Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Rahmin v. City of New York

United States District Court, Second Circuit

June 13, 2013

ALADDIN ABDAL RAHMIN Plaintiff,
v.
THE CITY OF NEW YORK, et. al., Defendant(s).

ORDER

LAURA TAYLOR SWAIN, District Judge.

Plaintiff Aladdin Abdal Rahmin ("Plaintiff"), proceeding pro se, brings this brings this action, pursuant to Title 42 of the United States Code section 1983, alleging that the defendants the City of New York ("the City"), The New York City Police Department, N. Almonte, and Joseph Matarazzo violated his civil rights.

The case was assigned to the undersigned and referred to Magistrate Judge Henry Pitman. Plaintiff moved for default judgment against all defendants and defendants N. Almonte and Joseph Matarazzo moved to dismiss for Plaintiff's failure to serve them under Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The City sought an extension of its time to respond to the complaint. Judge Pitman issued a Report and Recommendation, dated April 18, 2012 (the "Report"), which recommends that (1) plaintiffs application for a default judgment be denied; (2) Almonte and Matarazzo's motion to dismiss the complaint be denied without prejudice; (3) Plaintiff be ordered to complete service on Almonte and Matarazzo no later than June 18, 2012; (4) that the City's application for an extension of time to answer or move until June 29, 2012 be granted and (5) that the City be directed to provide Plaintiff with HIPPA releases and authorizations for release of pertinent criminal records within fourteen (14) days of the date of the Report. No objections to the Report have been received.

When reviewing a report and recommendation, the Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1)(C). "To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate, to which no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Wilds v. United Parcel Service, Inc. , 262 F.Supp.2d 163, 169 (S.D.N.Y.2003) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). The Court has reviewed carefully Magistrate Judge Pitman's thorough Report and Recommendation and finds no clear error. Accordingly, the Court accepts the Report's recommendations in their entirety, including the Report's recommendations for pretrial procedures and denial of Plaintiffs motion for default judgment.

SO ORDERED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.