TES DISTR] KO oF FILED Tey UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Ss Px WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK NOV 2023 Lig R 7 A □□□ re Loewenauth<— wh MARK BENNETT, STERN DisTRICL Plaintiff, v. 17-CV-13830 (JLS) (HKS) TDY INDUSTRIES, LLC, Defendant/ Fourth-Party Plaintiff, and ALLEGHENY TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendant/ Third-Party Plaintiff, v. STROM ENGINEERING CORPORATION, Third-Party Defendant/ Fourth-Party Defendant.

DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff Mark Bennett commenced an action in Supreme Court, Erie County on December 1, 2017 asserting claims against Allegheny Technologies, Inc. (“ATI”) for negligence under New York law in connection with injuries he allegedly sustained from a workplace accident. Dkt. 1-2 at 4-6.1 ATI removed the action on December 26, 2017. Dkt. 1. On January 3, 2018, United States District Judge Lawrence J. Vilardo

Unless otherwise noted, page references are to the numbering automatically generated by CM/ECF, which appears in the header of each page.

referred the case to United States Magistrate Judge H. Kenneth Schroeder, Jr. for all proceedings under

(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 6.2 On January 16, 2017, ATI filed a third-party complaint against Strom Engineering Corporation (“Strom”). Dkt. 8. On April 28, 2020, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint adding TDY Industries, LLC (“TDY”) as a defendant. Dkt. 46. Plaintiff then filed a Second Amended Complaint on June 10, 2020. Dkt. 53. The next day, TDY filed a fourth-party complaint against Strom. Dkt. 54. On October 14, 2021, ATI and TDY moved for summary judgment. Dkt. 73. Strom moved for summary judgment on October 15, 2021. Dkt. 75. Also on October 15, 2021, Plaintiff filed a motion to strike seeking to preclude ATI, TDY and Strom from asserting affirmative defenses based on Plaintiffs receipt of workers’ compensation benefits. Dkt. 76. The parties then briefed these motions. See Dkt. 78- 80. On September 7, 2024, Judge Schroeder issued a Report, Recommendation and Order (“R&R”) denying Plaintiffs [76] motion to strike and recommending that this Court deny the [73] and [75] motions for summary judgment. Dkt. 88. On October 4, 2023, ATI and TDY objected to the R&R. Dkt. 91. They argue that (1) Plaintiffs claims against ATI and TDY are barred because TDY was a “special employer” of Plaintiff; and (2) claims against ATI should not proceed because ATI was separate and distinct from TDY and, therefore, ATI is not liable for any alleged acts or omissions of TDY.

2 The case was transferred to the undersigned on February 18, 2020. Dkt. 44.

On October 5, 2023, Strom objected to the R&R, arguing that “ATI and TDY were both Plaintiffs special employer at the time of his accident and, therefore Plaintiffs sole remedy is under the Workers’ Compensation Law of New York.” Dkt. 93 at 7. Strom further argues that “the conditions for indemnity and contribution have not been met as a matter of law.” Jd. at 7. ATI and TDY responded to Strom’s objections, Dkt. 95, but Strom did not file a reply. Plaintiff responded to both sets of objections, Dkt. 96, and ATI and TDY replied. Dkt. 97. Strom did not reply to Plaintiffs response. The deadlines for briefing on the objections have now passed. See Dkt. 92, 94. A district court may accept, reject, or modify the findings or recommendations of a magistrate judge.

(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

(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(8). But neither

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,

(1985). This Court carefully reviewed the R&R, the objections briefing, and the relevant record. Based on its de novo review, the Court accepts and adopts Judge Schroeder’s recommendation.

For the reasons stated above and in the R&R, this Court DENIES ATI and TDY’s [73] motion for summary judgment, and further DENIES Strom’s [75] motion for summary judgment.

SO ORDERED. Dated: November 8, 2023 2? Buffalo, New York a fo _ gait a ZL ee Wonk anne, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE