Mitchell v. SUNY Upstate Medical University et al
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations re 5 Report and Recommendations: The Court hereby ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Baxter's Order and Report-Recommendation is ADOPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further ORDERS that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Baxter for review of the amended complaint and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. Signed by U.S. District Judge Mae A. D'Agostino on 6/22/2017. (Copy served via regular mail)(ban)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ROBBIE O. MITCHELL,
SUNY UPSTATE MEDICAL UNIVERSITY;
BRIAN C. REED, Materials Management
Admin; and LINDA A. MAZZONE, Leave
ROBBIE O. MITCHELL
1924 E. Genesee Street, Apt. 4
Syracuse, New York 13210
Plaintiff pro se
Mae A. D'Agostino, U.S. District Judge:
Plaintiff commenced this action on May 18, 2017, alleging employment discrimination in
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. See Dkt.
No. 1. In an Order and Report-Recommendation dated May 22, 2017, Magistrate Judge Baxter
recommended that the Court dismiss with prejudice the claims against Defendants Reed and
Mazzone because individuals cannot be held liable under the ADA. See Dkt. No. 5 at 4. As to
Defendant SUNY Upstate, Magistrate Judge Baxter recommended that the complaint be
dismissed without prejudice since it is not clear that amendment would be futile. See id. at 7-8.
Although Plaintiff did not object to the Order and Report-Recommendation, on June 15,
2017, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. See Dkt. No. 6. Currently before the Court is
Magistrate Judge Baxter's Order and Report-Recommendation.
When a party files specific objections to a magistrate judge's report-recommendation, the
district court makes a "de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed
findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However,
when a party files "[g]eneral or conclusory objections or objections which merely recite the same
arguments [that he presented] to the magistrate judge," the court reviews those recommendations
for clear error. O'Diah v. Mawhir, No. 9:08-CV-322, 2011 WL 933846, *1 (N.D.N.Y. Mar. 16,
2011) (citations and footnote omitted). After the appropriate review, "the 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).
Having reviewed the May 22, 2017 Order and Report-Recommendation, the Court finds
that Magistrate Judge Baxter correctly determined that the claims against the individual
Defendants should be dismissed with prejudice and that the claims against Defendant SUNY
Upstate should be dismissed without prejudice. Since Plaintiff has since filed an amended
complaint and renewed application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the Court will refer
this matter to Magistrate Judge Baxter for review of those filings.
Accordingly, the Court hereby
ORDERS that Magistrate Judge Baxter's Order and Report-Recommendation is
ADOPTED in its entirety for the reasons stated therein; and the Court further
ORDERS that this matter is referred to Magistrate Judge Baxter for review of the
amended complaint and application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 22, 2017
Albany, New York
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?