/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/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 ***