Order | Filed: July 29, 2026
| Entered: July 29, 2026
Tupper Jr. v. The State of New York et al
Consumer Credit | New York Eastern
Order Adopting Report and Recommendations Order on Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim Order on Motion to Amend/Correct/Supplement Order on Motion to Compel Order on Motion for Declaratory Judgment Order on Report and Recommendations
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS ; granting 91 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; denying 96 Motion to Amend/Correct/Supplement; denying 102 Motion to Compel; denying 108 Motion for Declaratory Judgment; adopting Report and Recommendations as to 109 Report and Recommendations.
Presently before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke, dated July 7, 2026, DE 109, recommending that: (1) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Docket Entry ("DE") 91, be granted; (2) Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint, DE 96, be denied; (3) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, DE 102, be denied; and (4) Plaintiff's Motion for Declaratory Judgment, DE 108, be denied. Plaintiff has timely filed objections to the Report and Recommendation, DE 111.
In reviewing a Report and Recommendation, the 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). Where a party makes specific and timely objections to a Magistrate Judge's findings or recommendations as to dispositive motions, the district court must apply a de novo standard of review to the portions of the Report and Recommendation to which the objection is made. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); see LLC v. Doe 3, 604 F.3d 110, 116 (2d Cir. 2010); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, "general or conclusory objections, or objections which merely recite the same arguments presented to the magistrate judge, are reviewed for clear error." Caldarola v. Town of Smithtown, No. 09-cv-272, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37280, at *1 (E.D.N.Y. Apr. 4, 2011).
The Court has carefully reviewed and considered the objections of Plaintiff, DE 111, and finds that they fail to raise any colorable objection to the Report and Recommendation. Indeed, in his filings, Plaintiff appears to seek to broaden the scope of the issues presented to Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke and set forth in the Report and Recommendation and seeks to have this Court consider post-briefing facts regarding the subsequent disposition of the foreclosure action. This Court is not persuaded by Plaintiff's objections or supplemental arguments concerning subsequent events. Moreover, in his objections to the issues addressed in the Report and Recommendation, Plaintiff principally restates the conclusory allegations he set forth in the motion papers. Because Plaintiff's objections merely reiterate its original arguments, as well as the facts and issues that were presented to Judge Locke, the undersigned may review the Report and Recommendation for clear error.
Nevertheless, although de novo review is not required, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report and Recommendation, and having reviewed the motion papers and the applicable law, the Court has determined that Judge Locke has thoughtfully and correctly applied the law.
Accordingly, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation, dated July 7, 2026, DE 109, of Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke in its entirety.
Accordingly,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: (1) Defendants' Motion to Dismiss the Complaint pursuant to Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, DE 91, is GRANTED; (2) Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint, DE 96, is DENIED; (3) Plaintiff's Motion to Compel, DE 102, is DENIED; and (4) Plaintiff's Motion for Declaratory Judgment, DE 108, is DENIED. Plaintiff's Complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
The Court certifies pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(3) that any appeal from this Order would not be taken in good faith and therefore in forma pauperis status is denied for the purpose of any appeal. See Coppedge v. United States, 369 U.S. 438, 444-45 (1962).
The Clerk of the Court is respectfully directed to serve a copy of this Order on the pro se Plaintiff and close the case.
Ordered by Judge Gary R. Brown on 7/29/2026. (LJ)