# Brown v. Whitley

> District Court, E.D. New York · May 12, 2022

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10307929

## Case

- **Court:** District Court, E.D. New York
- **Decided:** May 12, 2022
- **Opinion:** 100trialcourt
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10307929

## Opinion text

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

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10307929. Public record. Not legal advice.