Opinion
1:17-cv-86 (DNH/DJS)
09-13-2017
AGNES GEORGES, Plaintiff, v. MOISE DUCHENE; JN PIERRE HEUNAUSD; MARIE EDITH JOSEPH; RENALD THOMAS; FELIX PHILLIPE; ANDRE DORRIL; BRIAN MOORE; BEVERLY THOMAS; JOE THOMAS; YVES P. LAGUERRE; YVES VICIERE; LAW ENFORCEMENT HAITI; JEH JOHNSON; JOHN KANNENGEISER; MICHAEL J. BERELLI; FOX NEWS/WASHINGTON POST; SANDERS AND SANDERS LAW FIRM; DAVID LEATHER; MARK CROSSLAND; EVERY LEGAL LAWYER; PUBLIC; LEVY RATNER COMPANY; MARK ZUCKERBERG, Facebook Owner; JACKIE ROBINSON, NYS Thoma PS 15; JAY DIETZ COURT REPORTING; NALIA MILIEN; PHILLY MILIEN; THOMAS CHARIANE; S. MERCADO; MARIA AGARIN; VITAL MILIEN; SOPHONIE LEGER, as Primese; HOWARD, Dispatcher Checker Cab In Elmont; KIRKLAND GALEN; YODORA P. BOOKS; PHILLIS B. AGGREY; BILL PERKINS; CONGRESS; DA OFFICE NY STATE, Nassau, Mineola, NY; LABOR UNEMPLOYMENT, New York and Virginia; SOCIAL SERVICES, New York and Virginia; MATIM, MXO, JAMESON, REGINALD; MOTOR VEHICLE, Albany, New York and Virginia; MCBLADE; COMCAST BUSINESS; DOCTOR MISLHA; DOCTOR ARABSHAHI; DOCTOR LATEEF; DOCTOR RASHID; DOCTOR MEHTA SARJACK; EVELYN PORTILO; DOCTOR KESSLER DALMACY; DOCTOR DARGANI; DOCTOR AGARIN MARIA; DOCTOR E. GARCIA; DOCTOR KADIJA JELLOTTO; SMITH LAIGEAU; NEW YORK STATE LABOR, Albany; FEDERAL BUREAU IN DC; STRAFFORD UNIVERSITY, Inwood, VA; NASSAU HOSPITAL, East Meadow, NY; S. BARNES, Mercy Hospital; DOCTOR LORGAN; DOCTOR FANTINATTA; ARTHUR SAFALLOW; HOLLY PATTERSON NURSING HOME; MICHAEL J. BERELLI; ZUCKER HOSPITAL; TOTAL CARE AGENCY; RICCO AGENCY; VALUE CARE AGENCY; and PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE, Defendants.
APPEARANCES: AGNES GEORGES Plaintiff pro se 4081 Thackery Terrace Woodridge, VA 22192
APPEARANCES: AGNES GEORGES
Plaintiff pro se
4081 Thackery Terrace
Woodridge, VA 22192 DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER
Pro se plaintiff Agnes Georges brought this action against over seventy defendants. On February 3, 2017, the Honorable Daniel J. Stewart, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that plaintiff's complaint be dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 for failure to state a claim but that plaintiff be permitted to file an amended complaint to cure the stated deficiencies. No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed.
Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
Therefore, it is
ORDERED that
1. This action shall be DISMISSED pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e) unless, within thirty (30) days of the date of this Decision and Order plaintiff files an amended complaint that corrects the pleading defects identified in the Report-Recommendation;
2. If plaintiff files an amended complaint within the referenced thirty (30) day period, then the amended complaint shall be referred to Magistrate Judge Stewart for his review; and
3. If, however, plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within the referenced thirty (30) day period, then this action shall be dismissed without further order.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
/s/_________
United States District Judge Dated: September 13, 2017
Utica, New York.