Beaman v. Yelich, No. 9:2012cv01625 - Document 28 (N.D.N.Y 2014)

Court Description: DECISION and ORDER: Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the 26 Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. Defend ant's 24 motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) is GRANTED; and 2. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon plaintiff in accordance with the Local Rules and close the file. Signed by Judge David N. Hurd on 4/3/2014. (ptm) (Copy served on plaintiff by regular mail)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK -------------------------------SHELTON BEAMAN, Plaintiff, No. 9:12-cv-1625 (DNH/ATB) -vBRUCE YELICH, Superintendent, Bare Hill Correctional Facility Defendant. -------------------------------APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: SHELTON BEAMAN Plaintiff, pro se HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN New York State Attorney General Attorney for Defendants The Capitol Albany, NY12224 ADRIENNE J. KERWIN, ESQ. Ass't Attorney General DAVID N. HURD United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Pro se plaintiff Shelton Beaman brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. On March 21, 2014, the Honorable Andrew T. Baxter, United States Magistrate Judge, advised by Report-Recommendation that defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to prosecute be granted. No objections to the ReportRecommendation were filed. Based upon a careful review of the entire file and the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge, the Report-Recommendation is accepted in whole. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, it is ORDERED that 1. Defendant's motion to dismiss pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) is GRANTED; and 2. Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED in its entirety. The Clerk is directed to serve a copy of this Decision and Order upon plaintiff in accordance with the Local Rules and close the file. Dated: April 3, 2014 Utica, 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.