/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/220914.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Wednesday, September 14, 2022, Vol. 24, No. 178
Headlines
1422 FULTON CHICKEN: Rivalo Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
17 EDUCATION: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due Sept. 19
360 SUPPORT SERVICES: Ramirez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
3M COMPANY: Abshire Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: AFFF Products Can Cause Cancer, James Suit Claims
3M COMPANY: Azzara Sues Over PFAS Exposure From AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Bender Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Exposed Firefighters to PFAS, Feliciano Suit Alleges
3M COMPANY: Hardeman Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Hendrix Sues Over Side Effects of Using AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: May Sues Over AFFF Products' Risk to Human Health
3M COMPANY: Parazoo Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Schneider Sues Over Side Effects of AFFF Products
3M COMPANY: Trenery Suit Claims Toxic Exposure From AFFF Products
A+ VALET: Solomon Suit Alleges Unpaid Overtime for Valets
A.G.I.SUPREME: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Pembroke Pines Sues Over Drop of Stock Price
ALG VACATIONS: Sends Unsolicited Texts/Calls, Rodriguez Suit Says
ALLSTATE CORPORATION: Farley Suit Over Lincoln Benefit Sale Pending
AMERICAN GENERAL: LSIMC Appeals Class Cert. Ruling to 9th Cir.
APPLE INC: Judge Dismisses Proposed "Phishing App" Class Action
ARROW SENIOR: Roberts FLSA Suit Moved From E.D. Mo. to S.D. Ohio
ASTRO JOHNNY: Underpays Service Technicians, Nelson Suit Alleges
ASZ CARING: Fails to Pay Caregivers' Minimum, OT Wages, Leon Says
ATHLETIC PROPULSION: Cody Files Suit in C.D. California
AUSTRALIA: Robodebt Victims Set to Receive Settlement Payouts
BACK TO NATURE: Venticinque Sues Over Deceptive Labeling
BANK OF AMERICA: Faces Fraud Class Suit Over Zelle Payment Platform
BANK OF AMERICA: Modern Perfection Sues Over Misrepresentations
BED BATH: Late CFO Subject of Suit Over "Pump and Dump" Scheme
BRONX IRON: Faces Fernandez Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
CALUMET MONTANA: Files a Petition to Review SRE Denial to 9th Cir.
CANADA: Families, Former Patients Seek Access to Hospital Records
CARTER AND LITTLE: McNair Seeks Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Staff
CHRISTIAN DIOR: Collects Biometrics Without Consent, Warmack Claims
CLIF BAR: Uribe Sues Over Clif Blok Energy Chews' Caffeine Content
COLUMBIA BOOKS: Clarke Files Suit in W.D. Michigan
CONTANGO RESOURCES: OGP Sues Over Untimely Payment of Proceeds
CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $8.3M Fund From Settlement Used for Research
CVS PHARMACY: Lester Alleges Deceptive Hydrogen Peroxide's Label
DEERE & CO: Monopolizes Repair Service Market, Robbins Suit Says
DIRECTV LLC: Sapan Sues Over Unwanted Telemarketing Calls
DISCOVER CONSTRUCTION: Ct. Temporarily Terminates Class Cert Bid
DRIVERDO LLC: Wright Sues Over Failure to Pay Minimum and OT Wages
EARTHGRAINS DISTRIBUTION: Munoz Suit Removed to S.D. California
EQUIFAX INC: Sends Inaccurate Credit Scores to Lenders, Leahy Says
EXIMIUS COFFEE: Dollar General Suit Alleges Breach of Contract
F.T. MEAT: Faces Jimenez Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
FIRST CITIZENS: Bethea Files Suit Over Workplace Discrimination
FLOWERS FOODS: Appeals Order Granting Class Cert. in Ludlow Suit
GENERAL MOTORS: Court Junks Ambrose Class Suit
GENERAL MOTORS: Fails to Inform About Policy Conversion, Volz Says
GM NAMEPLATE: Kali Seeks Unpaid Wages for Non-Exempt Workers
GORSUCH LTD: Loadholt Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
GREIF INC: Hunt Sues Over Unpaid Overtime for Utility Workers
GRIFOLS SHARED: Gruber Must File Certification Bid by Dec. 16
HAUNTED GAME CAFE: Loadholt Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
HAVEN ANIMAL: Faces Zerr Suit Over Unpaid Wages and Retaliation
HAWKEYE SECURITY: Guacan Seeks Security Officers' Unpaid Overtime
HOMEGOODS INC: Casas Wage-and-Hour Suit Goes to S.D. California
HUMANIGEN INC: Pieroni Sues Over 47.25% Decline of Stock Price
HUNGRY HOWIE: Underpays Delivery Drivers, Remaley FLSA Suit Says
IHR1 CONSTRUCTION: Fails to Properly Pay Wages, Xochipa Claims
INDIANA PACKERS: Faces Rhines FLSA Class Suit in N.D. Indiana
INTRACARE HOSPITAL: Livingston ERISA Suit Alleges Denied Benefits
ITALKRAFT LLC: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
J.M. SMUCKER: Bopp Consumer Suit Moved From D.S.C. to N.D. Ohio
J.M. SMUCKER: Kraljevich Suit Moved From E.D. Ky. to N.D. Ohio
JOBCO INC: Pineda Seeks Final Approval of FLSA Settlement
JUUL LABS: Faces Clark County Suit Over Deceptive E-Cigarette Ads
KIA AMERICA: Faces Jones Suit Over Unsafe, Easy to Steal Vehicles
KIA CORP: Johnson Files Class Action Over Vehicle Theft Risk
KIMBERLY CLARK: Germ Removal Label "Deceptive," Rosenwald Claims
KING ASHTON: Initial Scheduling Order Entered in Shannon Suit
KOHL CORP: Portnoy Law Files Suit Over Misleading Financial Reports
KOHL'S INC: Terry Suit Alleges Illegal Collection of Biometrics
KRUEGER PIZZA: Wiles Seeks to Certify Class of Delivery Drivers
LAMOILLE HEALTH: Faces Class Lawsuit Over 58,000-Record Data Breach
LATCH INC: Portnoy Law Sues Over Misleading Financial Reports
LIMA ONE: Adr1assist Seeks More Time to File Class Cert. Bid
LOWRY FARMS: Benito, et al., Seek Approval of Rule 23 Class Notice
LYFT INC: Lowell, et al., Seek to Certify Five Rule 23 Classes
M COLLECTION HOME: Iskhakova Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
MAINE OXY-ACETYLENE: Prelim Approval of Class Settlement Sought
MARSHALLS OF CA: Moraga Labor Code Suit Goes to C.D. California
MATTERPORT INC: Suit Seeks to Certify Injunctive Relief Class
MCG HEALTH: Batt CCPA Suit Moved From C.D. Cal. to W.D. Wash.
MEDTRONIC PLC: Misleads Investors of Diabetes Business' Status
MERCEDES BENZ: Order Amending Case Schedule Entered in Hazdovac
META PLATFORMS: $37.5M Locating Tracking Settlement Awaits Court OK
METROPOLITAN DIRECT: Vega Suit Removed to D. New Mexico
MIKOMA CONSTRUCTION: Siguencia Seeks Unpaid Wages for Electricians
MOLECULAR PARTNERS: IPO Documents "Misleading," Class Suit Claims
MONARCH RECOVERY: Mullins Seeks More Time to File Replies
MORGAN STANLEY: Helfand Appeals Final Approval of Tillman Suit Deal
MUSIC TRIBE: Class Cert. Hearing Continued to February 27, 2023
NATIONAL ENTERPRISE: Edwards Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Michigan
NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Arbitration in Discrimination Suit Discussed
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL: Prelim Pretrial Order Entered in MSP Suit
NUEVO TULCINGO: Guerrero Sues Over Restaurant Staff's Unpaid Wages
ONETOUCHPOINT INC: Fails to Protect Patients' Info, Nardi Suit Says
OS RESTAURANT: Faces Raffo FLSA Suit in M.D. Florida
PAPARAZZI LLC: Hollins Suit Transferred to D. Utah
PATTERN ENERGY: Allowed Leave to File Opposition Surreply
PBM NUTRITIONAL: Agrees $2-M Settlement in Mislabeled Formula Suit
PLURALSIGHT INC: Tenth Cir. Reversed Dismissal of Securities Suit
PORK BARREL: Civil Case Management Plan, Scheduling Order Entered
PORTLAND, OR: Violates ADA Over Inaccessible Sidewalks, Suit Says
PRACTICE RESOURCES: Fails to Protect Patients' Info, Suit Claims
PRIORITY-1 INC: Potter Files FLSA Suit in E.D. Arkansas
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Kendall Suit Moved From C.D. Cal. to S.D. Ohio
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Pijacki Sues Over Air Fresheners' Deceptive Ads
PROMISES KEPT: Flowers Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Wrongful Discharge
RESURGENT CAPITAL: Benjamin Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. Florida
SALEM GROUP INC: Webster Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
SAUCE PIZZERIA: Faces Moreno Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
SELECT EMPLOYMENT: Villanueva Seeks to Redefine Proposed Classes
SHUTTERFLY LLC: Adams FTSA Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
SISKIYOU COUNTY, CA: Asian Americans File Discrimination Lawsuit
STITCH FIX: Faces Store Unions Suit Over 6% Drop of Stock Price
STUYVESANT GOURMET: Underpays Deli Workers, Linares Suit Claims
SURGE PRIVATE: Fails to Properly Pay Cleaners, Zhao Suit Alleges
SWD INC: Romero Files Suit Over Unlawful Biometric Data Collection
SWIFT BEEF COMPANY: Garza Suit Removed to C.D. California
SWIFT BEEF: Garza Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to C.D. California
SWISS RE: Harris Sues for Breach of Fiduciary Duties Under ERISA
SYMETRA ASSIGNED: Appeals Class Cert. Ruling in White Suit
TABC INC: Faces Class Action Over Failure to Pay Proper Wages
TALON WINERY: Loadholt Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
TELADOC HEALTH: Schutter Suit Moved From E.D.N.Y. to S.D.N.Y.
THEDACARE INC: Winters Sues Over Unpaid Overtime for CSR Employees
THIS IS L. INC: Paulson Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
TOYOTA MOTOR: Proposes $150M Settlement in Fuel Pumps Recall Suit
TRANSCANADA USA: Misclassifies Inspectors, Sain Suit Claims
TRUEACCORD CORP: Jones Files FDCPA Suit in W.D. Kentucky
TUSIMPLE HOLDINGS: Faces Class Suit Over Misleading SEC Statements
TUSIMPLE HOLDINGS: Legal Chief Steps Down Amidst Shareholders' Suit
TWITTER INC: McClellan Sues Over Illegal Use of Personal Info
TWITTER INC: Rosen Law Firm Investigates Possible Securities Claims
UNCLE AL'S: Van Lehn Sues Over Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Staff
UNITED STATES: Cancer Patient Joins Suit Over Medicaid Benefits
UNIVERSAL SPA: Terrazas Sues Over Illegal Collection of Biometrics
VERTAFORE INC: 5th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of Allen Suit
VERTAFORE INC: Masciota Suit Voluntarily Dismissed
VERTAFORE INC: Seeks Dismissal of Mulvey Suit
VERTIV HOLDINGS: Vinings Securities Suit Dismissed
VICTORIA: Police Faces Suit Over Use of Capsicum Spray at Protest
VROOM AUTOMOTIVE: Sonne UCC Suit Removed to W.D. Oklahoma
WALMART INC: Washington Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Pennsylvania
WANTAGH NOODLE: Faces Vicario Suit Over Failure to Pay OT Wages
YOUTUBE LLC: Collects Biometric Identifiers, Marschke Suit Claims
*********
1422 FULTON CHICKEN: Rivalo Files FLSA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against 1422 Fulton Chicken
LLC, et al. The case is styled as Joseph Rivalo, on behalf of
himself and other similarly situated v. 1422 Fulton Chicken LLC,
8221 Flatlands Chicken LLC, AR Group Brooklyn LLC, Ali Butt, Case
No. 1:22-cv-05273 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 5, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Fulton Chicken LLC is a business entity registered with the State
of New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mohammed Gangat, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF MOHAMMED GANGAT
675 Third Avenue, Ste. 1810
New York, NY 10017
Phone: (718) 669-0714
Email: mgangat107@gmail.com
17 EDUCATION: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due Sept. 19
--------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholder rights law firm Johnson Fistel, LLP on Sept. 6
disclosed that a class action lawsuit has commenced on behalf of
investors of 17 Education & Technology Group Inc. ("17EdTech" or
the "Company") (NASDAQ: YQ). The class action is on behalf of
shareholders who purchased or otherwise acquired 17EdTech
securities pursuant and/or traceable to the registration statement
and related prospectus (collectively, the "Registration Statement")
issued in connection with 17EdTech December 2020 initial public
offering (the "IPO" or "Offering"). Investors are hereby notified
that they have until September 19, 2022 to move the Court to serve
as lead plaintiff in this action.
What actions may I take at this time? If you suffered a loss and
are interested in learning more about being a lead plaintiff,
please contact Jim Baker (jimb@johnsonfistel.com) by email or phone
at 619-814-4471. If emailing, please include a phone number.
To join this action, you can click or copy and paste the link below
in a browser:
https://www.johnsonfistel.com/investigations/17-education-yq-ipo-lawsuit
There is no cost or obligation to you.
The Complaint alleges that the Registration Statement featured
false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:
(1) 17EdTech's K-12 Academic AST Services would end less than a
year after the IPO; (2) as part of its ongoing regulatory efforts,
Chinese authorities would imminently curtail and/or end 17EdTech's
core business; and (3) as a result, defendants' statements about
the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially
false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all
relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the
lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.
A lead plaintiff will act on behalf of all other class members in
directing the 17EdTech class-action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can
select a law firm of its choice to litigate the class-action
lawsuit. An investor's ability to share any potential future
recovery of the 17EdTech class action lawsuit is not dependent upon
serving as lead plaintiff. For more information regarding the lead
plaintiff process please refer to
https://www.johnsonfistel.com/lead-plaintiff-deadlines.
About Johnson Fistel, LLP:
Johnson Fistel, LLP is a nationally recognized shareholder rights
law firm with offices in California, New York and Georgia. The firm
represents individual and institutional investors in shareholder
derivative and securities class action lawsuits. Johnson Fistel
seeks to recover losses incurred due to violations of federal
securities laws. For more information about the firm and its
attorneys, please visit http://www.johnsonfistel.com.Attorney
advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
Contact:
Johnson Fistel, LLP
Jim Baker, 619-814-4471
Investor Relations
jimb@johnsonfistel.com [GN]
360 SUPPORT SERVICES: Ramirez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Zoila Magana Ramirez, as an aggrieved employee and on behalf of all
other aggrieved employees under the Labor Code Private Attorney's
General Act of 2004 v. 360 SUPPORT SERVICES, a California
corporation DBA 360 Services Group; HALLSTA 360, INC., a California
corporation; RENEE FIELDS, an individual; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, Case No. 22STCV28815 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.,
Sept. 2, 2022), is brought against the Defendants for violations of
the California Labor Code by failing to pay the Plaintiff overtime
wages.
The Defendants had and have a policy or practice of failing to pay
overtime wages to Plaintiff and other Aggrieved Employees in the
State of California in violation of California state wage and hour
laws as a result of, without limitation, the Plaintiff working over
8 hours per day, 40 hours per week, and/or 7 straight workdays in a
workweek without paying them proper overtime wages, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt
employee.
360 SUPPORT is a limited liability company organized and existing
under and by virtue of the laws of the State of California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David D. Bibiyan, Esq.
Jeffrey D. Klein, Esq.
Alexander D. Wallin, Esq.
BIBIYAN LAW GROUP, P.C.
1801 Century Park East, Suite 2600
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: (310) 438-5555
Facsimile: (310)300-1705
Email: david@tomorrowlaw.com
jeffrey@tomorrowlaw.com
alex@tomorrowlaw.com
3M COMPANY: Abshire Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN ABSHIRE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-02927-RMG
(D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with bladder cancer, says the
suit.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Telephone: (631) 600-0000
Facsimile: (631) 543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
3M COMPANY: AFFF Products Can Cause Cancer, James Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
GARY JAMES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY fka MINNESOTA MINING &
MANUFACTURING CO.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT CO.; CHEMGUARD, INC.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I.
DUPONT DE NEMOURS & CO.; KIDDE-FENWALL, INC; KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING,
INC; KIDDE PLC INC.; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS CO.; THE
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICA'S, INC; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 2:22-cv-02916-RMG (D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, strict liability,
defective design, failure to warn, fraudulent concealment, medical
monitoring trust, and violations of California Unfair Competition
Law and the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to use
reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture,
labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and
distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products
containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are
dangerous to human health because PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of
exposed individuals. The Defendants have also failed to warn public
entities and military members, including the Plaintiff, who they
knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products.
The Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in
their intended manner, without significant change in the products'
condition due to inadequate warning about the products' danger. The
Plaintiff relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper
handling of the products, says the suit.
As a result of the Defendants' omissions and misconduct, the
Plaintiff was diagnosed with thyroid disease and commenced on-going
medical treatment inclusive of surgical intervention via
thyroidectomy, the suit alleges.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwall, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde Fire Fighting, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products
based in Mebane, North Carolina.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
UTC Fire & Security America's Inc. is a manufacturer of security
and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeremy C. Shafer, Esq.
VETERAN LEGAL GROUP
700 12th Street N.W., Suite 700
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (888) 215-7834
E-mail: jshafer@bannerlegal.com
- and -
S. James Boumil, Esq.
BOUMIL LAW OFFICES
120 Fairmount Street
Lowell, MA, 01852
Telephone: (978) 458-0507
E-mail: sjboumil@boumil-law.com
- and -
Konstantine Kyros, Esq.
KYROS LAW
17 Miles Rd.
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (800) 934-2921
E-mail: kon@kyroslaw.com
3M COMPANY: Azzara Sues Over PFAS Exposure From AFFF Products
-------------------------------------------------------------
CHRIS AZZARA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY fka MINNESOTA MINING &
MANUFACTURING CO.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT CO.; CHEMGUARD, INC.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I.
DUPONT DE NEMOURS & CO.; KIDDE-FENWALL, INC; KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING,
INC; KIDDE PLC INC.; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS CO.; THE
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICA'S, INC; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 2:22-cv-02909-RMG (D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class
action against the Defendants for negligence, strict liability,
defective design, failure to warn, fraudulent concealment, medical
monitoring trust, and violation of the Uniform Voidable
Transactions Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to use
reasonable and appropriate care in the design, manufacture,
labeling, warning, instruction, training, selling, marketing, and
distribution of aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products
containing synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances
collectively known as PFAS. The Defendants' AFFF products are
dangerous to human health because PFAS are highly toxic and
carcinogenic chemicals and can accumulate in the blood and body of
exposed individuals. The Defendants have also failed to warn public
entities and military members, including the Plaintiff, who they
knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products.
The Plaintiff used the Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products in
their intended manner, without significant change in the products'
condition due to inadequate warning about the products' danger. The
Plaintiff relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the proper
handling of the products, says the suit.
As a result of the Defendants' omissions and misconduct, the
Plaintiff was diagnosed with testicular cancer and commenced
on-going medical treatment inclusive of surgical intervention via a
right orchiectomy, the suit alleges.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwall, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde Fire Fighting, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire safety products
based in Mebane, North Carolina.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
UTC Fire & Security America's Inc. is a manufacturer of security
and fire control systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeremy C. Shafer, Esq.
VETERAN LEGAL GROUP
700 12th Street N.W., Suite 700
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (888) 215-7834
E-mail: jshafer@bannerlegal.com
- and –
S. James Boumil, Esq.
BOUMIL LAW OFFICES
120 Fairmount Street
Lowell, MA, 01852
Telephone: (978) 458-0507
E-mail: sjboumil@boumil-law.com
- and -
Konstantine Kyros, Esq.
KYROS LAW
17 Miles Rd.
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (800) 934-2921
E-mail: kon@kyroslaw.com
3M COMPANY: Bender Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
WILLIE BENDER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-02875-RMG
(D.S.C., August 29, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with prostate cancer, says the
suit.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Telephone: (631) 600-0000
Facsimile: (631) 543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
3M COMPANY: Exposed Firefighters to PFAS, Feliciano Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
RAYMOND FELICIANO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-02928-RMG
(D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with lymphoma cancer, says the
suit.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Telephone: (631) 600-0000
Facsimile: (631) 543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
3M COMPANY: Hardeman Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
------------------------------------------------------------------
ALETHEA HARDEMAN, as Personal Representative/Administrator/Executor
of the Estate of DOUGLAS HARDEMAN, deceased, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE
PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION,
INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No.
2:22-cv-02908-RMG (D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning,
design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of
express and implied warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from personal injury and death of Douglas Hardeman,
Decedent, as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and civilian
firefighters, including the Decedent, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Decedent was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with prostate cancer. The
Decedent's diagnosis caused and/or contributed to his death, the
suit alleges.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [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
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
3M COMPANY: Hendrix Sues Over Side Effects of Using AFFF Products
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FAIN HENDRIX, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-02876-RMG
(D.S.C., August 29, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with prostate cancer, the suit
alleges.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Telephone: (631) 600-0000
Facsimile: (631) 543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
3M COMPANY: May Sues Over AFFF Products' Risk to Human Health
-------------------------------------------------------------
JUSTIN MAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-02926-RMG
(D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with colorectal cancer, says the
suit.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Telephone: (631) 600-0000
Facsimile: (631) 543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
3M COMPANY: Parazoo Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MONTY PARAZOO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE
EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS,
INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC;
CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY;
NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP,
as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-02877-RMG
(D.S.C., August 29, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict
liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied
warranties, and wantonness.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn public entities and civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with bladder cancer, says the
suit.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Telephone: (631) 600-0000
Facsimile: (631) 543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 328-9200
Facsimile: (205) 328-9456
3M COMPANY: Schneider Sues Over Side Effects of AFFF Products
-------------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN SCHNEIDER, as Personal Representative/Administrator/Executor
of the Estate of REGIS JOSEPH SCHNEIDER, deceased, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE
PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION,
INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No.
2:22-cv-02930-RMG (D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning,
design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of
express and implied warranties, wantonness, and survival and
wrongful death acts.
The case arises from personal injury and death of Regis Joseph
Schneider, Decedent, as a result of his exposure to the Defendants'
aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic,
toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as
PFAS. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care
in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction,
training, selling, marketing, and distribution of their
PFAS-containing AFFF products and also failed to warn public
entities and civilian firefighters, including the Decedent, who
they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF
products that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a
danger to human health. Due to inadequate warning, the Decedent was
exposed to toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with metastatic pelvic
cancer, kidney cancer and other medical related conditions. The
Decedent's diagnosis caused and/or contributed to his death, the
suit alleges.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stephen T. Sullivan, Jr., Esq.
John E. Keefe, Jr., Esq.
WILENTZ, GOLDMAN & SPITZER P.A.
125 Half Mile Road, Suite 100
Red Bank, NJ 07701
Telephone: (732) 855-6060
Facsimile: (732) 726-4860
3M COMPANY: Trenery Suit Claims Toxic Exposure From AFFF Products
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FRANK TRENERY and ERIN WILLIAMSON, his wife, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); ACG CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a
DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; TYCO FIRE
PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED
TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION,
INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Defendants, Case No.
2:22-cv-02929-RMG (D.S.C., August 31, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning,
design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of
express and implied warranties, wantonness, and per quod claim.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by
Plaintiff Frank Trenery as a result of his exposure to the
Defendants' aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) products containing
synthetic, toxic per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively
known as PFAS. The Defendants failed to use reasonable and
appropriate care in the design, manufacture, labeling, warning,
instruction, training, selling, marketing, and distribution of
their PFAS-containing AFFF products and also failed to warn public
entities and civilian firefighters, including Mr. Trenery, who they
knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products
that use of and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to
human health. Due to inadequate warning, Mr. Trenery was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with prostate cancer and/or other
medical conditions, the suit alleges.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with principal place of business at 1007 Market
Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Kidde-Fenwal, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire protection systems
based in Ashland, Massachusetts.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a manufacturer of foam concentrate, foam
proportioning systems, fixed and portable foam firefighting
equipment, with principal place of business located at 350 East
Union Street, West Chester, Pennsylvania.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Stephen T. Sullivan, Jr., Esq.
John E. Keefe, Jr., Esq.
WILENTZ, GOLDMAN & SPITZER P.A.
125 Half Mile Road, Suite 100
Red Bank, NJ 07701
Telephone: (732) 855-6060
Facsimile: (732) 726-4860
A+ VALET: Solomon Suit Alleges Unpaid Overtime for Valets
---------------------------------------------------------
DAVID SOLOMON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. A+ VALET PARKING INC. and CARLOS SARAVIA,
Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-07331 (S.D.N.Y., August 27, 2022) is a
class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the New York State Labor Law including
failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide wage notices, and
failure to provide wage statements.
The Plaintiff was employed as a valet at A+ Valet from
approximately June 8, 2022 to, through and including, July 11,
2022.
A+ Valet Parking Inc. is a provider of parking services based in
New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Levin-Epstein, Esq.
Jason Mizrahi, Esq.
LEVIN-EPSTEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4700
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 792-0046
E-mail: Joshua@levinepstein.com
A.G.I.SUPREME: Sanchez Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against A.G.I.Supreme LLC.
The case is styled as Cristian Sanchez, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. A.G.I.Supreme LLC, Case No.
1:22-cv-07533 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 2, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
A.G.I.Supreme LLC doing business as Ideal Baby --
https://www.idealbaby.com/ -- offers baby products from car seats
to baby strollers, from travel gear to nursery furniture.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Edward Y. Kroub, Esq.
MIZRAHI & KROUB LLP
200 Vesey Street, 24th Floor
New York, NY 11201
Phone: (212) 595-6200
Email: ekroub@mizrahikroub.com
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Pembroke Pines Sues Over Drop of Stock Price
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PEMBROKE PINES FIREFIGHTERS & POLICE OFFICERS PENSION FUND,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, ROBERT B. FORD, ROBERT E. FUNCK,
JR., JOSEPH MANNING, and CHRISTOPHER J. CALAMARI, Defendants, Case
No. 1:22-cv-04661 (N.D. Ill., August 31, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.
According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements and omissions concerning the safety and
salability of Abbott's infant formula in order to trade Abbott
common stock at artificially inflated prices from February 19, 2021
to June 8, 2022. Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants put
profitability ahead of children's safety. During that time, Abbott
engaged in a scheme to maximize revenues and inflate the company's
stock price while disregarding and then concealing lapses in safety
protocols that ultimately were linked to serious infant illnesses
and even deaths. When the truth emerged, Abbott's stock price
continuously dropped, from a closing price of $116.88 per share on
June 7, 2022, to a closing price of $112.71 per share on June 9,
2022. As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions,
and the precipitous decline in the market value of the company's
common stock, the Plaintiff and Class members have suffered
significant damages, says the suit.
Pembroke Pines Firefighters & Police Officers Pension Fund is a
public pension fund based in Pembroke Pines, Florida.
Abbott Laboratories is a manufacturer of health care products, with
its headquarters located in Abbot Park, Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Avi Josefson, Esq.
BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
875 North Michigan Avenue, Suite 3100
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 373-3880
Facsimile: (312) 794-7801
E-mail: avi@blbglaw.com
- and -
Hannah Ross, Esq.
Lauren A. Ormsbee, Esq.
Scott R. Foglietta, Esq.
BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
1251 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
Telephone: (212) 554-1400
Facsimile: (212) 554-1444
E-mail: hannah@blbglaw.com
lauren@blbglaw.com
scott.foglietta@blbglaw.com
ALG VACATIONS: Sends Unsolicited Texts/Calls, Rodriguez Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
KATHERINE RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ALG VACATIONS CORP., Defendant,
Case No. 6:22-cv-01545 (M.D. Fla., August 29, 2022) is a class
action against the Defendant for violations of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act and the Florida Telephone Solicitation
Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant is engaged in sending
text messages and calls to the cellular telephone numbers of
consumers, including the Plaintiff, in an attempt to promote its
goods and services without obtaining their prior express written
consent. The Defendant's telephonic sales calls have caused the
Plaintiff and Class members harm, including violations of their
statutory rights, statutory damages, annoyance, nuisance, and
invasion of their privacy, says the suit.
ALG Vacations Corp. is a provider of charter flights and vacation
packages, headquartered in Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
- and –
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
ALLSTATE CORPORATION: Farley Suit Over Lincoln Benefit Sale Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The Allstate Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2022, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 3, 2022 that the company is
continuing to defend a putative class action in California federal
court captioned Farley v. Lincoln Benefit Life Company (E.D. Cal.,
filed Dec. 2020), after Allstate has entered into a definitive
agreement to sell Lincoln Benefit Life to Resolution Life.
The Allstate Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiaries,
primarily Allstate Insurance Company, is a property and casualty
insurance company based in Illinois.
AMERICAN GENERAL: LSIMC Appeals Class Cert. Ruling to 9th Cir.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff LSIMC, LLC filed an appeal from a court ruling entered in
the lawsuit entitled LSIMC, LLC, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, v. AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Case No. 2:20-cv-11518-SVW-PVC, in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California, Los Angeles.
The suit alleges that the Defendant has cheated Plaintiff and other
owners of life insurance policies issued in California out of tens
of millions of dollars by deliberately under-paying interest owed
on amounts deposited with AmGen in violation of the terms of their
standardized form contracts.
The complaint contends that AmGen has breached the terms of the
policies by redetermining credited rates based on factors other
than its expectations of future investment earnings. For at least
the past four years, AmGen has redetermined the credited interest
rates on Plaintiff's policy at 3.0% -- which is the guaranteed
minimum set forth in the policy -- despite changes in AmGen's
expectations of future investment earnings amidst dramatic
fluctuations in the Treasuries, bonds, equities, and other assets
in which AmGen invests policyholder account value.
As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Feb. 24, 2022, the
Plaintiff asked the Court to enter an order granting class
certification, appointing Plaintiff as class representative, and
appointing Susman Godfrey, L.L.P. as class counsel for the
following "Investment Earnings Only California Class":
"All current and former owners of life insurance policies who
have received credited interest on policies issued by
American General Life Insurance Company, or its predecessors,
in the State of California on policy forms that provide that
any redetermination of interest rates will be based "only on
expectations of future investment earnings" and that have a
guaranteed minimum annual effective interest rate of 3.00%."
Excluded from the class are (a) Defendant, its officers and
directors, members of their immediate families, and the
heirs, successors, or assigns of any of the foregoing; (b)
all judges presiding in this case and their chambers staff;
and (c) all counsel of record in this case.
On Aug. 4, 2022, Judge Stephen V. Wilson ruled that the action is
certified to resolve the question of Defendant's liability pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(4), with the question of
damages to be resolved separately. Judge Wilson also granted in
part and denied in part motion to certify class action.
The Plaintiff seek a review of this order.
The appellate case is captioned as LSIMC, LLC v. American General
Life Insurance Company, Case No. 22-80092, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on Aug. 19,
2022.[BN]
Plaintiff-Petitioner LSIMC, LLC, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, is represented by:
Seth Ard, Esq.
SUSMAN GODFREY, LLP
1301 Avenue of the Americas 32nd Floor
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 336-8330
- and -
Glenn Charles Bridgman, Esq.
Steven G. Sklaver, Esq.
SUSMAN GODFREY, LLP
1900 Avenue of the Stars Suite 1400
Los Angeles, CA 90067-4405
Telephone: (310) 789-3104
Defendant-Respondent AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY is
represented by:
Dan Marmalefsky, Esq.
Nancy R. Thomas, Esq.
MORRISON & FOERSTER, LLP
707 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 6000
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 892-5809
- and -
David T. McDowell, Esq.
Hutson Brit Smelley, Esq.
MCDOWELL HETHERINGTON LLP
1001 Fannin Street Suite 2700
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (713) 337-5580
APPLE INC: Judge Dismisses Proposed "Phishing App" Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
Renuka Tahelyani published in The Crypto Times that Apple cannot be
held liable for the fake app hosted on its app store because it is
considered a publisher of content rather than a creator.
Tech MNC Apple was facing a class action lawsuit for damages
resulting from an alleged fake scam app available on its App Store
that stole cryptocurrencies from users' wallets. A federal judge in
California has now dismissed the proposed "phishing app" lawsuit,
rendering it immune from liability.
Hadona Diep, a Maryland resident, accused Apple of "authorizing a
malicious application" in its App Store, a spoof of the legitimate
Toast Wallet called Toast Plus. It allegedly cost Diep 474 XRP
tokens.
U.S. District Judge Phyllis J. Hamilton of the Northern District of
California ruled that section 230 of the Communications Decency Act
prevents Diep from holding Apple liable.
Hadona Diep accused Apple of violating the Computer Fraud and Abuse
Act by hosting the "Toast Plus" app on its app store. Diep's seed
phrase and all of the tokens in the fake wallet were stolen using
the fraudulent app.
Diep claimed more than $5,000 in damages, while her co-plaintiff
Ryumei Nagao claims he lost $500,000 in cryptocurrencies.
On August 4, Apple filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, arguing
that section 230 of the Communications Decency Act shields
"providers of interactive computer services from liability arising
from content created by third parties."
The judge agreed that Section 230 barred the suit from proceeding
because "plaintiffs' allegations all seek to impose liability based
on Apple's role in vetting the app and making it available to
consumers through the app store." [GN]
ARROW SENIOR: Roberts FLSA Suit Moved From E.D. Mo. to S.D. Ohio
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled DEBORAH ROBERTS and JADAN COOK, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. ARROW SENIOR LIVING
MANAGEMENT, LLC, Case No. 4:21-cv-01370, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri to the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on August 29,
2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Ohio assigned Case
No. 2:22-cv-03267-MHW-CMV to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the
Missouri Wage Act.
Arrow Senior Living Management, LLC is an owner and operator of
senior living communities based in Missouri. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq.
COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC
1550 Old Henderson Rd., Suite #126
Columbus, OH 43220
Telephone: (614) 949-1181
Facsimile: (614) 386-9964
E-mail: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com
- and –
Shannon M. Draher, Esq.
NILGES DRAHER LLC
7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D
Massillon, OH 44646
Telephone: (330) 470-4428
Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
E-mail: sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com
ASTRO JOHNNY: Underpays Service Technicians, Nelson Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
MARQUISIA NELSON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ASTRO JOHNNY WASTE MGT., LLC and CHRISTOPHER
STINE, II, individually, Defendants, Case No. 6:22-cv-00339 (E.D.
Tex., August 28, 2022) alleges the Defendants of intentional and
willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as a portable toilet
service technician.
The Plaintiff claims that he and other similarly situated service
technicians consistently work more than 40 hours per workweek.
However, instead of paying them overtime compensation at the rate
of one and one-half times their regular rates of pay for all hours
worked in excess of 40 per workweek, the Defendant paid them
straight time for all hours worked, says the Plaintiff.
On behalf of herself and all other similarly situated portable
toilet service technicians, the Plaintiff brings this collective
action complaint against the Defendants to recover unpaid overtime
compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, litigation
costs, court costs, pre- and post-judgment interest, and other
relief as may be necessary and/or appropriate.
Astro Johnny Waste MGT., LLC provides portable toilet services in
both East Texas, Dallas and Austin. Christopher Stine, II is the
President and co-owner of the Corporate Defendant. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas B. Welmaker, Esq.
WELMAKER LAW PLLC
409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118
Longview, TX 75601
Tel: (512) 799-2048
E-mail: doug@welmakerlaw.com
ASZ CARING: Fails to Pay Caregivers' Minimum, OT Wages, Leon Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case, VICTORIA LEON, and other similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff v. ASZ CARING HEARTS, INC., ASZ CARING HEARTS HEALTHCARE,
INC., and KAYLON ADAMS, Defendants, Case No. 0:22-cv-61599-XXXX
(S.D. Fla., August 26, 2022) arises from the Defendants' alleged
unlawful payroll practices and procedures that violated the Fair
Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as a caregiver from
approximately December 2020 through November 11, 2021.
Throughout the Plaintiff's employment with the Defendants, she has
worked an average of 84 hours per week. However, the Defendants did
not properly compensate her for all hours she has worked in excess
of 40 per week, and all her minimum wages. The Defendants allegedly
owe the Plaintiff an estimated of $24,575.04 total minimum wages
and $18,244.60 total overtime wages, says the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff brings this complaint as a collective action, on
behalf of herself and all other similarly situated caregivers,
seeking to recover all unpaid minimum wages and overtime wages
against the Defendants, as well as liquidated damages, reasonable
attorneys' fees and litigation costs, and other relief as the Court
deems equitable and just.
ASZ Caring Hearts, Inc. provides quality home in-home care for
older adults and individuals with disabilities. ASZ Caring Hearts
Healthcare, Inc. offers health care services for persons with
disabilities. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Julisse Jimenez, Esq.
R. Martin Saenz, Esq.
SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC
20900 NE 30th Ave., Suite 800
Aventura, FL 33180
Tel: (305) 503-5131
Fax: (888) 270-5549
E-mail: julisse@saenzanderson.com
msaenz@saenzanderson.com
ATHLETIC PROPULSION: Cody Files Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Athletic Propulsion
Labs LLC, et al. The case is styled as Annette Cody, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Athletic
Propulsion Labs LLC, Does 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No.
8:22-cv-01627 (C.D. Cal., Sept. 1, 2022).
The nature of suit is stated Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Athletic Propulsion Labs -- https://www.athleticpropulsionlabs.com/
-- offers APL running and basketball shoes, athletic apparel and
workout accessories for men and women.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Scott J Ferrell, Esq.
PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS APC
4100 Newport Place Drive Suite 800
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Phone: (949) 706-6464
Fax: (949) 706-6469
Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com
AUSTRALIA: Robodebt Victims Set to Receive Settlement Payouts
-------------------------------------------------------------
Emily McPherson, writing for 9News, reports that Robodebt victims
were expected to find out from Sept. 5 how much their share of a
$112 million settlement payment awarded as part of a $1 billion
class action would be.
However, there won't be a big pay day coming for most of the
eligible 400,000 or so class action members -- almost half will
receive less than $100.
Around 30 per cent of class action members will be paid between
$100 and $300.
A small minority, about 5 percent, of robodebt victims will receive
more than $1000.
Services Australia says it is sending out letters to class action
members from Sept. 5 and payments will arrive in bank accounts by
the end of the month.
The money amounts to the interest owed to victims who repaid
unlawful debts issued under the disastrously flawed scheme, which
ran from July 2015 to November 2019 and is set to be the subject of
an upcoming royal commission.
As part of the class action settlement, Centrelink has already
repaid the $751 million that was wrongly recovered from 381,000
people.
What is Robodebt?
When Robodebt was rolled out in 2015 it was hailed by the
government as a key tool to be used in tracking down welfare
fraudsters.
The automated scheme made use of data matching algorithms. It
assessed annual income data from the Australian Tax Office against
fortnightly Centrelink welfare payments.
But Robodebt's averaging system used to calculate debts was
problematic and in some cases inaccurate. It was declared unlawful
by the Federal Court in 2019.
Gordon Legal's class action lawsuit led to the government agreeing
to repay all of the unlawful debts.
It also led to the $112 million settlement now being paid out.
Why are the payouts so small?
Robodebt was described by Justice Bernard Murphy -- the presiding
judge over the class action -- as "a shameful chapter" and "massive
failure in public administration".
Robodebt victims have spoken about the financial and mental
distress the unlawful debts caused. Many had their wages and tax
refunds garnished to pay off the debts or were chased by debt
collectors.
Some family members have linked the debts to suicides, including
Queensland mum Kath Madgwick, whose son Jarrad took his own life
after receiving a debt.
Why then, are most victims only receiving what amounts to loose
change?
This is because the settlement amount relates only to the interest
owed. It is not compensation for any of the pain and suffering
endured by Robodebt victims.
Damages were not included in the scope of the class action.
One of the key questions to be examined by the Robodebt royal
commission, announced last month by Prime Minister Anthony
Albanese, will be whether victims should receive compensation.
How were the payments calculated?
Every class action member will get a different payment according to
how much interest they are owed.
Some robodebt victims repaid multiple debts. Class action members
who made the earliest and largest debt repayments will get the
highest settlement amount.
Gordon Legal's court-approved costs of $10.3 million were deducted
from the settlement sum of $112 million.
This left $101.7 million to distribute to class action members.
Once the interest owed was calculated, there was also an amount
left over which was divided amongst the class action members in
proportion to their interest amount.
What do I do now?
You do not need to do anything to receive your payment. Centrelink
will transfer the payment to your nominated bank account by
September 30.
You can check your payment amount by logging into Centrelink
through your MyGov account.
You don't need to report your settlement payment as income as it
will not be classed as taxable income.
If you believe your payment is incorrect you can request a review
from Services Australia as long as it is within 30 days of
receiving your settlement payment. [GN]
BACK TO NATURE: Venticinque Sues Over Deceptive Labeling
--------------------------------------------------------
Gracemarie Venticinque, individually and on behalf of a class of
similarly situated persons v. BACK TO NATURE FOODS COMPANY, LLC,
Case No. 1:22-cv-07497 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 1, 2022), is brought
against the Defendant's deceptive and misleading labeling of Back
to Nature "Stoneground Wheat Crackers."
The Product is manufactured by the Defendant and sold under the
brand name "Back to Nature." The Defendant's branding and labeling
of the Product conveys a message to consumers that is deceptive and
misleading and therefore unlawful, namely, that the main flour of
the Product is whole wheat flour. In fact, the Product's main flour
in not whole wheat flour, but rather unbleached enriched wheat
flour. The Plaintiff and all class members were harmed by paying
more to purchase the Product than they would have been willing to
pay had it not been misrepresented by the Defendant.
The front of the Product packaging states in bold print: "ORGANIC
WHOLE WHEAT FLOUR." The Defendant's labeling of the Product is
designed to--and does--deceive and mislead consumers. The
Defendant's deceptive and misleading labeling of the Product has
enabled the Defendant to sell more Products than it would have in
the absence of this misconduct, resulting in additional profits at
the expense of consumers.
As direct and proximate results of the Defendant's deceptive and
misleading representations, the Defendant injured the Plaintiff and
the Class members in that they: Paid a premium price for the
Product, which was not what the Defendant represented; Were
deprived of the benefit of the bargain because the Product they
purchased was different from what the Defendant represented; Were
deprived of the benefit of the bargain because the Product they
purchased had less value than what the Defendant represented; and
Purchased a Product that was of an inferior quality than what
Defendant promised, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased one or more packages of the Product.
Back to Nature Foods Company, LLC, is incorporated under the laws
of the State of Delaware.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles D. Moore, Esq.
REESE LLP
100 South 5th Street, Suite 1900
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Phone: 212-643-0500
Email: cmoore@reesellp.com
- and -
Michael R. Reese, Esq.
REESE LLP
100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor
New York, NY 10025
Phone: (212) 643-0500
Email: mreese@reesellp.com
- and -
Kenneth D. Quat, Esq.
QUAT LAW OFFICES
373 Winch Street
Framingham, MA 01701
Phone: (508) 872-1261
Email: ken@quatlaw.com
BANK OF AMERICA: Faces Fraud Class Suit Over Zelle Payment Platform
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Tristan v. Bank of America, N.A., Case No. 8:22-cv-1183-CDCA (June
8, 2022).
There is a groundswell of litigation arising over the lack of fraud
warning or bank reimbursement protection for customers utilizing
the Zelle network to transfer funds to a party who which has
scammed the consumer. Zelle was formed in 2017 by seven of the
nation's largest banks. Many other banks and credit unions are in
the Zelle network.
So far, at least three class action lawsuits have been filed
against financial institutions for Zelle fraud losses. On April 20,
2022, Bank of America was sued in Orange County, California in a
putative nationwide class action under the CA UCL. That case was
removed to the CDCA and is pending. Tristan v. BOA.
Also in April 2022, Navy Federal CU was sued in Union County, New
Jersey under the NJ CFA. That case was also removed and is pending
in the NJ federal court. Wilkins v. Navy FCU (Case 2:22-cv-02916
filed May 18, 2022). These claims are under the New Jersey CFA for
breach of contract.
In May 2022, Capital One was sued in Florida state court on similar
claim theories for fraudster activities utilizing the Zelle
network. That case was removed to federal court in Miami.
None of these cases have proceeded past the initial stages although
motions to dismiss have been filed. Similar lawsuits are likely to
follow.
The EFTA claim for these types of transactions is being bolstered
by determinations by the federal banking regulators - the CFPB and
the FDIC - that both banks and the money payment platform providers
- like Zelle, Cash App, or Venmo - have duties under EFTA to
investigate electronic fund disputes and to limit consumer
liability even when the consumer was negligent in allowing the
transfer. The regulators also maintain that it is improper for a
financial institution to try to limit its EFTA or Regulation E
duties to consumers via language in account agreements and related
disclosures.
Expect to see more activity by regulators examining reported fraud
in the money transfer space. Training staff on Regulation E's
requirements and assisting consumers alleging unauthorized
transactions will be very important.
Zelle is a person-to-person (P2P) payment transfer service wholly
owned and operated by seven of the largest banks in the U.S.
Person-to-person payments allows a consumer to send money to
another person without needing to write a check, swipe a physical
card, or exchange cash.
There are approximately 1,500 member banks and credit unions who
participate in the Zelle service. Those members engage in their own
significant marketing efforts to encourage their accountholders to
sign up for the Zelle service by marketing Zelle as a fast, safe,
and secure way for consumers to send money.
Bank of America prominently touts Zelle to its accountholders as a
secure, free, and convenient way to make money transfers. However,
it misrepresents and omits a key fact about the service that is
unknown to accountholders: that there is virtually no recourse for
consumers to recoup losses due to fraud.
The unique, misrepresented, and undisclosed architecture of the
Zelle payment system means - again, unlike other payment options
commonly used by American consumers - that virtually any money
transferred for any reason via Zelle is gone forever, without
recourse, reimbursement, or protection.
BOA does not and will not reimburse its accountholders for losses
via Zelle due to fraud, even where those losses are timely reported
by accountholders.
Users most likely never would have signed up for Zelle in the first
place if they had known the extreme risks of signing up for and
using the service.
Created in 2017 by the largest banks in the U.S. to enable instant
digital money transfers, Zelle is by far the country's most widely
used money transfer service. Last year, people sent $490 billion in
immediate payment transfers through Zelle.
The Zelle network is operated by Early Warning Services, a company
created and owned by seven banks, including: including Bank of
America, Capital One, JPMorgan Chase, PNC, Truist, U.S. Bank and
Wells Fargo.
Nearly 18 million Americas were defrauded through scams involving
person-to-person payment apps like Zelle in 2020 alone, according
to Javelin Strategy & Research, an industry consultant.
BOA Is Required to Follow EFTA Requirements and It Fails to Do So
The Electronic Fund Transfer Act requires banks to reimburse
customers for losses on transfers that were "initiated by a person
other than the consumer without actual authority to initiate the
transfer." (Electronic Fund Transfer FAQ, Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau)
An unauthorized Electronic Fund Transfer (EFT) is an EFT from a
consumer's account initiated by a person other than the consumer
without actual authority to initiate the transfer and from which
the consumer receives no benefit. 12 C.F.R. Sec 1005.2(m).
According to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), "If a
consumer has provided timely notice of an error under 12 CFR
1005.11(b)(1) and the financial institution determines that the
error was an unauthorized EFT, the liability protections in
Regulation E section 1005.6 would apply."
Recent CFPB guidance on unauthorized EFTs indicates P2P payments
like EFTs, such as transactions made with Zelle, trigger "error
resolution obligations" to consumers to protect them from
situations where they are fraudulently induced to initiate an
unauthorized EFT from a third-party.
The CFPB had made it clear that a transaction that is fraudulently
induced by a third party is an unauthorized electronic funds
transfer subject to the limitations of liability in 12 C.F.R. Sec
1005.6. [GN]
BANK OF AMERICA: Modern Perfection Sues Over Misrepresentations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Modern Perfection LLC and Fruitful Bear, LLC, individually and as
representatives of a class of similarly situated persons v. BANK OF
AMERICA, N.A., Case No. 1:22-cv-02103-MJM (D. Md., Aug. 22, 2022),
is brought against Bank of America's misrepresentations and
misconduct which have unjustly enriched Bank of America and have
harmed Plaintiffs, and to seek, on behalf of themselves and the
Class, damages, restitution, and injunctive relief for Bank of
America's: breach of contract; breach of the covenant of good faith
and fair dealing; common law fraud; fraud in the inducement; (5)
negligent misrepresentation; and violations of the North Carolina
Deceptive Business Practices Act ("NCDTPA").
In response to the extraordinary public health and economic impact
caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, Congress passed the Coronavirus
Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, H.R. 748 ("CARES Act"),
which the President of the United States signed on March 27, 2020,
to provide relief to Americans and American businesses suffering
from the resulting health and economic crisis.
To secure its massive commissions, Bank of America directly and
aggressively marketed and solicited small businesses to apply for
PPP loans through Bank of America, which were made pursuant to the
CARES Act under the PPP (the "Loan(s)"), as embodied in the
promissory notes between Bank of America and Plaintiffs and Class
members (the "Promissory Notes"). But, as many of those businesses
found to their detriment, the Loans that Bank of America secured on
their behalf were significantly larger than that the amounts they
qualified for under the PPP. Instead of principal and interest
being fully forgivable as represented in Bank of America's
communications and Promissory Notes, small business owners were
instead on the hook for tens of thousands of dollars, or more, that
Bank of America had wrongly represented were fully forgivabl--plus
interest.
More specifically, and as alleged in further detail below, unlike
Form W-2 worker payroll expenses, payroll expenses attributed to
1099-MISC workers ("1099 Workers") could not be used to calculate
the business's Loan eligibility. Nevertheless, Bank of America
instructed small business owners to include such pay in their loan
applications to calculate their maximum Loan eligibility, and then
subsequently included those 1099 Worker expenses when securing
Loans for those amounts. At no time did Bank of America inform or
clarify to these businesses that 1099 Worker expenses could not be
used to calculate their Loan eligibility, nor did Bank of America
disclose that Loans used to pay 1099 Workers were not forgivable.
As a result, many businesses, including Plaintiffs and the members
of the Class, relied on Bank of America's actions and statements
to apply for Loans through Bank of America and in using such funds
to retain and pay their 1099 Workers as Bank of America instructed
was permissible.
When Plaintiffs and Class members later applied for forgiveness of
their Loans through Bank of America, Bank of America rejected those
applications on the basis that 1099 Workers payroll expenses were
not—contrary to its calculations and representations at the time
the businesses applied for their Loans through Bank of
America—qualifying "payroll" expenses under the PPP. To their
surprise, Plaintiffs and Class members found themselves, contrary
to the terms of their Promissory Notes with Bank of America, liable
for repayment of the portions of their Loans that they used to pay
their 1099 Workers. Had they known that payments to 1099 Workers
did not qualify for PPP loans and/or would not qualify for
forgiveness under the PPP, Plaintiffs and the Class would not have
applied and taken a Loan, would have reduced the amount of the Loan
they applied for, and/or would have allocated their Loan funds
differently, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff Modern Perfection provides professional home interior
remodeling services and specializes in bathroom and kitchen
remodeling and flooring services in the Lutherville-Timonium,
Maryland area. The Plaintiff Fruitful Bear is a home renovation
business.
Bank of America is a national bank with its headquarters and
principal place of business located in Charlotte, North
Carolina.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Kelly L. Tucker, Esq.
Suzanne Sangree, Esq.
Laina M. Herbert, Esq.
GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A.
123 S. Justison Street, 7th Floor
Wilmington, DE 19801
Phone: (302) 622-7000
Fax: (302) 622-7100
Email: ktucker@gelaw.com
ssangree@gelaw.com
lherbert@gelaw.com
- and -
James C. Shah, Esq.
Natalie Finkelman Bennett, Esq.
MILLER SHAH LLP
1845 Walnut Street, Suite 806
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Phone: (866) 540-5505
Fax: (866) 300-7367
Email: jcshah@millershah.com
nfinkelman@millershah.com
- and -
Nathan C. Zipperian, Esq.
1625 N. Commerce Pkwy, Suite 320
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33326
Phone: (866) 540-5505
Fax: (866) 300-7367
Email: nczipperian@millershah.com
BED BATH: Late CFO Subject of Suit Over "Pump and Dump" Scheme
--------------------------------------------------------------
Bradford Betz, writing for FOXBusiness, reports that the executive
vice president and chief financial officer of Bed Bath & Beyond who
plunged to his death from the 18th floor of a New York City
skyscraper on Sept.2 was the subject of a class-action lawsuit
alleging that he and majority shareholder, GameStop Chairman Ryan
Cohen, had artificially inflated the company's value in a "pump and
dump" scheme.
Gustavo Arnal, 52, and Cohen, are listed as defendants in the
class-action lawsuit filed last month in the United States District
Court for the District of Columbia.
According to the lawsuit, Cohen approached Gustavo about his plan
to accumulate shares of BBBY and assume command of the company's
publicly available shares.
"With control over a significant portion of the public float, Cohen
would essentially act as a price support for the stock while
Gustavo would act in a similar capacity by controlling the sale of
shares by Insiders," the lawsuit says. "Under this arrangement,
defendants would profit handsomely from the rise in price and could
coordinate their selling of shares to optimize their returns."
Cohen purchased a large stake in BBBY, including call options, on
more than 1.6 million BBBY shares with a strike price between $60
and $80 in what, according to the lawsuit, was a "classic attempt
to spark a gamma squeeze, in exchange for Gustavo's assurance that
Insiders would not flood . . . the market with the stock."
BBBY stock climbed from $4.38 per share on July 1, 2022, to $30 per
share on Aug. 17, 2022. Between March and August, Cohen, Gustavo,
and J.P. Morgan Securities LLC -- another defendant in the lawsuit
-- discussed their plan of hyping the stock and exiting their
positions of BBBY shares at some point, according to the lawsuit.
Arnal sold 42,513 shares of Bed Bath & Beyond stock on Aug. 16 for
more than $1,029,000, according to MarketBeat.com. Following the
transaction, Arnal still owned 267,896 shares in the company,
valued at more than $6,488,000. By the close of the market on Sept.
2, BBBY was trading at just about $8.63.
Two days before Arnal's death, the company announced it was cutting
about 20% of its workforce across corporate and supply chain and
closing 150 lower-producing stores as part of a broader turnaround
plan.
FOX Business has reached out to Bed Bath & Beyond for comment.
Cohen could not be reached for comment.
About a week after the lawsuit was filed, Arnal jumped from a tower
in Manhattan's Tribeca section known as the "Jenga Building." Bed
Bath & Beyond confirmed Arnal's death, saying it wished "to extend
our sincerest condolences to Gustavo's family."
Arnal previously served as chief financial officer at beauty
company Avon and served in multiple executive roles for more than
20 years at Procter & Gamble. [GN]
BRONX IRON: Faces Fernandez Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------
JOSE PEDRO SANCHEZ FERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BRONX IRON & STEEL
FABRICATORS INC. (D/B/A BRONX IRON & STEEL), F&B IRONWORKS (D/B/A
IRONWORKS), MAMADOU BATHILY, and FATHIMA BATHILY A/K/A MICHELLE
THIAM, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-07360 (S.D.N.Y., August 29,
2022) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including
failure to pay overtime wages, failure to comply with notice and
recordkeeping requirements, failure to provide accurate wage
statements, and failure to timely pay wages.
Mr. Sanchez was employed by the Defendants as a sheet metal worker
at Bronx Iron and Steel and Ironworks from approximately 2014 until
December 2021.
Bronx Iron & Steel Fabricators Inc., doing business as Bronx Iron &
Steel, is an owner and operator of a welding company, located at
542 Barretto Street Bronx, New York.
F&B Ironworks, doing business as Ironworks, is an owner and
operator of a welding company, located at 115 West 142nd Street,
New York, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Catalina Sojo, Esq.
CSM LEGAL, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 317-1200
Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
E-mail: catalina@csm-legal.com
CALUMET MONTANA: Files a Petition to Review SRE Denial to 9th Cir.
------------------------------------------------------------------
CALUMET MONTANA REFINING, LLC filed a petition to review the
Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection
Agency's (EPA) final actions on June 3, 2022 denying its petitions
for small refinery hardship relief from the requirements of the
Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) for the 2019 and 2020 compliance
years and titled "June 2022 Denial of Petitions for RFS Small
Refinery Exemptions (SRE)."
In EPA's final actions, it is denying four SRE petitions for the
2019 and 2020 compliance years from two refineries, not just
because they have failed to demonstrate disproportionate economic
hardship (DEH), but also on alternative grounds: EPA here
determines that both refineries are ineligible to petition for
SREs. When submitting an SRE petition to EPA, the small refinery
bears the burden of demonstrating that compliance with the
requirements of the RFS program causes DEH for that small refinery.
The RFS regulations require that an SRE petition specify the
factors that demonstrate DEH, provide a detailed discussion
regarding the hardship the refinery would face in complying with
the RFS requirements, and identify the date by which the small
refinery anticipates that compliance with the RFS requirements can
reasonably be achieved.
The appellate case is captioned as Calumet Montana Refining, LLC v.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Case No. 22-70166, in the
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on
August 3, 2022.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Petitioner Calumet Montana Refining, LLC Mediation
Questionnaire was due on August 10, 2022;
-- Petitioner Calumet Montana Refining, LLC brief is due on
October 24, 2022.
-- Respondent U.S. Environmental Protection Agency answering
brief is due on November 21, 2022.
-- Petitioner's optional reply brief is due 21 days after
service of the answering brief. [BN]
Plaintiff-Petitioner CALUMET MONTANA REFINING, LLC is represented
by:
Jonathan G. Hardin, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
700 Thirteenth Street, N.W., Suite 800
Washington, DC 20005-3960
Telephone: (202) 654-6297
Facsimile: (202) 654-6211
E-mail: JHardin@perkinscoie.com
- and -
Eric B. Wolff, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 359-3779
E-mail: EWolff@perkinscoie.com
- and -
Karl J. Worsham, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
2901 N. Central Avenue, Suite 2000
Phoenix, AZ 85102-2788
Telephone: (602) 351-8000
Facsimile: (602) 648-7000
E-mail: KWorsham@perkinscoie.com
CANADA: Families, Former Patients Seek Access to Hospital Records
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Marie Woolf, writing for The Canadian Press, reports that Georgina
Martin says she is still searching for answers about the treatment
of her mother.
Martin was born at the Coqualeetza Indian Hospital in British
Columbia after her mother was confined there with tuberculosis.
Martin grew up with her grandparents in Williams Lake First Nation,
or T'Exelc, in that province, while her mother remained
hospitalized.
The professor and chair of Indigenous/Xwulmuxw studies at Vancouver
Island University says she does not have a complete picture of her
past, despite asking repeatedly for records.
"My birth in an Indian hospital was my first experience of trauma,
which was then compounded by being reared without the closeness of
a mother," Martin wrote in a coming memoir.
"There is no information in the limited literature available about
the effects of these hospitals on the Secwepemc people in my
community," wrote Martin, whose research focuses on
intergenerational trauma linked to both residential schools and the
health-care system
"What I am aware of is that I was born there. I made some effort to
obtain my birth records; so far I have not been able to locate
where I can find them or know if they even exist."
The federal government established "Indian hospitals" across Canada
from the 1930s, expanding them widely after the Second World War.
They were originally created to treat Indigenous Peoples who
contracted, or were suspected of having contracted, tuberculosis.
They later became segregated hospitals for Indigenous Peoples that
treated all manner of conditions, including pregnancy, burns and
broken bones. They had all closed or amalgamated into the
mainstream health system by 1981 after concerns were raised over
how the patients, including children, were forcibly confined and
treated within their walls.
Some patients who died at the hospitals were buried in unmarked
graves because the government often refused to pay the costs of
sending their bodies home to their families.
Now communities are looking for answers.
The Department of Crown-Indigenous Relations has signalled it would
be willing to open the records related to the former "Indian
hospitals" as part of any response to a $1.1-billion class-action
lawsuit filed in 2018 on behalf of Indigenous Peoples who received
treatment at those institutions.
A Federal Court judge certified the class-action lawsuit in January
2020.
"Survivors recount stories of sexual violence, physical abuse,
forced confinement, including being tied to a hospital bed for
prolonged periods, forced isolation from families, surgeries
without anesthesia," said Adam Tanel, a lawyer with Toronto-based
Koskie Minsky, one of two law firms involved in the action.
None of the allegations have been proven in court.
"First Nations people deserve an effective and reliable method to
access their own historical records -- both on an individual and a
community level," Tanel said.
Kyle Fournier, a spokesperson for the Department of
Crown-Indigenous Relations, said Ottawa is "working collaboratively
with the parties toward a meaningful resolution" to the
class-action lawsuit. Fournier suggested the federal government
would be willing to provide access to the long-sought files.
"Ensuring the availability of records to former patients and their
families will be considered as part of any resolution discussions,"
said Fournier.
"Research to collect relevant documents from various archives is
ongoing."
Academics who have had limited access to the records through
access-to-information requests say many Indigenous tuberculosis
patients received outdated treatment for the disease compared to
the non-Indigenous population.
Laurie Meijer Drees, who is also a member of the
Indigenous/Xwulmuxw Studies faculty at Vancouver Island University,
recorded testimonies of Indigenous Peoples who were treated in
these institutions for her 2013 book, "Healing Histories: Stories
from Canada's Indian Hospitals."
She said the collective understanding of how patients were treated
there is incomplete.
"Oral histories are helpful, but institutional policy documents
would reveal administrative directives," she said.
Documents she has found through her research suggest a cavalier
attitude toward consent from parents of children with
tuberculosis.
"I do not think consent of parents for open T.B. cases should be
stressed too much. It should be taken for granted," said a March
1946 memo, seen by Meier Drees, that the Department of National
Health and Welfare sent to officials at what was then the
Department of Indian Affairs.
By 1953, an amendment to the Indian Act meant those subject to it
could be prosecuted if they refused to go to hospital or comply
with a doctor's orders.
Maureen Lux, who teaches the history of Indigenous-government
relations and the social history of medicine at Brock University in
St. Catharines, Ont., also wants the records made available.
"I've been trying to get at all the records of the Indian hospitals
for 10 years," said Lux.
"Lately, it has proved very difficult to get anything."
Lux wrote a book on the subject in 2016, "Separate Beds: A History
of Indian Hospitals in Canada, 1920s-1980s," in which she shared
the story of a young boy who arrived at the Charles Camsell Indian
Hospital in Edmonton after being sent there alone from his home in
the Arctic.
She said none of the staff in the facility could pronounce his
name, so he was referred to as "Harry Hospital." He spent most of
his childhood there and was then sent by train to Ottawa, without
being able to say goodbye.
Lux said many families still do not know where loved ones who died
in the hospitals are buried.
"It's important that the hospitals open up their records,
especially for families so they can find their loved ones," she
said.
In 2019, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau apologized in Iqaluit for
the federal government's mid-century policy on tuberculosis, which
included separating thousands of Inuit from their families and
sending them to be treated in institutions in Southern Canada. Many
never came home.
As part of the apology, the Department of Crown-Indigenous
Relations set up the Nanilavut Initiative, a database to help
families access information about Inuit who were sent South for
treatment of tuberculosis from the 1940s to 1960s, including where
they were buried.
Claudette Commanda, an elder from Kitigan Zibi Anishinabeg in
western Quebec who will become chancellor of the University of
Ottawa in November, said several members of her family were sent to
"Indian hospitals" -- some for years.
"In my father's case he was shipped out to one of these Indian
hospitals. I was about 13 years old, he was there for at least a
year or two years," she said. "My husband, his mother was put in an
Indian hospital. They removed her lung."
She said people in her community returned with scars from
operations they had not been properly informed about.
"There is no reconciliation without the truth," she said. "They
need to open up these documents." [GN]
CARTER AND LITTLE: McNair Seeks Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Staff
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CHANTEL MCNAIR and KENEYSHA BANKS, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CARTER AND LITTLE
INVESTMENT GROUP LLC d/b/a FUSION SPORTS BAR & GRILL and KELVIN
CARTER, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-03516-AT (N.D. Ga., August 30,
2022) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay
minimum wages and failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiffs McNair and Banks worked for the Defendants as a waitress
and a bartender from February 13, 2021 until August 21, 2022, and
from September 2021 until April 16, 2022, respectively.
Carter and Little Investment Group LLC, doing business as Fusion
Sports Bar & Grill, is an operator of a sports bar and restaurant
in Atlanta, Georgia. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Arnold J. Lizana, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF ARNOLD J. LIZANA III
1175 Peachtree Street NE, 10th Floor
Atlanta, GA 30361
Telephone: (470) 207-1559
Facsimile: (470) 231-0672
E-mail: alizana@attorneylizana.com
CHRISTIAN DIOR: Collects Biometrics Without Consent, Warmack Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DELMA WARMACK-STILLWELL, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHRISTIAN DIOR, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:22-cv-04633 (N.D. Ill., August 30, 2022) is a class
action against the Defendant for violations of the Biometric
Information Privacy Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants violated BIPA by
collecting detailed and sensitive biometric identifiers and
biometric information, including complete facial scans, of its
website visitors through the Virtual Try-On feature without first
obtaining their consent, or informing them that their biometric
data is being collected or stored. Specifically, the Defendant did
not: (a) 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; (b) provide a
publicly available retention schedule and guidelines for
permanently destroying the biometric identifiers of the Plaintiff
and the Class; and (c) receive a written release from the Plaintiff
or the Class to collect, capture, or otherwise obtain their
biometric identifiers. By collecting, obtaining, storing, and using
the Plaintiff's and Class members' biometric data without their
consent, written or otherwise, the Defendant invaded their
statutorily protected right to privacy, says the suit.
Christian Dior, Inc. is a luxury fashion company, with its
principal place of business at 19 East 57th Street, New York, New
York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam J. Levitt, Esq.
Amy E. Keller, Esq.
Nada Djordjevic, Esq.
James Ulwick, Esq.
DICELLO LEVITT LLC
Ten North Dearborn Street, Sixth Floor
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 214-7900
E-mail: alevitt@dicellolevitt.com
akeller@dicellolevitt.com
ndjordjevic@dicellolevitt.com
julwick@dicellolevitt.com
CLIF BAR: Uribe Sues Over Clif Blok Energy Chews' Caffeine Content
------------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE URIBE, PATRICK DUNN, and JUDITH VERGIEN, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CLIF BAR &
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 4:22-cv-04900-KAW (N.D. Cal., August
26, 2022) is a class action against the Defendant for breach of
express warranty, fraud, and violations of the Magnuson-Moss
Warranty Act, the New York General Business Law, the California's
Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the California's Unfair Competition
Law, and the California's False Advertising Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant is engaged in false,
deceptive, and misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of
Clif Blok Energy Chews. On the front of the product's packaging,
the Defendant represents that the Bloks contain "+ [25 or 50]
milligrams Caffeine," depending on the flavor. Reasonable consumers
such as the Plaintiffs would understand this representation to mean
that each cube of the product contains 25mg or 50mg of caffeine.
However, nowhere in the product's nutrition information and
ingredients on the product's packaging does the Defendant state the
amount of caffeine per cube. In reality, the Bloks contains 25-50
milligrams of caffeine per three cubes. As a result, the Plaintiffs
and other similarly situated consumers have been harmed in the
amount of the price premium paid for the Bloks based on the
Defendant's misleading advertising, says the suit.
Clif Bar & Company is a manufacturer of food products, with its
principal place of business at 1451 66th Street, Emeryville,
California. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Brittany S. Scott, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: bscott@bursor.com
- and –
Max S. Roberts, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
888 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: mroberts@bursor.com
COLUMBIA BOOKS: Clarke Files Suit in W.D. Michigan
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Columbia Books Inc.
The case is styled as Kyle Clarke, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Columbia Books Inc. doing business
as: Columbia Books & Information Services, Case No.
1:22-cv-00803-JMB-SJB (W.D. Mich., Aug. 31, 2022).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Columbia Books & Information Services --
https://www.columbiabooks.com/ -- is an American company that
serves as a publisher of reference works, online databases, and
mailing lists.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory A. Mitchell, Esq.
Sharon S. Almonrode, Esq.
E. Powell Miller, Esq.
THE MILLER LAW FIRM PC
950 W University Dr., Ste. 300
Rochester, MI 48307
Phone: (248) 841-2200
Email: gam@millerlawpc.com
ssa@millerlawpc.com
epm@millerlawpc.com
- and -
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
BURSON & FISHER, P.A. (NY)
888 Seventh Ave.
New York, NY 10019
Phone: (646) 837-7150
Email: pfraietta@bursor.com
CONTANGO RESOURCES: OGP Sues Over Untimely Payment of Proceeds
--------------------------------------------------------------
OGP, LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CONTANGO RESOURCES, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
4:22-cv-00382-JFH-JFJ (N.D. Okla., September 1, 2022) is a class
action against the Defendant for breach of statutory obligation to
pay interest under the Oklahoma's Production Revenue Standards
Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to timely pay oil and
gas proceeds it owed to the Plaintiff and similarly situated
owners. The Defendant is aware of its statutory obligations to
automatically pay interest on late payments, but instead, only pays
interest when owners demand it. As a result, the Plaintiff and the
Class have suffered damages, says the suit.
OGP, LLC is a limited liability company, with its principal place
of business in Edmond, Oklahoma.
Contango Resources, LLC is a gas and oil producer, headquartered in
Fort Worth, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Randy C. Smith, Esq.
RANDY C. SMITH AND ASSOCIATES
One Leadership Square, Suite 1310
211 North Robinson Ave.
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Telephone: (405) 212-2786
Facsimile: (405) 232-6515
E-mail: randy@rcsmithlaw.com
- and -
Brady L. Smith, Esq.
Harry "Skeeter" Jordan, Esq.
BRADY SMITH LAW, PLLC
One Leadership Square, Suite 1320
211 N. Robinson Ave.
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
Telephone: (405) 293-3029
E-mail: Brady@BLSmithLaw.com
Skeeter@BLSmithLaw.com
CORNELL UNIVERSITY: $8.3M Fund From Settlement Used for Research
-----------------------------------------------------------------
greencarcongress.com reports that Professor Hector D. Abruna, the
E. M. Chamot Professor in the Department of Chemistry and Chemical
Biology in the College of Arts and Sciences (A&S) at Cornell
University, has been awarded $8.3 million to further his group's
research related to fuel cells and advanced battery technologies.
The funding comes from a cy-pres distribution from the 2019
settlement of a consumer class-action lawsuit against Volkswagen
Group over clean diesel marketing and fuel economy labeling. After
consumers were compensated, the remaining settlement fund of $76
million was offered, in a competitive process, to organizations
such as universities and nonprofits whose work mitigates or
addresses the impacts of climate change.
The A&S proposal was among 29 selected for the funding, and
represents the largest amount awarded to a single department.
Abruna's research focuses on the development and characterization
of new materials for fuel cells and batteries using a wide variety
of techniques.
The new funding will support coordinated research, development and
demonstration activities to accelerate integrating Cornell's
advanced fuel cell and battery materials into fuel cell and battery
powered vehicles, respectively. To do this, it will support new
fundamental and applied research in Abruna's labs focused on these
needs.
It will also support the establishment of a small fleet of
fuel-cell and battery powered (EV) cars along with a green hydrogen
fueling station and EV fast chargers. Cornell will engage
automotive manufacturing companies such as GM, Toyota, Tesla,
Mercedes-Benz, Nissan and Hyundai-many of which already have
existing collaborations with Cornell-to provide the fuel-cell and
battery powered vehicles that would make up the envisoned fleet.
The researchers also plan to modify the fuel-cell stack in one
fuel-cell-powered car as well as the battery stack in one of the
battery-powered (EV) vehicles to integrate Cornell's fuel cell and
battery technologies, respectively, making it possible to study the
technologies under real world conditions.
The funding will include fast-charging battery stations and a
hydrogen fueling station. The grant will also support eight
researchers who will work on both battery and fuel-cell related
activities, Abruna said. [GN]
CVS PHARMACY: Lester Alleges Deceptive Hydrogen Peroxide's Label
----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL LESTER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CVS PHARMACY, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:22-cv-07334-PKC (S.D.N.Y., August 27, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligent misrepresentation, fraud,
unjust enrichment, breaches of express warranty, implied warranty
of merchantability/fitness for a particular purpose and Magnuson
Moss Warranty Act, and violations of New York General Business Law
and State Consumer Fraud Acts.
According to the complaint, the Defendant is engaged in false,
deceptive, and misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of
its hydrogen peroxide solution under the CVS Health brand. The
Defendant promoted the product as treatment of minor cuts and
abrasions but this statement is false, misleading, and not
authorized by any applicable body. Had the Plaintiff and Class
members known the truth, they would not have bought the product or
would have paid less for it, says the suit.
CVS Pharmacy, Inc. is a healthcare company, headquartered in
Woonsocket, Providence County, Rhode Island. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 Cuttermill Rd., Ste. 412
Great Neck, NY 11021
Telephone: (516) 268-7080
E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com
DEERE & CO: Monopolizes Repair Service Market, Robbins Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
ROBBINS FAMILY GRAIN, LLC, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DEERE & CO. (d/b/a JOHN DEERE),
Defendant, Case No. 3:22-cv-50294 (N.D. Ill., August 26, 2022) is a
class action against the Defendant for violation of Sections 1 and
2 of the Sherman Act, promissory estoppel, and unjust enrichment.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged monopolization of the
repair service market for John Deere brand agricultural equipment
with onboard central computers known as engine control units
(ECUs). John Deere has deliberately monopolized the market for
repair and maintenance services of its agricultural equipment with
ECUs by making crucial software and repair tools inaccessible to
farmers and independent repair shops. Furthermore, John Deere's
network of highly-consolidated independent dealerships is not
permitted through their agreements with John Deere to provide
farmers or repair shops with access to the same software and repair
tools the dealerships have. As a result of the Defendant's
monopolization, John Deere and its dealerships have derived
supracompetitive profits from the sale of repair and maintenance
services, says the suit.
Robbins Family Grain, LLC is an agricultural company located in New
York.
Deere & Co., doing business as John Deere, is an agricultural
equipment manufacturer, headquartered in Moline, Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert M. Foote, Esq.
FOOTE, MIELKE, CHAVEZ & O'NEIL, LLC
10 W. State Street, Suite 200
Geneva, IL 60134
Telephone: (630) 232-7450
Facsimile: (630) 232-7452
E-mail: rmf@fmcolaw.com
- and –
Robin F. Zwerling, Esq.
Susan Salvetti, Esq.
Justin M. Tarshis, Esq.
ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP
41 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10010
Telephone: (212) 223-3900
Facsimile: (212) 371-5969
E-mail: rzwerling@zsz.com
ssalvetti@zsz.com
jtarshis@zsz.com
- and –
Arend R. Tensen, Esq.
CULLENBERG & TENSEN, PLLC
199 Heater Road, Suite 2
Lebanon, NH 03766
Telephone: (603) 448-7100
Facsimile: (603) 448-9559
E-mail: tensen@lawpower.com
- and –
Daniel C. Perrone, Esq.
PERRONE LAW PLLC
100 Duffy Avenue, Suite 510
Hicksville, NY 11801
Telephone: (833) 287-6748
Facsimile: (718) 761-5169
E-mail: dcp@theperronefirm.com
DIRECTV LLC: Sapan Sues Over Unwanted Telemarketing Calls
---------------------------------------------------------
PAUL SAPAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DIRECTV, LLC, and DIRECTV ENTERTAINMENT
HOLDINGS LLC, Defendants, Case No. 8:22-cv-01600 (C.D. Cal., August
29, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants for violations
of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants are engaged in sending
prerecorded telephone calls to the cellular telephone numbers of
consumers, including the Plaintiff, in an attempt to promote its
television services without obtaining their prior express written
consent. The Defendants' telephonic sales calls have caused the
Plaintiff and Class members harm, including invasion of their
privacy, says the suit.
DirecTV, LLC is a cable and other pay television services company,
headquartered in California.
DirecTV Entertainment Holdings LLC operates as a holding company
based in California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher J. Reichman, Esq.
Justin Prato, Esq.
PRATO & REICHMAN, APC
8555 Aero Drive, Suite 303
San Diego, CA 92123
Telephone: (619) 683-7971
E-mail: chrisr@prato-reichman.com
justinp@prato-reichman.com
DISCOVER CONSTRUCTION: Ct. Temporarily Terminates Class Cert Bid
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PENA v. DISCOVER
CONSTRUCTION, LLC, et al., Case No. 3:21-cv-18462 (D.N.J.), the
Hon. Judge Freda L. Wolfson entered an order temporarily
terminating the motion to certify class pending the parties'
settlement discussions with the Magistrate Judge Rukhsanah L.
Singh.
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.[CC]
DRIVERDO LLC: Wright Sues Over Failure to Pay Minimum and OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
ISAAC WRIGHT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DRIVERDO, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:22-cv-04553 (N.D. Ill., August 26, 2022) is a collective action
complaint brought against the Defendant for its alleged violations
of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the minimum wage provisions of the
Illinois Minimum Wage Law, and the payment provisions of the
Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as a driver from
approximately January 2019 until January 2022.
According to the complaint, the Defendant did not pay the Plaintiff
and other similarly situated Drivers an hourly or salary rate
because they were classified as independent contractors and exempt
them from the provisions of the FLSA. The Defendant paid them only
a set amount for each vehicle they transported or for each drive
completed. As a result, although the Plaintiff and other similarly
situated Drivers regularly or occasionally worked more than 40
hours per week, they were not paid overtime compensation at the
rate of one and one-half times their regular rates of pay for all
hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek, says the suit.
DriverDo, LLC d/b/a Draiver is a vehicle transport company. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Josh Sanford, Esq.
SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
Kirkpatrick Plaza
10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510
Little Rock, AR 72211
Tel: (501) 221-0088
Fax: (888) 787-2040
E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com
EARTHGRAINS DISTRIBUTION: Munoz Suit Removed to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled TLALOC MUNOZ, MIGUEL RUIZ, and EDGAR CORONA,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
EARTHGRAINS DISTRIBUTION, LLC, BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC., and DOES 1
through 100, inclusive, Case No. 37-2022-00029635-CU-OE-CTL, was
removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County
of San Diego, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of California on August 26, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:22-cv-01269-AJB-AHG to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California's Business and Professions
Code including failure to reimburse business expenses, unlawful
deductions from wages, failure to provide accurate wage statements,
failure to pay overtime, failure to provide meal periods, failure
to provide rest breaks, unfair business practices, and enforcement
of the California Private Attorneys General Act.
Earthgrains Distribution, LLC is a subsidiary of Bimbo Bakeries
USA, Inc., headquartered in Pennsylvania.
Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. is a bakery company, headquartered in
Pennsylvania. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Kathy H. Gao, Esq.
Joseph A. Govea, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
300 South Grand Avenue, Twenty-Second Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3132
Telephone: (213) 612-2500
Facsimile: (213) 612-2501
E-mail: kathy.gao@morganlewis.com
joseph.govea@morganlewis.com
EQUIFAX INC: Sends Inaccurate Credit Scores to Lenders, Leahy Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
VINCENT LEAHY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EQUIFAX, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:22-cv-03503-LMM-CCB (N.D. Ga., August 30, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act.
The case arises a glitch in the Defendant's technology systems,
which resulted in Equifax sending inaccurate credit scores to
lenders about individuals who applied for credit from mid-March
through early April 2022. The Defendant's actions or inactions that
allowed for the glitch are a violation of its duties and
obligations as a credit reporting agency under the FCRA.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks to recover FCRA statutory damages
to the fullest extent allowable by law, says the suit.
Equifax, Inc. is a consumer credit reporting agency, with its
principal place of business located at 1550 Peachtree Street, N.W.,
Atlanta, Georgia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John C. Herman, Esq.
Candace N. Smith, Esq.
HERMAN JONES LLP
3424 Peachtree Road NE, Suite 1650
Atlanta, GA 30326
Telephone: (404) 504-6555
E-mail: jherman@hermanjones.com
csmith@hermanjones.com
- and –
Mark S. Reich, Esq.
Courtney E. Maccarone, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
55 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10006
Telephone: (212) 363-7500
Facsimile: (212) 363-7171
E-mail: mreich@zlk.com
cmaccarone@zlk.com
- and –
Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
Edward Y. Kroub, Esq.
MIZRAHI KROUB LLP
200 Vesey Street, 24th Fl.
New York, NY 10281
Telephone: (212) 595-6200
E-mail: jmizrahi@mizrahikroub.com
ekroub@mizrahikroub.com
EXIMIUS COFFEE: Dollar General Suit Alleges Breach of Contract
--------------------------------------------------------------
DOLLAR GENERAL CORPORATION and DOLGENCORP, LLC, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. EXIMIUS
COFFEE, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 3:22-cv-00671 (M.D. Tenn., August
30, 2022) is a class action against the Defendant for breach of
contract; breach of common law duty to indemnify, defend, and hold
harmless; and breach of express and implied warranty.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has breached its master
supply agreement (MSA) with the Plaintiffs by failing to ensure
that its products are labeled in accordance with all applicable
laws. Pursuant to the MSA, Eximius agreed to supply Dollar General
with packaged coffee to sell in its retail stores. In 2020, two
class action lawsuits were filed against Dollar General alleging
that the labels on certain coffee products supplied by Eximius to
Dollar General contained false and misleading claims. Dollar
General gave Eximius notice of the complaints and demanded
indemnification and defense. Eximius has failed and refused to
indemnify, defend or hold Dollar General harmless against the
claims brought in both of the class action lawsuits. As a result of
Eximius's conduct, Dollar General has also suffered lost profits
and has incurred substantial attorney fees and costs in defending
and resolving the claims, says the suit.
Dollar General Corporation with its principal place of business in
Davidson County, Tennessee.
Dolgencorp, LLC is a wholly-owned company by Dollar General
Corporation, with its principal place of business in Davidson
County, Tennessee.
Eximius Coffee, LLC is a coffee vendor that sells coffee to
retailers, with its principal place of business at 5610 Clinton
Drive, Houston, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Tara L. Swafford, Esq.
Elizabeth G. Hart, Esq.
THE SWAFFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
321 Billingsly Court, Suite 19
Franklin, TN 37067
Telephone: (615) 599-8406
Facsimile: (615) 807-2355
E-mail: tara@swaffordlawfirm.com
betsy@swaffordlawfirm.com
F.T. MEAT: Faces Jimenez Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------
SALVADOR ALBERTO JIMENEZ MUNIZ, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. F.T. MEAT CORP. (D/B/A FOOD
FAIR FRESH MARKET), BRONX 656 FOOD CORP. (D/B/A KEY FOOD FRESH),
and KENT ALBERTO TAVERA, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-07402
(S.D.N.Y., August 30, 2022) is a class action against the
Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay overtime wages,
failure to pay minimum wages, failure to comply with notice and
recordkeeping requirements, failure to provide accurate wage
statements, and unlawful deductions.
F.T. Meat Corp., doing business as Food Fair Fresh Market, is an
owner and operator of a supermarket, located at 1065 E. 163rd St.,
Bronx, New York.
Bronx 656 Food Corp., doing business as Key Food Fresh, is an owner
and operator of a supermarket, located at 656 Castle Hill Ave.,
Bronx, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Catalina Sojo, Esq.
CSM LEGAL, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 317-1200
Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
E-mail: catalina@csm-legal.com
FIRST CITIZENS: Bethea Files Suit Over Workplace Discrimination
---------------------------------------------------------------
Briana Bethea, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. First Citizens Corporation; First Citizens
Bank & Trust Company; First Citizens BancShares, Inc., Jason
Maurer, individually; Eric Crain, individually, and Reeves Skeen,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-02790-BHH-MHC (D.S.C.,
Aug. 19, 2022) seeks declaratory, injunctive and equitable relief,
as well as monetary damages, to redress Defendants' unlawful
employment practices, including unlawful discrimination, against
Plaintiff in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964; Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1866; and the Equal
Pay Act of 1963.
The Plaintiff (individually and as class representative of the
putative classes) and classes of similarly situated Black and/or
female current and former employees of First Citizens are victims
of discriminatory barriers to equal opportunity advancement, which
has included the unlawful denial of promotions, compensation
commensurate with white male employees, and equality with respect
to the terms and conditions of their employment, including, in many
cases, the wrongful termination of such employment, says the suit.
Specifically, First Citizens' compensation, assignment and
promotion policies, practices and/or procedures incorporate the
following discriminatory practices: (a) failing to compensate Black
and/or female employees commensurate with similarly situated white
and/or male employees; (b) failing to promote Black and/or female
employees at the same rate and on the same terms and conditions as
similarly situated white and/or male employees; (c) relying on
subjective judgments, procedures and criteria which permit and
encourage the incorporation of racial- and/or gender-based
stereotypes and bias by the First Citizens' predominantly White
managerial and supervisory staff in making compensation,
assignment, and termination decisions; and (d) generally refusing
to provide equal terms and conditions of employment for Black,
and/or female employees, the suit asserts.
First Citizens Corporation is one of the largest banks in United
States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Casey Martens, Esq.
Molly R. Hamilton Cawley, Esq.
KIM & LAHEY LAW FIRM, LLC
3260 Pelham Rd. #213
Greenville, SC 29615
Telephone: (864) 973-6688
E-mail: cmartens@kimandlahey.com
molly@kimandlahey.com
- and -
Roy T. Willey, IV, Esq.
Paul J. Doolittle, Esq.
Blake G. Abbott, Esq.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (843) 614-8888
Facsimile: (843) 494-5536
E-mail: roy@akimlawfirm.com
pauld@akimlawfirm.com
blake@akimlawfirm.com
FLOWERS FOODS: Appeals Order Granting Class Cert. in Ludlow Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Flowers Foods, Inc., et al., filed an appeal from a court ruling
granting class certification in the lawsuit entitled DANIEL LUDLOW,
et al., Plaintiffs v. FLOWERS FOODS, INC., et al., Defendants, Case
No. 3:18-cv-01190-JO-JLB, in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California, San Diego.
In this action, Plaintiffs allege that they and other Flowers'
distributors were misclassified as independent contractors and
denied the benefits of California employment laws.
On May 6, 2021, the Plaintiffs filed a motion for class
certification. The Plaintiffs assert that class certification is
appropriate under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) because (1)
the class that Plaintiffs seek to certify is so numerous that
joinder of all members is impracticable; (2) there are questions
and answers of law or fact common to class members; (3) the claims
of the representative Plaintiffs are typical of the claims of the
class they seek to represent; and (4) the representative Plaintiffs
and their counsel will fairly and adequately protect the interests
of the proposed class.
On July 5, 2022, Judge Jinsook Ohta granted the Plaintiffs' motion
for class certification.
The appellate case is captioned as DANIEL LUDLOW and WILLIAM
LANCASTER, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs-Respondents v. FLOWERS FOODS, INC.; FLOWERS BAKERIES,
LLC; AND FLOWERS FINANCE, LLC, Defendants-Petitioners, Case No.
22-80083, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit, filed on Aug. 18, 2022.[BN]
Defendants-Petitioners FLOWERS BAKERIES, LLC, a Georgia limited
liability company, et al., are represented by:
Alexander M. Chemers, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
400 S. Hope Street Suite 1200
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 239-9800
- and -
Kevin Patrick Hishta, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, PC
191 Peachtree Street, NE Suite 4800
Atlanta, GA 30303
Telephone: (404) 881-1300
- and -
Matthew Willis Lampe, Esq.
JONES DAY
250 Vesey Street
New York, NY 10281-1047
Telephone: (212) 326-8338
- and -
Traci L. Lovitt, Esq.
JONES DAY
100 High Street
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (617) 960-3939
- and -
Amanda Kelly Rice, Esq.
JONES DAY
150 W. Jefferson Avenue, Suite 2100
Detroit, MI 48226
Telephone: (313) 230-7926
- and -
Francis L. Tobin, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, PC
4660 La Jolla Village Drive Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92122
Telephone: (858) 652-3100
Plaintiffs-Respondents DANIEL LUDLOW and WILLIAM LANCASTER,
individually and on behalf of others similarly-situated, are
represented by:
Shaun Markley, Esq.
Craig Nicholas, Esq.
Alex Tomasevic, Esq.
NICHOLAS & TOMASEVIC, LLP
225 Broadway
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 325-0492
GENERAL MOTORS: Court Junks Ambrose Class Suit
----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT AMBROSE, SCOTT
BARNES, RICHARD CHAPMAN, RYAN CIRIGNANO, CHRIS FAUSSETT, MILAN
GRUJIC, DAVID KELLER, JOHN KOBEL, DANIEL LAWSON, STEPHEN LUTSK,
LORI MAGALLANES, NOAM MEIER, ERIC OSTRANDER, ROBERT OVERTURF, and
MIKE WORONKO, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. General Motors LLC, Case No. 2:19-cv-13449-SFC-EAS
(E.D. Mich.), the Hon. Judge Sean F. Cox entered an order granting
GM's motion to dismiss and dismissing the class action.
The Court said, "The Plaintiffs do not meet their Rule 9(b)
particularly requirements, as the allegations made in this case do
not support a plausible inference that GM had pre-sale knowledge of
the alleged defect. Therefore, the Court grants Defendant’s
motion as to Plaintiffs’ claim for fraudulent concealment and
claims under various state consumer protection laws, and the Court
grants GM's motion as to Plaintiffs’ fraud-based claims and
dismisses Counts 6 and 8-18."
In this putative class action, fifteen named plaintiffs bring a
variety of statutory and common-law claims against GM arising out
of an alleged safety defect in the power steering assist in model
year (MY) 2015 and 2016 Chevrolet Colorado and GMC Canyon trucks.
The General Motors Company is an American multinational automotive
manufacturing company headquartered in Detroit, Michigan, United
States.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 26, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3wV5jae at no extra charge.[CC]
GENERAL MOTORS: Fails to Inform About Policy Conversion, Volz Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
WADE VOLZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GENERAL MOTORS, LLC and THE GENERAL MOTORS
LIFE AND DISABILITY BENEFITS PROGRAM FOR SALARIED EMPLOYEES,
Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-03471 (E.D. Pa., August 30, 2022) is a
class action against the Defendant for breach of fiduciary duty
under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
According to the complaint, the Defendants breached their fiduciary
duty to the Plaintiff by misrepresenting and failing to adequately
inform him of the need or the means to convert a group life
insurance policy purchased to cover his now-deceased ex-spouse,
Tina Volz, from an employee benefit plan established pursuant to
ERISA into a personal policy following his divorce with Ms. Volz.
Following divorce, the Plaintiff promptly called General Motors's
Human Resource department to notify them of his divorce and to
inquire about how the divorce would affect the health insurance,
dental insurance, and life insurance coverage he had maintained for
Ms. Volz. General Motors did not advise him of the need to complete
any conversion or portability application or take any other
affirmation action to maintain Ms. Volz's life insurance coverage
other than payment of premium. Had the Plaintiff been properly
informed by General Motors of the need to submit written
application to MetLife to continue benefits within 31 days of
termination of Ms. Volz's coverage, he would have sent written
application to MetLife and continue to pay premiums, says the
suit.
General Motors, LLC is an automobile manufacturer, with its
principal place of business located in Detroit, Michigan. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark W. Boczar, Esq.
LIFE LEGAL SERVICES, LLC
3390 Chichester Ave., Ste. 1961
Boothwyn, PA 19061
Telephone: (484) 925-1123
Facsimile: (484) 214-0094
GM NAMEPLATE: Kali Seeks Unpaid Wages for Non-Exempt Workers
------------------------------------------------------------
NAKIA KALI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GM NAMEPLATE, INC., BRUCE CLECKLEY, and DOES
1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 22CV402509 (Cal.
Super., Santa Clara Cty., August 26, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of the California Labor Code
and the California's Business and Professions Code including
failure to pay overtime wages, failure to pay minimum wages,
failure to provide meal periods, failure to provide rest periods,
waiting time penalties, wage statement violations, failure to
timely pay wages, failure to provide suitable seating, and unfair
competition.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a non-exempt employee
from August of 2017 through March of 2019.
GM Nameplate, Inc. is a manufacturer specializing in the custom
design & manufacture of product identification components including
nameplates & labels, headquartered in Seattle, Washington. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David D. Bibiyan, Esq.
Jeffrey D. Klein, Esq.
Jean Hopkins Power, Esq.
BIBIYAN LAW GROUP, P.C.
8484 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Telephone: (310) 438-5555
Facsimile: (310) 300-1705
E-mail: david@tomorrowlaw.com
jeff@tomorrowlaw.com
jean@tomorrowlaw.com
GORSUCH LTD: Loadholt Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Gorsuch, Ltd. The
case is styled as Christopher Loadholt, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Gorsuch, Ltd., Case No.
1:22-cv-07456 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 31, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Gorsuch Ltd. -- https://www.gorsuch.com/ -- is an apparel and
fashion company specializing in ski wear and mountain wear
clothing.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
Asbury Park, NJ 07712
Phone: (845) 367-7146
Fax: (732) 298-6256
Email: yzelman@marcuszelman.com
GREIF INC: Hunt Sues Over Unpaid Overtime for Utility Workers
-------------------------------------------------------------
PAUL HUNT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GREIF, INC. and THE NEWARK GROUP, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-00980-WED (E.D. Wis., August 26, 2022)
is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
and Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws.
Mr. Hunt was employed by the Defendants as a utility worker in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin from May 2022 until July 31, 2022.
Grief, Inc. is an industrial packaging products manufacturer,
headquartered at 425 Winter Road, Delaware, Ohio.
The Newark Group, Inc. is a paperboard product manufacturer,
headquartered at 425 Winter Road, Delaware, Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Walcheske, Esq.
Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
David M. Potteiger, Esq.
WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240
Brookfield, WI 53005
Telephone: (262) 780-1953
Facsimile: (262) 565-6469
E-mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com
dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com
GRIFOLS SHARED: Gruber Must File Certification Bid by Dec. 16
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Walter J. Gruber v.
Grifols Shared Services North America, Inc., et al., Case No.
2:22-cv-02621-SPG-AS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Sherilyn Peace
Garnett entered an order granting Parties' stipulation as follows:
1. Plaintiff's certification motion will be filed by December
16, 2022;
2. Defendants' opposition to certification will be filed by
February 15, 2023;
3. Plaintiff's reply in support of certification will be
filed by March 8, 2023, and
4. The class certification hearing will be set on a future
date determined by the Court.
Grifols manufactures plasma derivative biopharmaceutical products.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 26, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3KOo4BX at no extra charge.[CC]
HAUNTED GAME CAFE: Loadholt Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Haunted Game
Cafe, Inc. The case is styled as Christopher Loadholt, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. The Haunted Game Cafe,
Inc., Case No. 1:22-cv-07459 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 31, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Haunted Game Cafe -- https://www.hauntedgamecafe.com/ -- is a
quirky coffee bar at a game shop where locals may sip brews while
playing with some of the products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
Asbury Park, NJ 07712
Phone: (845) 367-7146
Fax: (732) 298-6256
Email: yzelman@marcuszelman.com
HAVEN ANIMAL: Faces Zerr Suit Over Unpaid Wages and Retaliation
---------------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA ZERR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HAVEN ANIMAL HEALTH SERVICES CORPORATION,
RUSSELL HOWE-SMITH, ABC CORPORATIONS 1-100, and JOHN DOES 1-100,
Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-05243 (D.N.J., August 26, 2022) is a
class action against the Defendants for unpaid wages in violation
of the Fair Labor Standards Act, retaliation, breach of contract,
and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The Plaintiff was hired by the Defendant as the director of human
resources and operations from November 19, 2021 until December 20,
2021.
Haven Animal Health Services Corporation with its headquarters and
principal place of business located at 1886 Greentree Road, Cherry
Hill, Camden County, New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher J. Keating, Esq.
Mark R. Natale, Esq.
MALAMUT & ASSOCIATES, LLC
457 Haddonfield Rd, Suite 500
Cherry Hill, NJ 08002
Telephone: (856) 424-1808
Facsimile: (856) 424-2032
E-mail: ckeating@malamutlaw.com
mnatale@malamutlaw.com
HAWKEYE SECURITY: Guacan Seeks Security Officers' Unpaid Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
IVAN GUACAN, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated in
the proposed FLSA collective action, Plaintiff v. HAWKEYE SECURITY
NY LLC, and THOMAS MARCUS DE LOS SANTOS, Defendants, Case No.
1:22-cv-07333 (S.D.N.Y., August 27, 2022) brings this complaint as
a collective action against the Defendants for their alleged
willful and intentional violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act
and the New York Labor Law.
The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as security officer at
the Defendants' security services company known as "Hawkeye
Security" from approximately June 2021 to through and including
March 2022.
The Plaintiff claims that throughout his employment with the
Defendants, he regularly worked more than 40 hours per week.
However, the Defendants deprived him of his lawfully earned
overtime compensation at the rate of one and one-half times his
regular rates of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 per
workweek. The Plaintiff also claims that the Defendant failed to
keep track of his tie worked nor utilize any time tracking device
that accurately reflected his actual hours worked. In addition, the
Defendants failed to provide him with accurate wage statements, and
with any notice of his rate of pay, employer's regular pay day, and
such other information, says the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, for himself
and for all other similarly situated Security Personnel, as well as
liquidated damages, statutory damages, pre- and post-judgment
interest, reasonable attorneys' fees, litigation costs and
disbursements, and other relief as the Court deems just and
proper.
Hawkeye Security NY LLC is a security agency owned and operated by
Thomas Marcus De Los Santos. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Levin-Epstein, Esq.
Jason Mizrahi, Esq.
LEVIN-EPSTEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4700
New York, NY 10165
Tel: (212) 792-0046
E-mail: Joshua@levinepstein.com
HOMEGOODS INC: Casas Wage-and-Hour Suit Goes to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled SARAHI CASAS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. HOMEGOODS, INC., and DOES 1-20,
inclusive, Case No. 37-2022-00025084-CU-BT-CTL, was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Diego,
to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
on August 29, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:22-cv-01274-BEN-AGS to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California's Unfair Competition Law
including failure to provide rest and meal breaks, failure to
provide accurate wage statements, failure to pay compensation due
upon termination, and unfair competition.
HomeGoods, Inc. is a chain of home furnishing stores, with its
principal place of business of Framingham, Massachusetts. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Bradley E. Schwan, Esq.
Jannine E. Kranz, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067-3107
Telephone: (310) 553-0308
Facsimile: (310) 553-5583
E-mail: bschwan@littler.com
jkranz@littler.com
- and –
Brittany L. McCarthy, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
501 W. Broadway, Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92101-3577
Telephone: (619) 232-0441
Facsimile: (619) 232-4302
E-mail: blmccarthy@littler.com
HUMANIGEN INC: Pieroni Sues Over 47.25% Decline of Stock Price
--------------------------------------------------------------
ALEJANDRO PIERONI, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HUMANIGEN, INC., CAMERON DURRANT,
and TIMOTHY MORRIS, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-05258 (D.N.J.,
August 26, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants for
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.
According to the complaint, the Defendants filed materially false
and misleading registration statements with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding Humanigen's business,
operations, and prospects in order to trade Humanigen securities at
artificially inflated prices between May 28, 2021 and July 12,
2022. Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) lenzilumab was less
effective in treating hospitalized COVID-19 patients than the
Defendants had represented; (ii) as a result, the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) was unlikely to approve the lenzilumab
Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and the ACTIV-5/BET-B study was
unlikely to meet its primary endpoint; (iii) accordingly,
lenzilumab's clinical and commercial prospects were overstated; and
(iv) as a result, the company's public statements were materially
false and misleading at all relevant times, says the suit.
When the truth emerged, Humanigen's stock price fell $7.14 per
share, or 47.25 percent, to close at $7.97 per share on September
9, 2021, the suit asserts.
Humanigen is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company, with its
principal place of business at 830 Morris Turnpike, 4th Floor,
Short Hills, New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas H. Przybylowski, Esq.
Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 661-1100
Facsimile: (917) 463-1044
E-mail: tprzybylowski@pomlaw.com
jalieberman@pomlaw.com
ahood@pomlaw.com
- and –
Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 697-6484
Facsimile: (212) 697-7296
E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com
HUNGRY HOWIE: Underpays Delivery Drivers, Remaley FLSA Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
CURTIS REMALEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HUNGRY HOWIE PIZZA & SUBS, INC. and HH PIZZA
MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-12056-DPH-JJCG (E.D.
Mich., August 31, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants
for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages in violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff worked as a delivery driver for the Hungry Howie's
Pizza store located at 2209 Citrus Blvd., Leesburg, Florida from
October 1, 2020 until April 30, 2022.
Hungry Howie's Pizza & Subs, Inc. is a pizza company based in
Michigan.
HH Pizza Management, Inc. is a privately held multi-unit enterprise
which owns and operates multiple Hungry Howie's Pizza locations.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Simon, Esq.
SIMON LAW CO.
5000 Rockside Road
Liberty Plaza, Suite 520
Independence, OH
Telephone: (216) 525-8890
E-mail: james@simonsayspay.com
- and -
Michael L. Fradin, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL L. FRADIN
8401 Crawford Ave., Ste. 104
Skokie, IL 60076
Telephone: (847) 644-3425
Facsimile: (847) 673-1228
E-mail: mike@fradinlaw.com
IHR1 CONSTRUCTION: Fails to Properly Pay Wages, Xochipa Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case, IGNACIO XOCHIPA, on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated in the proposed FLSA Collective Action,
Plaintiff v. IHR1 CONSTRUCTION INC., ISRAEL ANTONIO GOMEZ HERNANDEZ
(a/k/a Israel Hernandez), and Mirian Miranda, Defendants, Case No.
1:22-cv-07332 (S.D.N.Y., August 27, 2022) arises from the
Defendants' alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the New York Labor Law.
The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as a construction
worker and manual laborer from approximately November 2020 through
and including December 2021.
Throughout the Plaintiff's employment with the Defendants, he was
promised by the Defendants a flat salary of approximately $300 to
$400 per week. However, the Defendants underpaid him for roughly 10
weeks totaling approximately $3,500. Despite regularly working more
than 40 hours per week, the Defendants deprived him of an overtime
premium at the rate of one and one-half times his regular rates of
pay for all hours he worked in excess of 40 per workweek. The
Defendants also failed to compensate him for one hour's pay at the
basic minimum hourly wage rate for each day his shift exceeded 10
hours. In addition, the Defendants failed to maintain an accurate
record of his hours worked because it did not utilize any time
tracking device that accurately reflected his actual hours worked.
Moreover, the Defendants failed to provide him with wage statement,
and with any notice of his rate of pay, employer's regular pay day,
and such other information as required by NYLL, says the suit.
The Plaintiff brings this complaint as a collective action to
recover unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime wages, and unpaid
spread-of-hours pay, for himself and all other similarly situated
construction workers and manual laborers, against the Defendant.
The Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages, pre- and post-judgment
interest, reasonable attorneys' fees and the costs and
disbursements of this action, and other relief as the Court deems
just and proper.
IHR1 Construction Inc. is a construction company co-owned by Israel
Antonio Gomez Hernandez and Mirian Miranda. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Levin-Epstein, Esq.
Jason Mizrahi, Esq.
LEVIN-EPSTEIN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4700
New York, NY 10165
Tel: (212) 792-0046
E-mail: Joshua@levinepstein.com
INDIANA PACKERS: Faces Rhines FLSA Class Suit in N.D. Indiana
-------------------------------------------------------------
TREMAINE RHINES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. INDIANA PACKERS CORPORATION, Defendant, Case
No. 4:22-cv-00057 (N.D. Ind., August 29, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, breach of
contract, and unjust enrichment.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as an associate production
worker from May 2019 to January 2020. From January 2020 to January
2021, the Plaintiff held a driver position.
Indiana Packers Corporation is a label producer of fresh and
processed meats, with its principal place of business in Indiana.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jacob R. Rusch, Esq.
Zackary S. Kaylor, Esq.
JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC
444 Cedar Street, Suite 1800
Saint Paul, MN 55101
Telephone: (612) 436-1800
Facsimile: (612) 436-1801
E-mail: jrusch@johnsonbecker.com
zkaylor@johnsonbecker.com
INTRACARE HOSPITAL: Livingston ERISA Suit Alleges Denied Benefits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL LIVINGSTON, Plaintiff v. INTRACARE HOSPITAL NORTH d/b/a
INTRACARE NORTH HOSPITAL, Defendant, Case No. 4:22-cv-02925 (S.D.
Tex., August 26, 2022) brings this complaint on behalf of himself
and all other similarly situated Hospital Helpers against the
Defendants seeking for actual damages pursuant to Employee
Retirement Income Security Act.
The Plaintiff, who has worked for the Defendant as a Hospital
Helper, asserts that he was internationally retaliated against and
terminated on or about April 10, 2019 because he made a claim for
workers' compensation under the IntraCare North Hospital
Occupational Injury Plan. This is allegedly a result of the
incident happened involving him, a white female nurse, and a
patient, who had been problematic in the past and attempted to
attack and rape the nurse. The Plaintiff only did was stepped in to
assist the nurse in danger, but the patient attacked the Plaintiff
and pushed him to the ground so hard that the Plaintiff received a
complete tear in his left leg quadriceps muscle, says the
Plaintiff.
Because the Plaintiff was injured after the incident, he needed
surgery to repair the tear. As a result, the Plaintiff has suffered
medical expenses and loss of income and benefits. However, the
Defendant has deliberately and intentionally denied him of benefits
under ERISA, the suit alleges.
The Plaintiff also asserts claim pursuant to Civil Rights Action
Section 1981 because he was treated differently by the Defendant
from the other non-Black employees involved in the same incident.
Although both the Plaintiff and the nurse reported the incident,
but the Plaintiff was fired and the white female involved in the
same incident was retained. The Plaintiff was told that his conduct
involved a physical altercation with a patient and therefore he was
terminated.
The Plaintiff seeks actual damages, pre- and post-judgment
interest, front and back pay and court costs, reasonable attorneys'
fees, and all other relief to which he and those similarly situated
to the Plaintiff is entitled under Section 1981 and Section 502(a)
of ERISA such as employment reinstatement or promotion and a
neutral reference.
IntraCare Hospital North is mental medical facility. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yancy A. Carter, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF YANCY A. CARTER
Post Office Box 691442
Houston, TX 77269
Tel: (504) 319-3625
Fax: (832) 553-7261
E-mail: yancycarter@hotmail.com
ITALKRAFT LLC: Young Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Italkraft LLC. The
case is styled as Lawrence Young, on behalf of himself and all
other persons similarly situated v. Italkraft LLC, Case No.
1:22-cv-07054-CM (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 18, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Italkraft -- https://www.italkraft.com/ -- is a top selection for
luxury custom kitchens, custom bathrooms and millwork in Miami with
Italian craftmanship, iconic design, bespoke quality.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bradly G. Marks, Esq.
THE MARKS LAW FIRM, PC
155 East 55th St., Ste. 6a
New York, NY 10022
Phone: (646) 770-3775
Fax: (646) 867-2639
Email: brad@markslawpc.com
J.M. SMUCKER: Bopp Consumer Suit Moved From D.S.C. to N.D. Ohio
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled CAMERON BOPP, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. THE J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY, Case No.
2:22-cv-01812, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
District of South Carolina to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio on August 29, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Ohio assigned Case
No. 5:22-cv-01523 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged breach of express
warranty, breach of implied warranty, negligence, negligent failure
to warn, negligent design defect, breach of implied warranty of
merchantability, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, unjust
enrichment, and punitive damages by advertising, marketing, and
selling Jif peanut butter products contaminated with Salmonella.
The J.M. Smucker Company is a manufacturer of food products,
headquartered in Orrville, Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roy T. Willey, IV, Esq.
Eric Poulin, Esq.
Paul Doolittle, Esq.
Blake G. Abbott, Esq.
Poulin | Willey | Anastopoulo
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (843)-614-8888
E-mail: roy@akimlawfirm.com
eric@akimlawfirm.com
pauld@akimlawfirm.com
blake@akimlawfirm.com
J.M. SMUCKER: Kraljevich Suit Moved From E.D. Ky. to N.D. Ohio
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JOHN KRALJEVICH, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. THE J.M. SMUCKER COMPANY, Case No.
5:22-cv-00134, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Kentucky to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Ohio on August 30, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Ohio assigned Case
No. 5:22-cv-01549 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged breach of express
warranty, breach of implied warranty, negligence, negligent failure
to warn, negligent design defect, breach of implied warranty of
merchantability, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, unjust
enrichment, and punitive damages by advertising, marketing, and
selling Jif peanut butter products contaminated with Salmonella.
The J.M. Smucker Company is a manufacturer of food products,
headquartered in Orrville, Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas R. Coffey, Esq.
MORGAN, POTTINGER, MCGARVEY
401 South Fourth Street, Suite 1200
Louisville, KY 40202
E-mail: trc@mpmfirm.com
- and –
Roy T. Willey, IV, Esq.
Paul Doolittle, Esq.
Blake G. Abbott, Esq.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
E-mail: roy@akimlawfirm.com
paul@akimlawfirm.com
blake@akimlawfirm.com
JOBCO INC: Pineda Seeks Final Approval of FLSA Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JULIO PINEDA, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly-situated, v. JOBCO INCORPORATED,
and COMMERCIAL CONTRACTING SERVICES INC., and JAIME DELAHUNT,
individually, Case No. 2:20-cv-05321-JMA-LGD (E.D.N.Y.), the the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order:
1. Granting final approval of the settlement for the Rule 23
and Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) settlement classes in
accordance with the parties' Settlement Agreement;
2. Authorizing the distribution of settlement checks to all
Class Members who timely submitted a valid Claim Form and
Release, representing their respective shares of the class
settlement;
3. Awarding Service Awards to Named Plaintiff, Julio Pineda,
and Opt-in Plaintiff, Jose Diaz, in the total amount of
$10,000.00, for their work provided to secure the result
on behalf of the Class Members;
4. Awarding attorneys' fees in the amount of $69,333.33, for
legal services performed in prosecuting and settling the
claims in this action, to Stevenson Marino LLP as Class
Counsel;
5. Awarding $6,159.37 for costs and out-of-pocket expenses to
Class Counsel;
6. Awarding $7,000.00 for claims administration fees and
costs to Arden Claims Service LLC, the court-appointed
Claims Administrator in this matter;
7. Providing for the release of all claims as specified in
the Settlement Agreement by all Class Members who did not
properly and timely opt-out of the settlement;
8. Dismissing this action against Defendants Commercial
Contracting Services, Inc. and Jaime Delahunt without
prejudice; and
9. Dismissing this action against Defendant, Jobco
Incorporated, with prejudice, but with the Court's
continued jurisdiction over the construction,
interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of the
parties' settlement, as well as over the administration
and distribution of the settlement fund.
Jobco operates as a provider of industrial heaters and supply
solutions.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify class dated Aug. 26,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3ANou7c
at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffrey R. Maguire, Esq.
STEVENSON MARINO LLP
445 Hamilton Avenue, Suite 1500
White Plains, NY 10601
Telephone: (212) 939-7229
E-mail: jmaguire@stevensonmarino.com
JUUL LABS: Faces Clark County Suit Over Deceptive E-Cigarette Ads
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JUUL LABS, INC., ALTRIA GROUP,
INC., PHILIP MORRIS USA, INC., ALTRIA CLIENT SERVICES, LLC, ALTRIA
GROUP DISTRIBUTION COMPANY, JAMES MONSEES, ADAM BOWEN, NICHOLAS
PRITZKER, HOYOUNG HUH, and RIAZ VALANI, Defendants, Case No.
3:22-cv-04946 (N.D. Cal., August 30, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, gross negligence, and
violations of the Nevada Public Nuisance Law and the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants used three tactics to
maintain market dominance in the cigarette industry: (1) product
design to maximize addiction, (2) mass deception, and (3) targeting
of youth. Defendants JUUL Labs and Adam Bowen designed an
e-cigarette device allegedly intended to create and sustain
addiction, but without the stigma associated with cigarettes and
promoted them to vulnerable young population. JUUL Labs and other
Defendants developed and implemented a marketing scheme to mislead
users into believing that JUUL products contained less nicotine
than they actually do and were healthy and safe. The Defendants
enticed newcomers to nicotine with kid-friendly flavors without
ensuring the flavoring additives were safe for inhalation. The
Defendants targeted the youth market by placing vaporized campaigns
on youth-oriented websites and media and using influencers and
affiliates to amplify their message to a teenage audience. The
Defendants have successfully caused more young people to start
using e-cigarettes, creating a youth e-cigarette epidemic and
public health crisis, says the suit.
Clark County School District case has been consolidated in MDL No.
2913, IN RE: JUUL LABS, INC. MARKETING, SALES PRACTICES, AND
PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. The case is assigned to the Hon.
Judge William H. Orrick.
Clark County School District is a school district with its offices
located in Las Vegas, Nevada.
JUUL Labs, Inc., formerly known as Pax Labs, Inc., is an American
electronic cigarette company, with its principal place of business
in San Francisco, California.
Altria Group, Inc. is a producer of tobacco products, with its
principal place of business in Richmond, Virginia.
Philip Morris USA, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Altria
Group, Inc., with its principal place of business in Richmond,
Virginia.
Altria Client Services LLC is a tobacco company, with its principal
place of business in Richmond, Virginia.
Altria Group Distribution Company is a tobacco company, with its
principal place of business in Richmond, Virginia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas P. Cartmell, Esq.
Jonathan P. Kieffer, Esq.
Tyler W. Hudson, Esq.
WAGSTAFF & CARTMELL LLP
4740 Grand Ave., Ste. 300
Kansas City, MO 64112
Telephone: (816) 701-1100
Facsimile: (816) 531-2372
E-mail: tcartmell@wcllp.com
jpkieffer@wcllp.com
thudson@wcllp.com
- and –
Kirk J. Goza, Esq.
Brad Honnold, Esq.
GOZA & HONNOLD LLC
9500 Nall Ave., Ste. 400
Overland Park, KS 66207
Telephone: (913) 451-3433
E-mail: kgoza@gohonlaw.com
bhonnold@gohonlaw.com
- and –
Andy D. Birchfield, Jr., Esq.
Joseph G. VanZandt, Esq.
BEASLEY ALLEN CROW METHVIN PORTIS & MILES, LLC
234 Commerce Street
Montgomery, AL 36103
Telephone: (334) 269-2343
E-mail: Andy.Birchfield@BeasleyAllen.com
Joseph.VanZandt@BeasleyAllen.com
- and –
Rahul Ravipudi, Esq.
PANISH SHEA & BOYLE LLP
11111 Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 700
Los Angeles, CA 90025
Telephone: (310) 477-1700
Facsimile: (310) 477-1699
E-mail: ravipudi@psblaw.com
- and –
John P. Fiske, Esq.
BARON & BUDD, P.C.
11440 West Bernardo Court Suite 265
San Diego, CA 92127
Telephone: (858) 251-7424
Facsimile: (214) 520-1181
E-mail: jfiske@baronbudd.com
- and –
Khaldoun Baghdadi, Esq.
WALKUP MELODIA KELLY & SCHOENBERGER, P.C.
650 California Street, 26th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 617-1269
E-mail: kbaghdadi@walkuplawoffice.com
KIA AMERICA: Faces Jones Suit Over Unsafe, Easy to Steal Vehicles
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Heather Jones, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Kia America, Inc., Hyundai Motor America,
and Hyundai Kia America, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-02123-NYW (D.
Colo., Aug. 18, 2022) is a class action claim arising from a defect
in Defendants' vehicles which make them easy to steal, unsafe, and
worth less than they should be, if they did not have the defect, in
violation of the Colorado Consumer Protection Act and the Magnuson
Moss Warranty Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants manufacture, design,
produce, distribute and sell the "Defective Vehicles," which are
hereby defined as: "all Kia models from 2011-2021, and all Hyundai
models from 2011-2021 that lack an engine immobilizer." All these
vehicles share the same defects, and therefore an owner of any one
of them may bring a class action on behalf of the entire class.
The Defendants allegedly concealed or otherwise failed to disclose,
reveal, or provide notice to customers, including Plaintiff, in
Defendants' advertising, labeling or otherwise that these vehicles
are defective and are not fit for the ordinary purposes for which
the vehicles are used, says the suit.
Kia America, Inc. operates as an automobile dealer.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kevin D. Stanley, Esq.
HUMPHREY, FARRINGTON & McCLAIN, P.C.
221 West Lexington, Ste. 400
P.O. Box 900
Independence, MO 64051
Telephone: (816) 836-5050
Facsimile: (816) 836-8966
E-mail: kds@hfmlegal.com
KIA CORP: Johnson Files Class Action Over Vehicle Theft Risk
------------------------------------------------------------
FOX 9 reports that a St. Paul man who had his Kia stolen in August
has filed a federal class action lawsuit against Kia and Hyundai
Motors over an exploit that makes those vehicles more susceptible
to being stolen.
The lawsuit was filed on Sept. 2 by LaShaun Johnson after his
vehicle was stolen in August. According to the lawsuit, police told
him the thieves used a screwdriver to disassemble the ignition
column and start the vehicle. Now, he's without a vehicle "for
months" as he waits on replacement parks.
FOX 9 has reported about the spike in thefts of Kia and Hyundais in
recent months due to the exploit that police say allows thieves to
steal the vehicles with as little as a screwdriver or USB drive.
In July, FOX 9 reported that Kia and Hyundais had become the most
stolen vehicles in Minneapolis while in St. Paul thefts of Kias
were up 1,300 percent over the previous year.
Attorneys blame the thefts on a lack of an "engine immobilizer," a
device that prevents the vehicle from running when the key is not
near the vehicle. The lawsuit claims that it violates federal
regulations while pointing out that neither Kia nor Hyundai has
issued a recall to add the device to vehicles affected by the
exploit.
The lawsuit cites some of FOX 9's coverage in its arguments,
including the story of a Minneapolis woman whose Kia had been
targeted three times by thieves.
"If Defendants' vehicles included an engine immobilizer then they
would be more difficult to steal because a thief could not start or
move the vehicle without the vehicle's key," the lawsuit reads.
"Federal regulations require that a vehicle's engine cannot be
started and that a vehicle cannot move when the vehicle's key is
not present."
To make matters worse for Johnson, while his Kia is out of
commission due to the theft, his backup vehicle is a 2013 Hyundai
Sonata. [GN]
KIMBERLY CLARK: Germ Removal Label "Deceptive," Rosenwald Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
JUDAH ROSENWALD, CRAIG COURAKILEWIN, CINDY RUTTER, WILLIAM RUTTER,
TRINITY GUEVREMONT, NATASHA GARAMANI, JAMES SMITH, PATRICIA PEREZ,
JEANINE ECKERT, and PRESTON LESCHINS, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. KIMBERLY CLARK
CORPORATION and DOES 1-10, Defendants, Case No. 3:22-cv-04993 (N.D.
Cal., August 31, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants for
violations of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the False
Advertising Law, and the Unfair Competition Law, the California
Consumer Privacy Act, the Unfair Trade Practices and Consumer
Protection Law, the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, and the
Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act.
According to the complaint, Kimberly Clark is engaged in false,
deceptive, and misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of
Kleenex wet wipes products. Kimberly Clark misrepresents the "germ
removal" characteristic of the product that it says "wipes away 99%
of germs from skin." Kimberly Clark also misrepresents that its
"germ removal" wet wipes product has "no harsh chemicals," in fact
it contains no chemical cleanser in any significant quantity. Had
the Plaintiff and Class members known the truth, they would not
have purchased the product, says the suit.
Kimberly Clark Corporation is an American multinational personal
care corporation, headquartered in Irving, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David M. Rosenberg-Wohl, Esq.
HERSHENSON ROSENBERG-WOHL
3080 Washington St.
San Francisco, CA 94115
Telephone: (415) 317-7756
E-mail: david@hrw-law.com
- and -
Michael Maizes, Esq.
MAIZES & MAIZES LLP
2027 Williamsbridge Road, 2nd Fl.
Bronx, NY 10461
Telephone: (718) 823-4000
E-mail: michael@maizes.law
- and -
Alfred G. Yates, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF ALFRED G. YATES, JR., P.C.
300 Mt. Lebanon Boulevard, Suite 206-B
Pittsburgh, PA 15234
Telephone: (412) 391-5164
KING ASHTON: Initial Scheduling Order Entered in Shannon Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TIMOTHY SHANNON,
INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, v.
KING ASHTON MARKETING SERVICES, LLC, KENDRA KING, NICHOLAS ASHTON,
JOHN DOE CORPORATIONS I-XX, Case No. 2:22-cv-00204-LPL (W.D. Pa.),
the Court entered an initial scheduling order as follows:
1. Initial disclosures pursuant September 9, 2022
to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a) shall
be made by:
2. Amendments to the pleadings and September 26, 2022
joinder of additional parties
will be completed by:
3. The ADR process will be completed November 3, 2022
no later than:
4. A telephone status conference November 8, 2022
is scheduled for:
5. The parties shall complete fact January 9, 2023
discovery as to merits of Named
Plaintiff Shannon only, as well
as conditional certification
discovery by:
6. A status/settlement conference January 12, 2023
will be held on:
7. The Plaintiffs' Motion for Class February 9, 2023
Certification is to be filed by:
Defendants' Opposition by: March 9, 2023
Plaintiffs' Reply by: March 23, 2023
King Ashton is a company that operates in the Marketing and
Advertising industry.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 25, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3eoLqBS at no extra charge.[CC]
KOHL CORP: Portnoy Law Files Suit Over Misleading Financial Reports
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GlobeNewswire voiced Portnoy Law Firm's advice for Kohl's
Corporation ("Kohl's" or the "Company") (NYSE: KSS) investors that
a class action was filed on their behalf. The Kohl's investors that
lost money on their investment are encouraged to contact Lesley
Portnoy, Esq.
Investors are encouraged to contact attorney Lesley F. Portnoy, by
phone at 844-767-8529 or email: at lesley@portnoylaw.com, to
discuss their legal rights.
Also, the investors are encouraged to visit Portnoy's website,
https://portnoylaw.com/kohls-corporation/, to join the case, review
more information and submit their transaction information.
The Portnoy Law Firm can provide a complimentary case evaluation
and discuss investors' options for pursuing claims to recover their
losses.
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business, operations, and compliance policies.
Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that:
(i) Kohl's Strategic Plan was not well tailored to achieving the
Company's stated goals;
(ii) the Defendants had likewise overstated the Company's success
in executing its Strategic Plan;
(iii) Kohl's had deficient disclosure controls and procedures,
internal control over financial reporting, and corporate governance
mechanisms;
(iv) as a result, the Company's Board was able to and did withhold
material information from shareholders about the state of Kohl's in
the lead-up to the Company's annual meeting;
(v) all the foregoing, once revealed, was likely to have a material
negative impact on Kohl's financial condition and reputation; and
(vi) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially
false and misleading at all relevant times.
On May 19, 2022, Kohl's issued a press release announcing the
Company's fiscal Q1 2022 results, reporting, among other items, a
net sales figure expected to grow up to only 1% (compared to Wall
Street consensus growth of 1.94%), earnings per share of $0.11
(missing estimates by $0.59), a revenue figure which only barely
edged expectations, and the Company's decision to cut its full-year
earnings forecast. These results were at odds with the Defendants'
representations regarding the successful execution of the Company's
Strategic Plan, which was purportedly poised to drive top-line
growth and position the Company for long-term success.
Further, the press release quoted Kohl's Chief Executive Officer
Defendant Michelle Gass, who stated, in relevant part, "the year
has started out below our expectations. Following a strong start to
the quarter with positive low-single digits' comps through late
March, sales considerably weakened in April as we encountered macro
headwinds related to lapping last year's stimulus and an
inflationary consumer environment."
Then, on May 20, 2022, Macellum Advisors GP, LLC ("Macellum"), "a
long-term holder of nearly 5% of the outstanding common shares of
Kohl's", issued a statement addressing "this quarter's extremely
disappointing results," which Macellum attributed to a "flawed
strategic plan and an inability to execute." Macellum also stated
that "the current Board appears to have withheld material
information from shareholders about the state of Kohl's in the
lead-up to this year's pivotal annual meeting," which "suggests to
us a clear breach of fiduciary duty."
On this news, Kohl's stock price fell $5.84 per share, or 12.97%,
to close at $39.20 per share on May 20, 2022.
The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors in pursuing claims caused
by corporate wrongdoing. The Firm's founding partner has recovered
over $5.5 billion for aggrieved investors and attorney advertising.
Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Contact Info:
Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq.
Admitted CA and NY Bar
lesley@portnoylaw.com
310-692-8883
www.portnoylaw.com [GN]
KOHL'S INC: Terry Suit Alleges Illegal Collection of Biometrics
---------------------------------------------------------------
TERRELL TERRY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KOHL'S, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:22-cv-04625 (N.D. Ill., August 30, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendant for violations of the Biometric Information
Privacy Act (BIPA).
According to the complaint, the Defendants violated BIPA because
they did not: (a) 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; (b)
provide a publicly available retention schedule and guidelines for
permanently destroying the biometric identifiers of the Plaintiff
and the Class; and (c) receive a written release from the Plaintiff
or the Class to collect, capture, or otherwise obtain their
biometric identifiers. By collecting, obtaining, storing, and using
the Plaintiff's and Class members' biometric data without their
consent, written or otherwise, Kohl's invaded their statutorily
protected right to privacy, says the suit.
Kohl's, Inc. is a retail company, with its corporate headquarters
located in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq.
SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
The Helmsley Building
230 Park Ave., 17th Floor
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 223-6444
Facsimile: (212) 223-6334
E-mail: jguglielmo@scott-scott.com
- and –
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
- and –
Blake Hunter Yagman, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (212) 594-5300
E-mail: byagman@milberg.com
KRUEGER PIZZA: Wiles Seeks to Certify Class of Delivery Drivers
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MATTHEW WILES,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
KRUEGER PIZZA, LLC, Case No. 8:22-cv-00933-KKM-CPT (M.D. Fla.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order conditionally certifying
the following collective:
"All delivery driver employees who worked for Krueger Pizza,
LLC, at any time after April 21, 2019."
The Plaintiff brought this suit on behalf of certain former and
current delivery drivers of Krueger Pizza to recover minimum wages
and other damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion to certify class dated Aug. 23,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3QiTGki
at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Carlos Leach, Esq.
THE LEACH FIRM, PA
Wells Fargo Building
631 South Orlando Avenue, Suite 300
Winter Park, Florida 32789
Telephone: (844) 722-7567
E-mail: cleach@theleachfirm.com
- and -
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: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com
LAMOILLE HEALTH: Faces Class Lawsuit Over 58,000-Record Data Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------------
HIPAA Journal's Editor-in-Chief Steve Alder posted that the
Morristown, VT-based healthcare provider, Lamoille Health Partners,
is facing a class action lawsuit over a June 2022 ransomware attack
that affected almost 60,000 of its patients.
The attack was detected on June 13, 2022, with the investigation
confirming the attackers gained access to its network the previous
day. Before file encryption, the attackers potentially accessed or
acquired documents from its systems that contained names,
addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, health
insurance information, and medical treatment information.
On or around August 11, 2022, notification letters were sent to
affected individuals, and complimentary identity protection and
credit monitoring services were offered to patients whose Social
Security numbers were potentially stolen. Lamoille Health Partners
said the delay in issuing notification letters was due to the
length of the investigation to establish which individuals had been
affected and the types of information involved. The breach was
reported to the HHS' Office for Civil Rights as affecting 59,381
patients.
As is now common following healthcare data breaches, legal action
is being taken by patients who had their protected health
information exposed. The lawsuit alleges Lamoille Health Partners
failed to implement appropriate safeguards to ensure the
confidentiality of the protected health information stored on its
systems, in violation of the HIPAA Security Rule. The plaintiff,
Patricia Marshall, says "the negligence of Lamoille Health Partners
means her sensitive information is in the hands of cybercriminals
and she and the class members face an imminent and ongoing risk of
identity theft and fraud."
The lawsuit also alleges there was an unnecessary delay in issuing
notification letters to affected individuals, even though
notification letters were sent within the 60-days allowed by the
HIPAA Breach Notification Rule. The lawsuit, Marshall v. Lamoille
Health Partners Inc., was filed in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Vermont on September 1, 2022, and seeks compensatory
damages for the plaintiff and class members, and injunctive relief,
requiring Lamoille Health Partners to implement further security
measures to better protect patient data. The plaintiff is
represented by Burlington, VT, lawyer Matthew B. Byrne of Gravel
and Shea. [GN]
LATCH INC: Portnoy Law Sues Over Misleading Financial Reports
-------------------------------------------------------------
A news post of GlobeNewswire expresses that the Portnoy Law Firm
advises Latch, Inc. ("Latch" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: LTCH)
investors that a class action has been filed on behalf of
investors. Latch investors that lost money on their investment are
encouraged to contact Lesley Portnoy, Esq.
Investors are encouraged to contact attorney Lesley F. Portnoy, by
phone at 844-767-8529 or email: at lesley@portnoylaw.com, to
discuss their legal rights.
Also, the investors are encouraged to visit Portnoy's website,
https://portnoylaw.com/latch-inc/, to join the case, review more
information and submit their transaction information.
The Portnoy Law Firm can provide a complimentary case evaluation
and discuss investors' options for pursuing claims to recover their
losses.
Latch is a technology company that specializes in keyless entry
security systems to open and manage doors in apartment buildings
from a smartphone.
On August 25, 2022, in a Form 8-K filed with the SEC, Latch
announced a material financial accounting restatement. The Company
cited material errors and possible irregularities relating to,
among other things, the way it recognized revenue associated with
the sale of hardware devices since listing its shares on NASDAQ.
"The Audit Committee has determined the statements for 2021 and 1Q
2022 will be restated; and based on the preliminary findings of the
Investigation, certain revenue recognition errors occurred as a
result of unreported sales arrangements due to sales activity that
was inconsistent with the Company's internal controls and
procedures," Latch noted specifically. On this news, the price of
Latch shares declined by $0.14 per share, or approximately 12.96%,
from $1.08 per share to close at $0.94 on August 26, 2022.
The lawsuit alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that:
(1) there were unreported sales arrangements related to hardware
devices;
(2) as a result, the Company had improperly recognized revenue
throughout fiscal 2021 and the first quarter of 2022;
(3) there were material weaknesses in Latch's internal control over
financial reporting related to revenue recognition;
(4) as a result of the foregoing, Latch would restate financial
statements for fiscal 2021 and the first quarter of 2022; and
(5) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements
about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were
materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.
The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors in pursuing claims caused
by corporate wrongdoing. The Firm's founding partner has recovered
over $5.5 billion for aggrieved investors, and attorney
advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Contact Info:
Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq.
Admitted CA and NY Bar
lesley@portnoylaw.com
310-692-8883
www.portnoylaw.com [GN]
LIMA ONE: Adr1assist Seeks More Time to File Class Cert. Bid
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Adr1assist, LLC v. Lima
One Capital, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-05184-VMC (N.D. Ga.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order extending the date for
filing its motion for class certification until 30 days after the
Court has ruled on its Motion for Leave to Filed Second Amended
Complaint.
Lima One is a residential real estate investors.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Aug. 25, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3wR4r6I at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory Bosseler, Esq.
Michael F. Ram, Esq.
Marie N. Appel, Esq.
MORGAN AND MORGAN
191 Peachtree Street, Suite 4200
Atlanta, GA 30303
Telephone: (404) 496-7318
Facsimile: (470) 639-6875
E-mail: gbosseler@forthepeople.com
LOWRY FARMS: Benito, et al., Seek Approval of Rule 23 Class Notice
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BERNABE ANTONIO BENITO, et
al., v. LOWRY FARMS, INC., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01039-SOH (W.D.
Ark.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order approving the
Rule 23 Class Action Notice.
The Court granted the Plaintiffs' Motion for Rule 23 Class
Certification for the following class:
"All individuals admitted as H-2A temporary foreign workers
who were employed by Defendants for work in its sugarcane
planting operations in 2016, 2017, 2018, and/or 2019."
Lowry is a family farm located in Pilot Oak, Kentucky.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Aug. 26, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3enhLt9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Norma Ventura, Esq.
James M. Knoepp, Esq.
Anne Janet Hernandez Anderson, Esq.
SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER
150 E. Ponce de Leon Ave. No. 340
Decatur, GA 30030
Telephone: (404) 521-6700
E-mail: norma.ventura@splcenter.org
jim.knoepp@splcenter.org
aj.hernandez@splcenter.org
LYFT INC: Lowell, et al., Seek to Certify Five Rule 23 Classes
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HARRIET LOWELL and
WESTCHESTER DISABLED ON THE MOVE, INC., individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, v. LYFT, INC., Case No.
7:17-cv-06251-PMH-AEK (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court,
pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to, for
an Order:
1. certifying the following proposed classes pursuant to Rule
23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure:
-- the Non-Access Region Class
"All residents of or visitors to any and all regions
serviced by Lyft aside from Lyft's Access Regions who
require WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who are
denied equal access to Lyft’s transportation services
under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA);"
-- Access Regions Other Than NYC
"All residents of or visitors to the Access Regions
Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Los Angeles, Philadelphia,
Phoenix, Portland, or San Francisco who require WAVs
for vehicular transportation, and who are denied equal
access to Lyft's transportation services under the
ADA;"
-- the NYC Class
"All residents of or visitors to New York City who
require WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who are
denied equal access to Lyft's transportation services
under the ADA, the New York State Human Rights Law
(NYSHRL), and the New York City Human Rights Law;
-- the New York State Other Than NYC Class
"All residents of or visitors to any and all regions
serviced by Lyft in New York State aside from New York
City who require WAVs for vehicular transportation, and
who are denied equal access to Lyft's transportation
services under the ADA and NYSHRL;" and
-- the Westchester Class
"All residents of or visitors to Westchester County who
require WAVs for vehicular transportation, and who are
denied equal access to Lyft's transportation services
under the ADA and NYSHRL;
2. appointing Harriet Lowell and WDOMI as class
representatives for the Non-Access Region Class;
3. appointing Pauline Scudieri as the class representative
for the Access Regions Other Than NYC Class;
4. appointing Kenneth Burr as the class representative for
the NYC Class;
5. appointing Harriet Lowell and WDOMI as the class
representatives for the New York State Other Than NYC
Class;
6. appointing Harriet Lowell and WDOMI as the class
representatives for the Westchester Class;
7. appointing Finkelstein, Blankinship, Frei-Pearson &
Garber, LLP, Morgan & Morgan, P.C., and Michael Hellman of
ADA compliance specialists as the Classes' Counsel; and
8. granting such other and further relief as the Court deems
just and proper.
Lyft offers mobility as a service, ride-hailing, vehicles for hire,
motorized scooters, a bicycle-sharing system, rental cars, and food
delivery in the United States and select cities in Canada.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion to certify classes dated Aug. 26,
2022 is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3AGVEFe
at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jeremiah Frei-Pearson, Esq.
Chantal Khalil, Esq.
Amanda T. Chan, Esq.
FINKELSTEIN, BLANKINSHIP,
FREI-PEARSON & GARBER, LLP
1 North Broadway, Suite 900
White Plains, NY 10601
Telephone: (914) 298-3281
Facsimile: (914) 824-1561
E-mail: jfrei-pearson@fbfglaw.com
ckhalil@fbfglaw.com
achan@fbfglaw.com
- and -
Michael F. Ram, Esq.
MORGAN AND MORGAN
COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 358-6913
E-mail: mram@forthepeople.com
- and -
Michael T. Hellmann, Esq.
ADA COMPLIANCE SERVICE
27 Fieldstone Drive, Suite 209
Hartsdale, NY 10530
Telephone: (646) 662-1335
Facsimile: (914) 682-8518
E-mail: adatty@aol.com
M COLLECTION HOME: Iskhakova Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against M Collection Home,
Inc. The case is styled as Marina Iskhakova, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated v. M. Collection Home, Inc., Case
No. 1:22-cv-05187 (E.D.N.Y., Aug. 31, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
M Collection -- https://www.mcollection-home.com/ -- is a home
furnishing store specializing in interior design services and
quality furniture at affordable prices.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Ste. 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
MAINE OXY-ACETYLENE: Prelim Approval of Class Settlement Sought
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERNEST J. GLYNN, et al.,
v. MAINE OXY-ACETYLENE SUPPLY CO., et al., Case No.
2:19-cv-00176-NT (D. Maine), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter:
1. granting motion for preliminary approval of class action
settlement;
2. approving the proposed Settlement Agreement;
3. approving the proposed Settlement Notice to the Class; and
4. scheduling a Final Approval Hearing within 90 days of the
Order granting the Class Plaintiffs' Motion for
Preliminary Approval of Settlement.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Aug. 26, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3enIO7A at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Thomas L. Douglas, Esq.
DOUGLAS, MCDANIEL
& CAMPO LLC, PA
90 Bridge Street, Suite 100
Westbrook, ME 04092
Telephone: (207) 591-5747
E-mail: tdouglas@douglasmcdaniel.com
- and -
Jeffrey P. Russell, Esq.
BLOOMER RUSSELL & BEAUPAIN
175 Exchange St.
Bangor, ME 04401
Telephone: (207) 942-7110
E-mail: jeff@bloomerrussell.com
- and -
Lauren Thomas, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF LAUREN THOMAS
18 Wild Rose Ave.
South Portland, ME 04106
Telephone: (207) 619-4149
E-mail: laurenthomaslaw@gmail.com
MARSHALLS OF CA: Moraga Labor Code Suit Goes to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled CARLOS MORAGA, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. MARSHALLS OF CA, LLC, TJX COMPANIES,
INC., and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. CVRI2202916, was removed
from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of
Riverside, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California on August 29, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 5:22-cv-01522 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California's Unfair Competition Law
including failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay overtime
owed, failure to provide lawful meal periods, failure to authorize
and permit rest periods, failure to timely pay wages during
employment, failure to timely pay wages owed upon separation from
employment, failure to reimburse necessary expenses, knowing and
intentional failure to comply with itemized wage statement
provisions, and unfair competition.
Marshalls of CA, LLC is a retail company, with its principal place
of business in Framingham, Massachusetts.
TJX Companies, Inc. is an American multinational off-price
department store corporation, with its principal place of business
in Framingham, Massachusetts. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Bradley E. Schwan, Esq.
Jannine E. Kranz, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067-3107
Telephone: (310) 553-0308
Facsimile: (310) 553-5583
E-mail: bschwan@littler.com
jkranz@littler.com
- and –
Brittany L. McCarthy, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
501 W. Broadway, Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92101-3577
Telephone: (619) 232-0441
Facsimile: (619) 232-4302
E-mail: blmccarthy@littler.com
MATTERPORT INC: Suit Seeks to Certify Injunctive Relief Class
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN STEMMELIN, on behalf
of himself and all other persons similarly situated, v. MATTERPORT,
INC., a Delaware corporation; RJ PITTMAN; DAVE GAUSEBECK; MATT
BELL; CARLOS KOKRON; PETER HEBERT; JASON KRIKORIAN; and MIKE
GUSTAFSON, Case No. 3:20-cv-04168-WHA (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order:
1. certifying the following injunctive relief Class as to
Plaintiff's claims under California's Unfair Competition
Law, and California's False Advertising Law:
"All persons in the United States who, within the
applicable statute of limitations, applied online through
Matterport's website and became a Matterport Service
Partner, and incurred expenses to operate their MSP
business;"
Excluded from the Class are: (1) Defendants and
Defendants' agents; (2) the Judge to 15 whom this case is
assigned and the Judge's immediate family; (3) any person
who executes and 16 files a timely request for exclusion
from the Class; (4) any persons who have had their claims
in this matter finally adjudicated and/or otherwise
released; and (5) the legal representatives, successors
and assigns of any such excluded person; and
2. appointing him as Class Representative, and the law firm
of Zimmerman Law Offices, P.C. as Class Counsel for the
defined Class.
Matterport operates as a software company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Aug. 26, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3BfD0Gi at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas A. Zimmerman, Jr., Esq.
Sharon A. Harris, Esq.
ZIMMERMAN LAW OFFICES, P.C.
www.attorneyzim.com
firm@attorneyzim.com
77 W. Washington Street, Suite 1220
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 440-0020
Facsimile: (312) 440-4180
E-mail: tom@attorneyzim.com
sharon@attorneyzim.com
MCG HEALTH: Batt CCPA Suit Moved From C.D. Cal. to W.D. Wash.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled KELLEY BATT, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. MCG HEALTH, LLC, Case No.
2:22-cv-04486-MCS-PVC, was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California to the U.S. District Court
for the Western District of Washington on August 31, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Washington assigned
Case No. 2:22-cv-01229-RSM to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged negligence, breach of
contract, breach of implied contract, and violations of the
California Consumer Privacy Act, the California Customer Records
Act, the California Constitution's Right to Privacy, and the
California's Unfair Competition Law by failing to protect the
sensitive private information of the Plaintiff and similarly
situated consumers from unauthorized access and exfiltration.
MCG Health, LLC is a healthcare provider, with its principal place
of business in Seattle, Washington. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan M. Lebe, Esq.
Yuri A. Chornobil, Esq.
Nicolas W. Tomas, Esq.
LEBE LAW, APLC
777 S. Alameda Street, Second Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90021
Telephone: (213) 444-1973
E-mail: Jon@lebelaw.com
Yuri@lebelaw.com
Nicolas@lebelaw.com
MEDTRONIC PLC: Misleads Investors of Diabetes Business' Status
---------------------------------------------------------------
Burl Gilyard at Star Tribune reports that a new class-action
lawsuit against Medtronic alleges that problems within the
company's diabetes division hurt its stock price and, in turn, its
shareholders.
The suit claims Medtronic misled investors about the health of its
diabetes business and prospects for future approval from the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration for the MiniMed 780G device, its
next-generation insulin pump.
Pennsylvania-based law firm Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check announced
the litigation.
"During the class period, Medtronic repeatedly assured investors
that the MiniMed 780G model was 'on track' for approval by the
[FDA] and would provide Medtronic with the edge it needed to close
a growing gap with its competitors in the diabetes market," the
firm said in its announcement.
The law firm is inviting anyone who bought Medtronic stock between
June 8, 2019, and May 25, 2022 to join the suit.
Medtronic spokeswoman Erika Winkels said the company had been made
aware of the lawsuit but had not been served or reviewed the
complaint.
Last December, the company disclosed receiving a warning letter
from the FDA outlining concerns about how the diabetes division had
handled complaints, assessed product risks and dealt with recalls.
The company lowered its financial guidance for the diabetes group
that same day, sending Medtronic's stock down 6%.
The warning letter also cast a pall of uncertainty over the FDA
approval prospects for the MiniMed 780G.
In the company's most recent quarterly conference call with
analysts last month, Medtronic chief executive Geoff Martha said
the company was close to resolving issues with the FDA.
"We're making good progress on our warning letter commitments,"
Martha said, "We've completed more than 90% of the actions we
committed to the FDA." [GN]
MERCEDES BENZ: Order Amending Case Schedule Entered in Hazdovac
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CORY HAZDOVAC,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
MERCEDES BENZ USA, LLC, and DOES MBUSA 1 through 10, inclusive,
Case No. 3:20-cv-00377-RS (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Richard
Seeborg entered an order amending case schedule as follows:
1. The deadline for the Parties to November 9, 2022
conduct mediation shall be:
2. The deadline for Plaintiff to January 30, 2023
file any Motion for Class
Certification; and the
deadline for reports of any
experts Plaintiff intends to
rely upon at class certification
shall be:
3. The deadline for MBUSA to May 26, 2023
file an Opposition to any
Motion for Class Certification;
the deadline for MBUSA's
reports of any experts MBUSA
intends to rely upon at
class certification; and
the deadline for any motion
by MBUSA to limit or exclude
Plaintiff’s class certification
expert opinions based on Daubert
or any other basis shall be:
4. The deadline for Plaintiff to July 25, 2023
file a reply in support of
any Motion for Class
Certification; and the deadline
for Plaintiff to respond to
MBUSA's class certification
expert opinions based on
Daubert or any other basis
shall be:
5. The hearing on any Motion August 17, 2023.
for Class Certification shall
be:
Mercedes-Benz USA is a Mercedes-Benz Group-owned distributor for
passenger cars in the United States, headquartered in Sandy
Springs, Georgia.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 23, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3qaWVj2 at no extra charge.[CC]
META PLATFORMS: $37.5M Locating Tracking Settlement Awaits Court OK
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lisa Eadicicco, writing for CNET, reports that Facebook's parent
company, Meta, has agreed to a $37.5 million settlement to resolve
a lawsuit accusing the company of violating users' privacy by
tracking their movements without permission.
Plaintiffs in Lundy et al vs. Meta Platforms claim the social media
platform collected location data even when users turned off their
phones' location services setting, violating both California law
and Facebook's own privacy policies.
The settlement, filed Aug. 22 in San Francisco federal court, still
needs final approval by a judge before eligible users can receive
their share of any cash payout.
Meta didn't respond to a request for comment on the case. In court
papers, however, it said agreeing to the deal was not an admission
of any wrongdoing.
The company previously agreed to a $90 million settlement in June
following accusations it tracked users' online activity on other
sites even after they logged off Facebook. Earlier this year, Meta
settled a $650 million class action case claiming Facebook's facial
recognition scans violated Illinois' Biometric Information Privacy
Act.
Read on to find out what Facebook's location tracking case is
about, who is eligible for a payment and how to claim money.
For more on class action lawsuits, see if you're eligible for a
payout from T-Mobile's $350 million data breach settlement, AT&T's
$14 million hidden-fee case or Roundup weed killer's $45 million
settlement.
What is Facebook accused of?
A class action lawsuit filed in 2018 in the US District Court's
Northern District of California accuses Meta of recording Facebook
users' physical location without permission, using their IP address
to infer their position in order to serve them targeted ads.
"Facebook has been covertly obtaining detailed location information
from users regardless of whether a user has opted in or opted out
on his or her device," the complaint read.
It wasn't until the EU began enforcing the wide-ranging General
Data Protection Regulation in 2018 that Facebook "realized that it
had to come clean about its data collection practices in its data
policy," according to the complaint, which stated Facebook had
previously specifically claimed that collection of any location
information was opt-in.
Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg told Congress in 2018 that
the company used shared location data "to help advertisers reach
people in particular areas."
"For example, if people have shared their device locations with
Facebook or checked into a specific restaurant, we can show them
ads from an advertiser that wants to promote its services in their
area or from the restaurant [itself]," he said.
Who's eligible for money in the location tracking settlement?
A preliminary settlement was filed in San Francisco federal court
on Aug. 22. If it receives final approval from a judge, the
settlement will cover anyone with a Facebook account since Jan 30,
2015.
How much could I get?
It's not clear how much individual class members would receive yet,
though 30% of the proposed settlement could go to the plaintiffs'
legal fees, according to court documents.
How would eligible Facebook users get paid?
Eligible class members will be able to file a claim via a
yet-to-be-launched settlement website, according to the filing, and
then receive payment by check or direct deposit. [GN]
METROPOLITAN DIRECT: Vega Suit Removed to D. New Mexico
-------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Margaret Vega, individually and on behalf of
other similarly situated individuals v. Metropolitan Direct
Property and Casualty Insurance Company, Case No. 21cv1096 was
removed from the Second Judicial District Court to the U.S.
District Court for District of New Mexico on August 18, 2022.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:22-cv-00616-JB-SCY to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Insurance for Insurance Contract.
Metropolitan Direct Property and Casualty Insurance Company --
https://www.metlife.com/ -- provides insurance products and
services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Corbin Hildebrandt, Esq.
CORBIN HILDEBRANDT, P.C.
1400 Central Ave. S.E.
Albuquerque, NM 87106
Phone: (505) 998-6626
Fax: (505) 998-6628
Email: corbin@hildebrandtlawnm.com
- and –
Geoffrey R Romero, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF GEOFFREY R. ROMERO
4801 All Saints Road, NW
Albuquerque, NM 87120
Phone: (505) 247-3338
Fax: (505) 271-1539
Email: geoff@geoffromerolaw.com
- and –
Kedar Bhasker, Esq.
KEDAR BHASKER
2741 Indian School Rd. NE, Ste. 208
Albuquerque, NM 87106
Phone: (505) 720-2113
Fax: (505) 709-3279
Email: kedar@bhaskerlaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Nicole True, Esq.
LEWIS ROCA ROTHGERBER CHRISTIE LLP
201 E Washington St., Suite 1200
Phoenix, AZ 85004-2595
Phone: (602) 262-5389
Fax: (602) 262-5747
Email: ntrue@lewisroca.com
MIKOMA CONSTRUCTION: Siguencia Seeks Unpaid Wages for Electricians
------------------------------------------------------------------
MARIA BEATRIZ SIGUENCIA, CARLOS BENITO PINA, SLAWOMIR WARIAS,
TADEUSZ SOKOLOWSKI, GRZEGORZ LIGEZKA, LUIS BERMEO MOROCHO and MARIO
TENECORA QUINTUNA, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. MIKOMA CONSTRUCTION LLC, MIKOMA ELECTRIC
LLC, MIKOMA TECHNOLOGY OF POWER AND LIGHTS WIRING AND CONTROL
LIMITED LIABILITY PARTNERSHIP, MARCIN OKLA, and MILENA KOSZALKA,
Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-05138-DG-PK (E.D.N.Y., August 29,
2022) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including
failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages,
failure to provide accurate wage notice, failure to provide
accurate wage statements, breach of contract, quantum meruit, and
unlawful deductions.
The Plaintiffs and others similarly situated worked as electricians
and electricians' helpers for the Defendants' general and
electrical contracting business in New York.
Mikoma Construction LLC is a construction firm in New York.
Mikoma Electric LLC is a full service electrical contracting
company based in New York.
Mikoma Technology of Power and Lights Wiring and Control Limited
Liability Partnership is electrical contracting company based in
New York. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Robert Wisniewski, Esq.
ROBERT WISNIEWSKI P.C.
17 State Street, Suite 820
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 267-2101
MOLECULAR PARTNERS: IPO Documents "Misleading," Class Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GlobeNewswire reveals the announcement of shareholder rights law
firm Johnson Fistel, LLP, that a class action lawsuit has commenced
on behalf of investors of Molecular Partners AG ("Molecular
Partners" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: MOLN). The class action is on
behalf of shareholders who purchased Molecular Partners securities
pursuant and/or traceable to the Offering Documents issued in
connection with the Company's initial public offering conducted on
or about June 16, 2021 (the "IPO"); and/or (b) Molecular Partners
securities between June 16, 2021, and April 26, 2022, both dates
inclusive (the "Class Period"). Investors are notified that they
have until September 12, 2022, to move the Court to serve as lead
plaintiff in this action.
What actions may they take at this time? If they suffered a loss
and are interested in learning more about being a lead plaintiff,
they can contact Jim Baker (jimb@johnsonfistel.com) by email or
phone at 619-814-4471. And if emailing, a phone number must be
included.
To join the said action, they can click or copy and paste the link
below in a browser:
https://www.johnsonfistel.com/investigations/molecular-partners-mol-class-action,
for no cost or obligation.
The complaint alleges that the Offering Documents were negligently
prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements of a
material fact or omitted to state other facts necessary to make the
statements made not misleading and were not prepared in accordance
with the rules and regulations governing their preparation.
Additionally, the complaint alleges that, throughout the Class
Period, Defendants made materially false and misleading statements
regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects.
Specifically, the Offering Documents and Defendants made false
and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:
(i) ensovibep was less effective at treating COVID-19 than
Defendants had led investors to believe;
(ii) accordingly, the FDA was reasonably likely to require an
additional Phase 3 study of ensovibep before granting the drug EUA;
(iii) waning global rates of COVID-19 significantly reduced the
Company's chances of securing EUA for ensovibep;
(iv) as a product candidate, MP0310 was less attractive to Amgen
than Defendants had led investors to believe;
(v) accordingly, there was a significant likelihood that Amgen
would return global rights of MP0310 to Molecular Partners;
(vi) as a result of all the foregoing, the clinical and commercial
prospects of ensovibep and MP0310 were overstated; and
(vii) as a result, the Offering Documents and Defendants' public
statements throughout the Class Period were materially false and/or
misleading and failed to state information required to be stated
therein.
A lead plaintiff will act on behalf of all other class members in
directing the Molecular Partners class-action lawsuit. The lead
plaintiff can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the
class-action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share any potential
future recovery of the Molecular Partners class action lawsuit is
not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.
For more information regarding the lead plaintiff process please
refer to https://www.johnsonfistel.com/lead-plaintiff-deadlines.
About Johnson Fistel, LLP:
Johnson Fistel, LLP is a nationally recognized shareholder rights
law firm with offices in California, New York and Georgia. The firm
represents individual and institutional investors in shareholder
derivative and securities class action lawsuits. Johnson Fistel
seeks to recover losses incurred due to violations of federal
securities laws.
For more information about the firm and its attorneys and attorney
advertising, visit http://www.johnsonfistel.com.Past results do
not guarantee future outcomes.
Contact:
Johnson Fistel, LLP
Jim Baker, 619-814-4471
Investor Relations
jimb@johnsonfistel.com [GN]
MONARCH RECOVERY: Mullins Seeks More Time to File Replies
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICKIE MULLINS, on behalf
of herself and all others similarly situated, v. MONARCH RECOVERY
MANAGEMENT, INC., Case No. 5:21-CV-00120-KDB-DSC (W.D.N.C.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order extending the time to
file replies to the Defendant's Responses to her Motions for Class
Certification and Partial Summary Judgment up through and including
September 12, 2022.
The Plaintiff commenced this action by filing his complaint in
Superior Court, Caldwell County on June 30, 2021. The Plaintiff
alleged the Defendant unlawfully shared her sensitive financial
information with unauthorized third parties in violation of the
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the North Carolina
Debt Collection Act (NCDCA), the lawsuit says.
On August 12, 2021, the Defendant removed the action to this Court
under 28 U.S.C. section 1331 based on the claims made under the
FDCPA.
Monarch Recovery operates as a collection agency.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Aug. 23, 2022 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3CQCf7H at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott C. Harris, Esq.
Patrick M. Wallace, Esq.
S. Michael Dunn, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS CROSSMAN PLLC
900 W. Morgan Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Telephone: (919) 600-5000
Facsimile: (919) 600-5035
E-mail: sharris@milberg.com
pwallace@milberg.com
michael.dunn@milberg.com
MORGAN STANLEY: Helfand Appeals Final Approval of Tillman Suit Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Objector Steven F. Helfand filed an appeal from a court ruling
granting final approval of the settlement resolving the lawsuit
entitled Sylvia Tillman, Amresh Jaiejee, Vivian Yates, Richard
Gamen, and Cheryl Gamen, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. MORGAN STANLEY SMITH BARNEY, LLC, Case No.
1:20-cv-05914, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, this lawsuit
is brought against the Defendant for its failure to properly secure
and safeguard personal identifiable information, including names,
Social Security numbers, passport numbers, addresses, telephone
numbers, email addresses, account numbers, dates of birth, income,
asset value and holding information.
The Plaintiffs also allege that the Defendant failed to provide
timely, accurate, and adequate notice to them and similarly
situated Morgan Stanley current and former customers that their PII
had been lost and precisely what types of information was
unencrypted and in the possession of unknown third parties. This
case does not involve a breach of a computer system by a third
party, but rather an unauthorized disclosure of the PII of the
Plaintiffs and the class by the Defendant to unknown third
parties.
On November 4, 2021, the Court was advised that all claims asserted
have been settled in principle. On November 10, 2021, the Court was
further advised that the settlement in principle is classwide.
Accordingly, the Clerk of Court was directed to reopen the case.
On Jan. 18, 2022, the Court entered an Order granting Plaintiffs'
unopposed motion for preliminary approval of class action
settlement. The Settlement Agreement provides for a Settlement
Class defined as follows: All Individuals with existing or closed
Morgan Stanley accounts established in the United States who
received the Notice Letters regarding the Data Security Incidents.
On April 19, 2022, Mr. Helfand, a non-party member of class, filed
an objection to the proposed settlement/proof standing.
On August 5, 2022, the Court entered judgment and final approval of
the class action settlement. The Court also awarded attorneys'
fees, reimbursement of litigation expenses, and service awards to
the named Plaintiffs in the amount of $253,994.53.
The appellate case is captioned as In re Morgan Stanley Data
Security Litigation, Case No. 22-1819, in the United States Court
of Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed on Aug. 17, 2022.[BN]
Objector-Appellant Steven F. Helfand, of Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
appears pro se.
Plaintiffs-Appellees Amresh Jaijee, Sylvia Tillman, Vivian Yates,
Richard Gamen, Cheryl Gamen, Mark Blythe, Midori T. Nelson, John C.
Nelson, Howard Katz, Desiree Shapouri, Timothy M. Smith, on behalf
of themselves and all others similarly situated, are represented
by:
John A. Yanchunis, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
201 North Franklin Street
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 221-6583
- and -
Linda Phyllis Nussbaum, Esq.
NUSSBAUM LAW GROUP, P.C.
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (917) 438-9189
- and -
James E. Cecchi, Esq.
CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
5 Becker Farm Road
Roseland, NJ 07068
Telephone: (973) 994-1700
Defendant-Appellee Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC is represented
by:
Brad S. Karp, Esq.
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 373-3000
MUSIC TRIBE: Class Cert. Hearing Continued to February 27, 2023
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Audio-Technica
Corporation, et al., v. Music Tribe Commercial NV Inc., et al.,
Case No. 2:21-cv-09009-ODW-AS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Otis D.
Wright, II entered an order continuing the deadline for hearing
motions in this matter (other than class certification motions) to
February 27, 2023.
The deadline for hearing motions in this matter is currently set
for February 20, 2023. That date is a Court holiday in observance
of Juneteenth.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 25, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3QtF7L3 at no extra charge.[CC]
NATIONAL ENTERPRISE: Edwards Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Michigan
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against National Enterprise
Systems, Inc. The case is styled as Lasteve Edwards, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. National
Enterprise Systems, Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-12022-NGE-EAS (E.D.
Mich., Aug. 29, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
National Enterprise Systems -- https://www.nes1.com/ -- is an
account receivable collection agency.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601-2726
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Arbitration in Discrimination Suit Discussed
---------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Kasabian at bleacherreport.com reports that lawyers
representing NFL coaches Brian Flores, Ray Horton and Steve Wilks
in their class-action lawsuit against the NFL and its teams stated
in a brief filed that sending the case to the league's arbitration
process would lead to "unconscionably biased one-sided 'kangaroo
courts'" deciding the matter, per Larry Neumeister of the
Associated Press.
The lawsuit, which Flores filed in February, alleges that the NFL
and several teams engaged in racial discrimination in its hiring
decisions.
As noted by Mike Florio of ProFootballTalk, the 25-page brief also
states that the NFL's arbitration process "bear[s] no resemblance
to a neutral judicial forum and fail[s] to comport with basic
principles of fairness."
Commissioner Roger Goodell would oversee the case if it doesn't go
to jury, but the plaintiffs allege that he can't be unbiased in the
process.
"They included in their submission articles about Goodell's salary
and other personal details," Neumeister wrote.
"They cited the hundreds of millions of dollars he earns from
teams, his public statement that the lawsuit is without merit and
the likelihood that he could be a witness in the case."
In June, the NFL and six teams filed a motion in United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York in hopes of
pushing the case to arbitration.
The motion states that the plaintiffs signed contracts with their
teams that stated that any claims against the teams that employed
them had to go through arbitration.
In addition, the motion states that "the NFL Constitution's
arbitration provisions to which Plaintiffs agreed expressly cover
claims involving two or more member clubs and claims between any
coach and any member club-precisely the case here."
The NFL also stated in the motion that the matter was not for
federal courts to rule on: "Courts are particularly hesitant to
interfere in such matters, because the internal standards of
professional sports leagues 'are not necessarily familiar to courts
and obviously require some expertise in their application.'"
Flores served as the head coach of the Miami Dolphins for three
years before being fired in January. He is a senior defensive
assistant and linebackers coach with the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Wilks, who coached the Arizona Cardinals for one year in 2018
before the team parted ways with him, is the defensive passing game
coordinator and secondary coach for the Carolina Panthers.
The retired Horton notably worked as a defensive coordinator from
2011 to 2016 for the Arizona Cardinals, Cleveland Browns (two
stints) and Tennessee Titans. [GN]
NATIONWIDE MUTUAL: Prelim Pretrial Order Entered in MSP Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MSP Recovery Claims,
Series LLC et al v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company, et al.,
Case No. 2:21-cv-01901-MHW-CMV (S.D. Ohio), the Hon. Judge Chelsey
M. Vascura entered an preliminary pretrial order as follows:
-- Motions or stipulations addressing November 2, 2022
the parties or pleadings, if any,
must be filed no later than:
-- The Plaintiffs' motion for class September 29, 2023
certification shall be filed by:
-- The Plaintiffs' primary expert May 19, 2023
reports must be produced by:
-- The Defendants' primary expert June 19, 2023
reports must be produced by:
-- The Plaintiffs' rebuttal expert July 3, 2023
reports must be produced by:
-- The Defendants' rebuttal expert August 4, 2023
reports must be produced by:
-- Expert discovery must be August 4, 2023
completed by:
-- All fact discovery shall be May 5, 2023
completed by:
-- Case dispositive motions must September 29, 2023
be filed by:
-- The Plaintiff shall make a April 14, 2023
settlement demand by:
-- The Defendants shall respond April 28, 2023
by:
Nationwide Mutual is a group of large U.S. insurance and financial
services companies based in Columbus, Ohio.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 23, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Q9uM6x at no extra charge.[CC]
NUEVO TULCINGO: Guerrero Sues Over Restaurant Staff's Unpaid Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
YARITZA SALAZAR GUERRERO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NUEVO TULCINGO AZTECA CORP. d/b/a
NUEVO AZTECA MEX-RESTAURANT, and GILBERTO MOLINA, Defendants, Case
No. 1:22-cv-07285 (S.D.N.Y., August 26, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the New York Labor Law including unpaid minimum wages,
unpaid overtime wages, unpaid spread-of-hours premium, and
noncompliant recordkeeping and wage statements.
Ms. Salazar Guerrero has been employed as a chef's assistant,
waitress and food preparer at Nuevo Azteca restaurant since
approximately March 15, 2021.
Nuevo Tulcingo Azteca Corp. is an owner and operator of the Nuevo
Azteca restaurant, located at 134 East 170th Street, Bronx, New
York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Samuel, Esq.
THE SAMUEL LAW FIRM
1441 Broadway, Suite 6085
New York, NY 10018
Telephone: (212) 563-9884
E-mail: michael@thesamuellawfirm.com
ONETOUCHPOINT INC: Fails to Protect Patients' Info, Nardi Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ARIA NARDI, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. ONETOUCHPOINT, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:22-cv-00998-WED (E.D. Wis., August 30, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, breach of third-party
beneficiary contract, breach of implied contract, breach of
fiduciary duty, and violations of Wisconsin's Notice of
Unauthorized Acquisition of Personal Information and Wisconsin's
Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to safeguard the
personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff and similarly
situated patients. On April 27, 2022, the Plaintiff's and Class
members' sensitive PII was stolen by cybercriminals in a
cyber-attack on the Defendant's systems which resulted in the
access and exfiltration of sensitive patient information. The
Defendant began notifying its business customers of the breach on
June 3, 2022, but it did not began notifying affected individuals
until at least July 27, 2022. As a result of the data breach and
the Defendant's failure to promptly notify the Plaintiff and Class
members of the data breach, the Plaintiff and Class members have
experienced and will experience various types of misuse of their
PII in the coming months and years, including but not limited to,
unauthorized credit card charges, unauthorized access to email
accounts, identity theft, and other fraudulent use of their private
information, says the suit.
OneTouchPoint, Inc. is a software and business services company,
with its principal place of business at 1225 Walnut Ridge Drive in
Hartland, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Larry A. Johnson, Esq.
HAWKS QUINDEL, S.C.
5150 N. Port Washington Rd., Ste. 243
Milwaukee, WI 53217
Telephone: (414) 271-8650
Facsimile: (414) 207-6079
E-mail: ljohnson@hq-law.com
- and –
Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
Jason Rathod, Esq.
Tyler Bean, Esq.
Kevin Leddy, Esq.
MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD, LLP
412 H. Street NE
Washington, DC 20002
Telephone: (202) 470-3520
E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
OS RESTAURANT: Faces Raffo FLSA Suit in M.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------
ROBERT RAFFO and DANIEL CURRAN, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. OS RESTAURANT SERVICES,
LLC and BLOOMIN' BRANDS, INC., together doing business as
CARRABBA'S ITALIAN GRILL, Defendants, Case No. 8:22-cv-01999 (M.D.
Fla., August 30, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants for
failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Mr. Raffo was employed by the Defendants as a kitchen manager at
their location in Chattanooga, Tennessee from approximately August
2019 until February 2022.
Mr. Curran was employed by the Defendants as a part-time hourly
employee but had worked as a full-time front of house manager at
their Bay Meadows, Florida restaurant until June 2022.
OS Restaurant Services, LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of
Bloomin' Brands, Inc., with its principal place of business in
Florida.
Bloomin' Brands, Inc. is an owner and operator of a restaurant
under the name Carrabba's Italian Grill in Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
Alan L. Quiles, Esq.
SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
951 Yamato Road, Suite 285
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Telephone: (561) 447-8888
Facsimile: (561) 447-8831
E-mail: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
aquiles@shavitzlaw.com
- and –
Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
Christopher M. Timmel, Esq.
KLAFTER LESSER LLP
Two International Drive, Suite 350
Rye Brook, NY 10573
Telephone: (914) 934-9200
E-mail: seth@klafterlesser.com
christopher.timmel@klafterlesser.com
PAPARAZZI LLC: Hollins Suit Transferred to D. Utah
--------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Tamie Hollins, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Paparazzi, LLC, Case No. 7:22-cv-04015
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for Southern District
of New York, to the U.S. District Court for District of Utah on
Aug. 31, 2022.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-00553-DAO to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Paparazzi -- https://paparazziaccessories.com/ -- is a fashion
accessory wholesaler.[BN]
PATTERN ENERGY: Allowed Leave to File Opposition Surreply
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as In re Pattern Energy Group
Inc. Securities Class Action, Case No. 1:20-cv-00275-MN-JLH (D.
Del.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer L. Hall entered an order granting
the Defendants' unopposed motion for leave to file a surreply in
further opposition to lead plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.
Pattern Energy is an American company that develops, owns and
operates utility scale wind and solar power facilities in the
United States, Canada, and Japan.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 25, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3q7y8ML at no extra charge.[CC]
PBM NUTRITIONAL: Agrees $2-M Settlement in Mislabeled Formula Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Claim Form Deadline: November 30, 2022
Estimated Payout: $10 (No Proof) - $30 (With Proof)
Proof required: No
Method of payment: Prepaid MasterCard / Venmo / Zelle / PayPal /
Direct Deposit
What's This Settlement About?
A $2,000,000 Million Class Action Settlement has been reached with
a baby formula manufacturer, PBM Nutritional, LLC. They make the
following brands: Well Beginnings, Meijer Baby, Little Journey,
Wesley Farms, Burt's Bees Baby, Berkley Jensen, Parent's Choice,
Earth's Best Organic, Comforts, Up & Up, Babies "R" Us, Member's
Mark, and Bobbie Baby brand Products. These products are sold and
marketed it popular big box stores like Walgreen's, Walmart, and
Target.
The class action lawsuit alleged that PBM Nutritional, LLC, the
baby formula maker, marketed their bottles of formula as containing
specific numbers of liquid ounces when following instructions to
prepare and use the baby formula. However, the class action lawsuit
claims that the baby formula did not produce anywhere near enough
powdered baby formula and infant formula to produce the marketed
and labeled amounts on the product's containers.
PBM Nutritionals denies the allegations in the class action suit,
and says that its labelling and marketing is truthful but has
settled this case to avoid further litigation and distraction of
resources from its core business. They have agreed to pay
$2,000,000 to settle the class action lawsuit out of court.
How Do I Qualify?
You qualify if you purchased certain baby formula products from
January 1, 2017 through July 21, 2022:
-- Well Beginnings
-- Meijer Baby
-- Little Journey
-- Wesley Farms
-- Burt's Bees Baby
-- Berkley Jensen
-- Parent's Choice
-- Earth's Best Organic
-- Comforts
-- Up & Up
-- Babies "R" Us
-- Member's Mark
-- Bobbie Baby
The full list of products that qualify for the time period
mentioned above is available on the class action administrator
website here.
https://staging.pbmlabelsettlement.com/home/1554/DocumentHandler?docPath=/Documents/Class_Products_List.pdf
What Can I Get?
If the PBM Nutritional Class Action Settlement will receive final
approval, the amount will vary based on whether you have proof or
not (if you have proof of purchase you will receive more than if
you did not have any receipts or statements to show proof).
-- Tier 1 - Claims without Proof of Purchase:
You can get up to $2.00 per Unit purchased for up to a maximum of
$10.00 per Household; or
-- Tier 2 - Claims with Proof of Purchase:
You can get up to $2.00 per Unit purchased for which a valid Proof
of Purchase has been provided, up to a maximum of $30.00 per
Household.
How Do I File a Claim?
You must submit a Claim Form, with or without Proof of Purchase, to
be eligible to receive any money from the Settlement. You may
complete the Claim Form online, or download a Claim Form. You may
also email or call the Settlement Administrator at
info@pbmlabelsettlement.com or 833-512-2316 from the class action
lawsuit administrators to request a Claim Form.
Your Claim Form must be postmarked or submitted online no later
than 11:59 p.m. Central Time on November 30, 2020:
White v. PBM Nutritionals, LLC
c/o Kroll Settlement Administration LLC
PO BOX 225391
New York, NY 10150-5391
You may be asked for a "Class Member ID" which you can register for
here on the PBM Nutritionals Baby Formula class action settlement
administrator's website. The deadline to make a valid claim is
11:59 p.m. Central Time on November 30, 2022.
Claim Form Website: PBMLabelSettlement.com [GN]
PLURALSIGHT INC: Tenth Cir. Reversed Dismissal of Securities Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shearman and Sterling reports that on August 23, 2022, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit unanimously reversed
the dismissal of a putative securities class action against an
online education company (the "Company"), alleging violations of
Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange
Act"), SEC Rule 10b-5, Section 20A of the Exchange Act, and
Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the
"Securities Act").
Plaintiffs alleged that the Company made false and misleading
statements about the size and productivity of the Company's sales
force. The district court dismissed the Exchange Act claims because
the plaintiffs failed to plead a strong inference of scienter and
dismissed both the Exchange Act and the Securities Act claims for
failure to plead a violation of Item 303 of SEC Regulation S-K. On
appeal, the Tenth Circuit reversed and remanded, holding that:
(i) the Exchange Act allegations "supported an inference of
scienter at least as compelling as any nonculpable inference"; and
(ii) the district court relied on "erroneous reasoning" to dismiss
the Exchange Act and Securities Act claims based on the alleged
violation of Item 303.
Plaintiffs alleged that the Company, which was not profitable,
touted its "billings" growth to attract investors. The Company
defined "billings" as "total revenue plus the change in deferred
revenue in the period." Plaintiffs alleged that the Company made
assurances about how closely it tracked billings, allegedly calling
this a "key business metric."
According to the plaintiffs, the Company informed investors and
analysts that its sales force -- "including both the number of its
sales representatives and their productivity" -- was the primary
driver of the Company's billings growth. Plaintiffs alleged that
the Company artificially inflated its stock price, including in
connection with a secondary public offering in March 2019, when it
made false and misleading statements about the size and
productivity of its sales force.
Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that, in January 2019, the
Company's CFO spoke at an annual conference and highlighted the
size and effectiveness of the Company's sales force. During a Q&A
session with analysts and investors, the CFO explained that the
Company's sales force had grown from 80 to about 250
"quota-bearing" sales representatives over the course of several
years, which allegedly was false because the Company only had
around 200.
Also, the plaintiffs challenged statements in the Company's
February 2019 Form 10-K in which the Company stated that it had "a
large direct sales force to focus on business sales" and had "been
able to drive substantial increases in the productivity and
effectiveness of [its] sales personnel." Plaintiffs also alleged
that the Company violated Item 303, which requires the disclosure
of "known trends" reasonably likely to have a material impact on
net sales, by failing to disclose that the Company "was months
behind its sales ramp capacity plan, which was likely to negatively
impact its billings."
In dismissing the Exchange Act claims, the district court held that
the CFO's statement that "today we have about 250" quota-bearing
sales representatives was false. This allegedly was false because
the Company purportedly only had around 200, but the district court
concluded that plaintiffs failed to plead a "strong, cogent
inference of scienter" as required by the Private Securities
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. In dismissing the Item 303 claims,
the district court held that the plaintiffs had not adequately
alleged that the Company was aware that the alleged capacity gap
would materially impact billings growth because the Company
experienced "strong billings growth in the first quarter of 2019
despite the alleged sales capacity gap."
The Tenth Circuit reversed the district court’s holding that the
complaint failed to raise a strong inference of scienter. With
respect to the statement by the Company’s former CFO that "today
we have about 250" quota-bearing sales representatives, the Court
noted that the plaintiffs' allegations -- including that the CFO
admitted he knew about a capacity gap in an earnings call, that the
CFO represented he closely monitored the Company's sales force
numbers, and that he emphasized that sales force capacity to
generate billings was at the core of the Company’s business model
-- "strongly supported the inference that the CFO knew his January
16, 2019 statement was false or misleading when he made it." The
Court thus concluded that the district court erred in finding there
was no strong inference of scienter with respect to this
statement.
The Tenth Circuit next held that, on remand, the district court
should revisit the plaintiffs' allegations that the Company
violated Item 303. The Court explained that, according to the
complaint, the Company "relied heavily on deals that took several
months to close, and thus quarterly billings primarily reflected
deals initiated in a previous quarter."
Accordingly, the Court noted that the plaintiffs "plausibly alleged
the Company knew first quarter billings growth did not mean the
sales capacity gap would not affect future billings." The Court
held that the district court's conclusion -- that the failure to
disclose the sales capacity gap was not misleading -- was
"unsupported by the allegations in the complaint, and could not
form the basis for dismissing the Item 303 violation."
On remand, the Court instructed the district court to "consider in
the first instance whether two months of being behind an internal
sales ramp capacity plan constitutes a 'trend' within the meaning
of Item 303." [GN]
PORK BARREL: Civil Case Management Plan, Scheduling Order Entered
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD MEJIA,
Individually, and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
PORK BARREL BBQ, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-05373-LGS (S.D.N.Y.), the
Hon. Judge Lorna G. Schofield entered a civil case management plan
and scheduling order as follows:
-- All fact discovery shall be December 22, 2022
completed no later than:
-- Responsive documents shall Sept. 28, 2022
be produced by:
-- Interrogatories pursuant to Fed. Sept. 14, 2022
R. Civ. P. 33 shall be served by:
-- Requests to admit pursuant to Sept. 14, 2022
Fed. R. Civ. P. 36 shall be
served by:
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 23, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3TCUHXj at no extra charge.[CC]
PORTLAND, OR: Violates ADA Over Inaccessible Sidewalks, Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Portland Mercury's News Editor Alex Zielinski reported that a group
of Portlanders with disabilities filed a lawsuit in federal court
on September 6, accusing the city of Portland of failing to comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) for allowing tents
and other structures to occupy city sidewalks.
"The City has failed and continues to fail to maintain its
sidewalks clear of debris and tent encampments, which is necessary
to make its sidewalks readily accessible to people with mobility
disabilities," reads the complaint, filed by Attorney John
DiLorenzo of the law firm David Wright Tremaine.
The lawsuit demands the city clear all city sidewalks of tents --
and their residents -- while the litigation carries out in court.
Portland is subject to a Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling that
prohibits cities from removing homeless people from public spaces
if they cannot offer alternative shelter spaces. To meet that legal
requirement, the lawsuit demands that the city construct shelter
space to accommodate every person swept.
Those represented in the lawsuit include Portlanders who use
mobility devices to run errands and get to work, along with
caregivers for people with disabilities. The plaintiffs live in
neighborhoods across the city. Several plaintiffs describe having
to operate wheelchairs and canes in the middle of the street to
avoid blocked sidewalks. Others cited feeling threatened by
unhoused people who reside in tents and other structures along city
sidewalks.
The lawsuit does not include nor mention any people with
disabilities who themselves live in tents or other outdoor
shelters. According to Multnomah County's 2019 point-in-time count,
which acts as a census for unsheltered homeless populations, 62
percent of people without shelter said they had a disability.
The lawsuit goes beyond detailing violations of the ADA to opine on
city management and politics. The filing accuses city officials of
inaction on homeless sweeps due to "political headwinds" which have
allowed the city to take "only limited action to maintain its
sidewalks clear from tent encampments and debris and, instead,
prioritizes other public projects." The complaint also accuses the
police of not addressing crimes that are called in by people with
disabilities.
DiLorenzo has made a name for himself in Oregon by taking the
government to court, often on behalf of property owners and monied
businesses. DiLorenzo successfully fought Portland for misspending
water and sewer funds in 2017 and, more recently, failed to
overturn the city's renter relocation ordinance on behalf of irate
landlords. DiLorenzo also led the lawsuit against the state for
failing to maximize timber harvests, winning the plaintiff counties
a $1 billion verdict. He was also the attorney behind the 2020
lawsuit which accused the state of limiting businesses' economic
revenue due to COVID-19 restrictions.
Outside of the courtroom, DiLorenzo has a personal stake in
sweeping homeless camps. DiLorenzo co-owns an apartment in downtown
Portland and, in 2021, took it upon himself to hire a private
security team to investigate criminal activity taking place at
homeless encampments near his property. He used the results of that
investigation to lobby City Hall to remove the camp—and within
weeks, it was swept.
This isn't the first-time ADA regulations have informed the city's
homeless restrictions. In 2010, then-Mayor Sam Adams proposed a
policy that would limit people from sitting or lying in an
eight-foot "pedestrian-use zone" on city sidewalks, to accommodate
people with disabilities. The policy passed. Adams and his
then-chief of staff, Tom Miller, now both work in Mayor Ted
Wheeler's office.
ADA regulations are a common tool used to police homeless
populations across the US (along with other marginalized
communities), both through city policy and lawsuits. In 2019,
several cities in southern California were sued for violating the
ADA by allowing tents along city sidewalks. That lawsuit ended in
several settlement agreements with the cities involved, which
pledged to create additional shelter space to relocate unsheltered
people living on sidewalks. In 2020, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott
suggested the city of Austin use ADA violations to remove homeless
people from sleeping on sidewalks.
Wheeler's office said the mayor will comment on the lawsuit
following a press conference held by DiLorenzo on the
complaint.[GN]
PRACTICE RESOURCES: Fails to Protect Patients' Info, Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Noah Schwartz reported on Beckershospitalreview.com that medical
billing company Practice Resources is being hit by a class action
lawsuit alleging the company failed to protect patient information
and took too long to notify patients following a data breach,
according to Sept. 6 reporting on syracuse.com.
Practice Resources provided notice of the data breach last month,
following the April cyberattack that may have compromised patient
names, addresses, dates of treatment, health plan numbers, and
medical record numbers.
Practice Resources mailed out 950,000 letters to patients. Law firm
Migliaccio & Rathod filed the suit against Practice Resources.
The suit still needs to be certified by a court to proceed. [GN]
PRIORITY-1 INC: Potter Files FLSA Suit in E.D. Arkansas
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Priority-1 Inc., et
al. The case is styled as Wendy Potter, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Priority-1 Inc., Case No.
4:22-cv-00787-BRW (E.D. Ark., Aug. 31, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act for Denial of Overtime Compensation.
Priority1 -- https://www.priority1.com/ -- was founded in 1995 and
has morphed into a technology-enabled third-party logistics company
deploying cutting edge automation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel D. Ford, Esq.
SANFORD LAW FIRM PLLC
One Financial Center-Suite 411
650 South Shackleford
Little Rock, AR 72211
Phone: (501) 221-0088
Email: daniel@sanfordlawfirm.com
- and -
Joshua Sanford, Esq.
SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
10800 Financial Centre Parkway
Little Rock, AR 72211
Phone: (501) 221-0088
Fax: (888) 787-2040
Email: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Kendall Suit Moved From C.D. Cal. to S.D. Ohio
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled DONNEL COREY KENDALL; MARALE KURKEYERIAN; A.F. and
N.F., minors through their guardian ad litem MARALE KURKEYERIAN;
JOSE FIGUEROA; HAIDEH DANESHNIA; ASSAL MIRZA MOHAMMADI; and NASRIN
KHODADADIAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. THE PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY, Case No. 2:22-cv-05160,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California to the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Ohio on August 26, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Ohio assigned Case
No. 2:22-cv-03263-MHW-CMV to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged strict products
liability, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty,
fraudulent concealment, negligent misrepresentation, unjust
enrichment, and violations of California's Unfair Competition Law
and California Consumer Legal Remedies Act by manufacturing,
distributing, and selling aerosol antiperspirant sprays and aerosol
dry shampoo sprays contaminated with benzene, a known human
carcinogen.
The Procter & Gamble Company is a manufacturer of personal care
products, headquartered in Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Azar Mouzari, Esq.
Nilofar Nouri, Esq.
BEVERLY HILLS TRIAL ATTORNEYS, P.C.
468 N. Camden Drive, Suite 238
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Telephone: (310) 858-5567
Facsimile: (424) 286-0963
E-mail: azar@bhtrialattorneys.com
nilofar@bhtrialattorneys.com
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Pijacki Sues Over Air Fresheners' Deceptive Ads
------------------------------------------------------------------
Rosalie Pijacki, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. The Procter & Gamble Company, Defendant,
Case No. 1:22-cv-00624 (W.D.N.Y., Aug. 19, 2022) arises from the
Defendant's alleged misrepresentations of its aerosol air
fresheners under the Febreze brand in violation of the New York
General Business Law, State Consumer Fraud Acts, and the Magnuson
Moss Warranty Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant manufactures, markets,
and sells aerosol air fresheners under the Febreze brand that
promise to "Eliminate[s] Odors." This representation is consistent
across advertisements on television and the Internet. However, the
product does not eliminate odors by either criteria, asserts the
Plaintiff. This is shown through analysis of the product's
components and Defendant's own studies. The product's main active
ingredient is hydroxypropyl beta-cyclodextrin. This cyclodextrin
does not destroy, convert, or transform odors, but merely envelops
and sequesters them, reducing their release into the air and thus
the perception of malodor, says the suit.
The Plaintiff paid more for the product than she otherwise would
have paid had she known the truth, or would not have bought the
product, the suit asserts.
The Procter & Gamble Company is an American multinational consumer
goods corporation headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 412
Great Neck, NY 11021
Telephone: (516) 268-7080
E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com
PROMISES KEPT: Flowers Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Wrongful Discharge
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MARTHA FLOWERS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PROMISES KEPT, INC. dba ATARAXIS HOMES;
PROMISES KEPT ENTERPRISES, INC.; JAMES BUCKMAN; LORI BUCKMAN; and
DOES 1-99, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 22STCV28466 (Cal.
Super., Los Angeles Cty., August 30, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of the California Labor Code,
the California Public Policy, the California's Unfair Competition
Law, and the Fair Employment and Housing Act including retaliation,
failure to provide a reasonable accommodation, failure to engage in
interactive process, disability associational discrimination,
failure to prevent discrimination or retaliation, wrongful
discharge, failure to provide meal and rest periods, failure to pay
all wages due, failure to provide accurate wage statements, waiting
time penalty, unfair competition, and failure to provide employment
records upon demand.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a caretaker and a
care manager from June 2017 until March 23, 2022.
Promises Kept, Inc., doing business as Ataraxis Homes, is a company
that provides housing and care services for seniors and people with
chronic illnesses in California.
Promises Kept Enterprises, Inc. is a company that provides housing
and care services for seniors and people with chronic illnesses in
California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alan Romero, Esq.
Robert S. Myong, Esq.
Jessica Flores, Esq.
ROMERO LAW, APC
251 S. Lake Avenue, Suite 930
Pasadena, CA 91101-4873
Telephone: (626) 396-9900
Facsimile: (626) 396-9990
E-mail: ajr@romerolaw.com
rsm@romerolaw.com
RESURGENT CAPITAL: Benjamin Files FDCPA Suit in M.D. Florida
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Resurgent Capital
Services L.P., et al. The case is styled as Gerard Benjamin,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Resurgent Capital Services L.P., LVNV Funding, LLC, Case No.
3:22-cv-00946-BJD-JBT (M.D. Fla., Aug. 31, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
Resurgent Capital Services, LP -- https://www.resurgent.com/ --
provides financial services. The Company manages debt portfolios
for credit grantors and debt buyers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Justin Zeig, Esq.
ZEIG LAW FIRM, LLC
3595 Sheridan Street, Suite 103
Hollywood, FL 33021
Phone: (754) 217-3084
Email: justin@zeiglawfirm.com
SALEM GROUP INC: Webster Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Drew Webster, individually and for others similarly situated v. THE
SALEM GROUP, INC., Case No. 1:22-cv-04388 (N.D. Ill., Aug. 18,
2022), is brought to recover unpaid overtime wages and other
damages from the Defendant under the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA), New York Labor Law (NYLL), and Illinois Minimum Wage Law
(IMWL).
The Plaintiff regularly worked more than 40 hours a week. But the
Plaintiff never received overtime compensation for hours worked in
excess of 40 hours in a single workweek. Instead of receiving
overtime compensation as required by the FLSA, NYLL, and the IMWL,
these workers received a flat amount for each day worked (a "day
rate") without overtime compensation, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant from 2012 until 2021.
Salem is an independent right of way and land management consulting
company that provides Right of Way project management, title,
permitting & acquisition, employee training, staffing, and
regulatory consultation regarding FERC.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas M. Werman, Esq.
Maureen A. Salas, Esq.
WERMAN SALAS P.C.
77 West Washington Street, Suite 1402
Chicago, IL 60602
Phone: (312) 419-1008
Fax: (312) 419-1025
Email: msalas@flsalaw.com
msalas@flsalaw.com
- and -
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
Taylor Montgomery, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Phone: 713-352-1100
Facsimile: 713-352-3300
Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
tmontgomery@mybackwages.com
- and –
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500
Houston, TX 77046
Phone: 713-877-8788
Facsimile: 713-877-8065
Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com
SAUCE PIZZERIA: Faces Moreno Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
-----------------------------------------------------------
LEONORIO FACUNDO MORENO SALAZAR, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SAUCE PIZZERIA LLC (D/B/A
SAUCE PIZZERIA-12th Street), SAUCE MANAGEMENT LLC (D/B/A SAUCE),
LES PIZZA LLC (D/B/A SAUCE PIZZERIALES), ADAM ELZER, HRVOJE
BRKLJACIC, EARL PETERKIN, and MATHEW SILVA, Defendants, Case No.
1:22-cv-07320 (S.D.N.Y., August 26, 2022) is a class action against
the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the New York Labor Law including failure to pay overtime wages,
failure to pay minimum wages, failure to comply with notice and
recordkeeping requirements, failure to provide accurate wage
statements, and failure to reimburse business expenses.
Mr. Moreno was employed by the Defendants at a pizza shop and
restaurant from approximately August 2018, until February 8, 2022.
Sauce Pizzeria LLC is an owner and operator of a pizza shop and
restaurant under the name Sauce Pizzeria - 12th Street, located at
345 E. 12th Street, New York, New York.
Sauce Management LLC is an owner and operator of a pizza shop and
restaurant under the name Sauce, located at 78 Rivington St., New
York, New York.
Les Pizza LLC is an owner and operator of a pizza shop and
restaurant under the name Sauce Pizzeria - LES, located at 84
Rivington St., New York, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Catalina Sojo, Esq.
CSM LEGAL, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 317-1200
Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
E-mail: catalina@csm-legal.com
SELECT EMPLOYMENT: Villanueva Seeks to Redefine Proposed Classes
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Villanueva v. Select
Employment Services, Inc. et al., Case No. (), the Parties agree to
avoid overlap with the Keich certified classes, and Plaintiff seeks
to amend and redefine the proposed "On Premises Rest Break Class"
and "Third Rest Break Class" as follows:
-- On Premises Rest Break Class
"All current and former hourly non-exempt employees
employed by the Defendant in California between April 2,
2019, and November 19, 2019, and worked over 3.5 hours in a
workday;" and
-- Third Rest Break Class
"All current and former hourly non-exempt employees
employed by Defendant in California between April 2, 2019,
through the date the court certifies the class that worked
at least one shift in excess of 10 hours in a workday."
On April 30, 2021, the court in Keich certified a rest period class
defined as:
-- Rest Period Class
"All current and former non-exempt employees of U.S.
Healthworks, Inc. and/or Concentra Health Services, Inc. in
California who worked at least one shift in excess of 3.5
hours at any point from April 27, 2013 until April 1,
2019."
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Aug. 26, 2022 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3QeRH0f at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Lavi, Esq.
Jordan D. Bello, Esq.
Vincent C. Granberry, Esq.
Pooja V. Patel, Esq.
LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
The Defendant is represented by:
Alexander M. Chemers, Esq.
Jared L. Palmer, Esq.
Charles L. THompson, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEAWART, P.C.
SHUTTERFLY LLC: Adams FTSA Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
-------------------------------------------------------
The case styled COURTNEY ADAMS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. SHUTTERFLY, LLC, Case No.
2022-CA-001691, was removed from the Circuit Court of the Ninth
Judicial Circuit in and for Osceola County, Florida, to the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Florida on August 29,
2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Middle District of Florida assigned Case
No. 6:22-cv-01547 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Florida Telephone Solicitation Act by sending telephonic sales
calls without consent.
Shutterfly, LLC is an American photography, photography products,
and image sharing company, headquartered in Redwood City,
California. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Brandon T. White, Esq.
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3300
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 374-8500
Facsimile: (305) 789-7799
E-mail: brandon.white@hklaw.com
SISKIYOU COUNTY, CA: Asian Americans File Discrimination Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Rafu Shimpo reports that for years, Siskiyou County officials
and the Siskiyou Sheriff's Department have threatened, targeted,
and intimidated Hmong American and other Asian American community
members in an effort to isolate them and drive them out of the
region, according to a new class-action lawsuit led by four Asian
American community members.
Filed on Aug. 3, the lawsuit claims that county officials have
waged a systematic campaign of racist hostility and persecution,
including restricting Asian Americans' right to water and executing
unlawful traffic stops, search and seizure practices, and property
liens that are blatantly aimed at Asian Americans. Last summer, a
Hmong American man was shot and killed in the area by officers at a
wildfire evacuation checkpoint.
The county has denied the allegations of racial bias.
Siskiyou County is in the northernmost part of California. Its
county seat is Yreka and its highest point is Mount Shasta.
According to the complaint, Siskiyou County officials and Sheriff
Jeremiah LaRue have made their intentions explicit in public
meetings and documents, characterizing Asian Americans as people
"who thumb their nose at our society, at our way of life" and
singling out "the Hmong residents" at a Board of Supervisors
meeting before asking for a vote of "those county residents
present."
Community advocates say that the Sheriff's Department targets Asian
American drivers at a rate 12 times greater than the Asian American
driving-age population. At the same time, as the region faces
hotter temperatures and more extreme wildfires, Siskiyou County
officials have allegedly created a humanitarian crisis that
disproportionately deprives Asian American residents of water
needed for health and hygiene and to protect themselves and their
homes from wildfires.
"Like many of our neighbors, my husband, my son, and I love the
beauty of Siskiyou County and want to enjoy a safe, healthy life
with our friends and family," said Mai Nou Vang, one of the Hmong
American plaintiffs in the case who owns property in the area.
"Last year, my family and I were driving outside of Shasta Vista
and were stopped by two sheriff's deputies. For a half hour, we
were questioned about what we were doing and where we had come
from. They searched our car without a warrant, and then finally let
us go with a ticket to fix a light cover.
"My story isn't unique. So many of my Asian neighbors have been
stopped like this by the police while we try to go about our days,
run errands, and visit loved ones."
Siskiyou County is home to fewer than 45,000 people, of whom 85
percent are white and 1.6 percent are Asian American, according to
the latest U.S. Census. Many Asian American residents in Siskiyou
County are Hmong and came to the U.S. as refugees after fighting
alongside the U.S. government in the Vietnam War.
The lawsuit filed with the Eastern District Court of California
details the findings of a year-long investigation into the county's
treatment of Asian American residents, including interviews with
community members, public records requests, and review of thousands
of Board of Supervisors and Sheriff Department documents. Some of
the findings listed in the lawsuit:
-- Over 28 percent of traffic stops conducted by the Sheriff's
Department in 2021 were of Asian American drivers. The department
stops drivers of Asian descent at a rate nearly 12 times greater
than their proportion of the driving-age population.
-- An Asian American in Siskiyou County is about 17 times more
likely to be pulled over by the Sheriff's Department than a white
individual, and the median stop length for Asian American drivers
was 56 percent longer than for other drivers.
-- The Sheriff's Department stops Asian Americans during the day,
when a driver's race is more readily visible, at a nearly 60
percent higher rate than at night.
-- Several water ordinances have created a humanitarian crisis that
severely impacts Asian American residents, particularly in Shasta
Vista, Dorris, and Macdoel. While a judge recently issued a
preliminary injunction against two of the ordinances, the county's
measures have collectively degraded community members' health,
resulted in the loss of livestock and gardens, left people unable
to fend off wildfires, and forced many to leave their homes in the
past year.
-- Over 80 percent of property liens issued by the county have been
issued against Asian American residents, many of which are more
than double the assessed property value.
"Since more Hmong residents began moving to Siskiyou County in
2015, county officials and Sheriff LaRue have orchestrated a
sweeping campaign to push out the Asian American community," said
Emi Young, staff attorney at the ACLU Foundation of Northern
California. "The actions by Siskiyou County officials and the
Sheriff's Department follow a long history of law enforcement in
the region criminalizing and targeting communities of color,
including when white residents in the county convened to address
the so-called ‘Chinese evil' a century and a half ago.
"In 2022, as more and more people are reckoning with systemic
racism in our country, Siskiyou County officials are choosing to
create a humanitarian crisis, persecute Hmong Americans and Asian
Americans, and create divisions among neighbors."
Earlier this year, a federal judge in Sacramento affirmed that the
preliminary injunction for two of the discriminatory water
ordinances must stay in place after the county attempted to end the
injunction. In her ruling, the judge wrote that "the passage of
time has erased neither the concerning language county officials
used to describe their purposes nor the racial animosity Hmong
people in Shasta Vista have faced."
"We are a group of people who came to the United States in the late
'70s as refugees because of our involvement in helping the U.S.
during the Vietnam War. Many of us have since moved to Siskiyou
County because we love the landscape and rural nature of the
region," said Peter Thao, Hmong community member in Siskiyou
County. "We want to build a good rapport with the community here
and the local government.
"Hmong people are very family-oriented. We are not here to cause
hardship or burden to this community. I would like to see our
communities understand each other better. If the local government
would give us a seat at the table, we could work together to build
a better relationship between our communities."
The complaint seeks to hold Siskiyou officials accountable for
systematic racial targeting and for the violation of Asian
Americans' U.S. and California constitutional rights, including an
order prohibiting Siskiyou County and LaRue from engaging in race,
color, and ethnicity-based discrimination with safeguards to ensure
that such discrimination does not continue in the future.
In a statement to The Sacramento Bee last year, LaRue said
marijuana growers were "hostile" to first responders during fire
evacuations, and "the firefighters didn't feel very safe due to
some of the comments that were made."
"Like some of their most vocal constituents, they view Asian
Americans as a monolithic group of which every single person is
part of a violent drug cartel and blame the county's widespread
cannabis cultivation on Asian Americans in explicitly racialized
terms," the complaint reads.
The plaintiffs are represented by the ACLU Foundation of Northern
California, Asian Americans Advancing Justice-Asian Law Caucus, and
Covington & Burling LLP. [GN]
STITCH FIX: Faces Store Unions Suit Over 6% Drop of Stock Price
---------------------------------------------------------------
RETAIL WHOLESALE DEPARTMENT STORE UNION LOCAL 338 RETIREMENT FUND,
RETAIL WHOLESALE DEPARTMENT STORE UNION LOCAL 338 HEALTH & WELFARE
FUND, RETAIL WHOLESALE DEPARTMENT STORE UNION LOCAL 338 GENERAL
FUND, and RETAIL WHOLESALE DEPARTMENT STORE UNION LOCAL 338
BENEFITS TRUST FUND, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. STITCH FIX, INC., KATRINA LAKE,
ELIZABETH SPAULDING, STEVEN ANDERSON II, BASELINE VENTURES LLC,
BASELINE VENTURES 2009 LLC, BASELINE INCREASED EXPOSURE FUND, LLC,
BASELINE CABLE CAR, LLC, and BASELINE ENCORE, L.P., Defendants,
Case No. 3:22-cv-04893 (N.D. Cal., August 26, 2022) is a class
action against the Defendants for violations of Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder.
According to the complaint, the Defendants filed materially false
and misleading registration statements with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding Stitch Fix's Freestyle programs
in order to trade Stitch Fix Class A common stock at artificially
inflated prices between December 8, 2020, and March 8, 2022.
Throughout the Class Period, Stitch Fix touted that the programs
were synergistic, and repeatedly denied claims that the Freestyle
program could cannibalize its legacy Fix business, says the suit.
When the truth emerged, the price of Stitch Fix stock declined by
$0.67 per share, or 6 percent, from $11.01 per share to $10.34 per
share, the suit alleges.
Retail Wholesale Department Store Union Local 338 Retirement Fund
is a multi-employer pension and benefits fund.
Retail Wholesale Department Store Union Local 338 Health & Welfare
Fund is a multi-employer pension and benefits fund.
Retail Wholesale Department Store Union Local 338 General Fund is a
multi-employer pension and benefits fund.
Retail Wholesale Department Store Union Local 338 Benefits Trust
Fund is a multi-employer pension and benefits fund.
Stitch Fix, Inc. is a seller of a range of apparel, shoes, and
accessories, headquartered in San Francisco, California.
Baseline Ventures LLC is a venture capital investment firm in
California.
Baseline Ventures 2009 LLC is a venture capital investment firm in
California.
Baseline Increased Exposure Fund, LLC is a venture capital
investment firm in California.
Baseline Cable Car, LLC is a venture capital investment firm in
California.
Baseline Encore, L.P. is a venture capital investment firm in
California. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jonathan D. Uslaner, Esq.
BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2575
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 819-3470
E-mail: jonathanu@blbglaw.com
- and –
Avi Josefson, Esq.
Scott R. Foglietta, Esq.
BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
1251 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10020
Telephone: (212) 554-1400
Facsimile: (212) 554-1444
E-mail: avi@blbglaw.com
scott.foglietta@blbglaw.com
STUYVESANT GOURMET: Underpays Deli Workers, Linares Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
EVELIO LINARES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. STUYVESANT GOURMET DELI & GROCERY CORP
(D/B/A STUYVESANT GOURMET DELI), STUYVESANT GOURMET DELI & GROCERY
INC. I (D/B/A STUYVESANT GOURMET DELI), and NUMAN HAUTER,
Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-07316 (S.D.N.Y., August 26, 2022) is a
class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law including
failure to pay overtime wages, failure to pay spread-of-hours
wages, failure to comply with notice and recordkeeping
requirements, and failure to provide accurate wage statements.
Mr. Linares was employed by the Defendants as a deli worker at
Stuyvesant Gourmet Deli from approximately August 20, 2021, until
August 10, 2022.
Stuyvesant Gourmet Deli & Grocery Corp. is an owner and operator of
a deli under the name Stuyvesant Gourmet Deli, located at 444 E.
14th St., New York, New York.
Stuyvesant Gourmet Deli & Grocery Inc. I is an owner and operator
of a deli under the name Stuyvesant Gourmet Deli, located at 444 E.
14th St., New York, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Catalina Sojo, Esq.
CSM LEGAL, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 317-1200
Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
E-mail: catalina@csm-legal.com
SURGE PRIVATE: Fails to Properly Pay Cleaners, Zhao Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
MARIANNA ZHAO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SURGE PRIVATE EQUITY LLC, d/b/a SURGE
PRIVATE EQUITY; HIPPODROME SERVICES CORP. d/b/a HIPPODROME
SERVICES; and HIPPODROME LLC, d/b/a HIPPODROME SERVICES LLC; and
DOUGLAS KOPELMAN, Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-07314 (S.D.N.Y.,
August 26, 2022) is a class action against the Defendants for
unpaid wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the
New York State Labor Law.
The Plaintiff was hired by the Defendants as a cleaner for the
Defendants' Commercial Laundry business Hippodrome, located at 780
East 134th Street, Bronx, New York from June 2012 until December 1,
2019.
Surge Private Equity LLC is a private equity company, with a
principal place of business at 2101 Cedar Springs Road, Suite 1220,
Dallas, Texas.
Hippodrome LLC, doing business as Hippodrome Services LLC is a
cleaning services company, with a principal place of business at
780 East 134th Street, Bronx, New York.
Hippodrome Services Corp., doing business as Hippodrome Services,
is a cleaning services company, with a principal place of business
at 780 East 134th Street, Bronx, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
Anne Seelig, Esq.
LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
148 West 24th Street, Eighth Floor
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 465-1180
Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
SWD INC: Romero Files Suit Over Unlawful Biometric Data Collection
------------------------------------------------------------------
JESUS ROMERO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SWD, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2022LA000751
(Ill. Cir., 18th Judicial, Dupage Cty., Aug. 19, 2022) seeks to
stop Defendant's unlawful collection, use, storage, and disclosure
of Plaintiff's and the proposed Class' sensitive, private, and
personal biometric data pursuant to the Biometric Information
Privacy Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant never informed Plaintiff
and the Class that their biometric identifiers and/or biometric
information were being collected, stored, used and disseminated,
nor did Defendant inform Plaintiff and the Class of the specific
purpose(s) and length of term for which their biometric identifiers
and/or biometric information were being collected, stored, used and
disseminated.
By collecting, storing, using and disseminating Plaintiff's and the
Class' biometric identifiers and biometric information as described
herein, the Defendant violated Plaintiff's and the Class' rights to
privacy in their biometric identifiers and/or biometric information
as set forth in BIPA, says the suit.
The Plaintiff worked for Defendant at its location in Illinois.
SWD, Inc. is an automotive company providing metal finishing, black
oxide, and sorting solutions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brandon M. Wise, Esq.
Paul A. Lesko, Esq.
Adam Florek, Esq.
PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE CONWAY & WISE, LLP
818 Lafayette Ave., Floor 2
St. Louis, MO 63104
Telephone: (314) 833-4825
E-mail: bwise@peifferwolf.com
plesko@peifferwolf.com
aflorek@peifferwolf.com
SWIFT BEEF COMPANY: Garza Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Juan Garza, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Swift Beef Company, JBS USA Food Company
Holdings, DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. 22STCV24520 was removed
from the Los Angeles County Superior Court, to the U.S. District
Court for Central District of California on August 31, 2022.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-06223 to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Jobs Civil Rights for Other
Contract.
Swift Beef Company -- https://swiftblackangus.com/ -- is committed
to providing quality beef products for retail and foodservice.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
SWIFT BEEF: Garza Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JUAN GARZA, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. SWIFT BEEF COMPANY, JBS USA FOOD
COMPANY HOLDINGS, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
22STCV24520, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California, County of Los Angeles, to the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California on August 31, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 5:22-cv-01545-SSS-SP to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California's Business and Professions
Code including failure to provide meal periods, failure to provide
rest periods, failure to pay hourly wages, failure to indemnify
business expenses, failure to provide accurate written wage
statements, failure to timely pay all final wages, and unfair
competition.
Swift Beef Company is an American food processing company, with its
principal place of business in Greeley, Colorado.
JBS USA Food Company Holdings is an American food processing
company, with its principal place of business in Greeley, Colorado.
[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Tritia M. Murata, Esq.
Lauren R. Leibovitch, Esq.
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
707 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 6000
Los Angeles, CA 90017-3543
Telephone: (213) 892-5200
Facsimile: (213) 892-5454
E-mail: TMurata@mofo.com
LLeibovitch@mofo.com
SWISS RE: Harris Sues for Breach of Fiduciary Duties Under ERISA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shawyne Harris, Robert Taylor, and Sidney Dasent, individually and
as representatives of a class similarly situated persons, on behalf
of the Swiss Re Group U.S. Employee's Savings Investment Plan,
Plaintiffs v. Swiss Re American Holding Corporation, the Board of
Directors of the Swiss Re American Holding Corporation, the Swiss
Re American Holding Corporation Governance & Nomination Committee,
the Swiss Re American Holding Corporation Audit Committee, the
Swiss Re American Holding Corporation Compensation Committee, the
Swiss Re American Holding Corporation Finance & Risk Committee, the
Swiss Re American Holding Corporation Investment Committee, and
Does No. 1-30, whose names are currently unknown, Defendants, Case
No. 1:22-cv-07059 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 18, 2022) is a class action
brought by the Plaintiff, on behalf of the Swiss Re Group US
Employees' Savings Plan and a class of similarly-situated
participants, against Defendants for breach of their fiduciary
duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and
related breaches of applicable law.
According to the complaint, the Defendants maintain the Plan, and
are responsible for selecting, monitoring, and retaining the
service provider(s) that provide investment, recordkeeping, and
other administrative services. The Defendants are fiduciaries under
ERISA, and, as such, owe a series of duties to the Plan and its
participants and beneficiaries, including obligations to act for
the exclusive benefit of participants, ensure that the investment
options offered through the Plan are prudent and diverse, and
ensure that Plan expenses are fair and reasonable.
The complaint asserts that the Defendants have breached their
fiduciary duties to the Plan. Specifically, the Defendants: (1)
failed to fully disclose the expenses and risk of the Plan's
investment options to participants and beneficiaries; (2) allowed
unreasonable expenses to be charged to participants; and (3)
selected, retained, and/or otherwise ratified high-cost and
poorly-performing investments, instead of offering more prudent
alternative investments when such prudent investments were readily
available at the time Defendants selected and retained the funds at
issue and throughout the Class Period, says the suit.
Swiss Re is a reinsurance company based in Zurich,
Switzerland.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Rania V. Sedhom, Esq.
Matthew J. Scott, Esq.
SEDHOM LAW GROUP, PLLC
630 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2508
New York, NY 10111
Telephone: (212) 664-1600
Facsimile: (212) 563-9280
E-mail: rsedhom@bespokelawfirm.com
mscott@bespokelawfirm.com
SYMETRA ASSIGNED: Appeals Class Cert. Ruling in White Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
SYMETRA ASSIGNED BENEFITS SERVICE COMPANY, et al., are seeking an
appeal from a class certification ruling in the lawsuit entitled
RENALDO WHITE and RANDOLPH NADEAU, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, v. SYMETRA ASSIGNED BENEFITS SERVICE
COMPANY; SYMETRA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
2:20-cv-01866-MJP, in the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Washington, Seattle.
This case involves Defendant Symetra Assigned Benefits Service
Company's and Defendant Symetra Life Insurance Company's purchase
of future payments under structured settlement annuities they
administered. The Plaintiffs are two individuals who settled
personal-injury lawsuits for lump sum and periodic payments. The
tortfeasors in those settlements assigned their obligations to make
periodic payments to SABSCO. SABSCO then purchased an SSA from its
affiliate Symetra to fund and administer the future payments. The
Plaintiffs later sold their rights to future payments to SABSCO in
exchange for 9 immediate lump sum payments at a significant
discount.
The Plaintiffs allege that Defendants' solicitation of their rights
to the future payments under the SSAs was predatory and the result
of an illegal business scheme designed to induce annuitants into
selling their future payments at a steep discount.
As reported in the Class Action Reporter on Aug. 29, 2022, the Hon.
Judge Marsha J. Pechman entered an order:
1. denying the Defendants' request to strike; and
2. denying the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class as to
their breach of fiduciary duty claims.
The Court certified the following classes:
-- Nationwide Class
"All persons who are or were, at any time, annuitants of
an SSA that contemplated life contingent payments issued
by Symetra and who subsequently sold to a Symetra
affiliate the right to receive payments from that SSA in a
factoring transaction;" and
-- Void Ab Initio Subclass
"All members of the Class whose contract defining the
annuity at issue included language explicitly stating that
the annuitants lack the power to transfer their future SSA
payments."
The Court also appointed Alison Chase, Gretchen Freeman Cappio,
Lynn Lincoln Sarko, 16 Adele Daniel, and Sydney Read of Keller
Rohrback LLP, and Daniel Simons of Marcus & Marcus PC, Edward Stone
of Edward Stone Law PC, and Jerome Marcus and Jonathon Auerbach of
Marcus & Auerbach LLC as class counsel.
The Court said, "The Plaintiffs have provided sufficient evidence
to establish by a preponderance the class certification is
appropriate and proper for their claims under RICO, Washington CPA,
civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment and contract claims under Rule
23(a) and 23(b)(3)."
The appellate case is captioned as RENALDO WHITE and RANDOLPH
NADEAU, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs-Respondents v. SYMETRA ASSIGNED BENEFITS
SERVICE COMPANY and SYMETRA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendants-Petitioners, Case No. 22-80084, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on Aug. 18,
2022.[BN]
Defendants-Petitioners SYMETRA ASSIGNED BENEFITS SERVICE COMPANY
and SYMETRA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY are represented by:
Medora A. Marisseau, Esq.
KARR TUTTLE CAMPBELL
701 5th Avenue Suite 3300
Seattle, WA 98104
- and -
Maeve Louise O'Connor, Esq.
DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON, LLP
919 3rd Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 909-6000
Plaintiffs-Respondents RENALDO WHITE and RANDOLPH NADEAU,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are
represented by:
Gretchen Freeman Cappio, Esq.
Adele Daniel, Esq.
Lynn Lincoln Sarko, Esq.
KELLER ROHRBACK, LLP
1201 3rd Avenue Suite 3200
Seattle, WA 98101
- and -
Alison Elizabeth Chase, Esq.
KELLER ROHRBACK LLP
1129 State Street Suite 8
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Telephone: (805) 456-1496
TABC INC: Faces Class Action Over Failure to Pay Proper Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
prweb.com reports that the Los Angeles employment law attorneys, at
Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP, filed a class action
lawsuit against TABC, Inc. alleging the company violated the
California Labor Code. The lawsuit against TABC, Inc. is currently
pending in the Los Angeles County Superior Court, Case No.
22STCV25696.
According to the lawsuit filed, TABC, Inc. allegedly (a) failed to
pay minimum wages, (b) failed to pay overtime wages, (c) failed to
provide legally required meal and rest periods, (d) failed to
provide accurate itemized wage statements, (e) failed to reimburse
employees for required expenses, (f) failed to provide wages when
due, and (g) failed to pay sick pay wages, all in violation of the
applicable Labor Code sections listed in California Labor Code
Sections 201-204, 226, 226.7, 233, 246, 510, 512, 1194, 1197,
1197.1, 2802, and the applicable Wage Order(s), and thereby gives
rise to civil penalties as a result of such alleged conduct.
The Complaint alleges Defendant failed to fully relieve Plaintiff
for her legally required thirty (30) minute meals breaks. Employees
were also allegedly required, from time to time, to work in excess
of four (4) hours without being provided the legally required ten
(10) minute rest periods. The California Supreme Court defines
off-duty rest periods as the time during which an employee is
relieved from all work-related duties and free from employer
control.
For more information about the class action lawsuit against TABC,
Inc., call (800) 568-8020 to speak to an experienced California
employment attorney today.
Blumenthal Nordrehaug Bhowmik De Blouw LLP is a labor law firm with
law offices located in San Diego County, Riverside County, Los
Angeles County, Sacramento County, Santa Clara County, Orange
County and San Francisco County. The firm has a statewide practice
of representing employees on a contingency basis for violations
involving unpaid wages, overtime pay, discrimination, harassment,
wrongful termination and other types of illegal workplace conduct.
[GN]
TALON WINERY: Loadholt Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Talon Winery, LLC.
The case is styled as Christopher Loadholt, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated v. Talon Winery, LLC, Case No.
1:22-cv-07458 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 31, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Talon Winery -- https://www.talonwine.com/ -- is known for classic
style, fruit-forward wines made from the finest grapes
available.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
MARCUS & ZELMAN LLC
701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
Asbury Park, NJ 07712
Phone: (845) 367-7146
Fax: (732) 298-6256
Email: yzelman@marcuszelman.com
TELADOC HEALTH: Schutter Suit Moved From E.D.N.Y. to S.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled WALTER DE SCHUTTER, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. TELADOC HEALTH, INC., JASON
GOREVIC, and MALA MURTHY, Case No. 1:22-cv-04525, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York
to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on
August 29, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of New York assigned
Case No. 1:22-cv-07343-UA to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by filing materially false and misleading statements
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission pertaining to
Teladoc Health's business in order to trade Teladoc securities at
artificially inflated prices between October 28, 2021 and April 27,
2022.
Teladoc Health, Inc. is a healthcare services provider, with
principal executive offices located at 2 Manhattanville Road, Suite
203, Purchase, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Phillip Kim, Esq.
Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
275 Madison Ave., 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 686-1060
Facsimile: (212) 202-3827
E-mail: pkim@rosenlegal.com
lrosen@rosenlegal.com
THEDACARE INC: Winters Sues Over Unpaid Overtime for CSR Employees
------------------------------------------------------------------
HEATHER WINTERS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THEDACARE, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:22-cv-00978 (E.D. Wis., August 26, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendant for its failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Wisconsin's Wage
Payment and Collection Laws.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as an hourly-paid,
non-exempt Customer Service Representative employee from September
2019 until May 2022.
ThedaCare, Inc. is a healthcare provider doing business in
Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Walcheske, Esq.
Scott S. Luzi, Esq.
David M. Potteiger, Esq.
WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC
235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240
Brookfield, WI 53005
Telephone: (262) 780-1953
Facsimile: (262) 565-6469
E-mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com
sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com
dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com
THIS IS L. INC: Paulson Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against This is L. Inc. The
case is styled as Danielle Paulson, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. This is L. Inc., Case No.
1:22-cv-04665 (N.D. Ill., Aug. 31, 2022).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
This is L. Inc. -- https://www.thisisl.com/ -- is a privately held,
California based social enterprise and public-benefit corporation
that makes organic personal care products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
60 Cuttermill Road, Ste. 412
Great Neck, NY 11021
Phone: (516) 268-7080
Fax: (516) 234-7800
Email: spencer@spencersheehan.com
TOYOTA MOTOR: Proposes $150M Settlement in Fuel Pumps Recall Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jacob Oliva at motor1.com reports that Toyota Motor Corporation is
a step forward toward settling the US class-action litigation tied
to fuel pump recalls. According to a report by Reuters, a
preliminary settlement was filed in federal court in Brooklyn,
reaching up to $150 million. It now awaits a judge's approval.
Under the settlement, Toyota is said to extend the fuel pumps'
warranties to 15 years or 150,000 miles, whichever comes first. The
company will also provide customers with complimentary loaner
vehicles and towing options for repairs. Moreover, previous
repairs, including loaners and towing, are also to be reimbursed.
According to Reuters' report, Toyota and Denso International
America Inc. agreed to settle but did not admit wrongdoing.
"We are pleased to have resolved this litigation in a way that
demonstrates our commitment to providing customers with a great
ownership experience," Toyota said in a statement.
The proposed settlement covers owners and lessees of select Toyota
and Lexus with model years 2013 through 2020, affected by defective
Denso fuel pumps. The list has grown to around 5.8 million vehicles
worldwide - 3.36 million of which are in the US. The largest
addition to the long list of affected vehicles was in October 2020
with 1.5 million Toyota and Lexus units.
The list covers vehicles as old as the 2013 Lexus LS 460 up to the
2020 Toyota RAV4. The RAV4 has been Toyota's best-seller in the US
for several years, placing fourth in the rankings in 2021 just
behind the full-size American trucks.
The recall indicated that the fuel pump on the affected vehicles
could suddenly fail. Apart from dashboard warning lights, the
engine could stall as a result. The stalled engine could lead to
loss of power assist in steering and braking, which could be
potentially dangerous at high speeds. The fix, of course, is fuel
pump replacement, which Toyota will provide free of charge. [GN]
TRANSCANADA USA: Misclassifies Inspectors, Sain Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------
TODD SAIN, individually and for others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. TRANSCANADA USA SERVICES INC., and ONSHORE QUALITY
CONTROL SPECIALISTS, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 4:22-cv-02921 (S.D.
Tex., August 26, 2022) is a collective action complaint brought
against the Defendants for their alleged unlawful compensation
scheme that violated the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as an inspector from
July 2019 until November 2020.
According to the complaint, the Defendants improperly classified
the Plaintiff and other similarly situated Inspectors as
independent contractors. Although they often worked more than 40
hours in a week, the Defendant improperly denied them overtime
compensation at the rate of one and one-half times their regular
rates of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek.
Instead, they were paid a flat day rate regardless of the number of
hours they worked, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation for
himself and all other similarly situated Inspectors, as well as
liquidated damages, litigation costs, reasonable attorneys' fees
and expenses, pre- and post-judgment interest, and other relief as
may be necessary and appropriate.
TransCanada USA Services Inc. provides energy infrastructure.
Onshore Quality Control Specialists, LLC
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Tel: (713) 352-1100
Fax: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and –
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Tel: (713) 877-8788
Fax: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
TRUEACCORD CORP: Jones Files FDCPA Suit in W.D. Kentucky
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against TrueAccord Corp. The
case is styled as Sarah R. Jones, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. TrueAccord Corp., Case No.
4:22-cv-00122-JHM-HBB (W.D. Ky., Aug. 31, 2022).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.
TrueAccord -- https://www.trueaccord.com/ -- is the industry
leading recovery and collections platform powered by machine
learning and a consumer friendly digital experience.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Chad William Eisenback, Esq.
SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, LTD.
2500 South Highland Avenue, Suite 200
Lombard, IL 60148
Fax: (312) 313-1613
Email: ceisenback@fringebenefitlaw.com
TUSIMPLE HOLDINGS: Faces Class Suit Over Misleading SEC Statements
------------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP's announcement that the TuSimple
class action lawsuit seeks to represent purchasers or acquirers of
TuSimple Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: TSP): (a) common stock pursuant
and/or traceable to the Registration Statement and Prospectus
(collectively, the "Registration Statement") issued in connection
with TuSimple's April 15, 2021 initial public offering ("IPO");
and/or (b) securities between April 15, 2021 and August 1, 2022,
both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"). Captioned Dicker v.
TuSimple Holdings, Inc., No. 22-cv-01300 (S.D. Cal.), the TuSimple
class action lawsuit charges TuSimple, certain of its top executive
officers and directors, as well as the IPO's underwriters with
violations of the Securities Act of 1933 and/or Securities Exchange
Act of 1934.
If any investor/s suffered substantial losses and wish to serve as
the lead plaintiff of the TuSimple class action lawsuit, they can
provide their information on:
https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-tusimple-holdings-inc-class-action-lawsuit-tsp.html.
They can also contact attorney J.C. Sanchez of Robbins Geller by
calling 800/449-4900 or via e-mail at jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com. Lead
plaintiff motions for the TuSimple class action lawsuit must be
filed with the court no later than October 31, 2022.
CASE ALLEGATIONS: Headquartered in San Diego, TuSimple develops
autonomous technology specifically designed for semi-trucks.
TuSimple is developing a line of purpose-built Level 4 ("L4")
autonomous semi-trucks for the North American market. On April 15,
2021, TuSimple effected its IPO, selling 33.8 million Class A
common shares at $40.00 per share, generating $1.031 billion in
gross proceeds.
The TuSimple class action lawsuit alleges the defendants made
materially false or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose, among other things, that:
(i) TuSimple's commitment to safety was significantly overstated
and defendants concealed fundamental problems with TuSimple's
technology;
(ii) TuSimple was rushing the testing of its autonomous driving
technology to deliver driverless trucks to the market ahead of its
more safety-conscious competitors;
(iii) there was a corporate culture within TuSimple that suppressed
or ignored safety concerns in favor of unrealistically ambitious
testing and delivery schedules;
(iv) this conduct made accidents involving TuSimple's autonomous
driving technology more likely; and
(v) this conduct invited enhanced regulatory scrutiny and
investigatory action toward TuSimple.
On August 1, 2022, The Wall Street Journal published an article
entitled "Self-Driving Truck Accident Draws Attention to Safety at
TuSimple," which brought to light several previously undisclosed
concerns that undermined TuSimple's representations and omissions
concerning TuSimple's safety. For example, referencing an April 6,
2022 accident involving a truck fitted with TuSimple's autonomous
driving technology, the article revealed that "the accident, which
regulators disclosed to the public in June after TuSimple filed a
report on the incident, underscores concern that the
autonomous-trucking company is risking safety on public roads in a
rush to deliver driverless trucks to market, according to
independent analysts and more than a dozen of TuSimple's former
employees."
On this news, TuSimple's share price fell by nearly 10%, damaging
investors.
As of the filing of the TuSimple class action lawsuit, TuSimple's
share price has declined by more than 82% from the IPO offering
price.
THE LEAD PLAINTIFF PROCESS: The Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995 permits any investor who purchased or acquired
TuSimple common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration
Statement issued in connection with the IPO and/or securities
during the Class Period to seek an appointment as lead plaintiff. A
lead plaintiff is generally the movant with the greatest financial
interest in the relief sought by the putative class who is also
typical and adequate of the putative class. A lead plaintiff acts
on behalf of all other class members in directing the TuSimple
class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of
its choice to litigate the TuSimple class action lawsuit. An
investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not
dependent upon serving as the lead plaintiff of the TuSimple class
action lawsuit.
ABOUT ROBBINS GELLER: Robbins Geller is one of the world's leading
complex class action firms representing plaintiffs in securities
fraud cases. The Firm is ranked #1 on the 2021 ISS Securities Class
Action Services Top 50 Report for recovering nearly $2 billion for
investors last year alone - more than triple the amount recovered
by any other plaintiffs' firm. With 200 lawyers in 9 offices,
Robbins Geller is one of the largest plaintiffs' firms in the
world, and the Firm’s attorneys have obtained many of the largest
securities class action recoveries in history, including the
largest securities class action recovery ever - $7.2 billion - in
re Enron Corp. Sec. Litigation.
For more information and attorney advertising, visit the page:
https://www.rgrdlaw.com/services-litigation-securities-fraud.html
Past results do not guarantee future outcomes and services may be
performed by attorneys in any of our offices.
Contact Info:
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
655 W. Broadway, Suite 1900, San Diego, CA 92101
J.C. Sanchez, 800-449-4900
jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com [GN]
TUSIMPLE HOLDINGS: Legal Chief Steps Down Amidst Shareholders' Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CCJDigital's CCJ Staff reported that TuSimple Chief Legal and
Administrative Officer Jim Mullen has notified the company of his
intent to resign from his position by the end of September. Mullen
is a former Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety
Administration, having served the post in an interim capacity from
October 2019 to August 2020. In September 2020, he joined TuSimple.
"I am excited to start the next chapter in my professional career
but will miss working with so many talented and dedicated
professionals at TuSimple. It was an honor to be part of a team
that accomplished so much. I need to thank our commercial partners
who have been so supportive of TuSimple's efforts. The benefits of
autonomous trucks are numerous, and they will help improve the
supply chain. It has been a great ride, and more to come on what's
next." That is the message posted to Mullen's LinkedIn account on
September 7.
Mullen's departure comes at an arduous time for the autonomous
truck startup as multiple stakeholder rights law firms have
announced that a class action lawsuit has been filed against
autonomous trucking tech firm TuSimple Holdings in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of California.
The lawsuit was initially filed by TuSimple shareholder Austin
Dicker on Aug. 31 on behalf of anyone who purchased or acquired
TuSimple stock between April 15, 2021, and Aug. 1, 2022.
Dicker claims that an Aug. 1, 2022, article by The Wall Street
Journal detailing information about an April crash involving a
TuSimple truck brought to light issues with the company's
autonomous trucking technology.
TuSimple has not responded to CCJ inquiries about the lawsuit.
"The accident underscores concern that the autonomous-trucking
company is risking safety on public roads in a rush to deliver
driverless trucks to market," per The Wall Street Journal article.
Although TuSimple said the accident was the result of human error,
the Journal report said that "it was the autonomous-driving system
that turned the wheel, and that blaming the entire accident on
human error is misleading."
After the article was released, the lawsuit claims that shares of
TuSimple fell 97 cents, or 9.7%, during intraday trading to close
at $8.99 per share on Aug. 1.
According to the complaint, TuSimple allegedly made false and
misleading statements to the market, overstated its commitment to
safety and concealed significant problems with its technology. The
lawsuit also alleges that TuSimple rushed testing of its autonomous
driving tech to beat its competitors to market and that the company
fostered a corporate culture that ignored safety in favor of
ambitious delivery schedules, making "accidents involving the
company's autonomous driving technology more likely," the lawsuit
adds.
By the time the lawsuit was filed on Aug. 31, TuSimple shares
traded as low as $7.05 per share - a decline of more than 82% from
the $40 initial public offering price in April 2021. TuSimple
shares opened at $7.14 per share on Sept. 7.
The lawsuit claims that "as a result of TuSimple's wrongful acts
and omissions, and the precipitous declines in the market value" of
the company's stock, TuSimple shareholders "have suffered
significant losses and damages."
Investors have until Oct. 31 to register to join the class action
suit.[GN]
TWITTER INC: McClellan Sues Over Illegal Use of Personal Info
-------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTINA MCCLELLAN and BILLY MOSES, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. TWITTER, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:22-cv-04758-TSH (N.D. Cal., Aug. 18, 2022)
arises from the Defendant's misrepresentations and omissions to
consumers regarding the purpose for which it collected and used
consumers' email addresses and/or telephone numbers in violation of
the California's Unfair Competition Law.
According to the complaint, between May 2013 and September 2019,
Defendant induced consumers, including Plaintiffs, to provide their
email addresses and telephone numbers under the false pretext of
ensuring secure access to their accounts and for recovering those
accounts. However, without the knowledge or consent of those who
provided their email addresses and/or phone numbers, Twitter used
that information for its own pecuniary gain by providing it to
advertisers.
Twitter's alleged misrepresentations and omissions regarding the
purpose for which it collected email addresses and telephone
numbers were material to consumers because reasonable consumers do
not share this information with strangers, says the complaint. This
is particularly so where the information will be used to target
them with advertisements or solicitations or deanonymize their
online identities.
As a result of Twitter's deceptive practices, consumers surrendered
valuable personal information that they expected to remain private
and to be used only for security purposes. Consequently, consumers
were deprived of the ability to control how this information is
used and who possesses it, says the suit.
Twitter, Inc. is an American communications company based in San
Francisco, California.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
John J. Nelson, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
280 S. Beverly Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (917) 471-1894
Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
- and -
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW Suite 440
Washington, D.C. 20015-2052
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
E-mail: dlietz@milberg.com
TWITTER INC: Rosen Law Firm Investigates Possible Securities Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, continues
to investigate potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of Twitter, Inc. (NYSE: TWTR) resulting from
allegations that Twitter may have issued materially misleading
business information to the investing public.
SO WHAT: If you purchased Twitter securities you may be entitled to
compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs
through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is
preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=8303 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.
WHAT IS THIS ABOUT: On August 23, 2022, CNN published an article
entitled "Ex-Twitter exec blows the whistle, alleging reckless and
negligent cybersecurity policies" which revealed that "Twitter has
major security problems that pose a threat to its own users'
personal information, to company shareholders, to national
security, and to democracy, according to an explosive whistleblower
disclosure obtained exclusively by CNN and The Washington Post."
The report also stated that the disclosure was "sent last month to
a number of US government agencies and congressional committees,
including the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Federal Trade
Commission and the Department of Justice" and that the
whistleblower is "Peiter 'Mudge' Zatko, who was previously the
company's head of security, reporting directly to the CEO." The
report further stated, among other things, that "[w]hat Zatko says
he found was a company [Twitter] with extraordinarily poor security
practices, including giving thousands of the company's employees --
amounting to roughly half the company's workforce -- access to some
of the platform's critical controls." Finally, the report stated
that the disclosure "also alleges that some of the company's
senior-most executives have been trying to cover up Twitter's
serious vulnerabilities, and that one or more current employees may
be working for a foreign intelligence service."
On this news, Twitter's share price fell $3.15 per share, or 7%, to
close at $39.86 per share on August 23, 2022, on unusually heavy
trading volume.
WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources or any
meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contact Information:
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
lrosen@rosenlegal.com
pkim@rosenlegal.com
cases@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
UNCLE AL'S: Van Lehn Sues Over Unpaid Wages for Restaurant Staff
----------------------------------------------------------------
TORI VAN LEHN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. UNCLE AL'S SPORTS CAFE SUNRISE, INC. d/b/a
LUV'N OVEN ALE HOUSE, and DEBORAH ALVAREZ, Defendants, Case No.
0:22-cv-61628 (S.D. Fla., August 31, 2022) is a class action
against the Defendants for failure to pay the Plaintiff and
similarly situated restaurant workers appropriate minimum wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Florida Minimum
Wage Act.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a restaurant server and
bartender at Luv'n Oven Ale House from February 2020 until July 30,
2022.
Uncle Al's Sports Cafe Sunrise, Inc. is an owner and operator of a
restaurant under the name Luv'n Oven Ale House, located at 10033
Sunset Strip, Sunrise, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jordan Richards, Esq.
Jake Blumstein, Esq.
USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS-JORDAN RICHARDS, PLLC
1800 SE 10th Ave., Suite 205
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
Telephone: (954) 871-0050
E-mail: Jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com
Jake@jordanrichardspllc.com
UNITED STATES: Cancer Patient Joins Suit Over Medicaid Benefits
---------------------------------------------------------------
kpvi.com reports that a Nebraska woman who lost Medicaid coverage
in the midst of cancer treatment is challenging the federal rule
that required the state to cut her off.
Mary Shaw of Norfolk joined four plaintiffs from Connecticut and
Delaware in a class-action lawsuit against the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services. They are seeking a temporary injunction
to block the rule, which was issued in the waning days of President
Donald Trump's administration and remains in place.
The suit alleges that, because of the rule, Medicaid benefits have
been terminated to hundreds of thousands of people nationwide in
violation of the Coronavirus Response Act of 2020. [GN]
UNIVERSAL SPA: Terrazas Sues Over Illegal Collection of Biometrics
------------------------------------------------------------------
LYDIA TERRAZAS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. UNIVERSAL SPA TRAINING ACADEMY, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 2022LA000773 (Ill. Cir. Ct., 18th Jud. Cir.,
Dupage Cty., August 30, 2022) is a class action against the
Defendant for violations of the Biometric Information Privacy Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants violated BIPA because
they did not: (a) 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; (b)
provide a publicly available retention schedule and guidelines for
permanently destroying the biometric identifiers of the Plaintiff
and the Class; and (c) receive a written release from the Plaintiff
or the Class to collect, capture, or otherwise obtain their
biometric identifiers. As a result of the Defendant's misconduct,
the Plaintiff and Class members suffered damages, says the suit.
Universal Spa Training Academy, Inc. is a nationally accredited
school located in Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brandon M. Wise, Esq.
Paul A. Lesko, Esq.
Adam Florek, Esq.
PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE CONWAY & WISE, LLP
818 Lafayette Ave., Floor 2
St. Louis, MO 63104
Telephone: (314) 833-4825
E-mail: bwise@peifferwolf.com
plesko@peifferwolf.com
aflorek@peifferwolf.com
- and –
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
VERTAFORE INC: 5th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of Allen Suit
-------------------------------------------------------
Roper Technologies, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2022, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 3, 2022, that its subsidiary,
Vertafore, Inc., was named in a putative class action in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Texas captioned "Allen,
et al. v. Vertafore, Inc.," Case 4:20-cv-4139, filed December 4,
2020.
In July 2021, the court granted Vertafore's motion to dismiss the
Allen Case. In March 2022, the U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals
affirmed the lower court's dismissal of the Allen case.
Roper is a diversified technology company based in Florida.
VERTAFORE INC: Masciota Suit Voluntarily Dismissed
--------------------------------------------------
Roper Technologies, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2022, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 3, 2022, that three class action
lawsuits has been dismissed.
Roper's subsidiary, Vertafore, Inc., was named in a putative class
action "Masciotra, et al. v. Vertafore, Inc.", originally filed on
December 8, 2020 as Case 1:20-cv-03603 in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Colorado and subsequently transferred. In July
2021, the plaintiff in the Masciotra case voluntarily dismissed his
action without prejudice.
Roper is a diversified technology company based in Florida.
VERTAFORE INC: Seeks Dismissal of Mulvey Suit
---------------------------------------------
Roper Technologies, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2022, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 3, 2022, that Roper's subsidiary,
Vertafore, Inc., is facing a class action filed the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Texas captioned "Mulvey, et al.
v. Vertafore, Inc.," Case 3:21-cv-00213-E, filed January 31, 2021.
In June 2022, Vertafore filed a motion to dismiss the Mulvey case.
Roper is a diversified technology company based in Florida.
VERTIV HOLDINGS: Vinings Securities Suit Dismissed
--------------------------------------------------
Vertiv Holdings Co. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2022, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 3, 2022, that on March 24, 2022, a
putative securities class action captioned "Kirk Vinings v. Vertiv
Holdings Co," 22-cv-2416, was filed against Vertiv, Rob Johnson,
and David Fallon in the Southern District of New York. On May 13,
2022, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his lawsuit.
The plaintiff asserted claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and SEC Rule 10b-5 on
behalf of a putative class of all persons and entities that
purchased or otherwise acquired Vertiv securities between April 28,
2021 and February 23, 2022, relating to certain disclosures
contained in filings made by the Company with the SEC during 2021.
Vertiv Holdings Co. is into the design, manufacturing and servicing
of critical digital infrastructure technology based in Ohio.
VICTORIA: Police Faces Suit Over Use of Capsicum Spray at Protest
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Leo Crnogorcevic, writing for green left, reports that a class
action against Victoria Police's use of capsicum spray at the
October 2019 blockade of the International Mining and Resources
Conference (IMARC) was initiated in the Supreme Court of Victoria
on September 2.
A coalition, known as Blockade IMARC, protested the three-day
conference, which aimed to link mining companies with investors,
describing it as a "gathering of corporate criminals …
[complicit] in creating the climate crisis that is threatening the
world with extinction".
Police deployed aggressive force against the protesters, using
batons, horses and capsicum spray.
The class action alleges that police breached the Victorian Charter
of Human Rights and Responsibilities 2006 by using capsicum spray
in a way that is coercive, with no immediate or proportional threat
to officers or the public.
Section 16 of the Charter states there is a right to peaceful
assembly. Under section 38(1), it is unlawful for public
authorities to act in a way that is incompatible with a human
right.
Section 462A of the Crimes Act 1958 states that person may only use
proportionate force that is reasonably necessary to prevent a
serious crime from being committed or to help in the arrest of a
person committing that crime, or suspected of committing that
crime.
Lead plaintiff for the class action, Jordan Brown, is alleging the
police conduct outside the IMARC breached the Crimes Act, the
Victoria Police Manual and the force's internal instructions for
the use of capsicum spray.
Class action law firm Phi Finney McDonald and Inner Melbourne
Community Legal (IMCL) are seeking compensation, as well
declarations from the court that the police breached human rights.
IMCL principal solicitor Gregor Husper said: "We're concerned about
the rising militarisation of Victoria Police and the protection of
protest rights under Victoria's human rights laws. The rights for
peaceful assembly and freedom to demonstrate are integral to a
functioning democratic society."
Legal observers at the protest reported the indiscriminate use of
Oleoresin Capsicum (OC) foam by the police. The Melbourne Activist
Legal Support's 45-page report noted that the police "set a tone of
violence" with their actions.
Victoria Police's internal guidelines on capsicum spray state:
"[Police officers] should not use OC aerosols when a person is only
passively resisting." In other words, capsicum spray should not be
used in an indiscriminate manner, as a form of crowd control, or to
enforce compliance.
Police behaviour at the blockade was another demonstration of the
Daniel Andrews government's ongoing militarisation of the force. A
swathe of military-grade equipment, including projectile weapons,
were purchased for the police in 2016.
The Operations Resources Unit of Victoria Police received $35
million over five years to acquire weaponry, such as 175-shot
pepper ball semi-automatic rifles, 50-metre-range launchers and
grenades that can release rubber pellets.
These weapons are being increasingly used at protests, including at
the 2017 No Pride in Hate protest and during anti-lockdown
demonstrations last year. All Protective Services Officers are now
also armed with tasers.
Lead plaintiff Brown stated that the case is about "holding the
police to account for [their] actions and decisions".
The class action proceedings are continuing in the Supreme Court.
[GN]
VROOM AUTOMOTIVE: Sonne UCC Suit Removed to W.D. Oklahoma
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled W. BLAKE SONNE, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. VROOM AUTOMOTIVE LLC, d/b/a VROOM; and
VROOM INC., Case No. CJ-2022-822, was removed from the District
Court of Cleveland County, Oklahoma, to the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Oklahoma on August 29, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Oklahoma assigned
Case No. 5:22-cv-00761-PRW to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged breach of express and
implied warranties under the Oklahoma Uniform Commercial Code by
failing to provide a clean and marketable title for motor vehicles
in a timely manner and for violation of the Oklahoma Consumer
Protection Act by engaging in deceptive and unfair trade
practices.
Vroom Automotive, LLC is a provider of an e-commerce platform for
consumers to purchase and sell used vehicles, with its principal
place of business in Texas.
Vroom, Inc. is a used car retailer and e-commerce company, with its
principal place of business in Texas. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
William W. O'Connor, Esq.
Jerrick Irby, Esq.
HALL, ESTILL, HARDWICK, GABLE, GOLDEN & NELSON, P.C.
320 South Boston Avenue, Suite 200
Tulsa, OK 74103-3706
Telephone: (918) 594-0400
Facsimile: (918) 594-0505
E-mail: boconnor@hallestill.com
jirby@hallestill.com
- and –
Jon A. Epstein, Esq.
Carson Glass Lamle, Esq.
HALL, ESTILL, HARDWICK, GABLE, GOLDEN & NELSON, P.C.
100 North Broadway, Suite 2900
Oklahoma City, OK 73102-8865
Telephone: (405) 553-2828
Facsimile: (405) 553-2855
E-mail: jepstein@hallestill.com
clamle@hallestill.com
WALMART INC: Washington Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Pennsylvania
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled DONALD WASHINGTON and SYMONE WILDER, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. WALMART INC.,
Case No. 220701449, was removed from the Court of Common Pleas of
Philadelphia County to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania on August 26, 2022.
The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
assigned Case No. 2:22-cv-03429 to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Philadelphia Fair Workweek Employment Standards Ordinance by
failing to provide predictable schedules with at least 10 or
14-days' notice, changing employees' schedules at the last minute,
requiring hourly employees to work shifts on two consecutive days
without at least 9 hours off between shifts, and failing to offer
new shifts to current employees before hiring new employees.
Walmart Inc. is a retail company, headquartered in Bentonville,
Arkansas. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Natalie F. Bare, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
30 South 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-4196
Telephone: (215) 979-1962
Facsimile: (215) 405-3710
E-mail: nfbare@duanemorris.com
- and –
Margaret Connor, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
30 South 17th Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103-4196
Telephone: (215) 979-7356
Facsimile: (215) 827-5544
E-mail: mmconnor@duanemorris.com
WANTAGH NOODLE: Faces Vicario Suit Over Failure to Pay OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
MATEO VICARIO, Plaintiff v. WANTAGH NOODLE, INC. d/b/a JANI CHINESE
and JAPANESE CUISINE, and JANI DOE and KEYI YI SUN, individually,
Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-05076 (E.D.N.Y., August 26, 2022)
brings this complaint as a collective action against the Defendants
to recover unpaid overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.
The Plaintiff has worked for the Defendants as a kitchen helper
from September 13, 2021 until May 22, 2022.
The Plaintiff asserts that he was scheduled to work more than 40
hours each week throughout his employment with the Defendants.
However, the Defendants never paid him overtime compensation at the
rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay for all
hours worked in excess of 40 per workweek. The Defendants also
failed to maintain accurate ad sufficient time and pay records. In
addition, the Defendants failed to provide him with a written wage
notice setting forth his regular hourly rate of pay and
corresponding overtime rate of pay. Moreover, the Defendants failed
to provide him with a notation or any other documentation of his
hours worked during that pay period or his rate of pay, says the
Plaintiff.
On behalf of himself and all other similarly situated employees,
the Plaintiff seeks all unpaid overtime wages along with liquidated
damages, as well as statutory penalties, pre- and post-judgment
interest, litigation costs and disbursements, and other relief as
the Court deems just and proper.
Wantagh Noodle, Inc. d/b/a Jani Chinese and Japanese Cuisine
operates as a Chinese and Japanese restaurant owned by Keyi Yi Sun.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yale Pollack, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF YALE POLLACK
66 Split Rock Road
Syosset, NY 11791
- and –
Jacob Aronauer, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JACOB ARONAUER
225 Broadway, 3rd Floor
New York, NY 10007
Tel: (212) 323-6980
E-mail: jaronauer@aronauerlaw.com
YOUTUBE LLC: Collects Biometric Identifiers, Marschke Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BRAD MARSCHKE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. YOUTUBE, LLC and GOOGLE LLC, Defendants,
Case No. 3:22-cv-02022 (S.D. Ill., August 30, 2022) is a class
action against the Defendants for violations of the Biometric
Information Privacy Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendants violated BIPA because
they did not: (a) properly inform the Plaintiff or the Class in
writing that their biometric identifiers were being collected or
stored; (b) 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; (c) provide a
publicly available retention schedule and guidelines for
permanently destroying the biometric identifiers of the Plaintiff
and the Class; and (d) receive a written release from the Plaintiff
or the Class to collect, capture, or otherwise obtain their
biometric identifiers.
YouTube, LLC is a technology company, headquartered in San Bruno,
California.
Google LLC is an online advertising technology company,
headquartered in Mountain View, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James E. Barz, Esq.
Frank A. Richter, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
200 South Wacker Drive, 31st Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 674-4674
Facsimile: (312) 674-4676
E-mail: jbarz@rgrdlaw.com
frichter@rgrdlaw.com
- and –
Gary Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
221 West Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
- and –
Stuart A. Davidson, Esq.
Alexander H. Cohen, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500
Boca Raton, FL 33433
Telephone: (561) 750-3000
Facsimile: (561) 750-3364
E-mail: sdavidson@rgrdlaw.com
acohen@rgrdlaw.com
- and –
Nick Suciu, III, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
6905 Telegraph Road, Suite 115
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301
Telephone: (313) 303-3472
*********
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 2022. 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 ***