Brown v. Whitley

• Court: District Court, E.D. New York
• Decided: May 12, 2022
• Docket: 1:21-cv-02933
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------------------------------- X : LORRAINE BROWN, : Plaintiff, : MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

– against – : 21-CV-2933 (AMD) (CLP)

: JOHN E. WHITLEY, Acting Secretary of the Army, and DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, : : Defendants.

--------------------------------------------------------------- X ANN M. DONNELLY, United States District Judge :

On May 24, 2021, the plaintiff commenced this action against the defendants, alleging

racial and national origin discrimination, hostile work environment, retaliation and wrongful

termination, in violation of Title VII of the Civil Righ ts Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 200e et seq. (ECF No. 1.) On January 14, 2022, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. (ECF No. 16.) On

February 21, 2022, the plaintiff submitted a letter motion seeking leave to file a second amended

complaint to add a new plaintiff. (ECF No. 19.) On April 22, 2022, Chief Magistrate Judge Cheryl L. Pollak issued a characteristically thoughtful Report and Recommendation, in which she recommends that the plaintiff’s motion be denied without prejudice to the plaintiff filing a formal motion to amend, including an amended complaint and memorandum of law in accordance with the Local Rules of this District. She further recommends that the defendants’ time to answer, move or otherwise respond be stayed until any motion to amend is resolved. (See ECF No. 22.) No objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed, and the time for doing so has passed. A 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). To accept those portions of a report and recommendation to which no timely objection has been made, “a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record.” Jarvis v. N.

Am. Globex Fund L.P., 823 F. Supp. 2d 161, 163 (E.D.N.Y. 2011) (quoting Wilds v. United Parcel Serv., 262 F. Supp. 2d 163, 169 (S.D.N.Y. 2003)). Judge Pollak’s well-reasoned and comprehensive Report and Recommendation contains no error. Accordingly, I adopt it in its entirety. If the plaintiff wishes to file a formal motion to amend, she must do so by June 11, 2022.

SO ORDERED. s/Ann M. Donnelly ___________________________ ANN M. DONNELLY United States District Judge Dated: Brooklyn, New York May 12, 2022