Opinion
1:18-CV-0246 (LEK/DJS)
04-26-2018
MOHAMMAD KASSAMALI, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK STATE, Defendant.
ORDER
I. INTRODUCTION
This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on March 28, 2018, by the Honorable Daniel J. Stewart, U.S. Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 72.3. Dkt. No. 5 ("Report-Recommendation"). Pro se plaintiff Mohammad Kassamali timely filed objections. Dkt. No. 6 ("Objections").
II. LEGAL STANDARD
Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the party "may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); L.R. 72.1(c). If no objections are made, or if an objection is general, conclusory, perfunctory, or a mere reiteration of an argument made to the magistrate judge, a district court need review that aspect of a report-recommendation only for clear error. Barnes v. Prack, No. 11-CV-857, 2013 WL 1121353, at *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 18, 2013); Farid v. Bouey, 554 F. Supp. 2d 301, 306-07, 306 n.2 (N.D.N.Y. 2008), abrogated on other grounds by Widomski v. State Univ. of N.Y. at Orange, 748 F.3d 471 (2d Cir. 2014); see also Machicote v. Ercole, No. 06-CV-13320, 2011 WL 3809920, at *2 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 25, 2011) ("[E]ven a pro se party's objections to a Report and Recommendation must be specific and clearly aimed at particular findings in the magistrate's proposal, such that no party be allowed a second bite at the apple by simply relitigating a prior argument."). "A [district] judge . . . may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." § 636(b). Otherwise, a court "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." Id.
III. DISCUSSION
Although Plaintiff submitted a filing in response to the Report-Recommendation, he did not include any specific objections to Judge Stewart's findings or recommendations. Objs. at 1-2. The Court has reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear error and has found none.
IV. CONCLUSION
Accordingly, it is hereby:
ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 5) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further
ORDERED, that Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED, that if Plaintiff wishes to proceed with this action, he must file an amended complaint, as described in the Report-Recommendation, within thirty days of the filing date of this Order; and it is further
Any amended complaint, which shall supersede and replace the original complaint in its entirety, must allege claims of misconduct or wrongdoing against each named defendant that Plaintiff has a legal right to pursue, and over which jurisdiction may properly be exercised. Any amended complaint filed by Plaintiff must also comply with the pleading requirements of Rules 8 and 10 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. --------
ORDERED, that in the event Plaintiff fails to file a signed amended complaint within thirty days of the filing date of this Order, the Clerk shall enter judgment without further order of this Court dismissing this action without prejudice; and it is further
ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Order on Plaintiff in accordance with the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: April 26, 2018
Albany, New York
/s/_________
Lawrence E. Kahn
U.S. District Judge