Opinion
6:23-CV-1061 (GTS/TWD)
12-19-2023
WILLIE LINDER, JR., a/k/a Willie Linder, Plaintiff, v. ONEIDA COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE; SCOTT D. McNAMARA, District Atty.; GRANT GARRAMONE, District Atty.; TODD CARVILE, District Atty., Defendants.
WILLIE LINDER, JR.,
DECISION AND ORDER
GLENN T. SUDDABY, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Currently before the Court, in this pro se civil rights action filed by Willie Linder, Jr. (“Plaintiff”) against the Oneida County District Attorney's Office and District Attorneys Scott D. McNamara, Grant Garramone, and Todd Carville (“Defendants”), is United States Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks' Report-Recommendation recommending that Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) be dismissed in its entirety and without leave to amend for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii), 1915A(b)(1). (Dkt. No. 8.) Plaintiff has not filed an Objection to the Report-Recommendation, and the deadline by which to do so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.)
After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Dancks' thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the Report-Recommendation. Magistrate Judge Dancks employed the proper standards, accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. As a result, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety for the reasons set forth therein, and Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed in its entirety and without leave to amend for failure to state a claim pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii), 1915A(b)(1).
When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that report-recommendation to only a clear-error review. Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a clear-error review, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order t accept the recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a magistrate judge's] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks omitted).
ACCORDINGLY, it is
ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Dancks' Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 8) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED in its entirety without leave to amend pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i)-(ii), 1915A(b)(1).