/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240708.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Monday, July 8, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 136
Headlines
3M CO: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Substances, Powell Suit Says
3M COMPANY: Bell Legal Files 35 Lawsuits Over Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Carter Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Curphy Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Delong Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Forrest Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Hall Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Hunter Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Larson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Mangin Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Mann Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Mathews Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
51ST ST: Solis Seeks to Continue Class Certification Bid Deadline
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Class Cert. Bid Filing Due Jan. 23, 2025
ADARA SKIN: Guichay Sues Over Skin Care Technicians' Unpaid Wages
AGA SERVICE: Parties Seek Class Cert. Bids Extension
ALASKA AIRLINES: Creer Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California
ALASKA AIRLINES: Vigil Suit Stayed Pending Mediation
ALBERTSONS CO: Nguyen Suit Removed from State Ct. to C.D. Cal.
ALLEGIANCE ADMIN: Cohen Suit Seeks to Adjourn Class Cert Hearing
ALTUS JOBS: Court Stays Klinakis Suit
AMAZON.COM INC: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due March 14, 2025
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Parties Seek To Continue Class Cert to Oct. 11
APACHE CORP: $65MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Sept. 19
APPLE INC: Court Suggests Remanding Case to S.D. Illinois
ARC ONE: Pasteur Labor Suit Seeks Conditional Class Certification
ATONOMI LLC: Class Action Settlement in Hunichen Gets Final Nod
BAE SYSTEMS: All Discovery in Naylor Suit Due Oct. 11
BAYER CORP: Can File Class Cert Sur-reply Opposition
BAYER HEALTHCARE: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Sur Reply
BLINK CHARGING: Bush Seeks Initial Approval of Class Settlement
BNSF RAILWAY: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Smith Suit
BUFFALO, NY: Bid to Amend Briefing Schedule Deadlines Granted
CANVAS ENERGY: Wake Energy's Bid to Certify Settlement Class Tossed
CDK GLOBAL: Faces Jay Kay Collision Center Data Breach Suit
CENTRAL GARDEN: Order on Class Cert. Discovery Entered in Flodin
CENTREVILLE BANK: Faces O'Hara Suit Over Unlawful Overdraft Fees
CLAYTON CHRISTIAN: Niman Seeks to Certify Class of Students
CLAYTON COUNTY SCHOOL: Henry Seeks Collective Conditional Status
CREWS CONTROL: Filing for Conditional Status Bid Due Oc. 29
CROCS INC: Expert Discovery in Valentine Due Jan. 24, 2025
DEACON CONSTRUCTION: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due March 5, 2025
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Fact and Discovery Extended to Oct. 28
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Must File Class Cert Opposition by August 23
DMCG INC: Abeyta Suit Seeks to Certify UCL & Rosenthal Act Classes
DR. DENNIS: Class Settlement in Kandel Suit Gets Initial Nod
DRIFTWOOD HOSPITALITY: Class Cert Bid Deadlines for 2025, Ct. Says
EKSTER INC: Seeks Leave to File Docs Under Seal
ELON MUSK: Class Certification Briefing in Pampena Extended
ELON MUSK: Opposition of Class Cert Bid Extended to August 5
EVRY JEWELS: Froomin Sues Over Website's False Discount Ads
EXAMONE WORLD: Seeks Leave to File Docs Under Seal
EYE CARE: Class Action Settlement in Alliance Gets Final Nod
EYE CARE: Class Action Settlement in Farley Suit Gets Final Nod
FADA GROUP: Parties Must Engage in Settlement Negotiations
FBCS INC: Faces Dozal Suit Over Alleged Data Breach
FEDEX GROUND: Depina Suit Seeks to Continue Class Cert Hearing
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS: Chiong Sues Over Private Data Breach
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Morgan Class Suit Over Data Breach
GARAGE CARS: Barrett Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
GREYSTAR CALIFORNIA: Supplemental Briefing Order Entered in Zeff
HANDI-CRAFT CO: Cortez Alleges Deceptive Marketing of Baby Bottles
HOME POINT: Class Settlement in Securities Suit Gets Final Nod
IDAHO: Seeks Order on Bid for Hearing & Briefing Schedule
INDEGENE INC: Progressive Heath Seeks Class Certification
INTUITIVE SURGICAL: Parties Seek to Modify Class Cert Brief Sched
KAISER FOUNDATION: Court Resolves Discovery Dispute dated April 30
KASPER HOLDINGS: Fails to Properly Pay Managers, Hollis Alleges
KNOX COUNTY, IL: Initial Class Status Bid Moot
L & R DISTRIBUTORS: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Oct. 25
LANE BOOTS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Espinal Suit Says
LEXISNEXIS RISK: Court to Dismiss Madlinger Suit w/o Prejudice
LEXISNEXIS RISK: Scroggins Seeks to Seal Unredacted Reply
LOG-ON COMPUTER: Huerta Seeks Redress for Labor Law Breaches
LOUISIANA: Plaintiffs Seek to Amend Second Amended Scheduling Order
MDL 1720: Court Junks Bid for Initial OK of Settlement
MDL 1720: Court Suggests Remanding Case to S.D. Illinois
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in Cancer Care Due Sept. 11
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in CCMH Suit Due Sept. 11
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in FCS Suit Due Sept. 11
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in HOACNY Due Sept. 11
MDL 2724: DPPs Seek to Amend Pretrial Order No. 234
MDL 2873: Durheim Seeks Damages for AFFF Exposure
MDL 2873: Horan Seeks Damages for Harmful AFFF Products' Exposure
MERCURY MISSION: Order on Class Cert. Bids Entered in Burton Suit
MERIDIAN SERVICES: Plaintiffs File Bid to Approve Notice
MYLAN INC: Corrected Bid for Class Certification Tossed
NATIONAL RAILROAD: Class Cert Bid Filing Continued to Oct. 1
NORTH CAROLINA: Court Dismisses ACLU Class Suit
OAK STREET: Faces Dirth Suit Over Labor Law Breaches
OBERON AMERICAS: MPS Suit Seeks Scheduling Conference
OVATIONS FOOD: Bid for Initial Nod of Settlement Partly OK'd
OVERLAND SHEEPSKIN: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Espinal Alleges
PANERA LLC: Hoffman Sues Over Data Security Failures
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Plaintiffs Seek Rule 23 Class Certification
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Torres Suit Seeks to Seal Class Cert Exhibit
PURECYCLE TECHNOLOGIES: $12MM Settlement to be Heard on Oct. 8
RENTGROW INC: Green Sues Over Inaccurate Eviction Record Info
RK OIL: Pardo Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Commercial Property
RUGSUSA LLC: Class Action Settlement in Wiley Suit Gets Final Nod
RUSSELECTRIC INC: Bowers Suit Seeks Class Certification
RUSSELL INVESTMENTS: Filing for Renewed Class Cert Bid Due August 9
SAFEAEON INC: Khanna RICO Suit Removed to N.D. California
SECURITAS SECURITY: Must Respond to Class Cert Discovery
SITEMETRIC LLC: Underpays Access Control Officers, Greene Claims
SMITH'S FOOD: Dempsey Sues Over Worker Misclassification
SUSHI KATSUEI: Plaintiffs' Request for Discovery Sanctions Tossed
THOMAS BLUMENSHINE: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Kunkes
TL CANNON: Court Recommends Granting Bid to Amend Complaint
TRANSDEV SERVICES: Class Cert Bid Filing Continued to August 19
TRANSDEV SERVICES: Parties Seek to Continue Class Cert Deadlines
TYCO FIRE: $750MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Nov. 1
UNITED PARCEL: Orr Must File Class Certification Bid by Oct. 11
UNITED STATES: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Reply by July 18
UNLABELED LLC: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
VALVE CORP: Parties Must File Public Redacted Versions by July 11
VALVE CORP: Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Sensitive Financial Information
VALVE CORP: Seeks to Seal Class Certification Opposition
VAXART INC: Court Tosses Himmelberg Bid For Class Certification
VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY: Loses Bid to Dismiss Faw Class Suit
VITALS CONSUMER: Sweeton Seeks to Withdraw Class Cert Bid
VMWARE INC: Class Certified in Lamartina "Common Stock" Suit
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Dack Seeks Initial OK of Settlement Deal
WALMART INC: Class Settlement in Kukorinis Suit Gets Final Nod
WEATHERFORD INT'L: Sept. 26 Claims Filing Deadline Set
WEBMD LLC: Jancik Class Suit Seeks Class Certification
WEBMD LLC: Plaintiffs Seek to Withdraw Class Cert Bid
WELLPATH LLC: Falling-Davis Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid
WICHITA, KS: Clingerman Seeks More Time to Produce Expert Reports
WOLF APPLIANCE: Bid for Summary Judgment Tossed w/o Prejudice
WYNDHAM VACATION: Class Cert Hearing in Kirchner Set for July 22
*********
3M CO: Exposes Firefighters to Toxic Substances, Powell Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES POWELL v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company), et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-03674-RMG (D.S.C.,
June 25, 2024) is a class action seeking for damages resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams (AFFF) and firefighter
turnout gear (TOG) containing the toxic chemicals collectively
known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or
TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting, says the suit.
PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals. PFAS binds to
proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where it remains and
persists over extended periods of time. Due to their unique
chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body of
exposed individuals.
Mr. Powell is a resident and citizen of Michigan. Plaintiff
regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to, AFFF in
training and to extinguish fires during his working career as a
military and/or civilian firefighter. The Plaintiff James Powell
was diagnosed with kidney cancer as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products.
Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory
and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to the Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during the Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
The Defendants include AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE &
SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN
AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.
(f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS INC.; GLOBE
MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY
AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., INC.; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.); and W.L.
GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.
3M manufactured, marketed, and sold AFFF from the 1960s to the
early 2000s.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Telephone: (216) 815-9000
Facsimile: (216) 274-9365
3M COMPANY: Bell Legal Files 35 Lawsuits Over Toxic Aqueous Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bell Legal Group, LLC filed 35 lawsuits seeking class action status
against the Defendants 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota) Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE &
SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN
AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.
(f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS INC.; GLOBE
MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA, INC.;
KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY
AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., INC.; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC. Each of the complaints are stemming from personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams
("AFFF") and/or firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting, the military, and/or
training.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
All of the complaints were filed in the United States District
Court for the District of South Carolina. The complaints were filed
in May 17, 2024.
The Plaintiffs are:
Allen Hoerig. Case No. 2:24-cv-03062-RMG.
Alphonso Kraft. Case No. 2:24-cv-03063-RMG.
George Bajcar. Case No. 2:24-cv-03082-RMG.
George Bennett. Case No. 2:24-cv-03083-RMG.
Cari Hickman. Case No. 2:24-cv-03064-RMG.
Charles Murray. Case No. 2:24-cv-03065-RMG.
Clarence Brown. Case No. 2:24-cv-03066-RMG.
Yvonne Clark. Case No. 2:24-cv-03104-RMG.
Damian Guptill. Case No. 2:24-cv-03067-RMG.
Darren Walton. Case No. 2:24-cv-03072-RMG.
Daryl Bosh. Case No. 2:24-cv-03073-RMG.
David Spaid. Case No. 2:24-cv-03074-RMG.
Gregory Donatello. Case No. 2:24-cv-03087-RMG.
Elie Thompson. Case No. 2:24-cv-03077-RMG.
Francisco Capistrano. Case No. 2:24-cv-03078-RMG.
Frederick Person. Case No. 2:24-cv-03079-RMG.
Gerald Maines. Case No. 2:24-cv-03084-RMG.
Glen Maes. Case No. 2:24-cv-03085-RMG.
Gregg Hitch. Case No. 2:24-cv-03086-RMG.
Edward Groody. Case No. 2:24-cv-03075-RMG.
John Sholl. Case No. 2:24-cv-03092-RMG.
Jose Rodriguez. Case No. 2:24-cv-03094-RMG.
Joseph Szymborski. Case No. 2:24-cv-03095-RMG.
Kenneth Williams. Case No. 2:24-cv-03096-RMG.
Lee Koning. Case No. 2:24-cv-03099-RMG.
Lance Wood. Case No. 2:24-cv-03097-RMG.
Lawrence Thomason. Case No. 2:24-cv-03098-RMG.
Harold Hadden. Case No. 2:24-cv-03088-RMG.
Leroy McClinton. Case No. 2:24-cv-03100-RMG.
Lloyd Mcdonnaugh. Case No. 2:24-cv-03101-RMG.
Mark Myland. Case No. 2:24-cv-03103-RMG.
Gary Moberg. Case No. 2:24-cv-03081-RMG.
Edward Seeley. Case No. 2:24-cv-03076-RMG.
John Thibodeaux Jr. Case No. 2:24-cv-03093-RMG.
William Titterington. Case No. 2:24-cv-03106-RMG.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Carter Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ronnie Carter, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:24-cv-03015-RMG (D.S.C., May 13, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of Decedent's exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products at various locations during the course of
Decedent's training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further
seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from
the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
bladder cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Curphy Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Curphy, on behalf of himself v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota) Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE
PLUS INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY
PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
INC.; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest
to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.);
W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:24-cv-02984-RMG (D.S.C.,
May 10, 2024), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting
from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly exposed to AFFF and/or TOG during his
firefighting career and was diagnosed with Kidney Cancer as a
direct result of exposure to Defendants' products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Delong Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
James Delong, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:24-cv-02952-RMG (D.S.C., May 9, 2024), is brought for damages for
personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge
that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which
would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with
PFAS. Further, the Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF
which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of Decedent's exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products at various locations during the course of
Decedent's training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further
seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from
the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with
prostate cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-543-5450
- and -
Gregory A. Cade, Esq.
Gary A. Anderson, Esq.
Kevin B. McKie, Esq.
ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C.
2160 Highland Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: 205-328-9200
Facsimile: 205-328-9456
3M COMPANY: Forrest Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Forrest, on behalf of himself v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota)
Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.;
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE
NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS INC.;
GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA,
INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., INC.; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:24-cv-02996-RMG (D.S.C., May 10, 2024),
is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure
to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly exposed to AFFF and/or TOG during his
firefighting career and was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease as a
direct result of exposure to Defendants' products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Hall Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Hall, on behalf of himself v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota)
Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.;
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE
NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS INC.;
GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA,
INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., INC.; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:24-cv-02985-RMG (D.S.C., May 10, 2024),
is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure
to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly exposed to AFFF and/or TOG during his
firefighting career and was diagnosed with Liver Cancer as a direct
result of exposure to Defendants' products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Hunter Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Hunter, on behalf of himself v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota) Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA
U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE
PLUS INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY
PRODUCTS USA, INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
INC.; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.;
STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest
to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE &
SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.);
W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:24-cv-02986-RMG (D.S.C.,
May 10, 2024), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting
from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly exposed to AFFF and/or TOG during his
firefighting career and was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease as a
direct result of exposure to Defendants' products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Larson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Larson, on behalf of himself v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota)
Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.;
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE
NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS INC.;
GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA,
INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., INC.; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:24-cv-02992-RMG (D.S.C., May 10, 2024),
is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure
to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly exposed to AFFF and/or TOG during his
firefighting career and was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease as a
direct result of exposure to Defendants' products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Mangin Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pat Mangin, on behalf of himself v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota)
Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.;
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE
NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS INC.;
GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA,
INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., INC.; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:24-cv-02989-RMG (D.S.C., May 10, 2024),
is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure
to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly exposed to AFFF and/or TOG during his
firefighting career and was diagnosed with Kidney Cancer as a
direct result of exposure to Defendants' products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Mann Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Louis Mann, on behalf of himself v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota)
Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.;
ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY CORPORATION; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION;
CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.;
CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE
NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS INC.;
GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS USA,
INC.; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C.; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY
SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., INC.; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
PERIMETER SOLUTIONS LP.; SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; Case No. 2:24-cv-02981-RMG (D.S.C., May 10, 2024),
is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure
to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic
chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances
("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic
acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and
related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or
PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. TOG is personal protective equipment
designed for heat and moisture resistance in order to protect
firefighters in hazardous situations. Most turnout gear is made up
of a thermal liner, moisture barrier, and an outer layer. The inner
layers contain PFAS, and the outer layer is often treated with
additional PFAS.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS.
Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or TOG which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
the Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the
products. Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal
absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF or TOG products caused
Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and
complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at several Fire Departments and or Military
bases during Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
Plaintiff further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory
relief arising from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly exposed to AFFF and/or TOG during his
firefighting career and was diagnosed with Kidney Cancer as a
direct result of exposure to Defendants' products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J. Edward Bell, III, Esq.
Randolph L. Lee, Esq.
Gabrielle Anna Sulpizio, Esq.
BELL LEGAL GROUP, LLC
219 Ridge Street
Georgetown, SC 25442
Phone: 843-546-2408
Facsimile: 843-546-9604
Email: jeb@belllegalgroup.com
rlee@belllegalgroup.com
gsulpizio@belllegalgroup.com
3M COMPANY: Mathews Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
James Mathews, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY, f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company; ACG CHEMICALS AMERICAS,
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA US, INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BASF
CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHE-MDESIGN PRODUCTS INC.; CHE-MGUARD, INC.;
CHEMICALS, INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; CHUBB FIRE,
LTD; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS, INC., f/k/a
DowDuPont, Inc.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DV PONT DE NEMOURS AND
COMPANY; KIDDE-FENWAL, INC.; KIDDE P.L.C., INC.; NATION FORD
CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC., a/Wa Chubb National Foam;
THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE
PRODUCTS, LP; UNITED CORPORATION; UTC FIRE AMERICAS CORPORATION,
Interlogix, Inc., TECHNOLOGIES & SECURITIES INC., f/n/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-03040-RMG (D.S.C., May 15,
2024), is brought for personal injury damages resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce, AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further,
defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff Vernon Burks in their intended manner, without
significant change in the products' condition. Plaintiff was
unaware of the dangerous properties of the Defendants' AFFF
products and relied on the Defendants' instructions as to the
proper handling of the products. Plaintiffs' consumption,
inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF
products caused Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions
and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiffs seek to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiffs'
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiffs further seek
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish active fires during his working
career as a civilian and military firefighter and was diagnosed
with thyroid disease and skin cancer as a result of exposure to
Defendants’ AFFF products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and/or sellers of
PFAS-containing AFFF or underlying PFAS containing PFOA or PFOS
chemicals used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Charles R. Houssiere, III, Esq.
HOUSSIERE, DURANT & HOUSSIERE, LLP
1990 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 800
Houston, TX 77056-3812
Phone: 713-626-3700
Facsimile: 713-626-3709
Email: choussiere@hdhtex.com
51ST ST: Solis Seeks to Continue Class Certification Bid Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROSA SOLIS, an individual,
on behalf of herself, and on behalf of all persons similarly
situated, v. 51ST ST. & 8TH AVE. CORP., a New York corporation;
LOEWS CORONADO HOTEL CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; LOEW'S
HOTELS, INC., a New York corporation; and DOES 1-50, Inclusive,
Case No. 3:23-cv-01161-JES-MMP (S.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the
Court to enter an order granting joint motion to continue the
Plaintiff's class certification discovery cutoff and deadline to
file motion for class certification:
New Date: Dec. 13, 2024 Deadline to File Motion for
Class
Old Date: October 6, 2024 Certification
New Date: Nov. 14, 2024 Class Certification Discovery
Old Date: July 8, 2024 Cutoff
On June 22, 2023, the Defendants removed this matter from the San
Diego County Superior Court to this Court.
On Feb. 6, 2024, this Court issued its Scheduling Order Regulating
Putative Class Discovery and Setting Deadline for Motion for Class
Certification.
On May 14, 2024, this Court granted the Parties' joint motion and
continued the MCC Deadline to October 6, 2024.
51 St provides hotel services.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=NQlFxF at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jean-Claude Lapuyade, Esq.
Sydney Castillo-Johnson, Esq.
Perssia Razma, Esq.
JCL LAW FIRM, APC
5440 Morehouse Drive, Suite 3600
San Diego, CA 92121
Telephone: (619) 599-8292
Facsimile: (619) 599-8291
E-mail: jlapuyade@jcl-lawfirm.com
scastillo@jcl-lawfirm.com
prazma@jcl-lawfirm.com
- and -
Shani O. Zakay, Esq.
ZAKAY LAW GROUP, APLC
5440 Morehouse Drive, Suite 3600
San Diego, CA 92121
Telephone: (619) 255-9047
Facsimile: (858) 404-9203
E-mail: shani@zakaylaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Ellen M. Bronchetti, Esq.
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
101 Second Street, Suite 2200
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 655-1300
Facsimile: (415) 707-2010
E-mail: Ellen.bronchetti@gtlaw.com
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Class Cert. Bid Filing Due Jan. 23, 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEVEN PRESCOTT, et al.,
v. ABBOTT LABORATORIES, Case No. 5:23-cv-04348-PCP (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge P. Casey Pitts entered a case management order as
follows:
Joinder and Other Amendments Oct. 11, 2024
Motion for Class Certification Jan. 23, 2025
Opposition April 25, 2025
Reply June 19, 2025
Hearing July 10, 2025
Fact Discovery Cutoff Jan. 15, 2026
Expert Discovery Cutoff March 27, 2026
Filing of Dispositive/Daubert Motion(s) April 24, 2026
Trial Schedule
Joint Pretrial Conference Sept. 15, 2026
Jury Trial (7 days) Oct. 5, 2026
Abbott is an American multinational medical devices and health care
company.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=YfJdu7 at no extra
charge.[CC]
ADARA SKIN: Guichay Sues Over Skin Care Technicians' Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LILIANA FABIOLA MUNOZ GUICHAY, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ADARA SKIN CARE CORP. and
MARION BECERRA, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-04387 (E.D.N.Y., June
20, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations
of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, the New
York State Executive Law, the New York City Administrative Code,
and the New York State Human Rights Law including failure to pay
minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide
wage notices, failure to timely pay wages, failure to provide
accurate wage statements, and retaliation.
The Plaintiff was employed the Defendants as a skin care technician
from in or around May 2021 until in or around December 2023, with
the exception of in or around March 2023 until in or around April
2023.
Adara Skin Care Corp. is a skin care services provider based in
Jackson Heights, New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Telephone: (718) 263-9591
AGA SERVICE: Parties Seek Class Cert. Bids Extension
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALAN WHITEMAN, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. AGA SERVICE
COMPANY, INC., a foreign corporation, and JETBLUE AIRWAYS
CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, Case No. 0:23-cv-61826-AHS
(S.D. Fla.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order extending
the deadlines for filing dispositive pre-trial motions and Daubert
motions and for exchanging expert reports and rebuttal reports, and
setting a class certification briefing schedule:
-- Expert witness reports shall be exchanged by: Aug. 30,
2024
-- Expert witness rebuttal reports shall be Sept. 13,
2024
exchanged by
-- Dispositive pre-trial motions and Daubert Oct. 11, 2024
motions shall be filed by:
-- Any motion for class certification shall be July 26,
2024
filed by:
-- The response to any motion for class Sept. 10,
2024
certification shall be filed by:
-- The reply to any motion for class Sep. 24,
2024
certification shall be filed by:
AGA provides travel services.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated July 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=MlZdjp at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alec H. Schultz, Esq.
Ellen Ross Belfer, Esq.
William Burgess, Esq.
HILGERS GRABEN PLLC
1221 Brickell Avenue
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 630-8304
E-mail: aschultz@hilgersgraben.com
ebelfer@hilgersgraben.com
wburgess@hilgersgraben.com
ALASKA AIRLINES: Creer Labor Suit Removed to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled MICHELLE CREER, an individual, on behalf of herself
and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. ALASKA AIRLINES, INC.,
an Alaska corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. CGC-23-610836, was removed from the Superior
Court of California, County of San Francisco, to the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California on June 25, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:24-cv-03780 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.
Headquartered in SeaTac, WA, Alaska Airlines, Inc. provides air
transportation services. [BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Paul S. Cowie, Esq.
Melissa Hughes, Esq.
Julia G. Remer, Esq.
SHEPPARD, MULLIN, RICHTER & HAMPTON LLP
Four Embarcadero Center, 17th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-4109
Telephone: (415) 434-9100
Facsimile: (415) 434-3947
E-mail: pcowie@sheppardmullin.com
mhughes@sheppardmullin.com
jremer@sheppardmullin.com
ALASKA AIRLINES: Vigil Suit Stayed Pending Mediation
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHNATHAN VIGIL, v. ALASKA
AIRLINES, INC., Case No. 4:23-cv-05701-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Hon.
Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered an order granting stipulation
to stay matter pending mediation and continue deadlines:
1. The case shall be stayed in its entirety;
2. The parties will file a joint report with the Court by Sept.
6,
2024 (two weeks post-mediation) concerning the results of the
mediation and status of documenting any agreement;
3. The deadline for plaintiff to file his motion for class
certification is set for May 9, 2025;
4. The deadline for defendant to file its opposition to the
motion
is set for June 6, 2025;
5. The deadline for plaintiff to file any reply to the motion is
set for June 20, 2025; and
6. The hearing on plaintiff's motion for class certification
shall
take place on July 15, 2025 at 2:00 p.m.
Alaska Airlines provides air transportation services.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wtOtpt at no extra
charge.[CC]
ALBERTSONS CO: Nguyen Suit Removed from State Ct. to C.D. Cal.
--------------------------------------------------------------
TUAN NGUYEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ALBERTSONS COMPANIES, INC., Case No. 8:24-cv-01405
(Filed Feb. 26, 2024) was removed from the Superior Court of the
State of California for Orange County to the United States District
Court for the Central District of California on June 25, 2024.
The Central District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. e
8:24-cv-01405 to the proceeding.
The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant violated the California
Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA). In connection with these
claims, Plaintiff seeks, inter alia, restitution and injunctive
relief, attorneys' fees, and actual damages on behalf of "thousands
of individuals nationwide and within California."
The Plaintiff has proposed the following putative class:
-- All consumers who used EBT funds and/or WIC cards/vouchers
within California who were charged 10-cents for reusable
plastic bags at any of Defendant's Albertsons's grocery store
located in California within the four years prior to the
filing of the Complaint."
Albertsons is an American grocery company founded and headquartered
in Boise, Idaho.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Amanda L. Groves, Esq.
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
333 S. Grand Avenue, 38th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 615-1700
Facsimile: (213) 615-1750
E-mail: agroves@winston.com
ALLEGIANCE ADMIN: Cohen Suit Seeks to Adjourn Class Cert Hearing
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHMUEL COHEN, YEHUDA
FISCHER, ELIEZER ROSENBERGER and MAYER TANNENBAUM on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, v. ALLEGIANCE
ADMINISTRATORS, LLC d/b/a PERFORMANCE FIRST and AUTOGUARD ADVANTAGE
CORPORATION, Case No. 2:20-cv-03411-JLG-KAJ (S.D. Ohio), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their unopposed
motion and adjourning the hearing on their motion for class
certification.
By Order dated June 24, 2022, the Court directed the parties to
appear for a hearing on July 19, 2024, at 10 a.m. on Plaintiffs'
Motion for Class Certification. The primary attorney for Plaintiffs
in this action is unavailable on the scheduled hearing date due to
a preplanned international trip.
All parties consent to the requested adjournment and this is the
first request for an adjournment of this hearing. The parties are
available on Aug. 9, 2024 (the date of the recently cancelled Final
Pre-Trial Conference) as well as August 26 through August 29,
2024.
Allegiance provides vehicle service contracts to franchise and
multi-line new and used car dealers.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZWZ4Jr at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Evan S. Rothfarb, Esq.
Daniel A. Schlanger, Esq.
SCHLANGER LAW GROUP LLP
80 Broad Street, Suite 1303
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 500-6114
Facsimile: (646) 612-7996
E-mail: erothfarb@consumerprotection.net
dschlanger@consumerprotection.net
- and -
Eliahu Sarfaty, Esq.
SARFATY & ASSOCIATES, PC
1 North Sherri Lane
Wesley Hills, NY 10977
Telephone: (845) 377-5845
Facsimile: (212) 401-4720
E-mail: eli@sarfatylaw.com
- and -
Matthew R. Wilson, Esq.
Michael J. Boyle, Jr., Esq.
MEYER WILSON CO., LPA
305 W. Nationwide Blvd.
Columbus, OH 43215
Telephone: (614) 224-6000
Facsimile: (614) 224-6066
ALTUS JOBS: Court Stays Klinakis Suit
-------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALEXA KLINAKIS; JORDAN
KRAVETZKY; NICOLE WHITE; ANRICH BEKKER; MATEO VELEZ; LANEY
HEIDRICH; CLAUDIA RODRIGUEZ; ERIC TAYLOR; and ANGIE CIPRIANO, v.
ALTUS JOBS, LLC; and SAUM DUSTIN SHARIFI, Case No.
6:22-cv-01756-RBD-RMN (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Roy Dalton Jr.
entered an order that:
1. The class certification motions are denied without prejudice
as
moot.
2. The Order to Show Cause is discharged.
3. Altus's motion to refer this case to the bankruptcy court
is granted. this case is referred to the bankruptcy court.
4. The parties' stipulation is approved.
5. This action is stayed as to all parties.
6. The clerk is directed to close the file administratively.
7. By Friday, Aug. 30, 2024, and every sixty days thereafter,
the
parties are directed to file a joint report on the bankruptcy
status.
Altus is a recruiting firm.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=aBCytx at no extra
charge.[CC]
AMAZON.COM INC: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due March 14, 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIFER MILLER, EMAD
ALKAHLOUT, HAMADY BOCOUM, CHRISTOPHER CAIN, GARY GLEESE, JOSE
GRINAN, KIMBERLY HALO, CLARENCE HARDEN, KELLY KIMMEY, JUMA LAWSON,
STEVEN MORIHARA, SHARON PASCHAL, and PHILIP SULLIVAN, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, v. AMAZON.COM, INC.,
and AMAZON LOGISTICS, INC., Case No. 2:21-cv-00204-BJR (W.D.
Wash.), the Hon. Judge entered an order setting the following
deadlines and briefing schedule:
Deadline Date
Joinder of Parties Deadline Jan. 31, 2025
Amended Pleadings Feb. 7, 2025
Deadline to complete discovery Feb. 14, 2025
on class certification (not to be
construed as a bifurcation of
discovery)
Deadline for Plaintiffs to file Mar. 14, 2025
Motion for Class Certification
Deadline for Defendants to file April 14, 2025
Response to Motion for Class
Certification
Deadline for Plaintiffs to file April 28, 2025
Reply in Support of Motion for
Class Certification
Amazon.com is engaged in e-commerce, cloud computing, online
advertising, digital streaming, and artificial intelligence.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=obFa3r at no extra
charge.[CC]
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Parties Seek To Continue Class Cert to Oct. 11
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DYAN SALATINO, and JERREL
PARKER, an individual, on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all
persons similarly situated, v. AMERICAN AIRLINES, INC., a
corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
3:23-cv-01779-JLS-BLM (S.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to
enter an order that the deadline for the Plaintiff to file a motion
for class certification be continued to Oct. 11, 2024 to allow the
Parties time to finalize and execute the individual settlement
agreement, and file the appropriate requests for dismissal.
On May 20, 2023, the Plaintiff filed this Class Action against
Defendant alleging nine causes of action for violations of the
California Labor Code with the San Diego Superior Court.
On Sept. 21, 2023, Counsel for Plaintiff filed a Notice of Death of
Plaintiff Salatino in Superior Court.
On Dec. 21, 2023, this Court granted the Parties Joint Motion and
Stipulation for Leave for Plaintiff to File a First Amended
Complaint.
American Airlines provides scheduled air transportation services
for passengers and cargo.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=l7qGB9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Norman B. Blumenthal, Esq.
Kyle R. Nordrehaug, Esq.
Aparajit Bhowmik, Esq.
Jeffrey S. Herman, Esq.
Sergio Julian Puche, Esq.
Trevor G. Moran, Esq.
BLUMENTHAL NORDREHAUG BHOWMIK DE BLOUW LLP
2255 Calle Clara
La Jolla, CA 92037
Telephone: (858)551-1223
Facsimile: (858) 551-1232
E-mail: norm@bamlawca.com
kyle@bamlawca.com
aj@bamlawca.com
jeffrey@bamlawca.com
sergiojulian@bamlawca.com
trevor@bamlawca.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Adam P. Kohsweeney, Esq.
Kelly S. Wood, Esq.
Allan W. Gustin, Esq.
O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3823
Telephone: (415) 984-8700
Facsimile: (415) 984-8701
E-mail: akohsweeney@omm.com
kwood@omm.com
agustin@omm.com
APACHE CORP: $65MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Sept. 19
-----------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
IN RE APACHE CORP. SECURITIES LITIGATION
Case No. 4:21-cv-00575
District Judge George C. Hanks, Jr.
Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison
CLASS ACTION
SUMMARY NOTICE OF: (I) PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION AND PROPOSED
SETTLEMENT; (II) SETTLEMENT HEARING; AND (III) MOTION FOR
ATTORNEYS' FEES AND LITIGATION EXPENSES
TO: All persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
Apache Corp. common stock from September 7, 2016, through March 13,
2020, inclusive ("Class Period"), and were damaged thereby
("Settlement Class"):
PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY; YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE AFFECTED BY
A CLASS ACTION LAWSUIT PENDING IN THIS COURT.
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas ("Court"), that the
above-captioned action ("Action") has been provisionally certified
as a class action for purposes of settlement, except for certain
persons and entities who are excluded from the Settlement Class by
definition as set forth in the Stipulation and Agreement of
Settlement dated May 7, 2024 ("Stipulation") and the detailed
Notice of: (I) Pendency of Class Action and Proposed Settlement;
(II) Settlement Hearing; and (III) Motion for Attorneys' Fees and
Litigation Expenses ("Notice"). The Stipulation and Notice can be
viewed at www.ApacheSecuritiesSettlement.com.
YOU ARE ALSO HEREBY NOTIFIED that Court-appointed Lead Plaintiffs
Plymouth County Retirement Association and the Trustees of the
Teamsters Union No. 142 Pension Fund (together, "Lead Plaintiffs"),
and defendants Apache Corp. and its successor APA Corporation, a
Delaware corporation listed on NASDAQ under the symbol APA
("Apache"), John J. Christmann IV, Timothy J. Sullivan, and Stephen
J. Riney (collectively, "Defendants") have reached a proposed
settlement of the Action on behalf of the Settlement Class for
$65,000,000 in cash ("Settlement"). If approved by the Court, the
Settlement will resolve all claims in the Action.
A hearing ("Settlement Hearing") will be held on September 19, 2024
at 10:00 a.m., before the Honorable Andrew M. Edison, United States
Magistrate Judge for the Southern District of Texas, in Courtroom
8B of the Bob Casey United States Courthouse, 515 Rusk Street,
Houston, TX 77002, to determine, among other things: (i) whether
the Settlement on the terms and conditions provided for in the
Stipulation is fair, reasonable, and adequate to the Settlement
Class, and should be finally approved by the Court; (ii) whether
the Action should be dismissed with prejudice against Defendants
and the releases specified and described in the Stipulation (and in
the Notice) should be granted; and (iii) whether Lead Counsel's
motion for attorneys' fees in an amount not to exceed 33⅓% of the
Settlement Fund and payment of expenses in an amount not to exceed
$1.9 million (which amount may include a request for reimbursement
of the reasonable costs and expenses incurred by Lead Plaintiffs
directly related to their representation of the Settlement Class)
should be approved. Any updates regarding the Settlement Hearing,
including any changes to the date or time of the hearing or updates
regarding in-person or remote appearances at the hearing, will be
posted to the website www.ApacheSecuritiesSettlement.com.
If you are a member of the Settlement Class, your rights will be
affected by the pending Action and the Settlement, and you may be
entitled to share in the Settlement Fund. This notice provides only
a summary of the information contained in the detailed Notice. You
may obtain a copy of the Notice, along with the Claim Form, on the
website for the Settlement, www.ApacheSecuritiesSettlement.com. You
may also obtain a copy of the Notice and Claim Form by contacting
the Claims Administrator by mail at Apache Corp. Securities
Litigation, c/o A.B. Data, Ltd., P.O. Box 173035, Milwaukee, WI
53217; by calling toll free 1-877-311-3740; or by sending an email
to info@ApacheSecuritiesSettlement.com. Copies of the Notice and
Claim Form can also be found on Lead Counsel's websites
www.ktmc.com and www.saxenawhite.com.
If you are a Settlement Class member, in order to be eligible to
receive a payment from the proposed Settlement, you must submit a
Claim Form postmarked (if mailed), or online via
www.ApacheSecuritiesSettlement.com, no later than October 9, 2024,
in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Claim Form. If
you are a Settlement Class member and do not submit a proper Claim
Form, you will not be eligible to share in the distribution of the
net proceeds of the Settlement, but you will nevertheless be bound
by any releases, judgments, or orders entered by the Court in the
Action.
If you are a member of the Settlement Class and wish to exclude
yourself from the Settlement Class, you must submit a request for
exclusion such that it is received no later than August 29, 2024,
in accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice. If you
properly exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you will not
be bound by any releases, judgments, or orders entered by the Court
in the Action and you will not receive any benefits from the
Settlement. Excluding yourself from the Settlement Class is the
only option that may allow you to be part of any other current or
future lawsuit against Defendants or any of the other released
parties concerning the claims being resolved by the Settlement.
Any objections to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of
Allocation, and/or Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees and
Litigation Expenses must be filed with the Court and delivered to
Lead Counsel and Defendants' Counsel such that they are received no
later than August 29, 2024, in accordance with the instructions set
forth in the Notice.
PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT, THE CLERK'S OFFICE, DEFENDANTS, OR
DEFENDANTS' COUNSEL REGARDING THIS NOTICE. All questions about this
notice, the Settlement, or your eligibility to participate in the
Settlement should be directed to Lead Counsel or the Claims
Administrator.
Requests for the Notice and Claim Form should be made to the Claims
Administrator:
Apache Corp. Securities Litigation
c/o A.B. Data, Ltd.
P.O. Box 173035
Milwaukee, WI 53217
1-877-311-3740
info@ApacheSecuritiesSettlement.com
www.ApacheSecuritiesSettlement.com
All other inquiries should be made to Lead Counsel:
Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
Joshua E. D'Ancona, Esq.
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
1-610-667-7706
info@ktmc.com
Saxena White P.A.
David R. Kaplan, Esq.
505 Lomas Santa Fe Drive, Suite 180
Solana Beach, CA 92075
1-858-997-0860
settlements@saxenawhite.com
DATED: June 26, 2024
BY ORDER OF THE COURT
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
APPLE INC: Court Suggests Remanding Case to S.D. Illinois
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mirage Wine + Spirits,
Inc. v. Apple Inc. et al. (RE PAYMENT CARD INTERCHANGE FEE AND
MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No.
1:24-cv-04053-MKB-JAM (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Margo Brodie
suggests that the Panel remand the action to the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
The Clerk of Court is directed to transmit a copy of this
Suggestion of Remand to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation.
Finally, the Court will necessarily have to prioritize its
resolution of the pending dispositive motions in the B & R
Supermarket action over any forthcoming motions in the Mirage
action.7 With B & R Supermarket, the Court found that the factual
allegations and legal issues were sufficiently dissimilar to
warrant disassociation from MDL 1720.
Nevertheless, any forthcoming motions in Mirage would necessarily
be delayed, pending the Court’s resolution of the pending motions
in B & R Supermarket that have yet to be decided. Accordingly, it
is likely that Mirage could be more efficiently prosecuted in the
transferor district.
On June 6, 2024, the above-captioned action was transferred from
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Illinois to this Court for consolidation with In re Payment Card
Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation (MDL
1720) pursuant to an order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation (the “Panel”).
Mirage Wine + Spirits, Inc. brought this putative class action
against Apple Inc., Visa Inc., and Mastercard Incorporated for
alleged violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The alleged
violations relate to agreements that Apple has with Visa and
Mastercard, and the alleged effects of these agreements on the
market for card transaction services.
A copy of the Court's suggestion dated July 1, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6SaaeL at no extra
charge.[CC]
ARC ONE: Pasteur Labor Suit Seeks Conditional Class Certification
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RAYNARD PASTEUR,
individually and on behalf of all of all others similarly situated,
v. ARC ONE PROTECTIVE SERVICES LLC, a Florida Limited Liability
Company, Case No. 6:23-cv-01479-CEM-DCI (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order conditionally certifying this case
as a class action with respect to the putative class members
seeking to recover unpaid overtime wages (the "Unpaid Overtime
Class") against the Defendant, whose employment consisted of
providing security services at the Covid testing sites during Aug.
2021 through June 23 2022.
Arc One is a private security and consulting agency.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dBNFuT at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeremy D. Friedman, Esq.
Paul A. Hankin, Esq.
THE DOWNS LAW GROUP, P.A.
3250 Mary Street, Suite 307
Coconut Grove, FL 33133
Telephone: (305) 444-8226
Facsimile: (305) 444-6773
E-mail: jfriedman@downslawgroup.com
phankin@downslawgroup.com
ATONOMI LLC: Class Action Settlement in Hunichen Gets Final Nod
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRIS HUNICHEN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
ATONOMI LLC, a Delaware LLC, CENTRI ·TECHNOLOGY, INC., a Delaware
Corporation, VAUGHAN EMERY, DAVID FRAGALE, ROB STRICKLAND, DON
DELOACH, WAYNE WISEHART, WOODY BENSON, MICHAEL MACKEY, and JAMES
SALTER, Case No. 2:19-cv-00615-RAJ (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge
James Robart entered an order granting the Plaintiff's motion for
final approval of class action settlement and final judgment:
The Court finds that the Class Representative and Class Counsel
adequately represented the Class for the purposes of litigating
this matter and entering into and implementing the Settlement
Agreement.
Accordingly, the Settlement is hereby finally approved in all
respects, and the Parties and their counsel are hereby directed to
implement and consummate the Settlement Agreement according to its
terms and provisions, except as otherwise expressly directed
herein.
The Settlement Agreement is hereby incorporated into this Final
Judgment in full and shall have the full force of an Order of this
Court.
9. The Court adjudges that the payment of $156,000 in attorneys'
fees and litigation expenses in the amount of $2,211.24 (the "Fee
Award") is fair and reasonable for the following reasons and those
stated in Court.
The Court further adjudges that the reimbursement to Class Counsel
of $28,192.48 in previously incurred out-of-pocket costs for the
Notice required by the Class Certification Order and Preliminary
Approval Order. Such payment shall be made pursuant to and in the
manner provided by the terms of the Settlement Agreement, with the
balance of the $50,000 allocated to administration of the
Settlement and payment of the net settlement fund to be released to
the Administrator.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=k2qiga at no extra
charge.[CC]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs and Counter-Defendants, are:
Joel B. Ard, Esq.
D LAW GROUP PLLC
Bainbridge Island, WA 98110
Telephone: (206) 701-9243
E-mail: Joel@Ard.law
- and -
Angus F. Ni, Esq.
AFN LAW PLLC
506 2nd Ave, Suite 1400
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (646) 543-7294
- and -
William R. Restis, Esq.
THE RESTIS LAW FIRM,P.C
225 Broadway, Suite 2220
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 270-8383
E-mail: william@restislaw.com
BAE SYSTEMS: All Discovery in Naylor Suit Due Oct. 11
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIN NAYLOR on behalf of
the BAE Systems Employees Savings and Investment Plan, v. BAE
SYSTEMS, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-00536-AJT-WEF (E.D. Va.), the Hon.
Judge William E. Fitzpatrick entered a Rule 16(B) Scheduling Order
as follows:
1. All discovery shall be concluded by Oct. 11, 2024.
2. The Joint Discovery Plan filed by the parties is approved, as
amended, and shall control discovery to the extent of its
application unless further modified by the court.
3. All Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(1) disclosures shall be completed
by
July 10, 2024.
4. Expert disclosures required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2) shall
be
made in accordance with paragraph 11(b) of the Joint
Discovery
Plan. To the extent the parties wish to modify expert
deadlines,
they must seek leave of court.
5. The parties' proposed class certification briefing schedule
pursuant to paragraph 12 of the Joint Discovery Plan is
approved. The parties shall notice the motion for a hearing
before the District Judge.
6. If the parties believe that a settlement conference with the
court would be of assistance in resolving this dispute, they
may
arrange a settlement conference by contacting the undersigned
magistrate judge's chambers.
BAE is a British multinational aerospace, defence and information
security company.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0QVPMK at no extra
charge.[CC]
BAYER CORP: Can File Class Cert Sur-reply Opposition
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Corpuz v. Bayer
Corporation, Case No. 3:22-cv-01085 (S.D. Cal., Filed July 25,
2022), the Hon. Judge Michael M. Anello entered an order granting
the Defendant's ex parte motion for leave to file its sur-reply in
opposition to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.
The Defendant is ordered to file its sur-reply as a separate entry
on the docket forthwith.
The Plaintiffs may file a response to the sur-reply by July 8,
2024.
The suit alleges violation of the Torts -- Personal Property --
Other Fraud.
Bayer is a global enterprise with core competencies in the Life
Science fields of health care and agriculture.[CC]
BAYER HEALTHCARE: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Sur Reply
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DONIECE DRAKE, DEBORAH
BOWLING, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-01085-MMA-JLB
(S.D. Cal.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order
granting the Defendant's motion for leave to file a sur-reply to
address an untimely survey that Plaintiffs rely on in their reply
brief.
This survey did not test the Bayer label or change the opinion of
Plaintiffs' expert: the word "Natural" on the Bayer label has "no
statistical impact whatsoever" on consumers' perceptions.
The Defendant seeks leave to file a sur-reply because it did not
have an opportunity to address this new, inapposite survey in its
opposition to class certification.
The Plaintiffs filed their class certification motion on February
20, along with an expert report from Dr. Andrea Lynn Matthews.
However, during Dr. Matthews' first deposition on April 3, she
disclosed that she had undertaken an additional survey, which she
had designed and commenced before her report was filed.
The Defendant filed its class certification opposition on April 22.
At that time, Plaintiffs still maintained the survey was not
evidence, and had not provided any written report or opinions from
Dr. Matthews on the new survey—just the raw datav and blank
survey form.
Accordingly, Defendant did not address the untimely survey in its
opposition to class certification. On May 29, however, Plaintiffs
filed their reply brief, heavily relying on the new survey. Because
Defendant did not have an opportunity to address this untimely
survey in the class certification opposition, it seeks to make four
brief points.
Bayer discovers and manufactures healthcare and medical products.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5VgOfF at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Jonathan F. Cohn, Esq.
Shannon Grammel, Esq.
Katherine C. Yarger, Esq.
Alexis Swartz, Esq.
LEHOTSKY KELLER COHN LLP
200 Massachusetts Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: (512) 693-8350
Facsimile: (512) 727-4755
E-mail: jon@lkcfirm.com
katie@lkcfirm.com
alexis@lkcfirm.com
BLINK CHARGING: Bush Seeks Initial Approval of Class Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD M. BUSH,
Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v.
BLINK CHARGING COMPANY, MICHAEL D. FARKAS, and MICHAEL P. RAMA,
Case No. 1:20-cv-23527-KMW (S.D. Fla.), the Plaintiff asks the
Court to enter an order granting:
-- preliminary approval of class action settlement;
-- certification of the settlement class; and
-- approval of notice to the settlement class.
The Parties have reached an agreement to settle this Action in
exchange for a $3,750,000 cash payment to be made for the benefit
of the Settlement Class. This is a favorable result for the
Settlement Class, and it is both substantively and procedurally
fair. Accordingly, the Court should enter the Preliminary Approval
Order.
The Court need only schedule a Settlement Hearing at least 100 days
after granting preliminary approval; all other deadlines flow from
the date of the Settlement Hearing and the date of entry of the
Preliminary Approval Order. If this schedule is not convenient for
the Court, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court use at
least the same or greater intervals between each event listed in
the proposed schedule to provide all Parties sufficient time to
comply with the proposed Preliminary Approval Order.
On Feb. 19, 2021, Lead Plaintiffs filed the Complaint asserting
claims against all Defendants under Exchange Act section 10(b) and
Rule 10b-5 for material misstatements, and against the Individual
Defendants under section20(a) as control-persons of Blink.
Blink is an American electric vehicle charging network operator.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1MNHkZ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David M. Buckner, Esq.
BUCKNER + MILES
2020 Salzedo Street, Suite 302
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (305) 964-8003
E-mail: david@bucknermiles.com
- and -
Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
Brenda Szydlo, Esq.
Villi Shteyn, Esq.
POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 661-1100
E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
bszydlo@pomlaw.com
vshteyn@pomlaw.com
- and -
Reed R. Kathrein, Esq.
Lucas E. Gilmore, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 300
Berkeley, CA 94710
Telephone: (510) 725-3000
E-mail: reed@hbsslaw.com
lucasg@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Carol C. Villegas, Esq.
David J. Schwartz, Esq.
LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 907-0870
E-mail: cvillegas@labaton.com
dschwartz@labaton.com
- and -
Jayne A. Goldstein, Esq.
SHEPHERD FINKELMAN MILLER & SHAH LLP
1625 N. Commerce Parkway, Suite 320
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33326
Telephone: (954) 515-0123
E-mail: jgoldstein@sfmlaw.com
BNSF RAILWAY: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Smith Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Smith v. BNSF Railway
Company, Case No. 1:24-cv-01195-JBM-JEH (C.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge
entered an order 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.
BNSF is a freight transportation company.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=l2h31R at no extra
charge.[CC]
BUFFALO, NY: Bid to Amend Briefing Schedule Deadlines Granted
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Black Love Resists, et
al., v. City of Buffalo, et al., Case No. 1:18-cv-00719 (W.D.N.Y.,
Filed June 28, 2018), the Hon. Judge Christina Reiss entered an
order granting stipulated motion to amend briefing schedule
deadlines on class certification.
The suit alleges violation of the Civil Rights Act.
Buffalo is a city in the U.S. state of New York and the county seat
of Erie County.[CC]
CANVAS ENERGY: Wake Energy's Bid to Certify Settlement Class Tossed
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WAKE ENERGY, LLC, on
behalf of itself and all others similarly situated, v. CANVAS
ENERGY LLC, formerly known as CHAPARRAL ENERGY, L.L.C., Case No.
5:22-cv-00822-G (W.D. Okla.), the Hon. Judge Charles Goodwin
entered an order denying Wake Energy's unopposed motion to certify
settlement class for settlement purposes.
Canvas provides exploration and production services.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Ui5O9E at no extra
charge.[CC]
CDK GLOBAL: Faces Jay Kay Collision Center Data Breach Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
JAY KAY COLLISION CENTER, INC., individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CDK GLOBAL, LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-05313 (N.D. Ill., June 25, 2024), arises from
Defendant's failures to implement reasonable data security, seeking
redress for Defendant's unlawful conduct and assert claims for
negligence, breach of implied contract, and unjust enrichment.
According to the complaint, the Defendant's conduct caused a data
breach on or around June 18 and 19, 2024 and impacted the sensitive
personally identifiable information of millions of consumers.
Defendant prompted to shut down its computer systems. As a result,
the business operations of thousands of car dealerships, and
automobile maintenance and repair services businesses were
disrupted. While Defendant is assessing the overall impact of the
data breach, nearly 15,000 dealerships and other businesses that
rely on Defendant's software programs and platforms have been left
without much needed and bargained for services, such as being
unable to process sales, perform maintenance and repair services,
or complete other critical tasks for their office administration,
documentation, and financing, says the suit.
Headquartered in Hoffman Estates, Illinois, CDK Global, LLC
provides management systems for more than 15,000 car dealerships,
automobile repair centers, original equipment manufacturers,
software vendors, and other service providers. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas A. Zimmerman, Jr., Esq.
Sharon A. Harris, Esq.
Matthew C. De Re, Esq.
Jeffrey D. Blake, Esq.
ZIMMERMAN LAW OFFICES, P.C.
77 W. Washington Street, Suite 1220
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 440-0020
Facsimile: (312) 440-4180
E-mail: tom@attorneyzim.com
sharon@attorneyzim.com
matt@attorneyzim.com
jeff@attorneyzim.com
firm@attorneyzim.com
- and -
Marc E. Dann, Esq.
Brian D Flick, Esq.
DANNLAW
15000 Madison Avenue
Lakewood, OH 44107
Telephone: (216) 373-0539
Facsimile: (216) 373-0536
E-mail: notices@dannlaw.com
CENTRAL GARDEN: Order on Class Cert. Discovery Entered in Flodin
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN FLODIN, et al., v.
CENTRAL GARDEN & PET COMPANY, et al., Case No. 4:21-cv-01631-JST
(N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jon Tigar entered an order re: recent
filings discussing class certification discovery.
The Court said, "As Plaintiffs correctly observe, Defendants'
filing addresses class certification discovery issues but requests
no relief. Accordingly, the Court will take no action on
Defendants’ filing. The Court reminds the parties that any
discovery disputes must be resolved following the procedures
required by Magistrate Judge Ryu, to whom discovery has been
referred."
On March 19, 2024, Defendants filed a motion to extend the deadline
to oppose Plaintiffs' motion for class certification to July 16,
2024. ECF No. 152. After considering Plaintiffs' opposition and
both parties' supplemental statements, the Court granted the motion
on April 3, 2024.
On June 28, 2024, Defendants filed a "second addendum to
Defendants' motion for extension to file opposition to class
certification motion," even though the Court had granted their
motion months earlier. Plaintiffs filed an unsolicited brief in
response to this document on July 1, 2024.
Central Garden is a marketer and producer of products for the lawn
& garden and pet supplies markets.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gplFnl at no extra
charge.[CC]
CENTREVILLE BANK: Faces O'Hara Suit Over Unlawful Overdraft Fees
----------------------------------------------------------------
PATRICIA O'HARA, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. CENTREVILLE BANK, Case No. 1:24-cv-00250-JJM-PAS
(D.R.I., June 25, 2024) concerns the Defendant's unlawful business
practice of assessing
(a) $32.00 overdraft fees ("Overdraft Fees") on debit card
transactions authorized on sufficient funds, and
(b) multiple $32.00 fees on an item.
The Plaintiff and other customers of the Defendant have been
injured by Defendant's improper fee maximization practices, the
lawsuit says.
The Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of the classes of
individuals preliminarily defined below, brings claims for
Defendant’s breach of contract, including the duty of good faith
and fair dealing and unjust enrichment.
Ms. O'Hara is a citizen of Rhode Island and a resident of this
District. She has maintained a checking account with Defendant at
all times relevant hereto.
The Defendant is engaged in the business of providing retail
banking services to consumers at its twenty-one locations in Rhode
Island and Connecticut.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher M. Lefebvre, Esq.
THE CONSUMER AND FAMILY LAW CENTER
OF CLAUDE F. LEFEBVRE & CHRISTOPHER M.
LEFEBVRE, P.C.
2 Dexter Street
Pawtucket, RI 02860
Telephone: (401) 728-6060
E-mail: Chris@lefebvrelaw.com
- and -
Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD, LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 625-6481
ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Laura Edmunsend, Esq.
JOHNSON FIRM
610 President Clinton Ave, Suite 300
Little Rock, AR 72201
Telephone: (501) 372-1300
E-mail: laura@yourattorney.com
CLAYTON CHRISTIAN: Niman Seeks to Certify Class of Students
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BETHANY NIMAN, RILEY
BENNETT, JORA BOLENA, KASEY CALWELL, URSULA CASEY, BRIAN HAGAN,
MIRANDA STARR, ELIZABETH VICENCIO, and MADISON WARD, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. CLAYTON
CHRISTIAN, BRIANNE ROGERS, TODD BUCHANAN, JOYCE DOMBROUSKI, CASEY
LOZAR, LOREN BOUGH, JEFF SOUTHWORTH, NORRIS BLOSSOM, MARIA MANGOLD,
and SARAH CORBIN, Case No. 9:23-cv-00079-DWM (D. Mont.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order certifying a class of
all professional students charged out-of-state tuition from
three-years before the filing of the complaint to present.
Counsel for plaintiffs has contacted counsel for the defense and
they object.
The Defendant is
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pomUyz at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Geoffrey C. Angel, Esq.
ANGEL LAW FIRM
803 West Babcock
Bozeman, MT 59715
Telephone (406) 922-2210
Facsimile (406) 922-2211
E-mail: christianangel@hotmail.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Dale Schowengerdt, Esq.
LANDMARK LAW, PLLC
7 West 6th, Avenue, Suite 518
Helena, MT 59601
- and –
Hannah Tokerud, Esq.
MONTANA UNIVERSITY SYSTEM
Helena, MT 59620
CLAYTON COUNTY SCHOOL: Henry Seeks Collective Conditional Status
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KAREN HENRY, individually
and on behalf of all similarly situated persons, v. CLAYTON COUNTY
SCHOOL DISTRICT (CCSD), Case No. 1:24-cv-00441-TWT (N.D. Ga.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting conditional
certification of the following two groups of individuals.
-- On-Call Collective:
"All persons who were, or are, employed by CCSD as non-exempt
employees at any time within three years prior to the filing of
the original Complaint in this action and who were not
compensated
at an overtime rate of one and one-half times their regular
rate
of pay for time worked on call in excess of forty hours per
week."
-- Break Collective:
"All persons who were, or are, employed by CCSD as non-exempt
employees at any time within three years prior to the filing of
t
he original Complaint in this action and who were not
compensated
at an overtime rate of one and one-half times their regular
rate
of pay for time worked during their lunch “breaks” in
excess of
forty hours per week."
Ms. Henry requests that the Court conditionally certify these
collectives and authorize the distribution of: the On-Call Notice
attached to this Motion as Exhibit A; the Break Notice attached to
this Motion as Exhibit B; the OnCall Consent to Join Form attached
to this Motion as Exhibit C; the Break Consent to Join Form
attached to this Motion as Exhibit D; and the Reminder Notice
attached to this Motion as Exhibit E.
Ms. Henry further requests that the Court order CCSD to provide
Plaintiffs' counsel, within twenty-one days of the Court granting
this motion, a computer-readable file with the following
information for all putative members of both collectives: names;
last known mailing addresses; alternate addresses; work, cell, and
personal telephone numbers; work and personal email addresses;
dates of birth; last four digits of social security numbers; and
dates of employment. Plaintiff’s Motion is supported by the
accompanying Memorandum of Law and exhibits including the
Declarations of Karen Henry, Isaac Britt, and Jason Seda, as well
as the Declaration of Jake Knanishu, counsel for Plaintiffs.
Ms. Henry brings this collective action pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA"), individually and on behalf of all similarly
situated persons employed by the Defendant at any time within the
three years preceding the commencement of this action on Jan. 30,
2024, and the present day.
Ms. Henry alleges that, as a matter of regular and routine policy
and practice, CCSD violated the FLSA by willfully failing to pay
her and similarly situated persons overtime wages for all hours
worked in excess of forty hours per week. She alleges that, when
CCSD recorded her and these other individuals' hours worked and
calculated their wages owed, CCSD willfully excluded certain hours
worked, including hours worked while on call and during lunch
"breaks."
CSSD is a public school district headquartered in Jonesboro,
Georgia.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vliIPq at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jake Knanishu, Esq.
Justin M. Scott, Esq.
RADFORD SCOTT LLP
315 W. Ponce de Leon Ave., Suite 1080
Decatur, GA 30030
Telephone: (404) 400-3600
E-mail: jknanishu@radfordscott.com
jscott@radfordscott.com
CREWS CONTROL: Filing for Conditional Status Bid Due Oc. 29
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEVENS v. CREWS CONTROL,
LLC, Case No. 2:23-cv-01863 (W.D. Pa., Filed Oct. 27, 2023), the
Hon. Judge entered an order:
-- The Plaintiff's motion for conditional class Oct. 29,
2024
certification is due:
-- Defendant's response to Plaintiff's motion Nov. 18,
2024
for conditional class certification is due:
The Court will schedule the Post-Discovery Status Conference and
set remaining deadlines after its disposition on Plaintiff's motion
for conditional class certification.
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
Crews Control is traffic control company.[CC]
CROCS INC: Expert Discovery in Valentine Due Jan. 24, 2025
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Valentine, et al., v.
Crocs, Inc., Case No. 3:22-cv-07463 (N.D. Cal., Filed Nov. 23,
2022), the Hon. Judge Trina L. Thompson entered a final amended
scheduling order for class certification:
-- Pretrial Conference set for: March 13. 2025
-- Joint Pretrial Statement with Feb. 27, 2025
Objections due by:
-- Dispositive Motion Hearing set for: Feb. 11, 2025
-- Dispositive Motion due by: Dec. 20, 2024
-- Responses due by: Jan. 14, 2025
-- Replies due by: Jan. 24, 2025
-- Close of Expert Discovery is: Jan. 24, 2025
-- Rebuttal Reports due by: Jan. 14, 2025
-- Opening Reports due by: Dec. 20, 2024
-- Close of Fact Discovery is: Dec. 20, 2024
-- Further Case Management Conference set for: Dec. 5, 2024
The nature of suit states Torts -- Personal Property -- Other
Fraud.
Crocs is an American footwear company based in Broomfield,
Colorado, that manufactures and markets the Crocs brand of foam
footwear.[CC]
DEACON CONSTRUCTION: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due March 5, 2025
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DIANA WATSON, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. DEACON
CONSTRUCTION, LLC, a foreign limited liability company; and DOES
1-20, Case No. 2:24-cv-00082-BJR (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge
Barbara J. Rothstein entered an order setting the following
deadlines and briefing schedule:
Deadline Date Joinder of Parties Deadline: July 25, 2024
Amended Pleadings: Aug. 8, 2024
Deadline to complete discovery on class Feb. 3, 2025
certification (not to be construed as a
bifurcation of discovery):
Deadline for Plaintiffs to file Motion for March 5, 2025
Class Certification:
Deadline for Defendants to file Response to April 4, 2025
Motion for Class Certification:
Deadline for Plaintiffs to file Reply in April 18,
2025
Support of Motion for Class Certification:
Deacon builds and remodels custom homes and small commercial
buildings.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=di8hjh at no extra
charge.[CC]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Fact and Discovery Extended to Oct. 28
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as OLIVIA PARROTT, et al., v.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, Case No. 1:21-cv-02930-RCL (D.D.C.), the Hon.
Judge Royce Lamberth entered an order granting the Parties' joint
motion to extend discovery and entire record:
-- The fact and discovery on liability and class issues is
extended
until Oct. 28, 2024.
-- The Parties will meet and confer and propose a schedule for
expert
discovery by Oct. 31, 2024.
-- The Parties will meet and confer and propose a schedule for
class certification and summary judgment motions by Nov. 14, 2024.
District of Columbia is a compact city on the Potomac River,
bordering the states of Maryland and Virginia.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=x4AORs at no extra
charge.[CC]
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Must File Class Cert Opposition by August 23
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAKEL BARNES, et al., v.
THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00750-RCL
(D.D.C.), the Hon. Judge Royce Lamberth entered an order granting
the Defendant's consent motion for an extension of time to oppose
plaintiffs' motion for class certification and the entire record:
-- The District of Columbia shall file its opposition to
Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification by August 23, 2024.
District of Columbia is a compact city on the Potomac River,
bordering the states of Maryland and Virginia.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=72O7Ka at no extra
charge.[CC]
DMCG INC: Abeyta Suit Seeks to Certify UCL & Rosenthal Act Classes
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT ABEYTA,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
DMCG, INC., dba BAIL HOTLINE BAIL BONDS, a California corporation,
Case No. 3:22-cv-07089-SI (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff will move the
Court on Sept. 20, 2024, to grant Plaintiff's Motion to Certify UCL
and Rosenthal Act Classes.
The Plaintiff seeks certification of the following UCL Class
pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3), for restitution of amounts paid to
Defendant on the invalid and unenforceable bail bond premium
financing agreements:
"All persons who (1) cosigned a bail bond premium financing
agreement in California with DMCG, Inc.; (2) were not provided
the
notice described in California Civil Code Section 1799.91 prior
to
signing; (3) were not a spouse of the person who received
release
services in connection with the agreement at the time of
signing;
and (4) made any premium payment to DMCG, Inc. in connection
with
the bail bond transaction at any time on or after Oct. 3,
2018."
The Plaintiff also seeks to certify the following Rosenthal Act
Class pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3), for statutory damages:
"All persons who (1) cosigned a bail bond premium financing
agreement in California with DMCG, Inc; (2) were not provided
the
notice described in California Civil Code Section 1799.91 prior
to
signing; (3) were not a spouse of the person who received
release
services in connection with the agreement at the time of
signing;
and (4) to whom DMCG, Inc. sent a Settlement Letter regarding
such
bail bond at any time after Oct. 3, 2021."
The case concerns Bail Hotline's failure to comply with a
California law designed to protect such cosigners.
On July 8, 2022, Bail Hotline sent Mr. Abeyta a letter from Bail
Hotline based on its Settlement Letter template informing him that
he was liable for an outstanding balance of $6,415 and representing
that as the "indemnitor for the bail bond debt of Defendant Luis
Martinez, you are equally liable for any past due balance of the
Defendant."
DMCG is an Engineering Firm incorporated since 2000, with a
diversified practice covering the pharmaceutical and healthcare
industries.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=YGl50N at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
Yaman Salahi, Esq.
Natasha Fernandez-Silber, Esq.
Julian Zhu, Esq.
EDELSON PC
150 California Street, 18th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 212-9300
Facsimile: (415) 373-9435
E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com
ysalahi@edelson.com
nfernandezsilber@edelson.com
jzhu@edelson.com
DR. DENNIS: Class Settlement in Kandel Suit Gets Initial Nod
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAMI KANDEL, MOCHA
GUNARATNA, and RENEE CAMENFORTE, Plaintiffs, v. DR. DENNIS GROSS
SKINCARE, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-01967-ER (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge
Edgardo Ramos entered an order granting preliminary approval of
settlement as follows:
-- The Court conditionally certifies the Settlement Class, as
described below:
"All persons in the United States who, between March 10, 2016
and
the date of entry of this Preliminary Approval Order, purchased
in
the United States, for personal or household consumption and
not
for resale or distribution, one of the Class Products."
Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (1) the presiding
judges
in the Actions; (2) any member of those judges' immediate
families; (3) Defendant; (4) any of Defendant's subsidiaries,
parents, affiliates, and officers, directors, employees, legal
representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns; (5) counsel for
the Parties; and (6) any persons who timely opt-out of the
Settlement Class.
-- The Court orders that Jami Kandel, Mocha Gunaratna, and Renee
Camenforte are appointed as the Representative Plaintiffs.
-- The Court also orders that Clarkson Law Firm, P.C. is appointed
Class Counsel.
-- The Court preliminarily finds that the Representative
Plaintiffs
and Class Counsel fairly and adequately represent and protect
the
interests of the absent Settlement Class members in accordance
with Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.
Dr. Dennis offers beauty products.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7ZvmlL at no extra
charge.[CC]
DRIFTWOOD HOSPITALITY: Class Cert Bid Deadlines for 2025, Ct. Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Oppenheimer v. Driftwood
Hospitality Management, LLC, Case No. 9:24-cv-80246 (S.D. Fla.,
Filed: March 3, 2024), the Hon. Judge Robin L. Rosenberg entered an
order that the deadlines for expert discovery, motions for class
certification, and fact discovery are the specified dates in the
year 2025, not 2024.
The nature of suit states Property Rights -- Copyright
Infringement.
Driftwood operates and develops hotels throughout the United States
and Latin America.[CC]
EKSTER INC: Seeks Leave to File Docs Under Seal
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as THOMAS PURCELLEY,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
EKSTER INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 to 10, inclusive,
Case No. 2:23-cv-07908-WLH-JC (C.D. Cal.), the Defendants ask the
Court to enter an order granting application for leave to file
documents under seal in support of its opposition to plaintiff's
motion for class certification.
Pursuant to Local Rule 79-5.2.2, Ekster files application for leave
to file under seal unredacted versions of three exhibits to the
Declaration of Thomas van der Kolk in connection with Ekster's
Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification.
On June 27, 2024, counsel for the parties met via videoconference
and thoroughly discussed the substance and potential resolution of
this Application, which Plaintiff does not oppose.
Ekster is a scale-up that designs, produces and markets smart
leather goods.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=TpAZBi at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Hannah Lynn Cannom, Esq.
WALKER STEVENS CANNOM LLP
500 Molino Street, Suite 118
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Telephone: (213) 712-9145
Facsimile: (213) 403-4906
E-mail: hcannom@wscllp.com
- and -
Kevin F. Murphy, Esq.
Michael J. Senzer, Esq.
WUERSCH & GERING LLP
100 Wall St., 10th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 509-5050
Facsimile: (212) 509-9559
E-mail: kevin.murphy@wg-law.com
michael.senzer@wg-law.com
ELON MUSK: Class Certification Briefing in Pampena Extended
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GIUSEPPE PAMPENA, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. ELON R.
MUSK, Case No. 3:22-cv-05937-CRB (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the
Court to enter an order to extend the deadlines for certification
briefing as follows:
1. Defendant's deadline to file his Opposition to the Motion
shall
be extended to Aug. 5, 2024;
2. Plaintiffs' deadline to file their Reply in Support of their
Motion shall be extended to Sept. 6, 2024.
On May 24, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed their Motion to Certify.
On June 4, 2024, the Court entered an order extending the time for
briefing on the Motion upon the parties' stipulation that time was
needed in order for each party to adequately conduct
certification-related fact and expert discovery relevant to the
Motion.
Elon Musk is a businessman and investor known for his key roles in
space company SpaceX and automotive company Tesla, Inc.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=YF2jaU at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph W. Cotchett, Esq.
Mark C. Molumphy, Esq.
Tyson C. Redenbarger, Esq.
Gia Jung, Esq.
COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP
San Francisco Airport Office Center
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
Burlingame, CA 94010
Telephone: (650) 697-6000
E-mail: jcotchett@cpmlegal.com
mmolumphy@cpmlegal.com
tredenbarger@cpmlegal.com
gjung@cpmlegal.com
- and -
Francis A. Bottini, Jr., Esq.
Albert Y. Chang, Esq.
Aaron Arnzen, Esq.
BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC.
7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102
La Jolla, CA 92037
Telephone: (858) 914-2001
E-mail: fbottini@bottinilaw.com
achang@bottinilaw.com
aarnzen@bottinilaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Alex Spiro, Esq.
Jesse A. Bernstein, Esq.
Jonathan E. Feder, Esq.
Michael T. Lifrak, Esq.
Joseph C. Sarles, Esq.
Alex Bergjans, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Madison Ave 22nd floor
New York, NY 10010
Telephone: (212) 849-7000
Facsimile: (212) 849-7100
E-mail: alexspiro@quinnemanuel.com
jessebernstein@quinnemanuel.com
jonathanfeder@quinnemanuel.com
michaellifrak@quinnemanuel.com
josephsarles@quinnemanuel.com
alexbergjans@quinnemanuel.com
ELON MUSK: Opposition of Class Cert Bid Extended to August 5
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GIUSEPPE PAMPENA, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. ELON R.
MUSK, Case No. 3:22-cv-05937-CRB (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Charles Breye entered an order extending class certification
briefing deadlines as follows:
1. Defendant's deadline to file his Opposition to the Motion
shall
be extended to Aug. 5, 2024;
2. Plaintiffs' deadline to file their Reply in Support of their
Motion shall be extended to Sept. 6, 2024.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=rAF61H at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph W. Cotchett, Esq.
Mark C. Molumphy, Esq.
Tyson C. Redenbarger, Esq.
Gia Jung, Esq.
COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP
San Francisco Airport Office Center
840 Malcolm Road, Suite 200
Burlingame, CA 94010
Telephone: (650) 697-6000
E-mail: jcotchett@cpmlegal.com
mmolumphy@cpmlegal.com
tredenbarger@cpmlegal.com
gjung@cpmlegal.com
- and -
Francis A. Bottini, Jr., Esq.
Albert Y. Chang, Esq.
Aaron Arnzen, Esq.
BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC.
7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102
La Jolla, CA 92037
Telephone: (858) 914-2001
E-mail: fbottini@bottinilaw.com
achang@bottinilaw.com
aarnzen@bottinilaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Alex Spiro, Esq.
Jesse A. Bernstein, Esq.
Jonathan E. Feder, Esq.
Michael T. Lifrak, Esq.
Joseph C. Sarles, Esq.
Alex Bergjans, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
Madison Ave 22nd floor
New York, NY 10010
Telephone: (212) 849-7000
Facsimile: (212) 849-7100
E-mail: alexspiro@quinnemanuel.com
jessebernstein@quinnemanuel.com
jonathanfeder@quinnemanuel.com
michaellifrak@quinnemanuel.com
josephsarles@quinnemanuel.com
alexbergjans@quinnemanuel.com
EVRY JEWELS: Froomin Sues Over Website's False Discount Ads
-----------------------------------------------------------
RILEY FROOMIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. EVRY JEWELS INCORPORATED, Defendant, Case
No. 2:24-cv-05395 (C.D. Cal., June 25, 2024) arises from
Defendant's alleged deceptive marketing of its sale--with made-up
regular prices, made-up discounts, and made-up expirations--on its
website, www.evryjewels.com. Plaintiff asserts claims for breach of
contract, breach of express warranty, quasi-contract, negligent
misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, and for
violations of California’s False Advertising Law, and Consumer
Legal Remedies Act.
On its website, the Defendant lists prices and advertises purported
time-limited discounts from those listed prices. These include
"LIMITED TIME" discounts offering "X% off Sitewide." Defendant
purports that sales are close to ending by claiming that they
subsist "ONLY WHILE SUPPLIES LAST!". Defendant also advertises that
its Products have a lower discount price as compared to a higher,
regular price shown in grey and/or strikethrough font. Far from
being time-limited, however, Defendant's discounts are always
available. As a result, everything about Defendant's price and
purported discount advertising is false, says the suit.
Evry Jewels Incorporated sells and markets jewelry products and
accessories online through the Evry Jewels website,
www.evryjewels.com. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christin Cho, Esq.
Simon Franzini, Esq.
Grace Bennett, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
E-mail: christin@dovel.com
simon@dovel.com
grace@dovel.com
EXAMONE WORLD: Seeks Leave to File Docs Under Seal
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LARS F. BRAUER, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. EXAMONE WORLD WIDE
INC. and QUEST DIAGNOSTICS CLINICAL LABORATORIES, INC., Case No.
2:22-cv-07760-MEMF-JC (C.D. Cal.), the Defendants ask the Court to
enter an order granting Defendants' unopposed application for leave
to file under seal in connection with Defendants' opposition to the
Plaintiff's motion for class certification.
The Defendants ask the Court to seal the following portions of
documents filed in support of Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiff's
Motion for Class Certification:
Ex. 25 to the Declaration of Sean A Commons ISO Defendants'
Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification (Expert
Report of Bruce Strombom)—portions of Strombom Report Exhibits
3,
5, 6, 7, 8
Declaration of Garret D. Brumley ISO Defendants' Opposition to
Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification—portions of par.
39-43
and partial redaction of Exhibit 2 thereto.
Declaration of Linda H. Brustad ISO Defendants' Opposition to
Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification—portions of par.
16(k),
17(d), 23(b), 23(f), 23(h), 33(a)-(b), 33(d), 33(f)-(o),
38(c)).
Although these records do not identify any putative class members
by name, because the records relate to confidential medical
information, Defendants seek to seal certain portions in an
abundance of caution to protect the privacy interests of absent
third parties. This is a narrowly tailored request.
The parties conferred in an effort to eliminate or minimize the
need for filing under seal by means of redaction pursuant to Local
Rule 79-5.2.2(b). Plaintiff shall have four days from the filing of
this application to file a declaration establishing that the
material he has designated as confidential is sealable under Local
Rule 79-5.2.2(b)(i).
Examone provides diagnostics services.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=y8IssB at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Sean A. Commons, Esq.
Kristina Martinez, Esq.
Mark B. Blocker, Esq.
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
350 S. Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 896-6000
E-mail: scommons@sidley.com
mblocker@sidley.com
EYE CARE: Class Action Settlement in Alliance Gets Final Nod
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALLIANCE OPHTHALMOLOGY,
PLLC; DALLAS RETINA CENTER, PPLC; TEXAS EYE AND CATARACT, PPLC; AND
HOFACRE OPTOMETRIC CORPORATION, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, v. ECL GROUP, LLC; ECL HOLDINGS, LLC;
EYE CARE LEADERS HOLDINGS, LLC; EYE CARE LEADERS PORTFOLIO
HOLDINGS, LLC; INTEGRITY EMR, LLC; INTEGRITY EMR HOLDINGS, LLC;
ALTA BILLING, LLC; AND ALTA BILLING HOLDINGS, LLC, Case No.
1:22-CV-296 (M.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Catherine Eagles entered an
order as follows:
1. The joint motion for Final Approval of Class Action
Settlement
and Certification of Rule 23(b)(1)(B) Classes, is granted.
2. The plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees, expenses, and
service award, is granted as follows:
a. Patient Settlement Class Counsel's request for attorneys'
fees in the amount of $872,261, inclusive of expenses, to
be
paid from the settlement fund is granted.
b. The class representatives’ request for service awards of
$1,000 each to be paid to Kimberly Farley, Chad Forrester,
Kimberly Sandvig, Detrina Solomon, and Jeanne Byers from
the
settlement fund is granted.
3. All funds held by the Settlement administrator shall be
deemed
and considered to be in custodia legis of the Court and shall
remain subject to the jurisdiction of the Court until such
time
as the funds are distributed pursuant to the settlement or
further order of the Court.
4. No later than Nov. 25, 2024, the Settlement Administrator
shall
file a status report detailing the amounts distributed and
for
what purpose and any funds remaining.
5. The Court enters final judgment, and all claims are dismissed
with prejudice.
In June 2022, several patients of ophthalmology practices sued Eye
Care Leaders Holdings, LLC ("ECL"), the entity that provides
medical records platforms and patient management software to eye
care clinics and whose data systems were breached, exposing
plaintiffs' personal information.
Eye Care providers optimize operations, improve patient care and
drive more revenue.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=KXdlEX at no extra
charge.[CC]
EYE CARE: Class Action Settlement in Farley Suit Gets Final Nod
---------------------------------------------------------------
EYE CARE: Class Action Settlement in Farley Suit Gets Final Nod
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KIMBERLY FARLEY, CHAD
FORRESTER, and KIMBERLY SANDVIG, on behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated, v. EYE CARE LEADERS HOLDINGS, LLC, Case No.
1:22-CV-468 (M.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Catherine Eagles entered an
order as follows:
1. The joint motion for Final Approval of Class Action
Settlement
and Certification of Rule 23(b)(1)(B) Classes, is granted.
2. The plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees, expenses, and
service award, is granted as follows:
a. Patient Settlement Class Counsel's request for attorneys'
fees in the amount of $872,261, inclusive of expenses, to
be
paid from the settlement fund is granted.
b. The class representatives’ request for service awards of
$1,000 each to be paid to Kimberly Farley, Chad Forrester,
Kimberly Sandvig, Detrina Solomon, and Jeanne Byers from
the
settlement fund is granted.
3. All funds held by the Settlement administrator shall be
deemed
and considered to be in custodia legis of the Court and shall
remain subject to the jurisdiction of the Court until such
time
as the funds are distributed pursuant to the settlement or
further order of the Court.
4. No later than Nov. 25, 2024, the Settlement Administrator
shall
file a status report detailing the amounts distributed and
for
what purpose and any funds remaining.
5. The Court enters final judgment, and all claims are dismissed
with prejudice.
In June 2022, several patients of ophthalmology practices sued Eye
Care Leaders Holdings, LLC ("ECL"), the entity that provides
medical records platforms and patient management software to eye
care clinics and whose data systems were breached, exposing
plaintiffs' personal information.
Eye Care provides innovative software to help eye care providers
optimize operations, improve patient care and drive more revenue.
A copy of the Court's dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hV6p6R at no extra
charge.[CC]
FADA GROUP: Parties Must Engage in Settlement Negotiations
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as XUE v. FADA GROUP INC., et
al., Case No. 2:23-cv-02371 (D.N.J., Filed April 28, 2023), the
Hon. Judge Evelyn Padin entered an order the parties shall engage
in settlement negotiations ahead of the anticipated in-person
Settlement Conference.
-- The Plaintiff's counsel shall submit a letter by close of
business
today, confirming the date of the Settlement Conference.
-- The deadlines for filing Cross Motions for Class Certification
and
for Summary Judgment shall be held in abeyance pending the
outcome
of the Settlement Conference.
The nature of suit states IRS: Tax Liability.[CC]
FBCS INC: Faces Dozal Suit Over Alleged Data Breach
---------------------------------------------------
JASON DOZAL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FINANCIAL BUSINESS AND CONSUMER SOLUTIONS,
INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-02775 (E.D. Pa., June 25, 2024)
arises from Defendant's failure to properly secure Plaintiff's and
Class Members' personally identifiable information (PII) and
personal health information.
On February 26, 2024, FBCS discovered unauthorized access to
certain systems in its network. Its subsequent investigation
determined that the access persisted from February 14 and February
26, 2024. But FBCS did not disclose the incident until April 26,
2024, when it reported having sent notification letters to people
whose PII was exposed by the data breach. Accordingly, the
Plaintiff asserts claims for negligence, negligence per se, breach
of express contract, breach of third-party beneficiary contract,
unjust enrichment, and injunctive/declaratory relief.
FBCS operates as a nationally licensed and bonded collection
agency, which offers pre-charge off, early out, and third party
collection services for clients across a variety of industries.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bart D. Cohen, Esq.
BAILEY GLASSER LLP
1622 Locust Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 274-9420
E-mail: bcohen@baileyglasser.com
FEDEX GROUND: Depina Suit Seeks to Continue Class Cert Hearing
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CLARA DEPINA, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated, v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE
SYSTEM, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Case No. 3:23-cv-00156-TLT (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order granting her motion for
administrative relief to continue the hearing on her Motion for
Class Certification
to the next available date to the Court, which is as of the filing
of this Motion, Sept. 17, 2024.
The Plaintiff has requested Defendant stipulate to the extension,
to no avail. Thus, Plaintiff has no choice but to file this Motion.
This Motion is filed concurrently with the declaration of counsel
explaining why a stipulation for the relief sought could not be
reached and as required under Civil Local Rules 6-3(a) and 7-11(a).
The Plaintiff requests this continuance due to the primary handling
attorney for Plaintiff leaving Plaintiff's counsel's firm. The new
primary handling attorney, Mr. Segal, has a pre-planned vacation
until July 10, and Mr. Setareh, another attorney for Plaintiff, has
a preplanned vacation through July 22.
Mr. Segal will need time to get up to speed on the facts of the
case and the relevant briefing, and to plan and prepare for the
hearing. Furthermore, Mr. Segal has a previously scheduled conflict
currently set for July 16, 2024.
The Plaintiff requests only a brief continuance of the hearing date
in order to allow Plaintiff's counsel to adequately prepare for the
hearing.
Trial for this case has been set for July 14, 2025. Furthermore,
there are no pre-trial deadlines or Motions being heard in this
case between the current hearing date–July 16, 2024–and the
next available hearing date on the Court's calendar–September 17,
2024. Therefore, other pre-trial deadlines will not have to be
moved if the current hearing date is continued.
Fedex provides package delivery services.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jOW8KR at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shaun Setareh, Esq.
Thomas Segal, Esq.
Brian Louis, Esq.
SETAREH LAW GROUP
9665 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone (310) 888-7771
Facsimile (310) 888-0109
E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com
thomas@setarehlaw.com
brian@setarehlaw.com
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS: Chiong Sues Over Private Data Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOSELYN CHIONG, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS PARENT, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-01592-E (N.D. Tex., June 25, 2024)
arises from Defendant's failure to properly secure, safeguard, and
adequately destroy sensitive personally identifiable information
(PII) provided by and belonging to Plaintiff and Class Members,
that it had acquired and stored for its business purposes.
On or around June 6, 2024, the Defendant began notifying and
sending out notice letters to Plaintiff and Class Members. In the
notice letters, the Defendant admitted that sensitive PII was
compromised in a cyberattack and data breach that occurred on no
later than April 14, 2024. The affected data included names, dates
of birth, and Social Security numbers. Moreover, the Defendant's
failure to implement adequate and reasonable measures to protect
Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII, failure to timely detect the
data breach, failure to take adequate steps to prevent and stop the
data breach, failure to disclose the material facts that it did not
have adequate security practices in place to safeguard the PII, and
failure to provide timely and adequate notice of the data breach --
caused substantial harm and injuries to Plaintiff and Class Members
across the United States, says the suit.
Frontier Communications is a Dallas-based telecommunications
provider that offers internet, television, and other technology
services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kristina N. Kastl, Esq.
Samantha Best, Esq.
KASTL LAW, P.C.
4144 N. Central Expressway, Suite 1000
Dallas, TX 75204
Telephone: (214) 821-0230
E-mail: eservice@kastllaw.com
kkastl@kastllaw.com
sbest@kastllaw.com
- and -
Stephanie A. Casey, Esq.
COLSON HICKS EIDSON, P.A.
255 Alhambra Circle, Penthouse
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Telephone: (305) 476-7400
E-mail: scasey@colson.com
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Morgan Class Suit Over Data Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TIMOTHY MORGAN individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS PARENT, INC., Case No.
3:24-cv-01589-K (N.D. Tex., June 25, 2024) seeks to hold the
Defendant responsible for the injuries the Defendant inflicted on
Plaintiff and tens of thousands of similarly situated persons due
to the Defendant's impermissibly inadequate data security, which
caused the personal information of Plaintiff and those similarly
situated to be exfiltrated by unauthorized access by cybercriminals
(the "Data Breach") on or about April 14, 2024.
Defendant Frontier provides communications services to residential
and business customers in urban, suburban, and rural communities in
the United States. The Company offers a variety of communications
solutions services through its fiber-optic and copper networks,
including video, high-speed internet, advanced voice, and frontier
secure digital protection.
The Data Breach allegedly affected over 750 million people. The
data which the Defendant collected from the Plaintiff and Class
Members, and which was exfiltrated by cybercriminals from the
Defendant, were highly sensitive. Upon information and belief, the
exfiltrated data included personal identifying information ("PII")
such as: names, email addresses, SSNs, credit scores, dates of
birth, and phone numbers.
Accordingly, the Defendant obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members'
PII and then maintained that sensitive data in a negligent and/or
reckless manner. As evidenced by the Data Breach, the Defendant
inadequately maintained its network, platform, software—rendering
these easy prey for cybercriminals.
The Plaintiff and Class Members will likely suffer additional
financial costs for purchasing necessary credit monitoring
services, credit freezes, credit reports, or other protective
measures to deter and detect identity theft. Through this action,
the Plaintiff seeks to remedy these injuries on behalf of himself
and all similarly situated individuals whose PII were exfiltrated
and compromised in the Data Breach.
Plaintiff Morgan is a natural person and resident and citizen of
Pasco County, Florida. On June 6, 2024, Morgan received a letter
informing him of the Data Breach.
The Defendant operates a telecommunications company, offering a
variety of communications solutions, throughout the United
States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John A. Yanchunis, Esq.
Ronald Podolny, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN
COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
201 North Franklin Street 7th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 223-5505
Facsimile: (813) 223-5402
E-mail: JYanchunis@forthepeople.com
ronald.podolny@forthepeople.com
GARAGE CARS: Barrett Suit Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL BARRETT, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. THE GARAGE CARS,
LLC d/b/a THE GARAGE, Case No. 1:23-cv-11018-NMG (D. Mass.), the
Plaintiff will move the Court on Aug. 1, 2024, for an Order
granting the Plaintiff's motion for class certification pursuant to
FRCP 23.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FXIHY8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
MARCUS & ZELMAN, LLC
701 Cookman Avenue, Suite 300
Asbury Park, NJ 07712
Telephone: (732)695-3282
Facsimile: (732) 298-6256
E-mail: yzelman@MarcusZelman.com
GREYSTAR CALIFORNIA: Supplemental Briefing Order Entered in Zeff
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ZACHARY ZEFF, an
individual, on behalf of himself and on behalf of others similarly
situated, v. GREYSTAR CALIFORNIA, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
Case No. 3:20-cv-07122-EMC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge entered an
order re supplemental briefing as follows:
-- The Court has reviewed the motion for preliminary approval and
orders that the parties file a joint supplemental brief on the
issues identified below and revise specific language in the
settlement agreement as indicated. If the parties have
different
views on any issue, they can simply provide their respective
positions in the joint filing. A party may also indicate that
it
takes no position on any issue. The supplemental briefing shall
be
filed within a week of the date of this order, on July 5,
2024.
-- Attorney's Fees
The Court requests supplemental briefing regarding the
attorney's
fees calculation:
(1) Provide an estimate of hours incurred for each major
litigation task.
(2) Provide an hourly rate for attorneys and legal staff.
-- Settlement Agreement Terms
The website and toll-free telephone number for Class Members to
obtain more case information should be included in the actual
terms of the settlement agreement.
Greystar is in the residential rental housing industry.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ix0TXU at no extra
charge.[CC]
HANDI-CRAFT CO: Cortez Alleges Deceptive Marketing of Baby Bottles
------------------------------------------------------------------
ALEJANDRINA CORTEZ and TULIISA MILLER, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. HANDI-CRAFT
COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-03782 (N.D. Cal., June
25, 2024), accuses the Defendant of deceptive marketing of its Dr.
Brown's baby and infant bottles and cups.
The Defendant claims that the said products suitable for babies and
young children. However, Defendant fails to inform consumers that
when these products are heated as intended for ordinary use, they
leach harmful microplastics that cause long-term health
complications for children--including damaging children's digestive
tract, immune system, and reproductive systems. Moreover, the
Defendant has breached its legal obligations to consumers by not
stating expressly, clearly, and conspicuously on the products'
front packaging and labels that they pose severe health risks for
children, says the suit.
Headquartered in St. Louis, MO, Handi-Craft Company, Inc.
manufactures and distributes baby bottles and accessories. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq.
Bahar Sodaify, Esq.
Kelsey J. Elling, 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
bsodaify@clarksonlawfirm.com
kelling@clarksonlawfirm.com
agudino@clarksonlawfirm.com
HOME POINT: Class Settlement in Securities Suit Gets Final Nod
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re Home Point Capital Inc. Securities
Litigation, Case No. 4:21-cv-11457-SDK-KGA (E.D. Mich.), the Hon.
Judge Shalina Kumar entered an order:
-- granting plaintiffs' motion for final approval of the class
action
settlement, approval of plan of allocation, and final class
certification;
-- approving the Settlement and Plan of Allocation;
-- granting class counsel's motion for attorney's fees and
expenses
and statutory award to lead plaintiff;
-- dismissing this action with prejudice; provided, however, that
this Court retains jurisdiction over all matters relating to
the
administration of the Settlement, including allocation and
distribution of the Settlement Fund;
The Court further entered order that lead class counsel and the
settlement administrator Giraldi & Co. LLC shall remain responsible
for completion of the administration of the claims and distribution
of the Settlement Funds, but they may not invade the Settlement
Fund for reimbursement or payment of fees beyond that which is
ordered here absent further order of the Court.
The Court finds the Settlement and Plan of Allocation to be fair,
adequate, and reasonable to the class and therefore approves the
Settlement and Plan of Allocation. The Court certifies the class,
and it also finds that lead counsel and lead plaintiff are entitled
to awards reimbursing them for attorneys’ fees, costs, and
expenses incurred in litigating this action on behalf of the class
and that the awards sought are reasonable.
The requested $15,000 to reimburse lead plaintiff for his time and
effort and $337 to reimburse him for expenses associated with
obtaining an expedited visa to travel to the United States for his
deposition are reasonable.
The Court conducted a fairness hearing on May 14, 2024 to determine
whether a settlement agreement should be given final approval on
behalf of the certified settlement class in this case.
The Settlement addresses plaintiffs' claims under Sections 11 and
15 of the Securities Act, alleging that Home Point Capital, Inc.,
certain individual Home Point officers and directors, and private
equity funds, which owned the majority of Home Point common stock
and voting power, made material misrepresentations and failed to
make adequate disclosures in the prospectus and registration
statement issued in connection with Home Point's initial public
offering ("IPO").
The Court previously certified as a class for settlement purposes
only:
"all persons allegedly damaged by purchasing or otherwise
acquiring common stock in Home Point's IPO or after the IPO but
on
or before June 21, 2021."
Home Point is a residential mortgage originator and servicer.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=M4RwYi at no extra
charge.[CC]
IDAHO: Seeks Order on Bid for Hearing & Briefing Schedule
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JANE ROE, et al., v. RAUL
LABRADOR, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the State
of Idaho; et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00306-DCN (D. Idaho), the
Defendant asks the Court to enter an order on motion for hearing
and briefing schedule:
The State Defendants request
(1) that the Court schedule a hearing on Plaintiffs' motion for
Temporary Restraining Order no earlier than Tuesday July 2;
(2) that the State Defendants be granted until the date of any
hearing to file their response in opposition; and
(3) all other relief that is just.
The Plaintiffs did not file their complaint or TRO motion until
this afternoon, Friday, June 28. But their TRO motion is not
premised on some late-breaking emergency development. Governor
Little signed House Bill 668 back on March 27, 2024. And as early
as March 22, 2024, the ACLU, Plaintiffs’ lawyers, issued a press
release that condemned the Idaho Senate’s passage of the bill.
The Plaintiffs could have filed suit at any time since Governor
Little signed the bill. For example, in Poe v. Labrador, Case No.
1:23-cv-00269-BLW, 2023 WL 8935065 (Dec. 26, 2023), the plaintiffs
challenged Idaho’s Vulnerable Child Protection Act. The statute
was scheduled to take effect on January 1, 2024.
Those plaintiffs did not wait until New Years’ Eve, and then move
for a TRO. Instead, they sued on May 31, 2023, and the Court held a
preliminary-injunction hearing on November 6, 2023.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4lcif4 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Paul Carlos Southwick, Esq.
Emily Myrei Croston, Esq.
ACLU OF IDAHO FOUNDATION
Boise, ID 83701
Telephone: (208) 344-9750
E-mail: psouthwick@acluidaho.org
ecroston@acluidaho.org
- and -
Chase B. Strangio, Esq.
Malita Picasso, Esq.
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION
125 Broad St.
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 549-2584
E-mail: cstrangio@aclu.org
mpicasso@aclu.org
The Defendant is represented by:
James E. M. Craig, Esq.
James J. Simeri, Esq.
Gregory E. Woodard, Esq.
Matthew L. Maurer, Esq.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Boise, ID 83720-0010
Telephone: (208) 334-2400
Facsimile: (208) 854-8073
E-mail: james.craig@ag.idaho.gov
james.simeri@ag.idaho.gov
greg.woodard@ag.idaho.gov
matthew.maurer@ag.idaho.gov
INDEGENE INC: Progressive Heath Seeks Class Certification
---------------------------------------------------------
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 Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order certifying the
following class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(3):
Class A
"All persons or entities who were successfully sent a Fax, on
or
about Feb. 7, 2022, that states "Medical Record Review of the
Impact of Adverse Events Associated with the Use of Current
anti-
Parkinson's Disease Medications on Patient Clinical
Therapeutics
and Outcomes Trajectories in the U.S," and offers an honorarium
of
$250 per eligible patient."
The Plaintiff seeks to certify the following alternative class in
the event the Court finds there are individual issues as to those
recipients whom Defendant' Rule 30(b)(6) witness claims are in
Defendant Indegene's "Project" database whom Defendants claim
evidence prior express permission to be sent fax ads:
Class B
"All persons or entities who were successfully sent a Fax, on
or
about Feb. 7, 2022, that states "Medical Record Review of the
Impact of Adverse Events Associated with the Use of Current
anti-
Parkinson's Disease Medications on Patient Clinical
Therapeutics
and Outcomes Trajectories in the U.S," and offers an honorarium
of
$250 per eligible patient."
Excluded from Class B are the recipients in Indegene's database
for which Indegene claims it had prior express permission to
send
fax ads.
Excluded from both proposed Classes are Defendants' employees
and
agents.
The Plaintiff also seeks an Order from the Court appointing
Plaintiff as class representative and appointing the law firm of
Anderson + Wanca as class counsel.
In violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991
("TCPA"), the Defendants successfully sent 18,869 unsolicited fax
advertisements (the "Fax") to 18,851 unique fax numbers in a
broadcast conducted on Feb. 7, 2022. The Fax seeks participants for
a "Medical Record Review of the Impact of Adverse Events Associated
with the Use of Current anti-Parkinson's Disease Medications on
Patient Clinical Therapeutics and Outcomes Trajectories in the
U.S," and offers an honorarium of $250 per eligible patient.
The Defendants did not have prior express permission to send the
Fax, and the Fax does not contain a compliant opt out notice.
Indegene provides marketing products and services.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=shWQGX at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael J. Canning, Esq.
Matthew N. Fiorovanti, Esq.
GIORDANO, HALLERAN & CIESLA
125 Half Mile Road, Suite 300
Red Bank, NJ 07701-6777
Telephone: 732-741-3900
E-mail: mcanning@ghclaw.com
mfiorovanti@ghclaw.com
- and -
Ryan M. Kelly, Esq.
Wallace C. Solberg, Esq.
ANDERSON + WANCA
3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 500
Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
Telephone: 847-368-1500
E-mail: rkelly@andersonwanca.com
wsolberg@andersonwanca.com
INTUITIVE SURGICAL: Parties Seek to Modify Class Cert Brief Sched
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LARKIN COMMUNITY HOSPITAL
v. Intuitive Surgical Inc. (DA VINCI SURGICAL ROBOT ANTITRUST
LITIGATION), Case No. 3:21-cv-03825-AMO (N.D. Cal.), the Parties
ask the Court to enter an order modifying briefing schedule for the
Opposition and Reply briefs on Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
Certification shall be modified as follows:
Event Proposed Date
Intuitive's Opposition: July 30, 2024
Plaintiffs' Reply: Sept. 10, 2024
On June 6, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class
Certification.
On June 19, 2024, Intuitive asked Plaintiffs about the expert's
availability for a deposition on July 10 or July 11 and Plaintiffs
indicated that the expert was not available those days, but was
available the week of July 15, 2024.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7yexye at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffrey J. Corrigan, Esq.
Jeffrey L. Spector, Esq.
Icee N. Etheridge, Esq.
SPECTOR ROSEMAN & KODROFF, P.C.
2001 Market Street, Suite 3420
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 496-0300
Facsimile: (2150 496-6611
E-mail: jcorrigan@srkattorneys.com
jspector@srkattorneys.com
ietheridge@srkattorneys.com
- and -
Samuel Maida, Esq.
Gary I. Smith, Jr., Esq.
Reena A. Gambhir, Esq.
HAUSFELD LLP
600 Montgomery Street, Suite
3200 San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 633-1908
Facsimile: (415) 358-4980
E-mail: smaida@hausfeld.com
gsmith@hausfeld.com
rgambhir@hausfeld.com
- and -
Benjamin D. Brown, Esq.
Daniel McCuaig, Esq.
Manuel J. Dominguez, Esq.
Christopher J. Bateman, Esq.
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS &
TOLL PLLC
11780 U.S. Highway One, Suite N500
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33408
Telephone: (561) 515-2604
Facsimile: (561) 515-1401
E-mail: jdominguez@cohenmilstein.com
bbrown@cohenmilstein.com
dmccuaig@cohenmilstein.com
cbateman@cohenmilstein.com
- and -
Michael J. Boni, Esq.
Joshua D. Snyder, Esq.
John E. Sindoni, Esq.
BONI, ZACK & SNYDER LLC
15 St. Asaphs Road
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
Telephone: (610) 822-0200
Facsimile: (610) 822-0206
E-mail: mboni@bonizack.com
jsnyder@bonizack.com
jsindoni@bonizack.com
The Defendant is represented by:
William B. Michael, Esq.
Crystal L. Parker, Esq.
Daniel A. Crane, Esq.
Joshua Hill Jr., Esq.
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON &
GARRISON, LLP
535 Mission Street, 24th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (628) 432-5100
Facsimile: (628) 232-3101
E-mail: wmichael@paulweiss.com
JHill@paulweiss.com
cparker@paulweiss.com
dcrane@paulweiss.com
- and -
Kathryn E. Cahoy, Esq.
Sonya E. Winner, Esq.
Andrew Lazerow, Esq.
Ashley E. Bass, Esq.
COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
3000 El Camino Real
5 Palo Alto Square, 10th Floor
Palo Alto, CA 94306-2112
Telephone: (650) 632-4700
Facsimile: (650) 632-4800
E-mail: kcahoy@cov.com
swinner@cov.com
alazerow@cov.com
abass@cov.com
- and -
Allen Ruby, Esq.
ALLEN RUBY, ATTORNEY AT LAW
15559 Union Ave. 138
Los Gatos, CA 95032
Telephone: (408) 477-9690
E-mail: allen@allenruby.com
KAISER FOUNDATION: Court Resolves Discovery Dispute dated April 30
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN DOE, et al., v.
KAISER FOUNDATION HEALTH PLAN, INC., et al., Case No.
3:23-cv-02865-EMC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Peter Kang entered an
order resolving discovery dispute letter brief dated April 30,
2024.
The Court orders the Parties to begin meeting and conferring in
good faith on these Phase II ESI discovery issues starting after
October 11, 2024; and further orders the Parties to file monthly
Discovery Status Reports on the status of these negotiations and
progress of Phase II discovery, starting on Nov. 1, 2024 (unless
the Court
orders otherwise).
Kaiser operates as a non-profit health care organization.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=40oe1N at no extra
charge.[CC]
KASPER HOLDINGS: Fails to Properly Pay Managers, Hollis Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
CHANDLER HOLLIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. KASPER HOLDINGS, LLC, d/b/a Tradefull, and
TRADEFULL, LLC, d/b/a Tradefull, Defendants, Case No. 5:24-cv-01043
(N.D. Ohio, June 20, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants
for non-payment of wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act, the Ohio Constitution, the Ohio Minimum Fair Wages Standards
Act, and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act.
The Plaintiff has been employed by the Defendants as a Customer
Success Manager in North Canton, Ohio from June 2021 through the
present.
Kasper Holdings, LLC, doing business as Tradefull, is a provider of
outsourced e-commerce solutions, headquartered in Stark County,
Ohio.
Tradefull, LLC doing business as Tradefull, is a provider of
outsourced e-commerce solutions, headquartered in Stark County,
Ohio. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew S. Grimsley, Esq.
Anthony J. Lazzaro, Esq.
Lori M. Griffin, Esq.
THE LAZZARO LAW FIRM, LLC
The Heritage Building, Suite 250
34555 Chagrin Boulevard
Moreland Hills, OH 44022
Telephone: (216) 696-5000
Facsimile: (216) 696-7005
Email: matthew@lazzarolawfirm.com
anthony@lazzarolawfirm.com
lori@lazzarolawfirm.com
KNOX COUNTY, IL: Initial Class Status Bid Moot
----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as J.B.H. v. Knox County, et
al., Case No. 4:24-cv-04096 (C.D. Ill., Filed May 27, 2024), Hon.
Judge James E. Shadid entered an order that due to the filing of
their amended motion for class certification, the initial motion
for class certification is moot.
-- The Defendants have been served, but their answers or
responsive
pleadings are not yet due. As such, the Court sua sponte
extends
the deadline for Defendants to respond to Plaintiffs' amended
motion for class certification to August 12, 2024.
The nature of suit states Prisoner Civil Rights.[CC]
L & R DISTRIBUTORS: Filing for Class Certification Bid Due Oct. 25
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as REBECCA RYHAL,
individually and on behalf of the putative class, v. L. & R.
DISTRIBUTORS, INC., a New York Corporation, ET AL. Case No.
2:24-cv-03037-MRA-JC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Monica Ramirez
Almadani entered a pretrial and class certification scheduling
order as follows:
Final Pretrial Conference (3:00 p.m.): Oct. 16, 2025
Opposition to Motions in Limine Filing Sept. 25, 2025
Deadline:
Motions in Limine Filing Deadline: Sept. 18, 2025
Settlement Conference Completion Date: Sept. 11, 2025
(Private
Mediator)
Last Date to HEAR Daubert Motions: Aug. 21, 2025
Last Date to HEAR Non-Discovery Motions: July 24, 2025
Expert Discovery Cut-Off: July 10, 2025
Expert Disclosure (Rebuttal): June 19, 2025
Expert Disclosure (Initial): May 22, 2025
Non-Expert Discovery Cut-Off: May 1, 2025
Motion for Class Certification Hearing Jan. 9, 2025
Deadline:
Motion for Class Certification Filing Oct. 25, 2024
Deadline:
Last Date to HEAR Motions to Amend Sept. 26, 2024
Pleadings/Add Parties:
L&R provides wholesale distribution of cosmetics, accessories, hair
care products, stationery, office supplies and toys.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2ixAXd at no extra
charge.[CC]
LANE BOOTS: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Espinal Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
FRANGIE ESPINAL, ON BEHALF OF HERSELF AND ALL OTHER PERSONS
SIMILARLY SITUATED, Plaintiffs, v. LANE BOOTS, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 1:24-cv-04836 (S.D.N.Y., June 25, 2024), arises from
Defendant's failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its
website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by
Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people.
Plaintiffs alleges that the Defendant violated the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law. Accordingly, Plaintiff seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers.
Lane Boots, LLC manufactures and sells women's western boots. It
owns and operates the website, https://laneboots.com. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
LEXISNEXIS RISK: Court to Dismiss Madlinger Suit w/o Prejudice
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SCOTT MADLINGER, v.
LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS INC., et al., Case No. 23-2582 (ZNQ)
(RLS) (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Zahid Quraishi will:
-- grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Scott Madlinger's
Class Allegations and Claims for Statutory Damages, or in the
Alternative to Strike Plaintiff's Class Allegations; and
-- dismiss without prejudice the Amended Complaint.
The Plaintiff will be given an opportunity to file an Amended
Complaint to address the defects identified in this Opinion within
30 days. An appropriate Order will follow.
The Court finds that it must dismiss Plaintiff's Amended Complaint
because Plaintiff’s claims are precluded by the Settlement
Agreement.
The Plaintiff initiated the present action after the Defendant
allegedly issued inaccurate credit reports related to him. In
particular, the Plaintiff alleges that the credit reports contain
two inaccuracies.
First, Defendant reported Plaintiff as having two civil judgments
despite Plaintiff only having a single judgment on his record.
Second, Defendant reported Plaintiff as having been suspended for
an offense called "obstruction of windshield" even though Plaintiff
has never had his driver's license suspended.
Around March 2021, Plaintiff disputed these inaccuracies with
Defendant, but Defendant verified the inaccurate information in
response and failed to conduct a reasonable investigation. In May
2021, Plaintiff again disputed the inaccuracies, to no avail.
The Agreement defines the Rule 23(b)(2) class as:
"all persons residing in the United States of America who at
any
time from July 24, 2013 through the date of Preliminary
Approval
had: (1) a Lien, Judgment or Landlord Tenant record made
publicly
available by a government source or a Lien, Judgment or
Landlord
Tenant related court record included in a Consumer Report
furnished by LNRS or (2) a Motor Vehicle Record included in a
Consumer File Disclosure by LNRS."
LexisNexis. provides content-enabled workflow solutions.
A copy of the Court's opinion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sdyhVj at no extra
charge.[CC]
LEXISNEXIS RISK: Scroggins Seeks to Seal Unredacted Reply
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KERRY JENNIFER SCROGGINS,
v. LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS FL INC., Case No.
3:22-cv-00545-MHL-SLS (E.D. Va.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter, pursuant to Rule 5 of the Local Rules of the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, to seal
unredacted version of her Reply in Support of her Motion to Exclude
from Consideration on Class Certification Testimony and Evidence
from Defendant's Experts.
LexisNexis is a global data and analytics company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=3ZUToy at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leonard A. Bennett, Esq.
Craig C. Marchiando, Esq.
Drew D. Sarrett, Esq.
CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES, P.C.
763 J. Clyde Morris Blvd., Ste. 1-A
Newport News, VA 23601
Telephone: (757) 930-3660
Facsimile: (757) 930-3662
E-mail: lenbennett@clalegal.com
craig@clalegal.com
drew@clalegal.com
LOG-ON COMPUTER: Huerta Seeks Redress for Labor Law Breaches
------------------------------------------------------------
JUAN SALAZAR HUERTA, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective
Plaintiffs, and the Class, Plaintiff, v. LOG-ON COMPUTER & MAILING
SERVICES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-04835 (S.D.N.Y., June
25, 2024), accuses the Defendant of violating the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and New Jersey State Wage
and Hour Law.
In or around 1995, the Plaintiff was hired by Defendant to work as
a machine operator for printing/mailing machines. His employment
relationship continued with Defendant until January 2, 2024, when
he was terminated. Throughout his employment, the Plaintiff worked
his scheduled hours plus hours in addition to those scheduled
hours. Plaintiff was classified as a non-exempt employee but did
not receive all overtime compensation due to improper payments at a
fixed salary rate, regardless of overtime hours worked.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks to recover from Defendant: (1)
unpaid wages, including overtime, due to fixed salary payments
without payment for overtime hours, (2) liquidated damages, and (3)
attorneys' fees and costs.
Headquartered in New York, NY, Log-On Computer & Mailing Services,
Inc. provides digital print, direct mail, and fulfillment services.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
148 West 24th Street, Eighth Floor
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 465-1188
Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
LOUISIANA: Plaintiffs Seek to Amend Second Amended Scheduling Order
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VOICE OF THE EXPERIENCED,
a membership organization on behalf of itself and its members; and
MYRON SMITH, DAMARIS JACKSON, NATE WALKER, DARRIUS WILLIAMS, KEVIAS
HICKS, JOSEPH GUILLORY, KENDRICK STEVENSON, and ALVIN WILLIAMS, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. JAMES
LEBLANC, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Louisiana
Department of Public Safety and Corrections; TIMOTHY HOOPER, in his
official capacity as Warden of Louisiana State Penitentiary; MISTY
STAGG, in her official capacity as Director of Prison Enterprises,
Inc.; the LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY & CORRECTIONS; and
PRISON ENTERPRISES, INC., Case No. 3:23-cv-01304-BAJ-EWD (M.D.
La.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their
Motion to Amend the Second Amended Scheduling Order to Extend the
Deadline for Class Certification and setting the revised deadlines
for class certification accordingly:
-- Plaintiffs' opening brief to be filed on or before Aug. 16,
2024,
-- Defendants' opposition to be filed on or before Sept. 4, 2024,
and
-- Plaintiffs' reply brief to be filed on or before Sept. 16,
2024.
The Defendants do not oppose the Plaintiffs' request to extend the
class certification deadlines. The Plaintiffs do not seek any
change with respect to the other dates in the Second Amended
Scheduling Order.
Through this class action lawsuit, the Plaintiffs seek to enjoin
Defendants' continued use of the Farm Line at the Louisiana State
Penitentiary.
The Plaintiffs allege that the Farm Line, a dangerous and inhumane
form of discipline through which prison officials compel
incarcerated men to perform agricultural labor under conditions
that are strikingly reminiscent of 19th century slavery, violates
the Eighth Amendment, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities
Act, and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
On May 13, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary
restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction, seeking to
enjoin Defendants from operating the Farm Line whenever the heat
index is at or above 88 degrees.
On June 18, 2024, the Court heard oral argument on the TRO Motion.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Osw547 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Lydia Wright, Esq.
Samantha Bosalavage, Esq.
Claude-Michael Comeau, Esq.
THE PROMISE OF JUSTICE INITIATIVE
1024 Elysian Fields Avenue
New Orleans, LA 70117
Telephone: (504) 529-5955
E-mail: lwright@defendla.org
sbosalavage@defendla.org
ccomeau@defendla.org
- and -
Oren Nimni, Esq.
Amaris Montes, Esq.
RIGHTS BEHIND BARS
416 Florida Avenue NW, Se. 26152
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: (202) 455-4399
E-mail: oren@rightsbehindbars.org
amaris@rightsbehindbars.org
- and -
Joshua Hill Jr., Esq.
Jeremy A. Benjamin, Esq.
Arielle B. McTootle, Esq.
Leah R. Weiser, Esq.
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON
& GARRISON LLP
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019-6064
Telephone: (212) 373-3000
E-mail: jhill@paulweiss.com
jbenjamin@paulweiss.com
amctootle@paulweiss.com
lweiser@paulweiss.com
MDL 1720: Court Junks Bid for Initial OK of Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as IN RE PAYMENT CARD
INTERCHANGE FEE AND MERCHANT DISCOUNT ANTITRUST LITIGATION, Case
No. 1:05-md-01720-MKB-JAM (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Margo Brodie
entered an order denying the Plaintiffs' motion for preliminary
settlement approval.
The Court finds that it is not likely to grant final approval to
the Settlement.
The Court first considers the Rule 23(e)(2) factors, and then
considers additional Grinnell factors not otherwise addressed by
the Rule 23(e)(2) factors.31 The only factor that the Court does
not fully address below is the second Grinnell factor — "the
reaction of the class to the settlement." The Court has considered
this factor, to the limited extent possible at the preliminary
approval stage, through its consideration of the objections
received prior to the preliminary approval hearing.
After consideration of all relevant factors, the Court concludes
that it is not likely to grant final approval to the proposed
settlement.32
A class of over twelve million merchants, certified pursuant to
Rule 23(b)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,1 moves for
preliminary approval of a proposed settlement reached with
Defendants in this action — the Visa and Mastercard payment
networks and a number of banks that issue Visa- and
Mastercard-branded credit and debit cards. The Settlement, if
approved, would be the culmination of nearly twenty years of
litigation between Plaintiffs -- merchants who accept Visa -- and
Mastercard-branded credit and debit cards -- and Defendants.
Although Plaintiffs challenge a number of Defendants' rules and
policies, such as the "Honor All Cards" rules and Visa's and
Mastercard's default interchange fee schedules, the Settlement
primarily provides relief from Visa's and Mastercard's rules that
prohibit merchants from imposing surcharges on Defendants' cards at
the point of sale.
In addition, the Settlement provides for a modest reduction in
interchange fees, which Plaintiffs experts value as being worth
nearly $30 billion during the five-year settlement period.
On March 26, 2024, the Plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of
the Settlement.
Between April 17, 2024, and May 22, 2024, small, local merchants
and large, national merchants filed objections with the Court.
On May 13, 2024, Visa and Mastercard Defendants filed a memorandum
in support of preliminary approval.
On May 14, 2024, Plaintiffs filed a reply in support of preliminary
approval.
On June 13, 2024, the Court held a hearing on preliminary approval
of the Settlement and heard from Plaintiffs, Defendants, and the
Direct Action Plaintiffs.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ql1Lia at no extra
charge.[CC]
MDL 1720: Court Suggests Remanding Case to S.D. Illinois
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as In re Payment Card
Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation, Case
No. 1:24-cv-04053-MKB-JAM (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Margo Brodie
suggests that the Panel remand the action to the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Illinois.
The Clerk of Court is directed to transmit a copy of this
Suggestion of Remand to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation.
Finally, the Court will necessarily have to prioritize its
resolution of the pending dispositive motions in the B & R
Supermarket action over any forthcoming motions in the Mirage
action.7 With B & R Supermarket, the Court found that the factual
allegations and legal issues were sufficiently dissimilar to
warrant disassociation from MDL 1720.
Nevertheless, any forthcoming motions in Mirage would necessarily
be delayed, pending the Court's resolution of the pending motions
in B & R Supermarket that have yet to be decided. Accordingly, it
is likely that Mirage could be more efficiently prosecuted in the
transferor district.
On June 6, 2024, the above-captioned action was transferred from
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Illinois to this Court for consolidation with In re Payment Card
Interchange Fee and Merchant Discount Antitrust Litigation (MDL
1720) pursuant to an order of the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation (the “Panel”).
Mirage Wine + Spirits, Inc. brought this putative class action
against Apple Inc., Visa Inc., and Mastercard Incorporated for
alleged violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The alleged
violations relate to agreements that Apple has with Visa and
Mastercard, and the alleged effects of these agreements on the
market for card transaction services.
A copy of the Court's order suggestion dated July 1, 2024, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dl14FH
at no extra charge.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in Cancer Care Due Sept. 11
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cancer Care Network of
South Texas, P.A. v. Genentech Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00205 (N.D.
Okla.), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell entered a third amended
phase II scheduling order as follows:
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Disclosures Due: July 15, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Disclosures Due: July 29, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 14, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Close of Phase II Discovery: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Sept. 11, 2024
Certification Due:
-- Genentech's Response Brief Due: Oct. 25, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Reply Brief Due: Nov. 18, 2024
-- Hearing on Motion for Class Jan. 15, 2025
Certification:
The Cancer Care case is being consolidated in MDL 2000 Genentech,
Inc., Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech's
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
Genentech manufactures and markets pharmaceutical products.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8Evnkq at no extra
charge.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in CCMH Suit Due Sept. 11
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Comanche County Memorial
Hospital v. Genentech Inc. et al., Case No. 4:16-cv-00347 (N.D.
Okla.), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell entered a third amended
phase II scheduling order as follows:
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Disclosures Due: July 15, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Disclosures Due: July 29, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 14, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Close of Phase II Discovery: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Sept. 11, 2024
Certification Due:
-- Genentech's Response Brief Due: Oct. 25, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Reply Brief Due: Nov. 18, 2024
-- Hearing on Motion for Class Jan. 15, 2025
Certification:
The Comanche County case is being consolidated in MDL 2000
Genentech, Inc., Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales
Practices Litigation.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech's
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
Genentech manufactures and markets pharmaceutical products.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VcwWiR at no extra
charge.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in FCS Suit Due Sept. 11
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Florida Cancer
Specialists, P.L. v. Genentech, Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-00204 (N.D.
Okla.), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell entered a third amended
phase II scheduling order as follows:
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Disclosures Due: July 15, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Disclosures Due: July 29, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 14, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Close of Phase II Discovery: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Sept. 11, 2024
Certification Due:
-- Genentech's Response Brief Due: Oct. 25, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Reply Brief Due: Nov. 18, 2024
-- Hearing on Motion for Class Jan. 15, 2025
Certification:
The Florida case is being consolidated in MDL 2000 Genentech, Inc.,
Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech's
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer.
Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
Genentech manufactures and markets pharmaceutical products.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=YPNDHW at no extra
charge.[CC]
MDL 2700: Class Cert Bid Filing in HOACNY Due Sept. 11
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hematology-Oncology
Associates of Central New York, P.C. v. Genentech Inc., Case No.
4:16-cv-00221(N.D. Okla.), the Hon. Judge Gregory K. Frizzell
entered a third amended phase II scheduling order as follows:
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Disclosures Due: July 15, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Disclosures Due: July 29, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 14, 2024
-- Genentech's Expert Depositions Deadline: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Close of Phase II Discovery: Aug. 28, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Sept. 11, 2024
Certification Due:
-- Genentech's Response Brief Due: Oct. 25, 2024
-- Plaintiffs' Reply Brief Due: Nov. 18, 2024
-- Hearing on Motion for Class Jan. 15, 2025
Certification:
The Hematology-Onco case is being consolidated in MDL 2000
Genentech, Inc., Herceptin (Trastuzumab) Marketing and Sales
Practices Litigation.
These actions share factual questions arising from Genentech's
marketing and sales of Herceptin (trastuzumab), a prescription
medication for the treatment of certain types of breast cancer. The
Plaintiffs in all the actions are oncology providers who allege
that Genentech breached its warranties regarding the amount,
volume, or concentration of Herceptin that it sold them.
Genentech manufactures and markets pharmaceutical products.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hqly23 at no extra
charge.[CC]
MDL 2724: DPPs Seek to Amend Pretrial Order No. 234
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit RE: GENERIC PHARMACEUTICALS PRICING
ANTITRUST LITIGATION, Case No. 2:16-md-02724-CMR (E.D. Pa.), the
Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs (DPPs) ask the Court to enter an order
to amend Paragraph 12 of Pretrial Order No. 234 ("PTO No. 234")
[MDL Doc No. 2443] to permit DPPs to serve and file DPPs' further
replies in support of class certification by no later than July 24,
2024 instead of July 3, 2024.
The Defendants have refused to consent to this requested extension
that is a direct result of Defendants' improper reliance in their
June 17, 2024 sur-replies in opposition to DPPs' class
certification motions on the proposed "reply expert reports" of Dr.
John H. Johnson, IV.
Paragraph 6 of PTO NO. 234 provides that "Defendants shall serve
all expert reports and file responses to motions for class
certification (with any expert reports in support thereof) no later
than February 2, 2024."
Paragraph 8 of PTO NO. 234 provides that "Plaintiffs shall serve
all rebuttal expert reports and file replies in support of class
certification no later than May 3, 2024".
While Paragraph 11 of PTO 234 permits Defendants to "file any
sur-replies in opposition to class certification no later than June
17, 2024," it does not provide for the filing of any reply expert
reports by Defendants, or for Defendants to rely on them in their
June 17, 2024 SurReplies to DPPs' class certification motions.
However, contrary to PTO No. 234 and without seeking Court
permission, in disregard of PTO No. 234, on June 17, 2024, the
Defendants proposed reply expert reports of Dr. Johnson to their
Sur-Replies in opposition to class certification and relied on
those proposed reply reports to oppose DPPs' class certification
motions and the opinions of DPPs' expert Dr. Jeffrey J. Leitzinger.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EXSmSf at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Dianne M. Nast, Esq.
NASTLAW LLC
1101 Market Street, Suite 2801
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
Telephone: (215) 923-9300
E-mail: dnast@nastlaw.com
Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs' Steering Committee, are:
David F. Sorensen, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103
Telephone: (215) 875-3000
E-mail: dsorensen@bm.net
- and -
Thomas M. Sobol, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1 Faneuil Hall Square, 5th Floor
Boston, MA 02109
Telephone: (617) 482-3700
E-mail: tom@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Robert N. Kaplan, Esq.
KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP
800 Third Avenue, 38th Floor
New York, New York 10022
Telephone: (212) 687-1980
E-mail rkaplan@kaplanfox.com
- and -
Linda P. Nussbaum, Esq.
NUSSBAUM LAW GROUP, PC
1133 Avenue of the Americas, 31st Floor
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (917) 438-9189
E-mail: lnussbaum@nussbaumpc.com
- and -
Michael L. Roberts, Esq.
ROBERTS LAW FIRM P.A.
1920 McKinney Ave., Suite 700
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (501) 821-5575
E-mail: mikeroberts@robertslawfirm.us
MDL 2873: Durheim Seeks Damages for AFFF Exposure
-------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM DURHEIM, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANTS, Case
No. 2:23-mn-2873-RMG (D.S.C., June 25, 2024) is a class action
seeking for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to
aqueous film-forming foams (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear
(TOG) containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and
polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
Plaintiff Durheim seeks redress for Defendants' unlawful conduct
and asserts several claims including negligence, battery,
inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent
concealment, and breach for express and implied warranties.
Plaintiff was diagnosed with prostate cancer and Non-Hodgkin's
Lymphoma as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products.
However, Defendants encouraged the continued and even further
increased use of PFAS by their customers and others, including but
not limited to the manufacture, use, and release, of AFFF
containing PFAS and/or emergency responder protection gear or
equipment coated with materials made with or containing PFAS, and
tried to encourage and foster the increased and further use of PFAS
in connection with as many products/uses/and applications as
possible, despite knowledge of the toxicity, persistence, and
bioaccumulation concerns associated with such activities, says the
suit.
The Durheim case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE:
AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION.
Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company manufactures industrial,
safety and consumer products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Telephone: (216) 815-9000
Facsimile: (216) 274-9365
MDL 2873: Horan Seeks Damages for Harmful AFFF Products' Exposure
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH HORAN, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANT, Case No.
2:23-mn-2873-RMG (D.S.C., June 25, 2024) is a class action seeking
for damages for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams (AFFF) and firefighter turnout gear containing
the toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances (PFAS).
Plaintiff Joseph Horan was diagnosed with bladder cancer as a
result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products. However, at all
relevant times, Defendants, through their acts and/or omissions,
concealed and/or withheld information from their customers,
governmental entities, and the public that would have properly and
fully alerted Plaintiff to the legal, toxicological, medical, or
other significance and/or risk from having any PFAS material in
Plaintiff's blood. Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks to recover
compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and
significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products at various locations during the course of
Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities.
The Horan case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE:
AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION.
Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company manufactures industrial,
safety and consumer products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Constantine Venizelos, Esq.
CONSTANT LEGAL GROUP LLP
737 Bolivar Rd., Suite 440
Cleveland, OH 44115
Telephone: (216) 815-9000
Facsimile: (216) 274-9365
MERCURY MISSION: Order on Class Cert. Bids Entered in Burton Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMIDA BURTON, v. MERCURY
MISSION SYSTEMS, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-04260-FMO-PVC (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Fernando Olguin entered an order regarding
motions for class certification:
1. Joint Brief:
The parties shall work cooperatively to create a single,
fully
integrated joint brief covering each party's position, in
which
each issue (or sub-issue) raised by a party is immediately
followed by the opposing party's/parties' response.
2. Meet and Confer:
In order for a motion for class certification to be filed in
a
timely manner, the meet and confer must take place no later
than
35 days before the deadline for class certification motions
set
forth in the Court's Case Management and Scheduling Order.
Mercury Mission is a manufacturer of secure sensor and mission
processing subsystems for the aerospace and defense industries.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qR5Rya at no extra
charge.[CC]
MERIDIAN SERVICES: Plaintiffs File Bid to Approve Notice
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD STIRLING,
Individually and For Others Similarly Situated v. MERIDIAN SERVICES
GROUP, LLC f/k/a WORK MANAGEMENT, INC., Case No. 3:23-cv-00040-CDL
(M.D. Ga.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting
his unopposed motion to approve notice and methods to distribute
notice. The
The Parties have agreed on the form and substance of the Notice,
Consent, and Email. The Parties have agreed on the methods to
distribute Notice.
Meridian is a project management consulting and services company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0dazGz at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Richard M. Schreiber, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
rschreiber@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH, PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
C. Ryan Morgan, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
20 N. Orange Ave., 16th Floor
Orlando, FL 32802-4979
Telephone: (407) 420-1414
Facsimile: (407) 867-4791
E-mail: rmorgan@forthepeople.com
MYLAN INC: Corrected Bid for Class Certification Tossed
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re: EpiPen Direct Purchaser Litigation,
Case No. 0:20-cv-00827-ECT-JFD (D. Minn.), the Hon. Judge Eric
Tostrud entered an order that:
1. Plaintiffs' corrected motion for class certification is
denied.
2. Defendants' motion to exclude the expert opinions of Hal J.
Singer, Ph.D. is denied as moot.
The Plaintiffs have not affirmatively demonstrated that the class
is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable under
Rule 23(a)(1), that the representative parties will adequately
protect the interests of the class under 23(a)(4), or that
questions of law or fact common to class members predominate over
any questions affecting only individual members under 23(b)(3). For
these reasons, Plaintiffs’ class-certification motion will be
denied.
The Plaintiffs Rochester Drug Co-Operative, Inc. and Dakota Drug,
Inc. are drug wholesalers. Plaintiffs claim that Mylan, the
manufacturers of a device called the "EpiPen," paid bribes and
kickbacks to a group of pharmacy benefit managers (the "PBM
Defendants") to ensure that Mylan could raise the price of EpiPen
with impunity while preserving a monopoly market share. In doing
so, the Plaintiffs claim, all Defendants violated the Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act ("RICO"), and Mylan
violated the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Plaintiffs assert these
claims for themselves and for a proposed class of drug wholesalers
who, like Plaintiffs, purchased EpiPens directly from Mylan
The Plaintiffs seek to certify the following class:
"All persons or entities in the United States and its
territories
that directly purchased EpiPen, EpiPen Jr., EpiPen 2-Pak,
and/or
EpiPen Jr. 2-Pak from Mylan from Jan. 1, 2013 through Dec. 31,
2020."
Excluded from the Class are Defendants, their officers,
directors,
management, employees, subsidiaries, and affiliates, and all
federal governmental entities.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=O5vBiM at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Peter Kohn, Esq.
Joseph T. Lukens, Esq.
FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
Philadelphia, PA
- and -
Andrew Kelly, Esq.
Chris Letter, Esq.
Dan Chiorean, Esq.
Stuart Des Roches, Esq.
Thomas Maas, Esq.
ODOM & DES ROCHES, LLC
New Orleans, LA
- and -
Andrew C. Curley, Esq.
Caitlin G. Coslett, Esq.
David F. Sorensen, Esq.
E. Michelle Drake, Esq.
Richard D. Schwartz, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
Philadelphia, PA
- and -
Bruce E. Gerstein, Esq.
Jonathan M. Gerstein, Esq.
Noah Silverman, Esq.
Samuel E. Bonderoff, Esq.
GARWIN, GERSTEIN & FISHER LLP
New York, NY
- and -
Christopher M. First, Esq.
Eric Enger, Esq.
Russell Chorush, Esq.
HEIM, PAYNE & CHORUSH, LLP
Houston, TX
- and -
David S. Golub, Esq.
Steven Bloch, Esq.
SILVER GOLUB & TEITELL LLP
Stamford, CT
- and -
David C. Raphael, Jr., Esq.
Erin R. Leger, Esq.
Susan C. Segura, Esq.
SMITH SEGURA & RAPHAEL, LLP
Alexandria, LA
The Defendants are represented by:
Adam K. Levin, Esq.
Carolyn A. DeLone, Esq.
Charles A. Loughlin, Esq.
Christine A. Sifferman, Esq.
Christopher Fitzpatrick, Esq.
David M. Foster, Esq.
Devin Urness, Esq.
Elizabeth Jose, Esq.
Justin Bernick, Esq.
Michael D. Gendall, Esq.
Katherine Booth Wellington, Esq.
Anthony Ufkin, Esq.
Peter H. Walsh, Esq.
Brittany C. Armour, Esq.
HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP
Washington, DC
- and -
Brian C. Fries, Esq.
Carrie E. Josserand, Esq.
Jason Johnson, Esq.
LATHROP GPM LLP
Kansas City, MO
- and -
Atticus DeProspo, Esq.
Craig Singer, Esq.
Daniel M. Dockery, Esq.
Dylan McDevitt, Esq.
Enu A. Mainigi, Esq.
Lori Jo Interlicchio, Esq.
McKayla Stokes, Esq.
Raymond Kennon Poteat, III, Esq.
Annie Showalter, Esq.
Ashley Wall Hardin, Esq.
WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY LLP
Washington, DC
- and -
John W. Ursu, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
Minneapolis, MN
- and -
Jonathan Gordon Cooper, Esq.
Michael John Lyle, Esq.
Eric Christopher Lyttle, Esq.
Samuel Johnson, Esq.
Nicholas Inns, Esq.
Michael Chesley Smith, Esq.
Ellison Ward Merkel, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP
Washington, DC
- and -
Donald G. Heeman, Esq.
Jessica J. Nelson, Esq.
Randi J. Winter, Esq.
SPENCER FANE LLP
Minneapolis, MN
- and -
Andrew Glasnovich, Esq.
Kadee Jo Anderson, Esq.
STINSON, LLP
Minneapolis, MN
- and -
Bradley Harder, Esq.
David Andrew Hatchett, Esq.
Elizabeth Broadway Brown, Esq.
Jordan Elise Edwards, Esq.
Mark David Boyer, II, Esq.
Reagan Drake, Esq.
Brandon C.E. Springer, Esq.
Brian David Boone, Esq.
Kyle Hair, Esq.
ALSTON & BIRD LLP
Atlanta, GA
NATIONAL RAILROAD: Class Cert Bid Filing Continued to Oct. 1
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GORDON CHAPPELLE, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, v. NATIONAL
RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION, Case No. 2:24-cv-02667-JFW-MRW
(C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge John Walter entered an order granting
renewed joint stipulation to continue class certification
deadline:
-- Plaintiff's deadline to file a Motion for Class Certification
is
continued from July 31, 2024 until Oct. 1, 2024.
National Railroad is the national passenger railroad company of the
United States.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kLHJ3m at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Shahram Samie, Esq.
Atticus Lee, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON P.C.
2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067.3107
Telephone: (310) 553-0308
E-mail: ssamie@littler.com
atlee@littler.com
NORTH CAROLINA: Court Dismisses ACLU Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES
UNION OF NORTH CAROLINA, v. JOSHUA STEIN, in his official capacity
as Attorney General of the State of North Carolina, et al., Case
No. 1:23-cv-00302-LCB-JLW (M.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Loretta C.
Biggs entered an order granting the Defendants' motions to dismiss
the American Civil case.
The Court further entered an order that the Plaintiff's amended
motion to certify class, and the plaintiff's amended motion for
preliminary injunction, are each denied as moot.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=B0hrSU at no extra
charge.[CC]
OAK STREET: Faces Dirth Suit Over Labor Law Breaches
----------------------------------------------------
MIRANDA DIRTH, on behalf of herself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs,
and the Class, Plaintiff v. OAK STREET HEALTH, INC. and OAK STREET
HEALTH MSO, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-05290 (N.D. Ill.,
June 25, 2024) seeks to recover from Defendants: (1) unpaid wages,
including overtime, due to time-shaving; (2) liquidated damages;
and (3) attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
In or around April 25, 2022, the Plaintiff was hired by Defendants
to work remotely, using a laptop provided by Defendants, as a call
representative/customer service representative. The Plaintiff's
employment with Defendants was terminated around July 2023.
Throughout her employment, Plaintiff was time-shaved approximately
two hours every week for automatically deducted meal breaks that
she worked through. Among other things, the Defendants required
employees to remain available for calls until their scheduled
shift's end, but reprimanded employees for reporting hours worked
past their scheduled shifts. Accordingly, the Defendants knowingly
and willfully violated Plaintiff and Class members' rights by
failing to pay them the proper overtime compensation at rates of
not less than one and one-half times the regular rate of pay for
each hour worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek due a policy
of underreporting employees' hours, in violation of the state wage
and labor laws, says the suit.
Headquartered in Chicago, IL, Oak Street Health, Inc. is a network
of primary care centers for adults on Medicare. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
148 West 24th Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 465-1188
Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
OBERON AMERICAS: MPS Suit Seeks Scheduling Conference
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MPS MONITOR S.R.L., an
Italian corporation; NICOLA DE BLASI, an individual; and VALSOFT
CORPORATION, INC., a Canadian corporation, v. OBERON AMERICAS,
INC., a Florida corporation; and DENIS DRENI, an individual, Case
No. 2:24-cv-00409-JLB-KCD (M.D. Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court
to enter an order granting their unopposed motion for a scheduling
conference under Rule 16(b)(1)(B) to occur before the United States
District Judge or the United States Magistrate Judge.
The Plaintiffs assert claims against the Defendants for trademark
infringement, unfair competition, defamation per se, defamation per
quod, and tortious interference following the termination of a
software distribution agreement between MPS and Oberon. Despite
termination of the software agreement, the Defendants have falsely
informed Plaintiffs' customers that they cannot legally contract
with MPS, have falsely and publicly accused Plaintiffs of "criminal
conduct" and attempting a "hostile takeover," have continued to
demand payment from MPS's customers, and have continued to infringe
Plaintiffs' trademarks.
On May 15 and June 5, 2024, the parties conferred in accord with
Local Rule 3.02(a)(1) regarding the submission of joint case
management report. During these conferrals, Plaintiffs proposed an
accelerated schedule due to the parties’ contradictory assertions
regarding the termination of the software distribution agreement,
the rights to trademarks thereunder, the resulting confusion in the
marketplace, and the appropriateness for prompt judicial
resolution. Further, Plaintiffs do not believe that extensive
discovery will be required and are prepared to promptly produce all
relevant documents and make relevant witnesses available without
delay.
Accordingly, Plaintiffs propose an accelerated schedule under which
a trial would occur as soon as feasible and within ten months if
possible. Defendants ultimately rejected Plaintiffs' proposed
schedule and proposed an alternative schedule under which a trial
would not occur until the end of 2025 or over eighteen months after
the filing of this action. As demonstrated in the parties' Case
Management Report, filed contemporaneously with this motion, the
proposed schedules advanced are incompatible.
Oberon offers technology consulting services.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1tfj9x at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joseph H. Varner, III, Esq.
Daniel A. Silver, Esq.
HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP
100 North Tampa Street, Suite 4100
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 227-8500
E-mail: joe.varner@hklaw.com
daniel.silver@hklaw.com
- and -
Matthew W. Walch, Esq.
Linda Qiu, Esq.
LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
330 N. Wabash Ave, Suite 2800
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (312) 876-7700
E-mail: matthew.walch@lw.com
linda.qiu@lw.com
OVATIONS FOOD: Bid for Initial Nod of Settlement Partly OK'd
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as COOKS v. OVATIONS FOOD
SERVICES LP, Case No. 2:23-cv-01858 (W.D. Pa., Filed Oct. 26,
2023), Hon. Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan entered an order granting in
part and denying in part motion for preliminary approval of
collective action settlement.
-- The parties move for approval of a collective action
settlement.
-- But as the Court has explained, the Court does not have
authority
to approve collective action settlements and awards for
attorneys'
fees. Walker v. Marathon Petroleum Corp. , 684 F. Supp. 3d 408,
414 (W.D. Pa. 2023) (Ranjan, J.).
-- Further, this is not a class action, as Plaintiff never moved
for
class certification, and the motion itself consistently refers
to
a "collective-wide resolution."
-- Because judicial approval of this settlement is unauthorized
and
unnecessary and no class exists necessitating appointment of
class
counsel, the Court denies the motion for settlement approval
and
appointment of counsel.
-- The Court grants the motion insofar as it approves the proposed
notice of settlement. Consistent with Walker , after
consummation
of the settlement agreement, the parties should file a
stipulation
of dismissal.
The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).
Ovations Food Services, L.P., doing business as Spectra Food
Services & Hospitality, provides food services and hospitality
solutions.[CC]
OVERLAND SHEEPSKIN: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Espinal Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
FRANGIE ESPINAL, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated v. OVERLAND SHEEPSKIN CO., INC., Case No.
1:24-cv-04837 (S.D.N.Y., June 25, 2024) alleges that Overland
failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to
be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually-impaired people in violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
Because Defendant's website, https://www.overland.com is not
equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it
violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a
change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures
so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers. By failing to make its
Website available in a manner compatible with computer screen
reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and visually-impaired
individuals the benefits of its online goods, content, and services
-- all benefits it affords nondisabled individuals -- thereby
increasing the sense of isolation and stigma among those persons
that Title III was meant to redress, says the suit.
The Defendant operates the Overland online retail store across the
United States. This online retail store constitutes a place of
public accommodation. The Defendant’s Website provides consumers
with access to an array of goods including information about
purchasing apparel, accessories and other products and services
available online and to ascertain information relating to pricing,
shipping, ordering merchandise and return and privacy policies on
their website.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
PANERA LLC: Hoffman Sues Over Data Security Failures
----------------------------------------------------
WILL HOFFMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PANERA, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
4:24-cv-00884 (E.D. Mo., June 25, 2024) arises out of Defendant’s
failures to implement reasonable and industry standard data
security practices to properly secure, safeguard, and adequately
destroy Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive personal
identifiable information that it had acquired and stored for its
business purposes.
The Defendant's data security failures allowed a targeted
cyberattack to compromise Defendant's network that, upon
information and belief, contained personally identifiable
information of Plaintiff and other individuals. The data breach
occurred on or around March 23, 2024. Defendant began sending
notice letters to Class Members on June 13, 2024. Moreover, the
Defendant disregarded the rights of Plaintiff and Class Members by,
among other things, failing to take standard and reasonably
available steps to prevent the data breach and failing to provide
Plaintiff and Class Members with prompt and full notice of the data
breach, says the suit.
Headquartered in Missouri, Panera, LLC is a restaurant chain with
2,187 locations across 48 states. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John F. Garvey, Esq.
Colleen Garvey, Esq.
Ellen A. Thomas, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
701 Market Street, Suite 1510
St. Louis, MO 63101
Telephone: (314) 390-6750
E-mail: jgarvey@stranchlaw.com
cgarvey@stranchlaw.com
ethomas@stranchlaw.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW FERGUSON WEISELBERG GILBERT
One West Law Olas Blvd., Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 332-4200
E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Plaintiffs Seek Rule 23 Class Certification
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VALERIE TORRES and RHONDA
HYMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC., ACTIVEPROSPECT, INC., and ASSURANCE
IQ, LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-07465-CRB (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs
will move the Court on Oct. 18, 2024, pursuant to Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3), for an order certifying the
following class:
"All natural persons who, while in California, visited
Prudential.com, provided personal information on Prudential's
form
to receive a quote for life insurance, and for whom a
TrustedForm
Certificate URL associated with that website visit was
generated
from Nov. 23, 2021 to Dec. 13, 2022."
Excluded from the Class are Defendants, their employees, agents
and assigns, and any members of the judiciary to whom this case
is
assigned, their respective court staff, the members of their
immediate families, and Plaintiffs' counsel.
The Plaintiffs will also move the Court to appoint them as class
representatives and to appoint Girard Sharp LLP as Class Counsel.
Prudential provides financial services throughout the United States
and several locations worldwide.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=oyCfb3 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Dena C. Sharp, Esq.
Simon S. Grille, Esq.
Nina R. Gliozzo, Esq.
Jordan Isern, Esq.
GIRARD SHARP LLP
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 981-4800
Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
E-mail: dsharp@girardsharp.com
sgrille@girardsharp.com
ngliozzo@girardsharp.com
jisern@girardsharp.com
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Torres Suit Seeks to Seal Class Cert Exhibit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VALERIE TORRES and RHONDA
HYMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL, INC., ACTIVEPROSPECT, INC., and ASSURANCE
IQ, LLC, Case No. 3:22-cv-07465-CRB (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask
the Court to enter an order granting administrative motion to seal
exhibit to plaintiffs' motion for class certification:
1. The unredacted version of the Torres TrustedForm Certificate
to
the Gliozzo Declaration in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for
Class Certification, to be filed provisionally under seal;
2. The Declaration of Nina R. Gliozzo in Support of Plaintiffs'
Administrative Motion to Seal; and
3. A Proposed Order granting Plaintiffs' Administrative Motion
to
Seal.
The Plaintiffs file this motion pursuant to the Stipulated
Protective Order and Civil Local Rule 79-5. Pursuant to Civil Local
Rules 79-5 and 7-11(c), no hearing date has been set.
Discussion Plaintiffs seek to seal the private medical information,
mental health history, medication information, phone number, email
addresses, and other sensitive personal information contained in
the TrustedForm Certificate for Plaintiffs Valerie Torres.
Prudential provides financial services throughout the United States
and several locations worldwide.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=E1VB76 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Dena C. Sharp, Esq.
Simon S. Grille, Esq.
Nina R. Gliozzo, Esq.
Jordan Isern, Esq.
GIRARD SHARP LLP
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 981-4800
Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
E-mail: dsharp@girardsharp.com
sgrille@girardsharp.com
ngliozzo@girardsharp.com
jisern@girardsharp.com
PURECYCLE TECHNOLOGIES: $12MM Settlement to be Heard on Oct. 8
--------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP on July 1 announced that the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida has approved the following
announcement of a proposed class action settlement that would
benefit purchasers of securities of PureCycle Technologies, Inc.
(NASDAQ: PCT):
SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
AND FINAL APPROVAL HEARING
TO: ALL PERSONS WHO PURCHASED OR OTHERWISE ACQUIRED PURECYCLE
SECURITIES1 BETWEEN NOVEMBER 16, 2020 AND NOVEMBER 10, 2021, BOTH
DATES INCLUSIVE.
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to an Order of the United States
District Court for the Middle District of Florida, that a hearing
will be held on October 8, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable
Paul G. Byron, United States District Judge of the Middle District
of Florida, 401 West Central Boulevard, Courtroom 4B, Orlando,
Florida 32801, for the purpose of determining: (1) whether the
proposed Settlement of the claims in the above-captioned Action for
consideration including the sum of $12,000,000 should be approved
by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) whether the
proposed plan to distribute the Settlement proceeds is fair,
reasonable, and adequate; (3) whether the application of Lead
Counsel for an award of attorneys’ fees of up to one-third of the
Settlement Amount ($4,000,000) plus interest, reimbursement of
expenses of not more than $400,000, and a Compensatory Award to
Lead Plaintiffs of no more than $60,000 collectively (or $30,000
each) should be approved; and (4) whether this Action should be
dismissed with prejudice as set forth in the Stipulation of
Settlement dated May 6, 2024 (the "Settlement Stipulation").2
If you purchased or otherwise acquired Purecycle Securities between
November 16, 2020 and November 10, 2021, both dates inclusive (the
"Class Period"), your rights may be affected by this Settlement,
including the release and extinguishment of claims you may possess
relating to your ownership interest in Purecycle Securities. If you
have not received a detailed Notice Of Proposed Settlement Of Class
Action, Motion For Attorneys’ Fees And Expenses, And Final
Approval Hearing ("Notice") and a copy of the Proof of Claim and
Release Form, you may obtain copies by visiting
http://www.strategicclaims.net/purecycleor by contacting the
Claims Administrator toll-free at (866) 274-4004 or at
info@strategicclaims.net. If you are a member of the Settlement
Class, in order to share in the distribution of the Net Settlement
Fund, you must submit a Proof of Claim and Release Form postmarked
no later than September 12, 2024, establishing that you are
entitled to recovery. Unless you submit a written exclusion
request, you will be bound by any judgment rendered in the Action
whether or not you make a claim.
If you desire to be excluded from the Settlement Class, you must
submit to the Claims Administrator a request for exclusion so that
it is received no later than September 12, 2024, in the manner and
form explained in the Notice. All members of the Settlement Class
who have not requested exclusion from the Settlement Class will be
bound by any judgment entered in the Action pursuant to the
Settlement Stipulation.
Any objection to the Settlement, Plan of Allocation, or Lead
Counsel’s request for an award of attorneys’ fees and
reimbursement of expenses and award to Lead Plaintiffs must be in
the manner and form explained in the detailed Notice and received
no later than September 17, 2024, by each of the following:
Clerk of the Court
United States District Court
Middle District of Florida
401 West Central Boulevard
Rm. 4B
Orlando, Florida 32801
Lead Counsel
Jeremy A. Lieberman
Tamar A. Weinrib
POMERANTZ LLP
600 Third Avenue, Floor 20
New York, NY 10016
Counsel For Defendants
David Kistenbroker
Joni Jacobsen
DECHERT LLP
35 West Wacker Drive, Suite 3400
Chicago, IL 60601
John R. Loftus
Christine E. Ellice
DLA Piper LLP (US)
2000 Avenue of the Stars
Suite 400 North Tower
Los Angeles, CA 90067
If you have any questions about the Settlement, you may visit
http://www.strategicclaims.net/purecycleor write to Lead Counsel
at the above address.
PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT OR THE CLERK’S OFFICE REGARDING
THIS NOTICE.
Dated: June 4, 2024
BY ORDER OF THE UNITED STATES
DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE
DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
1 "PureCycle Technologies, Inc.," "PureCycle," or "the Company"
shall mean PureCycle Technologies, Inc. and any of its
predecessors, affiliates, or subsidiaries, including but not
limited to PureCycle Technologies LLC or Roth CH Acquisition I Co.
("ROCH"). During the Class Period, until March 17, 2021, the common
stock of ROCH traded on the NASDAQ under the ticker symbol "ROCH,"
the warrants to purchase the common stock of ROCH traded on the
NASDAQ under the ticker symbol "ROCHW," and the units comprised of
ROCH common stock and warrants traded on the NASDAQ under the
ticker symbol "ROCHU." Following the March 16, 2021 shareholder
approval of the merger and the March 17, 2021 closing of the
merger, PureCycle common stock trades on the NASDAQ under the
ticker symbol "PCT," the warrants to purchase its common stock
trade on the NASDAQ under the ticker symbol "PCTTW," and units
comprised of PCT common stock and warrants trade on the NASDAQ
under the ticker symbol "PCTTU." As further described in the
Stipulation of Settlement, these are all included within the
definition of PureCycle Securities.
2 Defendants deny any and all allegations of wrongdoing, fault,
liability, or damage whatsoever asserted by Lead Plaintiffs,
including but not limited to, the allegations that Lead Plaintiffs
or the Settlement Class have suffered damages or that Lead
Plaintiffs or the Settlement Class were harmed by the conduct
alleged in the Action. Defendants continue to believe the claims
asserted against them in the Action are without merit.
RENTGROW INC: Green Sues Over Inaccurate Eviction Record Info
-------------------------------------------------------------
ERIC L. GREEN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. RENTGROW, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-01102 (E.D. Va., June 25, 2024) accuses the Defendant of
violating the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Plaintiff Green alleges that Defendant negligently and/or willfully
failed to follow reasonable procedures to assure maximum accuracy
of eviction record information it included in tenant screening
reports it prepared about Plaintiff. In violation of FCRA, the
Defendant published harmful, inaccurate and outdated eviction
record information to their potential landlords and/or property
managers. In addition, the Defendant also failed to perform a
reasonable re-investigation of the disputed information and to
update or remove the inaccurate information from Plaintiff's file.
Headquartered in Waltham, MA, RentGrow, Inc. is a Delaware
corporation that provides resident screening services to
businesses, landlords and/or property managers throughout the
United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leonard A. Bennett, Esq.
Craig C. Marchiando, Esq.
CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES, P.C.
763 J. Clyde Morris Blvd., Ste. 1-A
Newport News, VA 23601
Telephone: (757) 930-3660
E-mail: lenbennett@clalegal.com
craig@clalegal.com
- and -
Drew D. Sarrett, Esq.
CONSUMER LITIGATION ASSOCIATES, P.C.
626 E. Broad Street, Suite 300
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone: (757) 930-3660
E-mail: drew@clalegal.com
- and -
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
Jordan Sartell, Esq.
FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS, P.C.
1600 Market Street, Suite 2510
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 735-8600
Facsimile: (215) 940-8000
E-mail: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
jsartell@consumerlawfirm.com
RK OIL: Pardo Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Commercial Property
--------------------------------------------------------------
NIGEL FRANK DE LA TORRE PARDO v. RK OIL, INC. d/b/a RK OIL INC /
SHELL, Case No. 1:24-cv-22431 (S.D. Fla., June 25, 2024) is a class
action seeking injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation
expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities
Act.
The Defendant owns, operates and oversees the commercial gas
station within its commercial property, to include the general
parking lot and parking spots specific to its commercial gas
station business therein and all other pathway and commercial goods
isas, aisles and restroom isas, which is open to the public located
within the commercial property.
The subject commercial property and gas station and mini-mart is
open to the public and is located in Palmetto Bay, Florida. The
individual Plaintiff visits the commercial property, to include
visits to the commercial property and business located within the
commercial property on March 20, 2024, and encountered multiple
violations of the ADA that directly affected his ability to use and
enjoy the commercial property. He often visits the Commercial
property and business located within the commercial property in
order to avail himself of the goods and services offered there, and
because it is approximately 27 miles from his residence and is near
other business and gas station and mini-mart he frequents as a
patron.
The Plaintiff found the commercial property and commercial gas
station business located within the commercial property to be rife
with ADA violations. The Plaintiff encountered architectural
barriers at the commercial property and Commercial gas station
business located within the commercial property and wishes to
continue his patronage and use of the premises, says the suit.
The Plaintiff has very limited use of his hands and cannot operate
any mechanisms which require tight grasping or twisting of the
wrist. He has lower paraplegia, which inhibits him from walking or
otherwise ambulating without the use of a wheelchair. He is limited
in his major life activities by such, including but not limited to
walking, standing, grabbing, grasping and/or pinching.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony J. Perez, Esq.
ANTHONY J. PEREZ LAW GROUP, PLLC
7950 w. Flagler Street, Suite 104
Miami, FL 33144
Telephone: (786) 361-9909
Facsimile: (786) 687-0445
E-Mail: ajp@ajperezlawgroup.com
jr@ajperezlawgroup.com
RUGSUSA LLC: Class Action Settlement in Wiley Suit Gets Final Nod
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRISTINA WILEY,
ALEXANDRIA LEE, TAWNEY BRIGGS, and CHRISTOPHER KORDA, each
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
RUGSUSA, LLC, Case No. 6:23-cv-03250-SRB (W.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge
Stephen Bough entered an order:
-- granting Plaintiffs' motion for final approval of class action
Settlement; and
-- granting in part and denying in part Plaintiffs' motion for
Attorneys' fees, costs, and incentive awards.
The Court finds that the factors articulated in Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 23 weigh in favor of final approval. Further, the
Court finds that while the costs and incentive awards are fair and
reasonable, the circumstances of this case warrant a reduction in
attorneys' fees from Class Counsel's request.
The Court affirms this finding, and certifies the Settlement Class
for the purposes of judgment. The Class consists of:
"All persons who, while in the State of California, purchased
one
or more products advertised as being subject to a purported
discount on Defendant’s website RugsUSA.com from May 17,
2020, to
Oct. 12, 2023 ("California Subclass"); and
"All persons who, while in the State of Washington, purchased
one
or more products advertised as being subject to a purported
discount on Defendant's website RugsUSA.com from June 30, 2019,
to
Oct. 12, 2023 ("Washington Subclass"); and
"All persons who, while in the State of Oregon, purchased one
or
more products advertised as being subject to a purported
discount
on Defendant's website RugsUSA.com from July 13, 2022, to Oct.
12,
2023 ("Oregon Subclass"); and
"All persons who, while in the State of Missouri, purchased one
or
more products advertised as being subject to a purported
discount
on Defendant's website RugsUSA.com from Aug. 11, 2018, to Oct.
12,
2023 ("Missouri Subclass").
The Court finds that the requirements of Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3) are met:
-- Distribution of Settlement Awards.
The Settlement calls for the distribution of cash and credit
benefits to Class Members. The Court finds that the plan of
distribution of these benefits is reasonable and effective, and
directs that Defendant and the Settlement Administrator
distribute
the benefits in the manner directed by the Settlement
Agreement.
-- Release of Claims.
The Settlement Agreement requires Class Members to release all
claims that "arise from the same facts and claims alleged" in
the
operate Complaint.
-- Incentive Awards.
The Court confirms its preliminary finding that the requested
incentive award amounts are appropriate. The requested awards
are
fair and reasonable given the Class Representatives’ service
to
the Class, and they do not deter from the fairness or
reasonableness of the settlement. Thus, the Court orders that
the
Class Representatives be paid incentive awards of $2,500 each.
-- Attorneys' Fees and Costs. Courts in the Eighth Circuit
typically
use the "percentage-of-the-fund method" to award attorneys'
fees
from a common fund.
-- In light of the above and after considering Class Counsel's
Motion
for Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and Incentive Awards, and the
Parties’
arguments regarding the request, the Court denies Class
Counsel's
requested award of $2,823,921.30 in fees.
Instead, the Court believes that a lower percentage of the common
fund is warranted and therefore, grants Class Counsel attorneys'
fees in the amount of $750,000—approximately 5.25% of the common
fund—and $29,759.30 for costs and expenses.
The fees and costs must be paid in the manner directed by the
Settlement Agreement.
On Feb. 27, 2024, the Court granted Plaintiffs' unopposed motion
for preliminary approval of class action settlement and conditional
class certification.
On June 26, 2024, the Court held a final fairness hearing on the
Motions currently before the Court.
RugsUSA offers wide range of rugs, carpets, and other related
products.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=u6MMiX at no extra
charge.[CC]
RUSSELECTRIC INC: Bowers Suit Seeks Class Certification
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Rita Bowers, Michele
Gear-Cole, Florence Lorenzano, and Reginald Tercy, as
representatives of a class of similarly situated persons, and on
behalf of the Russelectric Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan, v.
John H. Russell, Suzanne E. Russell, and Lisa J. Russell,
individually and as trustees of the Russelectric Stockholder Trusts
and the Russelectric Stock Proceeds Trusts, as defined herein; and
Denise D. Wyatt, Dennis J. Long, Argent Trust Company, and John and
Jane Does 1-25, Case No. 1:22-cv-10457-PBS (D. Mass.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order certifying the following
proposed class in this action (or such other class(es) as the Court
may determine to be appropriate) under Rule 23(a) and (b)(1) or
(b)(3):
"All participants and beneficiaries of the Russelectric Inc.
Employee Stock Ownership Plan who received a benefit when the
ESOP
terminated."
In addition, the Plaintiffs move to appoint Plaintiffs as the class
representatives for the class, and Plaintiffs' counsel as class
counsel under Rule 23(g).
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fiJpUd at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Charlie C. Gokey, Esq.
Carl F. Engstrom, Esq.
Brandon T. McDonough, Esq.
Mark E. Thomson, Esq.
Jennifer K. Lee, Esq.
ENGSTROM LEE LLC
323 Washington Ave. N., Suite 200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 305-8349
E-mail: cgokey@engstromlee.com
cengstrom@engstromlee.com
bmcdonough@engstromlee.com
mthomson@engstromlee.com
jlee@engstromlee.com
- and -
Jason M. Leviton, Esq.
BLOCK & LEVITON, LLP
260 Franklin Street, Suite 1860
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (617) 398-5600
E-mail: jason@blockesq.com
- and -
Marc Edelman, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 223-5505
E-mail: medelman@forthepeople.com
- and -
Brandon J. Hill, Esq.
WENZEL, FENTON, CABASSA, P.A.
1110 N. Florida Ave, Suite 300
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 337-7992
E-mail: bhill@wfclaw.com
RUSSELL INVESTMENTS: Filing for Renewed Class Cert Bid Due August 9
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANNY WANEK, JUAN DUARTE,
RICK RUBERTON, and LINDA RUBERTON, as representatives of a class of
similarly situated persons, and on behalf of the Caesars
Entertainment Corporation Savings & Retirement Plan, v. RUSSELL
INVESTMENTS TRUST COMPANY, CAESARS HOLDINGS, INC., THE PLAN
INVESTMENT COMMITTEE, and THE 401(K) PLAN COMMITTEE, Case No.
2:21-cv-00961-CDS-BNW (D. Nev.), the Hon. Judge entered an order
approving stipulation regarding class certification briefing
schedule:
(1) The deadline for Plaintiffs to file their renewed Motion
for
Class Certification shall be Aug. 9, 2024.
(2) The deadline for Defendants to oppose Plaintiffs' Motion for
Class Certification shall be Aug. 30, 2024.
(3) The deadline for Plaintiffs to file a reply in support of
their Motion for Class Certification shall be Sept. 13, 2024.
The Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class Certification on Oct.
17, 2023. The Court stayed Defendants' deadline to respond to
Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and Plaintiffs' reply
deadline pending resolution of Plaintiffs' Motion for Leave to File
a Fourth Amended Complaint.
Russell operates as an investment advisor.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zNdmUi at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Rew R. Goodenow, Esq.
Michael R. Kealy, Esq.
PARSONS BEHLE & LATIMER
50 West Liberty Street, Suite 750
Reno, NV 89501
Telephone: (775) 323-1601
E-mail: rgoodenow@parsonsbehle.com
mkealy@parsonsbehle.com
- and -
Sean M. Murphy, Esq.
Robert C. Hora, Esq.
MILBANK LLP
55 Hudson Yards, 34th Floor
New York, NY 10001-2163
Telephone: (212) 530-5000
E-mail: smurphy@milbank.com
rhora@milbank.com
SAFEAEON INC: Khanna RICO Suit Removed to N.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled RAJESH KHANNA, an individual, RNN, LLC, an Illinois
limited liability company, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. HARPREET WALIA, an individual, MANDEEP DHOAT,
an individual, SAFEAEON INC., a Delaware corporation, SEVENSECUR
INC., a Delaware corporation, WALIA ESTATES LLC, a California
limited liability company, WAVESTRONG, INC., a California
corporation, and DOES 1-10, Case No. 22CV011790, was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda,
to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
on June 20, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:24-cv-03716 to the proceeding.
The Plaintiffs bring class action complaint against the Defendants
for (1) rescission, (2) violation of the Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), (3) conspiracy to violate RICO,
(4) violation of California's Unfair Competition Law, (5) fraud by
concealment, (6) common law fraud, (7) breach of fiduciary duty,
(8) abuse of control, (9) constructive trust, and (10) civil theft
under California Penal Code.
SafeAeon Inc. is a computer security service company in Pleasanton,
California.
SevenSecur Inc. is a software company in California.
Walia Estates LLC is a limited liability company in California.
WaveStrong, Inc. is a computer security service company in
Pleasanton, California. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Kenneth B. Julian, Esq.
David Boyadzhyan, Esq.
MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
695 Town Center Drive, 14th Floor
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (714) 371-2500
Facsimile: (714) 371-2550
Email: KJulian@manatt.com
DBoyadzhyan@manatt.com
- and -
Justin Draa, Esq.
DRAA & LAPCEVIC, LLP
950 E. Campbell Ave.
Campbell, CA 95008
Telephone: (831) 325-2674
Email: JDraa@dld-law.com
SECURITAS SECURITY: Must Respond to Class Cert Discovery
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL ANGEL ULLOA II, v.
SECURITAS SECURITY SERVICES USA, INC., Case No. 4:23-cv-01752-DMR
(N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Donna Ryu entered an order granting
Plaintiff's motion to compel Defendant Securitas Security Services
USA, Inc. to respond to discovery.
The parties shall submit a proposed protective order by July 12,
2024. Defendant shall serve supplemental interrogatory responses
and responsive documents within seven days after the court enters
the parties' proposed protective order. Any joint letter regarding
the Plaintiff's request for handwritten time records for aggrieved
employees is due by July 12, 2024.
In this putative class action, Plaintiff sues his former employer
for wage and hour violations under California law. The Defendant
employed Plaintiff as a "Flex Officer" from May 2022 to October
2022. As a Flex Officer, the Plaintiff filled in for security
officers on leave, provided security for special events, and
temporarily staffed new accounts.
The Plaintiff seeks to represent a class of:
"all current and former non-exempt employees of Defendant[ ] in
the State of California at any time within the period beginning
four (4) years prior to the filing of this action and ending at
the time this action settles or the class is certified[.]"
Securitas is a provider of custom security & guarding solutions.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0DNK5P at no extra
charge.[CC]
SITEMETRIC LLC: Underpays Access Control Officers, Greene Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
QUAWNTINA GREENE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SITEMETRIC, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 4:24-cv-02326 (S.D. Tex., June 20, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and applicable state
overtime laws.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as an access control officer
from May 2023 until August 2023.
Sitemetric, LLC is a provider of construction site monitoring
services, headquartered in Houston, Texas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matt Dunn, Esq.
Whitney Flanagan, Esq.
GETMAN, SWEENEY & DUNN, PLLC
260 Fair St.
Kingston, NY 12401
Telephone: (845) 255-9370
Facsimile: (845) 255-8649
Email: mdunn@getmansweeney.com
wflanagan@getmansweeney.com
SMITH'S FOOD: Dempsey Sues Over Worker Misclassification
--------------------------------------------------------
BRIAN DEMPSEY, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated individuals, Plaintiff v. SMITH'S FOOD & DRUG CENTERS,
INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendant(s), Case No.
3:24-cv-00269 (D. Nev., June 25, 2024) alleges violations of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff has been employed by Smith's since on or about
December 31, 1996, to the present and has worked in various
capacities. He is currently an Assistant Store Manager (ASM). As an
ASM, the vast majority of Plaintiff's time is spent doing
non-exempt "clerk" work. However, he was misclassified as an
overtime exempt employee. Accordingly, Smith's owes Plaintiff and
all other ASMs overtime pay at one and one-half times their regular
rate of compensation for all hours that they worked over 40 in a
workweek, says the suit.
SMITH'S owns and operates 141 grocery stores in seven western
states (Arizona, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah, and
Wyoming). [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua D. Buck, Esq.
Leah L. Jones, Esq.
THIERMAN BUCK
325 West Liberty Street
Reno, NV 89501
Telephone: (775) 284-1500
Facsimile: (775) 703-5027
E-mail: josh@thiermanbuck.com
leah@thiermanbuck.com
SUSHI KATSUEI: Plaintiffs' Request for Discovery Sanctions Tossed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Chakma et al v. Sushi
Katsuei, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-07804-KPF (S.D.N.Y.), the
Hon. Judge Katherine Polk Failla entered an order denying the
Plaintiffs' request for sanctions in light of the Defendants'
representation that their tardiness in making certain productions
was due to family medical issues, and the parties' indication that
fact discovery has been completed pursuant to the amended
schedule.
The Court finds discovery sanctions are not warranted at this time.
Furthermore, upon the application of the parties and in the
interest of efficiency, the post-fact discovery conference
scheduled for July 2, 2024, at 2:30 p.m., will be held
telephonically. The dial-in instructions are as follows: At 2:30
p.m., the parties shall call (888) 363-4749, and use access code
5123533. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the pending
motion at docket entry 31.
The Parties conferred and agreed on the following schedule for
class certification briefing:
-- Plaintiffs' moving brief due on or before: Aug. 2, 2024
-- Defendants' opposition brief due on Aug. 30, 2024
or before:
-- Plaintiffs' reply brief due on or Sept. 13, 2024
before:
Sushi offers sushi for everyone.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=u0O3OU at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Diana Y. Seo, Esq.
SEO LAW GROUP, PLLC
136-68 Roosevelt Ave, Suite 726
Flushing, NY 11354
Telephone: (718)500-3340
E-mail: diana@seolawgroup.com
THOMAS BLUMENSHINE: Court Directs Discovery Plan Filing in Kunkes
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Kunkes, v. Blumenshine,
Case No. 1:23-cv-01454-JBM-JEH (C.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge entered
an order 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.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qq39Tk at no extra
charge.[CC]
TL CANNON: Court Recommends Granting Bid to Amend Complaint
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TAMMY DEES and DAKOTA
BOLAND, v. T.L. CANNON CORP., d/b/a APPLEBEES, et al. Case No.
5:20-cv-01537-BKS-MJK (N.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Mitchell Katz
recommended that:
-- Plaintiffs' motion for leave to amend be granted,
-- Plaintiffs' amended complaint be accepted for filing as the
operative pleading in this action,
-- Defendants' motion for partial summary judgment be granted in
part, in that the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") claim
alleged
in Count III of the amended complaint be dismissed with
prejudice,
-- the district court decline to exercise supplemental
jurisdiction
over Plaintiffs' state law claims brought pursuant to the New
York
Labor Law ("NYLL") and associated state regulations, and thus
the
remaining causes of action in the amended complaint be
dismissed
without prejudice to refiling in state court,
-- Plaintiffs' motion for class certification be denied as moot in
light of the aforementioned recommendations, without prejudice
to
refiling in state court.
On Dec. 10, 2020, Plaintiffs Tammy Dees and Dakota Boland commenced
this action, on behalf of themselves and a putative class of other
similarly situated individuals, alleging that the defendants
violated various sections of the FLSA, as well as the NYLL and
related state regulations.
The Plaintiffs Dees and Boland were employed at the defendants'
restaurant site in North Syracuse, New York for differing periods
of time between October 2019 and June 2021.
T.L. Cannon owns and operates restaurant.
A copy of the Court's report-recommendation dated July 1, 2024, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nc9gIJ
at no extra charge.[CC]
TRANSDEV SERVICES: Class Cert Bid Filing Continued to August 19
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHERISHA LOVEJOY, an
individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated,
v. TRANSDEV SERVICES, INC. and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case
No. 3:23-cv-00380-AJB-MMP (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Michelle
Pettit entered an order granting in part the parties' third joint
motion to continue deadline related to class certification as
follows:
1. Plaintiff's deadline to bring to the attention of the Court
any
disputes in relation to Defendant's responses to Plaintiff's
first set of interrogatories and production of documents,
currently set for June 21, 2024, is July 29, 2024.
2. Plaintiff's deadline to file a motion for class
certification,
currently set for July 19, 2024, is Aug. 19, 2024.
The Court finds there is good cause to extend the Plaintiff's
deadlines to file her motion for class certification and to bring
any discovery disputes in relation to its first set of
interrogatories and production of documents to the attention of the
Court.
No further extensions will be granted with a showing of good
cause.
Transdev is a leader in public transport.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WaegYz at no extra
charge.[CC]
TRANSDEV SERVICES: Parties Seek to Continue Class Cert Deadlines
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHERISHA LOVEJOY, v.
TRANSDEV SERVICES, INC. and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No.
3:23-cv-00380-AJB-MMP (S.D. Cal.), the Parties asks the Court to
enter an order granting third joint motion to continue deadline to
raise discovery dispute regarding the Defendant's responses to
first set of written discovery propounded by the Plaintiff and
Plaintiff's deadline to file class certification motion papers.
The Plaintiff's current deadline to file her motion for class
certification and supporting papers is July 19, 2024.
The Defendant rescheduled the deposition pursuant to the first
deposition notice twice. The parties have tentatively agreed that
the deposition pursuant to both Plaintiff’s first and second
notices will move forward on the July 9 date.
The Parties further seek to extend Plaintiff's deadline to inform
the Court of any outstanding disputes regarding Defendant's
responses to Plaintiff's first set of Interrogatories and Requests
for Production of Documents to August 12, 2024. Due to scheduling
issues that have delayed Plaintiffs’ taking of the 30(b)(6)
deposition and the outstanding discovery items, good cause exists
for the Parties' request to continue Plaintiff's deadline to inform
the Court of discovery disputes regarding Defendant’s responses
to written discovery and Plaintiff's class certification motion
deadline.
Transdev provides passenger transportation services.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=V162Zp at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Justin Hewgill, Esq.
HEWGILL COBB & LOCKARD, APC
1620 Fifth Avenue, Suite 325
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 432-2520
Facsimile: (619) 377-6026
E-mail: contact@hcl-lawfirm.com
- and -
Helen I. Zeldes, Esq.
Aya Dardari, Esq.
Joshua A. Fields, Esq.
SCHONBRUN SEPLOW HARRIS
HOFFMAN & ZELDES, LLP
501 W. Broadway, Suite 800
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 400-4990
Facsimile: (310) 399-7040
E-mail: hzeldes@sshhzlaw.com
adardari@sshhzlaw.com
jfields@sshhzlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Olga Savage, Esq.
HUSCH BLACKWELL LLP
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 700
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (510) 768-0913
E-mail: olga.savage@huschblackwell.com
TYCO FIRE: $750MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Nov. 1
--------------------------------------------------------
In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation,
MDL No. 2:18-mn-02873
This Document relates to: City of Camden, et al., v. 3M Company,
No. 2:23-cv-03147-RMG
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA, C
HARLESTON DIVISION
TO THE SETTLEMENT CLASS: All Active Public Water Systems in the
United States of America that have one or more Impacted Water
Sources as of June 22, 2023; and all Active Public Water Systems
that do not have one or more Impacted Water Sources as of
June 22, 2023 and (i) are required to test for certain PFAS under
U.S. EPA's UCMR-5, or (ii) serve more than 3,300 people, according
to U.S. EPA's SDWIS data system.
All capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the
meanings set forth in the Settlement Agreement, available for
review at www.PFASWaterSettlement.com.
Active Public Water System means a Public Water System whose
activity-status field in SDWIS states that the system is "Active."
Impacted Water Source means a Water Source that has a Qualifying
Test Result showing a Measurable Concentration of PFAS.
As used above, Public Water System means a system for the provision
to the public of water for human consumption through pipes or other
constructed conveyances, if such system has at least fifteen (15)
service connections or regularly serves an average of at least
twenty-five (25) individuals daily at least sixty (60) days out of
the year, consistent with the use of that term in the Safe Drinking
Water Act, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 300f(4)(A), and 40 C.F.R. Part 141.
Public Water System includes (i) any collection, treatment,
storage, and distribution facilities under control of the operator
of such system and used primarily in connection with such system,
and (ii) any collection or pretreatment storage facilities not
under such control which are used primarily in connection with such
system.
Solely for purposes of the Settlement Agreement, the term "Public
Water System" refers to a Community Water System of any size or a
Non-Transient Non-Community Water System that serves more than
3,300 people, according to SDWIS; or any Person (but not any
financing or lending institution) that has legal authority or
responsibility (by statute, regulation, other law, or contract) to
fund or incur financial obligations for the design, engineering,
installation, operation, or maintenance of any facility or
equipment that treats, filters, remediates, or manages water that
has entered or may enter Drinking Water or any Public Water System;
but does not refer to a Non-Transient Non-Community Water System
that serves 3,300 or fewer people, according to SDWIS, or to a
Transient Non-Community Water System of any size. It is the
intention of the Settlement Agreement that the definition of
"Public Water System" be as broad, expansive, and inclusive as
possible.
What Is the Purpose of this Notice? The purpose of this Notice is
(i) to advise you of a proposed settlement of certain Claims
against 3M Company ("3M" or "Defendant") in the United States
District Court for the District of South Carolina (the "Court");
(ii) to summarize your rights in connection with the Settlement;
and (iii) to inform you of a Court hearing to consider whether to
grant final approval of the Settlement (the "Final Fairness
Hearing"), to be held on February 2, 2024. at 10:00 a.m. EST in
Charleston Courtroom #1, J. Waties Waring Judicial Center, before
the Honorable Richard M. Gergel, United States District Judge of
the United States District Court for the District of South
Carolina, located at 85 Broad Street, Charleston, South Carolina
29401.
What Are the Key Terms of the Proposed Settlement? 3M has agreed to
pay an amount not less than $10,500,000,000 and not more than
$12,500,000,000, inclusive (the "Settlement Amount"), subject to
final approval of the Settlement by the Court and certain other
conditions specified in the Settlement Agreement. 3M shall
additionally pay up to $5,000,000 to cover costs incurred by the
Notice Administrator in the course of executing the Notice Plan.
Together, these payments constitute the "Settlement Funds." In no
event shall 3M be required under the Settlement Agreement to pay
any amounts above the Settlement Funds. Any fees, costs, or
expenses payable under the Settlement Agreement shall be paid out
of, and shall not be in addition to, the Settlement Funds. Each
Settlement Class Member that has not excluded itself from the Class
will be eligible to receive a settlement check(s) from the Claims
Administrator based on the Allocation Procedures developed by Class
Counsel, which are subject to final approval by the Court as fair
and reasonable and whose administration
is under the oversight of the Special Master.
What Are My Options?
YOU CAN PARTICIPATE IN THE SETTLEMENT. You must file a Claims Form
to be eligible to receive a payment under the Settlement. You can
submit your Claims Form online at www.PFASWaterSettlement.com, or
you can download, complete, and mail your Claims Form to the Claims
Administrator at AFFF Public Water System Claims, P.O. Box 4466,
Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70821. The deadline for a Phase One
Settlement Class Member to submit a Phase One Public Water System
Settlement Claims Form is 60 days following the Effective Date, and
the deadline for a Phase Two Settlement Class Member to submit a
Phase Two Action Fund Claims Form is July 31, 2026. Regardless of
whether you file a Claims Form or receive any distribution under
the Settlement, unless you timely opt out as described below, you
will be bound by the Settlement and any judgment or other final
disposition related to the Settlement, including the Release set
forth in the Settlement Agreement, and will be precluded from
pursuing claims against 3M separately if those Claims are within
the scope of the Release.
YOU CAN OPT OUT OF THE SETTLEMENT. If you do not wish to be a
Settlement Class Member and do not want to participate in the
Settlement and receive a settlement check, you may exclude yourself
from the Class by completing and mailing a notice of intention to
opt out. Any Person within the Settlement Class that wishes to opt
out of the Settlement Class and Settlement must serve a written and
signed statement entitled "Request for Exclusion" on the Notice
Administrator, the Special Master, the Claims Administrator, 3M's
Counsel, and Class Counsel no later than December 11, 2023.
YOU CAN OBJECT TO THE SETTLEMENT. Any Settlement Class Member that
has not successfully excluded itself ("opted out") may object to
the Settlement. Any Settlement Class Member that wishes to object
to the Settlement or to an award of fees or expenses to Class
Counsel must file a written and signed statement designated
"Objection" with the Clerk of the Court and provide service on 3M's
Counsel and Class Counsel no later than November 11, 2023.
VISIT WWW.PFASWATERSETTLEMENT.COM FOR COMPLETE INFORMATION
ABOUT YOUR RIGHTS
The Court's Final Fairness Hearing. The Court will hold the Final
Fairness Hearing in Charleston Courtroom #1, J. Waties Waring
Judicial Center of the United States District Court for the
District of South Carolina, located at 85 Broad Street, Charleston,
South Carolina 29401, on February 2, 2024 at 10:00 a.m. EST. At
that time, the Court will determine, among other things, (i)
whether the Settlement should be granted final approval as fair,
reasonable, and adequate, (ii) whether the Litigation should be
dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the terms of the Settlement
Agreement, (iii) whether the Settlement Class should be
conclusively certified, (iv) whether Settlement Class Members
should be bound by the Release set forth in the Settlement
Agreement, (v) the amount of attorneys' fees and costs to be
awarded to Class Counsel, if any, and (vi) the amount of the award
to be made to the Class Representatives for their services, if
any.
The Final Fairness Hearing may be postponed, adjourned, or
continued by Order of the Court without further notice to the
Class.
How Do I Get More Information? Please visit
www.PFASWaterSettlement.com or call toll free
1-855-714- 4341. You may also contact Class Counsel or the Notice
Administrator for more information:
Class Counsel
Scott Summy
Baron & Budd, P.C.
3102 Oak Lawn Ave., Ste. 1100
Dallas, TX 75219
Email: ssummy@baronbudd.com
Paul J. Napoli
Napoli Shkolnik
1302 Avenida Ponce de Leon
San Juan, PR 00907
Email: pnapoli@NSPRlaw.com
Joseph F. Rice
Motley Rice LLC
28 Bridgeside Blvd.
Mt. Pleasant, SC 29464
Michael A. London
Douglas & London
59 Maiden Lane, 6th Fl.
New York, NY 10038
Email: mlondon@douglasandlondon.com
Elizabeth A. Fegan
Fegan Scott LLC
150 S. Wacker Drive, 24 th Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
beth@feganscott.com
Notice Administrator
In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products
Liability Litigation
c/o 3M Notice Administrator
1650 Arch Street, Suite 2210
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Email: PFASSettlement@AngeionGroup.com
Claims Administrator
AFFF Public Water System Claims
PO Box 4466
Baton Rouge, LA 70821
Email: Info@pfaswatersettlement.com
UNITED PARCEL: Orr Must File Class Certification Bid by Oct. 11
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as REBECCA ORR, v. UNITED
PARCEL SERVICE, INC., et al., Case No. 5:24-cv-00421-SSS-SP (C.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Sunshine Suzanne Sykes entered an order that
the briefing schedule on Plaintiff's motion for class certification
shall be as follows:
Event Date
Deadline for Plaintiff to File Motion Oct. 11, 2024
for Class Certification and Any Class
Certification Expert Report
Deadline for Defendant to File Opposition Oct. 25, 2024
to Class Certification and Any Class
Certification Expert Report
Deadline for Plaintiff to File Reply in Nov. 1, 2024
Support of Motion for Class Certification
and Any Class Certification Rebuttal Expert
Report
Class Certification Hearing Dec. 6, 2024, at
2:00
p.m.
United Parcel delivers packages and documents.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zXruPX at no extra
charge.[CC]
UNITED STATES: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Reply by July 18
---------------------------------------------------------------
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 Hon. Judge Royce Lamberth entered an order granting
the Plaintiffs' consent motion for extension of time.
The Plaintiffs shall file their reply in support of their motion
for class certification and appointment of class counsel no later
than July 18, 2024.
United States Parole is responsible for granting or denying parole
to, and supervising the parole releases of, incarcerated
individuals who fall under its jurisdiction.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=oVVVv3 at no extra
charge.[CC]
UNLABELED LLC: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------
Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Unlabeled LLC, Defendant, Case No.
0:24-cv-02463 (D. Minn., June 25, 2024) accuses the Defendant of
violating the general non-discriminatory mandate and the effective
communication and auxiliary aids and services requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act as well as asserts a companion
cause of action under the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
The case arises from Defendant's failure to ensure its website to
be fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals
with vision-related disabilities.
Unlabeled LLC. owns, operates, and maintains the website,
www.unlabeled.com, which offers women's clothing and accessories
for sale including, but not limited to, tops, sweatshirts,
leggings, joggers, socks, beanies, and more. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jason Gustafson, Esq.
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
80 S. 8th Street, Suite 900
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
E-mail: jason@throndsetlaw.com
pat@throndsetlaw.com
chad@throndsetlaw.com
VALVE CORP: Parties Must File Public Redacted Versions by July 11
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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 pursuant to the parties' stipulation as follows:
1. The deadline for the Parties to file Public Redacted Versions
is
July 11, 2024.
2. By July 8, 2024, Valve will provide to Plaintiffs a proposed
version of the Schwartz Expert Report (including all
attachments) that redacts all materials sought to be sealed
by
Valve, Plaintiffs, and any third party. Thereafter, the
Parties
shall meet and confer prior to filing if Plaintiffs disagree
with filing the version provided by Valve.
3. Plaintiffs shall file the redacted public version of the
Schwartz Expert Report (including all attachments).
4. Valve shall file the redacted public version of Valve's
Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and
the
evidence and declarations on which Valve relies, and Valve's
Daubert Motion.
Pursuant to the Court's May 16, 2024 Stipulated Order, the deadline
for the parties to file versions redacting all the materials sought
to be sealed by any party or nonparty of the Schwartz Report,
Valve’s Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification
and the evidence and declarations on which Valve relies, and
Valve's Daubert Motion is June 27, 2024.
Because of uncertainty as to third-party motions to seal being
filed and the extent to which third parties seek redactions or
sealing, the high volume of proposed redactions by the Parties and
third parties, and the importance of avoiding inadvertent
disclosure of "Confidential" or "Highly Confidential Attorneys'
Eyes Only" materials when preparing Public Redacted Versions, the
Parties respectfully request additional time to prepare and file
the Public Redacted Versions.
Valve Corp. is an American video game developer, publisher, and
digital distribution company.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6EPS9N at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Alicia Cobb, Esq.
Steig D. Olson, Esq.
David LeRay, Esq.
Adam Wolfson, Esq.
Charles Stevens, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
51 Madison Avenue
New York, NY 10010
Telephone: (212) 849-7231
Facsimile: (212) 849-7100
E-mail: aliciacobb@quinnemanuel.com
steigolson@quinnemanuel.com
adamwolfson@quinnemanuel.com
charliestevens@quinnemanuel.com
- and -
Ankur Kapoor, Esq.
Noah Brecker-Redd, Esq.
Wyatt Fore, Esq.
CONSTANTINE CANNON LLP
335 Madison Avenue, 9th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (212) 350-2700
Facsimile: (212) 350-2701
E-mail: akapoor@constantinecannon.com
wfore@constantinecannon.com
- and -
Kenneth J. Rubin, Esq.
Timothy B. McGranor, Esq.
Kara M. Mundy, Esq.
Thomas N. McCormick, Esq.
VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP
52 East Gay Street
Columbus, OH 43215
Telephone: (614) 464-6400
Facsimile: (614) 719-4796
E-mail: kjrubin@vorys.com
tbmcgranor@vorys.com
kmmundy@vorys.com
tnmccormick@vorys.com
- and –
Tyre L. Tindall, Esq.
Stephanie L. Jensen, Esq.
Kenneth R. O'Rourke, Esq.
Jordanne M. Steiner, Esq.
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH &
ROSATI P.C.
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5100
Seattle, WA 98104-7036
Telephone: (206) 883-2500
Facsimile: (206) 883-2699
E-mail: sjensen@wsgr.com
korourke@wsgr.com
jordanne.miller@wsgr.com
ttindall@wsgr.com
- and -
W. Joseph Bruckner, Esq.
Joseph C. Bourne, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P.
100 Washington Avenue S, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-6900
Facsimile: (612) 339-0981
E-mail: wjbruckner@locklaw.com
jcbourne@locklaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Blake Marks-Dias, Esq.
Eric A. Lindberg, Esq.
CORR CRONIN LLP
1015 Second Avenue, Floor 10
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (206) 625-8600
Facsimile: (206) 625-0900
E-mail: bmarksdias@corrcronin.com
elindberg@corrcronin.com
- and -
Kristen Ward Broz, Esq.
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
2020 K. St. NW, Ste. 500
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 794-1220
Facsimile: (202) 461-3102
E-mail: kbroz@foxrothschild.com
- and -
Charles B. Casper, Esq.
MONTGOMERY McCRACKEN WALKER
& RHOADS LLP
1735 Market Street, 21st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone (215) 772-1500
E-mail: ccasper@mmwr.com
VALVE CORP: Plaintiffs Seek to Seal Sensitive Financial Information
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wolfire Games LLC et al v.
Valve Corporation (RE VALVE ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No.
2:21-cv-00563-JCC (W.D. Wash.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order sealing limited sensitive financial information
contained in the class certification report of Dr. Steven Schwartz
filed in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for class certification.
Pursuant to LCR 5(g)(3)(A), Dark Catt's counsel certify that they
conferred with Valve's counsel in good faith by videoconference on
June 25, 2024, regarding the need to file the Schwartz Report under
seal. Valve indicated that it does not oppose Dark Catt's motion.
Dark Catt brings this limited Motion in connection with the
Schwartz Report in support of the Plaintiffs' Motion for Class
Certification. The basis for sealing is established in the
accompanying Declaration of John Robb in Support of Motion to Seal
Materials Contained in Plaintiffs' Class Certification Report of
Steven Schwartz,
Ph.D. ("Robb Declaration").
The Robb Declaration establishes that the release of the sealed
information would cause substantial competitive, financial, and
other harm to Dark Catt.
Dark Catt seeks to seal confidential financial information which
includes detailed highly confidential information regarding Dark
Catt's competitively sensitive revenue information, and
calculations of Valve’s overcharges based thereon. A copy of the
Schwartz Report, with the proposed redactions highlighted, is
attached to this motion as Exhibit A and will be filed under seal.
Locations and descriptions of the proposed redactions in Exhibit A
are as follows:
Proposed Redactions Reason for Redaction
Paragraph 406 at pg. 217 Revenue information for Dark Catt, as
well as calculation for Valve's
overcharges on Dark Catt games that
reflect competitively sensitive
revenue
information.
Paragraph 410 at pg. 218 A calculation for Valve's overcharges
on
Dark Catt that reflect Dark Catt's
competitively sensitive revenue
information.
Figure 9 on pg. 219 Calculations for Valve's overcharges
on
Dark Catt that reflect Dark Catt's
competitively sensitive information.
Valve is an American video game developer, publisher, and digital
distribution company.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7T2NJv at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Stephanie L. Jensen, Esq.
Tyre L. Tindall, Esq.
Kenneth R. O'Rourke, Esq.
Jordanne Steiner, Esq.
WILSON SONSINI GOODRICH &
ROSATI P.C.
701 Fifth Avenue, Suite 5100
Seattle, WA 98104-7036
Telephone: (206) 883-2500
Facsimile: (866) 974-7329
E-mail: sjensen@wsgr.com
ttindall@wsgr.com
korourke@wsgr.com
jordanne.miller@wsgr.com
- and -
W. Joseph Bruckner, Esq.
Joseph C. Bourne, Esq.
Laura M. Matson, Esq.
Kyle Pozan, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P.
100 Washington Avenue S, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-6900
Facsimile: (612) 339-0981
E-mail: wjbruckner@locklaw.com
jcbourne@locklaw.com
lmmatson@locklaw.com
kjpozan@locklaw.com
VALVE CORP: Seeks to Seal Class Certification Opposition
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Wolfire Games LLC, et al.,
v. Valve Corporation (RE VALVE ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No.
2:21-cv-00563-JCC (W.D. Wash.), the Defendant asks the Court to
enter an order granting motion to seal opposition to class
certification, Schwartz Report, and supporting documents.
Valve has presented specific factual findings about the harms
caused by release of the Sealed Documents that outweigh public
disclosure. Valve has also followed the Class Cert. Sealing Order
and narrowly tailored its sealing requests. Valve respectfully
requests that the Court maintain the Sealed Documents under seal
and permit Valve to file the redacted versions of the Sealed
Documents for public access.
Pursuant to the May 16, 2024 Stipulation and Order, Valve brings
this motion to maintain under seal certain highly confidential,
proprietary, commercially sensitive, and personally identifiable
information ("PII") about Valve and third parties in the following
documents:
(1) The unredacted version of Valve's Corrected Opposition to
Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and Appointment
of
Co-Lead Class Counsel;
(2) The unredacted version of the Expert Report of Dr. Stephen
Schwartz (including attachments thereto);
(3) The unredacted version of Valve's Motion to Exclude
Testimony
of Steven Schwartz;
(4) The unredacted version of the Declaration of Blake
Marks-Dias
in support of the Oppos. and Daubert Motion;
(5) The unredacted versions of these Exhibits to the Marks-Dias
Decl.
In addition, pursuant to LCR 5(g)(3), Valve moves to seal material
designated under the Protective Order by third parties—Exhibits 3
and 8 to the Marks-Dias Decl. and information related to third
parties in the Chiou Report and Langer Report. Valve takes no
position on whether this material merits sealing but brings this
Motion to provide third parties an opportunity to show any reason
for sealing these materials.
Valve is an American video game developer, publisher, and digital
distribution company.
A copy of the Defendant's motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PJYSSb at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Blake Marks-Dias, Esq.
Eric A. Lindberg, Esq.
CORR CRONIN LLP
1015 Second Avenue, Floor 10
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (206) 625-8600
Facsimile: (206) 625-0900
E-mail: bmarksdias@corrcronin.com
elindberg@corrcronin.com
- and -
Kristen Ward Broz, Esq.
Nathan M Buchter, Esq.
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
2020 K. St. NW, Ste. 500
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 794-1220
Facsimile: (202) 461-3102
E-mail: kbroz@foxrothschild.com
nbuchter@foxrothschild.com
- and -
Charles B. Casper, Esq.
Jessica Rizzo, Esq.
Peter Breslauer, Esq.
Robert E. Day, Esq.
MONTGOMERY McCRACKEN WALKER
& RHOADS LLP
1735 Market Street, 21st Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone (215) 772-1500
E-mail: ccasper@mmwr.com
jrizzo@mmwr.com
pbreslauer@mmwr.com
rday@mmwr.com
VAXART INC: Court Tosses Himmelberg Bid For Class Certification
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Himmelberg v. Vaxart, Inc.
et al. (re VAXART, INC. SECURITIES LITIGATION), Case No.
3:20-cv-05949-VC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Vince Chhabria entered
an order denying the motion for class certification without
prejudice.
Any renewed motion is due within 28 days of this order. The
opposition is due 28 days later, and the reply is due 21 days after
that, the Court says.
As noted, their primary argument against class certification is, to
paraphrase:
"we've shown that the allegedly misleading statements in the
press
releases had no impact whatsoever on the stock price."
If the defendants had actually shown that, then of course the
denial of class certification would be with prejudice. But all they
did was submit an expert report arguing that the stock drop
following the New York Times article was insignificant, the Court
adds.
Vaxart is a biotechnology company based in San Francisco.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=aX8RRN at no extra
charge.[CC]
VILLANOVA UNIVERSITY: Loses Bid to Dismiss Faw Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MEREDITH FAW, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. VILLANOVA
UNIVERSITY, Case No. 2:23-cv-03897-CMR (E.D. Pa.), the Court
entered a memo denying Villanova University's motion to dismiss.
The Plaintiff Meredith Faw filed suit against Defendant Villanova,
on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, alleging
breach of implied contract and unjust enrichment. The claims arise
from disruptions to Villanova's operations due to the COVID-19
pandemic, which included a transition to fully remote learning and
the cancellation of on-campus services and events. Villanova has
moved to dismiss the Complaint.
The Plaintiff, a citizen of New Jersey, was an undergraduate
student at Villanova during the Spring 2020 semester.1 She and
other full-time students were charged $27,275 in tuition, a $180
General Fee, and a $185 Health and Wellness Fee for the semester
On March 13, 2020, Villanova announced that it was closing its
campus due to the COVID-19 pandemic, and all students were required
to leave by March 15. For the rest of the semester, all classes
were offered only in a remote online format, with no in-person
instruction or interaction. On-campus services, recreational
events, and student activity events were cancelled.
There are no allegations in this case that Villanova's modified
operations in response to the pandemic were improper. Nor are
payments for residence hall rooms or dining hall plans at issue, as
Villanova provided pro-rated refunds for those student expenses.
Rather, the Plaintiff challenges only Villanova's "decision to
retain the tuition and fees, paid by Plaintiff and other students
for in-person education, experiences, access to campus, and
services, without providing such for the entire duration of the
Spring 2020 semester."
On Oct. 6, 2023, Plaintiff filed a Complaint on behalf of herself
and others similarly situated, raising claims under state law for
breach of implied contract and unjust enrichment. Villanova moved
to dismiss the Complaint for failure to state a claim. That Motion
has been fully briefed and is now ripe for disposition.
Villanova is a private Catholic research university.
A copy of the Court's memorandum opinion dated June 28, 2024, is
available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7tr2oe
at no extra charge.[CC]
VITALS CONSUMER: Sweeton Seeks to Withdraw Class Cert Bid
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TAMERA SWEETON, et al., on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. VITALS
CONSUMER SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 4:23-cv-00088-BCW (W.D. Mo.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order withdrawing their motion
for class certification and suggestions in support.
The Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification and
suggestions in support on May 28, 2024. Following the filing of
Plaintiffs' Motion, a Consent Motion to File corrected motion for
class certification was filed on June 3, 2024.
The Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion to File Corrected Motion for
Class Certification on June 10, 2024 and Plaintiffs filed their
Corrected Motion for Class Certification the same day.
The Plaintiffs' Corrected Motion for Class Certification on file
has made Plaintiffs’ original motion no longer necessary.
Vitals provides healthcare medical information solutions.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=D9SN8g at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David L. Marcus, Esq.
DLM LAW LLC
4700 Belleview Ave., Suite 200
Kansas City, MO 64112
Telephone: (816) 256-4699
Facsimile: (816) 222-0534
E-mail: Dmarcus@dlmlaw.com
- and -
Bryan T. White, Esq.
WHITE, GRAHAM, BUCKLEY
& CARR, L.L.C
19049 East Valley View Parkway
Independence, MO 64055
Telephone: (816) 373-9080
Facsimile: (816) 373-9319
E-mail: Bwhite@wagblaw.com
- and -
Clayton Jones, Esq.
CLAYTON JONES, ATTORNEY AT
LAW
405 Foxwood Drive
Raymore, MO 64083
Telephone: (816) 318-4266
Facsimile: (816) 318-4267
E-mail: clayton@claytonjoneslaw.com
VMWARE INC: Class Certified in Lamartina "Common Stock" Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as WILLIAM LAMARTINA, v.
VMWARE, INC., et al., Case No. 5:20-cv-02182-EJD (N.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Edward Davila entered an order:
-- granting Plaintiffs' unopposed motion to certify the Class
consisting of:
"All persons who purchased the publicly traded Class A common
stock of VMware during the period from Aug. 24, 2018 through
Feb.
27, 2020, inclusive, and were damaged."
Excluded from the Class are Individual Defendants and their
immediate family members.
-- appointing Lead Plaintiff as Class Representative.
-- appointing Robbins Geller as Class Counsel.
The Plaintiffs and Lead Plaintiff bring this putative class action
against the Defendants alleging violations of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 ("SEC").
The Defendants do not oppose Lead Plaintiff's motion at this time.
The Court held a hearing on June 27, 2024, and heard oral arguments
from both Parties.
This case arises out of Defendants' alleged "material misstatements
and omissions concerning their practice of deliberately and
artificially inflating VMware's backlog by deferring revenues to
later periods at management's discretion."
Lamartina alleges to have purchased 1,700 shares of VMware common
stock at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period and
suffered losses when the corrective disclosures were revealed.
The Pension Fund, a multi-employer benefit pension plan, alleges to
have purchased 40,150 shares of VMware common stock during the
Class Period and suffered substantial losses following VMware's
series of four corrective disclosures.
Lamartina filed the original complaint on March 31, 2020. On July
20, 2020, the Court appointed the Pension Fund as Lead Plaintiff
and Robbins Geller, the Pension Fund's selection of counsel, as
Lead Counsel. Order Appointing Lead Pl. and Approving Lead Pl.'s
Selection of Lead Counsel 2, ECF No. 45. Lead Plaintiff filed an
amended consolidated complaint on September 18, 2020.
VMware is an American cloud computing and virtualization technology
company.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kWeEJo at no extra
charge.[CC]
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Dack Seeks Initial OK of Settlement Deal
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EMILY DACK, et al.,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v.
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., a New Jersey corporation, a/k/a
VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA, INC; and VOLKSWAGEN, AG, a/k/a VOLKSWAGEN
GROUP, a foreign corporation, Case No. 4:20-cv-00615-RK (W.D. Mo.),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their
unopposed motion seeking entry of an order granting final approval
to the Settlement Agreement.
Volkswagen markets and distributes automobiles and auto parts.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kGXJqF at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bonner C. Walsh, Esq.
WALSH PLLC
1561 Long Haul Road
Grangeville, ID 83530
Telephone: (541) 359-2827
Facsimile: (866) 503-8206 --Tag line:
E-mail: bonner@walshpllc.com
- and -
Tim E. Dollar, Esq.
DOLLAR BURNS & BECKER, L.C.
1100 Main Street, Suite 2600
Kansas City, MO 64105
Telephone: (816) 876-2600
Facsimile: (816) 221-8763
E-mail: timd@dollar-law.com
- and -
Matthew D. Schelkopf, Esq.
Joseph B. Kenney, Esq.
SAUDER SCHELKOPF LLC
555 Lancaster Ave.
Berwyn, PA 19312
Telephone: (610) 200-0581
Facsimile: (610) 421-1326
E-mail: mds@sstriallawyers.com
jbk@sstriallawyers.com
- and -
Adam R. Gonnelli, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF ADAM R. GONNELLI LLC
707 Alexander Road
Bldg. 2, Suite 208
Princeton, NJ, 08540
Telephone: (917) 541-7110
Facsimile: (315) 446-7521
E-mail: adam@arglawoffice.com
- and -
Russell D. Paul, Esq.
Amey J. Park, Esq.
Abigail J. Gertner, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 875-3000
Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
E-mail: rpaul@bm.net
apark@bm.net
agertner@bm.net
- and -
Tarek H. Zohdy, Esq.
Cody R. Padgett, Esq.
Laura E. Goolsby, Esq.
CAPSTONE LAW APC
1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 556-4811
Facsimile: (310) 943-0396
E-mail: tarek.zohdy@capstonelawyers.com
cody.padgett@capstonelawyers.com
laura.goolsby@capstonelawyers.com
- and -
Alec Leslie, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: aleslie@bursor.com
WALMART INC: Class Settlement in Kukorinis Suit Gets Final Nod
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VASSILIOS KUKORINIS, on
behalf of himself and any others similarly situated, v. WALMART,
INC., Case No. 8:22-cv-02402-VMC-TGW (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge
Virginia Hernandez Covington entered an order as follows:
(1) Plaintiff's Unopposed Motion for Final Approval of the Class
Action Settlement is granted.
(2) Plaintiff's Motion for Award of Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and
Expenses is granted.
(3) This Final Judgment and Order of Dismissal incorporates by
reference: (a) the Settlement; and (b) the Notice, Summary
Notice, and Declaration of the Claims Administrator with
respect to Notice, all filed with this Court.
(4) Accordingly, the Court authorizes and directs implementation
and performance of all the terms and provisions of the
Settlement Agreement, as well as the terms and provisions.
(5) Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(h), the Court
awards Class Counsel Attorney's Fees in the amount of
$9,000,000, plus litigation costs totaling $114,870.41,
payable
pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement
(6) Without affecting the finality of this Judgment in any way,
this Court retains jurisdiction up to and including Dec. 31,
2024.
Walmart operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department
stores, and grocery stores.
A copy of the Court's order dated June 28, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZazBvS at no extra
charge.[CC]
WEATHERFORD INT'L: Sept. 26 Claims Filing Deadline Set
------------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDING
File Nos. 3-17582 & 3-17628
In the Matter of Weatherford International PLC, f/k/a Weatherford
International LTD., James Hudgins, CPA, and Darryl Kitay, CPA,
Respondents.
In the Matter of Ernst & Young LLP, Craig R. Fronckiewicz, CPA, and
Sarah E. Adams, CPA, Respondents.
TO: Individuals and entities, or their lawful successors, who
purchased and/or acquired shares of Weatherford common stock
("Eligible Security") between February 25, 2009 and November 12,
2012, inclusive (the "Relevant Period").
The Commission's Orders arose out of substantially similar facts
and occurred during substantially the same time period as the
violations alleged in two related Class Actions:
In re Weatherford Int'l Sec. Litig., 11 Civ. 1646 (LAK) (JCF)
(S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2013) and Freedman v. Weatherford Int'l, No. 12
Civ. 2121, 2013 WL 5299137 (S.D.N.Y. Sept. 20, 2013) (the "Class
Actions").
If you filed an approved claim in one or both of the Class Actions,
you are automatically deemed a Claimant, but only with respect to
the transactions that were approved in the Class Action(s) (the
"Approved Transactions"). You do not need to submit another Proof
of Claim to participate in the Fair Fund, unless you wish to amend
your claim to include additional transactions or to provide new
information or documents to cure any deficiencies determined in the
Class Action(s) that were not cured. Additional transactional
documentation may be requested.
If you filed a claim in one or both of the Class Actions and such
claim was determined to be deficient and you failed to cure such
deficiencies, you do not need to submit another Proof of Claim Form
to participate in the Fair Fund as to your Deficient Transactions,
unless you wish to amend your claim. You must, however, provide the
required information and/or documentation to cure the deficiencies
identified in connection with your Class Action claim in order to
be eligible to receive a distribution from the Fair Fund for those
Deficient Transactions. Additional transactional documentation may
be requested.
If you purchased or acquired shares of the Eligible Security during
the Relevant Period and did not file a claim in one or both of the
Class Actions, you may be entitled to a recovery from the Fair
Fund. You must submit a Proof of Claim Form to the address
identified with the necessary documentation so that it is received
by September 26, 2024 (the "Claims Bar Date") to be eligible to
recover from the Weatherford SEC Fair Fund ("Fair Fund").
Copies of the Plan, Plan Notices, and the Proof of Claim Form are
available on the Weatherford Fair Fund website at
www.WeatherfordSECFairFund.com.
To qualify for a payment from the Weatherford Fair Fund, you must
satisfy certain eligibility criteria that are described in detail
in the Plan. The Plan is available on the Fair Fund website at
www.WeatherfordSECFairFund.com and on the Commission's public
website at http:/www.sec.gov/litigation/fairfundlist.htm. You can
also request a copy of the Plan by calling the Fund Administrator
at 1-800-581-1152 or by emailing info@WeatherfordSECFairFund.com.
The eligibility criteria include the following:
1. You must have purchased Weatherford common stock between
February 25, 2009, and November 12, 2012.
2. Your approved transactions must calculate to a Recognized Loss
as calculated under the Plan and your Distribution Payment must
equal or exceed $10.00.
3. You are not identified as an Excluded Party as defined in the
Plan.
THE DEADLINE TO SUBMIT A CLAIM FORM ELECTRONICALLY OR BY MAIL AT
THE ADDRESS BELOW IS SEPTEMBER 26, 2024. PLEASE NOTE: THIS IS A
"POSTMARKED" DEADLINE. PLEASE CHECK THE WEBSITE FREQUENTLY FOR
UPDATES.
Weatherford Fair Fund
Fund Administrator
P.O. Box 10574
Dublin, OH 43017
URL: www.WeatherfordSECFairFund.com
WEBMD LLC: Jancik Class Suit Seeks Class Certification
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LINDA M. JANCIK,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
WEBMD, LLC, Case No. 1:22-cv-00644-TWT (N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order granting class certification
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.
The grounds and legal authority for this motion are set forth in
the accompanying memorandum, which is incorporated by reference.
WebMD provides a full-service Internet healthcare portal.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=q7LRnn at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua D. Arisohn, Esq.
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
Alec M. Leslie, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: jarisohn@bursor.com
pfraietta@bursor.com
aleslie@bursor.com
- and -
H. Clay Barnett, III , Esq.
W. Daniel "Dee" Miles, III, Esq.
J. Mitch Williams, Esq.
BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN,
PORTIS & MILES, P.C.
Overlook II
2839 Paces Ferry Road SE, Suite 400
Atlanta, GA 30339
E-mail: Clay.Barnett@Beasleyallen.com
Dee.Miles@Beasleyallen.com
Mitch.Williams@Beasleyallen.com
WEBMD LLC: Plaintiffs Seek to Withdraw Class Cert Bid
-----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TAMERA SWEEETON and JASON
MOSS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v.
WEBMD, LLC, Case No. 4:23-cv-00094-BCW (W.D. Mo.), the Plaintiffs
ask the Court to enter an order withdrawing their motion for class
certification and suggestions in support.
The Plaintiffs filed their motion for class certification and
suggestions in support on May 28, 2024. Following the filing of
Plaintiffs' Motion, a Consent Motion to File corrected motion for
class certification was filed on June 3, 2024.
The Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion to File Corrected Motion for
Class Certification on June 10, 2024 and Plaintiffs filed their
Corrected Motion for Class Certification the same day.
The Plaintiffs' Corrected Motion for Class Certification on file
has made Plaintiffs’ original motion no longer necessary.
WebMD provides a full-service Internet healthcare portal.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated June 28, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=c0mO3n at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David L. Marcus, Esq.
DLM LAW LLC
4700 Belleview Ave., Suite 200
Kansas City, MO 64112
Telephone: (816) 256-4699
Facsimile: (816) 222-0534
E-mail: Dmarcus@dlmlaw.com
- and -
Bryan T. White, Esq.
WHITE, GRAHAM, BUCKLEY
& CARR, L.L.C
19049 East Valley View Parkway
Independence, MO 64055
Telephone: (816) 373-9080
Facsimile: (816) 373-9319
E-mail: Bwhite@wagblaw.com
- and -
Clayton Jones, Esq.
CLAYTON JONES, ATTORNEY AT
LAW
405 Foxwood Drive
Raymore, MO 64083
Telephone: (816) 318-4266
Facsimile: (816) 318-4267
E-mail: clayton@claytonjoneslaw.com
WELLPATH LLC: Falling-Davis Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PATTY FALING-DAVIS,
Individually and For Others Similarly Situated. v. WELLPATH LLC,
Case No. 1:23-cv-03017-MKD (E.D. Wash.), the Parties ask the Court
to enter an order extending the Plaintiff's deadline to file for
class certification.
The Plaintiff's current deadline to file for class certification is
July 1, 2024.
The Plaintiff would request an extension of 60 days to move for
class certification. Consistent with the timing in the current
schedule, Defendant would then have thirty days to respond to the
motion, and Plaintiff would have seven days to reply to the
response.
The Plaintiff’s request for more time to file for class
certification is due to the fact that Attorney Richard Schrieber
has taken over the matter as lead counsel from his former colleague
Carl Fitz, who has resigned from the law firm of Josephson Dunlap
at the end of March, 2024 and is still getting up to speed on this
matter.
Wellpath is a healthcare company.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated July 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=P5omNa at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nicholas D. Kovarik, Esq.
PISKEL YAHNE KOVARIK, PLLC
522 W. Riverside Ave., Suite 700
Spokane, WA 99201
Telephone: (509) 321-5930
Facsimile: (509) 321-5935
E-mail: nick@pyklawyers.com
- and -
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
Richard M. Schreiber, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
rschreiber@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Adam T. Pankratz, Esq.
Elizabeth A. Falcone, Esq.
Christopher F. McCracken, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK &
STEWART P.C.
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 5150
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 693-7057
Facsimile: (206) 693-7058
Adam.pankratz@ogletree.com
E-mail: Elizabeth.falcone@ogletree.com
Christopher.mccracken@ogletree.com
WICHITA, KS: Clingerman Seeks More Time to Produce Expert Reports
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RENEE CLINGERMAN, by and
through THOMAS CLINGERMAN, Guardian and Next Friend, v. CITY OF
WICHITA, Case No. 2:23-cv-02435-JWB-TJJ (D. Kan.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order granting her motion to extend the
deadline for producing expert and expert reports for class
certification, and to stay the effect of the current deadline of
June 28, 2024.
1) The current deadline for producing the experts and expert
reports is June 28, 2024.
2) The Plaintiff has hired the assistance of a class
certification
expert.
3) The Court has not yet ruled on that motion. It is anticipated
by
the Plaintiff and her expert that new deadlines will be set
if
the court grants the motion.
4) The Plaintiff's counsel spoke with defense counsel Charles
Branson, who also shares the belief that deadlines will be
continued if the court grants the motion.
Wichita is a city in south-central Kansas.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 27, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UwStv6 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark T. Schoenhofer, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF MARK T SCHOENHOFER LLC
1631 E. 1st Street
Wichita, KS 67214
Telephone: (316) 262-5400
Facsimile: (316) 262-1787
E-mail: mydefensefirst@yahoo.com
WOLF APPLIANCE: Bid for Summary Judgment Tossed w/o Prejudice
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bankhurst, John v. Wolf
Appliance, Inc., et al., Case No. 3:23-cv-00253 (W.D. Wisc., Filed
April 21, 2023), the Hon. Judge James D. Peterson entered an order
on denying without prejudice the Defendants' motion for summary
judgment.
The court concludes that there is no reason to depart from this
circuit's preferred practice of deciding class certification before
summary judgment.
The Defendants may renew their motion after the court rules on
class certification.
The nature of suit Contract Product Liability.
Wolf manufactures cooking appliances.[CC]
WYNDHAM VACATION: Class Cert Hearing in Kirchner Set for July 22
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Kirchner, et al., v.
Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc., Case No. 1:20-cv-00436 (D. Del.,
Filed March 27, 2020), the Hon. Judge Richard G. Andrews entered an
order setting a hearing regarding the motion to certify class for
July 22, 2024, at 2:00 PM in Courtroom 6A.
The nature of suit states Diversity -- Other Contract.
Wyndham Vacation provides travel services. The Company offers
suites, villas, resorts, and vacation club facilities.[CC]
*********
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 ***