/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/211112.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Friday, November 12, 2021, Vol. 23, No. 221

                            Headlines

3M COMPANY: Curcio Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Harris Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Hill Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
ABIOMED INC: Local 705 Teamsters' Class Suit Voluntarily Dismissed
AMAZON.COM: Reid Sues Over Unlawful Collection of Biometric Data

AMI EXPEDITIONARY: Savattier Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
BALA BANGLES: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
BANTAM BAGELS: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
BASSETT HEALTHCARE: Walrath Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
BEAUTY SYSTEMS: Mason Files ADA Suit in C.D. California

BEST INTERIORS: Gomez Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages, Penalties
BISCUITS & BATH: Fischler Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
BLACK GIRL: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
BRISTOL FARMS: Schwenk Sues Over Failure to Provide Premium Pay
BW PACKAGING: Aguirre Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages

CARRIER GLOBAL: Darnis Putative Class Suit Underway
CATALINA SNACKS: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
CHOMP EATERY: Alonzo Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
CL TRADING: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
CLUTTER INC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York

CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING: Scarpim Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
DBI SERVICES LLC: Jankowski Seeks Damages for Illegal Termination
DCH HEALTH CARE: Shortchanges Nurses' Overtime Pay, Gordon Says
DEDMAN'S SANITATION: Norvell Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
DESTINATION ANYWHERE: Guzman Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.

DYLA LLC: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
EL PORTON BAR: Fory Sues to Recover Proper Wages Under FLSA
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Grauman Files FCRA Suit in E.D. New York
EXHALE ENTERPRISES: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
GARRETT MOTION: Bid to Junk Consolidated Suit in New York Pending

GBR FINANCIAL: Perrong Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Pennsylvania
GEISINGER CLINIC: Federoff Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
GLOBAL PRECISION: Detention Officers Seek Pay for Off-Shift Hours
GOODPOP LLC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
HAGOOD HOLDINGS: Beam Slams Misclassification, Seeks Overtime Pay

HEARST COMMUNICATIONS: Ricketts Files Suit in S.D. New York
HERTZ GLOBAL: Ramirez Putative Class Suit Concluded
HIGHLINE WELLNESS: Bunting Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
HNLY LA: Fischler Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER: Chavez Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Whipple Suit Transferred to D. New Jersey
LIBERTY OILFIELD: Cobb and Joseph IPO Class Suits Underway
MAUDE GROUP: Graciano Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
MCKINSEY & COMPANY: Kent City Suit Transferred to N.D. Cal.
MEDICREDIT INC: Foley FDCPA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey

MOINK LLC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
NIELSEN HOLDINGS: PERS of Mississippi Suit Stayed for 90 Days
PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Bid to Nix NMSIC Lead Putative Class Suit Pending
PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Grower Litigation Underway in Oklahoma
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Boellner Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. Florida

TRIBEST CORP: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
TRIM FABRIC: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ULTIMA REPLENISHER: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
WINC INC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
YOGA SIX: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York


                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crane Co. Has 29,926 Pending Claims at Sept. 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Int'l. Faces Personal Injury Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lennox International Still Defends PI Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Olin Corporation Still Faces Exposure Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Has $1.05BB in Asbestos Liabilities



                            *********

3M COMPANY: Curcio Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Curcio, 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-03540-RMG (D.S.C., Oct. 27,
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, AFFF is a specialized substance
designed to extinguish petroleum-based fires. It has been used for
decades by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires
in training and in response to Class B fires. The Defendants
collectively designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released into the
stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained highly
toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users of the
product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further, the Defendants
designed, marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released,
trained users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold
and/or otherwise handled and/or used underlying chemicals and/or
products added to AFFF which contained PFAS for use in
firefighting.

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 and was diagnosed with
kidney cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.

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:

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



3M COMPANY: Harris Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Edward Charles Harris, 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-03531-RMG (D.S.C., Oct. 27,
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, AFFF is a specialized substance
designed to extinguish petroleum-based fires. It has been used for
decades by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires
in training and in response to Class B fires. The Defendants
collectively designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released into the
stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained highly
toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users of the
product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further, the Defendants
designed, marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released,
trained users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold
and/or otherwise handled and/or used underlying chemicals and/or
products added to AFFF which contained PFAS for use in
firefighting.

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 and was diagnosed with
kidney cancer and prostate cancer as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products.

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:

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


3M COMPANY: Hill Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Wesley Hill Sr., 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-03533-RMG (D.S.C., Oct. 27,
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, AFFF is a specialized substance
designed to extinguish petroleum-based fires. It has been used for
decades by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires
in training and in response to Class B fires. The Defendants
collectively designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released into the
stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained highly
toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users of the
product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further, the Defendants
designed, marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released,
trained users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold
and/or otherwise handled and/or used underlying chemicals and/or
products added to AFFF which contained PFAS for use in
firefighting.

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 and was diagnosed with
kidney cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.

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:

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


ABIOMED INC: Local 705 Teamsters' Class Suit Voluntarily Dismissed
------------------------------------------------------------------
Abiomed, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that the Company and
Local 705 International Brotherhood of Teamsters Pension Fund
entered into a stipulation to voluntarily dismiss the securities
class action and the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York ordered dismissal of the case with prejudice.

On or about August 6, 2019, the Company received a securities class
action complaint filed on behalf of a single shareholder in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, on
behalf of himself and persons or entities that purchased or
acquired the Company's securities between January 31, 2019 through
July 31, 2019.

On October 7, 2019, a similar purported class action complaint was
filed by a different shareholder on behalf of himself and persons
or entities that purchased or acquired the Company's securities
between November 1, 2018 and July 31, 2019.

Also, on October 7, 2019, four shareholders filed applications to
be appointed lead plaintiff and for their counsel to be appointed
lead counsel for the class.

Two of those shareholders also filed motions to consolidate the two
cases and two of the shareholders have withdrawn their applications
to be lead plaintiff.

The complaints alleged that the Company violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of and Rule 10b-5 under the Exchange Act, in connection with
allegedly misleading disclosures made by the Company regarding its
financial condition and results of operations.

On June 29, 2020, SDNY issued an order consolidating the two cases
and appointed Local 705 International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Pension Fund as the lead plaintiff and Labaton Sucharow LLP as lead
counsel.  

On September 17, 2020, the lead plaintiff filed an amended
complaint in which it proposed a new class period of May 3, 2018 to
July 31, 2019. As prescribed by a scheduling order, the Company
filed a motion to dismiss on November 16, 2020.

On September 21, 2021, SDNY granted the Company's motion, dismissed
the amended complaint, and gave the lead plaintiff leave to move to
amend the complaint by October 12, 2021.

On October 12, 2021, the Company and the lead plaintiff entered
into a stipulation to voluntarily dismiss the securities class
action and SDNY ordered dismissal of the case with prejudice on the
same day.

Under the terms of the stipulation, the lead plaintiff has agreed
not to move for leave to amend the complaint and not to appeal the
dismissal of the action.  

No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report.

Abiomed, Inc. is a provider of mechanical circulatory support
devices and offers a continuum of care in heart recovery to heart
failure patients. The Company develops, manufactures and markets
proprietary products that are designed to enable the heart to rest,
heal and recover by improving blood flow and/or performing the
pumping function of the heart. The Company's products are used in
the cardiac catheterization lab, or cath lab, by interventional
cardiologists and in the heart surgery suite by heart surgeons for
patients who are in need of hemodynamic support prophylactically or
emergently before, during or after angioplasty or heart surgery
procedures. The company is based in Danvers, Massachusetts.


AMAZON.COM: Reid Sues Over Unlawful Collection of Biometric Data
----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Reid, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. AMAZON.COM, INC. and AMAZON.COM SERVICES, INC., Case
No. 1:21-cv-06010 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 9, 2021), is brought on behalf
of customers harmed as a result of Amazon's surreptitious
collection, use, and storage of Plaintiff's and the proposed
Class's highly sensitive biometric data in violation of the
Illinois Biometric Information Privacy.

According to the complaint, Amazon develops certain technology
products, including Alexa, Amazon's "cloud-based voice service
available on hundreds of millions of devices from Amazon and
third-party device manufacturers." Amazon further describes Alexa
as its "voice AI," which "lives in the cloud and is happy to help
anywhere there's internet access and a device that can connect to
Alexa." Alexa "listens" to verbal communications and responds to
those communications in a simulated voice. In order to use an Alexa
Device, a person needs an internet connection and the Alexa mobile
application installed on a smartphone or tablet.

Unbeknownst to users, Amazon uses voice recognition technology to
surreptitiously collect, use, and store voiceprints of its users to
identify them. Amazon stores the biometric information of users in
its database located in the cloud. Amazon does not disclose its
biometric data collection to its users, nor does it ask users to
acknowledge, let alone consent to, these practices. Worse, instead
of disclosing its practice of collecting biometric identifiers in
the form of voiceprints, Amazon intentionally deceives users by
telling them that what Amazon collects is a voice input without
explaining the underlying technology and that it collects the
users' biometric data.

Through these practices, Amazon not only disregards the users'
privacy rights; it also violates the BIPA, which was specifically
designed to protect Illinois residents from practices like
Amazon's. In particular, Amazon violated (and continues to violate)
BIPA because it does not: Properly inform Plaintiff or the Class in
writing that their biometric identifiers (voiceprints) were being
generated, collected, stored and used; Properly inform Plaintiff or
the Class in writing of the specific purpose and length of time for
which their biometric identifiers were being collected, stored, and
used; Provide and follow a publicly available retention schedule
and guidelines for permanently destroying the biometric identifiers
of Plaintiff and the Class; and Receive a written release from
Plaintiff or the Class to collect, capture, or otherwise obtain
their biometric identifiers, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff has owned an Alexa Device since at least 2017.

Amazon is a world leader in e-commerce, cloud computing, digital
streaming, and artificial intelligence.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Anthony F. Fata, Esq.
          CAFFERTY CLOBES MERIWETHER & SPRENGEL LLP
          135 S. Wacker, Suite 3210
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Phone: (312) 782-4880
          Email: afata@caffertyclobes.com

               - and -

          Christian Levis, Esq.
          Margaret MacLean, Esq.
          Amanda Fiorilla, Esq.
          LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
          44 South Broadway, Suite 1100
          White Plains, NY 10601
          Phone: (914) 997-0500
          Facsimile: (914) 997-0035
          Email: clevis@lowey.com
                 mmaclean@lowey.com
                 afiorilla@lowey.com


AMI EXPEDITIONARY: Savattier Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Matthew Savattieri, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. AMI Expeditionary Healthcare, LLC, a
Delaware liability company; AMI Expeditionary Healthcare (USA),
LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company; DOES 1 through 25,
inclusive; Case No. 21STCV33372 was removed from the Los Angeles
County Superior Court to the United States District Court for the
Central District of California on Oct. 27, 2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:21-cv-08524-MCS-GJS to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Jobs Civil Rights for Employment
Discrimination.

AMI Expeditionary Healthcare -- https://ami.health/ -- is a novel
healthcare support organization.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan M. Genish, Esq.
          Matthew William Dietz, Esq.
          Sara Emi Ikeda Minne, Esq.
          BLACKSTONE LAW
          8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442
          Phone: 855-786-6355
          Fax: 855-786-6356
          Email: jgenish@blackstonepc.com
                 mdietz@blackstonepc.com
                 eminne@blackstonepc.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          JoAnna L. Brooks, Esq.
          Dominique N. Thomas, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON PC
          Treat Towers
          1255 Treat Boulevard Suite 600
          Walnut Creek, CA 94597
          Phone: (925) 932-2468
          Fax: (925) 946-9809
          Email: jbrooks@littler.com
                 DNThomas@littler.com


BALA BANGLES: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bala Bangles Inc. The
case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Bala Bangles Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-09230 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Bala Bangles -- https://shopbala.com/ -- are stylish wrist weight
bands from Los Angeles-based activewear company, Bala.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


BANTAM BAGELS: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bantam Bagels LLC.
The case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Bantam Bagels LLC, Case No.
1:21-cv-09234 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Bantam Bagels -- https://www.bantambagels.com/ -- offers mini
stuffed bagels and pancakes authentically made in NYC.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


BASSETT HEALTHCARE: Walrath Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
David Walrath and Harley Reynolds, individually and on behalf of
all other persons similarly situated who were employed by BASSETT
HEALTHCARE NETWORK and/or any other entities affiliated with or
controlled by BASSETT HEALTHCARE NETWORK v. BASSETT HEALTHCARE
NETWORK and any related entities, Case No. 6:21-cv-01179-DNH-ATB
(N.D.N.Y., Oct. 27, 2021), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act, New York Labor Law, and New York Codes, Rules and
Regulations to recover unpaid wages and overtime compensation as
well as related damages owed to the Plaintiffs.

Beginning in October 2015 and continuing through the present, the
Defendant has engaged in a policy and practice of depriving its
employees of the applicable straight time wages and overtime wages
for work they performed as mandated by federal and state law. The
Defendant has engaged in a policy and practice of requiring its
employees to regularly work in excess of 40 hours per week, without
providing overtime compensation as required by the applicable
federal and state laws. The Defendant also failed to provide
appropriate wage notices to the Plaintiffs and those similarly
situated as required under NYLL, sys the complaint.

The Plaintiffs were employed by Defendant as Nursing Assistants.

The Defendant is a domestic corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Frank S. Gattuso, Esq.
          GATTUSO & CIOTOLI, PLLC
          The White House
          7030 E. Genesee Street
          Fayetteville, NY 13066
          Phone: 315-314-8000
          Fax: 315-446-7521 (fax)
          Email: fgattuso@gclawoffice.com


BEAUTY SYSTEMS: Mason Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Beauty Systems Group
LLC, et al. The case is styled as Portia Mason, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Beauty Systems Group LLC
doing business as: Cosmo Prof, a Virginia limited liability
company, Does 1 to 10, inclusive, Case No. 2:21-cv-08506-JAK-GJS
(C.D. Cal., Oct. 27, 2021).

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

Beauty Systems Group (BSG) -- http://www.cosmoprofbeauty.com/-- is
a network of stores and Direct Sales Consultants selling exclusive
professional salon brands to licensed beauty professionals.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Binyamin I. Manoucheri, Esq.
          Jasmine Behroozan, Esq.
          Thiago Merlini Coelho, Esq.
          WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
          3055 Wilshire Boulevard 12th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90010
          Phone: (213) 381-9988
          Fax: (213) 381-9989
          Email: binyamin@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 jasmine@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com


BEST INTERIORS: Gomez Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages, Penalties
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jorge Gomez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Best Interiors, Inc. and Does 1 through 20,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 37-2021-00045785 (Cal. Super.,
October 27, 2021), seeks unpaid wages and interest thereon for
failure to pay for all hours worked and minimum wage rate, failure
to authorize or permit required meal periods, and failure to
authorize or permit required rest periods.

The lawsuit also seeks statutory penalties for failure to provide
accurate wage statements, waiting time penalties in the form of
continuation wages for failure to timely pay employees all wages
due upon separation of employment, unfair competition, injunctive
relief and other equitable relief, reasonable attorney's fees,
costs and interest pursuant to California Labor Code and applicable
Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders.

Best Interiors employed Gomez as non-exempt employee at its
California business location. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jessica L. Campbell, Esq.
      Kashif Haque, Esq.
      Samuel A. Wong, Esq.
      AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC
      9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100
      Irvine, CA 2618
      Telephone: (949) 379-6250
      Facsimile: (949) 379-6251
      Email: jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com
             swong@aegislawfirm.com
             khaque@aegislawfirm.com


BISCUITS & BATH: Fischler Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Biscuits & Bath
Companies, LLC. The case is styled as Brian Fischler, Individually
and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. Biscuits &
Bath Companies, LLC doing business as: Biscuits & Bath, Case No.
1:21-cv-09220 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Biscuits & Bath -- https://www.biscuitsandbath.com/ -- is a
consumer services company that provides veterinary care and
transportation services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas Brian Lipsky, Esq.
          LIPSKY LOWE LLP
          630 Third Avenue Fifth Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Phone: (212) 392-4772
          Fax: (212) 444-1030
          Email: doug@lipskylowe.com

BLACK GIRL: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Black Girl Sunscreen
LLC. The case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Black Girl Sunscreen
LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-09215 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

BlackGirlSunscreen -- https://www.blackgirlsunscreen.com/ -- is a
sunscreen made for ethnic women, in particular black women of
various shades.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


BRISTOL FARMS: Schwenk Sues Over Failure to Provide Premium Pay
---------------------------------------------------------------
John Schwenk, as a proxy for the State of California and on behalf
of all similarly aggrieved employees v. BRISTOL FARMS, a California
corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
30-2021-01228170-CU-OE-CXC (Cal. Super. Ct., Orange Cty., Oct. 25,
2021), is brought for violations of the Private Attorneys General
Act (the "PAGA"), and the California Labor Code, arising from the
Defendant's failure to pay meal and rest period premium based on
the regular rate of pay during pay periods in which Plaintiff and
aggrieved employees were paid meal and rest period premium pay.

The Plaintiff earned non-discretionary incentive pay, including
bonuses, which was not factored into the regular rate of pay for
purposes of paying meal and rest period premium pay. Instead,
during pay periods in which Plaintiff earned non-discretionary
remuneration covering time periods in which Plaintiff was paid meal
and rest period premium pay, Defendants improperly paid the meal
premium pay at the base rate of pay, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff currently works for the Defendant as a non-exempt
produce manager at the Defendant's supermarket located in Newport
Beach, California.

Bristol Farms is a supermarket chain with locations throughout the
United States, including without limitation, in Orange County,
California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Larry W. Lee, Esq.
          DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C.
          515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: (213) 488-6555
          Facsimile: (213) 488-6554
          Email: lwlee@diversitylaw.com

               - and -

          William L. Marder, Esq.
          POLARIS LAW GROUP LLP
          501 San Benito Street, Suite 200
          Hollister, CA 95023
          Phone: (831) 531-4214
          Facsimile: (831) 634-0333
          Email: bill@polarislawgroup.com

               - and -

          Dennis S. Hyun, Esq.
          HYUN LEGAL, APC
          515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: (213) 488-6555
          Facsimile: (213) 488-6554
          Email: dhyun@hyunlegal.com

               - and -

          Edward W. Choi, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF CHOI & ASSOCIATES
          515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Phone: (213) 381-1515
          Facsimile: (213) 465-4885
          Email: edward.choi@choiandassociates.com


BW PACKAGING: Aguirre Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mariano Aguirre, Jr., individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. BW PACKAGING SYSTEMS, INC., a Missouri
corporation; BARRY-WEHMILLER GROUP, INC., a Missouri corporation;
BARRY WEHMILLER COMPANIES, INC., a Missouri corporation; BARRY
WEHMILLER DESIGN GROUP, INC., a Missouri corporation; THIELE
TECHNOLOGIES LLC, a California limited liability company; and DOES
1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 21STCV39617 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 27, 2021), is brought against the Defendants for
California Labor Code violations and unfair business practices
stemming from the Defendants' failure to pay minimum wages, failure
to pay overtime wages, failure to provide meal periods, failure to
authorize and permit rest periods, failure to maintain accurate
records of hours worked and meal periods, failure to timely pay all
wages to terminated employees, failure to indemnify necessary
business expenses, and failure to furnish accurate wage
statements.

The complaint alleges that the Defendants maintained a systematic,
company-wide policy and practice of: Failing to pay employees for
all hours worked, including all minimum wages, and overtime wages
in compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders;
Failing to provide employees with timely and duty-free meal periods
in compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders,
failing to maintain accurate records of all meal periods taken or
missed, and failing to pay an additional hour's pay for each
workday a meal period violation occurred; Failing to authorize and
permit employees to take timely and duty-free rest periods in
compliance with the California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, and
failing to pay an additional hour's pay for each workday a rest
period violation occurred; Failing to indemnify employees for
necessary business expenses incurred; Willfully failing to pay
employees all minimum wages, overtime wages, meal period premium
wages, and rest period premium wages due within the time period
specified by California law when employment terminates; and Failing
to maintain accurate records of the hours that employees worked.
Failing to provide employees with accurate, itemized wage
statements containing all the information required by the
California Labor Code and IWC Wage Orders, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff worked for Defendants in the County of Los Angeles,
State of California, as a laser operator from 2014 to May 2021.

The Defendants own/owned and operate/operated an industry,
business, and establishment within the State of California,
including Los Angeles County.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kane Moon, Esq.
          Allen Feghali, Esq.
          Enzo Nabiev, Esq.
          MOON & YANG, APC
          1055 W. Seventh St., Suite 1880
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Phone: (213) 232-3128
          Facsimile: (213) 232-3125
          Email: kane.moon@moonyanglaw.com
                 allen.feghali@moonyanglaw.com
                 enzo.nabiev@moonyanglaw.com


CARRIER GLOBAL: Darnis Putative Class Suit Underway
---------------------------------------------------
Carrier Global Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that the company
continues to defend a putative class action suit entitled, Geraud
Darnis, et al. v. Raytheon Technologies Corporation, et al.

On August 12, 2020, several former employees of United Technologies
Corporation, ("UTC") or its subsidiaries filed a putative class
action complaint in the United States District Court for the
District of Connecticut against Raytheon Technologies Corporation,
Carrier, Otis Worldwide Corporation ("Otis"), the former members of
the UTC Board of Directors and the members of the Carrier and Otis
Boards of Directors (Geraud Darnis, et al. v. Raytheon Technologies
Corporation, et al.).

The Complaint challenges the method by which UTC equity awards were
converted to UTC, Carrier and Otis equity awards following the
Separation and the Distribution. Defendants moved to dismiss the
Complaint.

Plaintiffs amended their Complaint on September 13, 2021. The
amended Complaint, now with Raytheon, Carrier and Otis as the only
defendants, asserts that the defendants are liable for breach of
certain equity compensation plans and for breach of the implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

The Amended Complaint also seeks specific performance. Carrier
believes that the claims against the Company are without merit.

Carrier Global Corporation is a leading global provider of heating,
ventilating, air conditioning ("HVAC"), refrigeration, and fire and
security solutions. Carrier also provides a broad array of related
building services, including audit, design, installation, system
integration, repair, maintenance and monitoring. The company is
based in Palm Beach, Florida.


CATALINA SNACKS: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Catalina Snacks Inc.
The case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Catalina Snacks Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-09232 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Catalina Snacks Inc. -- https://us.catalinacrunch.com/ -- is one of
the fastest-growing companies in the Keto-Friendly cereal and snack
food categories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


CHOMP EATERY: Alonzo Files ADA Suit in C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Chomp Eatery and
Juice Station Inc. The case is styled as Thuy Thanh Alonzo,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Chomp Eatery and Juice Station Inc., a California corporation, Does
1 to 10, inclusive, Case No. 2:21-cv-08519-RGK-SK (C.D. Cal., Oct.
27, 2021).

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

Chomp eatery -- http://www.chompeatery.com/-- serves tasty gourmet
burgers, sandwiches, wraps, fresh salads and cold pressed juices in
Santa Monica.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Binyamin I. Manoucheri, Esq.
          Jasmine Behroozan, Esq.
          Thiago Merlini Coelho, Esq.
          WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
          3055 Wilshire Boulevard 12th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90010
          Phone: (213) 381-9988
          Fax: (213) 381-9989
          Email: binyamin@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 jasmine@wilshirelawfirm.com
                 thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com


CL TRADING: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against CL Trading LLC. The
case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. CL Trading LLC, Case No.
1:21-cv-09263 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 9, 2021).

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

CL Trading LLC -- https://t.cltradingfl.com/ -- is located in
Jackson, Miami and is part of the Household Appliances and
Electrical and Electronic Goods Merchant Wholesalers Industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


CLUTTER INC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Clutter Inc. The case
is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Clutter Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-09228
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Clutter Inc. -- https://www.clutter.com/ -- offers customizable
solutions for everyone including warehouse storage, self-storage,
moving, and packing supplies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com

CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING: Scarpim Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Ricardo Scarpim, on behalf of herself and those
similarly situated v. CONVERGENT OUTSOURCING, INC., VELOCITY
INVESTMENTS, LLC, JOHN DOES 1 TO 10, Case No. ESX-L-49-00021 was
removed from the Superior Court, Essex County, Law Division, to the
United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on Oct.
28, 2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:21-cv-19414-MCA-JBC to
the proceeding.

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

Convergent -- https://www.convergentusa.com/outsourcing/ -- is one
of America's leading collections agencies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yongmoon Kim, Esq.
          KIM LAW FIRM, LLC
          411 Hackensack Ave Ste 701
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Phone: (201) 273-7117
          Fax: (201) 273-7117
          Email: ykim@kimlf.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Aaron Raphael Easley, Esq.
          SESSIONS, ISRAEL& SHARTLE, LLC
          3 Cross Creek Drive
          Flemington, NJ 08822
          Phone: (908) 237-1660
          Fax: (908) 237-1663
          Email: aeasley@sessions-law.biz

               - and -

          Ashley R. Newman, Esq.
          HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP
          800 Third Avenue, 13th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Phone: (212) 471-6202
          Fax: (212) 935-1166
          Email: ANewman@hinshawlaw.com

DBI SERVICES LLC: Jankowski Seeks Damages for Illegal Termination
------------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Jankowski, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. DBi Services, LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 21-cv-01833, (M.D. Pa., October 27, 2021) seeks to recover
damages equaling 60 days' pay and ERISA benefits due to violations
of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988
including pay for accrued but unused vacation time, PTO time, and
any other workplace-related obligations owed.

DBi Services is an asset management and infrastructure services
company that provides a wide spectrum of services for government
and private entities where Jankowski was employed at their Hazleton
facility for nearly 17 years, until his layoff when DBi ordered a
mass layoff and/or plant closing of the Hazleton facility.
Jankowski alleges that DBi failed to provide 60 days' advance
notice to its employees. [BN]. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael Miller, Esq.
     MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN
     The Curtis Center, 4th Floor
     6th and Walnut Streets
     Philadelphia, PA 19106
     Phone: (302) 888-1112
            (610) 329-9250

           - and -

     James E. Huggett, Esq.
     MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN
     300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 800
     Wilmington, DE 19801
     Phone: (302) 888-1112
     Fax: (302) 888-1119
     Email:jhuggett@margolisedelstein.com


DCH HEALTH CARE: Shortchanges Nurses' Overtime Pay, Gordon Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Brittany Gordon, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. The DCH Health Care Authority, Defendant, Case No.
21-cv-01437 (N.D. Ala., October 27, 2021), seeks to recover
monetary damages, liquidated damages, prejudgment interest, and
costs, including reasonable attorneys' fees as a result of failure
to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

Defendant operates three medical centers in Alabama where Gordon
was employed as an hourly-paid Nurse from January of 2015 until the
present. She claims to be paid an improper overtime rate without
including the value of the nondiscretionary bonuses that she
received. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Courtney Lowery, Esq.
      SANFORD LAW FIRM
      Post Office Box 39
      Russellville, AR 72811
      Tel: (479) 880-0088
      Fax: (888) 787-2040
      Email: courtney@sanfordlawfirm.com


DEDMAN'S SANITATION: Norvell Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
John Norvell, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. DEDMAN'S SANITATION and JIM DEDMAN, Case No.
3:21-cv-00233-KGB (E.D. Ark., Nov. 5, 2021), is brought against the
Defendant for violations of the overtime provisions of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act.

The Defendants required Plaintiff and other Drivers and Helpers to
follow the Defendants' business policies and rules. The Defendants
did not pay Plaintiff or other Drivers and Helpers an overtime
premium for hours worked over forty per week. The Plaintiff
occasionally worked hours for which he was not paid. The Defendants
have deprived the Plaintiff and other Drivers and Helpers of proper
overtime compensation for all hours worked over forty per week. The
Defendants knew or should have known that they failed to pay the
Plaintiff and other Drivers and Helpers sufficient overtime wages,
says the complaint.

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a Driver from January
of 2018 to January of 2021.

The Defendants own and operate a sanitation and waste disposal
service in Arkansas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Josh Sanford, Esq.
          SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
          Kirkpatrick Plaza
          10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510
          Little Rock, AK 72211
          Phone: (501) 221-0088
          Facsimile: (888) 787-2040
          Email: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com


DESTINATION ANYWHERE: Guzman Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Destination Anywhere
Inc. The case is styled as Juan Perez Guzman, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Destination Anywhere
Inc. a California corporation, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2021-0010462
(Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., Nov. 9, 2021).

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

Destination Anywhere, Inc. -- https://destinationanywhere.us/ -- is
a licensed and bonded freight shipping and trucking company running
freight hauling business from Tracy, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan Melmed, Esq.
          MELMED LAW GROUP P.C.
          1801 Century Park E., Ste. 850
          Los Angeles, CA 90067-2346
          Phone: 310-824-3828
          Fax: 310-862-6851
          Email: jm@melmedlaw.com


DYLA LLC: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Dyla LLC. The case is
styled as Angel Rodriguez, individually and as the representative
of a class of similarly situated persons v. Dyla LLC doing business
as: Stur, Case No. 1:21-cv-06174 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2021).

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

Dyla LLC doing business as Stur -- https://sturdrinks.com/ -- is a
leading Water Enhancer brand made with delicious, all-natural fruit
and stevia leaf extracts – no sugar and no calories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


EL PORTON BAR: Fory Sues to Recover Proper Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------
Isabella Fory, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. El Porton Bar & Restaurant Corp., El
Porton Bar & Restaurant No. 2 Corp., Rafael Merlin, Meylen Eng and
Moises Merlin, Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-08776 (S.D. N.Y., October
27, 2021), seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages and
redress for failure to provide itemized wage statements 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 "El Porton" restaurant located
in Broadway, New York where Perros worked as a waitress. Perros
worked between 72 to 80 hours a week without meal breaks during her
12-13-hour daily shifts, asserts the complaint. Defendants failed
to compensate employees the minimum wage for hours over 33-35,
overtime premiums and spread-of-hour pay, it adds.

Fory claims to have spent over 20% of each shift performing
non-tipped duties and for those days, she claims to receive less
than minimum wage. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Emre Polat, Esq.
      EMRE POLAT, PLLC
      45 Broadway, Suite 1420
      New York, NY 10006
      Tel: (212) 480-4500
      Email: emre@emrelaw.com


EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Grauman Files FCRA Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equifax Information
Services LLC. The case is styled as Scott Grauman, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated  v. Equifax Information
Services LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-06197 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act.

Equifax Information Services LLC --
https://www.equifax.com/personal/ -- provides data solutions. The
Company offers financial, consumer and commercial data, and
analytical solutions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Philip Lawrence Fraietta, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          888 Seventh Ave
          New York, NY 10019
          Phone: (646) 837-7150
          Email: pfraietta@bursor.com



EXHALE ENTERPRISES: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Exhale Enterprises,
L.L.C. The case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Exhale Enterprises,
L.L.C., Case No. 1:21-cv-09214 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Exhale Enterprises, Inc. -- https://exhalespa.com/ -- was founded
in 2001. The Company's line of business includes operating health
clubs, spas, and other physical fitness facilities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


GARRETT MOTION: Bid to Junk Consolidated Suit in New York Pending
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Garrett Motion Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that the motion to
dismiss filed in the consolidated securities class action suit, is
pending.

On September 25, 2020, a putative securities class action complaint
was filed against Garrett Motion Inc. and certain current and
former Garrett officers and directors in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

The case bears the caption: Steven Husson, Individually and On
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. Garrett Motion Inc.,
Olivier Rabiller, Alessandro Gili, Peter Bracke, Sean Deason, and
Su Ping Lu, Case No. 1:20-cv-07992-JPC (the "Husson Action").

The Husson Action asserted claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Exchange Act, for securities fraud and control person
liability. On September 28, 2020, the plaintiff sought to
voluntarily dismiss his claim against Garrett Motion Inc. in light
of the Company's bankruptcy; this request was granted.

On October 5, 2020, another putative securities class action
complaint was filed against certain current and former Garrett
officers and directors in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York.

This case bears the caption: The Gabelli Asset Fund, The Gabelli
Dividend & Income Trust, The Gabelli Value 25 Fund Inc., The
Gabelli Equity Trust Inc., SM Investors LP and SM Investors II LP,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. Su
Ping Lu, Olivier Rabiller, Alessandro Gili, Peter Bracke, Sean
Deason, Craig Balis, Thierry Mabru, Russell James, Carlos M.
Cardoso, Maura J. Clark, Courtney M. Enghauser, Susan L. Main,
Carsten Reinhardt, and Scott A. Tozier, Case No. 1:20-cv-08296-JPC
(the "Gabelli Action").

The Gabelli Action also asserted claims under Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Exchange Act.

On November 5, 2020, another putative securities class action
complaint was filed against certain current and former Garrett
officers and directors in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York.

This case bears the caption: Joseph Froehlich, Individually and On
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. Olivier Rabiller,
Allesandro Gili, Peter Bracke, Sean Deason, and Su Ping Lu, Case
No. 1:20-cv-09279-JPC (the "Froehlich Action"). The Froehlich
Action also asserted claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Exchange Act.

All three actions are currently assigned to Judge John P. Cronan.
Su Ping Lu filed a waiver of service in the Gabelli Action on
November 10, 2020. On November 24, 2020, competing motions were
filed seeking the appointment of lead plaintiff and lead counsel
and the consolidation of the Husson, Gabelli, and Froehlich
Actions.

On December 8, 2020, counsel for the plaintiffs in the Gabelli
Action, the Entwistle & Cappucci law firm filed an unopposed
stipulation and proposed order that would (1) appoint the
plaintiffs in the Gabelli Action — the "Gabelli Entities" — the
lead plaintiffs; (2) would appoint Entwistle & Cappucci as lead
counsel for the plaintiff class; and (3) consolidate the Gabelli
Action, the Husson Action, and the Froehlich Action (the
"Consolidated D&O Action").

On January 21, 2021, the Court granted the motion to consolidate
the actions and granted the Gabelli Entities' motions for
appointment as lead plaintiff and for selection of lead counsel. On
February 25, 2021, plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended
Complaint for Violation of the federal securities laws.

The Company's insurer, AIG, has accepted the defense, subject to
the customary reservation of rights.

The bankruptcy court set a bar date of March 1, 2021 for current
and former shareholders to file claims against the Debtors arising
from rescission of a purchase or sale of Old Common Stock, for
damages arising from the purchase or sale of Common Stock of
Garrett Motion Inc., or for reimbursement or contribution allowed
under section 502 of the Bankruptcy Code on account of such claims
arising (or deemed to have arisen) prior to the Petition Date for
all securities claims arising prior to the Petition Date.

The company was not yet able to assess the likelihood that any such
claims will be allowed. To the extent allowed, each holder of such
claims pursuant to the Plan would be entitled to receive (i) its
pro-rata share of the aggregate cash payments received or
recoverable from any insurance policies of the Company on account
of any such allowed claims and (ii) solely to the extent that such
payments are less than the amount of its allowed claim, payment in
full of the remaining amount of its allowed claim, at the option of
the reorganized Debtors, in cash or a number of shares of Common
Stock at a value of $6.25 per share.

The Company agreed with the Gabelli Entities and their lead counsel
to permit a class claim to be recognized in the bankruptcy court
and to have securities claims against the Company to be litigated
in the district court alongside the Consolidated D&O Action.

The Gabelli Entities have agreed that any recoveries against
Garrett Motion Inc. on account of securities claims litigated
through the class claim are limited to available insurance policy
proceeds.

On July 2, 2021, the bankruptcy court entered an order approving
the joint request from the Company and the Gabelli Entities to
handle the securities claims against Garrett Motion Inc. in this
manner.

The Gabelli Entities were authorized, and on July 22, 2021 filed a
second amended complaint to add claims against Garrett Motion Inc.


On August 11, 2021, Garrett Motion Inc., Olivier Rabiller,
Alessandro Gili, Peter Bracke, Sean Deason, Russell James, Carlos
Cardoso, Maura Clark, Courtney Enghauser, Susan Main, Carsten
Reinhardt, and Scott Tozier filed a motion to dismiss with respect
to claims asserted against them.

On the same day, Su Ping Lu, who is represented separately, filed a
motion to dismiss with respect to the claims asserted against her.
Lead plaintiffs' opposition to the motions to dismiss was filed on
October 26, 2021, and reply briefs are due on or before December 8,
2021.

Based in Switzerland, Garrett Motion Inc. designs, manufactures and
sells highly engineered turbocharger and electric-boosting
technologies for light and commercial vehicle original equipment
manufacturers and the global vehicle and independent aftermarket.

GBR FINANCIAL: Perrong Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Pennsylvania
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against GBR Financial
Services, LLC. The case is styled as Andrew Perrong, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. GBR Financial
Services, LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-04937 (E.D. Pa., Nov. 9, 2021).

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

GBR Financial Services -- https://gbrfinancialservices.com/ -- is a
trusted advisor to retirees in Pennsylvania.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeremy C. Jackson, Esq.
          BOWER LAW ASSOCIATES, PLLC
          403 South Allen Street, Suite 210
          State College, PA 16801
          Phone: (814) 234-2626
          Fax: (814) 237-8700
          Email: jjackson@bower-law.com



GEISINGER CLINIC: Federoff Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Geisinger Clinic, et
al. The case is styled as Theodore Federoff, Brittany Faus, Melinda
Newhart, Archie Holsomback, III, Stacey Cook, Rachel Snukis, Cathy
Keeler, Christina Romanowski, Deborah Bonnell, Brittney Hannon,
Patricia deManicor, Keri Miller, James Hannon, Juliana Herrera,
Marisa Scott, Garry Oxenrider, Rachel Englehart-Noss, Kathy
Callaghan, Suzanne Wickham, Terri Lockcuff, LaRisha A. Scott, Mandy
Dinino, Angela Hummel, Christine Lynn Finkbeiner, Bridgette M.
Warford, Tylinn Smith, Kimberly Frace, Tina M. (Eisenhauer)
Buckles, Sally Miller, Bethany Kline-Leadbeter, Julianna Gay,
Jasmine Moroskie, Theresa Ann Chipolet, Jesseca John, Jeanne
Charles, Christine Baron, Sherryl Wagner, Amanda Mortimer, Kristy
Snavely, Jessica Wychock, Briana Rolshausen, Jenelle Shellenberger,
Crystal Davis, Jennifer A. Thomas, Marni Stewart, Tonna Underhill,
Lynn Kuzmitsky, Vanessa Miller, Barbie Harbaugh, Karen Karchner,
Kimberly Sipler, Amy Gordon, Amy Weidner, Kim Schooley, Lori
Taylor, Alexa Tomassacci, Bethanie Gresh, Marjorie Swartzlander,
Gallahad Mallery, Melody Danko-Holsomback, Tammy Caswell, Kristy
Rittenhouse, Gabrielle Teter, Marsha Bezuhly, Alexandra Portelli,
Heather Yost, Tara Grasley, Scott Brown, Judy Good, Kristy
Robinson, Jeffrey Tomassacci, Alexis Fetterman, Scott Fritz, Marsha
Bezuhly, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Geisinger Clinic, Geisinger Medical Center, Geisinger
Health Plan, Geisinger Lewistown Hospital, Geisinger Wyoming Valley
Medical Center, Geisinger System Services, Geisinger Health System,
Geisinger Bloomsburg Hospital, Geisinger Community Medical Center,
Geisinger Pottsville Cancer Center, Geisinger Hazelton Cancer
Center, Geisinger Mail Order Pharmacy, West Shore Advanced Life
Support Services, Inc., Geisinger System Financial Edits, Case No.
4:21-cv-01903-MWB (M.D. Pa., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Geisinger -- https://www.geisinger.org/ -- is a health and wellness
organization.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory A. Stapp, Esq.
          STAPP LAW, LLC
          153 West 4th Street, Suite 6
          Williamsport, PA 17701
          Phone: (570) 326-1077
          Fax: (570) 651-9420
          Email: gstapp@stapplaw.net


GLOBAL PRECISION: Detention Officers Seek Pay for Off-Shift Hours
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Norma Acosta and Marlyse O'Hagan, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. Global Precision Systems LLC and
Asset Protection and Security Services, LP,, Defendant, Case No.
21-cv-00269, (W.D. Tex., October 27, 2021), seeks to recover unpaid
overtime, liquidated damages, all available equitable relief,
attorney fees, and litigation expenses/costs, including expert
witness fees and expenses under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Defendants are contractors at the US Immigration and Customs
Enforcement facility in El Paso where Plaintiffs are/were detention
officers as part of a contract with the federal government. They
claim to have regularly worked in excess of 40 or 50 hours per week
but did not receive overtime pay for hours regularly worked in
excess of 40 hours in a workweek. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Raymond D. Martinez, Esq.
      Jonathan L.R. Baeza, Esq.
      MARTINEZ & MARTINEZ LAW FIRM, PLLC
      2110 E. Yandell Dr.
      El Paso, TX 79903
      Tel: (915) 541-1000
      Fax: (915) 541-1002
      Email: raymond@martinezlawyers.com
             jonathan@martinezlawyers.com


GOODPOP LLC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Goodpop LLC. The case
is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Goodpop LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-09233
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Exhale Enterprises, Inc. -- https://exhalespa.com/ -- was founded
in 2001. The Company's line of business includes operating health
clubs, spas, and other physical fitness facilities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


HAGOOD HOLDINGS: Beam Slams Misclassification, Seeks Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Alysha Beam, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. Hagood Holdings, LLC, Julie Hagood and Jarred Hagood,
Defendant0073, Case No. 21-cv-00984, (E.D. Ark., October 28, 2021)
seeks declaratory judgment, monetary damages, liquidated damages,
costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, as a result of failure to pay
sufficient overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act and
overtime provisions of the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act.

Defendants provide in-home care for senior patients where Beam
worked as a certified nursing assistant and has been since January
of 2020. Beam has been allegedly misclassified by Hagood as exempt
from overtime, despite regularly working more than 40 hours per
week. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

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


HEARST COMMUNICATIONS: Ricketts Files Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hearst
Communications, Inc. The case is styled as Cathy Ricketts,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Hearst Communications, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-09278-UA (S.D.N.Y.,
Nov. 9, 2021).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Personal Property.

Hearst -- https://www.hearst.com/ -- is a leading global,
diversified media, information and services company with more than
360 businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Peter Guglielmo, Esq.
          SCOTT + SCOTT, LLP (NYC)
          230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10169
          Phone: (212) 223-6444
          Fax: (212) 223-6334
          Email: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com


HERTZ GLOBAL: Ramirez Putative Class Suit Concluded
---------------------------------------------------
Hertz Global Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that the purported
shareholder class action suit entitled, Pedro Ramirez, Jr. v. Hertz
Global Holdings, Inc., et al., is now concluded.

In November 2013, a purported shareholder class action, Pedro
Ramirez, Jr. v. Hertz Global Holdings, Inc., et al., was commenced
in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey naming
Old Hertz Holdings (as defined in the Company's 2020 Form 10-K) and
certain of its officers as defendants and alleging violations of
the federal securities laws.

The complaint alleged that Old Hertz Holdings made material
misrepresentations and/or omissions of material fact in certain of
its public disclosures in violation of Section 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.

The complaint sought an unspecified amount of monetary damages on
behalf of the purported class and an award of costs and expenses,
including counsel fees and expert fees.

The complaint, as amended, was dismissed with prejudice on April
27, 2017 and on September 20, 2018, the Third Circuit affirmed the
dismissal of the complaint with prejudice.

On February 5, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a motion asking the
federal district court to exercise its discretion and allow the
plaintiffs to reinstate their claims to include additional
allegations from the administrative order agreed to by the SEC and
the Company in December 2018, which was supplemented by reference
to the Company's subsequently filed litigation against former
executives.

On September 30, 2019, the federal district court of New Jersey
denied the plaintiffs' motion for relief from the April 27, 2017
judgment and a related motion to allow the filing of a proposed
fifth amended complaint.

On October 30, 2019, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The parties fully
briefed the appeal and oral argument had been scheduled for June
19, 2020.

As a result of the Company's bankruptcy, the appeal was stayed as
to the Company, but the plaintiffs advocated that the appeal could
proceed against the individual defendants.

On October 13, 2020, the Third Circuit affirmed the District
Court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' motion for relief against the
individual defendants since the motion was not timely filed and the
appeal as to the Company remained stayed.

In February 2021, the parties participated in a bankruptcy-related
mediation process and arrived at a tentative settlement wherein the
Company would pay a $250,000 cash settlement.

In return, the plaintiffs would voluntarily dismiss all claims in
the underlying action with prejudice and withdraw the plaintiffs'
Proofs of Claim with prejudice.

On March 12, 2021, the Bankruptcy Court approved the tentative
settlement and the terms of the settlement have now been fully
implemented. This matter is now closed.

Hertz Global Holdings, Inc., together with its subsidiaries,
provides airport and off-airport vehicle rental and leasing
services. It operates through three segments: U.S. RAC,
International RAC, and All Other Operations. Hertz Global Holdings,
Inc. was founded in 1918 and is headquartered in Estero, Florida.


HIGHLINE WELLNESS: Bunting Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Highline Wellness
Inc. The case is styled as Rasheta Bunting, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. Highline
Wellness Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-06173 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2021).

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

Highline Wellness -- https://highlinewellness.com/ -- is an online
store that offers a wide range of cannabidiol products such as
oils, gummies, topicals and kits.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dan Shaked, Esq.
          SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
          14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
          Scarsdale, NY 10583
          Phone: (917) 373-9128
          Email: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com


HNLY LA: Fischler Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against HNLY LA LLC. The case
is styled as Brian Fischler, Individually and on behalf of all
other persons similarly situated v. HNLY LA LLC doing business as:
HNLY, Case No. 1:21-cv-06209 (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 9, 2021).

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

HNLY LA -- https://www.hnlyla.com/ -- offers sustainable henley
shirt focused clothing brand made in Los Angeles, CA.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas Brian Lipsky, Esq.
          LIPSKY LOWE LLP
          420 Lexington Avenue, Suite 1830
          New York, NY 10170
          Phone: (212) 392-4772
          Fax: (212) 444-1030
          Email: doug@lipskylowe.com


INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER: Chavez Files FDCPA Suit in D. New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against International
Computer Systems, Inc. The case is styled as Valerie Chavez,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
International Computer Systems, Inc., doing business as First
Collections Services, Case No. 2:21-cv-19842 (D.N.J., Nov. 9,
2021).

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

International Computer Systems, Inc., doing business as First
Collections Services -- https://www.fcscollects.com/ -- provides
financial services and has been the leader in the accounts
receivable management industry since 1969.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd D. Muhlstock, Esq.
          THE MUHLSTOCK LAW FIRM, P.C.
          100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Phone: (516) 974-9400
          Fax: (516) 345-1635
          Email: todd@muhlstocklaw.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Whipple Suit Transferred to D. New Jersey
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Larissa Whipple, Individually And On Behalf Of
All Others Similarly Situated v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC,
Case No. 3:21-cv-50226 was transferred from the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to the United
States District Court for the District of New Jersey on Nov. 8,
2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:21-cv-19830 to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.

Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies Inc. -- https://www.jnj.com/
-- engages in the research and development of products.[BN]


LIBERTY OILFIELD: Cobb and Joseph IPO Class Suits Underway
----------------------------------------------------------
Liberty Oilfield Services Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that the company
continues to defend putative class action suits initiated by
Marshall Cobb and Marc Joseph.

On March 11, 2020, Marshall Cobb, on behalf of himself and all
other persons similarly situated, filed a putative class action
lawsuit in the state District Court of Denver County, Colorado
against the Company and certain officers and board members of the
Company along with other defendants in connection with the IPO (the
"Cobb Complaint").

The Cobb Complaint alleges that the Company and certain officers
and board members of the Company violated Section 11 of the
Securities Act of 1933 by virtue of inaccurate or misleading
statements allegedly contained in the registration statement filed
in connection with the IPO and requests unspecified damages and
costs.

The Cobb Plaintiffs also allege control person liability claims
under Section 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 against certain
officers and board members of the Company and other defendants.

On April 3, 2020, Marc Joseph, on behalf of himself and all other
persons similarly situated, filed a putative class action lawsuit
in the United States District Court in Denver, Colorado against the
Company and certain officers and board members of the Company along
with other defendants in connection with the IPO and requests
unspecified damages and costs (the "Joseph Complaint," and
collectively with the Cobb Complaint, the "Securities Lawsuits").

The Joseph Complaint, which is based on similar factual allegations
made in the Cobb Complaint, alleges that the defendants violated
Sections 11 and 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933 by virtue of
inaccurate or misleading statements allegedly contained in the
registration statement and prospectus filed in connection with the
IPO.

The Joseph Complaint also alleges control person liability claims
under Section 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 against certain
officers and board members of the Company and other defendants.

The Company has hired counsel and plans to vigorously defend
against the allegations in the Securities Lawsuits.

No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report.

Liberty Oilfield Services Inc. is an independent provider of
hydraulic fracturing services and goods to onshore oil and natural
gas exploration and production companies in North America. The
company had grown from one hydraulic fracturing fleet in December
2011 to 24 fleets in the first quarter of 2020, including the
addition of one fleet in January 2020. The company is based in
Denver, Colorado.


MAUDE GROUP: Graciano Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Maude Group, Inc. The
case is styled as Sandy Graciano, on behalf of himself and all
other persons similarly situated v. Maude Group, Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-09280 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 9, 2021).

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

Maude -- https://getmaude.com/ -- is a modern sexual wellness
startup that launched in April 2018.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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



MCKINSEY & COMPANY: Kent City Suit Transferred to N.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as City of Kent, on behalf of itself and similarly
situated counties and cities v. McKinsey & Company Inc. United
States, McKinsey & Company Inc., Case No. 2:21-cv-01375 was
transferred from the United States District Court for the Western
District of Washington, to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on Nov. 5, 2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:21-cv-08629-CRB to the
proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Personal Injury: Health
Care/Pharmaceutical Personal Injury Product Liability for the
Racketeering (RICO) Act.

McKinsey & Company -- https://www.mckinsey.com/ -- is a global
management consulting firm that serves leading businesses,
governments, non-governmental organizations, and
not-for-profits.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Arthur Merritt Fitzpatrick, Esq.
          KENT CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
          220 4TH AVE S
          KENT, WA 98032
          Phone: (253) 856-5770
          Email: pfitzpatrick@kentwa.gov

               - and -

          Daniel P. Mensher, Esq.
          David J. Ko, Esq.
          Derek W. Loeser, Esq.
          Gretchen Freeman Cappio, Esq.
          Lynn Lincoln Sarko, Esq.
          Matthew M. Gerend, Esq.
          KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
          1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Phone: (206) 623-1900
          Fax: (206) 623-3384
          Email: dmensher@kellerrohrback.com
                 dko@kellerrohrback.com
                 dloeser@kellerrohrback.com
                 gcappio@kellerrohrback.com
                 lsarko@kellerrohrback.com
                 mgerend@kellerrohrback.com


MEDICREDIT INC: Foley FDCPA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Edith Foley, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. MEDICREDIT, INC., JOHN DOES 1-25, Case No.
MER-L-1930-21 was removed from the Mercer County Superior Court to
the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on
Nov. 5, 2021.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:21-cv-19764-MAS-DEA to
the proceeding.

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

Medicredit Corporation is a collection agency owned by The
Outsource Group.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph K. Jones, Esq.
          LAWYERS FOR JUSTICE, PC
          375 Passaic Avenue, Suite 100
          Fairfield, NJ 07004
          Phone: (973) 227-5900
          Fax: (973) 244-0019
          Email: jkj@legaljones.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Andy Guarionex Mercado, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART PC
          10 Madison Avenue, Suite 400
          Morristown, NJ 07960
          Phone: (646) 901-9424
          Fax: (973) 656-1611
          Email: andy.mercado@ogletreedeakins.com


MOINK LLC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Moink LLC. The case
is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Moink LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-09231
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Moink -- https://www.moinkbox.com/ -- is a subscription box service
that allows consumers to have humanely raised meat delivered to
their doorstep.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


NIELSEN HOLDINGS: PERS of Mississippi Suit Stayed for 90 Days
-------------------------------------------------------------
Nielsen Holdings plc said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that by agreement dated
September 8, 2021, the securities class action  headed by the
Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi has been stayed
for a period of 90 days.

In August 2018, a putative shareholder class action lawsuit was
filed in the Southern District of New York, naming as defendants
Nielsen, former Chief Executive Officer Dwight Mitchell Barns, and
former Chief Financial Officer Jamere Jackson.

Another lawsuit, which alleged similar facts but also named other
Nielsen officers, was filed in the Northern District of Illinois in
September 2018 and transferred to the Southern District of New York
in December 2018. The actions were consolidated on April 22, 2019,
and the Public Employees' Retirement System of Mississippi was
appointed lead plaintiff for the putative class. The operative
complaint was filed on September 27, 2019, and asserts violations
of certain provisions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, based on allegedly false and materially misleading
statements relating to the outlook of Nielsen's Buy segment (now
"Global Connect," which was sold in the first quarter of 2021),
Nielsen's preparedness for changes in global data privacy laws and
Nielsen's reliance on third-party data. Nielsen moved to dismiss
the operative complaint on November 26, 2019.

On January 4, 2021, certain of the allegations against Nielsen and
its officers were dismissed, while others were sustained. Discovery
is ongoing.

In addition, in January 2019, a shareholder derivative lawsuit was
filed in New York Supreme Court against a number of Nielsen's
current and former officers and directors.

The derivative lawsuit alleges that the named officers and
directors breached their fiduciary duties to the Company in
connection with factual assertions substantially similar to those
in the putative class action complaint.

The derivative lawsuit further alleges that certain officers and
directors engaged in trading Nielsen stock based on material,
nonpublic information.  

An amended complaint was filed on May 7, 2021, which Nielsen moved
to dismiss on July 16, 2021.  

By agreement dated September 8, 2021, the action was stayed for a
period of 90 days.  

Nielsen intends to defend these lawsuits vigorously. Based on
currently available information, Nielsen believes that the Company
has meritorious defenses to these actions and that their resolution
is not likely to have a material adverse effect on Nielsen’s
business, financial position, or results of operations.

Nielsen Holdings plc, together with its subsidiaries, operates as
an information and measurement company. It operates through Buy and
Watch segments. Nielsen Holdings plc was founded in 1923 and is
headquartered in Oxford, the United Kingdom.


PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Bid to Nix NMSIC Lead Putative Class Suit Pending
------------------------------------------------------------------
Pilgrim's Pride Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that the motion to
dismiss the putative class action suit headed by the New Mexico
State Investment Council ("NMSIC"), is pending.

On July 6, 2020, United Food and Commercial Workers International
Union Local 464A ("UFCW"), acting on behalf of itself and a
putative class of persons who purchased shares of PPC stock between
February 9, 2017 and June 3, 2020, filed a class action complaint
in the Colorado Court against the company (PPC), and Messrs.
William Lovette, Jayson Penn, and Fabio Sandri.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that PPC's public
statements regarding its business and the drivers behind its
financial results were false and misleading due to the defendants'
purported failure to disclose its participation in an antitrust
conspiracy as alleged in the Broiler litigation and the Indictment.


On September 4, 2020, UFCW and NMSIC filed competing motions to be
appointed lead plaintiff under the Private Litigation Securities
Reform Act.

On March 17, 2021, the court appointed NMSIC as lead plaintiff. On
May 26, 2021, NMSIC filed an amended complaint, which shortened the
end date of the putative class period to June 3, 2020.

PPC and the other defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint
on July 19, 2021. NMSIC filed an opposition to the motion to
dismiss on September 1, 2021, and PPC and the other defendants
filed their reply on September 30, 2021.

The Colorado Court's decision on the motion to dismiss is currently
pending.

Pilgrim's Pride Corporation engages in the production, processing,
marketing, and distribution of fresh, frozen, and value-added
chicken products in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe,
and Mexico. The company was founded in 1946 and is headquartered in
Greeley, Colorado. Pilgrim's Pride Corporation is a subsidiary of
JBS S.A.


PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Grower Litigation Underway in Oklahoma
--------------------------------------------------------
Pilgrim's Pride Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 28, 2021, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2021, that the company
continues to defend a consolidated suit entitled, In re Broiler
Chicken Grower Litigation, Case No. CIV-17-033-RJS.

On January 27, 2017, a purported class action on behalf of broiler
chicken farmers was brought against the company (PPC) and four
other producers in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Oklahoma alleging, among other things, a conspiracy to reduce
competition for grower services and depress the price paid to
growers.

Plaintiffs allege violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act and the
Packers and Stockyards Act and seek, among other relief, treble
damages.

The complaint was consolidated with a subsequently filed
consolidated amended class action complaint styled as In re Broiler
Chicken Grower Litigation, Case No. CIV-17-033-RJS (the "Grower
Litigation").

The defendants jointly moved to dismiss the consolidated amended
complaint on September 9, 2017 for failure to state a claim under
Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The Oklahoma Court granted only certain other defendants' motions
challenging jurisdiction.

On January 6, 2020, the Oklahoma Court denied the pending Rule 12
motion, and lifted the stay on discovery.

On October 6, 2020, the Oklahoma plaintiffs filed a motion with the
U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the "JPML")
seeking consolidation of a series of copycat complaints filed in
September and October 2020 in the U.S. District Courts for the
District of Colorado, the District of Kansas, and the Northern
District of California.

On December 15, 2020, the JPML ordered the transfer of all cases to
the Oklahoma Court for consolidated or coordinated pretrial
proceedings. On February 12, 2020, the Oklahoma Court entered a
case management order in the multi-district litigation setting a
February 1, 2022 deadline for the close of fact discovery.

That order also set a deadline of September 15, 2022 for the filing
of class certification motions, with deadlines of October 27, 2022
for opposition briefing and December 1, 2022 for reply briefing.

Under the order, motions for summary judgment are to be filed on
February 1, 2023, with oppositions and replies due March 22, 2023,
and April 12, 2023, respectively.

PPC will continue to litigate against the putative class of
plaintiffs and will seek a reasonable settlement if it is
available.

PPC has recognized an estimate of probable loss as expense that is
subject to change. PPC recognized this expense within Selling,
general and administrative expense in the Condensed Consolidated
Statements of Income for the three and nine months ended September
26, 2021.

Pilgrim's Pride Corporation engages in the production, processing,
marketing, and distribution of fresh, frozen, and value-added
chicken products in the United States, the United Kingdom, Europe,
and Mexico. The company was founded in 1946 and is headquartered in
Greeley, Colorado. Pilgrim's Pride Corporation is a subsidiary of
JBS S.A.


TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Boellner Files FDCPA Suit in S.D. Florida
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Transworld Systems
Inc. The case is styled as James Boellner, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Transworld Systems Inc.,
Case No. 9:21-cv-82049-RS (S.D. Fla., Nov. 9, 2021).

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

Transworld Systems Inc. -- https://tsico.com/ -- provides
receivables collection and management services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason Tenenbaum, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF JASON TENENBAUM, P.C.
          585 Stewart Avenue, Suite L50
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Phone: (516) 242-8185
          Fax: (516) 414-2869
          Email: jason@jtnylaw.com


TRIBEST CORP: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tribest Corp. The
case is styled as Lawrence Young, on behalf of himself and all
other persons similarly situated v. Tribest Corp., Case No.
1:21-cv-09145 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 4, 2021).

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

Tribest Corporation -- https://tribest.com/ -- designs and
manufactures home appliances. The Company offers juice extractor,
dehydrator, blender, and sprouter.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


TRIM FABRIC: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Trim Fabric NY Inc.
The case is styled as Lawrence Young, on behalf of himself and all
other persons similarly situated v. Trim Fabric NY Inc., Case No.
1:21-cv-09146 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 4, 2021).

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

Trim Fabric NY -- https://www.trimfabric.com/ -- is a fabric store
in New York City, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


ULTIMA REPLENISHER: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ultima Replenisher,
Inc. The case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Ultima Replenisher,
Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-09235 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Ultima Replenisher, Inc. -- https://www.ultimareplenisher.com/ --
is a provider of sugar-free electrolyte hydration products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com



WINC INC: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Winc, Inc. The case
is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Winc, Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-09207
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Winc -- https://www.winc.com/ -- is a modern winery with a direct
connection to the consumer, building a portfolio of brands for the
next generation of wine drinkers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


YOGA SIX: Contreras Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Yoga Six Franchise,
LLC. The case is styled as Yensy Contreras, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Yoga Six Franchise, LLC,
Case No. 1:21-cv-09213-PAE (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 8, 2021).

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

Yoga Six Franchise, LLC -- https://www.yogasix.com/ -- offers for
sale a franchise to establish and operate a fitness studio that
offers and provides indoor yoga.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jarrett Scott Charo, Esq.
          MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
          200 Vesey Street, Ste. 24th Floor
          New York, NY 10281
          Phone: (212) 595-6200
          Email: jcharo@mizrahikroub.com


                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crane Co. Has 29,926 Pending Claims at Sept. 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Crane Co. has been named a defendant in cases filed in numerous
state and federal courts alleging injury or death as a result of
exposure to asbestos as of September 30, 2021, according to the
Company's Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

The Company states, "Of the 29,926 pending claims as of September
30, 2021, approximately 18,000 claims were pending in New York of
which approximately 16,000 are non-malignancy claims that were
filed over 15 years ago and have been inactive under New York court
orders.

"We have tried several cases resulting in defense verdicts by the
jury or directed verdicts for the defense by the court. We further
have pursued appeals of certain adverse jury verdicts that have
resulted in reversals in favor of the defense. We have also tried
several other cases resulting in plaintiff verdicts which we paid
or settled after unsuccessful appeals.

"The gross settlement and defense costs incurred (before insurance
recoveries and tax effects) by us for the nine months ended
September 30, 2021 and 2020 totaled $35.7 million and $30.2
million, respectively. In contrast to the recognition of settlement
and defense costs, which reflect the current level of activity in
the tort system, cash payments and receipts generally lag the tort
system activity by several months or more, and may show some
fluctuation from period to period. Cash payments of settlement
amounts are not made until all releases and other required
documentation are received by us, and reimbursements of both
settlement amounts and defense costs by insurers may be uneven due
to insurer payment practices, transitions from one insurance layer
to the next excess layer and the payment terms of certain
reimbursement agreements. Our total pre-tax payments for settlement
and defense costs, net of funds received from insurers, for the
nine months ended September 30, 2021 and, 2020 totaled $29.6
million and $23.7 million, respectively.

"Cumulatively through September 30, 2021, we have resolved (by
settlement or dismissal) approximately 143,000 claims. The related
settlement costs incurred by us and our insurance carriers is
approximately $703 million, for an average settlement cost per
resolved claim of approximately $4,900. The average settlement cost
per claim resolved during the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019
and 2018 was $13,900, $15,800, and $11,300, respectively. Because
claims are sometimes dismissed in large groups, the average cost
per resolved claim, as well as the number of open claims, can
fluctuate significantly from period to period. In addition to large
group dismissals, the nature of the disease and corresponding
settlement amounts for each claim resolved will also drive changes
from period to period in the average settlement cost per claim.
Accordingly, the average cost per resolved claim is not considered
in our periodic review of our estimated asbestos liability."

A full-text copy of the Form 8-K is available at
https://bit.ly/30gJK6Q

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Int'l. Faces Personal Injury Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Honeywell International Inc. has been named in asbestos-related
personal injury claims related to North American Refractories
Company (NARCO), which was sold in 1986, and the Bendix Friction
Materials (Bendix) business, which was sold in 2014, according to
the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission.

The Company states, "NARCO manufactured high-grade, heat-resistant,
refractory products for various industries. Honeywell’s
predecessor, Allied Corporation, owned NARCO from 1979 to 1986.
Allied Corporation sold the NARCO business in 1986 and entered into
a cross-indemnity agreement which included an obligation to
indemnify the purchaser for asbestos claims, arising primarily from
alleged occupational exposure to asbestos-containing refractory
brick and mortar for high-temperature applications. NARCO ceased
manufacturing these products in 1980 and filed for bankruptcy in
January 2002, at which point in time all then current and future
NARCO asbestos claims were stayed against both NARCO and Honeywell
pending the reorganization of NARCO. The Company established its
initial liability for NARCO asbestos claims in 2002.

"NARCO emerged from bankruptcy in April 2013, at which time a
federally authorized 524(g) trust was established to evaluate and
resolve all existing NARCO asbestos claims (the Trust). Both
Honeywell and NARCO are protected by a permanent channeling
injunction barring all present and future individual actions in
state or federal courts and requiring all asbestos-related claims
based on exposure to NARCO asbestos-containing products to be made
against the Trust. The NARCO Trust Agreement (TA) and the NARCO
Trust Distribution Procedures (TDP) set forth the structure and
operating rules of the Trust, and established Honeywell's evergreen
funding obligations.

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

"The Company reflects the inclusion of all years of epidemiological
disease projection through 2059 when estimating the liability for
unasserted Bendix-related asbestos claims. Such liability for
unasserted Bendix-related asbestos claims is based on historic and
anticipated claims filing experience and dismissal rates, disease
classifications, and resolution values in the tort system for the
previous five years. The Company has valued Bendix asserted and
unasserted claims using average resolution values for the previous
five years. The Company updates the resolution values used to
estimate the cost of Bendix asserted and unasserted claims during
the fourth quarter each year.

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://bit.ly/3kqvUpu

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lennox International Still Defends PI Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lennox International Inc. is involved in a number of claims and
lawsuits incident to the operation of its businesses, some of these
claims and lawsuits allege personal injury or health problems
resulting from exposure to asbestos that was integrated into
certain of its products, according to the Company's Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Company states, "Insurance coverages are maintained and
estimated costs are recorded for such claims and lawsuits,
including costs to settle claims and lawsuits, based on experience
involving similar matters and specific facts known. We have never
manufactured asbestos and have not incorporated asbestos-containing
components into our products for several decades. A substantial
majority of these asbestos-related claims have been covered by
insurance or other forms of indemnity or have been dismissed
without payment. The remainder of our closed cases have been
resolved for amounts that are not material, individually or in the
aggregate. Our defense costs for asbestos-related claims are
generally covered by insurance. However, our insurance coverage for
settlements and judgments for asbestos-related claims varies
depending on several factors and are subject to policy limits. We
may have greater financial exposure for future settlements and
judgments."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://bit.ly/3wAKfnZ


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Olin Corporation Still Faces Exposure Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Olin Corporation and its subsidiaries, are defendants in various
other legal actions (including proceedings based on alleged
exposures to asbestos) incidental to its past and current business
activities, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Company states, "As of September 30, 2021, December 31, 2020
and September 30, 2020, our condensed balance sheets included
accrued liabilities for these other legal actions of $13.1 million,
$13.5 million and $13.0 million, respectively. These liabilities do
not include costs associated with legal representation. Based on
our analysis, and considering the inherent uncertainties associated
with litigation, we do not believe that it is reasonably possible
that these other legal actions will materially adversely affect our
financial position, cash flows or results of operations.

"During the ordinary course of our business, contingencies arise
resulting from an existing condition, situation or set of
circumstances involving an uncertainty as to the realization of a
possible gain contingency. In certain instances such as
environmental projects, we are responsible for managing the cleanup
and remediation of an environmental site. There exists the
possibility of recovering a portion of these costs from other
parties. We account for gain contingencies in accordance with the
provisions of ASC 450 "Contingencies" and, therefore, do not record
gain contingencies and recognize income until it is earned and
realizable."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://bit.ly/3bYmRr1


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Union Carbide Has $1.05BB in Asbestos Liabilities
------------------------------------------------------------------
Union Carbide Corporation has recorded a total asbestos-related
liability for pending and future claims and defense and processing
costs of $1,047 million at September 30, 2021 ($1,098 million at
December 31, 2020), according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Company states, "At September 30, 2021, approximately 24
percent of the recorded claim liability related to pending claims
and approximately 76 percent related to future claims.

"The Corporation is and has been involved in a large number of
asbestos-related suits filed primarily in state courts during the
past four decades. These suits principally allege personal injury
resulting from exposure to asbestos‑containing products and
frequently seek both actual and punitive damages. The alleged
claims primarily relate to products that UCC sold in the past,
alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products located on UCC's
premises, and UCC's responsibility for asbestos suits filed against
a former UCC subsidiary, Amchem Products, Inc. ("Amchem"). In many
cases, plaintiffs are unable to demonstrate that they have suffered
any compensable loss as a result of such exposure, or that injuries
incurred in fact resulted from exposure to UCC's products."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://bit.ly/3qpySOG




                            *********

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 ***