Xu v. The City of New York
- Analisa Torres
- 1:08-cv-11339
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In Xu v. City of New York, Judge Torres denied Xu’s reconsideration motion, leaving summary judgment for defendants in place.
Yan Ping Xu’s reconsideration request was denied, and the prior order granting summary judgment to the City of New York and Brenda M. McIntyre and denying Xu’s motion for partial summary judgment remained in place.
What happened
In Xu v. The City of New York, Yan Ping Xu brought an employment-discrimination case against the City of New York and Brenda M. McIntyre. Xu alleged violations of federal, state, and city laws, including the Fourteenth Amendment and Title VII.
The parties had filed competing requests for summary judgment. The court previously adopted a magistrate judge’s recommendation, granted the defendants’ request, and denied Xu’s request for partial summary judgment. Xu then asked the court to reconsider that decision, arguing that it should have reviewed the recommendation more fully.
Judge Analisa Torres denied the reconsideration motion. She found that Xu identified no change in controlling law, new evidence, or clear error, and explained that the court had properly reviewed specific objections while not being required to reconsider the entire recommendation from scratch.
The detailed version
- Xu v. The City of New York · No. 1:08-cv-11339
- Analisa Torres
- May 13, 2022
Background
Yan Ping Xu brought an employment-discrimination action against the City of New York and Brenda M. McIntyre under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging violations of the Fourteenth Amendment, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. The opinion does not restate the case’s underlying facts and instead refers to an earlier order and report and recommendation.
The parties cross-moved for summary judgment, which asks the court to decide whether a case can be resolved without a trial because there is no genuine dispute over material facts. The court referred those motions to Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger for a report and recommendation. On March 31, 2021, Judge Torres adopted the recommendation in full, overruled Xu’s objections, granted the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, and denied Xu’s motion for partial summary judgment.
Motion for Reconsideration
Xu moved for reconsideration of that order. Under Local Civil Rule 6.3, reconsideration is available only in limited circumstances, such as an intervening change in controlling law, new evidence, or a need to correct clear error or prevent serious injustice. It is not a way to relitigate issues already decided.
Xu argued that the court should have reviewed the entire report and recommendation anew because it addressed summary judgment. She also asserted that she had made specific objections, but she gave no examples and cited no supporting authority.
Court’s Analysis and Ruling
The court explained that it was required to conduct a fresh review only of the portions of the report and recommendation to which Xu made specific objections. It was not required to review the entire report anew merely because the underlying motions concerned summary judgment.
The court also explained that it had closely reviewed Xu’s objections in the earlier order. Objections that repeated arguments previously made before the magistrate judge were reviewed for clear error. New arguments raised for the first time in objections were not properly considered, and vague or conclusory objections did not warrant fresh review.
Judge Torres concluded that Xu had not shown a change in controlling law, new evidence, or clear error that could justify reconsideration. The court therefore denied Xu’s motion for reconsideration and directed the Clerk of Court to terminate the motions pending at ECF Nos. 298 and 299.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.