Oudekerk v. Thomas et al

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
NICHOLAS OUDEKERK,
Plaintiff,
v.
SERGEANT THOMAS, et al.,
Defendants.
9:24-cv-0109
(ECC/CBF)
Appearances:
Nicholas Oudekerk, Pro se Plaintiff
Corey A. Ruggerio, Esq., for Defendants
Hon. Elizabeth C. Coombe, United States District Judge:
MEMORANDUM-DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Nicholas Oudekerk commenced this action asserting claims under 42 U.S.C. §
1983 arising out of his incarceration at the Warren County Correctional Facility. Dkt. No. 1. On
November 25, 2025, Defendants filed a motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure (FRCP) 12(c). Dkt. No. 53. The motion was fully briefed. Dkt. Nos. 62,
63.
This matter was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Carla B. Freedman who, on
March 11, 2026, issued a Report-Recommendation and Order recommending that Defendants’
motion be granted in part, and that the Complaint be dismissed without prejudice due to Plaintiff’s
failure to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to bringing suit. Dkt. No. 76. Magistrate Judge
Freedman advised the parties that under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), they had fourteen days within
Case 9:24-cv-00109-ECC-CBF Document 79 Filed 05/29/26 Page 1 of 2

2
which to file written objections to the report and that the failure to object to the report within
fourteen days would preclude appellate review. Dkt. No. 76 at 12-13. No objections were filed.
As no objections to the Report-Recommendation have been filed, and the time for filing
objections has expired, the Court reviews the Report-Recommendation for clear error. See
Petersen v. Astrue, 2 F. Supp. 3d 223, 228–29 (N.D.N.Y. 2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b) advisory
committee’s note to 1983 amendment. Having reviewed the Report-Recommendation for clear
error and found none, the Court adopts the Report-Recommendation in its entirety.
For these reasons, it is
ORDERED that the Report-Recommendation, Dkt. No. 76, is ADOPTED in its entirety;
and it is further
ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings pursuant to FRCP
12(c), Dkt. No. 53, is GRANTED in part; and it is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Complaint, Dkt. No. 1, is DISMISSED without prejudice;
and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case; and it is further
ORDERED that the Clerk serve a copy of this Order upon the parties in accordance with
the Local Rules.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: May 29, 2026
Case 9:24-cv-00109-ECC-CBF Document 79 Filed 05/29/26 Page 2 of 2