Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00701/USCOURTS-caed-1_09-cv-00701-26/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

Plaintiff Silvestre Soto sought class certification, which was opposed by Defendant Castlerock 

Farming and Transport, Inc. (Docs. 145, 150-152.) On December 23, 2013, the Magistrate Judge

found Plaintiff failed to demonstrate the proposed classes satisfied the requirements of Rule 23, and 

recommended Plaintiff’s motion for class certification be denied. (Doc. 171). 

The Findings and Recommendations provided the parties with twenty-one days from the date of 

service, or until January 13, 2014, to file any objections. In addition, the parties were informed that the 

failure to file objections within the specified time may waive the right to appeal the District Court’s 

order. (Doc. 171 at 36, citing Martinez v. Ylst, 951 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1991)). To date, no party has 

filed objections to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation that class certification be denied. 

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b)(1)(C) and Britt v. Simi Valley United 

School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir. 1983), this Court has conducted a de novo review of the case. 

SILVESTRE SOTO, on behalf of himself 

and all other similarly situated individuals, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

CASTLEROCK FARMING AND 

TRANSPORT, INC.,

 Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 1:09-cv-00701 - AWI - JLT 

ORDER ADOPTING THE FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS DENYING PLAINTIFF’S 

MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION AND 

APPOINTMENT OF CLASS COUNSEL

Case 1:09-cv-00701-AWI-JLT Document 173 Filed 01/16/14 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

Having carefully reviewed the file, the Court finds the Findings and Recommendations are supported 

by the record and by proper analysis. 

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:

1. The Findings and Recommendations filed December 23, 2013, are ADOPTED IN 

FULL; and

2. Plaintiff’s motion for class certification and appointment of class counsel is DENIED. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 16, 2014 

 SENIOR DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:09-cv-00701-AWI-JLT Document 173 Filed 01/16/14 Page 2 of 2