/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/231122.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Wednesday, November 22, 2023, Vol. 25, No. 234
Headlines
23ANDME INC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Doe Suit Alleges
28 STREET FLOWERS: Cocoyutla Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
2953 BROADWAY: Ye Suit Seeks Class Certification
600 NORTH: Bid for Protective Order OK'd in Sanchez Class Suit
A.J. RICHARD & SONS: Harbord Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
ADIDAS AMERICA: Atkinson Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
ALCO WINDOWS: Difiore Files Bid for Class Certification
AMAZON.COM INC: Sued Over Illegal Internet Gambling Enterprise
AMAZON.COM LLC: Bailey Sues Over Labor Law Violations
AMERICAN ELECTRONIC: Jackson Suit Seeks to Certify Employee Class
ANTHONY'S DANCE: Simmonds Sues Over Exotic Dancers' Unpaid Wages
ART OF DERMATOLOGY: Watts Hits Unpaid Wages, Breach of Contract
BAXTER HEALTHCARE: Nguyen Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
BLUE BOTTLE: Faces Class Suit Over Workers' Unpaid Wages
BOCAITO INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Mendez Suit Alleges
BOSCO CONTRACTOR: Faces Woods Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
BRAINSTORM CELL: Sporn Sues Over False and Misleading Statements
BRITISH COLUMBIA: Faces Suit Over Unfair COVID Vaccine Mandates
CENTER FOR EMPLOYMENT: Dreher Suit Removed to E.D. California
COCA-COLA COMPANY: Martinez Seeks Blind's Equal Access to Website
COREBRIDGE FINANCIAL: Oakwood Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
CYMULATE INC: Stevens Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
DATACOMP APPRAISAL: Brown Sues Over Home Rental Monopoly
DAWN TO DUSK: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Avila Alleges
EMBASSY HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Walker Says
FELTRIGHT LLC: Carrero Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Messages
FREELAND ENTERPRISES: Zachary Seeks Delivery Drivers' Unpaid Wages
FRESH DINING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Castillo Alleges
FUR-EVER FRIENDS: Williamson Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
GIGACLOUD TECHNOLOGY: Villanueva Sues Over Share Price Drop
HOLLEY INC: Fort Lauderdale Sues Over Drop in Share Price
HONEY POT: Class Cert Discovery Denied w/o Prejudice
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Mize Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
JAXXON LLC: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Luis Suit Says
JJ APPAREL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Bilbao Suit Claims
KONICA MINOLTA: Motion to Certify Suit Over 401 (K) Plan Filed
KRAFT HEINZ: Collects Personal Data Without Consent, Darnell Says
LANCASTER, PA: Faces Stone Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
LEHIGH HANSON SERVICES: Raines Suit Removed to E.D. California
LEXISNEXIS RISK: Scroggins Allowed to File 2nd Amended Complaint
LI-CYCLE HOLDINGS: Davis Sues Over Drop in Share Price
MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL: Faces Suit Over Breach of Privacy Rights
MATTRESS FIRM: Everett Suit Removed to S.D. California
MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL: Colinayo & Maldonado Suits Consolidated
META MATERIALS: Consolidated Shareholder Suit Over Merger Dismissed
META PLATFORMS: Klein, et al., Seek to File Documents Under Seal
META PLATFORMS: Parties File Stipulation on Class Certification
MGM RESORTS: Faces Zari Suit Over Failure to Secure Personal Info
MILLER AUTO: Case Management Order Entered in Brown Class Suit
MILLS COLLEGE: $1.25M Deal in Degree Costs Suit Gets Prelim OK
MR. COOPER: Faces Class Suit Over Alleged Cyberattack
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION: Burton Sues Over Broker Fee Conspiracy
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Court Certifies Former Student-Athletes Suit
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Martinez Says
NATIONSTAR: Fails to Secure Customer's Private Info, McCartney Says
NATURES PATH: Wins Dismissal of Granola False Ads' Class Suit
NISSAN NORTH: Culler Sues Over Motor Vehicles' Defective Paint
NUTANIX INC: Faces Shareholder Suit in CA Court
PATHWARD: Faces Class Suit Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
POWERSOL USA: Mederos Sues Over Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls
PRA EVENTS: Hyneman Sues Over Labor Law Breaches
RE/MAX HOLDINGS: To Settle Burnett Suit in Missouri Court
RE/MAX HOLDINGS: To Settle Moehrl Suit in Illinois Court
REALPAGE INC: Davis Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
REGAL CINEMAS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Springett Alleges
REV GROUP INC: Securities Suit Over Equity Dispute Dismissed
ROYALTY CARPET: Calif. Sup. Court to Decide Suit Over PAGA Claims
RUSH UNIVERSITY: Faces Class Suit Over Illegal Biometric Collection
SAN DIEGO, CA: Court Certifies Suit Over Detainees' Discrimination
SCARLET WIRELESS: Misclassifies Driver Testers, Ahmed Suit Says
SECURE ACCESS: Faces Phillips Suit Over Laborers' Unpaid Overtime
SHELL OIL: Judge Recommends $10B 401 (K) Plan Suit to Go to Trial
SLEEPING BABY: Sends Unwanted Marketing Messages, Carrero Alleges
SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES: Shen Sues Over Securities Law Violations
SPORTSMAN'S GUIDE: Collects Data Without Consent, Delong Says
STEVEN GREENBERG: Perpetua Sues to Recover Compensation
STITCH FIX: Consolidated Shareholder Suit Over SEC Filing Dismissed
STONELEDGE FURNITURE: Class Cert. Deadline Extended by 210 Days
STOYANOV AND HYMAS: Initiates Illegal Telephone Calls, Pirone Says
SUNBEAM CANDLES: Knowles Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
SUTTER HEALTH: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Copans Alleges
TAO GROUP: Padilla Sues Over Employee Misclassification
TRELLIS ADVISORS: Rossetter Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
UNITED WELL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cowan Alleges
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Faces Ortega Suit Over Unlawful Labor Policies
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: Chatelain Sues Over Unprotected Info
VISA INC: Court OKs Probe on Website Over False Settlement Info
WESCOM CENTRAL: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Wall Alleges
WEST CHESTER: Giorgi Suit Seeks COVID-19 Tuition Fee Refunds
WEST TEXAS GAS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Morrow Alleges
WEST VIRGINIA: Gov. Justice Moves to Dismiss Suit Over Jail System
WHOLE FOODS: Mismanages 401(k) Plan's Costs, Winkelman Suit Says
WINS FINANCE: Faces Kamau Securities Suit Over Disclosures
*********
23ANDME INC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Doe Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
JOHN DOE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 23ANDME, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:23-cv-05717-AGT (N.D. Cal., Nov. 6, 2023) is an action on behalf
of all persons who are, in whole or in part, descended from
Ashkenazi Jews, whose personally identifiable information was taken
in a data breach or hack of the systems of Defendant commencing in
or about August 2023 (the "Data Breach" or "Hack").
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that as a direct and
proximate result of 23andMe's breach of confidence and failure to
protect their PII, the Plaintiff and Class members have been
injured by facing ongoing, imminent, impending threats of hate and
identity theft crimes, fraud, scams, and other misuses of their
PII.
23ANDME, INC. provides genetic testing and development services.
The Company offers DNA testing for inherited traits, genealogy, and
possible congenital risk factors. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dorothy P. Antullis, Esq.
Stuart A. Davidson, Esq.
Lindsey H. Taylor, Esq.
Nicolle B. Brito, Esq.
Alexander C. Cohen, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
225 NE Mizner Boulevard, Suite 720
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Telephone: (561) 750-3000
Facsimile: (561) 750-3364
28 STREET FLOWERS: Cocoyutla Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Policarpo Cocoyutla, on behalf of himself and other similarly
situated v. 28 STREET FLOWERS INC (DBA WHOLESALE FLOWERS) and
MHADUO PERSUART, Individually, Case No. 1:23-cv-09619 (S.D.N.Y.,
Nov. 1, 2023), is brought against the Defendant for unpaid overtime
wage compensation pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA"), the New York Labor Law ("NYLL") as recently amended by
the Wage Theft Prevention Act ("WTPA"), and related provisions from
Title 12 of New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations ("NYCRR").
The Defendants were required, under relevant New York State law, to
compensate Plaintiff with overtime pay at one and one-half the
regular rate for work in excess of 40 hours per work week. However,
despite such mandatory pay obligations, Defendants failed to pay
Plaintiff his lawful overtime pay for that period from October 14,
2021, until November 26, 2022, where he worked well in excess of
forty (40) hours per workweek. The Plaintiff also brings this
action under the Wage Theft Prevention Act for Defendants' failure
to provide written notice of wage rates in violation of said laws,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed to serve customers and make flower
deliveries.
The Defendants owned and operated 28 Street Flowers, Inc. (d/b/a
Wholesale Flowers), a corporate entity located in New York
City.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lina Stillman, Esq.
STILLMAN LEGAL PC
42 Broadway, 12th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Phone: 212-203-2417
Web: www.StillmanLegalPC.com
2953 BROADWAY: Ye Suit Seeks Class Certification
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as XING YE, JIA WANG LIN,
HONG YI LIN LIANG YAN CHEN, MAO HUI LIN, YONG ZHONG WANG, FU LONG
XUE, XUE XIN ZOU, and YE CHENG LUO on behalf of themselves, and on
behalf of others similarly situated in the Potential Rule 23 Class,
v. 2953 BROADWAY INC. d/b/a VINE SUSHI, and CHO KAM SZE a/k/a Tommy
Sze, Case No. 1:18-cv-04941-JHR (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the
Court to enter an order:
(1) Certifying the action as a class action pursuant to Rule 23
of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure;
(2) Appointing them as class representatives;
(3) Appointing Troy Law, PLLC and its attorneys John Troy, Aaron
B.
Schweitzer, and Tiffany Troy as class counsel;
(4) Permitting Case Plaintiffs to circulate a notice of class
action by direct mail to class members and by publication;
and
(5) granting such other and further relief as the Court shall
deem
just and proper.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 6, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/40Aj8IJ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
John Troy, Esq.
TROY LAW, PLLC
41-25 Kissena Blvd., Suite 110
Flushing, NY 11355
Telephone: (718) 762-1324
Facsimile: (718) 762-1324
E-mail: troylaw@troypllc.com
600 NORTH: Bid for Protective Order OK'd in Sanchez Class Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sanchez v. 600 North Akard
LLC et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-00540 (N.D. Tex., Filed March 10,
2023), the Hon. Judge Sam A. Lindsay entered an order granting the
Defendant's motion for Protective Order.
-- The Defendants request that the Court (1) enter a protective
order
that Defendants are not required to respond to the discovery
requests that Plaintiffs have served after the parties
completed
their Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(f) conference and
filed
their 23 Joint Request for Phases and Joint Status Report and
(2)
order the parties to confer regarding a mutually reasonable
discovery procedure that can be agreed upon and/or submitted to
the Court for review.
-- The Plaintiffs respond that the parties have conferred as
required
and agreed on the categories and topics related to conducting
discovery during Phase One and that Plaintiffs' serving
discovery
is permitted by the governing Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
and
not subject to any stay of discovery.
-- But Plaintiffs' claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act,
seeking
to proceed as a collection action under 29 U.S.C. section
216(b),
give rise to more specific requirements after the United States
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit's decision in Swales v.
KLLM Transp. Servs., L.L.C., 985 F.3d 430 (5th Cir. 2021).
-- The Court finds good cause for these reasons and enters the
requested protective order that Defendants are not required to
respond to the discovery requests that Plaintiffs have served
and
also orders that, by November 29, 2023, Plaintiffs and
Defendants
must confer and file a supplemental joint status report that
describes each parties' views on the facts and legal
considerations that are material to the "similarly situated
plaintiffs" analysis and the targeted, preliminary discovery
that
is necessary to determine whether to conditionally certify and
issue notice to potential plaintiffs.
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.[CC]
A.J. RICHARD & SONS: Harbord Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against A.J. RICHARD & SONS,
INC., et al. The case is styled as Melissa Harbord, Brian Tolkin,
Ocelia Claro and Thomas Claro, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. A.J. RICHARD & SONS, INC., P.C.
RICHARD & SON, INC., and P.C. RICHARD & SON LONG ISLAND
CORPORATION, Case No. 617680/2023 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Nassau Cty., Nov.
1, 2023).
The case type is stated as "Comm-Contract."
AJ Richard & Sons, Inc. was founded in 1977. The Company's line of
business includes the retail sale of electric and gas
refrigerators, stoves, and other household appliances.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Rocco G. Avallone, Esq.
Christopher F. Bellistri, Esq.
AVALLONE & BELLISTRI, LLP
3000 Marcus Avenue, Suite3E7
Lake Success, NY 11042
Phone: (516) 986-2500
Fax: (516) 986-2501
ADIDAS AMERICA: Atkinson Suit Removed to W.D. Washington
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Jacob Atkinson, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Adidas America, Inc., a foreign
profit corporation; and Does 1-20, Case No. 23-2-19326-1 SEA was
removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King
County, to the United States District Court for the Western
District of Washington on Nov. 1, 2023, and assigned Case No.
2:23-cv-01666.
The Plaintiff commenced this action on October 6, 2023, by filing a
Class Action Complaint for Damages, Injunctive Relief, and
Declaratory Relief ("Complaint").[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Kyle D. Nelson, Esq.
Emily A. Bushaw, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900
Seattle, WA 98101-3099
Phone: +1.206.359.8000
Facsimile: +1.206.359.9000
Email: EBushaw@perkinscoie.com
KyleNelson@perkinscoie.com
ALCO WINDOWS: Difiore Files Bid for Class Certification
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANTHONY DIFIORE,
individually and on behalf of a class of all persons and entities
similarly situated, v. ALCO WINDOWS AND DOORS LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-21522-JEM (S.D. Fla.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order:
the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order
-- Certifying a class;
-- Appoint him as class representative;
-- Appoint Kaufman P.A. and Coleman PLLC as class counsel; and
-- Establishing a deadline for submitting a proposed notice
plan.
Here, because of "the large number of claims, along with the
relatively small statutory damages, the desirability of
adjudicating these claims consistently, and the probability that
individual members would not have a great interest in controlling
the prosecution of these claims, all indicate that a class action
would be superior," Kron v. Grand Bahama Cruise Line, LLC, 328
F.R.D. 694, 702 (S.D. Fla. 2018).
Additionally, although not required, class certification here is
administratively feasible because “the district court can locate
the remainder of the class after certification.” Cherry, 986 F.3d
at 1303. Using DialedIn's dialer records for Alco’s calling
campaign and his proposed methodology, Plaintiff’s expert Mr.
Woolfson has already identified which of the telephone numbers in
the call records that received calls were Florida numbers and are
in the class. Woolfson
Class treatment is therefore superior to the alternatives.
The Plaintiff DiFiore moves to certify a class of the thousands of
Florida consumers who Defendant Alco called during a two-month
period in 2023 using an autodialer as part of a single calling
campaign in violation of the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act's
autodialer provision, Fla. Stat. section 501.059(8)(a).
Alco sells impact doors and windows to consumers in South Florida.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 6, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/49vBUoT at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Avi R. Kaufman, Esq.
Rachel E. Kaufman, Esq.
KAUFMAN P.A.
237 South Dixie Highway, 4th Floor
Coral Gables, FL 33133
Telephone: (305) 469-5881
E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com
rachel@kaufmanpa.com
- and -
Stefan Coleman, Esq.
COLEMAN PLLC
66 West Flagler Street, Suite 900
Miami, FL 33130
Telephone: (877) 333-9427
E-mail: law@stefancoleman.com
AMAZON.COM INC: Sued Over Illegal Internet Gambling Enterprise
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Scarcella of Reuters reports that Amazon.com (AMZN.O) earned
billions of dollars through an "illegal internet gambling
enterprise" by distributing casino-style apps and processing
payments for virtual chips, a new proposed consumer class-action
lawsuit claims.
The lawsuit, filed on November 10, 2023 by a Nevada resident who
said he was addicted to illegal online slot games, accuses Amazon
of offering more than 30 illegal casino apps to consumers in a
"dangerous partnership" with virtual casinos.
The complaint cites a 2018 U.S. appeals court ruling that found
"social casino" apps to be illegal under Washington state gambling
law. The case is the latest in Washington federal court targeting
online slot machines and other games.
Amazon and social casinos "have found a way to smuggle slot
machines into the homes of consumers throughout the United States,
24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and 365 days a year," the lawsuit
said.
A spokesperson for Amazon on November 13, 2023 did not immediately
respond to a request for comment.
The plaintiffs law firm that filed the case, Chicago-founded
Edelson, has secured hundreds of millions of dollars in
class-action settlements so far in related litigation over virtual
casino apps.
Edelson's Todd Logan, who leads the firm's gambling practice, said
the case was the firm's eighth lawsuit over social casino apps. "We
look forward to trying this case to a jury of Amazon's peers," he
said.
The games are all free to play, and they do not generate cash
payouts. Users instead can win virtual chips, and must buy more to
keep playing the games.
The lawsuit said "despite knowing that social casinos are illegal,
Amazon continues to maintain a 30% financial interest in the upside
by brokering the slot machine games, driving customers to them, and
acting as the bank."
Lawyers for the plaintiff estimated the class size to be "tens of
thousands of consumers." They are seeking damages and restitution,
among other court orders.
The lawsuit comes as Apple, Meta and Google are challenging a
California federal judge's 2022 order that said they could be held
liable for payment-processing the virtual chip payments that are
part of social casino apps.
The appeals are pending in the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit
Court of Appeals.
The case is Steve Horn v. Amazon.com Inc, U.S. District Court,
Western District of Washington, 2:23-cv-01727.
For plaintiff: Todd Logan of Edelson; and Cecily Jordan of Tousley
Brain Stephens
For defendant: No appearance yet. [GN]
AMAZON.COM LLC: Bailey Sues Over Labor Law Violations
-----------------------------------------------------
SHEYANNE BAILEY, individually, and on behalf of all employees
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, A
Delaware Limited Liability Company f.k.a. AMAZON.COM SERVICES,
INC.; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
5:23-cv-02280 (C.D. Cal., November 3, 2023) seeks damages and any
other available legal or equitable remedies resulting from
violations of the California Labor Code and the Unfair Competition
Law for the failure to pay overtime wages, misclassification of
exempt employee status, unlawful failure to provide uninterrupted
off-duty meal periods and rest breaks, and failure to keep accurate
payroll records of daily hours worked.
The Plaintiff is currently employed by Defendant Amazon in a
position titled "area manager." She was hired by Amazon in 2016 and
became an exempt area manager in 2019. However, throughout her
employment as an area manager, she was not paid for overtime wages
at the statutory rate of one and one-half times their regular rate
of pay when she worked for more than eight hours any workday or in
excess of 40 hours in a workweek. In the class action, the
Plaintiff alleges that based upon duties of area managers, she and
the putative class did not meet the criteria of any recognized test
in California for being exempt from overtime compensation. Among
other things, she asserts that the Defendant Amazon failed to
maintain accurate records of hours she worked including but not
limited to all hours worked beyond 80 in a two week pay period.
Headquartered in Washington, Amazon.com LLC is a subsidiary of
Amazon.com Inc. This Delaware limited liability company focuses on
selling different products online for third-party sellers. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michele M. Vercoski, Esq.
Yasmin N. Vahid, Esq.
MCCUNE LAW GROUP, APC
18565 Jamboree Road, Ste. 550
Irvine, CA 92612
Telephone: (909) 557-1250
Facsimile: (909) 557-1275
E-mail: mmv@mccunewright.com
ynv@mccunewright.com
- and -
Gavin P. Kassel, Esq.
SANFORD A. KASSEL A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION
334 W. 3rd Street, #207
San Bernardino, CA 92401
Telephone: (909) 884-6451
Facsimile: (909) 884-8032
E-mail: gavin@skassellaw.com
AMERICAN ELECTRONIC: Jackson Suit Seeks to Certify Employee Class
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JESSE JACKSON,
Individually and For Others Similarly Situated, v. AMERICAN
ELECTRONIC WARFARE ASSOCIATES, INC., Case No. 8:22-cv-01456-TDC (D.
Md.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order:
1. Certifying the following class under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23:
"All current and former AMEWAS employees classified as exempt
and paid straight time for overtime in Maryland from June 14,
2019 through the date this Court grants certification (the
"Maryland Class Members").
2. Appointing Jesse Jackson as Class Representative;
3. Appointing Michael Josephson, Andrew Dunlap, and Alyssa White
of
Josephson Dunlap, LLP, Richard (Rex) Burch of Bruckner Burch,
PLLC, and Nicholas Migliaccio and Jason Rathod of Migliaccio
&
Rathod LLP as Class Counsel;
4. Compelling Defendant American Electronic Warfare Associates,
Inc. to produce a complete, accurate and up-to-date list of
all
employees within the class definition, including their last
known address, phone number, email address, and dates of
employment, within 10 calendar days of the date this Court
grants certification; and
5. Approving Jackson's proposed form and methods of Notice to
the
Class.
American Electronic specializes in technology and engineering
products and services for security and defense purposes.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 3, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/46k6mQ9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
Alyssa J. White, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: awhite@mybackwages.com
mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH, PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP
412 H St. NE, Suite 302,
Washington D.C. 20002
Telephone: (202) 470-3520
Facsimile: (202) 800-2730
E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
jrathod@classlawdc.com
ANTHONY'S DANCE: Simmonds Sues Over Exotic Dancers' Unpaid Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
TRENEKA SIMMONDS and RASHEEKA TAYLOR, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ANTHONY'S DANCE CLUB, INC.
and EDWARD TOURANGEAU, Defendants, Case No. _______ (Mass. Super.,
Suffolk Cty., Nov. 1, 2023) arises from the Defendants' violations
of Massachusetts Wage Act and/or Massachusetts Tips Act by, amongst
other things, charging Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees
a "house fee" (a fee to work), failing to pay them the minimum wage
and overtime wages, and permitting unlawful tip-sharing practices.
Plaintiff Simmonds worked for the Defendants as an exotic dancer
from March 10, 2022 until her resignation on October 28, 2022.
Plaintiff Taylor was also employed as an exotic dancer from July
2021 until the termination of her employment in May 2022.
Anthony's Dance Club, Inc. is an adult entertainment club featuring
exotic dancers with a principal place of business in South Hadley,
Massachusetts.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Raven Moeslinger, Esq.
Nicholas F. Ortiz, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF NICHOLAS F. ORTIZ, PC
One Boston Place, #2600
Boston, MA 02108
Telephone: (617) 338-9400
E-mail: rm@mass-legal.com
ART OF DERMATOLOGY: Watts Hits Unpaid Wages, Breach of Contract
---------------------------------------------------------------
MARNIE WATTS, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ART OF DERMATOLOGY, LLC, CHETHANA GOTTAM,
individually, and VIKRAM GOTTAM, individually, Defendants, Case No.
2:23-cv-00979-JLB-KCD (M.D. Fla., Nov. 1, 2023) is brought against
the Defendants for unpaid compensation, declaratory relief and
other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act, claims under
Section 24, Article X of the Florida Constitution, and for breach
of contract.
According to the complaint, the Defendants failed to comply with 29
U.S.C. Sections 201-209, because Plaintiff, and those similarly
situated, performed services for Defendants for which no provisions
were made by Defendants to properly pay Plaintiff and those
similarly situated. During her employment with Defendants,
Plaintiff, and those similarly situated, were not paid their
regular rate of pay for all hours worked and one and one-half their
regular rate of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per
week, adds the complaint.
The Defendants breached their contract by not compensating
Plaintiff in accordance with the laws and by not submitting
payments to the health insurance plan/carrier/administrator for the
insurance premiums paid by Plaintiff through payroll deductions,
the suit says.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants from July 27, 2022 through
April 17, 2023.
Art of Dermatology, LLC is a dermatology company that operates and
conducts business in Collier County, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert H. Goodman, Esq.
Joseph E. Parrish, Esq.
Megan E. Shaw, Esq.
PARRISH & GOODMAN, PLLC
13031 McGregor Blvd., Suite 8
Fort Myers, FL 33919
Telephone: (813) 643-4529
Facsimile: (813) 315-6535
E-mail: rgoodman@parrishgoodman.com
mshaw@parrishgoodman.com
jparrish@parrishgoodman.com
kcumbee@parrishgoodman.com
dgarrett@parrishgoodman.com
BAXTER HEALTHCARE: Nguyen Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID NGUYEN, an aggrieved employee and on behalf of other
aggrieved employees; Plaintiff v. BAXTER HEALTHCARE CORPORATION, a
Delaware corporation; KELLY SERVICES GLOBAL, LLC, a Michigan
limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 50, Defendants, Case
No. 30-2023-01358073-CU-OE-CXC (Cal. Super., Orange Cty., Oct. 30,
2023) seeks to recover civil penalties under the California Private
Attorneys General Act, California Labor Code, arising from the
Defendants' alleged unlawful labor policies and practices.
The Plaintiff alleges the Defendants' failure to pay minimum wages
for all hours worked; failure to pay all earned overtime
compensation; failure to provide all legally required meal periods
and pay meal period premium wages; failure to authorize and permit
all legally required rest periods and pay rest period premium
wages; failure to furnish with complete, accurate, itemized wage
statements; failure to timely pay all final wages and compensation
earned; failure to reimburse for all necessary business expenses;
failure to pay all earned wages at least twice during each calendar
month; failure to permit inspection of employment records; and
failure to maintain accurate records.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as an hourly-paid,
non-exempt employee from approximately February 2023 to August 2023
as an assembler at their staffing agency facility in Irvine,
California.
Baxter Healthcare Corporation owns, operates, and manages a medical
device manufacturing facility in Irvine.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Young K. Park, Esq.
William C. Sung, Esq.
JUSTICE FOR WORKERS, P.C.
3600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1815
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Telephone: (323) 922-2000
Facsimile: (323) 922-2000
E-mail: young@justiceforworkers.com
william@justiceforworkers.com
BLUE BOTTLE: Faces Class Suit Over Workers' Unpaid Wages
--------------------------------------------------------
Northern California Record reports that a class action lawsuit
accuses Blue Bottle Coffee of shorting its workers' overtime and
other wages, among other accusations of violating California labor
law.
Employees "were not paid overtime wages because they were
misclassified as exempt, did not receive legally compliant meal and
rest breaks, and were not paid at their regular rate for their sick
time pursuant to Defendant's policies and/or practices," says the
lawsuit filed in San Francisco Superior Court.
Even though the plaintiffs were classified by the company as exempt
from overtime pay rules, they "were regularly scheduled, as a
matter of uniform company policy, to work, and in fact, worked as
salaried employees in excess of eight hours per workday and/or in
excess of 40 hours per work week without receiving straight time or
overtime compensation for such overtime hours."
Misclassifying the plaintiffs as exempt also caused the company
allegedly to deny them meal breaks and rest breaks as required by
California law, the lawsuit states.
"When Defendant did pay meal or rest period premium wages, Class
Members were only paid at the employee's base hourly rate rather
than their regular rate," the complaint said.
The plaintiffs seek compensatory damages and penalties, plus legal
fees.
They are represented by attorneys Edward J. Wynne and George
Nemiroff, of Wynne Law Group, of Larkspur; and Gregg I. Shavitz and
Camar Jones, of Shavitz Law Group, of Boca Raton, Florida.
Greely v. Blue Bottle Coffee, San Francisco Superior Court,
CGC-23-610084 [GN]
BOCAITO INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Mendez Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
PRISCILA MENDEZ, on behalf of herself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs,
and the Class, Plaintiff v. BOCAITO, INC., NICOLE AYALA, and MAYRA
AYALA, Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-08192-RPK-JRC (E.D.N.Y.,
November 3, 2023) seeks to recover from Defendants: (i) unpaid
wages, including overtime, due to Defendants' invalid tip credit
allowance, (ii) unpaid wages, including overtime, due to an
impermissible time-shaving policy, (iii) unpaid overtime premium,
(iv) unpaid wages, (v) statutory penalties, (vi) liquidated
damages, and (vii) attorney's fees and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.
In or about April 3, 2022, the Plaintiff was hired by Defendants to
work as a waitress and bartender for Defendants' restaurant.
Throughout her employment with Defendants, Plaintiff was regularly
scheduled to work over 40 hours per week during her first three
months of employment, without appropriate minimum wage
compensation, including overtime premiums, for the hours that she
worked. In addition, Plaintiff also did not receive any "spread of
hours" premium for working such shifts, as required under NYLL.
Located in Jackson Heights, NY, Bocaito Inc. owns and operates a
cafe and wine bar. [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
BOSCO CONTRACTOR: Faces Woods Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------
Michael A. Woods, Timothy Bledsoe, and Eli J. Brown on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Bosco
Contractor Services, LLC and Louis Bosco, individually, Defendants,
Case No. 1:23-cv-01233 (W.D. Tenn., Oct. 30, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' unlawful payroll policies and practices with regard to
overtime pay in direct violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff Woods was employed by the Defendants to work as a dump
truck driver on June 1, 2023. He quit his job on October 20, 2023
with Defendants due to safety concerns regarding the maintenance of
Defendants' dump trucks.
Plaintiff Bledsoe was also hired by the Defendants to work as a
dump truck driver on March 1, 2023. He quit his job with Defendants
to accept employment with another company on September 30, 2023.
Plaintiff Brown was employed by the Defendants to work as a machine
operator on May 1, 2023 and has worked continuously for Defendants
from his date of hire to the present.
Bosco Contractor Services, LLC is a construction company based in
Jackson, Tennessee.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Alan G. Crone, Esq.
Philip Oliphant, Esq.
THE CRONE LAW FIRM, PLC
88 Union Avenue, 14th Floor
Memphis, TN 38103
Telephone: (901) 737-7740
Facsimile: (901) 474-7926
E-mail: acrone@cronelawfirmplc.com
poliphant@cronelawfirmplc.com
BRAINSTORM CELL: Sporn Sues Over False and Misleading Statements
----------------------------------------------------------------
ELI SPORN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BRAINSTORM CELL THERAPEUTICS INC., CHAIM
LEBOVITS, and STACY LINDBORG, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-09630
(S.D.N.Y., Nov. 1, 2023) is a class action on behalf of the
Plaintiff and other persons or entities who purchased or otherwise
acquired publicly traded Brainstorm Cell securities between August
15, 2022 and September 27, 2023, inclusive, seeking to recover
compensable damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal
securities laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Brainstorm Cell Therapeutics Inc. is a biotechnology company which
develops and commercializes autologous cellular therapies for the
treatment of neurodegenerative diseases.
Throughout the Class period, the Defendants released statements
that were materially false and/or misleading because they
misrepresented and failed to disclose the adverse facts pertaining
to the Company's business, operations and prospects, which were
known to Defendants or recklessly disregarded by them.
Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Brainstorm Cell downplayed the
severity of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's refusal to file
letter; (2) Brainstorm Cell continued to conceal the risks
associated with the submission of the Biologics License
Application; and (3) as a result, Defendants' statements about its
business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
On this news, Brainstorm Cell's share price fell $0.19 per share,
or 48.72%, to close at $0.2 per share on September 28, 2023.
As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's common
shares, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant
losses and damages, the suit alleges.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Phillip Kim, Esq.
Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 686-1060
Facsimile: (212) 202-3827
E-mail: pkim@rosenlegal.com
lrosen@rosenlegal.com
BRITISH COLUMBIA: Faces Suit Over Unfair COVID Vaccine Mandates
---------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Dhaliwal of Rebel News reports that at least hundreds of
unvaccinated B.C. health care workers who lost their jobs during
the COVID pandemic have filed a class-action lawsuit against
provincial health officer Dr. Bonnie Henry.
Among the claimants is former lab technician, Terri Perepolkin, who
has been without work for two years over her failure to comply with
COVID vaccine mandates at her workplace. To afford B.C. living, she
and her husband sold their Vernon residence after her dismissal
from Vernon Jubilee Hospital, where she worked since 2004.
Perepolkin is currently a stay-at-home mom, who home schools their
children, as of October 26, 2021. The province terminated her
employment that November 18.
Meanwhile, she also started The United Health Care Workers of BC, a
non-profit society for all health care workers in the province
impacted by the mandates. Perepolkin told Castanet that her society
currently has 107 members, whom she hopes will join the class
action, once certified.
"Dr. Henry is still requiring the first two COVID shots to work in
health care in B.C. – even though she has admitted that all
workers who have the first two shots no longer have any protection
from them," claimed the Vernon lab technician.
A rural B.C. mayor wants the provincial health authority to
rehire unvaccinated healthcare workers amid repeat emergency room
closures across the province.
-- Rebel News (@RebelNewsOnline) April 24, 2023
In addition, co-plaintiff Jedediah Ferguson, who worked at
Cumberland Regional Hospital laundry since June 2015, also received
a leave of absence before Interior Health fired her.
According to court documents filed on October 13, the plaintiffs
tabled the action "on behalf of members of the class consisting of
all unionized healthcare workers in British Columbia who have been
subject to the COVID-19 vaccination status information and
preventative measures order."
It asserts the Henry undermined their contractual employment
agreements when she issued the public health order on October 14,
2021.
The plaintiffs claim she "acted with reckless indifference or
willful blindness" by continuing to enforce the order.
Despite reports that rural BC mayors want the COVID-19 vaccine
mandate to end for healthcare workers, the Ministry of Health's
refusal to rescind the order has created a persistent nursing
shortage province-wide.
According to the order, "vaccination is safe, very effective, and
the single most important preventive measure for health
professionals [. . .] to protect patients, residents and clients,
and the health and personal care workforce, from [. . .]
COVID-19."
The suit counters that claim, suggesting the COVID vaccine
monographs are 'misleading,' while referencing the risk of
sustaining an adverse side-effect from the jab, including blood
clots. The plaintiffs seek damages for the alleged contract breach,
"misfeasance" in public office, and the suit's certification.
The province had 21 days to respond from the action's filing, with
no response reported as of writing. [GN]
CENTER FOR EMPLOYMENT: Dreher Suit Removed to E.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Teddy Lawrence Dreher, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated, and the general public v. CENTER
FOR EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES, INC., a New York corporation; and
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 23CV007758 was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the County
Sacramento, to the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of California on Nov. 1, 2023, and assigned Case No.
2:23-cv-02515-JDP.
On September 1, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a civil Class Action
Complaint for Damages against Defendant which sets forth the
following causes of action: Failure to Provide Meal Periods;
Failure to Provide Rest Periods; Failure to Pay Hourly Wages and
Overtime; Failure to Pay Proper Reporting Time Wages; Failure to
Pay Proper Sick Pay; Failure to Provide Accurate Written Wage
Statements; Failure to Timely Pay All Final Wages; Failure to
Indemnify; and Unfair Competition.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Adam Y. Siegel, Esq.
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2500
Los Angeles, California 90017-5408
Phone: (213) 689-0404
Facsimile: (213) 689-0430
Email: Adam.Siegel@jacksonlewis.com
- and -
Michael Y. Hsueh, Esq.
JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
160 W. Santa Clara St., Suite 400
San Jose, California 95113-1708
Phone: (408) 579-0404
Facsimile: (408) 454-0290
Email: michael.hsueh@jacksonlewis.com
COCA-COLA COMPANY: Martinez Seeks Blind's Equal Access to Website
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PEDRO MARTINEZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE COCA-COLA COMPANY d/b/a Costa Coffee,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-08221-VMS (E.D.N.Y., November 6, 2023)
is a class action against the Defendant for violations of Title III
of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human
Rights Law, the New York State Civil Rights Law, and the New York
City Human Rights Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website,
us.costacoffee.com, contains access barriers which hinder the
Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online
goods, content, and services offered to the public through the
website. The accessibility issues on the website include, but not
limited to: lack of alt-text on graphics, inaccessible drop-down
menus, the lack of navigation links, the lack of adequate prompting
and labeling, the denial of keyboard access, empty links that
contain no text, redundant links where adjacent links go to the
same URL address, and the requirement that transactions be
performed solely with a mouse, the suit asserts.
The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.
The Coca-Cola Company, doing business as Costa Coffee, is a company
that operates Costa Coffee Stores in New York State and throughout
the United States, headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq.
SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
Scarsdale, NY 10583
Telephone: (917) 373-9128
E-mail: ShakedLawGroup@gmail.com
COREBRIDGE FINANCIAL: Oakwood Suit Transferred to D. Massachusetts
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Charles Oakwood, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. COREBRIDGE FINANCIAL, INC., Case No.
4:23-cv-02911 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Texas, to the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts on Nov. 1, 2023.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:23-cv-12634-ADB to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.
Corebridge Financial -- https://www.corebridgefinancial.com/ -- is
an American multinational financial services company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC - DALLAS
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 1450
Dallas, TX 75219
Phone: (214) 744-3000
Fax: (214) 744-3015
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Kevin M. McGinty, Esq.
Katharine K. Foote, Esq.
MINTZ, LEVIN, COHN, FERRIS, GLOVSKY AND POPEO, PC
One Financial Center, 42nd Flr.
Boston, MA 02111
Phone: (617) 542-6000
Fax: (617) 542-2241
Email: kmcginty@mintz.com
KKFoote@mintz.com
- and -
David T. McDowell, Esq.
Jason Anthony Richardson, Esq.
Louise Blanche Root, Esq.
MCDOWELL HETHERINGTON LLP
1001 Fannin St., Ste. 2400
Houston, TX 77002-6707
Phone: (713) 337-5580
Fax: (713) 337-8850
Email: david.mcdowell@mhllp.com
jason.richardson@mhllp.com
louise.root@mhllp.com
- and -
James J. Pastore, Jr., Esq.
Kristin D. Kiehn, Esq.
DEBEVOISE & PLIMPTON LLP
66 Hudson Boulevard
New York, NY 10001
Phone: (212) 909-6000
Email: jjpastore@debevoise.com
kdkiehn@debevoise.com
CYMULATE INC: Stevens Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
---------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW STEVENS and CHARLES ABABIO, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CYMULATE, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:23-cv-02407-K (N.D. Tex., Oct. 30, 2023)
arises from the Defendant's unlawful labor practices in violation
of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Colorado Wage Claim Act,
Colorado Rev. Stat., and the Colorado Minimum Wage Act as
interpreted by the Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards
Order.
According to the complaint, the Defendant maintained and followed a
policy and practice under which it refused to pay Plaintiffs the
required overtime premium for the hours they worked above 40 in any
given workweek. The Defendant violated the CWCA, Colorado Rev.
Stat. due to its retaliatory conduct against Plaintiff Stevens by
terminating him for making a protected complaint against Defendant
regarding his unpaid commissions.
Plaintiffs Stevens and Arabio were employed by Defendant as sales
development representatives from June 2022 until March 2023 and
from February 2022 to September 2022, respectively.
Cymulate, Inc. is a cybersecurity software company that operates
throughout the United States, with its principal place of business
in Dallas, Texas.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Caitlin Boehne, Esq.
Austin Kaplan, Esq.
KAPLAN LAW FIRM, PLLC
3901 S. Lamar Blvd, #260
Austin, TX 78704
Telephone: (512) 553-9390
Facsimile: (512) 692-2788
E-mail: cbohene@kaplanlawatx.com
akaplan@kaplanlawatx.com
- and -
Javier Perez, Esq.
PEREZ LAW PLLC
4925 Greenville Avenue, #1450
Dallas, TX 75206
Telephone: (214) 499-0667
E-mail: javier@javierperezlaw.com
DATACOMP APPRAISAL: Brown Sues Over Home Rental Monopoly
--------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN BROWN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DATACOMP APPRAISAL SYSTEMS, INC.; EQUITY
LIFESTYLE PROPERTIES, INC.; HOMETOWN AMERICA MANAGEMENT, L.L.C.;
LAKESHORE COMMUNITIES, INC.; SUN COMMUNITIES, INC.; RHP PROPERTIES,
INC.; YES! COMMUNITIES, INC.; INSPIRE COMMUNITIES, L.L.C.; KINGSLEY
MANAGEMENT, CORP.; and CAL-AM PROPERTIES, INC., Defendants, Case
No. 1:23-cv-15763 (N.D. Il., Nov. 8, 2023) alleges violation of the
Sherman Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants are
engaged in the conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize
manufactured home lot rental prices.
The Defendants used their reports to coordinate their prices by
sharing non public, competitively sensitive information about
manufactured home lot rental prices an occupancy, throughout the
United States. If Defendants are permitted to continue their
anticompetitive scheme, the Plaintiff and members of the Class will
continue to pay supracompetitive rents for manufactured home lots,
says the suit.
DATACOMP APPRAISAL SYSTEMS, INC. provides manufactured home
appraisals, inspections and market data. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kimberly A. Justice
FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC
923 Fayette Street
Conshohocken, PA 19428
Telephone: (610) 234-6487
Facsimile: (224) 632-4521
Email: kjustice@fklmlaw.com
- and -
Michael Moskovitz
Robert Wozniak
Nia Barberousse Binns
FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC
100 Tri-State Dr, 128
Lincolnshire, IL 60069
Telephone: (224) 632-4500
Facsimile: (224) 632-4521
Email: mmoskovitz@fklmlaw.com
rwozniak@fklmlaw.com
nbinns@fklmlaw.com
- and -
Bruce W. Steckler
STECKLER WAYNE CHERRY & LOVE PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Road, Suite 1045
Dallas, Texas 75230 Telephone:
Telephone(972) 387-4040
Facsimile: (972) 387-4041
Email: bruce@swclaw.com
- and -
John G. Emerson
EMERSON FIRM, PLLC
2500 Wilcrest, Suite 300
Houston, TX 77042
Telephone: (800) 551-8649
Facsimile: (501) 286-4659
Email:jemerson@emersonfirm.com
DAWN TO DUSK: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Avila Alleges
------------------------------------------------------
BRAYAN JIMENEZ AVILA; JOSE EDUARDO FLORES; and ROBERTO CASTRO,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. DAWN TO DUSK LANDSCAPING, INC.; ALBERT AMBROGI; and
THOMAS AMBROGI, Defendants, Case No. 618189/2023 (N.Y. Sup., Nassau
Cty., Nov. 7, 2023) is an action against the Defendants for failure
to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, provide meals and rest
periods, and provide accurate wage statements.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as landscapers.
DAWN TO DUSK LANDSCAPING, INC. provides landscaping, rock
installation, and tree services. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Telephone: (718) 263-9591
EMBASSY HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Walker Says
----------------------------------------------------------
Latasha Walker, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Embassy Healthcare Management, Inc.
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-02126 (N.D. Ohio, Oct. 30, 2023) arises
under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage
Standards Act, and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 for Defendant's failure to
pay Plaintiff and other similarly-situated employees all earned
minimum and overtime wages.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant in the direct care
nursing staff department from approximately October 10, 2022
through approximately November 18, 2022. She asserts that Defendant
violated the FLSA and OMWFSA by automatically deducting a
thirty-minute meal break from each and every shift. The Plaintiff,
the Collective Members and the Class Members worked regardless of
whether Plaintiff, the Collective Members and the Class Members
were able to take a meal break, regardless of whether they were
permitted to take a full thirty-minute meal break, and regardless
of whether they were completely relieved from duty for
thirty-minutes, adds the complaint.
Embassy Healthcare Management, Inc. owns and operates skilled
nursing facilities in Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and
Virginia.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael L. Fradin, Esq.
8401 Crawford Ave. Ste. 104
Skokie, IL 60076
Telephone: (847) 986-5889
Facsimile: (847) 673-1228
E-mail: mike@fradinlaw.com
- and -
James L. Simon, Esq.
SIMON LAW CO.
11 ½ N. Franklin Street
Chagrin Falls, OH 44023
Telephone: (216) 816-8696
E-mail: james@simonsayspay.com
FELTRIGHT LLC: Carrero Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Messages
---------------------------------------------------------------
KIMARY CARRERO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FELTRIGHT, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
6:23-cv-02143 (M.D. Fla., November 6, 2023) is a class action
against the Defendant for violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant is engaged in the
practice of sending unsolicited text messaging to consumers that
have registered their telephone numbers on the National Do Not Call
Registry in order to promote its goods and services. As a result,
the Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers suffered damages,
says the suit.
FeltRight, LLC is an e-commerce company doing business in Florida.
[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
FREELAND ENTERPRISES: Zachary Seeks Delivery Drivers' Unpaid Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
Denim Zachary and Michelle Coffin, on behalf of themselves and
those similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Freeland Enterprises, Inc.,
RFJ Trust I, Freeland Group Restaurants, Hut Diggity, Deanna
Freeland, Todd Hollman, Tyler Freeland, John Doe Corporation 1-10,
John Doe 1-10, Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-00948 (N.D. Ind., Oct.
30, 2023) seeks appropriate monetary, declaratory, and equitable
relief based on Defendants' willful failure to provide proper wages
to Plaintiffs and similarly-situated individuals as required by the
Fair Labor Standards Act and Indiana law.
The Defendants have repeatedly and willfully violated state and
federal laws by failing to adequately reimburse delivery drivers
for their delivery-related expenses, thereby failing to pay
delivery drivers the legally mandated minimum wage for all hours
worked and minimum overtime rate for hours worked in excess of 40
per workweek, says the suit.
The Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and
similarly situated current and former delivery drivers in Indiana.
Freeland Enterprises, Inc. operates at least 40 Pizza Hut Pizza
franchises across the U.S.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Myra R. Reid, Esq.
ANDERSON AGOSTINO & KELLER, PC
131 S. Taylor Street
South Bend, IN 46601
Telephone: (574) 288-1510
Facsimile: (574) 288-1650
E-mail: reid@aaklaw.com
FRESH DINING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Castillo Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
ALISIA CASTILLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FRESH DINING CONCEPTS LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 160985/2023 (N.Y., Sup., New York Cty., Nov. 8, 2023) seeks to
recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation,
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs
Plaintiff Castillo was employed by the Defendant as a fast food
employee.
FRESH DINING CONCEPTS LLC own and operate restaurants in New York.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Gaylord, Esq.
BOUKLAS GAYLORD LLP
357 Veterans Memorial Highway
Commack, NY 11725
Telephone:(516) 742-4949
Email:mark@bglawny.com
FUR-EVER FRIENDS: Williamson Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA WILLIAMSON, individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FUR-EVER FRIENDS DOGGIE DAYCARE &
MORE, INC., FUR-EVER FRIENDS DOGGIE DAYCARE, LLC, and KEITH R.
HANCOCK, JR., Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-01360-TJM-DJS (N.D.N.Y.,
Nov. 1, 2023) is an action brought against the Defendants pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and the
New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations to recover overtime
compensation, spread of hours compensation, and damages arising
from record-keeping violations on behalf of the Plaintiff.
The Plaintiff worked for Fur-Ever Friends as a part-time Kennel
Attendant from April 26, 2021, until May 22, 2021, during which she
was paid an hourly wage of $15.00 per hour. The Plaintiff was then
promoted to a full-time Facility Manager on May 23, 2021, wherein
she worked until approximately December 16, 2021.
Fur-Ever Friends Doggie Daycare & More, Inc. is a dog day care
center in Cohoes, New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ryan G. Files, Esq.
GATTUSO & CIOTOLI, PLLC
The White House
7030 E. Genesee Street
Fayetteville, NY 13066
Telephone: (315) 314-8000
Facsimile: (315) 446-7521
E-mail: rfiles@gclawoffice.com
GIGACLOUD TECHNOLOGY: Villanueva Sues Over Share Price Drop
-----------------------------------------------------------
ROCK VILLANUEVA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GIGACLOUD TECHNOLOGY INC, LARRY LEI WU, KWOK
HEI DAVID LAU, XIN WAN, FRANK LIN, XING HUANG, and AEGIS CAPITAL
CORP., Defendants, Case No. 2:23-cv-09134 (C.D. Cal., Oct. 30,
2023) is a class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and other
persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired
GigaCloud: (a) Class A ordinary shares pursuant and/or traceable to
the registration statement and prospectus issued in connection with
the Company's August 2022 initial public offering; and/or (b)
securities between August 18, 2022 and September 27, 2023,
inclusive, pursuing claims under the Securities Act of 1933 and the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
On August 19, 2022, the Company filed its prospectus on Form 424B4
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, which forms part
of the Registration Statement. In the Registration Statement and
throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made materially false
and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose
material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations,
and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors: (i) that the Company's business is a fraction of what it
publicly claims, as evidenced by staffing and activity levels at
its warehouses; (ii) that the Company overstated its last-mile
operations; (iii) that the Company engaged in undisclosed related
party transactions; (iv) that, as a result, the Company's financial
results were overstated; and (v) that, as a result of the
foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis, says the suit.
As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's
securities, the Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered
significant losses and damages, the suit alleges.
GigaCloud Technology, Inc. is a holding company which, through its
subsidiaries, offers an end-to-end ecommerce platform for global
trade services of heavy and large products, primarily
furniture.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jennifer Pafiti, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
1100 Glendon Avenue, 15th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Telephone: (310) 405-7190
E-mail: jpafiti@pomlaw.com
HOLLEY INC: Fort Lauderdale Sues Over Drop in Share Price
---------------------------------------------------------
CITY OF FORT LAUDERDALE GENERAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. HOLLEY INC. f/k/a EMPOWER LTD.; TOM TOMLINSON; and
DOMINIC BARDOS, Defendant, Case 1:23-cv-00148-GNS (W.D. Ky., Nov.
6, 2023) is a securities class action on behalf of all persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired Holley securities between July 21,
2021 and February 6, 2023, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies
and recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that throughout the Class
Period, the Defendants made materially false and misleading
statements and omitted material information regarding the Company's
business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Defendants
touted to investors that Holley was well-prepared to weather an
economic downturn thanks to sticky demand from car and truck
enthusiasts as well as the Company's seemingly successful growth
through M&A strategy, which had purportedly resulted in successful
integrations and significant cost synergies.
The price of Holley stock fell 31 percent, or $1.06 per share, to
close at $2.36 per share on February 7, 2023, on unusually high
trading volume. The following day, February 8, 2023, the price of
Holley stock fell an additional 9.75 percent, or $0.23 per share,
to close at $2.13 per share, down approximately 85 percent from the
Class Period peak of $14.52 per share on March 16, 2022.
As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
subsequent declines in the market value of Holley securities, the
Plaintiff and other members of the Class suffered losses and
damages, says the suit.
HOLLEY INC. f/k/a EMPOWER LTD. operates as an automobile company.
The Company designs, manufactures, and distributes carburetors,
fuel pumps, fuel injection and nitrous oxide injection systems,
superchargers, exhaust headers, mufflers, ignition components,
engine tuners, and automotive performance. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Garrison, Esq.
BARRETT JOHNSTON MARTIN & GARRISON, LLC
200 31st Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 244-2202
Facsimile: (615) 252-3798
Email: dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com
- and -
Robert J. Robbins, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
225 NE Mizner Boulevard, Suite 720
Boca Raton, FL 33423
Telephone: (561) 750-3000
Facsimile: (561) 750-3364
HONEY POT: Class Cert Discovery Denied w/o Prejudice
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICOLE MCAULEY et al., v.
THE HONEY POT COMPANY, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01986-AT-JW
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer E. Willis entered an order as
follows:
-- SDNY case law and the policy purpose behind Rule 26 both
suggest
that a request for discovery related to an anticipated
argument
is best denied without prejudice.
-- If the defense is eventually actually made, then a request for
such discovery could be entertained. Therefore, Plaintiffs'
Requests for Production Nos. 23, 24, and 30 are denied, but
without prejudice.
-- After the Defendants submit an Answer, the Plaintiffs may
submit
a renewed request. Third, in RFPs 2 and 15, the Plaintiffs
seek
"total net sales" and "any refunds". The Defendants object
that
this discovery would be premature. Clearly, sales and refund
information would be relevant to questions of numerosity under
Rule 23 and potential damages.
-- Fourth, Defendants also objected in their letters to RFPs 6-11
related to pricing strategy and the price elasticity of
supply.
At the conference, the Parties informed the Court that they
already responded to requests for RFPs 8-11.
Honey Pot is a manufacturer of feminine hygiene products intended
to offer healthy alternatives to feminine care.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 3, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/473ZDdZ at no extra charge.[CC]
INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS: Mize Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
KRISTAL MIZE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION,
JOHNSON & JOHNSON HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. and JANSSEN CAREPATH,
Defendants, Case No. 7:23-cv-09725-UA (S.D.N.Y., November 3, 2023)
seeks damages, restitution, and injunctive relief for the harms
caused by the data breach on August 2, 2023 in which Plaintiff's
and other similarly situated individuals' protected health
information and personal identifiable information were hacked.
The class action arises from the Defendants' failure to properly
secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly situated
individuals' PHI and PII, including names, addresses, dates of
birth, medical records, health insurance plan number IDs, and
claims data. In addition, while Defendants claim to have discovered
the data breach as early as August 2, 2023, Defendants did not
inform victims of the data breach until they sent notice via U.S.
Mail on September 15, 2023, says the suit.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff brings this class action on behalf of
herself and those similarly situated to address Defendants' alleged
inadequate safeguarding of Class Members' PHI/PII that Defendants
collected and maintained, and for failing to provide timely and
adequate notice to Plaintiff and other Class Members that their
PHI/PII had been subject to the unauthorized access of an unknown
third party or precisely what specific type of information was
accessed.
Headquartered in New York, IBM provides “infrastructure,
software, and consulting services to businesses. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James M. Evangelista, Esq.
EVANGELISTA WORLEY LLC
500 Sugar Mill Road
Suite 245A
Atlanta, GA 30350
Telephone: (404) 205-8400
Facsimile: (404) 205-8395
E-mail: jim@ewlawllc.com
- and -
Jennifer S. Czeisler, Esq.
STERLINGTON PLLC
One World Trade Center
85th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 433-2993
E-mail: Jen.czeisler@sterlingtonlaw.com
- and -
Edward Ciolko, Esq.
STERLINGTON PLLC
One World Trade Center
85th Floor
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 433-2993
E-mail: Edward.ciolko@sterlingtonlaw.com
JAXXON LLC: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Luis Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN YAN LUIS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. Jaxxon LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-09620 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 1, 2023) is a civil rights action
against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its website, jaxxon.com, to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired people in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
According to the complaint, the website contains significant access
barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind and
visually-impaired customers, including Plaintiff, to use the
website. In fact, the access barriers make it impossible for blind
and visually-impaired users to even complete a transaction on the
website. By failing to make the website accessible to blind
persons, Defendant is violating basic equal access requirements
under both state and federal law, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Jaxxon's policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination.
Jaxxon.com is a commercial website that offers products and
services for online sale. The online store allows the user to
browse high-quality jewelry, make purchases, and perform a variety
of other functions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Noor A. Saab Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB
380 North Broadway, Penthouse West
Jericho, NY 11753
Telephone: (718) 740-5060
Facsimile: (718) 709-5912
E-mail: NoorASaabLaw@gmail.com
JJ APPAREL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Bilbao Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------
AXEL BILBAO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. JJ APPAREL CROCKER, INC., Defendant, Case
No. CACE-23-021006 (Fla. Cir., Broward Cty., Nov. 10, 2023) seeks
to stop the Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls.
JJ APPAREL CROCKER, INC., doing business as Naked Zebra, operates
as an online clothing store. The Company offers dresses, tops,
bottoms, rompers, and handbags for date night, office attire, and
holidays. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.
Shawn A. Heller, Esq.
SOCIAL JUSTICE LAW COLLECTIVE, PL
974 Howard Ave.
Dunedin, FL 34698
Telephone: (202) 709-5744
Facsimile: (866) 893-0416
Email: josh@sjlawcollective.com
shawn@sjlawcollective.com
KONICA MINOLTA: Motion to Certify Suit Over 401 (K) Plan Filed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jacklyn Wille of Bloomberg Law reports that Konica Minolta Business
Solutions USA Inc. employees challenging the fees and investment
funds in their 401(k) plan asked a federal judge to certify their
case as a class action covering about 9,000 people.
The employees' motion, filed Nov. 10 in the US District Court for
the District of New Jersey, seeks a class covering all the Konica
Minolta plan's participants and beneficiaries since June 2014, with
the defendants and their immediate family members excluded. The
plan had between 8,117 and 9,220 participants with account balances
during this period, according to the motion. [GN]
KRAFT HEINZ: Collects Personal Data Without Consent, Darnell Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JASON DARNELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KRAFT HEINZ FOOD COMPANY, Defendant, Case
3:23-cv-03595-RJD (S.D. Ill., Nov. 6, 2023) seeks to redress and
curtail the Defendant's unlawful collection, use, storage, and
disclosure of Plaintiff's sensitive and proprietary biometric data
in violation of the Biometric Information Privacy Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant collected
and captured the fingerprint of the Plaintiff and other individuals
without giving proper notice and without obtaining proper
authorization in violation of the BIPA.
KRAFT HEINZ FOOD COMPANY operates as a food and beverage company.
The Company offers sauces, meals, soups, snacks, and infant
nutrition products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles Jason Brown, Esq.
Jayson A. Watkins, Esq.
BROWN & WATKINS LLC
301 S. US 169 Hwy
Gower, MO 64454
Telephone: (816) 424-1390
Facsimile: (816) 424-1337
Email: brown@brownandwatkins.com
watkins@brownandwatkins.com
LANCASTER, PA: Faces Stone Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
----------------------------------------------------
GEOFF L. STONE, an individual on behalf of himself and other
individuals similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CITY OF LANCASTER,
Defendant, Case No. 5:23-cv-04187-JMG (E.D. Pa., Oct. 30, 2023)
arises from the Defendant's violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act by failing to apply a properly calculate overtime rate to hours
of work of Plaintiff that qualified for an overtime rate of pay as
required by the law.
The Plaintiff is employed by the City of Lancaster as a full-time
firefighter. He asserts that the Defendant's violation have
continued from, at least, September 2020 to the present.
The City of Lancaster is a political subdivision organized and
existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
W. Daniel Feehan, Esq.
Stephen J. Holroyd, Esq.
HOLROYD GELMAN, P.C.
2005 Market Street, Suite 920
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 351-0657
LEHIGH HANSON SERVICES: Raines Suit Removed to E.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Walter L. Raines, on behalf of himself and
other similarly situated v. LEHIGH HANSON SERVICES, LLC; CALAVERAS
MATERIALS, INC.; MARTIN MARIETTA MATERIALS, INC.; HEIDELBERG CEMENT
GROUP; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No.
37-2023-00041586-CU-OE-CTL was removed from the Superior Court of
the State of California, County of San Joaquin, to the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of California on
Nov. 1, 2023, and assigned Case No. 2:23-cv-02516-TLN-KJN.
In the Class Action Complaint, the Plaintiff asserts the following
causes of action: failure to pay wages for all hours worked at
minimum wage in violation of Labor Code; failure to pay reporting
time pay in violation of Labor Code; failure to authorize or permit
meal periods in violation of Labor Code; failure to provide
complete and accurate wage statements in violation of Labor Code;
failure to timely pay all earned wages and final paychecks due at
time of separation of employment in violation of Labor Code; and
failure to timely pay earned wages during employment in violation
of Labor Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Mike Birrer, Esq.
Kelli Hinson, Esq.
Jordan R. Brownlow, Esq.
CARRINGTON, COLEMAN, SLOMAN & BLUMENTHAL, L.L.P.
901 Main Street, Suite 5500
Dallas, TC 75202
Phone: 214-855-3000
Facsimile: 214-580-2641
Email: mbirrer@ccsb.com
khinson@ccsb.com
jbrownlow@ccsb.com
- and -
Cassandra M Ferrannini, Esq.
Daria A Gossett, Esq.
DOWNEY BRAND LLP
621 Capitol Mall, 18th Floor
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-444-1000
Facsimile: 916-444-2100
Email: cferrannini@downeybrand.com
dgossett@downeybrand.com
LEXISNEXIS RISK: Scroggins Allowed to File 2nd Amended Complaint
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KERRY JENNIFER SCROGGINS,
V. LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS FL INC., Case No.
3:22-cv-00545-MHL-SLS (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Hannah Lauck
entered an order:
-- granting Scroggins's Motion for Leave to File Second Amended
Complaint, and
-- granting Ms. Scroggins's Motion for Extension of Time
regarding
Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification.
Lexisnexis was founded in 1994. The company's line of business
includes providing full service legal advice.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 2, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3StTp2L at no extra charge.[CC]
LI-CYCLE HOLDINGS: Davis Sues Over Drop in Share Price
------------------------------------------------------
RACHEL DAVIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LI-CYCLE HOLDINGS CORP.; AJAY KOCHHAR; and
DEBORAH SIMPSON, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-09894 (S.D.N.Y., Nov.
8, 2023) is a class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and other
persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Li-Cycle
securities between June 14, 2022 and October 23, 2023, inclusive,
seeking to pursue claims against the Defendants under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that throughout the Class
Period, the Defendants made materially false and/or misleading
statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts
about the Company's business, operations, and prospects.
Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that
the Company's Rochester Hub was experiencing escalating
construction costs; (2) that these "escalating construction costs"
exceeded the expected aggregate cost of the project; (3) that, as a
result, the Company would be forced to temporarily halt
construction and reevaluate the construction strategy for the
Rochester Hub; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing,
Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked
a reasonable basis.
Li-Cycle shares declined by $1.04, or approximately 45.81 percent,
to close at $1.23 per share on October 23, 2023, on unusually heavy
trading volume. As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and
omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the
Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have
suffered significant losses and damages, the suit alleges.
LI-CYCLE HOLDINGS CORP. operates as a holding company. The Company,
through its subsidiaries, provides lithium-ion battery recycling
and resource recovery solutions. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory B. Linkh, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
Rebecca Dawson
230 Park Ave., Suite 358
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 682-5340
Facsimile: (212) 884-0988
Email: glinkh@glancylaw.com
- and -
Robert V. Prongay, Esq.
Charles H. Linehan, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 201-9150
Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
- and –
Frank R. Cruz, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF FRANK R. CRUZ
1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 914-5007
MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL: Faces Suit Over Breach of Privacy Rights
--------------------------------------------------------------
SUSAN MILLER, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiff v. MASSACHUSETTS MUTUAL LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No.2023LA001176 (Fla. Cir., 18th Judicial,
DuPage Cty., November 3, 2023) alleges violations of the Illinois
Genetic Information Privacy Act, which prohibits insurers from
using protected genetic information for underwriting purposes
including the assessment of an individual's eligibility or the
computation of premium or contribution amounts.
Plaintiff Miller asserts that the Defendant requires its customers
to complete a life insurance application and undergo a physical
exam during which genetic information in the form of their family
medical history is requested. Accordingly, Plaintiff brings this
action for statutory damages and other remedies as a result of
Defendant's conduct in violating Plaintiff's Illinois genetic
privacy rights.
Based in Springfield, MA, Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance
Company offers life insurance and protection products, retirement
and investment services. Registered with the Illinois Department of
Insurance, it conducts substantial business throughout Illinois,
including in DuPage County. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Timothy P. Kingsbury, Esq.
Andrew T. Heldut, Esq.
Colin P. Buscarini, Esq.
MCGUIRE LAW, P.C.
55 W. Wacker Drive, 9th Fl.
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 893-7002
E-mail: tkingsbury@mcgpc.com
aheldut@mcgpc.com
cbuscarini@mcgpc.com
MATTRESS FIRM: Everett Suit Removed to S.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Amy Everett, David Shattuck, and David
Jackson, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated
v. MATTRESS FIRM, INC., and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
37-2023-00041586-CU-OE-CTL was removed from the Superior Court of
the State of California, County of San Diego, to the United States
District Court for the Southern District of California on Nov. 1,
2023, and assigned Case No. 3:23-cv-02020-RSH-MSB.
The Complaint brings putative class claims for the alleged: Failure
to Pay Regular/Overtime Wages in Violation of Labor Code; Failure
to Authorize, Permit, and/or Make Available Rest Periods in
Violation of Labor Code, and the Applicable Wage Order in Violation
of Labor Code; Failure to Authorize, Permit, and/or Make Available
Meal Periods in Violation of Labor Code; Failure to Furnish
Accurate Itemized Wage Statements in Violation of Labor Code; and
Unlawful, Unfair, and Fraudulent Business Practices Pursuant to
Business and Professions Code Section.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Alexander M. Chemers, Esq.
Madeleine K. Lee, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: 213-239-9800
Facsimile: 213-239-9045
Email: zander.chemers@ogletree.com
madeleine.lee@ogletree.com
MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL: Colinayo & Maldonado Suits Consolidated
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DARWIN COLINAYO, v.
MCKESSON MEDICAL-SURGICAL INC, Case No. 2:22-cv-01616-DJC-KJN (E.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Daniel J. Calabretta entered an order
consolidating cases:
1. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 42, the actions denominated as
Colinayo v. McKesson Medical-Surgical Inc., Case No.
2:22-cv-
01616 DJC-KJN, and Maldonado v. McKesson Medical-Surgical
Inc.,
Case No. 2:23-cv-00430 DJC-KJN, are consolidated for purposes
of
briefing, scheduling, discovery, class certification,
pretrial
proceedings, trial, and any post-trial motions or
proceedings.
Said actions shall be consolidated for purposes of judgment
or
appeal.
2. Case No. 2:22-cv-01616 DJC-KJN is designated as the "master
file;"
3. The Clerk of the Court is directed to add all complaints and
answers filed in Case No. 2:23-cv-00430 DJC-KJN, ECF No. 3
(Exhibits B and C), to the master file;
4. The Clerk of the Court is DIRECTED to administratively close
Case No. 2:23-cv-00430 DJC-KJN; and
5. The parties are directed to file all future pleadings,
motions
and other filings ONLY in Case No. 2:22-cv-01616 DJC-KJN.
McKesson is a medical distributor offering medical supplies,
healthcare solutions, distribution services and clinical
resources.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 3, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3sxVlMZ at no extra charge.[CC]
META MATERIALS: Consolidated Shareholder Suit Over Merger Dismissed
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Meta Materials Inc. disclosed in its Form 8-K report for September
29, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
October 2, 2023, that on September 29, 2023, following complete
briefing and argument of defendants' motion to dismiss, the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New York entered an
order granting defendants' motion to dismiss and holding that
plaintiffs failed to plead a false statement or material omission
or a strong inference of scienter.
Said order dismissed all claims against all defendants, including
the company. The plaintiffs will have 30 days to file a notice of
appeal from the date the court enters a final judgment in favor of
the defendants. On October 2, 2023, the issued a press release
announcing dismissal of the securities class action lawsuit.
Beginning in January 2022, two putative securities class action
lawsuits were filed in the Eastern District of New York against
Meta Materials, Inc., its chief executive officer, former chief
financial officer, a former chairman of the board of directors of
its subsidiary, Torchlight Energy Resources, Inc. and its former
chief executive officer. The complaints, purportedly brought on
behalf of all purchasers of our publicly traded securities from
September 21, 2020 through and including December 14, 2021,
asserted claims under Sections 10(b), 14(a) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, and Sections
11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, arising primarily from a
short-seller report and statements related to its business
combination with Torchlight and were subsequently consolidated into
a single action captioned "In re Meta Materials Inc. Securities
Litigation," No. 1:21-cv-07203.
Meta Materials Inc. is into advanced materials and nanotechnology
with potential customers across consumer electronics, 5G
communications, healthcare, aerospace, automotive and clean energy
with over 500 active patent documents, of which over 300 patents
have been issued.
META PLATFORMS: Klein, et al., Seek to File Documents Under Seal
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAXIMILIAN KLEIN, et al.,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. META
PLATFORMS, INC., Case No. 3:20-cv-08570-JD (N.D. Cal.), the
Advertiser plaintiffs file an administrative motion to file
documents under seal and notice of lodging pursuant to Civil local
rule 79-5 and the
Court's September 20, 2023 order.
Meta Platforms is a provider of social networking, advertising, and
business insight solutions.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 3, 2023 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3Sx33lc at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Yavar Bathaee, Esq.
Andrew C. Wolinsky, Esq.
Adam Ernette, Esq.
Priscilla Ghita, Esq.
Chang Hahn, Esq.
Andrew M. Williamson, Esq.
Allison Watson Cross, Esq.
Brian J. Dunne, Esq.
Edward M. Grauman, Esq.
BATHAEE DUNNE LLP
445 Park Avenue, 9th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (332) 322-8835
E-mail: yavar@bathaeedunne.com
awolinsky@bathaeedunne.com
bdunne@bathaeedunne.com
egrauman@bathaeedunne.com
aernette@bathaeedunne.com
pghita@bathaeedunne.com
chahn@bathaeedunne.com
awilliamson@bathaeedunne.com
across@bathaeedunne.com
- and -
Keith J. Verrier, Esq.
Austin B. Cohen, Esq.
LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP
510 Walnut Street, Suite 500
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Telephone: (215) 592-1500
E-mail: kverrier@lfsblaw.com
acohen@lfsblaw.com
- and -
Amanda F. Lawrence, Esq.
Patrick J. McGahan, Esq.
Michael P. Srodoski, Esq.
Carmen A. Medici, Esq.
Hal D. Cunningham, Esq.
Daniel J. Brockwell, Esq.
Patrick J. Rodriguez, Esq.
SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
156 South Main Street, P.O. Box 192
Colchester, CT 06415
Telephone: (860) 537-5537
E-mail: alawrence@scott-scott.com
pmcgahan@scott-scott.com
msrodoski@scott-scott.com
cmedici@scott-scott.com
hcunningham@scott-scott.com
dbrockwell@scott-scott.com
prodriguez@scott-scott.com
- and -
Tina Wolfson, Esq.
Robert Ahdoot, Esq.
Theodore W. Maya, Esq.
Henry Kelston, Esq.
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
2600 West Olive Avenue, Suite 500
Burbank, CA 91505
Telephone: (310) 474-9111
E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com
tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com
hkelston@ahdootwolfson.com
META PLATFORMS: Parties File Stipulation on Class Certification
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAXIMILIAN KLEIN, et al.,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. META
PLATFORMS, INC., a Delaware Corporation headquartered in
California, Case No. 3:20-cv-08570-JD (N.D. Cal.), the Parties file
joint stipulation regarding class certification concurrent expert
proceeding:
-- The Parties' expert witnesses shall meet and confer to prepare
a
joint statement that lists the top 6-8 issues of disagreement
for
each of the separate User and Advertiser class certification
motions, by descending importance.
-- The Court will use the joint statement as an agenda for the
discussion. The witnesses will be invited to comment on each
other's remarks, and to pose questions.
-- The parties anticipate that the following expert witnesses may
attend the concurrent expert proceeding:
for User Plaintiffs: Dr. Nicholas Economides, Dr. Joseph
Farrell, Mr. Robert Klein, and Prof. Sarah Lamdan;
for Advertiser Plaintiffs: Dr. Michael Williams, Dr. Joshua
Gans, Mr. Kevin Kreitzman, and Mr. Scott Fasser;
for Meta: Dr. Catherine Tucker, Dr. Yael Hochberg, and Ms.
Rebecca Kirk Fair.
-- For medical reasons, User Plaintiffs respectfully request that
two
of their experts—Mr. Klein and Prof. Lamdan—be permitted to
participate in the concurrent expert proceeding remotely via
Zoom.
Meta takes no position on this request.
-- The concurrent expert proceedings will last 2 hours per each of
the two class certification motions, by Users and by
Advertisers.
Meta Platforms is a provider of social networking, advertising, and
business insight solutions.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Nov. 3, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3QqIWCB at no extra charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Shana E. Scarlett, Esq.
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202
Berkeley, CA 94710
Telephone: (510) 725-3000
E-mail: shanas@hbsslaw.com
steve@hbsslaw.com
- and -
W. Joseph Bruckner, Esq.
Robert K. Shelquist, Esq.
Brian D. Clark, Esq.
Rebecca A. Peterson, Esq.
Arielle S. Wagner, Esq.
Kyle J. Pozan, Esq.
Laura M. Matson, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P.
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-6900
E-mail: wjbruckner@locklaw.com
rkshelquist@locklaw.com
bdclark@locklaw.com
rapeterson@locklaw.com
aswagner@locklaw.com
kjpozan@locklaw.com
lmmatson@locklaw.com
- and -
Kevin Y. Teruya, Esq.
Adam B. Wolfson, Esq.
Claire D. Hausman, Esq.
Brantley I. Pepperman, Esq.
Michelle Schmit, Esq.
Manisha M. Sheth, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
865 South Figueroa Street, 10th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017-2543
Telephone: (213) 443-3000
E-mail: kevinteruya@quinnemanuel.com
adamwolfson@quinnemanuel.com
clairehausman@quinnemanuel.com
brantleypepperman@quinnemanuel.com
michelleschmit@quinnemanuel.com
manishasheth@quinnemanuel.com
- and -
Yavar Bathaee, Esq.
Andrew C. Wolinsky, Esq.
Brian J. Dunne, Esq.
Edward M. Grauman, Esq.
BATHAEE DUNNE LLP
445 Park Avenue, 9th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (332) 322-8835
E-mail: yavar@bathaeedunne.com
awolinsky@bathaeedunne.com
bdunne@bathaeedunne.com
egrauman@bathaeedunne.com
- and -
Tina Wolfson, Esq.
Robert Ahdoot, Esq.
Theodore W. Maya, Esq.
Henry Kelston, Esq.
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
2600 West Olive Avenue, Suite 500
Burbank, CA 91505
Telephone: (310) 474-9111
E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com
tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com
hkelston@ahdootwolfson.com
- and -
Amanda F. Lawrence, Esq.
Patrick J. McGahan, Esq.
Michael P. Srodoski, Esq.
Hal D. Cunningham, Esq.
Daniel J. Brockwell, Esq.
Patrick J. Rodriguez, Esq.
SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
156 South Main Street, P.O. Box 192
Colchester, CT 06415
Telephone: (860) 537-5537
E-mail: alawrence@scott-scott.com
pmcgahan@scott-scott.com
msrodoski@scott-scott.com
hcunningham@scott-scott.com
dbrockwell@scott-scott.com
prodriguez@scott-scott.com
- and -
Keith J. Verrier, Esq.
Austin B. Cohen, Esq.
LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP
510 Walnut Street, Suite 500
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Telephone: (215) 592-1500
E-mail: kverrier@lfsblaw.com
acohen@lfsblaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Sonal N. Mehta, Esq.
David Z. Gringer, Esq.
Ross E. Firsenbaum, Esq.
Ryan Chabot, Esq.
Paul Vanderslice, Esq.
Ari Holtzblatt, Esq.
Molly M. Jennings, Esq.
Michaela P. Sewall, Esq.
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALE
AND DORR LLP
2600 El Camino Real, Suite 400
Palo Alto, CA 94306
Telephone: (650) 858-6000
E-mail: Sonal.Mehta@wilmerhale.com
David.Gringer@wilmerhale.com
Ross.Firsenbaum@wilmerhale.com
Ryan.Chabot@wilmerhale.com
Paul.Vanderslice@wilmerhale.com
Ari.Holtzblatt@wilmerhale.com
Molly.Jennings@wilmerhale.com
Michaela.Sewall@wilmerhale.com
MGM RESORTS: Faces Zari Suit Over Failure to Secure Personal Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PAUL ZARI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MGM RESORTS INTERNATIONAL, Defendant, Case
No. 2:23-cv-01777-CDS-BNW (D. Nev., Nov. 1, 2023) arises from a
recent cyberattack and data breach which resulted in unauthorized
actors viewing and accessing the personally identifiable
information of a significant number of individuals, including
Plaintiff, who were members of MGM's loyalty program.
According to the complaint, MGM's carelessness, negligence, and
lack of oversight and supervision caused its customers to lose all
sense of privacy. The Plaintiff and members of the Class have
suffered irreparable harm, including the exposure of their PII to
nefarious strangers and their significantly increased risk of
identity theft. The information at issue here is the very kind of
information that allows identity thieves to construct false
identities and invade all aspects of Plaintiff's and Class members'
lives. In addition to facing the emotional devastation of having
such personal information fall into the wrong hands, Plaintiff and
Class members must now undertake additional security measures and
precautions to minimize their risk of identity theft, the suit
asserts.
The Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of the
Class, seeking remedies including, but not limited to, compensatory
damages, reimbursement of out-of-pocket costs, injunctive relief,
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and all other remedies the
Court deems proper.
MGM Resorts International is a gaming and hospitality company that
owns and operates 31 hotel and gaming destinations globally.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nathan R. Ring, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
3100 W. Charleston Boulevard, Suite 208
Las Vegas, NV 89102
Telephone: (725) 235-9750
E-mail: lasvegas@stranchlaw.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch IV, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
The Freedom Center
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
Amina A. Thomas, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD, LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 636-6481
E-mail: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
athomas@cohenandmalad.com
MILLER AUTO: Case Management Order Entered in Brown Class Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHANNA BROWN, v. MILLER
AUTO LEASING et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-02431-JHR-GWG (S.D.N.Y.), the
Hon. Judge Gabriel W. Gorenstein entered an order a case management
order:
1. All pre-trial applications, including those relating to
scheduling and discovery, shall be made to the undersigned
(except motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings,
for
injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class
certification).
2. All discovery (as well as requests for admissions) must be
initiated in time to be concluded by the deadline for all
discovery.
3. Discovery motions -- that is, any application pursuant to
Rules
26 through 37 or 45 -- not only must comply with ¶ 2.A. of
the
Court's Individual Practices but also must be made promptly
after the cause for such a motion arises.
4. Any application for an extension of the time limitations with
respect to any deadlines in this matter must be made as soon
as
the cause for the extension becomes known to the party making
the application and must be made in accordance with 1.E of
the
Court's Individual Practices.
Miller Auto Leasing provides finance leases to companies for any of
their transportation needs.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 3, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3SAjEob at no extra charge.[CC]
MILLS COLLEGE: $1.25M Deal in Degree Costs Suit Gets Prelim OK
--------------------------------------------------------------
Johanna Alonso of Insidehighered.com reports that a judge has
preliminarily approved a $1.25 million settlement in a class action
lawsuit filed by former Mills College students who said they were
misled by university officials' claims that they would compete
their degrees at no extra cost after Mills merged with Northeastern
University, The San Francisco Chronicle reported.
The former women's college in Oakland, Calif., became
Northeastern's 10th campus last year. The plaintiffs said they were
not informed that Mills would offer its last degrees in 2022, at
which point the campus, Mills College at Northeastern University,
eliminated all programs not already offered by Northeastern,
leaving students in the lurch.
Students planning to graduate in 2023 said they were unable to do
so when their programs were eliminated; they also missed transfer
deadlines and lost thousands of dollars in tuition money. The
universities both denied misleading students and said they had
attempted to help them find solutions.
The lawsuit covers 408 students, The Mercury News reported, who
will receive about $1,600 each. The remaining money will go to
attorneys' fees. [GN]
MR. COOPER: Faces Class Suit Over Alleged Cyberattack
-----------------------------------------------------
Flavia Furlan Nunes of Housingwire reports that Mr. Cooper Group
became the target of at least four consumer class-action lawsuits
after disclosing a cyberattack at the end of October when customer
information was compromised and the company shut down certain
systems.
On Oct. 31, the Dallas-based servicer and lender said it had
experienced a cybersecurity incident with an unauthorized third
party accessing certain portions of its technology systems and
customer data. The firm informed law enforcement, regulatory
authorities and other stakeholders.
In the lawsuits filed in a district court in Texas, customers claim
that the defendant "failed to comply with industry standards to
protect information in its systems that contain" personally
identifiable information of millions of people.
Mr. Cooper had 4.3 million customers in its servicing portfolio in
the third quarter, consisting of $937 billion in UPB at the end of
September.
Customers claim that, as a result of the attack, they are "in the
hands of criminals” and face an “increased risk of identity
theft." Ultimately, they have spent and will continue to spend
"significant time and money" to protect themselves due to Mr.
Cooper's failures.
A representative for Mr. Cooper did not respond to a request for
comment.
Plaintiffs complained that the company notified them about the
incident days after discovering the data breach and the notice
lacked information, including details of the cyberattack and
customer recommendations.
They also complained about emotional stress since, once stolen,
fraudulent use of that information and damage to victims may
continue for years. In addition, fraudulent activity might not show
up for six to 12 months or even longer.
Customers seek, among other things, that the "company fully and
accurately disclose the nature of the information that has been
compromised and to adopt reasonably sufficient security practices
and safeguards to prevent incidents like this in the future."
Mr. Cooper is accused of negligence, breach of implied contract and
unjust enrichment, among other claims.
On November 9, 2023, Mr. Cooper announced it had partially resumed
its operations. After that, the company said phone systems and its
website were running again.
"We are continuing to investigate precisely what information was
exposed. In the coming weeks, we will mail notices to any affected
customer and provide them with complimentary credit monitoring
services," Mr. Cooper said on its website.
The company estimates fourth-quarter earnings will include $5 to
$10 million in additional vendor costs. At this time, however, it's
not possible to quantify the full extent of remediation and legal
expenses due to the cyberattack. [GN]
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION: Burton Sues Over Broker Fee Conspiracy
------------------------------------------------------------
SHAUNTELL BURTON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS;
KELLER WILLIAMS LLC; and KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY, INC., Defendants,
Case No. 7:23-cv-05666-JD (D.S.C., Nov. 6, 2023) alleges violation
of the Sherman Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants are
engaged in conspiracy to impose and enforce an anticompetitive
restraint that requires home sellers to pay the broker representing
the buyer of their homes, and to pay an inflated amount.
The Defendants' conspiracy involve adoption and implementation of a
rule that requires all seller's brokers to make a blanket,
unilateral and effectively non-negotiable offer of buyer broker
compensation (the "Adversary Commission Rule") when listing a
property on a Multiple Listing Service. The unlawful restraints
implemented and enforced by the Defendants benefit them furthering
their common goals by permitting brokers to impose
supra-competitive charges on home sellers and restrain competition
by precluding competition from innovative or lower-priced
alternatives, says the suit.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS is an American trade association
for those who work in the real estate industry. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick E. Knie, Esq.
Matthew W. Shealy, Esq.
KNIE & SHEALY
P.O. Box 5159
250 Magnolia Street
Spartanburg, S.C. 29304
Telephone: (864) 582-5118
Facsimile: (864) 585-1615
- and -
Mitch Slade, Esq.
MITCH SLADE LAW OFFICE, P.A.
P.O. Box 1007
Spartanburg, S.C. 29304
Telephone: (864) 582-4212
Email: mitch@mitchsladelaw.com
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Court Certifies Former Student-Athletes Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Mundy of LawyersandSettlement.com reports that a California
federal judge has given the green light for labor lawsuits accusing
the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) of depriving
U.S. college athletes of compensation for the commercial use of
their "name, image and likeness" to proceed as an anti-trust class
action. The plaintiffs, three college athletes, have accused the
NCAA and its conferences of conspiring to restrict payments to
athletes for television broadcasts, video games and other revenue
sources.
The NCAA could be on the hook for billions of dollars in damages to
more than 184,000 members, including players in men's football and
basketball, women's basketball and other sports for schools in the
NCAA's Division I, which is the top tier for U.S. college
athletics, who played anytime between 2016 and November 13, 2023.
The initial lawsuit was filed by Arizona State swimmer Grant House
and TCU basketball player Sedona Prince in 2020, and another
complaint by former Illinois football player Tymir Oliver was
added. The three athletes claim they were illegally blocked from
maximizing the amount of money they could be earning from selling
the rights to their name, image and likeness, due to NCAA rules
restrictions, reported ESPN. Judge Wilken approved a division of
the athletes into three categories, based on the ways those
athletes might have been able to maximize their earnings if the
NCAA's rules were different:
-- Football and men's basketball players
-- Women's basketball players
-- All other Division I athletes
The plaintiffs divided lost earnings into three categories:
-- Money from all NIL deals that were prohibited prior to the
NCAA adopting new, temporary rules in July 2021
-- Money from video game deals
-- Money from broadcast rights
Men's basketball and football players lost money in all three
categories; women's basketball players lost money from broadcast
deals and general NIL restrictions, and all other athletes lost
money from the general NIL restrictions. Plaintiffs' experts
contend that both male and female football and basketball players
provide at least 10% of the value in television broadcast rights
contracts, and that could amount to over $1 billion per year. Judge
Wilken concurred, writing in her decision that she "finds ample
support for Plaintiffs' assumption that student-athletes' NIL in
broadcasts have value, and that their value is at least ten
percent."
Granting the House case class action status by Judge Wilken likely
doesn't bode well with the NCAA, given similar antitrust lawsuits
over the past decade. According to ESPN, it represents a major
financial threat to the NCAA and is one of several current legal
challenges aimed at trying to force the association to change its
business model. As well, previous federal antitrust lawsuits have
mostly resulted in restructuring some parts of the NCAA's
antiquated amateurism rules. Wilken oversaw the district-court
portions of the Ed O'Bannon and Shawne Alston antitrust cases,
which the NCAA lost in a Supreme Court ruling.
One plaintiffs' lead attorney told USA TODAY Sports that this class
action "potentially means that student athletes will share (in)
broadcast revenues, ticket sales and endorsement deals. It's a huge
potential change in the NCAA and student-athletes relationship."
[GN]
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Martinez Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID MARTINEZ; and BRAD PADALECKI, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE
LLC dba Mr. Cooper, Defendant, Case No. A-23-881226-C (Nev. Cir.,
Clark Cty., Nov. 8, 2023) is a class action by the Plaintiff and on
behalf of Class Members whose personally identifiable information
was stolen by cybercriminals in a cyber-attack that accessed
sensitive private information through Defendant's files.
According to the complaint, On October 31, 2023, Plaintiffs'
valuable personally identifiable information was accessed on
Defendant's servers due to unauthorized access from cybercriminals.
As a result of the Defendant's failure to properly secure the
Plaintiffs' and the Class Members' private information, the
cybercriminals obtained valuable information including names, dates
of birth, addresses, and social security numbers, collectively
known as personally identifiable information, says the suit.
The Plaintiffs' and Class Members' sensitive Private Information,
which was entrusted to the Defendant, its officials, and agents,
was compromised, unlawfully accessed, and stolen due to the Data
Breach, the suit added.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, doing business as Mr. Cooper, offers
mortgage services. The Company provides mortgages loan,
re-financing, and home equity loans. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Kind, Esq.
KIND LAW
8860 South Maryland Parkway, Suite 106
Las Vegas, NV 89123
Telephone: (702) 337-2322
Facsimile: (702) 329-5881
Email: mk@kindlaw.com
- and -
George Haines, Esq.
Gerardo Avalos, Esq.
FREEDOM LAW FIRM
8985 S. Eastern Ave., Suite 100
Las Vegas, NV 89123
Telephone: (702) 880-5554
Facsimile: (702) 385-5518
NATIONSTAR: Fails to Secure Customer's Private Info, McCartney Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN MCCARTNEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NATIONSTAR d/b/a MR. COOPER, Defendant, Case
No. 1:23-cv-02157 (N.D. Ohio, November 3, 2023) arises from the
Defendant's failure its failure to properly secure and safeguard
Plaintiff’s and Class Members' personally identifiable
information stored within Defendant's information network and
asserts claims against the Defendant for negligence, breach of
implied contract, breach of fiduciary duty, invasion of privacy,
and breach of covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The complaint alleges that on November 2, 2023, Mr. Cooper, on
behalf of Nationstar, issued a data breach notice to notify its
customers that an unauthorized party accessed Nationstar systems on
or about October 31, 2023, downloading highly sensitive PII of at
least 4.1 million Nationstar customers and brokers or agents stored
on its servers, including Social Security numbers, first and last
names, dates of birth, and addresses.
Headquartered in Coppell, TX, Nationstar Financial, Inc. is a
Delaware limited liability company that provides financial and
mortgage services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marc E. Dann, Esq.
Brian D. Flick, Esq.
Andrew M. Engel, Esq.
DANNLAW
15000 Madison Ave.
Lakewood, OH 44107
Telephone: (216) 373-0539
Facsimile: (216) 373-0536
E-mail: notices@dannlaw.com
NATURES PATH: Wins Dismissal of Granola False Ads' Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Julie Steinberg of Bloomberg Law reports that Nature's Path Foods
Inc. exited a suit alleging excess sugar makes its claims that its
granola healthful deceptive, as a federal court called the
plaintiff's fraud theory "implausible and defective" because
nutrition facts are on the label, too.
Rebecca Lee filed a proposed class action in the US District Court
for the Southern District of California, challenging
representations like "wholesome," "nourish your day," and "put you
on a better path to a healthier lifestyle." The cereal is high in
added sugar, making the products decidedly unhealthy, she alleged.
[GN]
NISSAN NORTH: Culler Sues Over Motor Vehicles' Defective Paint
--------------------------------------------------------------
RANDALL CULLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 9:23-cv-05719-BHH (Nov. 8, 2023) seeks to redress the harms
caused by the Defendant for material defects in the primer coating
its motor vehicles.
According to the complaint, a material defect in the primer of the
vehicles manufactured and sold by the Defendant under the Nissan
brand name from at least 2017 through the present, has resulted in
the substantial devaluation of the vehicles purchased by Plaintiff
and other similarly situated individuals, and thus monetary loss to
purchasers of Defendant's vehicles. Despite having been aware of
its vehicles' defective primer, the Defendant has refrained from
disclosing the defect to its customers and has outright declined to
repair the defect free of charge, says the suit.
NISSAN NORTH AMERICA INC. operates in the automotive industry. The
Company designs, develops, and manufactures Nissan vehicles and
distributes them through dealers in the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dave Maxfield, Esq.
DAVE MAXFIELD, ATTORNEY, LLC
P.O. Box 11865
Columbia, SC 29211
Telephone: (803) 509-6800
Facsimile: (855) 299-1656
Email: dave@consumerlawsc.com
- and -
J. Olin McDougall, II, Esq.
McDOUGALL LAW FIRM
115 Lady’s Island Commons
Beaufort, SC 29907
Telephone: (843) 379-7000
Facsimile: (843-379-7007
Email: lin@mlf.law
- and -
Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
245 Fischer Ave., Suite D1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (800) 400-6808
Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
Email: ak@kazlg.com
NUTANIX INC: Faces Shareholder Suit in CA Court
------------------------------------------------
Nutanix, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the fiscal year
ended July 31, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on September 21, 2023, that it is currently facing a
shareholder suit in the District of Massachusetts (Case No.
1:23-cv-10858-AK).
On April 14, 2023, a purported federal securities class action
complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California against the company, two of the
company's current officers, and a former officer. The complaint
generally alleges that the defendants made false and misleading
statements in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange
Act and SEC Rule 10b-5. The court has appointed a lead plaintiff
for the putative class in this action, consisting of those who
purchased or otherwise acquired the company's securities between
September 21, 2021 and March 6, 2023, inclusive. In addition, on
May 5, 2023, a purported stockholder derivative complaint was filed
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, naming the company's current directors as defendants
and the company's company as a nominal defendant.
The complaint generally alleges violations of Section 14(a) of the
Exchange Act and breach of fiduciary duties, and aiding and
abetting breach of fiduciary duties, based on similar underlying
allegations contained in the purported federal securities class
action complaint described above. The court has ordered that all
proceedings in this stockholder derivative action be stayed pending
the court's decision on any motion to dismiss in the federal
securities class action
The complaint alleges that the company failed to disclose certain
information regarding efficacy and safety in connection with a
Phase I/II HMI-102 clinical trial, and seeks damages in an
unspecified amount. The case is in its early stages.
The company filed a motion to transfer venue (filed September 2,
2022) and a motion to dismiss (filed October 17, 2022). On April
18, 2023, the court granted the motion to transfer, finding that
venue was not proper in the Central District of California and
transferring the case to the District of Massachusetts. Following
the transfer, the case number changed to 1:23-cv-10858-AK (D.
Mass.)
Nutanix, Inc. provides an enterprise cloud platform that consists
of software solutions and cloud services that power its customers'
enterprise infrastructure.
PATHWARD: Faces Class Suit Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Ellis of The Dakota Scout reports that an Illinois man is
seeking class-action status in a lawsuit filed against a Sioux
Falls bank over a data breach that occurred earlier this year.
Jacob Kent claims he is one of 793,626 people whose data was
compromised by Pathward, a publicly traded financial services
institution that provides the H&R Block Emerald Card, a debit card.
The lawsuit also names two Massachusetts-based software companies
as defendants, Ipswitch Inc. and Progress Software Corp.
Kent's complaint says the three companies are responsible for the
data breach to H&R Block cardholders that occurred between May 27
and May 31. During the breach, hackers had access to personally
identifying information, or PII, to include names, addresses,
Social Security numbers, dates of birth, driver's license numbers,
email addresses, phone numbers and information about their debit
cards. [GN]
POWERSOL USA: Mederos Sues Over Unsolicited Telemarketing Calls
---------------------------------------------------------------
PEDRO MEDEROS, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. POWERSOL USA, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:23-cv-24228-XXXX (S.D. Fla., November 3, 2023) arises from the
Defendant's usage of automated systems to make outbound
telemarketing calls to hundreds if not thousands of consumers
across the United States, including to consumers in Florida, in
violation of the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant has violated the FTSA for
making such calls regardless of whether customers' telephone
numbers are registered on Florida's no sales solicitation calls
list. Neither he nor any other members of the proposed classes ever
provided Defendant with prior express written consent to receive
the telephonic sales calls, says the Plaintiff.
Powersol USA sells solar goods and services throughout the United
States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Avi R. Kaufman, Esq.
KAUFMAN P.A.
237 South Dixie Highway, Floor 4
Coral Gable, FL 33133
Telephone: (305) 469-5881
E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com
PRA EVENTS: Hyneman Sues Over Labor Law Breaches
------------------------------------------------
Jan Hyneman, individually and on behalf of other similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiff v. PRA Events, Inc., a Delaware corporation,
Defendant, Case No. 4:23-cv-00497-RCC (D. Ariz., November 3, 2023)
arises from the Defendant's failure to pay wages earned Plaintiff
and all those similarly situated in a timely manner as required by
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Arizona law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has unlawfully
misclassified Plaintiff as exempt under the FLSA. From November 3,
2020, through the present day, Plaintiff, as well as those
similarly situated, without exception, worked in excess of 40 hours
per workweek. However, the Defendant did not pay Plaintiff or those
similarly situated for any hours worked in excess of 40 per
workweek and certainly did not pay them overtime, says the suit.
PRA Events, Inc. is a Delaware corporation whose principal place of
business is in Cook County, Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roberto C. Garcia, Esq.
FARHANG & MEDCOFF
100 South Church Avenue, Suite 100
Tucson, AZ 85701
Telephone: (520) 214-2000
Facsimile: (520) 214-2001
E-mail: rgarcia@farhangmedcoff.com
RE/MAX HOLDINGS: To Settle Burnett Suit in Missouri Court
---------------------------------------------------------
RE/MAX Holdings, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
period ended September 13, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission in September 20, 2023, that a subsidiary of the
company, RE/MAX, LLC, entered into a Settlement Term Sheet on
September 15, 2023, to resolve a pending litigation in the United
States District Court for the Western District of Missouri brought
by Scott and Rhonda Burnett et al. (Case No. 4:19-cv-00332-SRB).
The settlement resolves all claims in the lawsuit and similar
claims on a nationwide basis against RE/MAX and releases RE/MAX and
the company, their subsidiaries and affiliates, and RE/MAX
sub-franchisors, franchisees and their sales associates in the
United States from the claims. By the terms of the settlement,
RE/MAX agreed to pay a total settlement amount of $55.0 million
into a qualified settlement fund. In addition, RE/MAX agreed to
make certain changes to its business practices.
Remax Holdings is a franchisor in the real estate industry under
the RE/MAX(R) brand and mortgage brokerages in the U.S. under the
Motto(R) Mortgage brand.
RE/MAX HOLDINGS: To Settle Moehrl Suit in Illinois Court
--------------------------------------------------------
RE/MAX Holdings, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
period ended September 13, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission in September 20, 2023, that a subsidiary of the
company, RE/MAX, LLC, entered into a Settlement Term Sheet on
September 15, 2023, to resolve a pending litigation in United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois brought
by Christopher Moehrl et al. (Case No. 1:19-cv-01610-ARW).
The settlement resolves all claims in the lawsuit and similar
claims on a nationwide basis against RE/MAX and releases RE/MAX and
the company, their subsidiaries and affiliates, and RE/MAX
sub-franchisors, franchisees and their sales associates in the
United States from the claims. By the terms of the settlement,
RE/MAX agreed to pay a total settlement amount of $55.0 million
into a qualified settlement fund. In addition, RE/MAX agreed to
make certain changes to its business practices.
Remax Holdings is a franchisor in the real estate industry under
the RE/MAX(R) brand and mortgage brokerages in the U.S. under the
Motto(R) Mortgage brand.
REALPAGE INC: Davis Sues Over Debt Collection Practices
-------------------------------------------------------
NICOLE DAVIS, individually an on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. REALPAGE, INC. DBA MULTIFAMILY INTERNET
VENTURES, LLC DBA LEASINGDESK INSURANCE SERVICES, Defendants, Case
No. 185921732 (Fla. Cir., Osceola Cty., Nov. 10, 2023) seeks to
stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a
debt.
REALPAGE, INC. provides products and services to the multifamily
real estate industries. The Company offers applicant screening,
accounting, budgeting, property management, and compliance
reporting solutions. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
Jennifer G. Simil, Esq.
Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 907-1136
Email: jibrael@jibraellaw.com
jen@jibraellaw.com
zane@jibraellaw.com
REGAL CINEMAS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Springett Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA SPRINGETT, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. REGAL CINEMAS, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 3:23-cv-01401-MAD-ML (N.D.N.Y., Nov. 7, 2023) seeks to
recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation,
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs.
Plaintiff Springett was employed by the Defendant as a floor
staff.
REGAL CINEMAS, INC. is an American movie theater chain
headquartered in Knoxville, Tennessee. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yitzchak Kopel, Esq.
Alec M. Leslie, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A
1330 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
Email: ykopel@bursor.com
aleslie@bursor.com
REV GROUP INC: Securities Suit Over Equity Dispute Dismissed
------------------------------------------------------------
REV Group, Inc. disclosed in its Form 8-K report for August 23,
2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August
25, 2023, that on August 23, 2023, the court entered an order
closing filed a putative stockholder class action complaint,
subject to the company filing an affidavit with the court
confirming that this notice has been issued. In entering the order,
the court was not asked to review, and did not pass judgment on,
the payment of the attorneys' fees and expenses or their
reasonableness.
On July 11, 2023, plaintiff Robert Garfield filed a putative
stockholder class action complaint in the Court of Chancery of the
State of Delaware against REV Group, Inc., the members of the
company's Board of Directors and American Industrial Partners (AIP)
under the caption "Garfield v. Bamatter, et al.," C.A. No.
2023-0703-SG, relating to the company's approval on June 1, 2023,
of the repurchase of up to $175.0 million of REV's outstanding
common stock.
The complaint alleged that the company approved the Share
Repurchase Authorization in order for AIP to attain a majority
equity stake in the company without paying a control premium. The
action sought, among other forms of relief, an injunction against
the defendants to prohibit the company from repurchasing its
outstanding common stock pursuant to the Share Repurchase
Authorization to the extent such repurchases would cause AIP's
equity stake in the company to surpass 50%.
On July 14, 2023, REV's Board of Directors executed a Unanimous
Written Consent, which stated that, in order to clarify and give
effect to the Board of Directors' intention at the time that it
approved the Share Repurchase Authorization, REV shall not acquire
any shares of its common stock pursuant to the Share Repurchase
Authorization if, after giving effect to such repurchase and any
related repurchases or other transactions, the shares of the
company's common stock held by AIP would represent more than 46.4%
(such percentage being the percentage that the shares of common
stock held by AIP represented as reported by the company in its
most recent quarterly report filed prior to the date of the Share
Repurchase Authorization) of the company's then-outstanding shares
of common stock. The Written Consent mooted the allegations in the
complaint.
On July 21, 2023, the court entered an order dismissing the action
as moot and retaining jurisdiction solely for the purpose of
adjudicating the anticipated application of plaintiff's counsel for
an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of expenses to
plaintiff's counsel. The company subsequently agreed to pay
$550,000.00 to plaintiff's counsel, on behalf of all defendants, in
full satisfaction of the claim for attorneys' fees and expenses in
the action.
REV Group, Inc. is a manufacturer of ambulances, buses, commercial
vehicle, firefighting vehicles, recreational vehicles and other
specialty vehicles, as well as aftermarket parts and services.
ROYALTY CARPET: Calif. Sup. Court to Decide Suit Over PAGA Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Duane Morris LLP's Eden E. Anderson, Gerald L. Maatman, Jr. and
Jennifer A. Riley of Lexology.com report that in a case with
significant consequences for employers, the California Supreme
Court heard oral argument in Estrada v. Royalty Carpet Mills, No.
S274340, on November 8, 2023. In Estrada, the Supreme Court will
decide whether trial courts have inherent authority to ensure that
PAGA claims will be manageable at trial, and to strike or narrow
such claims if they cannot be managed appropriately. The Supreme
Court signaled during oral argument its concerns with unwieldy PAGA
claims that, if tried, would require a series of mini-trials over
the course of years. The Supreme Court further expressed concern
with ensuring that employers' due process rights to present
affirmative defenses are protected, potentially signaling the
issuance of an employer-friendly decision. A decision is expected
in the next six months, and has the potential to transform the
prosecution and defense of PAGA litigation.
Case Background
Jorge Estrada filed a putative class action and PAGA action against
his former employer asserting meal period violations. After two
classes comprised of 157 individuals were certified, the parties
tried the claims before a judge in a bench trial. The trial court
ultimately decertified the classes, finding there were too many
individualized issues to support class treatment. Although the
trial court awarded relief to four individual plaintiffs, it
dismissed the non-individual PAGA claim, concluding it was not
manageable.
On appeal, Estrada argued that PAGA claims have no manageability
requirement, and the Court of Appeal agreed in Estrada v. Royalty
Carpet Mills, Inc., 76 Cal.App.5th 685 (2022). The Court of Appeal
reasoned that class action requirements do not apply in PAGA
actions and, therefore, the manageability requirement rooted in
class action procedure was inapplicable. Further, the Court of
Appeal opined that "[a]llowing courts to dismiss PAGA claims based
on manageability would interfere with PAGA's express design as a
law enforcement mechanism." Id. at 712. The Court of Appeal
acknowledged the difficulty that employers and trial courts face
with PAGA claims involving thousands of allegedly aggrieved
employees, each with unique factual circumstances, but concluded
that dismissal for lack of manageability was not an available tool
for a trial court to utilize.
Estrada is contrary to the holding in Wesson v. Staples the Office
Superstore, LLC, 68 Cal.App.5th 746 (2021), and created a split in
authority. In Wesson, the trial court struck a PAGA claim as
unmanageable, and the Court of Appeal affirmed. The claims at issue
in Wesson involved the alleged misclassification of 345 store
managers. The employer's exemption affirmative defense turned on
individualized issues as to each manager's performance of exempt
versus non-exempt tasks, which varied based on a number of factors
including store size, sales volume, staffing levels, labor budgets,
store hours, customer traffic, all of which varied across the
stores. The split in authority prompted the California Supreme
Court to grant review in Estrada, but not Wesson.
Oral Argument At The California Supreme Court
During oral argument on November 8, 2023, several Justices, most
prominently Justices Liu and Jenkins, expressed skepticism that a
trial court's inherent powers include the ability to outright
strike or dismiss an entire PAGA action for lack of manageability.
As Justice Liu commented, permitting trial courts such wide ranging
power would shortchange the PAGA statute unless there is an
overriding constitutional interest.
Several Justices also acknowledged that an employer has a due
process right to present evidence to support its affirmative
defenses and that, in certain cases, such evidence presentation
might require a series of mini-trials over a period of years and
wholly consume a trial court's resources. Justice Kruger asked
questions of Estrada's counsel that suggested the illogical nature
of these issues telling trial courts as to what to do in terms of
mini-trials, and how unwieldy such PAGA-related problems would
evolve under such a set of principles.
Justice Groban also expressed concern about a PAGA case where
multiple Labor Code violations are alleged, hundreds or thousands
of employees are at issue, and different work sites and different
types of employees ranging from janitors to accountants are
implicated. Justice Groban asked why, in that case, a trial court
could not that it would be best to have the janitors and
accountants in one trial, and then limit it to the accountants
only. Other justices raised similar concerns, with Chief Justice
Guerrero asking Estrada's counsel why the answer is that this is
all subject to appellate review.
Implications For Employers
The constellation of the comments from the justices seemingly
signals that the California Court may hold that trial courts
possess inherent authority to ensure an employer's right to due
process is safeguarded, which necessarily encompasses the right to
gauge the manageability of PAGA claims and to narrow them as
appropriate. As to whether such authority could include outright
dismissal of an entire PAGA case, employers will have to wait and
see. [GN]
RUSH UNIVERSITY: Faces Class Suit Over Illegal Biometric Collection
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Cook County Record reports that Rush University Hospital is one of
the latest big employers in Chicago targeted by a class action
lawsuit for allegedly violating Illinois' biometrics law.
The hospital allegedly required employees scan their fingerprint to
access patient medications dispensed through lockers using the
Pyxis system, says the suit, filed in Cook County Circuit Court.
"Within Rush Hospital there are multiple Pyxis devices," the suit
states. "Once a worker has registered his or her fingerprint with
the system, they have access to multiple Pyxis devices throughout
the hospital."
However, the system exposes the workers to the risk of data
breaches or identity theft, the lawsuit says.
"Unlike ID badges or key fobs -- which can be changed or replaced
if stolen or compromised -- fingerprints are unique, permanent
biometric identifiers associated with each worker," says the suit.
"This exposes workers who are required to use Pyxis as a condition
of their employment to serious and irreversible privacy risks.
information, namely their fingerprint, in order to access
medications."
If the system is hacked, "workers have no means by which to prevent
identity theft, unauthorized tracking or other unlawful or improper
use of this highly personal and private information," the lawsuit
states.
The plaintiffs are represented by attorneys Ryan F. Stephan, James
B. Zouras, Catherine Mitchell and Lauren A. Warwick, of the firm of
Stephan Zouras LLP, of Chicago.
Corey Heard, the lead plaintiff in the case against Rush, has
teamed up with the Stephan Zouras lawyers since 2019 on other
BIPA-related class actions against hospitals and the Becton
Dickinson company, the maker of the Pyxis medication dispensing
system. [GN]
SAN DIEGO, CA: Court Certifies Suit Over Detainees' Discrimination
------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff McDonald of Bozeman Daily Chronicle reports that what began as
a federal lawsuit accusing the San Diego Sheriff's Department of
discriminating against a dozen or more people in county jail with
various disabilities has expanded into a case that now involves
thousands of current and future detainees.
Judge Anthony Battaglia has granted a motion to certify the
complaint initially filed in early 2022 as a class-action lawsuit.
The order means the allegations lodged by people who use
wheelchairs or suffer from hearing loss will now apply to thousands
of people currently serving time in San Diego County jails — and
thousands of people who may be booked into sheriff's custody in the
future.
"All members of the classes are allegedly exposed to substantial
risk of harm due to defendants' alleged policies and practices,"
Battaglia wrote in an 11-page federal court ruling issued on Nov.
3.
"The requested relief would benefit the named plaintiffs as well as
all members of the proposed class and subclasses in the same manner
in a single stroke," the judge added.
The Sheriff's Department did not immediately respond to a request
for comment on the order. The department generally does not
publicly comment on ongoing litigation.
Attorneys for the original defendants said the ruling will help
impose reforms on a jail system that is badly in need of
improvements.
"This order is a significant development in the case and advances
us towards trial and injunctive relief for our clients," said Gay
Grunfeld, one of the lead attorneys who filed the case. "We are
honored to represent the approximately 4,000 incarcerated people
who are part of this class."
According to the order, lawyers for the plaintiffs and defendants
agreed on a plan to ensure that all members of the class would be
informed about the decision.
"The parties have agreed to the form and substance of the notice
and request the court to order copies of the notice be posted
throughout the jails in Spanish and English," the ruling says, and
"that defendant Sheriff's Department read the class notice to
individuals who are illiterate or have a disability that may affect
their ability to read the notice."
Under the Battaglia ruling, the represented class will now
include:
-- All adults who are now or will be in the future incarcerated in
any of the San Diego County jail facilities;
-- All adults who have a disability as defined in state and federal
law and are now or will be incarcerated in San Diego County jails;
-- Adults who are now or will be in jail and have a private lawyer
or are representing themselves in pursuing a state or federal
claim;
-- All Blacks or Latinx adults who are now or will be incarcerated
in San Diego County jails.
The case was filed in February 2022, days after a state audit
sharply criticized the San Diego County Sheriff's Department for
maintaining a jail system whose mortality rate was for years the
highest among California's largest counties.
Attorneys for the plaintiffs said the county was violating rights
of other people, and the initial claim should be certified as a
class-action case so that any judgments would apply to all people
in custody now or in the future.
The complaint includes claims from people who use wheelchairs being
assigned to upper bunks in small jail cells, leaving them unable to
access their sleeping area.
Plaintiffs' attorneys also accuse the county of maintaining
dangerously filthy jails, inadequate staffing, substandard booking
processes and insufficient medication monitoring.
It also says much of the safety equipment is non-functioning and
that the sheriff is not doing enough to prevent illegal drugs from
being smuggled into jails.
The lawsuit also includes allegations from incarcerated people with
disabilities such as hearing loss who say they are regularly denied
sign-language interpreters, leaving them unable to communicate with
healthcare providers, deputies or other jail employees.
"I did not understand what the dentist, the jail staff or anyone
else was saying," Cristian Esquivel, a detainee who is deaf and
struggles to read and write, said in a sworn declaration to the
court earlier this year.
"I did not understand what was on the papers that they gave me," he
said. "I did not know that they were going to take out my tooth
before they did it."
Another man serving time in San Diego County jail said he was being
held in a cell that does not comply with the Americans with
Disabilities Act. He said he uses a wheelchair due to a serious
back injury but could not access the upper bunk, forcing him to
sleep on the floor.
When Nierobi Kuykendall was unexpectedly transferred to the George
Bailey Detention Facility in February, he said he was not permitted
to bring his wheelchair.
"I asked if I could speak to a sergeant to explain that I need my
wheelchair . . . but no one came to talk to me," he wrote in his
declaration. "Instead, six deputies came up and forcibly removed me
from my wheelchair, lifting me out of it and put me in a vehicle to
send me to George Bailey.
"I have not had a wheelchair since that day," he added.
The declarations were filed in support of a request for an
injunction earlier this year. But days before a hearing on the
motion, the county reached a stipulated agreement with the
plaintiffs' legal team agreeing to specific reforms.
But the stipulation was limited.
The legal complaint is moving forward in San Diego federal court,
with a trial expected to be scheduled for late next year or early
in 2025, Grunfeld said. [GN]
SCARLET WIRELESS: Misclassifies Driver Testers, Ahmed Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
FAIZAN AHMED, JUNAID AHMED, SYED HUSSAINI, ZUBAIR MOHAMMED, and
MOHAMMED MOHIUDDIN, on behalf of themselves and a class and
collective of similarly situated others, Plaintiffs v. SCARLET
WIRELESS, INC., and ALFA TELECOM, LLC, Defendants, Case No.
1:23-cv-15571 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 1, 2023) arises from the Defendants'
practice of misclassifying employees as independent contractors in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Illinois Minimum
Wage Law, and the Chicago Minimum Wage Ordinance.
The complaint asserts the Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiffs and
a class and collective of similarly situated others for all time
worked and failure to pay overtime premiums due.
The Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants as drive testers whose
job was to test cellular telephone towers.
Scarlet Wireless, Inc. provides a number of services in the
cellular telephone market including network design and
optimization, radio frequency data collection, ground deployment,
and in-building distributed antenna system and small cells.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Aaron B. Maduff, Esq.
BARRETT & FARAHANY
77 W Wacker Dr. Suite 4500
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 800-8581
E-mail: Aaron@justiceatwork.com
SECURE ACCESS: Faces Phillips Suit Over Laborers' Unpaid Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ZACHARY PHILLIPS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SECURE ACCESS, LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 3:23-cv-01564-JWD-RLB (M.D. La., November 6, 2023) is a
class action against the Defendant for its failure to pay overtime
wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff was originally employed by the Defendant as a laborer
for approximately a year starting in June 2020. He returned as a
laborer from approximately January 2023 until November 2023.
Secure Access, LLC is a provider of fence and gate services,
headquartered at 9651 Chalma Avenue, Baton Rouge, Louisiana. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Philip Bohrer, Esq.
Scott E. Brady, Esq.
BOHRER BRADY LLC
8712 Jefferson Highway, Suite B
Baton Rouge, LA 70809
Telephone: (225) 925-5297
Facsimile: (225) 231-7000
E-mail: phil@bohrerbrady.com
scott@bohrerbrady.com
SHELL OIL: Judge Recommends $10B 401 (K) Plan Suit to Go to Trial
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jacklyn Wille of Bloomberg Law reports that proposed class action
saying Shell Oil Co. mismanaged its $10 billion 401(k) plan by
overpaying for administrative services and taking fees from plan
assets should go to trial, a federal magistrate judge recommended.
The Shell employees presented enough evidence to go to trial on all
four of their remaining claims, which say Shell breached its
fiduciary duties and committed prohibited transactions under the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act, Magistrate Judge Andrew M.
Edison said.
The case involves "hotly disputed" factual questions, including
whether the plan's recordkeeping fees were reasonable and whether
Shell properly monitored the fees charged for managed. [GN]
SLEEPING BABY: Sends Unwanted Marketing Messages, Carrero Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
KIMARY CARRERO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SLEEPING BABY, INC., Defendant, Case No.
6:23-cv-02142-PGB-LHP (M.D. Fla., November 6, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendant for violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant is engaged in the
practice of sending unsolicited text messaging to consumers that
have registered their telephone numbers on the National Do Not Call
Registry in order to promote its goods and services. As a result,
the Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers suffered damages,
the suit contends.
Sleeping Baby, Inc. is a company that specializes in wholesale baby
apparel products, doing business in Florida. [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
SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES: Shen Sues Over Securities Law Violations
----------------------------------------------------------------
DAPHNE SHEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., ZVI LANDO, and
RONEN FAIER, Defendants, Case No. 1:23-cv-09748 (S.D.N.Y., November
3, 2023) asserts claims against the Defendants under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
The Plaintiff brings the class action on behalf of persons and
entities that purchased or otherwise acquired SolarEdge securities
between May 3, 2023, and October 19, 2023, inclusive. She alleges
that throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made materially
false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose
to investors that, among other things, the Company's distribution
channels in Europe had higher than optimal inventory levels and
that, as a result, the Company was experiencing substantial
cancellations and pushouts of existing backlog from its European
distributors.
As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's
securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered
significant losses and damages, says the suit.
Headquartered in Israel, SolarEdge is incorporated under the laws
of Delaware. The company provides inverter solutions for a solar
photovoltaic system. Its offerings include power optimizers,
inverters, monitoring services, energy storage a smart energy
management via a cloud-based monitoring platform. It trades on the
NASDAQ exchange under the symbol "SEDG." [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory B. Linkh, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
230 Park Ave., Suite 358
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 682-5340
Facsimile: (212) 884-0988
E-mail: glinkh@glancylaw.com
- and -
Robert V. Prongay, Esq.
Charles H. Linehan, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 201-9150
Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
- and -
Howard G. Smith, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD G. SMITH
3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112
Bensalem, PA 19020
Telephone: (215) 638-4847
Facsimile: (215) 638-4867
SPORTSMAN'S GUIDE: Collects Data Without Consent, Delong Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
FLINT DELONG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SPORTSMAN'S GUIDE, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:23-cv-04356 (E.D. Pa., Nov. 7, 2023) alleges that the Defendant
aids, employs, agrees, and conspires with Meta Platforms, Inc. or
Facebook to intercept communications sent and received by Plaintiff
and Class Members, including communications containing protected
information about firearms purchases.
According to the complaint, the Defendant, through
sportsmansguide.com, assisted Facebook with intercepting
Plaintiff's communications, including those that contained
personally identifiable information and protected information about
his firearms purchases.
The Defendant assisted these interceptions without Plaintiff's
knowledge, consent or express written authorization. By failing to
receive the requisite consent, the Defendant breached
confidentiality and unlawfully disclosed the Plaintiff's personally
identifiable information and protected information about his
firearms purchases, says the suit.
THE SPORTSMAN'S GUIDE, INC. operates as an internet retailer of
outdoor gear and clothing products. The Company provides shooting,
hunting, and military products, boots and shoes, fishing and
boating products, camping products, truck accessories, outdoor
recreation products, home products, gadgets, and accessories.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven A. Schwartz, Esq.
Alex M. Kashurba, Esq.
CHIMICLES SCHWARTZ KRINER
& DONALDSON-SMITH LLP
361 W. Lancaster Avenue
Haverford, PA 19041
Telephone: (610) 642-8500
Facsimile: (610) 649-3633
Email: sas@chimicles.com
- and -
Joshua D. Arisohn, Esq.
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
Email: jarisohn@bursor.com
pfraietta@bursor.com
- and -
Stephen A. Beck, Esq.
Christopher R. Reilly, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
701 Brickell Ave., Suite 1420
Miami, FL 33131-2800
Telephone: (305) 330-5512
Facsimile: (305) 676-9006
Email: sbeck@bursor.com
creilly@bursor.com
STEVEN GREENBERG: Perpetua Sues to Recover Compensation
-------------------------------------------------------
William R. Perpetua, Ryan D. Wahala, and Dennis M. Watson, on
behalf of themself and all similarly situated individuals v. STEVEN
GREENBERG MANAGEMENT, LTD, dba GREENBERG APARTMENT COMMUNITIES,
Case No. 1:23-cv-02142-DAP (N.D. Ohio, Nov. 1, 2023), is brought to
recover compensation, liquidated damages, compensatory damages,
punitive damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and other equitable
relief pursuant to the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act
of 1938 ("FLSA"), the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act, (the
"Ohio Wage Act"), the Ohio Prompt Pay Act ("OPPA") (the Ohio Wage
Act and the OPPA will be collectively referred to as the "Ohio
Acts").
Regardless of the hours that the Plaintiffs and the Potential
Opt-In Plaintiffs work while on-call, any hours worked over 40
hours in a workweek have never been paid at the statutorily
mandated overtime the Plaintiffs' and the Potential Opt-In
Plaintiffs' respective overtime hours as straight hours—paying
them at their regular hourly rates for all hours worked over 40 in
a workweek. In August 2023, Named Plaintiffs complained to
Defendant that they were not being compensated for completing their
on-call services at the correct rate of 150% of their regular rate
for all hours they worked beyond 40 in a workweek. In response to
their complaints, Defendant raised their hourly rate to $24.50 on
October 1, 2023--a 3 dollar raise. However, when Name Plaintiffs
and the Potential Opt-In Plaintiffs work over 40 hours a week to
complete on-call services, they are still being paid these overtime
hours as straight hours—making $24.50 for all hours worked over
40 in a workweek. As a result, Defendant failed to pay the
Plaintiffs' and the Potential Opt-In Plaintiffs' respective
overtime hours at a rate of 150% of their regular rate for all
hours worked over 40 in a workweek, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs was hired by the Defendants to work for the
Defendant's benefit as Maintenance Technicians.
The Defendant was in the business of rental property
management.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
BARKAN MEIZLISH DEROSE COX, LLP
4200 Regent Street, Suite 210
Columbus, OH 43219
Phone: (614) 221-4221
Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
Email: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
STITCH FIX: Consolidated Shareholder Suit Over SEC Filing Dismissed
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Stitch Fix, Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the fiscal
year ended July 29, 2023, filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission in September 20, 2023, that as of January 17, 2023, the
lead plaintiff did not file a petition to the Supreme Court by the
deadline with regards to the affirmation of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit of the dismissal on October 19,
2022 of a consolidated complaint by the District Court for the
Northern District of California.
On October 11, 2018, October 26, 2018, November 16, 2018, and
December 10, 2018, four putative class action lawsuits alleging
violations of the federal securities laws were filed by certain of
the company's stockholders, naming as defendants the company and
certain of its officers. The four lawsuits accused the defendants
of allegedly making materially false and misleading statements
regarding its active client growth and strategy with respect to
television advertising between June 2018 and October 2018. The
plaintiffs seek unspecified monetary damages and other relief.
The four lawsuits have been consolidated and a lead plaintiff has
been appointed. On September 18, 2019, the lead plaintiff in the
consolidated class action lawsuits filed a consolidated complaint
for violation of the federal securities laws. On October 28, 2019,
defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint.
The lead plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on
December 9, 2019, and the defendants filed their reply in support
of its motion to dismiss on December 30, 2019. The court granted
its motion to dismiss on September 30, 2020 but allowed the lead
plaintiff to file an amended complaint.
On November 6, 2020, the lead plaintiff filed his amended
complaint. The company filed a motion to dismiss the amended
complaint on December 7, 2020. The lead plaintiff filed an
opposition to the motion to dismiss on January 8, 2021, and the
company filed its reply in support of its motion to dismiss on
January 22, 2021. The court granted the company's motion to dismiss
on October 1, 2021. On October 29, 2021, the plaintiffs filed a
notice of appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.
Stitch Fix is an online personal styling service in the United
States and United Kingdom that uses recommendation algorithms and
data science to personalize clothing items based on size, budget
and style.
STONELEDGE FURNITURE: Class Cert. Deadline Extended by 210 Days
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICARDO BRITO, an
individual, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all persons
similarly situated, v. STONELEDGE FURNITURE LLC, a Wisconsin
limited liability company; Case No. 2:23-cv-06480-JFW-MAA (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge John F. Walter entered an order that the
Plaintiff's class certification deadline of December 7, 2023 be
extended to 210 days from the date of service regarding the
action's removal or March 6, 2024.
Stoneledge is a retail furniture company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 1, 2023 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://bit.ly/3SsiYRM at no extra charge.[CC]
STOYANOV AND HYMAS: Initiates Illegal Telephone Calls, Pirone Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW PIRONE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. STOYANOV AND HYMAS INC dba 411 LOCALS,
Defendant, Case No. 7:23-cv-09643 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 1, 2023) is a
class action brought by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf
of putative class members, to seek injunctive relief and damages
pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant has contributed to a
barrage of telephone spam by initiating illegal calls to the
Plaintiff. The Plaintiff's home, phone, and privacy have been
invaded by 411 Locals' non-emergency calls selling marketing
services for small businesses, says the suit.
Mr. Pirone is a residential subscriber of a phone number that was
registered on the National Do Not Call Registry on April 15, 2022.
Stoyanov and Hymas Inc., dba 411 Locals, is a company providing
digital marketing services for businesses.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Hartmere, Esq.
LAWHQ, PC
299 S. Main St. #1300
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone: (385) 285-1090
E-mail: michael.hartmere@lawhq.com
SUNBEAM CANDLES: Knowles Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
CARLTON KNOWLES, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SUNBEAM CANDLES, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:23-cv-09645-JGK (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 1, 2023) is a civil
rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website,
https://www.sunbeamcandles.com, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
During Plaintiff's visits to the website, the last occurring on
October 21, 2023, in an attempt to purchase the Ceramic Vessel
Unscented - Blue Glaze from the Defendant, the Plaintiff allegedly
encountered multiple access barriers that denied Plaintiff a
shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person and full
and equal access to the goods and services offered to the public
and made available to the public. The Defendant denied Plaintiff
the full enjoyment of the goods and services of the website by
being unable to purchase candles, accessories, and other products
available online and to ascertain information relating to pricing,
shipping, ordering merchandise and return and privacy policies on
their website.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
Sunbeam Candles, Inc. is a home goods store in New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
SUTTER HEALTH: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Copans Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA COPANS, individually and on behalf of other similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SUTTER HEALTH; and WELLTOK, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 2:23-at-01154 (E.D. Cal., Nov. 10, 2023) alleges violation
of the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act.
According to the complaint, on May 2023, and perhaps even earlier,
unauthorized users accessed Sutter patient files. Upon accessing
the files, these unauthorized users obtained patients' sensitive
personal medical information. The total number of patients affected
is not less than 500, but the precise number is still unknown.
Rather than alerting patients of the breach right away as required
under state law, Sutter and WellTok took months to fully
investigate and reveal the extent of the breach, only notifying
patients in November 2023. The delay caused further harm, allowing
the hackers more time to exploit the information. The Defendant's
negligence allowed the medical information of the Plaintiff and the
Class to be accessed by unauthorized third persons and permitted it
to escape or spread from its normal place of storage, and therefore
negligently released the information within the meaning of CMIA, at
which time the medical information was viewed by unauthorized
persons, says the suit.
SUTTER HEALTH operates as a non-profit health care organization.
The Hospital offers Alzheimer's and brain health, arthritis and
rheumatology, behavioral care, fertility, pain management,
dermatology, physical therapy and rehabilitation, gastroenterology,
reconstructive plastic surgery, and nutrition services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Julie Erickson, Esq.
Elizabeth Kramer, Esq.
Kevin Osborne, Esq.
ERICKSON KRAMER OSBORNE LLP
44 Tehama Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 635-0631
Facsimile: (415) 599-8088
Email: julie@eko.law
elizabeth@eko.law
kevin@eko.law
TAO GROUP: Padilla Sues Over Employee Misclassification
-------------------------------------------------------
JOSE PADILLA, individually, and on behalf of Aggrieved Employees
pursuant to the California Private Attorneys General Act, Plaintiff
v. TAO GROUP LLC; WEHO HOSPITALITY, LLC; and DOES 1 through 25,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 23STCV27Q18 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., November 3, 2023) seeks to recover all available
remedies, including civil penalties and attorney's fees and costs,
under the California Labor Code Private Attorneys General Act of
2004.
The Defendants, jointly and severally, employed Plaintiff from
approximately February to August of 2022 as a sous chef at
Defendants' restaurant. For the duration of Plaintiff's employment,
Plaintiff was misclassified as exempt because Plaintiff was
employed under the "sous chef" title despite his day-to-day duties
were less than 50% managerial in nature, and more than 50%
non-managerial in nature. He mostly performed menial tasks related
to food preparation, cleaning, and other non-managerial tasks. As a
result, Plaintiff was subjected to the Defendants' practice of
failing to properly pay him all minimum wages, regular
rate/straight time wages, and overtime wages for all hours he
worked. Among other things, he was also deprived of meal and rest
breaks, the suit alleges.
Tao Group LLC and Weho Hospitality LLC own and operates the "LAVO
Ristorante" located at 9201 Sunset Blvd. Suite 100, West Hollywood,
CA. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan M. Genish, Esq.
Barbara DuVan-Clarke, Esq.
Alex K. Spellman, Esq.
P.J. Van Ert, Esq.
BLACKSTONE LAW, APC
8383 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 745
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Telephone: (310) 622-4278
Facsimile: (855) 786-6356
E-mail: jgenish@blackstonepc.com
BDC@blackstonepc.com
aspellman@blackstonepc.com
pjvanert@blackstonepc.com
TRELLIS ADVISORS: Rossetter Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
--------------------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM ROSSETTER, Plaintiff v. TRELLIS ADVISORS LLC; TRELLIS
ADVISORS LP; LOTUS DOMAINE MANAGEMENT LLC; LOTUS DOMAINE III LP;
LOTUS DOMAINE III GP LP; LOTUS DOMAINE III-A LP; LOTUS DOMAINE
ASSOCIATES LLC; TERRA ROSSA FAMILY OFFICE LP; TERRA ROSSA FAMILY
OFFICE LLC; and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
23STCV26514 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 30, 2023) arises
from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in violation
of the California Labor Code and the California Business and
Professions Code.
The complaint is brought by the Plaintiff for Defendants' civil
penalties pursuant to the Labor Code, retaliation, wrongful
discharge, failure to timely pay earned wages during employment,
failure to provide complete and accurate wage statements, failure
to pay all wages timely upon separation of employment, unfair
business practices, and failure to provide with an accounting of
all wages due and paid.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants from July 1, 2020 to
January 13, 2023 as a Vice President of Deal Origination and
Business Development. Throughout this employment, Plaintiff was a
California-based employee whose employment was subject to the
provisions of the California Labor Code.
Trellis Advisors LLC provides financial planning and investment
management services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
N. Nick Ebrahimian, Esq.
Alan Wilcox, Esq.
LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
8889 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Telephone: (310) 432-0000
Facsimile: (310) 432-0001
E-mail: nebrahimian@lelawfirm.com
awilcox@lelawfirm.com
UNITED WELL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cowan Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------
JAMIE COWAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. UNITED WELL SERVICES, LLC, Defendant, Case
2:23-cv-00982 (D.N.M., Nov. 6, 2023) is an action against the
Defendant's failure to pay the Plaintiff and the class overtime
compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.
Plaintiff Cowan was employed by the Defendant as a rig operator.
UNITED WELL SERVICES, LLC is an oil well drilling contractor. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ricardo J. Prieto, Esq.
Melinda Arbuckle, Esq.
WAGE AND HOUR FIRM
5050 Quorum Drive, Suite 700
Dallas, TX 75254
Telephone: (214) 489-7653
Facsimile: (469) 319-0317
Email: rprieto@wageandhourfirm.com
marbuckle@wageandhourfirm.com
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Faces Ortega Suit Over Unlawful Labor Policies
------------------------------------------------------------------
THERESA ORTEGA, an individual, GABRIELA ROCHA, an individual, on
behalf of themselves, all others similarly situated, and the
general public, Plaintiffs v. UNITEDHEALTH GROUP, INC., a
Corporation; OPTUM SERVICES, INC., a Corporation; OPTUM CARE, INC.,
a Corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case
No. 3:23-cv-05596 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 30, 2023) arises from the
Defendants' alleged unlawful labor policies and practices in
violation of the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification, the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.
The Plaintiffs, as former employees of the Defendants, are bringing
this employment case because they were laid off as part of a
countrywide mass layoff conducted by Defendants in August 2023. The
Defendants, like so many other employers who have recently
conducted similar mass layoffs, are attempting to skirt the
requirements of the WARN Act and avoid their obligation to pay 60
days of wages to affected employees, the suit alleges. The
Defendants also failed to provide Plaintiffs and the Plaintiff
Class with accurate itemized wage statements as required by
California law, the suit adds.
The Defendants further violated the UCL by engaging in unlawful,
unfair, and fraudulent business acts or practices, including but
not limited to: (a) failing to comply with WARN Act requirements of
60 days' notice before a mass layoff; (b) failing to provide
Plaintiffs with 60-day pay in lieu of notice as required by the
WARN Act; and (c) utilizing severance agreements as a means of
avoiding liability under the WARN Act by requiring employees to
waive their rights to receive lower payments then they would have
been entitled to under the law, says the suit.
Plaintiff Ortega was hired in April 2023 by Defendants as an
administrative assistant to the Facilities Director. Plaintiff
Rocha was hired in April 2023 as a Registration Clerk.
UnitedHealth Group, Inc. is an American multinational managed
healthcare and insurance company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael S. Morrison, Esq.
Jacqueline Gil, Esq.
ALEXANDER MORRISON + FEHR LLP
1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 394-0888
E-mail: mmorrison@amfllp.com
jgil@amfllp.com
UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA: Chatelain Sues Over Unprotected Info
-------------------------------------------------------------
MILAGROS CHATELAIN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA,
Defendant, Case No. 27-CV-23-17429 (D. Minn., Nov. 10, 2023) is an
action against the Defendant for its failure to secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff
and the Class.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that as a direct and
proximate result of the Defendant's failure to adequately safeguard
the sensitive data entrusted to it, the Plaintiff and the Class
Member's PII has been accessed by unauthorized actors.
The Plaintiff and the Class Members are now at significantly
increased and certainly impending risk of fraud, identity theft,
misappropriation of health insurance benefits, intrusion of health
privacy, and similar criminal mischief, says the suit.
The University of Minnesota is a public land-grant research
university in the Twin Cities of Minneapolis and Saint Paul.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian C. Gudmundson, Esq.
Michael J. Laird, Esq.
Rachel K. Tack, Esq.
ZIMMERMAN REED LLP
1100 IDS Center
80 South 8th Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 341-0400
Email: brian.gudmundson@zimmreed.com
michael.laird@zimmreed.com
Rachel.tack@zimmreed.com
VISA INC: Court OKs Probe on Website Over False Settlement Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Scarcella of Reuters reports that a U.S. judge has agreed to
investigate a website that lawyers said is presenting "false and
misleading" information about the $5.6 billion settlement that
retailers struck with Visa and Mastercard over credit and debit
card fees.
U.S. Magistrate Judge Joseph Marutollo in Brooklyn in an order on
November 10, 2023 granted a request from plaintiffs' lawyers in the
case to start a probe that could shut down the unauthorized site
and void any client contracts that have come from it.
Marutollo set a deadline for the website to respond to an inquiry
from him. A representative for the website did not immediately
respond to an inquiry from Reuters.
Major class action settlements often feature websites with
information for class members. The website at issue in the Visa and
Mastercard case closely resembles the official U.S.
court-authorized page set up as part of the 2019 settlement in the
litigation in Brooklyn, New York, federal court.
Fraud claims have arisen from at least two other class action cases
in recent months.
The judge overseeing 3M's $6 billion settlement of lawsuits
alleging its earplugs caused hearing damage warned of an identity
theft scam. Plaintiffs lawyers in the multibillion-dollar
litigation in North Carolina over contaminated water at Camp
Lejeune said they've seen efforts to dupe victims into paying
unnecessary fees.
In the Visa and Mastercard case, retailers accused the companies of
overcharging them on fees that are paid when consumers use credit
or debit cards to make purchases. A U.S. appeals court in March
upheld retailers' multibillion-dollar settlement. The companies
denied wrongdoing.
Plaintiffs lawyers in a Nov. 3 filing in the case notified the
court about what they called a "highly suspicious" settlement
website.
They told the court that the website was brought to their attention
by a company that said it received a voicemail purportedly from
prominent rap artist Snoop Dogg touting the page. Snoop Dogg's
business team on November 13, 2023 did not immediately respond to a
request for comment.
The attorneys who alerted the court did not immediately respond to
a request for comment.
Marutollo's order directed the settlement site to respond to why
the court should not issue a report and recommendation to
"immediately take down the website."
The case is In re Payment Card Interchange Fee and Merchant
Discount Antitrust Litigation, U.S. District Court, Eastern
District of New York, 1:05-md-01720-MKB-VMS. [GN]
WESCOM CENTRAL: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Wall Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
PRISCILLA WALL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WESCOM CENTRAL CREDIT UNION; and BARRACUDA
NETWORKS, INC., Defendants, Case 5:23-cv-02293 (C.D. Cal., Nov. 7,
2023) is a class action arising out of the recent cyberattack and
data breach resulting from Wescom's failure to implement reasonable
and industry standard data security practices.
According to the complaint, the personal information compromised in
the Data Breach included the Plaintiff's and Class Members' full
names and financial account numbers ("personally identifiable
information" or "PII"). The PII compromised in the Data Breach was
exfiltrated by cybercriminals and remains in the hands of those
cyber-criminals who target PII for its value to identity thieves.
The Data Breach was a direct result of Defendants' failure to
implement adequate and reasonable cyber-security procedures and
protocols necessary to protect Wescom's customers' PII from a
foreseeable and preventable cyber-attack. The Plaintiff and Class
Members have also been exposed to a present and continuing risk of
fraud and identity theft. The Plaintiff and Class Members must now
and in the future closely monitor their financial accounts to guard
against identity theft, says the suit.
WESCOM CENTRAL CREDIT UNION operates as a financial cooperative.
The Union provides financial solutions such as saving and checking
accounts, loans, investment, credit and debit cards, security,
insurance, ATMs, online banking, and other related services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John J. Nelson, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
280 S. Beverly Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (858) 209-6941
Email: jnelson@milberg.com
WEST CHESTER: Giorgi Suit Seeks COVID-19 Tuition Fee Refunds
------------------------------------------------------------
MADELINE GIORGI, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WEST CHESTER UNIVERSITY, Defendant, Case No.
2:23-cv-04285-JFM (E.D. Pa., November 3, 2023) arises from the
Defendant's refusal to provide a prorated refund of tuition or fees
tied to its on-campus education, services, and amenities that were
not available to students for a significant part of the Spring 2020
semester, alleging claims against the Defendant for breach of
implied contract and for unjust enrichment.
The Plaintiff and members of the Class paid their tuition in the
Spring 2020 semester to enjoy everything the Defendant offered
them, including on-campus resources, campus community, and
in-person education for the entire Spring 2020 term. Moreover, by
not giving prorated refunds for tuition or fees charged for
on-campus education and services not provided, the Defendant
breached its contracts with students or was otherwise unjustly
enriched, says the Plaintiff.
Founded in 1871, West Chester University is a public university
offering over 100 undergraduate programs and master's, doctoral and
professional programs. Its principal campus is located in the city
of West Chester, Chester County, Pennsylvania. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
Nicholas A. Colella, Esq.
LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP
1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Telephone: (412) 322-9243
Facsimile: (412) 231-0246
E-mail: gary@lcllp.com
nickc@lcllp.com
- and -
Michael A. Tompkins, Esq.
Anthony Alesandro, Esq.
LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C.
One Old Country Road, Suite 347
Carle Place, NY 11514
Telephone: (516) 873-9550
E-mail: mtompkins@leedsbrownlaw.com
aalesandro@leedsbrownlaw.com
WEST TEXAS GAS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Morrow Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
BRIAN MORROW, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WEST TEXAS GAS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
7:23-cv-00174 (W.D. Tex., Nov. 7, 2023) is a class action arises
out of a "data incident" perpetrated against the Defendant WTG, a
natural gas company that provides natural gas services for
customers in Georgia, as well as a handful of other states, that
occurred around May 2023.
As a result of the Data Breach, the Plaintiff and putative class
members suffered present injury and damages in the form of identity
theft, out-of-pocket expenses and the value of the time reasonably
incurred to remedy or mitigate the effects of the unauthorized
access, exfiltration, and subsequent criminal misuse of their
sensitive and highly personal information.
The Plaintiff and Class Members have been exposed to a heightened
and imminent risk of fraud and identity theft. The Plaintiff and
Class Members must now and in the future closely monitor their
financial accounts and information to guard against identity theft,
among other issues, says the suit.
WEST TEXAS GAS, INC. (WTG) distributes natural gas. The Company
processes and transmits natural gas and natural gas liquids to
residentail and commercial areas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jarrett L. Ellzey, Esq.
Leigh Montgomery, Esq.
Alexander G. Kykta, Esq.
ELLZEY & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
1105 Milford Street
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (713) 554-2377
Facsimile: (888) 276-3455
Email: jarrett@ellzeylaw.com
leigh@ellzeylaw.com
alex@ellzeylaw.com
- and -
Gary E. Mason, Esq.
Danielle L. Perry, Esq.
Lisa A. White, Esq.
MASON LLP
5101 Wisconsin Avenue, NW Suite 305
Washington, DC 20016
Telephone: (202) 429-2290
Email: gmason@masonllp.com
dperry@masonllp.com
lwhite@masonllp.com
WEST VIRGINIA: Gov. Justice Moves to Dismiss Suit Over Jail System
------------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Allen Adams of The Inter-Mountain reports that in two
filings on November 13, 2023, attorneys representing inmates at
Southern Regional Jail balked at attempts by Gov. Jim Justice to
avoid disclosures of key documents, while Justice filed a motion to
dismiss a separate class action lawsuit aimed at West Virginia's
entire corrections system.
Attorneys representing Michael Rose and Edward Harmon, two inmates
at the Southern Regional Jail near Beckley, filed a response on
November 13, 2023 in opposition to objections from Justice and
Governor's Office Chief of Staff Brian Abraham to a discovery order
issued last week by U.S. Magistrate Judge Omar J. Aboulhosn.
Aboulhosn granted a motion on Oct. 30 requiring Justice and Abraham
to provide certain documents to the plaintiffs while also ruling
against requiring Justice and Abraham to sit for depositions.
Attorneys for the SRJ inmates are seeking documents from Justice
and Abraham regarding the firing in 2022 of former Division of
Corrections and Rehabilitation commissioner Betsy Jividen and an
investigation conducted that same year by former Department of
Homeland Security secretary Jeff Sandy of SJR, including an on-site
visit.
Rose and Harmon filed a class action lawsuit in 2022 in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia against
state and county officials, alleging inhuman living conditions and
overcrowding at SJR. The two inmates are seeking a ruling ordering
the state to correct the conditions at the jail.
Attorneys for Justice and Abraham filed objections to the discovery
requests on November 13, 2023, arguing that the requests are unduly
burdensome and irrelevant to the case being brought by the SRJ
inmates.
They also argue that the granted motion violates the executive
privilege and deliberative processes of the governor's office, and
that it violates state sovereign immunity.
Stephen New, an attorney with one of the four law firms
representing Rose and Harmon, argued that Justice and Abraham
already opened the door for documents to be provided as long as
they could include a privilege log, a document explaining that
certain documents are being withheld due to certain exclusions.
"In other words, the witnesses set the standard and the magistrate
judge adopted that standard," New wrote. "They cannot now seek a
determination that they, not the Magistrate Judge, acted
incorrectly."
New also argued that Justice and Abraham have already provided
documents that could conceivably be considered privileged documents
and communications internal to the governor's office.
"For example, the witnesses state that 'the Governor's Office
learned of certain complaints and accusations at SRJ and solicited
information to help determine what actions to take.' This statement
discloses that the investigation supposedly was done in response to
complaints and accusations as opposed to any other reason," New
wrote, "Thus, while these witnesses claim a privilege, they have no
problem disclosing certain information as to their
decision-making."
In a separate order last week, Aboulhosn found in favor of a motion
from the inmates seeking default judgment against the state.
Aboulhosn accused DCR officials of intentionally destroying
evidence, including emails and electronically stored documents.
Attorneys for Rose and Harmon are seeking documents from Justice
and Abraham regarding discussions surrounding keeping
electronically stored information.
With respect to the determination of any involvement in the failure
to preserve ESI information, the email indicating that Sandy's
email account is to remain active raises a question, despite
counsel's explanation, as to the amount of control the Governor's
Office had over the ESI information related to (DCR/DHS). The
magistrate judge, having determined that the evidence was
destroyed, reasonably concluded that this was a proper area of
inquiry. If, as counsel represents, the Governor's Office had no
involvement, then a simple response is 'no such documents exist.'"
In a separate class action lawsuit brought in August by adult and
juvenile inmates against DCR about conditions in all of the state's
regional jails, prisons and juvenile facilities, attorneys for
Justice on November 13, 2023 filed a motion to dismiss the case.
That lawsuit accuses the state of understaffing, overcrowding, and
delays of deferred maintenance for facilities. The inmates are
seeking a ruling in their favor and an order to require the state
to spend available surplus funds on staffing and maintenance.
Attorneys for Justice claim he is immune from the lawsuit due to
sovereign immunity, which shields the governor from civil lawsuits
in certain circumstances.
While the governor, as the chief executive of the state, oversees
executive branch agencies, Justice's attorneys argue that he does
not have direct supervisory authority over state prisons and
jails.
Justice attorneys also argue that the plaintiffs have failed to
show their issues are traceable to actions by the governor and that
they cannot show that Justice has been deliberately indifferent to
conditions in the corrections system.
"Quite the opposite. In fact, Plaintiffs' own complaint
demonstrates the governor has for years focused his time and energy
seeking to address the alleged risks to health and safety in those
facilities," wrote attorney Michael Hissam.
A state of emergency has been in place for the past 15 months due
to severe staff vacancies in prisons and jails, with members of the
West Virginia National Guard assisting. . . Justice and the
Legislature included money in the current budget for deferred
maintenance for correctional facilities. An August special session
saw the Legislature pass bills to increase the pay for correctional
officers and a one-time bonus for correctional staff.
"…Not only have Plaintiffs failed to plausibly demonstrate the
state of mind of recklessness as to the governor concerning
conditions of confinement, they have affirmatively plead the
opposite: that the governor is not only subjectively aware of the
issues facing state correctional facilities, but that he has spent
his time in office focused on finding solutions to them," Hissam
wrote. [GN]
WHOLE FOODS: Mismanages 401(k) Plan's Costs, Winkelman Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
SHAUNA WINKELMAN, MICHAEL LENON, SCOTT CENNA, KALEA NIXON, ROBERT
GOLDORAZENA, CHAD DIEHL and ROSS NANFELDT, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. WHOLE FOODS
MARKET, INC., THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF WHOLE FOODS MARKET, INC.,
THE WHOLE FOODS MARKET, INC. EMPLOYER COMMITTEE, THE WHOLE FOODS
MARKET, INC. 401(K) COMMITTEE, THE WHOLE FOODS MARKET, INC.
BENEFITS ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE and JOHN DOES 1-50, Defendants,
Case No. 1:23-cv-01352 (W.D. Tex., November 6, 2023) is a class
action against the Defendants for breach of fiduciary duty of
prudence and failure to adequately monitor other fiduciaries in
violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
According to the complaint, the Defendants, as fiduciaries of the
Plan, breached the duties they owed to the Whole Foods Market
Growing Your Future 401(k) Plan, to the Plaintiffs, and to the
other participants of the Plan by, inter alia, failing to control
the Plan's administrative and recordkeeping costs. Accordingly, the
Plan had substantial bargaining power to negotiate favorable
recordkeeping and administration fees. Plans, such as the Plan,
with large numbers of participants can take advantage of economies
of scale by negotiating a lower per-participant recordkeeping fee.
The Defendants, however, did not try to reduce the Plan's expenses
to ensure they were prudent. Moreover, the Monitoring Defendants
breached their fiduciary monitoring duties by, among other things,
failing to monitor and evaluate the performance of the Committee
Defendants or have a system in place for doing so, standing idly by
as the Plan suffered significant losses as a result of the
Committee Defendants' imprudent actions and omissions. As a direct
and proximate result of the breaches of fiduciary duties alleged
herein, the Plan suffered millions of dollars in losses, says the
suit.
Whole Foods Market, Inc. is a nationwide grocery retailer based in
Austin, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Kell A. Simon, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF KELL A. SIMON
501 N. Interstate Highway 35, Suite 11
Austin, TX 78702
Telephone: (512) 898-9019
Facsimile: (512) 368-9144
E-mail: kell@kellsimonlaw.com
- and -
Donald R. Reavey, Esq.
CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C.
2933 North Front Street
Harrisburg, PA 17110
Telephone: (717) 233-4101
Facsimile: (717) 233-4103
E-mail: donr@capozziadler.com
- and -
Mark K. Gyandoh, Esq.
CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C.
312 Old Lancaster Road
Merion Station, PA 19066
Telephone: (610) 890-0200
Facsimile: (717) 233-4103
E-mail: markg@capozziadler.com
WINS FINANCE: Faces Kamau Securities Suit Over Disclosures
----------------------------------------------------------
WINS Finance Holdings Inc. disclosed in its Form 20-F/A report for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on October 12, 2023, that it is currently
facing a shareholder class action complaint in the District Court
for the Central District of California filed on July 24, 2020 by
Samuel Kamau captioned "Kamau v. Wins Finance Holdings, Inc., et
al.," Case No. 2:20-cv-06656.
It sought unspecified monetary damages for alleged violations of
the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the period
from October 31, 2018 to July 6, 2020 against Wins Finance Holdings
Inc., Renhui Mu, and Junfeng Zhao. Plaintiff's initial complaint
alleges, among other things, that defendants purportedly violated
the securities laws by failing to disclose that the repayment of a
RMB 580 million "loan" to Guohong Asset Management Co., Ltd. was
"highly uncertain," and that the resignation of the company's
former independent auditor was "foreseeably likely" given the
non-payment of the foregoing loan as well as alleged material
weaknesses in the company's control over financial reporting.
No summons and/or complaints have been served as of this date and
plaintiff has not filed an affidavit of service with the court
concerning service upon any defendant.
Wins Finance, a Cayman Island holding company with business
operations in China, is a leading and integrated lending solution
provider mainly serving small-and-medium sized enterprises in
Jinzhong City, Shanxi Province and Beijing, China.
*********
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 2023. 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 ***