Court, Explained
U.S. Federal District Courts
←Back to docket
S.D.N.Y.Procedural orderFiled Sept. 22, 2025

Soto v. Alliance Elevator Company

Full caption

Alexander Soto, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Alliance Elevator Company, LLC et al.

Judge
Rochon
Docket
1:25-cv-01735
Court
U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
Pages
2
Civil ProcedureFlsa
In one sentence

In Soto v. Alliance Elevator, Judge Rochon ordered the parties to discuss magistrate-judge consent and possible settlement conferencing after mediation failed.

Who this affects

Alexander Soto and the defendants, Alliance Elevator Company, LLC and the other defendants named in the case, must address magistrate-judge consent and possible settlement-conference referral.

What happened

In Alexander Soto v. Alliance Elevator Company, LLC, the court said mediation had been unsuccessful. The court therefore asked the parties to consider whether they would agree to have Magistrate Judge Gorenstein handle the rest of the case.

If both sides agree, they must submit a signed consent form within two weeks, and the court must approve it before the magistrate judge takes over. If either side does not agree, the parties must tell the court in a joint letter without identifying who objected and must state whether they want a settlement conference.

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon issued this case-management order. It did not decide the parties’ underlying claims, and it stated that no negative consequence would result from refusing consent.

The detailed version

For law students, journalists, and other readers who want the full reasoning

Case
Soto v. Alliance Elevator Company · No. 1:25-cv-01735
Judge
Rochon
Date
Sept. 22, 2025

Background

The court was informed that mediation had been unsuccessful. The opinion does not decide the merits of the parties’ claims.

Order concerning a magistrate judge

To conserve resources, promote efficiency, and seek a faster resolution, the court ordered the parties to discuss consenting under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) to having Magistrate Judge Gorenstein conduct all further proceedings. If both parties consent, they must file a fully signed consent and reference form within two weeks of the order’s date. If the court approves the form, Magistrate Judge Gorenstein will conduct the remaining proceedings instead of Judge Rochon. An appeal would go directly to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

If the parties do not consent

If any party does not consent, the parties must file a joint letter within two weeks stating that they do not consent, without identifying the party or parties who declined. The court stated that withholding consent would not result in adverse consequences. The parties must also state whether they want a settlement conference before Magistrate Judge Gorenstein.

Additional reminder and disposition

The court reminded the parties that settlements of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act often require court approval, citing Second Circuit precedent. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon entered a case-management order requiring the parties to consider magistrate-judge consent and, if necessary, a settlement conference. The order did not grant or deny a merits motion or resolve the underlying claims.

The authoritative version

Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.

Open opinion PDF →
Summary written with AI assistance. See how summaries are made. Spot something wrong? Tell us.