LAWRENCE E. KAHN, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on April 24, -, by the Honorable Randolph F. Treece, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Northern District of New York Local Rule 72.3(d). Dkt. No. 5 ("Report-Recommendation").
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's reportrecommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b); N.D.N.Y. L.R. 72.1(c). "If no objections are filed... reviewing courts should review a report and recommendation for clear error." Edwards v. Fischer , 414 F.Supp.2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006); see also Cephas v. Nash , 328 F.3d 98, 107 (2d Cir. 2003) ("As a rule, a party's failure to object to any purported error or omission in a magistrate judge's report waives further judicial review of the point."); Farid v. Bouey , 554 F.Supp.2d 301, 306 (N.D.N.Y. 2008).
No objections to the Report-Recommendation were filed in the allotted time period. After a thorough review of the Report-Recommendation and the record, the Court has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for clear error or manifest injustice.
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Motion (Dkt. No. 3) for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is DENIED for the reasons set forth in the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5); and it is further
ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED for the reasons set forth in the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5); and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order upon the ...