The Manna Beverages WARN Act lawsuit is a pair of federal cases filed in October 2025 by former employees who lost their jobs when the company shut down its three California facilities almost overnight. The suits, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California, allege that Manna violated the federal Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act by terminating hundreds of workers without the 60 days’ advance written notice the statute requires.1The Sacramento Bee. Manna Beverages WARN Act Lawsuits Filed
The Shutdown That Triggered the Suits
Late on the night of Thursday, October 2, 2025, workers at Manna’s West Sacramento bottling plant received text messages and robo-calls telling them not to show up the next morning. The plant employed 378 people.2The Sacramento Bee. Manna Beverages West Sacramento Plant Closure1The Sacramento Bee. Manna Beverages WARN Act Lawsuits Filed3CBS News Sacramento. Shuttered West Sacramento Bottling Plant New Ownership
Manna filed a notice with the California Employment Development Department on October 3, stating it would close the plants within four days.2The Sacramento Bee. Manna Beverages West Sacramento Plant Closure The union representing West Sacramento workers said it got no advance warning either. “There is no transparency or anything. They just shut the doors,” Greg Ball, president of the Nor Cal Beverage Employees’ Union, told CBS Sacramento. “We were totally shocked, totally stunned.” Local officials also said they received no notification.4CBS News Sacramento. West Sacramento Bottling Plant Abruptly Closes
What the Lawsuits Allege
On October 9, 2025, former employees filed two federal lawsuits against MBV-CA LLC, the entity registered to Manna Beverages’ Louisville, Kentucky, address.1The Sacramento Bee. Manna Beverages WARN Act Lawsuits Filed Both complaints allege the company terminated employees in West Sacramento, Anaheim, and Chino without the 60 days’ written notice the federal WARN Act requires before a mass layoff or plant closing.
The first suit was brought by three plaintiffs, two from West Sacramento and one from Anaheim. The second was filed by a Sacramento County resident who had worked at Manna for two years and is represented by Paul Pfeilschiefter, a partner at Bailey Law Partners.1The Sacramento Bee. Manna Beverages WARN Act Lawsuits Filed The plaintiffs seek the remedy the WARN Act provides workers who do not get proper notice: up to 60 days of back pay and benefits.
The cases were docketed as 2:25-cv-02916-DAD-JDP and 2:25-cv-02927-CKD. In November 2025 the court issued a related case order linking the two actions.5PACER Monitor. Jones et al v. MBV-CA, LLC
Manna’s Stated Defense
In its termination notice, Manna blamed “uncontrollable circumstances,” including underperformance and mounting debts, and said it had run out of time and money.4CBS News Sacramento. West Sacramento Bottling Plant Abruptly Closes The company also claimed it was exempt from the 60-day notice rule because it had been actively seeking capital to sustain operations, and that issuing a WARN notice would have jeopardized that search.6Abridged. West Sacramento Beverage Plant’s Abrupt Closure That argument tracks the WARN Act’s “faltering company” exception, but the company would have to prove it in court to rely on it, and so far it has not tried.
Manna had shown financial strain well before the closure. In July 2024 it completed a $28.1 million sale-leaseback of its West Sacramento manufacturing campus with Brennan Investment Group.7The Registry. Brennan Completes $28.1MM Sale-Leaseback to Manna Beverages & Ventures in Sacramento By June 2025 the company was shopping itself to buyers.2The Sacramento Bee. Manna Beverages West Sacramento Plant Closure When no deal materialized, it shut down. No formal bankruptcy has been publicly reported.
Where the Case Stands
Manna has not defended the lawsuits. The company did not initially list attorneys in the federal court system and did not respond to the filings. In January 2026 the court vacated an initial scheduling conference because the defendant still had not appeared. A request for entry of default was filed in February 2026. As of late May 2026 the case remained active, with a pending motion to amend the complaint.5PACER Monitor. Jones et al v. MBV-CA, LLC
By not appearing, Manna has left itself open to a default judgment, which would let the court rule in the plaintiffs’ favor without a trial. Whether the plaintiffs will actually collect on any judgment is a separate question the record does not answer, given the company’s stated insolvency.
What the Plant’s Sale Does Not Change
On November 12, 2025, a new entity called Redwood Beverage Group LLC acquired Manna’s West Sacramento assets and began rehiring former workers.8The Sacramento Bee. Redwood Beverage Group Acquires Manna Beverages Plant Josh Young, a principal at Redwood investor 13th Floor Capital, has said the new ownership group has no relationship with Manna’s former owners, officers, or directors.3CBS News Sacramento. Shuttered West Sacramento Bottling Plant New Ownership The reopening does not resolve the WARN Act claims. Those are against MBV-CA LLC, and as of mid-2026 the former employees’ claims for back pay and benefits have not been adjudicated.5PACER Monitor. Jones et al v. MBV-CA, LLC