DECISION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Selina Hayes commenced this action on September 18, 2024, asserting claims under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, 29 U.S.C. § 621 et seq. (“ADEA“), the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. (“ADA“), and New York State Human Rights Law, N.Y. Exec. Law § 290 et seq. (“NYSHRL“), against her former employer, Defendant Horizon Village, Inc. Dkt. 1. The case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Leslie G. Foschio for all proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 12.

On December 2, 2024, Defendant moved for partial dismissal of the Complaint. Dkt. 11. Specifically, Defendant argued that “Plaintiff‘s claims of disability and age discrimination, and hostile work environment must be dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).” Dkt. 11-1 at 2.¹ Plaintiff opposed Defendant‘s motion and cross moved for leave to amend. Dkt. 14. Defendant opposed Plaintiff‘s motion, Dkt. 17, and replied in further support of its own motion. Dkt. 16. Plaintiff also replied. Dkt. 19.

On September 26, 2025, Judge Foschio issued a combined Report and Recommendation and Decision and Order (“R&R“) recommending that this Court grant both motions. See Dkt. 20. Neither party filed objections, and the time to do so has expired. See Dkt. 35.

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). A district court 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, and in the absence of any objections, the Court accepts Judge Foschio‘s recommendation.

For the reasons above and in the R&R, Defendant‘s [11] motion to dismiss is GRANTED. Plaintiff‘s [14] motion for leave to amend is also GRANTED. As detailed in the R&R, by November 20, 2025, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint “from which are deleted Plaintiff‘s disparate treatment and hostile work environment claims, as well as her disability-based employment discrimination claims, but which includes the three additional paragraphs Plaintiff seeks to assert pertaining to the retaliation claims.” See Dkt. 20 at 26.

The case is referred back to Judge Foschio in accordance with the December 3, 2024 referral order. See Dkt. 12.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 21, 2025

Buffalo, New York

JOHN L. SINATRA, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Notes

Page numbers refer to the CM/ECF generated numbering in the header of each page.