United States District Court, E.D. New York
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ROSLYNN R. MAUSKOPF, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.
pro se Skiboky Shavar Stora commenced the
above-captioned copyright actions on December 11, 2015,
(see Compl. in 15-CV-7106 (the "7106
CompL") (Doc. No. 1)), and January 12, 2016,
(see Compl. in 16-CV-180 (the "180 Compl."
(Doc. No. 1)). Both of these cases center on Stora's
allegation that defendants in each case have infringed upon
copyrights of his visual artwork containing the words
"Don't Ask." (See 7106 Compl, Exs. A,
B; 180 Compl.) Broadly construed, Stora's complaints
allege that all of the defendants have engaged in the
business of advertising, marketing, and selling clothing
lines featuring logos or designs that infringe on his
motions are pending in these cases, including Stora's
motions for a preliminary injunction, for default judgments,
to compel discovery, to amend his complaints, and for
contempt; as well as defendants' motions for judgment on
the pleadings, or, in the alternative, for summary judgment,
and to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. (See
generally 15-CV-7106 (Doc. Nos. 17, 20, 32, 37, 39,
53-54, 59, 63, 71-72, 87); 16-CV-180 (Doc. Nos. 22, 28-29,
32, 34-35, 40, 42-43, 45, 52). By orders dated March 10,
2016, this Court referred all motions in these cases to the
assigned Magistrate Judge, the Honorable Robert M. Levy, for
a Report and Recommendation.
December 7, 2016, Judge Levy issued a Report and
Recommendation, a copy of which was electronically mailed to
Stora, recommending that Stora's cases be dismissed and
Stora's motions be denied. (See Report &
Recommendation 15-CV-7106 (Doc. No. 97); Report &
Recommendation 16-CV-180 (Doc. No. 67)) (collectively, the
"R&R"). Judge Levy reminded the parties that,
pursuant to Rule 72(b), any objections to the R&R must be
filed by December 21, 2016. On December 21, 2016, Stora filed
an objection to the R&R in both cases. (See Obj.
15-CV-7106 (Doc. No. 99); Obj. 16-CV-180 (Doc. No. 69).)
reviewing an R&R, a district court "may accept,
reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1)(C). When a party raises an objection to an
R&R, "the court is required to conduct a de
novo review of the contested sections." See
Pizarro v. Bartlett, 776 F.Supp. 815, 817 (S.D.N.Y.
1991). Portions to which no party has objected are reviewed
for clear error. See Morritt v. Siryker Corp.. 973
F.Supp.2d 177. 181 (E.D.N.Y.2013); Price v. City of New
York. 191 F.Supp.2d 219, 223 (E.D.N.Y. 2011). The Court
will find clear error only where, upon a review of the entire
record, it is left with the definite and firm conviction that
a mistake has been committed. See Fed. R. Civ. P.
72(a); Regan v. Daimler Chrysler Corp., No. 07-CV-l
112 (RRM) (JO), 2008 WL 2795470, at * 1 (E.D.N.Y. July 18,
2008) (quoting Nielsen V. New York City Dep't
of Educ, No. 04-CV-2182 (NGG) (LB), 2007 WL 1987792,
at *1 (E.D.N.Y. July 5. 2007)) C[T]he district court must
affirm the decision of the magistrate judge unless the
district court on the entire evidence is left with the
definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been
Stora filed an objection to the R&R in both cases,
neither objection contained substantive arguments contesting
portions of the R&R. (See Obj. 15-CV-7106; Obj.
16-CV-180.) Rather, the objections simply include a trademark
information sheet for a logo using the words "Don't
Ask.'" similar to the trademark information sheet
attached as Exhibit B to Stora's complaint in 15-CV-7106.
(Compare Obj. 15-CV-7106 at 4-6, and Obj,
16-CV-180 at 4-6, with 7106 Compl. at
4-5.) Because Stora failed to provide
substantive arguments contesting portions of the R&R, the
Court reviews the R&R for clear error.
to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 72, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear
error and, finding none, concurs with the R&R in its
entirety. See Covey v. Simonton. 481 F.Supp.2d 224.
226 (E.D.N.Y. 2007).
it is hereby ORDERED that defendants' motions to dismiss
the complaint be granted. (Mot. to Dismiss 15-CV-7106 (Doc.
No. 59); Mot. to Dismiss 16-CV-180 (Doc. Nos. 34-35).) It is
further ordered that all of Stora's pending motions are
Clerk of Court is respectfully directed to enter judgment,
mail a copy of this Memorandum and Order and the accompanying
judgment to plaintiff Skiboky Shavar Stora, pro se,
note the mailing on the docket, and close these cases.