/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/181029.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, October 29, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 216 Headlines 18301-1/2E. 5TH AVE: Underpays Dancers, Kappella Suit Alleges AAA TOWING: Ugarde Seeks Overtime Compensation under FLSA ABIGAEL'S ON BROADWAY: Baez et al. Sue over Tip-Pooling ADMIRAL SECURITY: Underpays Private Guards, Lacap & Gerez Say AHRC HOME: Villar Seeks Unpaid Wages & Overtime under FLSA AIRMEDIA GROUP: Court Dismisses Huang Class Action in New York ALBERTSONS COMPANIES: Appeal in Security Breach Suit Still Pending ALBERTSONS COMPANIES: Parties Agree to Dismiss Akile Class Suit ALLIED INTERSTATE: Worne Sues over Unwanted Phone Calls ALPHABET INC: Wicks Sues over Google+ Breach, Misleading Reports AMCOL SYSTEMS: Placeholder Bid for Class Certification Filed AMERICAN ACADEMIC: Dissemination of Class Notice Sought AMERICAN FAMILY CARE: Smiley Seeks OT Pay for Lab Technicians AMERICAN LOGISTICS: Delbosque Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code AMIRA NATURE: Plaintiff Bid for Relief from Dismissal Order Denied ANT HILL: Woodard Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA APPLE INC: Zaragosa and Coyle Allege False TV Season Bundle ARIZONA BEVERAGE: Faces Kubilius et al. Suit in S.D. New York AXLEHIRE INC: Underpays Drivers, De Leon and Lopez Suit Allege BANK OF AMERICA: Faces Flores Suit in District of Colorado BANK OF AMERICA: IPERS Lawsuit Will Continue, Federal Judge Rule BAXTER HEALTHCARE: De Vega Seeks Unpaid OT & Minimum Wage BIN INSURANCE: Ortiz et al. Seek Certification of FLSA Class CANCER GENETICS: Robbins Arroyo Files Class Action CAPITAL STACK: McQuaid Seeks OT & Minimum Wages under FLSA CELLULAR SALES: Holick Seeks to Certify Class CHART INDUSTRIES: Defends Stainless Steel Cryobiological Tank Suit CHART INDUSTRIES: Suit over Aluminum Cryobiological Tank Pending CHEGG INC: Bronstein Gewirtz Files Securities Class Action CITIGROUP INC: Dec. 21 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set CLEVELAND-CLIFFS INC: Lawsuits by Wabush Pensioners Resolved CLIENT SERVICES: Placeholder Bid for Class Certification Filed COCHLEAR AMERICAS: Alexander's Class Certification Bid Denied COOKUNITY LLC: Vazquez et al. Seek Minimum Wages under FLSA CSX CORP: Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation Ongoing CSX CORP: West Lumberton Baptist Church et al. Sue over Flooding DEL TACO: Discovery Still Ongoing in Former Cal. Employee Suit DELIV INC: Lawson et al Seek to Certify Class of Drivers DIGITAL ALTITUDE: Marketing & Business Courses A Sham, Doty Says DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK: Riley Seeks Unpaid Overtime DOS REALES: FLSA Class Conditionally Certified in Pena Olivera Suit DYNAMIC RECOVERY: Perea Sues over Debt Collection Practices EAGLE DINER: Flores and Goold Seek Approval of Class Notice EEOC: U.S. Pastor Council et al. Allege Gender, Religious Bias EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Rivera Suit Alleges Violation of FCRA ETTAIN GROUP: Udoewa Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Ellis Seeks to Certify Class FACEBOOK INC: Fails to Secure Users' Personal Info, McGuire Says FLOWERS FOODS: Carr et al. Seek to Certify 3 Classes FLYFIT HOLDINGS: Thurston Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA FRONTLINE ASSET: Williams Seeks to Certify Class of Consumers GATEWAY ONE: Anderson Sues over Repossession of Vehicles GEORGIA: Department of Corrections Faces Harris et al. Suit GIGA WATT INC: Refael Sofair Alleges RICO Act Violation GRAY TV: Walley's Auto Sales Alleges Price-Fixing of TV Ad Rates HENRY SCHEIN: Kramer Alleges Dental Supplies Pricing Conspiracy HERITAGE-CRYSTAL CLEAN: Continues to Defend Adelphia Class Suit HERTZ CORP: Mahe Seeks Overtime Wages under Labor Code HESKA CORP: Agreement in Principle Reached in Fauley TCPA Suit HK ENTERPRISES: Underpays Hair Stylists, Benitez et al. Allege ILLINOIS: Powell et al. Suit Alleges Disabilities Act Violations ILLUMINA INC: Faces Van Der Wall and Romanoff Securities Suit J.R. SIMPLOT: Arroyo Sues over Use of Consumer Credit Reports JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS: Court Denies Bid to Certify Class as Moot JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Rodriguez Sues over Sale of Talcum Powder JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Vassell Sues over Sale of Talcum Powder JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Zachary Sues over Sale of Talcum Powder JONATHAN NEIL: Can File Objections to Brown FDCA Suit Notice JP MORGAN CHASE: Sandel Alleges Wrongful Debt Collections K2M GROUP: Preliminary Injunction Sought in Brown Class Suit KINDER MORGAN: Brinckerhoff Class Action Concluded KINDER MORGAN: Says Landowner Litigation Settled and Dismissed KINDER MORGAN: Wisconsin Purchasers Class Action Ongoing KRAFT FOODS: Ploss Seeks to Certify Class LIONBRIDGE TECH: Pension Fund Seeks to Certify Stockholders Class LOANCARE LLC: Sanders Sues over Debt Collection Practices LOOMIS INTERNATIONAL: Eisenberg Seeks Unpaid OT under Labor Code LOS ANGELES, CA: Certification of Collective Action Sought LYFT INC: Underpays and Misclassifies Drivers, Wickerberg Says MACY'S WEST: Removes Tessitore & Mallon Suit to S.D. California MARYLAND MARKETSOURCE: Esparza Suit Moved to E.D. California MCGOWEN ENTERPRISES: Court Denies Class Certification Bid as Moot MCLAUGHLIN RESEARCH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hardy Suit Says MDL 2792: Kennedy Suit over Samsung Washing Machine Consolidated MDL 2792: Orenstein Suit over Washing Machine Samsung Consolidated MDL 2804: Lopez Suit vs. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al, Consolidated MED-PHARMEX INC: Lopez Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code MEPHISTO INC: Faces Wu Suit in Southern District of New York MERCK & CO: Flynns Sue over Zostavax MERCK & CO: Sansone et al. Suit Moved to E.D. Pennsylvania MERCURY PLASTICS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Torres Suit Alleges METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER: Underpays Production Crew Members, Suit Says METROPOLITAN 58TH: Faces Byron Breeze Suit in S.D. New York MICHAELS STORES: Armstrong Seeks to Certify 3 Classes MIDWAY INDUSTRIES: Shepardson Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA MINNEAPOLIS, MN: Underwood Suit Moved to District of Minnesota MOBIS NORTH AMERICA: Traynum and Carroll Seek Overtime Pay MONDA WINDOW: Ping Lin Suit Moved to Northern District of Illinois MONSANTO COMPANY: Fuller Sues over Sale of Herbicide Roundup MT. VIEW FARMING: Bustos Removes Own Suit to E.D. California MYEXPERIAN INC: Chavers Added as Plaintiff in Vinsant et al. Suit NATIONAL POLISHING: Charles Barkley Seeks Unpaid Wages NEW PRIME INC: Underpays Truck Drivers, Ratajesak Alleges NPAS INC: Collazo Sues over Debt Collection Practices OLD DOMINION: Saenz Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages under FLSA OLYMPIA MANAGEMENT: Dickerson Seeks OT Pay under FLSA OS RESTAURANT: Removes Lloyd Briggs Suit to C.D. California PEP BOYS MANNY: Fails to Pay Proper OT, Jimenez Suit Alleges PINDUODUO INC: Roger Webb Sues over July 2018 IPO PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT: Court Denies Certification of 5 Classes PJ IOWA: Court Certifies FLSA Collective Action PPG INDUSTRIES: Trevor Mild Securities Class Action Underway PRECISION GROUP: Elizondo Suit Moved to Southern District of Texas PRIDE N' LIVING: Reed Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA PVH RETAIL: Venieris Suit Goes to District of Arizona RAYMOND JAMES: Judge Denies Bid to Dismiss Class Action RED LION HOTELS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Alcaraz Suit Alleges REPUBLIC SERVICES: Faces Alexander Suit in Kern California RH INC: Court Certifies Class in Teacher Retirement Fund Suit RICHANI RESTAURANT: Certification of Collective Action Sought RISTORANTE LA BUCA: Wright Seeks to Certify Classes RIVER CITY CONDO ASSOC: Robles et al. Sue Board Members over Sale RMJV LP: Amador Suit Moved to Southern District of California ROBERT GILMORE: Court Denies Class Certification in Pelino Suit S&T HEALTH: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Suarez Camacho Says S. BRAVO SYSTEMS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Parra Claims SANMINA CORPORATION: Spalliero Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code SHATOS AUTO: Roberts-Glover Sues over Predelivery Service Fee SINCLAIR BROADCAST: Miller Suit over TV Ad Rates Moved to Illinois SIRY INVESTMENTS: Underpays Managers, Supervisors, & Technicians SODEXO INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Rivera Suit Alleges SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT: Certification of Employees Class Sought STAR WAY: Fails to Pay Wages, Vashkovskyi Says STATE STREET: Law Firm Reaches Truce with Special Master STITCH FIX: Sawicki Alleges Securities Law Violation SUNOCO LOGISTICS: Wants Pipeline Damage Class Action Narrowed SUPERVALU INC: Appeal in Data Security Breach Suit Underway SYNDER'S-LANCE: Mason Suit Moved to Southern District of Florida TENNESSEE VALLEY: Sechrest et al. Seek Unpaid Wages under FLSA TG THERAPEUTICS: Scott+Scott Files Securities Fraud Suit TRACTOR SUPPLY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Sweeney Suit Claims TRUST FINANCIAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Kam Suit Alleges TSR INC: Paskowitz Sues over "Change in Control" UNITED MANAGEMENT: Burgains Suit Moved to S.D. Florida UNITED TECH: Website not Accessible to Blind People, Sullivan Says UNITEDHEALTHCARE: K.H.B. Suit Moved to District of Utah USA DIVING: Harvard Diving Coach Resigns Amid Sex Misconduct VELO ASSOCIATES: Huff Seeks to Certify 4 Classes VELOX EXPRES: Motion for Conditional Certification Denied as Moot VITAL RECOVERY: Placeholder Bid for Class Certification Filed WALMART INC: Violated Video Privacy Protection Act, Capello Says WARNER MUSIC: Williams Seeks Cut from International Sales WESTCHESTER AMBULETTE: McCallum Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages & OT WESTMINSTER PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Yachera Suit in M.D. Florida WILMAR OILS: Flores Seeks Payment of OT & Minimum Wage ZOE'S KITCHEN: Mary Toth Balks at Merger Deal with Cava Group ZOE'S KITCHEN: Monteverde & Associates Files Class Action ********* 18301-1/2E. 5TH AVE: Underpays Dancers, Kappella Suit Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------- KATHERINE SCARLETT KAPPELLA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 18301-1/2E. 5TH AVE. CORP. D/B/A JUMBO'S CLOWN ROOM; and DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE, Case No. BC723618 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 1, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay wages, minimum and overtime wages, wages for missed meal and rest periods. The Plaintiff Kappella was employed by the Defendants as dancer. 18301-1/2E. 5th Ave. Corp. d/b/a Jumbo's Clown Room operates an adult entertainment club in Los Angeles, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Erik S. Velie, Esq. VICTORY LAW GROUP, LLP 26707 Oak Ave., Ste. D Canyon Country, CA 91351 Telephone: (213) 422-5061 Facsimile: (855) 640-7962 E-mail: erikvelie@victorvlawllp.com - and - Kevin W. Chiang, Esq. EQUITY LEGAL GROUP, P.C. 201 S. Lake Ave., Ste. 506 Pasadena, CA 91101 Telephone: (818) 928-5677 E-mail: kchiang@equitvlegalgroup.com AAA TOWING: Ugarde Seeks Overtime Compensation under FLSA --------------------------------------------------------- YANSELL C. UGARDE, and other similarly-situated individuals, the Plaintiffs, vs. AAA TOWING & RECOVERY, LLC, d/b/a M.I.A. TOWING & RECOVERY, and EDWING RODRIGUEZ, individually, the Defendants, Case No.: 1:18-cv-24078-JEM (S.D. Fla., Oct. 3, 2018), seeks to recover from the Defendants overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and the costs and reasonably attorney's fees under the provisions of Fair Labor Standards Act, on behalf of the Plaintiffs, and all other current and former employees similarly situated to the Plaintiff and who worked in excess of 40 hours during one or more weeks on or after September 2015, without being compensated minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the FLSA. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was hired as a non-exempt employee to perform non-exempt work as a tow- truck driver. The Defendants promised to pay Plaintiff 30% from every service performed by him. Defendants never honored the agreement, and approximately after 3 weeks, of work and too much conflict about the 30%, Defendants changed the payment method to $12.50 an hour or $500.00 weekly for a workweek of 5 days with 40 hours, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorney for Plaintiffs: Zandro E. Palma, Esq. ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A. 9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500 Miami, FL 33156 Telephone: (305) 446-1500 Facsimile: (305) 446-1502 E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com ABIGAEL'S ON BROADWAY: Baez et al. Sue over Tip-Pooling ------------------------------------------------------- MOISES LORENZI, GLORIMAR BAEZ, OSBIN ESCOBAR, and RICHARD ROMAGNOLO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. ABIGAEL'S ON BROADWAY, INC. JEFFREY NATHAN, individually, HARVEY RIEZENMAN, individually, and ROBERT ROSS, individually, the Defendants, Case No. 519930/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover minimum wages, overtime compensation, misappropriated tips, call-in pay, uniform purchase and maintenance violations, unlawful deductions and other damages for the Plaintiffs and their similarly situated co-workers -- servers, bartenders, bussers, barbacks, food runners, and other similarly situated non-managerial employees -- who work or have worked at Abigael's on Broadway located at 1407 Broadway, New York, New York 10018. According to the complaint, during the Plaintiffs' employment, the Defendants applied a tip credit to Tipped Workers' wages and paid Tipped Workers a reduced minimum wage rate. The Defendants, however, did not satisfy the requirements under the New York Labor Law or the Fair Labor Standards Act by which it could take a tip credit towards the hourly rates paid to Tipped Workers. The Defendants failed to provide the Plaintiffs and other Tipped Workers with proper notification of the tipped minimum wage rate or tip credit provisions of the NYLL or the FLSA, or of their intent to apply a tip credit to Plaintiffs' and other Tipped Workers' wages. Additionally, the Defendants require the Plaintiffs and other Tipped Employees to engage in a tip distribution scheme wherein they must share a daily portion of their total tips with managers and expediters -- tip ineligible employees under the NYLL and the FLSA -- the lawsuit says. Abigael's on Broadway is "the world's largest and most prestigious Kosher restaurant" that offers its customers "an array of globally eclectic American fare, Latin comfort foods and Sushi & Pan Asian specialties.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the Putative Class: Brian S. Schaffer, Esq. Dana M. Cimera, Esq. FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP 28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 300-0375 Attorneys for Defendants: Carolyn D. Richmond, Esq. Bryn Goodman, Esq. FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP 101 Park Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10178 Telephone: (212) 905-2305 E-mail: crichmond@foxrothschild.com bgoodman@foxrothschild.com ADMIRAL SECURITY: Underpays Private Guards, Lacap & Gerez Say ------------------------------------------------------------- RICHARD LACAP and ERNESTO GEREZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. ADMIRAL SECURITY SERVICES, INC.; and Does 1—50, the Defendants, Case No. 1BCV336103 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks restitution and compensation on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated employees for unpaid meal and rest period, statutory penalties, and interest. The Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees were hired as private security guards. As part of their employment, the Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees were assigned to job sites where there were no other guards or relievers to work with them. The Defendants required their guards, including the Plaintiffs, to execute on-duty meal agreements without respect to whether the nature of guard duties is appropriate for such agreements. The Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees who worked alone at their assigned job sites were not afforded complaint meal and rest breaks because they worked alone. Additionally, the Plaintiffs and other similarly situated employees never received any compensation for the breaks that were not provided, the lawsuit says. Admiral Security provides security guard services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class Tomas E. Margain, Esq. Huy Tran, Esq. JUSTICE AT WORK LAW GROUP, LLP 84 West Santa Clara Street, Suite 790 San Jose, CA 951 13 Telephone: (408) 317-1100 Facsimile: (408) 351-0105 E-mail: T0mas@JAWLaWGroup.com Huy@JAWLaWGroup.com - and - Kevin R. Allen, Esq. Daniel Velton, Esq. VELTON ZEGELMAN P.C. 525 W. Rcmington Drive, Suite 106 Sunnyvalc, CA 94087 Telephone: (408) 505-7892 Facsimile: (408) 228-1930 E-mail: kallen@vzfirm. com dvelton@vzfirm.com AHRC HOME: Villar Seeks Unpaid Wages & Overtime under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- FRANCISCO VILLAR, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and the Class, the Plaintiff, v. AHRC HOME CARE SERVICES, INC. and NYSARC, INC., the Defendants, Case 1:18-cv-09174 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 5, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime, unpaid wages for travel time, liquidated damages and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, the Defendants had a policy and practice of failing to pay the Plaintiff and Class members for all hours worked due to the Defendants' policy not to compensate for travel time. The Defendants willfully violated the Plaintiff's and the Class members' rights by failing to pay them their overtime compensation at rates not less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek, the lawsuit says. AHRC Home offers home health care assistance.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: C.K. Lee, Esq. Anne Seelig, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39 th Street, Second Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 465-1188 Facsimile: (212) 465-1181 AIRMEDIA GROUP: Court Dismisses Huang Class Action in New York -------------------------------------------------------------- AirMedia Group Inc. said in its Form 20-F report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on October 17, 2018, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2017, that the Court has granted the motion to dismiss filed in the case entitled, Huang v. AirMedia Group Inc. et al., and entered a judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint with prejudice. The Company and two of its officers were named as defendants in a putative securities class action filed on June 25, 2015 in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York: Huang v. AirMedia Group Inc. et al., Civil Action No. 1:15-CV-04966-ALC (S.D.N.Y.). The complaint in this putative class action alleges that certain of the defendants' financial statements and other public statements and disclosures contained misstatements or omissions, including with respect to the alleged sale of an equity interest in the Company's advertising subsidiary, in violation the U.S. securities laws. The complaint states that plaintiffs seek to represent a class of persons who allegedly suffered damages as a result of their trading activities related to the Company's ADRs between April 15 and June 15, 2015, and alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the U.S. Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On November 10, 2015, the Court appointed China Xiayuan Transportation Co. Ltd. as the lead plaintiff and appointed a lead counsel. On January 15, 2016, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint, advancing similar allegations and claims as the previously filed complaint and seeking to represent a class of persons who allegedly suffered damages as a result of their trading activities related to the Company's ADRs between April 7 and June 15, 2015. On March 10, 2016, the Company and one of its officers filed a motion to dismiss the Amended Complaint. On March 27, 2017, the Court granted the motion to dismiss and entered a judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint with prejudice. As of December 31, 2017, the Group did not record a provision for this matter as management believes the possibility of adverse outcome of the matter is remote and any liability it may incur would not have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial statements. AirMedia Group Inc. operates out-of-home advertising platforms in the People's Republic of China. The company operates a network of digital (television) TV screens on planes operated by 7 airlines; and gas station media network, as well as other outdoor media advertising platforms in gas stations. AirMedia Group Inc. was founded in 2005 and is headquartered in Beijing, the People's Republic of China. ALBERTSONS COMPANIES: Appeal in Security Breach Suit Still Pending ------------------------------------------------------------------ Albertsons Companies, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 18, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 8, 2018, that the appeal in the security breach related suit is still pending. On August 14, 2014, the Company announced that it had experienced a criminal intrusion by installation of malware on a portion of its computer network that processes payment card transactions for its retail store locations, including the Company's Shaw's, Star Market, Acme, Jewel-Osco and Albertsons retail banners. On September 29, 2014, the Company announced that it had experienced a second and separate criminal intrusion. The Company believes these were attempts to collect payment card data. Relying on its IT service provider, SuperValu, the Company took immediate steps to secure the affected part of the network. The Company believes that it has eradicated the malware used in each intrusion. The Company notified federal law enforcement authorities, the major payment card networks and its insurance carriers and is cooperating in their efforts to investigate these intrusions. As required by the payment card brands, the Company retained a firm to conduct a forensic investigation into the intrusions. The forensic firm has issued separate reports for each intrusion (copies of which have been provided to the card networks). Although the Company's network had previously been found to be compliant with the Payment Card Industry (PCI) Data Security Standard issued by the PCI Council, in both reports the forensic firm found that not all of these standards had been met at the time of the intrusions, and some of this non-compliance may have contributed to or caused at least some portion of the compromise that occurred during the intrusions. As a result of the criminal intrusions, two class action complaints were filed against the Company by consumers, Mertz v. SuperValu Inc. et al, filed in federal court in the state of Minnesota and Rocke v. SuperValu Inc. et al, filed in federal court in the state of Idaho, alleging deceptive trade practices, negligence and invasion of privacy. The plaintiffs seek unspecified damages. The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has consolidated the class actions and transferred the cases to the District of Minnesota. On August 10, 2015, the Company and SuperValu filed a motion to dismiss the class actions, which was granted without prejudice on January 7, 2016. The plaintiffs filed a motion to alter or amend the court's judgment, which was denied on April 20, 2016. The court also denied leave to amend the complaint. On May 18, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and defendants filed a cross-appeal. In a decision dated August 30, 2017, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the District Court's dismissal of the case as to one of the 16 named plaintiffs, affirmed the dismissal as to the remaining 15 named plaintiffs and remanded the case to the District Court for further proceedings. On November 3, 2017, the Company filed a motion to dismiss with respect to the remaining named plaintiff's claims on the basis that the plaintiff was not a customer of any of the Company's stores, and on March 7, 2018, the Company's motion to dismiss was granted with prejudice. On March 14, 2018, the named plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals. The appeal is currently pending. No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Albertsons Companies, Inc., through its subsidiaries, operates as a food and drug retailer in the United States. Its food and drug retail stores offer grocery products, general merchandise, health and beauty care products, pharmacy, fuel, and other items and services. The company is headquartered in Boise, Idaho. Albertsons Companies, Inc. is a subsidiary of Albertsons Investor Holdings LLC. ALBERTSONS COMPANIES: Parties Agree to Dismiss Akile Class Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Albertsons Companies, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 18, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 8, 2018, that Mel Aklile and the defendants in the putative class action suit with case number Del. C.A. No. 2018-0305-AGB, have stipulated to the dismissal of the action with prejudice and with each party agreeing to bear its own fees and expenses, which the Delaware Chancery Court granted. On April 24, 2018, Mel Aklile, a Rite Aid stockholder, (the "Plaintiff") brought a putative class action in Delaware Chancery Court against Rite Aid, the Company, certain of the Company's subsidiaries and each of the Rite Aid directors, Del. C.A. No. 2018-0305-AGB. The complaint alleged that Rite Aid stockholders had appraisal rights under Section 262 of the Delaware General Corporate Law ("DGCL"). The defendants opposed the Plaintiff's claims on the ground that Rite Aid stockholders had no right of appraisal under the DGCL because they had a right to receive all stock consideration as described in the proxy statement/prospectus filed by the Company on April 6, 2018. On May 7, 2018, the Chancery Court held a hearing on the Plaintiff's motion to expedite, finding that the Plaintiff failed to assert a colorable claim of relief. On May 16, 2018, the defendants filed motions to dismiss the Plaintiff's complaint. On August 8, 2018, while defendants' motions to dismiss were still pending and before any putative class had been certified, the Company and Rite Aid mutually agreed to terminate the proposed transaction thereby mooting the Plaintiff's claims. As a result, Mr. Aklile and defendants stipulated to the dismissal action with prejudice and with each party agreeing to bear its own fees and expenses, which the Chancery Court granted on August 14, 2018. Albertsons Companies, Inc., through its subsidiaries, operates as a food and drug retailer in the United States. Its food and drug retail stores offer grocery products, general merchandise, health and beauty care products, pharmacy, fuel, and other items and services. The company is headquartered in Boise, Idaho. Albertsons Companies, Inc. is a subsidiary of Albertsons Investor Holdings LLC. ALLIED INTERSTATE: Worne Sues over Unwanted Phone Calls ------------------------------------------------------- RICHARD WORNE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. ALLIED INTERSTATE LLC, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, and each of them, Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-08508 (C.D. Cal., Oct. 3, 2018), seeks to recover damages and any other available legal or equitable remedies resulting from the illegal actions of Defendant, in negligently, knowingly, and/or willfully contacting the Plaintiff on his cellular telephone in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection, thereby causing the Plaintiff to incur charges for incoming calls and invading the Plaintiff's privacy. According to the complaint, beginning in or around November of 2017, the Defendant contacted the Plaintiff on his cellular telephone number ending in -0772, in an attempt to collect on an alleged debt. The Defendant's calls constituted calls that were not for emergency purposes. The Defendant did not possess the Plaintiff's "prior express consent" to receive calls using an automatic telephone dialing system or an artificial or prerecorded voice on his cellular telephone pursuant to 47 U.S.C. section 227(b)(1)(A). The Plaintiff received numerous collection calls from the Defendant within a 12-month period, the lawsuit says. Allied Interstate provides accounts receivable, customer retention and debt collection services to blue-chip companies.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. Adrian R. Bacon, Esq. Meghan E. George, Esq. Tom E. Wheeler, Esq LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C. 21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (877) 206 4741 Facsimile: (866) 633 0228 E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com abacon@toddflaw.com mgeorge@toddflaw.com twheeler@toddflaw.com ALPHABET INC: Wicks Sues over Google+ Breach, Misleading Reports ---------------------------------------------------------------- ADAM WICKS, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. ALPHABET, INC., LAWRENCE E. PAGE, SUNDAR PICHAI and RUTH M. PORAT, the Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-06245-JSW (N.D. Cal., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks to recover compensable damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act. According to the complaint, between 2015 and March 2018, a software glitch in the Google+ website permitted outside developers to access the personal profile data of Google+ members who had not opted to permit their data to be shared publicly. The Defendants discovered this glitch in March 2018, ran tests to determine the impact of the glitch, and determined that the data of nearly half of a million users had been exposed to third parties. Google's legal and policy staff drafted a memorandum regarding the security failure and shared it with senior executives. Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants repeatedly made materially false and misleading statements regarding the security failure affecting users personal data. Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the Company's security measures had failed recently and massively, as Google had exposed the private data of hundreds of thousands of users of Google+ to third parties; (2) damage to the Company's reputation and operating results and loss of customers from this failure of the Company's security measures were imminent and inevitable; (3) the Company's security protections did not shield personal user data against theft and security breaches; and (4) the Company's security measures had been breached due to employee error, malfeasance, system errors or vulnerabilities. As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's common shares, the Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages, the lawsuit says. Alphabet was incorporated in 2015 and is the parent company of its leading subsidiary Google Inc. Google was founded in 1998. Alphabet and Google are headquartered in Mountain View, California. The Company's common stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Select under the ticker symbol "GOOG." Alphabet, through its subsidiary Google, operates a social networking website called "Google+" that allows people to communicate with their family, friends, and coworkers. Google+ users ostensibly have the ability to share and restrict the sharing of personal information according to their preferences by changing privacy settings.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Jennifer Pafiti, Esq. Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. Austin P. Van, Esq. Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 468 North Camden Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (818) 532-6499 E-mail: jpafiti@pomlaw.com jalieberman@pomlaw.com avan@pomlaw.com pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com AMCOL SYSTEMS: Placeholder Bid for Class Certification Filed ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned PAMELA SLOGASKI, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. AMCOL SYSTEMS, INC., the Defendant, Case No.: 18-cv-1604 (E.D. Wisc.), the Plaintiff asks the Court for an order certifying classes in this case, appointing the Plaintiff as class representative, and appointing Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP as Class Counsel, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem appropriate. The Plaintiff further asks that the Court stay this class certification motion until an amended motion for class certification is filed, and that the Court grant the parties relief from the local rules' automatic briefing schedule and requirement that Plaintiff file a brief and supporting documents in support of this motion. To avoid the risk of a defendant mooting a putative class representative's individual stake in the litigation, the Seventh Circuit instructed plaintiffs to file a certification motion with the complaint, along with a motion to stay briefing on the certification motion. Damasco v. Clearwire Corp., 662 F.3d 891, 896 (7th Cir. 2011), overruled on other grounds, Chapman v. First Index, Inc., 796 F.3d 783, 787 (7th Cir. 2015) ("The pendency of that motion [for class certification] protects a putative class from attempts to buy off the named plaintiffs."). While the Seventh Circuit has held that the specific procedure described in Campbell-Ewald cannot force the individual settlement of a class representative's claims, the same decision cautions that other methods may prevent a plaintiff from representing a class. Fulton Dental, LLC v. Bisco, Inc., 860 F.3d 541, 545-46 (7th Cir. 2017).[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Mark A. Eldridge, Esq. John D. Blythin, Esq. Jesse Fruchter, Esq. Ben J. Slatky, Esq. Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP 3620 East Layton Avenue Cudahy, WI 53110 Telephone: (414) 482-8000 Facsimile: (414) 482-8001 E-mail: jblythin@ademilaw.com meldridge@ademilaw.com jfruchter@ademilaw.com bslatky@ademilaw.com AMERICAN ACADEMIC: Dissemination of Class Notice Sought ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOELLE LEONE and MICHAEL WINN, for themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. AMERICAN ACADEMIC HEALTH SYSTEM, L.L.C., TENET HEALTHCARE CORP. and HAHNEMANN UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-03769-PD (E.D. Pa), the Plaintiffs move the Court to enter their proposed Order authorizing the dissemination of Class Notice to: "all persons who have worked as a full-time hourly employee with hands-on patient care responsibilities at Hahnemann University Hospital during the past three years under the "opt-in" mechanism for collective actions provided by the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. section 216(b)".[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: David J. Cohen, Esq. Ryan F. Stephan, Esq. James B. Zouras, Esq. STEPHAN ZOURAS LLP 604 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 873 4836 AMERICAN FAMILY CARE: Smiley Seeks OT Pay for Lab Technicians ------------------------------------------------------------- BRITTANY SMILEY, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, THE Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN FAMILY CARE, INC., a Tennessee Corporation, and AMERICAN FAMILY CARE OF TENNESSEE, LLC, a Tennessee Limited liability company, the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-00994 (M.D. Tenn., Oct. 3, 2018), alleges that the Defendants violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay the Plaintiff for all the hours she worked at the rate of time and one-half her regular rate of pay for all the hours worked over 40 hours in one workweek. According to the complaint, the Defendants knowingly, willfully, or with reckless disregard carried out their illegal pattern or practice of failing to pay overtime compensation with respect to Plaintiff and Class Members. The Defendants received complaints from the Plaintiff or Class Members regarding these excessive hours and the failure to compensate for all hours worked but failed to redress these concerns, necessitating this lawsuit. The Plaintiff and "Class Members" are Defendants' current and former hourly-paid Lab Technicians and/or Medical Assistants who were not paid for all their hours worked and who were not paid overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek as required by the FLSA, the lawsuit says. American Family operates a network of family care/urgent care clinics. It provides primary care, urgent care, family medicine, and occupational health services for various acute conditions, non-life threatening illness, and injuries.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Gordon E. Jackson, Esq. J. Russ Bryant, Esq. Paula R. Jackson, Esq. JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER & HOLT 262 German Oak Drive Memphis, TN 38018 Telephone: (901) 754 8001 Facsimile: (901) 759 1745 E-mail: gjackson@jsyc.com rbryant@jsyc.com pjackson@jsyc.com AMERICAN LOGISTICS: Delbosque Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code ----------------------------------------------------------------- GABRIELA DELBOSQUE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated and the general public of California, the Plaintiff, vs AMERICAN LOGISTICS COMPANY, LLC; CAREPLUS INVESTMENT INC.; BC TEA TIME INC.; STEPHEN A. MALOY; GLORIA MONTES DE OCA; DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. BC723989 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), alleges that the Defendants made unlawful deductions from Plaintiff and the rest of the class members' remuneration and failed to reimburse them for business expenses including, but not limited to, vehicle use, fuel, mileage, etc; failed to pay Plaintiff and the rest of the class overtime compensation; failed to provide Plaintiff and the rest of the class with required meal and rest periods; failed to pay Plaintiff and the rest of the class who have separated from their employment with Defendants, all earned wages; and failed to provide Plaintiff and the rest of the class with accurate itemized wage statements by failing to include the information required by Labor Code. The Defendants provide passenger transportation services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Stephen Glick, Esq. M. Anthony Jenkins, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN GLICK 1055 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1480 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 387-3400 Facsimile: (213) 387-7872 E-mail: sglick@glicklegal.com ajenkins@glicklegal.com AMIRA NATURE: Plaintiff Bid for Relief from Dismissal Order Denied ------------------------------------------------------------------ Amira Nature Foods Ltd. said in its Form 20-F report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on October 16, 2018, for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2018, that the motion of a class action plaintiff for relief from the court's order on the motion to dismissed has been denied. On February 10, 2015, two shareholder class action lawsuits were filed in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The complaints, which were subsequently consolidated, named the Company and certain of its current and former officers and directors as defendants. The consolidated lawsuit purported to state claims for violation of Section 11 and Section 15 of the Securities Act and Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, generally alleging that certain statements in the Company's Registration Statement and certain subsequent Exchange Act filings were false and misleading and seeking damages in an unspecified amount. The company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Plaintiff's amended complaint on October 2, 2015, and on July 18, 2016 the Court granted the company's Motion to Dismiss the complaint in its entirety. The second amended class action complaint was also dismissed on August 12, 2016. The Plaintiffs did not file a third amended complaint in the time permitted by the judge. On August 26, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed a motion for relief from the Court's order on the motion to dismiss. The Plaintiff's motion was denied on December 18, 2017. No further updates were provided in the Company's report. Amira Nature Foods Ltd. engages in processing, sourcing, and selling packaged Indian specialty rice. The company provides various types of basmati rice, other specialty rice and other food products, ready-to-eat snacks, edible oils, and organic products for retailers under the Amira brand; and non-basmati rice. Amira Nature Foods Ltd. was founded in 1915 and is based in Dubai, the United Arab Emirates. ANT HILL: Woodard Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA ----------------------------------------------- NYGERIA WOODARD 9109 Connecticut Avenue Cleveland, Ohio, 44105, On behalf of herself and all others similarly-situated, the Plaintiff, vs. ANT HILL, LLC D.B.A Magic City Lounge 2309 St Clair Avenue Cleveland, OH 44114; KIZELLA, LLC D.B.A Magic City Lounge 2309 St Clair Avenue Cleveland, OH 44114; ELEARE KINNEY 1810 Robindale Street Wickliffe, OH 44092; and ANTWAND HILL P.O. Box 18216 Cleveland, OH 44118, the Defendants, Case No.: 1:18-cv-02291 (N.D. Ohio, Oct. 3, 2018), alleges that the Defendants misclassified Ms. Woodard and other exotic dancer employees in their adult entertainment club, "Magic City Lounge," as "independent contractors" and paid these employees zero wages, instead requiring Woodard and those similarly-situated to pay a share of their income from dancing, which was derived solely from tips, to Magic City Lounge, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.[BN] Attorneys for Nygeria Woodard: Brian D. Spitz, Esq. Chris P. Wido, Esq. Tina M. Scibona, Esq. THE SPITZ LAW FIRM , LLC 25200 Chagrin Boulevard, Suite 200 Beachwood, OH 44122 Telephone: (216) 291 4744 Facsimile: (216) 291 5744 E-mail: chris.wido@spitzlawfirm.com APPLE INC: Zaragosa and Coyle Allege False TV Season Bundle ----------------------------------------------------------- GABRIELA ZARAGOZA and JOSEPH COYLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. APPLE INC., the Defendant, Case No. 5:18-cv-06139 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 5, 2018), seeks damages, restitution, declaratory and injunctive relief, and all other remedies the court deems appropriate as a result of the Defendant's false and misleading business practices with respect to the marketing and sale of television season bundles offered on Apple's iTunes store on the Apple TV 4 and 4k devices. According to the complaint, through Apple's iTunes store, consumers can browse a variety of TV shows on their Apple TVs. Each TV show offered on Apple's iTunes store has its own home page, providing consumers with general information regarding their selected TV show. On the home page for each TV show on iTunes, Apple offers consumers three purchasing options 2 at set prices. First, consumers may purchase episodes individually. Second, consumers can purchase completed seasons ("Buy Season"). Third, if the TV show's season has remaining episodes, a season pass can be purchased, offering all current and future episodes for the season. Had the Plaintiffs and other consumers known that the Season Features provided fewer standard, plot-based episodes than Apple represented, they would not have purchased the Season Features or would have paid significantly less for them. Therefore, the Plaintiffs and consumers have suffered injury in fact as a result of Apple's deceptive practices, the lawsuit says. Apple Inc. is an American multinational technology company headquartered in Cupertino, California, that designs, develops, and sells consumer electronics, computer software, and online services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Benjamin Heikali, Esq. Joshua Nassir, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP 10866 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1470 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Telephone: (424) 256.2884 Facsimile: (424) 256.2885 E-mail: bheikali@faruqilaw.com jnassir@faruqilaw.com ARIZONA BEVERAGE: Faces Kubilius et al. Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against AriZona Beverage Company LLC. The case is captioned as LUKAS KUBILIUS; VANESSA KAILEY; and MAKAYLO VAN PEEBLES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARIZONA BEVERAGE COMPANY LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09075-AT (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 3, 2018). The case is assigned to Judge Analisa Torres. AriZona Beverage Company LLC engages in producing and supplying ready-to-drink tea beverages. The company was founded in 1971 and is headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio. AriZona Beverage Company LLC operates as a subsidiary of Hornell Brewing Co., Inc. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: C.K. Lee, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39th Street, 2nd Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 465-1188 Facsimile: (212) 465-1181 E-mail: cklee@leelitigation.com AXLEHIRE INC: Underpays Drivers, De Leon and Lopez Suit Allege -------------------------------------------------------------- JORGE DE LEON, and LUCIA LOPEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AXLEHIRE, INC. d/b/a AXLEHIRE; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-08500-CJC-PLA (C.D. Cal., Oct. 3, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for unpaid regular hours, overtime hours, minimum wages, wages for missed meal and rest periods. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as drivers. Mr. De Leon was employed from March 2017 to November 2017, Ms. Lopez from August 2017 to January 2018. AxleHire, Inc. provides same-day delivery services for e-commerce, and brick and mortar retailers. The company was incorporated in 2015 and is based in Berkeley, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony J. Nunes , Esq. NUNES WORKER RIGHTS LAW, APC 15260 Ventura Blvd, Suite 1200 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (530) 848-1515 Facsimile: (424) 252-4301 E-mail: tony@nunesworkerrightslaw.com BANK OF AMERICA: Faces Flores Suit in District of Colorado ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bank of America, N.A. The case is captioned as Victoria Flores, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Bank of America, N.A., Case No. 1:18-cv-02527-WJM-KLM (D. Colo., Oct. 3, 2018). The case is assigned to Judge William J. Martinez and referred to Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix. Bank of America, National Association operates as a bank. The Bank offers saving and current account, investment and financial services, online banking, mortgage and non-mortgage loan facilities, as well as issues credit card and business loans. Bank of America serves client worldwide. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Douglas Kaliel, Esq. KALIEL, PLLC 1875 Connecticut Avenue NW, 10th Floor Washington, DC 20009 Telephone: (202) 350-4783 E-mail: jkaliel@kalielpllc.com BANK OF AMERICA: IPERS Lawsuit Will Continue, Federal Judge Rule ---------------------------------------------------------------- Kevin Hardy, writing for Des Moines Register, reports that an IPERS lawsuit alleging Wall Street banks engaged in a wide-ranging conspiracy to maintain exclusive control of the $1-trillion-plus stock loan market can continue, a federal judge ruled. The Iowa Public Employees' Retirement System filed a federal class action suit in August 2017 in the Southern District of New York. IPERS was joined by Los Angeles County Employees Retirement Association, the Orange County Employees Retirement System, the Sonoma County Employees Retirement Association and Torus Capital, LLC, a trading firm. The lawsuit alleged that six investment banks -- Bank of America, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, Morgan Stanley and UBS -- "took collective, illegal action to boycott, attack and acquire multiple entities who tried to increase competition and lower costs in the stock loan market." In a January 2018 motion, attorneys representing the six banks asked for the case to be dismissed, arguing that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim that could be granted relief under the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure. But U.S. District Court Judge Katherine Polk Failla denied that motion on September 27. "While it remains to be seen whether Plaintiffs' factual allegations will be borne out in discovery," the New York judge wrote, "the Court is not permitted to dismiss them at this early stage of the litigation." The defendants have until Oct. 26 to file an answer to the lawsuit. Five of the banks declined to comment on the litigation when contacted by the Register on September 28. Morgan Stanley officials did not respond to a request for comment. "IPERS is pleased to see that the judge is allowing this to proceed," IPERS Spokeswoman Judy Akre said on September 28. Unlike other financial markets, the suit claims that the stock loan market has not kept up with technological advancements. Without a central marketplace, the suit says borrowers and lenders face "an inefficient, antiquated, and opaque" system that requires intermediaries, known as prime brokers, who are predominantly large banks. The six investment banks named in the suit are the nation's dominant prime brokers, the suit claims, controlling 60 percent of market revenues in 2016. The suit says the IPERS fund has "lent significant volumes of stock," to the defendants and their stock borrower clients since 2009. The suit says banks have prevented participants from accessing marketplaces where they could benefit from direct trading and secure the best prices. Borrowers and lenders are essentially trading securities blindly, he said, in the dark on the true cost of transactions and fees. The retirement systems allege that big banks have colluded to pocket higher profits, depriving investors of money that should flow to retirees, said plaintiff's attorney Michael Eisenkraft, Esq.-- meisenkraft@cohenmilstein.com "This retirement fund supports thousands of thousands of retirees. So anything that hurts the fund hurts them," Eisenkraft told the Register in 2017. "The pension funds are making money. They're just not making as much money as they should because of this practice." In a statement on September 28, Eisenkraft reiterated that point, claiming the banks' conspiracy was aimed at preventing the "antiquated stock loan market from evolving" in order to preserve profits. The retirement systems are seeking damages and injunctive relief. IPERS is the state's largest public employee retirement program, with more than 350,000 state, city, county and school district employees, plus former Iowa public employees and retirees. The pre-paid fund issued $2 billion in retirement benefits during the last fiscal year, with $1.7 billion paid out in Iowa.[GN] BAXTER HEALTHCARE: De Vega Seeks Unpaid OT & Minimum Wage --------------------------------------------------------- IMELDA DE VEGA, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, the Plaintiff. vs BAXTER HEALTHCARE CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. RG18923256 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 3, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid rest period, and unpaid minimum wages under the California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Defendants employed the Plaintiff and other persons as hourly-paid or non-exempt employees within the State of California. The Defendants continue to employ hourly-paid or non-exempt employees within the Plaintiff and other class members worked over eight hours in a day, and/or 40 hours in a week during their employment with the Defendants. The Defendants engaged in a pattern and practice of wage abuse against their hourly-paid or non-exempt employees within the State of California. This scheme involved, failing to pay them for all hours worked, missed meal periods, and missed rest breaks in violation of California law, the lawsuit says. Baxter Healthcare develops, manufactures, and markets healthcare equipment and instruments.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff Douglas Han, Esq. Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq. Daniel J. Park, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION North Central Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone (818) 230 7502 Facsimile (818) 230 7502 BIN INSURANCE: Ortiz et al. Seek Certification of FLSA Class ------------------------------------------------------------ Robert Ortiz, Joy Morales, and Jeanette Valdez, on behalf of themselves and all other plaintiffs known and unknown, the Plaintiffs v. BIN Insurance Holdings, LLC, d/b/a Insureon, Inc., Insureon Agent Solutions, Techinsurance, Business Insurance, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-02119 (N.D. Ill.), the Plaintiffs move the Court on Oct. 11, 2018, for an order: 1. granting class certification of their overtime wage claims under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law and for certifying a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act, for Defendants' failure to pay for hours worked beyond 40 hours per week and to pay an overtime premium for those same hours, on behalf of workers class: "all current and former employees of Defendant BIN during the statutory period, who were Account Managers and/or Client Service Representatives in BIN's Illinois office, who worked at least one hour of overtime, and who were not paid for these hours nor paid an overtime premium for them because BIN misclassified them as exempt. 2. authorizing notice to issue to putative class and collective members at the Plaintiffs' expense; 3. appointing the Plaintiffs' counsel as class counsel, and Plaintiffs as Class Representatives; and 4. directing the Defendants to produce to the Plaintiffs' counsel the names and last known postal addresses, telephone numbers, and e-mail addresses of all individuals who fall within the class definition and who worked for the Defendant BIN, from March 22, 2015, to the present, to be produced in a usable electronic format within 10 days of the date of the order.[CC] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Jorge Sanchez, Esq. LOPEZ & SANCHEZ LLP 77 W. Washington St., Suite 1313 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 420-6784 Attorneys for the Defendants: Tiffany Fordyce, Esq. Elizabeth Ralph, Esq. Tiffany Andras, Esq. Greenberg Traurig, LLP 77 West Wacker Drive, Suite 3100 Chicago, IL 60601 CANCER GENETICS: Robbins Arroyo Files Class Action -------------------------------------------------- Shareholder rights law firm Robbins Arroyo LLP disclosed that purchasers of Cancer Genetics, Inc. (NASDAQ: CGIX) have filed a class action complaint against the company's officers and directors for alleged violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 between March 23, 2017 and April 2, 2018. Cancer Genetics, develops, commercializes, and provides molecular and biomarker-based tests and services in the U.S., Europe, and Asia. View this information on the law firm's Shareholder Rights Blog: https://www.robbinsarroyo.com/cancer-genetics-inc/ According to the complaint, beginning on March 23, 2017 and continuing through the class period, Cancer Genetics reaffirmed in filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission that "our disclosure controls and procedures were effective." On April 2, 2018, after the market closed, Cancer Genetics revealed that its "disclosure controls and procedures were not effective at December 31, 2017 as a result of the material weaknesses in internal controls¦ [and] may not prevent or detect misstatements." On this news, Cancer Genetic's shares fell $0.55, or over 33.3% per share on April 3, 2018, and have yet to recover. Cancer Genetics Shareholders Have Legal Options If you would like more information about your rights and potential remedies, contact attorney Leonid Kandinov at (800) 350-6003, LKandinov@robbinsarroyo.com, or via the shareholder information form on the firm's website. Leonid Kandinov, Esq. Robbins Arroyo LLP Telephone: (619)525-3990 Toll Free: (800) 350-6003 Website: www.robbinsarroyo.com Email: LKandinov@robbinsarroyo.com [GN] CAPITAL STACK: McQuaid Seeks OT & Minimum Wages under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- KIERAN MCQUAID, on behalf of himself, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs CAPITAL STACK, LLC, and EPRODIGY ACH, LLC, and EPRODIGY OPERATIONS, LLC, and DAVID RUBIN, individually, and BRIAN STULMAN, individually, the Defendants, Case 1:18-cv-09230 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 9, 2018), seeks to recover overtime and minimum wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked for the Defendants -- three Manhattan-based limited liability companies that operate as a single enterprise and/or joint employer that lend money to small and medium-sized businesses, as well as their Chief Executive Officer and Executive Vice President, both of whom served as the Plaintiff's direct supervisors -- in various positions from on or about August 1, 2014 until November 5, 2015. Throughout the Plaintiff's employment, the Defendants willfully failed to pay Plaintiff the wages lawfully due to him under the FLSA and the NYLL. Specifically, for the entirety of his employment, the Defendants required the Plaintiff to work, and the Plaintiff did in fact work, in excess of 40 hours each week or virtually each week, yet the Defendants willfully misclassified him as an exempt "manager" and paid him a flat weekly salary, and therefore failed to compensate the Plaintiff at any rate of pay, let alone at the statutorily required rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay for all hours that he worked in excess of 40 each week, in violation of the FLSA and the NYLL. Moreover, the Plaintiff's weekly wages fell below the minimum that either the FLSA or the NYLL or both required at various points of his employment for each hour worked, resulting in minimum wage violations under either or both statutes, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Michael R. Minkoff, Esq. Alexander T. Coleman, Esq. Michael J. Borrelli, Esq. BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C. 655 Third Avenue, Suite 1821 New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 279 5000 Facsimile: (212) 679 5005 CELLULAR SALES: Holick Seeks to Certify Class --------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAN P. HOLICK, JR., STEVEN MOFFITT, JUSTIN MOFFITT, GURWINDER SINGH, JASON MACK, WILLIAM BURRELL and TIMOTHY M. PRATT, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs CELLULAR SALES OF NEW YORK, LLC, and CELLULAR SALES OF KNOXVILLE, INC., the Defendants, Case 1:12-cv-00584-NAM-DJS (N.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court for an order: 1. certifying a class consisting of: "all persons who: (a) worked as a Sales Representative for Cellular Sales of Knoxville, Inc. and Cellular Sales of New York, in New York State; (b) were classified as non-employee independent contractors; (c) were paid, in whole, or in majority, on a commission basis"; 2. designating Jan P. Holick, Steven Moffitt, Justin Moffitt, Gurwinder Singh, Jason Mack, and Timothy Pratt as Class Representatives; and 3. appointing Gleason, Dunn, Walsh & O'Shea as Class Counsel.[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Christopher M. Silva, Esq. Ronald G. Dunn, Esq. Daniel A. Jacobs, Esq. GLEASON, DUNN, WALSH & O'SHEA 40 Beaver Street, 4th Floor Albany, NY 12207 Telephone: (518) 599-7538 Facsimile: (518) 432-5221 Attorneys for Defendants: C. Lany Carbo, III, Esq. Julie R. Offerman, Esq. David T. Luntz, Esq. Chamberlain Hrdlicka E-mail: Larry.carbo@chamberlainlaw.com Julie.offerman@chamberlainlaw.com dluntz@hinmanstraub.com CHART INDUSTRIES: Defends Stainless Steel Cryobiological Tank Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ Chart Industries, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 18, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the company continues to defend itself from a purported class action lawsuit related to the alleged failure of stainless steel cryobiological storage tank. During the second quarter of 2018, Chart was named in lawsuits (including a class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California) filed against Chart and other defendants with respect to the alleged failure of a stainless steel cryobiological storage tank (model MVE 808AF-GB) at the Pacific Fertility Center in San Francisco, California. No monetary damages related to the alleged failure have been specified or communicated to Chart at this point, and the company is evaluating the merits of such claims in light of the limited information available to date regarding use, maintenance and operation of the tank which has been out of the company's custody for the past six years when it was sold to the Pacific Fertility Center through an independent distributor. Accordingly, an accrual related to any damages that may result from the lawsuits has not been recorded because a potential loss is not currently probable or estimable. Chart Industries said, "We plan to assert various defenses against the claims in the lawsuits, including a defense that since manufacture, we were not in any way involved with the installation, ongoing maintenance or monitoring of the tank or related fertility center cryogenic systems at any time since the initial delivery of the tank." No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Chart Industries, Inc. manufactures and sells engineered equipment, packaged solutions, and value-add services for the industrial gas, energy, and biomedical industries worldwide. It operates in three segments: Energy & Chemicals (E&C), Distribution & Storage (D&S), and BioMedical. The company was incorporated in 1992 and is headquartered in Ball Ground, Georgia. CHART INDUSTRIES: Suit over Aluminum Cryobiological Tank Pending ---------------------------------------------------------------- Chart Industries, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 18, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the company continues to defend a purported class action suit related to the alleged failure of an aluminum cryobiological storage tank. Chart has been named in purported class action lawsuits filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice against the Company and other defendants with respect to the alleged failure of an aluminum cryobiological storage tank (model FNL XC 47/11-6 W/11) at The Toronto Institute for Reproductive Medicine in Etobicoke, Ontario. Chart Industries said, "We have confirmed that the tank in question was part of the aluminum cryobiological tank recall commenced on April 23, 2018. We are currently evaluating the merits of the claims and plan to assert various defenses against the claims in the lawsuits. Accordingly, an accrual related to any damages that may result from the lawsuit has not been recorded because a potential loss is not currently probable or estimable." No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Chart Industries, Inc. manufactures and sells engineered equipment, packaged solutions, and value-add services for the industrial gas, energy, and biomedical industries worldwide. It operates in three segments: Energy & Chemicals (E&C), Distribution & Storage (D&S), and BioMedical. The company was incorporated in 1992 and is headquartered in Ball Ground, Georgia. CHEGG INC: Bronstein Gewirtz Files Securities Class Action ---------------------------------------------------------- Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC notifies investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed against Chegg Inc. ("Chegg" or the "Company") (NYSE:CHGG) on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired Chegg securities between July 30, 2018 and September 25, 2018, (the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/chgg. This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Chegg lacked adequate security measures to protect users' data; (2) Chegg lacked the internal controls and procedures to detect unauthorized access to its systems and to its data; (3) consequently, the Company would incur additional expenses and litigation risks; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially false and/or misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. On September 25, 2018, Chegg said that it had "learned that on or around April 29, 2018, an unauthorized party gained access to a Company database that hosts user data for chegg.com and certain of the Company's family of brands such as EasyBib." Chegg also said that roughly 40 million users' data, including username, email address, shipping address, and hashed password, could have been stolen and that they are currently investigating the situation. Following this news, Chegg stock dropped over 12% to close at $28.42 on September 26, 2018. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/chgg or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in Chegg you have until November 26, 2018 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff. Peretz Bronstein, Esq. Yael Hurwitz, Esq. Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC Telephone; 212-697-6484 Email: peretz@bgandg.com [GN] CITIGROUP INC: Dec. 21 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set ------------------------------------------------------ UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK BENJAMIN MICHAEL MERRYMAN, AMY WHITAKER MERRYMAN TRUST, AND B MERRYMAN AND A MERRYMAN 4TH GENERATION REMAINDER TRUST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CITIGROUP, INC., CITIBANK, N.A., and CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC., Defendants. Civil Action No. 1:15-cv-09185-CM-KNF SUMMARY NOTICE OF (I) PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT; (II) FINAL APPROVAL HEARING; AND (III) MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND REIMBURSEMENT OF LITIGATION EXPENSES TO: All persons or entities (1) who received cash distributions from the Depositary-sponsored American Depositary Receipts ("ADRs") listed in Appendix 1 to the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated August 20, 2018 ("Stipulation")1 from January 1, 2006 to September 4, 2018, inclusive, and were damaged thereby (the "Damages Class"); and/or (2) who currently own the Depositary-sponsored ADRs listed in Appendix 1 to the Stipulation (the "Current Holder Class" and, together with the Damages Class, the "Class"). Certain persons and entities are excluded from the definition of the Class as set forth in detail in the Stipulation and the Notice described below. PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY. IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE CLASS, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT PENDING IN THIS COURT, AND YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO SHARE IN THE SETTLEMENT DESCRIBED BELOW. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, that the above-captioned litigation ("Litigation") has been provisionally certified as a class action for the purposes of settlement only and that the parties to the Litigation have reached a proposed settlement for $14,750,000 in cash and certain additional non-monetary relief ("Settlement"), that, if approved, will resolve all claims in the Litigation. A hearing will be held on December 21, 2018 at 10:00 a.m., before the Honorable Colleen McMahon at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, NY 10007, to determine: (i) whether the proposed Settlement should be approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (ii) whether the Litigation should be dismissed with prejudice against Citibank, N.A. ("Defendant" or "Depositary"), and the releases specified and described in the Stipulation (and in the Notice) should be granted; (iii) whether the proposed Plan of Allocation should be approved as fair and reasonable; and (iv) whether Lead Counsel's application for an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses should be approved. IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE CLASS DESCRIBED ABOVE, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE PENDING ACTION AND YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO SHARE IN THE SETTLEMENT FUND. A detailed Notice of (I) Pendency of Class Action and Proposed Settlement; (II) Final Approval Hearing; and (III) Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Reimbursement of Litigation Expenses ("Notice") and Proof of Claim and Release form ("Claim Form") (or Validation Letter for those Class Members who hold (or held) their eligible ADRs directly and are listed on the records of the Depositary's transfer agent) are currently being mailed to Class Members explaining their rights in connection with the Settlement and the process, for certain Class Members, to submit a Claim Form in order to be eligible to receive a payment from the Settlement. If you have not yet received the detailed Notice and Claim Form (or Validation Letter), you may obtain copies of these documents by visiting www.CitibankADRSettlement.com, or by contacting the Claims Administrator at: Citibank ADR Settlement c/o KCC Class Action Services P.O. Box 404077 Louisville, KY 40233-4077 1-866-680-6138 info@CitibankADRSettlement.com Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice and Claim Form, should be made to Court-appointed Lead Counsel: Sharan Nirmul, Esq. Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 (610) 667-7706 info@ktmc.com If you are a member of the Damages Class (i.e., you received cash distributions from the Depositary-sponsored ADRs listed in Appendix 1 to the Stipulation from January 1, 2006 to September 4, 2018, inclusive, and were damaged thereby) and, as explained in the Notice, you hold (or held) your Depositary-sponsored ADRs directly and are listed on the records of the Depositary's transfer agent, you are a Registered Holder Damages Class Members and do not have to take any action in order to be eligible to receive a payment from the Settlement. Your losses (if any) will be calculated using the information provided by the Depositary's transfer agent. However, if you hold (or held) your Depositary-sponsored ADRs through a bank, broker or other nominee and are not listed on the records of the Depositary's transfer agent, you are a Non-Registered Holder Damages Class Member and, in order for you to be eligible to receive a payment from the Settlement, you must submit a Claim Form postmarked no later than March 15, 2019. If you are a Non-Registered Holder Damages Class Member and do not submit a proper Claim Form, you will not be eligible to share in the distribution of the net proceeds of the Settlement, but you will nevertheless be bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court in the Litigation. If you are a member of the Current Holder Class (i.e., you currently own the Depositary-sponsored ADRs listed in Appendix 1 to the Stipulation), the Settlement also provides additional non-monetary relief related to the conversion of foreign currency of cash distributions paid by any Depositary-sponsored ADR issuer pursuant to a deposit agreement, the terms of which are fully set forth in the Stipulation and mailed Notice. If you are a member of the Class and wish to exclude yourself from the Class, you must submit a request for exclusion such that it is received no later than November 16, 2018, in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice. If you properly exclude yourself from the Class, you will not be bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court in the Litigation and if you are a member of the Damages Class, you will not be eligible to share in the net proceeds of the Settlement. Any objections to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of Allocation, or Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses, must be filed with the Court and delivered to Lead Counsel and Defendant's Counsel such that they are received no later than November 16, 2018, in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice. Please do not contact the Court, the Clerk's office, the Depositary, or its counsel regarding this notice. All questions about this notice, the Settlement, or your eligibility to participate in the Settlement should be directed to Lead Counsel or the Claims Administrator. DATED: September 4, 2018 BY ORDER OF THE COURT United States District Court Southern District of New York 1 The securities listed in Appendix 1 to the Stipulation are: (1) ABB Ltd. (CUSIP: 000375204); (2) Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (CUSIP: 00756M404); (3) BHP Billiton Ltd. (CUSIP: 088606108); (4) British American Tobacco (CUSIP: 110448107); (5) Compania Energetica de Minas Gerais – CEMIG (Preferred) (CUSIP: 204409601); (6) Delhaize Group (CUSIP: 29759W101); (7) Diageo PLC (CUSIP: 25243Q205); (8) GDF Suez (k/n/a/ Engie) (CUSIPs: 36160B105 / 29286D105); (9) Imperial Tobacco Group PLC (k/n/a Imperial Brands plc) (CUSIPs: 453142101 / 45262P102); (10) KT Corp. (f/k/a Korea Telecom Corp.) (CUSIP: 48268K101); (11) Nestle S.A. (CUSIP: 641069406); (12) Nokia (CUSIP: 654902204); (13) POSCO (f/k/a Pohang Iron and Steel Co.) (CUSIP: 693483109); (14) SK Telecom Co., Ltd. (f/k/a Korea Mobile Telecommunications Corp.) (CUSIP: 78440P108); (15) Singapore Telecommunications Ltd. (CUSIP: 82929R304); (16) Taiwan Semiconductor (CUSIP: 874039100); (17) Tata Motors (CUSIP: 876568502); (18) Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Ericsson) (CUSIP: 294821608); (19) Telefonica S.A. (f/k/a Telefonica de Espana S.A.) (CUSIP: 879382208); (20) Unilever PLC (CUSIP: 904767704); and (21) WPP PLC (CUSIP: 92933H101). CLEVELAND-CLIFFS INC: Lawsuits by Wabush Pensioners Resolved ------------------------------------------------------------ Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 1, 2018, that the defendants in Wabush Pensioners related suits have been released from claims and the suits have been discontinued. On May 31, 2017, an action captioned Johnson, et al. v. Cliffs Mining Company, et al. was filed in the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador, Trial Division (General) (the "Newfoundland Court") under the Class Actions Act (Newfoundland) by certain former employees of Wabush Mines on behalf of all non-union employees and retirees of Wabush Mines, against the defendants Cliffs Natural Resources Inc., Cliffs Mining Company, and certain former and current officers, directors and employees (the "Salaried Employees Action"). The Salaried Employees Action sought, among other things, various declarations and damages relating to the "Contributory Salaried Plan for Salaried Employees of Wabush Mines, Cliffs Mining Company, Managing Agent, Arnaud Railway Company and Wabush Lake Railway Company, Limited". On or about June 23, 2017, a separate action captioned Skinner, et al. v. Cliffs Mining Company, et al. was filed in the Newfoundland Court under the Class Actions Act (Newfoundland) by certain former employees of Wabush Mines on behalf of all unionized employees and retirees of Wabush Mines against the same defendants (the "Union Employees Action"). The Union Employees Action sought, among other things, declarations and damages relating to the "Pension Plan for Bargaining Unit Employees of Wabush Mines, Cliffs Mining Company, Managing Agent, Arnaud Railway Company and Wabush Lake Railway Company, Limited." On May 10, 2018, the parties reached a settlement of both the Salaried Employees Action and the Union Employees Action (together the "Employee Actions") which were implemented as part of the Amended Plan within the CCAA proceedings involving the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group. Cleveland-Cliffs said, "Under the terms of the Amended Plan, we and certain of our wholly-owned subsidiaries have made a C$19.0 million cash contribution to the Wabush Group pension plan and will contribute into the CCAA estate any distributions or payments we may be entitled to receive as creditors of the Bloom Lake Group and the Wabush Group for distribution to other creditors within the CCAA proceedings. Upon implementation of the Amended Plan on July 31, 2018, each of the Employee Actions was discontinued and the defendants in the Employee Actions were released from those claims contained in or which could have been raised in the Employee Actions." Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. operates as an iron ore mining company in the United States. The company operates four iron ore mines in Michigan and Minnesota; and Koolyanobbing iron ore mining complex located in Western Australia. It sells its products to integrated steel companies and steel producers in the United States and the Asia Pacific. The company was formerly known as Cliffs Natural Resources Inc. and changed its name to Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. in August 2017. Cleveland-Cliffs Inc. was founded in 1847 and is headquartered in Cleveland, Ohio. CLIENT SERVICES: Placeholder Bid for Class Certification Filed -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned TROY NORTON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. CLIENT SERVICES INC., the Defendant, Case No. 18-cv-1601 (E.D. Wisc.), the Plaintiff asks the Court for an order certifying classes in this case, appointing the Plaintiff as class representative, and appointing Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP as Class Counsel, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem appropriate. The Plaintiff further asks the Court to stay this class certification motion until an amended motion for class certification is filed, and that the Court grant the parties relief from the local rules' automatic briefing schedule and requirement that the Plaintiff file a brief and supporting documents in support of this motion. To avoid the risk of a defendant mooting a putative class representative's individual stake in the litigation, the Seventh Circuit instructed plaintiffs to file a certification motion with the complaint, along with a motion to stay briefing on the certification motion. Damasco v. Clearwire Corp., 662 F.3d 891, 896 (7th Cir. 2011), overruled on other grounds, Chapman v. First Index, Inc., 796 F.3d 783, 787 (7th Cir. 2015) ("The pendency of that motion [for class certification] protects a putative class from attempts to buy off the named plaintiffs."). While the Seventh Circuit has held that the specific procedure described in Campbell-Ewald cannot force the individual settlement of a class representative's claims, the same decision cautions that other methods may prevent a plaintiff from representing a class. Fulton Dental, LLC v. Bisco, Inc., 860 F.3d 541, 545-46 (7th Cir. 2017).[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Mark A. Eldridge, Esq. John D. Blythin, Esq. Jesse Fruchter, Esq. Ben J. Slatky, Esq. Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP 3620 East Layton Avenue Cudahy, WI 53110 Telephone: (414) 482-8000 Facsimile: (414) 482-8001 E-mail: jblythin@ademilaw.com meldridge@ademilaw.com jfruchter@ademilaw.com bslatky@ademilaw.com COCHLEAR AMERICAS: Alexander's Class Certification Bid Denied ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DONALD K. ALEXANDER, the Plaintiff, v. COCHLEAR AMERICAS, the Defendant, Case No. 18‐00498‐CV‐W‐HFS (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Howard F. Sachs entered an order on Oct. 11, 2018: 1. granting the Defendant's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint; and 2. denying as moot the Plaintiff's motions for demand for jury trial, court ruling, leave to file amended complaint, to certify class, and for default judgment. The Court said, "A careful review of plaintiff's allegations in the proposed Amended Complaint reveals a mirror image of those claims initially asserted. In fact, the plaintiff repeats that he is not asserting claims based on any type of product liability, federal statutes or case law, FDA oversight, or fraud upon the FDA, but rather, that his claims are based on Missouri consumer fraud and false advertising. Consequently, as amended, the allegations do not cure the preemption issues related to his claims, and leave to file this pleading will not be granted. Williams v. Bayer Corp., 541 S.W.3d, at 614. 2."[CC] COOKUNITY LLC: Vazquez et al. Seek Minimum Wages under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------- RAMIRO VAZQUEZ, DANIEL TORRES RAMOS, JUAN OLIVARES DE LA TORRE, RIGOBERTO ATLATENCO AMARO, MARIO CAMPOS, ABRAHAM GUTIERREZ OLIVARES, MARCOS ALCANTARA HERNANDEZ, LUIS MIGUEL BARRERA PEREZ, PEDRO LAZARO FORTIS, WILLIAM PALADINES, JUAN PALACIOS, RICARDO TRUJILLO GOMEZ, CARMELLO RAMIREZ MARTINEZ, JOSE IVAN ISLAS RAMIREZ, and MIGUEL ANGEL GALICIA JIMENEZ, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. COOKUNITY, LLC (D/B/A COOKUNITY), MATEO MARIETTI, MATIAS SEREBRINSKY, and LUCIA CISILOTTO, the Defendants, Case 1:18-cv-09301-AJN (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks unpaid minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, including applicable liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs. The Plaintiffs are both current and former employees of Defendants CookUnity, LLC. The Defendants own, operate, or control a meal delivery service/food distributer, whose principal executive office is located at 1 North 4th Place Apt. 34G, Brooklyn, New York, 11249 under the name "CookUnity". According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to maintain accurate record keeping of the hours worked and have failed to pay the Plaintiffs appropriately for any hours worked. In or around 2018, the Plaintiffs worked for the Defendants without appropriate minimum wage compensation for the hours that they worked. Instead the Plaintiffs were paid by the amount of deliveries they were delivering instead of being paid an hourly rate, specifically they were receiving $4.00 per delivery when they made over a certain amount of deliveries per day. Furthermore, the Defendants have repeatedly failed to pay Plaintiffs wages on a timely basis. In addition, the Defendants have maintained a policy and practice of unlawfully basis appropriating the Plaintiffs' and other tipped employees' tips and have made unlawful deductions from the Plaintiffs' and other tipped employees' wages, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 E-mail: faillace@employmentcompliance.com CSX CORP: Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation Ongoing ----------------------------------------------------- CSX Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 15, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the company continues to defend itself in the Fuel Surcharge Antitrust Litigation. In May 2007, class action lawsuits were filed against CSXT and three other U.S.-based Class I railroads alleging that the defendants' fuel surcharge practices relating to contract and unregulated traffic resulted from an illegal conspiracy in violation of antitrust laws. In November 2007, the class action lawsuits were consolidated in federal court in the District of Columbia, where they are now pending. The suit seeks treble damages allegedly sustained by purported class members as well as attorneys' fees and other relief. Plaintiffs are expected to allege damages at least equal to the fuel surcharges at issue. In June 2012, the District Court certified the case as a class action. The decision was not a ruling on the merits of plaintiffs' claims, but rather a decision to allow the plaintiffs to seek to prove the case as a class. The defendant railroads petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for permission to appeal the District Court's class certification decision. In August 2013, the D.C. Circuit issued a decision vacating the class certification decision and remanded the case to the District Court to reconsider its class certification decision. On October 10, 2017, the District Court issued an order denying class certification. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit is reviewing the District Court's denial of class certification and held oral argument on September 28, 2018, with a decision yet to be issued. The District Court has delayed proceedings on the merits of the case pending the outcome of the class certification proceedings. CSXT believes that its fuel surcharge practices were arrived at and applied lawfully and that the case is without merit. Accordingly, the Company intends to defend itself vigorously. However, penalties for violating antitrust laws can be severe, and resolution of this matter or an unexpected adverse decision on the merits could have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or liquidity in that particular period. CSX Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, provides rail-based transportation services in the United States and Canada. The company offers rail services, as well as transports intermodal containers and trailers. CSX Corporation was founded in 1978 and is based in Jacksonville, Florida. CSX CORP: West Lumberton Baptist Church et al. Sue over Flooding ---------------------------------------------------------------- WEST LUMBERTON BAPTIST CHURCH; CURRIE CHAIN SAW, INC.; C.J.M. VENTURES, INC.; WILLIAM LOCKLEAR D/B/A STRICKLAND'S BARBERSHOP; TBL ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY, INC.; SAMMY'S AUTO SALES, INC.; LINDA SAMPSON; and ERIC CHAVIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CSX CORPORATION; CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.; and CSX INTERMODAL TERMINALS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 7:18-cv-00178 (E.D.N.C., Oct. 4, 2018), alleges that since 2003, the Defendants have been on notice that an underpass at Interstate 95 owned by the Defendants and running through the levee system of the City of Lumberton ("City") creates a substantial risk of destructive flooding to the southern and western portions of the City. Nonetheless, the Defendants have taken no steps to correct the problem. As a direct result of the Defendants' disregard of the risk, flooding of the southern and western parts of the City occurred when the Lumber River rushed through the ungated underpass during 2016's Hurricane Matthew. The damage was extensive. Although the Defendants could not have had a more compelling demonstration of the damage that its underpass could cause, they still failed and refused to work with the City and other governmental bodies to take steps -- such as building a long-recommended floodgate -- to ensure that the flooding resulting from Hurricane Matthew was not repeated. Just two years later, Hurricane Florence threatened the City. Governmental officials – recognizing that the City was potentially facing a repetition of Matthew's devastating loss – pleaded with the Defendants to allow the City to build a temporary sandbag berm to try to fill the hole created by the I-95 underpass. The Defendants repeatedly refused, threatening legal action if the City acted without permission. Only when the Governor signed an emergency order could volunteers, government workers, and the National Guard attempt to construct the berm just as Hurricane Florence struck. When the berm ultimately failed, after protecting the City for two days, the Lumber River again rushed through the I-95 underpass, precisely as it had two years earlier. Once again, flooding forced evacuations, has left people homeless, closed businesses, and destroyed personal property and inventory. The Defendants have twice ignored foreseeable risks, and rejected cooperating with local governments and building a floodgate. Their willful, wanton, or reckless disregard was compounded in 2018, when the Defendants prevented the City from having the necessary time to build a more formidable temporary berm when Hurricane Florence hit the U.S. on September 2018. CSX Corporation, together with its subsidiaries, provides rail-based transportation services in the United States and Canada. The company offers rail services, as well as transports intermodal containers and trailers. It also serves production and distribution facilities through track connections. CSX Corporation was founded in 1978 and is based in Jacksonville, Florida. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Martha Geer, Esq. Jay Chaudhuri, Esq. Adam Langino, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 150 Fayetteville Street, Suite 980 Raleigh, NC 27601 Telephone: (919) 890-0560 Facsimile: (919) 890-0567 E-mail: mgeer@cohenmilstein.com jchaudhuri@cohenmilstein.com alangino@cohenmilstein.com - and - Theodore J. Leopold, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 2925 PGA Boulevard, Suite 220 Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410 Telephone: (561) 515-1400 Facsimile: (561) 515-1401 E-mail: tleopold@cohenmilstein.com - and - Gary K. Shipman, Esq. SHIPMAN & WRIGHT, LLP 575 Military Cutoff Road, Suite 106 Wilmington, NC 28405 Telephone: (910) 762-1990 Facsimile: (910) 762-6758 E-mail: gshipman@shipmanlaw.com - and - K. Robert Davis, Esq. THE BRITT LAW FIRM, P.C. 107 N. Court Square, Suite 22 Lumberton, NC 28358 Telephone: (910) 671-4500 Facsimile: (866) 780-8245 E-mail: thebrittlawfirm@yahoo.com DEL TACO: Discovery Still Ongoing in Former Cal. Employee Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Del Taco Restaurants, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 18, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 11, 2018, that that discovery is still ongoing in former employee's class suit in California. In March 2014, a former Del Taco employee filed a purported class action complaint alleging that Del Taco has not appropriately provided meal breaks and failed to pay wages to its California hourly employees. Discovery is in process and Del Taco intends to assert all of its defenses to this threatened class action and the individual claims. Del Taco has several defenses to the action that it believes could prevent the certification of the class, as well as the potential assessment of any damages on a class basis. Del Taco said, "Legal proceedings are inherently unpredictable, and the Company is not able to predict the ultimate outcome or cost of the unresolved matter. However, based on management's current understanding of the relevant facts and circumstances, the Company does not believe that these proceedings give rise to a probable or estimable loss and should not have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial position, operations or cash flows. Therefore, Del Taco has not recorded any amount for the claim as of September 11, 2018. Del Taco Restaurants, Inc. operates a chain of fast food restaurants. The company consists of two separate Mexican fast-food groups, 79 Del Taco units and 36 Taco Villa restaurants. The company offers Mexican food items, such as tacos, burritos, quesadillas, burgers, French fries, and soft drinks. The company was incorporated in 1983 and is based in Atlanta, Georgia. Del Taco Restaurants, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of W.R. Grace & Co. DELIV INC: Lawson et al Seek to Certify Class of Drivers -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned Raef Lawson and Joshua Albert, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. DELIV, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-03632-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court on January 10, 2019, for an order to certify a class that includes all California Deliv Drivers.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994 5800 E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com DIGITAL ALTITUDE: Marketing & Business Courses A Sham, Doty Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- JALLEH DOTY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DIGITAL ALTITUDE, LLC; and DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, Defendants, Case No. BC723964 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 3, 2018) seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of falsely advertising their services. According to the complaint, the Defendant represents that it will provide a digital marketing and business mastery course along with training, course materials, and customer service support. However, the Defendants failed to provide no concrete information on how to proficiently and successfully market and run a business. Despite the fact that the Defendants do not provide mastery courses on marketing and business that will allow consumers to make six figure incomes in six steps, the Defendants nonetheless represents to consumers that it does in order to entice them to give the Defendants thousands of dollars. Digital Altitude, LLC is a Delaware limited liability company engaged in the sale of marketing and business education courses and business. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. Adrian R. Bacon, Esq. Meghan E. George, Esq. Tom E. Wheeler , Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C. 21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (877) 206-4741 Facsimile: (866) 633-0228 E-mail: tfriedman@ toddflaw.com abacon@ toddflaw.com mgeorge@toddflaw.com twheeler@toddflaw.com DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK: Riley Seeks Unpaid Overtime --------------------------------------------------- ANTOINETTE RILEY individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. DOLGENCORP OF NEW YORK, INC. d/b/a DOLLAR GENERAL, and related or affiliated entities, the Defendant, Case No. 159417/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks to recover for unpaid wages, unpaid minimum wage, and unpaid overtime compensation pursuant to the New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, the Defendant maintained a policy and practice of deducting 30 minutes for lunch even when Plaintiff would not take all or parts of her lunch break. This policy and practice applied to her co-workers, to each member of the putative class. The Plaintiff routinely worked through her lunch break. Even when Plaintiff did not work through her entire lunch break, she rarely had 30 uninterrupted minutes for lunch. She would regularly be interrupted to assist a fellow sales associate or a customer, the lawsuit says. Dollar General is an American chain of variety stores headquartered in Goodlettsville, Tennessee. As of July 2018, Dollar General operates 15,000 stores in 45 of the 48 contiguous United States.{BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Putative Class: Lloyd R. Ambinder, Esq. Jack L. Newhouse, Esq. VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP 40 Broad Street, 7th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 943 9080 Facsimile: (212) 943 9082 E-mail: jnewhouse@vandallp.com DOS REALES: FLSA Class Conditionally Certified in Pena Olivera Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANATOLIO PENA OLIVERA and MARIA FERNANDA MARTINEZ Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. DOS REALES, INC. and ALVARO QUEZADA, the Defendants, Case No. 17-2203-KGS (D. Ks.), the Hon. Judge K. Gary Sebelius entered an order on Oct. 11, 2018: 1. granting conditional Fair Labor Standards Act certification and approval of notice of a class of similarly situated restaurant workers; 2. directing the Defendants to provide the Plaintiffs with a list of employees who fall within the putative class and provide the plaintiffs with these individuals' addresses, telephone numbers, and email addresses, if known; and 3. directing the parties to submit jointly proposed deadlines for remaining case management activities.[CC] DYNAMIC RECOVERY: Perea Sues over Debt Collection Practices ----------------------------------------------------------- Mario Perea, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Dynamic Recovery Solutions, LLC; and Pinnacle Credit Services, LLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-06706 (N.D. Ill., Oct. 3, 2018) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. The case is assigned to Honorable Rebecca R. Pallmeyer. Dynamic Recovery Services, Inc. provides collection services to the commercial sector. The company was founded in 1990 and is based in Farmers Branch, Texas. [BN] The case is represented by: Mario Kris Kasalo, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF M. KRIS KASALO, LTD. 20 North Clark Street, Suite 3100 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 726-6160 E-mail: mario.kasalo@kasalolaw.com EAGLE DINER: Flores and Goold Seek Approval of Class Notice ----------------------------------------------------------- In the case, ALEXIS FLORES AND VIRGINIA GOOLD, for themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. EAGLE DINER CORP., JAMES ROKOS, MARIA ROKOS AND MARKO ROKOS, the Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-01206-AB (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiffs move the Court to enter their proposed Order authorizing the dissemination of Class Notice to: "all persons who have worked as Eagle Diner Servers during the past three years under the "opt-in" mechanism for collective actions provided by the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. section 216(b)".[CC] Counsel for Plaintiffs: David J. Cohen, Esq. Ryan F. Stephan, Esq. James B. Zouras, Esq. STEPHAN ZOURAS LLP 604 Spruce Street Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 873-4836 EEOC: U.S. Pastor Council et al. Allege Gender, Religious Bias -------------------------------------------------------------- U.S. Pastor Council, on behalf of itself and others similarly situated; Hotze Health & Wellness Center, on behalf of itself and others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Victoria A. Lipnic, Chai R. Feldblum, and Charlotte A. Burrows, in their official capacities as chair and commissioners of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission; Jefferson B. Sessions III, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States; United States of America, the Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-00824-O (N.D. Tex., Oct. 6, 2018), seeks to enjoin the federal government from enforcing anti-discrimination policies against any employer that objects to homosexual or transgender behavior on religious grounds. The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claims that Title VII outlaws employment discrimination on account of sexual orientation or gender identity. See Baldwin v. Foxx, EEOC Doc. No. 0120133080, 2015 WL 4397641 (EEOC July 16, 2015); Macy v. Holder, EEOC Doc. No. 0120120821, 2012 WL 1435995 (EEOC Apr. 20, 2012). According to the complaint, neither the text of Title VII nor the EEOC's regulatory guidance makes any exemptions or accommodations for churches or corporations that oppose homosexual or transgender behavior on religious grounds. The failure to provide a religious exemption to this supposed anti-discrimination requirement violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act and the First Amendment, the lawsuit says.[BN] Counsel for Plaintiffs and the Proposed Classes: Charles W. Fillmore, Esq. H. Dustin Fillmore, Esq. THE FILLMORE LAW FIRM L.L.P. 1200 Summit Avenue, Suite 860 Fort Worth, TX 76102 Telephone: (817) 332-2351 Facsimile: (817) 870 1859 E-mail: chad@fillmorefirm.com dusty@fillmorefirm.com - and - Jonathan F. Mitchell, Esq. MITCHELL LAW PLLC 106 East Sixth Street, Suite 900 Austin, TX 78701 Telephone: (512) 686 3940 Facsimile: (512) 686 3941 E-mail: jonathan@mitchell.law EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Rivera Suit Alleges Violation of FCRA ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equifax Information Services, LLC. The case is captioned as Francisco Joel Rivera, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-04639-AT-JSA (N.D. Ga., Oct. 4, 2018). The lawsuit alleges violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The case is assigned to Judge Amy Totenberg and referred to Magistrate Judge Justin S. Anand. Equifax Inc. provides information solutions and human resources business process outsourcing services for businesses, governments, and consumers. Equifax Inc. was founded in 1899 and is headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James Marvin Feagle, Esq. SKAAR AND FEAGLE 2374 Main Street, Suite B Tucker, GA 30084 Telephone: (404) 373-1970 Facsimile: (404) 601-1855 E-mail: jfeagle@skaarandfeagle.com - and - James A. Francis, Esq. John Soumilas, Esq. FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C. 100 South Broad Street Philadelphia, PA 19110 Telephone: (215) 735-8600 Facsimile: (215) 940-8000 E-mail: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com - and - Micah S. Adkins, Esq. THE ADKINS FIRM, P.C. 7100 Executive Center Drive, Suite 110 Brentwood, TN 37027 Telephone: (615) 370-4099 E-mail: MicahAdkins@ItsYourCreditReport.com - and - Robert S. Sola, Esq. ROBERT S. SOLA, P.C. 1500 SW First Avenue, Suite 800 Portland, OR 97201 Telephone: (503) 295-6880 Facsimile: (503) 243-4546 E-mail: rssola@msn.com ETTAIN GROUP: Udoewa Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA -------------------------------------------------- PATRICK UDOEWA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. ETTAIN GROUP, INC. the Defendant, Case No.: 3:18-cv-00535 (W.D.N.C., Oct. 3, 2018), contends that the Defendant violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, by knowingly suffering and/or permitting the Plaintiff and the putative Class members to work in excess of 40 hours per week without properly compensating them at an overtime premium rate for these overtime hours. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a Consultant, Trainer, Go-Live Support staff, and Instructional Designer. The Plaintiff assisted with the implementation and administration of integrated health computer systems. The Defendant's main function was to recruit and hire individuals to assist hospitals and healthcare organizations with their implementation and administration of an integrated health computer system. The Plaintiffs were all compensated on an hourly basis. Mr Udoewa was paid approximately $50.00 to $85.00 an hour. The Plaintiffs were paid only straight time for all hours they worked, including all overtime hours worked each week, the lawsuit says. The Defendant provides staffing services to customers throughout the United States, including Virginia.[BN] Counsel for Plaintiff and the Putative Collective: Philip J. Gibbons, Jr., Esq. Craig L. Leis, Esq. Corporate Place, Suite 325 Charlotte, NC 28277 Telephone: (704) 612 0038 E-mail: phil@gibbonsleis.com craig@gibbonsleis.com - and - Ryan F. Stephan, Esq. STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP 100 North Riverside Plaza, Suite 2150 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 233 1550 E-mail: rstephan@stephanzouras.com aficzko@stephanzouras.com EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Ellis Seeks to Certify Class -------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned TERRACE ELLIS, the Plaintiff, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., the Defendant, Case 5:17-cv-07092-LHK (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff will move the Court on December 13, 2018, for an order certifying this class of consumers: "all natural persons who requested a copy of their consumer disclosure from Experian between May 30, 2013, through the present; (2) received a disclosure in response that included a tradeline with the name "Advanta Bank" or "Advanta Credit Cards"; (3) did not identify Cardworks Servicing, Inc. as a source of the information for the Advanta Bank or Advanta Credit Cards tradeline; and (4) whose "date of status" or "date last reported" field for the tradeline reflected a date of August 2010 or later."[CC] Counsel for Plaintiff: Craig C. Marchiando, Esq. Leonard A. Bennett, Esq. CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES , P.C. 763 J. Clyde Morris Blvd., Suite 1-A Newport News, VA 23601 Telephone: (757) 930 3660 Facsimile: (757) 257 3450 E-mail: craig@clalegal.com - and - Annick M. Persinger, Esq. TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP 483 Ninth Street, Suite 200 Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone (510) 254-6808 Facsimile (202) 973-0950 E-mail apersinger@tzlegal.com FACEBOOK INC: Fails to Secure Users' Personal Info, McGuire Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- KATHI MCGUIRE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs FACEBOOK, INC., the Defendant, Case 3:18-cv-06172 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 9, 2018), alleges that Facebook failed to secure its users' Personally Identifiable Information, and for its misrepresentations and omissions in its public statements about its information security practices. According to the complaint, to establish a Facebook account one is required to share one's name, gender, date of birth, and email address or mobile phone number. After that, Facebook tracks and stores any personally identifiable information users add to their accounts, including schools, maiden name, hometown, current city, employment, and group affiliations such as political clubs, and alumni associations; every IP address from which the user logs in; every friend in the network, including deleted friends; all of the user's activity on Facebook -- ever. That includes every post, every "like," every status change, and every search for another person on Facebook. Some users' accounts also contain credit or debit card information. All of this information is "Personally Identifiable Information" or "PII", which is information that can be used on its own or with other information to identify, contact, or locate a single person, or to identify an individual in context. The collection of massive amounts of PII is central to Facebook's business model. Most of Facebook's revenues, which exceeded $40 billion in 2017, were from the sale of targeted advertising; that is, advertising delivered to Facebook users selected on the basis of the PII the company maintains about them. On September 28, 2018, Facebook disclosed that a breach of the company's computer network resulted in hackers obtaining direct access to the accounts of 50 million Facebook users and all of the information accessible in and through those accounts. In addition, once they had access to the users' Facebook accounts, "the attackers could have gained access to apps like Spotify, Instagram and hundreds of others that give users a way to log into their systems through Facebook," the lawsuit says. Facebook is the world's largest social networking website, with more than two billion monthly active users as of June 2017. Facebook operates a social networking website that allows people to communicate with their family, friends, and coworkers by sharing (or "posting") information, including text, photographs, website links, and videos. Facebook is also widely used by companies and organizations to advertise and promote their products and causes.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: David Azar, Esq. MILBERG TADLER PHILLIPS GROSSMAN LLP 11766 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 500 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (212) 594 5300 Facsimile: (212) 868 1229 E-mail: dazar@milberg.com - and - Ariana J. Tadler, Esq. Henry J. Kelston, Esq. atadler@milberg.com hkelston@milberg.com One Pennsylvania Plaza, Suite 1920 New York, NY 10119 Telephone: (212) 594 5300 Facsimile: (212) 868 1229 FLOWERS FOODS: Carr et al. Seek to Certify 3 Classes ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MATTHEW CARR, TERRY CARR, DAVID TUMBLIN, and GREGORY BROWN, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. FLOWERS FOODS, INC. and FLOWERS BAKING CO. OF OXFORD, LLC, the Defendants., Case No.: 2:15-cv-06391-WB (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to certify three classes: -- "all persons who, at any time from December 1, 2012 continuing through entry of judgment in this case, worked as distributors for Flowers Foods, Inc. and/or Flowers Baking Company of Oxford, Inc. in the State of Pennsylvania and were classified as independent contractors under their distribution agreements"; -- "all persons who, at any time from December 12, 2012 continuing through entry of judgment in this case, worked as distributors for Flowers Foods, Inc. and/or Flowers Baking Company of Oxford, Inc. in the State of Maryland and were classified as independent contractors under their distribution agreements"; and -- "all persons who, at any time from March 24, 2014 continuing through entry of judgment in this case, worked as distributors for Flowers Foods, Inc. and/or Flowers Baking Company of Oxford, Inc. in the State of New Jersey and were classified as independent contractors under their distribution agreements".[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Shawn J. Wanta, Esq. Christopher D. Jozwiak, Esq. Scott A. Moriarity, Esq. BAILLON THOME JOZWIAK & WANTA LLP 100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1200 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 252 3570 Facsimile: (612) 252 3571 E-mail: samoriarity@baillonthome.com sjwanta@baillonthome.com cdjozwiak@baillonthome.com - and - Gordon Rudd, Esq. David Cialkowski, Esq. REED PLLP 111 IDS Center 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 341-0400 E-mail: Gordon.Rudd@zimmreed.com David.Cialkowski@Zimmreed.com - and - Peter Winebrake, Esq. R. Andrew Santillo, Esq. Mark J. Gottesfeld, Esq. WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC 715 Twining Road, Suite 211 Dresher, PA 19025 Telephone: (215) 884 2491 E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com asantillo@winebrakelaw.com mgottesfeld@winebrakelaw.com - and - Charles E. Schaffer, Esq. LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN 510 Walnut Street, Suite 500 Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 592 1500 Facsimile: (215) 592 4663 E-mail: cschaffer@lfsblaw.com - and - Susan E. Ellingstad, Esq. Rachel A. Kitze Collins, Esq. Brian D. Clark, pro hac vice LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339 6900 Facsimile: (612) 339 0981 E-mail: seellingstad@locklaw.com rakitzecollins@locklaw.com bdclark@locklaw.com Attorneys for Defendants: Christopher E. Humber, Esq. Michael J. Murphy, Esq. Margaret Santen Hanrahan, Esq. Mark Diana, Esq. Robin Kosky, Esq. K. Clark Whitney, Esq. Julie A. Donahue, Esq. Aaron Warshaw, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 1909 K Street NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20006 E-mail: chris.humber@ogletreedeakins.com michael.murphy@ogletreedeakins.com maggie.hanrahan@ogletreedeakins.com mark.diana@ogletreedeakins.com robin.koshy@ogletreedeakins.com clark.whitney@ogletreedeakins.com julie.donahue@ogletreedeakins.com aaron.warshaw@ogletreedeakins.com FLYFIT HOLDINGS: Thurston Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------- ALEXANDER RAY THURSTON, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the PLaintiff, vs. FLYFIT HOLDINGS, LLC (D/B/A FLYFIT GLOBAL) and BRIAN CHAPPON, the Defendants, Case 1:18-cv-09044 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 3. 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, Mr. Thurston was employed as an executive assistant of the CEO at the company located at 221 West 29th Street, Apt 22B, New York, New York 10001. The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants without appropriate compensation for the hours that he worked. Rather, the Defendants failed to maintain accurate record-keeping of the hours worked and failed to pay the Plaintiff appropriately for all hours worked. Furthermore, the Defendants repeatedly failed to pay the Plaintiff wages on a timely basis, the lawsuit says. FlyFit Holdings, LLC operate Manhattan fitness company FlyFit Global.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Michael Faillace, Esq. MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 E-mail: Faillace@employmentcompliance.com FRONTLINE ASSET: Williams Seeks to Certify Class of Consumers ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SAMUEL WILLIAMS, pleading on his own behalf and on behalf of all other similarly situated consumers, the Plaintiff, vs. FRONTLINE ASSET STRATEGIES; VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, the Defendants, Case 2:17-cv-03119-JD (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiff moves the Court for an Order certifying this case to proceed as a class action on behalf of a class of: "consumers with a Pennsylvania address that have received collection letters from Defendant concerning debts incurred for primarily personal, household, or family purposes during a period beginning one year prior to the filing of this complaint that a) fails to provide a partial payment disclosure, b) fails to disclose that the consumer cannot be sued on the debt, and c) falsely threatens the accrual of interest."[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Daniel Zemel, Esq. Elizabeth Apostola, Esq. ZEMEL LAW LLC 1373 Broad Street, Suite 203-C Clifton, NJ 07013 Telephone: (862) 227-3106 E-mail: dz@zemellawllc.com ea@zemellawllc.com GATEWAY ONE: Anderson Sues over Repossession of Vehicles -------------------------------------------------------- LAURENDA ANDERSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GATEWAY ONE LENDING & FINANCE, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 27-CV-18-16743 (Minn. Dist., Hennepin Cty., Oct. 4, 2018) seeks injunctive and monetary relief over the Defendant's alleged practice of repossessing and selling borrowers' vehicles in the State of Minnesota. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants sent to the Plaintiff a form post-repossession notice which misstates important consumer rights provided under the Uniform Commercial Code, including the borrower's true liability for a deficiency following the sale of a vehicle. Gateway One Lending & Finance, LLC manages and services indirect auto financing products for auto dealers in the United States. The company was incorporated in 2006 and is based in Anaheim, California with sales and credit locations in Northern California, Illinois, New Jersey, and Georgia. As of November 30, 2011, Gateway One Lending & Finance, LLC operates as a subsidiary of TCF National Bank. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark L. Heaney, Esq. HEANEY LAW FIRM, LLC 601 Carlson Parkway, Suite 1050 Minnetonka, MN 55305 Telephone: (952) 933-9655 Facsimile: (952) 487-0189 E-mail: mark@heaneylaw.com GEORGIA: Department of Corrections Faces Harris et al. Suit ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Georgia Department of Corrections. The case is captioned as RICARDO HARRIS; BRANDON COBB; TOMMY GREEN; TONY MOORE, JR.; CHRISTOPHER SHIELDS; DARRELL SMITH, JR.; JORAE SMITH; LEROY HENDERSON; ANDREW SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES; GREGORY C DOZIER, in his official capacity as COMMISSIONER OF THE GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; TERRY BARNARD, in his official capacity as CHAIRMAN OF THE GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF PARDONS AND PAROLES; TIMOTHY C. WARD, in his official capacity as the Chief of Staff of the GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; CLAY NIX in his official capacity as the DIRECTOR OF PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS OF THE GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; RICKY MYRICK, in his official capacity as the ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF THE FACILITIES DIVISION OF THE GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; JACK RANDY SAULS, in his official capacity as the ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF HEALTH SERVICES FOR THE GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; JAY SANDERS, in his official capacity as the ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INMATE SERVICES OF THE GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS; Warden TOMMY BOWEN, in his official capacity as WARDEN OF CENTRAL STATE PRISON; Warden ANTOINE CALDWELL, in his official capacity as Warden of JOHNSON STATE PRISON; TED PHILBIN, in his official capacity as WARDEN OF AUGUSTA STATE MEDICAL PRISON, Case No. 5:18-cv-00365-TES (M.D. Ga., Oct. 3, 2018). The lawsuit alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Case is referred to Judge Timan E. Self, III. Georgia Department of Corrections is an agency of the U.S. state of Georgia operating state prisons. The agency is headquartered in Forsyth, in the former campus of Tift College. The Plaintiff is represented by: Alexandria E. G. Swette, Esq. 767 Fifth Ave. New York, NY 10153 Telephone: (212) 310-8339 E-mail: alexandria.swette@weil.com - and - Anna Bitencourt, Esq. 8630 Fenton St., Suite 820 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: (301) 587-1789 Facsimile: (301) 587-1791 - and - Audrey E. Stano, Esq. WEIL GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 201 Redwood Shores Pkwy 6th Floor Redwood Shores, CA 94065 E-mail: audrey.stano@weil.com - and - Claudia Center, Esq. 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 343-0762 E-mail: ccenter@aclu.org - and - Kosha S. Tucker, Esq. PO BOX 77208 Atlanta, GA GA 30357 Telephone: (678) 271-0073 E-mail: ktucker@acluga.org - and - Nigar Shaikh, Esq. 767 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10153-0119 Telephone: (212) 310-8000 - and - Ralph I. Miller, Esq. 2001 M St NW, Suite 600 Washington, DC 20036 E-mail: ralph.miller@weil.com - and - Susan Mizner, Esq. 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 343-0762 E-mail: smizner@aclu.org - and - Talila A. Lewis, Esq. 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 343-0781 Facsimile: (415) 395-0950 - and - Zoe Brennan-Krohn, Esq. 39 Drumm Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 343-0762 E-mail: zbrennan-krohn@aclu.org - and - Sean Jengwei Young, Esq. PO Box 77208 Atlanta, GA 30357 Telephone: (678) 981-5295 E-mail: syoung@acluga.org GIGA WATT INC: Refael Sofair Alleges RICO Act Violation -------------------------------------------------------- REFAEL SOFAIR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Paintiff v. GIGA WATT INC.; DAVID MATTHEW CARLSON; GIGAWATT PTE LTD; and DOES 1-10, Case No. 2:18-cv-00308-SMJ (E.D. Wash., Oct. 2, 2018) alleges violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The case is assigned to Judge Salvador Mendoza, Jr. Gigawatt, Inc. operates a crowdfunding platform that enables clubs, teams, and others living in the United States to launch blitz fundraising campaigns. The company is based in San Mateo, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas A Hofmann, Esq. WILLIAMS KASTNER& GIBBS-SEA 601 Union Street, Suite 4100 P.O. Box 21926 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 628-6600 Facsimile: (206) 628-6611 E-mail: dhofmann@williamskastner.com - and - John Alan Knox, Esq. WILLIAMS KASTNER& GIBBS-SEA 601 Union Street, Suite 4100 P.O. Box 21926 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 233-2965 Facsimile: (206) 628-6611 E-mail: jknox@williamskastner.com GRAY TV: Walley's Auto Sales Alleges Price-Fixing of TV Ad Rates ---------------------------------------------------------------- WALLEY'S AUTO SALES, INC. d/b/a WALLEY'S MARINE & AUTO SALES, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. GRAY TELEVISION, INC.; HEARST COMMUNICATIONS; HEARST TELEVISION, INC.; NEXSTAR MEDIA GROUP, INC.; TEGNA INC.; TRIBUNE MEDIA COMPANY; and SINCLAIR BROADCAST GROUP, INC., the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-06740 (N.D. Ill., Oct. 5, 2018), alleges that the Defendants unlawfully coordinated efforts and shared information to artificially inflate prices for television commercials in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to represent a Class consisting of all persons and entities in the United States who paid for all or a portion of advertisement time on local TV provided by Gray Television, Inc., Hearst Communications, Inc., Hearst Television, Inc., Nexstar Media Group, Inc., Tegna Inc., Tribune Media Company, or Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. from at least January 1, 2014 until the effects of their unlawful conduct cease. Rather than compete for advertising sales on price, as competitors are supposed to do, the Defendants and their co-conspirators shared proprietary information and conspired to fix prices and reduce competition in the market, the lawsuit says.[BN] Counsel for Plaintiff and the Proposed Class: Steven A. Kanner, Esq. Michael J. Freed, Esq. Robert J. Wozniak, Esq. FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC 2201 Waukegan Road, Suite 130 Bannockburn, IL 60015 Telephone: (224) 632-4500 E-mail: skanner@fklmlaw.com mfreed@fklmlaw.com rwozniak@fklmlaw.com - and - Robert S. Kitchenoff, Esq. WEINSTEIN KITCHENOFF & ASHER LLC 100 South Broad Street, Suite 705 Philadelphia, PA 19096 Telephone: (215) 545-7200 E-mail: kitchenoff@wka-law.com HENRY SCHEIN: Kramer Alleges Dental Supplies Pricing Conspiracy --------------------------------------------------------------- NATHANIEL DYLAN KRAMER, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs HENRY SCHEIN, INC.; PATTERSON CO., INC.; BENCO DENTAL SUPPLY CO.; AND UNNAMED CO-CONSPIRATORS, the Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-06183 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 9, 2018), alleges that the Defendants have violated the Cartwright Act and California Unfair Competition Act with their agreement not to compete as to price and margins. This allows them to charge California dental practices well above competitive prices for dental supplies. This overcharging is in turn passed on, all or in part, to members of the proposed California Class of Dental Purchasers in their dental bills. According to the complaint, in aid of their pricing conspiracy, the Defendants have pursued four strategies. First, they have sought to fix pricing through an effort to reach agreed margins on sales across these major distributors. As Henry Schein's Regional Manager Mark Lowery has put it, the aim of the margin-fixing scheme is to ensure that dentists "get dental products for the same price no matter who they buy it from" so that "we all get paid," and the scope of this margin-fixing scheme has run "unanimously across the industry for as long as I have been in the dental business." Second, the Defendants have conspired to boycott the entry and expansion of competing distributors offering lower supply prices by boycotting, or threatening to boycott, manufacturers supplying the discounters by denying the manufacturers essential distribution by the Defendants. They have also boycotted, or threatened to boycott, (a) the trade shows of state dental trade associations, (b) dental practices, and (c) other industry participants dealing with, or promoting, lower-priced distributors. Third, the Defendants have divided among themselves the relevant market by agreeing not to "poach" one another's sales representatives and the dental practices serviced by these sales representatives. The Defendants' conduct is per se illegal under the Cartwright Act by fixing prices, boycotting, and dividing the relevant market. Overcharges inflicted on the California dental practices by the conspiracy have been passed on, all or in part, to their customers, members of the proposed Class of Dental Purchasers. The Defendants' conduct also constitutes unfair competition under the California Unfair Competition Act. Each Defendant is jointly and severally liable for all damages inflicted on the proposed Class, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Todd M. Schneider, Esq. Jason H. Kim, Esq. SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL KONECKY WOTKYNS LLP 2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400 Emeryville, CA 94608 Telephone: (415) 421-7100 Facsimile: (415) 421-7105 E-mail: tschneider@schneiderwallace.com jkim@schneiderwallace.com HERITAGE-CRYSTAL CLEAN: Continues to Defend Adelphia Class Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Heritage-Crystal Clean, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 17, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 8, 2018, that the company has petitioned the Illinois Court of Appeals for an interlocutory appeal on the Circuit Court's grant of class certification in the case entitled, Adelphia, Inc. d/b/a/ Village Auto and Dan's One Stop Shop, LLC v. Heritage-Crystal Clean, Inc. and Heritage-Crystal Clean, LLC. The Company is currently defending the putative class action lawsuit, Adelphia, Inc. d/b/a/ Village Auto and Dan's One Stop Shop, LLC v. Heritage-Crystal Clean, Inc. and Heritage-Crystal Clean, LLC, Case No. 15-L-386, in the Circuit Court for the Sixteenth Judicial Circuit in Kane County, Illinois, alleging that the Company charged fees in violation of both its contracts and applicable state laws. The case involves claims brought under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/1 et seq., as well as claims for breach of contract and unjust enrichment. The case has been brought as a putative class action on behalf of all customers of HCC who entered into a written contract and have paid a fuel surcharge from 2005 to present. The Circuit Court granted Plaintiffs' request for class certification on August 28, 2018. Heritage-Crystal Clean said, "We have petitioned the Illinois Court of Appeals for an interlocutory appeal of this order. As of September 9, 2018, no liability was accrued related to this lawsuit." Heritage-Crystal Clean, Inc., through its subsidiary, Heritage-Crystal Clean, LLC, provides parts cleaning, and hazardous and non-hazardous containerized waste services to small and mid-sized customers in the vehicle maintenance and manufacturing services industries in North America. It operates in two segments, Environmental Services and Oil Business. Heritage-Crystal Clean, Inc. was incorporated in 2007 and is headquartered in Elgin, Illinois. HERTZ CORP: Mahe Seeks Overtime Wages under Labor Code ------------------------------------------------------ ANAFOLIAKI MAHE, individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated persons, the Plaintiff, vs. THE HERTZ CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. 18CV335826 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), alleges that the Defendants failed to pay commission wages in breach of contract and failed to pay overtime wages in violation of the California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Defendants hired Plaintiff and the other class members as hourly-paid and commissioned sales employees, and failed to compensate them for all commission wages and overtime earned. The Defendants failed to provide the Plaintiff and the class members a commission plan that was applicable to their employment. The Plaintiff and the putative class members did not know how their commissions were calculated and had to ask their managers for copies of the Defendants' existing commission plan, the lawsuit says. Hertz Corporation, a subsidiary of Hertz Global Holdings Inc., is an American car rental company based in Estero, Florida that operates 9,700 international corporate and franchisee locations.[BN] Attorney for Plaintiff: Yse Kuzucuoglu, Esq. AK EMPLOYMENT LAW OFFICE 9 Pier, The Embarcadero, Suite 100 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 638-9471 E-mail: ayse@aklaw.co HESKA CORP: Agreement in Principle Reached in Fauley TCPA Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- Heska Corporation said in its Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed on October 16, 2018, that an agreement in principle has been entered between the company and Shaun Fauley. On October 10, 2018, Heska Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), entered into an agreement in principle to settle the complaint that was filed against it on March 12, 2015 by Shaun Fauley in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (the "Court") alleging the Company's transmittal of unauthorized faxes in violation of the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, as amended by the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005 (the "TCPA"), as a putative class action seeking stated damages of the greater of actual monetary loss or five hundred dollars per violation. The litigation is described in the Company's periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"), including in the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q filed for the quarter ended June 30, 2018. On August 24, 2018, the Court entered an order certifying a class in the case, and on September 7, 2018 the Company filed a Motion for Reconsideration of this Order, which remains pending. The parties agreed to mediate the dispute before the Hon. James Holderman (ret.) of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and the agreement in principle to settle the case was reached at the mediation. Heska said, "The settlement of this lawsuit remains subject to the execution of a written settlement agreement executed by the parties and the approval of such settlement by the Court. If approved by the Court, the Company would receive a full release from the settlement class, other than from those class members who timely elect to opt out of the settlement, concerning the claims asserted, or that could have been asserted, with respect to the conduct alleged in the complaint, and would make available a total of $6.75 million to pay class members, an incentive payment to the class representative, notice and administration costs in connection with the settlement, and attorneys' fees and expenses to legal counsel to the class. The Company has recorded an estimated loss provision of approximately $6.9 million in the third quarter of 2018 in connection with the settlement agreement and expenses associated with the matter; such amounts were not contemplated in the Company's original outlook range for the quarter(s) or full year of 2018." The Company has denied and continues to deny the allegations of Shaun Fauley and that it violated the TCPA. Nothing in this report or any settlement agreement shall be deemed to assign or reflect any admission of fault, wrongdoing or liability as to the Company, or of the appropriateness of a class action in such litigation. Heska Corporation manufactures, sells, and markets veterinary diagnostic and specialty products for canine and feline healthcare markets in the United States, Canada, Europe, and internationally. Heska Corporation was founded in 1988 and is headquartered in Loveland, Colorado. HK ENTERPRISES: Underpays Hair Stylists, Benitez et al. Allege -------------------------------------------------------------- DILCIA BENITEZ; TANIA FUENTES; and DANIEL EKINE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HK ENTERPRISES, INC.; CORONADO GROUP LLC; and BEANTOWN GROUP, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 18-3105A (Mass. Super., Suffolk Cty., Oct. 4, 2018) seeks to recover unpaid wages and overtime compensation. Ms. Benitez and Mr. Ekine were employed by the Defendants as hair stylists. Ms. Fuentes was employed as administrative staff. The Defendants operate Supercuts Salons in California, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island. The Defendants are family-owned and operated since 1981. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David B. Summer, Esq. 100 State Street, Suite 900 Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 695-0050 Facsimile: (617) 695-0055 ILLINOIS: Powell et al. Suit Alleges Disabilities Act Violations ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against The State of Illinois. The case is captioned as DEMETRIA POWELL, as guardian ad litem and on behalf of her son D.P.; TANYA REESE, as guardian ad litem and on behalf of her son M.R.; and TYWANNA PATRICK, as guardian ad litem and on behalf of her granddaughter J.C., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. THE STATE OF ILLINOIS; BRUCE RAUNER, Governor of the State of Illinois; ILLINOIS DEPARTMENT OF STATE POLICE; LEO P SCHMITZ, Director of the Illinois Department of State Police, Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-06675 (N.D. Ill., Oct. 3, 2018). The lawsuit alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is assigned to Honorable Joan B. Gottschall. The State of Illinois is located in the Midwestern region of the United States. The State provides a full range of services including education, health, safety, and transportation. Illinois has an economy that is primarily based on manufacturing, agriculture, and coal mining. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas Howard Geoghegan, Esq. Michael Schorsch, Esq. Michael Paul Persoon, Esq. DESPRES SCHWARTZ & GEOGHEGAN 77 West Washington Street, Suite 711 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 372-2511 E-mail: admin@dsgchicago.com mschorsch@dsgchicago.com mpersoon@dsgchicago.com ILLUMINA INC: Faces Van Der Wall and Romanoff Securities Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- BRADEN VAN DER WALL and STEVEN ROMANOFF, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated persons, the Plaintiffs, vs. ILLUMINA, INC., FRANCIS A. DESOUZA, and MARC A. STAPLEY, the Defendants, Case No.: 3:18-cv-02307-JLS-JLB (S.D. Cal., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover damages caused by the Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws. According to the complaint, the case is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or entities, other than the Defendants, Illumina's directors and officers, and their families and affiliates, who purchased or otherwise acquired Illumina common stock between July 26, 2016, and October 10, 2016, inclusive. The Defendants provided investors with material information concerning Illumina's revenue and sales for the third quarter of fiscal 2016. The Defendants' statements included, among other things, that Illumina's pipeline of sales supported Defendants' decision to forecast revenue of $625 million to $630 million for the quarter and increase its earnings-per-share estimates from between $3.35 per share and $3.45 per share to between $3.48 per share and $3.58 per share. The Defendants' statements in this regard prompted an immediate and dramatic increase in the price of Illumina's common stock. From a closing price of $150.10 per share on July 26, 2016 at the start of the Class Period, Illumina's stock price climbed to $162.25 the following day on July 27 on unusually high volume. The Defendants provided these overwhelmingly positive statements to investors while, at the same time, omitting to tell the public that Illumina's internal controls and forecasting processes were materially flawed. Prior to and during the third quarter of fiscal 2016, Illumina had been experiencing a material decline in sales of its traditional "HiSeq" sequencing instrument. The decline in sales, which the Defendants would later refer to as a "trend" that had been "building" for some time and "didn’t show up suddenly" during the third quarter, went unnoticed during the forecasting process. The fact that the Defendants failed to account for this "trend" when providing investors with materially strong guidance shows that the Defendants deliberately disregarded the "trend" during the Class Period and, therefore, acted with scienter, the lawsuit says. Attorneys for Braden Van Der Wall and Steven Romanoff and Lead Counsel for Class: Adam M. Apton, Esq. Nicholas I. Porritt, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP 445 South Figueroa Street, 31st Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 985 7290 E-mail: aapton@zlk.com nporritt@zlk.com J.R. SIMPLOT: Arroyo Sues over Use of Consumer Credit Reports ------------------------------------------------------------- LUIS ARROYO, on behalf of himself others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs J.R. SIMPLOT COMPANY, a Nevada corporation; and DOES I through 50, inclusive, the Defedants, Case No. 18CV335800 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), Seeks compensatory and punitive damages due to the Defendants' systematic and willful violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act, and the California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants routinely acquire consumer, investigative consumer and/or consumer credit reports to conduct background checks on the Plaintiff and other prospective, current and former employees and use information from credit and background reports in connection with their hiring process without providing proper disclosures and obtaining proper authorization in compliance with the law.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Shaun Setareh, Esq. Thomas Segal, Esq. Farrah Grant, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 315 South Beverly Drive, Suite 315 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone (310) 888-7771 Facsimile (310) 888-0109 E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com thornas@setarehlaw.com farrah@setarehlaw.com JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS: Court Denies Bid to Certify Class as Moot ---------------------------------------------------------------- JORGE MIGUEL PALACIOS and JESUS EDUARDO CARDENAS LOZOYA, the Plaintiffs, vs. JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS et al., the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-00026-RJC-DSC (W.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Robert J. Conrad., Jr. entered an order on September 29, 2018: 1. adopting the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation; 2. granting the Federal Defendants-Respondents' motion to dismiss; 3. denying as moot the Defendant White's motion to dismiss; 4. denying as moot the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class; and 5. directing the Clerk of Court to close this case. The Court said, "Defendants have moved to dismiss this case alleging that (1) Plaintiffs' release from detention renders their claims moot and deprives them of standing to bring this action and (2) this Court lacks federal subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' case. The Magistrate Judge disagreed with Defendants' first argument and found that the relation back doctrine applies in this case, giving Plaintiffs standing. No parties challenged this determination, so the Court need not analyze the M&R's standing determination. Regarding Defendants' second argument, the Magistrate agreed with Defendants and held that this Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over Plaintiffs' claims. Specifically, the Magistrate held that, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. section 1226(e) as well as 8 U.S.C. section 1252(a)(2)(B)(ii), this Court lacks jurisdiction over the Immigration Judges' ("IJs") discretionary determination that the Charlotte Immigration Court is an improper venue for Plaintiffs' bond motions. Because the M&R recommended that the Court dismiss Plaintiffs' claims on jurisdictional grounds, it found that "it is not necessary for the Court to reach the merits of [Defendant] White's Motion" and recommended that it be denied as moot. The Plaintiff now objects to the Magistrate Judge's M&R, arguing that the M&R erred in the following ways: (1) the M&R mischaracterized the challenged policy and erred in finding Plaintiffs' claims are based on discretionary determinations; (2) due to the M&R's mischaracterization of the challenged policy as discretionary, the M&R incorrectly found that this Court does not have jurisdiction; and (3) the M&R incorrectly neglected to adjudicate Defendant White's Motion to Dismiss."[CC] JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Rodriguez Sues over Sale of Talcum Powder ------------------------------------------------------------ VIRGINIA RODRIGUEZ, the Plaintiffs, vs. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business, the Defendants, Case No. 18CV335766 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover damages as a result of the Defendants' negligence, negligent failure to warn strict liability failure to warn, and design defect. According to the complaint, the Defendants were engaged in the business of placing the Products into the stream of commerce by designing, manufacturing, marketing, packaging, labeling, distributing and/or selling the Products Californians, including Plaintiff, and that JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC. designed, developed, manufactured, tested, packaged, promoted, marketed, advertised, distributed, labeled, and sold the PRODUCTS to consumers, and IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC. mined, extracted, sorted, milled, processed, treated, processed, formulated, packaged, sold, and shipped the talcum powder that comprises the PRODUCTS to JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC. for sale, without substantial change, to the general public worldwide and in the state of California. Despite the mounting scientific and medical evidence regarding talc use and ovarian cancer development over the past several decades, none of the warnings on product labels or in other marketing informed users, or similarly situated individuals, that use of the Products in the genital area could lead to an increased risk of ovarian cancer. For example, the only warnings on the Baby Powder label are to "keep powder away from child's face to avoid inhalation, which can cause breathing problems," and to "avoid contact with eyes", the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Lee Cirsch, Esq. Michael Akselrud, Esq. THE LANIER LAW FIRM, PC 21550 Oxnard Street, 3rd Floor Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (310) 277 5100 Facsimile: (310) 277 5103 E-mail: lee.cirsch@lanierlawfirm.com michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Vassell Sues over Sale of Talcum Powder ---------------------------------------------------------- BARRINGTON VASSELL, the Plaintiffs, vs. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business, the Defendants, Case No. 18CV335761 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover damages as a result of the Defendants' negligence, negligent failure to warn strict liability failure to warn, and design defect. According to the complaint, the Defendants were engaged in the business of placing the Products into the stream of commerce by designing, manufacturing, marketing, packaging, labeling, distributing and/or selling the Products Californians, including Plaintiff, and that JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC. designed, developed, manufactured, tested, packaged, promoted, marketed, advertised, distributed, labeled, and sold the PRODUCTS to consumers, and IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC. mined, extracted, sorted, milled, processed, treated, processed, formulated, packaged, sold, and shipped the talcum powder that comprises the PRODUCTS to JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC. for sale, without substantial change, to the general public worldwide and in the state of California. Despite the mounting scientific and medical evidence regarding talc use and ovarian cancer development over the past several decades, none of the warnings on product labels or in other marketing informed users, or similarly situated individuals, that use of the Products in the genital area could lead to an increased risk of ovarian cancer. For example, the only warnings on the Baby Powder label are to "keep powder away from child's face to avoid inhalation, which can cause breathing problems," and to "avoid contact with eyes", the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Lee Cirsch, Esq. Michael Akselrud, Esq. THE LANIER LAW FIRM, PC 21550 Oxnard Street, 3rd Floor Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (310) 277 5100 Facsimile: (310) 277 5103 E-mail: lee.cirsch@lanierlawfirm.com michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Zachary Sues over Sale of Talcum Powder ---------------------------------------------------------- ERIN ZACHARY, the Plaintiff, vs. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of business, the Defendants, Case No. 18CV335760 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover damages as a result of the Defendants' negligence, negligent failure to warn strict liability failure to warn, and design defect of their talcum-based products. Johnson & Johnson designed, developed, manufactured, tested, packaged, promoted, marketed, advertised, distributed, labeled, and sold the products to consumers, and Imerys mined, extracted, sorted, milled, processed, treated, processed, formulated, packaged, sold, and shipped the talcum powder that comprises the products to Johnson & Johnson. Despite the mounting scientific and medical evidence regarding talc use and ovarian cancer development over the past several decades, none of the warnings on product labels or in other marketing informed users, or similarly situated individuals, that use of the Products in the genital area could lead to an increased risk of ovarian cancer. For example, the only warnings on the Baby Powder label are to "keep powder away from child's face to avoid inhalation, which can cause breathing problems," and to "avoid contact with eyes", the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Lee Cirsch, Esq. Michael Akselrud, Esq. THE LANIER LAW FIRM, PC 21550 Oxnard Street, 3rd Floor Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Telephone: (310) 277 5100 Facsimile: (310) 277 5103 E-mail: lee.cirsch@lanierlawfirm.com michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com JONATHAN NEIL: Can File Objections to Brown FDCA Suit Notice ------------------------------------------------------------ In the case, TERI BROWN, Plaintiff, v. JONATHAN NEIL AND ASSOCIATES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:17-cv-00675-SAB (E.D. Cal.), Magistrate Judge Stanley E. Boone of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California ordered the Defendant to file any objections to the proposed class action notice within five days of the date of entry of the Order. On Aug. 29, 2018, an order issued granting the Plaintiff's motion for class certification. The order directed the Plaintiff to file a proposed class action notice for the Court's approval within 20 days. On Sept. 18, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a proposed class action notice. Thus, the Magistrate Judge provided the Defendant with the opportunity to file objections to the notice to the class. A full-text copy of the Court's Sept. 18, 2018 Order is available at https://is.gd/3RZt4w from Leagle.com. Teri Brown, Plaintiff, represented by Ari H. Marcus -- Ari@MarcusZelman.com -- Marcus & Zelman, LLC, pro hac vice, Yitzchak Zelman -- Yzelman@MarcusZelman.com -- Marcus & Zelman, LLC, pro hac vice & Tammy L. Hussin -- Tammy@HussinLaw.com -- Hussin Law. Jonathan Neil and Associates, Inc., Defendant, epresented by Christopher Michael Egan -- cegan@porterscott.com -- Porter Scott, APC, Derek Joseph Haynes -- dhaynes@porterscott.com -- Porter Scott, PC & Lynette Mary Komar -- lkomar@porterscott.com -- Porter Scott. JP MORGAN CHASE: Sandel Alleges Wrongful Debt Collections --------------------------------------------------------- JOEL SANDEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JP MORGAN CHASE & CO. & MRS ASSOCIATES, Defendant, Case No. 7:18-cv-09062-KMK (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 3, 2018) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. JPMorgan Chase & Co. operates as a financial services company worldwide. As of October 1, 2018, the company operated through a network of approximately 5,100 branches. JPMorgan Chase & Co. was founded in 1799 and is headquartered in New York, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Edward B. Geller, Esq. EDWARD B. GELLER, ESQ., P.C. M. HARVEY REPHEN & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 15 Landing Way Bronx, NY 10464 Telephone: (914) 473-6783 K2M GROUP: Preliminary Injunction Sought in Brown Class Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ K2M Group Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed on October 18, 2018, 2018, that a motion for a preliminary injunction has been filed in the case Brown vs K2M Group Holdings, Inc. et al., seeking to enjoin the shareholder vote on the Merger pending the disclosure of additional information. As part of the parties' continuing cooperation with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") and in order to provide the FTC with additional time for review, on October 17, 2018, Stryker Corporation ("Stryker") re-filed its premerger notification with the FTC and the U.S. Department of Justice under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976 (the "HSR Act") in connection with the previously announced Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of August 29, 2018 (the "Merger Agreement"), by and among K2M Group Holdings, Inc. ("K2M"), Stryker, and Austin Merger Sub Corp., a Delaware corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Stryker ("Merger Sub"), pursuant to which, on the terms and subject to the conditions therein, Merger Sub will merge with and into K2M, with K2M surviving the merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of Stryker (the "Merger"). The notification initiated a new waiting period under the HSR Act that will expire on November 16, 2018, unless extended by a request for further information or terminated earlier. On October 11, 2018, two purported class action lawsuits were filed in in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, challenging the Merger. These actions, Brown vs K2M Group Holdings, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-01567-UNA (filed Oct. 11, 2018) and Franchi vs K2M Group Holdings, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-01568-UNA (filed Oct. 11, 2018), name K2M and individual officers and members of the K2M Board of Directors as defendants. These lawsuits allege, among other things, that the defendants failed to disclose certain information relating to K2M's financial projections set forth in the proxy statement filed with the SEC. On October 17, 2018, plaintiff in the Brown lawsuit filed a motion for a preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the shareholder vote on the Merger pending the disclosure of additional information. The defendants believe these lawsuits are wholly without merit, and intend to vigorously defend against them. K2M Group said, "As previously announced, a special meeting of K2M stockholders to, among other things, consider and vote on a proposal to adopt the Merger Agreement will be held on November 7, 2018. K2M continues to anticipate completing the Merger in the fourth quarter of 2018." K2M Group Holdings, Inc., a medical device company, provides spine and minimally invasive solutions in the United States and internationally. The company offers implants, disposables, and instruments primarily to hospitals for use by spine surgeons to treat spinal pathologies, such as deformity, trauma, and tumor. The company was founded in 2004 and is headquartered in Leesburg, Virginia. KINDER MORGAN: Brinckerhoff Class Action Concluded -------------------------------------------------- Kinder Morgan, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 1, 2018, that the Court dismissed the class action lawsuit filed by Peter Brinckerhoff, in its entirety, and that dismissal is final. In April 2017, a purported class action suit was filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery by Peter Brinckerhoff, a former El Paso Pipeline Partners, L.P. (EPB) unitholder on behalf of a class of former unaffiliated unitholders of EPB, seeking to challenge the $9.2 billion merger of EPB into a subsidiary of Kinder Morgan, Inc. (KMI) as part of a series of transactions in November 2014 whereby KMI acquired all of the outstanding equity interests in Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. (KMP), Kinder Morgan Management, LLC and EPB that KMI and its subsidiaries did not already own. The suit alleged that the merger consideration did not sufficiently compensate EPB unitholders for the value of three derivative suits concerning drop down transactions which the derivative plaintiff lost standing to pursue after the merger. The suit claimed that the alleged failure to obtain sufficient merger consideration for the drop down lawsuits constituted a breach of the EPB limited partnership agreement and the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The suit also asserted claims against KMI and certain individual defendants for allegedly tortiously interfering with and/or aiding and abetting the alleged breach of the limited partnership agreement. In November 2017, the Court dismissed the suit in its entirety. On June 8, 2018, the Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal. Also in November 2017, counsel for Brinckerhoff filed a separate lawsuit against Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. (KMEP) and KMI seeking to recover up to $44 million in attorneys' fees allegedly incurred in connection with the assertion of derivative claims that Brinckerhoff lost standing to pursue. On April 9, 2018, the Court dismissed the suit in its entirety, and that dismissal is final. Kinder Morgan, Inc. operates as an energy infrastructure company in North America. It operates through Natural Gas Pipelines, CO2, Terminals, Products Pipelines, and Kinder Morgan Canada segments. The company was formerly known as Kinder Morgan Holdco LLC and changed its name to Kinder Morgan, Inc. in February 2011. Kinder Morgan, Inc. was founded in 1936 and is headquartered in Houston, Texas. KINDER MORGAN: Says Landowner Litigation Settled and Dismissed -------------------------------------------------------------- Kinder Morgan, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 1, 2018, that all pending lawsuits relating to the Union Pacific Railroad Company Easements Landowner Litigation, have been settled and dismissed on terms that are not material to KMI's results of operations, cash flows or dividends to shareholders. A purported class action lawsuit was filed in 2015 in a U.S. District Court in California against Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR), SFPP, KMGP and Kinder Morgan Operating L.P. "D" by private landowners who claimed to be the lawful owners of subsurface real property allegedly used or occupied by UPRR or SFPP for pipeline easements on rights-of-way held by UPRR. Substantially similar follow-on lawsuits were filed in federal courts by landowners in Nevada, Arizona and New Mexico. These suits, which were brought purportedly as class actions on behalf of all landowners who own land in fee adjacent to and underlying the railroad easement under which the SFPP pipeline is located in those respective states, asserted claims against UPRR, SFPP, KMGP, and Kinder Morgan Operating L.P. "D" alleging that the defendants' occupation and use of the subsurface real property was improper. Plaintiffs' motions for class certification were denied by the federal courts in Arizona and California. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied interlocutory review of the class certification decisions. The New Mexico and Nevada lawsuits were stayed. All pending lawsuits have been settled and dismissed on terms that are not material to KMI's results of operations, cash flows or dividends to shareholders. Kinder Morgan, Inc. operates as an energy infrastructure company in North America. It operates through Natural Gas Pipelines, CO2, Terminals, Products Pipelines, and Kinder Morgan Canada segments. The company was formerly known as Kinder Morgan Holdco LLC and changed its name to Kinder Morgan, Inc. in February 2011. Kinder Morgan, Inc. was founded in 1936 and is headquartered in Houston, Texas. KINDER MORGAN: Wisconsin Purchasers Class Action Ongoing -------------------------------------------------------- Kinder Morgan, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 1, 2018, that the company continues to defend itself from a Wisconsin class action suit involving the purchase of natural gas. Beginning in 2003, several lawsuits were filed by purchasers of natural gas against El Paso Corporation, El Paso Marketing L.P. and numerous other energy companies based on a claim under state antitrust law that such defendants conspired to manipulate the price of natural gas by providing false price information to industry trade publications that published gas indices. Several of the cases have been settled or dismissed. The remaining cases, which are pending in a U.S. District Court in Nevada, include a lawsuit brought by an industrial consumer in Kansas in which approximately $500 million in damages plus interest has been alleged against all defendants, and a Wisconsin class action in which approximately $300 million in damages plus interest has been alleged against all defendants. In the Wisconsin class action, the U.S. District Court denied plaintiff's motion for class certification, but on appeal the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals remanded the case with instructions to the U.S. District Court to provide a more detailed analysis of class certification issues. Kinder Morgan said, "There remains significant uncertainty regarding the validity of the causes of action, the damages asserted and the level of damages, if any, which may be allocated to us in the remaining lawsuits and therefore, our legal exposure, if any, and costs are not currently determinable." Kinder Morgan, Inc. operates as an energy infrastructure company in North America. It operates through Natural Gas Pipelines, CO2, Terminals, Products Pipelines, and Kinder Morgan Canada segments. The company was formerly known as Kinder Morgan Holdco LLC and changed its name to Kinder Morgan, Inc. in February 2011. Kinder Morgan, Inc. was founded in 1936 and is headquartered in Houston, Texas. KRAFT FOODS: Ploss Seeks to Certify Class ----------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as HARRY PLOSS, as Trustee for the HARRY PLOSS TRUST DTD 8/16/1993, on behalf of Plaintiff and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs KRAFT FOODS GROUP, INC. and MONDELEZ GLOBAL LLC, the Defendants, Case: 1:15-cv-02937 (N.D. Ill.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an Order: 1. certifying this case as a class action on behalf of all persons who or which: a. purchased a CBT December 2011 or a CBT March 2012 futures contract after October 31, 2011 except that purchases of CBT March 2012 futures contracts made after December 14, 2011, qualify for inclusion in the Class only to the extent they were made in liquidation of a short position in the CBT March 2012 contract (whether an outright short position or as part of a spread position) which was sold between November 1 and December 14, 2011 inclusive; or b. sold put options or purchased call options on the CBT December 2011 contract or on the CBT March 2012 contract after October 31, 2011 except that sales of put options or purchases of call options on the CBT March 2012 contracts made after December 14, 2011, qualify for inclusion in the Class only to the extent they were made in liquidation of a position in the CBT March 2012 contract (whether an outright position or as part of a spread position) which was initiated between November 1 and December 14, 2011 inclusive. Excluded from the Class are Cargill, Inc., the Defendants and any parent, subsidiary, affiliate or Confidential agent of any Defendant. 2. appointing Plaintiffs as the representative of the Class; and 3. appointing Lovell Stewart Halebian Jacobson LLP and Lowey Dannenberg, P.C. as Class Counsel. [CC] Interim Class Counsel: Christopher Lovell, Esq. Christopher McGrath, Esq. LOVELL STEWART HALEBIAN JACOBSON LLP 61 Broadway, Suite 501 New York, NY 10006 Telephone: (212) 608-1900 - and - Vincent Briganti, Esq. Lee J. Lefkowitz, Esq. Raymond Girnys, Esq. LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C. 44 South Broadway, Suite 1100 White Plains, NY 10601 Telephone: (914) 997 0500 LIONBRIDGE TECH: Pension Fund Seeks to Certify Stockholders Class ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LABORERS' LOCAL No. 231 PENSION FUND, the Plaintiff. vs. RORY J. COWAN, et al., the Defendants, Case 1:17-cv-00478-CFC (D. Del.), the Court on Oct. 5, 2018, entered an order: 1. certifying a class of: "all holders of Lionbridge Technologies, Inc., common stock on the record date, January 27, 2017, who were entitled to vote on the merger of Lionbridge and HIG and suffered loss as a result of Defendants violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in connection with the merger of Lionbridge and HIG as alleged in the litigation." Excluded from the class are Defendants, the officers and directors of Lionbridge at all relevant times, members of their immediate families and their legal representatives, heirs, successors, or assignees, and any entity in which Defendants have or had a controlling interest. 2. appointing Laborers' Local No. 231 Pension Fund as class representative and appointing Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP as class counsel; and 3. directing parties to provide Court with a proposed form of notice to the class by October 26, 2018.[CC] LOANCARE LLC: Sanders Sues over Debt Collection Practices --------------------------------------------------------- ANDREA S. SANDERS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LOANCARE, LLC; CIT BANK, N.A.; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC723967 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 3, 2018) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. Loancare, LLC is a Virginia limited liability company provides loan servicing solutions [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher P. Ridout, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED LLP 2381 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 328 Manhattan Beach, CA 90245 Telephone: (877) 500-8780 Facsimile: (877) 500-8781 E-mail: christopher.ridout@zimmreed.com LOOMIS INTERNATIONAL: Eisenberg Seeks Unpaid OT under Labor Code ---------------------------------------------------------------- TRACIE EISENBERG individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. LOOMIS INTERNATIONAL (US) INC., VIA MAT INTERNATIONAL (USA) INC. d/b/a LOOMIS INTERNATIONAL (US) INC., and related or affiliated entities, the Defendants, Case No.: 159217/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover for unpaid overtime compensation pursuant to the New York Labor Law. The Plaintiff and a putative class consist of salaried non-exempt employees who worked for and on behalf of the Defendants within the state of New York from October 4, 2012 to the present. The Defendants maintained a policy and practice of paying the Plaintiff on a salary basis even when she performed non-exempt work. According to the complaint, this misclassification did not just occur to Plaintiff. The Defendants would also compensate individuals who worked in other departments on a salary basis even though they performed non-exempt work. These workers include, but are not limited to, customer service representatives and order fulfillment workers In weeks when Named Plaintiff and members of the putative class worked in excess of 40 hours in a week, the Defendants failed to pay them overtime at a rate of one and one half times their regular rate of pay, the lawsuit says. Loomis International, Inc. provides internal tubular testing services to the oil and gas industry. The company offers tubular make-up, torque turn, and torque monitoring services; and internal and external hydro and helium testing services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Lloyd R. Ambinder, Esq. Jack L. Newhouse, Esq. VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP 40 Broad Street, 7th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 943-9080 Facsimile: (212) 943-9082 E-mail: jnewhouse@vandallp.com LOS ANGELES, CA: Certification of Collective Action Sought ---------------------------------------------------------- THOMAS FERGUSON, and MIGUEL ORTEGA, on behalf of themselves and other similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiffs, vs. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, the Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-06861-DSF-KK (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court on November 5, 2018, for an order conditionally certifying collective action for violations by the Defendant of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and granting leave to notify similarly situated class members, as authorized by the United States Supreme Court in Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 (1989) ("Hoffmann-La Roche").[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Harry S. Stern, Esq. Timothy K. Talbot, Esq. Jacob A. Kalinski, Esq. Peter A. Hoffman, Esq. Nicole R. Castronovo, Esq. RAINS LUCIA STERN ST. PHALLE & SILVER, PC 1428 2nd Street, Suite 200 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: (310) 393 1486 Facsimile: (310) 395 5801 E-mail: HStern@RLSlawyers.com - and - William B. Aitchison, Esq. PUBLIC SAFETY LABOR GROUP 3021 NE Broadway Street Portland, OR 97232 Telephone: (866) 486-5556 Facsimile: (866) 401-2201 E-mail: Will@PSLGlawyers.com LYFT INC: Underpays and Misclassifies Drivers, Wickerberg Says -------------------------------------------------------------- ERIC WICKBERG, on behalf of himself and and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. LYFT, INC., the Defendant, Case 1:18-cv-12094-RGS (D. Mass., Oct. 5, 2018), alleges that Lyft has misclassified its drivers, including Plaintiff Eric Wickberg, in violation of Mass. Gen. Law. According to the complaint, as a result of this misclassification, the drivers have had to bear expenses that should be borne by the employer. For example, drivers have had to pay expenses to own or lease a vehicle and maintain and fuel it, as well as phone/data expenses. Lyft has also failed to ensure that its drivers are paid at least the full minimum wage in violation of Mass. Gen. Law. Finally Lyft has also failed to pay its drivers the overtime premium for all hours worked beyond 40 per week, the lawsuit says. Lyft is a car service which engages drivers across the state of Massachusetts to transports riders.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. Adelaide Pagano, Esq. Anne Kramer, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994 5800 Facsimile: (617) 994 5801 E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com apagano@llrlaw.com akramer@llrlaw.com MACY'S WEST: Removes Tessitore & Mallon Suit to S.D. California --------------------------------------------------------------- Macy's West Stores, Inc. removed the case captioned as CRAIG TESSITORE and SARAH MALLON, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. MACY'S WEST STORES, INC., and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. 37-2018-00044691-CU-OE-CTL, from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. The Southern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:18-cv-02343-DMS-KSC to the proceeding. The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant failed to timely pay all wages to putative class members following their termination of employment because, among other allegations, it had previously deducted wages from their earned commissions pursuant to its "illegal Price Adjustment Chargeback policy" and its "illegal Even Exchange Chargeback policy" and did not pay them "these wages at the time of termination or resignation."[BN] Attorney for Defendant: Maria C. Roberts, Esq. GREENE & ROBERTS, LLP 402 West Broadway, Suite 1025 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619-398-3400 Facsimile: 619-330-4907 E-mail: mroberts@greeneroberts.com MARYLAND MARKETSOURCE: Esparza Suit Moved to E.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------ Johnny Esparza, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Petitioner, vs. Maryland Marketsource, Inc., a Maryland corporation; Allegis Group, Inc., a Maryland corporation; and Allegis Group Holdings, Inc., a Maryland corporation, the Respondents, Case No. 3:18-cv-02971, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court Eastern District of California (Sacramento) on Oct. 3, 2018. The Eastern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 18-cv-02688-TLN-KJN. The lawsuit alleges consumer credit related violation. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Troy L. Nunley.[BN] Attorneys for Petitioner: Chaim Shaun Setareh LAW OFFICES OF SHAUN SETAREH 9454 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 907 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (310) 888-7771 Facsimile: (310) 888-0109 E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com - and - Howard Scott Leviant, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 9454 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 907 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (310) 888 7771 Facsimile: (310) 888-0109 E-mail: scott@setarehlaw.com Attorneys for Respondents: Alison Sue Hightower, Esq. Kurt R. Bockes, Esq. Rod M. Fliegel, Esq. LITTLER, MENDELSON PC 650 California St., 20th Floor San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 288 6309 Facsimile: (415) 743 6642 E-mail: ahightower@littler.com kbockes@littler.com rfliegel@littler.com MCGOWEN ENTERPRISES: Court Denies Class Certification Bid as Moot ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the case, ALISON LEARY & TIMOTHY LEARY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. MCGOWEN ENTERPRISES, INC., the Defendant, Case 2:17-cv-02070-BMS (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Berle M. Schiller entered an order on October 4, 2018, denying the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification as moot.[CC] MCLAUGHLIN RESEARCH: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Hardy Suit Says --------------------------------------------------------------- ALEXANDER HARDY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MCLAUGHLIN RESEARCH CORPORATION; and DOES 1 to 50, Defendants, Case No. 37-2018-00049648-CU-0&CTL (Cal. Super., San Diego Cty., Oct. 1, 2018) alleges that the Defendants failed to pay all wages due at the time of termination or resignation, and have engaged in unfair competition and unlawful business practices. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants in California. McLaughlin Research Corporation provides engineering services for military and aerospace equipment, and military weapons. The company was formerly known as McLaughlin-Carr Associates and changed its name to McLaughlin Research Corporation in January 1947. McLaughlin Research Corporation was founded in 1941 and is based in New London, Connecticut with locations in Middletown, Rhode Island; Keyport, Washington; San Diego, California; Lexington, Massachusetts; and Arlington, Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: DARREN M. COHEN, Esq., KINGSLEY & KINGSLEY, APC 16133 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1200 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 990-8300 Facsimile: (818) 990-2903 E-mail: dcohen@kingsleykingsley.com MDL 2792: Kennedy Suit over Samsung Washing Machine Consolidated ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case, Colleen Kennedy and David Foster, on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, and Suzanne Moore, Jerry Wells, and Rose Wagner, the Intervenor Plaintiffs, vs Samsung Electronics America Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 2:14-cv-04987, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma (Oklahoma City) on Oct. 4, 2018. The Western District of Oklahoma Court Clerk assigned Case No. 5:18-cv-00975-D to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Timothy D. DeGiusti. The suit alleges Breach of Contract related violation. The lead case is Case No. 5:17-ml-02792-D. The Kennedy case is being consolidated with MDL 2792 re: SAMSUNG TOP-LOAD WASHING MACHINE MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on October 4, 2017. This litigation arises from allegations that certain Samsung top-load washing machines have design and manufacturing defects that may cause machine parts to detach, break apart, or explode during the spin cycle, and that a voluntary recall issued in November 2016 fails to provide adequate relief to consumers. In its October 4, 2017 Order, the MDL Panel found that the actions in this MDL involve common questions of fact, and that centralization will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. These putative class actions share complex factual questions arising from allegations that Samsung top-load washing machines subject to a voluntary recall issued November 4, 2016, suffer from design and manufacturing defects that manifest during the spin cycle and cause components, such as the top and drain pump, to detach, break apart, or explode. The shared factual questions include: (1) Samsung's design, testing, and manufacturing of the recalled washing machines; (2) whether defendants knew or should have known of the alleged defects; and (3) the adequacy of the recall. These common issues clearly are raised by Wagner, which alleges many of the same design flaws as the other actions, involves the same washing machine models, and presents overlapping issues concerning the adequacy of the recall remedy. Thus, Wagner will be included in the MDL. Additionally, there is substantial overlap in the putative nationwide and statewide classes in these actions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery; prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel, and the judiciary.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs Bruce Heller Nagel, Esq. Randee M. Matloff, Esq. NAGEL RICE, LLP 103 Eishenhower Parkway, Suite 201 Roseland, NJ 07068 Telephone: (973) 618 0400 Facsimile: (973) 618 9194 E-mail: rmatloff@nagelrice.com Attorneys for Intervenor Plaintiffs: Jason Louis Lichtman, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN LLP 250 Hudson River Street, 8th Floor New York, New York 10013 Telephone: (212) 355 9500 E-mail: jlichtman@lchb.com Attorneys for Samsung Electronics America Inc.: Joseph P. Lasala, Esq. MCELROY, DEUTSCH, MULVANEY & CARPENTER, LLP 1300 Mount Kemble Avenue, P.O. Box 2075 Morristown, NJ 07962-2075 Telephone: (973) 993-8100 - and - Paul Myung Han Kim, Esq. Sean Patrick Neafsey, Esq. SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS (US) LLP 30 Rockfeller Plaza, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10112 Telephone: (212) 872-9800 MDL 2792: Orenstein Suit over Washing Machine Samsung Consolidated ------------------------------------------------------------------ Mitchell Orenstein, on behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, and Suzanne Moore, Jerry Wells, and Rose Wagner, the Intervenor Plaintiffs, vs Samsung Electronics America Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 2:15-cv-04054, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma (Oklahoma City) on Oct. 4, 2018. The Western District of Oklahoma Court Clerk assigned Case No. 5:18-cv-00977-D to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Timothy D. DeGiusti. The lead case is Case No. 5:17-ml-02792-D. The Orenstein case is being consolidated with MDL 2792 re: SAMSUNG TOP-LOAD WASHING MACHINE MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES AND PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on October 4, 2017. This litigation arises from allegations that certain Samsung top-load washing machines have design and manufacturing defects that may cause machine parts to detach, break apart, or explode during the spin cycle, and that a voluntary recall issued in November 2016 fails to provide adequate relief to consumers. In its October 4, 2017 Order, the MDL Panel found that the actions in this MDL involve common questions of fact, and that centralization will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this litigation. These putative class actions share complex factual questions arising from allegations that Samsung top-load washing machines subject to a voluntary recall issued November 4, 2016, suffer from design and manufacturing defects that manifest during the spin cycle and cause components, such as the top and drain pump, to detach, break apart, or explode. The shared factual questions include: (1) Samsung's design, testing, and manufacturing of the recalled washing machines; (2) whether defendants knew or should have known of the alleged defects; and (3) the adequacy of the recall. These common issues clearly are raised by Wagner, which alleges many of the same design flaws as the other actions, involves the same washing machine models, and presents overlapping issues concerning the adequacy of the recall remedy. Thus, Wagner will be included in the MDL. Additionally, there is substantial overlap in the putative nationwide and statewide classes in these actions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery; prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties, their counsel, and the judiciary.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs Bruce Heller Nagel, Esq. Randee M. Matloff, Esq. NAGEL RICE, LLP 103 Eishenhower Parkway, Suite 201 Roseland, NJ 07068 Telephone: (973) 618 0400 Facsimile: (973) 618 9194 E-mail: rmatloff@nagelrice.com Attorneys for Intervenor Plaintiffs: Jason Louis Lichtman, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN LLP 250 Hudson River Street, 8th Floor New York, New York 10013 Telephone: (212) 355 9500 E-mail: jlichtman@lchb.com Attorneys for Samsung Electronics America Inc.: Joseph P. Lasala, Esq. MCELROY, DEUTSCH, MULVANEY & CARPENTER, LLP 1300 Mount Kemble Avenue, P.O. Box 2075 Morristown, NJ 07962-2075 Telephone: (973) 993-8100 - and - Paul Myung Han Kim, Esq. Sean Patrick Neafsey, Esq. SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS (US) LLP 30 Rockfeller Plaza, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10112 Telephone: (212) 872-9800 MDL 2804: Lopez Suit vs. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al, Consolidated --------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Lopez, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Purdue Pharma L.P., Purdue Pharma Inc.; Cephalon Inc.; Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd.; Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.; Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Johnson & Johnson; Noramco Inc.; Ortho-McNeil-Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., now known as Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Janssen Pharmaceutical Inc., now known as Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Endo Health Solutions Inc.; Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Allergan PLC, formerly known as: Actavis PLS; Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., now known as Actavis Inc.; Watson Laboratories Inc.; Actavis Pharma, Inc., formerly known as: Watson Pharma, Inc.; Actavis LLC; Mallinckrodt PLC; Mallinckrodt LLC; McKesson Corporation; Cardinal Health Inc.; AmerisourceBergen Drug Corporation; and Purdue Frederick Company, Inc., the Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-00719, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland) on Oct. 5, 2018. The Northern District of Ohio Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:18-op-46122-DAP to the proceeding. The Lopez House case is being consolidated with MDL 2804 in re: NATIONAL PRESCRIPTION OPIATE LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on December 5, 2017. These cases concern the alleged improper marketing of and inappropriate distribution of various prescription opiate medications into cities, states and towns across the country. Responding plaintiffs' positions on centralization vary considerably. Plaintiffs in over 40 actions or potential tag-along actions support centralization. Plaintiffs in 15 actions or potential tag-along actions oppose centralization altogether or oppose transfer of their action. In addition to opposing transfer, the State of West Virginia suggests that the MDL Panel delay transferring its case until the Southern District of West Virginia court decides its motion to remand to state court. Third party payor plaintiffs in an Eastern District of Pennsylvania potential tag-along action (Philadelphia Teachers Health and Welfare Fund) oppose centralization of third partypayor actions. Western District of Washington plaintiff City of Everett opposes centralization and, alternatively, requests exclusion of its case. Northern District of Illinois tag-along Plaintiff City of Chicago asks the Panel to defer transfer of its action until document discovery is completed. The Presiding Judge in the MDL is Sarah S. Vance, United States District Judge. The lead case is 1:17-md-02804-DAP.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Richard Eric Shelton, Esq. DEWSNUP KING OLSEN WOREL HAVAS MORTENSEN 36 S State St. STE 2400 Salt Lake City UT 84111-0024 Telephone: (801) 257-1554 E-mail: rshelton@dkowlaw.com MED-PHARMEX INC: Lopez Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code ---------------------------------------------------------- ALEJANDRA LOPEZ, an individual, individually, and on behalf of all other similarly situated aggrieved employees, the Plaintiff, v. MED-PHARMEX INC., a California corporation; GERALD PETER MACEDO, an individual; ANN MELINDA MACEDO, an individual; VINAY RANGNEKAR, an individual; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. BC724141 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 3, 2018), alleges that the Defendants have had a consistent policy of: (1) failing to provide aggrieved employees with uninterrupted, off-duty meal periods, or paying compensation in lieu thereof; (2) failing to provide uninterrupted, off-duty rest periods periods, or paying compensation in lieu thereof; (3) failing to provide inadequate wage statements; (4) failing to pay employees by the appropriate pay period; (5) failing to provide paid sick days; (6) failing to pay all wages by the appropriate pay period; and (7) failing to reimburse all necessary job-related expenses, pursuant to the California Labor Code. Med-Pharmex, Inc. engages in the research and development, manufacture, and formulation of generic human and veterinary drug products.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Kyle Todd, Esq. Shelby Miner, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF KYLE TODD 1055 West Seventh Street, Suite 1920 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (323) 208 9171 Facsimile: (323) 693 0822 E-mail: kyle@kyletodd.com shelby@kyletodd.com MEPHISTO INC: Faces Wu Suit in Southern District of New York ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mephisto, Inc. The case is captioned as KATHY WU, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MEPHISTO, INC., and MEPHISTO CONCEPT STORES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09119-AJN (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 4, 2018). The lawsuit alleges violation of the American with Disabilities Act. The case is assigned to Judge Alison J. Nathan. Mephisto, Inc. engages in the manufacture and sells shoes. The company offers leisure, sports, and sandal footwear; leather handbags, briefcases, wallets, and key-holders; shoe accessories; and sportswear for men and women. It also provides apparel, accessories, and watches. The company was founded in 1987 and is headquartered in Franklin, Tennessee. Mephisto, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Mephisto S.A. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dana Lauren Gottlieb, Esq. Gottlieb & Associates 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (917) 796-7437 Facsimile: (212) 982-6284 E-mail: danalgottlieb@aol.com MERCK & CO: Flynns Sue over Zostavax ------------------------------------ SUSAN FLYNN, an individual; JOHN FLYNN, an individual. the Plaintiffs, vs. MERCK & CO., INC., MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP., the Defendants, Case 2:18-cv-14883 (D.N.J., Oct. 11, 2018), alleges that Merck failed to warn the Plaintiffs and other consumers of the defective condition of Zostavax, as manufactured and/or supplied by Merck. According to the complaint, Ms. Flynn was inoculated with the Defendants' Zostavax vaccine on or about late 2016 in New York for routine health maintenance and for the prevention of shingles. The vaccine did not prevent shingles, but rather caused Plaintiff to contract a persistent strain of herpes zoster. Shortly after receiving the Zostavax vaccine, Ms. Flynn developed a blisters on her on chin, a rash on her left ear and scalp, both of which were accompanied by pain, weakness and fatigue. In response to these complaints, the Plaintiff presented to her primary care physician in New York and was diagnosed as suffering from herpes zoster. As a direct and proximate result of these malfunctions, Ms. Flynn suffered painful injuries and damages, and required extensive medical care and treatment. As a further proximate result, the Plaintiff has suffered and will continue to suffer significant medical expenses, and pain and suffering, and other damages, the lawsuit says. Merck developed, tested, designed, set specifications for, licensed, manufactured, prepared, compounded, assembled, packaged, processed, labeled, marketed, promoted, distributed, and/or sold the Zostavax vaccine to be administered to patients throughout the United States, including New Jersey.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Mark T. Sadaka, Esq., Michael H. Bowman, Esq. SADAKA ASSOCIATES, LLC 155 North Dean Street, Suite 4-D Englewood, NJ 07631 Telephone: (201) 266-5670 Facsimile: (201) 266-5671 E-mail: mark@sadakafirm.com MERCK & CO: Sansone et al. Suit Moved to E.D. Pennsylvania ---------------------------------------------------------- EMILY SANSONE and JOHN SANSONE, the Plaintiffs, vs. MERCK & CO., INC., MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP., the Defendants, Case No. 8:18-cv-02324, was removed from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Philadelphia) on Oct. 10, 2018. The Eastern District of Pennsylvania Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-20114-HB to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Harvey Bartle III. Merck & Co. is an American pharmaceutical company and one of the largest pharmaceutical companies in the world.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff Michael Goetz, Esq. Nicole Georges, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 201 North Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 223 5505 Facsimile: (813) 222 4737 E-mail: MGoetz@ForThePeople.com NGeorges@ForThePeople.com - and - Virginia E. Anello, Esq. DOUGLAS & LONDON, P.C. 59 Maiden Lane, 6th floor New York, NY 10038 Telephone: (212) 566-7500 Facsimile: (212) 566-7501 E-mail: vanello@douglasandlondon.com MERCURY PLASTICS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Torres Suit Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------------- RAUL TORRES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MERCURY PLASTICS, INC.; and DOES 1 THROUGH 10, INCLUSIVE, Defendants, Case No. BC723631 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 3, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and reimburse necessary business expenses. Mr. Torres was employed by the Defendant as a non-exempt hourly employee in California. Mercury Plastics, Inc. designs, manufactures, and markets custom thermoplastic extrusions, extruded plastic profiles, and specialized fabrications for industrial, commercial, and residential applications. Mercury Plastics, Inc. was founded in 1965 and is based in Middlefield, Ohio. As of December 31, 2017, Mercury Plastics, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Masco Corporation. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael D. Singer, Esq. Kristina De La Rosa, Esq. COHELAN KHOURY & SINGER 605 C Street, Suite 200 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 595-3001 Facsimile: (619) 595-3000 E-mail: msinger@ckslaw.CQm kdelarosa@ckslaw.com - and - Sahag Majarian II, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN II 18250 Ventura Boulevard Tarzana, CA 91356 Telephone: (818) 609-0807 Facsimile: (818) 609-0892 E-mail: sahagii@aol.com METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER: Underpays Production Crew Members, Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- A. SIMMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER STUDIOS, INC.; BABA-G PRODUCTIONS, LLC, and DOE 1 through and including DOE 10, Defendants, Case No. BC 723616 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles, Oct. 1, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and reimburse necessary business expenses. The Plaintiff Simms was employed by the Defendants as a crew member for the television program entitled Lucha Underground. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. was founded in 1919. The company's line of business includes the production of theatrical and nontheatrical motion pictures and video tapes. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alan Harris, Esq. David Garrett, Esq. Lin Zhan, Esq. HARRIS & RUBLE 655 North Central Avenue, 17th Floor Glendale CA 91203 Telephone: (323) 962-3777 Facsimile; (323) 962-3004 E-mail: barrisa@harrisandruble.com dgarrett@harrisandruble.com lzhan@harrisandruble.com METROPOLITAN 58TH: Faces Byron Breeze Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Metropolitan 58th Street Associates, LLC. The case is captioned as BYRON BREEZE, JR., individually and on behalf of all similarly situated, Plaintiff v. METROPOLITAN 58TH STREET ASSOCIATES, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09097-JMF (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 4, 2018). The case is assigned to Judge Jesse M. Furman. Metropolitan 58th Street Associates, LLC is engaged in the hotel industry. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nolan Keith Klein, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF NOLAN KLEIN, P.A. 39 Broadway, Ste. 2250 New York, NY 10006 Telephone: (646) 560-3230 Facsimile: (877) 253-2691 E-mail: klein@nklegal.com - and - Erik Mathew Bashian, Esq. BASHIAN & PAPANTONIOU, P.C 500 Old Country Road, Suite 302 Garden City, NY 11530 Telephone: (516) 279-1555 Facsimile: (516) 213-0339 E-mail: eb@bashpaplaw.com MICHAELS STORES: Armstrong Seeks to Certify 3 Classes ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as TERESA ARMSTRONG, individually, the Plaintiff, vs. MICHAELS STORES, INC., and DOES 1-100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. 5:17-cv-06540-LHK (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff will move the Court on January 3, 2019, for an order: 1. certifying a Store Opening Class defined as: "all persons employed as hourly-paid employees by Defendant in any store in California at any time on or after October 10, 2013 through the date of class certification who worked on an opening shift and was responsible for unlocking the door and other opening store tasks"; 2. certifying, a "Security Check Class" defined as: "all persons employed as hourly-paid employees by Defendant in any store in California at any time on or after October 10, 2013 through the date of class certification who went through a security check when leaving the store"; 3. certifying Reporting Time Class defined as: "all persons employed as hourly-paid employees by Defendant in any store in California at any time on or after October 10, 2013 through the date of class certification who were scheduled to work at least one shift where they were not furnished at least half that scheduled day's work"; 4. appointing Teresa Armstrong as representative of the proposed classes or later proposed and approved by the Court and any other sub-class the Court may devise; and 5. appointing Shaun Setareh, and Thomas Segal of Setareh Law Group as Class Counsel.[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiff Shaun Setareh, Esq. Thomas Segal, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 907 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (310) 888-7771 Facsimile: (310) 888-0109 E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com thomas@setarehlaw.com MIDWAY INDUSTRIES: Shepardson Seeks Overtime Pay under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------------- DALE SHEPARDSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, vs. MIDWAY INDUSTRIES, INC., and TOOL STEEL SERVICE OF CALIFORNIA, INC., the Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-03105-TLB (W.D. Ark., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover declaratory judgment, monetary damages, prejudgement interest, civil penalties and costs as a result of Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiff and other hourly-paid employees proper overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and other hourly-paid employees regularly worked in excess of 40 hours per week. It was the Defendants' common applied policy to not pay Plaintiff and other other hourly-paid employees a lawful overtime premium for all hours worked over 40 in a given week, the lawsuit says. Midway Industries, Inc. manufactures window system products. The Company offers metal doors, sash, and trim products.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Josh Sanford, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC One Financial Center 650 South Shackleford Road, Suite 411 Little Rock, AR 72211 Telephone: (501) 221 0088 Facsimile: (888) 787 2040 E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com MINNEAPOLIS, MN: Underwood Suit Moved to District of Minnesota -------------------------------------------------------------- Loren Underwood, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs City of Minneapolis, Minneapolis Police Officers, and John Does 1 through 8, the Defendants, Receipt No. AMNDC-6417578, was removed from the Hennepin County Court, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota on Oct 9, 2018. The District of Minnesota assigned Case No. 18-cv-2884 (PJS/HB) to the proceeding. The suit alleges Civil Rights Act related violation. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Patrick J. Schiltz.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: A. L. Brown, Esq. CAPITOL CITY LAW GROUP, LLC 287 East Sixth Street, Suite 20 Saint Paul, MN 55101 Telephone: (651) 705-8580 Facsimile: (651) 705-8581 E-mail: a.l.brown@cclawg.com - and - Joshua R Williams, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JOSHUA R. WILLIAMS 2836 Lyndale Avenue South, Suite 160 Minneapolis, MN 55408 Telephone: (612) 486 5540 E-mail: jwilliams@jrwilliamslaw.com Attorneys for City of Minneapolis: Burt T. Osborne, Esq. Brian Scott Carter, Esq. MINNEAPOLIS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE 350 South 5th Street-Room 210 Minneapolis, MN 55415 Telephone: (612) 554 3913 E-mail: burt.osborne@minneapolismn.gov brian.carter@minneapolismn.gov MOBIS NORTH AMERICA: Traynum and Carroll Seek Overtime Pay ---------------------------------------------------------- Adrian Traynum and Tiffany Carroll, On behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. MOBIS North America, LLC c/o CT Corporation System 4400 Easton Commons Way Suite 125 Columbus, Ohio 43219, the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-02312-JGC (N.D. Ohio, Oct. 4 2018), alleges that the Defendant failed to fully pay employees overtime wages seeking all available relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act, and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant suffered and permitted the Plaintiffs and those similarly situated Timeclock Associates to work more than 40 hours per workweek, while not fully compensating them for all such hours worked over 40 at a rate of at least one and one-half times their regular rate of pay, at a minimum, as a result of Defendant's rounding policy and/or practice. Mobis North America, LLC is engaged in the sale of auto-parts and also provides after-sales services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs and those similarly situated: Daniel I. Bryant, Esq. Matthew B. Bryant, Esq. BRYANT LEGAL, LLC 1457 S. High St. Columbus, OH 43207 Telephone: (614) 704 0546 Facsimile: (614) 573 9826 E-mail: dbryant@bryantlegalllc.com Mbryant@bryantlegalllc.com - and - Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq. COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC 1457 S. High St. Columbus, OH 43207 Telephone: (614) 949-1181 Facsimile: (614) 386-9964 E-mail: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com MONDA WINDOW: Ping Lin Suit Moved to Northern District of Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------------ JIAN PING LIN, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. MONDA WINDOW & DOOR SYSTEMS, INC. d/b/a Monda Windows & Doors d/b/a Monda Window & Door Systems, MONDA WINDOW & DOOR, CORP. d/b/a Monda Windows & Doors, MONDA WINDOW & DOOR MFG. LTD. d/b/a Monda Window & Door d/b/a Monda Window & Door Systems, WONDA LLC d/b/a Monda Window & Door d/b/a Monda Window & Door Systems, RIBIAO WANG a/k/a Ri Biao Wang, DENIS WANG, MIN OUYANG a/k/a Mindy Ouyang, DANCY LIN, and ELIAS ABUBEKER, the Defendants, Case 1:17-cv-03737, was transferred from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Oct 11, 2018. The Northern District of Illinois Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:18-cv-06848 to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Jorge L. Alonso. This action is brought by Plaintiff, on behalf of himself as well as other similarly situated employees, against the Defendants for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and of the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, and the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, arising from the Defendants' various willful and unlawful employment policies, patterns and/or practices.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs, the proposed FLSA Collective, and potential Rule 23 class: John Troy, Esq. Aaron Schweitzer, Esq. TROY LAW , PLLC 41-25 Kissena Boulevard Suite 119 Flushing, NY 11355 Telephone: (718) 762-1324 E-mail: troylaw@troypllc.com johntroy@sbcglobal.net Attorneys for Defendants: Richard A. Chen, Esq. LAW OFFFICES OF RICHARD ALAN CHEN, ESQ. 41-60 Main Street, Suite 203 Flushing, NY 11355 Telephone: (718) 886-8181 E-mail: raclawoffice3@gmail.com MONSANTO COMPANY: Fuller Sues over Sale of Herbicide Roundup ------------------------------------------------------------ MELISSA FULLER, the Plaintiff, v. MONSANTO COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 4:18-cv-01726-CAS (E.D. Mo., Oct. 10, 2018), seeks to recover damages suffered by Plaintiff, as a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup (TM), containing the active ingredient glyphosate. The Plaintiffs maintain that Roundup (TM) and/or glyphosate is defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be marketed and sold in commerce, and lacked proper warnings and directions as to the dangers associated with its use. The Plaintiff's injuries, like those striking thousands of similarly situated victims across the country, were avoidable. The Plaintiffs bring this action for personal injuries sustained by exposure to Roundup (TM), which contains the active ingredient glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA). As a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup, the Plaintiff developed diffuse Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma. Roundup refers to all formulations of Defendant's Roundup products, including, but not limited to, Roundup Concentrate Poison Ivy and Tough Brush Killer 1, Roundup Custom Herbicide, Roundup D-Pak Herbicide, Roundup Dry Concentrate, Roundup Export Herbicide, Roundup Fence & Hard Edger 1, Roundup Garden Foam Weed & Grass Killer, Roundup Grass and Weed Killer, Roundup Herbicide, Roundup Original 2k Herbicide, Roundup Original II Herbicide, Roundup Pro Concentrate, Roundup Pro Dry Herbicide, and Roundup Promax.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: D. Todd Mathews, Esq. Joseph B. Carnduff, Esq. 156 N. Main St. Edwardsville, IL 62025 Telephone: (618) 659-9833 Facsimile: (618) 659-9834 E-mail: todd@gorijulianlaw.com jcarnduff@gorijulianlaw.com MT. VIEW FARMING: Bustos Removes Own Suit to E.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------ The Plaintiff in the case of Samuel Bustos, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Mt. View Farming, Inc., Defendant, filed a notice to remove the lawsuit from Superior Court of the State of California, County of Tulare County (Case No. 275173) to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on October 4, 2018. The complaint has been assigned Case No. 1:18-cv-01380-AWI-SKO (E.D. Cal., Oct. 4, 2018). The case is assigned to District Judge Anthony W. Ishii, and referred to Magistrate Judge Sheila K. Oberto. Mt. View Farming, Inc. markets and sells grapes in California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas Henry Schelly, Esq. Lipeles Law Group, APC 880 Apollo Street, Suite 336 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (310) 322-2211 Facsimile: (310) 322-2252 E-mail: thomas@kallaw.com - and - Christina Cusimano Tillman, Esq. McCormick Barstow Sheppard Wayte and Carruth LLP 7647 N. Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93720 Telephone: (559) 433-1300 Facsimile: (559) 433-2300 MYEXPERIAN INC: Chavers Added as Plaintiff in Vinsant et al. Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. Naguishea Chavers consent to becoming a party-plaintiff on Oct. 9, 2018 to a lawsuit captioned CHARLES VINSANT, TARA BEAL, CHELSEA DYER, ASHLEY HAMILTON, ANTWAN HNEDRY, BELINDA MAXWELL, BRITTANY MORRIS, KIMBERLY ROLAND, and BETTY FULLER, Each Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. MYEXPERIAN, INC., the Defendant, Case 2:18-cv-02056-PKH (W.D. Ark.). Mr. Chavers said, "I am or was employed by MyExperian, Inc., on or after April 13, 2015, as an hourly-paid customers care specialist or customer service representative. I understand that a lawsuit is being brought against Defendant under the Fair Labor Standards Act for overtime compensation and other relief. As a current or former employee of Defendant, I consent to becoming a party-plaintiff to this lawsuit, to be represented by Sanford Law Firm PLLC, and to be found by any settlement of this action or adjudication of the Court."[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Josh Sanford, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC One Financial Center 650 south Shackleford Road, Suite 411 Little Rock, AR 72211 Telephone: (501) 221 0088 Facsimile: (888) 787 2040 E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com NATIONAL POLISHING: Charles Barkley Seeks Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------------------ CHARLES BARKLEY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL POLISHING SYSTEMS, INC., the Defendant, Case No. 5:18-cv-02377 (N.D. Ohio, Oct. 11, 2018), seeks unpaid wages, including overtime wages, and all other available relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant performs concrete work in multiple states. The Defendant employed the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals as non-exempt laborers. Laborers performed the manual tasks associated with Defendant's concrete polishing services. Defendant paid laborers on an hourly basis. Laborers were required to report to jobsites to perform the Defendant's concrete services in various states. These jobsites were frequently located hundreds of miles away from laborers' home communities. Laborers typically work at least 40 hours per workweek. Laborers typically worked multiple-day shifts away from their home communities. Because the worksites were away from their home communities, laborers typically stayed overnight in hotels during the scheduled work shifts. Laborers spent most of the day before and after their shifts driving hundreds of miles to and from the jobsites. This travel cut across Laborers' normal working hours during both regular working days and nonworking days. The Defendant did not count time spent traveling as hours worked for purposes of determining overtime eligibility. Consequently, the Defendant failed to pay proper wages, including overtime wages to the Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals. The Defendant willfully deprived laborers of proper wages, including overtime wages. Defendant knew that laborers were working overtime hours and hours for which they were not compensated at an overtime rate when they traveled to jobsites, the lawsuit says. Counsel for Plaintiff: Hans A. Nilges, Esq. Shannon M. Draher, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 7266 Portage Street, NW, Suite D Massillon, OH 44646 Telephone: (330) 470-4428 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 E-mail: hans@ohlaborlaw.com sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com NEW PRIME INC: Underpays Truck Drivers, Ratajesak Alleges --------------------------------------------------------- PAUL RATAJESAK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NEW PRIME, INC.; and DOES 1 through 25, Defendants, Case No. BC723954 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 1, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and reimburse necessary business expenses. The Plaintiff Ratajesak was employed by the Defendants as truck driver. New Prime, Inc., doing business as Prime Inc., operates as a refrigerated, flatbed, tanker, and intermodal trucking company. It serves customers in North America and internationally. The company was founded in 1970 and is based in Springfield, Missouri. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Aaron C. Gundzik, Esq. Rebecca G. Gundzik, Esq. GARTENBERG GELFAND HAYTON LLP 15260 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1920 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (213) 542-2100 Facsimile: (213) 542-2101 E-mail: agundzik@gghslaw.com rgundzik@gghslaw.com - and - Jonathan M. Lebe, Esq. LEBE LAW, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 777 S. Alameda Street, Second Floor Los Angeles, CA 90021 Telephone: (213) 358-7046 Facsimile: (310) 820-1258 E-mail: Jon@lebelaw.com NPAS INC: Collazo Sues over Debt Collection Practices ----------------------------------------------------- NYDIA REYES COLLAZO, Plaintiff, vs. NPAS, INC., a Tennessee corporation, the Defendant, Case No. 8:18-cv-02508-WFJ-AEP (M.D. Fla., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks damages, injunctive relief, and costs and attorney's fees under the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, resulting in the Defendant's failure to provide the debtors with certain information required by law and failed to disclose that it is a debt collector. In so failing, the Defendant has violated the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. According to the complaint, on or about April 28, 2018, NPAS sent Ms. Collazo a dunning letter by mail. That letter purports to relate to medical treatment obtained by Ms. Collazo at Largo Medical Center in Pinellas County, Florida, on or about February 17, 2018, in the amount of $254.96. The collection letter states that it was placed with NPAS for collection on April 28, 2018. The debt allegedly owed to Largo Medical Center was for personal, household, or family purposes and was therefore a "debt" pursuant to 15 U.S.C. section 1692a(5) and Section 559.55(6), Florida Statutes. The debt owed to Largo Medical Center was in default at the time it was placed for collection with NPAS. On information and belief, Largo Medical Center requires payment promptly after services are rendered and no later than on receipt of its invoice. Ms. Collazo had not paid the debt before April 28, 2018. In the April 28, 2018 collection letter, NPAS did not identify itself as a debt collector or state that any information obtained would be used for the purpose of collecting the debt, the lawsuit says. Attorneys for Plaintiff: Katherine E. Yanes, Esq. KYNES, MARKMAN & FELMAN, P.A. P.O. Box 3396 Tampa, FL 33601 Telephone: (813) 229 1118 Facsimile: (813) 221 6750 E-mail: kyanes@kmf-law.com - and - Brian L. Shrader, Esq. Gus M. Centrone, Esq. DUNLAP, BENNETT & LUDWIG, PLLC 612 W. Bay Street Tampa, FL 33606 Telephone: (813) 360-1529 Facsimile: (813) 336-0832 E-mail: bshrader@dbllawyers.com gcentrone@dbllawyers.com OLD DOMINION: Saenz Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------- EDUARDO A. SAENZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. OLD DOMINION FREIGHT LINE, INC., the Defendant, Case 1:18-cv-04718-CAP (N.D. Ga., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks to obtain full and complete relief for the Defendant's failure to pay overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant violated the FLSA by failing to pay the Plaintiff and the Collective Class overtime (i.e., time and one-half their regular hourly rates of pay) for all hours worked over 40 in a week. The Defendant required the Plaintiff and the Collective Class to work more than 40 hours in a week. Old Dominion Freight Line -- http://www.odfl.com-- is a less-than-truckload ("LTL") national freight and global transportation company. [BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Collective Class: Louise N. Smith, Esq. William J. Smith, Esq. SMITH LAW, LLC 3611 Braselton Highway, Suite 202 Dacula, GA 30019 Telephone: (678) 889-2898 Facsimile: (844) 828-5615 E-mail: louise@smithlaw-llc.com william@smithlaw-llc.com OLYMPIA MANAGEMENT: Dickerson Seeks OT Pay under FLSA ----------------------------------------------------- STACEY VANDERGRIFF, VICKIE DICKERSON, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. OLYMPIA MANAGEMENT INC., the Defendant, Case 4:18-cv-01635-ACA (N.D. Ala., Oct. 5, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages, unpaid overtime compensation and liquidated damages owed to Stacey Vandergriff, Vickie Dickerson and all other current and former employees similarly situated of Olympia Management Inc. for the past three years, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs and others similarly situated were required and are presently required by Defendant to treat this time as off-duty time, although such time constitutes on-duty time within the meaning of 49 C.F.R. section 395.2. The Plaintiffs and others similarly situated were not paid and at the present time are not being paid their minimum wages or overtime compensation due them by Defendant for these hours worked, in violation of 29 U.S.C.A. sections 206, 207, the lawsuit says. Olympia Management provides affordable housing community with top quality living conditions, friendly management, and security.[BN] Jeremy Schatz, Esq. THEA PATTON FIRM 3720 4th Avenue South Birmingham, AL 35222 E-mail: jschatz@thepattonfirmal.com - and - Robert L. Beeman, II, Esq. BEEMAN LAW FIRM 3720 4th Avenue South Birmingham, AL 35222 E-mail: rlbsportsmgnt12@att.net OS RESTAURANT: Removes Lloyd Briggs Suit to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The Defendant in the case of LLOYD T. BRIGGS III, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. OS RESTAURANT SERVICES, LLC; BLOOMIN BRANDS, INC., and DOES 1 through 20, Defendants, filed a notice to remove the lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles (Case No. BC719069) to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on October 1, 2018. The clerk of court for the Central District of California assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-08457-JAK-AFM (C.D. Cal., Oct. 1, 2018). The case is assigned to Judge John A. Kronstadt and referred to Magistrate Judge Alexander F. MacKinnon. OS Restaurant Services, LLC owns and operates as a restaurant in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Allen B Felahy, Esq. FELAHY EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS 550 South Hope Street Suite 2655 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (323) 645-5197 Facsimile: (323) 645-5198 E-mail: afelahy@felahylaw.com - and - Yashdeep Singh, Esq. YASH LAW GROUP 550 South Hope Street, Suite 2655 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (714) 494-6244 Facsimile: (714) 406-2722 E-mail: ysingh@yashlaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Jason C Ross, Esq. Kyle William Nageotte, Esq. James M Peterson, Esq. HIGGS FLETCHER AND MACK LLP 401 West A Street Suite 2600 San Diego, CA 92101-7913 Telephone: (619) 236-1551 Facsimile: (619) 696-1410 E-mail: rossj@higgslaw.com nageottek@higgslaw.com peterson@higgslaw.com PEP BOYS MANNY: Fails to Pay Proper OT, Jimenez Suit Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------ JUAN A. JIMENEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE PEP BOYS MANNY MOE & JACK OF CALIFORNIA; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No. BC723630 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 2, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, and provide accurate wage statements. Mr. Jimenez was employed by the Defendants as an hourly, non-exempt employee from November 11, 2016 to July 19, 2018. Pep Boys Manny, Moe & Jack Of California, Inc. offers automobile repair services. The company provides wheel alignment, oil change, and engine tune-up services. Additionally, it markets and distributes automotive parts and components. Pep Boys Manny, Moe & Jack Of California, Inc. was founded in 1932 and is headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Pep Boys Manny Moe & Jack Of California, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Pep Boys - Manny, Moe & Jack. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph Lavi, Esq. Joshua Webster, Esq. LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP 8889 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Telephone: (310) 432-0000 Facsimile: (310) 432-0001 E-mail: jlavi@lelawfirm.com jwebster@lelawfirm.com - and – Sahag Majarian II, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN II 18250 Ventura Boulevard Tarzana, CA 91356 Telephone: (818) 609-0807 Facsimile: (818) 609-0892 E-mail: sahagii@aol.com PINDUODUO INC: Roger Webb Sues over July 2018 IPO ------------------------------------------------- Roger Webb, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. PINDUODUO INC., QI LU, GEORGE YONG-BOON YEQ,ZHENWEI ZHENG, JUNYUN XIA0, HAIIFENG LIN, ZHENG HUANG, TIAN XU, LEI CHEN, ZHEN ZHANG; NANPENG SHEN, JIANMING YU, CHINA INTERNATIONAL CAPITAL CORPORATION, HONG KONG SECURITIES LIMITED, CHINA 19 RENAISSANCE SECURITIES (HONG KONG) LIMITED, CREDIT SUISSE SECURITIES (USA) LLC, and GOLDMAN SACHS (ASIA) L.L.C., the Defendants, Case No. 18CIV05509 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933. According to the complaint, on a day mid-July 2018 investment bankers from Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse hosted a meeting with investors in New York to sell the IPO of Pinduoduo, a fast growing and very young Chinese e-commerce company that some think could be the next JD.com or even Alibaba. Shortly afterwards, the stock priced at the top of its IPO range and leap 45% within a few days. But it wans't long before the hype began to wear off. After peaking a massive valuation of $35 billion, or 125 times its 2017 sales, shares of Pinduoduo began a steady decline towards the IPO price of $19. Thereafter, the stock declined below thew IPO price, making it a "broken IPO" in Wall Street jargon. The nail in the coffin was news that Chinese Regulators announced an investigation into the sale of counterfeit goods and items infringing on copyrights that have been sold on Pinduoduo's platform. Pinduoduo deals mainly in very cheap items sold between third parties, fertile ground for fake goods to be exchanged. These recent events have made it clear that Pinduoduo, its officers and directors, and the investment banks that brought the Company public made false and misleading statements in the Company's Prospectus and Registration Statement, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff Francis A, 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 PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT: Court Denies Certification of 5 Classes --------------------------------------------------------------- In the the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD L. ALLEN, et al., the Plaintiffs, vs. PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT, INC., et al., the Defendants, Case No. 17-00374-CV-W-GAF (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Gary A. Fenner entered an order on October 1, 2018, denying the Plaintiffs' motion for Rule 23 Class Certification of Missouri common law classes: -- Missouri Minimum Wage Law (MMWL) Unlawful Tip Pool Class: "all persons currently and formerly employed by Defendants within the state of Missouri in hourly positions who participated in a tip pool at any time during the two-year period preceding the filing of the instant lawsuit"; -- MMWL Time-Clock Rounding Class: "all persons currently and formerly employed by Defendants within the state of Missouri in hourly positions who worked at any time during the two-year period preceding the filing of the instant lawsuit"; -- MMWL Table Games Supervisor Class: "all persons currently and formerly employed by Defendants within the state of Missouri as Table Games Supervisors, and others with similar job titles, duties, and compensation structures who were subjected to a policy of denying compensation at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of forty in a workweek, who worked at any time during the two-year period preceding the filing of the instant lawsuit"; -- Missouri Unjust Enrichment Class: "all persons currently and formerly employed by Defendants within the state of Missouri in hourly positions or as a Table Games Supervisor who worked at any time during the five-year period preceding the filing of the instant lawsuit. -- Missouri Breach of Contract Class: "all persons currently and formerly employed by Defendants within the state of Missouri in hourly positions or as a Table Games Supervisor who worked at any time during the five-year period preceding the filing of the instant lawsuit". The Court said, "Plaintiffs have not established that questions of law or fact predominate over individualized questions for the proposed MMWL Time-Clock Rounding Class. The proposed MMWL Unlawful Tip Pool Class is not ascertainable or, in the alternative, lacks commonality. Mesplay and Kobermann are not members of the proposed MMWL Table Games Supervisor Class. For all of these reasons, the proposed Missouri common law classes fail."[CC] PJ IOWA: Court Certifies FLSA Collective Action ----------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BILLY D. FRAZIER and ANGELA KEARNS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. PJ IOWA, L.C., the Defendant, Case No. 4:17-cv-00160-JEG-HCA (S.D. Iowa), the Hon. Judge James E. Gritzner entered an order on Oct. 9, 2018: 1. granting the Plaintiffs' motion as to conditional certification of the Fair Labor Standards Act collective action claims, but denying as to Rule 23 certification of Iowa Minimum Wage Law and Iowa Wage Payment Collection Law class action claim; 2. directing to send notice of pendency of collective action to all individuals who worked for PJ Iowa as a delivery driver between March 16, 2015, and the present time; 3. approving notice and consent form, with the exception of the changes ordered above; 4. giving the Plaintiffs' counsel to have 10 days from receipt of to circulate the Notice and Consent Form via U.S. Mail; and 5. giving the Putative opt-in plaintiffs to have 60 days from the circulation of the Notice and Consent Form to opt in to this action.[CC] PPG INDUSTRIES: Trevor Mild Securities Class Action Underway ------------------------------------------------------------ PPG Industries, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 19, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the putative securities class action suit entitled, Trevor Mild v. PPG Industries, Inc., Michael H. McGarry, Vincent J. Morales, and Mark C. Kelly, remains pending. On May 20, 2018, a putative securities class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California against the Company and certain of its current or former officers. On September 21, 2018, an Amended Class Action Complaint was filed in the action. The Amended Complaint, captioned Trevor Mild v. PPG Industries, Inc., Michael H. McGarry, Vincent J. Morales, and Mark C. Kelly, asserts securities fraud claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on behalf of putative classes of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired stock of the Company during various time periods between January 19, 2017 and May 10, 2018. The allegations relate to, among other things, allegedly false and misleading statements and/or failures to disclose information about the Company's business, operations and prospects. This action remains pending. The Company believes this action is without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously. PPG Industries, Inc. manufactures and distributes paints, coatings, and specialty materials in the United States and internationally. It operates through Performance Coatings and Industrial Coatings segments. The company was founded in 1883 and is headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. PRECISION GROUP: Elizondo Suit Moved to Southern District of Texas ------------------------------------------------------------------ FELIPE ELIZONDO, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. PRECISION GROUP ENERGY SERVICES, INC. and HAROEEL A. GODINEZ, the Defendants, Case No. 5:18-cv-00597, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District Western of Texas, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Laredo) on Oct. 12, 2018. The Southern District of Texas assigned Case No.: 5:18-cv-00151. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Marina Garcia Marmolejo. According to the complaint, Mr. Felipe Elizondo brought this action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated who worked for Precision Group Energy Services, Inc., seeking all available relief, including compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.[BN] Attorneys for Felipe Elizondo Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated: Alan Clifton Gordon, Esq. Lauren E. Braddy, Esq. William Clifton Alexander, Esq. ANDERSON2X, PLLC 819 N. Upper Broadway Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 452-1279 Facsimile: (361) 452-1284 E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com - and - Jeffrey W. Hastings, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF JEFFREY W. HASTINGS 1773 Westborough Drive, Suite 105 Katy, TX 77449 Telephone: (281) 844-8436 Facsimile: (877) 373-1962 E-mail: Jeff@Jwh.Law Attorneys for Defendants: Carlos Evaristo Flores, Esq. Adolfo Gerardo Martinez, Esq. PERSON WHITWORTH BORCHERS MORALES, LLP 602 E. Calton Road, 2nd Fl Laredo, TX 78041 Telephone: (956) 727-4441 E-mail: cflores@personwhitworth.com amartinez@personwhitworth.com PRIDE N' LIVING: Reed Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------ DANIELLE REED, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. PRIDE N' LIVING HOME CARE, INC., the Defendant, Case No.: 0:18-cv-02906-PJS-DTS (D. Minn., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation under the Minnesota Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Danielle Reed, was employed by Defendant as a home care worker, specifically a Personal Care Assistant, from approximately June 2015 to June 2017. The Defendant has willfully engaged in a pattern, policy, and practice of unlawful conduct, in violation of the federal and state rights of the Plaintiff, those similarly situated, and members of the proposed Minnesota Rule 23 Class, the lawsuit says. The Defendant provides personal care, skilled and private duty nursing, pediatric services, companionship, and respite care services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Putative FLSA Collective and Minnesota Rule 23 Class: Michele R. Fisher, Esq. Neil D. Pederson, Esq. NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP 4600 IDS Center, 80 S. 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 256 3200 Facsimile: (612) 215 6870 E-mail: fisher@nka.com npederson@nka.com PVH RETAIL: Venieris Suit Goes to District of Arizona ----------------------------------------------------- PVH Retail Stores LLC removed the case captioned, PATRICK VENIERIS, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. PVH RETAIL STORES LLC, an Arizona Limited Liability Company d/b/a TOMMY HILFIGER COMPANY STORE and/or TOMMY HILFIGER, the Defendants, Case No. CV 2018-005427, filed in the Superior Court in the State of Arizona in and for the County of Maricopa, to U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona on Oct. 4, 2018. The District of Arizona Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-03161-ESW to the proceeding. On August 30, 2018, the Plaintiff Patrick Venieris filed his Class Action Complaint on behalf of himself and an alleged putative class. The Plaintiff alleges that PVH Retail deceptively and misleadingly advertises and displays its Tommy Hilfiger brand apparel as being sold at a discounted price by including a pre-discounted price on the tags. PVH Retail, doing business as Tommy Hilfiger. It was formerly known as PVH CK Stores, Inc. and changed its name to PVH Retail Stores, Inc. in February 2008.[BN] Attorneys for PVH Retail Stores LLC: Joshua Grabel, Esq. Heather Stanton, Esq. LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP 201 East Washington Street, Suite 1200 Phoenix, AZ 85004-2595 E-mail: jgrabel@lrrc.com hstanton@lrrc.com RAYMOND JAMES: Judge Denies Bid to Dismiss Class Action ------------------------------------------------------- Daniel Siegal, writing for Law360, reports that a Florida federal judge denied Raymond James' bid to toss a putative class action alleging the financial services company charges unauthorized commissions via a "processing fee".[GN] RED LION HOTELS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Alcaraz Suit Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------------- STACIE ALCARAZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. RED LION HOTELS CORPORATION; and DOES 1 THROUGH 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. CGC-18-570310 (Cal. Super., San Francisco Cty., Oct. 4, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, and provide accurate wage statements. The Plaintif Alcaraz was employed by the Defendants as non-exempt employee from September 2014 to November 2017. Red Lion Hotels Corporation, doing business as RLH Corporation, operates as a hospitality and leisure company the United States. The company was formerly known as WestCoast Hospitality Corporation and changed its name to Red Lion Hotels Corporation in September 2005. Red Lion Hotels Corporation was founded in 1937 and is headquartered in Denver, Colorado. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Norman B. Blumenthal, Esq. Kyle R. Nordrehaug, Esq. Aparajit Bhowmik, Esq. BLUMENTHAL NORDREHAUG BHOWMIK DE BLOUW LLP 2255 Calle Clara La Jolla, CA 92037 Telephone: (858) 551-1223 Facsimile: (858) 551-1232 REPUBLIC SERVICES: Faces Alexander Suit in Kern California ---------------------------------------------------------- An employment-related class action lawsuit has been filed against Republic Services, Inc. The case is captioned as JIMMY ALEXANDER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC.; ALLIED WASTE SYSTEMS, INC. D.B.A. REPUBLIC SERVICES OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY; and SOLANO GARBAGE COMPANY, Case No. BCV-18-102520 (Cal. Super., Kern Cty., Oct. 3, 2018). The case is assigned to Judge David R. Lampe. Republic Services, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, provides non-hazardous solid waste collection, transfer, recycling, disposal, and energy services for small-container, large-container, municipal and residential, and energy services customers in the United States and Puerto Rico. The company was founded in 1996 and is based in Phoenix, Arizona. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by Douglas Han, Esq., at Justice Law Corporation. RH INC: Court Certifies Class in Teacher Retirement Fund Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned CITY OF MIAMI GENERAL EMPLOYEES' & SANITATION EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT TRUST, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, vs. RH, INC., ET AL., the Defendants, Case No. 4:17-cv-00554-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Yvonne Gonzales Rogers entered an order on October 11, 2018: 1. certifying a class of: "all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock of Restoration Hardware Holdings, Inc. during the period from March 26, 2015 through June 8, 2016, inclusive; 2. appointing lead plaintiffs Public School Teachers Pension & Retirement Fund of Chicago and Arkansas Teacher Retirement System as Class Representatives; and 3. appointing Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman LLP as Class Counsel.[CC] RICHANI RESTAURANT: Certification of Collective Action Sought ------------------------------------------------------------- in the class action lawsuit captioned as MELONIE COLEMAN, On Behalf of HERSELF and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. RICHANI RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC d/b/a JOHNNY BRUSCO’S NEW YORK STYLE PIZZA, the Defendant, Case No.: 2:18-cv-00114 (E.D. Tenn.), the parties move the Court for an order: 1. conditionally certifying action as a collective action with the class of potential opt-ins described as: "each person who worked as a server at Defendant's three store locations at any time during the previous three years"' 2. requiring the Defendant to provide the Plaintiff's counsel with the name and last-known home address for each member of the class within 14 days from an order from this Court granting this Motion; 3. requiring the Plaintiff's counsel to mail the notice attached to this consent motion to each member of the class within seven days from receipt of the potential class members' contact information from Defendant; 4. staying, pending the parties' mediated settlement conference, the discovery period in this case, except for discovery focused on aiding the parties in negotiating a settlement of this case, as well as the deadlines for the parties to file the Rule 26(f) Report, and to exchange initial disclosures; and 5. requiring the parties to file a status report regarding the results of their efforts to settle the dispute within seven days immediately following the conclusion of their mediated settlement conference.[CC] Counsel for Plaintiff: David W. Garrison, Esq. Joshua A. Frank, Esq. BARRETT JOHNSTON MARTIN & GARRISON, LLC Bank of America Plaza 414 Union Street, Suite 900 Nashville, TN 37219 Telephone: (615) 244 2202 Facsimile: (615) 252 3798 E-mail: dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com jfrank@barrettjohnston.com Counsel for Defendant: Edward N. Boehm, Jr., Esq. FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP 1075 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 3500 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 231-1400 Facsimile: (404) 240-4249 E-mail: tboehm@fisherphillips.com - and - Mark S. Dessauer, Esq. HUNTER, SMITH & DAVIS 1212 N. Eastman Road, PO Box 3740 Kingsport, TN 37664 Telephone: (423) 378-8840 Facsimile: (423) 378-8840 E-mail: dessauer@hsdlaw.com RISTORANTE LA BUCA: Wright Seeks to Certify Classes --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICHOLAS J. WRIGHT, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. RISTORANTE LA BUCA INC. d/b/a RISTORANTE LA BUCA; JEANIE GIULIANI; ANTHONY GIULIANI; and DOE DEFENDANTS 1-10, the Defendant(s), Case 2:18-cv-02207-MAK (E.D. Pa.), the Plaintiff move the Court for an Order: 1. granting certification of proposed Class consisting of: "all current and former Tipped Employees who have worked for Defendant in the State of Pennsylvania at any point from May 25, 2015 through the present; and 2. granting conditional certification of a collective class, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. section 216(b), consisting of: "all persons employed by Defendant as Tipped Employees during the last three years, and (iii) the production to Plaintiffs of all names and addresses of members of the collective class in accordance with Hoffman-La Roche v. Sperling, 493 U.S. 165 (1989).[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Proposed Classes: Gerald D. Wells, III, Esq. Stephen E. Connolly, Esq. CONNOLLY WELLS & GRAY, LLP 2200 Renaissance Boulevard, Suite 275 King of Prussia, PA 19406 Telephone: 610-822-3700 Facsimile: 610-822-3800 E-mail: gwells@cwglaw.com sconnolly@cwglaw.com - and - Arkady "Eric" Rayz, Esq. KALIKHMAN & RAYZ, LLC 1051 County Line Road, Suite A Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006 Telephone: (215) 364-5030 Facsimile: (215) 364-5029 E-mail: erayz@kalraylaw.com RIVER CITY CONDO ASSOC: Robles et al. Sue Board Members over Sale ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case, DAN PEPPER, ROY ROBLES, NIHAD ALSAFWEH , FRANK DEBRECZENYI, FENGYUN LIU, XIAOSONG SHEN, BIN JIANG, ELANA RIVERA, BOB OLSEN, DONALD MOORE, RAPHAELA RAE PATERNO, ERIC XIE, PEIMING CHANG, MEITING CHANG, HZ RENTAL LLC, and TOM STAPPAS, individually and derivatively on behalf of themselves and all other unit owners of the RIVER CITY CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, the Plaintiffs, vs. MICHELINE MAGHARIOUS, STACEY ANDERSON, RYAN PALIDER, DAVID COHEN, and MARK MITREV, individually and as members of the Board of Directors of the River City Condominium Association, and the RIVER CITY CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, an Illinois Not-For-Profit Corporation, the Defendants, Case No.: 2018CH12423 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Cook Cty., Oct. 3. 2018), seeks an order barring the Board from taking further actions towards consummation of a Section 15 sale of the entire River City Condominium Association upon 449 Unit Owners. The lawsuit alleges that the Board: (1) failed to produce documentation validly requested per the Illinois Condominium Property Act that the sale was approved by 75% of the Unit Ownership as required to enforce a sale of the entire condominium association under Section 15 of the Illinois Condominium Property Act, 765 ILCS 605/15; (2) illegally conducted a vote to approve or reject the Section 15 sale by conspiring with the Buyer to arrange multiple "side deals," (i.e. bribes) to individual Unit Owners through which those owners will receive a premium payment for their units in contravention of Section 15, Section 18, and Section 18.4 of the Act; and (3) materially misrepresented the terms of the Agreement while threatening to increase the monthly assessments to unsustainable rates if the Unit Owners rejected the sale. According to the complaint, these overtly coercive and misleading actions in furtherance of consummating the sale by the Board render any such action towards closing of the "proposed sale" meaningless. The Board must produce evidence that the Unit Owners approved the sale by a vote of 75% or more of the total unit ownership, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: David J. Bloomberg, Esq. James R. Stevens, Esq. Adam K. Beattie, Esq. CHUHAK & TECSON, P.C. 30 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2600 Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 444 9300 E-mail: dbloomberg@chuhak.com jstevens@chuhak.com abeattie~chuhak.com service@chuhak.com RMJV LP: Amador Suit Moved to Southern District of California ------------------------------------------------------------- Alejandro Amador, individually and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs RMJV, LP doing business as: Fresh Creative Foods an unknown business entity and Does 1 Through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. 37-02018-00045893-CU-OE-NC, was transferred from the Superior Court of California, County of San Diego, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California (San Diego) on Oct. 12, 2018. The Southern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No.: 3:18-cv-02351-JM-KSC to the proceeding. The suit alleges labor law-related violations, seeking to recover $5,000,000. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Jeffrey T. Miller.[BN] Attorneys for Alejandro Amador: Douglas Han, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION 411 North Central Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 230-7502 Facsimile: (818) 230-7259 E-mail: dhan@justicelawcorp.com Attorneys for RMJV, LP: Evelyn F. Wang, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2400 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 633-6800 Facsimile: (213) 633-6899 E-mail: evelynwang@dwt.com ROBERT GILMORE: Court Denies Class Certification in Pelino Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- VITO A. PELINO, the Plaintiff, vs ROBERT GILMORE, MICHAEL ZAKEN, and STEPHEN DURCO, the Defendants, Case 2:18-cv-01232-MPK (W.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Maureen P. Kelly entered an order denying the motion for class certification on October 1, 2018. The Court said, "Plaintiff fails to satisfy at least one of these elements. As this Court has explained: It is well established that a prisoner proceeding pro se, is unable to satisfy the fourth element of a class action suit. See Awala v. New Jersey Dept. of Corrections, 227 Fed. Appx. 133, 134 (3d Cir. 2007) (affirming the District Court where the "District Court dismissed Awala's complaint and amended complaint under 28 U.S.C. sections 1915(e)(2)(B) & 1915A(b), concluding that as a pro se prisoner without formal training in the law. Awala would not be able to adequately represent the interests of the class and maintain the suit as a class action"); Bricker v. McVey, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 30387, 2009 WL 960383 at 8 n.11 (M.D. Pa. April 7, 2009), quoting Carter v. Taylor, 540 F. Supp. 2d 522, 527 (D. Del. 2008) ("When confronting such a request from a prisoner, courts have consistently held that a prisoner acting pro se 'is inadequate to represent the interests of his fellow inmates in a class action.'"); Caputo v. Fauver, 800 F. Supp. 168, 170 (D.N.J. 1992), aff'd, 995 F.2d 216 (3d Cir. 1993) (table decision) (stating that "[e]very court that has considered the issue has held that a prisoner proceeding pro se is inadequate to represent the interests of his fellow inmates in a class action"). Mearin v. Swartz, Civ. A. No. 11-669, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54339, at 3-4 (W.D. Pa. Apr. 18, 2012)."[CC] S&T HEALTH: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Suarez Camacho Says ------------------------------------------------------------ ANGEL ISHMAEL SUAREZ CAMACHO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. S&T HEALTH TRANSPORTATION INC and TIGRAN AVETISYAN, the Defendants, Case No. 18-2911 (Mass. Super. Ct., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks to recover all unpaid wages under the Massachusetts wage laws and regulations. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants habitually refuse to pay Suarez and other employees overtime wages in violation of the Massachusetts wage laws and regulations. Further, Suarez claims that the Defendants refuse to compensate Suarez and other employees for all travel time when they are assigned to travel to another location by Defendants. Finally, Suarez claims that the Defendants refuse to pay him and other employees for all hours worked at straight wages.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: John R. Yasi, Esq. David J. Relethford, Esq. Michael Forrest, Esq. Brian P. McNiff, Esq. FORREST, LAMOTHE, MAZOW, MCCULLOUGH, YASI & YASI, P.C. 2 Salem Green, Suite 2 Salem, MA 01970 Telephone: (617) 231-7829 E-mail: bmcniff@forrestlamothe.com drelethford@forrestlamothe.com jyasi@bmcniff@forrestlamothe.com mforrest@bmcniff@forrestlamothe.com S. BRAVO SYSTEMS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Parra Claims --------------------------------------------------------- IGNACIO PARRA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. S. BRAVO SYSTEMS, INC.; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC723626 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 2, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and reimburse necessary business expenses. The Plaintiff Parra was employed by the Defendant as an hourly, non-exempt employee from November 11, 2016 to July 19, 2018. S. Bravo Systems is a certified woman-owned and Made in the USA accredited manufacturer of high performance secondary containment systems for the petroleum equipment industry. The Company provides products and support that incorporate innovative engineering, industry feedback and customer service. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph Lavi, Esq. Joshua Webster, Esq. LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP 8889 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Telephone: (310) 432-0000 Facsimile: (310) 432-0001 E-mail: jlavi@lelawfirm.com jwebster@lelawfirm.com - and – Sahag Majarian II, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN II 18250 Ventura Boulevard Tarzana, CA 91356 Telephone: (818) 609-0807 Facsimile: (818) 609-0892 E-mail: sahagii@aol.com SANMINA CORPORATION: Spalliero Seeks Unpaid Wages under Labor Code ------------------------------------------------------------------ VINCENT SPALLIERO, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. SANMINA CORPORATION, a California Corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. 18CV336145 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid rest period, and unpaid minimum wages under the California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants new or should have known that the Plaintiff and other class members were entitled to receive all timely and complete meal periods or payment of one additional hour of pay at the Plaintiff's and other class members' regular rate of pay when a meal period was missed, late or interrupted, and they did not receive all timely and proper meal periods or payment of one additional hour of pay at the Plaintiff's and other class members' regular rate of pay when a meal period was missed. Specifically, the applicable Wage Order provides that the Defendants are and were required to pay the Plaintiff and other class members employed by the Defendants, who work(ed) more than 8 hours in a day or more than 40 hours in a workweek, at the rate of time-and-one-half for all hours worked in excess of 8 hours in a day or more than 40 hours in a workweek, the lawsuit says. Sanmina Corporation is an American electronics manufacturing services provider headquartered in San Jose, California that serves original equipment manufacturers in communications and computer hardware fields.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff: Douglas Han, Esq. Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION 411 North Central Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone (818) 230-7502 Facsimile (818) 230-7259 SHATOS AUTO: Roberts-Glover Sues over Predelivery Service Fee ------------------------------------------------------------- DERLYN ROBERTS-GLOVER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SHATOS AUTO SALES & TRANSPORT LLC, Defendants, Case No. 78800125 (Fla. Cir., Hillsborough Cty., Oct. 3, 2018) seeks to stop the Defendant's unlawful act of charging predelivery service fee to the Plaintiff and the class without prior disclosure. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant charges the Plaintiff predelivery service fee upon purchase of the 2006 Mercedes-Benz E-Class without disclosing it to her. The Defendant thus violated Florida Statutes when it charged the predelivery service fee without having printed on all documents that include a line item for such predelivery service fee the following disclosure: "This charge represents costs and profit to the dealer for items such as inspecting, cleaning, and adjusting vehicles, and preparing documents related to the sale." Shatos Auto Sales & Transport LLC is a Florida limited liability company engaged as a car dealer. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Roger D. Mason, II, Esq. Joseph V. Nemeh, Esq. John S. Valenti, Esq. ROGER D. MASON, II, P.A. 5135 West Cypress Street, Suite 105 Tampa, FL 33607 Telephone: (813) 304-2131 E-mail: rmason@flautolawyer.com jnemeh@flautolawyer.com jvalenti@flautolawyer.com admin@flautolawyer.com SINCLAIR BROADCAST: Miller Suit over TV Ad Rates Moved to Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------------ The case, LAW OFFICES OF PETER MILLER, P.A., 1601 South Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. SINCLAIR BROADCAST GROUP, INC. 10706 Beaver Dam Road Hunt Valley, MD 21030 Baltimore County; TRIBUNE MEDIA COMPANY 515 North State Street Chicago, IL 60654; TRIBUNE BROADCASTING COMPANY, LLC 435 N. Michigan Avenue Chicago, IL 60611; and DOES 1-20, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-02316, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) Oct. 12, 2018. The Northern District of Illinois Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:18-cv-06789. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Virginia M. Kendall. According to the complaint, the case is an antitrust class action arose from a conspiracy among Defendants and their co-conspirators to fix prices for commercials to be aired on broadcast television stations throughout the United States in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act, by sharing competitively sensitive information through their advertising sales teams. Defendants' and their co-conspirators' unlawful collusion led to supracompetitive prices in the market for the sale of television advertising. Specifically, instead of competing with each other on price for advertising sales as horizontal competitors typically would, Defendants and their co-conspirators shared proprietary information and conspired to fix prices and stifle competition in the market.[BN] Attorneys for Law Offices of Peter Miller, P.A.: Alicia Leigh Shelton, Esq. Cyril Vincent Smith , III, Esq. ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP 100 E Pratt St Ste 2400 Baltimore, MD 21202 Telephone: (410) 332-0444 E-mail: ashelton@zuckerman.com csmith@zuckerman.com - and - Kimberly A. Justice, Esq. Asher S Alavi, Esq. KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 Telephone: (610) 667-7706 E-mail: kjustice@ktmc.com - and - Jonathan Lee Greenblatt, Esq. SHEARMAN AND STERLING LLP 401 Pe 9th St. NW Washington, DC 20004 Telephone: (202) 508-8070 E-mail: jgreenblatt@shearman.com Attorneys for Tribune Media Company and Tribune Broadcasting Company, LLC: John Augustine Bourgeois, Esq. KRAMON AND GRAHAM PA One South St Ste 2600 Baltimore, MD 21202 Telephone: (410) 752-6030 E-mail: jbourgeois@kg-law.com - and - Daniel H. Levi, Esq. Jay Cohen, Esq. William B. Michael, Esq. PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 1285 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10019-6064 Telephone: (212) 373-3497 E-mail: dlevi@paulweiss.com jaycohen@paulweiss.com wmichael@paulweiss.com SIRY INVESTMENTS: Underpays Managers, Supervisors, & Technicians ---------------------------------------------------------------- CARLOS DELGADO PENA; MAURILIO DE LOS SANTOS; and AGUSTIN VARGAS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SIRY INVESTMENTS, L.P. D/B/A PORTO VISTA HOTEL AND SUITES; and DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE, Defendants, Case No. 37-2018-00050219-CU-OE-CTL (Cal. Super., San Diego Cty., Oct. 3, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, and provide accurate wage statements. Mr. Pena was employed by the Defendants as front desk manager from February 2017 to July 2017; Mr. De Los Santos as maintenance technician supervisor from April 2017 to August 2017; and Mr. Varas maintenance technician from March 2017 to August 2017. Siry Investments, L.P. is engaged in the construction business. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Farzad Rastegar, Esq. Amir Seyedfarshi, Esq. RASTEGAR LAW GROUP, APC 22760 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 200 Torrance, CA 90505 Telephone: (310) 961-9600 Facsimile: (310) 961-9094 E-mail: farzad@rastegarlawgroup.com amir@rastegarlawgroup.com SODEXO INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Rivera Suit Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------- ESTEVAN RIVERA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SODEXO, INC.; SDH EDUCATION WEST LLC; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00292 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 4, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, and provide accurate wage statements. The Plaintiff Rivera was employed by the Defendants as non-exempt, hourly paid employee. Sodexo, Inc. provides integrated food, facilities management, and other services that enhance organizational performance and improve the quality of life daily in North America. Sodexo, Inc. was formerly known as Sodexho, Inc. and changed its name to Sodexo, Inc. in April 2008. The company was founded in 1966 and is based in Gaithersburg, Maryland. Sodexo, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Sodexo S.A. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert L. Starr, Esq. Eric S. Mintz Esq. Manny Starr, Esq. FRONTIER LAW CENTER, APC 23901 Calabasas Road, Suite 2074 Calabasas, CA 91302 Telephone: (818) 914-3433 Facsimile: (818) 914-3433 E-mail: robert@frontierlawcenter.com eric@frontierlawcenter.com marmv@,fTontierlawcenter.com SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT: Certification of Employees Class Sought ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned JOSHUA CAUDLE and KRYSTLE WHITE, as individuals and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. SPRINT/UNITED MANAGEMENT COMPANY, a Kansas corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, the Defendants, Case 3:17-cv-06874-WHA (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court on Nov. 29, 2018, for an order: 1. certifying three California-only classes consisting of employees of Defendant Sprint/United Management Company: Class 1 (Unlawful Deductions - SPS Class): "all current and former employees of Sprint who worked at Sprint's retail store location(s) in California and whose compensation was based in full or in part on incentive compensation (also called "commissions"), and whose commissions were reduced by a Sprint Promoter Score Adjustment, at any time from February 2016 to March 2017"; Class 2 (Wage Statement Class): "all members of the Unlawful Deductions – SPS Class whose commissions were reduced by a Sprint Promoter Score Adjustment at any time from September 29, 2016 through March 2017" Class 3 (Waiting Time Class): "all members of the Unlawful Deductions – SPS Class who separated their employment from Sprint at any time from September 29, 2014 through the present" 2. appointing Plaintiffs as class representatives; and 3. appointing Plaintiffs' counsel, Paul K. Haines, Tuvia Korobkin, and Stacey M. Shim of Haines Law Group, APC, as Class Counsel.[CC] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Paul K. Haines, Esq. Tuvia Korobkin, Esq. Stacey M. Shim, Esq. HAINES LAW GROUP, APC 222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550 El Segundo, CA 90245 Telephone: (424) 292 2350 Facsimile: (424) 292 2355 E-mail: tkorobkin@haineslawgroup.com phaines@haineslawgroup.com sshim@haineslawgroup.com STAR WAY: Fails to Pay Wages, Vashkovskyi Says ---------------------------------------------- KOSTIANTYN VASHKOVSKYI, the Plaintiff, vs. STAR WAY TRANSPORT INC, INTER TEAM INC., SERGIY BAZYL YUK, TETY ANA BAZYL YUK, the Defendants, Case No.: 2018CH12778 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Cook Cty. Oct. 12, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages under the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act. According to the complaint, Kostiantyn Vashkovski is a resident of Florida and worked as a truck driver in Illinois, compensated on a per hauled cargo load non-exempt employee for Defendants in the State of Illinois. The Defendants failed and refused to pay Plaintiff and others similarly situated for some or all work performed, the lawsuit says. Star Way is a licensed and bonded freight shipping and trucking company running freight hauling business from Sun Prairie, Wisconsin.[BN] Attorney for Plaintiff: Julia Bikbova, Esq. 3400 Dundee Road, Suite 150 Northbrook, IL 60062 Telephone: (847) 541-8100 STATE STREET: Law Firm Reaches Truce with Special Master -------------------------------------------------------- Legal Newsline reports that securities class action firm Labaton Sucharow has reached a tentative truce with the special master investigating questionable activities that include a $4.1 million referral fee paid to a lawyer who did no work but served as the middleman between Labaton and an Arkansas pension fund that served as lead plaintiff in a lawsuit against State Street Bank and Trust. The mysterious fee, plus earlier examples of double-counting in a so-called "lodestar" report Labaton submitted to the court to justify its $75 million fee in the State Street case, sparked a wide-ranging investigation that continues. Columbia Law School Professor John Coffee, in a recent article, said the case could be a "Legal Watergate" that could reshape class action practice by forcing lawyers to disclose how they distribute their fees, especially to rainmakers who connect class action lawyers with the institutional investors they need to establish control of a case. The proposed settlement, released shortly after midnight on Oct. 10, represents a remarkable retreat for Labaton, which previously maintained an aggressive stance including seeking the recusal of U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf, who is overseeing the State Street case. When that gambit failed, State Street asked the judge to turn over any communications between Judge Wolf and the special master, retired federal judge Gerald E. Rosen, in search of evidence Rosen had injected bias against Labaton into the judge's mind. In the proposed agreement, Labaton said it "deeply regrets" paying a "bare referral" fee to Damon Chargois, a Texas lawyer who introduced the New York firm to Arkansas politicians and officials of the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System. Labaton fought to keep the payment secret, but it emerged in an investigation Judge Wolf ordered after the Boston Globe uncovered more than $4 million in double-billing in the lodestar report Labaton submitted to the court to justify its fee in the case. The firm said it would pay as much as $4.8 million to class members and other lawyers in the case as well as shouldering its cost of the special master's investigation, which has cost millions of dollars so far. Labaton was awarded $75 million in fees for negotiating a $300 million settlement with State Street in a lawsuit over foreign exchange fees. The special master concluded the fee was reasonable, but chastised Labaton for shoddy recordkeeping practices and failing to disclose the referral fee to Chargois, who did no work on the case and didn't accept responsibility as a legal representative of the pension fund. Professional ethics rules in Massachusetts allow for such bare referral fees, but they are prohibited nearly everywhere else, including most federal courts. Rosen also recommended Labaton retain its lead counsel role in the case. "Labaton acknowledges that the non-traditional nature of the Chargois fee agreement, and the facts that he neither worked on nor assumed responsibility for the State Street case, constitute important factors that would likely have contributed to a more robust decision-making process by the Court in the fee award process," the firm said in a statement accompanying the proposed settlement. The firm agreed to return $700,000 of the fee attributable to Chargois to class members, repay as much as $1.4 million to class members for double-counting, and shift $2.75 million in fees to lawyers representing ERISA clients. Those lawyers complained they were shortchanged on fees because of Labaton's incorrect lodestar calculations and the undisclosed referral fee to Chargois. Labaton formally adopted a policy prohibiting "bare referral" fees and an internal policy requiring the firm to disclose to all courts any fee-sharing agreement with other lawyers, following the ethics rules of the Eastern and Southern districts of New York. Labaton failed to disclose the Chargois fee because, it argued, Massachusetts, unlike other states, doesn't prohibit such referral fees. Labaton also agreed to halt the practice of allowing other firms to pay for Labaton staff attorneys working in its office, as well as allowing other firms to claim the time of Labaton staff lawyers on their lodestar petitions. Class action lawyers frequently share the costs of litigation, but also engage in undisclosed agreements to share lodestar hours, a practice critics say can mask anticompetitive behavior. By agreeing to split fees with competing law firms, class action lawyers can avoid noisy fights over the job of lead counsel as well as potential price competition over fees to get the work. To ensure future compliance, Labaton will hire James Holderman, former chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to monitor the firm's fee practices for a year. Labaton agrees to withdraw all pending motions, including its objections to the report, and waive its right to appeal. It will also pay its share of the special master's costs and cooperate with the investigation and federal or state inquiries that may arise. They can renew their objections if Judge Wolf rejects the special master's recommendations. Labaton lead partner Larry Sucharow -- lsucharow@labaton.com -- has been ordered to attend an Oct. 15 hearing with the judge over the proposed settlement. [GN] STITCH FIX: Sawicki Alleges Securities Law Violation ---------------------------------------------------- GREG SAWICKI, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. STITCH FIX, INC., KATRINA LAKE, PAUL YEE and MIKE C. SMITH, the Defendants, Case 3:18-cv-06208 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks remedies under sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. According to the complaint, Stitch Fix is an online retail fashion subscription service. Stitch Fix purchases clothing, shoes and accessories from name-brand manufacturers and designs more in-house that it has manufactured. Stitch Fix personnel then select and deliver curated boxes of items to "clients" to try on, buy what they like, and return the rest. While some or all of the items can be returned free of charge, clients are incentivized to accept the entire selection through a 25% price discount that is only applied if the client accepts the entire shipment. This business model exposes Stitch Fix to a substantial risk of being forced to write off unsaleable inventory, a risk magnified by how quickly fashion trends change. Stitch Fix mitigates this risk by accumulating large troves of data about its clients' sizes, style preferences and purchasing habits, and runs that data through complex algorithms to match client preferences. For subscription businesses like Stitch Fix, the most important business metric to investors is the number and growth rate of its "active clients," which Stitch Fix defines as a client who has responded to shipments at least once during the preceding 12-month period. In connection with its efforts to market its November 2017 initial public stock offering, Stitch Fix emphasized that its active client base had grown dramatically from 867,000 at August 1, 2015, to 1,674,000 at July 2, 2016, to 2,194,000 at July 29, 2017, representing year-over-year growth rates of 93.1% and 31.1%, respectively. Stitch Fix focused investors on the growth of its active clients, stating that "the number of active clients [was] a key indicator of [its] growth and the overall health of [its] business." Stitch Fix's dramatic active client growth during 2017 and 2018, which served as a proxy for its revenue and profit growth during those same periods, was in large part the result of its prolific television advertising campaign. Though Stitch Fix was founded in 2011, it did not launch its first television advertising campaigns until 2017. Throughout the Class Period, Stitch Fix made materially false and misleading statements about the strength of its active client growth and its continued investment in television advertising and its impact on the Company's financial prospects, setting high investor growth expectations far beyond what the Company was actually then experiencing. In particular, Stitch Fix materially misrepresented the strength of its sales growth prospects by concealing that its active client growth rate had plummeted from 8% in the third quarter of 2018 to 2% in the fourth quarter of 2018, and claiming, among other things, that its strong 3Q18 results demonstrated the continued positive momentum of its business cycle while failing to disclose that the historical rates of growth reported in the Company's financial statements and reports to investors had actually slowed dramatically. In truth, Stitch Fix's active client growth rate had plummeted by the time it reported its 3Q18 financial results on June 7, 2018 -- already a third of the way through 21 4Q18, which would end on July 28, 2018. Stitch Fix also misstated its commitment to its television advertising campaign, concealing that the Company had already determined it would cease running television advertising for 10 of the 13 weeks in 4Q18, further negatively impacting new client additions, the lawsuit says. Stitch Fix is an online subscription and personal shopping service in the United States. Founded in 2011, Stitch Fix went public in 2017. As of November 2017, immediately after the initial offering, Stitch Fix was valued at $1.6 billion and as of February 2018, the company was valued at $2 billion.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Shawn Williams, Esq. Samuel H. Rudman, Esq. Mary K. Blasy, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP Post Montgomery Center One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: 415/288-4545 Facsimile: 415/288-4534 E-mail: shawnw@rgrdlaw.com srudman@rgrdlaw.com mblasy@rgrdlaw.com – and - Franks J. Johnson, Esq. JOHNSON FISTEL, LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1400 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: 619/230-0063 Facsimile: 619/255-1856 SUNOCO LOGISTICS: Wants Pipeline Damage Class Action Narrowed ------------------------------------------------------------- Adam Rhodes, writing for Law360, reports that Sunoco Logistics Partners on Oct. 9 urged a Pennsylvania federal judge to trim a proposed class action claiming that construction of its controversial Mariner East 2 pipeline caused significant property damage. [GN] SUPERVALU INC: Appeal in Data Security Breach Suit Underway ----------------------------------------------------------- SUPERVALU INC. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 15, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 1, 2018, that an appeal is ongoing in the case entitled, In Re: SUPERVALU Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation. In August and November 2014, four class action complaints were filed against the company relating to the Criminal Intrusion. The cases were centralized in the Federal District Court for the District of Minnesota under the caption In Re: SUPERVALU Inc. Customer Data Security Breach Litigation. On June 26, 2015, the plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint. The company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Consolidated Class Action Complaint and the hearing took place on November 3, 2015. On January 7, 2016, the District Court granted the Motion to Dismiss and dismissed the case without prejudice, holding that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue as they had not met their burden of showing any compensable damages. On February 4, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a motion to vacate the District Court's dismissal of the complaint or in the alternative to conduct discovery and file an amended complaint, and we filed our response in opposition on March 4, 2016. On April 20, 2016, the District Court denied plaintiffs' motion to vacate the District Court's dismissal or in the alternative to amend the complaint. On May 18, 2016, plaintiffs appealed to the 8th Circuit and on May 31, 2016, the company filed a cross-appeal to preserve its additional arguments for dismissal of the plaintiffs' complaint. On August 30, 2017, the 8th Circuit affirmed the dismissal for 14 out of the 15 plaintiffs finding they had no standing. The 8th Circuit did not consider the company's cross-appeal and remanded the case back for consideration of the company's additional arguments for dismissal against the one remaining plaintiff. On October 30, 2017, the company filed its motion to dismiss the remaining plaintiff and on November 7, 2017, the plaintiff filed a motion to amend its complaint. The court held a hearing on the motions on December 14, 2017, and on March 7, 2018, the District Court denied plaintiff's motion to amend and granted the company's motion to dismiss. On March 14, 2018, plaintiff appealed to the 8th Circuit. SUPERVALU INC. said, "We had $50 of cyber threat insurance above a per incident deductible of $1 at the time of the Criminal Intrusion, which we believe should cover any loss related to this litigation." SUPERVALU INC., together with its subsidiaries, operates as a grocery wholesaler and retailer in the United States and internationally. It operates through two segments, Wholesale and Retail. The company was founded in 1871 and is headquartered in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. SYNDER'S-LANCE: Mason Suit Moved to Southern District of Florida ---------------------------------------------------------------- Denise Mason, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiff, vs Snyder's-Lance, Inc. and S-L Snacks National, LLC, doing business as: Kettle Foods, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-06423, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of the New York, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida (West Palm Beach) on Oct. 4, 2018. The Southern District of Florida assigned Case No. 9:18-cv-81338-DMM to the proceeding. The suit alleges fraud related violation. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks. Snyder's-Lance, Inc. is the second largest salty snack maker in the United States. It was formed by the 2010 merger of Lance and Snyder's of Hanover. As of 2018, it is a subsidiary of the Campbell Soup Company.[BN] TENNESSEE VALLEY: Sechrest et al. Seek Unpaid Wages under FLSA -------------------------------------------------------------- DRAVEN SECHREST, and ALANDA SHACKELFORD, AND ALL OTHER EMPLOYEES OR FORMER EMPLOYEES OF THE DEFENDANT, SIMILARLY-SITUATED, the Plaintiffs, vs., TENNESSEE VALLEY FAMILY SERVICES, INC, the Defendants, Case 5:18-cv-01678-HNJ (N.D. Ala.), seeks to recover unpaid wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). According to the complaint, TVFS employ hourly employees within the Northern District of Alabama. TVFS serves a safe house for at homeless, abused and at-risk victims of trafficking. The Plaintiffs worked as Youth Advisors at TVFS. Plaintiffs were required to stay overnight several times a week to supervise the residents. They were not allowed to leave the premises and had to get up several times a night to check on and the residents. Some of the residents are not required to return until 1:00 am and have to get up at 5:00 a.m. in the morning and Plaintiffs were expected to stay up and insure the residents came in and to be up at 5 am when the residents woke up. The Plaintiffs routinely worked 60 hours per week on behalf of Defendant, but were only paid for 40 hours in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the lawsuit says. Tennessee Valley is a nonprofit agency formed in 1977 by a group of concerned citizens and is focused on helping youth become successful.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Teri Ryder Mastando, Esq. Eric J. Artrip, Esq. MASTANDO & A RTRIP, LLC 301 Washington St., Suite 302 Huntsville, AL 35801 Telephone: (256) 532-2222 Facsimile: (256) 513-7489 E-mail: teri@mastandoartrip.com artrip@mastandoartrip.com TG THERAPEUTICS: Scott+Scott Files Securities Fraud Suit -------------------------------------------------------- Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP ("Scott+Scott"), a national shareholder and consumer rights litigation firm, is notifying investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed against TG Therapeutics, Inc., ("TG" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: TGTX) and other defendants, related to alleged violations of federal securities laws. If you purchased TG Therapeutics securities between June 4, 2018 and September 25, 2018, you are encouraged to contact a Scott+Scott attorney at (844) 818-6982 for more information. TG is a developmental biopharmaceutical company focused on treatments for B-cell malignancies and autoimmune diseases. The Company has been developing two therapies targeting hematologic malignancies: TG-1101 (ublituximab) and TGR-1202 (umbralisib). During the class period, TG was engaged in a randomized controlled Phase 3 trial to evaluate TG-1101 in combination with TGR-1202 for patients with front-line and previously treated Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia ("CLL"), known as the UNITY-CLL Trial. The lawsuit alleges that defendants made false and misleading statements regarding TG's business and prospects and the UNITY-CLL Trial. On September 25, 2018, pre-market, TG announced that it would not be releasing the data from the UNITY-CLL Trial and that it had failed to meet the trial's stated goal. On this news, the price of TG stock fell from $9.25 per share to $5.15 per share – a drop of over 44%. What You Can Do If you purchased TG Therapeutics securities between June 4, 2018 and September 25, 2018, inclusive, or if you have questions about this notice or your legal rights, please contact attorney Joe Pettigrew at (844) 818-6982, or at jpettigrew@scott-scott.com. The lead plaintiff deadline is December 3, 2018. About Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major securities, antitrust, and employee retirement plan actions throughout the United States. The firm represents pension funds, foundations, individuals, and other entities worldwide with offices in New York, London, Connecticut, California, and Ohio. [GN] TRACTOR SUPPLY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Sweeney Suit Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- DEBRA SWEENEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TRACTOR SUPPLY COMPANY; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18CV335670 (Cal. Super., Santa Clara Cty., Oct. 2, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, and provide accurate wage statements. The Plaintiff Sweeney was employed by the Defendants as an hourly, non-exempt employee from April 1, 2017 to June 22, 2018. Tractor Supply Company operates rural lifestyle retail stores in the United States. Tractor Supply Company was founded in 1938 and is headquartered in Brentwood, Tennessee. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Larry W. Lee, Esq. Kristen M. Agnew, Esq. Nicholas Rosenthal, Esq. DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C. 515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 488-6555 Facsimile: (213) 488-6554 E-mail: lwlee@diversitylaw.com kagnew@diversitylaw.com nrosenthal@diversitylaw.com - and - William L. Marder, Esq. POLARIS LAW GROUP, LLP 501 San Benito Street, Suite 200 Hollister, CA 95023 Telephone: (831) 531-4214 Facsimile: (831) 634-0333 E-mail: bill@polarislawgroup.com TRUST FINANCIAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Kam Suit Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------- Matt Kam, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Trust Financial, LLC; and Wilkerson & Bremer Law Group, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-00421-DCN (D. Idaho, Oct. 2, 2018) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt. The case is assigned to Judge David C. Nye. Trust Financial, LLC provides financial consulting services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan Adam Ballard, Esq. Ballard Law, PLLC 147 N. 2nd East, Suite 3 Rexburg, ID 83440 Telephone: (208) 359-5532 E-mail: ryanballardlaw@gmail.com TSR INC: Paskowitz Sues over "Change in Control" ------------------------------------------------ SUSAN PASKOWITZ On Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. AMES J. HILL, REGINA DOWD, CHRISTOPHER HUGHES, BRIAN J. MANGAN, RAYMOND A. ROEL, JOSEPH H. HUGHES, WINNIFRED M. HUGHES, ERIC STEIN; ZEFF CAPITAL, LP; QAR INDUSTRIES, INC., FINTECH CONSULTING LLC and TSR, INC., the Defendants, Case No.: 715541/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Oct. 11, 2018), alleges breach of fiduciary duty committed by these Defendants: (a) the members of the Board of Directors of TSRI; (b) Joseph H. Hughes, the former Chairman and CEO of the Company, who sold his controlling block of 41.8% of TSRI's shares at a premium price to the Zeff Group on July 23, 2018, effectively precluding the Company from auctioning itself to the highest bidder, despite the fact that just weeks earlier Joseph Hughes had set in motion a process to sell the Company for the benefit of all shareholders; and (c) Zeff Capital LP, QAR industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting, LLC, an investor group led by investment fund Zeff Capital and its founder Daniel Zeff, who on July 23,2018 purchased 819, 491 shares from Joseph Hughes at a premium price, and then additional shares, triggering what the Company has described in public filings as a "change in control" by reason of their present collective ownership of 48.8% of TSRI's common shares, under Securities laws. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff is a stockholder of a publicly traded company primarily engaged in the business of providing IT staffing for various companies. Due to the actions of Joseph Hughes and the Zeff Group, and the knowing inaction of the TSRI Board, the public shareholders have been damaged and will continue to be damaged, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Roy L. Jacobs, Esq. ROY L. JACOB ASSOCIATES 420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 2440 New York, NY Telephone: (212) 867-1156 Facsimile: (212) 504-8343 E-mail: Rjacobs@jacobsclasslaw.com UNITED MANAGEMENT: Burgains Suit Moved to S.D. Florida ------------------------------------------------------ Barry Burgains, and other similarly-situated individuals, the Plaintiff, vs Sprint/United Management Company, a Foreign Profit Corporation, the Defendant, Case No. 18-029342-CA-01, was moved from the 11th Judicial Circuit Miami-Dade County, Florida, to the U.S. District Court Southern District of Florida (Miami) on Oct. 10, 2018. The Southern District of Florida Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:18-cv-24176-UU to the proceeding. The suit alleges Fair Labor Standards Act violation. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Ursula Ungaro. Sprint/United Management Company, Inc. is based in Overland Park, Kansas. Sprint/United Management operates as a subsidiary of Sprint Nextel Corp.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Anthony Maximillien Georges-Pierre, Esq. REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC Court House Tower 44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200 Miami, FL 33130 Telephone: (305) 416 5000 Facsimile: (305) 416 5005 E-mail: agp@rgpattorneys.com Attorneys for Defendant: Nancy A. Johnson, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. 111 N. Magnolia Avenue, Suite 1250 Orlando, FL 32801 Telephone: (407) 393 2936 E-mail: najohnson@littler.com UNITED TECH: Website not Accessible to Blind People, Sullivan Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ PHILLIP SULLIVAN, JR., on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, the Defendant, Case 1:18-cv-09306-ER (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 11, 2018), contends that the Defendant failed to design, construct, and/or own or operate its website -- https://www.utc.com -- to be fully accessible to, and independently usable by, deaf and hard-of-hearing people. According to the lawsuit, deaf and hard-of-hearing people watch videos just as aurally capable people do. The lack of closed captioning means that deaf and hard-of-hearing people are excluded from the rapidly expanding Internet media industry and from independently accessing videos posted on the Website. Despite readily available accessible technology, such as the technology in use at other heavily trafficked websites, which makes use of closed captioning for hard-of-hearing individuals, such as YouTube and Netflix, the Defendant has chosen to post videos without closed captioning, or with limited closed captioning, that are inaccessible to deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals. Without closed captioning, deaf and hard-of-hearing people cannot comprehend the audio portion of the videos on the Website. By failing to make the Website accessible to deaf and hard-of-hearing persons, the Defendant is violating basic equal access requirements under both state and federal law, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff and the Class: C.K. Lee, Esq. Anne Seelig, Esq. LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC 30 East 39th Street, Second Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: 212-465-1188 Facsimile: 212-465-1181 UNITEDHEALTHCARE: K.H.B. Suit Moved to District of Utah ------------------------------------------------------- K.H.B. by and through his father, K.D.B., individually, and on behalf of similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiff, v. UNITEDHEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-04175, was transferred from the US District Court for the Northern District of California, to the US District Court for the District of Utah (Central) on Oct 10, 2018. The District of Utah Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:18-cv-00795-RJS to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Robert J. Shelby. This lawsuit seeks remedies under the Employee Retirement and Income Security Act of 1974 arising out of UHC's failure to comply with the terms of its insured ERISA plans, specifically its denial of coverage for licensed Wilderness Programs that treat documented mental illnesses and substance use disorders. In addition, the lawsuit seeks remedies due to UHC's violations of the Federal Parity Act, which form an enforceable part of the terms of UHC's ERISA-governed plans. It further seeks, inter alia, to recover the benefits that have been wrongfully denied to plaintiff and the class he sought to represent. Finally, it seeks to require UHC to provide accurate information to all ERISA insureds concerning the coverage of outdoor/wilderness behavioral healthcare programs.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Eleanor Hamburger, Esq. Richard E. Spoonemore, Esq. SIRIANNI YOUTZ SPOONEMORE HAMBURGER 701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2560 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: (206) 223-0303 Facsimile: (206) 223-0246 E-mail: ele@sylaw.com rspoonemore@sylaw.com - and - Jordan Lewis, Esq. JORDAN LEWIS, P.A. 4473 N.E. 11th Avenue Fort Lauderdale, FL 33334 Telephone: (954) 616-8995 Facsimile: (954) 206-0374 E-mail: jordan@jml-lawfirm.com - and - Nina Wasow, Esq. Catha Worthman, Esq. FEINBERG, JACKSON, WORTHMAN & WASOW, LLP 2030 Addison Street, Suite 500 Berkeley, CA 94704 Telephone: (510) 269-7998 Facsimile: (510) 269-7994 E-mail: nina@feinbergjackson.com catha@feinbergjackson.com USA DIVING: Harvard Diving Coach Resigns Amid Sex Misconduct ------------------------------------------------------------ Phil Helsel, writing for NBC News, reports that a Harvard University diving coach who had been placed on leave after a class-action lawsuit alleged sexual misconduct has resigned, the university said on Oct. 9. Harvard Athletic Director Bob Scalise said in a brief statement that Chris Heaton, 31, "has decided to step down from his role." "Tracey Bird will step in as the new interim coach, effective immediately," Harvard said, and "a national search for a successor will be conducted." Mr. Heaton was not named as a defendant in the class-action lawsuit, but the suit alleges that he solicited nude photographs from young female athletes at an Indiana diving school. He allegedly sent photos of his penis to female athletes while at the Ripfest Diving Camp in Indiana in 2015, according to the suit. Fifty women are listed as defendants, all but one are listed as Jane Does. Mr. Heaton did not respond to requests from NBC News, and an attempt to reach him on Oct. 9 was not successful. Harvard has said that it was unaware of any allegations of sexual misconduct when Mr. Heaton was hired as the head coach for diving in August of 2018. After learning of the allegations from media reports, the university said it immediately placed him on leave. The suit names USA Diving, a national governing body of the U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC), and its state-level administrative body the Indiana Diving Association in failing to protect athletes abused at the Indiana Diving Academy (Ripfest). Ripfest owner John Wingfield, and former coach Johel Ramirez Suarez are also defendants. Mr. Suarez was arrested in November of 2017 after three women accused him of rubbing their vaginal areas when he was supposed to help them stretch at diving camps operated by Ripfest, the Indianapolis Star reported. Court records show Mr. Suarez pleaded guilty to three counts of battery this past September and was sentenced to about a year and half in jail. Neither Ripfest nor Mr. Wingfield responded to NBC News' request for comment. Neither USA Diving nor the U.S. Olympic Committee responded to NBC's request for comment on the allegations against Mr. Heaton and Ripfest. [GN] VELO ASSOCIATES: Huff Seeks to Certify 4 Classes ------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT HUFF, individually and on behalf of similarly situated persons, the Plaintiff, v. VELO ASSOCIATES, PLC, et al., the Defendants, Case 2:17-cv-13556-SFC-EAS (E.D. Mich.), the Plaintiff asks the Court for an order: 1. certifying four classes: Fair Debt Collection Practices Act – Illegal Interest Class: "all persons, where Velo Associates, PLC, and/or Scott Renner filed a state court lawsuit in Michigan, in the name of Sun Homes Inc., against the person, in which interest was sought in the state court complaint, during a time period from October 31, 2016, to October 31, 2017"; Fair Debt Collection Practices Act – Improper Named Entity Class: "all persons, where Velo Associates, PLC, and/or Scott Renner filed a state court lawsuit in Michigan, in the name of Sun Homes Inc., against the person, during a time period from October 31, 2016, to October 31, 2017, where Account Adjustment Bureau, Inc. had entered into a written agreement, a Suit Authorization, with Sun Homes Inc."; State Law – Illegal Interest Class: "all persons, where Velo Associates, PLC, and/or Scott Renner filed a state court lawsuit in Michigan, in the name of Sun Homes Inc., against the person, in which interest was sought in the state court complaint, during a time period from October 31, 2011, to October 31, 2017"; State Law – Improper Named Entity Class: "all persons, where Velo Associates, PLC, and/or Scott Renner filed a state court lawsuit in Michigan, in the name of Sun Homes Inc., against the person, during a time period from October 31, 2011, to October 31, 2017, where Account Adjustment Bureau, Inc. had entered into a written agreement, a Suit Authorization, with Sun Homes Inc." Excluded from these four classes are: All persons who have filed suit against any of the Defendants alleging similar improper interest and/or improper name of entity allegations, including but not limited to the following plaintiffs in the following litigation: Hudson v. Velo Legal Services, et al., 2:17-cv-10345-SJM- SDD (E.D. Mich.); Swan v. Velo Associates, 1:17-cv-00544-RJJ-PGJ (W.D. Mich.); Weber v. Velo PLC, et al., 1:17-cv-00493-PLM-PJG (W.D. Mich.); McLane v. Velo Associates, 1:17-cv-00272-JTN-ESC (W.D. Mich.); Vargas v. Velo Legal Services PLC, 1:17-cv-00295-JTN-ESC (W.D. Mich.); and Trick v. Velo Associates PLC, 17-80069-jwb (W.D. Bk. Mich.). 2. appointing Plaintiff as the class representative; and 3. appointing Curtis C. Warner as class counsel.[CC] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Curtis C. Warner, Esq. WARNER LAW FIRM, LLC 350 S. Northwest Hwy., Ste. 300 Park Ridge, IL 60068 Telephone: (847) 701-5290 E-mail: cwarner@warner.legal - and - John A. Evanchek, Esq. KELLEY & EVANCHEK PC 43695 Michigan Ave. Canton, MI 48188 Telephone: (734) 397-4540 E-mail: john@kelawpc.com VELOX EXPRES: Motion for Conditional Certification Denied as Moot ----------------------------------------------------------------- VANESSA YORK, MARSHALL EMMERLING, and MATTHEW MOSS, Each Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the PLAINTIFFS, vs. VELOX EXPRES, INC., the DEFENDANT, Case 3:18-cv-00481-CRS (W.D. Ky.), the Hon. Judge Charles R. Simpson III entered an order on Oct. 9, 2018, granting the Defendants' renewed motion to dismiss and denying the Plaintiffs' Motion for conditional certification as moot.[CC] VITAL RECOVERY: Placeholder Bid for Class Certification Filed ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned CYNTHIA JOHNSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. VITAL RECOVERY SERVICES LLC, the Defendant, Case No.: 18-cv-1603 (E.D. Wisc.), the Plaintiff asks the Court for an order certifying classes in this case, appointing the Plaintiff as class representative, and appointing Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP as Class Counsel, and for such other and further relief as the Court may deem appropriate. The Plaintiff further asks that the Court stay this class certification motion until an amended motion for class certification is filed, and that the Court grant the parties relief from the local rules’ automatic briefing schedule and requirement that Plaintiff file a brief and supporting documents in support of this motion. To avoid the risk of a defendant mooting a putative class representative's individual stake in the litigation, the Seventh Circuit instructed plaintiffs to file a certification motion with the complaint, along with a motion to stay briefing on the certification motion. Damasco v. Clearwire Corp., 662 F.3d 891, 896 (7th Cir. 2011), overruled on other grounds, Chapman v. First Index, Inc., 796 F.3d 783, 787 (7th Cir. 2015) ("The pendency of that motion [for class certification] protects a putative class from attempts to buy off the named plaintiffs."). While the Seventh Circuit has held that the specific procedure described in Campbell-Ewald cannot force the individual settlement of a class representative's claims, the same decision cautions that other methods may prevent a plaintiff from representing a class. Fulton Dental, LLC v. Bisco, Inc., 860 F.3d 541, 545-46 (7th Cir. 2017).[CC] Attorneys for the Plaintiff: Mark A. Eldridge, Esq. John D. Blythin, Esq. Jesse Fruchter, Esq. Ben J. Slatky, Esq. Ademi & O'Reilly, LLP 3620 East Layton Avenue Cudahy, WI 53110 Telephone: (414) 482-8000 Facsimile: (414) 482-8001 E-mail: jblythin@ademilaw.com meldridge@ademilaw.com jfruchter@ademilaw.com bslatky@ademilaw.com WALMART INC: Violated Video Privacy Protection Act, Capello Says ---------------------------------------------------------------- ALICIA CAPPELLO and CATHERINE MOSQUEDA, for themselves and all others similarly situated, the Planitffs, vs. WALMART, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. RG18923367 (Cal. Sup. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), alleges that Walmart violated the Video Privacy Protection Act, by disclosing walmart.com customers' identities and video media purchases to Facebook, Inc. According to the complaint, VPPA prohibits "video tape service providers" like Walmart from knowingly disclosing consumers' personally-identifiable information, including "information which identifies a person as having requested or obtained specific video materials or services from a video tape service provider," without express written consent in a stand-alone consent form. Walmart installed an advertising tool called a Facebook pixel on its retail website walmart.com that systematically disclosed to Face book: (1) walmart.com customers' Face book ID's, and (2) the Walmart product ID's of the products those customers purchased, the lawsuit says. Walmart Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and grocery stores.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs: Ray E. Gallo, Esq. Dominic R. Valerian, Esq. Nathaniel M. Simons, Esq. GALLO LLP 1604 Solano Ave., Suite B Berkeley, CA 94707 Telephone: (415) 257 8800 E-mail: rgallo@gallo.Jaw dvalerian@gallo.law nsimons@gallo.law WARNER MUSIC: Williams Seeks Cut from International Sales --------------------------------------------------------- LEONARD WILLIAMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. WARNER MUSIC GROUP CORP.; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00006 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 4, 2018) is an action against the Defendant for failure to properly account to the Plaintiff for income derived from the exploitation of the Plaintiff's musical works. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant is contractually required to pay artists a portion of the international revenue it receives from the exploitation of the Plaintiff's artistic works from digital streaming. The Compensation Agreements entered by the Plaintiff and the Defendant do not allow the Defendant to assess an "intercompany charge" for international sales reported by the Defendant through its wholly owned subsidiaries. Despite this fact, the Defendant did, and continues to, assess an intercompany charge for international sales. By assessing an intercompany charge for international sales, the Defendant impermissibly takes up to 40% off the top of the international revenue earned from streaming sales and bases the artist's royalty rate on the remainder, which methodology directly violates the terms of the Compensation Agreements. The Defendant is underreporting revenue generated from foreign sales by improperly assessing an intercompany charge on revenues collected through its wholly owned foreign affiliates, thereby reducing the share owed to the Plaintiff by the same amount. Warner Music Group Corp. operates as a music-based content company in the United States, the United Kingdom, and internationally. The company was founded in 1929 and is headquartered in New York, New York. Warner Music Group Corp. is a subsidiary of Access Industries, Inc. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Neville L. Johnson, Esq. Douglas L. Johnson, Esq. Arun Dayalan, Esq. JOHNSON & JOHNSON LLP 439 North Canon Drive, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (310) 975-1080 Facsimile: (310) 975-1095 E-mail: njohnson@jjllplaw.com djohnson@jjllplaw.com adayalan@jjllplaw.com - and - Paul R. Kiesel, Esq. Jeffrey A. Koncius, Esq. Nicole Ramirez, Esq. KIESEL LAW LLP 8648 Wilshire Boulevard Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2910 Telephone: (310) 854-4444 Facsimile: (310) 854-0812 E-mail: kiesel@kiesel.law koncius@kiesel.law ramirez@kiesel.law - and - Clifford H. Pearson, Esq. Daniel L. Warshaw, Esq. Bobby Pouya, Esq. PEARSON SIMON & WARSHAW LLP 15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (818) 788-8300 Facsimile: (818) 788-8104 E-mail: cpearson@pswlaw.com dwarshaw@pswlaw.com bpouya@pswlaw.com WESTCHESTER AMBULETTE: McCallum Seeks Unpaid Minimum Wages & OT --------------------------------------------------------------- ALISHA MCCALLUM, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. WESTCHESTER AMBULETTE SERVICE, INC., COUNTYWIDE TRANSPORTATION, INC., and any other affiliated entities that employed Plaintiff and members of the putative class, the Defendants, Case No. 159209/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Oct. 4, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid wages including unpaid wages, minimum wages, overtime compensation, spread-of-hours compensation, call-in pay, and uniform maintenance wages pursuant to New York Labor Law. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and the putative class of individuals are or were formerly employed by Defendants as drivers and matrons from October 4, 2012 to the present. The Defendants are in the ambulette transportation business. Like Plaintiff, members of the putative class were paid less then the applicable minimum wage rate. They were not paid overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 in a week, lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiffs and the putative class: Lloyd R. Ambinder, Esq. Jack L. Newhouse, Esq. Joel L. Goldenberg, Esq. VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP 40 Broad Street, 7th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 943-9080 E-mail: lambinder@vandallp.com WESTMINSTER PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Yachera Suit in M.D. Florida --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Westminster Pharmaceuticals, LLC. The case is captioned as Kim Yachera, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Westminster Pharmaceuticals, LLC; and CVS Pharmacy, Inc., Case No. 8:18-cv-02463-MSS-AAS (M.D. Fla., Oct. 3, 2018). The case is assigned to Judge Mary S. Scriven and referred to Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone. Westminster Pharmaceuticals, LLC was founded in 2012. The company's line of business includes the wholesale distribution of prescription drugs, proprietary drugs, and toiletries. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott A. Bursor, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, PA 888 Seventh Ave. New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 989-9113 Facsimile: (212) 989-9163 E-mail: scott@bursor.com WILMAR OILS: Flores Seeks Payment of OT & Minimum Wage ------------------------------------------------------ DANIEL FLORES, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs WILMAR OILS & FATS (STOCKTON) LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No. STK-CV-VOE-2018-12758, Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 11, 2018), seeks unpaid overtime and minimum wages under the California Labor Code. According to the complaint, the Defendant hired Plaintiff and other class members and classified them as hourly-paid, non-exempt employees, and failed to compensate them for all hours worked, missed meal periods and/or missed rest breaks. The Defendants knew or should have known that Plaintiff and other class members were entitled to receive certain wages for overtime compensation and that they were not receiving wages for overtime compensation, the lawsuit says. Wilmar Oils & Fats offers vegetable oil storage and processing services.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Douglas Han, Esq. Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION 411 North Central Avenue, Suite 500 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 230 7502 Facsimile: (818) 230 7259 ZOE'S KITCHEN: Mary Toth Balks at Merger Deal with Cava Group ------------------------------------------------------------- MARY TOTH, On Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. ZOE'S KITCHEN, INC., GREG DOLLARHYDE, THOMAS BALDWIN, SUE COLLINS, CORDIA HARRINGTON, KEVIN MILES, and ALEC TAYLOR, the Defendants, Case 4:18-cv-00706 (E.D. Tex., Oct. 5, 2018), alleges that the Defendants violated Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and breached fiduciary duty as a result of the Defendants' efforts to sell the Company as a result of an unfair process for an unfair price to Cava Group, Inc. and Pita Merger Sub, Inc. According to the complaint, the action seeks to enjoin a stockholder vote in which Cava, through its affiliates, will acquire each outstanding share of Zoe's Kitchen common stock for $12.75 per share in cash, with a total valuation of approximately $300 million. The terms of the Proposed Transaction were memorialized in an August 20, 2018 filing with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 8-K attaching the definitive Agreement and Plan of Merger. Under the terms of the Merger Agreement, Zoe's Kitchen will become an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of Cava, and Zoe's Kitchen stockholders will receive $12.75 in cash for each share of Zoe's Kitchen common stock they own. Thereafter, on September 25, 2018, Zoe's Kitchen filed a Preliminary Proxy Statement on Schedule Prem14A with the Securities and Exchange Commission in support of the Proposed Transaction. The Proposed Transaction is unfair and undervalued for a number of reasons. Significantly, the Preliminary Proxy describes an insufficient sales process in which the Board only paid lip service to its fiduciary duties by creating a committee of the Board to serve as a "Special Committee." However, the Preliminary Proxy reveals that the Special Committee was inherently conflicted as Defendant Dollarhyde, the Company Chairman of the Board, former Chief Executive Officer, and an inside Director, was selected to sit on the Special Committee. Moreover, the Preliminary Proxy does not indicate what powers, if any this Special Committee would have to veto a proposed strategic alternative, the lawsuit says. Zoes Kitchen is a fast casual restaurant chain headquartered in Plano, Texas.[BN] Attorneys for Plaintiff: Thomas E. Bilek, Esq. THE BILEK LAW FIRM, L.L.P. 700 Louisiana, Suite 3950 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (713) 227-7720 - and - Evan J. Smith, Esq. Marc L. Ackerman, Esq. BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC Two Bala Plaza, Suite 510 Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 Telephone: (610) 667 6200 E-mail: esmith@brodskysmith.com mackerman@brodskysmith.com ZOE'S KITCHEN: Monteverde & Associates Files Class Action --------------------------------------------------------- Monteverde & Associates PC on Oct. 10 disclosed that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, Case No.1:18-cv-01536-MN, on behalf of public common shareholders of Zoe's Kitchen, Inc. ("Zoe's Kitchen" or the "Company") (NYSE: ZOES) who held Zoe's Kitchen securities on the record date October 22, 2018 (the "Class Period"), and have been harmed by Zoe's Kitchen and its board of directors' (the "Board") alleged violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") in connection with the sale of the Company to Cava Group, Inc. ("Cava Group"). Under the terms of the agreement, Zoe's Kitchen shareholders are only anticipated to receive $12.75 in cash (the "Merger Consideration") for each share of Zoe's Kitchen common stock they hold. The complaint alleges that the Merger Consideration is inadequate and that the Proxy Statement provides shareholders with materially incomplete and misleading information about the Company's financials and the Proposed Transaction, in violation of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. In particular, the complaint alleges that the Proxy Statement contains materially incomplete and misleading information concerning: (i) financial projections for Zoe's Kitchen and Cava Group; (ii) the valuation analyses performed by the Company's financial advisor in support of its fairness opinion; and (iii) the background process leading up to the Proposed Transaction. The special meeting of Zoe's Kitchen stockholders to vote on the Proposed Transaction is scheduled for November 20, 2018. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than December 4, 2018. 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. Click here for more information: https://monteverdelaw.com/case/zoes-kitchen-inc. It is free and there is no cost or obligation to you. Monteverde & Associates PC is a national class action securities and consumer litigation law firm committed that has recovered millions of dollars and is committed to protecting shareholders and consumers from corporate wrongdoing. Monteverde & Associates PC lawyers have significant experience litigating mergers & acquisitions and securities class actions, whereby they protect investors by recovering money and remedying corporate misconduct. Mr. Monteverde, who leads the legal team at the firm, has been recognized by Super Lawyers as a Rising Star in Securities Litigation in 2013 and 2017, an award given to less than 2.5% of attorneys in a particular field. He has also been selected by Martindale-Hubbell as a 2017 Top Rated Lawyer. Contact: Juan E. Monteverde, Esq. MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC The Empire State Building 350 Fifth Ave, Suite 4405 New York, NY 10118 United States of America jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com Tel: (212) 971-1341 [GN] ********* 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 ***