Opinion
Case No. 06-CV-3386 (FB) (RML).
August 22, 2007
For the Plaintiffs: ARTHUR A. HIRSCHLER, ESQ., Finkel Goldstein Berzow, Rosenbloom Nash, LLP, New York, NY.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
On June 29, 2007, Magistrate Judge Robert M. Levy issued a Report and Recommendation ("R R") recommending that default judgment be entered against the defendant and that plaintiffs be awarded $123,152.75 in unpaid fringe benefit contributions and interest, $24,362.55 in liquidated damages and $350.00 in costs, for a total judgment of $147,865.30. The R R states that "[a]ny objections this [R R] must be filed with the Clerk of the Court . . . within ten (10) business days," and that "[f]ailure to file objections within the specified time waives the right to appeal the district court's order." R R at 6. Plaintiff served a copy of the R R on the defendant and its principals by mail on July 18, 2007, see Docket Entry No. 14 (Affidavit of Service), making objections due by August 6, 2007. See Fed.R.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 Judge Levy's R R, the Court adopts it without de novo review. The Clerk is directed to enter judgment to the extent permitted by the R R.
SO ORDERED.