/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/240816.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Friday, August 16, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 165
Headlines
250-252 ELIZABETH: Public Accommodation Violates ADA, Lawrence Says
3M COMPANY: Abdullatif Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Anderson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Bassett Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Correia Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Null Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
43-43 KISSENA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Skiba Alleges
ABSORPTION PHARMACEUTICALS: Sued Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
ACADIAN AMBULANCE: Fontenot Files Suit in W.D. Louisiana
ACADIAN AMBULANCE: Stanford Files Suit in W.D. Louisiana
AMAZON.COM INC: Reiss Suit Transferred to S.D. New York
ANAVEX LIFE: Continues to Defend Blum Shareholder Class Suit
ANAVEX LIFE: Continues to Defend Shareholder Class Suit
ANN & ROBERT: Faces B.S. Class Action Suit in N.D. Ill.
ASCENSION HEALTH: Seney Class Suit Filed in E.D. Mo.
AT&T INC: Castro Sues Over Failure to Adequately Safeguard PII
AT&T INC: Powell Sues Over Inadequate Data Security Practices
BANK OF AMERICA: Seeks Temporary Stay Pending Court's Ruling
BANK OF AMERICA: Tristan Suit Seeks to Certify Four Classes
BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Subsidiary Faces Reading Hospital Class Suit
BBBB BONDING: Class Cert Bid Filing in Benton Due Feb. 14, 2025
BETACOM HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Technicians' OT Wages Under FLSA
BMO BANK NATIONAL: Xiong Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
BROOKLYN BEDDING: Grossman Sues Over False Advertising
CENTESSA PHARMACEUTICALS: Fernandes Suit Dismissed w/o Prejudice
CHEFS' WAREHOUSE: Faces Vasquez Wage-and-Suit in S.D.N.Y.
CIRCLE 9 RESOURCE: GOP LLC Files Suit in Okla. Dist. Ct.
CITADEL SERVICING: Plaintiffs' Bid for Class Certification Tossed
CREDIT COUNSEL: Misrepresents Debt Validation Date, Ortiz Claims
CROWDSTRIKE HOLDINGS: Plymouth Cty. Assoc. Hits Share Price Drop
CROWDSTRIKE INC: Del Rio Sues Over Flawed and Negligence Update
DP AUDIO VIDEO: Craft Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
ELSEVIER INC: Lyall Suit Alleges Greenwashing Practices
ENROLL CONFIDENTLY: Voelker Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
FENIX INTERNET: Bones Files Suit in Fla. Cir. Ct.
FINANCIAL BUSINESS: Fullwood Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
FUN SPOT: Unlawfully Sends Debt Collection Email, Parry Alleges
GOFUND ADVANCE: Appeals Court Judgment in Haymount Suit to 2nd Cir.
GORDON LANE: Parrish Seeks to Modify Class Cert Scheduling Order
HALF ISLAND: Saunders Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
HARVEST FOOD: Fails to Pay Line Workers' OT Wages, Luna Suit Claims
HEALTHEQUITY INC: Fails to Protect Customers' Info, Keane Says
JAMES LEBLANC: Class Certification Bid in VOE Suit Due Sept. 30
JP ECOMMERCE: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Bishop Alleges
LENOVO INC: Must Oppose Axelrod Class Cert Bid by Oct. 4
LUCKY COIN: Faces Ramales Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
LUNA CUISINE: Chen Appeals Denied Bid for Leave to Appeal
MADEWELL INC: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Dalton Suit Says
MERCER COUNTY, PA: Plaintiffs Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
META PLATFORMS: Sued Over Harmful Effects of Social Media
METROPOLIS TECHNOLOGIES: Uses Drivers' Personal Info, Petrone Says
MOXION POWER: Dean Sues Over WARN Act Violation
MRA-THE MANAGEMENT: Fontenot Files Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES: Deprives Stockholders' Rights, Mizel Says
NOR-WELL COMPANY: Underpays Sheet Metal Employees, Moore Alleges
OTTAWA COUNTY, MI: Baker Appeals Cir. Court Decision in Michigan
PAR INC: Badeen Brings Appeal to Mich. Appeals Ct.
PATELCO CREDIT: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cordell Alleges
PLAVAN COMMERCIAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Tanner Claims
PRECISION IMAGING: Court Tosses Sharman Class Certification Bid
PRIMECARE MEDICAL: Class Cert. Filing in Stafford Due Nov. 24
PRUDENT FIDUCIARY: Arnold Suit Seeks Class Certification
PUFF FOR TOBACCO: Noel Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
RECEIVABLES PERFORMANCE: Settlement in Hightower Initially OK'd
RH: Website Not Accessible to Blind Users, Dalton Suit Alleges
RINOWA CONSTRUCTION: Perez Seeks Unpaid OT for Construction Workers
RK ASSOCIATES: Brito Sues Over Inaccessible Property
SAALT LLC: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Espinal Suit Claims
SAVE MART: Parties Seek to Revise Class Cert Hearing Schedule
SILVERANDA PLLC: Joiner Alleges Wrongful Debt Collections
SIMMONS BANK: Njoroge Sues Over Improper Overdraft Fee Charges
SOLSTICE BENEFITS: Lyngas Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
SOUTH TEXAS: Faces Brown Class Action Suit in W.D. Tex.
SPECIALIZED LOAN: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due Sept. 30
SUNPOWER CORPORATION: Faces Rodrigues Suit Over Drop of Stock Price
SUSHI KATSUEI: Chakma Suit Seeks to Certify Tipped Worker Class
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike On-Premises Theory in Halley Suit
TD BANK: Discloses Clients' Private Info to Meta, Stevens Claims
TOYOTA MOTOR: Nunez Sues Over Hydrogen Retail Market Monopoly
TRANSFORM SR: Refrigerators Have Compressor Defect, Grotte Says
TRANSUNION RENTAL: Hearing on Class Cert Bid Continued to Feb. 2025
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: Parties Seeks Oct. 15 Class Cert Hearing
UNITED PARCEL: Class Cert Hearing in Malone Rescheduled to Sept. 11
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to May 27, 2025
WEST VIRGINIA: Writ of Certiorari Filed in Anderson Class Suit
WESTERN CONFERENCE: Court Modifies Case Schedule in Paieri Suit
WYNN RESORTS: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit in New York
ZARBEE'S INC: Lopez Seeks to Seal Class Certification Material
ZARBEE'S INC: Lopez Suit Seeks Class Certification
ZULILY LLC: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Douglas Due Jan. 31, 2025
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Carlisle Cos. Faces Numerous Exposure Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Carrier Global Faces Personal Injury Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crown Cork Faces 700 New Personal Injury Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dow Inc. Has $744MM Liabilities as of June 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Flowserve Faces 400 New Product Liability Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hartford Financial Still Receives A&E claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Int'l. Faces Personal Injury Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Otis Worldwide Defends Exposure Lawsuits
*********
250-252 ELIZABETH: Public Accommodation Violates ADA, Lawrence Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
NANA QUEENIE LAWRENCE v. 250-252 ELIZABETH STREET PARTNERSHIP,
L.P., and 250 SOHO CLEANERS, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-05966
(S.D.N.Y., Aug. 6, 2024) is a class action seeking declaratory,
injunctive, and equitable relief, as well as monetary damages and
attorney's fees, costs, and expenses, to redress Defendants'
unlawful disability discrimination against the Plaintiff, in
violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act and
its implementing regulation, the New York State Executive Law, and
the Administrative Code of the City of New York.
On Sept. 9, 2023, the Plaintiff attempted to access the business.
He discovered that the vestibule is not navigable by wheelchair at
the Defendants' place of public accommodation that prevents and/or
restricts access to the Plaintiff, a person with a disability. The
services, features, elements, and spaces of Defendants' place of
public accommodation are not readily accessible to, or usable by,
the Plaintiff, as required by the ADA Accessibility Guidelines. The
Defendants have and continue to discriminate against the Plaintiff
and other similarly situated disabled individuals by failing to
provide accessible facilities on or before January 26, 1992 in
violation of the ADA, says the suit.
Allegedly, the Plaintiff is being deprived of the meaningful choice
of freely visiting the same accommodations readily available to the
general public, and the Plaintiff is further deterred and
discouraged from additional travel due to Defendants' ongoing
non-compliance with the ADA. The Plaintiff also alleges a claim for
negligence.
Ms. Lawrence is an adult female confined to a wheelchair. She is
incapable of moving around outside of her home without assistance
and a wheelchair. She has further restrictions speaking, caring for
herself, and performing other tasks associated with daily living.
250-252 ELIZABETH STREET PARTNERSHIP, L.P. is a rental building
situated in New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jessica E. Soultanian-Braunstein, Esq.
BELL LAW GROUP, PLLC
116 Jackson Avenue
Syosset, NY 11791
Telephone: (516) 280-3008
E-mail: JSB@BellLG.com
3M COMPANY: Abdullatif Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rasheed Abdullatif, individually and as personal representative for
Decedent, David Edwin Tipton, and other similarly situated v. 3M
COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC
CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; 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; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS
USA, INC.; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY
LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES,
INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI
PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION;
SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS L.P. as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); and W.L.
GORE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-04249-RMG (D.S.C., Aug.
1, 2024), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") and firefighter
turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic chemicals collectively
known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS
includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA")
and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals
including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with
knowledge that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS,
which would expose end users of the product to the risks associated
with PFAS. Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or
TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his military career
who was diagnosed with Thyroid Disease as a result of exposure to
Defendants' AFFF or TOG products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David L. Selby, II, Esq.
BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
3000 Riverchase Galleria, Suite 905
Birmingham, AL 35244
Phone: 205.988.9253
Fax: 205.788.4896
Email: dselby@baileyglasser.com
3M COMPANY: Anderson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
--------------------------------------------------------------
James Winston Anderson, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BASF CORPORATION BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER
GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT, INC.; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.;
DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS
INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE SERVICE PLUS, INC.; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE
MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCT USA, INC.;
INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC INC.; L.N. CURTIS
& SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY
APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING
CO., INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN
MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES,
INC.; and WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, Case No. 2:24-cv-04274-RMG
(D.S.C., Aug. 2, 2024), is brought for damages for personal injury
resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") and
firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with
knowledge that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS,
which would expose end users of the product to the risks associated
with PFAS. Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or
TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his military career
who was diagnosed with Hypothyroidism and Thyroid Disease as a
result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David L. Selby, II, Esq.
BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
3000 Riverchase Galleria, Suite 905
Birmingham, AL 35244
Phone: 205.988.9253
Fax: 205.788.4896
Email: dselby@baileyglasser.com
3M COMPANY: Bassett Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Randy Allen Bassett, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY
(f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA,
INC.; BASF CORPORATION BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER
GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT, INC.; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.;
CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.;
DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS
INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE SERVICE PLUS, INC.; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE
MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCT USA, INC.;
INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC INC.; L.N. CURTIS
& SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY
APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE
PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS, LP; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING
CO., INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, INC.; SOUTHERN
MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as
successor-in-interest to The Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a
GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE & ASSOCIATES,
INC.; and WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, Case No. 2:24-cv-04270-RMG
(D.S.C., Aug. 2, 2024), is brought for damages for personal injury
resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") and
firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with
knowledge that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS,
which would expose end users of the product to the risks associated
with PFAS. Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or
TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his military career
who was diagnosed with Ulcerative Colitis and Hypothyroidism as a
result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David L. Selby, II, Esq.
BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
3000 Riverchase Galleria, Suite 905
Birmingham, AL 35244
Phone: 205.988.9253
Fax: 205.788.4896
Email: dselby@baileyglasser.com
3M COMPANY: Correia Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jason Correia, and other similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS
INC.; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; BUCKEYE
FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS, INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY
FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER
CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.);
DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; KIDDE PLC;
NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The
Ansul Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.), Case No.
2:24-cv-04316-RMG (D.S.C., Aug. 5, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film-forming
foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals collectively known as
per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is
not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane
sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that
degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF with knowledge that it contained
highly toxic and bio persistent PFASs, which would expose end users
of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Further, the
Defendants designed, marketed, developed, manufactured,
distributed, released, trained users, produced instructional
materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled and/or used
underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF which contained
PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of Decedent's exposure to
Defendants' AFFF products at various locations during the course of
Decedent's training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further
seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from
the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his working career
as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed with b
testicular cancer as a result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF
products.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
GACOVINO, LAKE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Phone: 631-600-0000
Facsimile: 631-761-0467
3M COMPANY: Null Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Taryn Penkala Null, individually and as personal representative for
Decedent, David Edwin Tipton, and other similarly situated v. 3M
COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC
CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA, INC.; 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; FIRE-DEX,
LLC; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS
USA, INC.; KIDDE PLC; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY
LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO., LLC; MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES,
INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI
PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION;
SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS L.P. as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); and W.L.
GORE & ASSOCIATES, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-04315-RMG (D.S.C., Aug.
5, 2024), is brought for damages for personal injury resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") and firefighter
turnout gear ("TOG") containing the toxic chemicals collectively
known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS"). PFAS
includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA")
and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related chemicals
including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
AFFF is a specialized substance designed to extinguish
petroleum-based fires. It has been used for decades by military and
civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in training and in
response to Class B fires. The Defendants collectively designed,
marketed, developed, manufactured, distributed, released, trained
users, produced instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or
otherwise released into the stream of commerce AFFF and or TOG with
knowledge that it contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS,
which would expose end users of the product to the risks associated
with PFAS. Further, defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or
TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to it where
it remains and persists over extended periods of time. Due to their
unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and body
of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remains
in the human body while contemporaneously presenting significant
health risks to humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF products were used by the
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of the Defendants' AFFF products and relied on the
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF products caused Plaintiff to develop the
serious medical conditions and complications alleged herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's
training and firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks
injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the
same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and to extinguish fires during his military career
who was diagnosed with Hypothyroidism and Thyroid Disease as a
result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products or underlying PFAS containing chemicals
used in AFFF production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David L. Selby, II, Esq.
BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
3000 Riverchase Galleria, Suite 905
Birmingham, AL 35244
Phone: 205.988.9253
Fax: 205.788.4896
Email: dselby@baileyglasser.com
43-43 KISSENA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Skiba Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT SKIBA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 43-43 KISSENA, LLC; 43KISSENA43, LLC; PERRY
E BERGER; JOHN M DOWNING; JOHN M DOWNING, JR.; ANDREW LIBASCI;
ROBERT EISENOFF; and HARRY EISENOFF, Defendants, Case No.
1:24-cv-04916-BMC (E.D.N.Y., 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 Skiba was employed by the Defendants as a maintenance
worker.
43-43 Kissena, LLC is a real-estate investor, developing
properties, as well as providing property management for
residential and commercial properties in New York and Connecticut.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
Anne Seelig, Esq.
LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
148 West 24th Street, Eighth Floor
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 465-1188
Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
ABSORPTION PHARMACEUTICALS: Sued Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------------
Carlton Knowles, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated v. ABSORPTION PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC, Case No.
1:24-cv-05943 (S.D.N.Y., Aug. 5, 2024), is brought against the
Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate its interactive website to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website,
https://www.promescent.com/, including all portions thereof or
accessed thereon (collectively, the "Website" or "Defendant's
Website"), is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, it violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent
injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies,
practices, and procedures so that Defendant's Website will become
and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers.
By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and
visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
ABSORPTION PHARMACEUTICALS, LLC, operates the Promescent online
retail store, as well as the Promescent interactive Website and
advertises, markets, and operates in the State of New York and
throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: michael@gottlieb.legal
dana@gottlieb.legal
jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
ACADIAN AMBULANCE: Fontenot Files Suit in W.D. Louisiana
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Acadian Ambulance
Service Inc. The case is styled as Benjamin Fontenot, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Acadian Ambulance
Service Inc., Case No. 6:24-cv-01045 (W.D. La., Aug. 5, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Acadian Ambulance -- https://acadianambulance.com/ -- is an
employee-owner private ambulance service that covers most of the
state of Louisiana, a large portion of Texas, two counties in
Tennessee, and one county in Mississippi.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew Allen Lemmon, Esq.
LEMMON LAW FIRM (NO)
5301 Canal Blvd Ste A
New Orleans, LA 70124
Phone: (985) 783-6789
Email: andrew@lemmonlawfirm.com
ACADIAN AMBULANCE: Stanford Files Suit in W.D. Louisiana
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Acadian Ambulance
Service Inc. The case is styled as Dylan Stanford, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Acadian Ambulance
Service Inc., Case No. 6:24-cv-01038 (W.D. La., Aug. 2, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor
Vehicle.
Acadian Ambulance -- https://acadianambulance.com/ -- is an
employee-owner private ambulance service that covers most of the
state of Louisiana, a large portion of Texas, two counties in
Tennessee, and one county in Mississippi.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew Allen Lemmon, Esq.
LEMMON LAW FIRM (NO)
5301 Canal Blvd Ste A
New Orleans, LA 70124
Phone: (985) 783-6789
Email: andrew@lemmonlawfirm.com
AMAZON.COM INC: Reiss Suit Transferred to S.D. New York
-------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Cd Reiss also known as Christine DeMaio, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. AMAZON.COM,
INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No. 2:24-cv-00851 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Washington, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York on Aug. 5, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:24-cv-05923-JLR to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust.
Amazon.com, Inc., doing business as Amazon, is an American
multinational technology company, engaged in e-commerce, cloud
computing, online advertising, digital streaming, and artificial
intelligence.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eamon P. Kelly, Esq.
Barry Frett, Esq.
SPERLING & SLATER, LLC
55 W. Monroe Street, Suite 3200
Chicago, IL 60603
Phone: (312) 641-3200
Facsimile: (312) 641-6492
Email: ekelly@sperling-law.com
bfrett@sperling-law.com
- and -
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1301 Second Avenue, Suite 2000
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 623-7292
Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
Email: steve@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Nathan Emmons, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
455 North Cityfront Plaza Drive, Suite 2410
Chicago, IL 60611
Phone: (708) 625-4949
Email: nathane@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Phillip Cramer, Esq.
SPERLING & SLATER, LLC
1221 Broadway, Suite 2140
Nashville, TN 37203
Phone: (312) 641-3200
Facsimile: (312) 641-6492
Email: pcramer@sperling-law.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Benjamin M. Mundel, Esq.
Carrie Mahan, Esq.
Jonathan E Nuechterlein
SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
1501 K Street, N. W.
Washington, DC 20005
Phone: (202) 736-8000
Email: bmundel@sidley.com
Carrie.mahan@sidley.com
- and -
Molly A. Terwilliger, Esq.
Patricia A. Eakes, Esq.
MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP (WA)
1301 Second Ave., Ste. 3000
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 274-6400
Fax: (206) 274-6401
Email: molly.terwilliger@morganlewis.com
ANAVEX LIFE: Continues to Defend Blum Shareholder Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Anavex Life Sciences Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for
the quarterly period ending June 30, 2024 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on August 6, 2024, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Blum shareholder class suit in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.
On March 13, 2024, a shareholder class action complaint was filed
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York.
The complaint is captioned Blum v. Anavex Life Sciences, Corp. et
al., case number 1:24-cv-01910, and names the Company and
Christopher Missling as Defendants.
The complaint alleges violations of the Securities and Exchange Act
of 1934 resulting from disclosures and statements made about
certain clinical trials for ANAVEX®2-73.
On July 12, 2024, the lead plaintiff filed an amended complaint.
The Company believes the complaint is without merit.
The Company is vigorously pursuing its defenses and a potential
dismissal of all claims asserted in the lawsuit.
Headquartered in New York, NY, Anavex Life Science Corp. is a
clinical stage biopharmaceutical company. Shares of the its stock
trade on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol "AVXL." [BN]
ANAVEX LIFE: Continues to Defend Shareholder Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------
Anavex Life Sciences Corp. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for
the quarterly period ending June 30, 2024 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on August 6, 2024, that the Company
continues to defend itself from AVATAR-related shareholder class
suit in the United States District Court for the Southern District
of New York.
On May 8, 2024, another purported shareholder of the Company filed
a similar lawsuit against the same defendants that raised similar
allegations and in addition, raised allegations related to
disclosures and statements made about the AVATAR trial.
The shareholder sought to consolidate the cases and be appointed
lead plaintiff of the consolidated action.
The court denied the consolidation motion and lead plaintiff motion
on June 13, 2024.
The Company plans to vigorously defend the lawsuit.
Headquartered in New York, NY, Anavex Life Science Corp. is a
clinical stage biopharmaceutical company. Shares of the its stock
trade on the Nasdaq under the ticker symbol "AVXL." [BN]
ANN & ROBERT: Faces B.S. Class Action Suit in N.D. Ill.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Ann & Robert H. Lurie
Children's Hospital of Chicago, captioned as B.S., individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated guardian ad litem Scott
Schultz, Plaintiff v. ANN & ROBERT H. LURIE CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF
CHICAGO, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-05577 (N.D. Ill., July 2,
2024).
The case is assigned to Honorable Sunil R. Harjani.
Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children's Hospital of Chicago provides
medical and surgical hospital services to children. The Hospital
offers emergency care, women's health services, cardiology,
orthopedic, and oncology services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Laura Grace Van Note, Esq.
Cole & Van Note
555 12th Street, Suite 2100
Oakland, CA 94607
Telephone: (510) 891-9800
Email: lvn@colevannote.com
ASCENSION HEALTH: Seney Class Suit Filed in E.D. Mo.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Ascension Health, captioned
as CARSON PARKER SENEY; BRIAN MICHAEL SENEY; and KARA ANN SENEY,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. ASCENSION HEALTH, Defendant, Case No.
4:24-cv-00933-JAR (E.D. Mo., July 2, 2024).
Sr. District Judge John A. Ross on July 24, 2024, ordered to
consolidate the case with other cases, and reassigned to the
lowest-numbered case, Case No. 4:24-cv-669.
Ascension Health operates as a non-profit organization. The
Organization provides physician practice management, venture
capital investing, biomedical engineering, clinical care, risk
management, palliative care, spiritual, and information services.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brandon Michael Wise, Esq.
PEIFFER WOLF LLP - St. Louis
One US Bank Plaza Suite 1950
St. Louis, MO 63101
Telephone: (314) 833-4827
Email: bwise@pwcklegal.com
AT&T INC: Castro Sues Over Failure to Adequately Safeguard PII
--------------------------------------------------------------
Monique Castro, Andrew Gilsey, Anna Hamilton, Anna Palafox, Latoya
Pettus, Tina Salinas, and Tina Young, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. AT&T, INC., Case No.
3:24-cv-01992-D (N.D. Tex., Aug. 5, 2024), is brought against AT&T
for its failure to properly and adequately safeguard the personally
identifying information ("PII") of tens of millions of current and
former AT&T customers.
The Defendant was aware of the risks of a data breach and that it
would be specifically targeted by malicious hackers. Indeed, in
2021, AT&T competitor T-Mobile was the subject of a massive data
breach involving the same critical PII, names, birth dates, and
Social Security Numbers, that are at issue here.
Armed with the PII from these records, hackers can sell the PII to
other thieves or misuse the PII themselves to commit a variety of
crimes that harm victims of the Data Breach. For instance, they can
take out loans, mortgage property, open financial accounts, and
open credit cards in a victim's name; use a victim's information to
obtain government benefits; or file fraudulent returns to obtain a
tax refund; obtain a driver's license or identification card in a
victim's name; gain employment in another person's name; or give
false information to police during an arrest.
As a requirement of providing services, AT&T collects critical
information from consumers, including, but not limited to, their
names, email addresses, mailing addresses, birth dates, and Social
Security Numbers: ("Private Information" or "PII"). On March 30,
2024, AT&T posted a notice on its website stating that "a number of
AT&T passcodes have been compromised." The notice further stated
that "we will be communicating with current and former account
holders with compromised sensitive personal information," but
provided no specifics about what "sensitive personal information"
was involved (the "Data Breach").
AT&T has had a history of ongoing and significant data breaches
over a number of years. Clearly, AT&T has still not addressed
cyber-security and continues to remain open to attack as a
consequence of its failure to institute and maintain adequate
cyber-security measures, despite its obligation to do so. Even as
recently as July 12, 2024, AT&T announced yet another massive data
breach--this time respecting customer call and text records of tens
of millions of consumers. The Federal Communications Commission has
commenced an investigation.
The Plaintiffs seek to hold Defendant responsible for its failure
to protect and keep secure the PII of Plaintiffs and similarly
situated Class Members and seek injunctive relief necessary to
avoid further harm, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a consumer who has had a cellular phone account
with Defendant.
AT&T is a telecommunications provider headquartered in Dallas,
Texas.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bruce W. Steckler, Esq.
STECKLER WAYNE & LOVE PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Suite 1045
Dallas, TX 75230
Phone: (972) 387-4040
Cell: (214) 208-3327
Email: bruce@stecklerlaw.com
- and -
Stephen R. Basser, Esq.
Samuel M. Ward, Esq.
BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE
600 West Broadway, Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619) 230-0800
Facsimile: (619) 230-1874
Email: sbasser@barrack.com
sward@barrack.com
- and -
Danielle M. Weiss, Esq.
BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE
Two Commerce Square
2001 Market Street, Suite 3300
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Phone: (215) 963-0600
Email: dweiss@barrack.com
- and -
John G. Emerson, Esq.
EMERSON FIRM, PLLC
2500 Wilcrest, Suite 300
Houston, TX 77042
Phone: 800-551-8649
Fax: 501-286-4659
Email: jemerson@emersonfirm.com
AT&T INC: Powell Sues Over Inadequate Data Security Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------
TINA POWELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AT&T INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:24-cv-01948-E (N.D. Tex., July 30, 2024) is a class action
arising from the recent cyberattack and data breach resulting from
Defendant's failure to implement reasonable and industry standard
data security practices.
In April 2024, AT&T became aware of a catastrophic, widespread data
breach of phone records from nearly all of its customers. According
to the New York Times, "the compromised data included files
containing AT&T records of calls and texts from more than 100
million cellular customers, wireless network customers and landline
customers from May 2022 through October 2022, and records from Jan.
2, 2023, for a small number of customers." The records expose the
telephone numbers which the Defendant's customer interacted with,
and some cases the "user's location in the form of cell site ID
numbers."
This most recent breach comes just months after another data breach
from the Defendant, in which "approximately 7.6 million current
AT&T account holders and approximately 65.4 million former account
holders" had personal information leaked including the "person's
full name, email address, mailing address, phone number, Social
Security number, date of birth, AT&T account number and passcode."
The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of all persons whose PII
was compromised as a result of Defendant's failure to: (i)
adequately protect the personal identifying information 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. Defendant's conduct amounts at least
to negligence and violates federal and state statutes, says the
complaint.
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.
AT&T, one of the U.S. telecommunications giants, provides cellular
services and Internet to both businesses and individual
customers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Warren T. Burns, Esq.
Daniel H. Charest, Esq.
Hannah M. Crowe, Esq.
BURNS CHAREST LLP
900 Jackson Street, Suite 500
Dallas, TX 75202
Telephone: (469) 904-4551
Facsimile: (469) 444-5002
E-mail: wburns@burnscharest.com
dcharest@burnscharest.com
hcrowe@burnscharest.com
- and -
Korey A. Nelson, Esq.
BURNS CHAREST LLP
365 Canal Street, Suite 1170
New Orleans, LA 70130
Telephone: (504) 799-2845
E-mail: knelson@burnscharest.com
- and -
Monica Miller, Esq.
Charles J. LaDuca, Esq.
Brendan Thompson, Esq.
Alex Warren, Esq.
CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
4725 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Suite 200
Washington, DC 20016
Telephone: (202) 789-3960
E-mail: monica@cuneolaw.com
charles@cuneolaw.com
brendant@cuneolaw.com
awarren@cuneolaw.com
- and -
Don Barrett, Esq.
BARRETT LAW GROUP, P.A.
404 Court Square North
Lexington, MS 39095
Telephone: (662) 834-9168
E-mail: donbarrettpa@gmail.com
- and -
William M. Audet, Esq.
Ling Y. Kuang, Esq.
AUDET & PARTNERS, LLP
711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 568-2555
E-mail: waudet@audetlaw.com
lkuang@audetlaw.com
BANK OF AMERICA: Seeks Temporary Stay Pending Court's Ruling
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RUSSELL PFEFFER, DAVID
DESSNER, ADAM SHERMAN, FRANK CRONIN, ROGER ROJAS, JASON AUERBACH,
GRACE BOZICK, MUHAMED VRLAKU, and ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, v.
BANK OF AMERICA CORPORATION and BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Case No.
3:23-cv-00813-KDB-DCK (W.D.N.C.), the Defendants ask the Court to
enter an order temporarily staying this case until after this Court
has the opportunity to consider Defendants' Motion to Certify for
Interlocutory Appeal.
Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(b), Defendants have conferred with the
Plaintiffs regarding this relief and the Plaintiffs do not
consent.
Bank of America is an American multinational investment bank and
financial services holding company.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=agiLoQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Meredith A. Pinson, Esq.
Rebecca W. Lineberry, Esq.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP
201 North Tryon Street, Ste. 300
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone: (704) 343-2252
Facsimile: (704) 353-6171
E-mail: mpinson@mcguirewoods.com
rlineberry@mcguirewoods.com
BANK OF AMERICA: Tristan Suit Seeks to Certify Four Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NATALIE TRISTAN, AVANTIKA
AHUJA, and PHILLIP MYERS, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; and EARLY WARNING
SERVICES, LLC D/B/A ZELLEPAY.COM, Case No. 8:22-cv-01183-DOC-ADS
(C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order
certifying the action as a class action based on the following
class definitions, for Plaintiff(s)' claim for breach of contract
and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing:
(i) Nationwide Fraud Class Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3),
the Plaintiffs seek certification of a nationwide "Fraud
Class", of which Plaintiff Ahuja is a member, defined as:
"All persons within the United States who were Bank of
America,
N.A. customers when they submitted a claim to Bank of
America,
N.A. between Nov. 20, 2020 and Aug. 5, 2024, concerning one
or
more Zelle transfers occurring not later than 120 days prior
to
the claim, where Bank of America, N.A. denied the claim, and
where the consumers reported they did not send the Zelle
transfer(s) or did not approve the Zelle transfer(s)."
(ii) Nationwide Scam Class Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3),
the
Plaintiffs seek certification of a nationwide "Scam Class",
of
which the Plaintiffs Myers and Tristan are members, defined
as:
"All persons within the United States who were Bank of
America,
N.A. customers when they submitted a claim to Bank of
America
between Nov. 20, 2020 and Aug. 5, 2024, concerning one or
more
Zelle transfers occurring not later 120 days prior to the
claim, where Bank of America, N.A. denied the claim, and
where
the consumers reported having been scammed, mislead, or
tricked, into transferring money via Zelle to a third
party."
(iii) Fraud Subclass (California) Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
23(b)(3), the Plaintiffs seek certification of a California
"Fraud Subclass", of which Plaintiff Ahuja is a member,
defined
as:
"All persons within California who were Bank of America,
N.A.
customers when they submitted a claim to Bank of America,
N.A.
between Nov. 20, 2020 and Aug. 5, 2024, concerning one or
more
Zelle transfers occurring not later than 120 days prior to
the
one-hundred and twenty claim, where Bank of America, N.A.
denied the claim, and where the consumers reported they did
not
send the Zelle transfer(s) or did not approve the Zelle
transfer(s)."
(iv) Scam Subclass (California & Nevada) Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ.
P.
23(b)(3), the Plaintiffs seek certification of a California
and
Nevada "Scam Subclass", of which the Plaintiffs Tristan and
Myers are members, defined as:
"All persons within California and Nevada who were Bank of
America, N.A. customers when they submitted a claim to Bank
of
America between Nov. 20, 2020 and Aug. 5, 2024, concerning
one
or more Zelle transfers occurring not later than 120 days
prior
to the claim, where Bank of America, N.A. denied the claim,
and
where the consumers reported having been scammed, mislead,
or
tricked, into transferring money via Zelle to a third
party."
Excluded from the Classes are persons whose transactions were
identified by the Bank as "First Party Fraud."
Bank of America is an American multinational investment bank and
financial services holding company.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Aug. 5, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=dsyGZZ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
1925 Century Park East, Suite 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (305) 975-3320
E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com
- and -
Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
Pamela E. Prescott, Esq.
Gil Melili, Esq.
KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP, APC
245 Fischer Avenue Suite D1
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Telephone: (800) 400-6808
E-mail: ak@kazlg.com
pamela@kazlg.com
v gil@kazlg.com
- and -
Laura R. Gerber, Esq.
Derek W. Loeser, Esq.
Nathan L. Nanfelt, Esq.
Chris N. Ryder, Esq.
KELLER ROHRBACK L.L.P.
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 3400
Seattle, Washington 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-1900
E-mail: lgerber@kellerrohrback.com
dloeser@kellerrohrback.com
nnanfelt@kellerrohrback.com
cryder@kellerrohrback.com
- and -
Jeffrey D. Kaliel, Esq.
KALIELGOLD PLLC
1100 15th Street NW, 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 350-4783
E-mail: jkaliel@kalielpllc.com
- and -
Edwin E. Elliott, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: edwin@shamisgentile.com
BAXTER INTERNATIONAL: Subsidiary Faces Reading Hospital Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Baxter International Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending June 30, 2024 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 6, 2024, that the Company's
subsidiary, Hill-Rom Holdings, faces the Reading Hospital class
suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania.
On June 20, 2024, Reading Hospital filed a putative class action
complaint against Hill-Rom Holdings, Inc., Hill-Rom Company, Inc.,
and Hill-Rom Services, Inc. in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
The complaint alleges that Hillrom violated Sections 1 and 2 of The
Sherman Antitrust Act and Section 3 of the Clayton Act by allegedly
engaging in anti-competitive conduct in alleged markets for
standard, ICU and birthing beds.
The plaintiff filed the action on behalf of itself and all "direct
purchasers of Standard Hospital Beds, ICU Beds, and/or Birthing
Beds from Hill-Rom during a period beginning at least as early as
June 20, 2020" and continuing past the date of filing.
Baxter International Inc. is a healthcare company based in
Illinois.
BBBB BONDING: Class Cert Bid Filing in Benton Due Feb. 14, 2025
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL BENTON, v. BBBB
BONDING CORPORATION, ET AL., Case No. 2:24-cv-01294-DJC-AC (E.D.
Cal.), the Hon. Judge Daniel Calabretta entered a scheduling order
-- Rule 26(a) Initial Disclosures: Sept. 16, 2024
-- All fact discovery shall be completed Oct. 10, 2025
no later than:
-- The parties shall disclose initial Nov. 7, 2025.
experts and produce reports in accordance
with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
26(a)(2) by no later than:
-- Plaintiff's motion for class certification, Feb. 14, 2025
shall be filed on or before:
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=LTZ3cQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
BETACOM HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Technicians' OT Wages Under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------------
LMAR LAY, individually and for others similarly situated v. BETACOM
HOLDINGS, INC., a Washington for-profit corporation and BETACOM
INCORPORATED, a Florida for-profit corporation, Case No.
2:24-cv-01195 (W.D. Wash., Aug. 6, 2024) seeks to recover unpaid
wages and other damages from Betacom.
Mr. Lay and the other Hourly Employees regularly work more than 40
hours a workweek. But Betacom does not pay Mr. Lay and the other
Hourly Employees for all their hours worked. Instead, Betacom
requires its Hourly Employees to "clock out" for 30 minutes a day
to record they took a meal break, regardless of whether they
actually received a bona fide, uninterrupted meal break (Betacom's
"meal deduction policy"). Betacom's meal deduction policy violates
the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) by depriving Mr. Lay and the
other Hourly Employees of overtime wages for all overtime hours
worked, the Plaintiff alleges.
In addition to failing to pay its Hourly Employees for all their
hours worked, including overtime hours, Betacom Holdings, Inc. and
Betacom Incorporated as a single, unified enterprise also fails to
pay them overtime at the proper premium rate. Instead, Betacom
uniformly pays Mr. Lay and its other Hourly Employees per diems
that Betacom intentionally excludes when calculating these
employees' regular rates of pay for overtime purposes. Betacom's
uniform per diem pay scheme violates the FLSA and Massachusetts
Wage and Hour Law by depriving Mr. Lay and the other Hourly
Employees of overtime pay at rates not less than 1.5 times their
regular rates of pay—based on all remuneration received—for
hours worked in excess of 40 a workweek, the suit added.
From March 2022 until November 2022, Betacom employed Mr. Lay as a
Tower Technician in Massachusetts, Maine, Connecticut, and New
Hampshire.
Betacom Incorporated and Betacom Holdings, Inc., together, operate
as a single, unified, telecommunication infrastructure services
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Subit, Esq.
FRANK FREED SUBIT & THOMAS, LLP
705 Second Ave., Suite 1200
Seattle, WA 98104
Telephone: (206) 682-6711
E-mail: msubit@frankfreed.com
- and -
Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
JOSEPHSON DUNLAP, LLP
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 352-1100
E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
adunlap@mybackwages.com
- and -
Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq.
BRUCKNER BURCH, PLLC
11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 877-8788
E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com
- and -
William C. (Clif) Alexander, Esq.
Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC
101 N. Shoreline Blvd., Suite 610
Corpus Christi, TXs 78401
Telephone: (361) 452-1279
E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
austin@a2xlaw.com
BMO BANK NATIONAL: Xiong Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against BMO Bank National
Association. The case is styled as Natthan Xiong, as an individual
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BMO Bank National
Association, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2024-0009262 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Joaquin Cty., Aug. 5, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment."
BMO Bank, N.A. -- https://www.bmo.com/en-us/main/personal/ -- is an
American national bank that is headquartered in Chicago,
Illinois.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Larry W. Lee, Esq.
DIVERSITY LAW GROUP
515 S Figueroa St., Ste. 1250
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3316
Phone: 213-488-6555
Fax: 213-488-6554
Email: lwlee@diversitylaw.com
BROOKLYN BEDDING: Grossman Sues Over False Advertising
------------------------------------------------------
Brynn Grossman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. BROOKLYN BEDDING LLC, Case No. CIVSB2422475 (Cal.
Super. Ct., San Berardino Cty., July 11, 2024), is brought against
the Defendant's in violation of the False Advertising law, Unfair
Competition law and Consumer Legal Remedies Act regarding their
mattresses and bedding products through the Leesa brand ("Leesa
Products" or "Products").
California's False Advertising Law prohibits businesses from making
statements they know or should know to be untrue or misleading.
This includes statements falsely suggesting that a product is on
sale, when it actually is not.
On its website, Defendant lists purported regular prices and
advertises purported 'Limited Time" discounts from those listed
regular prices. These include "LIMITED TIME" discounts offering "up
to SX off' and "X% off." Defendant uses countdown clocks to
represent that its les are on the verge of ending. Defendant also
advertises that its Products have a lower discount rice as compared
to a higher, regular price shown in grey and/or strikethrough
font.
Far from being time-limited, however, Defendant's discounts are
always available. As a result, everything about Defendant's price
and purported discount advertising is false. The regular prices
Defendant advertises are not actually Defendant's regular prices,
because Defendant's Products are always available for less than
that. The purported discounts Defendant advertises are not the true
discount the customer is receiving, and are Often not a discount at
all. Nor are the purported discounts "LIMITED TIME" or "EXPIRING
the opposite, they are always available.
The Plaintiff bought items from Defendant from its website,
www.leesa.com. When the Plaintiff made her purchase, Defendant
advertised that a sale was going on, and so Defendant represented
that the Products the Plaintiff purchased were being offered at a
steep discount from their purported regular prices that Defendant
advertised. And based on Defendant's representations, the Plaintiff
believed that she was purchasing Products whose regular price and
market value were the purported regular prices that Defendant
advertised, that she was receiving a substantial discount, and that
the opportunity to get that discount was time-limited. These
reasonable beliefs are what caused the Plaintiff to buy from
Defendant when she did.
In truth, however, the representations the Plaintiff relied on were
not true. The purported regular prices were not the true regular
prices that Defendant sells the products for, the purported
discounts were not the true discounts, and the discounts were
ongoing—not time limited. Had Defendant been truthful, the
Plaintiff and other consumers like her would not have purchased the
Products, or would have paid less for them, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased Leesa Products.
Brooklyn Bedding LLC sells and markets mattresses and bedding
products online through the Leesa brand and website,
www.leesa.com.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Simon Franzini, Esq.
Grace Bennett, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Phone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
Email: simon@dovel.com
grace@dovel.com
CENTESSA PHARMACEUTICALS: Fernandes Suit Dismissed w/o Prejudice
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAMIA FERNANDES, et al.,
v. CENTESSA PHARMACEUTICALS PLC, et al., Case No.
1:22-cv-08805-GHW-SLC (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gregory Woods
entered an order granting Defendants' motion to dismiss without
prejudice.
The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motion pending at
Dkt. No. 71.
The Court finds that the Plaintiffs have failed to adequately plead
"the existence of either a misstatement or an unlawful omission"
that was likely to "have misled a reasonable investor."
The Plaintiffs -- who purchased Centessa stock at its IPO, and held
it following the press release announcing lixivaptan's
discontinuation --brought this action, alleging that the defendants
violated the Securities Act through alleged misstatements and
omissions in Centessa's Registration Statement.
Namely, the Plaintiffs alleged that the defendants failed to
disclose that some of the studies and models Centessa had relied on
in hypothesizing the potentially relatively favorable safety
profile of lixivaptan (in comparison to tolvaptan) were, in
Plaintiffs' view, "too short" in duration, utilized the "wrong"
population, or failed to account for an allegedly key variable.
Centessa is a pharmaceutical research and development company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xzoSSX at no extra
charge.[CC]
CHEFS' WAREHOUSE: Faces Vasquez Wage-and-Suit in S.D.N.Y.
---------------------------------------------------------
DAVID VASQUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. THE CHEFS' WAREHOUSE, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 1:24-cv-05949 (S.D.N.Y., August 6, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for unpaid wages due to time-shaving in
violation of various labor laws in the U.S. and for breach of
contract and unjust enrichment.
The Plaintiff was employed as a truck driver operating out of the
Defendant's distribution center located at 240 Food Center Dr.,
Bronx, New York from January 2024 until June 2024.
The Chefs' Warehouse, Inc. is a provider of delivery services based
in Connecticut. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C.K. Lee, Esq.
LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
148 West 24th Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10011
Telephone: (212) 465-1188
Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
CIRCLE 9 RESOURCE: GOP LLC Files Suit in Okla. Dist. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Acadian Ambulance
Service Inc. The case is styled as GOP LLC, on behalf of itself and
all others similarly situated v. Circle 9 Resources LLC, C9 Subco
LLC, Case No. 6:24-cv-01045 (Okla. Dist. Ct., Canadian Cty., Aug.
5, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Civil Relief More Than $10,000: Class
Action."
Circle 9 Resources LLC is an Oklahoma City based energy
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Randy C. Smith, Esq.
211 North Robinson, Ste 1310
Oklahoma City, OK 73102
CITADEL SERVICING: Plaintiffs' Bid for Class Certification Tossed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Falon Ballard et al., v.
Citadel Servicing Corporation et al., Case No.
8:22-cv-01679-FWS-ADS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Fred Slaughter
entered an order denying the Plaintiffs' motion for class
certification.
(1) a "debt collection class" comprised of
"all persons in California who received a payment
'accommodation' from the Defendant as that term is defined
by
the CARES Act, were current before the accommodation, and
received a past due debt collection notice as a result of
the
non-payments subject to the accommodation, during the
relevant
statute of limitations period" (the "Debt Collection
Class");
and
(2) a "credit reporting class" comprised of:
"all persons in California who received a payment
'accommodation' from the Defendant as defined by the CARES
Act,
were current before the accommodation, and whose accounts
were
reported as delinquent or past due as a result of the non-
payments subject to the accommodation, during the relevant
statute of limitations period" (the "Credit Reporting
Class").
The court finds class certification is not appropriate because
Plaintiffs have not carried their burden to show that they are
typical or adequate representatives of the class, or that questions
of law or fact common to class members predominate over any
questions affecting only Plaintiffs.
The Plaintiffs assert claims against Defendant for violation of (1)
the California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act ("CCRAA"),
(2) the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"), and (3) the Rosenthal
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act ("Rosenthal Act").
On July 24, 2024, the court granted in part and denied in part
Defendant’s motion for summary judgment
Citadel provides non-prime loans for residential properties on both
an owner occupied and non-owner occupied basis.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 29, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=mRU4fN at no extra
charge.[CC]
CREDIT COUNSEL: Misrepresents Debt Validation Date, Ortiz Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
MARC ORTIZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. CREDIT COUNSEL, INC., Defendant, Case No.
CACE-24-011136 (Fla. Cir. Ct., 17th Jud. Cir., Broward Cty., August
6, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of
the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and the Florida Consumer
Collection Practices Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's incorrect calculation of the
end of the validation period in connection with its collection of a
consumer debt. Through voicemails and collection letter, the
Defendant misrepresented the date that it would be allowed to
report the consumer debt on the Plaintiff's credit report. As a
result of the Defendant's misconduct, the Plaintiff and the Class
suffered damages, the suit says.
Credit Counsel, Inc. is a debt collector based in Pines, Florida.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 907-1136
Facsimile: (855) 529-9540
Email: jibrael@jibraellaw.com
zane@jibraellaw.com
gerald@jibraellaw.com
CROWDSTRIKE HOLDINGS: Plymouth Cty. Assoc. Hits Share Price Drop
----------------------------------------------------------------
PLYMOUTH COUNTY RETIREMENT ASSOCIATION, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CROWDSTRIKE
HOLDINGS, INC., GEORGE KURTZ, and BURT W. PODBERE, Defendants, Case
No. 1:24-cv-00857 (W.D. Tex., July 30, 2024) is a federal
securities class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and a class of
all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
CrowdStrike Class A common stock between November 29, 2023 and July
29, 2024, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5, promulgated
thereunder.
Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants repeatedly touted the
efficacy of the Falcon platform while assuring investors that
CrowdStrike's technology was "validated, tested, and certified."
This complaint alleges that these statements were false and
misleading because Defendants had failed to disclose that: (1)
CrowdStrike had instituted deficient controls in its procedure for
updating Falcon and was not properly testing updates to Falcon
before rolling them out to customers; (2) this inadequate software
testing created a substantial risk that an update to Falcon could
cause major outages for a significant number of the Company's
customers; and (3) such outages could pose, and in fact ultimately
created, substantial reputational harm and legal risk to
CrowdStrike. As a result of these materially false and misleading
statements and omissions, CrowdStrike stock traded at artificially
high prices during the Class Period, says the suit.
The lawsuit alleges that on July 19, 2024, news broke that a flawed
Falcon content update caused major worldwide technology outages for
millions of devices running Microsoft Windows. On this news, the
price of CrowdStrike stock fell more than 11%. On July 22, 2024,
the price of CrowdStrike stock fell more than 13%. Finally, on July
29, 2024, the price of CrowdStrike stock fell nearly 10%.
CrowdStrike Holdings, Inc. is incorporated in Delaware and
headquartered in Austin, Texas. CrowdStrike is a global
cybersecurity company that provides software that helps prevent
data breaches.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Guillaume Buell, Esq.
Eric J. Belfi, Esq.
Francis P. McConville, Esq.
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 907-0700
Facsimile: (212) 818-0477
E-mail: gbuell@labaton.com
ebelfi@labaton.com
fmcconville@labaton.com
CROWDSTRIKE INC: Del Rio Sues Over Flawed and Negligence Update
---------------------------------------------------------------
Julio Del Rio, Jack Murphy, and Steven Bixby, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. CROWDSTRIKE, INC., Case
No. 1:24-cv-00881 (W.D. Tex., Aug. 5, 2024), is brought assert
claims for negligence, violation of the California Unfair
Competition Law, and public nuisance, and seek declaratory relief,
injunctive relief, monetary damages, statutory damages, punitive
damages, equitable relief, and all other relief authorized by law
as a result of CrowdStrike's flawed update.
On July 19, 2024, CrowdStrike released a security software update
for its Falcon platform. Rolling out this update should have been a
routine process without any noticeable impact on CrowdStrike's
customers' information technology ("IT") systems. Instead, shortly
after the release of the update "a global tech disaster was
underway. Due to CrowdStrike's negligent conduct, the software
update contained one or more serious bugs2 or errors that caused
millions of computers around the world to repeatedly crash and
become inoperable (the "CrowdStrike Outage").
CrowdStrike's flawed update not only interfered with airlines—it
also severely interrupted the lives of the millions of people
traveling in the days immediately following the CrowdStrike Outage.
The CrowdStrike Outage grounded thousands of flights and delayed
thousands more, often stranding travelers in airports thousands of
miles away from their intended destination for hours—and even
days.
But lengthy delays were not the only consequence of the outage for
travelers. Faced with increasingly long delays and mounting flight
cancellations, many travelers had no option but to spend hundreds
of dollars or more on additional meals, lodging, or other travel
arrangements as they desperately sought a way to their
destination.
CrowdStrike's failure to properly develop, test, and deploy the
Falcon update caused the CrowdStrike Outage and delayed or
cancelled Plaintiffs' and Class members' flights. These delays and
cancellations in turn forced Plaintiffs and Class members to incur
additional expenses and damages. This action seeks to remedy these
consequences of CrowdStrike's negligence. Plaintiffs bring this
action on behalf of themselves and all persons who had a flight
delayed or cancelled as a result of the CrowdStrike Outage, says
the complaint.
The Plaintiffs' airline IT system were affected by the Defendants
update.
CrowdStrike is a cybersecurity firm that offers commercial data
protection and cybersecurity services and products intended to keep
computers safe from cyberattacks and malware, including its Falcon
platform.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Cory S. Fein, Esq.
CORY FEIN LAW FIRM
712 Main Street, Suite 800
Houston, TX 77002
Phone: 713-730-5001
Fax: 530-748-0601
Email: cory@coryfeinlaw.com
- and -
Ben Barnow, Esq.
Anthony L. Parkhill, Esq.
BARNOW AND ASSOCIATES, P.C.
205 West Randolph Street, Ste. 1630
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: 312-621-2000
Fax: 312-641-5504
Email: b.barnow@barnowlaw.com
aparkhill@barnowlaw.com
DP AUDIO VIDEO: Craft Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against DP Audio Video LLC.
The case is styled as Robert Craft, individually, and on behalf of
the other memebers of the general public similarly situated v. DP
Audio Video LLC, Case No. STK-CV-UNPI-2024-0009270 (Cal. Super.
Ct., San Joaquin Cty., Aug. 5, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Non-PI/PD/WD (Other)
Tort."
DP Audio Video LLC offers high-end sound, lighting, and video.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
Adrian Robert Bacon, Esq.
Matthew R. Snyder, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF TODD M FRIEDMAN PC
21031 Ventura Blvd., Ste. 340
Woodland Hills, CA 91364-6522
Phone: 323-306-4234
Fax: 866-633-0228
Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
abacon@toddflaw.com
msnyder@toddflaw.com
ELSEVIER INC: Lyall Suit Alleges Greenwashing Practices
-------------------------------------------------------
KIP LYALL, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. ELSEVIER INC, RELX PLC, and CELL PRESS INC, Case No.
1:24-cv-12022-PBS (D. Mass., Aug. 6, 2024) is an action brought by
Kip Lyall alleging violation of the Americans with Disabilities
Act, Fair Employment Practices Act, Wrongful Discharge in Violation
of Public Policy, Securities Exchange Act Section 10(b) and Rule
10b-5, and Promissory Estoppel.
Mr. Lyall worked at Defendants' company since 2014. On 2020, Mr.
Lyall discovered that the Defendants were engaged in greenwashing:
their business conduct were actively supporting fossil fuel
expansion while they pledged to protect the climate as part of
their public-facing marketing. Mr. Lyall felt misled by the
Defendants. Mr. Lyall decided to speak up to the Defendants
regarding his climate-related concerns.
This complaint alleges the Defendants' misrepresentations about its
environmental sustainability commitment which misled shareholders,
consumers, the scientific community, and members of the public.
Contrary to their bold representations and pledges to environmental
sustainability goals, the Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants
have made numerous business decisions that contradict their climate
pledges in materials filed to the SEC and disclosed to investors,
marketing materials, and commitments to international
organizations.
The Plaintiff alleges that instead of acknowledging the concerns
and engaging in change, the Defendants intimidated and harassed
him. And in August 2023, Mr. Lyall was terminated from his job,
alleged for speaking out against the company's greenwashing
practices.
As a result of the Defendants' deceptive business practices, and
pressure and harassment targeting the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff
experienced severe decline in mental health. The Plaintiff suffered
from anxiety and helplessness when the Defendants' leadership
refused to acknowledge the irreversible harms associated with its
business conduct at the expense of global health. He experienced
grief and despair while observing people in management and power
take willfully performative action to exacerbate the climate crisis
and manipulate the findings of scientists for their own profit. He
felt unsafe at his workplace due to the Defendants' harassment,
isolation, and pressure toward the Plaintiff, asserts the
Plaintiff.
Mr. Lyall is a former employee of Cell Press, a publisher of
scientific journals and subsidiary of Elsevier, where he was an
Illustration & Design Program Manager. He purchased 4 shares of
RELX stock on March 8, 2021.
Elsevier is a subsidiary of RELX Group. Inc and one of the world's
largest academic publishing companies specializing in scientific,
technical, and medical contents which operates databases and
publishes literature such as the widely used scientific, technical,
and medical research platform ScienceDirect.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Juyoun Han, Esq.
Eric Baum, Esq.
Patrick K. Lin, Esq.
EISENBERG & BAUM LLP
24 Union Square East, Penthouse
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 353-8700
E-mail: jhan@eandblaw.com
- and -
Angie I. Martell, Esq.
IGLESIA MARTELL LAW FIRM PLLC
2723 S. State Street, Suite 150
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
Telephone: (734) 369-2331
E-mail: angie@iglesiamartell.com
ENROLL CONFIDENTLY: Voelker Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
ADAM VOELKER, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ENROLL CONFIDENTLY, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 2:24-cv-01886-DJH (D. Ariz., July 30, 2024) seeks monetary
damages and injunctive and declaratory relief arising from
Defendant's failure to safeguard the personally identifiable
information and protected health information of Plaintiff and Class
members, which resulted in unauthorized access to its information
systems on February 13, 2024, and the compromised and unauthorized
disclosure of that private information, causing widespread injury
and damages to Plaintiff and the proposed members.
According to the complaint, the Defendants detected unusual
activity in its computer systems and ultimately determined that an
unauthorized third party accessed its network and obtained certain
files from its systems on February 13. As a result of the data
breach, which Defendant failed to prevent, the private information
of Plaintiff and the proposed Class members, was stolen, including
their names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security numbers,
and medical information.
The Plaintiff brings causes of action against Defendant for
negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, invasion
of privacy, breach of fiduciary duty, violation of the California
Unfair Competition Law, and violation of the California Consumer
Records Act, seeking an award of monetary damages and injunctive
and declaratory relief, resulting from Defendant's failure to
adequately protect their highly sensitive private information.
Enroll Confidently, Inc. is a Delaware corporation offering a
benefits enrollment platform to employers and benefits
providers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Ave, Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
FENIX INTERNET: Bones Files Suit in Fla. Cir. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fenix Internet, LLC.
The case is styled as Sabian Bones, individually and on behalf of
all those similarly situated v. Fenix Internet, LLC, Case No.
2024-12589-CIDL (Fla. Cir. Ct., Volusia Cty., Aug. 5, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Other Civil - Circuit."
Fenix Internet -- http://fenixinternet.net/-- is a multifaceted
tech company with a focus on staying ahead of the curve.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (754) 444-7539
Email: gerald@jibraellaw.com
FINANCIAL BUSINESS: Fullwood Suit Removed to M.D. Florida
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Damica Fullwood, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Financial Business and Consumer
Solutions, Inc., Case No. 2024 CC 002654 was removed from the 9th
Judicial Circuit-Osceola County, to the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida on July 11, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 6:24-cv-01255-CEM-LHP to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Financial Business and Consumer Solutions, Inc. (FBCS) --
https://www.fbcs-inc.com/ -- is a nationally licensed and bonded
collection agency offering pre-charge off, early out, and third
party collection services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zane Charles Hedaya, Esq.
Gerald D Lane, Jr., Esq.
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th St., Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (813) 340-8838
Email: zane@jibraellaw.com
gerald@jibraellaw.com
jibrael@jibraellaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Edward J. McAndrew, Esq.
Nathalie A. Freeman, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
1735 Market Street, Suite 3300
Philadelphia, PA 19103
- and -
Robyn M. Feldstein, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
45 Rockefeller Plaza
- and -
Cailey Marsh, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
200 South Orange Avenue, Suite 2300
Orlando, FL 32801
Phone: (727) 743-0364
Email: cmarsh@bakerlaw.com
FUN SPOT: Unlawfully Sends Debt Collection Email, Parry Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA PARRY, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FUN SPOT OF FLORIDA, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 2024-CA-000561 (Fla. Cir. Ct., 5th Jud. Cir., Citrus Cty.,
August 6, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for
violation of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act.
The case arises from the Defendant's practice of sending electronic
mail communications to the Plaintiff and similarly situated
consumers between the hours of 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM in connection
with the collection of consumer debt without prior consent.
Fun Spot of Florida, Inc. is an amusement park company in Florida.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
Faaris K. Uddin, Esq.
Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 907-1136
Email: jibrael@jibraellaw.com
faaris@jibraellaw.com
zane@jibraellaw.com
gerald@jibraellaw.com
GOFUND ADVANCE: Appeals Court Judgment in Haymount Suit to 2nd Cir.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GOFUND ADVANCE, LLC, et al. are taking an appeal from a court
judgment in the lawsuit entitled Haymount Urgent Care PC, et al.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. GoFund Advance, LLC, et al., Defendants, Case No.
1:22-cv-1245, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York.
Plaintiffs Haymount Urgent Care P.C. ("Haymount") and Dr. Robert A.
Clinton sued defendants GoFund Advance, LLC ("GoFund"), Funding
123, LLC ("Funding 123"), Merchant Capital, LLC ("Merchant
Capital"), Alpha Recovery Partners, LLC ("Alpha Recovery"),
Yitzchok Wolf, Yosef Brezel, Joseph Kroen, and Yisroel Getter for
engaging in debt-collection practices that allegedly violated state
and federal law. At the start of this case, plaintiff was asserting
six claims against the defendants: (1) a RICO claim premised on the
collection of unlawful debts and a pattern of wire fraud; (2) a
racketeering conspiracy claim, premised on the same underlying
conduct as the substantive RICO claim; (3) a claim seeking a
declaratory judgment that a settlement agreement and the merchant
cash advance ("MCA") agreements plaintiffs entered into were void;
(4) a common law fraud claim for charging excessive fees and
extracting unauthorized debits using a misleading name to evade a
block on plaintiffs’ bank account; (5) a breach of contract claim
for underfunding and over-collecting on the MCA agreements; and (6)
a Section 1983 claim for violating due process by abusing
Connecticut's pre-judgment attachment statute.
At the motion to dismiss stage, the Court permitted the RICO,
racketeering conspiracy, breach of contract, and Section 1983
claims to move forward; however, the Court dismissed the
declaratory relief claim (except as against GoFund related to a
settlement agreement) and the common law fraud claim (except as
against GoFund relating to the extraction of unauthorized debits
using a misleading name to evade a block on plaintiffs' bank
account).
Then, on summary judgment, the Court entered judgment in favor of
defendants on all but the breach of contract claim, which the Court
permitted to proceed against all the defendants except for Mr.
Getter. However, because plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their
claims against Mr. Kroen, the only defendants remaining on the
breach of contract claim after summary judgment were Mr. Wolf, Mr.
Brezel, Alpha Recovery, GoFund, Funding 123, and Merchant Capital.
And, as the parties agreed at the start of trial, the only
plaintiff on this remaining claim was Haymount.
Accordingly, by the time of trial, only one claim remained for the
Court to adjudicate: whether the remaining defendants are liable to
Haymount for breaching the six MCA agreements entered into between
Haymount and the corporate defendants (GoFund, Merchant Capital,
and Funding 123).
Based upon the evidence presented at the bench trial, Plaintiff
asserted that Defendants breached the MCA agreements by: (1)
underfunding the agreements through the device of charging
excessive fees, as well as by funding the agreements in two
tranches; (2) collecting more from Plaintiff than Defendants were
owed under the contracts; and (3) filing an improper UCC lien that
resulted in a freeze being placed on Haymount's HRSA account.
Plaintiff asserted that not only are the corporate defendants, who
are the parties to the MCA agreements, liable for these breaches
but also that the individual defendants, Mr. Wolf and Mr. Brezel,
are alter egos of the corporate defendants and thus liable for
these breaches.
On June 26, 2024, Judge Jed S. Rakoff found that GoFund, Funding
123, and Mr. Wolf are liable for breach of contract, but no one
else. The Court ruled that the Plaintiff is entitled to $170,000
against Funding 123 with interest calculated at 8% from February 7,
2022, amounting to $32,453.70 in total interest; and $52,471.77
from GoFund with interest calculated at 8% from February 7, 2022,
amounting to $10,017.08 in total interest; with Mr. Wolf also being
jointly and severally liable to Plaintiff for $170,000 owed by
Funding 123 with interest calculated at 8% from February 7, 2022,
amounting to $32, 453.70 in total interest; and $50,071.77 owed by
GoFund with interest calculated at 8% from February 7, 2022,
amounting to $9,558.91 in total interest.
On June 27, 2024, judgment was entered in favor of Haymount Urgent
Care PC against Funding 123 LLC; in favor of Haymount Urgent Care
PC against GoFund Advance, LLC; in favor of Haymount Urgent Care PC
against Yitzchok Wolf in the amount of $264,942.55.
The appellate case is captioned Haymount Urgent Care PC, et al. v.
GoFund Advance, LLC, et al., Case No. 24-2003, in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed on July 29, 2024. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellees HAYMOUNT URGENT CARE PC, et al., individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented
by:
Shane Robert Heskin, Esq.
WHITE AND WILLIAMS LLP
1650 Market Street
1 Liberty Place
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Defendants-Appellees GOFUND ADVANCE, LLC, et al. are represented
by:
Elliot Hahn, Esq.
HAHN EISENBERGER PLLC
969 East 27th Street
Brooklyn, NY 11210
GORDON LANE: Parrish Seeks to Modify Class Cert Scheduling Order
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as GAIL PARRISH by and
through Successor in Interest, Monica Parrish, v. GORDON LANE
HEALTHCARE, LLC; SUN MAR MANAGEMENT SERVICES; IRVING BAUMAN; FRANK
JOHNSON; ELI MARMUR; WILLIAM PRESNELL and DOES 1- 250, inclusive,
Case No. 8:22-cv-01790-WLH-KES (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the
Court to enter an order modifying the Scheduling Order to extend
the deadline by which motions are to be filed to permit the filing
of a Second Amended Complaint and Motion for Class Certification,
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15 and Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 16.
The motion is noticed for hearing on Sept. 6, 2024, at 1:30 p.m.
This Motion is based on this Notice of Motion and Motion, the
Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the accompanying Declaration
of Brian Umpierre in support of the motion, and any further
evidence or argument offered at the hearing on the Motion. This
motion is made following the conference of counsel pursuant to L.R.
7-3 which took place on July 26, 2024.
The Plaintiff seeks leave to modify the Scheduling Order to extend
the deadline by which motions are to be filed and heard so as to
permit an amendment to the Complaint to name two additional
plaintiffs and proposed representatives of a class of Gordon Lane
residents who are not subject to arbitration, and the filing of
Plaintiff’s Second Amended Motion for Class Certification.
Each of the proposed representatives, like the current
named-Plaintiff Monica Parrish, has claims that are not subject to
arbitration. This Court previously denied Plaintiffs’ class
certification motion without prejudice on the grounds that
Plaintiff Parrish was not a member of the proposed classes she
sought to represent as defined in her motion. Specifically, insofar
as Plaintiff sought to certify classes consisting of current and
former residents of Gordon Lane who did not execute an arbitration
agreement with Defendant (or opted-out of such agreement), she was
not a member of the class so defined.
On March 14, 2023, the Plaintiff initially moved for class
certification seeking to certify classes of all current and former
Gordon Lane residents from Aug. 17, 2019, regardless of arbitration
status.
On June 21, 2024, the Defendant agreed to provide in a supplemental
interrogatory response the identities of those of its residents
from Aug. 17, 2019, through Aug. 17, 2022, who it previously
identified in response to an earlier interrogatory were not subject
to arbitration and who also consented to the disclosure of their
personal information to Plaintiff's counsel.
Gordon Lane is a for-profit nursing home providing Medicare and
Medicaid services.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=oI8kC4 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kathryn A. Stebner, Esq.
Brian S. Umpierre, Esq.
STEBNER GERTLER GUADAGNI & KAWAMOTO
A Professional Law Corporation
870 Market Street, Suite 1285
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 362-9800
Facsimile: (415) 362-9801
E-mail: kathryn@sgg-lawfirm.com
brian@sgg-lawfirm.com
HALF ISLAND: Saunders Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SAUNDERS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HALF ISLAND FLAVORS LLC d/b/a SESHNYC
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-05764 (S.D.N.Y., July 30, 2024) is a
civil action against Defendant for their failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its website, www.myseshnyc.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, the New York State Human Rights
Law, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the New York State
Civil Rights Law.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was injured when
attempting to access the website on July 13, 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 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.
Half Island Flavors LLC is a New York limited liability company
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
HARVEST FOOD: Fails to Pay Line Workers' OT Wages, Luna Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MARIA GUADALUPE LUNA, and MARIA SOCORRO SILVA, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly situated and the general public v.
HARVEST FOOD PRODUCTS CO., INC.; PARTNERS PERSONNEL - MANAGEMENT
SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1
through 50, Case No. (Cal. Super., Aug. 6, 2024) alleges that the
Defendants failed to compensate the Plaintiffs and putative class
members for all of their hours worked at their regular and overtime
rates.
Prior to clocking in the start of their shifts, the Plaintiffs and
putative class members were required by the Defendant to put on
personal protective equipment (PPE) which consisted of a hair cap,
white robe, gloves and mask resulting in unpaid off-the-clock work.
The Plaintiffs and putative class members were also required by the
Defendant to clean their shoes, wash their hands, put on plastic
sleeves and a plastic apron before clocking in the start of their
shifts resulting in unpaid off-the-clock work. At the end of their
shifts, the Plaintiffs and putative class members were required to
remove their PPE after the Defendant clocked them out of their
shift, says the suit.
In addition, due to the policy and practice of the Defendant to
require the Plaintiffs and putative class members to put on and
remove their PPE within their thirty-minute meal period, the meal
periods of Plaintiffs and putative class members were short in that
they enjoyed less than 30 minutes of meal period, the suit
asserts.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants to work at the food
manufacturing facility as nonexempt line workers on October 17,
2023.
Harvest is a food manufacturing company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Arlo Garcia Uriarte, Esq.
Un Kei Wu, Esq.
Elizabeth Lyons, Esq.
LIBERATION LAW GROUP, P.C.
3 1[2760 Mission Street
San Francisco, CA 94110
Telephone: (415) 695-1000
Facsimile: (415) 695-1006
E-mail: unkei@liberationlawgroup.com
HEALTHEQUITY INC: Fails to Protect Customers' Info, Keane Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jennifer Keane, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. HealthEquity, Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-00561-HCN (D.
Utah, Aug. 6, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to adequately
protect the Plaintiff's and Class Members' personal identifiable
information.
On March 25, 2024, HealthEquity became aware of a systems anomaly
requiring an extensive technical investigation and data forensics
until June 10, 2024.
On June 26, 2024, the Defendant admitted that it experienced a data
breach in a Data Breach Notification Submission to the Office of
the Maine Attorney General. The Notification Submission states that
the breach affected 4.3 million people.
The Plaintiff has allegedly suffered emotional distress from the
release of her PII and PHI, which she expected HealthEquity to
protect from disclosure, including anxiety, concern, and unease
about unauthorized parties viewing and potentially using her PII
and PHI.
As a result of the Data Breach, the Plaintiff and Class Members
have suffered concrete damages and are now exposed to a heightened
and imminent risk of fraud and identity theft for a period of
years, if not decades, the suit asserts.
Furthermore, the Plaintiff and Class Members must now and in the
future closely monitor their financial accounts to guard against
identity theft, at their own expense. Consequently, Plaintiff and
the other Class Members will incur ongoing out-of-pocket costs for,
e.g., purchasing credit monitoring services, credit freezes, credit
reports, or other protective measures to deter and detect identity
theft, the suit adds.
The Plaintiff is a customer of HealthEquity and has used its
financial services for over 12 years.
HealthEquity is an American financial technology and business
services company that is designated as a non-bank health savings
trustee by the IRS.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jason R. Hull, Esq.
Anikka T. Hoidal, Esq.
MARSHALL OLSON & HULL, PC
Ten Exchange Place, Suite 350
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone: (801) 456-7655
E-mail: jhull@mohtrial.com
ahoidal@mohtrial.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
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
- and -
Thomas E. Loeser, Esq.
COTCHETT, PITRE & MCCARTHY, LLP
999 N. Northlake Way, Suite 215
Seattle, WA 98103
Telephone: (206) 802-1272
E-mail: tloeser@cpmlegal.com.com
JAMES LEBLANC: Class Certification Bid in VOE Suit Due Sept. 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as VOICE OF THE EXPERIENCED,
A MEMBERSHIP ORGANIZATION ON BEHALF OF ITSELF AND ITS MEMBERS, ET
AL. V. JAMES LEBLANC, ET AL., Case No. 3:23-cv-01304-BAJ-EWD (M.D.
La.), the Hon. Judge Brian Jackson entered an order granting the
Joint Motion to Amend Third Amended Scheduling Order and the Joint
Motion to Expedite Consideration of Joint Motion to Amend Third
Amended Scheduling Order.
The Court's Third Amended Scheduling Order is amended as follows:
1. The deadline to join other parties or to amend the pleadings
is
expired.
2. The Plaintiffs' class certification motion due: Sept. 30,
2024
3. Defendants' response due: Oct. 21, 2024. Plaintiffs' reply
brief due: Oct. 31, 2024.
4. Plaintiffs' expert reports due: Aug. 30, 2024. Defendants'
expert reports due: Sept. 13, 2024.
5. Discovery must be completed by: Sept. 16, 2024. Expert
discovery, including depositions, must be completed by: Sept.
30, 2024.
6. Deadline to file dispositive motions and Daubert motions:
Oct.
7, 2024.
7. Deadline to file pre-trial order: Oct. 14, 2024.
8. Deadline to file motions in limine: Oct. 14, 2024. Responses
to
motions in limine due: Oct. 28, 2024.
9. Deadline to file an affidavit of settlement efforts: Nov. 4,
2024.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=auGTqW at no extra
charge.[CC]
JP ECOMMERCE: Website Inaccessible to Blind Users, Bishop Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CEDRIC BISHOP, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated v. JP ECOMMERCE, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-05985 (S.D.N.Y.,
Aug. 6, 2024) sues the Defendant for its failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://barehome.com/, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons,
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
July 18, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a light bamboo sheet from
the Defendant and to view the information on the Website, the
Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers that denied the
Plaintiff a shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person
and full and equal access to the goods and services offered to the
public and made available to the public, the suit says.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue to
contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation and segregation. The
Plaintiff now seeks a 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 consumers.
JP Ecommerce manufactures bed and bath textile products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, 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
E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
LENOVO INC: Must Oppose Axelrod Class Cert Bid by Oct. 4
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANDREW AXELROD and ELIOT
BURK, individually and on behalf all others similarly situated, v.
LENOVO (UNITED STATES) INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No.
4:21-cv-06770-JSW (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jeffrey White entered
an order granting seventh stipulation to extend class certification
deadlines:
Event Current New
Deadline
Deadline
Deadline to file opposition to Sept. 17, 2024 Oct. 4,
2024
motion for class certification
and to serve Defendant's expert
disclosures and reports:
Deadline to produce Defendant's Oct. 29, 2024 Nov. 15,
2024
experts for deposition:
Deadline to file reply re motion Dec. 3, 2024 Dec. 20,
2024
for class certification:
Hearing on motion for class Jan. 17, 2025 Feb. 7,
2025
Certification:
Lenovo operates as a software and hardware reseller.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7BK4dK at no extra
charge.[CC]
LUCKY COIN: Faces Ramales Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------------
JUANA RAMALES, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LUCKY COIN 888 LAUNDROMAT INC. (D/B/A LUCKY
COIN 888 LAUNDROMAT), WENJIN LIN, and YANFANG LUI, Defendants, Case
No. 1:24-cv-05745 (S.D.N.Y., July 30, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendants for unpaid minimum and overtime wages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and for violations of the
New York Labor Law, including applicable liquidated damages,
interest, attorneys' fees, and costs.
The Plaintiff alleges the Defendants' failure to pay minimum and
overtime wages, failure to provide with a written wage notice, and
failure to furnish accurate wage statements.
Plaintiff Ramales was employed as a laundry service clerk at
Defendants' Laundromat located in New York.
Lucky Coin 888 Laundromat Inc. owns, operates, and controls a
laundry service in New York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Catalina Sojo, Esq.
CSM LEGAL, P.C.
60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
New York, NY 10165
Telephone: (212) 317-1200
Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
LUNA CUISINE: Chen Appeals Denied Bid for Leave to Appeal
---------------------------------------------------------
XIU CHEN is taking an appeal from a court order denying her motion
for leave to appeal in forma pauperis in the lawsuit entitled
Emmanuel Templos, et al., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Luna Cuisine, Inc., et al.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:21-cv-00694, in the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of New York.
The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.
On June 27, 2024, Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto entered an order denying
a motion filed by filed by Xiu Chen, Gold Gong Inc., Luna Cuisine,
Inc., to set aside default judgment.
Defendant Xiu Chen filed a motion for leave to appeal in forma
pauperis, which the Court denied through an Order entered by Judge
Kiyo A. Matsumoto on July 25, 2024. The Court ruled that in
accordance with 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1915(a)(3), any appeal taken from
the Court's Memorandum and Order denying Defendants' motion to
vacate the default judgment would not be in good faith, and thus,
denied in forma pauperis status for the purpose of appeal.
The appellate case is captioned Templos v. Luna Cuisine, Inc., Case
No. 24-2011, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit,
filed on July 29, 2024. [BN]
Defendant-Appellant XIU CHEN appears pro se.
MADEWELL INC: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Dalton Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Madewell Inc., Case No. 0:24-cv-03142 (D. Minn., Aug.
6, 2024) contends that the Defendant's Website, www.madewell.com,
is not fully and equally accessible to people who are blind or who
have low vision in violation of both the general non-discriminatory
mandate and the effective communication and auxiliary aids and
services requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and
its implementing regulations, and the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
As a consequence of the Plaintiff's experience visiting the
Defendant's Website, including in the past year, and from
investigation performed on her behalf, the Plaintiff found the
Defendant's Website has a number of digital barriers that deny
screen-reader users like the Plaintiff full and equal access to
important Website content – content the Defendant makes available
to its sighted Website users. The Defendant's ongoing violations of
Title III have caused, and in the absence of an injunction will
continue to cause, harm to the Plaintiff and other individuals with
visual disabilities, the suit says.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction requiring a change in
the Defendant's corporate policies to cause its online store to
become, and remain, accessible to individuals with visual
disabilities; a civil penalty payable to the state of Minnesota
pursuant to Minn. Stat. 363A.33, Subd. 6 and Minn. Stat. section
363A.29, subd. 4 (2023); damages, and a damage multiplier pursuant
to Minn. Stat. section 363A.33, subd. 6 (2023), and Minn. Stat.
section 363A.29, subd. 4 (2023).
Madewell Inc. offers clothing, and accessories for sale including
jeans, t-shirts, tops, dresses, socks, shoes, wallets, belts, and
more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
Jason Gustafson, Esq.
THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC
80 South 8th Street, Suite 900
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
E-mail: chad@throndsetlaw.com
pat@throndsetlaw.com
jason@throndsetlaw.com
MERCER COUNTY, PA: Plaintiffs Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOYELLE CAMPBELL and
CLAYTON BOYD, individually and on behalf of a class of others
similarly situated, v. THE COUNTY OF MERCER, Case No.
2:23-cv-00099-CB-KT (W.D. Pa.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to
enter an order, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23,
certifying this action as a class action.
Mercer County is a county located in the U.S. state of New Jersey.
Its county seat is Trenton.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=hFKZBb at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
D. Aaron Rihn, Esq.
ROBERT PEIRCE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
707 Grant Street, Suite 125
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Telephone: (412) 281-7229
Facsimile: (412) 281-4229
E-mail: arihn@peircelaw.com
META PLATFORMS: Sued Over Harmful Effects of Social Media
---------------------------------------------------------
Ajita Abraham, on behalf of A.A. (a minor), individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. META PLATFORMS, INC.,
INSTAGRAM, LLC, META PAYMENTS, INC., and META PLATFORMS
TECHNOLOGIES, Case No. 3:24-cv-04723 (N.D. Cal., Aug. 5, 2024), is
brought against Meta, a social media conglomerate that targets
minors and encourages, to the point of addiction, their harmful
overuse of Meta's platforms.
This country universally bans minor access to other addictive
products, like tobacco and alcohol, because of the physical and
psychological damage such products can inflict. Social media is no
different, and Meta's own documents prove that it knows its
products harm children. Nonetheless, Meta has done nothing to
improve its social media products or limit their access to young
users. In fact, a child can sign up for Meta's harmful products in
a matter of minutes, without any parental or guardian guidance or
consent.
Meta products include "Facebook," its well-known social media
platform, and "Instagram." When using these platforms, the user is
able to post messages, pictures, and videos; view postings by other
users, including news outlets and influencers; and communicate with
those other users. Limited to these functions, Meta's products
might have been safe for minors. However, Meta has, in violation of
both state and federal law, manipulated its products in an effort
to further entice and ultimately ensnare young people into a
harmful obsession with social media; these efforts include
functions that relentlessly feed harmful content to young Meta
users. Meta has hidden the impacts of these features, made
misleading public statements about their effect on young users, and
publicly pretends to care about issues like parental controls and
limiting youth access.
Supplying harmful products to children is unlawful in every
jurisdiction in this country, under both state and federal law and
basic principles of products liability. And yet, that is what Meta
does every hour of every day of every year. Meta's conduct has
harmed Plaintiff and Class Members and will continue to harm them
unless and until it is stopped. As demonstrated in more detail
below, Plaintiff and Class Members are entitled to both
compensatory and injunctive relief for Meta's unlawful conduct.
Meta must also be disgorged of all profits earned from these
practices, says the complaint.
Minor A.A. is a thirteen-year-old from New York, New York. She has
been using Instagram since she was ten years old.
Meta Platforms is a Delaware corporation with its principal place
of business in Menlo Park, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Michelangelo Stein, Esq.
Nicholas Antonio Santos, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
44 Montgomery St., 41st Floor
San Francisco, CA 94104
Phone: (415) 293-6800
Fax: (415) 293-6899
Email: jstein@bsfllp.com
nsantos@bsfllp.com
- and -
David Boies, Esq.
Alexander Boies, Esq.
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
Phone: (914) 749-8200
Fax: (914) 749-8300
Email: dboies@bsfllp.com
aboies@bsfllp.com
- and -
Sigrid S. McCawley, Esq.
401 East Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1200
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (954) 356-0011
Fax: (954) 356-0022
Email: smccawley@bsfllp.com
- and -
Jenny Kim, Esq.
55 Hudson Yards, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10001
Phone: (212) 446-2300
Fax: (212) 446-2350
Email: jkim@bsfllp.com
- and -
Michael P. Canty, Esq.
Carol C. Villegas, Esq.
Danielle Izzo, Esq.
LABATON KELLER SUCHAROW LLP
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Phone: (212) 907-0700
Fax: (212) 818-0477
Email: mcanty@labaton.com
cvillegas@labaton.com
dizzo@labaton.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
- and -
Alexandra M. Honeycutt, Esq.
800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
Knoxville, TN 37929
Phone: (865) 247-0080
Email: ahoneycutt@milberg.com
METROPOLIS TECHNOLOGIES: Uses Drivers' Personal Info, Petrone Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
MATTHEW PETRONE, and GREGORY ANDERSON, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. METROPOLIS
TECHNOLOGIES INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00928 (M.D. Tenn.,
July 30, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for
unlawfully obtaining and using personal information of drivers from
their driver motor vehicle records in violation of the Driver's
Privacy Protection Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant's facilities operate
entirely through the use of license plate reading
technology/cameras that allow Defendant to track vehicles when they
enter and exit a parking garage or parking lot. Rather than
utilizing gates or parking lot attendants, the Defendant requires
customers to pay for their parking through a QR code or mobile
application on their phone. The Defendant's parking facilities do
not adequately alert drivers through signage or otherwise that they
must pay to park in the facilities. Because of this, many drivers
do not pay for their parking and exit the facility under the
reasonable assumption it was a free parking lot or garage.
However, the Defendant utilizes the license plate numbers they
collect from unknowing drivers to obtain personal information from
their driver motor vehicle records, including their name and
address. The Defendant then sends citations to drivers who did not
pay for their parking to the address listed on their DMV records.
The Defendant profits off the illegal use of drivers' personal
information obtained through their DMV records by mailing fake
parking citations to vehicle owners and threatening them with
severe consequences if they do not pay exorbitant sums, says the
suit.
Metropolis Technologies Inc. is a Delaware corporation that
primarily manages and operates parking lots and garages owned by
third parties throughout Tennessee and the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are 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
Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
Caroline C. Donovan, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, Fl 32
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: pfraietta@bursor.com
cdonovan@bursor.com
- and -
Brittany S. Scott, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: bscott@bursor.com
MOXION POWER: Dean Sues Over WARN Act Violation
-----------------------------------------------
Richard Dean, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated v.
MOXION POWER CO., Case No. 4:24-cv-04733 (N.D. Cal., Aug. 5, 2024),
is brought under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification
Act ("WARN Act") and the California Worker Adjustment and
Retraining Notification Act ("California WARN Act"), by the
Plaintiff on his own behalf and on behalf of the other similarly
situated persons against Moxion, the employer for WARN Act and
California WARN Act purposes.
On July 25, 2024, Defendant made a mass layoff or plant closure by,
unilaterally and without proper notice, permanently terminating
approximately 247 employees at its Richmond, California
facilities.
The Defendant failed to provide 60 days advance written notice as
required by the WARN Act, and the California WARN Act, to the
affected employees. On July 18, 2024, employees were notified that
they would be furloughed until August 5. A week later, on July 25,
2024, Defendant told employees that they would be indefinitely
terminated effectively immediately that day.
The Defendant's July 25, 2024, terminations constitute a mass
layoff or plant closing which became effective on that same
day—July 25, 2024. As such, Plaintiff and other similarly
situated employees should have received the full protection
afforded by the WARN Act and California WARN Acts, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant at all relevant times.
Moxion operated the facility located at 1414 Harbour Way South,
from where the employees worked.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eileen B. Goldsmith, Esq.
Danielle Leonard, Esq.
ALTSHULER BERZON LLP
177 Post Street, Suite 300
San Francisco, CA 94108
Phone: (415) 421-7151
Facsimile: (415) 362-8064
Email: egoldsmith@altber.com
dleonard@altber.com
- and -
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
Raina C. Borrelli, Esq.
STRAUSS & BORRELLI PLLC
613 Williamson St., Suite 201
Madison, WI 53703
Phone: (608) 237-1775
Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
Email: sam@straussborrelli.com
raina@straussborrelli.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Michael C. Iadevaia, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Phone: (615) 254-8801
Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
miadevaia@stranchlaw.com
- and -
Lynn A. Toops, Esq.
Amina A. Thomas, Esq.
COHEN & MALAD, LLP
One Indiana Square, Suite 1400
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Phone: (317) 636-6481
Email: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com
athomas@cohenandmalad.com
MRA-THE MANAGEMENT: Fontenot Files Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against MRA - The Management
Association Inc. The case is styled as Susan Giasson, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MRA - The
Management Association Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-00839-JPS (E.D. Wis.,
July 3, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
MRA -- https://www.mranet.org/ -- is an employer association that
partners with businesses to solve their HR issues.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew Gunem, Esq.
Raina C. Borrelli, Esq.
Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
980 N Michigan Ave Ste 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Phone: (872) 263-1100
Fax: (872) 263-1109
Email: agunem@straussborrelli.com
raina@straussborrelli.com
sam@straussborrelli.com
NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES: Deprives Stockholders' Rights, Mizel Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MITCHELL MIZEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC. and COREY M.
HOROWITZ, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-05955 (S.D.N.Y., August 6,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violation of
Section 15(a) of the Investment Company Act of 1940 (ICA).
The case arises from the Defendants' deprivation of the
stockholders' ICA rights in their By-Laws. The Plaintiff and
similarly situated stockholders seek an Order that (1) Network-1
meets the definition of an investment company, and that its
stockholders are entitled to voting rights as specified in ICA
Section 15; (2) the Plaintiff and Subclass members be permitted to
cast a binding vote on the adviser contract and compensation at the
Annual Meeting or, alternatively, the vote be voided and a re-vote
ordered; (3) the violative By-Laws provision cited herein be
rescinded under Section 47(b), along with any other By-Laws
provisions found inconsistent with the ICA; and (d) the chief
executive officer (CEO) be required to return any unreasonable
compensation under ICA Section 36(b)4, says the suit.
Network-1 Technologies, Inc. is a company that engages in the
development, licensing, and protection of intellectual property
assets headquartered in New Canaan, Connecticut. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Laurence D. Paskowitz, Esq.
THE PASKOWITZ LAW FIRM P.C.
The Contour
97-45 Queens Blvd., Ste. 1202
Rego Park, NY 11374
Telephone: (212) 685-0969
Email: lpaskowitz@pasklaw.com
- and -
Emily Komlossy, Esq.
KOMLOSSY LAW P.A.
4700 Sheridan St., Suite J
Hollywood, FL 33021
Telephone: (954) 842-2021
Facsimile: (954) 416-6223
Email: eck@komlossylaw.com
NOR-WELL COMPANY: Underpays Sheet Metal Employees, Moore Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
IAN MOORE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. NOR-WELL COMPANY, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-00135-DCLC-CRW (E.D. Tenn., August 6, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for its failure to pay overtime wages
in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as an hourly-paid sheet
metal employee.
Nor-Well Company, Inc. is a commercial and mechanical contractor
based in Tennessee. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gordon E. Jackson, Esq.
J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
J. Joseph Leatherwood IV, Esq.
JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER, HOLT OWEN & BRYANT
262 German Oak Drive
Memphis, TN 38018
Telephone: (901) 754-8001
Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
Email: gjackson@jsyc.com
rbryant@jsyc.com
jholt@jsyc.com
OTTAWA COUNTY, MI: Baker Appeals Cir. Court Decision in Michigan
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Linda L. Baker filed an appeal from a court decision in
the case captioned, LINDA L. BAKER v. OTTAWA COUNTY, from the
Ottawa Circuit Court.
The appeal was filed on July 2, 2024 before the Michigan Court of
Appeals, Case No. 371522.
Ottawa County is a county located in the U.S. state of Michigan.
[BN]
The appellant is represented by:
Donald R. Visser, Esq.
2480 44th St. SE, Suite 150
Kentwood, MI 49512
Tel: (616) 531-9860
Fax: (616) 531-9870
PAR INC: Badeen Brings Appeal to Mich. Appeals Ct.
--------------------------------------------------
GEORGE BADEEN, et al. have filed an appeal captioned George Badeen
vs. Par Inc., Case No. 371851, in the Michigan Court of Appeals on
July 29, 2024.
George Badeen (a licensed collection agency manager) and Midwest
Recovery and Adjustment, Inc. (a licensed collection agency that
Badeen owned and operated) brought a class action against PAR,
Inc.; Remarketing Solutions; CenterOne Financial Services, LLC; and
numerous other lenders and forwarding companies doing business in
Michigan. Plaintiffs alleged that defendant "forwarding companies"
acted as collection agencies under Michigan law but did so without
a license, in violation of MCL 339.904(1), and that defendant
lenders, who hired the forwarding companies, violated Michigan law
by hiring unlicensed collection agencies, in violation of MCL
445.252(s). Plaintiffs further alleged that the violations injured
them by impeding their business while not complying with Michigan
law. Defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the
forwarding companies did not satisfy the definition of "collection
agency" because the phrase "soliciting a claim for collection" in
that statute referred to asking the debtor to pay the debt, which
the forwarding companies did not do.
The court granted the Defendants' motion. The Court of Appeals
affirmed. Upon review, the Supreme Court concluded that the
forwarding companies indeed did fall within the statutory
definition of collection agencies. Accordingly, the Court vacated
Part III(B) of the Court of Appeals' judgment, and remanded the
case to the Circuit Court for further proceedings.[BN]
Defendants-Appellees PAR INC., et al., are represented by:
Brian Witus, Esq.
SARETSKY HART MICHAELS GOULD
995 South Eton
Birmingham, MI 48009
Telephone: (248) 502-3300
Facsimile: (248) 502-3301
- and –
Leslie C. Morant, Esq.
MORANT LAW, PLLC
124 Fulton Street E., Suite 101
Grand Rapids, MI 49503
Telephone: (616) 406-9282
- and –
Thomas S. Wienner, Esq.
THE MILLER LAW FIRM
950 W. University Dr., Suite 300
Rochester, MI 48307
Telephone: (248) 843-0843
- and –
William H. Burdett, Esq.
WINTHROP & WEINSTINE
Capella Tower, Suite 3500
225 South Sixth Street
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 604-6400
- and –
Derek S. Wilczynski, Esq.
BLANCO WILCZYNSKI, PLLC
2095 E. Big Beaver Road, Suite 400
Troy, MI 48083
Telephone: (248) 519-9000
Facsimile: (248) 519-9001
- and –
Matthew J. Lund, Esq.
TROUTMAN PEPPER
4000 Town Center, Suite 1800
Southfield, MI 48075
Telephone: (248) 359-7300
- and –
James R. Bruinsma, Esq.
MCSHANE & BOWIE
99 Monroe Avenue NW, Suite 1100
Grand Rapids, MI 49503
Telephone: (616) 747-7922
- and –
Joseph A. Ciucci, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
1075 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 1700
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: (404) 253-6988
- and –
Michael G. Brady, Esq.
Eberle, Berlin, Kading, Turnbow & McKlveen, Chartered
1111 W. Jefferson St., Ste. 530,
P.O. Box 1368
Boise, ID 83701
Telephone: (208) 344-8535
- and –
Laura N. You, Esq.
WARNER NORCROSS + JUDD LLP
2715 Woodward Avenue, Suite 300
Detroit, MI 48201
Telephone: (313) 546-6000
- and –
Matthew J. Boettcher, Esq.
Patrick C. Lannen, Esq.
PLUNKETT COONEY, PC
Bloomfield Hills, MI
Telephone: (248) 901-4035
PATELCO CREDIT: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Cordell Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
CARL CORDELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PATELCO CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No.
24CV082095 (Cal. Super., Alameda Cty., July 2, 2024) is an action
against the Defendant for its failure to properly secure and
safeguard sensitive information that Plaintiff and Class Members,
as customers of Patelco, entrusted to it, including, without
limitation, and upon information and belief, their names, dates of
birth, addresses, Social Security numbers, driver's license
numbers, and financial account information (collectively,
"personally identifiable information" or "PII").
According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, by obtaining,
collecting, using, and deriving a benefit from Plaintiff's and
Class Members' PII, Patelco assumed legal and equitable duties to
ensure the protection of that PII, and it knew or should have known
that it was thus responsible for protecting Plaintiff's and Class
Members' PII from disclosure.
As a result, the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members was compromised
through disclosure to an unauthorized third party. Plaintiff and
Class Members have a continuing interest in ensuring that their
information is and remains safe, and they should be entitled to
injunctive and other equitable relief, the suit says.
Patelco Credit Union operates as a financial cooperative. The Union
provides financial solutions such as loans, investment, saving and
checking accounts, insurance, security, credit and debit cards,
online banking, and other related services. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
M. Anderson Berry, Esq.
Gregory Haroutunian, Esq.
Brandon P. Jack, Esq.
Michelle Zhu, Esq.
CLAYEO C. ARNOLD
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
865 Howe Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95825
Telephone: (916) 239-4778
Facsimile: (916) 924-1829
Email: aberry@justice4you.com
gharoutunian@justice4you.com
bjack@justice4you.com
mzhu@justice4you.com
PLAVAN COMMERCIAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Tanner Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
TRACY TANNER, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PLAVAN COMMERCIAL FUELING, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 3:24-cv-01341-BTM-JLB (S.D. Cal., July 30, 2024) is a
class action against the Defendant for its failure to properly
secure and safeguard personal identifiable information(PII) of
approximately 2,948 individuals, including, but not limited to,
name and Social Security number.
On February 23, 2024, the Defendant experienced a ransomware
incident. The Defendant determined that, during the data breach, an
unknown actor may have acquired the PII of Plaintiff and Class
Members without authorization. On June 24, 2024, Defendant began
notifying Plaintiff and Class Members of the data breach.
According to the complaint, the PII was compromised due to
Defendant's negligent and/or careless acts and omissions and the
failure to protect the PII of Plaintiff and Class Members. The
Defendant has also purposefully maintained secret the specific
vulnerabilities and root causes of the breach and has not informed
Plaintiff and Class Members of that information.
The Plaintiff and Class Members have suffered injuries as a result
of Defendant's conduct including: (i) lost or diminished value of
PII; (ii) out-of-pocket expenses associated with the prevention,
detection, and recovery from identity theft, tax fraud, and/or
unauthorized use of their PII; and (iii) lost opportunity costs
associated with attempting to mitigate the actual consequences of
the data breach.
Plavan Commercial Fueling, Inc. provides fleet fuel card products
and services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael F. Ram, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
711 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 358-6913
E-mail: mram@forthepeople.com
- and -
Patrick A. Barthle II, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP
201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 229-4023
Facsimile: (813) 222-4708
E-mail: pbarthle@ForThePeople.com
- and -
Ryan D. Maxey, Esq.
MAXEY LAW FIRM, P.A.
107 N. 11th St. #402
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 448-1125
E-mail: ryan@maxeyfirm.com
PRECISION IMAGING: Court Tosses Sharman Class Certification Bid
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARC IRWIN SHARFMAN M.D.
P.A., v. PRECISION IMAGING ST. AUGUSTINE LLC and HALO DX, INC.,
Case No. 6:22-cv-00642-WWB-DCI (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Wendy
Berger entered an order denying the Plaintiff's motion for class
certification:
The Court said, "The Plaintiff cannot carry his burden as to
typicality under Rule 23(a)(3) and predominance under Rule
23(b)(3).
Certification of both putative classes is improper, and the Court
need not address the Plaintiff's additional objections as to the
remaining Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(3) factors."
The Plaintiff asserts several objections to the R&R. Specifically,
Plaintiff objects to the R&R insofar as it finds that Plaintiff has
failed to establish typicality, predominance, and superiority as to
both putative classes because online fax service recipients lack
Article III standing under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of
1991 (TCPA), the TCPA does not regulate faxes received through
online fax services, and because of individual issues regarding
prior express permission.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=t2qj51 at no extra
charge.[CC]
PRIMECARE MEDICAL: Class Cert. Filing in Stafford Due Nov. 24
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRYAN STAFFORD, in his
capacity as Executor of the Estate of THOMAS FLEENOR, JR., JOHN
CRABTREE, STEVEN MARTIN, GARY TOLER, ELGIE ADKINS, and SABRINA
EAGLE, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, v.
PRIMECARE MEDICAL, INC., THOMAS WEBER, BRETT BAVINGTON, TODD
HESKINS, KRISTA VALLANDINGHAM, MELISSA JEFFERY, BRANDY EASTRIDGE,
HELEN PERKINS, JESSICA MILLER, BRANDY EASTRIDGE, WEXFORD HEALTH
SOURCES, INC., MARY STONE, DANIEL CONN, ELAINE GEDMAN, JOHN
FROELICH, HUMAYAN RASHID, M.D., ANGELA NICHOLSON, MSN, APRN, FNP-C,
AMBER DUNCAN, LISA MULLENS, LPN, CASSEY BOLEN, JOHN PENNINGTON, MA,
LPC, NCC, NCSC, KENNADI SMITH, LPN, RACHEL LEEDY, LPN, ASHLEY
VALLANDINGHAM, LPN, BRITTANI MARSHALL, RN, AUTMN BLAIR, RN, JOYE
MARTIN, MD, HANNAH WHITE, LPN, ASHLEY STROUP, LPN, DONNA
DEAN-CHRIVIA, AND JOHN AND JANE DOE PRIMECARE AND WEXFORD
EMPLOYEES, Case No. 5:22-cv-00405 (S.D.W. Va.), the Hon. Judge
Frank Volk entered an order adopting the Parties' Rule 26(f) Report
of Parties Planning Meeting's class certification schedule in part
as follows:
Deadline Date
Last date to serve discovery requests Sept. 24, 2024
Plaintiff's supplemental expert disclosures Sept. 9, 2024
Defendant's responsive expert disclosures Oct. 9, 2024
Class certification motions Nov. 24, 2024
Response to class certification motions Dec. 8, 2024
Dispositive motions Jan. 6, 2025
Motions in limine Feb. 14, 2025
Plaintiffs' portion of pretrial order to Mar. 14, 2025
defendants
Integrated pretrial order Mar. 17, 2025
Pretrial conference Mar. 28, 2025
Final Settlement Conference May 2, 2025
PrimeCare provides psychiatrists, psychologists, and behavioral
health professionals who specialize in psychiatric patient care,
and crisis management.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=mIb8e2 at no extra
charge.[CC]
PRUDENT FIDUCIARY: Arnold Suit Seeks Class Certification
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LISA ARNOLD, BRANDI TROUT,
and SANDRA GOLDEN-WOODS, on behalf of the Churchill Holdings, Inc.
Employee Stock Ownership Plan, and on behalf of a class of all
other persons similarly situated, v. MIGUEL PAREDES, PRUDENT
FIDUCIARY SERVICES, LLC, LAWSON H. HARDWICK, III, MATTHEW C.
CLARKE, AND CECIL O. KEMP, JR., Case No. 3:23-cv-00545 (M.D.
Tenn.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order:
-- certifying the Class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(1),
defined
as:
"All vested participants in the Churchill Holdings, Inc.
Employee
Stock Ownership Plan and the beneficiaries of such participants
on
May 26, 2017, or anytime thereafter."
Excluded from the Class are the Defendants and their immediate
families; and legal representatives, successors, and assigns of
any such excluded persons; and
-- appointing Bailey & Glasser LLP as Class Counsel.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zi6W9B at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory Y. Porter, Esq.
Ryan T. Jenny, Esq.
Mark G. Boyko, Esq.
Laura E. Babiak, Esq.
BAILEY GLASSER LLP
1055 Thomas Jefferson St., NW, Suite 540
WAshington, DC 20007
Telephone: (202) 463-2101
Facsimile: (202) 463-2103
E-mail: gporter@baileyglasser.com
rjenny@baileyglasser.com
mboyko@baileyglasser.com
lbabiak@baileyglasser.com
- and -
Benjamin A. Gastel, Esq.
Alyson S. Beridon, Esq.
HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL,
LENISKI & WALL, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Ave., Ste 300
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 800-6225
Facsimile: (615) 994-8625
E-mail: ben@hsglawgroup.com
alyson@hsglawgroup.com
- and -
Robert A. Izard, Esq.
Christopher M. Barrett
IZARD, KINDALL & RAABE, LLP
29 South Main Street, Suite 305
West Hartford, CT 06107
Telephone: (860) 493-6292
Facsimile: (860) 493-6290
E-mail: rizard@ikrlaw.com
dneedham@ikrlaw.com
cbarrett@ikrlaw.com
- and -
Douglas P. Needham, Esq.
MOTLEY RICE LLC
20 Church Street, 17th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103
Telephone: (860) 218-2720
Facsimile: (860) 882-1682
E-mail: dneedham@motleyrice.com
PUFF FOR TOBACCO: Noel Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jaylon Noel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Puff for Tobacco, LLC and Mukaram Rashad Alhuthaife,
Case No. 2:24-cv-03811-JLG-EPD (S.D. Ohio, Aug. 3, 2024), is
brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Ohio
Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act ("OMWFSA"), for Defendants' failure
to pay Plaintiff and other similarly-situated employees all earned
minimum and overtime wages.
Under the FLSA and OMWFSA, employers must pay all non-exempt
employees an overtime wage premium of pay one and one-half times
their regular rates of pay for all time they spend working in
excess of 40 hours in a given workweek. The Defendants failed to
pay Plaintiff, the Collective Members and the Class Members one and
one-half times their regular rate of pay for all time they spent
working in excess of 40 hours in a given workweek, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff was a full-time employee of Defendants from September
8, 2023 through November 13, 2023.
Puff for Tobacco, LLC was an Ohio corporation duly licensed to
transact business in the State of Ohio.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael L. Fradin, Esq.
8 N. Court St. Suite 403
Athens, OH 45701
Phone: 847-986-5889
Facsimile: 847-673-1228
Email: mike@fradinlaw.com
RECEIVABLES PERFORMANCE: Settlement in Hightower Initially OK'd
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BERNADETTE HIGHTOWER, on
behalf of herself and all other similarly situated, v. RECEIVABLES
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT, LLC, Case No. 2:22-cv-01683-RSM (W.D.
Wash.), the Hon. Judge Ricardo Martinez entered an order granting
motion for preliminary approval:
1. Class Certification for Settlement Purposes Only.
For settlement purposes only and pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
23(b)(3) and (e), the Court certifies, solely for purposes of
effectuating the proposed Settlement, a Settlement Class
defined
as:
"All persons who were sent notification by RPM that their
personal information and/or protected health information was
or
may have been compromised in the Data Incident."
The Settlement Class includes approximately 3,766,573 people.
The Settlement Class specifically excludes: (1) the judges
presiding over this Action, and members of their direct
families; (2) RPM, its subsidiaries, parent companies,
successors, predecessors, and any entity in which RPM or its
parents have a controlling interest and their current or
former
officers, directors, and employees; and (3) Settlement Class
Members who submit a valid a Request for Exclusion prior to
the
Opt-Out Deadline.
Additionally, for settlement purposes only and pursuant to
Fed.
R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3) and (e), the Court certifies, solely for
the
purposes of effectuating the proposed Settlement, a
California
Settlement Subclass defined as:
"All persons who are members of the Settlement Class who are
residents of the State of California."
2. Class Representatives and Settlement Class Counsel:
Bernadette Hightower, Latershia Jones, George Dean, and Bruce
Mark Woodruff are provisionally designated and appointed as
the
Class Representatives.
3. Preliminary Settlement Approval”
The Court preliminarily approves the Settlement, as embodied
in
the Settlement Agreement, as being fair, reasonable, and
adequate to the Settlement Class, subject to further
consideration at the Final Approval Hearing.
Receivables Performance provides financial and accounts receivables
management services.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=uvg3Ju at no extra
charge.[CC]
RH: Website Not Accessible to Blind Users, Dalton Suit Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. RH, Case No. 0:24-cv-03141 (D. Minn., Aug. 6, 2024)
contends that the Defendant's website, www.rh.com, is not fully and
equally accessible to people who are blind or who have low vision
in violation of both the general non-discriminatory mandate and the
effective communication and auxiliary aids and services
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the
Minnesota Human Rights Act.
As a consequence of the Plaintiff's experience visiting the
Defendant's Website, including in the past year, and from
investigation performed on her behalf, the Plaintiff found the
Defendant's Website has a number of digital barriers that deny
screen-reader users like the Plaintiff full and equal access to
important Website content -- content the Defendant makes available
to its sighted Website users. The Defendant's ongoing violations of
Title III have caused, and in the absence of an injunction will
continue to cause, harm to Plaintiff and other individuals with
visual disabilities, the suit says.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction requiring a change in
the Defendant's corporate policies to cause its online store to
become, and remain, accessible to individuals with visual
disabilities; a civil penalty payable to the state of Minnesota
pursuant to Minn. Stat. 363A.33, Subd. 6 and Minn. Stat. section
363A.29, subd. 4 (2023); damages, and a damage multiplier pursuant
to Minn. Stat. section 363A.33, subd. 6 (2023), and Minn. Stat.
section 363A.29, subd. 4 (2023).
RH offers furniture, home improvement products, and accessories for
sale including seating, tables, shelving, faucets, lighting, rugs,
and more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
Jason Gustafson, Esq.
THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC
80 South 8th Street, Suite 900
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
E-mail: chad@throndsetlaw.com
pat@throndsetlaw.com
jason@throndsetlaw.com
RINOWA CONSTRUCTION: Perez Seeks Unpaid OT for Construction Workers
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MICHEL FRANK PEREZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. RINOWA CONSTRUCTION LLC and ADRIAN
PEREZ, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-61421 (S.D. Fla., August 6,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a construction worker
from June 2023 until September 2023.
Rinowa Construction LLC is a construction company doing business in
Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Julisse Jimenez, Esq.
THE SAENZ LAW FIRM
20900 NE 30th Avenue, Ste. 800
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (305) 503-5131
Facsimile: (888) 270-5549
Email: julisse@legalopinionusa.com
RK ASSOCIATES: Brito Sues Over Inaccessible Property
----------------------------------------------------
Carlos Brito, individually and on behalf of all other similarly
situated mobility-impaired individuals v. RK ASSOCIATES #2, INC.,
and TACO ISLAND BY TAYTA, INC. d/b/a TACO ISLAND MEXICAN
RESTAURANT, Case No. 1:24-cv-22984-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Aug. 5, 2024),
is brought for injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation
expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA") as a result of the Defendants' commercial retail plaza
(hereinafter the "Commercial Property") being inaccessible to
people who are disabled.
Although over 30 years have passed since the effective date of
Title III of the ADA, Defendants have yet to make their facilities
accessible to individuals with disabilities. Congress provided
commercial businesses one and a half years to implement the
Act. The effective date was January 26, 1992. In spite of this
abundant lead-time and the extensive publicity the ADA has received
since 1990, Defendants have continued to discriminate against
people who are disabled in ways that block them from access and use
of Defendants' property and the businesses.
The Plaintiff found the Commercial Property, and the business
located within the Commercial Property and Restaurant Property to
be rife with ADA violations. The Plaintiff encountered
architectural barriers at the Commercial Property, Restaurant
Property, and businesses located within the Commercial Property and
wishes to continue his patronage and use of each of the premises.
The Plaintiff has encountered architectural barriers that are in
violation of the ADA at the subject Commercial Property, Restaurant
Property, and businesses located within the Commercial Property.
The barriers to access at the Commercial Property, Restaurant
Property, and businesses located within the Commercial Property
have each denied or diminished Plaintiff's ability to visit the
Commercial Property, Restaurant Property, and businesses located
within the Commercial Property, and have endangered his safety in
violation of the ADA.
The Defendants have discriminated against the individual Plaintiff
by denying him access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or
accommodations of the Commercial Property and business located
therein, as prohibited by the ADA, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a paraplegic (paralyzed from his T-6 vertebrae
down) and requires the use of a wheelchair to ambulate.
RK ASSOCIATES #2, INC., owned and operated a commercial property at
16800 Collins Avenue., Sunny Isles Beach, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Beverly Virues, Esq.
Armando Mejias, Esq.
GARCIA-MENOCAL, P.L.
350 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 200
Coral Gables, Fl 33134
Phone: (305) 553-3464
Primary Email: bvirues@lawgmp.com
Secondary Emails: amejias@lawgmp.com
jacosta@lawgmp.com
- and -
Ramon J. Diego, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF RAMON J. DIEGO, P.A.
5001 SW 74th Court, Suite 103
Miami, FL, 33155
Phone: (305) 350-3103
Primary Email: rdiego@lawgmp.com
Secondary Email: ramon@rjdiegolaw.com
SAALT LLC: Website Inaccessible to Blind, Espinal Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
FRANGIE ESPINAL, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated v. SAALT, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-05946 (S.D.N.Y.,
Aug. 6, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://www.saalt.com, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired
persons, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
June 17, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a Saalt duo pack from the
Defendant and to view the information on the Website, the Plaintiff
encountered multiple access barriers that denied Plaintiff a
shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person and full
and equal access to the goods and services offered to the public
and made available to the public, the lawsuit contends.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer
frustration and humiliation as a result of the discriminatory
conditions present on Defendant's Website. These discriminatory
conditions continue to contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation
and segregation.
The Plaintiff seeks a 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 consumers.
Saalt creates sustainable period underwear and reusable period cups
(menstrual cups).[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, 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
E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
SAVE MART: Parties Seek to Revise Class Cert Hearing Schedule
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KATHERINE BAKER, et al.,
v. SAVE MART SUPERMARKETS and SAVE MART SELECT RETIREE HEALTH
BENEFIT PLAN, Case No. 3:22-cv-04645-AMO (N.D. Cal.), the Parties
ask the Court to enter an order revising the class certification
briefing schedule as follows:
Event Prior Date Proposed Date
Opposition to Motion for Class Aug. 9, 2024 Sept. 19,
2024
Certification
Reply in Support of Motion for Aug. 30, 2024 Oct. 17,
2024
Class Certification
Hearing on Motion for Class Oct. 3, 2024 Nov. 14,
2024
Certification
On July 3, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed their Motion for Class
Certification, including 56 supporting declarations.
The Court issued an Order on the parties' joint statement on July
26, 2024, which included an instruction for the parties to meet and
confer on necessary adjustments to the class certification briefing
schedule and submit either a stipulation and proposed order or
notice of their respective positions by Aug. 2, 2024.
Save Mart is an American grocery store operator.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5PR7c6 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Christopher W. Keegan, Esq.
Shayne H. Henry, Esq.
Michael B. Slade, Esq.
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
555 California Street
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 439-1400
Facsimile: (415) 439-1500
E-mail: chris.keegan@kirkland.com
shayne.henry@kirkland.com
mslade@kirkland.com
SILVERANDA PLLC: Joiner Alleges Wrongful Debt Collections
---------------------------------------------------------
JERI JOINER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SILVERANDA PLLC, Defendant, Case No.
CACE-24-009906 (Fla. Cir., Broward Cty., July 16, 2024) seeks to
stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a
debt.
Silveranda PLLC is in the business of rendering professional
services to the public same as that of an orthodontist. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq.
Zane C. Hedaya, Esq.
Gerald D. Lane, Jr.,
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
SIMMONS BANK: Njoroge Sues Over Improper Overdraft Fee Charges
--------------------------------------------------------------
CARYDAH NJOROGE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SIMMONS BANK, Defendant, Case No.
4:24-cv-00670-BRW (E.D. Ark., August 6, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for breach of contract and breach of the
covenant of good faith and fair dealing and unjust enrichment.
The case arises from Simmons Bank's routine and deceptive practice
of assessing more than one fee when an "item" is returned or paid
into overdraft in violation of its contractual documents. The
Defendant's customers, including the Plaintiff, have been injured
by its improper and deceptive practices.
Simmons Bank is a retail banking services company headquartered in
Arkansas. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott Poynter, Esq.
POYNTER LAW GROUP
4924 Kavanaugh Blvd.
Little Rock, AR 72207
Telephone: (501) 812-3943
Email: scott@poynterlawgroup.com
- and -
Jeffrey D. Kaliel, Esq.
Sophia G. Gold, Esq.
KALIELGOLD PLLC
1100 15th Street NW, 4th Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 350-4783
Email: jkaliel@kalielgold.com
sgold@kalielgold.com
- and -
Andrew Shamis, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
SOLSTICE BENEFITS: Lyngas Files Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Acadian Ambulance
Service Inc. The case is styled as Brian J. Lyngas, D.D.S.,
P.L.L.C., individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Solstice Benefits, Inc., John Does 1-5, Case No.
1:24-mc-00632-JPW (M.D. Pa., Aug. 5, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Motion to Quash Subpoenas.
Solstice Benefits -- https://www.solsticebenefits.com/ -- offers
affordable dental and vision plans for individuals and
families.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Shenkan, Esq.
SHENKAN INJURY LAWYERS LLC
6550 Lakeshore St
West Bloomfield, MI 48323
Phone: (800) 601-0808
Email: rshenkan@shenkanlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey Aaron Backman, Esq.
Roy Taub, Esq.
Greenspoon Marder, PA - Corporate
200 E. Broward Blvd., Ste. 1800
Ft Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (954) 491-1120
Fax: (407) 771-9264
Email: jeffrey.backman@gmlaw.com
roy.taub@gmlaw.com
- and -
Michael C. Witsch, Esq.
ARMSTRONG TEASDALE LLP
2005 Market Street, 29th Floor
One Commerce Square
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Phone: (267) 780-2016
Email: MWitsch@atllp.com
SOUTH TEXAS: Faces Brown Class Action Suit in W.D. Tex.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against South Texas Oncology and
Hematology, PLLC, captioned as JOSEPH BROWN, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOUTH TEXAS
ONCOLOGY AND HEMATOLOGY, PLLC, Defendant, Case No.
5:24-cv-00739-OLG (W.D. Tex., July 2, 2024).
The case is assigned to Judge Orlando L. Garcia.
South Texas Oncology and Hematology, PLLC offers patients a
comprehensive treatment plan that includes multi-specialty
services, genetic profiling of tumors, targeted therapies,
state-of-the-art treatment technology, and easy access to clinical
research options. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ronald W. Armstrong, II, Esq.
THE ARMSTRONG FIRM, PLLC
109 Yoalana St. Suite 210
Boerne, TX 78006
Telephone: (210) 277-0542
Facsimile: (210) 277-0548
Email: rwaii@tafpllc.com
SPECIALIZED LOAN: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due Sept. 30
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LARRY MILLS, on behalf of
himself and all similarly situated consumers, v. SPECIALIZED LOAN
SERVICING, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-00063-MSN-WE (E.D. Va.), the Hon.
Judge William Fitzpatrick entered an order regarding the
plaintiff's motion to extend deadlines for expert disclosures and
class certification:
1. Plaintiff's expert disclosures under Rule 26 shall be due no
later than Aug. 22, 2024.
2. Defendant's expert disclosures under Rule 26 shall be due no
later than Sept. 20, 2024.
3. Plaintiff's rebuttal disclosures shall be due no later than
Sept. 27, 2024.
4. The Plaintiff shall have until Sept. 30, 2024, to move for
certification of a class.
The hearing on Plaintiff's Motion scheduled for Aug. 2, 2024, at
10:00 a.m. is canceled and removed from the Court's calendar.
Specialized Loan operates as a financial company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 1, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QaKeDO at no extra
charge.[CC]
SUNPOWER CORPORATION: Faces Rodrigues Suit Over Drop of Stock Price
-------------------------------------------------------------------
GABRIEL RODRIGUES, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SUNPOWER CORPORATION, PETER
FARICY, THOMAS WERNER, and ELIZABETH EBY, Defendants, Case No.
3:24-cv-04775 (N.D. Cal., August 6, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendant for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements about SunPower's financial condition and
the sufficiency of its internal controls in order to trade its
common stock at artificially inflated prices between May 3, 2023
and July 19, 2024. When the truth emerged, the company's stock fell
40 percent July 18, 2024 and 55 percent on July 19, 2024, the close
of the Class Period. Had the Plaintiff and similarly situated
investors known the truth, they would not have purchased the stock.
As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
resulting decline in the market value of SunPower's stock, the
Plaintiff and the Class suffered significant losses and damages
under the federal securities laws, the suit alleges.
SunPower Corporation is a provider of photovoltaic solar energy
generation systems and battery energy storage products,
headquartered in Richmond, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David N. Lake, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF DAVID N. LAKE
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
16130 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 650
Encino, CA 91436
Telephone: (818) 788-5100
Facsimile: (818) 479-9990
Email: david@lakelawpc.com
- and -
Laurence D. Paskowitz, Esq.
THE PASKOWITZ LAW FIRM P.C.
97-45 Queens Boulevard, Ste. 1202
Rego Park, NY 11374
Telephone: (212) 685-0969
Email: lpaskowitz@pasklaw.com
SUSHI KATSUEI: Chakma Suit Seeks to Certify Tipped Worker Class
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RUPAN CHAKMA, SULOY
TRIPORA, TAPAN KANTI TANCHANGYA, TIYANIT KAEWPAN, and PRAMITA
CHAKMA, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, v.
SUSHI KATSUEI, INC. d/b/a SUSHI KATSUEI PARK SLOPE, ROYAL KATSUEI,
INC. d/b/a SUSHI KATSUEI WEST VILLAGE, AYE AYE SWE, and AUNG KO
WIN, Case No. 1:23-cv-07804-KPF (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiffs asks the
Court to enter an order:
(1) certifying a Class defined as:
"All tipped food-service employees other than sushi chefs
employed by the Defendants at the Sushi Katsuei restaurants
located in Brooklyn and/or Manhattan, New York on or after
Sept. 1, 2027 ("Class Members");"
(2) Appointing Rupan Chakma, Suloy Tripora, Tapan Kanti
Tanchangya,
Tiyanit Kaewpan, and Pramita Chakma as Class
Representatives;
(3) Appointing Joseph & Kirschenbaum LLP as class counsel under
Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g);
(4) Directing the Defendants to produce a list, in Excel format,
containing all Class Members' names, dates of employment,
last
known addresses, and last known phone numbers; and
(5) Authorizing the mailing of the proposed Notice to all Class
Members.
Sushi Katsuei is a sushi restaurant in Park Slope.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5oPycT at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
D. Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq.
Josef Nussbaum, Esq.
JOSEPH & KIRSCHENBAUM LLP
32 Broadway, Suite 601
New York, NY 10004
TARGET CORP: Seeks to Strike On-Premises Theory in Halley Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CORBIN HALLEY, as an
individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
TARGET CORPORATION, a Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50,
inclusive, Case No. 8:17-cv-00692-JGB-MRW (C.D. Cal.), the
Defendants ask the Court to enter an order granting their
application to strike on-premises theory from the plaintiff Corbin
Halley's motion for class certification or, alternatively, to
modify briefing and hearing schedule:
This application is being brought ex parte because a speedy
resolution of whether the On-Premises Theory should be part of the
Motion or whether Target should be allowed to address it now rather
than in a subsequent motion for class certification will save
significant time and resources for the Court and the parties.
In this August 2 conference call, plaintiff's counsel declined to
stipulate to the removal of the On-Premises Theory from the Motion.
The Plaintiff's counsel further declined to stipulate to a
modification of the class certification briefing and hearing
schedule to allow Target to file a supplemental opposition to the
Motion by Aug. 12, 2024, extend the time for plaintiff to file his
reply in support of the Motion to Aug. 26, 2024, and continue the
hearing on the Motion to Sept. 23, 2024.
Event Date
Target's Supplemental Opposition Aug. 12, 2024
Addressing Amended On-Premises Theory
Plaintiff's Reply in Support of Motion Aug. 26, 2024
for Class Certification
Hearing on Motion for Class Certification Sept. 23, 2024
Target Corporation is an American retail corporation that operates
a chain of discount department stores and hypermarkets.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=78jpzn at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Larry W. Lee, Esq.
DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C.
515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 488-6555
Facsimile: (213) 488-6554
E-mail: lwlee@diversitylaw.com
- and -
Edward W. Choi, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF CHOI & ASSOCIATES
515 S. Figueroa St., Suite 1250
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 381-1515
Facsimile: (213) 465-4885
E-mail: edward.choi@choiandassociates.com
- and -
Thomas M. Lee, Esq.
LEE LAW OFFICES, APLC
3435 Wilshire Blvd Suite 2400
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Telephone: (213) 251-5533
Facsimile: (213) 251-5534
E-mail: thomas@thomaslee.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey D. Wohl, Esq.
Eric D. Distelburger, Esq.
Anna M. Skaggs, Esq.
Aja S. Nunn, Esq.
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
101 California Street, 48th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 856-7000
Facsimile: (415) 856-7100
E-mail: jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
ericdistelburger@paulhastings.com
annaskaggs@paulhastings.com
ajanunn@paulhastings.com
TD BANK: Discloses Clients' Private Info to Meta, Stevens Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
JEFFREY STEVENS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TD BANK, N.A., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-08311 (D.N.J., August 6, 2024) is a class action against
the Defendant for negligence, negligence per se, unjust enrichment,
declaratory judgment, breach of confidence, breach of contract,
breach of implied contract, violation of the New York General
Business Law, and multistate unfair and deceptive trade practices.
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violation of
consumers' privacy rights under federal and state law by disclosing
their personal financial information to third parties without
consent. TD Bank tracks and records its customers' interaction with
its website and also shares these interactions with Meta Platforms,
Inc. without obtaining prior consent. The Plaintiff and the Class
would have used another bank that paid higher interest if they had
known TD Bank would share their personal information with Meta,
says the suit.
TD Bank, NA is an American national bank, with its principal place
of business in Cherry Hill, New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James E. Cecchi, Esq.
CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
5 Becker Farm Road
Roseland, NJ 07068
Telephone: (973) 994-1700
Email: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
- and -
Eric S. Dwoskin, Esq.
DWOSKIN WASDIN LLP
433 Plaza Real, Suite 275
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Telephone: (561) 849-8060
Email: edwoskin@dwowas.com
- and -
Norman E. Siegel, Esq.
J. Austin Moore, Esq.
Kasey Youngentob, 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
youngentob@stuevesiegel.com
TOYOTA MOTOR: Nunez Sues Over Hydrogen Retail Market Monopoly
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alejandro Nunez, et al., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A. Inc.,
First Element, Inc. a California corporation, and DOES 1 through 5,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06414 (C.D. Cal., July 30,
2024) is brought under Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act and
Section 4 of the Clayton Act seeking to recover treble damages or
disgorgement of profits, interest, costs of suit, equitable relief,
and reasonable attorneys' fees for damages to Plaintiffs and
members of the Class resulting from Defendants' restraints of trade
and monopolization of the hydrogen retail market.
According to the complaint, Toyota has unlawfully tied their
hydrogen fueled car Mirai to the First Element fuel through their
fuel card. Toyota has sufficient economic power in the tying
market, the hydrogen retail car market, to affect competition in
the tied market, hydrogen fuel.
Allegedly, Toyota has willfully acquired and maintained monopoly
power in the Hydrogen Retail Vehicle Market and the Hydrogen Retail
Fuel Market by means of predatory, exclusionary, and
anticompetitive conduct. Such conduct includes, but is not limited
to: (a) engaging in a scheme to exclude hydrogen stations from
entering the market (b) weaponizing its market position to
retroactively impose standards (c) market the vehicle as green when
it’s not (d) illicitly obtain taxpayer funds to further its goals
(f) obtain data from consumers by means of deception, says the
suit.
The Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and as
representatives of all other California taxpayers from 2011 or as
soon as Toyota began to receive benefits from the State of
California for hydrogen while not producing clean hydrogen and
blocking clean hydrogen paid for by taxpayers from entering the
market.
Toyota Motor Sales is the North American Toyota sales, marketing,
and distribution subsidiary devoted to the United States
market.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jason M. Ingber, Esq.
THE INGBER LAW GROUP
3580 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 1260
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Telephone: (310) 270-0089
E-mail: ji@jasoningber.com
TRANSFORM SR: Refrigerators Have Compressor Defect, Grotte Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES GROTTE individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated v. TRANSFORM SR, LLC and TRANSFORM SR BRANDS MANAGEMENT,
LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-06892 (N.D. Ill., Aug. 6, 2024) is a class
action against Transform SR, LLC and Transform SR Brands
Management, LLC on behalf of consumers who purchased a Class
Refrigerator—any Kenmore-branded refrigerators that contained a
common defective component called a "linear compressor" that was
sold in the United States within 10 years.
The suit says that Transform SR and Transform SR Brands, as well as
their predecessors, have been aware of the linear compressor defect
in the Class Refrigerators for several years. The Defendants and
their predecessors learned of this defect through reported failures
by consumers, a large volume of warranty claims, and several
lawsuits. Despite their knowledge of the linear compressor defect
and its propensity to cause the Class Refrigerators to fail
relatively shortly after purchase, the Defendants took no steps to
disclose the defect to consumers and instead continued to
misleadingly advertise the Class Refrigerators as reliable
products, the Plaintiff alleges.
The Class Refrigerators pose unreasonable risks of property damage
and personal injury via food-borne illnesses during normal use. A
refrigerator that fails to keep food at a safe temperature has no
value because it cannot be used safely. In the alternative, the
Class Refrigerators have significantly less value than promised at
the point of sale (i.e., a refrigerator that is prone to storing
food at an improper temperature is less valuable than one that can
store food at a safe temperature), the suit further asserts.
Mr. Grotte purchased his Class Refrigerator (Model Number:
795.73167.610) in mid- to late-2019 from a Sears store in Texas.
Transform SR is an integrated retailing company that operates
physical and digital stores.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jason L. Lichtman, Esq.
Jonathan D. Selbin, Esq.
Andrew Kaufman, Esq.
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN
& BERNSTEIN, LLP
250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
New York, NY 10013
Telephone: (212) 355-9500
E-mail: jlichtman@lchb.com
jselbin@lchb.com
akaufman@lchb.com
- and -
Joseph S. Tusa, Esq.
TUSA P.C.
55000 Main Road, 2nd Floor
Southold, NY 11971
Telephone: (631) 407-5100
E-mail: joseph.tusapc@gmail.com
- and -
Gary Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
E-mail: gklinger@milberg.com
TRANSUNION RENTAL: Hearing on Class Cert Bid Continued to Feb. 2025
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANNY MARTINEZ,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
TRANSUNION RENTAL SCREENING SOLUTIONS, INC., Case No.
2:23-cv-10678-GW-AS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge George Wu entered
an order granting joint stipulation to extend deadline for filing
Plaintiff's motion for class certification.
The Parties seek an extension on the Plaintiff's deadline to file
his Motion for Class Certification and for a continuance of the
Sept. 30, 2024, hearing on that Motion.
The pending deadlines on the Court's Scheduling Order are amended
as follows:
1. The Hearing on the Plaintiff's Motion for Class
Certification,
currently scheduled for Sept. 30, 2024, is continued to Feb.
24,
2025 at 8:30 a.m.;
2. The parties may stipulate to the briefing schedule, except
the
reply, which is due by Feb. 10, 2025.
3. There will be no further continuances granted of the Motion.
A copy of the Court's order dated July 31, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=eg7uEu at no extra
charge.[CC]
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: Parties Seeks Oct. 15 Class Cert Hearing
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LD, DB, BW, and CJ, on
behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, v. UNITED
BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, a California Corporation, UNITED HEALTHCARE
INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut Corporation, and MULTIPLAN, INC.,
a New York Corporation, Case No. 4:20-cv-02254-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the
Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting the joint
stipulation to continue class certification hearing scheduled for
Aug. 13, 2024 to Oct. 15, 2024.
On Dec. 18, 2024, the Court scheduled the hearing on Plaintiffs'
renewed motion for class certification for May 22, 2024.
On April 11, 2024, the Court granted the Parties' stipulation to
reschedule the class certification hearing for June 4, 2024.
On May 17, 2024, the Court issued an order vacating the June 4,
2024, class certification hearing .
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=aYBw77 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Matthew M. Lavin, Esq.
ARNALL GOLDEN GREGORY LLP
1775 Pennsylvania Ave NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 677-4030
Facsimile: (202) 677-4031
E-mail: Matt.Lavin@agg.com
- and -
David M. Lilienstein, Esq.
Katie J. Spielman, Esq.
DL LAW GROUP
345 Franklin Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: (415) 678-5050
Facsimile: (415) 358-8484
E-mail: david@dllawgroup.com
katie@dllawgroup.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Lauren M. Blas, Esq.
Geoffrey Sigler, Esq.
Derek K. Kraft, Esq.
GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
333 South Grand Avenue
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 229-7000
Facsimile: (213) 229-7520
E-mail: LBlas@gibsondunn.com
GSigler@gibsondunn.com
UNITED PARCEL: Class Cert Hearing in Malone Rescheduled to Sept. 11
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MICHAEL MALONE, on behalf
of himself and others similarly situated, v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE,
INC., Case No. 2:21-cv-03643-JDW (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Joshua
Wolson entered an order rescheduling the hearing as to Plaintiff's
Motion for Class Certification for Sept. 11, 2024, at 10:00 a.m.
United Parcel is an American multinational shipping & receiving and
supply chain management company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=veEnOn at no extra
charge.[CC]
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Class Cert Bid Filing Modified to May 27, 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICK DAVIS, SR. MATHEW
KOOHNS, and BRETT A. LOCKHART, SR., individually and on behalf of
all others similarly shared, v. UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED,
UNITEDHEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY, UNITEDHEALTHCARE OF WASHINGTON,
INC., and UNITED HEALTHCARE SERVICES, INC., Case No.
2:21-cv-01220-RSM (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Ricardo Martinez
entered an order granting the parties' joint motion to modify
scheduling order as follows:
April 16, 2025 Substantial completion of fact discovery
May 13, 2025 Disclosure of Plaintiffs' class certification
expert name(s)/CV(s)/brief description of the
subject matter of the expected testimony.
May 27, 2025 Class certification motion and service of
Plaintiffs' class-certification expert report
(if any)
June 25, 2025 Disclosure of Defendants' class certification
expert name(s)/CV(s)/brief description of
the subject matter of the expected testimony
July 11, 2025 Opposition to class certification and service
of
Defendants' class-certification expert report
(if any)
Aug. 13, 2025 Reply to class certification and service of
rebuttal classcertification expert report (if
any)
Jan. 30, 2026 Close of expert discovery
Feb. 20, 2026 Close of all discovery; dispositive motion(s)
filed
June 24, 2026 Proposed pretrial order
UnitedHealth is an American multinational health insurance and
services company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=TfvfUZ at no extra
charge.[CC]
WEST VIRGINIA: Writ of Certiorari Filed in Anderson Class Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM CROUCH, in his official capacity as Cabinet Secretary of
the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources, et al.
filed on July 29, 2024, a petition for a writ of certiorari with
the U.S. Supreme Court, under Case No. 24-90.
Mr. Crouch seeks a review of the ruling of the United States Court
of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit in the case captioned Shauntae
Anderson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, vs. William Crouch, in his official capacity as Cabinet
Secretary of the West Virginia Department of Health and Human
Resources, et al., Case No. 22-1927. [BN]
Defendants-Petitioners WILLIAM CROUCH, in his official capacity as
Cabinet Secretary of the West Virginia Department of Health and
Human Resources, et al. are represented by:
Michael Ray Williams, Esq.
OFFICE OF THE WEST VIRGINIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
State Capitol Complex, Bldg. 1, Rm E-26
1900 Kanawha Blvd. E
Charleston, WV 25305
Email: michael.r.williams@wvago.gov
WESTERN CONFERENCE: Court Modifies Case Schedule in Paieri Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Paieri v. Western
Conference of Teamsters Pension Trust, et al., Case No.
2:23-cv-00922 (W.D. Wash., Filed June 19, 2023), the Hon. Judge
Lauren King entered an order granting joint stipulated motion to
modify case schedule and to continue deadline to disclose rebuttal
expert testimony.
-- The Court finds good cause to extend the deadline to disclose
rebuttal expert testimony relating to class certification to
Aug.
28, 2024.
-- All other deadlines set forth in the Court's July 15, 2024
scheduling order shall remain in effect.
The suit alleges violation of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act (E.R.I.S.A.).
The Western Conference of Teamsters Pension Plan was established in
1955 through collective bargaining between labor and
management.[CC]
WYNN RESORTS: Continues to Defend Securities Class Suit in New York
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Wynn Resorts Ltd. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the
quarterly period ending June 30, 2024 filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 6, 2024, that the Company continues
to defend itself from a securities class suit in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York.
On February 20, 2018, a putative securities class action was filed
against the Company and certain current and former officers of the
Company in the United States District Court, Southern District of
New York (which was subsequently transferred to the United States
District Court, District of Nevada) by John V. Ferris and Joann M.
Ferris on behalf of all persons who purchased the Company's common
stock between February 28, 2014 and January 25, 2018.
The complaint alleges, among other things, certain violations of
federal securities laws and seeks to recover unspecified damages as
well as attorneys' fees, costs and related expenses for the
plaintiffs.
On April 15, 2019, the Company filed a motion to dismiss, which the
court granted on May 27, 2020, with leave to amend.
On July 1, 2020, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint.
On August 14, 2020, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the
amended complaint.
On July 28, 2021, the court granted in part, and denied in part,
the Company's motion to dismiss the amended complaint, dismissing
certain of plaintiffs' claims, including all claims against current
CEO Craig Billings and the individual directors, and allowing other
claims to proceed against the Company and several of the Company's
former executive officers, including Matthew Maddox, Stephen A.
Wynn, Kimmarie Sinatra, and Steven Cootey.
On March 2, 2023, the court granted the plaintiffs' motion for
class certification and appointed lead counsel.
The parties are now proceeding with discovery.
The defendants in this action intend to vigorously defend against
the claims pleaded against them and believe that the claims are
without merit.
This action is in the preliminary stages and the Company has
determined that based on proceedings to date, it is currently
unable to determine the probability of the outcome of these actions
or reasonably estimate the range of possible loss, if any.
Wynn Resorts is a developer and operator of high-end hotels and
casinos.
ZARBEE'S INC: Lopez Seeks to Seal Class Certification Material
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Krystal Lopez, and Damany
Browne, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. Zarbee's, Inc., Case No. 3:22-cv-04465-CRB (N.D.
Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting
their administrative motion to consider whether the following
Zarbee's materials should be sealed.
Plaintiffs have reviewed and complied with Civil Local Rule
79-5(f). The materials that Plaintiffs seek to file under seal are
identified in the following chart:
Document Portion(s) Designating Entity and
to Seal Reason(s) for Sealing
Plaintiffs' Mot. Redactions on The material redacted in
the
And Memo of Pages: i, 2-6, Motion has been
designated
Law ISO Class 8-9, 11 "CONFIDENTIAL" by
Zarbee's.
Certification
Exhibits 1, 2, The entirety All, or materially all,
of
3, 5 to the of exhibits the content has been
Declaration of designated "CONFIDENTIAL"
by
Jonas Jacobson Zarbee's.
in Support of
Plaintiffs'
Motion for Class
Certification.
Exhibits 6 to The redacted The redacted information
has
the Declaration portions of been designated
of Jonas Jacobson this single- "CONFIDENTIAL" by
Zarbee's.
in Support of page exhibit
Plaintiffs'
Motion for Class
Certification.
The Plaintiffs seek to seal only those portions of the documents
identified above that Defendants justify for sealing pursuant to
Civ. L. R. 79-5(c).
Zarbee's offers vitamins, supplements, immune support, throat
relief, and other related products.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9zAVGd at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jonas B. Jacobson, Esq.
Grace Bennett, Esq.
Simon Franzini, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
E-mail: jonas@dovel.com
grace@dovel.com
simon@dovel.com
ZARBEE'S INC: Lopez Suit Seeks Class Certification
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KRYSTAL LOPEZ, and DAMANY
BROWNE, each individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. ZARBEE'S, INC., Case No. 3:22-cv-04465-CRB (N.D.
Cal.), the Plaintiffs will move the Court on Nov. 8, 2024, to
certify case as class action.
The Plaintiff Krystal Lopez seeks to certify a California class for
UCL, FAL, CLRA, and express warranty claims as defined in the
memorandum of law.
The Plaintiff Damany Browne seeks to certify a New York class for
N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law section 349 and section 350 claims as defined in
the memorandum of law.
The Plaintiffs also move for their appointment as class
representatives and for the appointment of Dovel & Luner LLP as
class counsel.
This false advertising case is about excessively dosed and
mislabeled melatonin gummies for children.
The Plaintiffs move to certify two classes:
California Class:
"all consumers who purchased Zarbee's Children's Sleep
Melatonin
Gummies in California, before July 2023 and during the
governing
statute of limitations."
The Plaintiffs seek to certify UCL, FAL, CLRA, and express warranty
claims. Krystal Lopez is the proposed class representative.
New York Class:
"all consumers who purchased Zarbee's Children's Sleep
Melatonin
Gummies in New York, before July 2023 and during the governing
statute of limitations."
Zarbee's offers vitamins, supplements, immune support, throat
relief, and other related products.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=XmTTpQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jonas B. Jacobson, Esq.
Grace Bennett, Esq.
Simon Franzini, Esq.
DOVEL & LUNER, LLP
201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600
Santa Monica, CA 90401
Telephone: (310) 656-7066
Facsimile: (310) 656-7069
E-mail: jonas@dovel.com
grace@dovel.com
simon@dovel.com
ZULILY LLC: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Douglas Due Jan. 31, 2025
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ALEX DOUGLAS, et al., v.
ZULILY, LLC, et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-02916-SDM-KAJ (S.D. Ohio),
the Hon. Judge Kimberly Jolson entered a scheduling order as
follows:
-- The parties shall exchange initial Aug. 30, 2024
disclosures by:
-- Any motion to amend the pleadings or Oct. 31, 2024
to join additional parties shall be
filed by:
-- The motion for class certification Jan. 31, 2025
shall be filed by:
-- All discovery shall be completed by: June 30, 2025
-- Primary expert reports must be produced by: Jan. 31, 2025.
-- Rebuttal expert reports must be produced by: Feb. 28, 2025.
-- The Plaintiff will make a settlement Dec. 13, 2024.
demand by:
-- Defendants will respond by: Jan. 13, 2025
Zulily is an online retailer that offers consumers with daily
product deals.
A copy of the Court's order dated Aug. 2, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9tH3Wh at no extra
charge.[CC]
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Carlisle Cos. Faces Numerous Exposure Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Carlisle Companies Incorporated, over the years, has been named as
a defendant, along with numerous other defendants, in lawsuits in
various courts in which plaintiffs have alleged injury due to
exposure to asbestos-containing friction products produced and sold
predominantly by its discontinued Motion Control business between
the late-1940s and the mid-1980s and roofing products produced and
sold by Henry Company LLC, which was acquired on September 1, 2021,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company has recorded a liability for estimated indemnity costs
associated with pending and future asbestos claims. As of June 30,
2024, the Company believes that its accrual for these costs is not
material to the Company's financial position, results of
operations, or operating cash flows.
The Company currently maintains insurance coverage and is the
beneficiary of other arrangements that provide coverage with
respect to asbestos-related claims and associated defense costs.
The Company records the insurance coverage as a receivable in an
amount it reasonably estimates is probable of recovery for pending
and future asbestos-related indemnity claims. Since the Company's
insurance coverage contains various exclusions, limits of coverage
and self-insured retentions and may be subject to insurance
coverage disputes, the Company may incur expenses for indemnity and
defense costs and recognize income from insurance recoveries in
different periods, as such recoveries are recorded only if and when
it becomes probable that such costs will be covered by insurance.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=au9MaS
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Carrier Global Faces Personal Injury Lawsuits
--------------------------------------------------------------
Carrier Global Corporation has been named as a defendant in
lawsuits alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to
asbestos allegedly integrated into certain Carrier products or
business premises, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
While the Company has never manufactured asbestos and no longer
incorporates it into any currently-manufactured products, certain
products that the Company no longer manufactures contained
components incorporating asbestos. A substantial majority of these
asbestos-related claims have been dismissed without payment or have
been covered in full or in part by insurance or other forms of
indemnity. Additional cases were litigated and settled without any
insurance reimbursement. The amounts involved in asbestos-related
claims were not material individually or in the aggregate in any
period.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gzkAD2
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Crown Cork Faces 700 New Personal Injury Lawsuits
------------------------------------------------------------------
Crown Cork & Seal Company, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Crown
Holdings, Inc., is one of many defendants in a substantial number
of lawsuits filed throughout the United States by persons alleging
bodily injury as a result of exposure to asbestos, according to the
Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.
During the three months ended June 30, 2024, the Company receives
700 new claims.
Crown Cork has entered into arrangements with plaintiffs' counsel
in certain jurisdictions with respect to claims which are not yet
filed, or asserted, against it. However, Crown Cork expects claims
under these arrangements to be filed or asserted against Crown Cork
in the future. The projected value of these claims is included in
the Company's estimated liability as of June 30, 2024.
As of June 30, 2024, the Company's accrual for pending and future
asbestos-related claims and related legal costs was $198, including
$133 for unasserted claims. The Company determines its accrual
without limitation to a specific time period.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Vwd99Q
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dow Inc. Has $744MM Liabilities as of June 30
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dow Inc., in its press release issued on July 25, 2024, has
recorded a total $744 million in asbestos-related liabilities -
noncurrent as of June 30, 2024, according to the Company's Form 8-K
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
A full-text copy of the Form 8-K is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=J0VQxZ
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Flowserve Faces 400 New Product Liability Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Flowserve Corporation, during the three months ended March 31,
2024, receives 400 new claims, according to the Company's Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "We are a defendant in a substantial number of
lawsuits that seek to recover damages for personal injury allegedly
caused by exposure to asbestos-containing products manufactured
and/or distributed by our heritage companies in the past.
Typically, these lawsuits have been brought against multiple
defendants in state and federal courts. While the overall number of
asbestos-related claims in which we or our predecessors have been
named has generally declined in recent years, the number of such
claims may fluctuate or increase between periods, and there can be
no assurance that this trend will continue, or that the average
cost per claim to us will not further increase. Asbestos-containing
materials incorporated into any such products were encapsulated and
used as internal components of process equipment, and we do not
believe that significant emission of asbestos fibers occurred
during the use of this equipment."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=odLvpu
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Hartford Financial Still Receives A&E claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., continues to receive
A&E claims, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "Asbestos claims relate primarily to bodily
injuries asserted by people who came in contact with asbestos or
products containing asbestos. Environmental claims relate primarily
to pollution and related clean-up costs.
"The vast majority of the Company's exposure to A&E relates to
accident years prior to 1986 that are reported in Property &
Casualty Other Operations ("Run-off A&E"). In addition, since 1986,
the Company has written A&E exposures under general liability
policies and pollution liability under homeowners policies, which
are reported in the Commercial Lines and Personal Lines segments,
respectively."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=JgHegN
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Honeywell Int'l. Faces Personal Injury Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Honeywell International Inc. is named in asbestos-related personal
injury claims related to North American Refractories Company
(NARCO), which was sold in 1986, and the Bendix Friction Materials
business, which was sold in 2014, according to the Company's Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=TL2Yie
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Otis Worldwide Defends Exposure Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------
Otis Worldwide Corporation has been named as defendants in lawsuits
alleging personal injury as a result of exposure to asbestos,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Company states, "While we have never manufactured any
asbestos-containing component parts, and no longer incorporate
asbestos in any current products, certain of our historical
products have contained components manufactured by third parties
incorporating asbestos. A substantial majority of these
asbestos-related claims have been dismissed without payment or were
covered in full or in part by insurance or other forms of
indemnity. Additional cases were litigated and settled without any
insurance reimbursement. The amounts involved in asbestos-related
claims were not material individually or in the aggregate as of and
for the periods ended June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023.
"The estimated range of total liabilities to resolve all pending
and unasserted potential future asbestos claims through 2059 is
approximately $11 million to $22 million as of June 30, 2024, and
approximately $20 million to $43 million as of December 31, 2023.
Since no amount within the range of estimates is more likely to
occur than any other, we have recorded the minimum amounts of $11
million and $20 million as of June 30, 2024 and December 31, 2023,
respectively, which are principally recorded in Other long-term
liabilities on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Amounts
are on a pre-tax basis, not discounted, and exclude the Company's
legal fees to defend the asbestos claims (which will continue to be
expensed as they are incurred). In addition, the Company has an
insurance recovery receivable for probable asbestos-related
recoveries of approximately $3 million and $5 million as of June
30, 2024 and December 31, 2023, respectively, which are principally
included in Other assets on our Condensed Consolidated Balance
Sheets."
A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Dcp6f6
*********
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 ***