
    Samuel Ernest CARTEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, Defendant, Teachers’ Retirement Board, Defendant-Appellee.
    No. 09-3391-cv.
    United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
    May 26, 2010.
    Samuel Ernest Carty, New York, NY, pro se.
    
      Susan Choi-Hausman, Assistant Corporation Counsel (for Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel for the City of New York) New York, NY, for Appellees.
    PRESENT: JOSÉ A. CABRANES, ROBERT A. KATZMANN, Circuit Judges, J. GARVAN MURTHA, District Judge.
    
    
      
       The Honorable J. Garvan Murtha, of the United States District Court for the District of Vermont, sitting by designation.
    
   SUMMARY ORDER

Plaintiff Samuel Ernest Cartey appeals from the June 29, 2009 judgment of the District Court dismissing his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. On appeal, plaintiff argues that the District Court erred in concluding that the Teachers’ Retirement Sjrstem of the City of New York is exempt from the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. § 1001 et seq. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the facts and procedural history of this case.

We have reviewed plaintiffs claim and find it to be without merit. Substantially for the reasons stated by Magistrate Judge Douglas F. Eaton in his careful and thoughtful report and recommendation of March 18, 2009, see Cartey v. City Univ. of N.Y., No. 08 Civ. 1608 (S.D.N.Y. March 13, 2009), which the District Court adopted, see Cartey v. City Univ. of N.Y., No. 08 Civ. 1608 (S.D.N.Y. June 26, 2009), the June 29, 2009 judgment of the District Court is AFFIRMED.  