UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ______________________________________________ FREDERICK CANFIELD, a/k/a Fredrick Canfield, Plaintiff, 6:24-CV-1303 v. (GTS/TWD) PETER TARTAGLIA, Parole Officer; RICHARD KIMMERER, Sergeant, Sheriff’s Office;1 and OTSEGO COUNTY,2 Defendants. ______________________________________________ APPEARANCES: FREDERICK CANFIELD Plaintiff, Pro Se 194 Santoro Road Garrattsville, New York 13342 GLENN T. SUDDABY, United States District Judge DECISION and ORDER Currently before the Court, in this pro se civil rights action filed by Frederick Canfield, a/k/a Fredrick Canfield, (“Plaintiff”), against parole officer Peter Tartaglia, police officer Richard Kimmerer, and Otsego County (“Defendants”) is United States Magistrate Judge Thérèse Wiley Dancks’ Report-Recommendation recommending that certain of the claims in Plaintiff’s 1 The Clerk of Court shall revise the docket sheet to indicate that Defendant Richard Kimmerer’s alleged position is as a Sergeant in the Sheriff’s Office (not a parole officer), in accordance with page 2 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 13, at 2.) 2 The Clerk of Court shall also revise the docket sheet to add Otsego County as a Defendant, in accordance with the caption and page 2 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. (Dkt. No. 13, at 1-2.) Amended Complaint proceed and that the remaining claims be dismissed without prejudice. (Dkt. No. 15.) Plaintiff has not filed an Objection to the Report-Recommendation, and the time in which to do so has expired. (See generally Docket Sheet.) After carefully reviewing the relevant papers herein, including Magistrate Judge Dancks’

thorough Report-Recommendation, the Court can find no clear error in the Report- Recommendation:3 Magistrate Judge Dancks employed the proper standards, accurately recited the facts, and reasonably applied the law to those facts. (Dkt. No. 15.) As a result, the Report- Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety for the reasons stated therein. (Id.) ACCORDINGLY, it is ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Dancks’ Report-Recommendation (Dkt. No. 15) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED in its entirety; and it is further

ORDERED that the following claims in Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 13) SURVIVE the Court’s initial review and require a response from Defendants: (1) Plaintiff’s illegal-search-and-seizure claim against Defendant Kimmerer, arising from his vehicle search of June 25, 2024; (2) Plaintiff’s illegal-search-and-seizure claim against Defendants Kimmerer and Tartaglia, arising from their camper search of July 12, 2024;

3 When no objection is made to a report-recommendation, the Court subjects that report-recommendation to only a clear error review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes: 1983 Addition. When performing such a “clear error” review, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Id.; see also Batista v. Walker, 94-CV-2826,

, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 31, 1995) (Sotomayor, J.) (“I am permitted to adopt those sections of [a magistrate judge’s] report to which no specific objection is made, so long as those sections are not facially erroneous.”) (internal quotation marks omitted). 2 (3) Plaintiff's false arrest claim against Defendants Kimmerer and Tartaglia; and (4) Plaintiff's false imprisonment claim against Defendants Kimmerer and Tartaglia; and it is further ORDERED that the remaining claims asserted in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 13) are DISMISSED without prejudice to amendment during the pendency of this action upon the filing of a successful motion to amend pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 and N.D.N.Y. Local Rule 15.1, and thereafter with prejudice; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to issue Summonses and forward them, along with copies of the Complaint, to the U.S. Marshal for service upon Defendants Kimmerer and Tartaglia, and Defendants Kimmerer and Tartaglia are directed to respond in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall revise the docket sheet to indicate that Defendant Richard Kimmer’s alleged position is as a Sergeant in the Sheriff's Office (not a parole officer), in accordance with page 2 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 13, at 2); and it is further ORDERED that the Clerk of Court shall also revise the docket sheet to add Otsego County as a Defendant, in accordance with the caption and page 2 of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (Dkt. No. 13, at 1-2), and mark that party as “TERMINATED” as of the date of this Decision and Order. Dated: August 14, 2025 Syracuse, New York Glenn T. Suddaby ; U.S. District Judge