The following numbered papers were read on this motion: NYSCEF Doc No. 1: Summons and Complaint NYSCEF Doc No. 2: Exhibit A — Consent to be Plaintiff NYSCEF Doc No. 3: Notice of Appearance NYSCEF Doc No. 4: Notice of Motion for Approval of Collective Action Settlement NYSCEF Doc No. 5: Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion NYSCEF Doc No. 6: Affirmation of Melissa Stewart, Esq. in Support of Plaintiff’s Motion NYSCEF Doc No. 7: Settlement Agreement and Release NYSCEF Doc No. 8: Plaintiff’s Cost Summary NYSCEF Doc No. 9: Proposed Order Granting Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion NYSCEF Doc No. 10: Order in Braham v. Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company NYSCEF Doc No. 11: Order in Kennedy v. Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company NYSCEF Doc No. 12: Request for Judicial Intervention Regarding Notice of Motion NYSCEF Doc No. 13: Stipulation re Time to Answer NYSCEF Doc No. 14: Stipulation NYSCEF Doc No. 15: Stipulation of Agreement to Proposed Order NYSCEF Doc No. 16: Stipulated Proposed Order Granting Plaintiff’s Motion NYSCEF Doc No. 17: Supplemental Affirmation of Melissa Stewart, Esq. in Support of Motion NYSCEF Doc No. 18: Fee Entries NYSCEF Doc No. 19: Cost Entries NYSCEF Doc No. 20: Order in Ardaix v. BetterCloud, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 21: Order in Eisenman v. The Ayco Company, L.P. NYSCEF Doc No. 22: Order in Islam v. Morgans Hotel Group Management LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 23: Order in Cedeno v. Hibernia Construction LLC, et al. NYSCEF Doc No. 24: Order in Mauro v. Gurney’s Inn Resort & Spa LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 25: Order in Gonzalez v. Sterling Caterers, Inc., et al. NYSCEF Doc No. 26: Order in Padder v. Levy Premium Foodservice Limited Partnership NYSCEF Doc No. 27: Order in Braham v. Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company NYSCEF Doc No. 28: Order in Flaherty v. Bath & Body Works, LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 29: Order in Smith v. Alteryx, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 30: Order in Lombardi v. Shopkeep, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 31: Affirmation in Support in Ardaix v. BetterCloud, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 32: Order in Casebeer Darktrace, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 33: Order in Villasin v. American Yacht Club NYSCEF Doc No. 34: Memorandum of Law in Villasin v. American Yacht Club NYSCEF Doc No. 35: Order in Salzmann v. Metropolis Country Club, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 36: Memorandum of Law in Salzmann v. Metropolis Country Club, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 37: Notice of Entry in Won Kim v. TD Ameritrade, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 38: Affidavit of Brian S. Schaffer, Esq. in Won Kim v. TD Ameritrade, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 39: Order in Destra v. OS Restaurant Services, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 40: Affidavit of Brian Schaffer, Esq. in Destra v. OS Restaurant Services, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 41: Order in Jones v. Guidepoint Global LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 42: Supplemental Affirmation in Jones v. Guidepoint Global LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 43: Order in Pierre v. Kaufman Enterprises, LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 44: Affirmation of Troy L. Kessler in Pierre v. Kaufman Enterprises, LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 45: Order in Waloven v. Forty Eight Lounge LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 46: Affirmation in Support in Waloven v. Forty Eight Lounge LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 47: Order in Kulauzovic v. Citibank, N.A. NYSCEF Doc No. 48: Affirmation in Support in Kulauzovic v. Citibank, N.A. NYSCEF Doc No. 49: Order in Diaz v. Albert Kemperle, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 50: Memorandum of Law in Diaz v. Albert Kemperle, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 51: Order in Grant v. Jay-Jay Cabaret, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 52: Memorandum of Law in Grant v. Jay-Jay Cabaret, Inc. NYSCEF Doc No. 53: Order in Jacobs v. Washington Place, LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 54: Memorandum of Law in Jacobs v. Washington Place, LLC NYSCEF Doc No. 55: Letter from Plaintiff to Justice Aaron D. Maslow NYSCEF Doc No. 56: Stipulated Order Granting Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion DECISION u pon the foregoing papers and having heard oral argument on the record from appearing counsel, the within motion is determined as follows. I. Introduction Plaintiff Brysen Brown (“Plaintiff”) filed an unopposed motion for approval of a collective action settlement on October 27, 2022 (see NYSCEF Doc No. 4). On April 3, 2023, the parties submitted a Joint Stipulation (see NYSCEF Doc No. 15), stating that the motion is unopposed and agreeing to the text of the Stipulated Proposed Order (see NYSCEF Doc No. 16). On April 14, 2023, our Part requested via email that Plaintiff submit a supplemental affirmation regarding Plaintiff’s counsel’s fees (see NYSCEF Doc No. 55 at 1). Plaintiff submitted the affirmation in question on May 2, 2023 (see NYSCEF Doc No. 17). II. Plaintiff’s Claim Under the FLSA Plaintiff worked as an overtime-exempt Development Representative for Defendant Sisense, Inc. (“Defendant”) from October 2019 to October 2020 (see NYSCEF Doc No. 6, Stewart Aff 12). Plaintiff alleges that Defendant violated the FLSA, 29 U.S.C. §§201, et seq. and California law by improperly classifying him, and other similarly situated employees, namely, Account Development Representatives, Sales Development Representatives and Business Development Representatives (collectively “Development Representatives”), as exempt from federal overtime requirements and by failing to pay them overtime wages (see id.). III. Plaintiff’s Counsel’s Investigation of this Matter Before filing suit, Plaintiff’s counsel asserts that it conducted a thorough investigation as well as legal research, which focused on the merits of the putative collective members’ claims, the damages to which they were entitled, the legal exemptions that apply to the sales industry, and the likelihood of collective action certification (see id. 13). To explore potential pre-litigation resolution of this matter, Plaintiff’s counsel informed Defendant, by letter dated February 9, 2022, of the allegation that Development Representatives were misclassified as exempt (see id. 14). IV. The Mediation In approximately March 2022, the parties agreed to participate in a mediation (see id.
15-16). At that juncture, the parties engaged in an informal exchange of discovery (see id. 16). Defendant produced Plaintiff’s personnel documents, job descriptions, as well as summary compensation information and dates of employment for potential class members, which enabled Plaintiff’s counsel to develop a damages model and calculate damages allegedly sustained by Plaintiff and the putative collective members (see id.). On July 14, 2022, the parties attended a remote mediation session with Dina Jansenson, Esq., an experienced collective action mediator (see id. 17). The parties agreed on a settlement in principle, memorialized in a memorandum of understanding dated July 14, 2022 (see id.). During the next several months, the parties finalized the terms of the proposed settlement, which are memorialized in the parties’ Settlement Agreement, executed on October 12, 2022 (see id.). V. Plaintiff’s Counsel Views the Proposed Settlement as Fair and Reasonable Based on the informal discovery conducted in this case, Plaintiff’s counsel opines that the proposed settlement is fair, reasonable and in the best interest of the putative collective members in light of the risk of significant delay, as well as defenses asserted by Defendant as to collective action certification and the merits of the claims (see id. 18). VI. The Proposed Settlement Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, a Gross Fund of $699,999.99 shall be established to settle claims against Defendant (the “Gross Fund”), which Gross Fund is to be funded by Defendant (see NYSCEF Doc No. 7, Settlement Agreement and Release 1.10). The Gross Fund covers putative collective members’ settlement awards; Plaintiff’s counsel’s attorney’s fees and costs; any service award approved for the named Plaintiff; liquidated damages; interest; and the fees and costs of the Settlement Administrator (see id.). Plaintiff contends that the average net settlement per person, after accounting for payment of fees, costs, service awards and administration, amounts to approximately $4,847.99 (see NYSCEF Doc No. 55 at 1). A viable argument can be made that the aforesaid sum of $4,847.99, albeit far from lifealtering, provides putative collective members with meaningful economic benefit, particularly when contrasted with other like collective action settlements, from which recipients alas often derive de minimis sums or all but valueless coupons. Plaintiff’s counsel is seeking $233,333.33 in attorneys’ fees, as well as out-of-pocket costs amounting to $268.33, as reflected in counsel’s most recent Supplemental Affirmation on the subject, dated May 2, 2023 (see NYSCEF Doc No. 6, Stewart Supplemental Aff
