Aquino v. Uber Technologies, Inc.

Background

The court was informed that mediation between the parties had been unsuccessful. The court also had received Uber Technologies, Inc.’s motion to dismiss. The opinion does not describe the motion’s arguments or rule on it.

Order concerning a magistrate judge

To conserve resources, promote efficiency, and seek a faster resolution, the court ordered the parties to discuss whether they would consent under 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) to having Magistrate Judge Parker conduct all further proceedings. The consent would have to be voluntary and would permit the magistrate judge to handle the case through trial and entry of final judgment.

If all parties consented, they were required to submit a completed consent-and-reference form within two weeks of the order’s date. If the court approved the form, further proceedings would occur before Magistrate Judge Parker rather than before the district court. Any appeal would go directly to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.

If any party did not consent, the parties were required to file a joint letter within two weeks stating that they did not consent, without identifying the party or parties who withheld consent. The order stated that withholding consent would not result in adverse consequences. The parties also had to state whether they wanted a settlement conference before the magistrate judge.

Other reminder and disposition

The court reminded the parties that settlements of claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act generally must be approved by the court. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon ordered the parties to consider consent to proceedings before Magistrate Judge Parker or a settlement conference. The order did not decide the motion to dismiss, the merits of the claims, or whether the case would settle.