/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/201013.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Tuesday, October 13, 2020, Vol. 22, No. 205

                            Headlines

3M COMPANY: Collette Suit Alleges Injury From Toxic AFFF Exposure
3M COMPANY: Harris Suit Alleges Injury From Toxic AFFF Exposure
665 9TH AVE: Romero Sues Over Restaurant Staff's Unpaid OT Wages
ABBVIE INC: Blocked Entry of Generic Version of Bystolic, Says Suit
ABBVIE INC: Faces Soles Antitrust Suit Alleging Bystolic Monopoly

AC2T INC: Rosenfeld Files Fraud Class Suit in New York
ACTIVA HEALTH: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Alliance Says
ADVANCED MICRO: Doe Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to N.D. California
AMANDA LINDROTH CORP: Calcano Alleges Violation under ADA
AMERICAN BANK: Daniel T.A. Cotts Seeks to Recover Agent Fees

AMERICAN RETAIL: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Calcano Claims
AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS: Worthen Sues Over Sale of Adulterated MCDs
APPLE INC: Victims Seek Damages for Gift Cards Scam
ARCH INSURANCE: Osborn Suit Moved From New Jersey to Missouri
ARCON DESIGN: Faces Ha Class Suit Over Unlawful Wages for Laborers

AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE: Coren Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Calls
BARNES & NOBLE: Paguada Seeks Blinds' Full, Equal Web Site Access
BJC HEALTH SYSTEM: Faces Sweet Suit in Illinois Over Data Breach
BORGHESE INC: Paguada Class Suit Alleges Web Site Access Barriers
CANADA: Suit Claims Gov't. Mishandled Mental Health of RCMP Members

CANADIAN MEDICAL: Faces de la Cotera Suit Over Unsolicited Fax Ads
CELESTRON ACQUISITION: Bewer Alleges Telescope Price-Rigging
CENTURY FEDERAL: Szewczyk Sues Over Overdraft Fees
COLONEL LITTLETON: Tenzer-Fuchs Claims Website not Blind-Friendly
COLONY CREDIT: Bragar Eagel Reminds of November 9 Deadline

CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING: Pluto Asserts Breach of FDCPA
COTY INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Nov. 3 Deadline
CROWN HEIGHTS: Durand Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Pay for RNs
DAR TSON SHEN: Goldblatt Suit Asserts Telescope Price-Rigging
DAR TSON SHEN: Moore Suit Alleges Telescope Price-Rigging

DAVID'S LOFT: Drummond Sues Over Unpaid OT Pay for House Managers
ELKHART PRODUCTS: Underpays Employees' Overtime Pay, McCoy Claims
ERNIE'S AUTO: Perez Sues Over Detail Workers' Unpaid Overtime Pay
FASTLY INC: Bernstein Liebhard Reminds of Oct. 26 Motion Deadline
FRANKIES BIKINIS LLC: Bunting Claims Website not Blind-accessible

GATEWAY HEALTH: Misclassifies Case Managers, Hardisky Suit Claims
HARBOR FREIGHT: Appeals Ruling in Kaupelis Suit to 9th Circuit
HARBORSIDE INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of November 9 Deadline
HAT WORLD: Rafferty FLSA Suit Moved From N.D. Ohio to S.D. Indiana
HEALTHY BEVERAGE: Pierre Suit Alleges False Labeling of Steaz Tea

HEBREW HOMES: Martin Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages for Nurses
HOME CAREGIVERS: Shortchanges Caregivers' Wages, Emery Suit Says
INSURANCE SERVICES: Peterson Sues Over Breaches of ERISA Duties
JACK IN THE BOX: Szwanek Appeals Ruling in ADA Suit to 9th Cir.
JASEM RESTAURANT: Faces Vazquez Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages

JELD-WEN INC: Appeals Ruling in Grubb Antitrust Suit to 4th Cir.
JO CAT BAKERY: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Ramirez Says
KEURIG GREEN: Seeks Ninth Circuit Review of Ruling in Smith Suit
KROTO INC: Riggs Files Suit in Illinois
KUSHNER VILLAGE: Faces Kozak Class Suit in New York Supreme Court

LA PLAZA LLC: Garcia Seeks Unpaid Overtime, Spread-of-Hours Pay
LEXINFINTECH LTD: Bragar Eagel Reminds of November 9 Deadline
LIVONGO HEALTH: Hart Slams Sale to Teldoc Health for Lack of Info
MEDICAL DATA: Davis Asserts Breach of FDCPA
MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY: Cordero Seeks Refund of School Fees

MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OH: Harrison Appeals Ruling to 6th Circuit
MORLEY COMPANIES: Call Center Agents Seek Pay for Pre-shift Work
NANO-X IMAGING: Faces White Suit Over 25% Drop in Share Price
NCR CORPORATION: Kalaveras Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California
NESTLE USA: Green Slams Mislabeling on Vanilla-Flavored Creamer

NEW ROCHELLE: Romero Says Web Site Is Inaccessible to Blind Users
NEW YORK: 2nd Cir. Appeal Filed v. Rodriguez in Gulino Bias Suit
NIKOLA CORP: Faces Salem Securities Suit Over Drop in Share Price
NIKOLA CORP: Schall Law Alerts Class Action Filing
NORTHEAST FACTORY: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Calcano Says

NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: Craig Seeks Refund of School Fees
OPTUM INC: Faces Valdez Wage-and-Hour Class Suit in California
PINTO RANCH LP: Delacruz Suit Seeks Removal of Web Site Barriers
POINT BLANK: 11th Cir. Appeal Filed in OSTA Product Liability Suit
PORTSMOUTH, VA: Stuart Sues Over Paramedics' Unpaid Overtime Pay

PORVEN LTD: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind Users, Cota Alleges
PRECIGEN INC: Abadilla Sues Over Misleading Securities Statements
PRIME HEALTHCARE: Faces Simonds Suit Over Improperly Paid Wages
PROGENITY INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Oct. 27 Motion Deadline
PROGENITY INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Oct. 27 Motion Deadline

QUEENSLAND: Vegetation Mgmt. Suit Seeks Expressions of Interest
QUTOUTIAO INC: Rosen Law Alerts of Class Action Filing
REDBOX AUTOMATED RETAIL: Hummitsch Sues Over Illegal SMS Ad Blasts
ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION: Garcia Suit Removed to N.D. California
SEALAND CONTRACTORS: Infantino Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages

SIERRA MOUNTAIN: Perez Employment Suit Removed to E.D. California
SIGNIFY HEALTH: Bradford Asserts Breach of FDCPA
SN SERVICING CORP: Walker Files FDCPA Suit in Illinois
STEMILT AG SERVICES: Farm Workers Slam Hostile Work Environment
STICKER MULE: Bonefort Sues Over Prod'n Workers' Unpaid OT Wages

SUPERIOR ENERGY: Evans Suit Seeks Back Wages, Damages
TETRAPHASE PHARMA: Plumley Files Suit Over Sale to La Jolla
THINGS REMEMBERED: Cota Alleges Violation under ADA
TOTAL TRUCKING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Issacs Suit Alleges
TOYOTA MOTOR: Marques Suit Moved From E.D. Virginia to E.D.N.Y.

TULANE UNIVERSITY: Jones Seeks Tuition Fee Refund
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Moves to Compel Arbitration in Matthews Suit
UFC: Judge Like to Grant Class-Action Status on Antitrust Lawsuit
ULTRA PETROLEUM: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Nov. 2 Motion Deadline
UNITED STATES: Mathew, et al. File Suit v. Gov't Officials

UNITED STATES: Navy Sued by Abbey for Not Warning About Hazards
UNITED STATES: Wallace Asks to Appoint Klayman as Trump's Counsel
UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: Class Suit Brought Over Parking Fines
VA&VK LLC: Villafan Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages Under FLSA
WANG WANG LAI: Faces Alvaranga Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.

WEST PENN HOSPITAL: Hit With Suit Over Secret Patient Recordings
WESTERN REFINING: Court OKs First Amended Suit Filing in "Ramirez"
WHOLE FOODS MARKET: Hit for Banning "Black Lives Matter" Masks
WORLD FINANCIAL: Seeks Ninth Cir. Review in Yeomans Labor Suit
YANECK HOME: Faces Veletanga Wage-and-Hour Class Suit in E.D.N.Y.

ZARBEE'S INC: Delacruz Sues Over Web Site Access Discrimination

                            *********

3M COMPANY: Collette Suit Alleges Injury From Toxic AFFF Exposure
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL COLLETTE v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE
PRODUCTS GP HOLDING, LLC; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:20-cv-03388-RMG (D.S.C., Sept. 24, 2020), seeks to recover
compensatory and punitive damages for the Plaintiff and for those
similarly situated resulting from exposure to the Defendants'
aqueous film-forming foams containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. AFFF has been used for decades by military
and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

According to the complaint, the Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. The Defendants knew, or should have
known, that PFAS remain in the human body while presenting
significant health risks to humans. The consumption, inhalation
and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from the Defendants' AFFF products
caused the Plaintiff to develop skin cancer, the suit says.
The Collette case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of
PFAS-containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
          Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
          GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          270 West Main Street
          Sayville, NY 11782
          Telephone: (631) 600-0000
          Facsimile: (631) 543-5450

               - and -

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Telephone: (205) 328-9200
          Facsimile: (205) 328-9456


3M COMPANY: Harris Suit Alleges Injury From Toxic AFFF Exposure
---------------------------------------------------------------
DALE HARRIS v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing
Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
MANAGEMENT, LLC; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD,
INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD;
CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT
DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE PRODUCTS GP HOLDING, LLC;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No. 2:20-cv-03382-RMG (D.S.C., Sept. 24,
2020), seeks to recover compensatory and punitive damages for the
Plaintiff and for those similarly situated resulting from exposure
to the Defendants' aqueous film-forming foams containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances.

AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.

According to the complaint, the Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS.

PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. The Defendants knew, or should have
known, that PFAS remain in the human body while presenting
significant health risks to humans. The consumption, inhalation
and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from the Defendants' AFFF products
caused the Plaintiff to develop skin cancer, the suit says.
The Harris case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.

The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of
PFAS-containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
          Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
          GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          270 West Main Street
          Sayville, NY 11782
          Telephone: (631) 600-0000
          Facsimile: (631) 543-5450

               - and -

          Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
          Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
          Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
          ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
          2160 Highland Avenue South
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Telephone: (205) 328-9200
          Facsimile: (205) 328-9456


665 9TH AVE: Romero Sues Over Restaurant Staff's Unpaid OT Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
ANASTACIO ROMERO PEREZ, GILBERTO PAZARAN CRISTOBAL, JAVIER MORA
PERALTA, and JULIO CESAR HERNANDEZ PARRA, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated v. 665 9TH AVE. RESTAURANT
CORP. (D/B/A GALAXY DINER), STEVEN ANTONATOS, JOHN PANORIOS, ELIAS
NEOFOTISTOS, JUAN PEREZ, JUAN NASARIO, and MAURICIO DOE, Case No.
1:20-cv-08294-JPC (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), is brought against the
Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New
York Labor Law, including failure to compensate the Plaintiffs and
other employees appropriate minimum wages and overtime pay for all
hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek.

According to the complaint, the Defendants also failed to pay
spread of hours premium for all of hours worked in excess of 10
hours per day, to provide accurate wage notice and recordkeeping,
to furnish accurate wage statements, to reimburse business
expenses, and to timely pay wages during employment. The Defendants
also made unlawful deductions from the employees' wages.

The Plaintiffs are current and former employees of the Defendants,
who worked as cooks, dishwashers, supervisors, and/or delivery
workers at Galaxy Diner in New York City sometime between 2016 and
2020.

665 9th Ave. Restaurant Corp. is a company that operates and owns a
diner under the name Galaxy Diner located at 665 Ninth Avenue, in
New York City.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Michael Faillace, Esq.
         MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
         60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 317-1200
         Facsimile: (212) 317-1620


ABBVIE INC: Blocked Entry of Generic Version of Bystolic, Says Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The City of Providence, Rhode Island, on behalf of itself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Abbvie Inc., Allergan,
Inc., Allergan Sales, LLC, Allergan USA, Inc., Forest Laboratories,
Inc., Forest Laboratories Holdings, Ltd., Forest Laboratories
Ireland, Ltd., and Forest Laboratories, LLC, Defendants, Case No.
20-cv-05538 (S.D. N.Y., July 17, 2020), seeks treble damages and
declaratory and injunctive relief brought under state antitrust,
consumer protection and unjust enrichment laws and federal
antitrust laws.

Defendants are accused of the unlawful exclusion of generic
substitutes for the branded drug Bystolic, which contains the
active pharmaceutical ingredient nebivolol hydrochloride or
nebivolol HCl, an important cardiovascular prescription drug used
to treat high blood pressure. Forest allegedly entered into
reverse-payment agreements with potential generic competitors, so
as not compete with Forest or enter the market prior to September
17, 2021. Forest merged with Actavis PLC on February 17, 2014.

Forest Laboratories, LLC was merged with Allergan Sales, LLC on
January 1, 2018. AbbVie, Inc. is the corporate successor to
Allergan and Forest, having completed its purchase of Allergan on
May 8, 2020.

The City of Providence, Rhode Island is a municipal corporation
that operates a self-insured health and welfare benefit plan and
purchases that pays and/or provides reimbursement for some or all
of the purchase price of prescription drugs for its employees,
retirees and/or plan beneficiaries including Bystolic. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael M. Buchman, Esq.
      Michelle C. Clerkin, Esq.
      Jacob Onile-Ere, Esq.
      MOTLEY RICE LLC
      777 Third Avenue, 27th Floor
      New York, NY 10017
      Tel: (212) 577-0050
      Fax: (212) 577-0054
      Email: mbuchman@motleyrice.com
             mclerkin@motleyrice.com
             jonileere@motleyrice.com


ABBVIE INC: Faces Soles Antitrust Suit Alleging Bystolic Monopoly
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JEANETTE SOLES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ABBVIE INC.; ALLERGAN, INC.; ALLERGAN SALES, LLC;
ALLERGAN USA, INC.; FOREST LABORATORIES, INC.; FOREST LABORATORIES
HOLDINGS, LTD.; FOREST LABORATORIES IRELAND, LTD.; and FOREST
LABORATORIES, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-07580 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 16,
2020), is a civil antitrust action seeking treble damages and
declaratory and injunctive relief brought under state antitrust,
consumer protection and unjust enrichment law, and federal
antitrust law, concerning the Defendants' unlawful exclusion of
generic substitutes for the branded drug, Bystolic.

Bystolic is used to treat high blood pressure and contains the
active pharmaceutical ingredient nebivolol hydrochloride or
nebivolol HCl.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants'
unlawful agreement with its competitors prevented and delayed the
sale of generic Bystolic in the U.S. and unlawfully enabled the
Defendants to sell its branded Bystolic at artificially inflated
prices. But for the Defendants' unlawful conduct, generic
competitors would have been able to compete, unimpeded, with their
own generic versions of Bystolic. Were it not for the Defendants'
anticompetitive conduct, the Plaintiff and other members of the
Class would have purchased lower-priced generic Bystolic, instead
of the higher-priced brand Bystolic, according to the complaint.

AbbVie Inc. researches and develops pharmaceutical products. The
Company produces pharmaceutical drugs for specialty therapeutic
areas such as immunology, chronic kidney disease, hepatitis C,
women's health, oncology, and neuroscience. AbbVie also offers
treatments for diseases including multiple sclerosis, parkinson's,
and alzheimer's disease.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
          Mary K. Blasy, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
          58 South Service Road, Suite 200
          Melville, NY 11747
          Telephone: (631) 367-7100
          Facsimile: (631) 367-1173
          E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com
                  mblasy@rgrdlaw.com


AC2T INC: Rosenfeld Files Fraud Class Suit in New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AC2T, Inc. The case
is styled as Kalman Rosenfeld, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AC2T, Inc., Bonner
Analytical Testing Co. and Jeremy Hirsch, Defendants, Case No.
1:20-cv-04662 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 30, 2020).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Fraud or
Truth-In-Lending filed pursuant to the Diversity-Fraud.

Bonner Analytical Testing Co. is a Laboratory in West Hattiesburg,
Mississippi.[BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

   Yitzchak Kopel, Esq.
   Bursor & Fisher P.A.
   888 Seventh Avenue
   New York, NY 10019
   Tel: 646-837-7127
   E-mail: ykopel@bursor.com

ACTIVA HEALTH: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime Wages, Alliance Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
MIGLAISE ALLIANCE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. ACTIVA HEALTH SERVICES, INC. f/k/a ACTIVA
HOME HEALTH OF REGION 8, LLC f/k/a ACTIVA HOME HEALTH OF REGION 4,
LLC d/b/a Activa Home Health; INFINITY HEALTH SERVICES, INC. f/k/a
ACTIVA HOME HEALTH OF REGION 8, LLC f/k/a ACTIVA HOME HEALTH OF
REGION 4, LLC d/b/a Activa Home Health; ANN MARIE THOMPSON; and
ROBERT OSOWSKI, Case No. 9:20-cv-81681-DMM (S.D. Fla., Sept. 15,
2020), is brought against the Defendants for their failure to pay
the Plaintiff and the proposed class overtime compensation for
hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as health care
assistant.

Activa Health Services, Inc., provides home health care
services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Tanesha Blye, Esq.
          Aron Smukler, Esq.
          R. Martin Saenz, Esq.
          SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC
          20900 NE 30th Avenue, Ste. 800
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Telephone: (305) 503-5131
          Facsimile: (888) 270-5549
          E-mail: tblye@saenzanderson.com
                  asmukler@saenzanderson.com
                  msaenz@saenzanderson.com


ADVANCED MICRO: Doe Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as JANE DOE, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. ADVANCED MICRO TARGETING, INC.; and DOES 1 to
20, inclusive, Case No. RG20069225, was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of Alameda to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on
October 5, 2020.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:20-cv-06935 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged labor violations.

Advanced Micro Targeting, Inc., is a consulting company based in
Dallas, Texas.[BN]

The Defendant is represented by:

         Jonathan C. Sandler, Esq.
         BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK, LLP
         2049 Century Park East, Suite 3550
         Los Angeles, CA 90067
         Telephone: (310) 500-4600
         Facsimile: (310) 500-4602
         E-mail: jsandler@bhfs.com


AMANDA LINDROTH CORP: Calcano Alleges Violation under ADA
---------------------------------------------------------
Amanda Lindroth Corp is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
as Evelina Calcano, on behalf of herself, and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Amanda Lindroth Corp, Defendant,
Case No. 1:20-cv-08115 (S.D. N.Y., Sept. 30, 2020).

Amanda Lindroth Corp is located in Palm Beach, FL, United States
and is part of the Internet & Mail-Order Retail Industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Michael LaBollita , Esq.
   Gottlieb & Associates
   150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr 10003
   New York, NY 10003
   Tel: (212) 228-9795
   Email: michael@gottlieb.legal


AMERICAN BANK: Daniel T.A. Cotts Seeks to Recover Agent Fees
------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel T.A. Cotts PLLC, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. American Bank, N.A., Defendant,
Case No. 20-cv-00185 (S.D. Tex., July 17, 2020) seeks monetary
and/or equitable relief, statutory, treble, punitive or exemplary
damages, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, attorneys' fees
and costs of suit, including costs of notice, administration and
expert fees and such other legal or equitable relief, including
injunctive or declaratory relief resulting from unjust enrichment,
breach of contract—third party beneficiary and the Massachusetts
Consumer Protection Act.

On March 25, 2020, in response to the economic damage caused by the
COVID-19 crisis, the United States Senate passed the Coronavirus
Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act. This legislation
included $377 billion in federally-funded loans to small businesses
and a $500 billion governmental lending program, administered by
the United States Department of Treasury to provide support to
entrepreneurs and small businesses. Part of the CARES Act is the
"Paycheck Protection Program" (PPP) that provides small businesses
with loans to provide small businesses with eight weeks of
cash-flow assistance to fund payrolls. Said loans are administered
by Treasury, backed by the Federal Government, but funded by
private lenders, including the Defendants.

Daniel T.A. Cotts PLLC is a professional limited liability company
owned by Daniel Cotts. It spoecializes in taxation, partnership
taxation, wealth planning, corporate law and business law. It
assisted its clients in preparing their applications for a PPP loan
from American Bank, but the latter has failed to pay Cotts the
agent fees. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

       Cory S. Fein, Esq.
       CORY FEIN LAW FIRM
       712 Main St., #800
       Houston, TX 77002
       Telephone: (281) 254-7717
       Facsimile: (530) 748-0601
       E-mail: cory@coryfeinlaw.com


AMERICAN RETAIL: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Calcano Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
EVELINA CALCANO, individually and on behalf of all other similarly
situated v. AMERICAN RETAIL CORPORATION, Case No. 1:20-cv-07565-GBD
(S.D.N.Y., Sept. 15, 2020), alleges violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, https://www.watsons.com/, is not fully or equally accessible
to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff,
in violation of the ADA.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.

American Retail Corporation operates the Watsons online retail
store, as well as the Watsons website and advertises, markets, and
operates in the State of New York and throughout the United
States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS: Worthen Sues Over Sale of Adulterated MCDs
------------------------------------------------------------------
RONALD W. WORTHEN, individually and on behalf all others similarly
situated v. AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; AVKARE, INC.; and JOHN
DOES 1-100, Case No. 2:20-cv-14052 (D.N.J., Oct. 7, 2020), is
brought against the Defendants for negligence, negligence per se,
medical monitoring, products liability, failure to warn, violation
of the Magnusson-Moss Warranty Act, breach of implied warranty of
merchantability, breach of express warranties, and fraudulent
concealment.

According to the complaint, the Defendants are engaged in the
manufacturing, sale, and distribution of adulterated and/or
misbranded generic Metformin containing drugs (MCDs). The
Defendants' MCDs contained a probable human carcinogen known as
N-nitrosodimethylamine (NDMA), an active ingredient, which is not
present in the brand-name drug counterpart. The Defendants also
made false statements in the labeling of their MCDs by representing
and warranting to consumers that their generic MCDs were otherwise
fit for their ordinary uses, and were otherwise manufactured and
distributed in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. In
reality, their MCDs were never approved or even reviewed by the
Food and Drug Administration.

As a result of the Defendants' negligence and illegal introduction
of their unapproved MCDs into the market, the Plaintiff and all
others similarly situated consumers, who purchased the MCDs were
exposed to highly dangerous and potentially fatal carcinogenic
substances, the Plaintiff contends.

Amneal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., is a pharmaceutical company, with its
principal place of business located at 400 Crossing Blvd., in
Bridgewater Township, New Jersey.

AvKARE, Inc., is a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products, with
its principal place of business located at 615 N 1st Street, in
Pulaski, Tennessee.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Marlene J. Goldenberg, Esq.
         Laura L. Pittner, Esq.
         GOLDENBERGLAW, PLLC
         800 LaSalle Avenue, Suite 2150
         Minneapolis, MN 55402
         Telephone: (612) 436-5027
         E-mail: lpittner@goldenberglaw.com
                 mjgoldenberg@goldenberglaw.com

                - and –

         Daniel Nigh, Esq.
         LEVIN, PAPANTONIO, THOMAS, MITCHELL RAFFERTY
         & PROCTOR, P.A.
         316 South Baylen Street
         Pensacola, FL 32502
         Telephone: (850) 435-7013
         E-mail: dnigh@levinlaw.com

                - and –

         Ruben Honik, Esq.
         GOLOMB & HONIK, P.C.
         1835 Market Street, Ste. 2900
         Philadelphia, PA 19103
         Telephone: (215) 985-9177
         E-mail: rhonik@golombhonik.com

                - and –

         David J. Stanoch, Esq.
         KANNER & WHITELEY, L.L.C.
         701 Camp Street
         New Orleans, LA 70130
         Telephone: (504) 524-5777
         E-mail: d.stanoch@kanner-law.com


APPLE INC: Victims Seek Damages for Gift Cards Scam
---------------------------------------------------
Carl Barrett, Michel Polston, Nancy Martin, Douglas Watson, Eric
Marinbach, Michael Rodriguez and Maria Rodriguez, individually, and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Apple
Inc., Apple Value Services LLC and Does 1 through 10, inclusive,
Defendants, Defendants, Case No. 20-cv-04812 (N.D. Cal., July 17,
2020), seeks all actual, general, special, incidental, statutory,
punitive and consequential damages and restitution, prejudgment and
post-judgment interest on such monetary relief, appropriate
injunctive and/or declaratory relief, reasonable attorneys' fees
and costs and such further relief resulting from breach of
contract, unjust enrichment, breach of the implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing and for violation of the California
Consumers Legal Remedies Act, California Unfair Competition Law,
California False Advertising Law and the California Elder Abuse
Law.

Apple Inc. is engaged in the business of designing, manufacturing,
distributing and selling, smartphones, tablet computers, wearable
technology, headphones, laptops and desktop computers. It owns and
operates online platforms including the App and iTunes stores where
it earns a 30% commission on all sales of paid apps, purchases made
within apps and paid subscriptions to apps.

Apple sells iTunes gift cards for use on iTunes, in the App Store,
or inside of apps purchased or downloaded from the App Store.
iTunes gift cards are sold by Apple both directly to consumers, and
indirectly to consumers through retailers. Plaintiffs are victims
of scam calls/texts extorting them for iTunes Gift cards. They hold
Apple responsible because regardless of what the scammer does with
the funds in the card, Apple still gets its 30% share. [BN]

Fuentes is represented by:

      Christopher M. Burke, Esq.
      Alex M. Outwater, Esq.
      SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
      600 W. Broadway, Suite 3300
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 233-4565
      Facsimile: (619) 233-0508
      Email: cburke@scott-scott.com
             aoutwater@scott-scott.com

             - and -

      Jennifer W. Sprengel, Esq.
      Daniel O. Herrera, Esq.
      Nickolas J. Hagman, Esq.
      CAFFERTY CLOBES MERIWETHER & SPRENGEL LLP
      150 S. Wacker, Suite 3000
      Chicago, IL 60606
      Telephone: (312) 782-4880
      Email: jsprengel@caffertyclobes.com
             dherrera@caffertyclobes.com
             nhagman@caffertyclobes.com


ARCH INSURANCE: Osborn Suit Moved From New Jersey to Missouri
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled RONALD OSBORN, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. ARCH INSURANCE COMPANY, and OUT OF
TOWNE, LLC, D/B/A RED SKY TRAVEL INSURANCE, Case No. 2:20-cv-06345,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Jersey to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Missouri on October 5, 2020.

The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Missouri assigned
Case No. 4:20-cv-00797-BCW to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' breach of contract, breach of
the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, bad faith, and
unjust enrichment by denying the insurance claims of the Plaintiff
and all others similarly situated people, who purchased Ski Pass
Preserver insurance for the 2019-2020 ski season. The Defendants
universally refused to pay the Plaintiff and Class members despite
the fact that they cannot use and enjoy their ski pass benefits due
to stay-at-home or shelter-in-place orders and the closure of ski
resorts.

Arch Insurance Company is an insurance company based in Garden
City, New York. Out of Towne, LLC, d/b/a Red Sky Travel Insurance,
is an insurance company based in Kitty Hawk, North Carolina.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Andrew Obergfell, Esq.
         BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
         888 Seventh Avenue
         New York, NY 10019
         Telephone: (646) 837-7150
         Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
         E-mail: aobergfell@bursor.com

                - and –

         Yeremey Krivoshey, Esq.
         BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
         1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
         Walnut Creek, CA 94596
         Telephone: (925) 300-4455
         Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
         E-mail: ykrivoshey@bursor.com

                - and –

         Jonas Jacobson, Esq.
         DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
         201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
         Santa Monica, CA 90401
         Telephone: (310) 656-7066
         Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
         E-mail: jonas@dovel.com


ARCON DESIGN: Faces Ha Class Suit Over Unlawful Wages for Laborers
------------------------------------------------------------------
HYON JIN HA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ARCON DESIGN CONTRACTING, INC. d/b/a ARCON DESIGN
CONTRACTING, a New Jersey corporation, ARCON DESIGN CONTRACTING,
INC. d/b/a ARCON DESIGN CONTRACTING, a New York corporation, and
RICHARD C. HONG a/k/a CHANGHWAN HONG, individually, Case No.
1:20-cv-04779 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), arises from the Defendants'
unlawful labor practices that violate the Fair Labor Standards Act
and the New York Labor Law.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked for the Defendants
in excess of 40 hours per week without appropriate minimum wage and
overtime compensation for the hours that he worked. Rather, the
Defendants failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the hours
worked and failed to pay the Plaintiff appropriately for all hours
worked either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional
overtime premium. The Defendants also failed to pay the Plaintiff
one additional hour's pay at the basic minimum wage rate for each
day his spread-of-hours exceeded ten hours.

The Plaintiff was employed as a construction laborer at the
Defendants' construction business from January 2018 until August
2020.

Arcon Design Contracting, Inc., operates a construction business,
located in Queens County, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Younghoon Ji, Esq.
          AHNE & JI, LLP
          1220 Broadway, Suite 502
          New York, NY 10001
          Telephone: (212) 594-1035
          Facsimile: (212) 967-1112
          E-mail: youngjiesq@gmail.com


AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE: Coren Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Calls
---------------------------------------------------------------
CAROL COREN and STEWART SMITH, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE CENTER, LLC, a
California limited liability company, Case No. 1:20-at-00780 (E.D.
Cal., Oct. 6, 2020), arises from the Defendant's practice of
placing telemarketing calls to consumers, who are registered on the
National Do Not Call Registry, in violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant, in an attempt to sell
more vehicle service contracts, conducted a wide scale
telemarketing campaign and repeatedly makes unsolicited
telemarketing phone calls using an automatic telephone dialing
system to telephones which appear on the National Do Not Call
Registry, including the Plaintiffs'. The calls are made without
securing prior express consent, and even after consumers ask to
stop placing calls. As such, the Defendant not only invaded the
personal privacy of the Plaintiffs and members of the putative
Classes, they also intentionally and repeatedly violated the TCPA.

Automotive Service Center, LLC, is an auto repair shop company
located in Anderson, California.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Richard T. Drury, Esq.
          Rebecca Davis, Esq.
          LOZEAU DRURY LLP
          1939 Harrison St., Suite 150
          Oakland, CA 94612
          Telephone: (510) 836-4200
          Facsimile: (510) 836-4205
          E-mail: richard@lozeaudrury.com
                  rebecca@lozeaudrury.com

               - and -

          Patrick H. Peluso, Esq.
          Taylor T. Smith, Esq.
          WOODROW & PELUSO, LLC
          3900 East Mexico Avenue, Suite 300
          Denver, CO 80210
          Telephone: (720) 213-0676
          Facsimile: (303) 927-0809
          E-mail: ppeluso@woodrowpeluso.com
                  tsmith@woodrowpeluso.com


BARNES & NOBLE: Paguada Seeks Blinds' Full, Equal Web Site Access
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSUE PAGUADA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. BARNES & NOBLE BOOKSELLERS, INC., Case No.
1:20-cv-08259-GBD (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 5, 2020), is brought against the
Defendants for violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act and
the New York City Human Rights Law.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has denied him and all
others similarly situated blind or visually-impaired consumers full
and equal access to its website, http://www.barnesandnoble.com/.

The Defendant's website contains access barriers that hinder blind
consumers to fully use and enjoy the products and services offered
by the Defendant to the public, according to the complaint. These
access barriers include: (1) features lack alternative text
(alt-text), or a text equivalent, which prevents screen readers
from accurately vocalizing a description of the graphics; (2)
features fail to contain proper label elements or titles; (3) pages
contain the same title elements; and (4) pages contain a host of
broken links.

As a result of the Defendant's failure and refusal to remove these
access barriers to its website, the Plaintiff contends that he and
visually-impaired persons have been and are still being denied
equal access to the website, and the numerous goods and services
and benefits offered to the public through it.

Barnes & Noble Booksellers, Inc. is a book distributing company
with its principal place of business located in New York City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Mars Khaimov, Esq.
         MARS KHAIMOV LAW, PLLC
         10826 64th Avenue, Second Floor
         Forest Hills, NY 11375
         Telephone: (929) 324-0717
         E-mail: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com


BJC HEALTH SYSTEM: Faces Sweet Suit in Illinois Over Data Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
LEAHA SWEET, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. BJC HEALTH SYSTEM D/B/A BJC HEALTHCARE, Case No.
3:20-cv-00947 (S.D. Ill., Sept. 16, 2020), arises from a data
breach.

The lawsuit is brought by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf
of all similarly situated persons, who are citizens of Illinois
("Class Members"), whose personally identifiable information and
personal health information ("PHI"), which is considered protected
under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act
("HIPAA"), was entrusted to the Defendant and was stolen,
disclosed, and made accessible to hackers and identity thieves.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants failed
to implement and follow basic security procedures, the PHI of
patients, including the Plaintiff and Class Members. The Plaintiff
and the Class have to spend significant time and money to protect
themselves, including the cost of responding to the data breach,
cost of conducting a damage assessment, mitigation costs, costs to
rehabilitate the Plaintiff's and Class Members' PHI, and costs to
reimburse from losses incurred as a proximate result of the
breach.

BJC Health System, doing business as BJC Healthcare, operates as a
non-profit organization. The Organization offers inpatient and
outpatient, workplace and home health, home care, hospice, imaging,
medical, rehabilitation, and respiratory care services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Troy E. Walton, Esq.
          WALTON TELKEN, LLC
          241 N. Main Street
          Edwardsville, IL 62025
          Telephone: (618) 307-9880
          E-mail: twalton@waltontelken.com

               - and -

          Kenneth J. Brennan, Esq.
          Tyler Schneider, Esq.
          TORHOERMAN LAW LLC
          210 South Main Street
          Edwardsville, IL 62025
          Telephone: (618) 656-4400
          E-mail: kbrennan@thlawyer.com
                  tyler@thlawyer.com


BORGHESE INC: Paguada Class Suit Alleges Web Site Access Barriers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSUE PAGUADA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. BORGHESE INC., Case No. 1:20-cv-08266 (S.D.N.Y., Oct.
5, 2020), is a class action against the Defendants for violations
of the Americans With Disabilities Act and the New York City Human
Rights Law.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has denied him and all
others similarly situated blind or visually-impaired consumers full
and equal access to its website, http://www.borghese.com/.The
Defendant's website contains access barriers that hinder blind
consumers to fully use and enjoy the products and services offered
by the Defendant to the public, according to the complaint. These
access barriers include: (1) features lack alternative text
(alt-text), or a text equivalent, which prevents screen readers
from accurately vocalizing a description of the graphics; (2)
features fail to contain proper label elements or titles; (3) pages
contain the same title elements; and (4) pages contain a host of
broken links.

As a result of the Defendant's failure and refusal to remove these
access barriers to its website, he and visually-impaired persons
have been and are still being denied equal access to the website,
and the numerous goods and services and benefits offered to the
public through it, the Plaintiff contends.

Borghese Inc. is a manufacturer of personal products with its
principal place of business located in New York City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Mars Khaimov, Esq.
         MARS KHAIMOV LAW, PLLC
         10826 64th Avenue, Second Floor
         Forest Hills, NY 11375
         Telephone: (929) 324-0717
         E-mail: marskhaimovlaw@gmail.com


CANADA: Suit Claims Gov't. Mishandled Mental Health of RCMP Members
-------------------------------------------------------------------
globalnews.ca reports that a proposed class-action lawsuit alleges
the Canadian federal government was negligent and discriminatory in
how it handled a "mental health crisis" within the national police
force.

The suit was filed by four Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP)
officers on behalf of members who have been diagnosed with or
suffered from operational stress injuries.

According to a release from Halifax-based law firm Wagners, which
filed the case in the federal court on behalf of the RCMP members,
operational stress injuries are psychological problems that result
from operational duties with the RCMP, such as post-traumatic
stress disorder, depression, anxiety, and panic attacks.

The claim alleges that the federal government failed to provide
appropriate and timely mental health support services to RCMP
members who are expected to respond in dangerous and traumatic
situations as a condition of employment.

According to the firm, the claim also alleges the federal
government "condones and perpetuates a discriminatory workplace
culture" through the use of "stigmatizing language" in regard to
Mounties suffering from operational stress injuries.

The claim, which was filed in court on Sept. 16, makes allegations
that have not been proven in court.

"By the very nature of our jobs, we are exposed to dangerous,
violent and traumatic scenes on an almost daily basis," said one of
the proposed representative plaintiffs, Cpl. Garrett Moore, a
corporal in the RCMP since 2012.

"Then, when we finally hit the breaking point and seek help, we're
met with obstacle after obstacle to receive prompt and adequate
treatment, a diagnosis, accommodation, and medically-required
transfers."

Another proposed plaintiff, Const. Graham Walsh, a member of the
RCMP since 2009, also said that the culture around mental illness
in the RCMP is "one of silence and suffering alone - 'sucking it
up' - and that needs to change."

"Opportunities for promotion, transfers, specialized work - they're
all impacted. It's a dark cloud that hinders your whole career: so,
you basically have to choose your mental health or your career -
but you can't have both," he added.

Global News has reached out to the RCMP for comment, and will
update the story with a response. [GN]


CANADIAN MEDICAL: Faces de la Cotera Suit Over Unsolicited Fax Ads
------------------------------------------------------------------
FRED J. DE LA COTERA, D.D.S., individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly-situated persons v. CANADIAN
MEDICAL DIST INC., a Canadian corporation, Case No. 1:20-cv-05947
(N.D. Ill., Oct. 6, 2020), challenges the Defendant's practice of
sending "unsolicited advertisements" by facsimile, in violation of
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991.

The complaint alleges that, on September 30, 2020, the Defendant
sent an unsolicited fax advertisement regarding the availability
and pricing of various personal protection products to the
Plaintiff and the Class without prior express invitation or
permission and without compliant opt-out language, in violation of
the TCPA.

Canadian Medical Dist Inc. is a for-profit company which provides
various personal protection products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan M. Kelly, Esq.
          ANDERSON + WANCA
          3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 500
          Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
          Telephone: (847) 368-1500
          Facsimile: (847) 368-1501
          E-mail: rkelly@andersonwanca.com


CELESTRON ACQUISITION: Bewer Alleges Telescope Price-Rigging
------------------------------------------------------------
Sara Day Brewer and Thien Ngo, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. Celestron Acquisition,
LLC, Nantong Schmidt Opto-Electrical Technology Co. Ltd., Ningbo
Sunny Electronic Co. Ltd., Olivon Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Olivon
USA, LLC, Sky-Watcher Canada, Sky-Watcher USA, Suzhou Synta Optical
Technology Co. Ltd., SW Technology Corp., Synta Canada
International Enterprises Ltd., and Synta Technology Corp. of
Taiwan, Defendants, Case No. 20-cv-04823 (N.D. Cal., July 17,
2020), seeks compensatory damages, including interest thereon,
reasonable costs and expenses incurred in this action, including
counsel fees and expert fees and such other and further relief in
violation Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act,
State Antitrust Laws and various state consumer protection laws.

Synta Technology Corporation of Taiwan manufactures, markets and/or
sells telescopes throughout the U.S. SW Technology Corporation is a
wholly owned and/or controlled subsidiary of Synta. SW Technology
acquired Celestron as a wholly-owned subsidiary in 2005 and
continues to operate as a holding company. Sky-Watcher Canada, a
telescope manufacturer, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of defendant
Synta Technology.

Suzhou Synta Optical Technology Co., Ltd. is a telescope
manufacturing company located in Suzhou, China. It is 20% owned by
Synta Canada Int'l Enterprises Ltd.

Nantong Schmidt Opto-Electrical Technology Co. Ltd. is a telescope
manufacturing company in Rugao City, Jiangsu, China.

Olivon Manufacturing Co. Ltd. is a Canadian company that
manufactured, marketed, and/or sold telescopes that were sold and
purchased throughout the U.S. Olivon USA, LLC is a Nevada
corporation that manufactured, marketed, and/or sold telescopes
that were sold and purchased throughout the U.S.

Ningbo Sunny Electronic Co., Ltd. is a Chinese company that
manufactured, marketed and/or sold telescopes throughout the U.S.

Defendants are alleged of unlawfully engaging in a conspiracy to
monopolize, to allocate the market, and fix prices in the consumer
telescope market.

Sara Day Brewer and Thien Ngo are amateur astronomers who purchased
at least one telescope indirectly from the Defendants. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Marc M. Seltzer, Esq.
      Steven Sklaver, Esq.
      Kalpana Srinivasan, Esq.
      Michael Gervais, Esq.
      SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
      1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400
      Los Angeles, CA 90067
      Phone: (310) 789-3100
      Email: mseltzer@susmangodfrey.com
             ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com
             ksrinivasan@susmangodfrey.com
             mgervais@susmangodfrey.com


CENTURY FEDERAL: Szewczyk Sues Over Overdraft Fees
--------------------------------------------------
Gary Szewczyk, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Century Federal Credit Union, Defendant,
Case No. CV 20 937175 (Comm. Pleas. Ohio, September 14, 2020),
seeks compensatory damages, recovery on all monies wrongfully
obtained from overdraft fees, as well as enjoinment, pre-judgment
and post-judgment interest plus attorneys' fees resulting from
breach of contract, unjust enrichment and negligence.

Century Federal Credit Union is a federally chartered credit union
headquartered in Cleveland, Cuyahoga County, Ohio. Szewczyk has a
checking account with Century and opted in to Century's standard
overdraft practices.

According to the complaint, Century charges accountholders $30
"Courtesy Pay" fees on accounts that were never actually overdrawn.
Szewczyk was assessed a $25 Overdraft Fee on a $65 withdrawal when
his account was not even negative after that withdrawal. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alyson Steele Beridon, Esq.
      BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC
      425 Walnut St., Suite 2315
      Cincinnati, OH 45202
      Phone: (513) 381-2224
      Email: alysonb@bsjfirm.com

             - and -

      Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
      COHEN & MALAD, LLP
      One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
      Indianapolis, IN 46204
      Telephone: (317) 636-6481
      Email: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com

             - and -

      J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
      Martin F. Schubert, Esq.
      BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC
      223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
      Nashville, TN 37203
      Phone: (615) 254-8801
      Email: gerards@bsjfirm.com
             martys@bsjfirm.com

             - and -

      Christopher D. Jennings, Esq.
      JOHNSON FIRM
      610 President Clinton Avenue, Suite 300
      Little Rock, AR 72201
      Telephone: (501) 372-1300
      Email: chris@yourattorney.com


COLONEL LITTLETON: Tenzer-Fuchs Claims Website not Blind-Friendly
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle Tenzer-Fuchs, individually and on behalf of all other
similarly situated visually-impaired individuals, Plaintiff, v.
Colonel Littleton, Ltd., Inc., Defendant, Case No. 20-cv-03150
(E.D. N.Y., July 15, 2020), seeks preliminary and permanent
injunction, compensatory, statutory and punitive damages and fines,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest, costs and expenses of this
action together with reasonable attorneys' and expert fees and such
other and further relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act,
New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights
Law.

Colonel Littleton is an online leather retailer that specializes in
developing and producing purses, wallets, handbags, hats, belts,
briefcases and portfolios. It operates, manages and controls the
website www.colonellittleton.com which allows it to sell its
products and accessories and is an exclusive point of sale for
them. Plaintiff is legally blind and claims that Defendant's
website cannot be accessed by the visually-impaired. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jonathan Shalom, Esq.
     SHALOM LAW, PLLC.
     105-13 Metropolitan Avenue
     Forest Hills, NY 11375
     Tel: (718) 971-9474
     Email: Jshalom@JonathanShalomLaw.com


COLONY CREDIT: Bragar Eagel Reminds of November 9 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that a class action has been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of Colony Credit Real Estate,
Inc. (NYSE: CLNC). Stockholders have until the deadline below to
petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional
information about the case can be found at the link provided.

Colony Credit Real Estate, Inc. (NYSE: CLNC)

Class Period: Common stock purchased or otherwise acquired pursuant
and/or traceable to the Registration Statement and Prospectus
(collectively, the "Registration Statement") issued in connection
with the combination of Colony NorthStar, Inc. ("Colony NorthStar")
and NorthStar Real Estate Income Trust, Inc. ("NorthStar I") and
NorthStar Real Estate Income II, Inc. ("NorthStar II") on or about
February 1, 2018 (the "Merger").

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 9, 2020

The Company's common stock was registered with the SEC in
connection with the Merger. Following the Merger, Colony Credit's
common stock was listed on the New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE")
without an initial public offering: stockholders of NorthStar I
received 0.3532 shares of the Company's Class A common stock for
each share of NorthStar I common stock they owned; and stockholders
of NorthStar II received 0.3511 shares of the Company's Class A
common stock for each share of NorthStar II common stock they
owned.

On August 8, 2019, Colony Credit issued a press release to report
its second quarter 2019 financial results, in which it reported a
$119 million provision for loan losses.

On this news, the Company's share price fell $2.00 per share, or
more than 12%, over two consecutive trading sessions to close at
$14.05 per share on August 12, 2019.

On November 8, 2019, the Company announced a portfolio bifurcation
of certain assets and disclosed a $127 million provision for loan
losses.

On this news, the Company's share price fell $2.50 per share, or
nearly 18%, to close at $11.75 per share on November 8, 2019.

As of the date of the filing of this complaint, Colony Credit's
shares last closed at $5.40 per share, representing a more than 78%
decline from the $25 book value per share valued at the time of the
Merger.

The complaint, filed on September 10, 2020, alleges that the
Registration Statement was materially false and misleading and
omitted to state: (i) that the credit quality of certain of the
Company's assets had deteriorated prior to the Merger and were
continuing to deteriorate at the time of the Merger; (ii) that
certain of the Company's loans, including four loans of
approximately $261 million related to a New York hotel, were
substantially impaired, there was insufficient collateral to secure
the loans, and it was unlikely that the loans would be repaid;
(iii) that, as a result, the valuation attributed to certain of the
Company's assets was overstated; (iv) that certain of the assets
contributed as part of the Merger were of substantially lower value
than reflected in the Company's financial statements and the
Registration Statement; (v) that, as a result, the Company's
financial condition, including its book value, was materially
overstated; and (vi) that, as a result of the foregoing, the
positive statements in the Registration Statement about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

For more information on the Colony Credit class action case go to:
https://bespc.com/CLNC

About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York and California. The firm represents
individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities,
derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal
courts across the country. For more information about the firm,
please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do
not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com [GN]

CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING: Pluto Asserts Breach of FDCPA
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Convergent
Outsourcing, Inc. The case is styled as Lauren Pluto aka Garretson,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Convergent Outsourcing, Inc. and John Does 1-25,
Defendants, Case No. 1:20-cv-13558 (D.N.J., Sept. 30, 2020).

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

Convergent Outsourcing, Inc. is a debt collection agency. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Raphael Y. Deutsch
   Stein Saks PLLC
   285 Passaic Street
   Hackensack, NJ 07601
   Tel: (201) 282-6500
   Email: rdeutsch@steinsakslegal.com


COTY INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Nov. 3 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that a class action has been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of Coty, Inc. Stockholders have
until the deadline below to petition the court to serve as lead
plaintiff. Additional information about the case can be found at
the link provided.

Coty, Inc. (NYSE: COTY)

Class Period: October 3, 2016 to May 28, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 3, 2020

Coty is one of the world's largest beauty companies. The Company
operates three divisions: Coty Consumer Beauty ("Consumer Beauty")
which focuses on color cosmetics, retail hair coloring and styling
products, body care and mass fragrances sold primarily in the mass
retail channels; Coty Luxury ("Coty Luxury") which focuses on
prestige fragrances and skincare brands; and Coty Professional
Beauty ("Coty Professional") which focuses on servicing nail salon
owners and professionals in both hair and nail.

On the first day of the Class Period, October 3, 2016, Coty issued
a press release announcing the completion of its blockbuster merger
with The Proctor & Gamble Company's fine fragrance, color
cosmetics, salon professional and hair color and certain styling
businesses ("P&G Specialty Beauty Business") for $12.5 billion to
scale up its beauty business. In the press release, defendant
Becht, Chairman of Coty's Board of Directors, confirmed that ". . .
.we now have a much improved team, structure and culture to make
the vision of this merger a reality."

On July 1, 2019, Coty announced the write down of about $3 billion
in value of brands acquired from P&G as part of a four-year
restructuring plan, confirming that the P&G Specialty Beauty
Business had been overvalued.

On this news, Coty's stock price dropped $1.94, or over 14%, from
an opening price of $13.53 per share on July 1, 2019 to a closing
price of $11.59 per share.

On November 18, 2019, Coty announced another beauty brand
acquisition -- a 51% majority stake in Kylie Cosmetics for $600
million in order to "build and further develop Kylie's existing
beauty business," which "realized an estimated $177M net revenues
for the trailing twelve months (TTM)." Kylie Jenner was described
"as the youngest-ever self-made billionaire on the cover of Forbes
Self-Made Billionaire issue in August 2018."

But then, on May 29, 2020, Forbes reported that Kylie Jenner "has
been inflating the size and success of her business. For years." -
revealing that defendants had overvalued yet another acquisition.
On this news, Coty's stock price fell $0.56, or over 13%, from a
close of $4.19 on May 28, 2020 to a close of $3.63 per share on May
29, 2020.

The complaint, filed on September 4, 2020, alleges that throughout
the Class Period defendants made materially false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose material adverse facts about
Coty's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically,
defendants misrepresented and/or failed to disclose: (1) that
despite being no stranger to beauty brand acquisitions, Coty did
not have adequate processes and procedures in place to assess and
properly value the P&G Specialty Beauty Business and Kylie
Cosmetics acquisitions; (2) that as a result, Coty had overpaid for
the P&G Specialty Beauty Business and Kylie Cosmetics; (3) that
Coty did not have adequate infrastructure to smoothly integrate and
support the beauty brands that it acquired from P&G, including an
adequate supply chain; (4) that, as a result of its inadequate
infrastructure, Coty was not successfully integrating the beauty
brands it acquired from P&G and not delivering synergies from the
acquisition; (5) and that, as a result of the foregoing, Coty's
financial statements and defendants' statements about Coty's
business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and/or
misleading at all relevant times.

For more information on the Coty class action go to:
https://bespc.com/COTY

                          About Bragar Eagel

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York and California. The firm represents
individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities,
derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal
courts across the country. For more information about the firm,
please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do
not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com [GN]

CROWN HEIGHTS: Durand Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Pay for RNs
------------------------------------------------------------------
MYRIAM DURAND, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. CROWN HEIGHTS CENTER FOR NURSING AND REHABILITATION,
and JOEL LANDAU, Case No. 1:20-cv-04771-EK-PK (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 6,
2020), arises from the Defendants' violation of the New York City
Human Rights Law, New York State Human Labor Law, New York State
Labor Law, and the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants maintained a policy and
practice of requiring her, and other similarly situated employees,
to work an excess of 40 hours per week without providing the
overtime compensation required by federal and state laws and
regulations. Ms. Durand also asserts that the Defendants violated
the notice and recordkeeping requirements and wage statement
provisions of the NYLL.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants from approximately
2015 until August 19, 2017, as a registered nurse.

Crown Heights Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation operates a
nursing and rehabilitation center located in New York City, in the
borough of Brooklyn.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Tyrone A. Blackburn, Esq.
          1242 E. 80th Street, 3rd Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11236
          Telephone: (347) 342-7432


DAR TSON SHEN: Goldblatt Suit Asserts Telescope Price-Rigging
-------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Goldblatt, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, vs. Dar Tson Shen, Celestron Acquisition,
LLC, Nantong Schmidt Opto-Electrical Technology Co. Ltd., Ningbo
Sunny Electronic Co. Ltd., Olivon Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Olivon
USA, LLC, Sky-Watcher Canada, Sky-Watcher USA, Suzhou Synta Optical
Technology Co. Ltd., SW Technology Corp., Synta Canada
International Enterprises Ltd., Pacific Telescope, Corp. and Synta
Technology Corp. of Taiwan, Defendants, Case No. 20-cv-04860 (N.D.
Cal., July 17, 2020), seeks compensatory damages, including
interest thereon, reasonable costs and expenses incurred in this
action, including counsel fees and expert fees and such other and
further relief for violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman
Act, the Clayton Act, State Antitrust Laws and various state
consumer protection laws.

Synta Technology Corporation of Taiwan manufactures, markets and/or
sells telescopes throughout the U.S. SW Technology Corporation is a
wholly owned and/or controlled subsidiary of Synta. SW Technology
acquired Celestron as a wholly-owned subsidiary in 2005 and
continues to operate as a holding company. Sky-Watcher Canada, a
telescope manufacturer, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of defendant
Synta Technology. Dar Tson Shen is the founder, owner and chairman
of Synta.

Suzhou Synta Optical Technology Co., Ltd. is a telescope
manufacturing company located in Suzhou, China. It is 20% owned by
Synta Canada Int'l Enterprises Ltd.

Nantong Schmidt Opto-Electrical Technology Co. Ltd. is a telescope
manufacturing company in Rugao City, Jiangsu, China.

Olivon Manufacturing Co. Ltd. is a Canadian company that
manufactured, marketed, and/or sold telescopes that were sold and
purchased throughout the U.S. Olivon USA, LLC is a Nevada
corporation that manufactured, marketed, and/or sold telescopes
that were sold and purchased throughout the U.S.

Ningbo Sunny Electronic Co., Ltd. is a Chinese company that
manufactured, marketed and/or sold telescopes throughout the U.S.

Pacific Telescope Corp. is a British Columbia corporation that
sells Synta's Sky-Watcher brand of devices in Canada, and it is
controlled by co-conspirator Sylvia Shen, sister of Dar Tson Shen.

Defendants are alleged of unlawfully engaging in a conspiracy to
monopolize, to allocate the market, and fix prices in the consumer
telescope market.

Norman Goldblatt is an amateur astronomer who purchased at least
one telescope indirectly from the Defendants. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Eric B. Fastiff, Esq.
      Lin Y. Chan, Esq.
      LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN LLP
      275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
      San Francisco, CA 94111
      Telephone: (415) 956-1000
      Facsimile: (415) 956-1008
      Email: efastiff@lchb.com
             lchan@lchb.com

             - and -

      Dan Drachler, Esq.
      ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP
      1904 Third Avenue, Suite 1030
      Seattle, WA 98101
      Telephone: (206) 223-2053
      Facsimile: (206) 343-9636
      Email: ddrachler@zsz.com

             - and -

      Robert S. Schachter, Esq.
      Ryan Weller, Esq.
      ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP
      41 Madison Avenue, 32nd Floor
      New York, NY 10010
      Telephone: (212) 223-3900
      Facsimile: (212) 371-5969
      Email: rschachter@zsz.com
             rweller@zsz.com


DAR TSON SHEN: Moore Suit Alleges Telescope Price-Rigging
---------------------------------------------------------
Philip Moore, Robert Welsh, Herbert Nelson and John Goerger, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
vs. Dar Tson Shen, Celestron Acquisition, LLC, Nantong Schmidt
Opto-Electrical Technology Co. Ltd., Ningbo Sunny Electronic Co.
Ltd., Olivon Manufacturing Co., Ltd., Olivon USA, LLC, Sky-Watcher
Canada, Sky-Watcher USA, Suzhou Synta Optical Technology Co. Ltd.,
SW Technology Corp., Synta Canada International Enterprises Ltd.,
Pacific Telescope, Corp. and Synta Technology Corp. of Taiwan,
Defendants, Case No. 20-cv-06435 (N.D. Cal., September 14, 2020),
seeks compensatory damages, including interest thereon, reasonable
costs and expenses incurred in this action, including counsel fees
and expert fees and such other and further relief for violation of
Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, State
Antitrust Laws and various state consumer protection laws.

Synta Technology Corporation of Taiwan manufactures, markets and/or
sells telescopes throughout the U.S. SW Technology Corporation is a
wholly owned and/or controlled subsidiary of Synta. SW Technology
acquired Celestron as a wholly-owned subsidiary in 2005 and
continues to operate as a holding company. Sky-Watcher Canada, a
telescope manufacturer, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of defendant
Synta Technology. Dar Tson Shen is the founder, owner and chairman
of Synta.

Suzhou Synta Optical Technology Co., Ltd. is a telescope
manufacturing company located in Suzhou, China. It is 20% owned by
Synta Canada Int'l Enterprises Ltd.

Nantong Schmidt Opto-Electrical Technology Co. Ltd. is a telescope
manufacturing company in Rugao City, Jiangsu, China.

Olivon Manufacturing Co. Ltd. is a Canadian company that
manufactured, marketed, and/or sold telescopes that were sold and
purchased throughout the U.S. Olivon USA, LLC is a Nevada
corporation that manufactured, marketed, and/or sold telescopes
that were sold and purchased throughout the U.S.

Ningbo Sunny Electronic Co., Ltd. is a Chinese company that
manufactured, marketed and/or sold telescopes throughout the U.S.

Pacific Telescope Corp. is a British Columbia corporation that
sells Synta's Sky-Watcher brand of devices in Canada, and it is
controlled by co-conspirator Sylvia Shen, sister of Dar Tson Shen.

Defendants are alleged of unlawfully engaging in a conspiracy to
monopolize, to allocate the market, and fix prices in the consumer
telescope market.

Philip Moore, Robert Welsh, Herbert Nelson and John Goerger are
amateur astronomers who purchased at least one telescope indirectly
from the Defendants. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Eric B. Fastiff, Esq.
      Lin Y. Chan, Esq.
      Reilly T. Stoler, Esq.
      LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN LLP
      275 Battery Street, 29th Floor
      San Francisco, CA 94111
      Telephone: (415) 956-1000
      Facsimile: (415) 956-1008
      Email: efastiff@lchb.com
             lchan@lchb.com
             rstoler@lchb.com

             - and -

      Dan Drachler, Esq.
      ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP
      1904 Third Avenue, Suite 1030
      Seattle, WA 98101
      Telephone: (206) 223-2053
      Facsimile: (206) 343-9636
      Email: ddrachler@zsz.com


DAVID'S LOFT: Drummond Sues Over Unpaid OT Pay for House Managers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CLAYTON DRUMMOND, GREGORY FITZ, JAMES GILLIARD, and CALVIN HUGHES,
Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v.
DAVID'S LOFT CLINICAL PROGRAMS, INC. and DAVID H. THOMPSON, JR.,
Case No. 1:20-cv-02881-DKC (D. Md., Oct. 6, 2020), arises from the
Defendants' willful violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
Maryland Wage and Hour Law, and the Maryland Wage Payment and
Collection Law.

The complaint alleges that the Defendants misclassified the
Plaintiffs and the putative FLSA collective and Rule 23 class
members as exempt employees, required and permitted them to work
over 40 hours per week, and failed to pay overtime wages at the
mandated time and a half rate for each hour they worked in excess
of 40 per workweek, in violation of the FLSA, MWHL and MWPCL.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as Rehabilitation
Specialists/House Managers.

David's Loft Clinical Programs, Inc., is a drug rehabilitation and
addiction treatment center located in Baltimore, Maryland.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          James Edward Rubin, Esq.
          THE RUBIN EMPLOYMENT LAW FIRM, PC
          600 Jefferson Plaza, Suite 204
          Rockville, MD 20852
          Telephone: (301) 760-7914
          E-mail: jrubin@rubinemploymentlaw.com

               - and -

          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: jtb@jtblawgroup.com


ELKHART PRODUCTS: Underpays Employees' Overtime Pay, McCoy Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SHEILA McCOY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ELKHART PRODUCTS CORPORATION, Case No.
5:20-cv-05176-PKH (W.D. Ark., Oct. 1, 2020), is brought against the
Defendant for its alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act
and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant classified the Plaintiff
and other hourly-paid employees as non-exempt from the overtime
requirements of the FLSA and the AMWA. As a result, despite
regularly working over 40 hours in a week, the Plaintiff and other
similarly situated hourly-paid employees were not compensated for
their lawfully earned overtime at one and one-half times their
regular rate of pay. The Defendants consistently adjusted their
hour to reflect only 40 hours worked per week, the Plaintiff
alleges.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant from January 2020 to
September 2020 as an hourly-paid employee.

Elkhart Products Corporation offers a complete line of copper
fittings for the residential, commercial and industrial plumbing
markets.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Blake Hoyt, Esq.
          Josh Sanford, Esq.
          SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
          One Financial Center
          650 South Shackleford Road, Suite 411
          Little Rock, AR 72211
          Tel: (800) 615-4946
          Fax: (888) 787-2040
          E-mail: blake@sanfordlawfirm.com
                  josh@sanfordlawfirm.com


ERNIE'S AUTO: Perez Sues Over Detail Workers' Unpaid Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------------
RAMON PEREZ, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. ERNIE'S AUTO DETAILING, INC. and ERNESTO
DECENA, Case No. 2:20-cv-04798 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), is brought
against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, the New York Labor Law, and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law.

According to the complaint, the Defendants failed to compensate the
Plaintiff and all others similarly situated auto detail workers
overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a
workweek, to provide proper wage notices, and to furnish accurate
wage statements.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as an auto detail
worker at the Rallye Motors car dealership located at 1600 Northern
Blvd., in Roslyn, New York, from June 2016 until July 2020.

Ernie's Auto Detailing, Inc., is an autodetailing company with its
principal place of business located at 86 Spring Street, in
Passaic, New Jersey.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         C.K. Lee, Esq.
         Anne Seelig, Esq.
         LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
         148 West 24th Street, Eighth Floor
         New York, NY 10011
         Telephone: (212) 465-1188
         Facsimile: (212) 465-1181


FASTLY INC: Bernstein Liebhard Reminds of Oct. 26 Motion Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard, a nationally acclaimed investor rights law
firm, reminds investors of the deadline to file a lead plaintiff
motion in a securities class action that has been filed on behalf
of investors that purchased or acquired the securities of Fastly,
Inc. ("Fastly" or the "Company") (NYSE: FSLY) between May 6, 2020,
and August 5, 2020 (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit filed in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California alleges violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

If you purchased Fastly securities, and/or would like to discuss
your legal rights and options please visit Fastly Shareholder
Lawsuit or contact Matthew E. Guarnero toll free at (877) 779-1414
or MGuarnero@bernlieb.com.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business, operations and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose: (1) that Fastly's largest customer was ByteDance,
operator of TikTok, which was known to have serious security risks
and was under intense scrutiny by U.S. officials; (2) that there
was a material risk that Fastly's business would be adversely
impacted should any adverse actions be taken against ByteDance or
TikTok by the U.S. government; and (3) that, as a result,
Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked
a reasonable basis.

On August 5, 2020 after market close, Fastly held its second
quarter earnings conference call.  During the Class, Defendants
disclosed that ByteDance was Fastly's largest customer in the
second quarter of 2020, and that TikTok represented about 12% of
Fastly's revenue for the six months ended June 30, 2020.

On this news, Fastly's share price fell $19.28, or approximately
17.7% from the previous trading day's closing price of $108.92, to
close at $89.64 on August 6, 2020.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than October 26, 2020. A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require
that you serve as lead plaintiff. If you choose to take no action,
you may remain an absent class member.

If you purchased Fastly securities, and/or would like to discuss
your legal rights and options please visit
https://www.bernlieb.com/cases/fastlyinc-fsly-shareholder-class-action-lawsuit-stock-fraud-302/apply/
or contact Matthew E. Guarnero toll free at (877) 779-1414 or
MGuarnero@bernlieb.com.

Since 1993, Bernstein Liebhard LLP has recovered over $3.5 billion
for its clients. In addition to representing individual investors,
the Firm has been retained by some of the largest public and
private pension funds in the country to monitor their assets and
pursue litigation on their behalf. As a result of its success
litigating hundreds of lawsuits and class actions, the Firm has
been named to The National Law Journal's "Plaintiffs' Hot List"
thirteen times and listed in The Legal 500 for ten consecutive
years.

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING. © 2020 Bernstein Liebhard LLP. The law firm
responsible for this advertisement is Bernstein Liebhard LLP, 10
East 40th Street, New York, New York 10016, (212) 779-1414. The
lawyer responsible for this advertisement in the State of
Connecticut is Michael S. Bigin.  Prior results do not guarantee or
predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter.

         Matthew E. Guarnero
         Bernstein Liebhard LLP
         Tel No: (877) 779-1414
         E-mail: MGuarnero@bernlieb.com [GN]


FRANKIES BIKINIS LLC: Bunting Claims Website not Blind-accessible
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rasheta Bunting, individually and as the representative of a class
of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff, v. Frankies Bikinis LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 20-cv-03205 (E.D. N.Y., July 17, 2020), seeks
preliminary and permanent injunction, compensatory, statutory and
punitive damages and fines, prejudgment and post-judgment interest,
costs and expenses of this action together with reasonable
attorneys' and expert fees and such other and further relief under
the Americans With Disabilities Act, New York State Human Rights
Law and New York City Human Rights Law.

Frankies Bikinis, through Frankiesbikinis.com, provides swimwear
and beauty products. Bunting is legally blind and claims that said
website cannot be accessed by the visually-impaired. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Dan Shaked, Esq.
      SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
      14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
      Scarsdale, NY 10583
      Tel. (917) 373-9128
      E-mail: ShakedLawGroup@Gmail.com


GATEWAY HEALTH: Misclassifies Case Managers, Hardisky Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ROBBI HARDISKY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. GATEWAY HEALTH, LLC, formerly known as GATEWAY HEALTH
PLAN, LP, Case No. 2:20-cv-01483-MPK (W.D. Pa., Oct. 1, 2020), is
brought against the Defendant for its alleged violation of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as a Case Manager from
June 2015 to September 2019.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked over 40 hours in
one or more individual workweeks during the last 3 years. But,
because the Plaintiff was classified by the Defendant as exempt
from the overtime provisions of the FLSA and the PMWA, the
Plaintiff did not receive overtime pay at one and one-half times
her regular rate of pay when she worked over 40 hours in individual
workweeks during her employment with the Defendant.

Gateway Health, LLC, provides managed care services, including
utilization review services, to health plan members.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joshua P. Geist, Esq.
          GOODRICH & GEIST, P.C.
          3634 California Avenue
          Pittsburgh, PA 15212
          Tel: 412-766-1455
          Fax: 412-766-0300

                - and –

          Travis M. Hedgpeth, Esq.
          THE HEDGPETH LAW FIRM, PC
          3050 Post Oak Blvd. Suite 510
          Houston, TX 77056
          Tel: (281) 572-0727
          Fax: (281) 572-0728
          E-mail: travis@hedgpethlaw.com


HARBOR FREIGHT: Appeals Ruling in Kaupelis Suit to 9th Circuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., filed an appeal from a
Court ruling entered in the lawsuit styled Will Kaupelis, et al. v.
Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc., Case No. 8:19-cv-01203-JVS-DFM, in
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California,
Santa Ana.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter on March 16,
2020, the Plaintiffs moved the Court for an order:

    1. certifying these putative classes:

       California Class:

       "all persons in California who purchased a Portland
       14-inch electric chainsaw for personal, family, or
       household use from June 17, 2013 through May 13, 2018";

       Multi-State Implied Warranty Class:

       "all persons who purchased a Portland 14-inch electric
       chainsaw for personal, family, or household use: (1) in
       Alaska, Arkansas, California, Delaware, District of
       Columbia, Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota,
       Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota,
       Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South
       Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, or Wyoming
       on or after June 17, 2015 through May 13, 2018; or (2) in
       Colorado or Massachusetts on or after June 17, 2016
       through May 13, 2018"; and

       Nationwide UCL Class:

       "all persons in the United States who purchased a Portland
       14-inch electric chainsaw for personal, family, or
       household use from June 17, 2015 through May 13, 2018"; or
       alternatively

       Multi-State Consumer Protection Class:

       "all persons who purchased a Portland 14-inch electric
       chainsaw for personal, family, or household use: (1) in
       the states of Michigan, Minnesota, or New Jersey from June
       17, 2013 through May 13, 2018; (2) in the state Missouri
       from June 17, 2014 through May 13, 2018; (3) in the states
       of California, Florida, Massachusetts, or Washington from
       June 17, 2015 through May 13, 2018; (4) in the states of
       Illinois and New York from June 17, 2016 through May 13,
       2018."

       Excluded from each proposed class are persons who already
       received a replacement unit or refund from Harbor Freight
       in connection with its recall.

    2. appointing themselves as class representatives;

    3. appointing Bursor & Fisher, P.A. as class counsel, and
       award other relief as the Court deems just.

The lawsuit is a class action against the Defendant for the
manufacture and sale of Portland, One Stop Gardens, and Chicago
Electric 14-inch Electric Chainsaws, all of which suffered from an
identical defect in design.

The appellate case is captioned as Will Kaupelis, et al. v. Harbor
Freight Tools USA, Inc., Case No. 20-80140, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Respondents WILL KAUPELIS and FRANK ORTEGA, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented
by:

          Lawrence Timothy Fisher, Esq.
          Joel D. Smith, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          1990 N. California Boulevard, Suite 940
          Walnut Creek, CA 94596
          Telephone: (925) 300-4455
          Email: ltfisher@bursor.com

               - and -

          Marc G. Reich, Esq.
          REICH RADCLIFFE AND HOOVER LLP
          4675 MacArthur Court
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Telephone: (949) 975-0512
          E-mail: mgr@reichradcliffe.com

Defendant-Petitioner HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS USA, INC. is represented
by:

          Theane Evangelis, Esq.
          Timothy William Loose, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          333 South Grand Avenue
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
          Telephone: (213) 229-7746
          E-mail: tevangelis@gibsondunn.com
                  tloose@gibsondunn.com


HARBORSIDE INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of November 9 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that a class action has been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of Harborside, Inc.
Stockholders have until the deadline below to petition the court to
serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about the case can
be found at the link provided.

Harborside, Inc. (Other OTC: HSDEF)

Class Period: July 2, 2019 to August 12, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 9, 2020

On May 29, 2020, the Company issued a press release entitled
"Harborside Inc. Announces Intent to Restate Certain Historical
Financial Statements and Delay in Filing Annual Financial
Statements and MD&A" regarding the newly announced needed financial
restatements and the suspension of trading of its Canadian shares.

On this news, shares of Harborside fell 2% per share over the next
two trading days to close at $0.45 per share on June 2, 2020.

On June 22, 2020, Harborside issued a press release entitled
"Harborside Inc. Provides Update to Management Cease Trade Order
and Cease Trade Order" regarding its delayed restatements and the
continued suspension of trading of its Canadian shares.

On this news, shares of Harborside fell l2% per share over the rest
of the trading day and the next full trading day to close at $0.45
per share on June 23, 2020.

On June 30, 2020 issued a press release entitled "Harborside Inc.
Provides Update on MCTO and Financial Statement Filings" regarding
its delayed restatements and the continued suspension of trading of
its Canadian shares.

On this news, shares of Harborside fell 7% per share, to close at
$0.49 per share on July 1, 2020.

On July 10, 2020 issued a press release entitled "Harborside lnc.
Provides Update on Financial Statement Filings" regarding its
delayed restatements and the continued suspension of trading of Its
Canadian shares.

On this news, shares of Harborside fell l3% per share, to close at
$0.46 per share on July 13, 2020.

On August 12, 2020, Harborside filed with the Canadian securities
regulatory authorities its Unaudited Restated Condensed Interim
Consolidated Financial Statements for the Three and Six Months
Ended June 30, 2019 and 2018.

On this news, shares of Harborside fell over 5%, to close at $0.67
per share on August 13, 2020.

The complaint, filed on September 9, 2020, alleges that throughout
the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Harborside had undisclosed
material weaknesses and insufficient financial controls; (2)
Harborside's previously issued financial statements were false and
unreliable; (3) Harborside's earlier reported financial statements
would need restatement; (4) as a result of the foregoing and
subsequent reporting delays, Harborside's Canadian stock trading
would be suspended; (5) Harborside downplayed the negative impacts
of errors and delays regarding its financial statements; and (6) as
a result, defendants' public statements were materially false
and/or misleading at all relevant times. When the true details
entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered
damages.

For more information on the Harborside class action go to:
https://bespc.com/HSDEF

                       About Bragar Eagel

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York and California. The firm represents
individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities,
derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal
courts across the country. For more information about the firm,
please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do
not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com [GN]

HAT WORLD: Rafferty FLSA Suit Moved From N.D. Ohio to S.D. Indiana
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled MATT RAFFERTY, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. HAT WORLD INC., Case No. 5:20-cv-00857, was
removed from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Ohio to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Indiana on September 24, 2020.

The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Indiana assigned
Case No. 1:20-cv-02463-JRS-MPB to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Hat World, Inc., is an American retailer specializing in athletic
headwear.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony J. Lazzaro, Esq.
          LAZZARO LAW FIRM, LLC
          The Heritage Building, Suite 250
          3455 Chagrin Blvd.
          Moreland Hills, OH 44022
          Telephone: (216) 696-5000
          Facsimile: (216) 696-7005
          E-mail: anthony@lazzarolawfirm.com

               - and -

          D. Patrick Kasson, Esq.
          REMINGER CO. LPA
          200 S. Civic Center Dr., Suite 800
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (614) 232-2418
          Facsimile: (614) 232-2410
          E-mail: pkasson@reminger.com

               - and -

          Robert B. Kapitan, Esq.
          LAZZARO LAW FIRM
          Heritage Building, Ste. 250
          34555 Chagrin Blvd.
          Moreland Hills, OH 44022
          Telephone: (330) 703-9307
          Facsimile: (216) 696-7005


HEALTHY BEVERAGE: Pierre Suit Alleges False Labeling of Steaz Tea
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LAMARTINE PIERRE JR., DANIELLE GRAHAM, AMIE DELEON, JESSE GONZALEZ,
JEANNETTE RODRIGUEZ, VALERIE WELLS, STEPHANIE SMITH, SHANNON HOOD,
SHANNA HER, MELANIE BARBER, CHRISTOPHER MORGAN, and MOLLY BROWN, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. THE
HEALTHY BEVERAGE COMPANY, LLC, Case No. 2:20-cv-04934-GJP (E.D.
Pa., Oct. 6, 2020), is a class action against the Defendant
asserting claims for unjust enrichment.

The case arises from the Defendant's alleged false and misleading
advertising and marketing of its iced tea beverages under the Steaz
Organic Lightly Sweetened Iced Green Tea brand. The Defendant's
labeling of the Product as "Lightly Sweetened" misled consumers,
including the Plaintiffs, into believing that the Product is low in
sugar. Contrary to this representation, the Product contains 20
grams of added sugar.

As a result of the Defendant's misrepresentations and omissions,
the Plaintiffs and other putative Class members were deceived and
harmed by paying a premium for the advertised Product, according to
the complaint. They would not have purchased or paid more for the
Product had they known or were aware that the Product was not
"Lightly Sweetened" or low in sugar.

The Healthy Beverage Company, LLC, is a manufacturer of beverages
with its principal place of business located in Doylestown,
Pennsylvania.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Charles E. Schaffer, Esq.
         David C. Magagna Jr., Esq.
         LEVIN, SEDRAN & BERMAN, LLP
         510 Walnut Street, Suite 500
         Philadelphia, PA 19106
         E-mail: cschaffer@lfsblaw.com
                 dmagagna@lfsblaw.com

                - and –
   
         Gary E. Mason, Esq.
         MASON LIETZ & KLINGER LLP
         5101 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Suite 305
         Washington, DC 20016
         E-mail: gmason@masonllp.com

                - and –
   
         Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
         MASON LIETZ & KLINGER LLP
         227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
         Chicago, IL 60630
         E-mail: gklinger@masonllp.com

                - and –
   
         Jeffrey S. Goldenberg, Esq.
         GOLDENBERG SCHNEIDER L.P.A.
         4445 Lake Forest Drive, Suite 490
         Cincinnati, OH 45242
         E-mail: jgoldenberg@gs-legal.com


HEBREW HOMES: Martin Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages for Nurses
----------------------------------------------------------------
JAVIER MARTIN, and other similarly situated individuals v. HEBREW
HOMES HEALTH NETWORK, INC. d/b/a Plaza Health Network d/b/a Arch
Plaza Rehabilitation & Skilled Nursing d/b/a Jackson Plaza
Rehabilitation & Skilled Nursing d/b/a Ponce Plaza Rehabilitation &
Skilled Nursing d/b/a Sinai Plaza Rehabilitation & Skilled Nursing
d/b/a University Plaza, and HEBREW HOMES HEALTH NETWORK FOUNDATION,
INC., Case No. 1:20-cv-24026-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Oct. 1, 2020), arises
from the Defendants' alleged willful and intentional violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a nurse from September
1, 2016, to December 31, 2018. The Plaintiff alleges that he was
not properly compensated by the Defendants for all the hours he
worked in excess of 40 per week for approximately 65 compensable
weeks from the date of hire. The Plaintiff contends that he worked
approximately an average of 76 hours per week while he was employed
by the Defendants, but he was not compensated at the rate of not
less than one and one-half times his regular rate of pay.

The Defendants are comprised of five nursing and rehabilitation
centers in Miami-Dade, Florida, which share employees or
interchange employees, work in the direct interest of one another
and their employees are in the common control of both
companies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Tanesha Blye, Esq.
          Aron Smukler, Esq.
          Martin Saenz, Esq.
          SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC
          20900 NE 30th Ave., Ste. 800
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Tel: (305) 503-5131
          Fax: (888) 270-5549
          E-mail: tblye@saenzanderson.com
                  asmukler@saenzanderson.com
                  msaenz@saenzanderson.com


HOME CAREGIVERS: Shortchanges Caregivers' Wages, Emery Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Bonnie Emery, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. Home Caregivers of Cookeville, LLC,
Konstantin Yepifantsev and Jessica Yepifantsev, Defendants, Case
No. 20-cv-00038, (M.D. Tenn., July 17, 2020), seeks all unpaid
wages, including all minimum wage and overtime compensation due,
liquidated damages and/or penalties, disgorgement of all monies
deducted from Plaintiffs' pay, restitution for Defendants' unjust
enrichment and conversion, compensatory and punitive damages,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest, declaratory and injunctive
relief, costs and expenses of this action, together with reasonable
attorneys' fees and such other and further relief under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

Home Caregivers of Cookeville is a family owned and operated
nonmedical home care service provider owned by Konstantin
Yepifantsev and Jessica Yepifantsev. Emery worked as a caregiver
for Home Caregivers from December of 2019 through June 8, 2020 in
its Cookeville, Tennessee facility.

The complaint alleges that Home Caregivers failed to include the
non-discretionary bonuses earned by caregivers such as Plaintiff
and other Class Members in the calculation of the regular rate for
purposes of computing their overtime compensation. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Trevor Howell, Esq.
     HOWELL LAW, PLLC
     P.O. Box 158511
     Nashville, TN 37216
     Tel: (615) 406-1416
     Fax: (615) 373.8206
     Email: trevor@howelllawfirmllc.com

            - and -

     Peter F. Klett, Esq.
     Joshua Burgener, Esq.
     DICKINSON WRIGHT PLLC
     Fifth Third Center
     424 Church Street, Suite 1401
     Nashville, TN 37219-2392
     Tel: (615) 244-6538
     Email: pklett@dickinsonwright.com
            jburgener@dickinsonwright.com


INSURANCE SERVICES: Peterson Sues Over Breaches of ERISA Duties
---------------------------------------------------------------
JILLYN PETERSON, GABE HARE, ROBERT HEYNEN and ADAM KRAJEWSKI,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
INSURANCE SERVICES OFFICE, INC., THE PLAN ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE
OF INSURANCE SERVICES OFFICE, INC., THE TRUSTS INVESTMENT COMMITTEE
OF INSURANCE SERVICES OFFICE, INC., and JOHN DOES 1-30, Case No.
2:20-cv-13223-SDW-LDW (D.N.J., Sept. 24, 2020), is brought against
the Defendants for breaches of their fiduciary duties under the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

The Plaintiffs allege that during the putative Class Period, the
Defendants, as "fiduciaries" of the ISO 401(k) Savings and Employee
Stock Ownership Plan, breached the duties they owed to the plan, to
the Plaintiffs, and to the other participants of the plan by, inter
alia, (1) failing to objectively and adequately review the plan's
investment portfolio with due care to ensure that each investment
option was prudent, in terms of cost; and (2) maintaining certain
funds in the plan despite the availability of identical or similar
investment options with lower costs and/or better performance
histories.

The Defendants' mismanagement of the Plan, to the detriment of
participants and beneficiaries, including the Plaintiffs,
constitutes a breach of the fiduciary duties of prudence and
loyalty, and their actions were contrary to actions of a reasonable
fiduciary and cost the Plan and its participants millions of
dollars, the suit says.

Insurance Services Office, Inc., describes itself as "a leading
provider of advanced tools, data and analytics for property and
casualty insurers." The Company serves insurers, reinsurers, agents
and brokers, insurance regulators, risk managers, and other
participants in the property/casualty insurance marketplace.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Mark K. Gyandoh, Esq.
          CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C.
          312 Old Lancaster Road
          Merion Station, PA 19066
          Telephone: (610) 890-0200
          Facsimile: (717) 233-4103
          E-mail: markg@capozziadler.com

               - and -

          Donald R. Reavey, Esq.
          CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C.
          2933 North Front Street
          Harrisburg, PA 17110
          Telephone: (717) 233-4101
          Facsimile: (717) 233-4103
          E-mail: donr@capozziadler.com


JACK IN THE BOX: Szwanek Appeals Ruling in ADA Suit to 9th Cir.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs Judy Szwanek, et al., filed an appeal from a Court
ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled Judy Szwanek and James Lopez
II, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
JACK IN THE BOX, INC., Case No. 3:20-cv-02953-WHA, in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California, San
Francisco.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter on May 12,
2020, the lawsuit seeks to put an end to the systemic civil rights
violations committed by the Defendant in violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act against visually-impaired people in the
United States.

Jack in the Box denies the visually-impaired equal access to the
goods and services that Jack in the Box provides during
"late-night" operating times at thousands of their restaurants
throughout the United States, according to the complaint. In an
effort to increase profits and make their products available to the
public for longer periods of time, Jack in the Box restaurants
offer "late-night" hours. During these late evening and early
morning operating times, patrons are not allowed to physically
enter Jack in the Box restaurants and must access Jack in the Box
products and services via "drive-thru" windows.

These drive-thrus are only accessible by motor vehicle and are the
exclusive means by which a customer can independently purchase Jack
in the Box products during late-night hours. Despite being
accessible to the general public, Jack in the Box drive thrus lack
any meaningful accommodation for visually-impaired individuals who
are unable to operate motor vehicles, says the complaint. Since
they are unable to drive, and because it is not safe for them to
walk through the drive-thru, visually-impaired individuals are
totally precluded from accessing the Defendant's products during
late-night hours.

The Plaintiffs' eyesight has been compromised and the condition
renders them unable to legally operate a motor vehicle.

The appellate case is captioned as Judy Szwanek, et al. v. Jack in
the Box, Inc., et al., Case No. 20-16942, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

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

   -- Appellants James Lopez II and Judy Szwanek's Mediation
      Questionnaire is due on October 13, 2020;

   -- Transcript shall be ordered by November 4, 2020;

   -- Transcript is due on December 4, 2020;

   -- Appellants James Lopez II and Judy Szwanek's opening brief
      is due on January 13, 2021;

   -- Appellees Argo Hospitality Services, Inc., Different Rules,
      LLC, Jack in the Box, Inc. and Three Powers Foods, Inc.'s
      answering brief is due on February 16, 2021; and

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

Plaintiffs-Appellants JUDY SZWANEK and JAMES LOPEZ II, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented
by:

          Glenn M. Goffin, Esq.
          920 Beach Park Boulevard
          Foster City, CA 94404
          Phone: (415) 845-8556
          Email: ggoffin@glenngoffinlaw.com

Defendants-Appellees JACK IN THE BOX, INC., DIFFERENT RULES, LLC,
THREE POWERS FOODS, INC., and DIFFERENT RULES, LLC, are represented
by:

          Scott Michael McLeod, Esq.
          GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
          3 Parkcenter Drive, Suite 200
          Sacramento, CA 95825
          Telephone: (916) 565-2900
          E-mail: smcleod@grsm.com

               - and -

          Mark Saul Posard, Esq.
          GORDON REES LLP
          275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 986-5900
          E-mail: mposard@grsm.com

               - and -

          Stephen Edward Abraham, Esq.
          LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD AND SMITH LLP
          633 West 5th Street
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (714) 668-5562
          E-mail: Stephen.Abraham@lewisbrisbois.com


JASEM RESTAURANT: Faces Vazquez Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
LEANDRO VAZQUEZ VAZQUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. JASEM RESTAURANT, INC. d/b/a SUTTON CAFE
RESTAURANT, JOHN MANOLIDIS and VERA MANOLIDIS, jointly and
severally, Case No. 1:20-cv-08321 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), is
brought against the Defendants for violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and New York Labor Law.

The alleged violations include failure to compensate the Plaintiff
and all others similarly situated restaurant employees appropriate
minimum wages and overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40
hours in a workweek, failure to pay spread of hours premium for all
of hours worked in excess of 10 hours per day, and failure to
provide wage notices or wage statements.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a cook at their
restaurant, Sutton Cafe Restaurant, located at 1026 1st Avenue, in
New York City, from August 2009 through August 10, 2020.

Jasem Restaurant, Inc., owns and operates the Sutton Cafe
Restaurant with its principal place of business located at 1026 1st
Avenue, in New York City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


JELD-WEN INC: Appeals Ruling in Grubb Antitrust Suit to 4th Cir.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Jeld-Wen, Inc., et al., filed an appeal from a Court
ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled GRUBB LUMBER COMPANY, INC.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
MASONITE CORPORATION, and JELD-WEN, INC., Case No.
3:18-cv-00718-JAG, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Virginia at Richmond.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
challenges the Defendants' collusive pricing and illegal scheme for
"interior molded doors" in violation of the Sherman Act and the
Clayton Act.

Interior molded doors are a type of interior door made by
sandwiching a wood frame and a hollow or solid core between two
doorskins composed of a high-density fibrous mat and formed into a
raised panel design. Interior molded doors attempt to simulate the
aesthetics of solid wood doors at lower prices.

Masonite is a corporation organized under the laws of Delaware with
a principal place of business in Tampa, Florida.  Masonite is a
wholly owned subsidiary of Masonite International Corporation.

Jeld-Wen is a corporation organized under the laws of Delaware with
a principal place of business in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Jeld-Wen is a wholly owned subsidiary of JELD-WEN Holding, Inc.

The Defendants are vertically-integrated manufacturers, i.e., they
manufacture both molded doorskins as well as interior molded doors.
The Defendants control the majority (around 85%) of the market for
interior molded doors and are the only manufacturers for doorskins,
a necessary input for interior molded doors, in North America.

The appellate case is captioned as Grubb Lumber Company, Inc. v.
Jeld-Wen, Inc., Case No. 20-2064, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellees GRUBB LUMBER COMPANY, INC., Individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated; PHILADELPHIA RESERVE
SUPPLY CO.; LEN-CO LUMBER CORP.; and NEW DEAL LUMBER & MILLWORK
CO., INC. are represented by:

          Garrett D. Blanchfield, Jr., Esq.
          REINHARDT WENDORF & BLANCHFIELD
          First National Bank Building
          332 Minnesota Street
          St. Paul, MN 55105
          Telephone: (651) 287-2100
          E-mail: g.blanchfield@rwblawfirm.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey J. Corrigan, Esq.
          SPECTOR ROSEMAN & KODROFF P.C.
          2001 Market Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 496-0300
          E-mail: jcorrigan@srkattorneys.com

               - and -

          Eric Leon Cramer, Esq.
          BERGER & MONTAGUE, PC
          1818 Market Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 875-3009
          E-mail: ecramer@bm.net

               - and -

          Wyatt B. Durrette, Jr., Esq.
          Kevin Jerome Funk, Esq.
          Christine Alicia Williams, Esq.
          DURRETTE, ARKEMA, GERSON & GILL, PC
          1111 East Main Street
          P. O. Box 1463
          Richmond, VA 23219
          Telephone: (804) 775-6809
          E-mail: wdurrette@dagglaw.com
                  kfunk@dagglaw.com
                  cwilliams@dagglaw.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey B. Gittleman, Esq.
          BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE
          3300 Two Commerce Square
          2001 Market Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103-0000
          Telephone: (215) 963-0600
          E-mail: jgittleman@barrack.com

               - and -

          Brian Murray, Esq.
          GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
          230 Park Avenue
          New York, NY 10169
          Telephone: (212) 682-5340
          E-mail: bmurray@glancylaw.com

               - and -

          Elizabeth R. Odette, Esq.
          LOCKRIDGE, GRINDAL & NAUEN, PLLP
          100 Washington Avenue, South
          Minneapolis, MN 55401-0000
          Telephone: (202) 544-9840

Defendant-Appellant JELD-WEN, INC. is represented by:

          Tracie Lynn Bryant, Esq.
          KIRKLAND & ELLIS, LLP
          1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
          Washington, DC 20004
          Telephone: (202) 879-5954
          E-mail: tracie.bryant@kirkland.com

               - and -

          Richard Cullen, Esq.
          Brian Charles Riopelle, Esq.
          Seth Abram Schaeffer, Esq.
          MCGUIREWOODS, LLP
          800 East Canal Street P. O. Box 3916
          Richmond, VA 23219
          Telephone: (804) 775-1000
          E-mail: rcullen@mcguirewoods.com
                  briopelle@mcguirewoods.com
                  sschaeffer@mcguirewoods.com


JO CAT BAKERY: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Ramirez Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
ORLANDO RAMIREZ and WILLEBALDO CASTRO, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated v. JO CAT BAKERY CORP. D/B/A CATANIA
BAKERY, JOSEPH CATANIA and ROSAMARIA CATANIA, Case No.
1:20-cv-04792 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), is brought against the
Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New
York Labor Law.

The lawsuit asserts claims, including failure to compensate the
Plaintiffs and all others similarly situated employees appropriate
minimum wages and overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of 40
hours in a workweek, failure to pay spread of hours premium for all
of hours worked in excess of 10 hours per day, failure to provide
accurate wage notice, and failure to furnish accurate wage
statements.

Plaintiff Ramirez and Plaintiff Castro worked at the Defendants'
bakery in New York from September 9, 1994, through April 17, 2019,
and from 2006 through April 17, 2019, respectively. Their duties
consisted of preparing food, baking food and cleaning Catania
Bakery.

Jo Cat Bakery Corp., d/b/a Catania Bakery, is a company that
operates a bakery, with its principal place of business located at
487 Harman Street, in Brooklyn, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Amit Kumar, Esq.
         LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM CAFARO
         108 West 39th Street, Suite 602
         New York, NY 10018
         Telephone: (212) 583-7400
         E-mail: AKumar@Cafaroesq.com


KEURIG GREEN: Seeks Ninth Circuit Review of Ruling in Smith Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Keurig Green Mountain, Inc., filed an appeal from a Court
ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled KATHLEEN SMITH, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. KEURIG GREEN MOUNTAIN,
INC.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No.
4:18-cv-06690-HSG, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California, Oakland.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter on February 17,
2020, the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California issued an Order granting Defendant's Administrative
Motion to Modify the Hearing Date and Briefing Schedule in the
case.

The appellate case is captioned as Kathleen Smith v. Keurig Green
Mountain, Inc., Case No. 20-80139, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Respondent KATHLEEN SMITH, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, is represented by:

          Howard J. Hirsch, Esq.
          LEXINGTON LAW GROUP
          503 Divisadero Street
          San Francisco, CA 94117
          Telephone: (415) 913-7800
          E-mail: hhirsch@lexlawgroup.com

Defendant-Petitioner KEURIG GREEN MOUNTAIN, INC. is represented
by:

          Daniel R. Adler, Esq.
          Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., Esq.
          Bradley Joseph Hamburger, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          333 South Grand Avenue
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
          Telephone: (213) 229-7634
          E-mail: dadler@gibsondunn.com
                  tboutrous@gibsondunn.com
                  bhamburger@gibsondunn.com

               - and -

          Kent J. Schmidt, Esq.
          DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP
          38 Technology Drive
          Irvine, CA 92618-5310
          Telephone: (714) 800-1445
          E-mail: schmidt.kent@dorsey.com

               - and -

          Andrew S. Tulumello, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          1050 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20036-5306
          Telephone: (202) 955-8657
          E-mail: atulumello@gibsondunn.com


KROTO INC: Riggs Files Suit in Illinois
---------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kroto, Inc. The case
is styled as William Riggs, an individual and Florida resident, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Kroto, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:20-cv-05822 (N.D. Ill., Sept.
30, 2020).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Contract: Other
filed for Diversity-Other Contract.

Kroto, Inc. is a craft store in Niles, Illinois.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Leslie Guillon, Esq.
   Arnold Law Firm
   865 Howe Avenue
   Sacramento, CA 95825
   Tel: (916) 777-7777
   Email: lguillon@justice4you.com

     - and -

   Michael Anderson Berry, Esq.
   Arnold Law Firm
   865 Howe Avenue
   Sacramento, CA 95825
   Tel: (916) 777-7777
   Status: (916) 924-1829
   Email: aberry@justice4you.com


KUSHNER VILLAGE: Faces Kozak Class Suit in New York Supreme Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ANDREW KOZAK; DANIEL PORVIN; DARLA STACHECKI; MONIQUE SAFFORD;
MICHAEL MAHER; and ANA SUSSMANN, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. KUSHNER VILLAGE 329 EAST 9TH, LLC; and
WESTMINSTER MANAGEMENT, a/k/a WESTMINSTER MANAGEMENT, LLC, a/k/a
WESTMINSTER CITY LIVING, Case No. 157448/2020 (N.Y. Sup., New York
Cty., Sept. 15, 2020), is brought against the Defendants for relief
related to unlawful and dangerous construction in certain buildings
and for the Defendants' failure to obtain Certificates of
Occupancy.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs are tenants of a series
of four adjacent buildings located at 329-335 East 9th Street, in
New York City (collectively the "Subject Buildings"). The
Defendants added a new floor and completed construction of new
penthouses on the roof of each of the Subject Buildings in 2015 and
offered the penthouses for rent.

As a condition of the addition of penthouses to the Subject
Buildings, the Defendants were required by the New York City
Department of Buildings ("DOB") to obtain a Certificate of
Occupancy ("CO") for each of the Subject Buildings. Instead of
expeditiously proceeding to obtain the legally required COs, the
Defendants applied for and received a series of Temporary
Certificates of Occupancy ("TCOs") from on July 2015 through the
date herein, the Plaintiffs assert.

According to the complaint, the Defendants have perpetrated a fraud
by claiming that the penthouses have been continuously under
construction in order to renew its TCOs indefinitely in order to
avoid complying with the DOB's requirements for obtaining COs. As
part of this fraudulent scheme the Defendants have failed to
disclose the existence of the new, occupied residential units from
public agencies, including the DOB, New York Department of Housing
Preservation and Development ("HPD"); the Board of Standards and
Appeals ("BSA"); the New York City Department of Finance ("DIF");
and New York City Civil Court, by filing false documents and false
sworn statements with said agencies that failed to disclose the
increased occupancy of the buildings.

Kushner Village 329 East 9th, LLC, is engaged in the real estate
business.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Robin Loguidice, Esq.
          GRIMBLE & LOGUIDICE, LLP
          217 Broadway, Suite 304
          New York, NY 10007
          Telephone: (212) 349-0450

               - and -

          Jack L. Lester, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JACK LESTER
          99 Park Avenue, Suite 1100
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 832-5357
          E-mail: jllcomlaw@aol.com


LA PLAZA LLC: Garcia Seeks Unpaid Overtime, Spread-of-Hours Pay
---------------------------------------------------------------
Miguel Angel Garcia, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Roadway Moving Inc. and Ross
Sapir, Defendants, Case No. 20-cv-05570 (S.D. N.Y., July 20, 2020)
seeks unpaid minimum wages and overtime wage orders pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, New York Labor Law, NY Wage Theft
Prevention Act and the "spread-of-hours" and overtime wage orders
of the New York Commission of Labor, including applicable
liquidated damages, interest, attorneys' fees, and costs.

Garcia was an employee of Roadway Moving, making deliveries within
various Northeastern United States locations, stocking deliveries,
taking out the garbage and cleaning. He usually works in excess of
40 hours per week, without appropriate compensation for the hours
over 40 per week, says the complaint. Defendants also failed to
maintain accurate recordkeeping of their hours worked and failed to
pay Flores the required "spread-of-hours" pay for any day in which
he had to work over 10 hours a day, adds the complaint. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lina Stillman, Esq.
      STILLMAN LEGAL PC
      42 Broadway, 12th Floor
      New York, NY 10004
      Tel: (212) 203-2417
      Website: www.FightForUrRights.com


LEXINFINTECH LTD: Bragar Eagel Reminds of November 9 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that a class action has been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of LexinFintech Holdings, Ltd.
Stockholders have until the deadline below to petition the court to
serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about the case can
be found at the link provided.

LexinFintech, Ltd. (NASDAQ: LX)

Class Period: December 21, 2017 to August 24, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 9, 2020

On August 25, 2020, Grizzly Research published a report describing,
among other things, how the Company: (i) reports artificially low
delinquency rates by giving borrowers in default new funds to make
payments; (ii) has a business model that exposes shareholders to
enormous losses; (iii) was still conducting direct peer to peer
lending despite claiming otherwise, (iv) lacked internal controls;
and (v) conducted undisclosed related party transactions.

On this news, shares of LexinFintech stock fell $0.47 per share or
5.52% to close at $8.04 per share on August 25, 2020

The complaint, filed on September 9, 2020, alleges that throughout
the Class Period defendants made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (1) LexinFintech reported
artificially low delinquency rates by giving borrowers in default
new funds to make payments; (2) the Company's business model
exposes shareholders to enormous losses by prioritizing Chinese
lenders for off-balance sheet loans; (3) the Company exaggerated
its user base; (4) the Company was facilitating direct peer to peer
lending contrary to Chinese law; (5) the Company engaged in
undisclosed related party transactions; (6) the Company lacked
adequate internal controls; and (7) as a result, defendants' public
statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant
times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims
that investors suffered damages.

For more information on the LexinFintech class action go to:
https://bespc.com/LX

                       About Bragar Eagel

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York and California. The firm represents
individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities,
derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal
courts across the country. For more information about the firm,
please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do
not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com [GN]

LIVONGO HEALTH: Hart Slams Sale to Teldoc Health for Lack of Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Hart, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Livongo Health, Inc., Glen Tullman, Zane
Burke, Chris Bischoff, Karen L. Daniel, Sandra Fenwick, Philip D.
Green, Hemant Taneja, Teladoc Health, Inc. and Tempranillo Merger
Sub, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 20-cv-01222 (D. Del. September 14,
2020), seeks to enjoin defendants and all persons acting in concert
with them from proceeding with, consummating, or closing the
acquisition of Livongo Health, Inc. by Teladoc Health, Inc. and
Tempranillo Merger Sub Inc., rescinding it and setting it aside or
awarding rescissory damages in the event defendants consummate the
merger, costs of this action, including reasonable allowance for
attorneys' and experts' fees and such other and further relief
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, Livongo's
stockholders will receive 0.5920 shares of Parent common stock and
$4.24 in cash for each share of Livongo common stock they own.

The complaint alleges that the solicitation statement with respect
to the proposed transaction fails to disclose all line items used
to calculate EBIT and unlevered free cash flow and a reconciliation
of all non-GAAP to GAAP metrics and omitted the analyses performed
by Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC.

Livongo has created a unified platform that provides
cellular-connected devices, supplies, informed coaching, data
science-enabled insights and facilitates access to medications
across multiple chronic conditions for its members. It currently
offers Livongo for Diabetes, Livongo for Hypertension, Livongo for
Prediabetes and Weight Management, and Livongo for Behavioral
Health.

Hart owns Livongo common units. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Brian D. Long, Esq.
      Gina M. Serra, Esq.
      RIGRODSKY & LONG, P.A.
      300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1220
      Wilmington, DE 19801
      Tel: (302) 295-5310
      Facsimile: (302) 654-7530
      Email: bdl@rl-legal.com
             gms@rl-legal.com

             - and -

      Shane T. Rowley, Esq.
      Danielle Rowland Lindahl, Esq.
      ROWLEY LAW PLLC
      50 Main Street, Suite 1000
      White Plains, NY 10606
      Telephone: (914) 400-1920
      Facsimile: (914) 301-3514


MEDICAL DATA: Davis Asserts Breach of FDCPA
-------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Medical Data Systems,
Inc. The case is styled as Angela Davis, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Medical Data
Systems, Inc., t/a Medical Revenue Services, Inc. (Medical Revenue
Service) and John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 3:20-cv-00546
(W.D. N.C., Sept. 30, 2020).

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

Medical Data Systems, Inc. provides revenue cycle management and
collection services. MDS is exclusively healthcare focused
servicing 480+ facilities nationwide. Services include Extended
Business Office (Early Out), Primary and Secondary Bad-Debt
Collections services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   C. Randolph Emory, Esq.
   The Emory Law Firm, P.C.
   11020 David Taylor Drive, Suite 102
   Charlotte, NC 28262
   Tel: (704) 371-4333
   Fax: (704) 371-3015
   Email: emorylawecf@gmail.com


MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY: Cordero Seeks Refund of School Fees
-------------------------------------------------------------
ANTHONY CORDERO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. MONTANA STATE UNIVERSITY, Case No. 2:20-cv-00046-BMM
(D. Mont., Sept. 14, 2020), seeks a refund of the pro-rated portion
of tuition fees proportionate to the amount of time in the
respective semesters when the Defendant closed and switched to
online learning.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant failed to
refund any amount of the tuition fee paid by the Plaintiff, even
though the Defendant implemented online distance learning starting
on March 23, 2020. Because of the Defendant's response to the
COVID-19 pandemic, on March 23, 2020, the Defendant also stopped
providing many of the services or facilities the tuition fees were
intended to cover.

The Defendant's failure to provide the services for which tuition
fees were intended to cover since March 23, 2020, is a breach of
the contracts and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair
dealing, according to the complaint.

Montana State University offers degrees in both undergraduate and
graduate level curriculum. The University offers programs including
undergraduate degree programs in nursing and business, as well as
graduate degree programs in accounting, and biology.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adrian A. Miller, Esq.
          Michelle M. Sullivan, Esq.
          SULLIVAN MILLER LAW PLLC
          2812 1st Ave. N, Suite 225
          Billings, MT 59101
          Telephone: (406) 403-7066
          Facsimile: (406) 294-5702
          E-mail: michelle.sullivan@sullivanmiller.com
                  adrian.miller@sullivanmiller.com

               - and -

          Michael Tompkins, Esq.
          LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C.
          One Old Country Road, Suite 347
          Carle Place, NY 11514
          Telephone: (516) 873-9550
          E-mail: mtompkins@leedsbrownlaw.com


MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OH: Harrison Appeals Ruling to 6th Circuit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Alana Harrison filed an appeal from a court ruling issued
in her lawsuit entitled Alana Harrison v. Montgomery County, OH,
Case No. 3:19-cv-00288, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Ohio at Dayton.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
arises under the 5th and 14th Amendments to the United States
Constitution.

The case seeks relief relating to the alleged deprivation of the
Plaintiff's and Class members' property rights in real property
located within Montgomery County, Ohio. Specifically, the County,
acting within its governmental capacity and under color of state
law, terminated and seized the Plaintiff's ownership interest in
real estate under the auspices of tax foreclosure proceedings
authorized by O.R.C. Sections 323.65, et seq., but in doing so,
denied the Plaintiff and Class members their constitutional right
to just compensation, according to the complaint.

The appellate case is captioned as Alana Harrison v. Montgomery
County, OH, Case No. 20-4051, in the United States Court of Appeals
for the Sixth Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellant ALANA HARRISON, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:

          Marc E. Dann, Esq.
          THE DANN LAW FIRM
          P.O. Box 6031040
          Cleveland, OH 44103
          Telephone: (216) 373-0539
          Facsimile: (216) 373-0536
          E-mail: mdann@dannlaw.com

Defendant-Appellee MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OH, is represented by:

          Anne Jagielski, Esq.
          MONTGOMERY COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE
          P.O. Box 972
          Dayton, OH 45422
          Telephone: (937) 232-5698
          E-mail: jagielskia@mcohio.org


MORLEY COMPANIES: Call Center Agents Seek Pay for Pre-shift Work
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shikeal Jenkins and McKenzie Moe, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Morley Companies, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 20-cv-11921 (E.D. Mich., July 16, 2020), seeks
to recover compensation, liquidated damages and attorneys' fees and
costs pursuant to the provisions of Sections 206, 207 and 216(b) of
the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, and the South
Carolina Payment of Wages Act.

Morley Companies is a customer engagement and contact center that
provides customer services, technical support, and sales and
marketing support to their business clients. Jenkins and Moe worked
for Morley as call center agents at its Greenville, South Carolina
and Saginaw, Michigan offices respectfully. They claim to be
uncompensated for pre-shift work, usually logging-in to their
computers, reading company emails, opening multiple different
computer programs, logging in to each program and ensuring that
each program is running correctly, all of which can take up to
twenty minutes before they are allowed to clock in on the time
keeping software application and then take their first phone call.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jennifer L. McManus, Esq.
      FAGAN MCMANUS, P.C.
      25892 Woodward Avenue
      Royal Oak, MI 48067-0910
      Tel: (248) 542-6300
      Email: jmcmanus@faganlawpc.com

             - and -

      Clif Alexander, Esq.
      Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
      ANDERSON2X, PLLC
      819 N. Upper Broadway
      Corpus Christi, TX 78401
      Tel: (361) 452-1279
      Fax: (361) 452-1284
      Email: clif@a2xlaw.com
             austin@a2xlaw.com


NANO-X IMAGING: Faces White Suit Over 25% Drop in Share Price
-------------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW WHITE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. NANO-X IMAGING LTD.; RAN POLIAKINE; and ITZHAK MAAYAN,
Case No. 1:20-cv-04355 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 16, 2020), seeks to recover
compensable damages caused by the Defendants' violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by issuing false and misleading
statements resulting to the precipitous decline in the market value
of the Company's securities.

The lawsuit is a federal securities class action on behalf of all
persons and entities, who purchased the publicly traded securities
of Nano-X between August 21, 2020, and September 15, 2020, both
dates inclusive (the "Class Period").

According to the complaint, on July 30, 2020, Nano-X filed a
Registration Statement on Form F-1 with the Securities and Exchange
Commission. Following subsequent amendments, the Registration
Statement was declared effective on August 20, 2020. On August 25,
2020, Nano-X filed its final prospectus, which incorporated and
formed part of the final Registration Statement, with the SEC on
Form 424B4.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Registration Statement was
materially false and misleading because it misrepresented and
failed to disclose adverse facts pertaining to the Company's
business, operational and financial results, which were known to
the Defendants or recklessly disregarded by them. Specifically, the
Defendants made false and misleading statements and failed to
disclose that: (1) Nano-X's commercial agreements and its customers
were fabricated; (2) Nano-X's statements regarding its "novel"
Nanox System were misleading as the Company never provided data
comparing its images with images from competitors' machines; (3)
Nano-X's submission to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration
("FDA") admitted the Nanox System was not original; and (4) as a
result, Defendants' public statements were materially false and/or
misleading at all relevant times.

On September 15, 2020, Citron Research ("Citron") published the
report entitled, "Nano-X Imaging (NNOX) A Complete Farce on the
Market-Theranos 2.0" (the "Citron Report"). The Citron Report
summarized Nano-X as "this $3 billion company is nothing more than
a science project with a simple rendering, minimal R&D, fake
customers, no FDA approval, and fraudulent claims that are beyond
the realm of possibility."

On this news, Nano-X's stock price fell $12.41 per share, or more
than 25%, over the next two trading days to close at $36.80 per
share on September 16, 2020, damaging investors.

Nano-X Imaging Ltd. operates as a medical imaging technology
company. The Company offers cloud-based image analysis, online
diagnosis, and billing services. Nano-X Imaging serves governments,
hospitals, and clinic chains in Israel.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Phillip Kim, Esq.
          Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
          THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
          275 Madison Ave., 40th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 686-1060
          Facsimile: (212) 202-3827
          E-mail: pkim@rosenlegal.com
                  lrosen@rosenlegal.com


NCR CORPORATION: Kalaveras Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as ANGELO KALAVERAS, on behalf of himself and a
purported class of similarly situated v. NCR CORPORATION; and DOES
1-100, inclusive, Case No. MSC20-01186, was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County of
Contra Coast to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on October 5, 2020.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:20-cv-06930 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of
California Labor Code and California Business and Professions Code,
including failure to properly calculate and pay overtime, failure
to provide meal breaks, failure to provide rest breaks, failure to
furnish accurate itemized wage statements, failure to properly
calculate and pay sick leave, failure to pay all wages due and
owing separation, and unfair business practices.

NCR Corporation is an American software, managed and professional
services, consulting and technology company based in Atlanta,
Georgia.[BN]

The Defendant is represented by:                               
      
         Stacey M. Cooper, Esq.
         JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
         225 Broadway, Suite 2000
         San Diego, CA 92101
         Telephone: (619) 573-4900
         Facsimile: (619) 573-4901
         E-mail: Stacey.cooper@jacksonlewis.com


NESTLE USA: Green Slams Mislabeling on Vanilla-Flavored Creamer
---------------------------------------------------------------
Heather Green, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Nestle Holdings, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
20-cv-07499 (S.D. N.Y., September 14, 2020), seeks injunctive
relief resulting from negligence, unjust enrichment and breach of
contract and for violation of the Consumer Protection from
Deceptive Acts of New York business laws.

Nestle manufactures, distributes, markets, labels and sells vanilla
dairy creamer under its "Coffee Mate Natural Bliss" brand. Green
disputes Nestle's claim that their creamers are flavored only with
vanilla, asserting that they contain non-vanilla flavors which
imitate and extend vanilla but are not derived from the vanilla
bean. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
      SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
      505 Northern Blvd., Ste. 311
      Great Neck NY 11021-5101
      Tel: (516) 303-0552
      Facsimile: (516) 234-7800
      Email: spencer@spencersheehan.com


NEW ROCHELLE: Romero Says Web Site Is Inaccessible to Blind Users
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSUE ROMERO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. NEW ROCHELLE LIQUORS, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-08146-ER
(S.D.N.Y., Oct. 1, 2020), is brought against the Defendant for its
alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person, who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.

The Plaintiff alleges that during his visits to the Defendant's
website, http://www.getwineonline.com/,he has encountered multiple
access barriers that denied him full and equal access to the
facilities, goods and services offered to the public and made
available to the public and made available to the public. The
Defendant allegedly failed to comply with the WCAG2.1 Guidelines,
which would provide the Plaintiff and other visually-impaired
consumers with equal access to the Website, thereby, engaging in
acts of intentional discrimination.

New Rochelle Liquors, LLC is a wine manufacturer and retail company
that 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
          Tel: (929) 575-4175
          Fax: (929) 575-4195
          E-mail: Joseph@cml.legal


NEW YORK: 2nd Cir. Appeal Filed v. Rodriguez in Gulino Bias Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Board of Education of the City School District of the
City of New York filed an appeal from the District Court's Judgment
dated August 25, 2020, entered in the lawsuit styled GULINO, ET AL.
v. THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CITY
OF NEW YORK, Case No. 96-cv-8414, 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
Plaintiffs, a group of African-American and Latino teachers in the
New York City public school system, alleged that the Defendant, the
Board of Education of the City School District of the City of New
York, violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C.
Section 2000e et seq., by requiring Plaintiffs to pass certain
racially discriminatory standardized tests in order to obtain a
license to teach in New York City public schools. Judge Constance
Baker Motley, to whom the case was originally assigned, certified
the plaintiff class on July 13, 2001, pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 23(b)(2).

On December 5, 2012, the Court decertified the Plaintiff class to
the extent it sought damages and individualized injunctive relief
in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
v. Dukes, 131 S.Ct. 2541 (2011). The class survived, however, to
the extent Plaintiffs sought relief that may be awarded under Rule
23(b)(2), including a declaratory judgment regarding liability and
class-wide injunctive relief.

The appellate case is captioned as In re: New York City Board of
Education, Case No. 20-3264, in the United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellee Ivonne Rodriguez is represented by:

          Joshua S. Sohn, Esq.
          STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP
          180 Maiden Lane
          New York, NY 10038
          Telephone: (212) 806-1245
          E-mail: jsohn@stroock.com

Defendant-Appellant Board of Education of the City School District
of the City of New York is represented by:

          James Edward Johnson, Esq.
          CORPORATION COUNSEL
          NEW YORK CITY LAW DEPARTMENT
          100 Church Street
          New York, NY 10007
          Telephone: (212) 356-2500


NIKOLA CORP: Faces Salem Securities Suit Over Drop in Share Price
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ARAB SALEM, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. NIKOLA CORPORATION; TREVOR R. MILTON; MARK A. RUSSELL;
and KIM J. BRADY, Case No. 1:20-cv-04354 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 16,
2020), alleges violation of the Securities Exchange Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that on June 4, 2020, and
September 9, 2020, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"), the
Defendants made materially false and misleading statements
regarding the Company's business, operational and compliance
policies. Specifically, the Defendants allegedly made false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the
Defendant Milton had repeatedly misrepresented and/or exaggerated
Nikola's financial, technological, and operational profile; (ii)
the foregoing misrepresentations were intended to, and did, present
a materially false image of the Company's growth and success,
thereby artificially inflating the Company's stock price; (iii) the
foregoing misrepresentations were foreseeably likely to subject the
Company to enhanced regulatory scrutiny and/or enforcement, along
with reputational harm when the truth came to light; and (iv) as a
result, the Company's public statements were materially false and
misleading at all relevant times.

On September 10, 2020, Hindenburg Research ("Hindenburg") published
a report entitled, "Nikola: How to Parlay An Ocean of Lies Into a
Partnership With the Largest Auto OEM in America" (the "Hindenburg
Report" or the "Report"). Asserting that it had gathered "extensive
evidence--including recorded phone calls, text messages, private
emails and behind-the-scenes photographs," Hindenburg represented
that it had identified "dozens of false statements by" Milton,
which had led Hindenburg to conclude that Nikola "is an intricate
fraud built on dozen of lies over the course of . . . Milton's
career." Defendant Milton made these misrepresentations, the Report
asserted, to substantially grow the Company and secure partnerships
with top auto companies.

On this news, Nikola's stock price fell $4.80 per share, or 11.33%,
to close at $37.57 per share on September 10, 2020.

On September 14, 2020, after the market had closed, Bloomberg
reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission was
investigating Nikola to assess the merits of the Hindenburg Report.
Finally, on September 15, 2020, during intra-day trading, the Wall
Street Journal reported that the United States Department of
Justice ("DOJ") had joined the SEC's investigation of Nikola.

On this news, Nikola's stock fell an additional $0.17 per share
during intra-day trading, to close at $32.83 on September 15, 2020,
an 8.27% decline from its previous close on September 14, 2020.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

               - and -

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

               - and -

          Brian Schall, Esq.
          THE SCHALL FIRM
          1880 Century Park East, Suite 404
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: 310-301-3335
          Facsimile: 877-590-0482
          E-mail: brian@schallfirm.com


NIKOLA CORP: Schall Law Alerts Class Action Filing
--------------------------------------------------
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
announces the filing of a class action lawsuit against Nikola
Corporation ("Nikola" or "the Company") (NASDAQ:NKLA) 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 securities between June 4,
2020 and September 9, 2020, inclusive (the ''Class Period''), are
encouraged to contact the firm before November 16, 2020.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click here to
participate.

We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law
Firm, 1880 Century Park East, Suite 404, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at
310-301-3335, 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. Nikola's founder, Trevor Milton,
materially misrepresented the Company's technology and business.
The Company's profitability and business prospects were massively
overstated. 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 Nikola, investors suffered
damages.

Join the case to recover your losses.

The Schall Law Firm represents investors around the world and
specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder
rights litigation.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some
jurisdictions under the applicable law and rules of ethics. [GN]


NORTHEAST FACTORY: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Calcano Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
EVELINA CALCANO, individually and on behalf of all other similarly
situated v. NORTHEAST FACTORY FURNITURE, INC., Case No.
1:20-cv-07557-VEC (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 15, 2020), alleges violation of
the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, https://www.northeastfactorydirect.com/, is not fully or
equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers,
including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.

Northeast Factory Furniture, Inc., offers a wide selection of
sofas, loveseats, recliners, sectionals chairs, ottomans and
leather furniture.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY: Craig Seeks Refund of School Fees
---------------------------------------------------------------
TRISTAN CRAIG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. NOVA SOUTHEASTERN UNIVERSITY, Case No.
1:20-cv-23818-MGC (S.D. Fla., Sept. 15, 2020), seeks to recover
proportionate amount of the tuition fee paid to the Defendant.

According to the complaint, the Defendant has not refunded any
amount of the tuition fee paid by the Plaintiff, even though the
Defendant suspended classes on March 13, 2020, and implemented
online only distance learning starting on March 23, 2020.

Because of the Defendant's response to the COVID-19 pandemic, on
March 13, 2020, the Defendant stopped providing services or
facilities the tuition fee were intended to cover, according to the
complaint. The Defendant's failure to provide the services for
which tuition fees were intended to cover since March 13, 2020, is
a breach of the contracts between the Defendant and the Plaintiff
and the members of the Class, and is unjust.

Nova Southeastern University, Inc., offers degrees in both
undergraduate and graduate level curriculum. The University offers
programs including undergraduate degree programs in nursing and
business, as well as graduate degree programs in accounting and
biology.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
          Edward W. Ciolko, Esq.
          Nicholas A. Colella, Esq.
          CARLSON LYNCH, LLP
          1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Telephone: (412) 322-9243
          E-mail: glynch@carlsonlynch.com
                  eciolko@carlsonlynch.com
                  ncolella@carlsonlynch.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey K. Brown, Esq.
          Michael A. Tompkins, Esq.
          Brett R. Cohen, Esq.
          LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C.
          One Old Country Road, Suite 347
          Carle Place, NY 11514
          Telephone: (516) 873-9550
          E-mail: jbrown@leedsbrownlaw.com
                  mtompkins@leedsbrownlaw.com
                  bcohen@leedsbrownlaw.com

               - and -

          Jason P. Sultzer, Esq.
          Jeremy Francis, Esq.
          THE SULTZER LAW GROUP, P.C.
          270 Madison Avenue, Suite 1800
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 969-7810
          E-mail: sultzerj@thesultzerlawgroup.com
                  francisj@thesultzerlawgroup.com


OPTUM INC: Faces Valdez Wage-and-Hour Class Suit in California
--------------------------------------------------------------
GABRIELA VALDEZ, individually, and on behalf of other aggrieved
employees pursuant to the California Private Attorneys General Act
v. OPTUM, INC.; UNITEDHEALTH GROUP, INC. d/b/a Optum; OpTUM
SERVICES, INC.; HEALTHCARE PARTNERS MANAGEMENT SERVICES CALIFORNIA,
LLC; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 20STCV38485 (Cal.
Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 7, 2020), is brought against the
Defendants for violation of the Private Attorneys General Act.

The violations allegedly include failure to properly pay wages for
all overtime and regular hours work, failure to properly calculate
overtime compensation, unlawful meal and rest period policies,
failure to pay all wages due to discharged or quitting employees,
failure to maintain required records, failure to provide accurate
itemized wage statements, failure to timely pay wages during
employment, and failure to indemnify employees for necessary
expenditures and/or losses incurred in discharging their duties.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a non-exempt employee.

Optum, Inc., is a pharmacy benefit manager and care services group
based in Eden Prairie, Minnesota. UnitedHealth Group, Inc., d/b/a
Optum, is an American for-profit managed health care company based
in Minnetonka, Minnesota. Optum Services, Inc., is a health
services and innovation company that maintains offices and
facilities in Los Angeles County, California.

Healthcare Partners Management Services California, LLC is a
healthcare management services organization headquartered in
Torrance, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Matthew J. Matern, Esq.
         Tagore O. Subramaniam, Esq.
         Julia Z. Wells, Esq.
         MATERN LAW GROUP, PC
         1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200
         Manhattan Beach, CA 90266
         Telephone: (310) 531-1900
         Facsimile: (310) 531-1901
         E-mail: mmatern@maternlawgroup.com
                 tagore@maternlawgroup.com
                 jwells@maternlawgroup.com


PINTO RANCH LP: Delacruz Suit Seeks Removal of Web Site Barriers
----------------------------------------------------------------
EMANUEL DELACRUZ, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated v. PINTO RANCH, LP, Case No. 1:20-cv-08335-VEC
(S.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), is a class action against the Defendant
for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, New York
State Human Rights Law, and New York City Human Rights Law.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website,
https://www.pintoranch.com/, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by him and other blind or visually-impaired
people.

According to the complaint, the Defendant's website contains access
barriers which hinder the Plaintiff and Class members to have full
access to the facilities, goods and services offered to the general
public through the website. These access barriers include: (1) lack
of alternative text (alt-text), or a text equivalent, which
prevents screen readers from accurately vocalizing a description of
the graphics; (2) empty links that contain no text causing the
function or purpose of the link to not be presented to the user;
(3) redundant links where adjacent links go to the same Uniform
Resource Locator (URL) address, which results in additional
navigation and repetition for keyboard and screen-reader users; and
(4) linked images missing alt-text, which causes problems if an
image within a link contains no text and that image does not
provide alt-text.

The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the
Plaintiff.

Pinto Ranch, LP, offers curated collections of handmade cowboy
boots, buckles, hats and apparel, with its principal place of
business located at 1717 Post Oak Boulevard, in Houston,
Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:             
           
         Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
         Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
         Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
         GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
         150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
         New York, NY 10003
         Telephone: (212) 228-9795
         Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
         E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
                 Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
                 danalgottlieb@aol.com


POINT BLANK: 11th Cir. Appeal Filed in OSTA Product Liability Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs Ohio State Troopers Assoc., et al., filed an appeal from
a court ruling entered in their lawsuit entitled Ohio State
Troopers Assoc., et al. v. Point Blank Enterprises, Inc., Case No.
0:18-cv-63130-RAR, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter on June 22,
2020, Magistrate Judge Jared M. Strauss of the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Florida (1) granted in part and denied
in part the Plaintiffs' Expedited Motion to Strike the Expert
Report of Sarah Butler as Untimely and to Exclude Her Testimony and
Incorporated Memorandum of Law; (2) denied Defendant Point Blank
Enterprises, Inc.'s Motion to Exclude the Expert Reports of
Christine Cole, Douglas Hermann, and D.C. Sharp; and (3) granted in
part and denied in part the Plaintiffs' Omnibus Motion to Exclude
Defendant Point Blank Enterprises' Class Certification Experts and
Expert Opinions, Reports and Testimony and Memorandum of Law in
Support.

The case is a products liability case (or, rather, two consolidated
cases) in which the Plaintiffs seek certification of certain
classes. The Defendant makes bulletproof vests.  Many police
officers and others buy those bulletproof vests.  End users--the
individuals who ultimately wear the vests--often purchase their
vests from distributors and not directly from the Defendant. The
vests that the Defendant manufactures include concealable vests.
The Defendant manufactures some models of concealable vests with a
Self-Suspending Ballistic System ("SSBS"). It also manufactures
other models of concealable vests that are more commonly referred
to as traditional vests.

The appellate case is captioned as Ohio State Troopers Assoc., et
al. v. Point Blank Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 20-13588, in the
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

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

   -- The appellant's brief is due on or before November 3, 2020;

   -- The appendix is due no later than 7 days from the filing of
      the appellant's brief; and

   -- Appellee's Certificate of Interested Persons is due on or
      before October 22, 2020, as to Appellee Point Blank
      Enterprises, Inc.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellants OHIO STATE TROOPERS ASSOCIATION, INC.,
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF POLICE ASSOCIATIONS, TREVOR KOONTZ, RYAN
PURPURA, STEVEN ROHNER, ALEXANDER PATER, and LANCE DESHUK are
represented by:

          David M. Cohen, Esq.
          COMPLEX LAW GROUP, LLC
          40 Powder Springs St.
          Marietta, GA 30064
          Telephone: (770) 200-3100
          E-mail: dcohen@complexlaw.com

               - and -

          Ari Jonathan Glazer, Esq.
          Michael W. Moskowitz, Esq.
          MOSKOWITZ MANDELL SALIM & SIMOWITZ, PA
          800 Corporate Dr., Ste. 500
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33334-3621
          Telephone: (954) 491-2000
          E-mail: aglazer@mmsslaw.com
                  mmoskowitz@mmsslaw.com

               - and -

          Allan Kanner, Esq.
          Cynthia St. Amant, Esq.
          KANNER & WHITELEY, LLC
          701 Camp St.
          New Orleans, LA 70130
          Telephone: (504) 524-5777
          E-mail: A.Kanner@kanner-law.com

               - and -

          Herschel M. Sigall, Esq.
          OHIO STATE TROOPERS ASSOCIATION, INC.
          190 W Johnstown Rd.
          Gahanna, OH 43230

Defendant-Appellee POINT BLANK ENTERPRISES, INC. is represented
by:

          Troy S. Brown, Esq.
          Elisa P. McEnroe, Esq.
          Brian F. Morris, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP
          1701 Market St.
          Philadelphia, PA 19103-2921
          Telephone: (215) 963-5387
          E-mail: troy.brown@morganlewis.com
                  elisa.mcenroe@morganlewis.com
                  brian.morris@morganlewis.com

               - and -

          Clay Matthew Carlton, Esq.
          Brian Ercole, Esq.
          Carlos A. Haag, Esq.
          Bruno Reategui, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP
          200 S Biscayne Blvd., Ste. 5300
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 415-3447
          E-mail: clay.carlton@morganlewis.com
                  brian.ercole@morganlewis.com
                  carlos.haag@morganlewis.com
                  bruno.reategui@morganlewis.com

               - and -

          Leonard K. Samuels, Esq.
          BERGER SINGERMAN, LLP
          350 E Las Olas Blvd., Ste. 1000
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 525-9900
          E-mail: lsamuels@bergersingerman.com


PORTSMOUTH, VA: Stuart Sues Over Paramedics' Unpaid Overtime Pay
----------------------------------------------------------------
TIFFANY STUART, STEPHANIE ADAMS, ALYSSA BABCOCK, MEGAN BEATTY,
CHRISTINE CHERRY CIFELLI, LAUREN COLLINS, MADALYN DUBINSKY, MADISON
GRAY, MELANIE GRAY, JOSEPH HOOFLONG, LAUREL LAPP, THOMAS SASSO,
BRYAN SPRUILL, ANDREA VAHEY, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. CITY OF PORTSMOUTH, VIRGINIA, Case No.
2:20-cv-00499 (E.D. Va., Oct. 6, 2020), is brought against the
Defendant for its failure to compensate the Plaintiffs and all
others similarly situated paramedics overtime pay for all hours
worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek in violation of the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants also allegedly failed to provide the Plaintiffs and
Class members with the rights and protections provided under the
Virginia Gap Pay Act.

The Plaintiffs are current and former paramedics in the Defendant's
Portsmouth Fire, Rescue and Emergency Services department since
October 6, 2017.

City of Portsmouth is a municipal corporation that operates the
Portsmouth Fire, Rescue, and Emergency Services department in
Virginia.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         T. Reid Coploff, Esq.
         McGILLIVARY STEELE ELKIN LLP
         1101 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Suite 1000
         Washington, DC 20005
         Telephone: (202) 833-8855
         E-mail: trc@mselaborlaw.com


PORVEN LTD: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind Users, Cota Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
JULISSA COTA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PORVEN, LTD., d/b/a PORCELANOSA USA; and DOES 1 to 10,
inclusive, Case No. 3:20-cv-01806-BAS-RBB (S.D. Cal., Sept. 14,
2020), alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants'
website, https://www.porcelanosa-usa.com/, is not fully or equally
accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers in violation of
the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, including the Plaintiff.

Porven, Ltd., d/b/a Porcelanosa USA, offers a wide product range,
including tile, kitchen and bathroom furniture showrooms, hardwood,
mosaics, natural stone and countertop surfaces.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Thiago Coelho, Esq.
           Bobby Saadian, Esq.
           WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
           3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
           Los Angeles, CA 90010
           Telephone: (213) 381-9988
           Facsimile: (213) 381-9989
           E-mail: thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com
                   ADA@wilshirelawfirm.com


PRECIGEN INC: Abadilla Sues Over Misleading Securities Statements
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MARTIN JOSEPH ABADILLA, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. PRECIGEN, INC. F/K/A INTREXON CORPORATION,
RANDAL J. KIRK, and RICK L. STERLING, Case No. 3:20-cv-06936 (N.D.
Cal., Oct. 5, 2020), is brought against the Defendants for
violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

According to the complaint, the Defendants made misleading and
false statements with the United States Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) regarding Precigen's business prospects and
financial results to attract investors and artificially inflated
the prices of Precigen securities between May 10, 2017, and
September 25, 2020. Specifically, the Defendants failed to disclose
that: (1) the Company was using pure methane as feedstock for its
announced yields for its methanotroph bioconversion platform
instead of natural gas; (2) yields from natural gas as a feedstock
were substantially lower than the aforementioned pure methane
yields; (3) due to the substantial price difference between pure
methane and natural gas, pure methane was not a commercially viable
feedstock; (4) the Company's financial statements for the quarter
ended March 31, 2018 were false and could not be relied upon; (5)
the Company had material weaknesses in its internal controls over
financial reporting; and (6) as a result of the foregoing, the
Defendants' public statements were materially false and misleading
at all relevant times.

The SEC announced a Cease-and-Desist Order against Precigen on
September 25, 2020, after SEC found out that the Forms 8-K
submitted by the Company on May 10, August 9, and November 9, 2017,
were inaccurate.

As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
decline in the market value of the Company's securities, the
Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses
and damages, according to the complaint. Had the Plaintiff and the
other members of the Class been aware that the market price of the
Company's securities had been artificially and falsely inflated by
the Company's and the Individual Defendants' misleading statements
and by the material adverse information which the Company's and the
Individual Defendants did not disclose, they would not have
purchased the Company's securities at the artificially inflated
prices that they did, or at all.

Precigen, Inc., f/k/a Intrexon Corporation, is a company that
operates in the synthetic biology field and creates
biologically-based products, with its headquarters in Germantown,
Maryland.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


PRIME HEALTHCARE: Faces Simonds Suit Over Improperly Paid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
KIMBERLY SIMONDS, individually, and on behalf of aggrieved
employees pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act v. PRIME
HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC.; PRIME HEALTHCARE FOUNDATION, INC.; PRIME
HEALTHCARE MANAGEMENT, INC.; PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-ALVARADO,
LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-CENTINELA, LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE
SERVICES-ENCINO HOSPITAL, LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-GARDEN
GROVE, LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-HUNTINGTON BEACH, LLC; PRIME
HEALTHCARE SERVICES-LA PALMA, LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE
SERVICES-MONTCLAIR, LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-PARADISE VALLEY,
LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-SAN DIMAS, LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE
SERVICES-SHASTA, LLC; PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-SHERMAN OAKS, LLC;
PRIME HEALTHCARE SERVICES-ST. FRANCIS, LLC; PREM REDDY; and DOES 1
through 100, inclusive, Case No. 20VECV01127 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 7, 2020), is a class action against the
Defendants for violations of the Private Attorneys General Act.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants failed to pay all meal
period wages and rest break wages, to properly calculate and pay
all minimum and overtime wages, to provide accurate wage
statements, to pay all wages due and owing during employment and
upon termination of employment, and to reimburse all necessary
business expenses.

Prime Healthcare Services, Inc. is an American private healthcare
company headquartered in Ontario, California. Prime Healthcare
Foundation, Inc. is a public charity that owns not-for-profit
community-based hospitals headquartered in Ontario, California.
Prime Healthcare Management, Inc. is a healthcare company based in
California.

Prime Healthcare Services-Alvarado, LLC is a healthcare services
provider based in California. Prime Healthcare Services-Centinela,
LLC is a healthcare services provider based in California. Prime
Healthcare Services-Encino Hospital, LLC is a healthcare services
provider based in California. Prime Healthcare Services-Garden
Grove, LLC is a healthcare services provider based in California.

Prime Healthcare Services-Huntington Beach, LLC is a healthcare
services provider based in California. Prime Healthcare Services-La
Palma, LLC is a healthcare services provider based in California.
Prime Healthcare Services-Montclair, LLC is a healthcare services
provider based in California. Prime Healthcare Services-Paradise
Valley, LLC is a healthcare services provider based in California.

Prime Healthcare Services-San Dimas, LLC is a healthcare services
provider based in California. Prime Healthcare Services-Shasta, LLC
is a healthcare services provider based in California. Prime
Healthcare Services-Sherman Oaks, LLC is a healthcare services
provider based in California. Prime Healthcare Services-St.
Francis, LLC is a healthcare services provider based in
California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:             
           
         Douglas Han, Esq.
         Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq.
         Phillip Song, Esq.
         JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
         751 N. Fair Oaks Ave., Suite 101
         Pasadena, CA 91103
         Telephone: (818) 230-7502
         Facsimile: (818) 230-7259


PROGENITY INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Oct. 27 Motion Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of Progenity, Inc. Stockholders
have until the deadlines below to petition the court to serve as
lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case can be found
at the link provided.

Progenity, Inc. (NASDAQ: PROG)

Class Period: Common stock purchased pursuant and/or traceable to
the registration statement, as amended, issued in connection with
Progenity's June 2020 IPO (the "Registration Statement").

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 27, 2020

On or about June 22, 2020, defendants conducted Progenity's IPO. In
the IPO, defendants sold over 6.6 million shares of Progenity
common stock to the investing public at a price of $15 per share,
generating over $100 million in gross offering proceeds.

Shortly after the IPO, the price of Progenity stock suffered
significant price declines. By August 14, 2020, Progenity stock
closed at just $7.71 per share – nearly 50% below the $15 per
share price investors paid for the stock in the IPO less than two
months previously.

The complaint, filed on August 28, 2020, alleges that the
Registration Statement for the IPO was negligently prepared and, as
a result, contained untrue statements of material fact, omitted
material facts necessary to make the statements contained therein
not misleading, and failed to make the necessary disclosures
required under the rules and regulations governing its preparation.
Specifically, the Registration Statement failed to disclose the
following adverse facts that existed at the time of the IPO,
rendering numerous statements provided therein materially false and
misleading: (i) that Progenity had overbilled government payors by
$10.3 million in 2019 and early 2020 and, thus, had materially
overstated its revenues, earnings and cash flows from operations
for the historical financial periods provided in the Registration
Statement; (ii) that Progenity would need to refund this
overpayment in the second quarter of 2020 (the same quarter in
which the IPO was conducted), adversely impacting its quarterly
results; and (iii) that Progenity was suffering from accelerating
negative trends in the second quarter of 2020 with respect to the
Company's testing volumes, revenues and product pricing.

For more information on the Progenity class action go to:
https://bespc.com/PROG

    About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York and California. The firm represents
individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities,
derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal
courts across the country. For more information about the firm,
please visit www.bespc.com.  Attorney advertising.  Prior results
do not guarantee similar outcomes.  [GN]


PROGENITY INC: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Oct. 27 Motion Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of Progenity, Inc. (NASDAQ:
PROG). Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the
court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each
case can be found at the link provided.

Progenity, Inc. (NASDAQ: PROG)

Class Period: Common stock purchased pursuant and/or traceable to
the registration statement, as amended, issued in connection with
Progenity's June 2020 IPO (the "Registration Statement").

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: October 27, 2020

On or about June 22, 2020, defendants conducted Progenity's IPO. In
the IPO, defendants sold over 6.6 million shares of Progenity
common stock to the investing public at a price of $15 per share,
generating over $100 million in gross offering proceeds.

Shortly after the IPO, the price of Progenity stock suffered
significant price declines. By August 14, 2020, Progenity stock
closed at just $7.71 per share – nearly 50% below the $15 per
share price investors paid for the stock in the IPO less than two
months previously.

The complaint, filed on August 28, 2020, alleges that the
Registration Statement for the IPO was negligently prepared and, as
a result, contained untrue statements of material fact, omitted
material facts necessary to make the statements contained therein
not misleading, and failed to make the necessary disclosures
required under the rules and regulations governing its preparation.
Specifically, the Registration Statement failed to disclose the
following adverse facts that existed at the time of the IPO,
rendering numerous statements provided therein materially false and
misleading: (i) that Progenity had overbilled government payors by
$10.3 million in 2019 and early 2020 and, thus, had materially
overstated its revenues, earnings and cash flows from operations
for the historical financial periods provided in the Registration
Statement; (ii) that Progenity would need to refund this
overpayment in the second quarter of 2020 (the same quarter in
which the IPO was conducted), adversely impacting its quarterly
results; and (iii) that Progenity was suffering from accelerating
negative trends in the second quarter of 2020 with respect to the
Company's testing volumes, revenues and product pricing.

For more information on the Progenity class action go to:
https://bespc.com/PROG

                About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York and California. The firm represents
individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities,
derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal
courts across the country. For more information about the firm,
please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior results do
not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
Brandon Walker, Esq.
Melissa Fortunato, Esq.
Marion Passmore, Esq.
(212) 355-4648
investigations@bespc.com
www.bespc.com [GN]


QUEENSLAND: Vegetation Mgmt. Suit Seeks Expressions of Interest
---------------------------------------------------------------
Melody Labinsky of Queensland Country Life reports that Dan
McDonaldof Wyrapa, Charleville, is seeking expressions of interest
for a class action against the Queensland government "in order to
remedy the injustice they have deliberately inflicted upon all
people that own private property in Queensland".

There's a glint of steely determination in his eye when Charleville
grazier Dan McDonald tells you that his property rights are gone.

Mr. McDonald says he has been put in an untenable position as a
result of the Labor government's vegetation management policies.

He's no stranger to being in the headlines and over the past five
years. has become a lightning rod for the vegetation management
debate in Queensland.

In 2017, he was convicted and ordered to pay fines and costs of
$112,000 for six counts of carrying out development on his property
without a permit.

After his appeal in the Brisbane District Court was dismissed, he
went to the Court of Appeal in the hopes of getting his conviction
and sentence overturned.

In late 2019, the Court of Appeal reduced his fines and costs to
$10,000, citing the previous penalty as "a crushing burden".

Mr. McDonald and his family run 400 Droughtmaster breeders at
Wyrapa, where they've been for the past 16 years.

Like all landowners across Queensland, they have not been offered
compensation for the loss of their "right to use our land and
specifically, the right to use our vegetation".

"Up until early last year when the drought - I'm not going to say
the drought broke - but we finally got some useful rain, we were at
a point where we had approximately two weeks of feed left," Mr
McDonald said.

"That rain came at a crucial time for us; we had one week to ten
days left before we had to look at destocking and destock quickly.

"That's not because we were physically out of mulga, it's because
we were legallyunable to use the mulga that we had."

The most valuable element of property that myself and my family own
has been taken from me and now essentially resides with government,
Mr. McDonald says.

Mr. McDonald has described the government's policies around pushing
mulga as the greatest violation of justice ever bestowed upon
private landholders in Queensland.

As a result, he is seeking expressions of interest for a class
action against the Queensland government for compensation of their
loss of property.

"This action that I am proposing is what I see as the only means to
take this out of the political spectrum; get the highest court in
this country to essentially rule on this and vindicate our property
rights with compensation," Mr McDonald said.

"That will do two things: it will correct the injustice that's been
bestowed on us landowners and it will also provide, more
importantly, an effective sanction against this sort of overreach
of government taking place in the future."

With the state election looming on October 31, Mr McDonald says he
feels like a political football.

"The most valuable element of property that myself and my family
own has been taken from me and now essentially resides with
government," he said.

"Every election cycle our property - and when I say our I mean the
property of my family and every other landholder in rural and
regional Queensland - our property is kicked around like a
football.

"I've said for a long time that those fundamental principles of
property law are, and must remain, above the reach of misconduct
engaged in by deceitful political parties."

Speaking in Toowoomba on Sept. 17, Katter's Australian Party leader
and Traeger MP Robbie Katter said it was important to recognise
that politics has failed the people of Queensland.

Mr Katter said his party was here "to be a lightning rod for those
people who want to stand up and put some power back in their hands
to fight back against these weak politicians that cave in to these
ideologies".

"That's why private individuals have had to seek legal solutions to
try to defend people's rights in this country and in this state,"
Mr Katter said.

"We stand behind Dan McDonald and we'll do everything possible to
support and promote this action because it's the only option we've
got at the moment to try and turn things around.

"If the government continues to undermine land tenure and property
rights in this country then they are absolutely kidding
themselves."

KAP candidate for Warrego Rick Gurnett said security of title was
the foundation of a free democracy.

"If we can get the numbers, our plans are to repeal the vegetation
laws along with the reef laws," Mr Gurnett said.

"Education is far better than regulation; the farmer uses
considerable equity against considerable borrowings usually, so
he's in the best position to manage his land because he's got the
most skin in the game and is always going to look after his land
the best."

To register your non-binding interest in the class action, contact
freehold2020@outlook.com or 4654-0366 by October 20. [GN]


QUTOUTIAO INC: Rosen Law Alerts of Class Action Filing
------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces the
filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Qutoutiao Inc. (NASDAQ: QTT): (1) pursuant to and/or
traceable to the Company's September 2018 initial public offering
("IPO"); and/or (2) between September 14, 2018 and July 15, 2020,
inclusive (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit seeks to recover
damages for Qutoutiao investors under the federal securities laws.

To join the Qutoutiao class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1934.htmlor call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.

NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS
IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN
ONE. YOU MAY RETAIN COUNSEL OF YOUR CHOICE. YOU MAY ALSO REMAIN AN
ABSENT CLASS MEMBER AND DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT. AN INVESTOR'S
ABILITY TO SHARE IN ANY POTENTIAL FUTURE RECOVERY IS NOT DEPENDENT
UPON SERVING AS LEAD PLAINTIFF.

According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) Qutoutiao replaced its advertising agent with a related
party, thereby bypassing third-party oversight of the content and
quality of the advertisements; (2) the Company placed
advertisements on its mobile app for products whose claims could
not be substantiated and thus were considered false advertisements
under applicable regulations; (3) as a result, the Company would
face increasing regulatory scrutiny and reputational harm; (4) as a
result, the Company's advertising revenue was reasonably likely to
decline; and (5) 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.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October
19, 2020. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on
behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. If you
wish to join the litigation, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1934.htmlor to discuss
your rights or interests regarding this class action, please
contact Phillip Kim, Esq. of Rosen Law Firm toll free at
866-767-3653 or via e-mail at pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com.

Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1
by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities
class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the
top 3 each year since 2013. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest
ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company.
Rosen Law Firm's attorneys are ranked and recognized by numerous
independent and respected sources. Rosen Law Firm has secured
hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. Attorney
Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

         Laurence Rosen, Esq.
         Phillip Kim, Esq.
         The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
         275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Tel: (212) 686-1060
         Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
         Fax: (212) 202-3827
         E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
                 pkim@rosenlegal.com
                 cases@rosenlegal.com  [GN]


REDBOX AUTOMATED RETAIL: Hummitsch Sues Over Illegal SMS Ad Blasts
------------------------------------------------------------------
Bailin Hummitsch, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Redbox Automated Retail, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 20-cv-06429, (C.D. Cal., July 20, 2020), seeks
statutory damages and any other available legal or equitable
remedies for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Redbox Automated Retail, LLC is the operator of a national DVD,
Blu-ray and video game rental service. Hummitsch claims to have
received SMS Ads from Redbox without his express written consent to
be contacted using an automated dialer. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Frank S. Hedin, Esq.
      HEDIN HALL LLP
      1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140
      Miami, FL 33131
      Telephone: (305) 357-2107
      Facsimile: (305) 200-8801
      Email: fhedin@hedinhall.com

             - and -

      Eugene Y. Turin, Esq.
      MCGUIRE LAW, P.C.
      55 W. Wacker Drive, 9th Floor
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Tel: (312) 893-7002
      Fax: (312) 275-7895
      Email: eturin@mcgpc.com


ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION: Garcia Suit Removed to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as JULIAN GARCIA, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION SERVICES,
INC.; ROADRUNNER TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, INC.; and DOES 1 to 10
inclusive, Case No. RG20061917, was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California, County of Alameda, to the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California on October 5, 2020.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:20-cv-06918 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged failure to reimburse
employment expenses in violation of California Labor Code and
unfair competition in violation of California Business and
Professions Code.

Roadrunner Transportation Services, Inc., is a provider of
transportation and logistics services with its principal place of
business located in Cudahy, Wisconsin. Roadrunner Transportation
Systems, Inc., is a company that offers truck freight
transportation services with its principal place of business in
Illinois.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

         Christopher C. McNatt, Jr., Esq.
         SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON & FEARY, LLP
         2 North Lake Avenue, Suite 560
         Pasadena, CA 91101
         Telephone: (626) 795-4700
         Facsimile: (626) 795-4790
         E-mail: cmcnatt@scopelitis.com

                - and –

         Adam C. Smedstad, Esq.
         SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON & FEARY, P.C.
         3214 West McGraw Street, Suite 301F
         Seattle, WA 98199
         Telephone: (206) 288-6192
         Facsimile: (206) 299-9375
         E-mail: asmedstad@scopelitis.com

                - and –

         James A. Eckhart, Esq.
         SCOPELITIS, GARVIN, LIGHT, HANSON & FEARY, P.C.
         10 West Market Street, Suite 1400
         Indianapolis, IN 46204
         Telephone: (317) 637-1777
         Facsimile: (317) 687-2414
         E-mail: jeckhart@scopelitis.com


SEALAND CONTRACTORS: Infantino Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
COREY INFANTINO, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly-situated v. SEALAND CONTRACTORS CORP., and DANIEL BREE,
individually, Case No. 6:20-cv-06782 (W.D.N.Y., Oct. 1, 2020), is
brought against the Defendants for their alleged violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff worked for the Defendants
from July 2016 through September 8, 2019, as a non-managerial
laborer performing manual labor on multiple construction projects
in Monroe County. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants
willfully failed to compensate him at the statutorily-required
overtime rate of pay for all the hours he worked beyond 40 in a
workweek, and failed to provide him with a wage statement on each
payday that accurately stated the total hours that he worked each
week.

Sealand Contractors Corp. is a highway and bridge contractor that
offers neighborhood improvements, infrastructure improvements, and
site development services. Daniel Bree is the president and owner
of Sealand Contractors.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Justin R. Marino, Esq.
          STEVENSON MARINO LLP
          75 Maiden Lane, Suite 402
          New York, NY 10038
          Tel: (212) 939-7229


SIERRA MOUNTAIN: Perez Employment Suit Removed to E.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as SIGIFREDO PEREZ JR., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated and on behalf of the
general public v. SIERRA MOUNTAIN EXPRESS, INC., a limited
liability company, WILLIAM E. SCANLON, and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 34-2020-00279284, was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California in and for the County of
Sacramento to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of
California on October 6, 2020.

The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California assigned
Case No. 2:20-cv-02003-JAM-JDP to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of
California Labor Code and California Business and Professions Code,
including failure to pay minimum wages, failure to provide meal
periods, failure to permit paid rest breaks, failure to pay all
wages to piece-rate workers for time spent in rest breaks, failure
to pay wages upon separation of employment, failure to pay wages
within the required time, failure to provide accurate itemized wage
statements, failure to reimburse necessary business expenses,
failure to refrain from unlawful deductions, and unfair business
practices.

Sierra Mountain Express, Inc., is a freight forwarding service
provider in El Dorado Hills, California.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

         R. Scott Brink, Esq.
         James Neudecker, Esq.
         Taylor N. Burras, Esq.
         JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP
         1900 Avenue of the Stars, 7th Floor
         Los Angeles, CA 90067-4308
         Telephone: (310) 203-8080
         Facsimile: (310) 203-0567
         E-mail: rsb@jmbm.com
                 jneudecker@jmbm.com
                 tburras@jmbm.com


SIGNIFY HEALTH: Bradford Asserts Breach of FDCPA
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Signify Health, LLC.
The case is styled as Radley Bradford, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Signify Health, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 4:20-cv-03385 (S.D. Tex., Sept. 30, 2020).

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

Signify Health, LLC designs and develops software solutions. The
Company offers chronic care diabetes management and other health
care related application for the healthcare sector. Signify Health
serves customers in the State of Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Mohammed Omar Badwan, Esq.
   Sulaiman Law Group Ltd
   2500 S Highland Ave, Ste 200
   Lomgard, IL 60148
   Tel: (630) 575-8181
   Email: mbadwan@sulaimanlaw.com


SN SERVICING CORP: Walker Files FDCPA Suit in Illinois
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against SN Servicing
Corporation. The case is styled as John A Walker, individually, and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SN
Servicing Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:20-cv-05830 (N.D.
Ill., Sept. 30, 2020).

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

SN Servicing Corporation (SNSC) delivers quick and flexible
mortgage loan servicing solutions for owners of loans and real
estate.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Joseph Scott Davidson, Esq.
   Law Offices of Joseph P. Doyle, LLC
   105 South Roselle Road, Suite 203
   Schaumburg, IL 60193
   Tel: (630) 460-7655
   Email: jdavidson@fightbills.com


STEMILT AG SERVICES: Farm Workers Slam Hostile Work Environment
---------------------------------------------------------------
Gilberto Gomez Garcia and Jonathan Gomez Rivera, as individuals and
on behalf of all other similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs, vs.
Stemilt AG Services, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 20-cv-00254 (E.D.
Wash., July 20, 2020), seeks punitive damages, recovery of wages
withheld for wait times plus double damages, recovery of lost
wages, attorneys' fees and costs and other further relief resulting
from breach of contract and for violation of the Trafficking
Victims Protection Act and the Washington Law Against
Discrimination.

Stemilt AG Services, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Stemilt
Growers, a large tree fruit company in Wenatchee that manages more
than 8,000 acres of company-owned and leased orchards.

Garcia and Rivera were employed by Stemilt AG Services as H-2A
workers in 2017. Both are from Jalisco Mexico. They allege that
Stemilt violated federal anti-trafficking laws by threatening to
terminate and blacklist H-2A workers from future employment in the
United States if they did not meet unlawful daily production
standards. They further allege that Stemilt withheld their updated
work permits to prevent workers from leaving Stemilt's property.
[BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Maria Diana Garcia, Esq.
      Joachim Morrison, Esq.
      Alfredo Gonzalez Benitez, Esq.
      COLUMBIA LEGAL SERVICES
      7103 W. Clearwater Avenue, Suite C
      Kennewick, WA 99336
      Tel: (509) 374-9855
      Email: diana.garcia@columbialegal.org
             joe.morrison@columbialegal.org
             alfredo.gonzalez@columbialegal.org


STICKER MULE: Bonefort Sues Over Prod'n Workers' Unpaid OT Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
TIERRA BONEFORT, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. STICKER MULE LLC and PRINT BEAR, LLC, Case No.
1:20-cv-01222-GTS-ML (N.D.N.Y., Oct. 5, 2020), is brought against
the Defendants for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the New York Labor Law, including failure to compensate the
Plaintiff and other production workers overtime pay for all hours
worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a production staff
worker in New York from September 12, 2018, to January 31, 2020.
The Plaintiff also alleges that the Defendants failed to furnish
accurate wage statements.

Sticker Mule LLC is a sticker production company with its principal
place of business located at 49 Elk Street, in Amsterdam, New York.
Print Bear, LLC, is a sticker production company with its principal
place of business also located in Amsterdam, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Troy L. Kessler, Esq.
         KESSLER MATURA P.C.
         534 Broadhollow Road, Suite 275
         Melville, NY 11747
         Telephone: (631) 499-9100
         E-mail: tkessler@kesslermatura.com

                - and –

         Raphael Katri, Esq.
         LAW OFFICES OF RAPHAEL A. KATRI
         8549 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 200
         Beverly Hills, CA 90211
         Telephone: (310) 940-2034
         E-mail: rkatri@gmail.com


SUPERIOR ENERGY: Evans Suit Seeks Back Wages, Damages
-----------------------------------------------------
Casey Evans, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Superior Energy Services, Inc., Defendants,
Case No. 20-cv-00173 (W.D. Tex., July 15, 2020), seeks to recover
back wages, liquidated damages, attorney's fees and costs under the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.

Superior Energy is an oilfield services company where Evans worked
as gas lift specialist and tool specialist for the past three
years. Evans claims to have regularly worked in excess of forty
hours per week without being paid at a rate not less than one and
one-half times the regular rate but rather on a
salary-plus-daily-job-bonus basis without overtime pay. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Melissa Moore, Esq.
      Curt Hesse, Esq.
      MOORE & ASSOCIATES
      Lyric Centre
      440 Louisiana Street, Suite 675
      Houston, TX 77002-1063
      Telephone: (713) 222-6775
      Facsimile: (713) 222-6739
      Email: me@law.com
             curt@mooreandassociates.net


TETRAPHASE PHARMA: Plumley Files Suit Over Sale to La Jolla
-----------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Plumley, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., L.
Patrick Gage, Larry Edwards, Garen Bohlin, Steven Boyd, Jeffrey A.
Chodakewitz, John G. Freund, Gerri Henwood, Guy Macdonald, Keith
Maher, Nancy J. Wysenski, La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company and TTP
Merger Sub, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 20-cv-00955 (D. Del., July
16, 2020), seeks to enjoin defendants and all persons acting in
concert with them from proceeding with, consummating or closing the
acquisition of Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc. by La Jolla
Pharmaceutical Company and TTP Merger Sub, Inc., rescinding it in
the event defendants consummate the merger, 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.

TTP Merger Sub, Inc. commenced a tender offer to purchase all of
Tetraphase's outstanding common stock for $2.00 per share in cash
and one contingent value right.

The complaint alleges that the  June 29, 2020
Solicitation/Recommendation Statement filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the deal
lacked all line items used to calculate EBIT and Unlevered Free
Cash Flow and a reconciliation of all non-GAAP to GAAP metrics.
This provides stockholders with a basis to project the future
financial performance of a company, and allows stockholders to
better understand the financial analyses performed by Janney
Montgomery Scott LLC in support of its fairness opinion.

Tetraphase is a biopharmaceutical company involves in the creation
of novel tetracyclines for serious and life-threatening conditions,
including infections caused by many of the multidrug-resistant
bacteria.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Brian D. Long, Esq.
      Gina M. Serra, Esq.
      RIGRODSKY & LONG, P.A.
      300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1220
      Wilmington, DE 19801
      Tel: (302) 295-5310
      Facsimile: (302) 654-7530
      Email: bdl@rl-legal.com
             gms@rl-legal.com

             - and -

      Richard A. Maniskas, Esq.
      RM LAW, P.C.
      1055 Westlakes Dr., Ste. 3112
      Berwyn, PA 19312
      Tel: (484) 324-6800
      Facsimile: (484) 631-1305
      Email: rm@maniskas.com


THINGS REMEMBERED: Cota Alleges Violation under ADA
---------------------------------------------------
Things Remembered, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
as Julissa Cota, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Things Remembered, Inc., a Delaware
corporation and Does 1 to 10, Defendants, Case No.
3:20-cv-01939-GPC-BGS (S.D. Cal., Sept. 30, 2020).

Things Remembered, Inc. retails personalized gifts. The Company
offers portfolios, drinkware, albums, awards, plaques, recognition
clocks, desk sets, pens, and paper weight gifts for wedding,
anniversary, birthdays, graduation, and other related events.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Thiago M. Coelho, Esq.
   Wilshire Law Firm
   3055 Wilshire Boulevard
   12th Floor
   Los Angeles, CA 90010
   Tel: (213) 381-9988
   Email: thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com


TOTAL TRUCKING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Issacs Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES ISAACS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. TOTAL TRUCKING, INC., Case No. 5:20-cv-00996-J (W.D.
Okla., Oct. 1, 2020), is brought against the Defendant for its
alleged failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff, who was employed by the Defendant as an hourly-paid
dump truck driver, alleges that he was not paid for a guaranteed
minimum number of hours. The Plaintiff contends that he only
received "straight time" pay for overtime hours he worked instead
of receiving one and one-half times his regular rate of pay
pursuant to the FLSA.

Total Trucking provides hauling services for dirt, rock, and earth
in and around Oklahoma City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew S. Parmet, Esq.
          PARMET PC
          3 Riverway, Ste. 1910
          Houston, TX 77056
          Tel: 713-999-5228
          E-mail: matt@parmet.law


TOYOTA MOTOR: Marques Suit Moved From E.D. Virginia to E.D.N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ISABEL MARQUES, PAYAM RASTEGAR, and SYED ABDUL
NAFAY, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v.
TOYOTA MOTOR NORTH AMERICA, INC., and TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION,
Case No. 1:20-cv-00665, was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia to the U.S. District
Court for the Eastern District of New York on October 7, 2020.

The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of New York assigned
Case No. 1:20-cv-04804-WFK-CLP to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' violations of the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, fraudulent concealment, breach of
contract, violations of the Virginia Consumer Protection Act,
breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and breach of
covenant of good faith and fair dealing by continued selling and
refusing to repair or replace automobiles with defective
low-pressure fuel pumps.

Toyota Motor North America, Inc., is a holding company of sales and
manufacturing subsidiaries of Toyota Motor Corporation in the
United States, with its headquarters in Plano, Texas. Toyota Motor
Corporation is a multinational automotive manufacturer
headquartered in Toyota, Aichi, Japan.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Steven J. Toll, Esq.
         Brian E. Johnson, Esq.
         COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
         1100 New York Ave. NW, Suite 500
         Washington, DC 20005
         Telephone: (202) 408-4600
         Facsimile: (202) 408-4699
         E-mail: stoll@cohenmilstein.com
                 bejohnson@cohenmilstein.com

                - and –

         Steve W. Berman, Esq.
         Thomas E. Loeser, Esq.
         Jerrod C. Patterson, Esq.
         HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
         1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
         Seattle, WA 98101
         Telephone: (206) 623-7292
         Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
         E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com
                 toml@hbsslaw.com
                 jerrodp@hbsslaw.com


TULANE UNIVERSITY: Jones Seeks Tuition Fee Refund
-------------------------------------------------
Sylvia Jones, individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Administrators of the Tulane Educational
Fund, Defendant, Case No. 20-cv-02505 (E.D. La., September 14,
2020), seeks disgorgement of all amounts wrongfully obtained for
tuition, fees, on-campus housing, and meals, injunctive relief
including enjoining Tulane University of Louisiana from retaining
the pro-rated, unused monies paid for tuition, fees, on-campus
housing and meals, reasonable attorney's fees, costs and expenses,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest on any amounts awarded and
such other and further relief as may be just and proper, refunds of
all tuition fees paid on a pro-rata basis, together with other
damages resulting from breach of contract and unjust enrichment.

Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund manage the Tulane
University of Louisiana, a higher learning campus in New Orleans
where Jones is currently enrolled for the Spring 2020 semester at
Tulane's A.B. Freeman School of Business. Tulane decided to close
campus, constructively evict students, and transition all classes
to an online/remote format as a result of the Novel Coronavirus
Disease. Jones claims to be deprived the benefits of in-person
instruction, access to campus facilities, student activities and
other benefits and services in exchange for which they had already
paid fees and tuition. Tulane refused to provide reimbursement for
the tuition, fees and other costs. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Yvette Golan, Esq.
      THE GOLAN FIRM
      2000 M Street, NW, Suite #750-A
      Washington, DC 20036
      Tel: (866) 298-4150
      Fax: (928) 441-8250
      Email: ygolan@tgfirm.com

             - and -

      David A. Szwak, Esq.
      BODENHEIMER, JONES & SZWAK, LLC
      416 Travis Street, Ste. 800
      Mid South Tower
      Shreveport, LA 71101
      Tel: (318) 424-1400
      Fax: (318) 221-6555

             - and -

      James A. Francis, Esq.
      John Soumilas, Esq.
      David A. Searles, Esq.
      Edward H. Skipton, Esq.
      FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS, P.C.
      1600 Market Street, Suite 2510
      Philadelphia, PA 19103
      Tel: (215) 735-8600
      Fax: (215) 940-8000
      Email: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
             jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
             dsearles@consumerlawfirm.com
             eskipton@consumerlawfirm.com


UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Moves to Compel Arbitration in Matthews Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the putative class action lawsuit styled as VICTIASHEA MATTHEWS,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. UBER
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Case No. CGC-20-584582, the Defendant filed
with the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the
County of San Francisco a notice of motion and motion to compel
arbitration and for a stay of proceedings pending disposition of
the motion and arbitration on October 7, 2020.

The Defendant also filed a memorandum of points and authorities and
declarations of its legal counsel, Daniel Fishman, Esq., and
Claudia M. Vetesi, Esq., in support of its motion to compel
arbitration.

The case arises from the Defendant's alleged unjust enrichment and
violations of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act, False
Advertising Law, and Unfair Competition Law.

Uber Technologies Inc. is a company that offers vehicles for hire,
food delivery, package delivery, couriers, and freight
transportation services based in San Francisco, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
         KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
         245 Fischer Avenue, Suite D1
         Costa Mesa, CA 92626
         Telephone: (800) 400-6808
         Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
         E-mail: ak@kazlg.com

                - and –

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

                - and –

         Yana A. Hart, Esq.
         KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
         2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101
         San Diego, CA 92108
         Telephone: (619) 233-7770
         Facsimile: (619) 297-1022
         E-mail: yana@kazlg.com

                - and –

         George V. Granade, Esq.
         REESE LLP
         8484 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 515
         Los Angeles, CA 90211
         Telephone: (310) 393-0070
         E-mail: ggranade@reesellp.com


UFC: Judge Like to Grant Class-Action Status on Antitrust Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MMAJunkie reports that things appear to be headed in the right
direction for the plaintiffs in the years-long UFC antitrust
lawsuit.

U.S. District Judge Richard Boulware, who's presiding over the
case, on Sept. 17 said he is "likely" to certify the class of
fighters seeking damages from the promotion for anti-competitive
practices.

Class certification is a crucial step for the plaintiffs - which
include Jon Fitch, Cung Le and Nate Quarry - as Boulware said
during last year's hearings that he "couldn't see the case
proceeding" without it being granted.  If granted certification,
nearly 1,200 fighters would be grouped together to sue the UFC for
estimated damages of approximately $800 million to $1.6 billion,
looking to prove that the UFC possessed monopoly power to depress
their earnings.

The case was first filed in 2014, with lawyers from both sides
arguing in court. [GN]


ULTRA PETROLEUM: Bragar Eagel Reminds of Nov. 2 Motion Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of Ultra Petroleum Corp. (Other
OTC: UPLCQ, NASDAQ: UPL). Stockholders have until the deadlines
below to petition the court to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional
information about each case can be found at the link provided.

Ultra Petroleum Corp. (Other OTC: UPLCQ, NASDAQ: UPL)

Class Period: April 3, 2017 to August 8, 2019

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: November 2, 2020

Ultra Petroleum is an oil and gas development company with primary
assets in the Pinedale and Jonah fields of the Green River Basin of
southwest Wyoming. Over 80% of the Company's revenues have
historically been derived from the development and sale of natural
gas.

On May 14, 2020, Ultra Petroleum filed for bankruptcy protection
and is not named as a defendant in the action.

In April 2017, at the beginning of the Class Period, Ultra
Petroleum exited a court-supervised reorganization under Chapter 11
of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. According to defendants, Ultra
Petroleum exited the bankruptcy in "growth mode." Defendants stated
that the Company was poised to maximize the value of its
substantial oil and gas deposits (which they valued at $4.19
billion, including $1.5 billion of proved undeveloped reserves)
through ramped up production in 2017 and 2018 and that Ultra
Petroleum was on track to produce between 290 and 300 billion cubic
feet equivalent ("Bcfe") in 2017, with 25% production growth over
these figures in 2018. Defendants represented that the Company had
the financial and production flexibility to weather even a
low-commodity-price environment and was set to ramp up well
development with 10 rigs operating by 2018 on the back of an
estimated $788 million capital budget. Accretive to this plan was
the launch of a horizontal well drilling program, which Ultra
Petroleum executives claimed was set to significantly expand the
production capabilities of the Company's existing wells.

Then, beginning in August 2017, soon after exiting bankruptcy,
Ultra Petroleum began issuing a series of revelations demonstrating
that it could not grow production by any meaningful amount and that
its wells were worth a fraction of the values previously
represented. Finally, on August 9, 2019, Ultra Petroleum announced
disappointing results for the second quarter of 2019, disclosing
that total revenues for the quarter had decreased 18%, that the
Company's horizontal well program had been effectively halted, and
that it was lowering its 2019 projected capital investments to a
range of $260 million to $290 million and annual production to a
range of 238 to 244 Bcfe.

On this news, the price of Ultra Petroleum stock declined 31% to
just $0.09 per share and continued to fall to just $0.01 per share,
99% below the stock's Class Period high. On August 22, 2019, Ultra
Petroleum stock was delisted. And in May 2020, the Company was
forced to enter bankruptcy proceedings yet again in order to seek a
court-ordered reorganization.

The complaint, filed on September 1, 2020, alleges that these and
similar statements issued by defendants during the Class Period
were materially false and misleading when made. Throughout the
Class Period, defendants, inter alia: (i) materially overstated the
value of Ultra Petroleum's oil and gas reserves; (ii) materially
misrepresented the Company's ability to ramp up production and its
financial flexibility; (iii) failed to disclose the Company's
extreme sensitivity to even a modest decline in natural gas prices;
and (iv) concealed significant setbacks in the Company's vaunted
horizontal well drilling program.

For more information on the Ultra Petroleum class action go to:
https://bespc.com/ultrapetroleum

                          About Bragar Eagel

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York and California. The firm represents
individual and institutional investors in commercial, securities,
derivative, and other complex litigation in state and federal
courts across the country. For more information about the firm,
please visit www.bespc.com.  Attorney advertising.  Prior results
do not guarantee similar outcomes.  [GN]


UNITED STATES: Mathew, et al. File Suit v. Gov't Officials
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kosinski Peter. The
case is styled as Harley Mathew, L'Elie Damali, Michael Maniates,
Emily McGrath, Susan Lahey, N.H. Quaide Williams, Jessica Roitman,
Katie Von Holzen, Benjamin Cole and Ryan Burruss, individually, and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Kosinski
Peter, Andrew J. Spano, Douglas Kellner, in their official
capacities as Commissioners of the New York State Board of
Elections, Todd D. Valentine, Robert A. Brehm, in their official
capacities as Co-Executive Directors of the New York State Board of
Elections, Kathy Boockvar, in her official capacity of Secretary of
the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Jonathan Marks, in his official
capacity as Deputy Secretary for Elections and Commissions, Jessica
Mathis, in her official capacity as Director of the Bureau of
Election Service, Frank LaRose, in his official capacity as
Secretary of the State of Ohio, Ruth Hughes, in her official
capacity as Secretary of State of Texas, Albert Benjamin Chandler,
in his official capacity as Chairman of the Kentucky Board of
Elections, Michael Adams, in his official capacity as Kentucky
Secretary of State, Ann S. Jacobs, in her official capacity as
Chair of Wisconsin Elections Commission, Mark L. Thomsen, his
official capacity as Vice Chair of the Wisconsin Elections
Commission, Marge Bostelmann, in her official capacity as Secretary
of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, Julie Glancey, Dean Knudson,
Robert Spindell, Jr., in their official capacities as Commissioners
of the Wisconsin Elections Commission, and Brad Raffensperger, in
his official capacity as the Secretary of State of Georgia,
Defendants, Case No. 1:20-cv-04664 (E.D. N.Y., Sept. 30, 2020).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Civil Rights:
Voting.

The Defendants are government officials.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

   Remy Green, Esq.
   Cohen & Green
   1639 Centre Street, Suite 216
   Ridgewood, NY 11207
   Tel: (929) 888-9480
   Email: j.remy.green@gmail.com


UNITED STATES: Navy Sued by Abbey for Not Warning About Hazards
---------------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN ABBEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Case
4:20-cv-06443-DMR (N.D. Cal., Sept. 14, 2020), is an action against
the Defendant for failure to warn the Plaintiff and the proposed
class of hazardous substances, including radionuclides.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that due to the Defendant's
negligent acts, officers and other employees of the San Francisco
Police Department ("SFPD") were exposed, at Hunters Point Naval
Shipyard ("HPNS"), to unsafe levels of radioactive and otherwise
hazardous substances.

The Defendant's failure to disclose the truth about the hazardous
substances present at HPNS, and the Defendant's subsequent failure
to follow proper decontamination procedures, and decision to
conceal information about their failure from the City and County of
San Francisco ("the City") in violation of federal law, were a
substantial factor in causing the Plaintiff's acute symptoms and
elevated risk of developing life-threatening cancers and other
diseases, according to the complaint.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Khaldoun A. Baghdadi, Esq.
          Sara M. Peters, Esq.
          Jade Smith-Williams, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF WALKUP MELODIA KELLY
          & SCHOENBERGER, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
          650 California Street, 26th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94108-2615
          Tel: (415) 981-7210
          Fax: (415) 391-6965
          E-mail: kbaghdadi@walkuplawoffice.com
                  speters@walkuplawoffice.com
                  jsmithwilliams@walkuplawoffice.com

               - and -

          Wendi J. Berkowitz, Esq.
          MESSING ADAM & JASMINE LLP
          235 Montgomery Street, Suite 828
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 266-1800
          Facsimile: (415) 266-1128
          E-mail: wendi@majlabor.com


UNITED STATES: Wallace Asks to Appoint Klayman as Trump's Counsel
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the case styled United States of America, ex rel. Stephen P.
Wallace, Private Attorney General & RELATOR, and US Taxpayers
similarly situated v. John H. Durham, individually, and in his
Official Capacity as SPECIAL PROSECUTOR, and John/Jane Does not yet
named, Case No. 3:20-cv-01448-JCH (D. Conn.), the Plaintiffs
proffer Larry E. Klayman for President Donald Trump's Special
Counsel.

Mr. Klayman is a former USDOJ Official, and founder of JUDICIAL
WATCH & FREEDOM WATCH.

The action is a false claims class action Bivens complaint for
urgent "en banc" injunctive relief, compelling John H. Durham's
resignation, thus, allowing President Trump to appoint his special
counsel.

The Plaintiffs collectively bring this complaint alleging the
Defendants, collectively, have compromised their DUTY & OATHS of
OFFICE, with Intentional Delays of prosecuting IRREFUTABLE
"compounding of Crimes, under color of Law." The Plaintiffs demand
John H. Durham's resignation, sua sponte & instanter, or in the
alternative, an order from en banc panel, sua sponte.[BN]


UNIVERSITY OF ARKANSAS: Class Suit Brought Over Parking Fines
-------------------------------------------------------------
nwaonline.com reports that a Little Rock attorney is representing
his daughter in a class-action lawsuit alleging constitutional
rights to due process are violated in the appeals process for
parking tickets at the University of Arkansas.

Elizabeth Ann Corbitt, a freshman at UA last fall, was fined $100
and had her car towed after parking in a reserved lot, according to
court documents.

Chris Corbitt, her attorney, said he's also her father. He
criticized UA's ticketing practices and said steps required to
appeal a ticket are "outrageous."

The lawsuit states: "Traffic citation recipients are forced to pay
the fines, pay a $10 appeal fee and explain why their reason is
valid for a hearing in violation of their constitutional rights of
due process and adequate notice."

Corbitt filed the lawsuit Sept. 4 in U.S. District Court in Little
Rock. The board of trustees for the University of Arkansas System
is the defendant in the lawsuit, with six of 10 trustees listed by
name.

Chris Corbitt said he listed by name the six trustees who are
attorneys.

"I want them to hopefully take a look at this lawsuit and say, 'Oh
gosh, this is like [Constitutional Law] 101, what in the world are
we doing to our students here?'" he said.

Mark Rushing, a UA spokesman, said the university is "confident
that our parking policies are fair towards everyone and fully
comply with the law."

Rushing stated parking policies "are intended to ensure that the
university can provide quality parking facilities that meet the
needs of the campus community and visitors."

Chris Corbitt said with the class-action lawsuit, a goal is to get
money back for those ticketed. The lawsuit states those included in
the class action would be "students and non-students issued a
ticket by the University of Arkansas within the last three (3)
years."

The lawsuit also asks the court to step in and stop the university
from issuing parking violations. A jury trial is requested. [GN]


VA&VK LLC: Villafan Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages Under FLSA
--------------------------------------------------------------
JESUS VILLAFAN; NICOLAS ROJAS BARBOSA; PAMELA BROWN; RODERNO RAMOS
ZAMORA; SYREETA GEORGE (A.K.A. SYREETA THOMAS); and VICTOR GENARO
LOPEZ LECARO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. VA&VK LLC (D/B/A BAKAR); YAHYA ALLAHAM; VICTOR YAHIR;
and VICTOR ALLAHAM, Case No. 1:20-cv-04342 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 16,
2020), seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Villafan was employed by the Defendants as chef.
Plaintiff Rojas Barbosa was employed as server, Plaintiff Brown as
general manager, Plaintiff Ramos Zamora as busboy, Plaintiff George
as pastry maker and Plaintiff Lopez Lecaro as cook.

VA&VK LLC owns, operates, or controls an American steakhouse,
located at Coney Island Avenue, in Brooklyn, New York, under the
name "Bakar."

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael Faillace, Esq.
          MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 317-1200
          Facsimile: (212) 317-1620


WANG WANG LAI: Faces Alvaranga Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE SANTOS ALVARANGA, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. WANG WANG LAI INC., D/B/A MUSHROOMS, JIANPING WANG, in
his individual capacity, Case No. 2:20-cv-04773 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 6,
2020), is brought against the Defendants for violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, including failure
to compensate the Plaintiff and all others similarly situated
kitchen laborers appropriate minimum wages.

The Defendants also failed to pay overtime pay for all hours worked
in excess of 40 hours in a workweek and to provide proper wage
notices and wage statements.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a kitchen laborer
at a restaurant located in New York.

Wang Wang Lai Inc., d/b/a Mushrooms, is a company that owns and
operates a restaurant located in New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Delvis Melendez, Esq.
         LAW OFFICE OF DELVIS MELENDEZ
         90 Bradley Street
         Brentwood, NY 11717
         Telephone: (631) 434-1443


WEST PENN HOSPITAL: Hit With Suit Over Secret Patient Recordings
----------------------------------------------------------------
legalreader.com reports that West Penn Hospital is at the center of
a class-action lawsuit alleging it failed to protect the privacy of
its patients.

West Penn Hospital recently came under fire in a class-action
lawsuit filed by two women over allegations that they were
"secretly recorded while undressing in a hospital exam room." When
commenting on the suit, Michael Zagari, the attorney representing
the plaintiffs, said, "This suit seeks damages for their
humiliation, their exposure and their exploitation at the hands of
a West Penn Hospital employee."

One of the plaintiffs is a 25-year-old woman who went to West Penn
for a cancer procedure. Zagari said, "Her trust in medicine has
been shattered at a time when her trust in medicine is vital. It's
extremely important. These are women that are battling cancer. They
have a cancer scare — that's why they are there. That's why
they're putting trust in the hospital and I can tell you she feels
betrayed."

According to the lawsuit, a hospital worker found a small video
camera in one of the bathrooms, prompting police to charge "former
hospital employee Guy Caley in July with invasion of privacy."
Earlier this month, another 83 charges were filed against him.
Zagari said, "Unbeknownst to these women, prior to Mr. Caley
stepping out of that examination room, or that imaging room, Mr.
Caley had set up cameras inside the imaging room to record them
getting undressed."

Rob Peirce, another attorney representing the plaintiffs, said
Caley "allegedly videotape 21 employees and at least 34 patients."
Peirce further argues West Penn "did not do enough to protect
patient privacy." He added:

"We believe that protocols were not followed or even worse
protocols were not in place. And we are determined and we are
asking the court to make sure that if West Penn Hospital and other
facilities won't do it, that the courts will get involved on behalf
of these victims and make sure procedures are in place so no one
has to go through this again."

Shortly after Caley was hit with criminal charges, West Penn
Hospital issued the following statement:

"As we stated previously, the allegations described in the criminal
charges against a former West Penn Hospital employee are appalling,
and West Penn condemns his actions in the strongest possible terms.
We are dismayed that such a reprehensible act was committed on our
campus. At Allegheny Health Network and West Penn, we place the
utmost priority on safeguarding the privacy and dignity of our
employees, patients, and visitors, and we deeply regret that some
have been unknowingly affected by this criminal act. AHN and West
Penn would like to thank the Highmark Health police department and
the Allegheny County District Attorney's office, who thoroughly
investigated this case over the last several months, leading to the
charges being filed. We continue to cooperate fully with
authorities as their investigation and prosecution proceed." [GN]


WESTERN REFINING: Court OKs First Amended Suit Filing in "Ramirez"
------------------------------------------------------------------
Chief District Judge Kimberly J. Mueller approved a stipulation in
the case captioned JOANNA RAMIREZ, an individual, Plaintiff, v.
WESTERN REFINING RETAIL, LLC, a limited liability company; and DOES
1-100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:20-CV-01671-KJM-CKD,
pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of California.

The Court-approved stipulation provides that the plaintiff may file
a First Amended Complaint.  The defendant's responsive pleading
will be due within 30 days of the filing of the First Amended
Complaint.

This case was originally filed in Superior Court of California,
County of San Joaquin on June 30, 2019, with Case No.
STK-CV-UOE-2020-0005994. The case was subsequently removed to the
E.D. of California on August 20, 2020.

The lawsuit seeks redress for failure to authorize or permit
required meal periods, statutory penalties for failure to provide
accurate wage statements, waiting time penalties in the form of
continuation wages for failure to timely pay employees all wages
due upon separation of employment, failure to maintain time-keeping
records, injunctive relief and other equitable relief, reasonable
attorney's fees, costs and interest under California Labor Code and
applicable Industrial Wage Orders.

Western Refining operates "Speedway," a gas station and convenience
store in Stockton, California where Flores worked as a as an
Assistant Manager/Night Manager. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Mayall Hurley, Esq.
      Robert J. Wasserman, Esq.
      John P. Briscoe, Esq.
      Rachel Allgaier, Esq.
      2453 Grand Canal Boulevard
      Stockton, CA 95207-8253
      Telephone: (209) 477-3833
      Facsimile: (209) 473-4818
      Email: rwasserman@mayaUaw.com
             jbriscoe@mavallaw.com
             rallgaier@mayallaw.com

WHOLE FOODS MARKET: Hit for Banning "Black Lives Matter" Masks
--------------------------------------------------------------
Suverino Frith, Savannah Kinzer, Cedrick Juarez, Faith Walsh,
Mackenzie Shanahan, Corey Samuel, Abdulai Barry, Lindsay Vuong,
Samantha Berimbau, Camille Tucker-Tolbert, Ana Belen Del
Rio-Ramirez, Lylah Styles, Kayla Greene and Sharie Robinson,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. Whole Foods Market, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
20-cv-11358 (D. Mass., July 20, 2020), seek injunctive, declaratory
and compensatory relief for violations of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964.

Plaintiffs are Whole Foods employees in a number of stores around
the country who began wearing masks with the message "Black Lives
Matter" to protest racism and police violence against
African-Americans. Face masks are required in most parts of the US
due to COVID19. Whole Foods allegedly began disciplining employees
for wearing these masks and began sending employees home without
pay for wearing Black Lives Matters masks. Whole Foods has
threatened employees with termination if they continue wearing the
masks.

Plaintiffs claim that Whole Foods' selective enforcement of its
dress code in disciplining employees who wear apparel expressing
support for the Black Lives Matter movement constitutes unlawful
discrimination on the basis of race and on the basis of employees'
affiliation with and advocacy for Black employees. [BN]

Plaintiffs are represented by:

      Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq.
      Anastasia Doherty, Esq.
      LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
      729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000
      Boston, MA 02116
      Tel: (617) 994-5800
      Email: sliss@llrlaw.com
             adoherty@llrlaw.com


WORLD FINANCIAL: Seeks Ninth Cir. Review in Yeomans Labor Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants World Financial Group Ins., et al., filed an appeal from
a court ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled Tricia Yeomans, et
al. v. World Financial Group Ins., et al., Case No.
3:19-cv-00792-EMC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California, San Francisco.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, Judge Edward
M. Chen of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California denied (i) the Defendants' motion to transfer the case
to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia,
and (ii) the Plaintiffs' request for attorneys' fees.

The Plaintiffs bring a putative class action against Defendants
World Financial Group Insurance Agency (a California corporation),
World Financial Group Inc. (a Florida corporation), and Does 1 to
100, alleging violations of the California Labor Code, the
California Business and Professional Code, and California Wage
Orders (and asserting a claim of unjust enrichment) based on the
Defendants' purported misclassification of the Plaintiffs as
independent contractors, as opposed to employees.

The Defendants represent themselves as a financial- and
insurance-products marketing company; they recruit individuals as
"Associates" and purport to give people the tools to build and
operate their own financial services business.  However, the
Plaintiffs assert that the Defendants conduct their business by way
of a massive pyramid scheme, wherein recruiting new Associates is
one of the main factors involved in achieving promotions. Once
someone is an Associate, the Defendants pressure that person to
purchase the Defendants' financial and insurance products and to
sell financial and insurance products to the new Associates.

The appellate case is captioned as Tricia Yeomans, et al. v. World
Financial Group Ins., et al., Case No. 20-16937, in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

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

   -- Appellants World Financial Group Insurance Agency, Inc. and
World Financial Group, Inc.'s Mediation Questionnaire is due on
October 13, 2020;

   -- Transcript shall be ordered by November 4, 2020;

   -- Transcript is due on December 4, 2020;

   -- Appellants World Financial Group Insurance Agency, Inc. and
      World Financial Group, Inc.'s opening brief is due on
      January 13, 2021;

   -- Appellees Fatemeh Abtahi, Cameron Bradford, Ismail Chraibi,
      Dorothy Jenkins, Robert Jenkins, Adrian Rodriguez and
      Tricia Yeomans' answering brief is due on February 12,
      2021; and

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

Plaintiffs-Appellees TRICIA YEOMANS; ISMAIL CHRAIBI; ROBERT
JENKINS; DOROTHY JENKINS; FATEMEH ABTAHI; CAMERON BRADFORD,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated; and
ADRIAN RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, are represented by:

          Christina Lucio, Esq.
          FARNAES & LUCIO, APC
          2235 Encinitas Blvd., Suite 210
          Encinitas, CA 92024
          Telephone: (909) 908-3059
          E-mail: clucio@farnaeslaw.com

               - and -

          Stanley D. Saltzman, Esq.
          MARLIN & SALTZMAN, LLP
          29800 Agoura Road
          Agoura Hills, CA 91301
          Telephone: (818) 991-8080
          E-mail: ssaltzman@marlinsaltzman.com

Defendants-Appellants WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP INSURANCE AGENCY, INC.,
a California corporation, and WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP, INC., a
Georgia corporation, are represented by:

          Jesse C. Ferrantella, Esq.
          Marlene M. Moffitt, Esq.
          Spencer C. Skeen, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 990
          San Diego, CA 92122
          Telephone: (858) 652-3100
          E-mail: jesse.ferrantella@ogletree.com
                  marlene.moffitt@ogletree.com
                  spencer.skeen@ogletree.com


YANECK HOME: Faces Veletanga Wage-and-Hour Class Suit in E.D.N.Y.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CARLOS VELETANGA and PATRICIO CALLE, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. YANECK HOME IMPROVEMENT CORP. and
JAN SZCZECINA, Case No. 1:20-cv-04789 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), is
brought against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and New York Labor Law.

According to the complaint, the Defendants violated the FLSA and
the NYLL by failing to compensate the Plaintiffs and all others
similarly situated workers overtime pay for all hours worked in
excess of 40 hours in a workweek, failing to post notices of the
minimum wage and overtime wage requirements in a conspicuous place
at their workplace, and failing to keep accurate payroll records.

Mr. Veletanga and Mr. Calle were employed by the Defendants as
construction workers, laborers, and sheetrock workers at 61-80
Grove Street, in Ridgewood, New York, from March 2018 until July
2020 and from September 2017 until January 2020, respectively.

Yaneck Home Improvement Corp. is a company that provides home
improvement services, with a principal executive office located at
61-80 Grove Street, in Ridgewood, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
         HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
         80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
         Kew Gardens, NY 11415
         Telephone: (718) 263-9591
         Facsimile: (718) 263-9598


ZARBEE'S INC: Delacruz Sues Over Web Site Access Discrimination
---------------------------------------------------------------
EMANUEL DELACRUZ, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated v. ZARBEE'S, INC., Case No. 1:20-cv-08336-RA
(S.D.N.Y., Oct. 6, 2020), is a class action against the Defendant
for violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, New York
State Human Rights Law, and New York City Human Rights Law.

According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website,
https://www.zarbees.com/, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by the Plaintiff and all others similarly
situated blind or visually-impaired consumers.

According to the complaint, the Defendant's website contains access
barriers that deny the Plaintiff and Class members to have full
access to the facilities, goods and services offered to the general
public through the website. These access barriers include: (1) lack
of alternative text (alt-text), or a text equivalent, which
prevents screen readers from accurately vocalizing a description of
the graphics; (2) empty links that contain no text causing the
function or purpose of the link to not be presented to the user;
(3) redundant links where adjacent links go to the same Uniform
Resource Locator (URL) address, which results in additional
navigation and repetition for keyboard and screen-reader users; and
(4) linked images missing alt-text, which causes problems if an
image within a link contains no text and that image does not
provide alt-text.

The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers.

Zarbee's, Inc., is a manufacturer of pharmaceutical products, with
its principal place of business located at 50 Old Field Road, in
Greenwich, Connecticut.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
         Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
         Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
         GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
         150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
         New York, NY 10003
         Telephone: (212) 228-9795
         Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
         E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
                 Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
                 danalgottlieb@aol.com



                            *********

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

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

Copyright 2020. 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 ***