/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/160115.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, January 15, 2016, Vol. 18, No. 10 Headlines ADEX INTERNATIONAL: Kuehne Suit Goes to S.D. Florida ALLIED INTERSTATE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Landau" Suit Claims AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Brown" Suit Included in Airline Antitrust MDL AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Kelly" Suit Moved From N.D. Calif. to D.C. AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Grimes" Suit Goes From N.D. Calif to D.C. AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Garzel" Case Suit Goes to Wash. D.C. AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Lax" Suit Moved from N.D. Calif to D.C. AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Reiber" Suit Moved from N.D. Calif. to D.C. AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Jung" Suit Goes to Washington D.C. AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Chen" Suit Moved From N.D. Calif. to D.C. AMERICAN AIRLINES: BABC Suit Goes From N.D. Calif. to Wash. D.C. ANDOVER SCHOOL: Judge Narrows Claims in "Meagher" Suit APPLE INC: Class Cert. Denied in Suit Over Replacement Phones AQUA TRANSFER: "Gonzales" Action Seeks OT Recovery ATLAS ROOFING: Judge Picks Guide in Daubert Motion Application BED BATH: Faces "Diaz" Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS: "Sciulli" Suit Moved to S.D. Fla. BISON DRILLING: Faces "Talamantez" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT CAFE VICO: "Bou-Merhi" Action Seeks OT Recovery CANALU LLC: "Garcia" Action Seeks OT Recovery CAVALRY PORTFOLIO: Illegally Collects Debt, "Lopez" Suit Claims CAVALRY PORTFOLIO: Faces "Abramowitz" Suit Over Debt Collection CHESAPEAKE ENERGY: Sued in Penn. Over Alleged Royalty Conversion CHIPOTLE: Faces Class Action Lawsuit From Investors CLOVIS ONCOLOGY: Faces Shareholder Class Suits CONVERSE INC: "Munoz" Suit Goes from N.D. to C.D. California CORINTHIAN INTERNATIONAL: Judge Won't Allow Suit to be Remanded CREDIT CONTROL: Illegally Collects Debt, "Sanchez" Suit Claims DART CHEROKEE: Judge Denies Plaintiff's Second Bid to Remand Suit DELAWARE: "Chandler" Seeks Damages Over Mortgage Deal DELTA AIR LINES: "Pomeroy" Suit Moved From N.D. Ga. to D.C. DELTA-T GROUP: Faces "Johnson" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime DIRECTV INC: "Lippincott" Suit Moved to N.D. California DON RASMUSSEN: Sued Over Land Rover Vehicle Trade Restraint DOORDASH INC: "Gerald" Action Hits Unsolicited Texts DRAFTKINGS & FANDUEL: "Martinelli" Alleges Rigged Online Games DUPONT: Class Settlement Precludes Late Complainant's Cause EBAY INC: "Chen" Suit Removed from Alameda Court to N.D. Calif. ERBA DIAGNOSTICS: Faces "Tran" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l Reports ESSEX PROPERTY: Case Management Conference Set for Feb. 25 EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Faces "Fennern" Suit Over FCRA Violation EXPERIAN INFORMATION: "Letren" Suit Goes to Maryland Dist. Court FIFTH STREET ASSET: Holzer & Holzer Files Class Action FITBIT: Sued Over Inaccurate Heart-Rate Monitoring FLOWERS FOODS: Doesn't Properly Pay Employees, "Neff" Suit Says FRANKLIN COUNTY, OH: Judge Denies Bid to Unseal Records FRENKEL LAMBERT: Illegally Collects Debt, "Welch" Suit Claims GENERAL MARITIME: "Batchelor" Action Seeks OT Recovery GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC: "Hill" Suit Consolidated in Zofran MDL HOSPITAL SERVICE: "Leet" Class Suit Removed to M.D. Louisiana IQ DATA: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection J CREW: "Kamal" Suit Stayed Pending Decision in Spokeo J&J PAVEMENT REPAIRS: "Aguilar" Action Seeks OT Recovery JASA MARKETING: Faces "Almanza" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT KATZMAN PRODUCE: "Capote" Suit Seeks Overtime Recovery KEANE FRAC: "Metz" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages KLASSEN WELL TESTING: "Kuni" Action Seeks OT Recovery KOHL'S DEPARTMENT: "Chowning" Suit Moved to C.D. California LOCKS & KEYS: Mass. App. Court Narrows Appeal on "Collins" Suit MARTINEZ ENTERPRISES: Baltazar Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT MARYLAND TREATMENT: "Batiste" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages MATTEL INC: "Archer-Hayes" Suit Alleges Eavesdropping Doll MICHAEL STORES: Plaintiff Suffers No Injuries on Security Breach MIYABI RESTAURANTS: "Crumbling" Action Seeks Minimum Wages MODELL'S SPORTING: Faces "Diaz" Suit in N.Y. Over ADA Violation NATIONAL FREIGHT: "Portillo" Suit Goes to NJ District Court NATIONAL STORES: "Danino" Suit Seeks Overtime Recovery NEIL JONES: Judge Requires Parties to Submit Additional Briefings OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT: "Oravis" Moved to Wash. D.C. PACIFICA HOTEL: "Shasheet" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT PDF FILLER: Sued in C.D. Cal. Over Automatic Renewal Policies QUALITY ENERGY: Faces "Granado" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT R.J. REYNOLDS: "Fienman" Suit Over Camel Loyalty Program Settled ROSICKI ROSICKI: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection RUST-OLEUM: "Howell" Suit Removed to New Jersey District Court RYAN TRANSPORTATION: Faces "Bell" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT SAINT PETER'S HEALTHCARE: Plan Does Not Qualify for Exemption SELENE FINANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Mohammed" Suit Claims SELENE FINANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Jorge" Suit Claims SESTWON PIZZA: Faces "Munoz" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: "Valdes" Suit Moved from S.D. Fla. to D.C. SPOTIFY: Musicians Seek Class-Action Status for Copyright Suit SPOTIFY USA: Faces "Lowery" Suit Over Copyright Infringement SUNOCO INC: Faces "Hernandez" Suit in N.Y. Over ADA Violation SYNTHES USA: Judge Narrows Parties' Claims in "Lindell" Suit TARGET CORP: "Bowen" Suit Seeks Damages Over Share Price Drop TERRAFORM GLOBAL: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports TOTAL GAS & POWER: "Anastasio" Suit Hits Natural Gas Bids TRADER JOE'S: Under-Fills Tuna Cans, New York Suit Says TRINET GROUP: Robbins Geller Named Lead Counsel in "Welgus" Case TRINITY INDUSTRIES: "Nemky" Suit Goes from E.D. to N.D. Texas UBER TECH: Limo Drivers in Philadelphia File Class Action UNITED CONTINENTAL: "David" Suit Over Inflight Service Dismissed UNITED STATES: OPM Sued in D.C. Over Alleged Data Breach VALLEYCREST LANDSCAPE: "Tiller" Suit Removed to M.D. Florida VITAL THERAPIES: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Abdy" Suit in Cal. Over Defeat Devices XBIOTECH INC: Faces "Tran" Suit Over Misleading Financial Reports * KCC Expands New York Class Action Practice * Obama Administration to Veto H.R. 1927 Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: Class Suit Bill Faces Steep Senate Hurdle ASBESTOS UPDATE: TRC Has Fibro Reinsurance Deals with AIG, et al. ASBESTOS UPDATE: CSC Continues to Indemnify DyCorp Units ASBESTOS UPDATE: FedEx Continues to Defend Fibro-related Suit ASBESTOS UPDATE: WestRock Continues to Defend Fibro Lawsuits ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Refuses to Review Stay of Allstate Ruling ASBESTOS UPDATE: Former Custodian Loses Summary Judgment Bid ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Affirms Summary Judgment Favoring Fluor ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fed. Cir. Dismisses Veteran's Appeal ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dale Farm Fined Over Cookstown Fibro Exposure ASBESTOS UPDATE: Stobbs Denies Ford's Bid to Junk Fibro Suit ASBESTOS UPDATE: Garlock Postpones Fibro Hearing ASBESTOS UPDATE: Couple Names 70 Companies in Fibro Suit ASBESTOS UPDATE: Olivetti Fibro Trial Gets Underway ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro-related Deaths of Steelworkers Probed ASBESTOS UPDATE: Daughter Blames Cos. for Exposing Her, Father ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hundred of Hoo Academy Fined GBP35K Over Fibro ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dust Exposure Leads Rise in Construction Deaths ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ill. SC Bars Workers' Compensation Fibro Claim ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Mortality Rates Exceed Nat'l Average ASBESTOS UPDATE: Widow Says Ex-Employers Caused Husband's Death ASBESTOS UPDATE: Two Companies Fined GBP165K for Fibro Failings ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wateringen Residents Exposed to Deadly Dust ASBESTOS UPDATE: Security Guard Dies of Fibro-related Cancer ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Bill Would Expose Victims' Personal Data ********* ADEX INTERNATIONAL: Kuehne Suit Goes to S.D. Florida ---------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Kuehne Chemical Company, Inc. v. Adex International, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-05630, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami). The Florida District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15- cv-24157-DLG to the proceeding. Plaintiff brought the lawsuit alleging fraud, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel, indemnity, and intentional interference with contractual relations against the Defendant. Kuehne Chemical Company manufactures industrial inorganic chemicals. The company was founded in 1988 and is based in Kearny, New Jersey. Adex International provides tradeshows, exhibits, and marketing solutions. It offers marketing consultation and analysis design, project management, engineering, graphics, fabrication, installation, logistics, warehousing, multimedia, portables, and asset management services. The company was founded in 1978 and is based in Cincinnati, Ohio. ALLIED INTERSTATE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Landau" Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Wolf Landau, Saul Moskowitz, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated consumers v. Allied Interstate LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-06854-JG-PK (E.D.N.Y., December 2, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Allied Interstate LLC provides accounts receivable, customer retention and debt collection services to blue-chip companies. The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq. ADAM J. FISHBEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW 483 Chestnut Street Cedarhurst, NY 11516 Telephone: (516) 791-4400 Facsimile: (516) 791-4411 E-mail: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Brown" Suit Included in Airline Antitrust MDL ----------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Brown v. American Airlines Group, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-07433, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The DC District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01888-CKK to the proceeding. The lawsuit is consolidated in the multidistrict litigation captioned In re: Domestic Airline Travel Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 2656. The actions in the litigation arose from the Defendants' alleged conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain, or stabilize prices of airline tickets through a number of mechanisms, including signaling one another how quickly they would add new flights, routes, and extra seats to limit the capacity, and limiting access to competitive fare information to keep the price of airfares artificially high. American Airlines Group Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. American Airlines Group has been the holding company and parent company of American Airlines, Inc. since December 9, 2013. American Airlines Group has hubs in Charlotte, Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, Phoenix and Washington, D.C. American Airlines and the other airline companies under the American Airlines Group umbrella average close to 6,700 flights per day to 339 destinations in 54 countries. Over half a million passengers fly one of the airlines owned by American Airlines Group daily. The Plaintiff is represented by: Gregory F. Coleman, Esq. GREG COLEMAN LAW PC 550 Main Avenue, Suite 600 Knoxville, TN 37902 Telephone: (865) 247-0080 Facsimile: (865) 522-0049 E-mail: greg@gregcolemanlaw.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Kelly" Suit Moved From N.D. Calif. to D.C. -------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Kelly v. American Airlines, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03222, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01916- CKK to the proceeding. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly conspired for fixing, raising, maintaining, and/or artificially inflating the prices for domestic air passenger transportation services in the US in violation of Sherman Antitrust Act. Delta Air Lines is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, Georgia. Delta operates more than 5,400 flights per day to 326 locations in 64 countries. American Airlines is a Delaware corporation with its principal places of business located in Fort Worth, Texas. American is the largest airline in the world, operating nearly 6,700 flights per day to 339 locations in 54 countries. Southwest Airlines is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business located in Dallas, Texas. Southwest operates more than 3,600 flights per day to 94 locations in the United States and six additional countries. United Airlines is Delaware corporations with its principal places of business located in Chicago, Illinois. United offers service to more destinations than any other airline in the world, operating more than 5,300 flights per day to 369 locations across six continents. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher T. Micheletti, Esq. Jiangxiao Athena Hou, Esq. Eric W. Buetzow, Esq. ZELLE HOFMANN VOELBEL & MASON, LLP 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3400 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 693 0700 Facsimile: (415) 693 0770 E-mail: cmicheletti@zelle.com ahou@zelle.com ebuetzow@zelle.com The Defendants are represented by: John F. Cove, Jr., Esq. BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874 1000 Facsimile: (510) 874 1460 E-mail: jcove@bfllp.com - and - Alden Lewis Atkins, Esq. Matthew J. Jacobs, Esq. Michael L. Charlson, Esq. Mortimer H. Hartwell, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS, LLP 2200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 500W Washington, DC 20037 Telephone: (202) 639 6613 Facsimile: (202) 879 8813 E-mail: aatkins@velaw.com mjacobs@velaw.com mcharlson@velaw.com mhartwell@velaw.com - and - Michael Lacovara, Esq. FRESHFIELDS BRUCKHAUS DERINGER US, LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 277 4000 E-mail: michael.lacovara@freshfields.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Grimes" Suit Goes From N.D. Calif to D.C. ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Grimes et al. v. American Airlines Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03269, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California Northern, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01915-CKK to the proceeding. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly conspired for fixing, raising, maintaining, and/or artificially inflating the prices for domestic air passenger transportation services in the US in violation of Sherman Antitrust Act. American Airlines Group is an American publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in Fort Worth. American Airlines provides scheduled airline services. It offers scheduled jet services primarily to Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York City. Delta Air Lines is a major American airline, with its headquarters and largest hub at Hartsfield- Jackson Atlanta International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia. Southwest Airlines is a major U.S. airline and the world's largest low-cost carrier, headquartered in Dallas, Texas. United Continental Holdings is a publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in the Willis Tower in Chicago, and owns and operates United Airlines. Chicago, Illinois-based United Airlines offers passenger and cargo air transportation services. As of October 28, 2015, the company operated approximately 700 mainline aircraft. The Plaintiff is represented by: Whitney E. Street, Esq. Lesley E. Weaver, Esq. Erica G. Langsen, Esq. BLOCK & LEVITON LLP 520 Third Street, Suite 108 Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: (415) 968 8999 Facsimile: (617) 507 6020 E-mail: wstreet@blockesq.com lweaver@blockesq.com elangsen@blockesq.com - and - Peter Safirstein, Esq. Roger A. Sachar Jr., Esq. Domenico Minerva, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 28 West 44th Street, Suite 2001 New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 564 1637 Facsimile: (212) 564 1656 E-mail: PSafirstein@MorganSecuritiesLaw.com RSachar@MorganSecuritiesLaw.com DMinerva@Forthepeople.com The Defendants are represented by: John F. Cove, Jr., Esq. BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874 1000 Facsimile: (510) 874 1460 E-mail: jcove@bfllp.com - and - Alden Lewis Atkins, Esq. Matthew J. Jacobs, Esq. Michael L. Charlson, Esq. Mortimer H. Hartwell, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS, LLP 2200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 500W Washington, DC 20037 Telephone: (202) 639 6613 Facsimile: (202) 879 8813 E-mail: aatkins@velaw.com mjacobs@velaw.com mcharlson@velaw.com mhartwell@velaw.com - and - Michael Lacovara, Esq. FRESHFIELDS BRUCKHAUS DERINGER US, LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 277 4000 E-mail: michael.lacovara@freshfields.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Garzel" Case Suit Goes to Wash. D.C. -------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Garzel v. American Airlines Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-06940, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv- 01890-CKK to the proceeding. Plaintiff brought the civil action for treble damages under the antitrust laws of the United States. The lawsuit arose out of the alleged conspiracy by the Defendants to limit flight capacity, thus fixing, raising, maintaining, and/or stabilizing the price of domestic air travel services in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. American Airlines Group is an American publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in Fort Worth. American Airlines provides scheduled airline services. It offers scheduled jet services primarily to Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York City. Delta Air Lines is a major American airline, with its headquarters and largest hub at Hartsfield- Jackson Atlanta International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia. Southwest Airlines is a major U.S. airline and the world's largest low-cost carrier, headquartered in Dallas, Texas. United Continental Holdings is a publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in the Willis Tower in Chicago, and owns and operates United Airlines. United Airlines based in Chicago, Illinois, offers passenger and cargo air transportation services. As of October 28, 2015, the company operated approximately 700 mainline aircraft. The Plaintiff is represented by: Edward A. Wallace, Esq. Mark R. Miller, 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@wexlerwallace.com mrm@wexlerwallace.com aek@wexlerwallace.com The Defendants are represented by: Michael Lacovara, Esq. FRESHFIELDS BRUCKHAUS DERINGER US, LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 277 4000 E-mail: michael.lacovara@freshfields.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Lax" Suit Moved from N.D. Calif to D.C. ----------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Lax & Company, Inc. et al v. American Airlines Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-04085, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01901-CKK to the proceeding. The class action lawsuit seeks to recover damages and other appropriate relief based on the Defendants' unlawful conspiracy for fixing, raising, maintaining and stabilizing the price of domestic airline tickets in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act of 1890. American Airlines Group is an American publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in Fort Worth. American Airlines provides scheduled airline services. It offers scheduled jet services primarily to Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York City. Delta Air Lines is a major American airline, with its headquarters and largest hub at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia. Southwest Airlines is a major U.S. airline and the world's largest low-cost carrier, headquartered in Dallas, Texas. United Continental Holdings is a publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in the Willis Tower in Chicago, Illinois, and owns and operates United Airlines. United Airlines, based in Chicago, offers passenger and cargo air transportation services. As of October 28, 2015, the company operated approximately 700 mainline aircraft. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Whitney E. Street, Esq. Lesley E. Weaver, Esq. Erica G. Langsen, Esq. BLOCK & LEVITON LLP 520 Third Street, Suite 108 Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: (415) 968 8999 Facsimile: (617) 507 6020 E-mail: wstreet@blockesq.com lweaver@blockesq.com elangsen@blockesq.com - and - Peter Safirstein, Esq. Roger A. Sachar Jr., Esq. Domenico Minerva, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 28 West 44th Street, Suite 2001 New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 564 1637 Facsimile: (212) 564 1656 E-mail: PSafirstein@MorganSecuritiesLaw.com RSachar@MorganSecuritiesLaw.com DMinerva@Forthepeople.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Reiber" Suit Moved from N.D. Calif. to D.C. --------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Reiber v. American Airlines, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03387, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of. Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv- 01910-CKK to the proceeding. Delta Air Lines is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, Georgia. Delta operates more than 5,400 flights per day to 326 locations in 64 countries. American Airlines is a Delaware corporation with its principal places of business located in Fort Worth, Texas. American is the largest airline in the world, operating nearly 6,700 flights per day to 339 locations in 54 countries. Southwest Airlines is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business located in Dallas, Texas. Southwest operates more than 3,600 flights per day to 94 locations in the United States and six additional countries. United Airlines is Delaware corporations with its principal places of business located in Chicago, Illinois. United offers service to more destinations than any other airline in the world, operating more than 5,300 flights per day to 369 locations across six continents. The Defendants are represented by: Alden Lewis Atkins, Esq. Matthew J. Jacobs, Esq. Michael L. Charlson, Esq. Mortimer H. Hartwell, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS, LLP 2200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 500W Washington, DC 20037 Telephone: (202) 639 6613 Facsimile: (202) 879 8813 E-mail: aatkins@velaw.com mjacobs@velaw.com mcharlson@velaw.com mhartwell@velaw.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Jung" Suit Goes to Washington D.C. ------------------------------------------------------ The class action lawsuit titled Jung v. American Airlines, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03362, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of. Columbia (Washington, DC). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01912-CKK to the proceeding. Plaintiff brought the action for damages and injunctive relief pursuant to section 1 of the Sherman Act and sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act. Plaintiff seeks to recover treble damages for Defendants' alleged illegal conduct. Delta Air Lines is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, Georgia. Delta operates more than 5,400 flights per day to 326 locations in 64 countries. American Airlines is a Delaware corporation with its principal places of business located in Fort Worth, Texas. American is the largest airline in the world, operating nearly 6,700 flights per day to 339 locations in 54 countries. Southwest Airlines is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business located in Dallas, Texas. Southwest operates more than 3,600 flights per day to 94 locations in the United States and six additional countries. United Airlines is Delaware corporations with its principal places of business located in Chicago, Illinois. United offers service to more destinations than any other airline in the world, operating more than 5,300 flights per day to 369 locations across six continents. The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph W. Cotchett, Esq. Steven N. Williams, Esq. Adam J. Zapala, Esq. Elizabeth Tran, Esq. Joyce Chang, Esq. COTCHETT, PITRE & McCARTHY, LLP 840 Malcolm Road Burlingame, CA 94010 Telephone: (650) 697 6000 Facsimile: (650) 697 0577 E-mail: jcotchett@cpmlegal.com swilliams@cpmlegal.com azapala@cpmlegal.com etran@cpmlegal.com jchang@cpmlegal.com The Defendants are represented by: John F. Cove, Jr., Esq. BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874 1000 Facsimile: (510) 874 1460 E-mail: jcove@bfllp.com - and - Alden Lewis Atkins, Esq. Matthew J. Jacobs, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS, LLP 2200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 500W Washington, DC 20037 Telephone: (202) 639 6613 Facsimile: (202) 879 8813 E-mail: aatkins@velaw.com mjacobs@velaw.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: "Chen" Suit Moved From N.D. Calif. to D.C. ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Chen v. American Airlines, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03342, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of. Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv- 01913-CKK to the proceeding. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly conspired to fix, raise, maintain, and/or artificially inflate the prices for domestic air passenger transportation services in the US in violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. Delta Air Lines is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, Georgia. Delta operates more than 5,400 flights per day to 326 locations in 64 countries. American Airlines is a Delaware corporation with its principal places of business located in Fort Worth, Texas. American is the largest airline in the world, operating nearly 6,700 flights per day to 339 locations in 54 countries. Southwest Airlines is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business located in Dallas, Texas. Southwest operates more than 3,600 flights per day to 94 locations in the United States and six additional countries. United Airlines is Delaware corporations with its principal places of business located in Chicago, Illinois. United offers service to more destinations than any other airline in the world, operating more than 5,300 flights per day to 369 locations across six continents. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher T. Micheletti, Esq. Jiangxiao Athena Hou, Esq. Eric W. Buetzow, Esq. ZELLE HOFMANN VOELBEL & MASON, LLP 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 3400 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 693 0700 Facsimile: (415) 693 0770 E-mail: cmicheletti@zelle.com ahou@zelle.com ebuetzow@zelle.com The Defendants are represented by: John F. Cove, Jr., Esq. BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 900 Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 874 1000 Facsimile: (510) 874 1460 E-mail: jcove@bfllp.com - and - Alden Lewis Atkins, Esq. Matthew J. Jacobs, Esq. Michael L. Charlson, Esq. Mortimer H. Hartwell, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS, LLP 2200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Suite 500W Washington, DC 20037 Telephone: (202) 639 6613 Facsimile: (202) 879 8813 E-mail: aatkins@velaw.com mjacobs@velaw.com mcharlson@velaw.com mhartwell@velaw.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: BABC Suit Goes From N.D. Calif. to Wash. D.C. ---------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Boston Amateur Basketball Club, III, Ltd. v. American Airlines Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15- cv-04459, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01899-CKK to the proceeding. The proposed class action seeks to recover damages and other appropriate relief based on the Defendants' alleged conspiracy of fixing, raising, maintaining and stabilizing the price of domestic airline tickets in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act of 1890. American Airlines Group is an American publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in Fort Worth. American Airlines provides scheduled airline services. It offers scheduled jet services primarily to Chicago, Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York City. Delta Air Lines is a major American airline, with its headquarters and largest hub at Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport in Atlanta, Georgia. Southwest Airlines is a major U.S. airline and the world's largest low-cost carrier, headquartered in Dallas, Texas. United Continental Holdings is a publicly traded airline holding company headquartered in the Willis Tower in Chicago, and owns and operates United Airlines. United Airlines based in Chicago, Illinois, offers passenger and cargo air transportation services. As of October 28, 2015, the company operated approximately 700 mainline aircraft. The Plaintiff is represented by: Whitney E. Street, Esq. Lesley E. Weaver, Esq. Erica G. Langsen, Esq. BLOCK & LEVITON LLP 520 Third Street, Suite 108 Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: (415) 968 8999 Facsimile: (617) 507 6020 E-mail: wstreet@blockesq.com lweaver@blockesq.com elangsen@blockesq.com - and - Peter Safirstein, Esq. Roger A. Sachar Jr., Esq. Domenico Minerva, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 28 West 44th Street, Suite 2001 New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 564 1637 Facsimile: (212) 564-1656 E-mail: PSafirstein@ForThePeople.com RSachar@MorganSecuritiesLaw.com DMinerva@Forthepeople.com ANDOVER SCHOOL: Judge Narrows Claims in "Meagher" Suit ------------------------------------------------------ Magistrate Judge Judith Gail Dein of the District of Massachusetts ruled on plaintiff's motions in the case Jennifer Meagher, Plaintiff, v. Andover School Committee, et al., Defendants, Civil Action No. 13-11307-JGD (D. Mass.) Meagher was terminated on September 2012 from her employment as a tenured teacher at Andover High School (AHS) in Andover Massachusetts. The termination was based on Meagher having sent an email to approximately 60 of her colleagues urging them to vote against certain reports required as part of the school's accreditation application. Meagher filed a suit on May 30, 2013 against the Andover School Committee, the Andover School Department and the Superintendent of the Andover Public Schools, Marinel McGrath, and alleged that defendants violated her rights under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and the Massachusetts Civil Rights Act, Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 12, Sections 11H and 11I (MCRA). On July 2, 2013, while the suit was pending, the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board issued its decision in connection with an unfair labor practices charge filed by the union, finding Meagher's termination was in response to protected concerted activity and that her employer had discriminated against her based on her union activity in violation of Massachusetts law. The School Committee was ordered to reinstate Meagher to her teaching position at AHS and to compensate Meagher for all losses she had suffered, if any, as a result of the unlawful action. No appeal was taken. Meagher continued to pursue her claims against the defendants and eventually, the parties filed cross-motions for summary judgment as to liability only. In a decision dated March 31, 2015, the court concluded that Meagher had been unlawfully dismissed from her employment in retaliation for protected speech, but that McGrath was immune from liability under the doctrine of qualified immunity. The court further held that the plaintiff had failed to establish a triable issue with respect to her claims under the MCRA. A trial was scheduled on the issue of damages. Before trial, the parties settled Meagher's claim for $100,000.00, leaving to the court the issue of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. Plaintiff and her counsel filed an amended motion to assess costs including reasonable attorney's fees and a motion to submit additional materials to the court. Plaintiff's counsel is seeking $488,660.80 in fees, and $16,237.79 in costs, for a total amount of $504,898.59. Magistrate Judge Dein allowed, in part, and denied, in part, plaintiff's amended motion to assess costs including reasonable attorney's fees. Plaintiff is awarded $167,454.18 in fees and $16,237.79 in costs, for a total award of $183,691.97. Plaintiff's motion to submit additional materials to the court is denied. A copy of Magistrate Judge Dein's memorandum of decision and order dated January 6, 2016, is available at http://goo.gl/FFgpCofrom Leagle.com. Ms. Jennifer Meagher, Plaintiff, represented by Mark D. Stern -- lawoffice@mdsternlaw.com -- at Law Offices of Mark D. Stern Defendants, represented by: Gregor A. Pagnini, Esq. Leonard H. Kesten, Esq. BRODY, HARDON, PERKINS, & KESTEN LLP 699 Boylston Street Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: 617-880-7100 Facsimile: 617-880-7171 APPLE INC: Class Cert. Denied in Suit Over Replacement Phones ------------------------------------------------------------- Named plaintiff Fabrienne English accuses defendants Apple Inc., AppleCare Service Company Inc., and Apple CSC Inc. of various misrepresentations and omissions in connection with AppleCare+ and AppleCare Protection Plan, extended service plans Apple offers to purchasers of iPhones. English's claims vary slightly, but her core complaint is that Apple misrepresents to consumers that replacement iPhones under AC+ and APP will be new, when in fact many of the replacement devices in Apple's service stock are "refurbished" or otherwise not new. She moves to certify a class and two subclasses of purchasers of AC+ and APP asserting claims under California law for violations of the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, the False Advertising Law, the Unfair Competition Law, and the Secondhand Merchandize Labeling Law, Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code Sec. 17531, and for fraud. District Judge William H. Orrick ruled that none of her theories of liability support class certification, and she has not established adequacy of counsel under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a)(4). Her motion is denied, the judge said in a 27- page decision. A Case Management Conference is set for February 9, 2016 at 2 p.m. The parties shall file a Joint Case Management Statement by February 2, 2016 proposing a schedule to address the remaining issues in this case. The case is, FABRIENNE ENGLISH, Plaintiff, v. APPLE INC, et al., Defendants, Case No. 14-cv-01619-WHO (N.D. Cal.). AQUA TRANSFER: "Gonzales" Action Seeks OT Recovery -------------------------------------------------- James Gonzalez, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Aqua Transfer & Energy Services, LLC, Premier Flow Control, LLC, K&S Services, LLC and Chadwick Kindle, Defendants, Case No. 5:15-cv-01102-OLG (W.D. Tex., San Antonio Division, December 10, 2015), seeks actual damages, including owed wages, monthly benefit differential loss, lost benefits, mental anguish damages and other compensatory damages, liquidated and punitive damages as well as attorney's fees under Section 216 of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a yard worker and claims being paid a flat salary with no overtime premium for hours that they worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek. Aqua Transfer & Energy Services, LLC, is a domestic limited liability company with its principle office and place of business located Corsicana, Navarro County, Texas with Chadwick Kindle as President. Premier Flow Control, LLC, is a domestic limited liability company with its principle office and place of business located in Corsicana, Navarro County, Texas. K&S Services, LLC, is a domestic limited liability company with office and place of business located in Corsicana, Navarro County, Texas. The Plaintiff is represented by: Glenn D. Levy, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF GLENN D. LEVY 906 Basse, Suite 100 San Antonio, TX 78212 Tel: (210) 822-5666 Fax: (210) 822-5650 ATLAS ROOFING: Judge Picks Guide in Daubert Motion Application -------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Thomas W. Trash of the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, selected a case law in the case entitled IN RE ATLAS ROOFING CORPORATION CHALET SHINGLE PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION, No. 1:13-md-2495-TWT (N.D. Ga.) The suit is a products liability action involving allegedly defective roofing shingles. Before the court are the parties' letter briefs regarding the timing of Daubert type challenges to the plaintiffs' expert opinions in the context of the class certification. Both sides rely upon unpublished Eleventh Circuit cases to support their positions. The Plaintiffs rely upon Drayton v. Western Auto Supply Co., No. 01-10415, 2002 WL 32508918, at *6 (11th Cir. Mar. 11, 2002) ("Appellants have presented no authority establishing a court must perform a Daubert inquiry of scientific evidence at this early stage of a class action proceeding. The district court indicated it will address this issue as this case progresses, which we find sufficient."). The Defendant relies on Sher v. Raytheon Co., 419 F. App'x 887, 890 (11th Cir. 2011) ("In American Honda, the Seventh Circuit found that 'when an expert's report or testimony is critical to class certification, as it is here . . ., a district court must conclusively rule on any challenge to the expert's qualifications or submissions prior to ruling on a class certification motion.' Id. at 815-16. The American Honda court found that, if the situation warrants, the district court must perform a full Daubert analysis before certifying the class. Id. at 816. A district court is the gatekeeper. It must determine the reliability of the expert's experience and training as well as the methodology used. Id. 'The [district] court must also resolve any challenge to the reliability of information provided by an expert if that information is relevant to establishing any of the Rule 23 requirements for class certification.' Id. We agree."). In an opinion and order dated December 29, 2015, available at http://goo.gl/PqGnxJfrom Lealge.com, Judge Trash adopted the Sher standard and will conduct whatever Daubert analysis is appropriate in the context of making the class certification decision. Diane Dishman, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew Joseph Coomes, McConnell & Sneed, LLC, Christopher L. Coffin, Pendley, Baudin & Coffin, LLP, Shawn M. Raiter, Larson King, LLP, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Rodney Dishman, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew Joseph Coomes, McConnell & Sneed, LLC, Christopher L. Coffin, Pendley, Baudin & Coffin, LLP, Shawn M. Raiter, Larson King, LLP, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Anthony Costanzo, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew Joseph Coomes, McConnell & Sneed, LLC, Christopher L. Coffin, Pendley, Baudin & Coffin, LLP, Shawn M. Raiter, Larson King, LLP, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Wolfpen II Planned Community Homeowners Association, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by Daniel K. Bryson, Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP, Scott Crissman Harris, Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Brian David Seltzer, Plaintiff, represented by John R. Climaco, Climaco, Wilcox, Peca, Tarantino & Garofoli, Co., LPA, John A. Peca, Climaco, Wilcox, Peca, Tarantino & Garofoli, Co., LPA, Patrick G. Warner, Climaco, Wilcox, Peca, Tarantino & Garofoli, Co., LPA, Daniel K. Bryson, Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Michael Mazza, Plaintiff, represented by David Randolph Smith, David Randolph Smith & Associates, Dominick R. Smith, David Randolph Smith & Associates, Jamie E. Weiss, Complex Litigation Group, LLC, Jeffrey A. Leon, Quantum Legal, LLC, Jonathan Shub, Kohn Swift & Graf, P.C., Richard J. Burke, Quantum Legal LLC, Scott George, Seeger Weiss, LLP, William Lyon Chadwick, Jr., David Randolph Smith & Associates, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Linda Krehlik, Plaintiff, represented by David Randolph Smith, David Randolph Smith & Associates, Dominick R. Smith, David Randolph Smith & Associates, Jamie E. Weiss, Complex Litigation Group, LLC, Jeffrey A. Leon, Quantum Legal, LLC, Jonathan Shub, Kohn Swift & Graf, P.C., Richard J. Burke, Quantum Legal LLC, Scott George, Seeger Weiss, LLP, William Lyon Chadwick, Jr., David Randolph Smith & Associates, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Robert Johnson, Plaintiff, represented by David Randolph Smith, David Randolph Smith & Associates, Dominick R. Smith, David Randolph Smith & Associates, Jamie E. Weiss, Complex Litigation Group, LLC, Jeffrey A. Leon, Quantum Legal, LLC, Jonathan Shub, Kohn Swift & Graf, P.C., Richard J. Burke, Quantum Legal LLC, Scott George, Seeger Weiss, LLP, William Lyon Chadwick, Jr., David Randolph Smith & Associates, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC David Dickson, Plaintiff, represented by Dabny Lynn, Justin O'Toole Lucy Law Firm, Jordan L. Chaikin, Parker Waichman, LLP -BS FL, Justin Lucey, Justin O'Toole Lucey, P.A., Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Patricia Dickson, Plaintiff, represented by Dabny Lynn, Justin O'Toole Lucy Law Firm, Jordan L. Chaikin, Parker Waichman, LLP -BS FL, Justin Lucey, Justin O'Toole Lucey, P.A., Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Noble L. Brooks, Jr., Plaintiff, represented by James R. Reeves, Jr., Lumpkins, Reeves & Mestayer, PLLC, Everette L. Doffermyre, Jr., Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC, Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC & Christopher L. Coffin, Pendley, Baudin & Coffin, LLP Lloyd M Denson, Jr, Plaintiff, represented by Eric D. Hoaglund, McCallum, Hoaglund, Cook & Irby, LLP, Kenneth Edward Sexton, II, Gentle, Turner, Sexton, Debrosse & Harbison & Daniel K. Bryson, Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP Peggy C Denson, Plaintiff, represented by Eric D. Hoaglund, McCallum, Hoaglund, Cook & Irby, LLP, Kenneth Edward Sexton, II, Gentle, Turner, Sexton, Debrosse & Harbison & Daniel K. Bryson, Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP Stratford Club Condominium Association, Plaintiff, represented by James Plummer Lukes, Wise & Donahue, PLC Bryan Makowski, Plaintiff, represented by John C. Whitfield, Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP & Daniel K. Bryson, Whitfield Bryson & Mason, LLP Penny Seaberg, Plaintiff, represented by Jordan L. Chaikin, Parker Waichman, LLP & Kenneth S. Canfield, Doffermyre Shields Canfield & Knowles, LLC Atlas Roofing Corporation, Defendant, represented by Conor A. McLaughlin, Thompson Hine-Cleveland, Dana Woodrum Lang, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice-Charlotte Harlan Irby Prater, IV, Lightfoot Franklin & White, LLC, Henry B. Smythe, Jr., Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, LLP, Hugh M. Claytor, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, James E. Weatherholtz, Womble, Carlyle, Sandridge & Rice, LLP, Joel G. Pieper, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, LLP, John Phillip Wiederhold, Weiderhold, Moses, Kummerien & Waronicki, P.A., Keith Ashford Clinard, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC, Kip T. Bollin, Thompson Hine,Paul H. Stephenson, III, Watkins & Eager, Jennifer Saffold Collins, Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, LLP & William M. Ragland, Jr., Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, LLP BED BATH: Faces "Diaz" Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ----------------------------------------------------------- Cristhian Diaz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Bed Bath & Beyond Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-09439-ALC (S.D.N.Y., December 2, 2015) arises out of the access barriers in the Defendant's website that make it difficult if not impossible for blind customers to use the website. Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. owns and operates retail stores that provide to the public important goods, such as domestics merchandise, home furnishing, and electronics. The Plaintiff is represented by: Anne Melissa Seelig, Esq. C.K. Lee, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39th Street, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 465-1124 Facsimile: (212) 465-1181 E-mail: anne@leelitigation.com cklee@leelitigation.com BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS: "Sciulli" Suit Moved to S.D. Fla. --------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Sciulli et al. v. BellSouth Telecommunications, LLC, Case No. 15-021841CA01, was removed from the 11th Judicial Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami). The Florida District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-24163- MGC to the proceeding. Plaintiff seeks damages exceeding $15,000 pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. BellSouth Telecommunications is a Foreign Limited Liability Company and is doing business as AT&T. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brody Max Shulman, Esq. Jason Saul Remer, Esq. REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC Courthouse Tower 44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 416 5000 Facsimile: (305) 416 5005 E-mail: bshulman@rgpattorneys.com jremer@rgpattorneys.com The Defendant is represented by: Leticia de la Caridad Alfonso, Esq. LEGAL DEPARTMENT, AT&T SERVICES, INC. 675 W. Peachtree Street, NW, Suite 4300 Atlanta, GA 30308 Telephone: (404) 927 8859 Facsimile: (404) 927 7167 E-mail: la4469@att.com BISON DRILLING: Faces "Talamantez" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Jon Talamantez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bison Drilling and Field Services, LLC, Case No. 7:15- cv-00206 (W.D. Tex., December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. Bison Drilling and Field Services, LLC is an oilfield services company operating drilling rigs throughout the Permian Basin. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Lindsay R. Itkin, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. Jessica M. Bresler, Esq. FIBICH, LEEBRON, COPELAND, BRIGGS &JOSEPHSON 1150 Bissonnet Houston, TX 77005 Telephone: (713) 751-0025 Facsimile: (713) 751-0030 E-mail: mjosephson@fibichlaw.com litkin@fibichlaw.com adunlap@fibichlaw.com jbresler@fibichlaw.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH, P.L.L.C. 8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com CAFE VICO: "Bou-Merhi" Action Seeks OT Recovery ----------------------------------------------- Alexandre Bou-Merhi, and other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiffs, v. Cafe Vico, Inc. and Marcos Rodrigues, Defendants, Case No. 0:15-cv-62596-KMM (S.D. Fla., Fort Lauderdale Division, December 10, 2015), seeks damages for unpaid overtime and minimum wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Cafe Vico is an Italian Restaurant owned by Marcos Rodrigues where Bou-Merhi worked as a waiter. He routinely worked in excess of 40 hours per week without being compensated. The Plaintiff is represented by: R. Martin Saenz, Esq. SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC 20900 N.E. 30th Avenue, Ste. 800 Aventura, FL 33180 Tel: (305) 503-5131 Fax: (888) 270-5549 Email: msaenz@saenzanderson.com CANALU LLC: "Garcia" Action Seeks OT Recovery --------------------------------------------- Refugio Garcia, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated persons, known and unknown, Plaintiffs, v. Canalu, LLC and Dean Lubbat, individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-11134 (N.D. Ill., Eastern Division December 10, 2015), seeks recovery of overtime wages, statutory damages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. Canalu, LLC operate a restaurant called "Dinotto Pizza e Vino," located at 1551 N. Wells St., Chicago, Illinois. Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a cook and claims to have worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek without overtime compensation. The Plaintiff is represented by: Raisa Alicea, Esq. CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC 6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200 Chicago, IL 60646 Tel: (312) 800-1017 Email: ralicea@yourclg.com CAVALRY PORTFOLIO: Illegally Collects Debt, "Lopez" Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- Victoria Lopez, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated v. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC, and John Does 1 to 10, Case No. 2:15-cv-08372-CCC-JBC (D.N.J., December 1, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC is engaged in acquisition and management of non-performing consumer loan portfolios. The Plaintiff is represented by: Yongmoon Kim, Esq. KIM LAW FIRM LLC 411 Hackensack Ave 2 Fl. Hackensack, NJ 07601 Telephone: (201) 273-7117 Facsimile: (201) 273-7117 E-mail: ykim@kimlf.com CAVALRY PORTFOLIO: Faces "Abramowitz" Suit Over Debt Collection --------------------------------------------------------------- Leonard Abramowitz, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated consumers v. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-06857 (E.D.N.Y., December 2, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC is engaged in acquisition and management of non-performing consumer loan portfolios. The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq. ADAM J. FISHBEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW 483 Chestnut Street Cedarhurst, NY 11516 Telephone: (516) 791-4400 Facsimile: (516) 791-4411 E-mail: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com CHESAPEAKE ENERGY: Sued in Penn. Over Alleged Royalty Conversion ---------------------------------------------------------------- Edward M. Ostroski, Kathleen M. Ostroski, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. Chesapeake Energy Corporation, et al., Case No. 4:15-cv-02324-JEJ (M.D. Penn.., December 2, 2015) is an action for damages as a result of the Defendants' practice of converting royalties under oil and gas leases owned by the Plaintiffs and the other Class Members, specifically by not paying a royalty on the revenue paid by the third-party buyer and paying no royalty on the revenue from derivative contracts. Chesapeake Energy Corporation produces gas in Pennsylvania through a subsidiary, Chesapeake Appalachia, L.L.C. The Plaintiff is represented by: William R. Caroselli, Esq. David A. McGowan, Esq. CAROSELLI BEACHLER McTIERNAN & COLEMAN, L.L.C. 20 Stanwix Street, 7th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 391-9860 E-mail: wcaroselli@cbmclaw.com dmcgowan@cbmclawlaw.com - and - Robert C. Sanders, Esq. LAWOFFICE OF ROBERT C. SANDERS 12051 Old Marlboro Pike Upper Marlboro, MD 20772 Telephone: (410) 371-2132 E-mail: rcsanders@rcsanderlaw.com CHIPOTLE: Faces Class Action Lawsuit From Investors --------------------------------------------------- Marilyn Malara, writing for UPI, reports that Chipotle Mexican Grill has been accused of providing misleading information to investors in a class action lawsuit. The suit, filed in U.S. District Court by New York-based investor Susie Ong, states the troubled chain restaurant made "materially false and misleading statements" to investors, hid essential information regarding lack of quality controls and lied in public statements following an outbreak of customer illnesses. The Denver-based company, Chairman M. Steven Ells, President Montgomery F. Moran and CFO John R. Hartung were named in the lawsuit. The lawsuit cites an August incident in Simi Valley, Calif. that led to about 100 customers becoming ill from norovirus. "Health inspectors said that the restaurant in question contained dirty and inoperative equipment, equipment directly linked to the sewer, and other sanitary and health violations," the lawsuit said. The new legal battle begins after Chipotle disclosed it had been served with a subpoena as part of a federal criminal investigation. The subpoena was issued as part of an inquiry by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's Office of Criminal Investigations. Problems for the company began in August when 64 customers in Minnesota were sickened by salmonella. An E. coli outbreak in October and November spread over nine states, sickening 53 customers. In December, 140 college students were infected with norovirus in Boston after dining at a Chipotle location. The company reported a 14.6 percent decline in sales in the final quarter of 2015, claiming $14 million to $16 million will be allotted to dealing with the contamination issues. CLOVIS ONCOLOGY: Faces Shareholder Class Suits ---------------------------------------------- Joshua Lindenstein, writing for BizWest.com, reported that Clovis Oncology Inc. (Nasdaq: CLVS) has been named a defendant in at least four class-action lawsuits filed in recent weeks on behalf of shareholders who allege the company and its top executives made false and misleading statements about the company and clinical data regarding one of its cancer drug candidates. Those statements, the plaintiffs say, led to an inflated share price and, ultimately, the loss of billions of dollars for investors when Boulder-based Clovis' stock price plunged 70 percent on Nov. 16. Three such cases were filed in U.S. District Court in Colorado between Nov. 19 and Dec. 14. A fourth was filed Nov. 20 in U.S. District Court in northern California. Clovis officials declined comment on the pending lawsuits. Clovis is a clinical-stage pharmaceutical company developing multiple cancer drugs, with plans to commercialize its first, rociletinib, in the United States and Europe. Clovis filed a New Drug Application with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration last summer for approval of rociletinib in treating lung cancer, with a decision expected by March 30. But on Nov. 16, Clovis disclosed that the FDA had requested more clinical data on rociletinib in part because the number of study patients with unconfirmed responses to rociletinib who had converted to confirmed responses was lower than had been expected. That request was expected to delay the FDA's decision, and on Dec. 15, Clovis announced that the FDA had extended the goal date by three months to June 28. Clovis' share price had risen steadily through 2015 and closed at $99.43 on Friday, Nov. 13. After the early-morning announcement of the FDA request the following Monday, shares closed at $30.24, representing a loss of nearly $2.2 billion in market capitalization. The company's stock price has languished primarily between $30 and $35 per share since, and was down $1.13 to $29.67 per share in mid-afternoon trading Thursday. The respective lawsuits were filed in the names of John Moran, Sonny P. Medina, Ralph P. Rocco and Steve Kimbro. They name Clovis CEO Patrick Mahaffy and chief financial officer Erle Mast as defendants, along with the company. The suits aim to represent investors who purchased Clovis stock between Oct. 31, 2013, and Nov. 15, 2015, a period during which they contend that statements made by the company about the progress of rociletinib and the anticipated timeline for commercialization of the drug caused the stock price to rise artificially. The plaintiffs are seeking damages and attorneys' fees. The lawsuits contend that Clovis officials knew the data submitted to the FDA on rociletinib was insufficient and could cause a delay in approval before disclosing that information on Nov. 16. Specifically, the California suit alleges that the company failed to disclose that Clovis' New Drug Application contained immature data sets based on both unconfirmed and confirmed response rates, and that as the efficacy data matured, the number of patients with unconfirmed responses to the drug who converted to confirmed responses was lower than expected. As a result, the lawsuit alleges that company officials failed to disclose that Clovis' NDA was likely to be delayed and/or rejected, and that the company was in possession of such data during its third-quarter conference call on Nov. 5 in which company officials discussed Clovis' financial outlook, including statements implying that commercialization of the drug was imminent. Clovis, which went public in 2011, was founded in 2009 and has burned through hundreds of millions of dollars in developing drugs. But the company has been eyeing a big year in 2016 for some time, and last summer closed a $298.4 million follow-on stock offering as it prepared for regulatory approvals and commercialization. In addition to rociletinib, the company has been aiming to submit a New Drug Application for rucaparib for the treatment of ovarian cancer sometime this year. Clovis received a boost in May 2014, when rociletinib was granted Breakthrough Therapy designation by the FDA, a designation intended to help expedite development and review of certain drugs. The company received the same designation for rucaparib in early 2015. CONVERSE INC: "Munoz" Suit Goes from N.D. to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------ The class action lawsuit titled Yuliana Serna Munoz v. Converse, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03971, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Western Division - Los Angeles). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:15-cv-08592-PA-JEM to the proceeding. Converse, a Delaware corporation, manufactures and distributes galoshes, sneakers, apparel, and accessories for men, women, and kids. The company offers clothing and custom made shoes; and socks, goggles, caps, and bags, and is based in Boston, Massachusetts. Randstad Inhouse Services is a Delaware limited partnership based in Saint-Denis, France. It offers temporary staffing and recruitment services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Nourmand, Esq. James Alexander De Sario, Esq. THE NOURMAND LAW FIRM APC 8822 West Olympic Boulevard Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Telephone: (310) 553 3600 Facsimile: (310) 553-3603 E-mail: mnourmand@nourmandlawfirm.com jdesario@nourmandlawfirm.com The Defendants are represented by: Maya Harel, Esq. Casey J T McCoy, Esq. Jonathan D Meer, Esq. Sheryl L Skibbe, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW, LLC 2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 277 7200 Facsimile: (310) 201-5219 E-mail: mharel@seyfarth.com cjtmccoy@seyfarth.com jmeer@seyfarth.com sskibbe@seyfarth.com CORINTHIAN INTERNATIONAL: Judge Won't Allow Suit to be Remanded --------------------------------------------------------------- Senior District Judge Saundra Brown Armstrong of the Northern District of California, Oakland Division, ruled on plaintiff's motions in the case ADRIAN TURNER, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CORINTHIAN INTERNATIONAL PARKING SERVICES, INC., an unknown business entity; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendant(s), Case No. C 15-03495 SBA (N.D. Cal.) Adrian Turner is a former employee of Corinthian International Parking Services, Inc. and resides in the State of California. Turner brought a wage and hour action on behalf of all current and former hourly-paid or non-exempt California-based employees who were employed by Corinthians within the State of California at any time during the period from four years preceding the filing of the complaint to final judgment, in the Superior Court of California, Alameda. Turner alleges seven causes of action arising under California law, including claims for unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid rest period premiums, failure to pay minimum wage, failure to timely pay final wages, unreimbursed business expenses, and unfair business practices. Corinthians removed the action to the present court pursuant to the class action fairness act (CAFA), 28 U.S.C. Section 1332(d). Turner filed a motion to remand. Senior District Judge Armstrong denied plaintiff's motion to remand without prejudice; and granted leave to file an amended complaint for the express purpose of clarifying the putative class definition. A copy of Senior District Judge Armstrong's order dated December 1, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/UR1A42from Leagle.com. Adrian Turner, Plaintiff, represented by Douglas Han -- dhan@justicelawcorp.com -- Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh -- statavos@justicelawcorp.com -- at Justice Law Corporation; Edwin Aiwazian -- edwin@lfjpc.com -- Jill Jessica Parker -- jill@lfjpc.com -- at Lawyers for Justice, PC Corinthian International Parking Services, Inc., Defendant, represented by Jennifer Yuen-Sea Leung -- jennifer.leung@berliner.com -- Susan E. Bishop -- susan.bishop@berliner.com -- at Berliner Cohen LLP CREDIT CONTROL: Illegally Collects Debt, "Sanchez" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Jessica Sanchez, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Credit Control, LLC, Case No. 2:15-cv-14410-RLR (S.D. Fla., December 1, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Credit Control, LLC provides credit collection service that offers debt collections, accounts receivables management, and security. The Plaintiff is represented by: S. Keley Jacobson, Esq. Leo Wassner Desmond, Esq. DESMOND LAW FIRM, P.C. 5070 A1A Suite D Vero Beach, FL 34963 Telephone: (772) 231-9600 Facsimile: (772) 231-0300 E-mail: jacobson@verobeachlegal.com lwd@verobeachlegal.com DART CHEROKEE: Judge Denies Plaintiff's Second Bid to Remand Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Julie E. Robinson of the District of Kansas denied plaintiff's second motion to remand in the case BRANDON W. OWENS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. DART CHEROKEE BASIN OPERATING CO. LLC, and CHEROKEE BASIN PIPELINE, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 12-4157-JAR-JPO, (D. Kan.) Brandon Owens filed a suit in the District Court of Wilson County, Kansas asserting claims on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated oil and gas lessors. The putative class is comprised of a group of mineral owners who formed lease agreements with various production companies, exchanging working interests to explore for and produce oil and gas from their lands for royalty interests in the oil and gas yields. Owens asserts that Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Company, LLC (Dart) underpaid royalty owners by taking numerous deductions before the gas products were in marketable condition, and by deceptively deducting a conservation fee from plaintiffs' payments. As a result, Owens alleges that Dart breached its lease agreement with each member of the putative class by failing to produce and market at its sole cost the gas by placing the gas in a marketable condition. Defendants timely filed a notice of removal pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA). Defendants' notice of removal alleged, among other things, that Owen's putative class claims exceed $8.2 million. In response, Owens filed a motion to remand, where he claimed that defendants failed to satisfy their burden of establishing the requisite amount in controversy by a preponderance of the evidence in the notice of removal. Two days after filing the motion to remand, Owens filed an unopposed motion to stay the case pending mediation. The court granted Owens' motion to stay and the parties engaged in mediation. During the mediation, Owens's expert, Daniel Reineke, determined that the damages available exceeded $14.2 million without interest, based on the analysis of the three claims alleged in the petition. Following mediation, defendants timely filed their remand opposition containing evidence of Owens's $14.2 million damage calculation. Owens replied, arguing that defendants' submission of evidence was improper under Tenth Circuit precedent. Owens did not contest the alleged amount in controversy at that time. In keeping with Tenth Circuit precedent, the court held that defendants were required in their notice of removal to show sufficient facts to establish the amount in controversy, and granted Owens's motion to remand. The Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals denied defendants' petition for leave to appeal. Defendants' petition for rehearing en banc was subsequently denied. Defendants then filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the United States Supreme Court, which was granted. On December 15, 2014, the Supreme Court found that the Tenth Circuit abused its discretion by failing to grant defendants' petition and that the statutory requirements for removal under CAFA do not require a defendant to present evidence establishing the amount in controversy with the notice of removal. The court vacated and remanded the Tenth Circuit's order denying leave to appeal. Pursuant to the order of the Tenth Circuit, the court vacated its May 21, 2013 order remanding the case and reopened the proceedings. The court then conducted a status conference with the parties, where Owens indicated his intent to challenge whether the amount in controversy requirement has been met under CAFA. The parties agreed that this jurisdictional question should be resolved before proceeding to discovery. Plaintiff filed a second motion to remand, asserting that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction under CAFA. Plaintiff now asserts that the amount in controversy is $3,599,838.97, implying that two portions of his claims are not recoverable. Because there was no subject matter jurisdiction at the outset of the case, plaintiff argues, remand is warranted. Judge Robinson denied plaintiff's second motion to remand in a memorandum and order dated December 3, 2015, available at http://goo.gl/yTayjIfrom Leagle.com. Brandon W. Owens, Plaintiff, represented by Barbara C. Frankland - - bfrankland@midwest-law.com -- David E. Sharp -- dsharp@midwest- law.com -- Rex A. Sharp -- rsharp@midwest-law.com -- at Gunderson Sharp, LLP; Grady L. Young -- at Southeast Kansas Legal Associates PA; John F. Edgar -- at Edgar Law Firm, LLC Defendants, represented by David E. Bengtson -- david.bengtson@stinson.com -- Matthew J. Salzman -- matt.salzman@stinson.com -- at Stinson Leonard Street LLP; Jordan E. Kieffer -- at Jordan Kieffer Law, LLC DELAWARE: "Chandler" Seeks Damages Over Mortgage Deal ----------------------------------------------------- Delaware Community Reinvestment Action Council, Inc., Sharon Chandler, Nicole Draper, Ruth Corbin and Sewell Corbin on their behalf and on behalf of those similarly situated Plaintiffs, v. State of Delaware, Jack Markell, Governor of The State of Delaware, Ken Simpler, Treasurer of The State of Delaware, Michael Morton, Controller General of The State of Delaware, Defendants, Case No. 11773 (Del. Ch., December 7, 2015), seeks declaratory and injunctive relief resulting from breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duties. Delaware Community Reinvestment Action Council, Inc. is a non- profit corporation dedicated to ensuring equitable treatment and equal access to credit and capital through advocacy, education, legislation, and outreach on behalf of the citizens of Delaware headquartered at 601 North Church Street, City of Wilmington. Sharon Chandler owns property whose mortgage was a high interest loan with a fifteen year balloon that went into foreclosure when her loan matured. She was unable to refinance the payment because her property value dropped below the loan balance. A settlement agreement with the State of Delaware was executed to settle claims against Bank of America in connection with its conduct in the packaging, origination, marketing, sale, structuring, arrangement and issuance of residential mortgages in the State of Delaware. Bank of America was alleged to have violated both state and federal law by inflating home appraisals, fraudulently selling loans to the Federal National Mortgage Association and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation and misrepresenting the quality of the loans it issued. The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert D. Goldberg, Esq. 921 N. Orange Street P.O. Box 1489 Wilmington, DE 19899 Tel: (302) 655-9677 DELTA AIR LINES: "Pomeroy" Suit Moved From N.D. Ga. to D.C. ----------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Pomeroy v. Delta Air Lines, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-02525, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01897-CKK to the proceeding. According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act, and Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Act. The plaintiff seeks to obtain injunctive relief and to recover treble damages and the costs of the suit, including reasonable attorneys' fees. Delta Air Lines is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, Georgia. Delta operates more than 5,400 flights per day to 326 locations in 64 countries. American Airlines is a Delaware corporation with its principal places of business located in Fort Worth, Texas. American is the largest airline in the world, operating nearly 6,700 flights per day to 339 locations in 54 countries. Southwest Airlines is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business located in Dallas, Texas. Southwest operates more than 3,600 flights per day to 94 locations in the United States and six additional countries. United Airlines is Delaware corporations with its principal places of business located in Chicago, Illinois. United offers service to more destinations than any other airline in the world, operating more than 5,300 flights per day to 369 locations across six continents. The Plaintiff is represented by: David A. Bain, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF DAVID A.BAIN, LLC 1050 Promenade II 1230 Peachtree Street Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 724 9990 Facsimile: (404) 724 9986 E-mail: dbain@bain-law.com The Defendants are represented by: William Parker Sanders, Esq. SMITH, GAMBRELL & RUSSELL, LLP Promenade II 1230 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 3100 Atlanta, GA 30309-3592 Telephone: (404) 815 3500 Facsimile: (404) 685 6984 E-mail: psanders@sgrlaw.com - and - Michael Lacovara, Esq. FRESHFIELDS BRUCKHAUS DERINGER US, LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 277 4000 E-mail: michael.lacovara@freshfields.com DELTA-T GROUP: Faces "Johnson" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Leah Johnson, as an individual and on behalf of all similarly situated employees v. Delta-T Group, Inc., Delta-T Group Los Angeles, Inc., and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. BC602925 (Cal. Super. Ct., December 3, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the California Labor Code. The Defendants are providers of staffing solutions in behavioral, social service, education, psychiatry, mental health and addictions treatment fields. The Plaintiff is represented by: David A. Rosen, Esq. Kevin P. Smith, Esq. ROSE KLEIN & MARIAS, LLP 12800 Center Court Drive, Suite 500 Cerritos, CA 90703 Telephone: (562) 436-4696 Facsimile: (562) 436-6157 DIRECTV INC: "Lippincott" Suit Moved to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Lippincott v. DIRECTV, Inc. et al., Case No. SCV-257854, was removed from Superior Court of Sonoma County, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of. California (San Francisco). The California District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05096-MMC to the proceeding. The Plaintiff is suing the Defendants for alleged monopolistic conduct. DIRECTV Inc. operates as a subsidiary of DIRECTV, and is based in El Segundo, California. DIRECTV Holdings LLC provides direct-to- home digital television services and multi-channel video programming distribution (MVPD) services in the United States. It provides access to various channels of digital-quality video entertainment and CD-quality audio programming that are transmitted directly to subscribers' homes or businesses via geosynchronous satellites. The Plaintiff is represented by: Caleb Marker, Esq. Bradley Christopher Buhrow, Esq. Brian Gudmundson, Esq. Jason R. Lee, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED, LLP 555 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 500 Long Beach, CA 90802 Telephone: (877) 500 8780 Facsimile: (877) 500 8781 E-mail: caleb.marker@zimmreed.com brad.buhrow@zimmreed.com bcg@zimmreed.com - and - Arthur M Murray, Esq. MURRAY LAW FIRM 650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 525 8100 Facsimile: (505) 584 5249 The Defendants are represented by: Melissa D. Ingalls, Esq. Robyn E. Bladow, Esq. Tammy A. Tsoumas, Esq. KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 333 South Hope Street Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 680 8552 Facsimile: (213) 808 8073 E-mail: melissa.ingalls@kirkland.com robyn.bladow@kirkland.com tammy.tsoumas@kirkland.com DON RASMUSSEN: Sued Over Land Rover Vehicle Trade Restraint ----------------------------------------------------------- Araman Nahavandifar d/b/a Luxury Motors of California, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Don Rasmussen Company d/b/a Land Rover of Portland, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv- 09315-DSF-SP (C.D. Cal., December 2, 2015) arises from an illegal conspiracy between the Defendants to restrain the sale and use of their vehicles, and to obtain personal private information to assist the restraint in trade. Don Rasmussen Company is in the business of selling new and pre- owned Land Rover vehicles. The Plaintiff is represented by: Reza Sina, Esq. SINA LAW GROUP 107 West Valencia Avenue Burbank, CA 91502 Telephone: (310) 957-2057 Facsimile: (425) 409-0763 E-mail: reza@sinalawgroup.com DOORDASH INC: "Gerald" Action Hits Unsolicited Texts ---------------------------------------------------- Shaena Gerald, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. DoorDash, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:15-cv-11123 (N.D. Ill., Eastern Division December 10, 2015), seeks injunction requiring DoorDash to cease all of its unsolicited text message activities, statutory damages under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 227, et seq., as well as costs and reasonable attorneys' fees. DoorDash is a corporation organized in and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business located at 565 Stanford Avenue, Palo Alto, California 94306. It is an on-demand delivery service whose customers order meals from local merchants. It allegedly sends unsolicited text messages to the wireless telephones of Plaintiff without prior express consent in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 227, et seq. The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph J. Siprut, Esq. Ismael T. Salam, Esq. SIPRUT PC 17 North State Street, Suite 1600 Chicago, Illinois 60602 Tel: 312.236.0000 Fax: 312.241.1260 Email: jsiprut@siprut.com isalam@siprut.com DRAFTKINGS & FANDUEL: "Martinelli" Alleges Rigged Online Games -------------------------------------------------------------- Brian A. Martinelli and Paul Guercio, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. FanDuel, Inc. and DraftKings, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-09641-UA (S.D.N.Y., December 9, 2015), seeks to recover damages and injunctive relief arising from negligence, fraud and misinterpretation, civil conspiracy and unjust enrichment in violation of the Pennsylvania Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law and the New York Deceptive Acts and Practices Law and the False Advertising Law. The class action complaint arises out of an alleged internal rigging of online gaming website, Daily Fantasy Sports, an online game that allows paying participants to engage in virtual athletic drafting with data tied to actual player statistics that allows game simulations. DraftKings, Inc. and FanDuel, Inc. entice participants to play by offering cash winnings. DraftKings is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 225 Franklin St., 26th Floor, Boston, Massachusetts. FanDuel is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located at 41 East 11th Street, 10th Floor, New York, New York. The Plaintiff is represented by: Gary S. Graifman KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER AND GRAIFMAN P.C. 747 Chestnut Ridge Road Chestnut Ridge, NY 10977 Tel: (845) 356-2570 Fax: (845) 356-4335 - and - John A. Kehoe, Esq. KEHOE LAW FIRM, P.C. Two Penn Center Plaza, Suite 1020 1500 JFK Boulevard Philadelphia, PA 19120 Tel: (215) 792-6676 Fax: (215) 792-6689 - and - Joseph M. Profy, Esq. David M. Promisloff, Esq. Jeffrey J. Ciarlanto, Esq. PROFY PROMISLOFF & CIARLANTO, P.C. 100N 22nd Street, Unit 105 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Tel: (215) 259-5156 (215) 600-2642 DUPONT: Class Settlement Precludes Late Complainant's Cause ----------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Gene E. Pratter of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania granted defendant's motion in the case entitled IN RE: IMPRELIS HERBICIDE MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION THIS DOCUMENT APPLIES TO: ALL ACTIONS, No. 11-md-2284 (E.D. Penn.) In the fall of 2010, DuPont introduced Imprelis, a new herbicide designed to selectively kill unwanted weeds without harming non- target vegetation. After widespread reports of damage to non- target vegetation, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) began investigating Imprelis, leading to lawsuits, a suspension of Imprelis sales, and an EPA order preventing DuPont from selling Imprelis. QueenPin LLC claims that on May 24, 2011 Imprelis was applied to property adjacent to its two properties, and that this application of Imprelis damaged several trees and plants on its properties. In September 2011, DuPont started its own claim resolution process to compensate victims of Imprelis damage. Despite the voluntary process, plaintiffs continued to pursue their lawsuits, alleging consumer fraud/protection act violations, breach of express and/or implied warranty, negligence, strict products liability, nuisance, and trespass claims based on the laws of numerous states. After months of settlement discussions, including mediation, the parties came to a settlement agreement. The Imprelis Class Action Settlement (Settlement) covers three classes of Imprelis plaintiffs. Among the three settlement classes is a property owner class, to which, DuPont argues, QueenPin belongs. Under the settlement, property owner class members who filed claims by the claims deadline would receive tree removal or compensation for tree removal, payments for replacement trees, tree care and maintenance payments, and a 15% payment for incidental damages. The settlement included a warranty that provided for all benefits but the 15% incidental damages award for Imprelis damage that manifested after the claims period closed but before May 31, 2015. On February 12, 2013, the court preliminarily approved the settlement. On September 27, 2013, the court held a final fairness hearing to determine whether the settlement provided fair, reasonable, and adequate compensation to class members. The order entering final judgment as to the settlement states that class members are permanently enjoined and barred from instituting, commencing, or prosecuting any action or other proceeding asserting any released claims, against any releasee by whatever means, in any local, state, or federal court, or in any agency or other arbitral or other forum. The court also retained exclusive jurisdiction over any action relating to the settlement. In April 2015, QueenPin filed its complaint in Ohio state court. It alleges in its complaint that it tried to participate in the class action settlement process, but was ignored, and it asserts claims against both DuPont and its neighbor's lawn care company. In response, DuPont moved to enjoin the state court proceedings under the All Writs Act, arguing that the class action settlement precludes QueenPin's claims against it. QueenPin LLC responds to DuPont's motion by arguing that (1) because it was never given the opportunity to opt out, never consented to this Court's jurisdiction, and has no minimum contacts with the forum, the Court may not enjoin its state court action, (2) QueenPin is not a member of any Settlement Class, and (3) the notice program was inadequate. Judge Pratter granted DuPont's motion. A copy of Judge Pratter's memorandum dated November 25, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/sKAsr5from Leagle.com. EBAY INC: "Chen" Suit Removed from Alameda Court to N.D. Calif. --------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Chen et al. v. eBay Inc. et al., Case No. RG15780778, was removed from Alameda County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of. California (San Francisco). The California District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05048-EDL to the proceeding. Plaintiffs seek to recover as monetary damages the amount of sales that have been lost as a result of alleged competitive advertisement placed by the Defendants. eBay is an American multinational corporation and e-commerce company, providing consumer to consumer &business to consumer sales services via Internet. It is headquartered in San Jose, California. PayPal is an American company operating a worldwide online payments system. The company operates as an acquirer, performing payment processing for online vendors, auction sites and other commercial users, for which it charges a fee. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Anthony Albert Ferrigno, Esq. LAW OFCS OF ANTHONY A. FERRIGNO 1116 Ingleside Ave Athens, TN 37303 Telephone: (423) 744 4041 Facsimile: (925) 945 8792 E-mail: A-trust-fraudlaw@msn.com - and - John David Franklin, Esq. FRANKLIN & FRANKLIN 402 West Broadway, Suite 1140 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (858) 229 4441 E-mail: jdfranklaw@san.rr.com - and - Pamela Elizabeth Havird, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF PAMELA E. HAVIRD P O Box 375 San Diego, CA 92038 Telephone: (619) 888 8090 Facsimile: (858) 815 7778 The Defendants are represented by: William P. Donovan Jr., Esq. Whitty Somvichian, Esq. Nathaniel R. Cooper, Esq. Kristine A. Forderer, Esq. COOLEY, LLP 1333 Second Street, Suite 400 Santa Monica, CA 90401-4100 Telephone: (310) 883-6400 Facsimile: (310) 883-6500 E-mail: wdonovan@cooley.com wsomvichian@cooley.com ncooper@cooley.com kforderer@cooley.com ERBA DIAGNOSTICS: Faces "Tran" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l Reports ----------------------------------------------------------------- Nghiem Tran, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Erba Diagnostics, Inc., Mohan Gopalkrishnan, Ernesina Scala, Sanjiv Suri, and Prakash Patel, Case No. 1:15-cv-24440-MGC (S.D. Fla., December 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. Erba Diagnostics, Inc. develops, manufactures, and markets diagnostic test kits or assays, and automated systems that are used to aid in the detection of disease markers primarily in the areas of autoimmune, infectious diseases, clinical chemistry, hematology, and diabetes testing. The Plaintiff is represented by: Laurence Rosen, Esq. THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor New York, NY 10116 Telephone: (212) 686-1060 Facsimile: (212) 202-3827 E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com - and - Michael Goldberg, Esq. GOLDBERG LAW PC 13650 Marina Pointe Dr. Suite 1404 Marina Del Rey, CA 90292 Telephone: (1800) 977-7401 Facsimile: (1800) 536-0065 E-mail: info@goldberglawpc.com ESSEX PROPERTY: Case Management Conference Set for Feb. 25 ---------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Edward J. Davila of the Northern District of California, San Jose Division granted defendant's motion to dismiss in the case MARK FOSTER, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. ESSEX PROPERTY TRUST, INC., Defendant, Case No. 5:14-cv-05531-EJD (N.D. Cal.) Defendant Essex Property Trust, Inc. is a real estate investment trust that invests in apartment communities along the West Coast of the United States. It develops, redevelops, and manages multifamily communities located in Northern California, Southern California, and Seattle Metro areas. Plaintiffs Mark and Akiko Foster reside in an apartment leased from defendant in Menlo Park, California. Plaintiffs allege that when they leased their apartment from defendant, they were required to provide defendant with sensitive personal and financial information. Defendant allegedly kept the information in its computer systems, servers, and databases. Plaintiff alleges that defendant sustained one or more security breaches to its computer network due to their failure to maintain adequate data security. The security breaches allegedly placed plaintiffs' private information into the hands of cyber criminals. As a result of the data breach, plaintiffs allege their personal information was used to make unauthorized charges on their credit cards, and exposed them to a greater risk of identity theft and fraud. Plaintiffs commenced an action arising out of the data breach, asserting violation of California's Unfair Competition Law, violation of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act, violation of California Civil Code Section 1798.80 et seq., negligence under California law and breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing. Defendant filed a motion to dismiss pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6). Judge Davila granted defendant's motion to dismiss due to lack of standing. Plaintiffs' entire complaint is dismissed with leave. The court scheduled the case for a case management conference at 10:00 a.m. on February 25, 2016. The parties shall file a joint case management conference statement on or before February 18, 2016. A copy of Judge Davila's order dated November 25, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/bQmz2ifrom Leagle.com. Plaintiffs, represented by Brett E. Bitzer -- Clayeo C. Arnold -- ccacorp@aol.com -- at Clayeo C. Arnold, Clayeo C. Arnold, A Professional Law Corporation; John A. Yanchunis -- at Morgan and Morgan, P.A. Essex Property, Inc., Defendant, represented by Jon Peter Kardassakis -- Jon.Kardassakis@lewisbrisbois.com -- Michael K. Grimaldi -- Michael.Grimaldi@lewisbrisbois.com -- at Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Faces "Fennern" Suit Over FCRA Violation -------------------------------------------------------------- Angelia Fennern, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Experian Information Solution, Inc., et al., Case No. 8:15-cv-02004-DOC-JCG (C.D. Cal., December 1, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. Experian Information Solution, Inc. operates an information services company, providing data and analytical tools. The Plaintiff is represented by: Caleb Marker, Esq. Christopher P. Ridout, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED LLP 555 East Ocean Boulevard Suite 500 Long Beach, CA 90802 Telephone: (877) 500-8780 Facsimile: (877) 500-8781 E-mail: Caleb.Marker@zimmreed.com Christopher.Ridout@zimmreed.com EXPERIAN INFORMATION: "Letren" Suit Goes to Maryland Dist. Court ---------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Letren v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. et al., was removed from the Circuit Court for Prince George's County, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (Greenbelt). The Maryland District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:15-cv-03361-TDC to the proceeding. Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is an information services company that provides data and analytical tools to clients around the world. It offers credit report, credit score, credit monitoring, and identity theft protection services to individuals; and customer acquisition, customer management, risk management, fraud management, debt recovery, regulatory compliance, business resources, and consulting services to businesses. The company is based in Costa Mesa, California. Equifax is a global service provider with US $2.3 billion in annual revenue and 7,000+ employees in 14 countries and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. TransUnion is an American company that provides credit information and information management services to approximately 45,000 businesses and approximately 500 million consumers worldwide in 33 countries, and is based in Chicago, Illinois. The Defendants are represented by: Henry Mark Stichel, Esq. GOHN, HANKEY, STICHEL & BERLAGE, LLP 201 N Charles St., Ste 2101 Baltimore, MD 21201 Telephone: (410) 752 9300 Facsimile: (410) 752 2519 E-mail: hmstichel@ghsllp.com FIFTH STREET ASSET: Holzer & Holzer Files Class Action ------------------------------------------------------ Holzer & Holzer, LLC said a class action has been commenced in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut on behalf of purchasers of Fifth Street Asset Management, Inc. (NASDAQ: FSAM) common stock who purchased shares pursuant to and/or traceable to the Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with FSAM's October 30, 2014 initial public offering (the "IPO"). If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from Jan. 7, 2016. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact plaintiff's counsel, Corey D. Holzer, Esq. via email at cholzer@holzerlaw.com, or Marshall P. Dees, Esq. via email at mdees@holzerlaw.com, or via toll-free telephone at (888) 508-6832, to discuss your legal rights. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Any purchaser of FSAM common stock is invited to contact us concerning their eligibility to serve as a lead plaintiff in the action, regardless of the date of their purchase. FSAM, which is headquartered in Connecticut, is a credit-focused asset manager and the investment advisor for Fifth Street Finance Corp. ("FSC"), Fifth Street Senior Floating Rate Corp. ("FSFR"), and various private Fifth Street funds. The complaint alleges that FSAM and certain of its officers and directors violated the Securities Act of 1933. Specifically, the complaint alleges that offering documents filed in connection with the IPO contained materially false and misleading statements of fact and failed to disclose facts necessary to make the statements made therein not misleading, including, among other statements, that: (i) FSAM had $4.2 billion assets under management from FSC as of June 30, 2014, when in fact a substantial portion of FSC's portfolio had been impaired on a cost basis prior to the IPO; (ii) FSAM had increased its management fee revenues by a compound annual growth rate of nearly 50% year-over-year during the six months ended June 30, 2014 due to FSAM's "outstanding performance," when in fact the growth in fee revenue was largely due to the overstatement of FSC's assets and dilutive stock offerings detrimental to the Funds' shareholders; and (iii) FSAM had "high-quality and predictable earnings," when in fact FSAM's revenues were unsustainable and the result of conduct that placed FSAM's most important asset -- its management contract with FSC -- at risk. Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of FSAM common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the IPO. Holzer & Holzer, LLC -- http://www.holzerlaw.com/-- is an Atlanta, Georgia law firm that dedicates its practice to vigorous representation of shareholders and investors in litigation nationwide, including shareholder class action and derivative litigation. Contacts: Holzer & Holzer, LLC Corey D. Holzer, Esq. 888-508-6832 (toll-free) E-mail: cholzer@holzerlaw.com FITBIT: Sued Over Inaccurate Heart-Rate Monitoring -------------------------------------------------- Samantha Crook, writing for WPXI.com, reported that Fitbit is facing a class-action lawsuit for inaccurate heart-rate monitoring. "PurePulse continuous heart rate shows you how hard you're working," a Fitbit ad says. One plaintiff claims that her Fitbit Charge HR underestimated her heart rate by more than 70 beats per minute. She claims that she discovered the discrepancy after her personal trainer manually measured her heart rate. She says she was reaching the maximum recommended heart rate for her age, so relying on the Fitbit's data could have put her in an unsafe position. The lawsuit says Fitbit's PurePulse technology is to blame. The same technology is in the new Fitbit Blaze, which was released for presale on the same day the suit was filed. But Fitbit told Ars Technica that it doesn't think the case has merit. A company spokesperson told the outlet: "It's . . . important to note that Fitbit trackers are designed to provide meaningful data to our users to help them reach their health and fitness goals, and are not intended to be scientific or medical devices." FLOWERS FOODS: Doesn't Properly Pay Employees, "Neff" Suit Says --------------------------------------------------------------- Nick Neff and Matthew McCrea, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated individuals v. Flowers Foods, Inc., LePage Bakeries, Inc., and CK Sales Co., LLC, Case No. 5:15-cv-00254-gwc (D. Vt., December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants are in the business of developing, baking, and distributing bakery and snack food products to retail customers, using a centralized network of communication, distribution, and warehousing facilities. The Plaintiff is represented by: Patrick J. Bernal, Esq. WITTEN, WOOLMINGTON, CAMPBELL & BERNAL, P.C. 4900 Main Street, P.O. Box 2748 Manchester Center, VT 05255 Telephone: (802) 362-2560 E-mail: pjb@wittenetal.com - and - Shawn J. Wanta, Esq. Christopher D. Jozwiak, Esq. Patricia A. Bloodgood, Esq. BAILLON THOME JOZWIAK & WANTA LLP 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 252-3570 Facsimile: (612) 252-3571 - and - Susan E. Ellingstad, Esq. Rachel A. Kitze Collins, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Facsimile: (612) 339-0981 E-mail: seelingstad@locklaw.com rakitzecollins@locklaw.com FRANKLIN COUNTY, OH: Judge Denies Bid to Unseal Records ------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Gregory L. Frost of the Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division denied plaintiff's request to unseal in the case KRISTEN McDONALD, Plaintiff, v. FRANKLIN COUNTY, OHIO. Defendant, Case No. 2:13-cv-503 (S.D. Ohio) Kristen McDonald alleges that Franklin County Corrections Center (FCCC) took photographs of female, misdemeanant detainees who had tattoos in private areas at the time of their detention. She alleges that FCCC took photographs of these detainees' tattoos in violation of their constitutional rights. Defendant asserts that there exist approximately 74 females who were detained at FCCC whose records have been sealed. Defendant argues that the 74 individuals took affirmative steps to seal their criminal records. Defendant argues, the relevant statute provides a process by which the individual can elect to have the arrest and related proceedings erased from his or her record. Defendant concludes that both the parties and the Court should respect that process. Plaintiff concedes that the privacy concerns underlying the expungement statutes present a legitimate concern in the case. Plaintiff argues, however, that the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require the best notice that is practicable under the circumstances, which requires individual notice to all members who can be identified through reasonable effort. Plaintiff asserts that defendant can and should identify the potential class members by reviewing the sealed records in the case in order to allow plaintiff to notify those individuals directly about the lawsuit. Plaintiff proposes that defendant review the 74 records in question, that the court identifies the individuals who meet the class definition from those records, and that plaintiff contact theose individuals directly via telephone in order to minimize the chance that the information is revealed to third parties. Judge Frost declines to unseal the records of approximately 74 individuals who might be plaintiffs in the class action litigation. Plaintiff's request that the court issue such an order is denied. A copy of Judge Frost's opinion and order dated November 30, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/UuG9Lkfrom Leagle.com. Jane Doe, Individually and on behalf of a class of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew S Baker and Elmer Robert Keach, III, Law Offices of Elmer Robert Keach, III, PC Kristen McDonald, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew S Baker, D Aaron Rihn, Robert Peirce & Associates, P.C., Elmer Robert Keach, III, Law Offices of Elmer Robert Keach, III, PC & Nicholas A Migliaccio, Migliaccio Law Firm PLLC Franklin County, Ohio, Defendant, represented by Scott Oliver Sheets, Franklin County Prosecutor's Office &Jesse William Armstrong, Franklin County Prosecutor's Office FRENKEL LAMBERT: Illegally Collects Debt, "Welch" Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------- Raymond Welch and Kathleen Welch, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Frenkel Lambert Weiss Weisman & Gordon LLP and Antonio Caula, Case No. 2:15-cv-14412-JEM (S.D. Fla., December 2, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Frenkel Lambert Weiss Weisman & Gordon LLP owns and operates a law firm located at 20 West Main Street Bay Shore, New York 11706. The Plaintiff is represented by: Leo Wassner Desmond, Esq. S. Keley Jacobson, Esq. DESMOND LAW FIRM, P.C. 5070 N. Highway A1A, Suite D Vero Beach, FL 32963 Telephone: (772) 234-5150 Facsimile: (772) 234-5231 E-mail: lwd@verobeachlegal.com GENERAL MARITIME: "Batchelor" Action Seeks OT Recovery ------------------------------------------------------ Michael Batchelor, Individually, and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated Who Consent to Their Inclusion in a Collective Action; Plaintiff v. General Maritime Corp. Defendant, Case No. 6:15-cv-02082-CEM-KRS (M.D. Fla., Orlando Division December 10, 2015), seeks payment of unpaid overtime wages, liquidates damages and reasonable attorneys' fees as well as equitable relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Batchelor was employed as a marine superintendent by Defendant and claims to have worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek without overtime compensation. General Maritime Corporation, is a corporation organized under the laws of Delaware with principal place of business at 101 Harbor Road, Southport, CT 06890. The Plaintiff is represented by: Dennis Creed, Esq. Joseph Odato, Esq. FELDMAN LAW GROUP, P.A. 1715 North Westshore Blvd., Suite 400 Tamp, FL 33607 Tel: (813) 639-9366 Fax: (813) 639-9376 Email: dcreed@ffmlawgroup.com jodato@ffmlawgroup.com GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC: "Hill" Suit Consolidated in Zofran MDL ----------------------------------------------------------- The lawsuit styled Hill, et al. v. GlaxoSmithKline, LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-00637, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts (Boston). The Massachusetts District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-13711-FDS to the proceeding. The lawsuit is consolidated in the multidistrict litigation captioned In re: Zofran (Ondansetron) Products Liability Litigation, MDL No. 1:15-md-2657-FDS. The actions in the litigation share factual questions arising from allegations that Zofran and its generic equivalent, a prescription medication for the treatment of nausea, causes birth defects in children when their mothers ingest the drug while pregnant. GlaxoSmithKline PLC is a limited liability corporation, organized under the laws of the state of Delaware. GSK's sole member is GlaxoSmithKline Holdings, Inc., which is a Delaware corporation, and which has identified its principal place of business in Wilmington, Delaware. GSK designed, manufactured and distributed Zofran, the drug that is the subject of the lawsuit. Zofran is a drug developed to treat severe nausea on cancer patients resulting from chemotherapy or radiation therapy. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gary S. Nitsche, Esq. Joel Harry Fredricks, Esq. WEIK, NITSCHE, DOUGHERTY, & GALBRAITH 305 N. Union Street, 2nd Floor Wilmington, DE 19805 Telephone: (302) 655-4040 Facsimile: (302) 654-4892 E-mail: gnitsche@attys4u.com jfredricks@attys4u.com HOSPITAL SERVICE: "Leet" Class Suit Removed to M.D. Louisiana ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned Victoria Leet, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Hospital Service District No. 1 of East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana d/b/a Lane Regional Medical Center, Alegis Revenue Solutions, LLC, and Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company, Case No. 639818, was removed from the 19th Judicial District Court to the U.S. District Court Middle District of Louisiana (Baton Rouge). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-00811-JWD-SCR to the proceeding. The case asserts claims for violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. Hospital Service District No. 1 of East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana operates a hospital located at 6300 Main St, Zachary, LA 70791. Alegis Revenue Solutions, LLC is a third party receivable company dedicated to maximizing revenue for hospitals. Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company operates an insurance company located at 5525 Reitz Ave, Baton Rouge, LA 70809. The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew Joseph D'Aquilla, Esq. ANDREW JOSEPH D'AQUILLA P. O. Box 2666 11745 Ferdinand Street Saint Francisville, LA 70775 Telephone: (225) 635-2020 E-mail: adaquilla@bellsouth.net - and - Claude Devall, Esq. John Lee Hoffoss Jr., Esq. HOFFOSS DEVALL, LLC 517 W. College Lake Charles, LA 70605 Telephone: (337) 433-2053 Facsimile: (337) 433-2055 E-mail: tclaudedevall@yahoo.com jlhoffoss@hdinjurylaw.com - and - Derrick G. Earles, Esq. LABORDE LAW FIRM, LLC 203 Energy Parkway, Building B Lafayette, LA 70508-3843 Telephone: (337) 261-2617 Facsimile: (337) 261-1934 E-mail: digger@labordelawfirm.com - and - Donald Wayne McKnight, Esq. HOFFOSS DEVALL, LLC 3205 Ryan Street Lake Charles, LA 70601 Telephone: (337) 433-2053 Facsimile: (337) 433-2055 - and - Lawrence J. Centola III, Esq. Scott R. Bickford, Esq. MARTZELL & BICKFORD 338 Lafayette Street New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 581-9065 Facsimile: (504) 581-7635 E-mail: lcentola@mbfirm.com usdcmdla@mbfirm.com The Defendant Hospital Service District No. 1 of East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana is represented by: David Robert Kelly, Esq. Chris D. Billings, Esq. Joseph John Cefalu III, Esq. Thomas Richard Temple Jr., Esq. BREAZEALE, SACHSE & WILSON P.O. Box 3197 One American Place, 23rd Floor Baton Rouge, LA 70821-3197 Telephone: (225) 387-4000 Facsimile: (225) 381-8029 E-mail: drk@bswllp.com chris.billings@bswllp.com joseph.cefalu@bswllp.com trt@bswllp.com The Defendant Alegis Revenue Solutions, LLC is represented by: George Davidson Fagan, Esq. LEAKE & ANDERSSON, LLP 1700 Energy Centre, 1100 Poydras New Orleans, LA 70163 Telephone: (504) 585-7500 Facsimile: (504) 585-7775 E-mail: gfagan@leakeandersson.com - and - Margaret F. Swetman, Esq. LEAKE & ANDERSSON, LLP 1100 Poydras St., Suite 1700 New Orleans, LA 70163-1701 Telephone: (504) 585-7500 Facsimile: 585-7775 E-mail: mswetman@leakeandersson.com The Defendant Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company is represented by: Charles A. O'Brien III, Esq. Allison Nunley Pham, Esq. P.O. Box 98029, 5525 Reitz Avenue Baton Rouge, LA 70898-9029 Telephone: (225) 295-2454 Facsimile: (225) 297-2760 E-mail: brien@bcbsla.com allison.pham@bcbsla.com IQ DATA: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection --------------------------------------------------------- Sara Judith Garcia Galdamez, Jorge Armando Escobar Barillas, Virginia de Jesus Pena Pozuelos, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. I.Q. Data International, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01605-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va., December 1, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. I.Q. Data International, Inc. is engaged in multi-family property management debt collections. The Plaintiff is represented by: Simon Yehuda Sandoval-Moshenberg, Esq. SIMON SANDOVAL MOSHENBURG Legal Aid Justice Center 6066 Leesburg Pike, Suite 520 Fall Church, VA 22041 Telephone: (703) 778-3450 Facsimile: (703) 778-3454 E-mail: simon@justice4all.org J CREW: "Kamal" Suit Stayed Pending Decision in Spokeo ------------------------------------------------------ Magistrate Judge Mark Falk of the District of New Jersey granted defendants' motion to stay in the case AHMED KAMAL, on behalf of himself and the putative class, Plaintiff, v. J. CREW GROUP, INC.; J. CREW INC.; J. CREW INTERMEDIATE LLC; J. CREW INTERNATIONAL, INC.; J. CREW OPERATING CORP.; J. CREW SERVICES, INC.; CHINOS HOLDINGS, INC.; and CHINOS ACQUISITIONCORPORATION Defendant, Civil Action No. 15-0190 (WJM) Defendants J. Crew, a clothing apparel conglomerate, owns and operates more than 300 retail stores throughout the United States. Plaintiff Ahmed Kamal a New York resident, filed a class action complaint based upon defendants' alleged violation of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act (FACTA), an amendment to the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. Section 1681 et seq. J. Crew moved to dismiss the complaint based on plaintiff's failure to state a willful violation of FACTA. On March 25, 2015, Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint alleging that J. Crew willfully violated FACTA by disclosing more than the last five digits of Plaintiff's credit card number on three of his receipts. Plaintiff seeks to represent a class of all persons or entities to whom Defendants provided an electronically printed receipt in a sale or transaction occurring after January 10, 2010. Plaintiff seeks statutory and punitive damages. J. Crew moved to stay the case based on the fact that the Supreme Court has granted a petition for writ of certiorari review of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339 (U.S. Apr. 27, 2015). The Supreme Court is going to address the issue of whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who suffers no concrete harm, and who therefore could not otherwise invoke the jurisdiction of a federal court, by authorizing a private right of action based on a bare violation of a federal statute. Plaintiff opposes the stay and argues that the court is not obligated to stay the litigation purely on the chance that the Supreme Court decision in Spokeo might change the law. He also argues that a stay would prejudice him and his fellow class members by preventing their claims from being addressed in a timely fashion. Magistrate Judge Falk granted defendants' motion to stay and the action will be stayed pending the Supreme Court's decision in Spokeo. A copy of Magistrate Judge Falk's opinion dated December 29, 2015 is available at http://goo.gl/1Z9wEVfrom Leagle.com. AHMED KAMAL, Plaintiff, represented by MARVIN L. FRANK -- mfrank@frankllp.com -- at FRANK LLP; PETER Y. LEE -- at LEE LLC & ROBERT A. SOLOMON -- rsolomon@law.uci.edu -- at FRICKE & SOLOMON, P.C. Defendants, represented by ANDREW O. BUNN -- andrew.bunn@dlapiper.com -- at DLA PIPER, LLP J&J PAVEMENT REPAIRS: "Aguilar" Action Seeks OT Recovery -------------------------------------------------------- Julio Cesar Aguilar individually and on behalf of other employees similarly situated, Plaintiff v. J&J Pavement Repairs, Inc., and John B. Pancorvo, individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-11139 (N.D. Ill., Eastern Division December 10, 2015), seeks statutory damages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. Aguilar worked for Defendants operating heavy equipment and construction. He claims to have worked in excess of 40 hours per work week without overtime compensation as well as lunch breaks. The Plaintiff is represented by: Valentin T. Narvaez, Esq. CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC 6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200 Chicago, IL 60646 Tel: (312) 878-1302 Email: vnarvaez@yourclg.com JASA MARKETING: Faces "Almanza" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ----------------------------------------------------------- Jose Almanza and other similarly situated sales agents v. Jasa Marketing Group, Inc. and Enderica, Aldo, Case No. 35127551 (Fla. 11th Ct., December 3, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. Jasa Marketing Group Inc. is a management consulting service located in Sunny Isles Beach, Florida. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason S. Remer, Esq. Brody M. Shulman, Esq. REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC 44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305)416-5000 Facsimile: (305)416-5005 E-mail: jremer@rgpattorneys.com KATZMAN PRODUCE: "Capote" Suit Seeks Overtime Recovery ------------------------------------------------------ Angel M. Capote, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. S. Katzman Produce Inc., Stephen Katzman, Stefanie Katzman, and Mario Andreani, Defendants, Case No. 4:15- cv-01809 (S.D.N.Y., December 9, 2015), seeks collective damages for unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. S. Katzman Produce, Inc. is a New York corporation that owns and operates a warehouse located at Hunts Point Market, Row A, Unit 153-157, Bronx, New York 10474 with Stephen Katzman as Chief Executive Officer and Principal Executive Officer. Capote has generally worked as a loader, picker and porter at Katzman Produce. He regularly worked an average of fifty hours per workweek without overtime compensation in excess of 40 hours per week. The Plaintiff is represented by: Louis Pechman, Esq. Gianfranco J. Cuadra, Esq. 488 Madison Avenue, 11th Floor New York, NY 10022 Tel: (212) 583-9500 Email: pechman@pechmanlaw.com cuadra@pechmanlaw.com KEANE FRAC: "Metz" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Kalven Metz, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Keane Frac TX, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-01570-JFC (W.D. Penn., December 2, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Keane Frac TX, LLC operates an oilfield service company offering a wide range of services to the oil and gas industry in states such as Pennsylvania, West Virginia, North Dakota, and Texas. The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua P. Geist, Esq. GOODRICH & GEIST, P.C. 3634 California Ave. Pittsburgh, PA 15212 Telephone: (412) 766-1455 Facsimile: (412) 766-0300 E-mail: josh@goodrichandgeist.com - and - Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew Dunlap, Esq. Lindsay R. Itkin, Esq. Jessica M. Bresler, Esq. FIBICH, LEEBRON, COPELAND BRIGGS & JOSEPHSON 1150 Bissonnet St. Houston, TX 77005 Telephone: (713) 751-0025 Facsimile: (713) 751-0030 E-mail: mjosephson@fibichlaw.com adunlap@fibichlaw.com litkin@fibichlaw.com jbresler@fibichlaw.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH, P.L.L.C. 8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com KLASSEN WELL TESTING: "Kuni" Action Seeks OT Recovery ----------------------------------------------------- Bret Kuni, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Klassen Well Testing, Inc. and Pete Klassen, Defendants, Case No. 7:15-cv-00224 (W.D. Tex., Midland Division December 10, 2015), seeks to recover compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, pursuant to the provisions of Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Kuni was employed by Defendants as a flowback hand and as an HSE Supervisor. He claims not being paid overtime for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. Klassen Well Testing, Inc. is an Arkansas corporation doing business in the State of Texas and is into well testing. The Plaintiff is represented by: Clif Alexander, Esq. PHIPPS ANDERSON DEACON LLP 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Tel: (361) 452-1279 Fax: (361) 452-1284 Email: calexander@phippsandersondeacon.com KOHL'S DEPARTMENT: "Chowning" Suit Moved to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Wendy Chowning et al. v. Kohl's Department Stores, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-01624, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Western Division - Los Angeles). The California District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:15-Cv-08673-RGK-SP to the proceeding. Kohl's Department Stores, operates department stores in the United States. It offers apparel, footwear, accessories, and home products to middle-income customers. The company is based in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin. Kohl's Department Stores operates as a subsidiary of Kohl's Corp. The Plaintiffs are represented by: James P Frantz, Esq. William P Harris III, Esq. George Theodore Stiefel III, Esq. FRANTZ LAW GROUP APLC 402 West Broadway, Suite 860 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 233 5945 Facsimile: (619) 525 7672 E-mail: jpf@frantzlawgroup.com wharris@frantzlawgroup.com gstiefel@frantzlawgroup.com - and - Matthew J Zevin, Esq. STANLEY LAW GROUP 10021 Willow Creek Road, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92131 Telephone: (619) 235 5306 Facsimile: (815) 377 8419 E-mail: mzevin@aol.com - and - Derek J Emge, Esq. EMGE FIRM LLP 501 West Broadway, Suite 1760 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 595 1400 Facsimile: (619) 595-1480 E-mail: derek@emgelawfirm.com The Defendants are represented by: E Alex Beroukhim, Esq. James F Speyer, Esq. ARNOLD AND PORTER, LLP 777 South Figueroa Street, 44th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017-5844 Telephone: (213) 243 4000 Facsimile: (213) 243 4199 E-mail: alex.beroukhim@aporter.com james.speyer@aporter.com LOCKS & KEYS: Mass. App. Court Narrows Appeal on "Collins" Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- The Appeals Court of Massachusetts affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded the case of MICHAEL COLLINS, vs. LOCKS & KEYS OF WOBURN, INC., & another (and a companion case), No. 14-P-1556 (Mass. App. Ct.) Employers Fire Insurance Company (Employers) is the insurer for defendant Locks & Keys of Woburn, Inc. (Locks & Keys). As insurer for Locks & Keys, Employers has appealed from a postjudgment order ruling on several objections to various claims made pursuant to a class action settlement. Employers contends that the judge erroneously rejected its objections to three categories of claims. First, it contends that the claims of certain class members were filed too late essentially because class counsel did not send the required fax notice and mail notice to potential claimants on the same day. Second, the judge correctly denied Employers's objections that were based on its contention that the settlement required class counsel to present proof that a claim was timely received. Third Employers is concern with the fax number verifications on certain proof of claim forms. The Appeals Court of Massachusetts affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded the case. The portion of the order that denied Employers's objection based on the absence of the required fax number from the fax number verification section of the proof of claim form is vacated. The motion judge's order on the motion for endorsement of objections is otherwise affirmed. Also on remand, Employers is required to file a motion to be joined. A copy of the Appeals Court of Massachusetts' memorandum and opinion dated December 4, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/rI44ksfrom Leagle.com. The Appeals Court of Massachusetts panel consists of Justices Cynthia J. Cohen, Andrew R. Grainger and Gabrielle R. Wolohojian MARTINEZ ENTERPRISES: Baltazar Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Valentina Baltazar v. Martinez Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Casa Blanca, Case No. 5:15-cv-02202-MHH (N.D. Ala., December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime compensation and an additional amount as liquidated damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. Martinez Enterprises, LLC owns and operates 7 Mexican Restaurant and Cantina locations in the North Alabama. The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel E. Arciniegas, Esq. WIGGINS, CHILDS, PANTAZIS, FISHER, & GOLDFARB, LLC The Kress Building 301 19th Street North Birmingham, AL 35203 Telephone: (205) 314-0500 Facsimile: (205) 254-1500 E-mail: dea@wigginschilds.com MARYLAND TREATMENT: "Batiste" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Carmelle Batiste, and all others similarly-situated v. Maryland Treatment Centers, Inc., Case No. 8:15-cv-03698-PWG (D. Md., December 2, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act. Maryland Treatment Centers, Inc. is a private substance abuse facility located in Baltimore County, Maryland. The Plaintiff is represented by: Alan Lescht, Esq. ALAN LESCHT & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 1050 17th Street, N.W., Suite 400 Washington, D.C. 20036 Telephone: (202) 463-6036 Facsimile: (202) 463-6067 MATTEL INC: "Archer-Hayes" Suit Alleges Eavesdropping Doll ---------------------------------------------------------- Ashley Archer-Hayes, on behalf of herself and C.H., a minor child, individually, Charity Johnson, on behalf of herself and A.P, a minor child, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Toytalk, Inc., a Delaware corporation, Mattel, Inc., a Delaware corporation, Samet Privacy, LLC, a California limited liability company, dba Kidsafe Seal Program, and Does 1-10, Defendants, Case No. CCW-CAC-12-322 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles County December 7, 2015), seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, statutory, general, special and exemplary damages, attorneys' fees and expenses resulting from negligence, unjust enrichment and invasion of privacy in violation of the Business and Professions Code Sec. 17200 et seq. (Unfair Competition Law). Plaintiff purchased Internet-enabled toys from the Defendant which allegedly records audio conversations without their consent. Toytalk creates toy systems that allow playful conversations between child and toy. Mattel is a toy company that has been producing the fashion dolls. The two partnered together to produce an artificial intelligence-enabled fashion doll called "Hello Barbie" designed to engage in conversation with children. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Louis Kelly, Esq. Behram V. Parekh, Esq. Heather Baker Dobbs, Esq. Justin M. Keller, Esq. Michael W. Sobol, Esq. LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Tel: (415) 956-1000 Fax: (415) 956-1008 E-mail: msobol@lchb.com - and - Richard D. McCune, Esq. MCCUNEWRIGHT LLP 2068 Orange Tree Lane, Suite 216 Redlands, CA 92374 E-mail: rdm@mccunewright.com - and - Briana Kim, Esq. 249 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 814 Long Beach, CA 9080 Tel: (714) 482-6301 Fax: (714) 482-6302 E-Mail: Briana@BrianaKim.com - and - John A. Yanchunis, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Tel: (813) 223-5505 Fax: (813) 222-4738 E-mail: JYanchunis@ForThePeople.com - and - Steven W. Teppler, Esq. ABBOTT LAW GROUP P.A. 2929 Plummer Cove Road Jacksonville, FL 32223 Tel: (904) 292-1111 Fax: (904) 292-1220 E-mail: steppler@abbottlawpa.com - and - Joel R. Rhine, Esq. RHINE LAW FIRM, P.C. 1612 Military Cutoff Road, Ste. 300 Wilmington, NC 28403 Tel: (910) 777-7651 Fax: (910) 772-9062 E-mail: jrr@rhinelawfirm.com MICHAEL STORES: Plaintiff Suffers No Injuries on Security Breach ---------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Joanna Seybert of the Eastern District of New York granted defendant's motion to dismiss in the case MARY JANE WHALEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. Plaintiffs, v. MICHAEL STORES INC. Defendant, No. 14-CV- 7006 (JS)(ARL) (E.D.N.Y.) On January 25, 2014, Michael Stores initially notified its customers of possible fraudulent activity on some U.S. payment cards. Three months later, Michaels confirmed the existence of the security breach and estimated that approximately 2.6 million cards may have been affected during the time period between May 8, 2013 and January 27, 2014. Michaels offered free credit monitoring services for 12 months. Mary Jane Whalen was one of Michaels' customers during the time period. She alleges that she made purchases with her credit card at a Michaels retail location in Manhasset, New York on December 31, 2013. Whalen commenced an action on December 2, 2014. Her complaint alleges that she has suffered actual damages and faces an increased risk of future harm. As to actual damages, Whalen essentially alleges five different types of injuries: (1) actual damages including monetary losses arising from unauthorized bank account withdrawals, fraudulent card payments, and/or related bank fees charged to their accounts; (2) the loss of time and money associated with credit monitoring and obtaining replacement cards; (3) overpayment of Michaels' services because Whalen would not have shopped at Michaels had she known that Michaels did not properly safeguard her personal identified information; (4) the lost value of Whalen's credit card information); and (5) a statutory violation of the New York General Business Law Section 349 (GBL). Michaels filed a motion to dismiss arguing that Whalen lacks Article III standing because she failed to allege any actual damages arising out of the security breach or any future injuries that are certainly impending, and even if Whalen did have standing, she has failed to establish claims for breach of implied contract and for violation of GBL Section 349. Judge Seybert granted defendant's motion to dismiss and Whalen's claims are dismissed without prejudice. A copy of Judge Seybert's memorandum and order dated December 28, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/9Pp8umfrom Leagle.com. Daniel A. Edelman, Movant, represented by: Dan Edelman, Esq. EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER & GOODWIN, LLC 20 South Clark Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: 312-739-4200 Facsimile: 312-419-0379 For Plaintiffs: Joseph Siprut, Esq. Gregory W. Jones, Esq. SIPRUT PC 17 North State Street, Suite 1600 Chicago, IL 60602 E-mail: jsiprut@siprut.com gjones@siprut.com - and - Brian Phillip Murray, Esq. Gregory B. Linkh, Esq. GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP 122 East 42nd Street, Suite 2920 New York, NY 10168 E-mail: bmurray@glancylaw.com glinkh@glancylaw.com - and - Kyle A. Shamberg, Esq. LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG LLC 211 West Wacker Drive, Suite 500 Chicago, IL 60606 E-mail: kshamberg@litedepalma.com For Defendant: James D. Arden, Esq. Sonia Marquez, Esq. SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 787 Seventh Avenue New York, NY 10019 E-mail: jarden@sidley.com smarquez@sidley.com - and - Edward R. McNicholas, Esq. SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 1501 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20005 E-mail: emcnicholas@sidley.com MIYABI RESTAURANTS: "Crumbling" Action Seeks Minimum Wages ---------------------------------------------------------- Krista Crumbling, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Miyabi Murrells Inlet, LLC, United Will Kyoto Usa, Inc., Miyabi Greenville, Inc., Fayetteville Miyabi, Inc., Augusta Miyabi, Inc., Savannah Miyabi, Inc., Capital Japan, Inc,, Koichiro Hirao, individually, Koichiro Maeda, individually; and John Does 1-10, individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:15-cv- 04902-PMD (N.D. Ill., Eastern Division December 10, 2015), seeks actual damages, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Crumbling was employed as a server at the Miyabi restaurant in Murrells Inlet, South Carolina. She claims to receive an hourly wage less than the statutory minimum wage when her tips were withheld. She also claims to have worked in excess of 40 hours per work week without overtime pay. Defendants operate restaurants under the name Miyabi. The Plaintiff is represented by: Bruce E. Miller, Esq. BRUCE E. MILLER, P.A. 147 Wappoo Creek Drive, Suite 603 Charleston, SC 29412 Tel: (843) 579-7373 Fax: (843) 614-6417 Email: bmiller@brucemillerlaw.com MODELL'S SPORTING: Faces "Diaz" Suit in N.Y. Over ADA Violation --------------------------------------------------------------- Cristhian Diaz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Modell's Sporting Goods, Inc. and Henry Modell & Company, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-09444-RA (S.D.N.Y., December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Defendants own and operate sporting goods retail stores with locations in the Northeastern United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: Anne Melissa Seelig, Esq. C.K. Lee, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39th Street, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 465-1124 Facsimile: (212) 465-1181 E-mail: anne@leelitigation.com cklee@leelitigation.com NATIONAL FREIGHT: "Portillo" Suit Goes to NJ District Court ----------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Portillo et al. v. National Freight, Inc. et al., Case No., CAM L 2396 15, was removed from Camden County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (Camden). The New Jersey District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-07908-JBS-KMW to the proceeding. NFI Interactive Logistics operates as a third-party logistics company. The company offers supply chain optimization services. It provides the management of inbound and outbound transportation requirements, and it is based in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. National Freight, based in Vineland New Jersey, offers truckload freight carrier services in the United States. The company operates a fleet of tractors, as well as manages transportation assets. It has trucking support centers and mobile maintenance facilities in the United States. The Defendants are represented by: Robert H. Bernstein, Esq. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 200 Park Avenue P.O. BOX 677 Florham Park, NJ 07932 Telephone: (973) 360 7946 Facsimile: (973) 301 8410 E-mail: bernsteinrob@gtlaw.com NATIONAL STORES: "Danino" Suit Seeks Overtime Recovery ------------------------------------------------------ Beida Danino, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. National Stores Inc., Conway Stores, Inc. and Southern Island Stores LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-09627-PAE (S.D.N.Y., December 9, 2015), seeks injunctive and declaratory relief, monetary, compensatory and punitive damages, liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees, and other appropriate legal and equitable relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and new York Labor Laws. National Stores is a nation-wide retailer of clothes and merchandise and operates over four hundred retail stores throughout the country with principal place of business in New York located at 1375 Broadway, Suite 1102, New York, NY 10018 and its headquarters located at 15001 S. Figueroa St, Gardena, CA 90248. Conway Stores, Inc. and Southern Island Stores LLC are its subsidiaries. Danino worked as an assistant store manager for the Conway Store and claims to have rendered over 50 hours per work week without overtime premium and hardly ever took a lunch break. The Plaintiff is represented by: Russell S. Moriarty, Esq. LEVINE & BLIT, PLLC 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3601 New York, NY 10118 Tel: (212) 967-3000 Email: RMoriarty@LevineBlit.com NEIL JONES: Judge Requires Parties to Submit Additional Briefings ----------------------------------------------------------------- Senior District Judge Anthony W. Ishii of the Eastern District of California required the parties to submit additional briefings in the case LUIS VALDEZ, et al., Plaintiffs, v. THE NEIL JONES FOOD COMPANY, et al., Defendants, Case No. 1:13-cv-00519-AWI-SAB (E.D. Cal.) Plaintiff's second motion for preliminary approval was denied the court. The court indicated its concern regarding the substantial possible reversion. The Court noted that there was a realistic probability that much of the net settlement fund would go unclaimed as the settlement appeared to be structured to (1) cast as wide a net as possible in releasing claims of the putative class members, (2) minimize defendant's likely payout by creating a potential reversion and a claims process that serves little purpose, and (3) maximize the attorney's fees to class counsel by tying fees to the total settlement fund value even though that figure is an unrealistic projection of the actual benefit to the class. The Magistrate Judge and the court suggested that the parties agree upon a pro rata distribution of unclaimed funds, have unclaimed funds go to a cy pres beneficiary, or have class counsel's fee be linked to the actual benefit to the class. The amended settlement agreement has narrowed the scope of the release by class members to the claims actually at issue in the action. The parties have come closer to an agreement that the court would approve, but the court still has three overlapping concerns that may prevent preliminary approval: the reversion, the claims process, and that the attorney fee request in the claims- made settlement is based on the maximum settlement amount. Remedying of any one of these items would likely result in approval of a settlement in this action. On November 2, 2015, the Magistrate Judge issued findings and recommendations which recommended granting the parties motion to certify the class and for preliminary approval of the class action settlement. Judge Ishii ordered the parties to submit additional briefings within fourteen days of the date of the order. A copy of Senior District Judge Ishii's order dated December 3, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/ZN8GMSfrom Leagle.com Plaintiffs, represented by Dennis Patrick Wilson -- wilsontrialgroup@att.net -- at Law Offices of Dennis P. Wilson The Neil Jones Food Co., Defendant, represented by Andrea Bednarova -- abednarova@fosteremploymentlaw.com -- Michael Eugene Wilbur -- mwilbur@fosteremploymentlaw.com -- at Foster Employment Law OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT: "Oravis" Moved to Wash. D.C. -------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Oravis et al. v. United States of America, Office of Personnel Management et al., Case No. 1:15-cv- 01202, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01929-ABJ to the proceeding. The Plaintiffs contend that the Defendants failed to adequately safeguard and secure the financial and other personally identifiable information, including the names, addresses, fingerprints, and social security numbers of the Plaintiffs and Class Members. The United States Office of Personnel Management is an independent agency of the United States government that manages the civil service of the federal government. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Richard D. McCune, Esq. David C. Wright, Esq. Michele M. Vercoski, Esq. MCCUNEWRIGHT, LLP 2068 Orange Tree Lane, Suite 216 Redlands, CA 92374 Telephone: (909) 557 1250 Facsimile: (909) 557 1275 E-mail: rdm@mccunewright.com dcw@mccunewright.com mmv@mccunewright.com - and - Joel R. Rhine, Esq. RHINE LAW FIRM, P.C. 1612 Military Cutoff Road, Ste. 300 Wilmington, NC 28403 Telephone: (910) 777 7651 Facsimile: (910) 772 9062 E-Mail: jrr@rhinelawfirm.com - and - Frazer Walton, Jr., Esq. LAW OFFICE OF FRAZER WALTON, JR. 920 Burns Street, SE Washington, DC 20019 Telephone: (202) 584 7572 Facsimile: (202) 398 8920 E-Mail: frawalton@verizon.net PACIFICA HOTEL: "Shasheet" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT ---------------------------------------------------------- Issam Shasheet, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated Plaintiff, v. Pacifica Hotel Company, a California corporation, Pacifica Hotel Management, LLC, a California limited liability company, Invest West Financial Corporation, a California corporation, Invest West Residential Group, a California corporation, Invest West Financial Management, LLC, a California limited liability company, Invest Westfinancial, LLC, a California limited liability company, Invest Westfinancial II, LLC, a California limited liability company, Invest West Financial III, LLC, a California limited liability company, Larkspur Hotels, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company and Larkspur Hotels Human Resources Company, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 4:15-cv-01809 (E.D. Miss., December 9, 2015), seeks compensatory damages, restitution of disgorged profits, meal and rest period compensation pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 226.7, liquidated damages pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 1194.2 and 1197.1, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, waiting time penalties pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 203, statutory and civil penalties, interest on the unpaid wages pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 218.6, 1194, 2802 and California Civil Code Sec. 3287, 3288 and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 1194, 2699, 2802 and California Civil Code Sec. 1021.5. Defendants failed to pay Plaintiffs minimum wages for all hours worked by, requiring them to work off the clock through meal and rest breaks, illegally and inaccurately recording time records thus failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements. The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J. Matern, Esq. Emma Steiner, Esq. MATERN LAW GROUP 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Tel: (310) 531-1900 Fax: (310) 531-1901 PDF FILLER: Sued in C.D. Cal. Over Automatic Renewal Policies ------------------------------------------------------------- Jane Doe, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PDF Filler, Inc. and Does 1 - 10, inclusive, Case No. 8:15-cv-02005-DOC-JCG (C.D. Cal., December 2, 2015) is an action for damages as a result of the Defendant's practice of making automatic renewal or continuous service offers to consumers in and throughout California and at the time of making the automatic renewal or continuous service offers, failed to present the automatic renewal offer terms or continuous service offer terms, in a clear and conspicuous manner and in visual proximity to the request for consent to the offer before the subscription or purchasing agreement was fulfilled. PDF Filler, Inc. is an online document management platform that provides the services of an online editor, cloud storage platform, and a signature request manager all in one package. The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott J. Ferrell, Esq. Richard H. Hikida, Esq. David W. Reid, Esq. Victoria C. Knowles, Esq. NEWPORT TRIAL GROUP A Professional Corporation 4100 Newport Place, Ste. 800 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Telephone: (949) 706-6464 Facsimile: (949) 706-6469 E-mail: sferrell@trialnewport.com rhikida@trialnewport.com dreid@trialnewport.com vknowles@trialnewport.com QUALITY ENERGY: Faces "Granado" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ----------------------------------------------------------- Keith Granado, Gabriel Granado, Jr., Melvin Locke, Michael Carr, and Doyle Rice, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Quality Energy Services, Inc. d/b/a Qes Quality Energy Services, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-01061-XR (W.D. Tex., December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. Quality Energy Services, Inc. provides well intervention services to oilfield and energy companies. The Plaintiff is represented by: Edmond S. Moreland, Jr. MORELAND LAW FIRM, P.C. 13590 Ranch Road 12 Wimberley, TX 78676 Telephone: (512) 782-0567 Facsimile: (512) 782-0605 E-mail: edmond@morelandlaw.com R.J. REYNOLDS: "Fienman" Suit Over Camel Loyalty Program Settled ---------------------------------------------------------------- Vimbai Chikomo, writing for Legal Newsline, reported that a class action lawsuit against R.J. Reynolds over its termination of a consumer loyalty program associated with the company's Camel brand of cigarettes has been settled. On Sept. 10, Jeffrey Feinman, Richard Holter and Donald Wilson filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and others, against R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, claiming that the tobacco company breached its contract with consumers when it discontinued its Camel Cash consumer loyalty program. Three months later, the two sides notified the court they reached a settlement in principle, resulting in a discontinuance of proceedings. However, should the settlement not be finalized within 60 days, the plaintiffs can apply to reinstate the case. The Camel Cash promotion ran from Oct. 1, 1991 to March 31, 2007, and rewarded consumers who purchased packs of Reynolds' Camel brand of cigarettes with "C-Notes" they could use to redeem merchandise listed in a catalogue. The C-notes were enclosed in the cigarette packaging. The catalogue included merchandise like ash trays, pool tables, NASCAR trading cards, apparel, computers and pinball machines. The plaintiffs allege that after Oct.1, 2006, the merchandise became limited, and the Camel Cash program was discontinued altogether on March 31, 2007, offering consumers with C-notes the option to redeem coupons or more cigarettes. The plaintiffs claim that RJR breached its contract with them by failing to provide merchandise for C-note holders to redeem, which they allege was part of the agreement. Class action law expert Geoffrey Hazard, Jr, who is Trustee Professor of Law Emeritus at the University of Pennsylvania Law School, told Legal Newsline that although there was some probability that RJR could prove that it provided an alternative reward to customers who participated in the Camel Cash program by offering coupons and more cigarettes in exchange for the C-notes, everything boiled down to what the contract states. "It's a question of contract law, and it depends on what the terms of the offers were," Hazard said. Bryan Hatchell, spokesman for RJR declined to comment, stating that the company does not comment on ongoing litigation. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed. C-note holders in New York are not the only ones taking legal action against the tobacco powerhouse for the alleged violation. A similar class action was revived and certified by a California judge in 2014, and the case is still pending. A nationwide class action cannot be certified because contract laws vary from state to state. RJR was founded in 1875, is based in North Carolina and is the second-largest tobacco company in the country. ROSICKI ROSICKI: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection ----------------------------------------------------------------- Aaron Cohen, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates, PC and Ditech Financial LLC, Case No. 2:15-cv-06828 (E.D.N.Y., December 1, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Rosicki, Rosicki & Associates, PC operates a law firm located at 51 East Bethpage Road Plainview, New York 11803. Ditech Financial LLC is a provider of home loan, loan servicing and refinance products to consumers and institutional partners in the U.S. The Plaintiff is represented by: Shimshon Wexler, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF SHIMSHON WEXLER, PC 216 West 104th Street, #129 New York, NY 10025 Telephone: (212) 760-2400 Facsimile: (917) 512-6132 E-mail: shimshonwexler@yahoo.com RUST-OLEUM: "Howell" Suit Removed to New Jersey District Court -------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit entitled Daniel T. Howell, individually and as a class representative on behalf of others similarly situated v. Rust-Oleum Corporation, Case No. L-1408 15 was removed from the Superior Court of Gloucester County to the U.S. District Court District of New Jersey (Camden). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-08379-RMB-KMW to the proceeding. The Plaintiff asserts product liability claims. Rust-Oleum Corporation is a maker of protective paints and coatings for home and industry use. The Plaintiff is represented by: Lewis G. Adler, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF LEWIS ADLER 26 Newton Avenue Woodbury, NJ 08096 Telephone: (856) 845-1968 E-mail: lewisadler@verizon.net The Defendant is represented by: Marc C. Singer, Esq. SAIBER, LLC 18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200 Florham Park, NJ 07932 Telephone: (973) 622-3333 E-mail: msinger@saiber.com RYAN TRANSPORTATION: Faces "Bell" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT ------------------------------------------------------------- Jeff Bell, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Ryan Transportation Service, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-09857 (D. Kan. December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. Ryan Transportation Service, Inc. is a third-party logistics company specializing in transportation management and a full range of value-added freight services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew E. Osman, Esq. OSMAN & SMAY LLP 8500 W. 110th St., Ste. 330 Overland Park, KS 66210 Telephone: (913) 667-9243 Facsimile: (866) 470-9243 E-mail: mosman@workerwagerights.com SAINT PETER'S HEALTHCARE: Plan Does Not Qualify for Exemption ------------------------------------------------------------- Circuit Judge Thomas L. Ambro of the United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, affirmed the district court's denial of the motion to dismiss in the appealed case LAURENCE KAPLAN, on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SAINT PETER'S HEALTHCARE SYSTEM; RONALD C. RAK; SUSAN BALLESTERO, an individual; GARRICK STOLDT, an individual; JOHN and JANE DOES 1-20, Saint Peter's Healthcare System, Ronald C. Rak, Susan Ballestero, Garrick Stoldt, Appellants, No. 15-1172 (3d Cir.) Saint Peter's Healthcare System is a non-profit healthcare entity that runs a variety of facilities, including a hospital, and employs over 2,800 people. Though it is not a church, St. Peter's has ties to the Roman Catholic Diocese of Metuchen, New Jersey. St. Peter's established a retirement plan in 1974. It is a non- contributory defined benefit plan, and it covers substantially all employees of St. Peter's hired before July 1, 2010. St. Peter's operated the plan subject to the employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) and represented to its employees in plan documents and other materials that it was complying with ERISA. St. Peter's began to consider whether the church plan exemption might apply to its retirement plan. It then filed an application in 2006 with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) seeking such exemption. In May 2013, Laurence Kaplan, who worked for St. Peter's from 1985 to 1999, filed a putative class action alleging that St. Peter's failed to comply with various ERISA obligations. Among other things, the complaint alleged that, in the years after St. Peter's filed the application for a church plan exemption, it did not provide ERISA-compliant summary plan descriptions or pension benefits statements. In August 2013, while the lawsuit was pending, St. Peter's received a private letter ruling from the IRS affirming the plan's status as an exempt church plan for tax purposes. St. Peter's moved to dismiss the suit, claiming that it qualified for ERISA's church plan exemption and hence was not required to comply with the provisions Kaplan claimed it had violated. St. Peter's argued that the claimed exemption robbed the district court of subject matter jurisdiction over the ERISA allegations and in the alternative that the complaint failed to state a claim. The district court denied the motion after concluding that St. Peter's could not establish an exempt church plan because it is not a church. However, the court permitted St. Peter's to seek leave to appeal. Circuit Judge Ambro affirmed the district court's denial of the motion to dismiss. A copy of Circuit Judge Ambro's opinion dated December 29, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/3PB0BOfrom Leagle.com. Jeffrey J. Greenbaum, Esquire, James M. Hirschhorn, Esquire, Sills, Cummis & Gross, One Riverfront Plaza, Newark, NJ 07102, Katherine M. Lieb, Esquire, Sills, Cummis & Gross, One Rockefeller Plaza, New York, NY 10020, Counsel for Appellants, Saint Peter's Healthcare System, Ronald C. Rak, Susan Ballestero, Garrick Stoldt, Monya M. Bunch, Esquire, Karen L. Handorf, Esquire, Mathew A. Smith, Esquire, Michelle C. Yau, Esquire, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC, 1100 New York Avenue, N.W., West Tower, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20005, Ron Kilgard, Esquire, Keller Rohrback, 3101 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400, Phoenix, AZ 85012, Lynn L. Sarko, Esquire, Havila C. Unrein, Esquire, Keller Rohrback, 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200, Seattle, WA 98101, Counsel for Appellee Jeremy P. Blumenfeld, Esquire, Melissa D. Hill, Esquire, Morgan Lewis & Bockius, 1701 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103, Counsel for Amicus Appellant, Catholic Health East Mark E. Chopko, Esquire, Marissa Parker, Esquire, Brandon Riley, Esquire, Stradley, Ronon, Stevens & Young, 1250 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC 20036, Lisa Gilden, Esquire, The Catholic Health Association of the United States, 1875 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 1000, Washington, DC 20006, Counsel for Amicus Appellant, Catholic Health Association of the United States Jared M. Haynie, Esquire, Chipman Gasser, 2000 South Colorado Boulevard, Tower One, Suite 7500, Denver, CO 80222, James A. Sonne, Esquire, Stanford Law School, Religious Liberty Clinic, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Crown Quadrangle, Stanford, CA 94305, Counsel for Amicus Appellant, Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. Mary E. Signorille, Esquire, AARP Foundation Litigation, 601 E Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20049,Roberta L. Steele, Esquire, National Employment Lawyers Association, 2201 Broadway, Suite 402, Oakland, CA 94612, Counsel for Amicus Appellees, AARP and National Employment Lawyers Association Laurence A. Hansen, Esquire, Hugh S. Balsam, Esquire, Locke Lord, 111 South Wacker Drive, Suite 4300, Chicago, IL 60606, G. Daniel Miller, Esquire, Conner & Winters, LLP, 1627 Eye Street, N.W., Suite 900, Washington, DC 20006, Counsel for Amicus Appellant, GuideStone Financial Resources of the Southern Baptist Convention Richard H. Frankel, Esquire, Drexel University Thomas R. Kline School of Law, 3320 Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19104, Karen W. Ferguson, Esquire,Norman P. Stein, Esquire, Pension Rights Center, 1350 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 206, Washington, DC 20036, Counsel for Amicus Appellee, Pension Rights Center. Patrick C. Elliott, Esquire, Andrew L. Seidel, Esquire, Freedom from Religion Foundation, P.O. Box 750, 10 North Henry Street, Madison, WI 53703, Counsel for Amicus Appellee, Freedom from Religion Foundation Gregory M. Lipper, Esquire, Ayesha N. Kahn, Esquire, Americans United for Separation of Church and State, 1901 L Street, N.W., Suite 400, Washington, DC 20005,Daniel Mach, Esquire, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, 915 15th Street, N.W., 6th Floor, Washington, DC 20005, Counsel for Amicus Appellees, ACLU, ACLU of New Jersey, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State The United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit panel consists of Chief Judge Theodore A. McKee and Circuit Judges Thomas L. Ambro and Thomas M. Hardman SELENE FINANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Mohammed" Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- Majibur R. Mohammed, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Selene Finance LP, Case No. 2:15-cv-06835 (E.D.N.Y., December 1, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Selene Finance LP operates a residential mortgage company. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan L. Gentile, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF GUS MICHAEL FARINELLA 110 Jericho Turnpike, Suite 100 Floral Park, NY 11001 Telephone: (212) 675-6161 Facsimile: (212) 675-4367 E-mail: rlg@lawgmf.com SELENE FINANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Jorge" Suit Claims ------------------------------------------------------------ Richard Jorge, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Selene Finance LP, Case No. 2:15-cv-08371-KSH-CLW (D.N.J., December 1, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Selene Finance LP operates a residential mortgage company. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan Leyland Gentile, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF GUS MICHAEL FARINELLA PC 110 Jericho Turnpike-Suite 100 Floral Park, NY 11001 Telephone: (201) 873-7675 E-mail: rlg@lawgmf.com SESTWON PIZZA: Faces "Munoz" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- Isac Munoz, Rumaldo Antonio Sanchez-Vargas, Juan Gonzalez, Jorge Isaac Parra Romero, Emilio A. Nunez-Bernaid, and Keller Vargas, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Sestwon Pizza LLC d/b/a Domino's Pizza and Robert Cookston, Case No. 2:15-cv-06833-JFB-AKT (E.D.N.Y, December 1, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act. The Defendants operate a Domino's Pizza franchise located at 935 Front Street, Uniondale, NY 11553. The Plaintiff is represented by: Roman Avshalumov, Esq. HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 69-12 Austin Street Forest Hills, NY 11375 Telephone: (718) 263-9591 E-mail: HFDalton6912@Gmail.com SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: "Valdes" Suit Moved from S.D. Fla. to D.C. -------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Valdes v. Southwest Airlines Co., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-23125, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The Columbia District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01898-CKK to the proceeding. The lawsuit asserts violations of the antitrust laws of the United States. The Defendants allegedly conspired in fixing, raising, maintaining, or stabilizing prices of airline tickets. The Plaintiffs seek treble damages, injunctive relief, costs of suit, and other relief as may be determined as just and proper, against the Defendants. Delta Air Lines is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, Georgia. Delta operates more than 5,400 flights per day to 326 locations in 64 countries. American Airlines is a Delaware corporation with its principal places of business located in Fort Worth, Texas. American is the largest airline in the world, operating nearly 6,700 flights per day to 339 locations in 54 countries. Southwest Airlines is a Texas corporation with its principal place of business located in Dallas, Texas. Southwest operates more than 3,600 flights per day to 94 locations in the United States and six additional countries. United Airlines is Delaware corporations with its principal places of business located in Chicago, Illinois. United offers service to more destinations than any other airline in the world, operating more than 5,300 flights per day to 369 locations across six continents. The Plaintiff is represented by: Louis I. Mussman, Esq. Brian Ku, Esq. KU & MUSSMAN, PA 6001 NW 153rd Street, Suite 100 Miami Lakes, FL 33014 Telephone: (305) 891 1322 Facsimile: (305) 891 4512 E-mail: louis@kumussman.com brian@kumussman.com - and - Allan Kanner, Esq. Cynthia St. Amant, Esq. KANNER & WHITELEY, LLC 701 Camp Street New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 524 5777 Facsimile: (504) 524 5763 E-mail: a.kanner@kanner-law.com c.stamant@kanner-law.com The Defendants are represented by: Michael Lacovara, Esq. FRESHFIELDS BRUCKHAUS DERINGER US, LLP 601 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 277 4000 E-mail: michael.lacovara@freshfields.com SPOTIFY: Musicians Seek Class-Action Status for Copyright Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Aaron Morrison, writing for International Business Times, reports that Spotify, the music-streaming giant that was sued on claims of reproducing copyrighted material, was sued again for similar reasons. This time it's Melissa Ferrick, a Massachusetts-based indie folk singer best known for being the last- minute opening act on Morrissey's 1991 tour. Ferrick's lawsuit seeking $200 million was filed in federal court in Los Angeles, Agence France-Presse reported. She and an earlier plaintiff have asked a judge to grant them class-action status along with other alleged victims of Spotify's streaming service. In Ferrick's case, she alleged that the privately held Spotify failed to inform copyright owners when it created co-called phonorecords, or the files that allow instant music online. The Swedish-founded company, which provides a huge selection of on- demand music to 75 million global users, unethically created the files without getting advance clearance to do so, according to the lawsuit. Spotify took "a now-familiar strategy for many digital music services -- infringe now, apologize later," Ferrick's lawsuit states. "Spotify chose expediency over licenses. Thus, while Spotify has profited handsomely from the music that it sells to its subscribers, the owners of that music (in particular, songwriters and their music publishers) have not been able to share in that success because Spotify is using their music for free." Ferrick's songs had been streamed or downloaded from Spotify 1 million times over three years without the required licensing, according to the lawsuit. Spotify, in its response filed last month, said it was committed to "paying songwriters and publishers every penny" it owed over licensing issue, the AFP reported. David Lowery, the leader of alternative rock bands Cracker and Camper Van Beethoven, brought a $150 million lawsuit against Spotify in December over the company's failure to seek permission for copying and distributing his songs. SPOTIFY USA: Faces "Lowery" Suit Over Copyright Infringement ------------------------------------------------------------ DAVID LOWERY, individually and on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. SPOTIFY USA INC., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant, Case 2:15-cv-09929 (C.D. Cal.), is a class action brought by Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and the numerous other similarly situated holders of mechanical rights in copyrighted musical works that Defendant Spotify USA Inc. has used without mechanical licenses in an egregious, continuous and ongoing campaign of deliberate copyright infringement. The complaint alleges that Spotify has -- and continues to -- unlawfully reproduce and/or distribute copyrighted musical compositions -- Works -- to more than 75 million users via its interactive commercial music streaming service, as well as its offline listening service. Spotify reproduces and/or distributes the Works despite its failure to identify and/or locate the owners of those compositions for payment or to provide them with notice of Spotify's intent to reproduce and/or distribute the Works. The complaint says Spotify's infringement of Plaintiff's and the Class Members' mechanical rights is knowing and willful. Indeed, Spotify has publicly admitted its failures to obtain licenses for the musical works it distributes or reproduces or to pay royalties to copyright owners for its use of their Works. Moreover, Plaintiff is informed and believes that Spotify has created a reserve fund of millions of dollars wherein the royalty payments Spotify wrongfully withholds from artists are held. The existence of this fund reflects Spotify's practice and pattern of copyright infringement, the suit says. The suit claims, "Spotify has been unjustly enriched, in an amount that is not as yet fully ascertained but which Plaintiff is informed and believes is not less than $150,000,000, according to proof at trial." Attorneys for Plaintiff and Proposed Class: Sanford L. Michelman, Esq. Mona Z. Hanna, Esq. Melanie Natasha Howard, Esq. MICHELMAN & ROBINSON, LLP 17901 Von Karman Avenue, 10th Floor Irvine, CA 92614 Telephone: (714) 557-7990 Facsimile: (714) 557-7991 E-mail: smichelman@mrllp.com mhanna@mrllp.com mhoward@mrllp.com - and - David C. Lee, Esq. Ilse C. Scott, Esq. MICHELMAN & ROBINSON, LLP One Post Street, Suite 2500 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 882-7770 Facsimile: (415) 882-1570 E-mail: dlee@mrllp.com iscott@mrllp.com SUNOCO INC: Faces "Hernandez" Suit in N.Y. Over ADA Violation ------------------------------------------------------------- Kenneth A. Hernandez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Sunoco, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:15-cv- 06858-ERK-CLP (E.D.N.Y., December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Sunoco Inc. is an American petroleum and petrochemical manufacturer headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, formerly known as Sun Company Inc. and Sun Oil Co. The Plaintiff is represented by: John Domenick Zaremba, Esq. ZAREMBA BROWNELL & BROWN PLLC 40 Wall Street, 27th Floor New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 380-6700 Facsimile: (212) 871-6395 E-mail: jzaremba@zbblaw.com SYNTHES USA: Judge Narrows Parties' Claims in "Lindell" Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ District Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill of the Eastern District of California granted in part and denied in part the parties' motions for summary judgment in the case TROY M. LINDELL, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Plaintiffs, v. SYNTHES USA, SYNTHES USA SALES LLC, SYNTHES SPINE COMPANY, LP, Defendants, No. 1:11-cv-02053 LJO BAM (E.D. Cal.) Defendants Synthes USA, Synthes USA Sales, and Synthes Spine Company design, manufacture, market, and distribute implants and instruments for surgery. Defendants have a number of operating divisions, including Trauma, Spine, and Craniomaxillofacial. Plaintiff Troy M. Lindell was employed as a sales consultant for the defendants and was responsible for certain territories in California. At the time sales consultants are hired, they are required to read and sign an offer letter. Employees were required to acknowledge in writing that they read and understood the manuals. Plaintiff filed a class action lawsuit on December 13, 2011. An amended complaint was filed on February 27, 2012. Plaintiff argues that defendants do not reimburse certain employees for business expenses as required by Cal. Labor Code Section 2802, took unlawful deductions in violation of Cal. Labor Code Sections 221, 223 & 300, willfully failed to pay employees upon discharge in violation of Cal. Labor Code Sections 201-203, and engaged in unfair competition in violation of the California Unfair Competition Law (UCL), Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code Sections 17200-210. Plaintiff also seeks to recover under California's Private Attorney General Act (PAGA), Cal. Labor Code Sections 2698-2699.5, for violations of Labor Code Sections 201-203, 221, 223, 300 and 2804. Plaintiff asserts that the court has subject matter jurisdiction based on the class action nature of the case and the parties' diversity of citizenship. On September 20, 2013, plaintiff moved to certify two classes pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. Sections 1332(d) and 1711-15: -- One class (the Expense Class) includes employee sales consultants from defendants' Trauma and Spine and Craniomaxillofacial (CMF) Division, who earned wages based on commission. Plaintiff claims that defendants had a policy of not reimbursing these employees for business expenses. -- The other class (the Deduction Class) includes all former, current, and future sales consultants employed by defendants for the time period beginning December 13, 2007 through the date of the final disposition of the lawsuit. Plaintiff claims that defendants deducted money from these employees' paychecks and failed to pay them in full when their employment was terminated. Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe issued Findings and Recommendations, recommending that the court grant plaintiff's motion. On September 24, 2015, defendants filed for summary judgment and plaintiff filed for partial summary judgment. Judge O'Neill granted in part and denied in part plaintiff's and defendants' motions for summary judgment. Judge O'Neill denied plaintiff's motion summary judgment as to the expense class for the period between December 13, 2007 and December 30, 2012, as well as defendants' motion for the period between December 13, 2007, and September 2012. Judge O'Neill granted defendants' motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff's expense class claims for the period between January 2013 to the present and denied defendants' motion for summary judgment as to its first counterclaim. Judge O'Neill granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment as to defendants' liability to Deduction Class members pursuant to his second cause of action, for the period between December 13, 2007 and December 30, 2012. Judge O'Neill denied defendants' motion for summary judgment as to the same issue and denied defendants' motion for summary judgment as to plaintiff's third, fourth and fifth causes of action. A copy of Judge O'Neill's memorandum decision and order dated January 6, 2016, is available at http://goo.gl/jnu6Ptfrom Leagle.com. Troy M. Lindell, On Behalf of Themselves and all Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, represented by Charles Trudrung Taylor, Lang, Richert & Patch, Darin Daniel Ranahan, Feinberg, Jackson, Worthman & Wasow LLP, Michael Victor Caesar, Lewis, Feinberg, Lee & Jackson,Ana I. de Alba, Lang Richert and Patch & Catha Worthman, Feinberg Jackson Worthman & Wasow LLP Mark Pope, Plaintiff, represented by Ana I. de Alba, Lang Richert and Patch & Michael Victor Caesar, Lewis, Feinberg, Lee & Jackson Synthes USA, Defendant, represented by Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Harrison Lee, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP, Kathy PourSanae, CBRE, Inc. & Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP Synthes USA Sales LLC, Defendant, represented by Harrison Lee, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP, Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Kathy PourSanae, CBRE, Inc. & Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP Synthes Spine Company, LP, Defendant, represented by Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Harrison Lee, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP, Kathy PourSanae, CBRE, Inc. & Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP Synthes Spine Company, LP, Counter Claimant, represented by Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP, Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP & Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC Synthes USA Sales LLC, Counter Claimant, represented by Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP, Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP & Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC Synthes USA, Counter Claimant, represented by Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP & Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP Troy M. Lindell, On Behalf of Themselves and all Others Similarly Situated, Counter Defendant, represented by Charles Trudrung Taylor, Lang, Richert & Patch, Michael Victor Caesar, Lewis, Feinberg, Lee & Jackson, Ana I. de Alba, Lang Richert and Patch & Catha Worthman, Feinberg Jackson Worthman & Wasow LLP Synthes USA, Counter Claimant, represented by Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Harrison Lee, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP & Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP Synthes USA Sales LLC, Counter Claimant, represented by Harrison Lee, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP, Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP & Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP Synthes Spine Company, LP, Counter Claimant, represented by Colleen A Carolan, Blank Rome LLP, Harrison Lee, Blank Rome LLP, Howard M. Knee, Blank Rome LLP, Kathy PourSanae, CBRE, Inc., Michael S. Helsley, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Oliver W. Wanger, Wanger Jones Helsley PC, Anthony B. Haller, Blank Rome LLP & Larry R. Wood, Blank Rome LLP Troy M. Lindell, On Behalf of Themselves and all Others Similarly Situated, Counter Defendant, represented by Charles Trudrung Taylor, Lang, Richert & Patch,Michael Victor Caesar, Lewis, Feinberg, Lee & Jackson,Ana I. de Alba, Lang Richert and Patch & Catha Worthman, Feinberg Jackson Worthman & Wasow LLP Mark Pope, Counter Defendant, represented by Michael Victor Caesar, Lewis, Feinberg, Lee & Jackson TARGET CORP: "Bowen" Suit Seeks Damages Over Share Price Drop ------------------------------------------------------------- Aisha Bowen, an individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated Plaintiff, v. Target Corporation, a Minnesota corporation and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC602994 (Cal. Super. Los Angeles County, December 7, 2015), seeks compensatory damages, restitution, meal and rest period compensation pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 226.7, liquidated damages pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 1194.2 and 1197.1, declaratory, preliminary and permanent injunctive relief in violation of the California Labor Code, waiting time penalties pursuant to California Labor Code Sec. 203, statutory and civil penalties authorized by the California Labor Code Sec. 226(e) and 2698-2699.5, interest on the unpaid wages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. Target Corporation is a Minnesota corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California. The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J. Matern, Esq. Emma Steiner, Esq. MATERN LAW GROUP 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200 Manhattan Beach, CA 90266 Tel: (310) 531-1900 Fax: (310) 531-1901 TERRAFORM GLOBAL: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports ---------------------------------------------------------------- Iron Workers Mid-South Pension Fund, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated v. Terraform Global, Inc., et al., Case No. cv-536468 (Cal. Super. Ct., December 3, 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 in the Registration Statement for the Company's initial public offering. Terraform Global, Inc. operates a renewable energy company that owns long-term contracted wind, solar, and hydro-electric power plants. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian J. Robbins, Esq. George C. Aguilar, Esq. Jay N. Razzouk, Esq. ROBBINS ARROYO LLP 600 B Street, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 525-3990 Facsimile: (619) 525-3991 E-mail brobbins@robbinsaiToyo.com gaguilar@robbinsarroyo.com jrazzouk@robbinsarroyo.com TOTAL GAS & POWER: "Anastasio" Suit Hits Natural Gas Bids --------------------------------------------------------- Michael Anastasio, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Total Gas & Power North America, Inc. and John Does 1-50, Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-09689 (S.D.N.Y., December 10, 2015), seeks damages, relief and attorneys' fees in violation of the Commodity Exchange Act and Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Total allegedly engaged in manipulating bid-week prices to advantage their derivative natural gas positions resulting in artificial prices and price trends. Plaintiff transacts in natural gas physical, financial and related derivative contracts. Total Gas & Power North America, Inc. is headquartered in Houston, Texas. The Plaintiff is represented by: David E. Kovel, Esq. Lauren Wagner Pederson, Esq. Thomas W. Elrod, Esq. KIRBY McINERNEY LLP 825 Third Avenue, 16th Floor New York, NY 10022 Tel: (212) 371-6600 Fax: (212) 751-2540 Email: dkovel@kmllp.com lpederson@kmllp.com telrod@kmllp.com TRADER JOE'S: Under-Fills Tuna Cans, New York Suit Says ------------------------------------------------------- Suzy Strutner, writing for The Huffington Post, reported that Trader Joe's is being accused in court of under-filling cans of tuna after tests revealed that most of their 5-ounce cans actually contained less than 3 ounces of tuna, as first reported by the New York Post. The class action lawsuit, filed in New York state, says tests conducted by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration found that "nearly every single can" of Trader Joe's 5-ounce tuna tested contained between 2.43 and 2.87 ounces of tuna. According to government standards, a 5-ounce can of tuna must contain at least 3.23 ounces of meat (or 2.84 ounces, in the case of skipjack tuna). But Trader Joe's canned tuna fell an average of roughly 17 percent below the federally mandated minimums across six tested store brand varieties. Trader Joe's does not "comment on pending litigation," national public relations director Alison Mochizuki told The Huffington Post. This scuffle could turn sweet in the end: StarKist handed out $50 tuna vouchers after settling a similar class action lawsuit, Grub Street notes. TRINET GROUP: Robbins Geller Named Lead Counsel in "Welgus" Case ---------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the Northern District of California, San Jose Division, granted plaintiff's motion for appointment as lead plaintiff and approval of selection of counsel in the case HOWARD WELGUS, Plaintiff, v. TRINET GROUP, INC., et al., Defendants, Case No. 15-cv-03625-BLF (N.D. Cal.) Plaintiff Howard Welgus filed a putative securities class action lawsuit against Defendants TriNet Group, Inc. (TriNet), Burton M. Goldfield, and William Porter for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired TriNet common stock. Welgus alleges that, from May 5, 2014 to August 3, 2015 (class period), defendants issued materially false and misleading statements and concealed material adverse facts regarding TriNet's financial condition and growth prospects. Welgus alleges that, as a result of the misrepresentations and omissions, TriNet common stock traded at artificially inflated prices during the class period, reaching a high of $37.88 per share on March 3, 2015. Welgus alleges that, after the misrepresentations and omissions became apparent, the prices fell precipitously, reaching a low of $16.33 per share on August 4, 2015. On October 6, 2015, Welgus filed a motion seeking appointment as lead plaintiff and approval of Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP as lead counsel for the class. No other plaintiffs have sought to be named lead plaintiff, and no other law firms have sought to be named lead counsel. Judge Freeman granted plaintiff's motion for appointment as lead counsel and approval of selection of counsel. A copy of Judge Freeman's order dated December 3, 2015, is available at http://goo.gl/FFgKy9from Leagle.com. Howard Welgus, Plaintiff, represented by Brian O. O'Mara -- bomara@rgrdlaw.com -- Daniel Jacob Pfefferbaum -- dpfefferbaum@rgrdlaw.com -- Shawn A. Williams -- shawnw@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP Defendants, represented by Richard L. Gallagher -- Richard.Gallagher@ropesgray.com -- Anne Johnson Palmer -- Anne.JohnsonPalmer@ropesgray.com -- Matthew Austen Tolve -- Matthew.Tolve@ropesgray.com -- at Ropes & Gray LLP TRINITY INDUSTRIES: "Nemky" Suit Goes from E.D. to N.D. Texas ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Nemky v. Trinity Industries, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-00732, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Dallas). The Dallas District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-03537-N to the proceeding. According to the complaint, Defendants allegedly failed to disclose material adverse facts that were likely to negatively impact the Company's financial condition and business prospect. The Plaintiffs seek to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Trinity Industries owns a variety of businesses which provide product and services to the industrial, energy, transportation and construction sectors, and is headquartered in Dallas, Texas. Plumbers and Pipefitters National Pension Fund has business in specialty finance industry, and is based in Alexandia, Virginia. The Plaintiffs are represented by: George L McWilliams, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF GEORGE L MCWILLIAMS PC PO Box 58 Texarkana, TX 75504 Telephone: (903) 277 0098 - and - John C Goodson, Esq. KEIL & GOODSON 611 Pecan Street PO Box 618 Texarkana, AR 75504 Telephone: (501) 772 4113 - and - Matt Keil, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF MATT KEIL PO Box 618 611 Pecan Street Texarkana, TX 75504 Telephone: (501) 722 4113 - and - Naumon A Amjed, Esq. Ryan T Degnan, Esq. KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 Telephone: (610) 667 7706 Facsimile: (610) 667 7056 - and - David T Moran, Esq. George L McWilliams, Esq. Charles L Babcock, Esq. David Folsom, Esq. JACKSON WALKER LLP 2323 Ross Avenue, Suite 600 Dallas, TX 75201 Telephone: (214) 953 6051 Facsimile: (214) 661 6677 E-mail: dmoran@jw.com cbabcock@jw.com dfolsom@jw.com - and - Avi Josefson, Esq. Gerald H Silk, Esq. BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMAN 1285 Avenue of the Americas, 33rd Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 554 1400 E-mail: avi@blbglaw.com jerry@blbglaw.com - and - Michael B Himmel, Esq. Michael T.G. Long, Esq. LOWENSTEIN SANDLER, LLP 6 Becker Farm Road Roseland, NJ 07068 Telephone: (973) 597 2500 Facsimile: (973) 597 2400 E-mail: mhimmel@lowenstein.com mlong@lowenstein.com - and - Tom Hill Crawford , III, Seq. GRUBER ELROD HURST JOHANSEN HAIL SHANK LLP 1445 Ross Avenue, Suite 2500 Dallas, TX 75202 Telephone: (214) 855 6866 Facsimile: (214) 855 6808 E-mail: tcrawford@ghjhlaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Yvette Ostolaza, Esq. SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP 2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 3600 Dallas, TX 75201 Telephone: (214) 981 3401 Facsimile: (214) 981 3400 E-mail: yvette.ostolaza@sidley.com - and - James Mark Mann, Esq. MANN TINDEL & THOMPSON 300 W Main Henderson, TX 75652 Telephone: (903) 657 8540 Facsimile: (903) 657 6003 E-mail: mark@themannfirm.com - and - Elton Joe Kendall, Esq. KENDALL LAW GROUP LLP 3232 McKinney, Suite 700 Dallas, TX 75204 Telephone: (214) 744 3000 Facsimile: (214) 744 3015 E-mail: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com UBER TECH: Limo Drivers in Philadelphia File Class Action --------------------------------------------------------- Alison Burdo, writing for Philadelphia Business Journal, reported that a group of Philadelphia limousine drivers have filed a class action lawsuit against Uber, alleging the ride-sharing company is cutting into its business by promoting the illegally operating UberX system and purposefully preventing customers from accessing Uber Black drivers, and has failed to compensate them the proper hourly minimum wage and overtime pay. Dozens of Uber Black drivers -- who are subject to Uber requirements like operating specific luxury vehicles and must comply with Philadelphia Parking Authority regulations -- demonstrated outside Uber's South Philadelphia offices to draw attention to what they say are manipulative practices the company employs to boost UberX. UberX drivers, who can cart passengers in any type of car, are operating illegally in the city as all taxi and limousine services are supposed to be monitored by the PPA. To be an Uber Black driver, one must be certified with the PPA and have a certain type of insurance, along with other requirements. UberX drivers are not subject to the same regulations. "How are law abiding drivers supposed to compete with them?" asked Ali Razek, president of the Philadelphia Limo Association, and one of the plaintiffs listed in the class action lawsuit. "It's not possible." Razek, an Uber Black driver for the past two years, said the ride- sharing app stopped giving its users the option to order Uber Black several weeks ago, although UberX cars still showed. "If you don't see any of the black cars, it says to the rider no Uber Black cars are available," said Razek, who questioned that choice considering UberX drivers are not in compliance with city laws. Along with the lawsuit's claims that the company didn't pay overtime and the applicable hourly wages, Razek said a hacking issue with the app has resulted in some drivers footing the expenses for trips without receiving any compensation. Some tech saavy passengers fraudulently accessed other users' accounts, he said -- which the Black drivers who shuttled them to their destination had no way of knowing. "Then Uber refused to pay because it is a fraudulent account," Razek said. "If the problem is with security, that is with them not me." The ride-sharing company, however, said these allegations are untrue. "Uber absorbs the full cost of fraudulent trips and drivers receive full compensation," according to a company statement. The company also said it has taken steps to promote its higher end service, although it did not address the allegations the app is misrepresenting the number of available Uber Black vehicles. Uber said it is advertising the Black service at 30th Street Station, and has notified customers through email and an in-app message that appears while at Philadelphia International Airport to promote the service. "While we understand that many limousine drivers are frustrated, Philadelphia has shown enormous appetite for more affordable options like UberX," the company said. UNITED CONTINENTAL: "David" Suit Over Inflight Service Dismissed ---------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Susan D. Wigenton of the District of New Jersey ruled on the parties' motion in the case CARY M. DAVID, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. UNITED CONTINENTAL HOLDINGS, INC. and UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:15-cv-01926-SDW-LDW (D.N.J.) United Continental Holdings, Inc. and United Airlines, Inc. (United) are incorporated under Delaware law, with headquarters in Chicago, Illinois. United operates a major airline, United Airlines, which flies domestically and internationally. Plaintiff Cary M. David is a citizen of the state of New Jersey. On February 21, 2015, David purchased in-flight DirecTV from United while on-board United Flight 1142 from San Juan, Puerto Rico to Newark, New Jersey. Plaintiff alleges that throughout the representative flight, United advertised to passengers via the TV screen to "SWIPE NOW" to receive over 100 channels of DirecTV. According to plaintiff, at no time before or during the process of purchasing DirecTV service was Plaintiff informed that the DirecTV service plaintiff purchased would not work during the flight. For a flight of over 4 hours, substantially all of which was over water, plaintiff was able to use DirecTV for approximately 10 minutes. Plaintiff alleges that United sold DirecTV access to Plaintiff despite the fact, known to United and not to plaintiff that DirecTV would not work. According to plaintiff, United's failure to disclose to on-board consumers that DirecTV and/or WiFi would work only over the continental United States is a deceptive commercial practice meant to induce passengers to swipe their credit card in-flight, knowing that the services passengers thought they were purchasing were unavailable. On March 13, 2015, plaintiff filed a four-count class action complaint against United alleging consumer fraud, breach of contract, unjust enrichment and violations of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (NJCFA), N.J.S.A. Section 56:8-1 et seq. United filed a motion to dismiss all counts of plaintiff's complaint pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). On June 10, 2015, plaintiff filed opposition to United's motion to dismiss and a dotion to strike the declarations of David Cronin and Craig Norwood. Judge Wigenton granted United's motion to dismiss and denied plaintiff's motion to strike. A copy of Judge Wigenton's opinion dated November 24, 2015 is available at http://goo.gl/hr7mO6from Leagle.com. CARY M. DAVID, Plaintiff, represented by JENNIFER SARNELLI -- jsarnelli@gardylaw.com -- MARK C. GARDY -- mgardy@gardylaw.com -- at GARDY & NOTIS, LLP UNITED CONTINENTAL HOLDINGS, INC. and UNITED AIRLINES, INC., Defendant, represented by DOUGLAS HARRY AMSTER -- douglas.amster@leclairryan.com -- GENE KYLE KASKIW -- gene.kaskiw@leclairryan.com -- PETER B. VAN DEVENTER, JR. -- peter.vandeventer@leclairryan.com -- at LECLAIRRYAN UNITED STATES: OPM Sued in D.C. Over Alleged Data Breach -------------------------------------------------------- William Fleishell III and Chad Kappers on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. United States Office of Personnel Management, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-02089-ABJ (D. Col., December 2, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to protect, highly-personal private information of millions of present, former and prospective public servants, along with the information of their families. United States Office of Personnel Management is a federal agency that handles many aspects of the federal employee recruitment process, including managing federal job announcements, conducting background investigations and security clearances, overseeing federal merit systems, managing personal retirement and health benefits, providing training and development programs, and developing government personnel policies. The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew Miller, Esq. Charles J. LaDuca, Esq. CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP 507 C Street NE Washington, D.C. 20002 Telephone: 202 789 3960 Facsimile: 202 789 1813 E-mail: mmille@coneolaw.com charlesl@coneolaw.com - and - Mark R. Rosen, Esq. Beth T. Seltzer, Esq. BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE 3300 Two Commerce Square 2001 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 963-0600 Facsimile: (215) 963-0838 E-mail: mrosen@barrack.com bseltzer@barrack.com - and - Steven R. Basser, Esq. Samuel M. Ward, Esq. BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE One America Plaza 600 West Broadway, Suite 900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 230-0800 Facsimile: (619) 230-1874 E-mail: sbasser@barrack.com sward@barrack.com - and - John G. Emerson EMERSON SCOTT, LLP Emerson Scott, LLP 830 Apollo Lane Houston, TX 77058 Telephone: (281) 488-8854 Facsimile: (281) 488-8867 E-mail: jemerson@emersonfirm.com - and - David G. Scott, Esq. 1301 Scott Street Little Rock, AR 72202 Telephone: (501) 907-2555 Facsimile: (501) 907-2556 E-mail: dscott@emersonfirm.com VALLEYCREST LANDSCAPE: "Tiller" Suit Removed to M.D. Florida ------------------------------------------------------------ The class action lawsuit styled Robert Tiller, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Valleycrest Landscape Maintanance, Inc., Case No. 15-CA-010200, was removed from the Hillsborough County Court to the U.S. District Court Middle District of Florida (Tampa). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:15-cv-02776-RAL-EAJ to the proceeding. The case asserts claims for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. ValleyCrest Landscape Maintenance, Inc. provides landscape maintenance and horticultural services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher James Saba, Esq. Luis A. Cabassa, Esq. WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, PA Suite 300, 1110 N Florida Ave Tampa, FL 33602-3343 Telephone: (813) 321-4086 Facsimile: (813) 229-8712 E-mail: csaba@wfclaw.com lcabassa@wfclaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Thomas M. Gonzalez, Esq. THOMPSON, SIZEMORE, GONZALEZ & HEARING 201 N Franklin St-Ste 1600, PO Box 639 Tampa, FL 33601-0639 Telephone: (813) 273-0050 Facsimile: (813) 273-0072 E-mail: tgonzalez@tsghlaw.com VITAL THERAPIES: Sued in Cal. Over Misleading Financial Reports --------------------------------------------------------------- Patrick A. Griggs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Vital Therapies, Inc., Terry Winters, and Michael V. Swanson, Case No. 3:15-cv-02700-JLS-NLS (S.D. Cal., December 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. Vital Therapies, Inc. is a biotherapeutic company focused on developing a cell-based system for the treatment of liver failure. The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam C. McCall, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP 445 S. Figueroa St., 31st Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 985-7290 E-mail: amccall@zlk.com - and - Nicholas I. Porritt, Esq. Adam M. Apton, Esq. Julia Sun, Esq. Michael B. Ershowsky, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP 1101 30th Street NW, Suite 115 Washington, DC 20007 Telephone: (202) 524-4290 Facsimile: (202) 333-2121 E-mail: nporritt@zlk.com aapton@zlk.com jsun@zlk.com mershowsky@zlk.com VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Abdy" Suit in Cal. Over Defeat Devices --------------------------------------------------------------- Iraj Abdy, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:15-cv- 02705-JAH-NLS (S.D. Cal., December 2, 2015) arises out of the Defendant's alleged installation of defeat devices in approximately 482,000 diesel Volkswagen and Audi vehicles manufactured and sold and leased in the United States since 2009, to switch engines to a cleaner mode during official emissions testing. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and selling automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components throughout the United States of America. The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd D. Carpenter, Esq. CARPENTER LAW GROUP 402 West Broadway, 29th Floor San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 347-3517 Facsimile: (619) 756-6991 E-mail: todd@carpenterlawyers.com - and - Edwin J. Kilpela, Esq. Gary F. Lynch, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET & KILPELA, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 322-9243 Facsimile: (412) 231-0246 E-mail: ekilpela@carlsonlynch.com glynch@carlsonlynch.com - and - Arthur M. Murray, Esq. Stephen B. Murray Sr., Esq. Stephen B. Murray Jr., Esq. Jessica W. Hayes, Esq. Robin Myers Primeau, Esq. MURRAY LAW FIRM 650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 525-8100 Facsimile: (504) 584-5242 E-mail: info@murray-lawfirm.com XBIOTECH INC: Faces "Tran" Suit Over Misleading Financial Reports ----------------------------------------------------------------- Linh Tran, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Xbiotech Inc., John Simard, and Queena Han, Case No. 1:15-cv-01083 (W.D. Tex., December 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. Xbiotech Inc. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, which engages in the discovering and development of True Human monoclonal antibodies for treating various diseases. The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew L. Payne, Esq. R. Dean Gresham, Esq. PAYNE MITCHELL LAW GROUP 2911 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 1400 Dallas, TX 75219 Telephone: (214) 252-1888 Facsimile: (214) 252 1889 E-mail: andy@paynemitchell.com dean@paynemitchell.com - and - Phillip Kim, Esq. Laurence M. Rosen, Esq. THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A. 275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor Telephone: (212) 686-1060 Facsimile: (212) 202-3827 E-mail: pkim@rosenlegal.com lrosen@rosenlegal.com * KCC Expands New York Class Action Practice -------------------------------------------- KCC, a Computershare company and premier provider of administrative-support services for the legal and financial industries, is marking several milestones for its class action practice. The company was recently recognized as the 2015 Best Claims Administrator by The National Law Journal and is also celebrating the administration of its 6,000th class action settlement. The company's successes of the past year have included the addition of top industry talents, including Justin Hughes and Robert Cormio. They both bring extensive securities class action administration experience. The firm is actively looking to grow its east coast practice and interested persons should apply at kccllc.com. The company also announced the relocation of Jenny Trang, a director in the company's business development department, to New York. "Our class action settlement administration practice has achieved notable successes through the expertise, technology and client service model that we've built over the last five years," said Bryan Butvick, chief executive officer, KCC. "Bringing top talent to KCC and expanding our practice in New York will provide additional resources to law firms engaged in securities and antitrust matters." KCC has been settlement administrator for some of the largest securities and antitrust litigations. Some of KCC's largest securities matters include: Enron Securities Litigation (S.D. Tex.); Xerox Securities Litigation (D. Conn.); In Re Charles Schwab Corp Securities Litigation (N.D. Cal.); and Harborview MBS (S.D.N.Y.). KCC's antitrust administration experience includes: In re U.S. Foodservice, Inc. Pricing Litigation (D. Conn); In re Rubber Chemicals Antitrust Litigation (N.D. Cal.); In re Titanium Dioxide Antitrust Litigation (D. Md.); and In re Ethylene Propylene Diene Monomer (EPDM) Antitrust Litigation (D. Conn). KCC -- http://www.kccllc.com/-- provides administrative-support services that help legal professionals realize time and cost efficiencies. With an integrated suite of corporate restructuring, class action, mass tort, strategic communication and legal document management solutions, KCC alleviates the administrative challenges of today's legal processes and procedures. KCC has gained client and industry recognition for its industry expertise, professional-level client service and proprietary technologies. Computershare (ASX: CPU) -- http://www.computershare.com/-- is a global market leader in transfer agency and share registration, employee equity plans, proxy solicitation and stakeholder communications. We also specialize in corporate trust, mortgage, bankruptcy, class action and utility administration, and a range of other diversified financial and governance services. Founded in 1978, Computershare is renowned for its expertise in high integrity data management, high volume transaction processing and reconciliations, payments and stakeholder engagement. Many of the world's leading organizations use us to streamline and maximize the value of relationships with their investors, employees, creditors and customers. Computershare is represented in all major financial markets and has over 15,000 employees worldwide. For more information, contact: Kerry Anderson Computershare 424-236-7206 Kerry.Anderson@computershare.com * Obama Administration to Veto H.R. 1927 ---------------------------------------- Martine Powers, writing for Politico.com, reported that the Office of Management and Budget came out with a statement saying the Obama administration "strongly opposes" a bill that would modify class-action lawsuits (H.R. 1927), and the president will likely veto the measure if it reaches his desk. "It would impair the enforcement of important federal laws," the administration says, and "constrain access to the courts." The apparent intention of the proposed legislation is to cut down on frivolous litigation, dividing the victims in class-action lawsuits into smaller groups based on the type and seriousness of their injury. But OMB says H.R. 1927 isn't the right solution: "Class-action lawsuits allow groups of individuals with similar injuries to vindicate their rights efficiently and effectively. Courts already have ample authority under the existing rules governing class actions to screen out frivolous and baseless lawsuits." The legislation would almost certainly have an impact on civil suits related to automobile defects. OMB: "this new requirement would narrow the availability of class actions." The House was expected to vote on the bill by the end of last week. Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: Class Suit Bill Faces Steep Senate Hurdle ---------------------------------------------------------- Peter Hayes, Perry Cooper and Stephanie Cumings, writing for Bloomberg Brief -- Distress & Bankruptcy, reported that a bill to limit class actions and restrict illegitimate asbestos bankruptcy trust claims is predicted to sail through the House but is unlikely to muster sufficient votes in the Senate, according to sources. The Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act (H.R. 1927), which includes the Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency Act (formerly H.R. 526), is scheduled for a floor vote Jan. 7 or Jan. 8. Then it's on to the Senate, where the bill is expected to stall. Even if the legislation never passes, it could prove to be an interesting test case for the impact of a Republican-controlled Senate on the balance of power between tort reform advocates and those who trumpet increased access to the courts. "It does not seem likely that the FACT Act will pass the Senate," Rachel Reynolds with Sedgwick Law LLP told Bloomberg BNA in a Jan. 4 e-mail. Reynolds defends companies against product liability, environmental and toxic torts claims. "There is a strong lobby against the legislation that asserts that the bill is designed to unfairly deny injured individuals compensation to which they are due," she said. "Legal reform bills usually draw strong opposition from trial lawyer allies in the Senate so the FACT Act would most likely face challenges, including a filibuster, if it reaches the Senate floor," Mark Behrens with Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP told Bloomberg BNA in a Dec. 22 e-mail. Behrens co-chairs the firm's public policy group and is a tort reform advocate. "Asbestos plaintiff lawyers are especially politically active, well-funded, and influential within the American Association for Justice, the trial bar's lobbying organization," he said. But even if the bill fails to pass the Senate or get presidential approval, it may serve other ends. "Committee hearings and floor debate provide important opportunities to shine public light on plaintiff lawyer suppression of evidence in asbestos cases," Behrens said. Those opposed to the bills weren't so quick to see a silver lining. Joanne Doroshow, executive director of the Center for Justice & Democracy, told Bloomberg BNA in a Jan. 6 e-mailed statement that the bills "have nothing in common except for their overall purpose to block victims access to the courts and eliminate legal accountability for corporations engaged in wrongdoing." "Committee hearings and floor debate provide important opportunities to shine public light on plaintiff lawyer suppression of evidence in asbestos cases." "One bill would wipe out federal class actions. The second would block asbestos victims from accessing the courts while violating their privacy," she said. CJ&D is a public interest group promoting access to the courts. Under the class action bill, courts would be required to conduct "a rigorous analysis of the evidence" to determine that "each proposed class member suffered the same type and scope of injury" as the named class representative before certifying a class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(1). The House Judiciary Committee approved the bill in June. The measure targets class actions in which, defendants say, not all class members are injured. One such example is the moldy washing machine product liability litigation, where not everyone's defective washers grew mold. Other examples involve cases for statutory damages where, defendants say, no "concrete" injury has been suffered. "FICALA will restore consistency among the federal courts' treatment of overbroad class actions and in the process promote fairness in the litigation of class actions and the U.S. economy," the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform said in a statement e- mailed Jan. 4. But the bill "could be very detrimental for workers and consumers" if the "same type and scope" language is interpreted narrowly, Alexandra D. Lahav, a professor specializing in class actions and aggregate litigation at the University of Connecticut School of Law, told Bloomberg BNA in a Dec. 29 e-mail. Lahav testified against the bill at an April House subcommittee hearing. "In the end the effect will depend on how judges choose to interpret it," she said. If the courts interpret it as a "reminder" that the claims of the class representative must be typical of the class claims, "it will not have much of an effect, except perhaps to slightly narrow the typicality requirement." For example, the class action bill could affect pending consumer actions against Volkswagen over the use of emissions cheating software in the company's diesel engine vehicle fleet, plaintiffs' attorney Jonathan D. Selbin, of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein LLP in New York, told Bloomberg BNA in a Jan. 6 e-mail. The bill's supporters "want to protect companies like VW from being held accountable for its emissions fraud. As VW shows, sometimes big companies lie and cheat, and all the class action bill would do is make it harder for consumers to hold them accountable," he said. ASBESTOS UPDATE: TRC Has Fibro Reinsurance Deals with AIG, et al. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Transatlantic Reinsurance Company, an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Alleghany Corporation, has entered into a commutation agreement with AIG Property Casualty, Inc., National Indemnity Company and Resolute Management, Inc., with respect to certain reinsurance contracts covering asbestos-related illness and environmental liabilities, according to the Company's Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed on November 30, 2015. On November 30, 2015, Transatlantic Reinsurance Company ("TRC"), an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Alleghany Corporation ("Alleghany"), entered into a commutation and release agreement with AIG Property Casualty, Inc., National Indemnity Company and Resolute Management, Inc. with respect to certain reinsurance contracts (the "Commutation Agreement"), including contracts covering asbestos-related illness and environmental liabilities for 1986 and prior years (the "Commuted A&E Liabilities"). Pursuant to the Commutation Agreement, TRC will make a settlement payment of $400 million in the 2015 fourth quarter to terminate certain TRC liabilities and obligations, including for the Commuted A&E Liabilities. Based on a preliminary analysis of its asbestos-related illness and environmental impairment ("A&E") loss and loss adjustment expense reserves, TRC estimates that this settlement payment will eliminate approximately 90 percent of its liabilities for A&E losses occurring in 1986 and prior years. Alleghany Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, provides various insurance services in the United States. Alleghany Corporation was founded in 1929 and is based in New York, New York. ASBESTOS UPDATE: CSC Continues to Indemnify DyCorp Units -------------------------------------------------------- Computer Sciences Corporation and its subsidiary, Computer Sciences GS Business, continue to retain indemnities for insured litigation associated with dormant suits by former employees of DynCorp subsidiaries alleging exposure to asbestos, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended October 2, 2015. In connection with CSC's acquisition of DynCorp in 2003 and its divestiture of substantially all of that business in two separate transactions (in 2005 to The Veritas Capital Fund II L.P, and DI Acquisition Corp. and in 2013 to Pacific Architects and Engineers, Incorporated (collectively, the "DynCorp Divestitures")), CSC assumed and Computer Sciences GS Business will retain various environmental indemnities of DynCorp and its former subsidiaries arising from environmental representations and warranties under which DynCorp agreed to indemnify the purchasers of its subsidiaries DynAir Tech and DynAir Services by Sabreliner Corporation and ALPHA Airports Group PLC, respectively. As part of the DynCorp Divestitures, CSC also assumed and Computer Sciences GS Business will also retain indemnities for insured litigation associated with dormant suits by former employees of DynCorp subsidiaries alleging exposure to asbestos and other substances; other indemnities related to a 2001 case arising from counter- narcotics spraying in Colombia under a U.S. Department of State contract and the associated coverage litigation involving the aviation insurance underwriters; and an environmental remediation case involving HRI, a former wholly-owned subsidiary of DynCorp, in Lawrenceville, New Jersey. Computer Sciences GS Business does not anticipate any material adverse effect on its financial position, results of operations and cash flows from these indemnities. CSRA Inc. delivers a range of IT solutions and professional services to help its U.S. government customers modernize their legacy systems, protect their networks and assets, and improve the mission-critical functions for warfighters and citizens. CSRA Inc. was incorporated in 2015 and is headquartered in Falls Church, Virginia. ASBESTOS UPDATE: FedEx Continues to Defend Fibro-related Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- FedEx Corporation continues to face a potential criminal case by the U.S. Department of Justice for asbestos-related regulatory violations associated with the removal of roof materials from a hangar in Puerto Rico, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended November 30, 2015. The Compay states "On January 14, 2014, the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") issued a Grand Jury Subpoena to FedEx Express relating to an asbestos matter previously investigated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. On May 1, 2014, the DOJ informed us that it had determined to continue to pursue the matter as a criminal case, citing seven asbestos-related regulatory violations associated with removal of roof materials from a hangar in Puerto Rico during cleaning and repair activity, as well as violation of waste disposal requirements. Loss is reasonably possible; however, the amount of any loss is expected to be immaterial." FedEx Corporation provides transportation, e-commerce, and business services in the United States and internationally. The company was founded in 1971 and is based in Memphis, Tennessee. ASBESTOS UPDATE: WestRock Continues to Defend Fibro Lawsuits ------------------------------------------------------------ WestRock Company remains a defendant to approximately 796 lawsuits for asbestos-related injury litigations, according to the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2015. The Company states "As with numerous other large industrial companies, we have been named a defendant in asbestos-related personal injury litigation. Typically, these suits also name many other corporate defendants. To date, the costs resulting from the litigation, including settlement costs, have not been significant. As of September 30, 2015, there were approximately 796 lawsuits. We believe that we have substantial insurance coverage, subject to applicable deductibles and policy limits, with respect to asbestos claims. We have valid defenses to these claims and intend to continue to defend them vigorously. Should the volume of litigation grow substantially, it is possible that we could incur significant costs resolving these cases. We believe that the resolution of pending litigation and proceedings is not expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition or liquidity. In any given period or periods, however, it is possible such proceedings or matters could have a material effect on the results of operations." WestRock Company manufactures and sells paper and packaging solutions for the consumer and corrugated markets in North America, South America, Europe, and Asia. WestRock Company is based in Richmond, Virginia. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Refuses to Review Stay of Allstate Ruling ---------------------------------------------------------------- Allstate Insurance Company filed a petition seeking an order compelling A.O. Smith Corporation to arbitrate a dispute regarding a Settlement/Coverage-in Place Agreement. The Court granted A.O.'s motion to stay the case. Allstate has now moved the Court to reconsider that decision. Judge Thomas M. Durkin of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division, denied Allstate's motion to reconsider. "Allstate argues that the Court erroneously held that Allstate's action is parallel to the Wisconsin action. Allstate describes the Court's errors as errors of apprehension. But Allstate does not raise any facts or law of which the Court was unaware in finding that the Wisconsin action is parallel to Allstate's action in this Court. Instead, Allstate questions the Court's reasoning in reaching its decision. Thus, Allstate has not raised any basis for the Court to reconsider that finding," Judge Durkin held. The case is ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. A.O. SMITH CORPORATION, Defendant, No. 15 C 6574 (N.D. Ill.). A full-text copy of the Memorandum Opinion and Order dated December 11, 2015 is available at http://is.gd/2H8wOTfrom Leagle.com. Allstate Insurance Company, Petitioner, represented by James Richard Murray, Esq. -- jmurray@tresslerllp.com -- TRESSLER, SODERSTROM, MALONEY & PRIESS, Heather Colleen Sullivan, Esq. -- hcolleen@tresslerllp.com --TRESSLER LLP & Kathryn Ann Formeller, Esq. -- kformeller@tresslerllp.com -- TRESSLER LLP. A.O. Smith Corporation, Respondent, represented by Jeffrey O. Davis, Esq. -- jeffrey.davis@quarles.com -- QUARLES & BRADY, Patrick J Murphy, Esq. -- Patrick.murphy@quarles.com -- QUARLES & BRADY, Jacob M. Mihm, Esq. -- jmihm@hokellc.com -- HOKE LLC & Stephen M. Hoke, Esq. -- shoke@hokellc.com -- HOKE ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLC. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Former Custodian Loses Summary Judgment Bid ------------------------------------------------------------ Theresa Ely filed suit against her employer and her supervisors Dearborn Heights School District No. 7, Todd Thieken, and Jeffrey L. Bartold, after they disciplined her for speaking out about possible asbestos contamination at a school where she worked as a part-time custodian. She alleges that the defendants unlawfully restrained her right to speak and retaliated against her in violation of the First Amendment. Both sides filed motions for summary judgment. The defendants contend that the plaintiff has failed to advance any viable claim that can be supported by the record now before the Court, and the individual defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity. The plaintiff contends that no fact question remains for trial on her claims and the Court should grant judgment as a matter of law in her favor and award compensatory and exemplary damages. Judge David M. Lawson of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division, granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment. Judge Lawson ruled that the plaintiff has not offered evidence that establishes a claim against the municipal defendant. However, she has offered sufficient evidence to create jury- submissible claims against the individual defendants. And she has shown that those defendants violated her constitutional rights that were clearly established at the time. The existence of fact questions preclude summary judgment as a matter of law for the plaintiff and the individual defendants alike. It is further ordered that the Amended Complaint is dismissed with prejudice as to defendant Dearborn Heights School District Number 7, only. The case is THERESA ELY, Plaintiff, v. DEARBORN HEIGHTS SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 7, TODD THIEKEN, and JEFFREY L. BARTOLD, Defendants, Case No. 14-14500. A full-text copy of the Opinion and Order dated December 14, 2015 is available at http://is.gd/4oyY6efrom Leagle.com. Theresa Ely, Plaintiff, represented by Adam Michael Taub, Esq. -- MILLER COHEN P.L.C. & Robert D. Fetter, Esq. -- MILLER COHEN P.L.C. Todd Thieken, Defendant, represented by John L. Miller, Esq. -- jmiller@gmhlaw.com -- GIARMARCO, MULLINS & HORTON, P.C & Timothy J. Mullins, Esq. -- tmullins@gmhlaw.com -- GIARMARCO, MULLINS & HORTON, P.C.. Jeffrey Bartold, Defendant, represented by John L. Miller, Esq. -- GIARMARCO, MULLINS & HORTON, P.C. & Timothy J. Mullins, Esq. -- GIARMARCO, MULLINS & HORTON, P.C. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Affirms Summary Judgment Favoring Fluor -------------------------------------------------------------- Kenneth and Dorothy Evans sued Fluor Corporation along with a host of other defendants, alleging that Kenneth Evans developed asbestosis from his exposure to asbestos when he helped to demolish a gas cooling tower over a two to three week period in the 1950s. The trial court granted Fluor's motion for summary judgment, concluding that plaintiffs failed to establish a triable issue of fact that Evans was exposed to asbestos from any Fluor products. Fluor moved for summary judgment or, in the alternative, summary adjudication. In its motion, Fluor relied on Evans' written discovery responses and deposition testimony to argue that Evans lacked, and would be unable to discover, evidence to show he was exposed to asbestos from any products or services provided by Fluor at any time during his employment. The Plaintiffs contend that, even if Fluor met its initial burden, they produced sufficient evidence in opposition to summary judgment to raise a triable issue as to causation. The Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Four, disagree with the Plaintiffs' contention and affirms the trial court's decision granting Flour's bid for summary judgment. The case is KENNETH EVANS et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. AMERICAN OPTICAL CORPORATION et al., Defendants and Respondents, No. B257665. A full-text copy of the Decision dated December 15, 2015 is available at http://is.gd/AmSefCfrom Leagle.com. Plaintiffs and Appellants are represented by Simona A. Farrise, Esq. -- info@farriselaw.com -- FARRISE FIRM, Sharon J. Arkin, Esq. -- info@farriselaw.com -- THE ARKIN LAW FIRM Defendants and Respondents are represented by Thomas J. Tarkoff, Esq. -- ttarkoff@foleymansfield.com -- FOLEY & MANSFIELD, Cynthia Y. Chan, Esq. -- cchan@foleymansfield.com -- FOLEY & MANSFIELD, Orly Degani, Esq. -- orly@deganigalston.com -- DEGANI & GALSTON ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fed. Cir. Dismisses Veteran's Appeal ----------------------------------------------------- Johnny R. Williams seeks review of the decision of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirming the decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals. The United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, dismissed William's appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The Federal Circuit ruled that the Veterans Court's decision on appeal was limited to a determination of whether the Board had substantially complied with the Veterans Court's February 2014 remand order, in view of the fact that Williams declined the opportunity for a hearing in the first instance. Though Williams does not specify his grounds for appeal, he appears to argue that the Veterans Court should have found that the Board, in declining to provide Williams a hearing once he changed his mind with respect to his desire for one, failed to comply with its obligations. This issue, however, is directed to the application of law to the facts of a particular case, and is thus outside the scope of the court's review, the Federal Circuit further ruled. The case is JOHNNY R. WILLIAMS, Claimant-Appellant v. ROBERT A. McDONALD, SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, Respondent-Appellee, No. 2015-7105. A full-text copy of the Decision dated December 15, 2015 is available at http://is.gd/whAcJzfrom Leagle.com. Johnny R. Williams, Mansura, La, Pro Se. Sosun Bae, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department Of Justice, Washington, Dc, For Respondent- Appellee. Also Represented By Scott D. Austin, Robert E. Kirschman, Jr., Benjamin C. Mizer; Y. Ken Lee, Jonathan Elliott Taylor, Office Of General Counsel, United States Department Of Veterans Affairs, Washington, Dc. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dale Farm Fined Over Cookstown Fibro Exposure -------------------------------------------------------------- BBC News reported that Dale Farm has been fined GBP30,000 plus costs of GBP2,500 after two ventilation engineers were exposed to asbestos fibres. The incident happened during extension work at Dunmanbridge Creamery, Cookstown, on 13 March 2013. The company pleaded guilty to breaches of health and safety legislation. The case was brought by the Health and Safety Executive for Northern Ireland (HSENI). Dungannon Crown Court was told that the two engineers had not been provided with important information on the location of asbestos containing materials at the site before work began. An investigation by HSENI found that Dale Farm had an asbestos management survey carried out 10 years prior to the incident. However, an asbestos management plan had not been developed in the intervening time, nor had a refurbishment/demolition survey been undertaken before the extension work began. Dale Farm had also failed to update their asbestos register to take account of asbestos insulation board discovered in 2007 in the area where the incident took place. After the hearing, HSENI inspector Jonathan Knox said: Asbestos exposure is the single greatest cause of work-related deaths in Northern Ireland. "Although the supply of asbestos containing materials was prohibited in 1999 many buildings in Northern Ireland still contain such products. "Those in charge of non-domestic premises have a duty to manage the risks presented by asbestos containing materials." ASBESTOS UPDATE: Stobbs Denies Ford's Bid to Junk Fibro Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ Heather Isringhausen Gvillo, writing for Madison Record, reports that Madison County Associate Judge Stephen Stobbs denied a motion to dismiss an asbestos case filed by Ford Motor Company, relying on a statement made by Ford to the Illinois Supreme Court expressing its substantial contacts with the state. Stobbs, who presides over the Madison County asbestos docket, filed the order denying Ford's motion to dismiss for lack of personam jurisdiction on Nov. 6. In his order, Stobbs noted a recently filed brief with the Illinois Supreme Court in Folta v Ferro Engineering, which stated: "Ford is one of the world's leading automotive manufacturers. Ford manufactures and assembles automobiles across six continents and provides related products and services. Ford conducts substantial business in Illinois and operates as assembly plant in Chicago that manufactures several vehicles, including the Taurus, MKS, Police Interceptor, and Explorer. Ford employs over 4,000 people at the Chicago Assembly Plant. In the past five years, Ford has invested over half a billion dollars in its business operations in Illinois." As a result, Stobbs concluded that Ford "has availed itself of the protection of the Illinois Courts and the benefits of Illinois law and by its own admission conducts substantial, not de minimus, business in Illinois. "Ford's contacts with the State of Illinois are substantial, therefore significantly more than the minimum contacts required by federal due process standards." In fact, Ford has a town, Ford Heights, named after it in Illinois. Irene Jeffs, individually and as special administrator of the estate of Dale Jeffs, filed the lawsuit. He alleges the decedent was exposed to various asbestos-containing products while working as a union insulator for various contractors at various sites from 1968-1995. During the course of his employment, Jeffs alleges the decedent worked at Ford's plant in Michigan, where he was allegedly exposed to asbestos. As a result, the decedent eventually developed mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases. Ford filed its motion to dismiss, arguing that there is no alleged Illinois exposure occurring during the decedent's time working for Ford. Ford cites the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in the Daimler case, arguing that there is no basis to exercise general personal jurisdiction in Illinois for the case at hand. In Daimler, the court held that "'a court may assert jurisdiction over a foreign corporation to hear any and all claims against [it] only when the corporation's affiliations with the State in which suit is brought are so constant and pervasive as to render [it] essentially 'at home' in that forum State.'" Ford's principal place of business is in Michigan and its State of incorporation is Delaware. Ford also argues that the plaintiff's reliance on personal jurisdiction by consent, pursuant to the Illinois Business Corporation Act, is misplaced. "The Defendant argues that the Act's requirement that foreign corporations doing business in this State, register with the Secretary of State and appoint a resident agent for service of process cannot be construed as imposing consent to general personal jurisdiction in this State over a foreign corporation," the order explains. Stobbs was unconvinced. He held that while Ford's corporate offices are in Michigan, it has a certificate of authority to conduct business in Illinois, owns property in Illinois, has authorized dealers in Illinois, employs people in Illinois and maintains a registered agent to accept service of process in Illinois. He wrote that Ford voluntarily conducts regular business in Illinois and has done so since 1922. The defendant has also litigated numerous cases in this state, including other asbestos cases in Madison County, without objecting to personal jurisdiction. "Considering all the factors, the Court finds that Plaintiff has met her burden of establishing jurisdiction over this Defendant and that the exercise of jurisdiction, in this case, is not inconsistent with notions of fair play and substantial justice, the fundamental consideration in finding constitutional jurisdiction," Stobbs concluded. Madison County Circuit Court case number 15-L-533 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Garlock Postpones Fibro Hearing ------------------------------------------------ Rubber & Plastics News reports that Garlock Sealing Technologies has agreed to postpone an Asbestos Claims Resolution Process hearing, scheduled for Jan. 6, until late February. A subsidiary of EnPro Industries Inc., GST reached the agreement with the court-appointed legal representative of future asbestos claimants and a committee representing current claimants to delay the hearing pending in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina. GST also requested similar deferrals of other court calendared events -- including the confirmation hearing on GST's second amended plan of reorganization originally scheduled for June 2016 -- related to the ACRP. It said the bankruptcy court has approved the postponement of the hearing date to a date to be set by the court. The delays were requested after the representative of the future asbestos claim claimants and the current claimants committee advised GST that they have hare negotiating to resolve the terms co claims resolution procedures that would be an integral part of any potential consensual settlement of the ACRP and requested the postponement to continue those talks and to include GST in the sessions, the company said. GST said it agreed to the request because it continues to believe that a settlement with both the future and current claimants would provide the best path to finalize the ACRP, save significant costs, and lead to faster completion of the case. However, the company cautioned, there's no assurance that the negotiations will result in a settlement, noting that prior negotiations have not resulted in an agreement acceptable to all parties involved. GST has been dealing with thousands of asbestos claims for more than a decade. It previously produced gaskets, valves, pipe joints and other items that contained non-friable asbestos encapsulated in the products. The firm stopped making them in the U.S. in 2000 and in Mexico in 2001. Although the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said non- friable asbestos isn't likely to release asbestos fibers into the air, the company still faced claims charging exposure to asbestos in gasket sealing products over a 35-year period. GST said it has processed hundreds of thousands of asbestos claims to conclusion--including judgments, settlements and dismissals. It has shelled out in excess of at least $1 billion in settlements, judgments, fees and expenses. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Couple Names 70 Companies in Fibro Suit -------------------------------------------------------- Kyla Asbury, writing for West Virginia Record, reports that a couple is suing 70 companies they claim are responsible for an August mesothelioma diagnosis. John Lewis Lafferty was diagnosed with incurable and asbestos- related malignant mesothelioma on Aug. 25, according to a complaint filed in Marshall Circuit Court. Lafferty and his wife, Dorothy Lafferty, claim the only medically known cause for mesothelioma in America is exposure to asbestos dust and, over the course of his lifetime, John Lafferty was exposed to asbestos dust while working as a supply person at various job sites in West Virginia. The defendants' manufacture, sale, distribution, use, specification, disturbance and/or installation of asbestos- containing products exposed John Lafferty to asbestos, resulting in asbestos-caused disease, according to the suit. The plaintiffs claim exposure to and the inhalation of asbestos dust was a direct and proximate cause of his development of asbestos-related malignancy. Over the course of John Lafferty's life, he was exposed to and worked with and/or around products containing asbestos and/or other harmful minerals manufactured, supplied, sold, distributed, installed, used, specified, removed and/or required by the defendants, according to the suit. The plaintiffs claims the defendants failed to warn them of the dangers of the products and failed to take reasonable precautions to warn them of the dangers John Lafferty was exposed to when they knew or should have known of the dangers. The defendants failed to exercise reasonable care to warn John Lafferty of the danger to which he was exposed by use of the asbestos-containing products and failed to inform him of what would be safe and sufficient apparel for a person who was exposed to or used the product or products, according to the suit. The plaintiffs claim the defendants were negligent and caused damages and injuries. The plaintiffs are seeking compensatory and punitive damages with pre- and post-judgment interest. They are being represented by Leslie Ann James of Hartley & O'Brien PLLC. Marshall Circuit Court case number: 15-C-193 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Olivetti Fibro Trial Gets Underway --------------------------------------------------- The Local reports that 17 ex-managers at the electronics firm, Olivetti, are due to stand trial over allegations that asbestos exposure at a factory in the Piedmont town of Ivrea caused 14 deaths. Italian town shuts down Wi-Fi over health fears (08 Jan 16) Italy's 'orange battle' becomes computer game (05 Jan 16) Buffon blew EUR20 million in bid to save Italian jobs (31 Dec 15) The group, which includes Franco De Benedetti, the current chief of scooter manufacturer Piaggio, worked for the company between the late 1970s and 2000. De Benedetti was president of Olivetti between 1978 and 1996. If found guilty they face charges of manslaughter over 14 confirmed asbestos-related deaths which all occurred since 2005. "Olivetti knew about the risks posed to workers for years, but did not respond until it was too late," prosecuting magistrate Laura Longo told La Stampa. The prosecution team has amassed some 36,000 pages of evidence, which spans 50 years of the iconic brand's history and includes oral testimonies from employees working across a number of departments. The first hearing will take place on Monday, after which one hearing will be scheduled each week until a ruling is reached. Given the large number of those involved in the case, including the families of the deceased, trade unions who represent them and city hall representatives, the sessions are being heard in the hall of Gramsci secondary school as Ivrea's courtrooms are not large enough. Olivetti, a producer of computers, typewriters, fax machines and calculators, was founded in 1908 and became Italy's largest electronics manufacturing company, renowned for its innovative design. The company was acquired by Telecom Italia in 2003. The case against Olivetti has been mounting since 2005, when retired employee Lucia Delaurenti, who worked for the company between 1965 and 1980, died of malignant mesothelioma, a form of cancer linked to asbestos exposure. This is not the only recent inquiry into asbestos-related deaths embroiling a giant of Italian industry. In July 2015, eleven former managers at the tyre manufacturer, Pirelli, were convicted of manslaughter after 24 workers died due to asbestos exposure. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro-related Deaths of Steelworkers Probed ------------------------------------------------------------ The Star reports that two former Sheffield steelworkers who died from an asbestos-related cancer could have been exposed to the deadly dust in their former workplace. The families of Basil Laycock and Keith Guite have called in specialist lawyers to find out if they were exposed to asbestos while working at Stocksbridge Works British Steel, known as Samuel Fox's. Mr Laycock died aged 81 in January 2015 from mesothelioma, a terminal cancer of the lining of the lung, caused by exposure to asbestos dust decades ago. Mr Guite died aged 81 in April 2013 from the same disease. Both men worked for the firm for more than 35 years. Former work colleagues are being urged to come forward with information about the presence of potential asbestos at the steel site. Basil's daughter Gillian Sharpe, 50, from Sandygate, Sheffield, said: "My dad loved life and his death has really hit the family hard. "It was awful watching him deteriorate so quickly and now, as a family, we need to know how he came to develop this terrible condition. "Hopefully, those who worked alongside my Dad and Keith at the Stocksbridge Works will remember them and come forward with the information we need to help us understand why their deaths occurred." Keith's wife Carol, 75, said: "Keith and I were married for 51 years, and the manner of his death was devastating to watch for myself and our three children. "Their deaths raise many unanswered questions. I sincerely hope answers will be forthcoming." Adrian Budgen, of law firm Irwin Mitchell, said: "We would urge anyone who worked with Basil and Keith to get in touch with us. They might be able to provide vital information that may assist with our investigations so that we can achieve justice for his family." Anyone with any information about the working conditions at the steel firm from the 1940s to 1980s should contact Kerry Ford at Irwin Mitchell on 0370 1500 100. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Daughter Blames Cos. for Exposing Her, Father -------------------------------------------------------------- Molly English-Bowers, writing for Madison Record, reports that a Toledo, Illinois, woman is suing more than 50 companies, alleging she developed a serious medical condition from inhaling asbestos fibers her father worked around, and brought home on his clothing and person. Charity Johnson filed a lawsuit Dec. 9 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against Aurora Pump Company, General Electric Company, Ford Motor Company, Honeywell International and more than 50 other companies, alleging negligence, conspiracy and willful and wanton misconduct. According to the complaint, Johnson's father was employed as a welder, an auto mechanic and in construction throughout his working life, many times around asbestos. Dust created by working around asbestos-containing products permeated his clothing and Johnson's father world carry this dust home with him, repeatedly exposing the plaintiff to the dust, the suit says. On Dec. 12, 2013, the plaintiff discovered that she had developed mesothelioma, caused by the inhalation of asbestos dust, the lawsuit states. Not only does she expect a premature death because of the condition, she has spent large sums of money for medical care, has experienced pain and mental anguish, has been hindered in her normal course of employment and her family will continue to be deprived of her means of support, the suit says. The plaintiff seeks at least $50,000 from each defendant. She is represented by attorneys Ethan A. Flint, Carson C. Menges and Laci M. Whitley of Flint Law Firm in Glen Carbon. St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 15-L-693 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hundred of Hoo Academy Fined GBP35K Over Fibro --------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Hunter, writing for Kent Online, reported that an academy trust has been fined GBP35,000 for failing to manage asbestos and ensure the safety of builders working at a Medway school. Representatives from the Williamson Trust pleaded guilty at Medway Magistrates Court -- where it was heard asbestos had been uncovered during work at the Hundred of Hoo Academy, one of the trust's schools, in 2012. Facing the same charge was Mark Tucker, 51, director of MT & Sons Ltd, the firm contracted to carry out the work, who also pleaded guilty and was fined GBP17,000. Exposure to asbestos can cause the deadly disease mesotheliomia, of which there is a high incident rate in Medway, due mainly to its industrial past. The court heard how a "last minute change of plan" during work had led builders to remove some panels around a series of skylights in the English, humanities and media block during school holidays. It was only the next day they realised that the panels were asbestos, and closed the building. Barrister Mike Forster, representing the trust, said there was a failure of management on the part of the school caretaker. "He should have said 'this is a change of plan, we need to find out what's in these panels' but he didn't. The work continued and the panels were removed." Mr Forster added: "He had training in 2005 so he should have realised. Why he didn't think to stop the work is a mystery. "It's regrettable, it won't happen again and the trust are very sorry that it has happened." However he pointed to evidence from an expert witness Martin Steer, who said the risk of harmful exposure in the case was very low. In mitigation he pointed out it was one isolated incident, no one had been injured and the period of risk had been short. John Roberts, representing Mr Tucker, echoed much of the mitigation, and said his client had had an excellent safety record over 40 years. Magistrates said they found the trust's culpability was greater than Mr Tucker's, and fined both parties accordingly. A spokesman for the Williamson Trust said it regretted the incident, but added: "An expert's report presented to the court said the risk of exposure to the small number of people on site at the time was very low to insignificant. "It's regrettable, it won't happen again and the trust are very sorry that it has happened" -- Mike Forster "It is also important to point out this work was carried out during school holidays when no children and teaching staff were at school. "We have learned from this experience and as well as co-operating fully with the Health and Safety Executive during this case, have improved, robust and effective safety procedures in place to ensure this isolated incident is not repeated. "The school spent a considerable sum in 2012 to ensure the affected area was cleared." The Williamson Trust was founded by Sir Joseph Williamson's Mathematical School, Rochester, in 2011. As well as the Math School and Hundred of Hoo, the trust manages four primary schools. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dust Exposure Leads Rise in Construction Deaths ---------------------------------------------------------------- Ian Bailey, writing for The Globe and Mail, reports that deaths of B.C. construction workers jumped 40 per cent in 2015, an increase fuelled by the number of workers who have died after being exposed to asbestos while on their jobs decades ago. Al Johnson, WorkSafeBC's prevention service vice-president, said the situation may be worse than originally thought. He said actuarial tables estimated asbestos-related fatalities would peak between 2015 and 2020, but instead, WorkSafe is now expecting the high number of deaths to go on longer. "We think it's because there have been more exposures and more workers working with asbestos than originally had been anticipated in industry," Mr. Johnson said. In 2015, in British Columbia, 44 construction workers died, 26 of them from exposure and 18 from trauma. In 2014, 31 construction workers died -- 19 from exposures and 12 from trauma. Asbestos -- once widely used because of its resistance to fire and heat -- is now considered a leading workplace killer in Canada, and is linked to about 5,000 deaths since 1996. Health issues caused by the silicate mineral include mesothelioma, asbestosis and lung cancer. On Thursday, the asbestos issue lingered in the background at the annual memorial ceremony to mark one of B.C.'s most dramatic workplace disasters. Thirty-five years ago Thursday, four carpenters fell 36 floors to their deaths from Tower IV of the Bentall Centre while working on the structure. Family, members of the legislature, labour figures, city councillors and others attended a ceremony to honour the Tower IV victims -- Gunther Couvreux, Donald Davis, Yrjo Mitrunen and Brian Stevenson. The occasion also honoured the 44 construction workers killed in B.C. in 2015, with mourners laying 44 roses on a plaque remembering the accident. To make a point, 18 roses were red for workers who died of trauma; 26 were white for workers who died from exposure to substances -- basically asbestos. WorkSafeBC has recently concluded that in 2009, disease first exceeded traumatic injuries as the leading cause of work-related deaths in the province. The agency said traumatic injuries causing death have decreased 68 per cent since 1990, while the number of occupational disease- connected deaths -- largely linked to asbestos exposure -- has increased. Tom Sigurdson, executive director of the BC Building Trades Council, told the ceremony earlier that he expects the number of exposure deaths to rise in coming years -- "a consequence of workers having worked with asbestos." "We have known for the last century that asbestos has been hazardous, but it has only been in the last few years that we have actually used protective equipment when we work with asbestos," he said. He said WorkSafe BC is now diligent about processing the files of workers facing health issues due to exposure, which leads to some level of monetary compensation. But to protect today's workers, he called for vigilance to weed out contractors who do not see to the safety of employees as they do renovation and remediation of buildings where asbestos is present. He suggested enhanced provincial inspections of the well- known "troublemakers." Mr. Johnson, who spoke at the memorial, noted WorkSafeBC has a dedicated team of inspection officers, recently bolstered, monitoring issues around asbestos linked to demolition and small commercial renovation. "That's where we're seeing the exposures today," he said. "If we can prevent those exposures today, theoretically this disease can be eradicated in future." He said he did not have a dollar figure on compensation that WorkSafeBC is paying for those now suffering from asbestos-related disease. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ill. SC Bars Workers' Compensation Fibro Claim --------------------------------------------------------------- Vimbai Chikomo, writing for Legal Newsline, reported that the Illinois Supreme Court ruled against a plaintiff in a mesothelioma case, stating that the claim did not meet the time limitations established in the Workers' Compensation Act and the Workers' Occupational Disease Act. The plaintiff's diagnosis came 16 years after the time limitations had expired under these acts. "I think this is a surprising decision, in that the appellate court had ruled that the plaintiff could move forward with his claims, because of the latency of the disease. The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the appellate court decision," said David J. Scriven-Young, Senior Counsel at Peckar & Abramson PC. "On the other hand, the plain language of the statute of repose actually is pretty clear that these claims should be cut off after a certain period of time." On Nov. 4, the Illinois Supreme Court barred Ellen Folta, special administrator of James Folta's estate, from bringing action against Ferro Engineering for a mesothelioma diagnosis after alleged exposure to asbestos while he was employed as a shipping clerk and product tester for the company from 1966 to 1970. James was diagnosed with the asbestos-related disease 41 years later and sued his employer and 14 other defendants in a civil lawsuit in Cook County one month later, seeking to recover damages for the disease. The Illinois Workers' Occupational Diseases Act states in section 6(c) that "unless application for compensation is filed with the Commission within 25 years after the employee was so exposed, the right to file such application shall be barred." Ferro Engineering filed a motion to dismiss the complaint arguing that Folta's claims were barred "by the exclusive remedy provisions" of the Workers' Compensation Act and the Workers' Occupational Diseases Act. Folta maintained that since his disease didn't manifest until 41- years after his last exposure to asbestos, any asbestos-related compensation claim was barred before he had any knowledge of his disease, therefore, his claim "fell outside the exclusive remedy provisions because his claims were not 'compensable' under the acts." The court held that the plain language of the statutes barred Folta's right to bring a claim after 25 years, and found that the 25-year time limit imposed by the Workers' Occupational Diseases Act "acts as a statute of repose and creates an absolute bar on the right to bring a claim," and that the purpose of the repose period is to "terminate the possibility of liability after a defined period of time." "Although this may not necessarily be fair to individuals who get the disease and receive a late diagnosis, the intent of the statutes is to allow companies to not face litigation for something that took place decades ago," Scriven-Young explained. Scriven-Young stated that the court's decision is consistent with what happened previously -- it was actually the appellate court that seemed to change the rules a bit, he said. "So I think employers are breathing a sigh of relief at this point that there will not be a flood of new litigation and an expansion of their liability," he said. In its ruling, the court stated that it was "cognizant of the harsh result in this case," but asserted that the decision on whether to create a "different balance" under the acts given the current knowledge of asbestos exposure and mesothelioma is "a question more appropriately addressed to the legislature." Scriven-Young explained that many companies have taken a big hit financially due to asbestos claims. "In general, asbestos litigation has threatened the financial well-being of many companies," he said. "It is hard to tell exactly how many folks out there are time-barred by the statute (and now by this new court decision), but the opposite result might have tipped some employers over the edge into bankruptcy." ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Mortality Rates Exceed Nat'l Average ----------------------------------------------------------- Deaths attributed to asbestos-related diseases are alarmingly high in eight East Texas counties, reports the mesothelioma law firm of Baron & Budd. The Environmental Working Group (EWG) recently released an analysis of mortality rates in the Beaumont, Orange and Port Arthur areas, which the EWG dubbed "Asbestos Alley." According to the EWG, asbestos death rates in portions of the area are more than four times the national average. The organization reports that in Orange County, the mortality rate is nearly 24 deaths per 100,000 people, and the mortality rate in Sabine County is nearly 23 per 100,000. The national mortality rate is 4.9 per 100,000 and the Texas rate is 3.3 per 100,000. According to the EWG, these are the asbestos-related mortality rates in the region, known as the "Golden Triangle": Orange -- 23.9 Sabine -- 22.7 Jasper -- 16.8 Trinity -- 16.3 Jefferson -- 14.8 Newton -- 13.2 Hardin -- 12.8 Polk -- 11.8 Despite these numbers, not only does asbestos remain legal in the U.S., the EWG reports that approximately 8 million pounds of the deadly material has been imported into U.S. ports since 2006. In addition, Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-TX) has sponsored a piece of legislation that would make it far more difficult for asbestos victims to obtain compensation for their medical expenses and other costs associated with their illnesses. The bill, known as the FACT (Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency) Act, would require plaintiffs in asbestos lawsuits to fill out burdensome, expensive reports. If made into law, the act would not only significantly slow the processing of claims, it would also very likely dissuade many asbestos victims from pursuing legal action. According to the EWG, Koch Industries, Allstate, Nationwide and Honeywell are just some of the major corporations that support the bill, which might be up for a House vote. "We are incredulous that Rep. Farenthold would sponsor such a terrible piece of legislation, especially since he is no doubt aware of the toll asbestos is taking -- basically in his own backyard," said Russell Budd, president and managing shareholder of the mesothelioma law firm of Baron & Budd. "We strongly urge citizens to make their displeasure with the FACT Act known by contacting their State Representatives and Senators." The mesothelioma law firm of Baron & Budd may be able to help if you or a loved one has been diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease. ABOUT BARON & BUDD, P.C. The law firm of Baron & Budd, P.C., with offices in Dallas, Baton Rouge, New Orleans, Austin and Los Angeles, is a nationally recognized law firm with a nearly 40-year history of "Protecting What's Right" for people, communities and businesses harmed by negligence. Baron & Budd's size and resources enable the firm to take on large and complex cases. The firm represents individuals and government and business entities in areas as diverse as dangerous pharmaceuticals and medical devices, environmental contamination, the Gulf oil spill, financial fraud, overtime violations, deceptive advertising, automotive defects, trucking accidents, nursing home abuse, and asbestos-related illnesses such as mesothelioma. Contacts Baron & Budd, P.C. Bradley Bowen, 214-523-6633 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Widow Says Ex-Employers Caused Husband's Death --------------------------------------------------------------- Molly English-Bowers, writing for Madison Record, reports that an Illinois woman is suing nearly 40 companies and Metropolitan Life, alleging negligence in her husband's asbestos-related lung cancer and subsequent death. Bethi D. Dates, administrator of the estate of Roosevelt Dates Jr., filed a lawsuit Oct. 27 in St. Clair County Circuit Court against CBS Corporation, American Standard Inc., Union Carbide Corporation, Union Pacific Railroad and many other listed defendants, plus Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. According to the complaint, Roosevelt Dates Jr. began working in 1951 and continued working until 1992. The suit says at various times during his employment, the deceased was exposed to, inhaled, ingested or absorbed large amounts of asbestos fibers emanating from products he worked with and that were manufactured, sold, distributed or installed by the defendants. On April 28, 2015, the lawsuit states, Dates' family learned he had developed lung cancer, an asbestos-induced disease, which caused his death Oct. 18, 2014. Before he died, the suit says, he paid large sums of money for medical services, experienced great physical pain and mental anguish, and was prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment, leading to losses of income. The complaint says Dates' family has been deprived of his means of support and lost the society of the deceased, and the estate spent substantial sums of money for his funeral and burial. Bethi Dates seeks more than $50,000 from each of the defendants. The count against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company alleges conspiracy. The suit says Met Life conspired to discredit and terminate the studies and experiments of scientists who were developing data about the dangers of asbestos. The suit further states Met Life actively suppressed publication of articles about asbestosis in Asbestos Magazine, a source of information to the public and to users of asbestos products. As a result, Bethi Dates seeks more than $50,000 from Met Life. She is represented by attorneys Randy L. Gori and Barry Julian of Gori, Julian & Associates PC of Edwardsville. St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 15-L-610 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Two Companies Fined GBP165K for Fibro Failings --------------------------------------------------------------- North West Place reported that a food company and its Manchester- based contractor have been fined after asbestos was disturbed during building work and only identified by chance when an asbestos removal contractor attended site. Stafford Crown Court heard no asbestos survey had been carried out by Mizkan Euro, headqartered in London, D H Welton & Co, based in Failsworth, and either company could have commissioned a refurbishment or demolition before the work commenced. An investigation by the Health & Safety Executive found Mizkan Euro was undertaking a project to remove tanks from a factory which required the demolition of an external wall. It failed to provide an asbestos survey to enable contractor DH Welton to quote and plan appropriately for the work to be undertaken. However, HSE also found DH Welton could have commissioned a survey when it discovered that Mizkan only had access to a management survey for the building. When the wall was demolished asbestos insulation board at the top of the wall was unknowingly broken up. A skip of demolition debris was found to contain asbestos insulation board, which had been identified by an asbestos contractor who had been called to site. For the work to be undertaken correctly, a licensed asbestos removal contractor should have been appointed to remove the asbestos under controlled conditions prior to the wall being demolished. Mizkan Euro Ltd of Chiswick Park, Chiswick High Road, Chiswick, London pleaded guilty to breaching sections 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health & Safety at Work Act after failing to plan and manage the work carried out under its control without ensuring that risks to health and safety are prevented. It was fined œ60,000 for each charge, totalling œ120,000, and ordered to pay costs of œ13,589. D H Welton & Co Ltd of Corn Street, Failsworth, Manchester admitted breaching Section 2(1) and 3(1) of the Health & Safety at Work Act and regulation 5(1)(a) Control of Asbestos Regulations 2012 after failing to carry out a suitable and sufficient assessment as to whether asbestos was present or liable to be present during the removal of a wall. It was fined œ15,000 for each charge, totalling œ45,000 plus costs of œ4,529. Mizkan and DH Welton were both unavailable for comment at the time of publication. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wateringen Residents Exposed to Deadly Dust ------------------------------------------------------------ Janene Pieters, writing for NLTimes, reported that a very critical report on the asbestos cleanup in Wateringen after a large fire in January in 2014, was leaked. The investigators concluded that the the municipality of Westland unnecessarily exposed residents to severe health risks by not cleaning up the asbestos properly after the fire. One investigator even calls it "a deadly health risk", RTL Nieuws reports. According to the report, despite two rounds of cleanup by the municipality after the fire in 2015, the area is still not clean. "The municipality Westland seriously and culpably neglects its public task to clean up the public spaces and thereby risk the lives of its people unnecessarily", asbestos jurist Yvonne Waterman, who did the investigation, writes. The whole report can be read here in Dutch. According to RTL, the province of Zuid-Holland planned to keep the report secret for the time being, but finally relented under public pressure and released it. In a reaction to the report, Mayor Sjaak van der Tak said that the image the report creates "does not correspond to reality". A spokesperson for the municipality stated that the municipality did more than the Ministry requires when cleaning up the asbestos. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Security Guard Dies of Fibro-related Cancer ------------------------------------------------------------ Todd Fitzgerald, writing for Manchester Evening News, reports that Stuart Packard died in December of mesothelioma after helping out in the city centre following the 1996 blast A security guard who worked in Manchester in the wake of the IRA bombing has died of asbestos-related cancer 20 years after he is believed to have been exposed to carcinogenic dust in the aftermath of the blast. Stuart Packard, spent three weeks working in the city centre as an emergency security guard at the Arndale Centre helping deal with the devastation following the attack in June 1996. He died aged 40 of mesothelioma -- a cancer caused by asbestos. It is thought he came into contact with carcinogenic dust caused by demolition work following the attack, which injured more than 200 people and caused œ1.5bn-worth of damage. Buildings in a half-mile radius of the blast were destroyed. The clean up, which took months, was made more complicated by the fact that scores of the buildings affected contained asbestos. Archive images show workmen in protective clothing and masks. But Mr Packard's family believe he was not properly protected -- and have tasked law firm Fieldfisher with investigating the potential for a civil claim for compensation. His wife Julie Barrett, from Essex, said: "Stuart is so badly missed, he was so young. If the bomb hadn't happened, he would likely still be alive. "This disease just came back to get him so many years later. We all live with the threat of terrorism now every day -- and it was terrorism all those years ago that caused his tragic death." Mr Packard leaves behind two children, aged four and nine. He went on to work as a health and safety officer for the Ministry of Defence. Mr Packard only found out he was ill in March after he started losing weight and felt tired and out of breath. Medics were shocked to discover he was suffering from mesothelioma. The condition has a long incubation period and it can take years to develop any symptoms. Father-in-law Rod Barrett said: "He said he remembered the demolition ball knocking down buildings right behind him and there being dust and rubble everywhere. "When he was diagnosed with the disease, he thought back to when he could have been exposed to asbestos dust and it all fell into place." Solicitors at Fieldfisher are appealing for anyone who also worked in the area in the aftermath of the bombing, who may be able to provide information about protective clothing and masks. Specialist mesothelioma and asbestos solicitor Peter Williams said: "Mesothelioma usually attacks people at retirement age, but Mr Packard was only 40 when he died, which makes this case even more tragic." Wythenshawe and Sale MP Mike Kane raised the issue of asbestos- relation cancer -- and a lack of funding for research into the condition -- in the House of Commons. He claimed a lack of cash for work around mesothelioma could 'endanger potential life-changing, even life-saving breakthroughs'. Introducing a Ten Minute Rule Motion on the issue, Mr Kane said the UK has the highest rate of the disease in the world and mortality rates are increasing, having more than quadrupled over the last 30 years. It is estimated that more than 2,500 people will die of the disease in the UK and an estimated 60,000 people will die over the next 30 years unless new treatments are found. Citing Mr Packard's case, Mr Kane called for research funding to be guaranteed by law. Mr Kane said: "Unless a change is introduced into the way mesothelioma research is funded, we risk stagnation and endanger potential life-changing, even life-saving breakthroughs. "Currently, research relies on ad-hoc contributions from insurers, charitable donations and modest funding from the government. "This unreliable approach to funding jeopardises ongoing research, impacting not only on the British research industry but on Mesothelioma mortality in the UK. "This is why statutory funding must be secured for the research." ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Bill Would Expose Victims' Personal Data --------------------------------------------------------------- SC Magazine reports that privacy and public interest organizations are petitioning against a bill that attempts to prevent fraud in asbestos lawsuits. A group of privacy and public interest organizations are petitioning against a bill that attempts to prevent fraud in asbestos lawsuits. The groups say the Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency (FACT) Act would cause an increase incidents of identity theft targeting asbestos victims. The draft legislation could receive a House vote Thursday. The bill would establish trusts tasked with creating quarterly public reports "listing the name and exposure history of those who have filed a claim with such trust and any payments made to claimants and the basis for such payments." The campaign is led by Washington, DC-based Environmental Working Group (EWG) Action Fund, which sent a letter signed by a coalition that includes Essential Information, Government Accountability Project, Patient Privacy Rights, Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, Privacy Times, TURN-The Utility Reform Network and World Privacy Forum to the cyber caucus. The bill would "force the online disclosure of sensitive personal information of sick and dying asbestos victims seeking compensation for their illnesses," the letter stated. "Disclosure would include the last four digits of their Social Security numbers, work and medical histories, full name and birth year, among other details, on a publicly accessible website anyone with access to a computer can view and download." Last June American Veterans (AMVETS) and the Association of the U.S. Navy wrote to Congressional leaders opposing the bill, and last October, the International Association of Fire Fighters, the National Educational Association and AFSCME sent a letter to Congress opposing the legislation. The proposed FACT Act, sponsored by Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-TX), was approved by the Judiciary Committee in November 2015. ********* 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. Marion Alcestis A. Castillon, 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 2016. 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 * * *