Hess v. Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc.

Background

Donald Hess, Elizabeth Padilla, Judith Holland, Tika Jones, Harry Lichtman, Dawn Mesa, Alexandria Smith, and Emily Vahue brought the action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. In their Third Amended Complaint, they sought damages under the New York Labor Law. They alleged that Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc. violated New York Labor Law § 191 by paying wages biweekly rather than weekly and violated § 195 by failing to provide hiring notices that fully complied with the statute.

Motion and Recommendation

Bed Bath & Beyond moved to dismiss under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Magistrate Judge Robert W. Lehrburger recommended granting the motion under Rule 12(b)(1) and dismissing the action without prejudice. The Report and Recommendation warned that failing to object within the required period would waive objections and prevent appellate review. Neither party objected, and the parties confirmed that the objection deadline had passed without an objection.

Court’s Review and Ruling

Because there were no timely objections, the court reviewed the recommendation for clear error on the face of the record. The court found the recommendation’s reasoning sound and not clearly erroneous, adopted the Report in its entirety, and granted Defendant’s motion to dismiss. It dismissed the case without prejudice to Plaintiffs filing in state court. The court also stated that the lack of timely objections, despite the clear notice in the Report, precluded appellate review, and directed the Clerk of Court to close the case.