Arce v. Valley Prune, LLC et al
Filing
47
ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT, SETTING FINAL APPROVAL HEARING DATE AND APPROVAL OF CLASS NOTICE AND CLAIM FORM signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 7/23/14. Final Approval Hearing set for 11/5/2014 at 09:30 AM in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before Judge John A. Mendez. (Meuleman, A)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
9
EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
10
SACRAMENTO DIVISION
11
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFELD LLP
8
13
EDGAR ARCE and CESAR RODRIGUEZ,
individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated,
14
Plaintiffs,
15
v.
16
Case No. 2:12-cv-02772-JAM-CMK
ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF
SETTLEMENT, SETTING FINAL
APPROVAL HEARING DATE AND
APPROVAL OF CLASS NOTICE AND
CLAIM FORM
VALLEY PRUNE, LLC; TAYLOR
BROTHERS FARMS, INC., et al.,
17
Defendants.
18
19
20
The Court, having fully reviewed the Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action
21
Settlement, the Stipulation and Settlement of Class Action Claims (“Agreement”), and Exhibits in
22
support thereof, and having carefully reviewed the Agreement and the proposed Notice of
23
Pendency of Class Action and Proposed Settlement, and in recognition of the Court’s duty to
24
make a preliminary determination as to the reasonableness of any proposed Class Action
25
settlement, and if preliminarily determined to be reasonable, to provide notice to Class Members
26
in accordance with due process requirements, and to schedule a formal Final Settlement Hearing
27
to determine the good faith, fairness, adequacy and reasonableness of any proposed settlement;
28
-14379.001-1630866.4
ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL 2:12-CV-02772-JAM-CMK
1
2
THE COURT HEREBY MAKES THE FOLLOWING DETERMINATIONS AND
ORDERS:
by this reference and made a part of this Preliminary Approval Order, appears to be within the
5
range of reasonableness of a settlement which could ultimately be given final approval by this
6
Court; it further appears to the Court on a preliminary basis that the settlement amount is fair and
7
reasonable to Class Members when balanced against the probable outcome of further litigation
8
relating to liability and damages issues and potential appeal of rulings; it further appears that
9
significant discovery, investigation, research and litigation have been conducted such that counsel
10
for the parties at this time are able to reasonably evaluate their respective positions; it further
11
appears that settlement at this time will avoid substantial costs, delay and risks that would be
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
The Court finds on a preliminary basis that the Agreement, filed and incorporated herein
4
M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFELD LLP
3
presented by the further prosecution of the litigation; it further appears that the proposed
13
Settlement has been reached as the result of intensive, serious and non-collusive negotiations
14
between the parties;
15
ACCORDINGLY, GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, THE MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY
16
APPROVAL ORDER IS HEREBY GRANTED, THE CLASS IS CERTIFIED FOR
17
SETTLEMENT PURPOSES ONLY, MEANING THIS CERTIFICATION WILL HAVE NO
18
BINDING EFFECT SHOULD THE SETTLEMENT LATER BE DENIED, PLAINTIFFS
19
EDGAR ARCE AND CESAR RODRIGUEZ ARE APPOINTED CLASS REPRESENTATIVES
20
AND CHARLES KELLY OF HERSH & HERSH, DELLA BARNETT OF CALIFORNIA
21
RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION, AND MATTHEW D. CARLSON OF
22
CARLSON LEGAL SERVICES ARE CONDITIONALLY APPOINTED AS CLASS
23
COUNSEL.
24
Consistent with the definitions provided in the Agreement, the Class includes all
25
employees of Mexican national origin who were employed by Defendants for any period of time
26
from August 10, 2011 through May 7, 2012 at Defendants’ 4075 Oren Avenue, Corning, CA
27
96021 location. The “Class”, “Classes” and “Class Members” include Class Members who do not
28
properly exclude themselves from the terms of the Settlement. Further, the Court finds that the
-24379.001-1630866.4
ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL 2:12-CV-02772-JAM-CMK
proposed Notice of Pendency of Class Action and Proposed Settlement (“Class Notice”), which
3
advises the Class Members of the Preliminary Approval of the Settlement, the “Opt-Out” timing
4
and procedures, the timing and procedures for submitting a claim, and the date of the Final
5
Settlement Hearing, substantially in the form attached to the Agreement as Exhibit 2 and
6
incorporated herein by this reference and made a part of this Preliminary Approval Order, fairly
7
and adequately advises Class Members of the terms of the proposed Settlement and the benefits
8
available to Class Members, as well as their right to “Opt-Out” and procedures for doing so, and
9
of the formal Final Settlement Hearing date and time and the right of Class Members to file
10
documentation in support of or in opposition to the Settlement, and procedures for appearing at
11
said hearing; the Court further finds that said Notice clearly comports with all constitutional
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
proposed Settlement Administrator, Simpluris, Inc., is an adequate Claims Administrator, and the
2
M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFELD LLP
1
requirements, including those of due process; the Court further finds that the proposed Class
13
Notice and the Claim Form, are reasonable and adequate and will likely assist Class Members in
14
the claims process;
15
ACCORDINGLY, GOOD CAUSE APPEARING, THE COURT HEREBY APPROVES
16
THE PROPOSED CLAIMS ADMINISTRATION PROCESS, THE PROPOSED NOTICE OF
17
CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT, AND THE CLAIM FORM.
18
Mailing to the present or last known address of present and former employees and an
19
address update search for Class Members constitute an effective method of notifying Class
20
Members of their rights with respect to the Class Action and Settlement;
21
ACCORDINGLY, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT THE PROCEDURES SET
22
FORTH IN THE AGREEMENT AND THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE BE ESTABLISHED
23
AND FOLLOWED, UNLESS MODIFIED BY THE COURT:
24
25
26
27
28
Event
Defendants provide list of Class Members
to the Claims Administrator.
Claims Administrator mails Notice Packet
(Notice & Claim Form) to Class Members.
Claims Submission Deadline and Opt-Out
Deadline.
Timing
15 calendar days after Preliminary
Approval
21 calendar days after Preliminary
Approval
60 calendar days after mailing of Notice
Packet by Claims Administrator
-34379.001-1630866.4
ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL 2:12-CV-02772-JAM-CMK
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Objection Deadline
Claims Administrator provides declaration
of Mailing Class Notice and Claim Form.
Defendants files Motion for Final Approval
and Plaintiffs file Motion for Attorneys’
Fees, Costs, and Incentive Payments
Final Approval Hearing.
Defendants pay all sums under the
settlement as specified.
60 calendar days after mailing of Notice
Packet by Claims Administrator
16 court days before Fairness Hearing
16 court days before Fairness Hearing
Approximately 100 calendar days after
Preliminary Approval
10 calendar days after the Effective Date
Defendants, shall be heard in opposition to the Court’s determination of the good faith, fairness,
10
reasonableness and adequacy of the proposed Settlement, the requested attorneys’ fees and costs,
11
and any Order of Dismissal with Prejudice and Final Judgment regarding such Settlement, unless
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that no person, except Class Counsel and Counsel for
9
M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFELD LLP
8
such person has complied with the conditions set forth in the Notice of Pendency of Class Action
13
and Proposed Settlement, which conditions are incorporated herein.
14
15
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED all briefs supporting or opposing the Settlement shall be
served and filed in accordance with the above schedule.
16
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if, for any reason, the Court does not execute and file
17
an Order of Dismissal with Prejudice and Final Judgment, or if the “Effective Date” of
18
Settlement, as defined in the Agreement, does not occur for any reason whatsoever, the proposed
19
Agreement, and all evidence and proceedings had in connection therewith, shall be without
20
prejudice to the status quo and the rights of the parties to the litigation, as more specifically set
21
forth in the Agreement.
22
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pending further order of this Court, all proceedings in
23
this matter, except those contemplated herein and in the Agreement, are stayed. The Court
24
expressly reserves the right to adjourn or continue the Final Approval Hearing from time to time
25
without further notice to Class Members.
26
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that to facilitate administration of this Settlement, the Court
27
hereby enjoins all Plaintiffs, including Named Plaintiffs, from filing or prosecuting any claims,
28
-44379.001-1630866.4
ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL 2:12-CV-02772-JAM-CMK
1
cases, suits or administrative proceedings regarding claims released by this Settlement unless and
2
until such Plaintiffs have filed valid written requests for exclusion with the Settlement
3
Administrator.
undersigned on November 5, 2014 at 9:30 a.m. in Courtroom 6, located at the Robert I. Matsui
6
United States Courthouse, 501 I Street, 14th Floor, Sacramento, California, to consider the
7
fairness, adequacy and reasonableness of the proposed Settlement, preliminarily approved by this
8
Preliminary Approval Order, and to consider the application of Class Counsel, Charles Kelly of
9
Hersh & Hersh, Christina Medina of California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation, and Matthew
10
Carlson of Carlson Legal Services for an award of attorneys’ fees and costs incurred, and the
11
request for a Class Representative Service Fee for Plaintiffs EDGAR ARCE and CESAR
12
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Final Approval Hearing shall be held before the
5
M URPHY A USTIN A DAMS S CHOENFELD LLP
4
RODRIGUEZ.
13
IT IS SO ORDERED.
14
DATED: July 23, 2014
15
16
/s/ John A. Mendez_______________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT JUDGE
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-54379.001-1630866.4
ORDER OF PRELIMINARY APPROVAL 2:12-CV-02772-JAM-CMK
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?