/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/211220.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, December 20, 2021, Vol. 23, No. 247 Headlines 233 NINTH CORP: Zayas Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York 333 HUDSON CORP: Parabal Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York ADCO DRYWALL: Hernandez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. AEROTEK INC: Madrigal Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. AGUACALIENTE ENTERPRISES: Avila Sues Over Unpaid Overtime AKUA LIFE: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York AMERICAN PASTEURIZATION: Wilburn Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. APPLE INC: Babeu Slams Illegal Content Suppression Sans Payment CACTUS MEXICAN: Bid to Dismiss Figueroa Class Suit Tossed CEQUEL COMMUNICATIONS: DataCloud Sues Over File Manager Patents CONOPCO INC: Candelaria Claims Shampoo Causes Hair Loss DOLGEN CALIFORNIA: Appeals Denial of Motion to Compel Bid in Gile GLAXOSMITHKLINE: Bell Disputes "Non-drowsy" Label on Cough Meds HOT GIRL: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Weekes Suit Claims ITS LOGISTICS: Stipulation to Vacate Case Sched OK'd in Guthrie JERSEY CITY POWER: Marchese Sues Over Telemarketing Practices LINCOLN EDUCATIONAL: Gaviria Appeals Denial of Reconsideration Bid MASTERCARD INC: Sanborn Files Suit in S.D. New York MUSICTODAY II LLC: Ortega Sues Over Non-Blind-Friendly Website QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON: Kimery Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Calls SARPJ LLC: Faces Parden Suit Over Delivery Drivers' Unpaid Wages TARGET CORP: Petition for Permission to Appeal Granted in Mills WELLS FARGO: Clark Slams Misleading/Deceptive Loan Offer ********* 233 NINTH CORP: Zayas Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against 233 Ninth Corp., et al. The case is styled as Edwin Zayas, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 233 Ninth Corp., 8th Avenue Tobacco and Magazine Inc., Case No. 1:21-cv-10170-ER (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. 233 NINTH CORP. is corporation filed with the New York State Department of State.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James E. Bahamonde, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF JAMES E. BAHAMONDE, PC 2501 Jody Court North Bellmore, NY 11710 Phone: (516) 783-9662 Fax: (646) 435-4376 Email: james@civilrightsny.com 333 HUDSON CORP: Parabal Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against 333 Hudson Corp., et al. The case is styled as Evaristo Parabal, Geraldo Garcia, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. 333 Hudson Corp., Ok Ryon (a/k/a Alex) Kim, Case No. 1:21-cv-10575 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 10, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. 333 Hudson Corp. is a firm based at 333 Hudson Street, New York.[BN] The Plaintiffs appear pro se. ADCO DRYWALL: Hernandez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against ADCO Drywall And Metal Framing, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Martin Hernandez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. ADCO Drywall And Metal Framing, Inc., Does 1-50, Case No. 34-2021-00311945-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 30, 2021). The case type is stated as "Other Employment - Civil Unlimited." ADCO -- http://www.adcodrywall.com/-- is a full-service drywall and metal framing company specializing in the large-scale production of multi-family units and common areas.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nazo Koulloukian, Esq. KOUL LAW FIRM 3435 Wilshire Blvd, Ste 1710 Los Angeles, CA 90010-2003 Phone: 213-761-5484 Fax: 818-561-3938 Email: nazo@koullaw.com AEROTEK INC: Madrigal Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Aerotek, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Juana Madrigal, on behalf of other individuals similarly situated v. Aerotek, Inc., Does 1-10, Case No. 34-2021-00311963-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 30, 2021). The case type is stated as "Other Employment - Civil Unlimited." Aerotek -- https://www.aerotek.com/ -- is the leading recruitment and staffing agency worldwide.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marcus J. Bradley, Esq. BRADLEY/GROMBACHER LLP 31365 Oak Crest Dr., Ste. 240 Westlake Village, CA 91361 Phone: 805-270-7100 Fax: 805-270-7589 Email: mbradley@bradleygrombacher.com AGUACALIENTE ENTERPRISES: Avila Sues Over Unpaid Overtime --------------------------------------------------------- Miguel Angel Leal Avila, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Aguacaliente Enterprises Corp., Urbano Enterprises Inc., Urbano Hernandez and Jose Hernandez, Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-10307, (S.D. N.Y., December 3, 2021), seeks to recover earned but unpaid wages, liquidated damages, liquidated and statutory damages pursuant to New York labor laws and the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, reasonable attorneys' fees, costs and interest, as well as declaratory relief for failure to comply with New York Labor Law and wage notice and wage statement requirements violations. Aguacaliente Enterprises operates as Jimbos Hamburger Palace in New York where Avila was employed as delivery worker. He claims to have routinely worked in excess of 40 hours per week and often worked more than ten hours in a day but was never paid a premium rate for his overtime hours and never paid an extra hour of pay for working more than ten hours in a day. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Clifford Tucker, Esq. SACCO & FILLAS, LLP 31-19 Newtown Avenue, Seventh Floor Astoria, New York 11102 Tel: (718) 269-2243 Email: CTucker@SaccoFillas.com AKUA LIFE: Rodriguez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Akua Life, PBC. The case is styled as Angel Rodriguez, individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons v. Akua Life, PBC, Case No. 1:21-cv-06849 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 10, 2021). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Akua Life -- https://akualife.com/ -- offers a natural brain enhancing nootropic supplement formulated to increase focus, clarity, memory, and emotional wellbeing.[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 AMERICAN PASTEURIZATION: Wilburn Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Pasteurization Company, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Kenneth Wilburn, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. American Pasteurization Company, LLC, a limited liability company, Case No. 34-2021-00312027-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 30, 2021). The case type is stated as "Other Employment - Civil Unlimited." American Pasteurization Company -- https://www.americanpasteurizationcompany.com/ -- provides High Pressure Processing (HPP) to the food and beverage industry on a pay-as-you-go basis, co-manufacturing of many premium food products, post HPP packaging and assembly services and direct-to-consumer refrigerated shipping.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Justin F. Marquez, Esq. WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC 3055 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 510 Los Angeles, CA 90010-1145 Phone: 213-381-9988 Fax: 213-381-9989 Email: justin@wilshirelawfirm.com APPLE INC: Babeu Slams Illegal Content Suppression Sans Payment --------------------------------------------------------------- Christopher Babeu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Apple Inc., Defendant, Case No. 21-cv-11967 (D. Mass., December 6, 2021), assert claims for monetary damages, including but not limited to any statutory, compensatory, incidental, or consequential damages resulting from unjust enrichment and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and in breach of its Apple Media Services Terms and Conditions. Apple is a computer and phone manufacturer and retailer. It offer the option for consumers to "Rent" or "Buy" movies, television shows, music and other media content for a fee via its "iTunes" store and related applications. To streamline the Digital Content and App purchasing process, Apple allows consumers to associate a payment method (i.e., credit card, debit card, etc.) with their Apple ID. Thus, every time consumers purchase Digital Content or Apps, the payment is charged automatically without consumers having to re-enter their payment method information each time they make a purchase. Babeu alleges that should a payment for Digital Content fail to be processed at any time, whether because the form of payment has expired or the charge has been rejected by a bank, Apple immediately seizes all of that consumer's Digital Content and Apps and prevent any access to it, including the content that the consumer attempted to purchase before the payment method turned out to be invalid, regardless of the amount of debt owed or the number of units of already-purchased Digital Content and Apps that resided on the Apple Platform. Thus, if payment for a $4.99 purchase is rejected for whatever reason, Defendant will seize all purchased content even if the amount paid for the seized content was $100 or $10,000. Upon seizure, consumers are prevented from viewing or listening to the Digital Content and/or using any of the Apps. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Carlos F. Ramirez, Esq. Michael R. Reese, Esq. 100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor New York, New York 10025 Telephone: (212) 643-0500 Facsimile: (212) 253-4272 Email: mreese@reesellp.com cramirez@reesellp.com - and - Erica C. Mirabella, Esq. MIRABELLA LAW, LLC 132 Boylston Street, 5th Floor Boston, MA 02116 Tel: (617) 580-8270 Fax: (617) 583-1905 Email: erica@mirabellaLLC.com CACTUS MEXICAN: Bid to Dismiss Figueroa Class Suit Tossed --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MIRNA FIGUEROA, v. CACTUS MEXICAN GRILL LLC and RIGOBERTO VILLANUEVA, Case No. 1:21-cv-10445-FDS (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV entered an order denying the defendants' motion to dismiss, except that the portion of Count 2 seeking damages outside the three-year statutory limitations period of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, section 150, is dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. This is a case about an employee's claim for unpaid overtime wages. Section 207 of the Fair Labor Standards Act requires employers to compensate all non-overtime exempt employees at not less than one and one-half times their regular wage for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours per work-week. Plaintiff Mirna Figueroa has sued her former employer, Cactus Mexican Grill LLC, and its owner, Rigoberto Villanueva, for violations of the FLSA and related Massachusetts laws. The Defendants have moved to dismiss Counts 1, 2, 5, and 6 of the second amended complaint. Cactus Mexican Grill LLC operates a restaurant in East Boston, Massachusetts. Rigoberto Villanueva is the owner and manager of the LLC. Mirna Figueroa worked for Cactus Mexican Grill as a food preparer from 2013 to March 18, 2020, when she contends she was fired due to the COVID-19 pandemic. During her employment, Figueroa worked 51.7 hours in a normal week. A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 10, 2021 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3yuHgP9 at no extra charge.[CC] CEQUEL COMMUNICATIONS: DataCloud Sues Over File Manager Patents --------------------------------------------------------------- DataCloud Technologies, LLC v. Cequel Communications, LLC, Case No. 21-cv-01275 (W.D. Tex, December 8, 2021) is a patent infringement case over: Patent No Date Issued Description --------- ----------- ------------ 6,560,613 05/06/2003 Disambiguating file descriptors 7,209,959 04/24/2007 Apparatus, system, and method for communicating to a network through a virtual domain providing anonymity to a client communicating on the network 7,246,351 07/17/2007 System and method for deploying and implementing software applications over a distributed network RE44,723 01/21/2014 Regulating file access rates according to file type Plaintiff is represented by: James F. McDonough, Esq. ROZIER HARDT MCDONOUGH PLLC 1105 Nueces Street, Ste A Austin, TX 78701 Tel: (470) 480-9505 Email: jim@rhmtrial.com CONOPCO INC: Candelaria Claims Shampoo Causes Hair Loss ------------------------------------------------------- Elizabeth Candelaria, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Conopco, Inc. and Does 1 through 10, Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-06760 (E.D.N.Y., December 6, 2021), claims for negligence in connection with the sale of "TRESemme" shampoos that Candelaria alleges causes hair loss. Candelaria used Conopco's "TRESemme Color Revitalize" and states that she suffered a severe reaction that resulted in significant hair loss, hair thinning and severe scalp irritation. Conopco is an affiliate of the Unilever Group and manufactures, markets, designs, promotes and distributes TRESemme products in New York. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Stephen J. Fearon, Jr., Esq. SQUITIERI & FEARON, LLP 424 Madison Avenue, 3rd Floor New York, New York 10017 Telephone: (212) 421-6492 Facsimile: (212) 421-6553 Email: stephen@sfclasslaw.com DOLGEN CALIFORNIA: Appeals Denial of Motion to Compel Bid in Gile ----------------------------------------------------------------- Dolgen California, LLC filed an appeal from a court ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled BRIAN GILE, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated; RANDOLPH GALLEGOS, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. DOLGEN CALIFORNIA, LLC., a Tennessee limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 5:20-cv-01863-MCS-SP, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Riverside. The lawsuit was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The case arises from the Defendants' failure to reimburse employee expenses, unfair competition, unlawful nonpayment of overtime compensation, failure to compensate for all hours worked and overtime wages, unfair business practices, failure to pay wages upon discharge, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, and failure to furnish wage and hour statements, in violations of the California Labor Code. On August 27, 2021, Dolgen California filed a motion to compel arbitration. On November 15, 2021, Judge Mark C. Scarsi entered an order denying Defendant's motion to compel arbitration. The Defendant now seeks a review of the order. The appellate case is captioned as Dolgen California, LLC v Brian Gile, et al., Case No. 21-56311, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on December 6, 2021. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that: -- Appellant Dolgen California, LLC Mediation Questionnaire is due on December 13, 2021; -- Transcript shall be ordered by January 5, 2022; -- Transcript is due on February 4, 2022; -- Appellant Dolgen California, LLC opening brief is due on March 16, 2022; -- Appellees Randolph Gallegos and Brian Gile answering brief is due on April 15, 2022; and -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief.[BN] Defendant-Appellant DOLGEN CALIFORNIA, LLC, a Tennessee limited liability company, is represented by: Sabrina Alexis Beldner, Esq. MCGUIREWOODS, LLP 1800 Century Park, E, 8th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 956-3419 Plaintiffs-Appellees BRIAN GILE, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated; and RANDOLPH GALLEGOS, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, are represented by: Alfredo Torrijos, Esq. ARIAS SANGUINETTI STAHLE & TORRIJOS, LLP 6701 Center Drive West, 14th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90045 Telephone: (310) 844-9696 E-mail: alfredo@aswtlawyers.com GLAXOSMITHKLINE: Bell Disputes "Non-drowsy" Label on Cough Meds --------------------------------------------------------------- Paul Bell individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Holdings (US) LLC, GSK Consumer Health, Inc., and Pfizer, Inc. Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-09454, (C.D. Cal., December 6, 2021), seeks damages, including statutory, treble, and punitive damages, restitution, disgorgement, and other just equitable relief, pre- and post-judgment interest, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, as allowed by law and any additional relief in breach of express warranty and in violation of various states' consumer protection acts. Defendants make, sell, and market "Robitussin" over-the-counter cough medicine. Several Robitussin products contain the active ingredient Dextromethorphan Hydrobromide (DXM). At least 16 Robitussin products containing DXM prominently state on the front of their label that they are "Non-Drowsy." Bell disputes that products containing DXM, and thus the Non-Drowsy Robitussin Products do cause drowsiness, and that drowsiness is a known side-effect of DXM. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Jonas B. Jacobson, Esq. Simon Franzini, Esq. DOVEL & LUNER, LLP 201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600 Santa Monica, California 90401 Telephone: (310) 656-7066 Facsimile: (310) 656-7069 Email: jonas@dovel.com simon@dovel.com HOT GIRL: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Weekes Suit Claims ----------------------------------------------------------- ROBERT WEEKES, Individually, and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff v. HOT GIRL MERCH INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:21-cv-10450-ALC (S.D.N.Y., December 7, 2021) arises from the Defendant's failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually impaired people in violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has engaged in acts of intentional discrimination due to the inaccessibility of its website, meganthestallion.com, and seeks a permanent injunction to cause Defendant to change its corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers. Hot Girl Merch Inc. is an online retail company that owns and operates a website offering products that Defendant delivers to New York and across the U.S.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Edward Y. Kroub, Esq. Jarrett S. Charo, Esq. William J. Downes, Esq. MIZRAHI KROUB LLP 200 Vesey Street, 24th Floor New York, NY 10281 Telephone: (212) 595-6200 Facsimile: (212) 595-9700 E-mail: ekroub@mizrahikroub.com jcharo@mizrahikroub.com wdownes@mizrahikroub.com ITS LOGISTICS: Stipulation to Vacate Case Sched OK'd in Guthrie --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEITH GUTHRIE, v. ITS LOGISTICS, LLC, Case No. 1:21-cv-00729-AWI-EPG (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Erica P. Grosjean entered an order granting stipulation to vacate case schedule as follows: 1. The parties' stipulated request to vacate the case schedule is granted; 2. The case schedule is vacated; 3. The parties shall file a joint status report no later than March 15, 2022, reporting the results of their mediation; 4. If mediation is unsuccessful, the parties' joint status report shall also propose dates for resetting the case deadlines previously imposed; and 5. If necessary, the Court will issue an order setting a status conference regarding the scheduling of the case. As grounds, the parties state that they are scheduled to participate in a mediation on March 8, 2022, and vacating the case schedule will allow them to focus on settlement efforts "without incurring substantial costs to conduct discovery and prepare briefing for class certification." On August 6, 2021, the Court issued an order setting a case schedule. On December 10, 2021, the parties filed a stipulation and proposed order to vacate the case schedule. ITS Logistics is a premier Third-Party Logistics company. A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 10, 2021 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3s80l8D at no extra charge.[CC] JERSEY CITY POWER: Marchese Sues Over Telemarketing Practices ------------------------------------------------------------- JAMES L. MARCHESE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated Plaintiffs v. JERSEY CITY POWER & LIGHT CO., FIRST ENERGY CORP., and JOHN DOES 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 3:21-cv-20365 (D.N.J., December 6, 2021) is a class action against the Defendants for their alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The complaint alleges that the Defendants placed unsolicited robocalls using automatic telephone dialing system to Plaintiff and other consumers without their prior written express consent. The Defendants' alleged action harmed Plaintiff by causing the very harm that U.S. Congress sought to prevent - a "nuisance and invasion of privacy." The Corporate Defendants are American diversified energy companies.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua Bauchner, Esq. ANSELL GRIMM & AARON 365 Rifle Camp Road Woodland Park, NJ 07424 Telephone: (973) 247-9000 Facsimile: (973) 247-9199 LINCOLN EDUCATIONAL: Gaviria Appeals Denial of Reconsideration Bid ------------------------------------------------------------------ Plaintiff John Gaviria filed an appeal from a court ruling entered in the lawsuit entitled John Gaviria, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Lincoln Educational Services Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 2:20-cv-18552, in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. According to the complaint, Lincoln Educational Services Corporation operates for-profit vocational education institutions. Plaintiff John Gaviria began as a student at one such institution, but shortly after his enrollment, Lincoln Tech transitioned to online education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Gaviria, on behalf of himself and a putative class, sued Lincoln Tech to recover tuition and fee payments under contract, quasi-contract, and tort theories. On July 23, 2021, the Defendant filed a motion for reconsideration. On November 3, 2021, the Court entered an order granting in part and denying in part Defendant's motion for reconsideration and the Plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed. The Plaintiff now seeks a review of this order. The appellate case is captioned as John Gaviria v. Lincoln Educational Services Corp., Case No. 21-3250, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on December 6, 2021.[BN] Plaintiff-Appellant JOHN GAVIRIA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, is represented by: Joseph Lipari, Esq. Benjamin R. Zakarin, Esq. SULTZER LAW GROUP 270 Madison Avenue, Suite 1800 New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 524-5000 E-mail: liparij@thesultzerlawgroup.com Defendant-Appellee LINCOLN EDUCATIONAL SERVICES CORP. is represented by: Melissa J. Brown, Esq. MARKS O'NEILL O'BRIEN DOHERTY & KELLY 535 Route 38 East, Suite 501 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 Telephone: (856) 663-4300 E-mail: mbrown@moodklaw.com MASTERCARD INC: Sanborn Files Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mastercard Inc. The case is styled as James Sanborn, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Mastercard Inc., Case No. 7:21-cv-10182-NSR (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 30, 2021). The nature of suit is stated as Other Personal Property. Mastercard Inc. -- https://www.mastercard.us/en-us.html -- is an American multinational financial services corporation headquartered in the Mastercard International Global Headquarters in Purchase, New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Thomas Livezey Laughlin, IV, Esq. SCOTT + SCOTT, Attorneys at Law, LLP 230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10169 Phone: (212) 223-6444 Fax: (212) 223-6334 Email: tlaughlin@scott-scott.com - and - Arun Gopal Ravindran, Esq. HEDIN HALL LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140 Miami, FL 33131 Phone: (305) 203-4573 Email: aravindran@hedinhall.com MUSICTODAY II LLC: Ortega Sues Over Non-Blind-Friendly Website -------------------------------------------------------------- Juan Ortega, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Musictoday II, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-10295 (S.D.N.Y., December 2, 2021), seeks preliminary and permanent injunctions, compensatory, statutory and punitive damages and fines, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, costs and expenses of this action together with reasonable attorneys' and expert fees and such other and further relief under the Americans with Disabilities Act and New York City Human Rights Law. Musictoday is an online merchandise retail company that owns and operates the website shop.asapferg.com offering American rapper "A$ap Ferg" merchandise that it delivers throughout the United States, including New York State. Ortega claims that its website cannot be accessed by the visually-impaired. He is legally blind and claims that said website. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan P. Rubin, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JONATHAN P. RUBIN, PLLC 3000 Marcus Ave. Suite 1E5 Lake Success, NY 11042 Telephone: (516) 918-9347 Email: jprubinesq@gmail.com QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON: Kimery Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Calls ------------------------------------------------------------------- Stacey Kimery, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON, INC, Case No. 5:21-cv-02067 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 10, 2021), is brought against the Defendant to secure redress for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The Defendant uses prerecorded messages to send mass automated marketing calls to individuals' cellular phone numbers without first obtaining the required express written consent. Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt the Defendant's illegal conduct, which has resulted in the invasion of privacy, harassment, aggravation, and disruption of the daily life of thousands of individuals. The Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages on behalf of the Plaintiff and members of the Class, and any other available legal or equitable remedies, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a natural person who was a resident of Riverside County, California. The Defendant operates as a new and used car dealership which also offers maintenance and service of automobiles to consumers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Edelsberg, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW 1925 Century Park, E #1700 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: 786-289-9471 Email: Scott@Edelsberglaw.com SARPJ LLC: Faces Parden Suit Over Delivery Drivers' Unpaid Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- SHELBY PARDEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SARPJ, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 5:21-cv-00076-LGW-BWC (S.D. Ga., December 6, 2021) is a collective action brought by Plaintiff against Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay minimum and overtime wages and failing to reimburse for automobile expenses related to making deliveries. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as an hourly-paid delivery driver from approximately October 2020 until April of 2021. SARPJ, LLC owns and operates multiple Papa John's franchises throughout Georgia.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lydia H. Hamlet, Esq. 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 E-mail: lydia@sanfordlawfirm.com josh@sanfordlawfirm.com - and - Matthew W. Herrington, Esq. DELONG, CALDWELL, BRIDGERS, FITZPATRICK & BENJAMIN 101 Marietta Street, Suite 2650 Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: (404) 979-3150 E-mail: matthew.herrington@dcbflegal.com TARGET CORP: Petition for Permission to Appeal Granted in Mills --------------------------------------------------------------- Target Corporation granted petition for permission to appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(b) from a court ruling entered in the lawsuit styled CINNAMON MILLS, individually, on a representative basis, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. TARGET CORPORATION, a Minnesota corporation, and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. 5:20-cv-01460-JGB-KK, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, Riverside. The lawsuit was removed from the Superior Court of California in and for the County of Riverside to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on July 22, 2020. The complaint asserts claims against the Defendants for failure to pay vested vacation; failure to timely pay final wages; and unfair and unlawful competition in violation of the California Labor Code. As reported in the Class Action Reporter on June 9, 2021, the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting Plaintiff's motion for class certification. On July 14, 2021, Judge Jesus G. Bernal granted a Joint Stipulated Request to Continue Hearing on Defendant Target Corporation's Motion for Summary Judgment and Plaintiff Cinnamon Mills's Motion for Class Certification. On July 29, 2021, the Court granted in part and denied in part Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment and granted Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification. The Defendant sought a review of the order entered by Judge Bernal in an appellate case captioned Cinnamon Mills v. Target Corporation, Case No. 21-80111, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, that was filed on October 22, 2021. The Petitioner's motion for leave to file a reply is now granted. The petition for permission to appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1292(b) is granted. The appellate case is captioned as Cinnamon Mills v. Target Corporation, Case No. 21-56308, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on December 6, 2021. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that: -- Target Corporation and Cinnamon Mills Mediation Questionnaire was due on December 13, 2021; -- First cross-appeal brief is due on March 16, 2022 for Target Corporation; -- Second brief on cross-appeal is due on April 15, 2022 for Cinnamon Mills; -- Third brief on cross-appeal is due on May 16, 2022 for Target Corporation; and -- The optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the third brief on cross-appeal.[BN] Defendant-Appellant TARGET CORPORATION is represented by: Lindsey Cecellia Jackson, Esq. PAUL HASTINGS, LLP 515 S Flower Street, 25th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 683-6000 - and - Jeffrey D. Wohl, Esq. PAUL HASTINGS, LLP 101 California Street, 48th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 856-7000 Plaintiff-Appellee CINNAMON MILLS, individually on a representative basis, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Peter J. Carlson, Esq. Brian J. Mankin, Esq. FERNANDEZ & LAUBY LLP 4590 Allstate Drive Riverside, CA 92501 Telephone: (951) 320-1444 E-mail: pjc@fernandezlauby.com bjm@fernandezlauby.com - and - Deepak Gupta, Esq. GUPTA WESSLER, PLLC 2001 K Street, NW Suite 850 N Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 888-1741 - and - Neil Sawhney, Esq. GUPTA WESSLER, PLLC 100 Pine Street Suite 1250 San Francisco, CA 94111 WELLS FARGO: Clark Slams Misleading/Deceptive Loan Offer -------------------------------------------------------- Diane M. Clark and James M. Clark, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Wells Fargo & Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendants, Case No. 21-cv-09422 (N.D. Cal., December 6, 2021), seeks restitution and injunctive relief resulting from negligent misrepresentation and intentional misrepresentation and in violation of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, California's False Advertising Law and California's Unfair Competition Law. Wells Fargo provides, among other things, mortgage services throughout the United States, including in the State of California. As part of its mortgage servicing operations, Wells Fargo collects the monthly mortgage payments of borrowers (like the Clarks), and those funds are, in turn, applied to principal and interest, taxes and insurance as well as any other fees and charges that may have been assessed. Following the worldwide outbreak of COVID-19, the US Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act in order to provide some relief to millions of American homeowners struggling to make their mortgage payments as a result of the economic difficulties caused by the pandemic. The CARES Act instructed mortgagees and servicers to create mortgage forbearance provisions for all federally-backed mortgages, which includes loans serviced by Wells Fargo. As a result, many Wells Fargo customers elected to participate in the CARES Act in order to defer their mortgage payments through a forbearance. However, as the COVID-19 financial crisis has improved, many borrowers are able to transition back to full payments on their home mortgages and borrowers who did not apply for the CARES Act may want to take advantage of better interest rates by refinancing with Defendants through a loan modification. Clark alleges that Wells Fargo engaged in a "bait-and-switch" scheme to get borrowers to accept loan modification terms that were less favorable to them, whether less favorable than a partial claim loan under the CARES Act or under the guise that an initial loan modification offer from Wells Fargo had an incorrect interest rate. The Clarks jointly own a home located in Buena Park, California that is mortgaged through Wells Fargo with a 30-year fixed mortgage. Their forbearance with Wells Fargo obtained through the CARES Act expired on September 30, 2021 so they inquired about their options upon ending the forbearance. Wells Fargo said that they would need to resume their regular payments beginning in October 2021, and provided several options to exit their forbearance, including one that they could move the amount past due from the forbearance into a "separate, interest-free loan" called the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) COVID-19 National Emergency Partial Claim which, under the CARES Act, is a "partial claim loan is a zero interest, no fee, junior lien on the mortgage property that will become payable when they sell the home, pays off the mortgage or the mortgage otherwise terminates." Instead of receiving the Partial Claim Loan that was requested by Clark, Wells Fargo sent Plaintiffs a Loan Modification Offer via a written correspondence dated September 9, 2021 that was a much better offer than their current 30-year fixed mortgage and the Partial Claim Loan they considered applying for upon the expiration of their forbearance. Eager to take advantage of this financial opportunity, Plaintiffs decided to take Wells Fargo up on their offer and proceed with the Loan Modification Offer, instead of the Partial Claim Loan offered by the CARES Act. However, the second Loan Modification Offer from Wells Fargo dated October 1, 2021, with less favorable terms than the initial Loan Modification Offer that Clark initially received and complains that the terms of the second Loan Modification Offer (compared to the initial Loan Modification Offer) increased. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Abbas Kazerounian, Esq. Pamela E. Prescott, Esq. KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC 245 Fischer Avenue, Unit D1 Costa Mesa, California 92626 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 Email: ak@kazlg.com pamela@kazlg.com - and - Jason A. Ibey, Esq. KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC 321 N Mall Drive, Suite R108 St. George, Utah 84790 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 Email: jason@kazlg.com ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 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 ***