Beard v. Mason et al

OCR transcription for search; preserved printed pages are authoritative

Case 1:24-cv-00433-JLS-MJR Document94_ Filed 11/18/25 Pagelof4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

JADA C. BEARD,
Plaintiff,
v. 24-CV-433 (JLS) (MJR)

TRACEY MASON, in her Official
Capacity-Chief Nursing Officer;
WESTERN NEW YORK CHILDREN’S
PSYCHIATRIC CENTER;

NEW YORK STATE OFFICE OF
MENTAL HEALTH; NEW YORK
STATE; AMERICAN NURSES
ASSOCIATION, INC., also known as
American Nurses Association;
MAXIM HEALTHCARE SERVICES,
INC.; AMERICAN NURSES
ASSOCIATION - NEW YORK, INC.;
and OFFICE OF ATTORNEY
GENERAL,

Defendants.

DECISION AND ORDER
Plaintiff Jada C. Beard commenced this action on May 3, 2024. Dkt. 1. The
Second Amended Complaint, filed on July 17, 2024, is the operative complaint. See
Dkt. 12. Plaintiff asserts discrimination claims under various federal and state laws.
See id. The case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Michael J.
Roemer for all proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 25.
Before the Court is Judge Roemer’s Report, Recommendation, and Order

(“R&R”), Dkt. 838, which addresses the following motions:

AUTHENTICATED
U.S. GOVERNMENT.
INFORMATION

GPO.

Case 1:24-cv-00433-JLS-MJR Document94_ Filed 11/18/25 Page2of4

e A motion to dismiss by Defendants Tracey Mason, New York State, New
York State Office of Mental Health, Western New York Children’s
Psychiatric Center (the “State Defendants”) (Dkt. 48);

e A motion for judgment on the pleadings by Defendant Maxim Healthcare
Services, Inc. (“Maxim”) (Dkt. 51);

e Plaintiffs motion for Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts (Dkt. 28);

e Plaintiffs motion for New York State Attorney General Attorneys to file a
Notice of Appearance (Dkt. 58);

e Plaintiffs motion for Extension of Time to Serve (Dkt. 54); and

e Plaintiffs motion to notify and invite the Attorney General of the United
States to intervene (Dkt. 75).

Judge Roemer “recommended that Defendant [Maxim]’s motion for judgment on
the pleadings (Dkt. No. 51) be granted and Plaintiffs motion for judicial notice of
adjudicative facts (Dkt. No. 28) be denied as moot.” Dkt. 83 at 27. He “further
recommended that the State Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Dkt. No. 48) be granted as
to Defendants Tracey Mason, New York State Office of Mental Health, and the
Western New York Children’s Psychiatric Center, and denied as to Defendant New
York State, on the basis of insufficient service of process.” Id. He recommended that
dismissal be “without prejudice ....” Id. at 28.

In addition, Judge Roemer recommended that Plaintiff's motion for extension of
time to serve (Dkt. No. 54) be granted as explained [in the R&R)” and that “Plaintiff be
given leave to replead the claims discussed herein, and the claims previously

addressed in the decision of the District Court dated April 20, 2025. (See Dkt. No. 82).”
2

Case 1:24-cv-00433-JLS-MJR Document94 _ Filed 11/18/25 Page3of4

Id. Lastly, Judge Roemer denied “Plaintiffs motion for an order directing the state
attorney to file a notice of appearance (Dkt. No. 53)” and further denied “Plaintiffs
motion for certification of a constitutional challenge (Dkt. No. 75).” Id.

Plaintiff and the State Defendants filed objections. Dkt. 86, 87. The State
Defendants argue that Judge Roemer erred in recommending that: (1) “Plaintiff has
met the prima facie burden necessary to proceed with a Title VII disparate treatment
claim based on race”; (2) “Plaintiff receive additional time under Rule 4(m) to serve the
remaining State Defendants... .”; and (8) “Plaintiffs state law claims for prospective
injunctive relief against Defendant Mason in her official capacity are not barred by
sovereign immunity because she was found to have fall within the Ex Parte Young
exception.” See Dkt. 86. Plaintiff asserts various objections to Judge Roemer’s
conclusions as to each of the motions at Dkt. 48, 51, 28, 53, 54, and 75. See Dkt. 87.
The State Defendants and Maxim opposed Plaintiffs objections, Dkt. 89, 90. Plaintiff
replied. Dkt. 91.1

For a dispositive matter, the district court reviews de novo the parts of the R&R
to which the parties object. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(8). For a non-
dispositive matter, the district court reviews the R&R for clear error. 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1)(A); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). See also Fielding v. Tollaksen, 510 F.3d 175, 178
(2d Cir. 2007). 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).

1 Plaintiff then filed a Notice of Discrepancy in Counsel’s Address of Record, Dkt. 92,
and a Notice of Submission to The United States Department of Justice. Dkt. 93.

3

Case 1:24-cv-00433-JLS-MJR Document94_ Filed 11/18/25 Page4of4

This Court carefully reviewed the R&R, the objections briefing, and the relevant
record. Based on its de novo review, the Court accepts Judge Roemer’s
recommendations.

For the reasons above and in the R&R, Defendant Maxim’s motion for judgment
on the pleadings (Dkt. 51) 1s GRANTED. Plaintiffs motion for judicial notice of
adjudicative facts (Dkt. 28) is DENIED as moot. The State Defendants’ motion to
dismiss (Dkt. 48), is GRANTED as to Defendants Tracey Mason, New York State
Office of Mental Health, and the Western New York Children’s Psychiatric Center,
and DENIED as to Defendant New York State as discussed in the R&R. In addition,
Plaintiffs motion for extension of time to serve (Dkt. 54) is GRANTED as discussed in
the R&R. Plaintiffis granted leave to amend her claims as discussed in the R&R. The
R&R is otherwise AFFIRMED.

The case is referred back to Judge Roemer pursuant to the August 15, 2024
referral order. See Dkt. 25.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 18, 2025
Buffalo, New York

/

se
“JOHN‘L- SINATRA, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICP JUDGE