Federico Murillo v. Servicios Agricolas Mex

Good Law
592 F. App'x 613
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 6, 201512-16272California717 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Plaintiffs, farm workers with U.S. citizenship or lawful permanent residency, appeal the district court’s judgment denying their claims under the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act (“AWPA”). We affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we need not recount it here. We review questions of law de novo, Mousesian v. Victoria Versicherung AG, 670 F.3d 1067, 1071 (9th Cir.2012), and factual findings for clear error, United States v. Richey, 632 F.3d 559, 563 (9th Cir.2011).

The AWPA provides, in relevant part, for protections for seasonal agricultural workers, like plaintiffs, and migrant agricultural workers. 29 U.S.C. § 1831 . Pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 1832 (c), “[n]o farm labor contractor, agricultural employer, or agricultural association shall, without justification, violate the terms of any working arrangement made by that contractor, employer or association with any seasonal agricultural worker.”

The H-2A program permits U.S. employers anticipating a shortage of available U.S. workers needed for agricultural jobs to apply to the U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) for certification to hire non-immigrant foreign workers…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.