Case: Garcia v. Vilsack

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

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

People

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

Judge(s)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Anderson, Kenneth Charles

Attorney, Marc L.

Attorney, Alexander John

Attorney for Defendant

Expert/Monitor/Master/Other

Attorney, Paul March

Attorney, Jason J.

Judge(s)

Henderson, Karen LeCraft (District of Columbia)

Ishii, Anthony W. (California)

Robertson, James (District of Columbia)

Rogers, Judith Ann Wilson (District of Columbia)

Walton, Reggie B. (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Plaintiff

Anderson, Kenneth Charles

Attorney, Marc L.

Attorney, Alexander John

Boggs, Roderic Von

Esquire, Stephen Sedrick

Feinberg, Adam P (District of Columbia)

Ferguson, Laura G (District of Columbia)

Fraas, Philip L (District of Columbia)

Green, Robert Lamar

Hibey, Alexander John (District of Columbia)

Hill, Stephen S (District of Columbia)

Huhta, Susan E.

JIMINEZ, PATRICIA (District of Columbia)

Pires, Alexander John Jr. (District of Columbia)

Ruyak, Robert F. (District of Columbia)

Wahl, Barbara Susan

Wiseman, Alan M. (District of Columbia)

Attorney for Defendant

Bhattacharyya, Rupa (District of Columbia)

Bucholtz, Jeffrey S. (District of Columbia)

Cohen, Vincent H. (District of Columbia)

Esquire, Peter Douglas

Goitein, Elizabeth (District of Columbia)

Howard, Roscoe (District of Columbia)

Keisler, Peter D. (District of Columbia)

Lin, Jean (District of Columbia)

Loeb, Robert Mark

Mizer, Benjamin C. (District of Columbia)

Olson, Lisa A (District of Columbia)

Scarborough, Charles Wylie

Sitcov, Michael (District of Columbia)

Taylor, Jeff (District of Columbia)

Wainstein, Kenneth L.

Other

Edwards, Christal E (Maryland)

Esquire, Glen David

Fletcher, Brian H.

Jr., Paul A. Robinson

Lassow, Dina R.

Partner, Robin S.

Robinson, Paul A Jr. (Tennessee)

Skalet, Steven A.

Attorney Contact Information via CourtListener

Documents in the Clearinghouse

Documents in this case

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 2002 WL 33004124
76 1:00-cv-02445	Memorandum Garcia v. Veneman	Dec. 2, 2002	Dec. 2, 2002 Order/Opinion 211 F.R.D. 15
132 1:00-cv-02445	Memorandum Order Denying Class Certification Garcia v. Veneman	Sept. 10, 2004	Sept. 10, 2004 Order/Opinion 224 F.R.D. 8
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 444 F.3d 625
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 563 F.3d 519

show / hide documents

Resources

Resources related to this case
Title	Description		External URL Date / External URL
Garcia v. Vilsack: A Policy and Legal Analysisof a USDA Discrimination Case Jody Feder & Tadlock Cowan	Garcia v. Vilsack, involved allegations that USDA unlawfully discriminated against all similarly situated Hispanic farmers with respect to credit transactions and disaster benefits in violation of th…	February 22, 2013	Feb. 22, 2013 https://nationalaglawcenter.org/...

show / hide resources

Docket

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

Last updated Nov. 2, 2026, 9:58 p.m.

Change selected docket

Docket for: GARCIA v. VENEMAN

ECF Number	Date	Description	Link
1	Oct. 13, 2000	COMPLAINT filed by plaintiff GUADALUPE L. GARCIA, plaintiff TONY JIMINEZ, plaintiff PATRICIA JIMINEZ, plaintiff MR. X, plaintiff MRS. X (kmk) (Entered: 10/26/2000)	RECAP
	Oct. 13, 2000	SUMMONS (3) issued to federal party(s) federal defendant DAN GLICKMAN, and non-parties: U.S. Attorney and U.S. Attorney General. (kmk)
2	Dec. 6, 2000	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)	RECAP
3	Dec. 8, 2000	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)	RECAP
4	Dec. 12, 2000	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)	RECAP
5	Dec. 22, 2000	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)	RECAP
6	Dec. 22, 2000	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)	RECAP
7	Jan. 4, 2001	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)	RECAP
8	Jan. 9, 2001	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)	RECAP
10	Jan. 9, 2001	MOTION filed by plaintiff to extend time to 2/12/01 to move class certification (cas) (Entered: 01/11/2001)	RECAP
9	Jan. 10, 2001	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)	RECAP
11	Jan. 10, 2001	ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : Tele-conference set for 2:30 1/18/01 (N) (tb) (Entered: 01/11/2001)	RECAP
12	Jan. 10, 2001	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)	RECAP
13	Jan. 17, 2001	ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : Tele-conference set for 10:00 1/23/01 (N) (tb) (Entered: 01/18/2001)	RECAP
14	Jan. 23, 2001	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)	RECAP
15	Feb. 5, 2001	RESPONSE by plaintiff GUADALUPE L. GARCIA, plaintiff TONY JIMINEZ, plaintiff PATRICIA JIMINEZ, plaintiff MR. X, plaintiff MRS. X, plaintiff GLORIA MORALEZ, plaintiff BEATRICE GARZA, plaintiff RODOLFO GARZA, plaintiff LARRY CHAVARRIA, plaintiff ROBERT CHAVARRIA, plaintiff YSIDORO F. MENDOZA, plaintiff ALBERTO A. ACOSTA, plaintiff JIMMY ALVAREZ, plaintiff ELIZABETH ALVAREZ, plaintiff DAVID FLORES, plaintiff PATRICK R. FLORES, plaintiff GILBERT A. GARCIA, plaintiff F. RICHARD LLANEZ, plaintiff EDWARDO R. LOPEZ, plaintiff ISMAEL O. MEDINA, plaintiff SONJA MEYERS, plaintiff ROBERT ORTEGA JR., plaintiff EDWARD W. PROVENCIO, plaintiff GEORGE L. PROVENCIO, plaintiff ALEX CONTRERAS, plaintiff JOE CONTRERAS, plaintiff LOUIS CONTRERAS, plaintiff HECTOR T. FLORES, plaintiff JUAN J. FLORES, plaintiff ALBERTO M. ORTEGA, plaintiff RENE ORTEGA, plaintiff RUPERTO R. RODRIGUEZ, plaintiff ERASMO VALDEZ, plaintiff DIONICIO VALDEZZ II, plaintiff ARTURO VASQUEZ, plaintiff RODOLFO VASQUEZ, plaintiff DAVID L. HINJOSA SR. in 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 (6) (cas) (Entered: 02/06/2001)	RECAP
16	Feb. 6, 2001	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)	RECAP
17	Feb. 7, 2001	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)	RECAP
19	Feb. 8, 2001	MOTION filed by plaintiff for leave to file second amended class action complaint ; EXHIBIT (amended complaint) (jf) (Entered: 02/15/2001)	RECAP
20	Feb. 8, 2001	ERRATA by plaintiff to motion for leave to file second amended class action complaint; EXHIBIT (second amended complaint) (jf) (Entered: 02/15/2001)	RECAP
18	Feb. 12, 2001	MOTION filed by plaintiff to certify class ; exhibits (4) (jf) (zjpb). (Entered: 02/15/2001)	RECAP
26	Feb. 16, 2001	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)	RECAP
21	Feb. 20, 2001	MOTION filed by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN to strike motion to certify class [18-1] (jdm) (Entered: 02/21/2001)	RECAP
22	Feb. 21, 2001	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)	RECAP
23	Feb. 21, 2001	ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : granting motion to file excess pages limitation [6-1] by DAN GLICKMAN (N) (tb) (Entered: 02/21/2001)	RECAP
24	Feb. 21, 2001	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)	RECAP
42	Feb. 21, 2001	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) (zjpb). (Entered: 06/25/2001)	RECAP
25	Feb. 26, 2001	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)	RECAP
27	Feb. 28, 2001	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)	RECAP
28	Feb. 28, 2001	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 (Entered: 03/02/2001)	RECAP
29	March 23, 2001	MOTION filed by plaintiffs for temporary restraining order and oral argument requested ; Exhibits (7). (jdm) Modified on 03/28/2001 (zjpb). (Entered: 03/26/2001)	RECAP
30	March 26, 2001	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)	RECAP
31	March 26, 2001	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)	RECAP
	March 26, 2001	MOTION HEARING before Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer denied motion for temporary restraining order [29-1] by plaintiffs. Reporter: Santa Zizzo (gdf)
32	March 27, 2001	ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer denying plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order : (N) (tb) (Entered: 03/28/2001)	RECAP
33	April 4, 2001	MOTION filed by plaintiffs to strike notice [31-1] (jdm) (Entered: 04/05/2001)	RECAP
34	April 6, 2001	MOTION filed by plaintiffs to strike defendant's notice of filing [31-1] (bjsp) (Entered: 04/10/2001)	RECAP
35	April 6, 2001	ERRATA by plaintiffs to plaintiffs' previously filed motion to strike defendant's notice of filing (bjsp) (Entered: 04/10/2001)	RECAP
36	April 10, 2001	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)	RECAP
37	May 2, 2001	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)	RECAP
38	May 4, 2001	MOTION filed by plaintiffs for status conference (tb) (Entered: 05/07/2001)	RECAP
40	May 11, 2001	RESPONSE by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN in opposition to motion for status conference [38-1] by plaintiff's (cas) (Entered: 05/14/2001)	RECAP
39	May 14, 2001	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)	RECAP
	May 18, 2001	CASE REASSIGNED to Judge Royce C. Lamberth (tth)
41	May 21, 2001	ORDER by Judge Louis F. Oberdorfer : continuin hearing scheduled for 05/22/01 until further notice. (N) (jf) (Entered: 05/22/2001)	RECAP
43	Sept. 27, 2001	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)	RECAP
	Feb. 1, 2002	CASE REASSIGNED to Judge James Robertson (aet)
44	Feb. 7, 2002	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)	RECAP
45	Feb. 7, 2002	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for plaintiffs by Alan Wiseman. (aet) (Entered: 02/12/2002)	RECAP
46	Feb. 14, 2002	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)	RECAP
	Feb. 21, 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)
47	March 20, 2002	ORDER by Judge James Robertson: granting motion to strike defendant's notice of filing [34-1] by GUADALUPE L. GARCIA; granting motion to strike notice [33-1] by plaintiffs; denying motion to strike motion to certify class [21-1] by ANN V. VENEMAN; granting motion for leave to file second amended class action complaint [19-1] by MRS. X, MR. X, PATRICIA JIMINEZ, TONY JIMINEZ, GUADALUPE L. GARCIA; granting motion for leave to file second amended class action complaint [16-1] by plaintiffs; granting in part, denying in part motion to dismiss amended complaint complaint [5-1]; the Court's order of 1/23/01 14 is modified as described in open court on 2/21/02, to permit further briefing on the motions to certify a class 18 and to strike class action allegations 5 . (N) (mlp) (Entered: 03/20/2002)	RECAP
48	March 21, 2002	TRANSCRIPT filed for date(s) of 2/21/02. Reporter: Dennis Dinkel (aet) (Entered: 03/26/2002)	RECAP
50	April 8, 2002	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) (zjpb). (Entered: 05/01/2002)	RECAP
49	April 15, 2002	MOTION filed by plaintiffs for hearing on motion for class certification (aet) (Entered: 04/22/2002)	RECAP
51	April 25, 2002	MOTION filed by plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS to lift stay on discovery, and to adopt discovery plan (aet) (Entered: 05/01/2002)	RECAP
52	April 29, 2002	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) (zjpb). (Entered: 05/01/2002)	RECAP
53	May 6, 2002	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)	RECAP
54	May 6, 2002	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) (zjpb). (Entered: 05/08/2002)	RECAP
55	May 9, 2002	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)	RECAP
56	May 22, 2002	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)	RECAP
57	June 3, 2002	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)	RECAP
58	June 6, 2002	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)	RECAP
59	June 24, 2002	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN by Lisa Ann Olson (bcs) (Entered: 06/25/2002)	RECAP
60	July 17, 2002	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)	RECAP
61	July 24, 2002	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)	RECAP
62	July 26, 2002	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)	RECAP
63	July 30, 2002	MEMORANDUM by plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS in opposition to 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 (bcs) (Entered: 07/31/2002)	RECAP
64	July 30, 2002	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)	RECAP
65	Aug. 9, 2002	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)	RECAP
66	Aug. 19, 2002	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)	RECAP
67	Aug. 28, 2002	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)	RECAP
68	Sept. 5, 2002	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)	RECAP
69	Sept. 13, 2002	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)	RECAP
70	Sept. 17, 2002	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)	RECAP
71	Nov. 8, 2002	NOTICE by federal defendants DAN GLICKMAN, ANN V. VENEMAN of recent decisions handed down. (bcs) (Entered: 11/12/2002)	RECAP
72	Nov. 15, 2002	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)	RECAP
73	Nov. 15, 2002	RESPONSE by ALL PLAINTIFFS to notice of recent decisions [71-1] by ANN V. VENEMAN, DAN GLICKMAN; exhibits (2) (bcs) (Entered: 11/18/2002)	RECAP
74	Nov. 27, 2002	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)	RECAP
75	Nov. 27, 2002	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)	RECAP
76	Dec. 2, 2002	MEMORANDUM OPINION by Judge James Robertson (N) (dam) (Entered: 12/03/2002)	RECAP
77	Dec. 2, 2002	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)	RECAP
78	Dec. 9, 2002	MOTION (EMERGENCY) filed by plaintiff ALL PLAINTIFFS 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) ; exhibits (3) (bcs) (Entered: 12/10/2002)	RECAP
79	Dec. 10, 2002	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)	RECAP
	Dec. 18, 2002	STATUS HEARING before Judge James Robertson: held. status hearing set for 4:30 1/15/03 ; Reporter: Dennis Dinkel (dam)
80	Dec. 20, 2002	TRANSCRIPT filed for status hearing date(s) of 12/18/02. Reporter: Dennis A. Dinkel (bcs) (Entered: 12/24/2002)	RECAP
81	Jan. 6, 2003	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)	RECAP
82	Jan. 13, 2003	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)	RECAP
83	Jan. 14, 2003	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)	RECAP
84	Jan. 14, 2003	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)	RECAP
	Jan. 15, 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)
85	Jan. 28, 2003	TRANSCRIPT filed for status hearing date(s) of 1/15/03. Reporter: Dennis A. Dinkel (bcs) (Entered: 01/29/2003)	RECAP
86	Feb. 14, 2003	ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN by Rupa Bhattacharyya (nmr) (Entered: 02/19/2003)	RECAP
87	Feb. 14, 2003	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)	RECAP
88	Feb. 28, 2003	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)	RECAP
	March 21, 2003	SCHEDULING NOTICE: status hearing set for 4:45 4/9/03 ; before Judge James Robertson . (dam)
89	May 2, 2003	STATEMENT filed by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN, regarding: the deliberative process privilege. (bcs) (Entered: 05/05/2003)	RECAP
93	May 4, 2003	MEMORANDUM by ALL PLAINTIFFS in support of proposed protective order in a status hearing held 4/29/03. (bcs) (Entered: 05/14/2003)	RECAP
90	May 7, 2003	OBJECTIONS by federal defendant ANN V. VENEMAN to plaintiffs' proposed order (bcs) (Entered: 05/08/2003)	RECAP
91	May 7, 2003	TRANSCRIPT filed for status hearing date(s) of 4/29/03. Reporter: Dennis A. Dinkel (bcs) (Entered: 05/08/2003)	RECAP

show / hide docket entries

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

Federal

U.S. Department of Agriculture

Defendant Type(s):

Bank or credit provider

Case Details