The opinion
eae Week?
DOCUMENT
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DOC #:
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ——_—_—_
DATE FILED; 12/20/2023
Brandon D. Sherr,
Plaintiff, 1:23-cv-08693 (JLR) (SDA)
-against- ORDER
Board of Elections in the City of New York,
Defendant.
STEWART D. AARON, United States Magistrate Judge:
Defendant’s pending motion to dismiss having been referred to the undersigned for a
Report and Recommendation (see Referral Order, ECF No. 24), the Court intends to consider
together Defendant’s motion to dismiss and Plaintiff's motion to certify a collective action.* See,
e.g., Uraga v. Amici 519 LLC, No. 17-CV-03547 (ALC), 2018 WL 3579850, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. July 25,
2018) (noting that motion to dismiss and motion for conditional certification were “more
efficiently decided in one order” given overlapping arguments); Deas v. Alba Carting & Demolition
Inc., No. 17-CV-03947 (RA), 2018 WL 11409286, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Jan. 22, 2018) (deciding motions
in single order); Chen v. Major League Baseball, 6 F. Supp. 3d 449, 451 (S.D.N.Y. 2014) (same),
aff'd sub nom. Chen v. Major League Baseball Properties, Inc., 798 F.3d 72 (2d Cir. 2015).
+ “Orders authorizing notice are often referred to as orders ‘certifying’ a collective action, even though
the [Fair Labor Standards Act] does not contain a certification requirement.” Guillen v. Marshalls of MA,
Inc., 750 F. Supp. 2d 469, 475 (S.D.N.Y. 2010).
Accordingly, it is hereby Ordered that, no later than January 2, 2024, the parties shall file
a proposed briefing schedule for the remainder of the briefing on both motions or, if the parties
cannot agree, their respective proposals regarding the briefing schedule.
SO ORDERED.
Dated: New York, New York
December 20, 2023
STEWART D. AARON
United States Magistrate Judge