/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/180219.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, February 19, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 36 Headlines 2.7 AUGUST: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Gheem" Suit Claims A.B. GENERAL: "Lopez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA AAMES SECURITY: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, Hernandez Says ABM AVIATION: Fails to Pay Wages & Overtime under Labor Code ABS FINANCIAL: Faces "Carrasco" Suit over Club Membership Fees ACCO ENGINEERED: Products Have Asbestos, "Barnhart" Suit Claims ADVANCED MICRO: Sued over Selling of Defective Core Processor ADVANCED MICRO: Hauck Sues over Sale of Defective CPUs AFLAC INCORPORATED: Martin Sues over Drop in Share Price AMENDOLA PIZZA: Fails to Pay Minimum Wage & OT, Eustate Says AMERICAN FINANCE: Clair-Hibbard Balks at AR Global Merger Deal ARIES WORLDWIDE: "Miciak" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA ARGENTINA: Defaulted on Exchange Bonds, Draw Capital Suit Says AVIATION PORT: Faces "Hernandez" Suit in California BALLARD POWER: Porwal Sues over Drop in Share Price BIG HEART: Dog Food Contains Pentobarbital, Mullins Claims BIOTELEMETRY INC: "Matthews" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA CBRE GROUP: "Romo" Suit Moved to Central District of California COLETTA SPURLING: "Ornelas" Suit Moved to District of Arizona COMERICA BANK: Faces "Prince" Suit over Woodbridge Collapse CREDIT SUISSE: Refuses to Pay Deferred Compensation, Laver Says CYPRESS COMMUNICATIONS: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Bruton" Claims DALLAS INTERNATIONAL: "Patterson" Suit Seeks OT Pay under FLSA DELTA AIR: "Schofield" Suit Removed to N.D. California DEZIGNS CONSTRUCTION: Garcia Sues over Wage and Hour Laws DIGNITY HEALTH: Ruiz Calls Debt Collection "Wrongful" DIN TAI: "Ortiz" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code DIVINE MIRACLES: "Hohensee" Suit Seeks Minimum Pay, OT under FLSA DOCTOR'S MEDICAL: "Valencia" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA E.J.'S NORTH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Sandoval" Suit Claims EASTWESTPROTO INC: Parties Agree to Remand "Mason" Suit ENVISION HEALTHCARE: Quitly Sues over ER Physician Services EPSI INC: Underpays Pizza Delivery Drivers, "Gentry" Suit Says EQUIFAX INC: Directors Face Derivative Suit in N.D. Georgia EQUIFAX INC: Credit Unions Sue over Security Breach EQUIFAX INC: Faces "Bank" Suit over Security Breach EQUINOX FITNESS: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, Wesley Says EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: Fails to Pay All Overtime Wages, Vizza Says FITZSIMMONS SURGICAL: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Lott" Suit Claims FORESTRY MANAGEMENT: Faces "Montford" Suit over Failure to Pay OT FU FU CAFE: "Quema" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages, OT under FLSA FUNKO INC: "Lowinger" Suit Moved to W.D. Washington GC SERVICE: Faces "Galli" Suit in New York Supreme Court GEORGIA-PACIFIC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Pulido" Claims GLOBAL TRAVEL: Roberts Sues over "Reward Redemption" Scam GOVAN RD: "Galindo" Suit Seeks Minimum Wage & OT Pay GRAN CAFFE: Faces "Prazdnik" Suit in Eastern District of Penn. HEMANI CAPITAL: "Wilson" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA HERSCHELL GOLDMAN: Faces "Carter" Suit over EFTA Violations HURON CLINTON: "Livingston" Suit Seeks unpaid OT Wages under FLSA HYDRO-AIRE INC: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, McDowell Says HYUNDAI MOTOR: Sued by Brogan over Defective GDI Engines IGNYTA INC: Faces "Diaz" Suit over Proposed Roche Merger JASON NATURAL: Zeng Sues over "All Natural" Products Claims JZANUS LTD: Faces "Kim" Suit in Eastern District New York KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Sehrgosha Enjoins Merger with Consortium KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Tompkins Balks at TPG Global Merger Deal KOMEN USA: "Santoyo" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages under FLSA LEE KUM KEE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Leon" Suit Claims LJM FUNDS: Sokolow Sues over Plunge in LJMIX Share Price LTI TRUCKING: "Kennedy" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA MANHATTAN ACADEMY: Soghn Seeks Minimum Wage & OT under Labor Code MENARD INC: Violates Wage and Hour Laws, "Raisor" Suit Says MERCK & CO: Rochester Drug Sues over Monopoly of Zetia Drug METROPCS TEXAS: "Silguero" Suit Seeks Overtime Wages under FLSA MGB INC: "Oliver" Suit Seeks Minimum Wage & OT under FLSA MIDLAND FUNDING: McCoy Sues over Debt Collection Practices MOOOI USA: Faces "Bishop" Suit in Southern District New York MOTION PICTURE: Fails to Pay OT, "Maravilla" Suit Claims MRK FINE: Faces "Bishop" Suit in Southern District New York NATIONWIDE PROTECTIVE: Fails to Pay OT, "Ramessar" Suit Claims NAVIENT SOLUTIONS: Obeleagu Sues over Collection of Student Loan NIKOLAIS GALANOPOULOS: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT, Amastal Says NORTHSTAR LOCATION: Faces "Selwyn" Suit in E.D. New York NUDGE LLC: Faces Just Us Realtors Suit in District of Utah O'REILLY AUTO: Fails to Reimburse Gift Cards, Micallef Claims OFFICINE PANERAI: Faces "Thorne" Suit in S.D. New York OIL CAN: "Sarduy" Suit Seeks OT & Minimum Wages under FLSA OZARK PIZZA: "Paul" Suit Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages under FLSA PARLIER CITY, CA: "Jimenez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA PATHWAY LEASING: "Fisher" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages under FLSA PATHWAY LEASING: Fails to Pay Minimum Wages, Fisher Says PAX ASSIST: Fails to Pay for Overtime Work, Stewart Claims PETORE ASSOCIATES: Par Plumbing Sues over Unpaid Services PRISHA COSMETICS: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, Garcia Says PROFESSIONAL WATER: Garners Sue over Water Softening System RANGER READY: Refuses to Pay Overtime Premium, Thompson Says REJUVENATING CONCEPTS: Fails to Pay Minimum Wage, Hohensee Says ROCKROSE DEVELOPMENT: Faces "Bishop" Suit in S.D. New York ROOTER HERO: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Yearian Says RUSTY'S PIZZA: Faces "May" Suit in California Superior Court SAW ENTERPRISES: "Velez" Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Wages under FLSA SHERRY FRONTENAC: "Chera" Suit Moved to Southern Dist. of Florida SOBE MIAMI: "Ortega" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages & OT under FLSA SOCAL JIB: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Bonola" Suit Claims SOY SAUCE: Fails to Pay Overtime Pay, "Feng" Suit Claims STAMPS.COM INC: "Lopez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA STANLEY STEEMER: "Bradley" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA STORCK USA: Mislabels Caramel Candy Packs, Kpakpoe-Awei Claims SUMAIDA & KHURANA: Faces "Bishop" Suit in S.D. New York SUPER MICRO COMPUTER: Roofers Union Files Securities Class Suit SYNERGY PHARMACEUTICALS: CRG Loan Has Deceptive Terms, Lee Says SYNERMED INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Estrada" Suit Claims TASTEBUDS CATERING: "Ramirez" Suit Moved to S.D. Florida TD BANK: "Chavez" Sues over Recording of Telephone Conversations TRB LLC: Fails to Pay for Overtime Work, "Lorenzo" Suit Claims TURNER BROADCASTING: Faces "Byrd" Suit over Race Discrimination ULTIMATE FITNESS: Secure Sues over Telemarketing Messages ULYSSE NARDIN: Website No Accessible to Blind People, Thorne Says UNIVAR INC: "Jones" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA WAVEDIVISION HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Sanchez Says WHITELOCKE & ASSOCIATES: Martinez Sues over Collection Calls WIRELESS LIFESTYLE: Lillie Sues over Labor Code Violations ********* 2.7 AUGUST: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Gheem" Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------- ALICE GHEEM, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, 2.7 AUGUST APPAREL, INC., and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC690985 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 19, 2018) is an action alleging Defendant's policies, practices, and customs deprived the Plaintiff's rights guaranteed to her by the California Labor Code. Ms. Gheem worked for the Defendants from July 2016 to October 31, 2017. 2.7 August Apparel, Inc. is engaged in the Uniforms and Work Clothing business. According to Company's website -- https://27augustapparel.com/ -- it is a digital shopping destination where people can discover diverse brands and be able to shop an assortment of products directly in a single-cart experience. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Larry W. Lee, Esq. Nick Rosenthal, Esq. DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C. 515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213)488-6555 Facsimile: (213) 488-6554 E-mail: lwlee@diversitylaw.com - and - Edward W. Choi, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF CHOI & ASSOCIATES 515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213)381-1515 Facsimile: (213) 465-4885 E-mail: edward.choi@choiandassociates.com - and - Alex M. Cha, Esq. J. Edward Kim, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF ALEX CHA 1055 W 7th St., FI. 28 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 351-3513 Facsimile: (213) 351-3514 A.B. GENERAL: "Lopez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------- VICTOR LOPEZ, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. A.B. GENERAL CONSTRUCTION AND REPAIRS, LLC and JEM CONSTRUCTION GROUP, LLC, the Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-00386 (S.D. Tex., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. According to the complaint, the Defendants violated the FLSA by employing Lopez and other similarly situated nonexempt employees "for a workweek longer than forty hours [but refusing to compensate them] for [their] employment in excess of [forty] hours at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at which [they are or were] employed." The Defendants violated the FLSA by failing to maintain accurate time and pay records for Lopez and other similarly situated nonexempt employees as required by 29 U.S.C. section 211(c) and 29 C.F.R. pt. 516.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Melissa Moore, Esq. Curt Hesse, Esq. Bridget Davidson, Esq. MOORE & ASSOCIATES Lyric Center 440 Louisiana Street, Suite 675 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (713) 222 6775 Facsimile: (713) 222 6739 AAMES SECURITY: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, Hernandez Says --------------------------------------------------------------- JORGE HERNANDEZ, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. RSG/AAMES SECURITY INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, the Defendants, Case No. BC693466 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover overtime wages and minimum wages under the California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a non-exempt employee from October 2013 through September 2015. Defendants maintained and maintain one manufacturing location in Signal Hill, California, with various primary departments, including: (i) diecast; (ii) sheet metal work; (iii) paint; (iv) research and development; (v) soldering; (vi) assembly; and (vii) consulting. At various times throughout his employment, Plaintiff worked in one or more of Defendants' primary departments. During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff was usually scheduled from anywhere from around 5:00-6:00 a.m. to around 5:00-5:30 p.m. However, Plaintiff would often commence work before his scheduled start time and would also often work beyond the scheduled end of his shift. Throughout Plaintiffs employment with Defendants, Defendants would keep track of Plaintiffs actual time worked on an electronic timekeeping system. However, the timekeeping system would unlawfully round/shave Plaintiffs work time down to the quarter hour such that Plaintiff would not be fully paid for all time worked. This time shaving/rounding practice utilized by Defendants was not-even handed over time and would round/shave in Defendants' favor such that Plaintiff was routinely underpaid for his time worked. For example, on May 1, 2015, Plaintiff clocked- in and commenced work at 4:51 a.m., and then clocked out for a meal period at 12:00 p.m. Thus, for that period of his shift that day, Plaintiff worked a total of 7 hours and 9 minutes, but the timekeeping system rounded/shaved that work period down to 7 hours thereby causing Plaintiff to lose 9 minutes of work time credit. Plaintiff then clocked back in at 12:24 p.m. and worked until 3:11 p.m. when he clocked out for the day. Thus, for this second work period of Plaintiffs day, he worked 2 hours and 47 minutes, but was only given credit for 2 hours and 45 minutes due to Defendants' timekeeping rounding/shaving practices. As a result of Defendants' practices, Plaintiff was only given credit and paid for 9 hours and 45 minutes of work time on May 1, 2015 despite the fact he was clocked-in and worked for 9 hours and 56 minutes. This timekeeping shaving practice by Defendants was habitual, and there are numerous other instances in Plaintiffs time records showing how his actual work time was rounded down in favor of Defendants, causing Plaintiff to be underpaid minimum wages for such time. RSG, Inc. is a manufacturer and has been in the fire safety business for over twenty years.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott M. Lidman, Esq. Elizabeth Nguyen, Esq. LIDMAN LAW, APC 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (424) 322 4772 Facsimile: (424) 322 4775 E-mail: slidman@lidmanlaw.com enguyen@lidmanlaw.com - and - Paul K. Haines, Esq. Tuvia Korobkin, Esq. JORGE HERNANDEZ HAINES LAW GROUP, APC 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (424) 292 2350 Facsimile: (424) 292 2355 E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com tkorobkin@haineslawgroup.com ABM AVIATION: Fails to Pay Wages & Overtime under Labor Code ------------------------------------------------------------ LAURA PETITT, an individual, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. ABM AVIATION, INC.; and DOES 1 thru 50, inclusive, the Defendant, Case No. BC693422 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages and/or overtime under California Labor Code. According to the complaint, from at least four years prior to the filing of this action continuing to the present, Defendant has had a consistent policy of failing to pay wages and/or overtime to all Proposed Class Members when they work more than eight hours in a day or forty hours in a week. Plaintiff and other Proposed Class Members were not properly compensated for wages and overtime because Defendant required work to be performed off the clock; failed to pay for compensable activities, including waiting for and riding a mandatory shuttle to and from the time clock facility; altered timesheets to make it appear that employees worked less than they actually did, and issued paychecks that compensated for less than the total hours worked. ABM supports commercial aviation. The Company offers an array of services such as cargo, cleaning, ground transportation, passenger services, ramp handling, security, and outsource business solution. Air Serv provides solutions throughout the United States and United Kingdom.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and all aggrieved employees: Eric B. Kingsley, Esq. Liane Katzenstein Ly., Esq. Ari J. Stiller, Esq. KINGSLEY & KINGSLEY, APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 990 8300 Facsimile: (818) 990 2903 E-mail: eric@kingsleykingsley.com liane@kingsleykingsley.com ari@kingsleykingsley.com ABS FINANCIAL: Faces "Carrasco" Suit over Club Membership Fees -------------------------------------------------------------- Calvin Carrasco, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ABS Financial Services Inc., and Blast Fitness Group, LLC, Case No. 18-115D (Mass. Cmmw., Jan. 22, 2018), is a class action suit against the Defendants for charging, collecting and retaining impermissible fees for health club services. ABS Financial Services Inc. is an Arkansas Corporation which maintains a principal office located in Sherwood Arkansas and registered agent located in Boston, MA. The Company is in the business of servicing multiple Massachusetts health club contracts and in the business of billing and collecting funds from residents throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Blast Fitness Group, LLC is a Massachusetts limited liability company which maintains a principal office located in Auburndale, MA and registered agent located in Westborough, Massachusetts. The Company was engaged in the business of maintaining health clubs throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael C. Forrest, Esq. Robert E. Mazow, Esq. Brian P. McNiff, Esq. David J. Relethford, Esq. FORREST LAMOTHE MAZOW MCCULLOUGH YASI & YASI, P.C. 2 Salem Green, Suite 2 Salem, MA 01970 Telephone: (617) 231-7829 E-mail: mforrest@forrestlamothe.com rmazow@forrestlamothe.com bmcniff@forrestlamothe.com drelethford@forrestlamothe.com ACCO ENGINEERED: Products Have Asbestos, "Barnhart" Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against ACCO ENGINEERED SYSTEMS, INC. The case is captioned as RONALD BARNHART and SUSAN BARNHART, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ACCO ENGINEERED SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Case No. BC690950 (Cal. Super., Jan. 19, 2018). According to the complaint, Plaintiffs have used, handled, and exposed to asbestos and asbestos-containing products and equipment. Plaintiffs suffer from malignant mesothelioma, caused by and exposure to asbestos and asbestos-containing products and equipment. ACCO Engineered Systems, Inc. designs, manufactures, and installs industrial, commercial, high-rise, residential, and institutional heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems. ACCO Engineered Systems, Inc. was formerly known as Air Conditioning Company. The company was founded in 1934 and is based in Glendale, California with general offices in Glendale, California; and principal offices in San Leandro, Sacramento, Orange County, Azusa, San Diego, Bakersfield, Fresno, Petaluma, Redding, Vacaville, California; Boise, Idaho; Las Vegas, Nevada; and Seattle, Washington.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kevin M. Loew, Esq. Andrew Seitz, Esq. WATERS KRAUS & PAUL 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1900 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (310) 414-8146 Facsimile: (310) 414-8156 E-mail: kloew@waterskraus.com aseitz@waterskraus.com ADVANCED MICRO: Sued over Selling of Defective Core Processor ------------------------------------------------------------- NATHAN BARNES and JONATHAN CASKEYMEDINA, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., the Defendant Case No. 5:18-cv- 00883-HRL (N.D. Cal., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks an order awarding declaratory relief and enjoining Defendant from continuing the unlawful, deceptive, harmful, and unfair business conduct and practices. The Plaintiffs bring this action against Defendant, individually, and on behalf of all persons who purchased or leased a defective AMD core processor. Founded in 1969, Defendant AMD is a global semiconductor company, with facilities around the world. As part of its business operations, AMD designs, manufactures, sells, and/or distributes electronic computer products, including the defective CPUs challenged herein. In particular, AMD's CPUs suffer from a critical security defect, discussed in further detail below, which causes the CPUs to be exposed to significant security vulnerabilities by allowing potential access to integral kernel data (the "Spectre Defect"). This access, in turn, can compromise highly confidential personal and corporate information, such as that related to passwords, social security numbers, and credit card numbers. The CPUs Defendant AMD designed, manufactured, distributed, and/or sold to Plaintiffs and Class members were not merchantable and were unfit for the ordinary and particular purposes for which such goods are used due to the Spectre Defect. Had Plaintiffs and the other Class members known of the Spectre Defect, they would not have purchased or leased, or would have paid substantially less for AMD's CPUs, or the respective devices they purchased or leased that contained AMD's CPUs. Having purchased or leased a CPU that suffers from the Spectre Defect, Plaintiffs and Class members suffered injury in fact and a loss of money or property as a result of Defendant's conduct in designing, manufacturing, distributing, and/or selling defective CPUs. Defendant AMD has failed to remedy this harm, and has earned and continues to earn substantial profit from selling defective CPUs.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the proposed class: Alison Chase, Esq. KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 801 Garden Street, Suite 301 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 Telephone: (805) 456 1496 Facsimile: (805) 456 1497 E-mail: achase@kellerrohrback.com - and - T. David Copley, Esq. Gretchen Freeman Cappio, Esq. Cari Campen Laufenberg, Esq. KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623 1900 Facsimile: (206) 623 3384 E-mail: dcopley@kellerrohrback.com gcappio@kellerrohrback.com claufenberg@kellerrohrback.com ADVANCED MICRO: Hauck Sues over Sale of Defective CPUs ------------------------------------------------------ DIANA HAUCK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 5:18-cv-00447-SVK (N.D. Cal., Jan. 19, 2018), alleges that Defendant breached its implied warranties by selling to the Plaintiffs and Class members defective AMD central processing units. Defendant's defective processors are incapable of operating at represented processing speeds without exposing users to at least one security vulnerability known as "Spectre" -- which allows programs to steal data which is currently processed on the computer. Specifically, the Spectre defect steals data from the memory of other applications running on a machine. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. operates as a semiconductor company worldwide. Its primarily offers x86 microprocessors as an accelerated processing unit (APU), chipsets, discrete graphics processing units (GPUs), and professional graphics; and server and embedded processors, and semi-custom System-on-Chip (SoC) products and technology for game consoles. The company sells its products through its direct sales force, independent distributors, and sales representatives. It primarily serves original equipment manufacturers, original design manufacturers, system builders, and independent distributors. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. was founded in 1969 and is headquartered in Sunnyvale, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Eli R. Greenstein, Esq. Jennifer L. Joost, Esq. Stacey M. Kaplan, Esq. KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP One Sansome Street, Suite 1850 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 400-3000 Facsimile: (415) 400-3001 E-mail: egreenstein@ktmc.com jjoost@ktmc.com skaplan@ktmc.com - and - Joseph H. Meltzer, Esq. Samantha Holbrook, Esq. KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 Telephone: (610) 667-7706 Facsimile: (610) 667-7056 E-mail: jmeltzer@ktmc.com sholbrook@ktmc.com - and - Stuart A. Davidson, Esq. Christopher C. Gold, Esq. Ricardo J. Marenco, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500 Boca Raton, FL 33432 Telephone: (561) 750-3000 Facsimile: (561) 750-3364 E-mail: sdavidson@rgrdlaw.com cgold@rgrdlaw.com rmarenco@rgrdlaw.com - and - James E. Cecchi, Esq. CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C. 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, NJ 07068 Telephone: (973) 994-1700 Facsimile: (973) 994-1744 E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyme.com - and - Christopher A. Seeger, Esq. SEEGER WEISS LLP 55 Challenger Road, 6 th Floor Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660 Telephone: (973) 639-9100 Facsimile: (973) 639-9393 E-mail: cseeger@seegerweiss.com AFLAC INCORPORATED: Martin Sues over Drop in Share Price -------------------------------------------------------- JAHMEL MARTIN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. AFLAC INCORPORATED, DANIEL P. AMOS and FREDERICK J. CRAWFORD, the Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv- 00031-CDL (M.D. Ga., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover compensable damages caused by Defendants' violations of federal securities laws and pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The case is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities, other than Defendants and their affiliates, who purchased or otherwise acquired Aflac common stock from February 27, 2013 through January 11, 2018, both dates inclusive. The Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Aflac hired its sales associates under false promises of high compensation packages and worklife- balance; (ii) Aflac misclassified its employees as independent contractors to reduce costs associated with unemployment insurance taxes and employment benefits; (iii) Aflac manipulated its average weekly producer equivalent metric to fabricate growth; (iv) consequently, Aflac violated its Code of Conduct and corporate social responsibility standards, and (v) as a result of the foregoing, Aflac's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. On January 11, 2018, post-market, the news publication The Intercept released a report revealing undisclosed lawsuits against Aflac for exploitation of workers, manipulation of accounting, and insider trading. On this news, Aflac's stock declined from a close price of $91.69 on January 11, 2018, to a close price of $84.94 on January 12, 2018, a drop of approximately - 7.36%. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages. Aflac Inc. is an American insurance company and is the largest provider of supplemental insurance in the United States. The company was founded in 1955 and is based in Columbus, Georgia.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David A. Bain, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF DAVID A. BAIN, LLC 1230 Peachtree Street, NE Suite 1050 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 724 9990 Facsimile: (404) 724 9986 E-mail: dbain@bain-law.com - and - Eduard Korsinsky, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP 30 Broad Street, 24th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 363 7500 Facsimile: (212) 363 7171 E-mail: ek@zlk.com AMENDOLA PIZZA: Fails to Pay Minimum Wage & OT, Eustate Says ------------------------------------------------------------ JOSE AGUSTIN ORTEGA EUSTATE, JULIO CESAR LARA, and VICTOR CASTILLO HIDALGO, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. AMENDOLA PIZZA TRATTORIA INC. (D/B/A AMENDOLA PIZZA), AMENDOLA'S PIZZARIA, INC. (D/B/A AMENDOLA PIZZA), MATTEO AMENDOLA, MATTHEW AMENDOLA, and SEVERIO AMENDOLA, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-01142 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law. The Plaintiffs are both current and former employees of Defendants Amendola Pizza Trattoria Inc. the Defendants own, operate, or control an Italian restaurant, located at 203 E Hartsdale Ave., Hartsdale, NY 10530 under the name "Amendola Pizza. The Plaintiffs have been employed as delivery workers at the restaurant located at 203 E Hartsdale Ave., Hartsdale, NY 10530. The Plaintiffs have ostensibly been employed as delivery workers. However, they have been required to spend a considerable part of their work day performing non-tipped duties, including but not limited to putting tables and chairs away at night, sweeping, assembling pizza boxes, cleaning the floor, cleaning the windows, folding cardboard boxes, cleaning the tables, placing the chairs on the tables when they mop the floor and placing them back on the floor, and shopping for supplies. The Plaintiffs have worked for Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of hours compensation for the hours that they have worked. Rather, Defendants have failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the hours worked, failed to pay Plaintiffs appropriately for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional overtime premium. Further, Defendants have failed to pay Plaintiffs the required "spread of hours" pay for any day in which they have had to work over 10 hours a day.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317 1200 Facsimile: (212) 317 1620 E-mail: faillace@emplymentcompliance.com AMERICAN FINANCE: Clair-Hibbard Balks at AR Global Merger Deal -------------------------------------------------------------- CAROLYN ST. CLAIR-HIBBARD, Individually and on behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN FINANCE TRUST, INC., AMERICAN FINANCE ADVISORS, LLC, AR GLOBAL INVESTMENTS, LLC, NICHOLAS S. SCHORSCH and WILLIAM M. KAHANE, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-01148 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover damages sustained as a result of AFIN's breaches of fiduciary duties and Defendants aiding and abetting of those breaches of fiduciary duty. The action is brought as a class action by Plaintiff and all other stock holders of common stock of American Finance Trust, Inc., against the Company and its controlling persons, for their violations of Section 14(a) and 20(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in connection with the issuance of materially defective proxy materials which resulted in the approval of a new Advisory Agreement between the Company and the Advisor which appropriated value from Plaintiff and shareholders and enriched the Advisor and other Defendants (except AFIN) unfairly, illegally, and inequitably, as part of merger between AFIN and other AR Global affiliate, Retail Centers of America. AFIN is designed to protect shareholder capital and provide attractive, stable cash distributions.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Olimpio Lee Squitieri, Esq. SQUITIERI & FEARSON, LLP 32 East 57th Street, 12th Floor New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 421 6492 Facsimile: (212) 421 6553 ARIES WORLDWIDE: "Miciak" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------ KELLY MICIAK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. ARIES WORLDWIDE LOGISTICS, LLC, the Defendant, Case No. 4:18-cv-0039 (S.D. Tex., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime pay and other damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, Miciak worked nights for Aries, 48 hours per week, tracking shipments and notifying customers of deliveries. Aries paid Miciak about $42,000 per year. Aries did not pay the additional time a half required by the FLSA for hours worked in excess of forty hours per week. Aries knew Miciak worked over forty hours per week. Aries knew Miciak was not paid overtime at time and one-half her regular rate of pay. Aries knew or showed reckless disregard for whether its payroll practices violated the minimum wage and overtime provisions of the FLSA. Accordingly, Aries willfully violated the FLSA's minimum wage and overtime provisions.[BN] Aries Worldwide, Inc. provides logistics services. The company offers freight, ocean shipping, cargo, brokerage, trade compliance, carting, packing, and warehousing services. The Plaintiff is represented by: David I. Moulton, Esq. Matthew S. Parmet, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877 8788 Telecopier: (713) 877 8065 E-mail: dmoulton@brucknerburch.com mparmet@brucknerburch.com ARGENTINA: Defaulted on Exchange Bonds, Draw Capital Suit Says -------------------------------------------------------------- DRAW Capital Partners, LLC, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. The Republic of Argentina, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-00548-JGK (S.D.N.Y., Jan 22, 2018), is a class action sought against the Defendant's failure to make contractually-mandated interest payments on certain bonds issued that are currently owned and held by Plaintiff. The Republic of Argentina is an independent state and a republic which occupies much of the southern part of South America. Argentina is bordered by the Andes mountain range and Chile in west, by Bolivia and Paraguay in north and by Brazil and Uruguay in north east and it borders the South Atlantic Ocean in east. Argentina has a population of 43.5 million people (in 2016); capital and largest city is Buenos Aires. Spoken language is Spanish. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan S. Sack, Esq. SACK & SACK, LLP 70 East 55th Street, 10 th Floor New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 702-9000 Facsimile: (212) 702-9702 AVIATION PORT: Faces "Hernandez" Suit in California --------------------------------------------------- Marcos Hernandez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Aviation Port Services LLC, Defendant, Case No. BCV-18-100141 (Cal. Super., Kern Cty., Jan. 19, 2018) The case is assigned to Hon. Judge David R. Lampe. Aviation Port Services L.L.C was founded in 2007. The company's line of business includes operating and maintaining airports and flying fields. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by Matthew E. Crawford, Esq. BALLARD POWER: Porwal Sues over Drop in Share Price --------------------------------------------------- ANUPAMA PORWAL, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. BALLARD POWER SYSTEMS INC., R. RANDALL MACEWEN and ANTHONY ROBERT GUGLIELMIN, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-01137 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The case is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class consisting of all persons other than Defendants who purchased or otherwise acquired Ballard's securities between September 30, 2016 and January 25, 2018, both dates inclusive, Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the Company had overstated the operations of its China- based partners Broad Ocean and Synergy JV; (ii) Ballard's technologies had not been deployed in China to the extent the Company had represented; and (iii) as a result of the foregoing, Ballard shares traded at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period, and class members suffered significant losses and damages. On January 25, 2018, Spruce Point Capital Management reported that Ballard overstated the operations of its China-based partners Broad Ocean and Synergy JV and said that conflicting to Ballard's public statements, "there are no demonstration lines operating in Guangdong and that no bus lines are in service in Sanshui or Yunfu." The report continued to state that "Ballard and local press releases indicate that [Broad Ocean customer] Foshan has produced 114 FCV buses, [but] a Foshan employee claimed that far fewer buses have been produced to date and only 11 are licensed." Following this news, Ballard's share price fell $0.52, or over 13%, to close at $3.27 on January 25, 2018. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages. Ballard designs, develops, manufactures, sells and service hydrogen fuel cells for a range of applications. The Company's products and services are used in many industries such as materials handling, residential cogeneration, backup power and transportation. Ballard has represented to investors that the Company has been deploying its technologies in various parts of China, in conjunction with local partners Broad Ocean and Synergy JV. Founded in 1979, the Company is based in Burnaby, Canada, and its stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Market under the ticker symbol "BLDP."[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. J. Alexander Hood II, Esq. Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 661 1100 Facsimile: (212) 661 8665 E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com ahood@pomlaw.com pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com - and - Peretz Bronstein, Esq. BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 697 6484 E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com BIG HEART: Dog Food Contains Pentobarbital, Mullins Claims ---------------------------------------------------------- MACLAIN MULLINS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. BIG HEART PET BRANDS, INC., a Delaware corporation, the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-00861 (N.D. Cal., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks an order enjoining Defendant from selling contaminated dog food until Pentobarbital is removed. The Defendant manufactures, markets, advertises, labels, distributes, and sells Gravy Train Chunks in Gravy with Beef Chunks, Gravy Train Chunks in Gravy with TBone Flavor Chunks, Gravy Train Chunks in Gravy with Chicken Chunks, Gravy Train Strips in Gravy Beef Strips and Gravy Train With Lamb & Rice Chunks. The Contaminated Dog Foods contain pentobarbital, a barbiturate drug used as a sedative and anesthetic for animals. Pentobarbital is now most commonly used to euthanizing dogs and cats. Pentobarbital residue from euthanized animals will continue to be present in pet food, even if it is rendered or canned at high temperature or pressure. Pentobarbital is routinely used to euthanize animals, and the most likely way it could get into dog food would be in rendered animal products. Rendered products come from a process that converts animal tissues to feed ingredients, including tissues from animals that have been euthanized, decomposed or were diseased. Pentobarbital from euthanized animals survives the rendering process and could be present in the rendered feed ingredients used in pet food. The FDA's testing of dry dog food confirmed some samples contained pentobarbital. The FDA concluded that pentobarbital was entering pet foods from euthanized, rendered cattle or horses because of the lack of dog and cat DNA. Despite its findings, the FDA has not aggressively taken action under FDCA, 342 (a)(1) or (5), against the pet food companies that it found to have used nonslaughtered animals and contain pentobarbital in their pet foods. Therefore, manufacturers in the pet food industry, including Defendant, have continued their illegal practice of using non-slaughtered animals that may contain poisonous substances, like pentobarbital, in their pet foods.8It is not acceptable to use animals euthanized with a chemical substance in pet food, and the detection of pentobarbital in pet food renders the product adulterated. According to the Plaintiff, Defendant is also knowingly, recklessly and/or negligently selling contaminated dog food containing pentobarbital, a substance largely used to euthanize animals. On February 8, 2018, it was reported on WJLA that an independent investigation determined that the Contaminated Dog Foods contained pentobarbital. The independent investigation utilized two independent labs and both showed the inclusion of pentobarbital the Contaminated Dog Foods. Defendant knew the real risk that pentobarbital may appear in the Contaminated Dog Foods if the manufacturing and sourcing were not properly monitored. Indeed, this is not the first time that the Gravy Train line of food has been determined to include pentobarbital: "Back in 2001, analyses by the FDA found residue of the sedative in popular brands like Nutro, Gravy Train and Kibbles 'n Bits. Consumers have increasingly become more aware and cautious about the products they purchase. Additionally, Defendant knew that a consumer would be feeding the Contaminated Dog Foods multiple times each day to his or her dog. This leads to repeated exposure of the barbiturate to the dog. Defendant wrongfully advertised and sold the Contaminated Dog Foods without any label or warning indicating to consumers that these products contained any level of Pentobarbital or that Defendant utilized animals that have been euthanized as a protein or meat by-product source. Instead, the advertising and labels intentionally omit any reference to the food being adulterated.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Rebecca A. Peterson, Esq. Robert K. Shelquist, 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: rkshelquist@locklaw.com rapeterson@locklaw.com - and - Kevin A. Seely, Esq. Steven M. Mckany, Esq. ROBBINS ARROYO LLP 600 B Street, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 525 3990 Facsimile: (619) 525 3991 E-mail: kseely@robbinsarroyo.com smckany@robbinsarroyo.com - and - Kevin A. Seely, Esq. Steven M. Mckany, Esq. ROBBINS ARROYO LLP 600 B Street, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 525-3990 Facsimile: (619) 525-3991 E-mail: kseely@robbinsarroyo.com smckany@robbinsarroyo.com - and - Daniel E. Gustafson, Esq. Karla M. Gluek, Esq. Joseph C. Bourne, Esq. Raina C. Borrelli GUSTAFSON GLUEK, PLLC Canadian Pacific Plaza 120 South 6th Street, Suite 2600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 333 8844 Facsimile: (612) 339 6622 E-mail: dgustafson@gustafsongluek.com kgluek@gustafsongluek.com jbourne@gustafsongluek.com rborrelli@gustafsongluek.com - and - Charles Laduca, Esq. Katherine Van Dyck, Esq. CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP 4725 Wisconsin Ave NW, Suite 200 Washington, DC 20016 Telephone: (202) 789 3960 Facsimile: (202) 789 1813 E-mail: kvandyck@cuneolaw.com charles@cuneolaw.com - and - Joseph Depalma, Esq. Susana Cruz Hodge, Esq. LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG, LLC 570 Broad Street, Suite 1201 Newark, NJ 07102 Telephone: (973) 623-3000 E-mail: jdepalma@litedepalma.com scruzhodge@litedepalma.com BIOTELEMETRY INC: "Matthews" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------------- WILLIAM MATTHEWS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. BIOTELEMETRY, INC., d/b/a CARDIONET, the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-00561-MMB (E.D. Pa., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and Class Plaintiffs regularly work more than 40 hours per week, but are not properly compensated for their work in that Plaintiff are not paid overtime premium at 4.5 times their regular rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek. BioTelemetry provides cardiac monitoring, cardiac monitoring device manufacturing, and centralized cardiac core laboratory services. The company operates in three segments: Healthcare, Research, and Technology.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Murphy, Esq. Michael Groh, Esq. MURPHY LAW GROUP Eight Penn Center, Suite 1803 1628 John F. Kennedy Blvd. Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: 267 273 1054 Facsimile: 215 525 021 E-mail: murphy@phillyempoymentlawyer.com CBRE GROUP: "Romo" Suit Moved to Central District of California --------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Ricardo Romo, on behalf of himself and on behalf of a Class of all other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. CBRE Group, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. 30-02017-00945702, was removed from the Orange County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Southern Division - Santa Ana) on Feb. 9. 2018. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:18-cv-00237 to the proceeding. CBRE Group, Inc. is the largest commercial real estate services and investment firm in the world. It is based in Los Angeles, California and operates more than 450 offices worldwide and has clients in more than 100 countries.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. Attorneys for CBRE Group, Inc.: Limore Torbati, Esq. SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER AND HAMPTON LLP 333 S Hope Street 43rd Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 617 4110 Facsimile: (213) 443 2802 E-mail: ltorbati@sheppardmullin.com COLETTA SPURLING: "Ornelas" Suit Moved to District of Arizona ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Jose Alonzo Pacheco Ornelas, Jose Del Carmen Camacho Jimenez, Leonardo Cax Perez, Victorino Castaneda Martinez, and single man, and a class of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Coletta Spurling Incorporated, doing business as: Los Olivos Hand Car Wash an Arizona corporation; Coletta Spurling, a single woman; and Unknown Parties John Does 1-5, the Defendants, Case No. CV2018- 000185, was removed from the Maricopa County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the District Of Arizona (Phoenix Division) on Feb. 9. 2018. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-00465-DGC to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge David G Campbell. Coletta Spurling Inc is in the New and Used Car Dealers business.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jarrett Joshua Haskovec, Esq. Nicholas Jason Enoch, Esq. Stanley Lubin, Esq. LUBIN & ENOCH PC 349 N 4th Ave Phoenix, AZ 85003 Telephone: (602) 234 0008 Facsimile: (602) 626 3586 E-mail: jarrett@lubinandenoch.com nicholas.enoch@azbar.org stan@lubinandenoch.com Attorneys for Defendants: Cory G Walker, Esq. Robert Shawn Oller, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON PC 2425 E Camelback Rd., Ste. 900 Phoenix, AZ 85016-2907 Telephone: (602) 474 3616 Facsimile: (602) 957 1801 E-mail: cgwalker@littler.com soller@littler.com COMERICA BANK: Faces "Prince" Suit over Woodbridge Collapse ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Comerica Bank. The case is captioned as Robert J. Prince, Lilly Shirley, and Joseph C. Hull, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs v. Comerica Bank, the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-CV-00430-JFW-JC (C.D. Cal., Jan. 17, 2018). Plaintiffs purchased investments from the Woodridge Group of Companies. Unknown to Plaintiffs, Woodridge was a fraud made possible by Comerica having aided and abetted the Ponzi scheme that collapsed when Woodridge and most of its affiliated companies filed for bankruptcy in December 2017, causing staggering losses for Plaintiffs. Comerica maintained Woodridge's bank accounts throughout the fraud and helped facilitate and substantially assist and had knowledge of Woodridge's fraudulent activities. Comerica Bank provides personal and business banking products and services. Comerica Bank was formerly known as Comerica Bank- Detroit and changed its name to Comerica Bank in May 1991. The company was founded in 1849 and is based in Dallas, Texas with locations in Arizona, California, Florida, Michigan, and other states in the United States. Comerica Bank operates as a subsidiary of Comerica Incorporated. [BN] The Plaintiffs is represented by: Adam Wolf, Esq. PEIFFER ROSCA WOLF ABDULLAH CARR & KANE. A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 9696 Culver Blvd, Suite 301 Culver City, CA 90232 Telephone: (415)766-3534 E-mail: awolf@prwlegal.com arosca@prwlegal.com - and - Alan A. Rosca, Esq. PEIFFER ROSCA WOLF ABDULLAH CARR & KANE. A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 1422 Euclid Avenue, Suite 1610 Cleveland, OH 90232 Telephone: (216)589-9280 E-mail: arosca@prwlegal.com - and - Michael C. Dell'Angelo, Esq. Barbara A. Podell, Esq. BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215)875-3000 Facsimile: (215)875-4604 E-mail: mdellangelo@bm.net bpodell@bm.net CREDIT SUISSE: Refuses to Pay Deferred Compensation, Laver Says --------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTOPHER M. LAVER, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA), LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-00828 (N.D. Cal., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover damages, restitution, disgorgement, specific performance, and other appropriate equitable and injunctive relief caused by Credit Suisse's refusal to pay many millions of dollars in owed "deferred compensation" to its financial adviser employees following Credit Suisse's decision to shutter its financial advisory operations in late 2015. According to the complaint, for many years, Credit Suisse provided financial advisory services to clients throughout the United States, providing these services through a team of financial advisers in Credit Suisse's "Private Banking Division." The compensation that Credit Suisse agreed to pay the advisers consisted of multiple components. One of the primary components was "deferred compensation," whereby a significant portion of the advisers' compensation for a given year is paid on a deferred basis in subsequent years pursuant to the terms of Credit Suisse's form contracts. Under the contracts, the deferred compensation vests and is paid under a specified schedule, and is necessarily owed by Credit Suisse to the adviser except under limited, specified circumstances that are set forth in the contract -- specifically, if the adviser voluntarily "resigns" from Credit Suisse or the adviser is terminated by Credit Suisse for cause, neither of which occurred here. In October 2015, Credit Suisse announced that it was completely shuttering its financial advisory operations effective within a few months, leaving hundreds of Credit Suisse financial advisers out of a job. Even though Credit Suisse's advisory operations ceased operating altogether leaving advisors with no choice but to find new jobs, and even though Credit Suisse made clear to the advisers that they needed to find new jobs, when Plaintiff and other advisers joined new firms following the closure announcement, Credit Suisse took the erroneous position that the advisors voluntarily "resigned" from Credit Suisse and their remaining deferred compensation was thus forfeited under the contract. The lone exception that Credit Suisse made to this policy was if an adviser was hired by Wells Fargo, with whom Credit Suisse had entered into a "recruiting agreement," in which case they were permitted to retain some of their deferred compensation entitlements. Otherwise, all outstanding earned deferred compensation was cancelled and denied entirely by Credit Suisse. Through this "resignation" faáade, Credit Suisse is reported to have improperly retained as much as $300 million in deferred compensation owed to the advisers. Credit Suisse reaped the benefits of Plaintiff's and the Class' work over many years, including through substantial revenues Credit Suisse generated through their work. The deferred compensation at issue here was earned and is owed. Credit Suisse should not be able to avoid its obligation to compensate the advisers fully and fairly by claiming they "resigned" when, in fact, Credit Suisse simply ceased operating this business. Nor should Plaintiff and the Class be deprived of their earned deferred compensation because of Credit Suisse's unilateral business decision to exit the market and eliminate their jobs.[BN] Attorneys for Christopher M. Laver: Robert J. Nelson, Esq. Roger N. Heller, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: (415) 956 1000 Facsimile: (415) 956 1008 E-mail: rnelson@lchb.com rheller@lchb.com - and - Taras Kick, Esq. THE KICK LAW FIRM, APC 815 Moraga Drive Los Angeles, CA 90049 Telephone: (310) 395 2988 Facsimile: (310) 395 2088 E-mail: taras@kicklawfirm.com - and - Jeffrey K. Riffer, Esq. Julie Z. Kimball, Esq. ELKINS KALT WEINTRAUB REUBEN GARTSIDE LLP 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2700 Los Angeles, CA 90067-3202 Telephone: (310) 746 4400 Facsimile: (310) 746 4499 E-mail: jriffer@elkinskalt.com jkimball@elkinskalt.com CYPRESS COMMUNICATIONS: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Bruton" Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- LEROY BRUTON, JR., on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CYPRESS COMMUNICATIONS, INC.; CYPRESS COMMUNICATIONS OF S. FLORIDA, INC.; and DEAN R. PEZZA, Defendants, Case No. CACE-18-001577 (Fla. Cir., Broward Cty., Jan 19, 2018) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, declaratory relief, and attorney's fees and costs. Plaintiff alleged that from July 2016 to June 2017, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff at a rate of one and one-half times of the regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a single work week. Mr. Pezza is the owner and manager of the Defendants. Mr. Bruton was hired by the Defendants on July 2016 and work as a piece rate cable technician. Cypress Communications, Inc. provides data, voice, and video communications services to businesses located in commercial office buildings in metropolitan markets in the United States. The company was incorporated in 1995 and is based in Atlanta, Georgia. As of February 21, 2002, Cypress Communications, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of U.S. RealTel, Inc.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Noah E. Storch, Esq. RICHARD CELLER LEGAL, P.A. 7450 Griffin Road, Suite 230 Davie, FL 33314 Telephone: (866) 344-9243 Facsimile: (954) 337-2771 DALLAS INTERNATIONAL: "Patterson" Suit Seeks OT Pay under FLSA -------------------------------------------------------------- DOUGLAS PATTERSON, Individually, and ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED UNDER 29 USC 216(b), the Plaintiffs, v. DALLAS/FORT WORTH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT BOARD , the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-00307-N (N.D. Tex., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover overtime pay pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The Plaintiff and Class Members are those persons who are current and former non-exempt Emergency Medical Technicians or Paramedics who worked for Defendant and were paid hourly but were not paid time-and-one-half for all hours worked over 40 in each workweek. They routinely worked more than 40 hours in a single workweek and were not paid overtime at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate for all hours worked over 40 in a single workweek. The Defendants knowingly and deliberately failed to compensate Plaintiff and Class Members for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The DFW Airport Board of Directors is a semi-autonomous body charged with governing DFW International Airport.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Drew N. Herrmann, Esq. Pamela G. Herrmann, Esq. HERRMANN LAW, PLLC 777 Main St., Suite 600 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Telephone: (817) 479 9229 Facsimile: (817) 260 0801 E-mail: drew@herrmannlaw.com pamela@herrmannlaw.com DELTA AIR: "Schofield" Suit Removed to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The class action lawsuit titled Joseph L. Schofield, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., was removed from the San Francisco Superior Court (Case No. CGC-17-12032149), to the Northern District of California, Case No. 3:18-cv-00382-EMC, on Jan. 17, 2018. The case is assigned to Judge Edward M. Chen. Delta Air Lines, Inc. provides scheduled air transportation for passengers and cargo in the United States and internationally. The company operates through two segments, Airline and Refinery. Its route network is centered around a system of hubs, international gateways, and airports in Amsterdam, Atlanta, Boston, Detroit, London-Heathrow, Los Angeles, Minneapolis-St. Paul, New York-LaGuardia, New York-JFK, Paris-Charles de Gaulle, Salt Lake City, Seattle, and Tokyo-Narita. The company sells its tickets through various distribution channels, including delta.com and mobile applications/Web, telephone reservations, online travel agencies, traditional brick and mortar, and other agencies. It also provides aircraft maintenance, repair, and overhaul services; staffing, and professional security and training services, as well as aviation solutions to third parties; vacation packages to third-party consumers; and aircraft charters, and aircraft management and programs. As of February 2, 2017, the company operated a fleet of approximately 800 aircraft. Delta Air Lines, Inc. was founded in 1924 and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chaim Shaun Setareh, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 907 Beverly Hills, CA 90212-2937 Telephone: (310) 888-7771 Facsimile: (310) 888-0109 E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com - and - Thomas Alistair Segal, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 907 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (310) 888-7771 Facsimile: (310) 888-0109 E-mail: thomas@setarehlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Andrew Paul Frederick, Esq. MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1400 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304 Telephone: (650) 843-7565 Facsimile: (650) 843-4001 E-mail: andrew.frederick@morganlewis.com - and - Maureen Nicole Beckley, Esq. MORGAN LEWIS AND BOCKIUS LLP One Market Spear Street Tower San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 442-1470 E-mail: maureen.beckley@morganlewis.com - and - Robert Jon Hendricks, Esq. MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP One Market Spear Street Tower San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone (415) 442-1000 Facsimile: (415) 442-1001 E-mail: rj.hendricks@morganlewis.com DEZIGNS CONSTRUCTION: Garcia Sues over Wage and Hour Laws --------------------------------------------------------- SERGIO GARCIA, On behalf of himself and all other similarly situated persons, the Plaintiffs, v. DEZIGNS CONSTRUCTION, INC., ROSEANNE HARTLEY, and ABC CORPS. 1-10 & JANE & JOHN DOES 1-10, the Defendants, Case No. CAM-L-000559-18 (N.J. Super. Ct., Middlesex County, Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover overtime pay under New Jersey Wage and Hour Law. The Plaintiff Sergio has resided in the City of Camden in the County of Camden in the State of New Jersey at all times relevant to this matter and was employed by Defendant Dezigns Construction, Inc. from March of 2007 through January 26, 2018. The Defendant is a commercial roofing contractor that provides commercial and industrial roofing maintenance, restoration, repair and replacement services. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and the Class Members routinely worked far in excess of 40 hours per week for Defendant DCI and were not paid the appropriate or lawful overtime rate under the NJWHL when they worked over 40 hours per week. The Defendant DCIs ongoing illegal policy of failing to pay Plaintiff and the Class Members for time worked has resulted in Plaintiff and the Class Members being denied substantial legally required compensation and/or overtime payments given that the Plaintiff and the Class Members routinely worked in excess of 40 hours per week.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and All Other Similarly Situated Persons: Ravi Sattiraju, Esq. THE SATTIRAJU LAW FIRM, P.C. 116 Village Boulevard, Suite 200 Princeton, NJ 08540 Telephone: (609) 799 1266 Facsimile: (609) 228 5649 E-mail: rsattiraju@sattirajulawfirm.com DIGNITY HEALTH: Ruiz Calls Debt Collection "Wrongful" ----------------------------------------------------- Pedro Ruiz, individually and on behalf of a similarly situated Class v. Dignity Health and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. CGC-18-563863 (Cal. Super., Jan. 17, 2018), seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. According to the complaint, Plaintiff received emergency and medical care at one of the Defendant's hospitals. After Defendant's managed "care plans" paid an amount for that care accepted by Dignity, said patients have been personally charged and pursued wrongfully for recovery of amounts in excess of that reimbursed by the patients' care plans. Dignity Health owns and operates healthcare facilities in California, Arizona, and Nevada. The company provides inpatient, outpatient, sub-acute, and home healthcare services, as well as physician services through Dignity Health Medical Foundation and other affiliated medical groups. It also offers occupational health and urgent care services. The company was formerly known as Catholic Healthcare West and changed its name to Dignity Health in January 2012. Dignity Health was founded in 1986 and is headquartered in San Francisco, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kirk J. Wolden, Esq. CARTER WOLDEN CURTIS LLP 1111 Exposition Blvd., Suite 602 Sacramento, CA 95815 Telephone: (916) 567-1111 Facsimile: (916) 567-1112 DIN TAI: "Ortiz" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code --------------------------------------------------------- JOSE ORTIZ, as an individual and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. DIN TAI FUNG RESTAURANT, INC., a California Corporation; DIN TAI FUNG (DEL AMO) RESTAURANT, LLC; a California Limited Liability Corporation; DIN TAI FUNG (GLENDALE) RESTAURANT, LLC; a California Limited Liability Corporation; DIN TAI FUNG (SF) RESTAURANT, LLC; a California Limited Liability Corporation; DIN TAI FUNG (SANTA ANITA) RESTAURANT, LLC; a California Limited Liability Corporation; DIN TAI FUNG (SOUTH COAST) RESTAURANT, LLC; a California Limited Liability Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, Inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. BC693150 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages caused by systemic illegal employment practices of Defendants resulting in violations of the California Labor Code. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendants, joint and severally, have acted intentionally and with deliberate indifference and conscious disregard to the rights of all employees in receiving all lawful wages, gratuities, and meal and rest periods. The policies, practices and customs of Defendants resulted in unjust enrichment of Defendants and an unfair business advantage over businesses that routinely adhere to the strictures of the California Labor Code, Business & Professions Code and applicable IWC wage orders. Din Tai Fung is a restaurant originating in Taiwan, specializing in xiao long bao (soup dumplings).[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jennifer Kramer, Esq. JENNIFER KRAMER LEGAL, APC 5015 Eagle Rock Blvd., Suite 202 Los Angeles, CA 90041 Telephone: (213) 955 0200 Facsimile: (213) 226 4358 E-mail: iennifer@laborlex.com - and - Omar Anorga, Esq. THE ANORGA LAW FIRM, INC. 155 N Lake Ave Ste 800 Pasadena, CA 91101 Telephone: (213) 489 1271 Facsimile: (213) 223 6811 E-mail: Omar@Anorgalaw.com DIVINE MIRACLES: "Hohensee" Suit Seeks Minimum Pay, OT under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------------- LYDIA HOHENSEE, on behalf of herself and other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. DIVINE MIRACLES, INC. AND DONYETTE WILLIAMS, the Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-01287 (E.D. La., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover minimum wages and overtime wages, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, Divine Miracles operates a home health agency. Defendants have engaged and continue to engage in a centralized, widespread pattern and practice of FLSA violations, violations of Louisiana law, and intentional schemes designed to undermine and avoid the minimum wage and overtime pay provisions of the FLSA on a systemic, corporate-wide basis.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: George B. Recile, Esq. Preston L. Hayes, Esq. Ryan P. Monsour, Esq. Matthew A. Sherman, Esq. Barry W. Sartin, Esq. Patrick R. Follette, Esq. CHEHARDY, SHERMAN, WILLIAMS, MURRAY, RECILE, STAKELUM & HAYES, L.L.P. One Galleria Boulevard, Suite 1100 Metairie, LA 70001 Telephone: (504) 833 5600 Facsimile: (504) 613 4528 DOCTOR'S MEDICAL: "Valencia" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------------- EDGAR VALENCIA and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C. 216(b), the Plaintiff, v. DOCTOR'S MEDICAL CENTER, INC., and VENTURA DE PAZ, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-20524-KMW (S.D. Fla., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover overtime pay pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, it is believed that the Defendants have employed several other similarly situated employees like Plaintiff who have not been paid overtime and/or minimum wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours weekly from the filing of this complaint back three years. The Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a patient transport driver from on or about October 5, 2014 through on or about September 30, 2016. Defendant's business activities involve those to which the Fair Labor Standards Act applies. Doctor's Medical Centers is a primary care provider company that offers an innovative and integrated approach of care to patients.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J.H. Zidell, Esq. J.H. ZIDELL, P.A. 300 71st Street, Suite 605 Miami Beach, FL 33141 Telephone: (305) 865 6766 Facsimile: (305) 865 7167 E.J.'S NORTH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Sandoval" Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- FRANCISCO SANDOVAL, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. E.J.'S NORTH, L.L.C.; E.J. MALLOY'S NORTH, LLC; E.J. MALLOY'S SOUTH, LLC; EJ MALLOY'S EAST, LLC; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC690979 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 19, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for unpaid regular hours, overtime hours, minimum wages, wages for missed meal and rest periods. Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants in the year 2000 to July 2017, as an hourly, non-exempt employee in the position of general laborer and cook providing food preparation services at E.J. Malloy's restaurant and bar. E.J.'S NORTH, L.L.C., is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and registered to do business in the state of California. E.J. MALLOY'S NORTH, LLC, is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and registered to do business in the state of California. E.J. MALLOY'S SOUTH, LLC, is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and registered to do business in the state of California. EJ MALLOY'S EAST, LLC, is a limited liability company organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and registered to do business in the state of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Rob Hennig, Esq., Esq. HENNIG RUIZ P.C. 1925 Century Park East, Suite 1960 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 843-0020 Facsimile: (310) 843-9150 E-mail: rob@emplovmentattomevla.com - and - Pouya B. Chami, Esq. CHAMI LAW, PC 11845 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Telephone: (310) 484-5001 Facsimile: (310) 484-5002 E-mail: pchami@chamilaw.com EASTWESTPROTO INC: Parties Agree to Remand "Mason" Suit ------------------------------------------------------- The parties in the case, Michelle Mason, individually and on behalf of all employees similarly situated v. EastWestProto, Inc., doing business as Lifeline Ambulance, A California Corporation, Case No. 2:18-cv-00415 (C.D. Cal.), have entered a Joint Stipulation to remand the case to California state court. Plaintiff filed the Joint Stipulation on Feb. 15. The case was removed from the Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC679520, to the to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Case No. 2:18-CV-00415-JFW-JEM (C.D. Cal.), on Jan. 17, 2018, and assigned to Judge John F. Walter, and referred to Magistrate Judge John E. McDermott. EastWestProto, Inc. doing business business as Lifeline Ambulance, A California Corporation, was founded in 2002. The company's line of business includes providing local passenger transportation services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: George Andrew Aloupas, Esq. Richard E. Quintilone II, Esq. QUINTILONE AND ASSOCIATES 22974 El Toro Road Suite 100 Lake Forest, CA 92630 Telephone: (949) 458-9675 Facsimile: (949) 458-9679 E-mail: gaa@quintlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Maxim Vaynerov, Esq. BARNHILL AND VAYNEROV LLP 11400 West Olympic Boulevard Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Telephone: (310) 943-8989 Facsimile: (310) 943-8998 E-mail: vaynerov@bv-llp.com - and - Lewis Richard Walton, Jr. WALTON AND WALTON LLP 4640 Admiralty Way 5th Floor Marina del Rey, CA 90292 Telephone: (310) 496-5835 Facsimile: (310) 464-3057 E-mail: rwalton@taxtriallawyers.com ENVISION HEALTHCARE: Quitly Sues over ER Physician Services ----------------------------------------------------------- STEPHEN M. QUILTY, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. ENVISION HEALTCARE CORP., EMCARE HOLDINGS INC., and BAXLEY EMERGENCY PHYSICIANS, LLC, the Defendants, Case No. 8:18-cv-00341-VMC-CPT (M.D. Fla., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover damages and injunctive relief arising from Defendants' unlawful and deceptive acts and practices in the Florida healthcare market for emergency room physician services. Plaintiff and the proposed Class are commercially insured consumers of ED healthcare services who sought emergency medical care from physicians employed by, or affiliated with, Defendants. According to the complaint, since at least 2011, Defendants have engaged in a deliberate corporate scheme to raise revenue and profits by refusing to contract with many commercial payors throughout Florida. Without network contracts, Defendants may set any price for services rendered. Defendants initially seek reimbursement for services from the patient's insurance company. Some payors may offer Defendants the "usual and customary" rates -- i.e. the rates typically paid by that insurer to in-network providers in that geography for similarly services rendered -- while other payors may refuse to reimburse Defendants for any costs because there was no network contract.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marc A. Wites, Esq. Thomas B. Rogers, Esq. WITES LAW FIRM 4400 N. Federal Highway Lighthouse Point, FL 33064 Telephone: (954) 933 4400 E-mail: mwites@witeslaw.com - and -- Laurence D. King, Esq. Matthew George, Esq. Frederic S. Fox, Esq. Donald R. Hall, Jr., Esq. Aaron Schwartz, Esq. KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP 350 Sansome Street, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 772 4700 Facsimile: (415) 772 4707 E-mail: lking@kalanfox.com mgeorge@kalanfox.com ffox@kalanfox.com dhall@kalanfox.com aschwartz@kalanfox.com EPSI INC: Underpays Pizza Delivery Drivers, "Gentry" Suit Says -------------------------------------------------------------- BRUCE GENTRY, the Plaintiff, v. EPSI, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 5:18-cv-00020-RWS (E.D. Tex., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendant operates approximately 27 Domino's Pizza franchise stores in Texas and one Domino's Pizza store in Arkansas. The Defendant employs delivery drivers who spend at least 20% of their work time performing non-tipped duties. But, Defendant pays its delivery drivers a sub-minimum tipped wage for all of their work time in violation of the U.S. Department of Labor's "20% rule." The Defendant's delivery drivers drive their own automobiles to deliver pizza and other food items to Defendant's customers. Instead of reimbursing its delivery drivers for the reasonably approximate costs of the business use of their vehicles, Defendant utilizes a flawed method to determine reimbursement rates that provides such an unreasonably low rate beneath any reasonable approximation of the expenses they incur that the drivers' unreimbursed expenses cause their wages to fall below the federal minimum wage during some or all workweeks. EPSI Inc. was founded in 1989. The company's line of business includes the retail sale of prepared foods and drinks for on- premise consumption.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jesse Forester, Esq. Forester Haynie PLLC 1701 N. Market St. #210 Dallas, TX 75202 Telephone: (214) 210 2100 E-mail: jay@foresterhaynie.com - and - Richard M Paul III, Esq. PAUL LLP 601 Walnut Street, Suite 300 Kansas City, MO 64106 Telephone: (816) 984 8100 E-mail: Rick@PaulLLP.com - and - Mark A. Potashnick, Esq. WEINHAUS & POTASHNICK 11500 Olive Blvd., Suite 133 St. Louis, MO 63141 Telephone: (314) 997 9150 E-mail: markp@wp-attorneys.com EQUIFAX INC: Directors Face Derivative Suit in N.D. Georgia ----------------------------------------------------------- ROBERT L. BAX, derivatively on behalf of EQUIFAX, INC., the Plaintiff v. RICHARD F. SMITH, JOHN W. GAMBLE, JR., JOHN J. KELLEY, III, RODOLFO O. PLODER, JOSEPH M. LOUGHRAN, III, ROBERT D. DALEO, WALTER W. DRIVER, JR., MARK L. FEIDLER, G. THOMAS HOUGH, L. PHILLIP HUMANN, ROBERT D. MARCUS, SIRI S. MARSHALL, JOHN A. MCKINLEY, ELANE B. STOCK, MARK B. TEMPLETON, and EQUIFAX, INC., the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00317-TWT (N.D. Ga., Jan. 22, 2018) is a derivative action filed against the Individual Defendants for their failure to prevent or protect data breaches. Through this derivative action, Plaintiff brings claims against the Individual Defendants and seeks to remedy the harm suffered by Equifax and its shareholders in connection with the Data Breach, the most damaging and far-reaching compromise of consumer financial data in known history. Holding executives such as the Individual Defendants personally liable for the harm inflicted on Equifax and its shareholders would incentivize others to enact adequate measures to protect personal identifying information going forward, including investing in staffing and technology sufficient to safeguard the critically sensitive information they've accepted responsibility for protecting. The Individual Defendants knowingly and completely failed to undertake their responsibilities by consciously failing to oversee their data security oversight systems and controls. Despite knowing these systems were inadequate at detecting, preventing, and resolving data breaches, the Individual Defendants demonstrated a complete disregard for securing the very sensitive consumer data that drives their core businesses. Equifax Inc. provides information solutions and human resources business process outsourcing services for businesses, governments, and consumers. It operates in the United States, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay, Peru, Portugal, the Republic of Ireland, Spain, the United Kingdom, Cambodia, Malaysia, India, Russia, and Singapore. Equifax Inc. was founded in 1899 and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael I. Fistel, Jr., Esq. William W. Stone, Esq. David A. Weisz, Esq. JOHNSON FISTEL, LLP 40 Powder Springs Street Marietta, GA 30064 Telephone: (770) 200-3104 Facsimile: (770) 200-3101 E-mail: michaelf@johnsonfistel.com williams@johnsonfistel.com davidw@johnsonfistel.com EQUIFAX INC: Credit Unions Sue over Security Breach --------------------------------------------------- FIRST FINANCIAL CREDIT UNION, HALLIBURTON EMPLOYEES' FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, SEVEN SEVENTEEN CREDIT UNION, individually and on behalf of a class of all similarly situated financial institutions, and CREDIT UNION LEAGUE OF CONNECTICUT, each as an association on behalf of its members, Plaintiffs v. Equifax Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-00315 (N.D. Ga., Jan. 22, 2018), is a class action brought against the Defendant's failure to safeguard the financial institutions' customers' highly sensitive, personally identifiable information, including, but not limited to, names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and driver's license numbers and payment card data, including, but not limited to, credit and debit card numbers, primary account numbers, card verification value numbers, expiration dates and zip codes. Equifax Inc. provides information solutions and human resources business process outsourcing services for businesses, governments, and consumers. It operates in the United States, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay, Peru, Portugal, the Republic of Ireland, Spain, the United Kingdom, Cambodia, Malaysia, India, Russia, and Singapore. Equifax Inc. was founded in 1899 and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas A. Withers, Esq. GILLEN WITHERS & LAKE, LLC 8 E. Liberty Street Savannah, GA 31401 Telephone: (912) 447-8400 Facsimile: (912) 629-6347 E-mail: twithers@gwllawfirm.com - and - Anthony C. Lake, Esq. Craig A. Gillen, Esq. GILLEN WITHERS & LAKE, LLC 3490 Piedmont Road, N.E. Atlanta, GA 30305 Telephone: (404) 842-9700 Facsimile: (404) 842-9750 E-mail: aclake@gwllawfirm.com - and - Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq. Erin Green Comite, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP 230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10169 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 Facsimile: (212) 223-6334 E-mail: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com ecomite@ scott-scott.com - and - Gary F. Lynch, Esq. Jamisen A. Etzel, Esq. Bryan A. Fox, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 322-9243 Facsimile: (412) 231-0246 E-mail: glynch@carlsonlynch.com jetzel@carlsonlynch.com bfox@carlsonlynch.com - and - Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq. Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Ave. S., Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Facsimile: (612-339-0981) E-mail: khriebel@locklaw.com kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com - and - Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq. CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE 17 Washington Avenue North, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-7300 Facsimile: (612) 336-2940 E-mail: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com - and - Arthur M. Murray, Esq. Stephen B. Murray, Sr., Esq. Caroline W. Thomas, Esq. MURRAY LAW FIRM 650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 525-8100 Facsimile: (504) 584-5249 E-mail: amurray@murray-lawfirm.com smurray@murray-lawfirm.com cthomas@murray-lawfirm.com - and - Brian C. Gudmundson, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED LLP 1100 IDS Center, 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 341-0400 Facsimile: (612) 341-0844 E-mail: brian.gudmundson@zimmreed.com - and - Charles H. Van Horn BERMAN FINK VANHORN P.C. 3475 Piedmont Road, Suite 1100 Atlanta, GA 30305 Telephone: (404) 261-7711 Facsimile: (404) 233-1943 E-mail: cvanhorn@bfvlaw.com EQUIFAX INC: Faces "Bank" Suit over Security Breach --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equifax Inc. The case is captioned as Jonah Bank of Wyoming, individually and on behalf of a class of all similarly situated financial lending, deposit acceptance and payment card issuing institutions, Plaintiff v. Equifax Inc., Defendant, Case No. Case 1:18-cv- 00316-TWT (N.D. Ga., Jan. 22, 2018). Plaintiff alleged that Defendant failed to safeguard the financial institutions' customers' highly sensitive, personally identifiable information, including, but not limited to, names, Social Security numbers, birth dates, addresses, and driver's license numbers and payment card data, including, but not limited to, credit and debit card numbers, primary account numbers, card verification value numbers, expiration dates and zip codes. Equifax Inc. provides information solutions and human resources business process outsourcing services for businesses, governments, and consumers. It operates in the United States, Canada, Argentina, Brazil, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Mexico, Paraguay, Uruguay, Peru, Portugal, the Republic of Ireland, Spain, the United Kingdom, Cambodia, Malaysia, India, Russia, and Singapore. Equifax Inc. was founded in 1899 and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas A. Withers, Esq. GILLEN WITHERS & LAKE, LLC 8 E. Liberty Street Savannah, GA 31401 Telephone: (912) 447-8400 Facsimile: (912) 629-6347 E-mail: twithers@gwllawfirm.com - and - Anthony C. Lake, Esq. Craig A. Gillen, Esq. GILLEN WITHERS & LAKE, LLC 3490 Piedmont Road, N.E. Atlanta, GA 30305 Telephone: (404) 842-9700 Facsimile: (404) 842-9750 E-mail: aclake@gwllawfirm.com - and - Gary F. Lynch, Esq. Jamisen A. Etzel, Esq. Bryan A. Fox, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 322-9243 Facsimile: (412) 231-0246 E-mail: glynch@carlsonlynch.com jetzel@carlsonlynch.com bfox@carlsonlynch.com - and - Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq. Erin Green Comite, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP 230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10169 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 Facsimile: (212) 223-6334 E-mail: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com ecomite@ scott-scott.com - and - Arthur M. Murray, Esq. Stephen B. Murray, Sr., Esq. Caroline W. Thomas, Esq. MURRAY LAW FIRM 650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 525-8100 Facsimile: (504) 584-5249 E-mail: amurray@murray-lawfirm.com smurray@murray-lawfirm.com cthomas@murray-lawfirm.com - and - Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq. Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Ave. S., Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-6900 Facsimile: (612-339-0981) E-mail: khriebel@locklaw.com kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com - and - Brian C. Gudmundson, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED LLP 1100 IDS Center, 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 341-0400 Facsimile: (612) 341-0844 E-mail: brian.gudmundson@zimmreed.com - and - Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq. CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE 17 Washington Avenue North, Suite 300 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-7300 Facsimile: (612) 336-2940 E-mail: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com - and - Charles H. Van Horn BERMAN FINK VANHORN P.C. 3475 Piedmont Road, Suite 1100 Atlanta, GA 30305 Telephone: (404) 261-7711 Facsimile: (404) 233-1943 E-mail: cvanhorn@bfvlaw.com EQUINOX FITNESS: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, Wesley Says ------------------------------------------------------------- RONALD EDWARD WESLEY, an individual, the Plaintiff, v. EQUINOX FITNESS BEVERLY HILLS, INC., a California Corporation; EQUINOX FITNESS GLENDALE, INC., a California Corporation; EQUINOX HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware Corporation; DOES 1-10, business entities, forms unknown; DOES 11-20, individuals; and DOES 21-30, inclusive, Case No. BC 693601 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover overtime wages and minimum wages under the California labor Code. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff regularly work/worked more than 40 hours per week and/or eight hours per day, but was not paid overtime wages. Plaintiff regularly work/worked more than 12 hours per pay period, but was not paid twice the regular rate for any work in excess of 12 hours. The Defendants have failed and refused to pay overtime compensation to Plaintiff. While working as a Trainer throughout his employment, Plaintiff performed various ancillary and administrative duties in addition to the hours spent in training sessions with clients.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Cody D. Knight, Esq. Chantal R. Mccoy, Esq. KNIGHT EMPLOYMENT LAW 11500 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 400 Los Angeles, CA 90064 Telephone: (310) 444 3039 Facsimile: (310) 870 7207 E-mail: CodvKnight@KnightEmplovmentLaw.com ChantalMcCov@KnightEmplovmentLaw.com EQUITY RESIDENTIAL: Fails to Pay All Overtime Wages, Vizza Says --------------------------------------------------------------- PETER VIZZA, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. EQUITY RESIDENTIAL SERVICES II, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; EQUITY RESIDENTIAL SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 100, the Defendants, Case No. BC693215 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover all overtime wages under California Labor Code. The Defendants acquire, develop and manage apartment complexes throughout the United States, including operating over 50 in the greater Los Angeles area. Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a non-exempt employee from 1996 through the present; although his last day actually worked was in or around June 2017 when he commenced a medical leave of absence. The Plaintiff's most recent position held was at Defendants' Valencia apartment complex as a non-exempt Service Manager, with responsibility for leading all aspects of the property's hands-on maintenance, including overall inspection, repairs and scheduled maintenance of apartments and other interior/exterior areas. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendants, Plaintiff and other nonexempt employees would receive an annual, non- discretionary bonus as well as other nondiscretionary monetary awards from Defendants, and other forms of non-discretionary pay. For example, for the pay period beginning February 5 and ending February 18, 2017, Plaintiff received Incentive Pay in the form of a "Performance Bonus." During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff often worked shifts in excess of 8.0 hours in a day and 40.0 hours in a week. Furthermore, the Incentive Pay Plaintiff received during his employment was earned over pay periods during which Plaintiff worked these shifts in excess of 8.0 hours in a day and 40.0 hours in a week. However, Defendants failed to properly include the Incentive Pay in their calculation of the regular rate of pay for purposes of paying Plaintiff overtime wages. As a result, Plaintiff was not properly paid all of his required overtime wages.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott M. Lidman, Esq. Elizabeth Nguyen, Esq. LIDMAN LAW, APC 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (424) 322 4772 Facsimile: (424) 322 4775 E-mail: slidman@lidmanlaw.com enguyen@lidmanlaw.com - and - Paul K. Haines, Esq. Tuvia Korobkin, Esq. HAINES LAW GROUP, APC 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (424) 292 2350 Facsimile: (424) 292 2355 E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com tkorobkin@haineslawgroup.com FITZSIMMONS SURGICAL: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Lott" Suit Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- Courtney E. Lott, on behalf of herself, and all other plaintiffs similarly situated v. Fitzsimmons Surgical Supply, Inc., Case No. 1:18-cv-00335 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 17, 2018), is brought against the Defendant to recover unpaid back wages earned on or before the date three years prior to the filing of this action. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was required to work in excess of 40 hours in a workweek, without pay for those hours over 40 at a rate of time and one-half her regular hourly rate, pursuant to the requirements of the federal and states statutes herein relied upon. Plaintiff was at times required to perform work "on call" without pay for that work time. Fitzsimmons Surgical Supply, Inc., Fitzsimmons Surgical Supply, Inc. provides home medical equipment and products. It offers aids to daily living, bariatric equipment, batteries, canes/crutches, collection devices, CPAP products, CPAP masks, diagnostics, hospital beds, humidifiers, lift chairs, mattresses/low air loss systems, nebulizers/compressors, patient lifts, pulse oximeters, stethoscopes, support backs, support stockings, walkers/ rollators, and wheelchairs. The company also provides assisted living, bathroom safety, body muscle care, disposable respiratory, enteral nutrition, exercise/rehab, incontinence, lymphedema, orthopedics, oxygen miscellaneous, pain management, patient safety, respiratory miscellaneous, skin care, tracheostomy care, and wound care products; and oxygen and respiratory equipment, including oxygen concentrators, bilevel PAP products, and suction equipment. It serves patients home, nursing, assisted living, and rehabilitation facilities. The company was founded in 1931 and is based in Aurora, Illinois with locations in Illinois and Indiana. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John William Billhorn BILLHORN LAW FIRM 53 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 840 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 853-1450 FORESTRY MANAGEMENT: Faces "Montford" Suit over Failure to Pay OT ----------------------------------------------------------------- John M. Montford, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Forestry Management Service, LLC, and Brand Spiller, Case No. 5:18-cv-00019-MTT (M.D. Ga., Jan. 18, 2018), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff was employed by Defendants and for 3 years as truck drivers. According to the complaint, the Defendants paid Plaintiff straight time pay of $17 per hour but never paid Plaintiff time- and-a-half overtime pay for the hours worked in excess of 40 hours in the work week as required by the FLSA. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: McNeill Stokes, Esq. 1075 Heathcliff Lane Marietta, GA 30067 Telephone: (404) 352-2144 E-mail: mcstokes@bellsouth.net FU FU CAFE: "Quema" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages, OT under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------- ALONZO QUEMA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. FU FU CAFE, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 4:18-cv-00371 (S.D. Tex., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages, overtime pay, and other damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant failed to pay minimum wage and overtime compensation to their kitchen workers, including Plaintiff Alonzo Quema, as required by the FLSA. Instead, Fu Fu paid Quema and his coworkers a salary so low that their weekly pay did not cover the minimum wage and overtime pay required by the FLSA. Further, Fu Fu paid Quema and his coworkers less than the minimum wage required under the Texas Minimum Wage Act.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David I. Moulton, Esq. Matthew S. Parmet, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500 Houston, Texas 77046 Telephone: (713) 877 8788 Telecopier: (713) 877 8065 E-mail: dmoulton@brucknerburch.com mparmet@brucknerburch.com FUNKO INC: "Lowinger" Suit Moved to W.D. Washington --------------------------------------------------- ROBERT LOWINGER, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. FUNKO, INC.; BRIAN MARIOTTI; RUSSELL NICKEL; KEN BROTMAN; GINO DELLOMO; CHARLES DENSON; DIANE IRVINE; ADAM KRIGER; RICHARD MCNALLY; GOLDMAN, SACHS & CO.; J.P. MORGAN SECURITIES LLC; MERRILL LYNCH, PIERCE, FENNER & SMITH INCORPORATED; PIPER JAFFRAY & CO.; JEFFERIES LLC; STIFFEL, NICOLAUS & COMPANY, INCORPORATED; BMO CAPITAL MARKETS CORP.; SUNTRUST ROBINSON HUMPHREY, INC.; and JOHN DOES 1 THROUGH 25, the Defendants, Case No. 17-2-29838-7 SEA, was removed from the Superior Court of Washington in and for King County, to the United States District Court Western District of Washington at Seattle on Feb. 7, 2018. The Western District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-00201 to the proceeding. Funko is an American company that manufactures licensed pop culture toys. Funko is most known for producing licensed vinyl figures and bobbleheads.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: T. David Copley, Esq. Juli E. Farris, Esq. Elizabeth A. Leland, Esq. KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623 1900 Facsimile: (206) 623 3384 E-mail: dcopley@kellerrorhback.com jfarris@kellerrohrlback.com bleland@kellerrohrback.com - and - Aaron L. Brody, Esq. Michael J. Klein, Esq. 6 East 45th Street New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 687-7230 Fax: (212) 490-2022 E-mail: abrody@ssbny.com mklein@ssbny.com Attorneys for Defendants Funko, Inc.; Brian Mariotti; Russell Nickel; Ken Brotman; Gino Dellomo; Charles Denson; Diane Irvine; Adam Kriger; and Richard McNally: Benjamin Naftalis, Esq. Kevin McDonough, Esq. LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 885 Third Avenue New York, NY 10022-4834 Telephone: (212) 906 1246 Facsimile: (212) 751 4864 E-mail: benjamin.naftalis@lw.com kevin.mcdonough@lw.com GC SERVICE: Faces "Galli" Suit in New York Supreme Court -------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned Brian Galli, o/b/o of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GC Service Limited Partnership, Defendant, Case No. 611109/2017 was brought before the New York Supreme Court on February 9, 2018. GC Services is the largest privately-held outsourcing provider of call center management and collection agency services in North America.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: MITCHELL L. PASHKIN, ESQ. 775 PARK AVE, SUITE 255 HUNTINGTON, NY 11743 Tel: (631) 629-7709 GEORGIA-PACIFIC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Pulido" Claims ----------------------------------------------------------- RAYMOND PULIDO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. GEORGIA-PACIFIC CORRUGATED III LLC,; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 18CECG00265 (Cal. Super., Fresno Cty., Jan. 19, 2018) is brought against the Defendants for their failure to provide proper wage statements and failure to pay wages in a timely manner, in violation of the California Labor Code. Plaintiff was hired by Defendants on November 1997, to work as machine operator at Defendants' location in Fresno, California. On December 6, 2017, Plaintiff was terminated by Defendants. Georgia Pacific Corrugated LLC manufactures corrugated packaging. The company is based in Denton, Texas. Georgia Pacific Corrugated LLC operates as a subsidiary of Georgia-Pacific LLC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Larry W. Lee, Esq. Kristen M. Agnew, Esq. Nicholas Rosenthal, Esq. Mai Tulyathan, Esq. DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C. 515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 488-6555 Facsimile: (213) 488-6554 - and - William L. Marder, Esq. POLARIS LAW GROUP LLP 501 San Benito Street, Suite 200 Hollister, CA 95023 Telephone: (831) 531-4214 Facsimile: (831) 634-0333 GLOBAL TRAVEL: Roberts Sues over "Reward Redemption" Scam --------------------------------------------------------- PATRICK ROBERTS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, GLOBAL TRAVEL INTERNATIONAL INC., RANDALL J. WARREN, and MICHAEL GROSS, the Defendants, Case No. 2:18-at-00149 (E.D. Cal., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover damages under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act and California Consumers Legal Remedies Act. According to the complaint, The Defendants operate a nationwide telemarketing scam called "Reward Redemption" which has sparked numerous complaints by consumers, lawsuits and at least one government investigation. The "Reward Redemption" scam starts with an unsolicited prerecorded message sent en mass to telephones. If a consumer stays on the line or returns the call, he or she will be connected to a live sales representative who tells the consumer that the promised "$100 Rebate Card" is not free, but instead requires an initial "processing fee" or "shipping and handling" fee. The representative then tries to get the consumer to pay an additional monthly fee for a membership in discount buying clubs with names like Journey Pass, Valu-Pass and Go Shop & Save. The Better Business Bureau reports a "pattern of complaints" about GTI's "lack of transparency" about what the monthly charge is for, and ignoring later requests by consumers to stop charging the monthly fee. The Defendants do not take "no" for an answer when pressuring call recipients to participate in the scam. If a consumer declines to answer a call or tells a sales representative he or she is not interested, Defendants engage in a campaign of persistent calls to wear that consumer down. Defendants also call from numerous different phone numbers, making it difficult for consumers to recognize repeated incoming calls. In the last six years alone, Defendants' scam has prompted at least eight federal lawsuits against GTI alleging claims under the TCPA.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: L. Timothy Fisher, Esq. Joel D. Smith, Esq. Yeremey O. Krivoshey, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300 4455 Facsimile: (925) 407 2700 E-mail: ltfisher@bursor.com jsmith@bursor.com ykrivoshey@bursor.com GOVAN RD: "Galindo" Suit Seeks Minimum Wage & OT Pay ---------------------------------------------------- JAVIER GALINDO and PIFIANO MARTINEZ GALINDO, individually and on behalf of all other employees similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. GOVAN RD INC. f/k/a HONKY TONK TAVERN, and JOHN CAVANAGH, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-01113 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover compensation for all hours worked, minimum wage, and overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 each workweek under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, from August of 2000 until September 17, 2016, Plaintiff Javier Galindo was hired by Defendants to work as work as a cook and food preparer for Defendants' restaurant located at 1154 1st Avenue, New York, NY 10065. During his employment, Plaintiff regularly worked 11 to 12 hours per day and over 40 hours per week. Specifically, Plaintiff worked six days a week with Tuesdays off. His daily schedule ran from around 11:00am to around 10:00pm each day. Plaintiff did not have any uninterrupted break during each of his work day, as such, Plaintiff worked approximately 66 hours per week. The Plaintiff remained with this schedule for the duration of his employment with Defendants. Plaintiff received his compensation by check and a salary basis. In an attempt to make it appear as Defendants are paying an overtime rate, Plaintiff's checks show an hourly rate of $9 and an overtime rate of $13.50. However, Plaintiff received an additional fixed weekly salary of $200 in cash. The checks Plaintiff received do not reflect the proper hourly rate because they do not show the cash salary Plaintiff received, nor do they reflect all the hours actually worked.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Lian Zhu, Esq. HANG & ASSOCIATES, PLLC. 136-20 38th Ave., Suite 10G Flushing, NY 11354 Telephone: (718) 353 8588 E-mail: lzhu@hanglaw.com GRAN CAFFE: Faces "Prazdnik" Suit in Eastern District of Penn. -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Gran Caffe Group LLC. The case is styled as Leonid Prazdnik, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Gran Caffe Group LLC doing business as: Gran Caffe L'Aquila, Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-00565-RBS (E.D. Penn., February 9, 2018). Gran Caffe L'Aquila is an Italian cafe in America opened on December 24, 2014. The 1st floor is an authentic Italian bar and the second floor features the restaurant, wine bar, cultural and language school, as well as the coffee and gelato labs.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: C. K. LEE, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 EAST 39TH STREET SECOND FLOOR NEW YORK, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 465-1188 Email: cklee@leelitigation.com HEMANI CAPITAL: "Wilson" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------- CHRIS WILSON Individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated under 29 USC section 216(b), the Plaintiff, v. HEMANI CAPITAL GROUP, INC. d/b/a PAPA JOHNS and AL AMIN HEMANI, the Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-00102-Y (N.D. Tex., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages, unpaid overtime, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The Plaintiff and Team Leader Class Members are those persons who are current and former non-exempt employees who worked for Defendants as "Team Leaders" and were paid a salary, but no overtime for the hours worked over 40 in each workweek. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and Team Leader Class Members routinely worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The Plaintiff and Team Leader Class Members were not paid overtime at the rate of one-and-one-half their regular rates for all hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek. The Defendants knowingly and deliberately failed to compensate Plaintiff, Team Leader Class Members, and Class Members in accordance with the FLSA. The Plaintiff and Team Leader Class Members did not (and do not) perform work that meets the definition of exempt work under the FLSA. Hemani Capital is an investor located in Irving, Texas.[BN] Attorneys For Plaintiff and Class Members: Drew N. Herrmann, Esq. HERRMANN LAW, PLLC 777 Main St., Suite 600 Fort Worth, Texas 76102 Telephone: (817) 479 9229 Facsimile: (817) 887 1878 E-mail: drew@herrmannlaw.com - and - Jerry Murad, Jr. LAW OFFICE OF JERRY MURAD 6300 Ridglea Place, Suite 1010 Fort Worth, TX 76116 Telephone: (817) 335 5691 Facsimile: (817) 870 1162 E-mail: jerrymurad@mac.com HERSCHELL GOLDMAN: Faces "Carter" Suit over EFTA Violations ----------------------------------------------------------- Darrell Carter, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Herschell Goldman & Associates, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-00294-JS (E.D. Pa., Jan. 22, 2018), is a class action lawsuit alleging violation of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act. Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC focuses on the distribution of Goldman Sachs Funds. The company provides services that include securities brokerage, dealership, and underwriting; investment banking; commodity trading; and investment consulting. The company was founded in 1999 and is based in New York, New York. Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC operates as a subsidiary of The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. P&b Capital Group, LLC was founded in 2004. The company's line of business includes collection and adjustment services on claims and other insurance related issues. DeVille Asset Management specializes in the acquisition of defaulted account receivable portfolios from consumer credit originators such as major banks, retailers, credit unions, utility providers, and municipalities. DeVille generates revenues primarily through the purchase, collection and sale of performing and non-performing consumer receivables that have typically been delinquent 90 days by the credit grantors or not considered to be prime receivables. These receivables include MasterCard, Visa and other credit card accounts issued by banks. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ari Marcus, Esq. MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC 1500 Allaire Ave., Suite 101 Ocean, NJ 07712 Telephone: (732) 695-3282 E-mail: ari@marcuszelman.com HURON CLINTON: "Livingston" Suit Seeks unpaid OT Wages under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------------- BRETT LIVINGSTON, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, known and unknown, the Plaintiff, v. HURON CLINTON METROPOLITAN AUTHORITY, a municipal park district, the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-10467-SJM-DRG (E.D. Mich., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid regular and overtime wages plus an equal amount of liquidated damages, and an award of reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, under the Fair Labor Standards Act The Plaintiff brings this class action suit to compensate him for the damages suffered and to ensure that he and other employees of Defendant HC Metro Authority will not suffer from similar unlawful conduct in the future. The Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant HC Metro Authority whose rights under these statutes have been violated. He now seeks to recover the benefits owed to him under the FLSA due to Defendant HC Metro Authority's failure to pay Plaintiff minimum wage for all hours worked, failure to pay overtime wages for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek, and failure to maintain accurate records. The Huron-Clinton Metropolitan Authority (Metroparks) is a regional park system serving Livingston, Macomb, Oakland,. Washtenaw and Wayne Counties.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Bryan Yaldou, Esq. Leah Seliger, Esq. Omar Badr, Esq. BRYAN YALDOU, PLLC 23000 Telegraph, Suite 5 Brownstown, MI 48134 Telephone: (734) 692 9200 Facsimile: (734) 692 9201 E-mail: Bryan@yaldoulaw.com HYDRO-AIRE INC: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, McDowell Says -------------------------------------------------------------- DARREN MCDOWELL, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. HYDRO- AIRE, INC., a California corporation; CRANE AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONICS CO., an unknown business entity; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendant, Case No. BC693305 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid rest period, and premiums, and unpaid minimum wages under the California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Defendants directly hired and paid wages and benefits to Plaintiff and the other class members. The Defendants continue to employ hourly-paid or non-exempt employees within the State of California. The Plaintiff and the other class members worked over eight 8 hours in a day, and/or forty 40 hours in a week during their employment with Defendants. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of wage abuse against their hourly-paid or non-exempt employees within the State of California. This pattern and practice involved, inter alia, failing to pay them for all regular and/or overtime wages earned and for missed meal periods and rest breaks in violation of California law. Hydro-Aire, Inc. designs, develops, and manufactures aerospace components. It provides aircraft antiskid, brake control, and autobrake systems, as well as centrifugal fuel pumps and hydraulic components. The company also offers repair and overhaul services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Edwin Aiwazian, Esq. LAWYERS for JUSTICE, PC 410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 265 1020 Facsimile: (818) 265 1021 HYUNDAI MOTOR: Sued by Brogan over Defective GDI Engines -------------------------------------------------------- MARYANNE BROGAN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff v. HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA; KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.; HYUNDAI MOTOR COMPANY; and KIA MOTORS CORPORATION, the Defendants, Case No. 7:18-cv-00525-VB (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 22, 2018), is a class action against the Defendants' defective design of 2.0-liter GDI turbo-charged engines and 2.4-liter GDI engines found in certain model year 2011 through 2016 Kia and Hyundai vehicles. Hyundai Motor America manufactures and retails automobiles. The Company offers compacts, sedans, hybrids, crossovers, passenger cars, spare parts, tools, and equipments, including maintenance, repair, and auto finance. Hyundai Motor America serves customers throughout the United States. Kia Motors America, Inc. markets and distributes vehicles. It offers mid-size and luxury sedans, crossovers and minivans, compact vehicles, hybrid and electric vehicles, special edition vehicles, and concept cars. The company offers vehicles through dealers in the United States. The company was incorporated in 1992 and is based in Irvine, California with an additional office in Dallas, Texas. Kia Motors America, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Kia Motors Corp. Hyundai Motor Company, together with its subsidiaries, manufactures and distributes motor vehicles and parts worldwide. It operates in Vehicle, Finance, and Other segments. The company offers cars under the Centennial/Equus, Genesis, Azera, Sonata, Sonata Turbo, i40, i40 Sedan, Elantra, Elantra Sport, i30, i30 Wagon, i30 3DR, Veloster, Veloster Turbo, Accent, Accent 5DR, ix20, i20, i20 Coupe, Elite i20, HB20, Xcent, i10, Grand i10, and Eon names, as well as IONIQ ELECTRIC, IONIQ-Hybrid, Grand Santa Fe, and ix20 names. It also provides SUVs under the Grand Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Tucson, and Creta names; and commercial vehicles comprising trucks, buses, special vehicles, and bare chassis products, as well as Eco vehicles, including Sonata-Plug-in- Hybrid, ix35 Fuel Cell, and Sonata-Hybrid vehicles. In addition, the company provides vehicle financing, credit card processing, marketing, engineering, and insurance services; manufactures trains; and operates a football club. Further, it is involved in real estate development; and investment activities. Hyundai Motor Company was founded in 1967 and is headquartered in Seoul, South Korea. Kia Motors Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, manufactures and sells vehicles in South Korea, North America, Europe, and internationally. The company offers passenger cars, recreational vehicles, and commercial vehicles, as well as hybrid and plug-in hybrid, and electric vehicles. The company sells its products primarily through a network of distributors and dealers. Kia Motors Corporation was founded in 1944 and is based in Seoul, South Korea. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey L. Koenig, Esq. HECHT KLEEGER & DAMASHEK, PC 19 West 44th Street, Suite 1500 New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 490-5700 Facsimile: (212) 490-4800 - and - Austin B. Cohen, Esq. Daniel C. Levin, Esq. Charles E. Schaffer, Esq. Keith Verrier, Esq. LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN 510 Walnut Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 592-1500 Facsimile: (215) 592-4663 IGNYTA INC: Faces "Diaz" Suit over Proposed Roche Merger -------------------------------------------------------- EDILBERTO DIAZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. IGNYTA, INC., JONATHAN E. LIM, JAMES BRISTOL, HEINRICH DREISMANN, JAMES L. FREDDO, ALEX CASDIN and STEVEN HOERTER, Case No. 3:18-cv-00157-JM-MDD (S.D. Cal., Jan. 22, 2018) is brought as a class action by Plaintiff on behalf of himself and the other public holders of the common stock of Ignyta, Inc. to enjoin the expiration of a tender offer on a proposed transaction in which Ignyta will be acquired by Roche Holdings, Inc. through its wholly-owned indirect subsidiary Abingdon Acquisition Corp. through a flawed process and inadequate consideration. Ignyta, Inc., a precision oncology biotechnology company, engages in discovering, in-licensing or acquiring, developing, and commercializing molecularly targeted therapies for eradicating residual diseases. The company was founded in 2011 and is headquartered in San Diego, California. As of February 7, 2018, Ignyta, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Roche Holdings, Inc. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David E. Bower, Esq. MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC 600 Corporate Pointe, Suite 1170 Culver City, CA 90230 Telephone: (213) 446-6652 Facsmile: (212) 202-7880 JASON NATURAL: Zeng Sues over "All Natural" Products Claims ----------------------------------------------------------- Zeng Jin Li, an individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated , the Plaintiff, v. JASON NATURAL PRODUCTS, INC., a California Corporation, the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv- 01127 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks order requiring Defendant to immediately remove all advertisements, packaging and labeling of the Products that the same are all natural or gentle. This class action arises out of the fraudulent, deceptive and misleading conduct of Defendant Jason Natural Products, Inc. Specifically, for many years Defendant has represented that it "live[s] by a simple Code of Honor," and that the first of four tenets of that Code of Honor is that Jason "select[s] safe, gentle and effective ingredients." The claim of "gentle" ("Gentle Claim") is repeatedly reinforced in advertising and marketing materials appurtenant to each of Jason's personal care products. For example, Jason represents that it "select[s] only the purest, gentlest ingredients." In fact, however, Jason's products (including three of those purchased by Plaintiff) contain a startling number of harsh and unsafe ingredients that are not disclosed to -- and, in fact, are concealed from -- the online customer at the time of purchase. Playing on its overarching claim to utilize only "safe, gentle and effective ingredients," Jason further advertises many of its products as being "all natural," meaning, to the reasonable consumer (and the FTC), that such products contain natural ingredients only, i.e. devoid of any synthetic chemicals ("All Natural Claim"). But Jason's purportedly "all natural" products, including those that Plaintiff purchased, contain numerous synthetic chemicals, including many that are toxic, some of which are known carcinogens or otherwise carry a high risk of harm to product users. Not only are such products not "all natural" and not "gentle" but, moreover, they are potentially harmful to consumers with no warning of the danger posed.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Schlachet, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF MARK SCHLACHET 3515 Severn Road Cleveland, Ohio 44118 Telephone: (216) 225 7559 Facsimile: (216) 932 5390 E-mail: markschlachet@me.com JZANUS LTD: Faces "Kim" Suit in Eastern District New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Jzanus Ltd. The case is styled as Victor Kim, a/k/a Viktor Kim, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Jzanus Ltd. and John Does l-25, Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00897 (E.D. N.Y., February 9, 2018). Jzanus Ltd is located in Floral Park, New York. This organization primarily operates in the Business Consulting, nec business / industry within the Engineering, Accounting, Research, and Management Services sector.[BN] The Plaintiff appears PRO SE. KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Sehrgosha Enjoins Merger with Consortium ------------------------------------------------------------ MAZY SEHRGOSHA, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. KINDRED HEALTHCARE, INC., PHYLLIS R. YALE, BENJAMIN A. BREIER, JOEL ACKERMAN, JONATHAN D. BLUM, PAUL J. DIAZ, HEYWARD R. DONIGAN, RICHARD GOODMAN, CHRISTOPHER T. HJELM FRED J. KLEISNER, SHARAD MANSUKANI, M.D., and LYNN SIMON, M.D., the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv- 00230-UNA (D. Del., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to enjoin Defendants from holding shareholder vote on a Proposed Merger and taking any steps to consummate the Proposed Merger unless and until material information disclosed to Kindred shareholders, or, in the event the Proposed Merger is consummated, to recover damages resulting from the Defendants' violations of the Securities Exchange Act. On December 19, 2017, the Board caused the Company to enter into an agreement and plan of merger with The Consortium, pursuant to which, Kindred shareholders will receive $9.00 in cash for each share of common stock they own. On February 5, 2018, the Board authorized the filing of a materially incomplete and misleading preliminary proxy statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in violation of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. While Defendants are touting the fairness of the Merger Consideration to the Company's stockholders in the Proxy, they have failed to disclose material information that is necessary for stockholders to properly assess the fairness of the Proposed Merger, thereby rendering certain statements in the Proxy incomplete and misleading. Specifically, the Proxy contains materially incomplete and misleading information concerning: (i) the Company's financial projections; and (ii) the valuation analyses performed by the Company's financial advisors, Barclays Capital Inc. and Guggenheim Securities, LLC, in support of their fairness opinions. The special meeting of Kindred shareholders to vote on the Proposed Merger is forthcoming. It is imperative that the material information omitted from the Proxy is disclosed to the Company's shareholders prior to the forthcoming shareholder vote so that they can properly exercise their corporate suffrage rights. For these reasons as set forth in detail herein, Plaintiff asserts claims against Defendants for violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. Kindred Healthcare Incorporated is a healthcare services company that operates hospitals, nursing centers, and contract rehabilitation services across the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Juan E. Monteverde, Esq. MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC The Empire State Building 350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4405 New York, NY 10118 Telephone: (212) 971 1341 Facsimile: (212) 202 7880 E-mail: jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com - and - Blake A. Bennett, Esq. COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A. The Brandywine Building 1000 West Street, 10th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801 Telephone: (302) 984 3800 KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Tompkins Balks at TPG Global Merger Deal ------------------------------------------------------------ DALE TOMPKINS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. KINDRED HEALTHCARE, INC., BENJAMIN A. BREIER, JOEL ACKERMAN, JONATHAN D. BLUM, PAUL J. DIAZ, HEYWARD R. DONIGAN, RICHARD GOODMAN, CHRISTOPHER T. HJELM, FREDERICK J. KLEISNER, SHARAD MANSUKANI, LYNN SIMON, PHYLLIS R. YALE, KENTUCKY HOSPITAL HOLDINGS, LLC, KENTUCKY HOMECARE HOLDINGS, INC., KENTUCKY HOMECARE MERGER SUB, INC., TPG GLOBAL, LLC, WELSH, CARSON, ANDERSON & STOWE and HUMANA INC., the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-00086-DJH (W.D. Ky., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to enjoin Defendants from taking any steps to consummate a proposed merger transaction, including filing a definitive proxy statement with the Securities Exchange Commission or otherwise causing a Definitive Proxy to be disseminated to Kindred's shareholders, unless and until the material information is included in the Definitive Proxy or otherwise disseminated to Kindred's shareholders, and in the event the Proposed Transaction is consummated without the material omissions being remedied, Plaintiff seeks to recover damages resulting from the Defendants' violations. The Plaintiff brings this class action on behalf of the public stockholders of Kindred Healthcare, Inc. against Kindred's Board of Directors for their violations of Section 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15.U.S.C. sections 78n(a), 78t(a), and SEC Rule 14a-9, 17 C.F.R. 240.14a-9, arising out of the Board's attempt to sell the Company to TPG Global, LLC, Welsh, Carson, Anderson & Stowe, and Humana Inc. through TPG Global, LLC's affiliates Kentucky Hospital Holdings, LLC, Kentucky Homecare Holdings, Inc. and Kentucky Homecare Merger Sub, Inc. According to the lawsuit, the Defendants have violated the Securities Exchange Act by causing a materially incomplete and misleading preliminary proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 5, 2018. The Proxy recommends that Kindred shareholders vote in favor of a proposed transaction whereby Kindred is acquired by the Consortium. The Proposed Transaction was first disclosed on December 19, 2017, when Kindred and the Consortium announced that they had entered into a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which Kentucky Homecare Holdings, Inc. will acquire all of the outstanding shares of common stock of Kindred for $9.00 per share in cash. After the Proposed Transaction closes, Kindred's home health, hospice and community care businesses will be separated from the rest of the Company and acquired by Kentucky Hospital Holdings, LLC. The deal is valued at approximately $4.1 billion and is expected to close in the summer of 2018. The Board agreed to sell the Company right at the point where Kindred was beginning to come out of a rocky period after a large acquisition, a repositioning plan and political uncertainty. Just as the Company was beginning to see positive results from its repositioning plan, and at a time when the stock price was deflated, the Board sold to the Consortium for a price that was less than other offers. Indeed, a large Kindred stockholder has expressed its belief that the Proposed Transaction is not in the stockholders' best interests and does not maximize stockholder value. Furthermore, the Proxy is materially incomplete and contains misleading representations and information in violation of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. Specifically, the Proxy contains materially incomplete and misleading information concerning the sales process, financial projections prepared by Kindred management, as well as the financial analyses conducted by Barclays Capital Inc. and Guggenheim Securities, LLC, Kindred's financial advisors.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jamie K. Neal, Esq. BURKE NEAL PLLC 2200 Dundee Road, Suite C Louisville, Kentucky 40205 Telephone: (502) 709 9992 - and - Shane T. Rowley, Esq. Danielle Rowland Lindahl, Esq. ROWLEY LAW PLLC 50 Main Street, Suite 1000 White Plains, NY 10606 Telephone: (914) 400 1920 Facsimile: (914) 301 3514 KOMEN USA: "Santoyo" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------------- Teresa Santoyo, Individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Komen USA Inc. Building Maintenance & Consulting, a Colorado corporation, Jason Choi, Individually, and Bruce Choi, Individually, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv- 00331-KMT (D. Colo., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked for Defendants, Jason and Brue Choi, and their corporation, Komen USA Inc. Building Maintenance & Consulting ("Komen"), as a Custodian. Komen is a Colorado corporation incorporated by Mr. Jason Choi. Komen provides custodial and cleaning services to third party clients. In particular, Komen provides cleaning services to El Paso County, including the El Paso County Judicial Building, Centennial Hall, the Citizens Service Center, and other El Paso County properties.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bradley J. Sherman, Esq. CORNISH & DELL'OLIO, P.C. 431 N. Cascade Avenue, Ste. 1 Colorado Springs, CO 80903 Telephone: (719) 475 1204 Facsimile: (719) 475 1264 E-mail: bsherman@cornishanddellolio.com LEE KUM KEE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Leon" Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------- Agustin Leon, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated, and as an aggrieved employee on behalf of all aggrieved employees v. LEE KUM KEE (U.S.A.) INC., LEE KUM KEE (USA)FOODS INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. BC690608 (Cal. Super., Jan. 17, 2018), is brought against the Defendants to recover wages and penalties from unpaid wages earned and due, unpaid minimum wages, unpaid and illegally calculated overtime compensation, and unpaid premiums related to Defendants' illegal meal and rest period policies, in violation of the California Labor Code. Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a non-exempt, hourly paid employee from on or about September 2013 until August 2017. Plaintiff were employed by Defendants under employment agreements that were partly written, partly oral, and partly implied. Lee Kum Kee (U.S.A.), Inc. produces sauces. It offers cooking and dipping, chili, convenience, shrimp, oyster, soy, ready, recipe, Chinese cooking, and xo-sauces; and dry-condiments. The company serves restaurants and food manufacturers. It offers its products through supermarkets and stores in California, Washington, Arizona, Oregon, Michigan, Wisconsin, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Florida, North Carolina, Virginia, and Georgia; and Internet retailers. The company was incorporated in 1983 and is based in City of Industry, California. Lee Kum Kee (U.S.A.), Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Lee Kum Kee (Hong Kong) Foods Ltd. Lee Kum Kee (USA) Foods Inc. provides packages food. The Company offers foods and miscellaneous food specialties. Lee Kum Kee serves customers worldwide. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J. Matern, Esq. Andrew J. Sokolowski, Esq. MATERN LAW GROUP, PC 1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200 Manhattan Beach,CA 90266 Telephone: (310) 531-1900 Facsimile: (310) 531-1901 E-mail: mmatern@maternlawgroup.com LJM FUNDS: Sokolow Sues over Plunge in LJMIX Share Price -------------------------------------------------------- LEONARD SOKOLOW, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. LJM FUNDS MANAGEMENT, LTD., TWO ROADS SHARED TRUST, NORTHERN LIGHTS DISTRIBUTORS, LLC, ANDREW ROGERS, MARK GERTSEN, MARK GARBIN, NEIL KAUFMAN, ANITA KRUG, JAMES COLANTINO, ANISH PARVATANENI, and ANTHONY CAINE, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-01039 (N.D. Ill., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover compensatory damages against all Defendants, jointly and severally, for all damages suffered in connection with their purchases of LJMIX to the maximum extent permitted under section 11(e) of the Securities Act, and any other applicable law, in an amount to be proven at trial, plus interest. The case is a securities fraud class action on behalf of persons who purchased shares of the LJM Preservation and Growth Fund (ticker: LJMIX) between February 28, 2015 and February 7, 2018, inclusive. LJMIX is a mutual fund that purports to invest primarily in purchased and sold call and put options on Standard & Poor's 500 Futures Index. The Defendants represented in LJMIX's Registration Statements and Prospectuses that "[t]he Fund aims to preserve capital, particularly in down markets (including major market drawdowns), through using put option spreads as a form of mitigation risk." In truth, however, LJMIX was not focused on capital preservation and left investors exposed to an unacceptably high risk of catastrophic losses. The truth emerged on February 5, 2018, when the S&P fell approximately 4.6%. In the wake of this drop, LJMIX plunged from $9.82 on February 2, to $1.94 on February 7, a massive loss of approximately 80%.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael J. Freed, Esq. William H. London, Esq. Brian M. Hogan, Esq. FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC 2201 Waukegan Road, Suite 130 Bannockburn, IL 60015 Telephone: (224) 632 4500 Facsimile: (224) 632 4521 E-mail: blondon@fklmlaw.com mfreed@fklmlaw.com bhogan@fklmlaw.com - and - Thomas L. Laughlin, IV, Esq. Rhiana S. Swartz, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP The Helmsley Building 230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10169 Telephone: (212) 223 6444 Facsimile: (212) 223 6334 E-mail: tlaughlin@scott-scott.com rswartz@scott-scott.com - and - Michael E. Criden, Esq. Lindsey C. Grossman, Esq. CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A. 7301 SW 57th Court, Suite 515 South Miami, FL 33143 Telephone: (305) 357 9000 Facsimile: (305) 357 9050 E-mail: mcriden@cridenlove.com lgrossman@cridenlove.com LTI TRUCKING: "Kennedy" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- JOANN L. KENNEDY, on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. LTI TRUCKING SERVICES, INC.. the Defendant, Case No. 4:18-cv-00230 (E.D. Mo., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages, liquidated damages, interest, costs and attorneys' fees as well as declaratory relief under the Fair labor Standards Act. LTI is owned and operated for the purpose of moving freight interstate for its customers at the lowest cost possible. The Defendant controls Plaintiff's work and by law employs Plaintiff to transport goods by truck for LTI customers. Defendant controls when, where, and how Plaintiff delivers freight. It controls virtually every aspect of the way truckers work is performed, including routes taken and the equipment used, along with its maintenance and condition. Everything about Plaintiff's work is controlled by Defendant.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Carson C. Menges, Esq. MENGES LAW, LLC 6400 W. Main St., Ste 1G Belleville, IL 62223 Telephone: (618) 277 6646 E-mail: cmenges@mengesfirm.com MANHATTAN ACADEMY: Soghn Seeks Minimum Wage & OT under Labor Code ----------------------------------------------------------------- Adrienne Soghn, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Manhattan Academy, Inc., and Doe One through and including Doe Ten, the Defendants, Case No. BC693358 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover minimum wage and overtime under California Labor Code. The Plaintiff was not paid at the rate of one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for all hours worked over 40 hours per week and for all hours worked over eight hours per day. Plaintiff also seeks damages for Defendant's failure to provide meal and rest periods. This class action lawsuit asserts claims against Defendant for violations of California Labor Code sections 201, 202, 203, 226, 226.7, 510, 512, 1194, and 1198, violations of the Industrial Welfare Commission wage order, and violations of section 17200 et seq. of the California Business and Professions Code. Manhattan Academy is a privately held company in Manhattan Beach, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Ricasa, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JONATHAN RICASA 15760 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 700 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 650 8077 Facsimile: (818) 301 5151 E-mail: jricasa@ricasalaw.com - and - Briana M. Kim, Esq. BRIANA KIM, PC 249 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 814 Long Beach, CA 90802 Telephone: (714) 482 6301 Facsimile: (714) 482 6302 E-mail: briana@brianakim.com MENARD INC: Violates Wage and Hour Laws, "Raisor" Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTEN RAISOR, LAURISA LAROSE MOWERY, AND CONRAD SMITH on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. MENARD, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-00314 (N.D. Ohio, Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wage under the Fair Labor Standards Act. This case challenges policies and practices of Defendant that violate the FLSA, as well as Ohio, Missouri, and Wisconsin wage payment acts and wage and hour laws. The Plaintiffs and the putative class and collective action members are not subject to any arbitration agreement with a class or collective action waiver. The Plaintiffs bring this case as an FLSA "collective action" pursuant to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b), which provides that "[a]n action to recover the liability" prescribed by the FLSA "may be maintained against any employer . . . by any one or more employees for and on behalf of [herself] and other employees similarly situated." The Plaintiffs bring their FLSA collective action claims on behalf of all other similarly situated current and former hourly employees of Defendant's more than 300 retail home improvement stores, manufacturing facilities, and distribution centers throughout the United States during the preceding three years and through the conclusion of this Action.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Hans A. Nilges, Esq. Shannon M. Draher, Esq. Michaela M. Calhoun, Esq. NILGES DRAHER, LLC 7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D Massillon, OH 44646 Telephone: (330) 470 4428 Facsimile: (330) 754 1430 E-mail: hans@ohlaborlaw.com sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com calhoun@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Robert J. Hunt, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT J. HUNT, LLC 3091 E. 98th Street, Ste. 280 Indianapolis, IN 46280 Telephone: (317) 706 1100 Facsimile: (317) 623 8503 E-mail: rob@indianawagelaw.com MERCK & CO: Rochester Drug Sues over Monopoly of Zetia Drug ----------------------------------------------------------- ROCHESTER DRUG COOPERATIVE, INC., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. MERCK & CO., INC.; MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP.; SCHERING-PLOUGH CORP.; SCHERING CORP.; MSP SINGAPORE CO. LLC; GLENMARK PHARMACEUTICALS, LTD.; and GLENMARK GENERICS INC., U.S.A., the Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv- 00071-RAJ-RJK (E.D. Va., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover threefold damages, costs of suit and reasonable attorneys' fees for the injuries sustained by plaintiff and members of the Class resulting from defendants' unlawful impairment of generic competition. In the early 1990s, following its success with statins, Merck sought to identify new compounds that could reduce cholesterol and prevent the buildup of plaques in arteries. Merck turned to a class of drugs first developed forty years earlier: ACAT inhibitors. Merck quickly identified an initial lead compound, SCH48461, and then focused on its metabolites and metabolite-like analogues, including SCH58235 or ezetimibe. Merck used conventional techniques to develop these compounds into pharmaceutical compositions. Merck obtained three patents for these discoveries (one reissued as U.S. Patent No. RE37,721 (the "RE'721 patent")). Ezetimibe became the active ingredient in the blockbuster drug Zetia. In 2006, Merck sued Glenmark -- the first generic manufacturer to seek FDA approval to market generic Zetia -- alleging infringement of the RE'721 patent. Glenmark argued the RE'721 patent was unenforceable for inequitable conduct: Merck intentionally (and deceptively) failed to tell the PTO that compounds claimed in the RE'721 patent were inherent metabolites of compounds Merck publicly disclosed years earlier. Merck also withheld references that would have, at minimum, caused the examiner to ask questions about metabolites and inherency. Glenmark also argued that -- separate and apart from inequitable conduct -- this inherency rendered the RE'721 patent invalid for anticipation. Had the case resulted in a decision on the ultimate merits, Glenmark would have prevailed. Indeed, Merck later conceded the invalidity of the RE'721 patent. But rather than proceed to trial with Glenmark, Merck decided to settle. The Supreme Court holds that resolving patent infringement litigation by having the plaintiff (here, Merck) make a large and unjustified payment to the allegedly infringing defendant (here, Glenmark) violates federal antitrust law (assuming the other elements are satisfied). Nevertheless, Merck paid Glenmark to stay out of the market for almost five years. Merck's payment took the form of an agreement not to launch its own generic version of Zetia (called an "authorized generic"). Merck's no authorized generic ("no-AG") promise was worth approximately $800 million in sales to Glenmark. As first filer, Glenmark earned the right to keep other generic companies off the market for 180 days; this was its statutory reward. But Glenmark could not keep Merck from selling an authorized generic. Brand companies launch authorized generics, particularly during a first filer's so-called 180-day exclusivity period, in an effort to staunch the massive loss of revenue attending generic entry. The brand's authorized generic takes up to 50% of generic sales away from the first filer. So even though the authorized generic is selling at a lower price point than the brand, authorized generics let the brand hold on to sales that it otherwise would lose. In the absence of Merck's large and unjustified payment, Glenmark and Merck would have each launched a generic version of Zetia as early as December 6, 2011 and, in any event, well before December 12, 2016. Additional generics would have launched six months later. The presence of so many generics would have driven prices down to competitive levels. RDC and the direct purchaser class have been injured by Merck and Glenmark's conduct. In the absence of their unlawful agreement, class members would have been able to buy less-expensive generic instead of branded Zetia from as early as December 6, 2011 through the present. The proposed direct purchaser class has likely paid hundreds of millions in overcharges as a result of Merck and Glenmark's unlawful agreement. Merck & Company, Inc., d.b.a. Merck Sharp & Dohme outside the United States and Canada, is an American pharmaceutical company and one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world.[BN] Counsel for Rochester Drug Cooperative, Inc. and the Proposed Direct Purchaser Class: William H. Monroe, Jr., Esq. Marc C. Greco., Esq. Kip A. Harbison, Esq. Richard S. Glasser, Esq. Michael S. Glasser, Esq. GLASSER & GLASSER, P.L.C. Crown Center, Suite 600 580 East Main Street Norfolk, VA 23510 Telephone: (757) 625 6787 Facsimile: (757) 652 5959 E-mail: bill@glasserlaw.com marcg@glasserlaw.com kip@glasserlaw.com richardg@glasserlaw.com michael@glasserlaw.com - and - David F. Sorensen, Esq. Zachary D. Caplan, Esq. BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C. 1622 Locust Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 875 3000 Facsimile: (215) 875 4604 E-mail: dsorensen@bm.net zcaplan@bm.net - and - Peter R. Kohn, Esq. Joseph T. Lukens, Esq. Bradley J. Demuth, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI LLP 101 Greenwood Ave, Suite 600 Jenkintown, PA 19046 Telephone: (215) 277 5770 Facsimile: (215) 277 5771 E-mail: pkohn@faruqilaw.com jlukens@faruqilaw.com bdemuth@faruqilaw.com - and - Barry Taus, Esq. Archana Tamoshunas, Esq. Kevin Landau, Esq. TAUS, CEBULASH & LANDAU, LLP 80 Maiden Lane, Suite 1204 New York, NY10038 Telephone: (646) 873 7654 E-mail: btaus@tcllaw.com atamoshunas@tcllaw.com klandau@tcllaw.com METROPCS TEXAS: "Silguero" Suit Seeks Overtime Wages under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------------- DEE DEE SILGUERO, Individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. METROPCS TEXAS, LLC, HBCC INVESTMENTS INC. d/b/a DF WIRELESS, BKCR INC. d/b/a DF WIRELESS, WIRELESS DF TEXAS LLC, GSWAC INC. d/b/a DF WIRELESS, KJCC INC. d/b/a DF WIRELESS, PCSKK INC. d/b/a DF WIRELESS, and BONG KIM, the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-00039 (S.D. Tex., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks all available relief, including overtime wages, compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, pursuant to the provisions of Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members are those similarly situated persons who worked for Defendants at any time since February 8, 2015 through the final disposition of this matter, and were paid by the hour, but did not receive: (a) compensation for all hours worked, (b) all earned commissions and (c) overtime for all hours worked over 40 in each workweek. The Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members routinely work (and worked) in excess of 40 hours per workweek; however, Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members were not paid overtime for any hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek. The Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members were not compensated for all hours worked. Specifically, Defendants automatically deducted one hour meal periods from Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members' daily hours worked, despite knowing that Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members routinely worked (and continue to work) throughout their designated one-hour meal period each day. MetroPCS is a prepaid wireless service in the United States that is part of T-Mobile US, Inc. MetroPCS provides nationwide talk, text, and data depending on the plan services using GSM, HSPA, HSPA+ and 4G LTE networks.[BN] Attorneys in Charge for Plaintiff and the Putative Class Members: Clif Alexander, Esq. Austin W. Anderson, Esq. Lauren E. Braddy, Esq. Alan Clifton Gordon, Esq. Carter T. Hastings, Esq. George Schimmel, Esq. ANDERSON2X, PLLC 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 452 1279 Facsimile: (361) 452 1284 E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com austin@a2xlaw.com lauren@a2xlaw.com cgordon@a2xlaw.com carter@a2xlaw.com geordie@a2xlaw.com MGB INC: "Oliver" Suit Seeks Minimum Wage & OT under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------- VALERIE OLIVER, an individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. MGB, INC., a Virginia corporation, d/b/a PURE PLEASURE, and WILLIAM PYLIARIS, an individual, the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-00096-HEH (E.D. Va., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover minimum and overtime wages, liquidated damages, interest, and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The Defendants operate a strip club in Richmond, Virginia, commonly known as Pure Pleasure, that has failed to pay Plaintiff and all others similarly situated the applicable minimum wage and substantial overtime for hours worked. Indeed, not only have they fail to pay a single penny in wages, they tricked the Plaintiff and all others similarly situated into paying to work at the club. Defendants' failure to pay the minimum wage and overtime wages to Plaintiff and all others similarly situated violated Sections 6 and 7 of the FLSA, because Defendants' employment of Plaintiff and all other similarly situated employees does not meet the requirements for any applicable exemption under the FLSA.[BN] Counsel for Plaintiff: Stephen B. Pershing, Esq. PERSHING LAW PLLC 1416 E Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20002 Telephone: (202) 642 1431 E-mail: sbpershing@gmail.com - and - Harlan S. Miller, III, Esq. MILLER LEGAL, P.C. 6868 Leslie Lane Macon, Ga. 31220 Telephone: (404) 931 6490 Facsimile: (866) 704 3161 E-mail: hmiller@millerlegalpc.com MIDLAND FUNDING: McCoy Sues over Debt Collection Practices ---------------------------------------------------------- CHERYL MCCOY, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, the PLAINTIFF, v. MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC; MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC; and ENCORE CAPITAL GROUP, INC., the DEFENDANTS, Case No. 1:18-cv-01035 (N.D. Ill., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks statutory damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. section 1692k(a)(2)(B). According to Defendants, Plaintiff incurred an alleged debt for goods and services used for personal purposes, originally for a FIA Card Services, N.A. consumer credit card account ("alleged debt"). The alleged debt is a "debt" as that term is defined at section 1692a(5) of the FDCPA. Due to her financial circumstances, Plaintiff could not pay any debts, and the alleged debt went into default. Midland subsequently purchased the alleged debt, and retained MCM to assist with collection. Midland sued Plaintiff in the Circuit Court of Cook County in an attempt to collect the alleged debt. Plaintiff at the time was unable to afford an attorney and did not understand her rights and obligations with respect to the lawsuit, and Midland obtained a default judgment against her on November 17, 2017. Shortly thereafter, MCM sent a letter directly to Plaintiff regarding the alleged debt. The Letter conveys information regarding the alleged debt, including an account number, the identity of the original creditor and a current balance. Defendants falsely represented a voluntary financial disclosure form as legal process, in violation of 15 U.S.C. section 1692e(13), in an attempt to coerce Plaintiff into disclosing her income and assets. Defendants used unconscionable means to collect a debt, in violation of 15 U.S.C. section 1692f, when they communicated to Plaintiff that she must fill out a Financial Disclosure Form as a result of a judgment obtained against her.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Wood, Esq. Celetha Chatman, Esq. Holly McCurdy, Esq. Sarah Barnes, Esq. COMMUNITY LAWYERS GROUP, LTD. 73 W. Monroe Street, Suite 514 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 757 1880 Facsimile: (312) 265 3227 E-mail: cchatman@communitylawyersgroup.com MOOOI USA: Faces "Bishop" Suit in Southern District New York ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Moooi USA, Inc. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Moooi USA, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-01208 (S.D. N.Y., February 11, 2018). Moooi USA Inc. offers a wide collection of chandeliers, table lamps and wall lights.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Joseph H Mizrahi Law PC 337 Avenue W Suite 2f Brooklyn, NY 11223 Tel: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (347) 665-1545 Email: jmizrahilaw@gmail.com MOTION PICTURE: Fails to Pay OT, "Maravilla" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------- Maria T. Maravilla and Maria A. Vasquez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Motion Picture and Television Fund, DOES 1 through DOES 25, Case No. BC690494 (Cal. Super., Jan. 17, 2018), is brought against the Defendants for failure to correctly pay Plaintiffs and the rest of premium wages for overtime hours. Defendant also failed to provide Plaintiffs with the legally compliant meal breaks and rest breaks. Ms. Maravilla was employed by Motion Picture and Television Fund at its location in Woodland Hills, California from 1987 until November 2017. Motion Picture and Television Fund is a California Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporation organized under the laws of the state of California. Motion Picture and Television Fund, doing business as MPTF, provides programs and services for life and well-being of the entertainment industry community in Southern California. The company offers services ranging from elder care to social work, community outreach, financial support, child care, and beyond. Its programs and services include emotional and financial relief, a residential community, health care centers, health insurance options, and more. Motion Picture and Television Fund was formerly known as Motion Picture Relief Fund. The company was founded in 1921 and is based in Woodland Hills, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Aaron C. Gundzik, Esq. GARTENBERG GELFAND AND HAYTON LLP 15260 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1920 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (213) 542-2100 Facsimile: (213) 542-2101 E-mail: agundzik@gghslaw.com MRK FINE: Faces "Bishop" Suit in Southern District New York ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against MRK Fine Arts, LLC. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MRK Fine Arts, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-01207 (S.D. N.Y., February 11, 2018). Mrk Fine Arts, LLC is in the Precious Metal Cases business.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Joseph H Mizrahi Law PC 337 Avenue W Suite 2f Brooklyn, NY 11223 Tel: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (347) 665-1545 Email: jmizrahilaw@gmail.com NATIONWIDE PROTECTIVE: Fails to Pay OT, "Ramessar" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Ronald Ramessar, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Nationwide Protective Services, Inc., et al., Case No. BC690781 (Cal. Super., Jan. 17, 2018), is an action against the Defendant to recover unpaid regular and overtime wages, including unpaid compensation for meal and/or rest period violations, liquidated damages, and injunctive relief. Mr. Ramessar worked as a Security Officer of the Defendant. Nationwide Protective Services was founded in 1999. The company's line of business includes providing detective, guard, and armored car services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Edward Cole, Esq. Andrew Weaver, Esq. SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC 1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor Oakland, CA 94612 Telephone: (510) 891-9800 Facsimile: (510) 891-7030 E-mail: scole@scalaw.com NAVIENT SOLUTIONS: Obeleagu Sues over Collection of Student Loan ---------------------------------------------------------------- PRISCA O. OBELEAGU, Individually and on behalf of all similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. NAVIENT SOLUTIONS, LLC, and NAVIENT CORPORATION, the Defendants, Case No. 8:18-cv-00392-PX (Md. Cir., Prince George's County, Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover damages due to illegal and systematic abuse of Maryland residents by Defendants and SLM 2005 Trust, relative to engaging in collection and collection related student loan suits, without adherence to Maryland collection agency licensing and consumer protection laws. According to the complaint, for the period beginning not earlier than three years prior to the date of the filing of this lawsuit, Navient has been involved in the business of initiating and/or maintaining consumer collection actions on behalf of consumer student loan dent owner SLM 2005 Trust. In October 2014, Plaintiff while still in graduate school full time, began receiving collection letters and phone calls from Navient regarding her student loans account. Plaintiff became confused in regard to receiving debt communications because at all times relevant she was full-time student and thus her loan payments should have been deferred. Navient is a U.S. corporation based in Wilmington, Delaware, whose operations include servicing and collecting on student loans.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas N. Gottron, Esq. Terry E. Morris, Esq. MORRIS PALERM, LLC 2 Barrister's Place 751 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Telephone: dgottron@morrispalerm.com Tmorris@morrispalerm.com NIKOLAIS GALANOPOULOS: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT, Amastal Says -------------------------------------------------------------- ENRIQUE LOPEZ AMASTAL and JOSE LUIS GUZMAN RAMIREZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. NIKOLAIS GALANOPOULOS, the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-01133 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and New York Labor Law. The Plaintiffs are former employees of Defendant. The Defendant owned, operated, or controlled a diner/pizzeria, located at 70 West 71st Street, New York, New York 10023 under the name "Big Nick's Pizza Joint". The Plaintiffs were employed as a griller and a food preparer at the restaurant located at 70 West 71st Street, New York, New York 10023. The Plaintiffs worked for Defendant in excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and "spread of hours" compensation for the hours that they worked. Rather, Defendant failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the hours worked, failed to pay Plaintiffs appropriately for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional overtime premium.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317 1200 Facsimile: (212) 317 1620 E-mail: faillace@emplymentcompliance.com NORTHSTAR LOCATION: Faces "Selwyn" Suit in E.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against NorthStar Location Services, LLC. The case is styled as Yisroel Selwyn, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated consumers, Plaintiff v. NorthStar Location Services, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv- 00891 (E.D. N.Y., February 9, 2018). Northstar Location Services is a debt collection agency.[BN] The Plaintiff appears PRO SE. NUDGE LLC: Faces Just Us Realtors Suit in District of Utah ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nudge LLC. The case is styled as Just Us Realtors, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Nudge LLC, BuyPD, Income Property USA, Insiders Cash, Ryan Poelman, Guardian Law, American Legal & Escrow, Invictus Law and Blair R. Jackson, Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-00128-TC (D. Utah, February 9, 2018). Nudge, LLC provides a digital health coaching software solution for providers, coaches, and other health professionals to access healthcare data.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jon V. Harper, Esq. HARPER LAW PLC 68 S MAIN ST 8TH FL SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84101 Tel: (801) 910-4357 Email: jharper@jonharperlaw.com - and - M. Denise Dalton, Esq. HARPER LAW PLC 68 S MAIN ST STE 800 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84101 Tel: (801) 910-4358 O'REILLY AUTO: Fails to Reimburse Gift Cards, Micallef Claims ------------------------------------------------------------- Alfred Micallef, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated v. O'Reilly Automotive Stores, Inc., Case No. BC690610 (Cal. Super., Jan. 17, 2018), is brought to stop the Defendant's practice of illegally withholding the cash value of gift cards. Defendant also failed to reimburse the Plaintiff on gift cards with an amount of $10 or less. On November 1, 2017, Plaintiff used his gift card to purchase an Air Filter that totaled $8.20, including taxes and fees. After Plaintiff's purchase, Plaintiff had a remaining balance of $5.94 on the gift card. Plaintiff then requested from the store manager that Defendant provide a cash value redemption for the remaining balance of $5.94, but Defendant refused. Defendant stated that it was company policy not to provide gift card redemptions for any value. O'Reilly Automotive Stores Inc. supplies automobile equipment. The Company offers replacements parts, fluids and chemicals, performance, accessories, and tools. O'Reilly Automotive Stores serves customers in the State of Missouri. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq., Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, PC 21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (877) 206-4741 Facsimile: (866) 633-0228 E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com OFFICINE PANERAI: Faces "Thorne" Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Officine Panerai A.G. The case is styled as Braulio Thorne, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Officine Panerai A.G., Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-01209 (S.D. N.Y., February 11, 2018). Officine Panerai is a luxury Italian watch manufacturer, and a wholly owned subsidiary of Compagnie Financiere Richemont S.A.[BN] The Plaintiff appears PRO SE. OIL CAN: "Sarduy" Suit Seeks OT & Minimum Wages under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- ROBERT SARDUY and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C. 216(b), the Plaintiff, v. OIL CAN MAN INC., EUGENE GARGIULO, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-20512-FAM (S.D. Fla., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover overtime and/or minimum wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. This action arises under the laws of the United States. This case is brought as a collective action under 29 USC 216(b). It is believed that the Defendants have employed several other similarly situated employees like Plaintiff who have not been paid overtime and/or minimum wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours weekly from the filing of this complaint back three years. The Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a handyman and maintenance worker from on or about December 22, 2015 through on or about January 13, 2018. Defendant's business activities involve those to which the Fair Labor Standards Act applies. Both the Defendant's business and the Plaintiff's work for the Defendant affected interstate commerce for the relevant time period. Plaintiff's work for the Defendant affected interstate commerce for the relevant time period because the materials and goods that Plaintiff used on a constant and/or continual basis and/or that were supplied to him by the Defendant to use on the job moved through interstate commerce prior to and/or subsequent to Plaintiff's use of the same. The Plaintiff's work for the Defendant was actually in and/or so closely related to the movement of commerce while he worked for the Defendant that the Fair Labor Standards Act applies to Plaintiff's work for the Defendant.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J.H. Zidell, Esq. J.H. ZIDELL, P.A. 300 71st Street, Suite 605 Miami Beach, Florida 33141 Telephone: (305) 865 6766 Facsimile: (305) 865 7167 E-mail: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM OZARK PIZZA: "Paul" Suit Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages under FLSA -------------------------------------------------------------- ALICIA PAUL, individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons, the Plaintiff, v. OZARK PIZZA COMPANY, LLC, the Defendant, Case No. 6:18-cv-03042-MDH (W.D. Mo., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant has operated approximately 50 Papa John's franchise stores in Missouri, Illinois, Arkansas, Colorado and Oklahoma during times relevant. Defendant employs delivery drivers who use their own automobiles to deliver pizzas and other food items to its customers. Instead of reimbursing its delivery drivers for the reasonably approximate costs of the business use of their vehicles, Defendant uses a flawed method to determine reimbursement rates that provides such an unreasonably low rate beneath any reasonable approximation of the expenses they incur that the drivers' unreimbursed expenses cause their net wages to fall below the federal and Missouri minimum wages during some or all workweeks (nominal wages -- unreimbursed vehicle costs = subminimum wages).[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Richard M. Paul III, Esq. Sean R. Cooper, Esq. PAUL LLP 601 Walnut Street, Suite 300 Kansas City, MO 64106 Telephone: (816) 984 8100 E-mail: Rick@PaulLLP.com Sean@PaulLLP.com - and - Mark A. Potashnick, Esq. WEINHAUS & POTASHNICK 11500 Olive Boulevard., Suite 133 St. Louis, MO 63141 Telephone: (314) 997 9150 E-mail: markp@wp-attorneys.com PARLIER CITY, CA: "Jimenez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------------- ADOLFO MARTINEZ JIMENEZ, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiff, v. CITY OF PARLIER, the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-00210-DAD-EPG (E.D. Cal., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime and other compensation, interest, liquidated damages, costs of suit and reasonable attorney fees, and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Defendant implemented an illegal compensation computation method which undercounted Plaintiff's "regular rate" of pay. Defendant's method of calculating Plaintiff's "regular rate" of pay resulted in under-payment for overtime hours worked. The Defendant permitted Plaintiff to perform overtime work without proper compensation. On October 25, 2017, the City and Plaintiff entered into a tolling agreement which preserved the Parties' respective statute of limitations defense existing as of the effective date of the tolling agreement. From October of 2014 through March of 2015 and from the beginning of January 2017 to early January of 2017, when the canine died, the City did not pay Plaintiff for his time spent transporting, boarding, training, grooming, feeding, or otherwise caring for the dog while off duty. The City was never exempt under the FLSA from compensating Plaintiff for transporting, boarding, training, grooming, feeding, or otherwise caring for the dog while off duty. The City's failure to compensate Plaintiff for transporting, boarding, training, grooming, feeding, or otherwise caring for the canine while off duty impermissibly reduced the amount paid to Plaintiff both in his minimum wages as well as his overtime. The Defendant is a political subdivision of the State of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gary M. Messing, Esq. Jason H Jasmine, Esq. D. Paul Bird II, Esq. MESSING ADAM & JASMINE LLP 235 Montgomery St., Suite 828 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 266 1800 Facsimile: (415) 266 1128 E-mail: gary@majlabor.com jason@majlabor.com paul@majlabor.com PATHWAY LEASING: "Fisher" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------- JESSE FISHER and ANTHONY DENNIS; both individuals, the Plaintiffs, v. PATHWAY LEASING LLC, a Colorado limited liability company; MATTHEW HARRIS, an individual; and BOOKER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC., a Texas corporation, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00307-CMA (D. Colo., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants billed themselves as lessor of trucks for independent contractors, when in fact, Defendants sought to employ truckers to move goods in commerce without paying the cost of hiring and retaining employees. More specifically, the Carrier Defendant acted as joint employers with the Pathway Defendants in employing Plaintiffs to move goods in commerce. The Plaintiffs were duped into signing lease agreements for trucks believing they could operate those trucks as independent contractors and improve their lives through the exercise of entrepreneurial spirit. In reality, after signing these lease agreements, and other ancillary agreements, Defendants controlled every aspect of Plaintiffs' work, including who they could drive for, how and when they could repair or maintain their trucks, and incredulously, Defendants even required the companies that Plaintiffs drove for to remit Plaintiffs' pay to Defendants so that Defendants could make deductions from Plaintiffs' pay and issue them paychecks. These deductions never included payroll deductions mandated by state and federal law governing the payment of wages, but rather, included improper and unlawful deductions that resulted in Plaintiffs being paid less than minimum wage on many occasions. Some Plaintiffs were paid what equated to just a few dollars per hour despite working an average of 70 hours per pay period. The Defendants engaged in this behavior willfully and without regard for the economic welfare of their employees and with full knowledge that Plaintiffs were conferring benefits upon Defendants that were improperly procured.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: John R. Crone, Esq. ANDRUS WAGSTAFF PC 7171 West Alaska Drive Lakewood, CO 80226 Telephone: (303) 376 6360 E-mail: John.Crone@andruswagstaff.com PATHWAY LEASING: Fails to Pay Minimum Wages, Fisher Says -------------------------------------------------------- JESSE FISHER, an individual, the Plaintiff, v. PATHWAY LEASING LLC, a Colorado limited liability company; MATTHEW HARRIS, an individual; and INTERSTATE DISTRIBUTOR CO., a Washington corporation registered to conduct business in Colorado, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00309 (D. Colo., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants billed themselves as lessor of trucks for independent contractors, when in fact, Defendants sought to employ truckers to move goods in commerce without paying the cost of hiring and retaining employees. More specifically, the Carrier Defendant acted as joint employers with the Pathway Defendants in employing Plaintiffs to move goods in commerce. The Plaintiffs were duped into signing lease agreements for trucks believing they could operate those trucks as independent contractors and improve their lives through the exercise of entrepreneurial spirit. In reality, after signing these lease agreements, and other ancillary agreements, Defendants controlled every aspect of Plaintiffs' work, including who they could drive for, how and when they could repair or maintain their trucks, and incredulously, Defendants even required the companies that Plaintiffs drove for to remit Plaintiffs' pay to Defendants so that Defendants could make deductions from Plaintiffs' pay and issue them paychecks. These deductions never included payroll deductions mandated by state and federal law governing the payment of wages, but rather, included improper and unlawful deductions that resulted in Plaintiffs being paid less than minimum wage on many occasions. Some Plaintiffs were paid what equated to just a few dollars per hour despite working an average of 70 hours per pay period. The Defendants engaged in this behavior willfully and without regard for the economic welfare of their employees and with full knowledge that Plaintiffs were conferring benefits upon Defendants that were improperly procured.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: John R. Crone, Esq. ANDRUS WAGSTAFF PC 7171 West Alaska Drive Lakewood, CO 80226 Telephone: (303) 376 6360 E-mail: John.Crone@andruswagstaff.com PAX ASSIST: Fails to Pay for Overtime Work, Stewart Claims ---------------------------------------------------------- Samantha Stewart, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Pax Assist, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 700960-2018 (N.Y. Sup., Jan 19, 2018) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, maximum liquidated damages and attorney's fees, pursuant to the New York Labor Law. Ms. Stewart was employed by the Defendant on June 2016 as wheelchair assistant performing manual task such as handling and pushing wheelchairs with passengers throughout her workday. According to the complaint, Plaintiff was an hourly employee at a regular rate of pay of $11 per hour; worked 30-35 or more hours per week; paid on a bi-weekly basis; and was not provided with the notice required by the New York Labor Law. Pax Assist, Inc. is a New York corporation with business address located in Queens County, New York. The Company began operations in 2007 as a wheelchair ONLY company. The Company currently provide wheelchair services to JFK Terminals 4 & 5.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Abdul K. Hassan, Esq. ABDUL HASSAN LAW GROUP, PLLC 215-28 Hillside Avenue Queens Village, NY 11427 Telephone: (718) 740-1000 Facsimile: (718) 740-2000 E-mail: abdul@abdulhassan.com PETORE ASSOCIATES: Par Plumbing Sues over Unpaid Services --------------------------------------------------------- PAR PLUMBING CO. INC. on behalf of itself and on behalf of all others entitled to share in the funds received by PETORE ASSOCIATES, INC., as Trustee, in connection with the improvement of real property known as 200 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York, Block: 825; Lot: 31, the Plaintiff, v. PETORE ASSOCIATES, INC., TED G. VITALE, NATIONWIDE MUTUTAL INSURANCE COMPANY, PIER HEAD ASSOCIATES, LTD., ANDREW JAMES INTERIORS, INC., A & F FIRE PROTECTION CO., INC., LIBERTY CONTRACTING CORP., ISLAND PAINTING, INC., UNITED AIRCONDITIONING CORP., and "JOHN DOE No. 1" Through "JOHN DOE No. 100," said names being fictitious, true names being those unknown individuals and/or entities liable for the diversion of trust funds pursuant to Article 3-A of the Lien Law of the State of New York, in connection with the construction project at 200 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York, Block: 825; Lot: 31, the Defendants, Case No. 650641/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover trust funds as defined by Article 3-A of New York Lien Law, in connection with a plumbing work project.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Constantine T. Tzifas, Esq. ARTHUR J. SEMIMS, P.C. 286 Madison Avenue - Suite 1801 New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 557 5055 PRISHA COSMETICS: Fails to Pay OT & Minimum Wages, Garcia Says -------------------------------------------------------------- MIRNA GARCIA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. PRISHA COSMETICS, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendant, Case No.BC693273 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover overtime wages and minimum wages under California Labor Code. According to the complaint, for at least four years prior to the filing of this action and continuing to the present, the Defendants have had a consistent policy of failing to pay overtime wages to Plaintiff and other non-exempt employees in the State of California in violation of California state wage and hour laws as a result of, without limitation, Plaintiff and similarly situated employees routinely working over eight hours per day or 40 hours per week by, among other things, failing to accurately track all hours worked and failing to pay for all hours worked at the proper overtime rate of pay.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David D. Bibiyan, Esq. Diego Aviles, Esq. BIBIYAN LAW GROUP 1801 Century Park East, Suite 2600 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 438 5555 E-mail: david@tomorrowlaw.com diego@tomorrowlaw.com PROFESSIONAL WATER: Garners Sue over Water Softening System ----------------------------------------------------------- LLOYD GARNER and REBECCA GARNER, on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. PROFESSIONAL WATER SERVICES, INC.; AQUION, INC d/b/a RAINSOFT; KEITH BOROCHANER; JOHN DOE BUSINESSES 1-30; and JOHN DOES 1-30, the Defendants, Case No. MID-L-000823-18 (N.J. Super., Middlesex County, Feb. 7, 2018), seeks statutory damages of $100 for themselves and a class of other customers similarly situated under the Truth-in-Consumer Contract Warranty and Notice Act. This action raises both putative class action claims and individual claims against the Defendants, a home improvement contractor and its owner, based on their violations of the Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:8-1, et seq., Home Improvement Contractor Registration Act, the Home Improvement Contractor Registration Act Regulations, and the New Jersey Home Improvement Regulations (HIP), N.J.A.C. 13:45A-16.1 et seq. The Plaintiffs also seek treble damages for themselves and Classes of others similarly situated under the CFA, along with declaratory and injunctive relief, for ascertainable losses suffered from Defendants' unconscionable and deceptive practices in providing a lifetime warranty for a home water softening system and promising to provide a lifetime supply of free soap and cleaning products and failing to honor same.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs and those similarly situated: Bharati Sharma Patel, Esq. THE WOLF LAW FIRM, LLC 1520 U.S. Highway 130, Suite 101 North Brunswick, NJ 08902 Telephone: (732) 545 7900 Facsimile: (732) 545 1030 RANGER READY: Refuses to Pay Overtime Premium, Thompson Says ------------------------------------------------------------ TONY THOMPSON, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, the PLAINTIFF, v. RANGER READY MIX, LLC, AND AN MCBRIDE, INDIVIDUALLY, the DEFENDANTS, Case No. 1:18-cv-00123 (W.D. Tex., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, litigation costs, costs of court, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. According to the complaint, Defendants produce and deliver concrete within the State of Texas. Plaintiff and the collective class worked for Defendants as mechanics. In order to avoid responsibility for payment of overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act, Defendants improperly classified Plaintiff and the collective class as independent contractors. The Plaintiff and all others similarly situated were/are hourly, non-exempt, full time employees. Throughout their employment, Defendants repeatedly refused to pay Plaintiff and all others similarly situated overtime premiums for any hours worked over forty per week. For at least three years prior to the filing of this complaint, the Defendants willfully committed violations of the FLSA by classifying their mechanics as independent contractors and failing to pay them overtime premiums for any hours worked over forty per week. Ranger Ready Mix is a licensed and bonded freight shipping and trucking company running freight hauling business from Austin, Texas.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq. DUNHAM & JONES, P.C. 1800 Guadalupe Street Austin, TX 78701 Telephone: (512) 777 7777 Facsimile: (512) 340 4051 E-mail: doug@dunhamlaw.com REJUVENATING CONCEPTS: Fails to Pay Minimum Wage, Hohensee Says --------------------------------------------------------------- LYDIA HOHENSEE, on behalf of herself and other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. REJUVENATING CONCEPTS, INC., and DELISA ROWE, the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-01290 (E.D. La, Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover minimum wage and overtime pay, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs worked hours while employed by Defendants for which they either received no compensation, for which they were improperly paid at a rate less than one-and-one times their normal hourly rates, and/or for which they were paid below minimum wage.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: George B. Recile, Esq. Preston L. Hayes, Esq. Ryan P. Monsour, Esq. Matthew A. Sherman, Esq. Barry W. Sartin, Esq. Patrick R. Follette, Esq. CHEHARDY, SHERMAN, WILLIAMS, MURRAY, RECILE, STAKELUM & HAYES, L.L.P. One Galleria Boulevard, Suite 1100 Metairie, LA 70001 Telephone: (504) 833 5600 Facsimile: (504) 613 4528 ROCKROSE DEVELOPMENT: Faces "Bishop" Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Rockrose Development LLC. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Rockrose Development LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-01204 (S.D. N.Y., February 11, 2018). Rockrose is known as a neighborhood pioneer and is respected as one of New York's premier luxury real estate owner-manager- developers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Joseph H Mizrahi Law PC 337 Avenue W Suite 2f Brooklyn, NY 11223 Tel: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (347) 665-1545 Email: jmizrahilaw@gmail.com ROOTER HERO: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Yearian Says ------------------------------------------------------ JAMES YEARIAN, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. ROOTER HERO PLUMBING, INC., a California corporation; RHSFND, INC., a California corporation; ROOTER HERO SAN GABRIEL, INC., a California corporation; ROOTER HERO 9, INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, the Defendants, Case No. BC693216 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover all overtime wages and minimum wages under California Labor Code. The Defendants provide residential and commercial plumbing services throughout, among other areas, Southern California, including in Los Angeles, Orange and Ventura Counties. Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a non-exempt employee from approximately June 5, 2017 through approximately June 15, 2017 when Plaintiff was injured and commenced a medical leave of absence. Plaintiff performed various duties throughout his employment including, without limitation, providing plumbing services in the field at locations of Defendants' customers. During his employment with Defendants, Plaintiff was typically scheduled to commence work at approximately 7:00 a.m. by checking in with Defendants, and would work until approximately between 4:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. when he had to check-in again, depending on when the requisite work was completed for the day. Defendants kept track of Plaintiffs work time by using electronic tablets. However, Plaintiff was not actually compensated for the hours he worked each week. By way of example, on June 11, 2017, Plaintiffs "Start" and "First Arrival Time" is listed on his timesheet as 7:53 a.m. For that same day, Plaintiffs "End" time on his timesheet is listed as 16:01 p.m. Thus, Plaintiff worked for 8 hours and 8 minutes on June 11, 2017. Yet, Plaintiff was only given credit for working 3 hours and 47 minutes for that day. This was because Defendants refused to pay Plaintiff for what it considered down time during his shift despite the fact that Plaintiff remained under Defendants' direction and control for all time between his start and end times worked and recorded. Furthermore, Defendants would only agree to pay Plaintiff for time he actually was at customers' locations to perform services, but would not pay for his other work time during the day when he was otherwise still under Defendants' direction and control. There were several days Plaintiff worked that similarly had Defendants fail to pay him for all time worked, therefore resulting in Plaintiff being underpaid minimum, agreed-upon and overtime wages.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Scott M. Lidman, Esq. Elizabeth Nguyen, Esq. LIDMAN LAW, APC 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (424) 322 4772 Facsimile: (424) 322 4775 E-mail: slidman@lidmanlaw.com enguyen@lidmanlaw.com - and - Paul K. Haines, Esq. Tuvia Korobkin, Esq. HAINES LAW GROUP, APC 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (424) 292 2350 Facsimile: (424) 292 2355 E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com tkorobkin@haineslawgroup.com RUSTY'S PIZZA: Faces "May" Suit in California Superior Court ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Rusty's Pizza Parlors, Inc. The case is styled as Douglas May on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Rusty's Pizza Parlors, Inc., Defendant, Case No. BCV-18-100304 (Cal. Super. Ct., February 9, 2018). Rusty's Pizza Parlors, Inc. is a low-key pizza hub and a fantastic spot for families to dine together.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Amit Peery, Esq. The Peery Law Firm 27200 Agoura Rd Ste 101 Calabasas, CA 91301 Tel: (818) 995-4079 Fax: (818) 995-6514 Email: ap@peerylaw.com SAW ENTERPRISES: "Velez" Suit Seeks Unpaid OT Wages under FLSA -------------------------------------------------------------- WILSON VELEZ, ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND THOSE SIMILARLY SITUATED, the Plaintiff, v. SAW ENTERPRISES INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION, the Defendant, Case No. 8:18-cv-00315-SDM-CPT (M.D. Fla., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated, declaratory relief, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff has worked for Defendants as a Home Service Technician since May 2017. The Plaintiff primarily works in the St. Petersburg/Clearwater area for Defendant, but may travel to different parts of the state of Florida for his work for Defendant. Upon arriving at the first customer's job. Plaintiff would clock out to end his work day. However, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff and the other In Home Service Technicians for all hours worked during the day by claiming that the "variance" time shows the work should have been completed in less hours.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: C. Ryan Morgan, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 20 N. Orange Ave., 14th Floor P.O. Box 4979 Orlando, FL 32802 4979 Telephone: (407) 420 1414 Facsimile: (407) 245 3401 E-mail: RMorgan@forthepeople.com SHERRY FRONTENAC: "Chera" Suit Moved to Southern Dist. of Florida ----------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Smadar Chera, and other similarly situated non-exempt employees, the Plaintiff, v. Sherry Frontenac Resorts, Inc., a Florida profit corporation and Joel Sussman, individually, the Defendants, Case No. 17-029565 CA 01, was removed from the 11th Judicial Circuit of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami) on Feb. 9. 2018. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:18-cv- 20514-UU to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Ursula Ungaro.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason Saul Remer, Esq. REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC Court House Tower 44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 416 5000 Facsimile: (305) 416 5005 E-mail: jremer@rgpattorneys.com Attorneys for Sherry Frontenac Resorts, Inc.: Valerie Lorraine Hooker, Esq. Mendy Halberstam, Esq. JACKSON LEWIS P.C. 2 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 3500 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 577 7600 Facsimile: (305) 373 4466 E-mail: valerie.hooker@jacksonlewis.com - and - Mendy Halberstam, Esq. JACKSON LEWIS P.C. One Biscayne Tower Two South Biscayne Blvd. Suite 3500 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 577 7600 Facsimile: (305) 373 4466 E-mail: mendy.halberstam@jacksonlewis.com SOBE MIAMI: "Ortega" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages & OT under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------- RAYMOND ORTEGA, individually, and on behalf of all other employees of Defendants similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. SOBE MIAMI, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, d/b/a THE PALACE SOUTH BEACH, and THOMAS J. DONALL, an individual, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-20489-UU (S.D. Fla., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages and overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the Florida Minimum Wage Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and other employees similarly situated were required by Defendants to perform non- tipped work for which Plaintiff was paid at the reduced tip credit rate. Examples of such non-tipped generating labor, which the Plaintiff performed include: (1) bar set up assignments; (2) table set up, break downs, and cleaning projects; and (3) maintenance and janitorial undertakings in all areas of Defendants' establishment, including the bathroom. The non-tipped work for which Plaintiff was paid at a reduced rate exceeded 20% of Plaintiff's time at work. The Plaintiff and other employees similarly situated did not have a clear understanding as to how they were to be compensated with respect to their work. Despite the fact that Plaintiff was a timed employee, Plaintiff and other employees similarly situated were required to give a percentage of their tips to the managers. The Plaintiff was never provided notice that he would be paid pursuant to the "tip credit" exception.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Santiago J. Padilla, Esq. FOWLER RODRIGUEZ LLP 355 Alhambra Circle, Suite 801 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (786) 364 8400 Facsimile: (786) 364 8401 E-mail: spadilla@frfirm.com SOCAL JIB: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Bonola" Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------- FERNANDO BONOLA, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOCAL JIB FOOD MANAGEMENT, INC., doing business as JACK IN THE BOX; SB FOOD EXPRESS, INC., doing business as JACK IN THE BOX; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC690994 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 19, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for unpaid regular hours, overtime hours, minimum wages, wages for missed meal and rest periods. Mr. Bonola was employed by SB FOOD from January 21, 2014 to January 12, 2015. He was employed by SOCAL JIB from January 13, 2015 to February 16, 2017. He worked at the Jack in the Box restaurant located at 820 N. Harbor Drive, Santa Ana, California 92703. His job duties included taking orders, preparing food, and cleaning the restaurant. Socal Jib Food Management, Inc. is a privately held company in Azusa, CA and is a Single Location business. It is categorized under Management Services. SB Food Express, Inc. is an active Californian business entity incorporated on July 18 1991.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ronald H. Bae, Esq. Olivia D. Scharrer, Esq. AEQUITAS LEGAL GROUP 1156 E. Green Street, Suite 200 Pasadena, CA 91106 Telephone: (213) 674-6080 Facsimile: (213) 674-6081 SOY SAUCE: Fails to Pay Overtime Pay, "Feng" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------- HANMING FENG, TIAN FU ZENG, XIN HUI ZHANG, and PO MAN YAM, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOY SAUCE LLC, d/b/a Soy Sauce LLC; GAVRIEL BORENSTEIN, ELIE KATZ, and KONG SANG WONG, a/k/a Peter Wong, Defendants, Case No. 700975/2018 (N.Y. Sup., Jan. 21, 2018) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages and attorneys' fees, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, Plaintiffs' hours worked per week were always given as 30, rather than the true 62.5 hours; pay checks would always be for $262.50 before taxes were withheld, and $242.02 after taxes; an additional $264.98 was paid in cash per week, receiving a net pay of $506 per week. Plaintiff was paid a flat salary of $506 per week no matter how many hours he actually worked. Mr. Feng was employed by Defendants to work as miscellaneous kitchen workder. Mr. Feng was employed by Defendants to work as an oil wok. Mr. Zhang and Mr. Yam was employed by Defendants to work as a chef. Soy Sauce LLC, d/b/a Soy Sauce LLC is a domestic limited liability company organized under the laws of the State of New York. Mr. Borenstein is the owner and manager of Soy Sauce LLC, d/b/a Soy Sauce LLC.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John Troy, Esq. Kibum Byun, Esq. TROY LAW, PLLC 41-25 Kissena Boulevard, Suite 119 Flushing, NY 11355 Telephone: (718) 762-1324 E-mail: johntroy@troypllc.com STAMPS.COM INC: "Lopez" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- JUAN LOPEZ and NICHOLAS DIXON, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiffs, v. STAMPS.COM, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-01101 (C.D. Cal., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages, award of liquidated damages, injunctive and declaratory relief, attendant penalties, and award of attorneys' fees and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendant provides call center services to their customers primarily from a "brick-and-mortar" all center facility in El Segundo, California. The Defendant employed Plaintiffs as non- exempt hourly call center employees in the El Segundo, California call center. Some CSRs were permitted to occasionally work from home via a remote virtual private network ("VPN"). According to the complaint, the U.S. Department of Labor recognizes that call center jobs, like those held by Defendant's CSRs, are homogenous; in July 2008, it issued Fact Sheet No. 64 to alert call center employees to some of the abuses which are prevalent in the industry. One of those abuses, which is at issue in this case, is the employer's refusal to pay for work "from the beginning of the first principal activity of the workday to the end of the last principal activity of the workday." More specifically, Fact Sheet No. 64 condemns an employer's non- payment of an employee's necessary pre-shift activities: "An example of the first principal activity of the day for agents/specialists/representatives working in call centers includes starting the computer to download work instructions, computer applications and work-related emails." Additionally, the FLSA requires that "[a] daily or weekly record of all hours worked, including time spent in pre-shift and post-shift job- related activities, must be kept." Defendant requires their hourly CSRs to work a full-time schedule, plus overtime. However, Defendant does not compensate the CSRs for all work performed; instead, Defendant only pays the CSRs after they have loaded several essential software programs on their computers and are available to accept calls. This policy results in CSRs not being paid for all time worked, including overtime. Defendant's CSRs use multiple computer programs, software programs, and applications in the course of performing their responsibilities. These programs and applications are an integral, indispensable, and important part of the CSRs' work as they cannot perform their jobs effectively without them. Defendant's CSRs perform the same basic job duties and are required to use the same or similar computer programs, software programs, applications, and phone systems. Defendant also required or permitted CSRs to perform off-the-clock work at the end of their shifts when they were required to shut-down and log- out of the essential computer software used to perform their jobs. Additionally, Defendant maintained a common policy which required Plaintiffs to assist other CSRs at the beginning and end of their shifts while they were off-the-clock when there was a surplus of "calls in the que."[BN] Counsel for Plaintiffs and Proposed Class and Collective Members: David Yeremian, Esq. DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 535 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 705 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 230 8380 Facsimile: (818) 230 0308 E-mail: david@yeremianlaw.com - and - Kevin J. Stoops, Esq. Charles R. Ash IV, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. One Towne Square, Suite 1700 Southfield, MI 48076 Telephone: (248) 355 0300 Facsimile: (248) 436 8453 E-mail: kstoops@sommerspc.com crash@sommerspc.com STANLEY STEEMER: "Bradley" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------- MICHAEL BRADLEY, on behalf of himself, and all other plaintiffs similarly situated, known and unknown, the Plaintiff, v. STANLEY STEEMER INTERNATIONAL, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv- 01017 (N.D. Ill., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages and overtime under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Portal-to- Portal Act, and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. The Plaintiff is a former employee who performed cleaning services for Defendant and was compensated at varying hourly rates of pay and worked over 40 hours per week, including work that was not recorded or accounted for by Defendant's time keeping system. All other unnamed Plaintiffs known and unknown, are past or present employees who work or worked for Defendant and were paid hourly and also performed work off the clock. As an employee performing duties for an enterprise engaged in commerce, the named Plaintiff and all members of the Plaintiff Class were also engaged in commerce as defined by the FLSA. The total amount of hours worked by Plaintiff and members of the Plaintiff Class, and therefore the total number of regular and or overtime hours for which additional compensation is owed, is information that is substantially, if not completely, within the control and possession of Defendant, in that Defendant recorded or should have recorded such hours pursuant to the record keeping requirements found in Title 29 CFR, Part 516.[BN] Attorney for Plaintiff, and all other Plaintiffs similarly situated, known or unknown: John William Billhorn, Esq. BILLHORN LAW FIRM 53 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 840 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 853 1450 STORCK USA: Mislabels Caramel Candy Packs, Kpakpoe-Awei Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- JEFFREY KPAKPOE-AWEI, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. STORCK USA, L.P., the Defendant, Case No. 7:18-cv-01086 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks all recoverable compensatory and other damages sustained by Plaintiff and the Class as a result of deceptive and otherwise improper business practices that Defendant engages in with respect to the packaging of its 2.75 ounce bag of Werther's Original Sugar Free Chew Caramels candy product, which is regularly sold at brick-and- mortar stores, such was Walgreens, and online. The Product packaging misrepresents two things: a) the amount of candy in each Product bag, and b) the effect the Product has on blood glucose levels. The Product is mass produced and packaged in non-transparent plastic bags of standardized size, with a standardized quantity of candy in each bag. Plaintiff brings this proposed consumer class action on behalf of herself and all other persons who, from the applicable limitations period up to and including the present, purchased the Product for consumption and not for resale. The Defendant manufactured, marketed and sold the Product throughout the United States and the State of New York. Defendant purposefully sold the Product with non-functional slack-fill as part of a systematic practice and misrepresented the effect the Product has on blood glucose levels. Defendant violated statutes enacted in each of the fifty states and the District of Columbia that are designed to protect consumers against unfair, deceptive, fraudulent and unconscionable trade and business practices and false advertising. Storck USA, L.P. produces and markets confectionery products. It offers various candies, chocolates, chewy caramels, and sugar- free hard candy products through a network of stores in the United States. The company was founded in 1975 and is based in Chicago, Illinois.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class: Anne Seelig, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39th Street, Second Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: 212 465 1180 Facsimile: 212 465 1181 SUMAIDA & KHURANA: Faces "Bishop" Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sumaida & Khurana, LLC. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Sumaida & Khurana, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-01205 (S.D. N.Y., February 11, 2018). Sumaida & Khurana, LLC is a New York-based development firm founded by Saif Sumaida and Amit Khurana, establishing a new paradigm in global luxury real estate development.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq. Joseph H Mizrahi Law PC 337 Avenue W Suite 2f Brooklyn, NY 11223 Tel: (917) 299-6612 Fax: (347) 665-1545 Email: jmizrahilaw@gmail.com SUPER MICRO COMPUTER: Roofers Union Files Securities Class Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- UNITED UNION OF ROOFERS, WATERPROOFERS & ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL UNION NO. 8 WBPA FUND, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. SUPER MICRO COMPUTER, INC., CHARLES LIANG, and HOWARD HIDESHIMA, the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-00850 (N.D. Cal., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. This case is a class action on behalf of persons and entities that acquired Super Micro securities between August 5, 2016 and January 30, 2018, inclusive, against the Defendants Super Micro, its Chief Executive Officer Charles Liang, and its Chief Financial Officer Howard Hideshima. Super Micro, headquartered in San Jose, California, designs, develops, manufactures and sells server solutions. The Company's products include servers, motherboards, SPU Systems, chassis and other accessories. Beginning on August 29, 2017, Super Micro's stock price began to significantly decline after the Company revealed that it would need to delay releasing its 2017 Annual Report on Form 10-K pending an internal investigation into its accounting practices. That internal investigation, undertaken by the Company's Audit Committee, was focused on the illicit timing of revenue recognition of certain sales transactions that were improperly booked. The Audit Committee completed its investigation in late January 2018, but has yet to release its findings. On January 30, 2018, at the same time that the Company announced the completion of the investigation, it also announced that Defendant Hideshima, along with Super Micro's Senior VP of International Sales and Senior VP of Worldwide Sales, had "resigned," effective immediately. Additionally, Super Micro has yet to file its 2017 Annual Report, informing investors that the Company was "unable to provide a date as to when the Form 10-K will be filed or to determine whether the Company's historical financial statements will be adjusted or, if so, the amount of any such adjustment(s) and what periods any such adjustments may impact." Investors were shocked to learn that Super Micro was improperly recognizing revenue and as a result, would not be able to timely file its 2017 Annual Report. In all, after Super Micro first announced the delayed filing of its Annual Report on August 29, 2017 through early February 2018, the Company's stock price has fallen nearly 30% wiping out hundreds of millions in market capitalization. Throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that Super Micro was improperly and illicitly recognizing revenue on certain sales transactions; (2) that the Company failed to implement and maintain the proper internal controls to prevent improper and illicit recognition of revenue (3) Super Micro's financial results were not calculated in accordance with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles; (4) Super Micro's revenues and income were artificially inflated as a result of its illicit business practices; (5) that these practices caused the Company to be vulnerable to potential civil and criminal liability, and adverse regulatory action; and (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' statements about Super Micro's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Richard M. Heimann, Esq. Katherine C. Lubin, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Telephone: (415) 956 1000 Facsimile: (415) 956 1008 E-mail: rheimann@lchb.com kbenson@lchb.com SYNERGY PHARMACEUTICALS: CRG Loan Has Deceptive Terms, Lee Says --------------------------------------------------------------- DAVID LEE, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. SYNERGY PHARMACEUTICALS INC., GARY S. JACOB, and GARY GEMIGNANI, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00873 (E.D.N.Y., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover damages in favor of Plaintiff and the other Class Members against all Defendants, jointly and severally, for all damages sustained as a result of Defendants' wrongdoing relating to CRG Loan deceptive statement. The case is a securities class action on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Synergy between September 5, 2017 and November 14, 2017, inclusive. The Action is brought against Synergy, Gary S. Jacob, the Company's Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer during the Class Period, and Gary Gemignani, the Company's Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, for their dissemination of materially false and misleading statements and concealment of material adverse facts in violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Synergy, throughout the Class Period, had only one FDA-approved commercial product, TRULANCE (TM) (plecanatide), a drug for the once-daily treatment of chronic idiopathic constipation ("CIC). Trulance was approved by the FDA on January 19, 2017 and became available for purchase at the end of the first quarter of 2017. Prior to and during the Class Period, Synergy had an internal staff of researchers and positioned itself as a go-it-alone inventor, manufacturer and seller of its own products. It eschewed licensing partnerships with established drug manufacturers and distributors to disseminate Trulance; instead, choosing to manufacture and distribute Trulance through third party contract manufacturers and a cadre of 250 sales representatives. By foregoing partnering with an established drug manufacturer, Synergy sought to retain the profits generated by Trulance, even though that would increase the initial costs to the Company and set back the timeline for achieving profitability. The Company's go-it-alone strategy also meant that it needed to fund its operations through equity offerings and/or loans. To that end, on September 5, 2017, the beginning of the Class Period, Synergy announced that it closed on a $300 million senior secured loan from CRG Partners III L.P., providing an immediate cash infusion of $100 million with a second $100 million tranche of CRG Loan financing less than six months later, on or before February 28, 2018, and a third tranche of up to $100 million in the following 13 months. Defendant Gemignani extolled the newly- secured loan as "non-dilutive". All emphasis within this Class Action Complaint for Violation of the Federal Securities Laws is added unless otherwise stated. to the equity interests of the Company's shareholders while providing a material boost to Synergy's "cash position." Gemignani represented that the CRG Loan gave Synergy the "financial flexibility to continue to execute on the launch of Trulance and achieve our business objectives, which we are confident will ultimately maximize long- term shareholder value" by providing the Company "with access to capital for support of our commercialization of Trulance and funds our current plans for the Company through 2019 when, based on our current assumptions, we expect to be cash flow breakeven." As a result of these and further assurances that Synergy had: (i) arranged ample debt financing to keep its operations running through 2019; (ii) maintained a large capital cushion to achieve its business objectives; and (iii) had a manageable cash burn rate, the investing public was led to believe that Synergy could and would successfully develop and profit from Trulance without needing to raise additional capital through additional equity offerings and without diluting stockholders' outstanding equity interests. The CRG Loan was, however, subject to various significant onerous terms and conditions undisclosed by the Defendants that rendered materially false and misleading their statements regarding the CRG Loan, its non-dilutive effect, its availability "if and when needed," and its sufficiency to fund the Company's operations through 2019 and permit it to achieve its business objectives. When Defendants disclosed Synergy's entry into the CRG Loan, they were required to speak truthfully and provide all material information necessary to ensure that their statements were neither false nor misleading. This duty was heightened since the Defendants did not, at that time, file the CRG Loan document with the SEC or otherwise make it publicly available. On November 14, 2017, the end of the Class Period, the truth finally came out. The CRG Loan had critical undisclosed terms and conditions that prevented the Company from accessing funds "when needed," and that all but assured that Synergy would be required to conduct a dilutive secondary equity offering or offerings to fund its operations through 2019 and achieve its business objectives and secure the second $100 million tranche of the CRG Loan. Indeed, on November 14, 2017, Synergy conducted a secondary offering of approximately 22 million shares at $2.58 per share with warrants to purchase shares in the future at $2.86 per share, for net proceeds of $52.4 million. The offering was materially dilutive of current shareholders' equity interests, contrary to Defendants' representations. The 10% dilution of the outstanding equity (and 20% dilution if the warrants are exercised), resulted in an immediate 10% drop in the Company's stock price, to the detriment of those persons and entities who purchased Synergy stock during the Class Period. This dilutive capital increase was described by investors as "unexpected," "blindsiding," "reducing confidence in management," stoking "fears about further unexpected dilution," "sending the stock into a tailspin," and supposedly "unnecessary given current cash reserves and access to [the CRG Loan] non-dilutive debt financing." As the market digested the news and the full extent of Defendants' materially false and misleading statements was made apparent, Synergy's share price continued its downward spiral; trading as low as $1.68 per share on the following day, November 15, 2017.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph H. Weiss, Esq. Mark D. Smilow, Esq. Joshua M. Rubin, Esq. WEISSLAW LLP 1500 Broadway New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 682 3025 SYNERMED INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, "Estrada" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- DELMY ESTRADA, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SYNERMED INC., and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC690949 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 19, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for non-payment of wages for all hours worked and missed meal periods or rest breaks. Ms. Estrada was employed by the Defendants as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee, from March 2015 to November 2016, in the State of California, County of Los Angeles. SynerMed, Inc. develops customized information technology and business management solutions for independent physicians. The company offers cloud based SynerMed CONNECT portal that provides an array of clinical information, practice enhancement and management tools; and comprehensive online practice and patient management by allowing administrators and physicians to access, store, and process information. It also provides CAREGIVER portal that offers features to assist in-home supportive service consumers and providers; nurse lines; Medicaid and Medicare programs; ambulatory ICU; a platform that allows health plans to access claims, authorizations, and healthcare transactions in real-time; MEMBER portal that puts patients in control of their healthcare by communicating with physicians and healthcare providers through a Web portal; and advocacy for independent physicians at local, state, and federal levels. SynerMed, Inc. was founded in 1995 and is based in Monterey Park, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Edwin Aiwazian, Esq. LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE, PC 410 West Arden Avenue, Suite 203 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 265-1020 Facsimile: (818) 265-1021 TASTEBUDS CATERING: "Ramirez" Suit Moved to S.D. Florida -------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled Ruben Ramirez, and other similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Tastebuds Catering, LLC, a Florida limited liability company and Rachel Gebaide, individually, the Defendants, Case No. 18-000918, was removed from the 17th Judicial Circuit for Broward County, Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Ft Lauderdale) on Feb. 7, 2018. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:18-cv-60277-WPD to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge William P. Dimitrouleas. Tastebuds Catering specialize in off premise catering.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Edilberto O. Marban, Esq. 2655 S. LeJeune Road, Suite 804 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (305) 448 9292 Facsimile: (305) 448 9477 E-mail: marbanlaw@gmail.com The Defendants are represented by: Rachel D Gebaide, Esq. 215 North Eola Drive Orlando, FL 32802 Telephone: (407) 843 4600 E-mail: rachel.gebaide@lowndes-law.com TD BANK: "Chavez" Sues over Recording of Telephone Conversations ---------------------------------------------------------------- ADRIAN CHAVEZ, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, the Plaintiff, v. TD BANK USA, N.A., the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-00294-DMS-BLM (S.D. Cal., Feb. 7, 2018), alleges that Defendant continues to violate the California Penal Code section 632.7 by impermissibly recording its telephone conversations with California residents while the residents are on cellular telephones. TD Bank USA, N.A. provides personal, retail, small business, and commercial banking products and services. Its personal banking services include checking accounts, savings/money market accounts, cross-border banking (United States and Canada), debit cards, prepaid cards, and digital payments.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. Matthew M. Loker, Esq. Elizabeth A. Wagner, Esq. KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC 245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 E-mail: ak@kazlg.com ml@kazlg.com elizabeth@kazlg.com - and - Joshua B. Swigart, Esq. HYDE & SWIGART 2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101 San Diego, CA 92108 Telephone: (619) 233-7770 Facsimile: (619) 297-1022 E-mail: josh@westcoastlitigation.com - and - Daniel G. Shay, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF DANIEL G. SHAY 409 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101B San Diego, CA 92108 Telephone: (619) 222 7249 Facsimile: (866) 431 3292 E-mail: danielshay@tcpafdcpa.com TRB LLC: Fails to Pay for Overtime Work, "Lorenzo" Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- JOSE LORENZO, individually on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TRB, LLC; TIN ROOF BISTRO; TRB; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Case No. BC691293 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 19, 2018) is an action against the Defendants' failure to provide Plaintiff and his fellow employees with legally compliant 30-minute meal periods and 10-minute rest periods. Defendants also failed to pay Plaintiff and his fellow employees an extra hour of pay for each day in which Defendants failed to provide them with a legally-compliant meal period and for each day in which Defendants failed to provide them with a legally-compliant rest period. TRB, LLC is a California limited liability company with address at El Segundo, California. Tin Roof Bistro -- http://www.tinroofbistro.com/-- is a Casual Wine Country Bistro. Tin Roof Bistro is located in the Northwest corner of the Manhattan Village Mall at 3500 N. Sepulveda Blvd in Manhattan Beach, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: William A. Kershaw, Esq. Ian J. Barlow, Esq. KERSHAW COOK & TALLEY PC 401 Watt Avenue Sacramento, CA 95864 Telephone: (916) 779-7000 Facsimile: (916) 721-2501 E-mail: bill@kctlegal.com ian@kctlegal.com - and - Steven S. Elster, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF STEVEN ELSTER 785 E2 Oak Grove Road, Suite 201 Concord, CA 94518-3617 Telephone: (925) 324-2159 E-mail: steve.elster.law@gmail.com TURNER BROADCASTING: Faces "Byrd" Suit over Race Discrimination --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. The case is captioned as Wanda Byrd, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated individuals v. Turner Broadcasting Systems, Inc., Time Warner, Inc., Cable News Network Inc., and Turner Services, Inc., Case No. 1:18-CV-00271-MHC-CMS (N.D. Ga., Jan. 18, 2018). The Plaintiff alleged that Defendants discriminated a member of a class of African-American employees in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended by the Civil Rights Act of 1991. Ms. Byrd worked for Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., for 13 years, with initially serving as a Quality Assurance Analyst and was later promoted to a Quality Assurance Consultant. Prior to becoming employed with Defendants, Ms. Byrd had completed a series of Project Management classes at Villanova University and gained extensive managerial experience managing projects, caseloads, and fellow employees at all prior employments. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. creates and broadcasts news, entertainment, kids and young adult, animation, and sports media environments on television and other platforms for consumers worldwide. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. was formerly known as Turner Communications Company and changed its name to Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. in 1979. The company was incorporated in 1965 and is based in Atlanta, Georgia. It has locations in North America, the Asia Pacific, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Historic TW Inc. Time Warner Inc. operates as a media and entertainment company in the United States and internationally. It operates through three segments: Turner, Home Box Office, and Warner Bros. The company was formerly known as AOL Time Warner, Inc. and changed its name to Time Warner Inc. in 2003. Time Warner Inc. was founded in 1985 and is headquartered in New York, New York. Cable News Network, Inc. is an online news and information delivery company. It offers news in the areas of money, entertainment, tech, sport, travel, style, features, video, and more in Africa, the Americas, Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and internationally. The company's CNN.com features multimedia technologies that range from live video streaming to audio packages to searchable archives of news features and background information. Cable News Network, Inc. was founded in 1980 and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. It has bureaus worldwide. Cable News Network, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel R. Meachum, Esq. DANIEL R. MEACHUM & ASSOCIATES The Grant Building 44 Broad Street, NW, Suite 805 Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: (404) 521-0029 Facsimile: (404) 521-0030 E-mail: dmeachum@dmeachumlaw.com ULTIMATE FITNESS: Secure Sues over Telemarketing Messages --------------------------------------------------------- JOAN SECURE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. ULTIMATE FITNESS GROUP, LLC d/b/a ORANGETHEORY FITNESS, a Florida limited liability company, the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-20483-FAM (S.D. Fla., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks injunctive relief to halt Defendant's illegal conduct which has resulted in the invasion of privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of the daily lives of thousands of individuals, and seeks statutory damages and any other available legal or equitable remedies. The case is a putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, arising from Defendant's knowing and willful violations of the TCPA. Defendant owns and operates a chain of fitness facilities throughout South Florida. Despite having been previously sued for violating the TCPA, Defendant continues to engage in unsolicited telemarketing directed towards prospective customers, with no regard for consumers' privacy rights. This case arises from the transmission of a telemarketing text message to Plaintiff's cellular telephone promoting Defendant's fitness facilities.[BN] Counsel for Plaintiff: Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq. HIRALDO P.A. 401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 400 4713 E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com ULYSSE NARDIN: Website No Accessible to Blind People, Thorne Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- BRAULIO THORNE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. ULYSSE NARDIN, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-01110 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 7, 2018), seeks permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using his computer. Plaintiff uses the terms "blind" or "visually-impaired" to refer to all people with visual impairments who meet the legal definition of blindness in that they have a visual acuity with correction of less than or equal to 20 x 200. Some blind people who meet this definition have limited vision. Others have no vision. Based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1 million people in the United States are visually impaired, including 2.0 million who are blind, and according to the American Foundation for the Blind's 2015 report, approximately 400,000 visually impaired persons live in the State of New York. The Plaintiff brings this civil rights action against Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby and in conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act.[BN] Ulysse Nardin is a luxury Swiss watch manufacturer founded in 1846 in Le Locle, Switzerland, which has remained in continuous production since. Ulysse Nardin has operated out of the same building headquartered in Le Locle, Switzerland since 1865. The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel C. Cohen, Esq. DANIEL COHEN, PLLC 300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Fl. Brooklyn, New York 11201 Telephone: (646) 645 8482 Facsimile: (347) 665 1545 E-mail: dan@dccohen.com - and - Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 228 9795 Facsimile: (212) 982 6284 E-mail: nyjg@aol.com danalgottlieb@aol.com UNIVAR INC: "Jones" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------ YVONNE JONES, NAOMI MOORE, PEACE NJOKU, SHAKEYA SCOTT, SEAN SMITH, and INDY WILLIAMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. UNIVAR INC. and UNIVAR USA INC., the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00596-ELR (N.D. Ga., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover damages and other legal and equitable relief including overtime pay from Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiffs bring this action due to Defendants' regular failure to pay CSRs the statutorily required overtime rate of time-and-a-half for hours worked beyond 40 in a work week which violates the FLSA and any other cause(s) of action that can be inferred from the facts set forth herein. Defendants violated the FLSA by engaging in a systematic nationwide scheme of providing CSRs with "comp time" rather than overtime pay. Pursuant to this scheme, Defendants did not pay CSRs with an overtime premium for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per work week. Instead, Defendants issued CSRs time off the following work week in the same amount of hours they had worked in excess of 40. Univar is a global chemical and ingredients distributor and provider of value-added services who works with leading suppliers worldwide.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Beth A. Moeller, Esq. Tracey T. Barbaree, Esq. MOELLER BARBAREE LLP 1100 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 200 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 692 5543 E-mail: bmoeller@moellerbarbaree.com tbarbaree@moellerbarbaree.com - and - Robert J. Valli, Jr., Esq. Sara Wyn Kane, Esq. James A. Vagnini, Esq. VALLI KANE & VAGNINI LLP 600 Old Country Road, Suite 519 Garden City, NY 11530 Telephone: (516) 203 7180 Facsimile: (516) 706 0248 E-mail: rvalli@vkvlawyers.com skane@vkvlawyers.com jvagnini@vkvlawyers.com - and - Jay D. Ellwanger, Esq. ELLWANGER LAW LLLP 8310-1 N. Capital of Texas Hwy, Suite 190 Austin, TX 78731 Telephone: (737) 808 2262 E-mail: jellwanger@equalrights.law WAVEDIVISION HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Sanchez Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- JOSE SANCHEZ, an individual, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all persons similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. WAVEDIVISION HOLDINGS, LLC, a Limited Liability Company; and Does 1 through 50, Inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. 18CIV00684 (Cal. Super. Ct., Feb. 9, 2018), seeks to recover overtime pay under the California Labor Code. The Defendant provides Video, Internet, and phone services to customers in Washington, Oregon, and California. The company offers cable television, Internet, phone, and bundle services to residential customers. Defendant also offers business class, enterprise, and carrier/wholesale services to businesses ranging from small and mid-sized companies to government agencies to Fortune 100 brands in banking, carrier/cellular backhaul, education, hospitality, manufacturing, medical/pharmaceuticals, public sector/ government, retail, services, and technology industries. In addition, the company provides television advertising opportunities. Wave DiVision Holdings, LLC was founded in 2002. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant in California as a Technician classified as a non-exempt employee entitled to overtime pay and meal and rest periods from March of 2012 to September 14, 2017. Plaintiff was at all times relevant classified by defendant as a non-exempt employee paid in whole or in part on an hourly basis and received additional compensation from Defendant in the form of non-discretionary incentive wages. In violation of the applicable sections of the California Labor Code and the requirements of the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order, Defendant as a matter of company policy, practice and procedure, intentionally and knowingly failed to compensate Plaintiff and the other members of the California class at the correct rate of pay for all overtime worked. This uniform policy and practice of Defendant is intended to purposefully avoid the payment of the correct overtime compensation as required by California law which allowed Defendant to illegally profit and gain an unfair advantage over competitors who complied with the law. To the extent equitable tolling operates to toll claims by the California Class against Defendant, the California Class Period should be adjusted accordingly.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Norman B. Blumenthal, Esq. Kyle R. Nordrehaug, Esq. Aarajit Bhowmik, Esq. BLUMENTHAL NORDREHAUG BHOWMIK DE BLOUW LLP 22515) Calle Clara La Jolla, CA 92037 Telephone: (858) 551 1223 Facsimile: (858) 551 1232 Website: www.bamlawca.com WHITELOCKE & ASSOCIATES: Martinez Sues over Collection Calls ------------------------------------------------------------ STEVEN MARTINEZ, individually, and on all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. WHITELOCKE & ASSOCIATES LLC, the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-01096 (C.D. Cal., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover from Defendant $1,000 in statutory damages in addition to actual damages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. This case is a class action brought on behalf of all individuals in California who received collection calls from Defendant wherein Defendant failed to meaningfully disclose its identify and purpose of its call to Plaintiff, in violation of the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act According to the complaint, beginning in or around August of 2017, Defendant began contacting Plaintiff in an attempt to collect an alleged outstanding debt. During this process, Defendant, in its ordinary course of business, began placing collection calls to Plaintiff in an attempt to collect the alleged debt owed. Defendant placed its collection calls to Plaintiff's telephone ending in -5195.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. Adrian R. Bacon, Esq. Meghan E. George, Esq. Thomas E. Wheeler, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C. 21550 Oxnard St. Suite 780, Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (877) 206 4741 Facsimile: (866) 633 0228 E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com abacon@toddflaw.com mgeorge@toddflaw.com twheeler@toddflaw.com WIRELESS LIFESTYLE: Lillie Sues over Labor Code Violations ---------------------------------------------------------- IYANI LILLIE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. WIRELESS LIFESTYLE, INC., a Kansas corporation; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No. BC693433 (Cal. Sup. Ct., Feb. 8, 2018), seeks to recover monetary damages, including full restitution from Defendants as a result of Defendants' unlawful, fraudulent and/or unfair business practices. According to the complaint, the acts complained of occurred, occur and will occur, at least in part, within the time period from 4 years preceding the filing of the original Complaint, up to and through the time of trial for this matter although this should not automatically be considered the statute of limitations for any cause of action. With regard to Defendants' hourly-paid/commissioned employees, the Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to provide all legally-requisite meal periods; filed to authorize and permit all paid legally-requisite rest periods; independently failed to timely furnish accurate itemized wage statements; derivatively failed to timely furnish accurate itemized wage statements; violated Labor Code; violated Labor Code; incurred penalties pursuant to Labor Code; and conducted unfair business practices.[BN] Attorneys for Iyani Lillie, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated: Kevin T. Bames, Esq. Gregg Lander, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN T. BARNES 5670 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1460 Los Angeles, CA 90036-5664 Telephone: (323) 549 9100 Facsimile: (323) 549 0101 E-mail: Bames@kbames.com ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Marion Alcestis A. Castillon, Jessenius Pulido, Noemi Irene A. Adala, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche Maricon Castillon-Lopez, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2018. 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. * * * End of Transmission * * *