Martinez v. Semi-Tropic Cooperative Gin & Almond Huller, Inc. ( 2023 )

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 11 FABIAN CABALLERO MARTINEZ, on ) Case No.: 1:19-cv-1581 JLT CDB behalf of himself and all others similarly ) 12 situated, ) ORDER DIRECTING PLAINTIFF TO FILE ) SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEFING 13 Plaintiff, ) ) 14 v. ) ) 15 SEMI-TROPIC COOPERATIVE GIN & ) ALMOND HULLER, INC. and DOES 1 ) 16 through 20, inclusive, ) ) 17 ) Defendants. ) 18 ) 19 Fabian Caballero Martinez asserts Semi-Tropic Cooperative Gin & Almond Huller failed to 20 comply with California’s wage and hour laws. Plaintiff now seeks final approval of the settlement 21 reached in this action, including a claim under California’s Private Attorney General Act and payment 22 to the LWDA. (See generally Docs. 55-1.) 23 To bring an action under PAGA, an aggrieved employee must first provide written notice to the 24 employer and the Labor and Work Force Development Agency. Cal. Lab. Code § 2699.3(a)(1). Any 25 proposed settlement of PAGA claims must be submitted to the LWDA, and a trial court must “review 26 and approve” any settlement of PAGA claims. Id. § 2699(l)(2); see also Haralson v. U.S. Aviation 27 Servs. Corp., 383 F. Supp. 3d 959, 971 (N.D. Cal. 2019) (noting a proposed settlement should be 28 submitted to the LWDA). 1 In granting preliminary approval of the Settlement, the Court observed “there is no evidence t 2 || revised settlement agreement was submitted to the LWDA.” (Doc. 50 at 25 n. 25.) The Court noted: 3 [I]t appears the revised agreement should be submitted to the LWDA. See Mondrian vy. Trius Trucking, Inc., 2022 WL 2306963, at *13 (E.D. Cal. June 27, 4 2022) (observing the parties submitted their original agreement to the LWDA, and following revision, indicated the revised Settlement Agreement would be 5 served on the LWDA at the same time as briefing to the Court); see also Orosco v. Teva Parenteral Meds, 2021 Cal. Super. LEXIS 148227 at *3 (Cal. Sup. Ct. 6 Dec. 16, 2021) (directing the plaintiff to serve the LWDA with any revisions to the class settlement made following the court’s order). 7 8 || Ud.) Therefore, the Court ordered Plaintiff to submit the “Amended Settlement Agreement and 9 || Release” to the LWDA within seven days of its order granting preliminary approval. (/d. at 29, § 4.) 10 || Further, the Court ordered: “Plaintiff SHALL address whether the LWDA commented on either the 11 || initial settkement or amended settlement in the motion for final approval.” (d., 45.) 12 The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's motion for final approval, and Plaintiff only indicates that 13 || “submitted the Settlement Agreement to the LWDA on March 2, 2022.” (Doc. 55-1 at 13, citing 14 || Mallison Decl. 38 [Doc. 55-2 at 15].) Specifically, Mr. Mallison reports that “Plaintiff submitted tt 15 || initial Settlement Agreement to the LWDA on March 02, 2022.” (Doc. 55-2 at 15, emphasis added.) 16 || The motion and its supporting declaration are silent on whether Plaintiff served the amended □□□□□□□ 17 || to the LWDA as ordered, or whether the LWDA commented on the amended agreement. (See 18 || generally Doc. 55-1.) 19 Accordingly, the Court ORDERS: Plaintiff SHALL file supplemental briefing within seven 20 || days of the date of service of this Order, addressing when the “Amended Settlement Agreement and 21 || Release” was submitted to the LWDA, and if any comment was made by the LWDA on the amended 22 || agreement. 23 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. Dated: _ April 28, 2023 26 TED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 27 28