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)

Download PDF
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?