Summary
denying motion to dismiss as to hostile work environment claim where plaintiff alleged derogatory statements about pregnant women; plaintiff was told she could not work once she reached the sixth month of her pregnancy; and was ultimately terminated for failure to work the graveyard shift
Summary of this case from Whyte v. N.Y. State PoliceOpinion
12-cv-1715(SJF)(AKT)
03-27-2013
TATIANA AMADOR, Plaintiff, v. ALL FOODS, INC., Defendant.
ORDER
FEUERSTEIN, J.
Pending before the Court is the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson ("the Report"), dated February 20, 2013, recommending, inter alia, that the motion of defendant All Foods, Inc. ("defendant") to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure be denied. No objections have been filed to the Report. For the reasons stated herein, the Report of Magistrate Judge Tomlinson is accepted in its entirety.
I
Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure permits magistrate judges to conduct proceedings on dispositive pretrial matters without the consent of the parties. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Any portion of a report and recommendation on dispositive matters, to which a timely objection has been made, is reviewed de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). The court, however, is not required to review the factual findings or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to which no proper objections are interposed. See, Thomas v. Arn. 474 U.S. 140, 150, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985). To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate judge to which no timely objection has been made, the district judge need only be satisfied that there is no clear error apparent on the face of the record. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); Johnson v. Goord, 487 F.Supp.2d 377, 379 (S.D.N.Y. 2007), aff'd, 305 Fed. Appx. 815 (2d Cir. Jan. 1, 2009); Baptichon v. Nevada State Bank, 304 F.Supp.2d 451, 453 (E.D.N.Y. 2004), aff'd, 125 Fed.Appx. 374 (2d Cir. 2005).
Whether or not proper objections have been filed, the district judge may, after review, accept, reject, or modify any of the magistrate judge's findings or recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).
II
No party has filed any objections to Magistrate Judge Tomlinson's Report. Upon review, the Court is satisfied that the Report is not facially erroneous. Accordingly, the Court accepts Magistrate Judge Tomlinson's Report as an order of the Court. For the reasons set forth in the Report, defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is denied. SO ORDERED.
_______________
SANDRA J. FEUERSTEIN
United States District Judge
Dated: March 27, 2013
Central Islip, New York