United States District Court, E.D. New York
September 9, 2014
MOSHE ZIEGLER, D.D.S., for itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
ALLIED COMMERCIAL ROOFING, INC., Defendant.
MICHAEL KORSINSKY, ESQ., JOSEPH P. GARLAND, ESQ., Korsinsky & Klein LLP, Brooklyn, NY, for the Plaintiff.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
FREDERIC BLOCK, Senior District Judge.
On July 10, 2014, Magistrate Judge Azrack issued a Report and Recommendation ("R&R") recommending that default judgment be entered against defendant in the amount of $1, 600.00, consisting entirely of statutory damages. R&R at 5. The R&R directed plaintiff to serve defendant with a copy of the R&R and provided that defendant's failure to object within fourteen days of receipt would preclude appellate review. See id. Plaintiff served a copy of the R&R on defendant by mail on July 23, 2014. To date, no objections to the R&R have been filed.
If clear notice has been given of the consequences of failure to object, and there are no objections, the Court may adopt the R&R without de novo review. See Mario v. P & C Food Mkts., Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) ("Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences, failure to timely to object to a magistrate's report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate's decision."). The Court will excuse the failure to object and conduct de novo review if it appears that the magistrate judge may have committed plain error. See Spence v. Superintendent, Great Meadow Corr. Facility, 219 F.3d 162, 174 (2d Cir. 2000). No such error appears here. Accordingly, the Court adopts the R&R without de novo review and directs the Clerk to enter judgment in accordance with the R&R.