Opinion
06 CV 3085 (RJD) (LB).
March 28, 2008
ORDER
On March 12, 2008, Magistrate Judge Pollak issued a Report and Recommendation ("Report") in this case. Plaintiff objected within ten days of the issuance of the Report, as calculated pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 6(a). After careful consideration, and for the reasons stated below, the Court adopts Magistrate Judge Bloom's Report and grants defendants motion for summary judgment.
Magistrate Judge Bloom produced a typically thorough and thoughtful review of the arguments presented by both parties, concluding ultimately that plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for his claims of hostile workplace and disparate treatment; and that while plaintiff had established a prima facie case of discriminatory termination, defendants had provided a legitimate non-discriminatory reason for that termination, which plaintiff had failed to rebut. Defendant submitted a four-page objection. The first and third pages are typed and appear to have nothing to do with the facts of this case (dealing mostly with plaintiff's tribulations in Jamaica and Montego Bay). The second and fourth pages are hand-written and reiterate allegations made in plaintiff's original complaints, without providing any new information, substantiation or legal analysis.
"The district court judge . . . shall make a de novo determination upon the record, or after additional evidence, of any portion of the magistrate judge's disposition to which specific written objection has been made . . ." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) (emphasis added); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Some of our sister courts have opted, in light of non-specific objections, to review magistrate judge reports "as a whole only for clear error." Reynolds v. U.S.A., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 94961, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 26, 2007) (citing Edwards v. Fischer, 414 F. Supp. 2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006)); accord Vega v. Artuz, 2002 WL 31174466, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 30, 2002) ("Objections of this sort are frivolous, general and conclusory and would reduce the magistrate's work to something akin to a 'meaningless dress rehearsal.'") (citing Dennard v. Kelly, No. 90-CV-0203E, 1997 WL 9785, at *1 (W.D.N.Y. Jan. 2, 1997)). However, the Court need not address the sufficiency of plaintiff's objection at this time, because Magistrate Judge Bloom's Report withstands both clear error and de novo review.
Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report in its entirety, without reservations. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted and judgment should be entered accordingly.
SO ORDERED.