Case 1:21-cv-06384-JMF Document 11 Filed 08/24/21 Page 1 of 5
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN RE:
`
`IBM ARBITRATION AGREEMENT LITIGATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`
`JESSE M. FURMAN, United States District Judge:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`21-CV-6296 (JMF)
`21-CV-6297 (JMF)
`21-CV-6308 (JMF)
`21-CV-6310 (JMF)
`21-CV-6312 (JMF)
`21-CV-6314 (JMF)
`21-CV-6320 (JMF)
`21-CV-6322 (JMF)
`21-CV-6323 (JMF)
`21-CV-6325 (JMF)
`21-CV-6326 (JMF)
`21-CV-6331 (JMF)
`21-CV-6332 (JMF)
`21-CV-6337 (JMF)
`21-CV-6340 (JMF)
`21-CV-6341 (JMF)
`21-CV-6344 (JMF)
`21-CV-6349 (JMF)
`21-CV-6351 (JMF)
`21-CV-6353 (JMF)
`21-CV-6355 (JMF)
`21-CV-6375 (JMF)
`21-CV-6377 (JMF)
`21-CV-6380 (JMF)
`21-CV-6384 (JMF)
`
`ORDER
`
`
`
`On July 23, 2021, Plaintiff William Chastka filed a complaint seeking a declaratory
`
`judgment that certain provisions of an arbitration agreement he signed as an employee of
`
`Defendant International Business Machines Corporation (“IBM”) are unenforceable. See
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-06384-JMF Document 11 Filed 08/24/21 Page 2 of 5
`
`Chastka v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6296 (JMF), ECF No. 1.1 Since
`
`then, other Plaintiffs have filed similar suits in this Court. To date, the following twenty-four
`
`such actions have been reassigned to the undersigned:
`
`1. Abt v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6308
`2. Brown v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6310
`3. Burgoyne v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6312
`4. Carlton v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6314
`5. Corbett v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6380
`6. Cote v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6320
`7. Davis v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6322
`8. DiFelice v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6323
`9. Duffin v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6325
`10. Flannery v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6384
`11. Gianiny v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6377
`12. Goeckermann v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6326
`13. Guerinot v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6297
`14. Kamienski v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6331
`15. Lee v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6332
`16. Leigh v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6375
`17. Mandel v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6337
`18. McHugh v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6340
`19. Plotzker v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6341
`20. Saldarriaga v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6344
`21. Ulnick v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6349
`22. Vornhagen v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6351
`23. Warren v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6353
`24. Wilson v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 21-CV-6355
`
`On August 12, 2021, the Court directed the parties to address in a joint letter: the
`
`appropriateness of consolidation or other means to coordinate these actions; the best way for the
`
`Court to resolve the issues presented in these actions, including a briefing schedule; and whether
`
`the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) should be invited to share its views
`
`on the present cases. See ECF No. 13. The parties responded in a joint letter filed on August 19,
`
`2021. See ECF No. 16.
`
`
`Unless otherwise noted, all docket references are to 21-CV-6296 (JMF).
`
`2
`
`1
`
`
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-06384-JMF Document 11 Filed 08/24/21 Page 3 of 5
`
`I. CONSOLIDATION OF ACTIONS
`
`In light of the parties’ agreement, and the fact that the above-captioned actions involve
`
`common questions of law and fact, it is hereby ORDERED that pursuant to Rule 42(a)(2) of the
`
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the above-captioned cases are consolidated under case number
`
`21-CV-6296 (JMF). Notwithstanding such consolidation, the consolidated cases will “retain
`
`their separate identities.” Hall v. Hall, 138 S. Ct. 1118, 1128-31 (2018). The Clerk of Court is
`
`directed to consolidate the above-captioned actions under case number 21-CV-6296 and to close
`
`the other twenty-four actions listed above. All future filings in the consolidated actions are to
`
`be made only under case number 21-CV-6296.
`
`II. CAPTION
`
`It is hereby ORDERED that all orders, pleadings, motions, and other documents served
`
`or filed in the consolidated actions shall bear the following caption:
`
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN RE:
`
`IBM ARBITRATION AGREEMENT LITIGATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`21-CV-6296 (JMF)
`21-CV-6297 (JMF)
`21-CV-6308 (JMF)
`21-CV-6310 (JMF)
`21-CV-6312 (JMF)
`21-CV-6314 (JMF)
`21-CV-6320 (JMF)
`21-CV-6322 (JMF)
`21-CV-6323 (JMF)
`21-CV-6325 (JMF)
`21-CV-6326 (JMF)
`21-CV-6331 (JMF)
`21-CV-6332 (JMF)
`21-CV-6337 (JMF)
`21-CV-6340 (JMF)
`21-CV-6341 (JMF)
`21-CV-6344 (JMF)
`21-CV-6349 (JMF)
`21-CV-6351 (JMF)
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-06384-JMF Document 11 Filed 08/24/21 Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-----------------------------------------------------------------------------x
`
`The Clerk of Court is directed to conform the docket in 21-CV-6296 to the caption above.
`
`21-CV-6353 (JMF)
`21-CV-6355 (JMF)
`21-CV-6375 (JMF)
`21-CV-6377 (JMF)
`21-CV-6380 (JMF)
`21-CV-6384 (JMF)
`
`
`III. BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR THE PARTIES
`
`Plaintiffs’ motions for summary judgment shall be filed by September 23, 2021, and
`
`shall be limited to 30 pages in length; Defendant’s oppositions to Plaintiffs’ motions for
`
`summary judgment and cross-motions to dismiss and/or for summary judgment shall be filed by
`
`October 25, 2021, and shall be limited to a single, consolidated memorandum of law not to
`
`exceed 45 pages in length; Plaintiffs’ replies and oppositions to any cross-motions shall be filed
`
`by November 9, 2021, and shall be limited to a single, consolidated memorandum of law not to
`
`exceed 45 pages in length; and Defendant’s replies in support of cross-motions shall be filed by
`
`November 24, 2021, and shall be limited to 15 pages in length.
`
`IV.
`
`PARTICIPATION OF THE EEOC
`
`The Court hereby invites the EEOC to submit an amicus brief seven days after the first
`
`brief filed by the party that the EEOC is supporting (or, if filed in support of both parties or
`
`neither party, then seven days after Plaintiffs file their motions for summary judgment). In
`
`extending this invitation, the Court takes no position on the substance of the parties’ arguments
`
`concerning the interest, if any, of the EEOC and whether any deference would be owed to its
`
`views. It is ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ counsel shall promptly serve a copy of this Order on the
`
`EEOC and shall file proof of such service on the docket.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-06384-JMF Document 11 Filed 08/24/21 Page 5 of 5
`
`V.
`
`SUBJECT-MATTER JURISDICTION
`
`Upon review of the parties’ submissions in response to the Court’s July 29, 2021, Order
`
`to Show Cause, see ECF Nos. 14, 18, the Court is satisfied that there is subject-matter
`
`jurisdiction given that the underlying arbitrations involved claims under the Age Discrimination
`
`in Employment Act. See Doscher v. Sea Port Grp. Secs., LLC, 832 F.3d 372, 388 (2d Cir. 2016).
`
`VI. APPLICATION TO OTHER SIMILAR ACTIONS
`
`This Order shall apply to any other case referenced in Plaintiffs’ counsel’s letter of
`
`August 12, 2021, see ECF No. 15, that is subsequently assigned or reassigned to the undersigned.
`
`SO ORDERED.
`
`Dated: August 24, 2021
`
`New York, New York
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` __________________________________
`
`
` JESSE M. FURMAN
`
` United States District Judge
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`