/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/181105.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Monday, November 5, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 221
Headlines
178 7TH AVENUE: Violates ADA, Fishcler Suit Says
4IMPRINT INC: Faces Crosson ADA Class Action
ABBVIE INC: Holwill Sues over Kickbacks, Share Price Drop
ADOMANI INC: Amended Complaint Mulled in Mollik Class Action
AERIN HOLDINGS: Conner Files ADA Suit in New York
AL'S PLASTICS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Morfin Suit Alleges
ALDER WALLACH: Faces Langlois and Sandoval Suit in Sacramento CA
ALKERMES PLC: Oral Argument Held in Gagnon Class Action
ALL-CITY MANAGEMENT: Underpays Supervisors, Patton et al. Claim
ANTONYM COSMETICS: Kiler Files ADA Suit in New York
ARIANNA SKINCARE: Violates Disabilities Act, Figueroa Suit Says
ARMOUR RESIDENTIAL: Bid to Dismiss Merger Suit Still Pending
ART + COMMERCE LLC: Fails to Pay Proper OT, Rolsen Suit Alleges
AXOS FINANCIAL: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suits
BAGGU CORPORATION: Figueroa Files Suit Asserting ADA Violation
BETO FOR TEXAS: Syed Sues over Unwanted Telephone Calls
BIG APPLE: Torres Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA
BIMBO BAKERIES: Faces Morones Suit in Sacramento
BIOGEN INC: Appeal in Massachusetts Class Action Still Pending
BIRD AND LIME: 9 People Join E-Scooter Class Action
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Website Not Blind-accessible, Dominguez Says
BRINKER INTERNATIONAL: Franklin Suit Moved to M.D. Florida
BUCK MASON: Figueroa Class Action Asserts ADA Violation
CAFEPRESS: Law Firm Mulls Securities Class Action
CAMPING WORLD: Dec. 18 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
CAMPING WORLD: Misled Investors over Finances, David Ronge Claims
CAMTRENT LLC: Underpays Maintenance Workers, Romero Alleges
CASH CONVERTERS: Settles Borrowers' Class Action for $16.4MM
CENTENE CORP: Bid to Dismiss Suit over Ambetter Policies Ongoing
CENTENE CORP: Still Awaits Court OK on Bid to Dismiss Sanchez Suit
CHATTANOOGA PIZZA: Gibson Shortchanged on Vehicle Reimbursements
CITIGROUP INC: Dec. 21 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
CLIENT SERVICES: Vandehey Sues over Debt Collection Practices
CMR INC: Salas FLSA Suit Moved to Central District of California
CRES PROPERTY: Ware Sues over Debt Collection Practices
CRESCENT CONSULTING: Whitlow Suit Transferred to Oklahoma
DIRECT ENERGY: Made Unsolicited Calls, Shelton and Frey Claim
DIVERSIFIED CONSULTANTS: Vedernikov Files Class Suit Under FDCPA
DOORDASH INC: Must Arbitrate Misclassification Class Action
DPL ASSOCIATES: Biegeleisen Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
EARTHBATH INC: Faces Jurado Suit in Eastern District of New York
EMPIRE TODAY: Underpays Salespersons, Fallon Suit Alleges
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: McKinney Files Suit Under FCRA
FACEBOOK INC: Class C Reclassification Litigation Dismissed
FEDEX GROUND: Drivers Request $3.9MM in Attorneys' Fees
FIVE STAR HOME: Carmen Aria et al. Seek Unpaid Compensation
FUJITSU AMERICA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bianco Suit Alleges
GAPPSI INC: Fails to Pay Construction Workers, Blaszczyk Alleges
GENENTECH INC: Gerneth's Subpoena Bid Underway
GENERAL MOTORS: Faces Peckerar et al. Suit in C.D. California
GUERLAIN INC: Figueroa Suit Asserts ADA Violation
HEALTHSOURCE GLOBAL: Marron Sues over Background Checks
HF COX INC: Underpays Truck Drivers, Gutierrez Suit Alleges
HIMS INC: Andrews Brings ADA Class Suit in New York
HOBBY LOBBY: Marcrum Suit Moved to Northern District of Alabama
HUNTER WARFIELD: Walkers File FDCPA Suit in Florida
IMAGE PROPERTY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Barajas Suit Alleges
IMPERIAL MARBLE: Olson Class Suit Underway in Illinois
JAMAICA PANCAKE: Ramkalup Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA
JERICHO RESTAURANT: Pollier Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Class Certification Bid Granted in Elkies Suit
KING'S HAWAIIAN: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Robinson Suit Alleges
LA MAISON: Faces ADA Class Action in New York
MAGNOLIA BAKERY: Figueroa Sues Bakery for ADA Breach
MERCANTILE ADJUSTMENT: Sanchez Sues over Debt Collection Practices
MERCK & CO: Pinwnicki Suit Moved to Eastern Dist. of Pennsylvania
METAL FINISHING: Ringley Seeks Unpaid Wages under WARN Act
MIDLAND FUNDING: Fetai Sues Over Autodialed Collection Calls
MORRISONS: Loses First Data Leak Class Action in UK
MYGRANT GLASS: Underpays Delivery Drivers, Cong Suit Alleges
NORTHROP GRUMMAN: Mediation Session in Knurr Suit to Begin Tuesday
OCTOBER'S VERY OWN: Faces Figueroa ADA Class Action
OUTBOUND ENGINE: Thomas Sues over Unwanted Telephone Calls
PACIFIC GRAIN: Sued over Wrongful Termination of Employment
PACIFIC LOGISTICS: Dwayne Ballard Sues over Background Checks
PARKSMAN PARKING: Gonzales Worked Through Breaks, Says Suit
PAYPAL HOLDINGS: Sgarlata Class Action Underway
PHARMAVITE LLC: Pharmavite Files Petition for Writ of Certiorari
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Smith Sues over Debt Collections Practices
REALOGY GROUP: Bryant Suit Moved to Middle District of Florida
RELAY DELIVERY: Alvarez Files Suit Over Unpaid Wages
RESTAURANTS BRANDS: Arrington and Michel Class Suits Filed
SAVOYA LLC: Alabsi Sues Over FLSA Violation
SELECT PORTFOLIO: Evans Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
SOLO HEALTHCARE: Duffy et al Suit Moved to District of New Jersey
SONIC CORP: Seeks Initial Approval of Settlement in Malware Suit
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: Removes Tanis Suit to S.D. California
STACK'S-BOWERS: Delacruz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
SUNPOWER CORPORATION: Faces Sanchez Suit in California State Court
SUPERCOM INC: Judge Dismisses Securities Class Action
TORNE VALLEY: Faces Wu Suit in Southern District of New York
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Harbour Funds Taxi Drivers' Class Action
UNILEVER US: 'ICBINB Spray' Ads Deceptive, Zizumbo et al. Claim
VIE DE FRANCE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Rodriguez Alleges
WASH MULTIFAMILY: Sherman Grove et al. Sue over Extra Fees
WELLS FARGO: Rawls Sues over Debt Collection Practices
WELLS FARGO: Underpays Mortgage Loan Officers, Reyes-Aguilar Says
WHITECLIFF VINEYARD: Faces Wu Suit in Southern District of New York
WOLFFER ESTATE: Faces Wu Suit in Eastern District of New York
XANITOS INC: Byczek Sues over Collection of Biometric Data
XBIOTECH INC: Travis County District Court Tosses Securities Suit
*********
178 7TH AVENUE: Violates ADA, Fishcler Suit Says
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against 178 7th Avenue
Corporation. The case is styled as Brian Fischler individually and
on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 178
7th Avenue Corporation doing business as: Village Vanguard,
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09899 (S.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
The Village Vanguard is a jazz club at Seventh Avenue South in
Greenwich Village, New York City. The club was opened on February
22, 1935, by Max Gordon. At first, the club presented folk music
and beat poetry, but it became a jazz venue in 1957.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
4IMPRINT INC: Faces Crosson ADA Class Action
--------------------------------------------
4imprint, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit in New York for
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is
styled as Aretha Crosson individually and as the representative of
a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. 4imprint, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-05984 (E.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
4imprint, Inc. retails promotional products for corporate customers
online. The company offers corporate gifts, personalized gifts,
custom T-shirts, promotional pens, travel mugs, tote bags, water
bottles, Post-it Notes, custom calendars, custom shirts and much
more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq.
Shaked Law Group, P.C.
44 Court Street, Suite 1217
Brooklyn, NY 11217
Phone: (917) 373-9128
Fax: (718) 504-7555
Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com
ABBVIE INC: Holwill Sues over Kickbacks, Share Price Drop
---------------------------------------------------------
MAYUKO HOLWILL, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. ABBVIE INC., RICHARD A. GONZALEZ, and
WILLIAM J. CHASE, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-06790 (N.D.
Ill., Oct. 9, 2018), seeks to recover compensable 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 and entities
other than Defendants who purchased or otherwise acquired the
publicly traded securities of AbbVie between October 25, 2013 and
September 18, 2018, both dates inclusive. The Defendants made
materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's
business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, the
Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose that: (1) AbbVie's strategy to increase the sales growth
of its blockbuster drug, HUMIRA, relied in part upon illegal
kickbacks and unlawful sales and marketing tactics; (2) such
practices would foreseeably lead to heightened scrutiny by State
governments and agencies; and (3) as a result, the Defendants'
public statements were materially false and misleading at all
relevant times.
On September 18, 2018, the State of California, through its
Insurance Commissioner, filed suit against AbbVie, alleging that
the Company "systematically and repeatedly" violated anti-kickback
laws by "pa[ying] healthcare providers to prescribe HUMIRA far in
excess of the amount that they would have prescribed this expensive
and dangerous drug absent the illegal kickbacks". On this news,
AbbVie's stock price fell $4.35 per share, or over 4.5%, over the
next two trading days, to close at $91.02 per share on September
19, 2018. As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and
omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the
Company's securities, the Plaintiff and other Class members have
suffered significant losses and damages, the lawsuit says.
AbbVie discovers, develops, manufactures, and sells pharmaceutical
products worldwide. HUMIRA is AbbVie's blockbuster drug, which is
used to treat Crohn's disease, rheumatoid arthritis, ulcerative
colitis, psoriasis, and other ailments.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 661 1100
Facsimile: (212) 661 8665
E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
ahood@pomlaw.com
pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com
ADOMANI INC: Amended Complaint Mulled in Mollik Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------
ADOMANI, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 24, 2018, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that plaintiff's counsel
in the case entitled, M.D. Ariful Mollik v. ADOMANI, Inc. et al.,
has indicated that the plaintiff will be filing an amended
complaint.
On August 23, 2018, a purported class action lawsuit captioned M.D.
Ariful Mollik v. ADOMANI, Inc. et al., Case No. RIC 1817493, was
filed in the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Riverside against the Company, certain of its executive
officers, and the two underwriters of its offering of common stock
under Regulation A in June 2017.
This complaint alleges that documents related to the Company's
offering of common stock under Regulation A in June 2017 contained
materially false and misleading statements and that all defendants
violated Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended
(the "Securities Act"), and that the Company and the individual
defendants violated Section 15 of the Securities Act, in connection
therewith.
The plaintiff seeks on behalf of himself and all class members: (i)
certification of a class under California substantive law and
procedure; (ii) compensatory damages and interest in an amount to
be proven at trial; (iii) reasonable costs and expenses incurred in
this action, including counsel fees and expert fees; (iv) awarding
of rescission or rescissionary damages; and (v) equitable relief at
the discretion of the Court.
Plaintiff's counsel has indicated that the plaintiff will be filing
an amended complaint in the next several months, at which time the
Company will respond accordingly.
The Company believes that the purported class action lawsuit is
without merit and intends to vigorously defend the action.
ADOMANI, Inc. provides zero-emission electric and hybrid drivetrain
systems for integration in new and existing school buses and medium
to heavy-duty commercial fleet vehicles. Its products include
traction motor/generator and motor controller, as well as
power-flow set up for direct-drive configuration, which is a single
speed gearbox, or a multi-gear ration transmission system. The
company was founded in 2012 and is headquartered in Corona,
California.
AERIN HOLDINGS: Conner Files ADA Suit in New York
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Aerin Holdings LLC.
The case is styled as Mary Conner individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff
v. Aerin Holdings LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09858 (S.D.
N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Aerin Holdings LLC is in the Patent Buying, Licensing, Leasing
business.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq.
Shaked Law Group P.C.
44 Court Street, Suite 1217
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 373-9128
Fax: (718) 504-7555
Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com
AL'S PLASTICS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Morfin Suit Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
GILBERTO MARTINEZ MORFIN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AL'S PLASTICS, INC.; ALEX MENDRIN
d/b/a AL'S PLASTICS; ALEX MENDRIN; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00621 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 10, 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 Morfin was employed by the Defendants as non-exempt
employee.
Al's Plastics was founded in 1981. The company's line of business
includes the wholesale distribution of plastics materials. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James R. Hawkins, Esq.
Isandra Fernandez, Esq.
JAMES HAWKINS APLC
9880 Research Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
Telephone: (949) 387-7200
Facsimile: (949) 387-6676
ALDER WALLACH: Faces Langlois and Sandoval Suit in Sacramento CA
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Alder Wallach &
Associates Inc. The case is captioned as Christie Langlois; and
Brittany Sandoval, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Alder Wallach & Associates Inc.;
and Does 1-100, Defendants, Case No. 34-2018-00242141-CU-NP-GDS
(Cal. Super., Sacramento Cty., Oct. 9, 2018).
Adler Wallach & Associates, Inc., doing business as AWA
Collections, provides debt collection services. It offers
delinquent accounts receivable collection; pre-collection; early
out collection; third party collection; bankruptcy filing and
monitoring; second placement; mailing; litigation filing; asset
investigation; skip tracing; and credit bureau reporting services.
The company is based in Orange, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by Todd M. Friedman, Esq., at the law
offices of Todd M. Friedman.
ALKERMES PLC: Oral Argument Held in Gagnon Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
Alkermes Public Limited Company said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 23, 2018,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that oral
argument has been held in the putative class action suit entitled,
Gagnon v. Alkermes plc, et al., No. 1:17-cv-09178.
On November 22, 2017, a purported stockholder of the Company filed
a putative class action against the Company and certain of its
officers (collectively, the "Defendants") in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York captioned
Gagnon v. Alkermes plc, et al., No. 1:17-cv-09178.
This complaint has been amended twice since its initial filing. The
second amended complaint was filed on behalf of a putative class of
purchasers of Alkermes securities during the period of February 24,
2015 to November 14, 2017 and alleges violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, based
on allegedly false or misleading statements and omissions regarding
the Company's marketing practices related to VIVITROL.
The lawsuit seeks, among other things, unspecified damages for
alleged inflation in the price of securities, and reasonable costs
and expenses, including attorneys' fees.
On June 29, 2018, Defendants filed a motion to dismiss the second
amended complaint. Oral arguments on this motion were scheduled to
be heard on October 23, 2018.
Alkermes plc, a biopharmaceutical company, researches, develops,
and commercializes pharmaceutical products to address unmet medical
needs of patients in various therapeutic areas in the United
States, Ireland, and internationally. Alkermes plc was founded in
1987 and is headquartered in Dublin, Ireland.
ALL-CITY MANAGEMENT: Underpays Supervisors, Patton et al. Claim
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOYCE PATTON, and PAMELA ROBINSON, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ALL-CITY MANAGEMENT
SERVICES, INC.; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. BC723958 (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 Plaintiffs Patton and Robinson were employed by the Defendants
as area supervisors.
All City Management Services, Inc. provides crossing guard services
for public schools. The Company markets its services to school
districts in the State of California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Danny Yadidsion, Esq.
LABOR LAW PC
100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 700
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 494-6082
Facsimile: (877) 775-2267
E-mail: Danny@LaborLawPC.com
ANTONYM COSMETICS: Kiler Files ADA Suit in New York
---------------------------------------------------
Marion Kiler has filed a class action lawsuit against Antonym
Cosmetics LLC. The case is styled as Marion Kiler, individually and
as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons,
Plaintiff v. Antonym Cosmetics LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:18-cv-05978 (E.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Antonym Cosmetics is a natural and organic makeup brand.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
ARIANNA SKINCARE: Violates Disabilities Act, Figueroa Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Arianna Skincare,
LLC. The case is styled as Jose Figueroa on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Arianna Skincare, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09871 (S.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Arianna Skincare is an all-natural skincare brand that focuses on
the many benefits stemming from the power of Dead Sea
minerals.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 299-6612
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: joseph@cml.legal
ARMOUR RESIDENTIAL: Bid to Dismiss Merger Suit Still Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
ARMOUR Residential REIT, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 24, 2018,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the court
has not issued an order on the defendants' motion to dismiss in the
case entitled, In re JAVELIN Mortgage Investment Corp. Shareholder
Litigation.
Nine putative class action lawsuits have been filed in connection
with the tender offer (the "Tender Offer") and merger (the
"Merger") for JAVELIN. The Tender Offer and Merger are collectively
defined herein as the "Transactions."
All nine suits name ARMOUR, the previous members of JAVELIN's board
of directors prior to the Merger (of which eight are current
members of ARMOUR's board of directors) (the "Individual
Defendants") and JMI Acquisition Corporation ("Acquisition") as
defendants.
Certain cases also name ARMOUR Capital Management LP (ACM) and
JAVELIN as additional defendants. The lawsuits were brought by
purported holders of JAVELIN's common stock, both individually and
on behalf of a putative class of JAVELIN's stockholders, alleging
that the Individual Defendants breached their fiduciary duties owed
to the plaintiffs and the putative class of JAVELIN stockholders,
including claims that the Individual Defendants failed to properly
value JAVELIN; failed to take steps to maximize the value of
JAVELIN to its stockholders; ignored or failed to protect against
conflicts of interest; failed to disclose material information
about the Transactions; took steps to avoid competitive bidding and
to give ARMOUR an unfair advantage by failing to adequately solicit
other potential acquirors or alternative transactions; and erected
unreasonable barriers to other third-party bidders.
The suits also allege that ARMOUR, JAVELIN, ACM and Acquisition
aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duties by the
Individual Defendants. The lawsuits seek equitable relief,
including, among other relief, to enjoin consummation of the
Transactions, or rescind or unwind the Transactions if already
consummated, and award costs and disbursements, including
reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses.
The sole Florida lawsuit was never served on the defendants, and
that case was voluntarily dismissed and closed on January 20, 2017.
On April 25, 2016, the Maryland court issued an order consolidating
the eight Maryland cases into one action, captioned In re JAVELIN
Mortgage Investment Corp. Shareholder Litigation (Case No.
24-C-16-001542), and designated counsel for one of the Maryland
cases as interim lead co-counsel. On May 26, 2016, interim lead
counsel filed the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint for
Breach of Fiduciary Duty asserting consolidated claims of breach of
fiduciary duty, aiding and abetting the breaches of fiduciary duty,
and waste.
On June 27, 2016, defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the
Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint for failing to state a
claim upon which relief can be granted. A hearing was held on the
Motion to Dismiss on March 3, 2017, and the Court reserved ruling.
To date, the Court has not issued an order on the Motion to
Dismiss.
No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report.
ARMOUR Residential REIT, Inc. invests in residential mortgage
backed securities in the United States. The company is managed by
ARMOUR Capital Management LP. The company was founded in 2008 and
is based in Vero Beach, Florida.
ART + COMMERCE LLC: Fails to Pay Proper OT, Rolsen Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
T. ROLSEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ART + COMMERCE, LLC; ART + COMMERCE FILM,
LLC; JIMMY MOFFAT; and DOE ONE TO TEN, Defendants, Case No.
18STCV00206 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 10, 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 Rolsen was employed by the Defendants as employee for
the TV commercial production Farfetch Commercial.
Art + Commerce, an artists representation organization, offers
commercial photography services. It helps artists to build their
archives of published work and digital files for perpetuity. Art +
Commerce is based in New York, New York. As of February 14, 2007,
Art + Commerce is a subsidiary of IMG Worldwide, Inc. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alan Harris, Esq.
Min Ji Gal, Esq.
HARRIS & RUBLE
655 North Central Avenue 17th Floor
Glendale, CA 91203
Telephone: (323) 962-3777
Facsimile: (323) 962-3004
E-mail: harrisa@harrisandruble.com
mgal@harrisandruble.com
AXOS FINANCIAL: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suits
----------------------------------------------------------
Axos Financial, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 24, 2018, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the company
continues to defend multiple class action suits.
On October 15, 2015, the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and
its Chief Financial Officer were named defendants in a putative
class action lawsuit styled Golden v. BofI Holding, Inc., et al,
and brought in United States District Court for the Southern
District of California (the "Golden Case"). On November 3, 2015,
the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and its Chief Financial
Officer were named defendants in a second putative class action
lawsuit styled Hazan v. BofI Holding, Inc., et al, and also brought
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
California (the "Hazan Case").
On February 1, 2016, the Golden Case and the Hazan Case were
consolidated as In re BofI Holding, Inc. Securities Litigation,
Case #: 3:15-cv-02324-GPC-KSC (the "Class Action"), and the Houston
Municipal Employees Pension System was appointed lead plaintiff.
The plaintiffs allege that the Company and other named defendants
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, by failing to disclose
wrongful conduct that was alleged in a complaint filed in
connection with a wrongful termination of employment lawsuit filed
on October 13, 2015 (the "Employment Matter") and that as a result
the Company's statements regarding its internal controls, as well
as portions of its financial statements, were false and misleading.
On March 21, 2018, the Court entered a final order dismissing the
Class Action with prejudice. On March 28, 2018, the plaintiff filed
a notice of appeal.
On April 3, 2017, the Company, its Chief Executive Officer and its
Chief Financial Officer were named defendants in a putative class
action lawsuit styled Mandalevy v. BofI Holding, Inc., et al, and
brought in United States District Court for the Southern District
of California (the "Mandalevy Case"). The Mandalevy Case seeks
monetary damages and other relief on behalf of a putative class
that has not been certified by the Court. The complaint in the
Mandalevy Case (the "Mandalevy Complaint") alleges a class period
that differs from that alleged in the First Class Action, and that
the Company and other named defendants violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder, by failing to disclose wrongful conduct
that was alleged in a March 2017 media article. The Mandalevy Case
has not been consolidated into the First Class Action.
xos Financial said, "The Company and the other named defendants
dispute the allegations of wrongdoing advanced by the plaintiffs in
the Class Action, the Mandalevy Case, and in the Employment Matter,
as well as those plaintiffs' statement of the underlying factual
circumstances, and are vigorously defending each case."
Axos Financial, Inc. operates as the holding company for BofI
Federal Bank that provides consumer and business banking products
in the United States. The company offers deposits products,
including consumer and business checking, demand, savings, and time
deposit accounts. Axos Financial, Inc. was incorporated in 1999 and
is based in San Diego, California.
BAGGU CORPORATION: Figueroa Files Suit Asserting ADA Violation
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Baggu Corporation.
The case is styled as Jose Figueroa on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Baggu Corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09890-LGS (S.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Baggu Corporation's original and best-selling item is their
namesake ripstop nylon shopping bag. Based on the construction of
the plastic grocery bag, the Standard Baggu is durable,
lightweight, and can hold 2-3 times more than a traditional grocery
bag. BAGGU has a studio in California and is led by the creative
team that started the company in 2007.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 299-6612
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: joseph@cml.legal
BETO FOR TEXAS: Syed Sues over Unwanted Telephone Calls
-------------------------------------------------------
SAMEER SYED, individually and on behalf of all other similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. BETO FOR TEXAS, the Defendant, Case
3:18-cv-02791-S (N.D. Tex., Oct. 19, 2018), seeks to recover
damages pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, in 2018, the Plaintiff began receiving
text messages to his cellular phones, (973) XXX-5508 and (201)
XXX-6609, from the Defendant. The Plaintiff was the sole
subscriber, owner, and operator of the cellular phone ending in
-5508 and -6609. The Plaintiff is and always has been financially
responsible for the cellular phone and its services. The Plaintiff
received at least 9 text messages from the Defendant from different
phone numbers. When the Plaintiff called the phone numbers that the
Defendant's text messages came from, all calls resulted in error
messages or disconnected dial tones. This illustrates that text
messages did not originate from cellular phones but came from an
automated telephone dialing system.
The Defendant knew the Plaintiff's phone numbers were cellular
telephone phone numbers before the Defendant sent text messages to
those phone numbers. The Defendant never had permission to text or
call the Plaintiff's cellular telephones, the lawsuit says.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Shawn Jaffer, Esq.
SHAWN JAFFER LAW FIRM PLLC
15950 Dallas Parkway, Suite 400
Dallas, TX 75248
Telephone: 214 210-0730
Facsimile: 214 594-6100
E-mail: shawn@jafflaw.com
BIG APPLE: Torres Seeks Unpaid Overtime under FLSA
--------------------------------------------------
MANUEL TORRES, the Plaintiff, vs. BIG APPLE CONTRACTORS, LLC and
MISHAEL SADYKOV, individually, the Defendants, Case 1:18-cv-05874
(E.D.N.Y., Oct. 21, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
compensation and earned wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act
and New York Labor Law.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and the collective class
work or have worked as construction workers for Big Apple
Contractors, LLC, located in New York, New York owned and managed
by Sadykov.
The Defendants failed to compensate Plaintiff and members of the
FLSA Collective at one and one-half times the employee's wage for
all hours worked in excess of 40 during any workweek. The exact
accounting of such discrepancy can only be determined upon
completion of discovery, the lawsuit says.
Big Apple Contractors LLC delivers quality work at reasonable
prices.[BN]
Attorney for Plaintiff:
Jacob Aronauer, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JACOB ARONAUER
225 Broadway, 3rd floor
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 323-6980
Facsimile: (212) 233-9238
E-mail: jaronauer@aronauerlaw.com
BIMBO BAKERIES: Faces Morones Suit in Sacramento
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bimbo Bakeries USA
Inc. The case is captioned as Maria Morones, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Bimbo
Bakeries USA Inc., and Does 1-50 Defendants, Case No.
34-2018-00242133-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super., Sacramento Cty., Oct. 9,
2018).
Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. offers baking solutions. The company
provides breads, rolls, bagels, English muffins, and sweet baked
goods. It markets its products under THOMAS, ARNOLD, OROWEAT,
BIMBO, and BROWNBERRY brand names. The company was incorporated in
1993 and is based in Horsham, Pennsylvania. Bimbo Bakeries USA,
Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Grupo Bimbo, S.A.B. de C.V. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by Larry W. Lee, Esq.
BIOGEN INC: Appeal in Massachusetts Class Action Still Pending
--------------------------------------------------------------
Biogen Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on October 23, 2018, for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2018, that the plaintiff's appeal in the
class action suit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Massachusetts, is still pending.
Biogen said, "We and certain current and former officers are
defendants in an action filed by a shareholder in October 2016 in
the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts alleging
violations of federal securities laws under 15 U.S.C Section 78j(b)
and Section 78t(a) and 17 C.F.R. Section 240.10b-5 and seeking a
declaration of the action as a class action and an award of
damages, interest and attorneys' fees.
In March 2018 the court dismissed the complaint with prejudice. The
plaintiff's appeal is pending. An estimate of the possible loss or
range of loss cannot be made at this time.
No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report.
Biogen Inc. discovers, develops, manufactures, and delivers
therapies for the treatment of neurological and neurodegenerative
diseases worldwide. The company was formerly known as Biogen Idec
Inc. and changed its name to Biogen Inc. in March 2015. Biogen Inc.
was founded in 1978 and is headquartered in Cambridge,
Massachusetts.
BIRD AND LIME: 9 People Join E-Scooter Class Action
---------------------------------------------------
Lizbeth Licon, Angie Crouch and Shahan Ahmed, writing for NBC Los
Angeles, report that nine people have joined a class-action lawsuit
filed on Oct. 19 in Los Angeles County Superior Court against
e-scooter companies Bird and Lime, along with their manufacturers,
alleging "gross negligence," attorney Catherine Lerer told NBC4.
People in the lawsuit, along with several others represented by the
attorney, listed their injuries on the personal attorney's website
with graphic images that detail the injuries, which occurred in San
Diego, Santa Monica, Oakland, Los Angeles, Venice, West Hollywood
and Westwood.
Broken arms, facial injuries, broken legs, broken teeth,
concussions, lacerations and other injuries are detailed on the
website. Several people claimed to have required surgery.
The lawsuit alleges that the e-scooter companies contributed to
injuries in multiple ways by "dumping" the transportation devices
on streets without appropriate warning, The Washington Post
reported.
Multiple plaintiffs claim that they were struck by e-scooters while
walking. In one incident involving David Petersen, 62, the lawsuit
alleges the licensed street performer was struck by an e-scooter
while performing an act on the Santa Monica Pier, where e-scooters
are not allowed.
"I was like, 'Get the number of that motor vehicle that hit me,'"
Mr. Petersen said on Oct. 22. "But guess what? They don't have a
license plate. There's no way to identify them."
Mr. Petersen broke his arm and suffered a ruptured bicep that
required surgery. The rider of the Bird scooter rode away, and the
incident was being called a hit-and-run, with Mr. Petersen and Ms.
Lerer alleging that Bird had refused to provide the rider's name
when requested.
"I'd like to walk without looking over my shoulder every few
seconds," Mr. Petersen said.
Bird issued a statement in response to the lawsuit on Oct. 22:
"Class action attorneys with a real interest in improving
transportation safety should be focused on reducing the 40,000
deaths caused by cars every year in the U.S. At Bird, safety is our
very top priority, and it drives our mission to get cars off the
road to make cities safer and more livable. The climate crisis and
our car addiction demand a transportation mode shift to cleaner,
affordable vehicles. Shared e-scooters are already replacing
millions of short car trips and the pollution that comes with them,
and we at Bird will continue to work with cities to help them
redesign their transportation networks so that they are safer and
cleaner."
Lime issued the following statement in response to the lawsuit on
Oct. 22:
"Lime received the complaint recently and we are in the process of
reviewing it. While we don't comment on pending litigation, safety
has always been at the very core of everything we do at Lime -- as
is our mission of reducing cars from city streets and making them
safer and greener for pedestrians, bike and scooter riders alike.
Lime prides itself on always taking proactive steps relating to
safety wherever we have a presence." [GN]
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Website Not Blind-accessible, Dominguez Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Yovanny Dominguez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. BMW of North America, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 1:18-cv-09785 (S.D. N.Y., October 24, 2018) is brought against
the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people.
Defendant's websites, www.bmwusa.com and www.miniusa.com, are not
equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, which
is a violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, notes the
complaint.
Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
Yovanny Dominguez, at all relevant times, was a resident of Bronx,
New York. Plaintiff is a blind, visually-impaired handicapped
person and a member of a protected class of individuals under the
ADA.
Defendant is and was at all relevant times a Delaware Limited
Liability Company doing business in New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Fl.
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (929) 575-4175
Facsimile: (929) 575-4195
Email: Joseph@cml.legal
- and -
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Email: nyjg@aol.com
danalgottlieb@aol.com
BRINKER INTERNATIONAL: Franklin Suit Moved to M.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Michael Franklin, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Brinker
International, Inc. doing business as: CHILI'S GRILL AND BAR; and
Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-05323,
was removed from the Central District of California, to the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Florida on October 9,
2018. The Middle District of Florida Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:18-cv-01189-HES-JBT (M.D. Fla., Oct. 9, 2018) to the proceeding.
The Case is assigned to Senior Judge Harvey E. Schlesinger and
referred to Magistrate Judge Joel B. Toomey.
Brinker International, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, owns,
develops, operates, and franchises casual dining restaurants in the
United States and internationally. As of June 27, 2018, it owned,
operated, or franchised 1,686 restaurants comprising 997
company-owned restaurants and 689 franchised restaurants under the
Chili's Grill & Bar and Maggiano's Little Italy brand names. The
company was founded in 1975 and is based in Dallas, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Frank A. Perez, Esq.
Graham B LippSmith, Esq.
Jaclyn L Anderson, Esq.
KASDANLIPPSMITH WEBER TURNER LLP
360 East 2nd Street, Suite 300
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Telephone: (213) 254-4800
Facsimile: (213) 254-4801
- and -
Robert Ahdoot, Esq.
Tina Wolfson, Esq.
AHDOOT& WOLFSON, PC
10850 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 370
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Telephone: (310) 474-9111
Facsimile: (310) 474-8585
- and -
Theodore W Maya, Esq.
AHDOOT& WOLFSON, PC
10728 Lindbrook Drive
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Telephone: (310) 474-9111
Facsimile: (310) 474-8585
E-mail:tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jason K Fagelman, Esq.
NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
2200 Ross Avenue Suite 2800
Dallas, TX 75201-2784
Telephone: (214) 855-8000
Facsimile: (214) 855-8200
E-mail: jason.fagelman@nortonrosefulbright.com
- and -
Kelsey Ann Maher, Esq.
NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
555 South Flower Street 41st Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 892-9283
Facsimile: (213) 892-9494
E-mail: kelsey.maher@nortonrosefulbright.com
- and -
Spencer Persson, Esq.
NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
555 S Flower St., 41st Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 892-9200
E-mail: spencer.persson@nortonrosefulbright.com
BUCK MASON: Figueroa Class Action Asserts ADA Violation
-------------------------------------------------------
Buck Mason Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit in New York. The
case is styled as Jose Figueroa on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Buck Mason Inc., Defendant, Case
No. 1:18-cv-09887 (S.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Buck Mason is an online retailer that sells tees, shirts, bottoms,
and accessories. Its products include classic and pima tees,
henleys, belts, shorts, and pants.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 299-6612
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: joseph@cml.legal
CAFEPRESS: Law Firm Mulls Securities Class Action
-------------------------------------------------
Brendan Menapace, writing for pro marketing, reports that
everything seemed to be relatively wrapped up for CafePress. After
setting itself up to be acquired by Snapfish, it seemed like it was
pretty much the point where the credits start rolling and we assume
CafePress lives happily ever after in its new life.
That's not the case just yet, though.
The law firm Levi & Korsinsky LLP announced that it has started an
investigation into the fairness of the sale, particularly the
valuation of the company's shares. This is the same law firm that
brought about a securities fraud lawsuit against InnerWorkings
Inc., and it's for pretty much the same reason.
The investigation is focused on whether CafePress' board "breached
their fiduciary duties to stockholders by failing to adequately
shop the company before agreeing to enter into this transaction,"
according to Financial Buzz. Snapfish's role in it is also under
investigation, particularly whether or not it is underpaying for
CafePress shares at $1.48 per share, "thus unlawfully harming
CafePress shareholders."
This is all pretty new information, so it's difficult to fully
extrapolate a conclusion, but let's use the InnerWorkings Inc.
lawsuit as a guide.
In May, the company was the subject of a class action lawsuit that
alleged that it had errors in financial statements, which resulted
in flawed public statements and misleading materials.
The next month, InnerWorkings postponed its 2018 meeting of
shareholders after it stated that it would restate historical
financial statements for the fiscal years ended Dec. 31, 2017, 2016
and 2015.
The company also delayed the release of its first quarter 2018
financial results and conference call, and received a noncompliance
letter from NASDAQ as a result of that.
Granted, the situations are slightly different. While InnerWorkings
was under investigation for allegedly misleading shareholders,
CafePress is under investigation for allegedly failing to shop the
deal around and not doing enough to get the best deal for
shareholders. There haven't been any updates from Levi & Korsinsky
on the InnerWorkings lawsuit, so we don't expect a resolution
regarding CafePress any time soon. [GN]
CAMPING WORLD: Dec. 18 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
---------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, on Oct. 22
announced the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of
purchasers of the securities of Camping World Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:
CWH) from March 8, 2017 through August 7, 2018, inclusive (the
"Class Period"). The lawsuit seeks to recover damages for Camping
World investors under the federal securities laws.
To join the Camping World class action, go to
https://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-1433.html or call Phillip Kim,
Esq. or Zachary Halper, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email
pkim@rosenlegal.com or zhalper@rosenlegal.com for information on
the class action.
NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS
IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN
ONE. YOU MAY RETAIN COUNSEL OF YOUR CHOICE. YOU MAY ALSO REMAIN AN
ABSENT CLASS MEMBER AND DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT. AN INVESTOR'S
ABILITY TO SHARE IN ANY POTENTIAL FUTURE RECOVERY IS NOT DEPENDENT
UPON SERVING AS LEAD PLAINTIFF.
According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) Camping World disclosure controls and controls over
financial reporting suffered from a host of material weaknesses;
(2) Camping World's historical financial results had been
materially misstated; (3) Camping World's Gander Mountain Co.
stores had encountered integration setbacks, adversely impacting
Camping World's earnings growth and profit margins; and (4) Camping
World's core RV business was experiencing decelerating growth as
Camping World lagged industry trends and was losing market share to
competitors. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit
claims that investors suffered damages.
A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than December
18, 2018. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on
behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. If you
wish to join the litigation, go to
https://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-1433.html or to discuss your
rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact
Phillip Kim, Esq. or Zachary Halper, Esq. of Rosen Law Firm toll
free at 866-767-3653 or via e-mail at pkim@rosenlegal.com or
zhalper@rosenlegal.com.
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1
by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities
class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the
top 3 each year since 2013. [GN]
CAMPING WORLD: Misled Investors over Finances, David Ronge Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID RONGE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. CAMPING WORLD HOLDINGS, INC., MARCUS
A. LEMONIS, THOMAS F. WOLFE, BRENT L. MOODY, STEPHEN ADAMS,
CRESTVIEW PARTNERS II GP, L.P. and CRESTVIEW ADVISORS, L.L.C., the
Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-07030 (N.D. Ill., Oct. 19. 2018),
seeks remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
According to the complaint, the case is a federal securities class
action on behalf of all purchasers of Camping World Class A common
stock between March 8, 2017 and August 7, 2018, inclusive. Camping
World has long been majority owned and controlled by its Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer, Marcus Lemonis, and private equity
firm Crestview Partners II GP, L.P. and its affiliates.
Historically, the Company specialized in selling recreational
vehicles and related services such as travel assist programs,
emergency roadside assistance, property and casualty insurance
programs, extended vehicle service contracts, and vehicle financing
and refinancing. In October 2016, defendants took Camping World
public in a $261 million initial public offering. In the months
that followed the IPO, defendants emphasized the Company's earnings
growth and profit potential as Camping World engaged in a number of
strategic acquisitions.
In May 2017, Camping World announced that it would be expanding its
operations to include retail stores for outdoor sporting supplies
and accessories by acquiring certain assets of Gander Mountain Co.
from bankruptcy. This securities fraud class action arises from
materially false and misleading statements made by defendants
during the Class Period regarding Camping World's financial
performance, including its historical financial results and its
integration and operation of the newly acquired Gander stores. In
addition, defendants fraudulently concealed material weaknesses in
the Company's disclosure controls and internal controls over
financial reporting, which contributed to the artificial inflation
of Camping World’s reported 2016 basic earnings per share by over
37%. These misrepresentations were used to further a massive
insider selling scheme. At the same time that defendants were
misleading investors, Company insiders, including certain of the
Defendants, sold over $530 million worth of Camping World Class A
shares at artificially inflated prices.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
James E. Barz, Esq.
Franks A. Richter, Esq.
Brian E. Cochran, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
200 South Wacker Drive, 31st Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: 312 674-4674
Facsimile: 312 674-4676
E-mail: jbarz@rgrdlaw.com
frichter@rgrdlaw.com
bcochran@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
Michael I. Fistel, Jr., Esq.
JOHNSTON FISTEL, LLP
40 Powder Springs Street
Marietta, GA 30064
Telephone: 770/200-3104
Facsimile: 770/200-3101
E-mail: michaelf@johnsonfistel.com
CAMTRENT LLC: Underpays Maintenance Workers, Romero Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
PHIL U. ROMERO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CAMTRENT, LLC, and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00098 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 9, 2018) is an action against the Defendants'
failure to pay the Plaintiff and the class overtime compensation
for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.
Mr. Romero was employed by the Defendants as maintenance worker.
Camtrent, LLC operates a skilled nursing facility. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott Ernest Wheeler, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF SCOTT ERNEST WHEELER
250 West First Street, Suite 216
Claremont, CA 91711
Telephone: (909) 621-4988
Facsimile: (909) 621-4622
E-mail: sew@scottwheelerlawofflce.com
CASH CONVERTERS: Settles Borrowers' Class Action for $16.4MM
------------------------------------------------------------
David Chau, writing for ABC News, reports that Cash Converters has
settled a class action launched by 30,000 Queensland borrowers for
$16.4 million, without admitting fault.
The payout includes a maximum of $5.8 million in legal costs, and
an estimated $50,000 cost for the "verification of customer data".
It was alleged that the company effectively charged more than 400
per cent interest (per year) for one-month loans between April 2010
and June 2013 -- with some loans attracting rates which exceeded
600 per cent.
This was despite the fact that Queensland had changed its laws in
2008, imposing a cap of 48 per cent (annually) for consumer credit
loans.
Maurice Blackburn, the lawyers representing the borrowers, claimed
that Cash Converters tried to circumvent the law by deliberately
and "unconscionably" charging excessive brokerage fees for its
"cash advances".
The plaintiff law firm commenced the $17 million lawsuit two years
ago in the Federal Court on behalf of lead plaintiff Kim McKenzie,
a carer and disability pensioner.
"This settlement will be funded from existing resources," Cash
Converters said in a statement on Oct. 22.
"The total cost will be expensed in the current financial year and
is deductible for tax purposes."
The next step to finalise the settlement is for both parties to
obtain approval from the court.
In 2015, the company settled two class actions for $23 million
arising out of its questionable lending practices.
In that case, thousands of borrowers from New South Wales alleged
they were charged interest rates of up to 633 per cent on loans.
Cash Converters stocks surged 9.4 per cent to 29 cents at 12:00pm
(AEDT), after confirming its latest settlement in a statement on
Oct. 22.
But its share price remains near historic lows, having fallen 80
per cent since its record high of $1.45 (in mid-2013).
Second lawsuit to be contested
While Cash Converters has settled yet another case, it has decided
to defend another one "vigorously".
The second case was listed for hearing on Oct. 22 in the Federal
Court. It was also initiated by Maurice Blackburn on behalf of more
than 60,000 Queenslanders, including lead plaintiff Sean Lynch, a
disability pensioner who took out three loans with the company.
The substance of the second case is similar, relating to breaches
of Queensland consumer credit law, hefty brokerage fees and
vulnerable borrowers who ended up in "debt spirals".
However, the plaintiffs in this case took out personal loans
ranging from $600 to $2,000 for periods of six months.
"This class action is a perfect example of how the class action
regime works to promote access to justice for the most
disadvantaged in our community," Maurice Blackburn principal lawyer
Miranda Nagy said.
"We are really pleased with this result [the $16.4 million
settlement], but are focused on winning the rest of our case and
obtaining justice for an even bigger group of people who took out
Cash Converters' Personal Loans."
Maurice Blackburn estimated that when it launched the case in 2015,
Cash Converters would potentially be up for $30 million in
compensation.
The case will be heard in the Federal Court, Sydney registry, for
the next three weeks. [GN]
CENTENE CORP: Bid to Dismiss Suit over Ambetter Policies Ongoing
----------------------------------------------------------------
Centene Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 23, 2018, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the company is
seeking dismissal of the Second Amended Complaint in the class
action complaint related to Ambetter policies.
On January 11, 2018, a putative class action lawsuit was filed by
Cynthia Harvey and Steven A. Milman against the Company and certain
subsidiaries in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
Washington. The complaint alleges that the Company failed to meet
federal and state requirements for provider networks and
directories with regard to its Ambetter policies, denied coverage
and/or refused to pay for covered benefits, and failed to address
grievances adequately, causing some members to incur unexpected
costs. In March 2018, the Company filed separate motions to dismiss
each defendant.
In July 2018, the plaintiff voluntarily filed a First Amended
Complaint that removed Steven Milman as a plaintiff, dropped
Centene Corporation and Superior Health Plan as defendants,
abandoned certain claims, narrowed the putative class to Washington
State only, and added Centene Management Company as a defendant. In
August 2018, the Company moved to dismiss the First Amended
Complaint. In response, the plaintiff voluntarily filed a Second
Amended Complaint.
In September 2018, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the Second
Amended Complaint. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself
against these claims.
Centene said, "Nevertheless, this matter is subject to many
uncertainties and the Company cannot predict how long this
litigation will last or what the ultimate outcome will be, and an
adverse outcome in this matter could potentially have a materially
adverse impact on our financial position and results of
operations."
Centene Corporation operates as a diversified and multi-national
healthcare enterprise that provides programs and services to
under-insured and uninsured individuals in the United States. It
operates through two segments, Managed Care and Specialty Services.
The company provides its services through primary and specialty
care physicians, hospitals, and ancillary providers. Centene
Corporation was founded in 1984 and is headquartered in St. Louis,
Missouri.
CENTENE CORP: Still Awaits Court OK on Bid to Dismiss Sanchez Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Centene Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 23, 2018, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the company still
awaits a court ruling on its motion to dismiss filed in the case
entitled, Israel Sanchez v. Centene Corp., et al.,
On November 14, 2016, a putative federal securities class action,
Israel Sanchez v. Centene Corp., et al., was filed against the
Company and certain of its executives in the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California. In March 2017, the court
entered an order transferring the matter to the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri.
The plaintiffs in the lawsuit allege that the Company's accounting
and related disclosures for certain liabilities acquired in the
acquisition of Health Net violated federal securities laws. In July
2017, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Class Action
Complaint.
The Company filed a motion to dismiss this complaint in September
2017. In February 2018, the Court held a hearing on the motion to
dismiss but has not yet issued a ruling.
The Company denies any wrongdoing and is vigorously defending
itself against these claims. Nevertheless, this matter is subject
to many uncertainties and the Company cannot predict how long this
litigation will last or what the ultimate outcome will be, and an
adverse outcome in this matter could potentially have a materially
adverse impact on our financial position and results of
operations.
No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report.
Centene Corporation operates as a diversified and multi-national
healthcare enterprise that provides programs and services to
under-insured and uninsured individuals in the United States. It
operates through two segments, Managed Care and Specialty Services.
The company provides its services through primary and specialty
care physicians, hospitals, and ancillary providers. Centene
Corporation was founded in 1984 and is headquartered in St. Louis,
Missouri.
CHATTANOOGA PIZZA: Gibson Shortchanged on Vehicle Reimbursements
----------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Gibson, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Chattanooga Pizza LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-00219, (N.D. Ga., October 3, 2018),
seeks to recover minimum wages, liquidated damages, prejudgment and
post-judgment interest, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of
this action under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Defendant operates Domino's Pizza franchise stores in northern
Georgia and at least one in Tennessee. Gibson was employed by
Defendants as a delivery driver from about April 2017 to about May
2018. Gibson used his own vehicle to deliver pizzas and claims that
the reimbursement rates were unreasonably low thus causing their
net wages to fall below the federal minimum wage. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Potashnick, Esq.
WEINHAUS & POTASHNICK
11500 Olive Blvd., Suite 133
St. Louis, MO 63141
Telephone: (314) 997-9150 ext. 2
Facsimile: (314) 997-9170
Email: markp@wp-attorneys.com
- and -
Andrew Weiner, Esq.
WEINER & SAND LLC
7 Piedmont Ctr., 3rd Fl.
3525 Piedmont Rd.
Atlanta, GA 30305
Tel: (404) 254-0842
Fax: (866) 800-1482
Email: aw@atlantaemployeelawyer.com
- and -
Eli Karsh, Esq.
LIBERMAN, GOLDSTEIN & KARSH
230 S. Bemiston Ave., Suite 1200
St. Louis, Mo 63105
Telephone: (314) 862-3333, ext. 13
Facsimile: (314) 862-0605
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). [GN]
CLIENT SERVICES: Vandehey Sues over Debt Collection Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------
JACQUELYN A. VANDEHEY, on her own behalf and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. CLIENT SERVICES,
INC., a Missouri Corporation; and JOHN DOES, the Defendants, Case
No. 1:18-cv-01669 (E.D. Wisc.), alleges that the Defendants engaged
in illegal practices when attempting to collect an alleged debt
from the Plaintiff in violation of the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.
Client Services mailed or caused to be mailed a letter dated
October 30, 2017 to Vandehey. The Letter falsely implied to the
unsophisticated consumer that interest and other charges could
accrue on the charged-off Debt. Such false implication arises from
the totality of the Letter including, but not limited to, itemizing
post-charge-off interest and other charges, describing the amount
owed as the "Current Balance," and the statement on the Letter's
second page implying that interest will be added if payment of the
Debt is not resolved before Clien Services returns the Debt to the
creditor.
Client Services operates as a customer relationship management
company.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Francis R. Greene, Esq.
Philip D. Stern, Esq.
Andrew T. Thomasson, Esq.
STERN THOMASSON LLP
150 Morris Avenue, 2nd Floor
Springfield, NJ 07081
Telephone (973) 379-7500
E-mail: Philip@SternThomasson.com
Andrew@SternThomasson.com
Francis@SternThomasson.com
CMR INC: Salas FLSA Suit Moved to Central District of California
----------------------------------------------------------------
Monica Salas, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated
individuals, the Plaintiff, vs. CMR, Inc. d/b/a Call Management
Resources, Inc., the Defendant, Case No.: RIC1809767, was removed
from the Riverside County Superior Court, to the U.S. District
Court for Central District of California (Eastern Division -
Riverside). The Central District of California Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 5:18-cv-02238 to the proceeding on Oct. 19, 2018. The suit
alleges Fair Labor Standards Act violation.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
Attorneys for Defendant:
Melissa Beth Black, Esq.
SQUIRE PATTON BOOGS LLP
275 Battery Street Suite 2600
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 954-0200
Facsimile: (415) 393-9887
E-mail: melissa.black@squirepb.com
CRES PROPERTY: Ware Sues over Debt Collection Practices
-------------------------------------------------------
Kellie Ware, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Geoffrey Modderman; and Cres Property
Management LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-00713-TSB (S.D. Ohio,
Oct. 9, 2018) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and
unconscionable means to collect a debt. The case is assigned to
Judge Timothy S. Black.
Cres Property Management LLC a full service property management
company. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John Anthony Rebel, Esq.
McKinney & Namei Co LPA - 1
15 E Eighth Street
Cincinnati, OH 45202-2087
Telephone: (513) 721-0200
Facsimile: (513) 632-5898
E-mail: jarebel@fuse.net
- and -
Steven Charles Shane, Esq.
PO Box 73067
Bellevue, KY 41073
Telephone: (859) 431-7800
CRESCENT CONSULTING: Whitlow Suit Transferred to Oklahoma
---------------------------------------------------------
The class action captioned Tommy Whitlow on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Crescent Consulting,
L.L.C. an Oklahoma Limited Liability Company, Defendant, Case No.
4:18-mc-02965 (S.D. Tex., Oct. 24, 2018) was transferred to the
United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma,
and assigned Case No. 5:18-cv-01057.
Crescent Consulting, L.L.C. provides oil and gas consulting
services: engineering project management; drilling and completion
well site management, environmental and safety management and
cement and frac specialists.[BN]
The Movant is represented by:
Jared D Giddens, Esq.
Conner & Winters LLP
One Leadership Square
211 N. Robinson, Ste 1700
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Phone: (405) 272-5711
Fax: (405) 232-2695
Email: jgiddens@cwlaw.com
DIRECT ENERGY: Made Unsolicited Calls, Shelton and Frey Claim
-------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES EVERETT SHELTON, and JON FREY, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DIRECT ENERGY, LP,
Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-04375-CMR (E.D. Pa., Oct. 9, 2018)
seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of making unsolicited
calls.
Direct Energy, LP provides electricity, natural gas, and home
services for residential and commercial customers in North America.
The company has strategic partnerships with Nest, Plenti, and
SolarCity. Direct Energy, LP was founded in 1997 and is based in
Houston, Texas with regional offices in the United States. Direct
Energy, LP operates as a subsidiary of Centrica plc. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Clayton S. Morrow, Esq.
MORROW & ARTIM, PC
304 Ross Street, 7th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Telephone: (412) 281-1250
E-mail: csm@consumerlaw365.com
- and –
Anthony Paronich, Esq.
BRODERICK & PARONICH, P.C.
99 High St., Suite 304
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (508) 221-1510
E-mail: Anthony@broderick-law.com
DIVERSIFIED CONSULTANTS: Vedernikov Files Class Suit Under FDCPA
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Diversified
Consultants Inc., et al. The case is styled as Igor Vedernikov
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Diversified Consultants Inc., Absolute Resolutions
Investments LLC, John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 3:18-cv-15275
(D. N.J., Oct. 24, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.
Diversified Consultants, Inc., a telecom-specific collection
company, specializes in the bad debt recovery of wireless,
landline, cable, satellite, utilities, and security arenas. It
offers third party collection and pre-collection services; and
resolves customers' delinquency and dispute issues.
Absolute Resolutions Corporation provides accounts receivable
solutions for the healthcare, bank card and finance, retail, and
telecom sectors. The company focuses on the recovery, purchase, and
sale of distressed accounts receivables. It offers custom services
and reporting in the areas of collection, including custom reports,
early out programs, standard collections, legal collections, and
skip tracing.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
Stein Saks, PLLC
285 Passaic Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500 ext 101
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
DOORDASH INC: Must Arbitrate Misclassification Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
Linda Chiem, writing for Law360, reports that a DoorDash Inc.
delivery driver must arbitrate his putative class action claiming
the app-based food delivery service misclassified drivers as
independent contractors instead of employees, a California federal
judge ruled on Oct. 22. [GN]
DPL ASSOCIATES: Biegeleisen Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against DPL Associates, LTD
under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. The case is styled as
Naphtali Biegeleisen, others individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DPL Associates, LTD, John
Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-05975 (E.D. N.Y., Oct. 25,
2018).
DPLL Associates Limited is a privately held company in Congers, NY,
categorized under Collection Agencies. It is located at 24 South
Park Terrace, Congers, NY 10920.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel Harris Kohn, Esq.
Stein Saks PLLC
285 Passaic Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: dkohn@steinsakslegal.com
EARTHBATH INC: Faces Jurado Suit in Eastern District of New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Earthbath, Inc. The
case is captioned as Ricardo Jurado, individually on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Earthbath,
Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:18-cv-05619-JFB-AKT (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 9,
2018). The case is assigned to Judge Joseph F. Bianco and referred
to Magistrate Judge A. Kathleen Tomlinson.
Paul Armstrong founded Earthwhile Endeavors, Inc. in 1995 after a
chance encounter with three buddies in San Francisco who had
developed a natural, effective pet shampoo but didn't know what to
do with it.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Richard Gonnelli, Esq.
THE SULTZER LAW GROUP
85 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 104
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Telephone: (845) 483-7100
Facsimile: (888) 749-7747
E-mail:agonnelli@thesultzerlawgroup.com
- and -
George VolneyGranade , II, Esq.
Michael Robert Reese, Esq.
REESE LLP
100 West 93rd Street, 16th floor
New York, NY 10025
Telephone: (212) 643-0500
Facsimile: (212) 253-4272
E-mail: ggranade@reesellp.com
mreese@reesellp.com
- and -
Jason P. Sultzer, Esq.
Joseph Lipari, Esq.
The Sultzer Law Group P.C.
85 Civic Center Plaza, Ste. 104
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Telephone: (845) 483-7100
Facsimile: (888) 749-7747
E-mail: sultzerj@thesultzerlawgroup.com
liparij@thesultzerlawgroup.com
EMPIRE TODAY: Underpays Salespersons, Fallon Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
FRANK FALLON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EMPIRE TODAY, LLC; and TODAY'S SALES, LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 18-1297 (Mass. Super., Norfolk Cty., Oct. 10,
2018) alleges that the Defendants unlawfully misclassified the
Plaintiff as independent contractor instead of employees. The
Plaintiff seeks an award of damages arising from the
misclassification which resulted from the failure of the Defendants
to reimburse the Plaintiff for the costs and expenses related to
transportation incurred by the Plaintiff in connection with the
Defendants' business.
The Plaintiff Fallon was employed by the Defendants as salesperson
from July 2012 to July 2018.
Empire Today, LLC operates as a shop-at-home company that provides
installed flooring treatment products to customers across the
United States. Empire Today, LLC was formerly known as Empire Home
Services, LLC and changed its name to Empire Today, LLC in May
2007. The company was founded in 1959 and is based in Northlake,
Illinois. It has locations in Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas,
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia,
Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas,
Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan,
Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New
Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North
Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South
Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia,
Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew A. Slater, Esq.
Michael T. Marshall, Esq.
TENTINDO KENDALL CANNIFF & KEEFE LLP
510 Rutherford Avenue
Boston, MA 02129
Telephone: (617) 242-9600
Facsimile: (617) 242-0800
E-mail: mas@tkcklaw.com
mtm@tkcklaw.com
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: McKinney Files Suit Under FCRA
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equifax Information
Services, LLC. The case is styled as Demetrius McKinney
individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated
persons, Plaintiff v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 8:18-cv-02624-MSS-AEP (M.D. Fla., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Equifax Information Services LLC collects and reports consumer
information to financial institutions. The company was formerly
known as Equifax Credit Information Services Inc. and changed its
name to Equifax Information Services LLC in June 2004. The company
was incorporated in 1937 and is based in Atlanta, Georgia. Equifax
Information Services LLC operates as a subsidiary of Equifax
Inc.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bryan James Geiger, Esq.
Seraph Legal PA
2002 E 5th Ave Ste 104
Tampa, FL 33605
Phone: (813) 321-2348
Fax: (855) 500-0705
Email: bgeiger@seraphlegal.com
- and -
Philip Ross Goldberg, Esq.
Seraph Legal PA
2002 E 5th Ave Ste 104
Tampa, FL 33605
Phone: (813) 567-1230
Fax: (855) 500-0705
Email: PhilRGoldberg@Gmail.Com
- and -
Thomas Martin Bonan, Esq.
Seraph Legal PA
2002 E 5th Ave Ste 104
Tampa, FL 33605
Phone: (813) 567-1230
Fax: (855) 500-0705
Email: tbonan@seraphlegal.com
FACEBOOK INC: Class C Reclassification Litigation Dismissed
-----------------------------------------------------------
Facebook, Inc. said in its Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission filed on October 24, 2018, 2018, that the
Court in the case entitled, In re Facebook, Inc. Class C
Reclassification Litigation, Consol. C.A. No. 12286-VCL, approved a
Stipulation and Order of Dismissal.
Facebook said, "As previously disclosed, on September 25, 2017, the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the "Court") dismissed
as moot the consolidated class action (the "Action") captioned In
re Facebook, Inc. Class C Reclassification Litigation, Consol. C.A.
No. 12286-VCL. The Court retained jurisdiction of the Action to
determine the application by the Plaintiffs in the Action for an
award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement expenses."
On October 24, 2018, the Court approved a Stipulation and Order of
Dismissal (the "Order") entered into by the parties in the Action
to resolve the Plaintiffs' Motion for an Award of Attorneys' Fees
and Expenses.
Facebook, Inc. provides various products to connect and share
through mobile devices, personal computers, and other surfaces
worldwide. Facebook, Inc. was founded in 2004 and is headquartered
in Menlo Park, California.
FEDEX GROUND: Drivers Request $3.9MM in Attorneys' Fees
-------------------------------------------------------
Danielle Nichole Smith, writing for Law360, reports that FedEx
Ground drivers asked an Indiana federal judge to grant their
counsel $3.9 million in fees after he greenlighted a $13.3 million
settlement resolving their Employee Retirement Income Security Act
claims. [GN]
FIVE STAR HOME: Carmen Aria et al. Seek Unpaid Compensation
-----------------------------------------------------------
Carmen Aria, Carmen Cruz, and Virgen Pena, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff(s), vs. Five
Star Home Health Care Agency, Inc., the Defendant(s), Case No.
521067/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Oct. 19, 2018), seeks unpaid
compensation under the New York Labor Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant operates a service that
provides home aides for its clients. Carmen Aria has been employed
by Defendant since September 2016, and Carmen Cruz has been
employed since October 2016.
The Plaintiffs did not live in the homes of the Defendant's
clients; they maintained their own residences. Nevertheless, the
Plaintiffs worked long hours to provide services to these clients.
They frequently worked 24-hour shifts, staying at clients' homes
for three or four days straight each week. As result, the
Plaintiffs were frequently working 72-96 hours per week.
Five Star is an in-home service provider.[BN]
Attorney for Plaintiffs:
Michael Samuel, Esq.
SAMUEL & STEIN
38 West 32nd Street, Suite 1110
New York, NY 10001
Telephone: (212) 563 9884
FUJITSU AMERICA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bianco Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
RODNEY BIANCO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FUJITSU AMERICA, INC.; and DOES 1 through
100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00254 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 10, 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 Bianco was employed by the Defendants as hourly-paid,
non-exempt employee from 2011 to December 2017 in Los Angeles,
California.
Fujitsu America, Inc. develops business technology solutions and
provides related services. The company provides integrated
solutions that include consulting, systems integration, managed
services, outsourcing, and cloud services for infrastructure,
platforms, and applications; and data center and field services.
Fujitsu America, Inc. was formerly known as Fujitsu North America
Holdings, Inc. and changed its name to Fujitsu America, Inc. in
April 2009. The company was founded in 2008 and is based in
Sunnyvale, California. Fujitsu America, Inc. operates as a
subsidiary of Fujitsu Limited. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas Han, Esq.
Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq.
JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
41 1 North Central Avenue, Suite 500
Glendale, CA 91203
Telephone: (818) 230-7502
Facsimile: (818) 230-7259
GAPPSI INC: Fails to Pay Construction Workers, Blaszczyk Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN BLASZCZYK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GAPPSI INC.; M3 DEVELOPMENT GROUP INC.;
GIUSEPPE ABBRANCATI; and MICHAEL SPECCHIO, JR., Defendants, Case
No. 2:18-cv-05641-JMA-AYS (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 9, 2018) is an action
against the Defendant's failure to pay the Plaintiff and the class
overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per
week.
The Plaintiff Blaszczyk was employed by the Defendants as
construction worker.
Gappsi Inc. is Long Island's premier home improvement company.
Offering masonry, landscape design, swimming pools and home
remodeling on Long Island.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Saul D. Zabell, Esq.
ZABELL & COLLOTTA, P.C.
1 Corporate Drive, Suite 103
Bohemia, NY 11716
Telephone: (631) 589-7242
Facsimile: (631) 563-7475
E-mail: SZabell@laborlawsny.com
GENENTECH INC: Gerneth's Subpoena Bid Underway
----------------------------------------------
John J. Gerneth, plaintiff in a class action lawsuit against
Genentech, Inc., has asked the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia to enforce compliance with a subpoena and
require Genentech to produce documents in response to the
Plaintiff's subpoena served on Genentech on June 22, 2018,
including internal documents and communications, and communications
with other non-parties, from December 1, 2012 through July 31,
2014.
The Motion is pending before Judge Joseph C. Spero.
The Subpoena proceeding is captioned as LEAD PLAINTIFF'S NOTICE OF
MOTION TO ENFORCE GENENTECH, INC.'S COMPLIANCE WITH THE SUBPOENA,
Case No. 3:18-mc-80178-JCS (N.D. Cal., Oct. 9, 2018).
Genentech, Inc., a biotechnology company, discovers, develops,
manufactures, and commercializes medicines to treat patients with
serious or life-threatening medical conditions in the United
States. The company was founded in 1976 and is headquartered in
South San Francisco, California. Genentech, Inc. is as a subsidiary
of Roche Holding AG. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael I. Fistel, Jr., Esq.
Mary Ellen Conner, Esq.
JOHNSON FISTEL, LLP
40 Powder Springs Street
Marietta, GA 30064
Telephone: (770) 200-3104
Facsimile: (770) 200-3101
E-mail: michaelf@johnsonfistel.com
maryellene@johnsonfistel.com
- and -
Brian O. O'Mara, Esq.
Ryan A. Llorens, Esq.
Christopher D. Stewart, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 231-1058
Facsimile: (619) 231-7423
E-mail: bomara@rgrdlaw.com
ryanl@rgrdlaw.com
csteward@rgrdlaw.com
GENERAL MOTORS: Faces Peckerar et al. Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against General Motors, LLC.
The case is captioned as Scott Peckerar, and Samantha Peckerar,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. GENERAL MOTORS, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
5:18-cv-02153-DMG-SP (C.D. Cal., Oct. 9, 2018). The case is
assigned to Judge Dolly M. Gee and referred to Magistrate Judge
Sheri Pym.
General Motors LLC was incorporated in 2009 and is based in
Wilmington, Delaware. General Motors LLC operates as a subsidiary
of General Motors Company. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Nicole Ramirez, Esq.
Jeffrey A Koncius, Esq.
Paul R Kiesel, Esq.
KIESEL LAW LLP
8648 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2910
Telephone: (310) 854-4444
Facsimile: (310) 854-0812
E-mail: ramirez@kiesel.law
koncius@kiesel.law
kiesel@kiesel.law
GUERLAIN INC: Figueroa Suit Asserts ADA Violation
-------------------------------------------------
Guerlain, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit in New York. The
case is captioned as Jose Figueroa on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Guerlain, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 1:18-cv-09888 (S.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Guerlain Inc. manufactures perfume and cosmetics. The company is
based in New York, New York. Guerlain Inc. operates as a subsidiary
of LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton S.E.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 299-6612
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: joseph@cml.legal
HEALTHSOURCE GLOBAL: Marron Sues over Background Checks
-------------------------------------------------------
DAVID H. MARRON, on behalf of himself, all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. HEALTHSOURCE GLOBAL STAFFING, INC., a
California corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, the
Defendants, Case No. RG1892526 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 18, 2018),
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, under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the
California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act.
The Plaintiff also brings this class action against the Defendants
for alleged violations of the Labor Code and Business and
Professions Code. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants have
failed to provide him and all other similarly situated individuals
with meal periods; failed to provide them with rest periods; failed
to pay them premium wages for missed meal and/or rest periods;
failed to pay them at least minimum wage for all hours worked;
failed to pay them overtime wages at the correct rate; and failed
to pay them double time wages at the correct rate.
HealthSource is headquartered in Fremont California and places
skilled domestic and international health professionals in quality
positions across the US.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Shaun Setareh, Esq.
H. Scott Leviant, Esq.
William M. Pao, 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
scott@setarehlaw.com
william@setarehlaw.com
HF COX INC: Underpays Truck Drivers, Gutierrez Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
ISAAC R. GUTIERREZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HF COX, INC. d/b/a COX PETROLEUM
TRANSPORTATION; and DOES 1-20, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
18STCV00279 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 10, 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 Gutierrez was employed by the Defendants as truck
driver from August 2017 to September 2018.
H. F. Cox, Inc., doing business as Cox Petroleum Transport, a
common carrier trucking company, provides petroleum transportation
services in the western United States. It hauls gasoline, diesel
fuel, jet fuel, lube oils, crude oil, and fuel oils. The company
was founded in 1971 and is based in Bakersfield, California with
terminals in Central and Southern California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Vache A. Thomassian, Esq.
Caspar Jivalagian, Esq.
KJT LAW GROUP, LLP
230 N. Maryland Ave., Suite 306
Glendale, CA 91206
Telephone: (818) 507-8525
E-mail: vache@kjtlawgroup.com
caspar@kjtlawgroup.com
HIMS INC: Andrews Brings ADA Class Suit in New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hims, Inc. under the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Victor
Andrews individually and as the representative of a class of
similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. Hims, Inc. doing business
as: forhims.com, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-05986 (E.D. N.Y., Oct.
25, 2018).
Hims, Inc. manufactures men's wellness products. It offers
products, including hair loss prevention medicines, sexual wellness
products, skincare products, and oral care products. The company
also provides sweaters and candles. It sells its products
online.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq.
Shaked Law Group P.C.
44 Court Street, Suite 1217
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 373-9128
Fax: (718) 504-7555
Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com
HOBBY LOBBY: Marcrum Suit Moved to Northern District of Alabama
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled STEVEN D. MARCRUM, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HOBBY
LOBBY STORES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-01388, was removed
from the Northern District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Alabama on October 9, 2018. The
Northern District of Alabama Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:18-cv-01645-MHH (N.D. Ala., Oct. 9, 2018) to the proceeding. The
Case is assigned to the Hon. Madeline Hughes Haikala.
Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. owns and operates a chain of arts and
craft stores in the United States. The company provides products
under various categories that include home decors and frames,
crafts and hobbies, scrapbook and paper crafts, fabric and sewing
products, yarn and needle art products, beads and jewelry, baking
and party supplies, floral and wedding supplies, wearable arts,
seasonal and novelty products, and gift cards. It also sells
products online. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. was founded in 1972 and
is based in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua R. Gale, Esq.uire
WIGGINS CHILDS PANTAZIS
FISHER GOLDFARB LLC
101 N. Woodland Blvd. Ste. 600
DeLand, FL 32720
Telephone: (386) 675-6946
Facsimile: (386) 675-6947
E-mail: JGale@wigginschilds.com
HUNTER WARFIELD: Walkers File FDCPA Suit in Florida
---------------------------------------------------
Hunter Warfield, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit in Florida
under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.
The case is styled as Sophia Walker, Carlton Walker individually
and on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff
v. Hunter Warfield, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 8:18-cv-02612-VMC-CPT
(M.D. Fla., Oct. 24, 2018).
Hunter Warfield, Inc. provides debt collection and asset
investigation services. It specializes in multi-housing,
commercial, funeral care, and educational markets, as well as
serving educational-student housing and student loans, military
housing, utility billing, building and medical supply, and auction
bid defaults.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Bryan James Geiger, Esq.
Seraph Legal PA
2002 E 5th Ave Ste. 104
Tampa, FL 33605
Phone: (813) 321-2348
Fax: (855) 500-0705
Email: bgeiger@seraphlegal.com
- and -
Philip R. Goldberg, Esq.
Seraph Legal, P.A.
2002 E. 5th Ave., Ste. 104
Tampa, FL 33605
Phone: (813) 567-1230
Email: pgoldberg@seraphlegal.com
- and -
Thomas Martin Bonan, Esq.
Seraph Legal PA
2002 E 5th Ave Ste. 104
Tampa, FL 33605
Phone: (813) 567-1230
Fax: (855) 500-0705
Email: tbonan@seraphlegal.com
IMAGE PROPERTY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Barajas Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
VIOLETA BARAJAS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. IMAGE PROPERTY SERVICES, LLC; COMMERCIAL
SERVICE SOLUTIONS, LLC; and DOES 1 through, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 18CV336058 (Cal. Super., Santa Clara Cty., Oct. 10, 2018)
is an action against the Defendants for unpaid regular hours,
overtime hours, minimum wages, wages for missed meal and rest
periods.
The Plaintiff Barajas was employed by the Defendants as non-exempt,
hourly employee from December 2016 to October 10.
Image Property Service LLC was founded in 2008. The company's line
of business includes providing a variety of lawn and garden
services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shaun Setareh, Esq.
H. Scott Leviant, Esq.
William M. Pao, 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
scott@setarehlaw.com
william@setarehlaw.com
IMPERIAL MARBLE: Olson Class Suit Underway in Illinois
------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as Jennifer Olson, et al., the
Plaintiff, v. Imperial Marble Corporation, the Defendant, Case:
1:18-cv-01914 (N.D. Ill.), is underway before the Hon. Judge
Frederick J. Kapala. Discovery is ongoing in the case. A docket
entry by the Court of Clerk on October 4, 2018, provided that the
Defendant's outstanding discovery was due to the plaintiff by Oct.
5, 2018. The Defense counsel's motion to withdraw as attorney was
due to be filed by Oct. 12, 2018. The deadline for amended
pleadings, new counts or parties, and third−party complaints was
extended to Oct. 26, 2018.[CC]
Plaintiffs are represented by:
Mary E. Olsen, Esq.
The Gardner Firm, P.C.
Tel: 251-433-8100
E-mail: molsen@thegardnerfirm.com
- and -
Jeffrey S Sobek, Esq.
JS Law
312-756-1330
E-mail: jeffs@jsslawoffices.com
Imperial Marble is represented by:
Jonathan M. Boulahanis, Esq.
Tyler Bishop Duff, Esq.
Patrick Frasor Moran, Esq.
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP
Tel: 312-565-1400
E-mail: jboulahanis@gordonrees.com
tduff@gordonrees.com
pmoran@gordonrees.com
- and -
Patrick M DePoy, Esq.
Brenton Warren Vincent, Esq.
Bryan Cave Leighton Paisner LLP
Tel: 312-602-5000
E-mail: patrick.depoy@bclplaw.com
brent.vincent@bryancave.com
JAMAICA PANCAKE: Ramkalup Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA
-------------------------------------------------------
TARIQ RAMKALUP, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs JAMAICA PANCAKE HOUSE, INC.,
LINDENHURST PANCAKE HOUSE, INC., WESTBURY PANCAKE HOUSE, INC.,
FREEPORT PANCAKE HOUSE, INC., WPS INDUSTRIES, INC., LEVITTOWN
PANCAKE HOUSE, INC., and DANIEL CHUN, the Defendants, Case No.
614190/2018 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Oct. 19, 2018), seeks to recover
minimum wages, overtime compensation, misappropriated tips and
other damages for the Plaintiff and his similarly situated
co-workers -- servers, bussers, hosts and other similarly situated
Tipped Front of the House Employees who were paid less than the
full minimum wage as well as and Back of the House Employees who
were paid at least the full minimum wage -- who work or have worked
at IHOP restaurants owned and operated by the Defendants.
According to the complaint, the Defendants have paid the Plaintiff
and similarly situated FOH Employees at the "tipped" minimum wage
rate -- less than the full minimum wage rate for non-tipped
employees. The The Defendants however have not satisfied the strict
requirements under the New York Labor Law or the Labor Standards
Act that would allow them to apply a "tip credit" to FOH Employees'
wages. In this regard, the Defendants failed to provide FOH
Employees with notification of the tipped minimum wage rate or tip
credit provisions of the NYLL or FLSA, or of their intent to apply
a tip credit to FOH Employees' wages. The Defendants also maintain
a policy and practice whereby FOH Employees are required to spend
more than 20% of their shift and/or 2 hours performing non-tip
producing side work, including, but not limited to, stocking and
cleaning service areas, rolling silverware, wiping down and
polishing all of the stainless steel, cleaning ice cream areas, and
setting up and breaking down soda, tea, and coffee machines, the
lawsuit says.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Brian S. Schaffer, Esq.
Frank J. Mazzaferro, Esq.
FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP
28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 300-0375
Attorneys for Defendants:
Peter Shapiro, Esq.
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
77 Water Street, Suite 2100
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 232-1300
E-mail: Peter.shapiro@lewisbrisbois.com
JERICHO RESTAURANT: Pollier Seeks Unpaid Wages under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------
KRISTAL POLLIER and JOANNA CASTALDO, on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. JERICHO RESTAURANT
ASSOCIATES LLC, d/b/a RARE650, SMITH STEAKHOUSE, ONE NORTH 106 LLC
dba ONE NORTH RESTAURANT, MELVILLE STEAKHOUSE, LLC d/b/a BLACKSTONE
STEAKHOUSE, SCOTTO, LLC, ARTHUR VIANA, and ANTHONY SCOTTO, the
Defendants, Case 2:18-cv-05856-SJF-ARL (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 19, 2018),
seeks to recover unpaid wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants willfully failed and
refused to pay the Plaintiff's legally required minimum wage and
overtime rates for all hours worked.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
D. Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq.
Denise Schulman, Esq.
32 Broadway, Suite 601
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 688 5640
Facsimile: (212) 688 2548
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Class Certification Bid Granted in Elkies Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Rony Elkies, et al., the
Plaintiff v. Johnson and Johnson Services, Inc., et al., the
Defendants, Case 2:17-cv-07320-GW-JEM (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
George H. Wu entered an order October 19, 2018, granting
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
According to civil minutes, the parties are to file an updated
joint Rule 26(f) report by October 31, 2018, and the Court set a
Rule 26(f) scheduling conference for November 5 at 8:30 a.m.[CC]
Attorneys for the Plaintiffs:
Sara D. Avila, Esq.
Tracy R. Kalik, Esq.
Gillian L. Wade, Esq.
Richard D. Heideman, Esq.
MILSTEIN, JACKSON, FAIRCHILD & WADE, LLP
10250 Constellation Blvd., 14th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 396 9600
Facsimile: (310) 396.9635
E-mail: info@mjfwlaw.com
Attorneys for the Defendants:
Matthew D. Powers, Esq.
Alexander Larro, Esq.
TONIO BURGOS AND ASSOCIATES, INC.
115 Broadway, Suite 1504
New York, NY 10006
Telephone: (212) 566-5600
E-mail: connect@tonioburgos.com
KING'S HAWAIIAN: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Robinson Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ROSALIND ROBINSON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. KING'S HAWAIIAN, LLC; KING'S
HAWAIIAN BAKERY WEST, INC.; KING'S HAWAIIAN RETAIL, INC.; and DOES
1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00201 (C.D.
Cal., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 10, 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 Robinson was employed by the Defendants as
hourly-paid, non-exempt employee from 2016 to 2017 in California.
King's Hawaiian Enterprises, Inc. manufactures and markets breads,
cakes, and bakery products. In addition, the company owns and
operates restaurants. It caters to supermarket chains and
wholesalers. The company was founded in 1950 and is based in
Torrance, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas Han, Esq.
Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq.
JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
41 1 North Central Avenue, Suite 500
Glendale, CA 91203
Telephone: (818) 230-7502
Facsimile: (818) 230-7259
LA MAISON: Faces ADA Class Action in New York
---------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against La Maison Du
Chocolat, Inc. The case is styled as Jose Figueroa on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. La Maison
Du Chocolat, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09884 (S.D. N.Y.,
Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
La Maison du Chocolat New York: the French chocolatier La Maison du
Chocolat is famous for its truffles, assorted ganaches and many
other chocolate treats.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 299-6612
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: joseph@cml.legal
MAGNOLIA BAKERY: Figueroa Sues Bakery for ADA Breach
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Magnolia Bakery
Online LLC. The case is styled as Jose Figueroa on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Magnolia
Bakery Online LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09892 (S.D. N.Y.,
Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Magnolia Bakery Inc. produces cupcakes, cakes, icebox desserts,
pies, cookies, bars, and breakfast items. It also provides catering
services for on-site events, weddings, off-site events, and
off-off-site events. The company sells cupcakes, baked goods,
apparel, and corporate gifts through its online store.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 299-6612
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: joseph@cml.legal
MERCANTILE ADJUSTMENT: Sanchez Sues over Debt Collection Practices
------------------------------------------------------------------
DONNA G. SANCHEZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. MERCANTILE ADJUSTMENT BUREAU, LLC, the
Defendant, Case 6:18-cv-00044-C (N.D. Tex., Oct. 19, 2018), seeks
to recover damages arising out of the Defendant's attempts to
collect upon a debt pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act and the Texas Debt Collection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant began collecting after
Reliant charged off the subject debt. After charging off the
subject debt, Reliant ceased sending the Plaintiff periodic
statements, and thus ceased adding interest or other fees on the
subject debt, in turn demonstrating that Reliant waived collection
of additional amounts on the subject debt. Within the one year
preceding the filing of this Complaint, the Defendant communicated
and/or attempted to communicate with the Plaintiff in an attempt to
collect the subject debt. On or about August 14, 2018, the
Defendant mailed or caused to be mailed to the Plaintiff a
"dunning" letter via U.S. Mail in an attempt to collect the subject
debt.
The lawsuit contends that, although the Defendant includes this
interest/fee language in its Dunning Letter, the subject debt could
not properly accrue interest since Reliant had charged off the debt
and thus had waived any ability to collect further interest and
fees in connection with the subject debt. As such, the Defendant's
use of the interest/fee language misrepresented its lawful ability
to add these interest in fees. All of the Defendant's collection
actions at issue occurred within one year of the date of the filing
of the Complaint in this matter, the lawsuit says.
The Defendant is a "full service collection agency" that provides
debt collection services.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Eric D. Coleman, Esq.
Nathan C. Volheim, Esq.
Taxiarchis Hatzidimitriadis, Esq.
SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, Ltd.
2500 South Highland Ave., Suite 200
Lombard, IL 60148
Telephone: (630) 568-3056
Facsimile: (630) 575-8188
E-mail: nvolheim@sulaimanlaw.com
ecoleman@sulaimanlaw.com
thatz@sulaimanlaw.com
MERCK & CO: Pinwnicki Suit Moved to Eastern Dist. of Pennsylvania
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RONALD PIWNICKI, an individual KAREN PIWNICKI, an individual, the
Plaintiffs, vs. MERCK & CO., INC., MERCK SHARP & DOHME CORP., the
Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-06654, was removed from the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
(Philadelphia) on Oct. 19, 2018. The Eastern District of
Pennsylvania Court Clerk assigned Case No.: 2 2:18-cv-20119-HB the
proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Harvey Bartle
III.
The Plaintiffs allege injuries as the result of defects inherent to
the Defendant's Zostavax vaccine. As such, the Complaint is
subject to transfer and centralized consolidation as part of MDL
2848, located in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
The Plaintiffs brought their Complaint under federal diversity
jurisdiction, 28 U.S.C. section 1332(a), as the parties are
completely diverse in citizenship and the amount in controversy
exceeds $75,000.
Merck & Co. is an American pharmaceutical company and one of the
largest pharmaceutical companies in the world.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs:
Panagiotis "Pete" V. Albanis, Esq.
Michael Goetz, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN
12800 University Drive, Suite 600
Fort Myers, FL 33907
Telephone: (239) 432-6605
Facsimile: (239) 204-3798
E-mail: PAlbanis@ForThePeople.com
MGoetz@ForThePeople.com
- and -
Mark T. Sadaka, Esq.
SADAKA ASSOCIATES
155 North Dean Street, Suite 4-D
Englewood, NJ 07631
Telephone: (201) 266-5670
Facsimile: (201) 266-5651
E-mail: mark@sadakafirm.com
METAL FINISHING: Ringley Seeks Unpaid Wages under WARN Act
----------------------------------------------------------
LACEY RINGLEY on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. CARDINAL METAL FINISHING, LLC, the
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-03247-JRS-DLP (S.D. Ind., Oct. 19,
2018), alleges unpaid wages and benefits for 60 calendar days
pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act
of 1988.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was an employee of the
Defendant until she was terminated as part of, or as a result of a
mass layoff ordered by the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is
liable under the WARN Act for the failure to provide the Plaintiff
and the other similarly situated former employees at least 60 days'
advance written notice of termination, as required by the WARN
Act.
On or about September 24, 2018 and thereafter, the Defendant
ordered the termination of the Plaintiff's employment together with
the termination of approximately 80 other employees who worked at
or reported to the Facility as part of a mass layoff as defined by
the WARN Act, for which they were entitled to receive 60 days
advance written notice under the WARN Act, the lawsuit says.
Cardinal Metal operates as a full service provider in industrial
finishing, machining, and associated services.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
William R. Groth, Esq.
FILLENWARTH DENNERLINE
GROTH & TOWE, LLP
429 E. Vermont St., Suite 200
Indianapolis, IN 46202
Telephone: (317) 353-9363
Facsimile: (317) 351-7232
E-mail: wgroth@fdgtlaborlaw.com
- and -
Stuart J. Miller, Esq.
LANKENAU & MILLER, LLP
132 Nassau Street, Suite1100
New York, NY 10038
Telephone: (212) 581-5005
Facsimile: (212) 581-2122
- and -
Mary E. Olsen, Esq.
M. Vance McCrary, Esq.
THE GARDNER FIRM, PC
210 S. Washington Ave.
Mobile, AL 36602
Telephone: (251) 433-8100
Facsimile: (251) 433-8181
MIDLAND FUNDING: Fetai Sues Over Autodialed Collection Calls
------------------------------------------------------------
Emir Fetai, individually and on behalf of other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Midland Funding LLC and Midland Credit
Management, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 18-cv-01564, (E.D. Wisc.,
October 3, 2018), seeks damages and other legal and equitable
remedies, resulting from violations of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.
In or around 2014 or 2015, Fetai opened a "Menards" branded credit
card account with Capital One. He claims that after his credit card
defaulted, said account was transferred between the collection
companies. Defendants contacted Fetai on his cellular telephone
without his prior express consent via an automatic telephone
dialing system and/or by using a prerecorded voice, notes the
complaint.
Midland Credit Management is a debt collection agency located at
3111 Camino Del Rio North, Suite 103, San Diego, CA 92108. Midland
Funding is engaged in the business of taking title to charged-off
consumer debts, including credit card, auto deficiency and telecom
receivables purchased from national financial institutions, major
retail credit corporations, telecom companies and resellers of such
portfolios. [BN]
Plaintiff is represented by:
John D. Blythin, Esq.
Mark A. Eldridge, Esq.
Jesse Fruchter, Esq.
Ben J. Slatky, Esq.
ADEMI & O'REILLY, LLP
3620 East Layton Avenue
Cudahy, WI 53110
Tel: (414) 482-8000
Fax: (414) 482-8001
Email: jblythin@ademilaw.com
meldridge@ademilaw.com
jfruchter@ademilaw.com
bslatky@ademilaw.com
MORRISONS: Loses First Data Leak Class Action in UK
---------------------------------------------------
Kate O'Flaherty, writing for Forbes, reports that UK supermarket
Morrisons is facing a massive payout to staff after losing the
first data leak class action in the UK. It comes after Andrew
Skelton, a senior internal auditor at the retailer's Bradford
headquarters, leaked employee data online in 2014. Last year, a
court ruled the firm was liable for his actions.
The company appealed the decision, but on Oct. 22 a UK High Court
ruling found the supermarket giant liable for the data breach that
saw nearly 100,000 of its employees' sensitive details including
salary and bank details posted online. Those affected can now claim
compensation for "upset and distress".
The leak does not come under the EU Update to General Data
Protection Regulation (GDPR), but it shows the huge cost of a data
breach going forward. This can include class action by "interested
parties" -- including shareholders and victims of the breach.
"It will be interesting to see how the precedents set by the ICO
and FCA on breached firms will shape the litigation of class
actions moving forward," says Ian Thornton-Trump, head of
cybersecurity, AmTrust International.
He says regulators are "fed up" with firms being breached,
especially "when they find it was easily preventable". Meanwhile,
banks and insurance firms don't want to continue to pay out for
easily preventable data breaches, he adds.
He thinks the future will see class action being supported by a
regulatory finding and fine. "In a way, an egregious regulatory
fine and specific charges of negligence, lack of due diligence in
data protection or botched breach notification will really stoke
the fires of a class action, because the evidence of incompetence
will be readably available."
Mr. Thornton-Trump thinks it will make the "discovery" process of
class action move along at a much faster rate. "The regulatory
agency will need to produce a comprehensive ‘chronicle of shame'
to support any significant fine or penalty. It will be a very
symbiotic relationship."
It will also be an interesting "test case" from a US perspective.
"It may even embolden more class actions in an already pretty
litigious data breach environment," Mr. Thornton-Trump points out.
"It serves as another large and unknown potential data breach cost
that needs to be factored into the corporate risk assessment.
Certainly, in the case of shareholder class actions armed with a
comprehensive report from regulators, the executives at a firm may
find themselves in for a very expensive and precarious career
situation."
At a time when cyber-attacks happen every day and increasingly in
the public eye, it's a huge blow for reputations, too. "This could
not come at a worse time for Morrisons, when grocery firms in the
UK and around the world are in deep competition with each other,"
says Mr. Thornton-Trump. "The breach clean up, regulatory action
and class action lawsuits are revenue and reputation hits which
could be catastrophic in low margin, highly-competitive market
places." [GN]
MYGRANT GLASS: Underpays Delivery Drivers, Cong Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
JASON CONG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MYGRANT GLASS COMPANY, INC.; and DOES 1-15,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. RG18924061 (Cal. Super., Alameda
Cty., Oct. 10, 2018) is an action against the Defendants for unpaid
regular hours, overtime hours, minimum wages, wages for missed meal
and rest periods.
The Plaintiff Cong was employed by the Defendants as delivery
driver from June 19, 2017 to August 10, 2018.
Mygrant Glass Company, Inc. wholesales and supplies auto glass
products in the United States. It also accepts online orders.
Mygrant Glass Company, Inc. was formerly known as R. Mygrant Glass
& Glazing. The company was founded in 1926 and is based in Hayward,
California with warehouse locations in California, Nevada, Florida,
Minnesota, Illinois, Virginia, Maryland, New Jersey, New York,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, Missouri, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Idaho,
Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Utah, Alabama, North Carolina, Texas,
Arkansas, Tennessee, Georgia, Oklahoma, Arizona, and New Mexico.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Randall B. Aiman-Smith, Esq.
Reed W.L. Marcy, Esq.
Hallie Von Rock, Esq.
Carey A. James, Esq.
Brent A. Robinson, Esq.
AIMAN SMITH & MARCY, PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
7677 Oakport St., Suite 1150
Oakland, CA 94621
Telephone: (510) 817-2711
Facsimile: (510) 562-6830
E-mail: ras@asmlawyers.com
rwlm@asmlawyers.com
hvr@asmlawyers.com
caj@asmlawyers.com
bar@asmlawyers.com
NORTHROP GRUMMAN: Mediation Session in Knurr Suit to Begin Tuesday
------------------------------------------------------------------
Northrop Grumman Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 24, 2018,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that a mediation
session is currently scheduled for November 6, 2018 in the case
entitled, Steven Knurr, et al. v. Orbital ATK, Inc.
On June 6, 2018 (the "Merger date"), the company completed its
previously announced acquisition of Orbital ATK, Inc. ("Orbital
ATK") (the "Merger"). On the Merger date, Orbital ATK became a
wholly-owned subsidiary of the company and its name was changed to
Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems, Inc., which the company
established as a new, fourth business sector ("Innovation
Systems").
On August 12, 2016, a putative class action complaint, naming
Orbital ATK and two of its then-officers as defendants, Steven
Knurr, et al. v. Orbital ATK, Inc., No. 16-cv-01031 (TSE-MSN), was
filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Virginia. The complaint asserts claims on behalf of purchasers
of Orbital ATK securities for violations of Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, allegedly arising out of
false and misleading statements and the failure to disclose that:
(i) Orbital ATK lacked effective control over financial reporting;
and (ii) as a result, it failed to record an anticipated loss on a
long-term contract with the U.S. Army to manufacture and supply
small caliber ammunition at the U.S. Army's Lake City Army
Ammunition Plant.
On April 24, 2017 and October 10, 2017, the plaintiffs filed
amended complaints naming additional defendants and asserting
claims for alleged violations of additional sections of the
Exchange Act and alleged false and misleading statements in Orbital
ATK's Form S-4 filed in connection with the Orbital-ATK Merger. The
complaint seeks damages, reasonable costs and expenses at trial,
including counsel and expert fees, and such other relief as deemed
appropriate by the Court. On August 8, 2018, plaintiffs sought
leave to file an additional amended complaint; defendants filed an
opposition. On August 29, 2018, the court stayed and
administratively closed the case except for fact discovery, which
is complete. The court subsequently extended the stay and closure
until November 9, 2018. A mediation session is currently scheduled
for November 6, 2018.
Northrop Grumman said, "The company intends vigorously to defend
itself in connection with this matter, and we currently expect
related contingencies will continue to be included in the
company’s measurement period adjustments of the fair value of
assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the Merger."
Northrop Grumman Corporation operates as a security company for
government and commercial customers worldwide. It provides
products, systems, and solutions in autonomous systems; cyber;
command, control, communications and computers, intelligence,
surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR); strike; and logistics and
modernization. Northrop Grumman Corporation was founded in 1939 and
is based in Falls Church, Virginia.
OCTOBER'S VERY OWN: Faces Figueroa ADA Class Action
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against October's Very Own
Merchandising US, LP. The case is styled as Jose Figueroa on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
October's Very Own Merchandising US, LP, Defendant, Case No.
1:18-cv-09873-GHW (S.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
October's Very Own (OVO) is a record label founded by rapper Drake,
producer Noah Shebib, and Oliver El-Khatib, in 2012. October's Very
Own Merchandising US produces its own line of clothing which
include items such as t-shirts, sweaters, winter jackets, and
accessories which are sold through its online store.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Cohen & Mizrahi LLP
300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
Brooklyn, NY 11201
Phone: (917) 299-6612
Fax: (929) 575-4195
Email: joseph@cml.legal
OUTBOUND ENGINE: Thomas Sues over Unwanted Telephone Calls
----------------------------------------------------------
ROSE THOMAS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. OUTBOUND ENGINE, INC., the Defendant,
Case 6:18-cv-01775-GAP-KRS (M.D. Fla., Oct. 19, 2018), seeks to
stop the Defendant's practice of placing calls using an "automatic
telephone dialing system" to the cellular telephones of consumers
nationwide without their prior express written consent, enjoin
Defendant from continuing to place calls using an ATDS to consumers
who did not provide their prior express written consent to receive
them, and obtain redress for all persons injured by its conduct.
According to the complaint, Outbound called Ms. Thomas' cellular
telephone at least once using an ATDS, including a call on August
13, 2018 from telephone number: (407) 573-6498. The Plaintiff never
provided express written consent to be called by Outbound. There is
no dispute that Outbound owns the number that called Plaintiff, as
when the number is called back, a recording states: "Thank you for
calling Outbound Engine". The unlawful call placed to Plaintiff is
part of Outbound's pattern of practice of calling consumers on
their cellular telephones using an ATDS who have no direct
relationship with Outbound to market its products and services.
Outbound conducted a wide-scale campaign that features the repeated
making of unwanted autodialed telemarketing phone calls to
consumers' cellular telephones without prior express written
consent, all in violation of the TCPA. By making these automated
and autodialed calls, Outbound caused Plaintiff and the members of
the Class actual harm and cognizable legal injury. This includes
the aggravation and nuisance and invasions of privacy that result
from the receipt of such calls, in addition to the consumption of
battery life, lost cellular minutes, loss of value realized for the
monies consumers paid to their wireless carriers for the receipt of
such calls, in the form of the diminished use, enjoyment, value,
and utility of their cellular telephone plans.
Furthermore, Outbound made the calls knowing they interfered with
Plaintiff's and the other Class members’ use and enjoyment of,
and the ability to access their cellphones, including the related
data, software, and hardware components. Outbound placed these
calls with a predictive dialer with the present capacity to both
store and dial a list of telephone numbers without human
intervention, and generate random or sequential telephone numbers
and to then dial those numbers. When Plaintiff answered Defendant's
call, she heard a momentary pause. This pause is a hallmark of a
predictive dialer, the lawsuit says.
OutboundEngine, Inc. develops a marketing automation software for
small and midsize businesses.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Scott A. Bursor, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
888 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: scott@bursor.com
jarisohn@bursor.com
PACIFIC GRAIN: Sued over Wrongful Termination of Employment
-----------------------------------------------------------
JOSE BARRERA a/k/a JOSE GONZALEZ, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PACIFIC GRAIN & FOODS, LLC;
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18CECG03737
(Cal. Super., Fresno Cty., Oct. 9, 2018) is an action against the
Defendants for wrongful termination.
The Plaintiff claims that the Defendants retaliated after he
reported its illegal activity.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants constructively terminated
the Plaintiff when he made a complaint of workplace safety in
reporting the illegal procurement and use of the lethal pesticide
Aluminum Phosphide to several government entities.
Pacific Grain & Foods, LLC supplies food products. The Company
provides beans, dried fruits, grains, nuts, and spices, as well as
offers packaging, blending, milling, and roasting services. Pacific
Grain & Foods serves food industries and public worldwide. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
George J. Vasquez, Esq.
GEORGE J. VASQUEZ, PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
5588 N. Palm Ave., Ste. 109
Fresno, CA 93704
Telephone: (559) 334-3783
Facsimile: (559) 578-3777
E-mail: gvasquez@georgevasquezlaw.com
PACIFIC LOGISTICS: Dwayne Ballard Sues over Background Checks
--------------------------------------------------------------
DWAYNE BALLARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PACIFIC LOGISTICS CORP.; and DOES 1 through
50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00608 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 10, 2018) alleges violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant failed to
provide the required pre-authorization disclosure to applicants and
employees, including the Plaintiff and the Class, before procuring
background reports. The acquisition and use of investigative
consumer reports to conduct background checks on the Plaintiff and
prospective employees without complying state and federal mandate
for doing so violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Pacific Logistics Corp. was founded in 1999. The Company's line of
business includes the arranging of transportation of freight and
cargo. [BN]
Pacific Logistics Corp.
Anthony J. Orshansky, Esq.
Alexandria R. Kachadoorlan,
Justin Kachadoorian, Esq.
COUNSELONE, P.C.
9301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 650
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Telephone: (310) 277-9945
Facsimile: (424) 277-3727
E-mail: anthony@coun selonegroup.com
alexandria@counselonegroup.com
justin@counselonegroup.com
PARKSMAN PARKING: Gonzales Worked Through Breaks, Says Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
William Gonzalez, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v.
Parksman Parking, LLC and Mitchell Liss, individually, Defendants,
Case No. 18-cv-23621, (S.D. Fla., October 3, 2018) seeks to recover
unpaid overtime and minimum wage compensation, as well as an
additional amount as liquidated damages, costs and reasonable
attorney's fees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Defendant operates a valet service in Miami, Florida, and Plaintiff
was employed as a non-exempt valet. Gonzalez routinely worked for
Parksman in excess of 40 hours per week, without being paid for the
eight hours overtime, says the complaint. The Plaintiff says
Parksman Parking routinely edited his time records by docking five
hours from of his paychecks every fifteen days period and
attributing it to "breaks" even though Gonzales did not take breaks
and remained on duty during this time. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Henry Hernandez, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF HENRY HERNANDEZ, P.A.
2655 Le Jeune Road, Suite 802
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Tel: (305) 771-3374
Email: Henry@HHLAWFLORIDA.com
- and -
Monica Espino, Esq.
ESPINO LAW, PL
2655 S. LeJeune Road, Suite 802
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Tel: (305) 704-3172
Fax: (305) 722-7378
Email: me@espino-law.com
PAYPAL HOLDINGS: Sgarlata Class Action Underway
-----------------------------------------------
PayPal Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 23, 2018, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2018, that the company
continues to defend itself in a class action suit entitled,
Sgarlata v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., et al.
PayPal Holdings said, "In November 2017, we announced that we had
suspended the operations of TIO Networks ("TIO") as part of an
ongoing investigation of security vulnerabilities of the TIO
platform. On December 1, 2017, we announced that we had identified
evidence of unauthorized access to TIO's network, including
locations that stored personal information of some of TIO's
customers and customers of TIO billers and the potential compromise
of personally identifiable information for approximately 1.6
million customers. We have received a number of governmental
inquiries, including from state attorneys general, and we may be
subject to additional governmental inquiries and investigations in
the future."
In addition, on December 6, 2017, a putative class action lawsuit
captioned Sgarlata v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., et al., Case No.
3:17-cv-06956 was filed in the Court against the Company, its Chief
Executive Officer, its Chief Financial Officer and Hamed Shahbazi,
the former chief executive officer of TIO (the "Defendants")
alleging violations of federal securities laws.
Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that Defendants made false or
misleading statements or failed to disclose that TIO's data
security program was inadequate to safeguard the personally
identifiable information of its users, those vulnerabilities
threatened continued operation of TIO's platform, the Company's
revenues derived from TIO services were thus unsustainable, and
consequently, the Company overstated the benefits of the TIO
acquisition, and, as a result, the Company's public statements were
materially false and misleading at all relevant times.
The plaintiff who initiated the lawsuit sought to represent a class
of shareholders who acquired shares of the Company's common stock
between February 14, 2017 through December 1, 2017 and sought
damages and attorneys' fees, among other relief. On March 16, 2018,
the Court appointed two new plaintiffs, not the original plaintiff
who filed the case, as interim co-lead plaintiffs in the case and
appointed two law firms as interim co-lead counsel.
On June 13, 2018, the interim co-lead plaintiffs filed an amended
complaint, which named TIO Networks ULC, TIO Networks USA, Inc.,
and John Kunze (the Company's Vice President, Global Consumer
Products and Xoom) as additional defendants. The amended complaint
is purportedly brought on behalf of all persons other than the
Defendants who acquired the Company's securities between November
10, 2017 and December 1, 2017. The amended complaint alleges that
the Company's and TIO's November 10, 2017 announcement of the
suspension of TIO's operations was false and misleading because the
announcement only disclosed security vulnerabilities on TIO's
platform, rather than an actual security breach that Defendants
were allegedly aware of at the time of the announcement.
Defendants' filed their motion to dismiss the amended complaint on
July 13, 2018 and the Court heard oral argument on the motion to
dismiss on September 20, 2018.
PayPal Holdings said, "We may be subject to additional litigation
relating to TIO's data security platform or the suspension of TIO's
operations in the future."
PayPal Holdings, Inc. operates as a technology platform company
that enables digital and mobile payments on behalf of consumers and
merchants worldwide. Its payment solutions include PayPal, PayPal
Credit, Braintree, Venmo, Xoom, and Paydiant products. PayPal
Holdings, Inc. was founded in 1998 and is headquartered in San
Jose, California.
PHARMAVITE LLC: Pharmavite Files Petition for Writ of Certiorari
----------------------------------------------------------------
PHARMAVITE LLC, the Petitioner, vs. NOAH BRADACH, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, the Respondent, Case No.
18-449 (U.S.), is an appeal filed in the Supreme Court of United
States on Oct. 10, 2018, from a lower court decision in the Case.
No. 16-56598, 17-55064 (9th Cir.).
Judy Greenwald, writing for BusinessInsurance.com, reported in May
that a federal appeals court has overturned a lower court and
reinstated a putative class action filed by a plaintiff that
charged a vitamin company for false and misleading statements about
the value of its vitamin E dietary supplement.
Noah Bradach had sued Northridge, California-based Pharmavite
L.L.C. in U.S. District Court in Pasadena, charging that he and
other consumers purchasing Pharmavite's Nature Made Vitamin E
dietary supplements had relied on the statement on its label that
it "helps maintain a healthy heart," according to a ruling by the
9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco in Noah Bradach,
on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v.
Pharmavite L.L.C.
Mr. Bradach charged the company had violated California's Unfair
Competition Law and Consumers Legal Remedies Act.
The District Court dismissed the case and awarded Pharmavite
$84,862 in costs for a consumer survey it had commissioned in
relation to the litigation.
In overturning that ruling, the three-judge appeals court panel's
unanimous decision said under federal law, dietary supplement
manufacturers' statements on product labels fall into one of two
categories.
The first is "structure/function" claims, which allow manufacturers
to display "truthful, non-misleading" statements about their
supplements' benefits. Federal law does not pre-empt state
requirements that are structure/function claims, said the ruling.
The second type of permissible categories are disease claims, which
are statements that a product can "diagnose, mitigate, treat, cure,
or prevent" a disease. Federal law does pre-empt state regulations
on such statements, said the ruling.
The District Court held Mr. Bradach did not have standing to assert
his claims under state law because he believed the heart health
statement was a disease claim, and was therefore pre-empted by
federal law.
But, said the ruling, "The record does not support the proposition
that Brach's individual claims are solely premised on preempted
disease claims."
"Bradach's testimony reflects that he had a mixed understanding" of
what the vitamin E supplement would do, and understood it "to both
maintain his heart health and prevent heart disease."
"Courts have recognized that a plaintiff may have claims based on
mixed motives and have allowed claims arising in part from
non-preempted motives to move forward," said the ruling, in
overturning the lower court's dismissal of the case, and asking the
court to reconsider its denial of class certification.
It also held the lower court erred in granting Pharmavite's motion
to recover the cost of the consumer survey.
The case was remanded back to the District Court.
Pharmavite filed petition for a writ of certiorari. Response is due
November 9, 2018.[BN]
Attorneys for Petitioner:
Daniel Joseph Connolly, Esq.
FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP
2200 Wells Fargo Center
90 South Seventh Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
E-mail: daniel.connolly@faegrebd.com
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Smith Sues over Debt Collections Practices
--------------------------------------------------------------
Britni Smith a/k/a Britini Smith, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. Portfolio Recovery
Associates, LLC and John Does 1-25, the Defendant(s), Case
2:18-cv-02727-SHL-tmp (W.D. Tenn., Oct. 19, 2018), alleges
violation of the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act.
According to the complaint, on or about October 24, 2017, PRA sent
the Plaintiff a collection letter regarding the alleged debt
originally incurred with Comenity Bank. The remainder of the Letter
makes no mention of a settlement offer for a reduced amount. The
Letter states that no interest, costs or fees has accrued on the
account, nor has the Plaintiff received any credits for payments
made to Defendant on the account. Upon receipt of this Letter, the
Plaintiff was confused as to whether she owed the balance of
$331.66 or the alleged "Total Balance" of $324.39. The Defendant's
Letter fails to make any mention of a settlement offer and offers
no explanation as to the discrepancy between the balances shown.
The representation of differing amounts owed, without further
explanation, is deceptive and misleading to the Plaintiff.
The lawsuit also contends that the fact that the alleged "Total
Balance Due" is less than the amount the Plaintiff allegedly owed
at the time the Defendant acquired the debt is further misleading
as it is impossible to know from this Letter if remitting the
lesser amount of $324.39 would fully satisfy the debt. To date, the
Plaintiff has not received a statement from the Defendant
clarifying the exact amount owed to satisfy the debt.
The lawsuit states that the Plaintiff incurred an informational
injury as she could not ascertain from the deceptive and misleading
Letter the amount she presently owed on the debt. Further, the
Letter is a false representation of the amount of the debt. As a
result of the Defendant's deceptive, misleading and unfair debt
collection practices, the Plaintiff has been damaged, the lawsuit
says.
PRA is a publicly traded debt buyer based in Norfolk,
Virginia.[BN]
Counsel for Plaintiff:
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
285 Passaic Street
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
REALOGY GROUP: Bryant Suit Moved to Middle District of Florida
--------------------------------------------------------------
Anita Bryant, on behalf of herself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. Realogy Group LLC, the
Defendant, Case No.: 18-CA-009123, was moved from the 13th Judicial
Circuit - Hillsborough County, to the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Florida (Tampa) on Oct. 19, 2018. The Middle
District of Florida Clerk of Court assigned Case No.:
8:18-cv-02572-EAK-CPT to the proceeding. The case is assigned to
the Hon. Judge Elizabeth A. Kovachevich. The suit alleges that Fair
Credit Reporting Act violation.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
Marc Reed Edelman, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
One Tampa City Center Ste 700
201 N Franklin Street
Tampa, FL 33602-5157
Telephone: (813) 223-5505
Facsimile: (813) 257-0572
E-mail: MEdelman@forthepeople.com
Attorneys for Realogy Group LLC:
Nancy A. Johnson, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, PC
111 N Magnolia Ave Ste 1250
Orlando, FL 32801-2366
Telephone: (407) 393-2925
Facsimile: (407) 393-2900
E-mail: najohnson@littler.com
RELAY DELIVERY: Alvarez Files Suit Over Unpaid Wages
----------------------------------------------------
Hermenegildo Alvarez (a.k.a. Hermen) and Leonel De Los Santos,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. Relay Delivery Inc. (d/b/a relay), Alex Blum, and
Michael J. Chevett, Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-09822 (S.D. N.Y.,
October 24, 2018) is brought against the Defendant for unpaid
minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act.
Plaintiffs and other employees work in excess of 40 hours per week
without being provided the minimum wage and overtime compensation
required by federal and state law and regulations, says the
complaint.
Hermenegildo Alvarez (a.k.a. Hermen) is an adult individual
residing in Bronx County, New York. Alvarez was employed by
Defendants at Relay from approximately December 2016 until on or
about July 25, 2018 and then from approximately September 25, 2018
until on or about October 11, 2018.
Leonel De Los Santos is an adult individual residing in Bronx
County, New York. De Los Santos was employed by Defendants at Relay
from approximately May 2016 until on or about March 2017 and then
from approximately September 2017 until on or about February 2018.
Defendants owned, operated, or controlled a delivery services
company, located at 399 South 5th Street #2, Brooklyn, NY 11211
under the name "Relay".[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael Faillace, Esq.
MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Phone: (212) 317-1200
Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
RESTAURANTS BRANDS: Arrington and Michel Class Suits Filed
----------------------------------------------------------
Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership said in its
Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on October 24, 2018, for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2018, that the company is facing two class action suits filed by
separately by Jarvis Arrington and Monique Michel.
On October 5, 2018, a class action complaint was filed against
Burger King Worldwide, Inc. and Burger King Corporation in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida by Jarvis
Arrington, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated.
On October 18, 2018, a second class action complaint was filed
against Restaurant Brands International Inc., Burger King
Worldwide, Inc. and Burger King Corporation in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Florida by Monique Michel,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situation.
The plaintiffs in both cases seek to certify a class; however, as
of the date of this filing no hearings or motions have been filed
or held regarding class certification in either case. Both of the
complaints allege that the defendants violated Section 1 of the
Sherman Act by incorporating an employee no-solicitation and
no-hiring clause in the standard form franchise agreement all
Burger King franchisees are required to sign. Each plaintiff seeks
injunctive relief and damages for himself or herself and other
members of the class.
Restaurant Brands said, "While we currently believe that these
complaints are without merit and intend to vigorously defend
against these lawsuits, we are unable to predict the ultimate
outcome of either case."
Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership operates and
franchises quick service restaurants. The company operates through
three segments: Tim Hortons, Burger King, and Popeyes. The company
was founded in 2014 and is headquartered in Oakville, Canada.
Restaurant Brands International Limited Partnership is a subsidiary
of Restaurant Brands International Inc.
SAVOYA LLC: Alabsi Sues Over FLSA Violation
-------------------------------------------
Billy Alabsi, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Savoya, LLC, and Does 1-50, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 4:18-cv-06510-KAW (N.D. Cal., October 24,
2018) is a collective and class action that seeks relief pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standards Act to remedy Defendant's failure to
pay the appropriate overtime and minimum wage compensation, in
addition to restitutionary relief.
The complaint says the Defendant suffered and permitted Plaintiff
and the Collective Class to work more than forty hours per week
without overtime compensation, and at a rate sometimes below the
minimum wage.
Billy Alabsi has worked as a Driver for Savoya for approximately
two years in San Francisco, California, where he also resides.
Savoya, LLC is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
business in Dallas, Texas. Savoya does business in California and
nationwide, where it provides chauffeured transportation services
for corporate and individual clients.
The true names and capacities of Does 1-50 are unknown to Plaintiff
Alabsi.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bryan Schwartz, Esq.
Logan Starr, Esq.
BRYAN SCHWARTZ LAW
1330 Broadway, Suite 1630
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: (510) 444-9300
Fax: (510) 444-9301
E-mail: bryan@bryanschwartzlaw.com
logan@bryanschwartzlaw.com
SELECT PORTFOLIO: Evans Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Select Portfolio
Servicing, Inc. et al. The case is styled as Bret A. Evans on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc., U.S. Bank, N.A. as Trustee for
the J.P. Morgan Acquisition Trust 2006-WMC4 Asset Backed
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-WMCH, Defendants, Case No.
2:18-cv-05985 (E.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.
Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. operates a mortgage servicing
company in the United States. The company specializes in the
servicing of single-family residential mortgage loans. It manages
the day-to-day administration of mortgage accounts; and offers
assistance programs, including home retention and home
non-retention options for homeowners.
US Bank NA provides banking services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Catherine Elizabeth Anderson, Esq.
Giskan Solotaroff & Anderson, LLP
11 Broadway, Suite 2150
New York, NY 10004
Phone: (212) 847-8315
Email: canderson@gslawny.com
SOLO HEALTHCARE: Duffy et al Suit Moved to District of New Jersey
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ELIZABETH DUFFY and JOHN DUFFY, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. SOLCO HEALTHCARE U.S.,
LLC, PRINSTON PHARMACEUTICAL, INC., WALGREEN CO. a/k/a WALGREENS,
and THROGGS NECK PHARMACY, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-07460,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York, to the U.S. District Court for the District
of New Jersey (Trenton) on Oct. 18, 2018. The District of New
Jersey Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:18-cv-15076 to the
proceeding.
The case is a class action lawsuit regarding Defendants Solco and
Prinston's manufacturing and distribution of Valsartan-containing
generic prescription medications contaminated with
N-nitrosodimethylamine, a carcinogenic and liver-damaging impurity.
In turn, Defendants Walgreens and Throggs Neck Pharmacy sold this
contaminated generic medication to Plaintiffs and other similarly
situated consumers.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs:
Joseph Ignatius Marchese, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
888 Seventh Ave.
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 989-9113
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
SONIC CORP: Seeks Initial Approval of Settlement in Malware Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sonic Corporation said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 23, 2018, for the
fiscal year ended August 31, 2018, that the parties in the payment
card breach-related suit have filed a joint motion seeking
preliminary approval of a class settlement.
The Company was named as a defendant in nine purported class action
complaints related to a 2017 payment card breach at certain Sonic
Drive-Ins. The cases were consolidated in the Northern District of
Ohio (the "Litigation").
The plaintiffs in the Litigation assert various claims related to
the Company's alleged failure to safeguard customer credit card
information and seek monetary damages, injunctive and declaratory
relief and attorneys' fees and costs.
The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the Litigation
and intends to vigorously oppose the claims asserted by the
plaintiffs. On October 10, 2018, the parties to the Litigation
filed a joint motion seeking preliminary approval of a class
settlement.
Sonic Corp. said, "Based on the terms of the class settlement,
which is subject to final court approval, we do not believe any
payments made in connection with the class settlement or the
Litigation more generally would be in excess of our cyber liability
insurance coverage. The Company has since been named as a defendant
in one additional purported class action complaint filed on October
16, 2018, in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Arkansas. We cannot provide assurance that we will not
become subject to other inquiries or claims relating to the payment
card breach in the future. Although we maintain cyber liability
insurance, it is possible the ultimate amount paid by us relating
to the payment card breach may be in excess of our cyber liability
insurance coverage applicable to claims of this nature. We are
unable to estimate the amount of any such excess."
Sonic Corp., through its subsidiaries, operates and franchises a
chain of drive-in restaurants in the United States. Sonic Corp. was
founded in 1953 and is headquartered in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.
SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: Removes Tanis Suit to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The Defendant in the case of Suzanne Tanis, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Southwest
Airlines Co., and DOES 1 through 50, Defendants, filed a notice to
remove the lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State of
California, County of San Diego (Case No.
37-02018-00041143-CU-OE-CTL) to the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California on October 10, 2018. The clerk of
court for the Southern District of California assigned Case No.
3:18-cv-02333-BAS-BGS (S.D. Cal., Oct. 10, 2018). The case is
assigned to Judge Cynthia Bashant and referred to Magistrate Judge
Bernard G. Skomal.
Southwest Airlines Co. operates a passenger airline that provides
scheduled air transportation services in the United States and
near-international markets. Southwest Airlines Co. was founded in
1967 and is based in Dallas, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Hali M. Anderson, Esq.
WILSON TURNER KOSMO LLP
550 West C Street, Suite 1050
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 236-9600
Facsimile: (619) 236-9669
E-mail: handerson@grahamhollis.com
- and -
Vilmarie Cordero, Esq.
GRAHAM HOLLIS APC
3555 Fifth Avenue, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92103
Telephone: (619) 906-4025
Facsimile: (619) 692-0822
E-mail: vcordero@grahamhollis.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Brian Davis Berry, Esq.
Lisa Mireille Bowman, Esq.
OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART PC
Steuart Tower, Suite 1300
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 369-3554
Facsimile: (415) 442-4870
E-mail: brian.berry@ogletree.com
lisa.bowman@ogletree.com
- and -
Nikolas Trpe Djordjevski, Esq.
OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART PC
4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 990
San Diego, CA 92122
Telephone: (858) 652-3100
Facsimile: (858) 652-3101
E-mail: nikolas.djordjevski@ogletree.com
STACK'S-BOWERS: Delacruz Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Stack's-Bowers
Numismatics, LLC. The case is styled as Emanuel Delacruz and on
behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Stack's-Bowers Numismatics, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:18-cv-09900-RA (S.D. N.Y., Oct. 25, 2018).
The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
Stack's-Bowers Numismatics, LLC, doing business as Stack's Bowers
Galleries, conducts live, Internet, and specialized auctions of
rare the U.S. and world coins and currency, and ancient coins. The
company offers the United States and world rare coins and currency,
the United States postage stamps, numismatic Americana coins, and
others.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana Lauren Gottlieb, Esq.
Gottlieb & Associates
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Phone: (917) 796-7437
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: danalgottlieb@aol.com
SUNPOWER CORPORATION: Faces Sanchez Suit in California State Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
An employment-related class action lawsuit has been filed against
SunPower Corporation. The case is captioned as EDGAR SANCHEZ,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. SUNPOWER CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No.
BCV-18-102563 (Cal. Super., Kern Cty., Oct. 9, 2018). The case is
assigned to Stephen D. Schuett.
SunPower Corporation researches, develops, manufactures, and
delivers solar solutions worldwide. The company was incorporated in
1985 and is headquartered in San Jose, California. SunPower
Corporation is a subsidiary of Total Solar International SAS. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by Douglas Han, Esq.
SUPERCOM INC: Judge Dismisses Securities Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------
Shearman & Sterling LLP, in an article for JDSupra, reports that on
October 10, 2018, Judge Paul G. Gardephe of the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York issued a
memorandum opinion and order setting forth the reasoning for his
September 30, 2018, dismissal of a putative securities class action
against SuperCom Inc. (the "Company"), an Israeli manufacturer of
electronic identification and location tracking products, and
certain of its officers and directors. In re SuperCom Inc. Sec.
Litig., No. 20-cv-9650 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 10, 2018).
Plaintiffs—purchasers of the Company's common stock during a
ten-month putative class period—alleged violations of Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 ("Exchange
Act") as a result of defendants allegedly making materially false
and misleading statements regarding the Company's revenue and
earnings projections for 2015, which plaintiffs allege led to a 40%
decline in the Company's stock price when the Company subsequently
announced lower-than-expected financial results. The Court
disagreed, finding that the alleged misstatements are protected by
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 ( "PSLRA")
safe harbor because plaintiffs either failed to adequately allege
material misstatements or failed to adequately allege the requisite
scienter necessary to support their claims.
The Court first considered defendants' argument that the challenged
statements -- consisting of statements made in press releases,
earnings calls, and a supplemental prospectus used in connection
with a stock offering -- were protected under the PSLRA, which
provides a safe harbor for forward-looking statements that are
accompanied by meaningful cautionary language, are immaterial, or
the plaintiff fails to prove that the forward-looking statement was
made with actual knowledge that it was false or misleading. While
plaintiffs acknowledged that many of the statements were
forward-looking, they contended that their claims were premised on
numerous false and misleading statements "of present fact" that
defendants allegedly made "with the intention to bolster the
perceived credibility" of the initial forecast at issue. For
example, plaintiffs alleged that defendants' reference to an
"expanding base of recurring revenue" was misleading because the
description of "recurring revenue" included revenue from follow-on
contracts, which do not provide the same growth potential or high
margins of true recurring revenue. The Court determined that
because some of the revenue was not truly "recurring," a reasonable
investor would have been misled by the statement and therefore it
was not protected by the safe harbor.
The Court also considered whether additional statements allegedly
made by the individual defendants regarding the Company's sales
pipeline were misleading. The Court found that, unlike the
recurring revenue statement, none of the statements regarding the
sales pipeline were actionable. The Court rejected plaintiffs'
contention that statements that the Company's sales pipeline
opportunities were "just amazing" and "progressing well" were
misleading, finding that those statements were mere "puffery" and
thus not actionable. Similarly, the Court determined that an
alleged statement that the Company was "very close to having a
large contract awarded" was merely a statement of opinion because
it was an expectation about the future rather than presently
existing objective facts, and accordingly was also not actionable.
Finally, the Court determined that plaintiffs failed to allege with
sufficient particularity how three additional alleged statements
concerning the Company's pipeline—that it "continued to grow,"
that it had "dramatically broaden[ed]," and that the "number of
advanced stage tenders . . . continue[d] to increase"—were false
or misleading. Accordingly, the Court determined that all of the
statements regarding the sales pipeline were not actionable.
Addressing the issue about whether the alleged statements contained
the requisite "meaningfully cautionary language," the Court
determined that numerous cautionary statements "did more than refer
to the most general of economic risks," and therefore secured the
protection of the PSLRA safe harbor for forward-looking statements.
The Court noted that defendants' press releases and earnings calls
at issue referred to the Company's corporate filings containing
cautionary statements and risk factors that qualify for safe harbor
protection. In particular, the Court found that the specific risk
factors acknowledged the very risks that the amended complaint
blames for the alleged losses, such as delayed government
contracts, lengthy sales cycles, and unpredictable revenues from
non-recurring sources.
The Court then turned to defendants' argument that, even if
plaintiffs had adequately pleaded an actionable misstatement, they
failed to satisfy their burden of pleading scienter. At the
outset, the Court agreed with defendants that the amended complaint
impermissibility seeks to plead scienter through group pleading,
finding that the Section 10(b) claim against two of the individual
defendants must be dismissed because the amended complaint did not
contain any specific individual allegations of scienter as to those
two individuals. The Court further held that plaintiffs'
allegations were insufficient to establish that any defendant had
the requisite motive and opportunity to commit fraud, as none of
the defendants sold their stock at an inflated price, or otherwise
had a specific motive to commit fraud, and the Court reiterated the
well-established principle that a generalized corporate benefit is
insufficient to establish motive. Similarly, the Court found that
none of defendants' alleged conduct rose to the level of conscious
misbehavior or recklessness and, at best, supported only a minimal
inference of scienter, not the "strong inference" required to plead
a Section 10(b) claim. Finally, the Court rejected plaintiffs'
argument that a strong inference of scienter arises from a
"holistic review" of the amended complaint, including (i) the
purported "core operations theory", which pertains to the Company's
small size and the fact that defendants' alleged statements
concerned the Company's "key revenue stream"; (ii) the magnitude of
the alleged revenue miss (a $10 million miss based on a projection
of $42 million in revenue); and (iii) the "temporal proximity" of
only two months between defendants' reiteration of earning guidance
and the Company's issuance of the revised outlook. Based on
plaintiffs' inability to plead both a material misstatement and the
requisite scienter, the Court dismissed plaintiffs' remaining
Section 10(b) claims.
Finding that plaintiffs had not adequately pled a primary violation
under Section 10(b), the Court dismissed the individual defendants'
Section 20(a) control person liability claims, and dismissed
plaintiffs' amended complaint with prejudice. [GN]
TORNE VALLEY: Faces Wu Suit in Southern District of New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Torne Valley
Vineyards, LLC. The case is captioned as Kathy Wu, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Torne
Valley Vineyards, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09243-GHW
(S.D.N.Y., Oct. 9, 2018). The lawsuit alleges violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is assigned to Judge
Gregory H. Woods.
Torne Valley Vineyards, LLC produces and markets wines in
California. The company is based in New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bradly Gurion Marks, Esq.
The Marks Law Firm PC
175 Varick Street 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10014
Telephone: (646) 770-3775
Facsimile: (646) 867-2639
E-mail: bmarkslaw@gmail.com
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Harbour Funds Taxi Drivers' Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
Litigation Financial Journal reports that Maurice Blackburn is
leading an Australian class action against Uber, on behalf of taxi
drivers who allege that Uber's unfair business practices have
caused serious financial harm. Harbour Litigation Funding is
financing the claim to the tune of $20M, and estimates place the
potential payout in the $500M range -- making the claim one of the
largest in Australian history. [GN]
UNILEVER US: 'ICBINB Spray' Ads Deceptive, Zizumbo et al. Claim
---------------------------------------------------------------
JENNIFER ZIZUMBO, CHANDRA ZUNDEL, and ADRIANNE ORDAZ, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs.
UNILEVER UNITED STATES, INC., a Delaware corporation, the
Defendant, Case No: RG18925345 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 19, 2018),
alleges that Defendants engage in false, unfair and deceptive
practices in advertising, marketing, and selling I Can't Believe
It's Not Butter! Spray ("ICBINB Spray").
According to the complaint, the Defendants label, market, and sell
ICBINB Spray as containing "O calories" and "Og fat" when in fact
ICBINB Spray contains 1160 calories and 124 grams of fat per
12-ounce bottle. As part of their scheme to deceive consumers, and
in violation of California's Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act,
which incorporates the Food and Drug Administration's regulations,
Defendants use unreasonably small "serving sizes" that fail to
account for the manner in which consumers actually use ICBINB Spray
and failed to incorporate a statement of identity disclosing in
simple and direct terms that ICBINB is 40% vegetable oil.
Consumers, who are increasingly health conscious and interested in
calorie-free and fat-free food alternatives for themselves and
their families, are deceived by Defendants' practices, the lawsuit
says.
Unilever, a fast moving consumer goods company, manufactures and
sells food, refreshments, home, and personal care products.[BN]
Attorneysfor Plaintiff and the Proposed Class:
Adam J. Guitride, Esq.
Seth A. Safier, Esq.
Anthony Patek, Esq.
Kristen Simplicio, Esq.
GUTRIDE SAFIER LLP
100 Pine Street, Suite 1250
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 639-9090
Facsimile: (415) 449-6469
E-mail: adam@gutridesafier.com
seth@gutridesafier.com
anthony@gutridesafier.com
kristen@gutridesafier.com
- and -
Ureka E. Idstrom, Esq.
THE EUREKA LAW FIRM
5605 Belinder Road
Fairway, KS 66205
Telephone: (816) 665-3515
E-mail: uidstrom@eurekalaw.com
VIE DE FRANCE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Rodriguez Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
CECILIA RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VIE DE FRANCE YAMAZAKI, INC., and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 18STCV00117
(Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 9, 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 Rodriguez was employed by the Defendants as
non-exempt employee.
Vie De France Yamazaki, Inc., operates as a food service and retail
bakery-cafe company that produces and sells frozen bakery products.
The company was founded in 1971 and is based in Vienna, Virginia.
It has Bakery-Cafe locations in Costa Mesa, California; Washington,
District of Columbia; and Kensington, Potomac, and Rockville,
Maryland. Vie de France Yamazaki, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of
Yamazaki Baking Co. Ltd. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott M. Lidman, Esq.
Elizabeth Nguyen, Esq.
Milan Moore, Esq.
LIDMAN LAW, APC
222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550
El Segundo, CA 90245
Telephone: (424) 322-4772
Facsimile: (424) 322-4775
E-mail: slidman@lidmanlaw.com
enguyen@lidmanlaw.com
mmoore@lidmanlaw. com
- and -
Paul K. Haines, Esq.
Cecilia Rodriguez, Esq.
HAINES LAW GROUP, APC
222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550
El Segunao, CA 90245
Telephone: (424) 292-2350
Facsimile: (424) 292-2355
E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com
WASH MULTIFAMILY: Sherman Grove et al. Sue over Extra Fees
----------------------------------------------------------
SHERMAN GROVE APARTMENTS, LLC; BERENDO HOLLYWOOD APARTMENTS, LP;
and QUEEN'S GATE RESIDENTIAL, LLC, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WASH MULTIFAMILY
LAUNDRY SYSTEMS, LLC; and DOES 1 through 50, Defendants, Case No.
18STCV00129 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 9, 2018) is an
action against the Defendant's unlawful, unfair and fraudulent
business practice in charging and collecting fees not provided in
the contract.
According to the complaint, the Defendant entered into a lease
agreements with customers throughout California. Under the lease
agreement, customers lease their common area laundry rooms to the
Defendant. The Defendant places washer and dryer machines in the
laundry rooms, maintains the machines, and is required to collect
the revenues and split the gross income with its customers, such as
the Plaintiffs and the Class, equally, on a 50/50 basis.
The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant unilaterally and without
seeking or obtaining the Plaintiffs' approval or consent to any
change in the lease agreement, begun charging and collecting
unlawful, extra-contractual, and un-bargained-for fees. The
Defendant deducts monies from amounts payable to the Plaintiffs
each month, pays the Plaintiffs less than what they are owed, and
misrepresents the amount due the Plaintiffs under the lease
agreement. The lease agreement do not authorize the Defendants to
charge or collect such fees or to convert the Plaintiffs'
properties.
WASH Multifamily Laundry Systems, LLC offers laundry services to
apartments, condominiums, college and university residence halls,
military bases, and other multi-housing locations in the United
States and internationally. WASH Multifamily Laundry Systems, LLC
was formerly known as Web Service Company, Inc. and changed its
name to WASH Multifamily Laundry Systems, LLC in January 2011. WASH
Multifamily Laundry Systems, LLC was founded in 1947 and is based
in El Segundo, California. The company has branch offices in the
United States and Canada. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Paul R. Kiesel, Esq.
Jeffrey A. Koncius, Esq.
Stephanie H. Gold, 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
gold@kiesel.law
WELLS FARGO: Rawls Sues over Debt Collection Practices
------------------------------------------------------
ROSE MARY RAWLS, JOHN M. RAWLS, and CARMELA FOURNIER on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated and the general
public, the Plaintiffs, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., the Defendant,
Case 8:18-cv-02571-VMC-TGW (M.D. Fla., Oct. 19, 2018), seeks actual
and punitive damages, civil penalties, restitution, declaratory
relief to define the parties' rights and obligations, and
injunctive relief to prevent the Defendant from collecting on the
released loans and misrepresenting the obligations of the parties
and status of the loans, in violation of the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act, and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant Wells Fargo collected or
attempted collection on residential loans previously extinguished
by Wells Fargo and to which Plaintiffs and other members of the
putative class had no legal obligation to pay.
Wells Fargo took actions for its own benefit to affirmatively
release its security interest in loans held by the Plaintiffs and
the Class. By releasing its security interest, Wells Fargo had no
legal right to enforce the loans or collect on them. Nonetheless,
Wells Fargo illegally collected or attempted to collect on the
loans by systematically misrepresenting the status of the loans,
obligations under the loans, and initiated debt collection
procedures to pressure Plaintiffs and other Class members to pay on
the unenforceable loans, the lawsuit says.
Wells Fargo is an American multinational financial services company
headquartered in San Francisco, California, with central offices
throughout the country. It is the world's second-largest bank by
market capitalization and the fourth largest bank in the U.S. by
total assets.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs:
Christopher W. Boss, Esq.
BOSS LAW
9887 4th Street North, Suite 202
St. Petersburg, FL 33702
Telephone: (727) 471-0039
Facsimile: (888) 449-8792
E-mail: cpservice@bosslegal.com
- and -
W. Craft Hughes, Esq.
HUGHES ELLZEY, LLP
2700 Post Oak Blvd., Ste. 1120
Galleria Tower I
Houston, TX 77056
Telephone: (888) 350-3931
Facsimile: (888) 995-3335
E-mail: craft@hughesellzey.com
WELLS FARGO: Underpays Mortgage Loan Officers, Reyes-Aguilar Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MONICA REYES-AGUILAR, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. WELLS FARGO N.A.; WELLS FARGO &
COMPANY; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
18CECG03736 (Cal. Super., Fresno Cty., Oct. 9, 2018) is an action
against the Defendants for unpaid regular hours, overtime hours,
minimum wages, wages for missed meal and rest periods.
The Plaintiff Reyes-Aguilar was employed by the Defendants as
mortgage loan officer.
Wells Fargo & Company, a diversified financial services company,
provides retail, commercial, and corporate banking services to
individuals, businesses, and institutions. Wells Fargo & Company
was founded in 1852 and is headquartered in San Francisco,
California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
George J. Vasquez, Esq.
GEORGE J. VASQUEZ, PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
5588 N. Palm Ave., Ste. 109
Fresno, CA 93704
Telephone: (559) 334-3783
Facsimile: (559) 578-3777
E-mail: gvasquez@georgevasquezlaw.com
WHITECLIFF VINEYARD: Faces Wu Suit in Southern District of New York
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Kathy Wu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Whitecliff Vineyard And Winery, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:18-cv-09247-PAC (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 9, 2018). The
lawsuit alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The case is assigned to Judge Paul A. Crotty.
Whitecliff Vineyard And Winery, LLC is engaged in the wine
business. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bradly Gurion Marks, Esq.
The Marks Law Firm PC
175 Varick Street 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10014
Telephone: (646) 770-3775
Facsimile: (646) 867-2639
E-mail: bmarkslaw@gmail.com
WOLFFER ESTATE: Faces Wu Suit in Eastern District of New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kathy Wu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Wolffer Estate Vineyard, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 1:18-cv-05647-KAM-RER (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 9, 2010). The
lawsuit alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The case is assigned to Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto and referred to
Magistrate Judge Ramon E. Reyes, Jr.
Wolffer Estate Vineyard, Inc. was founded in 1978. The company's
line of business includes the manufacturing of wines, brandy, and
brandy spirits. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bradly Gurion Marks, Esq.
The Marks Law Firm PC
175 Varick Street 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10014
Telephone: (646) 770-3775
Facsimile: (646) 867-2639
E-mail: bmarkslaw@gmail.com
XANITOS INC: Byczek Sues over Collection of Biometric Data
----------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER BYCZEK, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. XANITOS, INC, a Delaware
corporation, the Defendant, Case No. 2018CH13064 (Ill. Cir. Ct.,
Cook Cty, Oct. 19, 2018), seeks to put a stop to the Defendant's
unlawful collection, use, and storage of the Plaintiff's and the
putative Class members' sensitive biometric data.
According to the complaint, Xanitos is a management company that
provides housekeeping, patient transport, and central laundry
services to hospitals throughout the United States. When employees
first begin their jobs at Xanitos, they are required to scan their
fingerprint in its biometric time tracking system as a means of
authentication, instead of using key fobs or other identification
cards.
While there are tremendous benefits to using biometric time clocks
in the workplace, there are also serious risks. Unlike key fobs or
identification cards-which can be changed or replaced if stolen or
compromised-fingerprints are unique, permanent biometric
identifiers associated with the employee. This exposes employees to
serious and irreversible privacy risks. For example, if a
fingerprint database is hacked, breached, or otherwise exposed,
employees have no means by which to prevent identity theft and
unauthorized tracking. Recognizing the need to protect its citizens
from situations like these, Illinois enacted the Biometric
Information Privacy Act, specifically to regulate companies that
collect and store Illinois citizens' biometrics, such as
fingerprints. Despite this law, Xanitos disregards its employees'
statutorily protected privacy rights and unlawfully collects,
stores, and uses their biometric data in violation of the BIPA, the
lawsuit says.[BN]
Attorneys for Plaintiff:
J. Eli Wade-Scott, Esq.
Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor
Chicago, IL 60654
Telephone: (312) 589.6370
Facsimile: (312) 589.6378
E-mail: brichman@edelson.com
ewadescott@edelson.com
- and -
David Fish, Esq.
John Kunze, Esq.
THE FISH LAW FIRM, P. C.
200 East Fifth Avenue, Suite 123
Naperville, IL 60563
Telephone: (630) 355 7590
Facsimile: (630) 778 0400
E-mail: dfish@fishlawfirm.com
jkunze@fishlawfirm.com
XBIOTECH INC: Travis County District Court Tosses Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
XBiotech Inc. said in its Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission filed on October 24, 2018, that the
Honorable Judge Dustin M. Howell of the 459th Travis County
District Court has issued a letter ruling granting the Company's
Motion to Dismiss the securities class action complaint brought
against XBiotech (Case D-1-GN-17-003063). The District Court has
directed the parties to prepare a formal order memorializing the
ruling.
A copy of the Company's press release announcing the event is
available at https://goo.gl/h6LrsT.
XBiotech Inc., a pre-market biopharmaceutical company, engages in
discovering and developing True Human monoclonal antibodies for
treating various diseases. XBiotech, Inc. was founded in 2005 and
is headquartered in Austin, Texas.
*********
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 ***