/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240222.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, February 22, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 39
Headlines
A.J. BOGGS: Court Stays Class Action
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Amended Class Settlement Gets Final Nod
AMC NETWORKS: Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set April 9
ASCENDUM MACHINERY: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Capiau Alleges
ATOM TICKETS: Laufer Sues Over Deceptive Ticket Service Fees
BECTON, DICKINSON: Court OK's Settlement of Kabak Shareholder Suit
BFG SUPPLY: Smith Class Suit Seeks to Recover OT Wages Under FLSA
BURNETT MEDICAL: Faces Hicks Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
CADY STUDIOS: Faces Traynham Suit Over Telephone Restrictions
CANADIAN HOCKEY: Faces Class Suit Over Antitrust Violations
CARGUARD ADMINISTRATION: Bid to Strike Class Allegations Tossed
CAROTHERS HOLDING: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert. Response
CELSIUS HOLDINGS: Starks Balks at Energy Drinks' Efficacy Claims
CIRCLE K: Class Cert. Order Vacated in Pettersen Class Action
CITIZENS DISABILITY: Faces Thompson Class Suit Over Robocalls
COLART INTERACTIVE: Fagnani Files Civil Rights Suit in S.D.N.Y.
CONOCOPHILLIPS CO: Quigley Suit Moved From W.D. Okla. to S.D. Tex.
CUS MF POWERHOUSE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Wismeg Says
DELTA AIR LINES: Continues to Defend Antitrust Class Suit
DENTELLE LLC: Villagra Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
DWK VENTURES: Owen Seeks Unpaid Wages of Pest Control Technicians
ENTREPRENEUR MEDIA: Discloses Users' Info to FB, Sancruzado Says
EOS IT MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Graef Suit Alleges
ERNST & YOUNG: Court OK's Bid to Compel Arbitration in FDIC Suit
ESA MANAGEMENT: Class Certification Bid Deadline Revised to Sept. 6
ESSILORLUXOTTICA SA: Faces Ringgold Over Branded Eyewear Conspiracy
EXETER FINANCE: Fails to Pay Proper wages, Clark Alleges
FIELDSTONE VENTURES: Class Cert. Bid in Ross Due March 31
FINANCIAL RISK: Faces Bednyak $5M Class Action Suit in E.D. La.
FORD MOTOR: Class Cert Bid Filing in Dolan Suit Due July 31
GAN LIMITED: Faces Zappia Class Securities Suit in S.D.N.Y.
GENERAL SERVICES: Faces Jeffers Class Suit Over COVID-19 Mandate
GOLDEN STATE: Sheffield Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to C.D. Cal.
GRAFTECH INTERNATIONAL: Porter Sues Over Share Price Drop
HAIN CELESTIAL: Parties Must Submit Supplemental Letter Briefs
HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Seeks to Seal Portions of Class Cert Opposition
HEALTHEC LLC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Hawk Alleges
HF MANAGEMENT: Collins Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Class
HI-SCHOOL PHARMACY: Landin Files Personal Injury Suit in W.D. Wash.
HOMEADVISOR INC: Airquip Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Nationwide Class
HOMEWORKS ENERGY: Court Tosses Giguere's Bid to Supplement Reply
IL TOSCANO: Velasquez Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA
IMMUNOVANT INC:Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit in E.D.N.Y
INMARKET MEDIA: Sells Geolocation Data Without Consent, Willis Says
IRHYTHM TECHNOLOGIES: Glazing Sues Over Drop in Share Price
ISOLVE RCM: Sends Unwanted Marketing Calls, Brown Suit Alleges
J.R. CARLSON: Fagnani Sues Over Disabled's Civil Rights Violation
JPS VENTURES: Court OK's Class Settlement in Guevara Lawsuit
JUMIO INC: Murphy Sues Over Personal Injury Claims in N.D. Cal.
KEENAN & ASSOCIATES: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Barfield Says
KELLER BROTHERS: Fails to Provide Proper Wages, Hernandez Says
KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION: California Law To Be Applied in Wage Claims
LEE & GEN: Faces Fagnani Suit Over ADA Violations in S.D.N.Y.
LEGACY CORP: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Hill Class Suit
LITTLE CAESAR: Parties Seek Modification of Class Cert Schedule
MATCH GROUP: Faces Class Action Suit Over Dating Platforms
MERIDIAN BEHAVIORAL: Johnson Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
MR. COOPER: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Randles Suit Alleges
NATIONAL CREDIT: Carrasquillo Files Consumer Credit Suit in N.Y.
OXFORD HEALTH: Class Cert Expert Discovery in Molly Due Feb. 28
PACKIT LLC: Faces Villaverde Suit Over Telephonic Sales Calls
PALM ENTERTAINMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Dahlquist Alleges
PENNSYLVANIA: Haggles Over Settlement of Unclaimed Property Suit
PHARMAVITE LLC: Hamzeh Files False Ad Suit Over Fish Oil Supplement
PLANET HOME: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Ward Suit Alleges
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Misled Consumers About Decongestants, Hadden Says
READING INTERNATIONAL: Discloses Personal Info to FB, Suit Says
ROYAL GUARDS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Aghatise Alleges
SEATGEEK INC: Fails to Disclose Total Ticket Cost, Vasell Alleges
SIDWELL AIR: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to August 30
SOLAR GRIDS: Faces Thornton Suit Over Telemarketing Calls
STARS WIRELESS: Court Expedites Supplementing Chief Judge's Order
STRATEGIC LIMITED: McMurray Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Calls
SUN TEES INC: Colak Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
SUTHERLAND GLOBAL: Amended Scheduling Order Entered in Savage Suit
TARGET CORPORATION: Filing of Class Cert. Bid Due March 26
TD BANK: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Dou Suit Due Jan. 2, 2025
TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL: Bid to Dismiss QVAR Antitrust Suit Pending
TRANSFORMATIVE HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach
TRUIST BANK: Class Cert. Bid Deadline in Truong Revised to Nov. 4
UKG INC: Fails to Implement Data Security Practices, Illouz Says
UNIVERSAL WINDOWS: Wade Files TCPA Class Suit in N.D. Ohio
VEGA CAPITAL: Vitol Seeks to Quash Subpoena in Antitrust Class Suit
VIRGINIA: Bid to Seal Class Cert Exhibits OK'd
VIVINT INC: Settles FCRA Class Action Suit for $9.7 Million
WALMART INC: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Frost Says
WASHINGTON DC: Reply in Support of Any Class Cert Bid Due March 29
WASHINGTON NATIONAL: Faces Harrington Contract Suit in S.D. Ind.
YAHOO INC: Faces Sancruzado Suit Over Illegal Collection Letter
*********
A.J. BOGGS: Court Stays Class Action
-------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as John Doe v. A.J. Boggs &
Company, Case No. 1:18-cv-01464 (E.D. Cal., Filed Oct. 22, 2018),
the Hon. Judge Jennifer L. Thurston entered an order staying Doe
class action for 10 days.
On Jan. 19, 2024, the parties filed a joint notice of potential
settlement and request for a ten-day stay.
The parties report that they are negotiating the terms of a written
Settlement Agreement.
The parties request that this matter, including Plaintiffs'
deadline to file their Motion for Class Certification, be stayed
for 10 calendar days in the interests of efficiency and
conservation of judicial resources.
Within 10 calendar days of the date of this Order, the parties
shall file a statement updating the Court as to the status of the
potential settlement.
The nature of suit states Diversity-Other Contract.
AJ Boggs is an IT company specializing in software development
services.[CC]
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Amended Class Settlement Gets Final Nod
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID GEORGE WILLIAMS an
individual, on behalf of the State of California, as a private
attorney general, and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company;
and DOES 1 to 50, Case No. 3:22-cv-01892-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge Vince Chhabria entered an order granting final approval of
class action settlement as amended.
1. The Court makes final the conditional class certification
contained in the Second Revised Order Granting Preliminary
Approval of Class Action Settlement, and thus makes final for
purposes of the Settlement Agreement the certification,
pursuant
to FRCP 23(a) and (b)(3), of a class consisting of:
The Plaintiff and all other individuals who are or were
employed by Defendant, based at one of Defendant’s nine
California office locations (SJC3, SJC15, SFO10, SFO13,
MRY11, SBP10, LAX10, SJC11, and SNA3), who worked remotely
for at least one pay period during the Class Period, who
were
assigned a registered USB security key and a Midway Pin by
Amazon, and who neither received some amount of home
Internet
expense reimbursement for each month of their employment
during the Class Period nor testified that they had been
reimbursed at least a reasonable portion of their Internet
expenses during the Class Period. The Class Period shall
mean
the period from March 15, 2020 through July 1, 2022."
2. The Court finds that the Class Notice mailed to all Class
Members, as previously ordered by the Court, fairly and
adequately described the terms of the proposed Settlement
Agreement; was the best notice practicable under the
circumstances; was valid, due and sufficient notice to all
Class
Members; and complied fully with FRCP Rule 23(e)(1)(B), due
process, and all other applicable laws.
3. The Court finally appoints Craig J. Ackermann, Brian
Denlinger,
and Avi Kreitenberg of Ackermann & Tilajef, P.C., and Joshua
Klugman of Joshua Klugman, Esq. as counsel for the Class, and
finds them to be adequate counsel experienced in similar
litigation.
Accordingly, the Court finally and unconditionally approves the
Settlement Agreement pursuant to FRCP 23(e)(1), and specifically:
a. Finally approves the gross settlement amount of $950,000.00;
b. Finally approves payment of up to $40,000.00 to ILYM Group,
Inc., the Settlement Administrator;
c. Finally approves the Class Representative Incentive award of
$20,000 to Plaintiff;
d. Finally approves an award of attorneys' fees, pursuant to
Rule
23(h) in the amount of $285,000.00, and costs in the
additional
amount of $83,499.91 to Plaintiff's counsel;
e. Finally approves the allocation of $30,000 as payment for
penalties under the California Labor Code Private Attorney
Generals Act ("PAGA"), and further approves of payment of 75%
thereof ($22,500) to the Labor and Workforce Development
Agency
for its portion of the PAGA penalties.
Amazon.com Services provides e-commerce services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=T7o6FZ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Craig J. Ackermann, Esq.
Avi Kreitenberg, Esq.
Brian Denlinger, Esq.
ACKERMANN & TILAJEF, P.C.
315 South Beverly Drive, Suite 610
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (310) 277-0614
Facsimile: (310) 277-0635
E-mail: cja@ackermanntilajef.com
ak@ackermanntilajef.com
bd@ackermanntilajef.com
- and -
Joshua Klugman, Esq.
9538 Pico Boulevard, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90035
Telephone: (424) 248-5148
E-mail: esquirejosh@yahoo.com
AMC NETWORKS: Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set April 9
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mike Snider, writing for USA TODAY, reports that if you subscribed
to and streamed AMC+ or any of its other video networks you may
have an award coming your way.
You may have already gotten an email about the settlement in a
class action suit filed against AMC Networks, which operates AMC+,
as well as the Acorn TV, AllBlk, HiDive Shudder and Sundance Now
streaming services.
Several subscribers to AMC+ and the other services filed the suit
in January 2023, charging the company with disclosing subscribers'
personally identifiable information -- "PII" -- to other parties
via third-party tracking technology without users' consent. AMC
Networks and attorneys for the subscribers reached a settlement
agreement in December and the settlement administrator recently
began emailing possible settlement class members.
AMC will pay $8.3 million to create a settlement fund and will quit
using or modify the use of tracking technologies so as they will
not violate the Video Privacy Protection Act, which prohibits video
services from knowingly disclosing consumers' PII to others without
their consent. AMC denies any violation in the settlement, but the
parties have agreed to the settlement to avoid trial.
How do I know if I am part of the AMC Networks class action
settlement class?
If you subscribed to any of the services and watched content from
Jan. 18, 2021, through Jan. 10, 2024, you are eligible.
Most have probably gotten an email. If you haven't seen the email,
check junk mail folders, too.
If you still cannot find the email, you can submit a claim by April
9 directly on the settlement website (www.amcvppasettlement.com),
or download a claim form on the site to send in.
How much could the settlement award be?
The settlement notes that the final payment amount cannot be
calculated until after the plaintiffs' settlements are awarded,
court-approved attorneys' fees and expenses are determined, and
other costs are paid following the May 16 final-approval hearing.
However, with a potential settlement class of 11.4 million
subscribers -- that's how many subscribers AMC Networks had at the
end of 2023 -- the award could amount to less than $1.
The semi-good news? The settlement gives all those whose claims are
submitted and approved a one week subscription to AMC+.
The alternate option, as one person on Reddit suggests: "Everybody
should send a letter in and decline the money. And start a bigger
class action and sue for more. Really make these companies pay for
illegally selling our information . . . . $8.3 million is chump
change for them." [GN]
ASCENDUM MACHINERY: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Capiau Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
BRIAN CAPIAU, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ASCENDUM MACHINERY, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 3:24-cv-00142-MOC-SCR (W.D.N.C., Feb. 7, 2024) is a class
action arising from the Defendant's failure to protect highly
sensitive data of the Plaintiff and the Class.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendant stores a
litany of highly sensitive personal identifiable information about
its current and former employees, and their minor children. But the
Defendant lost control over that data when cybercriminals
infiltrated its insufficiently protected computer systems in a data
breach.
Cybercriminals were able to breach the Defendant's systems because
the Defendant failed to adequately train its employees on
cybersecurity and failed to maintain reasonable security safeguards
or protocols to protect the Class's PII. In short, the Defendant's
failures placed the Class's PII in a vulnerable
position—rendering them easy targets for cybercriminals. Before
this data breach, its current and former employees', and their
minor children's, private information was exactly that—private.
Not anymore. Now, their private information is forever exposed and
unsecure, says the suit.
ASCENDUM MACHINERY, INC. is a machinery manufacturing, industrial
machinery & equipment, and manufacturing company. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joel R. Rhine, Esq.
Martin A. Ramey, Esq.
Ruth A. Sheehan, Esq.
Elise H. Wilson, Esq.
RHINE LAW FIRM, PC
1612 Military Cutoff Road Suite 300
Wilmington, NC 28403
Telephone: (910) 772-9960
Facsimile: (910) 772-9062
Email: jrr@rhinelawfirm.com
mjr@rhinelawfirm.com
ras@rhinelawfirm.com
ehw@rhinelawfirm.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina Borrelli, Esq.
TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
613 Williamson Street, Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
Telephone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
Email: sam@turkestrauss.com
raina@turkestrauss.com
ATOM TICKETS: Laufer Sues Over Deceptive Ticket Service Fees
------------------------------------------------------------
BENJAMIN LAUFER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ATOM TICKETS, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-00682-SPG-JC (C.D. Cal., Jan. 25, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for its alleged violation of the New York
Arts and Cultural Affairs Law.
According to the complaint, whenever a movie-goer selects a ticket
on the website, atomtickets.com, he is quoted a fee-less price,
only to be ambushed by a $1.99 "Service Fee" per ticket at checkout
after clicking through the various screens required to make a
purchase. This cheap trick has enabled Defendant to swindle
substantial sums of money from its customers, including Plaintiff,
says the suit.
For these reasons, Plaintiff seeks relief in this action
individually, and on behalf of all other Defendant ticket
purchasers for film screenings in the state of New York for actual
and/or statutory damages, reasonable attorneys' costs and fees, and
injunctive relief under the state law.
Atom Tickets, LLC sells movie tickets throughout the United States,
including in the state of New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stefan Bogdanovich, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: sbogdanovich@bursor.com
BECTON, DICKINSON: Court OK's Settlement of Kabak Shareholder Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Becton, Dickinson and Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2023, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission, that in, that in October 2023, an agreement in
principle was reached to resolve a putative class action captioned
"Kabak v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, et al.," Civ. No.
2:20-cv-02155 (SRC) (CLW), now captioned Industriens
Pensionsforsikring v. Becton, Dickinson and Company, et al., filed
in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on
February 27, 2020 against the company and certain of its officers.
The terms of the settlement were preliminarily approved by the
court on January 18, 2024, and the matter has been scheduled for a
hearing as to final approval on April 22, 2024.
The complaint, which purports to be brought on behalf of all
persons (other than defendants) who purchased or otherwise acquired
the company's common stock from November 5, 2019 through February
5, 2020, asserts claims for purported violations of Sections 10 and
20 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and
Exchange Commission Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, and seeks,
among other things, damages and costs.
The complaint alleges that defendants concealed certain material
information regarding Alaris (TM) infusion pumps, allegedly
rendering certain public statements about the company's business,
operations and prospects false or misleading, thereby allegedly
causing investors to purchase stock at an inflated price. After an
initial without prejudice dismissal, the plaintiff filed amended
pleadings, which the company in turn moved to dismiss. Ultimately,
the court permitted certain aspects of the case to proceed. An
answer with affirmative defenses was thereafter filed on October 3,
2022. The court has also permitted claims to be asserted on behalf
of option holders. Discovery has commenced and plaintiff's motion
for class certification was filed on January 17, 2023.
Becton, Dickinson and Company, also known as BD, is a multinational
medical technology company that manufactures and sells medical
devices, instrument systems and reagents.
BFG SUPPLY: Smith Class Suit Seeks to Recover OT Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LEON T. SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. BFG SUPPLY CO LLC, an Indiana limited liability
company, Case No. 1:24-cv-00220 (N.D. Ohio, Feb. 6, 2024) seeks to
recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages,
attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
The lawsuit asserts that the Plaintiff and those similarly situated
have regularly worked in excess of 40 hours a week and have been
paid some overtime for those hours but at a rate that does not
include the Defendant's shift differentials as required by the
FLSA. For example, the Plaintiff's pay stub for the pay period
beginning February 28, 2022 through March 13, 2022 shows 96.9 hours
of work, a base hourly rate of $19.50, and gross earnings of
$2,092.79, inclusive of $256.18 in shift differential pay and other
renumeration. However, his overtime rate does not account for the
shift differential pay and other renumeration and, therefore,
violates the FLSA, the suit claims.
The Plaintiff is an adult resident of Grand Rapids, Michigan and
was employed by the Defendant from 2018 through the present as a
non-exempt, hourly employee.
BFG supplies nursery, garden, and greenhouse products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew L. Turner, Esq.
Jesse L. Young, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
One Towne Square, 17th Floor
Southfield, MI 48076
Telephone: (248) 355-0300
E-mail: mturner@sommerspc.com
jyoung@sommerspc.com
- and -
Jonathan Melmed, Esq.
Laura Supanich, Esq.
MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C.
1801 Century Park East, Suite 850
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 824-3828
E-mail: jm@melmedlaw.com
lms@melmedlaw.com
BURNETT MEDICAL: Faces Hicks Suit Over Unpaid Overtime
------------------------------------------------------
LINAE HICKS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. BURNETT MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Case No. 3:24-cv-00063
(W.D. Wis., Jan. 25, 2024) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages
and other damages under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
According to the complaint, Burnett Medical Center failed to pay
Hicks and other hourly workers like her overtime as required by
federal law. Instead, Burnett paid Hicks and workers like her at
their same hourly rates, even when they worked more than 40 hours
in a workweek.
Plaintiff Hicks was and is an hourly-paid employee of Burnett since
July 2016.
Burnett Medical Center, Inc. is a hospital and health center.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew S. Parmet, Esq.
PARMET PC
2 Greenway, Ste. 250
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 999-5228
E-mail: matt@parmet.law
CADY STUDIOS: Faces Traynham Suit Over Telephone Restrictions
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cady Studios, LLC.
The case is captioned as Traynham v. Cady Studios, LLC, Case No.
3:24-cv-00006-WWB-PDB (M.D. Fla., Jan. 3, 2024).
The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Wendy W. Berger.
Cady Studios is a photography company that provides school,
athletic, and candid photos.[BN]
Plaintiff Melissa Traynham, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, is represented by:
Manuel Santiago Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO PA
Suite 1400, 401 E Las Olas Boulevard
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
- and -
Michael Eisenband, Esq.
EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
Suite 120, 515 E Las Olas Blvd
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 533-4092
E-mail: meisenband@eisenbandlaw.com
Defendant Cady Studios, LLC is represented by:
Seldon Jeffrey Childers, Esq.
CHILDERSLAW, LLC
Suite B, 2135 NW 40th Terrace
Gainesville, FL 32605
Telephone: (352) 335-0400
Facsimile: (407) 209-3870
E-mail: jchilders@smartbizlaw.com
CANADIAN HOCKEY: Faces Class Suit Over Antitrust Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class-action suit was filed in federal court in New York arguing
that the major junior hockey system in North America violates U.S.
antitrust law.
The lawsuit, brought by divisions of the World Association of
Icehockey Players Unions and two individual former major junior
players, takes aim at the Quebec Maritimes Junior Hockey League,
Ontario Hockey League and Western Hockey that make up the Canadian
Hockey League, as well as the NHL. The plaintiffs allege the
leagues exploit teenagers in the sport by restricting their ability
to pick where to play and, as a result, limiting their
compensation.
The NHL is named as a defendant for its role in supporting and
financing the CHL. Lawyers allege in the complaint that the NHL and
its teams "exert substantial influence and control over major
junior defendants, thereby facilitating major junior defendants'
conspiracy."
The lawyers call the system "a cartel (that) artificially
suppresses and standardizes compensation by denying players their
freedom of choice, freedom of movement and freedom to play for the
club of their choice."
The CHL had no immediate comment on the complaint.
"We have just been made aware of the complaint, filed by WAIPU, an
organization that has not been certified to represent any CHL
players," the league said in a statement sent to The Associated
Press. "Until we can thoroughly review the document, we are unable
to provide comment as to the legitimacy of its contents."
Representatives for the CHL and NHL were not given advance notice
and did not receive the complaint until this morning after it was
filed in U.S. District Court in Manhattan.
Nine of the CHL's 60 teams are based in the U.S.: five in
Washington state, two in Michigan and one each in Oregon and
Pennsylvania. The rest are in Canada, but one expert in sports
labor law does not think that is a problem, given that many
antitrust situations extend beyond the U.S.
"They're doing business in the United States, and the end users of
the most successful products are going to be, presumably, NHL
hockey players both in the U.S. and Canada," said Michael LeRoy, a
University of Illinois labor law professor. "I don't think that's a
problem."
Each U.S. state and Canadian province is assigned to one of the
three leagues -- the QMJHL, OHL or WHL -- and players from them who
want to play in the CHL cannot choose among them. They are then
drafted, and the team owns each player's rights for his entire
junior-age career.
Junior hockey players have not had a union for collective
bargaining with leagues. This move is similar to efforts in recent
years by minor league baseball players to unionize, which led to a
deal with Major League Baseball in 2022.
LeRoy also compared the situation to yearslong fights against the
NCAA by college athletes for name, image and likeness rights and
changes to make transferring easier -- which junior hockey players
don't have.
"Ironically (the suit) points out that the NCAA has a much freer
system of athletic labor than is involved here," LeRoy said.
The lawsuit seeks an injunction declaring the geographical draft
restrictions, contracts and agreements in place unenforceable,
along with damages for players for compensation and from league
profits. Plaintiffs are asking for a jury trial.
The two individual former major junior players who are part of the
suit are Isaiah DiLaura and Tanner Gould. DiLaura, 23, is from
Lakeville, Minnesota, and Gould, 19, is from Calgary, Alberta.
"Teenage players continue to be treated like disposable objects,
just like I was," DiLaura said in a news release. "I am hoping this
lawsuit will put an end to that." [GN]
CARGUARD ADMINISTRATION: Bid to Strike Class Allegations Tossed
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Candy Workman, v. CarGuard
Administration Incorporated, Case No. 2:23-cv-00961-DLR (D. Ariz.),
the Hon. Judge Douglas L. Rayes entered an order denying:
-- The Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a
Claim,
-- Motion to Strike Class Allegations,
-- Motion to Strike Paragraph 20 of the Complaint, and
-- Motion to Stay Discovery.
The Plaintiff Workman filed her First Amended Complaint on Aug. 4,
2023, asserting one cause of action against Defendant on behalf of
herself and a proposed class, stemming from the Defendant's alleged
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protect Act ("TCPA").
As alleged in the Complaint, the Defendant is a company that sells
and administers extended car warranties.
On July 14, 2020, the Plaintiff received a telephone call and was
greeted by a prerecorded message concerning a car warranty
supposedly about to expire. The Plaintiff followed the pre-recorded
prompts and was connected to a person who identified themselves as
"Ina."
Ina subsequently transferred Plaintiff to another telemarketing
agent named "Castro." Castro used "high pressure" sales tactics to
solicit Plaintiff's purchase of an extended car warranty.
The Plaintiff defines the proposed class as follows:
Prerecorded No Consent Class: All persons in the United States
from four years prior to the filing of the instant action who
(1)
Defendant (or a third person acting on behalf of Defendant)
made prerecorded calls, (2) to the person’s cellular
telephone
or residential telephone number, and (3) for whom Defendant
claims it obtained prior express written consent in the same
manner as Defendant claims it supposedly obtained prior
express written consent to send prerecorded calls to the
Plaintiff.
CarGuard is an administrator of vehicle service contracts.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Xuwqrg at no extra
charge.[CC]
CAROTHERS HOLDING: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert. Response
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as HUBERT SIMPSON, et al. v.
CAROTHERS HOLDING COMPANY, LLC, et al., Case No.
3:23-cv-00217-KDB-SCR (W.D.N.C.), the Defendants ask the Court to
enter an order granting their unopposed motion for enlargement of
time extending the time to file their supplemental memoranda up and
through Feb. 19, 2024, and pushing the remaining deadlines under
this Court's Order an additional two-weeks.
On Dec. 13, 2023, the Court entered its Order Granting the
Plaintiffs' oral Motion for leave to file a Second Amended
Complaint.
Thereafter, the Plaintiffs are directed to file a single
supplemental memoranda in reply on their class certification motion
and in response to Defendants' renewed motions to dismiss by Feb.
19, 2024.
On or before Feb. 26, 2024, the Defendants are directed to each
file a reply brief on their motions to dismiss.
The Defendants have conferred with the Plaintiffs' counsel who has
indicated they have no objection to the Defendants' request for a
two-week extension.
Further, the parties have agreed that this extension would push all
other deadlines two weeks, rendering the Plaintiffs' brief due by
March 4, 2024, and the Defendants' reply due by March 11, 2024.
A copy of Defendants' motion dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=c2jJ4f at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Alexander Heydemann, Esq.
Nicholas P. Panayotopoulos, Esq.
WEINBERG, WHEELER, HUDGINS,
GUNN & DIAL, LLC
3344 Peachtree Rd., Suite 2400
Atlanta, GA 30326
Telephone: (404) 591-9662
Facsimile: (404) 875-9433
E-mail: aheydemann@wwhgd.com
npanayo@wwhgd.com
- and -
Anthony T. Lathrop, Esq.
William M. Butler, Esq.
MOORE & VAN ALLEN PLLC
100 North Tryon Street, Floor 47
Charlotte, NC 28202-4003
Telephone: (704) 331-2455
Facsimile: (704) 339-5964
E-mail: tonylathrop@mvalaw.com
billbutler@mvalaw.com
- and -
Chesley S. McLeod, Esq.
Henry M. Perlowski, Esq.
ARNALL GOLDEN GREGORY LLP
171 17th Street NW, Suite 2100
Atlanta, GA 30363-1031
Telephone: (404) 873-1031
Facsimile: (404) 873-8501
Chesley.mcleod@agg.com
Henry.perlowski@agg.com
CELSIUS HOLDINGS: Starks Balks at Energy Drinks' Efficacy Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
SHAIANNE STARKS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CELSIUS HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:24-cv-00185-GPC-BLM (S.D. Cal., Jan. 26, 2024) is a class action
brought to remedy Defendant's unfair and unlawful conduct in
violation of the California's Unfair Competition Law and the
Consumer Legal Remedies Act.
According to the complaint, Celsius markets, distributes, and sells
"energy drinks," including Celsius Live Fit, which are marketed
with claims that render them unapproved new drugs. Celsius
aggressively markets Live Fit with deceptive efficacy claims that
suggest the product has medical benefits akin to prescription
weight loss drugs. In truth, Live Fit fails to deliver the
advertised benefits. The Defendant's representations mislead
consumers into believing that Live Fit is safe, legal, and
effective for its intended purposes, says the suit.
Plaintiff Starks asserts that she purchased and used Live Fit with
the belief that the product was safe and effective and sold in
compliance with state and federal regulations.
Celsius Holdings, Inc. operates as a holding company. The Company,
through its subsidiaries, provides thermogenic calorie-burning
beverages.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory S. Weston, Esq.
THE WESTON FIRM
1405 Morena Blvd., Suite 201
San Diego, CA 92110
Telephone: (619) 798-2006
E-mail: greg@westonfirm.com
CIRCLE K: Class Cert. Order Vacated in Pettersen Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM D. PETTERSEN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
CIRCLE K STORES, INC., an Arizona Corporation, and DOES 1-10 Case
No. 3:21-cv-00237-RBM-BGS (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Ruth Bermudez
Montenegro entered an order granting joint motion under fed. r.
civ. p. 60(b)(6) to vacate order granting the Plaintiff's motion
for class certification.
Specifically, the settlement agreement resolves Lead Plaintiff
Pettersen's claims, without which the class lacks a representative.
As Plaintiff submitted in the parties' joint statement of facts,
Plaintiff has been unable to identify "any other carton customer
that was purportedly misled by Circle K's advertisements" and
"Circle K is not aware of any other customer that was purportedly
misled by Circle K's advertisements."
Circle K is a chain of convenience stores that is headquartered in
Tempe, Arizona.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SJeAbJ at no extra
charge.[CC]
CITIZENS DISABILITY: Faces Thompson Class Suit Over Robocalls
-------------------------------------------------------------
GWENDOLYN THOMPSON, individually and on behalf of classes of all
persons and entities similarly situated v. CITIZENS DISABILITY,
LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-10304-DJC (D. Mass., Feb. 6, 2024) alleges
that the Defendant made telemarketing calls that were both
pre-recorded and sent to numbers on the National Do Not Call
Registry, both of which violate the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act.
Plaintiff Thompson's residential telephone number (601) 383-XXXX
has been on the National Do Not Call Registry since April of 2021.
This number is assigned to a cellular service. It is used by Ms.
Thompson for her personal, family, and residential use only.
However, Ms. Thompson received at least two pre-recorded
telemarketing calls on this number, promoting Citizens Disability's
services, including an August 31, 2022, September 7 and 9, 2022
call. The calls were clearly pre-recorded because there was a pause
before the recording played, the robot had a generic and unnatural
monotone voice, and the identical message was played in both calls,
the lawsuit alleges.
The Plaintiff never provided her consent or requested these calls.
She and all members of the Classes have been harmed by the acts of
the Defendants because their privacy has been violated and they
were annoyed and harassed. In addition, the calls occupied their
telephone lines, rendering them unavailable for legitimate
communication, including while driving, working, and performing
other critical tasks. Because telemarketing calls can be made to
thousands or even millions of individuals, the Plaintiff brings
this action on behalf of proposed nationwide classes of other
persons who were sent similar calls.
The Plaintiff proposes the following Class definitions, subject to
amendment as appropriate:
Robocall Class: All persons in the United States who, (1)
within four years prior to the commencement of this
litigation until the class is certified (2) received
one or more calls on their cellular telephone or any
other protected telephone service (3) from or on
behalf of Citizens Disability, (4) sent using
the same, or substantially similar, pre-recorded
message used to contact the Plaintiff.
National Do Not Call Registry Class: All persons in the
United States whose, (1) telephone numbers were on
the National Do Not Call Registry for at least 30
days, (2) but received more than one telephone
solicitation call from or on behalf of Citizens
Disability (3) within a 12-month period, (4) from
four years prior the filing of the Complaint.
Excluded from the Classes are counsel, the Defendant, and any
entities in which the Defendant has a controlling interest, the
Defendant's agents and employees, any judge to whom this action is
assigned, and any member of such judge’s staff and immediate
family.
Citizens Disability markets and sells insurance claim advocacy
services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
PARONICH LAW, P.C.
350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (508) 221-1510
E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com
COLART INTERACTIVE: Fagnani Files Civil Rights Suit in S.D.N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Colart Interactive,
Inc. The case is captioned as MYKAYLA FAGNANI, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. COLART INTERACTIVE,
INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-01035-AT (S.D.N.Y., February 12, 2024).
The suit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Colart Interactive, Inc. is a publishing and advertising company
based in New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr 10003
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: nyjg@aol.com
michael@gottlieb.legal
CONOCOPHILLIPS CO: Quigley Suit Moved From W.D. Okla. to S.D. Tex.
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JOHN E. QUIGLEY, et al., individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. CONOCOPHILLIPS COMPANY, et al.,
Case No. 5:23-cv-00062, was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Oklahoma to the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Texas on February 12, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Texas assigned Case
No. 4:24-cv-00508 to the proceeding.
The suit is brought over alleged violation of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act.
ConocoPhillips Company is an exploration and production company,
headquartered in Houston, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Douglas P. Needham, Esq.
IZARD, KINDALL & RAABE, LLP
29 South Main, Ste. 305
West Hartford, CT 06107
Telephone: (860) 493-6292
E-mail: dneedham@ikrlaw.com
- and -
Gregory Y. Porter, Esq.
BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
1055 Thomas Jefferson Street NW, Suite 540
Washington, DC 20007
Telephone: (202) 463-2101
Facsimile: (202) 463-2103
- and -
James L. Colvin, III, Esq.
LATHAM, STEELE, LEHMAN, KEELE, RATCLIFF, FREIJE & CARTER
1515 E. 71st Street, Ste. 200
Tulsa, OK 74136
Telephone: (918) 970-2000
Facsimile: (918) 970-2002
CUS MF POWERHOUSE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Wismeg Says
---------------------------------------------------------
TAYLOR WISMEG, CABRIAN TAGGART, and RICHARD MEDAL, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CUS MF
POWERHOUSE LLC d/b/a COYOTE UGLY SALOON, LILLIANA LOVELL, ANNA
GOTT, PAULA DINORIS, ELIZABETH JONES, and TOMMY BUCHHEIT,
Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00600 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 26, 2024) is an
action seeking equitable and legal relief for Defendants'
violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor
Law.
The Plaintiffs allege the Defendants' failure to pay minimum wages,
misappropriation of tips, unlawful deductions from wages, failure
to timely pay wages, failure to pay spread of hours wages, and
failure to provide payroll notices.
Plaintiffs Wismeg and Taggart have worked as bartenders and shift
leads for Defendants from in or around July 2021 and from June 2021
until June 2023, respectively.
Plaintiff Medal worked for Defendants as a line cook from June 2021
until February 2023.
CUS MF Powerhouse LLC, dba COYOTE UGLY SALOON, is an American
drinking establishment.[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
DELTA AIR LINES: Continues to Defend Antitrust Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
Delta Air Lines Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K Report for the
annual period ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on February 12, 2024, that the Company
continues to defend a consolidated antitrust multidistrict class
suit.
In July 2015, a number of purported class action antitrust lawsuits
were filed alleging that Delta, American, United and Southwest had
conspired to restrain capacity.
The lawsuits were filed in the wake of media reports that the U.S.
Department of Justice had served civil investigative demands upon
these carriers seeking documents and information relating to this
subject.
The lawsuits have been consolidated into a single Multi-District
Litigation proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the District
of Columbia.
In August 2023, the Court denied the defendants' motions for
summary judgment that had been pending for over two years.
In Fall 2023, the Company moved to certify the decision for an
interlocutory appeal or for reconsideration, and briefing related
to that motion is now complete.
It believes the claims in these cases are without merit and are
vigorously defending these lawsuits.
Delta Air Lines -- https://www.delta.com/ -- is one of the major
airlines of the United States and a legacy carrier headquartered
in
Atlanta, Georgia.[BN]
DENTELLE LLC: Villagra Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
---------------------------------------------------------
RICARDO VILLAGRA, EMMANUEL GALLARDO, RICARDO TOCAY, and NELSON
ARIEL JIMENEZ, on behalf of themselves and others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. DENTELLE, LLC dba GYPSEA ROSE BISTRO, and
ETIENNE DEYANS YANSOMWE, individually, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-00571 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 26, 2024) seeks to recover from the
Defendants unpaid wages, minimum wages, and overtime compensation;
unpaid spread of hours premiums; liquidated damages and statutory
penalties, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York
Labor Law and the New York Wage Theft Prevention Act.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants to work as servers,
cashiers, bartenders, and cooks at the Defendants' restaurant and
bar in New York County.
Dentelle, LLC owns Gypsea Rose Bistro, a restaurant and bar located
in New York.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Justin Cilenti, Esq.
Peter Hans Cooper, Esq.
CILENTI & COOPER, PLLC
60 East, 42nd Street, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 209-3933
Facsimile: (212) 209-7102
E-mail: pcooper@jcpclaw.com
DWK VENTURES: Owen Seeks Unpaid Wages of Pest Control Technicians
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN OWEN, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. DWK VENTURES II, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability
Company, f/k/a NativeGreen Pest Control & Fertilization, LLC, and
YARD-NIQUE, INC. a Foreign Profit Corporation, d/b/a Nativegreen
Pest Control & Fertilization, Defendants, Case No.
2:24-cv-14020-KMM (S.D. Fla., Jan. 25, 2024) is a collective action
brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act to recover unpaid
overtime compensation and unpaid straight-time wages owed to
Plaintiff and all others similarly situated to him who were
formerly or are currently employed by the Defendants.
The Plaintiff was employed as an hourly wage pest control
technician for Defendants in St. Lucie County, Florida from 2021
until his separation from employment on or about December 21,
2023.
DWK Ventures II, LLC is a Florida Limited Liability Company doing
business throughout South Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert S. Norell, Esq.
ROBERT S. NORELL, P.A.
300 N.W. 70th Avenue Suite 305
Plantation, FL 33317
Telephone: (954) 617-6017
Facsimile: (954) 617-6018
E-mail: rob@floridawagelaw.com
ENTREPRENEUR MEDIA: Discloses Users' Info to FB, Sancruzado Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Sancruzado, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. ENTREPRENEUR MEDIA, LLC, Case No.
8:24-cv-00254-CAS-ADS (C.D. Cal., Feb. 6, 2024) sues the Defendant
for knowingly disclosing to third parties, including, Meta
Platforms, Inc. ("Facebook"), data containing the Plaintiff's and
other digital-subscribers' personally identifiable information and
the computer file containing video viewing history, in violation of
the federal Video Privacy Protection Act.
According to the complaint, pixels are computer code the Defendant
allegedly installed on Entrepreneur.com that allow it to collect
users' data. Through the use of these analytics tools, the
Defendant tracks and discloses to third party business partners,
the digital subscribers' viewed Video Media, and most notably,
unique identifying information along with requested or obtained
video content. This occurs even when the digital subscriber has not
shared (nor consented to share) such information, the Plaintiff
contends.
Importantly, the Defendant shares the Personal Viewing Information
-- i.e., digital subscribers' unique ID and video content viewed
together as one data point. Any ordinary person can use it to
quickly and easily locate, access, and view digital subscribers'
corresponding account(s) and/or profile(s). Because
Entrepreneur.com digital subscribers are not informed about this
dissemination of their Personal Viewing Information -- indeed, it
is automatic and invisible -- they cannot exercise reasonable
judgment to defend themselves against the highly personal ways the
Defendant has used and continues to use data it has about them to
make money for itself. The Defendant chose to disregard the
Plaintiff and millions of other Entrepreneur.com digital
subscribers' statutorily protected privacy rights by releasing
their sensitive data to third parties, the suit adds.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff brings this class action for legal and
equitable remedies to redress and put a stop to the Defendant's
practices of intentionally disclosing its digital subscribers’
Personal Viewing Information to Facebook, or any other third
parties in knowing violation of VPPA.
Plaintiff Sancruzado began a digital subscription to
Entrepreneur.com in 2023 and has since ended his subscription. He
has had a Facebook account from 2023 to the present.
Entrepreneur Media operates as a publishing company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John R. Parker, Jr., Esq.
David S. Almeida, Esq.
Britany A. Kabakov, Esq.
Matthew J. Langley, Esq.
ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC
3550 Watt Avenue, Suite 140
Sacramento, CA 95821
Telephone: (916) 616-2936
E-mail: jrparker@almeidalawgroup.com
david@almeidalawgroup.com
britany@almeidalawgroup.com
matt@almeidalawgroup.com
EOS IT MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Graef Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHELE GRAEF, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EOS IT MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, INC.; EOS IT
SOLUTIONS; and DOES 1 through 50 inclusive, Defendants, Case no.
24CV062923 (Cal. Super., Alameda Cty., Feb. 6, 2024) is an action
against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime
compensation, provide meals and rest periods, and provide accurate
wage statements.
Plaintiff Graef was employed by the Defendants as a staff.
EOS IT MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS, INC. provides collaboration and
business IT support services to some industry leaders, delivering
forward-thinking solutions based on multi-domain architecture.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Emil Davtyan, Esq.
David Yeremian, Esq.
Roman Shkodnik, Esq.
Emma Geesaman, Esq.
D. LAW, INC.
880 E Broadway
Glendale, CA 91205
Telephone: (818) 962-6465
Facsimile: (818) 962-6469
Email: emil@d.law
d.yremian@d.law
r.shkodnik@d.law
e.geesaman@d.law
ERNST & YOUNG: Court OK's Bid to Compel Arbitration in FDIC Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE
CORP., v. ERNST & YOUNG LLP ET AL., Case No. 2:20-cv-01259-EEF-JVM
(E.D. La.), the Court entered an order that EY's Motion to Compel
Arbitration be granted, and this matter be referred to
arbitration.
The Court further ordered that Gloucester's Motion to Stay be
granted and that this matter be stayed and administratively closed
pending the outcome of that arbitration.
The case arises out of financial statement audits of First NBC Bank
and First NBC by Ernst & Young LLP in 2014 and 2015.
The Plaintiff filed the instant suit to recover damages from the
Defendants, alleging that the audits of First NBC were negligently
performed.
Specifically, FDIC-R alleges that EY failed to design audit
procedures to discover material fraud, and accordingly, failed to
discover fraud perpetrated by First NBC's President and Chief
Executive Officer, Ashton Ryan.
EY provides consulting, assurance, tax and transaction services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=iby6Iu at no extra
charge.[CC]
ESA MANAGEMENT: Class Certification Bid Deadline Revised to Sept. 6
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LATREASS BRITTIAN, v. ESA
MANAGEMENT, LLC, et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-00663-MOC-DCK (W.D.N.C.),
the Hon. Judge David C. Keesler entered an order granting the
"Joint Submission Of Proposed Revisions To Case Deadlines."
The scheduling order deadlines are revised as follows:
-- The Plaintiff' class certification June 24, 2024
expert report:
-- Defendants' class certification expert Aug. 2, 2024
Report:
-- Class certification motion: Sept. 6, 2024
-- Opposition to class certification Oct. 14, 2024
Motion:
-- Plaintiff's additional expert report: Dec. 5, 2024
-- Defendants' additional expert report Jan. 21, 2025
Discovery:
Completion: March 24, 2025
Mediation: April 4, 2025
Dispositive motions due: April 25, 2025
-- Trial: Aug. 18, 2025.
ESA is headquartered in the United States. The Company's line of
business includes the operation of nonclassifiable establishments.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 24, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JmzoUQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
ESSILORLUXOTTICA SA: Faces Ringgold Over Branded Eyewear Conspiracy
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Pamela Ringgold, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. EssilorLuxottica S.A., Luxottica Group, S.p.A., Essilor
International SAS, EssilorLuxottica USA Inc., Luxottica U.S.
Holdings Corp., Essilor of America Holding Company, Inc., Luxottica
of America, Inc., Essilor of America Inc., EyeMed Vision Care, LLC,
Essilor Laboratories of America, Inc., and Vision Source, LP, Case
No. 0:24-cv-00349 (D. Minn., Feb. 6, 2024) alleges that the
Defendants conspired with Fashion Houses, other Competing Eyewear
Entities, and Third-Party Sellers to artificially fix, depress,
suppress, or stabilize the price of Branded Eyewear in violation of
Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants formed a scheme to
create an illegal monopoly and to dominate the Eyewear market in
the United States. Moreover, the Defendants have entered into
unlawful agreements to fix the price of Eyewear at
supra-competitive rates. As a result of the Scheme and Defendants'
unlawful agreements, patients and individuals in the United States
have been overcharged by the Defendants and the Defendants have
obtained hundreds of millions of dollars in supra-competitive,
illegal profits. The suit claims that EssilorLuxottica has monopoly
power in the market for Eyewear and it controls most Corrective
Lens processing and Corrective Lens fabricating equipment.
This is an action brought under Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman
Act, 15 U.S.C. sections 1 & 2, and Section 16 of the Clayton Act,
15 U.S.C. section 26 for injunctive relief and under certain state
antitrust and consumer protection statutes based on
EssilorLuxottica's anticompetitive conduct to remedy the harm this
conduct has inflicted on hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of
consumers.
Plaintiff Pamela Ringgold purchased Ray-Ban frames and Essilor
branded lenses from Davis Visionworks located in Garden City, New
York in October 2021.
EssilorLuxottica is a vertically integrated, multinational,
corporate conglomerate that designs, manufactures, distributes, and
sells Eyewear, which is defined as eyeglasses, sunglasses, and
corrective lenses.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel R. Olson, Esq.
Jeffrey D. Klobucar, Esq.
Casey D. Marshall, Esq.
Aram V. Desteian, Esq.
BASSFORD REMELE
100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1500
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 333-3000
Facsimile: (612) 333-8829
E-mail: dolson@bassford.com
jklobucar@bassford.com
cmarshall@bassford.com
adesteian@bassford.com
- and -
Richard M. Paul, III, Esq.
Laura C. Fellows, Esq.
PAUL LLP
601 Walnut Street, Suite 300
Kansas City, MO 64106
Telephone: (816) 984-8100
E-mail: Rick@PaulLLP.com
Laura@PaulLLP.com
EXETER FINANCE: Fails to Pay Proper wages, Clark Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------
AUDREY CLARK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EXETER FINANCE LLC, Defendant, Case No.
3:24-cv-00302-B (N.D. Tex., Feb. 6, 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 Clark was employed by the Defendant as a customer service
representative.
EXETER FINANCE LLC is an auto finance company. The Company offers
loan packages to car owners, dealers, and investors. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ricardo J. Prieto, Esq.
Melinda Arbuckle, Esq.
WAGE AND HOUR FIRM
5050 Quorum Drive, Suite 700
Dallas, TX 75254
Telephone: (214) 489-7653
Facsimile: (469) 319-0317
Email: rprieto@wageandhourfirm.com
marbuckle@wageandhourfirm.com
FIELDSTONE VENTURES: Class Cert. Bid in Ross Due March 31
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD A. ROSS and
FIELDSTONE VENTURES, LLC, on their own behalf and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. EQT CORPORATION, EQT PRODUCTION
COMPANY, RICE DRILLING B, LLC, VANTAGE ENERGY APPALACHIA LLC, and
VANTAGE ENERGY APPALACHIA II LLC, Case No. 2:21-cv-01585-WSS (W.D.
Pa.), the Hon. Judge entered a stipulated scheduling order as
follows:
-- Class certification and the current March 31,
2024
phase of merits discovery shall close
on:
-- Expert reports as to class certification April 29,
2024
and merits are to be served by:
-- Rebuttal expert reports as to class June 28,
2024
Certification with brief in support due:
-- Brief in opposition is due by: July 29,
2024
-- Any reply brief is due by: Aug. 23,
2024
EQT is an integrated energy company with emphasis on Appalachian
area natural gas production, gathering, and transmission.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nkO4ga at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Scott M. Hare, Esq.
Anthony T. Gestrich, Esq.
WHITEFORD TAYLOR & PRESTON, LLP
11 Stanwix Street, Suite 1400
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
- and –
Alex J. Dravillas, Esq.
KELLER POSTMAN LLC
150 N. Riverside Plaza, Suite 4270
Chicago, IL 60606
The Defendants are represented by:
James L. Rockney, Esq.
Justin H. Werner, Esq.
REED SMITH LLP
225 Fifth Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
FINANCIAL RISK: Faces Bednyak $5M Class Action Suit in E.D. La.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Financial Risk
Mitigation, Inc. The case is captioned as Bednyak v. Financial Risk
Mitigation, Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-00025-JCZ-MBN (E.D. La., Jan. 3,
2024).
The nature of suit states Diversity-Personal Injury demanding $5M
in damages.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Jay C. Zainey.
Financial Risk offers accounting, commercial real estate,
asset-based lending, litigation and internal investigations.[BN]
Plaintiff Daniel Bednyak on behalf of himself individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by:
Andrew Allen Lemmon, Esq.
LEMMON LAW FIRM, LLC
5301 Canal Boulevard, Suite A
New Orleans, LA 70124
Telephone: (985) 783-6789
E-mail: andrew@lemmonlawfirm.com
FORD MOTOR: Class Cert Bid Filing in Dolan Suit Due July 31
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as James Dolan, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Ford Motor
Company, Case No. 3:23-cv-00512-REP (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge
Robert E. Payne entered an order a scheduling order as follows:
1. The Parties shall complete their documents March 30,
2024
Productions by:
2. The Parties shall file their respective April 30,
2024
expert disclosures under
Fed.R.Civ.P.26(a)(2) and opening reports by:
3. The Parties shall file his motion for July 31,
2024
Class certification by:
4. The Parties shall file any motions to July 31,
2024
exclude experts testimony under Federal
Rule of Evidence 702 by:
5. Ford shall file its opposition to the Aug. 23,
2024
Plaintiff's motion for class
Certification by:
Ford Motor is an American multinational automobile manufacturer.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 24, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=d8NkyW at no extra
charge.[CC]
GAN LIMITED: Faces Zappia Class Securities Suit in S.D.N.Y.
-----------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH ZAPPIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GAN LIMITED, SEAMUS MCGILL, MICHAEL SMURFIT,
DAVID GOLDBERG, SUSAN BRACEY, and ERIC GREEN, Case No.
1:24-cv-00032-JPC (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 3, 2024) is a class action suit
brought by the Plaintiff individually and on behalf of the Class
against GAN and the members of the Company's Board for violations
of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Plaintiff's claims arise in connection with the solicitation of
GAN's public stockholders to vote in favor of a merger transaction
pursuant to which GAN will merge into an affiliate of SEGA SAMMY
CREATION INC. in exchange for a payment of $1.97 per share in cash.
SSC is a subsidiary of SEGA SAMMY HOLDINGS INC., which is the
holding company of the SEGA SAMMY Group.
On Nov. 7, 2023, GAN issued a press release announcing that, based
upon the recommendation of a special committee purportedly
comprised "solely of independent directors," the Board had approved
the sale of the Company to SEGA for $1.97 per share in cash,
pursuant to a merger agreement.
On Jan. 9, 2024, the Defendants authorized the filing of a false
and misleading definitive proxy on Schedule 14A with the SEC with
the aim of soliciting GAN stockholders to vote for the Merger. As
the Proxy states, "the GAN board of directors is soliciting your
proxy." The Proxy, however, contains material misrepresentations
and omissions, and therefore violates Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of
the Exchange Act and Rule 14a-9. The material misrepresentations
and omissions in the Proxy must be cured in advance of the
Stockholder Vote to enable GAN stockholders to cast informed votes
with respect to the Merger. Therefore, Plaintiff seeks to enjoin
the Defendants from taking any further steps to consummate the
Merger and schedule the Stockholder Vote, until such violations are
cured. Alternatively, if the Merger is consummated, Plaintiff
reserves the right to recover damages suffered by Plaintiff and
other GAN stockholders as a result of such violations, and/or seek
other appropriate relief, the suit says.
The Plaintiff is and has been a stockholder of GAN common stock at
all relevant times.
GAN is a Bermuda corporation with its principal executive offices
located at 400 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1900, Irvine, CA 92618.
GAN is a supplier of business-to-business software solutions for
online casino gaming and online sports betting applications, and
developer and operator of a business-to-consumer online sports
betting and casino platform, which offers consumers in select
markets in Northern Europe, Latin America and Canada a digital
portal for engaging in sports betting, online casino games and
poker. The Individual Defendants are officers and directors of the
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua E. Fruchter, Esq.
WOHL & FRUCHTER LLP
25 Robert Pitt Drive, Suite 209G
Monsey, NY 10952
Telephone: (845) 290-6588
Facsimile: (718) 504-3773
E-mail: jfruchter@wohlfruchter.com
GENERAL SERVICES: Faces Jeffers Class Suit Over COVID-19 Mandate
----------------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN P. JEFFERS, on behalf of himself and a class of similarly
situated individuals v. ROBIN CARNAHAN, ADMINISTRATOR, GENERAL
SERVICES ADMINISTRATION (In both her individual and official
capacity), KATY KALE, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, GENERAL SERVICES
ADMINISTRATION, (In her individual capacity only), Case No.
1:24-cv-00023-APM (D.D.C., Jan. 3, 2024) alleges that GSA forced
the Plaintiffs to defend their beliefs in the face of a vaccine
mandate that created a culture of contempt for employees who were
simply trying to live according to their faith.
The suit says that GSA required that all employees be vaccinated by
November 22, 2021. GSA also required employees to provide proof of
vaccination status, including "the type of vaccine administered,
the number of doses received, the date of administration of each,
and the submission of acceptable documentation." In implementing
the vaccine mandate, GSA created a new and more onerous process for
requesting a religious accommodation than had previously been used
for religious accommodation requests. Mr. Jeffers filed a Request
for Religious Accommodation on September 21, 2022 to be exempt from
the vaccine, and re-submitted upon GSA request on October 14, 2022.
All GSA employees who filed religious exemptions to the vaccine
lived in constant fear of being disciplined or terminated for
failure to take the vaccine, especially since GSA admitted the
"accommodation" was short-term only and they reserved the right to
revoke their "approval" at any time, the suit alleges.
GSA placed some putative class members on AWOL status and placed
letters of reprimand in some Plaintiff's files. By forcing the
vaccine and the involuntary restrictions, such as testing and
social isolation on the Plaintiffs, the Defendants violated the
Plaintiffs' right to religious freedom and failed entirely in their
duty to defend the Plaintiffs' sincerely held religious beliefs and
protect them from discrimination, the Plaintiff adds.
As a result of the Defendants wrongful conduct, the Plaintiffs have
been and continue to be injured, suffering distress, humiliation,
loss of prestige, mental anguish, emotional pain and suffering, and
monetary and economic losses. The Plaintiffs and class members are
entitled to compensation for losses in earnings, promotional
opportunities and employment benefits, injury to reputation and
emotional distress – in amounts to be determined at trial.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Plaintiff was a Supervisory
Contract Specialist for GSA Public Building Services Region 9 and
had worked for the Agency for over four years. He is a Christian
whose religious beliefs conflict with the COVID-19 vaccine and
testing mandates.
General Services is an independent agency of the United States
government established in 1949 to help manage and support the basic
functioning of federal agencies.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
E. Scott Lloyd, Esq.
LLOYD, LEMMON, & HALE, PLLC
15 Chester Street
Front Royal, VA 22630
Telephone: (540) 823-1110
E-mail: scott@lloydlemmonhale.com
GOLDEN STATE: Sheffield Suit Removed from Sup. Ct. to C.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Golden State Supply,
LLC et al. The class action lawsuit captioned as Donovin Sheffield
v. Golden State Supply, LLC et al., Case No. 23STCV27330 was
removed from the Los Angeles County Superior Court to the United
States District Court for the Central District of California on
Jan. 3, 2024.
The Central California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:24-cv-00049-MCS-AS to the proceeding.
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged employment
discriminatory conduct.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Mark C. Scarsi.
Golden State is a company that operates in the Automotive
industry.[BN]
Plaintiff Donovin Sheffield, an individual, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, is represented by:
Michael Elkin, Esq.
Benjamin Alan McLain, Esq.
ELKIN GAMBOA LLP
4119 West Burbank Boulevard Suite 110
Burbank, CA 91505
Telephone: (323) 372-1202
Facsimile: (323) 372-1216
E-mail: michael@elkingamboa.com
ben@elkingamboa.com
Defendants Golden State Supply, LLC, et al., are represented by:
Adam Yuda Siegel, Esq.
Robert Yang, Esq.
JACKSON LEWIS PC
725 South Figueroa Street Suite 2500
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 689-0404
Facsimile: (213) 689-0430
E-mail: adam.siegel@jacksonlewis.com
Rob.Yang@jacksonlewis.com
GRAFTECH INTERNATIONAL: Porter Sues Over Share Price Drop
---------------------------------------------------------
JOHN C. PORTER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GRAFTECH INTERNATIONAL LTD., DAVID RINTOUL,
QUINN COBURN, MARCEL KESSLER, TIMOTHY K. FLANAGAN, JEREMY S.
HALFORD, BCP IV GRAFTECH HOLDINGS LP, BROOKFIELD CAPITAL PARTNERS
LTD., and BROOKFIELD ASSET MANAGEMENT LTD., Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-00154 (N.D. Ohio, Jan. 25, 2024) is a securities class
action on behalf of the Plaintiff and all purchasers of GrafTech
common stock between February 8, 2019 and August 3, 2023,
inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against
GrafTech and certain of the Company's senior executives, directors,
and controlling shareholder.
During the Class Period, the Defendants made false and misleading
statements and engaged in a scheme to deceive the market and a
course of conduct that artificially inflated the price of GrafTech
common stock and operated as a fraud or deceit on Class Period
purchasers of GrafTech common stock by misrepresenting the value of
the Company's business and prospects in the Company's operations.
As Defendants' misrepresentations and fraudulent conduct became
apparent to the market, the price of the Company's stock fell
precipitously on numerous occasions as the prior artificial
inflation came out of the stock's price. As a result of their
purchases of GrafTech common stock during the Class Period,
Plaintiff and other members of the Class suffered economic loss,
i.e., damages, under the federal securities laws, says the suit.
GrafTech International Ltd. is a manufacturer of graphite
electrodes and petroleum coke, which are essential for the
production of electric arc furnace steel and other metals.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
George W. Cochran, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF GEORGE W. COCHRAN
1981 Crossfield Circle
Kent, OH 44240
Telephone: (330) 607-2187
Facsimile: (330) 230-6136
E-mail: lawchrist@gmail.com
- and -
Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
58 South Service Road, Suite 200
Melville, NY 11747
Telephone: (631) 367-7100
Facsimile: (631) 367-1173
E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
Brian E. Cochran, Esq.
Francisco J. Mejia, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101-8498
Telephone: (619) 231-1058
Facsimile: (619) 231-7423
E-mail: bcochran@rgrdlaw.com
fmejia@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
Michael I. Fistel, Jr., Esq.
JOHNSON FISTEL, LLP
40 Powder Springs Street
Marietta, GA 30064
Telephone: (470) 632-6000
Facsimile: (770) 200-3101
E-mail: michaelf@johnsonfistel.com
HAIN CELESTIAL: Parties Must Submit Supplemental Letter Briefs
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRACY HOWARD, et al., v.
HAIN CELESTIAL GROUP, INC., Case No. 3:22-cv-00527-VC (N.D. Cal.),
the Hon. Judge Vince Chhabria entered an order requesting
supplemental briefing.
The parties are ordered to submit supplemental letter briefs on the
following questions:
-- It's obvious that that the proposed class for the fraud-based
claims is overbroad because it includes parents who purchased
the products for children who were not under two.
-- The Court is tentatively of the view that the same is true of
the proposed class for the UCL unlawful claim.
According to the plaintiffs' theory, the nutrient content claims
are "unlawful" because they are misbranded. But misbranding is not
injurious simply because it violates the law; it is injurious
because it risks misleading people. In this case, the only people
who risk being misled by the misbranding are parents purchasing the
products for children under two. And presumably a high percentage
of the proposed class members do not fall in that category.
The parties should discuss this issue and cite to any case law
(whether or not it supports them) on whether it would be
appropriate to certify a class that includes a substantial
percentage of people who were not at risk of being misled by the
alleged misbranding.
Hain Celestial is an international food and personal-care company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zA7zNX at no extra
charge.[CC]
HARTFORD FINANCIAL: Seeks to Seal Portions of Class Cert Opposition
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as REJOICE! COFFEE COMPANY,
LLC, a California limited liability company, on behalf of itself
and all others similarly situated, v. THE HARTFORD FINANCIAL
SERVICES GROUP, INC., a Delaware corporation; SENTINEL INSURANCE
COMPANY, LIMITED, a Connecticut corporation, Case No.
3:20-cv-06789-EMC (N.D. Cal.), the Defendants ask the Court to
enter an order allowing sealing the portions of Defendants' Class
Certification Opposition; Defendants' Daubert Motion; and Exhibits
6–8, 21, and 25 to the Declaration of Ryan M. Chabot in Support
of Defendants' Class Certification Opposition and Daubert Motion.
Hartford is a United States-based investment and insurance
company.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZbWIDD at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Alan E. Schoenfeld, Esq.
Ryan M. Chabot, Esq.
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
7 World Trade Center
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 230-8800
Facsimile: (212) 230-8888
E-mail: alan.schoenfeld@wilmerhale.com
ryan.chabot@wilmerhale.com
- and -
Anthony J. Anscombe, Esq.
STEPTOE & JOHNSON
One Market Plaza
Spear Tower, Suite 3900
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 365-6700
Facsimile: (415) 365-6699
E-mail: aanscombe@steptoe.com
HEALTHEC LLC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Hawk Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------
KENDALL HAWK; LISA BRYSON; TRINITY WHALEY; KATELYN CROWE; and ABBEY
ROBINSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HEALTHEC, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-00697-JKS-ESK (D.N.J., Feb. 6, 2024) arising from its
failure to safeguard certain Personally Identifying Information and
Protected Health Information of millions of its patients.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs and members of the Class
have been significantly injured by the Data Breach and have
incurred out-of-pocket expenses associated with the reasonable
mitigation measures they were forced to employ. The Plaintiffs and
the Class also now forever face an amplified risk of fraud and
identity theft due to their sensitive PII falling into the hands of
cybercriminals.
Despite the abundance and availability of information regarding
cybersecurity best practices for the healthcare industry, HealthEC
failed to adopt sufficient data security processes, a fact
highlighted by the fact that it did not detect the Data Breach for
over three months after it happened, says the suit.
HEALTHEC, LLC operates as a population health management company.
The Company offers as platform that integrates data from EHRs,
laboratory systems, payers claim submissions, data warehouses, and
other sources to improve patient outcomes, manages costs, and
optimizes patient's life. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick Howard, Esq.
SALTZ MONGELUZZI & BENDESKY, P.C.
8000 Sagemore Drive, Suite 8303
Marlton, NJ 08053
Telephone: (856) 751-0868
Email: phoward@smbb.com
- and -
Joe P. Leniski, Jr., Esq.
HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL,
LENISKI & WALL, PLLC
223 Rosa L. ParksAvenue, Suite 300
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 800-6225
Email: joey@hsglawgroup.com
- and -
Peter J. Jannace, Esq.
HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL,
LENISKI & WALL, PLLC
515 ParkAvenue
Louisville, KY 40208
Telephone: (502) 636-4333
Email: peter@hsglawgroup.com
HF MANAGEMENT: Collins Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Class
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEITH COLLINS and TIFFANY
MASON, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, v.
HF MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC d/b/a HEALTHFIRST, a limited liability
company, Case No. 1:24-cv-00465-MKV (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask
the Court to enter an order under Section 16(b) of the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA"):
(1) Conditionally certifying the proposed FLSA Collective;
(2) Requiring the Defendant to identify all putative collective
members by providing a list of their names; last known
addresses, dates, and location of employment; phone numbers;
and email addresses in electronic and importable format
within
10 days of the entry of the order;
(3) Authorizing the Plaintiffs' proposed form of notice and
implementing a procedure whereby the notice of Plaintiffs'
FLSA
claims is sent (via U.S. Mail, email, and text message) to:
"All current and former customer service representatives who
worked for Defendant at any time in the past three years
(the
"FLSA Collective").
(4) Appointing the undersigned counsel as counsel for the FLSA
Collective; and
(5) Giving members of the FLSA Collective 60 days to join this
case, measured from the date the Court-authorized notice is
sent, with one reminder email and text message sent 30 days
thereafter to anyone who did not respond.
HF Management operates as an investment management firm.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 24, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PluCXG at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jason T. Brown, Esq.
BROWN, LLC
111 Town Square Place, Suite 400
Jersey City, NJ 07310
Telephone: (877) 561-0000
Facsimile: (855) 582-5297
E-mail: jtb@jtblawgroup.com
- and -
Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
Alana A. Karbal, Esq.
SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
One Towne Square, 17th Floor
Southfield, MI 48076
Telephone: (248) 355-0300
E-mail: kstoops@sommerspc.com
akarbal@sommerspc.com
HI-SCHOOL PHARMACY: Landin Files Personal Injury Suit in W.D. Wash.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hi-School Pharmacy
Services LLC, et al. The case is captioned as SHAYNA MARIE LANDIN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
HI-SCHOOL PHARMACY SERVICES LLC, et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-05115-DWC
(W.D. Wash., February 12, 2024).
The nature of the suit is stated as 360 Torts - Personal Injury -
Other Personal Injury.
Hi-School Pharmacy Services LLC is a drug store chain headquartered
in Vancouver, Washington. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kaleigh Boyd, Esq.
Jason T. Dennett, Esq.
TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
1200 Fifth Ave., Ste. 1700
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 682-5600
Facsimile: (206) 682-2992
E-mail: kboyd@tousley.com
jdennett@tousley.com
HOMEADVISOR INC: Airquip Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Nationwide Class
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Airquip, Inc. v.
HomeAdvisor, Inc et al., (HOMEADVISOR, INC. LITIGATION), Case No.
1:16-cv-01849-PAB-KAS (D. Colo.), the Plaintiffs request that the
Court consider their arguments, conduct the Rule 23(b)(3) analyses
requested, and enter an order:
(1) certifying a Rule 23(b)(3) Nationwide Class applying
Colorado
law; OR, in the alternative, and
(2) certifying, pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3), Deceptive Practices
Classes under the laws of Colorado, California, Florida,
Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, New Jersey, New York, and/or
Ohio.
The legal similarities among Colorado and the nine states common
law and statutory claims are confirmed by Defendants' Appendix 1.
Accordingly, certification of a Colorado Deceptive Practices Class,
as well as the other state Deceptive Practices Classes, comports
with and satisfies Rule 23(b)(3) Pursuant to the Court's "plenary
power to revisit and amend interlocutory orders as justice
requires."
HomeAdvisor is a digital marketplace that connects homeowners with
local service professionals to carry out home improvement,
maintenance, and remodeling projects.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 24, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Qk7JQ5 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Nicholas E. Chimicles, Esq.
Kimberly M. Donaldson-Smith, Esq.
Beena M. McDonald, Esq.
Alex M. Kashurba, Esq.
Scott M. Tucker, Esq.
CHIMICLES SCHWARTZ KRINER &
DONALDSON-SMITH LLP
361 West Lancaster Avenue
Haverford, PA 19041
Telephone: (610) 642-8500
Facsimile: (610) 649-3633
E-mail: nec@chimicles.com
kds@chimicles.com
bmm@chimicles.com
amk@chimicles.com
Scotttucker@chimicles.com
- and -
Gordon W. Netzorg, Esq.
Mark W. Williams, Esq.
Jessica Arett, Esq.
SHERMAN & HOWARD, L.L.C.
633 17th Street, Suite 3000
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 299-8381
Facsimile: (303) 298-0940
E-mail: gnetzorg@shermanhoward.com
mwilliams@shermanhoward.com
jarett@shermanhoward.com
HOMEWORKS ENERGY: Court Tosses Giguere's Bid to Supplement Reply
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Giguere v. Homeworks
Energy, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:21-cv-30015 (D. Mass., Filed Feb.
5, 2021), the Hon. Judge Mark G Mastroianni entered an order
denying the Plaintiff's motion to supplement his reply to the
Defendants' opposition to the Motion for Class Certification.
As Defendant argues in its opposition, the Plaintiff has not
explained why the affidavit of Dr. Fox was not included with his
original reply brief filed many months ago.
Waiting until days before the delayed hearing to file the expert
affidavit deprives Defendant of an opportunity to fully respond to
Dr. Fox's opinions and/or methodology.
In addition, the court agrees with the Defendant that the
Plaintiff's counsel failed to fully comply with Local Rule
7.1(A)(2), which states:
"No motion shall be filed unless counsel certify that they
have
conferred and have attempted in good faith to resolve or
narrow
the issue."
Emailing opposing counsel at 12:30 p.m. on a Friday and then filing
the motion at 4:23 p.m. that same day after hearing no response is
not, in the court's view, a conferral and attempt in good faith to
narrow or resolve the issue, especially when Plaintiff's counsel
did not attempt to call or email Defendant's counsel again before
filing the motion.
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
HomeWorks Energy is an environmental services company.[CC]
IL TOSCANO: Velasquez Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ANTONIO VELASQUEZ, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated v. IL TOSCANO LLC, KIKU MENA and Collective
Action AHMET HOTI, Case No. 2:24-cv-00930 (E.D.N.Y., Feb. 6, 2024)
seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law.
Throughout the Plaintiff's employment with the Defendants, the
Plaintiff was paid $17 per hour. The Plaintiff was required to
work, and did in fact work, six days per week. The Defendants
failed to pay the Plaintiff at the statutorily required overtime
rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay, or one and
one-half the minimum wage rate, whichever is greater, for hours
worked in excess of 40 hours, the Plaintiff alleges.
The Defendants also failed to pay the Plaintiff spread-of-hours pay
for each day in which the Plaintiff's spread of hours exceeded 10
hours. Further, the Defendants failed to furnish accurate wage
statements for each pay period, and failed to provide a wage notice
upon his hire.
Accordingly, the Defendants treated and paid the Plaintiff and the
putative collective action members in the same or similar manner
and subjected them to the same corporate class-wide payroll
practices.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a kitchen worker
from April 2023 to December 16, 2023. He performed non-exempt
duties including preparing salads and desserts and cleaning the
kitchen.
Il Toscano operates a restaurant located at 6330 Jericho Turnpike,
Commack, NY 11725.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sara V. Messina, Esq.
ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC
490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277
Hauppauge, NY 11788
Telephone: (631) 257-5588
E-mail: smessina@romerolawny.com
IMMUNOVANT INC:Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit in E.D.N.Y
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Immunovant Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K Report for the annual
period ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on February 12, 2024, that the Company
continues to defend itself from securities class suit in the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
In February 2021, a putative securities class action complaint was
filed against the Company and certain of its current and former
officers in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New
York on behalf of a class consisting of those who acquired the
Company’s securities between October 2, 2019 and February 1,
2021.
The complaint alleges that the Company and certain of its officers
violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, by making false and misleading statements
regarding the safety of batoclimab and seeks unspecified monetary
damages on behalf of the putative class and an award of costs and
expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees.
On December 29, 2021, the U.S. District Court appointed a lead
plaintiff.
On February 1, 2022, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint
adding RSL and the Company's directors and underwriters as
defendants and asserting additional claims under Section 11,
12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 on behalf of a
putative class consisting of those who purchased or otherwise
acquired the Company's securities pursuant and/or traceable to the
Company's follow-on public offering on or about September 2, 2020.
On March 15, 2022, the lead plaintiff filed a further amended
complaint.
On February 14, 2023, the court granted the lead plaintiffs leave
to amend.
On March 17, 2023, the lead plaintiff filed a second amended
complaint.
The Company and other defendants served motions to dismiss the
second amended complaint on April 28, 2023.
The fully briefed motions to dismiss, including defendants' opening
briefs, lead plaintiff's opposition, and defendants’ replies were
filed with the court on June 30, 2023.
No hearing date has been set.
The Company intends to continue to vigorously defend the case and
has not recorded a liability related to this lawsuit because, at
this time, the Company is unable to reasonably estimate possible
losses or determine whether an unfavorable outcome is either
probable or remote.
Immunovant, Inc. is a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company
based in New York.
INMARKET MEDIA: Sells Geolocation Data Without Consent, Willis Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
AUTRY WILLIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. INMARKET MEDIA, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
4:24-cv-00511 (N.D. Cal., Jan. 26, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendant for invasion of privacy, unjust enrichment or
restitution, and violations of the California Computer Data Access
and Fraud Act, the Cal. Penal Code, the California Wiretapping Act,
and the California Unfair Competition Law.
According to the complaint, InMarket violates state laws by first
acquiring and tracking consumers' precise geolocation data and
other data through the use of spyware called "InMarket SDK" and
then profiting from that data by selling it to others. The data can
include consumers' movements to and from sensitive locations, like
locations associated with medical care, reproductive health,
religious worship, mental health, rallies, demonstrations, or
protests.
The Plaintiff is an individual who asserts claims on behalf of
herself and other similarly situated individuals for unjust
enrichment and violations of California privacy statutes. By
selling this data without consent, the Defendant has been unjustly
enriched and has violated Plaintiff's privacy rights, as well as
state consumer protection and privacy statutes, says the suit.
InMarket Media, LLC is a digital marketing platform and data
aggregator.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
L Timothy Fisher, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: ltfisher@bursor.com
- and -
Joseph I. Marchese, Esq.
Julian C. Diamond, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: jmarchese@bursor.com
jdiamond@bursor.com
IRHYTHM TECHNOLOGIES: Glazing Sues Over Drop in Share Price
-----------------------------------------------------------
GLAZING EMPLOYERS AND GLAZIERS' UNION LOCAL #27 PENSION AND
RETIREMENT FUND, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. IRHYTHM TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; QUENTIN
BLACKFORD; BRICE BOBZIEN; and DOUGLAS DEVINE, Defendants, Case No.
3:24-cv-00706 (N.D. Cal., Feb. 6, 2024) is a class action brought
on behalf of the Plaintiff and all persons or entities that
purchased or otherwise acquired iRhythm common stock between
January 11, 2022, and May 30, 2023, inclusive, seeking to pursue
remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, on May 30, 2023, after
the market closed, iRhythm disclosed the receipt of a warning
letter from the FDA that detailed several serious issues with the
Zio AT device (the "Warning Letter"). Among other things, the
Warning Letter criticized iRhythm's marketing of the Zio AT as a
"mobile cardiac telemetry monitor" that provides "near real-time
monitoring" and is approved for use in "high-risk patients" as
false. In truth, the Zio AT device was only approved for
non-critical patients and suffered from critical flaws that
imperiled high-risk patients.
iRhythm imposed an arbitrary transmission limit on the number of
times the Zio AT can transmit data and failed to communicate this
to providers and end-users. Critically, once the transmission limit
is reached, the patient's data stops being transmitted, and the
device can no longer be used for its intended purpose and cannot be
relied upon by high-risk patients, as iRhythm stated.
The Warning Letter also outlined other serious issues with the Zio
AT device that iRhythm had known of since at least 2017 yet failed
to disclose to the FDA, patients, or investors. These disclosures
caused the price of iRhythm common stock to decline by $7.41 per
share, or 6.1 percent.
As a result of the Defendants' actions detailed herein, and the
precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's common
stock, the Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered
significant losses and damages, says the suit.
IRHYTHM TECHNOLOGIES, INC. develops, produces, and distributes
medical instruments. The Company offers cardiac rhythm monitoring
devices for palpitation, shortness of breath, and fatigue. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan D. Uslaner, Esq.
BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER
& GROSSMANN LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2575
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Tel: (310) 819-3470
Email: jonathanu@blbglaw.com
ISOLVE RCM: Sends Unwanted Marketing Calls, Brown Suit Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against iSolve RCM LLC. The
case is captioned as ANGELA BROWN, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, v. ISOLVE RCM LLC, Case No.
2:24-cv-00810 (D.N.J., February 12, 2024).
The case arises from the Defendant's violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
iSolve RCM LLC is a provider of medical billing and credentialing
services to healthcare providers based in New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ross H. Schmierer, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
3000 Atrium Way, Suite 200
Mount Laurel, NJ 08054
Telephone: (800) 400-6808
E-mail: ross@kazlg.com
J.R. CARLSON: Fagnani Sues Over Disabled's Civil Rights Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against J.R. Carlson
Laboratories, Inc. The case is captioned as MYKAYLA FAGNANI,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. J.R.
CARLSON LABORATORIES, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-01037-LGS (S.D.N.Y.,
February 12, 2024).
The suit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
J.R. Carlson Laboratories, Inc. is a provider of nutritional
supplements based in Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr 10003
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: nyjg@aol.com
michael@gottlieb.legal
JPS VENTURES: Court OK's Class Settlement in Guevara Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as FELIPE DE JESUS GUEVARA
SANCHEZ, v. JPS VENTURES, INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-07869-AS
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Arun Subramanian entered an order
approving the settlement and dismissing the case with prejudice.
-- All pending motions are moot. The Clerk of Court is directed to
close the case.
-- Attorney's Fees and Costs
The Plaintiff seeks approval of $12,972 in attorneys' fees and
costs, to be deducted from the $37,500 settlement payment. The
proposed award represents 34.5% of the settlement amount, and
courts in this circuit have approved attorneys’ fees of up to
36%
of the recovery.
The Court finds further support for the agreed-upon attorney's fees
when comparing them to the Plaintiff's counsel's incurred fees and
costs.
The parties in this action, brought pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA), and the New York State Labor Law (NYLL),
The settlement's key terms are a release by Plaintiff of any claims
against the Defendants related to this action and a payment of
$37,500, $12,972 of which will be paid to Plaintiff's counsel.
A copy of the Court's memorandum opinion and order dated Jan. 23,
2024 is available from PacerMonitor.com at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dkp9j9 at no extra charge.[CC]
JUMIO INC: Murphy Sues Over Personal Injury Claims in N.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Jumio, Inc. The case
is captioned as RYAN MURPHY, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, v. JUMIO, INC., Case No.
3:24-cv-00839-AGT (N.D. Cal., February 12, 2024).
The nature of the suit is stated as 360 Torts - Personal Injury -
Other Personal Injury.
Jumio, Inc. is an online mobile payment and identity verification
company based in Sunnyvale, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leah Beligan, Esq.
BELIGAN LAW GROUP, LLP
19800 MacArthur Boulevard, Ste. 300
Newport Beach, CA 92612
Telephone: (949) 224-3881
Facsimile: (949) 209-5645
E-mail: lmbeligan@gmail.com
KEENAN & ASSOCIATES: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Barfield Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
DENNIS BARFIELD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KEENAN & ASSOCIATES, Defendant, Case No.
5:24-cv-00320-CAS-SP (C.D. Cal., Feb. 7, 2024) is a class action
arising out of the data security incident and data breach that was
perpetrated against Defendant, which held in its possession certain
personally identifiable information and protected health
information.
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 individuals' Private Information with which it was
entrusted employment.
The Defendant maintained the Private Information in a reckless
manner. In particular, the Private Information was maintained on
Defendant's computer network in a condition vulnerable to
cyberattacks. As a result of the Data Breach, the Plaintiff and
Class Members have been exposed to a heightened and imminent risk
of fraud and identity theft. Plaintiff and Class Members must now
and for years into the future closely monitor their financial
accounts to guard against identity theft, says the suit.
Keenan And Associates, Incorporated was founded in 1980. The
company's line of business includes providing management consulting
services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jill J. Parker, Esq.
PARKER & MINNE LLP
700 S. Flower Street, Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (310) 882-6833
Email: jill@parkerminne.com
KELLER BROTHERS: Fails to Provide Proper Wages, Hernandez Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
SONIA HERNANDEZ, BLANCA MENJIVAR, and SIDIA BELTRAN, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. KELLER
BROTHERS, INC., FERVAS CONSTRUCTION LLC, GREEN GENERATION
LANDSCAPING & DESIGN, LLC, and FERNANDO VASQUEZ, Defendants, Case
No. 8:24-cv-00253-AAQ (D. Md., Jan. 25, 2024) arises from
Defendants' misclassification of Plaintiffs as independent
contractors in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, Maryland
Wage and Hour Law, Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law,
Maryland Prevailing Wage Rate Law, and the Maryland Workplace Fraud
Law.
According to the complaint, during certain weeks, Plaintiffs worked
more than 40 hours per week and were entitled to be compensated for
that overtime work at the properly calculated overtime rate but
Defendants did not pay Plaintiffs at the overtime rate for their
overtime work.
The Defendants improperly classified Plaintiffs as independent
contractors. As a result of being improperly classified as
independent contractors, Plaintiffs were harmed, including by not
being paid at the overtime rate for overtime work, says the suit.
Plaintiffs Hernandez, Menjivar, and Beltran worked for Defendant
Fernando Vasquez and his companies as construction workers and
landscaping workers from approximately 2016, the fall of 2020, and
approximately August 2021, respectively.
Keller Brothers, Inc. is a Maryland corporation which is in the
construction business and which often acts as a construction
general contractor.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Matthew B. Kaplan, Esq.
THE KAPLAN LAW FIRM
1100 N Glebe Rd, Suite 1010
Arlington, VA 22201
Telephone: (703) 665-9529
E-mail: mbkaplan@thekaplanlawfirm.com
- and -
Matthew Handley, Esq.
HANDLEY FARAH & ANDERSON PLLC
201 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 200K
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 559-2411
E-mail: mhandley@hfajustice.com
KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION: California Law To Be Applied in Wage Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Patrick LaCross, et al.,
v. Knight Transportation Incorporated, et al., Case No.
2:15-cv-00990-JJT (D. Ariz.), the Hon. Judge John J. Tuchi entered
an order that the Court will apply California law to Plaintiffs'
wage claims and related classification claim based on trips driven
entirely within the state of California and will apply Arizona law
to Plaintiffs' wage claims and related classification claim based
on multi-state trips.
The Court further ordered that, after considering the Court's
summary of the law in this Order applicable to each of Plaintiffs'
claims in the First Amended Complaint, the parties shall file any
Motions for Summary Judgment within 30 days of the date of this
Order.
As a result, the Plaintiffs have not demonstrated that California
has a materially greater interest than Arizona in the wage and
overtime laws applied to the multi-state trips of drivers for an
Arizona corporation who signed agreements providing the terms of
their compensation and providing that Arizona law will apply to
govern those agreements.
Knight Transportation is a truckload carrier offering dry van,
refrigerated, intermodal and brokerage services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tGhSaR at no extra
charge.[CC]
LEE & GEN: Faces Fagnani Suit Over ADA Violations in S.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lee & Gen Global
Corporation. The case is captioned as MYKAYLA FAGNANI, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. LEE & GEN GLOBAL
CORPORATION, Case No. 1:24-cv-01036 (S.D.N.Y., February 12, 2024).
The suit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Lee & Gen Global Corporation is a cosmetics goods company based in
California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 E. 18th Street, Suite Phr 10003
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
LEGACY CORP: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Hill Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Haskins v. Legacy
Corporation of IL et al., Case No. 4:23-cv-04188-SLD-JEH (C.D.
Ill.), the Hon. Judge Jonathan E. Hawley entered a standing order
as follows:
-- Rule 16 scheduling conference
The Court will set a Rule 16 scheduling conference
approximately
30 days after the answer or other responsive pleading is
filed.
The conference will generally be conducted by telephone.
-- Discovery plan
The discovery plan shall be filed with the Court at least
three
calendar days before the Rule 16 scheduling conference.
-- Waiver of the Rule 16 scheduling conference
If the parties agree on all matters contained in the
discovery
plan, then the parties may waive the Rule 16 scheduling
conference. To do so, the parties shall indicate in the
discovery that the parties agree upon all maters contained
within the discovery plan, and they request that the Rule 16
scheduling conference be cancelled.
-- Failure of counsel to attend a scheduled telephone hearing
For the convenience of counsel, the Court conducts most
hearings
by telephone when possible. Counsel's failure to appear for a
telephone hearing will be treated as a failure of counsel to
appear for an in-person hearing.
-- Discovery disputes brought to the Court's attention after the
discovery deadline has already passed
The parties may not raise a discovery dispute with the Court
after the relevant discovery deadline has passed; all
discovery
disputes must be brought to the Court's attention before the
relevant discovery deadline passes. Any discovery disputes
raised with the Court after the expiration of the relevant
discovery deadline shall be deemed waived by the Court, even
if
the parties agreed to conduct discovery after the relevant
discovery deadline has passed. If the parties agree to
conduct
discovery after the expiration of a deadline set by the
Court,
they must still file a motion requesting that the Court move
that deadline as agreed by the parties in order to avoid any
subsequent discovery disputes being deemed waived.
-- Settlement conferences and mediation
The parties are encouraged to seek a settlement conference or
mediation with a magistrate judge. Where parties request a
settlement conference or mediation in a case referred to
Judge
Hawley, Judge Hawley will conduct said conference or
mediation.
Legacy Corporation is an excavation and marine company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=XesLqk at no extra
charge.[CC]
LITTLE CAESAR: Parties Seek Modification of Class Cert Schedule
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE CUEVAS, on behalf of
himself, all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the
general public, v. LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES, INC.; and DOES
through 10, inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-03166-RFL (N.D. Cal.), the
Parties file a joint stipulation modifying class certification
schedule as follows:
1. Motion for Class Certification due by: Sept. 9, 2024
2. Responses due by: Oct. 7, 2024
3. Replies due by: Oct. 28, 2024
4. Motion for Class Certification Dec. 3, 2024
Hearing set for:
Little Caesar is an American multinational chain of pizza
restaurants.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=3RJir4 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Yablonovich, Esq.
Monica Balderrama, Esq.
Tony Roberts, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF MARK YABLONOVICH
9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900
Beverly Hills, CA 90212-2511
Telephone: (310) 286-0246
Facsimile: (310) 407-5391
E-mail: Mark@Yablonovichlaw.com
Monica@Yablonovichlaw.com
Tony@Yablonovichlaw.com
- and -
Bevin Allen Pike, Esq.
Daniel Jonathan, Esq.
Trisha K. Monesi, Esq.
CAPSTONE LAW APC
1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 556-4811
Facsimile: (310) 943-0396
E-mail: Bevin.Pike@capstonelawyers.com
Daniel.Jonathan@capstonelawyers.com
Trisha.Monesi@capstonelawyers.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Ellen M. Bronchetti, Esq.
Priya E. Singh, Esq.
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
101 Second Street, Suite 2200
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 655-1300
E-mail: Ellen.bronchetti@gtlaw.com
Priya.singh@gtlaw.com
MATCH GROUP: Faces Class Action Suit Over Dating Platforms
----------------------------------------------------------
Tinder, Hinge and other Match dating apps are filled with addictive
features that encourage "compulsive" use, the proposed class-action
lawsuit claims.
The lawsuit filed in federal court in the Northern District of
California on Wednesday -- Valentine's Day -- says Match
intentionally designs its dating platforms with game-like features
that "lock users into a perpetual pay-to-play loop" prioritizing
profit over promises to help users find relationships.
This, the suit claims, turns users into "addicts" who purchase
ever-more-expensive subscriptions to access special features that
promise romance and matches.
"Match's business model depends on generating returns through the
monopolization of users' attention, and Match has guaranteed its
market success by fomenting dating app addiction that drives
expensive subscriptions and perpetual use," the lawsuit says. It
was filed by six dating app users and seeks class action status.
Representatives for Dallas-based Match did not immediately respond
to a message seeking comment.
hough it focuses on adults, the lawsuit comes as tech companies
face increasing scrutiny over addictive features that harm young
people's mental health. Meta Platforms, the parent company of
Facebook and Instagram, for instance, faces a lawsuit by dozens of
states accusing it of contributing to the youth mental health
crisis by designing features on Instagram and Facebook that addict
children to its platforms.
Match's apps, according to the lawsuit against the company,
"employs recognized dopamine-manipulating product features" to turn
users into "gamblers locked in a search for psychological rewards
that Match makes elusive on purpose." [GN]
MERIDIAN BEHAVIORAL: Johnson Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
Aniya Johnson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Meridian Behavioral Healthcare, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-00017-MW-HTC (N.D. Fla., Jan. 25, 2024)
is a data breach class action against Defendant for its failure to
adequately secure and safeguard confidential and sensitive
information held throughout the typical course of business of
Plaintiff and the Class.
On August 11, 2023, Defendant learned that an unauthorized third
party gained access to its network and computer systems and
obtained unauthorized access to its files. The information exposed
or otherwise accessed by an authorized third-party in the Data
Breach included Plaintiffs' and the Classes' names, address, date
of birth, Social Security number, medical diagnosis and treatment
information, health insurance information, and prescription
information.
The Plaintiff and the Class reasonably expected Defendant to keep
their information confidential and securely maintained, to use this
information for business purposes only, and to make only authorized
disclosures of this information. The Defendant, however, breached
its numerous duties and obligations by failing to implement and
maintain reasonable safeguards; failing to comply with
industry-standard data security practices and federal and state
laws and regulations governing data security; failing to properly
train its employees on data security measures and protocols;
failing to timely recognize and detect unauthorized third parties
accessing its system and that substantial amounts of data had been
compromised; and failing to timely notify the impacted Class, says
the suit.
Meridian Behavioral Healthcare, Inc. is a healthcare system
headquartered in Gainesville, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mariya Weekes, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
201 Sevilla Avenue, 2nd Floor
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (786) 879-8200
Facsimile: (786) 879-7520
E-mail: mweekes@milberg.com
- and -
Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq.
Philip J. Krzeski, Esq.
CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA
100 Washington Avenue South Suite 1700
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-7300
Facsimile: (612)-336-2940
E-mail: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com
pkrzeski@chestnutcambronne.com
MR. COOPER: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Randles Suit Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
ADRIAN SCOTT RANDLES, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MR. COOPER GROUP, INC.; and
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC d/b/a MR. COOPER, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-00177-NODJ-SKO (E.D. Cal., Feb. 7, 2024) alleges violation
of the California Consumer Privacy Act.
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint the cyberattack that
occurred between October 30, 2023 and November 1, 2023 exfiltrated
consumers' sensitive personal data from the Defendants' network,
and that data is now in the hands of the perpetrators.
As a result of this data breach, the Plaintiff Randles and the
members of the alleged Class face a lifetime risk of identity
theft. The data breach occurred due to the Defendants' negligent
and careless acts and omissions and the failure to protect
consumers' data. Defendants are responsible for allowing the data
breach to occur because it failed to implement reasonable security
procedures and practices and failed to comply with
industry-standard data security practices, says the suit.
MR. COOPER GROUP INC. provides financial services. The Company
offers home loan services for single-family residences. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rebecca Davis, Esq.
LOZEAU DRURY LLP
1939 Harrison Street, Suite 150
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 836-4200
Facsimile: (510) 836-4205
Email: rebecca@lozeaudrury.com
- and -
Patrick H. Peluso, Esq.
WOODROW & PELUSO, LLC
3900 East Mexico Avenue, Suite 300
Denver, CO 80210
Telephone: (720) 213-0676
Facsimile: (303) 927-0809
Email: ppeluso@woodrowpeluso.com
NATIONAL CREDIT: Carrasquillo Files Consumer Credit Suit in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against National Credit
Systems, Inc., et al. The case is captioned as SHEY CARRASQUILLO,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
NATIONAL CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01029-AT
(S.D.N.Y., February 12, 2024).
The suit is brought over alleged consumer credit violation.
National Credit Systems, Inc. is a collection firm based in
Atlanta, Georgia. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
OXFORD HEALTH: Class Cert Expert Discovery in Molly Due Feb. 28
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MOLLY C., et al., v.
OXFORD HEALTH INSURANCE, INC., Case No. 1:21-cv-10144-PGG-BCM
(S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Barbara Moses entered an order extending
the Plaintiffs deadline to request leave pursuant to 7(c) of the
Civil Case Management Plan and Scheduling Order to offer expert
testimony beyond the scope of the Defendant's disclosures to Feb.
1, 2024.
-- The Plaintiff's further expert report, if any, shall be filed
no
later than Feb. 12, 2024.
-- All expert discovery relating to class certification issues
must
be completed by Feb. 28, 2024.
Oxford Health provides life, accident and health insurance services
to its clients.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=N6TrEC at no extra
charge.[CC]
PACKIT LLC: Faces Villaverde Suit Over Telephonic Sales Calls
-------------------------------------------------------------
AMANDA VILLAVERDE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated V. PACKIT, LLC, Case No. CACE-24-001616 (Fla.
Cir., Feb. 6, 2024) alleges that the Defendant violated the Florida
Telephone Solicitation Act's Caller ID Rules by transmitting a
phone number that was not capable of receiving phone calls when it
made Telephonic Sales Calls by text message.
The Defendant transmitted (833) 546-1318 to the Plaintiff's Cell
Phone's caller identification service when it made the PackIt Text
Message Sales Calls. The Plaintiff called (833)546-1318, and call
could not be completed, the suit says.
The Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of a class of persons
similarly situated, seeks liquidated damages for each violation,
and injunctive relief to ensure the Defendant complies with the
Caller ID Rules when it makes PackIt Text Message Sales Calls.
The Plaintiff seeks to represent a class of persons defined as:
All persons and entities that reside in Florida whose
Caller identification service was transmitted a
Telephone number that was not capable of receiving
telephone calls when PackIt Text Message Sales Calls were
made to them since July 1,2021.
Ms. Amanda Villaverde is the regular user of a cellular telephone
number that receives the Defendant's telephonic sales calls, and
she resides in Broward County, Florida.
PackIt sells various goods to persons throughout the country
through its online store.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua A. Glickman, Esq.
Shawn A. Heller, Esq.
SOCIAL JUSTICE LAW COLLECTIVE, PL
974 Howard Ave.
Dunedin, FL 34698
Telephone: (202) 709-5744
Facsimile: (866) 893-0416
E-mail: josh@sjlawcollective.com
shawn@sjlawcollective.com
PALM ENTERTAINMENT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Dahlquist Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
RENEE TEREES DAHLQUIST, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PALM ENTERTAINMENT, LLC, D/B/A PUB
42, Defendant, Case No. 27-CV-24-1955 (Minn. Dist., Hennepin Cty.,
Feb. 7, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs.
Plaintiff Dahlquist was employed by the Defendant as a server.
PALM ENTERTAINMENT, LLC, D/B/A PUB 42 is a bar & eatery with a
patio offering familiar American grub & daily specials in relaxed
surrounds. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric D. Satre, Esq.
SATRE LAW FIRM
7900 International Drive, Suite 300-7044
Bloomington, MN 55425
Telephone: (651) 212-4919
Facsimile: (651) 212-4203
Email: esatre@satrelaw.com
admin@satrelaw.com
PENNSYLVANIA: Haggles Over Settlement of Unclaimed Property Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Hall, writing for The Pennsylvania Capital-Star, reports that
nearly a year after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that Delaware
improperly kept millions of dollars unclaimed by Pennsylvania
residents, the neighboring states and 29 others are still working
out how much is owed and by whom.
Pennsylvania and Delaware, meanwhile, find themselves as allies
fending off another set of lawsuits that claim states should be
required to pay interest when they return unclaimed property and
money to the rightful owners.
In the case that led to last year's Supreme Court decision,
Pennsylvania and Wisconsin separately sued Delaware, arguing that
it had wrongfully kept hundreds of millions of dollars paid to
international payments provider MoneyGram.
The other states joined them and a court-appointed special master
found in 2021 that Delaware improperly required MoneyGram to turn
over unclaimed funds that should have gone to the states where the
unclaimed MoneyGram checks were purchased.
The Supreme Court, which had original jurisdiction over the case as
a dispute between states, adopted the special master's
recommendation. It also rejected Delaware's argument that
MoneyGram's checks are not covered by a 1974 federal law that
requires money orders to be returned to the state where they were
purchased.
Pennsylvania Treasury spokesperson Erik Arneson said the states and
MoneyGram are now working with the special master to work out the
intricacies of a settlement, including how much Delaware should
pay, how much MoneyGram should pay and what portion of the money
owed should be repaid with interest. Treasurer Stacy Garrity
estimated after the 2023 decision that Pennsylvania could receive
nearly $19 million. Delaware's total liability could top $400
million.
Arneson told the Capital-Star on Wednesday there's no timeline for
a settlement and the parties are working amicably to reach a
resolution.
"It doesn't appear to be imminent. Enough progress is being made in
the discussions that nobody is clamoring for the judge to pull the
parties into a courtroom," Arneson said, adding "It'd be fair to
sum it up as Pennsylvania is seeking what it believes is the
appropriate amount and Delaware and MoneyGram want to give less."
Calls to a spokesperson at the Delaware Department of Finance were
not returned this week.
With favorable corporation laws and business-friendly courts,
Delaware is home to many large financial services companies, such
as MoneyGram, that handle large amounts of money that sometimes go
unclaimed. Delaware has derived between 6% and 13% of its state
budget revenue through the legal process of escheatment, in which
unclaimed property is used for the greater good.
Pennsylvania does this too, holding on to $4.5 billion in unclaimed
property while actively searching for its rightful owners, Arneson
said.
Each year hundreds of millions dollars are handed over to the
Treasury by financial institutions, insurance companies and other
entities required by law to give property to the state if they have
no contact with the owner for a given amount of time.
In 2022-23, the Treasury returned $274 million, the most ever in a
single fiscal year. But some of that money cannot be claimed by
anyone, Arneson said, and a portion of that remainder each year
goes into Pennsylvania's general fund to pay for government
programs.
Since the MoneyGram lawsuits were filed in 2016 but before the
Supreme Court ruled last year, Pennsylvania and Delaware were each
hit with proposed class action lawsuits claiming that the states
owe interest for the use of unclaimed property when the owners come
forward.
The suits were each filed on behalf of representative plaintiffs by
the Wilmington, Delaware, law firm Halloran Farkas Kittila. They
claim the states' unclaimed property laws violate the Takings
Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the
14th Amendment because they deny property owners just compensation
for the benefit of the property while the states held it. The lead
plaintiff in the Pennsylvania suit is a Chester County man.
A federal appeals court ruled in 2017 that Illinois' unclaimed
property law was unconstitutional and Illinois in 2021 reached a
settlement in which it is required to pay interest to those who
claim property it has held.
The plaintiffs in the Pennsylvania and Delaware lawsuits argue that
the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision on Illinois' law
should apply in those states, too.
In September, Delaware won an initial decision dismissing its
lawsuit.
A judge in the U.S. District Court for Delaware found that the
state's actions in holding and using the property don't add up to a
taking because the owner of the property was the one who allowed
his interest in the property to lapse in the first place.
That decision is now on appeal to the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of
Appeals in Philadelphia, where Garrity has filed an amicus brief
arguing that the outcome will also affect Pennsylvania.
The firm's proposed class action against Pennsylvania is still in a
preliminary stage and lawyers for the Treasury have filed a motion
to dismiss the case on similar grounds to those Delaware argued in
the case against it.
Arneson said the origins of the unclaimed property laws in
Pennsylvania and in states across the country were originally
intended and remain consumer protection measures for people who
forgot about a bank account or whose heirs were unaware of an
insurance policy.
The process laid out by the laws is very different from the
circumstances the Takings Clause was intended to address, such as a
state taking property through eminent domain to build a road, he
added.
"These are not things that the state took from individuals,"
Arneson said, adding that the alternative is to allow the money to
sit in a bank where it might never be claimed. "The concept here is
that while the state is working to get it back to the rightful
owner it is being used for the greater good." [GN]
PHARMAVITE LLC: Hamzeh Files False Ad Suit Over Fish Oil Supplement
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GUITY HAMZEH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PHARMAVITE LLC and NATURE MADE NUTRITIONAL
PRODUCTS, Defendants, Case No. 4:24-cv-00472-KAW (N.D. Cal., Jan.
25, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations
of State Consumer Protection Acts, the California's False
Advertising Law, Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and Unfair
Competition Law, breach of express warranty, quasi-contract,
negligent misrepresentation, and intentional misrepresentation.
The Defendants make, sell, and market Nature Made brand fish oil
supplements. Each bottle claims that the supplements "Help Support
a Healthy Heart." But the truth is, the product does not affect
heart health. There is no proof that fish oil supplements improve
heart health at all. In this way, Nature Made's affirmative
representations are misleading to reasonable consumers, says the
suit.
Like other consumers, Ms. Hamzeh bought the Nature Made Fish Oil
Supplements. Ms. Hamzeh read and relied on this statement that the
Product supports a healthy heart. She would not have purchased the
Product if she had known that the Products have not actually been
shown to improve cardiovascular outcomes or promote heart health,
the Plaintiff asserts.
Pharmavite LLC is an American vitamin and supplement company, based
in West Hills, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Simon Franzini, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
E-mail: simon@dovel.com
- and -
Zachary Arbitman, Esq.
FELDMAN SHEPHERD WOHLGELERNTER TANNER
WEINSTOCK & DODIG, LLP
1845 Walnut Street, 21st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 567-8300
Facsimile: (215) 567-8333
PLANET HOME: Fails to Secure Customers' Info, Ward Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOE WARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PLANET HOME LENDING, LLC, Case No. 3:24-cv-00158-SRU
(D. Conn., Feb. 6, 2024) sues the Defendant for its failure to
properly secure and safeguard the Plaintiff's and other similarly
situated customers' sensitive information.
On November 15, 2023, a Data Breach occurred as the result of "a
vulnerability existing in a software program that Planet
purchased."
On November 28, 2023, the Defendant determined that certain
personal data stored in the network environment, including the
personally identifiable information of approximately 200,000
individuals, was accessible to the unauthorized actor.
According to Defendant's letter sent to the Plaintiff and other
victims of the Notice of Data Breach, the compromised PII included
individuals' full names, addresses, Social Security numbers, loan
numbers, and financial account numbers.
The Plaintiff and Class Members have suffered injury as a result of
the Defendant's conduct. These injuries include: invasion of
privacy; lost or diminished value of PII; lost time and opportunity
costs associated with attempting to mitigate the actual
consequences of the Data Breach; lost opportunity costs associated
with attempting to mitigate the actual consequences of the Data
Breach; and the continued and certainly increased risk to their
PII, the lawsuit asserts.
The Plaintiff further suffered actual injury in the form of
experiencing a series of charges, totaling approximately $400, to
his Wells Fargo debit card, in January 2024, which was caused by
the Data Breach, the lawsuit adds.
The Plaintiff also suffered actual injury in the form of
experiencing an increase in spam calls, texts, and/or emails, which
was caused by the Data Breach.
The Data Breach has caused the Plaintiff to suffer fear, anxiety,
and stress, which has been compounded by the fact that the
Defendant has still not fully informed him of key details about
the Data Breach's occurrence.
Mr. Joe Ward is a resident of Orange, Texas.
Planet is a financial services company, specializing in residential
home mortgages and refinances, offering homebuyers and existing
homeowners various lending options.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sanford P. Dumain, Esq.
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
100 Garden City Plaza
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (212) 594-5300
Facsimile: (212) 818-9150
E-mail: sdumain@milberg.com
dlietz@milberg.com
- and -
Terence R. Coates, Esq.
Jonathan T. Deters, Esq.
MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
119 East Court Street, Suite 530
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone: (513) 651-3700
Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
E-mail: tcoates@msdlegal.com
jdeters@msdlegal.com
PROCTER & GAMBLE: Misled Consumers About Decongestants, Hadden Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
HALEY HADDEN, and BONNIE VAN NOY, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. THE PROCTER AND GAMBLE
COMPANY; JOHNSON AND JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.; and RECKITT
BENCKISER LLC, Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-00035-MCR-ZCB (N.D.
Fla., Jan. 25, 2024) seeks damages as a result of Defendants'
alleged wrongful conduct in connection with the manufacturing,
promoting, marketing, sale, and distribution of certain of their
allergy, cold and flu products that contain the ingredient
phenylephrine, which they claim is an active decongestant.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has concluded by unanimous
finding that the phenylephrine, which Defendants claimed was an
effective decongestant in their oral allergy, cold, and flu
products, is, in fact, wholly ineffective as a decongestant when
taken orally. Despite knowing that oral use of phenylephrine is
ineffective, Defendants have manufactured, promoted, marketed,
sold, and distributed oral products containing phenylephrine, which
hundreds of millions of Americans have purchased to treat certain
symptoms. But Defendants knew phenylephrine was ineffective, says
the suit.
The Defendants' deceptive practices were fraudulent, unlawful,
against public policy, unscrupulous, and unfair to consumers like
Plaintiffs and members of the Class and Subclass in this action. As
a result of Defendants' actions, Plaintiffs and members of the
Class and Subclass suffered substantial damages, including
out-of-pocket losses, and seek to recover all available monetary
and equitable relief.
The Procter and Gamble Company is an American multinational
consumer goods corporation headquartered in Cincinnati, Ohio.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
W. Daniel "Dee" Miles, III, Esq.
Alison D. Hawthorne, Esq.
Demet Basar, Esq.
BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C.
272 Commerce Street
Montgomery, AL 36104
Telephone: (334) 269-2343
E-mail: Dee.miles@beasleyallen.com
Alison.hawthorne@beasleyallen.com
Demet.basar@Beasleyallen.com
- and -
Rebecca D. Gilliland, Esq.
Jessica M. Haynes, Esq.
BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C.
301 St. Louis St.
Mobile, AL 36602
Telephone: (251) 308-1515
E-mail: Rebecca.gilliland@beasleyallen.com
READING INTERNATIONAL: Discloses Personal Info to FB, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
DANIEL VALENTINI and DALLACE BUTLER, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. READING INTERNATIONAL, INC., Case
No. 2:24-cv-00255 (D. Nev., Feb. 6, 2024) is a consumer privacy
class action against Reading International and the movie theater
chains it operates for knowingly disclosing consumers' movie
purchases and video-viewing habits to third parties, in violation
of the Video Privacy Protection Act.
The Plaintiffs contend that Reading Cinemas knowingly discloses
consumers' Personally Identifiable Information when they purchase
movie tickets online and when they watch videos on Reading Cinemas'
websites. Specifically, when an individual has a Facebook account
and they purchase a movie ticket or watch a video on Reading
Cinemas' website, Reading Cinemas discloses to Facebook both the
name of the movie purchased, or video watched, and the Facebook
user's identity as a single data point.
The Plaintiffs and members of the Classes did not provide the
Defendant with any form of consent that would authorize it to
disclose their Personally Identifiable Information to third
parties. Nor did the Defendant have authorization by means of court
order or any other part of the VPPA, the suit says.
The Plaintiffs bring this action for damages and other legal and
equitable remedies on behalf of themselves and all others who were
similarly harmed by the Defendant's violations of their privacy.
Mr. Valentini resides in the State of New York. He has had a
Facebook account since 2008 and has used the Defendant's website
and purchased movie tickets on that website. Additionally, the
Plaintiff has a member account with the Defendant.
Reading International owns and operates movie theaters across the
United States under various brand names including: "Reading
Cinemas," "Angelika Film Centers," and "Consolidated
Theatres."[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Robert T. Eglet, Esq.
Erica D. Entsminger, Esq.
EGLET ADAMS EGLET HAM HENRIOD
400 South Seventh Street, Suite 400
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Telephone: (702) 450-5400
Facsimile: (702) 450-5451
E-mail: eservice@egetlaw.com
- and -
Anthony G. Simon, Esq.
Jeremiah W. Nixon, Esq.
THE SIMON LAW FIRM, P.C.
800 Market Street, Suite 1700
St. Louis, MO 63101
Telephone: (314) 241-2929
Facsimile: (314) 241-2029
E-mail: asimon@simonlawpc.com
jnixon@simonlawpc.com
ROYAL GUARDS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Aghatise Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
IGHADARO AGHATISE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROYAL GUARDS SOLUTION LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 4:24-cv-00102 (E.D. Tex., Feb. 6, 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 Aghatise was employed by the Defendant as a security
guard.
ROYAL GUARDS SOLUTION LLC provides security services to its
corporate clients throughout Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Clif Alexander, Esq.
Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
Lauren E. Braddy, Esq.
Alan Clifton Gordon, Esq.
Carter T. Hastings, Esq.
ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC
101 N. Shoreline Blvd. Suite 610
Corpus Christi, TX 78401
Telephone: (361) 452-1279
Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
Email: clif@a2xlaw.com
austin@a2xlaw.com
lauren@a2xlaw.com
cgordon@a2xlaw.com
carter@a2xlaw.com
SEATGEEK INC: Fails to Disclose Total Ticket Cost, Vasell Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TORELL VASELL, SHANTEE GRANT, and SEAN BIEDERMAN, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SEATGEEK, INC., Case
No. 1:24-cv-00932-DLI-JRC (E.D.N.Y., Feb. 6, 2024) alleges that the
Defendant has been improperly charging consumers on their website
in violation of the New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law.
When ticket purchasers visit the Defendant's website
https://www.seatgeek.com to buy an admission ticket to an event,
they are initially quoted one price, only to later be shown the
true total ticket, which includes an additional "Fees." These added
fees are only presented after consumers select their ticket option
and pass through multiple screens in the purchase process, the
Plaintiffs assert.
The Plaintiffs purchased tickets through Defendant's website and
were forced to pay Defendant's "Fulfillment and Service Fee" in
order to secure their tickets. The Plaintiffs were harmed by paying
this added charge, even though that total cost was not disclosed to
the Plaintiffs at the beginning of the purchase process, and
therefore, is unlawful pursuant to New York Arts & Cultural Affairs
Law section 25.07(4).
As a result of the Defendant's failure to adhere to disclosure
standards, the Plaintiffs seek relief in this action individually,
and on behalf of all other ticket purchasers of the Defendant
for actual and/or statutory damages in the amount of fifty dollars
per violation, reasonable attorneys' costs and fees, and injunctive
relief under New York Arts and Cultural Affairs Law.
Plaintiff Torell Vassell is an individual consumer who was a
citizen and resident of New York. The Plaintiff purchased an
admission ticket to the Rod Wave concert at Barclay's Center
through the Defendant's website, https://www.seatgeek.com.
SeatGeek is a mobile-focused ticket platform that enables users to
buy and sell tickets for live sports, concerts, and theater
events.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
Mark S. Reich, Esq.
Courtney E. Maccarone, Esq.
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 363-7500
Facsimile: (212) 363-7171
E-mail: ek@zlk.com
mreich@zlk.com
cmaccarone@zlk.com
SIDWELL AIR: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to August 30
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAKOTA ROBERTS and DAWN
MARIE HACKER, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly
situated, v. SIDWELL AIR FREIGHT, INC, and DHL EXPRESS (USA) INC.,
d/b/a DHL EXPRESS, Case No. 3:21-cv-05912-TMC (W.D. Wash.), the
Hon. Judge Tiffany M. Cartwright entered an order extending class
certification
briefing schedule:
1. The case is a collective and proposed action wage and hour
lawsuit filed by the Plaintiffs Dakota Roberts and Dawn Marie
Hacker against the Defendants.
2. The Court granted the Plaintiffs' motion for conditional
certification of a collective action under the FLSA, notice
was
sent to the collective, and 47 individuals opted in.
3. The parties initially proposed that Plaintiffs file their
motion
for class certification of their state law claims under
Federal
Rule of Civil Procedure 23 on Nove. 3, 2023.
4. On Oct. 17, 2023, the parties submitted a Stipulated Motion
and
Proposed Order Setting Class Certification Briefing Schedule
in
which the parties requested the Court enter a class
certification briefing schedule that would allow additional
time
for the parties to engage in settlement negotiations and to
complete discovery.
5. On Oct. 20, 2023, the Court entered its Order on Stipulated
Motion and Proposed Order Setting Class Certification
Briefing
deadline for Plaintiffs to file their motion for class
certification.
6. The parties have agreed to a date for mediation, Feb. 27,
2024,
and a mediator, Dennis A. Clifford, Esq.
7. To allow time for the parties to focus on their mediation
efforts, and to give the parties time to conduct full
discovery
should the mediation be unsuccessful, the parties
respectfully
request an extension of time for Plaintiffs to file their
motion
for class certification, as follows:
-- Plaintiffs file their motion for class Aug. 30,
2024
certification:
-- Defendants file their class certification Sept. 20,
2024
response:
-- The Plaintiffs file their class Sept. 27,
2024
certification reply:
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 24, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=GPgEXP at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Toby J. Marshall, Esq.
Jennifer Rust Murray, Esq.
Ryan Tack-Hooper
TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC
936 North 34th Street, Suite 300
Seattle, WA 98103
Telephone: (206) 816-6603
Facsimile: (206) 319-5450
E-mail: tmarshall@terrellmarshall.com
jmurray@terrellmarshall.com
ryan@terrellmarshall.com
- and -
Camille Fundora Rodriguez, Esq.
Alexandra K. Piazza, Esq.
Mariyam Hussain, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 875-3000
Facsimile: (215) 875-4620
E-mail: crodriguez@bm.net
apiazza@bm.net
mhussain@bm.net
The Defendants are represented by:
Randall K. Edwards, Esq.
RANDALL K. EDWARDS, PLLC
Bountiful, UT 84011
Telephone: (801) 328-0300
Facsimile: (253) 620-6565
E-mail: randall@randallkedwards.com
- and -
Linda C. Schoonmaker, Esq.
Andrew R. Escobar, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
700 Milam, Suite 1400
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (713) 225-2300
Facsimile: (713) 225-2340
E-mail: lschoonmaker@seyfarth.com
aescobar@seyfarth.com
SOLAR GRIDS: Faces Thornton Suit Over Telemarketing Calls
---------------------------------------------------------
PABRINY THORNTON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. SOLAR GRIDS LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-00446 (S.D.
Tex., Feb. 6, 2024) contends that the Defendant promotes and
markets its merchandise, in part, by sending unsolicited text
messages to wireless phone users, in violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
Plaintiff Thornton owned a cellular telephone, the number for which
was (832) XXX-8348, and used the cell phone primarily for
residential purposes, such as speaking with friends and family. On
December 17, 2019, Thornton registered her number on the Federal
Do-Not-Call Registry to obtain solitude from unwanted telemarketing
calls. The spring and summer of 2020, Solar Grids allegedly engaged
in a widescale telemarketing operation, where it placed
telemarketing text messages and phone calls to consumers in masse,
without having first obtained the consumers' valid express written
consent, says the suit.
Plaintiff Thornton did not ever consent in any manner to receiving
telemarketing calls from Solar Grids, let alone provide the prior
express written consent the TCPA requires. Nonetheless, on June 24,
2020, Solar Grids placed a campaign of calls to Thornton soliciting
solar franchising services. The Defendant's incessant calls and
text messages were bothersome, invasive, disruptive and annoying,
and further invaded upon the Plaintiff's privacy, the suit
alleges.
The Plaintiff is a natural person residing in Richmond, Texas
77406.
Solar Grids is a solar energy product dealer offering sales,
installation, cleaning and repairs for solar panel equipment and
systems.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jacob U. Ginsburg, Esq.
KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, P.C.
30 East Butler Ave.
Ambler, PA 19002
Telephone: (267) 468-5374
E-mail: jginsburg@creditlaw.com
STARS WIRELESS: Court Expedites Supplementing Chief Judge's Order
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GS Holistic, LLC v. Stars
Wireless and Smoke LLC et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00641-WHR-MRM (S.D.
Ohio), the Hon. Judge Walter H. Rice entered supplemental order of
reference:
The Court finds it expedient to supplement the Chief Judge's Order
as follows:
-- The assigned Magistrate Judge is authorized to perform in each
referred case any and all functions authorized for full-time
United States Magistrate Judges by statute, except that the
preliminary pretrial conference/scheduling conference provided
for
in Fed.R.Civ.P. 16 will be scheduled and conducted by the
undersigned who will also issue the scheduling order required
by
Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(b)(2).
-- Absent a specific order of reference in a particular case,
which
the District Judge in his discretion may enter, the following
matters are excluded from these referrals:
1. Motions for temporary restraining order and preliminary
injunction;
2. Motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings under
Fed.
R. Civ. P. 12;
3. Motions to remand removed cases to state court should any
future case in which GS Holistic, LLC, is a plaintiff be
removed to this Court;
4. Motions for class certification;
5. Motions for summary judgment;
6. Any other matter hereafter classified as dispositive by the
United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit; and
7. Motions in limine relating to the admission of evidence at
trial;
On Dec. 19,2023, Chief Judge Marbley in a series of Orders
re-assigned all the then pending cases in which GS Holistic, is the
Plaintiff to the undersigned District Judge and transferred the
Magistrate Judge reference in those cases to recalled Magistrate
Judge Michael R.
Merz.
Stars Wireless is in the Telephone Communication, except Radio
business.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wH2TfJ at no extra
charge.[CC]
STRATEGIC LIMITED: McMurray Sues Over Unsolicited Marketing Calls
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Strategic Limited
Partners, LP, et al. The case is captioned as DELOISE MCMURRAY,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
STRATEGIC LIMITED PARTNERS, LP, et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-00512
(S.D. Tex., February 12, 2024).
The case arises from the Defendants' violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
Strategic Limited Partners, LP is an investment management services
firm headquartered in Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Amy Lynn Bennecoff Ginsburg, Esq.
GINSBURG LAW GROUP, P.C.
1012 N. Bethlehem Pike, Suite 103, Box 9
Ambler, PA 19002
Telephone: (855) 978-6564
Facsimile: (855) 777-0043
E-mail: Efilings@ginsburglawgroup.com
SUN TEES INC: Colak Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
--------------------------------------------------------
ALI COLAK, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. SUN TEES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-00597
(E.D.N.Y., Jan. 26, 2024) is a civil rights action against
Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate Defendant's website, www.suntees.info, to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired people in violation of Plaintiff's rights
under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New York City
Human Rights Law.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was injured when he
attempted on January 10, 2024 and again on January 12, 2024 to
access Defendant's Website from his 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. 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 Stacked Jean
Pants that Plaintiff wished to acquire from the Website, says the
suit.
The Plaintiff now 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.
Sun Tees, Inc. is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which Defendant ensures the delivery of
such goods throughout the United States, including New York
State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
PeterPaul Shaker, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
SUTHERLAND GLOBAL: Amended Scheduling Order Entered in Savage Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ASHLEY SAVAGE, et al., v.
SUTHERLAND GLOBAL SERVICES, INC., et al., Case No.
6:19-cv-06840-EAW-MWP (W.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Marian W. Payson
entered an amended scheduling order as follows:
1. The Plaintiff shall identify any expert witnesses and
provide
reports pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) and/or
disclosures pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C) within 45
days after the Court issues any decision on plaintiffs'
pending
motion for class certification. an amended scheduling order
as
follows:
2. The Defendants shall identify any expert witnesses and
provide
reports pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 within 45 days after
plaintiffs identify any expert witnesses and provide reports
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) and/or disclosures
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(C).
3. The Plaintiffs shall identify any rebuttal expert witnesses
and
provide rebuttal reports pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(2)(B)
within 32 days after defendants identify any expert witnesses
and provide reports pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26.
4. The Parties shall complete all discovery relating to experts,
including depositions, within 45 days after plaintiffs
identify
any rebuttal expert witnesses and provide rebuttal reports
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B).
Sutherland operates as a digital transformation company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 24, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=G52bcT at no extra
charge.[CC]
TARGET CORPORATION: Filing of Class Cert. Bid Due March 26
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERICA BROODIE,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
TARGET CORPORATION, Case No. 3:23-cv-00955-MMH-JBT (M.D. Fla.), the
Hon. Judge Marcia Morales Howard entered case management and
scheduling order and referral to mediation as follows:
Plaintiff's disclosure statement as required by Feb. 9, 2024
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1 and Local
Rule 3.03.
Deadline for providing mandatory initial Feb. 20, 2024
disclosures.
Deadline for moving to join a party or amend Feb. 20, 2024
the pleadings.
Deadline for disclosing expert reports.
Plaintiff: Mar. 26, 2025
Defendant: May 23, 2025
Rebuttal: June 6, 2025
Deadline for moving for class certification. Mar. 26, 2025
Deadline for completing discovery and filing June 6, 2025
motions to compel.
Deadline for filing dispositive and Daubert Sept. 26,
2025
motions (responses due 21 days after service).
Deadline for filing all other motions including Jan. 26, 2026
motions in limine.
Deadline for filing the joint final pretrial Feb. 9, 2026
statement.
Date and time of the final pretrial conference. Feb. 17, 2026
Target is an American retail corporation that operates a chain of
discount department stores and hypermarkets.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5r5u3p at no extra
charge.[CC]
TD BANK: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Dou Suit Due Jan. 2, 2025
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dou, et al., v. TD Bank
N.A., Case No. 1:23-cv-04880 (S.D.N.Y., Filed June 11, 2023), the
Hon. Judge J. Paul Oetken entered an order granting letter motion
for extension of time to complete discovery:
-- The parties shall submit a joint status Feb. 24,
2024
letter by:
-- Depositions shall be completed by: April 15,
2024
-- Requests to admit shall be completed by: May 6, 2024
-- Fact discovery shall be completed by: June 20,
2024
-- Expert disclosures shall be completed by: Aug. 19,
2024
-- Rebuttal expert disclosures shall be Oct. 15,
2024
completed by:
-- Expert discovery shall be completed by: Nov. 13,
2024
-- The Plaintiffs shall file a motion for Jan. 2, 2025
class certification by:
-- The Defendants shall file an opposition Feb. 3, 2025
to class certification by:
-- The Plaintiffs shall file a reply Feb. 24,
2025
motion for class certification by:
The nature of suit states Diversity: Securities & Exchange
Commission.
TD is an American national bank and the United States subsidiary of
the multinational TD Bank Group.[CC]
TEVA PHARMACEUTICAL: Bid to Dismiss QVAR Antitrust Suit Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. disclosed in its Form 10-K
Report for the annual period ending December 31, 2023 filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 12, 2024, that
the Company's motion to dismiss the QVAR asthma inhalers antitrust
class suit is still pending in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts
In May 2023, certain end-payor plaintiffs filed putative class
action complaints in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Massachusetts against Teva and a number of its affiliates, alleging
that Teva engaged in anticompetitive conduct to suppress generic
competition to its branded QVAR asthma inhalers in violation of
state and federal antitrust laws and state consumer protection
laws.
Teva moved to dismiss these claims on October 18, 2023, and that
motion remains pending.
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited is a global pharmaceutical
company into generics, innovative medicines and
biopharmaceuticals,
with worldwide operations and headquarters in Israel and a
significant presence in the United States, Europe and many other
markets around the world. Our key strengths include our
world-leading generic medicines expertise and portfolio, focused
innovative medicines portfolio and global infrastructure and
scale.
TRANSFORMATIVE HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach
-------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH BIRON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TRANSFORMATIVE HEALTHCARE, LLC; and COASTAL
MEDICAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-10310-JEK (D.
Mass., Feb. 7, 2024) alleges that the Defendants failed to prevent
data breach.
According to the complaint, on December 27, 2023, Defendants
announced publicly that on February 17, 2023, it had been the
recipient of a hack and exfiltration of sensitive personal
information involving approximately nine hundred thousand
individuals who were its former clients or patients (the "Data
Breach").
The Plaintiff and Class members now face a present and imminent
lifetime risk of identity theft, which is heightened here by the
loss of Social Security numbers. The Plaintiff's and Class members'
SPI was compromised due to Defendants' negligent and careless acts
and omissions and the failure to protect the SPI of Plaintiff and
Class members, says the suit.
TRANSFORMATIVE HEALTHCARE, LLC medical transportation companies
that transport patients using a network of ambulances and
transportation services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert J. Maselek, Jr., Esq.
MCDONOUGH COHEN & MASELEK, LLP
53 State Street, Suite 500
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 742-6520 (Ext. 246)
Facsimile: (617) 742-1393
Email: www.mcmlawfirm.com
- and -
Carl V. Malmstrom, Esq.
WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER
FREEMAN & HERZ LLC
111 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 1700
Chicago, IL 60604
Telephone: (312) 984-0000
Facsimile: (212) 686-0114
Email: malmstrom@whafh.com
TRUIST BANK: Class Cert. Bid Deadline in Truong Revised to Nov. 4
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEVIN TRUONG, v. TRUIST
BANK, Case No. 3:23-cv-00079-MOC-DCK (W.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge
entered an order granting the "Joint Motion To Amend Scheduling
Order."
The scheduling order deadlines are revised as follows:
-- Mediation report: July 26, 2024
-- The Plaintiff's expert reports: Aug. 9, 2024
-- The Defendant's expert reports: Sept. 9, 2024
-- Discovery completion: Oct. 15, 2024
-- Class certification motion: Nov. 4, 2024
-- Dispositive motions: Jan. 21, 2025
-- Trial date: April 21, 2025
Truist Bank offers saving and current account, investment and
financial services, and online banking.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bgiKzo at no extra
charge.[CC]
UKG INC: Fails to Implement Data Security Practices, Illouz Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
EVAN ILLOUZ, on behalf of himself individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UKG INC., Defendant, Case
No. 0:24-cv-60137-RS (S.D. Fla., Jan. 25, 2024) is a class action
arising from the recent cyberattack and data breach resulting from
UKG's failure to implement reasonable and industry standard data
security practices.
According to the complaint, Plaintiff's and Class Members'
sensitive personal identifiable information (PII) -- which they
entrusted to Defendant on the mutual understanding that Defendant
would protect it against disclosure -- was compromised and
unlawfully accessed due to the data breach. The PII compromised in
the Data Breach included Plaintiff's and Class Members' full names,
addresses, demographic information, recent salary information,
banking and routine information, and Social Security numbers.
The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit on behalf of those
similarly situated to address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding
of Class Members' PII and for failing to provide timely and
adequate notice to Plaintiff and other Class Members that their
information had been subject to the unauthorized access by an
unknown third party and precisely what specific type of information
was accessed.
UKG Inc. is an American multinational technology company with dual
headquarters in Lowell, Massachusetts, and Weston, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mariya Weekes, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
201 Sevilla Avenue, 2nd Floor
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (786) 879-8200
Facsimile: (786) 879-7520
E-mail: mweekes@milberg.com
UNIVERSAL WINDOWS: Wade Files TCPA Class Suit in N.D. Ohio
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Universal Windows
Direct, LLC. The case is captioned as STACY WADE, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. UNIVERSAL WINDOWS
DIRECT, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-00265 (N.D. Ohio, February 12,
2024).
The case arises from the Defendant's violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
Universal Windows Direct, LLC is an exterior remodeling company,
headquartered in Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian T. Giles, Esq.
GILES & HARPER-CINCINNATI
7247 Beechmont Avenue
Cincinnati, OH 45230
Telephone: (513) 379-2715
E-mail: bgiles@gilesharper.com
VEGA CAPITAL: Vitol Seeks to Quash Subpoena in Antitrust Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VITOL INC., v. VEGA
CAPITAL LONDON LIMITED, Case No. 4:24-mc-00010 (S.D. Tex.),
non-party Vitol moves the Court to quash Vega's Subpoena to Produce
Documents, Information, or Objects.
The Motion stems from a class action complaint filed by the
Plaintiff Mish, on behalf of itself and all others similarly
situated, against the Defendants Vega and John Does 1-100 in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
In the Complaint, Mish claims that the Defendants violated the
Commodity Exchange Act, and the Sherman Antitrust Act, by
intentionally manipulating the prices of NYMEX West Texas
Intermediate ("WTI") crude oil future contracts between April 20,
2020 and at least April 21, 2020.
Specifically, Mish alleges that, prior to April 20, 2020, traders
associated with Vega purchased a large volume of Trading at
Settlement ("TAS") contracts, which gave Vega the right to purchase
May 2020 WTI futures contracts at a price that would be determined
by the settlement price of the contracts at the close of trading on
April 20, 2020.[BN]
VIRGINIA: Bid to Seal Class Cert Exhibits OK'd
-----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL D. ROSE, and
EDWARD L. HARMON, on their own behalf and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. MICHAEL FRANCIS, individually and as an
employee of the West Virginia Division of Corrections and
Rehabilitation, et al., Case No. 5:22-cv-00405 (S.D.W. Va.), the
Hon. Judge Frank W. Volk entered an order granting the Defendants'
Motion to Seal Exhibit 8 to the Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
Certification.
The Court previously directed the parties to submit any revised
sealing requests related to Exhibits 2, 3, 8 and 20 to the
Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification on or before August 18,
2023. [Doc. 526].
In the event such a showing was not made by that date or otherwise
deemed inadequate, the Court advised the parties that the exhibits
would be ordered unsealed.
The Defendants include THE RALEIGH COUNTY COMMISSION, John/Jane Doe
Employees of the Raleigh County Commission, THE FAYETTE COUNTY
COMMISSION, John/Jane Doe Employees of the Fayette County
Commission, THE GREENBRIER COUNTY COMMISSION, John/Jane Doe
Employees of the Greenbrier County Commission, THE MERCER COUNTY
COMMISSION, John/Jane Doe Employees of the Mercer County
Commission, THE MONROE COUNTY COMMISSION, John/Jane Doe Employees
of the Monroe County Commission, THE SUMMERS COUNTY COMMISSION,
John/Jane Doe Employees of the Summers County Commission, THE
WYOMING COUNTY COMMISSION, John/Jane Doe Employees of the Wyoming
County Commission, PRIMECARE MEDICAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, INC.,
John/Jane Doe PrimeCare Employees, JOHN/JANE DOE CORRECTIONAL
OFFICERS, BETSY JIVIDEN, individually as an employee of the West
Virginia Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation, WEXFORD HEALTH
SOURCES, INC. John/Jane Doe Wexford Employees, BRAD DOUGLAS,
individually and in his official capacity as the acting
Commissioner of the West Virginia Division of Corrections and
Rehabilitation, JEFF S. SANDY, individually and in his official
capacity as the Cabinet Secretary of the West Virginia Division
Department of Homeland Security, and WILLIAM K. MARSHALL, III
individually and in his official capacity as the Commissioner of
the West Virginia Division of Corrections and Rehabilitation,
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 24, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cAxLIF at no extra
charge.[CC]
VIVINT INC: Settles FCRA Class Action Suit for $9.7 Million
-----------------------------------------------------------
A NOTICE OF CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT THAT ENTITLED ONE
TO A CASH PAYMENT FROM A CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT IF A CREDIT WAS
ACCESSED BY VIVINT, INC. TO OPEN ACCOUNTS WITHOUT AUTHORIZATION OR
IF ONE WAS SUBJECTED TO COLLECTION ATTEMPTS REGARDING SUCH
ACCOUNTS. THIS SETTLEMENT IS ENTIRELY SEPARATE FROM VIVINT'S
SETTLEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.
Vivint, Inc. ("Vivint") is a company that sells and services smart
home security systems across the United States. A settlement has
been reached in a class action lawsuit involving allegations that
Vivint accessed credit information in violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act and created Vivint accounts without authorization.
The proposed settlement is not an admission of wrongdoing by
Vivint, and Vivint denies that it violated the law. The Court has
not decided who is right or wrong. Rather, to save the time,
expense, and distraction of litigation, Vivint has agreed to a
settlement of the class action lawsuit. That settlement has been
preliminarily approved by a Court in Birmingham, Alabama. For
complete information visit www.VivintFCRASettlement.com.
As part of the settlement, Vivint has agreed to establish a
settlement fund of $9,750,000, from which Class Members may submit
a Claim Form to receive a cash payment. The exact amount of each
Class Member's payment is unknown at this time; but it will be up
to $1,200 per account created in their name without authorization
for which he or she was subjected to collection attempts and $250
per additional account created in his or her name without
authorization that was not subjected to collection attempts, to be
paid from the settlement fund. Please visit
www.VivintFCRASettlement.com to learn more about the settlement and
your rights and options, including how to submit a Claim Form
electronically or by mail, as well as how to exclude yourself or
object to the settlement. Claim Forms must be submitted by June 7,
2024.
As part of the settlement, Class Counsel will request an award of
attorneys' fees not to exceed one-third (1/3) of the settlement
fund and expenses (including costs) not to exceed One Hundred
Sixty-Five Thousand dollars ($165,000.00). The Class
Representatives will also petition the Court for a total award of
$30,000.00 for their services in bringing this suit. It is not
expected that the award of fees or the service award will reduce
the benefit to any Class Member, but it is possible depending on
the number of valid claims submitted. You may retain your own
counsel, but only at your own expense. [GN]
WALMART INC: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Frost Says
------------------------------------------------------------
Clarence and Tammy Frost, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Walmart Inc., Defendant, Case No.
0:24-cv-00211-JRT-LIB (D. Minn., Jan. 25, 2024) is a class action
under the Americans with Disabilities Act brought by Plaintiffs, on
behalf of blind and other vision disabled consumers, seeking relief
including an injunction requiring Defendant to make its website,
www.walmart.com, accessible to Plaintiffs and the putative class;
and requiring Defendant to adopt sufficient policies, practices and
procedures to ensure that Defendant's website remains accessible in
the future.
As a consequence of their experience visiting Defendant's Website,
including in 2023, and from investigation performed on their
behalf, Plaintiffs found Defendant's website has a number of
digital barriers that deny screen-reader users like Plaintiffs full
and equal access to important website content -- content Defendant
makes available to its sighted website users. By failing to provide
its website's content and services in a manner that is compatible
with auxiliary aids, Defendant has engaged, directly, or through
contractual, licensing, or other arrangements, in illegal
disability discrimination, says the suit.
Walmart Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that
operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and
grocery stores in the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
Jason Gustafson, Esq.
THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC
222 South Ninth Street, Suite 1600
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
E-mail: pat@throndsetlaw.com
jason@throndsetlaw.com
WASHINGTON DC: Reply in Support of Any Class Cert Bid Due March 29
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Larisa Popkova DSHS
Employee No.1, Paula Brantner-Thomas DSHS Employee No.2, Katherine
Rowlette DSHS Employee No.3, Karen Robbins DSHS Employee No.4, Gary
C. Bright DSHS Employee No.5, on behalf of themselves and all other
similarly situated persons, v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH
SERVICES, Don Clintsman and Jilma Meneses, DOES 1-50, Case No.
3:23-cv-05130-DGE (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge David G. Estudillo
entered an order that:
-- The Plaintiffs' new deadline to file any motion for class
certification is Feb. 16, 2024.
-- The Defendant DSHS's response to any motion for class
certification is due March 22, 2024.
-- Any reply in support of a motion for class certification is due
March 29, 2024.
Pursuant to LCR 7(j), the parties jointly ask the Court to continue
the class certification briefing schedule by 35 days (five weeks)
to facilitate resolution of potential class issues.
On Aug. 8, 2023, the Court entered a briefing schedule for class
certification. The Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is
due Friday, Jan. 12, 2024.
The Defendant DSHS's response is due Feb. 16, 2024, and Plaintiffs'
reply is due Feb. 23, 2024. The parties have begun productive
discussions that may eliminate the need for class certification
briefing or the Court's involvement in class certification issues.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VLP7gr at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Tracy Tribbett, Esq.
PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE
6404 Three Rivers Drive
Pasco, WA 99301
Telephone: (509) 713-9868
E-mail: ttribbett@pji.org
The Defendants are represented by:
Mary Crego Peterson, Esq.
Michael J. Ewart, Esq.
HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON P.S.
999 Third Avenue, Suite 4600
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (206) 623-1745
E-mail: mary.peterson@hcmp.com
jake.ewart@hcmp.com
WASHINGTON NATIONAL: Faces Harrington Contract Suit in S.D. Ind.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Washington National
Insurance Company. The case is captioned as KONNIE HARRINGTON,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
WASHINGTON NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
1:24-cv-00282-MPB-MJD (S.D. Ind., February 12, 2024).
The case type is stated as 190 Contract - Other Contract.
Washington National Insurance Company is a provider of supplemental
health and life insurance products, headquartered in Indiana. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Amina Thomas, Esq.
Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 636-6481
Facsimile: (317) 636-6481
E-mail: athomas@cohenandmalad.com
ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
YAHOO INC: Faces Sancruzado Suit Over Illegal Collection Letter
---------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD SANCRUZADO, individually and on behalf of all those
similarly situated v. YAHOO INC. D/B/A AOL, Case No. 189042144
(Fla. Cir., Jan. 3, 2024) sues the Defendant for violating the
Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act.
On December 29, 2023, the Defendant sent an electronic mail
communication to the Plaintiff in connection with the collection of
the Consumer Debt. The Communication was sent from
AOLAccountMgmt@comms.aol.net and delivered to the Plaintiff's
personal e-mail address.
The Communication advised: "your account is past due. Please update
your payment method." The Communication was sent by the Defendant
to the Plaintiff at 6:23 AM in the Plaintiff's time zone, and was
received by the Plaintiff at 6:23 AM in the Plaintiff's time zone.
The Defendant did not have the consent of the Plaintiff to
communicate with the Plaintiff between the hours of 9:00 PM and
8:00 AM, thus violating section 559.72(17) of the FCCPA, the
lawsuit asserts.
The Plaintiff is a citizen of the State of Florida, residing in
Miami-Dade County, Florida.
Yahoo is a technology and media company that serves users through
its portfolio of digital platforms, products, and services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
Jennifer G. Simil, Esq.
Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 907-1136
E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com
jen@jibraellaw.com
zane@jibraellaw.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 ***