Case: Garcia v. Vilsack

1:00-cv-02445 | U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia

Filed Date: Oct. 13, 2000

Closed Date: 2014

Clearinghouse coding complete

Case Summary

On October 13, 2000, a group of Hispanic farmers and ranchers filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture ("USDA") in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, alleged that the "USDA ha[d] maintained, and continue[d] to maintain, a system of administering its farm credit and non-credit benefit programs that gives virtually unfettered discretion to local officials to enforce highly subjective eligibility criteria that, in…

On October 13, 2000, a group of Hispanic farmers and ranchers filed this lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Agriculture ("USDA") in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Plaintiffs, represented by private counsel, alleged that the "USDA ha[d] maintained, and continue[d] to maintain, a system of administering its farm credit and non-credit benefit programs that gives virtually unfettered discretion to local officials to enforce highly subjective eligibility criteria that, in turn, give vent to hostility to minority farmers which deprives them of an equal fair opportunity to participate in such programs." Some of the discriminatory practices that Plaintiffs complained of included: discouraging Hispanics from applying for loans, long delays in processing applications, high denial rates, prejudicial delays in providing loans and providing less amount than was requested, and failing to provide loan servicing assistance. Additionally, Plaintiffs claimed it was virtually impossible for them to secure redress through the USDA appeals process, because its Civil Rights Office was so severely limited by lack of funding and interest that there it was incapable of investigating discrimination claims. The statute of limitations for such claims had run, but Plaintiffs cited the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1999, 7 U.S.C. §2279, which waived the statute of limitations for such claims.

Plaintiffs filed under the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. §1691, the Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. §2201, and the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq., requesting the following relief: (1) declaratory judgment that the practices, policies, patterns and procedures described above were unlawful, (2) a permanent injunction requiring USDA to adopt lending practice in conformity with ECOA and the APA, (3) a permanent injunction prohibiting USDA from engaging in discrimination in the administration of their loan programs and services, (4) an order mandating USDA to remedy its discriminatory practices by taking affirmative action to advertise to Hispanics, adopt a receipt system for all contacts with potential lendees, provide full and equal assistance to all farmers, provide Spanish versions of all application and explanation paperwork, employ fluent Spanish speakers, provide expedited review via independent mediators, and provide semi-annual reports to the Department Secretary, (5) redesign the computerized data collection system in order to ensure that full transparency is achieved, and (6) compensatory damages to deserving plaintiffs.

On December 22, 2000, the U.S. moved to dismiss all claims in Plaintiffs' complaint. On March 20, 2002, District Court Judge James Robertson granted in part and denied in part the motion to dismiss, dismissing the failure to investigate counts because, he found, they did not state a claim under ECOA or the APA. 2002 WL 33004124 (D.D.C. 2002).

On December 22, 2000, Plaintiffs moved to certify the class. This proposed class was described as: "Hispanics who farmed or ranched, or attempted to farm or ranch, during the period January 1, 1981, to the present and who were discriminated against by the USDA on the basis of national origin when they sought to participate on equal terms in farm loan and disaster benefit programs and who complained to the USDA about such discrimination." Subclasses were also proposed, defined by the phase of lending process in which the discrimination took place. Judge Robertson denied this motion on December 2, 2002, holding that the Plaintiffs had failed to demonstrate a common question of law or fact. 211 F.R.D. 15 (D.D.C. 2002). Plaintiffs entered a renewed motion for class certification, attempting to remedy the commonality issue. However, Judge Robertson denied the renewed motion on September 10, 2004, stating that claims still lacked sufficient commonality. 224 F.R.D. 8 (D.D.C. 2004). Plaintiffs appealed this decision and the March 20, 2002 dismissal order to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

On March 31, 2006, the U.S. Court of Appeals (Judge Karen L. Henderson) affirmed the District Court's denial of class certification and dismissal of the ECOA failure-to-investigate claim. 444 F.3d 625 (D.C. Cir. 2006). However, the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal regarding the APA failure-to-investigate claim, remanding to the District Court to investigate the claim further.

Meanwhile, Plaintiffs had sought a temporary restraining order on March 23, 2001, but on March 27, 2001, District Court Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer denied the motion. Plaintiffs then entered an emergency motion for preliminary injunction to the District Court on November 1, 2004, asking the court to order Defendant to adhere to the USDA policy that prohibits adverse actions against farmers who have filed civil rights complaints. However, Judge Robertson denied this motion on November 18, 2004, ruling that foreclosures were not necessarily prohibited by the policy.

Plaintiffs filed their third amended complain on June 30, 2006.

On November 30, 2007, Judge Robertson, after reconsidering the APA failure-to-investigate claim, dismissed the claim, citing his reasoning in a similar opinion in Love v. Vilsack (see 525 F. Supp. 2d 155). Plaintiffs appealed this decision again to the Court of Appeals. On April 24, 2009, the Court of Appeals (Judge Judith W. Rogers) affirmed the District Court dismissal of the APA claim. 563 F.3d 519 (D.C. Cir. 2009). Plaintiffs petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari, but it was denied on January 19, 2010. 558 U.S. 1158 (2010).

In late September 2010, the defendants, seemingly without the support of the plaintiffs, submitted a proposed settlement agreement. On October 6, the Plaintiffs moved for settlement class certification, arguing that the Defendants were attempting to settle the case while preventing the Plaintiffs from the protection of Rule 23 (governing class actions and class settlement). On October 20, 2010, District Court Judge Reggie B. Walton denied the Plaintiffs' motion.

The proposed settlement agreement appeared to go no further. For the next several months, little happened in the case, although the parties presented status reports to the judge regularly.

On January 20, 2012, Defendant submitted its eighth status report, which included the latest proposed settlement agreement framework. The proposal created three tracks of payment claims: Tier 2 ($50,000 reward, requires "substantial evidence" of discrimination), Tier 1(a) ($50,000 reward and debt relief, requires substantial evidence of discrimination), and Tier 1(b) (up to $250,000 reward, required a preponderance of the evidence of discrimination). Plaintiffs complained, however, that this framework lacked the "procedural safeguards" that had existed in similar settlements such as Pigford v. Glickman and Keepseagle v. Vilsack.

On April 4, 2013, the Black Farmers and Agriculturalists Association, Inc., which had been removed as a party by the District Court in In re Black Farmers Discrimination Litigation, moved to intervene in this matter. Both parties opposed this motion. The motion was denied.

In 2014, all but 4 named plaintiffs agreed to participate in an alternative dispute resolution program (ADR). The plaintiffs that elected to participate dismissed their claims with prejudice.

On September 18, 2014 two of the remaining plaintiffs filed motions to sever their claims and for leave to file an amended complaint, and a third plaintiff filed a motion to dismiss without prejudice. These motions were granted. The new docket number was 2:15-cv-00116. On September 2, 2016 this case was dismissed.

On February 16, 2016 the remaining named plaintiff's case was severed and transferred to the Eastern District of California. The new docket number was 1:16-cv-00282. On December 6, 2017 this case was dismissed for lack of standing.

This case is now closed.

Summary Authors

Dan Osher (6/29/2013)

Anna Brito (11/1/2018)

Related Cases

Love v. Vilsack, District of Columbia (2000)

Cantu v. United States, District of Columbia (2011)

People

For PACER's information on parties and their attrorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5098060/parties/garcia-v-veneman/


Judge(s)

Henderson, Karen LeCraft (District of Columbia)

Robertson, James (District of Columbia)

Rogers, Judith Ann Wilson (District of Columbia)

Walton, Reggie B. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Feinberg, Adam P (District of Columbia)

Ferguson, Laura G (District of Columbia)

Fraas, Philip L (District of Columbia)

Hibey, Alexander John (District of Columbia)

Hill, Stephen S (District of Columbia)

Pires, Alexander John Jr. (District of Columbia)

Judge(s)

Henderson, Karen LeCraft (District of Columbia)

Robertson, James (District of Columbia)

Rogers, Judith Ann Wilson (District of Columbia)

Walton, Reggie B. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Plaintiff

Feinberg, Adam P (District of Columbia)

Ferguson, Laura G (District of Columbia)

Fraas, Philip L (District of Columbia)

Hibey, Alexander John (District of Columbia)

Hill, Stephen S (District of Columbia)

Pires, Alexander John Jr. (District of Columbia)

Ruyak, Robert F. (District of Columbia)

Wiseman, Alan M. (District of Columbia)

Attorneys(s) for Defendant

Bhattacharyya, Rupa (District of Columbia)

Bucholtz, Jeffrey S. (District of Columbia)

Cohen, Vincent H. (District of Columbia)

Goitein, Elizabeth (District of Columbia)

Howard, Roscoe (District of Columbia)

Keisler, Peter D. (District of Columbia)

Lin, Jean (District of Columbia)

Mizer, Benjamin C. (District of Columbia)

Olson, Lisa A (District of Columbia)

Sitcov, Michael (District of Columbia)

Taylor, Jeff (District of Columbia)

Other Attorney(s)

Edwards, Christal E (Maryland)

Robinson, Paul A Jr. (Tennessee)

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Document

1:00-cv-02445

Docket [PACER]

Garcia v. Veneman

March 21, 2016

March 21, 2016

Docket
47

1:00-cv-02445

Memorandum Order

Garcia v. Veneman

March 20, 2002

March 20, 2002

Order/Opinion
76

1:00-cv-02445

Memorandum

Garcia v. Veneman

Dec. 2, 2002

Dec. 2, 2002

Order/Opinion
132

1:00-cv-02445

Memorandum Order Denying Class Certification

Garcia v. Veneman

Sept. 10, 2004

Sept. 10, 2004

Order/Opinion
959599

04-05448

Opinion

Garcia v. Johanns

U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

March 31, 2006

March 31, 2006

Order/Opinion
144

1:00-cv-02445

Third Amended Class Action Complaint

Garcia v. Johanns

June 30, 2006

June 30, 2006

Complaint
151

1:00-cv-02445

Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Request for Administrative Procedure Act Review

Garcia v. Johanns

Sept. 27, 2006

Sept. 27, 2006

Pleading / Motion / Brief
162-1

1:00-cv-02445

Defendant's Partial Opposition to Emergency Motion to Continue Order Staying Proceeding or, in the Alternative, to Issue a New Stay of Proceedings Nunc Pro Tunc to November 30, 2007 Until Further Order of the Court

Garcia v. Johanns

Dec. 5, 2007

Dec. 5, 2007

Pleading / Motion / Brief
168

1:00-cv-02445

Order

Garcia v. Veneman

Jan. 16, 2008

Jan. 16, 2008

Order/Opinion
1177401

08-05110

Opinion

U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

April 24, 2009

April 24, 2009

Order/Opinion

Resources

Docket

See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5098060/garcia-v-veneman/

Last updated Jan. 19, 2023, 3:06 a.m.

ECF Number Description Date Link Date / Link
1

COMPLAINT filed by plaintiff GUADALUPE L. GARCIA, plaintiff TONY JIMINEZ, plaintiff PATRICIA JIMINEZ, plaintiff MR. X, plaintiff MRS. X (kmk) (Entered: 10/26/2000)

Oct. 13, 2000

Oct. 13, 2000

PACER

SUMMONS (3) issued to federal party(s) federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN, and non-parties: U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (kmk)

Oct. 13, 2000

Oct. 13, 2000

PACER
2

MOTION (CONSENT) filed by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN to extend time to 12/22/00 in which to answer or otherwise respond to plaintiff's Class Action Complaint. (cas) (Entered: 12/07/2000)

Dec. 6, 2000

Dec. 6, 2000

PACER
3

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : granting motion to extend time to 12/22/00 in which to answer or otherwise respond to plaintiff's Class Action Complaint. [2-1] by DAN GLICKMAN (N) (rew) (Entered: 12/08/2000)

Dec. 8, 2000

Dec. 8, 2000

PACER
4

AMENDED COMPLAINT by plaintiff adding plaintiff GLORIA MORALEZ, BEATRICE GARZA, RODOLFO GARZA, LARRY CHAVARRIA, ROBERT CHAVARRIA, YSIDORO F. MENDOZA, ALBERTO A. ACOSTA, JIMMY ALVAREZ, ELIZABETH ALVAREZ, DAVID FLORES, PATRICK R. FLORES, GILBERT A. GARCIA, F. RICHARD LLANEZ, EDWARDO R. LOPEZ, ISMAEL O. MEDINA, SONJA MEYERS, ROBERT ORTEGA JR., EDWARD W. PROVENCIO, GEORGE L. PROVENCIO, ALEX CONTRERAS, JOE CONTRERAS, LOUIS CONTRERAS, HECTOR T. FLORES, JUAN J. FLORES, ALBERTO M. ORTEGA, RENE ORTEGA, RUPERTO R. RODRIGUEZ, ERASMO VALDEZ, DIONICIO VALDEZZ II, ARTURO VASQUEZ, RODOLFO VASQUEZ, DAVID L. HINJOSA SR., and amending complaint [1-1]; Exhibits (5). (tth) (Entered: 12/15/2000)

Dec. 12, 2000

Dec. 12, 2000

PACER
5

MOTION filed by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN to dismiss amended complaint complaint [4-1], and to strike class action allegations (ag) (Entered: 12/27/2000)

Dec. 22, 2000

Dec. 22, 2000

PACER
6

MOTION (CONSENT) filed by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN to file excess pages limitation ; EXHIBIT (Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support of Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and to Strike Class Action Allegations) (ag) (Entered: 12/27/2000)

Dec. 22, 2000

Dec. 22, 2000

PACER
7

MOTION (CONSENT) filed by plaintiffs to extend time to 2/5/01 to respond to defendant's motion to dismiss and to strike class action allegations (cas) (Entered: 01/05/2001)

Jan. 4, 2001

Jan. 4, 2001

8

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : granting motion to extend time to 2/5/01 to respond to defendant's motion to dismiss and to strike class action allegations [7−1] by plaintiffs; response to dispositive motions due by 2/5/01 ; (N) (jf) (Entered: 01/10/2001)

Jan. 9, 2001

Jan. 9, 2001

10

MOTION filed by plaintiff to extend time to 2/12/01 to move class certification (cas) (Entered: 01/11/2001)

Jan. 9, 2001

Jan. 9, 2001

9

RESPONSE by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN to plaintiff's motion to extend time to 2/5/01 to respond to defendant's motion to dismiss and to strike class action allegations [7−1] by plaintiff's. (cas) (Entered: 01/11/2001)

Jan. 10, 2001

Jan. 10, 2001

11

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : Tele−conference set for 2:30 1/18/01 (N) (tb) (Entered: 01/11/2001)

Jan. 10, 2001

Jan. 10, 2001

12

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : granting motion to extend time to 2/12/01 to move class certification [10−1] by plaintiffs; pending telephone conference set for 01/18/01 at 2:30 (N) (tb) (Entered: 01/11/2001)

Jan. 10, 2001

Jan. 10, 2001

13

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : Tele−conference set for 10:00 1/23/01 (N) (tb) (Entered: 01/18/2001)

Jan. 17, 2001

Jan. 17, 2001

14

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer; briefing on plaintiffs' motion for class certification is stayed pending resolution of defendant's motion to dismiss and to strike class allegations; class discovery shall commence one week after court's ruling on defendant's pending motion, parties shall submit a proposed schedule for briefing on class cerification within 10 days after ruling : (N) (tb) (Entered: 01/24/2001)

Jan. 23, 2001

Jan. 23, 2001

16

MOTION filed by plaintiff for leave to file to file second amend class action complaint ; EXHIBIT (SECOND AMENDED CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT (cas) Modified on 01/15/2002 (Entered: 02/08/2001)

Feb. 6, 2001

Feb. 6, 2001

17

MOTION filed by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN to extend time to 2/28/01 within which to reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and to Strike Class Action Allegations (cas) (Entered: 02/08/2001)

Feb. 7, 2001

Feb. 7, 2001

19

MOTION filed by plaintiff for leave to file second amended class action complaint ; EXHIBIT (amended complaint) (jf) (Entered: 02/15/2001)

Feb. 8, 2001

Feb. 8, 2001

20

ERRATA by plaintiff to motion for leave to file second amended class action complaint; EXHIBIT (second amended complaint) (jf) (Entered: 02/15/2001)

Feb. 8, 2001

Feb. 8, 2001

18

MOTION filed by plaintiff to certify class ; exhibits (4) (jf) (Entered: 02/15/2001)

Feb. 12, 2001

Feb. 12, 2001

26

RESPONSE by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN in opposition to motion for leave to file second amended class action complaint [19−1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA . (bjsp) (Entered: 03/01/2001)

Feb. 16, 2001

Feb. 16, 2001

21

MOTION filed by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN to strike motion to certify class [18−1] (jdm) (Entered: 02/21/2001)

Feb. 20, 2001

Feb. 20, 2001

22

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : granting motion to extend time to 2/28/01 within which to reply to Plaintiff's Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss and to Strike Class Action Allegations [17−1] by DAN GLICKMAN; reply to motion due by 2/28/01 ; (N) (tb) Modified on 02/21/2001 (Entered: 02/21/2001)

Feb. 21, 2001

Feb. 21, 2001

23

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : granting motion to file excess pages limitation [6−1] by DAN GLICKMAN (N) (tb) (Entered: 02/21/2001)

Feb. 21, 2001

Feb. 21, 2001

24

RESPONSE by plaintiffs in opposition to motion to strike motion to certify class [18−1] [21−1] by ANN V. VENEMAN . (jdm) (Entered: 02/22/2001)

Feb. 21, 2001

Feb. 21, 2001

42

MEMORANDUM by federal defendant in support of motion to dismiss amended complaint complaint [4−1] [5−1] and motion to strike class action allegations [5−2]; exhibits (6) (jf) (Entered: 06/25/2001)

Feb. 21, 2001

Feb. 21, 2001

25

REPLY by plaintiffs to defendant's opposition to theirn motion for leave to file second amended class action complaint [19−1] (ag) Modified on 03/05/2001 (Entered: 03/01/2001)

Feb. 26, 2001

Feb. 26, 2001

27

MOTION (CONSENT) filed by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN exceed page limitation on defendnats reply to plaintiffs' opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss or strike class action complaint (bjsp) (Entered: 03/01/2001)

Feb. 28, 2001

Feb. 28, 2001

28

REPLY by federal defendants to plaintiffs opposition to motion to dismiss amended complaint complaint [4−1] [5−1] by DAN GLICKMAN, motion to strike class action allegations [5−2] by DAN GLICKMAN ; exhibits (2) (bjsp) Modified on 03/05/2001

Feb. 28, 2001

Feb. 28, 2001

30

RESPONSE (OPPOSITIONS) by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN to motion for temporary restraining order [29−1] by plaintiffs; exhibits (6) (jf) (Entered: 03/27/2001)

March 26, 2001

March 26, 2001

31

STRICKEN PURSUANT TO COURT ORDER DATED 3/20/02 −−− NOTICE OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN of recent filing in Pigford v. Veneman, CA 97−1978 (PLF). (jf) Modified on 03/20/2002 (Entered: 03/27/2001)

March 26, 2001

March 26, 2001

MOTION HEARING before Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer denied motion for temporary restraining order [29−1] by plaintiffs. Reporter: Santa Zizzo (gdf) (Entered: 03/26/2001)

March 26, 2001

March 26, 2001

32

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer denying plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order : (N) (tb) (Entered: 03/28/2001)

March 27, 2001

March 27, 2001

33

MOTION filed by plaintiffs to strike notice [31−1] (jdm) (Entered: 04/05/2001)

April 4, 2001

April 4, 2001

34

MOTION filed by plaintiffs to strike defendant's notice of filing [31−1] (bjsp) (Entered: 04/10/2001)

April 6, 2001

April 6, 2001

35

ERRATA by plaintiffs to plaintiffs' previously filed motion to strike defendant's notice of filing (bjsp) (Entered: 04/10/2001)

April 6, 2001

April 6, 2001

36

RESPONSE by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN in opposition to motion to strike defendant's notice of filing [31−1] [34−1] by GUADALUPE L. GARCIA, motion to strike notice [31−1] [33−1] by plaintiffs; Exhibits (2). (jdm) (Entered: 04/11/2001)

April 10, 2001

April 10, 2001

37

ORDER by Judge Paul L. Friedman : motion hearing on defendant's motion to dismiss and to strike clas allegations set for 10:00 5/21/01 ; (N) (tb) (Entered: 05/03/2001)

May 2, 2001

May 2, 2001

38

MOTION filed by plaintiffs for status conference (tb) (Entered: 05/07/2001)

May 4, 2001

May 4, 2001

40

RESPONSE by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN in opposition to motion for status conference [38−1] by plaintiff's (cas) (Entered: 05/14/2001)

May 11, 2001

May 11, 2001

39

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : converting motion hearing set for 05/21/01 to a status hearing set for 10:00 5/22/01 (N) (tb) (Entered: 05/14/2001)

May 14, 2001

May 14, 2001

CASE REASSIGNED to Judge Royce C. Lamberth (tth) (Entered: 05/21/2001)

May 18, 2001

May 18, 2001

41

ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : continuin hearing scheduled for 05/22/01 until further notice. (N) (jf) (Entered: 05/22/2001)

May 21, 2001

May 21, 2001

43

ORDER by Judge Royce C. Lamberth : granting motion exceed page limitation on defendnats reply to plaintiffs' opposition to defendant's motion to dismiss or strike class action complaint [27−1] by DAN GLICKMAN (N) (tb) (Entered: 09/27/2001)

Sept. 27, 2001

Sept. 27, 2001

CASE REASSIGNED to Judge James Robertson (aet) (Entered: 02/04/2002)

Feb. 1, 2002

Feb. 1, 2002

44

ORDER by Judge James Robertson: granting motion for status conference [38−1] by plaintiffs; status hearing is set for 2:00 2/21/02. (N) (mlp) (Entered: 02/07/2002)

Feb. 7, 2002

Feb. 7, 2002

45

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiffs by Alan Wiseman. (aet) (Entered: 02/12/2002)

Feb. 7, 2002

Feb. 7, 2002

46

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Phillip L. Fraas representing ALL PLAINTIFFS . New address: Hogan & Hartson 555 Thirteenth St., NW Washington DC 20004 202−637−6624. (aet) (Entered: 02/19/2002)

Feb. 14, 2002

Feb. 14, 2002

STATUS HEARING before Judge James Robertson : trial set for 9:30 3/17/03 ; brief regarding class action due 4/8/02 ; response to brief due 4/29/02 ; reply to brief due 5/6/02. Reporter: Dennis Dinkel (mlp) (Entered: 02/21/2002)

Feb. 21, 2002

Feb. 21, 2002

48

TRANSCRIPT filed for date(s) of 2/21/02. Reporter: Dennis Dinkel (aet) (Entered: 03/26/2002)

March 21, 2002

March 21, 2002

50

MEMORANDUM by ALL PLAINTIFFS in support of motion to certify class [18−1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA; exhibits (50) (aet) (Entered: 05/01/2002)

April 8, 2002

April 8, 2002

49

MOTION filed by plaintiffs for hearing on motion for class certification (aet) (Entered: 04/22/2002)

April 15, 2002

April 15, 2002

51

MOTION filed by plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS to lift stay on discovery , and to adopt discovery plan (aet) (Entered: 05/01/2002)

April 25, 2002

April 25, 2002

52

RESPONSE by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN in opposition to motion to certify class [18−1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA . (aet) (Entered: 05/01/2002)

April 29, 2002

April 29, 2002

53

RESPONSE by federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN in opposition to motion to lift stay on discovery [51−1] and to stop discovery plan [51−2] by ALL PLAINTIFFS (cdw) (Entered: 05/07/2002)

May 6, 2002

May 6, 2002

54

REPLY by plaintiff to response in opposition to motion to certify class [18−1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA (aet) (Entered: 05/08/2002)

May 6, 2002

May 6, 2002

55

ORDER by Judge James Robertson: denying motion to lift stay on discovery [51−1] by ALL PLAINTIFFS, denying motion to adopt discovery plan [51−2] by ALL PLAINTIFFS (N) (mlp) (Entered: 05/10/2002)

May 9, 2002

May 9, 2002

56

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER by Judge James Robertson :directing parties meet and confer on schedule for discovery related to class coertification and setting status hearing set for 4:30 6/24/02 (N) (rew) Modified on 06/06/2002 (Entered: 05/23/2002)

May 22, 2002

May 22, 2002

57

MOTION filed by plaintiff for reconsideration or in the alternative clarification of the courts memorandum order of 5/22/02 [56−2] (bcs) (Entered: 06/06/2002)

June 3, 2002

June 3, 2002

58

ORDER by Judge James Robertson : denying motion for reconsideration or in the alternative clarification of the courts memorandum order of 5/22/02 [56−2] [57−1] by GUADALUPE L. GARCIA (N) (lin) (Entered: 06/07/2002)

June 6, 2002

June 6, 2002

59

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN by Lisa Ann Olson (bcs) (Entered: 06/25/2002)

June 24, 2002

June 24, 2002

60

SUPPLEMENTAL MEMORANDUM (SECOND) by plaintiffs in support of motion to certify class [18−1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA; exhibits (96) (bcs) (Entered: 07/18/2002)

July 17, 2002

July 17, 2002

61

MOTION filed by federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN to extend time to 8/28/02 to file a response to plaintiffs second suppplemental memorandum in support of their motion for class certification (bcs) (Entered: 07/25/2002)

July 24, 2002

July 24, 2002

62

ORDER by Judge James Robertson : granting motion to extend time to 8/28/02 to file a response to plaintiffs second suppplemental memorandum in support of their motion for class certification [61−1] by ANN V. VENEMAN, DAN GLICKMAN (N) (gdf) (Entered: 07/30/2002)

July 26, 2002

July 26, 2002

64

EXHIBITS (AMENDED) of plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS to plaintiffs second supplemental memorandum in support of their motion for class certification; exhibits (4−75) (bcs) (Entered: 07/31/2002)

July 30, 2002

July 30, 2002

65

ORDER by Judge James Robertson: the Court will consider plaintiffs' second supplemental memorandum in support of their motion for class certification [#63] to be deemed a motion for reconsideration. The motion for reconsideration is denied. (N) (dam) (Entered: 08/09/2002)

Aug. 9, 2002

Aug. 9, 2002

66

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Phillip L. Fraas representing plaintiff GUADALUPE L. GARCIA, plaintiff TONY JIMINEZ, plaintiff PATRICIA JIMINEZ, plaintiff MR. X, plaintiff MRS. X . New address: 3050 K Street, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, D.C., 20007−5108, 202−342−8864, effective 9/3/02. (rje) (Entered: 08/20/2002)

Aug. 19, 2002

Aug. 19, 2002

67

RESPONSE (OPPOSITIONS) by federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN to supplemental memorandum [60−1] by ALL PLAINTIFFS; exhibits (4) (bcs) (Entered: 08/29/2002)

Aug. 28, 2002

Aug. 28, 2002

68

REPLY by plaintiffs to defendants response to plaintiffs second supplemental memorandum in support of their motion to certify class [18−1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA; exhibits (6) (bcs) (Entered: 09/06/2002)

Sept. 5, 2002

Sept. 5, 2002

69

MOTION filed by federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN for leave to file a surreply to plaintiffs second supplemental memorandum in support of plaintiffs motion for class cerrification ; EXHIBIT (SURREPLY) (bcs) (Entered: 09/16/2002)

Sept. 13, 2002

Sept. 13, 2002

70

RESPONSE by plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS in opposition to motion for leave to file a surreply to plaintiffs second supplemental memorandum in support of plaintiffs motion for class cerrification [69−1] by ANN V. VENEMAN, DAN GLICKMAN . (bcs) (Entered: 09/18/2002)

Sept. 17, 2002

Sept. 17, 2002

71

NOTICE by federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN of recent decisions handed down. (bcs) (Entered: 11/12/2002)

Nov. 8, 2002

Nov. 8, 2002

72

MOTION filed by ALL PLAINTIFFS to lift the stay on discovery, to adopt a discovery plan and to require defendant to preserve all conceivably relevant documents and tangible things during the pendency of this case ; exhibits (5) (bcs) (Entered: 11/18/2002)

Nov. 15, 2002

Nov. 15, 2002

73

RESPONSE by ALL PLAINTIFFS to notice of recent decisions [71−1] by ANN V. VENEMAN, DAN GLICKMAN; exhibits (2) (bcs) (Entered: 11/18/2002)

Nov. 15, 2002

Nov. 15, 2002

74

RESPONSE by federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN in opposition to motion to lift the stay on discovery, to adopt a discovery plan and to require defendant to preserve all conceivably relevant documents and tangible things during the pendency of this case [72−1] by ALL PLAINTIFFS . (bcs) (Entered: 12/02/2002)

Nov. 27, 2002

Nov. 27, 2002

75

NOTICE OF CHANGE OF ADDRESS by Lisa Ann Olson representing federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN, federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN . New address: U.S. Department of Justice 20 Mass. Ave., NW, Rm 6118 Washington DC 20530 (202)514−5633. (bcs) (Entered: 12/02/2002)

Nov. 27, 2002

Nov. 27, 2002

76

MEMORANDUM OPINION by Judge James Robertson (N) (dam) (Entered: 12/03/2002)

Dec. 2, 2002

Dec. 2, 2002

77

ORDER by Judge James Robertson: denying motion to certify class [18−1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA (N) (dam) (Entered: 12/03/2002)

Dec. 2, 2002

Dec. 2, 2002

79

ORDER by Judge James Robertson : granting motion to stay proceedings nunc pro tunc to 12/2/02 pending resolution of plaintiffs' pending Interlocutory Appeal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 (f) [78−1] by ALL PLAINTIFFS (N) (dam) (Entered: 12/10/2002)

Dec. 10, 2002

Dec. 10, 2002

STATUS HEARING before Judge James Robertson: held. status hearing set for 4:30 1/15/03 ; Reporter: Dennis Dinkel (dam) (Entered: 12/18/2002)

Dec. 18, 2002

Dec. 18, 2002

80

TRANSCRIPT filed for status hearing date(s) of 12/18/02. Reporter: Dennis A. Dinkel (bcs) (Entered: 12/24/2002)

Dec. 20, 2002

Dec. 20, 2002

81

MOTION (EMERGENCY) filed by ALL PLAINTIFFS to modify 12/9/02 order staying proceedings nunc pro tunc to 12/2/02 for purposes of tolling the statute of limitations pursuant to LCR 7.1 (bcs) (Entered: 01/07/2003)

Jan. 6, 2003

Jan. 6, 2003

82

ORDER by Judge James Robertson: granting motion to modify 12/9/02 order staying proceedings nunc pro tunc to 12/2/02 for purposes of tolling the statute of limitations pursuant to LCR 7.1 [81−1] by ALL PLAINTIFFS (N) (dam) (Entered: 01/14/2003)

Jan. 13, 2003

Jan. 13, 2003

83

MOTION filed by ALL PLAINTIFFS to lift the stay on discovery, to adopt a discovery plan and to require defendant to preserve all conceivably relevant documents and tangible things during the pendency of this case (bcs) (Entered: 01/15/2003)

Jan. 14, 2003

Jan. 14, 2003

84

MOTION filed by plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS for reconsideration of the court's order dated 12/2/02 [77−1] , in the alternative, clarification of certain issues (bcs) (Entered: 01/15/2003)

Jan. 14, 2003

Jan. 14, 2003

STATUS HEARING before Judge James Robertson: The plaintiff is to serve discovery upon the defendant. If the defendant wants to oppose it they may. Discovery to be served by plaintiff upon defendant by 1/20/03; the defendant is to repond by 2/14/03. Reporter: Dennis Dinkel (dam) (Entered: 01/16/2003)

Jan. 15, 2003

Jan. 15, 2003

85

TRANSCRIPT filed for status hearing date(s) of 1/15/03. Reporter: Dennis A. Dinkel (bcs) (Entered: 01/29/2003)

Jan. 28, 2003

Jan. 28, 2003

86

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN by Rupa Bhattacharyya (nmr) (Entered: 02/19/2003)

Feb. 14, 2003

Feb. 14, 2003

87

RESPONSE by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN, federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN to motion to lift the stay on discovery, to adopt a discovery plan and to require defendant to preserve all conceivably relevant documents and tangible things during the pendency of this case [83−1] by ALL PLAINTIFFS; exhibits (3); (COPY) (bcs) (Entered: 03/11/2003)

Feb. 14, 2003

Feb. 14, 2003

88

REPLY by plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS to response to motion to lift the stay on discovery, to adopt a discovery plan and to require defendant to preserve all conceivably relevant documents and tangible things during the pendency of this case [83−1] by ALL PLAINTIFFS; exhibits (4) (bcs) (Entered: 03/11/2003)

Feb. 28, 2003

Feb. 28, 2003

SCHEDULING NOTICE: status hearing set for 4:45 4/9/03 ; before Judge James Robertson . (dam) (Entered: 03/21/2003)

March 21, 2003

March 21, 2003

89

STATEMENT filed by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN , regarding: the deliberative process privilege. (bcs) (Entered: 05/05/2003)

May 2, 2003

May 2, 2003

93

MEMORANDUM by ALL PLAINTIFFS in support of proposed protective order in a status hearing held 4/29/03. (bcs) (Entered: 05/14/2003)

May 4, 2003

May 4, 2003

90

OBJECTIONS by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN to plaintiffs' proposed order (bcs) (Entered: 05/08/2003)

May 7, 2003

May 7, 2003

91

TRANSCRIPT filed for status hearing date(s) of 4/29/03. Reporter: Dennis A. Dinkel (bcs) (Entered: 05/08/2003)

May 7, 2003

May 7, 2003

92

PROTECTIVE ORDER by Judge James Robertson: setting forth procedures for handling confidential material; allowing designated material to be filed under seal. (N)

May 8, 2003

May 8, 2003

95

RESPONSE by plaintiffs in opposition to motion to extend time to 6/5/03 to respond to plaintiffs' pending discovery requests [94−1] by ANN V. VENEMAN; attachment (1) . (rje) (Entered: 06/02/2003)

May 30, 2003

May 30, 2003

96

ORDER by Judge James Robertson: granting motion to extend time to 6/5/03 to respond to plaintiffs' pending discovery requests [94−1] by ANN V. VENEMAN (N) (dam) (Entered: 06/04/2003)

June 4, 2003

June 4, 2003

97

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN by Elizabeth Goitein (bm) (Entered: 06/17/2003)

June 13, 2003

June 13, 2003

99

TRANSCRIPT filed for status hearing date(s) of 7/15/03. Reporter: Dennis A. Dinkel (bcs) (Entered: 07/21/2003)

July 8, 2003

July 8, 2003

Case Details

State / Territory: District of Columbia

Case Type(s):

Fair Housing/Lending/Insurance

Special Collection(s):

Multi-LexSum (in sample)

Key Dates

Filing Date: Oct. 13, 2000

Closing Date: 2014

Case Ongoing: No

Plaintiffs

Plaintiff Description:

Hispanics who farmed or ranched, or attempted to farm or ranch, during the period January 1, 1981, to the present and who were discriminated against by the USDA on the basis of national origin when they sought to participate on equal terms in farm loan and disaster benefit programs and who complained to the USDA about such discrimination.

Plaintiff Type(s):

Private Plaintiff

Public Interest Lawyer: No

Filed Pro Se: No

Class Action Sought: Yes

Class Action Outcome: Denied

Defendants

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Federal

Defendant Type(s):

Bank or credit provider

Case Details

Causes of Action:

Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. §§ 551 et seq.

Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA), 15 U.S.C. § 1691

Declaratory Judgment Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2201

Available Documents:

Trial Court Docket

Complaint (any)

Any published opinion

Outcome

Prevailing Party: Mixed

Nature of Relief:

Unknown

Source of Relief:

Settlement

Form of Settlement:

Private Settlement Agreement

Content of Injunction:

Preliminary relief denied

Issues

General:

Disparate Treatment

Pattern or Practice

Record-keeping

Records Disclosure

Discrimination-area:

Lending

Discrimination-basis:

National origin discrimination

Language:

Spanish

National Origin/Ethnicity:

Hispanic