/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240422.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Monday, April 22, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 81
Headlines
AAGJ INC: Stroude Suit Alleges ADA Breach
ACACIA NETWORK: Neor Suit Seeks Conditional Collective Status
AFNI INC: Walker Files Class Action Suit in Florida
AGILON HEALTH: IPRS Sues Over Exchange Act Violation
AIR INTERNATIONAL: Perez Suit Removed to E.D. California
AJAY GLASS & MIRROR: Louis Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
ALCHEMEE LLC: O'Dea Sues Over Carcinogenic Impurity in Products
ALL THINGS INSURANCE: Sheldon Files TCPA Suit in D. Nevada
AMBETTER OF MAGNOLIA: Yarborough Files Suit in S.D. Mississippi
AMC ENTERTAINMENT: Plaintiffs Support $3.3MM Settlement Approval
AMERICANA ART: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
AMIKA LLC: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ANDERSON DESIGN: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
ANHEUSER-BUSCH: Opposition to Class Cert Bid Extended to May 30
ARAMARK SERVICES: Stewart Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois
ARGONAUT INFLATABLE: Thorne Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
ART HEADQUARTERS: Bruce Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Violates Disabilities Act, Martinez Claims
ASPEN PROPERTIES: Marinelli Suit Removed to M.D. Pennsylvania
AT&T INC: Aquino Sues Over Failure to Safeguard Information
AT&T INC: Barkley Files Suit in N.D. Texas
AT&T INC: Citino Files Suit in N.D. Texas
AT&T INC: Cumo Files Suit in N.D. Texas
AT&T INC: Dean Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach
AT&T INC: Doss Sues Over Failure to Secure and Safeguard PII
AT&T INC: Huyler Files Suit in N.D. Texas
AT&T INC: Slovenkay Files Suit in N.D. Texas
AT&T INC: Williamson Sues Over Failure to Safeguard & Secure PII
ATEKCITY CORPORATION: Castillo Suit Transferred to C.D. California
BANK OF AMERICA: Faces Walker Suit Over Contract-Related Violation
BANK OF AMERICA: Seeks to Stay Class Cert Briefing
BEAL PROPERTIES: Muir Seeks Unpaid Wages for Real Estate Employees
BOUNTIFUL CO: Supplements' Package Label "Misleading," Simon Says
BROADBASE INC: Gomez Files Labor Class Action
BUILD-A-BEAR WORKSHOP: Yard Sues Over Collection of Voiceprints
CHILDREN'S PLACE: Hernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
CIGNA HEALTH: Bid to Leave for Renewed Class Cert Bid Filing Denied
CITADEL SERVICING: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Ballard Due June 7
CITY WINERY: Faces Anderson Suit Over ADA Violation
D&C LOOP: General Pretrial Order Entered Guzman Class Suit
DELTA BRIDGE: Samson Sues Over Unpaid Wages & Layoff Without Notice
DIG INN RESTAURANT: Faces Hernandez Suit Over ADA Breach
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Theodore Files FCRA Suit in E.D. Virginia
EQUIPMENTSHARE.COM INC: Cocroft Suit Removed to S.D. California
ESH RESTAURANT: Cross Bid for Class Certification Denied as Moot
ETHAN ALLEN: Martinez Sues Over ADA Violation
ETHOS TECHNOLOGIES: Bond Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
EXOTIC WORLD: Wahab Files Suit Over ADA Violation
FINISH LINE: Hernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
FIRST AID BEAUTY: Lewis Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
FIRST AVENUE DELI: Avila Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
FIVE KEYS SCHOOLS: Perkins Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
FOCUS CAMERA: Anderson Files Suit Over Alleged ADA Violation
FOOD CONCEPTS: Court Defines Class of Servers in Timothy Class Suit
GENERAL MOTORS: Thongsawang Sues Over Personal Property Damages
HAIER US APPLIANCE: Blurton Sues Over Defective Compressors
HAIR CLUB FOR MEN: Anderson Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
HARD ROCK CAFE: Dibenedetto Suit Transferred to D. New Jersey
HELMS ORGANIC: Anderson Files Suit Over ADA Violation
HENG HENG: Violates ADA, Stroude Says
KIDDIECORP INC: Black Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
KIRKLAND LAKE: Plaintiff's Amended Class Certification Bid Tossed
KROGER CO: Kirkbride Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Classes
KUDOS INNOVATIONS: Deng Sues Over Unsafe Substances in Products
LA-Z-BOY INC: Martinez Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
LAVIVA HOME: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
LAZER SPOT INC: Hall Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
LENOVO GROUP: Class Cert Bid Filing Due April 25
LIMEGUYS INC: Hopkins Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
LINDE GAS & EQUIPMENT: Olivares Suit Removed to N.D. California
LOANDEPOT.COM LLC: Hunter Files Suit in W.D. Missouri
LOS ANGELES, CA: Suit Seeks to Certify Homeless Veteran Class
LUNA INNOVATIONS: Karzoun Sues Over Securities Laws Violation
M&D CAPITAL PREMIER: Barnes Files Suit in E.D. New York
MAC COSMETICS: Fact Discovery Deadline in Maciel Extended to June 8
MAC'S CONVENIENCE: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Brown
MACY'S RETAIL: Sykes Suit Removed to S.D. California
MASTRO'S RESTAURANTS: Cho Sues Over Sexual Harassment
MCLANE COMPANY: McGowan Suit Removed to C.D. California
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in Cancer Care Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in CCMH Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in FCS Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in HOACNY Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in MOH Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in NSHOA Suit Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in OHASV Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in SOP Set for June 4
MDL 2700: Settlement Conference in Trastuzumab Suit Set for June 4
MGM RESORTS: Bid for Voluntary Dismissal OK'd in Data Breach Suit
MISSION NEIGHBORHOOD: Goins Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
NAVY FEDERAL: King Appeals Case Dismissal to 9th Circuit
ONESKIN INC: Faces Slade Suit Over ADA Violation
PAUL SMITH: Anderson Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
RAWLINGS COMPANY: Zakarian Suit Asserts Breach of Contract
SMOOTHSTACK INC: Court Grants Bid to Toss Claim in O'Brien Suit
SPRINKLES CUPCAKES: Anderson Files ADA Suit in E.D.N.Y.
STARBUCKS CORP: Fails to Accommodate Lactating Staff, Iraheta Says
SUB-ZERO GROUP: Anderson Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
T.L. CANNON: Filing for Class Cert Reply in Dees Suit Due May 8
TECHNOGYM USA: Anderson Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
TILIT NYC INC: Hernandez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
TOSCANA PIZZA & GRILL: Claret Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
TUPPERWARE BRANDS: Seeks April 23 Class Cert Response Extension
UNITED SUGAR: Controls Granulated Sugar Prices, Piala Suit Claims
VALLEY OAKS: Faces Floyd Suit in Indiana
WALMART INC: Hawkins Fraud Suit Removed to E.D. Cal.
WELLS FARGO: Conduent Appeals Arbitration Order in Munoz Suit
ZUMIEZ INC: Anderson Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
*********
AAGJ INC: Stroude Suit Alleges ADA Breach
-----------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AAGJ, Inc. The case
is captioned as Colette Stroude, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. AAGJ, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02344
(E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
AAGJ, Inc. is a New York-based company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
ACACIA NETWORK: Neor Suit Seeks Conditional Collective Status
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GIITOU NEOR and TYRONE
WALLACE, on behalf of themselves, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and
the Class, v. ACACIA NETWORK, INC., d/b/a ACACIA NETWORK, ACACIA
NETWORK HOUSING INC., d/b/a ACACIA NETWORK, PROMESA RESIDENTIAL
HEALTH CARE FACILITY, INC., d/b/a PROMESA, and JOHN DOE CORP 1-100,
Case No. 1:22-cv-04814-ER (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court
to enter an order granting their motion for conditional collective
certification and for court facilitation of notice Pursuant to 29
U.S.C. section 216(b).
Acacia provides social services such as community groups.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 1, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1WkanN at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
Anne Seelig, Esq.
LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
148 West 24th Street, Eighth Floor
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 465-1188
Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
AFNI INC: Walker Files Class Action Suit in Florida
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Afni, Inc. The case
is captioned as JAMES WALKER, individually and on behalf of other
similarly situated consumers v. Afni, Inc., Case No.
2024-11132-CIDL (Fla. Cir., Volusia Cty., March 30, 2024).
The civil case is brought over Defendant's alleged business
transactions-related misconduct.
Afni, Inc. provides financial and commercial services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew Fornaro, Esq.
RAUSCH STURM LLP
St Petersburg, FL 33701
AGILON HEALTH: IPRS Sues Over Exchange Act Violation
----------------------------------------------------
Indiana Public Retirement System, on behalf of itself and all
others similarly situated v. AGILON HEALTH, INC., STEVEN J. SELL,
TIMOTHY S. BENSLEY, GLENN SOBOTKA, MICHELLE A. GOURDINE, MICHAEL L.
SMITH, RONALD A. WILLIAMS, SHARAD MANSUKANI, CLAY RICHARDS, RAVI
SACHDEV, RICHARD J. SCHNALL, DEREK L. STRUM, WILLIAM WULF, CLAYTON,
DUBILIER & RICE, LLC, GOLDMAN SACHS & CO. LLC, J.P. MORGAN
SECURITIES LLC, and BofA SECURITIES, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-02506
(S.D.N.Y., April 2, 2024), is brought on behalf of all persons who
purchased shares of Agilon common stock between April 15, 2021 and
February 27, 2024, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period"),
including purchases traceable to the April 2021 initial public
offering of Agilon stock (the "IPO"), seeking to pursue remedies
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "1934 Act") and the
Securities Act of 1933 (the "1933 Act") against Agilon, certain of
the Company's senior officers and directors, the underwriters for
the IPO, and private equity owner of the Company.
Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants claimed that Agilon's
differentiated business model had allowed it to avoid an uptick in
utilizations and medical care costs affecting other medical
providers and that the comparably better outcomes achieved by
Agilon validated the success of its Total Care Model. Even as other
healthcare providers reported upticks in utilizations, defendants
denied that Agilon was suffering from these same adverse trends and
pointed to the Company's purportedly superior cost mitigation track
record as evidence of its competitive advantages. These
representations caused the price of Agilon stock to increase to
over $40 per share. During the Class Period, defendants sold
billions of dollars' worth of Agilon stock at inflated prices,
including in three registered stock offerings during the Class
Period.
Unbeknownst to investors, in reality Agilon's business model did
not offer the cost savings represented by defendants, and the
Company was suffering the same dramatic uptick in utilizations and
medical claims as other healthcare providers, as patients who had
delayed elective procedures and otherwise utilizing medical
benefits during the COVID-19 pandemic sought treatment. Agilon was
experiencing up to 3x higher costs in 2023 as compared to 2022 and
had suffered tens of millions of dollars in excessive costs not
revealed to investors, including costs related to supplemental
benefits, specialist costs, outpatient surgeries, and Part B drugs.
In addition, Agilon had failed to disclose tens of millions of
dollars' worth of adverse prior year development claims. As a
result, Agilon was running hundreds of millions of dollars below
the medical margin trend represented to investors, with drastic
implications for the Company's profitability, its ability to
achieve positive cash flows, and the viability of its business
model. After the truth was revealed, the price of Agilon stock
collapsed to $6 per share, more than 85% below the Class Period
high.
The Defendants' statements were materially false and misleading
when made because they misrepresented and failed to disclose the
adverse facts about Agilon's business, operations, and prospects,
which were known to defendants or recklessly disregarded by them,
as follows: that Agilon's business model, purportedly focused on
patient care rather than fee-for-service, was unable to provide the
cost savings and the mitigation of medical expenses represented to
investors; that Agilon's purported historical cost savings
portrayed to investors in connection with the IPO and the September
2021 SPO were short-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and not
indicative of the cost controls and incentives ostensibly inherent
in Agilon's business model; and that, Agilon suffered from a
material, undisclosed risk of higher utilization and medical claims
rates once the short-term effects of the COVID-19 pandemic waned
and the providers in Agilon's network were poised to experience an
upsurge in patient demand for medical services, materially above
the historical rate portrayed in the Registration Statement, says
the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased Agilon common stock during the Class
Period and traceable to the IPO and suffered damages as a result.
Agilon is a healthcare company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
58 South Service Road, Suite 200
Melville, NY 11747
Phone: 631/367-7100
Fax: 631/367-1173
Email: srudman@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
Brian E. Cochran, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101-8498
Phone: 619/231-1058
Fax: 619/231-7423
Email: bcochran@rgrdlaw.com
AIR INTERNATIONAL: Perez Suit Removed to E.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Christian Perez, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. AIR INTERNATIONAL US, INC., a
Delaware corporation; AMERICAN STAFFING SERVICE, INC., a California
corporation; SOUTH EAST EMPLOYEE LEASING SERVICES, INC., a Florida
corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 24CV003072
was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California,
County of Sacramento, to the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of California on April 5, 2024, and assigned Case
No. 2:24-cv-01030-KJM-CSK.
The Complaint alleges eight causes of action which Plaintiff
pursues on a class action basis: failure to pay minimum wages,
failure to pay overtime compensation, failure to provide meal
periods, failure to authorize and permit rest breaks, failure to
indemnify necessary business expenses, failure to timely pay final
wages, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements, and
unfair business practices in violation of Business and Professions
Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Daniel B. Chammas, Esq.
Valorie L. Ferrouillet, Esq.
FORD HARRISON LLP
350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2300
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: (213) 237-2400
Facsimile: (213) 237-2401
Email: dchammas@fordharrison.com
vferrouillet@fordharrison.com
AJAY GLASS & MIRROR: Louis Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Gardy Louis, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. AJAY GLASS & MIRROR CO., INC., JIM STATHOPOULOS, STEVE
STATHOPOULOS, and DEAN STATHOPOULOS, Case No. 3:24-cv-00462-BKS-ML
(N.D.N.Y., April 2, 2024), is brought to recover unpaid wages,
overtime compensation, damages, penalties and reasonable attorneys'
fees and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act (the "FLSA") and
under McKinney's Labor Law (the "NYLL")
The Defendants have engaged in illegal and improper wage practices
and policies that have deprived Hourly Employees of millions of
dollars in wages and overtime compensation. These practices include
improperly compensating Hourly Employees based only upon their
scheduled hours rather than the actual time they worked.
Furthermore, Defendants failed to provide Hourly Employees with
appropriate and accurate pay rate acknowledgement forms and weekly
wage statements. These illegal practices and policies are uniform
throughout Defendants' facilities and have been known to Defendants
for years, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was hired by Ajay Glass in June 2023 and is employed
as a window glazier.
Ajay Glass provides residential and commercial construction
services throughout the Western and Northern Tiers of New
York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brett Gallaway, Esq.
Lee Shalov, Esq.
Jason Giaimo, Esq.
McLAUGHLIN & STERN, LLP
260 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10016
Phone: (212) 448-1100
Email: bgallaway@mclaughlinstern.com
lshalov@mclaughlinstern.com
jgiaimo@mclaughlinstern.com
ALCHEMEE LLC: O'Dea Sues Over Carcinogenic Impurity in Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lucinda O'Dea, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ALCHEMEE, LLC and TARO PHARMACEUTICALS U.S.A., INC.,
Case No. 1:24-cv-02755 (N.D. Ill., April 5, 2024), is brought
regarding Defendants' manufacturing, distribution, advertising,
marketing and sale of acne treatment products under various brands
that contain the active ingredient benzoyl peroxide ("BPO") (the
"Products"). BPO degrades over time into benzene, a carcinogenic
impurity that has been linked to leukemia and other cancers.
These Products are not designed to contain benzene, and the use of
benzene in the manufacturing process is not "unavoidable." Thus,
the presence of benzene in the Products renders them adulterated
and misbranded, and therefore illegal to sell under both federal
and state law. As a result, the Products are unsafe and illegal to
sell under federal law, and therefore worthless.
Although Defendants lists both active and inactive ingredients on
the Products' labels, benzene is not among those ingredients
listed. Thus, Defendants misrepresents that the Products do not
contain benzene, or otherwise Defendants fails to disclose that the
Products contain benzene. The Plaintiff and other Class Members
would not have purchased the Products, or would have paid
substantially less for the Products, had Defendants disclosed that
the Products contained or risked containing benzene, or otherwise
not misrepresented that the Products did not contain or were not at
risk of containing benzene.
The Defendants failed to detect or prevent the benzene in its
Products, and Plaintiff and consumers were harmed as a result of
Defendants' failure. The Defendants represent that the Products are
safe for their intended use. But the Products actually contain
benzene at the time of purchase, and prospective consumers are
unaware of this fact because the chemical is not included on the
Products' ingredients list or packaging. Further, Plaintiff and
Class Members reasonably relied on Defendants' representations that
the Products were safe, unadulterated, and free of any carcinogens
that are not listed on the label.
The Plaintiff and Class Members purchased and used the Product and
were therefore exposed to or risked being exposed to the harmful
presence of benzene in the Products. The Product is worthless
because it contains or risked containing benzene, a known human
carcinogen that is an avoidable ingredient in the Product and their
manufacturing process. Indeed, the presence of benzene renders the
Product adulterated, misbranded, and illegal to sell. The
Defendants failed to test for, detect, or prevent the benzene
contamination in its Product, and Plaintiff and consumers were
harmed as a result of Defendants' failure, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff has purchased and used Defendants' Proactiv 2.5% BPO
Cream and Defendants' Proactiv 5% BPO Cream from a CVS store in
Chicago, Illinois.
The Defendants own Proactiv which specializes in skincare products,
including moisturizers, acne treatments, and cleansers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN LLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
- and -
Nick Suciu III, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
6905 Telegraph Rd., Suite 115
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301
Phone: 313-303-3472
Email: nsuciu@milberg.com
- and -
J. Hunter Bryson, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
405 E 50th Street
New York, NY 10022
Phone: (630) 796-0903
Email: hbryson@milberg.com
- and -
Luis Cardona, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
1311 Ponce de Leon Avenue
San Juan, PR 00907
Phone: (516) 862-0194 Ext 5861.
Email: lcardona@milberg.com
- and -
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
New York, NY 10019
Phone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
Email: pfraietta@bursor.com
ALL THINGS INSURANCE: Sheldon Files TCPA Suit in D. Nevada
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against All Things Insurance
Group, LLC. The case is styled as Martin Sheldon, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. All Things Insurance
Group, LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-00645 (D. Nev., April 3, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
All Things Insurance Group (ATIG) --
https://allthingsinsurancegroup.com/ -- is a family-owned,
independent insurance agency providing unbeatable insurance
services nationwide.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gustavo E. Ponce, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
6787 W. Tropicana Ave., Suite 250
Las Vegas, NV 89103
Phone: (800) 400-6808
Email: gustavo@kazlg.com
AMBETTER OF MAGNOLIA: Yarborough Files Suit in S.D. Mississippi
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ambetter of Magnolia,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as John Yarborough, on behalf of
himself and all other similarly situated persons v. Ambetter of
Magnolia, Inc., John Does 1-10, Case No. 2:24-cv-00055-HSO-BWR
(S.D. Miss., April 5, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Insurance for Insurance Contract.
Ambetter from Magnolia Health --
https://ambetter.magnoliahealthplan.com/ -- offers Health Insurance
Marketplace plans in Mississippi.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel M. Waide, Esq.
JOHNSON, RATLIFF & WAIDE, PLLC
P. O. Box 17738
1300 Hardy Street, 2nd Floor (39401)
Hattiesburg, MS 39404
Phone: (601) 582-4553
Fax: (601) 582-4556
Email: dwaide@jhrlaw.net
AMC ENTERTAINMENT: Plaintiffs Support $3.3MM Settlement Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs Dennis J. Donoghue and Mark Rubenstein on April 17 filed
a response in support of AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.'s motion
for final approval of the parties' settlement.
According to the 2-page document, AMC's brief at page 9 gives a
broad-brush description of the contents of the First Amended
Complaint. It correctly notes that the first four Claims for
Relief, denominated as "Counts I-IV", depend upon the contention
that the Antara entities entered into 10% beneficial ownership of a
class of AMC equity securities on their signing of the Forward
Agreement on December 22, 2022. The Forward Agreement contained a
condition predicate to closing, that no objection be raised under
the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvement Act of 1976 ("the HSR
period") within 30 days of submission for review.
Beneficial ownership of shares is imputed to any person having the
capacity to acquire shares within 60 days. The plaintiffs' argument
for Antara's entry into beneficial ownership on execution of the
forward purchase is that the closing of the purchase did, in fact,
take place within 60 days of execution and that if an event
actually happened within 60 days, that event was empirically
capable of happening within 60 days.
"There is no appellate decision of which we are aware that supports
or rejects this line of argument, although there are one or two
district court decisions that do assume the contrary," David Lopez,
Esq., counsel for the Plaintiffs, stated. "In any event, the
present of the first four Claims for Relief provided bargaining
chips to be played in settlement negotiations and the Fifth Claim
for Relief backstopped the complaint with failsafe contention which
formed the ultimate basis for settlement -- that 10% beneficial
ownership happened on the expiration date of the HSR period."
He further noted that the reasoning of the first four Claims For
Relief is consistent with the thinking underlying treatment of
derivative securities in which a purchase occurs on entry into the
opening of a call equivalent position even if the derivative is not
then exercisable.
Mr. Lopez asserted that the financial condition of AMC was and
continues to be parlous and the concession of the plaintiffs to
settlement on the basis of the Fifth Claim for Relief was largely
in consideration, as a matter of judgment, of the best interest of
AMC.
"A prolongation of the case that might produce better facial
results would be pyrrhic victory if it came posthumously," Mr.
Lopez argued. "The proposed settlement is fair, reasonable and
adequate, all relevant factors taken into account including the
need for AMC to survive until and beyond collection."
A copy of the response is available at
https://tinyurl.com/37v77k5d
As previously reported by the Class Action Reporter, AMC
Entertainment Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: AMC), on March 12 disclosed
that a federal court in New York issued an order preliminarily
approving a proposed settlement reached by all parties to a civil
action brought by plaintiffs Dennis J. Donoghue and Mark
Rubenstein, each of whom are AMC shareholders, for AMC to recover
so-called "short-swing" profits under Section 16(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") alleged to
have been realized by defendants Antara Capital Master Fund LP,
Antara Capital Fund GP LLC, Antara Capital LP, Antara Capital GP
LLC, and Himanshu Gulati (collectively, the "Antara Defendants") in
connection with their purchases and sales of AMC securities. AMC
is party to the suit in name only, which was brought for the
benefit of AMC.
The court will hold a hearing on May 2, 2024 at 1:15 p.m. in
Courtroom 12B at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States
Courthouse, 500 Pearl Street, New York, New York to, among other
things, consider whether to finally approve the proposed
settlement. If finally approved, AMC will receive $3,300,000 from
the Antara Defendants and the Antara Defendants will be released
from claims of violations of Section 16(b) of the Exchange Act.
The settlement notice has been posted to the Investor Relations
section of AMC's website at
https://investor.amctheatres.com/notice-03-12-2024
AMERICANA ART: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Americana Art
Enterprises, LLC. The case is styled as Jessica Karim, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Americana Art
Enterprises, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-02452 (S.D.N.Y., April 1,
2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Americana Art Enterprises, L.L.C. was founded in 1998. The
Company's line of business includes the retail sale of specialized
lines of merchandise.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: (516) 287-3458
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
AMIKA LLC: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Amika, LLC. The case
is styled as Jessica Karim, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. Amika, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-02453-PAE-JLC
(S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Amika -- https://loveamika.com/ -- has grown to become one of the
largest independent hair care brands in the U.S.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: (516) 287-3458
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
ANDERSON DESIGN: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Anderson Design
Group, Inc. The case is styled as Jessica Karim, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Anderson Design Group,
Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02454-JMF-GS (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Anderson Design Group -- https://www.andersondesigngroupstore.com/
-- is a Nashville-based poster art design firm founded by Joel
Anderson.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: (516) 287-3458
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
ANHEUSER-BUSCH: Opposition to Class Cert Bid Extended to May 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as THOMAS E. OVERBY, JR., and
ABBY GEARHART, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated Plaintiffs, v. ANHEUSER-BUSCH, LLC, Case No.
4:21-cv-00141-AWA-DEM (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Arenda Wright
Allen entered an order granting joint motion for extension of
deadlines and to modify Rule 16(b) Scheduling Order as follows:
1. On or before April 18, 2024, the Plaintiffs shall make the
following limited expert disclosures: (i) identify the
name(s)
of any retained expert(s) and (ii) provide a summary, through
a sworn declaration of the retained expert, of the
anticipated
scope of the anticipated expert report and methodology the
expert shall use to conduct their analysis; such summary
shall
describe how the expert’s report/findings can be presented
at
trial in support of class-wide damages;
2. The deadline for Plaintiffs' Rule 23 class certification
motion
is extended from April 4, 2024 to April 18, 2024;
3. On or before May 30, 2024, the Defendant shall make the
following limited expert disclosures: (i) identify the
name(s)
of any retained expert(s) and (ii) provide a summary, through
a sworn declaration of the retained expert, of the
anticipated
scope of the anticipated expert report and methodology the
expert shall use to conduct their analysis;
4. The deadline for the Defendant's opposition to Rule 23 class
certification and motion for decertification is extended from
April 25, 2024 to May 30, 2024.
5. The deadline for the Plaintiffs' Reply to Rule 23 Class
Certification is extended from May 9, 2024 to July 11, 2024.
6. The deadline for the Plaintiffs’ Opposition to Motion for
decertification is extended from May 23, 2024 to July 11,
2024.
7. The deadline for the Defendant's reply in support of motion
for
decertification is extended from June 6, 2024 to Aug. 9,
2024.
8. The deadline for dispositive motions is extended from July
10,
2024, to Sept. 11, 2024.
9. The fact discovery deadline is extended from June 26, 2024,
to
Aug. 9, 2024.
Anheuser-Busch is an American brewing company.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 1, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JU1Blp at no extra
charge.[CC]
ARAMARK SERVICES: Stewart Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois
-------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Teba Stewart, individually and on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. Aramark Services,
Inc., Case No. 2023CH08859 was removed from the Circuit Court of
Cook County, Chancery, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois on April 1, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:24-cv-02596 to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I.
Aramark -- https://www.aramark.com/ -- provides food service,
facilities and uniform services to hospitals, universities, school
districts, stadiums and other businesses around the world.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Edward A. Wallace, Esq.
WALLACE MILLER
150 N Wacker, Ste. 1100
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (312) 261-6193
Fax: (312) 275-8174
Email: eaw@wallacemiller.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Esq.
Jennifer Ann Riley, Esq.
Tyler Zachary Zmick, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
190 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 3700
Chicago, IL 60603
Phone: (312) 499-6710
Email: gmaatman@duanemorris.com
jariley@duanemorris.com
tzzmick@duanemorris.com
ARGONAUT INFLATABLE: Thorne Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------------
Braulio Thorne, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, v. ARGONAUT INFLATABLE RESEARCH AND
ENGINEERING, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-02519 (S.D.N.Y., April 2,
2024), is brought against the Defendant for its failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website to be
fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's website,
https://www.aire.com (the "Website" or "Defendant's website"), is
not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it
violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a
change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures
so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually impaired consumers. By failing to make its
Website available in a manner compatible with computer screen
reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and visually-impaired
individuals the benefits of its online goods, content, and
services—all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals—thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
The Defendant operates the Aire online retail store as well as the
Aire website and advertises, markets, and operates in the State of
New York and throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Phone: 212.228.9795
Fax: 212.982.6284
Email: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
ART HEADQUARTERS: Bruce Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------
Kristin Bruce, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. ART HEADQUARTERS, LLC dba WENDOVER ART GROUP, Case No.
8:24-cv-00835 (M.D. Fla., April 4, 2024), is brought to recover
monetary damages for unpaid overtime wages and retaliation under
United States laws pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("the
Act").
The Plaintiff regularly worked hours over 40 in a work week,
however Plaintiff was not compensated for the required overtime
premium. The Defendant has a policy or pattern/practice of
improperly calculating the lawful overtime rate of Plaintiff and
others similarly situated. All records necessary to calculate the
amount of overtime monies due are in the possession of the
Defendant, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff began her employment in November 21, 2022, as a
Customer Account Manager.
The Defendant is a Foreign corporation licensed and authorized and
doing business in the State of Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Wolfgang M. Florin, Esq.
Miguel Bouzas, Esq.
FLORIN|GRAY
16524 Pointe Village Drive, Suite 100
Lutz, FL 33558
Phone: (727) 220-4000
Facsimile: (727) 483-7942
Email: wflorin@floringray.com
miguel@floringray.com
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Violates Disabilities Act, Martinez Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ashley Furniture
Industries, Inc. The case is captioned as Silvia Martinez, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Ashley
Furniture Industries, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02336 (E.D.N.Y., March
29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc. is an American home furnishings
manufacturer and retailer, headquartered in Arcadia,
Wisconsin.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
PeterPaul Elhamy Shaker, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
1 University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
ASPEN PROPERTIES: Marinelli Suit Removed to M.D. Pennsylvania
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Nick Marinelli, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Aspen Properties Group, LLC, Aspen
Growth IV Trust, Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, FCI Lender
Services, Inc., Does 1-10, Case No. 1608-CV-2024 was removed from
the Monroe County Court of Common Pleas, to the U.S. District Court
for the Middle District of Pennsylvania on April 4, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-00574-KM to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I.
Aspen Properties, LLC -- https://aspenpropertiesgroup.com/ --
develops communities, builds homes and manages property.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Chandler Steiger, Esq.
Kevin Abramowicz, Esq.
Kevin W. Tucker, Esq.
Stephanie Moore, Esq.
EAST END TRIAL GROUP LLC
6901 Lynn Way, Suite 215
Pittsburgh, PA 15208
Phone: (412) 223-5740
Fax: (412) 626-7101
Email: kabramowicz@eastendtrialgroup.com
ktucker@eastendtrialgroup.com
smoore@eastendtrialgroup.com
- and -
David Gaspar, Jr., Esq.
ARM LAWYERS
115 East Broad Street
Bethlehem, PA 18018
Phone: (484) 353-5402
Email: david@armlawyers.com
- and -
Patrick J. Best, Esq.
ARM LAWYERS
18 N. 8th St.
Stroudsburg, PA 18360
Phone: (570) 420-7431
Email: patrick@armlawyers.com
The Defendant is represented by:
James V. Noonan, Esq.
Pamela J. Leichtling, Esq.
NOONAN & LIEBERMAN, LTD.
33 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 1150
Chicago, IL 60602
Phone: (312) 431-1455
- and -
Kevin L. Hall, Esq.
TUCKER ARENSBERG, P.C.
300 Corporate Center Drive, Suite 200
Camp Hill, PA 17011
Phone: (717) 221-7951
Fax: (717) 232-6802
Email: khall@tuckerlaw.com
AT&T INC: Aquino Sues Over Failure to Safeguard Information
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Aquino, individually and on behalf all others similarly
situated v. AT&T INC., a corporation, Case No. 3:24-cv-00802-X
(N.D. Tex., April 2, 2024), is brought against the Defendants
admitted failure to safeguard the sensitive personal identifying
information.
The Plaintiff and millions of other consumers entrusted AT&T with
their personal data when they registered for accounts, providing
their names, contact information, social security numbers,
passcodes, dates of birth and/or security questions and answers. As
stated in their own privacy policy, AT&T recognizes the heavy
burden of protection and security that they bear when collecting
and storing this data.
Indeed, AT&T represents that it "worked hard to protect customers'
information." AT&T touts its purported dedication to strong
security by making the following advertising claims for its devices
and services, including but not limited to, the following: "AT&T
established electronic and administrative safeguards designed to
make the information they collect secure." "Applying encryption or
other appropriate security controls to protect Personal Information
when stored or transmitted by AT&T." "Laws and regulations guide
AT&T in how to give customers notification when certain types of
sensitive information are involved in a security breach."
AT&T's representations of strong and transparent security have
proved false and misleading--AT&T admittedly failed to safeguard
the sensitive personal identifying information of millions of its
consumers or implement robust security measures to prevent this
information from being stolen, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was required to create an AT&T account.
AT&T, Inc is a global technology service company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bruce W. Steckler, Esq.
STECKLER WAYNE & LOVE, PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Road, Suite 1045
Dallas, TX 75230
Phone: (972) 387-4040
Fax: (972) 387-4041
Email: bruce@swclaw.com
- and -
Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
Yana Hart, Esq.
Tiara Avaness, Esq.
CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C.
22525 Pacific Coast Highway
Malabu, CA 90265
Phone: (213) 788-4050
Email: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com
yhart@clarksonlawfirm.com
tavaness@clarksonlawfirm.com
AT&T INC: Barkley Files Suit in N.D. Texas
------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T, Inc. The case
is styled as Matthew Barkley, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. AT&T, Inc., Case No. 3:24-cv-00769-N (N.D.
Tex., April 1, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.
AT&T Inc. -- https://www.att.com/ -- is an American multinational
telecommunications holding company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bruce William Steckler, Esq.
STECKLER WAYNE & LOVE PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Rd., Suite 1045
Dallas, TX 75230
Phone: (972) 387-4040
Fax: (972) 387-4041
Email: bruce@swclaw.com
AT&T INC: Citino Files Suit in N.D. Texas
-----------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T, Inc. The case
is styled as Nella Citino, Daniel Mizell, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated v. AT&T, Inc., Case No.
3:24-cv-00843-B (N.D. Tex., April 5, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.
AT&T Inc. -- https://www.att.com/ -- is an American multinational
telecommunications holding company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Phone: (214) 744-3000
Fax: (214) 744-3015
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
AT&T INC: Cumo Files Suit in N.D. Texas
---------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T, Inc. The case
is styled as Jeffrey Cumo, Tiara Alston, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. AT&T, Inc., Case No.
3:24-cv-00772-L (N.D. Tex., April 1, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.
AT&T Inc. -- https://www.att.com/ -- is an American multinational
telecommunications holding company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Phone: (214) 744-3000
Fax: (214) 744-3015
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
AT&T INC: Dean Sues Over Cyberattack and Data Breach
----------------------------------------------------
Patricia Dean, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated
persons v. AT&T, INC., Case No. 3:24-cv-00776-X (N.D. Tex., April
1, 2024), is brought arising out of a recent targeted cyberattack
and data breach ("Data Breach") in which AT&T, the largest
telecommunications services company in the United States, lost
control over more than 73 million customers' personal data and
other sensitive information.
Those customers, including Plaintiffs and Class Members, suffered
ascertainable losses from this Data Breach including the loss of
the benefit of their bargain, out-of-pocket expenses and the value
of their time reasonably incurred to remedy or mitigate the effects
of the attack. The Plaintiff's and Class Members' personal data and
other sensitive information—which was entrusted to Defendant for
safe keeping—was compromised and unlawfully accessed due to the
Data Breach. The Data Breach included personally identifiable
information ("PII") that Defendant collected and maintained.
Information compromised in the Data Breach includes, inter alia,
names, addresses, phone numbers, dates of birth, Social Security
Numbers, and email addresses ("Private Information").
The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit to address
Defendant's inadequate safeguarding of Class Members' Private
Information that it collected, and for failing to provide timely
and adequate notice to Plaintiff and Class Members that their
information had been subject to the unauthorized access of unknown
third parties and precisely what specific type of information was
accessed. The Defendant collected and shared Private Information in
a reckless manner. In particular, Private Information was collected
by Defendant, inadequately secured, and shared with a vendor who
had insufficient cybersecurity protections in place to protect that
Private Information.
The mechanism of the cyberattack and potential for improper
disclosure of Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information
was a known risk to Defendant, and thus Defendant was on notice
that failing to take steps necessary to secure the Private
Information from those risks left that property in a dangerous
condition. The Plaintiff's and Class Members' identities are now at
increased risk of identity theft because of Defendant's negligent
conduct since the Private Information that Defendant collected and
promised to protect is now in the hands of data thieves.
As a result of the Data Breach, 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 in the
future closely monitor their financial accounts to guard against
identity theft. The Plaintiff and Class Members may also incur out
of pocket costs for, e.g., purchasing credit monitoring services,
credit freezes, credit reports, or other protective measures to
deter and detect identity theft. The Plaintiff seeks to remedy
these harms on behalf of herself and all similarly situated
individuals whose Private Information was accessed during the Data
Breach, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is an AT&T customer and received telecommunication
services from AT&T.
AT&T is a telecommunications company that provides, among other
things, wireless network services, cellular data plans, cell phone
plans, and Internet connection plans.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bruce W. Steckler, Esq.
STECKLER WAYNE & LOVE PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Road, Suite 1045
Dallas, TX 75230
Phone: (972) 387-4040
Facsimile: (972) 387-4041
Email: bruce@swclaw.com
- and -
Jean S. Martin, Esq.
Francesca K. Burne, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
Phone: (813) 223-5505
Facsimile: (813) 222-2434
Email: jeanmartin@forthepeople.com
fburne@forthepeople.com
AT&T INC: Doss Sues Over Failure to Secure and Safeguard PII
------------------------------------------------------------
Stephanie Doss, Bethany Miller, and Aimee Jarvis, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AT&T INC., Case No.
4:24-cv-00234-RK (W.D. Mo., April 2, 2024), is brought against
Defendant for its failure to secure and safeguard the personally
identifiable information ("PII") of over 70 million individuals who
are customers of the company.
The Defendant could have prevented the Data Breach by properly
monitoring their file software. Defendant required its customers to
provide it with their sensitive PII and failed to protect it.
Defendant had an obligation to secure their customers' PII by
implementing reasonable and appropriate data security safeguards.
This was part of the bargain between Plaintiffs and Class Members
and Defendant.
As a result of Defendant's failure to provide reasonable and
adequate data security, Plaintiffs' and the Class Members'
unencrypted, non-redacted PII has been exposed to unauthorized
third parties. Plaintiffs and the Class are now at much higher risk
of identity theft and cybercrimes of all kinds, especially
considering the highly sensitive PII stolen here and the fact that
the compromised PII is already being sold on the dark web.
This risk constitutes a concrete injury suffered by Plaintiffs and
the Class as they no longer have control over their PII, which PII
is now in the hands of third-party cybercriminals. This substantial
and imminent risk of identity theft has been recognized by numerous
courts as a concrete injury sufficient to establish standing, says
the complaint.
The Plaintiffs are individuals whose Personal Information was
compromised in the Data Breach.
ATT headquartered in Dallas, Texas is one of the world's largest
telecommunication companies, providing telecommunications goods and
services.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
Lucy McShane, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY, LLC
1656 Washington Street, Suite 120
Kansas City, MO 64108
Phone: (816) 888-8010
Facsimile: (816) 332-6295
Email: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
lmcshane@mcshanebradylaw.com
AT&T INC: Huyler Files Suit in N.D. Texas
-----------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T, Inc. The case
is styled as Brandon Huyler, on behalf of himself and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. AT&T, Inc., Case No.
3:24-cv-00847-L (N.D. Tex., April 5, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Breach of
Contract.
AT&T Inc. -- https://www.att.com/ -- is an American multinational
telecommunications holding company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Bruce William Steckler, Esq.
Steckler Wayne Cherry & Love PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Rd., Suite 1045
Dallas, TX 75230
Phone: (972) 387-4040
Fax: (972) 387-4041
Email: bruce@swclaw.com
- and -
Jonathan Marc Jagher, Esq.
FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC
923 Fayette Street
Conshohocken, PA 19428
Phone: (610) 234-6486
Fax: (224) 632-4521
Email: jjagher@fklmlaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
C. Shawn Cleveland
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
2850 N. Harwood Street, Suite 1100
Dallas, TX 75201
Phone: (214) 210-1210
Fax: (214) 210-1201
Email: scleveland@bakerlaw.com
AT&T INC: Slovenkay Files Suit in N.D. Texas
--------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AT&T, Inc. The case
is styled as Richard Slovenkay, Wesley Hansen, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. AT&T, Inc., Case
No. 3:24-cv-00774-X (N.D. Tex., April 1, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.
AT&T Inc. -- https://www.att.com/ -- is an American multinational
telecommunications holding company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Phone: (214) 744-3000
Fax: (214) 744-3015
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
AT&T INC: Williamson Sues Over Failure to Safeguard & Secure PII
----------------------------------------------------------------
Alison Williamson, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. AT&T, INC., Case No. 3:24-cv-00790-S (N.D.
Tex., April 2, 2024), is brought against Defendant for its failure
to properly secure and safeguard personally identifiable
information ("PII" or "Private Information") including, but not
limited to full names, email addresses, mailing addresses, phone
numbers, Social Security numbers, dates of birth, AT&T account
numbers and passcodes.
Despite unctuous privacy assurances, AT&T has suffered one of the
largest and most consequential data breaches in U.S. history,
compromising the sensitive personal information of approximately 73
million consumers. Initial indications of a hacking involving AT&T
customers was rumored back in 2021, yet Defendant was only recently
forced to acknowledged that certain former and current account
holder information was exfiltrated when it was determined that the
information was released on the dark web.
With this action, Plaintiff seeks to hold Defendant accountable for
the harms it caused and will continue to cause Plaintiff and at
least 7.6 million current and approximately 65.4 million former
AT&T account holders that have been impacted and other similarly
situated individuals in the massive and preventable cyberattack
purportedly discovered by Defendant, by which cybercriminals
infiltrated Defendant's inadequately protected network servers and
accessed and exfiltrated highly sensitive PII of Plaintiff and
Class Members which was inadequately maintained by Defendant ("Data
Breach"). The Plaintiff further seeks to hold Defendant responsible
for not ensuring that Plaintiff's PII was maintained and secured in
a manner consistent with industry standards.
The Defendant disregarded the rights of Plaintiff and Class Members
by intentionally, willfully, recklessly, and/or negligently failing
to take and implement adequate and reasonable measures to ensure
that the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members was safeguarded,
failing to take available steps to prevent an unauthorized
disclosure of data, and failing to follow applicable, required, and
appropriate protocols, policies, and procedures regarding the
encryption of data, even for internal use. As a result, the
Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was compromised through
disclosure to an unknown and unauthorized criminal third-party,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a resident and citizen of the State of Georgia,
residing in Fayetteville, Georgia who entrusted their PII with
Defendant.
The Defendant is an American multinational telecommunications
holding company headquartered in downtown Dallas, Texas.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Phone: 214-744-3000
Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Nathan D. Prosser, Esq.
HELLMUTH & JOHNSON PLLC
8050 West 78th Street
Edina, MN 55439
Phone: (952) 746-2124
Email: nprosser@hjlawfirm.com
ATEKCITY CORPORATION: Castillo Suit Transferred to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Shirley Castillo and Kaden Geiger, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ATEKCITY
CORPORATION and VESYNC CORPORATION, Case No. 4:24-cv-00176 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California on April 1, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-02643-FLA-BFM to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Etekcity Corporation -- https://etekcity.com/ -- operates as an
ecommerce retailer.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Phone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
Email: ltfisher@bursor.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Judith Shophet Sidkoff, Esq.
DENTONS US LLP
601 South Figueroa Street Suite 2500
Los Angeles, CA 90017-5704
Phone: (213) 623-9300
Fax: (213) 623-9924
Email: judith.sidkoff@dentons.com
- and -
Sarah Schneider Carlson, Esq.
DENTONS US LLP
4655 Executive Drive, Suite 700
San Diego, CA 92121
Phone: (314) 259-5831
Email: sarah.carlson@dentons.com
BANK OF AMERICA: Faces Walker Suit Over Contract-Related Violation
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bank of America, N.A.
The case is captioned as Isadora Y. Walker, et al., individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bank of America,
N.A. (W.D.N.C., March 29, 2024).
The Plaintiffs bring this suit over the Defendant's
contract-related violation.
The case is assigned to Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr.
Bank of America, N.A. operates as a bank. The Bank offers saving
and current account, investment and financial services, online
banking, and mortgage and non-mortgage loan facilities, as well as
issues credit card and business loans.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Dana Stone Smith, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD, LLP
745 Fifth Ave, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Telephone: (212) 532-1091
Facsimile: (646) 417-5967
E-mail: dsmith@sirillp.com
BANK OF AMERICA: Seeks to Stay Class Cert Briefing
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RUSSELL PFEFFER, DAVID
DESSNER, ADAM SHERMAN, FRANK CRONIN, ROGER ROJAS, JASON AUERBACH,
GRACE BOZICK, MUHAMED VRLAKU and ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, v.
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION and BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Case No.
3:23-cv-00813-KDB-DCK (W.D.N.C.), the Defendants ask the Court,
pursuant to Local Rule 7.1, to enter an Order:
1. staying briefing and consideration of the Plaintiffs' motion
for
conditional collective and facilitated notice, until after
the
Court has the opportunity to consider the Parties' positions
as
set forth in the Certification and Report of Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(f) Conference and Discovery Plan, including through the
requested scheduling conference, and enter an appropriate
Scheduling Order, or, in the alternative,
2. extending the Defendants' deadline to respond to the
Plaintiffs'
motion by 30 days.
Accordingly, the Defendants ask the Court enter an Order staying
briefing and consideration of the Motion, which the Defendants
believe is premature.
In light of the current approaching deadline for Defendants to
respond to the Plaintiffs' motion in less than two weeks on April
11, 2024, the Defendants file this Motion now in the abundance of
caution seeking this relief.
Bank of America is an American multinational investment bank and
financial services holding company.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Mar. 29, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=AVE5FX at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Meredith A. Pinson, Esq.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP
201 North Tryon Street, Ste. 3000
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone: (704) 343-2252
Facsimile: (704) 353-6171
E-mail: mpinson@mcguirewoods.com
BEAL PROPERTIES: Muir Seeks Unpaid Wages for Real Estate Employees
------------------------------------------------------------------
JEFF MUIR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BEAL PROPERTIES, LLC and STEWART BEAL,
Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-10898-PDB-APP (E.D. Mich., April 8,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Mr. Muir worked for the Defendants as a director of Acquisitions &
Investor Relations.
Beal Properties, LLC is a real estate management company doing
business in Michigan. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Guy T. Conti, Esq.
CONTILEGAL
28475 Greenfield Rd., Ste. 113
Southfield, MI 48076
Telephone: (888) 489-3232
Email: gconti@contilegal.com
BOUNTIFUL CO: Supplements' Package Label "Misleading," Simon Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JASON LEWIS SIMON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE BOUNTIFUL COMPANY, fka
Nature's Bounty Co.; NORDIC NATURALS, INC.; PFIZER, INC.; ALACER
CORP.; QUTEN RESEARCH INSTITUTE, LLC; BAYER HEALTHCARE, LLC;
PHARMAVITE, LLC; CHURCH & DWIGHT CO., INC., Defendants, Case No.
3:24-cv-00597-SB (D. Ore., April 8, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendants for violation of the Unlawful Trade Practices Act
and for intentional misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and
injunction/equitable relief.
The case arises from the Defendants' false, deceptive, and
misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of certain
vitamins, minerals, herbs, amino acids, spices, oils, and other
supplements to Oregon consumers. According to the complaint, the
Principal Display Panel (PDPs) on the accused products do not
provide a consumer with the information necessary to determine the
net quantity of contents in the package. Instead, the PDPs mislead
consumers and overstate the amount of dietary supplement in each
package by a factor equal to the serving size. The
misrepresentations, omissions, and non-complying nature of the PDPs
on the products were unknown to the Plaintiff and Class members at
the time of their purchases. As a result, they suffered actual and
ascertainable damages in the amount of their purchase price, says
the suit.
The Bountiful Company, formerly known as Nature's Bounty Co., is a
manufacturer of dietary supplements, with its headquarters in New
York.
Nordic Naturals, Inc. is a manufacturer of dietary supplements,
with its headquarters in California.
Pfizer, Inc. is a manufacturer of dietary supplements, with its
headquarters in New York.
Alacer Corp. is a manufacturer of dietary supplements, with its
headquarters in California.
Quten Research Institute, LLC is a manufacturer of dietary
supplements, with its headquarters in New Jersey.
Bayer HealthCare, LLC is a manufacturer of dietary supplements,
with its headquarters in New Jersey.
Pharmavite, LLC is a manufacturer of dietary supplements, with its
headquarters in California.
Church & Dwight Co., Inc. is a manufacturer of dietary supplements,
with its headquarters in New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rick Klingbeil, Esq.
RICK KLINGBEIL, PC
1826 NE Broadway
Portland, OR 97232
Telephone: (503) 490-6763
Email: rick@klingbeil-law.com
BROADBASE INC: Gomez Files Labor Class Action
---------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Broadbase, Inc. The
case is captioned as Lorenzo Migelito Gomez, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Broadbase, Inc., a
California corporation, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2024-0003942 (Cal.
Super., San Joaquin Cty., March 29, 2024).
The case is brought over the Defendant's alleged employment-related
violation.
A case management conference is scheduled for September 25, 2024
before Judge Barbara Kronlund.
Broadbase, Inc. offers automotive repair and maintenance services
in California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John G. Yslas, Esq.
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
3055 Wishire Blvd., 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Telephone: (213) 255-3937
E-mail: jyslas@wilshirelawfirm.com
BUILD-A-BEAR WORKSHOP: Yard Sues Over Collection of Voiceprints
---------------------------------------------------------------
MARK YARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BUILD-A-BEAR WORKSHOP, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 2024LA000430 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Dupage Cty., April 8, 2024) is a
class action against the Defendant for violations of the Illinois
Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA).
According to the complaint, the Defendant violated the BIPA by
collecting, capturing, and/or storing the voiceprint identifiers of
customers who purchased a Record Your Voice Chip. The customers
were not aware that their voiceprint data are being collected,
captured, and/or stored by the Defendant. The Defendant failed to
obtain a BIPA compliant written release from the Plaintiff and
Class members prior to collecting, capturing, and storing their
voiceprints when they purchased a Record Your Voice Chip in
Illinois, nor were they ever provided with a written policy
regarding the use of their biometric identifiers as required under
the BIPA, says the suit.
Build-A-Bear Workshop, Inc. is a retail store operator in Illinois.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew T. Peterson, Esq.
CONSUMER LAW ADVOCATE, PLLC
230 E. Ohio St., Suite 410
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (815) 999-9130
Email: mtp@lawsforconsumers.com
CHILDREN'S PLACE: Hernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy Hernandez, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, v. THE CHILDREN'S PLACE, INC., Case No.
1:24-cv-02417-LDH-SJB (E.D.N.Y., April 1, 2024), is brought against
Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate Defendant's website, www.childrensplace.com (the
"Website"), to be fully accessible to and independently usable by
Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Defendant's website is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore,
Defendant is in violation of the ADA. 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, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a blind, visually-impaired handicapped person.
The Defendant 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
Phone: (201) 282-6500 ext. 102
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
CIGNA HEALTH: Bid to Leave for Renewed Class Cert Bid Filing Denied
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RJ, as the representative
of her beneficiary son; DS, an individual, and on behalf of and all
others similarly situated, v. CIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, and MULTIPLAN, INC., Case No. 5:20-cv-02255-EJD (N.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Edward Davila entered an order denying the
Plaintiffs' administrative motion for leave to file a renewed
motion for class certification.
The Court says that "the Plaintiffs have not shown an intervening
change in controlling law, emergence of new material facts, or
clear error in the Court's order denying class certification, and
the Court finds that the Plaintiffs have not established any other
basis justifying a renewed class certification motion."
The Plaintiffs brought this lawsuit as a putative class action
based on the Defendants alleged failure to reimburse covered mental
health provider claims at usual, customary, and reasonable ("UCR")
rates.
The Plaintiffs are participants in employee benefits plans that are
administered by the Defendants and subject to the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA").
On Feb. 12, 2024, the Court denied the Plaintiffs' class
certification motion, finding that Plaintiffs "had not demonstrated
by a preponderance of the evidence that their proposed class
definition exhibited a common contention 'of such a nature that it
is capable of class-wide resolution -- which means that
determination of its truth or falsity will resolve an issue that is
central to the validity of each one of the claims in one stroke.'"
The Plaintiffs petitioned the Ninth Circuit for permission to
appeal the Class Certification Order on Feb. 27, 2024; the petition
was denied on March 27, 2024.
Cigna offers life and health insurance services.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 1, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WJrWTD at no extra
charge.[CC]
CITADEL SERVICING: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Ballard Due June 7
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Falon Ballard et al, v.
Citadel Servicing Corporation et al., Case No.
8:22-cv-01679-FWS-ADS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Fred Slaughter
entered an order granting in part and denying in part the
Plaintiffs' Ex Parte application to continue deadline to file class
certification motion from April 11, 2024, to June 7, 2024.
Event Date
Final Pretrial Conference & Hearing Sept. 26, 2024
on Motions in Limine:
Deadline for Plaintiff's Class June 7, 2024
Certification Motion:
Deadline for Defendants' opposition July 5, 2024
to Class Certification:
Deadline for Plaintiff's reply to July 19, 2024
opposition:
Hearing on Class Certification Motion: Aug. 1, 2024
Last Date to Hear Motions: June 27, 2024
Deadline to Complete Settlement Conference: July 2, 2024
Citadel provides non-prime loans for residential properties on both
an owner occupied and non-owner occupied basis.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 1, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BbQhko at no extra
charge.[CC]
CITY WINERY: Faces Anderson Suit Over ADA Violation
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against City Winery New York,
LLC. The case is captioned as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. City Winery New York,
LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-02350 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
City Winery New York, LLC is a live music venue based in New
York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 915-7415
E-mail: mars@khaimovlaw.com
D&C LOOP: General Pretrial Order Entered Guzman Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOEL GUZMAN, v. D & C LOOP
INC., doing business as SHINJUKU, and TENG HUANG, individually,
Case No. 1:24-cv-02235-RA-RFT (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Ronnie
Abrams entered an order:
-- General Pretrial (includes scheduling, discovery,
non-dispositive
pretrial motions, and settlement); and
-- Specific Non-Dispositive Motion/Dispute: Class certification
(if
any).
A copy of the Court's order dated March 28, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Pv91Ti at no extra
charge.[CC]
DELTA BRIDGE: Samson Sues Over Unpaid Wages & Layoff Without Notice
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SAMSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DELTA BRIDGE FUNDING LLC, CLOUDFUND LLC,
YELLOWSTONE CAPITAL LLC, FUNDRY LLC, INFUSION CAPITAL GROUP LLC,
FUNDERBOLT CAPITAL LLC, JOHN DOE CORPORATIONS 1-100, DAVID GLASS,
YITZHAK STERN, JEFFREY REECE, BARTOSZ MACZUGA, VADIM SEREBRO,
MATTHEW MELNIKOFF and MARK SANDERS, Defendants, Case No.
2:24-cv-02635 (E.D.N.Y., April 8, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendants for unpaid wages in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, conversion, unjust
enrichment, and failure to issue a notice in compliance with the
federal and the New York Worker Adjustment Retraining Notification
Act.
The Plaintiff worked as a sales representative for the Defendants
from approximately March 15, 2023, until March 10, 2024, at 1615
Northern Blvd., Ste. 301, Manhasset, New York.
Delta Bridge Funding LLC is an investment company based in New
York.
Cloudfund LLC is a cloud computing venture firm based in New York.
Yellowstone Capital LLC is a private equity firm based in New
York.
Fundry LLC is an alternative business lending firm based in New
York.
Infusion Capital Group LLC is a direct lending firm based in New
York.
Funderbolt Capital LLC is a direct lending firm based in New York.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Taimur Alamgir, Esq.
TA LEGAL GROUP PLLC
315 Main Street, Second Floor
Huntington, NY 11743
Telephone: (914) 552-2669
Email: tim@talegalgroup.com
DIG INN RESTAURANT: Faces Hernandez Suit Over ADA Breach
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Dig Inn Restaurant.
The case is captioned as Timothy Hernandez, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated v. Dig Inn Restaurant, Case No.
1:24-cv-02343 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Dig Inn Restaurant Group, LLC doing business as Dig Inn Seasonal
Market, owns and operates a chain of restaurants.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Theodore Files FCRA Suit in E.D. Virginia
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equifax Information
Services, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Wilson Theodore,
Lashanda Theodore, on behalf of themselves and others similarly
situated v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, Case No.
2:24-cv-00224-EWH-LRL (E.D. Va., April 3, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act.
Equifax Information Services LLC -- http://www.equifax.com/--
provides data solutions. The Company offers financial, consumer and
commercial data, and analytical solutions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Short, Esq.
John Justin Maravalli, Esq.
Leonard Anthony Bennett, Esq.
Mark Clifton Leffler, Esq.
Thomas Dean Domonoske, Esq.
CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES, P.C.
763 J. Clyde Morris Boulevard, Suite 1-A
Newport News, VA 23601
Phone: (757) 930-3660
Fax: (757) 930-3662
Email: adam@clalegal.com
john@clalegal.com
lenbennett@clalegal.com
mark@clalegal.com
tom@clalegal.com
EQUIPMENTSHARE.COM INC: Cocroft Suit Removed to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Kevin Dion Cocroft, an individual, on behalf
of himself, and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v.
EQUIPMENTSHARE.COM INC; and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, Case No.
37-2024-00009472-CU-OE-CTL was removed from the Superior Court of
the State of California for the County of San Diego, to the United
States District Court for the Southern District of California on
April 4, 2024, and assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-00645-BAS-AHG.
The Plaintiff's Complaint alleges violations of California Labor
Code ("Labor Code") Section 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 210, 221, 226,
226.7, 246, 510, 512, 558, 1194, 1197, 1197.1, 1198, 2802 and
California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"), based on alleged
failure to pay for all hours worked.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Michael E. Brewer (SBN 177912)
Janice W. Lin (SBN 349794)
BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP
Two Embarcadero Center, 11th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3802
Phone: (415) 576-3000
Facsimile: (415) 576-3099
Email: michael.brewer@bakermckenzie.com
janice.lin@bakermckenzie.com
- and -
Lily S. Duong (SBN 322274)
BAKER & MCKENZIE LLP
10250 Constellation Boulevard Suite 1850
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: (310) 201-4728
Facsimile: (310) 201-4721
Email: lily.duong@bakermckenzie.com
ESH RESTAURANT: Cross Bid for Class Certification Denied as Moot
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE PAGUAY, on behalf of
himself and the class, v ESH RESTAURANT GROUP LLC, et al, Case No.
1:23-cv-08434-JPO-KHP (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge J. Paul Oetken
entered an order, in light of Judge Parker's Opinion, denying as
moot the Plaintiffs' cross-motion for class certification.
On Sept. 25, 2023, the Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and a
putative class, filed this action under the Fair Labor Standards
Act and New York Labor Law against the Defendants.
The Court referred the case to the Honorable Katharine H. Parker
for
General Pretrial on Sept. 26, 2023.
On Jan. 19, 2024, the Defendants filed a motion to compel
arbitration and a motion to dismiss.
On Feb. 2, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a cross-motion to certify a
class pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(2).
On Apr. 1, 2024, Magistrate Judge Parker issued an Opinion and
Order granting the Defendants' motion to compel arbitration; that
Opinion did not resolve the Defendants' related motion to dismiss
and the Plaintiffs' cross-motion for class certification.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=XZvcsW at no extra
charge.[CC]
ETHAN ALLEN: Martinez Sues Over ADA Violation
---------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ethan Allen
Interiors, Inc. The case is captioned as Silvia Martinez, on behalf
of herself and all others similarly situated v. Ethan Allen
Interiors, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02334 (E.D.N.Y., March 29,
2024).
The lawsuit arises from the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Ethan Allen Interiors, Inc. is a manufacturer and retailer of home
furnishings.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
PeterPaul Elhamy Shaker, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
1 University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
ETHOS TECHNOLOGIES: Bond Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ethos Technologies,
Inc. The case is styled as Joseph Bond, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Ethos Technologies, Inc., Case
No. 1:24-cv-01440-ELR (N.D. Ga., April 4, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Ethos -- https://ethostec.com/ -- specializes in building
resilient, highly performant, and scalable cloud applications using
AWS and Azure.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony Paronich, Esq.
PARONICH LAW, P.C.
350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400
Hingham, MA 02043
Phone: (615) 485-0018
Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com
- and -
Steven Howard Koval, Esq.
THE KOVAL FIRM, LLC
Building 15, Suite 120
3575 Piedmont Rd.
Atlanta, GA 30305
Phone: (404) 513-6651
Fax: (404) 549-4654
Email: Steve@KovalFirm.com
EXOTIC WORLD: Wahab Files Suit Over ADA Violation
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Exotic World of
Frangrances, Inc. The case is captioned as Angela Wahab, on behalf
of herself and all others similarly situated v. Exotic World of
Frangrances, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02392 (S.D.N.Y., March 29,
2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Exotic World of Frangrances, Inc. provides essential oils, aroma
diffusers, bottles, bath products and aromatherapy products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
FINISH LINE: Hernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-----------------------------------------------------------
Timothy Hernandez, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, v. THE FINISH LINE, INC., Case No.
1:24-cv-02421 (E.D.N.Y., April 1, 2024), is brought against
Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate Defendant's website, www.jdsports.com (the "Website"), to
be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's website is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore,
Defendant is in violation of the ADA. 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, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a blind, visually-impaired handicapped person.
The Defendant 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
Phone: (201) 282-6500 ext. 102
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
FIRST AID BEAUTY: Lewis Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Adam Lewis, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. First Aid Beauty, Limited, was removed from
the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in Boward County, Florida, to the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on April
1, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:24-cv-60514-XXXX to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.
First Aid Beauty Limited -- https://www.firstaidbeauty.com/ --
manufactures and retails beauty and skincare products. The Company
offers sun protection cream, cleansers and exfoliators, masks,
serums and treatments, eye and lip makeup, and body care
products.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
The Defendant is represented by:
Jennifer Anne Adler, Esq.
THOMPSON HINE LLP
3560 Lenox Road NE, Suite 1600
Atlanta, GA 30326
Phone: (404) 407-3694
Fax: (404) 541-2905
Email: Jennifer.Adler@thompsonhine.com
FIRST AVENUE DELI: Avila Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mary Avila and Edwin Arias, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. FIRST AVENUE DELI & SUPER MARKET INC. (DBA
GIRO CHICKEN) and AHMED SAGHEER, Case No. 2:24-cv-04578 (S.D.N.Y.,
April 5, 2024), is brought against Defendants for alleged
violations of the Federal Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and of the
New Jersey State Wage and Hour Law ("NJWHL"), arising from
Defendants' various willful and unlawful employment policies,
patterns and/or practices and to recover unpaid minimum wages and
overtime compensation for the Plaintiffs.
The Defendants maintained a policy and practice of requiring the
Plaintiffs and the FLSA collective employees to work more than 40
hours per week without providing them with any additional
compensation. The Defendants have willfully and intentionally
committed widespread violations of the FLSA and NJWHL by engaging
in a pattern and practice of failing to pay its employees,
including the Plaintiffs, minimum wage and overtime compensation
for all hours worked over 40 each workweek.
The Defendants refused to record all of the time that the
Plaintiffs and similarly situated individuals employed by the
Corporate Defendant worked, including the work performed in excess
of forty hours each week. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs now bring
this Action on behalf of themselves and those other similarly
situated individuals, for federal and state claims relating to
unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime wages, failure to maintain
records pursuant to the FLSA and the NJWHL, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs were employed as cooks for the Defendants' company.
The Defendants owned and operated FIRST AVENUE DELI & SUPER MARKET
INC. (DBA GIRO CHICKEN), a corporate entity principally engaged in
the food services industry.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lina Stillman, Esq.
STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.
42 Broadway, 12t Floor
New York, NY 10004
Phone: (212) 203-2417
Web: www.StillmanLegalPC.com
FIVE KEYS SCHOOLS: Perkins Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Five Keys Schools and
Programs. The case is styled as Isaac Junior Perkins, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Five Keys Schools
and Programs, Case No. CGC24613580 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin
Cty., April 2, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Other Non-Exempt Complaints (age
discrimination in violation of Government Code 12940; Retaliation
For Opposing Practices Forbidden by FEHA in violation of Governemnt
Code 12940;)."
Five Keys Schools and Programs -- https://www.fivekeyscharter.org/
-- provide basic adult educational options for obtaining a High
School Diploma or High School Equivalency.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Gross, Esq.
FRONTIER LAW CENTER
23901 Calabasas Rd., Ste. 1084
Calabasas, CA 91302-3392
Phone: 818-924-2115
Email: Joseph@frontierlawcenter.com
FOCUS CAMERA: Anderson Files Suit Over Alleged ADA Violation
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Focus Camera, Inc.
The case is captioned as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Focus Camera, Inc., Case No.
1:24-cv-02354 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Focus Camera, Inc. is a family-owned photography and imaging
retailer with stores in Brooklyn, New York and Lakewood, New
Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 915-7415
E-mail: mars@khaimovlaw.com
FOOD CONCEPTS: Court Defines Class of Servers in Timothy Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TIMOTHY FIRESTONE AND
LYRIC RICHARDSON, Individually and Behalf all others Similarly
Situated, v. FOOD CONCEPTS, LLC d/b/a Cowboys Brazilian Steakhouse,
AND ARMELINDO CONTE individually, Case No. 2:22-cv-04020-BHH
(D.S.C.), the Hon. Judge Bruce Howe Hendricks entered an order
defining the class as follows:
"All current and former Servers and Gauchos who worked at Food
Concepts d/b/a Cowboys Brazilian Steakhouse located at 2411 Mall
Drive in North Charleston, SC, from Feb. 13, 2021, through June
15,
2022, who were paid an hourly rate less than the statutory
minimum
wage of Seven and 25/100 dollars ($7.25) per hour and shared in
a
mandatory tip pool."
On Feb. 13, 2024, the Court granted the Plaintiffs' motion for
conditional class certification and to authorize notice.
On Feb. 27, 2024, the parties filed a joint motion describing the
remaining disputes regarding the proposed notice and setting forth
each party's position.
A copy of the Court's order dated March 28, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7oPFjZ at no extra
charge.[CC]
GENERAL MOTORS: Thongsawang Sues Over Personal Property Damages
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against General Motors LLC,
et al. The case is captioned as Jariya Thongsawang, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. General Motors
LLC, et al., Case No. 8:24-cv-00695-AB-DFM (C.D. Cal., March 29,
2024).
The Plaintiff alleges personal property damages from Defendant's
misconduct.
General Motors LLC is an American multinational automotive
manufacturing company headquartered in Detroit, Michigan.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tina Wolfson, Esq.
Christopher Eric Stiner, Esq.
Deborah Marie D. De Villa, Esq.
Robert Ahdoot, Esq.
Theodore W. Maya, Esq.
AHDOOT AND WOLFSON PC
2600 West Olive Avenue Suite 500
Burbank, CA 91505
Telephone: (310) 474-9111
Facsimile: (310) 474-8585
E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
cstiner@ahdootwolfson.com
ddevilla@ahdootwolfson.com
rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com
tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com
HAIER US APPLIANCE: Blurton Sues Over Defective Compressors
-----------------------------------------------------------
Debbie Blurton and Travis O'Brien, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. HAIER US APPLIANCE SOLUTIONS, INC.
d/b/a GE APPLIANCES, Case No. 3:24-cv-00225-GNS (W.D. Ky., April 4,
2024), is brought involving the Defendant's design, manufacture,
marketing, and sale of refrigerators with a faulty design or
manufacturing process that results in defective compressors (the
"Compressor Defect"), is brought violations of the California
Unfair Competition Law, the California False Advertising Law, the
California Consumer Legal Remedies Act, the Virginia Consumer
Protection Act, and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, as well as for
breaches of express and implied warranty, fraud, negligent
misrepresentation, and unjust enrichment.
The Compressor Defect occurs in refrigerators designed,
manufactured, marketed, and sold by Defendant ("Class
Refrigerators" or "Refrigerators"). The Compressor Defect prevents
the refrigerators from cooling consumers' food and beverages,
ultimately causing the food and beverages to spoil and rendering
the refrigerators unusable for their intended purpose. The
Compressor Defect usually manifests shortly after purchase and well
before the end of the anticipated useful life of the Class
Refrigerators.
When the Compressor Defect manifests and the Class Refrigerators
are no longer capable of cooling the food and beverages inside,
Defendant's representatives charge diagnostic fees, which can range
from $100 to $300, just to inform consumers that the Compressor
Defect has manifested. After consumers pay for the replacement
compressors and observe that they are also defective, consumers are
forced to purchase new refrigerators so their food and beverages do
not continue to spoil.
The Defendant's marketing is false and misleading in that a
reasonable consumer would believe that the Class Refrigerators are
capable of keeping food and beverages cold because that is the
obvious purpose of a refrigerator. Moreover, Defendant's marketing
and advertising are false and misleading in that a reasonable
consumer would believe that the Class Refrigerators are durable and
will last for a decade or more, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs had the Refrigerators installed.
The Defendant manufactures, markets, advertises and sells home
appliances, including refrigerators, throughout the United States,
including in California and Virginia.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel K. Bryson, Esq.
WHITFIELD BRYSON & MASON, LLP
900 W. Morgan Street
Raleigh, NC 27605
Phone: 919-600-5000
Fax: (919) 600-5035
Email: Dan@whitfieldbryson.com
- and –
Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
Knoxville, TN 37929
Phone: (865) 247-0080
Fax: (865) 522-0049
Email: gcoleman@milberg.com
- and –
Joseph G. Sauder, Esq.
Joseph B. Kenney, Esq.
Juliette T. Mogenson, Esq.
SAUDER SCHELKOPF LLC
1109 Lancaster Avenue
Berwyn, PA 19312
Phone: (610) 200-0580
Facsimile: (610) 727-4360
Email: jgs@sstriallawyers.com
jbk@sstriallawyers.com
jtm@sstriallawyers.com
HAIR CLUB FOR MEN: Anderson Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hair Club for Men,
Ltd., Inc. The case is styled as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, v. Hair Club for Men,
Ltd., Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02569 (E.D.N.Y., April 5, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
HairClub -- http://www.hairclub.com/-- is an American hair
restoration, hair regrowth, and hair replacement company with
locations in the United States and Canada.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave.
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.com
HARD ROCK CAFE: Dibenedetto Suit Transferred to D. New Jersey
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Vincent Dibenedetto, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Hard Rock Cafe International
(USA), Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-06759 was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New York, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of New Jersey on April 4, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:24-cv-04541-KMW-MJS to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Hard Rock Cafe, Inc. -- https://www.hardrock.com/ -- is a chain of
theme bar-restaurants, memorabilia shops, casinos and museums
founded in 1971 by Isaac Tigrett and Peter Morton in London.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES PC
505 Northern Boulevard, Suite 311
Great Neck, NY 11021
Phone: (516) 303-0552
Fax: (516) 234-7800
The Defendant is represented by:
Eileen O. Muskett, Esq.
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
1301 Atlantic Avenue, Suite 400
Atlantic City, NJ 08401
Phone: (609) 572-2355
Email: emuskett@foxrothschild.com
- and -
John A. Wait, Esq.
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
101 Park Avenue, 17th Fl.
New York, NY 10178
Phone: (212) 878-7900
Fax: (212) 692-0940
Email: jwait@foxrothschild.com
HELMS ORGANIC: Anderson Files Suit Over ADA Violation
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Helms Organic, LLC.
The case is captioned as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Helms Organic, LLC, Case No.
1:24-cv-02355-HG (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Helms Organic, LLC is an Ohio-based company that provides bedding
products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 915-7415
E-mail: mars@khaimovlaw.com
HENG HENG: Violates ADA, Stroude Says
-------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Heng Heng Group, Inc.
The case is captioned as Colette Stroude, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Heng Heng Group, Inc., Case No.
1:24-cv-02346 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Heng Heng Group, Inc. is a company that owns and operates
www.nourishthai.com, a website which presents itself as the online
platform of the Nourish restaurant.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
KIDDIECORP INC: Black Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
--------------------------------------------------------
ISABELLA BLACK, an individual, on behalf of all persons similarly
situated v. KIDDIECORP, INC., A California Corporation, et al.,
Case No. CGC24613567 (Cal. Super., San Francisco Cty., March 29,
2024) arises from the Defendants' alleged violation of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.
The suit alleges Defendants' failure to pay minimum wages, failure
to pay overtime wages, failure to provide required meal and rest
periods, failure to reimburse employees for required expenses,
failure to provide wages when due, retaliation and unfair
competition.
A case management conference is scheduled for August 28, 2024
before Judge Anne-Christine Massullo.
KiddieCorp, Inc. is a child care agency in San Diego,
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jean-Claude Lapuyade, Esq.
Shani O. Zakay, Esq.
JCL Law Firm, APC
5440 Morehouse Dr, Ste 3600
San Diego, CA 92121-6720
Telephone: (619) 599-8292
Facsimile: (619) 599-8291
KIRKLAND LAKE: Plaintiff's Amended Class Certification Bid Tossed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as IN RE: KIRKLAND LAKE GOLD
LTD. SECURITIES LITIGATION, Case No. 1:20-cv-04953-JPO (S.D.N.Y.),
the Hon. Judge J. Paul Oetken entered an order:
-- Denying the Plaintiff's motion to exclude the testimony and
report
of defense expert James Griffin, and
-- Denying the Plaintiff's amended motion for class
certification.
The Plaintiff brings this suit against Kirkland that mines and
processes gold for violations of Sections 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.
The Plaintiff has moved for class certification under Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3), as well as to exclude the
testimony and report of one of Defendants' proposed experts.
Kirkland is a Canadian company that mines and processes gold.
A copy of the Court's order dated Mar. 29, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=MqDN93 at no extra
charge.[CC]
KROGER CO: Kirkbride Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Classes
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JUDY KIRKBRIDE and BEETA
LEWIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. THE KROGER CO., Case No. 2:21-cv-00022-ALM-EPD (S.D. Ohio), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order to certify the following
classes pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23:
The Ohio Medicare Class:
"All persons in Ohio who, at any point in time from the period
Dec. 9, 2018 through the date on which class notice is
disseminated, paid in whole or in part for a prescription drug
from The Kroger Co. using their Medicare supplement insurance
and
where the amount paid was more than the Kroger Rx Savings Club
price for that drug."
The Ohio Caremark Class:
"All persons in Ohio for whom prescription drug insurance
benefits were provided through Caremark, LLC and who, at any
point in time from the period Dec. 9, 2018 through the date on
which class notice is disseminated, paid in whole or in part
for
a prescription drug from The Kroger Co. using their insurance
where the amount paid was more than the Kroger Rx Savings Club
price for that drug."
The Texas Caremark Class:
"All persons in Texas for whom prescription drug insurance
benefits were provided through Caremark, LLC and who, at any
point in time from the period Dec. 9, 2018 through the date on
which class notice is disseminated, paid in whole or in part
for
a prescription drug from The Kroger Co. using their insurance
where the amount paid was more than the Kroger Rx Savings Club
price for that drug."
The Texas Express Scripts Class:
"All persons in Texas for whom prescription drug insurance
benefits were provided through Express Scripts, Inc. and who,
at
any point in time from the period Dec. 9, 2018 through the
date
on which class notice is disseminated, paid in whole or in
part
for a prescription drug from The Kroger Co. using their
insurance
where the amount paid was more than the Kroger Rx Savings Club
price for that drug."
On Dec. 9, 2018, Kroger launched the Savings Club to "capture as
much market share [of uninsured customers] as quickly as possible"
but without lowering its U&C prices for insured customers. Though
Kroger used the Savings Club to offer discount prices to cash
customers, it failed to report or otherwise include its Savings
Club prices when determining the U&C prices it reported for
insurance transactions.
Kroger is an American retail company that operates supermarkets and
multi-department stores throughout the United States.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7vkYX0 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Scott D. Simpkins, Esq.
CLIMACO WILCOX PECA &
GAROFOLI CO., LPA
55 Public Square, Suite 1950
Cleveland, OH 44113
Telephone: (216) 621-8484
Facsimile: (216) 771-1632
E-mail: sdsimp@climacolaw.com
- and -
Joshua D. Arisohn, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Fl.
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: jarisohn@bursor.com
- and -
Joel D. Smith, Esq.
SMITH KRIVOSHEY, P.C.
867 Boylston Street
5th Floor, 1520
Boston, MA 02116
Tel: 617-377-7404
E-mail: joel@skclassactions.com
KUDOS INNOVATIONS: Deng Sues Over Unsafe Substances in Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kimmy Deng and Ekaterina Kim, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. KUDOS INNOVATIONS, INC., Case No.
1:24-cv-10845-NMG (D. Mass., April 2, 2024), is brought on behalf
of similar persons who purchased Defendant's "Ultimate Diaper" (the
"Product"), which are unfit for their intended use because they
contain unsafe per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). The
Products are formulated, designed, manufactured, advertised,
distributed, and sold by Defendant or its agents to consumers,
including Plaintiffs, across the United States.
PFAS are a group of synthetic chemicals known to be harmful to
children. Because PFAS persist and accumulate over time, they are
harmful even at very low levels. Indeed, PFAS have been shown to
have a number of toxicological effects in laboratory studies and
have been associated with thyroid disorders, immunotoxic effects,
and various cancers. Furthermore, the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention ("CDC") outlined a host of health effects associated
with PFAS exposure, including liver damage, decreased fertility,
and increased risk of asthma.
Despite Defendant's representations to consumers that its Product
is "the safest diaper for baby's sensitive skin [and] the planet"
and composed of "plant-based materials," including on its website,
independent research conducted by Plaintiffs' counsel, utilizing a
Department of Defense ELAP-certified laboratory, revealed that the
Product contains 1.8 parts per billion PFAS.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs bring claims against Defendant individually
and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated for
Violation of the Massachusetts Unfair and Deceptive Business
Practices Ac Phone: violation of California's Unfair
Competition Law; violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act;
violation of California's False Advertising Law; breach of the
Implied Warranty under Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act; and
California Commercial Code; Fraud; Fraudulent Concealment or
Omission; Negligent Misrepresentation; Unjust Enrichment; Breach of
Express Warranty; and Negligent Failure to Warn, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiffs purchased Kudos' "Ultimate Diaper" from Defendant's
website.
The Defendant markets, sells, and distributes the Product
throughout the contiguous United States, including in California
and Massachusetts.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joel D. Smith, Esq.
867 Boylston Street, 5th Floor #1520
Boston, MA 02116
Phone: (617) 377-7404
Email: joel@skclassactions.com
- and -
L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
Joshua R. Wilner, Esq.
Joshua B. Glatt, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Phone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
Email: ltfisher@bursor.com
jwilner@bursor.com
jglatt@bursor.com
LA-Z-BOY INC: Martinez Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against La-Z-Boy
Incorporated. The case is captioned as Silvia Martinez, on behalf
of herself and all others similarly situated v. La-Z-Boy
Incorporated, Case No. 1:24-cv-02333-BMC (E.D.N.Y., March 29,
2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
La-Z-Boy Inc. is an American furniture manufacturer based in
Monroe, Michigan.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
PeterPaul Elhamy Shaker, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
1 University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
LAVIVA HOME: Karim Files ADA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against LAviva Home, LLC. The
case is styled as Jessica Karim, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. LAviva Home, LLC, Case No.
1:24-cv-02459 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
L'AVIVA HOME -- https://www.lavivahome.com/ -- is an NYC-based
design studio working hand-in-hand with artisan workshops around
the world to create exclusive, luxury home collections.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: (516) 287-3458
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
LAZER SPOT INC: Hall Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lazer Spot, Inc. The
case is styled as Ahnaisha Hall, an individual, on behalf of
herself and others similarly situated v. Lazer Spot, Inc., Case No.
STK-CV-UWT-2024-0003994 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., April
2, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Wrongful Termination."
Lazer Spot, Inc. -- https://www.lazerlogistics.com/ -- provides
yard management services. The Company offers spotting, shuttling,
trailer rentals, gate personnel staffing, and computerized yard
management, and training services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Blake R. Jones, Esq.
4348 Valle Vis
San Diego, CA 92103-1255
Phone: 619-249-2197
LENOVO GROUP: Class Cert Bid Filing Due April 25
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARK HERMANSON, et al., v.
LENOVO GROUP LIMITED, et al., Case No. 4:23-cv-05890-JSW (N.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jeffrey White entered an order vacating case
management conference scheduled for April 5, 2024.
The Court refers discovery in this matter to Mag. Judge Illman, who
is supervising discovery in the related case, Axelrod v. Lenovo,
21-cv-6770, including any disputes about what discovery in this
case is related to the claims in Axelrod.
The Court also refers any disputes regarding phasing discovery to
Magistrate Judge Illman for resolution or a report and
recommendation, as appropriate.
The Court expects the parties to work cooperatively and minimize
discovery disputes.
By April 13, 2024, the parties shall submit a stipulation and
proposed order regarding an ADR procedure and a deadline to
complete that procedure.
If the parties seek to modify these deadlines, they must file a
motion or a stipulation demonstrating good cause at least one week
before the deadline.
Event Deadline
Deadline to file Motion for Class April 25, 2025
Certification and to serve Chen's
expert disclosures and reports:
Deadline for Chen to produce experts for June 9, 2025
Deposition:
Deadline to file opposition to Motion for Aug. 11, 2025
Class Certification and to serve Lenovo
US's expert disclosures and reports
Deadline for Lenovo to produce experts Sept. 25, 2025
for deposition:
Deadline to file reply regarding Motion Oct. 23, 2025
for Class Certification:
Hearing on Motion for Class Certification: Dec. 12, 2025
Lenovo develops, manufactures, and distributes intelligent
devices.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=X7ROcP at no extra
charge.[CC]
LIMEGUYS INC: Hopkins Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Limeguys, Inc. The
case is styled as Donovan Hopkins, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Limeguys, Inc. doing business as
Griffin Materials, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2024-0004093 (Cal. Super.
Ct., San Joaquin Cty., April 3, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Wrongful Termination."
Limeguys, Inc. doing business as Griffin Materials --
https://www.griffinsoilgroup.com/ -- provides pneumatic
transportation, material handling and storage services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alexander Gamez, Esq.
BOUCHER LLP
21600 Oxnard St., Ste. 600
Woodland Hills, CA 91367-4903
Phone: 818-340-5400
Fax: 818-340-5401
Email: gamez@boucher.la
LINDE GAS & EQUIPMENT: Olivares Suit Removed to N.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Alejandro Olivares, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. LINDE GAS & EQUIPMENT,
INC., a corporation; and DOES l through 10, inclusive, Case No.
24-2-03889-2 SEA was removed from the Superior Court of the State
California for the County of Santa Cruz, to the United States
District Court for the Northern District of California on April 5,
2024, and assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-02079-KAW.
The Complaint asserts the following seven causes of action: Failure
to Pay Minimum and Straight Time Wages; Failure to Pay Overtime
Wages; Failure to Provide Meal Periods; Failure to Authorize and
Permit Rest Periods; Failure to Timely Pay Final Wages at
Termination; Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements;
Failure to Indemnify Employees for Expenditures; and Unfair
Business Practices.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Shiva Shirazi Davoudian, Esq.
Devon S. Mills, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067.3107
Phone: 310.553.0308
Fax: 800.715.1330
Email: sdavoudian@littler.com
dsmills@littler.com
LOANDEPOT.COM LLC: Hunter Files Suit in W.D. Missouri
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Loandepot.com, LLC.
The case is styled as Christopher Hunter, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Loandepot.com, LLC, Case
No. 4:24-cv-00239-DGK (W.D. Mo., April 2, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I.
LoanDepot -- https://www.loandepot.com/ -- sometimes stylized as
loanDepot, is an Irvine, California-based nonbank holding company
which sells mortgage and non-mortgage lending products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Maureen M. Brady, Esq.
MCSHANE & BRADY LLC
1656 Washington Street Suite 140
Kansas City, MO 64108
Phone: (816) 888-8010
Email: mbrady@mcshanebradylaw.com
LOS ANGELES, CA: Suit Seeks to Certify Homeless Veteran Class
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEFFREY POWERS, et al., v.
DENIS RICHARD MCDONOUGH, in his official capacity, Secretary of
Veterans Affairs, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-08357-DOC-KS (C.D.
Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court on May 6, 2024, pursuant
to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23, for an order certifying a
class defined as:
"All homeless veterans with Serious Mental Illness or
Traumatic
Brain Injuries, who reside in Los Angeles County."
In addition, the Plaintiffs seek an order certifying a Subclass
defined as:
"All Class Members whose income (including veterans disability
benefits) exceeds 50% of the Area Median Income."
The Plaintiffs also move the Court to appoint Plaintiffs Powers,
Sessom, Fields, Johnson, Wright, Petitt, Castellanos, Stibbie, Doe
1, and National Veterans Foundation as Class Representatives for
the Proposed Class and Plaintiff Johnson as Class Representative
for the Proposed Subclass.
The Plaintiffs further move the Court to appoint Public Counsel Law
Center, Inner City Law Center, Brown Goldstein & Levy, LLP and
Robins Kaplan LLP as Class Counsel for both the Proposed Class and
Subclass pursuant to Rule 23(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure.
The suit says that "The Court should certify this action as a class
action to avoid piecemeal litigation by homeless veterans who
suffer from serious mental illness ("SMI") or traumatic brain
injuries ("TBI") in Los Angeles and those within the VA Greater Los
Angeles Healthcare System (“VAGLAHS”) catchment area (i.e. Los
Angeles, Ventura, Kern, Santa Barbara, and San Luis Obispo
counties). Only by a class action can veterans and the advocacy
group championing their cause be assured that veterans will receive
the Permanent Supportive Housing ("PSH") that is vital to their
care and treatment."
Mr. Jeffrey Powers is a 60-year-old veteran with a 90%
service-connected disability rating eligible for healthcare
benefits from the VA.
The Plaintiffs include DEAVIN SESSOM, LAURIEANN WRIGHT, SAMUEL
CASTELLANOS, JOSEPH FIELDS, LAVON JOHNSON, BILLY EDWARDS, JESSICA
MILES, JOSHUA ROBERT PETITT, GLENN SURRETTE, NARYAN STIBBIE, DOES
1-2, and NATIONAL VETERANS FOUNDATION, all individually and as
class representatives,
The Defendants include MARCIA L. FUDGE, in her official capacity,
Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; DOUGLAS GUTHRIE, in his
official capacity, President, Housing Authority of the City of Los
Angeles; ROBERT MERCHANT, in his official capacity, Acting
Director, VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System; KEITH HARRIS,
in his official capacity, Senior Executive Homelessness Agent, VA
Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 1, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=MLbOoI at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Mark D. Rosenbaum, Esq.
Kathryn A. Eidmann, Esq.
Amanda K. Pertusati, Esq.
Amanda Mangaser Savage, Esq.
Amelia Piazza, Esq.
Yi Li, Esq.
PUBLIC COUNSEL LAW CENTER
610 S. Ardmore Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90005
Telephone: (213) 385-2977
Facsimile: (213) 385-9089
E-mail: mrosenbaum@publiccounsel.org
keidmann@publiccounsel.org
apertusati@publiccounsel.org
asavage@publiccounsel.org
apiazza@publiccounsel.org
yli@publiccounsel.org
- and -
Eve L. Hill, Esq.
Jamie Strawbridge, Esq.
BROWN GOLDSTEIN & LEVY, LLP
120 E. Baltimore St., Suite 2500
Baltimore, MD 21202
Telephone: (410) 962-1030
Facsimile: (401) 385-0869
E-mail: EHill@browngold.com
JStrawbridge@browngold.com
- and -
Roman M. Silberfeld, Esq.
David Martinez, Esq.
Tommy H. Du, Esq.
ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2800
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 552-0130
Facsimile: (310) 229-5800
E-mail: RSilberfeld@RobinsKaplan.com
dmartinez@robinskaplan.com
TDu@RobinsKaplan.com
- and -
T.E. Glenn, Esq.
Amanda Powell, Esq.
Charles Kohorst, Esq.
INNER CITY LAW CENTER
1309 East Seventh Street
Los Angeles, CA 90021
Telephone: (213) 891-2880
Facsimile: (213) 891-2888
E-mail: TGlenn@innercitylaw.org
APowell@innercitylaw.org
CKohorst@innercitylaw.org
LUNA INNOVATIONS: Karzoun Sues Over Securities Laws Violation
-------------------------------------------------------------
Eyad Karzoun, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. LUNA INNOVATIONS INCORPORATED, SCOTT A. GRAEFF, EUGENE
J. NESTRO, and GEORGE GOMEZ-QUINTERO, Case No. 2:24-cv-02630 (C.D.
Cal., April 1, 2024), is brought on behalf of persons or entities
who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded Luna
Innovations securities between August 11, 2023 and March 25, 2024,
inclusive (the "Class Period") and seeking to recover compensable
damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities
laws under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange
Act").
On August 10, 2023, after market hours, Luna Innovations filed with
the SEC its quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June
30, 2023 (the "2Q23 Report"). Attached to the 2Q23 Report were
certifications pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 ("SOX")
signed by Defendants Graeff and Nestro attesting to the accuracy of
financial reporting, the disclosure of any material changes to the
Company's internal control over financial reporting and the
disclosure of all fraud. The statement was materially false and
misleading at the time it was made because the Company lacked
effective internal controls, as a result of improper revenue
recognition.
On November 14, 2023, Luna Innovations filed with the SEC its
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30,
2023 (the "3Q23 Report"). Attached to the 3Q23 Report were
certifications pursuant to SOX signed by Defendants Graeff and
Gomez-Quintero attesting to the accuracy of financial reporting,
the disclosure of any material changes to the Company's internal
control over financial reporting and the disclosure of all fraud.
The statement was materially false and misleading at the time it
was made because the Company lacked effective internal controls, as
a result of improper revenue recognition.
The statements were materially false and/or misleading because they
misrepresented and failed to disclose the following adverse facts
pertaining to the Company's business, operations and prospects,
which were known to Defendants or recklessly disregarded by them.
Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: Luna Innovations financial
statements from August 10, 2023 to the present included false
figures as a result of improper revenue recognition; as a result,
Luna Innovations would need to restate its previously filed
financial statements from August 10, 2023 to November 14, 2023;
Luna Innovations lacked adequate internal controls; and as a
result, Defendants' statements about its business, operations, and
prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a
reasonable basis at all times, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased Luna Innovations securities during the
Class Period.
Luna Innovations is a technology company that is focused on fiber
optics.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: (213) 785-2610
Facsimile: (213) 226-4684
Email: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
M&D CAPITAL PREMIER: Barnes Files Suit in E.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against M&D Capital Premier
Billing, LLC. The case is styled as Jannia Barnes, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. M&D Capital Premier
Billing, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-02543 (S.D. Fla., April 4, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Personal Property for
Property Damage.
M&D Capital Premier Billing LLC is a medical billing company based
out of Richmond Hill, New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James Michael Evangelista, Esq.
EVANGELISTA WORLEY LLC
10 Glenlake Parkway, Suite 130
Atlanta, GA 30328
Phone: (404) 205-8400
Email: jim@ewlawllc.com
MAC COSMETICS: Fact Discovery Deadline in Maciel Extended to June 8
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as IGNACIO MACIEL, RUTH
TORRES on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated
employees, v. M.A.C. COSMETICS INC.; a New York corporation; and
DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-03718-AMO (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin entered an order granting a
2-month extension to various deadlines in the Jan. 5, 2024,
scheduling order, specifically, as follows:
-- Close of Fact Discovery currently due by Apr. 8, 2024, be
extended
to June 8, 2024;
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Reports currently due by May 5, 2024, be
extended to July 8, 2024;
-- Defendants' Expert Reports currently due by June 4, 2024, be
extended to Aug. 5, 2024;
-- Plaintiff's rebuttal expert reports currently due by June 29,
2024, be extended to Aug. 30, 2024.
-- Close of expert discovery currently due by July 19, 2024, be
extended to Sept. 19, 2024.
-- Daubert motions and motion for class certification currently
due
by Aug. 8, 2024, be extended to Oct. 8, 2024.
-- Oppositions to Daubert motions and motion for class
certification,
currently due by Sept. 10, 2024, be extended to Nov. 11, 2024.
-- Replies re: Daubert Motions and Motion for Class Certification,
currently due by Oct. 4, 2024, be extended to Dec. 4, 2024.
-- Daubert Motions and motions for class certification hearing
currently set for Nov. 14, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. be continued to a
date convenient for the Court on or after Jan. 9, 2025.
MAC Cosmetics is a Canadian cosmetics manufacturer.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 1, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wJknhB at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Allison S. Wallin, Esq.
Susan T. Ye, Esq.
Nathaniel H. Jenkins, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067.3107
Telephone: (310) 553-0308
Facsimile: (800) 715-1330
E-mail: awallin@littler.com
sye@littler.com
njenkins@littler.com
MAC'S CONVENIENCE: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Brown
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Brown v. Mac's Convenience
Store, LLC d/b/a Circle K No. 1415, Case No. 1:24-cv-01101-MMM-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.
Mac's was a chain of convenience stores in Canada.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=y1mJYu at no extra
charge.[CC]
MACY'S RETAIL: Sykes Suit Removed to S.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Robert Sykes, as an individual and on behalf
of all employees similarly situated v. MACY'S RETAIL HOLDINGS, LLC,
dba MACY'S, an Ohio Limited Liability Company; MACY'S, INC., a
Delaware Corporation, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
37-2024-00009502-CU-OE-CTL was removed from the Superior Court of
California, County of San Diego, to the United States District
Court for the Southern District of California on April 2, 2024, and
assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-00629-MMA-SBC.
The Plaintiff alleges class claims for failure to pay minimum
wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide meal
periods and rest periods, failure to provide accurate itemized wage
statements, failure to pay all wages due upon separation of
employment, failure to reimburse reasonable and necessary business
expenses, and violation of the state Unfair Competition Law.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Michael C. Christman, Esq.
MACY'S LAW DEPARTMENT
11477 Olde Cabin Road, Suite 400
St. Louis, MO 63141
Phone: (314) 342-6334
Facsimile: (314) 342-6366
Email: michael.christman@macys.com
MASTRO'S RESTAURANTS: Cho Sues Over Sexual Harassment
-----------------------------------------------------
Anna Kim Cho, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. MASTRO'S RESTAURANTS, LLC; and DOES 1 through 100, Case
No. 24SMCV01540 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., April 2, 2024),
is brought against the Defendants for sexual harassment;
retaliation for reporting sexual harassment; and failure to prevent
sexual harassment from occurring.
The Plaintiff was subjected to unwelcome sexual advances, comments,
and conduct by her General Manager, Leo Payne, which created a
hostile work environment. Throughout Plaintiff's employment Mr.
Payne made sexually explicit comments about Plaintiff's appearance,
touched Plaintiff inappropriately without consent, and sent
unsolicited messages of a sexual nature to Plaintiff's personal
phone. Plaintiff reported the sexual harassment to her direct
supervisor, Jessica Serleto, and no effective action was taken to
prevent further occurrences.
Subsequent to her report, Plaintiff experienced retaliation,
including but not limited to, a reduction in her work hours,
unwarranted disciplinary actions, and exclusion from staff
meetings, which began after her report. The retaliatory actions
taken by Defendant resulted in a significant loss of income for
Plaintiff and continued to contribute to a hostile work
environment. The Defendant failed to take all reasonable steps to
prevent sexual harassment from occurring in the workplace, despite
having knowledge of Mr. Payne's conduct and the hostile work
environment it created. The Plaintiff was ultimately terminated on
March 6, 2024, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants from 2018 until March 5,
2024.
MASTRO'S RESTAURANTS, LLC is a California company with its
principal place of business located in Los Angeles County,
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Manny Starr, Esq.
Joseph Gross, Esq.
FRONTIER LAW CENTER
23901 Calabasas Road, Suite 1084
Calabasas, CA 91302
Phone: (818) 914-3433
Facsimile: (818) 914-3433
Email: manny@frontierlawcenter.com
Joseph@frontierlawcenter.com
MCLANE COMPANY: McGowan Suit Removed to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Paris McGowan, individually, and on behalf of
other members of the general public similarly situated v. MCLANE
COMPANY, INC., a Texas corporation; MCLANE BEVERAGE DISTRIBUTION,
INC., a Texas corporation; MCLANE FOODSERVICE DISTRIBUTION, INC., a
North Carolina corporation; MCLANE FOODSERVICE, INC., a Texas
corporation; MCLANE INTERSTATE WAREHOUSE, INC., a Texas
corporation; MCLANE/SUNEAST, INC., a Texas corporation;
MCLANE/WESTERN, INC., a Colorado corporation; and DOES 1 to 100,
inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2332427 was removed from the Superior
Court of the State of California in and for the County of San
Bernardino, to the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on April 1, 2024, and assigned Case No.
2:24-cv-02647.
The Plaintiff's Complaint alleges 8 purported causes of action for:
Unpaid Overtime; Unpaid Meal Period Premiums; Unpaid Rest Period
Premiums; Unpaid Minimum Wages; Final Wages Not Timely Paid;
Non-Compliant Wage Statements; Unreimbursed Business Expenses; and
Violation of California Business & Professions Code all in
violation of the California Labor Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Matthew C. Kane, Esq.
Amy E. Beverlin, Esq.
Kerri H. Sakaue, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 2700
Los Angeles, CA 90067-4508
Phone: 310.820.8800
Facsimile: 310.820.8859
Email: mkane@bakerlaw.com
abeverlin@bakerlaw.com
ksakaue@bakerlaw.com
- and -
Sylvia J. Kim, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
Transamerica Pyramid
600 Montgomery Street, Suite 3100
San Francisco, CA 94111-2806
Phone: 415.659.2600
Facsimile: 415.659.2601
Email: sjkim@bakerlaw.com
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in Cancer Care Set for June 4
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cancer Care Network of
South Texas, P.A. v. Genentech, Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00205 (N.D.
Okla., Filed April 13, 2016), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell
entered an order setting class settlement conference for June 4,
2024, before Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The Cancer Care suit is consolidated in the MDL case 16-md-2700
Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech'
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
The Defendant provides health care facilities and services.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in CCMH Set for June 4
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Comanche County Memorial
Hospital v. Genentech Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00347 (N.D. Okla.,
Filed June 10, 2016), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell entered an
order setting class settlement conference for June 4, 2024 before
Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The Comanche suit is consolidated in the MDL case 16-md-2700
Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech'
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
Comanche County Memorial Hospital is an acute care facility
specializing in health care services including Emergency, Surgical,
and Primary Care Services.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in FCS Set for June 4
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Florida Cancer
Specialists, P.L., et al v. Genentech, Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00204
(N.D. Okla., Filed April 7, 2016), the Hon. Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell entered an order setting class settlement conference for
June 4, 2024, before Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The Florida suit is consolidated in the MDL case 16-md-2700
Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech'
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
Florida Cancer offers health care services.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in HOACNY Set for June 4
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hematology-Oncology
Associates of Central New York, P.C. v. Genentech Inc., Case No.
4:16-cv-00221 (N.D. Okla., Filed April 19, 2016), the Hon. Judge
Gregory K. Frizzell entered an order setting class settlement
conference for June 4, 2024 before Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The Hematology suit is consolidated in the MDL case 16-md-2700
Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech'
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
Hematology-Oncology Associates is a hospital specializing in
medical and radiation oncology, hematology, cancer rehab, clinical
trials, nutrition, and hormone therapy.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in MOH Set for June 4
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Minnesota Oncology
Hematology, P.A. v. Genentech, Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00210 (N.D.
Okla., Filed April 13, 2016), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell
entered an order setting class settlement conference for June 4,
2024, before Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The Minnesota suit is consolidated in the MDL case 16-md-2700
Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These share factual questions arising from Genentech' marketing and
sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription medication for the
treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
The Defendant provides health care facilities and services.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in NSHOA Suit Set for June 4
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as North Shore
Hematology-Oncology Associates, P.C. v. Genentech Inc., Case No.
4:16-cv-00202 (N.D. Okla., Filed April 7, 2016), the Hon. Judge
Gregory K. Frizzell entered an order setting class settlement
conference for June 4, 2024 before Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, “The parties agreed in earlier ex parte
discussions that settlement negotiations should not occur before
briefing is completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge
Gregory K. Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be
conducted between August 23 and September 30, 2024.
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The North Shore suit is consolidated in the MDL case 16-md-2700
Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech'
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
North Shore provides healthcare services.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in OHASV Set for June 4
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Oncology and Hematology
Associates of Southwest Virginia, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., Case No.
4:16-cv-00419 (N.D. Okla., Filed June 27, 2016), the Hon. Judge
Gregory K. Frizzell entered an order setting class settlement
conference for June 4, 2024, before Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The Southwest Virginia suit is consolidated in the MDL case
16-md-2700 Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales
Practices Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech'
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
The Defendant provides health care facilities and services.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Settlement Conference in SOP Set for June 4
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Shenandoah Oncology, PC v.
Genentech, Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00424 (N.D. Okla., Filed June 28,
2016), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell entered an order setting
class settlement conference for June 4, 2024, before Mag. Judge
Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
The Shenandoah suit is consolidated in the MDL case 16-md-2700
Genentech Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation. The lead case is case no. 4:16-md-02700.
These share factual questions arising from Genentech' marketing and
sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription medication for the
treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
The Defendant provides health care facilities and services.[CC]
MDL 2700: Settlement Conference in Trastuzumab Suit Set for June 4
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit Re: MDL 2700 Genentech Herceptin
(Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation, Case No.
4:16-md-02700 (N.D. Okla., Filed June 28, 2016), the Hon. Judge
Gregory K. Frizzell entered an order setting class settlement
conference for June 4, 2024, before Mag. Judge Paul J. Cleary.
The Court said, "The parties agreed in earlier ex parte discussions
that settlement negotiations should not occur before briefing is
completed on Class Certification. U.S. District Judge Gregory K.
Frizzell has ordered a settlement conference be conducted between
August 23 and September 30, 2024."
The purpose of this June 4 conference is to discuss the specific
timing and format for substantive settlement discussions in
September 2024, including who should be in attendance at that
conference and any preliminary issues that the Court may need to
address before that conference, the Court adds.
These share factual questions arising from Genentech' marketing and
sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription medication for the
treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
The Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
The Defendants provide health care facilities and services.[CC]
MGM RESORTS: Bid for Voluntary Dismissal OK'd in Data Breach Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re: MGM RESORTS INTERNATIONAL DATA
BREACH LITIGATION, Case No. 2:20-cv-00376-GMN-NJK (D. Nev.), the
Hon. Judge Gloria Navarro entered an order granting the Plaintiffs'
motion for voluntary dismissal.
The Clerk of Court is kindly instructed to dismiss without
prejudice William Fossett, Andrew Sedaghatpour, and Julie Mutsko
from this action.
The Court finds that the Moving Plaintiffs desire to no longer
litigate this case predominates over the alleged prejudice advance
by MGM.
The case arises from a data breach of MGM's network in which
hackers downloaded the personally identifiable information ("PII")
of MGM's guests worldwide. The Plaintiffs are a consolidated class
action of consumers whose PII was stolen in the Data Breach.
Specifically, hackers allegedly accessed the Plaintiffs' names,
addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, driver's license
numbers, passport numbers, military identification numbers, and
dates of birth.
MGM is an American global hospitality and entertainment company.
A copy of the Court's order dated April 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BxWewS at no extra
charge.[CC]
MISSION NEIGHBORHOOD: Goins Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
--------------------------------------------------------------
RAPHAEL MARQUIS GOINS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. MISSION NEIGHBORHOOD CENTERS, INC., et al.,
Case No. CGC24613506 (Cal. Super., San Francisco Cty., March 29,
2024) arises from the Defendants' alleged violation of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.
The suit alleges Defendants' failure to pay minimum wages, failure
to pay overtime wages, failure to provide required meal and rest
periods, failure to reimburse employees for required expenses,
failure to provide wages when due, retaliation and unfair
competition.
A case management conference is scheduled for August 28, 2024
before Judge Anne-Christine Massullo.
Mission Neighborhood Centers, Inc. provides child development
services in San Francisco, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jessica L. Campbell, Esq.
AEGIS LAW FIRM
9811 Irvine Center Dr Ste 100
Irvine, CA 92618-4375
Telephone: (949) 379-6250
NAVY FEDERAL: King Appeals Case Dismissal to 9th Circuit
--------------------------------------------------------
ANDREW KING is taking an appeal from a court order dismissing his
lawsuit entitled Andrew King, individually and on behalf of and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Navy Federal Credit Union,
Defendant, Case No. 2:23-cv-05915-SPG-AGR, in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit,
which was removed from the Los Angeles Superior Court to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California, is brought
against the Defendant for contract violation.
On Nov. 2, 2023, the Plaintiff filed a first amended complaint,
which the Defendant moved to dismiss on Nov. 16, 2023.
On Jan. 26, 2024, the Court granted in part and denied in part the
Defendant's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's first amended
complaint through an Order entered by Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett.
The Court granted the Defendant's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's
breach of contract claim with prejudice and denied its motion to
dismiss the Plaintiff's Unfair Competition Law (UCL) claim.
On Feb. 23, 2024, Judge Garnett dismissed the case without
prejudice.
The appellate case is captioned King v. Navy Federal Credit Union,
Case No. 24-1838, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit, filed on March 27, 2024.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Appellant's Mediation Questionnaire was due on April 1,
2024;
-- Appellant's Appeal Opening Brief is due on May 8, 2024; and
-- Appellee's Appeal Answering Brief is due on June 10, 2024.
[BN]
ONESKIN INC: Faces Slade Suit Over ADA Violation
------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against OneSkin, Inc. The
case is captioned as Linda Slade, individually and as the
representative of a class of similarly situated v. OneSkin, Inc.,
Case No. 1:24-cv-02407 (S.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
OneSkin, Inc. is a longevity company developing products designed
to extend skin and body health.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq.
Shaked Law Group, P.C.
14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
Scarsdale, NY 10583
Telephone: (917) 373-9128
E-mail: shakedlawgroup@gmail.com
PAUL SMITH: Anderson Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Paul Smith, Inc. The
case is captioned as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Paul Smith, Inc., Case No.
1:24-cv-02357 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Paul Smith, Inc. provides apparels. The Company offers clothing
men, women, and children, as well as provides footwear. Paul Smith
serves customers worldwide.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st ave
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 915-7415
E-mail: mars@khaimovlaw.com
RAWLINGS COMPANY: Zakarian Suit Asserts Breach of Contract
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Rawlings Company,
et al. The case is captioned as Martin Zakarian, on behalf of
himself and those similarly situated v. The Rawlings Company, et
al., Case No. 4:24-cv-00229-JAM (W.D. Mo., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged breach of
contract.
The case is assigned to Judge Jill A. Morris.
The Rawlings Company provides legal services. The Company offers
insurance claims recovery solutions. Rawlings serves customers in
the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph A. Kronawitter, Esq.
Taylor Foye, Esq.
HORN, AYLWARD & BANDY, LLC
2600 Grand Boulevard, Suite 1100
Kansas City, MO 64108
Telephone: (816) 421-0700
Facsimile: (816) 421-0899
E-mail: jkronawitter@hab-law.com
tfoye@hab-law.com
- and -
Brian C. McCart, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN TIMOTHY MEYERS
1044 Main Street, Suite 400
Kansas City, MO 64105
Telephone: (816) 842-0006
Facsimile: (816) 842-6623
E-mail: bmccart@btm-law.com
SMOOTHSTACK INC: Court Grants Bid to Toss Claim in O'Brien Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the lawsuit styled JUSTIN O'BRIEN, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SMOOTHSTACK, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:23-cv-00491-RDA-LRV (E.D. Va.), Judge Rossie
D. Alston, Jr., of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Virginia, Alexandria Division, grants the Defendant's motion to
dismiss one count of claim, without prejudice.
On April 13, 2023, the Plaintiff commenced this action on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, seeking unpaid minimum
wages and unpaid overtime pay pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act, a declaratory judgment that the Defendant's practices are
illegal, and backpay. Three other individuals have since "opted in"
to this case.
The Defendant owns and operates a staffing company that recruits
information technology ("IT") workers who are in the early stages
of their careers, provides them with training, and then places them
with new clients mainly in Fortune 500 companies. Once the Recruits
are placed with clients, they become "Consultants."
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant beginning in the Spring
of 2020. He alleges that the Defendant recruits young professionals
with promises of jumpstarting their careers but does not live up to
those promises. He contends that, in reality, the Defendant
requires that Recruits complete "14-15 weeks" of training, for
which the first 2-3 weeks of training is unpaid and the rest are
underpaid.
Further, as part of the program, the Plaintiff alleges that the
Defendant requires that Recruits sign a Training Repayment
Agreement Provision ("TRAP") at various stages of their employment.
He alleges that Recruits are first required to sign a TRAP shortly
after they are hired as a condition of their continued employment.
The TRAP provides that Recruits are required to bill 4,000 hours of
client work, approximately two years of full-time work, before they
have met their obligation to the Defendant. If a Recruit fails to
abide by the TRAP, he or she is required to pay the Defendant a
penalty in the range $24,000-$30,000.
The Plaintiff filed his initial complaint on April 13, 2023, on
behalf of himself and all other similarly situated workers. On May
12, 2023, the Defendant filed its first Motion to Dismiss. On May
23, 2023, the parties jointly stipulated to dismiss Counts III, V,
and VI of the initial complaint, and on May 25, 2023, the Plaintiff
filed his Amended Complaint.
On June 6, 2023, the Defendant filed a Motion to Dismiss Count III
of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, along with its Memorandum in
Support. The Plaintiff filed his Opposition on June 20, 2023, and
the Defendant filed its Reply on June 26, 2023. On July 31, 2023,
the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Consent to Join as a Party
Plaintiff, to add L. Nguyen and O. Ejini as opt-in Plaintiffs in
the instant litigation.
The Plaintiff filed his Motion for Court Authorized Notice on July
31, 2023. The Defendant filed a Consent Motion for Extension of
Time to file its Response on Aug. 11, 2023, and the Court granted
the motion on Aug. 14, 2023. The Defendant filed its Response on
Aug. 28, 2023, and the Plaintiff filed a Reply in support of his
Motion for Court Authorized Notice on Sept. 11, 2023. On Oct. 10,
2023, the Plaintiff filed a Notice of Consent to Join as a Party
Plaintiff to add Wesley Clements as an opt-in Plaintiff in this
litigation.
In his Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff brings four claims against
the Defendant. The Defendant seeks to dismiss only Count III for
failure to state a claim and for lack of standing. Count III of the
Amended Complaint asserts that the Defendant failed to pay the
Plaintiff and those similarly situated their wages "free and clear"
in violation of the FLSA.
The Defendant first moves the Court to dismiss Count III for lack
of standing because the Plaintiff alleges a "hypothetical minimum
wage violation," which is insufficient to establish injury-in-fact.
Alternatively, the Defendant contends that the Court should dismiss
Count III for failure to state a claim because the Plaintiff did
not plausibly allege that the Defendant actually caused the
Plaintiff to receive less than minimum wage as is required under
the FLSA.
The Court finds that there is no actual controversy between the
parties. The gravamen of the Plaintiff's allegations regarding
Count III is that, due to the operation of the TRAP repayment
provision, his wages were not paid unconditionally, and he feared
he could incur a debt due to the provision.
While the Plaintiff cites to multiple cases to support his position
that failing to pay employees on time is a redressable minimum wage
violation even if it is later remedied, in almost all of those
cases the plaintiffs had been actually deprived of their wages
during the relevant pay period, Judge Alston notes. However, here,
the Plaintiff has stipulated that at all times during and after the
training period, he was paid minimum wage for 40 hours per week.
Thus, under these circumstances, Judge Alston says the Plaintiff
has only alleged a hypothetical injury, which is insufficient to
confer standing. The Plaintiff argues, in the alternative, that his
belief that he incurred a debt is sufficient to confer Article III
standing. Again, the Court is unconvinced.
In sum, the Court finds that the Plaintiff has not alleged a
sufficient injury to confer Article III standing for Count III of
the Amended Complaint. Accordingly, the Motion is granted and Count
III is dismissed.
The Plaintiff proposes conditional certification of and notice to
all persons, who participated in the Defendant's Training Program
and/or signed an agreement containing a TRAP between April 13,
2020, through the date on which the Court grants this motion.
According to the Plaintiff, the facts he presents demonstrate that
he meets his burden of showing "similarly situated" plaintiffs,
such that conditional certification is warranted.
Upon consideration of the available facts, the Court finds that the
Plaintiff has offered sufficient evidence to demonstrate a "modest
factual showing" that the proposed collective is "similarly
situated" for purposes of the collective action at this lenient
stage. Among other things, Judge Alston finds that the Plaintiff
provided evidence that the Defendant maintains written policies
related to time keeping and compensation for its employees that are
uniformly applied.
The Court similarly finds that conditional certification is
appropriate given the Defendant's uniform compensation policy
capping pay at 40 hours per week. Accordingly, at this stage in the
proceedings, the declarations submitted by the Plaintiff, in
conjunction with the Defendant's express policy limiting overtime,
is sufficient to establish that potential collective members are
similarly situated. Accordingly, the Court finds that the Plaintiff
has met the "fairly lenient" conditional certification standard.
Moreover, under the circumstances of this case, the Court finds
that it would promote judicial efficiency for the Court and the
litigants to allow putative collective action members to proceed in
the same action. Therefore, the Court, in its discretion, will
grant the Plaintiff's Motion for conditional certification with
respect to Count I and Count II of the Amended Complaint.
Regarding the substance of the Revised Proposed Notice, the
Defendant argues that the case caption intimates that the
Plaintiff's claims are authorized or approved by the Court, which
does not maintain the appearance of judicial neutrality. The Court
disagrees. Stating that the Court has authorized the conditional
certification does not reflect any bias or constitute endorsement
of the litigation, Judge Alston points out.
In conclusion, the Court will grant in part and deny in part the
Plaintiff's Revised Proposed Notice Form Schedule, Notice Schedule,
and methods of communication.
For these reasons, the Court grants the Defendant's Motion to
Dismiss. Count III of the Amended Complaint is dismissed without
prejudice. The Defendant's First Motion to Dismiss is denied as
moot.
The Court also holds that the Plaintiff's Motion for Court
Authorized Notice is granted-in-part and denied-in-part. Within
fourteen (14) days of the date of this Order, the parties will,
after meeting and conferring, prepare and submit to the Court, for
approval, a revised form of notice (and related consent form) and a
revised form reminder notice incorporating the Court's rulings
delineated elsewhere in this Order.
Within fourteen (14) days of the date of this order, the Defendant
will provide the Plaintiff's counsel a computer-readable list of
the following information for each individual in the collective of
potential plaintiffs: (1) full name; (2) last known mailing
addresses; (3) last known cell phone number; (4) last known
personal email addresses; (5) work location(s); and (6) dates of
employment beginning with the first day of training.
The Plaintiff may create a website that will host the approved
notice and offer a place to download and submit the approved
consent to join form. The opt-in period will extend for
seventy-five (75) days from the date of mailing, or if both mail
and email notice are undeliverable, thirty (30) days from the date
of remailing, or the end of the notice period, whichever is later.
The Plaintiff may send a reminder notice via email or text to
Collective Members, who have not yet returned a consent to join
form during the first thirty (30) days of the notice period.
A full-text copy of the Court's Memorandum Opinion and Order dated
March 28, 2024, is available at https://tinyurl.com/mrxuv7fy from
PacerMonitor.com.
SPRINKLES CUPCAKES: Anderson Files ADA Suit in E.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sprinkles Cupcakes,
LLC. The case is captioned as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Sprinkles Cupcakes,
LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-02361 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Sprinkles Cupcakes, LLC is a bakery chain established in 2005.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st ave
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 915-7415
E-mail: mars@khaimovlaw.com
STARBUCKS CORP: Fails to Accommodate Lactating Staff, Iraheta Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
LUZ IRAHETA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. STARBUCKS CORPORATION and DOES 1-100,
Defendants, Case No. 24STCV08759 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty.,
April 8, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for
violations of the California Government Code, the California Labor
Code, and the California Business and Professions Code.
The case arises from Starbucks' alleged systemic failure to provide
state mandated accommodations to postpartum and nursing female
employees who have returned to work but need to pump breastmilk to
feed their babies. The Plaintiff is a current employee of Starbucks
and the mother of 19-month-old child that was primarily breastfed
until she was forced to stop due to Starbucks' centralized policies
and practices regarding lactation accommodation. First, Starbucks
did not provide reasonable breaks to pump. Second, Starbucks did
not have a legally compliant, dedicated lactation facility. As a
result, the Plaintiff and similarly situated employees experienced
embarrassment, anguish, personal hardship, anxiety, humiliation,
and emotional distress, says the suit.
Starbucks Corporation is an American multinational chain of
coffeehouses and roastery reserves, with its headquarters in
Seattle, Washington. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael S. Morrison, Esq.
Natalie Khoury, Esq.
ALEXANDER MORRISON + FEHR LLP
1900 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 394-0888
Facsimile: (310) 394-0811
Email: mmorrison@amfllp.com
nkhoury@amfllp.com
- and -
Sahag Majarian, Esq.
Garen Majarian, Esq.
MAJARIAN LAW GROUP, APC
18250 Ventura Blvd.,
Tarzana, CA 91356
Telephone: (818) 609-0807
Facsimile: (818) 609-0892
Email: sahag@majarianlawgroup.com
SUB-ZERO GROUP: Anderson Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sub-Zero Group, Inc.
The case is captioned as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Sub-Zero Group, Inc., Case No.
1:24-cv-02364 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Sub-Zero Group, Inc. is a privately-held American company that
manufactures and sells luxury kitchen appliances.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st ave
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 915-7415
E-mail: mars@khaimovlaw.com
T.L. CANNON: Filing for Class Cert Reply in Dees Suit Due May 8
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dees, et al., v. T.L.
Cannon Corp., et al., Case No. 5:20-cv-01537 (N.D.N.Y., File Dec.
10, 2020), the Hon. Judge Brenda K. Sannes entered an order setting
the deadline for Plaintiffs to file reply in support of class
certification motion, and opposition to any cross-motion for
summary judgment by May 8, 2024.
The nature of suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.[CC]
TECHNOGYM USA: Anderson Sues Over ADA Violation in E.D.N.Y.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Technogym USA Corp.
The case is captioned as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Technogym USA Corp., Case No.
1:24-cv-02367 (E.D.N.Y., March 29, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Technogym USA Corp. manufactures gym equipment. The Company offers
treadmills, exercise bikes, elliptical, dumbbells, skillrow, and
fitness accessories. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st ave
Flushing, NY 11367
Telephone: (917) 915-7415
E-mail: mars@khaimovlaw.com
TILIT NYC INC: Hernandez Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tilit NYC, Inc. The
case is styled as Timothy Hernandez, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Tilit NYC, Inc., Case No.
1:24-cv-02416 (E.D.N.Y., April 1, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Tilit -- https://www.tilitnyc.com/ -- offers chefs, cooks &
hospitality workers a wide assortment of chef coats, uniforms &
aprons.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
PeterPaul Elhamy Shaker, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
1 University Plaza, Ste. 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Email: pshaker@steinsakslegal.com
TOSCANA PIZZA & GRILL: Claret Suit Removed to S.D. Florida
----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Diego Martin Sosa Claret, Mary Ysabel Juarez
Solis, and others similarly situated v. TOSCANA PIZZA & GRILL, LLC,
a Florida Limited Liability Company, FERNANDO GABRIEL, and KINGA
SALAMON, Case No. CACE-24-002380 was removed from the Circuit Curt
in and for Broward County, Florida, to the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Florida on April 1, 2024, and
assigned Case No. 0:24-cv-60508-XXXX.
The Plaintiffs' complaint alleges seven causes of action between
both Plaintiffs against Defendant: minimum wage violations under
Florida state law (Counts 1 and 2); FLSA overtime violations as to
Solis against all Defendants (Count 3); to the extent they differ
from Counts 1 and 2, unpaid wage violations (Counts 4 and 5); and
retaliation under the FLSA (Counts 6 and 7).[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Daniel R, Levine, Esq.
Alex B.C. Ershock, Esq.
PADULA BENNARDO LEVINE, LLP
3837 NW Boca Raton Blvd., Suite 200
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Phone: (561) 544-8900
Email: DRL@PBL-Law.com
ABE@PBL-Law.com
TUPPERWARE BRANDS: Seeks April 23 Class Cert Response Extension
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL EDGE, Individually
and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. TUPPERWARE
BRANDS
CORPORATION, MIGUEL FERNANDEZ, and CASSANDRA HARRIS, Case No.
6:22-cv-01518-RBD-LHP (M.D. Fla.), the Defendants ask the Court to
enter an order granting the Defendants' unopposed motion for
extension of time to respond to the Plaintiff's motion for class
Certification by 10 days, up to and including April 23, 2023, and
to commensurately extend the Plaintiff's reply deadline up to and
including June 24, 2024.
The Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification on Feb.
13, 2024.
The Parties are diligently working together to schedule depositions
of the Named Plaintiffs. The Plaintiff Michael J. Dennehy's
deposition is scheduled for April 9, 2024. The Plaintiff Michael
Edge's deposition is scheduled for April 10, 2024. The Plaintiff
Ralph Estep's deposition is tentatively scheduled for April 10,
2024 (and may need to be moved until after April 15, 2024 to
accommodate Mr. Estep's schedule).
The Defendants have not previously requested an extension of time
in connection with filing their response to the Plaintiff's motion
for class certification, and this request is not being made for any
improper purpose or intended to cause undue delay.
The Defendants conferred with the opposing party by email on March
27, 2024, and represent that the opposing party does not oppose the
sought relief.
Tupperware is an American multinational company that produces home
product lines.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Mar. 29, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vfawS1 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Ian M. Ross, Esq.
James W. Ducayet, Esq.
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
1001 Brickell Bay Drive, Suite 900
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 391-5100
Facsimile: (305) 391-5101
E-mail: iross@sidley.com
jducayet@sidley.com
UNITED SUGAR: Controls Granulated Sugar Prices, Piala Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PIALA LLC, on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. UNITED SUGAR PRODUCERS & REFINERS COOPERATIVE F/K/A
UNITED SUGARS CORPORATION, AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING, INC., ASR GROUP
INTERNATIONAL, INC., DOMINO FOODS, INC., CARGILL, INC., MICHIGAN
SUGAR COMPANY, COMMODITY INFORMATION, INC., and RICHARD WISTISEN,
Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-01232-JMB-ECW (D. Minn., April 8,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violation Of
Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act.
The case arises from the Defendants' unlawful agreement to
artificially raise, fix, maintain, or stabilize prices of
granulated sugar throughout the Class Period. The Defendants have
implemented their agreement by sharing accurate, competitively
sensitive, non-public information with one another, including
through Commodity. Commodity provided this reciprocal information
to the Defendants rapidly, often within hours of having received
it. The Defendants then used the information they received from
Commodity when deciding how much to charge for their products, says
the suit.
Piala LLC is an operator of a Georgian restaurant, with its
principal place of business in Sebastopol, California.
United Sugar Producers & Refiners Cooperative, formerly known as
United Sugars Corporation, is a marketing cooperative based in
Edina, Minnesota.
American Sugar Refining, Inc. is a sugar producer based in West
Palm Beach, Florida.
ASR Group International, Inc. is a global producer and seller of
granulated sugar based in West Palm Beach, Florida.
Domino Foods, Inc. is a marketing and sales subsidiary of ASR Group
in Florida.
Cargill, Inc. is an American global food corporation based in
Minnetonka, Minnesota.
Michigan Sugar Company is a cooperative of sugar beet owners,
headquartered in Bay City, Michigan
Commodity Information, Inc. is corporation based in Orem, Utah.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew W. Ruan, Esq.
FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC
100 Tri-State International, Suite 128
Lincolnshire, IL 60069
Telephone: (224) 632-4500
Email: mruan@fklmlaw.com
- and -
Stuart G. Gross, Esq.
GROSS KLEIN PC
The Embarcadero
Pier 9, Suite 100
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 671-4628
Email: sgross@grosskleinlaw.com
VALLEY OAKS: Faces Floyd Suit in Indiana
----------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Valley Oaks Health,
Inc. The case is captioned as Branden Floyd, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Valley Oaks Health,
Inc., Case No. 79C01-2403-CT-000067 (Ind. Cir., Tippecanoe Cty.,
March 29, 2024).
The case is brought over the Defendant's alleged tort law
violation.
Valley Oaks Health, Inc. is a non-profit organization that offers
mental health care services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffrey Steven Gibson, Esq.
WAGNER REESE, LLP
11939 North Meridian St
Carmel, IN 46032
Telephone: (317) 569-0000
WALMART INC: Hawkins Fraud Suit Removed to E.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Matthew Hawkins, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Walmart, Inc., Case No. CV65903, was
removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Tuolumne to the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of California on March 29, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California assigned
Case No. 1:24-cv-00374-KES-SKO to the proceeding.
The case is brought over the Defendant's fraud-related conduct and
is assigned to Judge Kirk E. Sherriff.
Walmart, Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that
operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and
grocery stores.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Aubry Wand, Esq.
THE WAND LAW FIRM, P.C.
100 Oceangate, Ste 1200
Long Beach, CA 90802
Telephone: (310) 590-4503
E-mail: awand@wandlawfirm.com
- and -
Lisa Tamiko Omoto, Esq.
FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1060
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (424) 365-3225
E-mail: lomoto@faruqilaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Heather F. Canner, Esq.
Jacob Michael Harper, Esq.
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
865 S. Figueroa Street Ste 24th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 633-6800
Facsimile: (213) 633-6899
E-mail: heathercanner@dwt.com
jacobharper@dwt.com
WELLS FARGO: Conduent Appeals Arbitration Order in Munoz Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
CONDUENT STATE & LOCAL SOLUTIONS, INC., et al. are taking an appeal
from a court order granting in part and denying in part their
motion to compel individual arbitration in the lawsuit entitled Ana
Munoz, et al., individually and on behalf of and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:23-CV-00202-LF-SCY, in the U.S. District
Court for the District of New Mexico.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit is
brought against the Defendants for violations of the Electronic
Fund Transfer Act ("EFTA"), which protects consumers from liability
for unauthorized transfers.
On May 5, 2023, the Defendants filed a motion to compel individual
arbitration, enforce class action waiver, and to dismiss, or in the
alternative, stay proceedings pending arbitration.
On Mar. 12, 2024, Judge Laura Fashin granted in part and denied in
part the Defendants' motion to compel individual arbitration,
enforce class action waiver, and to dismiss, or in the alternative,
stay proceedings pending arbitration.
The Court held that Plaintiffs Ana Munoz and Michael Tilley agreed
to arbitrate their claims against Wells Fargo and will compel
arbitration with Wells Fargo. To the extent the Plaintiffs dispute
the arbitrability of their claims or the application of any terms
of the arbitration agreement, the arbitrator is tasked with
deciding those disputes pursuant to the delegation clause. The
Court further held that the Plaintiffs did not agree to arbitrate
their claims against Conduent, and Conduent cannot invoke the
doctrine of equitable estoppel to compel the Plaintiffs to
arbitrate under the terms.
The Court, therefore, ordered that the Defendants' motion to compel
arbitration is granted with respect to the Plaintiffs' claims
against Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., and this case is stayed
as to Wells Fargo pending that arbitration. The motion is denied in
all other respects.
The appellate case is captioned Munoz, et al. v. Conduent State &
Local Solutions, et al., Case No. 24-2044, in the United States
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, filed on March 27, 2024.
[BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellees ANA MUNOZ, et al., individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, are represented by:
Nicholas Hagen Mattison, Esq.
FEFERMAN & WARREN
300 Central Avenue, SW, Suite 2000W
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 243-7773
- and -
Evan S. Rothfarb, Esq.
Daniel A. Schlanger, Esq.
SCHLANGER LAW GROUP LLP
80 Broad Street, Suite 1301
New York, NY 10004
Defendants-Appellants CONDUENT STATE & LOCAL SOLUTIONS, INC., et
al. are represented by:
John C. Grugan, Esq.
Jenny Nicole Perkins, Esq.
BALLARD SPAHR
1735 Market Street, 51st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 665-8500
- and -
Charles R. Hughson, Esq.
RODEY DICKASON SLOAN AKIN & ROBB
201 Third Street NW, Suite 2200
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 765-5900
- and -
Alejandro Rettig y Martinez, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF ALEJANDRO RETTIG Y MARTINEZ
201 3rd Street NW, Suite 2200
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 766-7529
ZUMIEZ INC: Anderson Files ADA Suit in E.D. New York
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Zumiez, Inc. The case
is styled as Derrick Anderson, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, v. Zumiez, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02578
(E.D.N.Y., April 5, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
Zumiez Inc. -- https://www.zumiez.com/ -- is an American
multinational specialty clothing store founded by Thomas Campion
and Gary Haakenson in 1978, and publicly traded since 2005.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mars Khaimov, Esq.
14749 71st Ave.
Flushing, NY 11367
Phone: (917) 915-7415
Email: mars@khaimovlaw.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 ***