United States District Court, E.D. New York
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ROSLYNN R. MAUSKOPF, United States District Judge.
Naquone Taylor commenced this action through counsel on July
30, 2015 against defendants Broadway Gourmet Deli & Grill
Corp. ("Broadway Gourmet"), Woodhull Deli Corp.
(''Woodhull Deli"), and Mercer Square Owners
Corp. ("Mercer Square"). (See generally
Compl. (Doc. No. 1).) On February 1, 2016, Taylor filed an
amended complaint. (See Doc. No. 11.) On February 3,
2016, Taylor voluntarily dismissed the action as to Mercer
Square pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
(''Rule") 41(a)(1)(A) and subsequently requested
a certificate of default as to Broadway Gourmet and Woodhull
Deli. (See Dismissal (Doc. No. 12); 5/3/2016
Certificate of Default (Doc. No. 14).)
Taylor's request for a certificate of default, the Clerk
of Court sought information from Taylor's counsel with
respect to service of the amended complaint. (See
12/19/2016 Report and Recommendation ("R&R")
(Doc. No. 29) at I.) After Taylor failed to provide any
information regarding service, the magistrate judge assigned
to this case, the Honorable Steven M. Gold, directed Taylor
to submit a status report by June 23, 2016. (6/10/2016 Status
Report Order) When Taylor failed to respond to the status
report order, Judge Gold issued an R&R recommending that
this case be dismissed for failure to prosecute. (6/28/2016
R&R (Doc. No 15).) On July 15, 2016, Taylor sought
additional time to serve, and on July 19, 2016, Judge Gold
granted Taylor additional time. (7/15/2016 Status Report;
7/19/2016 Scheduling Order.) Subsequently, Taylor filed
affidavits of service, but neither Broadway Gourmet nor
Woodhull Deli appeared at a November 10, 2016 status
conference. (Summons (Doc. Nos. 24-25; 11/10/2016 Minute
Entry (Doc. No. 28).) Accordingly, Judge Gold directed Taylor
to seek entry of default by November 22, 2016. (11/10/2016
the conference on November 10, 2016, Taylor has neither
sought entry of default nor communicated with the Court in
any way. (12/19/2016 R&R at 2.) On December 19, 2016.
Judge Gold issued a second R&R recommending that the
action be dismissed for failure to prosecute and reminded the
parties that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), any
objections to the R&R had to be filed by January 2, 2017.
(Id.) That deadline passed, and no party filed an
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Rule 72, the Court has
reviewed the 12/19/2016 R&R for clear error and, finding
none, concurs in its entirety. See Covey v.
Simonton, 481 F.Supp.2d 224, 226 (E.D.N.Y. 2007).
41(b) governs the dismissal of an action for failure to
prosecute, providing that "[i]f the plaintiff fails to
prosecute or to comply with these rules or a court order, a
defendant may move to dismiss the action or any claim against
it."' Fed.R.Civ.P. 41(b). Rule 41(b) also
"gives the district court authority to dismiss a
plaintiffs case sua sponte for failure to
prosecute." LeSane v. Hall's Sec. Analyst,
Inc., 239 F.3d 206, 209 (2d Cir. 2001); see Storey
v. O'Brien, 482 Fed.App'x 647, 648 (2d Cir.
considering whether dismissal is proper, courts consider the
following factors: (1) the duration of plaintiff s failure to
comply with court orders; (2) whether plaintiff was on notice
that failure to comply would result in dismissal; (3) whether
defendant is likely to be prejudiced by further delay in the
proceedings; (4) a balancing of the court's interest in
managing its docket with the plaintiffs interest in receiving
a fair chance to be heard; and (5) whether the judge has
adequately considered a sanction less drastic than dismissal.
See Davis v. Town of Hempstead, 597 Fed.App'x
31, 32 (2d Cir. 2015). Generally, no one factor is
dispositive. Baptiste v. Sommers, 768 F.3d 212, 216
(2d Cir. 2014). Here, the requisite factors, on balance,
support Judge Gold's recommendation.
the Court adopts the 12/19/2016 R&R of Judge Gold (Doc.
No. 29). It is hereby ordered that this case is dismissed
with prejudice for failure to prosecute. The Clerk of Court
is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the case.
 Judge Gold's 6/28/2016 Order
conditioned that the Court would not dismiss the instant case
if Taylor provided a status report and service information by
7/15/2016. (See 6/28/2016 R&R.) Taylor provided
the requested information. (See 7/15/2016 Status
Report (Doc. No. 16).) As such, the 6/28/2016 R&R