The opinion of the court was delivered by: Hon. Norman A. Mordue, U.S. District Judge:
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
In this pro se inmate civil rights action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, defendants move (Dkt. No. 62) for an order dismissing all causes of action in the amended complaint, except the excessive force claims, or for an order directing plaintiff to file a more definite statement. Upon referral pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 72.3(c), United States Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks has issued a Report-Recommendation and Order (Dkt. No. 71) recommending that defendants' motion be granted in part and denied in part. Magistrate Judge
Dancks ordered that defendants' request for a more definite statement pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(e) be denied.
Plaintiff objects (Dkt. No. 73) to only one aspect of the Report-Recommendation and Order, i.e., the recommendation that this Court dismiss plaintiff's pendent state-law personal-capacity claims against employees of the Department of Corrections and Community Services
("DOCCS"). Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court reviews de novo those parts of a report and recommendation to which a party specifically objects. The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Dancks' analysis of the legal issue involved as well as plaintiff's objection. The Court agrees with Magistrate Judge Dancks' conclusion that the Supreme Court's decision in Haywood v. Drown, 556 U.S. 729 (2009), does not affect the question of district courts'
jurisdiction to hear pendent state law claims against DOCCS employees, and that therefore such claims are properly dismissed as barred by section 24 of New York Correction Law. See, e.g., O'Diah v. Fischer, 2012 WL 987726, *21 (N.D.N.Y. Feb. 28, 2012); Tafari v. McCarthy, 714
F.Supp.2d 317, 384 (N.D.N.Y. 2010). Therefore, upon de novo review of the issue to which plaintiff objects, and review of the balance of the Report-Recommendation and Order for plain error or manifest injustice, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation and Order in its entirety.
ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation and Order (Dkt. No. 71) is accepted; and it is further
ORDERED that defendants' motion (Dkt. No. 62) for partial dismissal for failure to state a claim is granted in part and denied in part as follows:
Partial dismissal is granted as follows:
1. Dismissal is granted by Plaintiff's consent as to all claims against Defendants DOCS, Brian Fischer, Jack McDaniel, Albert Prack, Jeffrey St. Louis, Edward Dauphin, R. Judway, M.J. Cappadonia, R.J. Miller, S. Purdy, C. Cucharale, H. Smith, T. Meachum, J. Mecca, D. Ashe, Debora Kinderman, A. Papaleo, Judy Palmer, C. Vail, Ted Vauss, Mary Shrimp, and Renna Piecce, without leave to amend;
2. Dismissal is granted on abandonment grounds of all claims arising out of or related to the July 2, 2010 Tier III inmate misbehavior report against Plaintiff and the hearing held in connection with the report, without leave to amend;
3. Dismissal is granted on abandonment grounds of all claims arising out of Defendant Rabideau's alleged failure to review the denials of Plaintiff's SHU confinement reviews in a fair manner, and Rabideau and Defendant McCarthy's denial of his requests ...