If the employee's 60-day notice was non-binding or aspirational it seems to me that their unemployment benefits should not have been cut off at the 60-day mark.

If the employee's 60-day notice was non-binding or aspirational it seems to me that their unemployment benefits should not have been cut off at the 60-day mark. Because the employee always had the option to change their mind and withdraw their notice to quit. In the unlikely case that it was impossible for the employee's employment to extend beyond the 60-day mark after giving a 60-day notice, it seems reasonable for the unemployment benefits to be cut off at the 60-day mark. But absent some express contract term or law, just giving notice would not prevent an employee from withdrawing notice before leaving the job.