CAR_Public/190214.mbx                C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Thursday, February 14, 2019, Vol. 21, No. 33

                            Headlines

2317 OMIYA: Denied Workers Overtime Pay, Wage Statements, Says Kan
ALLIANCEONE RECEIVABLES: Vandehey Seeks Approval of $23K Accord
ALTA-DENA CERTIFIED: Ninth Circuit Appeal Filed in Perez Suit
AMERICAN EXPRESS: Oliver et al. Sue over Anti-Steering Rules
AMERICAN MARKETING: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Boriskin Claims

AUDIT SYSTEMS: Travis FDCPA Suit Moved to W.D. Pennsylvania
BANK OF AMERICA: Ct. Grants Conditional Certification in Culpepper
BANK OF AMERICA: Removes Harrison Suit to N.D. California
BAPTIST COMMUNITY: Removes Williams Suit to E.D. Louisiana
BLOK CHOCOLATIER: Failed to Pay Overtime Wages, Santacruz Says

BOATS BY GEORGE: Thorne Bring Class Action in NY Under ADA
BOLL & BRANCH: Bunting Files Class Asserting ADA Violation
BOSTON WHALER: Thorne Brings Class Action Under ADA in New York Ct.
BRICKELL BRANDS: Wheeler Sues over Unwanted Cellular Phone Calls
BROWN UNIVERSITY: Kozlov Moves for Class Certification Under FLSA

BRUNSWICK FAMILY: Thorne Suit Asserts Disabilities Act Breach
BUSTER'S MARINE: Thorne Suit Asserts ADA Breach
CASTAWAY MARINA: Thorne Files ADA Class Action in New York
CENTURY ENTERPRISES: Holder Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages
CLEARPATH LENDING: Pjanic Suit Moved to Minnesota Federal Court

CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CA: Farrow Appeals Decision to 9th Circuit
COYOTE GRILL: Martin Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages, Reimbursements
CP OPCO: Wins Prelim. OK of $3-Mil. Settlement in McDonald Suit
CREDIT CONTROL: Ousmane Files Suit under FDCPA in Colorado
CSX TRANSPORTATION: Sued over Mishandling of Medical Information

DBV TECHNOLOGIES: Ito-Stone Hits Share Price Drop
eLOCAL USA: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Grossberg Suit Claims
FINANCE SYSTEM: Coggon Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
FITNESS TIME: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Rakovsky Suit Claims
FROST-ARNETT COMPANY: Zuaiter Says Collection Fees "Illegal"

GENERAL MOTORS: Hall et al. Allege StabiliTrak Defect in Vehicles
GLOW ASIAN FOOD: Violates FLSA, Chen Suit Asserts
GODIVA CHOCOLATIER: Hesse Files Fraud Class Suit in New York
GOLD STANDARD: Motion to Certify Class in Green Suit Nixed
GOOGLE INC: Seventh Circuit Appeal Filed in Rivera BIPA Suit

HEALTHY HALO INSURANCE: Hume Suit Asserts TCPA Violation
HIRSCHL & ADLER: Website not Blind Friendly, Dawson Says
ICONIC GROUP: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Larosa Suit Alleges
ILIA INC: Bunting Brings ADA Class Action in New York
ILLINOIS: Bryant Moves to Certify Prisoners Class and Sub-Classes

JACKSON HEWITT: Endres et al. Sue over No-Poach Agreements
KRONOS INC: Figueroa & Burton Sue over Biometric Data Storage
LOLLI AND POPS: Faces Conner ADA Class Action in New York
MARQUIS YACHTS: Thorne Suit Asserts Disabilities Act Violation
MARRIOTT INT'L: Costa Files Class Suit in Connecticut

MDL 2741: Wilkinson Suit v Monsanto over Roundup Sales Consolidated
METTERS INDUSTRIES: Class Certified Under FLSA in Ortiz Suit
MINDBODY, INC: Ryan et al. Balk at Merger Deal with Vista
MONSANTO COMPANY: Aldisons Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
MONSANTO COMPANY: Anthonys Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup

MONSANTO COMPANY: Brown Sues over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
MONSANTO COMPANY: Colombaras Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
MONSANTO COMPANY: Hanses Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
MORPHE LLC: Conner Files Suit Under Disabilities Act in NY
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Davis-Moab Files Class Action Over Injuries

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Delts Seeks Redress for Athletes' Injuries
NCAA: David Sunday Sues over Curry College Student-Athletes' Safety
NCAA: Wilson Sues over Health Issues of WVU Student-Athletes
NEWEGG INC: Violates Disabilities Act, Martinez Suit Asserts
NOVA DENTAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Sweeney Suit Claims

NUSRET MIAMI: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Compere Suit Alleges
OTIS ELEVATOR: Gorss' Bid to Certify Class Taken Under Advisement
OWLET BABY: Ruiz et al. Sue over Deceptive Smart Sock Baby Monitors
PERSONNEL STAFFING: Court Moves Hearing on Haack's Class Cert Bid
PG&E CORP: Rickaby Sues over November Camp Fire

PIZZA STOP: Garcia Espindola Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
PLYCEM USA: Smith et al. Sue over Defective Cement Siding
PONTOON BOAT: Thorne Files Class Action for ADA Violation
SABRA DIPPING: Faces Ochoa Labor Suit in Los Angeles
SANCHEZ OIL & GAS: Hornsby Seeks to  Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages

SKINFLINTS RESTAURANT: Sanchez Suit Seeks Proper Wages
ST. LOUIS, MO: Dixon Moves for Certification of Arrestees Class
STANFORD HEALTH: Underpays Caregivers, Rhyner Suit Alleges
SUN MERRY: Vargas Seeks Overtime Compensation
TD AMERITRADE: Knowles Files Suit in Nebr. for Breach of Contract

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION: Garnett Alleges Race Bias
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Hoffman Appeals W.D. Wash. Ruling to 9th Cir.
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: Brown et al. Allege Racial Bias
WELLS FARGO: Approval Hearing in Nakamura Suit Set for May 15
WELLS FARGO: Certification of Class Sought in McDonald Suit

WELLS FARGO: Pekoc Appeals Ct. Approval of Hefler Suit Settlement
WOLFGANG'S STEAKHOUSE: Dervisevic Sues Over Unpaid Wages
[*] Consumer Agency Settles Data Breach Class Action for $22MM
[*] Ride-Sharing Company Settles TCPA Class Action for $4MM

                            *********

2317 OMIYA: Denied Workers Overtime Pay, Wage Statements, Says Kan
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kan Ming, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. 2317 Omiya Sushi Inc., Phui Phui Woo, Yat
Khow Woo and Yao Qin Feng, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00298 (E.D.
N.Y., January 15, 2019), seeks unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid
"spread-of-hours" premium, compensation for failure to provide wage
notice at the time of hiring and failure to provide paystubs,
liquidated damages, prejudgment and post-judgment interest and
attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act
and New York Labor Law.

Defendants operate as "Omiya Sushi," a Japanese restaurant with
principal business address located at 2317 Avenue U, Brooklyn, NY
11229 where Kan was employed as a delivery worker. He worked in
excess of 40 hours per work week without overtime pay and/or
spread-of-hours pay and was not given wage statements. Defendants
also failed to reimburse Kan for his expenses on gas and
maintenance for using his own car to make deliveries, asserts the
complaint. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Xiaoxi Liu, Esq.
      HANG & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
      136-20 38th Avenue, Suite 10G
      Flushing, NY 11354
      Tel: (718)353-8588
      Email: xliu@hanglaw.com


ALLIANCEONE RECEIVABLES: Vandehey Seeks Approval of $23K Accord
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiff in the lawsuit captioned JACQUELYN A. VANDEHEY on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. ALLIANCEONE
RECEIVABLES MANAGEMENT, INC. and, JOHN AND JANE DOES NUMBERS 1
THROUGH 10, Case No. 1:18-cv-00481-WCG (E.D. Wisc.), asks the Court
to enter an order, which:

      (i) preliminarily approves the Class Settlement Agreement,
          which provides for the creation of a class settlement
          fund of $23,070;

     (ii) certifies for settlement purposes the Settlement Class
          as defined in Paragraph 8 of the Agreement;

    (iii) appoints STERN THOMASSON LLP as Class Counsel;

     (iv) appoints the Plaintiff as representative of the
          Settlement Class;

      (v) sets dates for Class Members to return a seek exclusion
          from, or to object to, the Settlement;

     (vi) schedules a hearing for final approval of the
          Agreement;

    (vii) approves the mailing of notice to Class Members in the
          form of Exhibit 1 to Exhibit A; and

   (viii) finds that mailing of such notice satisfies the
          requirements of due process.

The Litigation alleges that AllianceOne violated the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act by mailing consumers collection letters to
collect defaulted credit card debts that had been charged-off by
the original creditor.

For the purposes of settlement, the Parties stipulate to the
certification of the Settlement Class, which is defined as:

     All persons to whom AllianceOne Receivables Management, Inc.
     mailed an initial written to an address in the State of
     Wisconsin, between March 27, 2017 and April 17, 2018, which
     sought to collect a defaulted debt whose balance had been
     charged-off, and which: (i) listed "Interest" and or
     "Non-Interest Charges/Fees" as $0.00; (ii) conveyed an
     "offer" for a reduced amount if paid "within 40 days of
     receiving [the letter];" and (iii) stated AllianceOne "will
     notify our client that you have paid your account."

AllianceOne will create a class settlement fund of $23,070, which a
Third-Party Settlement Administrator will distribute to each Class
Member whose Class Notice is not returned as undeliverable and does
not exclude him/herself from the Settlement.  Each Class Member
whose Class Notice is not returned as undeliverable and does not
exclude him/herself from the Settlement will be sent a check in the
amount of $30, which will be void 60 days from the date of
issuance.

AllianceOne shall pay $1,500 to the Plaintiff for her statutory
damages pursuant to 15 U.S.C. Section 1692k(a)(2)(B), which also
takes into account her services to the Settlement Class.  In
connection with Class Counsel's application for approval of
attorney's fees and costs, the Parties stipulate that, if the Court
grants the Final Order, then the Litigation is a "successful
action" within the meaning of 15 U.S.C. Section 1692k(a)(3)
notwithstanding that AllianceOne does not admit to liability.  As
such, and subject to Court approval, AllianceOne agrees that Class
Counsel shall be entitled to receive $30,000, which covers all fees
and all expenses arising out of the Litigation.  The award of fees,
costs, and expenses to Class Counsel shall be in addition to, and
shall not in any way reduce, the settlement amounts provided to
Class Members.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          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: Francis@SternThomasson.com
                  Philip@SternThomasson.com
                  Andrew@SternThomasson.com


ALTA-DENA CERTIFIED: Ninth Circuit Appeal Filed in Perez Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Juan Perez filed an appeal from a court ruling issued in
his lawsuit titled Juan Perez v. Alta-Dena Certified Dairy, LLC,
Case No. 2:13-cv-07741-R-FFM, in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, Los Angeles.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, Mr. Perez has
filed other appeals over decisions entered by the District Court.

In his complaint, the Plaintiff raises a total of six causes of
action against the Defendant.  The primary claims for the purpose
of class certification are: claim one for failure to provide meal
and rest breaks and claim two for failure to pay wages.  The
remaining four claims are derivative of the first two.

The appellate case is captioned as Juan Perez v. Alta-Dena
Certified Dairy, LLC, Case No. 19-55118, in the United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows:

   -- Transcript must be ordered by February 25, 2019;

   -- Transcript is due on March 26, 2019;

   -- Appellant Juan Perez's opening brief is due on May 6, 2019;

   -- Appellee Alta-Dena Certified Dairy, LLC's answering brief
      is due on June 6, 2019; and

   -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after
      service of the answering brief.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellant JUAN PEREZ, on behalf of himself and those
similarly situated, is represented by:

          Natasha Chesler, Esq.
          Timothy B. McCaffrey, Jr., Esq.
          CHESLER MCCAFFREY LLP
          11377 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 500
          Los Angeles, CA 90064
          Telephone: (310) 882-6407
          Facsimile: (310) 882-6359
          E-mail: nchesler@tbmlaw.net
                  tmccaffrey@tbmlaw.net

Defendant-Appellee ALTA-DENA CERTIFIED DAIRY, LLC, a Delaware
Limited Liability Company, is represented by:

          Amanda Kate Bonn, Esq.
          Marc M. Seltzer, Esq.
          Steven G. Sklaver, Esq.
          SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
          1900 Avenue of the Stars
          Los Angeles, CA 90067-4405
          Telephone: (310) 789-3100
          Facsimile: (310) 789-3150
          E-mail: abonn@susmangodfrey.com
                  mseltzer@susmangodfrey.com
                  ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com


AMERICAN EXPRESS: Oliver et al. Sue over Anti-Steering Rules
------------------------------------------------------------
ANTHONY OLIVER, TERRY GAYLE QUINTON, SHAWN O'KEEFE, ANDREW AMEND,
SUSAN BURDETTE, GIANNA VALDES, DAVID MOSKOWITZ, ZACHARY DRAPER,
NATE THAYER and MICHAEL THOMAS REID on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. AMERICAN EXPRESS
COMPANY and AMERICAN EXPRESS TRAVEL RELATED SERVICES COMPANY, INC.,
the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00566 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2019),
seeks to enjoin Amex's continuing enforcement of its Anti-Steering
Rules under federal antitrust law.  The Plaintiffs also seek
damages under applicable state antitrust and consumer protection
laws and the law of unjust enrichment/restitution on behalf of: all
persons or entities who do not have an American Express charge or
credit card and did not have one during the relevant period, who
reside in a State,  and who used an electronic form of payment to
purchase a product or service from any merchant that accepts
American Express, Visa, Mastercard, and/or Discover credit or
charge cards; or, alternatively, damages are sought on behalf of
the subset of persons or entities who do not have an American
Express charge or credit card and did not have one during the
relevant period, who reside in a State, and who used an electronic
form of payment to purchase a product or service from any of the
Merchant Plaintiffs.

The antitrust action is brought on behalf of the millions of
persons and entities, which used an electronic form of payment
other than an American Express charge or credit card purchased
goods and services sold by merchants across the country at prices
inflated by Amex's Non-Discrimination Provisions. Amex imposes
Anti-Steering Rules in its merchant agreements. These vertical
restraints unreasonably restrain trade in the two-sided market for
general purpose credit and charge card transactions. Amex's
Anti-Steering Rules increase two-sided credit card transaction
prices to supra-competitive levels; result in fewer credit card
transactions than would occur but-for the restraints; and raise
consumer retail prices on goods and services purchased throughout
the country by Plaintiffs and the Class, the lawsuit says.

The American Express Company, also known as Amex, is an American
multinational financial services corporation headquartered in Three
World Financial Center in New York City. The company was founded in
1850 and is one of the 30 components of the Dow Jones Industrial
Average.[BN]

Counsel for Plaintiffs:

          Joseph J. Tabacco, Jr., Esq.
          Todd A. Seaver, Esq.
          Colleen Cleary, Esq.
          BERMAN TABACCO
          44 Montgomery Street, Suite 650
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 433-3200
          Facsimile: (415) 433-6382
          E-mail: jtabacco@bermantabacco.com
                  tseaver@bermantabacco.com
                  ccleary@bermantabacco.com

               - and -

          Gordon Ball, Esq.
          Jonothan T. Ball, Esq.
          GORDON BALL LLC
          7001 Old Kent Dr.
          Knoxville, TN 37919
          Telephone: (865) 525-7028
          Facsimile: (865) 525-4679
          E-mail: gball@gordonball.com

               - and -

          Jay B. Shapiro, Esq.
          Samuel O. Patmore, Esq.
          STEARNS WEAVER MILLER WEISSLER
          ALHADEFF & SITTERSON, P.A.
          150 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200
          Miami, FL 33130
          Telephone: (305) 789-3200
          Facsimile: (305) 789-3395
          E-mail: jshapiro@stearnsweaver.com
          spatmore@stearnsweaver.com

               - and -

          Christopher Lovell, Esq.
          Gary S. Jacobson, Esq.
          LOVELL STEWART HALEBIAN
          JACOBSON LLP
          61 Broadway, Suite 501
          New York, NY 10006
          Telephone: (212) 608-1900
          Facsimile: (212) 719-4775
          E-mail: clovell@lshllp.com
                  gsjacobson@lshllp.com

               - and -

          Marvin A. Miller, Esq.
          Andrew Szot, Esq.
          MILLER LAW LLC
          115 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 2910
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 332-3400
          Facsimile: (312) 676-2676
          E-mail: mmiller@millerlawllc.com
                  aszot@millerlawllc.com

               - and -

          Jared B. Stamell, Esq.
          Richard J. Schager, Jr., Esq.
          Andrew Goldenberg, Esq.
          STAMELL & SCHAGER, LLP
          260 Madison Ave., 16/F
          New York, NY 10016-2410
          Telephone: (212) 566-4057
          Facsimile: (212) 566-4061
          E-mail: stamell@ssnylaw.com
                  schager@ssnylaw.com
                  goldenberg@ssnylaw.com

               - and -

          Simon Paris, Esq.
          SALTZ MONGELUZZI BARRET &
          BANDESKY
          One Liberty Place, 52nd Floor
          1650 Market Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 496-8282
          Facsimile: (215) 496-0999
          E-mail: sparis@smbb.com

               - and -

          Eric. D. Barton, Esq.
          WAGSTAFF & CARTMELL LLP
          4740 Grand Avenue Suite 300
          Kansas City MO 64112
          Telephone: (816) 701-1167
          Facsimile: (816) 531-2372
          E-mail: ebarton@wcllp.com

               - and -

          Lewis S. Kahn, Esq.
          Melinda A. Nicholson, Esq.
          KAHN SWICK & FOTI, LLC
          1100 Poydras Street, Suite 3200
          New Orleans, LA 70163
          Telephone: (504) 455-1400
          Facsimile: (504) 455-1498
          E-mail: lewis.kahn@ksfcounsel.com
          melinda.nicholson@ksfcounsel.com

AMERICAN MARKETING: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Boriskin Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
ELIZABETH BORISKIN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AMERICAN MARKETING VENTURES, INC.
d/b/a YOUR VIDEO SPOKESPERSON, Defendant, Case No.
9:19-cv-80081-DMM (S.D. Fla., Jan. 20, 2019) seeks to stop the
Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls.

American Marketing Ventures, Inc. d/b/a Your Video Spokesperson is
engaged in video production and marketing. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 400-4713
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

               - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
          515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 533-4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com


AUDIT SYSTEMS: Travis FDCPA Suit Moved to W.D. Pennsylvania
-----------------------------------------------------------
A case, MELISSA TRAVIS, an individual, on behalf of herself and
those similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. AUDIT SYSTEMS INC.,
the Defendant, Case No.: 18-GD-16034, was removed from the
Allegheny County Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Pennsylvania (Pittsburgh) on Jan. 28, 2019. The Western
District of Pennsylvania Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:19-cv-00092-MJH to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the
Hon. Judge Marilyn J. Horan. The suit alleges Fair Debt Collection
Act violation.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          Eugene D. Frank, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF EUGENE D. FRANK, P.C.
          500 Grant Street, Suite 2900
          Pittsburgh, PA 15219
          Telephone: (412) 366-4276
          Facsimile: (412) 366-4305
          E-mail: efrank.esq@comcast.net

Attorneys for Defendant:

          Lauren M. Burnette, Esq.
          MESSER STRICKLER, LTD.
          12276 San Jose Blvd., Suite 720
          Jacksonville, FL 32223
          Telephone: (904) 527-1172
          Facsimile: (904) 683-7353
          E-mail: lburnette@messerstrickler.com

BANK OF AMERICA: Ct. Grants Conditional Certification in Culpepper
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Hon. Victor A. Bolden grants the Plaintiff's motion for
conditional certification under Section 216(b) of the Fair Labor
Standards Act in the lawsuit captioned AILEEN CULPEPPER v. BANK OF
AMERICA, NATIONAL ASS'N, Case No. 3:17-cv-00264-VAB (D. Conn.).

Judge Bolden also:

   -- denies without prejudice to renewal the Defendant's motion
      to strike Michael Weed's consent to join the Fair Labor
      Standards Act collective action;

   -- denies without prejudice to renewal the Defendant's motion
      to deny Rule 23 class certification;

   -- denies without prejudice to renewal the Plaintiff's motion
      for Rule 23 class certification;

   -- grants the Defendant's motion to seal the Timekeeping
      Compliance Learning Guide; and

   -- denies as moot the Plaintiff's motion to amend or correct
      the scheduling order.

The Court sets this schedule for the second phase of discovery:

   * The second phase of discovery will commence immediately;

   * Disclosure of Plaintiff's Rule 23 experts is due by June 14,
     2019;

   * Damages analysis is due by June 14, 2019;

   * Deposition of Plaintiff's Rule 23 experts is due by July 19,
     2019;

   * Disclosure of Defendant's Rule 23 experts is due by
     September 6, 2019;

   * Deposition of Defendant's Rule 23 experts is due by
     October 11, 2019;

   * Discovery is to be completed by October 11, 2019;

   * The Court will convene a post-discovery telephonic status
     conference on October 17, 2019 at 10 a.m.;

   * Plaintiff's motion for Rule 23 certification is due by
     November 15, 2019;

   * Defendant's motions for FLSA decertification and in
     opposition to Rule 23 certification as well as any
     dispositive motions by either party are due by December 20,
     2019;

   * Plaintiff's replies to Defendant's motions for FLSA
     decertification and in opposition to Rule 23 certification
     are due by January 10, 2020;

   * Any response to any dispositive motions are due by
     January 31, 2020;

   * Any replies to any responses to dispositive motions are due
     by February 14, 2020; and

   * Oral argument on motions for Rule 23 class certification,
     FLSA collective de-certifcation, and any dispositive motions
     will be held on March 19, 2020.[CC]


BANK OF AMERICA: Removes Harrison Suit to N.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The Defendants in the case of ANDREA HARRISON, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BANK OF
AMERICA, N.A.; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, filed
a notice to remove the lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State
of California, County of San Francisco (Case No. CGC-18-570911) to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on
January 18, 2019. The clerk of court for the Northern District of
California assigned Case No. 3:19-cv-00316-JCS. The case is
assigned to Judge Laurel Beeler.

Bank of America, National Association operates as a bank. The Bank
offers saving and current account, investment and financial
services, online banking, mortgage and non-mortgage loan
facilities, as well as issues credit card and business loans. Bank
of America serves client worldwide. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Michael D. Mandel, Esq.
          Ashley R. Li, Esq.
          MCGUIRE WOODS LLP
          1800 Century Park East, 8th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 315-8200
          Facsimile: (310) 315-8210
          E-mail: mmandel@mcguirewoods.com
                  ali@mcguirewoods.com

               - and -

          Sylvia J. Kim, Esq.
          MCGUIRE WOODS LLP
          2 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1300
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 844-9944
          Facsimile: (415) 844-9922
          E-mail: skim@mcguirewoods.com


BAPTIST COMMUNITY: Removes Williams Suit to E.D. Louisiana
----------------------------------------------------------
The Defendant in the case of TRENIKA WILLIAMS, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BAPTIST
COMMUNITY HEALTH SERVICES, INC., Defendant, filed a notice to
remove the lawsuit from the Civil District Court, Orleans Parish
(Case No. 2018-11486 I-14) to the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana on January 18, 2019. The clerk of
court for the Eastern District of Louisiana assigned Case No.
2:19-cv-00384-SM-KWR. The case is assigned to Judge Susie Morgan
and referred to Magistrate Karen Wells Roby.

Baptist Community Health Services Inc. operates as a non-profit
organization. The Organization offers a variety of health care
services. Baptist Community Health Services serves patients in the
United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Galen M. Hair, Esq.
          David Paul Vicknair, Esq.
          Jennifer Jon Greene, Esq.
          John Eric Bicknell , Jr.
          Samuel J. Ford, Esq.
          SCOTT VICKNAIR HAIR & CHECKI, LLC
          909 Poydras St., Suite 1100
          New Orleans, LA 70112
          Telephone: (504) 684-5200
          Facsimile: (504) 613-6351
          E-mail: hair@svhclaw.com
                  david@svhclaw.com
                  greene@svhclaw.com
                  bicknell@svhclaw.com
                  ford@vhclaw.com

               - and -

          Joshua L. Holmes, Esq.
          Crescent Care Legal Services
          2601 Tulane Ave., Suite 630
          New Orleans, LA 70119
          Telephone: (504) 568-1631
          Facsimile: (504) 301-1357
          E-mail: joshua.holmes@crescentcarehealth.org

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jeanne Roslyn Lemmon, Esq.
          GODOFSKY & SCHROEDER
          One Galleria Blvd., Suite 700
          Metairie, LA 70001
          Telephone: (504) 841-5261
          E-mail: rlemmon@lammico.com


BLOK CHOCOLATIER: Failed to Pay Overtime Wages, Santacruz Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
MARIA SANTACRUZ, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. BLOK CHOCOLATIER LLC,
CHOCOHOLIC INC., ESTHER ABRAHAM, ZASHA ABRAHAM and SHULEM PRERO,
the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00544 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 29, 2019),
seeks redress against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime
wages, spread of hour wages, and for failure to provide proper
statements with each payment of wages in violation of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.

According to the complaint, throughout Plaintiff's employment, the
Plaintiff worked between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through
Saturday, and on average worked 50 hours per week and was paid at
an hourly rate ranging from $10.00 to $15.00 per hour. Irrespective
of the number of hours Plaintiff worked per week, the Plaintiff was
paid at Plaintiff's regular hourly rate and was not paid overtime
wages of one and one-half times Plaintiff's regular hourly rate for
hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week. Moreover, the
Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of 10 hours per workday and
was not paid spread of hour wages of one additional hour at the
applicable minimum wage rate, the lawsuit says.

The Plaintiff worked as a chocolate preparer for Defendants at
their facility located in Brooklyn, New York, from in or around
October 2016 through September 28, 2018. The Defendants are the
producers and wholesalers of a brand of chocolate products known as
"Blok Chocolatier" and maintain their principal place of business
and production at 445 Park Ave, Suite 228, Brooklyn, New York
11205.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          Matthew Madzelan, Esq.
          SLATER SLATER SCHULMAN LLP
          445 Broad Hollow Road, Suite 334
          Melville, NY 11747
          Telephone: (631) 420-9300

BOATS BY GEORGE: Thorne Bring Class Action in NY Under ADA
----------------------------------------------------------
Boats by George, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
Braulio Thorne and on behalf of all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Boats by George, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-00961 (S.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Boats By George, Inc. manufactures and sells boats. The Company
offers new and used boats, fishing, and recreational water crafts.
Boats by George serves customers in the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq
   Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb
   150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Fax: (212) 982-6284
   Email: nyjg@aol.com


BOLL & BRANCH: Bunting Files Class Asserting ADA Violation
----------------------------------------------------------
Boll & Branch LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant
to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled Rasheta
Bunting, individually and as the representative of a class of
similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. Boll & Branch LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00619 (E.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Boll & Branch is a privately held, U.S. based, e-commerce company
that sells luxury bedding online. Headquartered in Summit, New
Jersey, the company manufactures and sells organic cotton bed
linens, blankets and bath towels and are the first maker of such
goods to be certified by Fair Trade USA.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Dan Shaked, Esq.
   Shaked Law Group P.C.
   44 Court Street, Suite 1217
   Brooklyn, NY 11201
   Tel: (917) 373-9128
   Fax: (718) 504-7555
   Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


BOSTON WHALER: Thorne Brings Class Action Under ADA in New York Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Boston Whaler, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant
to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled Braulio
Thorne and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Boston Whaler, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00985
(S.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Boston Whaler, Inc. operates as boat manufacturer. The company
offers the boats, including super sport, montauk, dauntless,
vintage, conquest, realm, outrage, and yacht tender. It offers its
products through dealers in the United States and internationally.
The company was founded in 1958 and is headquartered in Edgewater,
Florida. Boston Whaler, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Brunswick
Corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
   Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb
   150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Fax: (212) 982-6284
   Email: nyjg@aol.com


BRICKELL BRANDS: Wheeler Sues over Unwanted Cellular Phone Calls
----------------------------------------------------------------
THOMAS WHEELER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. BRICKELL BRANDS, LLC, the Defendant,
Case No. 2:19-cv-00678 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 29. 2019), seeks to recover
damages, injunctive relief, and any other available legal or
equitable remedies, resulting from the illegal actions of
Defendant, in negligently contacting Plaintiff on Plaintiff's
cellular telephone, in violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act, thereby invading Plaintiff's privacy.

According to thef complaint, on or about November 8, 2018, the
Plaintiff visited Defendant's online website
brickellmensproducts.com in order to request a free sample kit of
products. As a direct-to-consumer seller, Defendant relies on its
ability to provide free sample kits in order to entice purchases of
its products. At no time did Defendant inform Plaintiff that
Defendant would utilize Plaintiff's cellular telephone number to
send spam text message and/or promotional offers as part of a
marketing campaign. During the checkout process, the Plaintiff was
never presented any language or agreement informing or agreeing
that Defendant would be permitted to use his number for spam text
messages.

The Defendant then began to use Plaintiff's cellular telephone for
the purpose of sending Plaintiff spam advertisements and/or
promotional offers, via text messages, including two text message
sent to and received by Plaintiff on or about January 3, 2019. The
telephone number that Defendant, or its agent called was assigned
to a cellular telephone service for which Plaintiff incurs a charge
for incoming calls pursuant to 47 U.S.C. section 227 (b)(1). These
telephone calls constituted calls that were not for emergency
purposes as defined by 47 U.S.C. section 227 (b)(1)(A)(i). The
Plaintiff did not provide Defendant or its agents with prior
express consent to receive unsolicited text messages, pursuant to
47 U.S.C. section 227 (b)(1)(A). These telephone calls by
Defendant, or its agents, violated 47 U.S.C. section 227(b)(1), the
lawsuit says.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          Steven S. Soliman, Esq.
          THE SOLIMAN FIRM
          245 Fischer Avenue, Ste. D-1
          Costa Mesa, CA 92626
          Telephone: 714-491-4111
          Facsimile: 714-491-4111
          E-mail: ssoliman@thesolimanfirm.com

BROWN UNIVERSITY: Kozlov Moves for Class Certification Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit titled MAXWELL D. KOZLOV and BENJAMIN
D. BOSIS, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated
individuals v. BROWN UNIVERSITY IN PROVIDENCE IN THE STATE OF RHODE
ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS, alias, Case No.
1:19-cv-00028-JJM-LDA (D.R.I.), move to conditionally certify a
Fair Labor Standards Act collective action of:

     all individuals employed by Defendant as Student Unit
     Managers and/or Assistant Managers and/or Student Unit
     Supervisors in the Cashiers, Carts, or Blue Room Units (or
     other comparable positions) for Brown University Dining
     Services ("Brown Dining Services") and were subject to the
     following common practices and/or policies of Defendant at
     any time from three (3) years before the filing of the
     Complaint to the present:

     a) Who were scheduled or required to be "on call" for work;
        and,

     b) Who were not paid at least minimum wage for each hour
        they worked and/or were scheduled or required to be "on
        call" for work; and,

     c) Who worked more than forty (40) hours in a week,
        including but not limited to "on call" hours; and,

     d) Were not paid at least one and one-half (1 1/2) times
        their regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess
        of forty (40) in a week, including but not limited to "on
        call" hours; or,

     e) Who were just subject to the payment practices described
        in subparagraphs "a" and "b" above.

Maxwell D. Kozlov and Benjamin D. Bosis also ask the Court to set
an expedited briefing schedule and hearing on their motion for
conditional certification due to the rolling statute of limitations
and tolling provisions applicable in an FLSA collective action.
They also move that the Defendant be ordered to provide their
counsel with the names and last known addresses, Brown mail box
address, e-mail addresses, and telephone numbers of all putative
class members within 10 days.

The Plaintiffs also move the Court to authorize their counsel to a)
mail and/or e-mail the Notice of Pendency of Lawsuit and the
Plaintiff Consent to Sue Form to all putative class members, b)
post the Notice and Consent forms on the Counsel's firm's Web site
and/or a Web site created specifically for the purpose of putting
prospective class members on notice of this action and providing
the option to execute opt-in consent forms electronically on-line;
and, c) send follow up post cards and/or e-mails to any class
members, who have not responded within 15 days after the mailing
and/or e-mailing of the initial notice.  The Plaintiffs further
move that the Defendant be ordered to post the Notice and Consent
forms in conspicuous locations in all its worksites.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Richard A. Sinapi, Esq.
          SINAPI LAW ASSOCIATES, LTD.
          2374 Post Road, Suite 201
          Warwick, RI 02886
          Telephone: (401) 739-9690
          Facsimile: (401) 739-9040
          E-mail: ras@sinapilaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Barry J. Miller, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
          Two Seaport Lane, Suite 300
          Boston, MA 02210-2028
          Telephone: (617) 946-4806
          Facsimile: (617) 790-6753
          E-mail: bmiller@seyfarth.com


BRUNSWICK FAMILY: Thorne Suit Asserts Disabilities Act Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
Brunswick Family Boat Co., Inc. d/b/a/ Bayliner is facing a class
action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities
Act. The case is styled Braulio Thorne and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Brunswick Family Boat Co.,
Inc. d/b/a/ Bayliner, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00988 (S.D. N.Y.,
January 31, 2019).

Brunswick Family Boat Co. Inc., doing business as Bayliner Marine,
designs recreational boats that allow families to explore water
sports, fishing, cruising, and other options. It serves customers
through a network of dealers in the United States and
internationally. Brunswick Family Boat Co. Inc. was formerly known
as Bayliner Corporation. The company was founded in 1955 and is
based in Lake Forest, Illinois. Brunswick Family Boat Co. Inc.
operates as a subsidiary of Brunswick Corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq
   Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb
   150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Fax: (212) 982-6284
   Email: nyjg@aol.com




BUSTER'S MARINE: Thorne Suit Asserts ADA Breach
-----------------------------------------------
Buster's Marine Service, Corp. is facing a class action lawsuit
filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is
styled as Braulio Thorne and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Buster's Marine Service, Corp.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00966 (S.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Buster's Marine Service, Corp. is in the Motor Boat Dealers
business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq
   Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb
   150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Fax: (212) 982-6284
   Email: nyjg@aol.com


CASTAWAY MARINA: Thorne Files ADA Class Action in New York
----------------------------------------------------------
Castaway Marina, LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
Braulio Thorne and on behalf of all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Castaway Marina, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-00973 (S.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Castaway Marina, LLC is a privately held company in Queensbury, NY
and engaged boat repair.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
   Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb
   150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Fax: (212) 982-6284
   Email: nyjg@aol.com


CENTURY ENTERPRISES: Holder Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Holder, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. Century Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Century KIA,
Defendant, Case No. 8:19-cv-00280 (M.D. Fla., February 1, 2019) is
a putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
("TCPA"), arising from Defendant's knowing and willful violations
of the TCPA.

The Defendant caused thousands of pre-recorded messages and
unsolicited text messages to be sent to the cellular telephones of
Plaintiff and Class Members, causing them injuries, including
invasion of their privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on
seclusion, trespass, and conversion, says the complaint.

Plaintiff is a natural person who, at all times relevant to this
action, was a resident of Hillsborough, Florida.

Defendant owns and/or operates an automotive dealership in Tampa,
Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael Eisenband, Esq.
     EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
     515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
     Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
     Email: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com
     Telephone: 954.533.4092

          - and -

     Manuel Hiraldo, Esq.
     HIRALDO P.A.
     401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
     Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
     Phone: 954.400.4713
     Email: MHiraldo@HiraldoLaw.com

          - and -

     Ignacio J. Hiraldo, Esq.
     IJH LAW
     14 NE First Ave. 10th Floor
     Miami, FL 33132
     Phone: 786.351.8709
     Email: ijhiraldo@ijhlaw.com

          - and -

     Scott A. Edelsberg, Esq.
     EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
     Biscayne Blvd. #607
     Aventura, FL 33180
     Phone: 305.975.3320
     Email: Scott@edelsberglaw.com

          - and -

     Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
     SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
     14 NE 1st Ave #1205
     Miami, FL 33132
     Phone: 305.479.2299
     Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com


CLEARPATH LENDING: Pjanic Suit Moved to Minnesota Federal Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled CARON PJANIC, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CLEARPATH
LENDING, INC., Defendant, was removed from Hennepin County, to the
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota on January 18,
2019. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
0:19-cv-00148-JRT-KMM to the proceeding. The Case is assigned to
the Chief Judge John R. Tunheim and referred to Magistrate Judge
Katherine M. Menendez.

ClearPath Lending, Inc. is a mortgage lender offering a wide
variety of home mortgage loan products including VA, FHA, and
Conventional loans. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brittany McCormick, Esq.
          MID-MINNESOTA LEGAL AID
          430 First Ave North, Suite 300
          Minneapolis, MN 55401
          Telephone: (612) 746-3607
          Facsimile: (612) 746-3607
          E-mail: bmccormick@mylegalaid.org

               - and -

          Elizabeth Christie Goodell, Esq.
          MID MINNESOTA LEGAL AID
          430 1st Ave. N., Ste 300
          Minneapolis, MN 55401
          Telephone: (612) 746-3603
          Facsimile: (612) 746-3603
          E-mail: bgoodell@mylegalaid.org

               - and -

          Marisa C Katz, Esq.
          Vildan A Teske, Esq.
          TESKE KATZ KITZER & ROCHEL, PLLP
          222 S Ninth Street, Suite 4050
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 746-1558
          E-mail: katz@tkkrlaw.com
                  teske@tkkrlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Barbara P Berens, Esq.
          Erin K Fogarty Lisle, Esq.
          BERENS & MILLER, PA
          80 S 8th St Ste 3720
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 349-6171
          Facsimile: (612) 349-6416
          E-mail: bberens@berensmiller.com
                  elisle@berensmiller.com


CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CA: Farrow Appeals Decision to 9th Circuit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs John Farrow and Jerome Wade filed an appeal from a court
ruling in their lawsuit titled John Farrow, et al. v. Contra Costa
County, et al., Case No. 3:12-cv-06495-JCS, in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Jan. 23, 2019,
Magistrate Judge Joseph C. Spero (i) granted in part the County's
motion to exclude expert testimony; (ii) denied the Plaintiffs'
motion for summary judgment; (iii) granted the County's motion for
summary judgment as to the Plaintiffs' Sixth Amendment claim; and
(iv) dismissed the Plaintiffs' state law claim for lack of
jurisdiction.

John Farrow and Jerome Wade brought the putative class action
asserting a number of claims based on the alleged failure of
Defendant Contra Costa County to provide appointed counsel at the
Plaintiffs' first court appearances, or within a reasonable time
thereafter, in criminal proceedings in state court.  After multiple
motions to dismiss, an appeal to the Ninth Circuit, and remand to
the Court, the Plaintiffs' remaining claims are for failure to
provide the counsel as required by the Sixth Amendment within a
reasonable time after the right attached, and for a writ of
mandamus to enforce Contra Costa Public Defender Robin Lipetzky's
obligations under Section 27706 of the California Government Code.

The appellate case is captioned as John Farrow, et al. v. Contra
Costa County, et al., Case No. 19-15152, in the United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows:

   -- Transcript must be ordered by February 25, 2019;

   -- Transcript is due on March 26, 2019;

   -- Appellants John Farrow and Jerome Wade's opening brief is
      due on May 6, 2019;

   -- Appellee Contra Costa County's answering brief is due on
      June 4, 2019; and

   -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after
      service of the answering brief.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellants JOHN FARROW, on his behalf, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, and JEROME WADE, on their behalf,
and on behalf of others similarly situated, are represented by:

          Christopher Alan Martin, Esq.
          MARTIN LAW OFFICES
          21 Orinda Way, Suite C
          Orinda, CA 94563
          Telephone: (510) 206-2142
          E-mail: chris@martindefenders.com

Defendant-Appellee CONTRA COSTA COUNTY is represented by:

          David Cameron Baker, Esq.
          OFFICE OF THE COUNTY COUNSEL
          651 Pine Street
          Martinez, CA 94553
          Telephone: (925) 335-1890
          E-mail: cameron.baker@cc.cccounty.us


COYOTE GRILL: Martin Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages, Reimbursements
----------------------------------------------------------------
James Martin and Paige Aquino, as individuals, and on behalf of all
similarly situated employees, Plaintiff, v. Coyote Grill Inc. and
Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendant, Case No. 30-2013-01044235
(Cal. Super., January 15, 2019), seeks redress for Defendant's
failure to provide meal periods, rest periods, minimum wages,
overtime, complete and accurate wage statements; reimbursement of
business-related expenses and resulting from unfair business
practices; waiting time penalties for unpaid wages due upon
termination in violation of the California Labor Code, California
Business and Professions Code; as well as declaratory relief,
damages, penalties, equitable relief, costs and attorneys' fees.

Coyote Grill Inc. is a baja-style Mexican food restaurant located
at 31621 S. Coast Hwy, Laguna 28 11 Beach, California where Martin
and Aquino were employed as a non-exempt hourly-paid servers.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Kevin Mahoney, Esq.
      Shawn I. Pardo, Esq.
      MAHONEY LAW GROUP, APC
      249 E. Ocean Blvd.,Ste. 814
      Long Beach, CA 90802
      Telephone: (562) 590-5550
      Facsimile: (562) 590-8400
      Email: kmahoney@mahoney-law.net
             spardo@mahoney-law.net


CP OPCO: Wins Prelim. OK of $3-Mil. Settlement in McDonald Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Hon. Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr., issued an order in the lawsuit
styled DAVID MCDONALD v. CP OPCO, LLC, et al., Case No.
4:17-cv-04915-HSG (N.D. Cal.):

   -- granting the Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of
      class action settlement;

   -- denying Insperity's motion to preemptively deny
      certification;

   -- granting Insperity PEO Services, L.P.'s motion to file
      under seal;

   -- directing the parties to meet and confer and stipulate to a
      schedule of dates for events, which shall be submitted to
      the Court within seven days of the date of this order; and

   -- directing the parties to implement the proposed class
      notice plan.

The Settlement Class consists of "all persons who were employed by
CP OpCo dba Classic Party Rentals at a Covered Location (that is,
San Diego, Santa Ana/Orange County, Culver City/Inglewood
(Hillcrest Blvd.), El Segundo, Burlingame/San Francisco, Compton,
Modesto, Napa, San Jose, and Thousand Palms/Palm Desert) in
California and who were terminated from their employment with CP
OpCo dba Classic Party Rentals on or around July 11, 2017."

The Settlement provides for a Settlement Fund of $3 million,
non-reversionary, funded by Insperity and the Apollo Defendants,
with $2.055 million available for class member settlement
payments.

Class counsel are permitted to seek up to 30% of the $3 million
Settlement Fund for attorneys' fees as well as actual litigation
expenses incurred up to $15,000.  The settlement is not contingent
upon this provision being granted.  The Settlement allows for an
incentive award of up to $15,000 to class representative McDonald
but is not contingent upon this award being granted.[CC]



CREDIT CONTROL: Ousmane Files Suit under FDCPA in Colorado
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Credit Control, LLC.
The case is styled as Ndoye Ousmane, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Credit Control, LLC,
LVNV Funding, LLC and John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No.
1:19-cv-00279 (D. Colo., January 31, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Credit Control, LLC provides financial services. The Company
provides early out solutions, collections, and debt settlement
services. Credit Control serves customers in the State of
Missouri.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Yaakov Saks, Esq.
   RC Law Group, PLLC
   285 Passaic Street
   Hackensack, NJ 07601
   Tel: (201) 282-6500
   Fax: (201) 282-6501
   Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com



CSX TRANSPORTATION: Sued over Mishandling of Medical Information
----------------------------------------------------------------
ANTHONY SCHOBERT AND JOHN YORK, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF THOSE
SIMILARLY SITUATED, ET AL., the Plaintiffs, vs. CSX TRANSPORTATION,
INC.; CSX CORPORATION, the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00076-MRB
Doc (S.D. Ohio, Jan. 29, 2019), seeks to recover damages and
equitable relief, including declaratory and injunctive relief, to
redress the ongoing violation of rights of Plaintiffs and other
similarly situated employees of CSX Transportation, Inc. and CSX
Corporation under the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993, the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act, and the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973.

According to the complaint, the Defendants have received federal
financial assistance, including, but not limited to, from the
Federal-Aid Highways Act of 1944. The Plaintiffs and the putative
class members are qualified individuals with disabilities, as
defined by the Rehabilitation Act. Plaintiffs' and the putative
class members' pre-approved FMLA leave for treatment and time off
due to their disability was a reasonable accommodation for their
disabilities, requested and approved through Defendants' FMLA
certification process.

The Defendants unlawfully obtained, mishandled, and wrongfully
disclosed the medical information of Plaintiffs and the putative
class members, in violation of the Rehabilitation Act.  The
Defendants unlawfully restricted Plaintiffs' and the putative class
members' ability to use their reasonable accommodation of
intermittent leave and refused to engage in the interactive process
regarding Defendants' restrictions on their leave accommodation.

The Defendants discriminated against Plaintiffs and the putative
class members because of their disability and in retaliation for
their requests for accommodation by harassing, threatening,
disciplining, suspending, terminating, and creating a hostile work
environment for them. As a result of this conduct, Defendants have
caused Plaintiffs and the putative class members damage. The
Plaintiffs and other similarly situated putative class members were
eligible employees under the FMLA, had a serious medical condition
as defined by the FMLA, and were properly certified to take FMLA
leave. The Defendants were on notice of Plaintiffs' and other
similarly situated putative class members' reasons for leave under
the FMLA for their absences. Defendants were aware of their serious
health conditions before and after their need for medical leave of
absence and approved the Plaintiffs' and putative class members'
certifications.

The Defendants willfully violated Plaintiffs' and putative class
members' rights under the FMLA and willfully interfered with,
restrained and denied their rights provided by the FMLA. As a
result of this conduct, Defendants have caused Plaintiffs and the
putative class members damage, for which Plaintiffs and putative
class members are entitled to relief. The Plaintiffs and putative
class members were participants in Defendants' benefit. The
Defendants harassed, disciplined, and discriminated against
Plaintiffs and other plan. As a result of this conduct, Defendants
have caused Plaintiffs and the putative class members damage, for
which Plaintiffs and putative class members are entitled to relief,
the lawsuit says.

The Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated were or are
employees of the Defendants. CSXT is a national rail carrier and
operator engaged in interstate commerce.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

          Elizabeth Tuck Loring, Esq.
          LORING LAW OFFICE, LLC
          810 Sycamore St., 4th Floor
          Cincinnati, OH 45202
          Telephone: (513) 545-6781
          Facsimile: (513) 263-9081
          E-mail: eloringlaw@gmail.com

               - and -

          Tod J. Thompson, Esq.
          TOD J. THOMPSON, ATTY. AT LAW
          810 Sycamore St., 5th Floor
          Cincinnati, OH 45202
          Telephone: (513) 322-4348
          Facsimile: (513) 263-9001
          E-mail: tod@tthompsonlaw.com

DBV TECHNOLOGIES: Ito-Stone Hits Share Price Drop
--------------------------------------------------
Travis Ito-Stone, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. DBV Technologies S.A., Daniel
Tasse, Pierre-Henri Benhamou and David Schilansky, Defendants, Case
No. 19-cv-00525 (D. N.J., January 15, 2019), seeks to recover
compensable damages caused by violations of the federal securities
laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

DBV Technologies, a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company,
engages in the research and development of epicutaneous
immunotherapy products. Its lead product candidate was Viaskin
Peanut, an immunotherapy product. DBV failed to disclose that
Viaskin Peanut failed to provide the FDA with sufficient data on
manufacturing procedures and quality controls and eventually
voluntarily withdrew the biologics license application for it. On
this news, shares of DBV Technologies fell $8.39 per share or
nearly 60% to close at $5.76 per share on December 20, 2018,
damaging investors including Ito-Stone. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
      THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
      355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
      Los Angeles, CA 90071
      Telephone: (213) 785-2610
      Facsimile: (213) 226-4684
      Email: lrosen@rosenlegal.com


eLOCAL USA: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Grossberg Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN GROSSBERG, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. eLOCAL USA LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 1:19-cv-20284-MGC (S.D. Fla., Jan. 20, 2019) seeks to stop the
Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls.

eLocal USA LLC owns and operates an online business listing
platform. The company was incorporated in 2010 and is based in
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 400-4713
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

               - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
          515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 533-4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com


FINANCE SYSTEM: Coggon Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
----------------------------------------------------------
JASON J. COGGON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. FINANCE SYSTEM OF GREEN BAY, INC., Case No.
1:19-cv-00153 (E.D. Wisc., January 28, 2019), arises from the
alleged illegal practices of the Defendant when attempting to
collect an alleged debt from the Plaintiff and the class in
violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

FSGB is a for-profit corporation formed under the laws of the state
of Wisconsin.  FSGB maintains its principal place of business in
City of Green Bay, Brown County, Wisconsin.

FSGB is regularly engaged in the collection of debts.  FSGB
regularly collects or attempts to collect debts alleged to be owed
to others.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Francis R. Greene, Esq.
          Philip D. Stern, Esq.
          Andrew T. Thomasson, Esq.
          STERN THOMASSON LLP
          3010 South Appleton Road
          Menasha, WI 54952
          Telephone: (973) 379-7500
          E-mail: Philip@SternThomasson.com
                  Andrew@SternThomasson.com
                  Francis@SternThomasson.com


FITNESS TIME: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Rakovsky Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
BRANDON RAKOVSKY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FITNESS TIME, L.L.C., Defendant,
Case No. 1:19-cv-20282-FAM (S.D. Fla., Jan. 18, 2019) seeks to stop
the Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls.

Fitness Time, L.L.C. offers personal training, and weight loss
services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI, PLLC
          110 SE 6th Street
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 907-1136
          Facsimile: (855) 529-9540
          E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com


FROST-ARNETT COMPANY: Zuaiter Says Collection Fees "Illegal"
------------------------------------------------------------
A case, MADELEINE ZUAITER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. FROST-ARNETT COMPANY, the
Defendants, Case No. 0:19-cv-60224-KMW (S.D. Fla., Jan. 28, 2019),
contends that the Defendant violated the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act and the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act in
their attempt to collect collection fees from thousands of Florida
consumers.

The Plaintiff owes Sheridan Healthcorp Inc. for medical services.
The debt is governed by the FDCPA.  According to the complaint, the
Defendant sent a collection letter to Plaintiff in an attempt to
collect the Consumer Debt. The Defendant, through its website
payment portal, attempted to collect an illegal "fee" of $4.95 in
addition to the underlying debt.  Among other requirements,
Defendant must have either express authorization by an agreement or
express statutory authority to collect any sort of "fee;" here,
Defendant has neither. To that end, Defendant has violated multiple
provisions of the FDCPA when it attempted to collect the "convince
fee" from Plaintiff and other consumers, the lawsuit says.

Frost Arnett Company is a debt collection agency.[BN]

Counsel for Plaintiff:

          Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: 954-907-1136
          Facsimile: 855-529-9540
          E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com

GENERAL MOTORS: Hall et al. Allege StabiliTrak Defect in Vehicles
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ELAINE HALL; and MANUEL LOPEZ, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. GENERAL MOTORS, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. Case 4:19-cv-10186-MFL-SDD (E.D. Mich., Jan.
18, 2019) alleges that the Defendant sells and manufactures
defective motor vehicles.

The Defendant knew that the vehicles contain one or more design and
manufacturing defects in their StabiliTrak electronic stability
control system that can cause the system to engage when it should
not.  The StabiliTrak Defect can cause the vehicle to pull to one
side, particularly while turning, hesitate, jerk, brake, lock
wheels, lose power and stall. In addition to the obvious safety
hazard the StabiliTrak Defect poses, the cost to repair the
StabiliTrak Defect can be exorbitant, requiring consumers to pay
hundreds, if not thousands, of dollars.

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:

          E. Powell Miller, Esq.
          Sharon S. Almonrode, Esq.
          THE MILLER LAW FIRM, P.C.
          950 W. University Drive, Suite 300
          Rochester, MI 48307
          Telephone: (248) 841-2200
          E-mail: epm@millerlawpc.com
                  ssa@millerlawpc.com

               - and -

          Mark Greenstone, Esq.
          GREENSTONE LAW PC
          1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 201-9156
          E-mail: mgreenstone@greenstonelaw.com

               - and -

          Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq.
          Marc L. Godino, Esq.
          Danielle L. Manning, Esq.
          GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
          1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 201-9150
          E-mail: lglancy@glancylaw.com
                  mgodino@glancylaw.com
                  dmanning@glancylaw.com


GLOW ASIAN FOOD: Violates FLSA, Chen Suit Asserts
-------------------------------------------------
A complaint was filed pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act
against Glow Asian Food, Inc. doing business as: Glow Thai &
Japanese. The case is styled Ji Guo Chen, on his own behalf and on
behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Glow Asian Food,
Inc. doing business as: Glow Thai & Japanese and Qin Hsu,
Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-00630 (E.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Glow Asian Food, Inc. doing business as: Glow Thai & Japanese is a
casual option for Thai & Japanese dishes served in a chic, modern
interior with unique lighting.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears PRO SE.


GODIVA CHOCOLATIER: Hesse Files Fraud Class Suit in New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Godiva Chocolatier,
Inc. The case is styled as Steve Hesse, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Godiva Chocolatier,
Inc. and Does 1 through 50, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00972-AJN
(S.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

The docket of the lawsuit states the case type as Other Fraud
Dispute.

Godiva Chocolatier, Inc. manufactures and sells Belgian chocolates
to customers in the United States and internationally. It offers
chocolate truffles, gift baskets and towers, gourmet biscuits,
coffee and cocoa, wrapped chocolates, chocolate strawberries, party
favors, gift boxes, party snacks, and chocolate eggs and bunnies,
as well as pretzels, nuts, and bars. The company offers its
chocolates in dark, milk, white, nut and caramel, assorted, kosher,
and sugar free flavors for Easter, spring, and other
occasions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Innessa Melamed Huot, Esq.
   Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (NYC)
   685 Third Avenue, 26th Floor
   New York, NY 10017
   Tel: (212) 983-9330
   Fax: (212) 983-9331
   Email: ihuot@faruqilaw.com


GOLD STANDARD: Motion to Certify Class in Green Suit Nixed
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned Norman Green, et al., the
Plaintiff, vs. Gold Standard Baking, Inc., et al., the Defendant,
Case No. 1:13-cv-01524 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 29, 2019), the Hon. Judge
Sara L. Ellis entered an order on striking a motion to certify
class.

According to the docket entry made by the Clerk on Jan. 29, 2019,
the motion to certify class is stricken. Motion for extension of
time to file is granted and objections to report and recommendation
are due 14 days after Magistrate Judge Kim's ruling on the motion
to reconsider.  The Status hearing set for Jan. 31, 2019 is
stricken.[CC]

GOOGLE INC: Seventh Circuit Appeal Filed in Rivera BIPA Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs Lindabeth Rivera and Joseph Weiss filed an appeal from a
court ruling issued in their lawsuit entitled Lindabeth Rivera, et
al. v. Google, LLC, Case No. 1:16-cv-02714, in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
seeks damages and other alleged legal and equitable remedies
resulting from the illegal actions of Google in collecting, storing
and using the Plaintiff's and other similarly situated individuals'
biometric identifiers and biometric information without informed
written consent, in direct violation of the Illinois Biometric
Information Privacy Act.

The appellate case is captioned as Lindabeth Rivera, et al. v.
Google, LLC, Case No. 19-1182, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Seventh Circuit.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows:

   -- Transcript information sheet is due by February 11, 2019;
      and

   -- Appellant's brief is due on or before March 11, 2019, for
      Lindabeth Rivera and Joseph Weiss.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellants LINDABETH RIVERA, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, and JOSEPH WEISS, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented
by:

          Tina Wolfson, Esq.
          AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
          10728 Lindbrook Drive
          Los Angeles, CA 90024
          Telephone: (310) 474-9111
          E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com

Defendant-Appellee GOOGLE, LLC, is represented by:

          Debra Rae Bernard, Esq.
          PERKINS COIE LLP
          131 S. Dearborn Street
          Chicago, IL 60603-5559
          Telephone: (312) 324-8559
          E-mail: dbernard@perkinscoie.com


HEALTHY HALO INSURANCE: Hume Suit Asserts TCPA Violation
--------------------------------------------------------
Lori Hume, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. Healthy Halo Insurance Services, Inc. d/b/a
Buyhealthinsurance.com Insurance Services, Defendant, Case No.
8:19-cv-00214 (C.D. Cal., February 2, 2019) is a Class Action
Complaint seeking damages, injunctive relief, and any other
available legal or equitable remedies, resulting from the illegal
actions of Defendant in negligently and/or intentionally contacting
Plaintiff on her cellular telephone, in violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA").

Plaintiff was personally affected by the Defendant's aforementioned
conduct because Plaintiff was frustrated and distressed that
Defendant annoyed Plaintiff with text message using an Automatic
Dialing System without her prior express consent to receive such
text messages. This invaded Plaintiff's right to privacy, says the
complaint.

Ms. Hume is a citizen and resident of the State of California,
County of Orange, City of Trabuco Canyon.

Healthy Halo is an active, registered corporation with the State of
California's Secretary of State.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
     Jason A. Ibey, Esq.
     Nicholas R. Barthel, Esq.
     KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
     245 Fischer Avenue, Suite D1
     Costa Mesa, CA 92626
     Phone: (800) 400-6808
     Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
     Email: ak@kazlg.com
            jason@kazlg.com
            nicholas@kazlg.com

          - and -

     Joshua B. Swigart, Esq.
     HYDE & SWIGART
     2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101
     San Diego, CA 92108
     Phone: (619) 233-7770
     Facsimile: (619) 297-1022
     Email: josh@westcoastlitigation.com


HIRSCHL & ADLER: Website not Blind Friendly, Dawson Says
--------------------------------------------------------
Deshawn Dawson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. Hirschl & Adler Galleries, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00437 (S.D. N.Y., January 15, 2019),
seeks preliminary and permanent injunction, compensatory, statutory
and punitive damages and fines, prejudgment and post-judgment
interest, costs and expenses of this action together with
reasonable attorneys' and expert fees and such other and further
relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act, New York State
Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law.

Defendant operates the Hirschl & Adler Art Gallery as well as the
www.hirschlandadler.com website. Plaintiff is legally blind and
claims that Defendant's website cannot be accessed by the
visually-impaired. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
      Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
      GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
      150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
      New York, NY 10003-2461
      Telephone: (212) 228-9795
      Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
      Email: nyjg@aol.com
             danalgottlieb@aol.com

             - and -

      Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
      COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
      300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Fl.
      Brooklyn, NY 11201
      Tel: (929) 575-4175
      Fax: (929) 575-4195
      Email: Joseph@cml.legal


ICONIC GROUP: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Larosa Suit Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTIAN LAROSA, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ICONIC GROUP (FLORIDA), INC. a/k/a
ICONIC GROUP, INC. d/b/a GRADIMAGES, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-20283-CMA (S.D. Fla., Jan. 20, 2019) seeks to stop the
Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls.

Iconic Group, Inc. provides professional event photography services
in the United States, Canada, and Europe. Iconic Group, Inc. was
formerly known as Event Photography Group, Inc. and changed its
name to Iconic Group, Inc. in February 2016. The company was
founded in 2007 and is based in Atlanta, Georgia. Iconic Group,
Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Raymond James Financial, Inc.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 400-4713
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

               - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
          515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 533-4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com


ILIA INC: Bunting Brings ADA Class Action in New York
-----------------------------------------------------
Ilia Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled Rasheta
Bunting, individually and as the representative of a class of
similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. Ilia Inc. doing business
as: IliaBeauty.com, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00621 (E.D. N.Y.,
January 31, 2019).

ILIA Inc. manufactures cosmetics with organic ingredients and
non-toxic synthetics. The company offers foundations, moisturizers,
translucent powder, finishing powder, concealer, water stick,
lipsticks, lip conditioner, lip gloss, lip care, lipstick crayons,
mascara, eyeliner, shadow, eye primer, and make up tools and
brushes. It offer its products through its online platform. The
company was founded in 2011 and is headquartered in Laguna Beach,
California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Dan Shaked, Esq.
   Shaked Law Group P.C.
   44 Court Street, Suite 1217
   Brooklyn, NY 11201
   Tel: (917) 373-9128
   Fax: (718) 504-7555
   Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


ILLINOIS: Bryant Moves to Certify Prisoners Class and Sub-Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit styled CHARLES BRYANT, N61320, ALFRED
JOHNSON, R23237, and BRIAN D. CURTIS, R55894, individually and on
behalf of a Class of persons similarly situated v. JOHN R. BALDWIN,
Acting Director of the Illinois Department of Corrections, DR.
STEVE MEEKS, Chief of Health Services of the Illinois Department of
Corrections, and WEXFORD HEALTH SOURCES, INC., Case No.
2:18-cv-02192-CSB-EIL (C.D. Ill.), ask the Court to certify:

   (1) the case as a class action with this class definition:

       all current and future prisoners in IDOC custody who have
       presented, or will present, with a symptomatic hernia to
       prison staff, and under Rule 23(b)(3) (seeking damages as
       well as declaratory and injunctive relief) as all past and
       current prisoners in IDOC custody (through the date of a
       settlement or judgment) who have presented with a
       symptomatic hernia to prison staff; and

   (2) Certify two Sub-Classes:

       a. the Pre-Surgical Sub-Class, consisting of all class
          members who have a symptomatic abdominal wall hernia
          but who have been denied or unreasonably delayed in
          receiving a referral for a surgical consult and/or
          receiving recommended corrective surgery; and

       b. the Post-Surgical Sub-Class, consisting of all class
          members who previously suffered a symptomatic abdominal
          wall hernia and who suffered an unreasonable delay in
          obtaining corrective surgery, resulting in prolonged
          pain, suffering, limitation of daily activities, a
          worsening of their condition, the need for more
          extensive surgery, and/or other adverse effects
          causally related to the delay.

The Plaintiffs also ask the Court to appoint Plaintiff Charles
Bryant as class representative of the Pre-Surgery Class and appoint
Plaintiffs Alfred Johnson and Brian D. Curtis as class
representatives of the Post-Surgical Class.  The Plaintiffs further
ask the Court to appoint Thomas J. Pliura, M.D., J.D., P.C., as
Class Counsel.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Thomas J. Pliura, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF THOMAS J. PLIURA, M.D., J.D., P.C.
          P.O. Box 130
          LeRoy, IL 61752
          Telephone: (309) 962-2299
          Facsimile: (309) 962-4646
          E-mail: tom.pliura@zchart.com


JACKSON HEWITT: Endres et al. Sue over No-Poach Agreements
----------------------------------------------------------
TOM ENDRES, and LATONYA FIELDS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JACK HEWITT, INC.; JACKSON
HEWITT TAX SERVICE INC.; and TAX SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-00037 (E.D. Va., Jan. 18, 2019)
alleges violation of the Sherman Act.

The Plaintiffs allege in the complaint that the Defendants
unlawfully conspire and suppress wages of the Plaintiff and the
class through agreements with its franchisees not to compete for
workers. The Defendants require the Plaintiff and the class to sign
an agreement containing a no-poach clause that severely limited the
Plaintiffs' and the Class members' job mobility and served to
significantly suppress their compensation.

Jackson Hewitt Inc. offers professional tax preparation services in
the United States and Puerto Rico. The company was founded in 1982
and is based in Parsippany, New Jersey.  Jackson Hewitt Inc.
operates as a subsidiary of Jackson Hewitt Tax Service Inc. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Condrad M. Sunshine, Esq.
          WILLCOX & SAVAGE, P.C.
          440 Monticello Avenue, Suite 2200
          Norfolk, VA 23510
          Telephone: (757) 628-5500
          Facsimile: (757( 628-5566
          E-mail: cshumadine@wilsav.com


KRONOS INC: Figueroa & Burton Sue over Biometric Data Storage
-------------------------------------------------------------
CHARLENE FIGUEROA; and JERAMAINE BURTON, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. KRONOS
INCORPORATED, Defendant, Case No. 2019CH00744 (Ill. Cir., Cook
Cty., Jan. 18, 2019) alleges violation of the Biometric Information
Privacy Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant failed to provide the
Plaintiffs and the class with a written, publicly available policy
identifying its retention schedule and guidelines for permanently
destroying employees' biometric data when the initial purpose for
collecting or obtaining their biometrics is no longer relevant, as
required by the Biometric Information Privacy Act. The Defendant
also has collected, stored, and used the Plaintiffs and the class
biometric data for years without such a policy, the publishing of
the recent policy on its website is also problematic.

Kronos Incorporated provides cloud-based human capital management
and workforce management solutions. The company was founded in 1977
and is based in Chelmsford, Massachusetts. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          James B. Zouras, Esq.
          Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
          Andrew C. Ficzko, Esq.
          Haley R. Jenkins, Esq.
          STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
          100 N. Riverside Plaza, Suite 2150
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (312) 233-1550
          Facsimile: (312) 233-1560
          E-mail: jzouras@stephenzouras.com
                  rstephan@stephenzouras.com
                  aficzko@stephenzouras.com
                  hjenkins@stephenzouras.com

               - and

          Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
          J. Eli Wade-Scott, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (312) 589-6370
          Facsimile: (312) 589-6387
          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


LOLLI AND POPS: Faces Conner ADA Class Action in New York
---------------------------------------------------------
Lolli And Pops, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
Mary Conner, individually and as the representative of a class of
similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. Lolli And Pops, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00958 (S.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Lolli and Pops, Inc. operates sweet shops that offer artisan
chocolates, candies, confections, and gifts in the United States.
The company also sells its products online. It operates stores in
California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana,
Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey, Oklahoma,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Virginia, and Washington. The company
was founded in 2012 and is based in San Francisco, California.
Lolli and Pops, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Meetha Ventures
LLC.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Dan Shaked, Esq.
   Shaked Law Group P.C.
   44 Court Street, Suite 1217
   Brooklyn, NY 11201
   Tel: (917) 373-9128
   Fax: (718) 504-7555
   Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


MARQUIS YACHTS: Thorne Suit Asserts Disabilities Act Violation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Marquis Yachts, LLC D/B/A Carver Yachts is facing a class action
lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The
case is styled Braulio Thorne and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Marquis Yachts, LLC D/B/A Carver
Yachts, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00977 (S.D. N.Y., January 31,
2019).

Carver Yachts is a luxury yachts manufacturer of sport coupes and
command bridge yachts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
   Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb
   150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Fax: (212) 982-6284
   Email: nyjg@aol.com


MARRIOTT INT'L: Costa Files Class Suit in Connecticut
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Marriott
International, Inc. The case is styled as Kathryn Costa, Natalene
Gauna, Greg Leeb, Karen Stivaletta, Kerri Shapiro and Lori Trent,
individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. Marriott International, Inc. and Starwood
Hotels & Resorts Worldwide LLC, Defendants, Case No.
3:19-cv-00145-JAM (D. Conn., January 31, 2019).

The docket of the lawsuit states the case type as Other Contract
Dispute.

Marriott International is an American multinational diversified
hospitality company that manages and franchises a broad portfolio
of hotels and related lodging facilities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq.
   Scott+Scott, Attorneys at Law, LLP
   The Helmsley Building
   230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
   New York, NY 10169
   Tel: (212) 223-6444
   Fax: (212) 223-6334
   Email: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com



MDL 2741: Wilkinson Suit v Monsanto over Roundup Sales Consolidated
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled DWIGHT WILKINSON, the Plaintiff, v.
MONSANTO COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00034 (Filed Jan. 11,
2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Missouri to the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California (San Francisco) on Jan. 29, 2019. The
Northern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:19-cv-00491-VC to the proceeding.

This is an action for damages suffered by Plaintiff as a direct and
proximate result of Defendant negligent and wrongful conduct in
connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing,
packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution,
labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup (TM), containing the
active ingredient glyphosate.

The Whitmire case is being consolidated with MDL 2741 in re:
Roundup Products Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by Order
of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on
October 3, 2016. These actions share common factual questions
arising out of allegations that Monsanto's Roundup herbicide,
particularly its active ingredient, glyphosate, causes
non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. The Plaintiff alleges that they or their
decedents developed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma after using Roundup over
the course of several or more years. Plaintiff also alleges that
the use of glyphosate in conjunction with other ingredients, in
particular the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA),
renders Roundup even more toxic than glyphosate on its own. Issues
concerning general causation, the background science, and
regulatory history will be common to all actions.

In its October 3, 2016 Order, the MDL Panel found that the actions
in this MDL involve common questions of fact, and that
centralization in the Northern District of California will serve
the convenience of the parties and witnesses and promote the just
and efficient conduct of this litigation. Centralization will
eliminate duplicative discovery; prevent inconsistent pretrial
rulings (including with respect to discovery, privilege, and
Daubert motion practice); and conserve the resources of the
parties, their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the
MDL is Hon. Judge Vince Chhabria. The lead case is
3:16-md-02741-VC.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          D. Todd Mathews, Esq.
          Joseph B. Carnduff, Esq.
          GORI JULIAN LAW
          Edwardsville, IL 62025
          156 N. Main St.
          Telephone (618) 659 9833
          Facsimile (618) 659 9834
          E-mail: todd@gorijulianlaw.com
                  jcarnduff@gorijulianlaw.com

METTERS INDUSTRIES: Class Certified Under FLSA in Ortiz Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
The Hon. Paul G. Byron grants the Plaintiffs' Motion for
Conditional Certification and Court-Authorized Notice Pursuant to
29 U.S.C. Section 216(b) in the lawsuit entitled CARLOS ORTIZ and
VICTOR VALERIO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated v. METTERS INDUSTRIES, INC. d/b/a METTERS INC., and SAMUEL
METTERS, Case No. 6:17-cv-01879-PGB-DCI (M.D. Fla.).

The FLSA Minimum Wage Class is defined as:

     All employees who worked for Defendants at their Orlando,
     Florida, facility who were not paid minimum wage for all
     hours worked during the weeks of September 1, 2017, through
     October 27, 2017.

Judge Byron directs Defendants Metters Industries, Inc. and Samuel
Metters to produce to the Plaintiffs' counsel, within 14 days from
the date of this Order, a list containing the names and last known
addresses of all putative class members, who worked for the
Defendants between September 1, 2017, and October 27, 2017.  The
Plaintiffs' counsel shall have 15 days from the date the Plaintiffs
receive the List to send a notice to all individuals named on
Defendants' List.

Any individual whose name appears on the List shall have 90 days
from the date the Notices are initially mailed to file a Consent to
Join Collective Action.[CC]



MINDBODY, INC: Ryan et al. Balk at Merger Deal with Vista
---------------------------------------------------------
A case, PHILIP RYAN, JR. and DONALD FRIEDMAN, on behalf of
themselves and all other similarly situated stockholders of
MINDBODY, Inc., the Plaintiffs, vs. MINDBODY, INC., RICHARD L.
STOLLMEYER, KATHERINE BLAIR CHRISTIE, CUNNINGHAM, GAIL GOODMAN,
CIPORA HERMAN, ERIC LIAW, ADAM MILLER, GRAHAM SMITH, VISTA EQUITY
PARTNERS MANAGEMENT, LLC, TORREYS PARENT, LLC, TORREYS MERGER SUB,
INC., and INSTITUTIONAL VENTURE PARTNERS XIII, L.P., the
Defendants, Case No. 2019-0061 (D. Del., Jan. 29, 2019), sues
MINDBODY's board of directors including its Chairman, Chief
Executive Officer and co-founder Richard L. Stollmeyer, for breach
of fiduciary duties in connection with MINDBODY's proposed merger
with affiliates of Vista Equity Partners Management, LLC, against
whom Plaintiffs also bring this complaint for aiding and abetting
the Board's breaches of fiduciary duties.

The Plaintiffs also seek determinations pursuant to 8 Del. C.
section that (a) under MINDBODY's Amended and Restated Certificate
of Incorporation the Class B common stock of Stollmeyer and
Institutional Venture Partners XIII, L.P. has automatically
converted to Class A stock, and (b) the claim by Stollmeyer, Vista
and the MINDBODY Board that the Board has authority to approve
Stollmeyer and senior management receiving different consideration
for their stock violates the Certificate and any attempt to have
Stollmeyer and others receive different consideration would violate
the Certificate.

The stockholder class action challenges MINDBODY's take-private by
Vista for the unfair price of $36.50 per share in cash. The sale
process culminating in the Merger was irreparably tainted by the
conflicts of Stollmeyer and management, who ran the sale process
with MINDBODY's conflicted financial advisor, Qatalyst Partners LP,
which has lucrative ties to Vista and no prior relationship with
MINDBODY. Now the Board is soliciting stockholders to approve the
Merger based on materially misleading and incomplete disclosures in
MINDBODY's January 23, 2019 Definitive Proxy Statement. The Proxy
also represents that Stollmeyer and IVP hold vote per share Class B
stock, which would provide most of the votes needed to approve the
Merger. However, through Defendants' actions, these shares have
automatically converted into one vote per share Class A stock.

By October 2018, Stollmeyer had decided to take MINDBODY private,
which he had only taken public in 2015. On information and belief,
he was aware that IVP wanted to exit its investment in MINDBODY.
Stollmeyer met with behemoth private equity firm Vista in October
2018 to discuss Vista's investment strategy and interest in
MINDBODY. He also met with two other financial sponsors. The Proxy
does not provide the reason for or the dates of his contacts with
these three financial sponsors. There is no indication that the
MINDBODY Board had suggested or authorized Stollmeyer to canvas
potential financial partners for a management led buy-out.
Stollmeyer knew, based on Vista's track record of retaining
management teams of the companies it acquires, that if Vista took
MINDBODY private, it would continue to employ Stollmeyer after the
transaction closed, and allow him to retain a significant equity
interest in the private company.

The Board correctly and immediately recognized senior management's
conflicts and formed a three-member transaction committee of
non-management directors on October 30, 2018 that purposefully
excluded Stollmeyer. However, the Transaction Committee's authority
was limited to recommending a financial advisor. Moreover, the
Transaction Committee allowed Stollmeyer and senior management to
direct the sale process. For example, the Transaction Committee
instructed Stollmeyer to contact
Qatalyst and one other potential advisor. The Proxy does not
indicate who recommended Qatalyst, which had no prior relationship
with MINDBODY, but had done multiple transactions involving Vista.


Vista suggested Qatalyst to Stollmeyer who suggested Qatalyst to
the Transaction Committee and MINDBODY Board. The Proxy states that
on November 14, 2018, the Transaction Committee and certain
undisclosed members of the Board authorized MINDBODY to engage
Qatalyst. However, the Transaction Committee was not empowered to
retain a financial advisor and the Proxy acknowledges that it was a
meeting of the Committee, not the Board. Then, management, and not
the Transaction Committee, met with Qatalyst and decided which
potential bidders to contact.

As a condition of Vista's execution of the Merger Agreement,
Stollmeyer and IVP, a late stage investment capital and venture
firm that first invested in MINDBODY in 2012, executed irrevocable
proxies directing the holder to vote all MINDBODY shares they
beneficially owned in favor of the Merger, constituting
approximately 32.1% of MINDBODY's outstanding voting power and 6.6%
of MINDBODY's total outstanding shares. Vista's desire for a voting
and support agreement, the links between the Irrevocable Proxies
and the Merger Agreement, and the terms of the Irrevocable Proxies
that go beyond a proxy that merely enables Stollmeyer and IVP to
vote their shares, demonstrate that a transfer of the Class B
shares of Stollmeyer and IVP occurred, which automatically
converted those shares into Class A shares pursuant to the
Certificate. The Irrevocable Proxies are a share lock-up that,
combined with termination fees
and other defensive measures, effectively precludes alternative
bids. At the time IVP executed its Irrevocable Proxy, it was ripe
for liquidating its MINDBODY investment for which it had a
three-to-five-year investment horizon. The Merger would provide a
liquidation event, from which IVP would receive more than $96
million on its $21.4 million investment. However, the Proxy does
not disclose IVP's desire to exit its MINDBODY investment.

When Vista and MINDBODY jointly announced the Merger, Vista
announced that it "look[ed] forward to partnering with Rick and the
entire MINDBODY team" A week later, Stollmeyer sent a letter to
employees, in which he wrote that he was "excited to continue
serving and all of you for years to come," and that "Vista has
committed to keeping our pay and benefits unchanged for at least a
year."  However, on January 23, 2019, MINDBODY issued the Proxy,
which states that Vista and management have no agreements
concerning post-Merger employment or compensation. This is patently
inconsistent with the Joint Press Release and Employee Letter.

The Defendants are rushing to complete the Merger. A preliminary
proxy statement was filed on January 9, 2019, just 17 days after
the December 23, 2018 Merger Agreement was signed, and the
definitive Proxy was issued just two weeks later on January 23,
2019 for a special stockholders meeting on February 14, 2019. The
conditions to the closing of the Merger have been or will be
accepted on or shortly after February 14, 2019 and the parties
intend to close the Merger on or shortly after February 14.

The Defendant is a Delaware corporation headquartered in San Luis
Obispo, California. The company operates a cloud-based business
management software and payments platform for small and
medium-sized businesses in the wellness services industry.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

          Michael Hanrahan, Esq.
          Paul A. Fioravanti, Jr., Esq.
          Kevin H. Davenport, Esq.
          Eric J. Juray, Esq.
          Jason W. Rigby, Esq.
          PRICKETT, JONES & ELLIOTT, P.A.
          1310 N. King Street
          Wilmington, Delaware 19801
          Telephone: (302) 888-6500

               - and -

          Lee D. Rudy, Esq.
          J. Daniel Albert, Esq.
          Stacey A. Greenspan, Esq.
          KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER &
          CHECK, LLP
          280 King of Prussia Road
          Radnor, PA 19087
          Telephone: (610) 667-7706

               - and -

          Michael Hanrahan, Esq.
          Paul A. Fioravanti, Jr., Esq.
          Kevin H. Davenport, Esq.
          Eric J. Juray, Esq.
          Jason W. Rigby, Esq.
          PRICKETT, JONES & ELLIOTT, P.A.
          1310 N. King Street
          Wilmington, Delaware 19801
          Telephone: (302) 888-6500

               - and -

          Brian Schall, Esq.
          SCHALL LAW FIRM
          1880 Century Park East
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (424) 303-1964

MONSANTO COMPANY: Aldisons Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
-------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES T. ALDISON III and KATHY ALDISON, the Plaintiffs, v. MONSANTO
COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00121 (E.D. Mo., Jan. 29,
2019), seeks to recover damages suffered by the Plaintiff, as a
direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligent and
wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development,
manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising,
distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup (TM),
containing the active ingredient glyphosate.

The Plaintiffs say that Roundup (TM) and/or glyphosate is
defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be
marketed and sold in commerce, and lacked proper warnings and
directions as to the dangers associated with its use. The
Plaintiffs' injuries, like those striking thousands of similarly
situated victims across the country, were avoidable.

The Plaintiffs bring this action for personal injuries sustained by
exposure to Roundup (TM), which contains the active ingredient
glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA).
As a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup, the
Plaintiff developed diffuse Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Roundup refers to all formulations of the Defendant's Roundup
products, including, but not limited to, Roundup Concentrate Poison
Ivy and Tough Brush Killer 1, Roundup Custom Herbicide, Roundup
D-Pak Herbicide, Roundup Dry Concentrate, Roundup Export Herbicide,
Roundup Fence & Hard Edger 1, Roundup Garden Foam Weed & Grass
Killer, Roundup Grass and Weed Killer, Roundup Herbicide, Roundup
Original 2k Herbicide, Roundup Original II Herbicide, Roundup Pro
Concentrate, Roundup Pro Dry Herbicide, and Roundup Promax.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Seth S. Webb, Esq.
          BROWN & CROUPPEN, P.C.
          211 North Broadway, Suite 1600
          St. Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (314) 222-2222
          Facsimile: (314) 421-0359
          E-mail: sethw@getbc.com

MONSANTO COMPANY: Anthonys Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
-------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID ANTHONY and MARY M. ANTHONY, the Plaintiffs, v. MONSANTO
COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00124 (E.D. Mo., Jan. 29,
2019), seeks to recover damages suffered by the Plaintiff, as a
direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligent and
wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development,
manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising,
distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup (TM),
containing the active ingredient glyphosate.

The Plaintiffs say that Roundup (TM) and/or glyphosate is
defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be
marketed and sold in commerce, and lacked proper warnings and
directions as to the dangers associated with its use. The
Plaintiffs' injuries, like those striking thousands of similarly
situated victims across the country, were avoidable.

The Plaintiffs bring this action for personal injuries sustained by
exposure to Roundup (TM), which contains the active ingredient
glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA).
As a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup, the
Plaintiff developed diffuse Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Roundup refers to all formulations of the Defendant's Roundup
products, including, but not limited to, Roundup Concentrate Poison
Ivy and Tough Brush Killer 1, Roundup Custom Herbicide, Roundup
D-Pak Herbicide, Roundup Dry Concentrate, Roundup Export Herbicide,
Roundup Fence & Hard Edger 1, Roundup Garden Foam Weed & Grass
Killer, Roundup Grass and Weed Killer, Roundup Herbicide, Roundup
Original 2k Herbicide, Roundup Original II Herbicide, Roundup Pro
Concentrate, Roundup Pro Dry Herbicide, and Roundup Promax.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Seth S. Webb, Esq.
          BROWN & CROUPPEN, P.C.
          211 North Broadway, Suite 1600
          St. Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (314) 222-2222
          Facsimile: (314) 421-0359
          E-mail: sethw@getbc.com

MONSANTO COMPANY: Brown Sues over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
-----------------------------------------------------------
PAUL ALLEN BROWN, the Plaintiffs, v. MONSANTO COMPANY, the
Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00130 (E.D. Mo., Jan. 29, 2019), seeks
to recover damages suffered by the Plaintiff, as a direct and
proximate result of the Defendant's negligent and wrongful conduct
in connection with the design, development, manufacture, testing,
packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising, distribution,
labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup (TM), containing the
active ingredient glyphosate.

The Plaintiffs say that Roundup (TM) and/or glyphosate is
defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be
marketed and sold in commerce, and lacked proper warnings and
directions as to the dangers associated with its use. The
Plaintiffs' injuries, like those striking thousands of similarly
situated victims across the country, were avoidable.

The Plaintiffs bring this action for personal injuries sustained by
exposure to Roundup (TM), which contains the active ingredient
glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA).
As a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup, the
Plaintiff developed diffuse Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Roundup refers to all formulations of the Defendant's Roundup
products, including, but not limited to, Roundup Concentrate Poison
Ivy and Tough Brush Killer 1, Roundup Custom Herbicide, Roundup
D-Pak Herbicide, Roundup Dry Concentrate, Roundup Export Herbicide,
Roundup Fence & Hard Edger 1, Roundup Garden Foam Weed & Grass
Killer, Roundup Grass and Weed Killer, Roundup Herbicide, Roundup
Original 2k Herbicide, Roundup Original II Herbicide, Roundup Pro
Concentrate, Roundup Pro Dry Herbicide, and Roundup Promax.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Seth S. Webb, Esq.
          BROWN & CROUPPEN, P.C.
          211 North Broadway, Suite 1600
          St. Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (314) 222-2222
          Facsimile: (314) 421-0359
          E-mail: sethw@getbc.com

MONSANTO COMPANY: Colombaras Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
---------------------------------------------------------------
THOMAS COLOMBARA AND CYNTHIA COLOMBARA, the Plaintiffs, v. MONSANTO
COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00132 (E.D. Mo., Jan. 29,
2019), seeks to recover damages suffered by the Plaintiff, as a
direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligent and
wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development,
manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising,
distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup (TM),
containing the active ingredient glyphosate.

The Plaintiffs say that Roundup (TM) and/or glyphosate is
defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be
marketed and sold in commerce, and lacked proper warnings and
directions as to the dangers associated with its use. The
Plaintiffs' injuries, like those striking thousands of similarly
situated victims across the country, were avoidable.

The Plaintiffs bring this action for personal injuries sustained by
exposure to Roundup (TM), which contains the active ingredient
glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA).
As a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup, the
Plaintiff developed diffuse Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Roundup refers to all formulations of the Defendant's Roundup
products, including, but not limited to, Roundup Concentrate Poison
Ivy and Tough Brush Killer 1, Roundup Custom Herbicide, Roundup
D-Pak Herbicide, Roundup Dry Concentrate, Roundup Export Herbicide,
Roundup Fence & Hard Edger 1, Roundup Garden Foam Weed & Grass
Killer, Roundup Grass and Weed Killer, Roundup Herbicide, Roundup
Original 2k Herbicide, Roundup Original II Herbicide, Roundup Pro
Concentrate, Roundup Pro Dry Herbicide, and Roundup Promax.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Seth S. Webb, Esq.
          BROWN & CROUPPEN, P.C.
          211 North Broadway, Suite 1600
          St. Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (314) 222-2222
          Facsimile: (314) 421-0359
          E-mail: sethw@getbc.com

MONSANTO COMPANY: Hanses Sue over Sale of Herbicide Roundup
-----------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE W. HANS and MARGARET P. HANS, the Plaintiffs, v. MONSANTO
COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00127 (E.D. Mo., Jan. 29,
2019), seeks to recover damages suffered by the Plaintiff, as a
direct and proximate result of the Defendant's negligent and
wrongful conduct in connection with the design, development,
manufacture, testing, packaging, promoting, marketing, advertising,
distribution, labeling, and/or sale of the herbicide Roundup (TM),
containing the active ingredient glyphosate.

The Plaintiffs say that Roundup (TM) and/or glyphosate is
defective, dangerous to human health, unfit and unsuitable to be
marketed and sold in commerce, and lacked proper warnings and
directions as to the dangers associated with its use. The
Plaintiffs' injuries, like those striking thousands of similarly
situated victims across the country, were avoidable.

The Plaintiffs bring this action for personal injuries sustained by
exposure to Roundup (TM), which contains the active ingredient
glyphosate and the surfactant polyethoxylated tallow amine (POEA).
As a direct and proximate result of being exposed to Roundup, the
Plaintiff developed diffuse Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

Roundup refers to all formulations of the Defendant's Roundup
products, including, but not limited to, Roundup Concentrate Poison
Ivy and Tough Brush Killer 1, Roundup Custom Herbicide, Roundup
D-Pak Herbicide, Roundup Dry Concentrate, Roundup Export Herbicide,
Roundup Fence & Hard Edger 1, Roundup Garden Foam Weed & Grass
Killer, Roundup Grass and Weed Killer, Roundup Herbicide, Roundup
Original 2k Herbicide, Roundup Original II Herbicide, Roundup Pro
Concentrate, Roundup Pro Dry Herbicide, and Roundup Promax.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Seth S. Webb, Esq.
          BROWN & CROUPPEN, P.C.
          211 North Broadway, Suite 1600
          St. Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (314) 222-2222
          Facsimile: (314) 421-0359
          E-mail: sethw@getbc.com

MORPHE LLC: Conner Files Suit Under Disabilities Act in NY
----------------------------------------------------------
Morphe, LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Mary Conner,
individually and as the representative of a class of similarly
situated persons, Plaintiff v. Morphe, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-00955 (S.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Morphe, LLC manufactures beauty care products. The Company offers
lipstick, brushes, makeup removers, pressed pigments, gel liners,
concealers, powders, lashes, beauty sponges, tweezers, and
scissors. Morphe serves customers worldwide.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Dan Shaked, Esq.
   Shaked Law Group P.C.
   44 Court Street, Suite 1217
   Brooklyn, NY 11201
   Tel: (917) 373-9128
   Fax: (718) 504-7555
   Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Davis-Moab Files Class Action Over Injuries
----------------------------------------------------------------
RODNE DAVIS-MOAB, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION,
Case No. 1:19-cv-00432-RLY-MPB (S.D. Ind., January 28, 2019), is
brought to obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of the
Defendant's alleged reckless disregard for the health and safety of
generations of Delta State University student-athletes.

As a direct result of the Defendant's acts and omissions, the
Plaintiff and countless former DSU football players suffered brain
and other neurocognitive injuries from playing NCAA football, the
Plaintiff alleges.  As such, the Plaintiff brings this Class Action
Complaint in order to vindicate those players' rights and hold the
NCAA accountable.

NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal place of
business located in Indianapolis, Indiana.  NCAA is not organized
under the laws of any State, but is registered as a tax-exempt
organization with the Internal Revenue Service.

The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that
oversees 23 college sports and over 400,000 students, who
participate in intercollegiate athletics, including the football
program at BSU.  According to the NCAA, more than 1,200 schools,
conferences and affiliate organizations collectively invest in
improving the experiences of athletes -- on the field, in the
classroom, and in life.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeff Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Telephone: (713) 554-9099
          Facsimile: (713) 554-9098
          E-mail: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

               - and -

          Jay Edelson, 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: jedelson@edelson.com
                  brichman@edelson.com

               - and -

          Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          123 Townsend Street, Suite 100
          San Francisco, CA 94107
          Telephone: (415) 212-9300
          Facsimile: (415) 373-9435
          E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Delts Seeks Redress for Athletes' Injuries
---------------------------------------------------------------
DAMIEN DELTS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, and ROBERT
MORRIS UNIVERSITY, Case No. 1:19-cv-00421-JMS-TAB (S.D. Ind.,
January 28, 2019), wants to obtain redress for injuries sustained
as a result of the Defendants' alleged reckless disregard for the
health and safety of generations of RMU student-athletes.

As a direct result of Defendants' acts and omissions, the Plaintiff
and countless former RMU football players suffered and continue to
suffer brain and other neurocognitive injuries, the Plaintiff
contends.  As such, the Plaintiff brings this Class Action
Complaint in order to vindicate those players' rights and hold the
NCAA and RMU accountable.

NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal place of
business located in Indianapolis, Indiana.  NCAA is not organized
under the laws of any State, but is registered as a tax-exempt
organization with the Internal Revenue Service.

The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that
oversees 23 college sports and over 400,000 students, who
participate in intercollegiate athletics, including the football
program at BSU.  According to the NCAA, more than 1,200 schools,
conferences and affiliate organizations collectively invest in
improving the experiences of athletes -- on the field, in the
classroom, and in life.

Robert Morris University is a private university located at 6001
University Boulevard, in Moon Township, Pennsylvania.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeff Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Telephone: (713) 554-9099
          Facsimile: (713) 554-9098
          E-mail: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

               - and -

          Jay Edelson, 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: jedelson@edelson.com
                  brichman@edelson.com

               - and -

          Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          123 Townsend Street, Suite 100
          San Francisco, CA 94107
          Telephone: (415) 212-9300
          Facsimile: (415) 373-9435
          E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com


NCAA: David Sunday Sues over Curry College Student-Athletes' Safety
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID SUNDAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, and CURRY COLLEGE, the Defendants, Case No.
1:19-cv-00422-JMS-DLP (S.D. Ind. Jan. 28, 2019), seeks redress for
injuries sustained a result of Defendant's reckless disregard for
the health and safety of generations of Curry College ("Curry")
student-athletes.

According to the complaint, nearly 100,000 student-athletes sign up
to compete in college football each year, and it's no surprise why.
Football is America's sport and Plaintiff and a Class of football
players were raised to live and breathe the game. During football
season, there are entire days of the week that millions of
Americans dedicate to watching the game. On game days, hundreds of
thousands of fans fill stadium seats and even more watch around the
world. Before each game, these players -- often mere teenagers --
are riled up and told to do whatever it takes to win and, when
playing, are motivated to do whatever it takes to keep going.

But up until 2010, NCAA kept players and the public in the dark
about an epidemic that was slowly killing college athletes. During
the course of a college football season, athletes absorb more than
1,000 impacts greater than 10 Gs (gravitational force) and, worse
yet, the majority of football-related hits to the head exceed 20
Gs, with some approaching 100 Gs. To put this in perspective, if
you drove your car into a wall at 25 miles per hour and weren't
wearing a seatbelt, the force of you hitting the windshield would
be around 100 Gs. Thus, each season these 18, 19, 20, and
21-year-old student-athletes are subjected to repeated car
accidents.

Over time, the repetitive and violent impacts to players' heads led
to repeated concussions that severely increased their risks of
long-term brain injuries, including memory loss, dementia,
depression, Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy ("CTE"), Parkinson's
disease, and other related symptoms. Meaning, long after they
played their last game, they are left with a series of neurological
events that could slowly strangle their brains. For decades, NCAA
knew about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions,
concussion-related injuries, and sub-concussive injuries (referred
to as "traumatic brain injuries" or "TBIs") that resulted from
playing college football, but recklessly disregarded this
information to protect the very profitable business of "amateur"
college football.

While in school, Curry football players were under Defendant's
care. Unfortunately, Defendant did not care about the off-field
consequences that would haunt students for the rest of their lives.
Despite knowing for decades of a vast body of scientific research
describing the danger of traumatic brain injuries ("TBIs") like
those Plaintiff experienced, Defendant failed to implement adequate
procedures to protect Plaintiff and other Curry football players
from the long-term dangers associated with them. They did so
knowingly and for profit.

As a direct result of Defendant's acts and omissions, Plaintiff and
countless former Curry football players suffered brain and other
neurocognitive injuries from playing NCAA football. As such,
Plaintiff brings this Class Action Complaint in order to vindicate
those players' rights and hold the NCAA accountable, the lawsuit
says.

NCAA is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268
North American institutions and conferences.[BN]

Counsel for Plaintiff and the Putative Class:

          Jeff Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Telephone: (713) 554 9099
          Facsimile: (713) 554 9098
          E-mail: efile@raiznerlaw.com

               - and -

          Jay Edelson, Esq.
          Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
          Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (312) 589 6370
          Facsimile: (312) 589 6378
          E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com
                  jedelson@edelson.com
                  brichman@edelson.com

NCAA: Wilson Sues over Health Issues of WVU Student-Athletes
------------------------------------------------------------
QUINCY WILSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00431-JMS-MJD (S.D.
Ind. Jan. 28, 2019), seeks redress for injuries sustained a result
of Defendant's reckless disregard for the health and safety of
generations of West Virginia University (WVU) student-athletes.

According to the complaint, nearly 100,000 student-athletes sign up
to compete in college football each year, and it's no surprise why.
Football is America's sport and Plaintiff and a Class of football
players were raised to live and breathe the game. During football
season, there are entire days of the week that millions of
Americans dedicate to watching the game. On game days, hundreds of
thousands of fans fill stadium seats and even more watch around the
world. Before each game, these players -- often mere teenagers --
are riled up and told to do whatever it takes to win and, when
playing, are motivated to do whatever it takes to keep going.

But up until 2010, NCAA kept players and the public in the dark
about an epidemic that was slowly killing college athletes. During
the course of a college football season, athletes absorb more than
1,000 impacts greater than 10 Gs (gravitational force) and, worse
yet, the majority of football-related hits to the head exceed 20
Gs, with some approaching 100 Gs. To put this in perspective, if
you drove your car into a wall at 25 miles per hour and weren't
wearing a seatbelt, the force of you hitting the windshield would
be around 100 Gs. Thus, each season these 18, 19, 20, and
21-year-old student-athletes are subjected to repeated car
accidents.

Over time, the repetitive and violent impacts to players' heads led
to repeated concussions that severely increased their risks of
long-term brain injuries, including memory loss, dementia,
depression, Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy ("CTE"), Parkinson's
disease, and other related symptoms. Meaning, long after they
played their last game, they are left with a series of neurological
events that could slowly strangle their brains. For decades, NCAA
knew about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions,
concussion-related injuries, and sub-concussive injuries (referred
to as "traumatic brain injuries" or "TBIs") that resulted from
playing college football, but recklessly disregarded this
information to protect the very profitable business of "amateur"
college football.

While in school, WVU football players were under Defendant's care.
Unfortunately, Defendant did not care about the off-field
consequences that would haunt students for the rest of their lives.
Despite knowing for decades of a vast body of scientific research
describing the danger of traumatic brain injuries ("TBIs") like
those Plaintiff experienced, Defendant failed to implement adequate
procedures to protect Plaintiff and other WVU football players from
the long-term dangers associated with them. They did so knowingly
and for profit.

As a direct result of Defendant's acts and omissions, Plaintiff and
countless former WVU football players suffered brain and other
neurocognitive injuries from playing NCAA football. As such,
Plaintiff brings this Class Action Complaint in order to vindicate
those players' rights and hold the NCAA accountable, the lawsuit
says.

NCAA is a non-profit organization which regulates athletes of 1,268
North American institutions and conferences.[BN]

Counsel for Plaintiff and the Putative Class:

          Jeff Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Telephone: (713) 554 9099
          Facsimile: (713) 554 9098
          E-mail: efile@raiznerlaw.com

               - and -

          Jay Edelson, Esq.
          Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
          Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (312) 589 6370
          Facsimile: (312) 589 6378
          E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com
                  jedelson@edelson.com
                  brichman@edelson.com



NEWEGG INC: Violates Disabilities Act, Martinez Suit Asserts
-------------------------------------------------------------
Newegg Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled Pedro Martinez,
individually and as the representative of a class of similarly
situated persons, Plaintiff v. Newegg Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-00622 (E.D. N.Y., January 31, 2019).

Newegg Inc. owns and operates Newegg.com, an online retail place
for electronic products in the United States. The company offers
computer hardware products, computers and tablets, electronic
products, software, gaming products, cell phones and accessories,
home appliances, home living and improvement products, health and
beauty products, automotive and industrial products, outdoor and
garden supplies, office and point of sale products, sporting goods,
watches and jewelry, apparel and accessories, toys, baby and pet
products, and more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Dan Shaked, Esq.
   Shaked Law Group P.C.
   44 Court Street, Suite 1217
   Brooklyn, NY 11201
   Tel: (917) 373-9128
   Fax: (718) 504-7555
   Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


NOVA DENTAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Sweeney Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
BRENDAN A. SWEENEY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NOVA DENTAL INC., Defendant, Case
No. 0:19-cv-60179-BB (S.D. Fla., Jan. 20, 2019) seeks to stop the
Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls.

Nova Dental Inc. is a Florida corporation providing dental
services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 400-4713
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

               - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
          515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 533-4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com


NUSRET MIAMI: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Compere Suit Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
MELISSA COMPERE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NUSRET MIAMI, LLC d/b/a NUSRET STEAKHOUSE;
and NUSRET GOKCE, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-20277-KMM (S.D.
Fla., Jan. 18, 2019) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid
minimum wage compensation, unpaid overtime wage compensation,
liquidated damages, return of tips wrongfully taken, and other
relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff Compere was employed by the Defendants as an hourly,
non-exempt employee.

Nusret Miami, LLC d/b/a Nusret Steakhouse is a Florida limited
liability company owning and operating a restaurant. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert W. Brock II, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF LOWELL J. KUVIN
          17 East Flagler Street, Suite 223
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 358-6800
          Facsimile: (305) 358-6808
          E-mail: robert@kuvinlaw.com
                  legal@kuvinlaw.com


OTIS ELEVATOR: Gorss' Bid to Certify Class Taken Under Advisement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In a courtroom minutes entered in the lawsuit titled Gorss Motels
Inc. v. Otis Elevator Company, et al., Case No. 3:16-cv-01781-KAD
(D. Conn.), the Hon. Kari A. Dooley took under advisement these
motions:

   * Motion for Summary Judgment; and
   * Motion for Class Certification.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan Michael Kelly, Esq.
          ANDERSON + WANCA
          3701 Algonquin Rd., Suite 500
          Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
          Telephone: (847) 368-1500
          E-mail: rkelly@andersonwanca.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Becca J. Wahlquist, Esq.
          SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
          City National 2CAL
          350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3100
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3420
          Telephone: (213) 929-2544
          E-mail: bwahlquist@swlaw.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey J. White, Esq.
          ROBINSON & COLE, LLP
          280 Trumbull Street
          Hartford, CT 06103
          Telephone: (860) 275-8252
          Facsimile: (860) 275-8299
          E-mail: jwhite@rc.com


OWLET BABY: Ruiz et al. Sue over Deceptive Smart Sock Baby Monitors
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A case, AMANDA RUIZ and MARISELA ARREOLA, individually, and on
behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, the
Plaintiffs, vs. OWLET BABY CARE, INC., a Delaware corporation, the
Defendant, Case No. 5:19-cv-00182-DDP-SP (C.D. Cal., Jan. 29,
2019), alleges unlawful, false, misleading, and deceptive marketing
and advertising practices used by Owlet in selling, directly and
indirectly, Smart Sock baby monitors to consumers.

The Plaintiffs bring this action for themselves and on behalf of
all persons in the United States who, at any time in the last four
years prior to the filing of this complaint, purchased an Owlet
Smart Sock or Owlet Smart Sock baby monitor designed, manufactured,
marketed, distributed, sold, and warranted by Owlet Baby Care,
Inc.

The Smart Sock gives false alarms and causes parents to rush their
12 babies to the hospital, believing them to be grievously ill.
Owlet has had knowledge about this defect and has referred to it as
"false alarm fatigue." Conversely, the Smart Sock also regularly
fails to detect abnormal oxygen levels and heart rates -- the exact
purpose for which it was designed and advertised. Owlet failed to
disclose this material information to consumers prior to sale and
actively concealed its knowledge of these defects to the purchasing
public.

Released in October 2015, Owlet's Smart Sock differs greatly from
traditional baby monitors available to consumers. Rather than
providing a simple visual and audio system for parents to monitor
their babies from another room, the Smart Sock "is designed to
provide continuous monitoring of vital signs [oxygen saturation and
heart rate] in newborns via a sensor-embedded sock during their
sleep in home settings." Notably, the Smart Sock has no visual or
audio capabilities, so parents must also purchase a traditional
baby monitor to actually "Initial Experience and Usage Patterns
With the Owlet Smart Sock Monitor in 47,495 Newborns," Global
Pediatric Health Journal, Dec. 4, 2017, available at
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2333794X17742751
(last visited Jan. 24, 2019).

According to the complaint, Owlet touts: "Babies don't come with an
instruction manual, so Owlet will make you this promise -- we
promise to give you peace of mind." "Creating accurate and reliable
products empower parents with insights into the health and
well-being of their infant in the home." These are just a few of
Owlet's marketing mantras that successfully lure young parents into
reasonably believing that the Smart Sock "provides superior
technology and peace of mind for parents" and, most importantly,
will perform as advertised. Owlet's own study published in December
2017 found that a parental desire to know more about their child
as well as a feeling of peace of mind accounted for 75% of the
reasons to own the [Owlet Smart Sock]."

Owlet is fully aware that consumers rely on the representations of
Owlet when deciding to purchase, for a hefty premium, the Owlet
Smart Sock over other baby monitors. Owlet has certainly
capitalized on that reliance; or as one Forbes journalist
described, in an Oct. 2017 article aptly titled Owlet's Smart Sock
Makes Millions Selling Parents Peace of Mind, by "[t]argeting
anxious, tech-savvy Millennial parents, Owlet has sold almost
150,000 Smart Socks, now priced at $299, producing $19 million in
revenue last year, and it's projecting as much as $30 million this
year." However, the Owlet Smart Sock's high sales volume can
arguably be equally attributed to the information it advertises as
well as the information it does not disclose to consumers; i.e.,
the Smart Sock's frequent and unnerving false alarms, inaccurate
readings, and complete failure to detect and alert to abnormal
oxygen levels and heart rates, the exact purpose for which it was
designed and advertised. Early adopters took to Owlet's website to
voice their disappointment and frustration.

As a result of their reliance on Defendant's omissions, consumers,
including Plaintiffs, have suffered an ascertainable loss of money,
including, but not limited to, out of pocket costs incurred in
purchasing the overvalued Owlet Smart Sock. Further, as a result of
its deceptive marketing and unfair competition with other similar
manufacturers and brands, Owlet realized sizable profits, the
lawsuit says.

Owlet designs, produces, manufactures, markets, distributes, and
sells Smart Socks nationwide and throughout California.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

          Mark A. Ozzello, Esq.
          Tarek H. Zohdy, Esq.
          Cody R. Padgett, Esq.
          Trisha K. Monesi, Esq.
          CAPSTONE LAW APC
          1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 556-4811
          Facsimile: (310) 943-0396
          E-mail: Mark.Ozzello@capstonelawyers.com
                  Tarek.Zohdy@capstonelawyers.com
                  Cody.Padgett@capstonelawyers.com
                  Trisha.Monesi@capstonelawyers.com



PERSONNEL STAFFING: Court Moves Hearing on Haack's Class Cert Bid
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Honorable Ronald A. Guzman rules that the status hearing and
motion hearing as to the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class filed
in the lawsuit titled Roman Haack, et al. v. Personnel Staffing
LLC, et al., Case No. 1:17-cv-02854 (N.D. Ill.), which were set for
January 30, 2019, are stricken.

The hearing was reset to February 6, 2019, at 9:30 a.m., due to
Unexpected Court Closure.[CC]


PG&E CORP: Rickaby Sues over November Camp Fire
-----------------------------------------------
A case, STAN RICKABY, individually, and on behalf of similarly
situated Concow, California landowners; and RICKABY FIRE SUPPORT,
LLC, the Plaintiffs, vs. PG&E CORPORATION; PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC
COMPANY; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, the Defendants, Case No.
CGC-19-573256 (Cal. Super. Ct., Jan. 28, 2019), seeks damages to
personal property, lost profits, and lost land value due to the
destruction of Plaintiffs' community and its natural environment by
a camp fire in November of last year.

According to the complaint, the Camp Fire resulted from PG&E's
longstanding corporate culture, which expresses an attitude that
places stockholder dividends and employee comforts, bonuses, and
perks over public safety. PG&E's disregard for safety regulations
and risk management practices, along with its systemic failure to
design, maintain, and update its facilities and equipment, produced
this avoidable disaster.

The fire resulted from unsafe electrical infrastructure owned,
operated and negligently maintained by Defendants. The fire ignited
in Butte County on November 8, 2018 at approximately 6 a.m., in the
narrow, descending, windswept Feather River Canyon, very near a
PG&E tower located on a hill just above Poe Dam. Typically, the
wind flows up the canyon in the early morning, then changes
direction and flows more rapidly down the canyon. The descending
wind grew very strong that morning. Down the descending canyon from
the ignition point, the canyon turns southeast, to the left. Then,
along the northwest rim of the canyon, there is a low gap. The wind
drove the fire down into the curving northwest mountains so the
flames burst through the gap like a bullet shot out of a gun
barrel, headed straight for Con cow. So focused was the driven,
blast furnace-like wall of flame that the aerial view displays a
perfect, narrow rectangle, like a bullet of fire, headed for
Concow.  The wall of flame moved faster than an automobile. As the
flames reached the eastern border of the town, Stan Rickaby saw a
young man running downhill, as fast as he could, from the flames.
The flames overtook him and burned him to death. Over 150,000
residents have been displaced from their homes.  The town of Concow
was hit early and in the direct path of the fire by the fastest
blowing flames, resulting in almost complete destruction of the
community, the lawsuit says.[BN]

Attorney for Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff Class:

          Larry A. Peluso, Esq.
          PELUSO LAW GROUP, PC
          P.O. Box 1971
          Newport Beach, CA 92659
          Telephone: 949 395 0092
          Facsimile: 310-593 1821
          E-mail: pelusolaw@gmail.com

PIZZA STOP: Garcia Espindola Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Cesario Garcia Espindola, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Pizza Stop Corp. (d/b/a Pizza
Stop), 2166 Frederick Douglass Blvd Corp. (d/b/a Pizza Stop), Bilur
Lala, Lenny Doe, David Doe, and Ari Doe, Defendants, Case No.
1:19-cv-01026 (S.D. N.Y., February 1, 2019) seeks unpaid minimum
and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
("FLSA"), and for violations of the N.Y. Labor Law ("NYLL"), and
the "spread of hours" and overtime wage orders of the New York
Commissioner of Labor, including applicable liquidated damages,
interest, attorneys' fees and costs.

The Defendants maintained a policy and practice of requiring
Plaintiff Garcia and other employees to work in excess of 40 hours
per week without providing the minimum wage and overtime
compensation required by federal and state law and regulations,
says the complaint.

Plaintiff Garcia is a former employee of Defendants.

Defendants own, operate, or control two pizzerias, both under the
name "Pizza Stop".[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael Faillace, Esq.
     MICHAEL FAILLACE &ASSOCIATES, P.C.
     60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
     New York, NY10165
     Phone: (212) 317-1200
     Facsimile: (212) 317-1620


PLYCEM USA: Smith et al. Sue over Defective Cement Siding
---------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA L. SMITH, WALTER A. SMITH, individually and on behalf of
all similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiffs, vs. PLYCEM USA,
LLC, PLYCEM USA, INC., ELEMENTIA USA, INC., ELEMENTIA, S.A.B. DE
C.V., the Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-00071-DJH (W.D. Ky., Jan.
28, 2019), is a consumer class action against Defendants on behalf
of all persons and entities who own homes, residences or other
structures physically located in Kentucky, on which Defendants'
Allura fiber cement exterior siding is or was installed.

According to the complaint, the Siding on Plaintiffs' and Class
Members' homes suffers from an inherent defect resulting in the
Siding cracking, splitting, warping and breakage. The cracking,
splitting, warping, and breakage create paths for eventual water
and moisture intrusion as a result. Despite the Defendants'
representations that the Siding meets the applicable standards and
building codes for performance and weather resistance, the Siding
fails prematurely and is not suitable for use as an exterior
building product. However, as a result of the defect in the Siding,
the Plaintiffs and Class Members have incurred and will incur
thousands of dollars in damages to replace the Siding.

In making the Siding, the Defendants allegedly used excessive fly
ash as in ingredient that became unevenly distributed throughout
the Siding. Instead of fly ash, the Defendants could have used
common grain and silica used by other manufacturers of fiber cement
siding. Fly ash is a by-product of coal burning power plants and
costs less than cement, so its use by Defendants lowered the cost
of making the Siding. However, Defendant's decision to use an
excessive amount of fly ash resulted in brittleness, porosity
problems, and other alleged uniform damages -- none of which are
inherent in the better grain and silica sand design formulations.

The Defendants learned that the addition of an excessive amount fly
ash and/or improper distribution thereof, into its Siding caused
brittleness, cracking, splitting, and breakage that creates paths
for water intrusion into the home. The Defendants market the Siding
as durable, and as offering long-lasting protection for a specified
life of 50-years. The Defendants have marketed and represented the
Siding is a durable, aesthetically pleasing, and lasting exterior
building product, claiming specifically, that the Siding, inter
alia, "won't rot, warp or splinter and is designed to significantly
outperform wood in every way;" is "Unlike wood, vinyl and other
traditional building materials, Allura Fiber Cement products resist
damage from hail or termite attacks, resist rot, are
non-combustible, and free from manufacturing defects;" and
"Combining the appearance and workability of wood with the
durability of specially formulated fiber cement, Allura Lap Siding
not only looks great but lasts considerably longer than traditional
exterior wall cladding or vinyl siding."

The Plaintiffs' subcontractor, as well as Class Members' builders
and subcontractors, relied on Defendants' representations and
marketing in selecting and purchasing the Siding. The Siding has
not lived up to Defendants' representations, given the early and
severe failure, and given that the Siding requires unexpected
maintenance, premature repair, and replacement within the first
five years of its service life. All of Defendants' Siding is
uniformly defective such that Plaintiffs and Class members' Siding
fails before the time periods advertised, marketed, and represented
by Defendants, or otherwise expected by ordinary consumers
purchasing siding, the lawsuit says.

Plycem USA LLC manufactured, advertised, marketed and sold
defective Allura fiber cement siding that was installed on
Plaintiffs' homes and those of hundreds if not thousands of Class
Members in Kentucky. Elementia USA, Inc. manufactured, advertised,
marketed and sold defective Allura fiber cement siding that was
installed on Plaintiffs' homes and those of thousands of Class
Members in Kentucky.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiffs:

          Roger N. Braden, Esq.
          BRADEN HUMFLEET & DEVINE,PLC
          7000 Houston Road, Suite 5
          Florence, KY 41042
          Telephone: (859) 414-0777
          Facsimile: (859) 993-0350

               - and -

          Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
          Rachel Soffin, Esq.
          Adam A. Edwards, Esq.
          GREG COLEMAN LAW PC
          800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
          Knoxville, TN 37929
          Telephone: 865 247-0080
          Facsimile: 865 522-0049
          E-mail: greg@gregcolemanlaw.com
                  rachel@gregcolemanlaw.com
                  adam@gregcolemanlaw.com

PONTOON BOAT: Thorne Files Class Action for ADA Violation
---------------------------------------------------------
Pontoon Boat, LLC D/B/A Bennington Marine is facing a class action
lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The
case is styled Braulio Thorne and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Pontoon Boat, LLC D/B/A Bennington
Marine, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00957 (S.D. N.Y., January 31,
2019).

Bennington Marine, LLC manufactures various pontoon boats. The
company also provides apparel, headwear, and accessories. It offers
its products through a network of dealers in the United States,
Canada, Australia, Mexico, Europe, and South Africa. The company
was founded in 1997 and is based in Elkhart, Indiana.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq
   Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb
   150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Fax: (212) 982-6284
   Email: nyjg@aol.com


SABRA DIPPING: Faces Ochoa Labor Suit in Los Angeles
----------------------------------------------------
An employment-related class action lawsuit has been filed against
Sabra Dipping Company LLC. The case is captioned as LAURA OCHOA,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. SABRA DIPPING COMPANY LLC; and SERGIO SANDOVAL,
Defendants, Case No. 19STCV01692 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty.,
Jan. 18, 2019).

Sabra Dipping Co., LLC produces and distributes hummus, guacamole,
Greek yogurt dips, salsas, and vegetarian sides. It sells its
products through grocery stores in the United States and Canada.
The company was formerly known as Sabra Blue & White Foods, LLC and
changed its name to Sabra Dipping Co., LLC in March 2008. The
company was founded in 1986 and is based in White Plains, New York.
Sabra Dipping Co., LLC operates as a joint venture between Strauss
Fresh Foods Ltd. and Pepsico, Inc. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Raymond Babaian, Esq.
     4150 Concours, Suite 260
     Ontario, CA 91764
     Tel: (909) 677-2270
     Fax: (909) 677-2290
     https://www.valiantlaw.com/


SANCHEZ OIL & GAS: Hornsby Seeks to  Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
Marshall Hornsby, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Sanchez Oil & Gas Corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 5:19-cv-00091 (W.D. Tex., February 1, 2019)
seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages owed under
the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Hornsby, and the other workers like him, were typically scheduled
for 12 plus hour shifts, 7 days a week, for weeks at a time, notes
the complaint. But SOG did not pay Hornsby or the other workers
like him overtime. Instead of paying overtime as required by the
FLSA, SOG paid these workers a day rate and improperly classified
them as independent contractors, says the complaint.

Hornsby worked from approximately February 2016 to October 2018
exclusively for Defendant.

Sanchez Oil & Gas Corporation (SOG) is a private company engaged in
the management of oil and natural gas properties.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
     Andrew Dunlap, Esq.
     Richard M. Schreiber, Esq.
     JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
     11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
     Houston, TX 77046
     Phone: 713-352-1100
     Facsimile: 713-352-3300
     Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
            adunlap@mybackwages.com
            rschreiber@mybackwages.com

          - and -

     Richard J. (Rex) Burch
     BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
     8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500
     Houston, TX 77046
     Phone: 713-877-8788
     Facsimile: 713-877-8065
     Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com


SKINFLINTS RESTAURANT: Sanchez Suit Seeks Proper Wages
-------------------------------------------------------
Karla Sanchez, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Skinflints Restaurant Inc., Defendants, Case No.
501037/2019 (N.Y. Sup., January 15, 2019), seeks to recover unpaid
minimum and overtime wages, redress for failure to provide wage
notices and wage statements, declaratory and injunctive relief,
liquidated damages interest, reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and
all other appropriate legal and equitable relief under New York
State Labor Law.

Skinflints is a restaurant, providing dining services in Kings
County where Sanchez worked as a server and hostess from June 2011
to January 2019. Sanchez claims that her only compensation for her
work was the tips that she received from patrons. She did not
receive an hourly wage, the complaint says.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Russell S. Moriarty, Esq.
      LEVINE & BLIT, PLLC
      350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3601
      New York, NY 10118
      Tel: (212) 967-3000
      Email: RMoriarty@LevineBlit.com



ST. LOUIS, MO: Dixon Moves for Certification of Arrestees Class
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit entitled DAVID DIXON, JEFFREY
ROZELLE, AARON THURMAN, and RICHARD ROBARDS On behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated v. CITY OF ST. LOUIS, SHERIFF
VERNON BETTS, JUDGE ROBIN RANSOM in her official capacity as
presiding judge, JUDGE REX BURLISON in his official capacity as
interim Presiding Judge, JUDGE ELIZABETH HOGAN in her official
capacity as Division 16 Judge and Duty Judge, JUDGE DAVID ROITHER
in his official capacity as Division 25 Judge and Duty Judge, JUDGE
THOMAS MCCARTHY in his official capacity as Division 26 Judge,
COMMISSIONER DALE GLASS in his official capacity as St. Louis
Commissioner of Corrections, Case No. 4:19-cv-00112-SPM (E.D. Mo.),
seek an order certifying this class:

     all arrestees who are or will be detained in the Medium
     Security Institution (referred to as "the Workhouse") or the
     City Justice Center ("CJC"), operated by the City of St.
     Louis, post-arrest because they are unable to afford to pay
     a monetary release condition.

The Plaintiffs also ask the Court to appoint their counsel as class
counsel under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Blake A. Strode, Esq.
          Michael-John Voss, Esq.
          Jacqueline Kutnik-Bauder, Esq.
          Sima Atri, Esq.
          John M. Waldron, Esq.
          ARCHCITY DEFENDERS, INC.
          440 N. 4th Street, Suite 390
          Saint Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (855) 724-2489
          Facsimile: (314) 925-1307
          E-mail: bstrode@archcitydefenders.org
                  mjvoss@archcitydefenders.org
                  jkutnikbauder@archcitydefenders.org
                  satri@archcitydefenders.org
                  jwaldron@archcitydefenders.org

               - and -

          Thomas B. Harvey, Esq.
          Derecka Purnell, Esq.
          ADVANCEMENT PROJECT
          1220 L Street, N.W., Suite 850
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 728-9557
          Facsimile: (202) 728-9558
          E-mail: tharvey@advancementproject.org

               - and -

          Seth Wayne, Esq.
          Nicolas Riley, Esq.
          Robert Friedman, Esq.
          INSTITUTE FOR CONSTITUTIONAL ADVOCACY AND PROTECTION
          GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER
          600 New Jersey Ave. NW
          Washington, DC 20001
          Telephone: (202) 662-9042
          E-mail: sw1098@georgetown.edu
                  rdf34@georgetown.edu
                  nr537@georgetown.edu

               - and -

          Alec Karakatsanis, Esq.
          CIVIL RIGHTS CORPS
          910 17th Street NW, Suite 200
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 599-0953
          Facsimile: (202) 609-8030
          E-mail: alec@civilrightscorps.org


STANFORD HEALTH: Underpays Caregivers, Rhyner Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
MICHELLE RHYNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. STANFORD HEALTH CARE; and DOES 1 to 100,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19CV341248 (Cal. Super., Santa
Clara Cty., Jan. 18, 2019) is an action against the Defendants for
unpaid regular hours, overtime hours, minimum wages, wages for
missed meal and rest periods.

The Plaintiff Rhyner was employed by the Defendants as patient
care.

Stanford Health Care provides healthcare services through its
clinics. Its services include acne clinic, adult congenital heart
program, wound care, aging adult, pediatric, anesthesia
preoperative evaluation, aneurysm, anticoagulation, aortic disease,
arthritis and joint replacement, audiology and hearing devices,
autoimmune skin disease, autonomic disorders program, bariatric
surgery and medical weight loss, blistering disease, and blood and
marrow transplant program. Stanford Health Care was formerly known
as Stanford Hospital and Clinics and changed its name to Stanford
Health Care in October 2014. The company was founded in 1959 and is
based in Palo Alto, California. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Antonelli, Esq.
          Janelle Carney, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH ANTONELLI
          14758 Pipeline Ave., Suite E, 2nd Floor
          Chino Hills, CA 91709
          Telephone: (909) 393-0223
          Facsimile: (909) 393-0471
          E-mail: JAntonelli@antonellilaw.com

               - and -

          Michael Singer, Esq.
          COHELAN KHOURY & SINGER
          605 C Street, Suite 200
          San Diego, CA 9210
          Telephone: (619) 595-3001
          Facsimile: (619) 595-3000
          E-mail: singer@ck-lawfirm.com

               - and -

          Jonathan M. Lebe, Esq.
          LEBE LAW, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
          777 South Alameda St. 2nd Floor
          Los Angeles CA 90021
          Telephone: (213) 358-7046
          E-mail: jon@lebelaw.com


SUN MERRY: Vargas Seeks Overtime Compensation
---------------------------------------------
A case, JONATHAN VARGAS, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, vs. SUN MERRY USA INC. d/b/a SUNMERRY
BAKERY AND CAFE, PEI-HSUAN KAO, and JOHN DOES 1-5, the Defendants,
Case No. 2:19-cv-01167 (D.N.J., Jan. 28, 2019), alleges violations
of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New Jersey Wage and Hour
Law and Regulations, arising from the Defendants' failure to pay
exempt employees at the statutory overtime rate of time and
one-half for all hours worked over 40 hours per workweek.

According to the complaint, the Defendants have willfully and
intentionally committed widespread violations of the FLSA and
NJWHLR by engaging in a pattern and practice of failing to pay its
employees, including Plaintiff, overtime compensation at the
statutory rate of time and one-half for all hours worked above 40
hours in a workweek, the lawsuit says.[BN]

Attorneys for Plaintiff:

          Giustino (Justin) Cilenti, Esq.
          CILENTI & COOPER, PLLC
          708 Third A venue - 6th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 209-3933
          Facsimile (212) 209-7102
          E-mail: info@jcpclaw.com

TD AMERITRADE: Knowles Files Suit in Nebr. for Breach of Contract
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against TD Ameritrade Holding
Corporation. The case is styled as Russell D Knowles and Bernard A
Knowles through his attorney-in-fact Russell d. Knowles, on behalf
of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. TD
Ameritrade Holding Corporation, TD Ameritrade Inc., TD Ameritrade
Clearing, Inc. and TD Ameritrade Investment Management, LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 18:19-cv-00047-RFR-SMB (D. Neb., January 31,
2019).

The docket of the lawsuit states the case type as Other Breach of
Contract.

TD Ameritrade is a brokerage firm based in Omaha, Nebraska with
major trading centers in Southlake, Texas and St Louis, Missouri.
The letters TD are derived from Toronto-Dominion Bank, the largest
shareholder. The company provides services for individuals and
institutions that are investing online.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jason W. Grams, Esq.
   LAMSON, DUGAN LAW FIRM
   10306 Regency Parkway Drive
   Omaha, NE 68114-3743
   Tel: (402) 397-7300
   Fax: (402) 397-7824
   Email: jgrams@ldmlaw.com


TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION: Garnett Alleges Race Bias
--------------------------------------------------
MALVIN GARNETT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO;
TWU555; and TWU INTERNATIONAL, Defendants, Case No.
1:19-cv-20291-JEM (S.D. Fla., Jan. 22, 2019) alleges that the
Defendants have discriminated against the Plaintiff and the class
on the basis of their race in the workplace.

According to the complaint, the Defendant has allowed for a hostile
work environment against African Americans nationwide as a union
allowing a racially biased corporate culture and stereotypical
views about the skills, abilities, and potential of African
Americans that infect personnel decisions and form the basis of the
policies and practices challenge knowing promotions, disciplinary
actions, hiring, firing and harmony in the work place.

Transport Workers Union Of America, AFL-CIO is a labor union
representing workers of the transportation, airline, railroad,
utility, and service industries. It provides assistance in
negotiations, organizing drives, legislative campaigns, legal
advise, education, research, and public relations services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented pro se.


TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Hoffman Appeals W.D. Wash. Ruling to 9th Cir.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs Sarah Douglass, Esther Hoffman, Anthony Kim, Daria Kim
and Il Kim filed an appeal from a court ruling in their lawsuit
entitled Esther Hoffman, et al. v. Transworld Systems, Inc., et
al., Case No. 2:18-cv-01132-JCC, in the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Washington, Seattle.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
(assigned Case No. 18-00002-15483-9 SEA) was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of Washington, County of Washington to
the District Court on August 2, 2018.  The case is assigned to
Judge John C. Coughenour.

Transworld Systems Inc. provides accounts receivable, debt
recovery, and past due accounts services for businesses, medical
companies, dental companies, education facilities, Fortune 500
companies, and small businesses in the United States and
internationally.  The Company has strategic alliances with
athenahealth, eClinicalWorks, LeonardoMD, MDeverywhere, QuickBooks,
Sikka Software Corporation, and TotalMD.  Transworld Systems Inc.
was founded in 1970 and is based in Santa Rosa, California.

The appellate case is captioned as Esther Hoffman, et al. v.
Transworld Systems, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-35058, in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows:

   -- Appellants Sarah Douglass, Esther Hoffman, Anthony Kim,
      Daria Kim and Il Kim's opening brief is due on March 26,
      2019;

   -- Appellees Cheung, Matthew Cheung, Does, Patenaude & Felix,
      APC and Transworld Systems, Inc.'s answering brief is due
      on April 25, 2019; and

   -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after
      service of the answering brief.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellants ESTHER HOFFMAN, SARAH DOUGLASS, ANTHONY KIM,
IL KIM, and DARIA KIM, husband and wife and the marital community
comprised thereof, on behalf of themselves and on behalf of others
similarly situated, are represented by:

          Guy William Beckett, Esq.
          BERRY & BECKETT, PLLP
          1708 Bellevue Ave.
          Seattle, WA 98122-2017
          Telephone: (206) 441-5444
          E-mail: gbeckett@beckettlaw.com

               - and -

          Christina Latta Henry, Esq.
          HENRY & DEGRAAFF, P.S.
          150 Nickerson Street, Suite 311
          Seattle, WA 98109
          Telephone: (206) 330-0595
          Facsimile: (206) 400-7609
          E-mail: chenry@HDM-legal.com

Defendant-Appellee TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS, INC., is represented by:

          Damian P. Richard, Esq.
          SESSIONS FISHMAN NATHAN & ISRAEL, LLP
          1545 Hotel Circle South, Suite # 150
          San Diego, CA 92108
          Telephone: (619) 758-1891
          E-mail: drichard@sessions-law.biz

Defendants-Appellees PATENAUDE & FELIX, APC, and MATTHEW CHEUNG are
represented by:

          Marc Rosenberg, Esq.
          LEE SMART, P.S., INC.
          701 Pike Suite, Suite 1800
          Seattle, WA 98101-3929
          Telephone: (206) 624-7990
          E-mail: mr@leesmart.com


UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS: Brown et al. Allege Racial Bias
-------------------------------------------------------
A case, DERICK BROWN, ATIBA FLEMONS, and JEFFREY TAYLOR On behalf
of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs.
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS, the Defendant,
Case No. 2:19-cv-02020-CSB-EIL (C.D. Ill., Jan. 28, 2019), alleges
that the University of Illinois Board of Trustees is in violation
of Title VII and Illinois Civil Rights Act of 2003 (ICRA).

The Class Representatives seek to represent a class or classes
comprised of former, current, and future black employees at the
University of Illinois Champaign-Urbana campus, excluding
University officers with authority to make policy concerning
discrimination, who have been subjected to one or more of the
discriminatory policies or practices described in this Complaint.

According to the complaint, UIUC supervisors and other employees
frequently use racial slurs and offensive stereotypes, calling
black employees "niggers," "boy," "monkeys," "lazy," "angry,"
"rowdy," and "Aunt Jemima," and using other offensive racial
language. Class members are exposed to threats of racial violence,
such as nooses, swastikas, KKK garb, racist graffiti, and
confederate flags, including the noose and swastika.

UIUC supervisors and employees also excessively monitor,
scrutinize, belittle, and disrespect class members, and treat them
as less credible and capable than white employees. UIUC's standard
operating practice is racial harassment of class members,
implemented by the following:

     -- UIUC has an express written policy of allowing racial
harassment unless it is "sufficiently severe or pervasive,"
"objectively offensive," and "unreasonably interferes with, denies,
or limits a person'sability to participate or benefit from
employment opportunities, assessments or status at the
University;"

     -- The Director of ODEA at UIUC openly directs racial slurs
and stereotypes at black subordinates, and the ODEA department is
itself rife with internal racial harassment. As a consequence, the
University's senior anti-bias unit, instead acts as an agent of
bias;

     -- Human Resources, ODEA, and senior UIUC leadership have a
practice of avoiding finding that racial harassment constitutes a
violation of its Nondiscrimination Policy by ignoring racial
harassment complaints; failing to initiate investigations into
complaints it acknowledges receiving; suggesting complainants
engage in dispute resolution, without explaining they have the
right to an investigation, defeating ODEA's purpose, to root out
discrimination; and/or not conducting bona fide investigations into
complaints of racial harassment.

By design, UIUC's written Nondiscrimination Policy not only fails
to deter racial harassment, it permits it, the lawsuit says.

The University of Illinois is a public institution of higher
education under the authority of the State of Illinois Compiled
Statutes. 110 ILCS 205 Sec. 1(a). The Board of Trustees is the
governing body of the University of Illinois and is a corporate
body and a political subdivision under the authority of the State
of Illinois Compiled Statutes. 110 ILCS 305 Sec.[BN].

Counsel for Plaintiffs:

          Rebecca Houlding, Esq.
          Jesse Centrella, Esq.
          FRIEDMAN & HOULDING LLP
          1050 Seven Oaks Lane
          Mamaroneck, NY 10543
          Telephone: 888 369 1119
          Facsimile: 866.731.5553
          E-mail: rebecca@friedmanhouldingllp.com

WELLS FARGO: Approval Hearing in Nakamura Suit Set for May 15
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Hon. Daniel D. Crabtree sets an approval hearing for May 15,
2019, at 9:00 a.m., in the lawsuit captioned JIN NAKAMURA v. WELLS
FARGO BANK, NA d/b/a Wells Fargo Dealer Services, Inc., Case No.
5:17-cv-04029-DDC-GEB (D. Kan.).

According to the Clerk's Courtroom Minute Sheet, (i) Counsel will
submit a proposed order for the Court's approval, and (ii) Counsel
address the issues the Court set forth in its order on doc. 133
issued on January 22, 2019.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rex A. Sharp, Esq.
          Ryan Hudson, Esq.
          Scott B. Goodger, Esq.
          REX A. SHARP, PA,
          5301 West 75th Street
          Prairie Village, KS 66208
          Telephone: (913) 901-0500
          E-mail: rsharp@midwest-law.com
                  rhudson@midwest-law.com
                  sgoodger@midwest-law.com

               - and -

          Bryce B. Bell, Esq.
          Mark Schmitz, Esq.
          BELL LAW, LLC
          2600 Grand Blvd, Suite 580
          Kansas City, MO 64108
          Telephone: (816) 886-8206
          E-mail: Bryce@belllawkc.com
                  ms@belllawkc.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Carolee A. Hoover, Esq.
          Alicia A. Baiardo, Esq.
          MCGUIREWOODS, LLP
          Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1300
          San Francisco, CA 94111-3821
          Telephone: (415) 844-9944
          E-mail: choover@mcguirewoods.com
                  abaiardo@mcguirewoods.com


WELLS FARGO: Certification of Class Sought in McDonald Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Plaintiff in the lawsuit styled LIANE McDONALD, in her capacity
as the Administratrix of the ESTATE OF PATRICIA A. McDONALD,
Deceased, and as the Representative of a Class of Similarly
Situated Persons v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Case No.
2:16-cv-00264-MAK (W.D. Pa.), moves for class certification.

Ms. McDonald also asks the Court to appoint her as Representative
Plaintiff and to appoint her counsel as class counsel.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aurelius Robleto, Esq.
          Renee M. Kuruce, Esq.
          ROBLETO LAW, PLLC
          Three Gateway Center
          401 Liberty Avenue, Suite 13306
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Telephone: (412) 925-8194
          Facsimile: (412) 346-1035
          E-mail: info@robletolaw.com


WELLS FARGO: Pekoc Appeals Ct. Approval of Hefler Suit Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Objector Thomas Pekoc filed an appeal from a court ruling in the
lawsuit styled Gary Hefler, et al. v. Wells Fargo & Company, et
al., Case No. 3:16-cv-05479-JST, in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California, San Francisco.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Jan. 2, 2019, Judge Jon
S. Tigar granted both (i) Union's motion for final approval of the
class action settlement and the plan of allocation; and (ii) the
Class Counsel's motion for an award of attorneys' fees and
litigation expenses.

The Plaintiffs bring the federal securities class action against
Wells Fargo and several of its officers and directors for
violations of sections 10(b), 20(a), and 20A of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities and Exchange Commission's
Rule 10b-5.  Lead Plaintiff Union Asset Management Holding, AG
brings these claims on behalf of all persons who purchased Wells
Fargo common stock between Feb. 26, 2014 and Sept. 20, 2016,
inclusive.

The proposed settlement agreement resolves claims between Wells
Fargo and the class, which the Court conditionally certified as all
persons and entities who purchased Wells Fargo common stock from
Feb. 26, 2014 through Sept. 20, 2016, inclusive.

Under the Settlement, Wells Fargo has paid $480 million into the
Settlement Fund.  The following amounts will be subtracted from the
Settlement Amount: (1) taxes; (2) notice costs; and (3) attorneys'
fees and expenses.

The appellate case is captioned as Gary Hefler, et al. v. Wells
Fargo & Company, et al., Case No. 19-15140, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows:

   -- Transcript must be ordered by February 25, 2019;

   -- Transcript is due on March 25, 2019;

   -- Appellant Thomas Pekoc's opening brief is due on May 6,
      2019;

   -- Appellees John D. Baker III, David M. Carroll, John S.
      Chen, City of Hialeah Employees' Retirement System, Lloyd
      H. Dean, Elizabeth A. Duke, Susan E. Engel, Hope A.
      Hardison, Gary Hefler, Enrique Hernandez Jr., Donald M.
      James, David Julian, Michael J. Loughlin, Cynthia H.
      Milligan, Marcelo Mizuki, Avid Modjtabai, Oregon Public
      Employees Retirement System, Federico F. Pena, James H.
      Quigley, Judith M. Runstad, Stephen W. Sanger, John R.
      Shrewsberry, Timothy J. Sloan, Guy Solomonov, James M.
      Strother, John G. Stumpf, Susan G. Swenson, Carrie L.
      Tolstedt, Union Asset Management Holding AG, Suzanne M.
      Vautrinot and Wells Fargo & Company's answering brief is
      due on June 6, 2019; and

   -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after
      service of the answering brief.[BN]

Objector-Appellant THOMAS PEKOC is represented by:

          Steve A. Miller, Esq.
          STEVE A. MILLER, P.C.
          1625 Larimer Street
          Denver, CO 80202
          Telephone: (303) 892-9933
          E-mail: sampc01@gmail.com

               - and -

          John Jacob Pentz, III, Esq.
          CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS GROUP
          19 Widow Rites Lane
          Sudbury, MA 01776
          Telephone: (978) 261-5725
          E-mail: Clasaxn@earthlink.net

Plaintiffs-Appellees GARY HEFLER, MARCELO MIZUKI, GUY SOLOMONOV,
UNION ASSET MANAGEMENT HOLDING AG and CITY OF HIALEAH EMPLOYEES'
RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated, are represented by:

          Aelish Marie Baig, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
          100 Pine Street
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 288-4545
          E-mail: aelishb@rgrdlaw.com

               - and -

          Shawn Anthony Williams, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD, LLP
          One Montgomery Street
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 288-4545
          E-mail: shawnw@rgrdlaw.com

               - and -

          Salvatore Graziano, Esq.
          BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
          1251 Avenue of the Americas
          New York, NY 10020
          Telephone: (800) 380-8496
          E-mail: sgraziano@blbglaw.com

Defendant-Appellee WELLS FARGO & COMPANY is represented by:

          Brendan Peter Cullen, Esq.
          Sverker Kristoffer Hogberg, Esq.
          SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP
          1870 Embarcadero Road
          Palo Alto, CA 94303
          Telephone: (650) 461-5650
          E-mail: cullenb@sullcrom.com
                  hogbergs@sullcrom.com

               - and -

          Richard H. Klapper, Esq.
          SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP
          125 Broad Street
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (212) 558-4000
          E-mail: klapperr@sullcrom.com

Defendant-Appellee JOHN G. STUMPF is represented by:

          Grant Fondo, Esq.
          GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
          601 Marshall Street
          Redwood City, CA 94063
          Telephone: (650) 752-3100
          E-mail: gfondo@goodwinlaw.com

               - and -

          Nicholas A. Reider, Esq.
          Lloyd Winawer, Esq.
          GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
          100 Northern Avenue
          Boston, MA 02210
          Telephone: (617) 570-1000
          E-mail: nreider@goodwinlaw.com
                  lwinawer@goodwinlaw.com

               - and -

          Daniel Prugh Roeser, Esq.
          Richard Strassberg, Esq.
          GOODWIN PROCTER LLP
          620 Eighth Avenue
          New York, NY 10018-1405
          Telephone: (212) 813-8800
          E-mail: droeser@goodwinlaw.com
                  rstrassberg@goodwinlaw.com

Defendant-Appellee JOHN R. SHREWSBERRY is represented by:

          Miles Ehrlich, Esq.
          Ismail Ramsey, Esq.
          RAMSEY & EHRLICH LLP
          803 Hearst Avenue
          Berkeley, CA 94710
          Telephone: (510) 548-3600
          E-mail: miles@ramsey-ehrlich.com
                  izzy@ramsey-ehrlich.com

Defendant-Appellee CARRIE L. TOLSTEDT

          Jeffrey Faucette, Esq.
          SKAGGS FAUCETTE LLP
          One Embarcadero Center
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 315-1669
          E-mail: jeff@skaggsfaucette.com

               - and -

          Brian P. Hagerty, Esq.
          Jennifer Gourley Wicht, Esq.
          WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
          725 Twelfth Street, NW
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 434-5168
          E-mail: bhagerty@wc.com
                  jwicht@wc.com

Defendant-Appellee OREGON PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM is
represented by:

          Cadio Zirpoli, Esq.
          SAVERI & SAVERI, INC.
          706 Sansome Street
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 217-6810
          E-mail: cadio@saveri.com

Defendant-Appellee TIMOTHY J. SLOAN is represented by:

          Nanci L. Clarence, Esq.
          Josh Cohen, Esq.
          Adam Shearer, Esq.
          CLARENCE DYER & COHEN LLP
          899 Ellis Street
          San Francisco, CA 94109-7807
          Telephone: (415) 749-1800
          E-mail: nclarence@clarencedyer.com
                  jcohen@clarencedyer.com
                  ashearer@clarencedyer.com

Defendants-Appellees DAVID M. CARROLL and JAMES M. STROTHER are
represented by:

          Walter F. Brown, Jr., Esq.
          James N. Kramer, Esq.
          ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE LLP
          405 Howard Street
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 773-5995
          E-mail: wbrown@orrick.com
                  jkramer@orrick.com

Defendant-Appellee DAVID JULIAN is represented by:

          Timothy Paul Crudo, Esq.
          Rees F. Morgan, Esq.
          COBLENTZ PATCH DUFFY & BASS, LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 3000
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 677-5219
          E-mail: tcrudo@coblentzlaw.com
                  rmorgan@coblentzlaw.com

Defendant-Appellee HOPE A. HARDISON is represented by:

          Ed Swanson, Esq.
          SWANSON & McNAMARA, LLP
          300 Montgomery Street
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 477-3800
          E-mail: ed@smllp.law

Defendant-Appellee MICHAEL J. LOUGHLIN is represented by:

          Ted W. Cassman, Esq.
          Laurel Headley, Esq.
          ARGUEDAS, CASSMAN & HEADLEY, LLP
          803 Hearst Avenue
          Berkeley, CA 94710
          Telephone: (510) 845-3000
          E-mail: cassman@achlaw.com
                  headley@achlaw.com

Defendant-Appellee AVID MODJTABAI is represented by:

          Carl Brandon Wisoff, Esq.
          Douglas Rea Young, Esq.
          FARELLA BRAUN & MARTEL LLP
          235 Montgomery Street, 17th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 954-4400
          E-mail: bwisoff@fbm.com
                  dyoung@fbm.com

Defendants-Appellees JOHN D. BAKER III, JOHN S. CHEN, LLOYD H.
DEAN, ELIZABETH A. DUKE, SUSAN E. ENGEL, ENRIQUE HERNANDEZ, Jr.,
DONALD M. JAMES, FEDERICO F. PENA, JAMES H. QUIGLEY, JUDITH M.
RUNSTAD, STEPHEN W. SANGER, CYNTHIA H. MILLIGAN, SUSAN G. SWENSON
and SUZANNE M. VAUTRINOT are represented by:

          Jordan Eth, Esq.
          Anna Erickson White, Esq.
          MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
          425 Market Street
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2482
          Telephone: (415) 268-7126
          E-mail: jeth@mofo.com
                  awhite@mofo.com


WOLFGANG'S STEAKHOUSE: Dervisevic Sues Over Unpaid Wages
--------------------------------------------------------
NASER DERVISEVIC, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. WOLFGANG'S STEAKHOUSE, INC. and WOLFGANG ZWIENER, REX
FERATOVIC, ZIJO MUSIC, PETER ZWIENER, and STEVEN ZWIENER, Case No.
1:19-cv-00814 (S.D.N.Y., January 28, 2019), alleges that the
Defendants fail and refuse to pay the Plaintiff and other service
employees for all hours worked and the legally required overtime
wage for all hours worked over 40 hours in a workweek.

Wolfgang's Steakhouse, Inc., is a New York Corporation.  The
Company is owned, and its operations are conducted, by the
Individual Defendants.

The Defendants own and operate Wolfgang's Steakhouse located at 4
Park Avenue, in New York City.  The Defendants are the Plaintiff's
employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          D. Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq.
          JOSEPH & KIRSCHENBAUM LLP
          32 Broadway, Suite 601
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (212) 688-5640
          Facsimile: (212) 688-2548
          E-mail: maimon@jhllp.com


[*] Consumer Agency Settles Data Breach Class Action for $22MM
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy S. Close, Esq., Meredith K. Collier, Esq., David R. Coogan,
Esq., Jennifer C. Everett, Esq., Robert Levent Herguener, Esq.,
Richard J. Johnson, Esq., Laura G. Lim, Esq., Christopher Markham,
Esq., Daniel J. McLoon, Esq., Mary Alexander Myers, Esq., Kaeley R.
Brown, Esq., Mauricio F. Paez, Esq., and Nicole M. Perry, Esq., of
Jones Day, in an article for Mondaq, report that on December 3, a
federal court in the Central District of California granted
plaintiffs' request for preliminary approval of a proposed $22
million settlement of class action claims against a consumer
reporting agency related to a data breach that affected 15 million
individuals in the United States. The breach involved unauthorized
access to individuals' names, addresses, dates of births, Social
Security numbers, and driver's license numbers. The settlement
funds will be used to provide two years of credit monitoring
services to class members and cash payments for out-of-pocket
costs. [GN]


[*] Ride-Sharing Company Settles TCPA Class Action for $4MM
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy S. Close, Esq., Meredith K. Collier, Esq., David R. Coogan,
Esq., Jennifer C. Everett, Esq., Robert Levent Herguener, Esq.,
Richard J. Johnson, Esq., Laura G. Lim, Esq., Christopher Markham,
Esq., Daniel J. McLoon, Esq., Mary Alexander Myers, Esq., Kaeley R.
Brown, Esq., Mauricio F. Paez, Esq., and Nicole M. Perry, Esq., of
Jones Day, in an article for Mondaq, report that on November 6, a
proposed consumer class requested that the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Washington preliminarily approve its
proposed $3.99 million settlement with a ride-sharing company. The
class alleges that the company used an automatic telephone dialing
system to send unsolicited commercial texts to individuals in
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"). The
settlement class includes all Washington residents who, between
June 1, 2012, and the date of preliminary approval, received one or
more invitational text messages through the company's "Invite A
Friend" program. [GN]



                            *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  Rousel Elaine T.
Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L.
Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2019. 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 ***