Opinion
11-CV-2578 (SJF)
01-13-2014
ALFRED OKA and FRANCIS OKA, Plaintiffs, v. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, SUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT, SUFFOLK COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, SUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE OFFICER EDWARD RYBY, SUFFOLK COUNTY POLICE DETECTIVE FRIEDLANDER, and KELLY KILANOWSKI, Defendants.
ORDER
FEUERSTEIN, District Judge.
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Gary R. Brown's Report and Recommendation ("Report"), dated November 26, 2013, recommending that defendant Kelly Kilanowski's motion for judgment on the pleadings be granted. No objections to the Report have been filed. For the following reasons, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Brown's Report in its entirety.
I
Any portion of a report and recommendation on dispositive matters, to which a timely objection is made, is reviewed de novo, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. The court, however, is not required to review the factual findings or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge where no proper objections are interposed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings."). Thus, to accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge on a dispositive matter to which no timely objection has been made, the district judge need only be satisfied that there is no clear error on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Johnson v. Goord, 487 F. Supp. 2d 377, 379 (S.D.N.Y. 2007); Baptichon v. Nevada State Bank, 304 F. Supp. 2d 451, 453 (E.D.N.Y. 2004). After conducting the appropriate review, a district court may accept, reject or modify any of the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations whether or not objections have been filed. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
II
Neither party has filed objections to Magistrate Judge Brown's Report. Upon review, the Court is satisfied that the Report is not facially erroneous and therefore, the Report is adopted in its entirety. Accordingly, defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings (DE 23) is GRANTED as to Kelly Kilanowski and as to this defendant, plaintiffs' claims are dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is to amend the caption in accordance with this Order.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: January 13, 2014
Central Islip, New York
__________
Sandra J. Feuerstein, U.S.D.J.