UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
September 22, 2010
JOSHUA LINER, PLAINTIFF,
BRIAN FISCHER, COMMISSIONER; DALE ARTUS, SUPERINTENDENT; SCOTT GIGUERE, LAW LIBRARY OFFICER; THEODORE SWEET, CORRECTIONS OFFIC ER; AND JOHN DOE, DEFENDANTS.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Thomas J. McAVOY Senior United States District Judge
DECISION and ORDER
This pro se civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was referred to the Hon. Andrew T. Baxter, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report-Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c).
Defendants Artus, Fisher, and Sweet filed a motion for summary judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 seeking dismissal of Plaintiff's complaint. The Report-Recommendation dated August 4, 2010 recommended that the Defendants' motion be granted. Plaintiff filed objections to the Report-Recommendation, essentially raising the same arguments presented to the Magistrate Judge.
When objections to a magistrate judge's Report-Recommendation are lodged, the Court makes a "de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). After such a review, the Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge. The judge may also receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions." Id.
Having reviewed the record de novo and having considered the issues raised in the Plaintiff's objections, this Court has determined to accept and adopt the recommendation of Magistrate Judge Baxter for the reasons stated in the Report-Recommendation.
It is therefore
ORDERED that Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 36) is GRANTED, and the Plaintiff's Complaint be DISMISSED as to Defendants Artus, Fisher, and Sweet.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
© 1992-2010 VersusLaw Inc.