Liao v. Trimm et al, No. 9:2013cv01497 - Document 48 (N.D.N.Y 2016)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER: ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Peebles' Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 45 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety. ORDERED that Defendant's motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 41 ) is GRANTED. ORDERED that Plain tiff's Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED in its entirety. ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter Judgment for Defendant and close this action. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 3/22/16. (served on plaintiff by regular and certified mail) (alh, )

Download PDF
Liao v. Trimm et al Doc. 48 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ___________________________________________ SHIHSIANG LIAO, a/k/a Shih-Siang Shawn Liao, Plaintiff, 9:13-CV-1497 (GTS/DEP) v. FAISAL MALIK, Civilian Employee, Gouverneur Correctional Facility f/k/a S. Malik, Defendant. ___________________________________________ APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: SHIHSIANG LIAO Plaintiff, Pro Se P.O. Box 472 Wassaic, New York 12592 HON. ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN Attorney General for the State of New York Counsel for Defendants The Capitol Albany, New York 12224 KEITH J. STARLIN, ESQ. Assistant Attorney General GLENN T. SUDDABY, Chief United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Currently before the Court, in this pro se prisoner civil rights action filed by Shihsiang Liao, a/k/a Shih-Siang Shawn Liao (“Plaintiff”) against state correctional employee Faisal Malik (“Defendant”), are Defendant’s motion for summary judgment and United States Magistrate Judge David E. Peebles’ Report-Recommendation recommending that Defendant's motion be granted. (Dkt. Nos. 41, 45.) Plaintiff has not filed an objection to the Report-Recommendation, and the deadline by which to do so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.) After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Peebles’ thorough Report- Dockets.Justia.com Recommendation, the Court can find no clear-error in the Report-Recommendation.1 Magistrate Judge Peebles employed the proper standards, accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. As a result, the Report-Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety for the reasons set forth therein, Defendant’s motion is granted; and Plaintiff’s Complaint is dismissed. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Peebles’ Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 45) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Dkt. No. 41) is GRANTED; and it is further ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint (Dkt. No. 1) is DISMISSED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall enter Judgment for Defendant and close this action. Dated: March 22, 2016 Syracuse, New York ____________________________________ HON. GLENN T. SUDDABY Chief United States District Judge 1 When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that reportrecommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826, 1995 WL 453299, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a magistrate judge’s] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). 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.