From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cicio v. Williams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Jun 18, 2013
9:11-CV-1196 (N.D.N.Y. Jun. 18, 2013)

Opinion

9:11-CV-1196

06-18-2013

TERRY CICIO, Plaintiff, v. P. WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants.


THOMAS J. McAVOY,
Senior United States District Judge

DECISION & ORDER

I. INTRODUCTION

This pro se action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 was referred to the Hon. Andrew T. Baxter, United States Magistrate Judge, for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3(c). No objections to Magistrate Judge Baxter's Report-Recommendation [dkt. # 26] have been filed, and the time to do so has expired.

II. DISCUSSION

After examining the record, this Court has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for plain error or manifest injustice.

III. CONCLUSION

Accordingly, the Court ADOPTS the Report-Recommendation [dkt. # 26] for the reasons stated therein. Defendants' motion for summary judgment [dkt. # 20] is GRANTED, and the complaint is DISMISSED IN ITS ENTIRETY.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

____________

Thomas J. McAvoy

Senior, U.S. District Judge


Summaries of

Cicio v. Williams

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Jun 18, 2013
9:11-CV-1196 (N.D.N.Y. Jun. 18, 2013)
Case details for

Cicio v. Williams

Case Details

Full title:TERRY CICIO, Plaintiff, v. P. WILLIAMS, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Jun 18, 2013

Citations

9:11-CV-1196 (N.D.N.Y. Jun. 18, 2013)

Citing Cases

Rucano v. Annucci

does not create a liberty interest protected by due process.” Cicio v. Williams, No. 9:11-CV-1196 …