Arce

Arce v. Valley Prune, LLC

Good Law
3 F. Supp. 3d 794·2014 WL 977633·2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32328
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaMarch 12, 2014No. 12-cv-02772 JAM-CMKCalifornia2,321 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Mendez, J.

ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiffs’ Edgar Arce and Cesar Rodriguez (collectively “Plaintiffs”) Motion for Leave to File a Second Amended Complaint (“SAC”) (Doc. # 18). Defendants Valley Prune, LLC, and Taylor Brothers Farms (collectively “Defendants”) oppose the motion (Doc. #27) and Plaintiffs replied (Doc. # 29). 1 For the following reasons, Plaintiffs’ motion is granted in part and denied in part.

I. BACKGROUND

Plaintiff Edgar Arce filed this action on November 8, 2012, against Defendants (Doc. # 1). On August 26, 2013, pursuant to a stipulation, Plaintiff Edgar Arce filed a First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), the operative complaint, which added Cesar Rodriguez as a Plaintiff (Doc. #20). In the FAC, Plaintiffs allege two causes of action on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated individuals: (1) violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VII”), 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et *796 seq., and (2) violation of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (“FEHA”), Cal. Gov’t Code § 12940 et seq.

Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants and were allegedly subject to…

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.