Monroe v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision et al, No. 9:2017cv01050 - Document 54 (N.D.N.Y 2020)

Court Description: DECISION AND ORDER that Magistrate Judge Lovric's Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 53 ) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety. Defendants' motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 51 ) is GRANTED and Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. [2 6]) is DISMISSED in its entirety pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Court certifies that an appeal from this Decision and Order would not be taken in good faith. Signed by Chief Judge Glenn T. Suddaby on 2/26/2020. (Copy served via regular and certified mail). (sal )

Download PDF
Monroe v. New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision et al Doc. 54 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ___________________________________________ MICHAEL J. MONROE, Plaintiff, 9:17-CV-1050 (GTS/ML) v. SCOTT KOCIENSKI, Corr. Officer, Franklin Corr. Fac., f/k/a Officer K; and BRIAN TYO, Corr. Officer, Franklin Corr. Fac., f/k/a Officer T, Defendants. ___________________________________________ APPEARANCES: OF COUNSEL: MICHAEL J. MONROE Plaintiff, Pro Se 126 Halgren Crescent Haverstraw, New York 10927 HON. LETITIA A. JAMES Attorney General for the State of New York Counsel for Defendants The Capitol Albany, New York 12224 ERIK BOULE PINSONNAULT, 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 Michael J. Monroe (“Plaintiff”) against the two above-captioned employees of the New York State Department of Corrections and Community Supervision (“Defendants”), are (1) Defendants’ motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b), and (2) United States Magistrate Judge Miroslav Lovric’s ReportRecommendation recommending that Defendants’ motion be granted, and that Plaintiff’s Dockets.Justia.com Amended Complaint be dismissed in its entirety. (Dkt. Nos. 51, 53.) Neither party has 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 Lovric’s thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the Report-Recommendation.1 Magistrate Judge Lovric 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, Defendants’ motion to dismiss is granted, and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint is dismissed. ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Lovric’s Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 53) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 51) is GRANTED and Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 26) is DISMISSED in its entirety pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). The Court certifies that an appeal from this Decision and Order would not be taken in good faith. Dated: February 26, 2020 Syracuse, New York 1 When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that report-recommendation 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.