/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/150416.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Thursday, April 16, 2015, Vol. 17, No. 76 Headlines ABA TURKISH: Faces "Kayalamar" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ACE USA: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Boise" Suit Claims ACTIVISION BLIZZARD: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Suit Claims AMERICAN EXPRESS: Faces "Eaton" Suit Over Anti-Steering Policies AMERICAN WATER: Faces "Patrick" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ANTHEM INC: Faces "Hayes" Suit in Ind. Over Alleged Data Breach ARUBA NETWORKS: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports ASSET ACCEPTANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Breeden" Suit Claims B & J CONSTRUCTION: Faces "Amador" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT BEL FUSE: Faces "Ortega" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages BEST FOODS: Recalls Cumin Power Products Due to Peanuts BIG JOYS: "Espinobarros" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages BLOOMINGDALE'S INC: Sued in E.D.N.Y. Over Failure to Pay Overtime BLUE BELL: Recalls Banana Pudding Ice Cream Due to Listeria BLUE CROSS: Faces Numerous Class Suits Alleging Antitrust Claims BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Faces Suit Over False Twin-Turbo Engines BRIGHT HORIZONS: Faces "Douglas' Suit Over Failure to Pay OT CALIFORNIA: Border Patrol Sued for Not Providing Information CATAMARAN HEALTH: Sued for Selling Insurance Using "Superman" Ad CH2M HILL: "Schlei" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages CHAPA'S NOODLES: "Zhang" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime CHASE RECEIVABLES: Court Junks Motion to Dismiss "Vinas" Case CHUHAK & TECSON: Sued in Ill. for Perpetrating Tax Fraud Scheme COLONY CAPITAL: Accused of Hiding Material Info From SEC Filing COLORADO: Accused of Illegal Jail Time Due to Miscalculation CONN LANDSCAPE: Faces "Arias" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime COOPER VISION: Faces "Crose" Suit Over Contact Lens-Price Fixing COOPER VISION: Faces "Ball" Suit Over Contact Lens-Price Fixing COOPER VISION: Faces "Valdez" Suit Over Contact Lens-Price Fixing DEVA INC: "Sekiya" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages DIAMOND 1 PARKING: "Coronado" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT DICK'S SPORTING: Makes Employees Work Off the Clock, Suit Claims DIRECTV INC: Supreme Court to Review Suit Over Claims Arbitration DISTANCE LEARNING: Faces "Evans" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT EI DU PONT: Faces Suit Over Restructuring of Chemical Division GLOBE LEND: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Mogannam" Suit Claims GOLDEN MINE: Sued in Illinois Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages FAMILY SERVICE: "D'Arezzo" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages HARDIN MEDICAL: Sued Over Unlawful Emergency Care Policies HENRY'S FARM: Recalls Soybean Sprouts Due to Listeria HIGDON COMPANIES: Faces "Carpenter" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT HO WONG: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Chen" Suit Claims HOME DEPOT: Recalls Patio Set Rockers Due to Fall Hazard HOPE FOODS: Recalls Kale Pesto Hummus Products Due to Walnuts HUMANA PHARMACY: Faces Suit in Indiana Over Unsolicited Calls HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES: Sued Over Forced-Placed Insurance Fees IDREAMSKY TECHNOLOGY: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports INTERNATIONAL UNION: Court Chipped Away Claims From "Slack" Suit JAMBA JUICE: Deal to Re-label "All Natural" Smoothie Kits Okayed JANTON INDUSTRIES: Faces "Koszkos" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT JUDICIAL ALTERNATIVES: Sued Over Unconstitutional Probation Fees KAISER FOUNDATION: Trial in Suit by Surgery Patients Has Began KING DIGITAL: IPO Prices Were Artificially Inflated, Suit Claims LA COUNTY, CA: Battle Over Errors in Warrant System Turned Ugly LENOVO (US) INC: Faces "Cullifer" Suit Over Harmful Spyware LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Jeffries" Suit Over Toxic Flooring LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Fultineer" Suit Over Toxic Flooring LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Picard" Suit Over Toxic Flooring LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Washington" Suit Over Toxic Flooring LYFT INC: Has Sent Unsolicited Text Messages, "Wolf" Suit Claims MAGNOLIA HEALTH: Sued in S.D. Ind. Over Illegal Wages Deductions MANAGEMENT & TRAINING: Faces "Smith" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT MAYA OVERSEAS: Recalls Cumin Power Products Due to Peanuts MERRILL LYNCH: Faces Suit by Clifford Chance Plan Participant MICROSOFT CORP: 9th Cir. Reverses Denial of Class Certification MONSANTO CO: To Pay $350K to Settle With Farmers in Seven States NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Appeal Trial in Pay-for-Play Suit Continues NEVADA: Farmers Fight Restrictions on Groundwater Pumping NY FIRE: Faces "Song" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages OIL STATES INT'L: Faces "Dotson" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT OSAKA JAPANESE: "Chen" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages PACIFIC GATEWAY: Summary Judgment Bid in Arocho Case Denied PELHAM BAY: "Dubiel' Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages POCKETS RESTAURANTS: Faces "Valadez" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT POTESTIVO & ASSOCIATES: Illegally Collects Debt, "Carl" Suit Says PREMERA BLUE: Faces "Archibald" Suit Over Alleged Data Breach PREMERA BLUE: Faces "Kaplowitz" Suit Over Alleged Data Breach PRESENCE HEALTH: Doesn't Properly Fund Employees Plan, Suit Says PRESTIGE DELIVERY: Faces "Mose" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime PRITCHARD INDUSTRIES: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Ruiz" Suit Says PRODUCTION MEDIA: Fails to Provide Ad Presentation, Suit Claims PROVIDENCE CENTER: "D'Arezzo" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT RAJA FOODS: Recalls SWAD Cumin Powder Products Due to Peanuts RITE-WAY JANITORIAL: "Reyes" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT RUST-OLEUM CORPORATION: Faces "Baden" Suit Over Misbranding SANDISK CORP: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports SHADOW INDUSTRIES: Sued in C.D. Cal. Over Defective Radial Treads SHELDON RABIN: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Padilla" Suit Says SMOOTH INDUSTRIES: Recalls Children's Pajamas Due to Burn Risk SOCIAL SECURITY: Accused by Refugees of Tampering With Evidence SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: Sued Over Misleading Boarding Policies SPINNERS INC: Faces "Cornelio" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime SQUARE 1 FINANCIAL: Being Sold for Too Little, Shareholders Say STEPS TO SUCCESS: Faces "Artis" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime STERLING INFOSYSTEMS: Illegally Furnished Reports, Suit Claims STOKKE LLC: Recalls Trailz Strollers Due to Fall Hazard SUNTRUST BANKS: Faces " Gilbert" Suit Over Violation of ERISA SUPERVALU INC: Cannot Compel Arbitration of Antitrust Claims SUTTER HOME: Faces Suit Over Unsafe Levels of Arsenic in Wines SYMANTEC CORP: Has Lost Bid to Shake Off Insurance Fraud Claims TARGET CORP: To Pay $10MM to Settle Class Suit Over Data Breach TOYS R US: Faces Suit Over Deceiving Babies R Us Rewards Program TRADER JOE'S: Sued for Systematically Demoting "Older" Employees TRANS UNION LLC: Sued Over $10 Charge in Placing Security Freezes TRIPOLIS ENTERPRISES: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages TURN INC: Illegally Tracks Users Web Activities, Action Claims TWITTER INC: Accused by Ex-Software Engineer of Gender Bias UIL HOLDINGS: Being Sold for Too Little to Iberdrola, Suit Says UMG RECORDINGS: Close to Settling Suit Over Payments of Royalty USPLABS LLC: Falsely Marketed PowerFULL Supplements, Suit Claims VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Sued Over Denial of Mental Heath Coverage WARNER/CHAPPELL: "Happy Birthday to You" Song Called a Cash Cow WELLS FARGO: Bid to Strike Class Allegations in "Roy" Denied WHOLE FOODS: Recalls Bran Muffin Products Due to Eggs and Milk WISCONSIN DETAIL: Faces "Idris" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime XANODYNE PHARMACEUTICALS: Gets Ruling Dismissing Lightfoot Claims YORK PARTNERS: Faces "Uribe" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ********* ABA TURKISH: Faces "Kayalamar" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Selma Kayalamar, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Aba Turkish Restaurant LLC, Mustafa Yalaza, and Arif Gecer, Case No. 1:15-cv-02430 (S.D.N.Y., March 31, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for all hours worked over 40 each workweek. The Defendants own and operate a Turkish restaurant in New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq. JOSEPH, HERZFELD, HESTER, & KIRSCHENBAUM 233 Broadway, 5th Floor New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 688-5640 x 2548 Facsimile: (212) 688-5639 E-mail: maimon@jhllp.com ACE USA: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Boise" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------- Justin Mark Boise, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ACE USA, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-21264 (S.D. Fla., April 1, 2015), seeks to stop Defendant's practice of making illegal telemarketing calls to the telephones of consumers nationwide. ACE USA, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that provides commercial and personal property and casualty insurance, personal accident and supplemental health insurance, reinsurance and life insurance. The Plaintiff is represented by: Benjamin H. Crumley, Esq. CRUMLEY & WOLFE, PA 2254 Riverside Avenue Jacksonville, Florida 32204 Telephone (904) 374-0111 Facsimile (904) 374-0113 E-mail: ben@cwbfl.com - and - W. Craft Hughes, Esq. Jarrett L. Ellzey, Esq. HUGHES ELLZEY, LLP 2700 Post Oak Blvd., Ste. 1120 Galleria Tower I Houston, TX 77056 Telephone: (713) 554-2377 Facsimile: (888) 995-3335 E-mail: craft@hughesellzey.com jarrett@hughesellzey.com ACTIVISION BLIZZARD: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Activision Blizzard stiffs its senior artists for overtime, a class action claims in California Superior Court. AMERICAN EXPRESS: Faces "Eaton" Suit Over Anti-Steering Policies ---------------------------------------------------------------- James Eaton, Paul Kashishian, Gianna Valdes, Chad Tintrow and Matthew Moriarty, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. American Express Company and American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01770 (E.D.N.Y., April 1, 2015), arises out of the Anti-Steering Rules or Non- Discrimination Provisions that the Defendants entered into an illegal vertical agreements with merchants who accept American Express credit cards which artificially inflate the retail prices for goods and services. The Defendants own and operate a financial services company with its principal place of business in New York, New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd A. Seaver, Esq. BERMAN DEVALERIO One California Street, Suite 900 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 433-3200 Facsimile: (415) 433-6382 E-mail: jtabacco@bermandevalerio.com tseaver@bermandevalerio.com - and - Gordon Ball, Esq. Lance K. Baker, Esq. GORDON BALL PLLC 7001 Old Kent Drive Knoxville, TN 37919 Telephone: (865) 525-7028 Facsimile: (865) 525-4679 E-mail: gball@gordonball.com - and - Marvin A. Miller, Esq. MILLER LAW LLC 115 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 2910 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 332-3400 Facsimile: (312) 676-2676 E-mail: mmiller@millerlawllc.com - and - Christopher Lovell, Esq. LOVELL STEWART HALEBIAN JACOBSON LLP 61 Broadway, Suite 501 New York, NY 10006 Telephone: (212) 608-1900 Facsimile: (212) 719-4775 E-mail: CLovell@lshllp.com AMERICAN WATER: Faces "Patrick" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- David Patrick, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. American Water Works Company, Inc. and Missouri-American Water Company, Case No. 4:15-cv-00551 (E.D. Mo., March 30, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours weekly. The Defendants are providers of water and wastewater services in approximately 45 States in the United States and Canada. The Plaintiff is represented by: D. Todd Mathews, Esq. GORI JULIAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 156 N. Main Street Edwardsville, IL 62025 Telephone: (618) 659-9833 Facsimile: (618) 659-9834 E-mail: todd@gorijulianlaw.com - and - Robert W. Cowan, Esq. BAILEY PEAVY BAILEY, PLLC 440 Louisiana St., Suite 2100 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (713) 425-7100 Facsimile: (713) 425-7101 E-mail: rcowan@bpblaw.com ANTHEM INC: Faces "Hayes" Suit in Ind. Over Alleged Data Breach --------------------------------------------------------------- Steven L. Hayes, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Anthem, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00526 (S.D. Ind., April 1, 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: Edmond W. Foley FOLEY & SMALL 1002 E. Jefferson Boulevard South Bend, IN 46617 Telephone: (574) 288-7676 E-mail: efoley@foleyandsmall.com - and - Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq. Francis J. Rondoni, Esq. Jeffrey D. Bores, Esq. CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA 17 Washington Avenue North, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-7300 Facsimile: (612) 336-2940 E-mail: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com frondoni@chestnutcambronne.com jbores@chestnutcambronne.com - and - Gary F. Lynch, Esq. Edwin J. Kilpela Jr., Esq. Jamisen A. Etzel, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET & KILPELA, LLP PNC Park 115 Federal Street, Suite 210 Pittsburgh, PA 15212 Telephone: (412) 322-9243 Facsimile: (412) 231-0246 E-mail: glynch@carlsonlynch.com ekilpela@carlsonlynch.com jetzel@carlsonlynch.com - and - Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq. Heidi M. Silton, Esq. Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401-2159 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Facsimile: (612) 339-0981 E-mail: khriebel@locklaw.com hmsilton@locklaw.com kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com - and - W. Daniel Dee Miles III, Esq. Larry A. Golston, Esq. Andrew E. Brashier, Esq. BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C. 272 Commerce Street Post Office Box 4160 Montgomery, Alabama 36103-4160 Telephone: (334) 269-2343 Facsimile: (334) 954-7555 E-mail: dee.miles@beasleyallen.com larry.golston@beasleyallen.com andrew.brashier@beasleyallen.com - and - Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq. David R. Scott, Esq. Erin Green Comite, Esq. SCOTT + SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW 156 South Main Street, P.O. Box 192 Colchester, CT 06415 Telephone: (860) 537-5537 Facsimile: (860) 537-4432 E-mail: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com david.scott@scott-scott.com ecomite@scott-scott.com ARUBA NETWORKS: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports -------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Newfield, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Aruba Networks, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15- cv-01502 (N.D. Cal., April 1, 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. Aruba Networks, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Sunnyvale, California, which is a next-generation network access solution for the mobile enterprise. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian J. Robbins, Esq. Stephen J. Oddo, Esq. Edward B. Gerard, Esq. Justin D. Rieger, Esq. ROBBINS ARROYO LLP 600 B Street, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 525-3990 Facsimile: (619) 525-3991 E-mail: brobbins@robbinsarroyo.com soddo@robbinsarroyo.com egerard@robbinsarroyo.com jrieger@robbinsarroyo.com - and - Hamilton P. Lindley, Esq. DUNNAM DUNNAM HARMON WEST LINDLEY & RYAN LLP 4125 W. Waco Drive Waco, TX 76710 Telephone: (254) 753-6437 Facsimile: (254) 753-7434 E-mail: hlindley@dunnamlaw.com ASSET ACCEPTANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Breeden" Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- William K. Breeden, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Asset Acceptance, LLC and John Does 1-25, Case No. 3:15-cv-02306 (D.N.J., April 2, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendant's practice of using an unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Asset Acceptance, LLC is a collection agency with an office located at 28405 Van Dyke Avenue, Warren, Michigan, 48093. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ari Marcus, Esq. MARCUS LAW, LLC 1500 Allaire Avenue, Suite 101 Ocean, NJ 07712 Telephone: (732) 660-8169 Facsimile: (732) 298-6256 E-mail: ari@marcuslawnj.com B & J CONSTRUCTION: Faces "Amador" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Berman Ulises Treminio Amador and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C. 216(b) v. B & J Construction Service Corp, Beatriz Velazquez Granado, Case No. 1:15-cv-21252 (S.D. Fla., March 31, 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 construction company that regularly transacts business within Dade County, Florida. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jamie H. Zidell, Esq. J.H. ZIDELL, PA 300 71st Street, Suite 605 Miami Beach, FL 33141 Telephone: (305) 865-6766 Facsimile: 865-7167 E-mail: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM BEL FUSE: Faces "Ortega" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Ramon Ortega and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C. 216(b) v. Bel Fuse, Inc., Array Connector Corporation, Bill McPherson, Case No. 1:15-cv-21229 (S.D. Fla., March 30, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours weekly. The Defendants own and operate a Florida-based company that manufactures electronic components for the computer, networking, telecommunications, transportation and defense and aerospace industries. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jamie H. Zidell, Esq. J.H. ZIDELL, PA 300 71st Street, Suite 605 Miami Beach, FL 33141 Telephone: (305) 865-6766 Facsimile: 865-7167 E-mail: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM BEST FOODS: Recalls Cumin Power Products Due to Peanuts ------------------------------------------------------- Best Foods Inc. 75 Midvale Rd,. Edison, NJ is recalling its 7 ounce packages and 14 oz. packages of Deer brand Cumin Powder because they may contain undeclared peanuts. People who have allergies to peanuts run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products. The recalled packages of Deer brand Cumin Powder were distributed to NY, CT, NJ, MA, PA, DE and VA and have reached consumers through retail stores. The product comes in a clear and yellow plastic package. Some of the 7 ounce packages are marked with UPC number 714760027497 and some of the 14 ounce packages are marked with UPC number 714760027503. No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this problem. The recall was initiated after routine sampling and analysis by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets who found the product to contain peanuts which were not declared on the label. Consumers who have purchased 7 ounce and 14 ounce packages of Deer brand Cumin Powder are urged to return them to the place of purchase for full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at 1-732-650-1300 Ext 222, Monday - Friday 9 a.m. - 5 p.m. EST. BIG JOYS: "Espinobarros" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Celso Valentin Espinobarros, individually and in behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. Big Joys Corp. d/b/a West End Superette and New West End Superette, Jai Sung Choi, and Kooim Choi, Case No. 1:15-cv-02499 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a grocery store located at 273 West 72nd Street, New York, New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brandon David Sherr, Esq. John Gurrieri, Esq. Justin Alexander Zeller, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JUSTIN A. ZELLER, P.C. 277 Broadway, Suite 408 New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (212) 229-2249 Facsimile: (212) 229-2246 E-mail: bsherr@zellerlegal.com jmgurrieri@zellerlegal.com Jazeller@zellerlegal.com BLOOMINGDALE'S INC: Sued in E.D.N.Y. Over Failure to Pay Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- Shamoura Welch-Robinson, and Randy Davis, on behalf ofthemselves and all other similarly situated employees v. Bloomingdale's, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01752 (E.D.N.Y., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. Bloomingdale's, Inc. is an Ohio Business Corporation that operates a chain of department stores. The Plaintiff is represented by: Louis Ginsberg, Esq. THE LAW FIRM OF LOUIS GINSBERG, P.C. 1613 Northern Boulevard Roslyn, NY 11576 Telephone: (516) 625-0105 BLUE BELL: Recalls Banana Pudding Ice Cream Due to Listeria ------------------------------------------------------------ Blue Bell Creameries is expanding its recall of products that were produced in the Broken Arrow, Okla., plant to include Banana Pudding Ice Cream pints which tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes, and additional products manufactured on the same line. These items have the potential to be young children, frail or elderly people, and others with weakened immune systems. Although healthy individuals may suffer only short-term symptoms such as high fever, severe headache, stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea, Listeria monocytogenes infection can cause miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant women. The products being recalled are distributed to retail outlets, including food service accounts, convenience stores and supermarkets in Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, and Wyoming. No illnesses have been confirmed to date. On April 3, 2015, Blue Bell Creameries voluntarily suspended operations at its Broken Arrow, Okla., plant to thoroughly inspect the facility due to a 3oz. institutional/food service chocolate cup that tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes and was immediately withdrawn from all outlets. That product was only available to Blue Bell's food service and institutional accounts and was recalled along with 3oz. vanilla and strawberry institutional/food service cups. On April 4, 2015, out of an abundance of caution, Blue Bell began working with retail outlets to remove all products produced in Broken Arrow, Okla., from their service area. These products are identified with a code date ending in O, P, Q, R, S or T located on the bottom of the carton and they are a part of the voluntary market withdrawal. On April 7, 2015, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration notified Blue Bell that the Banana Pudding Ice Cream pint tested positive for Listeria monocytogenes. This pint was produced in the Broken Arrow, Okla., plant on February 12, 2015. Subsequently Blue Bell is recalling all products made on that one particular production line, from February 12, 2015 - March 27, 2015. These products were produced on that same line and have a code date ending in either S or T. Recalled products produced in Oklahoma are identified by the code date on the bottom of the carton. Ice Cream Pints: UPC # 071899-05101 5 Code Date ------------------------------------- --------- Ice Cream Banana Pudding pint 021217S Ice Cream Butter Crunch pint 021917S Ice Cream Mint Chocolate Chip pint 022017S Ice Cream Cookies 'n Cream pint 030317S, 030617S Ice Cream Homemade Vanilla pint 030417S Ice Cream Dutch Chocolate pint 032317S Ice Cream Moo-llennium Crunch pint 032417S, 032517S Sherbet Pint: UPC # 0 71899-19990 8 ----------------------------------- Rainbow Sherbet pint 021717S, 021817S, 022317S, 030217S Sherbet Quarts: UPC # 0 71899-18992 3 ------------------------------------- Orange Sherbet quart 032617S Mixed Berry Sherbet quart 032717S 3 ounce Tab Lid Cup: Product # 136 *Institutional / food service cup only --------------------------------- Rainbow Sherbet 022417S, 022617S, 022717S Gold Rim Half Gallon: UPC # 0 71899-03720 0 --------------------- Ice Cream Homemade Vanilla half gallon 030917T, 031017T, 031117T, 031217T, 031717T, 031717T, 031817T Brown Rim Half Gallon: UPC # 0 71899-83548 6 ---------------------- Ice Cream Pistachio Almond half gallon 031317T Light Half Gallon: UPC # 0 71899-73501 4 --------------------- Ice Cream Homemade Vanilla Light 031917T half gallon Consumers who have purchased these items are urged to return them to the place of purchase for a full refund. For more information consumers with questions may call 979-836-7977, Monday - Friday 8 a.m. - 5 p.m. CST or go to bluebell.comdisclaimer icon. BLUE CROSS: Faces Numerous Class Suits Alleging Antitrust Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that 29 businesses accuse Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Arizona of conspiring to monopolize health insurance, in a federal antitrust class action. Virtually identical complaints were filed in Buffalo and Rochester, N.Y. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Faces Suit Over False Twin-Turbo Engines -------------------------------------------------------------- Julie Baker-Dennis at Courthouse News Service reports that BMW cut costs by replacing its twin-turbo N54 engines with single-turbo products, but it is trading on the more powerful predecessor's prestige by marketing these newer models as "TwinPower Tubo," a federal class action alleges. "Twin-turbo engines are objectively superior to single-turbo engines," the March 13 complaint states. "Conventional driving tests can measure this superior performance. For example, twin- turbo engines boast reduced turbo lag, superior throttle response, smoother delivery power and torque, and greater ease of tuning." BMW's N54 twin-turbo engine was a huge success from 2006 to 2008, but the company phased that model out because of its high rate of pressure fuel pump failures and because of pressure to meet the Federal Corporate Average Fuel Regulations, according to the federal complaint. Lead plaintiff Deepkarn Singh Bedi says BMW's new engine, the N55, is a single turbo, but that the automotive company is trading on twin-turbo terminology to maintain the "market prestige" that the old engine built up. Bedi, a resident of Tiburon, Calif., says BMW deceived him into paying a premium lease price for the 335i coupe in 2013 because he expected a twin-turbo engine. Calling the N55 the "false twin" of the N54, Bedi says BMW acted "to manipulate consumers into believing that the vehicle contained twin turbos, when, in actuality, it contains only a single turbo." The N54's other "false twins" include the N20, N26 and B38 engines, according to the complaint. Among model-year 2014 cars that BMW has also falsely marketed with "TwinPower Turbo" nomenclature "the 228i, M235i, 320i, 328i, 335i, 428i, 435i, 528i, 535d, 535i, 640i, 740i, 740li, Z4 sDrive28i, Z4 sDrive35i, and Z4 sDrive35is," Bedi says. "They are all False Twins," the complaint continues. Noting that it is common knowledge in the marketplace that an automobile with twin-turbo engines can command a premium price, Bedi says "BMW charged a MRSP premium of $7,500 more for a twin- turbocharged 2012 335i coupe" over a single-turbocharged engine in an identical car. BMW uses TwinPower Turbo terminology on various media to promote single-turbo engines, Bedi says, pointing to the company's website, printed brochures, and other outlets. With even the "technically savvy, sophisticated car enthusiasts and tuners" on Internet message boards confused about BMW's marketing terms, Bedi says the average consumer doesn't stand a chance. "For the average consumer who uses the website to get a sense of the kind of car he or she wants, and then goes to a BMW dealership, there is no real opportunity to learn that every single BMW N20 and N55 TwinPower Turbo engine has only one turbocharger," the complaint states. "In fact, BMW goes to great lengths to lead average consumers to believe that 'TwinPower Turbo' means a twin-turbo engine." Bedi says he would have never leased the coupe at the price he paid if he had been told the car only had a single turbocharger, or if any of the stickers or labels on the car had not had the "TwinPower Turbo" terminology. The class seeks injunctive relief, restitution and punitive damages for breach of warranty, deceptive acts and other claims. The Plaintiff is represented by: James Shah, Esq. SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP 475 White Horse Pike Collingswood, NJ 08107 Telephone: (856) 858-1770 Facsimile: (856) 858-7012 E-mail: jshah@sfmslaw.com BRIGHT HORIZONS: Faces "Douglas' Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ------------------------------------------------------------ Biancka Douglas, on behalf of herself and all other 15 CV 2 4 6 similarly situated employees v. Bright Horizons Children's Centers LLC, and Bright Horizons Children's Centers, Inc., Case No. 1:15- cv-02486 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours worked up to 40 in a week. The Defendants own and operate a school located at 910 9th Ave. New York, NY 10019. The Plaintiff is represented by: Louis Ginsberg, Esq. Matthew Eric Cohen, Esq. LAW FIRM OF LOUIS GINSBERG, P.C. 55 John St.-10th Fl. New York, NY 10038 Telephone: (516) 625-0105 Facsimile: (516) 625-0106 E-mail: louisginsberg@1800lostjob.com matthewcohen21@gmail.com CALIFORNIA: Border Patrol Sued for Not Providing Information ------------------------------------------------------------ Customs and Border Protection refused to respond to nearly 38,000 Freedom of Information requests, immigration attorneys say in a federal class action, according to Mike Heuer at Courthouse News Service. Attorneys Meredith Brown of Glendale, Kelly Ryan of Denver, and Jeri Flynn of Baton Rouge sued Customs and Border Protection on March 12 in San Francisco on behalf of 11 co-plaintiff clients. They say CBP has made them wait for more than a year for information, though its statutory response time is 20 days. At the end of fiscal year 2013, CBP had nearly 38,000 FOIA requests that had been pending for more than 20 days, the attorneys say. This backlog was more than nine times greater than it had been at the close of 2011, despite enormous increases in CBP funding, according to the complaint. The failure to respond affects the proposed class's ability to obtain legal permanent residency in the United States and other issues. Though CBP receives "significantly more funding than its two counterparts within the Department of Homeland Security," Citizenship and Immigration Services and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, and gets far fewer FOIA requests than its counterparts, it has far more backlogged requests, according to the complaint. Customs and Border Protection received 41,381 FOIA requests in 2013 versus 132,797 received by Citizenship and Immigration Services, but Customs and Border Protection's backlog increased, while its counterpart's backlog decreased, the attorneys say. The backlog hurts the attorneys' clients by making it impossible to ascertain the significance of their clients' interactions with Border Patrol officials and prevents the attorneys from "moving forward with applications for which they or their clients may be eligible," according to the lawsuit. Such delay also "causes unnecessary emotional hardship for those left in legal limbo while they wait to obtain the records that hold the key to assessing their immigration options in the United States," the attorneys say. "The statistics demonstrate that Customs and Border Protection is not prioritizing reducing its backlog of FOIA requests" and its effort to clear the backlog "has been wholly inadequate and ineffectual," according to the complaint. The attorneys say there are "no exceptional circumstances" that warrant the delay in processing the FOIA requests. They seek class certification, declaratory judgment that Customs and Border Protection is violating the Freedom of Information Act, and a nationwide injunction requiring a response to all backlogged FOIA requests within 60 days of a court order. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Stacy Tolchin, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF STACY TOLCHIN 634 S. Spring St., Suite 500A Los Angeles, CA 90014 Telephone: (213) 622-7450 Facsimile: (213) 622-7233 E-mail: Stacy@tolchinimmigration.com CATAMARAN HEALTH: Sued for Selling Insurance Using "Superman" Ad ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin Lessmiller, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that a class claims that an insurance company sold them disability policies under an illegal blanket insurance group, using "Superman" actor Christopher Reeve in its marketing materials. James and Emma Imes sued Catamaran Health Solutions LLC -- formerly known as Catalyst Health Solutions Inc. and HealthExtras Inc. -- Stonebridge Life Insurance Company, and Virginia Surety Company Inc. individually and on behalf of a proposed class of North Carolinians who have purchased the defendants' disability insurance since 1999. The Imeses say Catamaran created the scheme around 1997, which offered $1 million in disability insurance coverage, and a $2,500 accident and sickness expense benefit, sold under the HealthExtras name. The lawsuit alleges Catamaran created a fake group to comply with a North Carolina state law requiring that blanket group disability policies be sold only to an employer or other entity that is not controlled by the insurer. Catamaran then paid credit card companies to include its marketing materials, featuring pictures of Reeve, in cardholders' monthly statements, according to the complaint. "The marketing flyers contained images of the late famed Superman actor, Christopher Reeve, well-known for his equestrian accident causing quadriplegia, as well as statements by Mr. Reeve endorsing the HealthExtras Program," the complaint states. Once consumers sent Catamaran a short application, they were made a member of a fake group and were charged insurance premiums, the class action claims. "Avoiding insurance regulation, rate oversight and the scrutiny of an actual group allowed Catamaran to fraudulently market and sell illegal group disability policies known as the HealthExtras Program to individuals on a large nationwide scale," the lawsuit states. "These policies, disguised as inexpensive individual disability policies, were then issued to fictitious groups or trusts formed by the defendants to create the illusion of a valid group. This was a successful scheme to avoid state regulatory scrutiny and to avoid the scrutiny of an actual group and has been perpetrated in North Carolina for nearly 15 years." HealthExtras profits went from $5.3 million in 1999 to $44.2 million in 2000 thanks to more than 300,000 new enrollments, according to a shareholder report cited in the lawsuit. The plaintiffs allege Stonebridge and Virginia Surety, as underwriters, approved the illegal policies that were not approved by the North Carolina Department of Insurance, as required by state law. The insurance plan's policyholder -- HealthExtras Inc. -- was not a valid group for disability insurance purposes, the complaint says. "HealthExtras Inc. was not a group or association at all. HealthExtras, now Catamaran was a fictitious, illegal and sham company, with premiums collected for the benefit of it and its business partners, rather than a valid group of persons," the plaintiffs claim. "There was no constitution or bylaws and the HealthExtras 'members' had no voting privileges or representation on any boards or committees. This group was created for the sole purpose of selling the HealthExtras scheme to consumers, while avoiding supervision and oversight of the North Carolina Department of Insurance in direct violation of North Carolina law." The disability policies were cancelled without explanation in 2014 amidst similar class actions in different jurisdictions, according to the complaint. The lawsuit seeks the return of insurance premiums, punitive damages and an order of restitution. The class is represented by: Aaron C. Hemmings, Esq. HEMMINGS & STEVENS PLLC 5613 Duraleigh Road, Suite 151 Raleigh, NC 27612 Telephone: (919) 277-0161 Facsimile: (919) 277-0162 E-mail: ahemmings@hemmingsandstevens.com CH2M HILL: "Schlei" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Rebecca Schlei, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CH2M Hill, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00350 (E.D. Wis., March 30, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. CH2M Hill, Inc. provides consulting, design, design-build, operations, and program management services to government and private clients. The Plaintiff is represented by: Larry A. Johnson, Esq. Summer H. Murshid, Esq. Timothy P. Maynard, Esq. HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C. 222 East Erie Street, Suite 210 P.O. Box 442 Milwaukee, WI 53201-0442 Telephone: (414) 271-8650 Facsimile: (414) 271-8442 E-mail: ljohnson@hq-law.com smurshid@hq-law.com tmaynard@hq-law.com CHAPA'S NOODLES: "Zhang" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- Guangli Zhang, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Chapa's Noodles and Grill Corp. d/b/a Cha Pa's Noodles and Grill, Jenny Lien, and Michael Doe, Case No. 1:15-cv-02448 (S.D.N.Y., March 31, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, prejudgment and post-judgment interest and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a restaurant with a principal address at 314 West 52nd Street, New York, NY 10019. The Plaintiff is represented by: Amy R. Millican, Esq. John Troy, Esq. TROY LAW, PLLC 41-25 Kissena Blvd. Suite 119 Flushing, NY 11355 Telephone: (301) 758-5754 E-mail: millicana@gmail.com johntroy@pllc.com CHASE RECEIVABLES: Court Junks Motion to Dismiss "Vinas" Case ------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Deborah K. Chasanow denied a motion to dismiss the case captioned MARIA VINAS on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. CHASE RECEIVABLES, INC., CIVIL ACTION NO. DKC 14-3270, (D. Md.). The Plaintiff filed this putative class action on October 20, 2014, contending that the processing or convenience fee for payment of debts online violates the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. She sued on her own behalf as well as on behalf putative class members: Class 1. All persons from whom Defendant attempted to collect a convenience fee within one year prior to the filing of the complaint where such fee was not authorized by the agreement creating the debt or by law. Class 2. All persons from whom Defendant collected a convenience fee within one year prior to the filing of the complaint where such fee was not authorized by the agreement creating the debt or by law. Instead of answering, Defendant extended a Rule 68 offer of judgment on December 15, 2014, which Plaintiff rejected. Then, on December 22, 2014, Defendant moved to dismiss, contending that the offer of judgment rendered Plaintiff's individual claim moot and that the entire action should be dismissed. According to Judge Chasanow's memorandum opinion entered March 27, 2015, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/rfkmJ9from Leagle.com, a case is moot when a plaintiff receives all the relief sought in the complaint. Sometimes, an offer of settlement or judgment is deemed to constitute complete relief, even if not accepted by the plaintiff, and thus to moot a complaint. "Here, of course, there is a complicating factor because Plaintiff seeks to represent others in a class action. There is no binding, clear authority in this circuit on whether an unaccepted offer of judgment (if it offers complete relief to the named plaintiff), prior to the filing of a motion for class certification, moots the action. District courts in this circuit have consistently ruled that the putative class action is not rendered moot in this situation," Judge Chasanow added. "Accordingly, even if the Rule 68 Offer of Judgment constitutes full relief for Plaintiff, the unaccepted offer does not moot this case as long as Plaintiff does not unduly delay in filing a motion for class certification. Defendant's motion will be denied." Maria Vinas, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, represented by Sergei Lemberg -- slemberg@lemberglaw.com -- Lemberg and Associates LLC. Chase Receivables, Inc., Defendant, represented by Jordan M Spivok -- jspivok@psclaw.net -- Protas Spivok and Collins LLC. CHUHAK & TECSON: Sued in Ill. for Perpetrating Tax Fraud Scheme --------------------------------------------------------------- Chuhak & Tecson attorneys perpetrated a multimillion-dollar tax fraud scheme by selling bogus unconventional fuel-tax credits, a former client claims in a class action, reports Lorraine Bailey at Courthouse News Service. Rauxa Direct filed the class action on March 16 in Cook County Circuit Court against the Chicago firm; two of its attorneys, Gary Stern and Leon Greenblatt III; a dozen other individuals and eight other businesses. Andy Tecson, the president of the firm who is not a party to the action, did not have a comment on the lawsuit by press time. In addition to running a massive scheme of selling bogus tax credits, Chuhak & Tecson attorneys charged outrageous fees to prepare fraudulent tax documents, Rauxa says. The Internal Revenue Service permits producers of fuels from non- conventional sources to claim tax credits if the fuel was sold to an unrelated third party. Rauxa said the illegal plot was simple: approach wealthy individuals and have them agree to buy a certain amount of credits for a certain amount of money. "The defendants would represent that by claiming the credits purchased from them, plaintiff and others could substantially decrease their tax liability," the complaint states. Holding themselves out as experts in tax law, Chuhak & Tecson attorneys agreed to assist a number of landfill operators sell the tax credits they received for capturing methane gas produced by garbage landfills, Rauxa claims. Stern and the other attorneys allegedly knew, however, that the vast majority of the tax credits they offered to unsuspecting individuals were not legitimate because, Rauxa says, most of the landfills lacked the proper equipment to convert methane gas to electricity. When the IRS began to investigate the tax credits, defendants "submitted false statements and documents to the IRS in the hope that they could somehow convince the tax authorities that the credits were legitimate," the complaint states. Rauxa says the IRS ultimately disallowed 90 percent of the credits. Undercutting the attorneys' attempts to legitimize the credits, Rauxa says, is "their failure to respond to the IRS audit request for the production of documentation that could have established the legitimacy of the credits." The class seeks punitive damages for violations of federal anti- racketeering law, conspiracy, breach of fiduciary duty, and aiding and abetting fraud. The class is represented by: Daniel Konicek, Esq. KONICEK & DILLON, P.C. 70 West Madison Street, Suite 2060 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 239-0283 COLONY CAPITAL: Accused of Hiding Material Info From SEC Filing --------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that with Colony Financial set to take on all of the real estate and investment management businesses and operations of Colony Capital for a "consideration of up to $657.5 million," a class of shareholders claims the board of directors omitted material information from an SEC filing. The case is filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court, Central District. COLORADO: Accused of Illegal Jail Time Due to Miscalculation ------------------------------------------------------------ Colorado incarcerates prisoners beyond their release date after miscalculating their good-time benefits, 154 inmates and former inmates claim in a federal class action, reports Emma Gannon at Courthouse News Service. Lead plaintiff Arlene Rosetta-Rangel sued Colorado, Colorado Department of Corrections Executive Director Rick Raemisch, and six other directors and former directors on March 13. Prisoners' mandatory release dates are supposed to be monitored by the CDOC. But the plaintiffs claim the CDOC denies that it is required to credit prisoners' good-time days (Time Comp) to their release date. They claim that parole eligibility dates and statutory discharge dates also are calculated in an inconsistent. Rosetta-Rangel claims her May 5, 1999 release date was not honored because the 180 days she spent in jail before sentencing was not credited. In fact, she says, she was forced to serve 839 days longer than she should have under her properly credited statutory discharge date. "Time Comp as a department of CDOC acts without any meaningful monitoring by any agency other than CDOC," the complaint states. It claims that the state and its prison directors have been "responsible for the willful, malicious, and reckless conduct of Time Comp from 1993 to today." Plaintiff Brian O'Connell claims he is scheduled to be released on March 17, 2016, but with good behavior properly calculated he should have been released in October 2011. Plaintiff Gregory Rutschman, who has served 92 months in prison, says he should have been released in July 2011 for good time compensation, but will be in prison until November. The plaintiffs compare their case to Randall Ankeney v. The State of Colorado, in which Ankeney claimed that CDOC intentionally refused to calculate his release date fairly and correctly. It is pending before the Colorado Supreme Court, and could affect thousands of other state prisoners. The plaintiffs in the new case seek credit for good time served and damages for willful and wanton neglect, violations of the 4th, 8th and 14th Amendments, emotional distress, and costs of suit. They also seek a rehaul of the Time Computation Department's calculations for all prisoners' mandatory release dates. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Blake Embry, Esq. 2953 Osceola St Denver, CO 80212-1438 Telephone: (270) 491-0007 CONN LANDSCAPE: Faces "Arias" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Felipe Arias, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Conn Landscape Service, LLC, 2 Maple Place, LLC, James S. Conn a/k/a James W.M. Conn and Valerie Ann Conn, Case No. 2:15- cv-01691 (E.D.N.Y., March 30, 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 New York-based residential and commercial landscape maintenance company. The Plaintiff is represented by: Steven John Moser, Esq. STEVEN J. MOSER, P.C. 3 School Street, Suite 207B Glen Cove, NY 11542 Telephone: (516) 671-1150 Facsimile: (516) 882-5420 E-mail: smoser@moseremploymentlaw.com COOPER VISION: Faces "Crose" Suit Over Contact Lens-Price Fixing ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jennifer L. Crose, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Cooper Vision, Inc., Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Bausch & Lomb Incorporated, Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., and ABB/Con-Cise Optical Group LLC (a/k/a ABB Optical Group), alleges that the Defendants entered into a conspiracy to impose minimum resale prices on certain contact lens lines by subjecting them to so called Unilateral Pricing Policies (UPPs) and eliminate price competition on those products by big box stores, buying clubs, and internet-based retailers that prevent them from discounting those products. The Defendants are United States companies that are engaged in the business of making eye care products. The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel E. Becnel Jr., Esq. Matthew B. Moreland, Esq. Kevin P. Klibert, Esq. Salvadore Christina Jr., Esq. P.O. Drawer H Reserve, LA 70084 Telephone: (985) 536-1186 Facsimile: (985) 536-6445 E-mail: dbecnel@becnellaw.com mmoreland@becnellaw.com kklibert@becnellaw.com schristina@becnellaw.com COOPER VISION: Faces "Ball" Suit Over Contact Lens-Price Fixing --------------------------------------------------------------- Marn Larsen-Ball, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Cooper Vision, Inc., Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Bausch + Lomb, Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Abb Optical Group, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Meijer, Inc., Costco Wholesale Corporation, 1-800-Contacts.Com, Lensdiscounters.Com, Case No. 3:15-cv-00138 (E.D. Tenn., March 30, 2015), alleges that the Defendants entered into a conspiracy to impose minimum resale prices on certain contact lens lines by subjecting them to so called Unilateral Pricing Policies (UPPs) and eliminate price competition on those products by big box stores, buying clubs, and internet-based retailers that prevent them from discounting those products. The Defendants are United States companies that are engaged in the business of making eye care products. The Plaintiff is represented by: Gordon Ball, Esq. W. GORDON BALL, ATTORNEY AT LAW 550 W. Main Street, Suite 601 Knoxville, TN 37902 Telephone: (865) 525-7028 Facsimile: (865) 525-4679 E-mail: gball@gordonball.com COOPER VISION: Faces "Valdez" Suit Over Contact Lens-Price Fixing ----------------------------------------------------------------- Barbara Zamora-Valdes, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Novartis Corporation, Alcon Laboratories, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc., Bausch & Lomb, Inc., Valeant Pharmaceuticals North America LLC; Cooper Vision, Inc., and Abb/Con-Cise Optical Group LLC, Case No. 2:15-cv-02220 (D.N.J., March 30, 2015), alleges that the Defendants entered into a conspiracy to impose minimum resale prices on certain contact lens lines by subjecting them to so called Unilateral Pricing Policies (UPPs) and eliminate price competition on those products by big box stores, buying clubs, and internet-based retailers that prevent them from discounting those products. The Defendants are United States companies that are engaged in the business of making eye care products. The Plaintiff is represented by: James E. Cecchi, Esq. CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C. 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, NJ 07068 Telephone: (973) 994-1700 Facsimile: (973) 994-1744 E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com DEVA INC: "Sekiya" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Masayo Sekiya, Sola Yoon, Alma Vicencio and Jallyn Sunrise De Leon, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Deva Inc. a/k/a Tod's, Case No. 1:15-cv-02364 (S.D.N.Y., March 30, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards. Deva Inc. owns and operates a high-end leather goods store on Madison Avenue, New York City. The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew A. Kimler, Esq. Avrohom Y. Gefen, Esq. VISHNICK MCGOVERN MILIZIO LLP 3000 Marcus Avenue Lake Success, NY 11042 Telephone: (516) 437-4385 Facsimile: (516) 437-4395 E-mail: akimler@vmmlegal.com agefen@vmmlegal.com DIAMOND 1 PARKING: "Coronado" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT ------------------------------------------------------------- Wilson Coronado, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. Diamond 1 Parking Garage, Inc., d/b/a Diamond Garage Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-02548 (S.D.N.Y., April 2, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages, overtime compensation, spread of hours compensation, and damages under the Fair Labor Standard Act. Diamond 1 Parking Garage, Inc. owns and operates car wash and parking businesses with several locations in New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Leonor Hidalgo Coyle, Esq. Lloyd Robert Ambinder, Esq. VIRGINIA & AMBINDER LLP 40 Broad Street, 7th fl., Suite 1403 New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 943-9080 Facsimile: (212) 943-9082 E-mail: lcoyle@vandallp.com lambinder@bivas.net DICK'S SPORTING: Makes Employees Work Off the Clock, Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Dick's Sporting Goods stiffs workers for overtime and makes them work off the clock, an employee claims in a class action in California Superior Court. DIRECTV INC: Supreme Court to Review Suit Over Claims Arbitration ----------------------------------------------------------------- DirecTV persuaded the Supreme Court on March 23 to decide whether customers must arbitrate their claims over early termination fees, reports Barbara Leonard at Courthouse News Service. The satellite television provider claims that arbitration is compelled by the landmark Supreme Court decision, Concepcion v. AT&T Corp., but both the trial judge in Los Angeles and California's Second Appellate District disagreed. Amy Imburgia and Kathy Greiner are the lead plaintiffs in the would-be class action, which has proceeded in state court at the same pace as federal multidistrict litigation. In addition to refusing to kick the Imburgia case to arbitration, the trial court refused to stay the litigation pending the outcome of the federal case. The court's class-certification order in Imburgia came just a week before the Supreme Court decided Concepcion on April 27, 2011. Though that finding said that the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) pre-empts California's law on unconscionable contracts, DirecTV had not previously tried to compel arbitration. In rejecting DirecTV's arguments last year, the California appeals court noted that it did not find a similar case from the 9th Circuit, Murphy v. DirecTV, persuasive. "If the customer agreement expressly provided that the enforceability of the class action waiver 'shall be determined under the (nonfederal) law of your state without considering the preemptive effect, if any, of the FAA,' then that choice of law would be enforceable; Murphy cites no authority to the contrary," the decision states. The court summarized its finding as thus: "Section 9 of the 2007 customer agreement provides that 'if . . . the law of your state would find this agreement to dispense with class arbitration procedures unenforceable, then this entire Section 9 is unenforceable.' The class action waiver is unenforceable under California law, so the entire arbitration agreement is unenforceable. The superior court therefore properly denied the motion to compel arbitration." Per its custom, the U.S. Supreme Court did not issue any comment in taking up the case March 23. The case is DirecTV, Inc. v. Imburgia, Amy, et al., Case No. 14- 462. DISTANCE LEARNING: Faces "Evans" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ------------------------------------------------------------ Corey Evans, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Distance Learning Systems Indiana, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-00519 (S.D. Ind., March 30, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked over 40 in a work week. Distance Learning Systems Indiana, Inc. is a business engaged in providing educational services in Greenwood, Indiana. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert F. Hunt, Esq. HUNT HASSLER LORENZ & KONDRAS LLP 100 Cherry Street Terre Haute, IN 47807 Telephone: (812) 232-9691 Facsimile: (812) 234-2881 E-mail: hunt@huntlawfirm.net EI DU PONT: Faces Suit Over Restructuring of Chemical Division -------------------------------------------------------------- DuPont is spinning off its performance chemicals division to stifle shareholders' rights and make the new company takeover- proof, a trust claims in a shareholder class action, reports Sean Kelly at Courthouse News Service. DuPont wants to "impede the exercise of stockholder voting rights by transferring a substantial business segment to a new takeover proof entity controlled by former or current DuPont board members and other members hand-selected by DuPont," the Vladimir Gusinsky Living Trust claims in its March 18 complaint in Chancery Court. The trust says DuPont is doing it in response to a proxy contest waged by activist investor Nelson Peltz, who proposed two nominees to the DuPont board and another two nominees to the Chemours board. The DuPont board "will impose Draconian voting restrictions and anti-takeover provisions on SpinCo [Chemours], including a certificate of incorporation providing for a staggered board with three-year terms, a prohibition on stockholders acting by written consent, a 35% threshold for stockholders to call a special meeting, an 80% threshold to amend any of the foregoing provisions and by-laws providing for 90-day advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals and nominations," according to the complaint. DuPont will issue shareholders stock in the spinoff company, but their value will be "impaired because the proposed anti-takeover measures will prevent an effective proxy contest or change-in- control transaction," says the trust. Because stockholders do not get to vote on these provisions, DuPont's directors are "evading the stockholder vote required by Delaware law by spinning off a substantial usiness segment into a new company and causing that new company's charter to contain a classified board provision," the trust says. Classified boards, also known as staggered boards, can serve as a powerful anti-takeover measure. The fight between Peltz and DuPont goes back to 2013, when his investment company, Trian Fund Management LP, bought a very large stake in DuPont, citing underperformance of the company's stock over the previous 10 years compared to similar conglomerates. Peltz's Trian Fund Management has led reorganization efforts of many older companies, such as H.J. Heinz. DuPont's board reacted to this acquisition by amending DuPont's bylaws to make it "more difficult for stockholders to nominate directors or make other proposals at annual meetings," the trust says. DuPont also changed one of its "guiding principles" for executive compensation during this time by adopting golden parachute packages for executive officers, says the trust. Shortly thereafter, DuPont announced the spin-off of Chemours, which brings in about $6.5 billion annually for DuPont, accounting for nearly 19% of DuPont's revenue. In 2014 Peltz and Trian redoubled their efforts by accusing the DuPont board in a lengthy letter of "destroying value" through corporate '"bureaucracy and . . . lack of accountability," highlighting "$2 to $4 billion of excess corporate costs including . . . the maintenance of a country club, a 1,252-seat theatre and a 217-room hotel,"' the trust claims in the new lawsuit. DuPont then filed a Form 10 Registration Statement for The Chemours Company, announcing the spinoff and detailing the board's intention to "subject the stockholders' interest in Chemours to extreme corporate governance measures," the complaint states. The trust wants the spinoff enjoined "unless and until defendants have acted in accordance with their fiduciary duties," and/or the voting restrictions and anti-takeover provisions enjoined, plus damages for breach of fiduciary duty, and costs. The Plaintiff is represented by: Kevin Davenport, Esq. PRICKETT, JONES & ELLIOTT, P.A. 1310 King Street Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: (302) 888-6542 Facsimile: (302) 658-8111 E-mail: khdavenport@prickett.com GLOBE LEND: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Mogannam" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- John Mogannam, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Globe Lend, Inc., 2:15-cv-00718 (E.D. Cal., April 1, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendant's practice of making unsolicited calls in an attempt to collect debt. Globe Lend, Inc. is a lender of consumer loans and capital to individuals and small businesses. The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. Suren N. Weerasuriya, Esq. Adrian R. Bacon, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C. 324 S. Beverly Dr., #725 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (877) 206-4741 Facsimile: (866) 633-0228 E-mail: tfriedman@attorneysforconsumers.com sweerasuriya@attorneysforconsumers.com abacon@attorneysforconsumers.com GOLDEN MINE: Sued in Illinois Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Pedro Villa-Dorantes and Alma Soto, individually and on behalf of other employees similarly situated v. Golden Mine, Inc. and Aliriza Eshtrefi, Case No. 1:15-cv-02764 (N.D. Ill., March 30, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 in a week. The Defendants own and operate a restaurant in Will County, Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: Valentin Tito Narvaez I, Esq. CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC 6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200 Chicago, IL 60646 Telephone: (312) 878-1302 Facsimile: (888) 270-8983 E-mail: vnarvaez@yourclg.com FAMILY SERVICE: "D'Arezzo" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Darlene A. D'Arezzo, Stacey L. Salyers, Joseph K. Reardon, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated v. Family Service of Rhode Island, Inc., Docket No. 1:15-cv-00121 (D.R.I., March 30, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Plaintiff is represented by: Richard A. Sinapi, Esq. SINAPI LAW ASSOCIATES, Ltd. 175 Hillside Road Cranston, RI 02920 Telephone: 944-9692 Facsimile: 943-9040 E-mail: ras@sinapilaw.com HARDIN MEDICAL: Sued Over Unlawful Emergency Care Policies ---------------------------------------------------------- Paul Keith Woolery, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Hardin County General Hospital and Hardin Medical Center, Case No. 1:15-cv-01070 (W.D. Tenn., March 30, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendants' unlawful policy and practice of requiring identification, pre-payment for services or proof of insurance to citizens who presented at the Defendant's hospital for emergency care. The Defendants own and operate a not for profit hospital in Tennessee. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael L. Weinman, Esq. WEINMAN & ASSOCIATES P.O. Box 266, 112 S. Liberty St., Ste. 321 Jackson, TN 38302 Telephone: (731) 423-5565 Facsimile: (731) 423-5372 E-mail: Mike@weinmanandassoc.com HENRY'S FARM: Recalls Soybean Sprouts Due to Listeria ----------------------------------------------------- Henry's Farm Inc. of Woodford, VA is recalling all packages of soybean sprouts because they may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes, an organism which can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections to individuals with weakened immune systems. Although healthy individuals may suffer only short term symptoms such as high fever, severe headache, stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea, Listeria infection can cause miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant women. The following products are being recalled by the firm. 1-lb bags of soybean sprouts in clear plastic bags labeled "Natto Soybean Sprouts" "Keep Refrigerated" with a UPC Code of 1303020000 produced on or after March 24, 2015. 10-lb bags of soybean sprouts in black plastic bags labeled "Soy Bean Sprouts" "Keep Refrigerated" produced on or after March 24, 2015. These items were distributed to retail stores in Virginia and Maryland. The contamination was discovered after sampling by the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Food Safety Program and subsequent analysis by the Virginia Division of Consolidated Laboratory Services revealed the presence of Listeria monocytogenes in the products. No illness has been reported to date. Individuals who purchased soybean sprouts, distributed by Henry's Farm should return the product to the place of sale for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company directly at 301- 802-2996 or the Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Food Safety Program at 804-786-3520. HIGDON COMPANIES: Faces "Carpenter" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT --------------------------------------------------------------- Mabel Carpenter, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated employees v. Higdon Companies, Inc. d/b/a Acuity Staffing and 5 Star Home Care Services and Kenny Higdon, and Melissa Stansbury, Case No. 1:15-cv-00076 (E.D. Tenn., April 2, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for hours worked over 40 per week. The Defendants are engaged in the business of providing healthcare and information technology staffing services with its principal place of business in Chattanooga, Tennessee. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael L. Russell, Esq. GILBERT RUSSELL MCWHERTER SCOTT BOBBITT PLC 341 Cool Springs Boulevard, Suite 230 Franklin, TN 37067 Telephone: (615) 354-1144 Facsimile: (731) 664-1540 E-mail: mrussell@gilbertfirm.com HO WONG: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Chen" Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------ Qiang Chen, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Ho Wong Take-Out, Inc. d/b/a Golden Forest, Chris Ho Chan, and Jane Doe, Case No. 1:15-cv-02449 (S.D.N.Y., March 31, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for all hours worked over 40 each workweek. The Defendants own and operate a restaurant in New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Amy R. Millican, Esq. John Troy, Esq. TROY LAW, PLLC 41-25 Kissena Blvd. Suite 119 Flushing, NY 11355 Telephone: (301) 758-5754 E-mail: millicana@gmail.com johntroy@pllc.com HOME DEPOT: Recalls Patio Set Rockers Due to Fall Hazard -------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Home Depot, of Atlanta, Ga., announced a voluntary recall of about 25,000 Patio set rockers. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The patio sets' rocking chairs can break during normal use, posing a fall hazard to consumers. This recall involves Home Depot's Hampton Bay-branded Niles Park Collection patio sets. The bronze patio sets are made of cast aluminum and woven fabric with brown or tan cushions, or cushions with a generic fabric to allow for custom covers. Patio sets were sold in combinations of four rocking chairs and a tile-top fire pit; and two rocking chairs, a love seat and a rectangular coffee table. The chairs were also sold separately in sets of two rockers. SKU number 658479, 658480, 658485, 658486, 662696, 682688 or 1000051056 is located on a label on the lower cross bar along the back of the recalled chairs. The firm has received three reports of the rocking chairs breaking. No injuries have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: http://is.gd/4On9dv The recalled products were manufactured in China by Guangdong Shunde Baiming Industry Co., Ltd., of China and sold at The Home Depot stores nationwide and online at HomeDepot.com from October 2014 through January 2015 for between $280, for two chairs, and up to $1,000, for a patio set. HOPE FOODS: Recalls Kale Pesto Hummus Products Due to Walnuts ------------------------------------------------------------- Hope Foods is voluntarily recalling one specific lot of Kale Pesto Hummus because it contains undeclared walnuts. People who have an allergy or sensitivity to walnuts run the risk of serious or life threatening allergic reaction if they consume the product. The hummus is safe for consumption by those who do not have walnut allergies. The affected product was distributed in 8 oz plastic tubs and is marked with a Best By date of 05/04/15 and Lot Code of 030215-KP which can be found on the side of the lid. The unit UPC is 8- 56500-00426-6. No other product is included in this recall. We believe fewer than 3100 units have been distributed nationwide to limited retailers and wholesalers in the US only. The recall was initiated after Hope Foods discovered that product containing walnuts was distributed in packaging that did not reveal the presence of walnuts. No illnesses have been reported to date. Consumers with a walnut allergy who have purchased the affected product are urged to dispose of it or return them to the store where they were purchased for an exchange or full refund. Consumers with questions can call Hope Foods at 720-663-7123, Monday through Friday 9:00 am to 5:00 pm MST. This limited voluntary recall is being conducted with the knowledge of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm440888.htm HUMANA PHARMACY: Faces Suit in Indiana Over Unsolicited Calls ------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Humana Pharmacy Solutions dba Rightsource makes unsolicited calls to advertise its medication- delivery service, a class claims in Indiana Federal Court. HUNTINGTON BANCSHARES: Sued Over Forced-Placed Insurance Fees ------------------------------------------------------------- Lynne Nofziger and Jeffrey Nofziger, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated v. Huntington Bancshares Incorporated, et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-00646 (N.D. Ohio, April 2, 2015), alleges that the Defendants are engaged in a force-placed insurance scheme and pattern of demanding that borrowers maintain property insurance for their property in amounts greater than that required by law, greater than required by their mortgage agreements and greater than the Defendant's financial interest in the property, without any reasonable basis or justification. Huntington Bancshares Incorporated is a Maryland corporation that operates as a financial services company providing banking, insurance, investments, mortgage banking and consumer finance to individuals, businesses and institutions in many states. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian Giles, Esq. Bryce Lenox, Esq. GILES & LENOX LLC 1018 Delta Ave., Suite 202 Cincinnati, OH 45208 Telephone: (513) 815-3853 Facsimile: (513) 824-8160 E-mail: Brian@gileslenox.com Bryce@gileslenox.com - and - Avonte D. Campinha-Bacote, Esq. Joseph B. Russell, Esq. CAMPINHA BACOTE LLC Two Miranova Place, Suite 500 Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 233-4727 Facsimile: (415) 276-2988 (fax) E-mail: Avonte@CamBacLaw.com Joe.Russell@CamBacLaw.com IDREAMSKY TECHNOLOGY: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports ------------------------------------------------------------ Troy Hung, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. IDreamsky Technology Limited, et al., Case No. 1:15- cv-02514 (S.D.N.Y., April 2, 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. IDreamsky Technology Limited is a China corporation that operates as a mobile game publishing platform. The Plaintiff is represented by: Gregory B. Linkh, Esq. Lesley F. Portnoy , Esq. GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 122 E 42nd Street, Suite 2920 New York, NY 10168 Telephone: (212)682-5340 Facsimile: (212) 884-0988 E-mail: glinkh@glancylaw.com lportnoy@glancylaw.com - and - Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq. Robert V. Prongay, Esq. Casey E. 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: lglancy@glancylaw.com rprongay@glancylaw.com csadler@glancylaw.com INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports -------------------------------------------------------------- International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers Local #6 Pension Fund, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. International Business Machines Corporation, Virginia M. Rometty, Martin J. Schroeter and James J. Kavanaugh, Case No. 1:15-cv-02492 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 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. International Business Machines Corporation is a global information technology company based in Armonk, New York. It manufactures and sells computer hardware and software and offers a variety of technology services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher J. Keller, Esq. Michael W. Stocker, Esq. Rachel A. Avan, Esq. LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 140 Broadway New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 907-0700 Facsimile: (212) 818-0477 E-mail: ckeller@labaton.com mstocker@labaton.com ravan@labaton.com INTERNATIONAL UNION: Court Chipped Away Claims From "Slack" Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- William Dotinga at Courthouse News Service reports that a federal judge chipped away more of a lurid class action by disgruntled union members who accuse leaders of squandering pension funds on bad investments and "double-breasted" operations. David Slack is the lead plaintiff in the 2013 lawsuit that accused the International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 3 -- headquartered in Alameda -- and 68 other defendants of violating labor management laws, the California Labor Code, ERISA and federal anti-racketeering law. The IUOE represents heavy-equipment operators and other construction workers and is the 10th largest union in the AFL-CIO. Local 3 is its largest branch, representing workers in California, Nevada, Utah, Hawaii and the Pacific Rim islands. In addition to claiming that the union illegally forced members to contribute 1 percent of their salaries to a political action committee fund, the plaintiffs said they've paid millions to the Hawaiian Stabilization Fund -- an alleged multimillion-dollar slush fund for union bosses disguised as a mechanism to keep contractors from operating "double-breasted" and working both union and nonunion jobs. The disgruntled union members also accused union leadership of squandering $50 million in IUOE pension funds on a bad investment vehicle born out of nepotism, and of cavorting with the Japanese Yakuza and the Chinese Triads crime syndicates. In response to five separate motions to dismiss the class action, U.S. District Judge Edward Chen ruled this past August that most of the union members' causes of action fell victim to either a lack of jurisdiction on the court's end or a lack of standing for the members. On the second week of March, Chen chipped away at a second amended complaint by the disgruntled union members -- finding that the plaintiffs had not shown that nonunion firms were being used in a sham attempt at avoiding collective bargaining obligations, a requirement for their double-breasted theory. The union members did better with the related theory regarding circumvention of the collective bargaining agreement, where one employer allegedly should have been making contributions for work done by nonunion employees since the work they did fell under the collective bargaining agreement parameters. Chen also advanced the union members' claim that leadership had written off millions in contributions owed to the pension trusts. Defendants argued it was pointless to pursue the money because the company that owed it was insolvent. But the plaintiffs' second amended complaint pointed to instances where write-offs took place for companies that weren't bankrupt or in financial trouble. "The court notes that plaintiffs have made allegations of a gross disparity in write-offs," Chen wrote. "Taking the allegations of gross disparity and no insolvency, a plausible inference can be made that the write-offs were not reasonable." As for the health of one of the pension funds at issue in the case, the judge noted -- as did the defendants -- that the fund isn't necessarily at risk of default. However, the union members made a sufficient case that not enough money is going into the pension fund due to the aforementioned circumvention of the collective bargaining agreements to move forward, he said. "Such a pocketbook injury directly suffered by plaintiffs is sufficient to confer standing. This stands in contrast to the situation where a traditional defined benefit plan is involved; in that instance, the contributing employer, not the employee, bears the risk of misfeasance resulting in financial loss to the fund," Chen wrote. Lastly, the judge advanced the members' claims that union bosses illegally interfered with their efforts to oppose union policies in violation of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. Three of the bosses have allegedly made threats and intimidated union members after they filed their lawsuit, according to the second amended complaint. "At the very least, plaintiffs have alleged a threat to the democratic integrity of the union," Chen wrote. "The Supreme Court has stated that Congress 'recognized that democracy would be assured only if union members are free to discuss union policies and criticize the leadership without fear of reprisal.' Here, Mr. Reding, Mr. Goff, and Mr. Burns threatened to act against plaintiffs because of their lawsuit, and a reasonable jury could conclude that a threat would be reasonably likely to deter plaintiffs, or even other union members, from engaging in protected activity directed at union policies and practices. "That the threats of Reding, Goff, and Burns were not made to plaintiffs directly is not dispositive because, at the very least, plaintiffs learned of the threats as they were made in public or quasi-public settings," Chen continued. "Similarly, it should not be dispositive that the threats made -- at least by Reding and Goff -- were somewhat general in nature (i.e., just that they would exact revenge, without the form being specified)." The defendants did not challenge union members' claims over a botched investment in the Longview Construction Loan Fund, a vehicle sold and managed by the wife of a union leader that has allegedly lost $50 million. The case is David Slack, et al. v. International Union of Operating Engineers, et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-05001-EMC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. JAMBA JUICE: Deal to Re-label "All Natural" Smoothie Kits Okayed ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jamba Juice will stop labeling its home smoothie kits "all natural" under a federal class action settlement a judge approved March 18, reports Elizabeth Warmerdam at Courthouse News Service. The settlement of Aleta Lilly et al. v. Jamba Juice Co. will end claims that the packaging was misleading because the products contain non-natural ingredients, including ascorbic acid, xanthan gum, steviol glycosides, modified cornstarch and gelatin. In September 2014, U.S. District Judge Jon Tigar certified a class of people in California who bought Mango-a-go-go, Strawberries Wild, Caribbean Passion, Orange Dream Machine and Razzmatazz smoothie kits. The class was not certified for purposes of seeking damages, because the consumer plaintiffs did not produce evidence on feasibility of their methods for calculating damages or submit a detailed explanation of how damages could be fairly determined or estimated. Nor did Tigar resolve the question whether Lilly and co-plaintiff David Cox had standing to seek injunctive relief. The parties informed the court they had resolved the action by stipulating to injunctive relief. But before approving the settlement, Tigar had to determine whether the consumers had standing for such relief. "Courts in this district have grappled with the question of when a consumer class may be certified for the purposes of obtaining injunctive relief against deceptive product labeling under Rule 23(b)(2)," Tigar wrote in his March 18 order. "Some courts have held that once a consumer is aware that a label is misleading, she can never have standing to seek injunctive relief, because there is no danger that she will be misled in the future." Tigar disagreed, finding that such a stance would preclude consumers from ever obtaining relief against mislabeling. "When a consumer discovers that a representation about a product is false, she doesn't know that another, later representation by the same manufacturer is also false. She just doesn't know whether or not it's true. A material representation injures the consumer not only when it is untrue, but also when it is unclear whether or not it is true." The manufacturer could change its product to conform to the representations on the label, leaving the consumer unaware of whether the label is accurate and unsure whether she should spend money on the product due to past misrepresentations, Tigar said. "In fact, knowing about the previous misrepresentation, she probably won't buy it -- even though it is now precisely the product she wants above all others. So, while other consumers may purchase the (now correctly labeled) product, our consumer -- the person most likely to suffer future injury from the misrepresentation -- will be deprived of it," Tigar wrote, finding that these plaintiffs have standing to obtain injunctive relief. Under the settlement, Jamba Juice will have until March 31 to relabel all of the challenged smoothie kits so they are no longer described as "all natural" on packaging or other advertising. Jamba Juice is not required to remove or recall the products, nor to discontinue the use of any packaging inventory that existed before final approval of the agreement. It can use all of its existing packaging to distribute and sell the products before the final approval date. Tigar found the settlement reasonable, though the class will not receive any money. "In light of the difficulty plaintiffs would face establishing damages on a classwide basis and the relatively small amount of money individual class members would be entitled to, the risk, expense, complexity, and likely duration of further litigation also support the conclusion that the settlement is substantively fair," Tigar wrote. The case is Aleta Lilly, et al. v. Jamba Juice Company, et al., Case No. 3:13-cv-02998-JST, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. JANTON INDUSTRIES: Faces "Koszkos" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Konrad Koszkos, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. Janton Industries, Inc. and Designcore, Ltd., Case No. 1:15-cv-01700 (E.D.N.Y., March 30, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for work in excess of 40 hours per week. The Defendants are engaged in the construction business with a principal place of business at 13 42nd Street, Brooklyn, New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Maurice Samuel Pianko, Esq. PIANKO LAW GROUP PLLC 30 Broad Street, 14th floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (646) 801-9675 Facsimile: (646) 801-9675 E-mail: mpianko@gmail.com - and - Lloyd Robert Ambinder, Esq. VIRGINIA & AMBINDER LLP 40 Broad Street, 7th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 943-9080 Facsimile: (212) 943-9082 E-mail: lambinder@vandallp.com JUDICIAL ALTERNATIVES: Sued Over Unconstitutional Probation Fees ---------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that a federal class action claims that Judicial Alternatives of Georgia, a private company, charges unconstitutional "probation supervision fees." KAISER FOUNDATION: Trial in Suit by Surgery Patients Has Began -------------------------------------------------------------- Katherine Proctor, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that a class of patients, who claim Kaiser refuses to cover reconstructive surgery after procedures for morbid obesity took their case to trial in Alameda County Court on March 16. Lead plaintiff Wendy Gallimore, a teacher covered by the Kaiser Foundation Health Plan, claimed that the plan systematically refuses to pay for removal of excess skin after bariatric surgery, such as gastric bypass, in violation of a provision of the Reconstructive Surgery Law. The statute requires health care plans to cover reconstructive surgery performed "to correct or repair abnormal structures of the body" necessary "to improve function" and "to create a normal appearance." Gallimore's attorney Robert Gianelli argued in opening statements that the class likely contains 10,000 patients. Bariatric surgery is frequently covered and provided by Kaiser, he said, because the patients' health benefits ultimately reduce Kaiser's costs. Gianelli said that Kaiser failed to assess the excess skin remaining after bariatric surgery on a case-by-case basis to determine whether the skin met the statute's "function" and "normal appearance" requirements. Instead, he said, the health plan writes off too many cases as mere cosmetic concerns. He claimed that 75 to 93 percent of bariatric surgery patients say they need the reconstructive surgery afterward. "This is not a once-in-a-while surgery, it's across the board," he said. Gianelli said that Gallimore was not suing the medical groups that provide the surgery because the groups are a third party. As a health plan, he said, it is Kaiser's "duty to provide statutory coverage." Mark Palley, representing Kaiser, argued that the statute was not written to apply to cases such as Gallimore's, but to repair abnormalities caused by congenital defects, diseases or accidents. He claimed that the plaintiffs willfully ignore the causation behind the reconstructive surgeries at issue and want to replace doctors' clinical judgments with "iron rules." "This is socializing the costs of cosmetic surgery, and the statute doesn't require it," Palley said. "It is cruel to treat a surgery to give someone with a congenital defect a normal appearance the same as tummy tucks or face lifts." Judge Wynne Carvill is presiding at the trial, which is expected to last two weeks. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Gianelli, Esq. GIANELLI & MORRIS, A LAW CORPORATION 888 West Sixth Street, 9th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 489-1600 Facsimile: (213) 489-1611 Kaiser is represented by: Mark Palley, Esq. MARION'S INN LLP 1611 Telegraph Ave Ste 707 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone Number: (510) 451-6770 Fax Number: (510) 451-1711 E-mail: mp@marionsinn.com KING DIGITAL: IPO Prices Were Artificially Inflated, Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Writing for Courthouse News Service, Dave Tartre reports that the makers of "Candy Crush Saga" concealed that their cash cow was drying up to capitalize on an initial public offering, investors claim in a class action. King Digital Entertainment went public last year after a frenzy of interest in its "Candy Crush" mobile app. While the company has other titles, such as "Pet Rescue Saga" and "Bubble Witch Saga," "Candy Crush Saga" represented 78 percent of the firm's gross bookings at the end of 2013, the complaint filed March 17 in San Francisco County Superior Court states. By the time of King's IPO in March 2015, however, its "cash cow, Candy Crush Saga, had entered into a serious decline," lead plaintiffs Sean Debotte and Michael Nunes say. The IPO raised nearly $500 million, and King kept around $329 million, while its venture-capital funders, insiders and underwriters pocketed the rest. Debotte and Nunes came to the party a little late. Debotte picked up 500 shares in April 2014 and Nunes bought 470 shares in July 2014. Though its numbers were deteriorating at the time, "King Digital represented in its IPO prospectus that there were 1.065 billion average daily games of Candy Crush played by 97 million daily active users," according to the complaint. "The reality was that a significant number of individuals paying to play Candy Crush Saga, which was the primary driver of King Digital's revenues, were no longer playing Candy Crush Saga and that . . . due to its decline, Candy Crush Saga had become a weight on King Digital that was hampering and would continue to hamper the Company's financial results," the complaint continues. Debotte and Nunes say King's share prices were thus "artificially and materially inflated at the time of the offering." King allegedly did not reveal that monthly unique payers had declined between the end of 2013 and the March 2014 until a May 7, 2014, conference call. The complaint quotes King's chief financial officer as saying on that call: "We believe this dynamic is the result of the fact that Candy Crush Saga is a game that brought first-time mobile gamers and payers to our network. As the game is maturing, we are seeing less payment activity from the occasional payers." On the day of that conference call, King shares declined 13 percent to close at $16.25, according to the complaint. Though the price picked back up to $18.20 on Aug. 12, Debotte and Nunes say it crashed again when King "shocked investors" after the close of trading that day to report "a $69 million decline . . . in Candy Crush bookings." Shares closed at $13.99 on Aug. 13, "a decline of approximately 23 percent," according to the complaint. King had emphasized gross bookings in its pre-IPO registration statement, defining the term as the "total amount paid by our users for virtual items and for access to skill tournaments." Though the company claimed that gross bookings offered a way "to evaluate the results of our operations, generate future operating plans and assess our performance," it added the use of these numbers in an analysis "should be considered supplemental in nature and is not meant as a substitute for revenue recognized in accordance with [International Financial Reporting Standards]," according to that statement. Debotte and Nunes note that Candy Crush Saga bookings had started to drop by the time of the offering, having declined almost 13 percent between the quarters preceding the IPO, from $493 million in the last quarter of 2013 to $429.5 million in the first quarter of 2014. In addition to King, the investors name its chief underwriters, J.P. Morgan Securities and Credit Suisse Securities, as defendants, as well as nine directors and officers at King Digital and 11 more investment banks. The class is seeking damages and rescission for violations of the federal Securities Act. The class is represented by: John T. Jasnoch, Esq. SCOTT AND SCOTT LLP 707 Broadway, Suite 1000 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 233-4565 Facsimile: (619) 233-0508 E-mail: jjasnoch@scott-scott.com LA COUNTY, CA: Battle Over Errors in Warrant System Turned Ugly --------------------------------------------------------------- A battle over errors in the L.A. County warrant system turned ugly March 19 after an attorney for the county said opposing counsel had accused him of a "criminal conspiracy," reports Matt Reynolds at Courthouse News Service. "This litigation has gone far afield of the merits of the case," a visibly angry Scott Caron said at a hearing in federal court. "I've been accused of engaging in a criminal conspiracy." Caron was incensed, he said, by statements the plaintiff's lawyer Donald Cook had made in an amended civil complaint, accusing an unnamed attorney and firm of accessing his client's criminal records to gain an advantage in the case. An attorney with Glendale firm Lawrence Beach Allen & Choi, Caron said Cook had also questioned his intelligence during a deposition hearing. "I owe him an apology," Cook said, pausing for a moment. "I owe him an apology . . . If what he says is true." "Did you call him stupid?" U.S. District Judge Dean Pregerson asked. "No, I did not," Cook said. Pregerson spent the better part of the hearing trying to get to the bottom of the dispute, after Caron complained that Cook was impossible to deal with. "It's never a good thing to make it personal," Pregerson told the attorneys. "It's always a bad idea." Pregerson then took the unusual step of summoning the attorneys to his chambers to conclude proceedings. About 15 minutes later, Caron walked out of the chambers, grabbed his case and marched out of the courtroom. Through all the histrionics, it was easy to forget why the lawyers were in court in the first place. Pregerson had scheduled the hearing to consider the county's motion to strike three civil rights claims in a class action complaint to fix flaws in the county' warrant system. In 2012, Cook's client Reggie Smith sued the county after his wrongful arrest on a warrant for another man, seeking an order to include unique identifiers on warrants. The identifiers are readily available to federal and state law enforcement agencies to prevent arrests or incarcerations because of cases of mistaken identity. The county, however, does not include that information on arrest warrants, Smith says. Though three counts of Smith's complaint were up for discussion, Pregerson was preoccupied with a fifth cause of action for violation of due process. Explaining the claim, Cook said he believed that someone could be looking at Smith's criminal history to see if his record was clean. His record might be used to gain a "litigation advantage," the attorney said. The amended complaint lists 10 instances between Dec. 15, 2011 and March 7, 2013 when Smith's California Department of Justice criminal history was accessed "without lawful justification." "That strikes me as odd and suspicious because it doesn't match up with the case," Cook told Pregerson. Caron said that Cook had provided no proof to support the claim. The county had retrieved Smith's criminal history for a "proper purpose," the attorney added. "You cannot base a cause of action on conjecture and speculation," Caron said. Cook said after the hearing that Pregerson had told the attorneys in his chambers that he would grant the motion to dismiss the count for due process. He left the door open for Smith to support his claim with evidence, Cook said. In response to Caron's complaints, Cook said: "What's he got to be angry about? He gets paid by the hour. I don't." Cook said that Caron was upset by the language he had used in Smith's amended complaint, stating that Smith's "confidential criminal history" had been retrieved in a "conspiracy involving county employees and Unnamed Lawyer and Unnamed Law Firm." Cook said in a hallway outside the courtroom: "My gut tells me, given the civil litigation it would be a law firm or a lawyer. But for all I know, it could be lawyers who work in the county counsel's office. And so I really don't know." He added: "I'm not saying it was him. I'm not saying it's his law firm, although that's a possibility. But I haven't got the evidence for it and that's why I'm not alleging it." Caron did not immediately respond to a request for an interview. The court posted civil minutes on March 19 noting that the county's motion to strike portions of the complaint had been taken under submission. LENOVO (US) INC: Faces "Cullifer" Suit Over Harmful Spyware ----------------------------------------------------------- Bill Cullifer, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lenovo (United States), Inc. and Superfish, Inc., Case No. 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: Laurence M. Rosen, Esq. THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. 355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 785-2610 Facsimile: (213) 226-4684 E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com - and - Phillip Kim, Esq. THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor New York, New York 10016 Telephone: (212) 686-1060 E-mail: pkim@rosenlegal.com - and - Christopher S. Hinton, Esq. THE HINTON LAW FIRM 275 Madison Ave., 34th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (646) 723-3377 Facsimile: (212) 202-3827 E-mail: chinton@hintonlegal.com LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Jeffries" Suit Over Toxic Flooring ------------------------------------------------------------- Wilbur Jeffries, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Lumber Liquidators Holdings, Inc. et al, Case No. 3:15-cv-01490 (N.D. Cal., April 1, 2015), alleges that the Defendants manufactured, labeled and sold Chinese Flooring that fails to comply with relevant and applicable formaldehyde standards. The Chinese Flooring emits and off-gasses excessive levels of formaldehyde, which is categorized as a known human carcinogen by the United States National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Lumber Liquidators, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 3000 John Deere Road, Toano, Virginia 23168. It is a retailer of hardwood flooring. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jill Michelle Manning, Esq. Allan Steyer, Esq. Donald Scott Macrae, Esq. STEYER LOWENTHAL BOODROOKAS ALVAREZ & SMITH LLP One California Street, Suite 300 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 421-3400 Facsimile: (415) 421-2234 E-mail: jmanning@steyerlaw.com asteyer@steyerlaw.com smacrae@bamlawlj.com LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Fultineer" Suit Over Toxic Flooring -------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Fultineer, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lumber Liquidators, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-00233 (W.D. Ky., March 30, 2015), alleges that the Defendants manufactured, labeled and sold Chinese Flooring that fails to comply with relevant and applicable formaldehyde standards. The Chinese Flooring emits and off-gasses excessive levels of formaldehyde, which is categorized as a known human carcinogen by the United States National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Lumber Liquidators, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 3000 John Deere Road, Toano, Virginia 23168. The Company is a retailer of hardwood flooring. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Cannon, Esq. BUBALO, GOODE, SALES & BLISS 9300 Shelbyville Rd., Suite 215b Louisville, KY 40222 Telephone: (502) 753-1600 E-mail: mcannon@bubalolaw.com - and - Gregory F. Coleman, Esq. Lisa A. White, Esq. Mark E. Silvey, Esq. GREG COLEMAN LAWPC Bank of America Center 550 Main Avenue, Suite 600 Knoxville, TN 37902 Telephone: (865) 247-0080 Facsimile: (865) 522-0049 E-mail: greg@gregcolemanlaw.com lisa@gregcolemanlaw.com mark@gregcolemanlaw.com - and - Shanon J. Carson, Esq. BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 875-3000 Facsimile: (215) 875-4604 E-mail: scarson@bm.net rpaul@bm.net - and - Edward A. Wallace, Esq. Amy E. Keller, Esq. WEXLER WALLACE LLP 55 West Monroe Street, Suite 3300 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 346-2222 Facsimile: 312-346-0022 E-mail: eaw@wexlerwallce.com aek@wexlerwallace.com LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Picard" Suit Over Toxic Flooring ----------------------------------------------------------- Peter Picard and Sherry Liggins, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lumber Liquidators, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-01460 (N.D. Cal., March 30, 2015), alleges that the Defendants manufactured, labeled and sold Chinese Flooring that fails to comply with relevant and applicable formaldehyde standards. The Chinese Flooring emits and off-gasses excessive levels of formaldehyde, which is categorized as a known human carcinogen by the United States National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Lumber Liquidators, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 3000 John Deere Road, Toano, Virginia 23168. The Company is a retailer of hardwood flooring. The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel C. Girard, Esq. Eric H. Gibbs, Esq. Adam E. Polk, Esq. Steve A. Lopez, Esq. GIRARD GIBBS LLP 601 California Street, 14th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-4800 Facsimile: (415) 981-4846 E-mail: dcg@girardgibbs.com ehg@girardgibbs.com aep@girardgibbs.com sal@girardgibbs.com - and - Robert A. Mosier, Esq. SANDERS PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC 2101 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 3290 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (310) 358-2777 Facsimile: (310) 258-2768 E-mail: RMosier@THESANDERSFIRM.COM - and - Joseph G. Sauder, Esq. Matthew D. Schelkopf, Esq. Benjamin F. Johns, Esq. CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP One Haverford Centre 361 West Lancaster Avenue Haverford, PA 19041 Telephone: (610) 642-8500 Facsimile: (610) 649-3633 E-mail: JGS@chimicles.com MDS@chimicles.com BFJ@chimicles.com LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: Faces "Washington" Suit Over Toxic Flooring --------------------------------------------------------------- Lila Washington, Laura Washingon, Ryan and Kristin Brandt, Kenneth and Casandra Barrett, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Lumber Liquidators, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv- 01475 (N.D. Cal., March 31, 2015), alleges that the Defendants manufactured, labeled and sold Chinese Flooring that fails to comply with relevant and applicable formaldehyde standards. The Chinese Flooring emits and off-gasses excessive levels of formaldehyde, which is categorized as a known human carcinogen by the United States National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Lumber Liquidators, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business at 3000 John Deere Road, Toano, Virginia 23168. The Company is a retailer of hardwood flooring. The Plaintiff is represented by: Steve W. Berman, Esq. Ari Y. Brown, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com ari@hbsslaw.com - and - Jeff D. Friedman, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202 Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: (510) 725-3000 E-mail: jefff@hbsslaw.com LYFT INC: Has Sent Unsolicited Text Messages, "Wolf" Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Emily Wolf, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Lyft, Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-01441 (N.D. Cal., March 30, 2015), seeks to stop the Defendant's practice of sending text message via an automatic telephone dialing system without their prior express consent. Lyft, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that provides transportation services, which maintains its principal place of business in San Francisco, California. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan D. Selbin, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10013 Telephone: (212) 355-9500 Facsimile: (212) 355-9592 E-mail: jselbin@lchb.com - and - Daniel M. Hutchinson, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: (415) 956-1000 Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 E-mail: dhutchinson@lchb.com - and - Matthew R. Wilson, Esq. Michael J. Boyle Jr., Esq. MEYER WILSON CO., LPA 1320 Dublin Road, Ste. 100 Columbus, OH 43215 Telephone: (614) 224-6000 Facsimile: (614) 224-6066 E-mail: mwilson@meyerwilson.com mboyle@meyerwilson.com MAGNOLIA HEALTH: Sued in S.D. Ind. Over Illegal Wages Deductions ---------------------------------------------------------------- Leslie Shayne Miller-Basinger, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Magnolia Health Systems, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00089 (S.D. Ind., March 30, 2015), arises out of the Defendant's illegal uniform wage deductions practices and its failure to pay wages for work-required time spent in drug screens and medical examinations. Magnolia Health Systems, Inc. owns and operates multiple nursing homes throughout the State of Indiana. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Peter Kondras Jr.,Esq. HUNT HASSLER LORENZ & KONDRAS LLP 100 Cherry Street Terre Haute, IN 47807 Telephone: (812) 232-9691 Facsimile: (812) 234-2881 E-mail: kondras@huntlawfirm.net MANAGEMENT & TRAINING: Faces "Smith" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ---------------------------------------------------------------- Issah "Isaiah" Smith, individually and on behalf of other employees similarly situated v. Management & Training Corporation, Case No. 4:15-cv-00236 (N.D. Tex., March 30, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for all hours worked over 40 each workweek. Management & Training Corporation is a Utah corporation that conducts academic and technical training to disadvantaged population. The Plaintiff is represented by: Trang Q. Tran, Esq. TRAN LAW FIRM LLP 9801 Westheimer Road, Suite 302 Houston, TX 77042 Telephone: (713) 223-8855 Facsimile: (713) 623-6399 E-mail: ttran@tranlawllp.com MAYA OVERSEAS: Recalls Cumin Power Products Due to Peanuts ---------------------------------------------------------- Maya Overseas Food Inc. of 48-85, Maspeth Ave., Maspeth, NY 11378, is recalling its 7 ounce packages of "Cumin Powder" because they may contain undeclared peanuts. People who have allergies to peanuts run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products. The recalled "Cumin Powder" were distributed NY, CT, NJ, MA, PA and VA in retail stores. The product comes in a 7 ounce, clear plastic package and is un-coded. No illnesses have been reported to date in connection with this problem. The recall was initiated after it was discovered that the peanut- containing product was distributed in packaging that did not reveal the presence of peanuts. Subsequent investigation indicated the problem was caused by a temporary breakdown in the company's production and packaging processes. Production of the product has been suspended until the company is certain that the problem has been corrected. Consumers who have purchased 7 ounce packages of "Cumin Powder" are urged to return to the place of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at 718-894-5145. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm440913.htm MERRILL LYNCH: Faces Suit by Clifford Chance Plan Participant ------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Merrill Lynch pursued its own profit motives in operating the 401(k) plan for the law firm Clifford Chance, a class represented by a pro se attorney-plan participant claims. The case is Craig Walker v. Merrill Lynch & Co. Inc.; Bank of America Corp., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. MICROSOFT CORP: 9th Cir. Reverses Denial of Class Certification --------------------------------------------------------------- A federal judge erred in refusing to certify a class of gamers who say Microsoft sells defective Xbox 360s that gouge discs, the 9th Circuit ruled March 18, reports Katherine Proctor at Courthouse News Service. Seth Baker is the lead plaintiff in the case, which alleges that even the smallest of vibrations, something bound to happen in normal game-playing conditions, can send game discs spinning out of control, scratching them against internal console components and rendering them permanently unplayable. Microsoft has countered that only 0.4 percent of Xbox owners report this issue, and that consumer misuse is a more likely culprit than design defect. In denying Baker and his co-plaintiffs class certification, however, the trial court pointed to a similar lawsuit that failed years earlier. The judge in that case had relied on reasoning from a case involving Land Rovers, but the 9th Circuit said March 18 that he erred in citing the Land Rover case for "the notion that individual issues of causation predominate because differing causes have produced the same effect." Though the 9th Circuit had reversed the Land Rover case in 2010, 10 months after the original scratched-disc case was dismissed, the judge presiding over Baker's lawsuit determined still deferred to the earlier certification order out of comity. The 2010 case is captioned Wolin v. Jaguar Land Rover North America LLC. The 9th Circuit's reversal in favor of Baker on March 18 says that the comity application was misplaced. Citing Wolin, the court said that the issues of the case "are susceptible to proof by generalized evidence and do not require proof of individual causation." "Rather, plaintiffs' breach of express warranty claim presents a common factual question -- is there a defect? -- and a common mixed question of law and fact -- does that defect breach the express warranty?" according to the 32-page opinion. The ruling slams the trial court for its erroneous ruling "that defect allegations are not amenable to resolution on a class-wide basis." "We express no opinion on whether the specific common issues identified in this case are amenable to adjudication by way of a class action, or whether plaintiffs should prevail on a motion for class certification if such a motion is filed," Judge Johnnie Rawlinson wrote for the three-judge panel. "We hold only that the district court committed an error of law and abused its discretion when it struck the class action allegations from the complaint." Judge Carlos Bea concurred in the majority's result, but not in its reasoning. He said that district court's primary error was its decision, at Microsoft's urging, to defer for reasons of comity to the court's denial of class certification in an earlier similar class action. "Our court should not misconstrue the district court rulings it reviews, and it should give guidance to district courts who face difficult questions of law," Bea wrote. He said that the circuit's majority opinion did not satisfy either of those duties. The Plaintiffs-Appellants are represented by: Benjamin Gould, Esq. Mark A. Griffin, Esq. Amy C. Williams-Derry, Esq. KELLER ROHRBACK LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-1900 Facsimile: (206) 623-3384 E-mail: mgriffin@kellerrohrback.com bgould@kellerrohrback.com awilliams-derry@kellerrohrback.com - and - Paul L. Stritmatter, Esq. STRITMATTER KESSLER WHELAN COLUCCIO 413 8th St. Hoquiam, WA 98550 Telephone: (360) 533-2710 E-mail: Brad@stritmatter.com - and - Brad J. Moore, Esq. STRITMATTER KESSLER WHELAN COLUCCIO 200 Second Ave W. Seattle, WA 98119 Telephone: (206) 448-1777 - and - Robert L. Esensten, Esq. WASSERMAN, COMDEN, CASSELMAN & ESENSTEN, LLP 5567 Reseda Blvd., Suite 330 Tarzana, CA 91356 Telephone: (818) 705-6800 - and - Darren T. Kaplan, Esq. DARREN KAPLAN LAW FIRM, P.C. 39 North Drive Great Neck, NY 11021 - and - Gregory E. Keller, Esq. CHITWOOD HARLEY HARNES LLP 1230 Peachtree St. NE 2300 Promenade II Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 873-3900 Facsimile: (404) 876-4476 Toll Free: (888) 873-3999 E-mail: gkeller@chitwoodlaw.com - and - Jeffrey M. Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW FERGUSON WEISELBERG KEECHL 200 SW 1st Avenue, Suite 1200 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 Facsimile: (954) 525-4300 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com The Defendant-Appellee is represented by: Stephen M. Rummage, Esq. Frederick B. Burnside, Esq. John Goldmark, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101-3045 Telephone: (206) 622-3150 Facsimile: (206) 757-7700 E-mail: steverummage@dwt.com fredburnside@dwt.com johngoldmark@dwt.com The appellate case is Seth Baker, et al. v. Microsoft Corporation, Case No. 12-35946, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The District Court case is Seth Baker, et al. v. Microsoft Corporation, Case No. 2:11-cv-00722-RSM, in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. MONSANTO CO: To Pay $350K to Settle With Farmers in Seven States ---------------------------------------------------------------- Joe Harris, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that Monsanto will pay $350,000 to settle class actions over its genetically modified wheat with farmers in Kansas, Missouri, Illinois, Oklahoma, Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. The lawsuits stemmed from discovery of genetically modified wheat on an Oregon farm in May 2013. The wheat had not been approved and the discovery prompted Japan and South Korea to temporarily suspend orders. Monsanto agreed to donate $50,000 to the agricultural school at the land grant university in each state, to be used in the interests of wheat farmers and the wheat industry. Monsanto admits no liability. "Rather than paying the costs of protracted litigation, this agreement puts that money to work in research and development efforts for the wheat industry," Monsanto's chief litigation counsel Kyle McClain said in a statement. In November, Monsanto settled related lawsuits for $2.4 million. With this latest settlement, only a class action in Arkansas relating to the Oregon incident is still pending. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Appeal Trial in Pay-for-Play Suit Continues ---------------------------------------------------------------- Maria Dinzeo at Courthouse News Service reports that in its fight for the reversal of a district court's historic ruling allowing student athletes to be compensated from broadcast revenue, the NCAA hung its legal hat on the argument that as the governing body for college athletics it has broad authority to protect amateurism in college sports by regulating student-athlete pay. "If this were a challenge just flat out to a rule that said you aren't paying the full amount of the reasonable expenses of attending college, and the full amount is not consistent with the principle of amateurism, we would have a different case," NCAA attorney Seth Waxman told a 3-judge panel of the 9th Circuit on March 17. "But this is a situation in which a judge has said no, the athletes must be allowed to share in the specific commercial revenue stream that derives from their participation in sports, and that is not what amateurs do. It's what professionals do." Waxman, a former U.S. solicitor general, added, "What constitutes reasonable expenses is a decision for the NCAA, an association of 1,100 educational institutions to make, not a federal antitrust judge to decide." The idea that U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken overstepped her authority by imposing an injunction that prohibits the NCAA from enforcing rules that student-athletes cannot be for the use of their names, images and likenesses was a common refrain for Waxman. "It can't be the role of an antitrust court to essentially redefine the rules of eligibility that define the amateur nature of athletics," he said. "In no amateur sport, in no amateur league that exists are athletes permitted to be paid to play. The notion that an antitrust court could say 'I don't see how that violates the rules of amateurism,' it just doesn't compute." In its appeal of Wilken's 2014 ruling, the NCAA has leaned on the 1984 Supreme Court case Oklahoma v. Board of Regents, which said that the NCAA "needs ample latitude" in maintaining amateurism, including not paying student-athletes. NCAA believes Wilken erred by not following Board of Regents in her landmark ruling that said the NCAA's rules limiting what student-athletes can receive from schools "unreasonably restrain trade in the market for educational athletic opportunities for Division I colleges and universities." Wilken explained her move, writing that "the college sports industry has changed substantially in the thirty years since Board of Regents was decided." Her ruling allows for scholarships covering the full cost of college attendance, and permits deferred name, image and likeness payments of no less than $5,000 a year for every year a student athlete plays. Led by former UCLA basketball star Ed O'Bannon, 20 student athletes sued the NCAA in a 2009 class action for the right to a share in the television broadcast revenue for their names, images and likenesses. A two-week bench trial was held in June. On March 17, O'Bannon's lawyer Michael Hausfeld said the NCAA misinterpreted its key case. "They're trying to extrapolate that Board of Regents has somehow established an impregnable determination that no rule in anyway encompassing the rubric of amateurism can be challenged, and that's not what Board of Regents stands for." He added, "What the NCAA argues in this case is by merely invoking the talismanic word of amateurism, that this court cannot form a judgment, because that judgment has already been made." March 17's panel comprised the same judges that ruled against video game maker Electronic Arts in a right-of-publicity class action brought by former Nebraska and Arizona State quarterback Sam Keller for using his image and likeness to increase profits for its NCAA-branded football and basketball videogames. With Chief Judge Sidney Thomas dissenting, the court ruled 2-1 that EA cannot hide behind First Amendment protections for artistic creations, since it seeks "avatars" of players that are as lifelike as possible. Judge Jay Bybee and Senior U.S. District Judge Gordon Quist from the Western District of Michigan were in the majority. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to take up that case last year. "At the end of the day we're talking about the value of the name- image-likeness of the players. Explain why you think the names, images, and likenesses have value in the antitrust sense?" Thomas asked Hausfeld March 17. "The names, images, and likenesses of the athletes have value because there are commercial enterprises that are wiling to pay for them and because the NCAA commercializes them," Hausfeld replied. Thomas continued, "I think you'll agree in terms of broadcasts, no court has recognized property rights in the names, images and likenesses, true?" Hausfeld assented but added, "In all instances, every contract involving a live broadcast includes the request by the broadcaster to receive the rights of the names, images, and likenesses." "Right now those rights have not been acknowledged by any court," Thomas said. "Let me get down to videogames and obviously with our Keller decision that has opened the pathway for compensation, but can you give me the likelihood given the uncontested rules and force of the NCAA that has value in the current market or reasonably foreseeable market?" "That one, your honor, really is easy. It's a yes," Hausfeld replied. "The head of EA said if I could get the names I'd publish the game and the only reason they're not publishing the game is because the NCAA withdrew it because it didn't want the athletes to have a share of that." The attorney also poked holes at the "amorphous, ethereal definition of what amateurism is," saying the NCAA has not applied its definition consistently. "Is there really a core consistent principle of amateurism? There is, but it's not a rule," Hausfeld said. "The record reveals the NCAA has revised its rules governing athlete compensation numerous times over the years. Why? Because pay has no meaning other than what the NCAA says it is, so you can't be in violation of a rule or not because you never know what the rule is because the rule is only what they say it is." Bybee remarked on the blurry line of pay-for-play in college sports, noting that a scholarship that covers the full cost of education seems above board, but a $5,000 payment for name, image and likeness crosses into dubious territory. "It seems to me there's a reasonable rule to be drawn that the cost of attendance bears some relation to the goods and services you're receiving at a university and therefore doesn't violate a theoretical notion of amateurism," Bybee said. "Once we get to the question of putting $5,000 per year in trust for athletes that would be a cash award at the end of their time at the university, it looks like we've crossed the line. Even though the line wasn't clearly drawn, at least it crosses some theoretical line about pay-for-play." NEVADA: Farmers Fight Restrictions on Groundwater Pumping --------------------------------------------------------- Laney Olson, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that farmers in western Nevada challenged a state order demanding they cut their groundwater pumping by half. Facing severe drought, Nevada's State Engineer in February issued Order 1250 for water curtailment. Drought and excessive groundwater pumping have led to some of the lowest groundwater levels on record. Since 2011, groundwater levels in Mason Valley have dropped by nearly 30 feet and dropped by nearly 40 feet in Smith Valley. Mason and Smith Valleys are in Lyon County, where the lawsuit was filed, and in adjacent counties. Most of Nevada is horst and graben mountain ranges, whose valleys are sinking and peaks are rising. The ranges run roughly north and south, the peaks separated by about 20 miles. Rainfall replenishes the aquifers under the valleys, but farmers, ranchers and cities are pumping it out far faster. The "perennial yield" of Mason Valley is about 25,000 acre-feet, the State Engineer's order says, but rights to more than 149,000 acre-feet a year have been issued. Of that 119,198 acre-feet were approved for irrigation -- 100,000 acre-feet of it designated as supplemental water rights. "The groundwater resources of Mason Valley and Smith Valley are being depleted at an alarming rate and it is essential for the welfare of the areas involved that immediate action be initiated to protect the groundwater resources and water rights in these hydrographic basins," the order states. The Order aims to conserve the Walker River system and reduce the excessive use of supplemental groundwater by limiting groundwater use to 50 percent for farmers in Mason Valley and Smith Valley. The plaintiffs, Farmers Against Curtailment Order LLC, claim the order violates the rights to water that some have had since the late 1940s. They seek judicial review of the order, claiming it will damage them and devalue their property. "The State Engineer made several errors in his order and list of water rights to be curtailed, including the decision to not order curtailment of non-supplemental rights or partially supplemental rights," the farmers group claims. "The State Engineer applied arbitrary and capricious rational on his explanations for curtailment and in his selection of water rights to curtail." The Nevada Farm Bureau Federation backs the farmers. "For Lyon County President and farmer Darrel Pursel, the curtailment will more than likely limit him to farming less than 50 percent of his operation," the Farm Bureau Federation said in an undated statement. "Pursel's operation is 160 acres, but his well is only permitted to pump for 121 acres, meaning he and some other farmers in the area will farm less than half of their land this irrigation season," the Farm Bureau Federation said. Similar concerns have been expressed throughout the state. John Bosta and Frank Maurizio, farmers from Nye County, have filed a class action, claiming the order violates their property rights. Bosta and Maurizio filed their complaint pro se. In the Farmers Against Curtailment lawsuit, the farmers said: "The State Engineer provided no legal justification or need for the curtailment. The petitioner's members were not provided a fair opportunity to hear or present evidence regarding this matter." The State Engineer's Office held meetings with Lyon County farmers before issuing the order. At those meetings, "Concerns were expressed about not having enough water to grow crops," said JoAnn Kittrell, with the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. NY FIRE: Faces "Song" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------- Bairu Song, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. NY Fire LLC, New York Business Fire System, Inc., Jian Li Hou a/k/a Peter Hou, and Sui Xiang Zhu a/k/a Susan Zhu, Case No. 1:15- cv-01769 (E.D.N.Y., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 each workweek. The Defendants own and operate a professional service company in New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: John Troy, Esq. TROY & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 41-25 Kissena Blvd., Suite 119 Flushing, NY 11355 Telephone: (718) 762-1324 Facsimile: (718) 762-1342 E-mail: tsaihongjanq@hotmail.com OIL STATES INT'L: Faces "Dotson" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ------------------------------------------------------------ Mark Louis Dotson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Oil States International, Inc. and Oil States Energy Services, L.L.C., Case No. 7:15-cv-00040 (W.D. Tex., March 30, 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 petrochemical services company with its principal place of business at 1999 Bryan Street, Suite 900, Dallas, Texas 75201. The Plaintiff is represented by: Curt Hesse, Esq. Melissa Moore, Esq. MOORE & ASSOCIATES 440 Louisiana, Suite 675 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (713) 222-6775 Facsimile: (713) 222-6739 E-mail: curt@mooreandassociates.net melissa@mooreandassociates.net OSAKA JAPANESE: "Chen" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages ------------------------------------------------------------ Zhong Xian Chen, individually and on behalf of all other employees similarly situated v. Osaka Japanese Food Service, Inc., d/b/a Osaka Japanese Cuisine, Qing Song Jiang, John Does and Jane Does # 1-10, Case No. 1:15-cv-01784 (E.D.N.Y., April 2, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure pay overtime compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a Japanese restaurant located at 272 Court Street, Brooklyn, NY 11231. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jian Hang, Esq. HANG & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 136-18 39th Ave, Suite 1003 Flushing, NY 11354 Telephone: (718) 353-8588 Facsimile: (918) 353-6288 E-mail: jhang@hanglaw.com PACIFIC GATEWAY: Summary Judgment Bid in Arocho Case Denied ----------------------------------------------------------- LOUIS AROCHO, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. CRYSTAL CLEAR BUILDING SERVICES, INC., ET AL., Defendants, CASE NO. 1:12CV2186, (N.D. Ohio) is before the Court on defendants' motion for summary judgment as to named plaintiffs Louis Arocho, Aldurant Arrington and Steven Hochstedler. Steven Hochstedler, Aldurant Arrington and Louis Arocho filed their Complaint with the Court on August 27, 2012, alleging that Defendant Crystal Clear Building Services, Inc. failed to pay them and similarly-situated employees overtime wages and/or minimum wage as required under the Fair Labor Standards Act 29 U.S.C. Section 216 et seq. On November 16, 2012, Plaintiffs' moved to conditionally certify the action as a collective action. On April 30, 2013, the Court granted the Motion and conditionally certified the collective action. Notice was approved and sent and 114 individuals opted-in to the collective action. On December 2, 2013, Plaintiffs' filed an Amended Complaint adding state law Breach of Contract, Unjust Enrichment and violation of Ohio's Prompt Pay Statute claims. Discovery was conducted and completed and the parties have each filed respective Motions for Summary Judgment. Defendants have also filed a Motion to Decertify the Class. District Judge Christopher A. Boyko, in his March 26, 2015 opinion and order denied the Defendants' Motion saying, among other things, that the Plaintiffs' have produced unrefuted evidence that they consented in writing to the collective action. Therefore, Defendants contention that no written consent was filed is unsupported by the evidence. Defendants also fail to provide any authority holding that such a written consent as provided by Plaintiffs fails to satisfy Section 256's written consent requirement. Because Section 256 only requires a written consent, the Court finds Plaintiffs' consents in their declarations satisfy the FLSA's written consent requirement. Moreover, the Court finds Defendants' argument on the timing of the consents is unavailing. Nothing in the statute requires a Named Plaintiff to file a written consent after conditional certification. In fact, the statutory language clearly indicates the written consent may be filed with the Complaint. A copy of the Court's ruling is available at http://is.gd/7Ia0ty from Leagle.com. Louis Arocho, Plaintiff, represented by Joseph F. Scott, Thomas A. Downie & Ryan A. Winters. Aldurrant Arrington, Plaintiff, represented by Joseph F. Scott, Thomas A. Downie & Ryan A. Winters. Steven Hochstedler, Plaintiff, represented by Joseph F. Scott, Thomas A. Downie & Ryan A. Winters. Crystal Clear Building Services, Inc., Defendant, represented by John F. Burke, III. Stephen M. Lesko, Defendant, represented by John F. Burke, III. James Lesko, Defendant, represented by John F. Burke, III. PELHAM BAY: "Dubiel' Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Lauren Dubiel, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Pelham Bay Diner, Inc., Gerasimos Stefanitsis, and Sarantis, Serras, Case No. 1:15-cv-02489 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, interest and costs, including reasonable attorney's fees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate a diner located at 1920 East Gun Hill Road, Bronx, NY 10469. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason Travis Brown, Esq. Nicholas R. Conlon, Esq. JTB LAW GROUP, LLC 155 2nd Street, Suite 4 Jersey City, NJ 07302 Telephone: (212) 725-7272 Facsimile: (212) 488-4848 E-mail: jtb@jtblawgroup.com nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com POCKETS RESTAURANTS: Faces "Valadez" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ---------------------------------------------------------------- Hugo Valadez, Maria Magdalena Valadez, and all others similarly situated v. Pockets Restaurants, Inc., John Stanfield, and Phil Parker, Case No. 3:15-cv-01021 (N.D. Tex., April 2, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 each workweek. The Defendants own and operate a restaurant in Dallas County, Texas. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jamie Harrison Zidell, Esq. Joshua Aaron Petersen, Esq. Robert Lee Manteuffel, Esq. J. H. ZIDELL PC 6310 LBJ Freeway, Suite 112 Dallas, TX 75240 Telephone: (972) 233-2264 Facsimile: (972) 386-7610 E-mail: zabogado@aol.com josh.a.petersen@gmail.com rlmanteuffel@sbcglobal.net POTESTIVO & ASSOCIATES: Illegally Collects Debt, "Carl" Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- Gary A. Carl, Dorothy J. Carl, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC and Potestivo & Associates, PC, Case No. 2:15-cv-11223 (E.D. Mich., March 31, 2015), arises out of the illegal practices of the Defendants who, used false, deceptive, misleading, unconscionable, and other illegal practices, in connection with their attempts to collect an alleged debt. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC is a mortgage loan servicer that maintains its principal place of business in East Lansing, Ingham County, Michigan. Potestivo & Associates, PC is engaged in the business of using the mails and telephone to collect consumer debts on behalf of mortgage servicers. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian P. Parker, Esq. BRIAN P. PARKER ASSOC. 2000 Town Center, Suite 1900 Southfield, MI 48075 Telephone: (248) 642-6268 Facsimile: (248) 659-1733 E-mail: Brianparker@collectionstopper.com PREMERA BLUE: Faces "Archibald" Suit Over Alleged Data Breach ------------------------------------------------------------- Sandy Archibald, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Premera Blue Cross, a Washington nonprofit corporation; and Does 1-50, is brought against the Defendants for failure to protect and safeguard its insureds' personal and medical information, and to notify those affected in a timely and complete manner. Premera Blue Cross owns and operates a health insurance company with headquarters located at 7001 220th Street SW, Mountlake Terrace, Washington, 98043. The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J. Ide, Esq. IDE LAW OFFICE 7900 SE 28th Street, Suite 500 Mercer Island, WA 98040 Telephone: (206) 625-1326 E-mail: mjide@yahoo.com - and - Tina Wolfson, Esq. Robert Ahdoot, Esq. Theodore W. Maya, Esq. AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC 1016 Palm Ave. West Hollywood, CA 90069 Telephone: (310) 474-9111 Facsimile: (310) 474-8585 E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com PREMERA BLUE: Faces "Kaplowitz" Suit Over Alleged Data Breach ------------------------------------------------------------- Howard Kaplowitz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Premera Blue Cross, Case No. 2:15-cv-00512 (W.D. Wash., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to properly secure and protect its users' sensitive, personally-identifiable information and personal health information. Premera Blue Cross is a health plan provider headquartered in Montlake Terrace, Washington. The Plaintiff is represented by: Cliff Cantor, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF CLIFFORD A. CANTOR, P.C. 627 208th Ave. SE Sammamish, WA 98074 Telephone: (425) 868-7813 Facsimile: (425) 732-3752 E-mail: cliff.cantor@outlook.com - and - Howard Longman, Esq. Patrick Slyne, Esq. STULL, STULL & BRODY 6 East 45th St. New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 687-7230 Facsimile: (212) 490-2022 - and - Gary S. Graifman, Esq. Robert Lubitz, Esq. KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER & GRAIFMAN, P.C. 747 Chestnut Ridge Rd. Chestnut Ridge, NY 10977 Telephone: (845) 356-2570 Facsimile: (845) 356-4335 PRESENCE HEALTH: Doesn't Properly Fund Employees Plan, Suit Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- Leslee R. Carver, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Presence Health Network, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv- 02905 (N.D. Ill., April 2, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, specifically for failing to properly fund the Plans and depriving the Plans' participants of pension insurance, while erroneously claiming that the Plans are exempt from ERISA's protections because they are church plans. Presence Health Network owns and operates a chain of hospital and healthcare facilities in Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: James B. Zouras, Esq. STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP 205 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 2560 Chicago, IL 60601 Telephone: (312) 233-1550 Facsimile: (312) 233-1560 E-mail: JZouras@stephanzouras.com - and - Lynn L. Sarko, Esq. KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-1900 Facsimile: (206) 623-3384 E-mail: lsarko@kellerrohrback.com - and - Ron Kilgard, Esq. Christopher Graver, Esq. KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400 Phoenix, AZ 85012 Telephone: (602) 248-0088 Facsimile: (602) 248-2822 E-mail: rkilgard@kellerrohrback.com cgraver@kellerrohrback.com - and - Karen L. Handorf, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC. 1100 New York Avenue, N.W. Suite 500, West Tower Washington, D.C. 20005 Telephone: (202) 408-4600 Facsimile: (202) 408-4699 PRESTIGE DELIVERY: Faces "Mose" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- Enoch Mose, and Efrain Rivera, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Prestige Delivery Systems, Inc. and Prestige Delivery Systems, LLC, Case No. 7:15-cv-02488 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours work in excess of 40 in a week. The Defendants are engaged in the business of providing delivery and logistics services throughout the State of New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason T. Brown, Esq. Nicholas R. Conlon, Esq. JTB LAW GROUP, LLC 155 2nd Street, Suite 4 Jersey City, NJ 07302 Telephone: (201) 630-0000 Facsimile: (855) 582-5297 E-mail: jtb@jtblawgroup.com nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com PRITCHARD INDUSTRIES: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Ruiz" Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Ruiz, and all others similarly situated v. Pritchard Industries (Southwest), Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-00841 (S.D. Tex., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime compensation for hours worked over 40 per week. Pritchard Industries (Southwest), Inc. is a Texas corporation that provides a full range of sustainable building services including janitorial, engineering, window cleaning, and elevator consulting. The Plaintiff is represented by: John Charles Lipps, Esq. JOHN C. LIPPS, ATTORNEY-AT-LAW, PLLC 7214 Winding Walk Dr. Houston, TX 77095 Telephone: (832) 283-3555 Facsimile: (281) 856-9393 E-mail: lippsclan@gmail.com PRODUCTION MEDIA: Fails to Provide Ad Presentation, Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- Di Tomaso Design Inc. /t/a Landscape Perceptions, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Production Media Company, Production Media Company d/b/a Production Network Media, and Production Media Company d/b/a School House Folders, Case No. 2:15-cv-02334 (D.N.J., April 2, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to provide completed Presentation Folders or School Magnet Calendars containing Class members' advertisements to the third parties with whom Defendant was in contract. The Defendants are engaged in the business of selling advertisement space to service providers. The Plaintiff is represented by: James V. Bashian, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JAMES V. BASHIAN, PC 70 Adams Street, Fourth Floor Hoboken, NJ 07030 Telephone: (973) 227-6330 Facsimile: (201) 488-3330 E-mail: jbashian@bashianlaw.com PROVIDENCE CENTER: "D'Arezzo" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT ------------------------------------------------------------- Darlene A. D'Arezzo, Olivia M. Howard, and Joelle A. Depeyrot, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated individuals v. The Providence Center, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-00120 (D.R.I., March 30, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Providence Center, Inc. a non-profit organization that provides care and training in programs for individuals with disabilities. The Plaintiff is represented by: Richard A. Sinapi, Esq. SINAPI LAW ASSOCIATES, Ltd. 175 Hillside Road Cranston, RI 02920 Telephone: 944-9692 Facsimile: 943-9040 E-mail: ras@sinapilaw.com RAJA FOODS: Recalls SWAD Cumin Powder Products Due to Peanuts ------------------------------------------------------------- Raja Foods of Maspeth, NY is recalling its 14 ounce packages of "SWAD Cumin Powder 14 oz" because they may contain undeclared peanuts. People who have allergies to peanut run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products. The recalled "SWAD Cumin Powder 14 oz" was distributed in the New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are found in South Asian retail stores. The product comes in a 14 ounce, clear packaged marked with batch number 24714 on the back with an expiration date of Sept 2017. No illness have been reported to date in connection with this problem. The recall was initiated after routine sampling by New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets Food Inspectors and subsequent analysis of the product by Food Laboratory personnel found the product to contain the presence of peanuts which were not declared on the label. Consumers who have purchased 14 ounce package of "SWAD Cumin Powder" are urged to return them to the place of purchase for a full refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company at 718-416-2632. RITE-WAY JANITORIAL: "Reyes" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT ------------------------------------------------------------ Carlos Reyes and Angel Reyes, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Rite-Way Janitorial Service, Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-00847 (S.D. Tex., April 1, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. Rite-Way Janitorial Service, Inc. is a Texas corporation that owns and operates a janitorial services company. The Plaintiff is represented by: Curt Christopher Hesse, Esq. Melissa Moore, Esq. MOORE & ASSOCIATES 440 Louisiana Street, Ste 675 Houston, TX 77002-1637 Telephone: (713) 222-6775 Facsimile: (713) 222-6739 E-mail: curt@mooreandassociates.net melissa@mooreandassociates.net RUST-OLEUM CORPORATION: Faces "Baden" Suit Over Misbranding ----------------------------------------------------------- Michael Baden, Michael Allen, Cynthia Scaglione and Inese Blanchard, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Rust-Oleum Corporation, Case No. 1:15-cv-02892 (N.D. Ill., April 1, 2015), arises out of the Defendant's misrepresentation of its Restore wooden decks treatment product that was designed to extend the life of decks and to spare consumers the hassle of the needing to routinely repaint, re- stain, resurface, and eventually replace their decks. However, the Restore begins to bubble and peel away in just months, leaving the decks not only unprotected but also looking significantly worse than before. Rust-Oleum Corporation manufactures, markets, warrants, and sells protective paints and coatings for homes and businesses. The Plaintiff is represented by: Edward A. Wallace, Esq. Amy E. Keller, Esq. WEXLER WALLACE LLP 55 West Monroe St. Suite 3300 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 346-2222 Facsimile: (312) 346-0022 E-mail: eaw@wexlerwallace.com aek@wexlerwallace.com - and - Eric H. Gibbs, Esq. A.J. De Bartolomeo, Esq. Steve Lopez, Esq. GIBBS LAW GROUP LLP One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 1125 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 350-9700 Facsimile: (510) 350-9701 E-mail: ehg@classlawgroup.com ajd@classlawgroup.com sal@classlawgroup.com - and - William M. Audet, Esq. Theodore H. Chase, Esq. AUDET & PARTNERS, LLP 221 Main St., Ste. 1460 San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415)568-2555 Facsimile: (415)568-2556 E-mail: waudet@audetlaw.com tchase@audetlaw.com SANDISK CORP: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports ------------------------------------------------------------ Trenton Glore, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SanDisk Corp., Sanjay Mehrotra, and Judy Bruner, Case No. 3:15-cv-01455 (N.D. Cal., March 30, 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. SanDisk Corporation designs, develops, manufactures, and markets data storage solutions in the United States and internationally. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jennifer Pafiti, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 468 North Camden Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (310) 285-5330 E-mail: jpafiti@pomlaw.com - and - Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. Matthew L. Tuccillo, Esq. Francis P. McConville, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (212) 661-8665 E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com mltuccillo@pomlaw.com fmcconville@pomlaw.com - and - Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP Ten South La Salle Street, Suite 3505 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 377-1181 Facsimile: (312) 377-1184 E-mail: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com SHADOW INDUSTRIES: Sued in C.D. Cal. Over Defective Radial Treads ----------------------------------------------------------------- Frank Alley, individually and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated v. Shadow Industries, Inc., Greenball Corp., Case No. 5:15-cv-00632 (C.D. Cal., April 1, 2015), is brought on behalf of all California and nationwide consumers who purchased a Greenball Tow-Master(R) tire manufactured between May 1, 2011 and April 2015 that were designed and manufactured with defective radial treads. The radial treads which are component of the tire crack and separate from the sidewall causing explosive blowouts of the tire during operation. The Defendants are California corporations, which are retailers, manufacturers, and sellers of auto parts. The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua B. Swigart, Esq. Sara Khosroabadi, Esq. HYDE & SWIGART 2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101 San Diego, CA 92108 Telephone: (619) 233-7770 Facsimile: (619) 297-1022 E-mail: josh@westcoastlitigation.com sara@westcoastlitigation.com - and - Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. Kazerouni Law Group, APC 245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 E-mail: ak@kazlg.com SHELDON RABIN: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Padilla" Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- Raul Padilla, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Sheldon Rabin, M.D., P.C., and Sheldon Rabin, M.D., Case No. 1:15-cv-01708 (E.D.N.Y., March 31, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours weekly. The Defendants own and operate two medical offices in New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason T. Brown, Esq. Patrick Sidney Almonrode, Esq. JTB LAW GROUP, LLC 155 2nd Street, Suite 4 Jersey City, NJ 07302 Telephone: (201) 630-0000 Facsimile: (855) 582-5297 E-mail: jtb@jtblawgroup.com patalmonrode@jtblawgroup.com SMOOTH INDUSTRIES: Recalls Children's Pajamas Due to Burn Risk -------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Smooth Industries, Oceanside, Calif., announced a voluntary recall of about 7,600 Children's Pajamas. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The pajamas fail to meet federal flammability standards for children's sleepwear, posing a risk of burn injuries to children. This recall involves children's one- and two-piece Smooth Industries pajama sets. The pajamas are made of 100% polyester and were sold in four styles: Ride Smooth, Honda, MX Superstars and Moto X. The racing-themed pajamas have large motocross-related graphics and were sold in red, white and black; orange, white and black; and red, blue and black. One-piece pajama sets were sold in sizes: 6 to 12 months, 12 to 18 months and 18 to 24 months. Two- piece sets were sold in sizes XS to Youth XL. "Smooth Ind." and "smoothindustries.com" is printed on the garment's neck label. No consumer incidents have been reported. The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at Authorized Smooth Industries motorcycle and motocross stores nationwide and online at SmoothIndustries.com and other motocross websites from October 2012 through January 2015 for between $30 and $35. Consumers should immediately take the recalled pajamas away from children, stop using them and return them to Smooth Industries for credit towards another Smooth Industries product. SOCIAL SECURITY: Accused by Refugees of Tampering With Evidence --------------------------------------------------------------- Jamie Ross at Courthouse News Service reports that the Social Security Administration tampered with evidence and harassed and intimidated Vietnamese, Iranian, and Somalian refugees who filed affidavits in an action pending in the 9th Circuit, immigrants claim in a class action. Lead plaintiff Mohammad Nassiri et al. sued Social Security Commissioner Carolyn Colvin, the Social Security Administration (SSA), and two SSA agents on March 14 in Federal Court. The class consists of "poor, disabled and non-English speaking Vietnamese or Middle Eastern (Somalian, Iraqi and Iranian) refugees in the United States who reside in San Diego County and who have been applying for or receiving Disability Insurance Benefits (DIB) and/or Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits." According to the lawsuit, the SSA has "been maintaining and implementing an illegal search and interrogation policy with respect to plaintiffs, and have violated the plaintiffs' rights to be free from unreasonable searches and inquisition." Social Security agents have intimidated class members "to recant their prior written testimonies in an ongoing action pending in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals," according to the complaint. The 9th Circuit action relates to the class members' representation in a complaint filed by Alexandra Nga Tran Manbeck, who claims the agency suspended her in 2013 from practicing Social Security law in retaliation for filing a previous class action alleging bias by a Social Security judge. Manbeck was the only attorney in San Diego fluent in Vietnamese. The new complaint claims the SSA "intimidated plaintiffs in providing personal information and privileged information in violation of the plaintiffs' privacy right and plaintiffs' attorney-client privilege, even though defendants knew that plaintiffs have been represented by counsel in ongoing litigation in federal court since 2013." Class member Anh T. Thai, a 50-year-old Vietnamese refugee, says she was first misled in 2006 by Duke Tran, an SSA employee, into letting him help her apply for benefits. Tran began harassing her in threatening phone calls in March 2013 after she obtained an attorney, including calling her "stupid" for signing loan documents to an acquaintance, and berating her "for seeking legal representation instead of trusting him to help her," according to the complaint. After Thai filed her affidavits against the agency in the Manbeck action, two agents bearing guns came to her house twice to question her. "Most of the questions centered on whether she was really disabled and whether she was required to pay in advance for legal services to her attorney," the lawsuit states. "The SSA agents threatened her with dismissal of her case if she refused to answer their questions." The class claims that because they are "refugees with a long history of being persecuted by the Communist authority in Vietnam, the warlords in Somalia or the ayatollahs in Iran, plaintiffs obviously became intimidated by defendants and complied with defendants' order." The plaintiffs seek class certification, an order stop the Social Security Administration and its agents from contacting them before a final hearing or intimidating them without a warrant, and compensatory and punitive damages for civil rights violations. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Quan Minh Chau, Esq. 400 S Flower St., Unit 39 Orange, CA 92868 - and - Alexandra Manbeck, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF ALEXANDRA MANBECK 95 North Salem Road P.O. Box 449 Cross River, NY 10518 SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: Sued Over Misleading Boarding Policies ---------------------------------------------------------- Teri L. Lowry, individually, and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. Southwest Airlines, Co., and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 8:15-cv-00500 (C.D. Cal., April 1, 2015), arises out of the Defendant's misleading and deceptive boarding algorithm of letting passengers purchase the Early Bird Check-in add-on to receive priority boarding over other customers. However based on the Defendant's published and unpublished boarding policies and procedures, the earlier a customer checks in, the higher the boarding position that customer receives. Southwest Airlines, Co. is a commercial airliner with its headquarters and principal place of business located in Dallas, Texas. The Plaintiff is represented by: Kristopher P. Badame, Esq. Joseph H. Hunter, Esq. Michele E. Pillette, Esq. BADAME & ASSOCIATES, APC 25432 Trabuco Road, Suite 207 Lake Forest, CA 92630 Telephone: (949) 770-2867 Facsimile: (866) 230-3044 E-mail: kbadame@badameandassociates.com jhunter@badameandassociates.com mpillette@badameandassociates.com SPINNERS INC: Faces "Cornelio" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Marco Cornelio, Andres Cornelio Serrano, Florencio Perez, on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated persons, known and unknown v. Spinners, Inc., d/b/a Emily's Pancake House, Inc., Quince, Inc., and Konstantino Maravelas, Case No. 1:15-cv-02888 (N.D. Ill., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants own and operate restaurants in various locations in Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher J. Williams, Esq. Alvar Ayala, Esq. WORKERS' LAW OFFICE, PC 53 W Jackson Blvd., Suite 701 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 795-9121 Facsimile: (312) 929-2207 E-mail: cwilliams@wagetheftlaw.com aayala@wagetheftlaw.com SQUARE 1 FINANCIAL: Being Sold for Too Little, Shareholders Say --------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that directors are selling Square 1 Financial too cheaply through an unfair process to PacWest Bancorp, in a 1-for-0.6 share swap valued at $849 million, shareholders claim in Delaware Chancery Court. STEPS TO SUCCESS: Faces "Artis" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- Anaise Artis, on behalf of herself and all others similarly- sitnated v. Steps To Success II, LLC, d/b/a Steps 2 Success Preschool/Brownsville Pre-School, and Anzhela Krimer, in her individual and professional capacities, Case No. 1:15-cv-01758 (E.D.N.Y., April 1, 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 four pre-school and day care centers in New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher Berlingieri, Esq. BORRELLI AND ASSOCIATES 1010 Northern Blvd Great Neck, NY 11021 Telephone: (516) 248-5550 Facsimile: (516) 248-6027 E-mail: cjb@employmentlawyernewyork.com STERLING INFOSYSTEMS: Illegally Furnished Reports, Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Stone, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Sterling Infosystems, Inc., and Does 1 through 10, Case No. 2:15-cv-00711 (E.D. Cal., March 30, 2015), arises out of the Defendants' practice of furnishing consumer reports regarding Plaintiff and other class members for employment purposes to the US Security Associates and others without first obtaining from US Security Associates and other persons to whom it furnished such reports a certification. Sterling Infosystems, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that is engaged in the business of assembling, evaluating and disbursing information concerning consumers for the purpose of furnishing consumer reports. The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter R. Dion-Kindem, Esq. PETER R. DION-KINDEM, P. C. 21550 Oxnard Street, Suite 900 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (818) 883-4900 Facsimile: (818) 883-4902 E-mail: peter@dion-kindemlaw.com - and - Lonnie C. Blanchard III, Esq. THE BLANCHARD LAW GROUP, APC Los Angeles, CA 90023 Telephone: (213) 599-8255 Facsimile: (213) 402-3949 E-mail: lonnieblanchard@gmail.com - and - Jeffrey D. Holmes, Esq. HOLMES LAW GROUP, APC 3311 East Pico Boulevard Los Angeles, CA 90023 Telephone: (310) 396-9045 Facsimile: (970) 497-4922 E-mail: jeffholmesjh@gmail.com STOKKE LLC: Recalls Trailz Strollers Due to Fall Hazard ------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Stokke LLC, of Stamford, Conn., announced a voluntary recall of about 400 Trailz Strollers. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The stroller handle can break while in use, posing a fall hazard to the infant. This recall involves Stokke Trailz strollers with the chassis and seat sold between November 2014 and December 2014. The strollers were sold in black, black melange, beige melange, deep blue, red and purple. The four-wheeled adjustable chassis is silver aluminum, and measures approximately 45 inches high by 32 inches long when fully extended. The strollers have adjustable angle handlebars, a storage bin above the wheelbase and a seat with an adjustable cover. The Stokke logo is printed on the front of the seat and the "Trailz" model name is printed on a tracking label affixed to the front of the wheelbase assembly. There has been one report of a broken handle in the United States. The firm has received eight reports of handles breaking in other countries. No injuries have been reported. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: http://is.gd/pkglij The recalled products were manufactured in Norway and sold at Specialty baby boutiques nationwide and online at AlbeeBaby.com, buybuyBABY.com, Diapers.com, Nordstrom.com and Stokke.com from November 2014 to December 2014 for about $1,300. Consumers should immediately stop using the stroller and contact Stokke to schedule a repair. SUNTRUST BANKS: Faces " Gilbert" Suit Over Violation of ERISA ------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Gilbert and Laura Pinho, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SunTrust Banks, Inc., Case No. :15- cv-80415 (S.D. Fla., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendant for violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act, specifically by failure to provide participants and beneficiaries in the Plan with adequate notice of their right to continue their health coverage upon the occurrence of a qualifying event. SunTrust Banks, Inc.is a large financial services corporation with its headquarters in Atlanta, Georgia. The Plaintiff is represented by: John Yanchunis, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP 201 North Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 223-5505 Facsimile: (813) 223-5402 E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com - and - Kai H. Richter, Esq. David J. Carrier, Esq. NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP 4600 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 256-3200 Facsimile: (612) 338-4878 E-mail: krichter@nka.com dcarrier@nka.com - and - Don J. Foty, Esq. Galvin B. Kennedy, Esq. KENNEDY HODGES, LLP 711 West Alabama Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: (713) 523-0001 Facsimile: (713) 523-1116 E-mail: dfoty@kennedyhodges.com gkennedy@kennedyhodges.com SUPERVALU INC: Cannot Compel Arbitration of Antitrust Claims ------------------------------------------------------------ C&S Wholesale Grocer and its fellow industry leader SuperValu cannot compel arbitration of antitrust claims it faces from mom- and-pop businesses, reports Joe Harris at Courthouse News Service. At issue is the fallout of a 2003 asset exchange agreement between SuperValu and C&S Wholesale Grocers. The deal was based on geography, giving SuperValu the Midwest and C&S the New England region. Mom-and-pop grocery stores took to the courts, claiming the asset exchange would increase the price of goods, and their cases were ultimately consolidated in Minnesota. Last year the 8th Circuit remanded the case for consideration of possibly certifying a narrow class. SuperValu and C&S filed a motion to dismiss, claiming that they can enforce certain arbitration agreements they have assigned as a result of the asset exchange through the successor-in-interest doctrine. U.S. District Judge Ann Montgomery shot down those arguments March 16, saying SuperValu and C&S are competitors and do not rely on each other to act. "To the extent Defendants have a relationship under the AEA, the relationship is one of assignor and assignee, because each wholesaler assigned to the other their rights to an arbitration agreement," the nine-page opinion states. "Thus, Defendants' relationship differs greatly from agency or agency-related relationships that courts have deemed to be sufficiently close for purposes of permitting a nonsignatory to enforce an arbitration agreement." SuperValu and C&S also argued that they could enforce the arbitration agreements because some of the events at issue in the class action occurred before the agreements were transferred. Montgomery found the argument failed because the examples used by SuperValu and C&S involved agreements that were terminated. "Here, the arbitration agreements were assigned, not terminated," Montgomery wrote. "Thus, the issue is not whether the right to arbitrate survives, but rather who is entitled to assert that right." The Plaintiffs are represented by: W. Joseph Bruckner, Esq. Elizabeth R. Odette, Esq. Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401-2159 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Facsimile: (612) 339-0981 E-mail: wjbruckner@locklaw.com erodette@locklaw.com kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com - and - Richard B. Drubel, Esq. Kimberly H. Schultz, Esq. BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP 26 South Main Street Hanover, NH 03755 Telephone: (603) 643-9090 Facsimile: (603) 643-9010 E-mail: rdrubel@bsfllp.com kschultz@bsfllp.com - and - Daniel A. Kotchen, Esq. Daniel L. Low, Esq. KOTCHEN & LOW LLP 1745 Kalorama Rd., NW, Suite 101 Washington, DC 20009 Telephone: (202) 471-1995 Facsimile: (202) 280-1128 E-mail: dkotchen@kotchen.com dlow@kotchen.com - and - Edward (Terry) Dangel III, Esq. DANGEL DWYER, LLC 10 Derne Street Beacon Hill Boston, MA 02114 Telephone: (617) 557-4800 E-mail: tdangel@dangeldwyer-llc.com Defendant SuperValu, Inc. is represented by: Stephen P. Safranski, Esq. Martin R. Lueck, Esq. K. Craig Wildfang, Esq. Heather M. McElroy, Esq. Damien A. Riehl, Esq. ROBINS KAPLAN LLP 800 LaSalle Avenue, Suite 2800 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 349-8587 E-mail: SSafranski@RobinsKaplan.com MLueck@RobinsKaplan.com KCWildfang@RobinsKaplan.com Defendant C&S Wholesale Grocers, Inc. is represented by: Todd A. Wind, Esq. Nicole M. Moen, Esq. FREDRIKSON & BYRON, PA 200 South Sixth Street, Suite 4000 Minneapolis, MN 55402-1425 Telephone: (612) 492-7000 Facsimile: (612) 492-7077 E-mail: twind@fredlaw.com nmoen@fredlaw.com - and - Christopher J. MacAvoy, Esq. Charles A. Loughlin, Esq. BAKER BOTTS LLP The Warner 1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004-2400 Telephone: (202) 639-7709 Facsimile: (202) 585-1006 E-mail: christopher.macavoy@bakerbotts.com charles.loughlin@bakerbotts.com The multidistrict litigation is captioned In re Wholesale Grocery Products Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 09-MD-2090 ADM/TNL, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. SUTTER HOME: Faces Suit Over Unsafe Levels of Arsenic in Wines -------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that more than two dozen cheap California wines have unsafe levels of arsenic, consumers claim in a class action in California Superior Court. Lead plaintiff Doris Charles claims that the defendants' wines contain "inorganic arsenic in amounts far in excess of what is allowed in drinking water," but do not disclose it to consumers. Twenty-eight of the 31 defendants are from California. They include many well-known California labels, including Sutter Home Winery, Beringer, Almaden, Fetzer, Korbel, Don Sebastiani and Trader Joe's. The Wine Institute, of California, called the lawsuit "irresponsible," "misleading," and "false." Institute spokeswoman Gladys Horiuchi told The Associated Press that the United States has set no maximum arsenic levels for wine, though other countries have, and California wines do not even approach those levels. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency set a maximum level of arsenic in drinking water at 10 parts per billion. The plaintiffs claim that some of the wines they tested had five times more arsenic than that. The 40-page complaint claims that most of the arsenic found in the wines was "inorganic," which it says is more toxic than organic arsenic -- arsenic that appears naturally in the soil. "(J)ust a glass or two of these arsenic-contaminated wines a day over time could result in dangerous toxicity to the consumer," the March 19 complaint states. California's 1,200 wineries produce nearly 90 percent of domestic wines, according to the lawsuit, but "no government regulatory agency is regularly monitoring or testing these wines to ensure they are free from toxic poisons that could sicken or kill consumers over time." Plaintiffs' attorney Brian Kabateck told The Associated Press that a Denver-based lab tested 1,306 bottles of wine, and found 83 with "excessive arsenic levels." Those statistics do not appear in the lawsuit. The four named plaintiffs, two from Los Angeles County and two from San Diego County, seek class certification and damages for consumer law violations, negligent misrepresentation, breach of warranty, unjust enrichment and unfair competition. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Brian Kabateck, Esq. KABATECK BROWN KELLNER LLP 644 S Figueroa St. Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 217-5000 Facsimile: (213) 217-5010 E-mail: bsk@kbklawyers.com SYMANTEC CORP: Has Lost Bid to Shake Off Insurance Fraud Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- The makers of Norton Antivirus software must face claims they misled consumers into purchasing a superfluous "download insurance" add-on, reports Kevin Koeninger at Courthouse News Service, citing a federal court ruling. A class of consumers who purchased the "insurance" for between $5 and $10 says that the ability to redownload the software after 60 days was already included in the program. The suit was filed in 2011 for violations of California's Unfair Competition Law and Consumers Legal Remedy Act, as well as violations of Minnesota's Consumer Fraud Act and unjust enrichment. U.S. District Court Judge John R. Tunheim had already refused to dismiss the case in March 2014, but Symantec filed another motion for summary judgment on May 15, 2014. The company claimed the language describing the download insurance on its Web site -- which noted it was the only "guaranteed" way to redownload the antivirus program -- did not violate any laws. It argued that, while there were other alternatives to the insurance, none of them were guaranteed. Symantec's reasoning did not fly with Judge Tunheim, who wrote: "Where a technically true fact can still be misleading, an obligation arises 'to disclose all other facts which 'materially qualify' the limited facts disclosed.' . . . In Symantec's case, irrespective of whether [the insurance] was the only 'guaranteed' redownload option, the evidence suggests that Symantec continued to provide the alternative options like trialware for the duration of the relevant time period." Alternatively, the company claimed the plaintiffs "suffered no economic loss by purchasing [the insurance], because the benefit [they] sought -- a guarantee that [they] would be able to redownload [their] software beyond sixty days -- is precisely what [they] received." Judge Tunheim disagreed, and wrote: "Multiple sources in the record indicate that customers could redownload the Norton software through both the customer support website and trialware. Although Symantec contends that it could have ceased offering these options at any time, it has offered no evidence that the company ever discussed or considered eliminating the alternatives. Because [the plaintiff's] deposition suggests that she would have acted differently had she been apprised of this information, a genuine issue of material fact remains as to whether her reliance on Symantec's representations caused her to suffer harm." The plaintiffs and defendants also filed motions to exclude the other's expert testimony. Judge Tunheim denied all of these motions, with the exception of a request by Symantec to exclude testimony regarding how consumers would download the insurance and how easily they could have rejected the product. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Douglas J. McNamara, Esq. Andrew N. Friedman, Esq. COHEN, MILSTEIN, SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 1100 New York Avenue Northwest West Tower, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 408-4600 Facsimile: (202) 408-4699 E-mail: dmcnamara@cohenmilstein.com afriedman@cohenmilstein.com - and - Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Facsimile: (612) 339-0981 E-mail: kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com Defendant Symantec Corp. is represented by: Patrick E. Gibbs, Esq. LATHAM & WATKINS, LLP 140 Scott Drive, Menlo Park, CA 94025 Telephone: (650) 463-4696 E-mail: Epatrick.gibbs@lw.com - and - Steve W. Gaskins, Esq. GASKINS, BENNETT, BIRRELL, SCHUPP, LLP 333 South Seventh Street, Suite 2900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 333-9500 Facsimile: (612) 333-9579 E-mail: Tsgaskins@gaskinsbennett.com Defendant Digital River, Inc. is represented by: Charles Smith, Esq. Amy Van Gelder, Esq. Jessica Frogge, Esq. Marcella L. Lape, Esq. SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM 155 North Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 407-0516 Facsimile: (312) 407-8523 E-mail: charles.smith@skadden.com amy.vangelder@skadden.com jessica.frogge@skadden.com marcella.lape@skadden.com The case is Devi Khoday and Danise Townsend v. Symantec Corp. and Digital River, Inc., Case No. 0:11-cv-00180-JRT-TNL, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. TARGET CORP: To Pay $10MM to Settle Class Suit Over Data Breach --------------------------------------------------------------- Lacey Louwagie, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that Target agreed to pay $10 million to settle a class action over a 2013 holiday season data breach that consumers claimed compromised as many as 100 million credit and debit accounts. Under the terms of the proposal, which still requires the approval of a federal judge in Minneapolis, Target will despot the money in an interest bearing escrow account, and ultimately pay individual victims up to $10,000 in damages. Despite a federal judge's dismissal last December of most of the consumer-negligence claims that had been filed against Target due to the breach, the retailer has continued to struggle in the realm of public perception. To woo back shopper' back to its aisles, Target over the past 15 months has granted 1-year free credit card monitoring to in-store shoppers, and has forgiven all fraudulent charges reported by effected considers. Investigators believe the security breach was carried out by thieves who installed software on Target's payment terminals to capture credit information. The breach affected over 1,700 of Target's 1,900 stores. If the settlement is approved by U.S. District Judge Paul Magnuson, who held a hearing on the proposal March 19 afternoon, claims will be submitted and processed primarily through a dedicated Web site. The settlement proposal also requires Target to adopt and implement data security measures , including appointing a chief information security officer, maintaining a written information security program, and implementing a process to monitor for so- called "information security events" and to respond to such events determined to present a threat. Magnuson said at the March 19 hearing that he will preliminarily approve the settlement. People can file claims before he holds a hearing for final approval, in late October or early November. Magnuson praised Target "for being willing to step up." In a written statement, Target spokeswoman Molly Snyder said the company is "pleased to see the process moving forward and looks forward to its resolution." The Plaintiffs are represented by: Vincent J. Esades, 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 dwoodward@heinsmills.com - and - E. Michelle Drake, Esq. NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP 4600 IDS Center 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 256-3200 Facsimile: (612) 338-4878 E-mail: drake@nka.com - and - John A. Yanchunis, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP, PA 201 North Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 223-5505 Facsimile: (813) 223-5402 E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com - and - Daniel C. Girard, Esq. GIRARD GIBBS LLP 601 California Street, 14th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-4800 Facsimile: (415) 981-4846 E-mail: DCG@girardgibbs.com - and - Ariana J. Tadler, Esq. MILBERG LLP One Pennsylvania Plaza, 49th Floor New York, NY 10119 Telephone: (212) 594-5300 Facsimile: (212) 868-1229 E-mail: atadler@milberg.com - and - Norman E. Siegel, Esq. STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP 460 Nichols Road, Suite 200 Kansas City, MO 64112 Telephone: (816) 714-7100 Facsimile: (816) 714-7101 E-mail: siegel@stuevesiegel.com The multidistrict litigation is captioned In re: Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach Litigation, MDL No. 14- 2522 (PAM/JJK), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota. TOYS R US: Faces Suit Over Deceiving Babies R Us Rewards Program ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin Lessmiller, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that a class claims Toys "R" Us's baby store division is shortchanging expectant parents through a misleading baby registry rewards program. Stacy Tongate sued Toys "R" Us Inc. doing business as Babies "R" Us and Toys "R" Us-Delaware Inc. in Federal Court individually and on behalf of others similarly situated. The lawsuit alleges breach of contract and fraud. Tongate says that the Babies "R" Us "Endless Earnings" program is deceptive. The program offers customers up to 10 percent back for purchases made from their baby registries but the plaintiffs claim that's not true. "Unfortunately, those who register for the program soon discover BRU's tantalizing offer of "Endless Earnings' is little more than empty rhetoric," the complaint states. "Indeed, consumers throughout the country have complained of receiving rewards that reflect only a fraction of the amount to which they are contractually entitled." Customers began complaining shortly after the Endless Earnings program was implemented, according to the complaint. The class action alleges Babies "R" Us does not calculate rewards using the formula in the program contract. "When contacted by customers regarding their missing rewards, however, BRU refuses to provide information on how their particular rewards were calculated," the complaint states. "Making matters worse, BRU even goes so far as to tell those registrants that it cannot provide the total value of qualifying purchases made from their registries." Tongate says she registered for Endless Earnings in 2014 and more than $3,400 in qualifying purchases were made from her baby registry but she only got $160 on a gift card, not the $328 the contract's formula provided for. "Plaintiff contacted BRU on numerous subsequent occasions in the hopes of reaching a supervisor (or any BRU employee, for that matter) that could explain the shortfall in her rewards. On each occasion, BRU claimed that it could not provide plaintiff with the information she requested," the complaint states. "On or around February 18, 2015, BRU sent plaintiff an additional eGift card for $144 in rewards. But even when factoring in this additional amount, BRU still owes plaintiff approximately $23 in rewards. Importantly, BRU did not provide plaintiff with any explanation as to the $23 shortfall, nor has it explained the true method by which it calculated her rewards." The lawsuit proposes two related classes. The participant class includes Americans who have created a Babies "R" Us registry since April 2014 and who did not received a full measure of their earned rewards. The purchaser class includes Americans who meet that same criteria but who also purchased a product from their own registry and did not receive a rewards calculation. The complaint seeks treble damages and attorney fees. The class is represented by: Michael Silverman, Esq. SIPRUT, P.C. 17 North State Street, Suite 1600 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 236-0000 Facsimile: (312) 948-9212 E-mail: msilverman@siprut.com TRADER JOE'S: Sued for Systematically Demoting "Older" Employees ---------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Trader Joe's "systematically" demotes employees 40 and older from upper-level positions, a class action claims in California Federal Court. TRANS UNION LLC: Sued Over $10 Charge in Placing Security Freezes ----------------------------------------------------------------- Credit-reporting giant TransUnion charges $10 before it places security freezes on the files of people dealing with identity theft, a class claims in Illinois Federal Court, reports Lorraine Bailey, writing for Courthouse News Service. Jon Niermann, the lead plaintiff in the March 18 action, says he learned about TransUnion's "illegal" policy after he became a victim of identity theft. After someone opened a Wells Fargo credit card account in the Austin, Texas-based man's name on April 24, 2014, Niermann closed the account before any charges were made, notified the police, and contacted the major credit agencies. Niermann says he wanted security notices on his account to "prevent unauthorized persons from opening any new credit in Mr. Niermann's name." "Experian promptly complied with his request," the complaint states. "TransUnion, however, did not comply with his request, but instead mailed a form letter requiring that he pay a $10.00 charge before TransUnion would place the security freeze on his file." Niermann says he sent TransUnion six separate requests to place a freeze on his account, but each time it refused unless he first paid $10. He notes that Texas law "allows CRAs to charge a 'reasonable fee,' not to exceed $10.00, for placing a security freeze, [but] does not make the CRAs' duty to place the security freeze within five business days conditional on the payment of the charge, nor does it allow CRAs to delay placing the security freeze until after the charge is paid," the complaint states, abbreviating credit-reporting agencies. The law of Texas and other states also exempts victims of identity theft who provide a police report from paying a fee to either place, temporarily life or remove security freezes, according to the complaint. Niermann, who names the company as Trans Union in his complaint, says the defendant refused to place a freeze on his file for six weeks until he contacted the credit agency's outside counsel and explained the situation. After immediately placing a freeze on his file, TransUnion excused its delay by claiming that the standard form police report Niermann submitted was not generally accepted as a valid police report. Niermann says that "TransUnion's repeated form letters show that TransUnion has a policy and practice of unlawfully charging consumers a fee or requiring them to provide a police report, investigative report, or complaint involving the alleged commission of an identity theft offense as a pre-condition to placing a security freeze," in violation of the Texas law. Delaware-based TransUnion operates its main offices in Chicago, where Niermann filed the federal complaint. He seeks punitive damages on behalf of a class including all individuals who sought a credit freeze on their file, in addition to a subclass of identity theft victims, for violations of the Texas Consumer Credit Reporting Act. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Caddell, Esq. CADDELL & CHAPMAN 1331 Lamar Street, Suite 1070 Houston, TX 77010 Telephone: (713) 581-8295 Toll Free: (877) 553-3057 Facsimile: (713) 751-0906 TRIPOLIS ENTERPRISES: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- Kari Lynn Gilbert, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. Tripolis Enterprises, Inc., d/b/a The Palace Men's Club, Case No. 5:15-cv-00246 (W.D. Tex., April 1, 2015), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. Tripolis Enterprises, Inc. owns and operates a gentleman's club in San Antonio, Texas. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert R. Debes Jr., Esq. SHELLIST LAZARZ SLOBIN LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1515 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 621-2277 Facsimile: (713) 621-0993 E-mail: bdebes@eeoc.net TURN INC: Illegally Tracks Users Web Activities, Action Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Anthony Henson and William Cintron v. Turn, Inc., Case No. 3:15- cv-01497 (N.D. Cal., April 1, 2015), alleges that the Defendant secretly exploited a feature of the routing processes of Verizon customers' mobile devices in order to convert those devices into tracking beacons and to monitor the user's behavior and track all of users' Web-based activities without their knowledge or consent, and in disregard of users' efforts to prevent the tracking. Turn, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Redwood City, California. It owns and operates an online advertising clearinghouse for companies such as Google, Yahoo and Facebook. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael W. Sobol, Esq. Nimish R. Desai, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: (415) 956-1000 Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 E-mail: msobol@lchb.com ndesai@lchb.com - and - Nicholas Diamand, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10013-1413 Telephone: (212) 355-9500 Facsimile: (212) 355-9592 E-mail: ndiamand@lchb.com - and - Hank Bates, Esq. CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM PLLC 11311 Arcade Drive, Suite 200 Little Rock, AR 72212 Telephone: 501.312.8500 E-mail: hbates@cbplaw.com - and - Bradley S. Clanton, Esq. CLANTON LEGAL GROUP PLLC 627 Mohawk Avenue Jackson, MS 39216 Telephone: 601-454-8794 Facsimile: 866-421-9918 E-mail: brad@clantonlegalgroup.com TWITTER INC: Accused by Ex-Software Engineer of Gender Bias ----------------------------------------------------------- Twitter fired a software engineer for complaining about the company's sexist policies, which she told CEO Dick Costolo are "arbitrary and unjust," she claimed March 19 in a class action, reports Dave Tartre at Courthouse News Service. Tina Huang claims in Superior Court that she was one of Twitter's earliest hires, but was denied promotions because Twitter "discriminates against its female employees by failing to promote equally qualified or better qualified women to engineering leadership positions." "The company's promotion system creates a glass ceiling for women that cannot be explained or justified by any reasonable business purpose, because Twitter has no meaningful promotion process for these jobs: no published promotion criteria, nor any internal hiring, advancement, or application processes for employees," Huang says in the complaint. Huang started at Twitter in 2009, when the company had fewer than 100 employees, and she says its dramatic growth has been largely due to the work of early hires. "Indeed, many of the early hires now hold senior positions in the company, and without exception, all of those senior positions within the software engineer job family are held by men," her complaint states. Huang claims that "Twitter recognizes its company-wide, pervasive problem of discrimination. It has conducted internal diversity studies, focusing on barriers to women's advancement. It also treats its promotion process (and the gender disparities therein) as a common, companywide problem requiring a companywide solution. "For example, Twitter recently began providing bias mitigation training throughout the company." Huang says senior management has acknowledged the gender disparity by saying the firm will "'continue improving' its 'diversity standing' and 'move the needle.'" In early 2013, she was put in the running for a senior software position by her immediate supervisor, which Huang says is the only way promotions are done at Twitter. The senior staff engineer position would be a critical promotion in her career, because the job would have shifted her focus from coding and individual projects to a leadership role and company- wide collaboration, as well as access to high-level management meetings. But despite years of impressive service to Twitter, excellent evaluations by peers and supervisors and an absence of any criticism or disciplinary issues, Huang says she was denied the promotion without explanation. She sought objective reasons, but was given none. The only reasons she could find, she says, were rumors about "her 'aggressiveness' and 'lack of high quality code'" on a specific project. She also learned that seven men had been promoted to the senior staff engineer level. That's when she sent CEO Costolo an e-mail that said Twitter's promotion policy was arbitrary and unjust. She says the corporate response was to order to take "personal leave" and that it would investigate her complaint. She says she met with Costolo and HR people, but no information about the investigation was shared with her, and her assignments were given to other engineers. Co-workers were told she was on personal leave, though they knew she had complained about the promotion process, so she says her ability to lead was undermined, too. After three months, Huang says, "She felt she had no choice by to leave the company for the sake of her career." She says that Twitter's actions "would cause a reasonable person in (her) position to feel compelled to resign." "Twitter intentionally caused objectively intolerable working conditions and knowingly allowed them to exist," Huang says. She seeks class certification, lost wages and benefits, full vesting of her stock options, and damages and punitive damages for sex discrimination, retaliation and wrongful termination. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason Lohr, Esq. LOHR RIPAMONTI & SEGARICH LLP 140 Geary Street, 4F San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 683-7266 Facsimile: (415) 789-4163 E-mail: jason.lohr@lrllp.com UIL HOLDINGS: Being Sold for Too Little to Iberdrola, Suit Says --------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that directors are selling UIL Holdings Corp. too cheaply through an unfair process to Iberdrola, in a share-for-share plus $10.50 per share deal valued at more than $3 billion, shareholders claim in New Haven Superior Court. UMG RECORDINGS: Close to Settling Suit Over Payments of Royalty --------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Universal Music Group is close to a settlement resolving claims that it shorted recording artists on royalties from digital downloads. The class action was filed by artists including Chuck D. of Public Enemy, Rick James (by way of trust) and Ron Tyson of The Temptations. The artists claim that record labels should treat digital download income as "licenses" rather than "sales," which would give artists 50 percent of the income instead of the 15 percent they currently receive. U.S. District Judge Susan Illston ordered Universal and the artists to submit a motion to approve a settlement by April 10. She also terminated all of Universal's motions for summary judgment. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Leonard B. Simon, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF LEONARD B. SIMON, P.C. 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 338-4549 Facsimile: (619) 231-7423 E-mail: lens@rgrdlaw.com Universal is represented by: Jeffrey D. Goldman, Esq. JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP 1900 Avenue of the Stars, 7th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 785-5386 Facsimile: (866) 297-8774 E-mail: JGoldman@jmbm.com The case is Rick James v. UMG Recordings, Case No. 3:11-cv-01613- SI, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. USPLABS LLC: Falsely Marketed PowerFULL Supplements, Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Brenden Moore, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. USPLabs, LLC and AllStarHealth.com, Case No. 1:15-cv- 02374 (S.D.N.Y., March 31, 2015), arises out of the Defendant's false and misleading claims that its PowerFULL supplement can increase human growth hormone secretion, promote better sleep, and provide a panoply of health benefits. USPLabs, LLC is a Dallas County, Texas-based company that manufactures a variety of health products and supplements. The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas A. Canova, Esq. Jack Fitzgerald, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF JACK FITZGERALD, PC Hillcrest Professional Building 3636 Fourth Avenue, Suite 202 San Diego, CA 92103 Telephone: (619) 692-3840 Facsimile: (619) 362-9555 E-mail: tom@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com jack@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Sued Over Denial of Mental Heath Coverage ----------------------------------------------------------------- John P., Erin P. and Gabriella P., individually and as representatives of the Class of similarly situated individuals v. Verizon Communications Inc., and The Verizon Medical Plan, Case No. 2:15-cv-00215 (D. Utah, March 31, 2015), is brought on behalf of the Verizon Medical Plan participants and beneficiaries that were denied of coverage for residential treatment services for mental health conditions to which they are entitled under the Plan. Verizon Communications Inc. is a wireless communications service provider throughout the United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian S. King, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF BRIAN S. KING 336 S 300 E STE 200 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Telephone: (801) 532-1739 E-mail: brian@briansking.com WARNER/CHAPPELL: "Happy Birthday to You" Song Called a Cash Cow --------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Reynolds, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that Warner/Chappell will not charge you if you sing "Happy Birthday" before your toddler blows out the candles on her birthday cake. But if you're a Hollywood producer, expect to take a hit. In court to fight claims that the 120-year-old "Happy Birthday to You" is in the public domain, a Warner/Chappell representative said it sometimes charges major motion pictures between five and six figures to license the most recognizable song in the English language. The revelation came at a March 23 hearing at the Edward R. Roybal Courthouse in downtown Los Angeles, where U.S. District Judge George King was hearing motions and cross-motions for summary judgment in a 2013 class action complaint. Good Morning to You Productions says Warner/Chappell collects millions of dollars in licensing fees for "Happy Birthday to You," even though the origins of the song, and who owns it, are disputed. Calling the lawsuit a "David and Goliath" case, Good Morning President Jennifer Nelson said it is "ridiculous" people have to pay for a song that has been in the public domain for 65 years. "If you don't pay for the license to the song they will notify you and let you know that you have to pay," Nelson said after the hearing. "They've never actually sued anybody but they have strong-armed people into having to pay." Nelson said she had paid $1,500 to use "Happy Birthday to You" for 10 seconds at a festival. Warner/Chappell says that chain of title extends to a valid federal copyright registration for "Happy Birthday" in 1935. But the plaintiffs say the song was not copyrightable because it had already been performed for over three decades, and by then was a public work. In addition, the registrations were only for "specific piano arrangements," the lawsuit states. If King declines to rule in favor of either the plaintiffs or music publisher the case could still go to trial. While delving into the complex copyright issues that will decide whether "Happy Birthday" belongs to one company -- or all of us -- Judge King asked for a breakdown of how much Warner/Chappell charges to license the song. Warner's attorney Kelly Klaus said he did not know the exact numbers but clarified what the license fees cover. "We're not talking about little kids' birthday parties in the back yard," Klaus said. Warner Chappell's head of legal and business affairs, Scott McDowell, told King from the courtroom that a music synchronization license varies but can cost from $500 to $1,500. A major feature film could pay up to five or six figures, McDowell said. Klaus stressed that licenses for some public performances of the song -- say at a party in a restaurant -- are covered under blanket licensing agreements with American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers, known as ASCAP. After the hearing, the plaintiffs' attorney Mark Rifkin said plaintiff and filmmaker Robert Siegel had paid $3,000 to use "Happy Birthday" in his indie comedy "Big Fan." "For a major motion picture it could be six figures?" Rifkin said. Warner bases its claim of ownership on two copyright registrations in 1935 by the Clayton F. Summy Company. The latter company published the song in songbooks -- claiming to own the copyright, but not to be the author. The original melody for "Happy Birthday to You" was composed in the late 1800s by school teacher Mildred Hill in St. Louisville, Kentucky. The song was part of the composition for a song called "Good Morning to All," with lyrics by her sister Patty Hill, according to court records. The sisters sold or assigned their rights to Summy for 10 percent of retail sales. Warner/Chappell, a subsidiary of Warner Music Group, says it secured the copyright after its $15 million acquisition of Birch Tree Group Limited in 1988. There has never been a judicial determination on the copyright of "Good Morning to All," the plaintiffs claim. Judge King took the case under submission. He did not give an indication when he will rule. WELLS FARGO: Bid to Strike Class Allegations in "Roy" Denied ------------------------------------------------------------ Before the court in SUMIT ROY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Defendant, CASE NO. 14-CV-04661-SC, (N.D. Cal.) is Defendant Wells Fargo's motion to strike class allegations. District Judge Samuel Conti denied the request saying the class allegations in Plaintiff's complaint are not an insufficient defense, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous. The Court also found that Wells Fargo's motion to strike is an improper motion and not permitted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. A copy of the Court's March 27, 2015 order is available at http://is.gd/I4FnVefrom Leagle.com. Sumit Roy, Plaintiff, represented by Seyed Abbas Kazerounian -- ak@kazlg.com -- Kazerouni Law Group, APC & Matthew Michael Loker - - ml@kazlg.com -- Kazerouri Law Group, APC. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendant, represented by Mark Douglas Lonergan, Severson & Werson & Scott J. Hyman -- sjh@severson.com -- Severson & Werson. WHOLE FOODS: Recalls Bran Muffin Products Due to Eggs and Milk -------------------------------------------------------------- Whole Foods Market is recalling Bran Muffin six packs produced and sold in retail stores in the Southwest Region, which includes TX, OK, LA, and AR, due to undeclared egg and milk ingredients. People who have an allergy or severe sensitivity to eggs or milk run the risk of serious or life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products. The product was sold in six packs packaged in clear plastic containers, PLU 24857800499 with best by dates of 1/21/15 to 4/6/15. The bran muffins in the six pack contain eggs and milk as ingredients, which was not declared on the label. No allergic reactions or illnesses have been reported to date. Signage is posted to notify customers of this recall, and all affected product has been removed from shelves. The error was discovered during routine product review. Consumers who have purchased this product from any Whole Foods Market Southwest stores in TX, OK, LA, and AR are encouraged to discard the product and may bring their receipt to the store for a full refund. Consumers with questions should contact their local store between the hours of 9am and 5pm CST any day of the week. Pictures of the Recalled Products available at: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm440730.htm WISCONSIN DETAIL: Faces "Idris" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------------- Xolani Idris v. Wisconsin Detail Services and Todd Schultz, Case No. 2:15-cv-00343 (E.D. Wis., March 30, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants are engaged in an automotive detailing business with its principal place of business at 2010 W Bender Road, in Glendale, Wisconsin. The Plaintiff is represented by: Sara J. Geenen, Esq. THE PREVIANT LAW FIRM SC 1555 N River Center Dr-Ste 202, PO Box 12993 Milwaukee, WI 53212 Telephone: (414) 271-4500 Facsimile: (414) 271-6308 E-mail: sjg@previant.com XANODYNE PHARMACEUTICALS: Gets Ruling Dismissing Lightfoot Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- In IN RE: DARVOCET, DARVON, AND PROPOXYPHENE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. Lightfoot v. Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc., MASTER FILE NO. 2:11-MD-2226-DCR, CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:14-198-DCR, (E.D. Ky.), Defendant Xanodyne Pharmaceuticals, Inc. filed a motion to dismiss the claims asserted against it pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Plaintiff Felicia Lightfoot, proceeding pro se, has filed a response which the Court also construes as a motion for leave to amend her Complaint. District Judge Danny C. Reeves granted both motions in his memorandum opinion and order dated March 27, 2015, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/9ONxiYfrom Leagle.com. Defendant Xanodyne's motion to dismiss is granted. Plaintiff Felicia Lightfoot's claims against Xanodyne are dismissed, with prejudice. Plaintiff Felicia Lightfoot's motion to amend the Complaint is granted. Plaintiff may tender an Amended Complaint within 10 days. Failure to tender an Amended Complaint within the time permitted will result in dismissal of this action without further notice. YORK PARTNERS: Faces "Uribe" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- Rafael Uribe, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated persons, known and unknown v. York Partners, Inc., d/b/a Nancy's Pizza, and Anthony Uroni, Case No. 1:15-cv-02889 (N.D. Ill., April 1, 2015), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 each workweek. The Defendants own and operate a restaurant located at 940 N. York St., Elmhurst, Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: Raisa Alicea, Esq. CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC 6232 N Pulaski Rd, Ste. 200 Chicago, IL 60646 Telephone: (312) 800-1017 E-mail: ralicea@yourclg.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 * * *