United States District Court, N.D. New York
July 1, 2014
KEVIN BLACKSHEAR, Plaintiff,
CAPTAIN WOODWARD, Captain-Hearing Officer, Watertown Correctional Facility; LIEUTENANT ZEHR, Watch Commander, Watertown Correctional Facility; and D. VENETTOZZI, Acting Director, Special Housing Inmate Disciplinary Program, N.Y.S. Department of Corrections and Community Supervision, Defendants.
KEVIN BLACKSHEAR, 11-B-0296, Hale Creek ASACTC, Johnstown, New York, Plaintiff pro se.
JUSTIN L. ENGEL, AAG, OFFICE OF NEW YORK STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, The Capitol, Albany, New York, Attorneys for Defendants.
FREDERICK J. SCULLIN, Jr., Chief District Judge.
Currently before the Court is Magistrate Judge Hummel's June 17, 2014 Report-Recommendation and Order, in which he recommended that this Court grant Defendants' motion for summary judgment as to all claims against all Defendants. See Dkt. No. 26. Plaintiff filed an "Objection Notice to Magistrate Judge Hummel's Report-Recommendation and Order, " in which he merely stated that he sent his "notice of objection to the Clerk of the United States District Court for a decision rendered by U.S. Magistrate Judge, Christian F. Hunnel [sic] on June 17, 2014." See Dkt. No. 28.
After reviewing a magistrate judge's recommendations, the district court may accept, reject or modify those recommendations. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The court reviews de novo those portions of the magistrate judge's recommendations to which a party objects. See Pizzaro v. Bartlett, 776 F.Supp. 815, 817 (S.D.N.Y. 1991). ""If, however, the party makes only conclusory or general objections, ... the Court reviews the Report and Recommendation only for clear error."'" Salmini v. Astrue, No. 3:06-CV-458, 2009 WL 179741, *1 (N.D.N.Y. June 23, 2009) (quoting [ Farid v. Bouey, 554 F.Supp.2d 301] at 306 [(N.D.N.Y. 2008)] (quoting McAllan v. Von Essen, 517 F.Supp.2d 672, 679 (S.D.N.Y. 2007))). Finally, even if the parties file no objections, the court must ensure that the face of the record contains no clear error. See Wilds v. United Parcel Serv., Inc., 262 F.Supp.2d 163, 169 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (quotation omitted).
In light of Plaintiff's conclusory objection, the Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Hummel's June 17, 2014 Report-Recommendation and Order for clear error; and, finding none, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Hummel's June 17, 2014 Report-Recommendation and Order is ACCEPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further
ORDERS that Defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED as to all claims against all Defendants; and the Court further
ORDERS that the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of Defendants and close this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.