Sadowski v. Primera Plana NY, Inc.

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT ese neeneray pep gun ae, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK oe □□□ ahahaha aii aialaatel OO ere □□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□□ | CHRISTOPHER SADOWSKI, DECT 47091 Plaintiff, : MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER -against- : PRIMERA PLANA NY, INC., et al., 2 18 Civ, 10072 (GBD) (OTW) Defendants. :

rrr rt rr tr te rer ee ee er ee re ee He HX GEORGE B. DANIELS, United States District Judge: Plaintiff Christopher Sadowski (“Plaintiff”) filed suit on October 31, 2018 against Defendant Primera Plana NY, Inc., (“Defendant’’)! for copyright infringement. (ECF No. 1). After Defendant failed to respond to the complaint, Plaintiff obtained a clerk’s certificate of default on February 7, 2019. (ECF No. 16). This Court subsequently granted Plaintiff's motion for default judgment and referred the matter to Magistrate Judge Wang for inquest on damages. (ECF Nos. 20 & 21). Before this Court is Magistrate Judge Wang’s October 16, 2019, Report and Recommendation (the “Report”), recommending that this Court enter judgment for Plaintiff in the amount of $11,900, with $10,500 of that amount for statutory damages and $1,400 for attorney’s fees and costs. (Report, ECF No. 26, at 6, 8.)

' Plaintiff also sued Does 1-10 but never amended the complaint with the names of such defendants. (ECF No. | at ¥ 10.)

Magistrate Judge Wang advised the parties that failure to file timely objections to the Report would constitute a waiver of those objections on appeal. (/d. at 8-9.) No objections were filed. A court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations” set forth in a magistrate judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). A magistrate judge's report to which no objections are made is reviewed for clear error. See Edwards v. Fischer, 414 F. Supp. 2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (citations omitted). “In clear error review, a court should reverse a finding only if it is ‘left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed,’ and not merely if it ‘would have decided the case differently.”” Hernandez v. City of New York, No. 11 Civ. 6644 (KPF) (DF), 2015 WL 321830, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 23, 2015) (quoting Easley v. Cromartie, 532 U.S. 234, 242 (2001)). Magistrate Judge Wang conducted a comprehensive and careful inquest. This Court finds no error, clear or otherwise in the Report's analysis. Accordingly, this Court adopts Magistrate Judge Wang’s recommended judgment regarding damages and attorney’s fees and costs for the reasons stated in the Report. Magistrate Judge Wang’s Report is ADOPTED in its entirety. Thus, final judgment shall be entered for the Plaintiff in the amount of $11,900. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case accordingly.

Dated: New York, New York December 14, 2021 SO ORDERED. Pitcce nited States District Judge