Lexplug logoLexplug

Aragon v. Che Ku

District Court, D. Minnesota
277 F.Supp.3d 1055 (2017)
ELI5:

Rule of Law:

Allegations of physical confinement, violence, and threats of deportation against immigrant employees are sufficient to state plausible claims for relief under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS) and the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), and may serve as predicate acts for a claim under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.


Facts:

  • Plaintiffs are twelve Latino individuals who were current or former employees of Defendants.
  • Defendants are five Minnesota corporations operating grocery stores and two individuals, Che Ku and Leng Ku, who serve as their chief executive officers.
  • The longest period of employment for any plaintiff was from 1998 to 2015.
  • Defendants allegedly moved employees between different stores and directed some to perform work at the individual defendants' homes.
  • On multiple occasions, eleven of the plaintiffs were allegedly locked in portions of the grocery stores, including the freezer.
  • Defendants allegedly physically assaulted certain plaintiffs and threatened to report them to immigration authorities if they did not follow instructions or complained about work conditions.
  • Defendants also allegedly failed to pay overtime and denied employees adequate breaks and medical attention.

Procedural Posture:

  • Twelve Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota against five corporations and two individuals (Defendants).
  • The complaint alleged four counts: (I) racial discrimination, (II) violation of the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), (III) violation of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), and (IV) violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.
  • Defendants filed a motion to dismiss Counts II, III, and IV for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Locked

Premium Content

Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief

You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture

Issue:

Do allegations that employers subjected immigrant workers to physical confinement, violence, and threats of deportation state a plausible claim for relief under the Alien Tort Statute, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act, and the RICO Act?


Opinions:

Majority - Judge Wilhelmina M. Wright

Yes. The plaintiffs' allegations are sufficient to state plausible claims for relief under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act (TVPRA), and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. The court reasoned that: (1) The ATS claim is viable because forced labor is a recognized violation of customary international law for which private individuals and corporations can be held liable, and plaintiffs' allegations of physical confinement and threats of deportation plausibly meet the definition of forced labor. (2) The TVPRA claim is sufficiently pleaded because allegations of being locked in freezers constitute 'physical restraint' and threats of deportation constitute 'abuse or threatened abuse of law or legal process' under the statute. (3) The RICO claim is plausible because the individual and corporate defendants together can form an 'association-in-fact enterprise' distinct from themselves, their grocery business affects interstate commerce, and the well-pleaded TVPRA violation serves as the required 'racketeering activity' predicate act.



Analysis:

This decision affirms the viability of using the Alien Tort Statute to hold private corporations and individuals accountable for severe labor exploitation within the United States. By adopting the majority circuit view that the ATS applies to private actors and recognizing forced labor as a cognizable violation of customary international law, the court provides a strong precedent, particularly in a circuit with little existing case law on the statute. The ruling demonstrates how specific allegations of both physical coercion (confinement) and psychological coercion (deportation threats) can satisfy the pleading standards for both the ATS and the TVPRA. This strengthens legal protections for vulnerable immigrant workers and clarifies the pathway for pleading complex statutory claims against abusive employers.

đŸ€– Gunnerbot:
Query Aragon v. Che Ku (2017) directly. You can ask questions about any aspect of the case. If it's in the case, Gunnerbot will know.
Locked
Subscribe to Lexplug to chat with the Gunnerbot about this case.

Unlock the full brief for Aragon v. Che Ku