Summary
using defendant-proffered declarations and documentation, as well as information judicially noticed, to assess 12(b) motion
Summary of this case from Piccolo v. New York City Campaign Finance BoardOpinion
05 Civ. 3656 (JSR) (MHD).
August 13, 2006
ORDER
On March 21, 2006, the Honorable Michael H. Dolinger, United States Magistrate Judge, issued a Report and Recommendation in the above-captioned matter recommending that defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's Complaint be granted.
Plaintiff has failed to file any objection to the Report and Recommendation, and, for that reason alone, has waived any right to review by this Court. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 147-48 (1985); Mario v. P C Food Markets, Inc., 313 F.3d 758, 766 (2d Cir. 2002); Spence v. Superintendent, Great Meadow Corr. Facility, 219 F.3d 162, 174 (2d Cir. 2000).
Accordingly, the Court hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation, and, for the reasons therein, grants defendants' motion to dismiss the Complaint. Clerk to enter judgment.
By letter dated March 30, 2006, plaintiff asked the Court to appoint counsel on his behalf. In a responding letter, the Court declined to do so, analogizing to Love v. McCray, 413 F.3d 192 (2d Cir. 2005). The Court here reconfirms that decision. This suit, which has not even withstood a motion to dismiss, is an inappropriate case for the discretionary appointment of counsel under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e), see Cooper v. A. Sargenti Co., 877 F.2d 170, 172 (2d Cir. 1989) (per curiam); Hodge v. Police Officers, 802 F.2d 58, 61-62 (2d Cir. 1986).
SO ORDERED.