Summary
denying motion to strike an affirmative defense where it was “in effect a denial that plaintiff will be able to prove an element of his claim and thus amount[ed] to a denial of the allegations of the complaint”
Summary of this case from Gaffney v. Crowe LLPOpinion
21 Civ. 3835 (AT) (GWG)
10-04-2022
BENJAMIN SAMUEL RICH fka SAMUEL GUILLAUME, Plaintiff, v. DETECTIVE MICHAEL MILLER and DETECTIVE VINCENT CORRANDO, Defendants.
ORDER
ANALISA TORRES UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Having received no objections to the Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”), ECF No. 86, of the Honorable Gabriel W. Gorenstein, the Court reviewed the R&R for clear error and found none. Oquendo v. Colvin, No. 12 Civ. 4527, 2014 WL 4160222, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 19, 2014).
The Court, therefore, ADOPTS the R&R in its entirety. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to strike is DENIED.
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion at ECF Nos. 73-74 and mail a copy of this order to Plaintiff pro se.
SO ORDERED.