Gabino Genao v. City of New York, et al.

S.D. New York

Gabino Genao v. City of New York, et al.

District Court, S.D. New York·Decided February 12, 2026·No. 1:20-cv-06507·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GABINO GENAO, Plaintiff, v. 20 Civ. 6507 (DEH) CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., ORDER Defendants.

DALE E. HO, United States District Judge: In this action, Plaintiff Gabino Genao, proceeding pro se, brings various claims alleging that Defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was a pretrial detainee at the George R. Vierno Center (“GRVC’”) at Rikers Island in 2018, arising from events surrounding an assault that he instigated on another inmate, leading to disciplinary proceedings and punishment. On October 14, 2025, Magistrate Judge Cave issued a Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), recommending that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 203, be granted and that this case be dismissed with prejudice. See ECF No. 226. The docket reflects that service was effectuated the next day. See Minute Entry, Oct. 15, 2025. Mr. Genao sought and received an extension until November 21, 2025 to file any objections to the Report. See Order, ECF No. 228. The docket reflects that service was effectuated. See Minute Entry, Oct. 28, 2025. No such objections were filed by that date. This Court then issued an order that, in light of Plaintiff's pro se status, sua sponte extended the time to file any objections to the Report until December 23, 2025. See Order, ECF No. 229. That Order specifically warned that “[i]f no objections are filed by Plaintiff by that date, the Court will consider any objections by Plaintiff waived. No further extensions shall be granted absent a

showing of good cause.” Jd. The docket reflects that service was effectuated. See Minute Entry, Dec. 3, 2025. No objections were filed by December 23, 2025. In reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). “In a case such as this one, where no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Kuan vy. Notoriety Grp. LLC, No. 22 Civ. 1583, 2023 WL 3936749, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. June 9, 2023). The Court has reviewed the Report and has found no error, clear or otherwise. It is hereby ORDERED that the Report is ADOPTED IN FULL. As set forth in the Report, there is no dispute of fact as to the merits of Mr. Genao’s various claims. Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 203, is granted, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate ECF No. 203, to close this case, and to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff.

Dated: February 12, 2026 New York, New York

DALEE.HO. United States District Judge

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK GABINO GENAO, Plaintiff, v. 20 Civ. 6507 (DEH) CITY OF NEW YORK, et al., ORDER Defendants.

DALE E. HO, United States District Judge: In this action, Plaintiff Gabino Genao, proceeding pro se, brings various claims alleging that Defendants violated his constitutional rights while he was a pretrial detainee at the George R. Vierno Center (“GRVC’”) at Rikers Island in 2018, arising from events surrounding an assault that he instigated on another inmate, leading to disciplinary proceedings and punishment. On October 14, 2025, Magistrate Judge Cave issued a Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), recommending that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 203, be granted and that this case be dismissed with prejudice. See ECF No. 226. The docket reflects that service was effectuated the next day. See Minute Entry, Oct. 15, 2025. Mr. Genao sought and received an extension until November 21, 2025 to file any objections to the Report. See Order, ECF No. 228. The docket reflects that service was effectuated. See Minute Entry, Oct. 28, 2025. No such objections were filed by that date. This Court then issued an order that, in light of Plaintiff's pro se status, sua sponte extended the time to file any objections to the Report until December 23, 2025. See Order, ECF No. 229. That Order specifically warned that “[i]f no objections are filed by Plaintiff by that date, the Court will consider any objections by Plaintiff waived. No further extensions shall be granted absent a

showing of good cause.” Jd. The docket reflects that service was effectuated. See Minute Entry, Dec. 3, 2025. No objections were filed by December 23, 2025. In reviewing a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). “In a case such as this one, where no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Kuan vy. Notoriety Grp. LLC, No. 22 Civ. 1583, 2023 WL 3936749, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. June 9, 2023). The Court has reviewed the Report and has found no error, clear or otherwise. It is hereby ORDERED that the Report is ADOPTED IN FULL. As set forth in the Report, there is no dispute of fact as to the merits of Mr. Genao’s various claims. Accordingly, Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 203, is granted, and this case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to terminate ECF No. 203, to close this case, and to mail a copy of this order to the pro se Plaintiff.

Dated: February 12, 2026 New York, New York

DALEE.HO. United States District Judge

Gabino Genao v. City of New York, et al., (S.D.N.Y. 2026).

Pincite

Gabino Genao v. City of New York, et al. (Gabino Genao v. City of New York, et al.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related