/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240805.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Monday, August 5, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 156

                            Headlines

3M CO: Discovery in PFAS-Related Suit Ongoing in South Carolina
3M CO: Trial for PFAS-Related Suit Set for Sept. 2026
3M COMPANY: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Alston Says
AAA NORTHEAST: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Murphy Suit Says
ADAPTHEALTH CORP: Nov. 13 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set

AMAZON.COM INC: Court Narrows Claims in Mallouk Suit
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Class Cert. Bid Filing Extended to Oct. 18
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Qawasmi Sues Over Share Price Drop
ANIMAL BEHAVIOR: Wilson Alleges Wrongful Debt Collections
ANN & ROBERT: Riley Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info

ANTHONY WILLS: Craigen Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
ANTHONY WILLS: Ford Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
APPLE INC: Faces Polly Suit Over Monopoly of Smartphone Market
APPLE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Lopez Extended to Oct. 18
ARB GAMING: Anderson Sues Over Biometric Data Collection

ARCIS GOLF: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boles Alleges
ASR GROUP: Borge and Gershzon Allege Sugar Price-Fixing Conspiracy
AT&T INC: Banu Data Breach Suit Transferred to N.D. Texas
AT&T INC: Sands Data Breach Suit Removed to W.D. Wash.
AUXILIOSERVICES INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Henry Alleges

BASSETT HEALTHCARE: Class Cert. Bid Filing Extended to Oct. 25
BASTIAT BROADWAY: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Murphy Says
BAY SMOKES: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Saunders Says
BAYER CORP: Court OK's Newman Bid to Seal Documents
BBQ CNG: Faces Shimunov Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.

BRIDGEWAY OF BENSENVILLE: Faces Abundiz Suit Over BIPA Violations
BROOKDALE SENIOR: Bid for Certification of Subclasses Partly OK'd
CAJUN SEAFOOD: Faces Lozano Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
CAMBER ENERGY: Sept. 12 Settlement Final Approval Hearing Set
CAPSTONE LOGISTICS: Sayah Sues Over Warehouse Employees' Unpaid OT

CENTURY ALUMINUM: Class Cert-Related Bids Due Jan. 3, 2025
CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Advanced Cardiology Sues Over Data Breach
CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Agius Alleges
CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Ingraham Counseling Suit Transferred to D. Minn.
CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Surgical Partners Sues Over Private Data Breach

CHARTWELL ASSET: Court Tosses Mackenzie Bid for Class Certification
CHOICE HEALTH: Bid for Final OK of Settlement Partly OK'd
CIRCLE K STORES: Parties Seek to Extend Class Deadlines for 60 Days
CLEANCHOICE ENERGY: Sommer Sues Over Exorbitant Electricity Rates
CONMEBOL: Denies Ticket Buyers Access to Stadium, Valderrama Says

CREDIT CONTROL: Final Approval of Class Action Settlement Sought
CVS HEALTH: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set September 10
DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL: Semino Suit Hits Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
DENTEGRA INSURANCE: Ehli Sues Over Data Security Failure
DG3 NORTH: Faces De Salvo Suit Over Customers' Compromised Info

DUNKLAU PHARMACY: Lawrence E. Samuels Suit Removed to E.D. Mo.
EQUINOX HOLDINGS: Class Settlement in Hubert Suit Gets Final Nod
EVENT TICKETS: Gershzon Sues Over Tickets' False Ads
EVOLVE BANK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Prystalski Alleges
F21 OPCO: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to March 6, 2025

FEDERAL BUREAU: MacDermott Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
FIRST ADVANTAGE: Wielkopolski Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
FITON INC: Order on Class Certification Entered in Endres Suit
FRANCO AND COMPANY: Lescano Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
GEICO INDEMNITY: Scheduling Order Entered in Harn Class Suit

GENERIC PHARMACEUTICALS: Class Cert Bid Hearing Set for Dec. 16-20
GEORGETOWN CORNER: Dupuis Seeks to Certify Collective Action
GOODYEAR TIRE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Alfonso Alleges
GREENSKY INC: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Documents Under Seal
GROUP 1001: Settles 2023 Data Breach Class Suit for $4.76-Mil.

HENNEPIN, MN: Court Narrows Claims in Berry Suit
HEYL TRUCK: Rogers Pay Transparency Suit Removed to W.D. Wash.
HOMEWORKS ENERGY: Giguere Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
HONDA MOTOR: Bolooki Seeks Leave to File Documents Under Seal
HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL: Nessi Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties

HOT TOPIC: Zuccaro Suit Seeks Conditional Class Certification
HUSH NYC: Saunders Suit Seeks Blind's Equal Access to Online Store
JAMES KOUTOULAS: De Ford Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
JUSTICE RESOURCE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Anderson Alleges
LA COLOMBE: Paraham Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime

LIBERTY MEDIA: Gutierrez Video Privacy Suit Removed to N.D. Ill.
LIBERTY MUTUAL: Hutzel Suit Removed to N.D. Ohio
MARINER FINANCE: Wilson Sues Over Deceptive Practices Act
MDALGORITHMS INC: Martin Says Acne Treatment Cream Contain Benzene
MEDIASTAR LIMITED: Hossain Seeks to Open Discovery Under VPPA

MEDIBASE GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Barbaria Says
MICHAEL L. MANNA: Faces Vasquez Suit Over Unlawful Labor Practices
MICROGENICS CORP: Steele-Warrick Suit Seeks to Certify Class
MKM REALTY: Cheli Sues Over Property's Architectural Barriers
MNGI DIGESTIVE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Halvorson Says

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Salom Allowed to File Overlength Brief
ODDITY TECH: Faces Class Suit Over AI Technology Misinformation
OPTIMAS OE: Faces Duncan Suit Over BIPA Violations
ORACLE INC: Agrees to Settle Data Privacy Class Suit For $115MM
PATELCO CREDIT: Faces Gallagher Suit Over Alleged Data Breach

PFP INDUSTRIES: Jackson Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
PLAINVILLE GAMING: Katopodis Moved for Subpoena Duces Tecum
PREMERA BLUE: Plaintiffs' Seek to Certify Plan Participant Class
RAWLINGS COMPANY: Faces Dascenzo Suit Over Insurance Claims
RECONNAISSANCE ENERGY: Settlement Claims Deadline Set October 22

RSC CORAL: Ovalles Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime
SAM'S WEST: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Frost & Frost Say
SANTA MONICA, CA: Black Lives Seek Initial OK of Class Settlement
SERITAGE GROWTH: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set August 30
SMACKED LLC: Saunders Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website

SNAPCHAT INC: Agrees $35M Settlement Over Platform Misuse
SOCALO DISCOUNT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Aquino Suit Says
SOUTH FLORIDA: Fails to Implement Security Protocols, Nobel Says
SQUISHABLE.COM: Class Settlement in Borovoy Gets Initial Nod
STAPLES INC: Weiler Sues Over Bait and Switch Business Scheme

TARGET CORP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Soares Alleges
TCK SANKAR: Minyety Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
TELLURIAN INC: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Woodside Energy
TWO RATS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Fisher Alleges
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: NCPA Sues Over Massive Data Breach

VIA RENEWABLES: Amburgey Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties
VINTAGE CAPITAL: Gale et al. Sue Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty
VPC IMPACT: $7MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Sept. 26
VPC IMPACT: Agrees to Settle Class Action Lawsuit for $7-Mil.
WAKEFERN FOOD: Barnes Seek to Certify Class of New York Purchasers

WALMART INC: Court Approves $2.5MM Wage Claims Class Settlement
WALMART INC: Faces John Suit Over Mislabeled Cereal Bars
WESTERN MESQUITE: Sornia Labor Suit Removed to S.D. Calif.
Y-MABS THERAPEUTICS: Hearing for Class Settlement Set October 28
YOTTA TECHNOLOGIES: Baumgartner Alleges Inaccessible Yotta Accounts


                            *********

3M CO: Discovery in PFAS-Related Suit Ongoing in South Carolina
---------------------------------------------------------------
3M Co. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period
ending June 30, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on July 26, 2024, that PFAS-related class suit discovery
is ongoing in South Carolina state court.

In South Carolina, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in
South Carolina state court against 3M, DuPont and DuPont related
entities in March 2022.

The lawsuit alleges property damage and personal injuries from
contamination from PFAS compounds used and disposed of at the
textile plant known as the Galey & Lord plant from 1966 until 2016.


The complaint seeks remedies including damages, punitive damages,
and medical monitoring.

The case has been removed to federal court.

Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in November 2022, and 3M
and DuPont filed a joint motion to dismiss, which was largely
denied in September 2023.

The case is now proceeding in discovery.

Based in Minnesota, 3M Company is a multinational conglomerate that
operates in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and
consumer goods. [BN]


3M CO: Trial for PFAS-Related Suit Set for Sept. 2026
-----------------------------------------------------
3M Co. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period
ending June 30, 2024 filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on July 26, 2024, that the federal court has set trial
for Wisconsin PFAS-related class suit in September 2026.

In Wisconsin, in August 2023, 3M and other defendants were named as
defendants in a putative class action brought in federal court by
several residents of Oneida County alleging property damage
resulting from PFAS contamination they attribute to the operations
of a paper mill in Rhinelander, Wisconsin.

In December 2023, the JPML denied 3M's request to transfer the case
to the AFFF MDL. 3M has filed a motion to dismiss, which remains
pending.

The court has set a trial date in September 2026.

Based in Minnesota, 3M Company is a multinational conglomerate that
operates in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and
consumer goods. [BN]


3M COMPANY: Firefighters Exposed to Toxic Chemicals, Alston Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
ERIC ALSTON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff 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.
Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-04050-RMG (D.S.C., July 19, 2024) is
an action resulting from Plaintiff's exposure to the Defendants'
aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"),
which 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.

According to the complaint, the Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and
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, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which
contained PFAS for use in firefighting.

The 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 dermal absorption of PFAS from
Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the serious
medical conditions and complications alleged herein.

3M Company conducts operations in electronics, telecommunications,
industrial, consumer and office, health care, safety, and other
markets. The Company businesses share technologies, manufacturing
operations, marketing channels, and other resources. 3M serves
customers worldwide. [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
          Telephone: (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
          Telephone: (205) 328-9200
          Facsimile: (205) 328-9456

AAA NORTHEAST: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Murphy Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES MURPHY, individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. AAA NORTHEAST, Defendant, Case
No.1:24-cv-05382 (S.D.N.Y., July 17, 2024) alleges violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, https://northeast.aaa.com,, is not fully or equally
accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the
Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.

AAA NORTHEAST, operates the AAA online insurance sales office as
well as the AAA interactive Website and advertises, markets, and
operates in the State of New York and throughout the United States.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
          Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
          Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
          150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003
          Telephone: (212) 228-9795
          Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
          Email: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
                 Michael@Gottlieb.legal
                 Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal

ADAPTHEALTH CORP: Nov. 13 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
---------------------------------------------------------
Kroll Settlement Administration issued a statement regarding
Hessler v. McGee et al., Civ. No. 2:21-cv-05335-GJP (E.D.Pa.).

TO: ALL RECORD HOLDERS AND BENEFICIAL OWNERS OF THE COMMON STOCK OF
ADAPTHEALTH, CORP. CURRENTLY AND AS OF JUNE 25, 2024, EXCLUDING
DEFENDANTS AND ANY ENTITY IN WHICH THEY HAVE A CONTROLLING INTEREST
AND OFFICERS AND DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY AND THEIR LEGAL
REPRESENTATIVES, HEIRS, SUCCESSORS, OR ASSIGNS.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, that the shareholder derivative action
entitled Hessler v. McGee et al., Civ. No. 2:21-cv-05335-GJP (E.D.
Pa.) is being settled on the terms set forth in a Stipulation of
Settlement, dated April 23, 2024 (the "Stipulation" or
"Settlement"). This notice should be read in conjunction with, and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to, the text of the
Stipulation, which has been filed with the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The text of the
Stipulation and the full-length Notice of Pendency and Proposed
Settlement of Shareholder Derivative Action ("Notice") may be found
at www.adapthealthderivativesettlement.com. All capitalized terms
herein have the same meanings as set forth in the Stipulation.

Under the terms of the proposed Settlement, AdaptHealth will adopt
and maintain certain corporate governance measures that serve as
the basis for the resolution of the claims asserted in this
derivative litigation (the "Corporate Governance Reforms"). The
Company has agreed to maintain the Corporate Governance Reforms for
no less than six (6) years.(1) The Corporate Governance Reforms are
detailed in their entirety in Exhibit A to the Stipulation.
Defendants have also agreed to pay an award of attorneys' fees,
reimbursement of expenses, and service awards, if any, for
Plaintiff and Plaintiff's Counsel in an aggregate amount not to
exceed $935,000.00, subject to Court approval (the "Fee and Expense
Award").

On November 13, 2024 at 10:00 a.m., a settlement fairness hearing
will be held before the Honorable Gerald J. Pappert, at the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania,
Courtroom 11-A, James A. Byrne U.S. Courthouse 601 Market Street,
Philadelphia, PA 19106 (the "Settlement Hearing"). At the
Settlement Hearing, the Court will: (a) determine whether Plaintiff
and Plaintiff's Counsel have adequately represented the interests
of AdaptHealth and its stockholders; (b) determine whether the
proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable, adequate, and in the best
interests of AdaptHealth and its stockholders; (c) determine
whether the Notice fully satisfies the requirements of Rule 23.1
and due process; (d) determine whether a judgment should be entered
dismissing the Derivative Action with prejudice against Defendants;
(e) determine whether the motion by Plaintiff's Counsel for the Fee
and Expense Award should be approved; (f) hear and determine any
objections to the Settlement or the motion by Plaintiff's Counsel
for the Fee and Expense Award; and (g) consider any other matters
that may properly be brought before the Court.

Any AdaptHealth stockholder who wishes to object to the Settlement
may appear and be heard at the Settlement Hearing, provided that
they (a) were a stockholder of record or beneficial owner as of
June 25, 2024, and (b) filed a timely notice of objection in the
manner and form described in the Notice. Any AdaptHealth
stockholder may enter an appearance through counsel of their own
choosing and at their own expense or may appear on their own. Any
objections must be on file with the Court, and served on counsel
for both parties so that they are received no later than October
23, 2024.

Any person or entity who fails to object or otherwise request to be
heard in the manner and form described in the Notice will be deemed
to have waived the right to object to any aspect of the Settlement
as incorporated in the Stipulation or otherwise to be heard
(including the right to appeal) and will be forever barred from
raising such objection in this or any other action or proceeding,
and, unless otherwise ordered by the Court, shall be bound by the
Final Judgment to be entered and the releases to be given.

Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice, may be made to:

Plaintiff's Counsel:

Gregory M. Nespole
LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
New York, New York 10004
Telephone: (212) 363-7500
gnespole@zlk.com

Joseph C. Kohn
KOHN, SWIFT & GRAF, P.C.
1600 Market Street, Suite 2500
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103
Telephone: (215) 238-1700
jkohn@kohnswift.com

Defendants' Counsel:

Todd G. Cosenza
WILLKIE FARR & GALLAGHER LLP
787 Seventh Avenue
New York, New York 10019
Telephone: (212) 728-8000
tcosenza@willkie.com

Dani R. James
KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
1177 Avenue of the Americas
New York, New York 10036
Telephone: (212) 715-9100
djames@kramerlevin.com

PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT REGARDING THIS NOTICE.

DATED: June 25, 2024

(1) Any Corporate Governance Reform relating to the composition of
AdaptHealth's Board of Directors will be implemented in the next
election cycle following Final Approval.


AMAZON.COM INC: Court Narrows Claims in Mallouk Suit
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SUZANNE MALLOUK, ALFREDO
RODRIGUEZ PEREZ, ARJUN DHAWAN, and WILLIAM NOVOLT, v. AMAZON.COM,
INC. and STARBUCKS CORPORATION, Case No. 2:23-cv-00852-RSM (W.D.
Wash.), the Hon. Judge Ricardo Martinez entered an order granting
in part and denying in part the Defendants' motion to dismiss:

   (1) Plaintiff Dhawan's and purported class members' claims under

       N.Y.C. Admin. Code section 22-1201(a) are dismissed;

   (2) Plaintiffs' claims under N.Y.C. Admin. Code section
22-1201(b)
       are dismissed;

   (3) Defendant Starbucks is dismissed from this case; and

   (4) Plaintiff Dhawan's unjust enrichment claim stands. All other

       Plaintiffs' unjust enrichment claims are dismissed.

The Court finds that, taking all inferences in a light most
favorable to Plaintiffs, Starbucks should be dismissed for similar
reasons to dismissal of Plaintiffs' claims under section
22-1201(b). Though Starbucks employees work in the store and,
perhaps, direct and instruct customers on palm scanning and
entering the gated area, as Plaintiffs allege, Plaintiffs fail to
allege sufficient facts that Starbucks plays any part in the
control of the Just Walk Out technology or otherwise share in
biometric identifier information as defined under § 22-1201(b).
For similar reasons to Plaintiffs' section 22-1201(b) claims
warranting dismissal, at this stage, Starbucks shall be dismissed
as a defendant in this case.

The Plaintiffs entered Starbucks-Amazon Go stores throughout 2022
and 2023 by using QR codes, palm scans, and a credit card.

A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yf8KW9 at no extra
charge.[CC]


AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Class Cert. Bid Filing Extended to Oct. 18
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIFER VINCENZETTI and
those similarly situated, v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, Case No.
1:21-cv-02681-RM-NRN (D. Colo.), the Hon. Judge N. Reid Neureiter
entered an order granting the joint motion to extend deadlines in
scheduling order as follows:

-- Discovery Cut-off:                             Sept. 13, 2024

-- Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification:    Oct. 18, 2024

-- Opposition to Class Certification; Motion      Nov. 18, 2024
    for Summary Judgments:

-- Reply to Motion for Class Certification:       Dec. 16, 2024

Amazon.com provides e-commerce services.

A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=KE9nkC at no extra
charge.[CC]

AMERICAN AIRLINES: Qawasmi Sues Over Share Price Drop
-----------------------------------------------------
YAZZAN QAWASMI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AMERICAN AIRLINES GROUP INC., ROBERT D.
ISOM, DEVON E. MAY, and VASU S. RAJA, Defendants, Case No.
4:24-cv-00673-Y (N.D. Tex., July 18, 2024) is a federal securities
class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and all investors who
purchased or otherwise acquired American securities between January
25, 2024 to May 28, 2024, inclusive, seeking to recover damages
caused by Defendants' violations of the federal Securities Exchange
Act.

According to the complaint, the Defendants provided investors with
material information concerning American's expected revenue for the
fiscal year 2024. Defendants' statements included, among other
things, confidence in the Company's new sales and distribution
strategy to reduce internal expenses while simultaneously driving a
significant demand increase for the Company's airline services. The
Defendants provided these overwhelmingly positive statements to
investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false
and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts
concerning the true state of American; notably, that the Company's
sales and distribution strategy was not driving the revenue
projected. However, it was actually driving customers away from
American as the strategy and its attested poor execution made it
more difficult for customers to access the Company's services. Such
statements absent these material facts caused Plaintiff and other
shareholders to purchase American's securities at artificially
inflated prices, says the suit.

Investors and analysts reacted immediately to American's
revelations. The price of American's common stock declined
dramatically. From a closing market price of $13.44 per share on
May 28, 2024, American's stock price fell to $11.62 per share on
May 29, 2024, a decline of more than 13.5% in the span of a single
day, the suit alleges.

American Airlines Group Inc. operates as a network air carrier,
providing scheduled air transportation passenger and cargo services
throughout the U.S. and in various other countries around the
world.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Stuart L. Cochran, Esq.
          CONDON TOBIN SLADEK THORNTON NERENBERG PLLC
          8080 Park Lane, Suite 700
          Dallas, TX 75231
          Telephone: (214) 265-3804
          Facsimile: (214) 691-6311
          E-mail: scochran@condontobin.com

               - and -

          Adam M. Apton, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
          33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (212) 363-7500
          Facsimile: (212) 363-7171
          E-mail: aapton@zlk.com

ANIMAL BEHAVIOR: Wilson Alleges Wrongful Debt Collections
---------------------------------------------------------
ANDREW WILSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ANIMAL BEHAVIOR COLLEGE, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 24-003254-CI (Fla., Cir., Pinnellas Cty., July 23, 2024)
seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to
collect a debt.

Animal Behavior College, Inc. helps animal lovers to pursue animal
careers. The Company offers certification programs which includes
dog trainer and cat trainer program, veterinary assistant program,
pet groomer, aquarium maintenance, and zookeeper assistant program.
Animal Behavior College serves customers in the State of
California. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gerald D. Lane, Jr.,
          Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
          Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
          110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 907-1136
          E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com
                  zane@jibraellaw.com
                  gerald@jibraellaw.com

ANN & ROBERT: Riley Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
--------------------------------------------------------------
ALEXAS RILEY, individually and on behalf of L.S., a minor, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ANN & ROBERT
H. LURIE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF CHICAGO, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-06082 (N.D. Ill., July 18, 2024) seeks to hold the
Defendant responsible for the injuries the Defendant inflicted on
Plaintiff and hundreds of thousands of similarly situated persons
due to the Defendant's impermissibly inadequate and unlawful data
security, which caused the personal information of Plaintiff's
minor child and those similarly situated to be exfiltrated by
unauthorized access by cybercriminals between January 26, 2024, and
January 31, 2024.

According to the complaint, the data breach affected approximately
800,000 individuals. The data which the Defendant collected from
the Plaintiff and Class Members, and which was exfiltrated by
cybercriminals from the Defendant, were highly sensitive. The
exfiltrated data included personal identifying information and
personal health information such as: children's name and date of
birth; health claims information; health plan; health plan
beneficiary numbers; medical condition or diagnosis; medical
treatment; other demographics; other health /medical records;
patient account / record ID#; patient admission date; patient dates
of service; patient discharge date; patient medical record number;
patient personal email address; and patient personal telephone
numbers.

Through this action, the Plaintiff seeks to remedy these injuries
on behalf of themselves and all similarly situated individuals
whose Personal Information was exfiltrated and compromised in the
Data Breach. The Plaintiff further seeks remedies including, but
not limited to, compensatory damages, treble damages, punitive
damages, reimbursement of out-of-pocket costs, and injunctive
relief -- including improvements to Defendant's data security
systems, future annual audits, and the appointment of an
independent and qualified cyber auditor to monitor Defendant's
cyber hygiene, all of which will be funded by Defendant.

Lurie Children's Hospital operates as a pediatric acute care
children's hospital. The Organization offers emergency care,
women's health services, cardiology, orthopedic, and oncology
service. Lurie Children's Hospital Health serves patients in 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

ANTHONY WILLS: Craigen Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Chappel Craigen, et al.,
v. Anthony Wills et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-01462-DWD (S.D. Ill.),
the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order certifying class
action.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 23, 2024 is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vlko42 at no extra
charge.

The Plaintiffs appear pro se.[CC]

ANTHONY WILLS: Ford Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Allen Ford, et al., v.
Anthony Wills et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-01462-DWD (S.D. Ill.), the
Plaintiff ask the Court to enter an order certifying class action.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated June 23, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=oF9Xcc at no extra
charge.[CC]

APPLE INC: Faces Polly Suit Over Monopoly of Smartphone Market
--------------------------------------------------------------
IRA POLLY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. APPLE INC. One Apple Park Way Cupertino, CA
95014, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-07849 (D.N.J., July 18, 2024) is
brought pursuant to the Sherman Act seeking to address Apple's
alleged anticompetitive and exclusionary conduct, and to alleviate
the harm caused to competition and consumers.

This complaint focuses on the conduct of Apple using mechanisms to
suppress technologies that would have increased competition among
smartphones. Suppressing these technologies does not reflect
competition on the merits, rather, to protect its smartphone
monopoly -- and the extraordinary profits that monopoly generates
-- Apple repeatedly chooses to make its products worse for
consumers to prevent competition from emerging. These have
contributed to Apple's ability to secure, grow, and maintain its
smartphone monopoly by increasing switching costs for users, which
leads to higher prices and less innovation for users and
developers, says the suit.

The Plaintiff therefore brings this case to rid smartphone markets
of Apple's exclusionary conduct, secure just compensation for the
consumers most directly impacted by that conduct, and ensure that
the next generation of innovators can upend the technological world
as we know it with new and transformative technologies.

Plaintiff Polly purchased an iPhone 15 Pro on September 22, 2023,
directly from Apple's Tyson Corner retail store.

Apple Inc. is a global technology company with headquarters in
Cupertino, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          William Christopher Carmody, Esq.
          Shawn J. Rabin, Esq.
          Cory Buland, Esq.
          Mark Musico, Esq.
          SUSMAN GODFREY LLP
          One Manhattan West, 50th Floor  
          New York, NY 10001-8602
          Telephone: (212) 336-8330
          Facsimile: (212) 336-8340
          E-mail: bcarmody@susmangodfrey.com
                  srabin@susmangodfrey.com
                  cbuland@susmangodfrey.com
                  mmusico@susmangodfrey.com

               - and -

          Michael D. Hausfeld, Esq.
          Melinda R. Coolidge, Esq.
          Sarah R. LaFreniere, Esq.
          Nick Murphy, Esq.
          Theodore DiSalvo, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          888 16th Street, NW Suite 300
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 540-7200
          Facsimile: (202) 540-7201
          E-mail: mhausfeld@hausfeld.com
                  mcoolidge@hausfeld.com
                  slafreniere@hausfeld.com
                  nmurphy@hausfeld.com
                  tdisalvo@hausfeld.com

                - and -

          Katie R. Beran, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          325 Chestnut Street Suite 900
          Philadelphia, PA 19106
          Telephone: (215) 985-3270
          Facsimile: (215) 985-3271
          E-mail: kberan@hausfeld.com

               - and -

          Scott D. Martin, Esq.
          Daniel P. Weick, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP   
          33 Whitehall Street 14th Floor
          New York, NY 10004
          Telephone: (646) 357-1100
          Facsimile: (212) 202-4322
          E-mail: smartin@hausfeld.com
                  dweick@hausfeld.com

               - and -

          Michael P. Lehman, Esq.
          Megan E. Jones, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP  
          600 Montgomery Street Suite 3200
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 633-1908
          Facsimile: (415) 633-4980
          E-mail: mlehman@hausfeld.com
                  mjones@hausfeld.com

               - and -

          Joseph J. DePalma, Esq.
          LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG & AFANADOR, LLC  
          570 Broad Street, Suite 1201
          Newark, NJ 07102
          Telephone: (973) 623-3000
          Facsimile: (973) 623-0858
          E-mail: jdepalma@litedepalma.com

               - and -

          Mindee J. Reuben, Esq.
          Steven J. Greenfogel, Esq.
          LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG & AFANADOR, LLC
          1515 Market Street, Suite 1200
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: (215) 854-4060
          Facsimile: (973) 623-0858
          E-mail: mreuben@litedepalma.com
                  sgreenfogel@litedepalma.com

APPLE INC: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Lopez Extended to Oct. 18
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as FUMIKO LOPEZ, FUMIKO
LOPEZ, as guardian of A.L., a minor, LISHOMWA HENRY, JOSEPH HARMS,
JOHN TROY PAPPAS, and DAVID YACUBIAN individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, v. APPLE INC., Case No.
4:19-cv-04577-JSW (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jeffrey White entered
a case management order as follows:

            Event                         Current         Proposed

                                          Deadlines      
Deadlines

  Plaintiffs' Deadline to Serve        July 19, 2024    Oct. 18,
2024
  Expert Reports in Support of
  Class Certification

  Motion for Class Certification       Aug. 9, 2024     Oct. 18,
2024

  Apple's Deadline to Serve Expert     Sept. 25, 2024   Jan. 17,
2025
  Reports in Opposition to Class
  Certification

  Opposition to Motion for Class       Oct. 18, 2024    Jan. 17,
2025
  Certification

  Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of      Dec. 4, 2024     Mar. 14,
2025
  Class Certification and Deadline
  to Serve Rebuttal Expert Reports,
  if any

  Last Day to Complete Mediation       Jan. 28, 2025    Jan. 28,
2025

Apple is an American multinational corporation and technology
company.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4jHv9H at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Erin Green Comite, Esq.
          Joseph P. Guglielmo, Esq.
          John T. Jasnoch, Esq.
          Hal D. Cunningham, Esq.
          Sean C. Russell, Esq.
          Victoria L. Burke, Esq.
          SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
          The Helmsley Building
          230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10169-1820
          Telephone: (212) 223-6444
          Facsimile: (212) 223-6334
          E-mail: ecomite@scott-scott.com
                  jguglielmo@scott-scott.com
                  jjasnoch@scott-scott.com
                  hcunningham@scott-scott.com
                  srussell@scott-scott.com
                  vburke@scott-scott.com

                - and -

          Vincent Briganti, Esq.
          Christian Levis, Esq.
          Andrea Farah, Esq.
          LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C.
          44 South Broadway, Suite 1100
          White Plains, NY 10601
          Telephone: (914) 997-0500
          Facsimile: (914) 997-0035
          E-mail: vbriganti@lowey.com
                  clevis@lowey.com
                  afarah@lowey.com

                - and -

          Mark N. Todzo, Esq.
          Patrick Carey, Esq.
          LEXINGTON LAW GROUP
          503 Divisadero Street
          San Francisco, CA 94117
          Telephone: (415) 913-7800
          Facsimile: (415) 759-4112
          E-mail: mtodzo@lexlawgroup.com
                  pcarey@lexlawgroup.com

                - and -

          E. Kirk Wood, Esq.
          WOOD LAW FIRM
          Birmingham, AL 35238
          Telephone: (205) 612-0243
          E-mail: kirk@woodlawfirmllc.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Arturo J. Gonzalez, Esq.  
          Alexis A. Amezcua, Esq.
          Purvi G. Patel, Esq.
          Katie Viggiani, Esq.
          MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
          425 Market Street
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2482
          Telephone: (415) 268-7000
          Facsimile: (415) 268-7522
          E-mail: agonzalez@mofo.com
                  AAmezcua@mofo.com
                  ppatel@mofo.com
                  kviggiani@mofo.com

                - and -

          Isabelle Ord, Esq.
          Raj N. Shah, Esq.
          Eric M. Roberts, Esq.
          DLA PIPER LLP (US)
          555 Mission Street, Suite 2400
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2933
          Telephone: (415) 836-2500
          Facsimile: (415) 836-2501
          E-mail: isabelle.ord@dlapiper.com
                  raj.shah@dlapiper.com
                  eric.roberts@dlapiper.com

ARB GAMING: Anderson Sues Over Biometric Data Collection
--------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL ANDERSON, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARB GAMING, LLC dba Modo. US,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-06052 (N.D. Ill., July 17, 2024)
alleges violations of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy
Act.

According to the complaint, Modo.US collects, stores, possesses,
otherwise obtains, uses, and disseminates its users' biometric data
to, amongst other things, further enhance Modo.US and its online
dating platform.

Modo.US's unlawful collection, obtainment, storage, and use of its
users' biometric data exposes them to serious and irreversible
privacy risks. For example, if Modo.US, or their third-party
affiliates, database containing facial geometry scans or other
sensitive, proprietary biometric data is hacked, breached, or
otherwise exposed, Modo.US users have no means by which to prevent
identity theft, unauthorized tracking or other unlawful or improper
use of this highly personal and private information, says the
suit.

ARB GAMING, LLC dba Modo. US offers blend of social gaming and the
chance to redeem cash prizes, all within a secure and legal online
environment. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael L. Fradin, Esq.
          FRADIN LAW
          8401 Crawford Ave. Ste. 104
          Skokie, IL 60076
          Telephone: (847) 986-5889
          Facsimile: (847) 673-1228
          Email: mike@fradinlaw.com

               - and -

          James L. Simon
          SIMON LAW CO.
          11 1/2 N. Franklin Street
          Chagrin Falls, OH 44022
          Telephone: (216) 816-8696
          Email: james@simonsayspay.com

ARCIS GOLF: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Boles Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------
CARL BOLES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ARCIS GOLF LLC, Defendant, Case No.
3:24-cv-01823-N (N.D. Tex., July 17, 2024) is an action against the
Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard
sensitive information of its customers.

According to the complaint, the Data Breach was a direct result of
the Defendant's failure to implement adequate and reasonable
cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to protect
consumers' personally identifiable information or "PII", from a
foreseeable and preventable cyber-attack.

Arcis Golf LLC owns and operates golf courses and country clubs.
The Company provides various amenities for private and public golf
clubs to offer diverse playing experiences for members and guests.
Arcis Golf serves customers in the United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joe Kendall
          KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
          3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
          Dallas, TX 75219
          Telephone: (214) 744-3000
          Facsimile: (214) 744-3015
          Email: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com

              - and -

          John J. Nelson, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          280 S. Beverly Drive
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (858) 209-6941
          Email: jnelson@milberg.com

ASR GROUP: Borge and Gershzon Allege Sugar Price-Fixing Conspiracy
------------------------------------------------------------------
REY BORGE and MIKHAIL GERSHZON, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ASR GROUP INTERNATIONAL,
INC.; AMERICAN SUGAR REFINING, INC.; DOMINO FOODS, INC.; MICHIGAN
SUGAR COMPANY; UNITED SUGAR PRODUCERS & REFINERS COOPERATIVE f/k/a
UNITED SUGARS CORPORATION; COMMODITY INFORMATION, INC.; and RICHARD
WISTISEN, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-02654 (D. Minn., July 9,
2024) arises under under Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act of
1890, and Sections 4 and 16 of the Clayton Antitrust Act, as well
as the antitrust and trade regulation laws, and common law, of the
several states including Connecticut, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona,
Arkansas and California.

Beginning at least as early as January 1, 2019, the Defendants
conspired to fix and artificially inflate the prices of granulated
sugar sold in the United States. To implement their price-fixing
conspiracy, Defendants exchanged detailed, competitively sensitive,
non-public information about granulated sugar prices, capacity,
sales volume, supply, and demand. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs bring
this class action for redress of the injury and damages they and
the members of the Class have suffered and continue to suffer by
reason of Defendants’ continuing violations of law.

Based in  West Palm Beach, FL, ASR Group refines and markets cane
sugar. The company sells most of its granulated sugar under the
Domino and C&H brand names. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

           Ian W. Sloss, Esq.
           John Seredynski, Esq.
           SILVER GOLUB & TEITELL, LLP
           1 Landmark Square, 15th Floor
           Stamford, CT 06901
           Telephone: (203) 325-4491
           Facsimile: (203) 325-3769
           E-mail: isloss@sgtlaw.com
                   jseredynski@sgtlaw.com

AT&T INC: Banu Data Breach Suit Transferred to N.D. Texas
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled Fulvia BANU, individually and on behalf of all
those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AT&T Inc., Defendant, Case
No. 0:24-cv-61047, was transferred from U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Florida to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Texas on July 9, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Texas assigned Case
No. 3:24-cv-01747-E to the proceeding.

The case arises from Defendant's alleged failure to properly secure
and safeguard Plaintiff's sensitive information, which was accessed
during the data breach at some time before March 17, 2024.

AT&T Inc. is a telecommunication corporation headquartered in
Dallas, TX. [BN]

AT&T INC: Sands Data Breach Suit Removed to W.D. Wash.
------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ROB SANDS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AT&T INC., a foreign corporation
doing business in Washington State, Defendant, Case No.
24-2-09591-8 SEA, was removed from the Superior Court of the State
of Washington, King County to the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Washington, Seattle Division, on July 9, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Washington assigned
Case No. 3:24-cv-01749-E.

The case arises from Defendant's failure to safeguard personal
information in violation of common law, contracts, and consumer
protection statutes.

AT&T is telecommunications holding company headquartered in Dallas,
TX. [BN]

The Defendant is represented by:

         Alexander Vitruk, Esq.
         BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
         999 Third Avenue, Suite 3900
         Seattle, WA 98104-4076
         Telephone: (206) 332-1380
         Facsimile: (206) 624-7317
         E-mail: avitruk@bakerlaw.com

AUXILIOSERVICES INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Henry Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
IRISE HENRY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AUXILIOSERVICES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-00391-MWM (S.D. OH., July 22, 2024) seeks to recover from
the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Plaintiff Henry was employed by the Defendant as a bus driver.

Auxilioservices, Inc. provides general education, special needs,
mid-day runs, and field trip transportation. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
          BARKAN MEIZLISH DEROSE COX, LLP
          4200 Regent Street, Suite210
          Columbus, OH43219
          Telephone: (614) 221-4221
          Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
          Email: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com

BASSETT HEALTHCARE: Class Cert. Bid Filing Extended to Oct. 25
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Browning v. Bassett
Healthcare Network, Case No. 6:23-cv-01514 (N.D.N.Y., Filed Dec. 1,
2023), Hon. Judge Lawrence E. Kahn entered an order extending the
deadline for the Plaintiff's motion for Rule class certification
and FLSA Rule 216(b) conditional certification to Oct. 25, 2024.

The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
and Equal Pay Act.

Bassett provides full spectrum of health care to patients.[CC]

BASTIAT BROADWAY: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Murphy Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES MURPHY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BASTIAT BROADWAY, INC. d/b/a BRANDY
MELVILLE, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-05576 (S.D.N.Y., July 23,
2024) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, https://us.brandymelville.com, is not fully or equally
accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the
Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA.

The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.

Bastiat Broadway, Inc. d/b/a Brandy Melville is a multinational
fast-fashion clothing company. Established in Italy by Silvio
Marsan, it gained international popularity after switching to a
California-based style and reaching American consumers. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
           Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
           Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
           GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
           150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
           New York, NY 10003
           Telephone: (212) 228-9795
           Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
           Email: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
                  Michael@Gottlieb.legal
                  Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal

BAY SMOKES: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Saunders Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SAUNDERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BAY SMOKES LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-05475 (S.D.N.Y., July 19, 2024) is a civil action against
Defendant for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate the Defendant's websites, www.baysmokes.com and
www.onlygas.com, 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.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was injured when
attempting to access Defendant's websites on July 11, 2024, from
his home in Bronx County, in an effort to search for and purchase
Defendant's products and services, including their premium hemp
cannabis, but encountered various access barriers that denied him
full and equal access to Defendant's online goods, content, and
services. The Plaintiff was unable to effectively navigate through
many sections of the websites because many of the images displayed
therein lacked "Alt.Text," or descriptive elements, preventing
Plaintiff's understanding of the webpage content, as well as
hundreds of potential links to specific products which lacked an
accessible name, says the suit.

The Plaintiff now seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so
that Defendant's websites will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers.

Bay Smokes LLC is an online shop that retails vapes, cartridges,
tinctures, edibles, gummies, hemp flowers, prerolls, dabs, and
extracts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jon L. Norinsberg, Esq.
          Bennitta L. Joseph, Esq.
          JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC
          110 East 59th Street, Suite 2300
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 227-5700
          Facsimile: (212) 656-1889
          E-mail: jon@norinsberglaw.com
                  bennitta@employeejustice.com

BAYER CORP: Court OK's Newman Bid to Seal Documents
---------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Newman v. Bayer
Corporation et al., Case No. 7:22-cv-07087-KMK-AEK (S.D.N.Y.), the
Hon. Judge Andrew Krause entered an order Plaintiff's motion to
seal documents.

   1. Exhibit 1 to the Declaration of Max S. Roberts, which
consists
      of excerpts from the Deposition of Amanda McCarthy,
Defendants'
      30(b)(6) witness. On June 28, 2024, Defendants designated the

      entirety of the deposition transcript as "confidential"
pursuant
      to Paragraph 14(a) of the Protective Order.

   2. Exhibits 3, 5-14, and 16-19 to the Declaration of Max S.
      Roberts, which are documents produced by Defendants that have

      been designated as "confidential" or "confidential -
attorneys'
      eyes only" pursuant to Paragraphs 2-3 of the Protective
Order.

   3. Portions of the Declaration of Colin B. Weir that rely on or

      include documents that have been designated as "confidential
--
      attorneys' eyes only" pursuant to Paragraph 3 of the
Protective
      Order.

   4. Portions of Plaintiffs Memorandum of Law In Support of Motion

      for Class Certification that rely on or reference the
      aforementioned documents. Were any of these documents to be
      disclosed, Defendants would be competitively harmed.

Bayer engages in the development, manufacture and distribution of
products in the areas of health care, nutrition and high-tech
materials.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RYfGoO at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Max S. Roberts, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER P.A.
          1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (646) 837-7408
          Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
          E-mail: mroberts@bursor.com

BBQ CNG: Faces Shimunov Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
------------------------------------------------------
GAVRIEL SHIMUNOV and MAXWELL DAVYDOV, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ADAM KAY, an
individual, BBQ CNG INC. d/b/a GRAZE BRANDS, LLC, and CRUST ON J
INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-05073 (E.D.N.Y., July 22, 2024)
is a class action against the Defendants for alleged unlawful labor
practices in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New
York Labor Law, and the New York Wage Theft Prevention Act.

The Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated for Defendant's systemic and continuous
violations of: i) the overtime provisions of the FLSA; ii) the
minimum wage and overtime provisions of the NYLL and N.Y. Comp.
Codes R. & Regs.; iii) misappropriation or unlawful withholding of
gratuities; iv) the spread of hours requirement as contained in New
York State regulation; v) the requirement that employers provide
employees with uninterrupted meal breaks; vi) the requirement that
employers furnish employees with a written statement at the time of
hiring; vii) the requirement that employers furnish employees with
wage statements on each payday containing specific categories of
accurate information; and viii) any other cause(s) of action that
can be inferred from the facts set forth herein.

Plaintiffs Shimunov and Davydov worked for the Defendants in food
and service capacities, including as servers, from September 2019
through the present and from November 2019 through the present,
respectively.

BBQ CNG Inc., d/b/a Graze Brands LLC, is a parent company owned and
operated by Defendant Adam Kay. Together, Defendants own
approximately seven restaurants, some with multiple locations, in
all five boroughs of New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Chaya Gourarie, Esq.
          Jennifer Calamia, Esq.
          BELL LAW GROUP, PLLC
          116 Jackson Avenue
          Syosset, NY 11791
          Telephone: (516) 280-3008
          E-mail: cg@belllg.com
                  jcalamia@belllg.com

BRIDGEWAY OF BENSENVILLE: Faces Abundiz Suit Over BIPA Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CINDY ABUNDIZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BRIDGEWAY OF BENSENVILLE INDEPENDENT LIVING,
LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2024LA000882 (Ill., Cir., Dupage Cty.,
July 23, 2024) alleges violation of the Illinois Biometric
Information Privacy Act.

Though the Defendant collected, stored, and used the Plaintiff's
biometrics for timekeeping and access purposes, the Defendant never
provided the Plaintiff with any written disclosures informing
Plaintiff that it was collecting, storing, and using biometrics or
explaining the purpose or length of term for which the biometrics
were being collected and stored. The Defendant never sought, nor
has the Plaintiff ever provided, any written consent relating to
the Defendant's collection, use, or storage, or dissemination of
the biometrics.

Though the Defendant came into possession of the Plaintiff's
biometrics, Defendant has failed to make publicly available any
written biometric retention, storage or destruction policy, says
the suit.

Bridgeway of Bensenville Independent Living, LLC is the premiere
center for short term rehabilitation, long term skilled nursing
care and retirement in Bensenville, IL. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Hammervold, Esq.
          HAMMERVOLD LAW, LLC
          155 S. Lawndale Ave.
          Elmhurst, IL 60126
          Telephone: (405) 509-0372
          Email: mark@hammervoldlaw.com

BROOKDALE SENIOR: Bid for Certification of Subclasses Partly OK'd
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as STACIA STINER, et al., v.
BROOKDALE SENIOR LIVING, INC., et al., Case No. 4:17-cv-03962-HSG
(N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Haywood Gilliam, Jr. entered an order
granting in part and denying in part the plaintiffs' motion for
certification of subclasses and defendants' motion for
clarification of the Court's March 30, 2023, order:

The court grants in part and denies in part the Plaintiffs' motion
for certification of subclasses.

The Plaintiffs may proceed on a class basis for the (b)(2) San
Ramon, Scotts Valley, and Brookhurst facility-based subclasses
seeking injunctive and declaratory relief, but may not proceed on
their proposed (b)(3) facility-based subclasses seeking statutory
damages. Further, the Court grants in part and denies in part the
Defendants' motion for clarification of its March 30, 2023, order.


The Court confirms that the Court's March 30, 2023 order excluded
manually powered wheelchair users from the Wheelchair and Scooter
User Subclass definition, but did not limit that definition to
include just "current residents."

The Court also sets a case management conference on Aug. 1, 2024,
at 1:00 p.m.

The hearing will be held by Zoom Webinar. All counsel shall use the
following link to access the hearing:
https://canduscourts.zoomgov.com/j/1607976056?pwd=aW5IeE14UkJRbkdPTGJFWFUrRG1Cdz09.

   Meeting ID: 1607976056
   Password: 129759

All attorneys and pro se litigants appearing for the hearing are
required to call in at least fifteen minutes before the hearing to
check in with the courtroom deputy and test internet, video, and
audio capabilities.

Finally, the Court confirms that trial in this matter remains
scheduled to start on Monday, Jan. 27, 2025 at 8:30 a.m. However,
the Court will advance the pretrial conference, currently scheduled
for Tuesday, Jan. 7, 2025 to Tuesday, Dec. 17, 2024 at 3:00 p.m. in
order to permit the Court and the parties adequate time to
frontload and work through trial-related issues in an orderly
manner.

Accordingly, the Court finds that Ms. Algarme may serve as the
representative for the (b)(2) Brookhurst subclass.
In short, the Court is satisfied that the (b)(2) subclasses, as
well as the San Ramon, Scotts Valley, Brookhurst, Tracy, and
Fountaingrove (b)(3) damages subclasses, are sufficiently numerous
for class treatment.

The Court finds the Defendants' motion for clarification
appropriate for disposition without oral argument and deems the
matter submitted.

On March 30, 2023, the Court ruled on Plaintiffs' then-pending
motion for class certification, which sought certification of three
classes. The Court declined to certify either the proposed
Disabilities Class or the Misleading Statements and Omissions
Class.

The Plaintiffs move to certify six subclasses of current and former
residents of six Brookdale facilities to pursue ADA and Unruh Act
claims related to access barriers for persons with mobility and/or
vision disabilities. Specifically, they seek to certify Rule
23(b)(3) subclasses on behalf of certain residents at the San
Ramon, Scotts Valley, Brookhurst, Fountaingrove, Tracy, and Hemet
facilities, and Rule 23(b)(2) subclasses on behalf of certain
residents at only the San Ramon, Scott Valley, and Brookhurst
facilities. The San Ramon, Scotts Valley, Brookhurst, and Tracy
subclasses are identically defined but for the relevant facility
name:

   "All persons with disabilities who use wheelchairs, scooters, or

   other mobility aids or who have vision disabilities and who
reside
   or have resided at the [Facility Name] residential care facility

   for the elderly located in California and owned, operated and/or

   managed by Brookdale during the three years prior to the filing
of
   the Complaint herein through the conclusion of this action,
   including their successorsin-interest if deceased, excluding any

   persons who are subject to arbitration."

The subclasses for the Fountaingrove and Hemet facilities are
defined almost identically to the others:

   "All persons with disabilities who use wheelchairs, scooters, or

   other mobility aids or who have vision disabilities and who
resided
   at the [Facility Name] residential care facility for the elderly

   located in California that was owned, operated and/or managed by

   Brookdale during the three years prior to the filing of the
   Complaint herein through the conclusion of this action,
including
   their successors-in-interest if deceased, excluding any persons
who
   are subject to arbitration."

Brookdale owns and operates retirement homes across the United
States.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=eduEWl at no extra
charge.[CC]


CAJUN SEAFOOD: Faces Lozano Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------
MIGUEL PEREZ LOZANO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CAJUN SEAFOOD MIDDLETOWN LLC d/b/a HOOK &
REEL SEAFOOD AND BAR and YAN QUIN NI, Defendants, Case No.
7:24-cv-05476 (S.D.N.Y., July 19, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendants seeking to recover Plaintiff's unpaid overtime
wages, spread-of-hours pay, liquidated damages, statutory damages,
pre-and post-judgment interest, and attorneys' fees and costs
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law,
and the New York Wage Theft Prevention Act.

The complaint alleges Defendants' failure to pay Plaintiff at a
rate of one and one-half his hourly wage rate for hours worked over
40 per workweek; failure to pay spread-of-hours compensation on
days when he worked shifts spanning over 10 hours; failure to
provide with wage notices at a time of hire or when wage rates
changed; and failure to furnish wage statements accurately
reflecting, inter alia, hours worked and hourly wage rates paid.

The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself, and all
similarly situated persons who are current and/or former kitchen
employees of Defendants since the date three years prior to the
filing of this Complaint who elect to opt-in to this action.

Cajun Seafood Middletown LLC is a seafood restaurant located in
Middletown, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Louis Pechman, Esq.
          Gianfranco J. Cuadra, Esq.
          Camille A. Sanchez, Esq.
          PECHMAN LAW GROUP PLLC
          488 Madison Avenue, 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 583-9500
          E-mail: pechman@pechmanlaw.com
                  cuadra@pechmanlaw.com
                  sanchez@pechmanlaw.com

CAMBER ENERGY: Sept. 12 Settlement Final Approval Hearing Set
-------------------------------------------------------------
Camber Energy, Inc. (NYSE American:CEI), a growth-oriented energy
company ("Camber" or the "Company") announced, that on July 2,
2024, the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas, issued an order providing for preliminary approval of a
proposed settlement of the claims asserted nominally on behalf of
Camber against the individual defendants named in the previously
disclosed stockholder derivative action, Case No. 4:22-cv-02167,
pending before the court.

The order set a final approval hearing for September 12, 2024, at
2:00 p.m. at the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas, Houston Division, 515 Rusk Street Houston, TX
77002 (or by telephonic or video means as may be designated by the
Court in the interest of public safety). As required by the order,
the Stipulation of Settlement, and a Notice of Proposed Settlement
of Derivative Actions, Final Approval Hearing, and Right to Appear,
have been posted to the Investor's Overview section of Camber's
website (http://camber.energy/).

For more information, please visit the company's website at
www.camber.energy.


CAPSTONE LOGISTICS: Sayah Sues Over Warehouse Employees' Unpaid OT
------------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES SAYAH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CAPSTONE LOGISTICS, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-01199-CCC (M.D. Pa., July 18, 2024) is a class action
complaint brought to obtain declaratory, injunctive, and monetary
relief resulting from Defendant's miscalculation of overtime pay in
violation of Pennsylvania's Minimum Wage Act.

The Plaintiff is an employee of Defendant who works in the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and was harmed by Defendant's unlawful
calculation and corresponding underpayment of overtime pay. The
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's "Production Pay Model" uses a
"fluctuating workweek" method that violates the state law.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as a warehouse laborer
at a warehouse located in Carlisle, Pennsylvania. His main job
duties were breaking down pallets and moving goods throughout the
warehouse. He worked at the job site until he was terminated on
February 5, 2024.

Capstone Logistics LLC is a logistics company that offers warehouse
management services for third parties.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Max S. Morgan, Esq.
          THE WEITZ FIRM, LLC
          1515 Market Street, #1100
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: (267) 587-6240
          Facsimile: (215) 689-0875
          E-mail: max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com

               - and -

          Shawn J. Wanta, Esq.
          Scott Moriarity, Esq.
          WANTA THOME PLC
          100 South Fifth Street, Suite 1200
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 252-3570
          Facsimile: (612) 252-3571
          E-mail: sjwanta@wantathome.com
                  samoriarity@wantathome.com

CENTURY ALUMINUM: Class Cert-Related Bids Due Jan. 3, 2025
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Leslie Deaver, on behalf
of herself and a class of all others similarly situated, Robert B.
Deaver, Nicholas A. Marino, Jennifer Marino, Amber Brown, Barry
Bumford, Catherine B. Burns, Katie L. Higgs, Troy L. Higgs, Robert
Keene, Jennifer Poston, Melissa Morris, Travis Shippel, Myrna S.
Siebel, and David Howell, v. Century Aluminum Company and Century
Aluminum of South Carolina, Inc., Case No. 2:23-cv-05766-RMG
(D.S.C.), the Hon. Judge Richard Mark Gergel entered a second
amended scheduling order as follows:

-- At the parties' joint request for a stay to       Sept. 1, 2024

    facilitate settlement discussions, discovery
    is stayed through and including:

-- Discovery shall be completed no later than:       Dec. 1, 2024

-- All motions relating to class certification       Jan. 3, 2025
    shall be filed no later than:

-- All dispositive motions and Daubert               Jan. 15,
2025
    motions shall be filed on or before:

Century is a US-based producer of primary aluminium.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=DhNnNs at no extra
charge.[CC]

CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Advanced Cardiology Sues Over Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------------
ADVANCED CARDIOLOGY OF SOUTH JERSEY, P.C., individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHANGE
HEALTHCARE, INC., and UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED, and
UNITEDHEALTHCARE, INC., and OPTUM, INC., Defendants, Case No.
0:24-cv-02659-DWF-DJF (M.D. Tenn., July 9, 2024) arises from a
massive data breach that began on February 12, 2024, when Blackcat,
a group of cybercriminals, accessed Change’s networks,
exfiltrated and encrypted the personal information and healthcare
records of millions of individuals and medical practices, and held
the stolen information for ransom.

As a result of the data breach, the Defendants took the Change
platform offline and left medical practices such as Plaintiff
without the ability to find and verify patient information, manage
their billing cycles, and submit bills to insurance companies. The
inability to perform basic administrative and billing tasks has
caused substantial losses for Plaintiff and other medical
practices, including but not limited to uncollected revenue, loss
of income from procedures that could not be pre-certified, and loss
of patients. Accordingly, the Plaintiff asserts claims for
negligence, negligent undertaking, unjust enrichment, and
declaratory judgment.

Headquartered in Nashville, TN, Change is a healthcare technology
company operating a software platform that connects medical
practices with payers, pharmacies, and patients in order to
streamline the process by which medical practices manage patient
visits, collect revenue, and access patient information. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J.Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
          STRANCH, JENNINGS &GARVEY PLLC
          The Freedom Center
          223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
          Nashville, TN 37203
          Telephone: (615) 254-8801
          E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com

                  - and -

          Roberta Liebenberg, Esq.
          Gerard A. Dever, Esq.
          Mary L. Russell, Esq.
          FINE, KAPLAN AND BLACK, RPC
          One South Broad St., Suite 2300
          Philadelphia, PA 19107
          Telephone: (215) 567-6565
          E-mail: rliebenberg@finekaplan.com
                  gdever@finekaplan.com
                  mrussell@finekaplan.com

                  - and -

          Linda P. Nussbaum, Esq.
          NUSSBAUM LAW GROUP, P.C.
          1133 Avenue of the Americas, 31st Floor
          New York, NY 10036
          Telephone: (917) 438-9102
          E-mail: lnussbaum@nussbaumpc.com

                  - and -

          Jack Meyerson, Esq.
          Matthew Miller, Esq.
          MEYERSON & MILLER
          1600 Market Street, Suite 1305
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (609) 703-0414
          E-mail: jmeyerson@meyersonlawfirm.com
                  mmiller@meyersonlawfirm.com

CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Agius Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
AGIUS PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES, LLC; AUTHENTIC LIVING PSYCHOTHERAPY
LLC; BALANCE FITNESS FOR LIFE, LLC; BALANCED LIFE COUNSELING
SOLUTIONS, LLC d/b/a CARRIE LEAF THERAPY, LLC; BEGINNINGS AND
BEYOND COUNSELING d/b/a PLAY THERAPY MINNESOTA; BELLO THERAPY;
BRENT C. GARRARD COUNSELING, LLC; CEPD PSYCHOLOGICAL SERVICES; CROM
REHABILITATION, LLC d/b/a ELATION PHYSICAL THERAPY; DOV WILLS,
PLLC; DR. WARREN H. JOHNSON PC; DREW FISHER COUNSELING SERVICES,
LLC; EAST PENN RHEUMATOLOGY; FRANK P. MAGGIACOMO, D.O., INC./MOC;
GARRARD THERAPEUTIC PARTNERS, LLC; HEALTHFIRST FAMILY CARE CENTER,
INC.; HOPE AND HARMONY COUNSELING, LLC; KILLINGLY DENTAL CARE LLC;
K. WADE FOSTER, M.D., P.A., d/b/a FLORIDA DERMATOLOGY AND SKIN CARE
CANCER CENTERS; KOKA CARDIOLOGY; KRISTIN PARKER, LMFT; LAURA COTTON
LICSW; LDK COUNSELING, LLC; LISA RIPPERTON, LCSW, LCAS; MAGNOLIA
MEDICAL CLINIC, P.A.; MELISSA MOREHOUSE LICSW LLC; M.P. COUNSELING
SERVICES, PLLC; THE NATIONAL COMMUNITY PHARMACISTS ASSOCIATION;
NORTH SHORE PHYSICAL THERAPY BELLAIRE, LLC; NORTHERN VERMONT
DERMATOLOGY, PLC; SHAMYNDS HEALING CENTER, PC; SHEPARD HEALTH LLC;
SOUTHEAST KANSAS EYE CARE ASSOCIATES, PA; SPACE COAST FOOT AND
ANKLE CENTER, LLC; STRONG ROOTS THERAPY LLC; SUMMIT PSYCHIATRIC
SERVICES, LLC; TELEBEHAVIORALHEALTH.US; TRANSFORMATIVE INTIMACY
LLC; TWIN CITIES COUNSELING LLC; and WIEMER FAMILY PODIATRY LLC,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. CHANGE HEALTHCARE INC., OPTUM, INC.; and UNITEDHEALTH
GROUP INCORPORATED, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-02804 (D. Minn.,
July 19, 2024) is an action against the Defendant for its failure
to properly secure and safeguard sensitive information of its
customers.

According to the complaint, the Defendants confirmed that a
ransomware group accessed Change's servers and seized 6 terabytes
of critical confidential and highly sensitive information,
resulting in network outages that have already impacted millions of
patients and physicians across the country. On February 21, 2024,
Defendants disclosed that Change was the subject of this massive
data breach whereby hackers known as "ALPHV/Blackcat" ("Blackcat")
gained unauthorized access to its unprotected network using an
employee's compromised credentials (the "Data Breach").

The Defendants are responsible for the Data Breach because they
failed to implement reasonable security procedures and practices
and failed to disclose material facts surrounding their deficient
security protocols. Defendants admitted that Blackcat entered their
externally facing server that was not protected with multifactor
authentication (MFA), says the suit.

Change Healthcare, Inc. provides healthcare technology solutions.
The Company offers analytical, connectivity, communication,
payment, consumer engagement, and workflow optimization software
solutions. Change Healthcare serves customers worldwide. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          E. Michelle Drake, Esq.
          BERGER MONTAGUE
          1229 Tyler Street NE, Suite 205
          Minneapolis, MN 55413
          Telephone: (612) 594-5933
          Email: emdrake@bm.net

               - and -

          Mark B. DeSanto, Esq.
          BERGER MONTAGUE
          1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 875-3046
          Email: mdesanto@bm.net

               - and -

          Sophia M. Rios, Esq.
          BERGER MONTAGUE
          8241 La Mesa Boulevard, Suite A
          La Mesa, CA 91942
          Telephone: (619) 489-0300
          Email: srios@bm.net

               - and -

          Norman E. Siegel, Esq.
          J. Austin Moore, Esq.
          Stefon J. David, Esq.
          STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP
          460 Nichols Road, Suite 200
          Kansas City, MO 64112
          Telephone: (816) 714-7100
          Email: siegel@stuevesiegel.com
                 moore@stuevesiegel.com
                 david@stuevesiegel.com

CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Ingraham Counseling Suit Transferred to D. Minn.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled INGRAHAM COUNSELING SERVICES, PLLC, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHANGE
HEALTHCARE INC. and UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INC, Defendant, Case No.
0:24-cv-02661-DWF-DJF, was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the Tennessee Middle District to the U.S. District Court for
the District of Minnesota on July 9, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the District of Minnesota assigned Case No.
3:24-cv-00663 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendant's failure to prevent a data
breach that impacted the patients' personal health information and
disrupted the services of Plaintiff and other healthcare
providers.

Change Healthcare is a healthcare technology company headquartered
in Nashville, TN. It provides solutions for clinical, financial,
administrative, and patient management to healthcare providers.
[BN]

CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Surgical Partners Sues Over Private Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------------------
SURGICAL PARTNERS OF OKLAHOMA,PLLC, Individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHANGE HEALTHCARE,
INC., OPTUM, INC., and UNITEDHEALTH GROUPINCORPORATED, Defendants,
Case No. 0:24-cv-02662-DWF-DJF (July 9, 2024) asserts claims for
negligence, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment.

According to the complaint, the Defendants' negligence in securing
and safeguarding their information systems from a foreseeable
cyberattack. The attack resulted in severe network interruptions
and the seizure of 6 terabytes of crucial, confidential
information, affecting millions of patients and physicians.
Moreover, due to the inability to submit bills and get paid for
services rendered to its patients after the Change Platform was
disabled, Plaintiff experienced a backlog of unpaid revenues, which
has impacted their ability to operate and treat their patients,
says the suit.

Headquartered in Nashville, TN, Change is a healthcare services and
support company that provides revenue and payment cycle management
to healthcare providers. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

        Matthew J. Sill, Esq.
        Tara Tabatabaie, Esq.
        SILL LAW GROUP, PLLC
        1101 N. Broadway Ave., Suite 102
        Oklahoma City, OK 73103
        Telephone: (405) 509-6300
        Facsimile: (800) 978-1345

CHARTWELL ASSET: Court Tosses Mackenzie Bid for Class Certification
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Angelica Dino, writing for Canadian Lawyer, reports that the BC
Supreme Court has adjourned a decision on certifying a class action
lawsuit against an asset management company and its founder due to
vague pleadings.

In Mackenzie v Chartwell Asset Management Inc., 2024 BCSC 1185, the
court addressed whether Cheryl Mackenzie could certify her lawsuit
against Chartwell Asset Management Inc. (CAM) as a
multi-jurisdictional class proceeding. This decision follows
Mackenzie's claim that she and others lost money invested through
CAM due to misinformation about the nature of the investments.

Mackenzie claimed that CAM and its founder, Gregory Cameron, misled
her and the proposed class about the true nature of their
investments. According to Mackenzie, Cameron directly managed the
investments and provided advice. Cameron disputed this, asserting
that CAM's portfolio managers were responsible for investment
management and advice.

CAM opposed the certification application but did not attend the
hearing, having lost legal representation. Despite CAM's position
as an "empty shell," Mackenzie pursued her certification
application against both CAM and Gregory Cameron.

The Supreme Court found Mackenzie's pleadings vague and
insufficiently particularized, requiring amendments to proceed. The
court acknowledged Mackenzie's more focused allegations and
identified potential common issues that could be properly pleaded.
The judge emphasized that the interests of justice favoured giving
Mackenzie an opportunity to amend her claims.

To certify a class action under the Class Proceedings Act, the
court emphasized that Mackenzie must meet five requirements:
disclose a cause of action, identify a class of two or more
persons, raise common issues among class members' claims,
demonstrate that a class proceeding is the preferable procedure,
and show that the representative plaintiff can fairly and
adequately represent the class.

The court stressed that certification does not determine the case's
merits but assesses whether a class proceeding is the appropriate
form for prosecuting the claims. Mackenzie's evidence mirrors the
allegations in her amended notice of civil claim (ANOCC),
describing her interactions with Cameron and her decision to invest
with CAM based on his advice and assurances. She claimed that her
previous investments were not yielding success and that Cameron
assured her of the safety and long-term security of the new
investments.

In contrast, Cameron maintained that he was not involved in
investment decisions or advice, focusing on CAM's finances and
human resources. He asserted that portfolio managers were solely
responsible for investment management.

Mackenzie referred to disciplinary actions by FP Canada and the BC
Securities Commission (BCSEC) against CAM and Cameron. FP Canada
found that Cameron failed to recommend appropriate strategies for
low-risk investors and did not adequately disclose investment
risks. The BCSEC identified deficiencies in CAM's handling of a
substantial loan in its high-income fund, which eventually
defaulted.

Ultimately, the court has given Mackenzie 90 days to apply for
amendments to her pleadings and certification materials. While
Mackenzie has identified potential claims, the court required more
focused and particularized allegations to proceed. [GN]

CHOICE HEALTH: Bid for Final OK of Settlement Partly OK'd
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JUANITA WILLIAMS, on
behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v. CHOICE HEALTH
INSURANCE, LLC, Case No. 1:23-cv-00292-RAH-KFP (M.D. Ala.), the
Hon. Judge R. Austin Huffaker, Jr. entered an order that:

   1. The Motion for Final Approval of Class Action Settlement is
      granted in part. As Class Counsel has withdrawn the request
for
      a Representative Plaintiff award, that request will be denied
as
      moot.

   2. The Motion for Class Counsel Fees and Expenses is granted.

   3. Finding that there is no just reason for delay, the Court
orders
      that this Final Approval Order shall constitute a final
judgment
      pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 54.

   4. The Clerk of Court is directed to close this case.

The Court conducted a hearing on the motions on July 9, 2024.
Having considered the motions, heard the arguments of counsel, and
reviewed the record, the motions are due to be granted, but with
the requested relief modified as follows.

The Plaintiff Juanita Williams alleges that Defendant violated the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), when Choice Health
initiated numerous telephone solicitation calls to the Plaintiff's
residential telephone number, which had been listed on the Do Not
Call Registry/

The Court finally certifies the Settlement Class, as identified in
the Settlement Agreement and Preliminary Order as:

All persons throughout the United States to whom Choice Health
Insurance, LLC placed, or caused to be placed, a call where (1) the
call was directed to a telephone number registered on the National
Do Not Call Registry for at least 30 days, (2) Digital Media
Solutions, LLC provided Defendant with the telephone number (but
excluding telephone numbers that Zeeto Group provided to Digital
Media Solutions, LLC and that Digital Medial Solutions, LLC then
provided to Defendant) and (3) the telephone number had at least
two calls placed to it in a 12-month period."

Choice Health offers healthcare options to individuals and families
across the United States.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4JZt2w at no extra
charge.[CC]

CIRCLE K STORES: Parties Seek to Extend Class Deadlines for 60 Days
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Monica Abboud,
individually and on behalf of a class of persons and entities
similarly situated, v. Circle K Stores Inc. and Mobivity Holdings
Corp., Case No. 2:23-cv-01683-DWL (D. Ariz.), the Parties ask the
Court to enter an order to extend the class and expert deadlines
for 60 days, which would create the following new deadlines:

   a. The party with the burden of proof on an issue shall provide

      full and complete expert disclosures, as required by Rule
      26(a)(2)(A)-(C) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, no
      later than Sept. 24, 2024.

   b. The responding party (not having the burden of proof on the
      issue) shall provide full and complete expert disclosures, as

      required by Rule 26(a)(2)(A)-(C) of the Federal Rules of
Civil
      Procedure, no later than Oct. 22, 2024.

   c. The party with the burden of proof on the issue shall make
its
      rebuttal expert disclosures, if any, no later than Nov. 19,
      2024.

   d. Expert depositions shall be completed no later than Dec. 9,
      2024.

   e. The deadline for Plaintiff to file a motion for class
      certification is Dec. 17, 2024.

   f. The deadline for Defendants to file their responses to the
      motion for class certification is 45 days after Plaintiff
files
      her motion for class certification.

   g. The deadline for Plaintiff to file her reply in support of
the
      motion for class certification is 30 days after the
Defendants'
      file their responses to the motion for class certification.

The Plaintiff brings this case as a class action against for
alleged violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
("TCPA"). The Plaintiff initiated this lawsuit on Aug. 17, 2023,
alleging that Circle K sent unwanted telemarketing text messages to
her cellular telephone number, without her consent, and in
violation
of the TCPA.

Circle K is an American chain of convenience stores.

A copy of the Parties' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0nIyBW at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James L. Davidson, Esq.
          GREENWALD DAVIDSON RADBIL PLLC
          5550 Glades Road, Suite 500
          Boca Raton, FL 33431
          Telephone: (561) 826-5477
          E-mail: jdavidson@gdrlawfirm.com

                - and -

          Nathan Brown, Esq.
          BROWN PATENT LAW
          15100 N 78th Way, Suite 203
          Scottsdale, AZ 85260
          Telephone: (602) 529-3474
          E-mail: Nathan.Brown@BrownPatentLaw.com


          Anthony Paronich, Esq.
          PARONICH LAW, P.C.
          350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
          Hingham, MA 02043
          Telephone: (508) 221-1510
          E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Matthew P. Hoxsie, Esq.
          Tyler R. Andrews, Esq.
          GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
          2375 East Camelback Road, Suite 800
          Phoenix, AZ 85016
          Telephone: (602) 445-8000
          Facsimile: (602) 445-8100
          E-mail: hoxsiem@gtlaw.com
                  andrewst@gtlaw.com

               - and -

          Tomio B. Narita, Esq.
          R. Travis Campbell, Esq.
          WOMBLE BOND DICKINSON (US)
          LLP
          50 California Street, Suite 2750
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 433-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 433-5530
          E-mail: Tomio.Narita@wbd-us.com
                  Travis.Campbell@wbd-us.com

CLEANCHOICE ENERGY: Sommer Sues Over Exorbitant Electricity Rates
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MARK SOMMER, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CLEANCHOICE ENERGY, INC. Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-11844 (D. Mass., July 18, 2024) seeks to redress
CleanChoice's alleged deceptive and bad faith marketing and pricing
practices that have caused thousands of residential and commercial
customers in Massachusetts to pay considerably more for their
electricity than they should otherwise have paid in violation of
the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act.

The complaint asserts that the Defendant has taken advantage of the
deregulation of Massachusetts' retail electricity market by
misrepresenting how its electricity rates are calculated.
CleanChoice also takes advantage of environmentally conscious
consumers by promising to provide electricity from renewable
sources when it does no such thing. Among other conduct challenged
in this action, CleanChoice makes these false and deceptive claims
in the customer contracts and enrollment materials CleanChoice
provides to Massachusetts customers.

As a result of these misleading representations and the other
unlawful and unauthorized acts described herein, thousands of
unsuspecting Massachusetts customers have been, and continue to be,
fleeced by CleanChoice out of millions of dollars in exorbitant
charges for electricity, says the suit.

CleanChoice Energy, Inc. is an independent energy service company
that sells residential and commercial electricity in Massachusetts'
deregulated retail electricity market.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          D. Greg Blankinship, Esq.
          FINKELSTEIN, BLANKINSHIP, FREI-PEARSON
           & GARBER, LLP
          One North Broadway, Suite 900
          White Plains, NY 10601
          Telephone: (914) 298-3281
          E-mail: gblankinship@fbfglaw.com

               - and -

          J. Burkett McInturff, Esq.
          WITTELS MCINTURFF PALIKOVIC
          305 Broadway, 7TH Floor
          New York, NY 10007
          Telephone: (910) 476-7253
          E-mail: jbm@wittelslaw.com

CONMEBOL: Denies Ticket Buyers Access to Stadium, Valderrama Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ELIANA VALDERRAMA and JUAN FELIPE VANEGAS, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CONMEBOL,
CONFEDERACION SUDAMERICA DE FUTBOL, CONFEDERATION OF NORTH, CENTRAL
AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN ASSOCIATION FOOTBALL, HARD ROCK STADIUM LLC,
SOUTH FLORIDA STADIUM LLC, TICKETMASTER, LLC, LIVE NATION
ENTERTAINMENT, INC., and JOHN DOES NO. 1-10, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-22772 (S.D. Fla., July 19, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendants for negligent misrepresentation reliance, breach of
contract, breach of implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing, unjust enrichment, and violations of Sec. 349 of the New
York General Business Law, Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade
Practices Act, and New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.

The case arises from the Defendants' failure to manage, maintain,
or direct the crowds at the July 14, 2024 Copa America soccer final
at the Hard Rock Stadium in Miami Gardens, Florida. Due to the
Defendants' negligence and omissions, thousands of ticket buyers
were denied access due to chaos, cancellations, stampedes, and
rejection at the gate despite paying for and presenting valid
tickets. Instead of maintaining order and ensuring that bona fide
ticket holders could enter the Stadium, the Defendants ceased to
let anyone else inside including bona fide ticket holders. The
valid ticket holders locked out of the Copa America Final have not
been provided refunds for the price of their tickets and the
Defendants have not announced a plan, timeline, or proposal to
provide refunds to ticker holders who were denied entry to the
Stadium or access to their seats.

Hard Rock Stadium LLC is a stadium owner and operator, located at
347 Don Shula Drive, Miami Gardens, Florida.

South Florida Stadium LLC is a limited liability company with its
headquarters located in Miami Gardens, Florida.

CONMEBOL is a governing body focused on the organization and
governance of football tournaments within Copa America based in
Paraguay.

Confederacion Sudamerica De Futbol is associated with or also known
as CONMEBOL with its headquarters in Luque, Paraguay.

Central America and Caribbean Association Football is associated
with or also known as CONCACAF with its headquarters in Miami,
Florida.

Live Nation Entertainment, Inc. is an entertainment company, with a
principal place of business located in Beverly Hills, California.

Ticketmaster LLC is a ticket distribution company with a principal
place of business located in Beverly Hills, California. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:                
      
       Alexander Kraff, Esq.
       KRAFF LAW GROUP, PA
       800 SE 4th Avenue, Suite 717
       Hallandale Beach, FL 33009
       Telephone: (305) 995-0401
       Facsimile: (305) 995-0304
       Email: alex@krafflawgroup.com

                - and -

       Fletcher Moore, Esq.
       MOORE LAW, PLLC
       30 Wall Street, 8th Floor
       New York, NY 10005
       Telephone: (212) 709-8245
       Facsimile: (917) 634-3035
       Email: fletcher@fmoorelaw.com

                - and -

       Lee Squitieri, Esq.
       SQUITIERI & FEARON, LLP
       305 Broadway, 7th Floor
       New York, NY 10007
       Telephone: (212) 421-6492
       Facsimile: (212) 421-6553
       Email: Lee@sfclasslaw.com

CREDIT CONTROL: Final Approval of Class Action Settlement Sought
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT A. SCHULTZ, JR., on
behalf of himself and those similarly situated, v. CREDIT CONTROL,
LLC and JOHN DOES 1 to 10, Case No. 2:18-cv-03474-CLW (D.N.J.), the
Plaintiff will move the Court on Aug. 5, 2024, for an order
granting final approval of the within Amended Class Action
Settlement Agreement, Class Counsel's attorney's fees and costs,
and related relief.

Credit Control is a provider of customized, performance-driven
receivables management services.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=TL4UfG at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yongmoon Kim, Esq.
          Philip D. Stern, Esq.
          Angela Yu, Esq.
          KIM LAW FIRM LLC
          411 Hackensack Avenue, Suite 701
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 273-7117
          Facsimile: (201) 273-7117

The Defendants are represented by:

          Peter G. Siachos, Esq.
          Stephanie M. Imbornone, Esq.
          GORDON & REES LLP
          18 Columbia Turnpike, Suite 200
          Florham Park, NJ 07932

CVS HEALTH: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set September 10
-------------------------------------------------------------
WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
the filing of a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of
securities of CVS Health Corporation (NYSE: CVS) between May 3,
2023 and April 30, 2024, both dates inclusive (the "Class Period").
A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September
10, 2024.

SO WHAT: If you purchased CVS Securities during the Class Period
you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of
pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the CVS class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=24975 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has
already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you
must move the Court no later than September 10, 2024. A lead
plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class
members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources or any
meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The
Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants
throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the forecasts CVS used to
determine plan premiums were ineffective at accounting for medical
cost trends and health care utilization patterns; (2) as a result,
CVS was likely to incur significant expenses to cover cost
increases that were not accounted for in the CVS' forecasts and
thus not covered by plan premiums; (3) accordingly, CVS had
overstated the profitability of its Health Care Benefits segment;
(4) contrary to defendants' assurances, the revenues generated from
CVS' other primary segments were insufficient to offset the
negative financial impact of the increasing expenditures within the
Health Care Benefits segment; and (5) as a result, CVS' public
statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant
times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims
that investors suffered damages.
To join the CVS class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=24975 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are
not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select
counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member
and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any
potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead
plaintiff.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.

Contact Information:

        Laurence Rosen, Esq.
        Phillip Kim, Esq.
        The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
        275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
        New York, NY 10016
        Tel: (212) 686-1060
        Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
        Fax: (212) 202-3827
        case@rosenlegal.com
        www.rosenlegal.com [GN]

DELTA ENVIRONMENTAL: Semino Suit Hits Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Maria C. Semino, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiff v. Delta Environmental Services, Inc., a/k/a
Delta Cleaning, and Alexander Leon, individually, Defendants, Case
No. 2:24-cv-00655 (M.D. Fla., July 18, 2024) is an action to
recover from the Defendants monetary damages for Plaintiff's unpaid
regular and overtime wages and retaliation under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The complaint alleges that Defendants willfully failed to pay
Plaintiff's regular wages and overtime hours at the rate of time
and one-half her regular rate for every hour that she worked over
40. The Plaintiff disagreed with the lack of payment of wages, and
she complained multiple times. On March 22, 2024, business owner
Alexander Leon fired Plaintiff after she complained about unpaid
wages one more time.

Plaintiff Semino worked for the Defendants from approximately
February 2, 2024 to March 22, or 7 weeks, as a cleaning employee,
cleaning offices at different office buildings.

Delta Cleaning is a contractor providing commercial janitorial and
cleaning services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

DENTEGRA INSURANCE: Ehli Sues Over Data Security Failure
--------------------------------------------------------
JEFFREY EHLI, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DENTEGRA INSURANCE COMPANY., Defendant, Case
No. 1:24-cv-11763-ADB (W.D. Wash., July 9, 2024) arises out of
Defendant's failure to safeguard the confidential protected health
information and personally identifiable information of its plan
members, including Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members,
resulting in the unauthorized disclosure of that PII in a
cyberattack in May 2023 to Dentegra's vendor, MOVEit.

According to the complaint, the PII disclosed in the data breach
included Plaintiff and Class Members' dates of birth, Social
Security Numbers, and health insurance information. Dentegra failed
to undertake adequate measures to ensure that MOVEit safeguarded
the PII of Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members, including
failing to ensure that MOVEit implemented industry standards for
data security, and properly trained employees on cybersecurity
protocols, resulting in the data breach. Although Dentegra
discovered the data breach on or about June 1, 2023, Defendant
failed to promptly notify and warn data breach victims of the
unauthorized disclosure of their PII for over seven months,
preventing them from taking necessary steps to protect themselves
from injury and harm. Accordingly, Plaintiff asserts claims for
negligence, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment,
declaratory judgment, and for violations of the Washington Data
Breach Disclosure Law and the Washington Consumer Protection Act.

Dentegra is a dental insurance provider headquartered in San
Francisco, CA. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Walter Smith, Esq.
          SMITH & DIETRICH LAW OFFICES PLLC
          3905 Martin Way E., Suite F
          Olympia, WA 98506
          Telephone: (360) 915-6952
          E-mail: walter@smithdietrich.com

                  - and -

          Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
          Raina Borelli, Esq.
          STRAUSS BORELLI PLLC
          908 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
          Chicago, IL 60611
          Telephone: (872) 263-1100
          Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
          E-mail: sam@straussborrelli.com
                  raina@straussborrelli.com

                  - and -

          Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
          Amina A. Thomas, Esq.
          COHEN & MALAD, LLP
          One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
          Indianapolis, IN 46204
          Telephone: (317) 636-6481
          E-mail: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
                  athomas@cohenandmalad.com

                  - and -

          J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
          Andrew E. Mize, Esq.
          STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
          The Freedom Center
          223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
          Nashville, TN 37203
          Telephone: (615) 254-8801
          Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
          E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
                  amize@stranchlaw.com

DG3 NORTH: Faces De Salvo Suit Over Customers' Compromised Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
DEBRA DE SALVO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DG3 NORTH AMERICA, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-07887-MEF-JSA (D.N.J., July 19, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for negligence, breach of third-party
beneficiary contract, unjust enrichment, and violation of the
Illinois Consumer Fraud Act.

The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and
safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the
Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals following a data
breach. The Defendant also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff
and similarly situated individuals about the data breach. As a
result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class members
was compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to
unknown and unauthorized third parties.

DG3 North America, Inc. is a supplier of print and visual
communications with its principal place of business located in
Jersey City, New Jersey. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
         Vicki J. Maniatis, Esq.
         MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
         100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
         Garden City, NY 11530
         Telephone: (865) 412-2700
         Email: vmaniatis@milberg.com

                 - and -

         Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
         MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
         227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
         Chicago, IL 60606
         Telephone: (866) 252-0878
         Email: gklinger@milberg.com

DUNKLAU PHARMACY: Lawrence E. Samuels Suit Removed to E.D. Mo.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled LAWRENCE E. SAMUELS, M.D. INC., Individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DUNKLAU
PHARMACY HOLDINGS, LLC, d/b/a MIDTOWN EXPRESS PHARMACY, and HENRY
JAMES DUNKLAU, IV, Defendants, Case No. 24SL-CC01412, was removed
from the Circuit Court of St. Louis County, Missouri to the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri on July 7,
2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of Missouri assigned
Case No.: 4:24-cv-00932-PLC to the proceeding.

The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the "Junk
Fax Act," as codified pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act.

Dunklau Pharmacy Holdings, LLC owns and operates a pharmacy in
Missouri. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

         James C. Morris, Esq.
         GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
         211 North Broadway, Suite 2150
         St. Louis, MO 63102
         Telephone: (314) 961-6686
         Facsimile: (314) 338-3076
         E-mail: jmorris@grsm.com

EQUINOX HOLDINGS: Class Settlement in Hubert Suit Gets Final Nod
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Marjorie Saint Hubert et
al., v. Equinox Holdings, Inc. et al., Case No.
2:21-cv-00086-PSG-SSC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge entered an order
granting the Plaintiff's motion for final approval of class action
settlement and granting the Plaintiff's motion for attorneys' fees
and costs.

-- The Court approves settlement of the action between the
Plaintiff
    and the Defendant, as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, as

    fair, just, reasonable, and adequate. The parties are directed
to
    perform their settlement in accordance with the terms set forth
in
    the Settlement Agreement.

-- Class Counsel are awarded $56,250 in attorneys' fees and $4,331
in
    costs. Additionally, Plaintiff is awarded a $5,000 enhancement

    award.

-- The Court approves payment in the amount of $20,000 to CPT
Group
    for settlement administration costs.

Without affecting the finality of this judgment in any way, this
Court retains exclusive jurisdiction over the Defendant and the
Class Members for all matters relating to the litigation, including
the administration, interpretation, effectuation, or enforcement of
the Settlement Agreement and this order

The Plaintiffs Hubert, Valerie Martinez, and Therese Svengert filed
this putative class action in California state court, asserting
numerous wage and hour claims in violation of the California Labor
Code and Business & Professions Code.

Equinox is an American luxury fitness company and health club
headquartered in New York City, New York.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pAaxE1 at no extra
charge.[CC]

EVENT TICKETS: Gershzon Sues Over Tickets' False Ads
----------------------------------------------------
MIKHAIL GERSHZON, an individual, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. EVENT TICKETS CENTER, INC.,
a Florida Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-04142-AGT (N.D.
Cal., July 9, 2024) arises from Defendant's false and misleading
representations that inflated the ticket price of a concert.

The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's website led him to believe
that it was difficult to obtain tickets for the concert and
therefore charged him $433.87 for two tickets to the concert. After
the purchase, Defendant provided him with digital tickets via an
email. However, those tickets turned out to be fraudulent. In
addition, Plaintiff relied on Defendant's misrepresentations in
making his purchase, including its representation of the limited
quantity of tickets.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff brings this action pursuant to the
Consumers Legal Remedies Act; (ii) the Unfair Competition Law, the
False Advertising Law, and (iv) the Ticket Resale Law. Plaintiff
also brings claims for breach of warranty and unjust enrichment.
Plaintiff seeks damages, restitution and injunctive relief, and any
other relief.

Headquartered in Florida, Event Tickets Center, Inc. owns and
operates a ticket retail service called eventticketscenter.com.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Ben Travis, Esq.
         BEN TRAVIS LAW, APC
         4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 100
         San Diego, CA 92122
         Telephone: (619) 353-7966
         E-mail: ben@bentravislaw.com

                 - and -

         Michael R. Reese, Esq.
         REESE LLP
         100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor
         New York, NY 10025
         Telephone: (212) 643-0500
         E-mail: mreese@reesellp.com

EVOLVE BANK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Prystalski Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
NORILYN PRYSTALSKI, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. EVOLVE BANK & TRUST, Defendant,
Case No. 2:24-cv-02511-MSN-tmp (W.D. Tenn., July 19, 2024) is an
action against the Defendant for its failure to properly secure and
safeguard sensitive information of its customers.

According to the complaint, the Data Breach was a direct result of
the Defendant's failure to implement adequate and reasonable
cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to protect
consumers' personally identifiable information or "PII", from a
foreseeable and preventable cyber-attack.

The Plaintiff's and Class Members' identities are now at risk
because of Defendant's negligent conduct because the PII that
Defendant collected and maintained has been accessed and acquired
by data thieves.

Evolve Bank & Trust as a bank. The Bank accepts deposits, makes
loans, and provides mortgage solutions, card facilities, and online
banking services. Evolve Bank serves clients in the United States.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexandra M. Honeycutt, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON GROSSMAN PLLC
          800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
          Knoxville, TN 37929
          Telephone: (865) 247-0080
          Email: ahoneycutt@milberg.com

               - and -

          Philip J. Krzeski, Esq.
          CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA
          100 Washington Avenue, Suite 1700
          Minneapolis, MN 55401-2138
          Telephone: (612) 339-7300
          Facsimile: (612) 336-2940
          Email:pkrzeski@chestnutcambronne.com

F21 OPCO: Filing for Class Cert Bid Modified to March 6, 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as FLOR JIMENEZ, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. F21 OPCO, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Case
No. 2:23-cv-03027-TLN-DB (E.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Troy Nunley
entered an order setting the following deadlines:

                Event                   Current Date    Revised
Date

  Close of Discovery Related to        Aug. 7, 2024     Nov. 5,
2024
  Class Certification

  Deadline to Designate Experts        Sept. 6, 2024    Dec. 5,
2024
  Related to Class Certification

  Close of Fact Discovery              Nov. 20, 2024    Feb. 18,
2025

  Deadline to File Motion for          Dec. 6, 2024     March 6,
2025
  Class Certification

  Deadline to Designate Experts        Jan. 20, 2025    April 21,
2025
  Unrelated to Class Certification

F21 is a multinational fast-fashion retailer.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=fqErCd at no extra
charge.[CC]

FEDERAL BUREAU: MacDermott Class Cert Bid Tossed w/o Prejudice
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Troy Nicholas MacDermott,
v. Federal Bureau of Prisons, BOP, Collette S. Peters, Director,
BOP, in her official capacity, Case No. 0:24-cv-01984-JMB-DTS (D.
Mont.), the Hon. Judge Jeffrey Bryan entered an order that:

   1. The Report and Recommendation (R&R) is adopted;

   2. The Plaintiff's motion to certify class is denied without
      prejudice as premature; and

   3. Plaintiff's motion to appoint class counsel is denied without

      prejudice as premature.

Federal Bureau of Prisons provides for the care, custody, and
control of federal prisoners.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=SzmW7w at no extra
charge.[CC]

FIRST ADVANTAGE: Wielkopolski Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LAURA WIELKOPOLSKI, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FIRST ADVANTAGE FORM I 9
COMPLIANCE, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-03235-LMM (N.D. Ga.,
July 22, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for its
failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally
identifiable information that it collected and maintained as part
of its regular business practices, including Plaintiff's and Class
Members' names, dates of birth, addresses, hire dates, and Social
Security numbers.

The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of all current and
former employees of Defendant's clients whose PII was compromised
as a result of Defendant's failure to: (i) adequately protect the
PII of Plaintiff and Class Members; (ii) warn Plaintiff and Class
Members of Defendant's inadequate information security practices;
and (iii) effectively secure hardware containing protected PII
using reasonable and effective security procedures free of
vulnerabilities and incidents.

The Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms and prevent any future
data compromise on behalf of herself and all similarly situated
persons whose personal data was compromised and stolen as a result
of the Data Breach and who remain at risk due to Defendant's
inadequate data security practices.

First Advantage Form I 9 Compliance, LLC is a limited liability
company that assists its clients in completing the government
required Form I-9 documents in connection with its clients'
employees' employment.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          MaryBeth V. Gibson, Esq.
          GIBSON CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC
          4279 Roswell Road, Suite 208-108
          Atlanta, GA 30342
          Telephone: (678) 642-2503
          E-mail: marybeth@consumerlawgroup.com

               - and -

          Mariya Weekes, Esq.
          MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
          201 Sevilla Avenue, 2nd Floor
          Coral Gables, FL 33134
          Telephone: (786) 879-8200
          Facsimile: (786) 879-7520
          E-mail: mweekes@milberg.com

FITON INC: Order on Class Certification Entered in Endres Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIFER ENDRES, v. FITON
INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-01589-FMO-PD (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Fernando M. Olguin entered an order on motions for class
certification as follows:

    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. Citation to Evidence:

       All citation to evidence in the joint brief shall be
directly
       to the exhibit and page number(s) of the evidentiary
appendix,
       or page and line number(s) of a deposition. Parenthetical
       explanations are encouraged.

    3. Unnecessary Sections:

       The parties need not include a "procedural history" section,

       since the court will be familiar with the procedural
history.
       The court is also familiar with the general standard for
class
       certification, so that need not be argued.

       However, if a party believes a specialized standard is
       applicable, the party may brief such a standard. If
       preliminary issues -- such as choice of law -- are in
dispute,
       the parties shall brief such issues in accordance with,
supra.

FitOn Inc. develops mobile fitness applications.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=UQreoC at no extra
charge.[CC]

FRANCO AND COMPANY: Lescano Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Andrea Lescano, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiff v. Franco and Company LLC d/b/a Franco & CO,
and Jaime M. Franco, individually, Defendants, Case No.
0:24-cv-61278 (S.D. Fla., July 18, 2024) seeks to recover monetary
damages for unpaid overtime wages and retaliatory constructive
discharge under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff brings this cause of action as a collective action to
recover from the Defendant overtime compensation, retaliatory
damages, liquidated damages, costs, and reasonable attorney's fees
under the provisions of the federal law, on behalf of herself all
other current and former employees similarly situated to her and
who worked more than 40 hours during one or more weeks on or after
June 2022, without being adequately compensated.

Plaintiff Andrea Lescano was employed by the Defendants from June
6, 2022, to February 14, 2024, or 88 weeks, as a non-exempt,
full-time, hourly podiatry assistant and nail technician.

Franco & CO is a podiatry care, surgery, and medical spa.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

GEICO INDEMNITY: Scheduling Order Entered in Harn Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Harn v. Geico Indemnity
Company, Case No. 1:24-cv-01873-VMC (N.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge
Victoria Marie Calvert entered a scheduling order as follows:

All expert reports and expert disclosures on behalf of the
Plaintiff relating to Plaintiff's anticipated motion for class
certification to be completed by Nov. 29, 2024.

Depositions of the Plaintiff's experts relating to Plaintiff's
anticipated motion for class certification to be completed by Dec.
20, 2024.

All expert reports and expert disclosures on behalf of Defendant
relating to Plaintiff's anticipated motion for class certification
to be completed by Jan. 17, 2025.

Depositions of the Defendant's experts relating to Plaintiff's
anticipated motion for class certification to be completed by Feb.
7, 2025.

Both Parties' rebuttal expert disclosures relating to Plaintiff's
anticipated motion to class certification to be completed by Feb.
21, 2025.

Depositions of the Parties' rebuttal experts relating to
Plaintiff's anticipated motion to class certification to be
completed by March 12, 2025.

All Discovery completed by March 12, 2025.

The Plaintiff's motion for class certification shall be filed no
later than April 11, 2025.

The Clerk is directed to correct the misnomer of Defendant GEICO
Indemnity Company on the docket and in the case caption.

GEICO Indemnity provides vehicle, property, business, and life
insurance services.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qQvvkC at no extra
charge.[CC]

GENERIC PHARMACEUTICALS: Class Cert Bid Hearing Set for Dec. 16-20
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GENERIC PHARMACEUTICALS
PRICING ANTITRUST LITIGATION, Case No. 2:16-md-02724-CMR (E.D.
Pa.), the Hon. Judge Cynthia Rufe entered an order that the class
certification hearings will be held beginning at 10:00 a.m. in
Courtroom 12-A, United States Courthouse, 601 Market Street,
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania on Dec. 16, 2024, through Dec. 20, 2024.


A copy of the Court's order dated June 23, 2024 is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=mQQWyj at no extra
charge.[CC]

GEORGETOWN CORNER: Dupuis Seeks to Certify Collective Action
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LARONDA DUPUIS and SHARON
HEATHER FOXX on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated, v. GEORGETOWN CORNER TAVERN, LLC; MICHAEL RABB,
individually; PHILIP BROUSSARD, individually; and JACQUELINE
HUBSCHMAN, individually, Case No. 2:23-cv-05739-DCN (D.S.C.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their motion
for:

-- Certification of the Collective Action;

-- Certification under Rule 23 for the Class Action; and

--  Authorization of notice to putative class members.

The Plaintiffs define the class as follows:

   "All GCT employees from the date of its opening around August
2022
   who at any time were paid a direct hourly rate less than $7.25
per
   hour and contributed a portion of their tips to a tip pool."

The Plaintiffs filed this action on Nov. 9, 2023, alleging the
Defendants violated provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA"). The primary section that the Plaintiffs allege Defendants
violated is section 203(m) of the FLSA ("Tip Credit").

Georgetown Corner is a restaurant in Georgetown, South Carolina.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=giKRXb at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Bruce E. Miller, Esq.
          BRUCE E. MILLER, P.A.
          147 Wappoo Creek Drive, Suite 603
          Charleston, SC 29412
          Telephone: (843) 579-7373
          E-mail: bmiller@brucemillerlaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Matthew E. Cox, Esq.
          SMITH, CURRIE, & HANCOCK, LLP
          5727 Westpark Drive, Suite 200
          Charlotte, NC 28278
          Telephone: (704) 335-5018
          E-mail: mecox@smithcurrie.com

GOODYEAR TIRE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Alfonso Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
ROLANDO ALFONSO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated individuals, Plaintiff v. THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER
COMPANY d/b/a GOODYEAR COMMERCIAL TIRE & SERVICE CENTERS,
Defendant, Case No. 0:24-cv-61252-XXXX 9S.D. Fla., July 17, 2024)
is an action against the Defendant's failure to pay the Plaintiff
and the class overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of
40 hours per week.

Plaintiff Alfonso was employed by the Defendant as a tire
technician.

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company develops, distributes, and sells
tires. The Company manufactures and markets rubber and
rubber-related chemicals and provides automotive repair services.
Goodyear also retreads truck, aircraft, and heavy equipment tires.
Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company serves customers in the United
States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

GREENSKY INC: Seeks Leave to File Class Cert Documents Under Seal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ELIZABETH BELYEA, et al.,
v. GREENSKY, INC., et al., Case No. 3:20-cv-01693-JSC (N.D. Cal.),
the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order granting their
administrative motion for leave to file documents under seal in
support of Defendants' opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion  for
class certification, and allowing them to file under seal the
following exhibits and/or documents:

     i) the Declaration of Tim Kaliban;

    ii) excerpts from the deposition of Dr. Michael Williams in
this
        case; and

   iii) excerpts from the deposition of Dr. Michael Williams in
Wright
        v. Greensky Mgt. Co., 2022 WL 17250331 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 28,

        2022).

On Aug. 25, 2021, the Court entered a Confidentiality Order to
protect nonpublic confidential and sensitive information to be
exchanged in discovery.

The parties have exchanged voluminous information and documentation
in the course of discovery to date, including records that would
constitute, and that GreenSky considers to be, non-public
confidential and sensitive information.

The Defendants contemporaneously herewith file their Opposition to
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification.

Certain exhibits to Defendants' Opposition to Plaintiffs' motion
for Class Certification have been designated as "Confidential"
pursuant to the Confidentiality Order in this case.

The Defendants desire to maintain the confidentiality of these
materials that support Defendants Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion
for Class Certification.

GreenSky operates as a technology company in the payment, credit,
and commerce space.

A copy of the Defendants' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=i9Nzve at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Defendants are represented by:

          Barry Goheen, Esq.
          Diem N. Kaelber, Esq.
          PIERSON FERDINAND, LLP
          100 Mount Paran Ridge
          Atlanta, GA 30327-3561
          Telephone: (404) 793-3093
          E-mail: barry.goheen@pierferd.com
                  diem.kaelber@pierferd.com

GROUP 1001: Settles 2023 Data Breach Class Suit for $4.76-Mil.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Top Class Action reports that consumers can receive payments from a
$4.76 million Group 1001 settlement resolving claims the company
failed to protect consumers from a 2023 data breach.

The settlement benefits Group 1001 customers, employees,
defendants, payees and others whose personal information may have
been exposed during the 2023 data breach.

Plaintiffs in the data breach class action lawsuit claim Group 1001
failed to protect them from a February 2023 data breach that
compromised sensitive data. The consumers argue Group 1001 could
have prevented the data breach by implementing reasonable
cybersecurity measures.

Group 1001 Insurance is an insurance and annuity company that
utilizes an online investing platform.

Group 1001 Insurance hasn’t admitted any wrongdoing but agreed to
pay $4.76 million to resolve the data breach class action lawsuit.

Under the terms of the Group 1001 settlement, class members can
receive up to $5,000 in reimbursement for data breach-related
losses, including bank fees, communication charges, travel
expenses, credit costs and up to four hours of lost time at a rate
of $20 per hour. As an alternative to this reimbursement, class
members may instead claim a pro rata cash payment. Payments will be
at least $5 but exact amounts will vary depending on the number of
valid claims filed.

Class members can also receive three years of free credit
monitoring and identity theft protection services. These services
offer many benefits, including $1 million in identity theft
insurance.

The deadline for exclusion and objection is Sept. 10, 2024.

The final approval hearing for the settlement is scheduled for Oct.
3, 2024.

To receive Group 1001 settlement benefits, class members must
submit a valid claim form by Oct. 10, 2024.

Who's Eligible
Group 1001 customers, employees, dependants, payees and others
whose personal information may have been exposed during the 2023
data breach.

Potential Award
$5,000

Proof of Purchase
Bills, receipts, invoices, account statements, credit reports and
other documentation of data breach-related losses.

Claim Form Deadline
10/10/2024

Case Name
Weigand, et al. v. Group 1001 Insurance Holdings LLC, et al., Case
No. 1:23-cv-01452-RLY-TAB, in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of Indiana

Final Hearing
10/03/2024

Settlement Website
Group1001Settlement.com

Claims Administrator

     Weigand, et al. v Group 1001 Insurance Holdings, LLC et al.
     c/o Kroll Settlement Administration LLC
     P.O. Box 5324
     New York, NY 10150-5324
     Info@Group1001settlement.com
     Phone: (833) 522-7100

Class Counsel

     Lynn A Toops
     COHEN & MALAD LLP
     One Indiana Square,
     1400 N Pennsylvania St,
     Indianapolis, IN 46204
     Phone: (317) 527-4350

     J Gerard Stranch IV
     STRANCH JENNINGS & GARVEY PLLC
     223 Rosa L Parks Ave #200
     Nashville, TN 37203
     Phone: (615) 254-8801

Defense Counsel

     Joseph W Swanson
     FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
     600 Congress Avenue, Suite 2900
     Austin, TX 78701
     Phone: (512) 542-7000

     John E Clabby
     CARLTON FIELDS PA
     One Atlantic Center
     1201 W. Peachtree Street NW
     Suite 3000
     Atlanta, GA 30309-3455
     Phone: (404) 815-3400 [GN]

HENNEPIN, MN: Court Narrows Claims in Berry Suit
------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Patrick Berry; Henrietta
Brown; Nadine Little; Dennis Barrow; Virginia Roy; Joel Westvig;
ZACAH; and Daniel Huiting, v. Hennepin County; Hennepin County
Sheriff Dawanna Witt, in her official capacity; City of
Minneapolis; Current Minneapolis Chief of Police Brian O'Hara, in
his official capacity; Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board;
Police Officers John Does; and Police Officers Jane Does, Case No.
0:20-cv-02189-ECT-JFD (D. Minn.), the Hon. Judge Eric Tostrud
entered an order that:

   1. Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment and partial summary
      judgment is denied.

   2. Defendants' Motion to Exclude Dr. Almquist is granted.

   3. Defendants' Motion to Exclude Professor Herring is denied as

      moot.

   4. Defendants' Motions for Summary Judgment are granted as
follows:

      a. Plaintiffs' claims for injunctive and declaratory relief
are
         dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing.

      b. Plaintiffs Westvig, Roy, and ZACAH's claims are dismissed

         without prejudice for lack of standing.

      c. Plaintiffs' claims against the City Defendants and
Hennepin
         County Defendants are dismissed without prejudice for lack
of
         standing.

      d. Plaintiffs' claims against Defendants Police Officers John

         and Jane Does are dismissed without prejudice pursuant to

         Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

      e. Plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed with prejudice.


The seven individual Plaintiffs once lived in homeless encampments
in public parks in the City of Minneapolis. Each individual
Plaintiff alleges to have been present when the Minneapolis Park
and Recreation Board ("MPRB") disbanded encampments in August,
September, and October 2020.

By May 2023, when the Second Amended Complaint was filed, however,
all of the individual Plaintiffs had housing.

Hennepin County is a county in the U.S. state of Minnesota. The
county extends from Minneapolis to the suburbs and outlying cities
in the western part of the county.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sH6DYQ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Dorinda L. Wider, Esq.
          Elana Max Dahlager, Esq.
          Justin H. Perl, Esq.
          Luke Grundman, Esq.
          MIDMINNESOTA LEGAL AID
          Minneapolis, MN

                - and -

          Jennell K. Shannon, Esq.
          Wallace G. Hilke, Esq.
          BALLARD SPAHR LLP
          Minneapolis, MN

                - and -

          Hannah L. Welsh, Esq.
          BALLARD SPAHR LLP
          Philadelphia, PA

                - and -

          Ian Bratlie, Esq.
          Teresa J. Nelson, Esq.
          Catherine H. Ahlin-Halverson, Esq.
          ACLU OF MINNESOTA
          Mankato, MN

The Defendants are represented by:

          Christiana Martenson, Esq.
          Devona L. Wells, Esq.
          Kelly K. Pierce, Esq.
          HENNEPIN COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
          Minneapolis, MN

                - and -

          Heather Passe Robertson, Esq.
          Kristin R. Sarff, Esq.
          Sharda R. Enslin, Esq.
          MINNEAPOLIS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE
          Minneapolis, MN

                - and -

          Alana M. Mosley, Esq.
          Anne E. Walther, Esq.
          Brian F. Rice, Esq.
          RICE, WALTHER & MOSLEY LLP
          Minneapolis, MN

HEYL TRUCK: Rogers Pay Transparency Suit Removed to W.D. Wash.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled ANTHONY ROGERS, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HEYL TRUCK LINES, INC., a
Foreign Profit Corporation, and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendant,
Case No. 24-2-08570-5, was removed from the Superior Court of
Washington in and for the County of Pierce to the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Washington on July 9, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Washington assigned
Case No. 3:24-cv-05546 to the proceeding.

The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of the
Revised Code of Washington for their failure to disclose in each
job opening the wage scale or salary range and a general
description of all benefits and other compensation being offered to
the hired applicant.

Heyl Truck Lines, Inc. is a trucking company based in Iowa. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

         Darren A. Feider, Esq.
         Tina Aiken, Esq.
         15375 SE 30th Pl., STE 310
         Bellevue, WA 98007
         Telephone: (425) 454-4233
         E-mail: dfeider@sbj.law
                 taiken@sbj.law

HOMEWORKS ENERGY: Giguere Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSEPH GIGUERE, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. HOMEWORKS ENERGY,
INC., MARTIJN FLEUREN, individually and MAX VEGGEBERG,
individually, Case No. 3:21-cv-30015-MGM (D. Mass.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order certifying the following class
with respect to all counts in the Complaint against Defendants:

    All current and former Crew Leads, Tech Is, Tech IIs, Crew
Leads
    in Training and employees of any other position employed by
the
    Defendants in Massachusetts who were subject to Defendants'
    disincentive deduction policies and whose pay was negatively
    affected by the disincentive deductions during at least one
    payroll period between Feb. 05, 2018 through the date of final

    judgment.

The Plaintiff further moves the Court to appoint named Plaintiff
Joseph Giguere as class representative and his counsel for the
class.

HomeWorks Energy specializes in energy assessment and consulting.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=LT6QYQ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Raymond Dinsmore, Esq.
          Richard E. Hayber, Esq.
          Hayber, McKenna & Dinsmore, LLC
          One Monarch Place, Suite 1340
          Springfield, MA 01144
          Telephone: (413) 785-1400
          E-mail: rdinsmore@hayberlawfirm.com
                  rhayber@hayberlawfirm.com

HONDA MOTOR: Bolooki Seeks Leave to File Documents Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hamid Bolooki v. Honda
Motor Company Limited et al. (re HONDA IDLE STOP LITIGATION), Case
No. 2:22-cv-04252-MCS-SK (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court
to enter an order, pursuant to Local Rule 79-5.2.2(b), granting
application for leave to file under seal certain documents,
deposition testimony, and portions of their Memorandum of Law in
Support of Motion for Class Certification and certain exhibits to
the Declaration of H. Clay Barnett, III.

This application concerns Plaintiffs' Reply Memorandum in Support
of Class Certification and documents and deposition transcripts
attached thereto marked confidential by American Honda Motor Co.,
Inc., (the "Designating Party"), and are attached to the
Declaration of H. Clay Barnett, III., in support of this
application.

It is unlikely that sealing many, if not all, of these documents is
appropriate. However, under the terms of the Order regarding
Stipulated Protective Order, documents designated as "Confidential"
and "Highly Confidential," as well as the information contained
therein, must be filed under seal by the non-designating party.

Moreover, because the Designating Party is best positioned to
explain why information designated confidential should be sealed,
the Designating Party is required to submit a declaration, within
four days of filing of the application, that explains the basis for
sealing the information. Failure to file a declaration or other
required document may be deemed sufficient grounds for denying the
application.

In advance of filing this application to seal, the Parties
conferred regarding Defendant's position on sealing and redaction,
and the Parties attempted to limit sealing and redactions to the
best of their ability pursuant to the Protective Order and Local
Rule 79-5.2.2(b).
Plaintiffs do not oppose filing their Motion for Class
Certification, Memorandum, and supporting exhibits on the public
docket with no redactions. The Plaintiffs are prepared to do so if
the Court is inclined to reject or otherwise limit sealing here.

Honda is a Japanese public multinational conglomerate manufacturer
of automobiles, motorcycles, and battery-powered equipment.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=PPSpDk at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:


          Daniel "Dee" Miles III, Esq.
          H. Clay Barnett III, Esq.
          Demet Basar, Esq.
          J. Mitch Williams, Esq.
          Dylan T. Martin, Esq.
          Rebecca D. Gilliland, Esq.
          BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW,
          METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C.
          272 Commerce Street
          Montgomery, AL 36104
          Telephone: (334) 269-2343
          E-mail: Dee.Miles@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Clay.Barnett@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Demet.Basar@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Mitch.Williams@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Dylan.Martin@BeasleyAllen.com
                  Rebecca.Gilliland@Beasleyallen.com

                - and -

          Adam J. Levitt, Esq.
          John E. Tangren, Esq.
          Daniel R. Ferri, Esq.
          Blake Stubbs, Esq.
          DICELLO LEVITT LLP
          Ten North Dearborn Street, Sixth Floor
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 214-7900
          E-mail: alevitt@dicellolevitt.com
                  jtangren@dicellolevitt.com
                  dferri@dicellolevitt.com
                  bstubbs@dicellolevitt.com

                - and -

          Moze Cowper, Esq.
          COWPER LAW PC
          10880 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1840
          Los Angeles, CA 90024
          Telephone: (877) 529-3707
          E-mail: mcowper@cowperlaw.com

                - and -

          Andrew Trailor, Esq.
          ANDREW T. TRAILOR, P.A.
          9990 Southwest 77 Avenue, PH 12
          Miami, FL 331156
          Telephone: (305) 668-6090
          E-mail: andrew@attlawpa.com

HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL: Nessi Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duties
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Antoinette Nessi, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Honeywell Retirement Earnings Plan;
Honeywell International Inc.; John Doe and Jane Doe 1-10,
Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-06093 (N.D. Ill., July 18, 2024) is a
class action against the Defendants for declaratory, injunctive and
equitable relief, to declare her rights under the terms of the
Honeywell Retirement Earnings Plan and the Defendants' violations
of the Employee Income Security Act of 1974.

On behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff
alleges, inter alia, that Defendants breached their fiduciary
duties and violated ERISA's joint and survivor annuity,
non-forfeiture and disclosure provisions by misrepresenting and
failing to disclose material information governing the calculation
of benefits and optional forms of benefits utilized by the Plan in
the "factors" applied to convert single life annuities into joint
and survivor annuities, including, inter alia, failing to disclose
the legally mandated relative values of the benefit forms and
options offered at retirement, utilizing unreasonable actuarial
assumptions in the calculation of joint and survivor benefits
resulting in the disclosure and payment of joint and survivor
benefits and optional forms of benefits that, contrary to ERISA,
are significantly less than the actuarial equivalent of the single
annuity form of benefits pension plan participants are entitled to
under ERISA.

In addition, the Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to timely
provide Plan documents that Defendants were required to provide in
response to Plaintiff's written requests.

The Plaintiff was employed by UOP, a company that was subsequently
purchased by Allied-Signal and changed its name to Honeywell
International Inc. following Allied-Signal's merger with Honeywell
from October 1976 through December 1988. She is a participant under
the Honeywell Retirement Earnings Plan under ERISA.

Honeywell International Inc. is the administrator of the Honeywell
Retirement Earnings Plan and a fiduciary with respect to the Plan
within the meaning of ERISA.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Susan Martin, Esq.
          Jennifer Kroll, Esq.
          Michael Licata, Esq.
          MARTIN & BONNETT, P.L.L.C.
          4647 N. 32nd St, Suite 185
          Phoenix, AZ 85018
          Telephone: (602) 240-6900
          Facsimile: (602) 240-2345
          E-mail: smartin@martinbonnett.com
                  jkroll@martinbonnett.com
                  mlicata@martinbonnett.com

               - and -

          Caryn C. Lederer, Esq.
          HUGHES SOCOL PIERS RESNICK & DYM, LTD.
          70 W. Madison St., Suite 4000
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 580-0100
          Facsimile: (312) 580-1994
          E-mail: clederer@hsplegal.com

HOT TOPIC: Zuccaro Suit Seeks Conditional Class Certification
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Zuccaro JAMIE ZUCCARO,
CATHERINE MOODY, and ANDREW COHN, each individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, v. Hot Topic, Inc., Case No.
3:23-cv-01242-MO (D. Or.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an
order:

   1. Granting preliminary approval of the proposed class action
      settlement set forth in the Settlement Agreement;

   2. Preliminarily certifying, for settlement purposes only, a
      settlement class in this matter;

   3. Preliminarily appointing Plaintiffs Jamie Zuccaro, Catherine

      Moody, and Andrew Cohn as class representatives for
settlement
      purposes;

   4. Preliminarily appointing Dovel & Luner LLP as Class Counsel;

   5. Preliminarily finding that the terms of the Settlement are
fair,
      reasonable, and adequate, and comply with Rule 23(e) of the
      Federal Rules of Civil Procedure; and

   6. Approving that the proposed Notice Plan complies with the
      requirements of Rule 23 and due process, and that the Notice
is
      to be sent to the Settlement Class Members as set forth in
the
      Agreement and pursuant to the deadlines in the Agreement.

The Plaintiffs allege that when they made their purchases, the
Defendant's website was advertising limited-time, percent-off
discounts. The Plaintiffs allege that they were injured by
Defendant's false representations because they "would not have
purchased the Products, or would have paid less for them" if they
had known that the products were not on sale, and that they were
not receiving the promised discounts. And they allege that other
consumers were injured in the same way.

Plaintiffs Jamie Zuccaro, Catherine Moody, and Andrew Cohn, and
Defendant Hot Topic, Inc., have reached a hard-fought class-wide
settlement. The Settlement will provide at least approximately
$12.5 million in relief to the Settlement Class—at least
approximately $10 million of which will be used to provide direct
relief to Class Members.

The Defendant sells clothing and accessories through its website,
Hottopic.com.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=LBWk0J at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jonas Jacobson, Esq.
          Simon Franzini, Esq.
          Grace Bennett, Esq.
          DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
          201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
          Santa Monica, CA 90401
          Telephone: (310) 656-7066
          E-mail: jonas@dovel.com
                  simon@dovel.com
                  grace@dovel.com

HUSH NYC: Saunders Suit Seeks Blind's Equal Access to Online Store
------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SAUNDERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HUSH NYC LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-05481 (S.D.N.Y., July 19, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendant for violations of Title III of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, the New York
State Civil Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law and
declaratory relief.

According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible
to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually impaired persons. The Defendant's website, www.hushny.com,
contains access barriers which hinder the Plaintiff and Class
members to enjoy the benefits of its online goods, content, and
services offered to the public through the website. The
accessibility issues on the website include, but not limited to:
lack of descriptive elements, inaccessible links, and lack of
alternative text.

The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause
a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and
procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain
accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals.

Hush NYC LLC is a company that sells online goods and services,
doing business in New York. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                
      
       Jon L. Norinsberg, Esq.
       Bennitta L. Joseph, Esq.
       JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC
       110 East 59th Street, Suite 2300
       New York, NY 10022
       Telephone: (212) 227-5700
       Facsimile: (212) 656-1889
       Email: jon@norinsberglaw.com
              bennitta@employeejustice.com

JAMES KOUTOULAS: De Ford Suit Seeks to Certify Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ERIC DE FORD, et al., v.
JAMES KOUTOULAS, et al., Case No. 6:22-cv-00652-PGB-DCI (M.D.
Fla.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order:

   (1) certifying this action as a class action under Rules 23(a)
and
       (b)(3);

   (2) appointing the Plaintiffs as Class Representatives; and

   (3) appointing Scott + Scott and Zigler Law Group as Class
Counsel.

Both firm's resumes can be found as exhibits attached to the Masson
Declaration In Support of Motion for Appointment of PSLRA Lead
Plaintiff and Lead Counsel.

Pursuant to L.R. 7.1(b), Lead Plaintiffs request a hearing on their
Motion for class certification. Lead Plaintiffs believe that oral
argument on the Motion would assist the Court with addressing any
novel issues concerning cryptocurrencies and blockchain
technologies that may distract from the core legal questions at
issue. Plaintiffs estimate that approximately one (1) hour would be
necessary to hold a hearing on this Motion.

Th Plaintiffs contend that the Class certification should be
granted. The class is easily ascertainable as its definition
consists of objective characteristics established by common
transactional facts and includes thousands of members. Moreover,
common issues predominate over any individual issues.

Finally, class-wide damages can also be calculated using a common
methodology. Each of Plaintiffs’ causes of action provides for
recessionary relief that can be mechanically calculated for each
member of the proposed classes. For these reasons, as discussed in
more detail below, the Court should certify the proposed class
under Rule 23(b)(3)

The Defendant James Koutoulas created a cryptocurrency named
LGBCoin in November 2021 and marketed it personally, and through
Defendant LGBCoin, LTD, to potential investors as having an
official affiliation with NASCAR and Republican influencers and
celebrities.
But on Jan. 4, 2022, NASCAR announced that there was no
sponsorship. While this played out, insiders sold and the value of
LGBCoin fell to zero erasing a $570 million market cap.

The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants created LGBCoin and made
it available for purchase. The Defendants thereafter targeted
potential LGBCoin purchasers by engaging in a widespread social
media and influencer marketing strategy to increase interest in
LGBCoin.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FDNRFj at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Aaron M. Zigler, Esq.
          Mary Jane Fait, Esq.
          Nidya S. Gutierrez, Esq.
          ZIGLER LAW GROUP, LLC
          308 S. Jefferson Street | Suite 333
          Chicago, IL 60661
          Telephone: (312) 673-8427
          E-mail: aaron@ziglerlawgroup.com
                  maryjane@ziglerlawgroup.com
                  nidya@ziglerlawgroup.com

                - and -

          John T. Jasnoch, Esq.
          Sean T. Masson, Esq.
          SCOTT+SCOTT
          ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP
          600 W. Broadway, Suite 3300
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 233-4565
          E-mail: jjasnoch@scott-scott.com
                  smasson@scott-scott.com

JUSTICE RESOURCE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Anderson Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
LISA ANDERSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. JUSTICE RESOURCE INSTITUTE, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-11856 (D. Mass., July 19, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for its failure to properly secure and
safeguard Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive personal health
information ("PHI") and personal identifiable information ("PII")
(PII and PHI collectively, "Personal Information"), which, as a
result, is now in criminal cyberthieves' possession.

The Defendant breached these duties owed to Plaintiff and Class
Members by failing to safeguard their Private Information that it
collected and maintained, including by failing to implement
industry standards for data security to protect against
cyberattacks, which failures allowed criminal hackers to access and
steal thousands of current and former patients' Private
Information.

The Defendant also failed to adequately protect Plaintiff's and
Class Members' Private Information––and failed to even encrypt
or redact this highly sensitive information. This unencrypted,
unredacted Private Information was compromised due to Defendant's
negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and its utter failure
to protect its patients' sensitive data. Hackers targeted and
obtained Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private Information because
of its value in exploiting and stealing their identities. The
present and continuing risk to Plaintiff and Class Members as
victims of the Data Breach will remain for their respective
lifetimes, says the suit.

Justice Resource Institute, Inc. (JRI) operates as a non-profit
organization. The Organization provides outpatient mental health
services including behavioral health, developing abilities, foster
care, and educational and trauma services. Justice Resource
Institute serves communities in the State of Massachusetts. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christina Xenides, Esq.
          SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
          1005 Congress Avenue, Suite 925-C36
          Austin, TX 78701
          Telephone: (646) 357-1732
          Email: cxenides@sirillp.com

               - and -

          Kenneth J. Grunfeld, Esq.
          Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
          KOPELOWITZ OSTROW FERGUSON WEISELBERG GILBERT
          65 Overhill Road
          Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
          Telephone: (954) 525-4100
          Email: grunfeld@kolawyers.com
                 ostrow@kolawyers.com

LA COLOMBE: Paraham Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER PARAHAM, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LA COLOMBE HOLDINGS INC., Defendant, Case
No. 2:24-cv-03148 (E.D. Pa., July 18, 2024) seeks to recover
Plaintiff's unpaid straight time and overtime wages, liquidated
damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs as a result of
Defendant's willful violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act, and the Pennsylvania Wage Payment
and Collection Law.

The Plaintiff and the putative FLSA collective and Rule 23 class
members are hourly-paid productions workers employed by Defendant
in the last three years, who were deprived of proper wages as a
result of the following unlawful policies maintained by Defendant:
failing to pay hourly-paid production workers for all hours worked
before their scheduled shifts, including hours worked in excess of
40 in a workweek; and failing to pay hourly-paid production workers
for hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek at a rate of or
greater than one and a half times their regular rate of pay.

Plaintiff Paraham has been employed by Defendant since December
2020 as an hourly-paid production worker. His current job title is
brewer.

La Colombe Holdings Inc. is a for profit corporation created and
existing under and by virtue of the laws of the Delaware.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Edmund Celiesius, Esq.
          Nicholas Conlon, Esq.
          BROWN, LLC
          111 Town Square Place, Suite 400
          Jersey City, NJ 07310
          Telephone: (877) 561-0000
          Facsimile: (855) 582-5297
          E-mail: ed.celiesius@jtblawgroup.com
                  nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com

LIBERTY MEDIA: Gutierrez Video Privacy Suit Removed to N.D. Ill.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled SERGIO GUTIERREZ, individually and on behalf of a
class of similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff, v. LIBERTY
MEDIA CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation; FORMULA ONE DIGITAL
MEDIA LIMITED, a foreign private limited company, Defendants, Case
No. 2024CH05112, was removed from the Circuit Court of Cook County,
Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, Eastern Division, on July 9, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Illinois assigned
Case No. 1:24-cv-05770 to the proceeding.

The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the Video
Privacy Protection Act.

Liberty Media Corporation is a mass media company headquartered in
Colorado. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Terance A. Gonsalves, Esq.
          ALSTON & BIRD LLP
          321 North Clark Street, Suite 2650
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (404) 881-7983
          Facsimile:(404) 881-7777
          E-mail: terance.gonsalves@alston.com

                  - and -

          Kathy J. Huang, Esq.
          Rachel E. K. Lowe, Esq.
          ALSTON & BIRD LLP
          350 South Grand Avenue, 51st Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 576-1000
          Facsimile: (213) 576-1100
          E-mail: kathy.huang@alston.com
                  rachel.lowe@alston.com

LIBERTY MUTUAL: Hutzel Suit Removed to N.D. Ohio
------------------------------------------------
The class action styled ANDREW HUTZEL, individually and for other
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LIBERTY MUTUAL PERSONAL INSURANCE
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 24-CIV-101, was removed from the Court
of Common Pleas, Ashland County, Ohio to the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Ohio on July 19, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Ohio assigned Case
No. 1:24-cv-01228-JPC to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff alleges that Liberty Mutual is wrongfully
understating actual cash value and withholding a payment of General
Contractor Overhead and Pricing for all claims involving roofing.

The Plaintiff's class definition includes "All Liberty
policyholders under any property policies issued by Liberty who
made: (1) a structural damages claim for property located in the
State of Ohio; and (2) which resulted in an actual cash value
payment, where roofing GCOP was not paid, or which should have
resulted in an actual cash value payment but for the withholding of
roofing GCOP payment causing the loss to drop below the applicable
deductible."

Liberty Mutual Personal Insurance Company operates as an insurance
company.[BN]

The Defendant is represented by:

          Rodger L. Eckelberry, Esq.
          Ali I. Haque, Esq.
          Christopher K. Riedel, Esq.
          BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
          200 Civic Center Drive, Suite 200
          Columbus, OH 43215-4138
          Telephone: (614) 228-1541
          Facsimile: (614) 462-2616
          Email: reckelberry@bakerlaw.com
                 ahaque@bakerlaw.com
                 criedel@bakerlaw.com

MARINER FINANCE: Wilson Sues Over Deceptive Practices Act
---------------------------------------------------------
CLEVELAND CORNELL WILSON; BERNADETTE ONITA BROWN; and JAQUELINE
RENA GREEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. MARINER FINANCE NORTH CAROLINA, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 5:24-cv-00379-BO-RJ (E.D.N.C., June 17, 2024)
alleges violation of the North Carolina Unfair or Deceptive
Practices Act.

As a direct and proximate result of Mariner's failure to release
the liens and provide clear titles to the Plaintiffs, the
Plaintiffs have suffered injuries of a personal and pecuniary
nature including, but not limited to, time spent trying to convince
Mariner to release the lien; emotional anxiety, stress, worry, and
frustration; and requiring attorneys to pursue litigation, says the
suit.

Mariner Finance North Carolina, Inc. provides financial lending
services. The Company offers a variety of lending options including
personal, home, auto, and home improvement loans, as well as debt
consolidation. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Erik A. Martin, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF JOHN T. ORCUTT
          1738 Hillandale Road, Suite D
          Durham, NC 27705
          Telephone: (919) 286-1695
          Email: emartin@lojto.com

               - and -

          Brian D. Flick, Esq.
          Brent S. Snyder, Esq.
          DANNLAW
          15000 Madison Avenue
          Cleveland, OH 44107
          Telephone: (216) 373-0539
          Facsimile: (216) 373-0536
          Email: notices@dannlaw.com

MDALGORITHMS INC: Martin Says Acne Treatment Cream Contain Benzene
------------------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA MARTIN and MYRA HUGGINS, individually, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. MDALGORITHMS, INC.; OBAGI
COSMECEUTICALS LLC, Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-04333 (N.D. Cal.,
July 18, 2024) is a class action lawsuit concerning Defendants'
manufacturing, distribution, advertising, marketing, and sale of
(1) MDalgorithms, Inc.'s MDacne Customized Treatment Cream (Benzoyl
Peroxide 5%), and (2) Obagi Cosmeceuticals LLC's CLENZIderm M.D.
Therapeutic Lotion Acne Treatment (Benzoyl Peroxide 5%), which are
alleged to contain benzene and/or degrade to form benzene -- a
carcinogen that has been linked to leukemia and other blood
cancers.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs and Class members
reasonably relied on Defendants' representations that the BPO
Products were safe, unadulterated, and free of any carcinogens that
are not listed on the label. Because the products contain benzene,
the products are adulterated and misbranded under the Missouri
Merchandising Practices Act and the Florida's Deceptive and Unfair
Trade Practices Act. The Defendants are therefore liable to
Plaintiffs and Class members for misrepresenting and/or failing to
disclose or warn that the products contain benzene and/or degrade
to form benzene, says the suit.

Had the Plaintiff known that benzene was contained in the products
at the time of purchase and/or that the products degraded to form
benzene, she wouldn't have purchased and used the Products at all
or would have paid significantly less for them, the suit asserts.

MDalgorithms, Inc. manufacture, market, distribute, and/or sell
various skin care products.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Kiley L. Grombacher, Esq.
          BRADLEY/GROMBACHER, LLP  
          31365 Oak Crest Drive, Suite 240
          Westlake Village, CA 91361
          Telephone: (805) 270-7100
          Facsimile: (805) 270-7589
          E-mail: kgrombacher@bradleygrombacher.com

MEDIASTAR LIMITED: Hossain Seeks to Open Discovery Under VPPA
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Hossain et al., v.
Mediastar Limited, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01201-KPF (S.D.N.Y.),
the Hon. Judge Katherine Polk Failla entered an order granting
Plaintiffs' request to open discovery under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23 for class certification and under the Video Privacy
Protection Act ("VPPA").

The Court orders the Plaintiffs to complete discovery in service of
their class certification motion and motion for default judgment on
or before Nov. 29, 2024.

Feb. 16, 2024, The Plaintiffs filed a proposed class action against
the Defendants, alleging the Defendants violated the VPPA by
knowingly disclosing personally identifiable information about
Chorki users to third parties.

On March 26, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a Request for a Pre-Motion
Conference re: Motion for Alternative Service with the Court
seeking permission to serve process on Chorki through alternative
methods pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(f)(3).

Accordingly, the Plaintiffs request an Order opening discovery to
assist in Plaintiffs' class certification motion and motion for
default judgment.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EZMSNA at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Yitzchak Kopel, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER P.A.
          1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (646) 837-7150
          Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
          E-mail: ykopel@bursor.com

MEDIBASE GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Barbaria Says
-----------------------------------------------------------
ROBIN BARBARIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE MEDIBASE GROUP, INC., Defendants, Case
No. 1:24-cv-03239-SDG (N.D. GA., July 23, 2024) is a class action
arising out of the recent data security incident and data breach
that was perpetrated against the Defendant Medibase (the "Data
Breach"), which held in its possession certain personally
identifiable information ("PII") and protected health information
("PHI") (collectively, the "Private Information") of Plaintiff and
other current and former patients of a vendor of Staten Island
University Hospital, the putative class members ("Class").

According to the complaint, the Data Breach resulted from the
Defendant's failure to implement adequate and reasonable
cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to protect
individuals' Private Information with which they were entrusted for
either treatment or employment or both.

The Defendant maintained the Private Information in a reckless
manner. In particular, the Private Information was maintained on
the Defendant's computer network in a condition vulnerable to
cyberattacks, says the suit.

The Medibase Group, Inc. provides software solutions, technical
assistance, and business. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ainsworth G. Dudley
          DUDLEY LAW, LLC
          P.O. Box 53319
          Atlanta, GA 30355
          Telephone: (404) 687-8205

               - and -

          Leigh S. Montgomery
          ELLZEY & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
          1105 Milford Street
          Houston, TX 77006
          Telephone: (888) 350-3931
          Facsimile: (888) 276-3455
          Email: leigh@ellzeylaw.com

MICHAEL L. MANNA: Faces Vasquez Suit Over Unlawful Labor Practices
------------------------------------------------------------------
JUAN VASQUEZ, JOSE LUIS ZAVALA, and MOISES ROCHA, on behalf of
themselves, the State of California, all similarly situated
aggrieved employees, and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs
v. MICHAEL L. MANNA RANCH, INC., MICHAEL L. MANNA, an Individual,
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
2:24-cv-01968-JDP (E.D. Cal., July 18, 2024) is a class action
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Rule 23 and a
collective action pursuant to the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural
Workers Protection Act and the California Private Attorneys General
Act brought by the Plaintiffs, on behalf of a class of workers
currently or formerly employed by Defendants in California, seeking
to vindicate the rights afforded to workers under AWPA, California
law, including the California Labor Code and Wage Orders, and
California's Unfair Competition Law.

The core violations Plaintiffs allege against Defendants are: (1)
failure to provide meal periods or appropriately compensate
employees in lieu thereof; (2) failure to pay minimum and premium
overtime; (3) failure to pay/compensate non-exempt employees for
rest and recovery periods and/or other nonproductive time separate
from any piece-rate compensation; (4) failure to pay all wages owed
upon separation from employment; (5) failure to provide accurate,
itemized wage statements; (6) failure to pay Plaintiffs for all
hours worked; (7) failure to reimburse necessary business
expenditures; and (8) failure to pay taxes, social security,
disability, unemployment, worker's compensation, Medicare, and
other required obligations.

The Plaintiffs and the Class are comprised of all current and
former non-exempt employees of Defendants.

Michael L. Manna Ranch, Inc. is an active carrier in Acampo,
California.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Stan S. Mallison, Esq.
          Hector R. Martinez, Esq.
          Cody A. Bolce, Esq.
          MALLISON & MARTINEZ
          1939 Harrison Street, Suite 730
          Oakland, CA 94612-3547
          Telephone: (510) 832-9999
          Facsimile: (510) 832-1101
          E-mail: StanM@TheMMLawFirm.com
                  HectorM@TheMMLawFirm.com
                  CBolce@TheMMLawFirm.com

MICROGENICS CORP: Steele-Warrick Suit Seeks to Certify Class
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Nadezda Steele-Warrick v.
Microgenics Corporation et al., Case No. 1:19-cv-06558-FB-VMS
(E.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting
a pre-motion conference to address the Plaintiffs' anticipated
motion for class certification.

The Plaintiffs Nadezda Steele-Warrick and Darryl Schultz bring this
action seeking damages for injuries caused by the Defendants and
current and former employees of the New York State Department of
Corrections and Community Supervision (the "DOCCS Defendants").

The Defendants induced DOCCS to adopt their immunoassay drug
testing system by intentionally misrepresenting its reliability,
and the DOCCS Defendants failed to do any due diligence to
determine whether and how the drug testing system could be used in
the correctional context.

The Defendants' misconduct caused thousands of incarcerated
individuals, including proposed class representatives Ms.
Steele-Warrick and Mr. Schultz, to be disciplined based solely on
untrustworthy test results despite a barrage of complaints about
the false results.

Ms. Steele-Warrick, a model prisoner with a pristine record
including no positive drug tests while incarcerated, received a
false positive drug test result in April 2019.

She was subsequently found guilty after a disciplinary hearing and,
as a result, lost a number of hardearned privileges, including
preferred housing and participation in DOCCS's Family Reunion
Program. Her hearing result was overturned in September 2019 when
DOCCS finally admitted that the results produced by the testing
system were not sufficiently reliable to support discipline.

Mr. Schultz had been in DOCCS custody since 1989 without ever being
disciplined for drug use. He was set to appear before the parole
board in August 2019, but he received false positive drug test
results in February and July 2019.

The Plaintiffs seek to represent a damages class, pursuant to Fed.
R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3), of all persons who received two concurrent
positive screening test results on the same urine sample from the
Corporate Defendants' drug testing system while in DOCCS custody.

Microgenics is a subsidiary of Thermo Electron Corporation that
specializes in manufacturing and supplying clinical diagnostic
products and toxicology testing solutions to the federal
government.

A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=71DPsv at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Emily K. Wanger, Esq.
          EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF ABADY WARD & MAAZEL LLP
          600 Fifth Avenue at Rockefeller Center, 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10020
          Telephone: (212) 763-5000
          Facsimile: (212) 763-5001
          E-mail: www.ecbawm.com

MKM REALTY: Cheli Sues Over Property's Architectural Barriers
-------------------------------------------------------------
CHARLENE CHELI, an individual, on her own behalf and on the behalf
of all other similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MKM REALTY LLC, a New
Jersey Limited Liability Company, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-07868
(D.N.J., July 18, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for
injunctive relief, damages, attorney's fees, litigation expenses,
and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act and the
New Jersey Law Against Discrimination.

According to the complaint, Plaintiff Cheli encounters
architectural barriers at many of the places that she visits.
Seemingly trivial architectural features such as parking spaces,
curb ramps, and door handles are taken for granted by the
non-disabled but, when improperly designed or implemented, can be
arduous and even dangerous to those in wheelchairs.

The barriers to access that Plaintiff Cheli experiences at
differing places of public accommodation are often similar in
nature. For example, she is repeatedly faced with sloping in
parking lots, improper curb ramps, abrupt changes of level within
paths of travel, and non-accessible restrooms. She has become
frustrated and disheartened by the repetitiveness of the complaints
she has been forced to make to the employees and management at
various establishments in the past; most often to no avail. Thus,
she now finds her redress through the ADA; as Congress intended,
says the suit.

Plaintiff Cheli is an individual with disabilities and has been
diagnosed with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy.

The Defendant owns a shopping center/plaza with several tenant
spaces located in Bridgeton, New Jersey.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jon G. Shadinger Jr., Esq.
          SHADINGER LAW, LLC
          717 E. Elmer Street, Suite 7
          Vineland, NJ 08360
          Telephone: (609) 319-5399
          E-mail: js@shadingerlaw.com

MNGI DIGESTIVE: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Halvorson Says
------------------------------------------------------------
JASON HALVORSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MNGI DIGESTIVE HEALTH, P.A., Defendant, Case
No. 0:24-cv-02851-DWF-DJF (D. Minn., July 22, 2024) is an action
against the Defendant for its failure to properly secure and
safeguard Plaintiff's and Class Members' protected health
information and personally identifiable information stored within
Defendant's information network.

According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, the Data Breach
resulted in the unauthorized disclosure, exfiltration, and theft of
consumers' highly personal information, including names, dates of
birth, Social Security numbers, financial account information, and
other personal information ("personal identifying information" or
"PII").

In failing to adequately protect the Plaintiff's and the Class's
PII, failing to adequately notify them about the breach, and by
obfuscating the nature of the breach, Defendant violated state and
federal law and harmed an unknown number of its current and former
consumers, says the suit.

MNGI Digestive Health is a nationally recognized leader in
gastroenterology diagnosis, quality and care. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David A. Goodwin, Esq.
          Daniel E. Gustafson, Esq.
          Frances Mahoney-Mosedale, Esq.
          GUSTAFSON GLUEK PLLC
          Canadian Pacific Plaza
          120 South 6th Street, Suite 2600
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 333-8844
          Email: dgustafson@gustafsongluek.com
                 dgoodwin@gustafsongluek.com
                 fmahoneymosedale@gustafsongluek.com

               - and -

          Marc H. Edelson, Esq.
          EDELSON LECHTZIN LLP
          411 S. State Street, Suite N300
          Newtown, PA 18940
          Telephone: (215) 867-2399
          Email: medelson@edelson-law.com

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Salom Allowed to File Overlength Brief
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICARDO SALOM, CATHERINE
PALAZZO as assignee for Ruben Palazzo, and PETER HACKINEN, on their
own behalf and on behalf of other similarly situated persons, v.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00444-BJR (W.D.
Wash.), the Hon. Judge Barbara Rothstein entered an order granting
motion for leave to file overlength brief:

   1. The Plaintiffs' motion is granted, and Plaintiffs shall
promptly
      file their Motion for Class Certification and Statement of
      Material Facts in Support of Class Certification presented in

      their motion along with their Continued Appendix of Exhibits.


   2. The Defendants may file a commensurate response.

Nationstar provides mortgages loan, re-financing, and home equity
loans.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=aNuMIs at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Christina L. Henry, Esq.
          SEATTLE CONSUMER JUSTICE, P.S.
          10728 16th Avenue SW
          Seattle, WA 98146
          Telephone: (206) 330-0595
          E-mail: chenry@hdm-legal.com

                - and -

          Phillip R. Robinson, Esq.
          CONSUMER LAW CENTER, LLC
          1220 Blair Mill Road, Suite 1105
          Silver Spring, MD 20901
          Telephone: (301) 448.1304
          E-mail: phillip@marylandconsumer.com

ODDITY TECH: Faces Class Suit Over AI Technology Misinformation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins LLP informs investors that a shareholder filed a class
action on behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or
otherwise acquired Oddity Tech Ltd. (NASDAQ: ODD) securities
between July 19, 2023 and May 20, 2024. Oddity describes itself as
"a consumer tech platform that is built to transform the global
beauty and wellness market."

For more information, submit a form, email attorney Aaron Dumas,
Jr., or give us a call at (800) 350-6003.

The Allegations: Robbins LLP is Investigating Allegations that
Oddity Tech Ltd. (ODD) Misled Investors Regarding its AI Technology
and Capabilities

According to the complaint, during the class period, defendants
failed to disclose that: (i) Oddity overstated its AI technology
and capabilities, and/or the extent to which this technology drove
the Company's sales; (ii) Oddity's repeat purchase rates and
revenues were, at least in part, derived from unsustainable and
deceptive sales and advertising practices; (iii) Oddity downplayed
the true scope and severity of ongoing civil litigation against the
Company and/or its subsidiaries; and (iv) as a result, Oddity's
public statements were materially false and misleading at all
relevant times.

The complaint alleges that on May 21, 2024, NINGI Research
published a report regarding Oddity, alleging that the Company
"completely misled investors about every critical aspect of its
business[.]" In particular, the Ningi Report alleged, inter alia,
that Ningi "talked to former employees who told [Ningi] that the
[Company's] AI is nothing but a questionnaire"; that Oddity's
lauded "repeat purchase rates" are attributable to "customers
unknowingly enter[ing] into non-cancelable plans" that allow the
Company "to recognize repeat purchases in the following quarters
even though the customers don't want the product"; and that Ningi
had "found hundreds of undisclosed lawsuits filed against ODDITY
and its subsidiaries in the US and Israel, frequently alleging
unpaid bills and violations of consumer protection laws," including
multiple class action lawsuits filed within the past several years.
On this news, Oddity's Class A ordinary share price fell $3.02 per
share, or 7.37%, to close at $37.97 per share on May 21, 2024.
Oddity's Class A ordinary share price continued to decline by an
additional $1.30 per share, or 3.42%, over the following two
consecutive trading sessions, closing at $36.67 per share on May
23, 2024.

What Now: You may be eligible to participate in the class action
against Oddity Tech Ltd. Shareholders who want to serve as lead
plaintiff for the class must file their motions with the court by
September 17, 2024. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who
acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.
You do not have to participate in the case to be eligible for a
recovery. If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent
class member. For more information, click here.

All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay
no fees or expenses.

About Robbins LLP: Some law firms issuing releases about this
matter do not actually litigate securities class actions; Robbins
LLP does. A recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation, the
attorneys and staff of Robbins LLP have been dedicated to helping
shareholders recover losses, improve corporate governance
structures, and hold company executives accountable for their
wrongdoing since 2002. Since our inception, we have obtained over
$1 billion for shareholders.

To be notified if a class action against Oddity Tech Ltd. settles
or to receive free alerts when corporate executives engage in
wrongdoing, sign up for Stock Watch today.

Attorney Advertising. Past results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.

Contact:

     Aaron Dumas, Jr.
     Robbins LLP
     5060 Shoreham Pl., Ste. 300
     San Diego, CA 92122
     adumas@robbinsllp.com
     (800) 350-6003
     www.robbinsllp.com [GN]

OPTIMAS OE: Faces Duncan Suit Over BIPA Violations
--------------------------------------------------
BRIAN DUNCAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. OPTIMAS OE SOLUTIONS, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 2024LA000883 (Ill. Cir., Dupage Cty., July 23, 2024) alleges
violation of the Illinois Biometric Information Privacy Act.

According to the complaint, by using biometric enabled technology,
the Defendant has captured, collected, stored, disseminated, and/or
otherwise used the biometrics of the Plaintiff and other Class
members, without their informed written consent as required by law,
in order to track their time at work.

Though the Defendant collected, stored, and used Plaintiff's
biometrics for timekeeping and access purposes, the Defendant never
provided Plaintiff with any written disclosures informing the
Plaintiff that it was collecting, storing, and using biometrics or
explaining the purpose or length of term for which the biometrics
were being collected and stored. Defendant never sought, nor has
Plaintiff ever provided, any written consent relating to the
Defendant's collection, use, or storage, or dissemination of the
biometrics, says the suit.

Optimas OE Solutions, LLC distributes industrial equipment and
supplies. The Company offers bolts, nuts, screws, washers, belts,
discs, wheel brushes, electric part solvents, extension cords,
specialty cleaners, wall brackets, tapes, gloves, and tools.
Optimas OE Solutions serves customers in the United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark Hammervold, Esq.
          HAMMERVOLD LAW, LLC
          155 S. Lawndale Ave.
          Elmhurst, IL 60126
          Telephone: (405) 509-0372
          Email: mark@hammervoldlaw.com

ORACLE INC: Agrees to Settle Data Privacy Class Suit For $115MM
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lindsay Clark, writing for The Register, reports that Oracle has
agreed to cough up $115 million to settle a two-year class action
lawsuit that alleged misuse of user data.

The legal agreement "delivers substantial relief" to the plaintiff
consumers in the class, according to a legal filing [PDF].

"The proposed Settlement delivers substantial relief to the
Settlement Class, providing that Oracle will pay $115 million into
a non-reversionary cash fund to be distributed evenly among
Settlement Class Members," it says.

The settlement ensures Big Red commits to address the alleged
privacy violations through binding promises that it will "not
capture certain complained-of electronic communications and will
implement an audit program to review its customers' compliance with
contractual consumer privacy obligations."

The complainants in the settlement number 220 million people.
Oracle signalled last month that it is closing its ad tech
business.

"The Settlement thus demarcates a new era for Oracle's relationship
with class members, offers substantial benefits, and at the same
time eliminates the risk and uncertainty of continued litigation,"
the filing adds.

On an earnings call in June, CEO Safra Catz said the company had
"decided to exit the advertising business, which had declined to
about $300 million in revenue in fiscal year 2024." The business
reported around $2 billion in 2022.

The plaintiff group began an investigation into Oracle's data
privacy practices in 2020. It involved analyzing the vast public
record, including complaints filed by consumer organizations and
government regulators, academic articles, news reports, books, web
pages, marketing materials, privacy policies, and disclosures,
according to the legal filing.

The plaintiffs also obtained Offline Access Request Response
Reports (OARRRs) from Oracle, which have been central to this
litigation. After consulting a privacy law scholar and two computer
science experts who performed forensic research and analysis of
Oracle's publicly available technical documentation, the plaintiffs
filed suit against Oracle in August 2022, alleging that its data
brokering business violates internet users' right to privacy under
the California Constitution as well as various state and federal
privacy statutes.

In April, Judge Richard Seeborg cut a claim from the case brought
under Florida common law and a claim under the Federal Wiretap Act.
The order allowed the parties to reach the current settlement. [GN]

PATELCO CREDIT: Faces Gallagher Suit Over Alleged Data Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
SIOBHAN GALLAGHER, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PATELCO CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No.
3:24-cv-04127-JCS (N.D. Cal., July 9, 2024) arises from the
Defendant's failure to protect highly sensitive personal
identifiable information (PII) about its current and former
customers.

According to the complaint, the cybercriminals were able to breach
Defendant's systems because Defendant failed to adequately train
its employees on cybersecurity and failed to maintain reasonable
security safeguards or protocols to protect the Class's PII. In
addition, Defendant also failed to promptly and properly notify
Plaintiff and Class members of the data breach exacerbated
Plaintiff and Class members' injury by depriving them of the
earliest ability to take appropriate measures to protect their PII
and take other necessary steps to mitigate the harm caused by the
data breach. Accordingly, the Plaintiff asserts claims for
negligence, breach of implied contract, invasion of privacy, unjust
enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty, declaratory judgment, and for
violations of California's Unfair Competition Law, the California
Consumer Privacy Act, and the California Customer Records Act.

Patelco Credit Union is a nonprofit corporation headquartered in
Dublin, CA. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

         Andrew G. Gunem, Esq.
         STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
         980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
         Chicago, IL 60611
         Telephone: (872) 263-1100
         Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
         Telephone: agunem@straussborrelli.com

PFP INDUSTRIES: Jackson Sues Over Unlawful Labor Practices
----------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA JACKSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PFP INDUSTRIES, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
7:24-cv-00167-DC-RCG (W.D. Tex., July 19, 2024) is an action for
damages and other legal and equitable relief from Defendant PfP
Industries, LLC for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act,
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, and any other causes of action
that can be inferred from the facts set in the federal wage and
hour laws.

The Plaintiff brings this action, on behalf of a collective group
of persons employed by Defendant as "Subcontractors" nationwide
during the past three years through the final date of the
disposition of this action who were denied overtime pay of one and
half times their hourly rate for all hours worked in excess of 40
per week in violation of the FLSA and are entitled to recover: (i)
unpaid overtime wages; (ii) liquidated damages; (iii) attorney fees
and costs; (iv) interest; and (v) such other and further relief as
this Court finds necessary and proper.

The Plaintiff additionally brings this action for racial
discrimination, hostile work environment, and retaliation in
violation of Title VII and Section 1981 and is entitled to recover:
(i) back pay; (ii) emotional damages; (iii) front pay; (iv)
punitive damages; (v) attorneys' fees and costs; and (vi)
interest.

PfP Industries, LLC is an entity engaged in the fracking/oil
industry that provides chemicals, machines/equipment, and
water-clean-up systems to third-party oil/gas companies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jay D. Ellwanger, Esq.
          ELLWANGER HENDERSON LLLP
          11149 Research Blvd., Ste. 100
          Austin, TX 78759
          Telephone: (737) 808-2262
          Facsimile: (737) 808-2262
          E-mail: jellwanger@equalrights.law

              - and -

          Alexander White, Esq.
          VALLI KANE & VAGNINI LLP
          600 Old Country Road, Suite 519
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Telephone: (516) 203-7180
          Facsimile: (516) 706-0248   
          E-mail: awhite@vkv.law

PLAINVILLE GAMING: Katopodis Moved for Subpoena Duces Tecum
-----------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit against PLAINVILLE GAMING
AND REDEVELOPMENT, LLC d/b/a PLAINRIDGE PARK CASINO captioned as
GREGORY KATOPODIS; ALAN CASSO; DAVID CARLSON; KIM JOYAL; and EDWARD
PETERSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. PLAINVILLE GAMING AND REDEVELOPMENT, LLC
d/b/a PLAINRIDGE PARK CASINO, Defendant, Case No. 2184CV01937-BLS-1
(Del. Super., Suffolk Cty., July 22, 2024) has asked the Delaware
Superior Court for Deposition Subpoena and Subpoena Duces Tecum to
MGM Resorts International.

PLAINVILLE GAMING AND REDEVELOPMENT, LLC d/b/a PLAINRIDGE PARK
CASINO is a harness racing track and slot machine parlor in
Plainville, Massachusetts. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan M. Albano, Esq.
          S. Elaine McChesney, Esq.
          Nathaniel Bruhn, Esq.
          Emma Diamond Hal, Esq.
          MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          One Federal Street
          Boston, MA 02110-1726
          Telephone: (617) 341-7700
          Facsimile: (617) 341-7701
          Email: jonathan.albano@morganlewis.com
                 elaine.mcchesney@morganlewis.com
                 nathaniel.bruhn@morganlewis.com
                 emma.hall@morganlewis.com

PREMERA BLUE: Plaintiffs' Seek to Certify Plan Participant Class
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as L.B. and M.B., on behalf
of their minor child A.B., and on behalf of similarly situated
others; L.B.; M.B., C.M. and A.H., on behalf of their minor child
J.M., and on behalf of similarly situated others; C.M.; and A.H.,
v. PREMERA BLUE CROSS, Case No. 2:23-cv-00953-TSZ (W.D. Wash.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting the motion and
certifying the class defined as:

    "All individuals who have been, are, or will be participants or

    beneficiaries in Premera health plans and/or health benefit
plans
    (whether insured or administered by Premera) who required,
    require, or will require treatment with gender-affirming chest

    surgery to treat their diagnosis of gender dysphoria, and who
were
    or will be denied pre-authorization or coverage of such surgery

    because they were or are under the age of 18."

The named plaintiffs A.B. and J.M., by and through their respective
parents, should be appointed as class representatives, and with the
law firms of Sirianni Youtz Spoonemore Hamburger, Lambda Legal and
Q Law Foundation, appointed as class counsel.

This lawsuit was filed on June 27, 2023. The Plaintiffs' Complaint
alleges that Premera discriminates on the basis of sex and age when
it imposes a categorical exclusion of coverage for gender-affirming
chest surgery in the GTAS Policy, despite well-established,
generally-accepted clinical practice guidelines that conclude that
such treatment can be medically necessary.

The Plaintiffs' Complaint alleged that Premera does not exclude the
same or similar treatment when sought by non-transgender enrollees
under the age of 18.

The Plaintiffs A.B. and J.M. are two transgender minor adolescents
enrolled in Premera health plans who have been denied coverage for
gender-affirming chest surgery because they are transgender and
under 18 years of age.

Premera is a not-for-profit Blue Cross Blue Shield licensed health
insurance company.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=THexNQ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Eleanor Hamburger, Esq.
          Daniel S. Gross, Esq.
          SIRIANNI YOUTZ
          SPOONEMORE HAMBURGER PLLC
          3101 Western Avenue, Suite 350
          Seattle, WA 98121
          Telephone: (206) 223-0303
          Facsimile: (206) 223-0246
          E-mail: ehamburger@sylaw.com
                  dgross@sylaw.com

                - and -

          Omar Gonzalez-Pagan, Esq.
          LAMBDA LEGAL DEFENSE AND
          EDUCATION FUND, INC.
          120 Wall Street, 19th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (646) 307-7406
          Facsimile: (212) 658-9721
          E-mail: ogonzalez-pagan@lambdalegal.org

                - and -

          J. Denise Diskin, Esq.
          Q LAW FOUNDATION OF WASHINGTON
          400 East Pine Street, Suite 225
          Seattle, WA 98122
          Telephone: (206) 483-2725
          E-mail: denise@qlawfoundation.org



RAWLINGS COMPANY: Faces Dascenzo Suit Over Insurance Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------
JEAN A. DASCENZO, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE RAWLINGS COMPANY LLC,
Defendant, Case No. CV 24 999019 (Ohio Comm. Pl., Cuyahuga Cty.,
June 17, 2024) alleges that the Defendant violated the applicable
Federal Regulations by refusing to reduce the subrogation lien for
the procurement costs, thereby causing damage to Plaintiff in the
amount of the excess subrogation recovery, which came directly out
of the Plaintiff's pocket.

Rawlings Company LLC provides legal services. The Company offers
insurance claims recovery solutions. Rawlings serves customers in
the United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Patrick J. Perotti, Esq.
          Frank A. Bartela, Esq.
          Shmeul S. Kleinman, Esq.
          DWORKEN & BERNSTEIN CO., LPA
          60 South Park Place
          Painesville, OH 44077
          Telephone: (440) 352-3391
          Facsimile: (440) 352-3469
          Email: pperotti@dworkenlaw.com
                 fbartela@dworkenlaw.com
                 skleinman@gmail.com

               - and -

           James A. DeRoche, Esq.
           GARSON JOHNSON LLC
           2900 Detroit Avenue
           Van Roy Building 2nd Floor
           Cleveland, OH 44113
           Telephone: (216) 696-9330
           Facsimile: (216) 696-8558
           Email: jderoche@garson.com

RECONNAISSANCE ENERGY: Settlement Claims Deadline Set October 22
----------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Finance reports that Berger Montague (Canada) PC announces
that the Supreme Court of British Columbia (the motion court,
"Court") approved the class action settlement agreement in Bowles
v. Reconnaissance Energy Africa, Ltd. (the "Action")(TSXV: RECO)
and (FRA: OXD); CUSIP: 75624R108.

Canadian domestic and foreign based investors that purchased shares
of Reconnaissance Energy Africa, Ltd. outside of the United States
of America are strongly encouraged to participate in the
settlement. The U.S. settlement is subject to different material
terms.

CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION MUST BE RECEIVED BY OCTOBER 22, 2024, so
please complete a claim form at the following Claim Form hosted by
NUVO Claims, Inc.

https://www.nuvoclaims.com/class-action/reconnaissance-africa

ABOUT BERGER MONTAGUE (CANADA) PC

Berger Montague (Canada) PC was previously known as Morganti & Co.,
P.C., a law firm that focused upon representing investors in
shareholder litigation. The Firm has litigated shareholder claims
against many mining companies counsel for investors in Allied
Nevada Gold Corp., BP plc, Canacol Energy Ltd., Detour Gold Corp.,
Ithaca Energy Inc., NovaGold Resources Inc., and Pretium Resources
Inc. The Firm understands investors' risks relating to investing in
energy and mining companies. [GN]

RSC CORAL: Ovalles Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------
NATHALIE L. OVALLES, on behalf of herself and other similarly
situated individuals, Plaintiff v. RSC CORAL REEF OPCO LLC d/b/a
THE OASIS AT CORAL REEF, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-22758 (S.D.
Fla., July 19, 2024) is an action to recover monetary damages for
unpaid overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff brings this suit, on behalf of herself and all other
current and former employees similarly situated, who worked for the
Defendant over 40 hours during one or more weeks on or after June
2023, without being compensated overtime wages pursuant to the
FLSA.

The Plaintiff was employed as a non-exempted, full-time, hourly
employee, from approximately June 1, 2003 to July 8, 2024, or 57
weeks. She had duties as a cook, and her last wage rate was $20 an
hour. Plaintiff's overtime rate should be $30 an hour.

RSC CORAL REEF OPCO LLC is a luxury senior living facility located
in Miami, Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

SAM'S WEST: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Frost & Frost Say
------------------------------------------------------------------
Clarence and Tammy Frost, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Sam's West Inc. d/b/a Sam's Club,
Defendant, Case No. 0:24-cv-02667-ECT-LIB (D. Minn., July 9, 2024)
accuses the Defendant of violating the Americans with Disabilities
Act and the Minnesota Human Rights Act by failing to provide its
online website content and services in a manner that is compatible
with screen reader technology.

The Plaintiffs allege that Defendant's policies regarding the
maintenance and operation of its website fail to ensure its website
is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals
with vision-related disabilities.

Headquartered in Bentonville, AR, Sam's West Inc. d/b/a Sam's Club
owns and operates a chain of warehouse club retail stores. It owns,
maintains, and controls the website, www.samsclub.com, which offers
groceries, household essentials, and accessories for sale,
including furniture, health and personal care products, home
improvement, mattresses, jewelry, and gardening materials. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

         Jason Gustafson, Esq.
         Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
         Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
         THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC
         80 South 8th Street, Suite 900
         Minneapolis, MN 55402
         Telephone: (763) 515-6110
         E-mail: jason@throndsetlaw.com
                 pat@throndselaw.com
                 chad@throndsetlaw.com

SANTA MONICA, CA: Black Lives Seek Initial OK of Class Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BLACK LIVES MATTER LOS
ANGELES, et al., v. City of Santa Monica et al., Case No.
2:21-cv-05253-CAS-AJR (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move the
Court on Aug. 5, to hear the unopposed motion on a shortened
schedule and to grant the proposed settlement in this case, certify
the stipulated class and authorize mailing and other notice to
class members.

The parties seek preliminary approval of the class action
settlement on a shortened motion schedule or, alternatively,
without a hearing. Pursuant to the order entered on Feb. 22, 2024,
following the notice of tentative settlement, the motion for class
approval was to be filed within 120 days of the Court's order or
the parties were to file quarterly status reports with the Court on
the progress of the settlement. The initial 120 days expired on
June 21, 2024.

The parties were delayed in getting approval by all parties.
This motion is based on the accompanying Memorandum of Law, the
proposed Preliminary Approval Order and exhibits and declarations
filed concurrently, as well as the files and records in this case,
and on such further evidence as may be presented at a hearing on
the motion.

The action arises out of the Defendants' arrest of participants in
a protest on May 31, 2020, and the early morning hours of June 1,
2020 in Santa Monica, responding to the killing of George Floyd by
police in Minneapolis a few days earlier.

The Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendants illegally ended the
assembly and unjustifiably detained and arrested the Plaintiffs,
holding them in unlawful conditions before releasing them.

The proposed settlement has now been signed by all parties. To
maximize efficiency and minimize costs, the parties agree to the
Law Office of Carol Sobel as class administrator at no more than
$23,000, far less than hiring a professional administrator.

The total monetary settlement is $2,300,000.00. Subject to court
approval, the proposed distribution of the settlement funds is as
follows:

   A. a class fund of $1,600,000.00 to be paid as follows:

      a. a maximum of $7,000 to each approved class member claim;

      b. incentive awards of $15,000 to the two remaining class
         representatives;

      c. a reverter for unclaimed funds and unspent administrative

         costs; and

   B. statutory attorney's fees and costs of $690,000.00, subject
to a
      separate motion for attorney’s fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
      section 1988 and Civil Code section 52.1(h) and with the
Court's
      approval.

All payments are to the Law Office of Carol A. Sobel Client Trust
Account.

The Defendants agree that Plaintiffs are prevailing parties and
further agree that $690,000 is consistent with the lodestar
Plaintiffs would have sought in a contested fee motion.

Santa Monica is a coastal city west of downtown Los Angeles.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=oLkYIJ at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Erin Darling, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF ERIN DARLING
          3435 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2910
          Los Angeles, CA 90010
          Telephone: (323) 736-2230
          E-mail: erin@erindarlinglaw.com

                - and -

          Carol A. Sobel, Esq.
          Weston Rowland, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF CAROL A. SOBEL
          2632 Wilshire Blvd., No. 552
          Santa Monica, CA 90403
          Telephone: (310) 393 -3055
          E-mail: carolsobellaw@gmail.com
                  rowland.weston@gmail.com

                - and -

          Paul Hoffman, Esq.
          John Washington, Esq.
          SCHONBRUN, SEPLOW, HARRIS,
          HOFFMAN & ZELDES LLP
          9415 Culver Blvd, #115
          Culver City, CA 90230
          Telephone: (310) 396-0731
          Facsimile: (310) 399-7040
          E-mail: hoffpaul@aol.com
                  jwashington@sshhlaw.com

SERITAGE GROWTH: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set August 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP notifies investors in Seritage Growth
Properties ("Seritage" or the "Company") (NYSE: SRG) of a class
action securities lawsuit.

CLASS DEFINITION: The lawsuit seeks to recover losses on behalf of
Seritage investors who were adversely affected by alleged
securities fraud between July 7, 2022 and May 10, 2024. Follow the
link below to get more information and be contacted by a member of
our team:

https://zlk.com/pslra-1/seritage-lawsuit-submission-form?prid=91380&wire=4


SRG investors may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. via email at
jlevi@levikorsinsky.com or by telephone at (212) 363-7500.

CASE DETAILS: The filed complaint alleges that defendants made
false statements and/or concealed that: (1) the Company lacked
effective internal controls regarding the identification and review
of impairment indicators for investments in real estate; (2) as a
result, the Company had overstated the value and projected gross
proceeds of certain real estate assets; and (3) as a result of the
foregoing, defendants' positive statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

WHAT'S NEXT? If you suffered a loss in Seritage during the relevant
time frame, you have until August 30, 2024 to request that the
Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability to share in any
recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

NO COST TO YOU: If you are a class member, you may be entitled to
compensation without payment of any out-of-pocket costs or fees.
There is no cost or obligation to participate.

WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY: Over the past 20 years, the team at Levi &
Korsinsky has secured hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved
shareholders and built a track record of winning high-stakes cases.
Our firm has extensive expertise representing investors in complex
securities litigation and a team of over 70 employees to serve our
clients. For seven years in a row, Levi & Korsinsky has ranked in
ISS Securities Class Action Services' Top 50 Report as one of the
top securities litigation firms in the United States.

CONTACT:

     Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
     Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
     Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
     33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor
     New York, NY 10004
     jlevi@levikorsinsky.com
     Tel: (212) 363-7500
     Fax: (212) 363-7171
     www.zlk.com [GN]

SMACKED LLC: Saunders Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SAUNDERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SMACKED LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-05479 (S.D.N.Y., July 19, 2024) is a civil action against
Defendant for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate the Defendant's website https://www.getsmacked.online 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.

The Plaintiff was injured when attempting to access Defendant's
Website on July 2024, from his home in Bronx County, in an effort
to search for and purchase Defendant's products and services, which
would assist Plaintiff in his daily quest to overcome his physical
limitations, but encountered various access barriers that denied
him full and equal access to Defendant's online goods, content, and
services. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to and
enjoyment of the goods, benefits, and services of the Websites, has
caused Plaintiff to suffer an injury in fact due to Plaintiff's
inability to purchase the desired items, which is a concrete and
particularized injury, and is a direct result of Defendant's
conduct, says the suit.

The Plaintiff now seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so
that Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.

Smacked LLC is a state licensed cannabis shop that owns and
maintains the website,.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:
   
          Jon L. Norinsberg, Esq.
          Bennitta L. Joseph, Esq.
          JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC
          110 East 59th Street, Suite 2300
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 227-5700
          Facsimile: (212) 656-1889
          E-mail: jon@norinsberglaw.com
                  bennitta@employeejustice.com

SNAPCHAT INC: Agrees $35M Settlement Over Platform Misuse
---------------------------------------------------------
Arnia, writing for Home At Last, reports that in 2024, Snapchat
faced a significant lawsuit due to allegations of aiding drug
dealers who exploited young users on the platform. This article
breaks down what happened, the settlement details, eligibility
requirements, and important payment dates.

What is the Snapchat Class Action Settlement?

In 2022, a lawsuit was filed against Snapchat, accusing the
platform of helping drug dealers target the younger generation.
Snapchat's parent company, Snap Inc., was accused of misleading
users and not properly notifying them when their snaps were
screenshotted, especially by iPhone users who found ways to bypass
this detection.

Lawsuit Payment Amount 2024

Snapchat's parent company agreed to a settlement of $35 million.
Each person who filed a claim is eligible to receive $16.35.
Snapchat was accused of misusing data collection practices and
sharing users' locations with third parties. Additionally, there
were allegations of Snapchat filters capturing biometric data,
violating privacy policies.

Eligibility for the Snapchat Class Action Settlement

To be eligible for the Snapchat class action settlement:

  -- You must be a US resident.

  -- You must have used Snapchat or its filters since November 17,
2015.

  -- Immigrants are not eligible as the settlement only applies to
US citizens under BIPA (Biometric Information Privacy Act).

Payment Dates for the Snapchat Class Action Settlement

The settlement payments are set to be distributed by January 23,
2024. Those who opted for paper checks should receive their
payments within 30 days via postal service. Unfortunately, the
application period to file claims has closed, but those who filed
on time will receive their payments electronically. If you haven't
received your payment, visit the official website for assistance.

Overview of the Snapchat Class Action Settlement

The lawsuit highlighted a critical issue: Snapchat became a
platform for drug dealers targeting teenagers with drugs like
fentanyl, a potent and dangerous opioid. Fentanyl, often misused
without a prescription, can lead to fatal consequences, especially
for young people. This lawsuit brought attention to the need for
better safety measures on social media platforms.

The Snapchat class action settlement is a significant step toward
addressing the misuse of social media platforms for illegal
activities. By understanding the details of the settlement,
eligibility criteria, and payment dates, users can stay informed
and take necessary actions. Always ensure to keep updated with
official sources for the latest information. [GN]

SOCALO DISCOUNT: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Aquino Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE AQUINO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SOCALO DISCOUNT FOOD INC. d/b/a EL ZOCALO
SUPERMARKET; and JUAN TEJADA, Defendants, Case No.
8:24-cv-01684-KKM-AAS (M.D. Fla., July 17, 2024) seeks to recover
from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation,
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Aquino was employed by the Defendant as a cook.

SOCALO DISCOUNT FOOD INC. d/b/a EL ZOCALO SUPERMARKET is a
family-run grocer for Mexican, Caribbean & American staples, plus a
casual cafe & a bake shop. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
          ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
          9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
          Miami, FL 33156
          Telephone: (305) 446-1500
          Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
          Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com

SOUTH FLORIDA: Fails to Implement Security Protocols, Nobel Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
DAS NOBEL, individually, and on behalf of all other similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SOUTH FLORIDA STADIUM LLC D/B/A HARD ROCK
STADIUM, CONFEDERACION SUDAMERICANA DE FUTBOL D/B/A CONMEBOL,
CONFEDERATION OF NORTH, CENTRAL AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN ASSOCIATION
FOOTBALL D/B/A CONCACAF, AND BEST CROWD MANAGEMENT, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-22751 (S.D. Fla., July 19, 2024) seeks
redress for a class of invitee fans who paid money to attend the
Copa America Final football match between Argentine and Columbia at
Hard Rock Stadium but were denied entry because of Defendants'
failure to implement adequate security protocols that resulted in
mass chaos, injuries, and ultimately, the Defendants' decision to
open the stadium to thousands of unticketed fans and to exclude
ticketed invitee fans like Plaintiff and the Class Members.

The Copa America Final Match was held at Hard Rock Stadium on July
14, 2024. The Defendants sold over 65,000 tickets to invitees like
Plaintiff to attend the Final Match at Hard Rock Stadium in Miami
Gardens, Florida.

As a direct result of Defendants' failures to implement appropriate
security and safety measures and the decision to open the gates to
unticketed fans that invaded the Hard Rock Stadium, Defendants
permitted unticketed fans to steal the seats paid for by Plaintiff
and the Class. Specifically, the Defendants admitted thousands of
unticketed fans and as a result, denied entry to thousands of
ticketed fans, including Plaintiff and the Class, says the suit.

The Plaintiff and the proposed Class were damaged as a result of
Defendants' negligent conduct and seek redress by way of a full
refund of their ticket purchases, plus interest, and damages
incurred as a result of their corresponding travel expenses. In the
alternative, the Plaintiff seeks disgorgement of all profits that
Defendants generated from the sale of the Class Members' tickets,
as allowing Defendants to retain profits from Plaintiff and Class
Members' purchases would unjustly enrich the Defendants.

South Florida Stadium LLC is a multi-purpose stadium located in
Miami Gardens, Florida.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffrey L. Newsome, Esq.
          Janet R. Varnell, Esq.
          Brian W. Warwick, Esq.
          Christopher J. Brochu, Esq.
          Pamela G. Levinson, Esq.
          VARNELL & WARWICK, P.A.
          400 N Ashley Drive, Suite 1900
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Telephone: (352) 753-8600
          Facsimile: (352) 504-3301
          E-mail: jnewsome@vandwlaw.com
                  jvarnell@vandwlaw.com
                  bwarwick@vandwlaw.com
                  cbrochu@vandwlaw.com
                  plevinson@vandwlaw.com
                  ckoerner@vandwlaw.com

SQUISHABLE.COM: Class Settlement in Borovoy Gets Initial Nod
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRISTINE BOROVOY, an
individual, and on behalf of classes of similarly situated
individuals, v. SQUISHABLE.COM, INC., a New York corporation, Case
No. 1:23-cv-03660-RA (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Ronnie Abrams
entered a preliminary approval order as follows:

Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only. The Settlement
Agreement provides for a Settlement Class defined as follows:

    "All persons residing in the United States whose PII was
involved
    in the Data Incident."

The Settlement Agreement also provides for the following California
Subclass:

    "All persons residing in the State of California whose PII was

    involved in the Data Incident."

    Specifically excluded from the Settlement Class and California

    Subclass are (i) all Persons who timely and validly request
    exclusion from the Class; (ii) the Judge assigned to evaluate
the
    fairness of this settlement; and (iii) any other Person found
by a
    court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law
of
    initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity
    occurrence of the Data Incident or who pleads nolo contendere
to
    any such charge.

Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e)(1), the Court
finds that giving notice is justified. The Court finds that it will
likely be able to approve the proposed Settlement as fair,
reasonable, and adequate. The Court also finds that it will likely
be able to certify the Settlement Class for purposes of judgment on
the Settlement because it meets all of the requirements of Rule
23(a) and the requirements of Rule 23(b)(3).

Settlement Class Representative and Settlement Class Counsel. The
Court finds that Plaintiff will likely satisfy the requirements of
Rule 23(e)(2)(A) and should be appointed as the Class
Representative.

Additionally, the Court finds that Kiley Grombacher of Bradley
Grombacher LLP and Mason A. Barney of Siri & Glimstad LLP will
likely satisfy the requirements of Rule 23(e)(2)(A) and should be
appointed as Class Counsel pursuant to Rule 23(g)(1).

Preliminary Settlement Approval. The Court finds the Settlement is
fair, reasonable, and adequate to warrant providing notice of the
Settlement to the Settlement Class and accordingly is preliminarily
approved.

A Final Approval Hearing shall be held on Feb. 6, 2025, at 2:00
p.m., at the Thurgood Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley
Square, Courtroom 1506.

The Court appoints KCC as the Settlement Administrator, with
responsibility for class notice and settlement administration. The
Settlement Administrator is directed to perform all tasks the
Settlement Agreement requires. The Settlement Administrator's fees
will be paid pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yLfCPJ at no extra
charge.[CC]

STAPLES INC: Weiler Sues Over Bait and Switch Business Scheme
-------------------------------------------------------------
ERIN WEILER, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. STAPLES, INC., a Delaware corporation, Defendant, Case
No. 1:24-cv-11895 (D. Mass., July 22, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for breach of contract, unjust enrichment,
conversion, and fraud due to its alleged systematic "bait and
switch" scheme through its online AutoRestock program.

According to the complaint, Staples "baits" customers by promising
significant discounts of up to 25% off the purchase price of most
products if customers agree for those products to be automatically
shipped in the future, only to tack on an undisclosed $9.95
shipping fee on all items under $25. The alleged scheme and
deception are intentional, designed to entice customers away from
competitors that properly disclose applicable shipping fees or have
free shipping on eligible items. The checkout process has been
designed so that customers see one (low) price before and during
checkout, but are automatically billed a higher price that includes
a $9.95 shipping fee, even though the potential for the shipping
fee is not disclosed at any point prior to the completion of the
transaction, the suit asserts.

The Plaintiff purchased Staples Heavy Duty Shipping Packing Tape on
Staples' website on June 22, 2024. She purchased the product using
her credit card through Staples' AutoRestock feature on its
website.

Staples, Inc. is an American office supply retail company
headquartered in Framingham, Massachusetts.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joel D. Smith, Esq.
          SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC   
          867 Boylston Street 5th Floor #1520
          Boston, MA 02116
          Telephone: (617) 377-4704
          Facsimile: (888) 410-0415
          E-mail: joel@skclassactions.com

               - and -

          Yeremey O. Krivoshey, Esq.
          SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC
          166 Geary Str STE 1500-1507
          San Francisco, CA 94108
          Telephone: (415) 839-7077
          Facsimile: (888) 410-0415
          E-mail: yeremey@skclassactions.com

TARGET CORP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Soares Alleges
------------------------------------------------------
FLORIZEL SOARES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TARGET CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No.
2477CV00736 (Sup. Comm. Mass., July 22, 2024) seeks to recover from
the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under Massachusetts
Wage Act.

Plaintiff Soares was employed by the Defendant as a staff.

Target Corporation operates general merchandise discount stores.
The Company focuses on merchandising operations which includes
general merchandise and food discount stores and a fully integrated
online business. Target also offers credit to qualified applicants
through its branded proprietary credit cards. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Benjamin Knox Steffans, Esq.
          STEFFANS LEGAL PLLC
          10 Wendell Ave., Ext. Suite 208
          Pittsfield, MA 01201
          Telephone: (413) 418-4176
          Email: bsteffans@steffanslegal.com

TCK SANKAR: Minyety Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN MINYETY,
Individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated,
v. TCK SANKAR LLC AND TIMRAH SANKAR, Jointly and Severally, Case
No. 1:23-cv-09930-JMF (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Jesse Furman
entered conditional certification and notice order:

   1) A collective action of the following individuals is
      conditionally certified: All persons whom Defendants employ
and
      have employed as painters, plasterers, floorers or in similar

      construction worker positions at any time since May 23, 2020,
to
      the entry of judgment in this case. ("Collective Action
      Members").

   2) The Collective Action Notice and Consent to Become A Party
      Plaintiff form, are approved and Plaintiff is authorized to
      distribute them to the Collective Action Members.

   3) The Defendants shall produce to Plaintiff within ten 10 days
of
      this Order, in electronic, native format (i.e., Excel
      spreadsheet), all names, employment dates, job titles,
mailing
      addresses, email addresses and telephone numbers (including,

      land lines and mobile) in Defendants’ custody or control
for
      the Collective Action Members.

   4) The Plaintiff shall mail the Collective Action Notice
Packages
      within 20 days of receiving the complete Collective Action
      Mailing List from Defendants;

   5) Beginning from the date the Collective Action Notice Packages

      are mailed, the Collective Action Members shall have 60 days
to
      email, fax or mail (with the post-mark being the
determinative
      date) their Consent to Become a Party Plaintiff form to
      Plaintiff. The Plaintiff shall promptly file any such form
with
      the Clerk of Court.

   6) Within 10 days of entry of this Order and until the last day
of
      the Optin Period, Defendants shall conspicuously post in
their
      workplace a full and correct copy of the Collective Action
      Notice Package. At a minimum, Defendants will post the
      Collective Action Notice Package where it posts other
mandatory
      employment-related posters.

On Nov. 9, 2023, the Plaintiff Jonathan Minyety filed a putative
class and collective action complaint under federal and state wage
and hour laws on behalf of herself and similarly situated
individuals.

A copy of the Court's order dated July 22, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bDnOTD at no extra
charge.[CC]



TELLURIAN INC: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Woodside Energy
--------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating Tellurian Inc. (NYSE: TELL), relating to its proposed
merger with Woodside Energy Group Ltd. Under the terms of the
agreement, Tellurian shareholders will be entitled to receive $1.00
per share in cash.

Click here for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/tellurian-inc/. It is free and there
is no cost or obligation to you.

Before you hire a law firm, you should talk to a lawyer and ask:

     1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
     2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
     3. What cases did you recover money in and how much?

About Monteverde & Associates PC

Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders . . .
and we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are
a national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.

No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in any of the above listed companies and have concerns or
wish to obtain additional information free of charge, please visit
our website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.

Contact:

     Juan Monteverde, Esq.
     MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
     The Empire State Building
     350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
     New York, NY 10118
     United States of America
     jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
     Tel: (212) 971-1341 [GN]

TWO RATS: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Fisher Alleges
---------------------------------------------------
BRIAN A. FISHER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TWO RATS INC. d/b/a CRAZY HORSE TAVERN ON
KIRKWOOD, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-01224-RLY-TAB (S.D. Ind.,
July 22, 2024) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff Fisher was employed by the Defendant as a bartender and
server.

TWO RATS INC. d/b/a CRAZY HORSE TAVERN ON KIRKWOOD owns and
operates a restaurant in Bloomington, Monroe County, Indiana and
known as Crazy Horse Tavern. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert P. Kondras, Jr., Esq.
          HASSLER KONDRAS MILLER LLP
          100 Cherry St.
          Terre Haute, IN 47807
          Telephone: (812) 232-9691
          Email: kondras@hkmlawfirm.com

UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: NCPA Sues Over Massive Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------
The National Community Pharmacists Association, along with dozens
of providers from multiple states, filed a class action lawsuit
late last Friday, July 19, against UnitedHealth Group and its
subsidiaries Change Healthcare and Optum for losses resulting from
the massive cyber-attack earlier this year.

"UnitedHealth Group and its subsidiaries need to be held
accountable for their lax security measures and for their failure
to provide our members with adequate support and assurances to
alleviate the financial losses our members suffered," said NCPA CEO
B. Douglas Hoey. Read the whole press release here.

NCPA is representing all retail pharmacies that were burned by the
data breach. If you're one of them, there's no need to do anything
now. The litigation won't be resolved for quite a while. But if you
have questions, you can reach out to NCPA's chief legal counsel,
matt.seiler@ncpa.org. [GN]

VIA RENEWABLES: Amburgey Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA AMBURGEY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VIA RENEWABLES INC., et al., Defendants,
Case No. 2024-0762 (Del. Ch., July 19, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for breach of fiduciary duties.

Via Renewables Inc. is an independent retail energy services
company in Houston, Texas. [BN]

VINTAGE CAPITAL: Gale et al. Sue Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty
--------------------------------------------------------------
BRIAN GALE, MARK NOBLE, TERRY PHILIPPAS, and LAWRENCE BASS,
Plaintiffs v. VINTAGE CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC, BRIAN KAHN, ANDREW
LAURENCE, MATTHEW AVRIL, and B. RILEY FINANCIAL, INC., Defendants,
Case No. 2024-0726-LWW (Del. Ch., July 12, 2024) asserts breach of
fiduciary duty and related claims stemming from the August 21, 2023
management led take-private of the Franchise Group, Inc., in
financial partnership with B. Riley Financial, Inc. and Irradiant
Partners.

While the Company's Definitive Proxy Statement and other public
filings stated that the sale process leading to the Merger began in
mid-March of 2023 with an unsolicited offer to acquire the
Franchise Group, Inc. for $30 per share by Kahn's long-time
investing partner B. Riley, that was not true. Kahn had begun
exploring a take-private transaction at least as early as January
2023. Then Kahn, through the Franchise Group, Inc., approached
Jefferies LLC about providing potential debt financing for a
take-private transaction and personally engaged in discussions with
Jefferies for the next two months. Moreover, the Proxy fails to
disclose that: (i) Kahn solicited Jefferies' services with respect
to potentially financing debt for a take-private transaction; (ii)
Jefferies signed a confidentiality agreement in January 2023 and
received various sets of Franchise Group, Inc's projections
(notably different than what Jefferies used for purposes of its
fairness opinion for the Merger); and (iii) Jefferies and Franchise
Group, Inc's management engaged in continued discussions through
March 2023, each of which occurred just prior to the Special
Committee retaining Jefferies as its "independent" financial
advisor, says the suit.

Vintage Capital Management, LLC is a private and public equity
investor specializing in the consumer, aerospace and defense, and
manufacturing sectors. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Daniel E. Meyer, Esq.
          BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
          500 Delaware Avenue, Suite 901
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 364-3600
          E-mail: daniel.meyer@blbglaw.com

                  - and -

          Kimberly A. Evans, Esq.
          Irene R. Lax, Esq.
          Robert Erikson, Esq.
          BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
          3801 Kennett Pike, Suite C-305
          Wilmington, DE 19807
          Telephone: (302) 499-3600
          E-mail: kim@blockleviton.com
                  irene@blockleviton.com
                  robby@blockleviton.com

                  - and -

          Jeroen van Kwawegen, Esq.
          Ed Timlin, Esq.
          Christopher J. Orrico, Esq.
          Shiva Mohan, Esq.
          BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
          1251 Avenue of the Americas
          New York, NY 10020
          Telephone: (212) 554-1400

                 - and -

          J. Daniel Albert, Esq.
          Michael McCutcheon, Esq.
          KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
          280 King of Prussia Road
          Radnor, PA 19087
          Telephone: (610) 667-7706

                  - and -

          Jason Leviton, Esq.
          Joseph Kiefer, Esq.
          BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
          260 Franklin Street, Suite 1860
          Boston, MA 02110
          Telephone: (617) 398-5600

VPC IMPACT: $7MM Class Settlement to be Heard on Sept. 26
---------------------------------------------------------
TO: All persons or entities who owned Class A common stock of VPC
Impact Acquisition Holdings II as of March 21, 2023 and had their
shares redeemed (the "Settlement Class"):

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rules 23 and 23.1 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York (the "Court"),
that the ATG Fund II LLC v. VPC Impact Acquisition Holdings Sponsor
II, LLC, et al, Civil Action No. 23-1978-JSR putative derivative
and class action (the "Action") is pending in the Court.

YOU ARE ALSO NOTIFIED that Lead Plaintiff, ATG Fund II LLC, in the
Action, on behalf of itself and the Settlement Class, has reached a
proposed settlement of the Action for $7,000,000 in cash (the
"Settlement"). If approved, the Settlement will resolve all claims
in the Action.

A hearing will be held on September 26, 2024, at 4:00 p.m., before
the Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, either in person at the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, Courtroom 14B
of the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl
Street, New York, New York 10007-1312, or by telephone or
videoconference (in the discretion of the Court), to determine,
among other things: (i) whether the proposed Settlement should be
approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (ii) whether, for
purposes of the proposed Settlement only, the Action should be
certified as a class action on behalf of the Settlement Class, Lead
Plaintiff, along with Funicular Funds LP, and Camac Fund LP, should
be certified as Class Representatives for the Settlement Class, and
Lead Counsel should be appointed as Class Counsel for the
Settlement Class; (iii) whether the Action should be dismissed with
prejudice against Defendants, and the Releases specified and
described in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated as
of June 12, 2024 (and in the Notice) should be granted; (iv)
whether the proposed Plan of Allocation should be approved as fair
and reasonable; (v) whether Lead Counsel's motion for an award of
attorneys' fees and expenses, and Lead Plaintiff's request for an
incentive award, should be approved; and (vi) any other matters
that may properly be brought before the Court in connection with
the Settlement.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, your rights may be
affected by the pending Action and the Settlement. More information
can be found at www.vihiisettlement.com.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, you have the right to
object to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of Allocation,
or Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees, incentive award and
litigation expenses. Any objections must be filed with the Court
and delivered to Lead Counsel and counsel specified in the Notice
such that they are received no later than September 5, 2024, in
accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice.

Please do not contact the Court, the Office of the Clerk of the
Court, Defendants, or Defendants' Counsel regarding this notice.
All questions about this Notice, the proposed Settlement, or your
eligibility to participate in the Settlement should be directed to
Lead Counsel for the Settlement Class:

Morris Kandinov LLP
Aaron T. Morris, Esq.
305 Broadway, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10007
aaron@moka.law
(332) 240-4024


VPC IMPACT: Agrees to Settle Class Action Lawsuit for $7-Mil.
-------------------------------------------------------------
All persons or entities who owned Class A common stock of VPC
Impact Acquisition Holdings II as of March 21, 2023 and had their
shares redeemed (the "Settlement Class"):

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rules 23 and 23.1 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York (the "Court"),
that the ATG Fund II LLC v. VPC Impact Acquisition Holdings Sponsor
II, LLC, et al, Civil Action No. 23-1978-JSR putative derivative
and class action (the "Action") is pending in the Court.

YOU ARE ALSO NOTIFIED that Lead Plaintiff, ATG Fund II LLC, in the
Action, on behalf of itself and the Settlement Class, has reached a
proposed settlement of the Action for $7,000,000 in cash (the
"Settlement"). If approved, the Settlement will resolve all claims
in the Action.

A hearing will be held on September 26, 2024, at 4:00 p.m., before
the Honorable Jed S. Rakoff, either in person at the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, Courtroom 14B
of the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl
Street, New York, New York 10007-1312, or by telephone or
videoconference (in the discretion of the Court), to determine,
among other things: (i) whether the proposed Settlement should be
approved as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (ii) whether, for
purposes of the proposed Settlement only, the Action should be
certified as a class action on behalf of the Settlement Class, Lead
Plaintiff, along with Funicular Funds LP, and Camac Fund LP, should
be certified as Class Representatives for the Settlement Class, and
Lead Counsel should be appointed as Class Counsel for the
Settlement Class; (iii) whether the Action should be dismissed with
prejudice against Defendants, and the Releases specified and
described in the Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement dated as
of June 12, 2024 (and in the Notice) should be granted; (iv)
whether the proposed Plan of Allocation should be approved as fair
and reasonable; (v) whether Lead Counsel's motion for an award of
attorneys' fees and expenses, and Lead Plaintiff's request for an
incentive award, should be approved; and (vi) any other matters
that may properly be brought before the Court in connection with
the Settlement.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, your rights may be
affected by the pending Action and the Settlement. More information
can be found at www.vihiisettlement.com.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, you have the right to
object to the proposed Settlement, the proposed Plan of Allocation,
or Lead Counsel's motion for attorneys' fees, incentive award and
litigation expenses. Any objections must be filed with the Court
and delivered to Lead Counsel and counsel specified in the Notice
such that they are received no later than September 5, 2024, in
accordance with the instructions set forth in the Notice.

Please do not contact the Court, the Office of the Clerk of the
Court, Defendants, or Defendants' Counsel regarding this notice.
All questions about this Notice, the proposed Settlement, or your
eligibility to participate in the Settlement should be directed to
Lead Counsel for the Settlement Class:

     Morris Kandinov LLP
     Aaron T. Morris, Esq.
     305 Broadway, 7th Floor
     New York, NY 10007
     aaron@moka.law
     (332) 240-4024 [GN]

WAKEFERN FOOD: Barnes Seek to Certify Class of New York Purchasers
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Barnes et al., v. Wakefern
Food Corp., Case No. 7:22-cv-06089-PMH (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs
ask the Court to enter an order granting motion to certify a class
of all New York purchasers of (regular) graham crackers sold by
Wakefern Food Corp., under the Bowl & Basket brand, during the
relevant statutes of limitations.

The Plaintiffs satisfy "the injury prong of sections 349 and 350 of
the GBL," because "they overpaid based on the Defendant's
inaccurate representations [that it contained a predominant amount
of whole grain graham flour]." The measure of each Class Member's
damages is the amount of the "price premium" inherent in the
Product that Class Members purchased.

Certification is also warranted pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
23(c)(4), "with respect to the particular issues" of Defendant's
allegedly deceptive conduct, liability, and damages, based on GBL
section 349(h) and 350-e(3).

The Plaintiffs allege the labeling of (regular) graham crackers
sold by Wakefern, under the Bowl & Basket brand, was misleading
with respect to the amount and proportion of whole grains.

Wakefern supplies food and consumer products.

A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated July 22, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7wG45j at no extra
charge.[CC]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
          SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 412
          Great Neck NY 11021
          Telephone: (516) 268-7080
          Facsimile: (516) 234-7800
          E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com



WALMART INC: Court Approves $2.5MM Wage Claims Class Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Laurel Kalser, writing for HRDive, reports that under a July 15
federal court-approved settlement, Walmart agreed to pay $2.5
million to resolve allegations it failed to compensate about 81,000
hourly workers in Arizona for their time spent undergoing
mandatory, pre-shift COVID-19 screening.

Each screening took an average of 10-15 minutes, the class-action
complaint in Arrison, et. al. v. Walmart alleged. Typically,
workers would wait in line before their shift to have their
temperatures scanned, answer questions about their health, travel
and exposure to COVID-19 and, if given the OK, walk to the other
end of the store to clock in, according to the complaint.

The workers sought payment under Arizona wage law. Pursuant to the
settlement, each class member will receive approximately 50% of
their potential claim based on the number of weeks they worked in
an Arizona Walmart store from April 10, 2020, through February 28,
2022. In return, they will release their class claims against the
company. Walmart did not respond to a request for comment prior to
press time.

Employers sometimes call upon workers to perform pre- or post-shift
tasks for the health, safety or security of the workplace.

However, when employees go unpaid for this time, such requirements
can lead to wage and hour lawsuits, which often involve class
actions ending with high-priced settlements.

For example, in 2022, Apple agreed to pay $30.4 million to settle a
class-action lawsuit by workers in California. The workers claimed
they were entitled to wages for undergoing off-the-clock security
bag checks when they left for meal breaks and after their shift
ended.

California's highest court found the workers were entitled to
compensation under state law because they were "clearly under
Apple's control while awaiting, and during, the exit searches."
Specifically, Apple confined employees to the premises and warned
them they could be disciplined or discharged if they didn't submit
to the bag checks, the court said.

Following the onset of COVID-19, pre-shift COVID screenings
triggered a wave of new lawsuits. In 2021, for instance, a former
Victoria's Secret employee filed a class-action under California
law to get paid for the time spent undergoing pre-shift temperature
checks. In March, a federal district court lifted a stay in the
case and let it continue.

Employees pursuing compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act
for off-the-clock work must meet a somewhat different standard, per
a 2014 ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court.

In that case, the justices unanimously rejected claims by warehouse
workers that the FLSA entitled them to be paid for the time they
spent undergoing security bag checks during meal breaks and after
clocking out. The justices said this was because the bag checks
were not a "principal activity" and not "integral and
indispensable" to the job the workers were hired to perform.

The workers in the Apple case also brought FLSA claims, but the
court dismissed them based on the Supreme Court's 2014 ruling.

In the context of employees seeking pay for pre-shift COVID
screenings under the FLSA, the U.S. Department of Labor has weighed
in on what the ruling means for them.

In a guidance, the DOL explains that under the FLSA, an employer is
required to pay for all the hours worked, including the time before
an employee begins their normal working hours "if the task [the
employee is] required to perform is necessary for the [employee's]
work."

In other words, a temperature check is likely to be compensable if
it is "integral and indispensable" to the employee's job, the DOL
notes.

The plaintiffs in Walmart case alleged that their pre-shift COVID
screenings were necessary to their principal work and "to ensure a
safe environment for Walmart's customers." In its order approving
the settlement, the court said it agreed with their counsel that
their recovery was "substantial . . . particularly considering the
percentage of recovery in similar cases within this circuit." [GN]

WALMART INC: Faces John Suit Over Mislabeled Cereal Bars
--------------------------------------------------------
VALERIE JOHN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. WALMART INC., Defendant, Case No.
612823/2024 (N.Y. Sup., Nassau Cty., July 22, 2024) arises from the
Defendant's false and deceptive representations and omissions of
its "Fruit & Grain Cereal Bars," in violation of the New York
General Business Law.

According to the complaint, despite the Defendant's representations
of "Naturally Flavored," the dark red filling of two bars, next to
two freshly picked cherries with their stems intact, in front of a
bowl of overflowing plump cherries, described as being "Made With
Real Fruit Filling," in packaging with various shades of red, the
Product's cherry taste is derived from artificial flavoring
ingredients. This is not disclosed on the front label or the fine
print on the back in the ingredient list, listed in order of
predominance, which confirms the fruit filling contains cherries
and natural flavor, but also an ingredient identified as "malic
acid." This confirmed the product contains more artificial cherry
flavor than natural flavors, and natural cherry flavor, because
malic acid is listed ahead of natural flavor on the ingredient
list, says the suit.

The Plaintiff seeks to represent a class comprising of all persons
in New York who purchased the product in New York during the
statutes of limitations for each cause of action alleged.

Walmart Inc. is an American multinational retail corporation that
operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount department stores, and
grocery stores in the United States, headquartered in Bentonville,
Arkansas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Spencer Sheehan, Esq.
          SHEEHAN & ASSOCIATES P.C.
          60 Cuttermill Rd Ste 412
          Great Neck, NY 11021
          Telephone: (516) 268-7080
          Facsimile: (516) 234-7800
          E-mail: spencer@spencersheehan.com

WESTERN MESQUITE: Sornia Labor Suit Removed to S.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled GUILLERMO L. SORNIA, an individual, on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. WESTERN
MESQUITE MINES, INC., a Nevada Corporation; EQUINOX GOLD CORP, a
Canadian Corporation; NEW GOLD CANADA, INC., a Canadian
Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
ECU003523, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California, County of Imperial, to the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California on July 9, 2024.

The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of California assigned
Case No. 3:24-cv-01181-L-DDL to the proceeding.

The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.

Western Mesquite Mines, Inc. is a mining company based in Imperial
County, California. [BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

        James P. Carter, Esq.
        Jordan Wysocki, Esq.
        Victoria L. Cendejas, Esq.
        JACKSON LEWIS P.C.
        200 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 500
        Irvine, CA 92618
        Telephone: (949) 885-1360
        E-mail: James.Carter@jacksonlewis.com
                Jordan.Wysocki@jacksonlewis.com
                Victoria.Cendejas@jacksonlewis.com

Y-MABS THERAPEUTICS: Hearing for Class Settlement Set October 28
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP announces that the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York has approved the following
announcement of a proposed class action settlement that would
benefit purchasers of stock of Y-mAbs Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ:
YMAB):

NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

TO: ALL PERSONS OR ENTITIES WHO PURCHASED OR OTHERWISE ACQUIRED THE
STOCK OF Y-MABS THERAPEUTICS, INC. ("Y-MABS") BETWEEN OCTOBER 6,
2020 AND OCTOBER 28, 2022, BOTH DATES INCLUSIVE.

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 New York, that a hearing will be held
on October 28, 2024, at 11:00 a.m. before the Honorable Arun
Subramanian, United States District Judge, at the courthouse for
the United States District Court, Southern District of New York,
Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse, 500 Pearl St.,
Courtroom 15A, New York, NY 10007 for the purpose of determining:
(1) whether the proposed Settlement of the claims in the
above-captioned Action for consideration in the amount of nineteen
million six hundred fifty thousand dollars ($19,650,000.00) should
be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2)
whether the Plan of Allocation is fair and reasonable, and should
be approved; (3) whether Lead Counsel's application for an award of
attorneys' fees of up to one-third (33 1/3%) of the Settlement
Amount, and reimbursement of out-of-pocket expenses of not more
than two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000.00) plus interest on
such fees and expenses, and a compensatory award for Lead Plaintiff
of not more than ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00), all to be paid
from the Settlement Fund, should be approved; and (4) whether this
Action should be dismissed with prejudice against the Defendants as
set forth in the Stipulation of Settlement dated June 26, 2024 (the
"Stipulation") filed with the Court.

You are receiving this Notice because the Court has certified a
class of investors for settlement purposes only ("Settlement
Class") and you may be a member of the Settlement Class
("Settlement Class Member"). The proposed Settlement Class will
consist of all persons or entities who purchased, or otherwise
acquired, the stock of Y-mAbs between October 6, 2020 and October
28, 2022, both dates inclusive (the "Settlement Class Period").
Excluded from the Settlement Class are the Defendants; members of
their immediate families and their affiliates; any entity in which
Defendants had a controlling interest during the Settlement Class
Period; any person who served as an officer or director of Y-mAbs
during the Settlement Class Period; the judges presiding over the
Action and the immediate family members of such judges; any persons
or entities listed on the Settlement Exclusion List; and the
successors, heirs, and assigns of any excluded person.

If you purchased or acquired Y-mAbs stock during the Settlement
Class Period, your rights may be affected by this Action and the
Settlement thereof, including the release and extinguishment of
claims you may possess relating to your ownership interest in
Y-mAbs stock. If you have not received a more-detailed, long-form
Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action, Motion for
Attorneys' Fees and Expenses, and Settlement Fairness Hearing
("Notice") and the Proof of Claim and Release Form, you may obtain
copies of these documents and the Stipulation by downloading them
at the Claims Administrator's website at:
www.strategicclaims.net/Y-mAbs/. If you are unable to do so, you
may contact the Claims Administrator to obtain copies:

   Y-mAbs Therapeutics, Inc. Securities Litigation
   c/o Strategic Claims Services
   P.O. Box 230
   600 N. Jackson St., Ste. 205
   Media, PA 19063
   Tel: (866) 274-4004
   Fax: (610) 565-7985
   Email: info@strategicclaims.net

The case has been litigated since January 2023. Lead Plaintiff
alleges that, in violation of the U.S. federal securities laws,
Defendants made material misrepresentations and/or omissions of
material fact in public statements to the investing public
regarding Y-mAbs product candidate omburtamab. Defendants have
denied and continue to deny these allegations and that they
committed any act or omission giving rise to any liability or
violation of the law. The Settlement will resolve the lawsuit and
the Released Claims as to the Defendants and other Released
Parties. Lead Plaintiff and the Settlement Class are represented by
Lead Counsel, who may be reached by contacting: Michael J. Wernke,
Pomerantz LLP, 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor, New York, NY 10016,
(212) 661-1100.

If you are a Settlement Class Member, in order to share in the
distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must submit a Proof of
Claim and Release Form received no later than October 7, 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 want to be excluded from the Settlement Class, you must
submit to the Claims Administrator a request for exclusion, in
accordance with the procedures set forth in the long-form Notice,
so that it is received no later than October 7, 2024. 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 Stipulation.

If you are a Settlement Class Member and do not exclude yourself,
you can object to the Settlement, Plan of Allocation, or Lead
Counsel's request for an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement
of expenses and compensatory award to Lead Plaintiff in the manner
and form explained in the detailed Notice and received no later
than October 7, 2024.

Any questions regarding the Settlement should be directed to Lead
Counsel for the Settlement Class.

PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT, THE CLERK'S OFFICE, THE
DEFENDANTS, OR DEFENDANTS' COUNSEL REGARDING THIS NOTICE.

Dated: July 1, 2024
BY ORDER OF THE COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK [GN]

YOTTA TECHNOLOGIES: Baumgartner Alleges Inaccessible Yotta Accounts
-------------------------------------------------------------------
ERIKA BAUMGARTNER, DANIEL LOPEZ and SHAUN KRAMM, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. YOTTA
TECHNOLOGIES INC., EVOLVE BANK & TRUST, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-05535 (S.D.N.Y., July 22, 2024) is an action brought by
Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly
situated customers of Yotta arising from a service disruption that
occurred on or about June 1, 2024 and continues in part to this
day.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs and Class members were
prevented from accessing their Yotta accounts for months -- denying
access to the only source of money for many. During the Service
Disruption, Plaintiffs and Class members were unable to spend or
withdraw their funds from their accounts needed for the basic
necessities of life, such as food, clothing, shelter and medicine.


The Plaintiffs and Class Members seek damages and injunctive relief
based upon Defendants' unlawful conduct denying Plaintiffs and
Class Members the ability to access and use funds in their
accounts.  

Evolve Bank & Trust is a bank headquartered in West Memphis,
Arkansas. Evolve wholly or primarily accepts deposits online, often
through intermediary financial technology software applications
such as Yotta, which use Evolve as a banking services
provider.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are 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


                            *********

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 ***