/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240503.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, May 3, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 90 Headlines 4E BRANDS: Must File Class Cert Response by May 10 A.J. BLOSENSKI: Court Narrows Claims in Salyers Suit ADMI CORP: Intercepts Electronic Communications, Hollaway Claims AMAZON.COM INC: Class Cert Filing in De Coster Extended to June 7 AMERICAN AIRLINES: Fails to Refund Canceled Flights, Renteria Says ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Defamatory Class Suit to Move Forward ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Faces Class Action Over Priest's Sermon ARISE VIRTUAL: Must File Class Cert Response in De Niro by May 9 ARTSANA USA: Zarfati Sues Over Defective Chicco-brand Strollers ASR GROUP: Controls Granulated Sugar Prices, Vicky Enterprises Says ASR GROUP: Wilson Sues Over Control of Granulated Sugar Prices AT&T INC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boykin Suit Alleges ATLANTA, GA: Parties Seek Final Nod of Class Action Certification AVANADE INC: Jan. 17, 2025 Continuance of Class Cert Filing Sought AVEM HEALTH: Class Action Settlement Gets Preliminary Approval BANK OF AMERICA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time for Class Cert Filing BETTERHELP INC: Auto Renews Therapy Subscription, de la Cruz Says BOSTON SCIENTIFIC: Class Settlement Approved in Securities Suit BRADLEY UNIVERSITY: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Sinha BRIDGESONE CORP: Benton Sues Over Tire Price Monopoly BROOKLYN GRID: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chimbolema Alleges BURGERFI INTERNATIONAL: Class Management Order Entered in Donoghue CAPITAL VISION: Plaintiffs Seek Leave To File Class Cert Reply CARECENTRIX INC: Conditional Collective Cert. Bid Extended to May 8 CAROLINA AMATO: Website Not Accessible to Blind, Martinez Says CARRIAGE SERVICES: Atkinson Sues Over Discrimination & Harassment CEDAR FAIR: Suit Seeks to Lift Continuance of Class Cert. Briefing CHG MEDICAL: Class Settlement in Carlino Gets Initial Nod COFFEE REGIONAL: Plaintiff Must File Class Cert Bids by July 15 COMPLIANCE STAFFING: Griffis Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to W.D. Pa. COMPULINK: Dancy-Wilkins Class Cert. Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice CREDENCE RESOURCE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Brennan Claims D'URSO LANDSCAPING: Calles Seeks Conditional Collective Status D2C LLC: Allowed to Seal Unredacted Opposition in Martinez DAVA MARKETING: Bid To Hold in Abeyance Rule 68 Judgment Nixed DELTA DELTA: Vaughan Files Personal Injury Suit in M.D.N.C. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert. DONALD COMB: Filing for Class Certification Bids Due July 22 DOYLE LAND: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Combs Suit Says DUNHAM'S ATHLEISURE: Bid for Interlocutory Appeal in Heppard Denied ECOPETROL SA: BT Energy Incident-Related Class Suit Pending EDGEWELL PERSONAL: Glassman Seeks to Seal Certain Documents ELEVANCE INC: Court Narrows Claims in Union Suit EMBRY-RIDDLE: Parties Must Confer Class Cert Deadlines ENHANCE HEALTH: Faces Turner Suit Over Racketeering Activity EQUIFAX INFO: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Bristol ESTES EXPRESS: Alvarez Must File Class Cert Bid by Oct. 21 EXP WORLD HOLDINGS: Faces Burton Class Suit in South Carolina EXPERIAN INFO: Class Cert Bid in Pena Suit Continued to August 2 FEDERAL EXPRESS: Parties Seek to Stay Class Cert Bid Deadline FLEET FARM: Faces Frost Suit Over ADA Violations in D. Minnesota FORT BELVOIR: Renewed Bid for Class Cert in Fischer Suit Due May 20 GALESBURG, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Mixon GEICO: Joint Bids to Seal in MAO-MSO Class Action OK'd GLOBAL CORD: Faces Class Action Over Self-Serving Transactions GO NEW YORK: Teta Sues Over Fraud Violations in S.D.N.Y. GOOGLE LLC: Brown Seeks $217MM Atty's Fees GORDON LANE: Parrish Amended Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice HALO BRANDED: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Chibazakura Alleges HILCO REDEVELOPMENT: $12-MM Deal in Little Village Suit Gets OK HOME PARTNERS: Seeks May 8 Summary Judgment Reply Extension HUNTINGTON NATIONAL: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by Dec. 10 INDEGENE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bids in Progressive Due June 7 INJURED WORKERS: Fact Discovery in Webb Suit Due Oct. 10 INTERLAKE MECALUX: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Billings ISUZU MOTORS: Faces Potential Class Action Over Suspension Defects JAB EXPRESS: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in Snide Due Sept. 9 JACOBO FARM: Gomez Must File Supplemental Class Cert Briefing JIM JUSTICE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Sanctions Nixed JOHN VIRTUSA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Sugg Modified to Oct. 21 KAISER FOUNDATION: Class Settlement Deal in Shcmitt Gets Final Nod KEENAN & ASSOCIATES: Heinz Suit Removed to C.D. California KINDER MORGAN: Continues to Defend ERISA Class Suit in Texas KING COUNTY, WA: Class Cert. Bid in Tucker Due March 31, 2025 KNOX COUNTY, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Hans Suit KOBE JAPANESE: Jiang Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action L&J TRANSPORTATION: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Perry Alleges LEE'S HOUSE: Plaintiff Must file Class Cert Reply Brief LEGACY INC: Elson Sues Over Fraud Violations in D. Minnesota LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES: Cabrera FDCPA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey LIBERTY MUTUAL: Sends Unsolicited Text Messages, Ward Suit Claims LINCOLN NATIONAL: Meade Files Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. Pa. LINKEDIN CORPORATION: Class Cert Bid Filing Due Jan. 9, 2025 LINOBGHK LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Becerra Alleges LITTLE CAESAR: Parties Seek Dec. 30 Extension for Class Cert Filing LOCUST MEDICAL: Class Cert Bid Reply Extended to May 3 LUCKY ELEPHANT: Fact Discovery in Luis Class Suit Due August 15 LUXURY BRAND: Class Action Settlement in Henning Gets Initial Nod LX HAUSYS: Torres Bid to Revise Pretrial Deadlines Partly OK'd MARIANI PACKING: Diesel Class Cert Bid Filing for MMPA Claims OK'd MARK CUBAN: Seeks Denial of Karnas Class Cert Bid MARLOU CORP: Parties Seek More Time for Class Cert Response MAUREEN CORCORAN: Plaintiff Seeks Notice of Putative Class Action ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Certify Class of Employees ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Seal Class Cert Documents MEDICAL EYE: Eufusia Personal Injury Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. MEDQ INC: Franklin Files Personal Injury Suit in E.D. Texas MERITAS HEALTH: Ballard Files Contract Suit in W.D. Missouri MIDLAND FUNDING: Class Cert Bid in Filgueiras Class Suit Tossed MINISO GROUP: Continues to Defend Federal Securities Class MISS DU'S TEA: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Volfman NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Filing for Class Cert Bids Amended to June 2 NCAA: Plaintiffs Seek to File Docs Under Seal NESTLE PURINA: Bid for Initial OK of Class Settlement Tossed NEW SOUTH WALES: Junior Doctors Settle Suit Over Unpaid Overtime NEW YORK LIFE: Bid to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal OK'd NEW YORK TIMES: Class Cert Bid in Perkins Suit Extended to June 6 NORTHWELL HEALTH: Lorusso Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class NU HOLDINGS LTD: Continues to Defend IDC Class Suit NU-BOTANICS CANDLE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bolanos Alleges OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM: Savoie Contract Suit Removed to W.D. La. OCUGEN INC: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit OFFICE DEPOT: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Yount Due Dec. 13 OGILVY HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chestnut Alleges ONTRAK INC: Continues to Defend Braun Securities Class Suit PACCAR INC: Court Won't Adopt Proposed Case Management Schedule PACIFIC MARKET: Brown Fraud Suit Removed to C.D. California PEGASYSTEMS INC: Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement Sought PINK JEEP: Parties Seek More Time for Plaintiff's Class Cert Reply PRIME HYDRATION: Vera Sues Over Energy Drink Caffeine Content PROGRESSIVE SELECT: Silverstein Files Consumer Suit in Cal. Super. PROGRESSIVE UNIVERSAL: Class Cert Redacted Memo Stricken in Taxer PROSPERITY HOME: Bid to Strike Class Allegations Denied in Keller R&G BRENNER: Scheduling Order Entered in Cinar Class Suit REZOLUT CENTRELAKE: Ramirez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. California ROCHESTER, MN: Tap House Seeks to Certify TID Fee Refund Class SAGE THERAPEUTICS: Court Sets Rule 26(F) Scheduling Conference SAINT ELIZABETH: Court Tosses Class Cert Bid in York Lawsuit SANTANDER CONSUMER: Brown Contract Suit Removed to S.D. Illinois SCHENKER INC: Wickham Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class SEWON AMERICA: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid After 180 Days SHAWN EMMONS: Parties' Agreements Modified in Daughtry Class Suit SHORT SQUEEZE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Briefing Schedule Tossed SHOWS & CALI: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Bid in Calogero to May 9 SIG SAUER: Class Cert Discovery in Glasscock Suit Due July 25 SIMM ASSOCIATES: Simpson Files Consumer Credit Suit in D. Delaware SKYLINE TOWER: Bid for Stay of Remand Order Pending Appeal Denied STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Bruno Class Suit STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Parker Class Suit STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Stockholder Class Suit SYMETRA LIFE: Davis Must Oppose Summary Judgment Bid by May 24 T-MOBILE USA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Bayani Extended to Sept. 20 TCL NORTH: Faces Ramos Suit Over ADA Violations in N.D. Illinois TELLURIDE RESORT: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by May 20 TENARIS SA: Class Settlement in Atanasio Gets Final Nod TEVA PHARMA: Ct. Conditionally Certifies Class in Kushelowitz TRINITY TEEN: Court OK's Class Cert Bid Following Remand TRUEACCORD CORP: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Quinn-Davis Due May 31 TSG ENTERPRISES: Faces Storey Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages UNIBARNS TRADING: August 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought UNITED HEALTH: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Mitchell Due Nov. 19 UNITED SERVICES: Class Cert Hearing Extended to August 6 UNITED STATES: Lewis Seeks to Certify Class UNITED STATES: Must Respond to Parks Class Complaint UNITED STATES: Olguin-Moreno Files Contract Suit in C.D. California UNITED STATES: Popkova Class Suit Stayed for Additional 30 Days UR JADDOU: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Sevastianov US CUSTOMS: Mora Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action USA WASTE: Eigenberg Files Torts Suit in C.D. California VALVE CORP: Brooks, et al., Bid to Intervene OK'd in Antitrust Suit VALVE CORPORATION: Bids to Seal Docs OK'd in Antitrust Suit VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: Class Discovery in Jackson Extended to June 28 VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: July 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought VIRGINIA FARM: Dilello Files Personal Property Suit in E.D. Va. VIRGINIA FARM: Noel Files Contract Suit in E.D. Virginia VIRGINIA: Court Narrows Claims in Mallory Suit VMSB LLC: Seeks More Time for Conditional Cert Response in Volpe VOYA RETIREMENT: Solorzano Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime WALMART INC: Class Cert. Filing Extended to June 17 WASHINGTON: Johnston Must Submit Forma Pauperis Application WASTE INDUSTRIES: Faces Stone Soup Contract Suit in D.S.C. WELLS FARGO: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in SEB Due June 4 WEST COVINA: Class Action Waiver in Arbitration Deal Enforceable WEST OF CHICAGO: Lee Files Labor Suit in California State Court WHEATLEIGH CORP: Employees Wait for Class Settlement in Labor Suit ZENTECH BLOOMINGTON: Ct Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Pryczynski [*] Class Action on Emails Sent at Inconvenient Time Lacks Merit Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: Claire's Faces Class Action Over Asbestos Concerns ASBESTOS UPDATE: PPG Industries Has $48MM Reserves as of March 31 ASBESTOS UPDATE: Trane Tech. Uses Two-Step Resolve Asbestos Claims ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Cos. Has $1.3BB Reserves as of March 31 ********* 4E BRANDS: Must File Class Cert Response by May 10 --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MELODY CALLANTINE, on behalf of herself, her minor children K.C. and L.C., and all others similarly situated, v. 4E BRANDS NORTH AMERICA, LLC, Case No. 3:20-cv-00801-DRL (N.D. Ind.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting an extension of time, up to and including May 10, 2024, to file its response in opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for class certification and disclose certification related experts. On March 15, 2024, the Plaintiff Melody Callantine filed her Motion for Class Certification. The deadline for the Defendant to file its response in opposition of the Plaintiff's motion for class certification and disclose certification-related experts is currently April 30, 2024. The Defendant previously filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, captioned as In re 4E Brands Northamerica LLC, Case No. 22-50009. The Defendant has since been dissolved which has made it challenging for defense counsel to obtain the information necessary to formulate a response to the Plaintiff's motion for class certification. The requested extension does not interfere with any other deadlines and/or hearing dates set by this Court. The Defense counsel, Corban J. Cavanaugh, has conferred with the Plaintiff's counsel, Ryan D. Milligan, about this motion and the Defendant's requested extension, and the Plaintiff's counsel has advised that the Plaintiff has no objection to the same. The Defendant is a manufacturer of drugs and pharmaceuticals. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated April 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5k3oPw at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Scott B. Cockrum, Esq. Corban J. Cavanaugh, Esq. LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP 2211 Main Street, Suite 3-2A Highland, IN 46322 Telephone: (219) 440-0600 Facsimile: (219) 440-0601 E-mail: Scott.Cockrum@lewisbrisbois.com Corban Cavanaugh Direct: 219.440.0621 Corban.Cavanaugh@lewisbrisbois.com A.J. BLOSENSKI: Court Narrows Claims in Salyers Suit ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAY SALYERS, v. A.J. BLOSENSKI, INC., WASTE CONNECTIONS, INC., and WASTE CONNECTIONS US, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-04802-WB (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Wendy Beetlestone entered a memorandum to deny the Defendants' motion to strike. The Court said that the motion to dismiss will be granted in part and denied in part. Salyers's allegation that "Defendants knew that their trash removal and recycling hauling services would prove deficient" is conclusory, so his UTPCPL claim must be dismissed. The Plaintiff Salyers has brought this putative class action against the Defendants alleging that AJB failed to pick up as agreed his garbage and recycling. Salyers, a citizen of Pennsylvania, has been a customer of AJB since 2018. Along with the putative class members, he makes quarterly payments to Defendants in exchange for trash and recycling services. AJB is a trash and recycling hauler that serves customers in Pennsylvania and Delaware. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Yu0gzn at no extra charge.[CC] ADMI CORP: Intercepts Electronic Communications, Hollaway Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- MICHELLE HOLLAWAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ADMI CORP. d/b/a TAG - THE ASPEN GROUP and ASPEN DENTAL MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendants, Case No. CV-24-001734 (Cal. Super., Stanislaus Cty., March 4, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants can monitor, read, record, learn the contents of, or otherwise intercept the conversations between Aspen Dental's contact center agents and Aspen consumers through a conversation intelligence software-as-a-service (SaaS) provided by Invoca, Inc. Neither the Defendants nor Invoca procured the consent of any person who interacted with Aspen Dental's contact center, prior to Invoca recording, accessing, reading, and learning the contents of conversations between Californians and Aspen Dental's contact center. The Plaintiff brings this action to prevent the Defendants from further violating the privacy rights of California residents, and to recover statutory damages for failing to comply with the CIPA. ADMI Corp. d/b/a TAG - The Aspen Group is a healthcare services provider, with its principal place of business at 800 West Fulton Market, Chicago, Illinois. Aspen Dental Management, Inc. is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Aspen Group, with its principal place of business at 800 West Fulton Market, Chicago, Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: L. Timothy Fisher, Esq. Julia K. Venditti, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 Email: ltfisher@bursor.com jvenditti@bursor.com - and - Joseph I. Marchese, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 837-7150 Facsimile: (212) 989-9163 Email: jmarchese@bursor.com AMAZON.COM INC: Class Cert Filing in De Coster Extended to June 7 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELIZABETH DE COSTER, et al., on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. AMAZON.COM, INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No. 2:21-cv-00693-JHC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John H. Chun entered an order as follows: 1. The interim deadline for Plaintiffs to file their class certification motion is extended to June 7, 2024. 2. The interim deadline for Amazon to respond to the Plaintiffs' motion is Sept. 9, 2024. 3. The interim deadline for the Plaintiffs' reply brief is Nov. 11, 2024. The Court previously granted the parties' request to extend the deadlines for the class certification briefing schedule by two months to allow parties time to discuss coordination of depositions of Amazon witnesses with the Plaintiffs in other related cases. The parties are still discussing coordination of the related cases and this matter, including the appropriate schedule for briefing class certification and scheduling attendant depositions. To avoid motion practice while the parties discuss the appropriate deposition and briefing schedules, the parties agree to a one-month extension of the currently set class certification briefing deadlines. Amazon.com is engaged in e-commerce, cloud computing, online advertising, digital streaming, and artificial intelligence. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=AANxH6 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Steve W. Berman, Esq. Barbara A. Mahoney, Esq. Anne F. Johnson, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com barbaram@hbsslaw.com annej@hbsslaw.com - and - Zina G. Bash, Esq. Jessica Beringer, Esq. Shane Kelly, Esq. Daniel Backman, Esq. KELLER POSTMAN LLC 111 Congress Avenue, Suite 500 Austin, TX, 78701 Telephone: (512) 690-0990 E-mail: zina.bash@kellerpostman.com Jessica.Beringer@kellerpostman.com shane.kelly@kellerpostman.com Daniel.Backman@kellerpostman.com - and - Derek W. Loeser, Esq. KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P. 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3052 Telephone: (206) 623-1900 Facsimile: (206) 623-3384 E-mail: Dloeser@kellerrohrback.com - and - Alicia Cobb, Esq. Steig D. Olson, Esq. David D. LeRay, Esq. Nic V. Siebert, Esq. Maxwell P. Deabler-Meadows, Esq. Adam B. Wolfson, Esq. QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 1109 First Avenue, Suite 210 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 905-7000 E-mail: aliciacobb@quinnemanuel.com steigolson@quinnemanuel.com davidleray@quinnemanuel.com nicolassiebert@quinnemanuel.com maxmeadows@quinnemanuel.com adamwolfson@quinnemanuel.com The Defendant is represented by: John A. Goldmark, Esq. MaryAnn Almeida, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104-1610 Telephone: (206) 622-3150 Facsimile: (206) 757-7700 E-mail: SteveRummage@dwt.com JohnGoldmark@dwt.com MaryAnnAlmeida@dwt.com - and - Karen L. Dunn, Esq. William A. Isaacson, Esq. Amy J. Mauser, Esq. Martha L. Goodman, Esq. Kyle Smith, Esq. PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP 2001 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20006-1047 Telephone: (202) 223-7300 Facsimile: (202) 223-7420 E-mail: kdunn@paulweiss.com wisaacson@paulweiss.com amauser@paulweiss.com mgoodman@paulweiss.com ksmith@paulweiss.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: Fails to Refund Canceled Flights, Renteria Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ CHRIS RENTERIA, HERBERT TALLEDO, and STEPHANIE CHIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1-100, Defendants, Case No. 24STCV05691 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., March 6, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for breach of contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, unjust enrichment, negligent misrepresentation, and violations of the Sherman Act and the Robinson Patman Act. The case arises from the Defendants' failure to adequately reimburse the Plaintiffs and similarly situated customers with a refund, compensation, or similarly valued alternative arrangement upon cancelling their confirmed flight. Additionally, the Plaintiffs bring this action for the Defendants' failure to provide a breakdown explaining how the refund, compensation, or similarly valued alternative arrangement was calculated, upon providing an inadequate reimbursement. American Airlines, Inc. is a global carrier based in Texas. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: W. Zev Abramson, Esq. Jack Gindi, Esq. Nissim Levin, Esq. ABRAMSON LABOR GROUP 1700 W. Burbank Blvd. Burbank, CA 91506 Telephone: (213) 493-6300 Facsimile: (213) 382-4083 ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Defamatory Class Suit to Move Forward -------------------------------------------------------------- Alanna Smith and Kristy Kirkup of The Globe and Mail report that a proposed class-action lawsuit filed by a residential-school survivor against a priest and entities associated with the Catholic Church will move forward after a Calgary judge struck down a motion to dismiss the case on April 22. Sphenia Jones, a 79-year-old elder of the Haida Nation in British Columbia who attended the Edmonton Indian Residential School in the 1950s, is the representative plaintiff in the proposed lawsuit. It names Rev. Marcin Mironiuk as a defendant. He is accused of making defamatory statements about residential-school survivors in 2021 and causing harm to their reputations by denying reports of unmarked graves. Also named as defendants are the Catholic Archdiocese of Edmonton, which placed Father Mironiuk on indefinite administrative leave after calling his comments "thoroughly unacceptable," and the Oblate Fathers of Assumption Province. The defendants presented arguments to strike the claim, a procedural option available if a party believes the case has no merit. Justice James Farrington, in a same-day decision, said he is satisfied the claim has a "reasonable chance of success and completes the basics." A statement of claim filed in July, 2023, details how Father Mironiuk made a number of statements in Polish regarding the discovery of grave sites at residential schools and repeatedly described it as "lies" and "manipulation," and claimed Indigenous children died of natural causes. He made his remarks after the discovery of unmarked burial sites at the former Kamloops Indian Residential School. Paul Morrison, legal counsel for the defendants, argued that there is "no basis" that a reasonable, objective person would consider his comments in relation to Ms. Jones. He also argued that the proposed class of "residential-school survivors who have spoken out about deaths" was poorly defined and questioned whether the claim could constitute group defamation. Justice Farrington did note concerns over how "spoken out" will be interpreted but said that is an issue for the class-action certification hearing. Meanwhile, Max Faille, a lawyer representing Ms. Jones, said it is "cruelly naive" to suggest that parishioners and other people who heard the words of Father Mironiuk would not be "potentially inclined to believe them." He said the group described in the claim is to whom Father Mironiuk's comments were directed. Mr. Faille, who practises Indigenous law and constitutional litigation, said Ms. Jones initiated the class action on behalf of all residential-school survivors who "have had the courage to speak about their experiences and their knowledge of what happened at residential schools, including the horrific number of deaths of children." He said, in an interview, that the law "does recognize that a group can be defamed." Raymond Frogner: Residential-school denialism doesn't stand up to reality Ms. Jones, ahead of the court hearing on , said there are few survivors alive to testify to the abuse that happened at residential schools. She said she had her fingernails ripped out, was hit with sticks and witnessed the death of other children. "She saw where they were buried, along the fence -- an area now overgrown with trees," the claim states. "My grandfather's telling me to stand up and be proud, so that's what I'm doing," she said on the steps of the Calgary court. "This is my way," she said, pausing, her voice breaking. "My way of saving our children." In a statement on behalf of Father Mironiuk and the Oblates, Father Marcin Serwin said Father Mironiuk has acknowledged he made statements about the residential-school site in Kamloops but that he did not question the existence of graves or intend to cause harm to those who attended residential schools. The statement also said Father Mironiuk acknowledged the school had a hurtful reality for some of its attendees and he lamented any loss of life, adding the Assumption Province echoes these sentiments and both parties regret the matter is before the courts despite their apologies. The Catholic Archdiocese of Edmonton said it cannot comment as the case is before the courts. The statement of claim details how Ms. Jones was forced from her community of Haida Gwaii to Edmonton at the age of 11 on a train that she said stopped multiple times to pick up other children -- some of whom did not survive the journey. The church has discounted the experiences of survivors, Ms. Jones said. "I'm here to say it's true," she said. Residential-school survivors have spoken out about present-day denialism of their experiences -- an issue documented in the preliminary report by Kimberly Murray, the independent special interlocutor on missing children, unmarked graves and burial sites. Ms. Murray is expected to release her final findings this spring. In the federal budget tabled in Parliament last week, Ottawa proposed spending $5-million over three years, starting in 2025-26, for Crown-Indigenous Relations and Northern Affairs Canada to establish a program to "combat residential school denialism." Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Gary Anandasangaree said that survivors have expressed that denialism is "deeply hurtful." "When people deny that this happened, it really does retraumatize and reignites the hurt that people already have," he said, adding both religious and political leaders need to be unequivocal in supporting Indigenous people who have gone through this experience. [GN] ARCHDIOCESE OF EDMONTON: Faces Class Action Over Priest's Sermon ---------------------------------------------------------------- Teri Fikowski, writing for CTV News Calgary, reports that a residential school survivor is leading a class-action lawsuit against the Catholic Church and one of its priests. It stems from comments allegedly made by the priest during a sermon describing evidence of unmarked graves as "lies" and "manipulation." On April 22, a judge ruled the proposed class-action lawsuit can go forward despite efforts from lawyers representing the archdiocese of Edmonton and a religious order to have it struck down. That decision was met with lots of tears, smiles and hugs from elder Sphenia Jones, who is leading the case. About a dozen of Jones' family and supporters rallied in support of residential school survivors and the lawsuit. The lawsuit alleges priest Marcin Mironiuk said Indigenous children died of natural causes and questioned the validity of unmarked graves during a mass in 2021. It sparked backlash and protests at the time. The archdiocese did not comment but apologized at the time and put the priest on indefinite administrative leave. However, a church website in Brampton, Ont., says the priest works there now. Lawyers behind the class action say denialism against residential schools is a growing phenomenon that further traumatizes survivors. Jones was forced to attend the former Edmonton residential school when she was 11 and says images of what she witnessed still haunt her at 80. Lawyers representing the church argued the remarks were made in Polish and misinterpreted, and don't meet the criteria of a class-action lawsuit -- such as referring to Jones directly. The judge disagreed and said it can go forward and also awarded Jones compensation for what she spent to fight the application to have it struck down. [GN] ARISE VIRTUAL: Must File Class Cert Response in De Niro by May 9 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Diavion De Niro, individually, and on behalf of similarly situated individuals, v. Arise Virtual Solutions, Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-00695-APG-EJY (D. Nev.), the Parties file a joint stipulation to extend time to respond to motion and respond to complaint: 1. The deadline for Arise to respond to Plaintiff's Motion for conditional certification will be extended to and including May 9, 2024; 2. The deadline for Arise to respond to the Plaintiff's Complaint shall be extended to and including May 16, 2024; and 3. This Stipulation addresses timing only and is without prejudice to any of the Parties' positions, arguments, allegations, defenses, and/or rights in this matter. On April 10, 2024, the Plaintiff filed both the Complaint in the instant lawsuit and a Motion for Conditional Certification. On April 11, 2024, Arise was served with the Summons and Complaint, along with the Motion for Conditional Certification. Arise provides business process outsourcing and consulting services. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5yBVlb at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. Adelaide Pagano, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Ste 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (671)-994-5800 E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com apagano@llrlaw.com mcassorla@llrlaw.com - and - Kristina Hillman, Esq. Sean W. McDonald, Esq. WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD 3199 E. Warm Springs Road, Ste 400 Las Vegas, NV 89120 Telephone: (702)508-9282 E-mail: nevadacourtnotices@unioncounsel.net khillman@unioncounsel.net smcdonald@unioncounsel.net The Defendant is represented by: Dora V. Lane, Esq. HOLLAND & HART LLP 5470 Kietzke Lane, Suite 100 Reno, NV 89511 Telephone: (775) 327-3045 E-mail: dlane@hollandhart.com - and - Adam P. KohSweeney, Esq. Katy (Yin Yee) Ho, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP Two Embarcadero Center, 28th floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 984-8700 E-mail: akohsweeney@omm.com kho@omm.com ARTSANA USA: Zarfati Sues Over Defective Chicco-brand Strollers --------------------------------------------------------------- LEXI LEIGH ZARFATI, MICHELLE WILLIAMS, JORDANA MORRIS, MARIA ANGELICA NAVAS, and GRANT WEST, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ARTSANA USA, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-21372-KMM (S.D. Fla., April 12, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for unjust enrichment and for violation of the Florida's Unfair & Deceptive Trade Practices Act and the Consumer Product Safety Act. The suit arises from the Defendant's alleged manufacturing, marketing, and distributing of defective and dangerous Chicco-brand strollers. Artsana represents these baby strollers to consumers as safe, including by representing to consumers that the strollers have an effective braking mechanism. In fact, several models of these strollers have a defective braking mechanism that allows the strollers to roll even when the user engages the brakes. This defective braking mechanism can lead to children being seriously injured or killed and, in fact, has already led to at least one child being seriously injured, says the suit. Artsana's misrepresentations about the efficacy of the braking mechanism and their omissions about the mechanism were unfair and deceived consumers including Plaintiffs, who paid for a product with a serious, undisclosed defect that rendered the product less valuable, the suit alleges. Artsana USA, Inc. manufactures, markets, and distributes various models of baby strollers in the United States, including in Florida.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Rachel Wagner Furst, Esq. John R. Byrne, Esq. Frank R. Maderal, Esq. Nicole Estrada, Esq. MADERAL BYRNE & FURST PLLC 2800 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 1100 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (305) 520-5690 E-mail: rachel@maderalbyrne.com john@maderalbyrne.com frank@maderalbyrne.com nicole@maderalbyrne.com alejandra@maderalbyrne.com ASR GROUP: Controls Granulated Sugar Prices, Vicky Enterprises Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- VICKY ENTERPRISES INC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ASR GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC.; AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING, INC.; DOMINO FOODS, INC.; CARGILL, INC.; MICHIGAN SUGAR COMPANY; UNITED SUGAR PRODUCERS & REFINERS COOPERATIVE f/k/a UNITED SUGARS CORPORATION; COMMODITY INFORMATION, INC.; and RICHARD WISTISEN, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-21386 (S.D. Fla., April 12, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violation of Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act and various state laws. 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. The Plaintiff allegedly purchased Granulated Sugar indirectly from one or more Defendants or their co-conspirators in Florida during the class period. ASR Group International, Inc. is a refiner and marketer of cane sugar based in West Palm Beach, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter Prieto, Esq. Matthew P. Weinshall, Esq. Dayron Silverio, Esq. PODHURST ORSECK, P.A. One S.E. 3rd Avenue, Suite 2300 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 358-2800 E-mail: pprieto@podhurst.com mweinshall@podhurst.com dsilverio@podhurst.com ASR GROUP: Wilson Sues Over Control of Granulated Sugar Prices -------------------------------------------------------------- WILSON COFFEE HOUSE, LLC D/B/A LINDEN STREET COFFEE HOUSE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ASR GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC., AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING, INC., DOMINO FOODS, INC., UNITED SUGAR PRODUCERS & REFINERS COOPERATIVE F/K/A UNITED SUGARS CORPORATION, MICHIGAN SUGAR COMPANY, CARGILL, INC., COMMODITY INFORMATION, INC., and RICHARD WISTISEN, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-01322-JMB-ECW (D. Minn., April 12, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, seeking treble damages, injunctive relief, and other relief pursuant to the federal antitrust laws and demands a trial by jury on all matters so triable. This lawsuit arises from Defendants' unlawful agreement to fix prices for granulated sugar in the United States. To implement their price-fixing conspiracy, the Defendants exchanged detailed, competitively sensitive, non-public information about Granulated Sugar prices, capacity, sales volume, supply, and demand. As a result of Defendants' unlawful agreement, commercial indirect purchasers of granulated sugar in the United States and its territories, including Plaintiff and the Class members, paid supra-competitive prices for granulated sugar sold by Defendants in the United States and its territories beginning no later than January 1, 2019, and running through the present, says the suit. ASR Group International, Inc. is a refiner and marketer of cane sugar based in West Palm Beach, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Shawn M. Raiter, Esq. LARSON KING LLP 30 East Seventh Street, Suite 2800 St. Paul, MN 55101 Telephone: (651)312-6518 E-mail: sraiter@larsonking.com - and - Michael J. Flannery, Esq. CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP Two City Place Drive Second Floor St. Louis, MO 63141 Telephone: (314) 226-1015 E-mail: mflannery@cuneolaw.com - and - Cody McCracken, Esq. Lissa Morgans, Esq. CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP 4725 Wisconsin Ave. NW Suite 200 Washington, DC 20016 Telephone: (202) 789-3960 Facsimile: (202) 589-1813 E-mail: cmccracken@cuneolaw.com lmorgans@cuneolaw.com - and - J. Barton Goplerud, Esq. SHINDELAR, ANDERSON, GOPLERUD & WEESE, P.C. 5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100 West Des Moines, IA 50265 Telephone: (515) 223-4567 E-mail: goplerud@sagwlaw.com - and - Jon Tostrud, Esq. Anthony Carter, Esq. TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, PC 1925 Century Park East Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 278-2600 E-mail: jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com acarter@tostrudlaw.com AT&T INC: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boykin Suit Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------- RAH-NITA BOYKIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AT&T, INC., Defendant, Case No: 1:24-cv-02973 (N.D. Ill, April 12, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to protect the Plaintiff and Class sensitive information, including their names, phone numbers, addresses, email addresses, dates of birth, financial account numbers, Social Security numbers and/or passport numbers ("Personally Identifiable Information" or "PII"), The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant failed to properly protect customers by investing in adequate data security, thereby allowing hackers to exfiltrate the highly sensitive PII that customers entrusted to Defendant. In mid-March 2024, the Defendant became aware of a catastrophic, widespread data breach in which the data of at least 73 million current and former customers was breached and exfiltrated (the "Data Breach"). As a result, the Plaintiff and Class members will suffer indefinitely from the substantial and concrete risk that their identities will be, or already have been, stolen and misappropriated even beyond the Data Breach itself, says the suit. AT&T INC. operates as a communications holding company. The Company, through its subsidiaries and affiliates, provides local and long-distance phone, wireless and data communications, Internet access and messaging, IP-based and satellite television, telecommunications equipment, and directory advertising and publishing services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq. Megan E. Shannon, Esq. FEGAN SCOTT LLC 150 S. Wacker Drive, 24th Floor Chicago, IL 60606 Telephone: (312) 741-1019 Facsimile: (312) 264-0100 Email: beth@feganscott.com megan@feganscott.com ATLANTA, GA: Parties Seek Final Nod of Class Action Certification ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Laurel Lawson, James Curtis, and James Turner, on behalf of themselves and other similarly-situated persons, v. City of Atlanta, Georgia, Case No. 1:18-cv-02484-SDG (N.D. Ga.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), approving final class certification and the Class Action Consent Decree. The Parties submit that the Class Action Consent Decree is fair, adequate, and reasonable. The Consent Decree calls for the certification of a class of (the "Class"): "All persons who have, or will have, a Mobility Disability and who have been or will have been denied equal access to pedestrian rights of way in the City of Atlanta at any time up through the expiration of this Consent Decree as a result of the City's policies and practices with regard to design, installation, repair, and maintenance of its pedestrian rights of way." On May 24, 2018, the Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, filed a class-action complaint against the City pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23. The complaint alleges that the City violates Title II of the ADA by failing to maintain sidewalks and other pedestrian access routes in the public right-of-way in a manner that is accessible to individuals with disabilities. On Aug. 3, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint. The Plaintiffs are mobility-impaired individuals who have disabilities recognized by the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the Rehabilitation Act. Atlanta is the capital and largest city of the U.S. state of Georgia. It is one of the South's largest cities. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fSxxXj at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Andrew Y. Coffman, Esq. A. Lee Parks, Jr., Esq. J. Daniel Cole, Esq. PARKS, CHESIN & WALBERT, P.C. 1355 Peachtree St.NE, Suite 2000 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 873-8000 E-mail: acoffman@pcwlawfirm.com lparks@pcwlawfirm.com dcole@pcwlawfirm.com - and - James E. Radford, Esq. Georgia Lord, Esq. RADFORD SCOTT, LLP 315 W. Ponce de Leon Ave. Decatur, GA 30030 Telephone: (678) 271-0300 E-mail: jradford@radfordscott.com glord@radfordscott.com The Defendants are represented by: Richard J. Valladares, Esq. Robert S. Fine, Esq. Robert S. Galbo, Esq. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP Terminus 200, Suite 2500 333 Piedmont Road NE Atlanta, GA 30305 Telephone: (678) 553-2100 Facsimile: (678) 553-4745 E-mail: FineR@gtlaw.com Valladaresr@gtlaw.com GalboR@gtlaw.com AVANADE INC: Jan. 17, 2025 Continuance of Class Cert Filing Sought ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MADISON LAIRD, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. AVANADE, INC., a Washington corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-04237-CRB (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order to continue the class certification motion and related deadlines set forth in its Nov. 15, 2023 Case Management Order as follows: Current Proposed Deadlines Continued Deadlines Class Certification Discovery May 17, 2024 Nov. 18, 2024 Cutoff: Motion for Class Certification June 17, 2024 Jan. 17, 2025 Deadline: Opposition to Motion for Class July 17, 2024 Feb. 17, 2025 Certification Deadline: Reply ISO Motion for Class July 31, 2024 March 3, 2025 Certification Deadline: Hearing on Motion for Class Aug. 23, 2024 April 4, 2025 Certification: The Plaintiff filed a Class Action Complaint against Defendant in the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Francisco on June 28, 2023, which alleged three causes of action for violations of the federal Fair Credit and Reporting Act and California Investigative Consumer Reporting Agencies Act. The Parties met and conferred multiple times, including on Oct. 31, 2023 and Nov. 8, 2023, and discussed potential avenues for resolving the instant action, including through private mediation. The Parties said that they are still actively discussing the potential for mediation, including possible mediators. Should the Parties agree to mediation, said mediation is expected to take place no earlier than August 2024. Avanade is a global professional services company providing IT consulting and services. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EYlDWB at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kane Moon, Esq. Allen Feghali, Esq. Jacquelyne VanEmmerik, Esq. MOON LAW GROUP, P.C. 1055 West Seventh Street, Suite 1880 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 232-3128 Facsimile: (213) 232-3125 E-mail: kmoon@moonlawgroup.com afeghali@moonlawgroup.com jvanemmerik@moonlawgroup.com The Defendants are represented by: Joan B. Tucker Fife, Esq. Tristan R. Kirk, Esq. Zarouhi Papazyan, Esq. WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 101 California Street San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 591-1000 Facsimile: (415) 591-1400 E-mail: jfife@winston.com tkirk@winston.com zpapazyan@winston.com AVEM HEALTH: Class Action Settlement Gets Preliminary Approval -------------------------------------------------------------- Federman & Sherwood announces that the Court has entered an Order granting preliminary approval to a proposed settlement in the class action against Avem Health Partners, Inc., styled Samuel Bingaman v. Avem Health Partners, Incl, United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, Case No. 23-cv-130-SM. To obtain additional information regarding the settlement and to submit a claim form, please visit: https://avemsettlement.com/. The deadline to submit a claim form is May 25, 2024. Contacts: Lacrista Bagley FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD 10205 N Pennsylvania Ave The Village, OK 73120 Telephone: (405) 235-1560 Email to: lab@federmanlaw.com [GN] BANK OF AMERICA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time for Class Cert Filing ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MOHAMMAD FARSHAD, ABDOLLAH NIA, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Case No. 3:21-cv-01799-BAS-BGS (S.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order extending the deadline for the Plaintiff's motion for class certification as to the presently live claims to May 16, 2024. Bank of America offers saving and current account, investment and financial services. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Pukmwg at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason S. Rathod, Esq. Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq. MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP 412 H. St. NE, Suite 302 Washington, DC 20002 Telephone: (202) 470-3520 E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com jrathod@classlawdc.com - and - Benjamin I. Siminou, Esq. Jonna D. Lothyan, Esq. SINGLETON SCHREIBER LLP 591 Camino De La Reina, Suite 1025 San Diego, CA 92108 Telephone: (619) 771-3473 E-mail: bsiminou@singletonschreiber.com jlothyan@singletonschreiber.com BETTERHELP INC: Auto Renews Therapy Subscription, de la Cruz Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- SEAN SMALL DE LA CRUZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BETTERHELP, INC., Defendant, Case No. 4:24-cv-01317-YGR (N.D. Cal., March 5, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of California Automatic Renewal Law, California Unfair Competition Law, California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, and Electronic Funds Transfer Act. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged illegal and deceptive practices to trick consumers into enrolling in its pricey therapy services and using illegal automatic renewal practices in connection with its subscription plans. BetterHelp's enrollment process is deceptive and violates the ARL because it fails to provide clear and conspicuous disclosures regarding its automatic renewal terms and does not obtain consumers' affirmative consent to automatic renewal. The enrollment process also fails to obtain consumers' written authorization for electronic fund transfers, as required by the EFTA. Similarly, BetterHelp fails to send consumers copies of their written authorization for electronic fund transfers, says the suit. BetterHelp, Inc. is a telehealth company, headquartered in Mountain View, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Shub, Esq. SHUB & JOHNS LLC Four Tower Bridge 200 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 400 West Conshohocken, PA 19428 Telephone: (610) 477-8380 Email: jshub@shublawyers.com - and - Ethan D. Roman, Esq. WITTELS MCINTURFF PALIKOVIC 305 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (914) 775-8862 Email: edr@wittelslaw.com BOSTON SCIENTIFIC: Class Settlement Approved in Securities Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit re Boston Scientific Corporation Securities Litigation, Case No. 1:20-cv-12225-ADB (D. Mass.), the Hon. Judge Allison Burroughs entered an order approving class action settlement. The Court certifies for the purpose of Settlement only, the Action as a class action pursuant to Rules 23(a) and b(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure on behalf of the Settlement Class consisting of: of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Boston Scientific common stock during the period from September 16, 2020 through November 16, 2020, inclusive, and were damaged thereby." Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (i) Defendants; (ii) Immediate Family Members of any Individual Defendant; (iii) any person who was an Officer or director of Boston Scientific during the Class Period and any of their Immediate Family Members; (iv) any parent, subsidiary, or affiliate of Boston Scientific; (v) any firm, trust, corporation, or other entity in which any Defendant or any other excluded person or entity has, or had during the Class Period, a controlling interest; and (vi) the legal representatives, agents, affiliates, heirs, successors-in interest, or assigns of any such excluded persons or entities. Also excluded from the Settlement Class are the persons and entities listed on Exhibit 1 hereto who or which are excluded from the Settlement Class pursuant to request. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZCtmiy at no extra charge.[CC] BRADLEY UNIVERSITY: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Sinha ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sinha v. Bradley University, Case No. 1:24-cv-01059-CSB-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. Bradley University is a private university in Peoria, Illinois. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=NdBTZm at no extra charge.[CC] BRIDGESONE CORP: Benton Sues Over Tire Price Monopoly ----------------------------------------------------- CHERESE BENTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BRIDGESONE CORPORATION; BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS, INC.; CONTINENTAL AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT; CONTINENTAL TIRE THE AMERICAS, LLC; THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY; COMPAGNIE GENERALE DES ETABLISSEMENTS; MICHELEN SCA; MICHELIN NORTH AMERICA, INC.; NOKIAN TYRES PLC; NOKIAN TYRES INC.; NOKIAN TYRES U.S. OPERATIONS LLC; PIRELLI & C.S.P.A.; and PIRELLI TIRE LLC, Defendants, Case 3:24-cv-02217 (N.D. Cal., April 15, 2024) alleges violation of the Sherman Act. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Defendants are engaged in a conspiracy to artificially raise and maintain the prices of new replacement tires for cars, vans, trucks and buses ("Replacement Tires") sold in the United States. Beginning on or about April 1, 2020, and with an end date presently unknown, the Defendants carried out an agreement to raise and maintain prices through the exchange of pricing information, the coordination of capacity and production and other means. The Defendants' conspiracy to fix prices for Replacement Tires was predatory and opportunistic and involved taking advantage of economic conditions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic as an excuse to raise prices, says the suit. BRIDGESTONE CORPORATION designs, produces, and sells automobile tires. The Company also produces and markets scales to weigh racing cars and jumbo aircrafts and sporting goods including golf equipment, tennis rackets, and bicycles. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Steven N. Williams, Esq. Kai'Ree K. Howard, Esq. Gerald Williams, Esq. STEVEN WILLIAMS LAW, PC. 201 Spear Street, Suite 1100 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: 415-597-1509 Email: swillliams@stevenwilliamslaw.com khowards@stevenwilliamslaw.com BROOKLYN GRID: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chimbolema Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------ DAMIAN CHIMBOLEMA; DIEGO ARMANDO CORO VALENTE; FELIX GERMAN EVAS GUAMAN; and ANGELICA MARIA JEREZ ASITIMBAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. BROOKLYN GRID LLC; SAMEER BATRA; and GIL BROITMAN, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-02844 (S.D.N.Y., April 15, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as construction workers. BROOKLYN GRID LLC a privately held real estate investment company with headquarters in NYC focusing on property acquisitions, development, and management. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Linden Miller, Esq. TAKEROOT JUSTICE 123 William St., Suite 401 New York, NY 10038 Telephone: (908) 251-9748 Email: Lmiller@takerootjustice.org - and - Samantha Wilhelm, Esq. 123 William Street, Suite 401 New York, NY 10038 Telephone: (646) 923-8315 Email: Swilhelm@takerootjustice.org BURGERFI INTERNATIONAL: Class Management Order Entered in Donoghue ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as DENNIS J. DONOGHUE et al., v. BURGERFI INTERNATIONAL, INC. et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-06400-AT-GWG (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gabriel Gorenstein entered a class management order as follows: -- All pre-trial applications, including those relating to scheduling and discovery, shall be made to the undersigned (except motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class certification). -- All applications must comply with this Court's Individual Practices, which are available through the Clerk's Office or at: https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-gabriel-w-gorenstein -- Discovery motions -- that is, any application pursuant to Rules 26 through 37 or 45 -- not only must comply with ¶ 2.A. of the Court's Individual Practices but also must be made promptly after the cause for such a motion arises. -- The parties are required to make affirmative attempts to settle this matter through discussions among counsel and mediation if necessary and appropriate. BurgerFi owns and operates a chain of restaurants. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SBVW9Z at no extra charge.[CC] CAPITAL VISION: Plaintiffs Seek Leave To File Class Cert Reply -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARY ALICE CLARK, CHRISTOPHER COULTER, AARON PEREZ, KEVIN NELSON, and PHILLIP ROSCHER on behalf of themselves, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. CAPITAL VISION SERVICES, LLC d/b/a MYEYEDR, Case No. 1:22-cv-10236-DJC (D. Mass.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order permitting them to file the reply in support of the Motion for Class Certification and granting any other relief the Court deems just. On Feb. 29, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification. The same day, the Defendant filed its opposition to the Motion. 3. A reply memorandum is necessary to address Defendant’s misstatement of facts regarding adequacy of counsel, and alleged variations within the testimony of the Plaintiffs. 4. Plaintiffs seek to file the reply at this time because the proposed reply largely cites to the same evidence as the evidence cited in the Plaintiffs’ opposition to Defendant’s Motion for Decertification. Capital Vision provides optometric and retail optical services. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8Z2aeX at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq. Camar Jones, Esq. Alan L. Quiles, Esq. SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A. 951 Yamato Road, Suite 285 Boca Raton, FL 33431 Telephone: (561) 447-8888 E-mail: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com aquiles@shavitzlaw.com cjones@shavitzlaw.com - and - Sam J. Smith, Esq. Loren Bolno Donnell, Esq. BURR & SMITH LLP 9800 4th Street North, Suite 200 St. Petersburg, FL 33702 Telephone: (813) 253-2010 E-mail: ssmith@burrandsmithlaw.com ldonnell@burrandsmithlaw.com - and - Hillary Schwab, Esq. Brant Casavant, Esq. FAIR WORK, PC. 192 South Street, Suite 450 Boston, MA 02111 Telephone: (617)607-3261 E-mail: hillary@fairworklaw.com brant@fairworklaw.com CARECENTRIX INC: Conditional Collective Cert. Bid Extended to May 8 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jones v. CareCentrix, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-01071 (D. Conn., Filed Aug. 10, 2023), the Hon. Judge Victor A. Bolden entered an order granting joint motion for extension of time to file response / reply as to motion to certify class Plaintiff's pre-discovery motion for conditional collective certification until May 8, 2024. The suit alleges violation Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). CareCentrix provides home health care services.[CC] CAROLINA AMATO: Website Not Accessible to Blind, Martinez Says -------------------------------------------------------------- SILVIA MARTINEZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. CAROLINA AMATO ACCESSORIES, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-02984 (E.D.N.Y., Filed April 22, 2024) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for the failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate the Defendant's website, www.amatonewyork.com, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the 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 the Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Based on a 2020 U.S. Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1 million people in the United States are visually impaired, including 2.0 million who are blind. According a 2016 report published by the National Federation of the Blind, 2016 report, approximately 418,500 visually impaired persons live in the State of New York. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using the computer. The Plaintiff is represented by: Rami Salim, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC One University Plaza, Suite 620 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Telephone: (201) 282-6500 Facsimile: (201) 282-6501 E-mail: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com CARRIAGE SERVICES: Atkinson Sues Over Discrimination & Harassment ----------------------------------------------------------------- ANGELICA ATKINSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CARRIAGE SERVICES OF VIRGINIA LLC, Defendant, Case No. 202403178 (Va. Cir. Ct., Fairfax Cty., March 4, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for employment discrimination and harassment in violation of the Virginia Code. Carriage Services of Virginia LLC is a provider of funeral and cemetery services and merchandise in Fairfax, Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason F. Zellman, Esq. SUROVELL ISAACS & LEVY PLC Fairfax, VA 22030 Telephone: (703) 277-9704 Facsimile: (703) 591-9285 Email: JZellman@SurovellFirm.com CEDAR FAIR: Suit Seeks to Lift Continuance of Class Cert. Briefing ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MONEVA WALKER, et al., v. CEDAR FAIR, L.P., et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-02176-JGC (N.D. Ohio), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order lifting the continuance on class certification briefing and directing the efendants to respond to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification within the next 30 days. The Plaintiffs have been seeking to certify this class action since they filed it, in 2020. They have defeated multiple motions to dismiss. They have completed the necessary class discovery and filed their motion for class certification, along with supporting evidence and expert testimony. Cedar Fair is an operator of amusement and water parks, and hotels. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1MslSq at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Nicole T. Fiorelli, Esq. DWORKEN & BERNSTEIN CO., L.P.A. 60 South Park Place Painesville, OH 44077 Telephone: (440) 352-3391 Facsimile: (440) 352-3469 Fax E-mail: nfiorelli@dworkenlaw.com - and - Jonas Jacobson, Esq. Simon Franzini, Esq. DOVEL & LUNER, LLP 201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: (310) 656-7066 Facsimile: (310) 656-7069 E-mail: jonas@dovel.com simon@dovel.com - and - Richard M. Kerger, Esq. Kimberly A. Conklin, Esq. THE KERGER LAW FIRM, LLC 4159 N. Holland-Sylvania Rd. Suite 101 Toledo, OH 43623 Telephone: (419) 255-5990 Facsimile: (419) 255-5997 E-mail: rkerger@kergerlaw.com kconklin@kergerlaw.com CHG MEDICAL: Class Settlement in Carlino Gets Initial Nod --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JACQUELINE CARLINO, an individual on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v. CHG MEDICAL STAFFING, INC., Case No. 1:17-cv-01323-LHR-CDB (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Christopher Baker entered an order granting the Plaintiff's motion for preliminary approval of class and collective action settlement. The Court preliminary finds that the terms of the Joint Stipulation and Settlement Agreement are fair, reasonable, and adequate, and comply with Rule 23(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court appoints CPT Group, Inc. as the settlement administrator, preliminarily approves settlement administration costs of up to $12,000, and, in accordance with the Settlement, directs the settlement administrator to complete dissemination of the notice of settlement within 30 days of entry of this Order. A final approval (fairness) hearing is hereby set for Sept. 18, 2024, at 1:00pm Central before the Honorable Lee H. Rosenthal to consider the fairness, reasonableness, and adequacy of the Settlement as well as the award of costs to class counsel and a service award to the class representative. Class counsel shall file the motion for final approval of the Settlement, along with any objections to the Settlement and any responses thereto, no later than 35 days before the final approval (fairness) hearing. On Feb. 28, 2019, the Court issued an order granting the Plaintiff's motion for rule 23 class certification and conditional certification of an FLSA collective. Specifically, the Court certified the following class and collective: -- California Class "All non-exempt hourly healthcare professionals employed in California through the RN Network division of CHG Medical Staffing, Inc., who, at any time from Sept. 29, 2013 through the date of certification [Feb. 28, 2019], worked overtime and had the value of their meals and incidental stipends, housing allowance, and/or housing accommodation excluded from their regular rate for purposes of calculating overtime pay." -- FLSA Collective "All non-exempt hourly healthcare professionals employed in the United States through the RN Network division of CHG Medical Staffing, Inc., who, at any time within the three years preceding certification, worked in excess of 40 hours in one or more workweeks and had the value of their meals and incidentals stipend, housing allowance, and/or housing accommodation excluded from their regular rate for purposes of calculating overtime pay." The Defendant is a staffing company that employs healthcare professionals for short-term assignments across the United States. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OoihLd at no extra charge.[CC] COFFEE REGIONAL: Plaintiff Must File Class Cert Bids by July 15 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Doe v. Coffee Regional Medical Center, Inc., Case No. 5:24-cv-00005 (S.D. Ga.), the Hon. Lisa G. Wood Judge entered an order on motion for extension of time. The Plaintiff shall file any desired class certification documents on or before July 15, 2024. The Court will consider any additional requests for extension in due course. Coffee Regional is a general medical and surgical facility.[CC] COMPLIANCE STAFFING: Griffis Wage-and-Hour Suit Removed to W.D. Pa. ------------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled ANDREW GRIFFIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. COMPLIANCE STAFFING AGENCY, LLC d/b/a JENNMAR SERVICES, Case No. GD-24-001121, was removed from the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Pennsylvania, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on March 1, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-00268-MPK to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violations of the Colorado Wage Claim Act, the Colorado Minimum Wage Act, and the Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards Order. Compliance Staffing Agency, LLC, doing business as Jennmar Services, is a staffing company based in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Christopher S. Bouriat, Esq. Joshua R. Sallmen, Esq. REED SMITH CENTRE 225 Fifth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 288-4119 Facsimile: (412) 288-3063 Email: cbouriat@reedsmith.com jsallmen@reedsmith.com COMPULINK: Dancy-Wilkins Class Cert. Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dancy-Wilkins et al v. Compu-Link Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-06208 (E.D.N.Y., Filed Oct. 14, 2022), the Hon. Judge Joanna Seybert entered an order denying without prejudice the Plaintiff's motions for class certification and Default Judgment. The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract. Compulink is a manufacturer of wire harnesses and custom molded cable assemblies.[CC] CREDENCE RESOURCE: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Brennan Claims ------------------------------------------------------------- JOSEPH BRENNAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CREDENCE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, LLC; and DIRECTV, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-03019 (C.D. Cal., April 13, 2024) seeks to stop the Defendants' practice of making unsolicited calls. CREDENCE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, LLC is a debt collection agency founded in Nevada in 2013, with its current headquarters in Dallas, Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dana J. Oliver, Esq. OLIVER LAW CENTER, INC. 8780 19th Street #559 Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91701 Telephone: (855)384-3262 Facsimile: (888)570-2021 Email: dana@danaoliverlaw.com - and - Keith J. Keogh, Esq. William M. Sweetnam, Esq. KEOGH LAW, LTD. 55 West Monroe Street, Suite 3390 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 726-1092 Email: keith@keoghlaw.com wsweetnam@keoghlaw.com - and - Anthony Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: (617) 485-0018 Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com D'URSO LANDSCAPING: Calles Seeks Conditional Collective Status -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JESUS CALLES, et.al., v. D'URSO LANDSCAPING SERVICES, et.al., Case No. 2:23-cv-04773-MCA-MAH (D.N.J.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court for an order conditionally certifying their Fair Labor Standard Act (FLSA) claims as a collective action and authorizing notice to prospective FLSA collective action members. D'Urso offers landscape designs, masonry, paving and landscape maintenance. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=x9BgOi at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Andrew I. Glenn, Esq. Jodi J. Jaffe, Esq. JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, P.A. 300 Carnegie Center, Suite 150 Princeton, NJ 08540 Telephone: (201) 687-9977 Facsimile: (201) 595-0308 E-mail: aglenn@JaffeGlenn.com jjaffe@JaffeGlenn.com The Defendants are represented by: Aaron C. Schlesinger, Esq. PECKAR & ABRAMSON, P.C. 70 Grand Avenue New York, NY 10010 Telephone: (212) 382-0909 E-mail: aschlesinger@pecklaw.com D2C LLC: Allowed to Seal Unredacted Opposition in Martinez ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Martinez v. D2C, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-21394 (S.D. Fla., Filed April 13, 2023), the Hon. Judge Robert N. Scola, Jr. entered an order granting the Defendant's unopposed motion to seal. -- The Defendant may file a sealed unredacted version of its opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification, along with its exhibits. -- Any redactions must be narrowly applied to only that information for which there is a factual and legal basis to depart from the policy that Court filings should be publicly available. -- The filing shall be kept under seal until 4/23/2029 at which time it shall be destroyed. The nature of suit states Other Statutory Actions.[CC] DAVA MARKETING: Bid To Hold in Abeyance Rule 68 Judgment Nixed -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AUSTIN COOK, individually; and HARRISON FOLLETT, individually, v. DAVA MARKETING, LLC, a Utah Limited Liability Company, Case No. 2:23-cv-00632-DBB-DBP (D. Utah), the Hon. Judge Dustin Pead entered an order denying Plaintiffs motion to hold in abeyance the Defendant's Federal Rule 68 Offer of Judgment until adequate discovery can take place to determine whether the offer is "just." The Plaintiffs filed a "Collective Action Complaint" claiming Defendant DAVA Marketing LLC failed to comply with federal and state wage laws in not paying for all hours and time worked, including overtime. On Dec. 12, 2023, near the outset of the case, the parties sought a stay until May 30, 2024, to facilitate settlement negotiations. The court granted the requested stay.2 Defendant served a Rule 68 Offer of Judgment on Plaintiffs on approximately February 2, 2024. Dava offers post-production media services to enhance digital content for creators and businesses. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=h66VdJ at no extra charge.[CC] DELTA DELTA: Vaughan Files Personal Injury Suit in M.D.N.C. ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Delta Delta Delta Fraternity, et al. The case is captioned as MASON VAUGHAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. DELTA DELTA DELTA FRATERNITY, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00186-LCB-JEP (M.D.N.C., March 6, 2024). The Plaintiff brings personal injury claims against the Defendants. Delta Delta Delta Fraternity is a global women's fraternity and Greek life organization headquartered in Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Edward H. Maginnis, Esq. Karl S. Gwaltney, Esq. MAGINNIS HOWARD 7706 Six Forks Rd., Suite 101 Raleigh, NC 27615 Telephone: (919) 526-0450 (919) 960-1545 Facsimile: (919) 882-8763 Email: emaginnis@maginnishoward.com kgwaltney@maginnishoward.com DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Plaintiffs Seek More Time to File Class Cert. ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICARDO CLARK, et al., v. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01564-RDM (D.D.C.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order, pursuant to Local Rule 23.1(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b)(1)(B), enlarging time to file their class certification motion pursuant to the Court's scheduling order following the parties' Rule 26(f) report or a Rule 16 conference. Pursuant to Local Rule 23.1(b), the Plaintiffs' neglect in filing a motion for class certification within 90 days of filing their complaint should be found excusable. In support of this Motion, the Plaintiffs rely upon their Memorandum of Law, filed herewith. Pursuant to Local Rule 7(m), the Plaintiffs have sought Defendant's consent for this motion, but Counsel for Defendant does not consent to the relief requested. District of Columbia is a compact city on the Potomac River, bordering the states of Maryland and Virginia. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BmWAV8 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Pamela M. Keith, Esq. Scott Lempert, Esq. CENTER FOR EMPLOYMENT JUSTICE, LLC 650 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite 600 Telephone: (818) 800-0292 E-mail: pamkeith@centerforemploymentjustice.com scottlempert@centerforemploymentjustice.com DONALD COMB: Filing for Class Certification Bids Due July 22 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jackson v. Personal Representative of Donald Comb, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-12208 (D. Mass., Filed Sept. 26, 2023), the Hon. Judge Richard G. Stearns entered an order -- Initial disclosures required by Fed. May 10, 2024 R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) will be completed by: -- If there is disagreement as to the July 5, 2024 delineation of the plaintiff class, class discovery will be completed by: -- Class certification motions will be July 22, 2024 filed by: with any opposition by: Aug. 5, 2024 -- If there is no disagreement as to Sept. 6, 2024 delineation of the class (the class parameters appear clear), all fact discovery will be completed by: If class discovery and certification Dec. 6, 2024 is necessary, all fact discovery will be completed by: The suit alleges violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (EIRSA) involving employee benefits.[CC] DOYLE LAND: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Combs Suit Says ------------------------------------------------------ TERESA COMBS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DOYLE LAND SERVICES, INC., Case No. 3:24-cv-01111 (S.D. Ill., April 15, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Combs was employed by the Defendant as an agent. DOYLE LAND SERVICES, INC. is a professional land services firm providing land services in support of the Energy Industry throughout the US. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas M. Werman, Esq. Maureen A. Salas, Esq. WERMAN SALAS P.C. 77 W. Washington St., Suite 1402 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 419-1008 Facsimile: (312) 419-1025 Email: dwerman@flsalaw.com msalas@flsalaw.com - and - Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 352-1100 Facsimile: (713) 352-3300 Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, TX 77046 Telephone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: (713) 877-8065 Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com DUNHAM'S ATHLEISURE: Bid for Interlocutory Appeal in Heppard Denied ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jessica Heppard, v. Dunham's Athleisure Corporation, Case No. 5:23-cv-10834-JEL-APP (E.D. Mich.), the Hon. Judge Judith E. Levy entered an order: -- Denying Defendant's motion to certify the Court's order for interlocutory appeal; and -- Denying as moot Defendant's motion to stay this action pending appellate review. The Court said that the Defendant's motion fails as it has not met its burden on the firstand third section 1292(b) factors. Specifically, Defendant has not demonstrated that the Court’s Order involves a controlling question of law, and that resolution of this issue would materially advance the ultimate termination of this suit. The Court ruled that Plaintiff’s OMFWSA claim can proceed as a class action because the Ohio law conflicts with Rule 23, and Rule 23 does not exceed the Rules Enabling Act. As a result, Plaintiff may pursue her FLSA claim as a collective action suit and her OMFWSA claim as a class action suit. Plaintiff Jessica Heppard brings a putative collective action and class action suit under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA“) and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wages Standards Act ("OMFWSA"). She alleges that Defendant Dunham's Athleisure Corporation had a policy and practice of not paying employees for all hours worked, including for overtime, and that Defendant also failed to keep accurate records. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant had a policy requiring retail store associates to clock out before completing closing tasks, and that they could only leave the store when all employees were ready to leave. The Plaintiff claims that these policies resulted in 20-30 minutes a day of unpaid work. The Plaintiff also alleges that she worked about 60 hours each week but was not compensated for her overtime hours, and that Defendant did not make, keep, or preserve accurate records of her unpaid work. The Plaintiff is a resident of Ohio and worked for Defendant from Sept. 27 to Dec. 15, 2021, as a full-time retail store associate in Hillsboro, Ohio. Dunham's operates a sporting good chain. A copy of the Court's opinion and order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HuP2II at no extra charge.[CC] ECOPETROL SA: BT Energy Incident-Related Class Suit Pending ----------------------------------------------------------- Ecopetrol S.A. disclosed in its form 20-F Report for fiscal period ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 18, 2024, that the first instance judgment in BT Energy incident-related class suit is pending. On October 22, 2014, the Company was served with a class action suit against the Company seeking monetary damages of approximately COP 7.4 trillion related to an incident that occurred on August 21, 2014, during the loading operations of the BT Energy Challenger vessel. The claimants alleged possible damage to the port area of Ecopetrol S.A.'s terminal in Coveñas, as well as of marine and submarine areas and beaches that form the geographical area of the Morrosquillo Gulf. This allegation is currently under investigation by the Harbor Master of Coveñas. Ecopetrol S.A. filed a motion requesting the judge to require the claimants to amend their claim to more precisely set forth the facts and evidence that allegedly support Ecopetrol S.A.'s liability. On March 3, 2015, Ecopetrol S.A. filed its statement of defense arguing the exclusive fault of a third party. On October 20, 2015, the Court denied a class action of more than 100 informal traders in the region because there is no common identity with the initial class (hotel employees). However, during 2016 the Sucre Administrative Court accepted another 1,208 informal traders and fishermen as claimants. On March 10, 2017, a mandatory settlement hearing was held in order to seek an agreement, but it failed. In January 2018, a judicial order was issued to commence the evidence production phase, a decision which was objected by the parties. In September 2018, all the ordered statements were made, the evidentiary stage was finalized and the parties filed their final closing arguments. As of the date of this annual report, a first instance judgment is pending. Ecopetrol S.A. is an oil company based in Bogota, Colombia. EDGEWELL PERSONAL: Glassman Seeks to Seal Certain Documents ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KENNETH GLASSMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. EDGEWELL PERSONAL CARE, LLC, Case No. 3:21-cv-07669-RS (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order allowing him to file under seal certain documents containing information that the Defendant has designated as confidential. The Plaintiff states that the "compelling reasons" standard applies to sealing documents related to class certification. However, the Plaintiff submits this request solely to comply with his obligations under Civil L.R. 79-5(f) and the Protective Order entered in this case. Edgewell is an American multinational consumer products company. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HsHJwu at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq. Shireen M. Clarkson, Esq. Katherine A. Bruce, Esq. Alan Gudino, Esq. CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C. 22525 Pacific Coast Highway Malibu, CA 90265 Telephone: (213) 788-4050 Facsimile: (213) 788-4070 E-mail: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com sclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com kbruce@clarksonlawfirm.com agudino@clarksonlawfirm.com - and - Neal J. Deckant, Esq. Brittany S. Scott, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 E-mail: ndeckant@bursor.com bscott@bursor.com - and - Lisa Omoto, Esq. Timothy J. Peter, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP 1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1060 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (424) 256-2884 Facsimile: (424) 256-2885 E-mail: lomoto@faruqilaw.com tpeter@faruqilaw.com ELEVANCE INC: Court Narrows Claims in Union Suit ------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRUSTEES OF INTERNATIONAL UNION OF BRICKLAYERS AND ALLIED CRAFTWORKERS LOCAL 1 CONNECTICUT HEALTH FUND and TRUSTEES OF SHEET METAL WORKERS' LOCAL NO. 40 HEALTH FUND, individually and on behalf of the INTERNATIONAL BRICKLAYERS AND ALLIED CRAFTWORKERS LOCAL 1 CONNECTICUT HEALTH FUND, the SHEET METAL WORKERS' LOCAL NO. 40 HEALTH FUND, and all others similarly situated, v. ELEVANCE, INC. F/K/A ANTHEM, INC., ANTHEM HEALTH PLANS, INC. D/B/A ANTHEM BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD, ANTHEM BLUE CROSS, EMPIRE BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD, and EMPIRE BLUE CROSS, Case No. 3:22-cv-01541-VDO (D. Conn.), the Hon. Judge Vernon Oliver entered an order granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' motion to dismiss. Specifically, all claims are dismissed without prejudice under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Within 60 days of this order, the Plaintiffs may move to file an amended complaint. Any such motion must include a redline comparison of the initial complaint and proposed amended complaint. Failure to timely file a request to amend the complaint will result in dismissal of all claims with prejudice. The Court concludes that it cannot consider Defendants' exhibits attached to the motion to dismiss. Defendants assert that the documents are the contracts that Plaintiffs entered into with Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Connecticut. However, as previously discussed, the Plaintiffs dispute the authenticity of these exhibits, asserting that the documents are drafts that do not contain Plaintiffs’ signatures. In Dec. 2022, the Plaintiffs brought this action against the Defendants, alleging breaches of fiduciary obligations in violation of Sections 404 and 406 of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"). The Plaintiffs are the trustees of two multi-employer, self-funded welfare benefit plans that provide medical benefits to union employees and retiree. Elevance is an American health insurance provider. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wJuo2V at no extra charge.[CC] EMBRY-RIDDLE: Parties Must Confer Class Cert Deadlines ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Garceau v. Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Inc., Case No. 6:24-cv-00755 (M.D. Fla., Filed April 23, 2024), the Hon. Judge Paul G. Byron entered an order directing the parties to confer regarding deadlines pertinent to a motion for class certification and advising the Court of agreeable deadlines in their case management report. The deadlines should include a deadline for (1) disclosure of expert reports -- class action, plaintiff and defendant; (2) discovery -- class action; (3) motion for class certification; (4) response to motion for class certification; and (5) reply to motion for class certification. The suit alleges violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). Embry–Riddle is a private university focused on aviation and aerospace programs.[CC] ENHANCE HEALTH: Faces Turner Suit Over Racketeering Activity ------------------------------------------------------------ CONSWALLO TURNER, TIESHA FOREMAN, ANGELINA WELLS, VERONICA KING, NAVAQUOTE, LLC and WINN INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ENHANCE HEALTH, LLC, TRUECOVERAGE, LLC, SPERIDIAN TECHNOLOGIES, LLC, NUMBER ONE PROSPECTING, LLC d/b/a MINERVA MARKETING, MATTHEW B. HERMAN and BRANDON BOWSKY, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-60591-MD (S.D. Fla., April 12, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for conspiracy, negligence per se, and violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants were associated with RICO Enterprise and conducted and participated in the Enterprise's affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity which comprised of numerous and repeated uses of the mails and interstate wire communications to execute a scheme to defraud. Specifically, Defendants TrueCoverage, Enhance Health and their downlines use the personally identifiable information to access the accounts of consumers who already have an Affordable Care Act health plan, then remove the plan's agent of record. They replace that AOR with their own in-house or downline AOR. These "AOR Swaps" are done without the consumer's knowledge or consent, and allow TrueCoverage, Enhance Health and their downlines to essentially steal the original AOR's commissions for the policy. The Defendants knew about and directed these activities. They obtained money and property belonging to Class Plaintiffs and class members as a result of these violations. Class Plaintiffs and class members have been injured in their business or property by Defendants' overt acts of mail and wire fraud, says the suit. Enhance Health, LLC is a senior-focused digital insurance agency.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jason K. Kellogg, Esq. LEVINE KELLOGG LEHMAN SCHNEIDER + GROSSMAN LLP 100 Southeast Second Street Miami Tower, 36th Floor Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 403-8788 Facsimile: (305) 403-8789 E-mail: jk@lklsg.com - and - Jason R. Doss, Esq. THE DOSS FIRM, LLC 1827 Powers Ferry Road Southeast Atlanta, GA 30339 Telephone: (770) 578-1314 Facsimile: (770) 578-1302 E-mail: jasondoss@dossfirm.com EQUIFAX INFO: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Bristol ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bristol v. Equifax Information Services LLC et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01039-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. Equifax offers financial, consumer and commercial data, and analytical solutions. A copy of the Court's standing order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=CqJLkW at no extra charge.[CC] ESTES EXPRESS: Alvarez Must File Class Cert Bid by Oct. 21 ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIO ALVAREZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. ESTES EXPRESS LINES, Case No. 3:24-cv-00001-REP (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Robert E. Payne entered an order that: -- discovery shall proceed simultaneously on the class certification questions as well as the merits of the case; -- plaintiff shall file a motion for class certification on Oct. 21, 2024; -- the defendant shall file its response on Nov. 20, 2024; and -- the plaintiff shall file his reply on Dec. 6, 2024. The court further orders that a hearing on the Motion for class certification shall be held on Jan. 7, 2025, at 10:00 a.m. Estes Express is a privately owned American freight transportation provider. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=63UBn6 at no extra charge.[CC] EXP WORLD HOLDINGS: Faces Burton Class Suit in South Carolina ------------------------------------------------------------- EXP World Holdings Inc. disclosed in its form 8-K Report for April 11, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 17, 2024, that the Company faces Burton class suit in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina. On April 11, 2024, a putative class action complaint under the caption Shauntell Burton et al. v. Bluefield Realty Group, LLC, et al. (Case No. 7:24-cv-01800-JDA) (the "Class Action") was filed in the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, Spartanburg Division, naming as defendants certain real estate brokerages, franchisors and real estate brokerage owners, including the Company. The Class Action complaint alleges that defendants conspired to restrain trade by causing certain home sellers to pay buyer broker fees and inflated commissions on the sale of homes all in violation of federal antitrust law. The putative class representatives seek to represent a class of persons comprising of any person who used a listing broker to sell a home listed on a multiple listing service in the District of South Carolina between November 6, 2019, through the present. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the putative class, seek a permanent injunction enjoining the defendants from requiring that sellers pay the buyer broker, continuing to restrict competition among buyer brokers and seller brokers and engaging in conduct determined to be unlawful. Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the putative class, also seek an award of declaratory relief, damages and/or restitution in an amount to be determined at trial, pre-and post-judgment interest and attorneys’ fees, expenses and costs of suit. The Company believes that additional antitrust litigation may be possible. The Company cannot provide any assurances that results of such litigation will not have a material adverse effect on its business, results of operations or financial condition. eXp World Holdings, Inc. is the holding company for eXp Realty, a global, cloud-based real estate brokerage. EXPERIAN INFO: Class Cert Bid in Pena Suit Continued to August 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARIA PENA, Successor in Interest to JOSE PENA, individually, and on behalf of all other similarly situated consumers, v. EXPERIAN INFORMATION SOLUTIONS, INC., Case No. 8:22-cv-01115-SSS-ADS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Sunshine Sykes entered an order as follows: 1. The Plaintiff shall file a reply brief in further support of the motion for Class Certification by July 5, 2024. 2. The Motion date for the Motion for Class Certification is continued from July 12, 2024, to Aug. 2, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. Experian operates as an information services company. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bE3sxu at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Erika Angelos Heath, Esq. James A. Francis, Esq. John Soumilas, Esq. Lauren KW Brennan, Esq. FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS, P.C. 369 Pine Street, Suite 410 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (628) 246-1352 Facsimile: (215) 940-8000 E-mail: eheath@consumerlawfirm.com jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com lbrennan@consumerlawfirm.com FEDERAL EXPRESS: Parties Seek to Stay Class Cert Bid Deadline ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARLINDA WILLIAMS, v. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION, Case No. 1:24-cv-01056-JPB (N.D. Ga.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order to stay the current deadline for the Plaintiff to file a motion for class certification. The Plaintiff filed her class action complaint on March 11, 2024. The. Defendant waived service of a summons in this action, which means that under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d)(3), the Defendant has 60 days from March 13, 2024, or until May 13, 2024, to answer or otherwise respond to the Complaint. Pursuant to N.D. Ga. Local Rule 23.1(B), the Plaintiff is required to move for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(1) within 90 days after a complaint is filed—that is, by June 10, 2024—unless the Court extends that deadline upon showing of good cause. FedEx is an American multinational conglomerate holding company focused on transportation, e-commerce and business services. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=y7qJxB at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: R. Joseph Barton, Esq. BARTON & DOWNES LLP 1633 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 200 Washington DC 20009 Telephone: (202) 734-7046 E-mail: jbarton@bartondownes.com - and - Stephen J. Anderson, Esq. KENNETH S. NUGENT, P.C. 4227 Pleasant Hill Road Building 11, Suite 300 Duluth GA 30096 Telephone: (770) 820-0893 E-mail: sanderson@attorneykennugent.com - and - Matthew Z. Crotty, Esq. RIVERSIDE NW LAW GROUP, PLLC 905 W. Riverside Ave., Suite 404 Spokane, WA 99201 Telephone: (509) 850-7011 E-mail: mzc@rnwlg.com - and - Thomas G. Jarrard, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS G. JARRARD LLC 1020 N. Washington St. Spokane, WA 99201 Telephone: (425) 239-7290 E-mail: Tjarrard@att.net The Defendant is represented by: T. Brandon Waddell, Esq. Emily C. Snow, Esq. CAPLAN COBB LLC 75 Fourteenth Street, NE, Suite 2700 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 596-5600 Facsimile: (404) 596-5604 E-mail: bwaddell@caplancobb.com esnow@caplancobb.com - and - M. Tristan Morales, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 1625 Eye Street, NW Washington, DC 20006 Telephone: (202) 383-5300 Facsimile: (202) 383-5414 E-mail: tmorales@omm.com - and - Colleen Hitch Wilson, Esq. FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 3620 Hacks Cross Road Building B, 3rd Floor Memphis, TN 38125 Telephone: (901) 434-8338 E-mail: chitchwilson@fedex.com FLEET FARM: Faces Frost Suit Over ADA Violations in D. Minnesota ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fleet Farm LLC. The case is captioned as CLARENCE FROST, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. FLEET FARM LLC, Case No. 0:24-cv-00760-JWB-LIB (D. Minn., March 4, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Fleet Farm LLC is a retailer headquartered in Wisconsin. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jason D. Gustafson, Esq. THRONDSET & MICHENFELDER LAW OFFICE LLC One Central Avenue West, Suite 101 St. Michael, MN 55330 Telephone: (763) 515-6110 Email: jason@throndsetlaw.com - and - Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq. THRONDSET MICHENFELDER LAW OFFICE, LLC 222 South Ninth Street, Ste. 1600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (763) 515-6110 Facsimile: (763) 226-2515 Email: pat@throndsetlaw.com FORT BELVOIR: Renewed Bid for Class Cert in Fischer Suit Due May 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Chief Petty Officer JOHN FISCHER and ASHLEY FISCHER, et al., v. FORT BELVOIR RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES LLC, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-00286-RDA-LRV (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge Rossie Alston, Jr. entered an order granting the parties' joint motion to extend current deadlines pending execution of formal settlement agreement as follows: Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment: May 17,2024 Renewed Motion for Class Certification: May 20, 2024 Defendants' Opposition Briefs: June 3, 2024 Plaintiffs' Reply Briefs: June 10, 2024. The Clerk is directed to forward copies of this Order to counsel of record. Fort Belvoir offers privatized military housing. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tjs8VR at no extra charge.[CC] GALESBURG, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Mixon ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mixon v. City of Galesburg et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01005-SLD-JEH (C.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge Jonathan E. Hawley entered a standing order as follows: -- Rule 16 scheduling conference The Court will set a Rule 16 scheduling conference approximately 30 days after the answer or other responsive pleading is filed. The conference will generally be conducted by telephone. -- Discovery plan The discovery plan shall be filed with the Court at least three calendar days before the Rule 16 scheduling conference. -- Waiver of the Rule 16 scheduling conference If the parties agree on all matters contained in the discovery plan, then the parties may waive the Rule 16 scheduling conference. To do so, the parties shall indicate in the discovery that the parties agree upon all maters contained within the discovery plan, and they request that the Rule 16 scheduling conference be cancelled. -- Failure of counsel to attend a scheduled telephone hearing For the convenience of counsel, the Court conducts most hearings by telephone when possible. Counsel's failure to appear for a telephone hearing will be treated as a failure of counsel to appear for an in-person hearing. -- Discovery disputes brought to the Court's attention after the discovery deadline has already passed The parties may not raise a discovery dispute with the Court after the relevant discovery deadline has passed; all discovery disputes must be brought to the Court's attention before the relevant discovery deadline passes. Any discovery disputes raised with the Court after the expiration of the relevant discovery deadline shall be deemed waived by the Court, even if the parties agreed to conduct discovery after the relevant discovery deadline has passed. If the parties agree to conduct discovery after the expiration of a deadline set by the Court, they must still file a motion requesting that the Court move that deadline as agreed by the parties in order to avoid any subsequent discovery disputes being deemed waived. -- Settlement conferences and mediation The parties are encouraged to seek a settlement conference or mediation with a magistrate judge. Where parties request a settlement conference or mediation in a case referred to Judge Hawley, Judge Hawley will conduct said conference or mediation. Galesburg is the county seat of Knox County and the principal city of the Galesburg Micropolitan Statistical Area. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jOwn5Q at no extra charge.[CC] GEICO: Joint Bids to Seal in MAO-MSO Class Action OK'd ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAO-MSO Recovery II, LLC et al., v. Government Employees Insurance Company (GEICO), Case No. TDC-17-0711 (D. Md.), the Hon. Judge Theodore Chuang entered an order granting the joint motions to seal. The Defendant is an American auto insurance company headquartered in Chevy Chase, Maryland. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zEyafD at no extra charge.[CC] GLOBAL CORD: Faces Class Action Over Self-Serving Transactions -------------------------------------------------------------- Robbins LLP informs investors that a shareholder filed a class action on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Global Cord Blood Corporation (NYSE: CO) securities between June 4, 2019 and May 3, 2022. Global Cord Blood provides umbilical cord blood storage and ancillary services in the in the Beijing Municipality, Guangdong Province, and Zhejiang Province of the People's Republic of China. For more information, submit a form, email attorney Aaron Dumas, Jr., or give us a call at (800) 350-6003. The Allegations: Robbins LLP is Investigating the Allegations that the Board of Global Cord Blood Corporation (CO) Engaged in Self-Serving and Conflicted Transactions According to the complaint, during the class period, Defendants failed to disclose that: (i) Global Cord employed a capital allocation strategy designed to reserve funds for Company insiders and related parties rather than for the benefit of Company shareholders; (ii) Global Cord's decisions to reject multiple going private offers and enter into the Transaction were nothing more than self-serving and conflicted attempts by Defendants to divert company funds to corporate insiders and related parties; (iii) Defendants fundamentally misrepresented to investors Global Cord's approach to capital allocation, strategic investments, acquisitions, and related party transactions as a result of the misappropriation by Defendant Kam and his entities of hundreds of millions of dollars from the Company; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. As a result, the Company's stock has declined, harming investors. What Now: You may be eligible to participate in the class action against Global Cord Blood Corporation Shareholders who want to serve as lead plaintiff for the class must file their motions with the court by June 24, 2024. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. You do not have to participate in the case to be eligible for a recovery. If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member. All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay no fees or expenses. About Robbins LLP: Some law firms issuing releases about this matter do not actually litigate securities class actions; Robbins LLP does. A recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation, the attorneys and staff of Robbins LLP have been dedicated to helping shareholders recover losses, improve corporate governance structures, and hold company executives accountable for their wrongdoing since 2002. Since our inception, we have obtained over $1 billion for shareholders. To be notified if a class action against Global Cord Blood Corporation settles or to receive free alerts when corporate executives engage in wrongdoing, sign up for Stock Watch today. Attorney Advertising. Past results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Contact: Aaron Dumas, Jr. Robbins LLP 5060 Shoreham Pl., Ste. 300 San Diego, CA 92122 adumas@robbinsllp.com (800) 350-6003 www.robbinsllp.com [GN] GO NEW YORK: Teta Sues Over Fraud Violations in S.D.N.Y. -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Go New York Tours, Inc. The case is captioned as CINDY TETA, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. GO NEW YORK TOURS, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-01614-ER (S.D.N.Y., March 1, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged fraud violations. Go New York Tours, Inc. is a travel agency in New York, New York. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Eduard Korsinsky, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP 55 Broadway, 10th Floor New York, NY 10006 Telephone: (212) 363-7500 Facsimile: (212) 363-7171 Email: ek@zlk.com GOOGLE LLC: Brown Seeks $217MM Atty's Fees ------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHASOM BROWN, WILLIAM BYATT, JEREMY DAVIS, CHRISTOPHER CASTILLO, and MONIQUE TRUJILLO individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, v. GOOGLE LLC, Case No. 4:20-cv-03664-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order awarding: -- $217,643,951.05 in attorneys' fees, -- $7,656,565.32 in costs, and -- $30,000 service awards to each of the five named Plaintiffs. These service awards are justified because this case imposed a significant burden on the named Plaintiffs. Google served voluminous discovery requests, requiring each named Plaintiff to respond to 55 RFAs, 34 RFPs, and 17 Interrogatories. Every Plaintiff was also deposed for a full day. Google is an American multinational corporation and technology company focusing on online advertising, search engine technology, cloud computing, computer software, quantum computing, e-commerce, consumer electronics, and artificial intelligence. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5Y1YfH at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: David Boies, Esq. Mark C. Mao, Esq. Beko Reblitz-Richardson, Esq. James Lee, Esq. Rossana Baeza, Esq. Alison L. Anderson, Esq. M. Logan Wright, Esq. BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 333 Main Street Armonk, NY 10504 Telephone: (914) 749-8200 E-mail: dboies@bsfllp.com mmao@bsfllp.com brichardson@bsfllp.com jlee@bsfllp.com rbaeza@bsfllp.com alanderson@bsfllp.com mwright@bsfllp.com - and - Bill Carmody, Esq. Shawn J. Rabin, Esq. Steven M. Shepard, Esq. Alexander Frawley, Esq. Amanda K. Bonn, Esq. SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P. One Manhattan West, 50th Floor New York, NY 10001 Telephone: (212) 336-8330 E-mail: bcarmody@susmangodfrey.com srabin@susmangodfrey.com sshepard@susmangodfrey.com afrawley@susmangodfrey.com abonn@susmangodfrey.com - and - John A. Yanchunis, Esq. Ryan J. McGee, Esq. Michael F. Ram, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 223-5505 E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com rmcgee@forthepeople.com mram@forthepeople.com GORDON LANE: Parrish Amended Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GAIL PARRISH by and through Successor in Interest, Monica Parrish, v. GORDON LANE HEALTHCARE, LLC; SUN MAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES; IRVING BAUMAN; FRANK JOHNSON; ELI MARMUR; WILLIAM PRESNELL and DOES 1–250, inclusive, Case No. 8:22-cv-01790-WLH-KES (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Wesley Hsu entered an order denying the Plaintiff's amended motion for class certification without prejudice on the basis that according to the proposed class definitions, named Plaintiff is not a member of the class. Parrish proposes to certify the following three classes under Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(3): Subclass One: Private Pay Residents-CLRA Claim Only. "All persons who resided in (or continue to reside in) the California skilled nursing facility Gordon Lane Healthcare, LLC, from Aug. 17, 2019, through the date of the final disposition of this action pursuant to a Standard Admission Agreement, and whose claims are not subject to arbitration because neither the resident nor the resident's responsible party (as defined in the Standard Admission Agreement) agreed to or accepted the arbitration contract in writing, where the Defendant was reimbursed for services provided to a "class member" by private pay and/or privately acquired insurance and/or any HMO or PPO." Subclass Two: All Residents-First And Second Causes of Action. "All persons who resided in (or continue to reside in) the California skilled nursing facility Gordon Lane Healthcare, LLC, from Aug. 17, 2019, through the date of the final disposition of this action pursuant to a Standard Admission Agreement, and whose claims are not subject to arbitration because neither the resident nor the resident's responsible party (as defined in the Standard Admission Agreement) agreed to or accepted the arbitration contract in writing." Subclass Three: Health & Safety Code Section 1430(b) Violations – 1430(b) Claim Only. "All persons who resided in (or continue to reside in) the California skilled nursing facility Gordon Lane Healthcare, LLC, from Aug. 17, 2019, through the date of the final disposition of this action pursuant to a Standard Admission Agreement, regardless of the manner in which Defendant was reimbursed for services, and whose claims are not subject to arbitration because neither the resident nor the resident's responsible party (as defined in the Standard Admission Agreement) agreed to or accepted the arbitration contract in writing." On April 12, 2024, the Court held a hearing and heard oral argument from both parties. Gordon Lane is a skilled nursing facility. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Yb1PTL at no extra charge.[CC] HALO BRANDED: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Chibazakura Alleges --------------------------------------------------------------- KEI CHIBAZAKURA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HALO BRANDED SOLUTIONS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-03035 (N.D. Ill., April 15, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to properly secure and safeguard the Plaintiff's and other similarly situated Halo employees' sensitive information, including name, date of birth, and Social Security number ("personally identifiable information" or "PII"). According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, on November 2023, the Defendant learned that its computer systems had been penetrated by a cyberattack. In response, the Defendant launched an investigation through which the result of its investigation, the Defendant concluded that Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII was compromised in the Data Breach. The Defendant failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and Class Members PII––and failed to even encrypt or redact this highly sensitive information. This unencrypted, unredacted PII was compromised due to Defendant's negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and their utter failure to protect employees' sensitive data. Hackers targeted and obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII because of its value in exploiting and stealing the identities of Plaintiff and Class Members. The present and continuing risk to victims of the Data Breach will remain for their respective lifetimes, says the suit. HALO BRANDED SOLUTIONS, INC. provides promotional marketing products. The Company offers calendars, keychains, tags, novelty items, toys, personalized bags, drinkware, pens, stationery, and promotional apparel products. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. Leanna A. Loginov, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A. 14 NE 1st Ave., Suite 705 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: (305) 479-2299 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com lloginov@shamisgentile.com HILCO REDEVELOPMENT: $12-MM Deal in Little Village Suit Gets OK ---------------------------------------------------------------- Brett Chase, writing for Fox32, reports that thousands of Little Village residents are eligible for payments after a federal judge approved a more than $12 million class-action settlement on April 22 for the botched implosion at a former coal plant that left the community blanketed in dust in 2020. Hilco Redevelopment and its subcontractors consented to the settlement, which will thwart potential future lawsuits from those residents covered by the agreement. Planning for the implosion of an almost 400-foot smokestack at the former Crawford power plant failed to contain a massive cloud of dust that rose when the chimney came crashing down. One resident, Elizabeth Rodriguez, told U.S. District Judge Young B. Kim that her husband still has difficulties breathing four years after the event. She and her family were left out of the agreement because she was just outside of the agreed boundaries for payouts. Rodriguez said she lives directly across the street from residents eligible for payments for either property damage or personal injury. Kim told Rodriguez that although she cannot benefit from the agreement, she is not bound by its restrictions, meaning that she can individually sue the companies because she's not part of the class action. The Easter weekend implosion was a failure of the developer Hilco, former Mayor Lori Lightfoot said shortly after the incident. Months later, the city's former inspector general, Joe Ferguson, also pointed to city officials overseeing the demolition, accusing them of being "negligent" and showing "incompetence" in their jobs to protect the public from harm. The Ferguson report has never been officially released, though the Sun-Times posted it in full early last year. Kim Wasserman, executive director of the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization, said Mayor Brandon Johnson should officially release the report and explain how any city employees involved with Crawford planning were reprimanded. In his report, Ferguson recommended David Graham, a public health official, be disciplined for his role, including possibly being fired. Marlene Hopkins, the city's new commissioner for the Department of Buildings, was also singled out by Ferguson for discipline. Lightfoot declined to discipline Hopkins. Graham reportedly received a written reprimand. Johnson's representatives didn't respond to requests for comment on the report or the city officials' roles in the failure. Hopkins was approved with unanimous City Council support last week. Council members praised the longtime city employee, including Ald. Michael Rodriguez (22nd), who represents Little Village. More than 20,000 residents are expected to receive payouts. "Our clients held the corporations responsible," said Scott Rauscher, a lawyer with Loevy & Loevy who represented the residents. "It's a great result." Hilco officials declined to comment. The $12.25 million is considerably larger than penalties Hilco paid to the state or city over the incident. Still, Wasserman said the amount is "pennies" to a large developer like Hilco. "Many communities have been gearing up to celebrate Earth Day," Wasserman said. "For our community, it is a continuation of the mourning." [GN] HOME PARTNERS: Seeks May 8 Summary Judgment Reply Extension ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as FRANK RICHMOND, MICHAEL MCDERMOTT and KELLEY MCDERMOTT, each individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. HOME PARTNERS HOLDINGS LLC, HP WASHINGTON I LLC, HPA BORROWER 2017-1 LLC, and OPVHHJV LLC, d/b/a PATHLIGHT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, Case No. 3:22-cv-05704-DGE (W.D. Wash.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order extending the deadlines for: -- the Plaintiffs' reply in support of Class April 26, 2024 Certification and response to the motion to exclude Dr. Kneuper's Expert Testimony to be filed by: -- The Defendant's reply in support of summary May 8, 2024 judgment to be filed: -- The Defendants' Reply in Support of the May 10, 2024 Motion to Exclude Dr. Kneuper's Expert Testimony to be filed by: Home Partners operates as a real estate owners and developers. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9rdDC8 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Anne T. Regan, Esq. Lindsey L. Larson, Esq. HELLMUTH & JOHNSON, PLLC 8050 West 78th Street Edina, MN 55439 Telephone: (952) 941-4005 E-mail: aregan@hjlawfirm.com llabellelarson@hjlawfirm.com - and - Andrew A. Lemmon, Esq. Scott C. Harris, Esq. Michael Dunn, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 2200 Seattle, WA 98101 E-mail: alemmon@milberg.com sharris@milberg.com Michael.dunn@milberg.com - and - Susan E. Ellingstad, Esq. Joseph C. Bourne, Esq. Eura Chang, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN, PLLP 100 South Washington Ave, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 E-mail: seellingstad@locklaw.com jcbourne@locklaw.com echang@locklaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Fred B. Burnside, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 5th Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104 E-mail: fredburnside@dwt.com - and - Michael F. Cockson, Esq. Nate Brennaman, Esq. Carolyn A. Gunkel, Esq. Diego E. Garcia, Esq. FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP 2200 Wells Fargo Center 90 S. 7th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 E-mail: michael.cockson@faegredrinker.com nate.brennaman@faegredrinker.com carolyn.gunkel@faegredrinker.com diego.garcia@faegredrinker.com - and - Robyn Bladow, Esq. Andrew Bloomer, Esq. KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 555 South Flower Street, Ste. 3700 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 680-8400 Facsimile: (213) 680-8500 E-mail: robyn.bladow@kirkland.com andrew.bloomer@kirkland.com HUNTINGTON NATIONAL: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by Dec. 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as TERESA KEELING, in her own right and as representative of a class of persons similarly situated, v. THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK, Case No. 3:23-cv-00352 (S.D.W. Va.), the Hon. Judge Robert Chambers entered an order amending the Scheduling Order as follows: The parties shall complete all discovery requests by September 24, 2024, and all depositions for fact discovery by November 8, 2024. The party bearing the burden of proof on an issue shall make the disclosures of information required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(A) and (B) for that issue to all other parties or their counsel no later than September 10, 2024. Plaintiffs shall file their motion for class certification by December 10, 2024. Response in opposition shall be due within 21 days and a reply within 14 days of a response. All dispositive motions, except those filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b), together with depositions, admissions, documents, affidavits or other exhibits, and a memorandum in support of such motions shall be filed by January 28, 2025. No later than Nov. 19, 2024, counsel and any unrepresented parties shall meet to conduct settlement negotiations. Huntington offers saving accounts, cards, insurance, mortgage, and treasury management. A copy of the Court's order dated April 17, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=611XHB at no extra charge.[CC] INDEGENE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bids in Progressive Due June 7 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as PROGRESSIVE HEALTH AND REHAB CORP., an Ohio corporation, individually and as the representative of a class of similarly situated persons, v. INDEGENE, INC., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-10106-ESK-AMD (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Ann Marie Donio entered a scheduling order as follows: 1. By no later than April 26, 2024, the parties shall submit a joint letter setting forth a proposed schedule for the filing of dispositive motions, together with supporting case law, as set forth on the record on April 17, 2024. 2. Any motion for class certification shall be filed by no later than June 7, 2024. Indegene provides marketing products and services. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vOWBbt at no extra charge.[CC] INJURED WORKERS: Fact Discovery in Webb Suit Due Oct. 10 -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Webb, et al., v. Injured Workers Pharmacy, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-10797 (D. Mass., Filed May 24, 2022), the Hon. Judge Richard G. Stearns entered an order: -- All fact discovery must be completed Oct. 10, 2024 no later than: -- The Plaintiffs shall designate expert(s) Nov. 20, 2024 and serve Rule 26(a)(2) reports no later than: -- Defendants expert(s) will be designated Dec. 10, 2024 and Rule 26(a)(2) reports served no later than: -- Expert discovery must be completed by: Jan. 10, 2025 -- Dispositive motions (if any) are due by Jan. 31, 2025 The nature of suit Other Statutory Actions. Injured is a full-service workers' compensation pharmacy.[CC] INTERLAKE MECALUX: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Billings ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Billings v. Interlake Mecalux, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-01125-JBM-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. Interlake provides industrial machinery and equipment. A copy of the Court's standing order dated April 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7NTKWV at no extra charge.[CC] ISUZU MOTORS: Faces Potential Class Action Over Suspension Defects ------------------------------------------------------------------ Chamberlains Law Firm is seeking participants to mount a class action against Isuzu and Mazda for defects contained within the suspension of the current generation of Isuzu D-Max (RG, 2019 to present) and MU-X (RJ, 2020 to present) and the current generation of Mazda BT-50 (TF, 2020 to present). A alleged flaw in the design of the front suspension of these vehicles is allegedly leading to 'bump steer', which causes excessive and premature tyre wear. Drivers of the affected vehicles are alleged to have been experiencing premature and uneven tyre wear. It is alleged that this not only results in a direct cost for the vehicle owners in having to rotate and replace tyres more frequently, but this allegedly widespread issue may also impact on the resale value of the vehicles. It is alleged that despite this problem being apparent for a number of years, no permanent fix has been offered by Isuzu or Mazda in relation to this issue. In the meantime, independent companies are offering after-market replacement steering knuckles, at a cost of approximately $3,000 per vehicle. It is understood the Mazda BT-50 is made with identical design elements in the same factory in Thailand as the Isuzu D-Max, following an arrangement made between the motoring industry heavyweights in 2016. Mazda and Isuzu are yet to publicly comment on the alleged design flaw and whether a fix can be expected by impacted customers. Both the MU-X and D-Max posted record sales figures in Australia in 2023. Over 31,000 D-Max utes and over 14,000 MU-X vehicles were sold over the same period, smashing Isuzu's historical sales figures in both those classes, gaining ground against the class leaders Ford and Toyota. You can register your interest in the class action with Chamberlains Law Firm by clicking on the following link, or by calling Chamberlains on 02 6188 3600: https://forms.office.com/Pages/ResponsePage.aspx?id=pgexjawfVkC59a7nEsW_d3HXmC5qVfFNvd6Fg5eYMdxUOEpSWkREOTVUQVJXOUYzOE9MWlRZSVdHMS4u [GN] JAB EXPRESS: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in Snide Due Sept. 9 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Snide, et al., v. JAB Express, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-01373 (N.D.N.Y., Filed Dec. 20, 2022), the Hon. Judge David N. Hurd entered an order granting letter motion insofar as and to the extent that: (1) Mandatory mediation shall be May 20, 2024 completed by: (2) All Discovery shall be completed Aug. 7, 2024 by: (3) the Class Certification Motion Sept. 9, 2024 shall be filed by: (4) Dispositive Motions shall be Oct. 16, 2024 filed by: The nature of suit states labor -- contract.[CC] JACOBO FARM: Gomez Must File Supplemental Class Cert Briefing ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARISOL GOMEZ, individually and on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. J. JACOBO FARM LABOR CONTRACTOR, INC., Case No. 1:15-cv-01489-JLT-BAM (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer Leigh Thurston entered an order directing the Plaintiff to file a notice of suggestion of death on the record, comply with Rule 25 of the federal rules of civil procedure, and submit supplemental briefing on the motion for preliminary approval of the class settlement. The proposed settlement also indicates that if terms "are materially modified" by the Court, it any party "may declare the Settlement null and void." The material modifications include those related to the releases. Thus, it is unclear if the Court striking the reference to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) would render the Settlement null and void. 1. Class Counsel shall file a notice of suggestion of death on the record related to the Plaintiff Ignacio Osorio within 7 days of the date of service of this order, and file proof of service of the notice upon Osorio's nonparty successor or representative. 2. Class Counsel shall file supplemental briefing regarding the release of claims arising under the FLSA within 21 days of the date of service of this order. In the alternative, the parties may file a stipulation to amend the settlement and strike the sole mention of the FLSA from the proposed Settlement. Marisol Gomez and Ignacio Osorio-Cruz initiated this action on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, asserting violations of California wage and hour laws and the federal Agricultural Workers Protection Act. Previously, the Court granted a motion for class certification in part and certified a class and sub-class related to specific claims raised in this action. Gomez now seeks preliminary approval of the settlement agreement. Significantly, in a footnote Gomez notes that she "remains the only Plaintiff and Class Representative, due to the passing of Ignacio Osorio." However, this does not satisfy the requirements of Rule 25(a)(1) for filing a notice of suggestion of death on the record. Moreover, the parties have not addressed whether the claims of Osorio survive in this action. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=26Lasw at no extra charge.[CC] JIM JUSTICE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Sanctions Nixed ------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN R., et al., v. JIM JUSTICE, et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00710 (S.D.W. Va.), the Hon. Judge Cheryl Eifert entered an order denying the Plaintiffs' motion for sanctions. Overall, the Court recognizes Plaintiffs' frustration in dedicating more effort than they believe should have been necessary to obtain and review these documents. In addition, the Defendants have a history of being sanctioned for spoilation of emails in this case. Yet, the record has only shown that the Defendants made mistakes in preserving and producing information, not that they have acted in bad faith or disregarded the Court's orders. The Defendants have shown good reasons for the mistakes and delays in producing the sample case files, and all information has been provided at this juncture with ample time for Plaintiffs and their experts to review it. Therefore, the Court concludes that sanctions are not warranted in this instance. On Sept. 30, 2019, 12 current and former West Virginia foster children filed a putative class action complaint against the state officials responsible for administering the West Virginia foster care system. The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants' system-wide foster care policies and practices expose them to a substantial risk of harm in violation of their substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Court certified a General Class consisting of all foster children who are or will be in the custody of DHHR or its successor agency. The Court also certified an ADA Subclass, which includes all members of the General Class who have physical, intellectual, cognitive, or mental health disabilities, as defined by federal law. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wD3ore at no extra charge.[CC] JOHN VIRTUSA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Sugg Modified to Oct. 21 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LEO SUGG, v. VIRTUSA, JOHN DOES 1-10, Case No. 3:18-cv-08036-GC-DEA (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Rukhsanah Singh entered an amended scheduling order as follows: 1. The Plaintiff's initial expert disclosures and reports must be served by July 29, 2024. 2. The Defendant's expert disclosures and reports must be served by Sept. 27, 2024. 3. The Plaintiff's reply expert disclosures and reports must be served by Oct. 21, 2024. 4. The deadline to complete fact discovery is Sept. 16, 2024. 5. The close of expert fact discovery is Nov. 15, 2024. 6. Motion for class certification and any dispositive motions must be filed by Oct. 21, 2024. Opposition papers must be filed by Nov. 18, 2024. Reply papers, if any, must be filed by Dec. 13, 2024. 7. The remaining instructions set forth in the Court's Nov. 18, 2019 Order and the Court's Nov. 29, 2023 Scheduling Order shall remain in effect. 8. The parties are to submit a joint status report by July 31, 2024. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nUHRNU at no extra charge.[CC] KAISER FOUNDATION: Class Settlement Deal in Shcmitt Gets Final Nod ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANDREA SCHMITT; ELIZABETH MOHUNDRO; and O.L. by and through her parents, J.L. and K.L., each on their own behalf, and on behalf of all similarly situated individuals, v. KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON; KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF WASHINGTON OPTIONS, INC.; KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN OF THE NORTHWEST; and KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN, INC., Case No. 2:17-cv-01611-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Robert Lasnik entered an order as follows: 1. The Settlement Agreement is approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, and its terms shall bind all class members, with the exception of the five class members who timely opted out; 2. Class counsel is awarded 33 1/3% of the gross amount of the Settlement Fund ($3,000,000) created in this matter as attorney fees. Such fees ($1,000,000) shall be paid from the common Settlement Fund. 3. Class counsel be reimbursed $374,137.63 in costs to be paid from the common Settlement Fund. 4. The Claims Processor is ordered to accept, adjudicate, and pay all late-filed claims and emailed claims received by May 4, 2024, as if the claims were timely received. 5. The Claims Processor is ordered to make payments and distribute checks to class members and the named plaintiffs in accordance with the Agreement and this Order, as approved by the Claims Processor or on appeal by the Arbitrator, in whole or in part based upon the distributions to be made. These amounts are authorized to be paid from the Settlement Fund. 6. Class Representatives Andrea Schmitt, Elizabeth Mohundro, and O.L., by and through their parents J.L. and K.L., are awarded $15,000 each, or $45,000 total, as case contribution awards, to be paid from the common Settlement Fund. 7. Class counsel is ordered to submit a Final Report in accordance with the Agreement and this Order. 8. Upon Kaiser’s payment of the Settlement Amount minus deduction of the amount previously paid by Kaiser pursuant to Section 6.2.1 of the Settlement Agreement, the parties shall file a request that this matter be dismissed with prejudice. On Dec. 11, 2023, this Court certified a settlement class and preliminarily approved an agreement for a class-wide settlement of claims against the Defendants. A total of 913 unique claims were received by the Claims Processor by April 4, 2024. The total value of these claims, after Epiq's initial review, is $2,695,629.29. Kaiser operates as a non-profit health care organization. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9G8QRC at no extra charge.[CC] KEENAN & ASSOCIATES: Heinz Suit Removed to C.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------- The case styled BRIAN HEINZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. KEENAN & ASSOCIATES, Case No. 24STCV03227, was removed from the Los Angeles Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on March 1, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-01735-MCS-DTB to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information of the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its system following a data breach. Keenan & Associates is a privately held insurance consulting and brokerage firm based in Torrance, California. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: John A. Vogt, Esq. Ryan D. Ball, Esq. Matthew T. Billeci, Esq. JONES DAY 3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 800 Irvine, CA 92612 Telephone: (949) 851-3939 Facsimile: (949) 553-7539 Email: javogt@jonesday.com rball@jonesday.com mbilleci@jonesday.com KINDER MORGAN: Continues to Defend ERISA Class Suit in Texas ------------------------------------------------------------ Kinder Morgan Inc. disclosed in its form 10-Q Report for quarterly period ending March 31, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 19, 2024, that the Company continues to defend itself from ERISA class suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. On February 22, 2021, Kinder Morgan Retirement Plan A participants Curtis Pedersen and Beverly Leutloff filed a purported class action lawsuit under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The named plaintiffs were hired initially by the ANR Pipeline Company (ANR) in the late 1970s. Following a series of corporate acquisitions, plaintiffs became participants in pension plans sponsored by the Coastal Corporation (Coastal), El Paso Corporation (El Paso) and our company by virtue of our acquisition of El Paso in 2012 and our assumption of certain of El Pas's pension plan obligations. The complaint, which was transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Civil Action No. 4:21-3590) and later amended to include the Kinder Morgan Retirement Plan B, alleges that the series of foregoing transactions resulted in changes to plaintiffs’ retirement benefits which are now contested on a class-wide basis in the lawsuit. The complaint asserts six claims that fall within three primary theories of liability. Claims I, II, and III all challenge plan provisions which are alleged to constitute impermissible "backloading" or "cutback" of benefits, and seek the same plan modification as to how the plans calculate benefits for former participants in the Coastal plan. Claims IV and V allege that former participants in the ANR plans should be eligible for unreduced benefits at younger ages than the plans currently provide. Claim VI asserts that actuarial assumptions used to calculate reduced early retirement benefits for current or former ANR employees are outdated and therefore unreasonable. On February 8, 2024, the Court certified a class defined as any and all persons who participated in the Kinder Morgan Retirement Plan A or B who are current or former employees of ANR or Coastal, and participated in the El Paso pension plan after El Paso acquired Coastal in 2001, and are members of at least one of three subclasses of individuals who are allegedly due benefits under one or more of the six claims asserted in the complaint. Plaintiffs seek to recover early retirement benefits as well as declaratory and injunctive relief, but have not pleaded, disclosed or otherwise specified a calculation of alleged damages. The extent of potential plan liabilities for past or future benefits, if any, remains to be determined in connection with pending cross motions for summary judgment on the question of liability or a bench trial scheduled to begin on August 5, 2024 with respect to any claims not resolved on summary judgment. The Company believes it has numerous and substantial defenses and intend to vigorously defend this case. KING COUNTY, WA: Class Cert. Bid in Tucker Due March 31, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MALIK TUCKER and REGINALD WILLIAMS, v. KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, Case No. 2:24-cv-00002-RAJ (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Richard Jones entered a scheduling order as follows: Event Date Fact Discovery Deadline: Nov. 30, 2024 Expert Report(s) for Party Bearing Dec. 31, 2024 Burden of Proof: Responsive Expert Report(s) Due: Jan. 31, 2025 Expert Discovery Deadline: Feb. 28, 2025 Class Certification Motion: March 31, 2025 A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=moa2bj at no extra charge.[CC] KNOX COUNTY, IL: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Hans Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hans v. Sheriff of Knox County et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-04037-JES-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. Galesburg is the county seat of Knox County and the principal city of the Galesburg Micropolitan Statistical Area. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xHXXeB at no extra charge.[CC] KOBE JAPANESE: Jiang Suit Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHUN LIN JIANG, on his own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. KOBE JAPANESE STEAKHOUSE, INC. f/k/a Tokyo Steak Hose Inc d/b/a Tokyo Japanese Steak House; TOKYO II STEAK HOUSE, INC. d/b/a Tokyo Japanese Steak House; and GUANGLONG LIN a/k/a Guang Long Lin a/k/a David Lin, Case No. 1:22-cv-11867-FDS (D. Mass.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order: (1) granting collective action status, under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), 29 U.S.C. section 216(b); (2) ordering the Defendants within 14 days of the entry of this Order to produce an Excel spreadsheet containing first and last name, last known address with apartment number (if applicable), the last known telephone numbers, last known e-mail addresses, WhatsApp, WeChat ID and/or FaceBook usernames (if applicable), and work location, dates of employment and position of all current and former non-exempt and non-managerial employees employed at any time from Nov. 2, 2019 (three years prior to the filing of the Complaint) to the date when the Court so- orders the Notice of Pendency and Consent to Join Form or the date when Defendants provide the name list, whichever is later; (3) authorizing that notice of this matter be disseminated, in any relevant language via mail, email, text message, website or social media messages, chats, or posts, to all members of the putative class within 21 days after receipt of a complete and accurate Excel spreadsheet with affidavit from the Defendants certifying that the list is complete and from existing employment records; (4) authorizing an opt-in period of 90 days from the day of dissemination of the notice and its translation; (5) authorizing the Plaintiff to publish the full opt-in notice on the Plaintiffs' counsel's website; Kobe is a Japanese restaurant and events catering services. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=b1EPdW at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Tiffany Troy, Esq. TROY LAW, PLLC 41-25 Kissena Boulevard Suite 110 Flushing, NY 11355 Telephone: (718) 762-1324 L&J TRANSPORTATION: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Perry Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------ DORYAL PERRY, individually and on behalf all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. L&J TRANSPORTATION COMPANIES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-01538 (E.D. Pa., April 14, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Perry was employed by the Defnedant as a delivery driver. L&J TRANSPORTATION COMPANIES, INC. provides transportation services. The Company offers logistics, warehousing, distribution, freight forwarding, brokerage, storage, and cargo services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sarah Schalman-Bergen, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Ste. 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (267) 256-9973 Email: ssb@llrlaw.com - and - Harold L. Lichten, Esq. Olena Savytska, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Ste. 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 Facsimile: (617) 994-5801 Email: hlichten@llrlaw.com osavytska@llrlaw.com - and - Ravi Sattiraju, Esq. SATTIRAJU & THARNEY, LLP 50 Millstone Road Building 300, Suite 202 East Windsor, NJ 08520 Telephone: (609) 469-2110 Email: rsattiraju@s-tlawfirm.com LEE'S HOUSE: Plaintiff Must file Class Cert Reply Brief ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MIN HUI LIN, on his own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. LEE'S HOUSE RESTAURANT, INC., SEN LIN, BAIQUN LIN, Case No. 2:23-cv-03111-MMB (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Michael M. Baylson entered an order that: 1. The Plaintiff may file a reply brief in support of the Motion to Certify the Class within seven (7) days. 2. If the Plaintiff wishes the Court to act on any discovery disputes, a motion to compel must also be filed within seven (7) days and the Defendant must answer within seven (7) days. 3. The Court will have argument on the Motion for Class Certification, including the request for additional discovery, on Monday, May 13, 2024 at 11:00 a.m. in Courtroom 3A. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ndmtQH at no extra charge.[CC] LEGACY INC: Elson Sues Over Fraud Violations in D. Minnesota ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Legacy, Inc. The case is captioned as STEVE ELSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. LEGACY, INC., Case No. 0:24-cv-00643-ECT-ECW (D. Minn., March 1, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged fraud violations. Legacy, Inc. is a company that offers a wide range of rare and exquisite coins based in Minnesota. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq. Christopher P. Renz, Esq. Jeffrey D. Bores, Esq. Chestnut Cambronne PA 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-7300 Facsimile: (612) 336-2940 Email: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com crenz@chestnutcambronne.com jbores@chestnutcambronne.com LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES: Cabrera FDCPA Suit Removed to D. New Jersey ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled MARILUX CABRERA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES, LLC a/k/a LEOPOLD & ASSOCIATES, PLLC; and JOHN DOES 1 to 10, Case No. ESX-L-00793-24, was removed from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Essex County, to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on March 6, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the District of New Jersey assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-01707-JKS-JSA to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act by making attempts to collect consumer debts on behalf of debt buyers who operate unlawfully without a license under the New Jersey Consumer Finance Licensing Act, thereby misrepresenting the amount of the debt and attempting to collect amounts not permitted by law. Leopold & Associates, LLC, also known as Leopold & Associates, PLLC, is a law firm in New York. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: Robert A. Berns, Esq. KAUFMAN DOLOWICH, LLP Court Plaza North 25 Main Street, Suite 500 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Telephone: (201) 488-6655 LIBERTY MUTUAL: Sends Unsolicited Text Messages, Ward Suit Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- ADAM WARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-10526-MJJ (D. Mass., March 1, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The case arises from the Defendant's practice of sending unsolicited text messages to consumers, including the Plaintiff, in an attempt to promote its products or services without obtaining prior consent in violation of the TCPA. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company is an insurance provider, with headquarters located in Boston, Massachusetts. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Craig Thor Kimmel, Esq. Jacob U. Ginsburg, Esq. KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, P.C. 30 East Butler Ave. Ambler, PA 19002 Telephone: (215) 540-8888 Facsimile: (877) 788-2864 Email: kimmel@creditlaw.com jginsburg@creditlaw.com LINCOLN NATIONAL: Meade Files Securities Fraud Suit in E.D. Pa. --------------------------------------------------------------- Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") announces that it has filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, captioned Meade v. Lincoln National Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-01704, on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Lincoln National Corporation ("Lincoln National" or the "Company") (NYSE: LNC) securities between November 4, 2020 and November 2, 2022, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Plaintiff pursues claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"). Investors are hereby notified that they have 60 days from the date of this notice to move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff in this action. If you suffered a loss on your Lincoln National investments or would like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact information at www.glancylaw.com/cases/Lincoln-National-Corporation/. You can also contact Pavithra Rajesh, of GPM at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights. On November 2, 2022, after the market closed, Lincoln National released its third quarter 2022 financial results, reporting a net loss of $2.6 billion for the quarter. This was compared to a net income of $318 million for the third quarter of 2021 the previous year. The Company explained "[t]he current quarter's adjusted operating results included net unfavorable notable items of $2.0 billion, or $11.62 per share, related to the company's annual review of DAC and reserve assumptions." The Company also disclosed that it "incurred a $634 million goodwill impairment to the life insurance business." On this news, Lincoln's stock price fell $17.27, or 33.2%, to close at $34.83 per share on November 3, 2022, on unusually heavy trading volume. The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to investors: (1) that the Company was experiencing a decline in its VUL business; (2) that, as a result, the goodwill associated with the life insurance business was overstated; (3) that, as a result, the Company's policy lapse assumptions were outdated; (4) that, as a result, the Company's reserves were overstated; (5) that, as a result, the Company's reported financial results and financial statements were misstated; and (6) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. If you purchased or otherwise acquired Lincoln National securities during the Class Period, you may move the Court no later than 60 days from the date of this notice to ask the Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the Class. If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these matters, please contact Pavithra Rajesh, Esquire, of GPM, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles California 90067 at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, by email to shareholders@glancylaw.com, or visit our website at www.glancylaw.com. If you inquire by email please include your mailing address, telephone number and number of shares purchased. This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. [GN] LINKEDIN CORPORATION: Class Cert Bid Filing Due Jan. 9, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as TODD CROWDER, et al., v. LINKEDIN CORPORATION, Case No. 4:22-cv-00237-HSG (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Haywood Gilliam, Jr. entered an order setting the following deadlines pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 and Civil Local Rule 16-10: Event Deadline Deadline for Defendant to answer First May 3, 2024 Amended Complaint: Deadline for Plaintiff's class certification Jan. 9, 2025 expert disclosures and class certification motion: Deadline for Defendant's class certification Feb. 6, 2025 expert disclosures and opposition to class certification motion: Deadline for Plaintiff's class certification Feb. 27, 2025 reply expert disclosures and class certification reply brief: Deadline to depose experts: March 13, 2025 Deadline to file class Daubert motions: March 20, 2025 Deadline for opposition to class Daubert March 27, 2025 motions (no replies permitted): Hearing on class certification and class: April 10, 2025, at 2:00pm. LinkedIn is a business and employment-focused social media platform that works through websites and mobile apps. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sfYshX at no extra charge.[CC] LINOBGHK LLC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Becerra Alleges -------------------------------------------------------- ROBERTO BECERRA; and MIGUEL VIVAR, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. LINOBGHK, LLC d/b/a The Healthy Kitchen; and MARK SMITH, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-02752-OEM-VMS (E.D.N.Y., April 12, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiffs Becerra and Vivar were employed by the Defendants as a dishwasher and as a chef, respectively. LINOBGHK, LLC d/b/a The Healthy Kitchen operates as a preparation and delivery meal service company in New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Samuel, Esq. THE SAMUEL LAW FIRM 1441 Broadway Suite 6085 New York, NY 10018 Telephone: (212) 563-9884 Email: michael@thesamuellawfirm.com LITTLE CAESAR: Parties Seek Dec. 30 Extension for Class Cert Filing ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE CUEVAS, on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public, v. LITTLE CAESAR ENTERPRISES, INC.; and DOES through 10, inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-03166-RFL (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order to extending the case schedule as follows: 1. ADR Deadline: Sept. 23, 2024 2. Motion for Class Certification due by Dec. 30, 2024 3. Responses due by Jan. 27, 2025 4. Replies due by Feb. 17, 2025 5. Motion for Class Certification Hearing set for Apr. 18, 2025 The Plaintiff filed a class action Complaint on May 12, 2023, in Santa Clara County Superior Court and Defendant removed the action to the Northern District of California on June 26, 2023. On Oct. 10, 2023, after an initial Case Management Conference, the Court (J. Chhabria) scheduled dates related to the Plaintiff's motion for Class Certification. On Jan. 23, 2024, the Parties submitted a stipulation requesting a modification of the Plaintiff's motion for Class Certification because they were in the process of attempting to schedule private mediation to meet the June 5, 2024 ADR deadline. On March 6, 2024, after the Court further extended the deadline to schedule private mediation to March 6, 2024, the Parties informed the Court that they had scheduled private mediation with Jeffrey Ross for May 22, 2024. Little Caesar is an American multinational chain of pizza restaurants A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yzZFxX at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark Yablonovich, Esq. Monica Balderrama, Esq. Tony Roberts, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF MARK YABLONOVICH 9595 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 900 Beverly Hills, CA 90212-2511 Telephone: (310) 286-0246 Facsimile: (310) 407-5391 E-mail: Mark@Yablonovichlaw.com Monica@Yablonovichlaw.com Tony@Yablonovichlaw.com - and - Bevin Allen Pike, Esq. Daniel Jonathan, Esq. Trisha K. Monesi, Esq. CAPSTONE LAW APC 1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 556-4811 Facsimile: (310) 943-0396 E-mail: Bevin.Pike@capstonelawyers.com Daniel.Jonathan@capstonelawyers.com Trisha.Monesi@capstonelawyers.com The Defendants are represented by: Ellen M. Bronchetti, Esq. Priya E. Singh, Esq. GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 101 Second Street, Suite 2200 San Francisco, California 94105 Telephone: (415) 655-1300 E-mail: Ellen.bronchetti@gtlaw.com Priya.singh@gtlaw.com LOCUST MEDICAL: Class Cert Bid Reply Extended to May 3 ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as GERARD JACKSON, v. LOCUST MEDICAL, LLC, Case No. 4:22-cv-00424-MWB (M.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Matthew W. Bran entered an order granting Plaintiff's motion for extension of time to file a reply to motion for class certification and motion to amend, of until May 3, 2024. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uybazc at no extra charge.[CC] LUCKY ELEPHANT: Fact Discovery in Luis Class Suit Due August 15 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KEVIN YAN LUIS, v. LUCKY ELEPHANT COUTURE LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-09982-PAE-GS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered civil case management plan and scheduling order as follows: -- All fact discovery shall be completed by: Aug. 15, 2024 -- Initial requests for production May 17, 2024 were / shall be served by: -- Expert discovery shall be completed by: Sept. 29, 2024 A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=BmKGHP at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Noor A. Saab Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF NOOR A. SAAB 380 North Broadway, Penthouse West Jericho, NY 11753 Telephone: (718) 740-5060 E-mail: NoorASaabLaw@Gmail.com The Defendant is represented by: Michael Samuel, Esq. THE SAMUEL LAW FIRM 1441 Broadway, Suite 6085 New York, NY 10018 Telephone: (212) 563-9884 E-mail: michael@thesamuellawfirm.com LUXURY BRAND: Class Action Settlement in Henning Gets Initial Nod ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELLA HENNING, et al., v. LUXURY BRAND PARTNERS, LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-07011-TLT (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Trina Thompson entered an order granting motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement as follows: -- Class data to be provided to Settlement May 21, 2024 Administrator: -- Class Notice to be sent by: June 3, 2024 -- Class Counsel to file their motion for Aug. 2, 2024 fees and costs and Class Representative awards: -- Motion for Final Approval to be filed by: Aug. 2, 2024 -- Postmark deadline to submit objection or Sept. 6, 2024 request for exclusion: -- Class counsel and settlement administrator Oct. 18, 2024 to submit supplemental statements regarding status of notice: The Plaintiffs filed the putative class action complaint on Nov. 8, 2022, against Luxury Brand. The pleadings allege that the defendants purchased "adulterated" IGK products containing more of the highly carcinogenic chemical benzene (2.49 ppm) than allowed by U.S. Food and Drug Administration. The Settlement Agreement defines the class as: "All persons in the United States, who, during the Class Period, purchased one or more of the IGK Products for personal, family, or household use and not for resale. Excluded from the Settlement Class are (a) all persons who are employees, directors, officers, and agents of [Luxury Brand Partners], or its subsidiaries and affiliated companies; (b) persons or entities who purchased the IGK Products primarily for the purposes of resale to consumers or other resellers; (c) governmental entities; and (d) the Court, the Court's immediate family, and Court staff." Luxury develops and manufactures personal care products. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pc2Qms at no extra charge.[CC] LX HAUSYS: Torres Bid to Revise Pretrial Deadlines Partly OK'd -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SINUHE CABRERA TORRES and PEDRO DOMINGUEZ BALDERAS, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. LX HAUSYS AMERICA, INC.; CL GLOBAL, LLC; andTOTAL EMPLOYEE SOLUTION SUPPORT, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-01283-MLB-RDC (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Regina Cannon entered an order granting in part Plaintiffs and LXHA's motion to revise certain pretrial deadlines. 1. LXHA must respond to the complaint on or before June 10, 2024. 2. If LXHA moves to dismiss the complaint under Rule 12(b), then: 3. Within 14 days after briefing on all Rule 12(b) motions to dismiss (whether filed by LXHA or other Defendants) is complete, lead counsel for all parties who have made an appearance must meet and confer to discuss possible settlement. 4. The parties must hold their Rule 26(f) planning conference within 21 days after all live Defendants have filed their answers or defaulted. 5. The parties must file their Joint Preliminary Report and Discovery Plan and serve their initial disclosures within 21 days after the Rule 26(f) conference. 6. The Plaintiffs must move for class certification within 60 days after all live Defendants have filed their answers or defaulted. This is an employment-discrimination class action LX Hausys manufactures and markets building materials. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=08Svqz at no extra charge.[CC] MARIANI PACKING: Diesel Class Cert Bid Filing for MMPA Claims OK'd ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as KIMBERLY DIESEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. MARIANI PACKING COMPANY, INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-01368-AGF (E.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Audrey Fleissig entered an order: -- Granting the Plaintiff's motion for class certification for claims under the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act (MMPA); -- Appointing the named Plaintiff Kimberly Diesel as Class Representatives to represent the MMPA Class, defined as follows: "All persons who purchased the Vanilla Yogurt Raisins in seven- ounce packages sold by the Defendant in Missouri between Nov. 14, 2017, through present, excluding the judge or magistrate assigned to this case; Defendant; any entity in which Defendant has a controlling interest; Defendant's officers, directors, legal representatives, successors, and assigns; and person who purchased the Product for the purpose of resale"; and -- Appointing Daniel F. Harvath of Harvath Law Group, LLC, 75 W Lockwood Ave Ste 1, Webster Groves, Missouri 63119 as Class Counsel. The parties shall meet and confer and within 14 days of this order submit a joint proposed order regarding notice in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(c)(2)(B). On Feb. 7, 2024, the Court ordered the parties to provide supplemental briefing regarding the impact of the MMPA's 2020 Amendments on class certification. The Plaintiff filed this putative class-action complaint alleging breach of express warranty and violations under the MMPA. She alleges that the Defendant misled customers by under-filling their seven ounce bag of Mariani Premium Vanilla Yogurt Raisins (the "Product"), such that the package is only filled to 42% capacity with Vanilla Yogurt Raisins, and contains 58% empty space. In other words, the Plaintiff alleges that the Product contains excessive slack fill. The Plaintiff alleges that she purchased the Product at locations including Dierbergs in St. Louis, Missouri in or around October 2022. Mariani is a food production company that offers dried fruits packaging services. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pQEHtA at no extra charge.[CC] MARK CUBAN: Seeks Denial of Karnas Class Cert Bid -------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DOMINIK KARNAS, et al., v. MARK CUBAN, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-22538-RKA (S.D. Fla.), the Defendants request that the Court deny Plaintiffs' Motion and decline to certify any class. No class should be certified, but if the Court considers redefining the class, it should at minimum exclude those that suffered no harm due to Defendants’ conduct, the Plaintiffs contend. Thus, in the alternative, Defendants propose a class definition of: All persons or entities in the United States who: 1. Opened a Voyager EPA using the MAVS100 promotional code between October 27, 2021, and October 29, 2021; 2. Made an initial deposit of $100, and an initial investment in an asset listed on the Voyager Earn Program of an amount greater than the minimum threshold balance; 3. Held that threshold balance for the requisite period to earn a reward from Voyager, and 4. Did not recover the entirety of that initial investment as a result of Voyager’s bankruptcy. The Plaintiffs moved for class certification on March 15, 2024, and proposed two classes: A "security class" of "All persons or entities in the United States who, from applicable statutes of limitation through July 5, 2022, purchased, repurchased, invested, reinvested, deposited, held and/or transferred additional funds to an EPA and/or purchased, repurchased, invested, and/or reinvested in VGX Tokens." and a "solicitation class" of "All persons or entities in the United States who, from October 27, 2021, through July 5, 2022, purchased, repurchased, invested, reinvested, deposited, held and/or transferred additional funds to an EPA and/or purchased, repurchased, invested, and/or reinvested in VGX Tokens." A copy of the Defendants' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=x8GNSC at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendants are represented by: Christopher E. Knight, Esq. Esther E. Galicia, Esq. Alexandra L. Tifford, Esq. FOWLER WHITE BURNETT, P.A. Brickell Arch, Fourteenth Floor 1395 Brickell Avenue Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 789-9200 Facsimile: (305) 789-9201 E-mail: cknight@fowler-white.com egalicia@fowler-white.com atifford@fowler-white.com - and – Paul C. Huck, Jr., Esq. LAWSON HUCK GONZALEZ, PLLC 334 Minorca Avenue Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (850) 825-4334 E-mail: paul@lawsonhuckgonzalez.com - and – Stephen A. Best, Esq. Rachel O. Wolkinson, Esq. Daniel L. Sachs, esq. Jonathan D. White, Esq. BROWN RUDNICK LLP 601 Thirteenth Street, N.W., Suite 600 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 536-1737 Facsimile: (202) 536-1701 E-mail: sbest@brownrudnick.com rwolkinson@brownrudnick.com dsachs@brownrudnick.com jwhite@brownrudnick.com MARLOU CORP: Parties Seek More Time for Class Cert Response ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LINDA WHEELER and KARISSA ANN HUGH, individually, and on behalf of similarly situated individuals, v. MARLOU CORPORATION d/b/a CLUB PLATINUM, a Nevada corporation, and RITA CAPOVILLA, Case No. 2:23-cv-01556-APG-BNW (D. Nev.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order extending the time for the Defendants to file a response to the Motion for conditional certification from the current deadline of April 24, 2024, up to and including May 8, 2024. Club platinum is a premium nightclub. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xLdM4L at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Matthew Thomson, Esq. Adelaide Pagano, Esq. LITCHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, PC 729 Boylston St 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 - and - Kristina L. Hillman, Esq. Sean W. McDonald, Esq. WEINBERG, ROGER, ROSENFELD, P.C. 1001 Marina Village Parkway. Suite 200 Alameda, CA 94501 The Defendants are represented by: Laurent R.G. Badoux, Esq. Kelsey E. Stegall, Esq. Emil S. Kim, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. Camelback Esplanade 2425 East Camelback Road, Suite 900 Phoenix, AZ 85016 Telephone: (602) 474-3600 Facsimile: (602) 957-1801 E-mail: lbadoux@littler.com kstegall@littler.com ekim@littler.com MAUREEN CORCORAN: Plaintiff Seeks Notice of Putative Class Action ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Alfar Kynwulf, V. Maureen Corcoran, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00213-SDM-CMV (S.D. Ohio), the Plaintiff files notice of putative class action possibility. The facts common to the Class may possibly include the fact that the Ohio Department of Medicaid and or the Ohio Department of Jobs and Family Services may inappropriately enroll the elderly or disabled into the Medicaid program in an effort to subject them to the mandates of the Medicaid Estate Recovery to later confiscate their estates after death. On March 17, 2024, Amanda Seitz, Associated Press reported, published an article entitled, "State Medicaid offices target dead people’s homes to recoup their health care costs." https://apnews.com/article/medicaid- estate- recovery- nursing- homes-65d5e637e19dc27bd1bd3b097d239b53. In this article it is clear that many elderly and or family are unfamiliar with the provisions of the medicaid Estate Recovery, and or that they did not knowingly, intelligently nor voluntarily consent to the provisions of the Medicaid Estate Recovery, due most likely to a failure to properly inform or verbally communicate these matters to reciepients for proper understanding. At least one Democratic lawmaker has introduced a bill entitled "Stop Unfair Medicaid Recoveries Act of 2024" to prevent the uninformed act of confiscation of homes after death permitted by the Medicaid Estate Recovery. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=edyvQ9 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alfar Kynwulf, Esq. 2107 Dixie Hwy Hamilton, OH 45011 Telephone: (513) 668- 7215 E-mail: ancestral.ways@aol.com ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Certify Class of Employees ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as WALTER STOCK, III, v. ME&I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES USA, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00064-MRH (W.D. Pa.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting motion to certify lawsuit as a class action pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3). The proposed class is defined as follows: "All individuals who, during any time since Feb. 7, 2019, were employed by the Defendant as hourly craft workers at the petrochemical facility located in Monaca, PA." -- appointing the undersigned law firms to serve as Class Counsel, and -- approving both (i) the "Notice of Class Action Lawsuit" form attached as Exhibit A and (ii) the class notice protocols and procedures detailed in paragraph 4 of the accompanying proposed order. ME&I is a full-service maintenance and construction services company. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8UrPxQ at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter Winebrake, Esq. R. Andrew Santillo, Esq. WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC 715 Twining Road, Suite 211 Dresher, PA 19025 Telephone: (215) 884-2491 Facsimile: (215) 884-2492 E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com asantillo@winebrakelaw.com - and - Timothy Conboy, Esq. CONBOY LAW, LLC 733 Washington Road, Suite 201 Pittsburgh, PA 15228 Telephone: (412) 343-9060 Facsimile: (412) 343-9062 E-mail: tim@conboylaw.com ME&I CONSTRUCTION: Stock Seeks to Seal Class Cert Documents ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as WALTER STOCK, III, v. ME&I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES USA, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00064-MRH (W.D. Pa.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order to seal documents referenced in the Plaintiff's motion for class certification. Consistent with the Parties' protective order, the Plaintiff requests the Court to allow it to file these documents under seal. However, if the Court believes that more justification is needed as to why Exhibits D-E and H should be sealed, the Plaintiff would request that the Court so indicate and presumably the Defendant or Great Arrow Builders, LLC will file any supplemental briefing in support of its position. On April 19, 2024, the Plaintiff filed his "Motion for Class Certification." As part of Plaintiff’s Motion, the Plaintiff references Exhibit D, E, and H which consist of documents produced in discovery by the Defendant or third parties to this litigation. Specifically, these documents consist of the following: a. Exhibit D - Great Arrow Builders LLC Offsite Parking & Transport (Mar. 1, 2019); b. Exhibit E - Loaned Personnel Agreement; and c. Exhibit H - Great Arrow Builders LLC Project Work Rules.1 These documents have been labeled as "Confidential" pursuant to the July 20, 2023 Protective Order, and have not been previously publicly filed by the producing parties in this case. As a result, the Plaintiff is prohibited from filing the documents publicly, and seeks leave from this Court to file them under seal pursuant to Local Rule 5.2(H). ME&I is a full-service maintenance and construction services company. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RQvXUs at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter Winebrake, Esq. R. Andrew Santillo, Esq. WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC 715 Twining Road, Suite 211 Dresher, PA 19025 Telephone: (215) 884-2491 Facsimile: (215) 884-2492 E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com asantillo@winebrakelaw.com - and - Timothy Conboy, Esq. CONBOY LAW, LLC 733 Washington Road, Suite 201 Pittsburgh, PA 15228 Telephone: (412) 343-9060 Facsimile: (412) 343-9062 E-mail: tim@conboylaw.com MEDICAL EYE: Eufusia Personal Injury Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. -------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled ERIC E. EUFUSIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MEDICAL EYE SERVICES, INC., Case No. 30-2023-01369472-CU-CO-CXC, was removed from the California Superior Court, County of Orange, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on March 1, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned Case No. 8:24-cv-00432-DOC-ADS to the proceeding. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged personal injury claims. Medical Eye Services, Inc. is a medical service provider in Santa Ana, California. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Kyle T. Cutts, Esq. BAKER AND HOSTETLER LLP Key Tower 127 Public Square Suite 2000 Cleveland, OH 44114 Telephone: (216) 586-7576 Facsimile: (216) 696-0740 Email: kcutts@bakerlaw.com MEDQ INC: Franklin Files Personal Injury Suit in E.D. Texas ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against medQ, Inc. The case is captioned as SHELBY D. FRANKLIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. MEDQ, INC., Case No. 4:24-cv-00198-ALM (E.D. Tex., March 5, 2024). The Plaintiff brings personal injury claims against the Defendant. medQ, Inc. is a software company in Plano, Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: William B. Federman, Esq. FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD 10205 North Pennsylvania Ave. Oklahoma City, OK 73102 Telephone: (405) 235-1560 Facsimile: (405) 239-2112 Email: wbf@federmanlaw.com MERITAS HEALTH: Ballard Files Contract Suit in W.D. Missouri ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Meritas Health Corporation, et al. The case is captioned as GARY BALLARD, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. MERITAS HEALTH CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-00154-RK (W.D. Mo., March 4, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged breach of contract. Meritas Health Corporation is a medical group based in Kansas City, Missouri. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Andrew B. Protzman, Esq. David D. Burkhead, Esq. PROTZMAN LAW FIRM 4001 W. 114th St., Suite 110 Leawood, KS 66211 Telephone: (816) 421-5100 Facsimile: (816) 421-5105 Email: andy@protzmanlaw.com david@protzmanlaw.com MIDLAND FUNDING: Class Cert Bid in Filgueiras Class Suit Tossed --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSEFA FILGUEIRAS, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated, v. MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, and MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., Case No. 2:16-cv-03037-ES-JSA (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Esther Salas entered an order denying the motion for class certification. Accordingly, the predominance requirement is not satisfied. Because the class cannot be certified absent predominance, the Court need not consider the remaining requirements. Ms. Filgueiras filed this putative class action against the Defendants Midland Funding, LLC, and Midland Credit Management, Inc. for alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("FDCPA"). On May 26, 2016, Ms. Filgueiras filed this suit against Midland. On January 10, 2020, Ms. Filgueiras filed the present motion for class certification. In the Complaint, Ms. Filgueiras proposed both a class and a subclass. In the instant motion, however, Ms. Filgueiras proposed only the following class: "All natural persons with addresses within the State of New Jersey, to whom, from May 26, 2015 through June 16, 2017, Midland Credit Management, Inc., sent one or more letters on behalf of Midland Funding LLC in the form attached as Exhibit B to the Complaint (letter code OS_0001), which debt arose from a Target store account that is not a Visa or MasterCard, where the debt was in default for more than four years prior to the date of the letter." Around 2008, Ms. Filgueiras became a cardholder at Target. Ms. Filgueiras made payments on the Target card through August 2009. In Sept. 2009, however, she defaulted on the account. Midland is a debt collection agency that collects different types of debt but focuses on consumer debts. A copy of the Court's opinion dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UO6TXw at no extra charge.[CC] MINISO GROUP: Continues to Defend Federal Securities Class ---------------------------------------------------------- MINISO Group Holdings Ltd. disclosed in its Form 20-F Report for the transition period from July 1, 2023 to December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 16, 2024 that the Company continues to defend itself from federal securities class suit in the Southern District of New York. In August 2022, a putative federal securities class action was filed against the Company and certain of its officers and Directors, alleging that the Company made misleading misstatements or omissions regarding its business operations and financials in violation of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The action is captioned In re MINISO Group Holding Limited Securities Litigation, 1:22-cv-09864 (S.D.N.Y.). Lead plaintiff was appointed in November 2022 and filed the operative complaint to the court. The Company and other defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, and the motion was granted by the court in February 2024, with leave to amend. Plaintiffs have filed a motion for reconsideration of the court's decision and intended to file a further amended complaint. As of December 31, 2023, the Directors were unable to assess the outcome of the action or reliably estimate the potential losses, if any. MINISO Group Holding Limited -- https://www.miniso.com/ -- operates as a holding company. The Company, through its subsidiaries, retails home decor, small electronics, textile, accessories, beauty tools, toys, cosmetics, personal care, snacks, fragrance and perfumes, and stationery and gifts.[BN] MISS DU'S TEA: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Volfman ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSEPH VOLFMAN, v. MISS DU'S TEA SHOP, INC., et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-02973-PAE-BCM (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Barbara Moses entered an order regarding general pretrial management as follows: -- All pretrial motions and applications, including those related to scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23) must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses. -- Once a discovery schedule has been issued, all discovery must be initiated in time to be concluded by the close of discovery set by the Court. -- Discovery applications, including letter-motions requesting discovery conferences, must be made promptly after the need for such an application arises and must comply with Local Civil Rule 37.2 and section 2(b) of Judge Moses's Individual Practices. -- Requests to adjourn a court conference or other court proceeding (including a telephonic court conference) or to extend a deadline must be made in writing and in compliance with section 2(a) of Judge Moses's Individual Practices. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Pe56oV at no extra charge.[CC] NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Filing for Class Cert Bids Amended to June 2 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BETSY NELSON, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC d/b/a Mr. Cooper, and CENLAR AGENCY, INC. d/b/a Cenlar FSB, Case No. 6:23-cv-03339-MDH (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Douglas Harpool entered a first amended schedule and order: -- All class-related discovery is to commence June 2, 2025 immediately and be completed by: -- All motions related to Class Discovery June 2, 2025 shall be filed by: -- The Plaintiff shall file all motions June 2, 2025 seeking class certification by: -- The Defendant shall file any responsive July 2, 2025 motions objecting to class certification by: -- The Plaintiff will designate any expert March 14, 2025 witnesses as to class certification by: Nationstar provides mortgages loan, re-financing, and home equity loan. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fW5fF3 at no extra charge.[CC] NCAA: Plaintiffs Seek to File Docs Under Seal --------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHUBA HUBBARD and KEIRA MCCARRELL, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION; ATLANTIC COAST CONFERENCE; THE BIG TEN CONFERENCE, INC.; THE BIG 12 CONFERENCE, INC.; PAC-12 CONFERENCE; and SOUTHEASTERN CONFERENCE, Case No. 4:23-cv-01593-CW (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs file an administrative motion to provisionally file under seal pursuant to Civil Local Rules 7-11, 79-5 and the stipulation and order regarding administrative motions to seal. The Order provides that "a single combined administrative motion to seal covering all sealing requests would be the most efficient way for the Court to handle all sealing issues arising from the Parties’ class certification papers and related documents." It also provides that the parties shall file redacted versions of their class certification briefs and related documents on the public docket "without accompanying interim motions to seal," and shall file sealed versions of those documents "using the ECF Event for 'Documents e-Filed Under Seal." National Collegiate is a nonprofit organization that regulates student athletics among about 1,100 schools in the United States, and one in Canada. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SDOrap at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Steve W. Berman, Esq. Emilee N. Sisco, Esq. Stephanie A. Verdoia, Esq. Benjamin J. Siegel, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 623-7292 Facsimile: (206) 623-0594 E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com emilees@hbsslaw.com stephaniev@hbsslaw.com bens@hbsslaw.com - and - Jeffrey L. Kessler, Esq. David G. Feher, Esq. David L. Greenspan, Esq. Sofia Arguello, Esq. Adam I. Dale, Esq. Jeanifer E. Parsigian, Esq. WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166-4193 Telephone: (212) 294-4698 Facsimile: (212) 294-4700 E-mail: jkessler@winston.com dgreenspan@winston.com sarguello@winston.com aidale@winston.com dfeher@winston.com jparsigian@winston.com NESTLE PURINA: Bid for Initial OK of Class Settlement Tossed ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as EMMAUEL SALINAS, on behalf of himself and the Class Members, v. NESTLE PURINA PETCARE COMPANY, Case No. 1:21-cv-01140-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer Thurston entered an order denying the motion for preliminary approval of the class action settlement without prejudice to a renewed motion addressing the Court's concerns. The Court said that because there is no showing that the cashing or depositing of checks by a class member constitutes proper written consent, the consent mechanism identified in the Settlement fails to comply with the requirements of the FLSA. Salinas fails to carry his burden to show the prerequisites of Rule 23(a) are satisfied for the proposed settlement class, and the Court is unable to certify the class, the Court adds. Accordingly, the Court declines to consider whether the Settlement satisfies the requirements of Rule 23(e)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Pursuant to the "Joint Stipulation of Settlement and Release", the parties agree to a gross settlement amount of $3,000,000.00 for the class including: "all persons employed by the Defendant in a Job Position at any time during the Class Period." The Settlement Class includes all persons employed by Nestle Purina in the state of California in any non-exempt hourly or non-exempt salaried position from Jan. 29, 2017 through Feb. 5, 2023. Mr. Salinas asserts Nestle Purina PetCare Company failed to comply with wage and hour laws arising under the California Labor Code, California Business & Professions Code, and Fair Labor Standards Act. Mr. Salinas began working for Nestle Purina PetCare Company in Feb. 2015, and is currently employed as a forklift operator in Maricopa, California. Nestle produces and markets pet food, treats, and cat and dog litter. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yg94pw at no extra charge.[CC] NEW SOUTH WALES: Junior Doctors Settle Suit Over Unpaid Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Alexander Lewis, writing for ABC News, reports that junior doctors settle class action with NSW Health over unpaid overtime. In short: NSW Health has settled a class action alleging junior doctors were underpaid in overtime and meal breaks between 2014 and 2020. Health Minister Ryan Park said NSW Health had made "significant inroads" in addressing payment concerns over the last 12 months. A class action alleging NSW Health underpaid junior doctors has settled after the department agreed to a payout of nearly a quarter of a billion dollars. More than 20,000 medicos may be eligible to claim a share of almost $230 million for the alleged underpayment of overtime and paid meal breaks. Law firms Hayden Stephens and Associates and Maurice Blackburn, which represented the plaintiffs, said the settlement was the largest underpayment class action outcome in Australian legal history. Dr Amireh Fakhouri brought the claim on behalf of junior doctors who worked in the state's public health system from December 2014 to December 2020. In a statement of claim, she alleged NSW Health failed to pay the overtime and weekend meal break entitlements she and her colleagues were owed. On April 24, Dr Fakhouri told News Breakfast that for her, the case was never about the money. "I did this for a cultural change to make it better for the next generation of junior doctors, for my fellow medical students," she said. Dr Fakhouri was employed by NSW Health from 2015 to 2018, completing her internship and residency at Sydney's Westmead Hospital. She now works in general practice and says the few thousand dollars she might receive from the settlement is merely a bonus. "It's not going to make a difference to our income, but it's about the changes that we're making." 'A big indent in the last 12 months' Health Minister Ryan Park said he was disappointed the matter was not resolved by Coalition government when it was in power. He said NSW Health had made "significant inroads" in addressing the payment concerns but still needed to do better. "I'm not saying we fixed it, but we've made a big indent in the last 12 months," he said. Greens NSW health spokesperson Dr Amanda Cohn, who is a former GP and emergency doctor, said her own junior years were traumatic. "I became a GP for many reasons, but one of them was to get out of the brutally hierarchical hospital system that made it hard to turn up to work every day," Dr Cohn said. "This is a clear message that exploitation of the skill and commitment of healthcare workers is unacceptable and cannot continue." Dr Fakhouri's lawyer Hayden Stephens said concerns over the dangerous working conditions of junior doctors were ignored for years. "This landmark settlement now represents a seismic shift in the way junior doctors are treated in their workplace," Mr Stephens said. Maurice Blackburn principal Rebecca Gilsenan said the class action had already resulted in change. "Our clients report that NSW Health has already implemented several improvements in the workplace," Ms Gilsenan said. Provided the settlement is approved by the Supreme Court of NSW, a process for assessing the claims of current and former doctors will begin this year. [GN] NEW YORK LIFE: Bid to File Class Cert Reply Under Seal OK'd ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as BARBARA LINHART, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE AND ANNUITY CORPORATION, and DOES 1 TO 50, inclusive, Case No. 5:21-cv-01640-CJC-DTB (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Cormac Carney entered an order granting Plaintiff's application to file under seal her reply memorandum in support of her motion for class certification. The Plaintiff's reply memorandum in support of her motion for class certification and appointment of Class Representative and Class Counsel shall be filed under seal pursuant to Local Rule 79-5. New York Life provides annuity services. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=f6HZ6e at no extra charge.[CC] NEW YORK TIMES: Class Cert Bid in Perkins Suit Extended to June 6 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Perkins v. The New York Times Company d/b/a The New York Times, Case No. 1:22-cv-05202-PKC (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Kevon P. Caster entered an order extending the motion for class certification and pre-motion letters regarding summary judgment to June 6. New York Times is an American mass-media company that publishes The New York Times. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0xdl3D at no extra charge.[CC] NORTHWELL HEALTH: Lorusso Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM LORUSSO, MARGARET GURLIDES, LINDA MORIARTY, RICHARD SEABERG, GARY LEONARD, CAROL VORPERIAN, NICHOLAS CAMPAGNOLA, JEROLD SCHERER, DENISE BEVILACQUA, AND KAREN CERVANTES, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. NORTHWELL HEALTH PENSION PLAN, NORTH SHORE UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, NORTHWELL HEALTH, INC., AND PENSION COMMITTEE, Case No. 2:24-cv-02785-JS-AYS (E.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court for and order: (1) certifying a class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(2); (2) appointing the Named Plaintiffs as Class Representatives; (3) appointing Thomas & Solomon PLLC as Class Counsel; and (4) such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper. Northwell is a healthcare provider that owns an integrated health care delivery system in the New York metropolitan area. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HJnVyE at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: J. Nelson Thomas, Esq. Jessica L. Lukasiewicz, Esq. THOMAS & SOLOMON PLLC 693 East Avenue Rochester, NY 14607 Telephone: (585) 272-0540 E-mail: nthomas@theemploymentattorneys.com jlukasiewicz@theemploymentattorneys.com NU HOLDINGS LTD: Continues to Defend IDC Class Suit --------------------------------------------------- Nu Holdings Ltd. disclosed in its form 20-F Report for fiscal period ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 19, 2024, that the Company continues to defend itself from the IDC class suit. On September 8, 2023, Instituto de Defesa Coletiva, or "IDC" filed a class action lawsuit against Nu Pagamentos and other financial institutions (5 in total) seeking a R$ 50 million indemnification for the financial crisis that affected 123 Milhas, a Brazilian company that offers travel packages and services to consumers. In summary, Instituto Defesa Coletiva argues that, ever since 123 Milhas suspended travel packages and flight tickets issuance, several clients tried to suspend charges on their credit card bills but did not succeed, in violation of Article 54-G of the Consumer's Protection Act. Nu Pagamentos filed its defense on February 09, 2024 and now awaits further developments. Nu Holdings Ltd is headquartered in England. The company's line of business includes designing, developing, and producing prepackaged computer software. [BN] NU-BOTANICS CANDLE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Bolanos Alleges -------------------------------------------------------------- INGRID BOLANOS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NU-BOTANICS CANDLE CORP.; POOYA BAKHTIARI; and DOES 1 THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE, Defendants, Case No. 24STCV09340 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., April 12, 2024) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, provide meals and rest periods, and provide accurate wage statements. Plaintiff Bolanos was employed by the Defendants as a staff. NU-BOTANICS CANDLE CORP. is an online shop for Religious, Santeria, Witchcraft, Occult, Religious, Feng Shui, Botanica Supplies. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J. Kirk Donnelly, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF J. KIRK DONNELLY, APC 2173 Salk Avenue, Suite 250 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Telephone: (760) 209-5894 Email: kdonnelly@jkd-law.com OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM: Savoie Contract Suit Removed to W.D. La. -------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled ROBERT SAVOIE, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORP., et al., Case No. 10-21049, was removed from the 38th Judicial District Court, Cameron Parish, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Louisiana on March 6, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Louisiana assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-00340-JDC-TPL to the proceeding. The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged contract violations. Occidental Petroleum Corp. is an American company engaged in hydrocarbon exploration, headquartered in Texas. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: Tarak Anada, Esq. Edward H. Bergin, Esq. JONES WALKER 201 St. Charles Ave. FL 51 New Orleans, LA 70170 Telephone: (504) 582-8322 Facsimile: (504) 589-8322 Email: tanada@joneswalker.com nbergin@joneswalker.com - and - Eric Phillip Morvant, Esq. JONES WALKER 445 N. Blvd., Ste. 800 Baton Rouge, LA 70802 Telephone: (225) 248-3098 Email: emorvant@joneswalker.com - and - Meghan Elizabeth Smith, Esq. CURRY & FRIEND 228 St. Charles Ave., Ste. 1200 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 524-8556 Facsimile: (504) 524-8703 Email: msmith@joneswalker.com OCUGEN INC: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit ----------------------------------------------------- Ocugen Inc. disclosed in its form 10-K Report for the fiscal period ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 16, 2024 that the Company continues to defend itself from a securities class suit. In April 2024, a securities class action lawsuit was filed against the Company and certain of its agents in the Court (Case No. 2:24-cv-01500) that purported to state a claim for alleged violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, based on statements made by the Company concerning its previously-issued audited consolidated financial statements for each fiscal year beginning January 1, 2020 and its previously-issued unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements for each of the first three quarters in such years and the effectiveness of its disclosure controls and procedures during each such period. The complaints seek unspecified damages, interest, attorneys' fees, and other costs. The Company believes that these lawsuits are without merit and intend to vigorously defend against them. Ocugen, Inc. operates as a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company. The Company offers products for improving the body's ability to regenerate healthy cartilage, joint function, and prevention of degenerative diseases. Ocugen serves patients and orthopedist throughout the United States.[BN] OFFICE DEPOT: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Yount Due Dec. 13 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICOLE YOUNT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. OFFICE DEPOT, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00392-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Robert Lasnik entered an order setting trial date and related class action dates as follows: -- Deadline for joining additional parties: May 1, 2024 -- Motion for class certification due and Dec. 13, 2024 noted on the Court's calendar for the fifth Friday thereafter: -- Deadline for amending pleadings: March 12, 2025 -- Expert Disclosures/Reports under March 12, 2025 FRCP 26(a)(2) due: -- All motions related to discovery must May 11, 2025 be noted on the motion calendar no later than the Friday before discovery closes pursuant to LCR 7(d) or LCR 37(a)(2) Discovery completed by: -- Settlement conference held no later than: May 25, 2025 -- All dispositive motions must be filed by June 10, 2025 and noted on the motion calendar no later than the fourth Friday thereafter: Office Depot is an American office supply retailer. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QAZe57 at no extra charge.[CC] OGILVY HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Chestnut Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------ ROBERT CHESTNUT; and ANTIONETTE STANIEWICZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. OGILVY HOLDINGS LLC; OGILVY PUBLIC RELATIONS WORLDWIDE LLC; THE OGILVY GROUP, LLC; EXTREME REACH PAYROLL SOLUTOINS, INC.; EXTREME REACH PRODUCTION PAYROLL, INC.; EXTREME REACH TALENT INC.; EXTREME REACH, INC., Defendants, Case No. 24CV071898 (Cal. Super., Alameda Cty., April 15, 2024) is an action against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages, overtime compensation, authorize and permit meal and rest periods, provide accurate wage statements, and reimburse necessary business expenses. The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as staffs. OGILVY HOLDINGS LLC provides advertising services. The Company offers marketing communications, including direct marketing, interactive media, media planning & buying, database management, telemarketing, directory services, public relations, sales promotion, and graphic design. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by; Douglas Han, Esq. Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq. Chris Petersen, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION 751 N. Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 101 Pasadenia, CA 91103 Telephone: (818) 230-7502 Facsimile: (818) 230-7259 ONTRAK INC: Continues to Defend Braun Securities Class Suit ----------------------------------------------------------- Ontrak Inc. disclosed in its form 20-F Report for the fiscal period ending December 31, 2023 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on April 16, 2024 that the Company continues to defend itself from the Braun securities class suit in the Superior Court of California for Los Angeles County. In February 2022, a purported securities class action was filed in the Superior Court of California for Los Angeles County, entitled Braun v. Ontrak, Inc., et al., Case No. 22STCV07174, on behalf of a putative class of all purchasers of our Series A Preferred Stock in such offerings. The action was brought against the Company, its officers and directors, and the investment banking firms that acted as underwriters for the offerings. The plaintiff asserted causes of actions alleging that it violated the federal securities laws in connection with the offerings based upon allegations that statements made regarding the growth of its customer base and expansion of its program with health plan customers were false or misleading. The Company believes that the allegations of falsity lack merit and that it has meritorious defenses, and it intends to defend against the action vigorously. Ontrak, Inc. is an artificial intelligence powered and telehealth-enabled, virtualized healthcare company with a platform that provides claim-based analytics and predictive modeling to provide analytic insights throughout the delivery of personalized treatment program. PACCAR INC: Court Won't Adopt Proposed Case Management Schedule --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as 10TH GEAR LLC, et al., v. PACCAR INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-01933-RSL (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Robert Lasnik entered an order that while the parties' proposed case management schedule will be considered, it will not be adopted. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(d)(1), the discovery period opened when the parties held their Rule 26(f) conference. If defendant seeks a stay of discovery while the motion to dismiss is pending, it must file a separate motion. The Court takes this matter under advisement. The parties should be aware, however, that the Court's standard class action case management order includes a trial date and that the Court views class certification as a preliminary procedural matter to be decided at the outset of the case. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=lNuMjf at no extra charge.[CC] PACIFIC MARKET: Brown Fraud Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The case styled MACKENZIE BROWN, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PACIFIC MARKET INTERNATIONAL, LLC, et al., Case No. 24STCV02653, was removed from the Los Angeles Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on March 4, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-01765-ODW-AJR to the proceeding. The suit is brought against the Defendants' alleged fraud violations. Pacific Market International, LLC is a manufacturer of food and beverage gear doing business in California. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: James F. Speyer, Esq. E. Alex Beroukhim, Esq. ARNOLD AND PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP 777 South Figueroa Street, 44th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 243-4000 Facsimile: (213) 243-4199 Email: james.speyer@arnoldporter.com alex.beroukhim@arnoldporter.com PEGASYSTEMS INC: Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement Sought ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as City of Fort Lauderdale Police And Firefighters' Retirement System et al v. Pegasystems Inc. et al. (PEGASYSTEMS INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION), Case No. 1:22-cv-11220-WGY (D. Mass.), the Lead Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order (i) preliminarily approving the proposed settlement; (ii) preliminarily certifying the Settlement Class for settlement purposes; (iii) approving the proposed form and manner of providing notice of the proposed Settlement to the Settlement Class; and (iv) setting a hearing date for the Court to consider final approval of the Settlement, approval of the Plan of Allocation of the Net Settlement Fund, Lead Counsel's application for attorneys' fees and expenses, and Lead Plaintiffs' applications for awards pursuant to 15 U.S.C. section 78u- 4(a)(4), as well as a schedule for deadlines relevant thereto. Pegasystems develops software for customer relationship management and business process management. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=T1U41I at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Debra J. Wyman, Esq. Christopher D. Stewart, Esq. Megan A. Rossi, Esq. Nicole Q. Gilliland, Esq. Chad Johnson, Esq. Snehee Khandeshi, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 231-1058 Facsimile: (619) 231-7423 E-mail: debraw@rgrdlaw.com cstewart@rgrdlaw.com mrossi@rgrdlaw.com ngilliland@rgrdlaw.com chadj@rgrdlaw.com skhandeshi@rgrdlaw.com - and - Theodore M. Hess-mahan, Esq. HUTCHINGS BARSAMIAN MANDELCORN, LLP 110 Cedar Street, Suite 250 Wellesley Hills, MA 02481 Telephone: (781) 431-2231 Facsimile: (781) 431-8726 E-mail: thess-mahan@hutchingsbarsamian.com PINK JEEP: Parties Seek More Time for Plaintiff's Class Cert Reply ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Geoffrey H. Slepian, on behalf of himself and all those similarly situated, v. Pink Jeep Tours, LLC, an Arizona limited liability company; Herschend Adventure Holdings, LLC, a Georgia limited liability company, Case No. 3:23-cv-08105-SPL (D. Ariz.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting a two-week extension up through and including May 10, 2024, for the Plaintiff to respond to the Defendants' opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for Rule 23 Class Action Certification. Absent said extension, the deadline for the Plaintiff to file a reply brief is April 26, 2024. The Plaintiff is seeking an extension due in part to pre-existing and conflicting work commitments. Additionally, the Plaintiff must thoroughly review information the Defendants submitted in support of their Opposition, including three declarations submitted on behalf of Pink Jeep Guides. This request is made in good faith and not for the purposes of delay, and the extension does not prejudice either party. Pink Jeep is a passenger tour operator that offers off-road and road-based excursions to various destinations. A copy of the Parties' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SaM5zx at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ty D. Frankel, Esq. Patricia N. Syverson, Esq. FRANKEL SYVERSON PLLC 2375 E. Camelback Road, Suite 600 Phoenix, AZ 85016 Telephone: (602) 598-4000 E-mail: ty@frankelsyverson.com patti@frankelsyverson.com The Defendants are represented by: Tracy A. Miller, Esq. J. Alexander Dattilo, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. Esplanade Center III, Suite 800 2415 East Camelback Road Phoenix, AZ 85016 PRIME HYDRATION: Vera Sues Over Energy Drink Caffeine Content ------------------------------------------------------------- Jonathan Limehouse of USA TODAY reports that YouTubers Logan Paul and KSI founded Prime Hydration in 2022, and while their products have become increasingly popular and profitable, the company continues to face class action suits over the ingredients in their energy and sports drinks. Prime Hyrdation LLC was sued April 8 in the Southern District of New York over "misleading and deceptive practices" regarding the company's 12-ounce energy drinks containing between 215-225 milligrams of caffeine as opposed to the advertised 200 milligrams, according to the class action suit. Lara Vera, a Poughkeepsie, New York resident, filed the suit in federal court on behalf of herself and others who bought Prime products across the U.S., the complaint says. Vera purchased Prime's Blue Raspberry products several times in August 2022 for about $3 to $4 each, but she would have never bought the drinks if she had known the actual caffeine content, according to the suit. Vera's suit is seeking $5 million from the company owned by Paul and KSI, real name Olajide Olayinka Williams "JJ" Olatunji, court records show. Court records do not say whether Prime Hydration retained legal counsel for Vera's suit. How much caffeine is in Prime energy drinks? Prime's advertised 200 milligrams of caffeine is equivalent to "half a dozen Coke cans or nearly two (12-ounce) Red Bulls," Vera's class action suit says. A 12-ounce can of Red Bull energy drink contains 114 milligrams of caffeine, and a cup of coffee contains around 100 milligrams of caffeine, according to the suit. The suit continues to say that "there is no proven safe dose of caffeine for children." Side effects of kids consuming caffeine could include rapid or irregular heartbeats, headaches, seizures, shaking, upset stomach and adverse emotional effects on mental health, according to the complaint. Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., called on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to investigate Prime energy drinks in 2023 because of dangerously high caffeine levels. Schumer alleged in a letter to the FDA that vague marketing targeting young people influenced parents to buy a "cauldron of caffeine" for their kids. Schumer's call to action to the FDA is referenced in Vera's suit. USA TODAY contacted Prime Hydration's attorneys but did not receive an immediate response. What are the Prime Hydration lawsuits? Vera's legal battle is beginning, but Prime is still dealing with another class action suit from 2023 alleging a flavor of the company's sports drinks contains PFAS, or "forever chemicals." Independent third-party testing determined the presence of PFAS chemicals in Prime Hydration grape flavor, according to a class action suit filed Aug. 2, 2023, in the Northern District of California by the Milberg law firm on behalf of Elizabeth Castillo and others similarly affected. "Lead plaintiff Elizabeth Castillo, a resident of California, purchased Prime Hydration on multiple occasions but says she would not have bought it at all if the product had been accurately marketed and labeled as containing PFAS," the Milberg law firm said in an August 2023 news release. "These chemicals were not reasonably detectible to consumers like herself." Castillo's suit is seeking a $5 million judgment, court records show. As of April 18, the judge in the case has heard Prime's argument to dismiss the suit due to Castillo not alleging "a cognizable injury" and her not alleging "facts showing a concrete (and) imminent threat of future harm," according to the drink company's motion. Paul addressed Castillo's claims in a 3-minute TikTok video. "First off, anyone can sue anyone at any time that does not make the lawsuit true," Paul said in the TikTok video. "And in this case, it is not . . . one person conducted a random study and has provided zero evidence to substantiate any of their claims." What are forever chemicals? PFAS are called forever chemicals because they "bioaccumulate, or accrue in the body over time," the Milberg law said in its news release. "These man-made chemicals are well-studied and have been found to have adverse effects on the human body and environment," the New York City-headquartered law firm said. Many PFAS are found in people's and animal's blood and can be detected at low levels in a variety of food products and in the environment, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) said. Forever chemicals can be found in water, air, fish and soil at locations across the nation and the globe, according to the EPA. "There are thousands of PFAS chemicals, and they are found in many different consumer, commercial, and industrial products," the EPA said. "This makes it challenging to study and assess the potential human health and environmental risks." Who made Prime energy drinks? Before founding Prime Hydration LLC, Logan Paul, 29, and KSI, 30, were YouTubers who turned their millions of subscribers into supporters of their boxing, wrestling, music, social media content and other endeavors. Going into the drinks business proved to be profitable for both YouTubers as "Prime Hydration generated more than $250 million in retail sales in its first year, including $45 million in a single month," according to the Milberg law firm. Paul and KSI continue to keep Prime products in the spotlight whether it is paying for an ad during Super Bowl 57, having livestreamer IShowSpeed dress up in a Prime sports drink bottle during Wrestlemania 40 or signing athletes including Patrick Mahomes, Aaron Judge, Israel Adesanya, Tyreek Hill, Kyle Larson, Alisha Lehmann and others to sponsorship deals. [GN] PROGRESSIVE SELECT: Silverstein Files Consumer Suit in Cal. Super. ------------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progressive Select Insurance Co. The case is captioned as TERESA SILVERSTEIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. PROGRESSIVE SELECT INSURANCE CO., Case No. CVRI2401167 (Cal. Super., Riverside Cty., March 4, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged unfair business practices. Progressive Select Insurance Co. is an insurance company based in Ohio. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Merriman, Esq. Hilgers Graben PLLC San Diego Office 655 W. Broadway, Suite 900 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 369-6232 Email: mmerriman@hilgersgraben.com PROGRESSIVE UNIVERSAL: Class Cert Redacted Memo Stricken in Taxer ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Taxer v. Progressive Universal Insurance Company, Case No. 3:22-cv-01255 (D. Or., Filed Aug. 24, 2022), the Hon. Judge Marco A. Hernandez entered an order striking the Plaintiff's Redacted Memorandum in Support of Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification and supporting exhibits. -- Within three days of this Order, the Plaintiffs shall refile their redacted memorandum and redacted supporting materials consistent with the requested redactions in the Third-Party Motion66 and Defendants' Response. The nature of suit states diversity-breach of contract.[CC] Progressive provides property and casualty insurance services. PROSPERITY HOME: Bid to Strike Class Allegations Denied in Keller ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Keller v. Prosperity Home Mortgage LLC, Case No. 6:23-cv-05048 (D.S.C., Filed Oct. 09, 2023), the Hon. Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin entered an order denying motion to strike class allegations. The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The Defendant moves to strike the class allegations pertaining to Count II of Plaintiff's Complaint purporting to state a class claim under the South Carolina Telephone Privacy Protection Act ("SCTPPA"). Specifically, Defendant contends the SCTPPA class cannot be certified as a matter of law because "actual loss" occasioned by a claimed violation is inherently individualized and fact-bound, thus defeating Plaintiff's ability to prove liability on a class-wide basis. The Plaintiff, on the other hand, contends that "Defendant's attempt to bootstrap the merits of the class claims capable of mathematical calculation and twist them into claims it contends are not subject to class wide proof must be rejected." Further, the Plaintiff argues that a Rule 12(f) motion is not the proper vehicle for the relief Defendant seeks, and that these arguments are more appropriately suited for briefing on a motion for class certification. [Id.] Rule 12(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure provides that "the court may strike from a pleading any insufficient defense or any redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter." Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f). Prosperity is a local full-service mortgage banker specializing in residential and refinance loans.[CC] R&G BRENNER: Scheduling Order Entered in Cinar Class Suit --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cinar v. R&G Brenner Income Tax, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-01362 (E.D.N.Y., Filed March 13, 2020), the Hon. Judge Rachel P. Kovner entered a scheduling order setting in-person motion hearing for May 10, 2024. The parties should come prepared to argue the motion for class certification and discovery dispute. Ordered by Magistrate Judge James R. Cho on 4/23/2024. (JDP) The nature of suit states Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) involving denial of overtime compensation. R&G Brenner is a full service income tax preparation business.[CC] REZOLUT CENTRELAKE: Ramirez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled CHRISTINA RAMIREZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. REZOLUT CENTRELAKE MSO LLC, et al., Case No. 24STCV02393, was removed from the Los Angeles Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on March 4, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-01768-DMG-JC to the proceeding. The suit is brought against the Defendants' alleged labor violations. Rezolut Centrelake MSO LLC is a diagnostic medical imaging services provider doing business in California. [BN] The Defendants are represented by: Frank C. Olah, Esq. Orlando J. Arellano, Esq. JACKSON LEWIS PC 725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2500 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 689-0404 Facsimile: (213) 689-0430 Email: frank.olah@jacksonlewis.com orlando.arellano@jacksonlewis.com ROCHESTER, MN: Tap House Seeks to Certify TID Fee Refund Class -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Tap House Real Estate, LLC, individually and on behalf of the putative class, v. City of Rochester, Case No. 0:22-cv-00492-ECT-DTS (D. Minn.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting certifying a Transportation Improvement District ("TID") fee refund class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(1), (2), and (3) defined as follows: "All entities subject to the payment of TID fees to the Defendant." The Plaintiff will further move for an order appointing it as class representative and appointing Anthony J. Nemo, Meshbesher & Spence, Ltd, and John T. Giesen, Dunlap & Seeger, P.A., as class counsel. Rochester is a city on Lake Ontario, in New York State. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=e3aJQl at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew L. Davick, Esq. Konstandinos Nicklow, Esq. Anthony J. Nemo, Esq. MESHBESHER & SPENCE, LTD 2519 Commerce Dr NW, Ste 120 Rochester, MN 55901 Telephone: (507) 280-8090 E-mail: adavick@meshbesher.com gnick@meshbesher.com tnemo@meshbesher.com - and - John T. Giesen, Esq. DUNLAP & SEEGER, P.A. 30 Third Street SE, Suite 400 Rochester, MN 55904 Telephone: (507) 288-9111 E-mail: jtg@dunlaplaw.com SAGE THERAPEUTICS: Court Sets Rule 26(F) Scheduling Conference -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MATHEW DOURAGHI, v. SAGE THERAPEUTICS, INC., et al., Case No. 8:24-cv-00716-FWS-DFM (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Fred Slaughter entered an order setting Rule 26(F) Scheduling Conference: At the Scheduling Conference, the court will dismiss all remaining fictitiously named Defendants. The court will also set a date by which motions to amend the pleadings or add parties must be heard. Sage develops treatments for central nervous system disorders. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bjNK42 at no extra charge.[CC] SAINT ELIZABETH: Court Tosses Class Cert Bid in York Lawsuit ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as SARAH YORK, v. SAINT ELIZABETH MEDICAL CENTER, INC., Case No. 2:21-cv-00125-DLB-CJS (E.D. Ky.), the Hon. Judge David Bunning entered an order denying Plaintiff's motion for class certification. The Court concludes that Plaintiff has not met her burden to show class certification would be proper. The Plaintiff has not shown that the class claims would rise and fall together or that common issues predominate as is necessary to certify a 23(b)(3) class. Even if the Plaintiff had met this burden, her Motion for Class Certification would still be denied because of the clear conflict of interest between the named Plaintiff and the class members. Instead of adequately addressing Defendant's substantive arguments, Plaintiff's counsel has chosen to use its Reply primarily as a vehicle to make snide comments and references, which do not assist the Court in making its decision on this Motion. Ms. Sarah York brought this putative class action alleging that the Defendant engaged in fraudulent billing. She alleges in the Amended Complaint that she is "one of thousands of patients who received a bill from St. Elizabeth that was inflated" based on the charges she should have incurred for her care. On May 6, 2021, the Plaintiff delivered a baby at St. Elizabeth. She received two bills from St. Elizabeth for her stay from May 6 to May 7, 2021. The first bill was for a total charge of $15,136.37, $11,250.54 of which was paid by the Plaintiff's insurer, United Health Care ("UHC"). The second bill was for a total of $4,497.71, $1,066.34 of which was paid by UHC. The Plaintiff alleges the "true charges" of these bills were $8,452.03 and $2,590.37, respectively. The Plaintiff alleges these bills were inflated based upon an "all-inclusive billing" policy at St. Elizabeth. The Plaintiff seeks to certify the following class: "Plaintiff and all current and former patients of St. Elizabeth Medical Center, Inc., who were private payers or whose bills were paid in full or in part by a private insurance payor, whose bills were inflated, by the addition of variable charge so as to match a selected reimbursement rated for Diagnosis-Related Groups ("DRG") through "All-Inclusive Billing" (excluding members of the Court and its staff, and Counsel for Plaintiffs and their staffs, Counsel for the Defendant and its staff, and Board members, Officers, and Employees of Defendant)." Elizabeth's is a Boston University teaching hospital. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cwDvOA at no extra charge.[CC] SANTANDER CONSUMER: Brown Contract Suit Removed to S.D. Illinois ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled CRYSTAL BROWN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC., Case No. 24-LA-0123, was removed from the State of Illinois Circuit Court St. Clair County to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Illinois on March 6, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of Illinois assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-00665-RJD to the proceeding. The suit is brought against the Defendant's alleged contract violations. Santander Consumer USA Inc. is a consumer finance company headquartered in Dallas, Texas. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Richard P. Darke, Esq. DUANE MORRIS LLP 190 S. LaSalle Street, Suite 3700 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 499-6743 Facsimile: (312) 499-6701 Email: rpdarke@duanemorris.com SCHENKER INC: Wickham Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIC WICKHAM, on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated, v. SCHENKER, INC., a New York corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 5:23-cv-00946-PCP (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff, on June 20, 2024 will move for an order appointing Plaintiff as class representative, appointing Setareh Law Group as class counsel, and certifying the following class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.: "All of the Defendant's current, former and prospective applicants for employment in the United States who applied for a job with Defendant at any time during the period for which a background check was performed beginning five years prior to the filing of this action and ending on the date that final judgment is entered in this action." The Plaintiff and the putative class of more than 30,000 are job applicants and employees of the Defendant for whom Schenker obtained employment related background checks without following basic requirements of federal law. Schenker is an international logistics company with locations across the United States. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZYeiyW at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Shaun Setareh, Esq. William M. Pao, Esq. Brian Louis, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 9665 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 430 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone (310) 888-7771 Facsimile (310) 888-0109 E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com william@setarehlaw.com brian@setarehlaw.com SEWON AMERICA: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid After 180 Days ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jimmy Ruiz Heredia and Edgar Emmanuel Serrano Mondragon, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Sewon America, Inc., and Total Employee Solution, LLC individually, Case No. 3:24-cv-00050-TCB-RGV (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Russell Vineyard entered an order on joint motion for extension of time: -- The Plaintiffs are permitted to file their motion for class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 and Local Rule 21.1(B) within 180 days of after all Defendants have filed an answer to the complaint or defaulted. Sewon manufactures and supplies automobile parts and components. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=I4tQWx at no extra charge.[CC] SHAWN EMMONS: Parties' Agreements Modified in Daughtry Class Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICARDO DAUGHTRY, et al., v. SHAWN EMMONS, TYRONE OLIVER, AHMED HOLT, STAN SHEPARD, JOE WILLIAMS, DENNIS TURNER, and FLEMISTER WILEY, Case No. 5:15-cv-00041-MTT (M.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Marc Treadwell entered an order that the injunction and the terms of the underlying parties' agreements are extended and modified as follows: -- The Court will appoint an independent monitor, at the Defendants' expense, to assist the defendants in achieving compliance. The Defendants have made clear that they cannot monitor compliance internally. The parties shall confer and propose by May 4, 2024, a candidate to serve as independent monitor. The parties shall further confer and propose procedures allowing the independent monitor access to all information necessary to monitor compliance. -- The term of the settlement agreement, the addendum agreement, and the Court's injunction are extended. That term shall expire six months after the appointment of the independent monitor. However, any party may move for the extension of the term. -- Because of the Defendants' longstanding and flagrant violations of the Court's injunction, the Court finds that coercive sanctions are necessary to compel compliance. The Court imposes a daily fine of $2,500.00. That fine will be payable upon the termination of the Court's injunction. The Defendants shall be purged of payment if they comply with the injunction. Beginning May 20, 2024, and every 30 days thereafter, the Defendants shall deposit with the Clerk of Court the sum of $75,000. -- The Court awards the plaintiffs reasonable attorney's fees and expenses incurred during the enforcement of the injunction. The Plaintiffs' counsel shall submit their fee request with supporting evidence by May 4, 2024. Accordingly, the Court finds the appointment of an independent monitor is necessary, narrowly tailored, and the least intrusive means to correct the violation of the federal rights by achieving compliance with the Court’s injunction. The inmates imprisoned in the Georgia Department of Corrections' ("GDC") Special Management Unit ("SMU") are, by definition, the worst inmates in Georgia's prison system. They are there because they require intense and close supervision. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=rL4aCq at no extra charge.[CC] SHORT SQUEEZE: Plaintiffs' Bid for Briefing Schedule Tossed ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit RE: January 2021 Short Squeeze Trading Litigation, Case No. 1:21-md-02989-CMA (S.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Cecilia Altonaga entered an order denying Lead Plaintiff, Blue Laine-Beveridge; Named Plaintiffs, Abraham Huacuja, Ava Bernard, Brendan Clarke, Brian Harbison, Cecilia Rivas, Doi Nguyen, Joseph Gurney, Marcel Poirier, Sandy Ng, Santiago Gil Bohorquez, and Thomas Cash's unopposed motion for a briefing schedule. Nothing in the Court's Nov. 13, 2023, Order amended the Scheduling Order's deadline for seeking class certification. Since Plaintiffs have not demonstrated good cause to extend the deadlines in the Scheduling Order, they may not file a renewed class certification motion. On Oct. 7, 2022, the Court entered an order setting trial and pre-trial schedule, requiring mediation, and referring certain matters to Magistrate Judge, which set a deadline of Apr. 28, 2023, for the Plaintiffs to file a motion for class certification. On April 28, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification, which the Court denied, explaining that the Plaintiffs had failed to identify a presumption of reliance sufficient to demonstrate that individualized issues of reliance would not predominate over common issues. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Ny7DVy at no extra charge.[CC] SHOWS & CALI: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Bid in Calogero to May 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Iris Calogero, Ind. and obo all others similarly situated and Margie Nell Randolph, Ind. and obo all others similarly situated, v. Shows, Cali & Walsh, LLP, a Louisiana Limited Liability Partnership; Mary Catherine Cali, an individual; and John C. Walsh, an individual, Case No. 2:18-cv-06709-BWA-DMD (E.D. La.), the Defendants move the Court to continue the submission date on Plaintiffs' motion to certify class to May 9, 2024. Shows is a company that operates in the legal services industry. A copy of the Defendants' motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JmVQEE at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendants are represented by: David S. Daly, Esq. Elliot M. Lonker, Esq. Allen J. Krouse, Esq. Suzanne M. Risey, Esq. FRILOT, LLC 1100 Poydras St., Suite 3700 New Orleans, LA 70163 Telephone: (504) 599-8329 Facsimile: (504) 599-8139 E-mail: DDaly@Frilot.com AKrouse@Frilot.com SRisey@Frilot.com SIG SAUER: Class Cert Discovery in Glasscock Suit Due July 25 ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Glasscock v. Sig Sauer, Inc., Case No. 6:22-cv-03095 (W.D. Mo., Filed April 18, 2022), the Hon. Judge Stephen R. Bough entered an order granting the joint motion to modify scheduling order. (1) The Defendant shall file an early summary May 31, 2024 judgment motion on or before: (2) The Plaintiff shall file an opposition to June 28, 2024 Defendant's early summary judgment motion on or before: (3) The Defendant shall file a reply in support July 12, 2024 of its early summary judgment motion on or before: (4) Discovery shall close for class July 25, 2024 certification on: (5) The Plaintiff shall designate class Sept. 5, 2024 certification experts and file his motion for class certification on or before: (6) The Defendant shall designate class Oct. 14, 2024 certification experts and file its opposition brief to Plaintiff's motion for class certification on or before: (7) The Plaintiff shall file his reply to Nov. 11, 2024 his motion for class certification on or before: The nature of suit states Torts - Diversity-Product Liability.[CC] Sig Sauer designs and manufactures firearms for military, law enforcement, and commercial markets. SIMM ASSOCIATES: Simpson Files Consumer Credit Suit in D. Delaware ------------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Simm Associates, Inc., et al. The case is captioned as PATRICIA SIMPSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SIMM ASSOCIATES, INC., et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00273-JLH (D. Del., March 1, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Simm Associates, Inc. is a family owned and operated financial services company based in Delaware. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph Andrews, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH ANDREWS 737 S. Queen St., Suite 3 Dover, DE 19904 Telephone: (302) 724-7176 Email: jandrews@firststatelaw.com SKYLINE TOWER: Bid for Stay of Remand Order Pending Appeal Denied ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELIZABETH L. GOLDBERG, et al., v. SKYLINE TOWER PAINTING INC., et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-01708-JRR (D. Md.), the Hon. Judge Julie R. Rubin entered an order denying the Motion for stay of remand order pending appeal. The Court said that the Defendants fail to demonstrate that any factor weighs significantly in favor of a stay. As the court succinctly stated in Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, "Defendants may seek, and the state court may issue, a stay pending the Fourth Circuit's resolution of the appeal of the remand. However, the Defendants have not met their burden of demonstrating that this Court should issue a stay pending appeal." On May 10, 2023, the Plaintiffs initiated suit in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City alleging that they "sustained property value depreciation as a result of lead contamination caused by the wrongful and negligent conduct of the Defendants." On June 23, 2023, the Defendants removed the action to this court. The Plaintiffs subsequently filed a motion to remand, which this court granted. On March 21, 2024, the Defendants filed petitions for permission to appeal with the Fourth Circuit. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Puxo7w at no extra charge.[CC] STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Bruno Class Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as GLENN BRUNO, Derivatively on Behalf of Nominal Defendant STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., v. GREGORY A. BEARD, WILLIAM B. SPENCE, RICARDO R.A. LARROUDE, SARAH P. JAMES, THOMAS J. PACCHIA, MATTHEW J. SMITH, and THOMAS R. TROWBRIDGE, IV, and STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-798-JGLC-GS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered an order granting the parties' joint motion to consolidate Case Nos. 1:23 Civ. 10028 (RA) (GS) and 1:24 Civ. 798 (RA) (GS). On Sept. 5, 2023, the Plaintiff Wilson filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment. On Oct. 24, 2023, the Court entered an order consolidating the Wilson and Navarro Actions into an action styled In re Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, and appointing The Brown Law Firm, P.C. and Lifshitz Law PLLC as Co-Lead Counsel representing plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2iYa8c at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq. LIFSHITZ LAW PLLC 1190 Broadway Hewlett, NY 11557 Telephone: (516) 493-9780 Facsimile: (516) 280-7376 E-mail: jlifshitz@lifshitzlaw.com - and - Timothy Brown, Esq. Saadia Hashmi, Esq. THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C. 767 Third Avenue, Suite 2501 New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (516) 922-5427 Facsimile: (516) 344-6204 E-mail: tbrown@thebrownlawfirm.net shashmi@thebrownlawfirm.net - and - Melissa A. Fortunato, Esq. J. Brandon Walker, Esq. BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C. 810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620 New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 308-5858 E-mail: fortunato@bespc.com walker@bespc.com - and - Serina M. Vash, Esq. John C. Herman, Esq. HERMAN JONES LLP 153 Central Avenue, # 131 Westfield, NJ 07090 Telephone: (404) 504-6516 E-mail: svash@hermanjones.com jherman@hermanjones.com The Defendants are represented by: Sandra D. Grannum, Esq. FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP 1177 Avenue of the Americas, 41st Floor New York, NY 10036-2714 Telephone: (212) 248-3140 E-mail: Sandra.grannum@faegredrinker.com - and - Marisa Antonelli, Esq. Jeffrey Crough, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS LLP 1114 Avenue of Americas New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 237-0000 Facsimile: (212) 237-0100 E-mail: mantonelli@velaw.com jcrough@velaw.com STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Parker Class Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JEFF PARKER and TIAN YANG, Derivatively on Behalf of STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., v. GREGORY A. BEARD, WILLIAM B. SPENCE, RICARDO R.A. LARROUDE, SARAH P. JAMES, THOMAS J. PACCHIA, MATTHEW J. SMITH, and THOMAS R. TROWBRIDGE, IV, and STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC., Case No. 1:23-cv-10028-RA-GS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered an order granting the parties' joint motion to consolidate Case Nos. 1:23 Civ. 10028 (RA) (GS) and 1:24 Civ. 798 (RA) (GS). On Sept. 5, 2023, the Plaintiff Wilson filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment. On Oct. 24, 2023, the Court entered an order consolidating the Wilson and Navarro Actions into an action styled In re Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, and appointing The Brown Law Firm, P.C. and Lifshitz Law PLLC as Co-Lead Counsel representing plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nHAywl at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq. LIFSHITZ LAW PLLC 1190 Broadway Hewlett, NY 11557 Telephone: (516) 493-9780 Facsimile: (516) 280-7376 E-mail: jlifshitz@lifshitzlaw.com - and - Timothy Brown, Esq. Saadia Hashmi, Esq. THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C. 767 Third Avenue, Suite 2501 New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (516) 922-5427 Facsimile: (516) 344-6204 E-mail: tbrown@thebrownlawfirm.net shashmi@thebrownlawfirm.net - and - Melissa A. Fortunato, Esq. J. Brandon Walker, Esq. BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C. 810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620 New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 308-5858 E-mail: fortunato@bespc.com walker@bespc.com - and - Serina M. Vash, Esq. John C. Herman, Esq. HERMAN JONES LLP 153 Central Avenue, # 131 Westfield, NJ 07090 Telephone: (404) 504-6516 E-mail: svash@hermanjones.com jherman@hermanjones.com The Defendants are represented by: Sandra D. Grannum, Esq. FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP 1177 Avenue of the Americas, 41st Floor New York, NY 10036-2714 Telephone: (212) 248-3140 E-mail: Sandra.grannum@faegredrinker.com - and - Marisa Antonelli, Esq. Jeffrey Crough, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS LLP 1114 Avenue of Americas New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 237-0000 Facsimile: (212) 237-0100 E-mail: mantonelli@velaw.com jcrough@velaw.com STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: Actions Consolidated in Stockholder Class Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit re: STRONGHOLD DIGITAL MINING, INC. STOCKHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION., Case No. 1:23-cv-07840-RA-GS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gary Stein entered an order granting the parties' joint motion to consolidate Case Nos. 1:23 Civ. 10028 (RA) (GS) and 1:24 Civ. 798 (RA) (GS). On Sept. 5, 2023, the Plaintiff Wilson filed a Verified Stockholder Derivative Complaint for violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, breach of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, and unjust enrichment. On Oct. 24, 2023, the Court entered an order consolidating the Wilson and Navarro Actions into an action styled In re Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. Stockholder Derivative Litigation, and appointing The Brown Law Firm, P.C. and Lifshitz Law PLLC as Co-Lead Counsel representing plaintiffs in the Consolidated Action. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Tucrdn at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq. LIFSHITZ LAW PLLC 1190 Broadway Hewlett, NY 11557 Telephone: (516) 493-9780 Facsimile: (516) 280-7376 E-mail: jlifshitz@lifshitzlaw.com - and - Timothy Brown, Esq. Saadia Hashmi, Esq. THE BROWN LAW FIRM, P.C. 767 Third Avenue, Suite 2501 New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (516) 922-5427 Facsimile: (516) 344-6204 E-mail: tbrown@thebrownlawfirm.net shashmi@thebrownlawfirm.net - and - Melissa A. Fortunato, Esq. J. Brandon Walker, Esq. BRAGAR EAGEL & SQUIRE, P.C. 810 Seventh Avenue, Suite 620 New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 308-5858 E-mail: fortunato@bespc.com walker@bespc.com - and - Serina M. Vash, Esq. John C. Herman, Esq. HERMAN JONES LLP 153 Central Avenue, # 131 Westfield, NJ 07090 Telephone: (404) 504-6516 E-mail: svash@hermanjones.com jherman@hermanjones.com The Defendants are represented by: Sandra D. Grannum, Esq. FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP 1177 Avenue of the Americas, 41st Floor New York, NY 10036-2714 Telephone: (212) 248-3140 E-mail: Sandra.grannum@faegredrinker.com - and - Marisa Antonelli, Esq. Jeffrey Crough, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS LLP 1114 Avenue of Americas New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 237-0000 Facsimile: (212) 237-0100 E-mail: mantonelli@velaw.com jcrough@velaw.com SYMETRA LIFE: Davis Must Oppose Summary Judgment Bid by May 24 -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Dennis Davis, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SYMETRA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:21-cv-00533-KKE (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Kymberly Evanson entered an order modifying scheduling order as follows: Event Deadline Deadline to file Plaintiff' opposition May 3, 2024 to Defendant's motion for summary judgment: Deadline to file Defendant's reply brief May 24, 2024 in support of motion for summary judgment: Settlement Conference, if mediation has been Sept. 23, 2024 requested by the parties per LCR 39.1, held no later than: Mediation per LCR 39.1, if requested by the Oct. 28, 2024 Parties, held no later than: Symetra offers annuities, disability, medical, accidental, and life insurance services. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pVZRF1 at no extra charge.[CC] T-MOBILE USA: Class Cert Bid Filing in Bayani Extended to Sept. 20 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as EMAN BAYANI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. T-MOBILE USA, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00271-JHC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John Chun entered an order extending the class certification deadlines as follows: Event Current Proposed Deadline Deadline Deadline for discovery related to Feb. 23, 2024 June 21, 2024 Numerosity. The parties agree to Stay discovery on other issues Until numerosity discovery is complete: Plaintiff's motion for class: June 21, 2024 Sept. 20, 2024 Certification: Defendants' response to class July 19, 2024 Oct. 18, 2024 Certification motion: Plaintiff's reply in support of Aug. 2, 2024 Nov. 1, 2024 Motion for class certification: On Feb. 27, 2023, Plaintiff Eman Bayani commenced a putative class action in this Court. On Oct. 20, 2023, the Court issued an order granting in part and denying in part T-Mobile's motion to dismiss. On Nov. 3, 2023, the parties submitted a joint proposed case schedule that included deadlines for completing discovery on numerosity and for briefing class certification. The Court entered the proposed schedule on Nov. 6, 2023. On Nov. 28, 2023, the Plaintiff propounded discovery requests directed at the issue of numerosity on T-Mobile. After multiple agreed extensions, T-Mobile produced its initial objections and responses on January 18, 2024. The parties met and conferred on the discovery. T-Mobile is an American wireless network operator. A copy of the Court's order dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tju2wb at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Beth E. Terrell, Esq. Adrienne D. McEntee, Esq. Elizabeth A. Adams, Esq. TERRELL MARSHALL LAW GROUP PLLC 936 North 34th Street, Suite 300 Seattle, WA 98103 Telephone: (206) 816-6603 E-mail: bterrell@terrellmarshall.com amcentee@terrellmarshall.com eadams@terrellmarshall.com - and - Joseph A. Fitapelli, Esq. Frank J. Mazzaferro, Esq. FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP 28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 300-0375 E-mail: jfitapelli@fslawfirm.com fmazzaferro@fslawfirm.com The Defendant is represented by: Stephen M. Rummage, Esq. Jennifer K. Chung, Esq. Daniel H. Leigh, Esq. James Moon, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: (206) 622-3150 E-mail: steverummage@dwt.com jenniferchung@dwt.com danielleigh@dwt.com jamesmoon@dwt.com TCL NORTH: Faces Ramos Suit Over ADA Violations in N.D. Illinois ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against TCL North America, Inc. The case is captioned as ESLIMERARI RAMOS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. TCL NORTH AMERICA, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-01745 (N.D. Ill., March 1, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. TCL North America, Inc. is a consumer electronics manufacturer based in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Yaakov Saks, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC One University Plaza, Suite 620 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Telephone: (201) 282-6500 Email: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com TELLURIDE RESORT: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by May 20 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Alvarez, et al., v. Telluride Resort Partners, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-00354 (D. Colo., Filed Feb. 7, 2023), the Hon. Judge John L. Kane entered an order Granting joint motion to extend time for class certification and dispositive motions. -- The Plaintiffs shall file the Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 motion for class certification and any party shall file the Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 motion for summary judgment on the issue of joint employment by no later than May 20, 2024. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).[CC] TENARIS SA: Class Settlement in Atanasio Gets Final Nod ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Atanasio v. Tenaris S.A. et al. (Tenaris S.A. Securities Litigation), Case No. 1:18-cv-07059-KAM-SJB (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Kiyo Matsumoto entered an order that: -- the Lead Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the Class Action Settlement and the Plan of Allocation is granted in its entirety; and -- the Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees, including an award of 33 1/3% of the Settlement Fund plus interest as attorneys' fees, $83,935.26 in out-of-pocket litigation expenses, and a total PSLRA award of $15,000 in total ($7,500 for each Lead Plaintiff) is granted in its entirety. The Clerk of Court is requested to enter Judgment and close this case. The Court finds that the requested reimbursement is based on reasonably incurred expenses that "were essential to the successful prosecution and resolution of the" instant case and that the relevant expenses are adequately documented. On Dec. 12, 2018, the Plaintiff commenced the instant securities class action in the Eastern District of New York before Judge Raymond Dearie, against the Defendants Tenaris S.A., Paolo Rocca, and three other Defendants who have since been dismissed. On Sept. 14, 2023, Lead Plaintiffs filed the instant motion seeking final approval of the proposed settlement and the Court held a settlement conference and fairness hearing on Oct. 19, 2023. The Lead Plaintiffs filed a supplemental submission on March 29, 2024 confirming that claims processing was complete and outlining the results of the processed claims. Tenaris is a global manufacturer and supplier of steel pipes and related services. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Hx36pF at no extra charge.[CC] TEVA PHARMA: Ct. Conditionally Certifies Class in Kushelowitz -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Barry Kushelowitz and Kerri Baldwin, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, USA, Inc. and Teva Sales and Marketing, Inc., Case No. 2:22-cv-07599-SDW-JRA (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Susan D. Wigenton entered an order granting Baldwin's motion to conditionally certify class pursuant to section 16(b) of the Fair Labor Standard Act ("FLSA"). Accordingly, the Court is satisfied that Plaintiffs have met their burden. It is clear from the pleadings and Teva's own admissions that, although assigned to different products and markets, Sales Specialists are required to undergo and successfully complete the same training and are all classified as exempt from overtime pay during such training. The Plaintiffs initiated this lawsuit on December 30, 2022. Because Teva allegedly classified all Sales Specialists as exempt from overtime pay during training, paid them a base salary during training, and utilize a uniform job description for all Sales Specialist positions, on Oct. 25, 2023, Plaintiff filed the instant motion seeking conditional certifications for all Sales Specialists who worked in Teva's mandatory training during the three-year liability period from Aug. 19, 2019, through December 2022. The Plaintiffs are current and former Sales Specialists of the Defendant. Teva manufactures and markets generic pharmaceutical products. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=lultVv at no extra charge.[CC] TRINITY TEEN: Court OK's Class Cert Bid Following Remand -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CARLIE SHERMAN, ANNA GOZUN, and AMANDA NASH, on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated persons, v. TRINITY TEEN SOLUTIONS, INC., a Wyoming corporation; ANGELA C. WOODWARD; JERRY D. WOODWARD; KARA WOODWARD; KYLE WOODWARD; and DALLY-UP, LLC, a Wyoming limited liability company, Case No. 2:20-cv-00215-SWS (D. Wyo.), the Hon. Judge Scott Skavdahl entered an order granting class certification following remand. The Court previously denied class certification from which Plaintiffs took an interlocutory appeal. The Tenth Circuit vacated the class certification denial and remanded the matter for further consideration by the Court. The Plaintiffs putative class action alleges the parents of "troubled teen" female minors paid to send their children to a working ranch in northern Wyoming where the teens were supposed to receive various forms of traditional and cutting-edge therapy and schooling to address their misbehavior. The Plaintiffs are the former teenaged residents of the ranch, and they contend the ranch was light on the education and therapy. Trinity is an all-teen-girls', residential treatment center, treating dual diagnosis mental health patients. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7eqKfO at no extra charge.[CC] TRUEACCORD CORP: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Quinn-Davis Due May 31 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as NINA QUINN-DAVIS, Individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, v. TRUEACCORD CORP., Case No. 1:23-cv-23590-DSL (S.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge David Leibowitz entered an amended order setting jury trial and class certification deadlines as follows: Accordingly, this case remains set for trial during the Court’s two-week trial calendar beginning on Nov. 4, 2024, but before the Honorable David S. Leibowitz. Counsel for all parties shall also appear at a calendar call at 1:45 p.m. on Oct. 29, 2024. Unless instructed otherwise by subsequent order, the trial and all other proceedings in this case shall be conducted in Courtroom 202A at the U.S. Federal Building and Courthouse, 299 East Broward Boulevard, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301. The parties shall adhere to the following schedule: -- Mediation shall be held on May 7, 2024, at 2:00 p.m.; Mediator Barbara Locke. -- The parties have filed all motions to amend pleadings or to join parties. -- May 17, 2024. The parties shall exchange rebuttal expert witness summaries and reports. -- Class Certification Motions due: May 31, 2024 -- All discovery, including expert discovery, June 28, 2024 shall be completed: -- Class Certification Responses due: June 30, 2024 -- The parties must have completed mediation July 19, 2024 and filed a mediation report: -- Hearing on Class Certification: July 31, 2024 -- The parties shall file all pre-trial Aug. 2, 2024 motions, including motions for summary judgment, and Daubert motions: -- The parties shall submit all trial Aug. 30, 2024 preparation materials including, but not limited to, a joint pre-trial stipulation of all undisputed facts, proposed jury instructions and TrueAccord provides debt recovery services. A copy of the Court's order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tB4GV5 at no extra charge.[CC] TSG ENTERPRISES: Faces Storey Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------------- Kyle Storey, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TSG Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Pure Hockey & David Nectow, Defendant, Case No. 2481CV971 (Mass. Super., Middlesex Cty., April 12, 2024) seeks to recover damages arising from the Pure Hockey's misclassification of Plaintiff and all other similarly situated persons as overtime exempt in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Storey was employed by Pure Hockey as an Assistant Store Manager at its Burlington, Massachusetts store from approximately December 2021 through November 2023. Pure Hockey is a specialty retailer that sells hockey gear and apparel and related products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam J. Shafran, Esq. RUDOLPH FRIEDMANN LLP 92 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 723-7700 Facsimile: (617) 227-0313 UNIBARNS TRADING: August 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ORLANDO JONES, v. UNIBARNS TRADING, INC. d/b/a UNICE HAIR, Case No. 1:23-cv-00594-CCE-JEP (M.D.N.C.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting a 90-day extension of the current May 6, 2024, deadline to file a motion for class certification to August 5, 2024. Orlando Jones has filed this putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. 227(c)(5), because he received the text messages from Unibarns Trading, Inc. UNice Hair despite being on the Do Not Call List and asking them to stop the text messages in response to several solicitations he received. Unibarns is a modern logistic company. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=LgLZ74 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: (617) 485-0018 Facsimile: (508) 318-8100 E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Karl S. Gwaltney, Esq. MAGINNIS HOWARD 7706 Six Forks Road, Suite 101 Raleigh, NC 27615 Telephone: (919) 526-0450 Facsimile: (919) 882-8763 E-mail: kgwaltney@maginnishoward.com UNITED HEALTH: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Mitchell Due Nov. 19 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mitchell v. United Health Centers of the San Joaquin Valley, Case No. 1:23-cv-00060 (E.D. Cal., Filed Jan. 11, 2023), the Hon. Judge Jennifer L. Thurston entered an order modifying the Court's scheduling order as follows: -- The deadline for non-expert disclosures Aug. 26, 2024 is extended to: -- The deadline for expert disclosures is Sept. 15, 2024 extended to: -- The deadline for rebuttal expert Nov. 12, 2024 disclosures is extended to: -- The Plaintiff shall file a motion for Nov. 19, 2024 class certification by no later than: The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). United is a private non-profit organization, established from a grass root movement by people trying to improve access to healthcare in their rural communities in California's Central Valley.[CC] UNITED SERVICES: Class Cert Hearing Extended to August 6 -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as HAROLD J. DAVIDSON, a married man, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, a Texas Corporation, Case No. 2:20-cv-00527-JWH-MAA (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge John Holcomb entered an order vacating the April 23, 2024, deadline for expert disclosures. That deadline will be reset following the court's decision on the Plaintiff's motion for class certification. The hearing on Plaintiff's motion for class certification is continued to Aug. 6, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. United Services is an American financial services company providing insurance and banking products. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Jlpugq at no extra charge.[CC] UNITED STATES: Lewis Seeks to Certify Class ------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHARLES LEWIS, et al., v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-02182-RCL (D.D.C.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order: -- certifying a class as to all claims in this action, defined as follows: "All District of Columbia code parolees who meet all of the following requirements: (1) have not had their parole terminated after being on parole continuously for five years; (2) have not had a termination hearing once they reached five years; and (3) have not had a termination hearing every two years thereafter (where applicable)." -- certifying Charles Lewis, Anthony Mack, Carlton Paige, and Darin Hagins as class representatives, and -- appointing Zoe Friedland, Hanna Perry, and Maya Chaudhuri from the Public Defender Service for the District of Columbia as class counsel. United States Parole is the parole board responsible for granting or denying parole to, and supervising the parole releases of, incarcerated individuals who fall under its jurisdiction. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gkdZEQ at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Zoe Friedland, Esq. Hanna Perry, Esq. Maya Chaudhuri, Esq. PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 633 3rd St. N.W. Washington, DC 20004 Telephone: (202) 824-2524 UNITED STATES: Must Respond to Parks Class Complaint ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as PARKS, et al., v. Alejandro Mayorkas, Case No. 1:23-cv-03561 (D.D.C., Filed Nov. 29, 2023), the Hon. Judge Randolph D. Moss entered an order that the Defendant shall respond to the complaint within 14 days after the Court resolves Plaintiffs motion to extend time to move for class certification. The nature of suit states Employment Discrimination.[CC] UNITED STATES: Olguin-Moreno Files Contract Suit in C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against United States Automobile Association, et al. The case is captioned as HUGO OLGUIN-MORENO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. UNITED STATES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, et al., Case No. 5:24-cv-00474-WLH-SHK (C.D. Cal., March 1, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged breach of contract. United States Automobile Association is an American financial services company headquartered in San Antonio, Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Manfred Patrick Muecke, Esq. MANFRED APC 600 West Broadway Suite 700 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 550-4005 Facsimile: (619) 550-4006 Email: mmuecke@manfredapc.com - and - Jae Kook Kim, Esq. LYNCH CARPENTER LLP 117 East Colorado Boulevard, Suite 600 Pasadena, CA 91105 Telephone: (626) 550-1250 Facsimile: (619) 756-6991 Email: ekim@lcllp.com - and - Todd D. Carpenter, Esq. LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP 1234 Camino del Mar Del Mar, CA 92014 Telephone: (619) 762-1900 Facsimile: (724) 656-1556 Email: todd@lcllp.com UNITED STATES: Popkova Class Suit Stayed for Additional 30 Days --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Larisa Popkova, DSHS Employee No. 1, Paula Brantner-Thomas, DSHS Employee No. 2, Katherine Rowlette, DSHS Employee No. 3, Karen Robbins, DSHS Employee No. 4, Gary C. Bright, DSHS Employee No. 5, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated persons, v. DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL AND HEALTH SERVICES, Don Clintsman and Jilma Meneses DOES 1-50, Case No. 3:23-cv-05130-DGE (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge David Estudillo entered an order to stay the action for an additional 30 days. The Court says that on or before the expiration of 30 days following entry of this order, the parties shall file a status report with the Court describing the status of the parties' settlement discussions. The Court has set no other deadlines in this matter, so no other case deadlines will be affected by this request. This stay will continue to conserve the resources of the Court and the parties and will additionally facilitate a resolution of this action. On Jan. 11, 2024 and Feb. 14, 2024, the parties jointly requested extensions of the class certification briefing schedule to enable the parties to focus their efforts on resolving the class certification issues without Court involvement. On March 15, 2024, the parties jointly asked the Court to strike the class certification briefing schedule and to stay the action for 30 days while the parties worked toward resolution. The Court granted that request on March 18, 2024. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sTDITL at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Tracy Tribbett, Esq. Harold Franklin, Esq. PACIFIC JUSTICE INSTITUTE 6404 Three Rivers Drive Pasco, WA 99301 Telephone: (509) 713-9868 E-mail: ttribbett@pji.org hfranklin@pji.org The Defendants are represented by: Mary Crego Peterson, Esq. Michael J. Ewart, Esq. HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON P.S. 999 Third Avenue, Suite 4600 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: (206) 623-1745 E-mail: mary.peterson@hcmp.com jake.ewart@hcmp.com UR JADDOU: General Pretrial Management Order Entered in Sevastianov ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as IGOR SEVASTIANOV, v. UR JADDOU, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01075-DEH-BCM (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Barbara Moses entered an order regarding general pretrial management as follows: -- All pretrial motions and applications, including those related to scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23) must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses. -- The Plaintiff is reminded that it is his obligation to serve the summons and complaint on each defendant within 90 days of the issuance of the summonses. -- The Plaintiff must serve a copy of this Order on all defendants served with the summons and complaint. -- The Plaintiff must file with the Court an affidavit with proof of service of the summons and complaint (and this Order) on each defendant. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=IuVmm1 at no extra charge.[CC] US CUSTOMS: Mora Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Julian SANCHEZ MORA, Siobhan WALDRON, Carlos Moctezuma GARCIA, Brenda CANUDAS TIRADO, and Ali AINAB, v. U.S. CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION; and U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, Case No. 3:24-cv-02430-JCS (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move this Court for class certification pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. The Plaintiffs seek an order from this Court certifying the proposed class, appointing the named Plaintiffs as class representatives, and appointing the undersigned attorneys as class counsel. The Plaintiffs challenge the Defendant U.S. Customs and Border Protection's (CBP) nationwide pattern and practice of failing to respond to requests for records under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) within the timeframe mandated by the statute. The Plaintiffs are attorneys and individuals who seek records that pertain to their clients and themselves, respectively, including records related to an individual's entry into and/or exit from the United States, admission, criminal history, and records of inspection, apprehensions, or interactions with CBP employees. These records are critical to determining eligibility for immigration benefits, including lawful permanent residence, naturalization, and acquisition of citizenship; defending against deportation; responding to automobile seizures; and/or investigating damages claims based on tortious or unconstitutional conduct by CBP employees, the Plaintiffs contend. Pursuant to Rules 23(a) and 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Plaintiffs move the Court to certify the following class: "All persons who filed, or will file, FOIA requests with CBP for an individual's records which have been pending, or will be pending, with CBP for more than 30 business days without a determination." A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fLzqh2 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Trina Realmuto, Esq. Mary Kenney, Esq. Aidan Langston, Esq. NATIONAL IMMIGRATION LITIGATION ALLIANCE 10 Griggs Terrace Brookline, MA, 02446 Telephone: (617) 819-4447 - and - Matt Adams, Esq. Leila Kang, Esq. NORTHWEST IMMIGRANT RIGHTS PROJECT 615 Second Avenue, Suite 400 Seattle, WA 98104 Telephone: (206) 957-8611 - and - Marc Van Der Hout, Esq. Johnny Sinodis, Esq. VAN DER HOUT LLC 360 Post St., Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-3000 USA WASTE: Eigenberg Files Torts Suit in C.D. California -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against USA Waste of California, Inc. The case is captioned as HOWARD EIGENBERG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. USA WASTE OF CALIFORNIA, INC., Case No. 5:24-cv-00490-SVW-SHK (C.D. Cal., March 5, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged torts to land. USA Waste of California, Inc. is a solid waste & recycling company headquartered in California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mickel M. Arias, Esq. Arnold C. Wang, Esq. Michael Anthony Jenkins, Esq. ARIAS SANGUINETTI WANG AND TORRIJOS LLP 6701 Center Drive West, 14th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90045 Telephone: (310) 844-9696 Facsimile: (310) 861-0168 Email: mike@aswtlawyers.com anthony@aswtlawyers.com - and - D. Reed Solt, Esq. Laura L. Sheets, Esq. Matthew Z. Robb, Esq. Steven D. Liddle, Esq. LIDDLE SHEETS COULSON PC 975 East Jefferson Avenue Detroit, MI 48207 Telephone: (313) 392-0015 Facsimile: (313) 392-0025 Email: lsheets@LSCcounsel.com mrobb@LSCcounsel.com sliddle@LSCcounsel.com VALVE CORP: Brooks, et al., Bid to Intervene OK'd in Antitrust Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wolfire Games LLC et al v. Valve Corporation (VALVE ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No. 2:21-cv-00563-JCC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John Coughenour entered an order granting Jason Brooks, Robert Austin McCuistion, and Apeirogon Games' motions to intervene. The Court said that the proposed Intervenors sought leave to intervene and submitted opposition briefs in lockstep with the parties’ briefing on Defendant’s motion to seal. The Plaintiffs Wolfire Games, LLC, Dark Catt Studios Holdings, Inc., and Dark Catt Studios Interactive, LLC recently moved the Court to certify a class of game developers and/or game publishers who paid the Defendant for the use or sale of their games on the Defendant's game platform. In doing so, Plaintiffs filed under seal unredacted versions of their motion and supporting exhibits in accordance with a prior order from this Court. The Defendant then moved to maintain the unredacted filings under seal, based on what it deems to be confidential information included in those filings. Proposed Intervenors Brooks and McCuistion, as gamers and consumers of Defendant's platform, assert an interest in this matter and, correspondingly, the redacted information and sealed documents relating to Plaintiff’s motion for class certification. Specifically, they contend that, as game consumers, they have effectively borne the cost of the allegedly inflated commissions paid to Defendant. And because this Court has previously ruled that their claims must be brought through arbitration, they require access to this information to assist in pursuing their individual claims. Valve is an American video game developer, publisher, and digital distribution company. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dwiPdF at no extra charge.[CC] VALVE CORPORATION: Bids to Seal Docs OK'd in Antitrust Suit ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wolfire Games LLC et al v. Valve Corporation (VALVE ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No. 2:21-cv-00563-JCC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John C. Coughenour entered an order granting motions to seal by non-parties Epic Games, Inc. and Microsoft, Inc., along with Plaintiffs Dark Catt Studios Holdings, Inc. and Dark Catt Studios Interactive, LLC. The Clerk is directed to maintain under seal the portions of Docket Numbers 192, 182-27, 182-48, and 182-74 described in the movants' motions. No party has lodged an opposition to the movants' motions to seal. Therefore, the Court concludes that each have merit, regardless of which standard need be applied. The Plaintiffs recently moved the Court for the certification of a class of game developers and/or game publishers who paid Defendant for the use or sale of the developers/publishers' games on Defendant's game platform. Valve is an American video game developer, publisher, and digital distribution company. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VfToe4 at no extra charge.[CC] VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: Class Discovery in Jackson Extended to June 28 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as GERARD JACKSON, v. VIBRANT HEALTHCARE, LLC, Case No. 4:22-cv-01221-MWB (M.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Matthew Brann entered an order granting extending: -- class certification discovery to June 28, 2024; and -- the deadline for the Plaintiff to file a motion for class certification deadline is July 5, 2024. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FMxi0I at no extra charge.[CC] VIBRANT HEALTHCARE: July 5 Extension for Class Cert Filing Sought ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GERARD JACKSON, v. VIBRANT HEALTHCARE, LLC, Case No. 4:22-cv-01221-MWB (M.D. Pa.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order extending the discovery to June 28, 2024, and the deadline for the Plaintiff to file a motion for class certification to July 5, 2024. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7KyKCQ at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: (617) 485-0018 E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com VIRGINIA FARM: Dilello Files Personal Property Suit in E.D. Va. --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Virginia Farm Bureau Holding Corporation, et al. The case is captioned as THOMAS DILELLO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. VIRGINIA FARM BUREAU HOLDING CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-00156-HEH (E.D. Va., March 2, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged personal property violations. Virginia Farm Bureau Holding Corporation is a company that offers insurance services in Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Steven T. Webster, Esq. WEBSTER BOOK LLP 300 N. Washington Street, Suite 404 Alexandria, VA 22314 Telephone: (888) 987-9991 Facsimile: (888) 987-9991 Email: swebster@websterbook.com - and - Carl Vincent Malmstrom, Esq. WOLF HALDENSTEIN ALDER FREEMAN & HERZ LLC 111 W. Jackson Boulevard, Suite 1700 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 984-0000 Facsimile: (212) 686-0114 Email: malmstrom@whafh.com - and - Matthew Thomas Sutter, Esq. SUTTER & TERPAK PLLC Annandale, VA 22003 Telephone: (703) 256-1800 Facsimile: (730) 991-6116 Email: matt@sutterandterpak.com VIRGINIA FARM: Noel Files Contract Suit in E.D. Virginia -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Virginia Farm Bureau Insurance Company. The case is captioned as CAMERON NOEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. VIRGINIA FARM BUREAU INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 3:24-cv-00155-HEH (E.D. Va., March 2, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged contract violations. Virginia Farm Bureau Insurance Company is an insurance firm in Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew Thomas Sutter, Esq. SUTTER & TERPAK PLLC Annandale, VA 22003 Telephone: (703) 256-1800 Facsimile: (730) 991-6116 Email: matt@sutterandterpak.com - and - Jason S. Rathod, Esq. Nicholas Alexander Migliaccio, Esq. MIGLIACCIO AND RATHOD LLP 412 H. St. NE Washington, DC 20002 Telephone: (202) 470-3520 Email: jrathod@classlawdc.com nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com VIRGINIA: Court Narrows Claims in Mallory Suit ---------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mallory Patterson, Emily Comer, Carla McDowney, v. Virginia Department of Corrections, Director Chadwick Dotson, Case No. 3:23-cv-00757-DJN (E.D. Va.), the Hon. Judge David Novak entered an order granting in part and denying in part the Defendants' joint motion to dismiss. The Court grants the motion to dismiss Counts III and IV, as to the Plaintiffs' class and individual claims. However, the Court denies the motion to dismiss Counts I and II. This order should not be construed as ruling on the merits of the Plaintiffs' class claims in Counts I and II, as the Court will direct the class certification to be briefed in a forthcoming scheduling order. A copy of the Court's order dated April 19, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8M9vC9 at no extra charge.[CC] VMSB LLC: Seeks More Time for Conditional Cert Response in Volpe ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIC VOLPE, ENZO FERRER, AND VINCENZO MATINO, each individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. VMSB LLC, a Florida limited liability company, Case No. 1:23-cv-23888-RAR (S.D. Fla.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order granting a 7-day extension of time to file its response to the motion for conditional certification, up and through April 29, 2024, and award such other relief the Court deems proper. The requested enlargement is brief, is not made for purpose of delay and will not cause any undue delay or prejudice to Plaintiffs. Pursuant to S.D. Fla. L.R. 7.1, counsel for VMSB certifies that he has conferred with counsel for the Plaintiffs, and that they do not oppose the requested relief. This is an action for claims of purported violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) brought by the Plaintiffs, current employees of VMSB. On Dec. 28, 2023, the Plaintiffs served its Amended Fair Labor Standards Act Complaint upon VMSB. On Jan. 11, 2024, VMSB filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint, which the Court scheduled for hearing on April 23, 2024. On Apr. 2, 2024, the Court, after a sua sponte review of the record noting that the deadline to move for conditional certification had passed, entered an Order to Show Cause requiring the Plaintiffs to file their motion for conditional certification by April 8, 2024. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zf0bFc at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Andrew B. Zelmanowitz, Esq. Nikki Branch, Esq. BERGER SINGERMAN, LLP 201 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-9900 Facsimile: (954) 523-2872 E-mail: azelman@bergersingerman.com nbranch@bergersingerman.com DRT@bergersingerman.com VOYA RETIREMENT: Solorzano Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------ JUAN SOLORZANO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VOYA RETIREMENT INSURANCE and ANNUITY COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-00837-DGC (D. Ariz., April 12, 2024) arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act for Defendant's failure to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated phone representatives all overtime pay for all time worked in excess of 40 hours per week. The Plaintiff is an individual who Defendant employed as an hourly, non-exempt telephone-dedicated employee at the call center operated by Defendant located in Tempe, Arizona from approximately January 2019 to August 2023. Voya Retirement Insurance is a financial and investment company offering financial products and services and health insurance products and services throughout Arizona and the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James X. Bormes, Esq. Catherine P. Sons, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JAMES X. BORMES, P.C. 8 South Michigan Avenue Suite 2600 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 201-0575 E-mail: jxbormes@bormeslaw.com cpsons@bormeslaw.com - and - Thomas M. Ryan, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS M. RYAN, P.C. 35 East Wacker Drive Suite 650 Chicago, IL 60601 Telephone: (312) 726-3400 E-mail: tom@tomryanlaw.com - and - Michelle R. Matheson, Esq. MATHESON & MATHESON, P.L.C. 15300 North 90th Street, Suite 550 Scottsdale, AZ 85260 Telephone: (480) 889-8951 E-mail: mmatheson@mathesonlegal.com WALMART INC: Class Cert. Filing Extended to June 17 --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SUSAN GAGETTA and TRACIE GOMEZ, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. WALMART INC., Case No. 3:22-cv-03757-AMO (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Araceli Martinez-Olguin entered an order extending time to file motion for class certification as follows: Event Original Date Proposed Date Motion for Class Certification May 13, 2024 June 17, 2024 and Expert Reports Due: Defendant's Opposition to July 9, 2024 Aug. 8, 2024 Motion for Class Certification, Expert Reports and Daubert Motions Due: Plaintiffs' Class Cert Reply, Aug. 13, 2024 Sept. 12, 2024 Daubert Opposition and Daubert Motions Due Defendants Daubert Reply and Aug. 27, 2024 Sept. 26, 2024 Opposition to Daubert Motions Due: Plaintiffs' Daubert Reply Sept. 10, 2024 Oct. 10, 2024 Due: Close of Fact Discovery: Sept. 20, 2024 Oct. 21, 2024 Hearing on Motion for Class Oct. 24, 2024 Nov. 7, 2024 Certification and Daubert Motions Walmart operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and grocery stores. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RdrdLP at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: L. Timothy Fisher, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Boulevard, Suite 940 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 E-mail: ltfisher@bursor.com - and - Jonathan Shub, Esq. SHUB & JOHNS LLC Four Tower Bridge 200 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 400 Conshohocken, PA 19428 Telephone: (610) 477-8380 E-mail: jshub@shublawyers.com - and - Kevin Laukaitis, Esq. LAUKAITIS LAW FIRM LLC 954 Avenida Ponce De Leon Suite 205, #10518 San Juan, PR 00907 Telephone: (215) 789-4462 E-mail: klaukaitis@laukaitislaw.com - and - Gary E. Mason, Esq. Danielle Perry, Esq. MASON LLP 5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Suite 460 Washington, DC 20015 Telephone: (202) 640-1168 E-mail: gmason@masonllp.com dperry@masonllp.com - and - Lori G. Feldman, Esq. David J. George, Esq. Brittany L. Brown, Esq. Janine L. Pollack, Esq. Michael Liskow, Esq. GEORGE FELDMAN MCDONALD, PLLC 102 Half Moon Bay Drive Croton-on-Hudson, NY 10520 Telephone: (833) 346-3587 E-mail: lfeldman@4-justice.com eservice@4-justice.com dgeorge@4-justice.com bbrown@4-justice.com eservice@4-justice.com jpollack@4-justice.com mliskow@4-justice.com The Defendant is represented by: Livia M. Kiser, Esq. Rose J. Hunter jones, Esq. Michael l. Resch, Esq. Ethan p. Davis, Esq. Samuel r. Diamant, Esq. KING & SPALDING LLP 50 California Street, Suite 3300 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 318-1200 Facsimile: (415) 318-1300 E-mail: lkiser@kslaw.com rjones@kslaw.com mresch@kslaw.com edavis@kslaw.com sdiamant@kslaw.com WASHINGTON: Johnston Must Submit Forma Pauperis Application ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KURT J. ANGELONE, JOHN GRIFFIN HEADRICK, ADAM PERSELL, ALEX MIYARES, and JONATHAN JOHNSTON, v. WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, SUPERINTENDENT RONALD HAYNES, AHCC, AARON BROWN, LANCE HALL, SGT. D. YOUNG, SGT. McKINNEY, DANIEL JONES, JANE and JOHN DOE CORRECTIONAL OFFICERS AND PERSONNEL, Case No. 2:24-cv-00096-TOR (E.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Thomas Rice entered an order that: (1) Within 30 days of the date of this Order, the Plaintiff Jonathan Johnston shall submit a completed and signed declaration and application to proceed in forma pauperis by a prisoner bringing a Civil Rights Action Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. section 1983; (2) In the alternative, the Plaintiff Jonathan Johnston may pay a full $405.00 filing fee ($350.00 statutory filing fee, plus $55.00 administrative fee); (3) The Plaintiff Jonathan Johnston's failure to comply with this Order will be construed as his consent to being dismissed from this action. (4) The Clerk of Court shall re-note for hearing the Motion for Class Certification, Memorandum, Declarations in Support, Requesting Appointment of Interim Counsel to Protect Class Pending Certification and Appointment of Counsel; or Joinder of Parties by All Plaintiffs, ECF No. 3, to 30 days after the date of this Order and terminate the current hearing deadline for this Motion. A copy of the Court's order dated April 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EaDe45 at no extra charge.[CC] WASTE INDUSTRIES: Faces Stone Soup Contract Suit in D.S.C. ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Waste Industries, LLC, et al. The case is captioned as STONE SOUP MARKET AND CAFE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. WASTE INDUSTRIES, LLC, et al., Case No. 7:24-cv-01137-TMC (D.S.C., March 5, 2024). The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged breach of contract. Stone Soup Market and Cafe is a restaurant owner and operator in Landrum, South Carolina. Waste Industries, LLC is a solid waste & recycling company headquartered in Raleigh, North Carolina. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher James Moore, Esq. RICHARDSON THOMAS HALTIWANGER MOORE AND LEWIS 1513 Hampton Street, 1st Floor Columbia, SC 29201 Telephone: (803) 281-8147 Facsimile: (803) 632-8263 Email: chris@richardsonthomas.com - and - Grace Madeline Babcock, Esq. RICHARDSON THOMAS HALTIWANGER MOORE AND LEWIS 1513 Hampton Street, First Floor Columbia, SC 29205 Telephone: (803) 440-8500 Facsimile: (803) 632-8263 Email: grace@richardsonthomas.com - and - Patrick Eugene Knie, Esq. KNIE AND SHEALY P.O. Box 5159 250 Magnolia Street (29306) Spartanburg, SC 29304 Telephone: (864) 582-5118 Facsimile: (864) 585-1615 Email: pat@knieshealy.com WELLS FARGO: Filing for Class Cert. Bid in SEB Due June 4 --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as SEB INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT AB, et al., v. WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, et al., Case No. 3:22-cv-03811-TLT (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Trina Thompson entered a revised case management and scheduling order as follows: Trial Date: May 5, 2025 Final Pretrial Conference: April 3, 2025 Last day to file dispositive motions: Dec. 20, 2024 Fact Discovery Cut-Off: Aug. 9, 2024 Expert Discovery Cut-Off: Nov. 22, 2024 Private Mediation to be completed by: Aug. 30, 2024 Class Certification: Motion: June 4, 2024 Opposition: June 25, 2024 Reply: July 9, 2024 Hearing: July 23, 2024, 2:00 p.m. Wells Fargo provides personal banking, investing, mortgage, and commercial finance. A copy of the Court's order dated April 18, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0dAL1D at no extra charge.[CC] WEST COVINA: Class Action Waiver in Arbitration Deal Enforceable ---------------------------------------------------------------- Travis J. Anderson and Shannon Z. Petersen, writing for National Law Review, reports that In Flores v. West Covina Auto Group, --- Cal.Rptr.3d ----, 2013 WL 139200 (Cal.App. 2 Dist. Jan. 11, 2013), the California Court of Appeal extended the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark decision in AT&T Mobility, Inc. v. Concepcion, 131 S. Ct. 1740 (2011) by holding that the Federal Arbitration Act preempts any right to a class action under the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"), and class action waivers in arbitration agreements governed by the FAA are therefore enforceable. The CLRA grants consumers the right to file class actions to enforce its terms, and -- according to the Flores court -- provides that "any waiver by a consumer" of this right "is contrary to public policy and shall be unenforceable and void." Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 1751. The court determined that the FAA preempts the CLRA's antiwaiver provision because the latter "stands as an obstacle to the accomplishment and execution of the full purposes and objective of the FAA," which is to enforce arbitration agreements according to their terms. If an arbitration provision is subject to the FAA and contains a class action waiver, the waiver must be enforced regardless of state public policy concerns. In Flores, consumers filed a putative class action against an car dealership, alleging the dealership sold them a "lemon" and failed to fully disclose all sale terms. The dealership moved to compel arbitration and enforce the class action waiver contained in a form contract widely used by dealerships throughout California. Plaintiffs opposed, contending the CLRA prevented enforcement of the class action waiver, and that the arbitration agreement was unconscionable and therefore unenforceable. The trial court granted the dealership's motion and compelled arbitration. The Court of Appeal affirmed. In doing so, it disagreed with Fisher v. DCH Temecula Imports LLC, 187 Cal.App.4th 601 (2010), which had denied arbitration on the ground that the CLRA establishes an unwaivable right to bring class actions. The Flores court correctly noted that, "since Fisher, the United States Supreme Court's decision in Concepcion has altered the legal landscape substantially." The Court of Appeal found "no meaningful distinction" between the CLRA's antiwaiver provision and the preempted class action waiver rule in Concepcion, and held that the FAA preempted both Fisher and the CLRA's prohibition against class waivers. The Flores court further held that the arbitration agreement was not substantively unconscionable for any other reason. Plaintiffs focused on four terms they claimed were one-sided in favor of the dealership -- 1) a party who loses at arbitration can appeal to a panel of three arbitrators only if the award is $0, exceeds $100,000, or grants injunctive relief; 2) the dealership only pays the first $2,500 of plaintiffs' arbitration costs; 3) only certain arbitration organizations could be selected by the plaintiffs without the dealership's approval; and 4) self-help remedies, including the right to repossession, are excluded from arbitration. Citing Pinnacle Museum Tower Association v. Pinnacle Market Development (US), LLC, 55 Cal.4th 223 (2012), the Flores court held that none of these terms were "so one-sided as to shock the conscience." Thus, the agreement was fully enforceable. The California Supreme Court will soon address these and/or related issues in Sanchez v. Valencia Holding Co. LLC, 201 Cal.App.4th 74 (2011) review granted, 139 Cal.Rptr.3d 2 (Mar. 21, 2012), which involves the same form contract. [GN] WEST OF CHICAGO: Lee Files Labor Suit in California State Court --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against West of Chicago Restaurants, Inc., et al. The case is captioned as MIKAYLA LEE, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. WEST OF CHICAGO RESTAURANTS, INC., et al., Case No. 24CV004334 (Cal. Super., Sacramento Cty., March 6, 2024). A case management conference is set for February 28, 2025, before Judge Richard K. Sueyoshi. West of Chicago Restaurants, Inc. is a restaurant company in California. [BN] WHEATLEIGH CORP: Employees Wait for Class Settlement in Labor Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------ Mass. Lawyers Weekly reports that where the parties have reached a global settlement agreement in a class action brought by wait staff employees, that agreement should be approved as fair, reasonable and adequate. "Defendants raise several arguments in opposition to final approval. First, Defendants argue that Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence that Class Counsel obtained informed consent for a global settlement of this class action and the Individual Cases as required by Mass. R. Prof. C. 1.8(g) ('Rule 1.8(g)'), which prohibits a lawyer who represents two or more clients from participating in making an aggregate settlement of the claims absent informed consent in a writing signed by each client. Defendants do not cite to any authority to support the argument that Plaintiff has the burden to prove that she and the Individual Plaintiffs provided informed consent. . . . "Second, Defendants claim that Plaintiff failed to identify all agreements made in connection with the settlement proposal as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(e)(3), because Plaintiff failed to identify joint representation and co-counsel agreements involving Class Counsel and Michael A. Rivkin, an associate with the law firm Cohen Kinne Valicenti & Cook, for Plaintiff and each of the Individual Plaintiffs. Defendants have not pointed to any case holding that Class Counsel may not rely on the services of an attorney employed by a different firm to provide representation to class members. In the court's experience, Cohen Kinne Valicenti & Cook is a very reputable Berkshire County law firm that provides highly competent representation to its clients. Rule 23(e)(3) requires parties seeking approval of a class action settlement to file a statement identifying any agreement made in connection with the proposal. The agreements, which were drafted and signed in 2018 at the beginning of the litigation, were not 'made in connection with the [settlement] proposal' in 2021. Thus, Defendants have not shown that Plaintiff was obliged to identify them, and Defendants' argument is unavailing. "Third, Defendants maintain that the order certifying the class failed to identify which specific claims of Plaintiff's were being certified as required by Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(c)(1)(B). As noted by the court in the order granting Plaintiff's motion for class certification and certifying the Class, Plaintiff sought class certification as to all her state law claims but did not seek certification of a collective action as to her FLSA claims (Dkt. No. 113 at 2). The court's granting of the motion and certifying of the Class correspondingly included all of Plaintiff's state law claims, as evidenced by the court's discussion of the relevant state law in connection with its analysis of the suitability of the proposed class for certification. However, even if the court's certification order were deficient on this point, 'an order certifying a class and detailing the class composition and the case's issues and claims . . . can [be] amend[ed] before final judgment.' . . . In the court's view, Defendants waived the argument that the certification order was deficient by failing to raise it at the time of preliminary approval and then failing to file a proposed alternative by the deadline set by the court at the fairness hearing. Nevertheless, the court alters or amends the certification order to clarify that the claims for which the Class is certified include: (1) that Defendants violated Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 151, Secs.1 and 7 by paying the service rate to compensate Plaintiff and members of the Class when they should have received the full minimum wage due to Defendants' unlawful distribution of its tip pools, the un-tipped tasks to which Plaintiff and members of the Class were assigned, and Defendants' failure to provide proper written notice before utilizing the service rate (Count I); (2) that Defendants violated Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, Sec.152A by unlawfully distributing wages from the tip pool to non-wait staff employees and supervisors (Count III); and (3) that Defendants violated Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, Secs.148 and 150 by failing to timely pay wages to Plaintiff and members of the Class (Count IV). . . . "The court has discretion to calculate reasonable counsel fees as a percentage of the fund ('POF') or by utilizing a lodestar analysis. . . . "Consideration of the pertinent factors supports the 27.2% POF sought here. . . . Class Counsel is awarded $92,893.20 in attorneys' fees." Mongue v. The Wheatleigh Corporation, et al. (Lawyers Weekly No. 02-213-24) (15 pages) (Robertson, U.S.M.J.) (Civil No. 3:18-cv-30095-KAR) (April 16, 2024). [GN] ZENTECH BLOOMINGTON: Ct Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Pryczynski ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Pryczynski v. Zentech Bloomington, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01451-JBM-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. Zentech is an engineering driven electronics contract manufacturer. A copy of the Court's standing order dated April 22, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=IjkBcR at no extra charge.[CC] [*] Class Action on Emails Sent at Inconvenient Time Lacks Merit ---------------------------------------------------------------- John Rossman, writing for insideARM, reports that consumer attorneys are filing new class action lawsuits asserting that debt collector emails are being sent before 8 a.m. or after 9 p.m. in violation of the FDCPA. While debt collectors must adhere to the time restrictions for sending debt collection emails, it will be impossible for the consumer attorneys to certify any FDCPA class action asserting that a debt collector sent emails at an inconvenient time because email providers routinely delay the delivery of emails. As discussed below, this delay between when a debt collector sends an email and when the consumer receives the email necessitates an "individualized inquiry" to establish standing for each potential class member which will defeat any class action. Time-Restrictions on Sending Debt Collection Emails The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau articulated in Regulation F that debt collection email communications violate 1692c as inconvenient if they are sent before 8 a.m. and after 9 p.m. local time for the consumer. Regulation F further provides that "an electronic communication occurs when the debt collector sends it, not, for example, when the consumer receives or views it." Consumer attorneys are now asserting putative FDCPA class action lawsuits against debt collectors premised on the time that an email was received by the consumer. However, the time that a consumer receives an email is often different from the time that the email was sent by the debt collector, sometime by many hours. How to Identify Email Delivery Delays to Defeat a Class Action An email that a consumer receives utilizing the Yahoo email platform does not, on its face, always disclose the actual time that the email is sent despite including a "time sent" field in the email. Yahoo publishes the following information on its website to assist consumers with accessing the "full header" on an email to determine how long an email was delayed. In the example published on the Yahoo website above, the email is delayed "for about 1 hour and 15 minutes." However, the recipient of the email would be unaware of this delay unless the recipient took the multiple steps outlined on the Yahoo website to access the "full header" for the email. Gmail likewise uses "predelivery scanning" to delay certain email messages before delivery, in some cases for hours. Email Delays Necessitate Individualized Standing Inquiries, thus Defeating Class Certification While Regulation F provides that "an electronic communication occurs when the debt collector sends it," the United States Supreme Court held in Ramirez v. TransUnion that each consumer seeking to participate in a class action must suffer some "concrete injury." This standing requirement of a "concrete injury" is problematic for any FDCPA class action alleging that debt collection emails were sent at an inconvenient time because the receipt of emails are frequently delayed. How could a potential class member in an FDCPA lawsuit establish any "concrete injury" if a debt collection email that was sent at an inconvenient time is received by the consumer’s computer at a convenient time due to delivery delays by the email carrier? Thus, to determine whether a consumer qualifies as a member of any potential class action asserting that debt collection emails were sent at an inconvenient time, an individualized inquiry must be conducted to determine if the email was received at an inconvenient time by each member of the potential class due to email delays. For potential class members with a Yahoo email address, the multi-step process described on the Yahoo website and cited above must be used to identify the sending time in the full header. Notably, the requirement for an individualized inquiry regarding the actual receipt time of each email for each potential class member defeats the "predominance" or "superiority" element of a class action. The United States Supreme Court has held in Comcast v. Behrend that a class action is improperly certified if individual questions overwhelm questions common to the class. Conclusion Any company facing class allegations that it sent debt collection emails at an inconvenient time -- whether those allegations arise under the FDCPA, the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act or some other law -- should consider whether delays in email delivery may defeat these claims. [GN] Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: Claire's Faces Class Action Over Asbestos Concerns ------------------------------------------------------------------- Neutral IT reports that Claire's was hit with a proposed class action on April 10, 2024 in New York federal court, a day after the retail company recalled three of its makeup products, over asbestos presence concerns. The plaintiffs alleged that the recall would not fully compensate for their loss. Two plaintiffs told that the voluntary recall of the products was not fulfilling enough to repay the consumers for their damages and future diagnostic screening. A recent test conducted by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and AMA Analytical Services Inc. indicated the retailer sold cosmetics contaminated with asbestos. The FDA recently found that three samples collected from Claire's and one from another retailer Justice tested positive for asbestos presence. ASBESTOS UPDATE: PPG Industries Has $48MM Reserves as of March 31 ----------------------------------------------------------------- PPG Industries Inc. has been a defendant in lawsuits involving claims alleging personal injury from exposure to asbestos, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. PPG Industries states, "The Company monitors and reviews the activity associated with its asbestos claims and evaluates, on a periodic basis, its estimated liability for such claims and all underlying assumptions to determine whether any adjustment to the reserves for these claims is required. Additionally, as a supplement to its periodic monitoring and review, the Company conducts discussions with counsel and engages valuation consultants to analyze its claims history and estimate the amount of the Company's potential liability for asbestos-related claims. As of both March 31, 2024 and December 31, 2023, the Company's asbestos-related reserves totaled $48 million. "The Company believes that, based on presently available information, the total reserves of $48 million for asbestos-related claims will be sufficient to encompass all of the Company's current and estimable potential future asbestos liabilities. These reserves, which are included within Other liabilities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheets, involve significant management judgment and represent the Company's current best estimate of its liability for these claims. "The amount reserved for asbestos-related claims by its nature is subject to many uncertainties that may change over time, including (i) the ultimate number of claims filed; (ii) whether closed, dismissed or dormant claims are reinstituted, reinstated or revived; (iii) the amounts required to resolve both currently known and future unknown claims; (iv) the amount of insurance, if any, available to cover such claims; (v) the unpredictable aspects of the tort system, including a changing trial docket and the jurisdictions in which trials are scheduled; (vi) the outcome of any trials, including potential judgments or jury verdicts; (vii) the lack of specific information in many cases concerning exposure for which the Company is allegedly responsible, and the claimants' alleged diseases resulting from such exposure; and (viii) potential changes in applicable federal and/or state tort liability law. All of these factors may have a material effect upon future asbestos-related liability estimates. While the ultimate outcome of the Company's asbestos litigation cannot be predicted with certainty, the Company believes that any financial exposure resulting from its asbestos-related claims will not have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, liquidity or results of operations." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dFuUHD ASBESTOS UPDATE: Trane Tech. Uses Two-Step Resolve Asbestos Claims ------------------------------------------------------------------ Evan Ochsner of Bloomberg Law reports that plaintiffs fighting Trane Technologies Plc's attempt to use bankruptcy to resolve asbestos liabilities lost their bid for a fast-tracked appeal challenging the legality of the maneuver. A divided panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit rejected a request by asbestos claimants to quickly consider whether the bankruptcies of two Trane Technologies units -- Aldrich Pump and Murray Boiler -- should be dismissed. The case must now go through the traditional bankruptcy appeals process, which requires a federal district court to consider the dispute before the Fourth Circuit. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Cos. Has $1.3BB Reserves as of March 31 ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Travelers Companies, Inc., has net asbestos paid loss and loss expenses in the first three months of 2024 and 2023 of $74 million and $33 million, respectively, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company states, "Net asbestos reserves were $1.30 billion and $1.27 billion at March 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. "In the ordinary course of its insurance business, the Company has received and continues to receive claims for insurance arising under policies issued by the Company asserting alleged injuries and damages from asbestos- and environmental-related exposures that are the subject of related coverage litigation. The Company is defending asbestos- and environmental-related litigation vigorously and believes that it has meritorious defenses; however, the outcomes of these disputes are uncertain. In this regard, the Company employs dedicated specialists and comprehensive resolution strategies to manage asbestos and environmental loss exposure, including settling litigation under appropriate circumstances. Currently, it is not possible to predict legal outcomes and their impact on future loss development for claims and litigation relating to asbestos and environmental claims. Any such development could be affected by future court decisions and interpretations, as well as future changes, if any, in applicable legislation. Because of these uncertainties, additional liabilities may arise for amounts in excess of the Company's current insurance reserves. In addition, the Company's estimate of ultimate claims and claim adjustment expenses may change. These additional liabilities or changes in estimates, or a range of either, cannot now be reasonably estimated and could result in income statement charges that could be material to the Company's results of operations in future periods. "The Company continues to be involved in disputes, including litigation, with a number of policyholders, some of whom are in bankruptcy, over coverage for asbestos-related claims. Many coverage disputes with policyholders are only resolved through settlement agreements. Because many policyholders make exaggerated demands, it is difficult to predict the outcome of settlement negotiations. Settlements involving bankrupt policyholders may include extensive releases which are favorable to the Company, but which could result in settlements for larger amounts than originally anticipated. Although the Company has seen a reduction in the overall risk associated with these disputes, it remains difficult to predict the ultimate cost of these claims. As in the past, the Company will continue to pursue settlement opportunities." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qT9A97 ********* 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 ***