Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Aug. 19, 2022

Doe 1 v. McAdam Financial Group LLC

Judge
Gregory Woods
Docket
1:22-cv-00113
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil Procedure
In one sentence

In Jane Doe 1 v. McAdam Financial Group LLC, Judge Woods adopted an unchallenged recommendation and granted transfer to Massachusetts.

Who this affects

Jane Doe 1, McAdam Financial Group LLC, and Charles Norfleet; the case was ordered transferred from the Southern District of New York to the District of Massachusetts.

What happened

In Jane Doe 1 v. McAdam Financial Group LLC, a magistrate judge recommended transferring the case to the District of Massachusetts. The opinion does not describe the claims or the reasons for the recommendation.

No party filed a written objection within the required fourteen-day period. The district court reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.

Judge Woods accepted and adopted the recommendation in full, granted the defendants’ motions to transfer, and directed the Clerk of Court to transfer the case to the District of Massachusetts without delay.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Doe 1 v. McAdam Financial Group LLC · No. 1:22-cv-00113
Judge
Gregory Woods
Date
Aug. 19, 2022

Background

On August 3, 2022, Magistrate Judge Netburn issued a report and recommendation advising the court to transfer this action to the District of Massachusetts. The opinion does not state the claims in the case or the reasons given in the report and recommendation for transferring it.

Review of the Recommendation

Under federal law, parties may file specific written objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation within fourteen days after receiving it. No objection was filed within that period. Judge Woods therefore reviewed the report and recommendation for clear error and found none.

Ruling

Judge Gregory H. Woods accepted and adopted the report and recommendation in its entirety. The court granted the defendants’ motions to transfer the action to the District of Massachusetts. The Clerk of Court was directed to terminate the motions listed at Docket Nos. 16, 24, and 41 and to transfer the action without delay.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.