With respect to the sixth cause of action, negligence, "[t]o hold a defendant liable in common-law negligence, a plaintiff must demonstrate (1) a duty owed by the defendant to the plaintiff, (2) a breach of that duty, and (3) that the breach constituted a proximate cause of the injury" (Paden v Brooklyn Museum of Arts, 226 AD3d 920, 921 [2024] [internal quotation marks omitted]; see Santoro v Poughkeepsie Crossings, LLC, 180 AD3d 12, 18 [2019]). Here, the proposed amended complaint alleges, in relevant part, that "both Xinshuang Zhai and [defendant] owed a duty of care to the Plaintiff when both Defendants voluntarily assumed the duty to secure the Plaintiff's entry into the United States under TN status." However, neither Zhai nor defendant had such a duty, as it is USCBP, not Zhai or defendant, who is authorized to approve applications for TN status (see U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, "TN NAFTA Professionals," https://www.uscis.gov/working-in-the-united-states/temporary-workers/tn-nafta-professionals [last accessed Mar. 11, 2025]; see also Weiss v Vacca, 219 AD3d 1375, 1376-1377 [2023]; Santoro v Poughkeepsie Crossings, LLC, 180 AD3d at 21; Tirpack v 125 N. 10, LLC, 130 AD3d 917, 919 [2015]). Thus, the Civil Court providently exercised its discretion in denying plaintiff leave to amend the complaint to assert the additional cause of action of negligence (see Klein v Signature Bank, Inc., 204 AD3d 892, 898 [2022]; Healey v Ean Holdings, LLC, 180 AD3d 1017, 1018 [2020]; Del Bourgo v 138 Sidelines Corp., 208 AD2d 795, 796 [1994]).