BidSpotter, Inc. v. Koster Industries, Inc.

District Court, E.D. New York

BidSpotter, Inc. v. Koster Industries, Inc.

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------X BidSpotter, Inc.,

Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM & ORDER 21-CV-01726 (DG) (ARL) -against-

Koster Industries, Inc.,

Defendant. --------------------------------------------------------------X DIANE GUJARATI, United States District Judge: On March 30, 2021, Plaintiff BidSpotter, Inc. commenced this action against Defendant Koster Industries, Inc., asserting claims for breach of contract and accounts stated. See generally Complaint (“Compl.”), ECF No. 1. Defendant was served, see Executed Summons, ECF No. 7, but did not appear in the action, and the Clerk of Court entered default against Defendant on May 19, 2021, see Entry of Default, ECF No. 13. On May 21, 2021, Plaintiff moved for default judgment against Defendant. See generally Motion for Default Judgment (the “Motion”), ECF No. 14. On May 26, 2021, I referred the Motion to Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson for a report and recommendation. See May 26, 2021 Order. On November 12, 2021, the case was reassigned from Judge Tomlinson to Magistrate Judge Arlene R. Lindsay. See November 12, 2021 Docket Entry. On November 29, 2021, in light of the case’s reassignment, I referred the Motion to Judge Lindsay for a report and recommendation. See November 29, 2021 Order. On January 3, 2022, Judge Lindsay issued a Report and Recommendation (the “R&R”) recommending that Plaintiff’s motion for a default judgment be granted and that Plaintiff be awarded $167,148.95, plus $8,613.90 in prejudgment interest, for a total award of $175,762.85, in connection with Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim. See generally R&R, ECF No. 16. Judge Lindsay’s R&R further recommended that Plaintiff’s claim for accounts stated be dismissed. See id. at 6-7. No objection to the R&R has been filed, and the time for doing so has passed. See id. at 7.

A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

28 U.S.C. § 636

(b)(1); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). To accept those portions of a Report and Recommendation to which no timely objection has been made, “a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Jarvis v. N. Am. Globex Fund, L.P.,

823 F. Supp. 2d 161, 163

(E.D.N.Y. 2011) (quotation marks omitted). I have reviewed Judge Lindsay’s R&R, and, having found no clear error, adopt the R&R in its entirety. Therefore, Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment is granted as set forth in Judge Lindsay’s R&R. Plaintiff is granted a default judgment against Defendant and is awarded

$167,148.95, plus $8,613.90 in prejudgment interest, for a total award of $175,762.85, in connection with Plaintiff’s breach of contract claim. Plaintiff’s claim for accounts stated is dismissed. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment accordingly. Plaintiff is directed to serve a copy of this Order on Defendant Koster Industries, Inc. by certified mail and to file proof of service no later than February 7, 2022. SO ORDERED. /s/ Diane Gujarati _ DIANE GUJARATI United States District Judge

Dated: January 31, 2022 Brooklyn, New York

Reference

Status
Unknown