/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/210623.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Wednesday, June 23, 2021, Vol. 23, No. 119

                            Headlines

3M COMPANY: Bertsch Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
ACELRX PHARMA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 9 Deadline
ACELRX PHARMA: Glancy Prongay Reminds of August 9 Deadline
ALPHA FUNDING: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California
AMAZON.COM: Garner Sues Over Invasion of Privacy

ANCESTRY.COM: Prevails in Yearbook Database Class Action Lawsuit
ANNA SHEFFIELD: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of July 13 Deadline
ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Rosen Law Reminds of July 13 Deadline
ASP FARM SEVICES: Pimentel Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.

ASSURANCE IQ: Smith Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Washington
AT&T MOBILITY: Jarrat Files Suit in E.D. California
ATERIAN INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 12 Deadline
BACKYARD LAWN: Harnish Sues Over FCRA Violation
BALTIMORE, MD: Mayor Responds to ADA Class-Action Lawsuit

BAPTIST MEMORIAL: Stewart Files Suit in W.D. Tennessee
BATH FITTER: Miller Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
BRSI LLC: Still-Dobson Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Oklahoma
CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: Rabinowitz Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey
CASINO LLC: Iiams Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations

CASTLE CREDIT: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Hodges Suit Claims
CHEMOCENTRYX INC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline
CHIPPEWA CREE: Class Action Settlement Brings $59M to Descendents
CHURCHILL CAPITAL: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline
CITY OF BILLINGS: Attempt to Take Over Costly Lawsuit Rejected

COAST TO COAST: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Parker Claims
COLLICUTT ENERGY: Hernandez Sues Over Unpaid Compensations
CONOPCO INC: Huskey Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri
CONOPCO INC: Sandbach Fraud Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri
CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of December 16 Deadline

CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 16 Deadline
DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 13 Deadline
DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 13 Deadline
DEVON ENERGY: $28 Million Settlement Over Gas Royalties OK'd
DIANNE BIGEAGLE: Federal Court Tosses Out Attempted MMIWG Suit

EB GOLF MEDIA: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ETERNAL BEVERAGES: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
FITNESS INT'L: Nagy Sues Over Illegal Electronic Fund Transfers
FREQUENCY THERA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline
FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Glancy Prongay Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline

FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Kirby McInerney Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline
FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Klein Law Firm Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline
FRESENIUS USA: Fenske Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations
GENERAL MILLS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
GULF OF MEXICO: Charter Operators Fight Back Against Lawsuit

H.E.W. AND ASSOCIATES: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California
H.L. GROSS & BRO: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
HAIN CELESTIAL: Maestre Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
HERFF JONES: Furcinito Suit Asserts Credit Card Fraud
HONEST PAWS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York

HYUNDAI MOTOR: GV80 Subject of Class Action Filed by Boca Raton
JIM 'N NICK'S: Porter Sues Over Failure to Compensate OT Wages
KAISER FOUNDATION: Settles Employment Class Action for $1.4M
LEPOZZI INC: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
LIMETREE BAY: Boynes Sues Over Harmful Effects of Refinery

LOSTMY.NAME INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
MDL 2913: Oneida City School District Sues Over E-Cigarette Crisis
MEDINAH COUNTRY: Campos Sues Over Unlawful Biometrics Collection
MEKONG BK CORP: Gonzalez Seeks Overtime Pay, Slams Tip Credit
MIDLAND CREDIT: Belizor Sues Over Deceptive Collection Letter

MONTGOMERY, AL: Carter Appeals Denied Class Cert. Bid to 11th Cir.
MONTGOMERY, AL: McCullough Appeals Class Certification Bid Denial
MUD LAKE, NL: Province Removed as Party in Mud Lake Flood
NABC INC: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK: To Settle US Bank Bill Swap Rate Suit

NATIONWIDE TAX: Loftus Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California
NCAA: Flores Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana
NCAA: Harris Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana
NCAA: Kirkwood Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois
NCAA: Parrish Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana

NCAA: Reis Suit Transferred to Northern District of Illinois
NCAA: Romashko Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois
NOBLR RECIPROCAL EXCHANGE: Greenstein Sues Over Data Breach
NON TYPICAL INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
O'REILLY AUTO: Faces Suit Over COVID Screenings, Security Checks

OCUGEN INC: Gainey McKenna Reminds of August 17 Deadline
OCUGEN INC: Johnson Fistel Reminds of August 17 Deadline
OCUGEN INC: Schall Law Reminds of August 17 Deadline
ONTARIO: Court OKs $100M BMO Class Action Settlement Over FX Fees
PELOTON INTERACTIVE: Portnoy Law Firm Reminds of June 28 Deadline

PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Tosses Tavern's COVID-19 Coverage Class Suit
PERFORMANCE VALIDATION: Mohilo Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime
POWELL'S BOOKS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
PROMED & ASSOCIATED: Khaled Sues Over Failure to Pay EMTs' OT
PROVENTION BIO: Klein Law Firm Reminds of July 20 Deadline

PURECYCLE TECH: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 12 Deadline
PUREFORMULAS INC: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
RED LOBSTER: Marshall Sues Over Questionable Seafood Farm Practices
RELIA HOME: Misclassifies Acquisition Specialists, Linares Claims
RESURGENT CAPITAL: Bradshaw Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. North Carolina

RLX TECHNOLOGY: Wolf Haldenstein Reminds of August 9 Deadline
SEND A CAKE: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
SKILLZ INC: Robbins Geller Reminds Investors of July 7 Deadline
SUNBUTTER LLC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
TLM RESEARCH: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York

TTT WEST COAST: Scialfo Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
UBIQUITI INC: Glancy Prongay Reminds of July 19 Deadline
UBIQUITI INC: Lieff Cabraser Reminds of July 19 Deadline
UBIQUITI INC: Vincent Wong Reminds Investors of July 19 Deadline
VIRGIN GALACTIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 27 Deadline

VIRGIN GALACTIC: Thornton Law Reminds of July 27 Deadline
VIRGIN GALACTIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 27 Deadline
WASHINGTON PRIME: Klein Law Reminds Investors of July 23 Deadline
WESTCHESTER SURPLUS: Cafe Int'l Appeals Insurance Suit Dismissal
WESTERN DIGITAL: To Settle SMR HDD False Advertising Class Action


                            *********

3M COMPANY: Bertsch Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Bertsch, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, Co.), AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS,
INC., AGC, INC. (f/k/a Asahi Glass Co., Ltd.), AMEREX CORPORATION,
ARCHROMA MANAGEMENT, LLC, ARCHROMA U.S., INC., ARKEMA, INC.,
individually and as successor-in-interest to Atofina, S.A., BASF
CORPORATION, individually and as successor-in-interest to Ciba,
Inc., BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT CO., CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION,
individually and as successor-interest to Kidde-Fenwal, Inc.,
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC., CHEMGUARD, INC., CHEMICALS, INC., CHUBB
FIRE, LTD., CLARIANT CORPORATION, CLARIANT CORPORATION,
individually and as successor-in-interest to Sandoz Chemical
Corporation, CORTEVA, INC., individually and as
successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise,
DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC., DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC., individually
and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical Solutions
Enterprise, DYNAX CORPORATION, E.I. DUPONT DE NEMOURS & COMPANY,
individually and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical
Solutions Enterprise, KIDDE-FENWAL, INC., individually and as
successor-in-interest to Kidde Fire Fighting, Inc., KIDDE PLC,
INC., NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY, NATIONAL FOAM, INC., THE
CHEMOURS COMPANY, individually and as successor-in-interest to
DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise, THE CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC,
individually and as successor-in-interest to DuPont Chemical
Solutions Enterprise, TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company, UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION, and UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION (f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-01643-RMG (D.S.C., June 2,
2021), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.

According to the complaint, 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. PFAS are
highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. Defendants knew, or should
have known, that PFAS remain in the human body while presenting
significant health risks to humans.

The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter at multiple sites located
throughout California and was diagnosed with testicular cancer and
thyroid disease as a result of exposure to the Defendants' AFFF
products containing PFAS.

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:

          James L. Ferraro, Esq.
          Janpaul Portal, Esq.
          James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
          Dick M. Ortega, Esq.
          THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
          600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
          Miami, Florida 33131
          Phone: (305) 375-0111
          Email: jlf@ferrarolaw.com
                 jpp@ferrarolaw.com
                 jjr@ferrarolaw.com
                 dmo@ferrarolaw.com


ACELRX PHARMA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 9 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------
Attorney Advertising--Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC notifies
investors that a class action lawsuit has been filed against AcelRx
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("AcelRx" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: ACRX)
and certain of its officers, on behalf of shareholders who
purchased or otherwise acquired AcelRx securities between March 17,
2020 and February 12, 2021, (the "Class Period"). Such investors
are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site:
www.bgandg.com/acrx.

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

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose that: (1) AcelRx had deficient disclosure controls and
procedures with respect to its marketing of DSUVIA; (2) as a
result, AcelRx had been making false or misleading claims and
representations about the risks and efficacy of DSUVIA in certain
advertisements and displays; (3) the foregoing conduct subjected
the Company to increased regulatory scrutiny and enforcement; and
(4) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially
false and misleading at all relevant times.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to
review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm's site:
www.bgandg.com/acrx or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or
his Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein, Gewirtz
& Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in AcelRx
you have until August 9, 2021 to request that the Court appoint you
as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't
require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation
boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of
litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to
representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class
action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general
corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities
arbitration. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee
similar outcomes. [GN]

ACELRX PHARMA: Glancy Prongay Reminds of August 9 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the
upcoming August 9, 2021 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in
the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or
otherwise acquired AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("AcelRx" or the
"Company") (NASDAQ: ACRX) securities between March 17, 2020 and
February 12, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period").

If you suffered a loss on your AcelRx investments or would like to
inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss
under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact
information at
https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/acelrx-pharmaceuticals-inc/. You
can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150,
Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at
shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.

AcelRx is a pharmaceutical company that develops therapies for the
treatment of acute pain. One of its lead product candidates is
DSUVIA, which has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration ("FDA") for the management of acute pain in adults
that is severe enough to require an opioid analgesic in certified
medically supervised healthcare settings.

On February 16, 2021, AcelRx disclosed that it had received a
warning letter from the FDA concerning promotional claims for
DSUVIA. Specifically, the FDA concluded that certain of AcelRx's
promotional communications "make false or misleading claims and
representations about the risks and efficacy of DSUVIA," and
"[t]hus . . . misbrand Dsuvia within the meaning of the Federal
Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) and make its distribution
violative."

On this news, AcelRx's stock price fell $0.21 per share, or 8.37%,
to close at $2.30 per share on February 16, 2021, thereby injuring
investors.

The complaint filed alleges that throughout the Class Period,
Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as
well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) AcelRx had
deficient disclosure controls and procedures with respect to its
marketing of DSUVIA; (2) as a result, AcelRx had been making false
or misleading claims and representations about the risks and
efficacy of DSUVIA in certain advertisements and displays; (3) the
foregoing conduct subjected the Company to increased regulatory
scrutiny and enforcement; and (4) as a result, Defendants'
statements about its business, operations, and prospects, were
materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at
all relevant times. [GN]

ALPHA FUNDING: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Alpha Funding 001
LLC, et al. The case is styled as Terry Fabricant, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Alpha Funding 001
LLC, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 2:21-cv-04935 (C.D.
Cal., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Alpha Funding LLC -- https://www.alphafunding.com/ -- is a
full-service syndicate firm with relationship with all the top
lenders.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


AMAZON.COM: Garner Sues Over Invasion of Privacy
------------------------------------------------
Kaeli Garner, Dolores Sheehan, Ricky Babani, Michael Bates, Dennis
and Jeannette Croteau, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware Corporation, and
A2Z DEVELOPMENT CENTER, INC., a Delaware Corporation, Case No.
2:21-cv-00750-RSL (W.D. Wash., June 7, 2021), is brought against
the Defendants to obtain redress for all California, Florida,
Massachusetts, and New Hampshire residents who have used Alexa on
any Alexa Device, or had their communications monitored, recorded,
stored, or intercepted by an Alexa Device--irrespective of whether
they were registered or unregistered users--and have therefore been
recorded by Amazon without consent.

According to the complaint, Alexa devices are designed to record
and respond to communications immediately after an individual says
a word known as a "wake" word, which usually consists of an
individual saying the words "Alexa" or "Echo." Once the Alexa
device recognizes the "wake" word, the Alexa device then records
the ensuing communication--including anything an individual in the
vicinity of the device may say--and then transmits that recording
to Amazon's servers for interpretation and processing before
receiving the relevant data back in response. Amazon then
indefinitely and permanently stores a copy of that recording on its
own servers for later use and commercial benefit, warehousing
billions of private conversations in the process.

Shockingly, Alexa may also capture a person's voice and record
their conversations even without the intentional use of a wake
word. It has been found that words as varied as "exclamation,"
"congresswoman," "Kevin's car," "pickle," or "a ghost" have caused
an Alexa device to activate if the programmed wake words were
"Alexa" or "Echo." Notably, a user may set their own wake word,
which brings with it another wide range of false positives that
activate Alexa's ears--and Amazon's insidious course of conduct in
the process.

Alexa's eavesdropping range thus captures a host of private
conversations that many individuals would find extremely personal,
including conversations about one's family, medical conditions,
religious beliefs, political affiliations, and other personal or
private matters. Such conversations are located and stored in a
cold server owned by Amazon—and left in Amazon's hands to use as
they see fit, says the complaint.

The Plaintiffs lived in a household with an Alexa Device.

Amazon is one of the largest companies in the world, with net sales
of over $386 billion in 2020.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bradley S. Keller, Esq.
          BYRNES KELLER CROMWELL LLP
          1000 Second Avenue
          Seattle, Washington 98104
          Phone: (206) 622-2000
          Facsimile: (206) 622-2522
          Email: bkeller@byrneskeller.com

               - and -

          Michael P. Canty, Esq.
          Carol Villegas, Esq.
          LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
          140 Broadway
          New York, NY 10005
          Phone: (212) 907-0700
          Facsimile: (212) 818-0477
          Email: mcanty@labaton.com
                 cvillegas@labaton.com

               - and -

          Guillaume Buell, Esq.
          THORNTONLAW FIRM LLP
          1 Lincoln Street
          Boston, MA 02111
          Phone: (617) 720-1333
          Facsimile: (617) 720-2445
          Email: gbuell@tenlaw.com

               - and -

          Mark Goldman, Esq.
          Paul Scarlato, Esq.
          Brian Penny, Esq.
          GOLDMAN SCARLATO & PENNY, P.C.
          8 Tower Bridge
          161 Washington Street
          Conshohocken, PA 19428
          Phone: (484) 342-0700
          Facsimile: (484) 580-8747
          Email: goldman@lawgsp.com
                 scarlato@lawgsp.com
                 penny@lawgsp.com

               - and -

          Alan L. Rosca, Esq.
          23250 Chagrin Blvd.
          Beachwood, OH 44122
          Phone: (888) 998-0530
          Facsimile: (484) 580-8747


ANCESTRY.COM: Prevails in Yearbook Database Class Action Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ancestry.com Inc. prevailed in a class action which alleged that it
misappropriated consumers' images and violated their privacy by
using such data to solicit and sell their services and products.
The court granted Ancestry.com's motion to dismiss the amended
complaint with prejudice because the plaintiffs "did not cure the
complaint's deficiencies" after being granted leave to amend the
first complaint.

As we previously wrote in November 2020, Ancestry.com was hit with
a class action in the Northern District of California for
"knowingly misappropriating the photographs, likenesses, names, and
identities of Plaintiff and the class; knowingly using those
photographs, likenesses, names, and identities for the commercial
purpose of selling access to them in Ancestry products and
services; and knowingly using those photographs, likenesses, names
and identities to advertise, sell and solicit purchases of Ancestry
services and products; without obtaining prior consent from
Plaintiffs and the class." In March 2021, the court dismissed the
lawsuit based on lack of standing, but allowed the plaintiffs to
amend and address the deficiencies. Although the plaintiffs added
allegations of emotional harm, lost time, and theft of intellectual
property, that didn't sway the court. U.S. Magistrate Judge Laurel
Beeler said that the new allegations "do not change the analysis in
this court's earlier order." The court held that the plaintiffs
still did not establish Article III standing because they had not
alleged a concrete injury.

Additionally, the court noted that even if standing were
established, Ancestry.com is immune from liability under the
Communications Decency Act (CDA) because it is not a content
creator. Magistrate Beeler said that Ancestry.com "obviously did
not create the yearbooks [. . .] [i]nstead, it necessarily used
information provided by another information content provider and is
immune under [the CDA]." [GN]


ANNA SHEFFIELD: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Anna Sheffield
Jewelry Inc. The case is styled as Juan Roman, on behalf of himself
and all other persons similarly situated v. Anna Sheffield Jewelry
Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05373 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Anna Sheffield Jewelry -- https://www.annasheffield.com/ -- offers
non-traditional fine jewelry & unique engagement rings that are
exceptionally crafted with responsibly sourced diamonds.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of July 13 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed on behalf of persons and entities that
purchased or otherwise acquired Array Technologies, Inc. securities
between October 14, 2020 and May 11, 2021, inclusive (the "Class
Period"); and/or (b) common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the
registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with (1)
the October 2020 initial public offering (the "IPO"); or (2) the
December 2020 secondary public offering (the "December 2020 SPO");
or (3) the March 2021 secondary public offering (the "March 2021
SPO," and together with the IPO and the December 2020 SPO, the
"Offerings"). Array investors have until July 13, 2021 to file a
lead plaintiff motion.  

In October 2020, Array completed its initial public offering,
selling 7 million shares at $22 per share.

On May 11, 2021, after the close of trading, Array announced first
quarter 2021 results, reporting lower revenues year-over-year and
lower margins as a result of increased steel and shipping costs.
The Company also announced that Peter Jonna had resigned from the
Board of Directors effective May 10, 2021.

On this news, Array's stock price fell $11.49 per share, or 46%, to
close at $13.46 per share on May 12, 2021, significantly below the
IPO price.

The complaint filed alleges that in the registration statements for
the Offerings and throughout the Class Period, Defendants made
materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to
disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to
disclose to investors that: (1) dating back to the first quarter of
2020, prices of certain commodities such as steel was in the
process of more than doubling, and Array was facing increasing
freight costs; (2) the increases in commodity and freight costs had
been negatively impacting the Company's business and operations;
and (3) as a result, Defendants' statements about its business,
operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

If you purchased Array securities during the Class Period, you may
move the Court no later than July 13, 2021 to ask the Court to
appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you need
not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your
choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class.
If you purchased Array securities, have information or would like
to learn more about these claims, or have any questions concerning
this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these
matters, please contact Frank R. Cruz, of The Law Offices of Frank
R. Cruz, 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100, Los Angeles,
California 90067 at 310-914-5007, by email to
info@frankcruzlaw.com, or visit our website at
www.frankcruzlaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your
mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares purchased.
[GN]

ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES: Rosen Law Reminds of July 13 Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------
WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds
purchasers of the securities of Array Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:
ARRY) who: (1) purchased or otherwise acquired Array securities
between October 14, 2020 and May 11, 2021, inclusive (the "Class
Period"); and/or (2) purchased or otherwise acquired Array common
stock pursuant and/or traceable to: (i) the registration statement
and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's October 2020
initial public offering (the "IPO"); or (ii) the registration
statement and prospectus issued in connection with the Company's
December 2020 offering (the "December 2020 SPO"); or (iii) the
registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with the
Company's March 2021 offering (the "March 2021 SPO"); or (iv) any
combination of the IPO, December 2020 SPO, or March 2021 SPO, of
the important July 13, 2021 lead plaintiff deadline.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Array securities during the Class Period
you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of
pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Array class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-2098.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. If you
wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later
than July 13, 2021. A lead plaintiff is a representative party
acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience or resources. The
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. 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 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, the offering
documents and defendants made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to adequately disclose the then-existing rise of
costs related to certain supplies such as steel, as well as Array's
freight costs, and that these were likely to have, and were having,
an adverse effect on the Company's business and operations. The
complaint also alleges that defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements in press releases and conference calls
because defendants omitted and otherwise failed to disclose that
dating back to Q1 2020, prices of certain commodities such as steel
were increasing dramatically, and that Array was facing increasing
freight costs, and as a result of the foregoing, defendants'
positive statements about Array's business and operations lacked a
reasonable basis. When the true details entered the market, the
lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Array class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-2098.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 Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are
not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select
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.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome. [GN]


ASP FARM SEVICES: Pimentel Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against ASP FARM SERVICES,
LLC. The case is styled as Jorge Guzman Pimentel, on behalf of all
others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public v.
ASP FARM SERVICES, LLC, Case No. BCV-21-101285 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Kern Cty., June 7, 2021).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment - Civil Unlimited."

Asp Farm Services is located in Delano, California. This
organization primarily operates in the General Farms, Primarily
Crop business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Seung L. Yang, Esq.
          MOON & YANG, APC
          1055 W 7th St., Ste. 1880
          Los Angeles, CA 90017-2529
          Phone: 213-232-3128
          Fax: 213-232-3125
          Email: seung.yang@moonyanglaw.com


ASSURANCE IQ: Smith Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Washington
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Assurance IQ, LLC.
The case is styled as Kelsey Smith, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Assurance IQ, LLC, Case No.
2:21-cv-00823 (W.D. Wash., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Assurance IQ -- https://assurance.com/ -- is a direct-to-consumer
platform that transforms the buying experience for individuals
seeking personalized health and financial wellness solutions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
          TURKE & STRAUSS, LLP
          613 Williamson Street, Suite 201
          Madison, WI 53703
          Phone: (608) 237-1775
          Email: sam@turkestrauss.com


AT&T MOBILITY: Jarrat Files Suit in E.D. California
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T Mobility LLC.
The case is styled as Casey Jarrat, on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. AT&T Mobility LLC, Case No.
34-2021-00302103-CU-BT-GDS (E.D. Cal., June 8, 2021).

The case type is stated as "Business Tort."

AT&T Mobility LLC, also known as AT&T Wireless and marketed as
simply AT&T -- https://www.att.com/ -- is an American
telecommunications company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
          BURSOR AND FISHER, PA
          1990 N. California Blvd., Suite 940
          Walnut Creek, CA 94596
          Phone: (925) 300-4455
          Fax: (925) 407-2700
          Email: ltfisher@bursor.com


ATERIAN INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 12 Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of those who acquired Aterian, Inc.
f/k/a Mohawk Group Holdings, Inc. ("Aterian" or the "Company")
(NASDAQ: ATER) securities from December 1, 2020 through May 3,
2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Investors have until July 12,
2021 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in the
lawsuit.

On May 4, 2021, Culper Research published a report titled "Aterian
(ATER): Bought from Felons & Fraudsters, Sold to You," alleging
that Aterian has "ties to convicted criminals" and is "promoting
what we believe is an overhyped 'AI' narrative and a string of
garbage acquisitions to mask the failure of its already
ill-conceived core business." Culper also alleges that "[o]ver 25%
of Aterian shares now belong to two felons and two alleged scam
artists, all of whom will be free to dump their stock by August."
The report alleged that the Company "has been largely unsuccessful
in convincing other Amazon sellers to pay for its 'AIMEE' AI
platform, and at least 5 former employees and a former customer
have expressed doubts regarding AIMEE's legitimacy." On this news,
Aterian's stock price declined by $3.04 per share, or approximately
14.7%, from $20.66 per share to close at $17.62 per share on May 4,
2021, thereby injuring investors.

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as
failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants
failed to disclose to investors that: (1) the Company's organic
growth is plummeting; (2) the Company's recent, self-lauded
acquisitions were overpayments for flawed assets from questionable
sources; (3) Aterian's purported artificial intelligence software
is a flawed product that lacks customer interest; (4) Aterian uses
rebate programs and paid or artificial reviews to pump up their
product offerings; and (5) as a result, Defendants' statements
about its business, operations, and prospects, were materially
false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all
relevant times.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Aterian securities, have
information, or would like to learn more about these claims, please
contact Thomas W. Elrod of Kirby McInerney LLP at 212-371-6600, by
email at investigations@kmllp.com, or by filling out this contact
form, to discuss your rights or interests with respect to these
matters without any cost to you.

Kirby McInerney LLP is a New York-based plaintiffs' law firm
concentrating in securities, antitrust, whistleblower, and consumer
litigation. The firm's efforts on behalf of shareholders in
securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions
of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at
Kirby McInerney LLP's website: http://www.kmllp.com.

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

BACKYARD LAWN: Harnish Sues Over FCRA Violation
-----------------------------------------------
James Harnish, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. BACKYARD LAWN MASTER, LLC, Case No. 128363755
(Fla. 13th Judical Ct., Hilssbourough Cty., June 8, 2021), is
brought against Defendant for violations of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (FCRA).

The complaint alleges that the Defendant violated the FCRA by
procuring consumer reports on Plaintiff for employment purposes
without following the law. Under this subsection of the FCRA, the
Defendant is required to disclose to its employees--in a document
that consists solely of the disclosure--that it may obtain a
consumer report on them for employment purposes. This disclosure
must be made by employers prior to obtaining copies of employees',
or prospective employees', consumers reports. A "consumer report"
means any written, oral, or other communication of any information
by a consumer reporting agency bearing on a consumer's credit
worthiness, credit standing, credit capacity, character, general
reputation, personal characteristics, or mode of living which is
used or expected to be used or collected in whole or in part for
the purpose of serving as a factor in establishing the consumer's
eligibility for an employment purpose.

The Defendant willfully violated the FCRA by failing to provide the
Plaintiff with a copy of a separate document consisting solely of
the Defendant's disclosure, stating that Defendant may obtain a
consumer report on any person for employment purposes. The
Defendant also violated this requirement by failing to provide this
disclosure to the Plaintiff prior to obtaining a copy of the
person's consumer report. Further, the Defendant violated the FCRA
by obtaining consumer reports for the Plaintiff without proper
authorization, due to the fact that its disclosure forms fail to
comply with the requirements of the FCRA, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a former employee of the Defendant.

The Defendant is a foreign limited liability company incorporated
under the laws of Michigan but routinely doing business in Tampa,
Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brandon J. Hill, Esq.
          Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
          WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, P.A.
          1110 North Florida Ave., Suite 300
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Main Number: 813-224-0431
          Facsimile: 813-229-8712
          Email: lcabassa@wfclaw.com
                 bhill@wfclaw.com
                 gnichols@wfclaw.com

               - and -

          Chad A. Justice, Esq.
          JUSTICE FOR JUSTICE LLC
          1205 N. Franklin Street, Suite 326
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Direct No: 813-566-0550
          Facsimile: 813-566-0770
          Email: chad@getjusticeforjustice.com


BALTIMORE, MD: Mayor Responds to ADA Class-Action Lawsuit
---------------------------------------------------------
Mayor Brandon Scott has responded to the class-action lawsuit filed
in regards to the city's past noncompliance with the Americans with
Disabilities Act by assembling a multi-agency task force.

"My administration has inherited a host of longstanding challenges
that we are committed to addressing with a true equity approach.
It's long past time for leaders to commit to building a more
accessible Baltimore that values our neighbors with disabilities
and creates pathways for them to thrive," said Mayor Scott.

The class-action lawsuit was filed on behalf of the people with
mobility disabilities that work, live and visit in Baltimore. The
suit alleges that Baltimore's pedestrian right of way is
inaccessible to people with disabilities. They are asking the court
to grant injunctive relief, damages and attorney fees.

The mayor assembled the multi-agency task to address Baltimore's
ADA compliance and directed it to use all necessary measures to
triage current accessibility complaints. The Department of
Transportation will develop a remediation plan and a timetable. The
task force is expected to provide an update later this summer.

Baltimore City has emphasized the newly-elected Mayor's commitment
to accessibility and equality for all Baltimore citizens and
visitors. [GN]

BAPTIST MEMORIAL: Stewart Files Suit in W.D. Tennessee
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Baptist Memorial
Health Care Corporation. The case is styled as Gregory Stewart, on
behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Baptist Memorial Health Care Corporation, Case No.
2:21-cv-02377-TLP-cgc (W.D. Tenn., June 7, 2021).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Civil Rights for the Fair
Credit Reporting Act.

Baptist Memorial Hospitals -- https://www.baptistonline.org/ --
provide compassionate, close-to-home care for patients in the
Mid-South.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marc Reed Edelman, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, PA - Tampa
          201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Phone: (813) 577-4722
          Fax: (813) 257-0572
          Email: medelman@forthepeople.com


BATH FITTER: Miller Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bath Fitter
Tennessee, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Carol Miller,
Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bath
Fitter Tennessee, Inc., a Tennessee corporation; Bath Fitter
Manufacturing Inc., a Delaware Corporation; Case No.
1:21-cv-01072-JPW (M.D. Pa., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Bath Fitter Tennessee, Inc., doing business as Bath Fitter, Inc. --
https://www.bathfitter.com/us-en/ -- provides bath products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew M. Carroll, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF ANDREW M. CARROLL
          427 N Packard St.
          Hammonton, NJ 08037
          Phone: (856) 426-9815
          Email: AndrewCarrrollEsq@gmail.com

               - and -

          Avi Robert. Kaufman, Esq.
          400 NW 26th Street
          Miami, FL 33127
          Phone: (305) 469-5881



BRSI LLC: Still-Dobson Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Oklahoma
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against BRSI LLC. The case is
styled as Jennifer Still-Dobson, on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. BRSI LLC doing business as: Big Red Kia, Case No.
5:21-cv-00579-PRW (W.D. Okla., June 7, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Brsi LLC -- http://www.bigredsports.com/-- is located in Norman,
Oklahoma and is part of the Automobile Dealers Industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ignacio J. Hiraldo, Esq.
          IJH LAW
          1200 Brickell Ave., Ste. 1950
          Miami, FL 33131
          Phone: (786) 496-4469
          Email: ijhiraldo@ijhlaw.com


CAPITAL MANAGEMENT: Rabinowitz Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Capital Management
Services, LP. The case is styled as Joshua Rabinowitz, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Capital Management
Services, LP, Case No. 3:21-cv-12203-PGS-LHG (D.N.J., June 7,
2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Capital Management Services -- https://cms-collect.com/ -- offers a
full suite of professional collection and customized recovery
services for creditors.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lawrence C. Hersh, Esq.
          17 Sylvan Street, Suite 102B
          Rutherford, NJ 07070
          Phone: (201) 507-6300
          Email: lh@hershlegal.com



CASINO LLC: Iiams Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations
----------------------------------------------------
Khrystopher Iiams, individually and on behalf of others similarly
all situated v. CASINO, LLC; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case
No. 21STCV21360 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 7, 2021),
is brought alleging that the Defendants have engaged in a
systematic pattern of wage and hour violations under the California
Labor Code and Industrial Welfare Commission ("IWC") Wage Orders.

The Defendants have increased their profits by violating state wage
and hours laws by, among other things; failing to provide lawful
meal periods or compensation in lieu thereof; failing to authorize
or permit lawful rest breaks or provide compensation in lieu
thereof; failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements;
failing to pay all wages due upon separation of employment, says
the complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt
employee at the Defendants' California business location.

The Defendant is in the business of operating casinos.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Samuel A. Wong, Esq.
          Kashif Haque, Esq.
          Jessica L. Campbell, Esq.
          Kristy R. Connolly, Esq.
          AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC
          9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Phone: (949) 379-6250
          Facsimile: (949) 379-6251



CASTLE CREDIT: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Hodges Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISHONA HODGES, Plaintiff v. CASTLE CREDIT CO HOLDINGS LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:21-cv-03148 (N.D. Ill., June 11, 2021) brings
this class and collective action complaint on behalf of herself and
all other similarly situated employees against the Defendant to
recover unpaid wages and damages and to obtain declaratory and
injunctive relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the
Illinois Minimum Wage Law.

The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendant from October 2019 to
June 5, 2021 as a collection specialist.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant failed to properly pay her
and other similarly situated collection specialists and customer
service representatives' appropriate overtime premium pay as
required by the FLSA and IMWL. This is because the Defendant did
not include the commissions paid to them in their regular rates of
pay for the purpose of calculating their overtime wage. As a
result, despite regularly working more than 40 hour per week, the
Plaintiff and other similarly situated collection specialists and
customer service representatives allegedly did not receive their
accurate overtime premium at the rate of one and one-half times
their regular rates of pay for all hours they have worked in excess
of 40 per workweek.

Castle Credit Co Holdings LLC is a consumer finance company that
provides financing for home improvement, remodeling, and related
trades throughout Illinois and nationwide. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher J. Wilmes, Esq.
          Justin Tresnowski, Esq.
          HUGHES SOCOL PIERS RESNICK & DYM, LTD.
          70 W. Madison St., Suite 4000
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Tel: (312) 580-0100


CHEMOCENTRYX INC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that a class action
lawsuit has commenced in the on behalf of investors who purchased
ChemoCentryx, Inc. ("ChemoCentryx") (NASDAQ: CCXI) between November
26, 2019 and May 6, 2021.

If you suffered a loss, contact us at the link below. There is no
cost or obligation to you.
http://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/chemocentryx-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16980&wire=5

Allegations against CCXI include that the Company made materially
false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:
(1) the study design of the Phase III ADVOCATE trial presented
issues about the interpretability of the trial data to define a
clinically meaningful benefit of avacopan and its role in the
management of ANCA-associated vasculitis; (2) the data from the
Phase III ADVOCATE trial raised serious safety concerns for
avacopan; (3) these issues presented a substantial concern
regarding the viability of ChemoCentryx's New Drug Application
("NDA") for avacopan for the treatment of ANCA-associated
vasculitis; and (4) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants'
public statements were materially false and misleading at all
relevant times.

If you suffered a loss in ChemoCentryx you have until July 6, 2021
to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your
ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as
a lead plaintiff.

Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney that has represented
investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and
violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Vincent Wong, Esq.
39 East Broadway
Suite 304
New York, NY 10002
Tel. 212.425.1140
Fax. 866.699.3880
E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN]


CHIPPEWA CREE: Class Action Settlement Brings $59M to Descendents
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Kennard at nativenewsonline.net a $59 million settlement in
Peltier v. Haaland, a class action lawsuit alleging trust fund
mismanagement and failure to account by the Department of the
Interior, will go to four tribes located in the Midwest and
Northwest United States and more than 39,000 beneficiaries.

On June 10, the United States District Court for the District of
Columbia finalized the settlement, which was reached in the Court
of Federal Claims with the Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy's
Reservation of Montana, the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa
Indians of North Dakota, the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians
of Montana, and the White Earth Band of Chippewa Indians of
Minnesota, the Interior Department announced. The tribes were
represented by the Native American Rights Fund (NARF), according to
the website designated for the lawsuit.

Want more Native News? Get the free daily newsletter today.
"It took them way too long and it's way too little," said Gerald
Gray, Chairman of the Little Shell Tribe of Chippewa Indians.

The lawsuit has its roots in land ceded by the Pembina Band of
Chippewa Indians to the U.S. government in unfair treaties
throughout the 19th century.

On Oct. 2, 1863, the Red Lake and Pembina Bands ceded about 7.5
million acres of land in the Red River region of North Dakota and
Minnesota to the federal government, according to a 1971 report
from the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs and a 1982
report from the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs.

In 1905, the Pembinas ceded roughly 10 million acres of land west
of the Red River area to the government for a price of 10 cents an
acre as part of what is known as the "Ten Cent Treaty," according
to the 1982 report. The report said 8 million acres of the ceded
land "extended from the present day north central part of North
Dakota to the Canadian border."

In 1964 and 1980, the Pembinas were awarded additional compensation
for the land ceded in the 1863 treaty and more than 8 million acres
of the land ceded in the "Ten Cent Treaty," respectively, according
to the lawsuit website and the 1982 report. These funds were put
into trust in the Pembina Judgement Fund (PJF).

At the request of tribal leaders and with the approval of Congress,
per capita payments from the fund ranging from $44 to $1,400 were
made to eligible recipients in 1984, 1988, 1990, and 1994,
according to an article published in the first 2006 issue of the
NARF Legal Review.

In 1988, leaders of the Turtle Mountain Chippewa Band of Chippewa
Indians "were dismayed at the overall lack of money available for
distribution" in the per capita distribution, the article said. The
tribe then requested an audit from the Interior Department Office
of the Inspector General and "also hired independent accountants
who confirmed to the tribe that on this issue, 'you don't need an
accounting firm, you need a law firm.'"

The Peltier v. Haaland class action breach of trust lawsuit was
filed in 1992. [GN]

CHURCHILL CAPITAL: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 6 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that a class action
lawsuit has commenced in the on behalf of investors who purchased
Churchill Capital Corp IV ("Churchill Capital") (NYSE: CCIV)
between January 11, 2021 and February 22, 2021.

If you suffered a loss, contact us at the link below. There is no
cost or obligation to you.
http://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/churchill-capital-corp-iv-loss-submission-form?prid=16996&wire=5

Allegations against CCIV include that the Company made materially
false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:
(1) Lucid was not prepared to deliver vehicles by spring of 2021;
(2) Lucid was projecting a production of 557 vehicles in 2021
instead of the 6,000 vehicles touted in the run-up to the merger
with Churchill; and (3) 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. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims
that investors suffered damages.

If you suffered a loss in Churchill Capital you have until July 6,
2021 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your
ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as
a lead plaintiff.

Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney that has represented
investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and
violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Vincent Wong, Esq.
39 East Broadway
Suite 304
New York, NY 10002
Tel. 212.425.1140
Fax. 866.699.3880
E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN]


CITY OF BILLINGS: Attempt to Take Over Costly Lawsuit Rejected
--------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Jorgensen at billingsgazette.com reports that an increasingly
costly class-action lawsuit against the City of Billings that has
dragged on for more than three years will now drag on even longer.

A judge denied a request by two Billings residents to intervene in
the lingering case, appoint a new attorney and get it over with.

The two residents, Andrew Billstein, an estate attorney, and Jacob
Troyer, a business owner, had hoped to take over as representatives
of the class and appoint Billings attorney John Heenan as counsel.
The trio had offered to do the work for free. Even the city's
attorneys thought the trio's intervening would be a good idea.

The battle is over an estimated $50 million the city charged
ratepayers over several decades in what it called franchise fees
for water, sewer services and garbage disposal.

When the trio's motion to take over was filed in October 2020, the
attorneys' fees in the case had already topped $1.5 million. Those
fees are now closer to $2 million.

"So far, the only ones who benefit from this case are the lawyers,"
Heenan argued in a court brief.

Paradoxically, win or lose the suit, Billings residents will have
to pay. If they win, the city may be ordered to rebate to residents
as much as $25 million of the collected fees, plus the plaintiffs'
attorneys' fees. That sum, however, because it's city money, would
come from taxpayers, and city officials have said paying it may
force cuts to other city services including public safety. If
residents lose, they're on the hook for attorneys' fees from both
sides.

In his ruling denying the motion to intervene, Judge Mike Salvagni
said he doubted the interveners' sincerity, calling their concerns
a pretext. The case was assigned to Salvagni, a retired district
judge, because all Yellowstone County judges would have had a
conflict of interest.

"While proposed interveners denounce the city for being 'stubborn
in paying lawyers to defend this claim . . . . to the detriment of
the city taxpayers,' they provide no evidence that they have ever
protested the city's waste of funds or protested the alleged
illegal sales taxes the city began imposing on ratepayers in
1992."

The judge also felt the interveners attempting to take over after
nearly three years of litigation "raises question about their
motives."

Matthew Monforton, a Bozeman attorney representing the plaintiffs,
said all the motion to intervene did was prolong the suit "and
inflict more cost on taxpayers."

Now, it's up to the city to end it, he said. "And, they can do that
any time they want to make an offer."

Back in March 2018, Monforton said he offered to settle with the
city for $20,000. The city declined, Monforton has said, leading to
the class action suit being filed in May 2018.

The city began collecting the so-called franchise fees as early as
1992. Typically, a franchise fee is charged by a utility or other
entity and paid to the city as a sort of rent for using public
property to run its pipes, poles or wires. In the lawsuit, city
residents called the fees an illegal sales tax.

The city has insisted the fees were legal, but stopped collecting
them after the lawsuit was filed.

Already, the two parties in the suit have participated in several
settlement conferences and were finally ordered to mediation in May
2020.

As eager as Monforton said he is to get the case over with, he
isn't budging on at least one condition of settlement, that the
city, or a judge, acknowledge that the collection of the franchise
fees was illegal.

"We have to have something on the record that those fees were
illegal in order to prevent the city from charging them again," he
said.

Heenan said Friday even if he can't intervene in the case, he and
other city residents will continue to keep an eye on it as the
costs of the lawsuit mount.

Monforton's fees "are coming out of our tax dollars," Heenan said.
"That money should be used by the city for filling potholes, or
funding the police or fire department, things that keep us safe."
[GN]

COAST TO COAST: Fails to Pay Proper OT Wages, Parker Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------
SHARONNA PARKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. COAST TO COAST CARPORTS, INC., and JORGE
ZAVALA, Defendants, Case No. 2:21-cv-02110-PKH (W.D. Ark., June 11,
2021) brings this collective action complaint for its alleged
violations of the overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the overtime provisions of the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act.

The Plaintiff, who was employed by the Defendants as an hourly-paid
employee to perform the work necessary to its business, claims that
the Defendant failed to properly pay his and other similarly
situated employees overtime compensation. Although the Defendant
paid them for all the hours they have worked in excess of 40 hours
per week at the rate of one and one-half times his regular rates of
pay, the Defendant failed to include the commissions that were to
them in their regular rates when calculating their overtime pay,
the Plaintiff says.

Coast to Coast Carports, Inc. manufactures and installs carports,
garages and barns. Jorge Zavala is the owner. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Courtney Lowery, Esq.
          Josh Sanford, Esq.
          SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
          Kirkpatrick Plaza
          10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510
          Little Rock, AR 72211
          Tel: (501) 221-0088
          Fax: (888) 787-2040
          E-mail: courtney@sanfordlawfirm.com
                  josh@sanfordlawfirm.com

COLLICUTT ENERGY: Hernandez Sues Over Unpaid Compensations
----------------------------------------------------------
Robert Hernandez, on behalf of himself and others v. COLLICUTT
ENERGY SERVICES INC. and DOES 1 to 25, inclusive, Case No.
21STOV21135 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 7, 2021), is
brought against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum wages and
compensations in violation of the California Labor Code.

The complaint alleges that Collicutt did not provide Plaintiff and
other similarly situated aggrieved employees with the minimum wages
to which they were entitled for all work performed and did not
compensate him and others for all hours worked pursuant to
California Labor Code sections 1194, 1197 and 1197.1. This is so
because Plaintiff and others were not paid for all hours worked and
for all hours wherein Plaintiff and other employees were under the
control of Collicutt.

The Plaintiff started working for Collicutt on December 2020 as a
parts technician, but also did some retail work in terms of selling
parts.

The Defendant is a Delaware Corporation, doing business in the
County of Los Angeles, State of California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Harout Messrelian, Esq.
          MESSRELIAN LAW INC.
          500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Phone: (818) 484-6531
          Facsimile: (818) 956-1983
          Email: hm@messrelianlaw.com


CONOPCO INC: Huskey Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri
-------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Drew Huskey, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Conopco, Inc. doing business as:
Unilever, Does 1 through 10, was removed to the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri on June 17, 2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:21-cv-00710 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.

Conopco, Inc., doing business as Unilever --
https://www.conopco.com/ -- provides personal care products. The
Company offers perfumes, soaps, and shampoos, as well as food
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.

The Defendant is represented by:

          James Muehlberger, Esq.
          SHOOK HARDY LLP - Kansas City
          2555 Grand Blvd., 19th Floor
          Kansas City, MO 64108
          Phone: (816) 474-6550
          Fax: (816) 421-5547
          Email: jmuehlberger@shb.com


CONOPCO INC: Sandbach Fraud Suit Removed to E.D. Missouri
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Jennifer Sandbach, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Conopco, Inc. doing business as:
Unilever, Does 1 through 10, was removed to the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri on June 17, 2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:21-cv-00706 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.

Conopco, Inc., doing business as Unilever --
https://www.conopco.com/ -- provides personal care products. The
Company offers perfumes, soaps, and shampoos, as well as food
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff appears pro se.

The Defendant is represented by:

          James Muehlberger, Esq.
          SHOOK HARDY LLP - Kansas City
          2555 Grand Blvd., 19th Floor
          Kansas City, MO 64108
          Phone: (816) 474-6550
          Fax: (816) 421-5547
          Email: jmuehlberger@shb.com


CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Frank R. Cruz Reminds of December 16 Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed on behalf of persons and entities that
purchased or otherwise acquired ContextLogic Inc. ("ContextLogic"
or the "Company") (NASDAQ: WISH) common stock: (1) between December
16, 2020 and May 12, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"); and/or
(2) pursuant or traceable to the registration statement and
prospectus issued on connection with the Company's initial public
offering conducted on or about December 16, 2020 (the "IPO" or
"Offering"). ContextLogic investors have until July 16, 2021 to
file a lead plaintiff motion.

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

In December 2020, ContextLogic completed its initial public
offering ("IPO") in which it sold 46 million shares at $24 per
share.

On March 8, 2021, ContextLogic reported its fourth quarter and
fiscal year 2020 financial results for the period ended December
31, 2020, disclosing that by the time of its December 2020 IPO,
ContextLogic's monthly active users ("MAUs") had already "declined
10% YoY during Q4 to 104 million, primarily in some emerging
markets outside of Europe and North America where Wish temporarily
de-emphasized advertising and customer acquisition as the company
worked through logistics challenges it faced earlier in the year."

On this news, ContextLogic's common stock price fell $1.83, more
than 10%, to close at $15.94 per share on March 8, 2021, thereby
injuring investors.

On May 12, 2021, ContextLogic reported its first quarter 2021
financial results and disclosed that MAUs had declined another 7%
to just 101 million.

On this news, ContextLogic's stock price fell $3.36 per share, or
approximately 29%, to close at $8.11 per share on May 12, 2021,
significantly below the IPO price of $24 per share.

The complaint filed alleges that throughout the Class Period,
Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as
well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants failed to disclose to investors that: (1) ContextLogic's
fourth quarter 2020 MAUs had declined materially and were not then
growing; and (2) as a result of the foregoing, defendants
materially overstated the Company's business metrics and financial
prospects.

If you purchased ContextLogic securities during the Class Period,
you may move the Court no later than July 16, 2021 to ask the Court
to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you
need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of
your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the
Class. If you purchased ContextLogic securities, have information
or would like to learn more about these claims, or have any
questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests
with respect to these matters, please contact Frank R. Cruz, of The
Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz, 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100,
Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-914-5007, by email to
info@frankcruzlaw.com, or visit our website at
www.frankcruzlaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your
mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares purchased.
[GN]

CONTEXTLOGIC INC: Kirby McInerney Reminds of July 16 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP reminds investors that a class
action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California on behalf of those who acquired
ContextLogic Inc. ("ContextLogic" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: WISH)
securities between December 13, 2020 and May 12, 2021, both dates
inclusive (the "Class Period"); and/or ContextLogic common stock
pursuant and/or traceable to the offering documents issued in
connection with the Company's initial public offering conducted on
December 16, 2020 (the "IPO" or "Offering"). Investors have until
July 16, 2021 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead
plaintiff in the lawsuit.

ContextLogic, headquartered in San Francisco, California, is a
global mobile e-commerce company that operates the Wish platform
that connects its value-conscious user base to merchants. Wish
generates revenue by charging merchants a commission on sales made
in its marketplace. On December 16 2020, ContextLogic completed its
IPO in which it sold 46 million shares at $24 per share.

On March 8, 2021, ContextLogic reported its fourth quarter and
fiscal year 2020 financial results for the period ended December
31, 2020, disclosing that by the time of its December 2020 IPO,
ContextLogic's monthly active users ("MAUs") had already "declined
10% YoY during Q4 to 104 million, primarily in some emerging
markets outside of Europe and North America where Wish temporarily
de-emphasized advertising and customer acquisition as the company
worked through logistics challenges it faced earlier in the year."
On this news, ContextLogic's stock price declined by $1.83 per
share, or approximately 10.3%, from $17.77 per share to close at
$15.94 per share on March 8, 2021, thereby injuring investors.

On May 12, 2021, ContextLogic reported its first quarter 2021
financial results and disclosed that MAUs had declined another 7%
to just 101 million. On this news, ContextLogic's stock price
declined by $3.36 per share, or approximately 29.3%, from $11.47
per share to close at $8.11 per share on May 13, 2021,
significantly below the IPO price of $24 per share.

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as
failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants
failed to disclose to investors that: (1) ContextLogic's fourth
quarter 2020 MAUs had declined materially and were not then
growing; and (2) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants
materially overstated the Company's business metrics and financial
prospects.
If you purchased or otherwise acquired ContextLogic securities,
have information, or would like to learn more about these claims,
please contact Thomas W. Elrod of Kirby McInerney LLP at
212-371-6600, by email at investigations@kmllp.com, or by filling
out this contact form, to discuss your rights or interests with
respect to these matters without any cost to you.

Kirby McInerney LLP is a New York-based plaintiffs' law firm
concentrating in securities, antitrust, whistleblower, and consumer
litigation. The firm's efforts on behalf of shareholders in
securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions
of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at
Kirby McInerney LLP's website: http://www.kmllp.com.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some
jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.

Contacts
Kirby McInerney LLP
Thomas W. Elrod, Esq.
212-371-6600
https://www.kmllp.com
investigations@kmllp.com [GN]

DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 13 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------------
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has
commenced on behalf of shareholders of Danimer Scientific, Inc.
Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the
deadline listed to petition the court. Further details about the
case can be found at the link provided. There is no cost or
obligation to you.

DNMR Shareholders Click Here:
https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/danimer-scientific-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1

Danimer Scientific, Inc. (NYSE:DNMR)

DNMR Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased October 5, 2020
- May 4, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 13, 2021
TO LEARN MORE, VISIT:
https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/danimer-scientific-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1

According to the filed complaint, during the class period, Danimer
Scientific, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Danimer had deficient internal
controls; (ii) as a result, the Company had misrepresented, inter
alia, its operations' size and regulatory compliance; (iii)
Defendants had overstated Nodax's biodegradability, particularly in
oceans and landfills; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public
statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant
times.

You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request that the
court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any
recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

Levi & Korsinsky is a nationally recognized firm with offices in
New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's
attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing
investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of
millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney
advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
55 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10006
jlevi@levikorsinsky.com
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
www.zlk.com [GN]


DANIMER SCIENTIFIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 13 Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announce that class actions have
commenced on behalf of certain shareholders in the following
companies. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff
deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff.
There will be no obligation or cost to you.

Danimer Scientific, Inc. (NYSE:DNMR)

If you suffered a loss, contact us
at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/danimer-scientific-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16957&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 13, 2021
Class Period: October 5, 2020 - May 4, 2021

Allegations against DNMR include that: (i) Danimer had deficient
internal controls; (ii) as a result, the Company had
misrepresented, inter alia, its operations' size and regulatory
compliance; (iii) Defendants had overstated Nodax's
biodegradability, particularly in oceans and landfills; and (iv) as
a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and
misleading at all relevant times.

To learn more contact Vincent Wong, Esq. either via email
vw@wongesq.com or by telephone at 212.425.1140.

Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented
investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and
violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN]

DEVON ENERGY: $28 Million Settlement Over Gas Royalties OK'd
------------------------------------------------------------
Devon Energy Production Co. will pay $28 million to Texas well
owners who say they were underpaid royalties after a federal court
in the state granted final approval of a class action settlement
and plan of allocation.

The settlement is fair and reasonable considering the complexity
and duration of the case, and the "risks involved in establishing
liability and damages," according to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of Texas. The plan of allocation is also fair
and reasonable to the class, the court said.

Class counsel was awarded about $9.3 million in attorneys' fees,
according to the ruling. The court also approved about $612,000 in
litigation expenses and $80,000 to be divided evenly among the
named plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs argued they were underpaid millions of dollars in
royalties for processing gas extracted from wells at the Bridgeport
Gas Processing Plant owned by Devon Energy's affiliate, Devon Gas
Services, between 2008 and 2014.

Devon Gas Services deducted 17.5% of the value of residue gas and
natural gas liquids as a processing fee, the lawsuit says, which
was improperly passed on to class members by reducing their royalty
payments. Devon Energy could have obtained a higher price through a
lower processing fee, but it "failed to do so in order to secretly
create a lucrative profit center," according to the complaint.

Devon Energy has denied any wrongdoing, the court said.

Judge Ed Kinkeade issued the final approval.

Wick Phillips, Seidel Law Firm PC, Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check
LLP, and Mattingly & Roselius PLLC represents the class as class
counsel. Hedrick Kring PLLC represents the class as local counsel.
Thompson & Knight LLP represents Devon.

The case is Seeligson v. Devon Energy Prod. Co., N.D. Tex., No.
3:16-cv-00082, 6/16/21. [GN]


DIANNE BIGEAGLE: Federal Court Tosses Out Attempted MMIWG Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Heather Polischuk at leaderpost.com reports that her attempted
class action lawsuit having been tossed out, Dianne BigEagle has
vowed this won't be the end of her battle for missing and murdered
Indigenous women and girls like her daughter.

"I'm bound and determined to get justice for my daughter, and
nothing's going to stop me . . . . ," said BigEagle, whose
22-year-old daughter Danita went missing in 2007. "I've been in
this fight too long for all of these girls."

Having found the claim "overly broad," a Federal Court judge
quashed the class action which was to represent family and
community members of missing and murdered Indigenous women and
girls (MMIWG).

In September, legal counsel for the families on one side and the
federal government on the other argued in a Regina courtroom on
whether the claim of BigEagle should be allowed to proceed through
court as a class action. Federal Court Justice Glennys McVeigh
issued her decision late last month.

It was publicly posted this week.

"This motion is dismissed given that it is plain and obvious that
this Statement of Claim will fail," McVeigh wrote. "That does not
mean that individual actions cannot proceed."

McVeigh said there were a number of "deficiencies" with the
pleadings, despite having been amended several times.

"This matter will not be fixed by further amendments," she wrote.

She determined the individual issues involved "span far more issues
than the common issues."

"This is an overly broad claim that when the Pleading(s) were
reviewed had no material facts to support a rational connection to
the arguments made," McVeigh wrote.

She dismissed the motion for class action certification and struck
the statement of claim without leave to amend.

BigEagle filed the claim in 2018. By the time it came before
McVeigh, a total of 43 victims - relating to incidents throughout
Canada between 1968 and 2016 - were listed in the motion record.

The proposed class action was to ask for declarations and monetary
damages for families and community members of listed victims. The
claim alleged a failing by RCMP to properly investigate and
prosecute cases involving MMIWG as well as members of the
2SLGBTQQIA community.

BigEagle's lawyer Tony Merchant said his office will be filing an
appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal.

"We were surprised . . . . ," he said. "(In) the statement of
claim, I ran through the many and myriad problems with Canada's
handling of murdered and missing (people) with details that came
from the (National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous
Women and Girls) report and we thought overwhelmingly justify
certification."

Merchant said, short of a successful appeal, the decision would
effectively freeze many or all would-be claims.

"These are David and Goliath circumstances," he said. "While I
don't exactly think of myself as a David, I also recognize the
battle against big institutions is hard. The way class actions work
in being effective is if you gather together hundreds of people or
maybe thousands of people who have similar claims, then all
together they can carry the freight of the legal expense and the
battle. It's just unrealistic to think that any single family or
even two or three or four families getting together are going to
find a law firm that will take on the Government of Canada and the
RCMP over these issues. The battle's just too big a battle."

With members of some impacted families passing away due to age and
illness, BigEagle said she's made promises to them to take up the
battle on their behalf.

The attempted claim alleged systemic negligence, breach of common
law duties, breach of the Charter and other rights, and breach
against the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act.

While McVeigh pointed out her role at this point was not to
evaluate evidence, she added she needed to assess material facts
contained within the plaintiff's pleadings. McVeigh determined
neither the RCMP Act nor the Criminal Code "support an undivided
loyalty (by RCMP) towards the claimant class" or create a "trust
relationship" between the two over and above what's included in
general public duty - even though the claimants are considered
vulnerable.

Further, she found the RCMP doesn't have a "private duty of care"
to the families and community members as might exist in cases like
a police officer-prisoner situation. She said establishing the
necessary basis to proceed became even trickier given many of the
allegations involve non-RCMP police services.

McVeigh added courts have been "clear and unequivocal" that duty of
care applicable to a negligent investigation "is to a person that
is being investigated."

"This is too large of (a) leap to go from someone that is being
investigated to a victim or victim's family or members of this
class," she wrote.

While the claim alleges Charter breaches related to systemic racism
and anti-Indigenous approaches within the RCMP, McVeigh said
Charter rights are "personal to an individual," not to that
individual's family or community members.

McVeigh further found claims of genocide cannot stand given the
claimant alleges negligence, which doesn't include the intent
necessary for genocide. Additionally, she said nothing in the
pleadings shows the RCMP engaged in acts defined as a crime against
humanity as part of "a widespread or systemic attack directed
against a civilian population." [GN]

EB GOLF MEDIA: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against EB Golf Media LLC.
The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. EB Golf Media LLC, Case No.
1:21-cv-05368 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

EB Golf Media LLC doing business as Golf Magazine --
https://golf.com/ -- is a sports magazine that provides everything
golf enthusiasts need to improve their game.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


ETERNAL BEVERAGES: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Eternal Beverages,
Inc. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated v. Eternal Beverages, Inc., Case
No. 1:21-cv-05366 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Eternal Beverages, Inc. -- https://www.eternalwater.com/ -- is
located in Walnut Creek, California and is part of the Food
Wholesalers Industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


FITNESS INT'L: Nagy Sues Over Illegal Electronic Fund Transfers
---------------------------------------------------------------
ZOLTON NAGY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, LLC dba L.A. FITNESS,
a California corporation; and DOES 1-20 inclusive, Defendants, Case
No. 2:21-cv-04766 (C.D. Cal., June 11, 2021) is a class action
complaint brought against the Defendants for their alleged
violations of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, Consumer Legal
Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law, and Conversion.

From approximately 2015 through June 2020, the Plaintiff has paid
for membership at the Defendant's L.A. Fitness brand health and
exercise facilities located in Los Angeles County, California.

The Plaintiff alleges that since the Defendants automatically
withdraw monthly gym membership fees from its members' personal
bank accounts via electronic fund transfers (EFTs) as its standard
practice, the Defendants illegally made recurring automatic EFTs
from his bank account from approximately July 2018 through June
2020. The Plaintiff has discovered that the Defendant had been
withdrawing membership fees for both gym memberships from his
personal bank accounts without prior written authorization.
Although the Defendant acknowledged withdrawal of funds and agreed
to refund 3 of the unauthorized payments, the Defendants refused to
refund the balance of the remaining payments estimated to be at
least $600, the suit says.

Fitness International, LLC operates a brand health and exercise
facilities. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


FREQUENCY THERA: Bronstein Gewirtz Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC notifies investors that a class
action lawsuit has been filed against Frequency Therapeutics, Inc.
("Frequency" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: FREQ) and certain of its
officers, on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise
acquired Frequency securities between November 16, 2020 and March
22, 2021, (the "Class Period"). Such investors are encouraged to
join this case by visiting the firm's site: www.bgandg.com/freq.

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

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose that: (1) Frequency's development and commercialization of
a hearing loss treatment titled "FX-322" was not producing the
results desired by Frequency; (2) FX-322's ongoing clinical study
was not as positive as Frequency portrayed it; and (3) 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. When the true details
entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered
damages.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to
review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm's site:
www.bgandg.com/freq or you may contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or
his Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein, Gewirtz
& Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in
Frequency you have until August 2, 2021 to request that the Court
appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any
recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation
boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of
litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to
representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class
action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general
corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities
arbitration. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee
similar outcomes.[GN]

FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Glancy Prongay Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the
upcoming August 2, 2021 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in
the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or
otherwise acquired Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. ("Frequency" or
"the Company") (NASDAQ: FREQ) common stock between November 16,
2020 and March 22, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period").

If you suffered a loss on your Frequency investments or would like
to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss
under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact
information at
https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/frequency-therapeutics-inc/. You
can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150,
Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at
shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.

Frequency Therapeutics has conducted several clinical studies
evaluating the safety and effectiveness of FX-322, the most
significant which was a Phase 2a study that began in October 2019.

In April 2020, Frequency's Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"), David
L. Lucchino, began selling his shares of Frequency, totaling over
350,000 shares sold and earning over $10.5 million.

On March 23, 2021, before the market opened, Frequency disclosed in
a press release disappointing interim results of the Phase 2a
study, revealing that subjects with mild to moderate SNHL did not
demonstrate improvements in hearing measures versus placebo.

On this news, Frequency's shares fell $28.30, or 78%, to close at
$7.99 per share, thereby damaging investors.

The complaint filed alleges that throughout the Class Period,
Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as
well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that Frequency's Phase 2a study
did not yield positive results to support the commercialization of
FX-322; and (2) that, as a result, Defendants' statements about its
business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Frequency securities during
the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than August 2,
2021 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative
class action lawsuit. To be a member of the class action you need
not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your
choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class
action. If you wish to learn more about this class action, or if
you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights
or interests with respect to the pending class action lawsuit,
please contact Charles Linehan, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park
East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-201-9150,
Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com,
or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com. If you inquire by email
please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of
shares purchased. [GN]

FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Kirby McInerney Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP announces that a securities
class action lawsuit has been filed in the U.S. District Court for
the District of Massachusetts on behalf of those who acquired
Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. ("Frequency" or the "Company")
(NASDAQ: FREQ) securities from November 16, 2020 through March 22,
2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Investors have until August
2, 2021 to apply to the Court to be appointed as lead plaintiff in
the lawsuit.

Frequency Therapeutics is a Massachusetts-based pharmaceutical
company focused on the development of treatments for hearing loss,
including its drug "FX-322." Frequency Therapeutics has conducted
several clinical studies evaluating the safety and effectiveness of
FX-322, the most significant of which was a Phase 2a study that
began in October 2019.

In April 2020, Frequency's Chief Executive Officer ("CEO"), David
L. Lucchino, began selling his shares of Frequency, totaling over
350,000 shares sold and earning over $10.5 million.

On March 23, 2021, before the market opened, Frequency disclosed in
a press release disappointing interim results of the Phase 2a
study, revealing that subjects who had mild to moderate SNHL did
not demonstrate improvements in hearing measures versus placebo. On
this news, Frequency's stock price declined by $28.30 per share, or
approximately 78%, from $36.29 per share to close at $7.99 per
share on March 23, 2021, thereby damaging investors.

The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as
failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants
failed to disclose: (1) that Frequency's Phase 2a study did not
yield positive results to support the commercialization of FX-322;
and (2) that, as a result, Defendants' statements about its
business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Frequency securities, have
information, or would like to learn more about these claims, please
contact Thomas W. Elrod of Kirby McInerney LLP at 212-371-6600, by
email at investigations@kmllp.com, or by filling out this contact
form, to discuss your rights or interests with respect to these
matters without any cost to you.

Kirby McInerney LLP is a New York-based plaintiffs' law firm
concentrating in securities, antitrust, whistleblower, and consumer
litigation. The firm's efforts on behalf of shareholders in
securities litigation have resulted in recoveries totaling billions
of dollars. Additional information about the firm can be found at
Kirby McInerney LLP's website: http://www.kmllp.com.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some
jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.

Contacts
Kirby McInerney LLP
Thomas W. Elrod, Esq.
212-371-6600
https://www.kmllp.com
investigations@kmllp.com [GN]

FREQUENCY THERAPEUTICS: Klein Law Firm Reminds of Aug. 2 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been
filed on behalf of shareholders of Frequency Therapeutics, Inc.
There is no cost to participate in the suit. If you suffered a
loss, you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that
the court appoint you as lead plaintiff.

Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ:FREQ)
Class Period: November 16, 2020 - March 22, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: August 2, 2021

The FREQ lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period,
Frequency Therapeutics, Inc. made materially false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: the Company's
Phase 2a trial results failed to live up to the Company's
expectations as the results revealed no discernable difference
between FX-322 and the placebo. In spite of the disappointing
results, the Company continued to conduct the Phase 2a study while
releasing positive statements in earnings calls, press releases,
SEC filings, and pharmaceutical presentations about FX-322's
potential. These statements materially misled the market and
artificially inflated the value of Frequency's common stock.

Learn about your recoverable losses in FREQ:
https://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/frequency-therapeutics-inc-loss-submission-form?id=16978&from=1

Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you
serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class
period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J.
Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages
provided.

J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities
litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar
outcomes.

CONTACT:
J. Klein, Esq.
Empire State Building
350 Fifth Avenue
59th Floor
New York, NY 10118
jk@kleinstocklaw.com
Telephone: (212) 616-4899
Fax: (347) 558-9665
www.kleinstocklaw.com [GN]



FRESENIUS USA: Fenske Sues Over Wage and Hour Violations
--------------------------------------------------------
Michael Fenske, individually and on behalf of others similarly all
situated v. FRESENIUS USA MANUFACTURING, INC; and DOES 1 through
20, inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2115114 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Bernardino Cty., June 7, 2021), is brought alleging that the
Defendants have engaged in a systematic pattern of wage and hour
violations under the California Labor Code and Industrial Welfare
Commission ("IWC") Wage Orders, all of which contribute to the
Defendants' deliberate unfair competition.

The Defendants have increased their profits by violating state wage
and hours laws by, among other things; failing to pay all wages
(including minimum and overtime wages); failing to provide lawful
meal periods or compensation in lieu thereof; failing to authorize
or permit lawful rest breaks or provide compensation in lieu
thereof; failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements;
failing to pay all wages due upon separation of employment, says
the complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt
employee at the Defendants' California business location.

The Defendants are in the kidney and medical dialysis centers
supply industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kashif Haque, Esq.
          Samuel A. Wong, Esq.
          Jessica L. Campbell, Esq.
          AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC
          9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Phone: (949) 379-6250
          Facsimile: (949) 379-6251


GENERAL MILLS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against General Mills, Inc.
The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. General Mills, Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-05367 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

General Mills, Inc. -- https://www.generalmills.com/ -- is an
American multinational manufacturer and marketer of branded
consumer foods sold through retail stores.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


GULF OF MEXICO: Charter Operators Fight Back Against Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------------
Steve Bittenbender at nationalfisherman.com reports that a week
after receiving class-action status in its lawsuit against the U.S.
Department of Commerce, NOAA, and NMFS, a nonpartisan civil rights
group has filed an amended lawsuit regarding NMFS' plan to monitor
charter boats in the Gulf of Mexico.

A group of 11 small businesses and fishing-boat owners claim that a
policy requiring electronic monitoring and reporting infringes on
their operations. Last July, NOAA issued an order to electronically
submit reports for each fishing trip, even if no fish were caught.
It also requires boats to notify the agency before departing on any
kind of trip.

"Warrantless GPS surveillance of even a suspected criminal's
vehicle is indisputably unconstitutional," said Sheng Li, a lawyer
for the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA). "Yet, NOAA is
mandating 24-hour GPS surveillance of countless boat owners for
running legitimate businesses. It does not take a legal scholar to
spot the constitutional violation."

The amended lawsuit filed June 9 in a U.S. District Court in Baton
Rouge, La., also objects to NOAA mandating captain reveal charter
fees, number of paying passengers, and the amount of fuel used.
That information, the plaintiffs claim, does not help determine the
status of fishing stocks in the Gulf of Mexico.

The amended complaint came one week after U.S. District Judge Susie
Morgan approved the plaintiffs' request for class-action status.
With that designation, more than 1,000 charter operators are now
eligible to join the case, according to an NCLA statement.

The federal government opposed the motion for class-action status.
In a filing on Dec. 11, 2020, U.S. Deputy Assistant Attorney
General Jean E. Williams and Shampa Panda, a U.S. Justice
Department trial attorney for wildlife and marine resources, said
granting class-action status would lead to delays in the case and
increase the costs.

They also said that there was "significant disagreement" among
charter-boat owners.

"A survey of the administrative record that was lodged in this case
reveals that there are a number of comments from the owners and
operators of federal permitted charter vessels on the proposed rule
that demonstrate that a number of permit holders are in favor of
the final rule, for reasons ranging for accountability to accuracy
in data collection," the government argued.

However, Morgan determined that the plaintiffs met the standard for
class-action status.

The plaintiffs seek a decision that the electronic monitoring order
is unconstitutional as the data charter owners and operators
collect is private property. [GN]

H.E.W. AND ASSOCIATES: Fabricant Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against H.E.W. and
Associates, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Terry Fabricant,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
H.E.W. and Associates, LLC, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and each
of them, Case No. 2:21-cv-04944 (C.D. Cal., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Hew & Associates is a communications consulting firm.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


H.L. GROSS & BRO: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against H. L. Gross & Bro.
Garden City, Inc. The case is styled as Juan Roman, on behalf of
himself and all other persons similarly situated v. H. L. Gross &
Bro. Garden City, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05375 (S.D.N.Y., June 17,
2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

H.L. Gross & Bro. Jeweler -- https://www.hlgross.com/ -- has been
Long Island's premier diamond jewelry and watch destination since
1910.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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



HAIN CELESTIAL: Maestre Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hain Celestial Group,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Brianna Maestre, Salvatore
Stiles, on behalf of themselves and all other individuals similarly
situated v. Hain Celestial Group, Inc., Does 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 605375/2021 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Nassau Cty., June 7,
2021).

The nature of suit is stated as Commercial Division.

The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. -- http://www.hain.com/-- is an
American food company whose main focus is foods and personal care
products.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          CARLSON LYNCH LLP
          1133 Penn Ave., Fl. 5
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Phone: (412) 322-9243

The Defendants are represented by:

          JENNER& BLOCK LLP
          919 Third Avenue 37eh Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Phone: (212) 891-1624


HERFF JONES: Furcinito Suit Asserts Credit Card Fraud
-----------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Furcinito and Miriam Barnicle, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Herff Jones, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 21-cv-01661 (S.D. Ind., June 11, 2021), seeks
all monetary and non-monetary relief allowed by law, including
restitution of all profits stemming from unfair, unlawful and
fraudulent business practices, declaratory and injunctive relief,
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under the New York Deceptive
Practices Act of the New York General Business Law and the
Wisconsin Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Herff Jones manufactures and sells educational recognition and
achievement products and motivational materials with production
facilities across the United States and Canada.

Barnicle, a resident of Milwaukee, Wisconsin, used her Discover
credit card to make a purchase with Herff Jones for approximately
$8.39 to pay for the shipping costs associated with the cap and
gown for her graduation from Alverno College. Following her
purchase with Herff Jones, seven fraudulent charges amounting
totaling approximately $112 were made on her card.

Furcinito, a resident of New York, used her Apple credit card to
make a purchase with Herff Jones in the amount of $8.59 to pay for
the shipping costs associated with her cap and gown for her
graduation from Syracuse University. Following her purchase with
Herff Jones, an unauthorized fraudulent charge at a Best Buy store
located in El Paso, Texas was made in the amount of $2,995.99.
[BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Irwin B. Levin, Esq.
      Richard E. Shevitz, Esq.
      COHEN & MALAD, LLP
      One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
      Indianapolis, IN 46204
      Tel: (317) 636-6481
      Email: ilevin@cohenandmalad.com
             rshevitz@cohenandmalad.com

             - and -

      Robert Ahdoot, Esq.
      AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
      2600 W. Olive Ave., Suite 500
      Burbank, CA 91505
      Tel: (310) 474-9111
      Fax: (310) 474-8585
      Email: rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com

             - and -

      Andrew W. Ferich, Esq.
      AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
      201 King of Prussia Road, Suite 650
      Radnor, PA 19087
      Tel: (310) 474-9111
      Fax: (310) 474-8585
      Email: aferich@ahdootwolfson.com


HONEST PAWS: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Honest Paws LLC. The
case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Honest Paws LLC, Case No.
1:21-cv-05370 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Honest Paws -- https://www.honestpaws.com/ -- offers premium CBD
products for pets.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


HYUNDAI MOTOR: GV80 Subject of Class Action Filed by Boca Raton
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Boca Raton law firm claims that Hyundai GV80s - the SUV Tiger
Woods was driving at the time of his California crash - is unsafe
and unrepairable.

Marcus W. Corwin of Corwin Law in Boca Raton just filed a Federal
Class Action Lawsuit against Hyundai. The suit names Delray Beach
resident Dr. Barbara Feinstein as the named plaintiff on behalf of
the class, and accuses Hyundai of manufacturing a vehicle with
"instability and subpar performance, including shaking, shuddering,
vibrating and pulling."

Feinstein, alleges the suit, leased a 2021 Genesis GV80, only to
have it unusable for nearly half of the first 95 days of the lease.
Hyundai, says Feinstein, has been unable to repair the issues.

According to an advisory issued by the law firm, "Hyundai is
accused of promoting the GV80 luxury SUV despite being aware of
dangerous defects affecting the vehicle's drivability that are
documented in Korean news media and current customer message
boards."

Florida's Lemon Law requires vehicle owners to follow several
procedures to obtain a refund or new vehicle, including arbitration
in front of a three member panel. It was not immediately clear
whether Dr. Feinstein - or any of the class members - engaged in
the longstanding procedures set by the office of Florida's Attorney
General to resolve the alleged vehicle deficiencies. [GN]



JIM 'N NICK'S: Porter Sues Over Failure to Compensate OT Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lisa Porter, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated v.
Jim N Nicks Alabaster, LLC; Jim N Nicks Auburn, LLC; Jim 'N Nick's
Bar B Q Homewood, Inc.; Jim 'N Nick's Bar B Q Riverchase, Inc.; Jim
'N Nick's Bar B Q South, Inc.; Jim N Nicks Birmingham, LLC; Jim N
Nicks Gardendale, LLC; Jim N Nicks Jasper, LLC; Jim N Nicks
Management, LLC; Jim N Nicks Montgomery East, LLC; Jim 'N Nick's of
Huntsville, LLC; Jim N Nicks Trussville, LLC; Jim N Nicks
Tuscaloosa, LLC; Jim N Nicks 5 Points, LLC; Jim N Nicks Charleston,
LLC; Jim N Nicks Atlanta I, LLC, Jim N Nicks Memphis I, LLC; Jim N
Nicks Nashville, LLC; Jim N Nicks Nashville II, LLC; Brian Lyman;
John Haire; John Doe Corp. 1-10; and John Doe 1-10; Case No.
2:21-cv-01706-BHH (D.S.C., June 8, 2021), is brought to seek
appropriate monetary, declaratory, and equitable relief based on
Defendants' willful failure to compensate the Plaintiff with
overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants pay their servers a tip credit minimum wage of $2.13
per hour for the hours they work up to 40 hours each week. By
paying $2.13 per hour for regular rate hours, Defendants were
required to pay $5.755 per hour for all overtime hours worked.
Rather than paying $5.755 per hour, the Defendants paid $3.62 per
hour for each hour of overtime. As a result, the Defendants
underpay the Plaintiff and similarly situated servers by $2.134 per
hour ($5.755 - $3.62) for each hour worked in excess of 40 per
workweek. The Defendants underpaid their servers during each week
that the employees worked exclusively in a tipped wage capacity,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff Lisa Porter worked for Defendants at Jim 'N Nick's
Community Bar-B-Q at the Defendants' North Charleston, South
Carolina location.

The Defendants have operated Jim 'N Nick's Community Bar-B-Q.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Glenn V. Ohanesian, Esq.
          OHANESIAN & OHANESIAN
          504 North Kings Highway
          P. O. Box 2433
          Myrtle Beach, SC 29578
          Phone: 843-626-7193
          Facsimile: 843-492-5164
          Email: OhanesianLawFirm@cs.com


KAISER FOUNDATION: Settles Employment Class Action for $1.4M
------------------------------------------------------------
courthousenews.com reports that a class of call center staff for
Kaiser Foundation Hospitals reached a settlement with the health
care giant on claims it consistently failed to accurately pay
employees.

Kaiser employed staff in its medical call centers under categories
such as "telemedicine specialists," "customer support specialists,"
and "wellness specialists."

Former call center workers Monica Smith and Erika Sierra sued
Kaiser in 2018, claiming violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) and California laws governing wage and time-tracking
protocols for employees.

In their class action, Smith and Sierra said Kaiser failed to
accurately compensate employees for certain tasks performed during
breaks and after their shifts. The tasks included locating work
equipment, shredding patient notes, traveling to Kaiser training
locations, managing computer stations and commuting to meeting
places.

Kaiser also failed to reimburse its staff for certain
business-related expenditures, the plaintiffs said.

The parties have previously moved for preliminary approval of a
settlement and have since been denied twice. An initial agreement
in principle was reached in February 2019.

U.S. District Judge Karen S. Crawford denied the prior motions for
preliminary approval due to concerns over the structure of the
settlement and the scope of the proposed collective seeking remedy
of FLSA claims.

In October 2020, the parties filed amendments and corrections to
the proposed settlement and filed a third motion for preliminary
approval, which the court granted.

The settlement class includes employees who worked in Kaiser call
centers in San Diego between Feb. 21, 2013, and Feb. 18, 2021,
while the FLSA collective includes employees who worked in Kaiser
call centers in San Diego between Dec. 21, 2014, and Feb. 18, 2021

At a June 9 fairness hearing held by Crawford, no class members
filed objections to the settlement or appeared at the hearing. Six
of the 474 class and FLSA collective members requested to be
excluded from the settlement.

The agreement received final approval by Crawford and will provide
a gross settlement of $1,475,000 which, after relevant fees are
deducted, will amount to a $922,000 payment to class members. Class
members will receive an average payment of $1,971 with the highest
payment being $5,894.

Named plaintiffs Smith and Sierra will receive $7,500 and $2,500
incentive awards, respectively, while opt-in plaintiff Christa Fox
will receive $5,000.

The parties have allocated $203,000 of the net settlement to the
FLSA collective members.

Attorneys for the parties did not immediately respond to emailed
requests for comment on the settlement.

In exchange for the settlement payment, class members agree to
release Kaiser of any and all claims related to their lawsuit.

Crawford wrote in the June 15 order that the settlement satisfied
the four threshold requirements of numerosity, commonality,
typicality, and adequacy of representation.

"The court finds that the proposed class representatives and their
counsel have vigorously prosecuted this action, leading ultimately
to the settlement now before it, and have faithfully discharged
their duties as fiduciaries to the absent class members," Crawford
wrote. "The court finds no evidence of collusion or antagonism.
Furthermore, counsel for the class is experienced in employment
litigation, and has successfully litigated numerous wage-and hour
class actions such as this one." [GN]


LEPOZZI INC: Roman Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lepozzi, Inc. The
case is styled as Juan Roman, on behalf of himself and all other
persons similarly situated v. Lepozzi, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05376
(S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Lepozzi, Inc. doing business as Lauren B Jewelry --
https://www.laurenbjewelry.com/ -- in New York City specializes in
custom engagement ring design, loose diamonds, fine jewelry,
moissanites and more.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
          150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr
          New York, NY 10003
          Phone: (212) 228-9795
          Email: nyjg@aol.com
                 michael@gottlieb.legal


LIMETREE BAY: Boynes Sues Over Harmful Effects of Refinery
----------------------------------------------------------
Clifford Boynes, Chris Christian, Margaret Thompson, Delia
Almestica, Carlos Christian, Minor Child "J.M.M.", Minor Child
"V.M.", Minor Child "Z.R.C.", Minor Child "M.M", Anna
Rexach-Constantine, Minor Child "O.N.", Mervyn Constantine, Neal
Davis, Edna Santiago, Guidrycia Wells, O'Shay Wells, Aaron G.
Maynard, Verne McSween, Rochelle Gomez, Joan Mathurin, Myrna
Mathurin, Ann Marie John-Baptiste, Warrington Chapman, Loeba
John-Baptiste-Pelle, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. LIMETREE BAY VENTURES, LLC; LIMETREE BAY
REFINING, LLC; LIMETREE BAY TERMINALS, LLC; ARCLIGHT CAPITAL
PARTNERS, LLC; FREEPOINT COMMODITIES, LLC; EIG GLOBAL ENERGY
PARTNERS, LLC; BP PRODUCTS NORTH AMERICA, INC.; and JOHN DOES
1-100, Case No. 1:21-cv-00252-WAL-GWC (D.V.I., June 7, 2021), is
brought in order to seek adequate redress for the harm caused by
the Defendant's Refinery and the operation of that refinery.

According to the complaint, the Defendants, who own a "world class
refinery" called the Limetree Bay Refinery, threaten the integrity
of the citizens who live in St. Croix as well as the island's
tourist economy due to the Refinery's wrongful emission and
discharge of toxic substances, gases and odors including (but not
limited to) oil, hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, petroleum
hydrocarbons, and other chemicals and particulates.

Previously, the Refinery had been closed due, in part, to other
environmental disasters which threatened the island's citizens and
its local economy; however, the Refinery was reopened in February
of 2021. It took less than a month for the first environmental
disaster to occur since the Refinery's reopening – and numerous
incidents have occurred since then, including the Refinery
"showering oil on local residents twice, spewing sulfuric gases
into the surrounding area, and releasing hydrocarbons into the
air." In May of 2021, the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA")
shut the refinery down, claiming that the Refinery's continued
operation was an "imminent" threat to the health of people on the
island

The Plaintiffs and the members of the putative Class have been
subjected to unreasonable odors, gases, vapors, and fumes which
contain the aforementioned Toxins due to the Defendants' unlawful
operation of the Refinery. Particulate matter has been released
into the air containing Toxins, and visible droplets of oil have
literally fallen from the sky onto the island and the people who
reside there, says the complaint.

The Plaintiffs are citizens of St. Croix, United States Virgin
Islands who live and/or work in communities adjacent to or located
downwind from the Refinery, were harmed by the Defendants' Refinery
and its operations, and suffered damages as a result.

The Defendants operate the aforementioned Limetree Bay
Refinery.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jennifer Jones, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JENNIFER JONES
          9003 Havensight Mall, Ste. 319
          St. Thomas, V.I. 00802
          Phone: (340) 779-7386
          Facsimile: (340) 714-5080
          Email: jjones@vienvironmentallaw.com

               - and -

          Kerry J. Miller, Esq.
          Paul C. Thibodeaux, Esq.
          C. Hogan Paschal, Esq.
          FISHMAN HAYGOOD, L.L.P.
          201 St. Charles Avenue, 46th Floor
          New Orleans, LA 70170
          Phone: (504) 586-5252
          Facsimile: (504) 586-5250
          Email: kmiller@fishmanhaygood.com
                 pthibodeaux@fishmanhaygood.com
                 hpaschal@fishmanhaygood.com

               - and -

          Hugh Lambert, Esq.
          J. Christopher Zainey, Esq.
          Brian Mersman, Esq.
          THE LAMBERT FIRM, PLC
          701 Magazine Street
          New Orleans, LA 70130
          Phone: (504) 581-1750
          Facsimile: (504) 529-2931
          Email: hlambert@thelambertfirm.com
                 czainey@thelambertfirm.com
                 bmersman@thelambertfirm.com

               - and -

          Daniel K. Bryson, Esq.
          Melissa K. Sims, Esq.
          Blake H. Yagman, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
          100 Garden City Plaza
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Phone: (212) 594-5300
          Email: dbrysonh@milberg.com
                 msims@milberg.com
                 byagman@milberg.com


LOSTMY.NAME INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lostmy.name Inc. The
case is styled as Kevin Davis, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Lostmy.name Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05355
(S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Wonderbly, previously Lost My Name -- https://www.wonderbly.com/ --
is a technology and publishing business that produces personalized
books for children and adults.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
          MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
          701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
          Asbury Park, NJ 07712
          Phone: (845) 367-7146
          Fax: (732) 298-6256
          Email: yzelman@marcuszelman.com


MDL 2913: Oneida City School District Sues Over E-Cigarette Crisis
------------------------------------------------------------------
Oneida City School District v. JUUL Labs, Inc.. F/K/A PAX LABS,
INC.; JAMES MONSEES; ADAM BOWEN; NICHOLAS PRITZKER; HOYOUNG HUH;
RIAZ VALANI; ALTRIA GROUP, INC.; ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES LLC; ALTRIA
GROUP DISTRIBUTION COMPANY; and PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-04412 (N.D. Cal., June 9, 2021) is a
complaint against the Defendants for negligence, gross negligence,
and violations of Public Nuisance Law and the Racketeer Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendants used three tactics to
maintain market dominance in the cigarette industry: (1) product
design to maximize addiction, (2) mass deception, and (3) targeting
of youth. Defendants JUUL Labs and Adam Bowen designed an
e-cigarette device allegedly intended to create and sustain
addiction, but without the stigma associated with cigarettes and
promoted them to vulnerable young population. JUUL Labs and other
Defendants developed and implemented a marketing scheme to mislead
users into believing that JUUL products contained less nicotine
than they actually do and were healthy and safe. The Defendants
enticed newcomers to nicotine with kid-friendly flavors without
ensuring the flavoring additives were safe for inhalation. The
Defendants targeted the youth market by placing vaporized campaigns
on youth-oriented websites and media and using influencers and
affiliates to amplify their message to a teenage audience. The
Defendants have successfully caused more young people to start
using e-cigarettes, creating a youth e-cigarette epidemic and
public health crisis, the suit alleges.

Oneida City School District is a unified school district with its
offices located at 565 Sayles Street in Oneida, New York.

JUUL Labs, Inc., formerly known as Pax Labs, Inc., is an American
electronic cigarette company, with its principal place of business
in San Francisco, California. Altria Group, Inc. is a producer of
tobacco products, with its principal place of business in Richmond,
Virginia. Altria Client Services LLC provides Altria Group Inc. and
its companies digital marketing, packaging design & innovation,
product development,  
and safety, health, and environmental affairs. Altria Group
Distribution Company provides sales, distribution and consumer
engagement services to Altria's tobacco companies.

Philip Morris USA, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Altria
Group, Inc., with its principal place of business in Richmond,
Virginia.

The Oneida case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2913, In Re: JUUL
Labs, Inc. Marketing, Sales Practice, and Products Liability
Litigation. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge William H.
Orrick. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                                  


         James Frantz, Esq.
         William B. Shinoff, Esq.
         FRANTZ LAW GROUP, APLC
         402 W. Broadway, Ste. 860
         San Diego, CA 92101
         Telephone: (619) 233-5945
         Facsimile: (619) 525-7672
         E-mail: jpf@frantzlawgroup.com
                 wshinoff@frantzlawgroup.com

MEDINAH COUNTRY: Campos Sues Over Unlawful Biometrics Collection
----------------------------------------------------------------
ROSEMARY CAMPOS, on behalf of herself and all other person
similarly situated, known and unknown, Plaintiff v. MEDINAH COUNTRY
CLUB, Defendant, Case No. 2021L000642 (Ill. 18th Jud. Cir. Ct.,
June 14, 2021) is a class action complaint brought by the Plaintiff
against the Defendant pursuant to the Illinois Biometric
Information Privacy Act.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant between 1998 and 2020
as a seasonal employee.

According to the complaint, the Defendant required the Plaintiff
and other hourly employees to use a biometric time clock time
system beginning in approximately 2015 or 2016 to record their time
worked by scanning their fingerprints in the Defendant's biometric
time clock each time they started and finished working. Allegedly,
the Defendant placed its employees at risk by using their biometric
identifiers, like fingerprints, to "punch the clock" because it can
never be changed when compromised and thus subject a victim
identity theft to heightened risk of loss. By compromising the
privacy and security of the biometric identifiers and information
of the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees, the
Defendant allegedly violated the BIPA.

Medinah Country Club is a private country club. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Max P. Barack, Esq.
          Haskell Garfinkel, Esq.
          THE GARFINKEL GROUP, LLC
          6252 N. Lincoln Ave., Suite 200
          Chicago, IL 60659
          Tel: (312) 736-7991
          E-mail: max@garfinkelgroup.com
                  haskell@garfinkelgroup.com


MEKONG BK CORP: Gonzalez Seeks Overtime Pay, Slams Tip Credit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Josue Toc Gonzalez, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Mekong BK Corp. and James Hoang Bui,
Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-03302 (E.D. N.Y., June 11, 2021), seeks
to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages and spread-of-hours
pay pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and New York
Labor Law, including applicable liquidated damages, interest,
attorneys' fees and costs.

Defendants own, operate, or control a Vietnamese restaurant,
located in Brooklyn, NY under the name "Mekong," where Gonzalez was
employed as a food preparer, cook and delivery worker. He claims to
have generally worked in excess of 40 hours a week without overtime
for hours in excess of 40 hours per workweek and denied
spread-of-hours premium for workdays exceeding 10 hours. Defendants
also claimed tip credit for all hours worked despite requiring him
to work non-tipped duties for hours exceeding 20% of the total
hours worked each workweek. Plaintiff also claims to have never
received wage statements. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

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


MIDLAND CREDIT: Belizor Sues Over Deceptive Collection Letter
-------------------------------------------------------------
BARBARA BELIZOR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC. and JOHN
DOES 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-00798 (D. Conn., June 11,
2021) is a class action complaint brought against Defendant Midland
Credit for its alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendant sent a collection letter
to the Plaintiff on or about February 4, 2021 in an attempt to
collect the Plaintiff's alleged debt incurred to creditor Comenity
Bank primarily for personal, family or household purposes,
specifically use of a credit card. Although the Defendant's letter
provided three payment options, the third option is not adequately
explained and results in two different possible interpretations.
The Defendant's letter is allegedly false, deceptive and misleading
because it failed to explain whether Option 3 is a settlement
option or a full pay option.

Midland Credit Management, Inc. is a debt collector. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Raphael Deutsch, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          285 Passaic Street
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Tel: (201) 282-6500 ext. 107
          Fax: (201) 282-6501
          E-mail: rdeutsch@steinsakslegal.com


MONTGOMERY, AL: Carter Appeals Denied Class Cert. Bid to 11th Cir.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff ALDARESS CARTER filed an appeal from a court ruling
entered in the lawsuit entitled ALDARESS CARTER, individually and
on behalf of a class of similarly situated persons, v. THE CITY OF
MONTGOMERY, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-00555-RCL-SMD, in the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Alabama.

The Plaintiff alleges that several of his statutory and
constitutional rights were violated by Defendants' "policies and
practices employed to collect debts from the fines, fees, costs,
and surcharges that the City assesses, usually for traffic
tickets."

In sum, the Plaintiff alleges that in 2011 he was placed on
"probation" under the supervision of Defendant JCS for failure to
pay fines, fees and costs related to traffic tickets. After the
Plaintiff failed to respond to several "failure to report" letters
issued by JCS, which the Plaintiff alleges he did not receive, JCS
petitioned for Plaintiff's "probation" to be revoked. The Plaintiff
never received notice that a hearing was being held, but on January
30, 2013, Montgomery issued a warrant for Plaintiff's arrest for
"Failure to Appeal" in court. The Plaintiff was arrested nearly a
year later, still without having received notice of the earlier
court dates or bench warrant until his arrival at the Montgomery
City jail. When Plaintiff appeared before the judge he was ordered
to pay $915 for the fines and fees associated with his unpaid
traffic tickets to secure his release. The Plaintiff was released
on January 30, 2014, after his mother paid $452 on his behalf. The
Plaintiff then discovered that Defendant Branch D. Kloess had
entered a notice of appearance on his behalf, though he had never
met Kloess and did not know who he was. Defendant Kloess "did not
appear before the judge to plead [Plaintiff's] indigency or request
that the judge reduce his sentence based on his inability to pay,
nor did he meet with [Plaintiff] and file any pleading raising the
issue of his indigency."

The Plaintiff is seeking a review of the Court's Memorandum Opinion
and Order dated May 21, 2021 wherein Hon. Judge Royce C. Lamberth
entered an order denying his motion for class certification.

Mr. Carter moved to certify four classes: a City class, a JCS
Bearden subclass, a Kloess subclass, and a false-imprisonment
class.

   1. City Class consists of:

      "all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on
      JCS-supervised probation, who (1) had debt commuted to jail
      time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS petitioned the court

      to revoke probation; and (2) served any of that jail time on

      or after August 3, 2013."

   2. JCS Bearden Subclass consists of:

      "all individuals in the City Class who served any of their
      post-commutation jail time on or after September 11, 2013."

   3. Kloess Subclass consists of:

      "all individuals in the City Class whose debt was commuted
to

      jail time on a date when Branch Kloess was the public
      defender assigned to the jail docket or for whom Benchmark
      court records or other documents indicate the individuals
      were represented by Branch Kloess for the commutation."

   4. False-Imprisonment Class consists of:

      "all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on
      JCS-supervised probation, who (1) had debt commuted to jail
      time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS petitioned the court

      to revoke probation; and (2) served any of that jail time on

      or after September 11, 2009."

The appellate case is captioned as Aldaress Carter v. The City of
Montgomery, et al., Case No. 21-90015, in the United States Court
of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, filed on June 4, 2021.[BN]

Plaintiff-Petitioner ALDARESS CARTER, individually, and for a class
of similarly situated persons or entities, is represented by:

          Leslie Andrea Bailey, Esq.
          Brian Hardingham, Esq.
          John He, Esq.  
          PUBLIC JUSTICE, PC
          475 14th St Ste 610
          Oakland, CA 94612-1928
          Telephone: (510) 622-8203

               - and -

          Alexandra Brodsky, Esq.
          PUBLIC JUSTICE, PC
          1620 L St NW Ste 630
          Washington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 797-8600

               - and -

          George Daniel Evans, Esq.
          Maurine C. Evans, Esq.
          Alexandria Parrish, Esq.
          THE EVANS LAW FIRM, PC
          1736 Oxmoor Rd Ste 101
          Birmingham, AL 35209
          Telephone: (205) 870-1970
          E-mail: gdevans@evanslawpc.com
                  mevans@evanslawpc.com
                  ap@evanslawpc.com   

               - and -

          Toby James Marshall, Esq.
          TERRELL MARSHALL & DAUDT, PLLC
          936 N 34th St Ste 400
          Seattle, WA 98103-8869
          Telephone: (206) 816-6603

Defendant-Respondent THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY, BRANCH D. KLOESS, and
JUDICIAL CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, INC. are represented by:

          Michael David Brymer, Esq.
          Kimberly Owen Fehl, Esq.
          OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
          103 N Perry St
          Montgomery, AL 36104
          Telephone: (334) 241-2050

               - and -

          Richard Hamilton Gill, Esq.
          Shannon L. Holliday, Esq.
          Robert D. Segall, Esq.  
          COPELAND FRANCO SCREWS & GILL, PA
          444 S Perry St
          Montgomery, AL 36104
          Telephone: (334) 834-1180
          E-mail: holliday@copelandfranco.com

               - and -

          Micheal Stewart Jackson, Esq.
          WEBSTER HENRY LYONS BRADWELL COHAN & BLACK, PC
          PO Box 239
          105 Tallapossa St Ste 101
          Montgomery, AL 36101
          Telephone: (334) 264-9472
          E-mail: mjackson@websterhenry.com

               - and -

          Wilson Franklin Green, Esq.
          FLEENOR & GREEN, LLP
          1657 McFarland Blvd N Ste G2A
          Tuscaloosa, AL 35406
          Telephone: (205) 722-1018  

               - and -

          Jonathan Griffith, Esq.
          Michael Leon Jackson, Esq.
          Larry Logsdon, Esq.
          Wesley Kyle Winborn, Esq.  
          WALLACE JORDAN RATLIFF & BRANDT, LLC
          PO Box 530910
          Birmingham, AL 35253
          Telephone: (205) 870-0555
          E-mail: mjackson@wallacejordan.com
                  llogsdon@wallacejordan.com
                  wwinborn@wallacejordan.com

MONTGOMERY, AL: McCullough Appeals Class Certification Bid Denial
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Angela McCullough, et al., filed an appeal from a court
ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled ANGELA McCULLOUGH, et al.,
individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated
persons, Plaintiffs v. THE CITY OF MONTGOMERY, et al., Defendants,
Case No. 2:15-cv-00463-RCL-SMD, in the U.S. District Court for the
Middle District of Alabama.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Jan. 5, 2021, Judge
Royce C. Lamberth of the U.S. District Court for the Middle
District of Alabama, Northern Division:

     (i) denied the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification;

    (ii) granted in part and denied in part the City's motion to
         reconsider and entered summary judgment for the City on
         Mr. Jones' Section 1983 claim;

   (iii) denied Judicial Correction Services, Inc. ("JCS")'s
         motion to reconsider; and

    (iv) denied the Plaintiffs' motion to reconsider.

This case arose from the system of collecting traffic fines in
Montgomery, Alabama, between 2009 to 2014. During that time, the
Montgomery Municipal Court routinely jailed traffic offenders for
failing to pay fines without inquiring into their ability to pay.
In carrying out that system, the Municipal Court deprived offenders
of their due process and equal protection rights not to be
incarcerated for their poverty, asserts the complaint. During that
period, the City of Montgomery contracted on behalf of itself and
the Municipal Court with JCS to supervise Municipal Court-ordered
misdemeanor probation.

The Plaintiffs are Montgomery residents, who served probation with
JCS after they were unable to pay their traffic tickets. They sued
the City and JCS on behalf of themselves and purported classes of
similarly situated persons. Their operative complaint alleges
causes of action for violations of the Due Process and Equal
Protection Clauses under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and for false
imprisonment and abuse of process.

The Plaintiffs moved to certify the following three classes:

   a. The plaintiffs seek to certify a Bearden class consisting
      of all individuals the Montgomery Municipal Court placed on
      JCS-supervised probation, who: (1) had debt commuted to
      jail time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS petitioned the
      Court to revoke probation; and (2) served any of that jail
      time on or after July 1, 2013;

   b. The Plaintiffs seek to certify a false imprisonment class
      "consisting of all individuals the Montgomery Municipal
      Court placed on JCS-supervised probation, who: (1) had debt
      commuted to jail time in a JCS-supervised case after JCS
      petitioned the Court to revoke probation; and (2) served
      any of that jail time on or after July 1, 2009"; and

   c. The Plaintiffs seek to certify an abuse of process class
      "consisting of all individuals the Montgomery Municipal
      Court placed on JCS-supervised probation: (1) who at any
      time paid less than the minimum monthly payment ordered by
      the Court; and (2) from whom JCS continued to collect or
      attempt to collect after July 1, 2013."

The Plaintiffs now seek a review of the order denying Class
Certification entered by Judge Lamberth.

The appellate case is captioned as Angela McCullough, et al. v.
City of Montgomery, Alabama, et al., Case No. 21-90016, in the
United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, filed on
June 4, 2021.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Petitioners ANGELA MCCULLOUGH, MARQUITA JOHNSON, KENNY
JONES, ALGI EDWARDS, LEVON AGEE, HASSAN CALDWELL, and CHRISTOPHER
MOONEY, on behalf of themselves, individually, and on behalf of a
class of all other similarly situated, are represented by:

          Jennifer Barrett, Esq.
          Harold Hirshman, Esq.
          DENTONS US, LLP
          233 S Wacker Dr Ste 5900
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (312) 876-8000

               - and -

          Greg Bass, Esq.
          Claudia Wilner, Esq.
          NATIONAL CENTER FOR LAW AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE
          275 7th Ave Ste 1506
          New York, NY 10001
          Telephone: (212) 633-6967

               - and -

          Martha Irene Morgan, Esq.
          MORGAN LAW OFFICE
          8800 Lodge Lane
          Cottondale, AL 35453
          Telephone: (205) 799-2692
          E-mail: mimorgan@yahoo.com    

               - and -

          Stephen J. O'Brien, Esq.
          DENTONS US LLP
          1 Metropolitan Sq Ste 3000
          Saint Louis, MO 63102
          Telephone: (314) 241-1800

               - and -

          Henry Sanders, Esq.
          Faya Rose Toure, Esq.
          CHESTNUT SANDERS & SANDERS, LLC
          1 Union St, PO Box 1290
          Selma, AL 36701
          Telephone: (334) 875-9264
          E-mail: gpompey@csspca.com
                  fayarose@gmail.com

Defendants-Respondents CITY OF MONTGOMERY, ALABAMA and JUDICIAL
CORRECTION SERVICES, INC., JCS are represented by:

          Michael David Brymer, Esq.
          Kimberly Owen Fehl, Esq.           
          OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
          103 N Perry St
          Montgomery, AL 36104
          Telephone: (334) 241-2050
          E-mail: mbrymer@montgomeryal.gov
                  kfehl@montgomeryal.gov

               - and -

          Richard Hamilton Gill, Esq.
          Shannon L. Holliday, Esq.
          Robert D. Segall, Esq.  
          COPELAND FRANCO SCREWS & GILL, PA
          444 S Perry St
          Montgomery, AL 36104
          Telephone: (334) 834-1180
          E-mail: holliday@copelandfranco.com
                  segall@copelandfranco.com   

               - and -

          Wilson Franklin Green, Esq.
          FLEENOR & GREEN, LLP
          1657 McFarland Blvd N Ste G2A
          Tuscaloosa, AL 35406
          Telephone: (205) 722-1018  

               - and -

          Jonathan Griffith, Esq.
          Michael Leon Jackson, Esq.
          Larry Logsdon, Esq.
          Wesley Kyle Winborn, Esq.  
          WALLACE JORDAN RATLIFF & BRANDT, LLC
          PO Box 530910
          Birmingham, AL 35253
          Telephone: (205) 870-0555
          E-mail: mjackson@wallacejordan.com
                  llogsdon@wallacejordan.com
                  wwinborn@wallacejordan.com

MUD LAKE, NL: Province Removed as Party in Mud Lake Flood
----------------------------------------------------------
Evan Careen at saltwire.com reports that The provincial government
was successful in removing itself from the class-action lawsuit
brought against it and Nalcor Energy by residents of Mud Lake,
Labrador.

The class action was launched following a flood in 2017 in the
central Labrador town of about 50 people that destroyed homes and
caused significant property damage there and in Happy Valley-Goose
Bay. The lawsuit alleges Nalcor and the province were negligent and
created a nuisance with the Muskrat Falls project. It contends the
building of the dam altered the ice buildup on the Churchill River,
leading to the flooding in Mud Lake and Happy Valley-Goose Bay.

Both the province and Nalcor were granted leave to appeal the
certification of the class-action lawsuit in August 2020 and that
appeal was heard in March of this year. The decision was released,
and only the province was successful in removing itself from the
suit.

The province argued it "could not be liable in negligence or
nuisance for acts or omissions of Nalcor; and the pleadings do not
provide a foundation for liability in negligence or nuisance as
against the province," according to the written decision from the
court of appeal.

The decision said the class action relies on what it refers to as
the province's "oversight mandate" of the project and the Water
Resources Act, which addresses requirements for permits and
licences related to waterworks, such as dams, as well as oversight
over water rights and the protection of water in the province.

The decision said while the act gives the minister authority to do
things such as direct an operator of waterworks to make an
inspection or submit a report, "this does not amount to the
imposition of a duty of care on the minister to take actions that
have been imposed on Nalcor and for which Nalcor is responsible.

"Rather, the legislation is intended to provide the minister with
the tools to facilitate the regulation of waterworks for the public
good. In this respect, the legislative provisions are comparable to
the regulation, for the public good, of any number of activities,
including a multitude of waterworks, that individuals and
corporations undertake in the province."

The court determined for these reasons the province could be
removed from the suit.

Nalcor had sought to be removed from just the nuisance aspect of
the suit, not the negligence allegation. The ruling said based on
the statement of claim and the allegations, it's too early to
determine there is no reasonable prospect of the class action
proceeding, which is best determined at trial.

"The class is claiming that Nalcor's actions or failure to take
preventive actions caused them substantial and unreasonable
interference with the use and enjoyment of their property," it
read. "Whether the claim can be proven, including the question of
causation, is a matter for trial." [GN]

NABC INC: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against NABC, Inc. The case
is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. NABC, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-05374 (S.D.N.Y.,
June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

NABC, Inc. doing business as New Age Beverages --
https://www.newage.com/ -- is a Colorado-based organic and healthy
products company intending to become one of the world's leading
social selling and distribution companies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


NATIONAL AUSTRALIA BANK: To Settle US Bank Bill Swap Rate Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kurian Nainan at Reuters reports that National Australia Bank Ltd
said it has agreed to settle a 2016 class action lawsuit in the
United States over alleged manipulation of a key short-term
interest rate.

The terms of settlement in the bank bill swap rate lawsuit are
confidential and without any admission of liability, Australia's
third largest bank said. (https://bit.ly/35yyemo) [GN]


NATIONWIDE TAX: Loftus Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Nationwide Tax
Consulting LLC, et al. The case is styled as William Loftus,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. H
Nationwide Tax Consulting LLC, Does 1 through 10, inclusive, and
each of them, Case No. 2:21-cv-04924 (C.D. Cal., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.

Nationwide Tax Consulting LLC --
https://nationwidetaxconsulting.com/ -- is a professional tax
resolution company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


NCAA: Flores Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National
Collegiate Athletic Association. The case is styled as Daniel
Flores, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-03256
(S.D. Ind., June 17, 2021).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

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

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Phone: (713) 554-9099
          Fax: (713) 554-9098
          Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

The Defendant appears pro se.


NCAA: Harris Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National
Collegiate Athletic Association. The case is styled as Shane
Harris, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No.
1:21-cv-01817-JPH-DLP (S.D. Ind., June 17, 2021).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

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

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Phone: (713) 554-9099
          Fax: (713) 554-9098
          Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

The Defendant appears pro se.


NCAA: Kirkwood Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois
------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Robert Kirkwood, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic
Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01284, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 17,
2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-03208 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

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

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Phone: (713) 554-9099
          Fax: (713) 554-9098
          Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

The Defendant appears pro se.


NCAA: Parrish Files Suit in Southern District of Indiana
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against the National
Collegiate Athletic Association. The case is styled as Ronald
Parrish, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. National Collegiate Athletic Association, Case No.
1:21-cv-01818-JRS-MG (S.D. Ind., June 17, 2021).

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

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

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Phone: (713) 554-9099
          Fax: (713) 554-9098
          Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

The Defendant appears pro se.


NCAA: Reis Suit Transferred to Northern District of Illinois
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Chester Reis, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic
Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01303, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 17,
2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-03209 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

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

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Phone: (713) 554-9099
          Fax: (713) 554-9098
          Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

The Defendant appears pro se.


NCAA: Romashko Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois
------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Alexander Romashko, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. National Collegiate Athletic
Association, Case No. 1:21-cv-01283, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on June 17,
2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:21-cv-03207 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.

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

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey L. Raizner, Esq.
          RAIZNER SLANIA, LLP
          2402 Dunlavy Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Phone: (713) 554-9099
          Fax: (713) 554-9098
          Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com

The Defendant appears pro se.


NOBLR RECIPROCAL EXCHANGE: Greenstein Sues Over Data Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Greenstein and Cynthia Nelson, on behalf of themselves and
all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. NOBLR
Reciprocal Exchange, Defendant, Case No. 21-cv-04537, (N.D. Cal.,
June 1, 2021) seeks damages, restitution and injunctive relief
resulting from negligence, breach of implied contract, breach of
fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment and violation of the Drivers'
Privacy Protection Act and California's Unfair Competition Law.

Noblr Reciprocal Exchange is an insurance provider currently
providing insurance in Arizona, Colorado, Ohio, Louisiana,
Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Mexico and Texas, and has insurance
licenses in all fifty states.

Greenstein is a resident of Watchung, New Jersey. In May 2021,
Plaintiff Greenstein received notice from Noblr that it improperly
exposed his personal information to unauthorized third parties.
Greenstein never sought a quote for insurance of any sort from
Noblr.

Nelson received notice from Noblr informing her of the Unauthorized
Data Disclosure and that her driver's license number and address
may have been accessed. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     David S. Casey, Jr., Esq.
     Gayle M. Blatt, Esq.
     P. Camille Guerra, Esq.
     CASEY GERRY SCHENK FRANCAVILLA BLATT & PENFIELD, LLP
     110 Laurel Street
     San Diego, CA 92101
     Telephone: (619) 238-1811
     Facsimile: (619) 544-9232
     Email: dcasey@cglaw.com
            gmb@cglaw.com
            camille@cglaw.com

            - and -

     Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq.
     Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq.
     LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P.
     100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200
     Minneapolis, MN 55401
     Telephone: (612) 339-6900
     Facsimile: (612) 339-0981
     Email: kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com
            khriebel@locklaw.com


NON TYPICAL INC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Non Typical, Inc..
The case is styled as Kevin Davis, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Non Typical, Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-05362 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Non Typical, Inc. doing business as Cuddeback --
https://www.cuddeback.com/ -- produces digital scouting camera and
equipment in the United States and is the leader in digital
scouting cameras.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
          MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
          701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
          Asbury Park, NJ 07712
          Phone: (845) 367-7146
          Fax: (732) 298-6256
          Email: yzelman@marcuszelman.com


O'REILLY AUTO: Faces Suit Over COVID Screenings, Security Checks
----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Wiessner at Reutes reports that O'Reilly Auto Enterprises
LLC has been hit with a proposed nationwide class action claiming
the retailer should have paid workers at its 28 U.S. distribution
centers for time they spent each day in COVID-19 screenings and
security checks.

Jeffrey Pipich, who worked at an O'Reilly distribution center in
California until February, said in a complaint filed in San Diego
federal court that he and other workers spent as much as 20 minutes
per shift in screenings but were not paid the minimum wage or
overtime for that time, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

Pipich, who is represented by Berger Montague, says O'Reilly began
conducting COVID-19 screenings last year. Distribution center
employees were required to have their temperatures taken and answer
a series of questions before they proceeded to a security check.
Workers also went through a security screening after clocking out
at the end of their shifts, he said.

Springfield, Missouri-based O'Reilly did not immediately respond to
a request for comment.

O'Reilly is just the latest company to face class-action claims
over employee security screenings and, more recently, COVID-19
screenings such as temperature checks.

Walmart Inc was sued in February for allegedly violating the FLSA
and California law by not paying workers for COVID checks. The
retailer has said that it added wages to hourly workers' paychecks
to reflect the time they spent in screenings.

In the 2014 case, Integrity Staffing Solutions Inc v. Busk, the
U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held that security screenings are
not part of workers' "principal activities," and thus are not
compensable under the FLSA.

But Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan in a concurring
opinion said security checks that are directly related to worker
safety or efficiency should be covered by the wage law, and several
courts have agreed.

Last year, for example, the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said
corrections officers at a New Mexico prison had to be paid for time
spent in security checks because they were integral to ensuring the
safety of the facility.

Pipich's lawyers in his complaint did not address Busk, but
asserted that time O'Reilly employees spent in screenings were
compensable under the FLSA.

Pipich proposed a nationwide opt-in collective and is seeking lost
wages, liquidated damages, restitution and statutory penalties.

The case is Pipich v. O'Reilly Auto Enterprises LLC, U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of California, No. 3:21-cv-01120.

For Pipich: Sophia Rios of Berger Montague

For O'Reilly: Not available [GN]

OCUGEN INC: Gainey McKenna Reminds of August 17 Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
Gainey McKenna & Egleston announces that a class action lawsuit has
been filed against Ocugen, Inc. ("Ocugen") (NASDAQ: OCGN) in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania on behalf of those who purchased or otherwise acquired
Ocugen publicly traded securities between February 2, 2021 and June
10, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Complaint alleges that Defendants made materially false and
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the
information submitted to the FDA was insufficient to support an
EUA; (2) the Company would not file an Emergency Use Authorization
with the FDA; (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's
financial statements, as well as Defendants' statements about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects, were false and
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On June 10, 2021, the Company announced that it would "no longer
pursue an emergency use authorization" for its COVID-19 vaccine
candidate, Covaxin, and would instead go through the process of
obtaining full approval. The Company said that the decision was
"based on a recommendation from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration," which also "requested more information and data"
for the approval. The news shocked the market, as the Company had
previously indicated that it intended to apply for emergency use
authorization. On this news, the Company's share price dropped to
$6.69 from $9.31 at close the day before.

Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of Ocugen
during the Class Period should contact the Firm prior to the August
17, 2021 lead plaintiff motion deadline. A lead plaintiff is a
representative party acting on behalf of other class members in
directing the litigation.  If you wish to discuss your rights or
interests regarding this class action, please contact Thomas J.
McKenna, Esq. or Gregory M. Egleston, Esq. of Gainey McKenna &
Egleston at (212) 983-1300, or via e-mail at tjmckenna@gme-law.com
or gegleston@gme-law.com.

Please visit our website at http://www.gme-law.comfor more
information about the firm. [GN]


OCUGEN INC: Johnson Fistel Reminds of August 17 Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
Shareholder rights law firm Johnson Fistel, LLP announces that a
class action lawsuit has commenced on behalf of investors of
Ocugen, Inc. ("Ocugen" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: OCGN). The class
action is on behalf of shareholders who purchased Ocugen between
February 2, 2021 and June 10, 2021, both dates inclusive (the
"Class Period"). If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff in this
class action, you must move the Court no later than August 17,
2021.

The Complaint alleges that Defendants made materially false and
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the
information submitted to the FDA was insufficient to support a EUA;
(2) the Company would not file an Emergency Use Authorization with
the FDA; (3) as a result of the foregoing, the Company's financial
statements, as well as Defendants' statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects, were false and misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On June 10, 2021, the Company announced that it would "no longer
pursue an emergency use authorization" for its COVID-19 vaccine
candidate, Covaxin, and would instead go through the process of
obtaining full approval. The Company said that the decision was
"based on a recommendation from the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration," which also "requested more information and data"
for approval. The news shocked the market, as the Company had
previously indicated that it intended to apply for emergency use
authorization.

When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that
investors suffered damages.

A lead plaintiff will act on behalf of all other class members in
directing the Ocugen class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can
select a law firm of its choice to litigate the class action
lawsuit. An investor's ability to share any potential future
recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

If you are an Ocugen shareholder and have losses greater than
$250,000, and are interested in learning more about being a lead
plaintiff, please contact Jim Baker (jimb@johnsonfistel.com) at
619-814-4471. If emailing, please include a phone number.

                      About Johnson Fistel

Johnson Fistel, LLP is a nationally recognized shareholder rights
law firm with offices in California, New York and Georgia. The firm
represents individual and institutional investors in shareholder
derivative and securities class action lawsuits. For more
information about the firm and its attorneys, please visit
http://www.johnsonfistel.com.Attorney advertising. Past results do
not guarantee future outcomes.

Contact:
Johnson Fistel, LLP
Jim Baker, 619-814-4471
jimb@johnsonfistel.com [GN]


OCUGEN INC: Schall Law Reminds of August 17 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
reminds investors of a class action lawsuit against Ocugen, Inc.
("Ocugen" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: OCGN) 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 February
2, 2021 and June 10, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period"), are
encouraged to contact the firm before August 17, 2021.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click
https://schallfirm.com/cases/ocugen-inc/#case-form to participate.

We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law
Firm, 2049 Century Park East, Suite 2460, 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. Ocugen's information submission to the
FDA for the development of a COVID-19 vaccine failed to include
sufficient data to support an Emergency Use Authorization ("EUA").
The Company did not submit an EUA to the FDA. 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 Ocugen, 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.

Contacts
The Schall Law Firm
Brian Schall, Esq.
www.schallfirm.com
Office: 310-301-3335
info@schallfirm.com [GN]


ONTARIO: Court OKs $100M BMO Class Action Settlement Over FX Fees
-----------------------------------------------------------------
James Langton at advisor.ca reports that an Ontario court has
approved a $100-million settlement in a class action against
several Bank of Montreal (BMO) subsidiaries over undisclosed
foreign exchange fees charged in clients' RRSPs and other
registered accounts.

The Ontario Superior Court of Justice approved the deal, which was
brought against the bank's brokerage subsidiaries, BMO Nesbitt
Burns Inc. and BMO Investorline Inc., and BMO Trust Co. in 2006.

The settlement followed a court ruling in 2020, which found that
"the BMO defendants were liable to the class over the 10-year class
period for breach of trust, breach of fiduciary duty and breach of
contract, and concluded that the appropriate remedy for the
defendants' wrongdoing was an accounting and disgorgement of
profits."

Ultimately, the two sides agreed on a settlement of $100 million,
which will be paid out to approximately 135,000 affected clients,
subject to a $25 minimum, with the defendants paying the
distribution costs.

The court granted the plaintiffs' lawyers a $20 million fee and
granted $50,000 to a former advisor who helped bring the case.

The court said that approving the settlement was easy, as the $100
million amount "is well within the required zone of reasonableness"
and the resolution is "fair and reasonable and in the best
interests of the class."

On the tougher issue of legal fees, the court ruled that $20
million was appropriate, saying that in a "mega" settlement such as
this, "the legal fees approved must take into account not only the
risks incurred and results achieved but also the need to maintain
the integrity of the legal profession."


In this case, the class counsel sought a $25-million fee,
reflecting their 25% contingent retainer.

However, the court said that simply applying a contingency fee
percentage in mega-settlements "can result in undeserved windfalls
and transform class action litigation into something approaching a
lottery."

Ultimately, after considering the risks incurred and the results
achieved by the litigation, "the most this court can justify and
explain in a principled fashion consistent with comparable case law
is a legal fees award that falls within a range of $18 million to
$20 million," the decision read.

"The right number may well be around $19 million," the court said.
"However, given that this was a truly self-made class action that
consumed 15 years of litigation, 10,000 hours in docketed time and
resulted in a genuinely commendable settlement, I am prepared to
err on the side of caution and in favour of class counsel."

The representative plaintiffs in the case were also awarded a
combined $70,000 with $10,000 going to each of two representative
plaintiffs, and $50,000 going to a third plaintiff -- James Richard
Macdonald, a former advisor at Nesbitt Burns, who the court said
suffered financial hardship as a result of bringing the case.

Macdonald was "entitled to the additional $40,000 because of the
financial harm he sustained as the lead plaintiff in what became a
high-profile class action in the banking community," the court
ruled.

"His employment as an investment advisor became strained and he had
to leave the industry well before his retirement age," the court
said, noting that while Macdonald ultimately found a job teaching
finance courses at a local community college, "his income today is
much less than when he worked as an investment advisor."

"I therefore have no difficulty concluding that Mr. MacDonald
suffered significant financial hardship in taking on the role and
responsibilities of the lead representative plaintiff. The request
for a $50,000 honorarium is more than justified," the court said.
[GN]


PELOTON INTERACTIVE: Portnoy Law Firm Reminds of June 28 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Portnoy Law Firm advises investors that a class action lawsuit
has been filed on behalf of Peloton Interactive, Inc. (NASDAQ:
PTON) investors that acquired shares between September 11, 2020 and
May 5, 2021. Investors have until June 28, 2021 to seek an active
role in this litigation.

Investors are encouraged to contact attorney Lesley F. Portnoy, to
determine eligibility to participate in this action, by phone
310-692-8883 or email, or click here to join the case.

The investigation focuses on whether Peloton issued misleading
and/or false statements and/or failed to disclose information
pertinent to investors. Peloton is the subject of a press release
issued on April 17, 2021 by the U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission, titled: "CPSC Warns Consumers: Stop Using the Peloton
Tread+." According to this press release, the CPSC's "Urgent
Warning Comes After Agency Finds One Death and Dozens of Incidents
of Children Being Sucked Beneath the Tread+ (Formerly Known as the
Tread)." The agency added, "the urgent warning comes less than a
month after Peloton itself released news of a child's death by a
Peloton Tread+ and CPSC's announcement of an investigation into
that incident," and "to date, CPSC is aware of 39 incidents
including one death." Shares of Peloton fell sharply across the
next several trading sessions, based on this news.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than June 28,
2021.

Please visit our website to review more information and submit your
transaction information.

The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors in pursuing arising from
corporate wrongdoing. The Firm's founding partner has recovered
over $5.5 billion for aggrieved investors. Attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes. [GN]


PENNSYLVANIA: Judge Tosses Tavern's COVID-19 Coverage Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Daphne Zhang at law360.com reports that a Pennsylvania federal
judge tossed a tavern's proposed class action against an insurer
seeking coverage for pandemic-related losses, saying the complaint
doesn't allege how COVID-19 or government closure orders caused any
physical harm on its property.

U.S. District Judge John R. Padova granted judgment on the
pleadings to American Fire and Casualty Co., rejecting policyholder
Spring House Tavern's argument that its mere loss of use of its
property due to pandemic-related shutdown orders triggered
coverage. The judge emphasized that Spring House didn't claim the
COVID-19 virus was on its premises.

"The complaint in this case does not allege that any amount of the
COVID-19 virus was, itself, present in plaintiff's property, or
that some amount of the COVID-19 virus itself made plaintiff's
property 'physically unusable,'" the judge said, adding that, even
if Spring House had included such allegations, coverage would be
foreclosed by a virus exclusion in its policy.

Although the policy covers government closure orders due to food
contamination from a "communicable disease," the tavern's complaint
never alleged that its food stock was contaminated with any harmful
substance.

According to the suit, Spring House of Ambler, Pennsylvania, said
it was forced to close business and furlough employees due to the
pandemic and government closure orders. The restaurant held a
policy with American Fire which provides business income,
contamination and civil authority coverage. It sued American Fire
after the insurer denied coverage, seeking a declaration that the
policy covers its COVID-19-related losses.

The carrier has maintained that Spring House failed to allege
property loss or damage, but the tavern has argued that the meaning
of "direct physical loss of or damage to property" includes "loss
of use" of property, so it does not need to allege physical harm to
get coverage.

"Spring House has identified no authority in this Circuit, or
decision of the Superior Court or Supreme Court of Pennsylvania,
that supports its position," which is "not a reasonable alternative
interpretation," Judge Padova said.

Additionally, the judge said, Spring House is not entitled to civil
authority coverage because the tavern never alleged it was unable
to access its property due to dangerous physical conditions nearby
or any surrounding property was damaged by COVID-19 or had another
dangerous physical condition.

The tavern is represented by James C.Haggerty of Haggerty Goldberg,
Schleifer & Kupersmith, P.C.

The insurer is represented by Cari K.Dawson of Alston & Bird LLP,
Christopher S.Finazzo and Robert F.Cossolini of Finazzo Cossolini
O'Leary Meola &Hager LLC and Matthew Burke of Robins Kaplan LLP.

The case is Spring House Tavern, Inc v. American Fire and Casualty
Co., Case Number: 2:20-cv-02872, in the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania. [GN]

PERFORMANCE VALIDATION: Mohilo Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case, REBEKAH MOHILO individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PERFORMANCE VALIDATION, INC., and
PERFORMANCE VALIDATION, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:21-cv-00491
(W.D. Mich., June 11, 2021) arises from the Defendants' alleged
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as salaried Validation
Engineers from March 2019 until May 2021.

The Plaintiff claims that the Defendants misclassified her and
other and other Validation Engineers as exempt from the overtime
requirements of the FLSA. Although they regularly worked over 40 in
a workweek, the Defendants allegedly denied them of overtime
compensation at the rate of one and one-half times their regular
rate of pay for all hours they worked in excess of 40 per
workweek.

The Corporate Defendants provide commissioning, qualification and
validation services to the pharmaceutical, biotech and medical
device industries. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Josh Sanford, Esq.
          SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
          Kirkpatrick Plaza
          10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510
          Little Rock, AR 72211
          Tel: (501) 221-0088
          Fax: (888) 787-2040
          E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com


POWELL'S BOOKS: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Powell's Books, Inc.
The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Powell's Books, Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-05353 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Powell's Books -- https://www.powells.com/ -- is a chain of
bookstores in Portland, Oregon, and its surrounding metropolitan
area.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          285 Passaic Street
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com


PROMED & ASSOCIATED: Khaled Sues Over Failure to Pay EMTs' OT
-------------------------------------------------------------
NASSER M. KHALID, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. PROMED & ASSOCIATED, INC., MEGA CARE EMS,
INC., and NASR-EDDINE BENCHAITA, Defendants, Case No. 4:21-cv-01908
(S.D. Tex., June 11, 2021) alleges the Defendants of violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff was originally hired by Defendant Promed &
Associated, Inc. as Emergency Medical Technician (EMT) in or about
2008. Mega Care began working in conjunction with Promed Care in or
about 2010 conducting the same services from the same physical
address and sharing personnel, equipment, and other
business-related items.

The Plaintiff claims that he and other similarly situated EMTs were
not properly compensated for the overtime hours in which they were
required by the Defendants to continue to perform the same EMT
duties. Accordingly, once they worked or were close to working 40
hours in a workweek with that first Defendant, they were required
to clock-in with a different named Defendant and work additional
hours. However, instead of paying them overtime at the federally
mandated overtime rate for the hours they performed work in excess
of 40 with the second Defendant, the Defendants paid them straight
time without overtime. The Defendants allegedly continued the
scheme of avoiding to pay overtime by splitting their hours between
multiple companies until on or about September 2019. Moreover, the
Defendants failed to keep records of the hours the Plaintiff and
other similarly situated EMTs have worked in a workweek.

The Corporate Defendants provide emergency medical services.
Nasr-Eddine Benchaita is the owner and President of Texas forfeited
corporation, Mega Care Ambulance. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Derrick A. Reed, Esq.
          Marrick Armstrong, Esq.
          STEPHENS REED & ARMSTRONG, PLLC
          12234 Shadow Creek Pkwy
          Building 1, Suite 1104
          Pearland, TX 77584
          Tel: (281) 489-3934
          Fax: (281) 657-7050
          E-mail: derrick@srapllc.com

PROVENTION BIO: Klein Law Firm Reminds of July 20 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------
The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been
filed on behalf of shareholders of Provention Bio, Inc. There is no
cost to participate in the suit. If you suffered a loss, you have
until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint
you as lead plaintiff.

Provention Bio, Inc. (NASDAQ:PRVB)
Class Period: November 2, 2020 - April 8, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 20, 2021

The PRVB lawsuit alleges that throughout the class period,
Provention Bio, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the teplizumab
Biologics License Application ("BLA") was deficient in its
submitted form and would require additional data to secure U.S.
Food and Drug Administration approval; (ii) accordingly, the
teplizumab BLA lacked the evidentiary support the Company had led
investors to believe it possessed; (iii) the Company had thus
overstated the teplizumab BLA's approval prospects and hence the
commercialization timeline for teplizumab; and (iv) as a result,
the Company's public statements were materially false and
misleading at all relevant times.

Learn about your recoverable losses in PRVB:
https://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/provention-bio-inc-loss-submission-form?id=16978&from=1

Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you
serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class
period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J.
Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages
provided.

J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities
litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar
outcomes. [GN]

PURECYCLE TECH: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 12 Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has
commenced on behalf of shareholders of PureCycle Technologies, Inc.
Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have until the
deadline listed to petition the court. Further details about the
case can be found at the link provided. There is no cost or
obligation to you.

PCT Shareholders Click Here:
https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/purecycle-technologies-inc-information-request-form?prid=16977&wire=1

PureCycle Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ:PCT)

PCT Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased November 16, 2020
- May 5, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 12, 2021
TO LEARN MORE, VISIT:
https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/purecycle-technologies-inc-information-request-form?prid=16977&wire=1

According to the filed complaint, during the class period,
PureCycle Technologies, Inc. made materially false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) the
technology PureCycle licensed from Procter & Gamble is not proven
and presents serious issues even at lab scale; (ii) the challenges
posed by the availability and competition for the raw materials
necessary to commercialize the licensed technology are significant;
(iii) PureCycle's financial projections are baseless; and (iv) as a
result, the Company's public statements were materially false and
misleading at all relevant times.

You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request that the
court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any
recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

Levi & Korsinsky is a nationally recognized firm with offices in
New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's
attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing
investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of
millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney
advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
55 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10006
jlevi@levikorsinsky.com
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
www.zlk.com [GN]


PUREFORMULAS INC: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pureformulas, Inc.
The case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Pureformulas, Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-05354 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

PureFormulas -- https://www.pureformulas.com/ -- is a one-stop shop
for health supplements, vitamins, minerals and other nutritional
supplements.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          285 Passaic Street
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com


RED LOBSTER: Marshall Sues Over Questionable Seafood Farm Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Dezzi Rae Marshall, individually and on behalf of other similarly
situated individuals, Plaintiff, v. Red Lobster Management LLC, Red
Lobster Seafood Co., LLC, Red Lobster Restaurants LLC, and Red
Lobster Hospitality LLC, Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-04786 (C.D.
Cal., June 11, 2021) seeks relief including actual damages,
interest, costs and reasonable attorneys' fees for violation of the
California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California's False
Advertising Law and Unfair Competition Law.

Marshall brings this action regarding the allegedly deceptive
marketing and sale of Red Lobster's Maine lobster and shrimp
products as "sustainable" when they may have been sourced from
suppliers that use environmentally harmful and inhumane practices.
The lawsuit also alleges environmentally destructive practices,
poor reporting of environmental data and standards, and overuse of
antibiotics. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

     Matthew Strugar, Esq.
     LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW STRUGAR
     3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 2910
     Los Angeles, CA 90010
     Tel: (323) 696-2299
     Email: matthew@matthewstrugar.com

            - and -

     Jay R. Shooster, Esq.
     RICHMAN LAW & POLICY
     535 Mission Street
     San Francisco, CA 94105
     Telephone: (718) 705-4579
     Facsimile: (718) 228-8522
     Email: jshooster@richmanlawpolicy.com


RELIA HOME: Misclassifies Acquisition Specialists, Linares Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JHOVANNI LINARES, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. RELIA HOME BUYERS, LLC; CODY
PURTLE; and JARED GRAVES, Defendants, Case No. 4:21-cv-01915 (S.D.
Tex., June 11, 2021) is a collective action complaint brought
against the Defendants for its alleged willful violations of the
Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay minimum wage and
overtime compensation to their Acquisition Specialists.

The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as Acquisition
Specialist from approximately June 2019 to April 2020.

According to the complaint, the Defendant misclassified its
Acquisition Specialists as independent contractors exempt from the
minimum wage and overtime pay, instead of classifying them as
employees. The Defendants purportedly compensated them on a
commission basis, but they were being rarely paid any commissions
in reality and denied them full compensation for their hours worked
over 40.

The Plaintiff claims that despite the fact he has worked for 7
months in 2019, the Defendants paid him approximately $4,400 which
equates to an hourly rate below the minimum. The Defendants
frequently promised to pay the Plaintiff commissions for his work,
but those commissions never materialized, says the suit.

Relia Home Buyers, LLC is a real estate company that buys
distressed properties and resells those properties. Cody Purtle and
Jared Graves are the owners of Relia Home. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John Neuman, Esq.
          SOSA-MORRIS NEUMAN, PLLC
          5612 Chaucer Drive
          Houston, TX 77005
          Tel: (281) 885-8630
          Fax: (281) 885-8813
          E-mail: JNeuman@smnlawfirm.com

RESURGENT CAPITAL: Bradshaw Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. North Carolina
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Resurgent Capital
Services, L.P. The case is styled as Eleanore Bradshaw, Rebecca
Perez, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v.
Resurgent Capital Services, L.P., Case No. 1:21-cv-00461-CCE-LPA
(M.D.N.C., June 7, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Resurgent Capital Services, LP -- https://www.resurgent.com/ --
provides financial services. The Company manages debt portfolios
for credit grantors and debt buyers.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Scott C. Harris, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          900 W. Morgan Street
          Raleigh, NC 27603
          Phone: (919) 600-5000
          Fax: (919) 600-5035
          Email: sharris@milberg.com


RLX TECHNOLOGY: Wolf Haldenstein Reminds of August 9 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP announces that a federal
securities class action lawsuit has been filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of
investors that purchased RLX Technology Inc. (NYSE: RLX) ("RLX")
American Depositary Receipts ("ADRs") pursuant or traceable to
RLX's January 2021 initial public stock offering (the "IPO").

All investors who purchased the ADR's of RLX Technology Inc. and
incurred losses are urged to contact the firm immediately at
classmember@whafh.com or (800) 575-0735 or (212) 545-4774. You may
obtain additional information concerning the action or join the
case on our website, www.whafh.com.

If you have incurred losses in the ADR's of RLX Technology Inc.,
you may, no later than August 9, 2021, request that the Court
appoint you lead plaintiff of the proposed class. Please contact
Wolf Haldenstein to learn more about your rights as an investor in
the ADR's of RLX Technology Inc.

RLX claims to be the "No. 1 branded e-vapor company in China,"
which it also claims is its "largest potential market." On January
19, 2021, RLX filed its final amendment to a Form F-1 registration
statement (the "Registration Statement"), which registered
133,975,000 RLX ADR for public sale. On January 22, 2021, the
defendants priced the IPO at $12 per ADR and filed the final
prospectus for the IPO, which forms part of the Registration
Statement. Through the IPO, the defendants issued and sold
approximately 116,500,000 RLX ADR, all pursuant to the Registration
Statement, for gross proceeds of nearly $1.4 billion.

The filed complaint alleges that the Registration Statement
misrepresented and omitted, among other things, RLX's exposure to
China's then-existing campaign to establish a national standard for
e-cigarettes that would bring them into line with regular cigarette
regulations.

The truth was revealed when draft regulations were posted by the
Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, before the market
opened on March 22, 2021, eight weeks after RLX's IPO, which
confirmed e-cigarettes and new tobacco products would be regulated
similar to traditional tobacco offerings.

Following this news, the price of RLX's shares suffered an enormous
decline. On March 22, 2021, RLX's ADR closed at $10.15 per ADR,
down nearly 48% from its previous close of $19.46 per ADR on March
19, 2021, the previous trading day.

Wolf Haldenstein has extensive experience in the prosecution of
securities class actions and derivative litigation in state and
federal trial and appellate courts across the country. The firm has
attorneys in various practice areas; and offices in New York,
Chicago and San Diego. The reputation and expertise of this firm in
shareholder and other class litigation has been repeatedly
recognized by the courts, which have appointed it to major
positions in complex securities multi-district and consolidated
litigation.

If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions regarding
your rights and interests in this case, please immediately contact
Wolf Haldenstein by telephone at (800) 575-0735, via e-mail at
classmember@whafh.com, or visit our website at www.whafh.com. [GN]

SEND A CAKE: Angeles Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Send A Cake LLC. The
case is styled as Jenisa Angeles, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Send A Cake LLC, Case No.
1:21-cv-05360 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

Send A Cake -- https://sendacake.com/ -- is an ultimate birthday
cake and gift delivery store specializing in surprise cake
gifts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          285 Passaic Street
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 282-6500
          Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com


SKILLZ INC: Robbins Geller Reminds Investors of July 7 Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that purchasers of
Skillz Inc. f/k/a Flying Eagle Acquisition Corp. (NYSE:SKLZ)
securities between December 16, 2020 and April 19, 2021 (the "Class
Period") have until July 7, 2021 to seek appointment as lead
plaintiff in the Skillz class action lawsuit, Jedrzejczyk v. Skillz
Inc. f/k/a Flying Eagle Acquisition Corp., No. 21-cv-03450 (N.D.
Cal.), which is assigned to Richard G. Seeborg.

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any
investor who purchased Skillz securities during the Class Period to
seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Skillz class action
lawsuit. A lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest
financial interest in the relief sought by the putative class who
is also typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead
plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members in directing
the Skillz class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a
law firm of its choice to litigate the Skillz class action lawsuit.
An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery of
the Skillz action lawsuit is not dependent upon serving as lead
plaintiff. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff of the Skillz
class action lawsuit or have questions concerning your rights
regarding the Skillz class action lawsuit, please provide your
information here or contact counsel, J.C. Sanchez of Robbins
Geller, at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058 or via e-mail at
jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com. Lead plaintiff motions for the Skillz class
action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than July 7,
2021.

Flying Eagle Acquisition Corp. ("FEAC") was formed as a special
purpose acquisition company, or SPAC, in early January 2020. Within
eight months, FEAC secured $158 million in private placement
commitments in connection with a business combination between FEAC
and its target - Skillz. FEAC and Skillz finalized their merger,
valuing Skillz at $3.5 billion, on December 16, 2020.

The Skillz class action lawsuit alleges that, throughout the Class
Period, defendants issued materially misleading statements and
omissions including representations relating to certain of Skillz's
business operations, performance metrics, and ultimate valuation,
including, among others: (i) Skillz's ability to attract new
end-users, (ii) future profitability, (iii) the shrinking
popularity of Skillz's hosted games that accounted for 88% of its
revenue, and (iv) Skillz's valuation. The Skillz class action
lawsuit also alleges that one of Skillz's objectively unrealistic
promises included the unsupportable claim that Skillz was valued at
$3.5 billion, based on revenue projections in excess of $550
million for 2022. However, Skillz allegedly failed to inform
investors that downloads of games accounting for a majority share
of Skillz's revenue had been declining since at least November
2020.

On March 8, 2021, Wolfpack Research released a report titled:
"SKLZ: It Takes Little Skill to see this SPACtacular Disaster
Coming," alleging, among other things, that the growth speculations
that Skillz and its insiders had touted were "entirely
unrealistic." Specifically, the Wolfpack Research report alleged,
among other things, that the three games Skillz relies on for 88%
of its revenue had begun to decline prior to Skillz going public.
The Wolfpack Research report concluded that Skillz buried this
decline in downloads and revenue in its disclosures while
continuing to tout massive future revenue growth. On this news, the
price of Skillz shares fell by nearly 11%.

Then, on April 19, 2021, Eagle Eye Research posted an anonymous
report on Twitter claiming that, through the use of providing users
with incentive bonus payments, Skillz "likely recognizes
substantial non-cash revenue, and . . . cash revenue may be less
than ½ of GAAP revenue." On this news, the price of Skillz shares
fell an additional 6%, further damaging investors.

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP has launched a dedicated SPAC Task
Force to protect investors in blank check companies and seek
redress for corporate malfeasance. Comprised of experienced
litigators, investigators, and forensic accountants, the SPAC Task
Force is dedicated to rooting out and prosecuting fraud on behalf
of injured SPAC investors. The rise in blank check financing poses
unique risks to investors. Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP's SPAC
Task Force represents the vanguard of ensuring integrity, honesty,
and justice in this rapidly developing investment arena.

With 200 lawyers in 9 offices nationwide, Robbins Geller Rudman &
Dowd LLP is the largest U.S. law firm representing investors in
securities class actions. Robbins Geller attorneys have obtained
many of the largest shareholder recoveries in history, including
the largest securities class action recovery ever - $7.2 billion -
in In re Enron Corp. Sec. Litig. The 2020 ISS Securities Class
Action Services Top 50 Report ranked Robbins Geller first for
recovering $1.6 billion for investors last year, more than double
the amount recovered by any other securities plaintiffs' firm.
Please visit http://www.rgrdlaw.comfor more information.

Contacts
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
655 W. Broadway, San Diego, CA 92101
619-231-1058
J.C. Sanchez, 800-449-4900
jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com [GN]


SUNBUTTER LLC: Davis Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sunbutter, LLC. The
case is styled as Kevin Davis, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Sunbutter, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-05364
(S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

SunButter, LLC -- https://sunbutter.com/ -- manufactures SunButter
Sunflower Butter in a peanut and tree nut free facility.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
          MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
          701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
          Asbury Park, NJ 07712
          Phone: (845) 367-7146
          Fax: (732) 298-6256
          Email: yzelman@marcuszelman.com


TLM RESEARCH: Pascual Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against TLM Research Labs
LLC. The case is styled as Domingo Pascual, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated v. TLM Research Labs LLC, Case
No. 1:21-cv-05372 (S.D.N.Y., June 17, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.

TLM Research Labs doing business as Innovet Pet Products --
https://www.innovetpet.com/ -- offers hemp oil for dogs or
cats.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


TTT WEST COAST: Scialfo Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Carmine Scialfo, and other similarly situated aggrieved employees
v. TTT WEST COAST, INC.; B-T-L PAYROLLS, LLC; and DOES 1 to 25,
inclusive, Case No. 21STCV21137 (Cal. Super. Ct., June 7, 2021), is
brought against the Defendants for failure to pay the Plaintiff for
all hours worked, including the statutory minimum and overtime
wages for all hours worked and for "off the clock" work.

TTT violated Labor Code because it failed to pay the Plaintiff for
all hours worked, including the statutory minimum wage for all
hours worked and for "off the clock" work. Plaintiff was not paid
for all hours worked in violation of Labor Code Section 1194 and
the applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Order as the
Plaintiff would work several hours per week that were not counted
towards his hours worked. When the Plaintiff logged the actual
hours he worked, he would get reprimanded, and the company would
not allow it since there was a company policy of not allowing
overtime. Due to the latter, the company would do anything in its
power to make sure that the Plaintiff's work hours were 40 hours
per week on the dot or less, despite how many hours the Plaintiff
actually worked, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff initially worked as a producer on the Extra TV show
and then was brought 20 back as a Media Manager, working in the
library.

TTT WEST COAST, INC. is a California corporation, doing business in
the County of Los Angeles, State of California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Harout Messrelian, Esq.
          MESSRELIAN LAW INC.
          500 N. Central Ave., Suite 840
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Phone: (818) 484-6531
          Facsimile: (818) 956-1983
          Email: hm@messrelianlaw.com


UBIQUITI INC: Glancy Prongay Reminds of July 19 Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the
upcoming July 19, 2021 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in
the class action filed on behalf of investors who purchased or
otherwise acquired Ubiquiti Inc. ("Ubiquiti" or the "Company")
(NYSE: UI) securities between January 11, 2021 and March 30, 2021,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

If you suffered a loss on your Ubiquiti investments or would like
to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss
under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact
information at https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/ubiquiti-inc/. You
can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150,
Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at
shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.

On March 30, 2021, after the market closed, Krebs on Security
published an article entitled "Whistleblower: Ubiquiti Breach
'Catastrophic'" stating that the Company had downplayed a data
breach from January 2021 and that the "third-party cloud provider
claim was a fabrication." According to the article, the attacker(s)
had accessed "privileged credentials that were previously stored in
the LastPass account of a Ubiquiti IT employee, and gained root
administrator access to all Ubiquiti AWS [Amazon Web Services]
accounts, including all S3 data buckets, all application logs, all
databases, all user database credentials, and secrets required to
forge single sign-on (SSO) cookies." As a result, the article noted
that the Company should have immediately invalidated customers'
credentials and forced a reset, rather than asking customers to
change their passwords when they next log on.

On this news, the Company's stock price fell $50.70, or 14.5%, to
close at $298.30 per share on March 31, 2021, on unusually heavy
trading volume.

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout
the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects. Specifically, Defendants, in their statements concerning
the data breach, failed to speak fully and truthfully because they
failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company had
downplayed the data breach in January 2021; (2) that attackers had
obtained administrative access to Ubiquiti's servers and obtained
access to, among other things, all databases, all user database
credentials, and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO)
cookies; (3) that, as a result, intruders already had credentials
needed to remotely access Ubiquiti's customers' systems; and (4)
that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements
about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were
materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Ubiquiti securities during
the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 19,
2021 to request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative
class action lawsuit. To be a member of the class action you need
not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your
choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the class
action. If you wish to learn more about this class action, or if
you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights
or interests with respect to the pending class action lawsuit,
please contact Charles Linehan, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park
East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles, California 90067 at 310-201-9150,
Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com,
or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com. If you inquire by email
please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of
shares purchased.

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


UBIQUITI INC: Lieff Cabraser Reminds of July 19 Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP announces
that class action litigation has been filed on behalf of investors
who purchased or otherwise acquired the securities of Ubiquiti Inc.
("Ubiquiti" or the "Company") (NYSE:UI) between January 11, 2021
and March 30, 2021, inclusive (the "Class Period").

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Ubiquiti securities during
the Class Period, you may move the Court for appointment as lead
plaintiff by no later than July 19, 2021. A lead plaintiff is a
representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in
directing the litigation. Your share of any recovery in the actions
will not be affected by your decision of whether to seek
appointment as lead plaintiff. You may retain Lieff Cabraser, or
other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.

Ubiquiti investors who wish to learn more about the litigation and
how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should click here or
contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at
1-800-541-7358.

Background on the Ubiquiti Securities Class Litigation

Ubiquiti, headquartered in New York, New York, manufactures and
sells wireless data communication and wired products for
enterprises and homes.

The action alleges that, throughout the Class Period, defendants
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) the Company minimized the severity of its data breach in
January 2021; (2) hackers had obtained full access to Ubiquiti's
servers and also obtained access to, among other things, all
databases, user database credentials, and secrets required to forge
single sign-on (SSO) cookies; (3) as a result of the data breach,
attackers could remotely access Ubiquiti's customers' devices; and
(4) 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.

On March 30, 2021, following the close of the market, cybersecurity
news website Krebs on Security ("Krebs") reported that Ubiquiti had
understated the scale of its data breach, which began in December
2020, and that the Company's statement on the breach "downplayed
and [was] purposefully written to imply that a 3rd party cloud
vendor was at risk and that Ubiquiti was merely a casualty of that,
instead of the target of the attack." According to the Krebs
report, a Ubiquiti security professional noted that the Company had
been aware for months that attackers had "administrative access to
all Ubiquiti AWS accounts, including . . . all user database
credentials, and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO)
cookies." On this news, the Company's stock price fell $50.70, or
14.5%, from its closing price of $349.00 on March 30, 2021, to
close at $298.30 per share on March 31, 2021, on unusually heavy
trading volume.

On April 4, 2021, Krebs published another article, highlighting
that Ubiquiti continued to "confirm[] and reinforce[] th[e] claims"
from the March 30, 2021 article.

About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San
Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law
firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting
corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of
the nation's top plaintiffs' law firms for fourteen years. In
compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent
verdicts and settlements and looked for firms "representing the
best qualities of the plaintiffs' bar and that demonstrated unusual
dedication and creativity." Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as
one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting
our firm's "laser focus" and noting that our firm routinely finds
itself "facing off against some of the largest and strongest
defense law firms in the world." Benchmark Litigation has named
Lieff Cabraser one of the "Top 10 Plaintiffs' Firms in America."

For more information about Lieff Cabraser and the firm's
representation of investors, please visit
https://www.lieffcabraser.com/.

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


UBIQUITI INC: Vincent Wong Reminds Investors of July 19 Deadline
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announced that a class action has
commenced on behalf of certain shareholders of Ubiquiti Inc. If you
suffered a loss you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to
request that the court appoint you as lead plaintiff. There will be
no obligation or cost to you.

Ubiquiti Inc. (NYSE:UI)

If you suffered a loss, contact us
at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/ubiquiti-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16957&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 19, 2021
Class Period: January 11, 2021 - March 20, 2021

Allegations against UI include that: (1) the Company had downplayed
the data breach in January 2021; (2) attackers had obtained
administrative access to Ubiquiti's servers and obtained access to,
among other things, all databases, all user database credentials,
and secrets required to forge single sign-on (SSO) cookies; (3) as
a result, intruders already had credentials needed to remotely
access Ubiquiti's customers' systems; and (4) 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.

To learn more contact Vincent Wong, Esq. either via email
vw@wongesq.com or by telephone at 212.425.1140.

Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented
investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and
violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Vincent Wong, Esq.
39 East Broadway
Suite 304
New York, NY 10002
Tel. 212.425.1140
Fax. 866.699.3880
E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN]

VIRGIN GALACTIC: Levi & Korsinsky Reminds of July 27 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has
commenced on behalf of shareholders of Virgin Galactic Holdings,
Inc. Shareholders interested in serving as lead plaintiff have
until the deadline listed to petition the court. Further details
about the case can be found at the link provided. There is no cost
or obligation to you.

SPCE Shareholders Click Here:
https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/virgin-galactic-holdings-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1

Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:SPCE)

SPCE Lawsuit on behalf of: investors who purchased October 26, 2019
- April 30, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 27, 2021
TO LEARN MORE, VISIT:
https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/virgin-galactic-holdings-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16977&wire=1

According to the filed complaint, during the class period, Virgin
Galactic Holdings, Inc. made materially false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) for accounting
purposes, Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp.'s ("SCH")
warrants were required to be treated as liabilities rather than
equities; (ii) Virgin Galactic had deficient disclosure controls
and procedures and internal control over financial reporting; (iii)
as a result, the Company improperly accounted for SCH warrants that
were outstanding at the time of the business combination; and (iv)
as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false
and misleading at all relevant times.

You have until the lead plaintiff deadlines to request that the
court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any
recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

Levi & Korsinsky is a nationally recognized firm with offices in
New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's
attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing
investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of
millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders. Attorney
advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
55 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10006
jlevi@levikorsinsky.com
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
www.zlk.com [GN]


VIRGIN GALACTIC: Thornton Law Reminds of July 27 Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------
The Thornton Law Firm alerts investors that a class action lawsuit
has been filed on behalf of investors of Virgin Galactic Holdings,
Inc. (NYSE:SPCE). The case is currently in the lead plaintiff
stage. Investors who purchased SPCE stock or other securities
between October 26, 2019 and April 30, 2021 may contact the
Thornton Law Firm's investor protection team by visiting
www.tenlaw.com/cases/SPCE for more information. Investors may also
email investors@tenlaw.com or call 617-531-3917.

The case alleges that Virgin Galactic and its senior executives
made misleading statements to investors and failed to disclose
that: (i) for accounting purposes, the warrants of Social Capital
Hedosophia Holdings Corp. ('SCH') were required to be treated as
liabilities rather than equities; (ii) Virgin Galactic had
deficient disclosure controls and procedures and internal control
over financial reporting; and (iii) as a result, Virgin Galactic
improperly accounted for SCH warrants that were outstanding at the
time of the Business Combination.

Interested SPCE investors have until July 27, 2021 to retain
counsel and apply to be a lead plaintiff if they are interested to
do so. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other investor class
members in managing the class action. Investors do not need to be a
lead plaintiff in order to be a class member. If investors choose
to take no action, they can remain an absent class member. The
class has not yet been certified. Until certification occurs,
investors are not represented by an attorney. Thornton Law Firm is
not currently representing a plaintiff who filed a complaint but is
investigating the case on behalf of investors interested in being a
lead plaintiff.

Thornton Law Firm's securities attorneys are highly experienced in
representing investors in recovering damages caused by violations
of the securities laws. Its attorneys have established track
records litigating securities cases in courts throughout the
country and recovering losses on behalf of investors. This may be
considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior
results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect
to any future matter.

CONTACT:
Thornton Law Firm LLP
1 Lincoln Street
State Street Financial Center
Boston, MA 02111
www.tenlaw.com/cases/SPCE [GN]


VIRGIN GALACTIC: Vincent Wong Reminds of July 27 Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Vincent Wong announced that a class action has
commenced on behalf of certain shareholders of Virgin Galactic
Holdings, Inc. If you suffered a loss you have until the lead
plaintiff deadline to request that the court appoint you as lead
plaintiff. There will be no obligation or cost to you.

Virgin Galactic Holdings, Inc. (NYSE:SPCE)

If you suffered a loss, contact us
at:https://www.wongesq.com/pslra-1/virgin-galactic-holdings-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=16957&wire=1
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 27, 2021
Class Period: October 26, 2019 - April 30, 2021

Allegations against SPCE include that: (i) for accounting purposes,
Social Capital Hedosophia Holdings Corp.'s ("SCH") warrants were
required to be treated as liabilities rather than equities; (ii)
Virgin Galactic had deficient disclosure controls and procedures
and internal control over financial reporting; (iii) as a result,
the Company improperly accounted for SCH warrants that were
outstanding at the time of the business combination; and (iv) as a
result, the Company's public statements were materially false and
misleading at all relevant times.

To learn more contact Vincent Wong, Esq. either via email
vw@wongesq.com or by telephone at 212.425.1140.

Vincent Wong, Esq. is an experienced attorney who has represented
investors in securities litigations involving financial fraud and
violations of shareholder rights. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Vincent Wong, Esq.
39 East Broadway
Suite 304
New York, NY 10002
Tel. 212.425.1140
Fax. 866.699.3880
E-Mail: vw@wongesq.com [GN]

WASHINGTON PRIME: Klein Law Reminds Investors of July 23 Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been
filed on behalf of shareholders of Washington Prime Group, Inc.
There is no cost to participate in the suit. If you suffered a
loss, you have until the lead plaintiff deadline to request that
the court appoint you as lead plaintiff.

Washington Prime Group, Inc. (NYSE:WPG)
Class Period: November 5, 2020 - March 4, 2021
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 23, 2021

The WPG lawsuit alleges that Washington Prime Group, Inc. made
materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose that: (1) WPG's financial condition was deteriorating
substantially; (2) as a result, there was substantial uncertainty
about the Company's ability to meet its capital structure
obligations as they became due; and (3) 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.

Learn about your recoverable losses in WPG:
https://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/washington-prime-group-inc-loss-submission-form?id=16978&from=1

Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you
serve as a lead plaintiff. If you suffered a loss during the class
period and wish to obtain additional information, please contact J.
Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or visit the webpages
provided.

J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities
litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar
outcomes.

CONTACT:
J. Klein, Esq.
Empire State Building
350 Fifth Avenue
59th Floor
New York, NY 10118
jk@kleinstocklaw.com
Telephone: (212) 616-4899
Fax: (347) 558-9665
www.kleinstocklaw.com [GN]


WESTCHESTER SURPLUS: Cafe Int'l Appeals Insurance Suit Dismissal
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Cafe International Holding Company LLC filed an appeal
from a court ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled CAFE
INTERNATIONAL HOLDING COMPANY LLC, Plaintiff v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS
LINES INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 1:20-cv-21641-JG, in
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

As reported in the Class Action Reporter on May 17, 2021,
Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman of the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of Florida, Miami Division, granted
Westchester's motion for judgment on the pleadings and dismissed
the complaint.

Westchester issued a commercial property insurance policy to Cafe
International -- the owner and operator of IT Italy, a restaurant
in Fort Lauderdale, Florida -- for the policy period from Nov. 29,
2019 to Nov. 29, 2020. The Policy specifies what it covers and what
it does not. Coverage is available only if Cafe International
proves that a "Covered Cause of Loss" caused direct physical loss
of or damage to the property. The Policy defines "Covered Cause of
Loss" as "direct physical loss unless the loss is excluded or
limited in this policy."

The Policy provides three types of coverage relevant in the case:
Business Income, Extra Expense, and Civil Authority. Each type of
coverage is triggered only where there is (i) direct physical harm
to property (ii) caused by or resulting from a Covered Cause of
Loss.

Cafe International filed suit on April 20, 2020, asserting six
claims for breach of contract and declaratory judgment on the
theory that it is entitled to Business Income, Extra Expense, and
Civil Authority coverage from Westchester for certain losses Café
International allegedly suffered during the coronavirus pandemic.
The Complaint alleges that, in March 2020, Cafe International was
"forced to suspend business operations at its restaurant, as a
result of COVID-19" and because civil authority orders allegedly
"prohibited public access" to the restaurant.

The Complaint also asserts a legal conclusion that the suspension
of Cafe International's business operations resulted from "the
presence of COVID-19 causing direct physical loss of and/or damage
to" Cafe International's restaurant. But the Complaint does not,
and cannot, allege facts supporting this conclusory allegation.
Moreover, at the hearing on Westchester's motion for judgment on
the pleadings, the Plaintiff's counsel was likewise unable to
articulate any specific facts about this conclusory allegation; he
said it was not commercially feasible to now pinpoint any specific
property which was in fact damaged.

The Plaintiff is seeking a review of the case dismissal order
entered by Judge Goodman.

The appellate case is captioned as Cafe International Holding
Company LLC v. Westchester Surplus Lines Insurance Company, Case
No. 21-11930, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Eleventh Circuit, filed on June 4, 2021.

The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:

   -- Appellant's Certificate of Interested Persons was due on June
18, 2021 as to Appellant Cafe International Holding Company LLC;
and

   -- Appellee's Certificate of Interested Persons is due on or
before July 2, 2021 as to Appellee Westchester Surplus Lines
Insurance Company.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellant CAFE INTERNATIONAL HOLDING COMPANY LLC,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is
represented by:

          Alexander Boies, Esq.
          Nicholas A. Gravante, Jr., Esq.
          BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP
          55 Hudson Yards Fl 20
          New York, NY 10001
          Telephone: (212) 446-2230
          E-mail: aboies@bsfllp.com
                  ngravante@bsfllp.com

               - and -

          David Boies, Esq.
          BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP
          333 Main St
          Armonk, NY 10504
          Telephone: (914) 749-8200
          E-mail: dboies@bsfllp.com  

               - and -

          Lea Pilar Bucciero, Esq.
          Kristina Marie Infante, Esq.
          Steven Craig Marks, Esq.
          Aaron S. Podhurst, Esq.
          Pablo Rojas, Esq.
          Matthew P. Weinshall, Esq.  
          PODHURST ORSECK, PA
          1 SE 3rd Ave Ste 2300
          Miami, FL 33130
          Telephone: (305) 358-2800
          E-mail: lbucciero@podhurst.com
                  kinfante@podhurst.com
                  smarks@podhurst.com
                  apodhurst@podhurst.com
                  mweinshall@podhurst.com  

               - and -

          Marshall Dore Louis, Esq.
          Bruce Alan Weil, Esq.
          Stephen Neal Zack, Esq.
          BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER, LLP
          100 SE 2nd St Ste 2800
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 539-8400
          E-mail: mlouis@bsfllp.com
                  bweil@bsfllp.com
                  szack@bsfllp.com   

Defendant-Appellee WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY is
represented by:

          Steven J. Brodie, Esq.
          CARLTON FIELDS, PA
          700 NW 1st Ave Ste 1200
          Miami, FL 33136-4118
          Telephone: (305) 530-0050
          E-mail: sbrodie@carltonfields.com  

               - and -

          Allen W. Burton, Esq.
          Leah Godesky, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP
          7 Times Sq Ste 34
          New York, NY 10036
          Telephone: (212) 326-2000
          E-mail: aburton@omm.com

               - and -

          Andrew Kenneth Daechsel, Esq.
          CARLTON FIELDS PA
          100 SE 2nd St Ste 4200
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 530-3000
          E-mail: akdaechsel@carltonfields.com   

               - and -

          Richard Blair Goetz, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP
          400 S Hope St Ste 1800
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-6000
          E-mail: rgoetz@omm.com  

               - and -

          Amy J. Laurendeau, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP
          610 Newport Center Dr Fl 17
          Newport Beach, CA 92660-6419
          Telephone: (949) 823-6900
          E-mail: alaurendeau@omm.com

               - and -

          Daniel M. Petrocelli, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP
          1999 Avenue of the Stars 8th Fl
          Los Angeles, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 553-6700
          E-mail: dpetrocelli@omm.com  

               - and -

          Heidi Hudson Raschke, Esq.
          CARLTON FIELDS, PA
          4221 W Boy Scout Blvd Ste 1000
          PO Box 3239
          Tampa, FL 33601-3239
          Telephone: (813) 223-7000
          E-mail: hraschke@carltonfields.com

WESTERN DIGITAL: To Settle SMR HDD False Advertising Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Alcorn at tomshardware.com reports that WD has moved to settle
one of its ongoing class-action lawsuits for false advertising
associated with its SMR WD Red hard drives, according to a report
from LawStreet. The proposed settlement comes after widespread
criticism from WD's customers about its surreptitious use of slower
shingled magnetic recording (SMR) technology in some of its hard
drives without disclosing that fact in marketing materials or
specification sheets. Notably, this settlement is only proposed for
one of the multiple litigation actions against Western Digital on
the matter.

With the settlement, WD would agree that the WD Red NAS HDDs with
SMR tech aren't suitable for NAS and RAID usage. The negotiated
terms come to $2.7 million, with complainants receiving $4 to $7 in
cash for each drive purchased with a maximum pro-rata adjustment of
85% of the retail price possible. That means the maximum damages
per drive in the ~$160 range (although this is hard to calculate
due to inflated pricing due to ongoing HDD shortages). You won't
need proof of purchase to make a claim.

WD previously disclosed to Tom's Hardware that the 2 to 6TB WD Red
hard drives, among others, use SMR technology. This tech boosts
capacity and results in a lower manufacturing cost, but it comes at
the expense of performance, particularly in random write activity.
Aside from generally slower performance, that can also cause
excessive rebuild times (resilvering) in the targets NAS use cases,
particularly if they use ZFS RAID arrays.

The settlement value comes as the culmination of 10 weeks of
negotiations and also includes lawyers' fees and other costs. WD
also agrees to fully disclose the recording technology used in its
drives, both on the packaging and its web pages, for the next four
years.

The original false advertising claims against WD touched off a wave
of class-action lawsuits, with one even calling for a ban to block
WD from selling SMR drives for NAS usage. The company has since
clarified which drives use SMR technology and even released new
drives to address the issue.

WD isn't the only HDD manufacturer to ship the slower SMR tech
without full disclosure - Toshiba and Seagate also shipped drives
without full disclosure. We aren't aware of any pending litigation
against those companies. We do know that multiple class-action
lawsuits have been filed against WD in different regions. LawStreet
reports that one such lawsuit has been dismissed while the
plaintiff amends the complaint. [GN]


                            *********

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

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

Copyright 2021. 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 ***