UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
May 19, 2008
TERRY SMITH, PLAINTIFF,
BEZALEL WURZBERGER, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Gary L. Sharpe U.S. District Judge
DECISION AND ORDER
The above-captioned matter comes to this court following a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") by Magistrate Judge David E. Peebles, filed March 27, 2008. (Dkt. No. 34.)*fn1 The R&R recommended that the defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted. Pending are the plaintiff's timely objections ("Objections") to the R&R. (Dkt. No. 35.)
It is plain from the plaintiff's Objections that he disagrees with the result reached by Judge Peebles. However, beyond noting his disagreement, he does not point to any specific errors in the R&R. Rather, his Objections are general and conclusory in nature. (See, e.g., Objections at 1 ("Deliberate indifference was explained to the court correctly.").) Therefore, the court has reviewed the R&R for clear error. See Almonte v. New York State Div. of Parole, No. 9:04-cv-484, 2006 WL 149049, at *3-6 (N.D.N.Y. Jan. 18, 2006); Lara v. Bloomberg, No. 04-cv-8690, 2008 WL 123840, at *3 n.5 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 8, 2008) (reviewing R&R for clear error where plaintiff's objections "reveal only his disagreement with the conclusions reached by [the Magistrate Judge]" and "do not assert any specific errors contained in the Report"). Upon such review, the court finds no error in Judge Peebles's analysis. Accordingly, the R&R is approved and adopted in its entirety.
WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, it is hereby ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Peebles's March 27, 2008 Report and Recommendation is adopted in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that the defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 28) is GRANTED and the Complaint is DISMISSED; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk provide copies of this Decision and Order to the parties.
IT IS SO ORDERED.