SUMMARY ORDER

UPON DUE CONSIDERATION, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the district court be AFFIRMED.

Plaintiff-appellant Donna Leak, pro se, appeals from a June 23, 2010 judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Stein, J.), which dismissed her complaint for failure to state a claim and denied her leave to amend. We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review.

We review de novo the dismissal of a complaint pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), “construing the complaint liberally, accepting all factual allegations in the complaint as true, and drawing all reasonable inferences in the plaintiffs favor.” Chambers v. Time Warner, Inc., 282 F.3d 147, 152 (2d Cir. 2002). We review the denial of a motion for leave to amend the complaint for abuse of discretion. McCarthy v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp., 482 F.3d 184, 200 (2d Cir. 2007).

For substantially the same reasons set forth in the magistrate judge’s well-reasoned report and recommendation, we conclude that the district court properly dismissed Leak’s complaint and denied her motion to amend as futile.

We have considered all of Leak’s arguments on appeal and find them to be without merit. For the foregoing reasons, the judgment of the district court is hereby AFFIRMED.