---

             C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Thursday, October 2, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 196

                             Headlines

ALLIANCE INSPECTION: "Duro" Suit Moved From N.Y. to Pennsylvania
ANHEUSER-BUSCH COS: Oct. 27 Trial Scheduled for Kirin Case
AU NATURALE: Accused of False Advertising; Can't Market Products
BAD BOY: Recalls Recreational Off-Road Vehicles
BALLY TECHNOLOGIES: Minn., Nev. Suits Over Acquisition Dismissed

BALLY TECHNOLOGIES: Lawsuits Over Merger Consolidated in Nevada
BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Potassium Chloride Injection
BEST BAKED: Accused of Discriminating Against Haitian Workers
BNY MELLON: Faces Class Action Over Unrecorded Mortgages
BOLT TECHNOLOGY: Removes "Halstrom" Class Suit to Connecticut

BOLT TECHNOLOGY: Removes "Walker" Suit to District of Connecticut
BRAVO OF MANCHESTER: Recalls Select Turkey and Chicken Pet Foods
CAVINESS BEEF: Recalls 23,100 Lbs. of Beef Trimmings Products
CHE SENIOR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages Under FLSA, Suit Claims
CHICO'S FAS: Still Faces "Delfierro" Labor Lawsuit in California

COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO: Misleads Speed Stick Consumers, Suit Says
CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING: Violates FDCPA in California, Class Says
CUSHING & DOLAN: Accused of Discriminating Against Lady Lawyer
DELICIOUS BEEF: Recalls 8 Lbs. of Beef Jerky Products
DIRECTED LLC: Recalls Directed Remote Start Systems

DJSP ENTERPRISES: Removes PFM Suit to S.D. Florida
DOMINGUEZ FOODS: Recalls "Su Cocina" Pan Molido
DOPS INC: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages Under FLSA
DUDLEY AND ASSOCIATES: Never Paid Overtime to Workers, Suit Says
ENTERPRISE RECOVERY: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act

ETANG RUISSEAU: Recalls Cocktail American Oysters Due to E. Coli
ETHICON INC: Sued Over Injury From Use of Proceed Surgical Mesh
FOSTER FARMS: Recalls Frozen Chicken Breast Strips
GENERAL MOTORS: Faulty Ignition Switch Death Toll Rises to 19
GENERAL MOTORS: Recall Reveals Patchwork Approach to Auto Safety

GLASER ORGANIC: Recalls Organic Carob Powder
GOLD STAR: Recalls Cold Smoked Steelhead in Vacuum Pack
GOODYEAR TIRE: Removes "Van Alst" Suit to Florida District Court
GREEN TREE: Faces Suit Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violations
GUCCI AMERICA: Removes "Oda" Suit to California District Court

HEARTH & HOME: Recalls Gas Fireplaces, Stoves, Inserts & Log Sets
HOME DEPOT: Faces "Merritt" Suit in Northern District of Georgia
HOME DEPOT: Faces 15 Suits Over Data Security Breach
IKEA NORTH AMERICA: Recalls Children's Swing Due To Fall Hazard
INDIAN CREEK: Faces "Piner" Suit Alleging Violations of FLSA

JPMORGAN CHASE: Must Face Mortgage-Back Securities Class Action
KILLION & SONS: Fails to Pay Field Workers OT Premium, Suit Says
LANNETT COMPANY: Faces "Schaefer" Securities Suit in Pennsylvania
MARINI FOODS: Recalls REA Sweet Cacciatore Sausages
MARRIOTT INT'L: Accused of Bias by Ex-Worker With Disability

MEDTRONIC INC: Pretrial Process in Sprint Fidelis Suit Underway
MEDTRONIC INC: Still Faces Shareholder Suit in Minn. Over INFUSE
MEDTRONIC INC: Faces Lawsuit in Minn. Over Acquisition of Covidien
MEDTRONIC INC: Faces "Steiner" Shareholder Suit in Minnesota
MEDTRONIC INC: Faces "Taxman" Shareholder Suit Over Acquisition

MEDTRONIC INC: Faces "Cobb" Suit in Massachusetts Superior Court
MICHAELS COS: Calif. Superior Court Decertifies "Rhea" Labor Claim
MICHAELS COS: Consolidated Suit Over Data Security Incident Junked
MICHAELS COS: Settlement of Cal. Zip Code Claims Finally Approved
MOBILE HOUSING: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages and Overtime

MONOGRAM COMFORT: Recalls 607 Lbs. of Uncured Beef Corn Dogs
MORGAN STANLEY: Loses Bid to Dismiss Suit Over Credit-Linked Notes
MOUNTAIN PATH: Metal Pieces Prompt Recall of Organic Flax Seed
NASON MEDICAL: Removes "Caskie" Class Suit to D. South Carolina
NELSON & KENNARD: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Claims

ORIGINAL SOUPMAN: Recalls Lobster Bisque in Tetra Pak Cartons
RADIUS HOSPITAL: Sued by Union Over Improper WARN Act Notice
RANSOM-EVERGLADES SCHOOL: Faces Fla. Suit Alleging Discrimination
ROSS PROCUREMENT: Recalls Metal Bistro Chairs Due to Fall Hazard
SAM WYLY: Judge Imposes $300-Mil. Penalties in Securities Suit

SANTANDER CONSUMER: Faces Securities Lawsuit in New York Court
SHIVVERS MANUFACTURING: Recalls Country Clipper Lawn Mowers
SOLERA HOLDINGS: Moves to Dismiss Suit Over Valuation of Vehicles
T-MOBILE USA: Removes "Moore" Suit to New York District Court
TELEXELECTRIC LLLP: "Ferguson" Suit Transferred to Massachusetts

TEMAK MEDICAL: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Claims
TEMPLETON RYE: Removes "McNair" Suit to Illinois District Court
TESLA MOTORS: Seeks Dismissal of Securities Suit
VETERANS AFFAIRS DEP'T: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Suit Claims
VICTORY TRANSPORTATION: Sued for Not Paying Minimum and OT Wages

WACOAL AMERICA: To Refund Customers After False Advertising Claim
WALGREEN CO: Class Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
WHOLE FOODS: Recalls "Plain Streusel Coffeecake"
WINDHAM PROFESSIONALS: "Humphreys" Class Suit Moved to W.D. Pa.
WINNCOMPANIES INC: Removes "Perez" Class Suit to E.D. California

ZIGGY'S AUTO: Accused by Car Maintenance Worker of Violating FLSA


                            *********


ALLIANCE INSPECTION: "Duro" Suit Moved From N.Y. to Pennsylvania
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Duro v. Alliance Inspection
Management, LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-02263, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York to the
U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
(Pittsburgh).  The Pennsylvania District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 2:14-cv-01309-CRE to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff seeks relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The action is transferred to the Western District of Pennsylvania,
where an earlier-filed, substantially similar FLSA collective
action (Jones v. Alliance Inspection Management, LLC, No. 12-1662
(CRE)), has been pending since November 20, 2013.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Louis Ginsberg, Esq.
          Matthew Cohen, Esq.
          LAW FIRM OF LOUIS GINSBERG, P.C.
          1613 Northern Blvd.
          Roslyn, NY 11578
          Telephone: (516) 625-0105
          Facsimile: (516) 625-0106
          E-mail: lg@louisginsberglawoffices.com
                  matthewcohen21@gmail.com

               - and -

          Wade Christopher Wilkinson, Esq.
          MCLAUGHLIN & STERN, LLP
          260 Madison Avenue
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 448-1100
          Facsimile: (212) 448-0066
          E-mail: wwilkinson@mclaughlinstern.com

               - and -

          Lee S. Shalov, Esq.
          SHALOV, STONE AND BONNER
          485 Seventh Avenue, Suite 1000
          New York, NY 10018
          Telephone: (212) 239-4340

The Defendant is represented by:

          Roshni Chaudhari, Esq.
          FORD & HARRISON LLP
          100 Park Avenue, 25th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 453-5949
          Facsimile: (212) 453-5959
          E-mail: rchaudhari@fordharrison.com


ANHEUSER-BUSCH COS: Oct. 27 Trial Scheduled for Kirin Case
----------------------------------------------------------
John Pacenti, writing for Daily Business Review, reports that
there's a beer battle brewing in Miami courts.  The litigation
claims Anheuser-Busch Cos. Inc. is duping beer drinkers by not
informing them clearly on packaging and bottle labels that the
Kirin and Beck's brands are brewed in the United States, not Japan
or Germany.

The Kirin litigation was filed in Miami-Dade Circuit Court on
behalf of consumers Lady L. Suarez and Gustavo E. Olivia.  The
beer drinkers claim Anheuser-Busch is trying to fool consumers
into thinking the beer is brewed in Japan with a label that has
Japanese lettering but small print saying it's brewed under a
licensing agreement at Anheuser-Busch plants in Los Angeles or
Williamsburg, Va.  The Kirin case is scheduled for trial Oct. 27
before Miami-Dade Circuit Judge John Thornton.

The Beck's litigation is a class action in front of U.S.
Magistrate Judge John O'Sullivan and claims the St. Louis-based
beverage manufacturer knowingly tricks consumers into thinking the
pilsner is made in Germany.  The plaintiffs are from Florida, New
York and California.  The lawsuits claim unfair and deceptive
practices and unjust enrichment by marketing and selling beer in a
way that misleads consumers.

"We believe consumers are being tricked that the beers are
imported beers, and there is a distinction in the consumers' minds
on imported beers between quality and cost," said lead plaintiffs
attorney Tucker Ronzetti, a partner at Kozyak Tropin &
Throckmorton in Coral Gables.  "Because of their trickery, they
are not getting what they want or what they are paying for."

A check on Sept. 25 with a store clerk at ABC Fine Wine & Spirits
in Miami found a six-pack of Kirin Ichiban cost $8.49, while a six
pack of Budweiser costs $7.99.  A 12-pack of Beck's and Budweiser
cost the same: $12.99.

Mr. Ronzetti and fellow partner Adam Moskowitz filed the lawsuits
in conjunction with Miami Shores attorney Lance Harke, a partner
at Harke, Clasby & Bushman, and Miami attorney Robert W.
Rodriguez.

Label dispute

Anheuser-Busch responded by email on Sept. 19 to questions about
the Beck's lawsuit.  A company statement said the complaint was
without merit, adding, "We have always been transparent and
informative with beer drinkers, and Beck's plainly states 'Product
of the USA' on the front of the primary packaging."  The brewer
said the product has been "meticulously loyal" to Beck's origin
and its German recipe brewed in accordance with the Germany Purity
Law.

Company attorney Stanley H. Wakshlag --
swakshlag@kennynachwalter.com -- a partner at Kenny Nachwalter in
Miami, had no comment.  In a motion to dismiss the federal
lawsuit, he wrote Anheuser-Busch has informed U.S. consumers since
2012 on the Beck's label that the beer is brewed in the United
States.

"Despite these changes, plaintiff filed this purported class
action claiming that the new labeling and packaging deceived him
into believing that Beck's is still imported," he wrote.
Plaintiffs in both lawsuits said the labeling is on the bottles
but not on the outer packaging.

Anheuser-Busch operates 13 breweries, manufacturing and
distributing numerous domestic brands including Budweiser, Busch,
Michelob, Rolling Rock and Land Shark, among others.  The company
is part of Anheuser-Busch InBev, a Belgian-Brazilian multinational
headquartered in Leuven, Belgium, that owns global brands such a
Modelo Especial of Mexico, Stella Artois of Belgium and Beck's in
Germany.

In the growing trend of consolidation among major beer producers,
AB InBev is working on financing to purchase rival SABMiller plc
for $122 billion, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The Beck's lawsuit claims the beer industry capitalizes on a lack
of consumer knowledge about this globalization to charge import-
level prices.  The complaint includes advertisements labeling the
product as "imported."

Motion denied

O'Sullivan on Sept. 20 denied Anheuser-Busch's motion to dismiss
the Beck's complaint and allowed plaintiffs to submit an amended
complaint seeking injunctive relief.  The judge found the label
declaring Beck's is brewed in the United States was a tough read.
The label informs consumers of Beck's "German quality" and it was
"brewed under the German Purity Law of 1516."

Following an Aug. 1 hearing, O'Sullivan said there was sufficient
evidence of deceptive marketing to allow the lawsuit to move
forward.  He examined the 12-ounce bottle of Beck's himself to
make the determination.

"The undersigned finds that the 'Product of USA' disclaimer as
printed on the actual cans and bottles themselves is difficult to
read," he wrote.

The magistrate went on to say that depending on the angle of view,
the "Product of USA" notation can be easily obscured by overhead
lighting and the outer packaging on a 12-pack does not contain the
information.

"A reasonable consumer is not required to open a carton or remove
a product from its outer packaging in order to ascertain whether
representations made on the face of the packaging are misleading,"
O'Sullivan concluded.

In the Kirin lawsuit, similar claims are made by the plaintiffs.
The complaint notes the Japanese lettering on the bottle, along
with a mythical dragon from which the product takes its name.

Traditionally, the product was brewed in Japan, but starting in
1996 Anheuser-Busch started making the product in the United
States.

"The packaging, marketing and advertising of Kirin beer is
designed to deceive consumers into believing they are purchasing a
product made in Japan," according to the complaint filed in
October 2013.

The edge of the label does say "brewed under Kirin's strict
supervision by Anheuser-Busch, Los Angeles, CA, and Williamburg,
VA," but the complaint, like the Beck's lawsuit, states the
information can be seen by consumers only after the bottle is
removed from the six-pack packaging.

"Consumers believe they are purchasing beer imported from Japan
brewed with Japanese ingredients, when in fact they are purchasing
beer brewed in California and Virginia with ingredients from the
United States," the complaint states.


AU NATURALE: Accused of False Advertising; Can't Market Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that an Iowa judge has permanently
barred a Law Vegas company from marketing to state residents
following allegations of false advertising.

Polk County District Court Judge Eliza Ovrom issued the injunction
on Sept. 30 against Au Naturale Health Solutions.  It also
requires that the company refund Iowa consumers who request one.

Au Naturale Health Solutions sold health and nutrition products in
the state, including marine phytoplankton pills and liquid oxygen
drops.  The company is accused of making false claims about the
health benefits of the phytoplankton pills.

The Iowa Attorney General's Office says its consumer protection
division also recorded phone calls with telemarketers making false
claims about its products.


BAD BOY: Recalls Recreational Off-Road Vehicles
-----------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Bad Boy Buggies, of Augusta, Ga., announced a voluntary recall of
about 4,460 bad boy buggies off-road vehicles.  Consumers should
stop using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is
illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer
product.

Incorrect parking brake adjustments and improperly bled brake
lines can diminish a consumer's braking ability, posing a crash
hazard.

There were no incidents that were reported.

The recall involves gas- and electric-powered, four-wheeled
recreational vehicles manufactured by Bad Boy Buggies.  The
vehicles have bench seats for the driver and passenger, a cargo
bed in the rear of the two-person model, and a rear-facing back
seat in the four-person model.  The recreational vehicles were
sold in black, camouflage, green and red, and have 1 3/4 inch
tubular steel exterior frames.  The recalled off-road vehicles
have serial numbers ranging from 8004970 through 8012901.  Serial
numbers are printed on a plate or label on the steering column.
Brand and model names are printed on the side and front panels of
the vehicle.  Model names included in the recall are:

   -- Ambush and Ambush iS;
   -- Instinct; and
   -- Recoil and Recoil iS

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/6jxiTl

The recalled products were manufactured in United States and sold
at Bad Boy Buggies dealers nationwide from August 2012 through May
2014 for between $9,600 and $14,400.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled vehicles and
contact Bad Boy Buggies or an authorized dealer for a free repair.


BALLY TECHNOLOGIES: Minn., Nev. Suits Over Acquisition Dismissed
----------------------------------------------------------------
All of the Acquisition Litigation actions against Bally
Technologies, Inc. have been dismissed, according to the company's
Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2014.

Prior to the consummation of the Acquisition of SHFL
Entertainment, Inc., a number of putative class actions and
shareholder derivative actions challenging the Acquisition were
filed against the Company, Manhattan Merger Corp., SHFL, and
SHFL's then current directors in various jurisdictions that
generally alleged breach of fiduciary duties and that the entity
defendants aided and abetted those alleged breaches, and sought,
among other relief, declaratory judgment and an injunction against
the transaction. In May 2014, the Company and the plaintiffs to
the Minnesota action stipulated to a dismissal without prejudice
and the Minnesota State Court entered an order dismissing the
action without prejudice. In August 2014, the Company and the
plaintiffs to the Nevada action stipulated to a dismissal with
prejudice and the Nevada State Court entered an order dismissing
the action with prejudice. All of the Acquisition Litigation
actions have been dismissed.


BALLY TECHNOLOGIES: Lawsuits Over Merger Consolidated in Nevada
---------------------------------------------------------------
Parties to all five lawsuits over the merger of Bally
Technologies, Inc. signed a stipulation and proposed order to
consolidate the suits under the single caption In re Bally
Technologies, Inc. Stockholders Litigation, Case A-14-70512-B,
according to Bally's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended March
31, 2014.

The following complaints challenging the merger have been filed in
the District Court of the Eighth Judicial District, County of
Clark, Nevada: (i) Shaev v. Bally Technologies, Inc., et al., No.
A-14-705012-B; (ii) Crescente v. Bally Technologies, Inc., et al.,
No. A-14-705144-C; (iii) Lewandoski v. Bally Technologies, Inc.,
et al., No. A-14-705153-C; (iv) Rosenfeld v. Bally Technologies,
Inc., et al., No. A-14-705162-B; and (v) Stein v. Bally
Technologies, et al., No. A-14-705338-B. Each of the actions is a
putative class action filed on behalf of the public shareholders
of Bally Technologies, Inc. and names as defendants the Company,
its directors, Scientific Games, Merger Sub and Financing Sub. The
complaints generally allege that the individual defendants
breached their fiduciary duties in connection with their
consideration and approval of the merger. Four of the five
complaints also allege that all of the entity defendants aided and
abetted the purported breaches by the individual defendants. The
fifth complaint, Shaev v. Bally Technologies, Inc., et al.,
alleges that Scientific Games, Scientific Games Nevada, Inc. and
Scientific Games International, Inc., the subsidiaries of
Scientific Games formed to consummate the merger, aided and
abetted the individual defendants' purported breaches but makes no
such claim against the Company. The complaints seek, among other
relief, to enjoin the merger. On or about August 20, 2014, the
parties to all five lawsuits signed a stipulation and proposed
order to consolidate the suits under the single caption In re
Bally Technologies, Inc. Stockholders Litigation, Case A-14-70512-
B. The stipulation further provides that the defendants need not
respond to any of the complaints currently filed in the actions
and shall confer on a response deadline after plaintiffs file an
anticipated amended consolidated complaint.


BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Potassium Chloride Injection
----------------------------------------------------------
Baxter International Inc. announced it is voluntarily recalling
one lot of Potassium Chloride Injection 10mEq per 100mL, product
code 2B0826 to the hospital/pharmacy/nurse level.  The recall is
being initiated due to a labeling error on the shipping cartons in
a single lot, which was identified by three customers.  Shipping
cartons labeled for this specific lot number of Potassium Chloride
Injection may contain units of Gentamicin Sulfate Injection, 80 mg
in 100 mL, product code 2B0862.

Potassium Chloride is indicated for treatment of potassium
deficiency and administered intravenously.  Gentamicin Sulfate is
an antibacterial drug for intravenous administration.

As both products are packaged in 100mL containers, have similar
code numbers and red labeling on the front panel, there is a
potential risk of medication error or delay in therapy for
patients that require high concentration potassium chloride.

The affected lot of Potassium Chloride Injection was distributed
to customers in the United States between May 26, 2014, and
Aug. 8, 2014.

The recall affects the P318220 lot of Potassium Chloride Injection
10 mEq per 100mL

As part of standard clinical practice, it is recommended that
healthcare professionals carefully review the product label before
administering.  There have been no reported adverse events
associated with this situation to date.

Consumers with questions regarding this recall can call Baxter at
1-800-422-9837, Monday through Friday, between the hours of 8:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Central Time, or e-mail Baxter at:
onebaxter@baxter.com.  Consumers should contact their physician or
healthcare provider if they have experienced any problems that may
be related to using this drug product.

Adverse reactions or quality problems experienced with the use of
this product may be reported to the FDA's MedWatch Adverse Event
Reporting program either online, by regular mail or by fax.

The recall is being conducted with the knowledge of the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration.

Baxter International Inc., through its subsidiaries, develops,
manufactures and markets products that save and sustain the lives
of people with hemophilia, immune disorders, cancer, infectious
diseases, kidney disease, trauma and other chronic and acute
medical conditions.  As a global, diversified healthcare company,
Baxter applies a unique combination of expertise in medical
devices, pharmaceuticals and biotechnology to create products that
advance patient care worldwide.


BEST BAKED: Accused of Discriminating Against Haitian Workers
-------------------------------------------------------------
Marcel Vilsaint v. Best Baked Goods, Inc., d/b/a Mainstreet
Gourmet Bakery, Case No. 0:14-cv-62202-WPD (S.D. Fla.,
September 24, 2014) is about the alleged disparate treatment that
Black Haitian employees have suffered while employed by the
Defendant, and the retaliation that one Black Haitian suffered
when he reported the discrimination.

The Plaintiff is a black Haitian American man, who was formerly
employed by the Defendant as a Bench Employee, and who was
responsible for assembling customer orders at the Defendant.

Best Baked Goods, Inc., doing business as Mainstreet Gourmet
Bakery, is a Florida registered corporation, and doing business in
Florida.  The Company is a wholesale commercial bakery, located in
Fort Lauderdale, Florida, which provides baked products to hotels,
country clubs, restaurants and specialty stores in Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rebecca Ann Radosevich, Esq.
          THE TICKTIN LAW GROUP, P.A.
          600 W. Hillsboro Boulevard, Suite 220
          Deerfield Beach, FL 33441
          Telephone: (954) 570-6760
          Facsimile: (954) 570-6760
          E-mail: Serv529@LegalBrains.com


BNY MELLON: Faces Class Action Over Unrecorded Mortgages
--------------------------------------------------------
Saranac Hale Spencer, writing for The Legal Intelligencer, reports
that three months after a federal judge entered declaratory
judgment for the Montgomery County recorder of deeds in a class
action case she brought against the private mortgage recording
service called MERS, she has filed suit against the big banks that
used that service.

Nancy Becker, the recorder of deeds, filed the suit last week in
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, naming half-a-dozen major
banks as defendants in a proposed class action seeking damages for
the banks' failure to record mortgage assignments with
Pennsylvania's county offices.  BNY Mellon, Citibank, Deutsche
Bank National Trust Co., HSBC, JPMorgan Chase and Wells Fargo are
the defendants -- each one declined to comment on the filing.

The state has lost more than $100 million in revenue due to the
unrecorded mortgages, according to the complaint.

"Each of the defendants has systematically failed to create and
timely record mortgage assignments in connection with transfers of
promissory notes secured by mortgages on Pennsylvania real estate,
both when operating within the MERS system and otherwise,"
according to the complaint.

Beyond the use of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS),
the complaint also alleges that the practice of securitizing loans
resulted in lost revenue since that process transfers the mortgage
loans several times, none of which were recorded with the county
offices.

"Beginning in the 1990s, securitization of mortgage loans became
more common," according to the complaint.  "Mortgage lenders would
originate as many residential mortgage loans as possible and then
sell them to various banks and financial institutions.  Investment
banks would then pool the mortgages into special purpose trusts
and issue securities backed by the mortgage loans in the trusts."

That process "requires at least three mortgage assignments and
often involves more than three such assignments as the mortgage
loan moves from origination, through several intermediaries [in]
the secondary market, and into the investment trust.  Under
Pennsylvania law, each such assignment must be documented in a
recordable form and timely recorded in the office of the recorder
of deeds for the county in which the property is situated,"
according to the complaint.

That failure to record the transfer of the mortgages with the
county office leaves gaps in the public record and holds back
revenue that is due, according to the complaint.

Similar issues arose from the banks' use of MERS, which was
established in the mid-1990s by the mortgage lending industry.
Financial institutions pay an annual membership to use the MERS
system, which records all land transactions between MERS members
privately on the system instead of with the counties' recorders of
deeds.

In July, U.S. District Senior Judge J. Curtis Joyner of the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania had ruled in a case that
Ms. Becker had also brought as a class action against Merscorp
itself, "We now formally declare that the assignment or transfer
of a promissory note secured by a mortgage on real estate is, in
Pennsylvania, equivalent to a mortgage assignment.  We further
declare that defendants' failure to create and record documents
evincing the transfers of promissory notes secured by mortgages on
real estate in the commonwealth of Pennsylvania is, was and will
in the future be, in violation of the Pennsylvania recording law."

The current case against the banks has also been assigned to
Joyner.

In the MERS system, the original mortgage is recorded with the
county in MERS's name, but the promissory note is bought and sold
several times in the secondary market and none of those
transactions are recorded with the county, according to the
complaint.  The complaint estimated that more than 130,000
mortgages have been recorded under MERS's name in Montgomery
County since 2004.  More than 78 million have been recorded across
the country, according to the complaint.

The underlying issues mirror the case against MERS, said
Joseph Kohn -- jkohn@kohnswift.com -- of Kohn, Swift & Graf, who
represents Ms. Becker, but this one seeks to hold accountable the
major banks that benefited from the system.


BOLT TECHNOLOGY: Removes "Halstrom" Class Suit to Connecticut
-------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Teledyne Technologies Inc. and Lightning Merger Sub,
Inc. removed the class action lawsuit titled Halstrom v. Bolt
Technology Corporation, et al., was removed to the U.S. District
Court for the District of Connecticut.  The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:14-cv-01407-SRU to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sebastiano Tornatore, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINKSY, LLP
          733 Summer St, Suite 304
          Stamford, CT 06901
          Telephone: (212) 363-7500
          E-mail: stornatore@zlk.com

Defendants Teledyne Tech, Inc and Lightning Merger Sub, Inc., are
represented by:

          Shawn Randall Fox, Esq.
          MCGUIRE WOODS, LLP
          1345 Avenue of the Americas, 7th Floor
          New York, NY 10105
          Telephone: (212) 548-2165
          Facsimile: (212) 715-6278
          E-mail: sfox@mcguirewoods.com


BOLT TECHNOLOGY: Removes "Walker" Suit to District of Connecticut
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Walker v. Bolt Technology
Corporation, et al., was removed from the Superior Court of the
state of Connecticut, Judicial District of Stamford-Norwalk at
Stamford, to the U.S. District Court for the District of
Connecticut (New Haven).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 3:14-cv-01406-MPS to the proceeding.

The lawsuit alleges violations of securities laws.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Shannon L. Hopkins, Esq.
          Sebastiano Tornatore, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINKSY, LLP
          733 Summer St., Suite 304
          Stamford, CT 06901
          Telephone: (212) 363-7500
          E-mail: shopkins@zlk.com
                  stornatore@zlk.com

Defendant Bolt Technology Corporation and the Individual
Defendants are represented by:

          Frank J. Silvestri, Jr., Esq.
          LEVETT ROCKWOOD P.C.
          33 Riverside Avenue
          Westport, CT 06880
          Telephone: (203) 222-0885
          Facsimile: (203) 226-8025
          E-mail: fsilvestri@levettrockwood.com

               - and -

          John J. Tumilty, Esq.
          Scott R. Magee, Esq.
          EDWARDS WILDMAN PALMER LLP
          111 Huntington Avenue
          Boston, MA 02199
          Telephone: (617) 239-0100
          Facsimile: (617) 227-4420
          E-mail: jtumilty@edwardswildman.com
                  smagee@edwardswildman.com

Defendants Teledyne Tech, Inc and Lightning Merger Sub, Inc. are
represented by:

          Shawn Randall Fox, Esq.
          Laurent S. Wiesel, Esq.
          Kristina M. Allen, Esq.
          MCGUIRE WOODS, LLP
          1345 Avenue of the Americas, 7th Floor
          New York, NY 10105
          Telephone: (212) 548-2165
          Facsimile: (212) 715-6278
          E-mail: sfox@mcguirewoods.com
                  lwiesel@mcguirewoods.com
                  kallen@mcguirewoods.com


BRAVO OF MANCHESTER: Recalls Select Turkey and Chicken Pet Foods
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bravo of Manchester, CT is recalling select lots of Bravo Turkey
and Chicken pet foods for dogs and cats because they have the
potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.  Salmonella can
affect animals eating the products and there is risk to humans
from handling contaminated pet products, especially if they have
not thoroughly washed their hands after having contact with the
products or any surfaces exposed to these products.

Healthy people infected with Salmonella should monitor themselves
for some or all of the following symptoms: nausea, vomiting,
diarrhea or bloody diarrhea, abdominal cramping and fever.
Salmonella can result in more serious ailments, including arterial
infections, endocarditis, arthritis, muscle pain, eye irritation,
and urinary tract symptoms.  Consumers exhibiting these signs
after having contact with this product should contact their
healthcare providers.

Pets with Salmonella infections may be lethargic and have diarrhea
or bloody diarrhea, fever, and vomiting.  Some pets will have only
decreased appetite, fever and abdominal pain.  Infected but
otherwise healthy pets can be carriers and infect other animals or
humans.  If your pet has consumed the recalled product and has
these symptoms, please contact your veterinarian.

The recalled product was distributed nationwide beginning on
Nov. 14, 2013 to distributors, retail stores, internet retailers
and directly to consumers.  The product can be identified by the
batch ID code (best used by date) printed on the side of the
plastic tube.

  1. These products are being recalled because they have the
potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.

RAW FOOD DIET BRAVO! TURKEY BLEND FOR DOGS AND CATS
Product Number: 31-102
Size: 2 lb. (32 OZ) plastic tubes
Best used by date: 11-05-15
UPC: 829546311025
Keep Frozen

Bravo! Blends All Natural Chicken Blend diet for dogs & cats
Product Number: 21-102
Size: 2 lb. (32 OZ) plastic tubes
Best used by date: 08-11-16
UPC: 829546211028
Keep Frozen

  2. These products are being recalled out of an abundance of
caution because they were manufactured in the same manufacturing
facility or on the same day as products that tested positive.

Premium Turkey Formula BRAVO Balance RAW DIET
Product Number: 31-405
Size: 5 lb. (80 OZ) 2.3KG plastic tubes
Best used by date: 11-05-15
UPC: 829546314057
Keep Frozen

Bravo! Blends All Natural Chicken Blend diet for dogs & cats
Product Number: 21-105
Size: 5 lb. (80 OZ) 2.3KG plastic tubes
Best used by date: 08-11-16
UPC: 829546211059
Keep Frozen

The recall was initiated after routine testing by the Nebraska
Department of Agriculture revealed the presence of Salmonella in
two lots of product.  This batch tested negative by a third party
independent laboratory prior to release for distribution to
consumers.

No additional products affected by this recall.  The company has
received no reports of illness in either people or animals
associated with these products to date.

In addition to the voluntary recall of the above products, Bravo
has chosen to voluntarily withdraw the following poultry products
from the marketplace to provide its customers with the certainty
of safety.  Those products include all sizes (2 lb., 5 lb. and 10
lb.) of Bravo Chicken Blend(s), Bravo Turkey Blend(s), Bravo
Balance Chicken Balance and Bravo Balance Premium Turkey Formula
frozen raw diet products with best used by dates between June 20,
2016 and Sept. 18, 2016.  This is being done out of an abundance
of caution despite no evidence of any manufacturing defect or
distribution problem.  None of these products are known to have
tested positive for the presence of pathogens.  This market
withdrawal has NOT been requested by the FDA, but is being done
voluntarily by Bravo.

The recalled product should not be sold or fed to pets.  Pet
owners who have the affected product at home should dispose of
this product in a safe manner (example, a securely covered trash
receptacle).  Customers who have purchased the recalled pet food
can return to the store where purchased and submit the Product
Recall Claim Form available on the Bravo website for a full refund
or store credit.  More information on the Bravo recall can also be
found at http://www.bravopetfoods.comdisclaimericon, or call toll
free (866) 922-9222 Monday through Friday 9:00 am to 5:00 pm
(EST).


CAVINESS BEEF: Recalls 23,100 Lbs. of Beef Trimmings Products
-------------------------------------------------------------
Caviness Beef Packers, a Hereford, Texas establishment, is
recalling approximately 23,100 pounds of Beef Trimmings products
that may be contaminated with E. coli O157:H7, the U.S. Department
of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS)
announced.

The Beef Trimmings products were produced on Aug. 14, 2014 and
Aug. 20, 2014.  The products subject to recall includes:

Combo bins containing "Beef Trimmings, BNLS, 90 L"
Combo bins containing "Beef Trimmings, BNLS, 84 L"

The products subject to recall bear the establishment number "EST.
675" inside the USDA mark of inspection.  These products were sent
to establishments for further processing and will likely not bear
the establishment number "EST. 675" on products available for
direct consumer purchase.  These products were shipped to fast
food restaurants and retail distribution locations in Texas.

The problem was discovered during a food safety assessment.  The
products subject to recall are lots that tested negative, however
were produced consecutive to the positive lots and were
subsequently processed into raw ground products and distributed to
retailers.

E. coli O157:H7 is a potentially deadly bacterium that can cause
dehydration, bloody diarrhea and abdominal cramps 2-8 days (3-4
days, on average) after exposure the organism.  While most people
recover within a week, some develop a type of kidney failure
called hemolytic uremic syndrome (HUS).  This condition can occur
among persons of any age but is most common in children under 5-
years old and older adults.  It is marked by easy bruising,
pallor, and decreased urine output.  Persons who experience these
symptoms should seek emergency medical care immediately.

FSIS and the company are concerned that some product may be frozen
and in consumers' freezers.

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify
recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that
steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer
available to consumers.  When available, the retail distribution
list(s) will be posted on the FSIS website at:

                 http://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls

FSIS advises all consumers to safely prepare their raw meat
products, including fresh and frozen, and only consume beef that
has been cooked to a temperature of 145F or 160F for ground meat.
The only way to confirm that beef is cooked to a temperature high
enough to kill harmful bacteria is to use a food thermometer that
measures internal temperature, http://1.usa.gov/1cDxcDQ

Media and consumers with questions regarding the recall can
contact Trevor Caviness, President, at (806) 372-5781.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov or
via smartphone at m.askkaren.gov.  The toll-free USDA Meat and
Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in
English and Spanish and can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4 p.m.
(Eastern Time) Monday through Friday. Recorded food safety
messages are available 24 hours a day.  The online Electronic
Consumer Complaint Monitoring System can be accessed 24 hours a
day at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/reportproblem.


CHE SENIOR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages Under FLSA, Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Emily Anastasio v. Che Senior Psychological Services, P.C.; and
Psychological Health Services, P.C., Case No. 3:14-cv-01415-JBA
(D. Conn., September 25, 2014) seeks money damages and other legal
and equitable remedies against the Defendants for unlawfully
failing to pay wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and
Connecticut Wage and Hour laws.

The Defendants intentionally breached an employment agreement to
pay wages, were unjustly enriched, breached the covenant of good
faith and fair dealing, Ms. Anastasio alleges.  She is a licensed
psychologist, who entered into an employment agreement with the
Defendants on May 14, 2014, to become a staff psychologist and
provide psychological, administrative and supervisory services to
residents of health care facilities and other institutional
clients of the Defendants.

CHE Senior Psychological Services, P.C., and CHE Psychological
Health Services, P.C., are New York corporations having places of
business in Brooklyn, New York, and Waterbury, Connecticut.  The
Defendants are operated as single employer or joint employer, as
they have the same management, payroll department, human resources
department, same shareholders and same officers.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark P. Carey, Esq.
          MARK P. CAREY, P.C.
          71 Old Post Road, Suite One
          Southport, CT 06490
          Telephone: (203) 255-4150
          Facsimile: (203) 255-0380
          E-mail: Mcarey@capclaw.com


CHICO'S FAS: Still Faces "Delfierro" Labor Lawsuit in California
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chico's FAS, Inc. continues to face a labor lawsuit filed by Toni
Delfierro in the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Sacramento, according to the company's Aug. 29, 2014,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended Aug. 2, 2014.

The Company was named as a defendant in a putative class action
filed in February 2014 in the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Sacramento: Toni Delfierro, et al, v.
White House Black Market, Inc. The Complaint alleges numerous
violations of California law related to wages, meal periods, rest
periods, wage statements, and failure to reimburse business
expenses, among other things.


COLGATE-PALMOLIVE CO: Misleads Speed Stick Consumers, Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Oscar Alberto and John Doe (New York) on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated v. Colgate-Palmolive Company, Colgate-
Palmolive (America) Inc, and Colgate-Palmolive (New York) Inc,
Case No. 1:14-cv-05649 (E.D.N.Y., September 25, 2014) seeks
redress on a class-wide basis for the Defendants' alleged
deceptive and improper business practice with respect to the
packaging of their "Speed Stick(R) Power(TM)" and "Speed Stick(R)
Deodorant" anti-perspirants and deodorants.

The Speed Stick(R) Power(TM) is a line of anti-perspirants and
deodorants available in "Fresh," "Ultimate Sport" and "Unscented"
scents; and the Speed Stick(R) Deodorant is a line of deodorants
available in "Regular," "Ocean Surf," "Fresh" and "Musk" scents.

The Plaintiffs allege that the labels of the Products are
misleading.  They contend that the size of the Products' container
in comparison to the actual deodorant stick makes it appear to the
reasonable consumer that they are buying more than what is
actually being sold.

Colgate-Palmolive Company is a Delaware corporation with
headquarters in New York.  Colgate-Palmolive (America) and
Colgate-Palmolive (New York) Delaware corporations headquartered
in Wilmington, Delaware, and are subsidiaries of Colgate-Palmolive
Company.  The Defendants manufacture, market, sell and distribute,
inter alia, various consumer products under well-known household
brand names, like Speed Stick(R).

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          C.K. Lee, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          30 East 39th Street, Second Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 465-1188
          Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
          E-mail: cklee@leelitigation.com


CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING: Violates FDCPA in California, Class Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wayne C. Wambaugh and Susan Pathman, on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc., and
LVNV Funding LLC, Case No. 3:14-cv-04303-EDL (N.D. Cal., September
24, 2014) accuses the Defendants of violating the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Todd Michael Friedman, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
          324 South Beverly Drive, Suite 725
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (877) 206-4741
          Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
          E-mail: tfriedman@attorneysforconsumers.com


CUSHING & DOLAN: Accused of Discriminating Against Lady Lawyer
--------------------------------------------------------------
Heather M. Deitch v. Cushing & Dolan, P.C., Case No. 1:14-cv-
13704-DJC (D. Mass., September 25, 2014) arises from the alleged
unlawful actions of C&D in discriminating against the Plaintiff,
an attorney, on the basis of her gender and by paying her less
than her similarly situated male counterparts during the course of
her employment.

The Plaintiff is a resident of Roslindale, Massachusetts.  She was
employed as an associate attorney by C&D from August 22, 2011,
through August 8, 2013.

Cushing & Dolan, P.C., is a professional corporation organized in
Massachusetts with a principal office located in Waltham,
Massachusetts.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Emily Smith-Lee, Esq.
          Rebecca C. E. Tatem, Esq.
          SMITH LEE NEBENZAHL LLP
          One Post Office Square
          Sharon, MA 02067
          Telephone: (781) 784-2322
          Facsimile: (781) 793-0600
          E-mail: esmithlee@slnlaw.com
                  btatem@slnlaw.com


DELICIOUS BEEF: Recalls 8 Lbs. of Beef Jerky Products
-----------------------------------------------------
Delicious Beef Jerky, LLC, an Albuquerque, N.M. establishment, is
recalling 8 pounds of beef jerky products because they were marked
and shipped without the benefit of inspection when they were
produced under a retail exemption, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced.

The products subject to recall include:

2.5 once and 5 ounce plastic bags of Delicious Beef Jerky Lemon
Pepper Seasoned Beef Jerky with a use-by date of 0911155

The products, which contain the establishment number "EST. 34408"
inside the USDA Mark of Inspection, were sold in small retail
stores in the Albuquerque, N.M. area.  All 2.5 once and 5 ounce
plastic bags with a use-by date of 9-11-15 are being recalled.

The problem was discovered when a friend of an FSIS inspector
purchased the product at a liquor store in Albuquerque, and the
inspector recognized that the product should not bear the mark of
inspection.

FSIS and the company have received no reports of adverse reactions
or illness due to consumption of these products.  Anyone concerned
about a reaction should contact a healthcare provider.

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify
recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that
steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer
available to consumers.  When available, the retail distribution
list(s) will be posted on the FSIS website at:
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls

Media or consumers with questions about the recall should contact
Mr. Theodore Baca at (505) 344-9221.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at
http://www.AskKaren.govor via smartphone at m.askkaren.gov.  "Ask
Karen" live chat services are available Monday through Friday from
10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET.  The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline
1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and
Spanish and can be reached from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET Monday
through Friday.  Recorded food safety messages are available 24
hours a day.  For information on how to report a problem with a
meat, poultry or processed egg product to FSIS at any time, visit
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/reportproblem.


DIRECTED LLC: Recalls Directed Remote Start Systems
---------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 23, 2014
Posting date:             September 23, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Tools and Electrical Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Product Safety
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-41473

Affected products: Directed Remote Start Systems

The recall involves Directed Remote Start Systems and interface
modules.  These are electronic control modules that are used to
remotely start a vehicle while the vehicle is parked.  The brand
names of the remote start systems that are affected by this recall
include these: Astrostart, Autostart, Avital, Clifford, Command
Start, Nordic Start, Orbit, Polar Start, Premier Defense,
ProStart, Python, Ready Remote, Viper, Xpresskit and XpressStart.

Directed LLC has determined that a defect which relates to motor
vehicle safety exists in certain Push To Start (PTS) vehicles that
have had a Directed Remote Start System installed between 2008 and
2014.  These vehicles may have an installation related defect that
may cause the vehicle's engine to shut down in certain situations,
leading to potential injuries.

Neither Health Canada nor Directed LLC has received any reports of
consumer incidents or injuries related to the use of the products.

There were 883,545 units of the recalled products sold in Canada
by automotive dealers and various other retailers.

The recalled products were manufactured in China and assembled in
Canada and sold from Jan. 2009 to June 2014.

Companies:

   Importer     Directed Electronics Canada Inc.
                Montreal
                Quebec
                Canada

Consumers who purchased a 2008 to 2014 Push To Start (PTS) vehicle
and had a Directed Remote Start System installed should visit the
Directed LLC website or call toll-free 1-888-770-7122 to verify if
their system is part of the recall.


DJSP ENTERPRISES: Removes PFM Suit to S.D. Florida
--------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Philadelphia Financial Management
of San Francisco, LLC, et al. v. DJSP Enterprises, Inc., et al.,
Case No. CACE-14-013041 (03), was removed from the Circuit Court
of the 17th Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida,
to the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Florida.  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:14-cv-
62225-DMM to the proceeding.

The Plaintiffs allege that during the relevant time period, the
Defendants caused to be issued a series of false and misleading
public statements, and omitted material facts that were required
to be disclosed in their public statements and filings with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, regarding the true operating
and financial condition of DJSP and the manner in which DJSP and
the affiliated firm effected foreclosure proceedings.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Daniel M. Cohen, Esq.
          CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
          211 North Union Street, Suite 100
          Alexandria, VA 22314
          Telephone: (202) 789-3960
          Facsimile: (202) 789-1813
          E-mail: danielc@cuneolaw.com

               - and -

          Scott R. Shepherd, Esq.
          Nathan Zipperian, Esq.
          SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP
          1640 Town Center Circle, Suite 216
          Weston, FL 33326
          Telephone: (954) 515-0123
          Facsimile: (954) 515-0124

               - and -

          Jonathan W. Cuneo, Esq.
          Matthew E. Miller, Esq.
          CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
          507 C Street, N.E.
          Washington, DC 20002
          Telephone: (202) 789-3960
          Facsimile: (202) 789-1813
          E-mail: jonc@cuneolaw.com
                  mmiller@cuneolaw.com

               - and -

          Charles J. LaDuca, Esq.
          CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
          8120 Woodmont Ave., Suite 810
          Bethesda, MD 20814
          Telephone: (202) 789-3960
          Facsimile: (202) 789-1813
          E-mail: charlesl@cuneolaw.com

               - and -

          David I. Greenberger, Esq.
          David M. Marek, Esq.
          LIDDLE & ROBINSON, L.L.P
          800 Third Avenue, 8th Floor
          New York, NY. 10022
          Telephone: (212) 687-8500
          Facsimile: (212) 687-1505
          E-mail: dgreenberger@liddlerobinson.com
                  dmarek@liddlerobinson.com

               - and -

          Joseph E. White III, Esq.
          Lester R. Hooker, Esq.
          SAXENA WHITE P.A.
          2424 N. Federal Highway, Suite 257
          Boca Raton, FL 33431
          Telephone: (561) 394-3399
          Facsimile: (561) 394-3382
          E-mail: jwhite@saxenawhite.com
                  lhooker@saxenawhite.com

               - and -

          Richard S. Wayne, Esq.
          Thomas P. Glass, Esq.
          John M. Levy, Esq.
          STRAUSS & TROY, LPA
          150 East Fourth Street
          Cincinnati, OH 45202-4018
          Telephone: (513) 621-2120
          Facsimile: (513) 629-9426
          E-mail: rswayne@strausstroy.com
                  tpglass@strausstroy.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey P. Harris, Esq.
          Brian T. Giles, Esq.
          STATMAN HARRIS & EYRICH, LLC
          3 700 Carew Tower
          441 Vine Street
          Cincinnati, OH 45202
          Telephone: (513) 621-2666
          Facsimile: (513) 621-4896
          E-mail: jharris@statmanharris.com
                  bgiles@statmanharris.com

Defendant DJSP Enterprises, Inc., is represented by:

          Sharon Kegerreis, Esq.
          Lara E. O'Donnell, Esq.
          BERGER SINGERMAN LLP
          1450 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1900
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 755-9500
          Facsimile: (305) 714-4340
          E-mail: skegerreis@bergersingerman.com
                  lodonnell@bergersingerman.com

Defendant Kumar Gursahaney is represented by:

          Caitlin Marie Trowbridge, Esq.
          FOWLER WHITE BURNETT, P.A.
          1395 Brickell Ave., 14th Floor
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 728-7539
          Facsimile: (305) 728-7549
          E-mail: ctrowbridge@rumberger.com

               - and -

          Dennis A. Nowak, Esq.
          RUMBERGER KIRK & CALDWELL, P.A.
          Brickell Bayview Centre
          80 SW 8th St., Suite 3000
          Miami, FL 33130
          Telephone: (305) 358-5577
          Facsimile: (305) 371-7580
          E-mail: dnowak@rumberger.com


DOMINGUEZ FOODS: Recalls "Su Cocina" Pan Molido
-----------------------------------------------
Dominguez Foods Washington Inc. of Zillah, Washington is recalling
"Su Cocina" Pan Molido (Plain Bread Crumbs) because it may contain
undeclared Wheat, Whey (Milk), and Soy.  People who have an
allergy or severe sensitivity to wheat, milk, or soy run the risk
of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume
this product.

"Su Cocina" Pan Molido (Plain Bread Crumbs) was distributed to two
retail stores in OREGON and two retail stores in WASHINGTON.

"Su Cocina" Pan Molido (Plain Bread Crumbs) has UPC 6 79790 05912
5, packaged in a cellophane package with yellow label and orange
writing, and the net weight is 8 oz.  Bread crumbs are grounded
and tan in color.  There is no lot code on a package. Customers
who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to wheat, milk or soy
should not consume this product and return recalled product to the
retail store and ask for a refund.

No illnesses have been reported to date.

Dominguez Foods of Washington Inc. initiated the voluntary recall
after the mis-labeling issue was discovered during the inspection
on September 15th, 2014 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

The recall is being made with the knowledge of the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration.

For further information customers may call Dominguez Foods of WA
at 509-829-6089 from 8am - 4pm (PDT) Monday - Friday of email
dominguezfoods@yahoo.com.


DOPS INC: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Arnoldo Bonilla, 7174 Hanover Parkway Greenbelt, MD 20774 v. DOPS,
Inc., 116 Pates Drive, Fort Washington, MD 20744, and The
Corporation Trust Incorporated, 351 West Camden Street, Baltimore,
MD 21201, Case No. 1:14-cv-03055 (D. Md.,
September 27, 2014) seeks to recover unpaid wages and statutory
damages under the Federal Fair Labor Standards act of 1938, the
Maryland Wage and Hour Law, and the Maryland Wage Payment and
Collection Law.

DOPS, Inc. is a Delaware corporation and registered as a foreign
corporation in the state of Maryland.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ken C. Gauvey, Esq.
          THE LAW PRACTICE OF KEN C. GAUVEY
          111 South Calvert Street, Suite 2700
          Baltimore, MD 21202
          Telephone: (410) 346-2377
          Facsimile: (866) 487-1154
          E-mail: kgauvey@gauveylaw.com


DUDLEY AND ASSOCIATES: Never Paid Overtime to Workers, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Damon Bradley and Abuki Petersen, Individually and on Behalf of
All Others Similarly Situated v. Dudley and Associates Licensed
Electrical Contractors, Inc., Security Management Systems, Inc.,
Jamal A. Dudley and Al Albrecht, Jointly and Severally, Case No.
1:14-cv-05663 (E.D.N.Y., September 26, 2014) alleges that the
Plaintiffs were never paid overtime premium pay for work performed
in excess of 40 hours in a given workweek.

Dudley and Associates Licensed Electrical Contractors, Inc., is an
active New York corporation headquartered in Bronx, New York.  D&A
is an electrical contracting business.  Jamal A. Dudley is the
owner and operator of D&A.

Security Management Systems, Inc., is an active New York
corporation headquartered in Great Neck, New York.  SMS is in the
security systems business.  Al Albrecht is an owner or officer of
SMS.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Brent E. Pelton, Esq.
          PELTON & ASSOCIATES, PC
          111 Broadway, Suite 1503
          New York, NY 10006
          Telephone: (212) 385-9700
          Facsimile: (212) 385-0800
          E-mail: pelton@peltonlaw.com


ENTERPRISE RECOVERY: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Maxim Maximov, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Enterprise Recovery Systems, Inc., Case No.
1:14-cv-05589 (E.D.N.Y., September 24, 2014) alleges violations of
the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Igor B. Litvak, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF IGOR LITVAK
          1701 Ave P.
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (646) 796-4905
          Facsimile: (718) 408-9570
          E-mail: igorblitvak@gmail.com


ETANG RUISSEAU: Recalls Cocktail American Oysters Due to E. Coli
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 23, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Other
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Etang Ruisseau Bar Ltee
Distribution:             Alberta, Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Warehouse
CFIA reference number:    9265

Affected products: 23825 Count Mallet Cocktail American Oysters


ETHICON INC: Sued Over Injury From Use of Proceed Surgical Mesh
---------------------------------------------------------------
Reba Colburn v. Ethicon, Inc., Case No. 6:14-cv-00056-C (N.D.
Tex., September 24, 2014) is a negligence, strict liability, and
breach of warranty action against Ethicon arising out of the
alleged serious personal injuries the Plaintiff suffered as a
result of his having a hernia repair with the Defendant's Proceed
surgical mesh.

Ethicon, Inc. is a foreign corporation licensed to do business in
the state of Texas.  The Company manufactured, designed, and
marketed the Proceed surgical mesh.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Price Ainsworth, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF PRICE AINSWORTH, P.C.
          3821 Juniper Trace, #210
          Austin, TX 78738
          Telephone: (512) 233-1131
          Facsimile: (512) 472-9157
          E-mail: price@ainsworth-law.com


FOSTER FARMS: Recalls Frozen Chicken Breast Strips
--------------------------------------------------
Foster Farms, a Farmerville, La., establishment, is recalling
approximately 39,747 pounds of frozen pre-cooked chicken products
due to possible contamination with Listeria monocytogenes, the
U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS) announced.

The frozen Chicken Breast Grilled Strips product was produced on
August 5, 2014, and then shipped to retail warehouse locations in
California, Texas, Utah, and Washington state.  The product
subject to recall includes:

3.25-lb. Plastic resealable bags containing frozen "Chicken Breast
Grilled Strips."

The affected product packaging will bear the establishment number
"P-33901" as well as a Best by Date of 08-05-15.

The problem was discovered during the company's routine in-plant
inspection.  While some of the product was set aside and held, the
product subject to this recall was inadvertently shipped.  FSIS
and the company have received no reports of illnesses associated
with consumption of these products.

Consumption of food contaminated with L. monocytogenes can cause
listeriosis, a serious infection that primarily affects older
adults, persons with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women
and their newborns.  Less commonly, persons outside these risk
groups are affected.

Listeriosis can cause fever, muscle aches, headache, stiff neck,
confusion, loss of balance and convulsions sometimes preceded by
diarrhea or other gastrointestinal symptoms.  An invasive
infection spreads beyond the gastrointestinal tract.  In pregnant
women, the infection can cause miscarriages, stillbirths,
premature delivery or life-threatening infection of the newborn.
In addition, serious and sometimes fatal infections in older
adults and persons with weakened immune systems. Listeriosis is
treated with antibiotics.  Persons in the higher-risk categories
who experience flu-like symptoms within two months after eating
contaminated food should seek medical care and tell the health
care provider about eating the contaminated food.

FSIS and the company are concerned that some product may be frozen
and in consumers' freezers.

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify
recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that
steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer
available to consumers.  When available, the retail distribution
list(s) will be posted on the FSIS website at:
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls

FSIS advises all consumers to reheat ready-to-eat product until
steaming hot.

Media with questions regarding the recall can contact Ira Brill,
Foster Farm Marketing Director, at (209) 394-7901 ext. 6891.

Consumers with questions regarding the recall can contact Teresa
Lenz, Foster Farm Consumer Affairs Manager, at (800) 338-8051.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov or
via smartphone at m.askkaren.gov.  The toll-free USDA Meat and
Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in
English and Spanish and can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4 p.m.
(Eastern Time) Monday through Friday.  Recorded food safety
messages are available 24 hours a day.  The online Electronic
Consumer Complaint Monitoring System can be accessed 24 hours a
day at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/reportproblem.


GENERAL MOTORS: Faulty Ignition Switch Death Toll Rises to 19
-------------------------------------------------------------
Hilary Stout, writing for The New York Times, reports that the
death toll from General Motors' faulty ignition switch is rising.

From the time it began recalling cars for the defect over the
winter, G.M. has never publicly revised its original assessment
that 13 people died in accidents linked to the problem, saying
only that the number could rise.  But on Sept. 15, the lawyer G.M.
hired to develop a program to compensate victims raised the
automaker's tally by nearly 50 percent.

In its first six weeks of operation, the compensation program run
by Kenneth R. Feinberg has found 19 death claims eligible for
payment, the program disclosed on Sept. 15.  With more than 100
death claims still under review -- and more likely to be filed
before the Dec. 31 deadline -- the total is almost certain to
grow.

G.M., which has set aside $400 million to pay accident victims and
surviving relatives, released a statement saying it accepted the
new number.

"We have previously said that Ken Feinberg and his team will
independently determine the final number of eligible individuals,
so we accept their determinations for the compensation program,"
the company said.  "What is most important is that we are doing
the right thing for those who lost loved ones and for those who
suffered physical injury."

The 19 eligible death claims -- none of the victims were
identified -- are among hundreds of claims that have poured into
the fund over these initial weeks.  In all, 445 claims have been
submitted, 125 of them for deaths, the rest for injuries.

Camille Biros, the deputy administrator of the program, said in an
interview that Mr. Feinberg could start sending letters disclosing
how much the fund would pay to a few claimants.  She would not
discuss numbers, but under a formula Mr. Feinberg disclosed this
summer, most of the death payments are expected to be in the
millions of dollars.

Unlike fatalities, G.M. has never discussed injuries resulting
from the defective switch, which, if jostled, can cut off power in
a moving car, disabling air bags and other major safety systems
like power steering and power brakes.

The compensation program reported on Sept. 15 that it had received
58 claims of serious injuries -- those resulting in quadriplegia,
paraplegia, double amputation, permanent brain damage or pervasive
burns.  Of them, four claims have been determined eligible so far.

In addition, the program has received 262 claims for less serious
injuries that required hospitalization or outpatient treatment
within 48 hours of the accident, and has found eight to be
eligible so far.

Those making claims must demonstrate that the air bags did not
deploy in an accident involving one of the original 2.6 million
older cars recalled for the faulty switch.  The program does not
apply to the millions of other G.M. cars recalled this year for
ignition problems.

All claims that have not been deemed eligible are still under
review or awaiting additional evidence.

"We are looking at every bit of information a claimant can provide
-- looking at photos, repair records, black box data, insurance
company record, police reports," Ms. Biros said.  "We're looking
at everything and trying to make our best determination."

Mr. Feinberg's payment formula starts with a base of $1 million
for each death and adds a calculation of lifetime earnings lost
and $300,000 for a spouse and for each dependent.  Jury awards in
a wrongful death or personal injury case may be potentially
larger, but the Feinberg program's burden of proof is more
lenient.

For example, Mr. Feinberg has said the program will not hold
driver negligence like intoxication, texting or speeding against
anyone who files a claim. And in reviewing claims, the program
will not invoke G.M.'s legal protection from liabilities involving
accidents before its July 10, 2009, bankruptcy restructuring
agreement.

Robert Hilliard, a Texas lawyer, said he had been told by
Mr. Feinberg that 11 of the claims he filed had been declared
eligible.  Once those clients receive notice of the proposed
payment, Mr. Hilliard said he would have "a real heart-to-heart
conversation about the risks and benefits" of going forward with
litigation.

It is unclear whether the 19 eligible death claims include all of
the 13 on G.M.'s official victims list.  Ms. Biros said she and
Mr. Feinberg would never disclose the identities of any of the
claimants because the program promises to protect their privacy.

G.M. and Mr. Feinberg have said that the company has given him
full discretion to determine the eligibility and the amount of
claims.  Some lawyers and victims have remained doubtful that the
process is really independent of the automaker.  But Mr. Hilliard,
one of the initial skeptics, said so far he has been satisfied.

"My fear was that Ken Feinberg was going to be the Pinocchio to
G.M.'s Geppetto," said Mr. Hilliard, who has met or spoken to
Mr. Feinberg and his associates many times over the last few
months.  But he added: "So far all the signs point to him being
independent. G.M. does not control the purse strings."


GENERAL MOTORS: Recall Reveals Patchwork Approach to Auto Safety
----------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Jensen, writing for The New York Times, reports that
in July 2013, an angry and worried Connecticut owner of a 2007
Chevrolet Equinox wrote federal regulators to complain about a
gasoline leak that a dealer refused to repair under a recall.  The
reason, General Motors argued, was that Connecticut did not get
hot enough.

The Equinox owner differed.

"Several heat waves in Connecticut causing crack in fuel pump
module," the owner wrote the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration.  "Not on recall list per G.M. However, should be
for any safety issue such as this.  Afraid to drive. Huge cost to
fix."  Without any objection from federal safety regulators, G.M.
had recalled only about 41,000 vehicles sold or registered in some
states that have hot weather.  That included the Equinox in
Arizona, California, Nevada and Texas, where, the automaker said,
a "state-by-state analysis" of warranty claims showed cracks in
the fuel pump module were most likely to occur.

The Equinox recall is an example of what is known in the industry
as a regional recall -- repairs that are done on a limited,
geographic basis.  Automakers began such recalls in the 1980s.
The idea is that special factors -- like extreme heat or extensive
use of road salt -- cause a crucial part to fail.  Automakers
argue that it makes no sense to repair vehicles elsewhere, and
federal safety officials typically go along.

For roughly three decades, regional recalls have frustrated
automobile owners who have found it difficult to navigate the
patchwork approach to fixing safety problems.  The recalls have
also been a focus of consumer advocacy groups, which complain that
they save automakers millions of dollars while running the risk
that, in a mobile society, some dangerous vehicles will not be
fixed. Advocacy groups have tried unsuccessfully to eliminate
regional recalls.

"It is irrational and harms the safety and economic well-being of
the American people," said Brian Wolfman, a visiting professor at
Stanford Law School who studies consumer protection issues.
Regional recalls amount "to manufacturer discrimination against
certain customers based on where they live, even if they have the
problem," said Jack Gillis, a spokesman for the Consumer
Federation of America.

In the case of the Equinox, General Motors extended a warranty on
the fuel pump to other states.  But in a full recall, all of the
pumps would be replaced.  Under the extended warranty, a consumer
would have to have a vehicle that leaked -- and a fire danger --
to receive help. Even so, some owners, like the one in
Connecticut, told the agency the dealer refused to make repairs
free.

"I had to pay to get it fixed," the owner of a 2007 Equinox from
Michigan wrote in December 2013.

The major automakers did not answer email messages seeking a
response to criticism of regional recalls.  Wade Newton, a
spokesman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, did not
respond directly to the criticism that regional recalls benefit
automakers financially while some owners may not get a needed
repair.  Instead, Mr. Newton wrote by email, "What's most
important here is that any recalled vehicle is quickly repaired."

Alan Adler, a G.M. spokesman, said regional recalls were "an
option we would consider when appropriate, such as a corrosion
case where vehicles in cold weather/road salt use states would be
more susceptible to an issue," But Mr. Adler said by email that
owners who had the problem in other states could still get a free
repair.

The highway traffic safety agency's policy is that "safety-related
defects must be remedied on a nationwide basis, unless the
manufacturer can justify a limited geographic scope,"
Karen Aldana, a spokeswoman, wrote by email.  "Any regional recall
will be scrutinized and monitored to ensure that the regional
scope is sufficient and does not need to be expanded."  No agency
officials were made available to discuss regional recalls.

One of the country's largest current regional recalls is taking
place in only two states and two territories: In June, nine
automakers recalled about 900,000 vehicles in Florida, Hawaii, the
United States Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico to repair air bags,
made by Takata Corporation, that can rupture, sending shrapnel
flying into the cabin. It is the latest in a series of Takata-
related recalls that has grown to include 14 million vehicles.

Takata officials cited high humidity in Florida, Hawaii and the
two territories that may set off the air bag's propellant in a
crash and rupture its casing. Millions of vehicles in other
states, though, may have the same problem, and will not be fixed.

Even Honda, one of the automakers involved, was skeptical of the
reasoning.

"The whole Gulf of Mexico region exhibits a combination of high
absolute humidity and high temperatures," Chris Martin, a Honda
spokesman, wrote by email.

Honda greatly expanded its recall beyond the 420,000 in the two
states, Puerto Rico and the United States Virgin Islands and is
now recalling an additional 2.4 million vehicles registered or
first sold in Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South
Carolina, Texas and California.

The Takata regional recall "is simply the latest manifestation of
a problem that has existed for a long time, and I don't think it
has served the American people well," said David C. Vladeck, a
professor at Georgetown Law and former director of the Federal
Trade Commission's Bureau of Consumer Protection.

The safety agency is going along with Takata's recommendations but
will take "appropriate action" if a wider recall seems warranted,
Ms. Aldana, the spokeswoman, wrote by email.

A Takata spokesman, Alby Berman, declined to answer questions.

A lawsuit to prohibit automakers from issuing recalls only in
certain areas was unsuccessful.  In 2004, Public Citizen,
represented by lawyers including Mr. Wolfman, joined the Center
for Auto Safety in a suit in the United States District Court for
the District of Columbia against the safety agency.  It claimed
federal regulators were required to fix all vehicles.

"By allowing automakers to treat identical vehicles from
neighboring states differently, N.H.T.S.A. is endangering the
public," the suit said.

Lawyers for the safety agency disagreed and won.  The judge
concluded that the law "envisions the agency will exercise its
discretion to determine whether a safety-related defect exists in
a given scenario."

Since that decision, regional recalls have increased, although
they remain a tiny fraction of total recalls.

In the decade ending in 2002, there were 39 regional recalls,
according to the federal court case.  But since 2003 at least 14
million vehicles have been covered in at least 60 regional
recalls.  About two-thirds of them occurred since 2009, according
to a Times analysis of a list of regional recalls compiled by the
Center for Auto Safety.

It is unclear how many injuries or deaths, if any, have resulted
from defects covered by regional recalls.  The highway traffic
safety agency does not keep a tally of regional recalls,
Ms. Aldana, the agency spokeswoman, wrote by email.

Even though a federal judge ruled that regional recalls were
legal, it is still wrong for the agency to allow automakers to
issue them, said Rosemary Shahan, the president of Consumers for
Auto Reliability and Safety.

"Cars don't stay in the same place -- cars move; people move,"
Ms. Shahan said in an interview.  "So, the idea that they only
pose a threat in a certain part of the country is fundamentally
wrong."


GLASER ORGANIC: Recalls Organic Carob Powder
--------------------------------------------
Glaser Organic Farms has been notified by its supplier of a recall
of Organic Carob Powder due to possible health risks related to
Salmonella contamination.  Salmonella is an organism which can
cause serious and sometime fatal infections in young children,
frail, or elderly people and others with weakened immune systems.
Healthy persons infected with Salmonella often experience fever,
diarrhea (which may be bloody), nausea, vomiting, and abdominal
pain.  In rare circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result
in the organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more
severe illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected
aneurysms), endocarditis, and arthritis.

Glaser Organic Farms has taken immediate action to recall Organic
Carob Powder in order to ensure the safety of its consumers.

Products were distributed from May 7, 2014 thru July 23, 2014

RAW CAROB POWDER 8 ounces Lot# 0507081456 I UPC Code 83291005567
and CAROB FUDGY BROWNIE 5.5 ounces Lot# 0207211406 I UPC Code
832910002061

No other Glaser Organic Farms products are affected by the recall
and no illnesses have been reported to date.  The recall is
initiated as a precautionary measure due to a possibility of
contamination as notified by our suppliers.

Consumers that have purchased these products with the above stated
lot numbers and UPC are asked not to consume the product and
discard it.

Consumers with questions may contact Glaser Organic Farms at 305-
238-7747, Monday -Friday from 9 am-5 pm EST.  Email correspondence
can be sent to raw@glaserorganicfarms.com.

Glaser Organic Farms is working closely with the FDA on this
matter.


GOLD STAR: Recalls Cold Smoked Steelhead in Vacuum Pack
-------------------------------------------------------
Gold Star Smoked Fish Corp., located at 570 Smith Street,
Brooklyn, NY 11231, is recalling Cold Smoked Steelhead in Vacuum
Pack with blue and gold label due to contamination or possible
contamination with Listeria monocytogenes.

The recall was initiated after sampling by New York State
Department of Agriculture and Markets Food Inspectors and
subsequent analysis of the product by Food Laboratory personnel
revealed the presence of Listeria monocytogenes in a sample of the
product being recalled. Gold Star Smoked Fish Corp. is recalling
the product as a precaution.

The recalled product is packaged in clear plastic vacuum bag for
food service distribution and has a white label with a code 244
affixed on the back of the bag.  The UPC Number on the front label
is 021 143140026.  The subject product was sold in the States of
New York, New Jersey and Florida as a food service item to be
weighed at point of sale.

Listeria monocytogenes can cause serious and sometimes fatal
infections in young children, frail or elderly people and others
with weakened immune systems.  Although healthy persons may suffer
only short-term symptoms such as high fever, severe headache,
stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea, Listeria can cause
miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant women.

No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this
problem.  Consumers who purchased Cold Smoked Steelhead in Vacuum
Pack should not consume it and should return it to the place of
purchase.  Consumers with any questions may contact the company
directly at 718-522-5480.


GOODYEAR TIRE: Removes "Van Alst" Suit to Florida District Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Van Alst v. Goodyear Tire &
Rubber Company, Case No. 14-CA-9158, was removed from the
Thirteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Hillsborough County,
Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of
Florida (Tampa).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:14-
cv-02413-CEH-EAJ to the proceeding.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael Schuette, Esq.
          JOHN BALES ATTORNEYS
          9700 Dr MLK Jr St. N, Suite 400
          St Petersburg, FL 33702
          Telephone: (727) 823-9100
          E-mail: mschuette@johnbales.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Caran L. Rothchild, Esq.
          Kristina L. Ciaffi, Esq.
          Paul B. Ranis, Esq.
          GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
          401 E Las Olas Blvd., Suite 2000
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 765-0500
          Facsimile: (954) 765-1477
          E-mail: rothchildc@gtlaw.com
                  arnsdorffk@gtlaw.com
                  ranisp@gtlaw.com


GREEN TREE: Faces Suit Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth R. Whalen, On behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Green Tree Servicing LLC, Case No. 3:14-cv-00649-jdp
(W.D. Wis., September 25, 2014) seeks relief under the Fair Credit
Reporting Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Eric Leighton Crandall, Esq.
          CRANDALL LAW OFFICES, SC
          PO Box 27
          New Richmond, WI 54017
          Telephone: (715) 246-1012
          Facsimile: (715) 246-1018
          E-mail: consumerlaw@frontiernet.net

               - and -

          Thomas John Lyons, Jr., Esq.
          CONSUMER JUSTICE CENTER, P.A.
          367 Commerce Court
          Vadnais Heights, MN 55127
          Telephone: (651) 770-9707
          E-mail: tommycjc@aol.com

               - and -

          Thomas John Lyons, Sr., Esq.
          LYONS LAW FIRM PA
          367 Commerce Court
          Vadnais Heights, MN 55127
          Telephone: (651) 770-9707
          Facsimile: (651) 770-5830
          E-mail: tlyons@lyonslawfirm.com


GUCCI AMERICA: Removes "Oda" Suit to California District Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Janine Oda, et al. v. Gucci
America Inc., et al., Case No. BC551545, was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los
Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California (Los Angeles).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 2:14-cv-07469-MRP-AGR to the proceeding.

The Plaintiffs assert employment discrimination claims.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          James S. Cahill, Esq.
          Neal J. Fialkow, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF NEAL J. FIALKOW INC.
          215 North Marengo Avenue, Third Floor
          Pasadena, CA 91101
          Telephone: (626) 584-6060
          Facsimile: (626) 584-2950
          E-mail: jscahilllaw@aol.com
                  nfialkow@pacbell.net

               - and -

          Sahag Majarian, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN II
          18250 Ventura Boulevard
          Tarzana, CA 91356
          Telephone: (818) 609-0807
          Facsimile: (818) 609-0892
          E-mail: sahagii@aol.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Betsy Johnson, Esq.
          OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK AND STEWART PC
          400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 239-9800
          Facsimile: (213) 239-9045
          E-mail: betsy.johnson@ogletreedeakins.com

               - and -

          Ki'jhana R. Friday, Esq.
          OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK AND STEWARD PC
          400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 239-9800
          Facsimile: (213) 239-9045
          E-mail: kijhana.friday@ogletreedeakins.com


HEARTH & HOME: Recalls Gas Fireplaces, Stoves, Inserts & Log Sets
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
fireplace manufacturer Hearth & Home Technologies, of Lakeville,
Minn., announced a voluntary recall of about 20,000 gas
fireplaces, gas stoves, gas inserts and log sets.  Consumers
should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is
illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer
product.

The gas valve in the unit can leak, posing a fire hazard.

There were no incidents that were reported.

The recall involves Hearth & Home Technologies, Heat-N-Glo,
Heatilator, Outdoor Lifestyles and Quadra Fire natural or propane
gas indoor and outdoor fireplaces, stoves, inserts and log sets.
The following brand names and serial numbers are printed on the
unit rating plate, located near the controls, and in the
instruction manual.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/oZdh0z

The recalled products were manufactured in Taiwan and United
States and sold at fireplace stores from May 2014 through July
2014 for between $1,200 and $8,000.

Consumers should immediately stop using the gas fireplaces,
stoves, inserts and log sets, turn off the gas to the units and
contact the fireplace store where the unit was purchased to
arrange for a free inspection and, if necessary, valve
replacement.  The firm's dealers are contacting known purchasers.


HOME DEPOT: Faces "Merritt" Suit in Northern District of Georgia
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy Merritt, Gary Gilchrist and Travis Russell, Individually
and on Behalf of all Others Similarly Situated v. Home Depot
U.S.A., Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-03075-CC (N.D. Ga., September 24,
2014) asserts claims for breach of contract.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Darren T. Kaplan, Esq.
          STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON, LLP
          1359 Broadway, Suite 2001
          New York, NY 10018
          Telephone: (212) 999-7370
          E-mail: kaplan@stuevesiegel.com

               - and -

          John Austin Moore, Esq.
          Norman E. Siegel, Esq.
          STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON, LLP
          460 Nichols Road, Suite 200
          Kansas City, MO 64112
          Telephone: (816) 714-7100
          E-mail: moore@stuevesiegel.com
                  siegel@stuevesiegel.com

               - and -

          John Raymond Bevis, Esq.
          Roy E. Barnes, Esq.
          THE BARNES LAW GROUP, LLC
          31 Atlanta Street
          Marietta, GA 30060
          Telephone: (770) 227-6375
          Facsimile: (770) 227-6373
          E-mail: Bevis@barneslawgroup.com
                  Roy@barneslawgroup.com


HOME DEPOT: Faces 15 Suits Over Data Security Breach
----------------------------------------------------
Amanda Bronstad, writing for The National Law Journal, reports
that at least 15 lawsuits have been filed against The Home Depot
Inc. over a security breach that compromised data belonging to 56
million customers.

Home Depot announced on Sept. 8 that malicious software at its
checkout terminals had potentially harmed customers who made
purchases between April and September at its U.S. and Canadian
stores.

Last week, a number of financial institutions announced that they
would reissue the affected debit and credit cards, with some
reporting fraudulent transactions.  So far, Home Depot has
incurred $62 million in expenses, including legal costs,
associated with the breach -- although it anticipates those costs
will rise.

Attorneys general in three states have launched investigations.
On Sept. 15, a team of plaintiffs lawyers who have filed a class
action in the Northern District of Georgia, where Home Depot is
based in Atlanta, moved to coordinate the litigation.

"This is a huge case that has already received a great deal of
pretrial publicity, and numerous actions will likely be filed
against Home Depot in a multitude of districts, making transfer
and consolidation essential," they wrote in a motion to coordinate
three cases in the Northern District of Georgia.  The team --
William Federman of Federman & Sherwood in Oklahoma City;
Cornelius Dukelow -- cdukelow@abingtonlaw.com -- a patent attorney
at Abington Cole in Tulsa; and James Evangelista --
jim@hpllegal.com -- a partner at Atlanta's Harris Penn Lowry --
added another eight cases to their motion on Sept. 19.

Federman, Dukelow and Evangelista did not respond to requests for
comment.  Home Depot spokesman Stephen Holmes declined to comment
on the allegations.  "Our focus is on our customers and our
investigation right now, so we haven't fully reviewed any suits
yet," he wrote in an email.

Home Depot's response in court is due Oct. 10.

The lawsuits allege Home Depot was negligent in failing to secure
its customers' personal and financial information.  Most of the
cases were brought on behalf of Home Depot customers, although two
credit unions and one bank have sued.  The suits have been filed
in California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Louisiana, Missouri and
New York. At least one class action was filed in Canada.

Although larger, the Home Depot breach hasn't generated the same
massive outcry as did Target Corp., whose breach involved debit
and credit card information of 40 million customers during last
year's Christmas shopping season.  Home Depot has said it first
learned of the breach on Sept. 2 from banks and law enforcement --
although blogger Brian Krebs had published the first report by
then.

Target, which has been accused of being aware of data-security
risks as early as 2007, now faces about 100 lawsuits, most of
which have been coordinated for pretrial purposes before U.S.
District Judge Paul Magnuson in Minnesota.  On Sept. 2, Target
filed a motion to dismiss the litigation brought by financial
institutions, alleging it has no "special relationship" with them
that requires a duty of care.  Target's dismissal motion against a
consolidated consumer class action is due Oct. 1.


IKEA NORTH AMERICA: Recalls Children's Swing Due To Fall Hazard
---------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
IKEA North America Services LLC, of Conshohocken, Pa., announced a
voluntary recall of about 2,000 in the United States and 300 in
Canada GUNGGUNG child's swing.  Consumers should stop using this
product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or
attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The suspension fittings can break causing a child to fall from the
swing, posing a risk of serious injury.

There have been four reports worldwide including one in Germany,
two in Austria and one in Canada of the suspension fittings
breaking in use.  In one incident a child fell and sustained a
fractured leg.  No incidents have been reported in the US.

The recall involves IKEA GUNGGUNG Swing. GUNGGUNG is intended for
indoor and outdoor use by children ages 3-7.  It is made of green
polyester fabric and hangs from a plastic suspension fitting
attached to steel hooks.  The full length of the suspension strap,
including the sling seat, is 17 feet and the width of the seat is
0.8 feet.  A permanent label is attached to one of the suspension
straps, showing age recommendation (3-7), IKEA logo, Design and
Quality IKEA of Sweden, GUNGGUNG article number 302.439.74,
supplier number 17915 and Made in Vietnam.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/ax96f3

The recalled products were manufactured in Vietnam and sold
exclusively at IKEA stores nationwide and online from June 2014 to
Aug. 2014 for $20.

Consumers should immediately take down the swing to prevent use by
children and return it to any IKEA store for a full refund.  Proof
of purchase is not required to receive a full refund for the
return.


INDIAN CREEK: Faces "Piner" Suit Alleging Violations of FLSA
------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Piner v. Indian Creek Logistics, Inc., Bridget Wardlaw and
Mack Wardlaw, Case No. 5:14-cv-00847-XR (W.D. Tex., September 25,
2014) alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Beatriz A. Sosa-Morris, Esq.
          Galvin B. Kennedy, Esq.
          KENNEDY HODGES LLP
          711 West Alabama Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Telephone: (713) 523-0001
          Facsimile: (713) 523-1116
          E-mail: bsosamorris@kennedyhodges.com
                  gkennedy@kennedyhodges.com


JPMORGAN CHASE: Must Face Mortgage-Back Securities Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Stempel, writing for Reuters, reports that a federal
judge on Sept. 30 said JPMorgan Chase & Co must face a class
action lawsuit by investors who claimed the largest U.S. bank
misled them about the safety of $10 billion of mortgage-backed
securities it sold before the financial crisis.

U.S. District Judge Paul Oetken in Manhattan certified a class
action as to JPMorgan's liability but not as to damages, saying it
was unclear how investors could value the certificates they
bought, given how the market was "not particularly liquid."  He
said the plaintiffs could try again to certify a class on damages.

Judge Oetken ruled 10 months after JPMorgan reached a $13 billion
settlement to resolve U.S. and state probes into the New York-
based bank's sale of mortgage securities.  The class consists of
investors before March 23, 2009 in certificates issued from nine
of 11 trusts created by JPMorgan for the April 2007 offering.  The
other two trusts attracted only a handful of investors, and are
the subject of other lawsuits.

Judge Oetken named the Laborers Pension Trust Fund for Northern
California and Construction Laborers Pension Trust for Southern
California as lead plaintiffs, and their law firm Robbins Geller
Rudman & Dowd as lead counsel.

A JPMorgan spokesman did not immediately respond to a request for
comment.  The plaintiffs' lawyer did not immediately respond to a
similar request.

The lawsuit said that JPMorgan misled prospective investors about
the underwriting, appraisals and credit quality of the home loans
underlying the certificates.  It said that by the time the
litigation began in March 2009, six months after Lehman Brothers
Holdings Inc. failed, the certificates were worth at most 62 cents
on the dollar.

Judge Oetken rejected JPMorgan's arguments that the case could not
be a class action because it was based on the practices of many
originators and more than 8,000 underwriting guidelines, some
investors were more sophisticated than others, and the MBS had
evolved too rapidly during the two-year class period.  He also
said he had no basis to accept JPMorgan's request that he
disqualify Robbins Geller because one of what the judge called the
firm's "confidential sources" for the lawsuit, a former employee
at a loan originator, later withdrew his testimony -- something
the bank said had occurred in other cases handled by the firm.

The case, whose caption names a different plaintiff, is Fort Worth
Employees' Retirement Fund v. JPMorgan Chase & Co, U.S. District
Court, Southern District of New York, No. 09-03701.


KILLION & SONS: Fails to Pay Field Workers OT Premium, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Matthew Cox, on behalf of himself and similarly situated employees
v. Killion & Sons Well Service, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-01325-MRH
(W.D. Pa., September 26, 2014) accuses the Defendant of failing to
pay the Plaintiff and other field employees extra overtime premium
compensation for hours worked over 40 per week.

Killion & Sons Well Service, Inc., is a corporate entity
headquartered in Palestine, Texas, and maintains a local office in
Canonsburg, Pennsylvania (Washington County).  The Company
provides a variety of on-site services at gas and oil drilling
sites in various states, including Pennsylvania.  These services
include monitoring of gas and oil wells, pumping services, flow
back services, and maintenance of on-site production equipment.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Peter Winebrake, Esq.
          Andrew Santillo, Esq.
          Mark Gottesfeld, Esq.
          WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
          715 Twining Road, Suite 211
          Dresher, PA 19025
          Telephone: (215) 884-2491
          Facsimile: (215) 884-2492
          E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com

               - and -

          Jerry Martin, Esq.
          David W. Garrison, Esq.
          BARRETT JOHNSTON MARTIN & GARRISON, LLC
          414 Union Street, Suite 900
          Nashville, TN 37201
          Telephone: (615) 244-2202
          E-mail: jmartin@barrettjohnston.com
                  dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com


LANNETT COMPANY: Faces "Schaefer" Securities Suit in Pennsylvania
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lannett Company, Inc. faces a securities lawsuit filed by David
Schaefer in the United States District Court, Eastern District of
Pennsylvania (14-cv-05008), according to the company's Aug. 29,
2014, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2014.

On August 27, 2014, David Schaefer, as an alleged class
representative, filed a class action complaint in the United
States District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania (14-cv-
05008) against the Company and certain of its officers, alleging
violations of federal securities laws arising out of statements
about the Company made in its securities filings during the period
of September 10, 2013 through July 16, 2014.  The complaint
alleges that the statements were false and misleading because the
defendants allegedly knew at the time the statements were made
that the Company was in violation of Connecticut antitrust laws
relating to its sale of digoxin.


MARINI FOODS: Recalls REA Sweet Cacciatore Sausages
---------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 25, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Salmonella
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Marini Foods Limited
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail

Marini Foods Limited is voluntarily recalling REA brand Sweet
Cacciatore Sausages and Bona brand Sweet Cacciatore Sausages - Lot
4237.233 from the marketplace due to possible Salmonella
contamination.  Consumers should not consume the recalled products
described below.

Check to see if you have recalled products in your home.  Recalled
products should be thrown out or returned to the store where they
were purchased.

Food contaminated with Salmonella may not look or smell spoiled
but can still make you sick. Young children, pregnant women, the
elderly and people with weakened immune systems may contract
serious and sometimes deadly infections.  Healthy people may
experience short-term symptoms such as fever, headache, vomiting,
nausea, abdominal cramps and diarrhea.  Long-term complications
may include severe arthritis.

There have been no reported illnesses associated with the
consumption of these products.

The recall was triggered by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's
(CFIA) inspection activities.  The CFIA is conducting a food
safety investigation, which may lead to the recall of other
products. If other high-risk products are recalled, the CFIA will
notify the public through updated Food Recall Warnings.

The CFIA is verifying that industry is removing recalled products
from the marketplace.


MARRIOTT INT'L: Accused of Bias by Ex-Worker With Disability
------------------------------------------------------------
Judith Dolahan v. Marriott International, Inc., Concord
Hospitality Enterprises Company, Moody National CY Lyndhurst Mt,
LLC, Bret Esbrant, Individually, and David McLoughlin,
Individually, Case No. 2:14-cv-06022-KM-MAH (D.N.J., September 26,
2014) alleges that the Defendants discriminated against the
Plaintiff because of her disability by subjecting her to
harassment, failing to accommodate her disability, and terminating
her employment.

Marriott International, Inc. is a foreign corporation with a main
business address in Bethesda, Maryland.  Concord Hospitality
Enterprises Company is a foreign corporation with a main business
address in Cleveland, Ohio.  Moody National CY Lyndurst MT is a
foreign corporation with a main business address in Houston,
Texas.  The Individual Defendants are officers or managers of the
Corporate Defendants.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael R. DiChiara, Esq.
          KRAKOWER DICHIARA LLC
          77 Market Street, Suite 2
          Park Ridge, NJ 07656
          Telephone: (201) 746-0303
          Facsimile: (866) 417-2333
          E-mail: md@kdlawllc.com


MEDTRONIC INC: Pretrial Process in Sprint Fidelis Suit Underway
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pretrial proceedings are underway in the Sprint Fidelis Product
Liability Matters against Medtronic, Inc. in the Ontario Superior
Court of Justice in Canada, according to the company's Aug. 29,
2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended July 25, 2014.

In 2007, a putative class action was filed in the Ontario Superior
Court of Justice in Canada seeking damages for personal injuries
allegedly related to the Company's Sprint Fidelis family of
defibrillation leads. On October 20, 2009, the court certified a
class proceeding but denied class certification on plaintiffs'
claim for punitive damages. Pretrial proceedings are underway.


MEDTRONIC INC: Still Faces Shareholder Suit in Minn. Over INFUSE
----------------------------------------------------------------
Medtronic, Inc. continues to face a lawsuit in the U.S. District
Court for the District of Minnesota, alleging that it made false
and misleading public statements regarding the INFUSE Bone Graft
product, according to the company's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarter ended July 25, 2014.

West Virginia Pipe Trades and Phil Pace, on June 27 and July 3,
2013, respectively, filed putative class action complaints against
Medtronic and certain of its officers in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Minnesota, alleging that the defendants made
false and misleading public statements regarding the INFUSE Bone
Graft product during the period of December 8, 2010 through August
3, 2011.


MEDTRONIC INC: Faces Lawsuit in Minn. Over Acquisition of Covidien
------------------------------------------------------------------
Lewis Merenstein filed a putative shareholder class action on July
2, 2014, in Hennepin County, Minnesota, District Court seeking to
enjoin the potential acquisition of Covidien plc by Medtronic
Inc., according to Medtronic's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended June 30, 2014.

The lawsuit names Medtronic, Covidien, and each member of the
Medtronic board as defendants, and alleges that the directors
breached their fiduciary duties to shareholders with regard to the
potential acquisition.


MEDTRONIC INC: Faces "Steiner" Shareholder Suit in Minnesota
------------------------------------------------------------
Kenneth Steiner filed on August 21, 2014, a putative shareholder
class action against Medtronic, Inc. in Hennepin County,
Minnesota, District Court, seeking an injunction to prevent the
potential Covidien plc acquisition, according to Medtronic's Aug.
29, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2014.


MEDTRONIC INC: Faces "Taxman" Shareholder Suit Over Acquisition
---------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Taxman filed a putative shareholder class action on July
10, 2014, against Medtronic Inc. in the U.S. District Court for
the District of Massachusetts, according to Medtronic's Aug. 29,
2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2014.

The suit is seeking to enjoin the potential acquisition, and
naming Medtronic, Covidien, and the members of the Covidien board
of directors as defendants.


MEDTRONIC INC: Faces "Cobb" Suit in Massachusetts Superior Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
William Cobb filed a putative shareholder class action on August
26, 2014, in Suffolk County Superior Court, Massachusetts,
asserting claims similar to those asserted by Richard Taxman,
according to Medtronic's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June
30, 2014.


MICHAELS COS: Calif. Superior Court Decertifies "Rhea" Labor Claim
------------------------------------------------------------------
The class in the "Rea Claim," which was filed by The Michaels
Companies, Inc. store managers in California Superior Court in and
for the County of Orange, was decertified, according to the
company's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Aug. 2, 2014.

On September 15, 2011, the Company was served with a lawsuit filed
in the California Superior Court in and for the County of Orange
("Superior Court") by four former store managers as a class action
proceeding on behalf of themselves and certain former and current
store managers employed by Michaels in California. The lawsuit
alleges that the Company stores improperly classified its store
managers as exempt employees and as such failed to pay all wages,
overtime and waiting time penalties and failed to provide accurate
wage statements. The lawsuit also alleges that the foregoing
conduct was in breach of various laws, including California's
unfair competition law. On December 3, 2013, the Superior Court
entered an Order certifying a class of approximately 200 members.
The Company successfully removed the case to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California and on May
8, 2014, the class was de-certified.


MICHAELS COS: Consolidated Suit Over Data Security Incident Junked
------------------------------------------------------------------
The motion of Michaels Companies, Inc. to dismiss a consolidated
complaint against The Michaels Stores Inc. relating to a January
2014 data breach, was granted, according to Michaels's Aug. 29,
2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2014.

Five putative class actions were filed against MSI relating to the
January 2014 data breach. The plaintiffs generally allege MSI
failed to secure and safeguard customers' private information
including credit and debit card information, and as such, breached
an implied contract, and violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act
(and other states' similar laws) and are seeking damages including
declaratory relief, actual damages, punitive damages, statutory
damages, attorneys' fees, litigation costs, remedial action, pre
and post judgment interest and other relief as available.

The cases are as follows: Christina Moyer v. Michaels Stores,
Inc., was filed on January 27, 2014; Michael and Jessica Gouwens
v. Michaels Stores, Inc., was filed on January 29, 2014; Nancy
Maize and Jessica Gordon v. Michaels Stores, Inc., was filed on
February 21, 2014; and Daniel Ripes v. Michaels Stores, Inc., was
filed on March 14, 2014. All four of these cases were filed in the
United States District Court-Northern District of Illinois,
Eastern Division. A case, Mary Jane Whalen v. Michaels Stores,
Inc., was filed in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of New York on March 18, 2014, but was
voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff on April 11, 2014, without
prejudice to her right to re-file a complaint. On April 16, 2014,
an order was entered consolidating the current actions. On July
14, 2014, the Company's motion to dismiss the consolidated
complaint was granted.


MICHAELS COS: Settlement of Cal. Zip Code Claims Finally Approved
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of California, County of San Diego granted
final approval to a settlement reached in the California Zip Code
Litigation against The Michaels Companies, Inc., according to the
company's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Aug. 2, 2014.

On August 15, 2008, Linda Carson, a consumer, filed a purported
class action proceeding against MSI in the Superior Court of
California, County of San Diego ("San Diego Superior Court"), on
behalf of herself and all similarly-situated California consumers.
The Carson lawsuit alleges that MSI unlawfully requested and
recorded personally identifiable information (i.e., her zip code)
as part of a credit card transaction. The plaintiff seeks
statutory penalties, costs, interest, and attorneys' fees. On
February 10, 2011, the California Supreme Court ruled, in a
similar matter, Williams-Sonoma v. Pineda, that zip codes are
personally identifiable information and, therefore, the Song-
Beverly Credit Card Act of 1971, as amended ("Song Act"),
prohibits businesses from requesting or requiring zip codes in
connection with a credit card transaction.

Subsequent to the California Supreme Court decision, three
additional purported class action lawsuits seeking similar relief
have been filed against MSI: Carolyn Austin v. Michaels Stores,
Inc. and Tiffany Heon v. Michaels Stores, Inc., both in the San
Diego Superior Court and Sandra A. Rubinstein v. Michaels Stores,
Inc. in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles,
Central Division. An order coordinating the cases has been entered
and plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint on April 24, 2012.
The parties settled the lawsuit for an amount that will not have a
material effect on the company's consolidated financial
statements. On August 6, 2014, the Court granted final approval of
the settlement.


MOBILE HOUSING: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages and Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ty Criswell, Ronald Coffman, Eric Knight, Samuel Mccord, Denisa
Peacock & Joe Frank Smiley, Jr. v. Mobile Housing Board, Case No.
1:14-cv-00447-KD-N (S.D. Ala., September 26, 2014) is brought to
recover unpaid compensation in the form of unpaid wages and
overtime, owed to the Plaintiffs pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Mobile Housing Board is an entity organized in Alabama and doing
business in the Southern District of Alabama.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Daniel A. Hannan, Esq.
          DANIEL A. HANNAN, LLC
          P.O. Box 1286
          Mobile, AL 36633
          Telephone: (251) 289-1326
          Facsimile: (251) 252-1331
          E-mail: hannanlaw@gmail.com


MONOGRAM COMFORT: Recalls 607 Lbs. of Uncured Beef Corn Dogs
------------------------------------------------------------
Monogram Comfort Foods, a Bristol, Ind., establishment, is
recalling approximately 607 pounds of uncured beef corn dogs
because they may have experienced temperature abuse in the
distribution chain, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food
Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced.

The products subject to recall include:

   -- 10 oz. cartons of "Applegate Naturals Gluten-free Uncured
      Beef Corn Dogs" with a "Best By" date of 04/21/15

The products were produced on April 21, 2014, and bear the
establishment number "EST. 2512" inside the USDA Mark of
Inspection.  The products were distributed in Colorado, Montana,
New Mexico, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming.

The problem was found during a routine check by a warehouse that
received the product.  The product had been stored at the
warehouse in a dry storage area instead of in the freezer.

FSIS and the company have received no reports of adverse reactions
due to consumption of these products.  Anyone concerned about a
reaction should contact a healthcare provider.

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify
recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that
steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer
available to consumers.  When available, the retail distribution
list(s) will be posted on the FSIS website at:
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls

Media with questions about the recall should contact Gary Brooks,
Vice President of Technical Services, at (901) 259-6201.

Consumers with questions about the recall should contact DeWayne
McVeigh, Director of Customer Service, at (901) 259-6642.

For inquiries concerning Applegate, consumers with questions about
the recall should contact Gerry Clarkson, Applegate Consumer
Relations Specialist, at (800) 587-5858.  Media inquiries for
Applegate should contact Maria Balice at (312) 543-6630.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at:
http://www.AskKaren.govor via smartphone at m.askkaren.gov.  "Ask
Karen" live chat services are available Monday through Friday from
10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET.  The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline
1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and
Spanish and can be reached from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET Monday
through Friday.  Recorded food safety messages are available 24
hours a day.  For information on how to report a problem with a
meat, poultry or processed egg product to FSIS at any time, visit
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/reportproblem.


MORGAN STANLEY: Loses Bid to Dismiss Suit Over Credit-Linked Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Suevon Lee, writing for Law.com, reports that a Singapore
financial company can advance with fraud claims against Morgan
Stanley for having structured and sold credit-linked notes backed
by risky collateral that were allegedly designed to profit the
bank instead of investors, a Manhattan judge has held.

Justice Eileen Bransten's Sept. 12 ruling mostly denying Morgan
Stanley's motion to dismiss the action, Hong Leong Finance Limited
(Singapore) v. Morgan Stanley, 653894/2013, vindicates Hong Leong
Finance, a mid-sized financial institution, following last year's
dismissal of similar claims by the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York.

In 2006, Hong Leong Finance (HLF), akin to a savings and loans
association, entered into a distribution agreement with note
issuer Pinnacle, arranger Morgan Stanley Singapore and agent
Morgan Stanley International to sell so-called pinnacle notes to
customers who consisted mostly of middle to working class
Singaporeans and small to mid-sized enterprises.

These investment products had the potential to produce higher
yield than standard bonds but were riskier due to their dependence
on credit default swaps linked to debt held by corporations or
sovereign nations, according to the decision.

HLF, which is regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore,
sold the equivalent of $72.4 million of notes.  The company later
paid out $32 million to resolve customers' claims when the notes
failed during the financial crisis.

The crux of the company's complaint is that these notes were
deliberately "designed to fail," and created "with such a high
concentration of risk exposure that [Morgan Stanley] basically
engineered the single tranche collateralized debt obligations to
be more likely to generate portfolio losses and fail," the
decision said in summarizing the allegations.

"Morgan Stanley secretly, deceptively, and wrongfully invested the
investors' principal in very risky underlying assets," HLF's
complaint alleges.

Two actions were filed in the Southern District following Hong
Leong's losses over the sale of notes.  The first, an October 2010
class action by investors, Dandong v. Pinnacle Performance, Civ.
10-8086, was allowed to move forward on fraud and breach of duty
of good faith claims, in an Oct. 31, 2011 ruling by U.S. District
Judge Leonard Sand.

The second -- HLF v. Morgan Stanley, Civ. 12-6010, filed Aug. 6,
2012 -- in which HLF served as the direct plaintiff, was dismissed
Oct. 23, 2013 for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.
Two weeks later, HLF, represented by Lieff Cabraser Heimann &
Bernstein, brought state claims including for fraud, negligent
misrepresentation and breach of contract in the Commercial
Division.

Attorneys for Morgan Stanley at Simpson Thacher & Bartlett
similarly moved to dismiss on forum non conveniens grounds and
failure to state a claim.

Judge Bransten, liberally referencing the federal Dandong class
action decision, rejected most of those arguments.

"This court cannot say that this action is devoid of New York
connections," she wrote, pointing out that the Dandong court found
that the activity underpinning the investors' claims took place
mostly in New York and London, such as the selection of assets,
arrangement of the CDOs and the drafting of offering materials.

Judge Bransten also noted that most material witnesses were
located in New York and that furthermore, "Singapore is a common-
law country with very similar substantive law to New York."

However, she dismissed a claim for negligent misrepresentation,
holding there was no special relationship between HLF and Morgan
Stanley since they were sophisticated commercial entities that
entered into an arms-length relationship, citing MBIA v.
Countrywide, 87 A.D.3d 287, 297 (First Dept. 2011).

Judge Bransten also preserved the breach of contract claim for
Morgan Stanley's alleged failure to indemnify HLF for its $32
million customer settlement and allowed the fraud claims to move
forward, despite the bank's protests that the notes' offering
materials disclosed they were subject to "high degree of complex
risks."

"These disclosures do not encompass the secret risk that Morgan
Stanley had deliberately selected the riskiest assets," the judge
wrote.  "Thus, the disclosures and disclaimers fall significantly
short of tracking the particular misrepresentations and omissions
alleged by HLF."

Bruce Angiolillo -- bangiolillo@stblaw.com -- a partner at Simpson
Thacher, declined to comment.

David Stellings, a partner at Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein,
said he was "pleased" with the decision.

"Morgan Stanley fought for more than two years to prevent these
claims from being heard in New York," he wrote in an email. "We
very much look forward to litigating and proving our claims at
trial."


MOUNTAIN PATH: Metal Pieces Prompt Recall of Organic Flax Seed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 23, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Extraneous Material
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Mountain Path Organic & Natural Foods
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9277


NASON MEDICAL: Removes "Caskie" Class Suit to D. South Carolina
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Caskie v. Nason Medical Center
LLC, et al., 2014-CP-10-5325, was removed from the Court of Common
Pleas for the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Charleston, County, South
Carolina, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South
Carolina (Charleston).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:14-cv-03768-DCN to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff accuses the Defendants of violating the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Celeste Tiller Jones, Esq.
          MCNAIR LAW FIRM
          1221 Main Street
          Columbia, SC 29201
          Telephone: (803) 799-9800
          Facsimile: (803) 753-3278
          E-mail: cjones@mcnair.net

               - and -

          Henry Wilkins Frampton, IV, Esq.
          Joshua Wallace Dixon, Esq.
          MCNAIR LAW FIRM
          PO Box 1431
          Charleston, SC 29402
          Telephone: (843) 973-6852
          Facsimile: (843) 805-5723
          E-mail: hframpton@mcnair.net
                  jdixon@mcnair.net

Defendants Nason Medical Center LLC, Bankfield Holding Company
LLC, Barron S. Nason and Robert T. Hamilton are represented by:

          Allan Riley Holmes, Esq.
          Cheryl H. Ledbetter, Esq.
          GIBBS AND HOLMES
          PO Box 938
          Charleston, SC 29402
          Telephone: (843) 722-0033
          Facsimile: (843) 722-0114
          E-mail: aholmes@gibbs-holmes.com
                  cledbetter@gibbs-holmes.com

Defendant Fariborz Ghardar is represented by:

          Merritt G. Abney, Esq.
          NELSON MULLINS RILEY AND SCARBOROUGH
          151 Meeting Street, Sixth Floor
          Charleston, SC 29401
          Telephone: (843) 534-4110
          Facsimile: (843) 722-8700
          E-mail: merritt.abney@nelsonmullins.com


NELSON & KENNARD: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Emilie Nazaroff, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Nelson & Kennard, a Business Entity, Form
Unknown, Case No. 3:14-cv-02262-MMA-RBB (S.D. Cal., September 24,
2014) alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jared M. Hartman, Esq.
          HARTMAN LAW OFFICE
          400 South Melrose, Suite 209
          Vista, CA 92081
          Telephone: (951) 234-0881
          Facsimile: (888) 819-8230
          E-mail: jaredhartman@jmhattorney.com


ORIGINAL SOUPMAN: Recalls Lobster Bisque in Tetra Pak Cartons
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Original Soupman of Staten Island, New York, is recalling some
of its Lobster Bisque in Tetra Pak cartons because due to human
error some cartons were printed omitting that, in addition to
lobster, the product also contains shrimp, as well as perch and
tilapia in its lobster base.  Only people who have allergies to
shrimp (Crustaceans) run the risk of serious or life-threatening
allergic reaction if they consume this product.

The recalled "Original Soupman Lobster Bisque" was distributed
nationwide in retail stores.

The product comes in a 17 oz., tetra pak carton marked with lot
numbers:

Lot Number:

   -- 0314435801;
   -- 0411435801;
   -- 0523435801;
   -- 0709435803;
   -- 0822435801;
   -- 0709435802; and
   -- 0821435801

on the top and with a best buy date stamped on the top as well.

No allergic reactions have been reported to date in connection
with this problem and the product is otherwise safe for
consumption by persons who have no allergies to lobster, shrimp,
perch or tilapia.

The recall was initiated after it was discovered that when the
Company moved its production to the United States, the product was
distributed in packaging that inadvertently did not declare the
presence of shrimp, perch and tilapia.

Consumers that have purchased the "Lobster Bisque" can call the
Company to arrange for return and a refund.  Consumers may contact
the Company at 646-722-6673, Monday-Friday, 9 a.m. - 4 p.m. ET.


RADIUS HOSPITAL: Sued by Union Over Improper WARN Act Notice
------------------------------------------------------------
1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East v. Radius Hospital
Management II, Inc., d/b/a Radius Specialty Hospital, Case No.
1:14-cv-13713 (D. Mass., September 26, 2014) alleges that the
Defendant failed to comply with the notice requirement of the
Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act before
announcing the closure of its facilities in Quincy, Massachusetts,
and Boston, Massachusetts.

As a result of Defendant's violations of the WARN Act, over 150
bargaining unit members represented by 1199SEIU have been
subjected to hardship and financial loss, according to the
complaint.  The action is brought on behalf of all 1199SEIU
bargaining unit members impacted by the Defendant's alleged
violations and all persons similarly situated.

1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East is a labor organization,
and an unincorporated association with offices in Boston,
Massachusetts.  1199SEIU has acted as the exclusive bargaining
agent for units of employees employed or formerly employed by the
Defendant.

Radius Hospital Management II, Inc., doing business as Radius
Specialty Hospital, is a Massachusetts corporation with a
principal place of business in Boston.  The Defendant owns and
operates hospitals in Quincy and Boston.  The Defendant holds
itself out as owning and operating "Radius Specialty Hospital."

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David Rome, Esq.
          Ian O. Russell, Esq.
          PYLE ROME EHRENBERG PC
          2 Liberty Square, 10th Floor
          Boston, MA 02109
          Telephone: (617) 367-7200
          E-mail: drome@pylerome.com
                  irussell@pylerome.com


RANSOM-EVERGLADES SCHOOL: Faces Fla. Suit Alleging Discrimination
-----------------------------------------------------------------
J.B. Barley v. Ransom-Everglades School, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-
23540-FAM (S.D. Fla., September 24, 2014) alleges that the
Plaintiff, during his time of employment at the School, suffered
discrimination and retaliation on the basis of his race/color, and
age.

The Plaintiff, an African American, was hired as a Groundskeeper,
and his duties included cutting grass, trimming trees and bushes,
care of sprinkler system and general maintenance of the school's
property.

Ransom-Everglades School, Inc., is a Florida corporation.  Ransom
School is an upscale college preparatory school located in Coconut
Grove, Miami, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
          3100 South Dixie Highway, Suite 202
          Miami, FL 33133
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com


ROSS PROCUREMENT: Recalls Metal Bistro Chairs Due to Fall Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Ross Procurement Inc., of Dublin, Calif., announced a voluntary
recall of about 840 metal bistro chairs.  Consumers should stop
using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to
resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The chair's seat can fail to attach to the frame when the chair is
unfolded, causing the chair to collapse.  This poses a fall hazard
to consumers.

Ross has received three reports of minor injuries from the chairs
collapsing, including a back strain and minor bruises.

The recall involves metal folding bistro chairs that are orange
and have perforations on the seat.  The chairs measure about 36
inches tall by 15 inches wide by 16 inches deep.  SKU 400101018858
is found on the product hangtag.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/FcG6ij

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold
exclusively at Ross stores nationwide from Feb. 2014 through April
2014 for about $30.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled chairs with
seats that do not attach to the frame and return them to any Ross
store for a full refund.


SAM WYLY: Judge Imposes $300-Mil. Penalties in Securities Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jan Wolfe, writing for Law.com, reports that in one of the
stiffest penalties ever imposed on individual defendants in a
securities fraud case, a judge has ordered billionaire Sam Wyly
and the estate of his late brother Charles Wyly to hand over at
least $300 million to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

In an 83-page ruling issued on Sept. 25, U.S. District Judge Shira
Scheindlin in Manhattan ordered the Wylys to disgorge 25 percent
of their total profits from a secret scheme to hide trades in
public companies they helped direct.  Judge Scheindlin also
ordered disgorgement of taxes the Wylys avoided paying through the
scheme. Excluding prejudgment interest, the judge put Sam Wyly on
the hook for $123.8 million and Charles Wyly for $63.8 million.

"Although the SEC must recalculate prejudgment interest, according
to my rough estimate, the final disgorgement award, including
prejudgment interest will be between $300 million and $400
million," the judge wrote.  "This single award is equivalent to
approximately 10 percent of the total penalties and disgorgement
ordered in SEC enforcement cases nationwide last year."

Prior to their run-ins with the SEC, the Wylys launched Sterling
Software Inc. and the arts and crafts retail giant Michaels Stores
Inc.  They later sat on the boards of those companies and others.
They often donated to charities, and contributed to more than 200
Republican political candidates.

In a 2010 complaint, the SEC alleged that the Wylys had also been
busy committing securities fraud and violating rules governing
corporate insiders.  The agency claimed the duo used trusts in the
Isle of Man to conceal trades in companies for which they served
as directors, reaping $550 million in undisclosed profits. (The
estate of Charles Wyly was swapped in as a defendant following his
death in a 2011 car crash.)

At the agreement of the parties, Judge Scheindlin bifurcated the
issue of damages and held a liability-only jury trial over five
weeks earlier this year.  A jury returned a verdict for the SEC on
May 12, rejecting an argument by the defense that the trusts were
only used for tax benefits.  The Wylys were represented at trial
by attorneys at Susman Godfrey, including the father and son team
of Stephen and Harry Susman.

The SEC had sought upward of $1.4 billion in disgorgement and
penalties, arguing that it should be allowed to recoup all of the
Wylys' profits from the fraudulent scheme.  Judge Scheindlin
rejected that approach in a July 29 ruling, and again in the
Sept. 25 opinion.  She instead calculated disgorgement based on
the average discount received on unregistered securities, which
she put at 25 percent.

The judge also didn't impose civil penalties.  "Disgorgement of
this magnitude is more than sufficient to deter future
violations," she wrote.


SANTANDER CONSUMER: Faces Securities Lawsuit in New York Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc. faces a securities lawsuit in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York, according to the company's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 8-K filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

On August 26, 2014, a purported securities class action lawsuit
was filed in the United States District Court, Southern District
of New York, against Santander Consumer USA Holdings Inc. (the
"Company") certain of the Company's current and former directors
and executive officers and certain institutions that served as
underwriters of the Company's initial public offering (the "IPO").
The lawsuit was brought by a purported stockholder of the Company
seeking to represent a class consisting of all those who purchased
or otherwise acquired the Company's securities pursuant and/or
traceable to the Company's Registration Statement and Prospectus
issued in connection with the Company's IPO. Plaintiff alleges
that the Registration Statement and Prospectus contained
misleading statements concerning the Company's auto lending
business and underwriting practices. The lawsuit asserts claims
under Section 11 and Section 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 and
seeks unspecified damages and other relief.


SHIVVERS MANUFACTURING: Recalls Country Clipper Lawn Mowers
-----------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Shivvers Manufacturing Inc., of Corydon, Iowa, announced a
voluntary recall of about 1,650 in the U.S. and 261 in Canada
riding lawn mowers.  Consumers should stop using this product
unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt
to resell a recalled consumer product.

The ignition module can fail to ground, resulting in overheating
and melting, posing a fire hazard.

Shivvers has received reports of four lawn mower ignition modules
overheating and melting.  No injuries have been reported.

The recall involves model year 2012, 2013 and 2014 Country Clipper
riding lawn mowers.  The recalled mowers are equipped with 27-
horsepower Kohler Command CV740 or Kohler Courage SV740 twin
cylinder engines.  The Command engine is dark gray and has the
name and model number on a label on the side of the engine near
the air filter.  The Courage engine has a black engine shroud and
has the name and model number on the top of the shroud.  The
recalled mowers are steered by either a joystick or two steering
arms.  The recalled mowers were manufactured from October 2011 to
May 2014 and include the model names Challenger, Charger, Edge,
Jazee, Jazee Pro and Jazee Pro DLX. The following model years and
model numbers are recalled:

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/8Plyc1

The recalled products were manufactured in United States and sold
at Country Clipper lawn mower dealers nationwide from Oct. 2011 to
May 2014 for between $5,300 and $9,500.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled lawn mowers
and contact a Country Clipper dealer to schedule a free repair.


SOLERA HOLDINGS: Moves to Dismiss Suit Over Valuation of Vehicles
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Solera Holdings, Inc. moved to dismiss an amended suit filed over
its methodology for determining the value of total loss vehicles,
according to the company's Aug. 29, 2014, Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
June 30, 2014.

The company continues to be involved in legal proceedings, claims
and other litigation that arise in the ordinary course of
business. For example, it was involved in disputes with collision
repair facilities, acting individually and as a group in some
situations that claim that it colluded with its insurance company
customers to depress the repair time estimates generated by the
company's repair estimating software. It was also involved in
litigation alleging that it colluded with its insurance company
customers to cause the estimates of vehicle fair market value
generated by the company's total loss estimation software to be
unfairly low. On February 28, 2014, Solera, Explore, and Audatex
North America, Inc. were each served with a civil complaint filed
against them and another defendant by an insurance company third
party claimant in Minnesota state court.  The complaint seeks
state-wide class action status for similarly situated claimants,
claiming that the defendant's methodology for determining the
value of total loss vehicles violates Minnesota law.  The company
filed a motion to dismiss on April 18, 2014.  The complaint was
subsequently removed to the U.S. District Court for the District
of Minnesota and an amended complaint was filed on July 16, 2014.
The company and the company's co-defendant have moved to dismiss
the amended complaint.


T-MOBILE USA: Removes "Moore" Suit to New York District Court
-------------------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit styled Moore v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., Case No. 401054-
14, was removed from the Supreme Court of the state of New York,
County of New York, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York.  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:14-cv-07724-GBD to the proceeding.

On August 20, 2014, petitioner Teddy Moore commenced a special
proceeding in the New York Supreme Court by an order to show cause
entered by the Honorable Peter H. Moulton.  In the Order to Show
Cause, Justice Moulton ordered T-Mobile to show cause why a final
Award of Arbitration rendered on August 7, 2014, in an arbitration
styled Teddy Moore v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., AAA Case Number 13-20-
1400-0596, should not be deemed "null and void" based on Mr.
Moore's allegation that "there was no valid agreement to arbitrate
and thus no jurisdiction for the arbitrator."

In the Arbitration, Mr. Moore asserted claims for alleged
violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, in
connection with which he sought a minimum of $650,000 in damages
against T-Mobile.

The Plaintiff is not represented by any law firm.

The Defendant is represented by:

          Daniel Benjamin Rapport, Esq.
          FRIEDMAN KAPLAN SEILER & ADELMAN LLP
          1633 Broadway
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (212) 833-1100
          Facsimile: (212) 833-1250
          E-mail: drapport@fklaw.com

               - and -

          Jason Charles Rubinstein, Esq.
          FRIEDMAN KAPLAN SEILER & ADELMAN LLP
          7 Times Square, 28th Floor
          New York, NY 10036
          Telephone: (212) 833-1100
          Facsimile: (212) 833-1250
          E-mail: jrubinstein@fklaw.com


TELEXELECTRIC LLLP: "Ferguson" Suit Transferred to Massachusetts
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Ferguson, et al. v. Telexelectric,
LLLP, et al., Case No. 5:14-cv-00316, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina to
the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
(Worcester).  The Massachusetts District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 4:14-cv-40138-NMG to the proceeding.

In his order granting the Plaintiffs' motion to transfer, Judge
James C. Denver III of the North Carolina District Court said that
various TelexFree entities and related individuals operated an
illegal pyramid scheme whereby they sold securities in the form of
"memberships" and essentially paid members to recruit other
investors whose new membership fees alone kept the scheme afloat.
Until TelexFree changed its compensation plan in March 2014, a
month before it filed for bankruptcy, it did not require
"promoters" to sell its "product" to be eligible for a guaranteed
return of over 200%, he noted.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ihuoma Igboanugo, Esq.
          THE CRESCENT LAW PRACTICE
          P.O.Box 41333
          Raleigh, NC 27629
          Telephone: (919) 341-9707
          Facsimile: (919) 457-1256
          E-mail: ihuoma.igboanugo@thecrescentlaw.com

Defendant TD Bank NA is represented by:

          Lauren Byers Loftis, Esq.
          MCGUIREWOODS, LLP
          201 N. Tryon St., Suite 3000
          Charlotte, NC 28202
          Telephone: (704) 343-2356
          Facsimile: (704) 805-5084
          E-mail: lloftis@mcguirewoods.com

Defendant Fidelity Co-Operative Bank, doing business as Fidelity
Bank, is represented by:

          Pressly M. Millen, Esq.
          WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE & RICE, PLLC
          P. O. Box 831
          150 Fayetteville St., Suite 2100
          Raleigh, NC 27602
          Telephone: (919) 755-2135
          Facsimile: (919) 755-6067
          E-mail: pmillen@wcsr.com

Defendant Propay, Inc., is represented by:

          David Glen Guidry, Esq.
          KING & SPALDING, LLP
          100 North Tryon St., Suite 3900
          Charlotte, NC 28202
          Telephone: (704) 503-2640
          Facsimile: (704) 503-2622
          E-mail: dguidry@kslaw.com


TEMAK MEDICAL: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Eves, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Temak aka Temak Medical Billing And Practice
Management (TMPM) L.C., Case No. 2:14-cv-05545 (E.D. Pa.,
September 26, 2014) alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brent F. Vullings, Esq.
          VULLINGS LAW GROUP LLC
          3953 Ridge Pike, Suite 102
          Collegeville, PA 19426
          Telephone: (610) 489-6060
          E-mail: bvullings@vullingslaw.com


TEMPLETON RYE: Removes "McNair" Suit to Illinois District Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled McNair v. Templeton Rye Spirits,
LLC, Case No. 2014 CH 14583, was removed from the Circuit Court of
Cook County, Illinois, to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).  The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-07440 to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is brought under the Truth-in-Lending Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Amir Cheyenne Missaghi, Esq.
          Ari Jonathan Scharg, Esq.
          Jay Edelson, Esq.
          John C. Ochoa, Esq.
          Mark Stephen Eisen, Esq.
          Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          350 North LaSalle Street Suite 1300
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (312) 572-7202
          Facsimile: (312) 589-6378
          E-mail: amissaghi@edelson.com
                  ascharg@edelson.com
                  jedelson@kamberedelson.com
                  jochoa@edelson.com
                  meisen@edelson.com
                  rbalabanian@edelson.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Simon A. Fleischmann, Esq.
          David F. Standa, Esq.
          Thomas Justin Cunningham, Esq.
          LOCKE LORD LLP
          111 South Wacker Drive
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (312) 443-0462
          Facsimile: (312) 896-6471
          E-mail: sfleischmann@lockelord.com
                  dstanda@lockelord.com
                  tcunningham@lockelord.com


TESLA MOTORS: Seeks Dismissal of Securities Suit
------------------------------------------------
Marisa Kendall, writing for The Recorder, reports that attorneys
for Tesla Motors Inc. are making the electric car company's safety
record a central issue in securities litigation sparked by a
series of vehicle fires in 2013.

The securities suit, filed last year in the Northern District of
California, is based on "sensationalist media coverage" of three
battery fires and ignores the car's consistently high safety
ratings since its release in June 2012, according to a team of
Irell & Manella lawyers out of Los Angeles.

"The safety record of the Model S is exemplary," Tesla's lawyers
wrote in a motion to dismiss.  "In more than 275 million miles
driven, there has not been a single death or permanent injury
suffered by any of its occupants."

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco will hear
arguments on Sept. 19.  The plaintiffs are represented by
Pomerantz partners Matthew Tuccillo and Jeremy Lieberman of New
York, and Glancy Binkow & Goldberg partners Lionel Glancy, Michael
Goldberg and Robert Prongay of Los Angeles.

Tesla is represented by partner David Siegel and counsel Charles
Elder -- celder@irell.com -- of Irell & Manella, where the
company's deputy general counsel, Todd Maron, formerly worked as
an associate.

Plaintiffs' lawyers seek to represent a class of shareholders who
purchased Tesla stock between May 10 and Nov. 6, 2013, and
suffered losses when the shares dropped 30 percent in six weeks.
The three fires were reported over two months, with the last fire
occurring Nov. 7.

The suit alleges that Tesla executives chose to install high-
energy lithium ion batteries in the Model S, which increased the
life of the car's charge but also led to a higher risk of fire.
Executives did not try to mitigate the danger, which they could
have done by installing protective sleeves around the batteries or
stronger undercarriage shielding, according to plaintiffs'
counsel.

"Defendants understood the significant risks posed by using
higher-energy batteries, with a propensity for high-intensity
fires, placed along the bottom of the car inches above the road,"
plaintiffs wrote in response to Tesla's motion to dismiss.

Yet during the class period, executives claimed the Model S was
the "safest car in America" and said it was less likely than
gasoline-powered cars to catch fire.  According to plaintiffs, the
executives also hid prior fires, both in testing and on the road.
Tesla's lawyers say the company disclosed the risk of battery
fires by telling investors the Model S battery cells "have been
observed to catch fire or vent smoke and flame."

The team stands by Tesla's safety claims during the class period,
pointing out the Model S alerts drivers before an impending fire,
telling him or her to pull over and exit the car.  The National
Highway Traffic Safety Administration awarded the vehicle its
highest safety rating in 2013 and closed an investigation into the
Model S fires without finding any defect, defense lawyers state.

The three publicized fires were caused by extreme circumstances
and did not result in serious injuries, according to Tesla.  A
Model S burst into flame in Merida, Mexico after speeding through
a concrete barrier and crashing into a tree.  In Washington, a
Model S drove over metal road debris, which pierced the car's
undercarriage and caused a fire.  The owner, who escaped without
injury, bought another Model S.


VETERANS AFFAIRS DEP'T: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Annamma Samji, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated, 21 Holmes Street, West Orange, NJ 07052 v. United States
of America, Department of Veterans Affairs, 151 Knollcroft Road,
Lyons, NJ 07939, Case No. 3:14-cv-06019-FLW-LHG (D.N.J., Sept. 26,
2014) alleges that the Defendant intentionally failed to pay the
Plaintiff proper overtime compensation earned while in the employ
of the Defendant.

United States of America, Department of Veterans Affairs, is a
federal agency that operates numerous hospitals throughout the
United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Justin L. Swidler, Esq.
          Manali Arora, Esq.
          SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC
          1101 Kings Hwy N, Suite 402
          Cherry Hill, NJ 08034
          Telephone: (856) 685-7420
          Facsimile: (856) 685-7417
          E-mail: jswidler@swartz-legal.com
                  marora@swartz-legal.com


VICTORY TRANSPORTATION: Sued for Not Paying Minimum and OT Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lawanda Barnes, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated
v. Victory Transportation, Inc., Akiti Kingsley and Christian
Akponwei, Individually, Case No. 3:14-cv-00762-DPJ-FKB (S.D.
Miss., September 26, 2014) is brought under the Fair Labor
Standards Act for unpaid overtime and minimum wage compensation.

Based in Terry, Mississippi, Victory Transportation, Inc., is a
transportation company that provides various services, including
non-emergency passenger transportation, shuttle service, and
package delivery.  The Individual Defendants own and operate the
Company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher William Espy, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
          One Jackson Place, Suite 777
          188 East Capitol Street
          Jackson, MS 39201
          Telephone: (601) 718-2087
          Facsimile: (601) 718-2102
          E-mail: cespy@forthepeople.com


WACOAL AMERICA: To Refund Customers After False Advertising Claim
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Diane Bartz, writing for Reuters, reports that bras, girdles and
leggings infused with caffeine and sold as weight loss aids were
more decaf than espresso, and the companies that sold them have
agreed to refund money to customers and pull their ads, U.S.
regulators said on Sept. 29.

The Federal Trade Commission said Wacoal America and Norm Thompson
Outfitters, which owns Sahalie and others, were accused of
deceptive advertising that claimed their caffeine-impregnated
clothing would cause the wearer to lose weight and have less
cellulite.

"If someone says you can lose weight by wearing the clothes they
are selling, steer clear.  The best approach is tried and true:
diet and exercise," said Jessica Rich, director of the FTC's
Bureau of Consumer Protection.

In the case of Oregon-based Norm Thompson, the company sold
clothing made with Lytess brand fabric infused with caffeine
which, the company said, would break down fat.

"Slimming and firming results are visible in under a month," the
company said in one advertisement the commission quoted in its
complaint.

Wacoal America, based in New Jersey, also advertised that its
clothing had microcapsules with caffeine, vitamin E and other
chemicals that it said led to weight loss.  In one ad, it cited
the "revolutionary iPant new shapewear that works with your body
to eliminate cellulite," the FTC said.

In both cases, the companies did not have evidence to back up
their claims that the clothing would lead to substantial weight
loss, the FTC said in the complaints.

Neither company immediately responded to attempts to reach them
for comment.  Refunds will be about $1.5 million, the FTC said.


WALGREEN CO: Class Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
James Skipper, Fritz Barionette, Jake Iskandarani, Richard Penella
and Besa Hoxhalli v. Walgreen Co., d/b/a Walgreens, Case No. 8:14-
cv-02417-CEH-AEP (M.D. Fla., September 24, 2014) seeks to recover
unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, and
costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Walgreen Co., d/b/a Walgreens, is a foreign corporation,
incorporated in Illinois, and is duly authorized to conduct
business in the state of Florida.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Mark Aloysius Cullen, Esq.
          THE CULLEN LAW FIRM, PA
          500 S Australian Ave., Suite 543
          West Palm Beach, FL 33401
          Telephone: (561) 640-9191
          Facsimile: (561) 241-4021
          E-mail: mailbox@cullenlawfirm.net


WHOLE FOODS: Recalls "Plain Streusel Coffeecake"
------------------------------------------------
Whole Foods Market is recalling "Plain Streusel Coffeecake"
produced and sold in the Bedford, Massachusetts location due to an
undeclared tree nut allergen.  The product has a "Sell By" date
between Sept. 19 and Sept. 30, 2014.

The coffee cake contained pecans as an ingredient.  People who
have an allergy or severe sensitivity to tree nuts run the risk of
serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume
these products.

The coffee cake was sold in the store between Friday, Sept. 19 and
Thursday, Sept. 25, 2014.

Signage is posted to notify customers of this recall, and all
affected product has been removed from shelves.

No allergic reactions or illnesses have been reported.

Consumers who have purchased this product from Whole Foods Market
Bedford may bring their receipt to the store for a full refund.
Consumers with questions should contact their local store or call
617-492-5500 between the hours of 9am and 5pm EST.


WINDHAM PROFESSIONALS: "Humphreys" Class Suit Moved to W.D. Pa.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Humphreys v. Windham
Professionals, Inc. Case No. 4:14-cv-01455, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania to
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania
(Pittsburgh).  The Western District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:14-cv-01310-TFM to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Cynthia Levin, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD FRIEDMAN, PC
          1150 First Avenue
          King of Prussia, PA 19406
          Telephone: (888) 595-9111
          Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
          E-mail: czlevin@comcast.net

The Defendant is represented by:

          Lauren M. Burnette, Esq.
          MARSHALL, DENNEHEY, WARNER, COLEMAN & GOGGIN
          100 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 201
          Camp Hill, PA 17011
          Telephone: (717) 651-3703
          Facsimile: (717) 651-3707
          E-mail: lmburnette@mdwcg.com


WINNCOMPANIES INC: Removes "Perez" Class Suit to E.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Perez v. Winncompanies, Inc., et
al., Case No. S-1500-CV-282610 LHB, was removed from the Kern
County Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of California (Fresno).  The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-01497-LJO-JLT to the proceeding.

The lawsuit asserts employment discrimination claims.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Arby Aiwazian, Esq.
          THE AIWAZIAN LAW FIRM
          410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (818) 265-1020
          Facsimile: (818) 265-1021
          E-mail: arby@aiwazian.com

               - and -

          Edwin Aiwazian, Esq.
          LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE, PC
          410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (818) 265-1020
          Facsimile: (818) 265-1021
          E-mail: edwin@lfjpc.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Derrick K. Lam, Esq.
          Connie L. Michaels, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
          2049 Century Park East, Suite 500
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 553-0308
          Facsimile: (310) 553-5583
          E-mail: dlam@littler.com
                  cmichaels@littler.com

               - and -

          Elizabeth Staggs-Wilson, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
          633 West 5th Street, 63rd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 443-4300
          Facsimile: (213) 443-4299
          E-mail: estaggs-wilson@littler.com


ZIGGY'S AUTO: Accused by Car Maintenance Worker of Violating FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Andres Pujols v. Ziggy's Auto Body, Inc., and Rozalski Zbitgniew,
individually, Case No. 2:14-cv-06029-JLL-JAD (D.N.J.,
September 26, 2014) is brought as a collective action on behalf of
similarly situated non-exempt car maintenance workers, who
suffered damages as a result of the Defendants' alleged violations
of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Ziggy's Auto Body, Inc., is headquartered in Jersey City, Union
County, New Jersey.  Rozalski Zbitgniew is an owner, partner,
officer or manager of Ziggy's Auto Body.  The Defendants manage,
auto detailing/repairing throughout the state of New Jersey.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew I. Glenn, Esq.
          Jodi J. Jaffe, Esq.
          JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, P.A.
          Lawrence Office Park
          168 Franklin Corner Road
          Bldg. 2, Suite 220
          Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
          Telephone: (201) 687-9977
          Facsimile: (201) 595-0308
          E-mail: AGlenn@JaffeGlenn.com
                  JJaffe@JaffeGlenn.com


                              *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N  I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  Ma. Cristina
Canson, Noemi Irene A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Valerie Udtuhan,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A.
Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2014. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via
e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each. For subscription information, contact
Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-241-8200.



                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *