DECISION and ORDER I. INTRODUCTION On February 23, 2023, plaintiff Theodore Barbuto (“Mr. Barbuto” or “plaintiff”) brought a complaint for employment discrimination against his employer, Syracuse University (“Syracuse”), and Syracuse personnelle, Mary Pat Grzymala (“Gryzmala”), (collectively “defendants”). Dkt. No. 1. Plaintiff’s seven-count complaint asserted claims under the Family Medical Leave Act (“FMLA”), §504 of the Rehabilitation Act (the “Rehabilitation Act”), Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the “ADA”), and related portions of New York law. Id. On April 26, 2023, defendants moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(1) and Rule 12(b)(6) to dismiss plaintiff’s complaint. Dkt. No. 8. That motion was granted in part and denied in part on July 24, 2024. Dkt. No. 16. Specifically, defendants’ motion to dismiss Mr. Barbuto’s ADA claim was denied. Id. On August 7, 2024, defendants moved for reconsideration of the Court’s decision. Dkt. No. 18. The motion has been fully briefed and will be considered on the basis of the parties’ submissions.1 Dkt. Nos. 18, 22. II. BACKGROUND The Court assumes the parties’ familiarly with the relevant historical facts in this case. Briefly stated, however, Mr. Barbuto works as a custodian for Syracuse. Compl. 17. In March 2021, Syracuse authorized plaintiff to take FMLA leave to care for his husband.2 Id. 21. In Novemeber, plaintiff attempted enroll in Syracuse college courses — a fringe benefit for Syracuse employees. Id. 23. In December, Syracuse imposed a stipulation (the “Stipulation”) that forbid plaintiff from attending classes on any day that he was absent from work on account of his FMLA benefits or otherwise. Compl.
