CAR_Public/180829.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Wednesday, August 29, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 173

                            Headlines

ACCOUNT RECOVERY: Young Sues over Debt Collections Practices
ACE & W INVESTMENT: Pipes Seeks Payment of Minimum Wages
AIR NEW ZEALAND: Court Certifies 2 Classes in 25 Wortman Suits
ALOHA POKE: OHA May Pursue Class Action Over Brand Name Issues
AMERICAN FEDERATION: Deducts Union Dues from Paycheck, Prokes Says

AMERICAN TRAFFIC: Seeks Dismissal of Ticket Fee Class Action
AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG: Newman Sues over Sale of Opioids
ANADARKO PETROLEUM: Investors Refile Class Action
BAYER A.G.: Cnicast Alleges Conspiracy of Diisocyanate Products
BELUX CATERING: Faces Bishop Suit in Southern Dist. of New York

BROADWAY PLAZA: Faces Bishop Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
BUYER HERO: Becker Moves for Class Certification Under TCPA
C & L IMPERIAL: Faces Lu Suit in Eastern District of New York
CBRE: Settles Embezzlement Class Action for $157MM
CENTERPLATE INC: D.C. Judge Rejects FACTA Class Action

CITIGROUP INC: Settles 401(k) Plan Class Action for $6.9MM
CITIMORTAGE INC: Gastineau Suit Moved to New Jersey Federal Court
CITIMORTAGE INC: Silva Suit Moved to New Jersey Federal Court
CITIMORTGAGE INC: Barry et al. Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois
COCA-COLA CO: Averts Class Action Over Tainted Tea Product

COMPLYRIGHT INC: Newman Sues over Data Breach
CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD: Fails to Pay OT Wages, Dixon Says
CYNOSURE INC: Three R Sues over Vaginal Rejuvenation Device
DAVID BOULEY: Faces Bishop Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
DEER STAGS: Faces Bunting Suit in Eastern District of New York

DONA MARIA: Wins Preliminary OK of Ledo Suit Settlement
EARTHLINK HOLDINGS: Yadegarian Balks at Windstream Merger Deal
EATON CORP: Imamura Seeks to Certify Class & Subclasses
ENTERTAINMENT CRUISES: Faces Bishop Suit in S.D. New York
EPIC SYSTEMS: Semanoff Ormsby Attorney Comments on SCOTUS Ruling

FACEBOOK INC: Bernstein Litowitz, Robbins Geller Named Counsel
FACEBOOK INC: Faces Class Action Over Alleged Video Metric Errors
FAULKNER TRUCKING: Faces Hester Suit in California State Court
FIRSTSOURCE ADVANTAGE: Ungar Sues over Debt Collections Practices
FLAGSHIP FACILITY: De Orozco Seeks Unpaid Wage under FLSA

FORD MOTOR: Motion to Dismiss Door Latch Defect Case Dismissed
FORD MOTOR: Roe et al. Sue over Duratec Cyclone Engine Defect
FOWLER FOODS: Weber Seeks Overtime Compensation under FLSA
GALFAB ACQUISITIONS: Kreischer Moves for Class Certification
GEO GROUP: Judge Certifies Forced Immigrant Labor Class Action

GLOBAL RADAR: Sanders & Williams Sue over Background Checks
INDIANA UNIVERSITY: Another Former Diver Added to Abuse Lawsuit
JANBAR INC: Faces Cancino et al. Suit in S.D. New York
JR LICENSING: Website not Accessible to Blind, Slade Says
LIFEVANTAGE CORPORATION: Smith Suit Moved to District of Utah

MABRY MANAGEMENT: Amezola Seeks Refund of Expenses
MDL 2591: Kellogg v. Watts Guerra Consolidated in Mir162 Corn Case
MDL 2820: Bumper Crop Farms Suit v. Monsanto Consolidated
MERRILL LYNCH: Faces Class Action Over DACA Job Discrimination
MICHIGAN: Ct. Certifies Class of Jewish Inmates in "Ackerman"

MILWAUKEE, WI: DOC Agrees to Pay $885K Legal Fees in ACLU Suit
NEW ORLEANS: 5th Cir. Hears Case Over Public Defender Wait Lists
NIELSEN HOLDINGS: Robbins Arroyo Files Class Action
OHIO STATE: Diving Club Coach on Leave Following Class Action
OJ CARTON: Faces Class Action Over False Advertising Claims

OLYMPIAN CONSTRUCTION: Faces Sullivan Suit in S.D. New York
PEBO TRAVIATA: Faces Sapon's Unpaid Overtime Suit in New York
PENN CREDIT: Shinn Suit Moved to Southern District of Florida
PEPE ROSSO: Faces Barrera Suit in Eastern District of New York
PMG AUTO: Faces Mulvey Suit over Robocalls

PUROSYSTEMS LLC: Faces Matzura Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
QUEENS CITY PAYROLL: Faces Delacruz Suit in S.D. New York
REAL THAI: Faces Teofilo Suit in Southern District of New York
ROTI RESTAURANTS: Garcia Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA
SALLIE MAE: Faces Homaidan Suit in E.D. New York

SAMY'S CAMERA: Flores Seeks Overtime Pay under Labor Code
SHAPIRO & MASSEY: Faces Cody et al. Suit in S.D. Mississippi
SYNGENTA CROP: Faces Sullivan Suit in S.D. New York
TESLA INC: Faces Yeager Suit over Plan to Go Private
TESLA INC: Hagens Berman Files Securities Class Action

TESLA INC: Kaskela Law Files Shareholder Class Action Lawsuit
THUNDER BAY: Sued Over Sex Assault Case
TOTOKAELO LLC: Faces Delacruz Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
TREEHOUSE FOODS: Tarara's Bid to Certify Class Entered and Cont'd
WOODSTOCK, VT: Bandler Suit Moved to Vermont Federal Court

XPLORE TECHNOLOGIES: Mencher Balks at Zebra Technologies Merger

                            *********

ACCOUNT RECOVERY: Young Sues over Debt Collections Practices
------------------------------------------------------------
SERETSE YOUNG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. ACCOUNT RECOVERY SPECIALISTS, INC. and
JOHN DOES 1-25, the Defendant(s), Case No. 2:18-cv-02419 (D. Kan.,
Aug. 14, 2018), alleges violation of the Fair Debt Collections
Practices Act.

According to the complaint, some time prior to October 2, 2017, an
obligation was allegedly incurred to Geary Community Hospital. The
Geary obligation arose out of a transactions involving medical
services which were incurred primarily for personal, family or
household purposes. The alleged Geary obligation is a "debt" as
defined by 15 U.S.C. section 1692a(5). Geary is a "creditor" as
defined by 15 U.S.C. section 1692a(4). Geary or a subsequent owner
of the Geary debt contracted with Defendant to collect the alleged
debt.

The Defendant collects and attempts to collect debts incurred or
alleged to have been incurred for personal, family or household
purposes on behalf of creditors using the United States Postal
Services, telephone and internet.

Account Recovery is doing business in the collections
industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Keith N. Williston, Esq.
          THE WILLISTON LAW FIRM, LLC
          201 SE Williamsburg Drive
          Blue Springs, MO 64014
          Telephone: (913) 207 5450
          E-mail: willistonkeith@yahoo.com


ACE & W INVESTMENT: Pipes Seeks Payment of Minimum Wages
--------------------------------------------------------
ANGELA PIPES, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. ACE & W INVESTMENT, LLC d/b/a MANNY'S
ORIGINAL CHOPHOUSE OF KISSIMMEE, the Defendant, Case No.
6:18-cv-01328-PGB-GJK (M.D. Fla., Aug. 14, 2018), seeks to recover
minimum wage under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff began working for
Defendant as a Server in May 2016 and she worked in this capacity
until October 2016.  The Plaintiff, the FLSA Collective Class
Members, and the putative Florida Class Members worked hours at the
direction of Defendant, and they were not paid at least the
applicable minimum wage for all the hours that they worked.

The Defendant operates restaurant Kissemmee, Osceola County,
Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew K. Fenton, Esq.
          Christopher J. Saba, Esq.
          WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, P.A.
          1110 North Florida Avenue, Suite 300
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Telephone: (813) 224 0431
          Facsimile: (813) 229 8712
          E-mail: mfenton@wfclaw.com
                  csaba@wfclaw.com
                  tsoriano@wfclaw.com


AIR NEW ZEALAND: Court Certifies 2 Classes in 25 Wortman Suits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Between 2007 and 2015, Donald Wortman commenced a total of 25
lawsuits against Air New Zealand, Japan Airlines International
Company, Ltd., and All Nippon Airways Corporation, Ltd. over the
sale of discounted airfare.  The Hon. Judge Charles R. Breyer has
entered an order certifying these classes:

* Japan Class:

   "all persons and entities that directly purchased tickets for
   passenger air transportation from Japan Airlines International
   Company, Ltd. ("JAL") or All Nippon Airways Corporation, Ltd.
   ("ANA"), or any predecessor, subsidiary or affiliate thereof,
   that originated in the United States and included at least one
   flight segment from the United States to Japan between the
   period beginning February 1, 2005 and ending December 31,
   2007."

   Excluded from the class are any tickets that did not include a
   fuel surcharge. Excluded from the class are any antitrust
   immunized fares agreed upon at IATA "Tariff Coordinating
   Conferences."

   Excluded from the class are tickets exclusively acquired
   through award or reward travel or any tickets acquired for
   infant travel with a 90% discount. Also excluded from the
   class are purchases by government entities, Defendants, any
   parent subsidiary or affiliate thereof, and Defendants' or any
   other commercial airline's officers, directors, employees,
   agents, and immediate families.

* Satogaeri Class:

   "all persons and entities that directly purchased satogaeri
   fares from JAL or ANA or any predecessor, subsidiary or
   affiliate thereof that originated in the United States and
   included at least one flight segment to Japan and does not
   include travel to countries other than the United States and
   Japan between the period beginning January 1, 2000 and ending
   April 1, 2006."

   Excluded from the class are purchases by government entities,
   Defendants, any parent subsidiary or affiliate thereof, and
   Defendants' officers, directors, employees and immediate
   families. Also excluded are purchases of "Satogaeri Special"
   and maerui satogaeri fares ("Satogaeri Class," and
   collectively with the Japan Class, the "Classes").

The Court said, "Plaintiffs' proposed classes meet the predominance
requirements. Even if a small number of customers of Japan Class
members received discounted fares, it is not an obstacle to class
certification. See Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Bouaphakeo, 136 S. Ct.
1036, 1043 (2016) (affirming district court certification of a
class of 3,344 members even though it was "undisputed that hundreds
of class members suffered no injury in the case."); Ruiz Torres v.
Mercer Canyons Inc., 835 F.3d 1125, 1137 (9th Cir. 2016)
(concluding that in cases where the defendant asserts "the
potential for unlawful conduct in the absence of harm,” the
"fortuitous non-injury to a subset of class members does not
necessarily defeat certification of the entire class."); In re Rail
Freight, 2017 WL 5311533, at 87 (suggesting that if more than 5% or
6% of class members are uninjured, the class is un-certifiable).
Defendant will have the opportunity to present evidence on the
merits of Plaintiffs' approach during the trial. And the Court
reserves the right, upon presentation of further evidence and
testimony subject to cross-examination, to de-certify either or
both classes. But for now, Plaintiffs have adequately demonstrated
that "all or virtually all" of their proposed classes suffered an
injury. See In re Rail Freight, 2017 WL 5311533, at 87.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs' proposed classes satisfy the predominance
requirement."

The lawsuits are:

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:07-cv-05634-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-04459-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:07-cv-06394-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:08-cv-01453-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:08-cv-01912-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:10-cv-04137-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03090-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03111-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03137-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03176-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03222-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03269-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03296-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03342-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03362-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03374-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03387-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03412-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03446-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03467-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03497-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03520-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-03881-CRB (N.D. Cal.)";

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-04085-CRB (N.D. Cal.)"; and

"DONALD WORTMAN, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, v. AIR NEW ZEALAND, et
al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-04223-CRB (N.D. Cal.)".


ALOHA POKE: OHA May Pursue Class Action Over Brand Name Issues
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ashok Selvam, writing for Chicago Eater, reports that native
Hawaiians grabbed national headlines for objecting to Aloha Poke
Co.'s legal strategy of demanding poke restaurants to drop the
words "aloha" and "poke" in its names. Native Hawaiian activist Dr
Kalamaokaaina Niheu (who goes by "Kalama O Ka Aina" via Facebook)
recorded a viral video which pondered whether Aloha Poke Co.'s
branding trademarks were misguided cultural appropriation.

Dr. Niheu is working with local sympathizers in Chicago. A
demonstration is planned for Aug. 6 outside Aloha Poke's Loop
offices and a protest is planned for August 15 at the Aloha Poke
Co. at 818 W. Fullerton Avenue near DePaul University's campus.
She's welcoming all Chicagoans to join.

"Aloha Poke Co. has no idea what they started," Dr. Niheu said.
"People talk about poking a bear? Well, they just poked the
Hawaiian shark."

Native Hawaiians and supporters grew angry over the sense that
Aloha Poke Co. was trying to own a piece of the native culture by
regulating the use of Hawaiian language. These are more than just
words for natives as the battle for culture is complicated in
Hawai'i thanks to the islands' history of colonialism. That made
Aloha Poke Co.'s strategy particularly hurtful to Native Hawaiians.
Aloha Poke Co. was founded in 2016 by Zach Friedlander, a suburban
Chicago native who is Jewish.
Mr. Friedlander has since left the company, but the optics are
still bad. For example, the company didn't answer if it employed
any Hawaiians.

A fourth letter has since popped up, sent to the owners of a Plano,
Texas shop. Dr. Niheu is trying to give a marginalized population a
voice. Her efforts have been noticed by the Office of Hawaiian
Affairs, the public entity formed in the '70s to preserve native
culture. OHA could pursue a class-action lawsuit against Aloha Poke
Co. as a counter measure.

OHA said in a statement, "OHA is currently reaching out to key
stakeholders to discuss possible solutions to this immediate
controversy. However, the commercialization and exploitation of
Native Hawaiian traditional knowledge has been an issue for
generations. At the heart of the issue are trademark laws that
present substantial challenges for protecting our culture and
promoting its pono (appropriate) use."

An Aloha Poke Co. spokesperson didn't immediately provide a comment
about the protests. The company apologized, but maintained it was
defending its trademarks. The Chicago chain was founded two years
ago and took off, bringing raw fish bowls to the Midwest. They
received an infusion of investment money and expanded into markets
like LA, Minneapolis, and Washington, D.C. Aloha Poke Co. claimed
that the company has no intention of shutting down competitors'
poke restaurants.

For Dr. Niheu, much of the frustration stems from Aloha Poke Co.
going after Native Hawaiians on the islands. There's worry
attorneys will issue letters to more Hawaiian businesses. She won't
be joining the protest later this month, but she said she'll have
future opportunities: "There's definitely more coming," she said.
[GN]


AMERICAN FEDERATION: Deducts Union Dues from Paycheck, Prokes Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jayme Prokes, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal
Employees, Council No. 5; American Federation of State, County, and
Municipal Employees, Council No. 5, Local 2440, as representative
of the class of all chapters and affiliates of the American
Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees, Council No.
5; American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees,
the Defendants, Case No. 0:18-cv-02384 (D. Minn., Aug. 14, 2018),
alleges that the Defendants have violated Ms. Prokes's rights by
establishing an "agency shop," where employees were compelled to
pay money to AFSCME Council 5 and its affiliates as a condition of
employment. And the defendants are continuing to violate Ms.
Prokes's rights by taking union dues from her paycheck -- even
after she resigned her union membership and instructed the union to
terminate all union-related payroll deductions.

The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is
the largest trade union of public employees in the United
States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan F. Mitchell, Esq.
          MITCHELL LAW PLLC
          106 East Sixth Street, Suite 900
          Austin, TX 78701R
          Telephone: (512) 686 3940
          Facsimile: (512) 686 3941
          E-mail: jonathan@mitchell.law

               - and -

          Douglas P. Seaton, Esq.
          SEATON, PETERS & REVNEW, P.A.
          7300 Metro Boulevard, Suite 500
          Minneapolis, MN 55439
          Telephone: (952) 921 4604
          Facsimile: (952) 896 1704
          E-mail: dseaton@seatonlaw.com


AMERICAN TRAFFIC: Seeks Dismissal of Ticket Fee Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Hale, writing for Law360, reports that American Traffic
Solutions Inc. urged a Florida federal court to toss a putative
class action over convenience fees the company charged motorists
who used credit cards to pay red-light tickets it processed for
North Miami Beach, arguing the suit fails to state a viable claim.

ATS, which holds a contract for equipment and administrative
services to operate the city's red-light camera program, told the
court that the three claims for unjust enrichment in Steven J.
Pincus' complaint are based on alleged violations of various state
laws.

The case is styled Pincus v. American Traffic Solutions, Inc., Case
Number 9:18-cv-80864 (S.D. Fla.).  The case is assigned to Judge
Donald M. Middlebrooks.  The case was filed June 29, 2018. [GN]


AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG: Newman Sues over Sale of Opioids
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit seeks reimbursement to Newman's Medical
Services, Inc., for monetary loss caused by opioid epidemic in
regards to treating as first responders and transporting opioid
addicted persons to hospitals, and to recoup monies spent because
of Defendants' false, deceptive and unfair marketing and/or
unlawful diversion of prescription opioids.

Opioid analgesics are widely diverted and improperly used, and the
widespread abuse of opioids has resulted in a national epidemic of
opioid overdose deaths and addictions.  The Plaintiff contends that
the manufacturers of prescription opioids aggressively pushed
highly addictive, dangerous opioids, falsely representing to
doctors that patients would only rarely succumb to drug addiction.
These pharmaceutical companies aggressively advertised to and
persuaded doctors to prescribe highly addictive, dangerous opioids,
which turned patients into drug addicts for their own corporate
profit. Such actions were intentional and/or unlawful.

The Plaintiff also brings this suit against the wholesale
distributors of these highly addictive drugs. The distributors and
manufacturers intentionally and/or unlawfully breached their legal
duties under federal and state law to monitor, detect, investigate,
refuse and report suspicious orders of prescription opiates.

The case is captioned as NEWMAN'S MEDICAL SERVICES, INC., the
Plaintiff, v. AMERISOURCEBERGEN DRUG CORPORATION; CARDINAL HEALTH,
INC.; McKESSON CORPORATION;PURDUE PHARMA L.P.; PURDUE PHARMA, INC.;
THE PURDUE FREDERICK COMPANY, INC.; TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES,
LTD.; TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC.; CEPHALON, INC.; JOHNSON &
JOHNSON; JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; UCLASS ACTION COMPLAINT
ORTHO-MCNEIL-JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. n/k/a JANSSEN
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICA INC. n/k/a JANSSEN
PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; NORAMCO, UJURY TRIAL DEMANDED INC.; ENDO
HEALTH SOLUTIONS INC.; ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; ALLERGAN PLC
f/k/a ACTAVIS PLS; WATSON PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. n/k/a ACTAVIS,
INC.; WATSON LABORATORIES, INC.; ACTAVIS LLC; ACTAVIS PHARMA, INC.
f/k/a WATSON PHARMA, INC.; MALLINCKRODT PLC and MALLINCKRODT LLC.,
the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00358-KD-M (S.D. Ala., Aug. 14,
2018).[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sidney W. Jackson, III, Esq.
          JACKSON & FOSTER, LLC
          75 St. Michael Street
          Mobile, AL 36602
          Telephone: (251) 433 6699
          Facsimile: (251) 433 6127
          E-mail: sid@jacksonfosterlaw.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey Perloff, Esq.
          JEFFREY PERLOFF, P.C.
          75 St. Michael Street
          Telephone, AL 36602
          Telephone: (251) 338 0369
          Facsimile: (251) 433 6127
          E-mail: jeff@jeffperlofflaw.com

               - and -

          Rhon E. Jones, Esq.
          Jere L. Beasley, Esq.
          Richard D. Stratton, Esq.
          Jeffrey D. Price, Esq.
          J. Ryan Kral, Esq.
          William R. Sutton, Esq.
          BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW,
             METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C.
          218 Commerce Street
          Post Office Box 4160 (36103-4160)
          Montgomery, AL 36104
          Telephone: (334) 269 2343
          Facsimile: (334) 954 7555
          E-mail: Jere.Beasley@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Rhon.Jones@BeasleyAllen.com
                  TRick.Stratton@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Jeff.Price31T@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Ryan.Kral@BeasleyAllen.com
                  William.Sutton@BeasleyAllen.com


ANADARKO PETROLEUM: Investors Refile Class Action
-------------------------------------------------
Ben Markus, writing for Colorado Public Radio, reports that
Anadarko Petroleum executives once again find themselves facing a
legal battle related to the deadly well explosion in Firestone.

Investors have re-filed a class action complaint -- chock full of
new details -- that alleges management is responsible for lost
stock value and that they were aware of safety problems at the
company, but continued to cut budgets amid an oil downturn, leading
to fatal consequences.

Most of the new information in the amended complaint comes from a
whistleblower only identified as "Former Employee 7" -- a male,
high-ranking superintendent with the company for 12 years, who left
Anadarko just before the 2017 blast. Allegations include:

   -- Twenty-five percent of the wells received from Noble Energy
in a big asset swap, that this former employee plugged, were old
and dangerous. The Firestone well, known as Coors V 6-14Ji, was
part of the swap.

   -- Anadarko did not know the locations of flowlines and
pipelines for up to 30 percent of the wells acquired in the swap
with Noble. A flowline, thought to be abandoned, pumped gas into
the Firestone home leading to the explosion. In fact, Anadarko
couldn't even locate some whole wells it acquired from Noble, let
alone underground pipelines, according to the lawsuit.

   -- Before Firestone, flowlines on 80 percent of all Anadarko
wells in Colorado were deemed low risk by the company and never
pressure tested, "in direct violation of Colorado law."

The former employee also details Anadarko's use of contractors to
carry out inspections in the suit. These contractors, called
"pumpers," were overworked and undertrained, the unnamed source
said. They had only about five minutes to conduct cursory
inspections, including looking at the well and smelling for leaks.
Contractors' limited inspections would have missed odorless gas
from the Firestone well, according to the court filing.

Another claim is that some Anadarko wells were never even
inspected. Up to 5 percent of all of Anadarko's wells were missed
because contractors couldn't handle the work.

The former employee said he and others repeatedly informed upper
management of safety problems, but because many of the wells were
old, low producers were not given priority.

Anadarko wouldn't comment on the accusations in the lawsuit.

"Although there is a lot we would like to say at this time," wrote
Jennifer Brice, manager of corporate communications, in an email.
"The appropriate path for us is to reserve our response for the
court as part of the judicial process." [GN]


BAYER A.G.: Cnicast Alleges Conspiracy of Diisocyanate Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
CNICAST, INC., on behalf of itself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. BAYER A.G.; BA YER CORPORATION;
COVESTRO LLC; BASF SE; BASF CORPORATION; DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY;
HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL LLC; HUNTSMAN LLC; HUNTSMAN CORPORATION;
WANHUA CHEMICAL GROUP CO., LTD.; W ANHUA CHEMICAL AMERICA CO. LTD.;
MITSUI CHEMICALS, INC.; MITSUI CHEMICALS AMERICA, INC.; MCNS; MCNS
POLYURETHANES CSA INC.; LANXESS AG; and LANXESS CORP., the
Defendants, Case No. 5:18-cv-03438-GJP (E.D. Pa., Aug. 14, 2018),
alleges that Defendants and certain unnamed coconspirators
conspired to fix, raise, maintain and/or stabilize prices for
methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) and toluene diisocyanate
(TDI) products sold in the United States.

According to the complaint, the conspiracy was implemented in part
through an agreement among Defendants to limit production of MDI
and TDI products and thereby drive up prices for these products.
MDis and TDis are precursor ingredients for the manufacture of
polyurethane foams, thermoplastic polyurethanes and thermoset
urethanes. Flexible polyurethane foam is used in products such as
mattresses, upholstered furniture and car seats. Rigid polyurethane
foam is used mostly as an efficient insulating material for
buildings and refrigeration appliances. Thermoplastic polyurethanes
are used in diverse product groups such as clothing, mobile
electronic devices and sports equipment.

In the years leading up to the conspiracy period (referring to the
period from the start of the conspiracy on January 1, 2016 to the
present), prices for MDis and TDis in the United States and across
the globe were low and relatively stable. As noted by the
Independent Chemical Information Service ("ICIS") in September of
2013, MDI prices in the United States "were steady, amid balanced
supply and demand. No pricing announcements have been heard,
suggesting prices will remain stable into October". In 2015, prices
actually declined due to lower costs of raw materials, such as
benzene and oil. In 2014, Defendants (Covestro, Dow, BASF,
Huntsman, Wanhua and Mitsui as identified below) were experiencing
reduced profits in MDI and TDI products caused by a "market
oversupply" -- that is, lower prices due to increased competition
owing to more product availability. MDI and TDI prices continued to
decline into 2015 partly due to decreasing raw material costs. In
order to stop the declining profit rates and increase their
margins, Defendants conspired to fix, raise, stabilize and maintain
MDI and TDI prices by: (a) engaging in coordinated limitations on
the production of these products and (b) engaging in a series of
lockstep price increases for these products.

Bayer AG is a German multinational pharmaceutical and life sciences
company. It is headquartered in Leverkusen, where its illuminated
sign is a landmark.[BN]

Counsel for Plaintiff Unicast Inc. and the Class:

          Joshua Grabar, Esq.
          GRABAR LAW OFFICES
          1735 Market Street, Suite 3750
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (267) 507 6085
          E-mail: jgrabar@grabarlawoffice.com

               - and -

          Marc H. Edelson, Esq.
          EDELSON & ASSOCIATES, LLC
          3 Terry Drive, Suite 205
          Newtown, PA 18940
          Telephone: (215) 867 2399
          Facsimile: (267) 685 0676
          E-mail: medelson@edelson-law.com


BELUX CATERING: Faces Bishop Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Belux Catering Corp.
The lawsuit is captioned as Cedric Bishop on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Belux Catering
Corp. also known as: Antuns Catering, the Defendant, Case No.
1:18-cv-07351 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 14, 2018). The case alleges Americans
with Disabilities Act violations.

Belux Catering is in non-classified establishments business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq.
          COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
          300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (917) 299 6612
          Facsimile: (929) 575 4195
          E-mail: joseph@cml.legal


BROADWAY PLAZA: Faces Bishop Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Broadway Plaza Hotel
Inc. The lawsuit is captioned as Cedric Bishop, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Broadway Plaza Hotel Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-07354
(S.D.N.Y., Aug. 14, 2018). The case alleges Americans with
Disabilities Act violations.

Broadway Plaza Hotel is a boutique hotel located in the heart of
Manhattan and is just steps away from New York City's best
attractions and restaurants.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


BUYER HERO: Becker Moves for Class Certification Under TCPA
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiff in the lawsuit captioned CODY BECKER, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BUYER HERO, LLC
d/b/a OFFRS.com, Case No. 0:18-cv-61656-UU (S.D. Fla.), moves to
certify a class with respect to two claims for alleged violations
of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, as set forth in Count I
of the complaint.

The proposed class is defined as:

     All persons within the United States who, within the four
     years prior to the filing of this Complaint; were sent a
     text message using The Texting Company Inc. d/b/a Textedly
     platform; from Defendant or anyone on Defendant's behalf; to
     said person's cellular telephone number; advertising
     Defendant's services, without the recipient's prior express
     written consent.

     Excluded from the Class is OFFRS, OFFRS' directors and
     officers, OFFRS' employees, immediate families of OFFRS'
     directors and officers, or the legal representatives,
     agents, affiliates, heirs, successors-in-interests or
     assignees of any such excluded person, and the Judge
     presiding over this action, including the Judge's staff,
     clerk, and family members.

Mr. Becker also asks the Court to appoint him as representative of
the Class, to appoint Hiraldo P.A. as class counsel, and to
establish a deadline for submission of the proposed class notice
and notice plan.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          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


C & L IMPERIAL: Faces Lu Suit in Eastern District of New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against C & L Imperial, Inc.
The class action lawsuit is captioned as Fu-Chih Lu, Individually
and on behalf of all other employees similarly situated, the
Plaintiff, v. C & L Imperial, Inc. d/b/a C & L Imperial Main Street
Taiwanese Gourmet; Chia Ling Chang; and "John" (First Name Unknown)
Lin, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-04550 (E.D.N.Y., Aug. 13,
2018). The case alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

C & L Imperial is doing business in restaurant industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


CBRE: Settles Embezzlement Class Action for $157MM
--------------------------------------------------
Nathan Hale, writing for Law360, reports that a class of real
estate investors has reached an agreement with CBRE and one of its
employees to settle claims that the property management firm aided
executives from Cabot Investment Properties LLC in embezzling $157
million, leading to the cancelation on Aug. 6 of an upcoming jury
trial.

U.S. District Judge William P. Dimitrouleas, who had certified the
class in March, issued an order canceling the trial, which was
scheduled to start Sept. 4 in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and found
all pending motions moot.

The case is styled Cabot East Broward 2 LLC et al v. Cabot et al
Case No. 0:16-cv-61218 (S.D. Fla.).  The case is assigned to Judge
William P. Dimitrouleas.  The case was filed June 7, 2016. [GN]


CENTERPLATE INC: D.C. Judge Rejects FACTA Class Action
------------------------------------------------------
Joyce Hanson, writing for Law360, reports that a D.C. federal judge
tossed on Aug. 3 a proposed class action against Centerplate
accusing the sports concessionaire of violating the Fair and
Accurate Credit Transactions Act by printing a consumer's entire
16-digit card number and expiration date on printed receipts,
ruling that the court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly on Aug. 3 found that
consumer Doris Jeffries failed to show she has standing to bring
her FACTA suit against Centerplate, formerly known as Volume
Services America Inc.

The case is styled JEFFRIES v. VOLUME SERVICES AMERICA, INC. et al,
Case No. 1:17-cv-01788 (D.C.).  The case is assigned to Judge
Colleen Kollar-Kotelly.  The case was filed September 1, 2017.
[GN]


CITIGROUP INC: Settles 401(k) Plan Class Action for $6.9MM
----------------------------------------------------------
Greg Iacurci, writing for Investment News, reports that Citigroup
Inc. has reached a $6.9 million settlement with plaintiffs in a
more than decade old lawsuit alleging the financial services firm
stuffed its retirement plan with expensive in-house investments,
thereby enriching the company at the expense of its employees.

The lawsuit, Leber v. Citigroup Inc. et al, was originally filed in
October 2007 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York. Plaintiffs claimed the company breached its fiduciary
duty by including high-cost, underperforming investment products
managed by Citigroup subsidiaries and affiliates -- including Smith
Barney and Salomon Brothers -- in the Citigroup 401(k) plan.

Parties filed for the proposed settlement Aug. 1. Citigroup didn't
admit to wrongdoing as part of the proposed settlement, which still
must be approved by the judge. Citigroup spokesman Mark Costiglio
declined to comment.

The eligible class of plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit
includes participants in the Citigroup 401(k) plan who invested in
one of nine in-house funds between Oct. 18, 2001, and Dec. 1, 2005.
The Citigroup plan has roughly $12 billion in assets and more than
144,000 participants, according to BrightScope Inc.

A slew of asset managers, primarily those focused on active
management of their investments, have been sued in recent years
over self-dealing via proprietary funds in their 401(k) plans.

Citigroup joins a handful of other financial services firms that
have settled in these cases. Over 2017-18, for example, American
Airlines, Allianz, TIAA and New York Life settled for $22 million,
$12 million, $5 million and $3 million, respectively. Some
lawsuits, such as those against Wells Fargo & Co., Capital Group
and Putnam Investments, have been dismissed. [GN]


CITIMORTAGE INC: Gastineau Suit Moved to New Jersey Federal Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled JO ANN GASTINEAU, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
CITIMORTGAGE INC., the Defendant, Case No. 2:11-cv-08326, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of New
Jersey (Trenton) on Aug. 14, 2018. The District of New Jersey Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 3:18-cv-12725 to the proceeding.

CitiMortgage, Inc. provides mortgage products. The company offers a
portfolio of financial services, including banking, insurance, and
asset management.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lisa J. Rodriguez, Esq.
          SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS LLP
          Woodland Falls Corporate Park
          220 Lake Drive East, Suite 200
          Cherry Hill, NJ 08002-1165
          Telephone: (856) 482 5222
          Facsimile: (856) 482 6980
          E-mail: ljrodriguez@schnader.com

Attorneys for CitiMortage Inc.:

          Marc C. Singer, Esq.
          SAIBER, LLC
          18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200
          Florham Park, NJ 07932
          Telephone: (973) 622 3333
          E-mail: msinger@saiber.com


CITIMORTAGE INC: Silva Suit Moved to New Jersey Federal Court
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled JUAN SILVA also known as: JOHN
SILVA, and ELIZABETH SILVA FARIAS, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. CITIMORTAGE INC., PHV
LUCIA NALE, PHV MICHELE L. ODORIZZI, PHV DEBRA BOGO-ERNST, PHV
STEPHEN J. KANE, PHV KIM A. LEFFERT, RUSSELL D. PAUL, and SHERRIE
R. SAVETT, the Defendants, Case No. 2:11-cv-08325, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of New
Jersey (Newark) on Aug. 14, 2018.  The District of New Jersey Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-12726 to the proceeding.

CitiMortgage, Inc. provides mortgage products. The company offers a
portfolio of financial services, including banking, insurance, and
asset management.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

          Lisa J. Rodriguez, Esq.
          Nicole M. Acchione, Esq.
          SCHNADER HARRISON SEGAL & LEWIS LLP
          Woodland Falls Corporate Park
          220 Lake Drive East, Suite 200
          Cherry Hill, NJ 08002-1165
          Telephone: (856) 482 5222
          Facsimile: (856) 482 6980
          E-mail: ljrodriguez@schnader.com

Attorneys for Citimortage Inc.:

          Marc C. Singer, Esq.
          SAIBER, LLC
          18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200
          Florham Park, NJ 07932
          Telephone: (973) 622 3333
          E-mail: msinger@saiber.com


CITIMORTGAGE INC: Barry et al. Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Leslie Barry, John Petrides, and
Maria Petrides on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiffs, v. CitiMortgage Inc., the Defendant, Case
No. 2:11-cv-08323, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California, to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Aug. 13, 2018.  The
Northern District of Illinois Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:18-cv-05499 to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon.
Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr.

The Plaintiffs and all other similarly situated Illinois homeowners
allege that Defendant have wrongfully denied them a permanent
modification of their mortgages. The Defendant is the country's
fourth largest mortgage servicer.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Eric Lechtzin, Esq.
          Sherrie R. Savett, Esq.
          BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C.
          1622 Locust Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 875 3038
          E-mail: elechtzin@bm.net
                  ssavett@bm.net

               - and -

          Kim Ann Leffert, Esq.
          MAYER BROWN LLP
          71 South Wacker Drive
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (312) 782 0600
          E-mail: kleffert@mayerbrown.com

               - and -

          Mark Richard Miller, Esq.
          WEXLER WALLACE LLP
          55 W. Monroe Street No. 3300
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 346 2222
          E-mail: mrm@wexlerwallace.com

Attorneys for CitiMortgage Inc.:

          Debra L Bogo-Ernst, Esq.
          Kim Ann Leffert, Esq.
          Lucia Nale, Esq.
          Stephen J Kane, Esq.
          MAYER BROWN LLP
          71 South Wacker Drive
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (312) 782 0600
          E-mail: dernst@mayerbrown.com
                  LNale@mayerbrown.com
                  courtnotification@mayerbrown.com


COCA-COLA CO: Averts Class Action Over Tainted Tea Product
----------------------------------------------------------
Brandi Fleeks, writing for Louisiana Record, reports that a judge
in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana
recently denied a motion to certify the class by plaintiff Pam
Fradella in a suit against the Coca-Cola Company, ruling Ms.
Fradella hasn't met all the requirements for a claim to qualify as
a class action lawsuit.

Ms. Fradella had filed suit in September 2017 in 24th Judicial
District Court for Jefferson Parish alleging she "became ill" after
consuming a Gold Peak Tea containing "mold or some other
deleterious substance," court filings said.

Ms. Fradella then filed a motion to make the case a class action
lawsuit on the grounds that "there are thousands of Louisiana
residents who have purchased Gold Peak Tea and been adversely
affected by this unwholesome product."

U.S. District Judge Susie Morgan denied the class action request in
a July 26 filing.  

To file a class action suit, the plaintiff must prove six things:
numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy, predominance and
superiority.

A threshold of 100 to 150 people is the general standard to satisfy
the numerosity requirement of a class action lawsuit. Ms. Fradella
did not produce any other plaintiffs but felt the numerosity
requirement was met because, it's a "known fact that millions of
bottles of Gold Peak Tea have been sold in Louisiana in just the
last two years, so, it can be inferred that thousands of people
have identical complaints," the filing said.

Judge Morgan denied the motion because Ms. Fradella failed to meet
the numerosity qualification. Since she was the only person named
in the case, and no other plaintiffs have come forward or made any
similar complaints, the judge refused her speculation that other
Louisiana residents have purchased a bottle of the tea in
question.

"Ultimately, plaintiff's inability to point to any person, other
than herself, who fits within her proposed class definition
demonstrates the numerosity requirement is not met in this case,"
Morgan wrote in her decision. "The court finds the numerosity
requirement is not met in this case. As a result, the court denies
plaintiff's motion to certify the class."

Ms. Fradella claims she drank a bottle of Gold Peak Tea that
contained mold and then became ill. She filed her lawsuit against
Coca-Cola and added Rouses Enterprises, a supermarket chain, to the
complaint on Dec. 6, 2017. [GN]


COMPLYRIGHT INC: Newman Sues over Data Breach
---------------------------------------------
CHARLES NEWMAN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, the Plaintiff, v. COMPLYRIGHT, INC., the Defendant, Case
No. 2:18-cv-01258 (E.D. Wisc., Aug. 14, 2018), alleges that
ComplyRight failed to implement and maintain reasonable security
measures to protect Personal Information from unauthorized access.

In the course of providing its services to such organizations,
ComplyRight has acquired personally identifiable information of
numerous individuals -- including, their name, address, telephone
number, email address, and Social Security number (the "Personal
Information").  According to the complaint, the Personal
Information of Plaintiff and other Class members was accessed and
viewed by unauthorized individuals while being maintained on
ComplyRight's website at some point between April 20, 2018 to May
22, 2018, if not earlier.

ComplyRight offers a suite of legal compliance services for small
businesses.  Their services range "from hiring and training to time
tracking and recordkeeping, to labor law posting and tax
information reporting." In a 2017 news release, ComplyRight boasted
that it "has partnered with millions of businesses of all
sizes."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Shpetim Ademi, Esq.
          John D. Blythin, Esq.
          Mark A. Eldridge, Esq.
          ADEMI & O'REILLY, LLP
          3620 East Layton Avenue
          Cudahy, WI 53110
          Telephone: (414) 482 8000
          Facsimile: (414) 482 8001
          E-mail: sademi@ademilaw.com
                  jblythin@ademilaw.com
                  meldridge@ademilaw.com

               - and -

          Ben Barnow, Esq.
          Erich P. Schork, Esq.
          BARNOW AND ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          One North LaSalle Street, Suite 4600
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 621 2000
          Facsimile: (312) 641 5504
          E-mail: b.barnow@barnowlaw.com
                  e.schork@barnowlaw.com


CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD: Fails to Pay OT Wages, Dixon Says
--------------------------------------------------------
DIMITRI DIXON, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. CUSHMAN AND WAKEFIELD WESTERN, INC., a
California corporation; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, the Defendants,
Case No. CGC-18-568886 (Cal. Super. Ct., Aug. 14, 2018), alleges
that Defendants failed to pay overtime wages, provide meal periods,
provide rest periods, reimburse business expenses, and furnish
accurate itemized Wage Statements in violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Cushman & Wakefield Inc. is a global commercial real estate
services company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Laura L. Ho, Esq.
          Alan D. Romero, Esq.
          GOLDSTEIN, BORGEN, DARDARlAN & HO
          300 Lakeside Drive, Suite 1000
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Telephone: (510) 763 9800
          Facsimile: (510) 835 1417
          E-mail: lho@gbdhlegal.com
                  aromero@gbdhlegal.com


CYNOSURE INC: Three R Sues over Vaginal Rejuvenation Device
-----------------------------------------------------------
THREE R LLC, Individually and on Behalf of Itself and all Others
Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. CYNOSURE, INC, the Defendant,
Case No. 3:18-cv-30133 (D. Mass., Aug. 13, 2018), seeks to address
financial injury caused by the Defendant's alleged unlawful
deceptive selling of a dangerous medical device for purposes for
which the United States Food and Drug Administration did not
approve and for which the device has no proven benefit.

The Plaintiff brings this action against Cynosure on its own behalf
and on behalf of those others similarly situated for breach of the
implied warranty of merchantability and fitness for a particular
purpose and violation of Massachusetts' Consumer Protection Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant is one of the companies
that has engaged in this egregious "deceptive marketing of a
dangerous product".  It has unabashedly marketed and sold its
MonaLisa Touch laser system as a vaginal rejuvenation device with
promises that it will increase intimacy and improve sexual function
-- which, as the FDA can hardly have been clearer -- are purposes
for which it was not approved by the FDA and for which use there is
no proven benefit. The MonaLisa Touch is a most expensive device --
costing doctors and health practices $150,000 or more. The
Plaintiff has suffered economic injury directly as a result of
Cynosure's false and deceptive marketing scheme. Plaintiff has, for
two years, been making payments on a lease to purchase a MonaLisa
Touch for purposes of treating vaginal atrophy. The aggregate lease
payments exceed $200,000. In light of the July 30, 2018 FDA
Warning, Three R LLC can no longer use the MonaLisa Touch unit,
although payments on the unit remain due.

On July 30, 2018, the FDA announced that it had warned several
companies to stop marketing laser devices for procedures often and
colloquially referred to as "vaginal rejuvenation." As succinctly
explained by FDA Commissioner Dr. Scott Gottlieb, the FDA had
recently become aware of a growing number of manufacturers
marketing "vaginal rejuvenation" devices to women and claiming
these procedures will treat conditions and symptoms related to
menopause, urinary incontinence or sexual function.  The procedures
use lasers and other energy-based devices to destroy or reshape
vaginal tissue.  These products have serious risks and don't have
adequate evidence to support their use for these purposes.
Statement from FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb, M.D., on efforts to
safeguard women's health from deceptive health claims and
significant risks related to devices marketed for use in medical
procedures for "vaginal rejuvenation", dated July 30, 2018,
available at
https://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm615130.htm;
see also FDA Warns Against Use of Energy-Based Devices to Perform
Vaginal 'Rejuvenation' or Vaginal Cosmetic Procedures: FDA Safety
Communication, dated July 30, 2018, available at
https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/safety/alertsandnotices/ucm615013.htm
(text of warning) ("July 30, 2018 FDA Warning").

As Commissioner Gottlieb further explained, while the FDA had
cleared various laser and other energy-based devices to treat such
conditions as abnormal or precancerous cervical or vaginal tissue
or genital warts, "the safety and effectiveness of these devices
hasn't been evaluated or confirmed by the FDA for 'vaginal
rejuvenation.'"  Nonetheless, companies who produce and sell these
devices make "deceptive health claims" and engage in "deceptive
marketing of a dangerous procedure with no proven benefit," which
he stated was, in a word, "egregious." As the July 30, 2018 FDA
Warning itself stated, using such devices for vaginal rejuvenation
"may lead to serious adverse events," including vaginal burns,
scarring, pain during sexual intercourse, and recurring/chronic
pain.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff and The Class:

          Fran L. Rudich, Esq.
          Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
          Michael H. Reed, Esq.
          KLAFTER OLSEN & LESSER LLP
          Two International Drive, Suite 350
          Rye Brook, NY
          Telephone: (914) 934 9200
          Facsimile: (914) 934 9220


DAVID BOULEY: Faces Bishop Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against David Bouley LLC.
The lawsuit is captioned as Cedric Bishop, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. David Bouley LLC,
the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-07352 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 14, 2018).
The case alleges Americans with Disabilities Act violations.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq.
          COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
          300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (917) 299 6612
          Facsimile: (929) 575 4195
          E-mail: joseph@cml.legal


DEER STAGS: Faces Bunting Suit in Eastern District of New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Deer Stags Concepts,
Inc.  The class action lawsuit is captioned as Rasheta Bunting
Individually and as the representative of a class of similarly
situated persons, the Plaintiff, v. Deer Stags Concepts, Inc., the
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-04547 (E.D.N.Y., Aug. 13, 2018).  The
case alleges violation of Americans with Disabilities Act.

Deer Stags designs and sells footwear in the United States. It
offers fine dress shoes, dress casual shoes, comfortable shoes and
boots.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


DONA MARIA: Wins Preliminary OK of Ledo Suit Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Judge Lucy H. Koh grants the Motion for Preliminary
Approval based upon the terms set forth in the Stipulated
Settlement Agreement between the parties in the lawsuit captioned
CESAR LEDO, an individual, MIGUEL LEDO, an individual, RICARDO CHOY
MOREY, an individual v. GUILLERMO PRADO INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA DONA
MARIA, MARIA PRADO INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA DONA MARIA, Case No.
5:17-cv-02393-LHK (N.D. Cal.).

The proposed "OT Class" and Hourly Wage Dispute Class satisfy the
requirements of Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and
are certified for purposes of settlement only on that basis.  The
proposed FLSA Sub Classes satisfy the requirements of 29 U.S.C.
Section 216(b) and are certified for purposes of settlement only on
that basis.

The Court approves the revised Consent to Join Form.  The Court has
further amended the Revised Notice, and approves the Amended
Notice.  The Court directs the mailing of the Consent to Join Form
and Amended Notice by first-class mail to the Class Members in
accordance with the schedule set forth in the Stipulated Settlement
Agreement.

The Court appoints Cesar Ledo, Miguel Ledo and Ricardo Choy Morey
as Class Representatives for settlement purposes only.  The Court
appoints the Law Offices of James Dal Bon as Class Counsel for
settlement purposes only.

The Court confirms CPT Group as the Claims Administrator, and
preliminarily approves settlement administration fees and expenses
to the Claims Administrator not to exceed $20,000.

The Court also sets this schedule:

   Scheduled Event                                   Date
   ---------------                             ---------------
   Deadline to Submit Class List and Data to   August 31, 2018
   Claims Administrator & Class Counsel

   Deadline to Mail Amended Notice & FLSA      September 10, 2018
   Consent to Join Form to Class Members

   Deadline to File Motion for Attorney's      October 8, 2018
   Fees

   Deadline to Opt-Out                         October 26, 2018

   Deadline to Object                          October 26, 2018

   Deadline to Consent to FLSA Action          October 26, 2018

   Deadline to File Motion for Final           November 9, 2018
   Approval

   Deadline to Respond to Objections           November 30, 2018

   Final Approval Hearing                      December 6, 2018,
                                               at 1:30 p.m.


EARTHLINK HOLDINGS: Yadegarian Balks at Windstream Merger Deal
--------------------------------------------------------------
CARLOS YADEGARIAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. JULIE A. SHIMER, MARC F. STOLL, WALTER
L. TUREK, WINDSTREAM, HOLDINGS, INC., CAROL B. ARMITAGE, SAMUEL E.
BEALL III, JEANNIE H. DIEFENDERFER, JEFFREY T. HINSON, JOSEPH F.
EAZOR, WILLIAM G. LAPERCH, LARRY LAQUE, KRISTI MOODY, MICHAEL G.
STOLTZ, TONY THOMAS, ALAN L. WELLS, the Defendants, Case No.
2018CV308935 (Ga. Super. Ct., Atlanta, Aug. 10, 2018), alleges that
the Defendants violated the Securities Act of 1933 in connection
with false and misleading statements and material omissions in the
Registration Statement and Prospectus issued in connection with the
merger of EarthLink and Windstream.

The case is a securities class action brought on behalf of the
former holders of EarthLink Holdings Corp. common stock against
Windstream Holdings, Inc., its Board of Directors, and certain of
Windstream's officers. On October 5, 2016, Windstream proposed a
merger between the two companies in which each share of EarthLink
common stock would be exchanged for 0.7 shares of Windstream common
stock. On November 4, 2016, EarthLink and Windstream agreed on an
exchange ratio of 0.818. Based on the closing price of Windstream
common stock on the NASDAQ on November 3, 2016, the exchange ratio
of 0.818 represented approximately $5.55 in value for each share of
EarthLink common stock. On January 24, 2017, EarthLink and
Windstream jointly filed and disseminated a definitive Joint
Proxy/Registration Statement with the SEC, which was supplemented
on February 14, 2017.

According to the complaint, EarthLink stockholders acquired shares
of Windstream common stock traceable to the Prospectus and
Registration Statement and have been damaged as a result. For these
reasons, Plaintiff asserts claims against defendants for violation
of sections 11, 12, and 15 of the 1933 Act.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          James M. Evangelista, Esq.
          David J. Worley, Esq.
          Kristi Stahnke McGregor, Esq.
          EVANGELISTA WORLEY, LLC
          8100A Roswell Road, Suite 100
          Atlanta, GA 30350
          Telephone: (404) 205 8400
          Facsimile: (404) 205 8395
          E-mail: jim@ewlawllc.com
                  david@ewlawllc.com
                  kristi@ewlawllc.com

               - and -

          Francis Bottini Jr., Esq.
          Albert Y. Chang, Esq.
          Yury A. Kolesnikov, Esq.
          BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC.
          7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102
          La Jolla, CA 92037
          Telephone: (858) 914 2001
          Facsimile: (858) 914 2002
          E-mail: fbottini@bottinilaw.com
                  achang@bottinilaw.com
                  ykolesnikov@bottinilaw.com


EATON CORP: Imamura Seeks to Certify Class & Subclasses
-------------------------------------------------------
In the lawsuit captioned Michael Imamura, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Eaton
Corporation, an Ohio corporation, the Defendant, Case No.
2:18-cv-03886-DSF-KS (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff will move the Court
on November 19, 2018, for an order:

   1. certifying Classes:

      Disclosure Class:

      "all persons in the United States who (1) from a date two
      years prior to the date the Complaint is filed to the date
      notice is sent; (2) applied for employment with Defendant;
      (3) about whom Defendant procured a consumer report; and
      (4) who were provided the same FCRA disclosure and
      authorization as the disclosure that Eaton provided to
      Plaintiff Imamura"

      Adverse Action Class:

      "all persons in the United States who (1) from a date two
      years prior to the date the Complaint is filed to the date
      notice is sent; (2) were subject to an adverse employment
      action; (3) based in whole or in part upon any consumer
      report procured by Defendant; and (4) who, like Plaintiff
      Imamura, were notified that Eaton had taken adverse action
      against them prior to being sent pre adverse action notice
      or copies of the reports and summaries of their rights
      under the FCRA"; and

      California Subclass:

      "all persons belonging to either the Disclosure Class or
      the Adverse Action Class who were residents of the State of
      California at the time they received such disclosures and
      notices";

   2. appointing Plaintiff Imamura as the Class Representative;
      and

   3. appointing law firms of Woodrow & Peluso, LLC and Arias
      Sanguinetti Wang & Torrijos, LLP as Class Counsel.

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          Mike Arias, Esq.
          Alfredo Torrijos, Esq.
          ARIAS SANGUINETTI WANG & TORRIJOS, LLP
          6701 Center Drive West, 14th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90045
          Telephone: (310) 844-9696
          Facsimile: (310) 861-0168
          E-mail: mike@asstlawyers.com
                  alfredo@asstlawyers.com

               - and -

          Steven L. Woodrow, Esq.
          Patrick H. Peluso, Esq.
          Taylor T. Smith, Esq.
          WOODROW & PELUSO, LLC
          3900 East Mexico Avenue, Suite 300
          Denver, CO 80210
          Telephone: (720) 213 0675
          Facsimile: (303) 927 0809
          E-mail: swoodrow@woodrowpeluso.com
                  ppeluso@woodrowpeluso.com
                  tsmith@woodrowpeluso.com


ENTERTAINMENT CRUISES: Faces Bishop Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Entertainment
Cruises, Inc.  The lawsuit is captioned as Cedric Bishop, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Entertainment Cruises, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-07356
(S.D.N.Y., Aug. 14, 2018).  The case alleges Americans with
Disabilities Act violations.

Entertainment Cruises, Inc. operates dining and sightseeing cruises
in Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, New Jersey, New York, Norfolk,
Philadelphia, South Florida, and Washington D.C.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq.
          COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
          300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (917) 299 6612
          Facsimile: (929) 575 4195
          E-mail: joseph@cml.legal


EPIC SYSTEMS: Semanoff Ormsby Attorney Comments on SCOTUS Ruling
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chelan David, writing for Smart Business, reports that on May 21,
2018, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Epic Systems
Corp. v. Lewis, which significantly undermined the power of workers
to effectively assert discrimination and wage and hour claims
against their employers.

"Epic Systems enables businesses to proactively address the wave of
class action discrimination and wage and hour lawsuits that have
inundated businesses in recent years," says Stephen C. Goldblum --
sgoldblum@sogtlaw.com -- a member at Semanoff Ormsby Greenberg &
Torchia LLC.

Smart Business spoke with Mr. Goldblum about the Epic Systems
decision and the impact it will have on both businesses and
employees.

What is the background of the Epic decision?

Epic Systems involved three consolidated cases, and tens of
thousands of employees at three companies: Epic Systems Corp.,
Ernst & Young LLP, and Murphy Oil USA Inc. The employees had signed
agreements related to their employment that required them to
arbitrate, not litigate, work-related claims and prohibited them
from joining with other employees in class-action lawsuits against
their employers.

The workers argued that their right to file class-action lawsuits
over alleged wage and hours violations is protected by the National
Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which was passed in 1935 to offer
employees greater leverage to collectively challenge unjust
treatment on the job, and which made the agreements unenforceable.

The court, in a 5-4 decision, however, sided with the employers,
and Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in the majority opinion that the
1925 Federal Arbitration Act, which favors the right to privately
arbitrate disputes, supersedes the NLRA, and therefore the
challenged agreements were enforceable.

What is the impact of the Epic decision?

The practical import of the Court's decision is that private-sector
employees may be contractually barred by employers from the right
to enter into class-action lawsuits to challenge violations of
federal labor laws. Employers may lawfully require employees, as a
condition of employment, to enter into agreements that compel
arbitration of work-related disputes and that preemptively bar them
from pursuing class action claims in court or in arbitration.
Employees who enter into arbitration agreements with class waivers
may only litigate claims against their employers in an individual
arbitration.

How should employers proceed?

While the Supreme Court's decision in Epic Systems puts to rest
facial challenges to the enforcement of class action waivers in
arbitration agreements on the basis that they conflict with the
NLRA, employees may still challenge such agreements under generally
available contract defenses such as 'fraud, duress or
unconscionability.' To be sure, the plaintiffs' bar and employee
advocacy groups will attempt to expand these and other arguments to
challenge the enforceability of arbitration agreements and class
action waivers.

One reaction to class action waivers that has already occurred is
the filing by plaintiffs' lawyers of dozens of individual
arbitrations at once against a particular company, for which the
company is often required to pay.

These continual challenges to the enforceability of arbitration
agreements place an increased premium on employers' careful
drafting, implementation and maintenance of agreements and class
action waivers. Moreover, although arbitration has traditionally
been seen as a low cost alternative to litigation, that is not
necessarily the reality. Arbitration can be a costly and
time-consuming process.

Employers should also anticipate that Congress may attempt, at some
time in the future, to exempt certain claims, such as those for
sexual harassment or discrimination, from mandatory arbitration and
class action waivers.

The Epic Systems decision resolves certain long-standing issues
regarding arbitration and class action waivers, however significant
questions and issues remain that employers must confront when
determining whether to implement or maintain an arbitration
agreement or a class action waiver. Consult with experienced
employment counsel to ensure your company's program is implemented
and maintained in a manner that will support its enforceability.
[GN]


FACEBOOK INC: Bernstein Litowitz, Robbins Geller Named Counsel
--------------------------------------------------------------
Taylor Arluck, writing for Law360, reports that a California
federal judge on Aug. 3 appointed Bernstein Litowitz Berger &
Grossmann LLP and Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP as co-lead
counsel in consolidated class action litigation against Facebook
Inc. after its stock dropped following disclosure of its ties to
the now-bankrupt political consulting firm Cambridge Analytica.

U.S. District Judge Edward J. Davila tapped the two firms the same
day he consolidated two stock-drop suits against Facebook after the
social media company allegedly misled investors.

The case is Yuan v. Facebook, Inc. et al, Case No. 5:18-cv-01725
(N.D. Calif.).  The case is assigned to Judge Edward J. Davila.
The case was filed March 20, 2018. [GN]



FACEBOOK INC: Faces Class Action Over Alleged Video Metric Errors
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Wendy Davis, writing for MediaPost, reports that marketers who are
suing Facebook over allegations of inflated video metrics have
amended their complaint to include allegations that the social
networking service's statements about metrics may have amounted to
fraud.

"Internal records recently produced in this litigation suggest . .
.  that Facebook's action rises to the level of fraud and may
warrant punitive damages," the marketers allege in new court papers
filed on Aug. 3 with U.S. District Court Judge Jeffrey White in
Oakland, California.

The new complaint contains large swaths of blacked-out text, making
it difficult to determine what specific information forms the basis
of the fraud allegations. But in a publicly available passage of
the class-action complaint, the marketers refer to Facebook's
alleged "longstanding reckless indifference to the metrics'
accuracy."

The court battle stems from revelations that Facebook misreported
two metrics related to its video ads. The result of the errors was
that Facebook inflated the average time spent viewing ad clips by
60% to 80%.

The company said last September that its mistaken calculations
didn't affect billing. (This spring, Facebook acknowledged that it
also overstated the number of times consumers clicked on some
mobile ads; the company said it had issued refunds to affected
advertisers.)

Several marketers, including LLE One (which does business as Crowd
Siren and Social Media Models), subsequently sued the company. They
argued that the misrepresentations led them to believe that
Facebook's video ads were more valuable than they actually were,
resulting in inflated prices.

"The wide disparity between the actual average viewership and
Facebook's reported metrics should have been corrected
immediately," the marketers write in the newly amended complaint.
"Facebook either knew that the average viewership metrics it was
reporting was false . . . or reported those metrics recklessly and
without regard for their truth."

They are seeking monetary damages -- including punitive damages --
and an injunction that would force Facebook to hire outside
auditors and to "promptly correct any problems or issues detected
by these auditors."

Facebook hasn't yet responded to MediaPost's request for comment on
the marketers' new allegations, but the company previously said the
case "has no merit" and that the company will defend itself
"vigorously." [GN]


FAULKNER TRUCKING: Faces Hester Suit in California State Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Faulkner Trucking
Inc.  The class action lawsuit is captioned as Hester, Charles On
Behalf Of All others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Faulkner
Trucking Inc. and Faulkner, Ronald, the Defendants, Case No.
VCU275034 (Cal. Super. Ct., Aug. 13, 2018). The case relates to
employment issues.

Faulkner Trucking, Inc. was founded in 2001. The company's line of
business includes providing trucking transportation services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jared Hague, Esq.
          SUTTON HAGUE LAW CORPORATION
          Silicon Valley Center
          2570 North 1st Street, Suite 200
          San Jose, CA 95131
          Telephone: (408) 273 4624
          Facsimile: (408) 273 6016
          E-mail: jared@suttonhague.com


FIRSTSOURCE ADVANTAGE: Ungar Sues over Debt Collections Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Myra Ungar, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated , the Plaintiff, v. FirstSource Advantage, LLC, and John
Does 1-25, Defendant(s), the Defendant, Case No. 7:18-cv-07316
(S.D.N.Y., Aug. 13, 2018), seeks to recover damages and declaratory
and injunctive relief under the Fair Debt Collections Practices
Act.

According to the complaint, sometime prior to December 7, 2017, an
obligation was allegedly incurred to Bank of America, N.A.  The
Bank of America obligation arose out of a transaction in which
money, property, insurance or services, which are the subject of
the transaction, are primarily for personal, family or household
purposes, specifically a personal credit card.

The alleged Bank of America, N.A. obligation is a "debt" as defined
by 15 U.S.C. section 1692a(5). Bank of America is a "creditor" as
defined by 15 U.S.C. section 1692a(4).  Bank of America or a
subsequent owner of the Bank of America debt contracted the
Defendant to collect the alleged debt. The Defendant collects and
attempts to collect debts incurred or alleged to have been incurred
for personal, family or household purposes on behalf of creditors
using the United States Postal Service, telephone and
internet.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          Daniel Kohn, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          285 Passaic Street
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 282 6500
          Facsimile: (201) 282 6501
          E-mail: dkohn@steinsakslegal.com


FLAGSHIP FACILITY: De Orozco Seeks Unpaid Wage under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------
MARTA L CERON DE OROZCO, individually and on behalf of all
similarly situated employees of Defendants in the State of
California, the Plaintiff, v. FLAGSHIP FACILITY SERVICES, INC.; and
DOES 1 THROUGH 50, inclusive, Defendant, Case No.
37-2018-00040481-CU-OE-CTL (Cal. Super. Ct., Aug. 13, 2018), seeks
to recover unpaid compensation for all hours worked, liquidated
damages, and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

According to the complaint, Defendants are engaged in a systematic
pattern of Labor Code and IWC Wage Order violations De Orozco
toward Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees in
California include, but are not limited to:

     a. failure to provide a first off-duty meal period of at least
30-minutes before the commencement of the sixth hour and a second
off-duty meal period of at least 30-minutes before the commencement
of the eleventh hour;

     b. failure to authorize and permit off-duty paid rest
periods;

     c. failure to pay all minimum and regular wages for all hours
worked;

     d. failure to pay all overtime wages;

     e. failure to pay accrued vacation wages;

     f. failure to indemnify employees for necessary business
expenses;

     g. failure to maintain accurate records;

     h. failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements;

     i. failure to produce employment records; and

     j. failure to timely pay all wages due upon separation of
employment.

Flagship Facility provides facilities maintenance and cleaning
services.  The company's services include floor care, event
preparation and cleanup.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Graham S.P. Hollis, Esq.
          Vilmarie Cordero, Esq.
          Laura M. Supanich, Esq.
          GRAHAMHOLLIS APC
          3555 Fifth Avenue, Suite 200
          San Diego, CA 92103
          Telephone: (619) 692 0800
          Facsimile: (619) 692 0822
          E-mail: ghollis@grahamhollis.com
                  vcordero@grahamhollis.com
                  lsupanich@grahamhollis.com


FORD MOTOR: Motion to Dismiss Door Latch Defect Case Dismissed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Linda Chiem, writing for Law360, reports that a New York federal
judge said on Aug. 6 that Ford Motor Co. must face putative class
allegations it failed to warn consumers of faulty door latches in
its F-150 pickup trucks, saying a technical service bulletin that
Ford circulated among dealerships may back claims that Ford knew of
the defect.

U.S. District Judge Lawrence E. Kahn denied Ford Motor Co.'s motion
to dismiss lead plaintiff Brandon Kommer's amended putative class
action.

The case is styled Kommer v. Ford Motor Company, Case No.
1:17-cv-00296 (N.D.N.Y.).  The case is assigned to Judge Lawrence
E. Kahn.  The case was filed March 13, 2017. [GN]


FORD MOTOR: Roe et al. Sue over Duratec Cyclone Engine Defect
-------------------------------------------------------------
BOBBY ROE and DONALD M. CHRISTENSON, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. FORD MOTOR
COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-12528-LJM-APP (E.D. Mich.,
Aug. 14, 2018), alleges that Ford has failed to inform its
customers that its vehicles incorporating Ford Cyclone engine,
branded as the Duratec engine, contain a defect in design,
manufacturing, materials and/or workmanship that causes the water
pump to suddenly and prematurely fail -- before the end of the
useful life of the engine -- and can lead to catastrophic engine
failure.

According to the complaint, Ford Motor Company informs consumers
that its vehicles are "Built Ford Tough," and touts the quality,
reliability and safety of its vehicles.  Ford's customers rely on
these representations when they decide to lease or purchase
vehicles sold under the Ford, Lincoln and Mercury brand names.

Beginning in 2007 and continuing through the present, Ford has
equipped millions of vehicles sold under the Ford, Lincoln and
Mercury brand names with the Cyclone Engine. Unbeknownst to
purchasers and lessees of the Class Vehicles at the time of
purchase or lease, the Class Vehicles contain the Water Pump
Defect.  The Plaintiffs Roe and Christenson bring this class action
against Ford, individually and on behalf of all persons or entities
in the United States who purchased, leased or own a Class Vehicle,
asserting claims for fraudulent concealment, negligent
misrepresentation, breach of express and implied warranties,
violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. section
2301, et seq., unjust enrichment and violations of the Arkansas and
Washington consumer fraud statutes on behalf of the Sub-Classes.

The Cyclone Engine contains an internal chain-driven water pump,
which means the timing chain is connected to the water pump and
provides the power the water pump needs to circulate coolant
through the engine when the engine is running. The chain-driven
water pump in the Class Vehicles is located inside the Cyclone
Engine, behind numerous engine components, including the timing
chain cover. As a result of the Water Pump Defect, coolant leaks
from the water pump directly into engine parts or the oil pan,
destroying essential engine components or mixing with the engine's
oil. In many cases, this mixture of engine oil and coolant is
carried throughout the engine leading to destruction of the
engine.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Classes:

          E. Powell Miller, Esq.
          Sharon S. Almonrode, Esq.
          Dennis A. Lienhardt, Esq.
          THE MILLER LAW FIRM, P.C.
          Miller Building
          950 West University Drive, Suite 300
          Rochester, MI 48307
          Telephone: (248) 841 2200
          Facsimile: (248) 652 2852
          E-mail: epm@miller.law
                  ssa@millerlawpc.com
                  dal@millerlawpc.com

               - and -

          Joseph H. Meltzer, Esq.
          Peter A. Muhic, Esq.
          Ethan J. Barlieb, Esq.
          Natalie Lesser, 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
                  pmuhic@ktmc.com
                  ebarlieb@ktmc.com
                  nlesser@ktmc.com

               - and -

          John C. Goodson, Esq.
          Matt Keil, Esq.
          KEIL & GOODSON PA
          Texarkana, AR 71854
          Telephone: (870) 772 4113
          Facsimile: (870) 773 2967
          E-mail: jgoodson@kglawfirm.com
                  mkeil@kglawfirm.com

               - and -

          Robert H. Edwards, Esq.
          THE EDWARDS FIRM, P.L.L.C.
          711 West Third Street
          Little Rock, AR 72201
          Telephone: (501) 372 1329


FOWLER FOODS: Weber Seeks Overtime Compensation under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------
KRISTIE WEBER, Individually and on Behalf of Others Similarly
Situated, the Plaintiff, v. FOWLER FOODS, INC., WALLACE FOWLER and
CHRIS FOWLER, the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-00150-DPM (E.D.
Ark., Aug. 13, 2018), seeks to recover declaratory judgment,
monetary damages, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, civil
penalties and costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees as a
result of Defendant's failure to pay Plaintiff and all others
similarly situated overtime compensation for all hours that
Plaintiff and all others similarly situated worked in excess of 40
per workweek, under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Arkansas
Minimum Wage Act.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked as an hourly-paid
employee, Defendants automatically clocked out Plaintiff and other
hourly-paid employees once the store had been closed to customers.
However, Defendants did not allow Plaintiff and other hourly-paid
employees to leave until the store had been fully cleaned and
prepared for the next shift. As a direct result of Defendants'
policies, even though Plaintiff and other hourly-paid employees
worked more than 40 hours in many weeks that they worked for
Defendants during time period relevant to this Complaint, they were
not compensated for all of their overtime hours worked.

Fowler Foods, Inc. operates and manages restaurants. The company
operates franchises for various brands like Kentucky Fried Chicken,
Taco Bells and Pancho's. Fowler Foods, Inc. was founded in 1970 and
is based in Jonesboro, Arkansas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steve Rauls, Esq.
          Josh Sanford, Esq.
          SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
          One Financial Center
          650 South Shackleford, Suite 411
          Little Rock, AR 72211
          Telephone: (501) 221 0088
          Facsimile: (888) 787 2040
          E-mail: steve@sanfordlawfirm.com
                  josh@sanfordlawfirm.com


GALFAB ACQUISITIONS: Kreischer Moves for Class Certification
------------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit styled JOHN KREISCHER, et al., On
behalf of themselves and all others similarly-situated v. GALFAB
ACQUISITIONS, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-04068 (N.D. Ill.), move
for an order:

   1. conditionally certifying the action as a collective action
      for purposes of notice and discovery;

   2. authorizing the Plaintiffs' counsel to send notice to all
      putative plaintiffs;

   3. approving the form and content of the Plaintiffs' proposed
      notices;

   4. directing the Defendants to produce to the Plaintiffs'
      Counsel the contact information for each putative
      plaintiff, (last known address and e-mail address) as
      defined in the accompanying memorandum in support; and

   5. authorizing a 90-day notice period for putative plaintiffs
      to join the action.

Plaintiffs JOHN KREISCHER, HENRY EPPS, WILLIAM BOX, JASON YENNA,
THOMAS NELSON, CULEY CONLEY, BRIAN BUCKMAN, and JAMES GALBREATH, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, are
represented by:

          Elizabeth A. Thompson, Esq.
          Sharilee K. Smentek, Esq.
          SAUL, EWING, ARNSTEIN & LEHR LLP
          161 North Clark, Suite 4200
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Telephone: (312) 876-7185
          Facsimile: (312) 876-0288
          E-mail: elizabeth.thompson@saul.com
                  sharilee.smentek@saul.com

               - and -

          Brian D. Spitz, Esq.
          Chris P. Wido, Esq.
          THE SPITZ LAW FIRM, LLC
          25200 Chagrin Boulevard, Suite 200
          Beachwood, OH 44122
          Telephone: (216) 291-4744
          Facsimile: (216) 291-5744
          E-mail: brian.spitz@spitzlawfirm.com
                  chris.wido@spitzlawfirm.com


GEO GROUP: Judge Certifies Forced Immigrant Labor Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Shadow Proof reports that in a lawsuit alleging systematic wage
theft, thousands of detained immigrants held at GEO Group's
Northwest Detention Center (NWDC) were certified as a class by a
federal judge.

The United States District Court for the Western District of
Washington rejected an argument by the private prison contractor
that the immigrants are "unemployable" by GEO -- because they "lack
work authorization" -- and so they cannot claim the contractor has
violated the state's minimum wage law.

Judge Robert Bryan determined the detained immigrants have an
"employment relationship with GEO." They all participate in a
volunteer work program at NWDC and allege the same "injury," which
is that they are only paid $1 per day for work, "an amount not
commensurate" with the law.

Previously, GEO Group attempted to argue the corporation would face
federal sanctions for employing undocumented immigrants. Bryan
rejected this argument in December 2017.

Ugochuk Goodluck Nwauzor and Fernando Aguirre-Urbina were appointed
to represent the class of plaintiffs.

Mr. Nwauzor lives in Kent, Washington, and was detained at NWDC
from February 2016 to January 2017. He is a Nigerian citizen, who
was granted asylum the same month he was released.

Mr. Aguirre-Urbina is still in detention. He is a Mexican citizen,
who has been confined there since September 2012.

GEO Group has owned and operated the NWDC, which has 1,500 beds for
immigrants, since 2005. The contractor relies on detainees to
"clean, maintain, and operate NWDC," according to the complaint.

Sometimes detained immigrants are not even given $1 per day. They
may instead be compensated with more or "better" food.

In February 2018, NWDC was the site of a hunger strike and work
stoppage by over 100 detainees.

According to the grassroots group, NWDC Resistance, the actions
were in response to GEO Group's failure to provide "edible
nutritious food" and the use of solitary confinement, especially as
a form of retaliation.

Those engaged in resistance claimed GEO guards "constantly search
the beds and units of detained people without reason nor
explanation." Detainees demanded an end to the searches.

Washington state has also brought a lawsuit against GEO Group in
the state's superior court that alleges it is violating the state's
minimum wage laws.

The state's attorney general, Bob Ferguson, declared, "A
multi-billion dollar corporation is trying to get away with paying
its workers $1 per day. That shouldn't happen in America, and I
will not tolerate it happening in Washington. For-profit companies
cannot exploit Washington workers."

The class action lawsuit in federal court will proceed, as the
state of Washington's suit moves through state court.

Multiple lawsuits have sought class certification to challenge GEO
Group's denial of wages. As Prison Legal News documented, "On
February 9, 2018, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the
certification of two classes of immigration detainees who were
forced by GEO to labor without pay or to "volunteer" to work for $1
per day" in a case in Aurora, Colorado. [GN]


GLOBAL RADAR: Sanders & Williams Sue over Background Checks
-----------------------------------------------------------
SHAWANA SANDERS and KENYATTA WILLIAMS on their own behalf and on
behalf of all similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiffs, v.
GLOBAL RADAR ACQUISITION, LLC, d/b/a GLOBAL HR RESEARCH, a foreign
for-profit corporation, f/k/a RADAR POST-CLOSING HOLDING COMPANY,
INC., f/k/a GLOBAL HR RESEARCH, INC., the Defendant, Case No.
2:18-cv-00555-UA-CM (Fla. Cir. Ct. Lee Cty., Aug. 13, 2018),
alleges that Global HR willfully obtained and used consumer report
for employment purposes, pursuant to the under the Fair Credit
Reporting Act of 1970.

According to the complaint, the Defendant violated FCRA by
providing consumer reports used for employment purposes without
certification from A1 HR's clients that they would abide by the
FCRA's disclosure, authorization and notice requirements.

Global HR is a consumer reporting agency, providing employers with
consumer reports, commonly referred to as "background checks" for
employment purposes.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marc R. Edelman, Esq.
          201 N. Franklin Street No. 700
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Telephone: 813 223 5505
          Facsimile: 813 257 0572
          E-mail: MEdelman@forthepeople.com

               - and -

          C.R. Ryan Morgan, Esq.
          Orlando, FL 33802
          Telephone: (407) 420 1414
          Facsimile: (407) 245 3401
          E-mail: RMorgan@forthepeople.com

               - and -

          Andrew Frisch, Esq.
          600 North Pine Island Road., Suite 400
          Plantation, FL 33324
          Telephone: (954) WORKERS
          Facsimile: (954) 327 3013


INDIANA UNIVERSITY: Another Former Diver Added to Abuse Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Alesia and Zach Osterman, writing for Indianapolis Star,
report that another former Indiana University diver has been added
to a class action lawsuit against a former IU coach and
Indianapolis-based USA Diving, which is accused of ignoring or
obstructing accusations of sexual abuse.

The federal lawsuit alleges that the woman, at age 17, sent naked
photos of herself to Will Bohonyi, a volunteer assistant diving
coach for IU, at the coach's request. Mr. Bohonyi, a former IU
diver, had befriended the woman after she was redshirted -- held
out of competition to preserve a season of eligibility -- as a
freshman, the lawsuit says.

In November of that year, the lawsuit alleges, the woman performed
oral sex on the coach when he threatened to tell her boyfriend that
he had naked pictures of the minor girl.

Although the woman is named in the lawsuit, IndyStar typically does
not name alleged sexual assault victims.

The woman moved to Bloomington from out of state in May 2008 as a
minor, the lawsuit alleges. She dove for the Indiana University
Diving Club -- a top USA Diving program -- before starting as an IU
athlete in August 2008.

IU is not named as a defendant. USA Diving, Mr. Bohonyi and the
Ohio State University Diving Club are named as defendants.

Mr. Bohonyi did not immediately respond to an email from IndyStar
requesting comment.

IU spokesman Chuck Carney said in a statement on Aug. 6: "Indiana
University will not tolerate inappropriate conduct by those
entrusted to serve our students. Immediately after learning of
allegations regarding a former volunteer diving coach, IU initiated
an independent review. As the review continues, these latest
allegations, which are especially troubling, will be thoroughly
pursued."

The original lawsuit was filed last month. It named two women as
plaintiffs, one of whom was a former IU diver who transferred.

At the time, a spokeswoman for USA Diving said in a statement,
"Providing a safe environment for our members is of tremendous
importance to USA Diving, and we take these matters very seriously.
USA Diving is unable to comment further at this time."

Mr. Bohonyi has been on USA Diving's list of banned coaches since
2015, but the lawsuit alleges that action didn't happen until six
months after Ohio State University investigated one of the
plaintiff's allegations and fired him. The report, the lawsuit
says, was provided to USA Diving.

The original two plaintiffs, both former divers, accuse Mr. Bohonyi
of coercing and forcing them into frequent sex. [GN]


JANBAR INC: Faces Cancino et al. Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Janbar, Inc. et al.
The lawsuit is captioned as Mr. Julio Cancino and Mr. William Lagos
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Plaintiffs, v. Janbar, Inc.; Janbar Group, Inc.; and Mr. Janusz
Bartnicki, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-07219 (S.D.N.Y., Aug.
10, 2018). The case alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

Janbar is a general contracting company located in Brooklyn New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs appear pro se.


JR LICENSING: Website not Accessible to Blind, Slade Says
---------------------------------------------------------
LINDA SLADE, Individually and as the representative of a class of
similarly situated persons, the Plaintiff, v. JR LICENSING, LLC
d/b/a Judith Ripka, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-07218
(S.D.N.Y., Aug. 10, 2018), alleges that the Defendant failed to
design, construct, maintain, and operate their website at
http//:www.Judithripka.com/ to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons.

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.

Defendants' denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered, and in
conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of
Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          The SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          44 Court Street, Suite 1217
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (917) 373 9128
          Facsimile: (718) 504 7555


LIFEVANTAGE CORPORATION: Smith Suit Moved to District of Utah
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Brian Smith, individually and on
behalf of all other similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Lifevantage Corporation, Darren Jensen, Justin Rose, and Ryan
Goodwin, the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-00135, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut to the
U.S. District Court for the District of Utah (Central) on Aug. 6,
2018. The District of Utah Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:18-cv-00621-DBP to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the
Hon. Judge Dustin B. Pead.

Plaintiff is represented by:

     James K. Robertson, Jr., Esq.
     Carmody Torrance Sandak & Hennessey, LLP
     Tel: 203-575-2636
     E-mail: jrobertson@carmodylaw.com

     Randall Adam Swick, Esq.
     Reid Collins & Tsai LLP
     Tel: 512-647-6100
     aswick@rctlegal.com

     John Louis Cordani, Jr.
     Carmody Torrance Sandak & Hennessey, LLP
     Tel: 203-784-3110
     E-mail: jlcordani@carmodylaw.com

     J. Benjamin King, Esq.
     Reid Collins & Tsai LLP
     Tel: 214-420-8900
     E-mail: bking@rctlegal.com

     Brian T. Henebry, Esq.
     Carmody Torrance Sandak & Hennessey, Llp - Nh
     Tel: 203-573-1200
     E-mail: bhenebry@carmodylaw.com

     John Cordani, Esq.
     McCarter & English LLP
     Tel: 203-206-6291
     E-mail: jcordani@mccarter.com

     Andrew Kochanowski, Esq.
     Sommers Schwartz, P.C.
     Tel: 248-746-4068
     E-mail: akochanowski@sommerspc.com

Defendants are represented by:

     John C.C. Sanders, Esq.
     Winston & Strawn LLP
     Tel: 214-453-6462
     E-mail: jsanders@winston.com

     Rex Mann, Esq.
     Winston & Strawn LLP
     Tel: 214-453-6412
     E-mail: rmann@winston.com

     John Matthew Doroghazi, Esq.
     Wiggin & Dana
     Tel: 203-498-4421
     E-mail: jdoroghazi@wiggin.com

     Lane M. Webster, Esq.
     Winston & Strawn LLP
     Tel: 214-453-6510
     E-mail: lwebster@winston.com

     Thomas Melsheimer, Esq.
     Winston & Strawn/chicago
     Tel: 214-453-6401
     melsheimer@winston.com

LifeVantage Corporation identifies, researches, develops, and
distributes nutraceutical dietary supplements and skin care
products.[BN]


MABRY MANAGEMENT: Amezola Seeks Refund of Expenses
--------------------------------------------------
GUSTAVO AMEZOLA, as an individual, LORENA AMEZOLA, as an
individual, and on behalf of all similarly situated employees, the
Plaintiff, v. MABRY MANAGEMENT CO. INC., and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. BC717308 (Cal. Super. Ct., Aug.
13, 2018), alleges that on or about September 20, 2017, the
Defendant employed Plaintiffs as on-site resident managers at one
of Defendant's apartment locations in Los Angeles County. The
Defendants required directed Plaintiffs as part of their
employment, to incur necessary expenditures or losses in carrying
out their job duties. Specifically, Defendants required Plaintiff
to drive their personal vehicles to Defendant's banking location to
deposit checks in Defendant's bank account among other uses of
their personal vehicle for necessary job-related purposes.

Mabry Management provides real estate property management
services.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Kevin Mahoney, Esq.
          Alexander Perez, Esq.
          MAHONEY LAW GROUP, APC
          249 E. Ocean Boulevard, Suite 814
          Long Beach, CA 90802
          Telephone: (562) 590 5550
          Facsimile: (562) 590 8400
          E-mail: kmahoiiev@mahoney-law.net
                  aperez@mahoney-law.net


MDL 2591: Kellogg v. Watts Guerra Consolidated in Mir162 Corn Case
------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Kellogg, et al., the Plaintiffs, v.
Watts Guerra, LLP et al., the Defendants, Case No. 0:18-cv-01082,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of
Minnesota, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas
(Kansas City). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:18-cv-02408-JWL-JPO to the proceeding.

Syngenta produces crop protection products and seeds. The company
produces herbicides, insecticides, and fungicides, and seeds for
field crops, vegetables, and flowers. The company is based in
Basel, Switzerland.

The Kellogg case is being consolidated with MDL 2591 in re:
Syngenta AG Mir162 Corn Litigation. The MDL was created by Order of
the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on
December 11, 2014. These cases concern the Syngenta defendants'
decision to commercialize corn seeds containing a genetically
modified trait, known as "MIR162" that reportedly controls certain
insects. Corn with this trait has entered U.S. corn stocks but has
not been approved for import by the Chinese government, which has
imposed a complete ban on U.S. corn with this trait.

In its December 11, 2014 Order, the MDL Panel found that it involve
common questions of fact, and that centralization in the District
of Kansas will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. John W. Lungstrum, United States
District Judge. The lead case is 2:14-md-02591-JWL-JPO.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

          Douglas J Nill, Esq.
          DOUGLAS J. NILL, P.L.L.C.
          120 South Sixth Street, Suite 2050
          Minneapolis, MN 55402-1801
          Telephone: (612) 573 3669

Attorneys for Watts Guerra, LLP:; Mikal C. Watts; and Francisco
Guerra:

          Christopher L. Goodman, Esq.
          THOMPSON, COE, COUSINS & IRONS, LLP
          408 Saint Peter Street, Ste 510
          Saint Paul, MN 55102
          Telephone: (651) 389 5025
          Facsimile: (651) 389 5099
          E-mail: cgoodman@thompsoncoe.com

Attorneys Daniel M. Homolka P.A.; and Yira Law Office LTD:

          Joao C.J.G. De Medeiros, Esq.
          Richard A Lind, Esq.
          LIND, JENSEN, SULLIVAN & PETERSON, P.A.
          1300 AT&T Tower
          901 Marquette Avenue South
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 333 3637
          Facsimile: (612) 333 1030

Attorneys for Hovland and Rasmus, PLLC; Dewald Deaver, P.C., LLO;
Patton Hoversten & Berg, P.A.; and Wojtalewicz Law Firm, Ltd.:

          John M Degnan, Esq.
          Kathryn M Short, Esq.
          Briggs & Morgan, PA
          80 S 8th St Ste 2200
          Mpls, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 977 8660
          Facsimile: (612) 977 8650

Attorneys for Mauro, Archer & Associates, LLC; Wagner Reese, LLP;
VanDerGinst Law, P.C.; and Law Office of Michael Miller:

          Arthur G Boylan, Esq.
          ANTHONY OSTLUND BAER & LOUWAGIE PA
          90 S 7th St Ste 3600
          Mpls, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 349 6969
          Facsimile: (612) 349 6996

Attorneys for Pagel Weikum, PLLP:

          Chad J Hintz, Esq.
          Richard J Thomas, Esq.
          BURKE & THOMAS, PLLP
          3900 Northwoods Drive, Suite 200
          Arden Hills, MN 55112
          Telephone: (651) 490 1808
          Facsimile: (651) 490 1872


MDL 2820: Bumper Crop Farms Suit v. Monsanto Consolidated
---------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled BUMPER CROP FARMS, LLC, the
Plaintiffs, v. MONSANTO COMPANY, and BASF CORPORATION, the
Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-01409, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for Southern District of Illinois to the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (Cape
Girardeau) on Aug. 10, 2018. The Eastern District of Missouri Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 1:18-cv-00200-SNLJ to the proceeding. The
case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Jr.

The Bumper Crop case is being consolidated with MDL 2820 in re:
Dicamba Herbicides Litigation. The MDL was created by Order of the
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on
February 2, 2018. The actions share factual questions arising from
allegations concerning the development, testing, and marketing of
Monsanto's dicamba-resistant Xtend seeds and three dicamba
herbicides -- XtendiMax, Engenia, and FeXapan -- as well as
allegations of injury from the use of those 2 herbicides, either
alone or in conjunction with the Xtend seeds.

In its Feb. 2 Order, the MDL Panel found that centralization will
eliminate duplicative discovery, the possibility of inconsistent
rulings on class certification, Daubert motions, and other pretrial
matters, and conserve judicial and party resources. In particular,
discovery concerning the development, testing, marketing, and
regulatory histories of the herbicides and seed products --
including expert discovery on such matters as the chemical
composition of the herbicides and the mechanism of injury --
appears likely to be extensive. The Plaintiffs' allegations that
defendants conspired with one another to conceal the risks and
misrepresent the characteristics of their products to regulators
and the public also may necessitate significant discovery into
defendants' various business agreements and arrangements. The lead
case is 1:18-md-02820-SNLJ.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael J. Sudekum, Esq.
          Mandel & Mandel LLP
          1108 Olive Street, 5th Floor
          St. Louis, MO 63101

               - and -

          Beverly T. Randles, Esq.
          Billy R. Randles, Esq.
          Angela M. Splittgerber, Esq.
          RANDLES & SPLITTGERBER, LLP
          5823 N. Cypress Ave.
          Kansas City, MO 64119
          Telephone: (816) 744 4779
          E-mail: bill@randleslaw.com
                  bev@randleslaw.com
                  angie@randleslaw.com

               - and -

          L. Benjamin Mook, Esq.
          DAVIS GEORGE MOOK LLC
          1600 Genessee Street, Suite 328
          Kansas City, MO 64102
          Telephone: (816) 569 2629
          Facsimile: (816) 447 3939
          E-mail: ben@dgmlawyers.com


MERRILL LYNCH: Faces Class Action Over DACA Job Discrimination
--------------------------------------------------------------
Prachi Gupta, writing for The Slot, reports that Donald Trump's
decision to end Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals -- a
decision he seems to have forgotten about -- has upended the lives
of thousands of undocumented immigrants who have permits to work
and study in the United States thanks to the Obama-era policy.
Among the many devastating effects of the chaos created by this
administration, a group of DACA recipients say that companies
aren't hiring them because of their newly tenuous immigration
status.

Vox reports that the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational
Fund (MALDEF) has "filed class-action lawsuits against Merrill
Lynch (owned by Bank of America), Procter & Gamble, and Allied
Wealth Partners" on behalf of four DACA recipients, alleging that
the companies discriminated against prospective employees or
interns on basis of immigration status in New York, New Jersey,
Florida, and California. DACA permits expire every two years and
must be renewed, but due to Trump's bullshit and the generally
malicious composition of Congress, the fate of DACA is unknown. The
lawsuits allege that applicants were denied by recruiters because
they don't have a specific work authorization status, like a green
card or student visa.

The lawsuits come three years after DACA recipient and Yonkers, New
York resident Ruben Juarez settled with Northwestern Mutual over a
similar claim. As part of the agreement, the company started a DACA
recipient recruitment program and promised to pay other DACA
recipients they had rejected up to $7,500. The wave of class-action
lawsuits now alleging similar discrimination suggests that this is
actually pretty common. Which is incredibly fucked up but not
surprising.

From Vox:

It's unclear how many DACA workers have been barred from jobs in
the past six years. Thomas Saenz, president of MALDEF, suspects
that it happens pretty often.

"These are among the five largest and most sophisticated companies
in the country," Saenz told me, referring to the defendants in the
cases. "You would expect that if they are engaging in this conduct,
then probably much smaller companies who don't have access to
high-powered lawyers must be doing the same."

In 2013, DACA recipient David Rodriguez was denied for an
internship with Procter & Gamble, but was told that "the company's
policy was that applicants had to be legally authorized to work in
the U.S. without restraint on the type, duration, or nature of
employment," according to NBC. "I was really excited to possibly be
working for a large company, because I am a first-generation
immigrant without other family members whose career path I could
follow," he told NBC, "and I more than fulfilled the academic
requirements." Rodriquez is among the plaintiffs represented by
MALDEF.

In a statement to Vox, Procter & Gamble said it doesn't
discriminate, "period."

In 2017, the company was one of several major corporations that
released statements denouncing the decision to rescind DACA. At the
time, Procter & Gamble called on Congress to protect the program so
that that the U.S. might "continue to benefit from the
contributions of the 800,000 Dreamers."

A nice sentiment, really. [GN]


MICHIGAN: Ct. Certifies Class of Jewish Inmates in "Ackerman"
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Hon. Linda V. Parker grants the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification filed in the lawsuit titled GERALD ACKERMAN and MARK
SHAYKIN v. HEIDI WASHINGTON, Case No. 4:13-cv-14137-LVP-MKM (E.D.
Mich.).

The Court certifies this class with respect to the claims in the
Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint:

     All Jewish individuals confined with the Michigan Department
     of Corrections who are designated by the prison system to
     receive kosher meals.

Michael Arnold filed this action against Michigan Department of
Corrections ("MDOC") Director Heidi Washington ("Defendant"),
claiming that Jewish inmates requiring a kosher diet are receiving
food not prepared or served in a kosher manner.  Mr. Arnold alleged
that this conduct violates the putative class members' First
Amendment rights and their rights under the Religious Land Use and
Institutionalized Persons Act.  He sought declaratory and
injunctive relief.  After he was paroled, the parties stipulated to
the substitution of Gerald Ackerman and Mark Shaykin as Plaintiffs
and putative class representatives.

The Court designates Ackerman and Shaykin as the representative
plaintiffs for that certified class and, pursuant to Rule 23(g) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Daniel E. Manville, Esq., and
Michael Steinberg, Esq., as lead class counsel.


MILWAUKEE, WI: DOC Agrees to Pay $885K Legal Fees in ACLU Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Molly Beck, writing for Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, reports that
taxpayers would pay nearly $900,000 to wrap up a federal lawsuit
filed against state prison officials over their treatment of young
offenders at the Lincoln Hills School for Boys and Copper Lake
School for Girls.

Attorneys with the Department of Corrections have agreed to
shoulder $885,000 of the $1.1 million worth of legal fees attorneys
the American Civil Liberties Union of Wisconsin accrued before
settling a class-action lawsuit earlier this year that forces
Department of Corrections officials to end their use of pepper
spray and solitary confinement for teen inmates.

The agreement must be approved by a federal judge overseeing the
lawsuit, according to court filings.

The ACLU brought the lawsuit against DOC in 2017 on behalf of
current and former inmates of the youth prison, who accused prison
officials of violating their constitutional rights to live free
from cruel and unusual punishment by regularly using pepper spray
on inmates to manage behavior, and by keeping inmates locked in
isolation for months in some cases.

The agreement overhauls conditions at the youth prison and
establishes policies for new juvenile lockups that are to be built
in the coming years.

An independent monitor will be hired to enforce the agreement, and
have the power to inspect the facilities, including the new ones.

The legal fees to be covered by taxpayers will come on top of
nearly $19 million the state recently agreed to pay to a former
inmate who suffered severe brain damage after a suicide attempt. At
least four other inmate lawsuits are pending that could result in
further payouts.

The $885,000 is a "compromised amount," according to court filings,
and pays for at least 20% less work than what the attorneys
actually completed in arguing on behalf of the inmates. [GN]


NEW ORLEANS: 5th Cir. Hears Case Over Public Defender Wait Lists
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that judges hearing an appeal on Aug.
6 on whether putting poor defendants on wait lists for an attorney
violates their constitutional rights appeared skeptical as to
whether it was the federal court's job to step in or whether there
was still a need to do so.

The three-judge panel at the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals was
hearing a case brought by the American Civil Liberties Union.

The ACLU sued the New Orleans and state public defenders in 2016 on
behalf of three defendants after the New Orleans body began putting
some poor defendants on wait lists to get an attorney. The Orleans
Public Defenders argued they didn't have the resources and staffing
to fairly defend those clients.

The lawsuit was part of a long history of challenges to the state's
indigent defense system, which critics say is underfunded and
relies too heavily on fines and fees that can vary wildly from year
to year.

The ACLU would like the federal courts to declare the wait lists a
violation of the defendants' constitutional rights. A lower court
judge acknowledged a "serious systemic problem" in Louisiana's
indigent-defense system, but said the issues should be addressed in
the appeals process.

The federal appeals panel seemed just as skeptical on Aug. 6.

Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod questioned why these cases weren't
brought before the relevant state judges, for example, by arguing
their right to a speedy trial was being violated.

"Remedy is with the state judge," she said.

The judges also pointed out that there seemed to be little
difference in the position of the ACLU and the defendants, with
both sides calling on the federal judge to make a ruling. At one
point, Judge E. Grady Jolly questioned whether the court case was
simply a public relations effort to get a decision from the federal
court that they could then show to the state legislature,
presumably to force change.

Speaking after the hearing, Buskey said states aren't allowed to
get out of following the constitution by simply not paying for a
constitutional right.

Judge Elrod also questioned why the case was still continuing when
the defendants were no longer on a wait list. The three defendants
were eventually appointed lawyers and have had their cases
adjudicated.

John Landis, an attorney representing the state public defender,
said that at the state level money was reallocated from capital
cases to non-capital cases which helped eliminate the wait list.
But he said there is now a wait list for lawyers in capital cases
and warned that wait lists in non-capital cases could come back in
New Orleans and in other districts.

Derwyn Bunton, who heads the Orleans Public Defenders office, said
after the hearing that the fundamental problem remains with the
public defender system. He said it relies too heavily on fines and
fees from court cases and traffic offenses, which can vary greatly
from year to year.

"We are always going to be vulnerable," he said. [GN]


NIELSEN HOLDINGS: Robbins Arroyo Files Class Action
---------------------------------------------------
Shareholder rights law firm Robbins Arroyo LLP disclosed that
purchasers of Nielsen Holdings plc (NYSE: NLSN) have filed a class
action complaint against the company's officers and directors for
alleged violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 between
February 8, 2018 and July 25, 2018. Nielsen, together with its
subsidiaries, operates as an information and measurement company.

View this information on the law firm's Shareholder Rights Blog:
https://www.robbinsarroyo.com/nielsen-holdings-plc/

Nielsen Accused of Disregarding the True Risks of Privacy Related
Regulations

According to the complaint, Nielsen repeatedly assured investors
that its measurement and analytics services were viable and strong,
and that the enactment of the European General Data Protection
Regulation ("GDPR") would not impact its business. Despite these
representations, on July 26, 2018, Nielsen announced that it had
significantly missed public net income and free cash flow estimates
by a wide margin, and reduced previously reaffirmed 2018 financial
guidance. Nielsen attributed the shortfall to the GDPR and changes
in the consumer data privacy landscape, which caused its clients to
struggle to ensure compliance with targeting and data usage rights.
On this news, Nielsen's stock plunged more than 25% to close at
$22.11 per share on July 26, 2018.

Nielsen Shareholders Have Legal Options

Concerned shareholders who would like more information about their
rights and potential remedies can contact attorney Leonid Kandinov
at (800) 350-6003, LKandinov@robbinsarroyo.com, or via the
shareholder information form on the firm's website.

Robbins Arroyo LLP is a nationally recognized leader in shareholder
rights law. The firm represents individual and institutional
investors in shareholder derivative and securities class action
lawsuits, and has helped its clients realize more than $1 billion
of value for themselves and the companies in which they have
invested. Sign up for our FREE portfolio monitoring service, Stock
Watch.

         Leonid Kandinov, Esq.
         Robbins Arroyo LLP
         Email: LKandinov@robbinsarroyo.com [GN]


OHIO STATE: Diving Club Coach on Leave Following Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Somerson, writing for Columbus Business First, reports that
the head coach of Ohio State's diving club is on administrative
leave and was suspended from the sport's national governing body
shortly after a class-action lawsuit was filed, accusing a former
diving coach of sexual misconduct. The accusations involve a
16-year-old girl. [GN]


OJ CARTON: Faces Class Action Over False Advertising Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------
Herald Tribune reports that Florida's Natural is the latest orange
juice facing a lawsuit over allegedly false advertising claims.
Tropicana was the subject of a similar false label lawsuit in
March.  A Brooklyn, N.Y., woman is challenging claims that the
orange juice is indeed "natural" as declared in its name and images
on the OJ carton.  The class-action lawsuit was filed on July 20
against Florida's Natural and its parent company, Citrus World Inc.
[GN]


OLYMPIAN CONSTRUCTION: Faces Sullivan Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Olympian Construction
CO., LLC.  The class action lawsuit is captioned as Phillip
Sullivan, Jr., on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. Olympian Construction CO., LLC, the
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-07307 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 13, 2018). The
case alleges Americans with Disabilities Act violations.

Olympian Construction is a full-service general contractor
servicing Nashville, Tennessee, with superior construction services
at the lowest cost.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


PEBO TRAVIATA: Faces Sapon's Unpaid Overtime Suit in New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pebo Traviata Pizza
Corp. et al.  The lawsuit is captioned as Oseas Quic Sapon, also
known as: Bryan individually; and Oseas Quic Sapon also known as:
Bryan, on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Pebo Traviata Pizza Corp., doing business as: La Traviata Pizza;
Virgilio Rojas Santos; Jenny Doe; Blanca E. Perez; Jose Luis Perez;
the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-07237 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 10, 2018).
The plaintiff alleges denial of overtime compensation.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


PENN CREDIT: Shinn Suit Moved to Southern District of Florida
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Penn Credit
Corporation.  The class action lawsuit is captioned as Ryan Shinn,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the
Plaintiff, v. Penn Credit Corporation, the Defendant, Case No.
9:18-cv-81076-DMM (S.D. Fla., Aug. 13, 2018). The case is assigned
to the Hon. Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks.

Penn Credit is a nationwide accounts receivables management
firm.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jibrael Jarallah Said Hindi, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th St., 17th Floor
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 907 1136
          E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com


PEPE ROSSO: Faces Barrera Suit in Eastern District of New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pepe Rosso 24 Inc.
The class action lawsuit is captioned as Manuel Barrera, on behalf
of himself, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly-situated, the Plaintiff, v. Pepe Rosso 24 Inc. d/b/a Pepe
Rosso; Rosso Uptown, Ltd. d/b/a Rosso Uptown Pizzeria & Restaurant
and/or Brick Osteria; Michael Tizzano, an individual; and Massimo
Gammella, an individual, the Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-04558
(E.D.N.Y., Aug. 13, 2018).  The case alleges denial of overtime
compensation.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


PMG AUTO: Faces Mulvey Suit over Robocalls
------------------------------------------
AARON MULVEY on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. PMG AUTO SALES OF SOUTH DALLAS, LLC D/B/A ATKINSON
TOYOTA SOUTH DALLAS, the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-02093-C (N.D.
Tex., Aug. 10, 2018), alleges that the Defendant, using an
automatic telephone dialing system, made at least two calls to
Plaintiff that delivered text messages to Plaintiff's cell phone
without Plaintiff's prior express consent. These calls violated the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act, which prohibits the making of
any calls to a cellular telephone using an automatic telephone
dialing system without the prior express consent of the person to
whom the call is made. For the past four years, Defendant has made
thousands of identical or substantially similar calls using an
automatic telephone dialing system to cellular telephones of
thousands of persons throughout the United States without obtaining
the prior express consent of the persons being called.[BN]

Attorney for Plaintiff and the proposed Class:

          Aaron K. Mulvey, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF AARON K. MULVEY, PLLC
          1327 Bar Harbor Dr.
          Dallas, TX 75232
          Telephone: (214) 282 5215
          E-mail: Aaron@MulveyLaw.net


PUROSYSTEMS LLC: Faces Matzura Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Purosystems, LLC. The
lawsuit is captioned as Steven Matzura, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Purosystems, LLC
doing business as: Puroclean, the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-07224
(S.D.N.Y., Aug. 10, 2018).  The lawsuit alleges Americans with
Disabilities Act violations.

PuroSystems, LLC provides fire and water damage restoration, mold
and mildew removal, and biohazard cleanup services to residential
customers, and commercial establishments.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq.
          COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
          300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (917) 299 6612
          Facsimile: (929) 575 4195
          E-mail: joseph@cml.legal


QUEENS CITY PAYROLL: Faces Delacruz Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Queens City Payroll
Services, Inc. The lawsuit is captioned as Emanuel Delacruz on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff,
v. Queens City Payroll Services, Inc., doing business as: Caring
Transitions, the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-07227 (S.D.N.Y., Aug.
10, 2018). The lawsuit alleges Americans with Disabilities Act
violations.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H Mizrahi
          Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
          300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Tel: (917) 299-6612
          Fax: (929) 575-4195
          E-mail: joseph@cml.legal


REAL THAI: Faces Teofilo Suit in Southern District of New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Real Thai Cuisine
Inc. et al.  The lawsuit is captioned as Jose Luis Gavino Teofilo,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the
Plaintiff, v. Real Thai Cuisine Inc., doing business as: Real Thai
Cuisine; Nimnual Likitvarin; and Pookie Doe, the Defendants, Case
No. 1:18-cv-07238 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 10, 2018). The lawsuit alleges
denial of overtime Compensation.[BN]

The Plaintiffs appears pro se.


ROTI RESTAURANTS: Garcia Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA
------------------------------------------------------
RAUL GARCIA, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and
the Class, the Plaintiff, v. ROTI RESTAURANTS, LLC, the Defendants,
Case No. 157518/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Aug. 13, 2018), seeks to
recover unpaid wages due to time-shaving, call-in pay, unreimbursed
uniform costs, statutory penalties, liquidated damages pursuant to
the New York Labor Law, and the Fair Labor Standards Act.

According to the complaint, Defendant knowingly and willfully
operated their business with a policy and practice that unlawfully
failed to pay Plaintiff and Class members their call-in pay premium
on days when they were sent home after shortly arriving for their
shift. The Plaintiff, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and Class members
were deducted $45 for each pair of slip proof shoes provided by
Defendant. Throughout Plaintiff's employment with Defendant, he was
deducted several times for such uniform costs. Such deductions were
deducted from their wages and they were not reimbursed. Defendant
unlawfully failed to reimburse Plaintiff, FLSA Collective
Plaintiffs and Class members for their uniform costs.

Roti Restaurants, LLC operates restaurants. It also offers catering
services. Roti Restaurants, LLC was incorporated in 2006 and is
based in Chicago, Illinois.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          C.K. Lee, Esq.
          Anne Seelig, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          30 East 39th Street, Second Floor
          New York, NY 10016


SALLIE MAE: Faces Homaidan Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sallie Mae, Inc. et
al.  The lawsuit is captioned as Hilal K. Homaidan on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Sallie Mae, Inc.; Navient Solutions, LLC; and Navient Credit
Finance Corporation, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-04527-ARR
(E.D.N.Y., Aug. 10, 2018).  The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge
Allyne R. Ross.

Sallie Mae is a student loan company with over 40 years of
providing student loans for college, supporting graduate and
undergraduate study.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam Reese Shaw, Esq.
          BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
          10 North Pearl Street, 4th Floor
          Albany, NY 12207
          Telephone: (518) 434 0600
          Facsimile: (518) 434 0665
          E-mail: ashaw@flip.com

               - and -

          Austin Smith, Esq.
          SMITH LAW GROUP
          MITCHELL PLACE
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (917) 992 2121
          E-mail: austin@acsmithlawgroup.com

               - and -

          George F. Carpinello, Esq.
          Robert Tietjen, Esq.
          BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP
          30 South Pearl Street, 4th Floor
          Albany, NY 12207
          Telephone: (518) 434 0600
          Facsimile: (518) 434 0665
          E-mail: gcarpinello@bsfllp.com
                  rtietjen@bsfllp.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Dion W. Hayes, Esq.
          K. Elizabeth Sieg, Esq.
          Kyle R. Hosmer, Esq.
          Shawn R. Fox, Esq.
          McGurie Woods LLP
          1345 Avenue Of The Americas, 7th Floor
          New York, NY 10105
          Telephone: (212) 548 2165
          E-mail: sfox@mcguirewoods.com

               - and -

          Thomas M. Farrell, Esq.
          JP MORGAN CHASE TOWER
          600 Travis Center, Ste. 7500
          Houston, TX 77002
          Telephone: (713) 571 9191
          E-mail: tfarrell@mcguirewoods.com



SAMY'S CAMERA: Flores Seeks Overtime Pay under Labor Code
---------------------------------------------------------
EDGAR FLORES, as an individual and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. SAMY'S CAMERA, INC., a
California Corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, the Defendant, Case
No. BC717463 (Cal. Super. Ct., Aug. 10, 2018), seeks to recover
overtime compensation under the California Labor Code.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was employed by
Defendants as a non-exempt employee from approximately April 2013
until approximately May 2018.  Unless otherwise specified, all
allegations in this complaint occurred during Plaintiffs
employment. The Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees often
worked in excess of 8.0 hours per workday and/or 40.0 hours per
workweek but did not receive overtime compensation equal to one and
one-half times their regular rate of pay for all overtime hours
worked. Specifically, Defendant paid Plaintiff and other aggrieved
employees "commissions," "processing" bonuses, and/or other forms
of pay not properly excludable as a matter of law when calculating
the regular rate of pay. Despite the payment of Incentive Pay to
Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees. Defendants failed to
properly calculate the regular rate of pay, thereby causing
Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees to be underpaid all of
their required overtime wages.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          Paul K. Haines, Esq.
          Fletcher w. Schmidt, Esq.
          Andrew J. Rowbotham, Esq.
          Matthew K. Moen, Esq.
          HAINES LAW GROUP
          222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550
          El Segundo, CA 90245
          Telephone: (424) 292 2350
          Facsimile: (424) 292 2355
          E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com
                  fschmidt@haineslawgroup.com
                  arowbotham@haineslawgroup.com
                  mmoen@haineslawgroup.com


SHAPIRO & MASSEY: Faces Cody et al. Suit in S.D. Mississippi
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Shapiro & Massey,
LLC.  The lawsuit is captioned as Stacy M. Cody and Timothy S.
Cody, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
the Plaintiff, v. Shapiro & Massey, LLC, the Defendant, Case No.
1:18-cv-00262-HSO-JCG (S.D. Miss., Aug. 10, 2018).  The case is
assigned to the Hon. Judge Halil S. Ozerden and alleges Fair Debt
Collection Act violations.

Shapiro & Massey LLC is a law firm in Flowood, Mississippi.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael T. Ramsey, Esq.
          SHEEHAN LAW FIRM, PLLC
          429 Porter Avenue
          Ocean Springs, MS 39564
          Telephone: (228) 875 0572
          E-mail: mike@sheehanlawfirm.com


SYNGENTA CROP: Faces Sullivan Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Syngenta Crop
Protection, LLC.  The class action lawsuit is captioned as Phillip
Sullivan, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
the Plaintiff, v. Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, the Defendant,
Case No. 1:18-cv-07296 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 13, 2018), seeks to recover.
The case alleges Americans with Disabilities Act violations.

Syngenta provides crop protection chemical products and
agricultural services.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


TESLA INC: Faces Yeager Suit over Plan to Go Private
----------------------------------------------------
JOHN YEAGER, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, the Plaintiff, v. TESLA, INC. and ELON MUSK, the
Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-04912 (N.D. Cal., Aug. 13, 2018),
seeks to recover compensable damages caused by Defendants'
violations of federal securities laws and pursue remedies under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Tesla designs, develops, manufactures, and sells high-performance
fully electric vehicles and energy generation and storage systems,
and also installs and maintains such systems and sells solar
electricity.

According to the complaint, on August 7, 2018, Defendant Elon Musk,
the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of Directors
of Tesla, issued the following post on Twitter.com: "Am considering
taking Tesla private at $420. Funding secured." Later that day,
Musk issued another post on Twitter.com: "Investor support is
confirmed. Only reason why this is not certain is that it's
contingent on a shareholder vote."

But the truth was that Musk had not lined up secure financing for a
going-private transaction that priced Tesla shares at $420 per
share. Rather, Musk's tweets were an ill-conceived attempt to
manipulate the stock price of Tesla upward in order to burn
investors who had sold Tesla stock short. Musk has a long-standing
public feud with short sellers and has threatened them in the
recent past. For example, on May 4, 2018, Musk tweeted that the
"short burn of the century [was] comin[g] soon" and that the "sheer
magnitude of the short carnage will be unreal. If you're short, I
suggest tiptoeing quietly to the exit[.]"

Musk's false statements had the desired effect of creating a
massive one-day increase in the price of Tesla stock and causing
short sellers large losses. The share price of Tesla common stock
closed at $379.57 on August 7, 2018, a jump of 11% over the
previous day's closing price. It has been reported in the media
that short sellers lost as much as $1 billion as a result. However,
the fraudulent nature of Musk’s statements was uncovered over the
next two days when neither Tesla nor Musk substantiated Musk's
claim that there was secure financing for a going-private
transaction at $420 a share.

On August 8, 2018, it was announced that the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission had made inquiries to Tesla regarding the
veracity of the tweet sent by Musk and the reason the disclosure
was made via a social media posting rather than a filing with the
SEC. Multiple financial news agencies have reported that no
investment banks or technology firms they contacted were aware of
Tesla's potential going-private transaction and had denied being
the source of the "secure" funding that Musk had promised.

This news caused the price of the Company's stock to decline from
$379.57 per share, on August 7, 2018, to close at $352.27 per
share, on August 9, 2018. As a result of the fraudulent conduct
alleged herein, Plaintiff and other members of the Class purchased
Tesla common stock at artificially inflated prices and suffered
significant losses and damages once the truth emerged.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff John Yeager:

          John T. Jasnoch, Esq.
          Joe Pettigrew, Esq.
          Thomas L. Laughlin, IV, Esq.
          Rhiana L. Swartz, Esq.
          SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
          600 W. Broadway, Suite 3300
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 233 4565
          Facsimile: (619) 233 0508
          E-mail: jjasnoch@scott-scott.com
                  jpettigrew@scott-scott.com
                  tlaughlin@scott-scott.com
                  rswartz@scott-scott.com


TESLA INC: Hagens Berman Files Securities Class Action
------------------------------------------------------
Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP, a national investor-rights law
firm headquartered in Seattle, Washington with 10 offices across
the country, announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit on
behalf of investors in Tesla, Inc. ( TSLA) securities between
August 7, 2018 and August 10, 2018 (the "Class Period"). This
action, William Chamberlain vs. Tesla Inc., et al., Case No.
3:18-cv-04876, is filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California. The complaint alleges Tesla, Inc. and its
Chief Executive Officer (Elon Musk) violated the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

"Elon Musk appears to have tried to move the markets with a
misleading tweet, and now investors are paying the price," said
Hagens Berman Partner Reed R. Kathrein. "Bravado is fine, but not
reckless statements that hurt the investors who provide the market,
and Tesla, with its needed capital."

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than 60 days from today. If you wish to discuss this action
or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or
interests, contact attorney Reed Kathrein at 510-725-3000, email
TSLA@hbsslaw.com or visit www.hbsslaw.com/cases/TSLA, where you may
view the complaint online. Any member of the putative class may
move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their
choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class
member.

Tesla, Inc. is incorporated in Delaware, and its securities are
listed on the Nasdaq ("NASDAQ") and other exchanges. The Company
designs, develops, manufactures, and sells electric vehicles, and
energy storage systems in the United States and internationally.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, Defendants
misrepresented that they had already "secured" funding to take the
Company private, and that they already had "investor support" for
this move. These false statements had a material impact on the
prices of Tesla securities.

When this this fraud began to be disclosed, investors in the
Company's securities were harmed.

                    About Hagens Berman

Hagens Berman is a national investor-rights law firm headquartered
in Seattle, Washington with 80+ attorneys in 10 offices across the
country. The firm represents investors, whistleblowers, workers and
consumers in complex litigation. More about the firm and its
successes can be found at www.hbsslaw.com. For the latest news
visit our newsroom or follow us on Twitter at @classactionlaw.

         Reed Kathrein, Esq.
         510-725-3000
         Email: reed@hbsslaw.com [GN]


TESLA INC: Kaskela Law Files Shareholder Class Action Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kaskela Law LLC disclosed that a shareholder class action lawsuit
has been filed against Tesla, Inc. (NASDAQ: TSLA) ("Tesla" or the
"Company") and its CEO, Elon Musk ("Musk"), on behalf of investors
who purchased or sold Tesla securities between  August 7, 2018 and
August 10, 2018, inclusive (the "Class Period").

IMPORTANT DEADLINE:  Investors who purchased or sold Tesla
securities during the Class Period may, no later than October 9,
2018, seek to be appointed as a lead representative of the investor
class.  Tesla investors who have suffered financial harm are
encouraged to contact Kaskela Law LLC (D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq.) at
(888) 715-1740, or via http://kaskelalaw.com/case/tesla/,for
additional information about this action and to discuss their legal
options for recovery.

As detailed in the complaint, on August 7, 2018, defendant Musk
stated on Twitter: (i) "Am considering taking Tesla private at
$420"; (ii) "Funding secured"; (iii) "Shareholders could either to
sell at 420 or hold shares & go private"; and (iv) "Investor
support is confirmed."  These tweets drove the price of Tesla
shares up as much as $45.47 per share, or up as much as about 13%,
during intraday trading before closing at $379.57 on August 7,
2018.

However, since that time, both the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission and Tesla's board of directors are reportedly
investigating the truth of Musk's tweets, and whether in fact
funding had been secured.  Major investors and banks have
unanimously stated that they are aware of no such funding.  In the
face of these investigations and demand for support for the false
statements set forth above, defendants have remained silent --
evidencing the lack of support for the false statements and driving
the price of Tesla's securities down to near pre-tweet levels, with
its common stock closing at $355.49 on August 10, 2018.

The shareholder class action complaint alleges that defendants
materially misled investors as to the following material facts: (i)
contrary to defendant Musk's statements that funding had been
"secured" to take Tesla private at $420 per share, no such funding
had been secured; and (ii) contrary to defendant Musk's statement
that investor support to take Tesla private "is confirmed," there
was no such confirmation.  As a result of the foregoing, Tesla
investors sustained significant investment losses.

Tesla investors are encouraged to contact Kaskela Law LLC at (888)
715-1740 or http://kaskelalaw.com/case/tesla/for additional
information about this action and their legal options for recovery.
Kaskela Law LLC exclusively represents investors in state and
federal courts throughout the country.  For additional information
about Kaskela Law LLC please visit www.kaskelalaw.com.

         D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq.
         KASKELA LAW LLC
         201 King of Prussia Road
         Suite 650
         Radnor, PA 19087
         (484) 258-1585
         (888) 715-1740
         Email: skaskela@kaskelalaw.com [GN]


THUNDER BAY: Sued Over Sex Assault Case
---------------------------------------
Julie Goldberg and Kaitlin Ryana, writing for The Alpena News,
reports that a group of children and their families have filed a
class-action lawsuit against Thunder Bay Transportation Authority,
Prell's Services, and Andrew Bartz, a former bus assistant
convicted in 2016 of sexually assaulted multiple children over a
two-year span.

The suit stems from assaults committed by Bartz from 2014 through
October 13, 2015.

Thunder Bay Transportation Authority Board Vice President Adam Poll
said TBTA will not comment on the lawsuit and will continue to
provide its best services going forward.

An original complaint was filed against the defendants on Aug. 5,
2016, alleging that Bartz was sexually abusing students on the TBTA
buses.

Bartz was hired as a bus assistant through Prell's, TBTA's third-
party contractor. The complaint claims that no background check was
done on Bartz prior to his employment and that, had one been
performed, the check would have revealed Bartz had a prior
investigation of improper sexual conduct with a minor.

The complaint alleged Bartz sexually assaulted the named
plaintiffs. It also stated that parents of students riding the
buses had told the defendants of the abuse, but the defendants
failed to take action.

The complaint also states that security cameras on the buses were
not working and the defendants made no effort to fix the cameras.
The complaint went on to say TBTA and Prell's officials ignored a
policy of reviewing tapes. If they had reviewed the footage, they
would have seen the alleged abuse, the suit claims.

Bartz admitted to molestation at his sentencing hearing in December
2016.

"I did the only honorable thing to do, I confessed and gave these
children a chance," he told the court. "There is no excuse for what
I did. I do know that what I did was wrong."

Bartz was sentenced to 20 to 30 years on three first-degree
criminal sexual conduct counts and 10 to 15 years on a
second-degree criminal sexual conduct count.

The Alpena-Montmorency-Alcona Educational Service District, which
serves special-needs children, had contracted with the TBTA for bus
services at the time. That contract ended in May and a new contract
with Dean Transportation took effect this month.

Superintendent Scott Reynolds said during Thursday's Board of
Education meeting that he has been subpoenaed to give a deposition
in the lawsuit. He could not be reached August 10 to answer
follow-up questions.

The AMA ESD is not listed as a defendant in the case.

Kaitlin Ryan can be reached at kryan@thealpenanews.com or by phone
at 989-358-5693. Julie Goldberg can be reached at
jgoldberg@thealpenanews.com or 989-358-5688. [GN]


TOTOKAELO LLC: Faces Delacruz Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Totokaelo, LLC. The
lawsuit is captioned as Emanuel Delacruz, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Totokaelo, LLC,
the Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-07229 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 10, 2018).
The case alleges Americans with Disabilities Act violations.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H Mizrahi, Esq.
          COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
          300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (917) 299 6612
          Facsimile: (929) 575 4195
          E-mail: joseph@cml.legal


TREEHOUSE FOODS: Tarara's Bid to Certify Class Entered and Cont'd
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Robert M. Dow, Jr., entered and continued the Lead
Plaintiff's motion for class certification in the lawsuit entitled
Annemarie Tarara, et al. v. Treehouse Foods, Inc., et al., Case No.
1:16-cv-10632 (N.D. Ill.).


WOODSTOCK, VT: Bandler Suit Moved to Vermont Federal Court
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Michael Bandler, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Woodstock, Town of, Woodstock, Village, State of Vermont, and John
Does 1-300, the Defendants, Case No. 267-6-18 Wrcv, was removed
from the Vermont Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the
District of Vermont (Burlington) on Aug. 9, 2018. The Vermont
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-00128-cr to the
proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Christina
Reiss.

Woodstock is a town in Vermont. Historic buildings surrounding the
central square, known as the Green, include the 1880s pink
sandstone Norman Williams Public Library. Just north, Billings Farm
& Museum is a functioning dairy farm, with an 1890 farmhouse and
exhibits re-creating 19th-century farm life.[BN]

Attorneys for Michael Bandler on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated:

          Eric Goldwarg , Esq.
          ANGEL, COIL & BARTLETT
          125 West Mendenhall, Suite 201
          Bozeman, MT 59715
          Telephone: (406) 586 1926

               - and-

          P. Scott McGee, III, Esq.
          HERSHENSON, CARTER, SCOTT & MCGEE, P.C.
          P.O. Box 909
          Norwich, VT 05055
          Telephone: (802) 295 2800
          Facsimile: (802) 295 3344
          E-mail: smcgee@hcsmlaw.com

Attorneys for Town of Woodstock, and Village of Woodstock:

          Kaveh S. Shahi, Esq.
          CLEARY SHAHI & AICHER, P.C.
          110 Merchants Row
          P.O. Box 6740
          Rutland, VT 05702-6740
          Telephone: (802) 775 8800
          Facsimile: (802) 775 8809
          E-mail: kss@clearyshahi.com

Attorneys for State of Vermont:

          David R. McLean, Esq.
          VERMONT OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
          109 State Street
          Montpelier, VT 05609
          Telephone: (802) 828 5341
          E-mail: David.McLean@vermont.gov


XPLORE TECHNOLOGIES: Mencher Balks at Zebra Technologies Merger
---------------------------------------------------------------
AMIR MENCHER, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, the Plaintiff, v. XPLORE TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, THOMAS
B. PICKENS III, ROBERT N. MCFARLAND, ANDREA GOREN, DONALD F.
NEVILLE, and KENT A. MISEMER, the Defendants, Case No.
1:18-cv-01172-UNA (D. Del., Aug. 4, 2018), seeks to enjoin
Defendants from closing a tender offer or taking any steps to
consummate a proposed merger transaction with Zebra Technologies
Corporation, unless and until material information is disclosed to
Xplore shareholders or, in the event the Proposed Transaction is
consummated, to recover damages resulting from the Defendants'
violations of the Securities Exchange Act.

According to the complaint, on July 5, 2018, Xplore entered into an
Agreement and Plan of Merger, whereby each shareholder of Xplore
common stock will receive $6.00 per share in cash.  On July 17,
2018, in order to convince Xplore shareholders to tender their
shares, the Board authorized the filing of a materially incomplete
and misleading Schedule 14D-9 Solicitation/Recommendation Statement
with the SEC. In particular, the Recommendation Statement contains
materially incomplete and misleading information concerning: (i)
financial projections for the Company; (ii) the valuation analyses
performed by the Company's financial advisor, Duff & Phelps, LLC,
in support of their fairness opinions; and (iii) the potential
conflict of interest Duff & Phelps faced as a result of its
dealings with Xplore in the Proposed Transaction. The Tender Offer
was scheduled to expire at 12:00 a.m. midnight, New York City time,
at the end of the day on August 13, 2018.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Blake A. Bennett, Esq.
          COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A.
          The Brandywine Building
          1000 West Street, 10th Floor
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 984 3800

               - and -

          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          Miles D. Schreiner, 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
                  mschreiner@monteverdelaw.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.  Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, 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 ***