Suresh v. Crain Communications, Inc.
- Paul Engelmayer
- 1:23-cv-04976
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In Suresh v. Crain Communications, Judge Engelmayer adopted the magistrate judge’s recommendation and denied Crain’s motion to dismiss.
Ajay Suresh and Crain Communications, Inc.; Crain’s motion to dismiss was denied.
What happened
In Suresh v. Crain Communications, Inc., Crain asked the court to dismiss Ajay Suresh’s complaint for failing to state a legally sufficient claim.
Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis recommended denying the motion. Because neither party objected, Judge Engelmayer reviewed the recommendation for clear error and found none.
Judge Engelmayer adopted the recommendation in full and denied Crain’s motion to dismiss. The court also stated that the parties’ failure to object waived appellate review.
The detailed version
- Suresh v. Crain Communications, Inc. · No. 1:23-cv-04976
- Paul Engelmayer
- Feb. 28, 2024
Background
Defendant Crain Communications, Inc. moved under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to dismiss plaintiff Ajay Suresh’s complaint for failure to state a claim. The opinion incorporates the factual summary contained in Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis’s Report and Recommendation; that report is not included in the provided text.
Review of the Recommendation
Judge Willis recommended denying Crain’s motion. No party objected to the recommendation. As a result, Judge Engelmayer reviewed it for clear error, meaning an obvious mistake on the face of the record. He found no such error and adopted the Report and Recommendation in its entirety.
The court also stated that the Report had warned that failing to object within 14 days would waive objections and prevent appellate review. The parties’ failure to object therefore operated as a waiver of appellate review, according to the opinion.
Ruling
Judge Engelmayer denied Crain’s motion to dismiss. He directed the Clerk of Court to terminate all pending motions. The opinion does not provide further details about the underlying claims or explain the reasoning in the Report beyond adopting it.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.