United States District Court, E.D. New York
MEMORANDUM & ORDER
N. VITALIANO United States District Judge
Gustavia Home, LLC ("Gustavia"), a single member
limited liability company, initiated this residential
mortgage foreclosure action on May 10, 2016 against
mortgagors Fatima Corporan and Jose Anibal Marrero and a host
of their judgment creditors: New York State Department of
Taxation & Finance, the Criminal Court of the City of New
York, Queens County Supreme Court, Target National Bank,
Capital One Bank (USA), NA, the City of New York
Environmental Control Board, and the City of New York
Department of Transportation Parking Violations Bureau, and
John Doe 1 through 12. See Dkt. No. 1
("Compl."); Dkt. No. 20 at 2 ("Am.
Compl."). The claim is simple. Plaintiff contends that,
on June 1, 2006, Corporan and Marrero executed a promissory
note, secured by a mortgaige. Am. Compl. ¶¶ 30-33.
They then failed to comply with the terms and provisions of
their mortgage by not making monthly payments. This default
started on March 1, 2009 and has continued to date.
Id. ¶ 34. Gustavia represents that it has
complied with all contractual provisions in the loan
documents, as well as with the requisite statutory notice
requirements. Id. ¶¶ 35-38; see
also N.Y. Real Prop. Law §§ 1304(1), 1302,
docket reflects that defendants were formally served. Despite
having been I provided notice, no defendant has answered or
moved with respect to the amended complaint. See
Dkt. Nos. 17, 22-33. As a consequence of defendants'
inaction, on September 8, 2016, Gustavia moved for default
judgment, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
Dkt. No. 38. That motion was respectfully referred to
Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy to make a Report and
Recommendation ("R&R"). Magistrate Judge
Levy's R&R issued on January 31, 2017, in which he
recommended that the motion for default judgment be
granted. Dkt. No. 41. The R&R gave notice that
any objection had to be filed within 14 days of service,
which was completed the same day. See Dkt. No. 42.
The Court now adopts the R&R as the opinion of the Court
for the reasons set forth below.
reviewing a report and recommendation of a magistrate judge,
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). More
significantly, a district judge is required to
"determine de novo any part of the magistrate
judge's disposition that has been properly objected
to." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3); accord 28 U.S.C.
§ 636(b)(1); see also Arista Records, LLC v. Doe
3, 604 F.3d 110, 116 (2d Cir. 2010). But, where no
timely objection has been made, the "district court need
only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face
of the record" to accept a magistrate judge's report
and recommendation, Gesualdi v. Mack Excavation
& Trailer Serv., Inc., No. 09-CV-2502 (KAM) (JO),
2010 WL 985294, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Mar. 15, 2010) (citation and
internal quotations omitted), and, even then, the district
court may still "adopt those portions of the [r]eport...
which are not facially erroneous." Price v. City of
New York, 797 F.Supp.2d 219, 223 (E.D.N.Y. 2011)
(citation and internal quotations omitted).
respect to Judge Levy's R&R, in this case, no
objections have been filed, and the time to do so has long
passed. After careful review of the record, the Court finds
the R&R tc be correct, well-reasoned, and free of any
clear error. See Id. It is, therefore, adopted as
the opinion of the Court.
accord with the now adopted R&R, Gustavia's motion
for default judgment is granted against defendants. Gustavia
is awarded $114, 760.40 against defendants Corporan
and Marrero, consisting of $58, 402 in outstanding principal,
plus accrued interest in the amount of $56, 358.40 for the
period March 1, 2009 through August 10, 2016. Defendants John
Does 1 through 12 are dismissed from this case.
is directed to submit a revised Proposed Judgment of
Foreclosure and Sale in accordance with the default judgment
now awarded. The Court will select and appoint a referee to
conduct the auction sale from a list of referees maintained
by the New York State Unified Court System.
execution of the Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale by the
Court, the Clerk of Court is directed to enter that judgment
and to close this case for administrative purposes:
 Plaintiff also requested (i) that John
Does 1 through 12 be dismissed from the action and (ii) that
a referee be appointed to conduct an auction sale of the