UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

KENDALL WALKER,

Plaintiff, 9:18-cv-1189 (BKS/CFH)

v.

D. MARTUSCELLO, et al.,

Defendants.

Appearances: Plaintiff pro se: Kendall Walker Rosedale, NY 11422 For Defendants: Letitia James Attorney General of the State of New York Erik Boule Pinsonnault Assistant Attorney General The Capitol Albany, NY 12224

Hon. Brenda K. Sannes, United States District Judge:

MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER Pro se Plaintiff Kendall Walker commenced this action under

asserting claims arising out of his incarceration at Coxsackie Correctional Facility. (Dkt. No. 1). On November 30, 2020, Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 56. (Dkt. No. 44). Plaintiff filed a response on February 8, 2021, and Defendants filed a reply on February 11, 2021. (Dkt. Nos. 50, 51). This matter was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Christian F. Hummel who, on June 21, 2021, issued a Report-Recommendation and Order recommending that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment be granted in part and denied in part. (Dkt. No. 53). Magistrate Judge Hummel advised the parties that under

(b)(1), they had fourteen days within which to file written objections to the report, and that the failure to object to the report within fourteen days would preclude appellate review. (Dkt. No. 53, at 47). No objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed.

As no objections have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See Petersen v. Astrue,

, 228–29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory committee’s note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed Magistrate Judge Hummel’s thorough Report-Recommendation for clear error and found none, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation in its entirety. For these reasons, it is ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 53) is ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 44) is GRANTED IN PART and the following claims are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE:

(1) First Amendment Free Exercise Clause claim based on lack of Jumu’ah services in 2015 as against all defendants; (2) First Amendment Free Exercise Clause claim based on the timing of Jumu’ah services in 2016 as against all defendants; (3) First Amendment Free Exercise Clause claim based on the rescheduling of the October 2015 Saviour’s Day celebration insofar as asserted against Defendant Martuscello; (4) Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection claims; and it is further ORDERED that this action is TERMINATED as to Defendant Martuscello; and it is further ORDERED that Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. No. 44) is DENIED insofar as it seeks dismissal of plaintiffs First Amendment Free Exercise Clause claim against Defendants Father Reddie and Barringer based on the rescheduling of the October 2015 Saviour’s Day celebration; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order upon the parties in accordance with the Local Rules. IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: July 26, 2021 oll KS 4 CA Syracuse, New York Brenda K. Sannes U.S. District Judge