UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------- X : CHRISTOPHER SADOWSKI, : : Plaintiff, : : 23-CV-337 (VSB) (RWL) - against - : : AMENDED ORDER : TRIBUNA ABIERTA, INC., : : Defendant. : : --------------------------------------------------------- X

VERNON S. BRODERICK, United States District Judge: This order amends and supersedes the prior order dated February 27, 2025. (Doc. 39.) * * * Before me is the Report & Recommendation (the “Report”) of Magistrate Judge Robert H. Lehrburger recommending that I award Plaintiff statutory damages of $7,200. (Doc. 37 (“Report”).) No party has filed an objection to the Report. For the following reasons, I ADOPT the Report in full. The Report contains a detailed summary of the factual background and procedural history in the case, which I adopt in full. Plaintiff, a photojournalist, initiated this action on January 13, 2023, asserting a single count of copyright infringement for Defendant’s unauthorized use of Plaintiff’s copyrighted photograph. (See Doc. 1.) Defendant failed to respond, and on Plaintiff’s motion, (Doc. 14), on August 30, 2023, I entered a default judgment against Defendant as to liability, (Doc. 31). The same day, I issued a referral to Judge Lehrburger for a damages inquest. (Doc. 30.) Judge Lehrburger issued his Report on April 16, 2024, recommending an award of $7,200 in statutory damages; pre-judgment interest at the rate set forth in

(a),1 0F starting from commencement of the action; and $3,647.52 in attorneys’ fees and costs. (Report 18.) Plaintiff submitted proof of service of the Report on Defendant on April 19, 2024. (Doc. 38.) No party has objected to the report. A district court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.”

(b)(1). “To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate, 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.” Nelson v. Smith,

(S.D.N.Y. 1985) (citations omitted). Although the Report explicitly provided that “[p]ursuant to

(b)(1) and Rules 72, 6(a), and 6(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the parties shall have fourteen (14) days to file written objections to this Report & Recommendation,” and warned that “[f]ailure to file timely objections will result in a waiver of the right to object and will preclude appellate review,” (Report 18), no party filed an objection or requested additional time to do so.

I have reviewed Judge Lehrburger’s thoughtful and well-reasoned Report for clear error and, after careful review, find none. I therefore ADOPT the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. For the foregoing reasons, I ADOPT the Report in its entirety.

1 The statute provides that interest shall be calculated “at a rate equal to the weekly average 1-year constant maturity Treasury yield, as published by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, for the calendar week preceding the date of the judgment.”

(a). The Clerk of Court is respectfully directed: (1) to enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favor of $7,200 in statutory damages; pre-judgment interest on the statutory damages at a rate of 4.12% starting from January 13, 2023 and ending on the date of the judgment; and $3,647.52 in attorneys’ fees and costs; and (2) to close the case. SO ORDERED. Dated: March 4, 2025 , New York, New York Hy Lf Vernon S. Broderick United States District Judge