/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/150310.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Tuesday, March 10, 2015, Vol. 17, No. 49 Headlines ABBOTT LABORATORIES: 7th Cir. Reluctant to Revive Depakote Claims ALLERGAN INC: Restraints Availability of Botox(R), Suit Claims ALPINE AUTO: Faces "Grady" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime AMERIGAL CONSTRUCTION: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Hours ANITA'S UPHOLSTERY: Faces "Triana" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ANTHEM INC: Faces "Daniels" Suit Over Alleges Data Breach ANTHEM INC: Faces "Douglass" Suit Over Alleged Data Breach ANTHEM INC: Faces "Hyde" Suit in Ind. Over Alleged Data Breach ASSET RECOVERY: Illegally Collects Debt, "Ramos" Suit Claims ASSET RECOVERY: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, N.Y. Suit Says ATLANTIC HARBOR: "Dubois" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime BANK OF AMERICA: Illegally Manipulates FX Prices, Suit Claims BANK OF AMERICA: Illegally Manipulates LIBOR, Action Claims BANKERS CAPITAL: Has Sent Unsolicited Faxes, Action Claims BASIC RESEARCH: To Refund Customers Under Akavar Settlement BIG MACK'S: "Hopkins" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages BIOZOOM INC: Court Narrows Claims in Securities Litigation BP PLC: Court Denies $750-Mil. Oil Spill Insurance Claim BRIDGEPOINT EDUCATION: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports CAC FINANCIAL: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act CALSONIC KANSEI: Mitsuba's Bid to Dismiss Class Action Denied CHEMTEC CHEMICALS: Recalls Iron-Remover Products CHICKEN-OUT INC: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, Suit Claims CLARFIELD OKON: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act CONTROLADORA VUELA: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports CPM SERVICES: "Morales" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime CR BARD: In Talks to Settle Thousands of Pelvic Mesh Suits DANZE INC: Sued in N.D. Ill. Over Damages Caused by Faucet Design DENSO CORP: Bid to Dismiss End-Payors' Suit Denied DWM CONSULTING: Faces "Lopez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ECO WASTE & RECYCLING: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ELECTROLUX HOME: Removes "Grasso" Suit to Florida District Court FAMILY DOLLAR: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages FEDERAL EXPRESS: ADA Suit Moved From Maryland to Pennsylvania FREEDOM RAIN: Sued in Alabama for Exploiting Struggling Women GE OIL & GAS: "Ramirez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages GERALEX INC: Faces "Oquendo" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime GLASS AMERICA: "Aleman" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime HANCOCK ROOFING: "Lovin" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime HARUTH INC: "Cohen" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages HMSHOST CORP: Sued for Misclassifying Assistant Unit Managers ICHIKOH INDUSTRIES: Dismissed From Auto Parts Antitrust Suit JANSSEN PHARMA: Jury Awards $2.5MM Verdict in Risperdal Suit JC LEWIS: Accused of Failing to Pay Proper Overtime Compensation JOE WHEELER: Removes "Bates" Suit to Northern District of Alabama JOHN SHORB: Faces "Hernandez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime KIMMEN PLAZA: Facility Inaccessible to PWDs, "Kennedy" Suit Says LA HACIENDA CAFE: Violates Fair Labor Standards Act, Suit Claims LANDRY'S INC: Faces "Saechao" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime LEGGETT & PLATT: Direct Purchaser Settlements Get Final Approval LENOVO GROUP: Faces "Pick" Suit Over Pre-Installed Spyware LENOVO GROUP: Faces "Hunter" Suit Over Pre-Installed Spyware MEGA CARE: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Kharibouch" Suit Says MY BELLY'S: Faces "Castaneda" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime NAT'L BUREAU COLLECTION: Faces "Esppsito" Suit in S.D.N.Y. NATIONAL FOOTBALL: White Gets OK to File Documents Under Seal NAVISTAR: Recalls CE School Bus 2015 Models Due to Safety Hazard NEIGHBORHOOD RESTAURANT: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages NETFLIX INC: Walmart's Gift Card Settlement Okay, 9th Cir. Says NEW YORK ASSOCIATES: Has Sent Unsolicited Faxes, Suit Claims NEW YORK CITY, NY: Overhauls Solitary Policy in Rikers Island NEW YORK FRESH: Faces "Cabrera" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime NORDSTROM INC: Cal. Supreme Court Asked to Rule on Day Off Issue OLYMPUS CORP: Sued Over Medical Scope-Linked Superbug Outbreak QUANTUM3 GROUP: Removes "Ford" Suit to Georgia District Court ROBERT HALF: Removes "Washington" Class Suit to N.D. California ROCHE LABORATORIES: Judge Bars Expert Testimony in Accutane Suit SCORPION DRILLING: "Garcia" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime SCOTT TECHNOLOGIES: Ex-Firefighter Settles Equipment Failure Suit SEAFOOD ON THE TABLE: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages SHINY STAR: Recalls Jack 'N Jill Chicharron Products SIDEWINDER DRILLING: Illegally Terminates Employees, Suit Claims SIMON ROOFING: Faces "Warren" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime SOUTH FLORIDA ELECTRIC: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages SPACELABS HEALTHCARE: Recalls Bedside and QUBE Compact Monitors SUNVIEW VINEYARDS: June 11 Fairness Hearing on $4.5MM Settlement TAKATA CORP: "Corticeiro" Suit Included in Airbag Products MDL TAKATA CORP: "Martin" Suit Consolidated in Airbag Products MDL TAKATA CORP: Air-Bag Litigation Hearing Begins in Miami TAKATA CORP: Judge to Appoint Lead Counsel to Oversee Airbag Suit TARGET BRANDS: Faces "Chamberlin" Suit Over Product Misbranding TD BANK: Ordered to Pay $67 Million to Investor Group TIMEKEEPERS INC: Faces "Limon" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime TRINITY INDUSTRIES: Faces Class Suit Alleging Product Liability UNC-CHAPEL HILL: Hires Skadden to Defend Academic Fraud Suits US WELL: Faces "Lackie Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages WATCH-U-WANT INC: Has Sent Unsolicited Text Messages, Suit Claims WOODLAWN ENTERPRISE: Faces "Lopez" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT XENEX LABORATORIES: Recalls API - Meloxicam Products XENEX LABORATORIES: Recalls API - Azelaic Acid Products XENEX LABORATORIES: Recalls API - DMSO Products XPRESS FINANCIAL: Has Sent Unsolicited Faxes, Suit Claims YACHTING PROMOTIONS: Faces "Garcia" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT YESO CONSTRUCTION: Faces "Cedillo" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ********* ABBOTT LABORATORIES: 7th Cir. Reluctant to Revive Depakote Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- Jack Bouboushian at Courthouse News Service reports that the 7th Circuit seemed reluctant February 20 to revive claims by health benefit plans that reimbursed members for Depakote, an anti- seizure drug that Abbott Laboratories has admitted to marketing improperly. Abbott Laboratories has already faced four False Claims Act suits over Depakote, settling them in 2012 for $1.6 billion, and the drugmaker had admitted to previous improper marketing of Depakote for off-label purposes. In this phase of the billion-dollar litigation, the plaintiffs are multi-employer health benefit plans and service funds. They sought in 2013 to represent a class of third-party payers who, on behalf of their members, reimbursed or paid for Depakote that Abbott allegedly marketed for the treatment of dementia without approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. A federal judge allowed a later shareholder suit, but U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis threw out the RICO claims by the benefit plans in this case for missing the statute of limitations. "The funds allege they began paying for these prescriptions in 1998, and it was at that point that the funds could or should have discovered they were paying for off-label uses," she wrote. "A reasonable plaintiff would have. The funds' broad statement that Abbott concealed its involvement in the marketing of Depakote is not enough to excuse their lack of diligence." Still able to refile their dismissed state-law claims, the plaintiffs took the RICO issue to the 7th Circuit. Their attorney, James Sabella, insisted that normal diligence would not have made a difference. "The court dismissed the case not on the facts, but on its speculation as to when a reasonable plan would have brought suit," he told the three-judge panel. Judge Kenneth Ripple cut in: "But do we have any idea when the payers became aware?" "Not at all," Sabella replied. "We need more fact-finding. They didn't know the prescriptions were off-label." Judge John Tinder failed to throw the attorney off by noting that "a plan doesn't just pay any prescription." "Actually that's a factual issue," Sabella said. "Plans generally pay if a doctor prescribes it. Every plan pays for thousands of prescriptions, and doctors often write prescriptions off-label." Tinder pointed out that Abbott was being investigated as early as 2005, but Sabella insisted that this was not enough. "I don't think that just paying a prescription amounts to discovery of the issue," he said. "The defense talks about qui tam suits being unsealed in 2011," the attorney added. "That's hardly the kind of thing insurers can discover, just a couple suits." Citing 11th Circuit precedent, Sabella concluded: "The insurers had to pay if the drug was prescribed, whether for approved or off-label use." Defense attorney William Cavanaugh disagreed. "A diligent third- party payer would've discovered this before 2009," he said. "The first injury took place in 1998." Tinder took up Sabella's logic: "But off-label uses are not unusual." "But 11 years went by," Cavanaugh said. "Articles were published. This is a sophisticated entity in the business of investigating insurance claims, with a fiduciary duty." Ripple noted "that may be true, but I don't know because I don't have facts in front of me." This echoed the call by plaintiffs for more discovery before deciding the claim. Tinder seemed skeptical. "I don't see how the fiduciary duty helps you," the judge said. "It runs to the beneficiaries." "No," the attorney replied. "They made a strategic decision to focus on equitable estoppel of the statute of limitations, not these other arguments. There are no allegations of any investigations." Tinder replied: "But this is the complaint, in which they don't have a duty to plead around the statute of limitations." Cavanaugh took up the argument. "You can plead yourself out of a case, and they admitted that their injury goes back to 1998," the judge said. February 20 was Tinder's last regular sitting day before he assumes senior status and retires. In a brief speech to begin the day, Judge Michael Kanne said: "Indiana's produced some outstanding judges, but Judge Tinder is near if not at the top of that list." Both he and Ripple are from Indiana as well. The Sidney Hillman Health Center of Rochester, a local Teamsters chapter and a fund run by the United Food and Commercial Workers Unions are the named plaintiffs in the class action at issue. ALLERGAN INC: Restraints Availability of Botox(R), Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Adel Tawfilis, DDS d/b/a Carmel Valley Center For Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Allergan, Inc., Case No. 8:15-cv-00307 (C.D. Cal., February 24, 2015), arises out of the unlawful agreement between the Defendant and Medytox, Inc. to restraint trade and monopolize sale of Botox(R) in the U.S. market. Allergan, Inc. is a Delaware based multinational pharmaceutical company focusing on ophthalmic pharmaceuticals, dermatology, neuroscience, urology, and cosmetics. The Plaintiff is represented by: Roy A. Katriel, Esq. THE KATRIEL LAW FIRM 4225 Executive Square, Suite 600 La Jolla, CA 92037 Telephone: (858) 242-5642 Facsimile: (858) 430-3719 E-mail: rak@katriellaw.com - and - Ralph B. Kalfayan, Esq. Lynne M. Brennan, Esq. KRAUSE, KALFAYAN, BENINK & SLAVENS, LLP 550 West C Street, Suite 530 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 232-0331 Facsimile: (619-232-4019 E-mail: ralph@kkbs-law.com lbrennan@kkbs-law.com ALPINE AUTO: Faces "Grady" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------ Gary Grady, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated persons v. Alpine Auto Recovery LLC, a Colorado limited liability company, and Don Heald, Jr., Case No. 1:15-cv-00377 (D. Colo., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a tow truck company with its principal place of business located at 6150 East 49th Avenue, Commerce City, Colorado 80022. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian David Gonzales, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN D. GONZALES 123 North College Avenue, #200 Fort Collins, CO 80524 Telephone: (970) 212-4665 Facsimile: (303) 539-9812 E-mail: bgonzales@coloradotriallaw.com AMERIGAL CONSTRUCTION: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Hours -------------------------------------------------------------- Nemecio Llamas Lopez and Ramiro Bravo, each on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Amerigal Construction Co., Inc. and Luis A. Ezequiel, Case No. 8:15-cv-00520 (D. Md., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for work in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The Defendants own and operate a construction company located in Rockville (Montgomery County), Maryland. The Plaintiff is represented by: Alvaro Augusto Llosa, Esq. Roberto N. Allen, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF ROBERTO ALLEN LLC 11002 Veirs Mill Rd, Ste 700 Wheaton, MD 20902 Telephone: (301) 861-0202 Facsimile: (410) 864-8895 E-mail: allosa@robertoallenlaw.com rallen@robertoallenlaw.com ANITA'S UPHOLSTERY: Faces "Triana" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Tony Triana, individually and on behalf of other employees similarly situated v. Anita's Upholstery, Inc. and Carlos Alvarez, Case No. 1:15-cv-01612 (N.D. Ill., February 22, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. The Defendants own and operate a Reupholster and Furniture Repair shop in Chicago, Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: David Erik Stevens, Esq. CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC 6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200 Chicago, IL 60646 Telephone: (312) 307-0766 E-mail: Dave@StevensLawLLC.com ANTHEM INC: Faces "Daniels" Suit Over Alleges Data Breach --------------------------------------------------------- Lisa Diane Daniels, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Anthem, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-10530 (D. Mass., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to provide adequate security and protection for its computer systems containing patient's personally identifiable information and personal health information. Anthem Inc. is an Indiana corporation that owns and operates a managed health care company. The Plaintiff is represented by: Lisa Lee, Esq. JANET, JENNER & SUGGS, LLC 31 St. James Avenue, Suite 365 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 933-1265 Facsimile: (410) 653-9030 E-mail: llee@MyAdvocates.com - and - Robert K. Jenner, Esq. Justin A. Browne, Esq. JANET, JENNER & SUGGS, LLC Commerce Centre East 1777 Reisterstown Road, Suite 165 Baltimore, MD 21208 Telephone: (410) 653-3200 Facsimile: (410) 653-9030 E-mail: rjenner@MyAdvocates.com jbrowne@MyAdvocates.com ANTHEM INC: Faces "Douglass" Suit Over Alleged Data Breach ---------------------------------------------------------- Nanette Douglass, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Anthem, Inc. d/b/a Anthem Health, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00307 (S.D. Ind., February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to provide adequate security and protection for its computer systems containing patient's personally identifiable information and personal health information. Anthem Inc. is an Indiana corporation that owns and operates a managed health care company. The Plaintiff is represented by: Irwin B. Levin, Esq. Lynn A. Toops, Esq. Richard E. Shevitz, Esq. Scott D. Gilchrist, Esq. Vess Allen Miller, Esq. COHEN & MALAD LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 636-6481 Facsimile: (317) 636-2593 E-mail: ilevin@cohenandmalad.com ltoops@cohenandmalad.com rshevitz@cohenandmalad.com sgilchrist@cohenandmalad.com vmiller@cohenandmalad.com - and - Andrew N. Freidman, Esq. Douglas J. McNamara, Esq. Sally M. Handmaker, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 1100 New York Ave., NW East Tower, 5th Floor Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 408-4600 Facsimile: (202) 408-4699 E-mail: afriedman@cohenmilstein.com dmenamara@cohenmilstein.com shadmaker@cohenmilstein.com ANTHEM INC: Faces "Hyde" Suit in Ind. Over Alleged Data Breach -------------------------------------------------------------- Kimberly T. Hyde, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Anthem Inc., d/b/a Anthem Health, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00319 (S.D. Ind., February 24, 2015), s brought against the Defendant for failure to provide adequate security and protection for its computer systems containing patient's personally identifiable information and personal health information. Anthem Inc. is an Indiana corporation that owns and operates a managed health care company. The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott L. Starr, Esq. Mark S. Fryman Jr., Esq. Andrew B. Miller, Esq. STARR AUSTEN & MILLER LLP 201 South Third Street Logansport, IN 46947 Telephone: (574) 722-6676 E-mail: starr@starrausten.com miller@starrausten.com fryman@starrausten.com - and - Samuel H. Rudman, Esq. Mark S. Reich, Esq. William J. Geddish, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 Melville, NY 11747 Telephone: (631) 367-7100 Facsimile: (631) 367-1173 E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com mreich@rgrdlaw.com wgeddish@rgrdlaw.com - and - Stuart A. Davidson, Esq. Mark J. Dearman, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500 Boca Raton, FL 33432 Telephone: (561) 750-3000 Facsimile: (561) 750-3364 E-mail: sdavidson@rgrdlaw.com mdearman@rgrdlaw.com - and - Michael I. Fistel Jr., Esq. JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP 40 Powder Springs Street Marietta, GA 30064 Telephone: (770) 200-3104 Facsimile: (770) 200-3101 E-mail: michaelf@johnsonandweaver.com ASSET RECOVERY: Illegally Collects Debt, "Ramos" Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------ Henry Ramos, on behalf himself and all others similarly situated v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00958 (E.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendants' abusive and unfair practice of collecting alleged debt. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC is a debt collection firm that maintains its principal business address at 2200 E. Devon Ave., Ste. 200, Des Plaines, Illinois 60018. The Plaintiff is represented by: Abraham Kleinman, Esq. KLEINMAN LLC 626 RXR Plaza Uniondale, NY 11556-0626 Telephone: (516) 522-2621 Facsimile: (888) 522-1692 E-mail: akleinman@kleinmanllc.com ASSET RECOVERY: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, N.Y. Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- Henry Ramos, an individual; on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC, an Illinois Limited Liability Company; Steven Fishbein, individually and in his official capacity; Tony Eshaya, individually and in his official capacity; Kirsten Bernheim, individually and in her official capacity; Bureaus Investment Group Portfolio No. 15, LLC, an Illinois Limited Liability Company; and John and Jane Does Numbers 1 through 25, Case No. 2:15-cv-00958-JS-AKT (E.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015) alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Plaintiff is represented by: Abraham Kleinman, Esq. KLEINMAN, LLC 626 RXR Plaza Uniondale, NY 11556-0626 Telephone: (516) 522-2621 Facsimile: (888) 522-1692 E-mail: akleinman@kleinmanllc.com ATLANTIC HARBOR: "Dubois" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Norman David Dubois, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Atlantic Harbor Seawalls, Inc., and James Gorman, Case No. 0:15-cv-60363 (S.D. Fla., February 21, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Atlantic Harbor Seawalls, Inc. is a Florida corporation based at 560 NE 42nd Court, Oakland Park, Florida 33334. It is engaged in the business of marine construction and seawall building and repairs throughout South Florida. The Plaintiff is represented by: Keith Michael Stern, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF KEITH M. STERN, P.A. 20937 Pacifico Terrace Boca Raton, FL 33433 Telephone: (888) 505-9941 Facsimile: (561) 807-0020 E-mail: employlaw@keithstern.com BANK OF AMERICA: Illegally Manipulates FX Prices, Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------- Neil Taylor, Steve Leaven and John Burnside, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Bank of America Corporation, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-01350 (S.D.N.Y., February 23, 2015), alleges that the Defendants illegally manipulate foreign exchange (FX) prices. Bank of America Corporation is a multinational banking and financial services corporation with headquarter located at 100 North Tryon Street, Charlotte, North Carolina 28255. The Plaintiff is represented by: David E. Kovel,Esq. Lauren Wagner Pederson, Esq. Thomas W. Elrod, Esq. KIRBY McINERNEY LLP 825 Third Avenue, 16th Floor New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 371-6600 Facsimile: (212)751-2540 E-mail: dkovel@kmllp.com lpederson@kmllp.com telrod@kmllp.com - and - Anthony F. Fata, Esq. Jennifer W. Sprengel, Esq. CAFFERTY CLOBES MERIWETHER AND SPRENGEL LLP 30 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 3200 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312)782-4880 Facsimile: (312)782-4485 E-mail: afata@caffertyclobes.com jsprengel@caffertyclobes.com - and - Bryan L. Clobes, Esq. CAFFERTY CLOBES MERIWETHER AND SPRENGEL LLP 1101 Market Street, Suite 2650 Philadelphia, PA 19107 Telephone: (215)864-2800 Facsimile: (215)864-2810 E-mail: bclobes@caffertyclobes.com - and - Karen L. Morris, Esq. Patrick F. Morris, Esq. R. Michael Lindsey, Esq. MORRIS AND MORRIS LLC 4001 Kennett Pike, Suite 300 Wilmington, DE 19807 Telephone: (302) 426-0400 Facsimile: (302) 426-0406 E-mail: morris@morrisandmorrislaw.com pmorris@morrisandmorrislaw.com rmlindsey@morrisandmorrislaw.com - and - George Sang, Esq. 1060 Edgebrook Lane Glencoe, IL 60022 Telephone: (312) 648-2300 E-mail: sang32@comcast.net BANK OF AMERICA: Illegally Manipulates LIBOR, Action Claims ----------------------------------------------------------- National Asbestos Workers Pension Fund, et al., and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bank Of America Corporation, et al., Case No. 7:15-cv-01336 (S.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015), alleges that the Defendants manipulate London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) in order to increase their own profits as well as to create the illusion of financial strength by under reporting the interest rates that they were being charged to borrow money. Bank of America Corporation is a Delaware financial corporation headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina. The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel H. Rudman, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 Melville, NY 11747 Telephone: (631) 367-7100 Facsimile: (631) 367-1173 E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com - and - Patrick W. Daniels, Esq. David W. Mitchell, Esq. Steven M. Jodlowski, Esq. Nathan W. Bear, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 231-1058 Facsimile: (619) 231-7423 E-mail: patrickd@rgrdlaw.com davidm@rgrdlaw.com sjodlowski@rgrdlaw.com nbear@rgrdlaw.com BANKERS CAPITAL: Has Sent Unsolicited Faxes, Action Claims ---------------------------------------------------------- Al and Po Corporation, an Illinois corporation, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bankers Capital Funding, LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-01641 (N.D. Ill., February 24, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendant's practice of sending unsolicited junk faxes in bulk to unwilling recipients with deficient opt-out notices. Bankers Capital Funding, LLC is in the business of providing various financial services to other businesses, including merchant cash advances, short term business loans, factoring, and commercial real estate funding. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ismael Tariq Salam, Esq. Joseph J. Siprut, Esq. SIPRUT PC 17 N. State Street, Suite 1600 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 236-0000 E-mail: isalam@siprut.com jsiprut@siprut.com BASIC RESEARCH: To Refund Customers Under Akavar Settlement ----------------------------------------------------------- The Associated Press reports that a Salt Lake City-based company has agreed to pay refunds to consumers who purchased its weight- loss tablets to settle a class-action lawsuit that claimed its advertising slogan, "Eat All You Want & Still Lose Weight," was deceptive. Under the proposed settlement, Basic Research will pay a refund of $25 per box after being sued by law firms on behalf of consumers who purchased the product called Akavar beginning in 2007. A Basic Research representative didn't respond to requests for comment. But the company has denied any wrongdoing and would still be able to use the slogan under the proposed agreement. Salt Lake City attorney Jon Harper, who represents consumers, told The Salt Lake Tribune that he couldn't comment other than to say the litigation was resolved "on terms satisfactory to the parties." In 2007, a proposed class-action lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in Utah against Basic Research on behalf of consumers who bought Akavar based on the company's advertising. A second similar complaint was filed in state court in California in 2008. The two lawsuits, which were eventually consolidated into one action in federal court in Utah, said the company lacked a scientific basis for the weight-loss claims and was deceiving consumers. Akavar was sold by major retailers and marketed as a wonder pill in which consumers could "Eat All You Want & Still Lose Weight . . . (And we couldn't say it in print if it wasn't true!)" The company sold 60 capsules for $39.99 and two bottles for $79.98 with a third one for free, and sales brought in millions of dollars, according to court documents. In 2006, the Federal Trade Commission fined Basic Research $3 million and reached a settlement requiring the company to have a scientific basis for the claims of its products. The FTC and Basic Research sued each other in 2009 in federal court in Utah over whether the company was violating the 2006 deal. But last year, U.S. District Judge Clark Waddoups sided with Basic Research, noting two of four case studies done in 2001 suggested the herbal compounds in Akavar helped users to lose weight. His decision is cited in the proposed settlement of the class-action lawsuit, The Tribune reported. BIG MACK'S: "Hopkins" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages ----------------------------------------------------------------- Misty Hopkins, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Big Mack's Lounge, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-20761 (S.D. Fla., February 24, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. Big Mack's Lounge, Inc. owns and operates an adult entertainment club located at 1792 NW 79 St., Miami, FL 33147. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael N. Hanna, Esq. MORGAN AND MORGAN 600 N. Pine Island Road, Suite 400 Plantation, FL 33324 Telephone: (954) 318-0268 Facsimile: (954) 333-3515 E-mail: Mhanna@forthepeople.com BIOZOOM INC: Court Narrows Claims in Securities Litigation ---------------------------------------------------------- IN RE BIOZOOM, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION, CASE NO. 1:14-CV-01087, (N.D. Ohio) is a putative securities class action, wherein Plaintiffs generally seek rescission or damages after the value of Biozoom securities that Plaintiffs had purchased collapsed. Plaintiffs purchased the stock in over-the-counter markets from market makers. Plaintiffs contend the Biozoom securities were unregistered and argue that the Defendant market makers are strictly liable for selling the unregistered stock. Plaintiffs make claims under Section 12(a)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933 and under a variety of state-law theories. Defendants have sought the dismissal of both the federal claims and the state claims. District Judge James S. Gwin granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss. "In sum, the Court grants Defendants' motion to dismiss Count 1 on statute of limitations grounds as to all Defendants except KCG Americas LLC, grants Defendants' motion to dismiss all of Plaintiffs' state law claims except the breach of contract claims due to implied preemption, and grants Defendants' motion to dismiss Plaintiffs' breach of contract claims because Plaintiffs have not plausibly pled an agreement to deliver registered securities and have not plausibly pled contract damages. Defendants' motion to dismiss Count 1 as to KCG is denied," wrote Judge Gwin in his opinion and order dated February 26, 2015, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/I4SWytfrom Leagle.com. BP PLC: Court Denies $750-Mil. Oil Spill Insurance Claim -------------------------------------------------------- John Council, writing for Texas Lawyer, reports that BP will not be allowed to pass off massive costs associated with the 2010 Deepwater Horizon explosion onto insurance companies that wrote $750 million worth of policies for another company that owned the drilling rig, according to a recent decision by the Texas Supreme Court. The high court's 8-1 decision in In Re Deepwater Horizon resolves one of the most expensive disputes on its docket and represents a huge defeat for the giant oil company. The background to the insurance coverage dispute is as follows, according to the majority decision. BP made a demand for insurance coverage for the environment disaster that claimed the lives of 11 workers and polluted the Gulf of Mexico with millions of barrels of oil. But the insurance companies that wrote liability policies for Transocean -- the company BP contracted with to use its mobile offshore drilling platform -- refused to cover BP. Instead, the insurance companies filed a declaratory judgment action in federal court seeking a ruling that BP would not be entitled to additional-insured coverage for subsurface pollution claims arising from the Deepwater Horizon explosion. The federal trial court denied BP coverage, but on appeal the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed that decision. On rehearing, the Fifth Circuit withdrew its opinion and instead sent it to the Texas Supreme Court via certified question to be resolved under the state's complicated insurance coverage case law. In resolving the case in the insurance companies' favor, a majority of the court found that a provision in the drilling contract between BP and Transocean indicated that the oil company was responsible for liability resulting from subsurface pollution. We "conclude that BP is an additional insured only as to liabilities assumed by Transocean under the drilling contract and no others. Because Transocean did not assume liability for subsurface pollution, Transocean was not 'obliged' to name BP as an additional insured as to that risk," wrote Justice Eva Guzman in the Feb. 13 majority opinion. "Because there is no obligation to provide insurance for that risk, BP lacks status as an 'insured' for the same." Justice Phil Johnson dissented, writing that insurance "coverage is not limited to liabilities Transocean assumed in the drilling contract." The ruling is a big win in a case that's been closely watched by the insurance industry, said Byron Keeling, a partner in Houston's Keeling & Downes who represents one of Transocean's insurers. "For the biggest disaster to ever hit the Gulf of Mexico, the most important result is that BP, which is self-insured, is not going to be able to rely on Transocean's insurance policy to cover its own sins," Mr. Keeling said. Geoff Morrell, BP's senior vice president for U.S. communications and external affairs, said of the decision, "We are disappointed and are considering our options." BRIDGEPOINT EDUCATION: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports ------------------------------------------------------------- Nelda Zamir, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bridgepoint Education, Inc., Andrew S. Clark, and Daniel J. Devine, Case No. 3:15-cv-00408 (S.D. Cal., February 24, 2015), alleges that the Defendants made false and misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Bridgepoint Education, Inc. is a for-profit provider of postsecondary education services. Its academic institutions include Ashford University and University of the Rockies, as well as online institutions. The Plaintiff is represented by: Casey Edwards Sadler, Esq. GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 201-9150 Facsimile: (310) 201-9160 E-mail: csadler@glancylaw.com CAC FINANCIAL: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act ------------------------------------------------------------ Chaim Bornstein, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CAC Financial Corp., Case No. 1:15-cv-00957- MKB-RER (E.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015) accuses the Defendant of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Plaintiff is represented by: David Palace, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF DAVID PALACE 383 Kingston Avenue, #113 Brooklyn, NY 11213 Telephone: (347) 651-1077 Facsimile: (347) 464-0012 E-mail: davidpalace@gmail.com CALSONIC KANSEI: Mitsuba's Bid to Dismiss Class Action Denied ------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Marianne O. Battani denied defendants Mitsuba Corporation and American Mitsuba Corporation's motion to dismiss the dealership plaintiffs' consolidated amended class action complaint and end-payor plaintiffs' consolidated amended class action complaint in IN RE: AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION. In Re: Radiators, NO. 12-MD-02311, (E.D. Mich.) Judge Battani concluded that even if Mitsuba Defendants manufactured and sold only radiator fans, one of the products identified as making up a Radiator, they are not saved by the limited product involvement. Mitsuba Defendants pleaded guilty to price-fixing radiator fans as well as other component parts in the MDL litigation involving different markets. A plea is not needed to establish the viability of the complaints. Moreover, Mitsuba Corporation's guilty plea does not dictate the parameters of the antitrust claims alleged by Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (IPPs). IPPs use the term "Radiators" to encompass radiator fans. These allegations are sufficient to state a claim. For these reasons, Mitsuba Defendants' motion is denied, she said. The Court's February 26, 2015 opinion and order, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/yKkyi5from Leagle.com, relates to Dealership Actions 13-01003, End-Payor Actions 13-01002. CHEMTEC CHEMICALS: Recalls Iron-Remover Products ------------------------------------------------ Starting date: February 13, 2015 Posting date: February 13, 2015 Type of communication: Consumer Product Recall Subcategory: Chemicals Source of recall: Health Canada Issue: Labelling and Packaging Audience: General Public Identification number: RA-43691 This recall involves Iron-Remover cleaning product sold in a white 454g container, UPC 06300900004. Health Canada's auditing process has revealed that the product does not meet labelling and child-resistant packaging requirements for consumer chemical products under Canadian law. The consumer product does not have proper hazard labelling and child-resistant packaging required by the Consumer Chemicals and Containers Regulations, 2001 under the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act. The lack of child-resistant packaging and improper labelling could result in unintentional exposure to these products and lead to serious illness, injury, or death. Neither Health Canada nor Chemtec Chemicals has received any reports of consumer incidents or injuries related to the use of this product. Approximately 2,964 units of the affected product were sold at retail locations in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba. The recalled product was sold between January 2011 and December 2014. Manufactured in Canada. Manufacturer: Chemtec Chemicals Regina, Saskatchewan CANADA Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled product and dispose of it according to Municipal Hazardous Waste Guidelines. For additional information, consumers may contact Chemtec Chemicals at 1-306-543-1788 or email or via Chemtec Chemicals website. Please note that the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act prohibits recalled products from being redistributed, sold or even given away in Canada. Health Canada would like to remind Canadians to report any health or safety incidents related to the use of this product or any other consumer product or cosmetic by filling out the Consumer Product Incident Report Form. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: http://is.gd/Wx8gM9 CHICKEN-OUT INC: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------- Maria Serrano, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Chicken-Out Inc., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00276 (D.D.C., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. Chicken-Out Inc. owns and operates restaurants located in the District of Columbia, Maryland, and Virginia. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jamie L. Crook, Esq. RELMAN, DANE & COLFAX PLLC 1225 19th Street, NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 728-1888 E-mail: jcrook@relmanlaw.com CLARFIELD OKON: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act ------------------------------------------------------------- Therese Sheldon and Carlos Faris, individuals, on behalf themselves and others similarly situated v. Clarfield, Okon, Salomone & Pincus, P.L., a Florida professional limited liability company, Case No. 0:15-cv-60379-WJZ (S.D. Fla., February 24, 2015) accuses the Defendant of violating the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jennifer Thompson Harley, Esq. LEGAL AID SERVICE OF BROWARD COUNTY, INC. 491 N. State Road 7 Plantation, FL 33317 Telephone: (954) 736-2488 Facsimile: (954) 736-2484 E-mail: jharley@legalaid.org - and - Patrick Christopher Crotty, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF SCOTT D. OWENS 3800 S. Ocean Drive, Suite 235 Hollywood, FL 33019 Telephone: (954) 589-0588 Facsimile: (954) 337-0666 E-mail: pccrotty@gmail.com - and - Scott David Owens, Esq. SCOTT D. OWENS, P.A. 3800 S. Ocean Drive, Suite 235 Hollywood, FL 33019 Telephone: (954) 589-0588 Facsimile: (954) 337-0666 E-mail: scott@scottdowens.com CONTROLADORA VUELA: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports ---------------------------------------------------------- Dekalb County Employees Retirement System, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Controladora Vuela Compania De Aviacion, S.A.B. de C.V., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv- 01337 (S.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015), alleges that the Defendants made false and misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Controladora Vuela Compania De Aviacion, S.A.B. de C.V. is a Mexican corporation that provides air transportation services for passengers, cargo, and mail in Mexico and internationally. The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel Howard Rudman, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 58 South Service Road, Suite 200 Melville, NY 11747 Telephone: (631) 367-7100 Facsimile: (631) 367-1173 E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com CPM SERVICES: "Morales" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------- Omar Morales, Endy Aguila, Alexer Guerra and other similarly- situated individuals v. CPM Services, Inc. and Carlos Mule, Case No. 1:15-cv-20771 (S.D. Fla., February 24, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a full service construction management and general contracting firm in Miami-Dade County, 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 CR BARD: In Talks to Settle Thousands of Pelvic Mesh Suits ---------------------------------------------------------- Amanda Bronstad, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that medical device manufacturer C.R. Bard Inc. is in talks to settle thousands of lawsuits filed by women over its pelvic mesh products. U.S. District Judge Joseph Goodwin on Feb. 12 appointed Ellen Reisman, a partner in the Los Angeles office of Washington's Arnold & Porter, "to facilitate settlement discussions" between plaintiffs attorneys and Bard, which faces more than 14,000 lawsuits in state and federal courts nationwide. Lawyers have met during the past few weeks with Ms. Reisman, said Joseph Rice, co-founder of Motley Rice in Mt. Pleasant, S.C., who is spearheading the talks with Henry Garrard of Athens, Ga.'s Blasingame Burch Garrard Ashley, co-lead counsel in the Bard litigation. "She is working as a special master -- a go-between person who will be able to talk more freely, but under court protection, with both defendant and plaintiffs and help put together a resolution if possible with Bard," Mr. Rice said. Ms. Reisman was national settlement counsel for Endo International PLC, which set aside $1.6 billion to resolve most of the 25,000 pelvic mesh cases against its American Medical Systems Inc. subsidiary in 2014. Judge Goodwin took a planned Feb. 18 bellwether trial against Bard off the table after that case settled. Details of the settlement weren't disclosed. The judge on Jan. 9 rejected Bard's attempt to halt the trial based on statements he made in court, later published in an online news article, that the company faced potentially "billions of dollars" in liability and should consider settling its cases. Representatives of Bard and the company's attorney, Michael Brown -- mkbrown@reedsmith.com -- a partner in the Los Angeles office of Reed Smith, did not respond to a request for comment. Judge Goodwin is overseeing most of the pelvic mesh litigation in the Southern District of West Virginia, where nearly 70,000 cases have been coordinated against Bard and six other defendants alleging their pelvic mesh devices have caused pain and subsequent surgeries in women. Thousands more have been filed in state courts across the country over the products, which are used to treat urinary incontinence and pelvic organ prolapse. On Feb. 5 and Feb. 6, Judge Goodwin held private conferences in all the cases that involved in-house and outside lawyers for the defendants "with full authority to make all decisions," including settlement. During those meetings, Ms. Reisman outlined the details of the Endo settlements, Mr. Rice said. Afterward, Goodwin met with just the defendants, and "there was a much more in-depth discussion concerning the issues of resolution," Mr. Rice said. Soon afterward, Bard asked to meet with Ms. Reisman, he said. Goodwin has put pressure on all the mesh defendants to settle. Bard, based in Murray Hill, N.J., settled 500 mesh cases last year but also has taken its chances at trial. Bard lost the first pelvic mesh trial in the country in 2012. A California appellate court upheld the $5.5 million verdict last year. In 2013, Bard lost a $2 million verdict and settled two lawsuits under confidential terms. Judge Goodwin has laid out an aggressive schedule in which more than 200 cases would be sent back this summer to their original courts for trial against Bard. That plan has led to "significant additional litigation-related defense costs," Bard said in its annual report on Feb. 18. DANZE INC: Sued in N.D. Ill. Over Damages Caused by Faucet Design ----------------------------------------------------------------- Duncan Place Owners Association, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Danze, Inc., f/k/a Globe Union America Corporation, and Globe Union Industrial Corporation, Case No. 1:15-cv-01662 (N.D. Ill., February 24, 2015), arises out of the extensive damages causes by design of Danze brand faucets. The Defendants design, engineer and manufacture faucets, bath accessories, and showerheads. The Plaintiff is represented by: Katrina Carroll, Esq. Kyle A. Shamberg, Esq. LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG, LLC 211 West Wacker Drive, Suite 500 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 750-1265 E-mail: kcarroll@litedepalma.com kshamberg@litedepalma.com - and - Joseph J. DePalma, Esq. Susana Cruz Hodge, Esq. LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG, LLC Two Gateway Center, Suite 1201 Newark, NJ 07102 Telephone: (973) 623-3000 Facsimile: (973) 623-0858 E-mail: jdepalma@litedepalma.com scruzhodge@litedepalma.com - and - Anthony L. Rafel, Esq. Tyler B. Ellrodt, Esq. RAFEL LAW GROUP PLLC 600 University St. Ste. 2520 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 838-2660 Facsimile: (206) 838-2661 E-mail: arafel@rafellawgroup.com tellrodt@rafellawgroup.com DENSO CORP: Bid to Dismiss End-Payors' Suit Denied -------------------------------------------------- District Judge Marianne O. Battani issued an opinion and order on February 26, 2015, in IN RE: AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION. In Re: Motor Generators, MASTER FILE NO. 12-MD-02311, (E.D. Mich.) denying motor generators defendants' joint motion to dismiss the end-payors' consolidated amended class action complaint and the automobile dealers' consolidated amended class action complaints. The ruling, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/hmDC3cfrom Leagle.com, relates to Dealership Action 2:13-cv-01502, End-Payor Action 2:13-cv-01503. Defendants include DENSO Corporation and DENSO International America, Inc., (together DENSO Defendants), Hitachi Automotive Systems, Ltd. (HIAMS) and Hitachi Automotive Systems Americas, Inc. (HIAMS-US) (together Hitachi Defendants). At the January 28, 2015, oral argument, Hitachi Defendants represented that they had reached a settlement in this case, and have withdrawn from the motion. In addition, the parties informed the Court that they had resolved their dispute as to the standing of the End-Payor Plaintiffs and the Automobile Dealership Plaintiffs. The parties waived oral argument on the remaining issues. In their motion, DENSO Defendants argued that Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (IPPs) fail to allege a plausible conspiracy lasting fourteen years inasmuch as IPPs reference only one specific allegation of a coordinated set of bids relevant to one Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM). Judge Battani disagreed saying, "IPPs' complaints allege an overarching conspiracy to rig bids and fix the prices of Motor Generators. The complaints detail international government investigations that resulted in the guilty pleas of other defendants for their part in the price-fixing and bid-rigging of automotive component parts, including Motor Generators, as well as the market conditions that facilitated the conspiracy. Here, HIAMS pleaded guilty to an antitrust conspiracy from at least as early as January 2000. DENSO Corporation pleaded guilty to antitrust violations involving other component parts. These two Defendants are linked to a specific example of bid rigging and pricefixing. Defendants have no authority to support their argument that dismissal of a civil complaint is required when the complaint expanded beyond the conduct to which the defendants in an antitrust criminal case have pleaded guilty, and this Court has declined to dismiss complaints falling within 12-2311 on this ground. The existence of the guilty pleas demonstrate that the Motor Generators conspiracy existed, and the allegation that Defendants conspired from as early as 2000 is not implausible, particularly, when HIAMS' guilty plea is considered. The factual allegations advanced in the IPPs' complaints create "a reasonable expectation that discovery will reveal evidence of illegal agreement" beyond the extent admitted by HIAMS." DWM CONSULTING: Faces "Lopez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Byron Lopez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DWM Consulting, LLC, Case No. 6:15-cv-00425 (W.D. La., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for work in excess of 40 hours per workweek. DWM Consulting, LLC is a Texas limited liability company that is engaged in the business of employing oil field personnel to work for oil field services companies in need of alternative project staffing for solids control operations. The Plaintiff is represented by: Kenneth W. DeJean, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF KENNETH W. DEJEAN P.O. Box 4325 Lafayette, LA 70502 Telephone: (337) 235-5294 Facsimile: (337) 235-1095 E-mail: kwdejean@kwdejean.com ECO WASTE & RECYCLING: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Marcus Martel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Eco Waste & Recycling, LLC, Hershel Hayes and Monique Hayes, Case No. 4:15-cv-00501 (S.D. Tex., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for work in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The Defendants own and operate a Garbage Collection Company providing curbside door to door, backdoor, porter and recycling services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert J. Filteau, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF FILTEAU & SULLIVAN, LTD., LLP 9894 Bissonnet Street, Suite 865 Houston, TX 77036 Telephone: (713) 236-1400 Facsimile: (713) 236-1706 E-mail: rfilteau@fso-lawprac.com ELECTROLUX HOME: Removes "Grasso" Suit to Florida District Court ---------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned Grasso, et al. v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc., was removed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-20774-RNS to the proceeding. The lawsuit asserts claims for Contract Product Liability. The Plaintiffs are represented by: John Allen Yanchunis, Sr., Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP 201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 223-5505 Facsimile: (813) 223-5402 E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com The Defendant is represented by: Joshua Clark Webb, Esq. Robert Craig Mayfield, Esq. HILL, WARD & HENDERSON, P.A. Bank of America Plaza 101 E. Kennedy Blvd., Suite 3700 Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 222-3165 Facsimile: (813) 221-2900 E-mail: jwebb@hwhlaw.com cmayfield@hwhlaw.com FAMILY DOLLAR: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages ----------------------------------------------------------- Aniko Steingruber, for and in behalf of herself and other employees similarly situated v. Family Dollar Stores of Florida, Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-00199 (M.D. Fla., February 23, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standard Act. Family Dollar Stores of Florida, Inc. owns and operates a discount store in Duval County, Florida. The Plaintiff is represented by: Kelly L. DeGance, Esq. Mark G. Alexander, Esq. ALEXANDER DEGANCE BARNETT Suite 1200, 225 Water St Jacksonville, FL 32202 Telephone: (904) 345-3277 Facsimile: (904) 345-3294 E-mail: kelly.degance@adblegal.com mark.alexander@adblegal.com - and - Scott Thomas Fortune, Esq. FORTUNE LAW OFFICES 1807 Third Street North Jacksonville Beach, FL 32250 Telephone: (904) 246-2125 Facsimile: (904) 246-1551 E-mail: sfortune@fortunelegal.com FEDERAL EXPRESS: ADA Suit Moved From Maryland to Pennsylvania ------------------------------------------------------------- Max Mitchell, writing for The Legal Intelligencer, reports that a suit against FedEx claiming the company discriminates against deaf package handlers should be moved from Baltimore to Pittsburgh, a federal court has ruled. U.S. District Judge William M. Nickerson of the District of Maryland ordered the case, U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. FedEx Ground Package System, be transferred from the Maryland district court to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. The decision granted FedEx's motion to transfer venue. According to Judge Nickerson, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has alleged that FedEx violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by discriminating against or failing to accommodate deaf and partially deaf package handlers and people who applied to the position. The case was filed on behalf of 17 named people, as well as an unspecified number of "similarly aggrieved individuals." Although the EEOC had argued that its case focuses not on corporation-wide policies but on how FedEx's policies were implemented at facilities across the country, Judge Nickerson noted that testimony about the development of those policies will likely become important to the case. And since many of the FedEx employees who developed the policies likely reside in the Pittsburgh area, where FedEx Ground Package System Inc. is headquartered, the venue change was proper, Judge Nickerson said. "In these cases, what happens at the local level is certainly critical. To determine the liability of the corporation under the anti-discrimination statutes, however, the finder of fact also needs to understand how the official policy is developed, communicated and monitored," Judge Nickerson said. "While the understanding of what is happening at the different FedEx distribution centers may come from witnesses dispersed around the country, the understanding of the official policy will come from witnesses who predominantly work and live in Pittsburgh." The EEOC, according to Nickerson, has claimed the training and orientation practices at FedEx did not sufficiently accommodate for deaf or partially deaf people, and that the technology and equipment was not properly modified or adapted for use by deaf or partially deaf employees. According to Judge Nickerson, FedEx brought a 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a) motion to change the venue, arguing that Pittsburgh was "undeniably" a more convenient venue for the litigation since it is where most of the company's officers and directors reside. FedEx also argued that Pittsburgh is where most of the company's documents are housed, and further noted that some of the documents that could be important to the litigation exist only as hard copies in the Pittsburgh headquarters. The EEOC, however, contended that the case should be held in Baltimore because most of the investigation was centered in that office, Judge Nickerson said. The EEOC further argued that, while it has a field office in Pittsburgh, the office is small and has little support staff, and no one in the office worked on the FedEx investigation. Judge Nickerson said he considered access for witnesses, convenience for parties and the interest of justice as factors in determining the proper venue. The EEOC, however, focused much of its venue arguments on the convenience for the attorneys, which is not a proper consideration, Judge Nickerson said. According to Judge Nickerson, only one of the charging package handlers named in the EEOC's case worked at a Maryland facility. Nickerson further said that one of the facilities that allegedly engaged in unlawful practice was located in Pittsburgh. Regarding whether a venue transfer further facilitated the interest of justice, Judge Nickerson noted the Western District of Pennsylvania is much less congested than the Maryland district court. But ultimately, the decision hinged on the convenience of the witnesses, Judge Nickerson said. According to Judge Nickerson, FedEx argued its employees responsible for developing and implementing the training and orientation, as well as those who selected and developed the equipment and technology package handlers use, work in Pittsburgh and live in the area. FedEx further argued that, because claims in the case date back as far as 2006, some of those employees have likely retired from the company but may still live in the Pittsburgh area. The EEOC countered that, because its case centered on the "frontline" application of FedEx's policies, the key witnesses will be the aggrieved individuals and the managers and human resources officials from the company's distribution facilities. Judge Nickerson, however, was not persuaded by the EEOC's line of argument. "While that may be true, only one of FedEx's distribution facilities is located in Maryland, the rest are disbursed across the country," Judge Nickerson said. "Therefore, with the exception of those potential witnesses connected with the Hagerstown, Maryland, facility, Baltimore is no more convenient than Pittsburgh." Calls to both FedEx's attorney, Grace E. Speights -- gspeights@morganlewis.com -- of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, and EEOC counsel Debra M. Lawrence were not returned. FREEDOM RAIN: Sued in Alabama for Exploiting Struggling Women ------------------------------------------------------------- A nonprofit set up to help struggling women and their children allegedly used its "charitable facade" to exploit their difficulties and make them work for substandard wages, a class action claims, reports Tracey Dalzell Walsh at Courthouse News Service. In a lawsuit filed in the Birmingham, Ala. Federal Court, Briana Walker says that Freedom Rain Inc., which does business as The Lovelady Center, is a "tax exempt non-profit holding itself out as a charity that adopts women in need and provides housing and rehabilitative services to approximately 450 women, plus many children daily." The women who go to the Lovelady Center are often suffering from physical and substance abuse, or have served time in prison. "These women have no money and no options," the complaint says. "Despite Lovelady's charitable facade and its representations on the Internet that it is 'adopting' these women, in reality, Lovelady exploits these women by employing them at substandard wages, improperly taking credits against its minimum wage obligations equal to the value of Lovelady's 'intake fees,' 'program fees,' and other charges, while also failing to pay them overtime compensation," Walker says. She says "Lovelady's operation can be compared to a soup kitchen that solicits donations to feed the homeless but then charges the homeless, at a profit, for each bowl of soup." Walker, a former client of the nonprofit, maintains that Lovelady clients have no choice but to submit to this treatment because if they don't, they won't receive a certificate of completion from the program. "During the relevant times preceding this action, Lovelady forced Plaintiff and others similarly situated to work for no wages or on an hourly basis, depending on whether Lovelady, on its own, characterized the work as voluntary," the complaint says. "During the three year period preceding the filing of this litigation, Lovelady (1) failed to pay Plaintiff and others similarly situated the federally required minimum wage and/or overtime due under the Fair Labor Standards Act . . . (2) took improper credits towards its minimum wage and overtime obligations under the act; and (3) intentionally misclassified Clients as 1099 independent contractors." Walker says the women are initially forced to work at Lovelady's program center in the laundry, cafeteria, maintenance department, call center, nail salon, coffee shop, thrift store or daycare. Many of these stores and facilities staffed by clients are open to the public and offer a "healthy profit" to Lovelady. The complaint states that the women are regularly required to work in excess of 40 hours a week without any overtime compensation and Lovelady will take money from their pay checks towards the fees they are forced to pay. Additionally, the complaint alleges that Lovelady decides if some of the hours worked by the clients are "voluntary" and the women never know when they are working for free. According to the complaint, Lovelady "utilizes several illegal schemes to exploit the women it touts it protects in order to cause these women to work for substandard wages" and it acts as a "staffing company" by sending the women to work at other businesses owned by family members of Lovelady's founder, including a tax company, a retail store and two assisted living facilities. Walker claims Lovelady provides transportation for the women, but charges them for the service and fines them if they are late for pick up. Clients are also fined $10 if they miss work, if they are late or if they change a shift. The complaint claims that Lovelady receives the checks for the work performed by their clients and it will calculate how many hours worked were voluntary and keep this money. Lovelady will then take a credit against any outstanding balances held by the clients and the complaint states that often the women were left with no money for their work. "Lovelady has recently reached a settlement related to overtime violations with the Department of Labor . . . covering 37 women contracted to assisted living facilities," the complaint says. "However, not all these 37 women agreed to settle their claims, and these 37 women do not constitute all those employed at the facilities made subject of the investigation. Lovelady 'cherry picked' the 37 and misrepresented to the DOL the number of women actually employed at those locations." Walker seeks declaratory relief, compensatory and liquidated wages on the claimed violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. A representative of The Lovelady Center declined to comment on Walker's allegations when contacted by CNS, explaining that had been unaware of the lawsuit and not seen the complaint. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Camp, Esq. WIGGINS, CHILDS, PANTAZIS, FISHER & GOLDFARB LLC The Kress Building 301 19th Street North Birmingham, AL 35203 Telephone: (205) 314-0500 Facsimile: (205) 254-1500 E-mail: rcamp@wigginschilds.com GE OIL & GAS: "Ramirez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages ------------------------------------------------------------- Christopher Ramirez and Jonathan Barney, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. GE Oil & Gas Logging Services, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00096 (S.D. Tex., February 23, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. GE Oil & Gas Logging Services, Inc. is a Texas corporation that provides onshore and offshore cased whole services to oil, gas, and power generation industries. The Plaintiff is represented by: William Clifton Alexander, Esq. Craig M. Sico, Esq. SICO WHITE HOELSCHER & BRAUGH LLP 900 Frost Bank Plaza 802 N Carancahua Ste 900 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 653-3300 Facsimile: (361) 653-3333 E-mail: calexander@swhhb.com csico@swhhb.com - and - Timothy Dean Raub, Esq. RAUB LAW FIRM PC 814 Leopard St Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 880-8181 Facsimile: (361) 887-6521 E-mail: timraub@raublawfirm.com GERALEX INC: Faces "Oquendo" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- Yesenia Oquendo, Maria Garcia, Marguerita Segura, and Delfino Gonzalez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Geralex, Inc. a/k/a Geralex Janitorial Services, Geralex Simple Solutions, LLC, Gerardo Alvarado, and Alejandra Alvarado, Case No. 1:15-cv-01634 (N.D. Ill., February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. The Defendants own and operate a janitorial firm doing business in the Chicago, Illinois area. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Grant Brown, Esq. JEFFREY GRANT BROWN, P.C. 221 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1414 Chicago, IL 60601 Telephone: (312) 789-9700 Facsimile: (312) 789-9702 E-mail: jeff@jgbrownlaw.com - and - Angel Petrov Bakov, Esq. Glen Joseph Dunn Jr., Esq. GLEN DUNN & ASSOCIATES, LTD. 221 N. LaSalle St., Suite 1414 Chicago, IL 60601 Telephone: (312) 546-5056 Facsimile: (312) 546-5058 E-mail: abakov@gjdlaw.com gdunn@gjdlaw.com GLASS AMERICA: "Aleman" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------- Jose Aleman, and others similarly- situated v. Glass America Midwest Inc. d/b/a Glass America, and Glass America Midwest LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-20756 (S.D. Fla., February 23, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants provide retail services of glass repair, replacement, and installation to residents of Miami-Dade County, Florida. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher F. Zacarias, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF CHRISTOPHER F. ZACARIAS, P.A. 5757 Blue Lagoon Dr, Suite 230 Miami, FL 33126 Telephone: (305) 403-2000 Facsimile: (305) 459-3964 E-Mail: czacarias@zacariaslaw.com - and - Isaac Mamane, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF ISAAC MAMANE, PA 1150 Kane Concourse, Second Floor Bay Harbor Islands, FL 33154 Telephone (786) 704 - 8898 E-mail: mamane@gmail.com HANCOCK ROOFING: "Lovin" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- Jason Lovin, individually, and on behalf of all similarly situated persons v. Hancock Roofing & Construction, LLC d/b/a Hancock Claims Consultants, Case No. 1:15-cv-00540 (N.D. Ga., February 23, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. Hancock Roofing & Construction, LLC is a limited liability company with its principal place of business located at Alpharetta, Georgia. It provides roof inspection services, ladder assist services, direct inspections of roof damage and tarping services, to insurance companies nationwide. The Plaintiff is represented by: Edward D. Buckley, Esq. THE BUCKLEY LAW FIRM, LLC Promenade, Suite 900 1230 Peachtree Street, NE Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 781-1100 Facsimile: (404) 781-1101 E-mail: edbuckley@buckleylawatl.com HARUTH INC: "Cohen" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages --------------------------------------------------------------- Felisa Cohen, and other similarly-situated individuals v. Haruth, Inc. and Craig Hershoff, Case No. 1:15-cv-20755 (S.D. Fla., February 23, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a retail Shell gas station, convenience store, beverage, and liquor business located at 16800 Collins Avenue, Sunny Isles Beach, Florida. The Plaintiff 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 HMSHOST CORP: Sued for Misclassifying Assistant Unit Managers ------------------------------------------------------------- Patricia D. McPherson and Dhropatie, Kawalsingh v. HMSHost Corporation, Host International, Inc., and Host Services of New York, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-00959 (E.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015) alleges that the Defendants misclassified the Plaintiffs as exempt under federal and state overtime laws and failed to pay them for all hours worked. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as "assistant unit managers" at various food and beverage concessions within New York. The Defendants are Delaware corporations with their principal place of business located in Bethesda, Maryland. HMSHost Corporation is wholly owned by Autogrill Group, Inc., a subsidiary of Autogrill S.p.A., an Italian corporation. Directly or through wholly owned subsidiaries, including Defendants Host International, Inc. and Host Services of New York, Inc., HMSHost Corporation manages and oversees the operations of food and beverage concessions at numerous United States airports and other travel facilities. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Seth R. Lesser, Esq. Jeffrey A. Klafter, Esq. Fran L. Rudich, Esq. Michael H. Reed, Esq. KLAFTER, OLSEN & LESSER LLP Two International Drive, Suite 350 Rye Brook, NY 10573 Telephone: (914) 934-9200 Facsimile: (914) 934-9220 E-mail: slesser@klafterolsen.com Jklafter@klafterolsen.com frudich@klafterolsen.com michael.reed@klafterolsen.com - and - Bradley I. Berger, Esq. BERGER & ASSOCIATES 321 Broadway New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (212) 571-1900 ICHIKOH INDUSTRIES: Dismissed From Auto Parts Antitrust Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ District Judge Marianne O. Battani granted a motion filed by Ichikoh Industries, Ltd. to dismiss plaintiffs' consolidated amended class action complaints in IN RE: AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ANTITRUST LITIGATION. In re: HID Ballasts, MASTER FILE NO. 12-MD- 02311, (E.D. Mich.) for lack of personal jurisdiction. Judge Battani held that defendant Ichikoh "lacks sufficient minimum contacts for the Court to exercise personal jurisdiction. Ichikoh has virtually no ties to the United States, and Plaintiffs' stream of commerce and conspiracy theories are unavailing. In addition, the Court declines to permit jurisdictional discovery in this matter, as there is no reasonable basis to expect that further discovery would reveal any evidence to support an exercise of jurisdiction. See Chrysler Corp. v. Fedders Corp., 643 F.2d 1229, 1240 (6th Cir. 1981). Therefore, the Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Ichikoh, and it will be dismissed from this action." The February 26, 2015 ruling, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/dNBofvfrom Leagle.com, relates to Dealership Actions 2:13-cv-01702 and End-Payor Actions 2:13-cv-01703. JANSSEN PHARMA: Jury Awards $2.5MM Verdict in Risperdal Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ P.J. D'Annunzio, writing for The Legal Intelligencer, reports that a Philadelphia jury has awarded $2.5 million to the plaintiff in the first of roughly 1,250 Risperdal mass-tort cases in the city's courts. After roughly a day-and-a-half of deliberations, the 12-member jury in Pledger v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals handed down the verdict in Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Ramy I. Djerassi's courtroom on Feb. 24. The verdict, agreed upon by 11 of the jurors, brought an end to the month-long trial. The jury found defendant Janssen Pharmaceuticals negligent in having failed to warn of the potential for Risperdal to cause gynecomastia, a condition in which males grow enlarged breasts. The plaintiff in the case, Austin Pledger, took Risperdal to assist with behavioral symptoms related to autism and claimed to have developed gynecomastia from taking the drug. Kline & Specter co-founder Thomas R. Kline said the verdict set the stage for the rest of the Risperdal cases set to go to trial. He also remarked that, in 37 years of trying drug cases, "I have never seen a worse case of corporate misconduct than I have seen here." That misconduct, Mr. Kline said, was exemplified by Janssen's failure to turn over information to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about Risperdal's ability to elevate levels of prolactin, the hormone that causes gynecomastia. "The documents now in the public domain, including the statistically significant association between elevated prolactin levels and gynecomastia, which was never turned over to the FDA, was seen by the jury for what it was," Mr. Kline said. As for whether the amount of the verdict met his expectations, Mr. Kline said, "The amount of the verdict speaks to the reaction of the jury, not only to the evidence against Janssen -- which was damning -- but to the injury caused to the most vulnerable members of our society." In a Janssen statement issued in response to the verdict, a company spokeswoman said, "We are disappointed and will consider all of our options going forward, including appeals. We firmly believe this verdict should be overturned." The spokeswoman continued, "During the trial, Janssen presented abundant evidence showing that the FDA-approved label properly warned of the medication's potential side effects and the plaintiff's physician was aware of those side effects. The evidence also showed that Mr. Pledger was not harmed by using Risperdal and, in fact, his quality of life was significantly improved during the time he was taking Risperdal." The atmosphere of the trial itself was often combative, with counsel for both parties verbally sparring with each other. Frequent objections were commonplace as well as informal criticisms of expert witnesses tossed around in open court. Closing arguments in the case encapsulated the contentious nature of the trial. Weil, Gotshal & Manges attorney Diane Sullivan, who represented Janssen, noted how much the plaintiff's experts, Dr. Mark P. Solomon and former FDA commissioner Dr. David Kessler, earned as testifying witnesses, and said the plaintiff had failed to bring a specialist in endocrinology, which Sullivan argued would be the medical field most directly related to the plaintiff's allegations. Ms. Sullivan also referred to Solomon, who is a plastic surgeon, as "the Tom Brady of penile enlargement surgery," and said that as an expert, Dr. Kessler "hasn't met a warning label he liked yet." However, Mr. Kline, during the rebuttal portion of his argument, referred to Sullivan's portrayal of Solomon as "disgusting crap," and noted the defendants did not call a pediatric endocrinologist. "I brought in a commissioner of the FDA," Mr. Kline said, before turning to Ms. Sullivan. "Where's your commissioner of the FDA?" Mr. Pledger, a 20-year-old from Alabama, claimed he grew large breasts as a result of taking Risperdal when he was 8 years old, and that -- barring a mastectomy -- the condition is permanent. Mr. Kline alleged that Janssen knew about the increased risk of gynecomastia associated with Risperdal relative to similar drugs, but was not forthright in disclosing that information. Mr. Pledger had used Risperdal beginning in 2002, but stopped after the FDA provided a new warning label in 2006 outlining the risks associated with gynecomastia. Closing Arguments Focus on Experts Max Mitchell, writing for The Legal Intelligencer, reports that closing arguments in the first trial of Philadelphia's Risperdal mass-tort actions focused largely on attacking the testimony and backgrounds of the experts. Plaintiffs attorney Thomas R. Kline of Kline & Specter referenced a defense expert who came from Alabama as "Dr. Alabama," and argued the doctor was less qualified than Kline's experts. However, during the defense's portion of the arguments, counsel for Janssen Pharmaceuticals, the defendant in the case, referred to the plaintiff's experts as "regulars on the litigation circuit." The arguments, which were heard Feb. 20, came after nearly a month of trial over whether the drugmaker failed to warn patients about the risk of gynecomastia, a condition in which young males grow breast tissue. Although attorneys on both sides in the case, Pledger v. Janssen Pharmaceuticals, outlined their arguments before the jury, and went over their interpretations of the questions on the verdict sheet, much of the contentious arguments focused on the experts. Weil, Gotshal & Manges attorney Diane Sullivan, who represented Janssen, noted how much the plaintiff's experts, Dr. Mark P. Solomon and Dr. David Kessler, earned as testifying witnesses, and said the plaintiff had failed to bring a specialist in endocrinology, which Sullivan argued would be the medical field most directly related to the plaintiff's allegations. Ms. Sullivan also referred to Solomon, who is a plastic surgeon, as "the Tom Brady of penile enlargement surgery," and said that as an expert, Kessler, who was a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration commissioner, "hasn't met a warning label he liked yet." However, Mr. Kline, during the rebuttal portion of his argument, referred to Sullivan's portrayal of Solomon as "disgusting crap," and noted the defendants did not call a pediatric endocrinologist. "I brought in a commissioner of the FDA," Mr. Kline said, before turning to Ms. Sullivan. "Where's your commissioner of the FDA?" Plaintiff Austin Pledger's case is the first of roughly 1,250 cases claiming that Risperdal, an antipsychotic, causes gynecomastia that have been filed in the city's court system. The trial, which was held before Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Ramy I. Djerassi, began Jan. 23. According to Mr. Kline, Mr. Pledger, a 20-year-old from Alabama, grew large breasts as a result of taking Risperdal when he was 8 years old, and that, barring a mastectomy, the condition is permanent. Mr. Kline alleged that Janssen knew about the increased risk of gynecomastia associated with Risperdal relative to similar drugs, but was not forthright with the FDA or doctors about those risks. Mr. Pledger had used Risperdal beginning in 2002, but stopped after the FDA provided a new warning label in 2006 outlining the risks associated with gynecomastia. Mr. Kline contended in closing arguments that the company hid data from prescribing doctors, and focused on selling the drug instead of studying its safety. "When a pharmaceutical company is acting reasonably and prudently they investigate it, they report it, they tell the FDA, they tell the world," Mr. Kline said. "Nobody knew all this risk, except the insiders." Mr. Kline said the drug caused Mr. Pledger to develop size 46 DD breasts, and that the condition could not be due only to natural hormonal changes of puberty. "Is there any boy that you know who has 46 DD breasts that he got from puberty?" Mr. Kline asked the jury. The jury slip, which Mr. Kline and Ms. Sullivan both used to outline their closing arguments, included a question on whether Janssen was negligent, and a question on whether the negligence was a causative factor in Mr. Pledger developing gynecomastia. Kline pointed to testimony from both Mr. Pledger's mother and his prescribing doctor to show that the doctor would have advised the mother differently and the mother would not have decided to give Mr. Pledger the drug had the warning label noted the relationship to gynecomastia. Ms. Sullivan countered that the treating doctor had prescribed Pledger the drug in January 2007 after the new labeling was issued, and the drug had been refilled a few times. She also noted that other drugs Mr. Pledger had taken were known to have side effects including a fatal skin disease. Numerous times in her closing argument Ms. Sullivan noted the case did not begin after a doctor diagnosed Pledger with gynecomastia, but instead after Mr. Pledger's mother saw a television advertisement. "1-800. Call. We'll sue," she said. "Plaintiffs don't matter. Facts don't matter." Ms. Sullivan also characterized the plaintiff's analysis of the pharmaceutical testing data as "the height of cherry-picking," and said several times that the plaintiff's case was "a show." "Why would you measure for bra size?" Ms. Sullivan asked. "Real doctors don't do that." During his rebuttal, Mr. Kline said Ms. Sullivan's case had been largely based on distractions and personal attacks. "It's a telltale sign when somebody smashes, mashes, bashes and stomps," he said. "An 800-lawyer? I'm proud to be a lawyer." JC LEWIS: Accused of Failing to Pay Proper Overtime Compensation ---------------------------------------------------------------- Elliott D. Dawkins v. J.C. Lewis Primary Health Care, Aretha Jones, CEO, Laura Adams, CFO, Hilton Fordham Human Resources Liaison, Courtney Staley, Momentum Resources, Case No. 4:15-cv- 00043-BAE-GRS (S.D. Ga., February 24, 2015) alleges that the Plaintiff was not paid overtime when he worked in excess of 40 hours for the Defendants. J.C. Lewis Primary Health Clinic is an instrumentality of the state of Georgia. J.C. Lewis is located in Savannah, Chatham County, state of Georgia. The Individual Defendants are officers and agents of J.C. Lewis. JOE WHEELER: Removes "Bates" Suit to Northern District of Alabama ----------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit styled Bates v. Joe Wheeler Electric Membership Corporation, Case No. CV-2015-900048, was removed from the Circuit Court of Morgan County, Alabama, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama (Northeastern). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 5:15-cv-00334-IPJ to the proceeding. The Plaintiff's Complaint asserts claims for: (1) Declaratory, Injunctive, and Equitable Relief; (2) Breach of Contract; (3) Unjust Enrichment; and (4) Accounting. The a class action is brought on behalf of the current and former members of the Defendant, an Alabama cooperative, for a declaration that the putative Class is entitled to a refund of "Patronage Capital" pursuant to the Alabama Code, together with interest, costs, and any other appropriate relief. The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas E. Baddley, Jr. Jeffrey P. Mauro John Parker Yates BADDLEY & MAURO, LLC 850 Shades Creek Parkway, Suite 310 Birmingham, AL 35209 Telephone: (205) 939-0090 Facsimile: (205) 939-0064 E-mail: tbaddley@baddleymauro.com jpmauro@baddleymauro.com jpy@baddleymauro.com - and - Andrew P. Campbell, Esq. John C. Guin, Esq. Stephen D. Wadsworth, Esq. CAMPBELL, GUIN, WILLIAMS, GUY & GIDIERE, LLC 505 N. 20th Street North, Suite 1600 Birmingham, AL 35203 E-mail: andy.campbell@campbellguin.com stephen.wadsworth@campbellguin.com john.guin@campbellguin.com The Defendant is represented by: Cecil Caine, Esq. Trey Goldsmith, Esq. CAINE GOLDSMITH Post Office Box 667 652 Walnut Street Moulton, AL 35650 Telephone: (256) 974-1126 Facsimile: (256) 974-1195 E-mail: ccaine@legal-cg.com tgoldsmith@legal-cg.com JOHN SHORB: Faces "Hernandez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Carlos A. Hernandez, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. John Shorb Landscaping, Inc., Case No. 8:15-cv-00529 (D. Md., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours weekly. John Shorb Landscaping, Inc. is a Maryland corporation that own and operates a landscaping business. The Plaintiff is represented by: Alvaro Augusto Llosa, Esq. Roberto N. Allen, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF ROBERTO ALLEN LLC 11002 Veirs Mill Rd, Ste 700 Wheaton, MD 20902 Telephone: (301) 861-0202 Facsimile: (410) 864-8895 E-mail: allosa@robertoallenlaw.com rallen@robertoallenlaw.com KIMMEN PLAZA: Facility Inaccessible to PWDs, "Kennedy" Suit Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- Pat Kennedy, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Kimmen Plaza LLC, Case No. 9:15-cv-80231 (S.D. Fla., February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to adhere to the Americans with Disabilities Act's policy, practice and procedure to ensure that all goods, services and facilities are readily accessible to and usable by persons with disabilities. Kimmen Plaza LLC is a business establishment located at 1800-1940 N.W. Boca Raton Blvd. (2nd Ave.), Boca Raton, FL. The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas B. Bacon, Esq. THOMAS B. BACON, P.A. 4868 S.W. 103rd Ave. Cooper City, FL 33328 Telephone: (954) 478-7811 Facsimile: (954) 237-1990 E-mail: tbb@thomasbaconlaw.com - and - Jeannette Elizabeth Albo, Esq. THOMAS B. BACON, P.A. 9444 SW 69th Ct. Miami, FL 33516 Telephone: (305) 502-4593 E-mail: jalbo@bellsouth.net LA HACIENDA CAFE: Violates Fair Labor Standards Act, Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Miguel A. Mayancela, individually and in behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. La Hacienda Cafe Corp. d/b/a Tacqueria La Hacienda, jointly and severally; Alexander Molano, jointly and severally; and Fernando Navarro, jointly and severally, Case No. 1:15-cv-00964 (E.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015) is brought over alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. LANDRY'S INC: Faces "Saechao" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Mouang Saechao, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Landry's, Inc., and McCormick & Schmick Restaurant Corp, Case No. 4:15-cv-00815 (N.D. Cal., February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a restaurant in Berkeley, California. The Plaintiff is represented by: Cari Ann Cohorn, Esq. PHILLIPS ERLEWINE GIVEN & CARLIN LLP The Presidio 39 Mesa Street, Suite 201 San Francisco, CA 94129 Telephone: (415) 398-0900 Facsimile: (415) 398-0911 E-mail: cac@phillaw.com LEGGETT & PLATT: Direct Purchaser Settlements Get Final Approval ---------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Jack Zouhary granted final approval of "Leggett & Platt and Carpenter Settlements" and a motion for an award of attorneys' fees and for reimbursement of expenses in In re Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation, ANTITRUST CASE NO. 1:10 MD 2196, (N.D. Ohio). Under the proposed settlements, and in exchange for a release of all Direct Purchaser claims against Leggett & Platt and the Carpenter Defendants, Direct Purchasers will receive: * $39.8 million from Leggett & Platt, including an initial $4 million cash payment; * $108 million from the Carpenter Defendants, including an initial $20 million cash payment (the two funds together are referred to as the Settlement Fund); and * Trial testimony from up to two Leggett & Platt employees and up to two Carpenter Defendant employees for the purpose of admitting Leggett & Platt and Carpenter documents at trial. Class Counsel have sought a $52,473,855.80 cut of the Settlement Fund, including: * Thirty percent of the Settlement Fund for attorneys' fees, or roughly $44.34 million; and * Reimbursement of Class Counsel's incurred expenses, amounting to $8,133,855.80. The Court concluded that Class Counsel's fee request is reasonable. The Court also awarded Class Counsel $8,113,855.80 for reimbursement of expenses. The Court granted Co-Lead Counsel authority to "distribute the fees in a manner that, in the judgment of Co-Lead Counsel, fairly compensates each firm for its contribution to the prosecution of Plaintiffs' claims". The Court certified the "Direct Purchaser Settlement Class" for the purposes of this settlement. The Direct Purchaser Settlement Class consists of the certified Direct Purchaser Litigation Class minus the persons and entities who request exclusion from the Direct Purchaser Settlement Class. As to the Leggett & Platt Released Parties and the Carpenter Released Parties, as defined in the Settlement Agreements, the Class Action and any and all currently pending direct purchaser class action lawsuits directly related to the subject matter of this litigation are dismissed with prejudice and in their entirety, on the merits, and, except as provided for in the Settlement Agreement, without costs. The Order does not settle or compromise any claims by Class Representatives or the Direct Purchaser Settlement Class against the Defendants or other persons or entities other than the Leggett & Platt Released Parties or the Carpenter Released Parties, and all rights against any other Defendant or other person or entity are specifically reserved. The sales of Polyurethane Foam to members of the Direct Purchaser Settlement Class by the Leggett & Platt Released Parties and the Carpenter Released Parties will remain against the non-settling Defendants as a basis for damage claims, and will be part of any joint and several liability claims against any non-settling Defendant or other person or entity other than the Leggett & Platt Released Parties or the Carpenter Released Parties. A copy of the Court's February 26, 2015 memorandum opinion and order is available at http://is.gd/wko5p2from Leagle.com. LENOVO GROUP: Faces "Pick" Suit Over Pre-Installed Spyware ---------------------------------------------------------- Lukas Pick, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lenovo (United States) Inc. and Superfish Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-00068 (E.D.N.C., February 24, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of selling new computers with preinstalled harmful and offensive spyware and malware. Lenovo (United States) Inc. is a subsidiary of Lenovo Group Limited, a multinational computer technology company, which, through its subsidiaries, designs, develops, manufactures and sells personal computers, tablet computers, smartphones, workstations, servers, electronic storage devices and smart televisions. Superfish, Inc. is a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business in Palo Alto, California. It is an advertising company that develops various advertising-supported software products based on a visual search engine. The Plaintiff is represented by: Dhamian A. Blue, Esq. Daniel T. Blue Jr., Esq. Daniel T. Blue III, Esq. BLUE STEPHENS & FELLERS LLP 205 Fayetteville Street, Suite 300 Raleigh, NC 27601 Telephone: (919) 833-1931 Facsimile: (919) 833-8009 E-mail: dab@bluestephens.com - and - Stuart A. Davidson, Esq. Mark J. Dearman, Esq. Holly W. Kimmel, Esq. Alex D. Kruzyk, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMA & DOWD LLP 120 East Palmetto Park Rd., Suite 500 Boca Raton, FL 33432 Telephone: (561) 750-3000 Facsimile: (561) 750-3363 - and - Carmen A. Medici, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101-8498 Telephone: (619) 231-1058 Facsimile: (619) 231-7423 LENOVO GROUP: Faces "Hunter" Suit Over Pre-Installed Spyware ------------------------------------------------------------ David Hunter, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., and Superfish, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-00819 (N.D. Cal., February 23, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of selling new computers with preinstalled harmful and offensive spyware and malware. Lenovo (United States) Inc. is a subsidiary of Lenovo Group Limited, a multinational computer technology company, which, through its subsidiaries, designs, develops, manufactures and sells personal computers, tablet computers, smartphones, workstations, servers, electronic storage devices and smart televisions. Superfish, Inc. is a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business in Palo Alto, California. It is an advertising company that develops various advertising-supported software products based on a visual search engine. The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel M. Lasser, Esq. EDELSON PC 1934 Divisadero Street San Francisco, CA 94115 Telephone: (415) 994-9930 Facsimile: (415) 776-8047 E-mail: slasser@edelson.com - and - Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq. Benjamin H. Richman, Esq. J. Dominick Larry, Esq. Amir C. Missaghi, Esq. EDELSON PC 350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300 Chicago, IL 60654 Telephone: (312) 589-6370 Facsimile: (312) 589-6378 E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com brichman@edelson.com nlarry@edelson.com amissaghi@edelson.com MEGA CARE: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Kharibouch" Suit Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- Abdellah Kharibouch, individually and on behalf of similarly situated individuals v. Mega Care Ems, Inc. d/b/a Mega Care Ems, Case No. 4:15-cv-00507 (S.D. Tex., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for work in excess of 40 hours per workweek. Mega Care Ems, Inc. owns and operates an ambulance services company doing business within the State of Texas. The Plaintiff is represented by: Shelly M. Davis-Smith, Esq. THE DAVIS LAW FIRM 3100 Richmond Ave., Ste 480 Houston, TX 77098 Telephone: (713) 349-9299 Facsimile: (713) 349-9244 E-mail: info@thedavislawfirm.com MY BELLY'S: Faces "Castaneda" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Gregorio Castaneda, Jesus Quirino Velasquez, Jose Luis Romero Toledano, Juan Sanchez Flores, Severiano Flores Alonso, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. My Belly's Playlist LLC d/b/a My Belly's Playlist, Shawn Reilly, Ian Behar and Ryan Sasson, Case No. 1:15-cv-01324 (S.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for the hours over 40 per week. The Defendants own and operate a sandwich shop under the name located at 18 Murray Street, New York, NY 10007. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Antonio Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2020 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 E-mail: faillace@employmentcompliance.com NAT'L BUREAU COLLECTION: Faces "Esppsito" Suit in S.D.N.Y. ---------------------------------------------------------- Denise Esposito, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National Bureau Collection Corp. et al, Case No. 7:15-cv-01336 (S.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendants' abusive and unfair practice of collecting alleged debt. National Bureau Collection Corp. is debt collecting firm that maintains its principal place of business at 150 White Plains Road, 1st Fl., Tarrytown, New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Louis Arleo, Esq. ROBERT L. ARLEO, ESQ. 380 Lexington Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10168 Telephone: (212) 551-1115 Facsimile: (518) 751-1801 E-mail: RobertArleo@gmail.com NATIONAL FOOTBALL: White Gets OK to File Documents Under Seal ------------------------------------------------------------- REGGIE WHITE, et al., Plaintiffs, v. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, et al., Defendants, NO. 4:92-CV-00906-MJD, (D. Minn.) came on before the court on the Plaintiffs' motion to file under seal certain portions of their memorandum of law, portions of several declarations and certain exhibits which have been submitted in support of Plaintiffs' Fed.R.Civ.Proc. 60(b) motion. In an order entered March 3, 2015, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/MoIqaLfrom Leagle.com, Chief District Judge Michael J. Davis granted the Plaintiffs' motion for permission to file the documents under seal. NAVISTAR: Recalls CE School Bus 2015 Models Due to Safety Hazard ---------------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: February 12, 2015 Type of communication: Recall Subcategory: School Bus Notification type: Safety Mfr System: Fuel Supply Units affected: 645 Source of recall: Transport Canada Identification number: 2015066TC ID number: 2015066 Manufacturer recall number: 15501 On certain school buses, a wiring harness may wear against a high pressure fuel line. Overtime, this could cause a fuel leak in the engine bay. Leaking fuel could come in contact with high temperature components, increasing the risk of fire causing injury and/or damage to property. Correction: Dealers will inspect and replace any damaged fuel lines while adding a harness saddle to prevent further damage to the fuel lines. Make Model Model year(s) affected ---- ----- ---------------------- IC CE SCHOOL BUS 2015 NEIGHBORHOOD RESTAURANT: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Michelle Brown, on behalf of herself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Neighborhood Restaurant Partners Florida, LLC d/b/a Applebee's, Case No. 8:15-cv-00382 (M.D. Fla., February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours worked in excess of 40 during any workweek. Neighborhood Restaurant Partners Florida, LLC is a foreign for- profit corporation that owns and operates Applebee's restaurant. The Plaintiff is represented by: Donna V. Smith, Esq. WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, PA Suite 300, 1110 N Florida Ave Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 223-0431 Facsimile: (813) 229-8712 E-mail: dsmith@wfclaw.com NETFLIX INC: Walmart's Gift Card Settlement Okay, 9th Cir. Says --------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's approval of a settlement in the case, IN RE ONLINE DVD-RENTAL ANTITRUST LITIGATION, ANDREA RESNICK; BRYAN EASTMAN; AMY LATHAM; MELANIE MISCIOSCIA; STAN MAGEE; MICHAEL OROZCO; LISA SIVEK; MICHAEL WIENER, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. THEODORE H. FRANK, Objector-Appellant, v. NETFLIX, INC.; WAL-MART STORES, INC.; WALMART.COM USA LLC, Defendants-Appellees. IN RE ONLINE DVD-RENTAL ANTITRUST LITIGATION, ANDREA RESNICK; BRYAN EASTMAN; AMY LATHAM; MELANIE MISCIOSCIA; STAN MAGEE; MICHAEL OROZCO; LISA SIVEK; MICHAEL WIENER, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. JON M. ZIMMERMAN, Objector-Appellant, v. NETFLIX, INC.; WAL-MART STORES, INC.; WALMART.COM USA LLC, Defendants-Appellees. IN RE ONLINE DVD-RENTAL ANTITRUST LITIGATION, ANDREA RESNICK; BRYAN EASTMAN; AMY LATHAM; MELANIE MISCIOSCIA; STAN MAGEE; MICHAEL OROZCO; LISA SIVEK; MICHAEL WIENER, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. EDMUND F. BANDAS, Objector-Appellant, v. NETFLIX, INC.; WAL-MART STORES, INC.; WALMART.COM USA LLC, Defendants-Appellees. IN RE ONLINE DVD-RENTAL ANTITRUST LITIGATION, ANDREA RESNICK; BRYAN EASTMAN; AMY LATHAM; MELANIE MISCIOSCIA; STAN MAGEE; MICHAEL OROZCO; LISA SIVEK; MICHAEL WIENER, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARIA COPE, Objector-Appellant, v. NETFLIX, INC.; WAL-MART STORES, INC.; WALMART.COM USA LLC, Defendants-Appellees. IN RE ONLINE DVD-RENTAL ANTITRUST LITIGATION, ANDREA RESNICK; BRYAN EASTMAN; AMY LATHAM; MELANIE MISCIOSCIA; STAN MAGEE; MICHAEL OROZCO; LISA SIVEK; MICHAEL WIENER, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. JOHN SULLIVAN, Objector- Appellant, v. NETFLIX, INC.; WAL-MART STORES, INC.; WALMART.COM USA LLC, Defendants-Appellees. IN RE ONLINE DVD-RENTAL ANTITRUST LITIGATION, ANDREA RESNICK; BRYAN EASTMAN; AMY LATHAM; MELANIE MISCIOSCIA; STAN MAGEE; MICHAEL OROZCO; LISA SIVEK; MICHAEL WIENER, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. TRACEY KLINGE COX, Objector- Appellant, v. NETFLIX, INC.; WAL-MART STORES, INC.; WALMART.COM USA LLC, Defendants-Appellees, NOS. 12-15705, 12-15889, 12-15957, 12-15996, 12-16010, 12-16038. Class members challenged the district court's approval of the settlement between Walmart and a class of Netflix DVD subscribers, arguing, among other matters, that the gift card portion of the settlement constituted a coupon settlement within the meaning of the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), Pub. L. No. 109-2, 119 Stat. 4 (2005). In the settlement agreement, Walmart agreed to pay a total amount of $27,250,000, comprising both a "Cash Component" and a "Gift Card Component," in exchange for dismissal with prejudice of all claims asserted in the complaint. The class consists of: any person or entity residing in the United States or Puerto Rico that paid a subscription fee to rent DVDs online from Netflix on or after May 19, 2005, up to and including the date the Court grants Preliminary Approval of the Settlement, or some other date to be agreed to by the parties to this Agreement. The Cash Component funded attorneys' fees and expenses, costs of notice and administration, and incentive payments to class representatives. The amount remaining constituted the Gift Card Component and was used to provide class members with either gift cards or, if they so chose, the cash equivalent of a gift card. The gift card could only be used at the Walmart website and was freely transferrable, although it could not be resold. To receive payment, a class member was required to submit a claim form. A claimant could submit a claim for a gift card via e-mail, the class action website, or regular mail. A claimant could submit a claim for cash by regular mail only, and had to include the last four digits of his or her Social Security Number. Each claimant received an equal share of the Gift Card Component. In other words, the Gift Card Component (the amount remaining after subtracting attorneys' fees and expenses, notice and administration costs, and incentive payments) was split evenly among all valid claimants, regardless of the specific damages each individual claimant incurred. Initial e-mail notice of the settlement was provided to some 35 million class members. Notice was mailed to more than 9 million class members whose email addresses were invalid such that the email notice "bounced back." The notice informed class members about the settlement and claims-submission process; stated that class counsel would seek $1.7 million in reimbursement of litigation expenses and fees of 25% of the total settlement fund of $27,250,000 and that Class Representatives would receive $5,000 each in incentive payments; it also set a deadline for filing a claim, leaving the class, or objecting to the settlement of February 14, 2012. The notice encouraged class members to visit the class website for more details. In response to the notice, 1,183,444 claims were submitted. 744,202 requests were for gift cards and 434,253 were for the equivalent value in cash. 722 class members opted out of the class and 30 lodged objections. In approving the Settlement, the District Court concluded the attorneys' fees were properly calculated as 25% of the settlement fund, including administration and notice costs. It decided the percentage amount was fair, especially given that the alternative lodestar calculation would have resulted in attorneys' fees three times larger than the amount class counsel requested. The District Court approved attorneys' fees of $6,812,500 (25% of the total fund of $27,250,000), reimbursement of some litigation expenses totaling $1,700,000, incentive awards of $5,000 each for nine class representatives (totaling $45,000), and payment of notice and administration costs out of the fund. Administration and notice costs totaled roughly $4.5 million, leaving roughly $14.1 million in the settlement fund for the Gift Card Component. Divided among almost 1.2 million claims, the Gift Card Component will provide claimants with roughly $12 each. Following the court's approval of the settlement, six objectors, Theodore Frank, Tracey Klinge Cox, Maria Cope, Edmund F. Bandas, John Sullivan, and Jon M. Zimmerman, timely appealed and their cases were consolidated. The Ninth Circuit held in its February 27, 2015 opinion, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/rz1GWufrom Leagle.com, that the district court did not err in approving the settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate. Accordingly, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's decision to approve the settlement between the class of Netflix subscribers and Walmart, to certify the settlement class, and to grant class counsels' motion for attorneys' fees. One of the Objectors raised the concerns that the gift cards will not disgorge Walmart of ill-gotten gains and will force class members to buy from the defendant in their class action. The Ninth Circuit held, however, that giving thousands of consumers the ability to purchase $12 in goods from the Walmart website for free will not be insignificant to the retailer. The Ninth Circuit also said the case does not present the same problems as one like Young v. Polo Retail, LLC, in which the class members were former Polo Retail employees who complained about being forced to purchase Polo clothing and were then given Polo Retail gift cards. No. C-02-4546, 2006 WL 3050861, at *3-5 (N.D. Cal. 2006) ("[W]hy would former employees, who allegedly were forced to buy a great deal of unwanted Polo products, desire product vouchers so that they could purchase even more clothes?"). "Here, class members are suing due to an online-DVD rental agreement between Walmart and Netflix. Since Walmart sells many products beyond DVDs, class members have less reason to be wary of a gift card to the defendant retailer than did the plaintiffs in Young," the Ninth Circuit explained. "Moreover, the claimants in this case had the option of obtaining cash instead of a gift card, undercutting the argument that the settlement forces them to buy from the defendant. In sum, we hold that the Walmart gift cards in this case are not coupons that fall under the umbrella of CAFA." Theodore H. Frank, (argued) -- tfrank@gmail.com -- Center for Class Action Fairness, Washington, D.C.; Gary Sibley, Dallas, Texas; Joseph Darrell Palmer -- darrell.palmer@palmerlegalteam.com -- Law Offices of Darrell Palmer PC, Solana Beach, California; Christopher A. Bandas -- cbandas@bandaslawfirm.com -- Bandas Law Firm, P.C., Corpus Christi, Texas; Christopher V. Langone and Grenville Pridham, Law Office of Christopher Langone, Ithaca, New York; Joshua R. Furman -- jrf@furmanlawyers.com -- (argued), Joshua R. Furman, Law Corp., Los Angeles, California, for Objector-Appellants Frank, Cope, Cox, Bandas, Sullivan, and Zimmerman. Todd A. Seaver -- tseaver@bermandevalerio.com -- (argued), Joseph J. Tabacco, Jr. -- jtabacco@bermandevalerio.com -- and Christopher T. Heffelfinger -- cheffelfinger@bermandevalerio.com -- Berman DeValerio, San Francisco, California, for Plaintiffs-Appellees. NEW YORK ASSOCIATES: Has Sent Unsolicited Faxes, Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------ Central Alarm Signal, Inc., a Michigan corporation, individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. New York Associates Inc. and John Does 1-10, Case No. 2:15-cv- 10681 (E.D. Mich., February 24, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of sending unsolicited facsimiles. New York Associates Inc. is a Florida corporation that provides engineering, architecture, planning, and program and project management services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan M. Kelly, Esq. Brian J. Wanca, Esq. ANDERSON & WANCA 3701 Algonquin Road Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 Telephone: (847) 368-1500 Facsimile: (847) 368-1501 E-mail: rkelly@andersonwanca.com buslit@andersonwanca.com NEW YORK CITY, NY: Overhauls Solitary Policy in Rikers Island ------------------------------------------------------------- Some light has shined inside Rikers Island's darkest holes on February 21, reports Adam Klasfeld at Courthouse News Service. That's when the New York City Department of Corrections' new rules take effect, imposing time limits on solitary confinement and jettisoning the prison's "owed-time" policy. Corrections Commissioner Joseph Ponte estimated at a press conference in December that the reforms will eliminate pending solitary confinement terms of thousands of Rikers inmates, and he banned the placement of 16- and 17-year-olds in isolation earlier this year. These developments followed extensive federal litigation over alleged civil rights abuses inside Rikers Island jails and prisons. Last year, Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara slammed what he called a "Lord of the Flies" atmosphere facing teenagers inside the juvenile lockups, where his investigation found beatings occurred with "alarming frequency." Four months after releasing the results that probe, on Dec. 18, 2014, Bharara's office joined a 4-year-old civil lawsuit, Nunez v. City of New York, challenging the jailhouse's use of solitary confinement. The day after this development, the Corrections Department held a public hearing to address a wide range of policies regarding so- called "punitive segregation." One of these included the rule forcing inmates released from solitary before the end of their terms to make up for their "owed time" later in their sentence. Known as "bings" at Rikers, this policy also came under fire nearly four months ago in Manhattan through the federal class action, Bryant v. City of New York. Lead plaintiff Ahlijah Bryant was 20 years old when his lawyers at the Legal Aid Society and Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP filed the Oct. 30, 2014, complaint on behalf of the prison's pretrial detainees. When released on parole from Midstate Correctional Facility in April 2013 for an attempted-robbery conviction, Bryant had not yet completed his solitary confinement term, and he had to make up the difference at Rikers after his first-degree robbery arrest last year, records show. Such a punishment is inconsistent with the presumption of innocence, his lawyers say. Calling solitary confinement a "dangerous practice," their complaint notes that a Corrections Department-commissioned report labeled it "one of the most severe forms of punishment that can be inflicted on human beings short of killing them." The Yale and New York University-affiliated psychiatrists who wrote the report found that 41 percent of solitary inmates at Rikers are mentally ill, isolation stints stretched up to 3,000 days, and that the "torture" of isolation could cause or aggravate "psychosis." The Corrections Department's board unanimously voted on Jan. 13 this year to overhaul their solitary practices. Two weeks before these rules were memorialized, the prisons banned solitary for inmates younger than 18. The department plans to raise a minimum age of 21 next year, if they obtained enough resources and staffing to implement the change, according to the 15-page notice of the rules. The mentally ill and the seriously physically disabled also will be excluded starting on February 20, the rules state. Inmates in solitary for nonviolent-jailhouse infractions will spend at least seven out-of-cell hours a day, instead of one, and maximum terms cap at 30 days, the notice says. The new rules also beef up due-process protections for hearing leading to solitary terms, train corrections officers working those shifts, and mandate bimonthly reports monitoring the prisons' compliance with the changes. Commissioner Ponte said on Dec. 17 that the owed-time shelving alone would eliminate 1,000 names from the solitary backlog. "We are going to take all that historic time and wipe that off the books," he said. "So all those things -- guys that have gotten out, coming back -- they're not going to owe time anymore." The New York City Law Department told the judge hearing the Bryant case that the shelving of the owed-time policy could lead to a settlement in that case. A Jan. 20 letter states that the parties need time to pour through "relevant medical records" of the 10 named plaintiffs for their discussions. U.S. District Judge Sidney Stein adjourned proceedings until March 26. The Legal Aid Society's Barbara Hamilton, the lead attorney on that case, called the new measures a "good step towards reform and progress." NEW YORK FRESH: Faces "Cabrera" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- Adael Cabrera, Gustavo Gomez, Luis Gomez, Miguel Palacios, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. New York Fresh Meat Inc. and Min J. Lee, Case No. 1:15-cv-01325 (S.D.N.Y., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for the hours over 40 per week. The Defendants own and operate a meat supply company located at 355 Food Center Drive, Bronx, New York 10474. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Antonio Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2020 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 E-mail: faillace@employmentcompliance.com NORDSTROM INC: Cal. Supreme Court Asked to Rule on Day Off Issue ---------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Reynolds at Courthouse News Service reports that the 9th Circuit on February 19 asked the California Supreme Court to settle a question of "extreme importance" to tens of thousands of workers: how many days they have to work without a day off. Former Nordstrom salesman Christopher Mendoza filed a Superior Court class action in 2009 against the fashion retailer, claiming he had worked more than six days in a row without having a day off. Under California labor laws, Mendoza said, he should have had one day's rest in every seven days he worked. After the case was removed to Federal Court for a bench trial, U.S. District Judge Cormac Carney said California law applies to any rolling period in which an employee worked seven days in a row, rather than by workweek. But Carney found that Nordstrom did not violate labor laws because Mendoza had worked less than six hours for at least one day during the consecutive days on the job. In addition, Nordstrom did not coerce Mendoza to work more than seven consecutive days. He had agreed to take them, Carney ruled. On February 19, the 9th Circuit certified three questions to state supreme court, noting that there is no controlling law or appeals court precedent to guide its decision. The panel asked the court to decide if under state labor laws the day off rule is calculated based on a workweek or on any instance in which a person works for seven days in row. It also asked the supreme court to rule on exemptions to the rest day requirement. "Does that exemption apply when an employee works less than six hours in any one day of the applicable week, or does it apply only when an employee works less than six hours in each day of the week?" Judge Susan P. Graber wrote. The court also was unclear on what it means for an employer to "cause" an employee to work more than six days in seven. Does it mean "force, coerce, pressure, schedule, encourage, reward, permit, or something else?" Graber asked. "The answers to these questions of California law would be dispositive of the appeal before us, and no clear controlling California precedent exists," Graber wrote. "Moreover, because the questions that we certify are of extreme importance to tens of thousands of employees in California, considerations of comity and federalism suggest that the court of last resort in California, rather than our court, should have the opportunity to answer the questions in the first instance." The 9th Circuit stayed the case pending the supreme court's decision. Judge Ronald M. Gould and Consuelo M. Callahan joined Graber on the panel. The Plaintiff-Appellant is represented by: Andre E. Jardini, Esq. K.L. Myles, Esq. KNAPP PETERSEN AND CLARKE 550 North Brand Boulevard, Suite 1500 Glendale, CA 91203-1922 Telephone: (818) 547-5000 Facsimile: (818) 547-5329 E-mail: aej@kpclegal.com klm@kpclegal.com The Plaintiff/Intervenor-Appellant is represented by: R. Craig Clark, Esq. James M. Treglio, Esq. Laura M. Cotter, Esq. CLARK & TREGLIO 205 W Date Street San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 239-1321 E-mail: cclark@clarklawyers.com jim@clarktreglio.com lcotter@clarkmarkham.com - and - David Roger Markham, Esq. THE MARKHAM LAW FIRM 750 B St Ste 1950 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 399-3995 Facsimile: (619) 615-2067 E-mail: dmarkham@markham-law.com The Defendant-Appellee is represented by: Julie A. Dunne, Esq. Dawn Fonseca, Esq. Lara K. Strauss, Esq. Michael G. Leggieri, Esq. Joshua D. Levine, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON P.C. 501 W. Broadway, Suite 900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 232-0441 Facsimile: (619) 232-4302 E-mail: jdunne@littler.com dfonseca@littler.com lstrauss@littler.com mleggieri@littler.com jdlevine@littler.com The case is Christopher Mendoza, an individual, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff- Appellant; Meagan Gordon, Plaintiff-Intervenor v. Nordstrom, Inc., a Washington Corporation authorized to do business in the State of California, Defendant-Appellee, Case No. 12-57130, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. OLYMPUS CORP: Sued Over Medical Scope-Linked Superbug Outbreak -------------------------------------------------------------- The Associated Press reports that two lawsuits target the maker of a medical scope linked to the outbreak of a superbug at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. The first was filed on Feb. 23 on behalf of 18-year-old Aaron Young, who remains hospitalized after becoming infected. The Los Angeles Times reports that suit claims negligence and fraud by Olympus Corp. of the Americas. The company makes the difficult-to-clean duodenoscope involved in the outbreak of the deadly and antibiotic-resistant bacteria known as CRE. On Feb. 25 the family of Antonia Torres Cerda also sued. The 48- year-old Corcoran woman died in November after allegedly becoming infected following a liver transplant. The Fresno Bee says her family is suing for wrongful death, negligence and fraud. QUANTUM3 GROUP: Removes "Ford" Suit to Georgia District Court ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Ford v. Quantum3 Group, LLC, et al., Case No. 14-01054-SDB, was removed from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Georgia to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia (Augusta). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-00031-JRH-BKE to the proceeding. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher A. Cosper, Esq. HULL BARRETT, PC P.O. Box 1564 Augusta, GA 30903-1564 Telephone: (706) 722-4481 Facsimile: (706) 722-9779 E-mail: ccosper@hullbarrett.com The Defendants are represented by: Lisa Ritchey Craig, Esq. MCCULLOUGH, PAYNE & HAAN, LLC 271 17th St., NW, Suite 2200 Atlanta, GA 30363-1032 Telephone: (404) 873-1386 Facsimile: (404) 875-4817 E-mail: lrcraig@mplawfirm.com ROBERT HALF: Removes "Washington" Class Suit to N.D. California --------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit entitled Washington v. Robert Half International Inc., Case No. CIV 532207, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Mateo to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Oakland). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:15-cv-00841-KAW to the proceeding. The lawsuit seeks relief under the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The Defendant is represented by: Adam P. KohSweeney, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 984-8700 Facsimile: (415) 984-8701 E-mail: akohsweeney@omm.com ROCHE LABORATORIES: Judge Bars Expert Testimony in Accutane Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mary Pat Gallagher, writing for New Jersey Law Journal, reports that In a ruling likely to impact thousands of pending cases, a New Jersey judge has barred Accutane plaintiffs from presenting expert testimony that the drug causes Crohn's disease. The testimony failed to meet the standards of scientific reliability required by New Jersey Rule of Evidence 702, Atlantic County Superior Court Judge Nelson Johnson said in a decision made public Feb. 23. It is one thing to "stand alone in the world of science by advancing a hypothesis that others do not accept," but "quite another thing to advance a hypothesis that can only be supported by disregarding valid scientific research," Judge Johnson said. "The court embraces its obligation to be flexible in applying scientific evidence to novel personal injury claims falling within the penumbra of 'toxic torts,'" but claimants have "a reciprocal obligation to be mindful of the scientific standards of the scientific community," Judge Johnson added. As of Feb. 18, there were more than 6,700 lawsuits consolidated before Johnson on a multicounty litigation docket alleging that Accutane, an acne medication made by Roche Laboratories, caused harmful side effects such as inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), ulcerative colitis, birth defects and extreme depression. Crohn's, a type of IBD, is a chronic gastrointestinal disease, the symptoms of which include abdominal pain, severe diarrhea, fatigue, weight loss and rectal bleeding, and it can lead to colorectal cancer, bowel perforation and other life-threatening complications. Roche stopped manufacturing Accutane in 2009 but the generic versions, including Amnesteen, Claravis and Absorica, remain on the market subject to restrictions on prescribing them. In addition, women users must take precautions against becoming pregnant. The decision to exclude the expert testimony could preclude recovery on claims that Accutane caused Crohn's disease. Just how many such claims there are is uncertain. Judge Johnson required defense counsel to provide him with the number of affected lawsuits by March 6. He further stated that before entering an order regarding those cases, he would allow the plaintiffs to be heard on whether they were properly included. Judge Johnson's decision was in response to a motion filed in January by Roche and Hoffmann-La Roche, a co-defendant, seeking to block the testimony of two experts: Dr. Arthur Kornbluth, who teaches at the Mount Sinai Medical School, and David Madigan, a statistics professor at Columbia University. It followed the so-called Kemp hearing required by the Evidence Rule 104, which entailed eight days of hearings in which Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Madigan testified, as did two defense experts. Before hearing the testimony, Johnson asked counsel on both sides to provide him with all reports, treatises and other scientific literature on which their experts relied and was provided with more than 400 such items. Judge Johnson said those materials were "invaluable" and enabled him to conclude that the only thing that the scientific community seemed to agree on was that the drug isotretinoin, sold as Accutane, is the only medication effective in treating severe nodular acne, but there was no consensus whatsoever on whether it affects general health. There is no study stating that isotretinoin causes IBD, Johnson said. Judge Johnson emphasized that his role as a gatekeeper was not to determine whether a theory of causation had achieved general acceptance in the scientific community but whether it was "derived from a sound and well-founded methodology," one generally followed by experts in the field. Judge Johnson called Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Madigan "exceptionally learned and accomplished professionals," but concluded that their testimony suffered from "multiple deficiencies," especially their "finely tuned selectivity of the evidence on which they rely." For instance, they relied heavily on studies involving 509 and 76 subjects while ignoring much larger epidemiological studies with a combined total of more than 2 million subjects, Judge Johnson noted. "The reliance upon these two studies is fatal and reveals the lengths to which legal counsel and their experts are willing to contort the facts and torture the logic associated with plaintiffs' hypothesis," Judge Johnson said. Judge Johnson also said Dr. Kornbluth tried to have it both ways by asking the court to reject the best evidence available because of its flaws but to accept "evidence at the bottom of the medical evidence hierarchy because it is all he can find to support his hypothesis of causation." Dr. Kornbluth's medical report "confirms that his hypothesis is a muddle of ambiguities and that his report camouflages mere speculation as true science," Judge Johnson said. Judge Johnson called Mr. Madigan's opinion "conclusion-driven" rather than methodology-based and referred to the "hired gun phenomenon." Judge Johnson called case studies largely "anecdotal" and said he placed little value on animal studies, noting that dogs cannot develop IBD, and adverse event reports filed with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, suggesting that lawyers were abusing the system. Johnson cited a study showing that of the 2,214 reports filed with the FDA from 2003 to 2011 claiming isotretinoin caused IBD, 1,944, or 87.8 percent, were submitted by lawyers, which the study authors said was much higher than for other drug reactions. "The courts should never underestimate the resourcefulness of some attorneys," Johnson said. Roche attorney Paul Schmidt -- pschmidt@cov.com -- of Covington & Burling in Washington, D.C., referred a request for comment to Roche spokeswoman Tara Iannuccillo. Ms. Iannuccillo supplied a statement saying, "The scientific record is now overwhelming that Accutane does not cause Crohn's disease, and Judge Johnson's opinion recognizes that fact in rejecting the unscientific opinions of plaintiffs' paid experts." David Buchanan of Seeger Weiss in Newark, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said, "We are disappointed by the court's decision, and will be pursuing an appeal." Judge Johnson's decision contrasts with one by Judge Carol Higbee in 2008. Judge Higbee refused to toss out a $2.5 million verdict in McCarrell v. Hoffmann-La Roche where the expert testimony on causation was based in part on animal studies and case studies, even though the federal judge in the Accutane Multi-District Litigation had ruled there was no scientific basis for similar testimony, a decision later affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. The Appellate Division agreed with Judge Higbee on the expert testimony but vacated the verdict on other grounds and the case was retried to a $25 million verdict in 2010. An appeal of the verdict is to be argued March 9. Judge Johnson took over the Accutane cases from Higbee last September after she became an appeals court judge. In October, he dismissed four bellwether cases on statute-of- limitations grounds that applied to an unknown number of other cases. Judge Johnson followed up in December by tossing out more than 600 suits for failure to comply with discovery. SCORPION DRILLING: "Garcia" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- Omar Garcia, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Scorpion Drilling, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00098 (S.D. Tex., February 24, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. Scorpion Drilling, Inc. is a Texas corporation that provides drilling services for the oil and natural gas industry throughout South Texas and the surrounding areas within the Eagle Ford Shale. The Plaintiff is represented by: William Clifton Alexander, Esq. SICO WHITE HOELSCHER & BRAUGH LLP 900 Frost Bank Plaza 802 N Carancahua Ste 900 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 653-3300 Facsimile: (361) 653-3333 E-mail: calexander@swhhb.com SCOTT TECHNOLOGIES: Ex-Firefighter Settles Equipment Failure Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Joel Stashenko, writing for New York Law Journal, reports that a former firefighter who laid in burning wreckage for 20 minutes while other firemen tried to find him has reached a $10.6 million settlement with a safety equipment manufacturer. Mitchell Dryer Jr. was awarded the compensatory damages on Feb. 18 by a Madison County Supreme Court jury, following a trial before Justice Eugene Faughnan. As the jury was to begin considering punitive damages against defendant Scott Technologies, Mr. Dryer's attorneys said they reached a settlement. Scott agreed not to appeal the verdict and to pay the compensatory damage award by April 5 in return for not facing punitive damages. The deal carried no confidentiality clause, said Walter Benson, a partner in the Lynn Law Firm of Syracuse, which represented Dryer and his wife, Aimee, in Dryer v. Scott Technologies, 2008-1622. Dryer lost an arm and an ear during the off-hours fire on April 22, 2007 at a bowling alley in Oneida, New York. He said that the Personal Alert Safety System device he was wearing failed to send out a piercing alarm and flashing red light when he became immobilized so his fellow firefighters could locate him more quickly. Because they did not know precisely where he was, firefighters said they could not use a chain saw to cut through the wreckage and free Dryer sooner. The manufacturer's bid to have the Dryer suit dismissed was rejected by the Appellate Division, Third Department (NYLJ, May 6, 2014). Scott Technologies was represented by Charles Eblen of Shook, Hardy & Bacon in Kansas City. SEAFOOD ON THE TABLE: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------- Priscilla Mays, and other similarly-situated individuals v. Seafood on The Table, Inc. d/b/a Aromas Del Peru, Carlos M. Vidal, Case No. 1:15-cv-20760 (S.D. Fla., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a restaurant in Miami-Dade County, 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 SHINY STAR: Recalls Jack 'N Jill Chicharron Products ---------------------------------------------------- Starting date: February 13, 2015 Type of communication: Recall Alert sub-type: Food Recall Warning (Allergen) Subcategory: Allergen - Gluten, Allergen - Wheat Hazard classification: Class 1 Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency Recalling firm: Shiny Star Canada Ltd., APO Products Ltd. Distribution: Ontario, Possibly National, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, Quebec Extent of the product distribution: Retail CFIA reference number: 9639 Industry is recalling Jack 'N Jill brand Chicharron products from the marketplace because they contain wheat which is not declared on the label. People with an allergy to wheat or sensitivity to gluten 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. If you have an allergy to wheat or sensitivity to gluten, do not consume the recalled products as they may cause a serious or life- threatening reaction. There have been no reported reactions associated with the consumption of these products. This recall was triggered by the CFIA's 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 product from the marketplace. Brand name Common name Size Code(s) on product UPC ---------- ----------- ---- ------------------ --- Jack 'N Jill Chicharron ni 90 g All codes where 4 800016 Mang Juan - wheat is not 10528 Espesyal Suka't declared on the Sili label. Jack 'N Jill Chicharron ni 90 g All codes where 4 800016 Mang Juan - wheat is not 110511 Sukang Paombong declared on the label. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: http://is.gd/CFfoRN SIDEWINDER DRILLING: Illegally Terminates Employees, Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Lord and Armando Reyes, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Sidewinder Drilling, Inc., Case No. 7:15-cv-00022 (W.D. Tex., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to provide 60 days advance written notice in connection with a recent Mass Layoff and Plant Closing at Midland, Texas single site. Sidewinder Drilling, Inc. owns and operates a fleet of premium land drilling rigs and provides contract drilling services to exploration and production companies targeting unconventional resource plays in North America. The Plaintiff is represented by: Allen R. Vaught, Esq. BARON AND BUDD PC 3102 Oak Lawn Ave-Ste 1100 Dallas, TX 75219 Telephone: (214) 521-3605 Facsimile: (214) 520-1181 E-mail: avaught@baronbudd.com SIMON ROOFING: Faces "Warren" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Jason Warren, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated employees nationwide v. Simon Roofing and Sheet Metal Corp., Case No. 4:15-cv-00359 (N.D. Ohio, February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. Simon Roofing and Sheet Metal Corp. is an Ohio corporation with its headquarters at 70 Karago Avenue, Youngstown, Ohio 44512. It is one of the nation's largest commercial roofing companies that manufactures innovative roofing products and provides high-quality roof repair, restoration and replacement services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert E. DeRose II, Esq. BARKAN MEIZLISH HANDELMAN GOODIN DEROSE WENTZ 10th Floor, 250 East Broad Street Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 221-4221 Facsimile: (614) 744-2300 E-mail: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com SOUTH FLORIDA ELECTRIC: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages --------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Velie, James Dalton Holloway, and others similarly situated v. South Florida Electric, LLC, and James R. Coleman, Case No. 9:15-cv-80236 (S.D. Fla., February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. South Florida Electric, LLC is a Florida Limited Liability Company that provides commercial electrical service and repair in Palm Beach County, 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 SPACELABS HEALTHCARE: Recalls Bedside and QUBE Compact Monitors --------------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: February 14, 2015 Type of communication: Medical Device Recall Subcategory: Medical Device Hazard classification: Type II Source of recall: Health Canada Issue: Medical Devices Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals Identification number: RA-43819 Spacelabs has received multiple reports of XPREZZON and qube monitors failing to boot up or returning to factory default configuration settings following power on or reset. A failure to boot following power on or reset, resulting in a failure in monitor operation loss of network connectivity, which may result in i) an inability to display alarms and data from the affected monitor on central stations and other bedside monitors, or ii) a failure to transmit parameter and alarms from the affected monitor to system printers and spacelabs' Intesys Clinical Suite retrospective database (including the clinical events interface remote notification feature) display of english language when previously configured for another language (the alarm messages displayed in the parameter waveform zone are not affected, as these are stored on a command module and not on the monitor) touchscreen failure where touching the screen does not produce the expected response. The parameter alarms and information are still present and correct once the monitor has completely started up. No one has been injured as a result of these issues. Spacelabs believes this issue is caused by inadequate electrical contact on one of its printed circuit board assemblies. Affected products: A. Bedside Monitor Lot or serial number: More than 10 lots, please contact the manufacturer. Model or catalog number: 91393 B. QUBE Compact Monitor Lot or serial number: More than 10 lots, please contact the manufacturer. Model or catalog number: 91390 Manufacturer: Spacelabs Healthcare Inc. 35301 SE Center Street Snoqualmie, WA 98065 SUNVIEW VINEYARDS: June 11 Fairness Hearing on $4.5MM Settlement ---------------------------------------------------------------- Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston granted preliminary approval of a settlement in the class action captioned SANTIAGO ROJAS, et al., Plaintiffs, v. MARKO ZANINOVICH, et al., Defendants, CASE NO. 1:09-CV-00705-AWI-JLT, (E.D. Cal.). Under the proposed settlement, the parties agree to a "Maximum Settlement Amount" totaling $4,550,000. Defendant Sunview agrees to fund the Settlement for a class including "all current and former non-exempt fieldworkers who were employed by Sunview in California at any time from November 9, 2001 through and including September 30, 2014." Within five days of the Court's order granting preliminary approval of the Settlement, Defendant will pay 20% of the settlement funds into an escrow account at Bank of America and then deposit 10% of the funds into the account every thirty days thereafter until the "Maximum Settlement Amount has been deposited or the Effective Date [is reached] whichever occurs first. Judge Thurston held that preliminary approval of the parties' proposed settlement agreement, as modified by her order, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/y552wPfrom Leagle.com, is granted. The proposed notice plan is also approved. Santiago Rojas, Josefino Rameriz, Catalina Robles, Juan Montes, Benito Espino, and Guillermina Perez are appointed the Class Representatives for the Settlement Class. The law firms of Mallison & Martinez and Kingsley & Kingsley are appointed as Class Counsel. Rust Consulting is appointed as the Claims Administrator, with responsibilities pursuant to the terms set forth in the Settlement Agreement. The Class Representative enhancement requests for Plaintiffs are granted preliminarily up to the amount of $7,500, subject to a petition and review at the Final Approval and Fairness Hearing. Class Members and their counsel may support or oppose this request, if they so desire, at the Final Approval and Fairness Hearing. Class Counsel's request for fees of not to exceed 33 1/3% of the gross settlement amount and costs in an amount to be proven is granted preliminarily, subject to counsel's petition for fees and review at the Final Approval and Fairness Hearing. Class Members and their counsel may also support or oppose this request, if they so desire, at the Final Approval and Fairness Hearing. The petition for attorneys' fees and for class representative enhancement fee will be filed no later than May 21, 2015. Costs of settlement administration will not exceed $70,000. The Settlement Administrator must mail the approved Class Notice Packet no more than March 16, 2015. A class member who wishes to be excluded from settlement must postmark the Exclusion Request no later than April 27, 2015. Any objections to or comments on the Settlement Agreement must be filed with the Court and mailed to Class Counsel no later than April 27, 2015. A Final Approval and Fairness Hearing is set for June 11, 2015, at 9:00 a.m. at the United States Courthouse located at 510 19th Street, Bakersfield, California. The Court reserves the right to vacate the Final Approval and Fairness Hearing if no comments or objections are filed with this Court on or before April 27, 2015. Santiago Rojas, Plaintiff, represented by Hector Rodriguez Martinez -- hectorm@themmlawfirm.com -- Mallison & Martinez, Joseph Donald Sutton -- jsutton@themmlawfirm.com -- Mallison & Martinez, Marco A. Palau -- mpalau@themmlawfirm.com -- Mallison & Martinez, Stanley S. Mallison -- stanm@themmlawfirm.com -- Mallison and Martinez, Douglas D. Winter -- dwinter@balllawllp.com -- McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP, Ira Lawrence Gottlieb -- igottlieb@bushgottlieb.com -- Geffner & Bush, Jeff S. Westerman -- jwesterman@jswlegal.com -- Westerman Law Corp. & Nicole Marie Duckett -- nduckett@milberg.com -- Milberg Weiss LLP. Josefino Ramirez, Plaintiff, represented by Hector Rodriguez Martinez, Mallison & Martinez, Joseph Donald Sutton, Mallison & Martinez, Marco A. Palau, Mallison & Martinez, Stanley S. Mallison, Mallison and Martinez, Douglas D. Winter, McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP, Ira Lawrence Gottlieb, Geffner & Bush, Jeff S. Westerman, Westerman Law Corp. & Nicole Marie Duckett, Milberg Weiss LLP. Catalina Robles, Plaintiff, represented by Eric Bryce Kingsley -- eric@kingsleykingsley.com -- Kingsley & Kingsley APC, Hector Rodriguez Martinez -- hectorm@themmlawfirm.com -- Mallison & Martinez, Ira Lawrence Gottlieb -- igottlieb@bushgottlieb.com -- Geffner & Bush, Joseph Donald Sutton -- jsutton@themmlawfirm.com - - Mallison & Martinez, Marco A. Palau -- mpalau@themmlawfirm.com - - Mallison & Martinez, Matthew Sawaya McNicholas -- msm@mcnicholaslaw.com -- McNicholas and McNicholas, LLP., Nicole Marie Duckett -- nduckett@milberg.com -- Milberg Weiss LLP, Stanley S. Mallison -- stanm@themmlawfirm.com -- Mallison and Martinez, Thomas Patrick Lynch, Marcos Camacho Law Corporation & Douglas D. Winter -- dwinter@balllawllp.com -- McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP. Juan Montes, Plaintiff, represented by Eric Bryce Kingsley, Kingsley & Kingsley APC, Hector Rodriguez Martinez, Mallison & Martinez, Ira Lawrence Gottlieb, Geffner & Bush, Joseph Donald Sutton, Mallison & Martinez, Marco A. Palau, Mallison & Martinez, Matthew Sawaya McNicholas, McNicholas and McNicholas, LLP., Nicole Marie Duckett, Milberg Weiss LLP, Stanley S. Mallison, Mallison and Martinez, Thomas Patrick Lynch, Marcos Camacho Law Corporation & Douglas D. Winter, McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP. Benito Espino, Plaintiff, represented by Eric Bryce Kingsley, Kingsley & Kingsley APC, Hector Rodriguez Martinez, Mallison & Martinez, Ira Lawrence Gottlieb, Geffner & Bush, Joseph Donald Sutton, Mallison & Martinez, Marco A. Palau, Mallison & Martinez, Matthew Sawaya McNicholas, McNicholas and McNicholas, LLP., Nicole Marie Duckett, Milberg Weiss LLP, Stanley S. Mallison, Mallison and Martinez & Thomas Patrick Lynch, Marcos Camacho Law Corporation. Guillermina Perez, Plaintiff, represented by Eric Bryce Kingsley, Kingsley & Kingsley APC, Hector Rodriguez Martinez, Mallison & Martinez, Ira Lawrence Gottlieb, Geffner & Bush, Joseph Donald Sutton, Mallison & Martinez, Marco A. Palau, Mallison & Martinez, Matthew Sawaya McNicholas, McNicholas and McNicholas, LLP., Nicole Marie Duckett, Milberg Weiss LLP, Stanley S. Mallison, Mallison and Martinez, Thomas Patrick Lynch, Marcos Camacho Law Corporation & Douglas D. Winter, McNicholas & McNicholas, LLP. Sunview Vineyards of California, Inc., Defendant, represented by Dennis John Sinclitico, Jr. -- dsinclitico@morganlewis.com -- Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP, Eric Meckley -- emeckley@morganlewis.com -- Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, James Norman Penrod -- jpenrod@morganlewis.com -- Morgan, Lewis & Bockius Llp, Michael E. Molland -- mmolland@mollandlaw.com -- Molland Law, Oliver W. Wanger -- owanger@wjhattorneys.com -- Wanger Jones Helsley PC & Shannon Bettis Nakabayashi -- snakabayashi@morganlewis.com -- Morgan Lewis and Bockius. TAKATA CORP: "Corticeiro" Suit Included in Airbag Products MDL -------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Corticeiro v. Takata Corporation, et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-00616, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami). The Florida District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-20758-FAM to the proceeding. The lawsuit is included in the multidistrict litigation known as In re: Takata Airbag Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 1:15- md-02599-FAM. The actions in the litigation share factual questions arising from allegations that certain Takata-manufactured airbags are defective in that they can violently explode and eject metal debris, resulting in injury or even death. The Plaintiffs allege that Takata and the various motor vehicle manufacturer defendants became aware of the defect years ago, but concealed their knowledge from safety regulators and the public. TAKATA CORP: "Martin" Suit Consolidated in Airbag Products MDL -------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit styled Martin, et al. v. Takata Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-00092, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami). The Florida District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15- cv-20757-FAM to the proceeding. The lawsuit is included in the multidistrict litigation known as In re: Takata Airbag Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 1:15- md-02599-FAM. The actions in the litigation share factual questions arising from allegations that certain Takata-manufactured airbags are defective in that they can violently explode and eject metal debris, resulting in injury or even death. The Plaintiffs allege that Takata and the various motor vehicle manufacturer defendants became aware of the defect years ago, but concealed their knowledge from safety regulators and the public. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Richard S. Frankowski, Esq. THE FRANKOWSKI FIRM, LLC 231 22nd Street South, Suite 203 Birmingham, AL 35233 Telephone: (205) 390-0399 Facsimile: (205) 390-1001 E-mail: Richard@frankowskifirm.com - and - Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq. Joseph D. Cohen, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP The Chrysler Building 405 Lexington Avenue, 40th Floor New York, NY 10174 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 Facsimile: (212) 223-6334 E-mail: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com jcohen@scott-scott.com - and - David R. Scott, Esq. Stephen J. Teti, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP 156 South Main Street P.O. Box 192 Colchester, CT 06415 Telephone: (860) 537-5537 Facsimile: (860) 537-4432 E-mail: david.scott@scott-scott.com steti@scott-scott.com TAKATA CORP: Air-Bag Litigation Hearing Begins in Miami ------------------------------------------------------- Julie Kay, writing for Law.com, reports that more than 100 of the nation's top class action lawyers packed a Miami federal courtroom on Feb. 20 for the first hearing to establish rules for a multidistrict litigation case against air-bag maker Takata Corp. and major automakers. U.S. District Judge Federico A. Moreno, who landed the massive case alleging that exploding air bags caused deaths and injuries, noted he recognized many of the same lawyers he dealt with in his last MDL case against the managed care industry. Peter Prieto -- pprieto@podhurst.com -- of Podhurst Orseck in Miami spoke for the plaintiffs' lawyers, saying they decided to pick five co-lead counsel. When asked by Judge Moreno who would apply, more than a dozen raised their hands, including famed litigator David Boies of Boies, Schiller & Flexner. The first fissure among the plaintiffs' attorneys appeared when Mr. Prieto noted that 70 lawyers attended a strategy meeting on Feb. 19 at Podhurst Orseck, and Boies did not attend. Mr. Boies was the only one to oppose the five co-lead counsel proposal, drawing sharp criticism from his colleagues. "With all due respect to David Boies, he was not at our meeting," said Stuart Grossman of Grossman & Roth in Miami. "We are not interested in forming a bureaucracy. But we don't have 250 lawyers at our plaintiff firms like Mr. Boies does. We don't have armies of lawyers to battle the thousands of (defense lawyers). We think we're small but talented." Other plaintiffs lawyers involved include Aaron Podhurst; Bobby Gilbert -- rcg@grossmanroth.com -- of Grossman & Roth; Daniel Becnel of the Becnel Law Firm in Louisiana; Harley Tropin -- hst@kttlaw.com -- of Kozyak Tropin & Throckmorton in Coral Gables; and Mary Barzee Flores -- mbarzeeflores@stearnsweaver.com -- of Stearns Weaver Miller Alhadeff & Sitterson. Local defense counsel include Guy Lewis and Michael Tein of Lewis Tein for Mazda and Marty Steinberg -- msteinberg@bilzin.com -- of Bilzin Sumberg Baena Price & Axelrod for Honda. Judge Moreno questioned whether five lead co-counsel is "a lot." Mr. Prieto said it wasn't, considering numerous class action and personal injury cases have been consolidated, and the case will involve considerable travel and depositions around the world. Criteria for choosing the lead counsel will be quality of the lawyers, and geographic, ethnic and gender diversity, Mr. Prieto said. Judge Moreno will sort through applications to make the final selection. "I feel like an admissions counselor," the judge joked. "Do you have any applications with SAT scores and GPAs?" Michael Mallow -- mmallow@sidley.com -- of Sidley Austin, who also represents Honda, said the defense doesn't care how many lead counsel the plaintiffs choose and are only concerned about consolidating all the federal and state cases to avoid significant overlaps in discovery. When asked whether he could call federal and state judges to ask them to send their cases to the MDL, Judge Moreno said he would not be comfortable doing so. But, he said, he would agree to take the cases if the judges called him. "It has not been my practice to tell other judges what to do," Judge Moreno said, "especially in federal court, where there's a mechanism in place to do so already." Seventeen active personal injury cases against Japan's Takata are in state court, said Rich Newsome of the Newsome Law Firm in Orlando, which is handling four of them. Judge Moreno exhibited his usual brand of humor and storytelling at the hearing. He invited out-of-town lawyers to speak first, asking who had planes to catch. Laughter erupted when he recited a letter from someone offering to be special master in the case. "Where was he 15 years ago when I had the other MDL that went on a little too long?" Moreno laughed. "Hey, maybe we do need a special master." David Bernick of Dechert, who represents Takata, noted, "Our product has obviously been very controversial over the last few months." He said recalled air bags are not being preserved but are being activated for testing purposes. At least six deaths and 64 injuries have been blamed on air bag inflators installed in an estimated 15 million U.S. vehicles made by 10 auto companies. A federal investigation and congressional hearings are planned on the air bag issue. On Feb. 20, the federal government announced it will start fining Takata $14,000 per day for failing to fully cooperate with its long-running investigation. Takata has resisted demands to recall its driver's side air bags nationwide although automakers have issued recalls themselves. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration also accuses Takata of failing to explain a "deluge" of 2.4 million pages of documents turned over without a catalog or index. TAKATA CORP: Judge to Appoint Lead Counsel to Oversee Airbag Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Julie Kay, writing for Law.com, reports that siding with the local plaintiffs bar, U.S. District Judge Federico Moreno will appoint five lead counsel and two liaison counsel to oversee the consolidated Takata air bag case in Miami federal court. In an order issued late on Feb. 24, Judge Moreno said any lawyers interested in serving as lead counsel on the potentially lucrative multidistrict litigation case should apply by March 6 listing legal experience and financial resources. Only one lawyer, David Boies -- dboies@bsfllp.com -- of Boies, Schiller & Flexner, opposed the request, suggesting just three lead counsel. "The court recognizes the efficiency of appointing a small number of lead counsel," the order said. "However, due to the financial requirements in undertaking this representation and the goal of achieving some geographical diversity among lead counsel, the court may appoint five lead counsel and two liaison counsel." Judge Moreno also said he may name a general master to handle details of the two tracks -- personal injury and class action damages. The judge also encouraged the defense lawyers to appoint a defense leadership team and submit names by March 23. Ten automakers have recalled more than 14 million U.S. cars with Takata air bags since 2013. Six deaths have been linked to exploding air bags in Hondas, and at least 64 injuries have been reported, including 52 in Hondas. TARGET BRANDS: Faces "Chamberlin" Suit Over Product Misbranding --------------------------------------------------------------- Jennifer Chamberlin, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Target Corporation and Target Brands, Inc., Case No. 0:15-cv-00578 (D. Minn., February 24, 2015), alleges that the Defendant mislabeled its Up & Up Herbal dietary supplement products because they failed to contain the medical herbs represented by the label. The Defendants own and operate a retailing company with its principal place of business in Minneapolis, Minnesota doing business in the State of Arkansas. The Plaintiff is represented by: Vincent J. Esades, Esq. Renae D. Steiner, Esq. David Woodward, Esq. HEINS MILLS & OLSON, P.L.C. 310 Clifton Avenue Minneapolis, MN 55403 Telephone: (612) 338-4605 Facsimile: (612) 338-4692 E-mail: vesades@heinsmills.com rsteiner@heinsmills.com dwoodward@heinsmills.com - and - Irwin B. Levin, Esq. Scott D. Gilchrist, Esq. COHEN & MALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 636-6481 Facsimile: (317) 636-2593 E-mail: ilevin@cohenandmalad.com sgilchrist@cohenandmalad.com TD BANK: Ordered to Pay $67 Million to Investor Group ----------------------------------------------------- Carlos Harrison, writing for Daily Business Review, reports that a Miami federal judge gave TD Bank until Feb. 26 to pay $67 million to a group of investors in disbarred attorney Scott Rothstein's failed $1.2 billion Ponzi scheme. U.S. District Judge Marcia G. Cooke's order could finally bring an end to a three-year battle over the $32 million in compensatory damages and $35 million in punitive damages awarded by a jury to Texas-based Coquina Investments LLC. TD Bank's motion asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to stay Cooke's order was denied by a three-judge panel Feb. 20. Coquina attorney David Mandel -- dmandel@mandel-law.com -- in Miami called Judge Cooke's decision a welcome closure to the lengthy legal fight. "It's been more than five long years since TD Bank defrauded us and a lot of other investors, and over three years since TD cheated in spectacular fashion at the trial, and still lost," said Mr. Mandel of Mandel & Mandel. "Coquina is very pleased that it's finally time for TD to pay the piper." Judge Cooke authorized Mr. Mandel to collect from TD Bank's appellate bond if the payment is late. All may not be done, however. TD Bank spokeswoman Judith Schmidt on Feb. 23 said, "While TD Bank will comply with the court's order, we are disappointed with the ruling, and we have filed an appeal." The lawsuit began in 2010 when Coquina alleged TD Bank employees knew about Rothstein's settlement financing fraud and helped him perpetrate it. A jury awarded damages to Coquina in July 2012. The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the verdict last July and refused to rehear the case. In its motion to enforce the judgment, Coquina noted the deadline to petition for a writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court has passed. "Judge, this is like a football game," Mandel said in his argument before Cooke on Feb. 11. "The game is over, the crowd has left, and the cleaning crew is working in the stands. In spite of TD's numerous unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, the scoreboard shows that we won 67 to nothing. And despite everything, TD is here today throwing a Hail Mary pass, not acknowledging that there is no time left on the clock." He accused the bank of stalling and noted, "Several of Coquina's partners are elderly and, judge, shouldn't in fairness they get a chance to use the money the jury awarded for their injuries during their lifetimes?" TD Bank attorney Mark W. Kinghorn -- mkinghorn@mcguirewoods.com -- of McGuireWoods argued Coquina would receive all but $7.5 million of the $32 million in compensatory damages from the bankruptcy trustee for Rothstein's law firm, Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler. He maintained payment from the bank would amount to a double recovery for the investors. Mandel agreed Coquina already received $9.1 million from the bankruptcy trustee but asked the judge to order the amount to be returned to the bankruptcy liquidator. Judge Cooke agreed. Mr. Rothstein was given a 50-year sentence after pleading guilty in January 2010 to two counts of fraud and three counts of conspiracy. In December 2011, he testified former TD Bank regional vice president Frank Spinosa aided him in defrauding investors. Mr. Spinosa invoked his Fifth Amendment right against self- incrimination 193 times when he was called to testify in the Coquina trial. He faces a fraud conspiracy indictment. TIMEKEEPERS INC: Faces "Limon" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Fernando Limon III, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Timekeepers, Inc. and Tier One Security, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-00143 (W.D. Tex., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for work in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The Defendants provide security guard services for various entities throughout Texas and Northern Louisiana. The Plaintiff is represented by: Carlos Adrian Solis, Esq. CARLOS ADRIAN SOLIS LAW OFFICES 310 S. St. Mary's St., Suite 2900 San Antonio, TX 78205 Telephone: (210) 446-5000 Facsimile: (210) 446-5001 E-mail: csolis@hilley-solis.com TRINITY INDUSTRIES: Faces Class Suit Alleging Product Liability --------------------------------------------------------------- La Crosse County, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Trinity Industries, Inc. and Trinity Highway Products, LLC, Case No. 3:15-cv-00117-slc (W.D. Wis., Feb. 24, 2015) asserts claims for product liability. The Plaintiff is represented by: Aaron N. Halstead, Esq. Caitlin Marie Madden, Esq. HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. 222 W. Washington Avenue, Suite 450 P.O. Box 2155 Madison, WI 53701-2155 Telephone: (608) 257-0040 Facsimile: (608) 256-0236 E-mail: ahalstead@hq-law.com cmadden@hq-law.com - and - Jason S. Kilene, Esq. GUSTAFSON GLUEK PLLC 120 South Sixth Street, Suite 2600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 333-8844 Facsimile: (612) 339-6622 E-mail: jkilene@gustafsongluek.com UNC-CHAPEL HILL: Hires Skadden to Defend Academic Fraud Suits ------------------------------------------------------------- Nell Gluckman, writing for The Am Law Daily, reports that Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom has been hired to represent the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in litigation, accreditation and regulatory matters resulting from a 2014 report detailing widespread instances of academic fraud involving thousands of students, many of whom were athletes. The report, which resulted from an eight-month investigation headed by Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft's white-collar defense and investigations group chairman, Kenneth Wainstein, revealed that over 3,100 students took so-called paper classes, which were not taught by a professor and only required students to write one essay to receive class credit. These classes, where students often got high grades despite poor-quality work, were popular among athletes who had to meet eligibility requirements in order to continue to participate on college teams, the report said. Last year, two cases were filed against UNC regarding the academic fraud, sibling publication Corporate Counsel reports. In McAdoo v. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, a football player is suing the university for allegedly failing to adequately educate him, and in Willingham v. the University of North Carolina, a university employee claims she was retaliated against after she reported instances of academic fraud to The News & Observer. Skadden litigation partner Patrick Fitzgerald will represent UNC in the litigation, as well as in matters related to the investigation and the university's accreditation, which the school's accrediting body announced it would review as a result of revelations from Wainstein's report. Also on the Skadden team are litigation partners Stephen Robinson, Michael Scudder and Lisa Gilford, as well as litigation associate Marianne Combs and other Skadden attorneys on an as-needed basis, according to the firm's contract, which was released to The News & Observer in response to a public records request. The contract says the Skadden partners will be paid a blended rate of $990 an hour, "which represents a significant discount off standard firm rates in recognition of the university's public interest mission." Associates and counsel will bill between $450 and $975 an hour, the contract says. The contract states that for each of the two cases against the university, fees for litigating the motion to dismiss, including oral arguments, will be capped at $325,000. The contract says that Skadden may also work on separate litigation relating to its sexual assault policies and response to sexual assault claims and litigation alleging discrimination by the university's admissions department. As an example, the contract cites Students for Fair Admissions v. University of North Carolina, a case brought by a group of college applicants who allege the university unfairly discriminated against Asian applicants. The group brought a similar case against Harvard University. "We wanted and needed a firm that had a national profile," says David Parker, university interim vice chancellor and general counsel. Given the scope of the matters at hand, he says the university saw in Skadden "a firm that could cover a wide range of litigation matters and in a sense step back and act as a coordinator." In hiring Mr. Fitzgerald, the university has selected a litigator with a long track record working on high-profile cases. Mr. Fitzgerald joined Skadden in 2012 after serving over a decade as the U.S. attorney for the Northern District of Illinois. In that post, he headed investigations and prosecutions of former Illinois Governor George Ryan, convicted of fraud, racketeering and lying to the FBI in 2006; former Hollinger International Inc. chairman Conrad Black, convicted of fraud in 2007; and former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich, convicted of public corruption in 2011. The Chicago-based attorney also tried the case of Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff who was convicted in 2007 of lying about the leak of an undercover CIA agent. When he was hired by Skadden two years ago, Mr. Fitzgerald told The American Lawyer that he was reticent about becoming a criminal defense attorney and thus agreed to come aboard only to help companies conducting internal investigations, work as a monitor or advise boards of companies in trouble. UNC would appear to fit the bill. "Skadden has extensive experience representing clients on their most critical litigation issues," he said in a university press release. "We are committed to providing ongoing legal support and counsel to Carolina." The university has already been billed $3.1 million by Cadwalader for its work on the report, which was released last October, according to the university's website. Those costs were covered by a UNC-Chapel Hill Foundation account that is not tied to state funding or tuition dollars, the website states. "Given that we were brought in to conduct an outside, independent investigation, we and the university thought it best to let another firm serve as advocate for the university in these particular lawsuits," Cadwalader said in response to questions about why the firm will not continue to work with the university. UNC is not the only public university facing litigation and mounting legal fees. Pennsylvania State University has been billed about $55.7 million in legal and consulting fees as a result of revelations that former football coach Jerry Sandusky sexually abused eight boys, the school's website states. US WELL: Faces "Lackie Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Lackie, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. U.S. Well Services, LLC, Case No. 2:15-cv-00695 (S.D. Ohio, February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. U.S. Well Services, LLC is an oilfield services provider of well stimulation services to the upstream oil and gas industry. The Plaintiff is represented by: Hans A. Nilges, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 4580 Stephen Circle, N.W., Suite 201 Canton, OH 44718 Telephone: (330) 470-4428 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 E-mail: hans@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Steven G. Thomakos, Esq. STEVEN G. THOMAKOS, LLC 221 Front Avenue SW, PO Box 944 New Philadelphia, OH 44663 Telephone: (330) 308-0500 Facsimile: (330) 364-4373 E-mail: sthomakos@aol.com - and - Thomas A. Downie, Esq. 46 Chagrin Falls Plaza #104 Chagrin Falls, OH 44022 Telephone: (440) 973-9000 Facsimile: (440) 210-4610 E-mail: tom@chagrinlaw.com WATCH-U-WANT INC: Has Sent Unsolicited Text Messages, Suit Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- David Izsak, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Watch-U-Want, Inc., a Florida corporation, Case No. 1:15-cv-01644 (N.D. Ill., February 24, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendant's practice of sending unsolicited text messages to the wireless telephones of the Plaintiff and each of the members of the Class without prior express written consent. Watch-U-Want, Inc. is in the business of buying, trading, and consigning pre-owned luxury watches with its principal place of business located in Broward County, Florida. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ismael Tariq Salam, Esq. Joseph J. Siprut, Esq. SIPRUT PC 17 N. State Street, Suite 1600 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 236-0000 E-mail: isalam@siprut.com jsiprut@siprut.com WOODLAWN ENTERPRISE: Faces "Lopez" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Marvin Lopez, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Woodlawn Enterprise, LLC t/a Bestway Supermarket, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00248 (E.D. Va., February 23, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. Woodlawn Enterprise, LLC is a Virginia limited liability company that owns and operates a grocery store located in Mt. Vernon, Virginia. The Plaintiff is represented by: Mitchell I. Batt, Esq. SULLIVAN TALBOTT & BATT 77 S Washington St, Suite 304 Rockville, MD 20850 Telephone: (301) 340-2450 Facsimile: (301) 424-8280 E-mail: mbatt@verizon.net XENEX LABORATORIES: Recalls API - Meloxicam Products ---------------------------------------------------- Starting date: February 13, 2015 Posting date: February 25, 2015 Type of communication: Drug Recall Subcategory: Drugs Hazard classification: Type II Source of recall: Health Canada Issue: Product Safety Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals Identification number: RA-43827 Lack of evidence of temperature control for cold storage Depth of distribution: Wholesalers and compounding pharmacies Affected products: API - Meloxicam, Nystatin, Retinoic Acid, Omeprazole, Liothyronine Sodium, Levothyroxine Sodium DIN, NPN, DIN-HIM: N/A Dosage form: Powder Strength: N/A Lot or serial number: All lots Recalling Firm: Xenex Laboratories Inc. 2402 Canoe Ave, Coquitlam V3K 6C2, British Columbia CANADA Marketing Authorization Holder: Not Applicable XENEX LABORATORIES: Recalls API - Azelaic Acid Products ------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: February 13, 2015 Posting date: February 25, 2015 Type of communication: Drug Recall Subcategory: Drugs Hazard classification: Type II Source of recall: Health Canada Issue: Product Safety Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals Identification number: RA-43821 Lack of evidence product was fabricated specific to quality standard for drugs. Depth of distribution: Wholesalers and compounding pharmacies Affected products: API - Azelaic Acid, Dichloroacetic acid sodium salt DIN, NPN, DIN-HIM: N/A Dosage form: Powder Strength: N/A Lot or serial number: All lots Recalling Firm: Xenex Laboratories Inc. 2402 Canoe Ave, Coquitlam V3K 6C2. British Columbia CANADA Marketing Authorization Holder: Not Applicable XENEX LABORATORIES: Recalls API - DMSO Products ----------------------------------------------- Starting date: February 13, 2015 Posting date: February 25, 2015 Type of communication: Drug Recall Subcategory: Drugs Hazard classification: Type II Source of recall: Health Canada Issue: Product Safety Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals Identification number: RA-43825 Purified grade is not for direct human use. Depth of distribution: Wholesalers and compounding pharmacies Affected products: API - DMSO DIN, NPN, DIN-HIM: N/A Dosage form: Liquid Strength: N/A Lot or serial number: All lots Recalling Firm: Xenex Laboratories Inc. 2402 Canoe Ave, Coquitlam V3K 6C2, British Columbia CANADA Marketing Authorization Holder: Not Applicable XPRESS FINANCIAL: Has Sent Unsolicited Faxes, Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------- New United, Inc., an Illinois corporation, individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. Xpress Financial Inc. and John Does 1-10, Case No. 1:15-cv-01616 (N.D. Ill., February 23, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of sending unsolicited facsimiles. Xpress Financial Inc. is a Financial Services company located in 807 S Orlando Ave, Winter Park, Florida, United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian J. Wanca, Esq. Ryan M. Kelly, Esq. ANDERSON + WANCA 3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 760 Rolling Meadows, IL 60008 Telephone: (847) 368-1500 Facsimile: (847) 368-1501 E-mail: bwanca@andersonwanca.com rkelly@andersonwanca.com YACHTING PROMOTIONS: Faces "Garcia" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT --------------------------------------------------------------- Danilo Lopez Garcia and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C. 216(B) v. Yachting Promotions, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-20776 (S.D. Fla., February 24, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours weekly. Yachting Promotions, Inc. is a Florida corporation that is engaged in the business of promoting and producing yacht and boat shows in the world. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jamie H. Zidell, Esq. JAMIE H. ZIDELL, PA 300 71st Street, Suite 605 Miami Beach, FL 33141 Telephone: (305) 865-6766 Facsimile: 865-7167 E-mail: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM YESO CONSTRUCTION: Faces "Cedillo" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Miguel Cedillo and Alejandro Enriquez, individually and on behalf of other employees similarly situated v. Yeso Construction, Inc. and Nansalmaa Bold, Case No. 1:15-cv-01611 (N.D. Ill., February 22, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. The Defendants own and operate a construction company in Lake County, Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: David Erik Stevens, Esq. CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC 6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200 Chicago, IL 60646 Telephone: (312) 307-0766 E-mail: Dave@StevensLawLLC.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 2015. 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 202-362-8552. * * * End of Transmission * * *