Order | Filed: July 29, 2026
Skaf v. Google, LLC
Civil Rights: Jobs | New York Southern
Order
OPINION AND ORDER re: 27 MOTION to Dismiss [Partial Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint]. filed by Google, LLC. For the foregoing reasons, Google's motion to dismiss is GRANTED with respect to Counts 2, 6, 8, 11 and DENIED with respect to Counts 1, 3, 5, 9, and 10. That raises the question of whether leave to amend the dismissed claims should be granted. Leave to amend should be freely given "when justice so requires," Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2), but "it is within the sound discretion of the district court to grant or deny leave to amend," McCarthy v. Dun & Bradstreet Corp., 482 F.3d 184, 200 (2d Cir. 2007). Here, the Court concludes that Skaf should be granted leave to amend Count 8 - her retaliation claim premised on failure to transfer. Given Skaf's representations in her memorandum of law, see Pl.'s Mem. 13, "it is possible that [she] can plead additional facts to remedy the deficiencies ident ified in this opinion without prejudice to Defendant[]." Lipow v. Net1 UEPS Techs., Inc., 131 F. Supp. 3d 144, 174 (S.D.N.Y. 2015). By contrast, the Court declines to grant leave to amend to revive the rest of Skaf's dismissed claims beca use the problems with them are substantive. See, e.g., Roundtree v. NYC, No. 19-CV-2475 (JMF), 2021 WL 1667193, at *6 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 28, 2021) (collecting cases). Moreover, Skaf does not seek leave to amend or state that she is in possession of fa cts that would cure the problems with those claims. See, e.g., Clark v. Kitt, No. 12-CV-8061 (CS), 2014 WL 4054284, at *15 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 15, 2014); accord TechnoMarine SA v. Giftports, Inc., 758 F.3d 493, 505-06 (2d Cir. 2014). And the Court gran ted Skaf leave to amend in response to Google's motion to dismiss and explicitly warned that she would "not be given any further opportunity to amend the complaint to address issues raised by the motion to dismiss." ECF No. 22; see, e.g., Transeo S.A.R.L. v. Bessemer Venture Partners VI L.P., 936 F. Supp. 2d 376, 415 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). Skaf shall file any amended complaint consistent with this Opinion and Order no later than August 12, 2026. Unless and until the Court orders othe rwise, Google shall file its answer by the earlier of September 2, 2026, or three weeks after Skaf files an amended complaint. In addition, the initial pretrial conference, previously adjourned, is hereby reinstated and RESCHEDULED for September 10 , 2026, at 9:00 a.m. To access the conference, counsel should call the Court's dedicated conference call line at (855) 244-8681 and use access code 2303 019 3884, followed by the pound (#) key. When prompted for an attendee ID number, press the pound (#) key again. The parties are reminded to follow the procedures for telephone conferences described in the Court's Individual Rules and Practices for Civil Cases, which are available at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-jesse-m-furman, inc luding Rule 3(B)(i), which requires the parties, no later than twenty-four hours before the conference, to send a joint email to the Court with the names and honorifics (e.g., Mr., Ms., Dr., etc.) of counsel who may speak during the conference and the telephone numbers from which counsel expect to join the call. The parties are reminded that, no later than the Thursday before the conference, they must submit a joint status letter and proposed Case Management Plan. See ECF No. 6. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF No. 27. SO ORDERED. (Signed by Judge Jesse M. Furman on 7/29/2026) (Amended Pleadings due by 8/12/2026. Initial Conference set for 9/10/2026 at 09:00 AM before Judge Jesse M. Furman.) (ar)