Solar v. Superintendent Paul Annetts et al, No. 9:2010cv00341 - Document 125 (N.D.N.Y 2012)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 120 ) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY. ORDERED, that Defendants' Motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 98 ) is GRANTED as to all defendants and all claims. Signed by Senior Judge Lawrence E. Kahn on 9/10/12. (served on plaintiff by regular mail) (alh, )

Download PDF

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK RAFAEL SOLAR, Plaintiff, -against- 9:10-CV-00341 (LEK/CFH) C.O. R. LENNOX; NURSE NESMITH, Great Meadow Correctional Facility; P.A. TICHENOR, Upstate Correctional Facility; C.O. R. LENNOX, Great Meadow Correctional Facility; DR. THOMPSON, Great Meadow Correctional Facility; and CAPTAIN ROWE, Great Meadow Correctional Facility, Defendants. DECISION and ORDER This matter comes before the Court following a Report-Recommendation filed on May 23, 2012 by the Honorable David R, Homer,1 United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Northern District of New York Local Rule 72.3(d). Dkt. No. 120 ( ReportRecommendation ). Within fourteen days after a party has been served with a copy of a magistrate judge s reportrecommendation, the party may serve and file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. FED . R. CIV . P. 72(b); N.D.N.Y. L.R. 72.1(c). If no objections are filed . . . reviewing courts should review a report and recommendation for clear error. Edwards v. Fischer, 414 F. Supp. 2d 342, 346-47 (S.D.N.Y. 2006) (citations omitted). Here, no objections have been raised in the allotted time with respect to Magistrate Judge 1 Due to Judge Homer s retirement, the case has since been reassigned to the Honorable Christian F. Hummel, United States Magistrate Judge. Dkt. No. 124. Homer s Report-Recommendation. See generally Dkt. Plaintiff requested an extension of time to file objections to the Report-Recommendation, which was granted. Dkt. No. 121 (and accompanying Text Order). Plaintiff failed to file objections during this extension. See generally Dkt. After a thorough review of the Report-Recommendation and the record, the Court has determined that the Report-Recommendation is not subject to attack for clear error or manifest injustice. Accordingly, it is hereby: ORDERED, that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 120) is APPROVED and ADOPTED in its ENTIRETY; and it is further ORDERED, that Defendants Motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 98) is GRANTED as to all defendants and all claims; and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon the parties to this action. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED: September 10, 2012 Albany, New York 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.