Arroyo v. Yelen

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ANIBAL ARROYO, Plaintiff, 1:21-cv-1250 (GLS/DJS) v. JANET YELEN et al., Defendants. APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: FOR THE PLAINTIFF: ANIBAL ARROYO Pro Se 19-A-4132 Shawangunk Correctional Facility P.O. Box 700 Walkill, NY 12589 Gary L. Sharpe Senior District Judge ORDER The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a Report- Recommendation and Order (R&R) by Magistrate Judge Daniel J. Stewart, duly filed January 21, 2022 (Dkt. No. 10.) Following fourteen days from the service thereof, the Clerk has sent the file, including any and all objections filed by the parties herein. No objections1 having been filed, and the court having reviewed the 1 Plaintiff filed a letter stating, among other things, “I object for reasons I comply with Rules.” (Dkt. No. 11.) To the extent that the document can be construed as objections to the R&R for clear error, it is hereby ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation and Order (Dkt. No. 10) is ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that plaintiff's amended complaint (Dkt. No. 3) is DISMISSED; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk is directed to close this case; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk provide a copy of this Order to plaintiff in accordance with the Local Rules of Practice. IT 1S SO ORDERED. March 29, 2022 Albany, New York . Dishnict Judge

R&R, it lacks any argument whatsoever and triggers error for clear error review only. See Almonte v. N.Y. State Div. Of Parole, No. Civ. 904CV484, 2006 WL 149049, at *5-6 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2006).