UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------------------x

RQ INNOVATIONS, INC.,

Plaintiff,

-against- MEMORANDUM AND ORDER 19-CV-3886 (RPK) (RER) CARSON OPTICAL, INC. AND RICHARD CAMERON.

Defendants. ----------------------------------------------------x RACHEL P. KOVNER, United States District Judge: Plaintiff RQ Innovations, Inc. brought this action to seek redress for trademark infringement, false designation of origin, unfair competition, and unfair and deceptive trade practices. See Compl. ¶¶ 42-69 (Dkt. #1). Plaintiff named as defendants Carson Optical, Inc. and Richard Cameron. See id. ¶¶ 2-3. On the same day plaintiff filed its complaint, it filed a motion seeking a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. See Pl.’s Mot. for a T.R.O. and a Prelim. Inj. (Dkt. #2). Plaintiff’s motion was denied on the recommendation of Magistrate Judge Ramon E. Reyes, Jr. See Order Adopting Report and Recommendation (Aug. 21, 2019) (Dkt. #18). Plaintiff has now filed a new motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Pl.’s Mot. to Dismiss (Dkt. #23). That motion was referred to Judge Reyes for a report and recommendation. See Order Referring Mot. (Sept. 22, 2019). Judge Reyes recommends that the motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice be granted. See Report and Recommendation (“R. & R.”) at 9 (Dkt. #27). A district court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). No party has objected to the R. & R. within the time required by

(b)(1). When no party has objected to a magistrate judge’s recommendation, the recommendation is reviewed, at most, for “clear error.” See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee’s Notes (1983) (“When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear

error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.”); see, e.g., Alvarez Sosa v. Barr,

(E.D.N.Y. 2019). Clear error will only be found only when, upon review of the entire record, the Court is left with “the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” United States v. Snow,

(2d Cir. 2006). I have reviewed Magistrate Judge Reyes’s report and recommendation and, having found no clear error, adopt it in full. Plaintiff’s motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case. SO ORDERED. /s/ Rachel Kovner RACHEL P. KOVNER United States District Judge

Dated: March 18, 2021 Brooklyn, New York