Opinion
No. 05-CV-4810 (FB) (JMA).
April 9, 2007
For the Plaintiff: DAVID R. HOCK, ESQ., Cohen, Weiss and Simon LLP, New York, NY.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On February 21, 2007, Magistrate Judge Joan Azrack issued a Report and Recommendation ("R R") recommending that a default judgment of $37,837.95 be entered in favor of plaintiff, Larry Jacobson ("Jacobson"), and against defendant, R.N.R. Associates, Inc. ("RNR"). See Docket Entry # 14 (R R). The R R recited that "[a]ny objections to this Report and Recommendation must be filed with the Clerk of the Court with a courtesy copy to the undersigned within 10 days of the date of service of this Report," R R at 12, and that "[f]ailure to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the District Court's order." Id. The government served a copy of the R R on defendant at their last known address on February 21, 2007, see Docket Entry #16 (Certificate of Service), making objections due by March 12, 2006. See Fed. RR. Civ. P. 6(a), 6(e). To date, no objections have been filed.
Where, as here, clear notice has been given of the consequences of failure to object, and there are no objections, the Court may adopt the R R without de novo review. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985); Mario v. P C Food Mkts., Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002) ("Where parties receive clear notice of the consequences, failure timely to object to a magistrate's report and recommendation operates as a waiver of further judicial review of the magistrate's decision."). The Court will excuse the failure to object and conduct de novo review if it appears that the magistrate judge may have committed plain error, see Spence v. Superintendent, Great Meadow Corr. Facility, 219 F.3d 162, 174 (2d Cir. 2000).
As no error appears on the face of the Magistrate Azrack's R R, the Court adopts it without de novo review. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment in accordance with the R R.