From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leidner v. Napolitano

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Northern Division at Covington
Mar 3, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-197-DLB (E.D. Ky. Mar. 3, 2010)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-197-DLB.

March 3, 2010


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (R R) of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. #57) entered on February 5, 2010. The R R recommends that Plaintiff's motion to file a second amended complaint to include additional counts of alleged retaliation relating to the revocation of Plaintiff's security clearance and request for additional time for discovery be denied.

Plaintiff has not submitted any objections to the R R, and the time for filing such objections having now expired, and the Court agreeing with the analysis of the Magistrate Judge, and being otherwise sufficiently advised,

IT IS ORDERED that:

(1) The Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. #57) is hereby ADOPTED as the findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Court; and
(2) Plaintiff's Second Motion to Amend the Complaint and Request for Additional Time for New Discovery (Doc. #45) is hereby DENIED.


Summaries of

Leidner v. Napolitano

United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Northern Division at Covington
Mar 3, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-197-DLB (E.D. Ky. Mar. 3, 2010)
Case details for

Leidner v. Napolitano

Case Details

Full title:NANCY LEIDNER PLAINTIFF v. JANET NAPOLITANO, SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF…

Court:United States District Court, E.D. Kentucky, Northern Division at Covington

Date published: Mar 3, 2010

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-197-DLB (E.D. Ky. Mar. 3, 2010)

Citing Cases

Dibbern v. Univ. of Mich.

Other courts in this circuit have held that "where some time has elapsed between when the employer learns of…

Condiff v. Hart County School District

However, "where some time has elapsed between when the employer learns of the protected activity and the…