Opinion

Pawlik

Court
District Court, W.D. New York
Filed
Feb 11, 2026
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 38.7%

The opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Ko RIO 25

WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Ss By

| FEB 11 2096

a La,

West LOEWENGUIH

DASSY D. PAWLICK, RN DISTRICT

Plaintiff,

v. 24-CV-978 (JLS) (JJM)

BUFFALO CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT,

also known as Buffalo Public Schools;

THE CITY OF BUFFALO BOARD OF

EDUCATION,

Defendants

DECISION AND ORDER

Plaintiff commenced this action, which seeks relief for sex, age, and disability

discrimination, against her former employer in October 2024, Dkt. 1. Defendant

moved to dismiss the complaint. Dkt. 5. Plaintiff responded. Dkt. 8. Defendant

did not reply.

This Court referred the case to United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J.

McCarthy for all proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 6.

On September 29, 2025, Judge McCarthy issued a Report and Recommendation

(“R&R”), recommending that this Court: (1) grant Defendants’ motion as to

Plaintiffs disability discrimination claim, with leave to amend; and (2) otherwise

deny Defendants’ motion. See Dkt. 10. No party filed objections, and the time to do

so has passed.

A district court may accept, reject, or modify the findings or recommendations

of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). It must

conduct a de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge’s recommendation

to which a party objects. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). But

neither 28 U.S.C. § 636 nor Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 requires a district

court to review the recommendation of a magistrate judge to which no objections are

raised. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149-50 (1985).

This Court carefully reviewed the R&R and the relevant record. Based on

that review, the Court accepts and adopts Judge McCarthy’s recommendation.

For the reasons stated above, and in the R&R, this Court GRANTS, IN

PART, AND DENIES, IN PART, Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. 5). Plaintiffs

disability discrimination claim is dismissed, with leave to amend.! Defendants’

motion otherwise is denied. The case is referred back to Judge McCarthy for

further proceedings, consistent with the referral order at Dkt. 6.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 11, 2026

Buffalo, New York

at L. SINATRA, JR.

TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

1 Any amended complaint shall be filed in accordance with a deadline to be set by

Judge McCarthy.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.