Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00705/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00705-23/pdf.json

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

---

1

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

On March 29, 2013, the Court ordered Plaintiffs to file a proposed notice for approval by the 

Court. (Doc. 213 at 10). Plaintiffs filed this proposed notice on April 18, 2013. (Doc. 214). Defendant 

Sunview Vineyards of California filed several objections to the notice on April 26, 2013. (Doc. 216). 

Defendant asserts “information in the proposed Notice is misleading, irrelevant and/or 

inconsistent with the Court’s class certification order.” Id. at 2. Defendant contends the dates proposed 

by Plaintiffs fail to provide “sufficient time” for Defendant to provide contact information to the claims 

administrator. Id. Also, Defendant objects to the use of V3 Corporation as the claims administrator, 

because “Plaintiffs have provided no evidence that V3 Corporation is a credible and legitimate class 

action claims administrator, and other well-respected alternatives exist.” Id. Further, Defendant 

objects the notice should not be posted at Sunview because mailing serves as sufficient notice, and any 

Spanish translation should be prepared by a court-certified interpreter. Id. at 3. Notably, the parties 

SANTIAGO ROJAS, et al.,

 Plaintiffs,

v.

MARKO ZANINOVICH, INC. and SUNVIEW 

VINEYARDS OF CALFORNIA, INC. et al.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:09-cv-00705 - AWI - JLT

ORDER DIRECTING THE PARTIES TO MEET 

AND CONFER 

Case 1:09-cv-00705-AWI-JLT Document 217 Filed 04/30/13 Page 1 of 2
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

have not met and conferred regarding the issues identified concerning the contents of the proposed 

notice. In the interest of judicial economy, the parties shall attempt to resolve these issues without the 

involvement of the Court.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The parties SHALL meet and confer regarding the issues identified by Defendant in its 

objections to the Proposed Notice no later than May 10, 2013;

2. Plaintiffs SHALL file an amended proposed notice on or before May 17, 2013; and

3. Any objections to the amended notice SHALL be filed on or before May 24, 2013.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: April 29, 2013 /s/ Jennifer L. Thurston 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DEAC_Signature-END:

9j7khijed

Case 1:09-cv-00705-AWI-JLT Document 217 Filed 04/30/13 Page 2 of 2