Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01600/USCOURTS-caed-1_05-cv-01600-5/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 790
Nature of Suit: Other Labor Litigation
Cause of Action: 29:1801 Farmworker Rights

---

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SANTOS R. VALENZUELA et al. on

behalf of themselves and all others

similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,

v.

GIUMARRA VINEYARS

CORPORATION, and DOES 1 to 50

inclusive,

Defendants.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CIV-F-05-1600 AWI SMS

ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL

BRIEFING AND VACATING

HEARING DATE

After reviewing the moving papers, the court has determined that additional briefing

would be helpful. Chief among the issues the court would like to have clarified is the parties’

position regarding the scope of the Migrant and Seasonal Worker Protection Act (“AWPA”). In

its initial memo, Giumarra stated, “The federal statute does not define ‘wages’ or ‘working

arrangement.’ It also gives no indication that it was intended to provide a forum for all claims of

violations of state employment laws affecting agricultural workers, other than perhaps those

whose adjudication may be necessary to resolve the issue of non-payment of wages or violations

of the employer’s ‘working arrangement.’” Doc. 59, Brief, at 3:19-23. 

The court requests Giumarra answer the following questions in detail and provide

appropriate legal briefing in support thereof by 4 PM Tuesday, May 30, 2006: Can AWPA claims

ever be based on violation of state law, such as a state minimum wage law? If so, what is the

Case 1:05-cv-01600-AWI -SMS Document 70 Filed 05/12/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

distinction between those state laws that can be the basis of an AWPA claim and those that can

not? Which of Plaintiffs’ state law causes of action can be the basis of an AWPA claim and

which can not? Should the court abstain only if it declines supplemental jurisdiction, only if it

exercises supplemental jurisdiction, or regardless of the supplemental jurisdiction decision? 

Under what theory or theories (Younger, Pullman, Burford, Colorado River) is abstention

sought? 

Plaintiffs may file a response by 4 PM Tuesday, June 13, 2006. Giumarra may file a

reply by 4 PM Tuesday, June 20, 2006. The hearing scheduled for 1:30 PM Monday, May 15,

2006 is vacated and no party shall appear at that time. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 12, 2006 /s/ Anthony W. Ishii 

0m8i78 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:05-cv-01600-AWI -SMS Document 70 Filed 05/12/06 Page 2 of 2