IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN

AMY GWEN DENERO, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Case No. 3:13-cv-0073 ) J-MACKS PROPERTIES, LLC, and ) PALM HORIZONS MANAGEMENT, INC. ) d/b/a CATERED TO VACATION HOMES, )

Defendants. ORDER BEFORE THE COURT are the Magistrate Judge’s: (1) July 1, 2016 Report and Recommendation containing factual findings concerning representations made to the District Court by Kyle R. Waldner, Esq. (“Attorney Waldner”), during a June 10, 2015 hearing in this case (ECF No. 444); and (2) June 30, 2021 Report and Recommendation that no sanctions be imposed on Attorney Waldner (ECF No. 451). No objections have been filed in connection with those Reports and Recommendations. “Within 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a see party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2);

(b)(1) (“Within fourteen days after being served with a copy, any party may serve and file written objections to such proposed findings and recommendations as provided by rules of court.”). When no objection SeeHenderson v. Carlson to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation is made the district court reviews the report and recommendation for plain error. ,

, 878 (3d Cir. 1987) (“While ... [

(b)(1)(C)] may not require, in the absence of objections, the district court to review the magistrate's report before accepting it, we believe that the Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n v. City of Long Branch better practice is for the district judge to afford some level of review to dispositive legal issues raised by the report.”); ,

(3d Cir. 2017) (“If a party fails to object timely to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, we generally review the district court's order for plain error.”). Case No. 3:13-cv-0073 Order P age 2 of 2 Here, the parties did not file any objections to the Magistrate Judge’s July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2021 Reports and Recommendations within 14 days after their service. Accordingly, the Court reviews them for plain error. Having reviewed the record and the July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2021 Reports and Recommendations for plain error, the Court finds that the Magistrate Judge addressed the dispositive legal issues in a manner consistent with applicable law. The Court finds no error in the July 1, 2016 and June 30, 2021 Reports and RecommORenDdEaRtiEoDns. The premises considered, it is hereby that the JuAlDy O1P, T20E1D6. and June 30, 2021 Reports and Recommendations (ECF Nos. 444 and 451) are The Clerk of Court is directed to close the case. Date: Robert A. Molloy ROBERT A. MOLLOY M arch 1 5, 2023 /Csh/i_ef Judge _________