/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240214.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Wednesday, February 14, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 33

                            Headlines

1998 GRILL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Porras Suit Alleges
ALL MY SONS: Fails to Pay Overtime Premiums, Zepeda Suit Claims
ALLOVIR INC: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due March 19
APEX TECHNOLOGY: Drulias & Farzad Sue Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty
ASTROPHYSICS INC: Faces Ortiz Wage-and-Hour Suit

AVENTA HEALTH: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Sierra Suit Says
BOP ACQUISITION: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Lohr Alleges
BRINGER CORPORATION: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Badel Alleges
CARE BY CASSIE: Buford et al. Sue Over Nonpayment of OT Wages
CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bunch Alleges

CHECKERS DRIVE-IN: Sanchez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
COMMUNITY HEALTH: Foust Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Care Providers
COMMUNITY HEALTH: Sharp Seeks Proper Overtime Wages
DUKE ENERGY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cobb Alleges
EVERCOMMERCE INC: Trust Sues Over Unlawful Stockholders Agreement

EVOLUTION AB: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due March 25
F&E AIRCRAFT: Trejo Labor Code Suit Removed to C.D. California
FALLON AMBULANCE: D'Angelo Sues Over Private Data Breach
FOCUS CARE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Fowler Alleges
FUBOTV INC: Faces Beasley Suit Over Data Privacy Violations

GENESIS RECOVERY: Fails to Pay Overtime Premium, Scott Suit Claims
GREEN LEAF: Ramirez Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime Wages
GROUP MANAGEMENT SERVICES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Durham Claims
HEALTH EXTENSION: Wahab Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
ILOV305 I LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Atucha Alleges

JANJER ENTERPRISES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bell Alleges
KELLER WILLIAMS: Agrees to Settle Commissions Class Suit for $70M
KRAFT HEINZ: Sisca Sues Over Misleading Cheese Product Labeling
LIVEPERSON INC: Browne Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties
LL FLOOR DESIGNS: Valencia and Jimenez Sues Over Labor Law Breaches

LOANDEPOT INC: Costello Sues Over Unprotected Private Data
LONG ISLAND COMMUNITY: Jacobsen Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties
MAKING MOVES: O'Sullivan Sues Over Crew Members' Unpaid Wages
MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Nadel Suit Set for Feb. 23
MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Pasternacki Suit Set for Feb. 23

MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Poppe Sleeper Suit Set for Feb. 23
MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Shaffer v. Mattel Set for Feb. 23
MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Willis Sleeper Suit Set for Feb. 23
MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Wray Sleeper Suit Set for Feb. 23
MIAMI TOP CLEANING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Serafin Says

MINDVALLEY INC: Thornton Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Info
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Shabazz Sues Over Loan Modification Denial
NAUTIC PARTNERS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Bourque Alleges
NEW SCHOOL: Lankau Suit Seeks Tuition Fee Refund
PALM ENTERTAINMENT: Dahlquist Sues Over Illegal Tip Pool

PERELMAN'S FAMILY: Wahab Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
PETER MARCUS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Bullock Says
PLANET HOME: Canepa Sues Over Unprotected Private Info
PRGB INC: Clarke Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection Practices
PRIMMER PIPER: Gaboriault Sues Over Unauthorized Access of Info

PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cooper Alleges
PROSTAFF SERVICES: Velasquez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
SANSAI-PASADENA: Mendez Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
SIKA AG: Artificially Inflated Prices for CCAs, D'Onofrio Claims
SUNCAKES LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ferguson Alleges

UNITED STATES: Various Parties File Suit Over Tolling Program
UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Snyder Suit Says
UNIVISION COMMUNICATIONS: Discloses Private Info, Claxton Suit Says
VERIZON WIRELESS: Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set April 15
VIRGIN PULSE: Fails to Secure Patients' Personal Info, Elston Says

[*] Current Issues Discussed in Data Breach Class Action Settlement
[] Registration Now Open for 8th Annual Class Action Conference

                            *********

1998 GRILL: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Porras Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
Bonnie S. Porras, and other similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff v. 1998 Grill LLC a/k/a 19/98 Grill and Edward Contino,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00025-AW-HTC (N.D. Fla.,
January 31, 2024) is a class action accusing the Defendants of
violating the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants employed Plaintiff from approximately April 22, 2023
to November 25, 2023. In this complaint, Plaintiff seeks to claim
damages only for the period from September 27, 2023 to November 25,
2023 in which she was not properly compensated.

The 1998 Grill is an American restaurant located at 17751 US-19,
Fanning Springs, FL. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented  by:

         Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
         ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
         9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
         Miami, FL 33156
         Telephone: (305) 446-1500
         Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
         E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

ALL MY SONS: Fails to Pay Overtime Premiums, Zepeda Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE ZEPEDA, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ALL MY SONS MOVING & STORAGE OF DALLAS,
INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00248-G (N.D. Tex., January 31,
2024) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages owed
under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Zepeda was employed by Defendant from approximately 2010
through approximately June
2023 as a non-exempt, manual labor employee. He regularly worked
more than 40 hours in a week. Rather than receiving overtime pay --
time-and-one-half his regular rate of pay, which would include all
compensation for hours worked, services rendered, or performance --
as required by the FLSA, Zepeda only received "straight time" pay
for overtime hours worked, says the suit.

Based in Texas, All My Sons Moving & Storage of Dallas, Inc. is a
moving and storage company that provides services to residential
and commercial customers. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Travis Gasper, Esq.
          GASPER LAW PLLC
          1408 N. Riverfront Blvd., Suite 323
          Dallas, TX 75207
          Telephone: (469) 663-7736
          E-mail: travis@travisgasper.com

ALLOVIR INC: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due March 19
-------------------------------------------------------------
Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C., a nationally recognized shareholder
rights law firm, reminds investors that class actions have been
commenced on behalf of stockholders of AlloVir, Inc. (NASDAQ:
ALVR), GrafTech International Ltd. (NYSE: EAF), Maplebear, Inc.
d/b/a Instacart (NASDAQ: CART), and The Boeing Company (NYSE: BA).
Stockholders have until the deadlines below to petition the court
to serve as lead plaintiff. Additional information about each case
can be found at the link provided.

AlloVir, Inc. (NASDAQ: ALVR)

Class Period: March 22, 2022 - December 21, 2023

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 19, 2024

The complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose that:

     (i) the posoleucel Phase 3 Studies were unlikely to meet their
primary endpoints;

    (ii) as a result, it was likely that the Company would
ultimately discontinue the posoleucel Phase 3 studies;

   (iii) accordingly, AlloVir overstated the efficacy and clinical
and/or commercial prospects of posoleucel; and
  
    (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were
materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On December 22, 2023, AlloVir announced that it was discontinuing
the posoleucel Phase 3 studies over efficacy concerns and stated
that it would explore strategic alternatives for the Company.
Specifically, AlloVir said it was discontinuing the posoleucel
Phase 3 studies after pre-planned analyses concluded they wouldn't
meet their primary endpoints.

On this news, AlloVir's stock price fell $1.57 per share, or
67.38%, to close at $0.76 per share on December 22, 2023.

For more information on the AlloVir class action go to:
https://bespc.com/cases/ALVR

GrafTech International Ltd. (NYSE: EAF)

Class Period: February 8, 2019 - August 3, 2023 (Common Stock
Only)

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 25, 2024

The GrafTech class action lawsuit alleges that defendants
throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that:

     (i) GrafTech's manufacturing operations in Monterrey, Mexico
had for decades chronically contaminated neighboring communities
with harmful carcinogenic gasses and particulate matter;

    (ii) GrafTech had signed agreements with local authorities
committing itself to improving the environmental performance of its
Monterrey facility, but repeatedly failed to honor these
commitments;
   (iii) GrafTech had been repeatedly warned over an approximately
30-year period regarding its wanton disregard for the environment
and health and well-being of people near its operations in
Monterrey, Mexico;

   (iv) GrafTech's operations in Monterrey, Mexico were not in
compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations;

    (v) GrafTech had failed to adequately remediate the
environmental problems caused by the Monterrey facility following
the 2019 administrative proceeding conducted by the Department of
Sustainable Development of the State of Nuevo Leon;

    (vi) the government of Apodaca had sought intervention from the
State of Nuevo León authorities to curtail and prevent the adverse
environmental impacts and noncompliance with environmental laws and
regulations caused by the Monterrey facility;

   (vii) GrafTech's purported cost leadership was achieved in
substantial part by failing to implement appropriate and effective
environmental safeguards at its manufacturing facility in
Monterrey, Mexico;

  (viii) GrafTech's capital expenditures and/or related operational
projects were woefully insufficient to adequately address the harm
that GrafTech's operations in Monterrey, Mexico had inflicted on
the environment and people within the neighboring communities;

    (ix) as a result of the above, GrafTech was acutely exposed to
undisclosed material risks that GrafTech's manufacturing operations
in Monterrey, Mexico would be severely disrupted by government
action or enforcement; and

     (x) as a result of the above, GrafTech was acutely exposed to
undisclosed material risks that its supplies of pin stock and
graphite electrodes would be withdrawn and/or materially
diminished, thereby materially harming GrafTech's business,
operations, reputation, and financial results.

Maplebear, Inc. d/b/a Instacart (NASDAQ: CART)

Class Period: pursuant and/or traceable to the Offering Documents
issued in connection with the Company's initial public offering
conducted on or about September 19, 2023; and/or September 19, 2023
- October 1, 2023

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: March 25, 2024

Instacart provides online grocery shopping services to households
in North America. The Company sells and delivers a range of
products in the food, alcohol, consumer health, pet care, and
ready-made meals categories, in addition to others. The Company
offers its services through a mobile application and website, while
also providing software-as-a-service solutions to retailers.

On August 25, 2023, Instacart filed a registration statement on
Form S-1 with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC")
in connection with the IPO, which, after several amendments, was
declared effective by the SEC on September 18, 2023 (the
"Registration Statement").

On September 19, 2023, pursuant to the Registration Statement,
Instacart's common stock began publicly trading on the Nasdaq
Global Select Market ("NASDAQ") under the ticker symbol "CART".

On September 20, 2023, Instacart filed a prospectus on Form 424B4
with the SEC in connection with the IPO, which incorporated and
formed part of the Registration Statement (the "Prospectus" and,
collectively with the Registration Statement, the "Offering
Documents").

Pursuant to the Offering Documents, Instacart and other selling
stockholders identified in the Prospectus sold 14.1 million and 7.9
million shares of the Company's common stock to the public,
respectively, at the Offering price of $30.00 per share for total
proceeds of approximately $400 million and $224 million to
Instacart and the selling stockholders, respectively, after
applicable underwriting discounts and commissions.

The complaint alleges that the Offering Documents were negligently
prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements of material
fact or omitted to state other facts necessary to make the
statements made not misleading and were not prepared in accordance
with the rules and regulations governing their preparation. In
addition, the complaint alleges that, throughout the Class Period,
Defendants made materially false and misleading statements
regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects.
Specifically, the Offering Documents and Defendants made false
and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that:

     (i) Instacart had overstated the extent to which online
grocery shopping and delivery habits among consumers were
accelerating;

    (ii) Instacart had downplayed the extent of the competition
that it faced in the online grocery shopping and delivery market;
  
   (iii) accordingly, Defendants overstated the Company's post-IPO
growth, business, and financial prospects; and

    (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were
materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On September 22, 2023, Reuters published an article noting, among
other things, that Instacart's stock price was falling after
"lukewarm analyst reports" indicated that the Company would
struggle from heavy competition. For example, the article noted
that "BTIG analyst Jake Fuller gave Instacart a 'neutral' rating
and warned that the company faces heavy competition from DoorDash
(DASH.N) and Uber Technologies (UBER.N) in the slowly expanding
market of grocery delivery."

On this news, Instacart's stock price fell $0.65 per share, or
2.12%, to close at $30.00 per share on September 22, 2023.

Then, on October 2, 2023, investment research firm Gordon Haskett
initiated coverage of Instacart with a "hold" rating, stating that
it "ha[s] doubts that online grocery delivery adoption will
continue to materially increase at a time when consumers are
becoming increasingly cautious about spending", while similarly
citing the competitive environment in the online grocery shopping
and delivery market as a headwind to the Company's business.

On this news, Instacart's stock price fell $2.73 per share, or
9.2%, to close at $26.96 per share on October 2, 2023.

As of the time the complaint was filed, Instacart's common stock
continues to trade below the $30.00 per share Offering price,
damaging investors.

The Boeing Company (NYSE: BA)

Class Period: October 23, 2019 - January 24, 2024

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: April 1, 2024

Boeing, headquartered in Arlington, Virginia, is one of the largest
aerospace companies in the world. Its Commercial Airplanes Segment
is a leading producer of commercial aircraft and offers a family of
commercial jetliners including its 737 MAX. Approximately five
years ago, two Boeing 737 MAX 8 planes were involved in fatal
crashes caused by malfunctions due to design flaws in the 737 MAX's
flight control software. The first crash occurred in October 2018
and the second crash occurred in March 2019 killing a total of 346
people and leading to 737 MAX planes being grounded from March 2019
to December 2020.

According to the filed complaint, the Class Period starts on
October 23, 2019, when Defendants boasted that Boeing was making
progress towards the safe return to service of the 737 MAX.
Throughout the Class Period, Defendants continued to assure
investors that Boeing was laser-focused on safety and quality.
Defendants also claimed that Boeing did not make trade-offs between
safety and profit, and that safety was Boeing's priority.

Also according to the filed complaint, unbeknownst to investors,
statements such as those above were false and misleading because
Boeing failed to disclose that it had been prioritizing its profits
over safety, which led to poor quality control standards in the
production of its commercial aircrafts such as the 737 MAX,
resulting in a heightened risk of manufacturing flaws which could
render the Company's new airplanes unsafe. This very risk had
materialized during the Class Period. These false and misleading
statements caused Boeing stock to trade at artificially inflated
prices during the Class Period.

Also, according to the filed complaint, it took a near disaster to
expose this heightened safety risk. The public first learned about
it on January 5, 2024 when a panel called a “door plug” flew
out of the side of a 737 MAX 9 (a variant of 737 MAX) during Alaska
Airlines Flight 1282. This left a gaping hole in the plane's main
cabin, feet from where passengers were sitting. Over the next few
weeks, investigations into the incident continued and problems with
such door plugs on other 737 MAX planes were discovered including
loose bolts holding the door plugs in place, further revealing the
Company's manufacturing and production missteps and leading to the
grounding of many 737 MAX 9 planes.

In reaction to these and other related disclosures, Boeing's stock
price plummeted from $249.00 on January 5, 2024 to $201.88 on
January 25, 2024, a $47.12 per share or 18.9% decline.

About Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.:

Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C. is a nationally recognized law firm
with offices in New York, California, and South Carolina. The firm
represents individual and institutional investors in commercial,
securities, derivative, and other complex litigation in state and
federal courts across the country. For more information about the
firm, please visit www.bespc.com. Attorney advertising. Prior
results do not guarantee similar outcomes.

Contact Information:

     Bragar Eagel & Squire, P.C.
     Brandon Walker, Esq.
     Marion Passmore, Esq.
     Phone: (212) 355-4648
     Email: investigations@bespc.com
     www.bespc.com [GN]

APEX TECHNOLOGY: Drulias & Farzad Sue Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty
-------------------------------------------------------------------
DEAN WILLIAM DRULIAS AND MICHAEL FARZAD, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. APEX TECHNOLOGY
SPONSOR LLC, JEFF EPSTEIN, BRAD KOENIG, DAVID CHAO, PETER BELL,
DONNA WELLS, ALEX VIEUX, AND STEVEN FLETCHER, Defendants, Case No.
2024-0094 (Del. Ch., February 2, 2024) asserts claims against the
Defendants for breach of fiduciary duty arising from Apex's July 1,
2021 merger with AvePoint, Inc and that created Legacy AvePoint.

The complaint contends that Defendants made material omissions by
failing to disclose the true amount of cash underlying each Apex
share is beyond peradventure. As a result, Plaintiffs and other
Apex's stockholders relied on the materially misleading Proxy in
deciding whether to exercise their redemption rights and in voting
to approve the merger. Accordingly, Plaintiffs seek monetary and/or
rescissory damages against Defendants for their breaches of
fiduciary duty owed to Apex public stockholders.

Apex Technology Sponsor LLC is a Delaware limited liability company
with principal offices located at 533 Airport Blvd., Suite 400,
Burlingame, CA. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

           Christine M. Mackintosh, Esq.
           Jason M. Avellino, Esq.
           GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A.
           123 S. Justison Street, 7th Floor
           Wilmington, DE 19801
           Telephone: (302) 622-7000
           Facsimile: (302) 622-71

                     - and -

           Christopher H. Lyons, Esq.
           Tayler D. Bolton, Esq.
           ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
           1521 Concord Pike, Suite 301
           Wilmington, DE 19803
           Telephone: (302) 467-2660

                     - and -

           Randall J. Baron, Esq.
           Erik W. Luedeke, Esq.
           ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
           655 W. Broadway. Suite 1900
           San Diego, CA 92101
           Telephone: (619) 231-1058

ASTROPHYSICS INC: Faces Ortiz Wage-and-Hour Suit
------------------------------------------------
ROSSYO ORTIZ, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ASTROPHYSICS, INC., a Delaware corporation;
LEE HECHT HARRISON, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; MARK
ZAYEK, an individual; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 24STCV01341 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty.,
Jan. 18, 2024) arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor
practices in violation of the California Labor Code and the
California Business and Professions Code.

The complaint alleges the Defendants' failure to pay minimum and
overtime wages, failure to provide meal and rest periods, waiting
time penalties, wage statement violations, failure to timely pay
wages, failure to indemnify, and unfair competition.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a non-exempt
employee, with duties that included, but were not limited to,
marketing, from approximately May of 2022 through approximately
June of 2023.

Astrophysics, Inc. manufactures security X-ray scanners.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David D. Bibiyan, Esq.
          Jeffrey D. Klein, Esq.
          Wesley Gonzales, Esq.
          BIBIYAN LAW GROUP, P.C.
          8484 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211
          Telephone: (310) 438-5555
          Facsimile: (310) 300-1705  
          E-mail: david@tomorrawlaw.com
                  jeff@tomorrowlaw.com
                  wesley@tomorrowlaw.com

AVENTA HEALTH: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Sierra Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
Joana Sierra, and other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff
v. Aventa Health LLC, d/b/a Aventa Health, Defendant, Case No.
0:24-cv-60176-XXXX (S.D. Fla., January 31, 2024) accuses the
Defendant of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to
pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals the proper
compensation for every overtime hour worked at the rate of time and
one-half their regular rate.

During her employment, the Plaintiff always worked more than 40
hours weekly, but she was not paid for overtime hours. In addition,
the Plaintiff was paid weekly by direct deposits without paystubs
providing accurate information about the number of hours worked,
wage rate paid, commissions paid, employee taxes withheld, etc.,
says the suit.

Based in Coral Springs, FL, Aventa Health is a health care
insurance marketplace or agency selling affordable health insurance
plans. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

BOP ACQUISITION: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Lohr Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
JUSTIN LOHR, individually and for others similarly situated v. BOP
ACQUSITION LLC, BOP ABSTRACT LLC, BOP LAND SERVICES LP, and BOP
LAND GP LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-00069-MJH (W.D. Pa., Jan. 18, 2024)
arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Pennsylvania Minimum
Wage Act, and the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law.

According to the complaint, BOP has engaged in a uniform shift rate
pay scheme that violates the FLSA and PMWA by depriving Plaintiff
and similarly situated employees of overtime wages for all overtime
hours worked over 40. Likewise, BOP's uniform shift rate pay scheme
violates the PWPCL by depriving Plaintiff Lohr and the Class
members of earned wages for all their hours worked.

Plaintiff Lohr was employed by the Defendants as a Landman in
Pennsylvania from approximately January 2018 until January 2024.

BOP Acquisition LLC, BOP Abstract LLC, BOP Land Services LP, and
BOP Land GP LLC all operate under the same trade name -- BOP -- as
a unified, full-service land and title company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 352-1100
          Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
          E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                  adunlap@mybackwages.com

               - and -

          Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
          BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 877-8788
          Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
          E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com

               - and -

          Joshua P. Geist, Esq.
          William F. Goodrich, Esq.
          GOODRICH & GEIST, PC
          3634 California Ave.
          Pittsburgh, PA 15212
          Telephone: (412) 766-1455
          Facsimile: (412) 766-0300
          E-mail: josh@goodrichandgeist.com
                  bill@goodrichandgeist.com

BRINGER CORPORATION: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Badel Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
CARLOS D. BADEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BRINGER CORPORATION, and EDUARDO DE CASTRO,
Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-20400-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 31, 2024)
seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime
compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and
costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Badel was employed by the Defendants as a warehouse
manager.

BRINGER CORPORATION operates as a transportation company. The
Company offers air freight and cargo services. Bringer serves
customers worldwide. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, PA.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

CARE BY CASSIE: Buford et al. Sue Over Nonpayment of OT Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
JONELLE M. BUFORD, MICKELL DAVIS, and CHRISTA BRIDGES, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs V. CARE BY
CASSIE, INC., CLARK WHEELER, CASSANDRA MICHELLE, and KATHRYN BACON,
Defendants, Case No. 4:24-cv-00082-SRB (W.D. Mo. January 2, 2024)
seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage and overtime compensation, and
related penalties and damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiffs Buford, Davis, and Bridges have worked as direct support
professionals for Defendant for approximately one year. Allegedly,
they were subjected to Defendants' common policy and practice of
refusing to correctly pay overtime wages in violation of the FLSA.

Based in Missouri, Care by Cassie, Inc. operates care facilities in
the United States. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Barry R. Grissom, Esq.
         GRISSOM MILLER LAW FIRM, LLC
         1600 Genessee Street, Suite 460
         Kansas City, MO 64102
         Telephone: (816) 336-1213
         Facsimile: (816) 384-1623
         E-mail: barrv@grissommiller.com

                 - and -

         Michael Hodgson, Esq.
         THE HODGSON LAW FIRM, LLC
         3609 SW Pryor Rd.
         Lee's Summit, MO 64082
         Telephone: (816) 600-0117
         E-mail: mike@thehodgsonlawfirm.com

CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bunch Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL R. BUNCH, individually and on behalf of all all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00026-TMR-PBS (S.D. Ohio, Jan. 30,
2024) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime
compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and
costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Bunch was employed by the Defendant as a staff.

CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS, INC. manufactures construction and mining
equipment. The Company offers diesel and natural gas engines,
industrial gas turbines, and electric locomotives. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
          BARKAN MEIZLISH DEROSE COX, LLP
          4200 Regent Street, Suite 210
          Columbus, OH 43219
          Telephone: (614) 221-4221
          Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
          Email: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com

CHECKERS DRIVE-IN: Sanchez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
RAYDEL SANCHEZ, and other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff
v. CHECKERS DRIVE-IN RESTAURANTS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-20379 (S.D. Fla., January 31, 2024) seeks to recover
monetary damages for unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Checkers Restaurants employed Plaintiff Sanchez as a non-exempt,
full-time employee from approximately January 01, 2021, to December
21, 2021, or 50 weeks. Throughout his employment, Plaintiff worked
in excess of 40 hours every week, but Defendant failed to pay him
overtime wages. Instead, the Defendant misclassified Plaintiff as a
manager even if his primary duty was non-exempted and manual in
nature, says the suit.

Checkers Restaurants is one of the largest chains of drive-through
fast food restaurants in the United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
         ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
         9100 S. Dadeland Blvd.  Suite 1500
         Miami, FL 33156
         Telephone: (305) 446-1500
         Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
         E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

COMMUNITY HEALTH: Foust Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages for Care Providers
------------------------------------------------------------------
SARAH FOUST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. COMMUNITY HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. and CLEVELAND
TENNESSEE HOSPITAL COMPANY, LLC d/b/a TENNOVA HEALTHCARE -
CLEVELAND, Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-00129 (M.D. Tenn., February
2, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to
pay straight-time wages and overtime in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 and Tennessee common law.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a care provider in
Cleveland, Tennessee from approximately October 2020 to July 2022.

Community Health Systems, Inc. is a healthcare services provider,
headquartered in Franklin, Tennessee.

Cleveland Tennessee Hospital Company, LLC, doing business as
Tennova Healthcare - Cleveland, is a healthcare services provider,
headquartered in Franklin, Tennessee. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
         Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
         William M. Hogg, Esq.
         JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
         11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
         Houston, TX 77046
         Telephone: (713) 352-1100
         Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
         E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                 adunlap@mybackwages.com
                 whogg@mybackwages.com

                  - and -

         Clif Alexander, Esq.
         Austin Anderson, Esq.
         Blayne E. Fisher, Esq.
         Lauren Braddy, Esq.
         ANDERSON ALEXANDER PLLC
         819 N. Shoreline Blvd., 6th Floor
         Corpus Christi, TX 78401
         Telephone: (361) 452-1279
         Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
         E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
                 austin@a2xlaw.com
                 blayne@a2xlaw.com
                 lauren@a2xlaw.com

                  - and -

         Melody Fowler-Green, Esq.
         N. Chase Teeples, Esq.
         YEZBAK LAW OFFICES PLLC
         P.O. Box 159033
         Nashville, TN 37215
         Telephone: (615) 250-2000
         Facsimile: (615) 250-2020
         E-mail: mel@yezbaklaw.com
                 teeples@yezbaklaw.com

COMMUNITY HEALTH: Sharp Seeks Proper Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------
JENNIFER SHARP, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. COMMUNITY HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC. and CAMPBELL
COUNTY HMA, LLC d/b/a LAFOLLETTE MEDICAL CENTER, Defendants, Case
No. 3:24-cv-00126 (M.D. Tenn., February 2, 2024) seeks to recover
overtime wages, liquidated damages, and other applicable penalties
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and Tennessee common law.

Plaintiff Jennifer Sharp was employed by Defendants during the
relevant time period. Plaintiff Sharp did not receive compensation
for all hours worked or the correct amount of overtime compensation
for all hours worked over 40 hours each workweek, says the suit.

Headquartered in Franklin, TN, Community Health Systems, Inc. is a
foreign for-profit corporation that operates LaFollette Medical
Center. [BN]


The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
          William M. Hogg, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 352-1100
          Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
          E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                  adunlap@mybackwages.com
                  whogg@mybackwages.com

                  - and -

          Clif Alexander, Esq.
          Austin Anderson, Esq.
          Blayne E. Fisher, Esq.
          Lauren Braddy, Esq.
          ANDERSON ALEXANDER PLLC
          819 N. Shoreline Blvd., 6th Floor
          Corpus Christi, TX 78401
          Telephone: (361) 452-1279
          E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
                  austin@a2xlaw.com
                  blayne@a2xlaw.com
                  lauren@a2xlaw.com

                  - and -

          Melody Fowler-Green, Esq.
          N. Chase Teeples, Esq.
          YEZBAK LAW OFFICES PLLC
          P.O. Box 159033
          Nashville, TN 37215
          Telephone: (615) 250-2000
          Facsimile: (615) 250-2020
          E-mail: mel@yezbaklaw.com
                  teeples@yezbaklaw.com

DUKE ENERGY: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Cobb Alleges
----------------------------------------------------
RONALD COBB, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION, Defendant, Case
3:24-cv-00107 (W.D.N.C., Jan. 30, 2024) seeks to recover from the
Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Plaintiff Cobb was employed by the Defendant as a nuclear security
officer.

DUKE ENERGY CORPORATION is an energy company located primarily in
the Americas that owns an integrated network of energy assets. The
Company manages a portfolio of natural gas and electric supply,
delivery, and trading businesses in the United States and Latin
America. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher Strianese, Esq.
          Tamara Huckert, Esq.
          STRIANESE HUCKERT LLP
          3501 Monroe Rd.
          Charlotte, NC 28205
          Telephone: (704) 966-2101
          Email: chris@strilaw.com
                 tamara@strilaw.com

               - and -

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 352-1100
          Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
          Email: 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
          Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com

EVERCOMMERCE INC: Trust Sues Over Unlawful Stockholders Agreement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
VLADIMIR GUSINSKY REVOCABLE TRUST, Plaintiff v. ERIC REMER, PENNY
BALDWIN, KIMBERLY ELLISON-TAYLOR, MARK HASTINGS, JOHN MARQUIS, JOE
OSNOSS, JOHN RUDELLA, RICK SIMONSON, AND DEBBY SOO, PROVIDENCE
STRATEGIC GROWTH II L.P., PROVIDENCE STRATEGIC GROWTH II-A L.P.,
PROVIDENCE STRATEGIC GROWTH III L.P., SLA CM ECLIPSE HOLDINGS, L.P.
AND SLA ECLIPSE CO-INVEST, L.P., Defendants, and EVERCOMMERCE,
INC., Nominal Defendant, Case No. 2024-0077 (Del. Ch., January 31,
2024) is brought by the Plaintiff, directly on behalf of himself
and all other similarly situated public stockholders of nominal
defendant EverCommerce, Inc., seeking declaratory relief
invalidating a provision of the stockholders agreement between the
EverCommerce, Inc. and the sponsor stockholders in violation of the
Delaware General Corporation Law.

Section 4.1 of the stockholders agreement contains the Chief
Executive Officer Approval Right. It provides that, as long as the
sponsor stockholders own at least 30% of the aggregate number of
shares outstanding immediately following the consummation of the
EverCommerce's Initial Public Offering, then EverCommerce may not
hire or terminate its CEO without the express written consent of
the sponsor stockholders.

Headquartered in Denver, CO, EverCommerce is a publicly traded
corporation that provides software-as-a-service (SaaS) solutions
for small- and medium-sized businesses. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Kimberly A. Evans, Esq.
         Lindsay K. Faccenda, Esq.
         Robert Erikson, Esq.
         BLOCK & LEVITON LLP   
         3801 Kennett Pike, Suite C-305
         Wilmington, DE 19807
         Telephone: (302) 499-3600
         E-mail: kim@blockleviton.com
                 lindsay@blockleviton.com
                 robby@blockleviton.com

                 - and -

         Jason Leviton, Esq.
         Saranna Soroka, Esq.
         BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
         260 Franklin Street, Suite 1860
         Boston, MA 02110
         Telephone: (617) 398-5600

EVOLUTION AB: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Appointment Due March 25
--------------------------------------------------------------
WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of
American Depositary Shares ("ADSs") of Evolution AB (publ) (OTC:
EVVTY) between February 14, 2019 and October 25, 2023, both dates
inclusive (the "Class Period"). A class action lawsuit has already
been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move
the Court no later than March 25, 2024.

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

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Evolution class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=22119 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action. A class
action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead
plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than March 25, 2024. A
lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other
class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources or any
meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants
throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading
statements regarding Evolution's and Evolution's customers'
compliance with governing laws; the effect of non-compliance on
Evolution's revenue; and Evolution's predicted growth and growth
strategies. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit
claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Evolution class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=22119 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are
not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select
counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member
and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any
potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead
plaintiff.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.

Contact Information:

        Laurence Rosen, Esq.
        Phillip Kim, Esq.
        The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
        275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
        New York, NY 10016
        Tel: (212) 686-1060
        Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
        Fax: (212) 202-3827
        lrosen@rosenlegal.com
        pkim@rosenlegal.com
        cases@rosenlegal.com
        www.rosenlegal.com [GN]

F&E AIRCRAFT: Trejo Labor Code Suit Removed to C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JESUS TREJO, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. F&E AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE (MIAMI), LLC
and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Case No. 23STCV26730, was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los
Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California on February 2, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:24-cv-00931 to the proceeding.

The case arises from F&E's alleged violations of the California
Labor Code including failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay
overtime wages, failure to provide meal and rest periods, failure
to pay sick pay at correct rates, failure to pay all wages due upon
separation of employment, and failure to provide accurate wage
statements.

F&E Aircraft Maintenance (Miami), LLC is a provider of aircraft
line maintenance, headquartered in Florida. [BN]

The Defendant is represented by:                                   
                                  
         
         Kasey L. Bond, Esq.
         KEATING MUETHING & KLEKAMP
         One East Fourth Street, Suite 1400
         Cincinnati, OH 45202
         Telephone: (513) 579-6400
         Facsimile: (513) 579-6457
         E-mail: kbond@kmklaw.com

FALLON AMBULANCE: D'Angelo Sues Over Private Data Breach
--------------------------------------------------------
BREVAN D'ANGELO, individually and on behalf of a class of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FALLON AMBULANCE SERVICE,
TRANSFORMATIVE HEALTHCARE LLC and COASTAL MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION
SYSTEMS LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-10292-JEK (D. Mass.,
February 5, 2024) arises out of a targeted cyberattack and data
breach caused by Defendants' failure to secure and safeguard
Plaintiff's and other individuals' personally identifying
information and personal health information.

Between February 17, 2023 and April 22, 2023, an unauthorized party
gained access to Transformative Healthcare's computer systems.
During that time, the hackers copied the archived private
information of Fallon Ambulance's patients. However, Plaintiff
learned of the data breach when he received a notice from Fallon
dated December 27, 2023, more than ten months after the data breach
began, stating that Plaintiff's Private Information was exposed in
the data breach, says the suit.

Fallon Ambulance was a Massachusetts-based emergency medical
transportation services company responding to patient emergencies
and providing administrative services for affiliated medical
transportation companies, until it ceased operations in December
2022. It was purchased by Defendant Transformative Healthcare's
Massachusetts medical transportation division in 2018, which was
subsequently acquired by Defendant Coastal Medical in 2022. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Edward F. Haber, Esq.
          Ian J. McLoughlin, Esq.
          SHAPIRO HABER & URMY LLP
          One Boston Place, Suite 2600
          Boston, MA 02108
          Telephone: (617) 439-3939
          Facsimile: (617) 439-0134
          E-mail: ehaber@shulaw.com
                  imcloughlin@shulaw.com

FOCUS CARE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Fowler Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------
TAMI FOWLER; DONNA WATSON; and ANABEL ORTEGA, individually and on
behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. FOCUS CARE,
INC. d/b/a/ FEV TUTOR, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-10253-IT
(D. Mass., Jan. 30, 2024) 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.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as remote agents.

FOCUS CARE, INC. d/b/a/ FEV TUTOR, INC. is a company that provides
live online 1:1 tutoring services for K-12 students. They partner
with K-12 educators to offer personalized and engaging instruction
anytime, anywhere. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Benjamin Knox Steffans, Esq.
          STEFFANS LEGAL, PLC
          10 Wendell Ave. Ext. Suite 208
          Pittsfield, Massachusetts, 01201
          Telephone: (413) 418-4176
          Email: bsteffans@steffanslegal.com

               - and -

          Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
          Paulina R. Kennedy, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, 17th Floor
          Southfield, MC 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          Email: kstoops@sommerspc.com
                 pkennedy@sommerspc.com

FUBOTV INC: Faces Beasley Suit Over Data Privacy Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------
CATHERINE BEASLEY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FUBOTV, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-00711 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 31, 2024) alleges that the Defendant
knowingly and intentionally discloses its users' personally
identifiable information, including a record of every video viewed
by the user, to unauthorized third parties without first complying
with the Video Privacy Protection Act.

According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendant's
Website and app use first-party and third-party cookies, software
development kits, pixels, Facebook's Business Tools, including
Advanced Matching and Conversion API, Google Analytics, and related
tracking tools to purposely track, record, and transmit its digital
subscribers' interactions with Defendant's Website.

The Defendant knowingly installed and used these tools, and it
controlled which data was transmitted to unrelated third parties.
In conjunction with this, it purposefully and specifically chose
to: (1) track and record consumers' viewed video media, (2)
disclose that information to Facebook 1 alongside its digital
subscribers' individual Facebook ID ("FID") and other persistent
identifiers, and (3) did this without its users' knowledge or
consent via surreptitious technology.

The Plaintiff and consumers were harmed by Defendant's unlawful
conduct, which deprives them of their right to privacy in their own
homes, and the disclosures at issue reveal highly personal details
regarding their unique video requests and viewing habits, says the
suit.

FUBOTV, INC. is an Internet television service provider. The
Company focuses primarily on channels that distribute live sports,
plus news, network television series, and movies. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adrian Gucovschi, Esq.
          GUCOVSCHI ROZENSHTEYN, PLLC
          140 Broadway, Suite 4667
          New York, NY 10005
          Tel: (212) 884-4230
          Email: adrian@gr-firm.com

GENESIS RECOVERY: Fails to Pay Overtime Premium, Scott Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
LAKEISHA SCOTT, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GENESIS RECOVERY AND WELLNESS OF OHIO LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-00205-DAP (N.D. Ohio, February 2, 2024)
arises from the Defendant's failure to pay Plaintiff proper
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
brings Ohio breach of contract and unjust enrichment claims as a
direct and proximate result of Defendant's failure to pay her at
the agreed hourly base rate.

Instead of compensating Plaintiff at one and one-half times her
regular hourly rate for hours more than 40 hours per workweek,
Defendant paid her at regular, straight time hourly rate for
overtime hours worked, says the suit.

Headquartered in Middleburg Heights, OH, Genesis is an Ohio
for-profit limited liability company that operates as addiction
treatment center. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan A. Winters, Esq.
          Joseph F. Scott, Esq.
          Ryan A. Winters, Esq.
          SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIM, LLC
          Telephone: (216) 912-2221
          Facsimile: (440) 846-1625
          50 Public Square, Suite 1900
          Cleveland, OH 44113
          E-mail: jscott@ohiowagelawyers.com
                  rwinters@ohiowagelawyers.com

                  - and -

          Kevin M. McDermott II, Esq.
          SCOTT & WINTERS LAW FIRM, LLC
          Telephone: (216) 912-2221
          Facsimile: (440) 846-1625
          11925 Pearl Rd., Suite 310
          Strongsville, OH 44136
          E-mail: kmcdermott@ohiowagelawyers.com

GREEN LEAF: Ramirez Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------------
BRUNO ADRIAN PAZ RAMIREZ, an individual, JUSTO RAMIREZ PEREZ, an
individual, and CESILIO CARDONA CARRETO, an individual, on behalf
of themselves and all other Plaintiffs similarly situated, known
and unknown, Plaintiffs v. GREEN LEAF THAI LIMITED, an Illinois
corporation, RATTIYA UDOMPAICHITKUL, an individual, and DEER
UDOMPAICHITKUL, an individual, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-470
(N.D. Ill., Jan. 18, 2024) arises under the Fair Labor Standards
Act, the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, and the Chicago Minimum Wage
Ordinance and Paid Sick Leave Ordinance for Defendants' failure to
pay Plaintiffs, and other similarly situated employees, overtime
compensation for hours worked over 40 in a workweek.

The Plaintiffs were former employees of Defendants' Green Leaf Thai
Cuisine restaurant who worked as dishwashers and cooks. They assert
that Defendants paid all of their hours, including all of their
overtime compensable hours, at their straight-time hourly rates of
pay.

Green Leaf Thai Limited is an Illinois corporation that operates
the Green Leaf Thai Cuisine restaurant on North Western Avenue in
Chicago, Illinois.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Timothy M. Nolan, Esq.
          NOLAN LAW OFFICE
          53 W. Jackson Blvd., Ste. 1137
          Chicago, IL 60604
          Telephone: (312) 322-1100
          E-mail: tnolan@nolanwagelaw.com

GROUP MANAGEMENT SERVICES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Durham Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Durham, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Group Management Services, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 4:24-cv-00217-BYP (N.D. Ohio, February 5, 2024) arises
under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage
Standards Act, the Ohio Prompt Pay Act, and Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23 seeking to address the Defendant's failure to pay
Plaintiff and other similarly-situated employees all earned minimum
and overtime wages.

The Plaintiff was employed by Group Management Services as an
hourly non-exempt employee November 1, 2022 through approximately
May 31, 2023. The Defendant violated the FLSA and OMWFSA by
automatically deducting a thirty-minute meal break from each and
every shift Plaintiff worked regardless of whether he was 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 30 minutes, says the
suit.

Headquartered in Ohio, Group Management Services, Inc., among other
things, owns and operates hotels in Northeast Ohio. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         James L. Simon, Esq.
         SIMON LAW CO.
         11 1/2 N. Franklin Street
         Chagrin Falls, OH 44022
         Telephone: (216) 816-8696
         E-mail: james@simonsayspay.com

HEALTH EXTENSION: Wahab Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELA WAHAB, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HEALTH EXTENSION, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-00381 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 18, 2024) is a civil rights action
against Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain,
and operate its website, www.healthextension.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 and the New York City Human Rights Law.

The Plaintiff was injured when it attempted on December 18, 2023
and again on December 29, 2023 to access Defendant's website from
Plaintiff's home in an effort to shop for Defendant's products, but
encountered barriers that denied the full and equal access to
Defendant's online goods, content, and services. Specifically,
Plaintiff wanted to purchase the Grain Free Turkey & Salmon Recipe
cat food.

Due to Defendant's failure to build the Website in a manner that is
compatible with screen access programs, Plaintiff was unable to
understand and properly interact with the Website, and was thus
denied the benefit of purchasing the Grain Free Turkey & Salmon
Recipe that Plaintiff wished to acquire, says the suit.

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.

Health Extension, LLC offers pet foods and products including a
variety of dry and wet foods, treats, supplements, and grooming
essentials.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Suite 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 282-6500
          Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
          E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com

ILOV305 I LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Atucha Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------
FELIX A. ATUCHA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ILOV305 I LLC D/B/A WILD N OUT 305; STEVEN
DAVIDOVICI; and EREZ DAVIDOVICI, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-20397-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 31, 2024) 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 Atucha was employed by the Defendants as a floor
manager.

ILOV305 I LLC D/B/A WILD N OUT 305 is a bar and restaurant located
at Miami Beach, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, PA.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

JANJER ENTERPRISES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bell Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------
LISA BELL; HEATHER BARBAGALLO; KAILYN WAGNER; and JAMES LOFTUS,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. JANJER ENTERPRISES, INC., Defendants, Case No.
5:24-cv-00150-BKS-TWD (N.D.N.Y., Jan. 31, 2024) seeks to recover
from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation,
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiffs Bell, Barbagallo, and Wagner were employed by the
Defendant as servers. Plaintiff Loftus was employed as cook.

JANJER ENTERPRISES, INC. owns and operates several International
House of Pancakes restaurants throughout New York State. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           James Emmet Murphy, Esq.
           VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP
           40 Broad Street, 7th Floor
           New York, NY 10004
           Telephone: (212) 943-9080
           Facsimile: (212) 943-9082
           Email: jmurphy@vandallp.com

                - and -

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

KELLER WILLIAMS: Agrees to Settle Commissions Class Suit for $70M
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Andy Medici, writing for WFTV.com, reports that Keller Williams
Realty has become the latest real estate giant to reach a
settlement in a series of class-action lawsuits.

The brokerage has agreed to pay $70 million to settle claims
nationwide across class-action lawsuits that allege the National
Association of Realtors' "participation rule" and "cooperative
compensation" practices unfairly forced home sellers to pay
inflated commissions to buyer agents and amounted to a conspiracy
with brokerages to keep commissions high.

The settlement states that Keller Williams will make it clear to
franchisees that they are not required to offer compensation to
buyer brokers, to inform customers that commissions are negotiable
and that real estate agents must show properties regardless of the
amount of offered compensation, according to a motion filed in the
litigation. [GN]


KRAFT HEINZ: Sisca Sues Over Misleading Cheese Product Labeling
---------------------------------------------------------------
MARTIN SISCA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KRAFT HEINZ FOODS COMPANY, Defendant, Case
No. 2:24-cv-00813 (E.D.N.Y., January 3, 2024) alleges violations of
the New York General Business Law and the New York Agriculture &
Markets Law in connection with the Defendant's misleading product
labeling of Velveeta Shells & Cheese.

The representation that the said product is "Made With Real Cheese"
results in it being misleading to consumers because they will
expect the predominant component of the cheese sauce to be "real
cheese," even though its most predominant ingredients are whey and
canola oil, says the suit.

Headquartered in Pennsylvania, Kraft Heinz Foods Company
manufactures and sells sauces, meals, soups, snacks, and infant
nutrition products. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
          SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES P.C.
          60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 412
          Great Neck NY 11021
          Telephone: (516) 268-7080
          E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com

LIVEPERSON INC: Browne Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties
---------------------------------------------------------
SONJA BROWNE, Plaintiff v. JILL LAYFIELD, BRUCE HANSEN, KEVIN
LAVAN, JIM MILLER, VANESSA PEGUEROS, WILLIAM G. WESEMANN, YAEL
ZHENG, and JOHN SABINO, Defendants, and LIVEPERSON, INC., Nominal
Defendant, Case No. 2024-0079 (Del. Ch., January 31, 2024) alleges
that the Defendants breached their fiduciary duties to Plaintiff
and other public investors in connection with the Board's adoption
of poison pill with a 5% trigger (NOL pill).

The Defendants' public statements justify the NOL Pill as necessary
to defend the value of the Company's net operating loss
carry-forwards (NOLs) from being limited due to an "ownership
change" within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Code. However,
the NOL Pill, uses a sweeping definition of "beneficial ownership"
that aggregates shares based solely on agreements, arrangements, or
understandings solely to voting -- something that has no effect on
"economic ownership" under the Internal Revenue Code and would pose
zero risk to the NOLs. Accordingly, Plaintiff brings this action
individually and on behalf of all stockholders of the company.

LivePerson, Inc. is a publicly traded Delaware corporation founded
by Robert LoCascio in 1995. The technology company that develops
conversational commerce and AI software. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher J. Orrico, Esq.
          GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A.
          485 Lexington Avenue, 29th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (646) 722-8500
          E-mail: corrico@gelaw.com

                  - and -

          Joel Fleming, Esq.
          Amanda Crawford, Esq
          EQUITY LITIGATION GROUP LLP
          101 Arch Street, 8th Floor
          Boston, MA 02110
          Telephone: (617) 468-8602
          E-mail: jfleming@equitylitigation.com
                  acrawford@equitylitigation.com

                  - and -

          Christine M. Mackintosh, Esq.
          Jonathan C. Millis, Esq.
          GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A.
          123 Justison Street
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 622-7000
          E-mail: cmackintosh@gelaw.com
                  jmillis@gelaw.com

LL FLOOR DESIGNS: Valencia and Jimenez Sues Over Labor Law Breaches
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JACKSON VALENCIA and JOSE JIMENEZ, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. LL FLOOR DESIGNS,
INC., BIG APPLE FLOOR SERVICES, INC., and LESTER LOCKWOOD,
Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00709 (S.D.N.Y., January 31, 2024)
seeks equitable and legal relief for Defendants' violations of the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law.

The Defendants employed Plaintiff Valencia as a floor designer from
on or around March 1, 2017 until in or around June 2023. Throughout
his employment, Plaintiff was only compensated at a fixed hourly
rate for all hours worked, including those over 40 per week, says
the suit.

LL Floor Designs, Inc. provides hardwood flooring design, flooring
installation, and floor polishing services to commercial locations
throughout New York and New Jersey. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Adam Sackowitz, Esq.
          KATZ MELINGER PLLC
          370 Lexington Avenue, Suite 1512
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 460-0047
          Facsimile: (212) 428-6811
          E-mail: ajsackowitz@katzmelinger.com

LOANDEPOT INC: Costello Sues Over Unprotected Private Data
----------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA COSTELLO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LOANDEPOT, INC., Defendant, Case No.
8:24-cv-00242 (C.D. Cal., February 5, 2024) arises from the
Defendant's failure to protect highly sensitive data and asserts
claims for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied
contract, invasion of privacy, breach of fiduciary duty, and for
violations of the California Unfair Competition Law, the the
California Consumer Privacy Act, and the the California Consumer
Records Act.

On January 8, 2024, Defendant reported the data breach. Two weeks
later, Defendant explained that the company has determined that an
unauthorized third party gained access to sensitive personal
information of approximately 16.6 million individuals in its
systems. However, the Defendant has not provided notice to its data
breach victims, depriving them of the opportunity to try and
mitigate their injuries in a timely manner, says the suit.

Headquartered in  Irvine, CA, LoanDepot, Inc. is a nonbank company
that provides mortgages and other lending products. It advertises
$179 billion in refinanced mortgages, $96 billion in new home
purchases, and 200+ locations nationwide. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John J. Nelson, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          280 S. Beverly Drive
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (858) 209-6941
          E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com

LONG ISLAND COMMUNITY: Jacobsen Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties
------------------------------------------------------------------
NICHOLE JACOBSEN, KATHERINE KING, DEBORAH DALRYMPLE, and LAURA
PHILLIPS, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. LONG ISLAND COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, Defendant,
Case No. 2:24-cv-00386 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 18, 2024) is a class action
under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as
amended, against the Defendant for breaching its fiduciary duties
in the management, operation and administration of the Brookhaven
Memorial Hospital Medical Center DBA Long Island Community Hospital
Retirement Savings Plan.

According to the complaint, the Defendant failed to meet its
fiduciary obligations in basic ways. First, the Plan offered and
maintained higher cost share classes when identical lower cost
share classes of the same mutual funds were available. This
resulted in the participants paying additional unnecessary
operating expenses with no value to the participants and resulting
in a loss of compounded returns. The Defendant failed to monitor
the share classes of mutual fund investments and to substitute less
expensive share classes of mutual funds from more expensive share
classes of the very same mutual fund, thus wasting the assets of
the Plan participants.

Second, Defendant wasted participants' money by failing to
appropriately select and monitor the Plan's stable value fund. Had
Defendant monitored and evaluated the returns on the Plan's stable
value fund, it would have realized that the Plan's stable value
fund was an underperforming fund throughout the entire Class Period
and that the Plan's parties-in-interest were benefitting from the
returns on the stable value fund, at the cost of the Plan's
participants.

The Plaintiffs are participants in the Plan during the Class
Period.

Long Island Community Hospital is a 306-bed medical center situated
in Suffolk County, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gustavo F. Bruckner, Esq.
          Samuel J. Adams, Esq.
          Ankita Sangwan, Esq.
          POMERANTZ LLP
          600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 661-1100
          Facsimile: (917) 463-1044
          E-mail: gfbruckner@pomlaw.com
                  sjadams@pomlaw.com
                  asangwan@pomlaw.com

MAKING MOVES: O'Sullivan Sues Over Crew Members' Unpaid Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW O'SULLIVAN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MAKING MOVES, INC., an Oklahoma
Corporation; BRYGHT YOUNG THINGS FILMS LLC, a New York Limited
Liability Company; COREY ASKINS, an individual; and DOE 1 through
and including DOE 10, Defendants, Case No. 24STCV01367 (Cal.
Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 18, 2024) is a civil action brought
under by the Plaintiff under the California Labor Code and the
California Business and Professions Code.

The complaint alleges the Defendants' failure to provide proper
minimum and overtime wages, failure to provide compliant wage
statements, failure to provide meal and rest breaks, failure to
reimburse business expenses, failure to provide employment records
upon request, failure to provide compliant pay stubs, failure to
pay all wages accrued upon separation from employment, and unfair
competition.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a crew member for
the filming of a commercial entitled "NFL Shop" in August 2021.

Making Moves, Inc. is an Oklahoma corporation conducted business
within the County of Los Angeles, State of California and produced
a commercial entitled "NFL Shop."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alan Harris, Esq.
          David Garrett, Esq.
          Min Ji Gal, Esq.
          HARRIS & RUBLE
          655 North Central Avenue, 17th Floor
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (323) 962-3777
          Facsimile: (323) 962-3004
          E-mail: harrisa@harrisandruble.com
                  mgal@harrisandruble.com
                  dgarrett@harrisandruble.com

MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Nadel Suit Set for Feb. 23
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Nadel, et al., v.
Fisher-Price, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-00791 (W.D.N.Y., Filed
June 14, 2019), the Hon. Judge Geoffrey Crawford entered an order
scheduling hearing on motion to certify class and initial pretrial
conference for Feb. 23, 2024.

The hearing is to be held at United States District Court, Federal
Building, 11 Elmwood Avenue, Burlington, Vermont.

The Nadel suit is being consolidated in RE: Rock 'N Play Sleeper
Marketing, Sales Practices, And Products Liability Litigation (MDL
No. 1:19-md-2903).

The "Rock 'n Play Sleeper" is an inclined infant "sleeper" that the
Defendants, until they were forced to recall it on April 12, 2019,
marketed and sold for ten years as suitable for safe infant sleep,
including prolonged and overnight sleep.

The Plaintiff contends that Defendants' marketing of this product
as safe for infant sleep, including prolonged and overnight sleep,
was intentional and overt. Not only is "Sleeper" in the name of the
product, but the boxes in which the Rock 'n Play Sleepers were
sold, and other materials used to promote them, prominently
exclaim, "Baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all night long!"
and make similar statements about its fitness for nighttime sleep.


The Rock 'n Play Sleeper is inherently unsafe as a sleeper and
unfit for its intended use. It poses a number of serious safety
risks that led to many documented infant deaths and injuries, the
Plaintiff adds.

The suit alleges violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
involving torts -- personal injury -- product liability.

Fisher-Price is an American company that produces educational toys
for infants, toddlers and preschoolers.[CC]

MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Pasternacki Suit Set for Feb. 23
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Pasternacki v. Fisher
Price, Inc. et al., v. Fisher-Price, Inc. et al., Case No.
1:19-cv-00941 (W.D.N.Y., Filed July 17, 2019), the Hon. Judge
Geoffrey Crawford entered an order scheduling hearing on motion to
certify class and initial pretrial conference for Feb. 23, 2024.

The hearing is to be held at United States District Court, Federal
Building, 11 Elmwood Avenue, Burlington, Vermont.

The Pasternacki suit is being consolidated in RE: Rock 'N Play
Sleeper Marketing, Sales Practices, And Products Liability
Litigation (MDL No. 1:19-md-2903).

The "Rock 'n Play Sleeper" is an inclined infant "sleeper" that the
Defendants, until they were forced to recall it on April 12, 2019,
marketed and sold for ten years as suitable for safe infant sleep,
including prolonged and overnight sleep.

The Plaintiff contends that Defendants' marketing of this product
as safe for infant sleep, including prolonged and overnight sleep,
was intentional and overt. Not only is "Sleeper" in the name of the
product, but the boxes in which the Rock 'n Play Sleepers were
sold, and other materials used to promote them, prominently
exclaim, "Baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all night long!"
and make similar statements about its fitness for nighttime sleep.


The Rock 'n Play Sleeper is inherently unsafe as a sleeper and
unfit for its intended use. It poses a number of serious safety
risks that led to many documented infant deaths and injuries, the
Plaintiff adds.

The suit alleges violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
involving torts -- personal injury -- product liability.

Fisher-Price is an American company that produces educational toys
for infants, toddlers and preschoolers.[CC]

MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Poppe Sleeper Suit Set for Feb. 23
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Poppe v. Fisher Price,
Inc. et al., v. Fisher-Price, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-00870
(W.D.N.Y., Filed June 28, 2019), the Hon. Judge Geoffrey Crawford
entered an order scheduling hearing on motion to certify class and
initial pretrial conference for Feb. 23, 2024.

The hearing is to be held at United States District Court, Federal
Building, 11 Elmwood Avenue, Burlington, Vermont.

The Poppe suit is being consolidated in RE: Rock 'N Play Sleeper
Marketing, Sales Practices, And Products Liability Litigation (MDL
No. 1:19-md-2903).

The "Rock 'n Play Sleeper" is an inclined infant "sleeper" that the
Defendants, until they were forced to recall it on April 12, 2019,
marketed and sold for ten years as suitable for safe infant sleep,
including prolonged and overnight sleep.

The Plaintiff contends that Defendants' marketing of this product
as safe for infant sleep, including prolonged and overnight sleep,
was intentional and overt. Not only is "Sleeper" in the name of the
product, but the boxes in which the Rock 'n Play Sleepers were
sold, and other materials used to promote them, prominently
exclaim, "Baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all night long!"
and make similar statements about its fitness for nighttime sleep.


The Rock 'n Play Sleeper is inherently unsafe as a sleeper and
unfit for its intended use. It poses a number of serious safety
risks that led to many documented infant deaths and injuries, the
Plaintiff adds.

The suit alleges violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
involving torts -- personal injury -- product liability.

Fisher-Price is an American company that produces educational toys
for infants, toddlers and preschoolers.[CC]

MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Shaffer v. Mattel Set for Feb. 23
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Shaffer v. Mattel, Inc. et
al., v. Fisher-Price, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-00791
(W.D.N.Y., Filed May 22, 2019), the Hon. Judge Geoffrey Crawford
entered an order scheduling hearing on motion to certify class and
initial pretrial conference for Feb. 23, 2024.

The hearing is to be held at United States District Court, Federal
Building, 11 Elmwood Avenue, Burlington, Vermont.

The Shaffer suit is being consolidated in RE: Rock 'N Play Sleeper
Marketing, Sales Practices, And Products Liability Litigation (MDL
No. 1:19-md-2903).

The "Rock 'n Play Sleeper" is an inclined infant "sleeper" that the
Defendants, until they were forced to recall it on April 12, 2019,
marketed and sold for ten years as suitable for safe infant sleep,
including prolonged and overnight sleep.

The Plaintiff contends that Defendants' marketing of this product
as safe for infant sleep, including prolonged and overnight sleep,
was intentional and overt. Not only is "Sleeper" in the name of the
product, but the boxes in which the Rock 'n Play Sleepers were
sold, and other materials used to promote them, prominently
exclaim, "Baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all night long!"
and make similar statements about its fitness for nighttime sleep.


The Rock 'n Play Sleeper is inherently unsafe as a sleeper and
unfit for its intended use. It poses a number of serious safety
risks that led to many documented infant deaths and injuries, the
Plaintiff adds.

The suit alleges violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
involving torts -- personal injury -- product liability.

Mattel is an American multinational toy manufacturing and
entertainment company.[CC]

MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Willis Sleeper Suit Set for Feb. 23
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Willis v. Fisher Price,
Inc. et al., v. Fisher-Price, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-01107
(W.D.N.Y., Filed Aug. 21, 2019), the Hon. Judge Geoffrey Crawford
entered an order scheduling hearing on motion to certify class and
initial pretrial conference for Feb. 23, 2024.

The hearing is to be held at United States District Court, Federal
Building, 11 Elmwood Avenue, Burlington, Vermont.

The Willis suit is being consolidated in RE: Rock 'N Play Sleeper
Marketing, Sales Practices, And Products Liability Litigation (MDL
No. 1:19-md-2903).

The "Rock 'n Play Sleeper" is an inclined infant "sleeper" that the
Defendants, until they were forced to recall it on April 12, 2019,
marketed and sold for ten years as suitable for safe infant sleep,
including prolonged and overnight sleep.

The Plaintiff contends that Defendants' marketing of this product
as safe for infant sleep, including prolonged and overnight sleep,
was intentional and overt. Not only is "Sleeper" in the name of the
product, but the boxes in which the Rock 'n Play Sleepers were
sold, and other materials used to promote them, prominently
exclaim, "Baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all night long!"
and make similar statements about its fitness for nighttime sleep.


The Rock 'n Play Sleeper is inherently unsafe as a sleeper and
unfit for its intended use. It poses a number of serious safety
risks that led to many documented infant deaths and injuries, the
Plaintiff adds.

The suit alleges violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
involving torts -- personal injury -- product liability.

Fisher-Price is an American company that produces educational toys
for infants, toddlers and preschoolers.[CC]

MDL 2903: Class Cert Hearing in Wray Sleeper Suit Set for Feb. 23
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wray v. Fisher Price, Inc.
et al., v. Fisher-Price, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-01067
(W.D.N.Y., Filed Aug. 13, 2019), the Hon. Judge Geoffrey Crawford
entered an order scheduling hearing on motion to certify class and
initial pretrial conference for Feb. 23, 2024.

The hearing is to be held at United States District Court, Federal
Building, 11 Elmwood Avenue, Burlington, Vermont.

The Wray suit is being consolidated in RE: Rock 'N Play Sleeper
Marketing, Sales Practices, And Products Liability Litigation (MDL
No. 1:19-md-2903).

The "Rock 'n Play Sleeper" is an inclined infant "sleeper" that the
Defendants, until they were forced to recall it on April 12, 2019,
marketed and sold for ten years as suitable for safe infant sleep,
including prolonged and overnight sleep.

The Plaintiff contends that Defendants' marketing of this product
as safe for infant sleep, including prolonged and overnight sleep,
was intentional and overt. Not only is "Sleeper" in the name of the
product, but the boxes in which the Rock 'n Play Sleepers were
sold, and other materials used to promote them, prominently
exclaim, "Baby can sleep at a comfortable incline all night long!"
and make similar statements about its fitness for nighttime sleep.


The Rock 'n Play Sleeper is inherently unsafe as a sleeper and
unfit for its intended use. It poses a number of serious safety
risks that led to many documented infant deaths and injuries, the
Plaintiff adds.

The suit alleges violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act
involving torts -- personal injury -- product liability.

Fisher-Price is an American company that produces educational toys
for infants, toddlers and preschoolers.[CC]

MIAMI TOP CLEANING: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Serafin Says
-----------------------------------------------------------
RAUL H. SERAFIN, and other similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff v. MIAMI TOP CLEANING SERVICE LLC and ULYSSES GONZALEZ,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-20396-XXXX (S.D. Fla.,
January 31, 2024) alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Defendants employed Plaintiff as a non-exempted, full-time,
hourly cleaning employee from approximately May 9, 2023, to
November 21, 2023, or 29 weeks. While employed with Defendants,
Plaintiff worked overtime hours not paid to him at any rate, not
even at the minimum wage rate, as required by law, says the suit.

Based in Florida, Miami Top Cleaning Service LLC provides
commercial cleaning and janitorial services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
         ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
         9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
         Miami, FL 33156
         Telephone: (305) 446-1500
         Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
         E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

MINDVALLEY INC: Thornton Sues Over Unlawful Disclosure of Info
--------------------------------------------------------------
KIMBERLY THORNTON, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MINDVALLEY, INC., Defendants, Case No.
5:24-cv-00593 (N.D. Cal., January 31, 2024) accuses the Defendant
of violating the Video Privacy Protection Act by knowingly
disclosing consumers' personally identifiable information (PII),
including information which identifies a person as having requested
or obtained specific video materials or services from a video tape
provider.

Allegedly, Mindvalley shares its customers' PII with Meta for
advertising and marketing purposes via the Meta pixels on their
website. In addition, Mindvalley did not obtain any informed
written consent from Plaintiff with regards to the disclosure of
video viewing histories.

Headquartered in Palo, Alto, CA, Mindvalley owns and operates a
subscription-based online video streaming platform called
"mindvalley.com." In exchange for a monthly or annual fee,
Mindvalley subscribers can request and watch hundreds of
educational videos from their computer or mobile device. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Julie C. Erickson, Esq.
         Elizabeth A. Kramer, Esq.
         Kevin M. Osborne, Esq.
         ERICKSON KRAMER OSBORNE LLP
         44 Tehama Street
         San Francisco, CA 94105
         Telephone: 415-635-0631
         Facsimile: 415-599-8088
         E-mail: julie@eko.law
                 elizabeth@eko.law
                 kevin@eko.law

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Shabazz Sues Over Loan Modification Denial
---------------------------------------------------------------
ABDUL SHABAZZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, d.b.a. RIGHTPATH
SERVICING, Defendant, Case No. 5:24-cv-00498 (E.D. Pa., February 2,
2024), arises under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer
Protection Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.

The Plaintiff met the eligibility requirements for a loan
modification program that should have been available and as
authorized by the Secretary of the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development. Nationstar, however, inexplicably
refused to issue the required loan modification offers to Plaintiff
claiming that they were prohibited to do so for reasons that had no
basis in fact or law, specifically, Nationstar claimed that the
loan modification would not result in a decreased principal and
interest portion of Plaintiff's payment, even though no such
requirement exists, says the suit.

Headquartered in Dallas, TX, Nationstar Mortgage LLC operates as a
mortgage servicer in the United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Max S. Morgan, Esq.
          THE WEITZ FIRM, LLC
          1515 Market Street, #1100
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: (267) 587-62340
          Facsimile: (215) 689-0875
          E-mail: max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com

                  - and -

          Brian D. Flick, Esq.
          Daniel M. Solar, Esq.
          DANN LAW
          15000 Madison Ave.
          Lakewood, OH 44107
          Telephone: (216) 373-0539
          Facsimile: (216) 373-0536
          E-mail: notices@dannlaw.com

NAUTIC PARTNERS: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Bourque Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
HAYLEY BOURQUE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NAUTIC PARTNERS, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-00047-MSM-LDA (D.R.I., Jan. 31, 2024) is an action arising
out of the recent cyberattack and data breach resulting from the
Defendant's failure to implement reasonable and industry standard
data security practices.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Data Breach was a
direct result of the Defendant's failure to implement adequate and
reasonable cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to
protect consumers' personal identifying information from a
foreseeable and preventable cyber-attack.

The Defendant maintained the PII in a reckless manner. In
particular, the PII was maintained on the Defendant's computer
networks in a condition vulnerable to cyberattacks. Upon
information and belief, the mechanism of the cyberattack and
potential for improper disclosure of the Plaintiff's and Class
Members' PII was a known risk to the Defendant, and thus, the
Defendant was on notice that failing to take steps necessary to
secure the PII from those risks left that property in a dangerous
condition, says the suit.

NAUTIC PARTNERS, LLC operates as a private equity firm. The Company
focuses on healthcare, industrial products, and outsourced services
sectors. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Vincent L. Greene, Esq.
          MOTLEY RICE LLC
          40 Westminster St., 5th Floor
          Providence, RI 02903
          Telephone: (401) 457–7730
          Facsimile: (401) 457–7708
          Email: vgreene@motleyrice.com

              - and -

          David K. Lietz, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
          PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
          5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW
          Washington, D.C. 20015-2052
          Telephone: (866) 252-0878
          Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
          Email: dlietz@milberg.com

NEW SCHOOL: Lankau Suit Seeks Tuition Fee Refund
------------------------------------------------
MCKAYLA LANKAU, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff V. THE NEW SCHOOL, Defendant, Case No.
601034/2024 (N.Y. Sup., Nassau Cty., Jan. 18, 2024) is a class
action brought by the Plaintiff for damages, restitution, and
declaratory relief resulting from New School's retention of the
tuition and fees paid by her and the other putative Class Members
for in-person education and services not being provided.

In March 2020, in response to the outbreak of the SARS-CoV-2 virus,
the virus that causes the COVID-19 disease, New School, like many
other universities, transitioned to remote online-only education,
canceled on-campus recreational events, canceled student activity
events, and ordered students to refrain from going on campus. As a
result, all on-campus education, services, and amenities were no
longer available to New School students.

This lawsuit seeks disgorgement of the prorated, unused amounts of
the fees that Plaintiff and other putative Class Members paid, but
for which they (or the students on behalf of whom they paid) were
not provided the benefit, as well as a partial prorated tuition
reimbursement representing the difference in fair market value
between the on-campus product for which they had paid, and the
online product that they received.

The Plaintiff, an undergraduate student during the Spring 2020
semester, chose and paid tuition and fees to enroll in New School's
on-campus, in-person education program, including all the benefits
and services associated therewith for the entirety of the
semester.

New School is a university founded in 1919. New School offers
numerous major fields for undergraduate students, as well as a
number of graduate programs.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Tompkins, Esq.
          Anthony Alesandro, Esq.
          LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C.
          1 Old Country Road, Suite 347
          Carle Place, NY 11514
          Telephone: (516) 873-9550
          E-mail: mtompkins@leedsbrownlaw.com
                  aalesandro@leedsbrownlaw.com

               - and -

          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

PALM ENTERTAINMENT: Dahlquist Sues Over Illegal Tip Pool
--------------------------------------------------------
Renee Terees Dahlquist, individually and on behalf of those
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Palm Entertainment, LLC, d/b/a Pub
42, Defendant, Case No. 27-CV-24-1859 (Minn. Dist. Ct., 4th
Judicial, Hennepin Cty., February 5, 2024) alleges violations of
the Minnesota Statutes Sections 181.14.

The Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a server at its 7600 42nd
Ave. N., New Hope, MN 55427 property from March 16, 2022, through
her resignation in September 5, 2022. Allegedly, the Defendant
refused to pay Plaintiff her full earnings in a timely manner
because it diverted compensation from her by requiring coercing her
to pay into an illegal tip pool and thereby reducing her
compensation, says the suit.

With a registered office address at 321 Westwood Drive North Golden
Valley, MN 55422, Palm Entertainment, LLC owns and operates Pub 42.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Eric D. Satre, Esq.
          SATRE LAW FIRM
          INTERNATIONAL PLAZA
          7900 International Drive, Suite 300-7044
          Bloomington, MN 55425
          Telephone: (651) 212-4919
          Facsimile: (651) 212-4203
          E-mail: esatre@satrelaw.com
                  admin@satrelaw.com

PERELMAN'S FAMILY: Wahab Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
ANGELA WAHAB, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PERELMAN'S FAMILY JEWELRY, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-00385 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 18, 2024) is a civil rights
action against Defendant for the failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate Defendant's website, www.kingsjewelry.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 and the New York City Human Rights
Law.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was injured when she
attempted on January 1, 2024 and again on January 4, 2024 to access
Defendant's Website from Plaintiff's home in an effort to shop for
Defendant's products, but encountered barriers that denied the full
and equal access to Defendant's online goods, content, and
services. Specifically, Plaintiff wanted to purchase the Men's
Diamond Ring (Sterling Silver 1/10 Carat Total Weight Diamond With
8X6mm Emerald Shaped Black Onyx Center Surrounded By Rounds).

Due to Defendant's failure to build the Website in a manner that is
compatible with screen access programs, Plaintiff was unable to
understand and properly interact with the Website, and was thus
denied the benefit of purchasing the Men's Diamond Ring that
Plaintiff wished to acquire from the Website, says the suit.

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.

Perelman's Family Jewelry, Inc. is an online retailer offering
various types of jewelry including engagement rings, wedding bands,
custom jewelry, and fashion jewelry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          One University Plaza, Suite 620
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 282-6500
          Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
          E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com

PETER MARCUS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Bullock Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
JUSTIN BULLOCK, individually and as the representative of a class
of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. PETER MARCUS PARADIGM,
LLC, d/b/a Good Wipes, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-00758 (S.D.N.Y.,
February 2, 2024) arises from the Defendant's failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons in violation of Plaintiff's rights
under the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Despite readily available accessible technology, such as the
technology in use at other heavily trafficked retail websites,
which makes use of alternative text, accessible forms, descriptive
links, resizable text and limits the usage of tables and
JavaScript, Defendant has chosen to rely on an exclusively visual
interface. Defendant's sighted customers can independently browse,
select, and buy online without the assistance of others. However,
blind persons must rely on sighted companions to assist them in
accessing and purchasing on www.goodwipes.com, says the suit.

Headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, Peter Marcus Paradigm, LLC, is a
Delaware Foreign limited liability company that manufactures and
sells plant-based wet wipes. [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

PLANET HOME: Canepa Sues Over Unprotected Private Info
------------------------------------------------------
FRANK CANEPA, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated; Plaintiff v. PLANET HOME LENDING, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive; Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00140 (D. Conn., February 2,
2024) seeks to hold Defendant responsible for the harms it caused
and will continue to cause Representative Plaintiff and, at least,
thousands of other similarly situated persons in the massive and
preventable cyberattack purportedly discovered by Defendant on
November 15, 2023, in which cybercriminals infiltrated Defendant's
inadequately protected network servers and accessed highly
sensitive personally identifiable information that was being kept
unprotected and alleges claims against the Defendant for
negligence, negligence per se, breach of confidence, breach of
implied contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing, breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and
declaratory judgment.

While Defendant claims to have discovered the breach as early as
November 15, 2023, Defendant did not file a Notice of data breach
with the Office of the Maine Attorney General until January 25,
2024, and did not inform victims of the data breach by mailing them
copies of the Notice until late January of 2024. Despite the
prevalence of public announcements of data breaches and data
security compromises, Defendant failed to take appropriate steps to
protect Representative Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII from
being compromised, says the suit.

Headquartered in Connecticut, Planet Home Lending provides home
loan services to individuals and businesses across the world. [BN]


The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Oren Faircloth, Esq.
         SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
         745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
         New York, NY 10151
         Telephone: (212) 532-1091
         Email: ofaircloth@sirillp.com

                - and -

         Daniel Srourian, Esq.
         SROURIAN LAW FIRM, P.C.
         3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1710
         Los Angeles, CA 90010
         Telephone: (213) 474-3800
         Facsimile: (213) 471-4160
         E-mail: daniel@slfla.com

PRGB INC: Clarke Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection Practices
------------------------------------------------------------
DONALD CLARKE, individually and behalf of all those similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PRGB, INC. A BUILD, Defendant, Case No.
CACE-24-001522 (Fla. Cir., Broward Cty., February 2, 2024) accuses
the Defendant of violating the Florida Consumer Collection
Practices Act.

On December 15, 2023, Defendant sent an electronic mail
communication to Plaintiff in connection of the consumer debt.
However, the communication was sent by Defendant to Plaintiff at
10:01 PM in Plaintiff's time zone, says the suit.

Based in Draper, UT, PRGB, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that
credit building products. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
         Jennifer G. Simil, Esq.
         Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
         LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI, PLLC.
         110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
         Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
         Telephone: (954) 907-1136

PRIMMER PIPER: Gaboriault Sues Over Unauthorized Access of Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
SHAWNA GABORIAULT, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PRIMMER, PIPER, EGGLESTON, &
CRAMER, PC, and JOHN DOES 1 to 10, Defendants, Case No.
2:24-cv-00113-wks (D. Vt., February 2, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for negligence, negligent hiring and
retention, breach of contract, breach of implied contract, invasion
of privacy, publication of private facts, and unjust enrichment.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged failure to properly
secure and safeguard personally identifiable information (PII) and
protected health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly
situated patients stored within the Defendants' network system
following a data breach that occurred from November 8, 2021, to
November 11, 2021. The Defendants also failed to timely notify the
Plaintiff and similarly situated patients about the data breach. As
a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class
members was compromised and damaged through access by and
disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties, says the
suit.

Primmer, Piper, Eggleston, & Cramer, PC is a law firm,
headquartered in Burlington, Vermont. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Andrew B. Delaney, Esq.
         P.O. Box 607
         100 N. Main St.
         Barre, VT 05641
         Telephone: (802) 479-0568
         E-mail: andrew@mdrvt.com

                 - and -

         Yongmoon Kim, Esq.
         KIM LAW FIRM LLC
         411 Hackensack Ave, Suite 701
         Hackensack, NJ 07601
         Telephone: (201) 273-7117
         E-mail: ykim@kimlf.com

PROGRESS SOFTWARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cooper Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
FRANK W. COOPER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PROGRESS SOFTWARE CORPORATION; PENSION
BENEFIT INFORMATION, LLC d/b/a PBI RESEARCH SERVICES; and PURITAN
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-10251-ADB (D. Mass., Jan. 30, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for their failure to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable information including, but not
limited to, the Plaintiff and Class Members' names, Social Security
numbers, and dates of birth.

According to the complaint, despite its duties to the Plaintiff and
Class Members related to and arising from its cloud hosting and
secure file transfer services and applications involving MOVEit,
the Defendants stored, maintained, and hosted the Plaintiff's and
Class Members' Private Information on its MOVEit transfer services
software that was negligently and recklessly configured and
maintained so as to contain security vulnerabilities that resulted
in multiple breaches of its network and systems or of its
customers' networks and systems.

As a result of the breach, unauthorized third-party cybercriminals
gained access to and obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII.
As a result of Defendants' unreasonable and inadequate data
security practices that resulted in the Data Breach, Plaintiff and
Class Members are at a current and ongoing substantial risk of
identity theft and have suffered numerous actual and concrete
injuries and damages, says the suit.

Progress Software Corporation develops, markets, and distributes
applications. The Company offers databases, application, messaging
servers, and development tools. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kristen A. Johnson, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO
          1 Faneuil Hall Square, 5th Floor
          Boston, MA 02109
          Telephone: (617) 482-3700
          Facsimile: (617) 482-3003
          Email: kristenj@hbsslaw.com

               - and -

          Sean R. Matt, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO
          1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Telephone: (206) 623-7292
          Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
          Email: sean@hbsslaw.com

               - and -

          Jeffrey S. Goldenberg, Esq.
          GOLDENBERG SCHNEIDER, LPA
          4445 Lake Forest Drive, Suite 490
          Cincinnati, OH 45242
          Telephone: (513) 345-8291
          Facsimile: (513) 345-8294
          Email: jgoldenberg@gs-legal.com

               - and -

          Charles Schaffer, Esq.
          Nicholas J. Elia, Esq.
          LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN LLP
          510 Walnut Street, Suite 500
          Philadelphia, PA 19106
          Telephone: (215) 592-1500
          Facsimile: (215) 592-4663
          Email: cschaffer@lfsblaw.com
                 nelia@lfsblaw.com

               - and -

          Joseph M. Lyon, Esq.
          THE LYON FIRM
          2754 Erie Ave.
          Cincinnati, OH 45208
          Telephone: (513) 381-2333
          Facsimile: (513) 766-9011
          Email: jlyon@thelyonfirm.com

PROSTAFF SERVICES: Velasquez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Teofila A. Velasquez and other similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff v. Prostaff Services USA LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-20401-XXXX (S.D. Fla., January 31, 2024) seeks to recover
monetary damages for unpaid overtime wages under Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Prostaff Cleaning employed Plaintiff Velasquez as a non-exempted,
full-time, hourly housekeeping employee from approximately August
28, 2023, to December 17, 2023, or 16 weeks. During her employment
with Defendant, Plaintiff worked a total of 45.5 hours weekly and
she did not take bonafide lunchtime hours. However, Defendant
willfully failed to pay Plaintiff overtime hours at the rate of
time and one-half her regular rate for every hour that she worked
over 40, says the suit.

Based  in Miami-Dade County, Florida, Prostaff Services USA LLC is
a commercial cleaning company that provides services to the
hospitality industry. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
           ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
           9100 S. Dadeland Blvd.
           Suite 1500
           Miami, FL 33156
           Telephone: (305) 446-1500
           Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
           E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

SANSAI-PASADENA: Mendez Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
----------------------------------------------------------
ARMANDO HERRERA MENDEZ, an individual, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SANSAI-PASADENA, a business
entity form unknown; PREMIUM ALTERNATIVE, INC., a California
Corporation; YON S. LIPSKY; an individual; and DOES 1 to 100,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 24STCV01386 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., Jan. 18, 2024) arises from the Defendants' violations
of the California Labor Code and the California Business and
Professions Code arising out of, among other things, failure to pay
wages, pay overtime, provide meal and rest breaks to its employees,
furnish accurate wage statements, and maintain accurate payroll
records.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants to work at their
restaurant for approximately 15 years through approximately
November 18, 2023.

SANSAI-PASADENA, a business entity form unknown, and PREMIUM
ALTERNATIVE, INC., a California Corporation, operate a curated food
delivery service.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Sarkis Sirmabekian, Esq.
          SIRMABEKIAN LAW FIRM, PC
          3435 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1710
          Los Angeles, CA 90010
          Telephone: (818) 473-5003
          Facsimile: (818) 476-5619
          E-mail: contact@slawla.com

SIKA AG: Artificially Inflated Prices for CCAs, D'Onofrio Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
D'ONOFRIO GENERAL CONTRACTORS CORP., on behalf of itself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SIKA AG; SIKA CORPORATION;
CHRYSO, INC.; GCP APPLIED TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; COMPAGNIE DE
SAINT-GOBAIN S.A.; SAINT-GOBAIN NORTH AMERICA; MASTER BUILDERS
SOLUTIONS ADMIXTURES U.S., LLC; MASTER BUILDERS SOLUTIONS
DEUTSCHLAND GMBH; CINVEN LTD.; CINVEN, INC.; THE EUCLID CHEMICAL
COMPANY; RPM INTERNATIONAL INC.; and DOES 1-10, Defendants, Case
No. 1:24-cv-00783 (E.D.N.Y., February 2, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for violations of Sections 1 and 3 of the
Sherman Act.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful agreement to
fix the prices for (a) concrete admixtures, (b) cement additives,
and (c) admixtures for mortar (collectively, "CCAs"). CCAs, which
can be either liquid or powdered, are added to concrete, cement,
and mortar before or during the aggregate's mixing with water to
give the finished product certain qualities. In sum, beginning no
later than May 11, 2018, the Defendants entered into an agreement
to consolidate their control over the global manufacture of CCAs
and charge supracompetitive prices for CCAs through price increases
and the imposition of surcharges. This agreement, which was
effectuated through the Defendants' shared membership in numerous
trade associations, resulted in the Plaintiff and members of the
Class paying supra-competitive prices for CCAs in the United States
and its territories. Through this action, the Plaintiff, on behalf
of itself and members of the Class, seeks to recover the
overcharges they paid to the Defendants.

D'Onofrio General Contractors Corp. is a construction company, with
its principal place of business in Brooklyn, New York.

Sika AG is a specialty chemicals company, with its primary place of
business at Zugerstrasse 50 Baar, Zug, 6341 Switzerland.

Sika Corporation is a specialty chemicals company based in
Lyndhurst, New Jersey.

Chryso, Inc. is a construction chemicals company, with its primary
place of business in Rockwall, Texas.

GCP Applied Technologies Inc. is a chemicals company, with its
primary place of business in Alpharetta, Georgia.

Compagnie de Saint-Gobain S.A. is a manufacturing company, with its
primary place of business in France.

Saint-Gobain North America is a building materials manufacturer
based in Malvern, Pennsylvania.

Master Builders Solutions Admixtures US, LLC is a chemicals
company, with its primary place of business in Beachwood, Ohio.

Master Builders Solutions Deutschland GmbH is a chemicals company,
with its primary place of business in Mannheim, Germany.

Cinven Ltd. is a private equity firm in London, England.

Cinven, Inc. is a private equity firm in Manhattan, New York.

The Euclid Chemical Company is a chemicals company, with its
primary place of business in Cleveland, Ohio.

RPM International, Inc. is a chemicals company, with its primary
place of business in Medina, Ohio. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Thomas H. Burt, Esq.
         Lillian R. Grinnell, Esq.
         WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER FREEMAN & HERZ LLP
         270 Madison Avenue, 9th Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Telephone: (212) 545-4600
         Facsimile: (212) 686-1094
         E-mail: burt@whafh.com
                 grinnell@whafh.com

                  - and -

         Fred T. Isquith, Sr., Esq.
         ISQUITH LAW PLLC
         103 East 84th Street
         New York, NY 10028
         Telephone: (718) 775-6478
         E-mail: isquithlaw@gmail.com

                  - and -

         Justin S. Nematzadeh, Esq.
         NEMATZADEH PLLC
         101 Avenue of the Americas, Suite 909
         New York, NY 10013
         Telephone: (646) 799-6729

SUNCAKES LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ferguson Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
ANGELIQUE FERGUSON; and IRIS HULSEY, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SUNCAKES, L.L.C.; and
SUNCAKES, TN, L.L.C., Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-00099 (M.D.
Tenn., Jan. 30, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid
wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages,
attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as servers.

SUNCAKES, L.L.C. owns and operates IHOP franchised restaurants in
Tennessee, Virginia, North Carolina and South Carolina. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gordon E. Jackson, Esq.
          J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
          James L. Holt, Jr., Esq.
          J. Joseph Leatherwood IV, Esq.
          JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER, HOLT
          OWEN & BRYANT
          262 German Oak Drive
          Memphis, TN 38018
          Telephone: (901) 754-8001
          Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
          Email: gjackson@jsyc.com
                 rbryant@jsyc.com
                 jholt@jsyc.com
                 jleatherwood@jsyc.com

UNITED STATES: Various Parties File Suit Over Tolling Program
-------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORKERS AGAINST CONGESTION PRICING TAX, DANNY BUZZETTA, DR.
GREGOR WINKEL, LEE BERMAN, MEREDITH LeVANDE, RITA SUE SIEGEL, TOMMY
LOEB, KATHRYN FREED, TREVER HOLLAND, RICKY YANG, PAUL ENG, BARUCH
WEISS, ROBERT FRIEDRICH, KEVIN FORRESTAL, WARREN SCHREIBER,
CHRISTOPHER RYAN, BEN MASON, DENNIS ROSARIO, RABBI Y.S. GINZBERG,
JACOB ENGLANDER, AARON GONZALEZ, HOWARD CHIN, ELAINE LA PENNA,
THOMAS ANTHONY SCARPACI, COUNCILMEMBER JOSEPH C. BORELLI,
COUNCILMEMBER KRISTY MARMORATO, COUNCILMEMBER VICKIE PALADINO,
COUNCILMEMBER JOANN ARIOLA, COUNCILMEMBER SUSAN ZHUANG,
COUNCILMEMBER KALMAN YEGER, COUNCILMEMBER INNA VERNIKOV,
COUNCILMEMBER DAVID CARR, COUNCILMEMBER ROBERT F. HOLDEN and
ASSEMBLYMEMBER DAVID WEPRIN, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION, FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, SHAILEN BHATT,
in his official capacity as Administrator of the Federal Highway
Administration, RICHARD J. MARQUIS, in his official capacity as
Division Administrator of the New York Division of the Federal
Highway Administration, METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY,
TRIBOROUGH BRIDGE AND TUNNEL AUTHORITY, NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION, NEW YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION and
TRAFFIC MOBILITY REVIEW BOARD, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00367
(S.D.N.Y., Jan. 18, 2024) is a class action joining other legal
challenges brought by institutional, individual and pro se
litigants to the arbitrary, capricious and unlawful proposed
implementation of New York's Central Business District Tolling
Program, referred here as Congestion Pricing.

The Plaintiffs comprise grassroots community-based organizations
and a cross-section of citizens representing various communities in
New York City. The Plaintiffs raise critical socioeconomic issues
left unexamined or unresolved by virtue of Defendants' unlawfully
abbreviated and truncated environmental review process. They
challenge FHWA's failure to conduct and prepare an Environmental
Impact Statement. FHWA published a Finding of No Significant Impact
on June 22, 2023 in relation to the environmental consequences of
Congestion Pricing despite the prior publication of a Final
Environmental Assessment in May 2023 that found significant adverse
environmental consequences, says the suit.

According to the complaint, the significant environmental
consequences of Congestion Pricing concern, among other things, the
severe adverse impacts of increased traffic flow and congestion to
certain neighborhoods within and in proximity to the Central
Business District, particularly communities of low income, minority
populations and neighborhoods designated as environmental justice
communities, and the financial burdens upon the working poor with
no mass transit options to commute to their employment.

The Plaintiffs are residents of environmental justice communities
in Chinatown, the Lower East Side, Clinton, East Harlem and the
South Bronx. Due to Congestion Pricing, Plaintiffs and members of
the putative class face risks of health concerns increasing the
likelihood of heart and lung diseases, acute and chronic
bronchitis, asthma attacks and general respiratory problems and
premature mortality, the suit says.

United States Department of Transportation is the executive
department of the federal government responsible for oversight of
the transportation planning process.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jack L. Lester, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JACK L. LESTER, ESQ.
          41 Squaw Road
          East Hampton, NY 11937
          Telephone: (631) 604-2228
          E-mail: Jllcomlaw@aol.com

UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Snyder Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kimberly Snyder, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. The Universty of Chicago Medical
Center, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-00985 (N.D. Ill., February 3,
2024) seeks to recover unpaid wages, penalties, and attorney's fees
and costs from the University of Chicago in violation of the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law.

Plaintiff Snyder was a full-time employee of UChicago who worked as
an hourly-paid patient transport specialist from approximately
April, 2017 through approximately February, 2023. Following the
outbreak of the Coronavirus, UChicago implemented a company-wide
policy requiring each of its hourly, non-exempt employees to
undergo a physical and medical examination to check for symptoms of
the Coronavirus each shift. This examination was imposed by
UChicago as a requirement to work each shift. The examination was
required by UChicago and was necessary for each employee to perform
his/her work for UChicago. Unfortunately, UChicago refused to pay
for this time, says the suit.

Based in Hyde Park, IL, UChicago is a not-for-profit academic
medical health system with hospitals, outpatient clinics and
physician practices throughout Chicago and its suburbs. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Michael L. Fradin, Esq.
           FRADIN LAW, LLC
           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 1/2 N. Franklin Street
           Chagrin Falls, OH 44022
           Telephone: (216) 816-8696
           E-mail: james@simonsayspay.com

UNIVISION COMMUNICATIONS: Discloses Private Info, Claxton Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Claxton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Univision Communications, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-00840 (S.D.N.Y., February 5, 2024) alleges that
the Defendant violated the Video Privacy Protection Act by
knowingly and intentionally disclosing the personally identifiable
information of its website users.

According to the complaint, Mr. Claxton never consented, agreed,
nor otherwise permitted Defendant to disclose his PII and viewing
information to third parties and certainly did not do so. Likewise,
Defendant never gave Mr. Claxton the opportunity to prevent the
disclosure to and interception of his PII by third parties.

Univision is one of the largest Spanish media conglomerates and
video content providers in the United States. Defendant owns and
operates several online and mobile streaming applications,
including www.tv.univision.com. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Adrian Gucovschi, Esq.
           GUCOVSCHI ROZENSHTEYN, PLLC
           140 Broadway, Suite 4667
           New York, NY 10005
           Telephone: (212) 884-4230
           E-mail: adrian@gr-firm.com

VERIZON WIRELESS: Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set April 15
----------------------------------------------------------------
Clifford Colby, writing for CNET, reports that you could be owed
money in 2024 as part of a proposed $100 million settlement of a
class action lawsuit, if you're a current or former Verizon
customer who purchased a traditional, postpaid wireless plan in the
past seven years. Verizon is making the payments to address claims
that its service plans were misleading because the advertised
prices didn't include an administrative charge.

In the suit, the plaintiffs alleged (PDF) that Verizon Wireless
implemented, charged and increased an administrative fee for
postpaid wireless or data services in a deceptive and unfair
manner.

In a statement to CNET, a Verizon spokesperson said the company
"clearly identifies and describes its wireless consumer Admin
Charge multiple times during the sales transaction, as well as in
its marketing, contracts and billing. This charge helps our company
recover certain regulatory compliance and network-related costs."

Here's what to know about the proposed settlement, including who is
eligible for a payment of up to $100 and how to submit a claim.
Here's how to check if your state has money or property you can
claim.

Who's eligible for money from the Verizon class action settlement?

You may be eligible if you are a current or former US customer who
purchased postpaid wireless or data services from Verizon and paid
an administrative charge or an administrative and telco recovery
charge between Jan. 1, 2016, and Nov. 8, 2023.

A postpaid wireless plan means customers pay for the service after
they use it, at the end of their billing cycle. The settlement
doesn't include customers who purchased prepaid plans from
Verizon.

In an October fact sheet, Verizon reported that it served about 93
million retail postpaid customers as of Sept. 30, 2023.

If you received a notice about the settlement by email or mail, you
are eligible to file a claim, according to the official Verizon
administrative charge settlement website.

What settlement amount could I receive?

If the settlement is approved and finalized, Verizon will pay $100
million into a settlement fund. Customers filing valid claims by
the deadline could receive up to $100 each as part of the
settlement, depending on how long they were a Verizon subscriber
and how many valid claims are filed.

How do I claim money as part of the Verizon settlement?

The settlement's administrative site has a claim form that eligible
class members can fill out and submit online.

You can also download (PDF), fill out and mail a paper form to this
address:

     Verizon Administrative Charge Settlement
     c/o Settlement Administrator
     1650 Arch St., Suite 2210
     Philadelphia, PA 19103

The deadline to submit a claim is 11:59:59 p.m. PT, April 15,
2024.

When will I get my settlement money?

The settlement FAQ says payments will be issued by check or
electronic payment after the settlement is approved and finalized.
A hearing is scheduled for March 22, 2024. [GN]

VIRGIN PULSE: Fails to Secure Patients' Personal Info, Elston Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
SHIRLEY ELSTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VIRGIN PULSE, INC. and WELLTOK, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-05096 (W.D. Wash., February 2, 2024)
is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, breach of
an implied contract, unjust enrichment, invasion of privacy, and
violations of the Washington Data Breach Disclosure Law and the
Washington State Consumer Protection Act.

The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and
safeguard personally identifiable information (PII) and protected
health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly situated
patients stored within the Defendants' MOVEit software technology
following a data breach in May 2023. The Defendants also failed to
timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated patients about
the data breach. As a result, the private information of the
Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and damaged through
access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties,
says the suit.

Virgin Pulse, Inc. is a software development company, headquartered
in Providence, Rhode Island.

Welltok, Inc. is a Software as a Service (SaaS) company based in
Providence, Rhode Island. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Sean R. Matt, Esq.
         HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
         1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
         Seattle, WA 98101
         Telephone: (206) 623-7292
         Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
         E-mail: sean@hbsslaw.com

                 - and -

         J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
         Andrew E. Mize, 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
                 amize@stranchlaw.com

[*] Current Issues Discussed in Data Breach Class Action Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark A. Olthoff and Shundra Crumpton Manning, writing for mondaq,
report that very few civil cases ever reach a jury. Nearly every
lawsuit is at some point resolved by the court on motion or through
settlement. Class action cases are no different, including those
filed after data breach incidents. Accordingly, developing a
strategy early in a lawsuit timeline is critical -- whether to seek
an early dismissal or an early out of court resolution. This
article discusses a number of developments in the past year
impacting class action settlements. And whether a case settles for
tens of millions of dollars or substantially less, these recent
events should be a part of any settlement consideration.

Class Certification

First, as we reported last year in this publication, two federal
courts recently certified classes in data breach cases. Both cases
were appealed and, in each instance, the appeals courts reversed or
vacated the district court decisions (albeit for different
reasons). While the lower courts' certification orders demonstrate
data breach cases can be appropriate for class treatment, the fact
that appeals courts have closely scrutinized the district courts'
conclusions also shows there is uncertainty. In turn, a well-known
axiom for any settle environment is where uncertainty exists on
either or both sides.

Claims Rates and Notices

Second, courts, particularly in the federal system, are
increasingly scrutinizing settlements in terms of fairness,
reasonableness, and result. Courts are evaluating the claim rates
and adequacy of notices being used. A California federal judge
recently complained that predicted rates of 1%-9% were too low. He
also found that the settlement notice provided to class members was
too long and complicated. In denying the plaintiffs' motion for
preliminary approval, the judge told the lawyers to find a way to
boost up the expected number of claims. In another recent instance,
a Michigan federal judge became irked when the settlement presented
to him describing potential payouts failed to consider that
settlement costs and attorney fees were being deducted from the
settlement fund. He found the notice was misleading and rejected
preliminary approval. The First Circuit Court of Appeals also
recently vacated a class settlement where it found significant
differences in the claims created conflicts within the class
requiring separate class representatives and would not allow for
equal treatment of class awards. Finally, the Second Circuit Court
of Appeals vacated a settlement finding there is no "presumption of
fairness" as to a settlement agreement that was negotiated at arm's
length during a lengthy mediation before a neutral party. Rather,
district courts must fully analyze all aspects of a settlement
under the factors in Rule 23.

Aggregators and Artificial Intelligence

Relatedly, another somewhat recent development is the introduction
of third-party aggregators using artificial intelligence ("AI") to
boost objection, opt-out, and claims rates. In essence, aggregators
are using AI to locate class members and then communicate with them
to file objections, opt-outs (with the possibility of filing other
suits), or submit claims on behalf of the class members. At least
one court has sounded an alarm and rejected the use of an AI
aggregator for these purposes. See In re Juul Labs, Inc. Marketing,
Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, 2023 WL 6205473
(N.D. Cal. Sept. 19, 2023). The court overruled objections and set
aside aggregated claims reasoning there was a lack of control over
class communications and notice. On the other hand, some
commentators have expressed that the use of AI could lead to more
class member participation, better class notice, improvements in
class administration, and higher claim rates. That said, AI is not
a panacea for all problems and safeguards to prevent abuses and
fraud would have to be implemented.

Attorney's Fees

Counsel fees continue to be a source of judicial consternation and
a number of courts have continued to question attorney's fee awards
in settlements. In a June 2023 Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals
opinion, the court reversed (and revoked) a district court order
where the plaintiffs initially sought $6 million and the court
reduced it to $1.7 million. Still, the appeals court rejected the
amount because -- in the claims-made settlement -- only $53,000 in
compensation was claimed. This resulted in attorney's fees of more
than 30 times the amount. This case and others like it are now
being used to change class action settlement structures. Plaintiffs
are aggressively pushing for settlement terms that include
non-monetary class-wide relief such as credit monitoring or certain
forms of injunctive relief to demonstrate the value of the class
settlement. There are also a significant number of cases where
plaintiffs are demanding a common fund structure (as opposed to
claims-made) to reduce the risk that settlements are not approved
because they do not sufficiently compensate class members.
Historically, claims-made settlements have been a better approach
in data breach settlements because the structure permits
compensation to be awarded to those class members that have
interest in the settlement and have been harmed by the incident. A
common fund structure, on the other hand, merely distributes a
settlement fund without regard to anyone's possible damage --
potentially resulting in overpayments and underpayments to
particular class members.

Residual Settlement Funds

Finally, residual settlement funds have received attention in the
past year. Frequently, in a common fund settlement, these are funds
remaining due to an inability to locate every class member. Several
alternatives exist to distribute the remainder: (1) reversion to
the defendant, (2) re-distribute to the class members who are
known, (3) distribute to a cy pres recipient, (4) or escheat to a
government. Ordinarily, courts reject returning money to the
defendant that paid to settle and, in some instances, it is
infeasible or uneconomical to re-distribute to the class members.
This leaves alternatives (3) or (4) most likely. In the past year,
courts have continued to struggle with the tension of distributing
money to a cy pres recipient that has no connection to the lawsuit
and judges determining how much should be awarded to any particular
organization. In addition, critics have commented that cy pres
awards divert funds from the real beneficiaries of the settlement.
This said, courts have recently approved both cy pres distributions
and awarded residual funds to the U.S. Treasury. The validity and
application of cy pres and other alternatives will continue to be
addressed by the courts.

Each of these developments will continue to impact the future of
data breach class actions and settlements. There are opportunities
to be creative and seek novel ways to resolve these claims and
parties and counsel alike should be open to building settlements
that can reach the proposed classes yet also consider the necessary
safeguards to protect against abuses. [GN]

[] Registration Now Open for 8th Annual Class Action Conference
---------------------------------------------------------------
Registration is now open for the 8th Annual Class Action Money &
Ethics Conference.

Join top professionals and thought leaders in the class action
industry for this one-day event.

CAME 2024 will be held in-person at The Harmonie Club on Monday,
May 6, 2024.  To register, visit
https://www.classactionconference.com/

For sponsorship or speakership opportunities, please contact:

     Will Etchison
     Tel: 305-707-7493
     E-mail: will@beardgroup.com



                            *********

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

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

Copyright 2024. 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 ***