Issuing its second sharply divided procedural opinion in as many months with ramifications for wage-and-hour practitioners, the Supreme Court yesterday ruled that a Pennsylvania nursing facility’s “offer of judgment,” which would have provided full relief to the sole putative collective action representative, effectively “mooted” her case. Accordingly, no collective action could proceed even though the offer was rejected. Genesis Healthcare Corp. v. Symczyk, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 3157 (U.S. 2013). As with the Court’s Comcast decision regarding FRCP 23 practice and certification, Symczyk concerns highly technical issues relating to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, specifically FRCP 68’s “offer of judgment” mechanism, and the related “mootness” doctrine. Employers and counsel should analyze the decision and its impact on pending litigation in depth.