- Two Mexican farmworkers settled a federal lawsuit against Michigan’s First Pick Farms over labor trafficking allegations.
- Supervisors allegedly used immigration threats and coercion to force workers to harvest blueberries across state lines.
- The confidential agreement resolves claims of overcrowding and illegal housing charges without an admission of wrongdoing.
A federal lawsuit brought by two Mexican farmworkers against First Pick Farms and related Michigan entities settled July 9, ending claims that immigration threats were used to keep them harvesting blueberries and discourage complaints.
Feliciano Velasco Rojas and Luis Guzman Rojas said they accepted H-2A jobs in North Carolina but were taken to West Olive, Michigan, in 2017. They alleged that supervisors threatened to contact immigration authorities if they refused to go, tried to prevent them from leaving and charged them for housing.
The settlement resolves the case in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Michigan. Its financial terms remain confidential, and the agreement does not include an admission of wrongdoing by the defendants.
The case advanced through two major rulings. U.S. Magistrate Judge Sally J. Berens ruled in 2025 that the trafficking claims could proceed. U.S. District Judge Paul L. Maloney then allowed the trafficking and labor claims to enter discovery on January 2, 2026.
The workers said a North Carolina job became Michigan harvest labor
The complaint identified Antonio Sanchez, a field supervisor and transporter, as a central figure in the alleged move. Sanchez allegedly awakened workers in North Carolina, supplied fake identities and warned that immigration authorities would be alerted if they refused to travel to Michigan.
The allegations involved the two named plaintiffs and approximately 30 other guestworkers. Court filings described the workers as recruited under valid H-2A contracts for North Carolina before being transported across state lines under circumstances the plaintiffs characterized as coercive.
Housing formed another part of the case. The workers alleged that 30 people were placed in a single three-bedroom, two-bathroom home, with many sleeping on the basement floor. They also said they paid $20–$25 per week for the housing.
The plaintiffs described their pay as a piece rate of approximately 50 cents per pound of blueberries. Their claims covered labor conditions, housing charges and the alleged use of immigration consequences to compel continued work.
The defendants disputed responsibility for conduct attributed to the recruiter. The lawsuit named four primary corporate defendants: First Pick Farms, Grow Blue Farms, HB Hive and Company, and FPF Management.
The settlement ends claims under two federal labor laws
The case invoked the Trafficking Victims Protection Act and the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act. The plaintiffs argued that threats connected to their immigration status helped create forced labor conditions.
Tom Mitchell appeared in court documents as the direct or indirect owner of the four primary defendant companies. Scott Nagelvoort served as president of the defendant entities, while Jennifer Crawford was identified as their registered agent.
The workers were represented by Gonzalo Peralta, a senior staff attorney at the Michigan Immigrant Rights Center, and Julia Solórzano, legal and policy director at Centro de los Derechos del Migrante.
Peralta said the plaintiffs felt relief after reaching an agreement, although they no longer work in agriculture. He described them as “content that we’ve reached a resolution that’s amenable to all parties.”
“No one should be made to work under threat from their employer, regardless of where they’re from. This is just another step in the judiciary taking the steps to make inroads and clarify these issues going forward so that it provides a roadmap.”
Peralta made the statement while discussing the settlement and the litigation’s possible use in later agricultural labor cases.
Solórzano said the structure of the guestworker program can make workers reluctant to report abuse because their legal status is connected to their employer.
“The H-2A program ties a worker's legal status to their employer, creating a structural 'chilling effect' that punishes those who speak out against abuse.”
Michigan labor cases have produced different outcomes
The settlement followed a separate Michigan forced-labor verdict involving five Guatemalan workers. On June 6, 2025, a jury in Gomez-Echeverria v. Purpose Point Harvesting LLC awarded $555,000, including $450,000 in punitive damages, over allegations involving passport confiscation and immigration-related threats.
That verdict did not decide the claims against First Pick Farms. The newer case ended through settlement instead of a trial verdict, and its confidential terms provide no public damages figure.
Farmworker Legal Services and Farmworker Justice said the case should warn growers that using outside recruiters does not automatically shield them from trafficking claims. The organizations pointed to the alleged conduct by a recruiter and the farm operators’ role in the broader labor arrangement.
The litigation also drew attention to the relationship between recruitment and employer control. The plaintiffs’ account placed the initial recruitment in North Carolina, the alleged threats during the transfer and the disputed working conditions at the Michigan harvest site.
The court record leaves the allegations unresolved
A settlement closes the federal proceeding without a judicial finding that the defendants committed trafficking or labor violations. The agreement also leaves the parties’ confidential financial resolution outside the public record.
The case was filed as Feliciano Velasco Rojas and Luis Guzman Rojas v. First Pick Farms, LLC et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-604. The July 9 agreement covered the federal action in Grand Rapids, Michigan.
The plaintiffs’ allegations included the use of fake IDs, threats that immigration authorities would be contacted, overcrowded housing and weekly rent deductions. The defendants challenged responsibility for the recruiter’s alleged conduct while the claims moved through the federal court process.
The settlement was reported on July 9, 2026, and announced July 15, 2026. Its resolution came after the January 2 discovery ruling and more than three years after the case was filed.
The federal case now ends without a public trial record deciding whether the alleged threats compelled labor. The claims nevertheless placed recruitment, housing and immigration-related coercion in the same litigation, a combination that farmworker advocates said could shape future cases.
This article provides general information and is not legal advice. Consult a qualified immigration attorney about your specific case.
