CAR_Public/190308.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Friday, March 8, 2019, Vol. 21, No. 49

                            Headlines

68TH ST CAFE: Refuses to Pay Overtime Under FLSA, Guanan Alleges
AICOM SOLUTIONS: Second Cir. Appeal Filed in Shimson Wexler Suit
ALTITUDE OF MARLBOROUGH: Leary Sues to Recover Sick Time Pay
ANADARKO PETROLEUM: Smith Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
APOLLO TRANSPORTATION: Faces Reichman Class Suit in NY State Court

ARB KC LLC: Hand TCPA Class Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
ASHFORD UNIVERSITY: Hawkins Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls
ATHENAHEALTH INC: Crawford Files Securities Class Action in Mass.
BEST ONE RESTAURANT: Huang Seeks to Recover OT Under FLSA & NYLL
BIG HEART: Faces Acquard Action Over Products' False Ad

BLUE DIAMOND: Hernandez Challenges Mislabeled Wasabi Almonds
BLUE MARLIN: Thorne Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act
BRAINFM INC: Rivera Files Suit in C.D. California
CAVALRY PORTFOLIO: Jones Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
CENTO FINE FOODS: Sibrian Files Fraud Class Suit in New York

CHAPARRAL BOATS: Thorne Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
CHRIS CRAFT CORP: Thorne Files Suit under ADA in New York
CITY TOWEL: Pineda Files Suit Over Missed Meal Periods
CLEAN ENERGY EXPERTS: Bryant Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls
CULLISON & GORMAN: Borozny Suit Alleges ADA Violation

CUTCO CORPORATION: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
CVR REFINING: Suit Challenges Buy Out of Public Common Unitholders
D&R BOATS: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
DARP INC: Eighth Circuit Appeal Filed in Fochtman Class Suit
DARP INC: Seeks Eighth Circuit Review of Ruling in Fochtman Suit

DOBBERSTEIN LAW: Fonseca Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection
DUTTON RANCH: Removes Hernandez Labor Suit to N.D. California
EPISCOPAL COMMUNITIES: Sarmenta Files Suit in Ca. Super. Ct.
FARFETCH.COM US: Faces Dawson Suit Over Inaccessible Web Site
FIRST ADVANTAGE: Faces Harris Suit Alleging FCRA Violation

FOREST PIZZA: Jimenez Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
FRISCH'S RESTAURANTS: Sued by Hopkins for Not Paying Workers' OT
GROCERY DELIVERY: Faces Dawson Action Alleging ADA Violation
HAL LEONARD: Garey Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
HARRY'S USA: Dawson Alleges Website Not Blind-accessible

HILL'S PET: Bauer Files Suit Over Recalled Dog Food
HP INC: Kiler Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act in New York
II-VI INCORPORATED: Stabile Seeks to Halt Merger Deal
IRONCLAD ENERGY: Hines Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
JACK RILEY INVESTMENTS: Garey Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York

JOE & THE JUICE: Nguyen Sues Over Missed Meal Periods
JOHN FLUEVOG: Dawson Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
JUICERIE LLC: Rogers Sues Over Inaccessible Entrance and Counters
LAMPS PLUS INC: Chen Discount Row Removed to W.D. Wash.
MARINER'S COVE: Bishop Files ADA Class Action in New York

MARLEY SPOON: Dawson Asserts Disabilities Act Breach
MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Benwitz Sues Over Compromised Customer Data
MASTERCARD: Ombudsman Wants Consumer Class Action to Proceed
MDL 2492: Bartos v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
MDL 2492: Butler v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated

MDL 2492: Cooke v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
MDL 2492: Crow v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
MDL 2492: Dziuk v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
MDL 2492: Ellis v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
MDL 2492: Green v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated

MDL 2492: Houghton v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
MEDLINE INDUSTRIES: Dominguez Suit Alleges FLSA Violation
MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Gainey McKenna Files Securities Class Suit
MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Glancy Prongay Files Securities Class Action
MOBILE AUTO CONCEPTS: Liu Files Class Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Allen Asserts Negligence Over Injuries
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Ayles Seeks Damages Over Injuries
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Benditt Suit Seeks Damages Over Concussions
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Booker Hits Negligence Over Head Injuries
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Brown Hits Negligence Over Athlete's Injuries

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Vickers Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
NATIONS RECOVERY: Martinez Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
NCAA: K. Hailey Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
NERIUM INT'L: Harris Appeals N.D. Cal. Decision to Ninth Circuit
NUTRA SOLUTIONS USA: Machine Operators Claim Unpaid Overtime

PANINI AMERICA: Brashear Hits Card Redemption Delays
PANINI AMERICA: Faces Class Action Over Redemption Cards
POWERCOR: Supreme Court Dismisses Bushfire Victims' Class Action
PRETIUM RESOURCES: April 11 Class Action Opt-Out Deadline Set
PROMEVO LLC: Hambrick Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation

PROSHARES SHORT VIX: Robbins Geller Commences Class Action
PROSHARES SHORT: Howard G. Smith Files Class Action
PTV LLC: Borozny Asserts Violation Under Disabilities Act
REDROCK TRAVEL: Andrade Claims Unpaid Overtime Wages
SIG SAUER INC: Gordon Files Product Liability Suit in Texas

SNAP-ON BUSINESS: Underpays Workers' Overtime Pay, Baldwin Says
SONIC: Customers Could Be Entitled to Class Action Settlement
SONY MUSIC: Faces New Copyright Infringement Class Actions
STOCKADE FRANCHISING: Alvarez Sues Over Unpaid Compensation
SUN SOUTH HOME-HEALTH: Andrews Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages

T-MOBILE USA: Shakes Class Action Over Unauthorized Accounts
TLC HOMES INC: Bills Action Claims Unpaid Overtime
TRACFONE WIRELESS: Violates TCPA, Gallant Claims
TRUMP CARD: Zavala-Lopez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
TYME TECHNOLOGIES: Canas Hits Share Drop from Failed Cancer Meds

UMG RECORDINGS: Musicians Sue to Reclaim Rights Recordings
UNITED STATES: Jones Files Suit Under Tucker Act
UNITED STATES: Third Circuit Appeal Filed in Schuchardt Suit
US GOVERNMENT: Homeland Security Employees Hit Late Wages
UXIN LIMITED: Bragar Eagel Files Securities Class Action Lawsuit

VALE SA: Schall Law Files Securities Class Action Lawsuit
VELOCITYSHARES DAILY: April 5 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
WESTLAKE SERVICES: Hammond Suit Asserts TCPA Breach
WILLIAM-SONOMA STORES: Olsen Alleges Violation under ADA
WISCONSIN: Magnussen Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages

XPO LAST MILE: Removes Gonzalez Suit to Mass. Dist. Ct.

                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: AGs Petition EPA to Draft Asbestos Policy
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ashland Global Had $369MM Reserve at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Attempt to Dismiss Cahoon Suit Denied
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Commercial Renovation Results in Asbestos Charge
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Had $146MM Non-PCC Reserves at Dec. 31

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Inc. Has $185MM PCC Liability at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ct. Tosses Montana Resources' Summary Ruling Bid
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Diamond Offshore Still Defends Suits at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Employee Claims Filed Over McGill Hall Asbestos
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Goodyear Tire Records $166MM Liability at Dec. 31

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Had $1.6-Bil. Bendix Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Had $2.5-Bil. Liabilities at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Records $891MM NARCO Liabilities
ASBESTOS UPDATE: House Flipper Fined $800K for Asbestos Violations
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ingersoll-Rand Has $612MM Liabilities at Dec. 31

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ingersoll-Rand Still Defends Claims at Dec. 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Judge Dismisses Mantovi Asbestos Exposure Suit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Judge Remands Shanahan Litigation to State Court
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Awards $18.5MM for Fatal Asbestos Exposure
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lawyers Rally Parents of Montana Preschoolers

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Natives Disproportionately Affected by Asbestos
ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Evidence in Philadelphia Asbestos Talc Trial
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sen. Murray Probing J&J About Asbestos Talc
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sri Lanka Talc Imports Halted Pending Tests
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toy's Action Against Ford Motor Dismissed

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wycombe Hospital Refuses to Reveal Asbestos Risks


                            *********

68TH ST CAFE: Refuses to Pay Overtime Under FLSA, Guanan Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
LUIS GUANAN, MOISES MORALES, and MARLON NIETO, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly situated v. 68TH ST. CAFE INC.,
d/b/a SOLE BISTRO ITALIANO and d/b/a LUCE RESTAURANT AND ENOTECA,
DRITON MILA, RAMAZAN MILA, and GAZMEND HODZIC, Case No.
1:19-cv-01426 (S.D.N.Y., February 14, 2019), accuses the Defendants
of failing and refusing to pay the Plaintiffs for all hours worked,
failing and refusing to pay the Fair Labor Standards Act-required
overtime wage for all hours worked over 40 hours in a workweek, and
allowing non-tipped employees to share in their tips.

68th Street Cafe Inc. is a New York Corporation that owns and
operates Sole Italian Bistro located at 2014 Broadway and owned and
operated its predecessor in the same location, Luce Restaurant and
Enoteca.

Sole is owned, and its operations are conducted, by the Individual
Defendants.  The Restaurant's liquor license is in the name of all
three Defendant owners.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are 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


AICOM SOLUTIONS: Second Cir. Appeal Filed in Shimson Wexler Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Law Offices of Shimson Wexler, P.C., filed an appeal from
a District Court order entered on January 7, 2019, in its lawsuit
styled Law Offices of Shimson Wexler v. AICOM Solutions LLC, et
al., Case No. 17-cv-8573, in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York (New York City).

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
(assigned Case No. 1:17-cv-01084) was transferred on November 6,
2017, from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Georgia to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New
York.

The case arises out of the Defendants' practice of sending
advertisements by facsimile in violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.

The appellate case is captioned as Law Offices of Shimson Wexler v.
AICOM Solutions LLC, et al., Case No. 19-307, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellant Law Offices of Shimson Wexler, P.C., a New York
professional company, individually and as the representative of a
class of similarly-situated persons, is represented by:

          Phillip A. Bock, Esq.
          BOCK & HATCH, LLC
          134 North La Salle Street
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 658-5500
          E-mail: phil@bockhatchllc.com

Defendants-Appellees Time Warner Cable LLC, DBA Spectrum; Time
Warner Cable Media LLC; Charter Communications, Inc.; and Charter
Communications Operating, LLC, are represented by:

          Catrina Celeste Creswell, Esq.
          MILLER & MARTIN PLLC
          Volunteer Building
          832 Georgia Avenue
          Chattanooga, TN 37402
          Telephone: (423) 756-6600
          E-mail: ccreswell@millermartin.com


ALTITUDE OF MARLBOROUGH: Leary Sues to Recover Sick Time Pay
------------------------------------------------------------
Cam Leary, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. Altitude of Marlborough, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
19-272, filed in the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts on January 28, 2019, seeks an accounting and
retroactive crediting of all sick time owed, payment for sick time
taken, statutorily mandated treble damages, attorneys' fees and
costs, and all permissible legal interest for violation of the
Massachusetts Earned Sick Time Law.

Altitude of Marlborough operates an indoor trampoline park located
in Marlborough MA where Leary currently works. He claims that
Altitude does not pay its employees for time taken off work due to
sickness. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Adam J. Shafran, Esq.
      RUDOLPH FRIEDMANN LLP
      92 State Street Boston, MA 02109
      Tel: (617) 723-7700
      Fax: (617) 227-0313
      Email: ashafran@rflawyers.com


ANADARKO PETROLEUM: Smith Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
Jason Smith, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. Anadarko Petroleum Corporation and Alpha
Services, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 4:19-cv-00589 (S.D. Tex.,
February 20, 2019) is a collective action and lawsuit seeking to
recover unpaid overtime wages from Defendants.

The Defendants violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
("FLSA"), by employing Plaintiff and other similarly situated
nonexempt employees "for a workweek longer than forty hours but
refusing to compensate them for their employment in excess of forty
hours at a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular
rate at which they are or were employed", says the complaint.

Smith is an individual who resides in West Monroe, Louisiana and
who has been employed by Defendants during the last three years.

Anadarko Petroleum Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its
principal place of business in Houston, Harris County, Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Melissa Moore, Esq.
     Curt Hesse, Esq.
     Bridget Davidson, Esq.
     MOORE & ASSOCIATES
     Lyric Center
     440 Louisiana Street, Suite 675
     Houston, TX 77002
     Phone: (713) 222-6775
     Facsimile: (713) 222-6739


APOLLO TRANSPORTATION: Faces Reichman Class Suit in NY State Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Apollo
Transportation, Inc., in the New York Supreme Court, Bronx County
on January 31, 2019.

The case is styled as Pamela Reichman, Miraldo Ponce, Miqueal
Green, Maritza Amador, on behalf of themselves and all other
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Apollo Transportation, Inc., NYC
Flywheels, Inc., Manjeet Kaur, individually, and Amandeeptor Singh
a/k/a Bobby Singh, individually, Defendants, Case No. 30488/2018.

Apollo Transportation currently operates a modern fleet of school
buses fully insured buses, ranging in size from the smaller
29-passenger model, to the more standard 72-passenger model, with
wheel-chair accessible buses available as well.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

   BOUKLAS GAYLORD LLP
   400 Jericho Turnpike #226
   Jericho, NY 11753, USA
   Tel: +1 516-742-4949

The Defendants are represented by:

   Markotsis & Lieberman, PC
   115B Broadway, Ste 2
   Hicksville, NY 11801
   United States
   Tel: (516) 935-2330


ARB KC LLC: Hand TCPA Class Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
---------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action lawsuit captioned J.T. Hand,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ARB
KC, LLC d/b/a ANGEL'S ROCK BAR, Case No. 1816-CV19818, was removed
on February 14, 2019, from the Circuit Court of Jackson County,
Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Missouri.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:19-cv-00108-BCW to the
proceeding.

On July 30, 2018, Plaintiff J.T. Hand filed his Class Action
Petition for Damages.  He alleges that Rock Bar is liable to him
and each putative class member for statutory and regulatory
violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          William Charles Kenney, Esq.
          BILL KENNEY LAW FIRM LLC
          1100 Main Street, Suite 1800
          Kansas City, MO 64105
          Telephone: (816) 842-2455
          E-mail: bkenney@billkenneylaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          W. James Foland, Esq.
          Jacqueline M. Sexton, Esq.
          Zach T. Bowles, Esq.
          FOLAND, WICKENS, ROPER, HOFER & CRAWFORD, P.C.
          1200 Main Street, Suite 2200
          Kansas City, MO 64105
          Telephone: (816) 472-7474
          Facsimile: (816) 472-6262
          E-mail: jfoland@fwpclaw.com
                  jsexton@fwpclaw.com
                  zbowles@fwpclaw.com

               - and -

          Lauri A. Mazzuchetti, Esq.
          KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP
          One Jefferson Road
          Parsippany, NJ 07054
          Telephone: (973) 503-5900
          E-mail: lmazzuchetti@kelleydrye.com


ASHFORD UNIVERSITY: Hawkins Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Stephanie Hawkins and Crystal Coursey, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Ashford
University, LLC and Doe Individuals, inclusive, and each of them,
Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00180, (S.D. Cal., January 25, 2019),
seeks injunctive relief and statutory damages for violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Ashford University is an institution of higher learning who
attempted to contact Plaintiffs using an automatic telephone
dialing system. Plaintiffs did not give their expressed consent to
be contacted using an auto-dialer. Hawkins and Coursey are both on
the national Do-Not-Call Registry. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      John P. Kristensen, Esq.
      KRISTENSEN WEISBERG, LLP
      12450 Beatrice St., Suite 200
      Los Angeles, CA 90066
      Telephone: (310) 507-7924
      Facsimile: (310) 507-7906
      Email: john@kristensenlaw.com

             - and -

      Jarrett Ellzey, Esq.
      W. Craft Hughes, Esq.
      HUGHES ELLZEY, LLP
      Galleria Tower I
      2700 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 1120
      Houston, TX 77056
      Tel: (713) 554-2377
      Fax: (888) 995-3335
      Email: craft@hughesellzey.com
             jarrett@hughesellzey.com


ATHENAHEALTH INC: Crawford Files Securities Class Action in Mass.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Crawford, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated
v. Athenahealth, Inc, et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-10033 (D. Mass.,
January 7, 2019), is brought against the Defendants for violations
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Plaintiff also seeks to enjoin the vote on a proposed
transaction, pursuant to which Athenahealth will be acquired by May
Holding Corp., an affiliate of Veritas Capital and Evergreen Coast
Capital, a subsidiary of Elliott Management Corporation, which owns
approximately 9% of the Company's stock.

On December 21, 2018, Athenahealth filed a Definitive Proxy
Statement on Schedule 14A with the SEC in connection with the
Proposed Transaction. The Proxy Statement, which recommends that
Athenahealth stockholders vote in favor of the Proposed
Transaction, omits or misrepresents material information, asserts
the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a stockholder of the Defendant.

The Defendant Athenahealth is a Delaware corporation with its
principal executive offices located at 311 Arsenal Street,
Watertown, Massachusetts, 02472. Athenahealth partners with
hospital and ambulatory customers to drive clinical and financial
results. Athenahealth offers medical record, revenue cycle, patient
engagement, care coordination, and population health services.
Athenahealth combines insights from its network of more than
120,000 providers and approximately 117 million patients with deep
industry knowledge and perform administrative work at scale. The
Company's common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market
under the ticker symbol "ATHN."

The Individual Defendants are members of Athenahealth's board of
directors. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Mitchell J. Matorin, Esq.
      MATORIN LAW OFFICE, LLC
      18 Grove Street, Suite 5
      Wellesley, MA 02482
      Tel: (781) 453-0100
      E-mail: mmatorin@matorinlaw.com


BEST ONE RESTAURANT: Huang Seeks to Recover OT Under FLSA & NYLL
----------------------------------------------------------------
HONG ZHUO HUANG, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Best One Restaurant Inc. d/b/a Long River, Wang T Wong
a/k/a Hong Tu Huang, Bin Lin Wong, and Anita Wong, Case No.
1:19-cv-00941 (E.D.N.Y., February 15, 2019), alleges that pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, the
Plaintiff and the class members are entitled to recover from the
Defendants: (1) unpaid overtime wages, (2) liquidated damages, (3)
prejudgment and post-judgment interest; and/or (4) attorneys' fees
and costs.

Best One Restaurant Inc., doing business as Long River, is a
domestic business corporation organized under the laws of the state
of New York with a principal business address in West Islip, New
York.

The Company operates a restaurant under the trade name of Long
River located at 351 Union Blvd., Chestnut St. & Beach St., in West
Islip, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Xiaoxi Liu, Esq.
          HANG & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
          136-20 38th Ave., Suite 10G
          Flushing, NY 11354
          Telephone: (718) 353-8588
          Facsimile: (718) 353-6288
          E-mail: xliu@hanglaw.com


BIG HEART: Faces Acquard Action Over Products' False Ad
-------------------------------------------------------
Theresa Acquard and Tom Butler, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Big Heart Pet Brand, Inc., Case No.
6:19-cv-06021 (W.D. N.Y., January 7, 2019), is a consumer
protection and false advertising class action lawsuit against the
Defendant, based on the Defendant's false and misleading
representations regarding a number of its "Nature's Recipe" brand
products.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has falsely and
deceptively labeled and advertised the Products with the following
representations: "All Natural," "All Natural Dog Food," and "All
Natural Cat Food". However, the Products contain non-natural,
artificial, and synthetic ingredients including but not limited to
sodium tripolyphosphate, synthetic vitamins and minerals, citric
acid, and lactic acid, notes the complaint.

The Plaintiff Theresa Acquard is a citizen of New York, residing in
North Java, New York. Approximately every 13 weeks since July, 2015
to October, 2018, Ms. Acquard purchased: Adult Grain Free Chicken,
Sweet Potato & Pumpkin Recipe both in Alden, New York and Java, New
York.

The Plaintiff Tom Butler is a citizen of New York, residing in
Ballston Lake. Between mid-2017 and mid-2018, Mr. Butler purchased
the following Products for his dog: Puppy Chicken Meal & Rice
Recipe, Grain Free Puppy Chicken Sweet Potato & Pumpkin Recipe, and
Grain Free Salmon and Potato Recipe. Mr. Butler purchased the
foregoing Products from a Hannaford market in Malta, New York, and
Price Chopper in Clifton Park, New York.

The Defendant Big Heart Pet Brands, Inc., is a Delaware corporation
with its principal place of business in San Francisco, California.
Defendant, and its agents, formulates, manufactures, labels,
packages, advertises, distributes, and sells the Products
nationwide, including in New York. Big Heart has maintained
substantial distribution, sales, and marketing operations in this
District. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

      Michael R. Reese, Esq.
      REESE LLP
      100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor
      New York, NY 10025
      Tel: (212) 643-0500
      Fax: (212) 253-4272
      E-mail: mreese@reesellp.com

          - and -

      Benjamin Heikali, Esq.
      FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
      10866 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1470
      Los Angeles, CA 90024
      Tel: (424) 256-2884
      Fax: (424) 256-2885
      E-mail: bheikali@faruqilaw.com


BLUE DIAMOND: Hernandez Challenges Mislabeled Wasabi Almonds
------------------------------------------------------------
GILBERT TRAVIS HERNANDEZ, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. BLUE DIAMOND GROWERS, a California corporation, Case
No. 1:19-cv-01467 (S.D.N.Y., February 15, 2019), is a consumer
protection action seeking redress for, and a stop to, the
Defendant's alleged unfair and deceptive practice of advertising
and marketing its "Bold Wasabi & Soy Sauce" almonds.

The wasabi plant is native to Japan, its stem has a unique pungent
flavor and is a distinctive green color.  Wasabi usually
accompanies sushi and sashimi either as a condiment or within the
sushi itself.  Real wasabi products are in high demand and are
generally expensive.

The Defendant has labeled the Product as "wasabi" and purports that
the Product contains authentic wasabi, according to the complaint.
However, in reality, the Plaintiff alleges, the Product does not
contain the wasabi plant at all and so it is not a wasabi food
item, and is flavored by horseradish to imitate the taste of
wasabi.

Blue Diamond Growers is a corporation organized under the laws of
California with its principal executive office located in
Sacramento, California.  The Defendant distributes, manufactures,
and sells the Product.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C.K. Lee, Esq.
          Anne Seelig, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          30 East 39th Street, Second Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 465-1188
          Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
          E-mail: cklee@leelitigation.com
                  anne@leelitigation.com


BLUE MARLIN: Thorne Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act
------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Marlin Boats, 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 others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Blue Marlin Boats, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-01567 (S.D. N.Y., February 19, 2019).

Blue Marlin Boats, Inc. is a boat dealer in Massapequa, New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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




BRAINFM INC: Rivera Files Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against BrainFM, Inc. et al.
The case is styled as Brianna Rivera individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BrainFM, Inc. a
Delaware corporation, Does 1 - 10, Inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
2:19-cv-01217 (C.D. Cal., Feb. 19, 2019).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

BrainFM, Inc. are a collective of musicians, engineers, scientists
and entrepreneurs obsessed with exploring and expanding music's
relationship to the brain.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


CAVALRY PORTFOLIO: Jones Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cavalry Portfolio
Services, LLC. The case is styled as Tanea Jones on behalf of
herself individually and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff
v. Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-01023 (E.D. N.Y., Feb. 20, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.

Cavalry Portfolio Services, LLC provides financial resolution
services. Its services cover various areas, such as collection
account and debt control.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Novlette Rosemarie Kidd, Esq.
     Fagenson & Puglisi
     450 Seventh Avenue, Suite 704
     New York, NY 10123
     Phone: (212) 268-2128
     Fax: (212) 268-2127
     Email: nkidd@fagensonpuglisi.com


CENTO FINE FOODS: Sibrian Files Fraud Class Suit in New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cento Fine Foods,
Inc. The case is styled as Ricardo Sibrian individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Cento Fine
Foods, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-00974 (E.D. N.Y., Feb. 19,
2019).

The nature of suit is stated as Fraud or Truth-In-Lending.

Cento Fine Foods Inc. produces and distributes Italian style food
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Spencer I. Sheehan, Esq.
     Sheehan & Associates, P.C.
     505 Northern Boulevard, Suite 311
     Great Neck, NY 11021
     Phone: (516) 303-0552
     Fax: (516) 234-7800
     Email: spencer@spencersheehan.com


CHAPARRAL BOATS: Thorne Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
----------------------------------------------------------
Chaparral Boats, 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 others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Chaparral Boats, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-01570 (S.D. N.Y., February 19, 2019).

Chaparral Boats is the world's leading manufacturer of quality
fiberglass boats.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


CHRIS CRAFT CORP: Thorne Files Suit under ADA in New York
---------------------------------------------------------
Chris Craft Corporation 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 others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Chris Craft Corporation, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-01568 (S.D. N.Y., February 19, 2019).

Chris-Craft Corporation is an American manufacturer of recreational
powerboats that is based in Sarasota, Florida. Since June 4, 2018,
Chris-Craft has been owned by Winnebago Industries, an American
manufacturer of recreational vehicles.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


CITY TOWEL: Pineda Files Suit Over Missed Meal Periods
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against City Towel & Dust
Service. The case is styled Estefania Pineda and Claudia Salazar,
individually, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. City Towel & Dust Service d/b/a Sunset
Linen and Uniform, a California Corporation and Does 1 to 50
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. CGC19573425 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Francisco Cty., January 31, 2019).

The docket of the lawsuit states the case type as other non exempt
complaints (for failure to provide required meal periods).

City Towel & Dust Service Inc operates as a linen company. The
Company provides uniforms, bedding, towels, table linens, mats, and
healthcare supplies. City Towel & Dust Service offers linens for
the healthcare, restaurant, and hospitality industry.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

   Matthew J. Matern, Esq.
   Matern Law Group
   PC1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200
   Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
   Tel: 310-531-1900
   Fax: 310-531-1901
   Email: www.maternlawgroup.com


CLEAN ENERGY EXPERTS: Bryant Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jovette Bryant and Necole Franklin, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Clean Energy Experts,
LLC and Doe Individuals, inclusive, and each of them, Defendants,
Case No. 19-cv-00460, (S.D. Cal., January 25, 2019), seeks
injunctive relief and statutory damages for violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Clean Energy Experts operates as "Solar Research Group," a company
that sells marketing leads to solar companies. In an effort to
solicit potential customers, they began making telephone calls, en
masse, to consumers across the country. Hawkins and Coursey are
both on the national Do-Not-Call Registry. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      John P. Kristensen, Esq.
      KRISTENSEN WEISBERG, LLP
      12450 Beatrice St., Suite 200
      Los Angeles, CA 90066
      Telephone: (310) 507-7924
      Facsimile: (310) 507-7906
      Email: john@kristensenlaw.com

             - and -

      Jarrett Ellzey, Esq.
      W. Craft Hughes, Esq.
      HUGHES ELLZEY, LLP
      Galleria Tower I
      2700 Post Oak Boulevard, Suite 1120
      Houston, TX 77056
      Tel: (713) 554-2377
      Fax: (888) 995-3335
      Email: craft@hughesellzey.com
             jarrett@hughesellzey.com



CULLISON & GORMAN: Borozny Suit Alleges ADA Violation
-----------------------------------------------------
Cullison & Gorman, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
Austin Borozny, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Cullison & Gorman, Inc. doing business as:
Sandpiper Inn, a Florida corporation, Defendant, Case No.
8:19-cv-00417 (M.D. Fla., February 15, 2019).

Cullison & Gorman, Inc. doing business as: Sandpiper Inn is engaged
in the hotel business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jessica Lynn Kerr, Esq.
   The Advocacy Group, LLC
   200 SE 6th St Ste 504
   Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3424
   Tel: (954) 282-1858
   Fax: (844) 786-3694
   Email: jkerr@advocacypa.com


CUTCO CORPORATION: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cutco Corporation.
The case is styled as Braulio Thorne and On Behalf of All Other
Persons Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. Cutco Corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01577 (S.D. N.Y., Feb. 20, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

Cutco Corporation, formerly Alcas Corporation, is a direct sales
company that sells knives, predominantly through multi-level
marketing. It is the parent company of CUTCO Cutlery Corp., Vector
Marketing, Ka-Bar Knives, and Schilling Forge. Its primary brand is
the name Cutco.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


CVR REFINING: Suit Challenges Buy Out of Public Common Unitholders
------------------------------------------------------------------
FRED FISCHER, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated
former unitholders of CVR REFINING, LP v. CVR REFINING, LP, CVR
ENERGY, INC., CVR REFINING HOLDINGS, LLC, CVR REFINING GP, LLC,
ICAHN ENTERPRISES, L.P., CARL C. ICAHN, SUNGHWAN CHO, JONATHAN
FRATES, DAVID L. LAMP, ANDREW LANGHAM, LOUIS J. PASTOR, KENNETH
SHEA, JON R. WHITNEY, AND GLENN R. ZANDER, Case No. 2019-0110 (Del.
Ch., February 13, 2019), alleges that the Defendants, among other
things, breached the terms of the First Amended and Restated
Agreement of Limited Partnership of CVR Refining, LP, dated as of
January 23, 2013 (the "Partnership Agreement").

This suit challenges the multi-step plan by which Icahn
Enterprises, L.P. ("Icahn"), an investment firm controlled by Carl
Icahn, acting through various entities, weaponized a call right in
the limited partnership agreement of the CVR Refining, LP (the
"Partnership") in order to buy out the Partnership's public common
unitholders on the cheap.

The Partnership is a Delaware master limited partnership ("MLP")
that owns and operates petroleum refining and auxiliary businesses
in the United States.  The Partnership is an oil refiner and
marketer of transportation fuels organized as a limited partnership
under the laws of the state of Delaware and headquartered in Sugar
Land, Texas.

CVR Refining GP, LLC (the "General Partner") is a limited liability
company organized and existing under the laws of the state of
Delaware, and is an indirectly wholly owned subsidiary of CVR
Energy through CVR Holdings.  The General Partner is the general
partner of the Partnership, and has direct responsibility for
conducting the Partnership's business and managing its operations.

CVR Holdings is a limited liability company organized and existing
under the laws of the state of Delaware, and is an indirectly
wholly owned subsidiary of CVR Energy. CVR Holdings owns and
controls the General Partner.

CVR Energy is a corporation organized and existing under the laws
of the state of Delaware.  The Partnership, CVR Holdings, and the
General Partner are now wholly owned subsidiaries of CVR Energy.
CVR Energy controlled the General Partner.

Icahn is a limited partnership organized and existing under the
laws of the state of Delaware.  Icahn either directly or indirectly
controlled the actions of CVR Energy, CVR Holdings, the General
Partner, and, thus, the Partnership.  The Individual Defendants are
directors and officers of one or more of the Corporate
Defendants.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joel Friedlander, Esq.
          Jeffrey Gorris, Esq.
          Christopher P. Quinn, Esq.
          FRIEDLANDER & GORRIS P.A.
          1201 N. Market Street, Suite 2200
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 573-3500
          E-mail: jfriedlander@friedlandergorris.com
                  jgorris@friedlandergorris.com
                  cquinn@friedlandergorris.com

               - and -

          Mark Lebovitch, Esq.
          Adam Wierzbowski, Esq.
          BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
          1251 Avenue of the Americas
          New York, NY 10020
          Telephone: (212) 554-1400
          E-mail: markl@blbglaw.com
                  adam@blbglaw.com

               - and -

          Frank A. Bottini, Jr., Esq.
          BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC.
          7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102
          La Jolla, CA 92037
          Telephone: (858) 914-2001
          E-mail: fbottini@bottinilaw.com


D&R BOATS: Thorne Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against D & R Boats, Inc. The
case is styled as Braulio Thorne and On Behalf of All Other Persons
Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. D & R Boats, Inc., Defendant, Case
No. 1:19-cv-01569 (S.D. N.Y., Feb. 19, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

D & R Boats Inc is a privately held company in Green Brook, NJ,
categorized under Marine Equipment and Supplies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


DARP INC: Eighth Circuit Appeal Filed in Fochtman Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Hendren Plastics, Inc., filed an appeal from a Court
ruling in the lawsuit styled Mark Fochtman, et al. v. DARP, Inc.,
et al., Case No. 5:18-cv-05047-TLB, in the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Arkansas - Fayetteville.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Feb. 18, 2019, the Hon.
Judge Timothy L. Brooks entered an order:

   1. granting separate Plaintiff Corby Shumate's motion to
      withdraw as class representative;

   2. certify a class of:

      "all individuals who were DARP participants at any time
      from Oct. 23, 2014, until the present, and who worked for
      Hendren Plastics, Inc. in the State of Arkansas during
      their time at DARP";

   3. designating Mark Fochtman, Michael Spears, Andrew Daniel,
      Fabian Aguilar, and Sloan Simms as class representatives;

   4. designating Attys. Jerry D. Garner, John Holleman, and
      Timothy A. Steadman as class counsel; and

   5. directing class counsel no later than Feb. 28, 2019 to
      submit a motion for approval of a proposed plan of notice
      and proposed notice forms in accordance with Rule 23(c)(2)
      (B).

The appellate case is captioned as Mark Fochtman, et al. v. DARP,
Inc., et al., Case No. 19-8004, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Respondents Mark Fochtman, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated; Michael Spears; Andrew Daniel,
individually and on behalf of all others; Fabian Aguilar,
individually and on behalf of all others; and Sloan Simms,
individually and on behalf of all others, are represented by:

          Jerry D. Garner, Esq.
          John T. Holleman, Esq.
          Timothy A. Steadman, Esq.
          HOLLEMAN & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
          1008 W. Second Street
          Little Rock, AR 72201
          Telephone: (501) 975-5040
          Facsimile: (501) 975-5043
          E-mail: jerry@johnholleman.net
                  jholleman@johnholleman.net
                  tim@johnholleman.net

Defendant-Petitioner Hendren Plastics, Inc., is represented by:

          Timothy Chad Hutchinson, Esq.
          Laurence Mullins McCredy
          James Robert Renner
          RMP, LLP
          5519 Hackett Road, Suite 300
          Springdale, AR 72762
          Telephone: (479) 443-2705
          E-mail: thutchinson@rmp.law
                  lmccredy@rmpllp.com


DARP INC: Seeks Eighth Circuit Review of Ruling in Fochtman Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant DARP, Inc., filed an appeal from a Court ruling in the
lawsuit styled Mark Fochtman, et al. v. DARP, Inc., et al., Case
No. 5:18-cv-05047-TLB, in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Arkansas - Fayetteville.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Feb. 18, 2019, the Hon.
Judge Timothy L. Brooks entered an order:

   1. granting separate Plaintiff Corby Shumate's motion to
      withdraw as class representative;

   2. certify a class of:

      "all individuals who were DARP participants at any time
      from Oct. 23, 2014, until the present, and who worked for
      Hendren Plastics, Inc. in the State of Arkansas during
      their time at DARP";

   3. designating Mark Fochtman, Michael Spears, Andrew Daniel,
      Fabian Aguilar, and Sloan Simms as class representatives;

   4. designating Attys. Jerry D. Garner, John Holleman, and
      Timothy A. Steadman as class counsel; and

   5. directing class counsel no later than Feb. 28, 2019 to
      submit a motion for approval of a proposed plan of notice
      and proposed notice forms in accordance with Rule 23(c)(2)
      (B).

The appellate case is captioned as Mark Fochtman, et al. v. DARP,
Inc., et al., Case No. 19-8005, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Respondents Mark Fochtman, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated; Michael Spears; Andrew Daniel,
individually and on behalf of all others; Fabian Aguilar,
individually and on behalf of all others; and Sloan Simms,
individually and on behalf of all others, are represented by:

          Jerry D. Garner, Esq.
          John T. Holleman, Esq.
          Timothy A. Steadman, Esq.
          HOLLEMAN & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
          1008 W. Second Street
          Little Rock, AR 72201
          Telephone: (501) 975-5040
          Facsimile: (501) 975-5043
          E-mail: jerry@johnholleman.net
                  jholleman@johnholleman.net
                  tim@johnholleman.net

Defendant-Petitioner DARP, Inc., is represented by:

          William B. Putnam, Esq.
          TAYLOR LAW FIRM
          112 W. Center Street
          P.O. Box 3457
          Fayetteville, AR 72702-0000
          Telephone: (501) 443-5222


DOBBERSTEIN LAW: Fonseca Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection
----------------------------------------------------------
JESSICA FONSECA and JASON COGGON, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. DOBBERSTEIN LAW FIRM, LLC, Case No.
2:19-cv-00235-NJ (E.D. Wisc., February 13, 2019), arises from the
Defendant's alleged illegal practices when attempting to collect an
alleged debt from the Plaintiffs, in violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Dobberstein is a for-profit limited liability company formed under
the laws of the state of Wisconsin with its principal place of
business located in Brookfield, Wisconsin.

Dobberstein regularly engages in the collection of defaulted
consumer debts.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are 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


DUTTON RANCH: Removes Hernandez Labor Suit to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The putative class action lawsuit entitled OMAR HERNANDEZ
HERNANDEZ, and ANTONIO HERNANDEZ SANTIAGO on behalf of themselves
and other aggrieved employees v. DUTTON RANCH CORPORATION, and Does
1 through 40, INCLUSIVE, Case No. MCV 247180, was removed on
February 14, 2019, from the Superior Court in the State of
California for the County of Sonoma to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:19-cv-00817-KAW to the
proceeding.

On December 5, 2018, the Plaintiffs brought the lawsuit pursuant to
the Immigration and Nationality Act alleging violations of
contracts pursuant to the U.S. Department of Labor's H-2A visa
program.  The Plaintiffs allege, in pertinent part, causes of
action for breach of contract, failure to reimburse, waiting time
penalties, unfair or unlawful business practices, and penalties
under the California Labor Code.[BN]

Plaintiff OMAR HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ is represented by:

          Josephine Weinberg, Esq.
          Ann Vicente de Castro, Esq.
          CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE, INC.
          3 Williams Rd.
          Salinas, CA 9350
          Telephone: (831) 757-5221
          Facsimile: (831) 757-6212
          E-mail: jweinberg@crla.org
                  avicente@crla.org

               - and -

          Estella Cicneros, Esq.
          CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE, INC.
          3 747 E. Shields Ave.
          Fresno, CA 93726
          Telephone: (559) 441-8721
          Facsimile: (559) 441-0724
          E-mail: ecisneros@crla.org

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Peter Rukin, Esq.
          Valerie Brender, Esq.
          RUKIN HYLAND & RIGGIN LLP
          1939 Harrison Street, Suite 290
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Telephone: (415) 421-1800
          Facsimile: (415) 421-1700
          E-mail: prukin@rukinhyland.com
                  vbrender@rukinhyland.com

Defendant DUTTON RANCH CORP. is represented by:

          Mollie M. Burks, Esq.
          Nicholas A. Deming, Esq.
          GORDON & REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI LLP
          275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 986-5900
          Facsimile: (415) 986-8054
          E-mail: mburks@gordonrees.com
                  ndeming@grsm.com


EPISCOPAL COMMUNITIES: Sarmenta Files Suit in Ca. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Episcopal Communities
& Services for Seniors, a California corporation. The case is
styled Maria Sarmenta, on behalf of herself, all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Episcopal Communities & Services for
Seniors, a California corporation, ECS Management LLC, a California
limited liability company and Does 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. CGC19573432 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco
Cty., January 31, 2019).

The docket of the lawsuit states the case type as other non exempt
complaints.

Episcopal Communities & Services for Seniors (ECS) provides a
broadspectrum of care and services to foster good health,
fulfillment, and spritual well-being in the lives of older
adults.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Shaun Setareh, Esq.
   Setareh Law Group
   9454 Wilshire Blvd
   Beverly Hills, CA 90212
   Tel: 310.888.7771
   Fax: 310.888.0109


FARFETCH.COM US: Faces Dawson Suit Over Inaccessible Web Site
-------------------------------------------------------------
LESHAWN DAWSON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. FARFETCH.COM US, LLC, Case No. 1:19-cv-01383-GHW
(S.D.N.Y., February 13, 2019), accuses the Defendant of failing to
design, construct, maintain, and operate its Web site --
http://www.farfetch.com/-- to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.

The Defendant is a California Corporation doing business in the
United States, including New York.  The Defendant's Web site, and
its facilities, goods, and services offered thereupon, is a public
accommodation within the definition of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

The Defendant is a clothing company.  The Defendant operates and
distributes its products throughout the United States, including
New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

               - and -

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


FIRST ADVANTAGE: Faces Harris Suit Alleging FCRA Violation
----------------------------------------------------------
GREGORY HARRIS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. FIRST ADVANTAGE BACKGROUND SERVICES CORP., Case No.
2:19-cv-00677 (E.D. Pa., February 15, 2019), is a consumer class
action based upon the Defendant's alleged violation of the Fair
Credit Reporting Act.

Mr. Harris brings the action on behalf of employment applicants
throughout the United States, who have been the subject of alleged
prejudicial, misleading and inaccurate background reports performed
by the Defendant and sold to employers.  He accuses the Defendant
of adopting and maintaining a policy and practice of inaccurately
reporting the grades of criminal infractions, representing that
certain offenses are more serious than they actually are.

First Advantage Background Services Corp. is a business entity that
provides background screening services, decision-making
intelligence, public record reports and operates as a consumer
reporting agency.  First Advantage regularly conducts business in
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and operates a principal place of
business in Atlanta, Georgia.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James A. Francis, Esq.
          John Soumilas, Esq.
          David A. Searles, Esq.
          Lauren KW Brennan, Esq.
          FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.
          1600 Market Street, 25th Floor
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 735-8600
          E-mail: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
                  jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
                  dsearles@consumerlawfirm.com
                  lbrennan@consumerlawfirm.com

               - and -

          Sharon M. Dietrich, Esq.
          Jamie Gullen, Esq.
          COMMUNITY LEGAL SERVICES, INC.
          1424 Chestnut Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: (215) 981-3700
          E-mail: sdietrich@clsphila.org
                  igullen@clsphila.org


FOREST PIZZA: Jimenez Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Gabriel Jimenez and Manuel Martinez, Individually and on Behalf of
All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. Forest Pizza
Restaurant Inc. d/b/a Cafe Milano, Eric & John L.L.C., Eric
Stropoli and John Lucchese, Jointly and Severally, Defendants, Case
No. 1:19-cv-00985 (E.D. N.Y., February 19, 2019) seeks to recover
unpaid minimum wages and overtime premium pay owed to Plaintiffs
pursuant to both the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the New
York Labor Law ("NYLL").

For their work, during the relevant time period, Plaintiffs were
not paid minimum wages for all hours worked and were not paid
overtime premiums for hours worked over 40 in a given workweek,
says the complaint.

Plaintiffs are former servers and kitchen employees at Defendants'
restaurants located in Staten Island, New York.

Forest Pizza Restaurant Inc. is an active New York Corporation
doing business as "Cafe Milano Pizzeria Restaurant", with its
principal place of business at 401 Forest Avenue, Staten Island,
New York 10301.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Brent E. Pelton, Esq.
     Taylor B. Graham, Esq.
     PELTON GRAHAM LLC
     111 Broadway, Suite 1503
     New York, NY 10006
     Phone: (212) 385-9700
     Email: pelton@peltongrham.com
            graham@peltongrham.com
            www.peltongraham.com


FRISCH'S RESTAURANTS: Sued by Hopkins for Not Paying Workers' OT
----------------------------------------------------------------
AMY HOPKINS, On Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated
v. FRISCH'S RESTAURANTS INC., Case No. 1:19-cv-00120-SJD (S.D.
Ohio, February 15, 2019), alleges that the Defendant willfully and
unlawfully failed to pay hourly-paid employees, including Servers,
Cashiers, Cooks, and Dishwashers, for all hours worked, including
hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek.

Ms. Hopkins brings this action to recover monetary damages,
liquidated damages, interest and costs, including reasonable
attorneys' fees under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Indiana
Wage Payment Statute, the Kentucky Wage and Hour Law, and the
common law of Indiana and Kentucky.

Frisch's is an Ohio Corporation headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio.
The Company operates full service family style restaurants under
the "Frisch's Big Boy" name in the United States, including various
regions of Ohio, Kentucky, and Indiana.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
          Trent Taylor, Esq.
          Jessica R. Doogan, Esq.
          BARKAN MEIZLISH DEROSE WENTZ MCINERNEY PEIFER, LLP
          250 E. Broad Street, 10th Floor
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (800) 274-5297
          Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
          E-mail: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
                  ttaylor@barkanmeizlish.com
                  jdoogan@barkanmeizlish.com

               - and -

          Nicholas R. Conlon, Esq.
          Jason T. Brown, Esq.
          BROWN, LLC
          111 Town Square Place, Suite 400
          Jersey City, NJ 07310
          Telephone: (877) 561-0000
          Facsimile: (855) 582-5297
          E-mail: nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com
                  jtb@jtblawgroup.com


GROCERY DELIVERY: Faces Dawson Action Alleging ADA Violation
------------------------------------------------------------
Grocery Delivery E-Services USA Inc. is facing a class action
lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The
case is styled Leshawn Dawson, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Grocery Delivery E-Services USA
Inc. doing business as: Hello Fresh, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-01490 (S.D. N.Y., February 17, 2019).

Grocery Delivery E-Services USA INC., doing business as HelloFresh,
provides online food delivery services. It delivers pre-portioned
and planned meals. The company was founded in 2011 and is based in
New York, New York. Grocery Delivery E-Services USA INC. operates
as a subsidiary of HelloFresh SE.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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



HAL LEONARD: Garey Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hal Leonard LLC. The
case is styled as Kevin Garey on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Hal Leonard LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 1:19-cv-01916 (S.D. N.Y., Feb. 28, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

Hal Leonard LLC operates as a music publishing company. The Company
offers publications in the areas of piano song books and sheet
music, guitar, bass, folk instruments, band, jazz, drums and
percussions, educational magazines, and orchestra. Hal Leonard
serves customers worldwide.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jonathan Shalom, Esq.
     Shalom Law, PLLC
     124-04 Metropolitan Avenue
     Kew Gardens, NY 11374
     Phone: (516) 807-1748
     Email: jshalom@jonathanshalomlaw.com


HARRY'S USA: Dawson Alleges Website Not Blind-accessible
--------------------------------------------------------
LESHAWN DAWSON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. HARRY'S USA, INC., Case No. 1:19-cv-01431-JPO
(S.D.N.Y., February 14, 2019), alleges that the Defendant's Web
site -- http://www.harrys.com/-- is not equally accessible to the
Plaintiff and other blind and visually-impaired consumers, in
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Harry's USA, Inc., is a Delaware Corporation doing business in the
United States, including New York.  The Company operates and
distributes its products throughout the United States, including
New York

Harry's is an online manufacturer and retailer of shaving
equipment, and owns and operates the Web site.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

               - and -

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


HILL'S PET: Bauer Files Suit Over Recalled Dog Food
----------------------------------------------------
Ann Bauer, Jill Cole, Forrest Cleveland, Yasser Daoudi, Karen
Guinen, Wendy Henry, Kimberly Mull, Lorie Pritchard, Lyn Shanley,
Donna Lee Soltis, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-00908 (N.D. Cal., February 20, 2019) is
brought on behalf of Plaintiffs and other similarly situated
individuals who purchased the Defendant's recalled products.
Plaintiffs seek relief under the consumer protection laws of
California, Florida, Iowa, Michigan, New York, Ohio, and
Pennsylvania.

On January 31, 2019, Defendant recalled select canned dog food
products because the products contained excessive amounts of
vitamin D. Canine consumption of excessive amounts of vitamin D can
lead to serious health issues. Plaintiffs purchased Recalled
Products for their dogs and fed the Recalled Products to their
dogs, believing that the Recalled Products were nutritious, safe,
and fit for canine consumption.

The Defendant's unfair or deceptive acts or practices were likely
to, and did in fact, deceive reasonable consumers, including
Plaintiffs about the true nutritional content, quality and safety
of the Recalled Products. The Defendant intentionally and knowingly
misrepresented material facts regarding the Recalled Products with
the intent to mislead Plaintiff, says the complaint.

Plaintiffs purchased Recalled Products for their pets.

Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc. is a large-scale manufacturer of pet
nutrition products, including dog and cat food.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Kathryn Y. Schubert, Esq.
     Robert C. Schubert, Esq.
     Willem F. Jonckheer, Esq.
     Kathryn Y. Schubert, Esq.
     SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP
     Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650
     San Francisco, CA 94111
     Phone: (415) 788-4220
     Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
     Email: rschubert@sjk.law
            wjonckheer@sjk.law
            kschubert@sjk.law


HP INC: Kiler Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act in New York
------------------------------------------------------------
HP Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled Marion Kiler,
on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff
v. HP Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00917 (E.D. N.Y., February
15, 2019).

The Hewlett-Packard Company or Hewlett-Packard was an American
multinational information technology company headquartered in Palo
Alto, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   C.K. Lee, Esq.
   Lee Litigation Group, PLLC
   30 East 39th Street
   2nd floor
   New York, NY 10016
   Tel: (212) 465-1188
   Fax: (212) 465-1181
   Email: cklee@leelitigation.com


II-VI INCORPORATED: Stabile Seeks to Halt Merger Deal
------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Stabile, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. II-VI Incorporated, Vincent D. Mattera,
Jr., Mary Jane Raymond, Francis J. Kramer, Joseph J. Corasanti,
Enrico Digirolamo, Marc Y. E. Pelaez, Shaker Sadasivam, William
Schromm and Howard H. Xia, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00062 (W.D.
Pa., January 21, 2019), seeks to enjoin defendants and all persons
acting in concert with them from proceeding with, consummating or
closing the proposed merger of Finisar, II-VI Incorporated and
Mutation Merger Sub Inc.; rescinding it in the event defendants
consummate the merger; as well as rescissory damages, costs of this
action, including reasonable allowance for plaintiff's attorneys'
and experts' fees and such other and further relief under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Under the terms of the merger agreement, Finisar's stockholders
will receive, on a pro-rated basis, $15.60 per share in cash and
0.2218 times the shares of II-VI common stock, valued at $10.40 per
share based on the closing price of II-VI's common stock of $46.88
on November 8, 2018. The transaction values Finisar at $26.00 per
share, or approximately $3.2 billion in equity value and represents
a premium of 37.7% to Finisar’s closing price on November 8,
2018. Finisar shareholders would own approximately 31% of the
combined company. Upon completion of the Merger, Finisar common
stock no longer will be publicly traded.

Finisar provides components and subsystems to networking equipment
manufacturers, data center operators, telecom service providers,
consumer electronics and automotive companies.

According to the complaint, the merger proxy statement failed to
provide any of the company's valuation analyses prepared by its
financial advisor, Barclays Capital Inc., in support of their
fairness opinion and the potential conflicts of interest faced by
the Board during the sales process. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alfred G. Yates, Jr.
      Gerald L. Rutledge, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF ALFRED G. YATES, JR., P.C.
      300 Mt. Lebanon Boulevard, Suite 206-B
      Pittsburgh, PA 15234-1507
      Telephone: (412) 391-5164
      Facsimile: (412) 471-1033
      Email: yateslaw@aol.com

             - and -

      D. Seamus Kaskela, Esq.
      KASKELA LAW LLC
      201 King of Prussia Road, Suite 650
      Radnor, PA 19087
      Tel: (888) 715–1740
      Email: skaskela@kaskelalaw.com


IRONCLAD ENERGY: Hines Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------
Dexter Hines, Nick Noles, Jeremy Martin, Joseph Smith, and Reginald
Vanzandt, Each Individually and on behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiffs, v. Ironclad Energy, LLC, James C. Donnan, and
Steven Cloy Gantt, Defendants, Case No. 5:19-cv-00155 (W.D. Tex.,
February 19, 2019) is an action under the Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA")

Plaintiffs seek for declaratory judgment, monetary damages,
liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and costs, including
reasonable attorneys' fees as a result of the Defendants' failure
to pay Plaintiffs and other hourly oilfield employees overtime
compensation for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week,
says the complaint.

Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants within the 3 years
preceding the filing of this Original Complaint.

Ironclad Energy, LLC is a domestic limited liability company,
licensed to do business in the State of Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

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


JACK RILEY INVESTMENTS: Garey Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Jack Riley
Investments, LLC. The case is styled as Kevin Garey on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Jack Riley
Investments, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01912 (S.D. N.Y.,
Feb. 28, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

Jack Riley Investments LLC is located in Bowling Green, KY. Jack
Riley Investments LLC industry is listed as Investor.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jonathan Shalom, Esq.
     Shalom Law, PLLC
     124-04 Metropolitan Avenue
     Kew Gardens, NY 11374
     Phone: (516) 807-1748
     Email: jshalom@jonathanshalomlaw.com


JOE & THE JUICE: Nguyen Sues Over Missed Meal Periods
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Joe & The Juice US
Holdings, Inc. The case is styled David Nguyen, an individual, and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Joe & The
Juice US Holdings, Inc. a California Corporation, Joe & The Juice
New York LLC a New York limited liability corporation and Does 1 to
50, Defendants, Case No. CGC19573445 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Francisco Cty., January 31, 2019).

The docket of the lawsuit states the case type as other non exempt
complaints (for failure to provide required meal periods).

JOE & THE JUICE A/S franchises and operates a juice bar chain. The
company also offers shakes, handmeals, shots, sandwich, and coffee.
It operates in Northern Europe including Scandinavia, Germany, and
the United Kingdom. JOE & THE JUICE A/S was incorporated in 2002
and is based in Copenhagen, Denmark. JOE & THE JUICE A/S operates
as a subsidiary of Joe & The Juice Holding A/S.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

   Matthew J. Matern, Esq.
   Matern Law Group
   PC1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200
   Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
   Tel: 310-531-1900
   Fax: 310-531-1901
   Email: www.maternlawgroup.com



JOHN FLUEVOG: Dawson Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
-------------------------------------------------------
John Fluevog Shoes Ltd. is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
Leshawn Dawson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. John Fluevog Shoes Ltd., Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-01494 (S.D. N.Y., February 17, 2019).

John Fluevog Shoes Ltd. designs and creates unique boots, sandals,
formal, and casual shoes for men and women.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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



JUICERIE LLC: Rogers Sues Over Inaccessible Entrance and Counters
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ERIC ROGERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. JUICERIE LLC d/b/a THE BUTCHER'S DAUGHTER, Case No.
1:19-cv-01396-JMF (S.D.N.Y., February 13, 2019), is brought over
alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the
New York State Human Rights Law.

Among other things, the Plaintiff, a paraplegic who uses a
wheelchair for mobility, alleges that the Defendant has an
inaccessible main and only entrance due to a step in violation of
the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines, as
well as inaccessible self-service and counter shelves in violation
of the ADAAG.

Juicerie LLC, doing business as The Butcher's Daughter, is a
domestic limited liability company.  The Butcher's Daughter is a
juice bar and cafe.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bradly G. Marks, Esq.
          THE MARKS LAW FIRM, PC
          175 Varick Street, 3rd Floor
          New York, NY 10014
          Telephone: (646) 770-3775
          Facsimile: (646) 770-2639
          E-mail: brad@markslawpc.com


LAMPS PLUS INC: Chen Discount Row Removed to W.D. Wash.
-------------------------------------------------------
Weimin Chen, for himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Lamps Plus, Inc. and Does 1-20, inclusive, Defendant,
Case No. 19-2-00381-2, filed in the Superior Court of Washington
for King County on January 4, 2019, was removed to the United
States District Court for the Western District of Washington at
Seattle on January 28, 2019, under Case No. 19-cv-00119.

Chen's original complaint alleges that Lamps Plus manipulated its
pricing to seemingly create an impression of a discount.  The
complaint seeks damages as well as disgorgement or restitution,
including all revenues, profits derived from unjust enrichment.

Defendant cites Chen's residency in King County WA while Lamps Plus
is a California corporation as justification for removal on the
ground of minimal diversity. [BN]

Chen is represented by:

     Daniel M. Hattis, Esq.
     Che Corrington, Esq.
     HATTIS & LUKACS 400 108TH Avenue, Suite 500
     Bellevue, WA 98004
     Tel: (425) 233-8650
     Fax: (425) 412-7171
     Email: dan@hattislaw.com
            che@hattislaw.com
     Website: www.hattislaw.com

Lamps Plus is represented by:

     Robert J. Guite, Esq.
     SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER &HAMPTON LLP
     Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor
     San Francisco, CA 94111
     Tel: (415) 434-9100
     Fax: (415) 434-3947



MARINER'S COVE: Bishop Files ADA Class Action in New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mariner's Cove
Marine, Inc. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop and On Behalf of
All Other Persons Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. Mariner's Cove
Marine, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01603 (S.D. N.Y., Feb.
20, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

Mariner's Cove Marine features a full-service marina, sales,
service, and rental facility.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


MARLEY SPOON: Dawson Asserts Disabilities Act Breach
----------------------------------------------------
Marley Spoon Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant
to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled Leshawn
Dawson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Marley Spoon Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01492
(S.D. N.Y., February 17, 2019).

Marley Spoon offers meal delivery services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: Benwitz Sues Over Compromised Customer Data
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Adam Benwitz, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. Marriott International, Inc. and Starwood
Hotels & Resorts, Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00565 (N.D. Ill.,
January 28, 2019), seeks actual, statutory, punitive, exemplary
and/or multiple damages, disgorgement, restitution, preliminary or
other equitable or declaratory relief, prejudgment and
post-judgment interest, reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and
expenses and such other and favorable relief resulting from
negligence and breach of contract.

Marriott's Starwood guest reservation database suffered a massive
security breach that began in or around 2014, compromising personal
and financial information belonging to up to 500 million
customers.

Marriott operates Starwood Hotels and Resorts Worldwide. Benwitz
used the Starwood Reservation to book a room at Marriot, Sheraton
and Starwood properties. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Todd A. Smith, Esq.
     Brian LaCien, Esq.
     POWER ROGERS & SMITH, P.C.
     70 West Madison St., 55th Floor
     Chicago, IL 6060
     Tel: (312) 236-9381
     Email: tsmith@prslaw.com
            blacien@prslaw.com


MASTERCARD: Ombudsman Wants Consumer Class Action to Proceed
------------------------------------------------------------
Law360 reports that Britain's former financial ombudsman asked a
London appeals court on Feb. 5 to allow a multibillion-pound
lawsuit involving potentially millions of claimants to go ahead
against Mastercard Inc. over credit card charges. [GN]


MDL 2492: Bartos v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A case, John Bartos, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00290 (Filed Jan. 25,
2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb 19, 2019. The
Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00971 to
the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of student-athletes.

The Bartos case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re:
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION
INJURY LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013.
These actions seek medical monitoring for putative classes of
former student athletes at NCAA-member schools who allege they
suffered concussions. The Plaintiffs allege that the NCAA concealed
information about the risks of the long-term effects of concussion
injuries. Opponents to centralization argue, inter alia, that (1)
the putative classes and claims alleged in these actions do not
sufficiently overlap; and (2) given the small number of actions
pending, alternatives to centralization are preferable. Opponents'
arguments, while persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first
filed, are less compelling now given the current state of the
litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the these
actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient
conduct of this litigation. These actions share factual questions
relating to allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries
sustained while playing sports at NCAA-member institutions,
including damages resulting from the permanent long-term effects of
concussions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery;
prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to
class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties,
their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is
Hon. Judge. John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MDL 2492: Butler v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A case, Quinton Butler, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No.  1:19-cv-00304 (Filed Jan. 25,
2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb 19, 2019. The
Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00981 to
the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of student-athletes.

The Butler case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re:
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION
INJURY LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013.
These actions seek medical monitoring for putative classes of
former student athletes at NCAA-member schools who allege they
suffered concussions. The Plaintiffs allege that the NCAA concealed
information about the risks of the long-term effects of concussion
injuries. Opponents to centralization argue, inter alia, that (1)
the putative classes and claims alleged in these actions do not
sufficiently overlap; and (2) given the small number of actions
pending, alternatives to centralization are preferable. Opponents'
arguments, while persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first
filed, are less compelling now given the current state of the
litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the these
actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient
conduct of this litigation. These actions share factual questions
relating to allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries
sustained while playing sports at NCAA-member institutions,
including damages resulting from the permanent long-term effects of
concussions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery;
prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to
class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties,
their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is
Hon. Judge. John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MDL 2492: Cooke v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
----------------------------------------------------------------
A case, CLIFFORD COOKE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00268 (Filed Jan. 25,
2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb 19, 2019. The
Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00958 to
the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of generations of
Missouri University of Science and Technology student-athletes.

The Cooke case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re:
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION
INJURY LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013.
These actions seek medical monitoring for putative classes of
former student athletes at NCAA-member schools who allege they
suffered concussions. The Plaintiffs allege that the NCAA concealed
information about the risks of the long-term effects of concussion
injuries. Opponents to centralization argue, inter alia, that (1)
the putative classes and claims alleged in these actions do not
sufficiently overlap; and (2) given the small number of actions
pending, alternatives to centralization are preferable. Opponents'
arguments, while persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first
filed, are less compelling now given the current state of the
litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the these
actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient
conduct of this litigation. These actions share factual questions
relating to allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries
sustained while playing sports at NCAA-member institutions,
including damages resulting from the permanent long-term effects of
concussions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery;
prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to
class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties,
their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is
Hon. Judge John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MDL 2492: Crow v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
---------------------------------------------------------------
A case, ANTONIO LASHAUN CROW, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE
ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-256 (Filed
Jan. 25, 2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb. 19, 2019. The
Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00949 to
the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of generations of
Louisiana Tech University ("LTU") student-athletes

The Crow case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re: NATIONAL
COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION INJURY
LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United States
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013. These
actions seek medical monitoring for putative classes of former
student athletes at NCAA-member schools who allege they suffered
concussions. The Plaintiffs allege that the NCAA concealed
information about the risks of the long-term effects of concussion
injuries. Opponents to centralization argue, inter alia, that (1)
the putative classes and claims alleged in these actions do not
sufficiently overlap; and (2) given the small number of actions
pending, alternatives to centralization are preferable. Opponents'
arguments, while persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first
filed, are less compelling now given the current state of the
litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the these
actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient
conduct of this litigation. These actions share factual questions
relating to allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries
sustained while playing sports at NCAA-member institutions,
including damages resulting from the permanent long-term effects of
concussions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery;
prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to
class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties,
their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is
Hon. Judge John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MDL 2492: Dziuk v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
----------------------------------------------------------------
A case, DUSTIN DZIUK, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00278 (Filed Jan. 25,
2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb 19, 2019. The
Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00963 to
the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of student-athletes.

The Dziuk case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re:
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION
INJURY LITIGATION. The MDL was created by Order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013.
These actions seek medical monitoring for putative classes of
former student athletes at NCAA-member schools who allege they
suffered concussions. The Plaintiffs allege that the NCAA concealed
information about the risks of the long-term effects of concussion
injuries. Opponents to centralization argue, inter alia, that (1)
the putative classes and claims alleged in these actions do not
sufficiently overlap; and (2) given the small number of actions
pending, alternatives to centralization are preferable. Opponents'
arguments, while persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first
filed, are less compelling now given the current state of the
litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the these
actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient
conduct of this litigation. These actions share factual questions
relating to allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries
sustained while playing sports at NCAA-member institutions,
including damages resulting from the permanent long-term effects of
concussions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery;
prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to
class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties,
their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is
Hon. Judge. John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MDL 2492: Ellis v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
----------------------------------------------------------------
A case, KAI ELLIS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00296 (Filed Jan. 25,
2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb. 19, 2019. The
Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00975 to
the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of student-athletes.

The Ellis case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re:
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION
INJURY LITIGATION, Master Docket 13-C-9116. The MDL was created by
Order of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013. These actions seek medical monitoring
for putative classes of former student athletes at NCAA-member
schools who allege they suffered concussions. The Plaintiffs allege
that the NCAA concealed information about the risks of the
long-term effects of concussion injuries. Opponents to
centralization argue, inter alia, that (1) the putative classes and
claims alleged in these actions do not sufficiently overlap; and
(2) given the small number of actions pending, alternatives to
centralization are preferable. Opponents' arguments, while
persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first filed, are less
compelling now given the current state of the litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the these
actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient
conduct of this litigation. These actions share factual questions
relating to allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries
sustained while playing sports at NCAA-member institutions,
including damages resulting from the permanent long-term effects of
concussions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery;
prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to
class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties,
their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is
Hon. Judge. John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MDL 2492: Green v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
----------------------------------------------------------------
A case, ADRIAN GREEN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC
ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-252 (Filed Jan. 25,
2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb 19, 2019. The
Illinois District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00945 to
the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of generations of
University of North Alabama ("UNA") student-athletes.

The Green case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re:
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION
INJURY LITIGATION, Master Docket 13-C-9116. The MDL was created by
Order of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013. These actions seek medical monitoring
for putative classes of former student athletes at NCAA-member
schools who allege they suffered concussions. The Plaintiffs allege
that the NCAA concealed information about the risks of the
long-term effects of concussion injuries. Opponents to
centralization argue, inter alia, that (1) the putative classes and
claims alleged in these actions do not sufficiently overlap; and
(2) given the small number of actions pending, alternatives to
centralization are preferable. Opponents' arguments, while
persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first filed, are less
compelling now given the current state of the litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the these
actions involve common questions of fact, and that centralization
in the Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of
the parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient
conduct of this litigation. These actions share factual questions
relating to allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries
sustained while playing sports at NCAA-member institutions,
including damages resulting from the permanent long-term effects of
concussions. Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery;
prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to
class certification; and conserve the resources of the parties,
their counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is
Hon. Judge. John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MDL 2492: Houghton v. NCAA over Health & Safety Issues Consolidated
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A case, CHRISTOPHER HOUGHTON, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE
ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION, the Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-262 (Filed
Jan. 25, 2019), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago) on Feb 19, 2019. The
Chicago District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00953 to the
proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings this class action complaint against NCAA to
obtain redress for injuries sustained a result of Defendant's
reckless disregard for the health and safety of generations of
University of North Carolina, Pembroke ("UNC Pembroke")
student-athletes.

The Houghton case is being consolidated with MDL No. 2492, Re:
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION STUDENT-ATHLETE CONCUSSION
INJURY LITIGATION, Master Docket 13-C-9916. The MDL was created by
Order of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation on Dec. 18, 2013. These actions seek medical monitoring
for putative classes of former student athletes at NCAA-member
schools who allege they suffered concussions. The Plaintiffs allege
that the NCAA concealed information about the risks of the
long-term effects of concussion injuries. Opponents to
centralization argue, inter alia, that (1) the putative classes and
claims alleged in these actions do not sufficiently overlap; and
(2) given the small number of actions pending, alternatives to
centralization are preferable. Opponents' arguments, while
persuasive when the Section 1407 motion was first filed, are less
compelling now given the current state of the litigation.

Since the motion for centralization was filed, an additional eight
related actions have been filed, most alleging overlapping putative
classes of former football players at NCAA-member schools. The
Northern District of Illinois Arrington action involves
student-athletes who participated in additional sports, and the
putative class alleged in that action is more limited in scope.
Most of the actions now pending, however, involve nearly completely
overlapping putative classes and claims. Moreover, the Panel is
persuaded that the overlap between Arrington and the remaining
actions is sufficient to warrant centralization. Regardless of the
scope of the putative classes alleged, all actions share common
factual questions concerning the NCAA's knowledge of the risks of
concussions in football players and its policies governing the
protection of players from such injuries. Plaintiffs in all actions
seek medical monitoring for putative class members.

In its Dec. 18, 2013 Order, the MDL Panel found that the  actions
involve common questions of fact, and that centralization in the
Northern District of Illinois will serve the convenience of the
parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of
this litigation. These actions share factual questions relating to
allegations against the NCAA stemming from injuries sustained while
playing sports at NCAA-member institutions, including damages
resulting from the permanent long-term effects of concussions.
Centralization will eliminate duplicative discovery; prevent
inconsistent pretrial rulings, including with respect to class
certification; and conserve the resources of the parties, their
counsel, and the judiciary. Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon.
Judge John Z. Lee Paul. The lead case is 1:16-cv-08727.

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

Counsel for the 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

MEDLINE INDUSTRIES: Dominguez Suit Alleges FLSA Violation
---------------------------------------------------------
David Dominguez, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated
v. Medline Industries, Inc., Case No. 4:19-cv-00061 (S.D. Tex.,
January 7, 2019), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Plaintiff alleges that when the Defendant's laborers worked
more than 40 hours in a week, they were not paid any additional
wages for overtime because Defendant misclassified these workers as
independent contractors.

The Plaintiff worked as a warehouse laborer for the Defendant from
April 2018 to October 2018.

The Defendant is the largest privately held manufacturer and
distributor of medical supplies for large healthcare systems,
independent physician practices, and home health patients and their
families. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Mark G. Lazarz, Esq.
      Ricardo J. Prieto, Esq.
      SHELLIST LAZARZ SLOBIN LLP
      11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1515
      Houston, TX 77046
      Tel: (713) 621-2277
      Fax: (713) 621-0993
      E-mail: mlazarz@eeoc.net
              rprieto@eeoc.net


MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Gainey McKenna Files Securities Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Gainey McKenna & Egleston disclosed that a class action lawsuit has
been filed against Micron Technology, Inc. ("Micron" or the
"Company") (NASDAQ: MU) in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of those who purchased or
acquired the securities of Micron between June 22, 2018 and
November 19, 2018, inclusive (the "Class Period"), seeking to
recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal
securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act")
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

The Complaint alleges that Defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the
Chinese State Administration for Market Regulation notified Micron
it was investigating dynamic random-access memory ("DRAM") chip
providers in China for potential collusion and other
anti-competitive conduct; (2) Chinese investigators had found
"massive evidence" of Micron's anti-competitive behavior; (3)
Micron had engaged in a price-fixing conspiracy with Samsung
Electronics and SK Hynix; and (4) as a result, Micron's public
statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant
times.

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired shares during the
Class Period should contact the Firm prior to the March 25, 2019
lead plaintiff motion deadline.  A lead plaintiff is a
representative party acting on behalf of other class members in
directing the litigation.  If you wish to discuss your rights or
interests regarding this class action please:

        Thomas J. McKenna, Esq.
        Gregory M. Egleston, Esq.
        Gainey McKenna & Egleston
        Telephone: (212) 983-1300
        Website: www.gme-law.com  
        E-mail: tjmckenna@gme-law.com
                gegleston@gme-law.com. [GN]


MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Glancy Prongay Files Securities Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") disclosed that it has filed a
class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York, captioned Rojvall v. Micron
Technology, Inc. et al., (Case No. 1:19-cv-00990), on behalf of
persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Micron
Technology, Inc. (NASDAQ: MU) ("Micron" or the "Company")
securities between September 26, 2017 and November 19, 2018,
inclusive (the "Class Period"). Plaintiff pursues claims under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").

Investors are hereby notified that they have until March 25, 2019
to move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff in this action.

On November 19, 2018, the Financial Times reported that Chinese
investigators found "massive evidence" of anti-competitive behavior
by Micron and two other companies. On this news, Micron's share
price fell $2.61 per share, nearly 7%, to close at $36.83 per share
on November 19, 2018, thereby injuring investors.

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout
the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors: (1) that the Company engaged in anti-competitive
behavior, including artificially restricting supply growth of DRAM;
(2) that these anti-competitive efforts were reasonably likely to
lead to regulatory scrutiny; (3) that the Company's
anti-competitive efforts artificially boosted its operating
metrics; (4) that, as a result, the Company's financial
performance, including revenue, was overstated; and (5) that, as a
result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

Follow us for updates on Twitter: twitter.com/GPM_LLP.

If you purchased Micron securities during the Class Period, you may
move the Court no later than March 25, 2019 to ask the Court to
appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you need
not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your
choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class.
If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any
questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests
with respect to these matters please :

         Lesley Portnoy,Esq.
         Glancy Prongay and Murray LLP
         1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
         Los Angeles, California 90067
         Website: www.glancylaw.com
         Email: lportnoy@glancylaw.com
                shareholders@glancylaw.com [GN]


MOBILE AUTO CONCEPTS: Liu Files Class Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mobile Auto Concepts
Inc. et al. The case is styled as Tony Liu individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Mobile Auto
Concepts Inc., Does 1 to 100, Defendants, Case No. CGC19573837
(Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., Feb. 19, 2019).

The case type is stated as "Other Non-Exempt Complaints".

MobileAuto Concepts Inc. provides mobile fleet management services
covering Northern California based in the San Francisco Bay
Area.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Scott E. Cole, Esq.
     Scott Cole and Associates
     1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor,
     Oakland, CA 94612
     Tel: (510) 891-9800
     Fax: (510) 891-7030
     Email: info@scalaw.com

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Allen Asserts Negligence Over Injuries
-----------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Allen, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
(NCAA), Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00255 (S.D. Ind., January 25,
2019), seeks economic, monetary, actual, consequential,
compensatory, and punitive damages, past, present and future
medical expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time and
interest, lost future earnings, litigation and attorney fees,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest, injunctive and/or
declaratory relief and such other and further relief resulting from
negligence, fraudulent concealment, breach of express contract,
breach of implied contract, breach of third-party express contract
and unjust enrichment.

Andrew Allen played football at New Mexico Highlands University
from 2001 to 2002. He suffered from numerous concussions, as well
as countless sub-concussive hits as part of routine practice and
gameplay. Allen now suffers from issues including, but not limited
to, depression, emotional instability, loss of impulse control,
loss of inhibition, loss of concentration, ADHD, short-term memory
loss, motor impairment, speech and language impairment, and
suicidal thoughts.

NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal office
located at 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206.
The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that
oversees twenty-three college sports and over 400,000 students who
participate in intercollegiate athletics. Allen alleges NCAA knew
about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions,
concussion-related injuries and sub-concussive injuries that
resulted from playing college football, but did nothing.

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jay Edelson, Esq.
     Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
     EDELSON PC
     350 North LaSalle Street, 13th Floor
     Chicago, IL 60654
     Tel: 312.589.6370
     Fax: 312.589.6378
     Email: jedelson@edelson.com
            brichman@edelson.com

            - and -

     Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
     329 Bryant Street
     San Francisco, CA 94107
     Tel: 415.212.9300
     Fax: 415.373.9435
     Email: rbalabanian@edelson.com

            - and -

     Jeff Raizner, Esq.
     RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
     2402 Dunlavy Street
     Houston, TX 77006
     Tel: 844.456.4823
     Fax: 713.554.9098
     Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Ayles Seeks Damages Over Injuries
------------------------------------------------------
Blake Ayles, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
(NCAA), Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00420 (S.D. Ind., January 28,
2019), seeks economic, monetary, actual, consequential,
compensatory, and punitive damages, past, present and future
medical expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time and
interest, lost future earnings, litigation and attorney fees,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest, injunctive and/or
declaratory relief and such other and further relief resulting from
negligence, fraudulent concealment, breach of express contract,
breach of implied contract, breach of third-party express contract
and unjust enrichment.

Ayles played football at the University of Southern California from
2008 to 2011. He suffered from numerous concussions, as well as
countless sub-concussive hits as part of routine practice and
gameplay. Ayles now suffers from depression, irritability,
short-term memory loss, post-traumatic stress disorder, ADHD,
emotional instability, impulse control problems, loss of
inhibition, loss of concentration and motor impairment.

NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal office
located at 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206.
The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that
oversees twenty-three college sports and over 400,000 students who
participate in intercollegiate athletics. Ayles alleges NCAA knew
about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions,
concussion-related injuries and sub-concussive injuries that
resulted from playing college football, but did nothing.

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jay Edelson, Esq.
     Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
     EDELSON PC
     350 North LaSalle Street, 13th Floor
     Chicago, IL 60654
     Tel: 312.589.6370
     Fax: 312.589.6378
     Email: jedelson@edelson.com
            brichman@edelson.com

            - and -

     Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
     329 Bryant Street
     San Francisco, CA 94107
     Tel: 415.212.9300
     Fax: 415.373.9435
     Email: rbalabanian@edelson.com

            - and -

     Jeff Raizner, Esq.
     RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
     2402 Dunlavy Street
     Houston, TX 77006
     Tel: 844.456.4823
     Fax: 713.554.9098
     Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Benditt Suit Seeks Damages Over Concussions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Russell Benditt II, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. National Collegiate Athletic
Association (NCAA), Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00433 (S.D. Ind.,
January 28, 2019), seeks economic, monetary, actual, consequential,
compensatory, and punitive damages, past, present and future
medical expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time and
interest, lost future earnings, litigation and attorney fees,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest, injunctive and/or
declaratory relief and such other and further relief resulting from
negligence, fraudulent concealment, breach of express contract,
breach of implied contract, breach of third-party express contract
and unjust enrichment.

Benditt played football at the Albright from 1997 to 2001. He
suffered from numerous concussions, as well as countless
sub-concussive hits as part of routine practice and gameplay.
Benditt now suffers from issues including, but not limited to,
migraines, emotional instability, loss of impulse control, loss of
inhibition, loss of concentration, motor impairment, ADHD and
short-term memory loss.

NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal office
located at 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206.
The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that
oversees twenty-three college sports and over 400,000 students who
participate in intercollegiate athletics. Benditt alleges NCAA knew
about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions,
concussion-related injuries and sub-concussive injuries that
resulted from playing college football, but did nothing.

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jay Edelson, Esq.
     Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
     EDELSON PC
     350 North LaSalle Street, 13th Floor
     Chicago, IL 60654
     Tel: 312.589.6370
     Fax: 312.589.6378
     Email: jedelson@edelson.com
            brichman@edelson.com

            - and -

     Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
     329 Bryant Street
     San Francisco, CA 94107
     Tel: 415.212.9300
     Fax: 415.373.9435
     Email: rbalabanian@edelson.com

            - and -

     Jeff Raizner, Esq.
     RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
     2402 Dunlavy Street
     Houston, TX 77006
     Tel: 844.456.4823
     Fax: 713.554.9098
     Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Booker Hits Negligence Over Head Injuries
--------------------------------------------------------------
Simeon Booker III, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. National Collegiate Athletic
Association (NCAA) and Cornell University, Defendants, Case No.
19-cv-00338 (S.D. Ind., January 25, 2019), seeks economic,
monetary, actual, consequential, compensatory, and punitive
damages, past, present and future medical expenses, other out of
pocket expenses, lost time and interest, lost future earnings,
litigation and attorney fees, prejudgment and post-judgment
interest, injunctive and/or declaratory relief and such other and
further relief resulting from negligence, fraudulent concealment,
breach of express contract, breach of implied contract, breach of
third-party express contract and unjust enrichment.

Booker played football at Cornell University from 1970 to 1972. He
suffered from numerous concussions, as well as countless
sub-concussive hits as part of routine practice and gameplay. Allen
now suffers from issues including, but not limited to, memory loss,
loss of concentration, loss of impulse control, loss of inhibition,
vision impairment and motor impairment.

NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal office
located at 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206.
The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that
oversees twenty-three college sports and over 400,000 students who
participate in intercollegiate athletics. Booker alleges NCAA knew
about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions,
concussion-related injuries and sub-concussive injuries that
resulted from playing college football, but did nothing.

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jay Edelson, Esq.
     Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
     EDELSON PC
     350 North LaSalle Street, 13th Floor
     Chicago, IL 60654
     Tel: 312.589.6370
     Fax: 312.589.6378
     Email: jedelson@edelson.com
            brichman@edelson.com

            - and -

     Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
     329 Bryant Street
     San Francisco, CA 94107
     Tel: 415.212.9300
     Fax: 415.373.9435
     Email: rbalabanian@edelson.com

            - and -

     Jeff Raizner, Esq.
     RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
     2402 Dunlavy Street
     Houston, TX 77006
     Tel: 844.456.4823
     Fax: 713.554.9098
     Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Brown Hits Negligence Over Athlete's Injuries
------------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip Brown, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. National Collegiate Athletic Association
(NCAA), Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00430 (S.D. Ind., January 28,
2019), seeks economic, monetary, actual, consequential,
compensatory, and punitive damages, past, present and future
medical expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time and
interest, lost future earnings, litigation and attorney fees,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest, injunctive and/or
declaratory relief and such other and further relief resulting from
negligence, fraudulent concealment, breach of express contract,
breach of implied contract, breach of third-party express contract
and unjust enrichment.

Philip Brown played football at the University of Virginia from
2004 to 2005. He suffered from numerous concussions, as well as
countless sub-concussive hits as part of routine practice and
gameplay. Brown now suffers from depression, headaches, loss of
impulse control, loss of inhibition, loss of concentration, memory
loss, speech and language impairment and suicidal thoughts.

NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal office
located at 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206.
The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that
oversees twenty-three college sports and over 400,000 students who
participate in intercollegiate athletics. Brown alleges NCAA knew
about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions,
concussion-related injuries and sub-concussive injuries that
resulted from playing college football, but did nothing.

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jay Edelson, Esq.
     Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
     EDELSON PC
     350 North LaSalle Street, 13th Floor
     Chicago, IL 60654
     Tel: 312.589.6370
     Fax: 312.589.6378
     Email: jedelson@edelson.com
            brichman@edelson.com

            - and -

     Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
     329 Bryant Street
     San Francisco, CA 94107
     Tel: 415.212.9300
     Fax: 415.373.9435
     Email: rbalabanian@edelson.com

            - and -

     Jeff Raizner, Esq.
     RAIZNER SLANIA LLP
     2402 Dunlavy Street
     Houston, TX 77006
     Tel: 844.456.4823
     Fax: 713.554.9098
     Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Vickers Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National
Collegiate Athletic Association. The case is styled as Maxalan
Vickers individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. National Collegiate Athletic Association,
Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00979 (N.D. Ill., Feb. 19, 2019).

The nature of suit is stated as Other.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association is a non-profit
organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American
institutions and conferences.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jeffrey Lewis Raizner, Esq.
     Raizner Slania, Llp
     2402 Dunlavy Street
     Houston, TX 77006
     Phone: (713) 554-9099
     Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com


NATIONS RECOVERY: Martinez Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nations Recovery
Center, Inc. The case is styled as Kelly Martinez on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Nations
Recovery Center, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00313 (E.D.
Wis., Feb. 28, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.

Nations Recovery Center Inc is a privately held company in Atlanta,
GA and is a Unknown business and categorized under Business
Consultants.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Marwan R Daher, Esq.
     Omar T Sulaiman, Esq.
     Law Office of Majdi Y Hijazin Ltd
     2500 S Highland Ave-Ste 200
     Lombard, IL 60148
     Phone: (630) 537-1770
     Fax: (630) 575-8188
     Email: mdaher@sulaimanlaw.com
            osulaiman@sulaimanlaw.com


NCAA: K. Hailey Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
-------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against National Collegiate
Athletic Association. The case is styled as Kenneth Hailey
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Defendant,
Case No. 1:19-cv-01137 (N.D. Ill., Feb. 28, 2019).

The nature of suit is stated as Other.

The National Collegiate Athletic Association is a non-profit
organization which regulates athletes of 1,268 North American
institutions and conferences.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jeffrey Lewis Raizner, Esq.
     Raizner Slania, Llp
     2402 Dunlavy Street
     Houston, TX 77006
     Phone: (713) 554-9099
     Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com


NERIUM INT'L: Harris Appeals N.D. Cal. Decision to Ninth Circuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Jon Harris filed an appeal from a Court ruling in the
lawsuit entitled Jon Harris v. Nerium International, LLC, et al.,
Case No. 3:18-cv-02877-EDL, in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California, San Francisco.

The lawsuit arises from labor-related issues.

The appellate case is captioned as Jon Harris v. Nerium
International, LLC, et al., Case No. 19-15284, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

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

   -- Appellant Jon Harris' opening brief is due on April 15,
      2019;

   -- Appellees Nerium International, LLC, Jeff Olson and Renee
      Olson's answering brief is due on May 15, 2019; and

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

Plaintiff-Appellant JON HARRIS, an individual; on behalf of himself
and other persons similarly situated, is represented by:

          Alejandro Pedro Gutierrez, Esq.
          HATHAWAY, PERRETT, WEBSTER, POWERS, CHRISMAN,
          & GUTIERREZ APC
          5450 Telegraph Road, Suite 200
          Ventura, CA 93003
          Telephone: (805) 644-7111
          E-mail: agutierrez@hathawaylawfirm.com

               - and -

          Brian D. Hefelfinger, Esq.
          PALAY & HEFELFINGER, APC
          1746 S. Victoria Avenue, Suite 230
          Ventura, CA 93003
          Telephone: (805) 642-8220
          E-mail: bdh@calemploymentcounsel.com

Defendants-Appellees NERIUM INTERNATIONAL, LLC, a Texas Limited
Liability Company; JEFF OLSON, an individual; and RENEE OLSON, an
individual, are represented by:

          Brock Joseph Seraphin, Esq.
          BLANK ROME LLP
          2029 Century Park East, 6th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (424) 239-3427
          E-mail: bseraphin@blankrome.com


NUTRA SOLUTIONS USA: Machine Operators Claim Unpaid Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------
Yanet Aguilar, Rosa Landaverde, Elvira Vasquez and other
similarly-situated individuals, Plaintiff, v. Nutra Solutions USA
Inc. and Tito Rahman, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00529, (E.D. N.Y.,
January 28, 2019), seeks to recover regular wages, overtime
compensation, liquidated damages, costs and reasonable attorney's
fees under the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New
York Labor Law.

Nutra Solutions manufacture dietary suplements where Plaintiffs
worked as machine operators. They claim to be denied overtime pay
for hours in excess of 40 per week, spread-of-hours pay and
accurate wage statements. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Christopher K. Collota, Esq.
     Ryan M. Eden, Esq.
     ZABEL & COLLOTA PC
     1 Corporate Drive, Suite 104
     Bohemia, NY 11716
     Telephone: (631) 589-7242
     Facsimile: (631) 653-7475
     Email: ccolotta@laborlawsny.com
            reden@laborlawsny.com


PANINI AMERICA: Brashear Hits Card Redemption Delays
----------------------------------------------------
Kevin B. Brashear, Individually and on behalf of similarly situated
individuals v. Panini America, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
19-cv-00201, (N.D. Tex., January 25, 2019) seeks monetary damages,
punitive damages, prejudgment interest, costs, including reasonable
attorneys' fees as a result of violations of Texas Deceptive Trade
Practices Act, fraud and unjust enrichment.

Panini is a manufacturer of sports collectibles, trading cards and
certified memorabilia with licenses with all major sports, such as
the NFL, NBA, baseball and others. Panini randomly places
individual collectible cards featuring a sports personality sealed
in packs. Some contain "redemption cards" with a code that a buyer
can redeem an actual collectible card. Plaintiff claims that Panini
fails to adhere to its delivery schedule in sending the actual
cards. Consumers also allege Panini America, Inc. fails to
communicate redemption order status, and fails to respond to emails
and telephone calls. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Scott R. Bickford, Esq.
      MARTZELL, BICKFORD & CENTOLA
      338 Lafayette Street
      New Orleans, LA 70130
      Tel: (504) 581-9065
      Fax: (504) 581-7365
      Email: usdcedtx@mbfirm.com
             srb@mbfirm.com


PANINI AMERICA: Faces Class Action Over Redemption Cards
--------------------------------------------------------
Rich Mueller, writing for SportsCollectorsDaily.com, reports that
redemption cards have always been a hot button issue between
trading card makers and those who buy their products.  When players
don't send their cards back in time for release, the manufacturers
still what's essentially an IOU in the product for that particular
autograph.  Sometimes it's fulfilled quickly. Other times, it can
drag on for months—or even years.  Now, the practice is being
challenged in court.

Kevin Brashear, a collector from the Dallas area, has filed suit in
federal court there, accusing Panini America of violating the State
of Texas Deceptive Practices Act.

Mr. Brashear and his attorney, Scott Bickford of New Orleans, filed
the putative class action lawsuit , alleging that the process often
leaves collectors holding the bag when the promised autograph never
materializes.  He also claims the expiration dates on redemption
cards shouldn't be allowed and that the stated time of 4-8 months
for receiving an autograph after inputting redemption card data is
often ignored.

Trading card manufacturers typically say they'd rather not have any
redemption cards in products but are at the mercy of players to
return those cards on time.  The lawsuit states that despite those
regrets, redemptions are a "well-established pattern and
practice."

"The delay or failure to redeem causes damage to the putative class
because the redeemable cards are more often than not of players
whose cards are in high demand at the time of receipt of the
redemption card," Bickford stated in initial court filings.  "A
delay can cause the value of said actual card to diminish and, of
course, failure to ever supply the actual card causes additional
damage."

Mr. Beshear claims he has an expired redemption card from two years
ago and brought the claim to court "on behalf of thousands of other
consumers."

He's asking for compensatory and punitive damages for all class
members as well as attorney fees.

Panini has not yet filed its response to the suit. [GN]


POWERCOR: Supreme Court Dismisses Bushfire Victims' Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Thomson, writing for Sydney Morning Herald, reports that
victims of a bushfire in south-west Victoria could be left $250,000
out of pocket after their class action claim against a power
company was dismissed by a Supreme Court judge as "fanciful".

The Gazette bushfire on St Patrick's Day last year was caused by a
eucalyptus tree falling on to a powerline that ran through a blue
gum plantation, causing the ignition of nearby vegetation.

The cause of the fire was admitted by Powercor.

Justice John Dixon handed down a finding on Feb. 6, hours before
the tenth anniversary of the Black Saturday bushfires.

"The proposition that Powercor created, or aggravated, the risk of
bushfire on St Patrick's Day in the pleaded circumstances - that
is, by failing to clear healthy blue gums in a plantation - is
fanciful," he found.

"The claim in nuisance that is articulated by (plaintiff) Block is
not coherent with the responsibilities and obligations created by
the statutory scheme.

"The proceeding will be summarily dismissed," he found.

Maddens Lawyers, of Warrnambool, and Tim Tobin, QC, ran the class
action and will not be paid for their professional services.

The issue of Powercor's costs have been adjourned until a further
hearing on February 15.

It is expected that those costs will have to be paid by the Gazette
class action lead plaintiffs Nicholas and Georgina Block.

Industry sources expect the costs to be about $250,000.

Mr Block on Feb. 7 declined to comment.

Maddens Lawyers principal Brendan Pendergast said the Supreme Court
of Victoria on Feb. 6 ruled that Powercor has no case to answer in
relation to the Gazette fire as pleaded.

Mr Pendergast was asked about the fundamental issues with the case
and about Powercor's costs.

"Of course, some cases are difficult and some are easy," he said.

"We don't confine our efforts to easy cases. There is no order for
costs. The costs issue is reserved."

Mr Pendergast said Maddens would soon convene a meeting of property
owners affected by the Gazette fire to discuss the ruling.

"And consider any possible options for recovery of compensation for
these fire victims. That has been and continues to be Maddens
Lawyers' focus," he said.

Mr Pendergast said the court on Feb. 6 also heard submissions and
provided directions to  parties in respect of the Garvoc class
action, which involves about 40 people, and the Terang class
action, involving more than 180 people, relating to a forthcoming
court ordered mediation of each matter.

"We believe these cases disclose very strong causes of action
against Powercor," he said.

"If they are not resolved at mediation they are both fixed for
trial in October of this year.

"Presently we are well under way with the important task of
identifying and quantifying each fire victim's total compensable
fire related losses."

In 2017, 4000 survivors of the Black Saturday bushfires who were
claimants in a class action against SP Ausnet shared in a $496
million settlement. That came after personal injury money was
distributed to survivors in 2016, through which around 1800
claimants shared in $192 million.

Law firm Maurice Blackburn reached Australia's largest class action
settlement in 2014 for the Kinglake fire, with SP AusNet liable for
$380 million and government agencies to pay $104 million.

In 2015, the Murrindindi fire was settled for $300 million.

AusNet Services was held directly responsible in court for causing
the fires

The Black Saturday bushfires killed 173 people, including 119 in
the Kilmore East-Kinglake fires, and 40 in the Murrindindi fire
complex. [GN]


PRETIUM RESOURCES: April 11 Class Action Opt-Out Deadline Set
-------------------------------------------------------------
Read this notice carefully as it may affect your legal rights

This Notice is directed to: All persons and entities, other than
Excluded Persons1, who purchased Pretium Resources, Inc.'s
("Pretium") common shares listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange
("TSX"), and all Canadian-resident persons and entities who
purchased Pretium's common shares listed on the New York Stock
Exchange, during the period from July 23, 2013, to and including
October 21, 2013, and who held some or all of those securities at
the close of trading on October 8, 2013; or October 21, 2013 (the
"Class" and "Class Member(s)") 1Excluded Person means Pretium
Resources Inc. and Robert A. Quartermain, and Pretium's past and
present subsidiaries, affiliates, officers, directors, and any
member of Quartermain's family.

This lawsuit alleges that Pretium and Quartermain released
documents containing misrepresentations about the Company's
business and operations at its Brucejack Mine. The lawsuit further
alleges that when the Company issued statements correcting these
misrepresentations on October 9, and 22, 2013, the price of
Pretium's stock declined to reflect the true state of events,
thereby harming Class Members.

On January 23, 2019, the Honourable Justice Belobaba of the Ontario
Superior Court of Justice certified the action: Wong v. Pretium
Resources, Court File No.: CV-13-00491800-CP (the "Class Action")
as a class proceeding against Pretium and Quartermain on consent,
and appointed David Wong as the representative plaintiff. The
substance of the litigation (i.e. that the Defendants made
misrepresentations in their public disclosure documents in 2013)
has not been adjudicated by the Court. The Defendants deny the
allegations.

YOUR TWO OPTIONS:

1. Do Nothing and Remain in the Class Action:
Class Members are automatically included in the action once
certified if they do not opt-out. You do not need to do anything at
this time to stay in the Class Action. If a settlement or any
recovery or benefits are achieved for the Class and approved by the
Court, you will be notified about how to ask for the portion to
which you are entitled. You will be legally bound by all orders and
judgments of the Court, and you will not be able to sue the
Defendants on your own regarding the legal claims made in this
case. You will NOT be required to pay any costs in the event that
this Class Action is unsuccessful.

2. Opt-Out of the Class Action:
All Class Members will be bound by all orders and judgments of the
Court and any settlement reached unless they opt-out of the action.
If you wish to pursue your own action or do not want to be bound by
the outcome of the Class Action, YOU MUST OPT-OUT OF THE CLASS
ACTION.

If you want to opt-out of the Class Action, you must fill out an
Opt-Out Form (available at www.morgantico.com) and send it BEFORE
THURSDAY, APRIL 11, 2019 AT 5:00 PM E.S.T., by email to
paul@trilogyclassactions.ca or by regular mail or courier to
Paul Battaglia at:

         Trilogy Class Action Services
         c/o Pretium Class Action Settlement
         177 Queen Street,P.O. Box 1000,
         Niagara-on-the-Lake, ON L0S 1J0

A copy of the long-form notice providing greater detail about the
certification and your right to opt-out of the action is available
at http://www.morgantico.com

Class members who seek the advice or guidance of their personal
lawyers do so at their own expense.

The publication of this notice was authorized by the Ontario
Superior Court of Justice. Questions about this notice should NOT
be directed to the Court.

Contacts:

         Hadi Davarinia
         Lawyer
         MORGANTI & CO., P.C.
         21 St. Clair Avenue East, Suite 1102
         Toronto, ON Canada M4T 1L9
         Office: (647) 344-1900 ext. 5
         E-mail: hdavarinia@morgantilegal.com
         Web site: http://www.morgantico.com[GN]


PROMEVO LLC: Hambrick Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
------------------------------------------------------------
Lesley Hambrick, individually and on behalf of those similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Promevo, LLC and Aaron Gumz, Defendants,
Case No. 2:19-cv-00017-WOB-CJS (E.D. Ky., February 19, 2019) is an
opt-in collective action for violations of the Federal Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA"), and pursuant to the Kentucky Revised
Statutes ("KRS").

The Defendants have employed numerous non-exempt inside sales
employees who have worked more than 40 hours a week, but who have
not been paid the legally required amount for their overtime hours,
says the complaint.

Plaintiff worked for Defendants as an inside sales person from
November 2016 to May 2017.

Promevo, LLC is a Kentucky Limited Liability Company with its
principal office at 1720 Wildcat Blvd., Suite 200, Burlington, KY
41005.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Christopher P. Finney, Esq.
     FINNEY LAW FIRM, LLC
     4270 Ivy Pointe Blvd., Suite 225
     Cincinnati, OH 45245
     Phone: (513) 943-5678
     Fax: (513) 943-6669
     Email: stephen@finneylawfirm.com

          - and -

     Deborah R. Grayson, Esq.
     MEIZLISH & GRAYSON
     830 Main St., Suite 999
     Cincinnati, OH 45202
     Phone: (513) 345-4700
     Fax: (513) 345-4703
     Email: drgrayson@fuse.net


PROSHARES SHORT VIX: Robbins Geller Commences Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP has commenced the first securities
class action on behalf of purchasers of ProShares Short VIX
Short-Term Futures ETF ("SVXY" or the "Fund") (NASDAQ:SVXY)
pursuant to the May 15, 2017 Registration Statement and/or between
May 15, 2017 and February 5, 2018 (the "Class Period"). This action
was filed in the Southern District of New York and is captioned
Ford v. ProShares Trust II, et al., No. 19-cv-00886, and assigned
to Judge Ronnie Abrams. On February 4, 2019, Judge Abrams ordered,
pursuant to the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995,
that any member of the putative class may move the Court to be
appointed as lead plaintiff not later than 60 days after
publication of notice of the action. As Robbins Geller published
notice of the filing of the action on January 29, 2019, motions for
appointment as lead plaintiff are due by April 1, 2019.

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any
investor who purchased shares of SVXY pursuant to the Registration
Statement and/or during the Class Period to seek appointment as
lead plaintiff. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class
members in directing the litigation. The lead plaintiff can select
a law firm of its choice. An investor's ability to share in any
potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead
plaintiff. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions
concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact
plaintiff's counsel, Samuel H. Rudman or David A. Rosenfeld of
Robbins Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at
djr@rgrdlaw.com. You can view a copy of the complaint as filed at
http://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases/proshares/.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of all purchasers of
SVXY shares pursuant to the Registration Statement and/or during
the Class Period (the "Class"). The plaintiff is represented by
Robbins Geller, which has extensive experience in prosecuting
investor class actions including actions involving financial
fraud.

Robbins Geller -- http://www.rgrdlaw.com-- is one of the world's
leading law firms representing investors in securities litigation.
With 200 lawyers in 10 offices, Robbins Geller has obtained many of
the largest securities class action recoveries in history. For five
consecutive years, ISS Securities Class Action Services has ranked
the Firm in its annual SCAS Top 50 Report as one of the top law
firms in both amount recovered for shareholders and total number of
class action settlements. Robbins Geller attorneys have helped
shape the securities laws and recovered tens of billions of dollars
on behalf of aggrieved victims. Beyond securing financial
recoveries for defrauded investors, Robbins Geller also specializes
in implementing corporate governance reforms, helping to improve
the financial markets for investors worldwide. [GN]


PROSHARES SHORT: Howard G. Smith Files Class Action
---------------------------------------------------
Law Offices of Howard G. Smith disclosed  that a class action
lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors that acquired
ProShares Short VIX Short-Term Futures ETF ("SVXY" or the "Fund")
(NYSE: SVXY) pursuant to the May 15, 2017 Registration Statement
and/or between May 15, 2017 and February 5, 2018 (the "Class
Period"). SVXY investors have until April 1, 2019 to file a lead
plaintiff motion.

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that during the
Class Period and the Registration Statement, Defendants made false
and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose adverse
information regarding the risks of investing in the Fund.
Specifically, the Registration Statement failed to disclose that
the Fund was threatened with catastrophic losses as a result of the
Fund's flawed design and the low-volatility environment and acute
liquidity risks that existed during the Class Period. In addition,
during the Class Period defendants made substantially similar false
and misleading statements as those contained in the Registration
Statement in numerous financial reports and draft prospectuses and
registration statements filed with the SEC.

If you purchased shares of SVXY, have information or would like to
learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning
this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these
matters please:

         Howard G. Smith, Esq.
         Law Offices of Howard G. Smith
         3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112,
         Bensalem, Pennsylvania 19020
         Website: www.howardsmithlaw.com
         Telephone: 215-638-4847
         Toll free: 888-638-4847
         Email: howardsmith@howardsmithlaw.com [GN]


PTV LLC: Borozny Asserts Violation Under Disabilities Act
---------------------------------------------------------
PTV, LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the
Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled Austin Borozny,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. PTV, LLC doing business as: Palm Tree Villas a Florida
limited liability company, Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-00205 (M.D.
Fla., February 14, 2019).

PTV, LLC doing business as: Palm Tree Villas is engaged in the
hotel business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jessica Lynn Kerr, Esq.
   The Advocacy Group, LLC
   200 SE 6th St Ste 504
   Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-3424
   Tel: (954) 282-1858
   Fax: (844) 786-3694
   Email: jkerr@advocacypa.com




REDROCK TRAVEL: Andrade Claims Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------
Lucciana Andrade, and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C.
216(b), Plaintiff(s), v. Redrock Travel Group, LLC, Cardiff
Lexington Corporation, Jay Jahid, Fernanda Jahid and Rollan
Roberts, individually, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00173 (M.D. Fla.,
January 25, 2019), seeks all available relief, including
compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs,
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Redrock specializes in developing leads for timeshare and vacation
club industries and also engages in online, media and offline
advertising that directs traffic to online websites. Cardiff took
control of Redrock operations in May 2018. Andrade claims to be
underpaid during her tenure with Redrock, citing several days in
certain weeks where she wasn't paid at all. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jordan Richards, Esq.
      Melissa Scott, Esq.
      USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS - JORDAN RICHARDS, PLLC
      805 E. Broward Blvd. Suite 301
      Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
      Tel: (954) 871-0050
      Email: Jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com
             Livia@jordanrichardspllc.com
             Melissa@jordanrichardspllc.com
             Jake@jordanrichardspllc.com


SIG SAUER INC: Gordon Files Product Liability Suit in Texas
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sig Sauer, Inc. The
case is styled as Dante Gordon Individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Sig Sauer, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 4:19-cv-00585 (S.D. Tex., Feb. 20, 2019).

The nature of suit is stated as Contract Product Liability.

Sig Sauer, Inc. designs, manufactures, and sells firearms for
military, law enforcement, and commercial markets.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael Kenan Oldham, Esq.
     Reynolds Frizzell LLP
     1100 Louisiana, Ste 3500
     Houston, TX 77002
     Phone: (713) 485-7200
     Fax: (713) 485-7250
     Email: oldham@reynoldsfrizzell.com


SNAP-ON BUSINESS: Underpays Workers' Overtime Pay, Baldwin Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lori Baldwin, on behalf of herself  and all other similarly
situated individuals v. Snap-On Business Solutions, Inc., Case No.
5:19-cv-00036 (N.D. Ohio, January 7, 2019), is brought against the
Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the
Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act.

The case challenges company-wide policies and practices of
Defendant that violate the FLSA and concerns the underpayment of
overtime to non-exempt employees.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant in Defendant's Business
Solutions Department at its Richfield, Ohio location for over 20
years, from approximately September 1995 to approximately January
24, 2018 as a Support Specialist II.

The Defendant Snap-on Business Solutions, Inc., a technology-driven
company, designs and delivers information tools and applications
for vehicle and original equipment manufacturers, dealers, and
end-users worldwide. The Defendant has locations in Wisconsin, Ohio
and Michigan, as well as locations outside of the United States.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Robi J. Baishnab, Esq.
      NILGES DRAHER LLC
      34 N. High St., Ste. 502
      Columbus, OH 43215
      Tel: (614) 824-5770
      Fax: (330) 754-1430
      E-mail: rbaishnab@ohlaborlaw.com


SONIC: Customers Could Be Entitled to Class Action Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Jones, writing for WTVM, reports that some Sonic customers
across the country and in the Chattahoochee Valley could be
entitled to a settlement from a class action lawsuit.

The lawsuit stems from a purported data breach that affected the
company in 2017, though the company denies all claims in the
lawsuit.

The settlement includes anyone who made a purchase using a credit
or debit card within the specified time period at any of the 325
affected stores, one of which is in Columbus.

To qualify to make a claim, consumers would have had to have made a
purchase between April 7, 2017 and Oct. 28, 2017.

The Sonic located at 3464 Victory Dr. in Columbus is one of the 325
affected locations.

If you used your card at this or any other of the locations listed
here during the specified time period, you may be entitled to a $10
settlement.

If you used your card at any of the locations during the correct
period of time and experienced fraudulent or unauthorized charges
on the card you used, you may be entitled to a $40 settlement.[GN]


SONY MUSIC: Faces New Copyright Infringement Class Actions
----------------------------------------------------------
Evan Minsker, writing for Pitchfork, reports that Sony Music
Entertainment and Universal Music Group are facing new class-action
copyright infringement lawsuits filed by artists seeking ownership
of their music, Music Business Worldwide reports. The lawsuits
against the two labels—viewed by Pitchfork—were filed on
February 5 by the New York Dolls' David Johansen, John Waite,
Southside Johnny, the Nerves' Paul Collins, and Joe Ely.

The lawsuits cite Section 203 of the Copyright Act of 1976, which
gives recording artists the opportunity to terminate grants of
copyright ownership 35 years after a recording's initial release.
The lawsuits state:

But while the Copyright Act confers upon authors the valuable
"second chance" that they so often need, the authors of sound
recordings, in particular, who have attempted to avail themselves
of this important protection have encountered not only resistance
from many record labels, they have been subjected to the stubborn
and unfounded disregard of their rights under the law and, in many
instances, willful copyright infringement.

The class action lawsuits assert that hundreds of musicians have
served Notices of Termination to Sony and Universal while the
labels have "routinely and systematically refused to honor them."
They seek damages for copyright infringement and declaratory
relief.

"This behavior must stop," attorney Evan S. Cohen said in a
statement. "The legal issues in these class action suits have never
been decided by a court, and are of paramount importance to the
music industry." [GN]


STOCKADE FRANCHISING: Alvarez Sues Over Unpaid Compensation
-----------------------------------------------------------
Martha Alvarez on Behalf of Herself and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. Stockade Franchising LP, Stockade
Restaurants LLC, and Stockade Companies, LLC d/b/a Montana Mike's
Steakhouse, Defendants, Case No. 5:19-cv-00160 (W.D. Tex., February
20, 2019) seeks to recover unpaid wages.

The case implicates the Defendants violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act's ("FSLA") tip credit and subsequent underpayment of
their employees at the federally mandated minimum wage rate.

The Defendants' practice of requiring Plaintiff and Class Members
to pay a portion of their wages back for customer walkouts or cash
register shortages violates the FLSA and invalidates Defendants'
ability to claim the tip credit. Moreover, despite the fact that
the Plaintiff and Class Members were "clocked out" during their
meal period, they were still required to work, says the complaint.

Plaintiff worked as a waitress for Defendants from July 2012 to
October 2017 in New Braunfels, Texas.

Defendants operate over 14 restaurants in six states, including two
restaurants in Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Don J. Foty, Esq.
     KENNEDY HODGES, L.L.P.
     4409 Montrose Blvd., Suite 200
     Houston, TX 77006
     Phone: (713) 523-0001
     Facsimile: (713) 523-1116
     Email: dfoty@kennedyhodges.com


SUN SOUTH HOME-HEALTH: Andrews Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Karen Andrews, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Sun
South Home-Health Enterprises, Inc. and Akbar Memarianfard,
Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-00426-N (N.D. Tex., February 20, 2019)
asserts that the Defendants knowingly, willfully, or with reckless
disregard carried out their illegal pattern or practice of failing
to pay Plaintiff and the FLSA Class Members proper and lawful
compensation as required under the Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA").

All hours worked by Plaintiff on tasks paid under Defendants' piece
rate system were not counted in the total hours worked each
workweek, including weekly hours worked in excess of 40, notes the
complaint.

Because Defendants did not accurately track and pay for all hours
worked, including overtime hours, Defendants violated the FLSA by
failing to pay Plaintiffs' minimum wage for all hours worked and
overtime compensation for all hours worked in excess of 40 per
workweek, the complaint relates.

Plaintiff Karen Andrews is an individual who has worked for the
Defendants at various locations throughout this District within the
last three years.

Defendants have been involved in home healthcare and medical
staffing in the United States over the last three years.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     J. Forester, Esq.
     Matthew Haynie, Esq.
     Forester Haynie PLLC
     1701 N. Market Street, Suite 210
     Dallas, TX 75202
     Phone: (214) 210-2100
     Fax: (214) 346-5909
     Email: www.foresterhaynie.com


T-MOBILE USA: Shakes Class Action Over Unauthorized Accounts
------------------------------------------------------------
Perry Cooper, writing for Bloomberg Law, reports that T-Mobile USA
Inc. won't have to face the current version of a consumer class
complaint alleging it opened unauthorized accounts, a federal court
held Jan. 30.

The lead plaintiff didn't sufficiently allege he'd be harmed again
by T-Mobile's conduct, Judge M. James Lorenz wrote for the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of California.

The Ninth Circuit has held that a single incident is insufficient
to establish a likelihood of future injury.

The court gave him 21 days to amend his complaint to address its
concerns.

Patrick Ames sued T-Mobile under California consumer law after he
gave the company his personal information to get a quote for
telephone services. He decided not to buy a phone from the company
but says the company charged him $46 for phone services.

He alleged the company had a practice of soliciting personal
information from potential customers and using it to open
unauthorized cell phone service accounts.

T-Mobile moved to dismiss because Ames sought only injunctive
relief and didn't allege he was likely to be harmed again.

The court agreed. Ames didn't explain how he personally was likely
to be injured again by the actions of the company, it said.

"It is just as likely that the debt levied against plaintiff was
simply a clerical error or one bad-acting customer service
representative, rather than an intentional, system-wide policy,"
the court said.

Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman P.C. represented Ames.

Alston & Bird LLP represented T-Mobile.

The case is Ames v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., 2019 BL 30453, S.D. Cal.,
No. 3:17-cv-1666, 1/30/19.[GN]


TLC HOMES INC: Bills Action Claims Unpaid Overtime
--------------------------------------------------
Sara Bills, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. TLC Homes Inc., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00148 (E.D.
Wis., January 28, 2019), seeks unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid
agreed upon wages, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees,
declaratory and/or injunctive relief and/or any such other relief
pursuant to Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws and the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

TLC Homes operates as "Vista Care," a company that provides in-home
support, memory care, residential, mental health and day services
to individuals with developmental, physical and intellectual
disabilities in the State Wisconsin. Bills worked a "direct service
professional from December 2017 to December 2018. She claims
overtime pay for time worked beyond 40 hours per work week. [BN]

Plaintiffs are represented by:

      James A. Walcheske, Esq.
      Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
      WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
      15850 W. Bluemound Rd., Suite 304
      Brookfield, WS 53005
      Phone: (262) 780-1953
      Fax: (262) 565-6469
      Email: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
             sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com


TRACFONE WIRELESS: Violates TCPA, Gallant Claims
------------------------------------------------
BRIAN GALLANT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. TRACFONE WIRELESS, INC. D/B/A SAFELINK WIRELESS, a
Florida Corporation, Case No. 1:19-cv-20580-KMW (S.D. Fla.,
February 13, 2019), seeks to secure redress for the Defendant's
alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by
sending unsolicited telemarketing text messages.

Tracfone Wireless, Inc., doing business as Safelink Wireless, is a
Florida corporation whose principal office is located in Miami,
Florida.

Tracfone is a prepaid mobile virtual network operator.  To promote
its services, Defendant engages in unsolicited marketing, harming
thousands of consumers in the process.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
          14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 1205
          Miami, FL 33132
          Telephone: (305) 479-2299
          E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com

               - and -

          Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW, PA
          19495 Biscayne Blvd #607
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Telephone: (305) 975-3320
          E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com


TRUMP CARD: Zavala-Lopez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Antonio Zavala-Lopez, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Trump Card Holdings, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Corporation; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 30-2019-01051899-CU-OE-CXC (Cal.
Super. Ct., Orange Cty., February 19, 2019) assert that the
Defendant implemented a series of willful, systematic, and
deliberate policies and practices that suppressed operating costs
at the expense of employee rights set forth under the California
Labor Code and the Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") Wage
Orders.

Plaintiff alleges that several of the Defendant's practices
resulted in the failure to pay all overtime compensation owed.
Plaintiff regularly worked in excess of 40 hours in a work week and
on the seventh consecutive day of the work week without receiving
mandatory overtime and/or double time pay, says the complaint.

Plaintiff was, and is, an individual residing in the City of Garden
Grove, County of Orange, State of California.

Trump Card Holdings, LLC was, and is, a Delaware Limited Liability
Corporation engaged in the transportation and logistics industry,
that, among other activities, engages in the
shipping/transportation industry in the State of California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Gregory P. Wong, Esq.
     BARKHORDARIAN LAW FIRM, PLC
     6047 Bristol Parkway, Second Floor
     Culver City, CA 90230
     Phone: (323) 450-2777
     Facsimile: (310) 215-3416
     Email: greg@barklawfirm.com

          - and -

     Sandeep J. Shah, Esq.
     SHAH SHETH LLP
     650 Town Center Drive, Suite 1400
     Costa Mesa, CA 92626
     Phone: (714) 955-4551
     Facsimile: (714) 966-0663
     Email: Sandeep@shahshethlaw.com


TYME TECHNOLOGIES: Canas Hits Share Drop from Failed Cancer Meds
----------------------------------------------------------------
Henry Canas, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Tyme Technologies, Inc., Steve Hoffman and
Ben R. Taylor, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00843 (S.D. N.Y., January
28, 2019), seeks to recover damages caused by violations of the
federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Tyme is a clinical-stage biotechnology company that develops novel
cancer therapeutics. Tyme is currently developing SM-88, a
combination therapy based on dysfunctional metyrosine derivatives
for metastatic pancreatic cancer and biomarker-recurrent prostate
cancer.

Tyme failed to disclose that it had not adequately designed the
Phase II Study to present reliable results on the efficacy of SM-88
on pancreatic cancer and failed to include an appropriate control
group in its open-label Phase II clinical trial for SM-88. The
omission of an appropriate control group distorted the reliability
of data showing the efficacy of SM-88 in the Phase II study.

On this news, Tyme's stock price fell $1.32 per share, or 35.39%,
to close at $2.41 per share on January 18, 2019. Canas owned Tyme
securities and lost when the share prices dropped. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented pro se.

      Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
      J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
      Jonathan Lindenfeld, Esq.
      POMERANTZ LLP
      600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 661-1100
      Facsimile: (212) 661-8665
      Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
             ahood@pomlaw.com
             jlindenfeld@pomlaw.com

             - and -

      Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq.
      POMERANTZ LLP
      10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505
      Chicago, IL 60603
      Telephone: (312) 377-1181
      Facsimile: (312) 377-1184
      Email: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com

             - and -

      Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
      BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
      60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600
      New York, NY 10165
      Telephone: (212) 697-6484
      Facsimile (212) 697-7296
      Email: peretz@bgandg.com


UMG RECORDINGS: Musicians Sue to Reclaim Rights Recordings
----------------------------------------------------------
Eriq Gardner, writing for Hollywood Reporter, reports that for the
past decade, a number of prominent musicians including Tom Petty
and Bob Dylan have quietly attempted to reclaim rights to songs by
serving notices of termination to publishers and record labels.
Often, like in the case of Prince, these notices become invitations
to renegotiate deals for more favorable royalty arrangements. But
according to lawsuits filed on Feb. 5 in New York federal court, in
the face of hundreds of termination notices, UMG Recordings and
Sony Music have "routinely and systematically refused to honor
them."

The named plaintiffs in the UMG case are John Waite, a solo artist
and former lead singer of the 1970s group The Babys, and Joe Ely,
who has recorded 18 solo albums and also was a performer on works
by The Clash and Rosie Flores. In the Sony case, David Johansen of
The New York Dolls, John Lyon (known as Southside Johnny) and Paul
Collins of The Beat are hoping to lead the charge.

They are looking towards the Copyright Act of 1976, which extended
the term but also gave artists who bargained away rights during the
early part of their careers a second bite at the apple by allowing
them to terminate copyright grants during the latter portion of the
copyright term.

There are important exceptions to who has the right to terminate.
Among them is anyone who created "works made for hire," essentially
a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her
employment. In such a situation, it's the employer seen as the
statutory author of the work.

The newest lawsuits state that UMG and Sony are regularly taking
the position in response to termination notices that recordings are
"works made for hire" because of contractual language in recording
agreements.

"As a result of UMG's policy, UMG has refused to acknowledge that
any recording artist has the right to take over control of the
sound recordings, or enter into an agreement with a different label
for the exploitation of recordings, after the effective date of
termination," states the complaint. "In many instances, UMG has
continued to exploit the recordings after the effective date,
thereby engaging in willful copyright infringement of the United
States copyright in those recordings."

The newest lawsuits, the first attempts at an action that
represents a class of recording artists, aim to change the
situation.

Not only are UMG and Sony being sued for infringing the copyrights
of many of the songs in their respective catalogs, but the
plaintiffs seek declaratory relief that sound recordings can't ever
be considered "works made for hire" under the law, that release of
sound recordings in album format doesn't constitute a "contribution
of a collective work" or "compilation" (other exceptions to
termination), that foreign choice of law provisions in contracts
don't have any effect on U.S. copyright law with respect to the
termination powers, that sound recordings aren't "commissioned
works," and that recording artists aren't barred from terminating
based on the use of loan-out companies.

Additionally, the lawsuits address issues of timeliness for
determining the statute of limitations and whether the exercise of
termination rights amounts to a breach of contract.

The plaintiffs in both cases, represented by attorneys at Blank
Rome, also demand monetary damages and injunctive relief. [GN]


UNITED STATES: Jones Files Suit Under Tucker Act
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against the United States in
the U.S. Court of Federal Claims on February 15, 2019. The case is
styled as David Jones, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. USA, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-00257-CFL.

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Civil Pay -
FLSA, filed pursuant to the Tucker Act.

The U.S. is a country of 50 states covering a vast swath of North
America, with Alaska in the northwest and Hawaii extending the
nation’s presence into the Pacific Ocean. Major Atlantic Coast
cities are New York, a global finance and culture center, and
capital Washington, DC. Midwestern metropolis Chicago is known for
influential architecture and on the west coast, Los Angeles'
Hollywood is famed for filmmaking.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Joshua Sanford, Esq.
   Sanford Law Firm
   One Financial Center
   650 South Shackleford, Suite 411
   Little Rock, AR 72211
   Tel: (501) 221-0088
   Email: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com


UNITED STATES: Third Circuit Appeal Filed in Schuchardt Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Elliott J. Schuchardt filed an appeal from a Court ruling
in his lawsuit styled Elliott Schuchardt v. President United States
of America, et al., Case No. 2-14-cv-00705, in the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter, on June 2, 2014, Mr.
Schuchardt filed a complaint in the District Court asserting
constitutional, statutory, and state law claims against the
President, the Director of National Intelligence, and the Directors
of the NSA and Federal Bureau of Investigation.  He alleged that
the Government was violating the Fourth Amendment by storing his
confidential communications "in a computer database, or through a
government program, which the Defendants call 'Prism.'"  He sought
to enjoin "the [Government] from engaging in any further collection
of . . . [his] information."

The appellate case is captioned as Elliott Schuchardt v. President
United States of America, et al., Case No. 19-1366, in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellant ELLIOTT J. SCHUCHARDT, individually and doing
business as the Schuchardt Law Firm, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, represents himself:

          Elliott J. Schuchardt, Esq.
          6223 Highland Place Way
          Knoxville, TN 37919
          Telephone: (865) 304-4374
          E-mail: elliott016@gmail.com

Defendants-Appellees PRESIDENT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DIRECTOR
OF NATIONAL INTELLIGENCE, DIRECTOR OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY AGENCY
AND CHIEF OF THE CENTRAL SECURITY SERVICE and DIRECTOR FEDERAL
BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION are represented by:

          Caroline J. Anderson, Esq.
          Julia A. Berman, Esq.
          Marcia Berman, Esq.
          UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
          20 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20530
          Telephone: (202) 305-8645
          E-mail: Caroline.J.Anderson@usdoj.gov
                  julia.berman@usdoj.gov
                  marcia.berman@usdoj.gov

               - and -

          James J. Gilligan, Esq.
          UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
          950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20530
          Telephone: (202) 514-3358
          E-mail: james.gilligan@usdoj.gov

               - and -

          Rodney Patton, Esq.
          UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
          P.O. Box 14271
          Washington, DC 20044
          Telephone: (202) 616-4105
          E-mail: rodney.patton@usdoj.gov


US GOVERNMENT: Homeland Security Employees Hit Late Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned Current and former employees of the Department
of Homeland Security assigned Customs and Border Protection and
other similarly-situated individuals, Plaintiff, v. The United
States of America, Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00129, filed in the
United States Court of Federal Claims on January 25, 2019, seeks
declaratory judgment, back wages, interest on their back wages and
other associated relief for willful and unlawful violations of
federal law pursuant to the Border Patrol Agent Pay Reform Act, the
Back Pay Act and 5th and 13th Amendments.

The US Government partially shut down its federal operations due to
a legislative impasse regarding the federal budget that started at
12:01 a.m., December 22, 2018. Plaintiffs were required to report
to work and perform their normal duties, but they were not timely
compensated for certain work performed and for subsequent work that
has been performed during the shutdown, asserts the complaint.
[BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Gary E. Mason, Esq.
     Danielle Perry, Esq.
     WHITFIELD BRYSON & MASON LLP
     5101 Wisconsin Ave., NW, Ste. 305
     Washington, DC 20016
     Tel: (202) 640-1160

            - and -

     Alan Lescht, Esq.
     Jack Jarrett, Esq.
     ALAN LESCHT AND ASSOCIATES, PC
     1050 17th St., NW, Suite 400
     Washington, DC 20036
     Tel: (202) 463-6036

            - and -

     Neil Landeen, Esq.
     YEN PILCH & LANDEEN, P.C.
     6017 N. 15th Street
     Phoenix, AZ 85014
     Tel: (602) 241-0474

            - and -

     Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
     Lisa A. White, Esq.
     Mark E. Silvey, Esq.
     GREG COLEMAN LAW PC
     First Tennessee Plaza
     800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
     Knoxville, TN 37929
     Telephone: (865) 247-0080
     Facsimile: (865) 522-0049

            - and -

     Justin Swidler, Esq.
     SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC
     1101 Kings Hwy N., Suite 402
     Cherry Hill, NJ 09034
     Telephone: (856) 685-7420
     Facsimile: (856) 685-7417


UXIN LIMITED: Bragar Eagel Files Securities Class Action Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. disclosed  that a class action lawsuit
has been filed in the Supreme Court of the State of New York on
behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired American Depository Shares ("ADSs") of Uxin Limited
(NASDAQ: UXIN) securities pursuant to and/or traceable to Uxin's
Initial Public Offering ("IPO") on or about June 27, 2018.

The complaint alleges that the Registration Statement was
materially false and misleading and omitted to state that: (1) the
company was likely to stop providing complementary services such as
inspections to its customers; (2) instead, the company would
connect consumers to dealers who would provide such complementary
services; (3) as a result, the company's 2B business would be
materially impacted; and (4) as a result of the foregoing,
defendants' statements in the Registration Statement regarding
Uxin's business, operations, and prospects, were materially false
and/or misleading.

If you purchased Uxin ADSs pursuant to and/or traceable to the IPO
and suffered a loss, have information, have information, would like
to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning
this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these
matters, please contact Brandon Walker or Melissa Fortunato by
email at investigations@bespc.com, or telephone at (212) 355-4648,
or by filling out this contact form.  There is no cost or
obligation to you.

         Brandon Walker, Esq.
         Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
         Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
         Telephone: (212) 355-4648
         Email: fortunato@bespc.com
                walker@bespc.com [GN]


VALE SA: Schall Law Files Securities Class Action Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
disclosed  the filing of a class action lawsuit against Vale S.A.
("Vale" or "the Company") (NYSE: VALE) for violations of §§10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder by the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Investors who purchased the Company's shares between April 13, 2018
and January 28, 2019, inclusive (the "Class Period"), are
encouraged to contact the firm before March 29, 2019.         

We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall, or Sherin Mahdavian,
of the Schall Law Firm, 1880 Century Park East, Suite 404, Los
Angeles, CA 90067, at 424-303-1964, to discuss your rights free of
charge. You can also reach us through the firm's website at
www.schallfirm.com, or by email at brian@schallfirm.com.

The class, in this case, has not yet been certified, and until
certification occurs, you are not represented by an attorney. If
you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class
member.

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading
statements to the market. Vale did not take adequate measures to
survey the damage and assess the risk of a potential dam breach at
the Company's Feijão mine. At the same time, the Company failed to
maintain proper programs to mitigate health and safety incidents.
As a result of these actions, multiple people were killed and
hundreds remain missing after the Company's dam at the Feijão iron
ore mine failed. Based on these facts, the Company's public
statements were false and materially misleading throughout the
class period. When the market learned the truth about Vale,
investors suffered damages.

Join the case to recover your losses.

         Brian Schall, Esq.
         Sherin Mahdavian, Esq.
         The Schall Law Firm
         1880 Century Park East, Suite 404
         Los Angeles, CA 90067
         Email: info@schallfirm.com
                 brian@schallfirm.com.
                 sherin@schallfirm.com [GN]


VELOCITYSHARES DAILY: April 5 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC on Feb. 6 notified investors
that a class action lawsuit has been filed against VelocityShares
Daily Inverse VIX Medium Term Exchange Traded Notes ("ZIV" or the
"Company") (NASDAQ: ZIV) and certain of its officers, on behalf of
shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired ZIV securities
between June 30, 2017 and February 5, 2018, both dates inclusive
(the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to join this
case by visiting the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/ziv.

This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for
alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

The Complaint alleges that Defendants made materially false and
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the
inverse ETNs was not appropriate for managing daily trading risks;
(2) Credit Suisse had designed the ZIV to fail under certain market
conditions; (3) Credit Suisse had offered and sold more inverse
ETNs than the market could bear which would enable Credit Suisse to
cause the collapse of the inverse ETNs when the opportunity
presented itself; and (4) Credit Suisse could actively manipulate
inverse ETNs by precipitating an acute liquidity event in
volatility markets including markets for VIX futures.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to
review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm's site:
www.bgandg.com/ziv or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his
Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein, Gewirtz &
Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in ZIV you
have until April 5, 2019 to request that the Court appoint you as
lead plaintiff.  Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't
require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation
boutique.  Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of
litigation claims on behalf of our clients.  In addition to
representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class
action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general
corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities
arbitration. [GN]


WESTLAKE SERVICES: Hammond Suit Asserts TCPA Breach
---------------------------------------------------
Paul Hammond, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Westlake Services, LLC d/b/a Westlake
Financial Services, and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and each of
them, Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-01234 (C.D. Cal., February 19,
2019) is a complaint for damages, injunctive relief, and any other
available legal or equitable remedies, resulting from the illegal
actions of the Defendant in negligently, knowingly, and/or
willfully contacting Plaintiff on Plaintiff's cellular telephone,
thereby violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA").

The Defendant did not possess Plaintiff's "prior express consent"
to receive calls using an automatic telephone dialing system or an
artificial or prerecorded voice on his cellular telephone, notes
the complaint. Furthermore, Plaintiff orally revoked any and all
consent to be contacted using an automated telephone dialing
system, to the extent any ever existed, the complaint adds.

Plaintiff Paul Hammond is a natural person residing in Los Angeles
County in the state of California.

Westlake Services, LLC d/b/a Westlake Financial Services is finance
company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
     Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
     LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
     21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780
     Woodland Hills, CA 91367
     Phone: (323) 306-4234
     Fax: (866) 633-0228
     Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
            abacon@toddflaw.com


WILLIAM-SONOMA STORES: Olsen Alleges Violation under ADA
--------------------------------------------------------
William-Sonoma Stores, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
Thomas J. Olsen, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. William-Sonoma Stores, Inc. doing business
as: Rejuvenation, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00955 (E.D. N.Y.,
February 17, 2019).

Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc. operates as a home furnishing
retailer. The company was incorporated in 1984 and is based in San
Francisco, California. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc. operates as a
subsidiary of Williams-Sonoma Inc.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Christopher Howard Lowe, Esq.
   Lipsky Lowe LLP
   630 Third Avenue
   New York, NY 10017
   Tel: (212) 392-4772
   Fax: (212) 444-1030
   Email: chris@lipskylowe.com


WISCONSIN: Magnussen Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------
Sarah Magnussen on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. State of Wisconsin, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-00226-WCG (E.D. Wis., February 12, 2019) is a collective
and class action brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act
of 1938 ("FLSA"), and Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws
("WWPCL") for purposes of obtaining relief under the FLSA and WWPCL
for unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid agreed upon wages,
liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees, declaratory and/or
injunctive relief, and/or any such other relief the Court may deem
appropriate.

Plaintiff worked as an hourly-paid, non-exempt Nurse in Defendant's
Department of Corrections at the Taycheedah Correction Institution
located in Taycheedah, Wisconsin. Plaintiff and all other
hourly-paid, non-exempt employees consistently worked in excess of
40 hours per workweek but the Defendant did not properly and
lawfully compensate Plaintiff and all other hourly-paid, non-exempt
Nurses employed in its Department of Corrections at the correct,
proper, and lawful overtime rate of pay for all hours worked and/or
worked performed each workweek, in violation of the FLSA and the
WWPCL, asserts the complaint.

The Defendant operated (and continues to operate) an unlawful
compensation system that deprived and failed to compensate all
current and former hourly-paid, non-exempt employees for all hours
worked and work performed each workweek, including at an overtime
rate of pay, by failing to include all monetary, non-discretionary
forms of compensation in said employees' regular rates of pay for
overtime calculation purposes, in violation of the FLSA and WWPCL,
the complaint says.

Plaintiff Sarah Magnussen is an adult female resident of the State
of Wisconsin.

Defendant, the State of Wisconsin, operates via numerous state
agencies, including but not limited to the Department of
Administration and the Department of Corrections.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     James A. Walcheske, Esq.
     Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
     David M. Potteiger, Esq.
     WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
     15850 W. Bluemound Road, Suite 304
     Brookfield, WI 53005
     Phone: (262) 780-1953
     Fax: (262) 565-6469
     Email: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
            sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com
            dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com


XPO LAST MILE: Removes Gonzalez Suit to Mass. Dist. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
The putative class action lawsuit titled RAMON GONZALEZ, VICTOR
RODRIGUEZ ORTIZ, and ADDELYN MARTE, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. XPO LAST MILE, INC., d/b/a XPO
LOGISTICS, Case No. 1877CV01075B, was removed on February 14, 2019,
from the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for
the County of Essex to the U.S. District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, Eastern Division.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-10290 to the
proceeding.

Ramon Gonzalez, Victor Rodriguez, and Addelyn Marte, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, filed a complaint
against XPO LM on July 20, 2018, asserting that they and the other
putative class members worked as delivery drivers for XPO LM,
"delivering products to customers' homes from stores such as Home
Depot and Lowe's."  The Plaintiff-Drivers claim they were (or are)
employees of XPO LM (as opposed to employees of the independent
businesses and motor carriers that provided delivery services), and
were misclassified as independent contractors.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Steve Churchill, Esq.
          Hillary Schwab, Esq.
          Rachel Smit, Esq.
          FAIR WORK, P.C.
          192 South Street, Suite 450
          Boston, MA 02111
          Telephone: (617) 607-3260
          E-mail: steve@fairworklaw.com
                  hillary@fairworklaw.com
                  rachel@fairworklaw.com

               - and -

The Defendant is represented by:

          Douglas J. Hoffman, Esq.
          JACKSON LEWIS LLP
          75 Park Plaza
          Boston, MA 02116
          Telephone: (617) 367-0025
          Facsimile: (617) 367-2155
          E-mail: douglas.hoffman@jacksonlewis.com


                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: AGs Petition EPA to Draft Asbestos Policy
----------------------------------------------------------
The Hill reported that the Attorneys General from 15 states are
petitioning the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to draft a
policy to collect more data on harmful asbestos.

The AGs from California and Massachusetts lead the group in asking
the EPA to create a new reporting rule requiring those who import
the cancer-linked mineral fiber or use it domestically to give the
EPA more data on its use.

"Each year, tens of thousands die from exposure to asbestos," said
Massachusetts Maura Healey. "We urge Acting Administrator Wheeler
to issue a rule that will protect the lives of thousands of
workers, families and children in Massachusetts and across the
country."

Currently, importers of raw asbestos or articles that contain
asbestos are exempt from having to report to EPA information about
the products, according to the AGs.

The group argues that the information is necessary to protect the
public from asbestos exposure. Their petition asks EPA to both
eliminate the exemption for "naturally occurring substances" and
require all imported articles containing asbestos to be reported to
the EPA.

"It is widely known that asbestos is one of the most harmful
chemicals known to humankind," said California AG Xavier Becerra.
"There is no excuse to continue allowing any amounts of toxic
asbestos to pass into our community, especially into the lungs of
workers and children, when we know the danger it presents. We call
on Acting Administrator Wheeler to begin the process of eliminating
exemptions that allow this unsafe chemical to continue to harm tens
of thousands of people each year."

Asbestos is not banned on the federal level, except for a few
specific uses. A 2016 law gave the EPA new authority to prohibit
the carcinogen.

Last June EPA introduced a proposal intended to require companies
to notify the EPA if they planned to import or manufacture various
out-of-date uses of asbestos, like roofing felt and floor tile.

The agency chose to list 15 known uses of asbestos, even though
none are currently in use, and proposed companies be required to
notify the EPA if they want to use asbestos in those situations, a
move that would give the agency time to examine and potentially ban
them.

It led to a firestorm, with news stories, denunciations and
well-known figures like Chelsea Clinton and Sen. Brian Schatz
(D-Hawaii) charging that the EPA is opening the door to asbestos --
something the agency strongly refutes.

The EPA later pushed back with a PR blitz through interviews,
social media and a fact sheet.

Internal EPA emails later reported by the New York Times showed
that EPA staff also objected to the reporting change. Career staff
involved with the development of a key proposal meant to prevent
companies from returning to use of the carcinogenic chemical felt
that steps being taken by senior officials could allow for some
legacy uses to return anew.

Career staff pushed instead for a wider rule that would have
encompassed all legacy uses of asbestos.

EPA spokesman James Hewitt told the Times at the time that the
emails showed some staffers "did not fully understand the proposal
being developed."

Last August another group of 12 AGs filed a comment with EPA
opposing its new rule methodology, arguing that the agency was
refusing to consider the most significant and dangerous exposure
risks posed by the fiber.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ashland Global Had $369MM Reserve at Dec. 31
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ashland Global Holdings Inc. has asbestos reserve of US$369 million
at December 31, 2018, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly
period ended December 31, 2018.

The Company states, "The claims alleging personal injury caused by
exposure to asbestos asserted against Ashland result primarily from
indemnification obligations undertaken in 1990 in connection with
the sale of Riley.  The amount and timing of settlements and number
of open claims can fluctuate from period to period.

"From the range of estimates, Ashland records the amount it
believes to be the best estimate of future payments for litigation
defense and claim settlement costs, which generally approximates
the mid-point of the estimated range of exposure from model
results.  Ashland reviews this estimate and related assumptions
quarterly and annually updates the results of a non-inflated,
non-discounted approximate 50-year model developed with the
assistance of Nathan.

"During the most recent annual update of this estimate completed
during the June 2018 quarter, it was determined that the liability
for Ashland asbestos-related claims should be decreased by US$8
million.  Total reserves for asbestos claims were US$369 million at
December 31, 2018 compared to US$380 million at September 30,
2018."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://bit.ly/2Srboo0


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Attempt to Dismiss Cahoon Suit Denied
------------------------------------------------------
U.S. District Judge James C. Dever, III denied Defendant's motion
to dismiss filed in the case Karen Cahoon, as Executrix of the
Estate of Grace H. Webster, Plaintiff, v. Edward Orton Jr. Ceramic
Foundation, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, and Union Carbide
Corporation, Defendants. No. 2:17-CV-63-D, (E.D. N.C.), without
prejudice. Defendant, however, can file a new motion to dismiss by
March 8, 2019 and Plaintiff can respond by March 29, 2019.
Defendant can reply by April 9, 2019. Judge Dever also denied the
motion for a new briefing schedule as moot.

A copy of the Order, is available at https://tinyurl.com/y37xc39f
from Leagle.com.

Karen Cahoon, other, Plaintiff, represented by James Andrew Sealey
-- dsealey@simmonsfirm.com -- Simmons Hanley Conroy & Janet Ward
Black -- info@wardblacklaw.com -- Ward Black Law.

Edward Orton Jr. Ceramic Foundation, Defendant, represented by Amy
C. Drayton -- adrayton@deanandgibson.com -- Dean & Gibson, PLLC.

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Defendant, represented by
Keith E. Coltrain -- Keith.Coltrain@WallTempleton.com -- Wall
Templeton & Haldrup, P.A.

Union Carbide Corporation, Defendant, represented by Christopher
Barton Major -- cmajor@hsblawfirm.com -- Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd,
Moffatt G. McDonald -- mmcdonald@hsblawfirm.com -- Haynsworth
Sinkler Boyd, P.A., Scott E. Frick -- sfrick@hsblawfirm.com --
Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, P.A. & William David Conner --
dconner@hsblawfirm.com -- Haynsworth Sinkler Boyd, P.A.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Commercial Renovation Results in Asbestos Charge
-----------------------------------------------------------------
WebWire reported that the Los Angeles City Attorney recently
announced 19 criminal charges that the office has filed against a
commercial property owner and a renovation company. The charges
were the result of alleged improper removal of asbestos materials
during a demolition and renovation project in violation of state
rules and regulations.

The owner of the multi-unit commercial building, along with the
owner of the renovation company who was also a tenant, were both
charged as were their corporations with 1 count of disposal of
hazardous waste and 9 counts of violating Air Quality Management
District (AQMD) rules and regulations. The property owner was also
charged with 9 additional criminal counts for AQMD violations
according to the City Attorney’s office. Both business owners are
licensed contractors.

The material in question was an acoustic ceiling that contained
asbestos. These types of ceilings are just one of numerous building
materials that were made with asbestos and can still be found in
all types of buildings across California and the nation. Other
common asbestos-containing materials regularly encountered include
fireproofing materials; attic and wall insulation; vinyl floor
tiles and the backing on vinyl sheet flooring; adhesives; roofing
and siding shingles; textured paint and patching compounds used on
walls and ceilings; and hot water and steam pipes coated with
asbestos or covered with an asbestos blanket or tape.

"Asbestos rules and regulations are there to protect workers and
building occupants from exposure to asbestos fibers which are known
to cause lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis," said Michael
Chapman, Laboratory Manager at LA Testing's Huntington Beach
facility. "Unless a material is labeled as containing asbestos,
which very rarely is the case, the only way to know if it contains
asbestos is to have it tested. If test results come back positive,
then properly trained asbestos removal professionals can safely
handle the situation to prevent needless exposure, potential
criminal prosecution, and costly fines and penalties."

LA Testing, with multiple laboratories across the state, provides
testing services, sampling supplies and easy to use test kits to
identify asbestos, lead and other regulated materials.

To learn more about asbestos or other indoor environmental quality,
building science, occupational, health and safety services, please
visit www.LATesting.com, email  info@LATesting.com  or call (800)
755-1794. For access to IEQ test kits, visit www.EMSLTestKits.com.

About LA Testing

LA Testing is California's leading laboratory for indoor air
quality testing of asbestos, mold, lead, VOCs, formaldehyde, soot,
char, ash and smoke damage, particulates and other chemicals. In
addition, LA Testing offers a full range of air sampling and
investigative equipment to professionals and the general public. LA
Testing maintains an extensive list of accreditations including:
AIHA LAP LLC., AIHA ELLAP, AIHA EMLAP and AIHA IHLAP, CDC ELITE,
NVLAP, State of California, State of Hawaii Department of Health
and other states. LA Testing, along with the EMSL Analytical, Inc.
network, has multiple laboratories throughout California including
South Pasadena, Huntington Beach, San Leandro and San Diego.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Had $146MM Non-PCC Reserves at Dec. 31
---------------------------------------------------------------
Corning Incorporated's reserve for asbestos claims that are
unrelated to Pittsburgh Corning Corporation ("PCC") was US$146
million at December 31, 2018, according to the Company's Form 10-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.

The Company states, "Corning is a defendant in certain cases
alleging injuries from asbestos unrelated to PCC (the "non-PCC
asbestos claims") which had been stayed pending the confirmation of
the Plan.  The stay was lifted on August 25, 2016.

"At December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2017, the amount of the
reserve for these non-PCC asbestos claims was estimated to be
US$146 million and US$147 million, respectively.  The reserve
balance as of December 31, 2018 represents the undiscounted
projection of claims and related legal fees for the estimated life
of the litigation."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2IFYzX0


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Corning Inc. Has $185MM PCC Liability at Dec. 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Corning Incorporated disclosed in its Form 10-K filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2018, that the total amount of payments due in years
2019 through 2022 for asbestos claims under the reorganization plan
of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation (PCC) is US$185 million.

The Company states, "Corning and PPG Industries, Inc. each owned
50% of the capital stock of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation ("PCC").
PCC filed for Chapter 11 reorganization in 2000 and the Modified
Third Amended Plan of Reorganization for PCC (the "Plan") became
effective in April 2016.

"At December 31, 2016, the Company's liability under the Plan was
US$290 million, which is required to be paid through a series of
fixed payments beginning in the second quarter of 2017.  Payments
of US$35 million and US$70 million were made in June 2018 and June
2017, respectively.  At December 31, 2018, the total amount of
payments due in years 2019 through 2022 is US$185 million, of which
US$50 million is due in the second quarter of 2019 and is
classified as a current liability.  The remaining US$135 million is
classified as a non-current liability."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2IFYzX0


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ct. Tosses Montana Resources' Summary Ruling Bid
-----------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Andrew S. Hanen denied Defendants Montana Resources,
Inc. and Montana Resources, LLP's Post-Discovery Motion for Summary
Judgment in the case captioned ASARCO, LLC, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
MONTANA RESOURCES, INC., et al., Defendants, Civil Action No.
1:12-CV-137 (S.D. Tex.).

On May 31, 1989, AR Montana Corporation the alleged predecessor to
ASARCO Master, Inc. and a special purpose subsidiary of ASARCO,
LLC, entered into a Partnership Agreement with Montana Resources,
Inc. to create Montana Resources, a general partnership. Montana
Resources operated and developed certain mining facilities in
Butte, Montana. MRI initially possessed a 50.1% interest in the
partnership, while AR Montana received the remaining 49.9%.

According to the terms of the Agreement, the partners would be
liable for "Cash Calls," if necessary, to cover the partnership's
expenses. If one of the partners did not pay a Cash Call when due
and failed to remedy the nonpayment within 30 days, it would be in
default. Additionally, the filing of a bankruptcy petition was an
event of default.

Plaintiffs' suit are based on the November 2011 alleged breach of
contract, for which Plaintiffs request declaratory and equitable
relief.

The Defendants filed their Post-Discovery Motion for Summary
Judgment, alleging three new grounds for summary judgment.

First, Defendants argue that "neither Plaintiff [ASARCO Master or
ASARCO, LLC] had any actual rights to assert when they sent the
Nov. 15, 2011 letter demanding reinstatement" because ASARCO, LLC
has never been a partner under the Agreement. Defendants argue that
ASARCO Master did not obtain rights from its predecessor for two
reasons: AR Montana did not seek MRI's consent to transfer its
rights to ASARCO Master, a requirement under the Agreement and
under Montana partnership law, and neither AR Montana nor ASARCO
Master complied with the prerequisites for transfer under the
Partnership Agreement, so any purported transfer was invalid.
Further, Defendants allege that ASARCO Master was wound down
according to the terms of the Bankruptcy Plan and that wound-down
entities cannot receive assets post-bankruptcy.

Defendants also allege that when ASARCO Master filed for
bankruptcy, it defaulted under Section 11(d) of the Agreement;
thus, even if the Court permitted Plaintiffs to cure the Cash
Calls, Defendants allege that default under Section 11(d) is
incurable and would still prohibit Plaintiffs' reinstatement. Last,
Defendants contend that two newly discovered drafts of the
Partnership Agreement make the meaning of the default clause "clear
and unambiguous" and compel a judgment in their favor as a matter
of law.

Upon careful analysis of the facts presented, the Court holds that
Defendants have failed to show that there is no genuine dispute as
to any material fact or that they are entitled to judgment as a
matter of law. While Defendants are no doubt correct that by filing
for bankruptcy, AR Montana/ASARCO Master defaulted under Section
11(d) of the Partnership Agreement, the consequences that result
due to default depend upon the interpretation of the ambiguous
default and reinstatement provisions. Notwithstanding the newly
discovered drafts of the Partnership Agreement and the affidavit of
MRI lawyer Dennis E. Lind, fact issues remain as to the meaning of
the default and cure provisions, and whether Plaintiffs have a
right to reinstatement under the terms of the Agreement. Fact
issues also remain concerning whether AR Montana and ASARCO Master
merged prior to bankruptcy and whether, as a result of this merger,
ASARCO Master is able to be reinstated under the terms of the
Partnership Agreement. Relatedly, Defendants' own filings have
created questions with regard to whether ASARCO, LLC or ASARCO
Master are similarly able to be reinstated under the terms of the
Partnership Agreement. Finally, issues remain as to what type of
interest, if any, must be reinstated--a 1.23% partnership
(ownership) interest or a 1.23% interest of a different kind.

A copy of the Court's Memorandum and Order dated Jan. 15, 2019 is
available at https://bit.ly/2Tiq6Tl from Leagle.com.

Asarco, LLC, a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, represented by
Brian R. Holland -- bholland@crowleyfleck.com -- CROWLEY FLECK,
Gregory L. Evans -- gevans@mcguirewoods.com -- McGuireWoods LLP,
Kenneth K. Lay , CROWLEY FLECK, Tanya Guerrero , INTEGER LAW
CORPORATION, pro hac vice, Thomas M. Farrell --
tfarrell@mcguirewoods.com -- McGuirewoods LLP, William Adam Duerk,
IV , Milodragovich, Dale & Steinbrenner, PC, Daphne Hsu , Integer
Law Corporation, pro hac vice, Dion William Hayes , McGuireWoods
LLP, James R. Burrell -- jburrell@mcguirewoods.com -- McGuire Woods
LLP, James G. Warren , Kramer deBoer & Keane, Kris A. McLean , Kris
A McLean Law Firm, PLLC, Laura G. Brys , Integer Law Corporation,
pro hac vice & Patrick L. Hayden -- phayden@mcguirewoods.com --
McGuire Woods LLP.

ASARCO Master, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Plaintiff, represented
by Brian R. Holland , CROWLEY FLECK, Gregory L. Evans ,
McGuireWoods LLP, Kenneth K. Lay , CROWLEY FLECK, Tanya Guerrero ,
INTEGER LAW CORPORATION, pro hac vice, Thomas M. Farrell ,
McGuirewoods LLP, William Adam Duerk, IV , Milodragovich, Dale &
Steinbrenner, PC, William R. Pletcher , INTEGER LAW CORPORATION,
pro hac vice, Daphne Hsu , Integer Law Corporation, Dion William
Hayes , McGuireWoods LLP, James R. Burrell , McGuire Woods LLP,
James G. Warren , Kramer deBoer & Keane, Kris A. McLean , Kris A
McLean Law Firm, PLLC, Laura G. Brys , Integer Law Corporation, pro
hac vice & Patrick L. Hayden , McGuire Woods LLP.

Montana Resources, Inc., a Montana corporation & Montana Resources,
LLP, a Montana limited liability partnership, Defendants,
represented by A. Christopher Edwards , EDWARDS FRICKLE CULVER, pro
hac vice, A. Clifford Edwards , EDWARDS FRICKLE AND CULVER, Eric M.
English , KING & SPALDING LLP, pro hac vice, Glenn A. Ballard, Jr.
-- glenn.ballard@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP, John William
Edwards , EDWARDS FRICKLE CULVER, pro hac vice, Mark W. Wege --
mark.wege@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP, Richard J. Angell ,
Parsons Behle & Latimer, Penn C. Huston , Mouer Huston PC, Richard
David Salgado , Dentons US LLP & Triel Culver , EDWARDS FRICKLE
ANNER-HUGHES AND COOK.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Diamond Offshore Still Defends Suits at Dec. 31
----------------------------------------------------------------
Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. continues to defend itself in
asbestos-related lawsuits pending in Louisiana state courts,
according to the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2018.

The Company states, "We are one of several unrelated defendants in
lawsuits filed in Louisiana state courts alleging that defendants
manufactured, distributed or utilized drilling mud containing
asbestos and, in our case, allowed such drilling mud to have been
utilized aboard our drilling rigs.  The plaintiffs seek, among
other things, an award of unspecified compensatory and punitive
damages.  The manufacture and use of asbestos-containing drilling
mud had already ceased before we acquired any of the drilling rigs
addressed in these lawsuits.  We believe that we are not liable for
the damages asserted in the lawsuits pursuant to the terms of our
1989 asset purchase agreement with Diamond M Corporation.  We are
unable to estimate our potential exposure, if any, to these
lawsuits at this time but do not believe that our ultimate
liability, if any, resulting from this litigation will have a
material effect on our consolidated financial condition, results of
operations or cash flows."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2H4w1Ej


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Employee Claims Filed Over McGill Hall Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Montana Standard reported that more than 30 asbestos-related
employee claims had been filed against the University of Montana as
of Friday over concerns about contamination discovered since
December at McGill Hall.

The 32 claims could include faculty, staff or student workers.

"We have not made a determination yet in regards to contacting
prior employees," said Michele Wheeler, workers’ compensation
manager at UM, in an email. "Because we have been told by experts
that there is no current airborne hazard in McGill and there is no
definitive data to indicate that there ever was an airborne hazard,
these discussions are still underway."

The number of claims filed in recent fiscal years was not
immediately available.

In the last two weeks, UM closed two child care facilities. Neither
had asbestos in tests of the air, but the McGill Hall center had
concentrations of asbestos fibers on surfaces as much as 80 times
higher than the federal threshold for cleanup. The Craighead Child
Care facility just south of campus had much lower levels of
asbestos in surface tests but was closed to be thoroughly cleaned,
UM officials said. The university also evacuated the rest of McGill
Hall, affecting some 70 faculty, staff, plus students.

UM officials and a certified industrial hygienist have said results
show asbestos is not present in detectable levels based on air
tests in McGill and air tests in the Craighead Child Care facility.
Craighead will move to the College of Education on Monday.

UM officials and consultants have stressed surface asbestos does
not correlate to a health hazard. A university consultant said
mucous generally washes asbestos out of the digestive tract, but if
it remains, it can cause lesions.

The carcinogen can cause asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma
if inhaled, but latency periods can run 10 to 40 years.

At a meeting last week, a consultant said the entire Montana
University System is paying attention to the situation in
Missoula.

The relocation and closure at UM will bring immediate costs and
possibly future health care expenses, and it is prompting UM
officials to review asbestos management protocols.

The immediate expenses include testing for asbestos and analysis of
the results, reimbursing parents for children's winter gear
sequestered in McGill and purchasing new furniture and toys for the
child care facilities.

Cost estimates for work in McGill were not yet available because
the extent of the cleanup had yet to be determined. But Paul
Lasiter, UM vice president for operations and finance, said the
university could tap a couple of different funds and might also
seek support outside its own general fund.

"Regardless of where the funds are coming from, we're committed to
making McGill Hall a safe place for our employees and students to
work and learn," Lasiter said. He sent the email prior to the
relocation of Craighead child care.

A discovery of loose asbestos in McGill in December subsequently
led to more investigations of the old building and a finding of
degradation of material with asbestos in a tunnel that's difficult
to reach.

It isn't clear if the degradation of materials UM saw in McGill
Hall, built in 1953, is isolated, but UM officials have noted they
may start to see similar situations in aging buildings.

UM did not conduct regular asbestos inspections on campus. As a
result of the current findings, university officials note the
campus is revising its asbestos protocols to be proactive.

Parents are requesting routine testing so the high surface
contamination detected in the preschool does not reoccur. Faculty
and staff also want their areas tested.

Asbestos, long used as an insulator, is present on other Montana
campuses, as well as in schools and other public and private
buildings in Montana. But the abrupt preschool closure, subsequent
building evacuation and review of management protocols at UM so far
have not prompted a wider assessment of asbestos management plans
across the state.

Kevin McRae, spokesman for the Office of the Commissioner of Higher
Education, said management for asbestos remains a responsibility of
professionals at the campus level. He also said campuses work
together.

“We have cross-campus, system-wide collaboration to make sure
that our practices and procedures at the campus level are up to
date,” McRae said.

At least at UM, an online search for asbestos management turns up a
2009 operations and maintenance plan. The plan mentions the Clapp
Building, managed for asbestos, and work tunnels in Corbin/Brantly,
but it did not note McGill Hall.

McRae also said the Commissioner's Office does not have emergency
funds for situations such as a building closure related to public
health concerns.

"UM is going to have to prioritize and manage its facilities within
existing budgets," McRae said. " ... When any public sector or
private sector entity that is in the business of serving the public
has a facility need, they don't go to the Commissioner of Higher
Education or the state saying 'fix it.'"

He said the Commissioner's Office would provide support in
communication.

UM officials have said the campus will take responsibility for the
situation and the preschool students. The flagship has directed
parents to its risk manager, Jason Sloat.

Sloat encouraged parents of preschool children to contact him. He
said he will collect pertinent information, and if appropriate,
initiate the claims process and submit it to the risk management
and tort defense division of the Montana Department of
Administration.

He also said UM was preserving preschool attendance records related
to the situation and is making test results public.

UM President Seth Bodnar announced cleanup would begin at McGill
that day and the building likely would be reoccupied by the end of
the month.

Spokeswoman Paula Short said the preschool area there would remain
closed for the time being.

UM noted most surface tests from Craighead child care came back
below a federal cleanup threshold of 5,000 asbestos fibers per
square centimeter, but some came back higher. UM said Friday it was
relocating the Craighead facility in order to conduct a thorough
cleaning, and not because of health concerns.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Goodyear Tire Records $166MM Liability at Dec. 31
------------------------------------------------------------------
The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company has recorded US$166 million
gross liabilities at December 31, 2018 for both asserted and
unasserted asbestos-related claims, inclusive of defense costs,
according to the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2018.

The Company states, "We are a defendant in numerous lawsuits
alleging various asbestos-related personal injuries purported to
result from alleged exposure to asbestos in certain products
previously manufactured by us or present in certain of our
facilities.  Typically, these lawsuits have been brought against
multiple defendants in state and federal courts.

"We periodically, and at least annually, update, using actuarial
analyses, our existing reserves for pending claims, including a
reasonable estimate of the liability associated with unasserted
asbestos claims, and estimate our receivables from probable
insurance recoveries.  We recorded gross liabilities for both
asserted and unasserted claims, inclusive of defense costs,
totaling US$166 million and US$167 million at December 31, 2018 and
2017, respectively.  In determining the estimate of our asbestos
liability, we evaluated claims over the next ten-year period.  Due
to the difficulties in making these estimates, analysis based on
new data and/or a change in circumstances arising in the future may
result in an increase in the recorded obligation, and that increase
could be significant.

"We maintain certain primary and excess insurance coverage under
coverage-in-place agreements, and also have additional excess
liability insurance with respect to asbestos liabilities.  After
consultation with our outside legal counsel and giving
consideration to agreements with certain of our insurance carriers,
the financial viability and legal obligations of our insurance
carriers and other relevant factors, we determine an amount we
expect is probable of recovery from such carriers.  We record a
receivable with respect to such policies when we determine that
recovery is probable and we can reasonably estimate the amount of a
particular recovery.

"We recorded a receivable related to asbestos claims of US$108
million and US$113 million at December 31, 2018 and 2017,
respectively.  We expect that approximately 65% of asbestos claim
related losses would be recoverable through insurance during the
ten-year period covered by the estimated liability.  Of these
amounts, US$13 million and US$15 million was included in Current
Assets as part of Accounts Receivable at December 31, 2018 and
2017, respectively.  The recorded receivable consists of an amount
we expect to collect under coverage-in-place agreements with
certain primary and excess insurance carriers as well as an amount
we believe is probable of recovery from certain of our other excess
insurance carriers."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2GYBlJn


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Had $1.6-Bil. Bendix Claims at Dec. 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Honeywell International Inc. recorded US$1,623 million at December
31, 2018 in asbestos-related liabilities involving predecessor
company Bendix Friction Materials (Bendix) business, according to
the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.
The Company also disclosed that it had 6,209 unresolved
Bendix-related claims at December 31.

The Company states, "Bendix manufactured automotive brake linings
that contained chrysotile asbestos in an encapsulated form.
Claimants consist largely of individuals who allege exposure to
asbestos from brakes from either performing or being in the
vicinity of individuals who performed brake replacements.

"It is not possible to predict whether resolution values for
Bendix-related asbestos claims will increase, decrease or stabilize
in the future.

"Our consolidated financial statements reflect an estimated
liability for resolution of asserted (claims filed as of the
financial statement date) and unasserted Bendix-related asbestos
claims and excludes the Company's legal fees to defend such
asbestos claims which will continue to be expensed by the Company
as they are incurred.  We have valued Bendix asserted and
unasserted claims using average resolution values for the previous
five years.  We update the resolution values used to estimate the
cost of Bendix asserted and unasserted claims during the fourth
quarter each year.

"Honeywell reflects the inclusion of all years of epidemiological
disease projection through 2059 when estimating the liability for
unasserted Bendix-related asbestos claims.  Such liability for
unasserted Bendix-related asbestos claims is based on historic and
anticipated claims filing experience and dismissal rates, disease
classifications, and resolution values in the tort system for the
previous five years.

"Our insurance receivable corresponding to the liability for
settlement of asserted and unasserted Bendix asbestos claims
reflects coverage which is provided by a large number of insurance
policies written by dozens of insurance companies in both the
domestic insurance market and the London excess market.  Based on
our ongoing analysis of the probable insurance recovery, insurance
receivables are recorded in the financial statements simultaneous
with the recording of the estimated liability for the underlying
asbestos claims.  This determination is based on our analysis of
the underlying insurance policies, our historical experience with
our insurers, our ongoing review of the solvency of our insurers,
judicial determinations relevant to our insurance programs, and our
consideration of the impacts of any settlements reached with our
insurers."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2Eu8IlC


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Had $2.5-Bil. Liabilities at Dec. 31
---------------------------------------------------------------
Honeywell International Inc. recorded total liabilities of US$2,514
million related to asbestos matters at December 31, 2018, according
to the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.

The Company states, "Honeywell is a defendant in asbestos related
personal injury actions related to North American Refractories
Company ("NARCO"), which was sold in 1986, and Bendix Friction
Materials ("Bendix") business, which was sold in 2014."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2Eu8IlC


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Records $891MM NARCO Liabilities
-----------------------------------------------------------
Honeywell International Inc. recorded US$891 million at December
31, 2018, in asbestos-related liabilities involving predecessor
company North American Refractories Company (NARCO), according to
the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.

The Company states, "Honeywell's predecessor, Allied Corporation
owned NARCO from 1979 to 1986.  When the NARCO business was sold,
Honeywell's predecessor entered into a cross-indemnity agreement
with NARCO which included an obligation to indemnify the purchaser
for asbestos claims.  Such claims arise primarily from alleged
occupational exposure to asbestos-containing refractory brick and
mortar for high-temperature applications.  NARCO ceased
manufacturing these products in 1980, and the first asbestos claims
were filed in the tort system against NARCO in 1983.  Claims
filings and related costs increased dramatically in the late 1990s
through 2001, which led to NARCO filing for bankruptcy in January
2002.  Once NARCO filed for bankruptcy, all then current and future
NARCO asbestos claims were stayed against both NARCO and Honeywell
pending the reorganization of NARCO.

"Following the bankruptcy filing, in December 2002 Honeywell
recorded a total NARCO asbestos liability of US$3.2 billion, which
was comprised of three components: (i) the estimated liability to
settle pre-bankruptcy petition NARCO claims and certain
post-petition settlements (US$2.2 billion, referred to as
"Pre-bankruptcy NARCO Liability"), (ii) the estimated liability
related to then unasserted NARCO claims for the period 2004 through
2018 (US$950 million, referred to as "NARCO Trust Liability"), and
(iii) other NARCO bankruptcy-related obligations totaling US$73
million.

"As of December 31, 2018, our total NARCO asbestos liability of
US$891 million reflects Pre-bankruptcy NARCO liability of US$148
million and NARCO Trust Liability of US$743 million.  Through
December 31, 2018, Pre-bankruptcy NARCO Liability has been reduced
by approximately US$2 billion since first established in 2002,
largely related to settlement payments.  The remaining
Pre-bankruptcy NARCO liability principally represents estimated
amounts owed pursuant to settlement agreements reached during the
pendency of the NARCO bankruptcy proceedings that provide for the
right to submit claims to the NARCO Trust subject to qualification
under the terms of the settlement agreements and Trust Distribution
Procedures.  The other NARCO bankruptcy obligations were paid in
2013 and no further liability is recorded.

"As of December 31, 2018, Honeywell has not made any payments to
the NARCO Trust for Annual Contribution Claims as Annual
Contribution Claims which have been paid since the Trust became
operational have been funded by cash dividends from HWI.

"Honeywell continues to evaluate the appropriateness of the US$743
million NARCO Trust Liability.  Despite becoming effective in 2013,
the NARCO Trust has experienced delays in becoming fully
operational.  Violations of the Trust Distribution Procedures and
the resulting disputes and challenges, a standstill pending dispute
resolution, and limited claims payments, have all contributed to
the lack of sufficient normalized data based on actual claims
processing experience in the Trust since it became operational.  As
a result, we have not been able to further update the NARCO Trust
Liability.  The US$743 million NARCO Trust Liability continues to
be appropriate because of the unresolved pending claims in the
Trust, some portion of which will result in payouts in the future,
and because new claims continue to be filed with the NARCO Trust.
When sufficiently reliable claims data exists, we will update our
estimate of the NARCO Trust Liability and it is possible that a
material change may need to be recognized.

"Our insurance receivable of US$307 million as of December 31,
2018, corresponding to the estimated liability for asserted and
unasserted NARCO asbestos claims, reflects coverage which
reimburses Honeywell for portions of NARCO-related indemnity and
defense costs and is provided by a large number of insurance
policies written by dozens of insurance companies in both the
domestic insurance market and the London excess market.  We conduct
analyses to estimate the probable amount of insurance that is
recoverable for asbestos claims.  While the substantial majority of
our insurance carriers are solvent, some of our individual carriers
are insolvent, which has been considered in our analysis of
probable recoveries.  We made judgments concerning insurance
coverage that we believe are reasonable and consistent with our
historical dealings and our knowledge of any pertinent solvency
issues surrounding insurers."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2Eu8IlC


ASBESTOS UPDATE: House Flipper Fined $800K for Asbestos Violations
------------------------------------------------------------------
Patch.com reported that a Seattle-based house flipping company
might pay nearly $800,000 in fines after improper handling of
asbestos on a job site, state officials say. The asbestos
violations endangered workers, according to state officials, and
neighbors of a home under renovation.

According to the state Department of Labor and Industries, a
neighbor living next to a home under renovation along Densmore Road
in Lynnwood noticed workers removing suspected asbestos tiles. Two
neighbors confronted a man named Chris Walters, who identified
himself as the owner of the home, according to L&I. Walters told
the neighbors he would begin removing the asbestos properly, but
the neighbors later took video documenting continued improper
asbestos removal.

L&I investigators found that the Lynnwood home had originally been
bought by a Seattle company called Northlake Capital & Development.
Ownership was then transferred to a company called 3917 Densmore
LLC. Walters was an employee of Northlake, according to L&I.

L&I is fining Northlake, 3917 Densmore LLC, Walters, and Northlake
owner James Thorpe for multiple violations.

"The violations included using un-certified workers to remove
asbestos; not using a certified asbestos supervisor; and not
obtaining an asbestos good faith survey prior to beginning work.
They were also cited for not using water and not keeping the
shingles intact during removal (the workers were breaking the tiles
with hammers); for the lack of proper personal protective equipment
for workers; not monitoring the air during removal; and for not
having a written accident prevention program," L&I said in a press
release.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ingersoll-Rand Has $612MM Liabilities at Dec. 31
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ingersoll-Rand Public Limited Company has total asbestos-related
liabilities of US$611.6 million as of December 31, 2018, according
to the Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.

Ingersoll-Rand states, "During the year ended December 31, 2018,
the Company's valuation model was updated to address a change in
potential future claims.  The adjustment, which increased the
asbestos-related liability for both Ingersoll-Rand Company and
Trane, was partially offset by asbestos-related receivables from
insurance carriers.  During the year ended December 31, 2017, the
Company recorded an adjustment to update its liability for
potential future claims.  This amount was partially offset by
asbestos-related settlements reached with various insurance
carriers.  Amounts recorded during the year ended December 31, 2016
included asbestos-related settlements with various insurance
carriers.

"In 2012 and 2013, Ingersoll-Rand Company filed actions in the
Superior Court of New Jersey, Middlesex County, seeking a
declaratory judgment and other relief regarding the Company's
rights to defense and indemnity for asbestos claims.  The
defendants were several dozen solvent insurance companies,
including companies that had been paying a portion of
Ingersoll-Rand Company's asbestos claim defense and indemnity
costs.  The responding defendants generally challenged the
Company's right to recovery, and raised various coverage defenses.
Since filing the actions, Ingersoll Rand Company has settled with
approximately two-thirds of the insurer defendants, and has
dismissed one of the actions in its entirety.

"The Company continually monitors the status of pending litigation
that could impact the allocation of asbestos claims against the
Company's various insurance policies.  The Company has concluded
that its Ingersoll-Rand Company insurance receivable is probable of
recovery because of the following factors:

   * Ingersoll-Rand Company has reached favorable settlements
regarding asbestos coverage claims for the majority of its recorded
asbestos-related insurance receivable;

   * a review of other companies in circumstances comparable to
Ingersoll-Rand Company, including Trane, and the success of other
companies in recovering under their insurance policies, including
Trane's favorable settlement;

   * the Company's confidence in its right to recovery under the
terms of its policies and pursuant to applicable law; and

   * the Company's history of receiving payments under the
Ingersoll-Rand Company insurance program, including under policies
that had been the subject of prior litigation.

"The amounts recorded by the Company for asbestos-related
liabilities and insurance-related assets are based on currently
available information.  The Company's actual liabilities or
insurance recoveries could be significantly higher or lower than
those recorded if assumptions used in the calculations vary
significantly from actual results.  Key variables in these
assumptions include the number and type of new claims to be filed
each year, the average cost of resolution of each such new claim,
the resolution of coverage issues with insurance carriers, and the
solvency risk with respect to the Company's insurance carriers.
Furthermore, predictions with respect to these variables are
subject to greater uncertainty as the projection period lengthens.
Other factors that may affect the Company's liability include
uncertainties surrounding the litigation process from jurisdiction
to jurisdiction and from case to case, reforms that may be made by
state and federal courts, and the passage of state or federal tort
reform legislation.

"The aggregate amount of the stated limits in insurance policies
available to the Company for asbestos-related claims acquired, over
many years and from many different carriers, is substantial.
However, limitations in that coverage, are expected to result in
the projected total liability to claimants substantially exceeding
the probable insurance recovery."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2VpxEAs


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Ingersoll-Rand Still Defends Claims at Dec. 31
---------------------------------------------------------------
More than 75 percent of the open and active asbestos-related claims
against Ingersoll-Rand Public Limited Company at December 31, 2018,
are non-malignant or unspecified disease claims, according to the
Company's Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018.

Ingersoll-Rand states, "Certain wholly-owned subsidiaries and
former companies of ours are named as defendants in
asbestos-related lawsuits in state and federal courts.  In
virtually all of the suits, a large number of other companies have
also been named as defendants.  The vast majority of those claims
have been filed against either Ingersoll-Rand Company or Trane U.S.
Inc.  (Trane) and generally allege injury caused by exposure to
asbestos contained in certain historical products sold by
Ingersoll-Rand Company or Trane, primarily pumps, boilers and
railroad brake shoes.  None of our existing or previously-owned
businesses were a producer or manufacturer of asbestos.

"The Company engages an outside expert to perform a detailed
analysis and project an estimated range of the Company's total
liability for pending and unasserted future asbestos-related
claims.  In accordance with ASC 450, the Company records the
liability at the low end of the range as it believes that no amount
within the range is a better estimate than any other amount.
Asbestos-related defense costs are excluded from the liability and
are recorded separately as services are incurred.  The methodology
used to prepare estimates relies upon and includes the following
factors, among others:

   * the outside expert's interpretation of a widely accepted
forecast of the population likely to have been occupationally
exposed to asbestos;

   * epidemiological studies estimating the number of people likely
to develop asbestos-related diseases such as mesothelioma and lung
cancer;

   * the Company's historical experience with the filing of
non-malignancy claims and claims alleging other types of malignant
diseases filed against the Company relative to the number of lung
cancer claims filed against the Company;

   * the outside expert's analysis of the number of people likely
to file an asbestos-related personal injury claim against the
Company based on such epidemiological and historical data and the
Company's claims history;

   * an analysis of the Company's pending cases, by type of disease
claimed and by year filed;

   * an analysis of the Company's history to determine the average
settlement and resolution value of claims, by type of disease
claimed;

   * an adjustment for inflation in the future average settlement
value of claims, at a 2.5% annual inflation rate, adjusted downward
to 1.0% to take account of the declining value of claims resulting
from the aging of the claimant population; and

   * an analysis of the period over which the Company has and is
likely to resolve asbestos-related claims against it in the future
(currently projected through 2053).

"At December 31, 2018, over 75 percent of the open and active
claims against the Company are non-malignant or unspecified disease
claims.  In addition, the Company has a number of claims which have
been placed on inactive or deferred dockets and expected to have
little or no settlement value against the Company."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-K is available at
https://bit.ly/2VpxEAs


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Judge Dismisses Mantovi Asbestos Exposure Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Forbes reported that the chief judge of New York's controversial
asbestos court has dismissed a lawsuit by a man who claimed his
cancer was caused by exposure to asbestos fibers in floor tiles, in
a significant ruling that may make it harder for plaintiffs to win
money from outlier defendants whose products presented a marginal
risk of exposure at best.

The January 31 decision could have especially strong implications
for lawsuits over talcum powder, which even plaintiff experts say
contains only trace amounts of asbestos. Plaintiff lawyers are
hoping for big results in the court, which is known as New York
City Asbestos Litigation and has a reputation as a plaintiff's
paradise.

Four talc trials were scheduled to begin in January in NYCAL.

The five-page ruling by Justice Manuel J. Mendez comes several
months after the New York Court of Appeals tightened the standards
for asbestos lawsuits in Juni v. Ford Motor Co. Under Juni,
plaintiffs must not only show that asbestos can cause cancer as a
general proposition, but that the specific product they are suing
over contained enough of the deadly fibers to cause their disease.

The decision in Mantovi v. American Biltrite reflects those tighter
standards, with Justice Mendez writing that the defendants
successfully showed the fibers embedded in its floor tiles
couldn’t cause mesothelioma, a deadly cancer of the pleural
lining linked to asbestos exposure.

"Generally courts have been reluctant to grant summary judgment
where the asserted defense is based on a lack of scientific
causation," said Oded Burger, a partner with Goldberg Segalla who
defends companies in asbestos lawsuits. "But this shows it is a not
insurmountable burden in New York City."

Thomas Mantovi sued American Biltrite, claiming he was exposed to
asbestos fibers contained in the company's floor tiles while he
worked as an insurance agent inspecting construction sites in the
1960s and '70s. Before he died of mesothelioma in 2018, Mantovi
testified that he visited job sites where floor tiles were cut and
laid down and that he was exposed to asbestos dust.

American Biltrite, in its motion to dismiss, presented evidence
from industrial hygienists and physicians that the floor tiles
contained relatively harmless chrysotile asbestos that was
encapsulated in resin and couldn't be released into the air in
deadly form. The company also pointed to other likely sources of
the plaintiff's exposure, including his service on U.S. Navy ships
and years working at a Mobil refinery.

The plaintiff's expert, Dr. David Zhang, supplied a report
concluding Mantovi had a history of significant levels of asbestos
exposure, but that each source of exposure could have contributed
to his disease. The expert didn't point to any studies showing how
American Biltrite's Amtico floor tiles could have caused the
plaintiff’s disease, however, and made no distinction between
chrysotile fibers and far deadlier amphibole fibers Mantovi could
have been exposed to in other settings.

The plaintiff's evidence failed to meet the standards under Juni
and predecessor decisions in New York, Justice Mendez wrote, which
require experts to estimate exposure with mathematical models and
compare that exposure to levels in studies demonstrating it can
cause disease.

Every person is exposed to significant amounts of asbestos in daily
life, so plaintiffs must show their exposure was higher than
background levels and, under New York's tighter rules, how the
product they are suing over caused that exposure.

"Plaintiff's conclusory argument that Dr. Zhang's trial testimony
will rest on an 'overwhelming scientific consensus' is unavailing,"
the judge wrote. Defense experts estimated that Mantovi's exposure
to fibers from floor tiles was less than 1/600th of the lowest
level of ambient exposure not associated with disease, making it
impossible to show the tiles were a significant contributing factor
to his disease.

Justice Mendez is the sole judge who decides summary judgment
motions in NYCAL, which handles all asbestos litigation in the
five-borough New York City area and represents one of the busiest
asbestos courts in the country. Johnson & Johnson and other talc
manufacturers are likely to use this decision as a template for
their own motions to dismiss hundreds of lawsuits claiming talc
causes mesothelioma and other cancers.

"This is the first decision out of NYCAL that demonstrates you can
obtain summary judgment where there's some alleged exposure, but
the science shows that such an exposure did not increase the risk
of the disease," Burger said.

To prevail, plaintiffs will have to find experts willing to testify
that there is enough asbestos in talc to make a daily dusting with
the powder a deadly risk. Talc manufacturers maintain there is no
asbestos in their products, a statement supported by numerous
tests.

Plaintiffs say talc was contaminated with asbestos in the 1960s and
1970s, but now, under this ruling, will have to find experts
willing to testify that the amount of asbestos in talc back then
was sufficient to increase plaintiffs' exposure significantly above
background levels.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Judge Remands Shanahan Litigation to State Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Jesse M. Furman for the Southern District of New
York has granted Plaintiffs' motion to remand the case styled Laura
Shanahan and Vincent Walsh, Plaintiffs, v. Kolmar Laboratories,
Inc., et al., Defendants, No. 18-CV-8317 (JMF), (S.D. N.Y.) to the
Supreme Court of New York, New York County.

Plaintiffs Laura Shanahan and Vincent Walsh brought this
products-liability action against Kolmar Laboratories, Inc. and
eight other entities in New York state court, seeking compensatory
and punitive damages related to Defendants' alleged manufacture and
sale of asbestos-containing talc products, to which -- Plaintiffs
allege -- Shanahan was exposed, causing her to develop
mesothelioma.

Although Plaintiffs and Kolmar are citizens of New York, and the
Court would thus appear to lack diversity jurisdiction, Defendants
Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. removed the
action to the Court, invoking the doctrine of fraudulent joinder.
Under the fraudulent doctrine, "courts overlook the presence of a
non-diverse defendant if from the pleadings there is no possibility
that the claims against that defendant could be asserted in state
court."

In support of their fraudulent joinder theory, the J&J Defendants
contend that Plaintiffs have "not pled any facts specifying what .
. . role Kolmar had in producing the talcum powder to which Ms.
Shanahan was exposed." But that is not the case, as Plaintiffs
explicitly allege in their Complaint that "Kolmar engaged in
tortious conduct through the manufacture, design, testing, supply,
labeling and distribution of asbestos-containing talc products to
which [Ms. Shanahan] was exposed."

While that general allegation would arguably be insufficient under
federal pleading standards, the Court points out that the question
at this stage is whether Plaintiffs' pleadings are enough to give
them some possibility of success against Kolmar in the state court
from which the action was removed. The Court explains that New York
requires only that a complaint "plead facts with sufficient
particularity to give the court and parties notice of the
transactions, occurrences, or series of transactions or
occurrences, intended to be proved and the material elements of
each cause of action or defense." Taking into account New York's
more lenient pleading standard, the Court determines that
Plaintiffs' allegations connecting Kolmar's conduct to Shanahan's
injuries are particular enough to create at least some possibility
that Plaintiffs could recover against Kolmar in New York's courts.


Conceding for the purposes of argument that Kolmar was at least a
"contract manufacturer" of J&J Baby Powder -- the
asbestos-containing talc product to which Plaintiffs allege
Shanahan was exposed -- the J&J Defendants also argue that Kolmar
would be immune from liability under New York law.

Under New York law, a "contractor is justified in relying upon the
plans and specifications which he has contracted to follow, unless
they are so apparently defective that an ordinary [contractor] of
ordinary prudence would be put upon notice that the work was
dangerous and likely to cause injury." But, as Plaintiffs point
out, when Kolmar filed its answer in the Court, it failed to raise
the contract-specifications affirmative defense.

More significantly, the contract-specifications defense implicates
factual questions that remain unresolved at this stage. Obviously,
for Kolmar to prevail on the defense, a factfinder would have to
conclude that it manufactured the talc products according to
someone else's "plans and specifications" and that those plans and
specifications were not "so apparently defective" that an
ordinarily prudent manufacturer would have been on notice of the
dangerous defect. At a minimum, the latter question remains in
dispute, as Plaintiffs allege that Kolmar learned that the talc
products it manufactured were contaminated with asbestos as early
as the 1970s. Thus, the Court cannot conclude that there is "no
possibility" that Plaintiffs' claims against Kolmar "could be
asserted in state court," or -- alternatively -- that there is "no
reasonable basis" for those claims.

Thus, the Court concludes J&J Defendants have failed to carry their
burden to show that Kolmar was fraudulently joined for the purpose
of defeating diversity jurisdiction. As diversity jurisdiction was
the sole basis for removal, remand is required. Nevertheless, the
Court rejects Plaintiffs' request for attorney's fees. Although the
J&J Defendants' arguments fell short, the Court cannot say that
they lacked an objectively reasonable basis for seeking removal
given the parsimonious nature of Plaintiffs' allegations against
Kolmar

A copy of the Memorandum Opinion and Order, is available at
https://tinyurl.com/yxkdkbsl from Leagle.com.

Laura Shanahan & Vincent Walsh, Plaintiffs, represented by Renner
Kincaid Walker , Levy Konigsberg LLP, Brendan E. Little , Levy
Konigsberg LLP & Suzanne Micheline Ratcliffe , Weitz & Luxenberg,
P.C.

Kolmar Laboratories, Inc., Defendant, represented by Richard John
Pelliccio , Mcglinchey Stafford, PLLC.

Brenntag North America, as a successor-in-interest to Mineral
Pigment Solutions, Inc., as a successor-in-interest to Whittaker,
Clark & Daniels, Inc. & Brenntag Specialties, Inc., as a
successor-in-interest to Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc.,
Defendants, represented by Daniel Robert Kuszmerski , Barrett,
Lazar & Lincoln, LLC.

Cyprus Amax Minerals Company, Imerys Talc America, Inc.,
individually, Imerys USA, Inc. & Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc.,
Defendants, represented by Andrew Sapon -- Sapon@LitchfieldCavo.com
-- Litchfield Cavo LLP & Michael Robert L'Homme --
LHomme@LitchfieldCavo.com -- Litchfield Cavo LLP.

Johnson & Johnson & Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., Defendants,
represented by Louis Michael Russo -- lmrusso@pbwt.com --
Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP & Thomas Philip Kurland --
tkurland@pbwt.com -- Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP.

Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc., Defendant, represented by
Christopher Stephen Kozak -- ckozak@lcbf.com -- Landman Corsi
Ballaine & Ford, PC.

Kolmar Laboratories, Inc., Cross Claimant, represented by Richard
John Pelliccio , Mcglinchey Stafford, PLLC.

Kolmar Laboratories, Inc., Cross Defendant, represented by Richard
John Pelliccio , Mcglinchey Stafford, PLLC.

Brenntag North America, as a successor-in-interest to Mineral
Pigment Solutions, Inc., as a successor-in-interest to Whittaker,
Clark & Daniels, Inc. & Brenntag Specialties, Inc., as a
successor-in-interest to Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc., Cross
Defendants, represented by Daniel Robert Kuszmerski , Barrett,
Lazar & Lincoln, LLC.

Cyprus Amax Minerals Company, Imerys Talc America, Inc.,
individually, Imerys Talc America, Inc., as successor-in-interest
to Metropolitan Talc, American Talc, Resource Processors, Inc. and
Charles Mathieu, Inc., Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc. & Imerys USA,
Inc., Cross Defendants, represented by Andrew Sapon --
Sapon@LitchfieldCavo.com -- Litchfield Cavo LLP & Michael Robert
L'Homme -- LHomme@LitchfieldCavo.com -- Litchfield Cavo LLP.

Johnson & Johnson & Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc., Cross
Defendants, represented by Louis Michael Russo -- lmrusso@pbwt.com
-- Patterson, Belknap, Webb & Tyler LLP & Thomas Philip Kurland --
tkurland@pbwt.com -- Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP.

Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc., Cross Defendant, represented by
Christopher Stephen Kozak -- ckozak@lcbf.com -- Landman Corsi
Ballaine & Ford, PC.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Awards $18.5MM for Fatal Asbestos Exposure
----------------------------------------------------------------
Arkansas Online reported that after a three-week trial in a Little
Rock federal courtroom, a jury awarded more than $18.5 million to
the family of a man who worked at a brake shop in the city in the
1970s, exposing him to asbestos in brake-shoe linings.

The verdict, published in electronic court records, was against
Honeywell International Inc., which years ago bought Allied Signal,
a company that had acquired Bendix in 1984. Bendix was one of the
principal manufacturers of brake-shoe linings in the country. When
Honeywell bought Allied Signal, it also bought all of the company's
liabilities.

Benjamin Braly, a Dallas attorney who tried the case on behalf of
the estate of Ronald Burlie Thomas, a former Arkansan who developed
mesothelioma in March 2017 and died Dec. 31 of that year at age 72,
said he found the verdict "validating." But Braly said he was
disappointed that jurors didn't also hold Ford Motor Co. liable for
Thomas' suffering and death. Ford manufactured some of the cars on
which Thomas installed the brake shoes, but other American
automobile manufacturers had been absolved of asbestos liability as
a result of bankruptcy filings years ago.

Mesothelioma is a fatal, progressive and incurable cancer of the
lining around the lung and is a sign of exposure to asbestos. Braly
said the disease takes 20 to 50 years from the time of first
exposure to develop, and that latency period is why asbestos
lawsuits continue to be filed across the country, despite
increasing awareness over the years of the dangers of the product.
He said the product causes genetic errors, eventually causing the
coating that allows the lungs to slide over the ribs to thicken and
harden until it hurts to breathe.

Thomas worked at Stuart's Brake Shop in Little Rock and North
Little Rock from 1971 until 1983, performing 10 to 12 brake jobs
every day during some periods, according to court documents. Braly
noted that the shop, which is still open in North Little Rock, was
owned then by Stuart Flanders, but has different owners now. He
said Thomas moved to Texas in 1984 and was still living in the
state, in Midland, when he was diagnosed.

Thomas held other jobs, too, but because his greatest exposure to
asbestos was at the brake shops in Little Rock and North Little
Rock, "we feel like it made more sense to file [the 2017 lawsuit]
in Little Rock," Braly said Wednesday.

He said he isn't expecting Honeywell to appeal the verdict because
of a negotiated settlement before the verdict that covered a range
of verdicts.

The verdict, delivered in the courtroom of Chief U.S. District
Judge Brian Miller, assigned 18.75 percent of the fault to
Honeywell. Jurors also found that Ronald Thomas was 5 percent at
fault, and that two other companies that settled their portions of
the case before trial -- Pneumo Abex LLC and Genuine Parts Co.,
also known as Napa -- each bore 9.375 percent of the fault. Jurors
attributed the lion's share of the fault -- 57.5 percent -- to
"other parties."

Jurors awarded $216,000 for Thomas' loss of life, $5 million for
his pain and suffering and $341,979 for his medical expenses.
Thomas' wife was deceased, but the couple's son and two daughters,
all of whom live in Texas, were each awarded $1 million for
anguish. The jury also leveled $10 million in punitive damages,
answering yes to the question, "Do you find, by clear and
convincing evidence, that Honeywell International Inc. knew or
should have known that its conduct would naturally and probably
result in injury and that it continued such conduct in reckless
disregard of the consequences of its action?"

Braly said Bendix "knew they had a problem" but instead of trying
to find a solution, they "turned a blind eye" to it.

Braly is with the law firm Dean Omar Branham & Shirley in Dallas,
which he says has 50 to 100 active mesothelioma cases underway
across the country, but, "This was my first trial."

While he is a first-year trial lawyer, he said, he has been a part
of several other mesothelioma trials over the past 10 years.

George Wise of the Brad Hendricks Law Firm in Little Rock was local
counsel on the plaintiffs' side.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lawyers Rally Parents of Montana Preschoolers
--------------------------------------------------------------
Montana Kaimin reported that parents of children exposed to
asbestos in McGill Hall's childcare area met with two attorneys
Feb. 7 after grilling University of Montana officials at multiple
on-campus meetings about its response to the contamination.

On the second floor of the Florence Building in downtown Missoula,
attorneys Adam Duerk and Jim Roberts shared their experiences in
representing clients exposed to toxins, and took questions from the
nearly two dozen adults in the audience. Some held babies in their
arms. Their older children stayed busy at tables on the far side of
the room.

A child started to cough.

"Cover your mouth, please," said his father.

Duerk and Roberts, both part of the Knight Nicastro law firm, held
an open meeting Thursday for anyone concerned with being exposed to
asbestos in McGill Hall, which the University closed January 31.

"The main purpose is to let people know that there is a legal
recourse, and that solutions tend to emerge with time," Duerk
said.

Both Duerk and Roberts represent a client who, like all the parents
in the audience, was impacted by the discovery of traces of
exposure in McGill well above standards established by the
Environmental Protection Agency.

For nearly two months, UM has tried to ease concerns from staff,
faculty, students and parents. Tests of a dust pile found above a
ceiling tile in McGill Hall showed "unacceptable" amounts of
asbestos fibers December 12.

In the following weeks, the University first sealed off several
offices. After further tests, officials closed off the building's
preschool center, displacing the program's 47 children. Two days
later, an email announced that the entire building would be
shuttered. Although air consistently showed no dangerous level of
asbestos fibers, wipe samples taken from computers and furniture in
the preschool showed levels far above federal standards.

In the past two weeks, officials heard from parents outraged that
they were not told of the initial discovery of asbestos, and
professors and students of the Media Arts program who now found
themselves without access to specialized equipment or classrooms
vital to the program.

When told at a meeting earlier on campus Thursday that McGill may
open within the next week, audience members still questioned
whether they'd be risking their health by returning to class. And
the concern is not contained to McGill.

Martin Horejsi, a professor in the education building, held up a
plastic container with bits of ceiling tile that he found on a
bookshelf in his office.

"Should I wear a respirator when I clean my office?" he asked
environmental hygienist Scott Rogers.

Acting on behalf of its client, Duerk's firm has requested that the
University preserve all material in McGill's daycare being tested
for asbestos, such as books, clothes and furniture. Other items
requested for preservation includes emails between the University
and the environmental hygienists hired to test for asbestos.

Since the discovery of loose asbestos in December, Duerk said that
parents, students and faculty have reached out to his firm for
consultation.

According to Duerk, Knight Nicastro has also requested a meeting
with University to discuss the concerns of his client directly with
officials.

Knight Nicastro has represented both plaintiffs and defendants in
cases involving asbestos exposure. In September 2018, the firm
successfully defended BNSF Railway company in a $1.67 million
lawsuit from an engineer claiming to suffer illnesses caused by
asbestos exposure in Libby, Montana.

"These cases often settle," Duerk said. "But occasionally they do
go to trial.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Natives Disproportionately Affected by Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mesothelioma.net reported that mesothelioma is an equal opportunity
disease. It impacts everybody who has been exposed to asbestos,
regardless of age, gender, or other demographic information.
However, not everybody is equally at risk for exposure to asbestos.
It has long been known that there are certain occupations that
historically had a higher degree of exposure to the carcinogenic
material than others. What has not been publicized is the fact that
Native Americans continue to be put at disproportionate risk for
asbestos-related diseases because of illegal dumping of asbestos on
their tribal lands.

According to a report published in The Circle, a Native American
news publication, data available through the National American
Indian Cancer Foundation has revealed lung cancer as one of the top
causes of deaths among the Native American community, and that
mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases are a particular
concern. Though Native American women are also affected by breast
and colorectal cancer and men by prostate and colorectal cancer,
there is significant concern about the role that asbestos has
played in tribal health. This is not only because so many Native
American men and women worked in blue collar jobs that put them at
high risk for exposure to the mineral. Another known source of
asbestos exposure leading to mesothelioma among Native Americans is
that those who worked in asbestos-exposed jobs later brought
asbestos dust home on their skin, clothing or hair. This
second-hand exposure has long been known as a risk factor for
family members, including women and children.

Fly Tipping is Illegal and Puts Native Americans at Risk
One of the mesothelioma risks that Native Americans face is from
exposure to asbestos that has been illegally dumped on their tribal
lands. This practice is known as fly tipping, and it is frequently
perpetrated by those trying to avoid compliance with federal, state
or local asbestos disposal and handling rules. This puts Native
Americans of all ages at risk for exposure to this carcinogenic
material: its fibers can easily become airborne and inhaled, as
well as carried into groundwater and ingested.

The heightened risk of mesothelioma as a result of these actions
represents a continuation of the damage caused by asbestos. If you
or anybody you love has been impacted by asbestos and needs
information on the resources available to you, contact the Patient
Advocates at Mesothelioma.net at 1-800-692-8608.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Evidence in Philadelphia Asbestos Talc Trial
----------------------------------------------------------------
Forbes reported that companies facing million-dollar lawsuits in
Philadelphia can celebrate today, as what would have been the first
talc-related asbestos trial held in the city has seen a judge cut
off the plaintiff's case before it could ever get to a jury.

On February 7, Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas Judge
Kenneth Powell granted a motion for summary judgment from Theresa
M. Mullaney of Kent & McBride, counsel for defendant
Colgate-Palmolive Company.

This comes after Powell refused to let the plaintiff's expert
testify that Cashmere Bouquet-brand cosmetic talcum powder, made by
Colgate, caused Sally Brandt's mesothelioma -- a deadly cancer
linked to asbestos exposure.

Powell's one-page order granted the defense's renewed request for
judgment, filed after Powell disqualified the plaintiff's expert,
Dr. James Millette.

"Now that Dr. Millette's testing opinions have been excluded, Ms.
Raterman (an industrial hygienist testifying for the plaintiff) has
no foundation for her opinion, and Plaintiffs have no other expert
testimony that could create a triable issue on the question of
whether Colgate's product caused Ms. Brandt's disease," Mullaney
wrote in Colgate's motion.

Despite a debate over the science, talc-asbestos cases have
resulted in stunning verdicts around the country.

Most notable of these is a $4.7 billion verdict in St. Louis
against Johnson & Johnson on behalf of 22 women who were diagnosed
with ovarian cancer.

Legal Newsline previously reported that the plaintiffs' attorney,
Mark Lanier of Texas, used unorthodox props like a block of cheese
to convince the jury that the science was on his side.

Verdicts in Philadelphia have been a concern for business and legal
reform groups. Just last week, a jury awarded $25 million in
punitive damages as part of a $41 million verdict in a pelvic mesh
case. Defendants have vowed to appeal.

The city has long been a target for pharmaceutical lawsuits from
out-of-state plaintiffs, as its Complex Litigation Center houses
thousands of Risperdal and Xarelto cases.

The Brandt talc case dates back to December 31, 2015, and was filed
by Charles Brandt of Duncannon, as executor of the estate of Sally
Brandt against Bon-Ton Stores, Inc. (doing business as "Pomeroy's
Department Store") of York; Charles B. Chrystal Company of New York
City; Colgate-Palmolive Company of Harrisburg; Whittaker Clark &
Daniels of Newark, N.J.; and Imerys Talc America, Inc. of
Wilmington, Del.

The case alleged that Sally developed mesothelioma from Cashmere
Bouquet-brand cosmetic talcum powder, manufactured by Colgate. This
causation argument was supported by opinions from four experts,
geologist Sean Fitzgerald, pathologist Ronald Gordon, industrial
hygienist Raterman and pathologist John Maddox.

Fitzgerald and Gordon both previously stated that they claimed to
have found asbestos in test samples of Cashmere Bouquet talcum
powder.

However, after a Frye hearing, their opinions were deemed
unreliable due to "numerous methodological flaws" in their research
and excluded from future testimony on September 25, 2017.

As a result, Colgate-Palmolive filed a motion for summary judgment
on November 16, 2017, arguing that the exclusion of Fitzgerald and
Gordon's opinions ensured the plaintiffs had no evidence to create
a triable issue of fact that Sally was exposed to asbestos through
using Cashmere Bouquet-brand talc, and that this caused her
mesothelioma.

Plaintiff counsel, the Locks Law Firm of Philadelphia and Waters &
Kraus of Dallas, countered that Raterman's opinion of Sally being
exposed to asbestos fibers at levels "significantly greater than
background concentrations" led to an increased risk of her
developing mesothelioma.

Though this perspective relied partially on the excluded research
and testing of Fitzgerald, plaintiff counsel claimed it was
supported by other evidence -- specifically, air test sample
results from non-testifying expert witness Dr. James Millette.

This led the Court initially to deny Colgate's motion for summary
judgment on Oct. 2 of last year. However, the Court later excluded
Millette's airborne concentration opinions on Feb. 1, ensuring they
would not be considered "of record" in the case – and thus,
leading Colgate to renew its motion for summary judgment on Feb.
6.

"Where the plaintiff fails to proffer evidence to create a triable
issue as to whether she was frequently and regularly exposed to
significant airborne concentrations of asbestos from the
defendants' product, summary judgment is warranted," the defense
motion for summary judgment read, in part.

"Here, even assuming arguendo that the Cashmere Bouquet talcum
powder that Ms. Brandt used contained some level of asbestos -- and
it did not -- plaintiff cannot support a claim against Colgate,
because they have no evidence that could establish that Ms. Brandt
was exposed to airborne concentrations of asbestos from the product
at levels sufficient to cause her disease.

"As plaintiffs have no competent, admissible evidence that Ms.
Brandt was exposed to asbestos from Cashmere Bouquet cosmetic
talcum powder at levels sufficient to cause her disease, summary
judgment is warranted."

The summary judgment motion further argued that the Court, in
excluding Millette's testing opinions, "substantially changed the
status of the case, warranting renewed consideration of Colgate's
summary judgment motion."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sen. Murray Probing J&J About Asbestos Talc
------------------------------------------------------------
Asbestos.com reported that Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., has
questions, and she wants answers from Johnson & Johnson about its
iconic baby powder and the reported link to asbestos-related
cancers.

Murray recently sent a letter to Johnson & Johnson CEO Alex Gorsky,
asking for documentation about past testing for asbestos-tainted
talc and communication with the FDA regarding the safety of its
product.

Murray is a ranking member of the Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions.

The letter stemmed from an earlier report by Reuters that Johnson &
Johnson hid evidence of asbestos in its product for many years and
intentionally misled the FDA about it.

Murray wanted the documents to "understand more about efforts by
Johnson & Johnson to determine whether there were possible
carcinogens in its baby powder and how it presented that
information to regulators and consumers."

Legal Troubles Mounting for J&J
Johnson & Johnson already is facing mounting legal problems with
more than 11,000 plaintiffs contending Johnson's Baby Powder and
Shower to Shower products caused cancer.

The number of plaintiffs is expected to double in 2019.

A small percentage of the cases involve mesothelioma, a rare and
aggressive cancer caused almost exclusively by asbestos. The
majority of cases center around ovarian cancer.

Some of the more highly publicized cases in 2018 include:

A jury in St. Louis ordered Johnson & Johnson to pay $4.9 billion
in damages to 22 women who blamed the baby powder for causing their
ovarian cancer.
A South Carolina judge declared a mistrial after jurors failed to
reach a verdict for a man alleging asbestos in Johnson's Baby
Powder caused the mesothelioma that led to his wife's death.
A Los Angeles Superior Court awarded $21.7 million to a woman who
said using the company's baby powder for 20 years led to her
mesothelioma.
J&J Confirms Senator's Concerns
J&J, based in Brunswick, New Jersey, is the world's largest
marketer of talc products.

Its sales exceed those of all competitors combined.

J&J spokesman Ernie Knewitz confirmed receiving the letter from
Murray. He told Reuters the company looks forward to sharing its
response with the Senator.

Murray opened her letter with:

"I am troubled by recent reports of an alleged decades-long effort
by Johnson & Johnson to potentially mislead regulators and
consumers about the safety of one of its products, which may have
resulted in long-term harm for men, women and children who used
Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder."

J&J Adamant About Talc Safety

In response to the earlier report by Reuters, Johnson and Johnson
was adamant that its baby powder was safe. In each legal case it
defended, executives maintained their products do not contain toxic
asbestos.

Various testing methods through the years have been inconclusive.

"For over 100 years, Johnson & Johnson has known that the talc in
our baby powder is the purest, safest pharmaceutical-grade talc on
earth," Gorsky said in a video response to the Reuters report.

"If we believed our products were unsafe, they would be off the
shelves and out of the market immediately," he continued.

The issue stems from the mining of talc, which often is found close
to asbestos deposits, which can cause cross contamination. Talc,
the softest naturally occurring mineral in the world, is used in
variety of industrial and consumer products.

Reuters, in its earlier report, obtained documents that proved
Johnson & Johnson executives debated about the purity of its talc
years ago.

Company memos and other internal documents included efforts to
influence scientific research on the health effects of talc and
hinder regulators to limit asbestos in J&J's products.

In her letter, Murray wrote that it's "unclear whether the company
disclosed to the FDA that some of its tested samples contained
contaminants."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sri Lanka Talc Imports Halted Pending Tests
------------------------------------------------------------
Reuters reported that Sri Lanka has halted imports of Johnson &
Johnson Baby Powder until the company proves its product is free
from cancer-causing asbestos, two government officials and the
product’s local distributor told Reuters.

Stocks of the product already in Sri Lanka can still be sold, but
there will be no new imports of the talc, a popular healthcare
product across Sri Lanka and much of Asia, until J&J India, from
where Sri Lanka imports the product, provides fresh test results.

On Dec. 14, Reuters reported that the U.S. drugs and consumer
products group knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby
Powder, leading to tests in several countries, including in India.

The report was based on thousands of pages of company memos,
internal reports, and other confidential documents.

J&J has described the Reuters story as "one-sided, false, and
inflammatory."

Kamal Jayasinghe, chief executive of Sri Lanka’s National
Medicine Regulatory Authority (NMRA), which is part of the health
ministry, said it had informed the distributor, A.Baur & Co., that
it would require further tests for it to continue importing the
powder.

"We have held their re-registration and informed the distributor to
submit quality reports from an accredited laboratory to ensure
there is no asbestos in their products," Jayasinghe told Reuters.

The license for A.Baur & Co to import the product expired in
December, a second person at the NMRA said.

Shalutha Perera, head of consumer for A.Baur, told Reuters the firm
has informed J&J in India of the suspension of the licensing
process.

"J&J India directly handles all the regulatory matters," he said.

Perera said the NMRA contacted A.Baur in December regarding new
asbestos testing.

A spokeswoman for J&J India declined to comment on the halt of
shipments to Sri Lanka but said the company "is in full compliance
with current Indian regulatory requirements for the manufacturing
and testing of our talc."

"We are fully cooperating with the Indian government and are
awaiting results from their testing," she added.

The spokeswoman said the product was routinely tested by both
suppliers and independent labs to ensure it is free of asbestos.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toy's Action Against Ford Motor Dismissed
----------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to a Stipulation, Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. of the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
dismissed Plaintiffs' action against Defendant Ford Motor Company
in the case entitled Thomas H. Toy, Sr. and Agnes Toy, Plaintiffs,
v. Honeywell International Inc., f/k/a Allied-Products Liability
Signal, Inc., sued as successor-in-interest to Bendix Corporation,
et al., Defendants, Case No. 4:19-cv-00325-HSG, (N.D. Cal.),
without prejudice.

A copy of the Order, is available at https://tinyurl.com/y3p6tz4s
from Leagle.com.

Thomas H. Toy, Sr. & Agnes Toy, Plaintiffs, represented by Benjamin
H. Adams -- badams@dobllp.com -- Dean Omar Branham Shirley &
Jessica M. Dean -- jdean@dobllp.com -- Dean Omar & Branham LLP.

Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, individually and as
successor-in-interest to Buffalo Pumps Inc & Velan Valve Corp.,
Defendants, represented by Glen R. Powell -- gpowell@grsm.com --
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP, James G. Scadden --
jscadden@grsm.com -- Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani LLP & Michael J.
Pietrykowski -- mpietrykowski@grsm.com -- Gordon Rees Scully
Mansukhani LLP.

Aurora Pump Company, Defendant, represented by Christine Dianne
Calareso , CMBG3 Law LLC & Haley Lanell Hansen , CMBG3 Law LLC.

Blackmer Pump Company, Carrier Corporation & Warren Pumps LLC,
Defendants, represented by James P. Cunningham --
james.cunningham@tuckerellis.com -- Tucker Ellis LLP & Ronald Q.
Tran -- ronald.tran@tuckerellis.com -- Tucker Ellis LLP.

CBS Corporation, a Delaware corporation, successor-by-merger to CBS
Corporation, a Pennsylania corporation, and also as success-in
interest B.F. Sturtevant Company, Defendant, represented by Kevin
Douglas Jamison , Kevin Jamison Law, PC, Erin Nicole Empting ,
Kevin Jamison Law, PC & Justin Finnell Cronin , Kevin Jamison Law,
PC.

CLA-VAL Co., Defendant, represented by Charles H. Kanter --
ckanter@ptwww.com -- Palmieri, Tylerm Wiener, Wilhelm & Waldron LLP
& John Russell Lister -- jlister@ptwww.com -- Palmieri Tyler Wiener
Wilhelm Waldron.

Copes-Vulcan Inc., Defendant, represented by Nicole Elisabet Gage
-- nicole.gage@tuckerellis.com -- Tucker Ellis LLP & Lance Douglas
Wilson , Tucker Ellis LLP.

Dana Companies LLC, Defendant, represented by Edward R. Hugo --
ehugo@hugoparker.com -- Hugo Parker, LLP & Christina M. Glezakos --
cglezakos@hugoparker.com -- Hugo Parker, LLC.

Flowserve US Inc., Defendant, represented by Daniel James Kelly --
daniel.kelly@tuckerellis.com -- Tucker Ellis LLP & Nicole Elisabet
Gage -- nicole.gage@tuckerellis.com -- Tucker Ellis LLP.

General Electric Company, Defendant, represented by Derek S.
Johnson -- djohnson@wfbm.com -- WFBM, LLP, Charles T. Sheldon --
csheldon@wfbm.com -- WFBM, LLP, Emily Elizabeth Anselmo --
eanselmo@wfbm.com -- WFBM, LLP & Katherine Paige Gardiner --
kgardiner@wfbm.com -- WFBM, LLP.

Genuine Parts Company, doing business as Rayloc, Defendant,
represented by Dana Leigh Burch -- dburch@pondnorth.com -- Pond
North LLP, Francis Dennis Pond -- fpond@pondnorth.com -- Pond North
LLP & Nilufar Kashani Majd -- nmajd@pondnorth.com -- Pond North
LLP.

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Defendant, represented by
Carrie S. Lin -- clin@mgmlaw.com -- Manning Gross + Massenburg LLP
& Jennifer Anne Cormier -- jcormier@mgmlaw.com -- Manning Gross +
Massenburg LLP.

Hennessy Industries LLC, formerly known as Hennessy Industries
Inc., Defendant, represented by Ian Garth Williamson --
igwilliamson@grsm.com -- Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, Jacqueline
Kirk Dubois -- jdubois@grsm.com -- Gordon Rees & Casey Carlton Shaw
-- cshaw@grsm.com -- Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani.

IMO Industries Inc., Defendant, represented by Bobbie Rae Bailey --
bbailey@leaderberkon.com -- Leader & Berkon LLP.

Ingersoll-Rand Company, Defendant, represented by Arpi Galfayan --
agalfayan@prindlelaw.com -- Prindle, Goetz, Barnes and Reinholtz
LLP, Carla Lynn Crochet -- ccrochet@prindlelaw.com -- Prindle,
Amaro, Goetz, Hillyard, Barnes & Reinholz LLP, Jeremy David
Milbrodt -- jmilbrodt@prindlelaw.com -- Prindle, Amaro, Goetz,
Hillyard, Barnes & Reinholtz LLP & Thomas Alan Steig --
tsteig@prindlelaw.com -- Prindle, Goetz, Barnes & Reinholtz LLP.

M. Slayen and Associates, Inc., Defendant, represented by Emily
Denise Bergstrom -- ebergstrom@bkscal.com -- Becherer Kannett &
Schweitzer, Patrick Mark Mahoney -- pbecherer@bkscal.com --
Becherer Kannett & Schweitzer & Mark S. Kannett --
mkannett@bkscal.com -- Becherer Kannett & Schweitzer.

Metalclad Insulation LLC, individually and as successor-in-interest
to Metalclad Insulation Company, Inc., Defendant, represented by
Daniel B. Hoye , McKenna Long & Aldridge, Lisa Lurline Oberg --
Lisa.Oberg@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP & Michelle Christian
Jackson -- Michelle.Jackson@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP.

National Automotive Parts Association, also known as Napa & Western
Auto Supply Company, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Advance Auto
Parts Inc, Defendants, represented by Dana Leigh Burch --
dburch@pondnorth.com -- Pond North LLP, Frank D. Pond --
fpond@pondnorth.com -- Pond North LLP & Nilufar Kashani Majd --
nmajd@pondnorth.com -- Pond North LLP.

Pneumo Abex LLC, successor-in-interest to Abex Corporation,
Defendant, represented by John R. Brydon , Demler Armstrong Rowland
LLP.

Viking Pump Inc., Defendant, represented by Peter K. Renstrom ,
WFBM, LLP & Todd Marshall Thacker , WFBM, LLP.

Weir Valves & Controls USA, Inc., individually and as
successor-in-interest to Atwood & Morrill Co. Inc., Defendant,
represented by Emily Diane Bergstrom -- ebergstrom@bkscal.com --
Becherer Kannett & Schweitzer, Mark S. Kannett --
mkannett@bkscal.com -- Becherer Kannett & Schweitzer & Juniper
Bacon -- jbacon@bkscal.com -- Becherer Kannett & Schweitzer.

The William Powell Company, Defendant, represented by Douglas Garth
Wah -- dwah@foleymansfield.com -- Foley Mansfield, PLLP, Khaled
Taqi-Eddin -- ktaqi@foleymansfield.com -- Foley & Mansfield PLLP &
Andrew Livingston Sharp -- asharp@foleymansfield.com -- Foley &
Mansfield PLLP.

BorgWarner Morse TEC LLC, as successor-b-merger to Borg-Warner
Corporation, Defendant, represented by Daniel B. Hoye , McKenna
Long & Aldridge & Lisa Lurline Oberg -- Lisa.Oberg@dentons.com --
Dentons US LLP.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Wycombe Hospital Refuses to Reveal Asbestos Risks
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bucks Free Press reported that a hospital has allegedly refused to
reveal whether its patients and staff may be at risk of a deadly
asbestos-related disease, on the grounds of "commercial
confidentiality" -- a move branded "scandalous" by the devastated
family of a former nurse.

Wycombe Hospital is facing a claim by former employee Jemima
Abraham that she contracted mesothelioma -- a deadly disease caused
by breathing in asbestos dust -- while she and her husband worked
there.

Mrs Abraham, who worked as a nurse at the Queen Alexandra Road
hospital between 1977 and 2002, was diagnosed with mesothelioma in
July last year.

While use of asbestos is now banned, it was widely used in cladding
and insulation in the 1970s and 80s.

Her lawyers fear that if she did come into contact with asbestos
during her time at the hospital, it could mean other staff and
patients were put at risk.

Now her daughters, Sheona Ramsay-Edwards and Heather Abraham, are
demanding to know why their mother was not protected by her
employer -- but the hospital has refused to disclose what problems
it might have with asbestos.

Under a formal Freedom of Information request, lawyer Martyn
Hayward of Ashtons Legal, asked Bucks Healthcare NHS Trust for
details of its asbestos inspections and surveys -- documents the
hospital is required to keep by law.

But in reply, the trust claimed that the information is
"commercially sensitive," and its disclosure "would be likely to
prejudice the trust or a third party in its commercial dealings."

Mrs Abraham, who now lives in Ely in Cambridgeshire, recalls seeing
pipes in the hospital "lagged with asbestos" and said the hospital
was in a "poor state of repair."

Her late husband Robert also began working at the hospital shortly
after she joined, as a fitter and maintenance man, and Mrs Abraham
claims he brought the deadly dust home on his work clothes -- which
she would brush before putting in the washing machine.

She also used to visit her husband in his office, where she also
remembers seeing "worn pieces" of asbestos "lying on the floor."

Mr Hayward said: "On the face of it, the Trust's refusal to
disclose any asbestos risks is scandalous.

"They seem to be putting their own commercial interests above the
safety of patients and staff, in spite of being required by law to
keep a record of asbestos in the building.

"In fact, any contractor who works there is required to read and
sign the records to make sure any asbestos present isn’t
disturbed during activities.

"Yet with lives at stake, the trust arrogantly refutes any
responsibility. My client has suffered an extremely serious illness
which can only have come from being in contact with asbestos.

"We know there is asbestos in the hospital building and that it may
not have been in good repair several years ago. It's likely that
the illness was caused by my client's having worked in the hospital
for 26 years, and others may still be at risk.

"I have written back to the Trust making clear I expect a more
responsible reply, and if they still refuse to disclose information
which by rights should be in the public domain anyway, we will take
the matter further."

A spokesman for Bucks Healthcare NHS Trust said: "We were very
saddened to hear about Mrs Abraham’s illness. We can only
apologise that we made a mistake in not responding in the correct
manner to the initial Freedom of Information request we received
from her solicitors. We are undertaking an internal review to
ensure an error of this kind does not occur again.

"We take our responsibilities for the health and safety of our
patients, their visitors and our staff extremely seriously and we
would like to reassure Mrs Abraham that we will provide whatever
support we can to her and her family, including providing any
relevant documentation or site plans we have on record that may
help with her claim."

Mr Abraham also worked in the boiler house at Rank Hovis McDougal
in Cressex Industrial Estate and a similar claim has been launched
against them by lawyers.

Martyn Hayward would like any of Mr and Mrs Abraham’s former
colleagues who may be able to provide further information to get in
touch on 01223 431112 or at Martyn.Hayward@ashtonslegal.co.uk.



                            *********

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 ***