-VPC Rivera et al v. Peri & Sons Farms, Inc., No. 3:2011cv00118 - Document 61 (D. Nev. 2011)
Court Description: ORDER OF JUDGMENT - In light of the Plaintiffs' # 58 recent filing, the Court hereby dismisses Plaintiffs' # 56 Second Amended Complaint with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and enters final judgment in Def endant's favor. The September 1, 2011 Case Management Conference is vacated. This matter is closed. Signed by Chief Judge Robert C. Jones on 9/8/2011. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - DRM) (Main Document 61 replaced on 9/9/2011 to remove blue-header overlap ) (DRM).
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
-VPC Rivera et al v. Peri & Sons Farms, Inc. Doc. 61 1 Mark R. Thierman NV#8285 THIERMAN LAW FIRM, PC 2 7287 Lakeside Drive 3 Reno, Nevada 89511 Tel: (775) 284-1500 4 Fax: (775) 703-5027 E-mail: laborlawyer@pacbell.net 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Matthew J. Piers mpiers@hsplegal.com José Jorge Behar jbehar@hsplegal.com Christopher J. Wilmes cwilmes@hsplegal.com Caryn C. Lederer clederer@hsplegal.com HUGHES SOCOL PIERS RESNICK & DYM, LTD. 70 W. Madison Street, Suite 4000 Chicago, IL 60602 Tel: (312) 580-0100 Fax: (312) 580-1994 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 DISTRICT OF NEVADA VÍCTOR RIVERA RIVERA, ERNESTO SEBASTIAN CASTILLO RIOS, VICENTE CORNEJO LUGO, JESÚS GARCÍA MATA, LUIS ÁNGEL GARCÍA MATA, GAUDENCIO GARCÍA RÍOS, SIMÓN GARCÍA RÍOS, VICENTE CORNEJO CRUZ, EMILIO MONTOYA MORALES, JORGE LUIS AGUILAR SOLANO, DOMINGO RAMOS RIOS, ARTEMIO RINCÓN CRUZ, SERGIO RIOS RAMOS, PEDRO RIVERA CAMACHO, GERARDO RIOS RAMOS, REGULO RINCON CRUZ, AURELIANO MONTES MONTES, MANUEL RIVERA RIVERA, JOSE BALDERAS GUERRERO, VIRGILIO MARQUEZ LARA, MARTIN FLORES BRAVO, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, 25 26 vs. 27 PERI & SONS FARMS, INC., 28 Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) CASE NO. 3:11-CV-118-RCJ-VPC ORDER OF JUDGMENT ORDER OF JUDGMENT Dockets.Justia.com 1 1. On July 27, 2011, the Court dismissed Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint but 2 granted Plaintiffs’ leave to amend a Third Amended Complaint. 3 2. On August 11, 2011, the Plaintiffs filed a Notice of Intent Not to Amend Plaintiffs’ 4 Second Amended Class Action Complaint. 5 3. In that pleading, Plaintiffs notified the Court that they intend to stand upon the 6 7 sufficiency of the allegations in their Second Amended Complaint and asked the Court to enter 8 final judgment in Defendant’s favor. 9 10 4. In light of the Plaintiffs’ recent filing, the Court hereby dismisses Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint with prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) and 11 12 enters final judgment in Defendant’s favor. 13 5. The September 1, 2011 Case Management Conference is vacated. 14 6. This matter is closed. 15 IT IS SO ORDERED: 16 17 18 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE, DATED: 09-08-2011 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 1 ORDER OF JUDGMENT
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
