UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
August 21, 2012
TRUSTEES OF THE EMPIRE STATE CARPENTERS WELFARE, PENSION ANNUITY, APPRENTICESHIP, CHARITABLE TRUST, LABOR MANAGEMENT COOPERATION, AND SCHOLARSHIP FUNDS,
M.R. DRYWALL SERVICES, LLC, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Seybert, District Judge:
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
Pending before the Court is Magistrate Judge William D. Wall's Report and Recommendation ("R&R"), issued on August 6, 2012. For the following reasons, the Court ADOPTS this R&R in its entirety.
Plaintiffs, the Trustees of the Empire State Carpenters Welfare, Pension Annuity, Apprenticeship, Charitable Trust, Labor Management Cooperation, and Scholarship Funds ("Plaintiffs"), commenced this action on April 14, 2011 seeking payment of delinquent contributions plus interest, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to Section 502(g)(2) of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. § 1132(g)(2). Defendant M.R. Drywall Services, LLC did not answer the Complaint or otherwise appear in the action. Plaintiffs moved for an entry of default on November 23, 2011 (Docket Entry 3), which was entered by the Clerk of the Court on November 29, 2011 (Docket Entry 4). On February 21, 2012, Plaintiffs moved for default judgment and an award of damages (Docket Entries 5), and on February 24, 2012, the Court referred Plaintiffs' motion to Judge Wall for an R&R (Docket Entry 7).
Judge Wall issued his R&R on August 6, 2012 recommending that a default judgment be granted and that Plaintiffs be awarded damages in the amount of $3,550.84 in unpaid contributions, $710.17 in liquidated damages, $5,311.00 in attorneys' fees, and $607.38 in costs. Judge Wall did not recommend awarding the pre-judgment interest requested by Plaintiffs because they failed to provide evidence in support of such a request.*fn1 Judge Wall invited Plaintiffs to submit supplemental evidence in support of their proposed interest calculation for this Court to consider at its discretion.
Plaintiffs have failed to do so. Also, neither party has filed an objection to any portion of Judge Wall's R&R.
In reviewing an R&R, a district court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). If no timely objections have been made, the "court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Urena v. New York, 160 F. Supp. 2d 606, 609-10 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted).
Here, no party objected to Judge Wall's R&R. And the Court finds his R&R to be correct, comprehensive, well-reasoned and free of any clear error. Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS it in its entirety.
Judge Wall's R&R is ADOPTED in its entirety. Plaintiffs are awarded a default judgment and damages in the following amounts:
(1) $3,550.84 in unpaid contributions;
(2) $710.17 in liquidated damages;
(3) $5,311.00 in attorneys' fees; and
(4) $607.38 in costs.
The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter a Judgment consistent with this Memorandum and Order and to mark this matter CLOSED.
Joanna Seybert, U.S.D.J.