William Ellis as Administrator of the Estate of James A. Ellis, Deceased v....

SSINES DISTRICFS UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT Ks FILED CS WESTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK S MAY - 7 2026 AND WILLIAM ELLIS as Administrator of Tat eR «> the Estate of JAMES A. ELLIS, DIST Deceased, Plaintiff, 24-CV-1242 (JLS) (JJM) v. ERIE COUNTY, KEVIN McGEE, D.O., JOANNE McVEY, CARRIE LUDWIG, HOLLY BRYANT, STEPHANIE SLY, AMANDA MARTINEZ, GRACE MOKA, EMILY TAGGART, and JOHN DOE 1 through 5, Defendants.

DECISION AND ORDER Plaintiff William Ellis, as Administrator of the estate of James A. Ellis commenced this action on November 26, 2024, alleging claims under 42 U.S.C. § 19838 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”), 42 U.S.C. § 12111 et seq., based on James Ellis’s death while in pretrial custody at the Erie County Holding Center. See Dkt. 1. Plaintiff filed an amended complaint on March 31, 2025. Dkt. 11. The case has been referred to United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy for all proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 2.

On June 5, 2025, Defendants moved for judgment on the pleadings. Dkt. 17.

Plaintiff opposed the motion, Dkt. 21, and Defendants replied. Dkt. 22. On March 26, 2026, Judge McCarthy issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that this Court grant Defendants’ [17] motion in part and deny it in part. See Dkt. 26.

Plaintiff objected to the R&R. Dkt. 27. He argues that the R&R “is clearly erroneous and contrary to law in the following manner: (a) the Magistrate Judge erred in dismissing McGee for lack of personal involvement; [and] (b) the [R&R] is silent on whether or not plaintiff was granted leave to amend his complaint.” Id. at 1-2.1 Defendants opposed the objections, Dkt. 29, and Plaintiff did not reply.

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)(8). 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)(8). 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 its de novo review, the Court accepts and adopts Judge McCarthy’s recommendation. For the reasons above and in the R&R, Defendants’ [17] motion for judgment on the pleadings is GRANTED. Plaintiff is granted leave to amend, including as to Defendant Kevin McGee, on a schedule to be determined by the Magistrate Judge.

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

The Court refers the case back to Judge McCarthy for further proceedings consistent with the referral order at Dkt. 2.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 7, 2025 Buffalo, New York \ — □ JOHN L-SINATRA, JR. wae UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUD