Paulette v. Suffolk County 5th Precinct Police Department

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Salvatore J. Paulette, Plaintiff,

-v- 2:22-cv-2913 (NJC) (ARL) Detective Stephen Masciopinto, #1699,

Defendant.

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER NUSRAT J. CHOUDHURY, United States District Judge: On March 4, 2024, Plaintiff Salvatore J. Paulette (“Plaintiff”), filed a Motion to Amend the Complaint. (ECF No. 52.) On November 12, 2024, Magistrate Judge Arlene R. Lindsay issued a Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”) recommending that Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend be denied. (R&R, ECF No. 65.) Defendant served a copy of the R&R upon Plaintiff by certified mail to Plaintiff’s address of record at the Auburn Correctional Facility on November 12, 2024. (See Cert. Service, ECF No. 67.) The R&R instructed that any objections to the R&R must be submitted in writing to the Clerk of Court within fourteen (14) days of service, i.e., by November 26, 2024. (R&R at 6.) The date for filing any objections has thus expired, and no party has filed an objection to the R&R. In reviewing a report and recommendation, the court “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). If no objections are filed, a district court reviews a report and recommendation for clear error. King v. Paradise Auto Sales I, Inc., No. 15-cv-1188, 2016 WL 4595991, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Sept. 2, 2016) (citation omitted); Covey v. Simonton, 481 F. Supp. 2d 224, 226 (E.D.N.Y. 2007). As no party has filed timely objections to the R&R, I review the R&R for clear error. Having conducted a review of the Motion, the R&R, and the applicable law, I find no clear error and adopt the thorough and well-reasoned R&R in its entirety. Accordingly, I deny Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend the Complaint (ECF No. 52).

Dated: Central Islip, New York January 2, 2025

/s/ Nusrat J. Choudhury NUSRAT J. CHOUDHURY United States District Judge