From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

PinMonster, Inc. v. Fertob, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Dec 30, 2013
12 CV 6053 (SJ) (RML) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 30, 2013)

Opinion

12 CV 6053 (SJ) (RML)

12-30-2013

PINMONSTER, INC., doing business as DOLLAR PHONE PINLESS, Plaintiff, v. FERTOB, INC., et al., Defendants.

BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC By: Peretz Bronstein Shimon Yiftach Attorneys for Plaintiff


ORDER ADOPTING

REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION

APPEARANCES BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
By: Peretz Bronstein

Shimon Yiftach
Attorneys for Plaintiff
JOHNSON, Senior District Judge:

Presently before the Court is a Report and Recommendation ("Report") prepared by Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy. Judge Levy issued the Report on October 4, 2013, and provided the parties with the requisite amount of time to file any objections. None of the parties filed any objections to the Report. For the reasons stated herein, this Court affirms and adopts the Report in its entirety.

A district court judge may designate a magistrate judge to hear and determine certain motions pending before the Court and to submit to the Court proposed findings of fact and a recommendation as to the disposition of the motion. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Within 10 days of service of the recommendation, any party may file written objections to the magistrate's report. See id. Upon de novo review of those portions of the record to which objections were made, the district court judge may affirm or reject the recommendations. See id. The Court is not required to review, under a de novo or any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the report and recommendation to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985). In addition, failure to file timely objections may waive the right to appeal this Court's Order. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Small v. Sec'y of Health and Human Servs., 892 F.2d 15, 16 (2d Cir. 1989).

In this case, objections to Magistrate Judge Levy's recommendations were due on October 18, 2013. No objections to the Report were filed with this Court. Upon review of the recommendations, this Court adopts and affirms Magistrate Judge Levy's Report in its entirety. SO ORDERED. Dated: December 30, 2013

Brooklyn, NY

_______________

Senior United States District Judge


Summaries of

PinMonster, Inc. v. Fertob, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
Dec 30, 2013
12 CV 6053 (SJ) (RML) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 30, 2013)
Case details for

PinMonster, Inc. v. Fertob, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:PINMONSTER, INC., doing business as DOLLAR PHONE PINLESS, Plaintiff, v…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

Date published: Dec 30, 2013

Citations

12 CV 6053 (SJ) (RML) (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 30, 2013)