/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/241002.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Wednesday, October 2, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 198 Headlines 7-ELEVEN INC: Baker Sues Over Unlawful Tobacco Surcharge ALASKA AIRLINES: Class Settlement in Clarkson Suit Gets Initial Nod APERION CARE: Miceli Suit Seeks Nursing Assistants' Unpaid Overtime BANK OF AMERICA: Court Extends Time to File Reply Papers BANK OF AMERICA: Seeks More Time to File Reply in Unemployment Suit BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Class Settlement in Hu Suit Gets Final Nod BOWERY RESIDENTS: Faces Lugo Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y. BUBOLO MEDICAL LLC: Radvansky Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia BUMBLE INC: Artificially Inflated Stock Price, Holzer Suit Claims BUTTERFIELD MARKET: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Andrews Says CATALYST MEDIUM: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Morgan Says CENTER STREET: Architectural Barriers Violate ADA, Feltzin Says CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Coletti & Egleston Sue Over Private Data Breach DARREN INDYKE: Seeks Redaction of Certain Info in Exhibits DEERE CREDIT: Settlement in Cornelius Suit Wins Initial Approval DIVISION STREET HOTEL: Martinez Sues Over Failure to Pay Wages DNP-Y INC: Wheatley Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website DOMINO'S PIZZA: Bender Files Suit Over Share Price Drop DONALD TRUMP: US Must Oppose Class Cert. Bid by Oct. 17 ECP BUSINESS: Discovery in Taylor Suit Due May 30, 2025 ELON MUSK: Gorog Appeals Case Dismissal to 2nd Circuit EPIC RIGHTS: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ERICSSON INC: Class Settlement in Gutierrez Suit Gets Initial Nod EVERI GAMES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Valenzuela Due Feb. 6, 2025 EVOLENT HEALTH: Underpays Customer Service Reps, Delaney Says FAVORITE WORLD: Parties Seeks to Attach Exhibits to Class Cert Bid FILMSUPPLY LLC: Trimboli Files Suit in N.D. California FOOD LION: Bates Sues Over Deceptive Product Labeling FORD MOTOR: Faces Sklodowski Suit Over 18.36% Drop of Stock Price GALESBURG COMMUNITY: Ct. Directs Discovery Plan Filing in N.T. Suit GEO GROUP: Gonzalez Seeks Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal GM GROUP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Briceno Suit Alleges HEALTHY PAWS: Can File Opposition to Class Cert Bid Under Seal ILLINOIS TOOL: Court Awards Class Counsel $60.4K IMMACULATE HOME: Response to Class Cert Bid Extended to Oct. 21 INEOS NITRILES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Metzger Alleges INSTAGRAM LLC: Wins Summary Judgment vs Dangaard JENNIFER COZBY: Hurdsman Loses Bid for Class Certification JO-ANN STORES: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website JOHN HANCOCK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Lindley Alleges JOHNSON, TN: B.P. Protective Order Bid on Depositions Partly OK'd KISS NUTRACEUTICALS: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by Oct. 9 LA FINANCIAL: Fails to Safeguard Personal Info, Cohen Says LABOR SOURCE: Speight Loses Bid to Certify Class LIVE NATION: Witt Sues Over ADA Non-Compliant Facilities LOOK ENTERTAINMENT: Collective Partly Gets Conditional Status LUSA CONSTRUCTION: Delgado Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation M&R MANUFACTURING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Zambrano Claims MAINFACTOR INC: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website MARIANI PACKING: Wins Bid for Summary Judgment v. Diesel MCGRAW HILL: Discloses Personal Info to 3rd Parties, Harwell Says MDL 2873: Walthall Sues Over Harmful AFFF Products MDL 2873: Washington Seeks Damages for AFFF-Caused Injuries MDL 2873: Williams Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemical Substances MDL 2873: Willis Sues Over Harmful Chemical Substances MDL 2873: Wood Sues Over AFFF's Undisclosed Health Hazards MDL 2873: Wynn Alleges Injuries Due to Toxic Chemicals' Exposure MDL 3031: CIIPPs Seek to Certify Injunctive Relief Class MDL 3090: Settlement in Data Security Suit Gets Initial Nod MICOR INDUSTRIES: Gonzalez Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime MISSOURI: Class Cert. Bid Filing Due May 23, 2025 NATIONAL PRESTO: Mislabels Coffee Percolator Capacity, McCabe Says NDC ASSET: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Morris Alleges NEW FORTRESS: Bojdol Suit Alleges Securities Law Violations NEW YORK, NY: Jefferson Sues Over NYPD's Unconstitutional Conduct ORMAT NEVADA: Woodruff Labor Suit Removed to S.D. Calif. PARTS AUTHORITY: Casey and Foust Sue Over Worker Misclassification POLITICO LLC: Khamooshi Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. POOH-BAH: Baez Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages PRACTICE RESOURCE: Class Settlement in Data Suit Gets Initial Nod RAEN OPTICS LLC: Karim Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website RODEO RESTAURANT: Castillo Suit Seeks Proper Overtime Wages ROYCE JUPITER: Architectural Barriers Violate ADA, Feltzin Says SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE: Zdrojewski Seeks Team Leads' Unpaid Wages SALESFORCE INC: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Yockey Due April 24, 2025 SAM'S WEST: Sanchez Appeals Class Cert. Bid Denial to 9th Circuit SAP AMERICA INC: Khoo Suit Removed to C.D. California SKY CLIMBER: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Olmedo Suit Due Oct. 19 SMARTMATCH INSURANCE: Cocciolillo Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Missouri SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: Harper Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Discrimination SOVENA USA: Sells Adulterated & Impure Avocado Oil, Morrison Claims SPECIALTY NETWORKS: Bryson Balks at Unprotected Personal Info TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL: Plaintiffs Seek to File Reply Under Seal TOYOTA INDUSTRIES: Faces Broadmoor Lumber's False Ad Suit in Cal. TRICOLOR CALIFORNIA: Rivera Suit Removed to C.D. California TWENTY-SIX DESIGNS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Herrera Says VINEYARD VINES: Agnone Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website VITAL FARMS: Bid for Summary Judgment Partly OK'd ZOETIS INC: California Spine Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties ********* 7-ELEVEN INC: Baker Sues Over Unlawful Tobacco Surcharge -------------------------------------------------------- Barbara A. Baker, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-01360 (W.D. Pa., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought to challenge Defendant's practice of charging a "tobacco surcharge" in the form of a supplemental premium that unjustly forces certain employees to pay higher premiums for their health insurance, in violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA") and its anti-discrimination provisions by unfairly targeting employees based on their health status, such as tobacco use. It is both unfair and unlawful for entities like 7-Eleven to impose punitive health insurance surcharges on employees who use tobacco products. Tobacco surcharges have become more prevalent in recent years, but to be lawful, they must adhere to specific rules set forth by ERISA and related regulations. These rules mandate that employers cannot charge extra fees based on tobacco use unless those fees are part of a compliant wellness program that offers a reasonable alternative standard to all participants. While ERISA allows for wellness programs that incentivize healthy behavior, these programs must meet strict criteria. However, the 7-Eleven Comprehensive Welfare Benefit Plan (the "Plan") does not provide a compliant reasonable alternative standard, and Defendant has failed to adequately notify employees about the availability of such an alternative in all its plan communications. Consequently, Defendant's tobacco surcharge violates ERISA's anti-discrimination provisions by imposing additional costs on employees who use tobacco products without meeting the legal requirements for a bona fide wellness program. The surcharge has imposed an additional financial burden on her and other similarly situated employees, despite 7-Eleven's failure to comply with the legal requirements for wellness programs under ERISA. The Plaintiff brings this lawsuit individually and on behalf of all similarly situated Plan participants and beneficiaries, seeking to recover the unlawfully charged tobacco surcharges and to obtain plan-wide equitable relief to prevent 7-Eleven from continuing to collect these improper fees in violation of ERISA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a former employee who was required to pay the tobacco surcharge to maintain health insurance coverage under the Plan. 7-Eleven is a multinational chain of convenience stores.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joel R. Hurt, Esq. Ruari McDonnell, Esq. FEINSTEIN DOYLE PAYNE & KRAVEC, LLC 429 Fourth Avenue Law & Finance Building, Suite 1300 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Phone: (412) 281-8400 Facsimile: (412) 281-1007 Email: jhurt@fdpklaw.com rmcdonnell@fdpklaw.com - and - Oren Faircloth, Esq. David J. DiSabato, Esq. SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Phone: (212) 532-1091 Email: ofaircloth@sirillp.com ddisabato@sirillp.com ALASKA AIRLINES: Class Settlement in Clarkson Suit Gets Initial Nod ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CASEY CLARKSON, v. ALASKA AIRLINES, INC., and HORIZON AIR INDUSTRIES, INC., Case No. 2:19-cv-00005-TOR (E.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Thomas Rice entered an order granting preliminary approval of class action settlement: -- The Court previously certified a Paid Leave Class consisting of: "All current or former Alaska or Horizon pilots who have taken short-term military leave from October 10, 2004 through the date of the judgment." -- Plaintiff requests one change to the class previously certified by the Court—that it have an end date of May 31, 2023. Because this change "does not alter the reasoning underlying the Court's prior Order granting class certification" the Court finds this modification to the class definition is appropriate. -- The definition of the Paid Leave Class is thus modified to: "All current or former Alaska or Horizon pilots who have taken short-term military leave from Oct. 10, 2004 through May 31, 2023." The proposed Settlement provides substantial relief to the Class. The monetary component of the Settlement Agreement provides for payment of $4.75 million to a settlement fund for the benefit of the Class—43% of Class Counsel’s estimate of the Class’s gross damages (i.e., not including prejudgment interest, liquidated damages, or any offset for military pay). This result is better than that achieved in class settlements approved by other courts in USERRA cases, both in absolute terms and as a proportion of Class Counsel’s estimate of Defendants’ potential liability. The Settlement Agreement also provides for significant forwardlooking relief for the Class: Defendants will provide members of the Class who are employed as pilots at Alaska Airlines or Horizon Air with four calendar days of paid military leave per year, subject to certain terms and conditions. Class Counsel estimates this benefit will have an annual value of $2,000.00-$6,619.40 for each Class member at Alaska Airlines and $1,512.00-$3,612.00 for each Class member at Horizon Air. This substantial prospective relief for the Class further supports preliminary approval. Class Counsel will file any Motion for Attorneys' Fees, Costs, and any motion for Class Representative Service Awards by Jan. 3, 2025. Class Counsel shall file a Motion for Final Approval of the Settlement by Jan. 3, 2025. The Court will hold a final fairness hearing on Jan. 15, 2025, at 11:00 a.m., at the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington, 920 West Riverside Ave., Courtroom 902, Spokane, Washington. Alaska Airlines is a major American airline headquartered in SeaTac, Washington, within the Seattle metropolitan area. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=N2Q0FG at no extra charge.[CC] APERION CARE: Miceli Suit Seeks Nursing Assistants' Unpaid Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------------- RASHELLE MICELI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. APERION CARE, INC. and GOLDWATER CARE MANAGEMENT, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-08773 (N.D. Ill., September 23, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law. The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a certified nursing assistant from approximately 2022 until July 2023. Aperion Care, Inc. is a healthcare services provider located in Lincolnwood, Illinois. Goldwater Care Management, LLC is a healthcare services provider located in Lincolnwood, Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Hans A. Nilges, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 7034 Braucher Street NW, Suite B North Canton, OH 44720 Telephone: (330) 470-4428 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 Email: hnilges@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Robi J. Baishnab, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 1360 E. 9th Street, Suite 808 Cleveland, OH 44114 Telephone: (216) 230-2955 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 Email: rbaishnab@ohlaborlaw.com - and - Scott D. Perlmutter, Esq. TITTLE & PERLMUTER 4106 Bridge Ave. Cleveland, OH 44113 Telephone: (216) 308-1522 Facsimile: (888) 604-9299 Email: scott@tittlelawfirm.com BANK OF AMERICA: Court Extends Time to File Reply Papers -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit re Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation, Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB (S.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Gonzalo Curiel entered an order granting the Defendant's unopposed motion for extension of time to file reply papers in further support of motions to seal corrected documents filed in support of plaintiffs" motion for class certification and the documents at issue. The Court concludes that good cause exists to grant the extension. The actions in the MDL involve BANA's conduct in distributing unemployment benefits for the California Employment Development Department ("EDD"). Bank of America offers saving and current account, investment and financial services, and online banking. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Cr88SI at no extra charge.[CC] BANK OF AMERICA: Seeks More Time to File Reply in Unemployment Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit re: Bank of America California Unemployment Benefits Litigation, Case No. 3:21-md-02992-GPC-MSB (S.D. Cal.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order extending the deadline to file its reply in support of motions to seal by 7 days, from Sept. 26, 2024 to Oct. 3, 2024. This is BANA's first request for an extension of time to file a brief in connection with its motions to seal. This extension does not affect any previously scheduled deadlines and will not cause prejudice to Plaintiffs because no hearing is yet scheduled on the motions to seal, and the Parties' briefing on Plaintiffs' underlying Motion for Class Certification will not be complete until Nov. 21, 2024. BANA conferred with the Plaintiffs regarding the relief sought in this motion and Plaintiffs stated that they do not oppose BANA's request for an extension. On Aug. 29, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a Motion to Certify Class by Consolidated Plaintiffs, as well as 157 exhibits in support of that motion. On Sept. 5, 2024, BANA filed a Motion to Seal Documents filed in support of Plaintiffs' motion for class certification, as well as a proposed order granting said motion. On Sept. 17, 2024, BANA filed a motion to seal corrected documents filed in support of Plaintiffs' motion for class certification. Bank of America offers saving and current account, investment and financial services, and online banking. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=xNuMNe at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: James W. Mcgarry, Esq. GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 100 Northern Avenue Boston, MA 02210 Telephone: (617) 570-1000 Facsimile: (617) 523 1231 E-mail: JMcGarry@goodwinlaw.com - and - Thomas M. Hefferon, Esq. Sabrina M. Rose-smith, Esq. Matthew L. Riffee, Esq. Laura G. Brys, Esq. GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 1900 N St. NW Washington, DC 20036 Telephone: (202) 346-4000 Facsimile: (202) 346-4444 E-mail: THefferon@goodwinlaw.com SRoseSmith@goodwinlaw.com MRiffee@goodwinlaw.com LBrys@goodwinlaw.com - and - Yvonne W. Chan, Esq. JONES DAY 100 High Street Boston, MA 02110 Telephone: (617) 960-3939 Facsimile: (617) 449-6999 E-mail: YChan@jonesday.com - and - Janice P. Brown, Esq. Matthew B. Nazareth, Esq. MEYERS NAVE 600 B Street, Suite 1650 San Diego, CA 92101 E-mail: jbrown@myersnave.com mnazareth@myersnave.com BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Class Settlement in Hu Suit Gets Final Nod ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSHUA HU, et al., v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA LLC, et al., Case No. 2:18-cv-04363-JBC (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge James Clark, III entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for final approval of class action settlement. The Court certifies the following Settlement Class for purposes Settlement only: "All Persons who purchased or leased a model year 2009-2013 BMW X5 xDrive35d or 2009-2011 BMW 335d vehicle (defined as the "Class Vehicles) on or before the Preliminary Approval date, Feb. 28, 2024." Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (i) the BMW Defendants and their officers, directors, and employees; and the BMW Defendants' corporate affiliates' officers, directors, and employees; (ii) Class Counsel; (iii) the judges who have presided over the action; (iv) Persons who settled with, released, or otherwise had claims dismissed with prejudice or had claims adjudicated on the merits against the BMW Defendants arising from the same allegations or circumstances as the actions; and (v) all other Persons who timely elect to become opt-outs from the Settlement Class in accordance with the Court's Orders and as approved by the Court. BMW of North America was established in 1975 as the United States importer of BMW luxury/performance vehicles. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=e1eory at no extra charge.[CC] BOWERY RESIDENTS: Faces Lugo Wage-and-Hour Suit in S.D.N.Y. ----------------------------------------------------------- JILLIAN LUGO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BOWERY RESIDENTS' COMMITTEE, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-07223 (S.D.N.Y., September 24, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide wage notice, and failure to provide wage statements. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as an hourly-paid shift supervisor from on or about February 2, 2023, until on or about May 21, 2023. She was promoted as a site coordinator on or about May 22, 2023, and held that position until she resigned on or about August 6, 2024. Bowery Residents' Committee, Inc. is a homeless shelter, with its principal place of business located at 131 West 25th Street, 12th Floor, New York, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David D. Barnhorn, Esq. Peter A. Romero, Esq. ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC 490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277 Hauppauge, NY 11788 Telephone: (631) 257-5588 BUBOLO MEDICAL LLC: Radvansky Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bubolo Medical, LLC. The case is styled as Ethan Radvansky, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Bubolo Medical, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-04365-SCJ (N.D. Ga., Sept. 26, 2024). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Bubolo Medical -- https://bubolomedical.com/ -- is a wellness center.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Phone: (615) 485-0018 Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Steven Howard Koval THE KOVAL FIRM, LLC Building 15, Suite 120 3575 Piedmont Rd. Atlanta, GA 30305 Phone: (404) 513-6651 Fax: (404) 549-4654 Email: Steve@KovalFirm.com BUMBLE INC: Artificially Inflated Stock Price, Holzer Suit Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- MICHAL HOLZER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BUMBLE INC., LIDIANE JONES, WHITNEY WOLFE HERD, and ANURADHA B. SUBRAMANIAN, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-01131 (W.D. Tex., September 24, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding Bumble's business, operations, and prospects in order to trade Bumble securities at artificially inflated prices between November 7, 2023, and August 7, 2024. Specifically, the Defendants provided overwhelmingly positive statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning Bumble's relaunch strategy, including Premium Plus and base tiers, focused engagement and more personalized experiences for younger users, and enhancing premium offerings for paid subscription members. Such statements absent these material facts caused the Plaintiff and other shareholders to purchase Bumble's securities at artificially inflated prices. When the truth emerged, the price of Bumble stock declined from $8.06 per share on August 7, 2024, to $5.71 per share on August 8, 2024. As a result of the Defendants' fraudulent statements and omissions, the Plaintiff and similarly situated investors have sustained significant damages. Bumble Inc. is a developer of online dating and networking application, headquartered in Austin, Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Stuart L. Cochran, Esq. CONDON TOBIN SLADEK THORNTON NERENBERG PLLC 8080 Park Lane, Suite 700 Dallas, TX 75231 Telephone: (214) 265-3804 Facsimile: (214) 691-6311 Email: scochran@condontobin.com - and - Adam M. Apton, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP 33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 363-7500 Facsimile: (212) 363-7171 Email: aapton@zlk.com BUTTERFIELD MARKET: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Andrews Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- VICTOR ANDREWS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Butterfield Market Group, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-06666 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 22, 2024) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate their website https://www.butterfieldmarket.com to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. On August 28, 2024, the Plaintiff was searching online for a local grocery store that offered fresh, high quality foods for a family gathering he was planning. During his search, he came across the Defendant's website, and wanted to review the company's offers and make a purchase. However, the Plaintiff encountered accessibility issues on the website, which prevented him from browsing for more information about the store's locations or making a purchase online. These access barriers have caused Butterfieldmarket.com to be inaccessible to, and not independently usable by blind and visually-impaired persons. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Butterfield Market Group's policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to unlawful discrimination. Butterfield Market Group, Inc. operates the website that offers food products and gourmet provisions including prepared foods, baked goods, coffee, cookies, fruits, vegetables, fish, meat, cheeses, beverages, gift baskets and specialty foods.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Asher H. Cohen, Esq. ASHER COHEN PLLC 2377 56th Dr. Brooklyn, NY 11234 Telephone: (718) 914-9694 E-mail: acohen@ashercohenlaw.com CATALYST MEDIUM: Web Site Not Accessible to Blind, Morgan Says -------------------------------------------------------------- PARADISE MORGAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CATALYST MEDIUM FOUR INC. d/b/a Smartish, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-07059 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 18, 2024) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, www.smartish.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Catalyst Medium Four Inc. d/b/a Smartish design and manufacture phone cases, and phone accessories. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dan Shaked, Esq. SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C. 14 Harwood Court, Suite 415 Scarsdale, NY 10583 Telephone: (917) 373-9128 Email: ShakedLawGroup@gmail.com CENTER STREET: Architectural Barriers Violate ADA, Feltzin Says --------------------------------------------------------------- LAWRENCE FELTZIN, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated mobility-impaired individuals, Plaintiff v. CENTER STREET PLAZA, CORP., Defendant, Case No. 9:24-cv-81157 (S.D. Fla., Sept. 20, 2024) is an action against the Defendant seeking injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Defendant owned and operated the commercial buildings located in Jupiter, Florida and conducted a substantial amount of business in that place of public accommodation in Palm Beach County, Florida. Plaintiff Feltzin is an individual with disabilities as defined by and pursuant to the ADA. He visits the commercial property and businesses located within the area and encountered multiple violations of the ADA that directly affected his ability to use and enjoy the commercial property. Specifically, the Plaintiff encountered architectural barriers that are in violation of the ADA at the subject commercial property and the business. The barriers to access at the commercial property, and the business within, have each denied or diminished Plaintiff's ability to visit the commercial property and have endangered his safety in violation of the ADA, says the suit. Center Street Plaza, Corp., owns and/or operates a place of public accommodation as defined by the ADA.[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 Telephone: (305) 553-3464 E-mail: bvirues@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 Telephone: (305) 350-3103 E-mail: rdiego@lawgmp.com CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Coletti & Egleston Sue Over Private Data Breach ------------------------------------------------------------------ JASON COLETTI and CLAUDIA EGLESTON, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CHANGE HEALTHCARE, INC., Defendant, Case No. 0:24-cv-03681-DWF-DJF (D. Minn., September 17, 2024) arises out of the Defendant's failures to properly secure and safeguard hundreds of millions of Class Members' sensitive personal identifiable information and protected health information. The Defendant's data security failures allowed a targeted cyberattack to compromise Defendant's network that contained the private information of Plaintiffs and other individuals. The data breach occurred between February 17, 2024, and February 20, 2024, and Defendant released a Notice of Data Breach to impacted individuals on June 20, 2024 and August 8, 2024. The Defendant also released an update about the breach on July 29, 2024. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs bring this action against Defendant seeking redress for its unlawful conduct and asserting claims for: (i) negligence and negligence per se, (ii) breach of implied contract (iii) breach of fiduciary duty, (iv) unjust enrichment, and (vi) declaratory relief. Headquartered in Nashville, TN, Change Healthcare, Inc. provides payment and revenue cycle services, clinical and imaging services, and other services to its clients. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Charlie R. Alden, Esq. GILBERT ALDEN BARBOSA PPLC 2801 Cliff Rd E, Suite 200 Burnsville, MN 55337 Charlie@GilbertAlden.com Telephone: (612) 990-2484 Facsimile: (612) 806-0585 DARREN INDYKE: Seeks Redaction of Certain Info in Exhibits ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bensky et al., v. Indyke et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-01204-AS (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Arun Subramanian entered an order granting application to redact certain categories of information contained in Exhibits B, C, D, E, O, P, T, U, V, and X1 to the Declaration of Sigrid McCawley in support of Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification, and to seal Exhibit Z attached thereto. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate the motions at ECF No. 117 and 122. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1C3AyQ at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendants are represented by: Daniel S. Ruzumna, Esq. PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER LLP 1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 336-2034 Facsimile: (212) 336-2222 E-mail: druzumna@pbwt.com DEERE CREDIT: Settlement in Cornelius Suit Wins Initial Approval ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MELVIN CORNELIUS, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, v. DEERE CREDIT SERVICES, INC., Case No. 4:24-cv-00025-RSB-CLR (S.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge R. Stan Baker entered an order conditionally certifying class and preliminarily approving settlement: The Court, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, conditionally certifies, for purposes of this Settlement only, the following Settlement Class: "All persons throughout the United States (1) to whom Deere Credit Services, Inc. placed a call, (2) directed to a number assigned to a cellular telephone service, but not assigned to a Deere Credit Services, Inc. customer or accountholder, (3) in connection with which Deere Credit Services, Inc. used an artificial or prerecorded voice, (4) from Feb. 2, 2020 through June 25, 2024." The Court appoints Plaintiff to act as class representative of the Settlement Class pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court appoints The Koval Firm, LLC, Paronich Law, P.C. and Greenwald Davidson Radbil PLLC as Class Counsel pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Deere Credit offers forestry, landscaping, construction equipment, and golf financing services. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bJZyRy at no extra charge.[CC] DIVISION STREET HOTEL: Martinez Sues Over Failure to Pay Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- Martha Martinez, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated v. DIVISION STREET HOTEL CORP. d/b/a THE AMERICAN HOTEL, Case No. 2:24-cv-06827 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought to recover for Defendant's failure to pay spread-of-hours pay, and failure to timely pay wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the New York Labor Law ("NYLL"). The Defendant failed to timely pay Plaintiff's wages weekly and instead paid her wages bi-weekly pursuant to its company-wide payroll practice in violation of NYLL. Every time that Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff her wages earned within seven days of the end of the workweek, Defendant deprived her of the use of money to which she was legally entitled. As a result of Defendant's failure to timely pay Plaintiff's wages Plaintiff lost the time value of money. Each time that Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff her wages earned within seven days of the end of the workweek, Defendant underpaid Plaintiff for the work that she performed. As a result of Defendant's failure, Plaintiff was deprived of her income for longer than she would have been had she been able to assert her claim for unpaid wages earlier. The Plaintiff was unable to determine how much she had been underpaid throughout her employment. Plaintiff would have asserted her claim earlier if accurate statements had been provided, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a cook from in March 2023 to December 2023. The Defendant's restaurant requires a "wide variety" of materials that have moved through interstate commerce such as foodstuffs, kitchen utensils, cooking vessels, cleaning supplies, paper products, furniture, and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J. Farnworth, Esq. Peter A. Romero, Esq. ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC 490 Wheeler Road, Suite 250 Hauppauge, NY 11788 Phone: (631) 257-5588 Email: mfarnworth@romerolawny.com DNP-Y INC: Wheatley Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website -------------------------------------------------------- Hannibal Wheatley, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. DNP-Y, INC. d/b/a FRESHLY BAKED NYC 2; and DNP-Z, INC d/b/a FRESHLY BAKED NYC, Case No. 1:24-cv-07300 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought against Defendant for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate the Defendant's Website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, https://www.freshlybaked.nyc and therefore its denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's Website is not equally accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore, Defendant is in violation of the ADA. 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, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content while using the computer. DNP-Y, INC. d/b/a FRESHLY BAKED NYC 2 and DNP-Z, INC. d/b/a FRESHLY BAKED NYC is a New York Limited corporations.[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 Phone: (212) 227-5700 Fax: (212) 656-1889 Email: jon@norinsberglaw.com bennitta@employeejustice.com DOMINO'S PIZZA: Bender Files Suit Over Share Price Drop ------------------------------------------------------- SCOTT BENDER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. DOMINO'S PIZZA, INC., RUSSELL J. WEINER, and SANDEEP REDDY, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-12477-LVP-APP (E.D. Mich., Sept. 20, 2024) is a federal securities class action on behalf of the Plaintiff and a class consisting of all persons and entities other than Defendants that purchased or otherwise acquired Domino's securities between December 7, 2023 and July 17, 2024, both dates inclusive, seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials. Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) DPE, the Company's largest master franchisee, was experiencing significant challenges with respect to both new store openings and closures of existing stores; (ii) as a result, Domino's was unlikely to meet its own previously issued long-term guidance for annual global net store growth; (iii) accordingly, Domino's business and/or financial prospects were overstated; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times, says the suit. On this news, Domino's stock price fell $64.23 per share, or 13.57%, to close at $409.04 per share on July 18, 2024. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages, the suit alleges. Domino's Pizza, Inc. operates as a global pizza company in three segments: U.S. Stores, International Franchise, and Supply Chain. Domino's offers pizzas and other food products under the Domino's brand name through Company-owned and franchised stores.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. J. Alexander Hood II, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (917) 463-1044 E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com ahood@pomlaw.com - and - Peretz Bronstein, Esq. BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 697-6484 Facsimile: (212) 697-7296 E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com DONALD TRUMP: US Must Oppose Class Cert. Bid by Oct. 17 ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BLACK LIVES MATTER D.C. et al., v. DONALD TRUMP, et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01469 (D.D.C., Filed June 4, 2020), the Hon. Judge Dabney L. Friedrich entered an order that: -- The United States shall file any opposition to the Black Lives Matter plaintiffs' motion to certify class on or before Oct. 17, 2024. -- The plaintiffs shall file any reply on or before Nov. 21, 2024. The nature of sui states Civil Rights -- Other Civil Rights. Donald John Trump is an American politician, media personality, and businessman who served as the 45th president of the United States from 2017 to 2021. Trump received a Bachelor of Science degree in economics from the University of Pennsylvania in 1968.[CC] ECP BUSINESS: Discovery in Taylor Suit Due May 30, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as COURTNEY TAYLOR, individually and purportedly on behalf of all others similarly situated, V. ECP BUSINESS CAPITAL LLC, Case No. 5:24-cv-00167-DCR-MAS (E.D. Ky.), the Hon. Judge Danny Reeves entered a scheduling order as follows: (1) Within 14 days, the parties shall exchange information required by Rule 26(a)(1) which has not been previously exchanged. These disclosures need not be filed in the record. (2) No later than March 25, 2025, the parties shall make all expert disclosures on matters pertinent to class certification. (3) By May 30, 2025, the parties shall complete all discovery pertinent to class certification (with discovery requests served in a manner calculated for responses compliant with this deadline). (4) All motions for extensions of time shall be referred to the undersigned for disposition. The parties are advised in advance that such motions are not favored and must be accompanied by a memorandum and affidavit of counsel outlining sufficient grounds for granting the relief sought (5) The parties shall file any motion to amend the pleadings or join additional parties no later than November 29, 2024. (6) The motion for class certification shall be filed no later than June 30, 2025. Subject to the limitations outlined in paragraph (7) above, briefing shall be governed by the local rules for civil practice. ECP provides a broad array of services and solutions for small businesses. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HRwq0Z at no extra charge.[CC] ELON MUSK: Gorog Appeals Case Dismissal to 2nd Circuit ------------------------------------------------------ COLBY GOROG, et al. are taking an appeal from a court order dismissing their lawsuit entitled Keith Johnson, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Elon Musk, et al., Defendants, Case No. 1:22-cv-5037, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The lawsuit is brought against the Defendants for their alleged engagement in a Crypto Pyramid Scheme by way of Dogecoin cryptocurrency. On Jan. 22, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed their fourth amended complaint against the Defendants, which the Defendants moved to dismiss on Mar. 1, 2024. On Aug. 29, 2024, the Court granted with prejudice the Defendants' motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs' fourth amended complaint through an Order entered by Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein. Judgment was entered in the Defendants' favor and tax costs. The case was closed. The appellate case is captioned Johnson v. Musk, Case No. 24-2501, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, filed on September 24, 2024. [BN] Plaintiffs-Appellants COLBY GOROG, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by: Evan Spencer, Esq. EVAN SPENCER LAW, PLLC 305 Broadway, 7th floor New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (917) 547-4665 Defendants-Appellees ELON MUSK, et al. are represented by: Alex Spiro, Esq. QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor New York, NY 10010 EPIC RIGHTS: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ---------------------------------------------------------- Milton Williams, for himself and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, v. EPIC RIGHTS, LLC (or "Woodstock"), Case No. 1:24-cv-07314 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 26, 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://woodstock.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 the computer. EPIC RIGHTS, LLC, operates the Woodstock online retail store, as well as the Woodstock 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: jeffrey@gottlieb.legal dana@gottlieb.legal michael@gottlieb.legal ERICSSON INC: Class Settlement in Gutierrez Suit Gets Initial Nod ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Josue Gutierrez v. Ericsson Inc. et al., Case No. 5:23-cv-01665-GW-SHK (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge George Wu entered an order: -- preliminary certifying the proposed class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) for purposes of settlement; -- granting the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement; -- approving the appointment of Josue Gutierrez as class representative; -- approving the appointment of The Wand Law Firm, P.C. as class counsel; -- approving the proposed long form notice and concomitant notice plan, subject to the extended deadline for opt-outs delineated above; and -- directing the parties to proceed under the scheduling order delineated in Part F of the foregoing discussion section. For purposes of settlement only, the parties have agreed to certification of the following class: "All persons who worked for Defendant as a non-exempt employee reporting to a California work location during the Class Period." The class period is defined as June 22, 2019 through the date of preliminary approval. To resolve the matter, Ericsson has agreed to pay an all-in, non-reversionary Gross Settlement Amount of $1,350,000 as well as the Employer’s Share of Payroll Taxes. The Court would find that the Settlement was negotiated at arm’s length and that there are no apparent indications of collusion that would prevent preliminary approval of the class action settlement. Ericsson is a telecommunications company. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=cFLYt1 at no extra charge.[CC] EVERI GAMES: Class Cert Bid Filing in Valenzuela Due Feb. 6, 2025 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOSE VALENZUELA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. EVERI GAMES INC.; and DOES 1 to 10, Case No. 2:24-cv-00257-MRA-JPR (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Monica Ramirez Almadani entered an order granting the Parties' joint stipulation to modify pretrial scheduling order to allow for mediation: 1. Last day to file motion for class certification is continued to Feb. 6, 2025; 2. Non-Expert Discovery Cutoff is continued to April 24, 2025; 3. Initial Expert Disclosure is continued to May 15, 2025; 4. Rebuttal Expert Disclosure is continued to June 12, 2025; 5. Expert Discovery Cut-Off is continued to July 3, 2025; 6. Last Date to Hear Non-Discovery Motions is continued to July 17, 2025; 7. Last Date to Hear Daubert Motions is continued to Aug. 14, 2026; 8. Motions in Limine Filing Deadline is continued to Sept. 11, 2025; 9. Opposition to Motions in Limine Filing Deadline is continued to Sept. 18, 2025; 10. Final Pretrial Conference is continued to October 9, 2025. The parties shall comply with the Court's Civil Trial Order. These dates and deadlines will not be continued except upon a showing of good cause, which generally requires unforeseeable circumstances. Failure to conduct discovery diligently or a desire to engage in settlement discussions will not constitute good cause. Everi develops entertaining game content, gaming machines, and gaming systems. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zbxvzp at no extra charge.[CC] EVOLENT HEALTH: Underpays Customer Service Reps, Delaney Says ------------------------------------------------------------- KYEISHA DELANEY, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. EVOLENT HEALTH LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-01668 (E.D. Va., Sept. 20, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant seeking to recover Plaintiff's unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act, and state common law. The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a customer service representative from approximately June 2021, through April 30, 2024, as a non-exempt employee. She asserts that Defendant violated the federal and state laws by knowingly suffering or permitting her and similarly situated employees to work in excess of 40 hours during a workweek without paying overtime compensation at a rate of one and a half times the regular rate. Evolent Health LLC operates a healthcare customer service center with approximately 5,100 employees in total.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew T. Sutter, Esq. SUTTER & TERPAK, PLLC 7540 Little River Turnpike, Suite A Annandale, VA 22003 Telephone: (703) 256-1800 E-mail: matt@sutterandterpak.com - and - Jesse L. Young, Esq. Kevin J. Stoops, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. One Towne Square, 17th Floor Southfield, MI 48076 Telephone: (248) 355-0300 E-mail: jyoung@sommerspc.com kstoops@sommerspc.com - and - Jonathan Melmed, Esq. Meghan Higday, Esq. MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C. 1801 Century Park E., Suite 850 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 824-3828 E-mail: mh@melmedlaw.com jm@melmedlaw.com FAVORITE WORLD: Parties Seeks to Attach Exhibits to Class Cert Bid ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID MINOR and ASHA AYANNA, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. FAVORITE WORLD, LLC; and DOES 1-100, inclusive, Case No. 2:24-cv-04425-JFW-AJR (C.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order placing the confidential exhibits attached to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification and the citations made to these same Exhibits in the Motion under seal. The Confidential Exhibits -- deposition excerpts and a linesheet -- which Plaintiffs are citing in their Motion for Class Certification are properly designated as confidential and should be filed under seal. The information about Defendant’s internal pricing strategy on the Shapermint website is not known to the public or to Defendant’s competitors, and Defendant’s competitive standing could be harmed if this information was part of the public record. Additionally, some of this information includes Defendant’s trade secrets. Favorite is a company that engages in the highly competitive marketing and sales of fashion products for sale on the Shapermint website, including shapewear, swimwear, bras, and underwear. A copy of the Parties' motion dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1ozvUA at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Brandon Brouillette, Esq. Craig W. Straub, Esq. Zachary M. Crosner, Esq. CROSNER LEGAL, P.C. 9440 Santa Monica Blvd. Suite 301 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (866) 276-763 Facsimile: (310) 510-6429 E-mail: bbrouillette@crosnerlegal.com craig@crosnerlegal.com zach@crosnerlegal.com The Defendant is represented by: Russell M. Selmont, Esq. Pooja S. Nair, Esq. Banu S. Naraghi, Esq. ERVIN COHEN & JESSUP LLP 9401 Wilshire Boulevard, Twelfth Floor Beverly Hills, CA 90212-2974 Telephone: (310) 273-6333 Facsimile: (310) 859-2325 E-mail: rselmont@ecjlaw.com pnair@ecjlaw.com bnaraghi@ecjlaw.com FILMSUPPLY LLC: Trimboli Files Suit in N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against FilmSupply, LLC. The case is styled as Jonathan Trimboli, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. FilmSupply, LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-06752-KAW (N.D. Cal., Sept. 26, 2024). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor Vehicle. Filmsupply -- https://www.filmsupply.com/ -- is the global leader in cinematic footage licensing, representing filmmakers from M ss ng P eces, Biscuit, Anonymous Content, and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adrian John Barnes, Esq. Ari Nathan Cherniak, Esq. Julian Ari Hammond, Esq. Polina Brandler, Esq. HAMMONDLAW P.C. 1201 Pacific Avenue, Ste. 600 Tacoma, WA 98402 Phone: (510) 316-9926 Fax: (310) 295-2385 Email: abarnes@hammondlawpc.com acherniak@hammondlawpc.com jhammond@hammondlawpc.com pbrandler@hammondlawpc.com - and - John J. Nelson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 402 W. Broadway, Suite 1760 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (858) 209-6941 Fax: (865) 522-0049 Email: jnelson@milberg.com FOOD LION: Bates Sues Over Deceptive Product Labeling ----------------------------------------------------- KATHY APPLE GATE BATES, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. FOOD LION LLC, a North Carolina limited liability company, Defendant, Case No. 7:24-cv-864 (E.D.N.C., September 17, 2024) alleges that Defendant', strawberry, blueberry, apple pie, and mixed berry flavors are misbranded and deceptively labeled. The products state on their front label that they are "Naturally Flavored" and "Made With Real Fruit Filling." However, all of these products contain an ingredient known as "malic acid" which is used as a flavoring in the products. The form of malic acid used in these products is artificial. Accordingly, the Plaintiff asserts claims for unjust enrichment, breach of express warranty and for violations of the North Carolina Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Food Lion LLC is a North Carolina limited liability company headquartered in Salisbury, NC. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Inez de Ondarza Simmons, Esq. DE ONDARZA SIMMONS PLLC 4030 Wake Forest Road, Suite 319 Raleigh, NC 27609 Telephone: (984) 837-0361 Facsimile: (919) 277-1727 E-mail: Inez@DeOndarzaSimmons.com - and - Charles C. Weller, Esq. CHARLES C. WELLER, APC 11412 Corley Court San Diego, CA 92126 Telephone: (858) 414-7465 E-mail: legal@cweller.com FORD MOTOR: Faces Sklodowski Suit Over 18.36% Drop of Stock Price ----------------------------------------------------------------- ROBERT SKLODOWSKI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FORD MOTOR COMPANY, JAMES D. FARLEY, JR., and JOHN T. LAWLER, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-12492-TGB-EAS (E.D. Mich., September 23, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding Ford's business, operations, and prospects in order to trade Ford securities at artificially inflated prices between October 28, 2021, and July 24, 2024. Specifically, the Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) that the company had deficiencies in its quality assurance of vehicle models; (2) that, as a result, the company was experiencing higher warranty costs; (3) that the company's warranty reserves did not accurately reflect the quality issues in vehicles sold; (4) that, as a result, the company's profitability was reasonably likely to suffer; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, the Defendants' positive statements about the company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis. When the truth emerged, Ford's share price fell $2.51, or 18.36 percent, to close at $11.16 per share on July 25, 2024, on unusually heavy trading volume. As a result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, which caused the precipitous decline in the market value of the company's common shares, the Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant economic losses and damages. Ford Motor Company is an automobile company based in Dearborn, Michigan. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sharon S. Almonrode, Esq. THE MILLER LAW FIRM 950 W. University Dr., Suite 300 Rochester, MI 48307 Telephone: (248) 841-2200 Facsimile: (248) 652-2852 Email: ssa@millerlawpc.com - and - Robert V. Prongay, Esq. Charles H. Linehan, Esq. GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 201-9150 Facsimile: (310) 201-9160 - and - Rebecca Dawson, Esq. 745 Fifth Ave., Fifth Floor New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (212) 935-7400 Email: rdawson@glancylaw.com - and - Frank R. Cruz, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF FRANK R. CRUZ 2121 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 800 Century City, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 914-5007 GALESBURG COMMUNITY: Ct. Directs Discovery Plan Filing in N.T. Suit ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as N.T. et al v. Galesburg Community Unit School District No. 205 et al., Case No. 4:24-cv-04124-JES-JEH (C.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge Jonathan E. Hawley entered a standing order as follows: -- Rule 16 scheduling conference The Court will set a Rule 16 scheduling conference approximately 30 days after the answer or other responsive pleading is filed. The conference will generally be conducted by telephone. -- Discovery plan The discovery plan shall be filed with the Court at least three calendar days before the Rule 16 scheduling conference. -- Waiver of the Rule 16 scheduling conference If the parties agree on all matters contained in the discovery plan, then the parties may waive the Rule 16 scheduling conference. To do so, the parties shall indicate in the discovery that the parties agree upon all maters contained within the discovery plan, and they request that the Rule 16 scheduling conference be cancelled. -- Failure of counsel to attend a scheduled telephone hearing For the convenience of counsel, the Court conducts most hearings by telephone when possible. Counsel's failure to appear for a telephone hearing will be treated as a failure of counsel to appear for an in-person hearing. -- Discovery disputes brought to the Court's attention after the discovery deadline has already passed The parties may not raise a discovery dispute with the Court after the relevant discovery deadline has passed; all discovery disputes must be brought to the Court's attention before the relevant discovery deadline passes. Any discovery disputes raised with the Court after the expiration of the relevant discovery deadline shall be deemed waived by the Court, even if the parties agreed to conduct discovery after the relevant discovery deadline has passed. If the parties agree to conduct discovery after the expiration of a deadline set by the Court, they must still file a motion requesting that the Court move that deadline as agreed by the parties in order to avoid any subsequent discovery disputes being deemed waived. -- Settlement conferences and mediation The parties are encouraged to seek a settlement conference or mediation with a magistrate judge. Where parties request a settlement conference or mediation in a case referred to Judge Hawley, Judge Hawley will conduct said conference or mediation. Galesburg Community is a public school district in Illinois. They serve 4,200 students across 7 schools. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WVvyAD at no extra charge.[CC] GEO GROUP: Gonzalez Seeks Leave to File Exhibits Under Seal ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as HUGO GONZALEZ, JOSE BACA, ERICK LOPEZ, MARIO MANJARREZ, and RICARDO SANDOVAL GUADARRAMA, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. The GEO Group, Inc., et al, Case No. 2:22-cv-04014-JGB-SHK (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their application for leave to file Exhibits 1-12, 15 and 16 in support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, under seal. Exhibits 1-12, 15 and 16, reference documents and/or information that has been designated as confidential by Defendant GEO Group, Inc. according to the terms of the protective order in this case. Exhibit 1 consists of a list of all detainees housed in the relevant units and contains some personally identifying information such as locations and dates of arrival in the country. The Plaintiff class members have a right to privacy under state law in this information. For this reason, good cause exists to file Exhibit 1 under seal. Pursuant to Local Rule 79-5.2.2(b) Plaintiffs met and conferred with the Defendant's counsel on September 22 – September 23, 2024, in an attempt to eliminate or minimize the need for filing under seal, but no agreement regarding publicly filing these exhibits was reached. On Sept. 22, 2024, the Plaintiffs initiated the meet and confer process required by Local Rule 79-5.2.2(b) by sending an email to counsel for the designating Defendant. GEO Group is a publicly traded C corporation that invests in private prisons and mental health facilities in the United States, Australia, South Africa, and the United Kingdom. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WOUX00 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Catherine Sweetser, Esq. Tessa R. Baizer, Esq. UCLA LAW CLINICS 385 Charles E Young Drive East Los Angeles, CA 90095 E-mail: csweetser@sshhzlaw.com baizer@law.ucla.edu - and - Paul Hoffman, Esq. John Washington, Esq. SCHONBRUN SEPLOW HARRIS HOFFMAN & ZELDES LLP 200 Pier Avenue, no. 226 Hermosa Beach, CA 90245 Telephone: (310) 396-0731 E-mail: hoffpaul@aol.com jwashington@sshhzlaw.com - and - Barrett S. Litt, Esq. Lindsay Battles, Esq. McLANE, BEDNARSKI & LITT, LLP 975 East Green Street Pasadena, CA 91106 Telephone: (626) 844-7660 E-mail: blitt@mbllegal.com lbattles@mbllegal.com GM GROUP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Briceno Suit Alleges --------------------------------------------------------- GENESIS BRICENO, on her behalf and on behalf of those similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GM GROUP ED LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, SUPER AREPA PEMBROKE PINES LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, and EDUARDO L. GOMEZ, an individual, jointly and severally, Defendants, Case No. 0:24-cv-61711-XXXX (S.D. Fla., September 17, 2024) seeks to recover minimum wages, overtime, and misappropriated tips for Plaintiff and similarly situated co-workers, defined generally as hourly wage food service workers who regularly receive tips and have worked at Defendants' South Florida restaurants. Plaintiff Briceno was employed by Defendants as a server at Super Arepa Churrasquería from approximately November 2023 to August 2024. However, the Defendants deprived Plaintiff and their co-workers of proper minimum wages and overtime compensation. Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks to remedy violations of the wage-and-hour provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act by Defendants that have deprived Plaintiff and others similarly situated of their lawfully earned wages. The Plaintiff also brings a supplementary state law claim for breach of contract based on the Defendants' theft of her wages. GM Group ED LLC owns and operates the restaurants, Super Arepa Churrasqueria (Carne en Vara), Super Arepa Express (Cooper City) and Super Arepa Express (Pembroke Pines). [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert S. Norell, Esq. ROBERT S. NORELL, P.A. 300 N.W. 70th Avenue, Suite 305 Plantation, FL 33317 Telephone: (954) 617-6017 Facsimile: (954) 617-6018 E-mail: rob@floridawagelaw.com HEALTHY PAWS: Can File Opposition to Class Cert Bid Under Seal -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as STEVEN BENANAV, et al., v. HEALTHY PAWS PET INSURANCE LLC, Case No. 2:20-cv-00421-LK (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Lauren King entered an order: (1) granting Healthy Paws' motion to seal its opposition to the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification; (2) granting Plaintiffs' motion to file information designated as "Confidential" in Open Court; (3) granting Healthy Paws' motion to seal its motion to exclude the testimony of Dr. Michael Naaman; and (4) granting Healthy Paws' motion to seal its reply in support of its motion to exclude the reports and testimony of Dr. Michael Naaman. The following docket entries may remain under seal: Dkt. Nos. 232, 232-1, 232-2, 232-3, 232-4, 232-5, 232-6, 232-7, 251, 251-1, 251-2, 251-3, 251-4, 287, 295, 318, and 323. The Clerk of the Court is directed to unseal docket entries 272 and 273. After reviewing these documents, the Court finds that the Insurers have made a sufficient, particularized showing supporting these redactions because the sensitive financial information therein could be used unfairly by competitors to harm the Insurers’ business interests. Accordingly, docket entries 287, 295, 318, and 323 can remain sealed. Protecting against that competitive harm is a compelling reason to permit the redactions to Dr. Gron’s report. Healthy Paws offers dog and puppy insurance, cat and kitty insurance. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gXjkkh at no extra charge.[CC] ILLINOIS TOOL: Court Awards Class Counsel $60.4K ------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN DUFFY III, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. ILLINOIS TOOL WORKS, INC., and SOUTH/WIN LTD., Case No. 2:15-cv-07407-NGG-SIL (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Nicholas Garaufis entered an order overruling Class Counsel's Objections and adopts in full Magistrate Judge's R&R awarding Class Counsel $19,316.35 in attorneys fees, plus $41,117.61 in costs, for a total award of $60,433.96. The court also grants Plaintiff Duffy's petition for an incentive fee award in the amount of $10,000. This is a class action lawsuit commenced by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, against Defendants, asserting claims for breach of express warranty, strict product liability, negligence, and deceptive business practices and false advertising under New York General Business Law sections 349 and 350, respectively. Illinois Tool Works produces engineered fasteners and components, equipment and consumable systems, and specialty products. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=z9k5MR at no extra charge.[CC] IMMACULATE HOME: Response to Class Cert Bid Extended to Oct. 21 --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LAKEESHA WILSON, v. IMMACULATE HOME HEALTHCARE AGENCY, LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-01439-MSG (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Mitchell Goldberg entered an order granting the Defendant's unopposed letter request for a thirty-day continuance of the deadline for filing a response to Plaintiff's motion for Conditional Collective Class Certification. -- The request is granted and the time within which Defendant has to file its response to Plaintiff's motion is extended to Oct. 21, 2024. Immaculate provides non-medical and medical home care services for older adults, seniors, and people with medical conditions. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=CSx2vc at no extra charge.[CC] INEOS NITRILES: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Metzger Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------- ALAN METZGER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. INEOS NITRILES USA LLC, Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-01598-JRK (N.D. Ohio, Sept. 18, 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 Metzger was employed by the Defendant as a tech operator. Ineos Nitriles USA LLC operates a facility in Lima, Ohio and is engaged in the production of industrial chemical products such as acrylonitrile, acetonitrile, and hydrogen cyanide. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq. Adam C. Gedling, Esq. Kelsie N. Hendren, Esq. Tristan T. Akers, Esq. COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC 1550 Old Henderson Rd Suite #126 Columbus, OH 43220 Telephone: (614) 949-1181 Facsimile: (614) 386-9964 Email: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com agedling@mcoffmanlegal.com khendren@mcoffmanlegal.com takers@mcoffmanlegal.com INSTAGRAM LLC: Wins Summary Judgment vs Dangaard ------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAWN DANGAARD, KELLY GILBERT, JENNIFER ALLBAUGH, and all other similarly situated, v. INSTAGRAM, LLC, FACEBOOK OPERATIONS, LLC, META PLATFORMS, INC., and JOHN DOES 1- 10, Case No. 3:22-cv-01101-WHA (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge William Alsup entered an order: -- Defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted. -- Defendant's motion to strike is granted in part and denied in part. There is no claim left to try. Given that plaintiffs have been unable to produce the predicate data to move past the summary-judgment stage, judgment shall be entered accordingly. All hearing dates are vacated. -- The plaintiffs have not met the elements for this cause of action. As such, summary judgment of the second claim for relief is granted. In this putative class action, plaintiffs allege that defendants are engaged in unfair competition, and intentional interference with contracts and business relationships. The Plaintiffs allege that defendants conspired in an anticompetitive scheme to boost the popularity of OnlyFans to the detriment of plaintiffs through two tactics: bribery and blacklisting. The Plaintiffs filed the original complaint as a putative class action in February 2022 and filed their first amended complaint in September in 2022. In March 2023, all parties appeared for a case management conference. The Plaintiffs Dawn Dangaard, Kelly Gilbert, and Jennifer Allbaugh are adult entertainment performers who use social media to disseminate their content and promote themselves. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=iq3Jsq at no extra charge.[CC] JENNIFER COZBY: Hurdsman Loses Bid for Class Certification ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RODNEY ADAM HURDSMAN, v. JENNIFER COZBY, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00147-BU (N.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge James Wesley Hendrix entered an order denying Plaintiff's request for class certification. Accordingly, the Plaintiff has not met the requirements of Rule 23(a). First, even if the Plaintiff could satisfy the first three pre-requisites for class certification-numerosity, commonality, and typicality-he cannot meet the fourth criteria found in Rule 23(a)(4). That is, he has failed to present any evidence to demonstrate his adequacy to represent a class. The Plaintiff has also failed to demonstrate that his complaint complies with Rule 23(b). The Plaintiffs fact allegations are insufficient to demonstrate that group fact questions predominate over the fact questions affecting each individual potential plaintiff. The Plaintiff, a prisoner proceeding pro se, filed a civil-rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. section 1983. He purports to bring this case as a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 on behalf of "every TDCJ Robertson Unit inmate whom [sic] is currently or has been incarcerated at the prison facility in the last 5-years." A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Lh54W6 at no extra charge.[CC] JO-ANN STORES: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ---------------------------------------------------------- Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Jo-Ann Stores LLC, Defendant, Case No. 0:24-cv-03714 (D. Minn., Sept. 20, 2024) arises because Defendant's website www.joann.com is not fully and equally accessible to Plaintiff and other 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. As a consequence of Plaintiff's experience visiting Defendant's website, including in the past year, and from an investigation performed on her behalf, she found Defendant's website has a number of digital barriers that deny screen-reader users like her full and equal access to important website content -- content Defendant makes available to its sighted website users. The Defendant's policies regarding the maintenance and operation of its website fail to ensure its website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with vision-related disabilities, says the Plaintiff. In addition to her claim under the ADA, the Plaintiff also asserts a companion cause of action under the Minnesota Human Rights Act. The Plaintiff now seeks a permanent injunction requiring a change in Defendant's corporate policies to cause its online store to become, and remain, accessible to individuals with visual disabilities. Jo-Ann Stores LLC operates the website that offers crafts, décor, and accessories for sale including, but not limited to, fabric, sewing supplies, yarn, paper crafts, beads, 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: pat@throndsetlaw.com chad@throndsetlaw.com jason@throndsetlaw.com JOHN HANCOCK: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Lindley Alleges ----------------------------------------------------------- VIVIAN LINDLEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JOHN HANCOCK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (U.S.A.), Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-12383 (D. Mass., Sept. 18, 2024) is an action against the Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard sensitive information of its customers. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, between October 29 and November 2, 2023, an unauthorized party gained access to Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII by encrypting ransomware on IMS's systems. The Data Breach was a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's failure to implement and follow basic security procedures. Because of Defendant's failures, unauthorized individuals were able to access and pilfer the Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII. As a result, the Plaintiff and Class Members are at substantially increased risk of future identity theft, both currently and for the indefinite future. Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII, including their Social Security numbers, that were compromised by cybercriminals in the Data Breach, is highly valuable because it is readily useable to commit fraud and identity theft, says the suit. John Hancock Life Insurance Company provides insurance and financial services. The Company offers life insurance, mutual funds, college savings, long term care, retirement plan services, and institutional investment products. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christian Levis, Esq. Peter Demato, Esq. LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C. 44 South Broadway, Suite 1100 White Plains, NY 10601 Telephone: (914) 997-0500 Email: clevis@lowey.com pdemato@lowey.com - and - Nicole Maruzzi, Esq. Anthony M. Christina, Esq. LOWEY DANNENBERG, P.C. One Tower Bridge 100 Front Street, Suite 520 West Conshohocken, PA 19428 Telephone: (215) 399-4770 Email: nmaruzzi@lowey.com achristina@lowey.com JOHNSON, TN: B.P. Protective Order Bid on Depositions Partly OK'd ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as B.P., H.A., S.H., individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. CITY OF JOHNSON CITY, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-00071-TRM-JEM (E.D. Tenn.), the Hon. Judge Jill McCook entered an order denying in part and granting in part the Plaintiffs' motion for protective order regarding depositions of unnamed class members and/or motion to quash deposition subpoenas issued to Females 8, 9, and 12 and denying the Plaintiffs' motion to strike. -- In sum, the detailed allegations about the Females in the Amended Complaint, their identification in Plaintiffs' Initial Disclosures, and Female 9's and Female 12's previous roles as named plaintiffs support Defendants' argument that the Females are not ordinary absent class members but instead have injected themselves into this litigation such that their depositions are warranted. Plus, Plaintiffs' counsel represents the Females. The Plaintiffs filed this action on June 21, 2023 and filed the Second Amended Class Action Complaint on March 1, 2024. The Amended Complaint alleges that "[b]eginning in at least 2018 and continuing to 2021, Sean Williams, a known drug dealer and convicted felon, conspired with Alvaro Fernando Diaz-Vargas and others to drug and rape women, and sexually exploit children, in his apartment in downtown Johnson City." The Plaintiffs represent three classes: (1) "All individuals, including minors, who were sexually abused, drugged, or trafficked by Sean Williams or Alvaro Fernando Diaz-Vargas"; (2) "All members of the Sex Trafficking Survivor Class who were sexually assaulted by Sean Williams following the first report to the JCPD of Sean Williams'[s] alleged sexual violence on or about November 7, 2019"; and (3) "All women, including minors, who reported sexual abuse or trafficking by any person to JCPD from January 1, 2018, to April 25, 2023." A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5Mw9iD at no extra charge.[CC] KISS NUTRACEUTICALS: Plaintiffs Must File Class Cert Bid by Oct. 9 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as MELISSA GAMBOA, on her own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. KISS NUTRACEUTICALS, KISS INDUSTRIES, LLC, COLE EVANS, and GRANT DEAN, Case No. 1:22-cv-01141-WJM-JPO (D. Colo.), the Hon. Judge William Martínez entered an order sustaining the plaintiffs' objections to Magistrate Judge's minute order permitting depositions of counsel and public official. 1. Plaintiffs' Objections are sustained in their entirety; 2. Given that there is no objection to Defendants' request for documentary discovery on topics other than the January Event, Defendants are directed, within 5 days of this Order, to serve amended document requests to named Plaintiff Melissa Gamboa limited to 5 document requests on each of the following subjects: (1) the over-reporting of hours while plaintiff was employed by KISS and (2) the ascertainability of potential class members; 3. Plaintiffs shall file their Renewed Motion for Class Certification by no later than Oct. 9, 2024; Defendants' response to said Renewed Motion shall be due no later than Oct. 23, 2024; and Plaintiffs' Reply will be due no later than Oct. 30, 2024; and 4. Within 5 business days of the date soon-to-be Magistrate Judge Timothy P. O'Hara assumes the bench of this Court and is assigned the duties of the Magistrate Judge in the referral role in this action, the parties are directed to jointly contact his Chambers to set a Status Conference, or such other proceeding as Judge Timothy P. O'Hara deems appropriate, to address without limitation the entry of a Phase II Scheduling Order in this action. The Plaintiffs' counsel, the Court finds this conclusion must also logically extend to the ordered depositions of Denver Labor Executive Matthew Fritz-Mauer, opt-in Plaintiff Maria Hernandez, and Defendant Cole Evans as to the January Event. The Court finds the portion of the Discovery Order permitting Defendants to propound document requests related to the January Event to be clearly erroneous. In that respect, Plaintiffs' Objection is also sustained. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=174Te7 at no extra charge.[CC] LA FINANCIAL: Fails to Safeguard Personal Info, Cohen Says ---------------------------------------------------------- DANIEL COHEN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LA FINANCIAL FEDERAL CREDIT UNION, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-08106 (C.D. Cal., Sept. 20, 2024) is a class action against Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard personally identifiable information and protected health information of its customers, including Plaintiff. The Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive personal information -- which they entrusted to Defendant on the mutual understanding that Defendant would protect it against disclosure -- was targeted, compromised and unlawfully accessed due to the data breach. The PII compromised in the data breach included Plaintiff's and Class Members' full names, Social Security numbers, and account number, says the suit. As a result of the data breach, the Plaintiff and Class Members have been exposed to a heightened and imminent risk of fraud and identity theft. The Plaintiff and Class Members must now and in the future closely monitor their financial accounts to guard against identity theft. Through this complaint, Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms on behalf of himself and all similarly situated individuals whose PII was accessed during the data breach. La Financial Federal Credit Union is a credit union that operates branches in California and Arizona.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John J. Nelson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 280 S. Beverly Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (858) 209-6941 E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com LABOR SOURCE: Speight Loses Bid to Certify Class ------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as BILLY SPEIGHT, JASON HAGENS, SCOTTIE WILLIAMS, and TANGELA FLANAGAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. LABOR SOURCE, LLC, Case No. 4:21-cv-00112-FL (E.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Louise Flanagan entered an order: -- denying the Plaintiffs' motion to certify class, and -- granting in part and denying in part the Defendant's motion for partial judgment on the pleadings. Plaintiffs' North Carolina Wage and Hour Act ("NCWHA") claims based upon failure to pay minimum wage and overtime wages are dismissed. Plaintiffs' NCWHA claim based upon a violation of the NCWHA payday provision, N.C. Gen. Stat. section 95-24.6, is allowed to proceed. The parties are directed to file, within 14 days of the date of this order, a joint status report regarding case scheduling. In sum, plaintiffs' motion is unavailing on several levels. It is conceivable that plaintiffs may be able to establish similarities across customers and projects in the relevant time period, sufficient to support a finding of commonality and typicality. However, plaintiffs have not done so based on the present record and motion. The instant motion accordingly is denied. The court does not reach additional arguments raised by defendant, where class certification must be denied because of the threshold reasons stated herein. The Plaintiff is a former employee of defendant commenced this action August 12, 2021, asserting collective action claims on behalf of himself and others similarly situated under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"); as well as putative class action claims under the NCWHA. Following an additional period of class discovery, the plaintiffs filed the instant motion to certify class April 10, 2024, requesting certification of the following class: "All current and former hourly, non-exempt employees, including but not limited to, Laborers, non-exempt Crew Leads, non- commercial drivers, technicians, carpenters, apprentices, cleaning crew, plumbers, welders, and other Laborers with similar job duties employed by Defendant within the State of North Carolina during the Class Period." In addition, plaintiffs request certification of a subclass consisting of "any Class Member who was designated as or performed the duties of a Crew Lead." Labor Source is a staffing company based in Kansas that "recruits and assigns workers" to other companies in various states, including North Carolina. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1ZhhNl at no extra charge.[CC] LIVE NATION: Witt Sues Over ADA Non-Compliant Facilities -------------------------------------------------------- LARI WITT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LIVE NATION ENTERTAINMENT, INC., Defendant, Case No. 5:24-cv-06445 (N.D. Cal., September 12, 2024) accuses the Defendant of violating the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, the California Disabled Persons Act, and California's Unruh Civil Rights Act due to alleged unlawful conduct. Plaintiff Witt seeks to put an end to systemic civil rights violations committed by Defendant at Shoreline Amphitheatre against disabled individuals within California. She alleges that the Defendant--the operator and lessor of the business, property, buildings, parking lots, and/or portions thereof located at or about One Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA 94043, commonly known as the "Shoreline Amphitheatre" -- has failed to provide disabled persons with full and equal access to its goods and services in violation of the ADA by constructing, altering, and/or failing to remove architectural barriers that prevent persons with mobility limitations from using and enjoying their facilities in the full and equal manner as able-bodied persons are able to do. Live Nation Entertainment is an American multinational entertainment company that, among other things, promotes, operates, and manages ticket sales for live entertainment internationally. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Neal J. Deckant, Esq. Julia K. Venditti, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1990 North California Boulevard, 9th Floor Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Telephone: (925) 300-4455 Facsimile: (925) 407-2700 E-mail: ndeckant@bursor.com jvenditti@bursor.com LOOK ENTERTAINMENT: Collective Partly Gets Conditional Status ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANGELIQUE MCPHERSON, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, v. LOOK ENTERTAINMENT LTD, d/b/a Billy Dean's Showtime Cafe, WILLIAM "BILLY" DEAN, an individual, and RORI GORDON, an individual, Case No. 2:23-cv-04273-JMA-JMW (E.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge James Wicks entered an order granting in part and denying in part the Plaintiff's motion for conditional certification of a collective and for court facilitation of notice. In accordance with this Order: (i) Defendants are directed to provide the contact information for potential opt-ins to Plaintiffs via the excel spreadsheet on or before Oct. 8, 2024; and (ii) the parties are directed to meet and confer and, by Oct. 24, 2024, file a proposed Notice and Consent to Join Form, along with any remaining objections, for the Court's consideration. The Court thus finds that Plaintiff has adduced sufficient evidence for conditional certification of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective. The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of herself and other similarly situated current and former and current employees of the Defendants alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the New York Labor Law ("NYLL"), and New York Codes, Rules and Regulations ("NYCRR"). The Plaintiff commenced this action on June 9, 2023, to recover unpaid or underpaid wages and other damages under the provisions of the FLSA and the NYLL. The Plaintiff was a performer for Billy Dean's Showtime Cafe as a dancer from Sept. 1, 2021, to March 16, 2022. Billy Dean's is a so-called "gentlemen's club." A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=7X3bzl at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Penn Dodson, Esq. ANDERSON DODSON, P.C. 11 Broadway, Suite 615 New York, NY 10004 The Defendants are represented by: Gerald V. Dandeneau, Esq. DANDENEAU & LOTT 425 Broadhollow Rd. Suite 114 Melville, NY 11747 LUSA CONSTRUCTION: Delgado Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation ----------------------------------------------------------------- Jose Delgado, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. LUSA CONSTRUCTION, INC. and EDUARDO ALBUQUERQUE, Case No. 2:24-cv-09474 (D.N.J., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought to recover unpaid overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the New Jersey State Wage and Hour Law ("NJWHL"). The Defendants willfully and intentionally maintained a policy and practice of requiring the Plaintiff and the FLSA collective employees to work more than 40 hours per week without providing them with any additional compensation, as evidenced by timesheets, employee schedules, and other relevant documentation. The Defendants have willfully and intentionally committed widespread violations of the FLSA and NJWHL by engaging in a pattern and practice of systematically failing to pay its employees, including Plaintiff, overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 each workweek, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a skilled welder and repairer of construction machinery for Defendants' business in New Jersey. The Defendants owned and operated LUSA CONSTRUCTION, INC., a corporate entity principally engaged in the construction services industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lina Stillman, Esq. STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C. 42 Broadway, 12t Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: (212) 203-2417 Web: www.stillmanlegalpc.com M&R MANUFACTURING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Zambrano Claims --------------------------------------------------------------- Juan Carlos Zambrano, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. M&R Manufacturing LLC, RVO Manufacturing, LLC, and Ronak Patel, Defendants, Case No. 4:24-cv-03408 (S.D. Tex., September 12, 2024) accuses the Defendants of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Zambrano worked for the Defendants as a machine operator from 2015 until 2024. During the time he worked for the Defendants, he regularly worked more than 40 hours per week but he was not paid an overtime premium. Instead, Defendants paid him the same hourly rate for all the hours he worked for the majority of his tenure, says the Plaintiff. Based in Houston, TX, M&R Manufacturing LLC is engaged in machine shop/fabrication business. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Josef F. Buenker, Esq. THE BUENKER LAW FIRM P.O. Box 10099 Houston, TX 77206 Telephone: (713) 868-3388 Facsimile: (713) 683-9940 E-mail: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com MAINFACTOR INC: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------- Milton Williams, for himself and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, v. MAINFACTOR INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-07315 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 26, 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://jeffersonairplane.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 the computer. MAINFACTOR INC., operates the Jefferson Airplane online interactive Website and retail store across 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: jeffrey@gottlieb.legal dana@gottlieb.legal michael@gottlieb.legal MARIANI PACKING: Wins Bid for Summary Judgment v. Diesel -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KIMBERLY DIESEL, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. MARIANI PACKING COMPANY, INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-01368-AGF (E.D. Mo.), the Hon. Judge Audrey Fleissig entered an order granting the Defendant's motion for summary judgment. -- All claims against all parties having been resolved, a separate Judgment will accompany this Memorandum and Order -- In short, the Court concludes the Plaintiff has not established the existence of all elements essential to her case. Therefore, Defendant is entitled to summary judgment In early October of 2022, the Plaintiff purchased Defendant's seven-ounce bag of Vanilla Yogurt Raisins at a Dierbergs grocery store in St. Louis, Missouri, after having previously purchased this Product on two or three other occasions. After purchasing the Product for the third or fourth time, the Plaintiff noticed that despite the Product's packaging being 19.5 centimeters high, the bag was filled to only eight (8) centimeters with vanilla yogurt raisins. In other words, the Product contains 58% slack-fill. On Nov. 14, 2022, the Plaintiff filed this class action against the Defendant claiming that Defendant's Product misled reasonable consumers, and asserting violations of the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act ("MMPA"), State Consumer Fraud Acts, breaches of express warranty, implied warranty of merchantability/fitness for a particular purpose, and the Magnuson Moss Warranty Act; negligent misrepresentation; fraud; and unjust enrichment. Mariani is a food and beverage manufacturing, grocery retail, and agriculture company located in Vacaville, California. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=iG4eRj at no extra charge.[CC] MCGRAW HILL: Discloses Personal Info to 3rd Parties, Harwell Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- MAXWELL HARWELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MCGRAW HILL LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-07222 (S.D.N.Y., September 24, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant has disclosed to unrelated third parties, including Twilio and Meta Platforms, Inc., the personally identifiable information (PII) and video viewing information of its website and app users without consent. Specifically, the Defendant disclosed the users': (i) name, (ii) email address, (iii) User ID, (iv) the title of the specific video viewed, (v) the video ID, and (vi) the fact that the specific video was actually watched or viewed by the users. As a result, the Defendant violated the Plaintiff's and the Class members' statutorily protected privacy rights. McGraw Hill LLC is a publishing company, headquartered in New York, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Yitzchak Z. Kopel, Esq. Max S. Roberts, Esq. Victoria X. Zhou, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 837-7150 Facsimile: (212) 989-9163 Email: ykopel@bursor.com mroberts@bursor.com vzhou@bursor.com MDL 2873: Walthall Sues Over Harmful AFFF Products -------------------------------------------------- BRAD JEFFREY WALTHALL, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY ET AL., Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-04981-RMG (D.S.C., September 12, 2024) is a class action seeking to recover compensatory and punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants' aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) products at various locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities. Allegedly, 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 per and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), which would expose end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS. Accordingly, Plaintiff asserts claims for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express and implied warranties, and wantonness. The Walthall case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, is a Delaware corporation engaged in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gregory A. Cade, Esq. Gary A. Anderson, Esq. Kevin B. McKie, Esq. Yahn Olson, Esq. ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP, P.C. 2160 Highland Avenue South Birmingham, AL 35205 Telephone: (205) 328-9200 Facsimile: (205) 328-9456 E-mail: gary@elglaw.com MDL 2873: Washington Seeks Damages for AFFF-Caused Injuries ----------------------------------------------------------- OCIE WASHINGTON, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY ET AL., Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-04986-RMG, is a class action seeking for damages for personal injury resulting from Plaintiff's exposure to Defendants' aqueous film-forming foams, which contain toxic chemicals that are collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately, caused Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and complications and to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The complaint alleges that Defendants did not warn public entities, firefighter trainees who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products, or firefighters employed by either civilian and/or military employers that use of and/or exposure to Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS and/or its precursors would pose a danger to human health. The Washington case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, is a Delaware corporation engaged in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq. THE FERRARO LAW FIRM 600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor Miami, FL 33131 Telephone (305) 375-0111 E-mail: james@ferrarolaw.com MDL 2873: Williams Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemical Substances ------------------------------------------------------------------ ERIC WILLIAMS, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-04999-RMG (D.S.C., September 12, 2024) is a class action seeking for damages for personal injury resulting from Plaintiff's exposure to Defendants' aqueous film-forming foams, which contain toxic chemicals that are collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately, caused Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and complications and to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The complaint alleges that Defendants did not warn public entities, firefighter trainees who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products, or firefighters employed by either civilian and/or military employers that use of and/or exposure to Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS and/or its precursors would pose a danger to human health. The Williams case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, is a Delaware corporation engaged in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq. THE FERRARO LAW FIRM 600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor Miami, FL 33131 Telephone (305) 375-0111 E-mail: james@ferrarolaw.com MDL 2873: Willis Sues Over Harmful Chemical Substances ------------------------------------------------------- DAVID WILLIS, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY ET AL., Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-04964-RMG (D.S.C., September 12, 2024) is a class action seeking for damages for personal injury resulting from Plaintiff's exposure to Defendants' aqueous film-forming foams, which contain per and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from Defendants' AFFF products, directly and proximately, caused Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and complications and to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The complaint alleges that Defendants did not warn public entities, firefighter trainees who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products, or firefighters employed by either civilian and/or military employers that use of and/or exposure to Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS and/or its precursors would pose a danger to human health. The Willis case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, is a Delaware corporation engaged in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq. THE FERRARO LAW FIRM 600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor Miami, FL 33131 Telephone (305) 375-0111 E-mail: james@ferrarolaw.com MDL 2873: Wood Sues Over AFFF's Undisclosed Health Hazards ---------------------------------------------------------- ALVIN WOOD, SR., Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-04973-RMG (D.S.C., September 12, 2024) is a class action seeking for damages for personal injury resulting from Plaintiff's exposure to Defendants' aqueous film-forming foams, which contain per and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately, caused Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and complications and to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The complaint asserts that Defendants failed to warn public entities, firefighter trainees who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products, or firefighters employed by either civilian and/or military employers that use of and/or exposure to Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS and/or its precursors would pose a danger to human health. The Wood case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, is a Delaware corporation engaged in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq. THE FERRARO LAW FIRM 600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor Miami, FL 33131 Telephone (305) 375-0111 E-mail: james@ferrarolaw.com MDL 2873: Wynn Alleges Injuries Due to Toxic Chemicals' Exposure ---------------------------------------------------------------- FRED WYNN, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-04985-RMG (D.S.C., September 12, 2024) is a class action seeking for damages for personal injury resulting from Plaintiff's exposure to Defendants' aqueous film-forming foams, which contain per and polyfluoroalkyl substances. The Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of PFAS from Defendant's AFFF products, directly and proximately, caused Plaintiff to develop the serious medical conditions and complications and to suffer severe personal injuries, pain, suffering, and emotional distress. The complaint asserts that Defendants failed to warn public entities, firefighter trainees who they knew would foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products, or firefighters employed by either civilian and/or military employers that use of and/or exposure to Defendants' AFFF products containing PFAS and/or its precursors would pose a danger to human health. The Wynn case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, IN RE: AQUEOUS FILM-FORMING FOAMS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION. Headquartered in St. Paul, MN, 3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company, is a Delaware corporation engaged in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq. THE FERRARO LAW FIRM 600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor Miami, FL 33131 Telephone (305) 375-0111 E-mail: james@ferrarolaw.com MDL 3031: CIIPPs Seek to Certify Injunctive Relief Class -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit Re: Cattle and Beef Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 0:22-md-03031-JRT-JFD (D. Minn.), The Commercial And Institutional Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs (CIIPPs) ask the Court to enter an order for an order certifying: (1) an injunctive relief class pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2) for their claims under the Sherman Act; and (2) a monetary damages class pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3) under the applicable state antitrust and consumer protection statutes and state common law claims for unjust enrichment under Arizona, Arkansas, California, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Nevada, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and West Virginia. CIIPPs request certification of the proposed classes under the following class definitions: -- Injunctive Relief Class Pursuant to Rule 23(b)(2): "All entities in the United States that indirectly purchased one or more of the following types of raw beef, fresh or frozen: brisket, chuck, loin, rib, or round, sold by Defendants in the United States from Jan. 1, 2015, to Feb. 29, 2020, for their own use in commercial food preparation." For this lawsuit, beef products excludes: non-fed beef, ground beef, trim beef, beef identified as cooked, beef products with non-beef ingredients other than seasonings, or any product that is marketed as USDA Prime. Excluded from this Class are: natural persons who purchased beef for their personal use and not for commercial food preparation; purchases of beef for resale in unaltered form; purchases of beef from an intermediary who has further processed the beef; the Defendants and their Co-Conspirators; the officers, directors or employees of any Defendant or Co- Conspirator; any entity in which any Defendant or their Co- Conspirator has a controlling interest; any entity with an interest, controlling or non-controlling, in a Defendant or their Co-Conspirator; any (in whole or in part), affiliate, legal representative, heir or assign of any Defendant or their Co-Conspirator; any federal, state or local governmental entities, any judicial officer presiding over this action and the members of his/her immediate family and judicial staff, any juror assigned to this action, and any Co-Conspirator identified in this action. -- Monetary Damages Class Pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3): "All entities in the Indirect Purchaser States that indirectly purchased one or more of the following types of raw beef, fresh or frozen: brisket, chuck, loin, rib, or round, sold by Defendants in the Indirect Purchaser States from Jan. 1, 2015, to Feb. 29, 2020, for their own use in commercial food preparation." For this lawsuit, beef products excludes: non-fed beef, ground beef, trim beef, beef identified as cooked, beef products with non-beef ingredients other than seasonings, or any product that is marketed as USDA Prime. Excluded from this Class are: natural persons who purchased beef for their personal use and not for commercial food preparation; purchases of beef for resale in unaltered form; purchases of beef from an intermediary who has further processed the beef; the Defendants and their Co-Conspirators; the officers, directors or employees of any Defendant or Co- Conspirator; any entity in which any Defendant or their Co- Conspirator has a controlling interest; any entity with an interest, controlling or non-controlling, in a Defendant or their Co-Conspirator; any (in whole or in part), affiliate, legal representative, heir or assign of any Defendant or their Co-Conspirator; any federal, state or local governmental entities, any judicial officer presiding over this action and the members of his/her immediate family and judicial staff, any juror assigned to this action, and any Co-Conspirator identified in this action. The actions in this MDL are individual direct purchaser actions alleging a price fixing conspiracy among leading American beef producers. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 25, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kTt6Gf at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Michael J. Flannery, Esq. Evelyn Riley, Esq. Cody McCracken, Esq. Lissa Morgans, Esq. CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP Two CityPlace Drive, Second Floor St. Louis, MO 63141 Telephone: (314) 226-1015 E-mail: mflannery@cuneolaw.com evelyn@cuneolaw.com cmccracken@cuneolaw.com lmorgans@cuneolaw.com - and - Sterling Aldridge, Esq. Katherine Barrett Riley, Esq. BARRETT LAW GROUP, P.A. 404 Court Square Lexington, MS 39095 Telephone: (662) 834-2488 Facsimile: (662) 834-2628 E-mail: saldridge@barrettlawgroup.com kbriley@barrettlawgroup.com - and - Shawn Raiter, Esq. LARSON KING LLP   30 East Seventh Street Suite   2800 St. Paul, MN 55101   Telephone: (651) 312-6518 E-mail: sraiter@larsonking.com MDL 3090: Settlement in Data Security Suit Gets Initial Nod ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit RE: FORTRA FILE TRANSFER SOFTWARE DATA SECURITY BREACH LITIGATION, Case No. 1:24-md-03090-RAR (S.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Rodolfo Ruiz II entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement. The Court said that it reviewed the proposed Settlement and its exhibits, all relevant filings, and the record, the Court finds the proposed Settlement satisfies the criteria for preliminary approval; the proposed Settlement Class should be preliminarily certified; the proposed Notice Program and Claim process should be approved; and Class Representatives, Class Counsel, and the Settlement Administrator should be appointed. The Court finds, for settlement purposes only, that the Rule 23 factors are satisfied, and certification of the proposed Settlement Class is appropriate under Rule 23. The Court provisionally certifies the following Settlement Class: "All living individuals residing in the United States who received notice of the Brightline Data Incident indicating that their Private Information may have been impacted in the Data Incident. A subset of the Settlement Class is the California Settlement Class of "Settlement Class members residing in California as of January 30, 2023." The Court further finds, for settlement purposes only and conditioned on final certification of the proposed Settlement Class and entry of a Final Approval Order, that the Settlement Class and proposed Settlement satisfy the requirements of Rule 23(a), 23(b)(3), and 23(e), as well as the Bennett factors. Final Approval Hearing The Court will hold a Final Approval Hearing on Feb. 10, 2025, at 10:00 A.M As agreed by the Parties, the Court appoints Epiq Class Action & Claims Solutions, Inc. as the Settlement Administrator to supervise and administer the Notice Program and Claims process, as well as to administer the Settlement should the Court grant Final Approval. All Settlement Administration Costs will be paid out of the Settlement Fund The Court sets the following schedule of events in connection with the Settlement’s administration and Final Approval Hearing: Event Date Notice Program Begins Oct. 24, 2024 Notice Program Complete Dec. 24, 2024 Deadline to File Motion for Final Dec. 24, 2024 Approval, and Application for Attorneys' Fees and Costs Opt-Out Deadline Jan. 9, 2025 Objection Deadline Jan. 9, 2025 Final Approval Hearing Feb. 10, 2025 at 10:00 A.M. Deadline to Submit Claim Forms Feb. 26, 2025 Brightline is a virtual behavioral health care company offering therapy and coaching for minors. Brightline was one of Fortra's customers who used Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT file transfer application in connection with its business. Fortra is in the business of offering cybersecurity and automation solutions. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=R5aGMH at no extra charge.[CC] MICOR INDUSTRIES: Gonzalez Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime ----------------------------------------------------------- Eric Gonzalez, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff v. Micor Industries, LLC Defendant, Case No. 6:24-cv-01728 (M.D. Fla., Sept. 21, 2024) s an action against the Defendant to recover monetary damages for unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant willfully failed to pay Plaintiff overtime wages at the rate of time and a half his regular rate for every hour worked in excess of 40 in violation of the FLSA. The Plaintiff was paid via direct deposit without paystubs providing accurate information about the number of hours worked or wages earned. The Plaintiff was terminated on August 14, 2024, for an alleged workplace conflict, says the suit. Plaintiff Gonzalez was employed by the Defendant from approximately September 1, 2022 to August 14, 2024, or a total of 102 weeks. He was hired as a Mechanic Assembly Worker for the first six months at $24 per hour and was later promoted to Supervisor at $30 per hour until he was terminated. Micor Industries, LLC is engaged in the precision machining industry headquartered in Melbourne, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Zandro E. Palma, Esq. ZANDRO E. PALMA P.A. 9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500 Miami, FL 33156 Telephone: (305) 446-1500 Facsimile: (305) 446-1502 E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com MISSOURI: Class Cert. Bid Filing Due May 23, 2025 ------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as TRACIE COFFEY, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. HIGHER EDUCATION LOAN AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF MISSOURI, d/b/a MOHELA, Case No. 5:24-cv-00270-MMH-PRL (M.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Marcia Morales Howard entered a case management and scheduling order and referral to mediation: Having considered the case management report prepared by the parties, the Court enters this case management and scheduling order: Plaintiff's disclosure statement. Oct. 4, 20241 Deadline for providing mandatory initial Oct. 4, 2024 disclosures. Deadline for moving to join a party or Oct. 16, 2024 amend the pleadings. Deadline for disclosing expert reports. Plaintiff: March 21, 2025 Defendant: April 21, 2025 Rebuttal: May 23, 2025 Deadline for completing discovery and filing May 23, 2025 motions to compel. Deadline for moving for class certification. May 23, 2025 Deadline for filing dispositive and June 23, 2025 Daubert motions (responses due 21 days after service). Deadline for filing the joint final Nov. 10, 2025 pretrial statement. Date and time of the final pretrial Nov. 17, 2025 conference. The Defendant is one of the largest holders and servicers of student loans in the United States. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 24, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=02q4aq at no extra charge.[CC] NATIONAL PRESTO: Mislabels Coffee Percolator Capacity, McCabe Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ KEVIN McCABE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NATIONAL PRESTO INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-06552 (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 18, 2024) alleges that the Defendant mislabeled its "Presto Stainless-Steel Electric Coffee Percolator, 12-Cups, Black" (the "Coffee Percolator"). According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and the Class were materially misled by the term "12-Cups" in the Coffee Percolator Title. If the Product Listing had conspicuously and accurately represented the Coffee Percolator Capacity, the price of the Coffee Percolator would have been less than what it actually was, and, therefore, the Class Members would have paid that lower amount. National Presto Industries, Inc. is a diversified manufacturing company. The Company manufactures defense products, housewares and small appliances, and absorbent products. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd C. Bank, Esq. TODD C. BANK, ATTORNEY AT LAW, P.C. 119-40 Union Turnpike Fourth Floor Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Telephone: (718) 520-7125 NDC ASSET: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Morris Alleges ---------------------------------------------------- KIMBERLY MORRIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NDC ASSET MANAGEMENT LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-01319 (W.D. Pa., Sept. 18, 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 Morris was employed by the Defendant as a property manager. NDC Asset Management LLC provides real estate management services. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua P. Geist, Esq. GOODRICH & GEIST, PC 3634 California Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15212 Telephone: (412) 766-1455 Facsimile: (412) 766-0300 Email: josh@goodrichandgeist.com - and - Clif Alexander, Esq. Austin W. Anderson, Esq. Lauren E. Braddy, Esq. ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC 101 N. Shoreline Blvd, Suite 610 Corpus Christi, TX 78401 Telephone: (361) 452-1279 Facsimile: (361) 452-128 Email: clif@a2xlaw.com austin@a2xlaw.com lauren@a2xlaw.com NEW FORTRESS: Bojdol Suit Alleges Securities Law Violations ----------------------------------------------------------- MIKOLAJ BOJDOL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NEW FORTRESS ENERGY INC., WESLEY ROBERT EDENS, CHRISTOPHER S. GUINTA, and ANDREW DETE, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-07032 (S.D.N.Y., September 17, 2024) seeks to recover damages caused by Defendants' alleged violations of the federal securities laws. Plaintiff Bojdol brings this federal securities class action on behalf of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired New Fortress securities between February 29, 2024 and August 8, 2024. Allegedly, the Defendants provided overwhelmingly positive statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning related to New Fortress' Fast LNG projects in Mexico, including the FLNG 1 project. As a result, the Plaintiff purchased New Fortress common stock at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period and was damaged upon the revelation of the Defendants' fraud, says the suit. Headquartered in New York, NY, New Fortress Energy Inc. is an American liquefied natural gas company that owns and operates natural gas and LNG infrastructure and an integrated fleet of ships and other logistics assets to deliver energy solutions to customers worldwide. The company's common stock traded on the NASDAQ Stock Market under the symbol "NFE." [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam M. Apton, Esq. 33 Whitehall Street, 17th Floor New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (212) 363-7500 Facsimile: (212) 363-7171 E-mail: aapton@zlk.com NEW YORK, NY: Jefferson Sues Over NYPD's Unconstitutional Conduct ----------------------------------------------------------------- SHAMAR JEFFERSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE CITY OF NEW YORK (CITY), THE NEW YORK CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT (NYPD), JOSEPH FRANCO (FRANCO), in his official capacity as then NEW YORK CITY POLICE OFFICER, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-07212 (S.D.N.Y., September 24, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of 42 U.S.C. Sections 1983 and 1988, the Fourth, Fifth, and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution, and the laws of the State of New York. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged practice of illegal and unconstitutional conduct, including malicious prosecutions, fabricating evidence, denial of due process of law, perjury in circumventing Fourth Amendment restrictions, arrests without probable cause, and unconstitutional searches and seizures. The failure of the City of New York and the NYPD to properly select, train, supervise, promote, and discipline police officers and supervisory officers constitutes gross and deliberate indifference to unconstitutional conduct by officers. The City of New York is a municipal corporation in New York. The New York City Police Department (NYPD) is an agency of the City of New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Rudy Velez, Esq. 930 Grand Concourse, Suite IA Bronx, NY 10451 Telephone: (917) 674-0573 Email: rvesq@yahoo.com ORMAT NEVADA: Woodruff Labor Suit Removed to S.D. Calif. -------------------------------------------------------- The case styled JAMES WOODRUFF, on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ORMAT NEVADA, INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendant, Case No. ECU003647, was removed from the Superior Court for the State of California for the County of Imperial to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on September 12, 2024. The Clerk of Court for the Southern District of California assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-01638-L-MSB to the proceeding. The case asserts the following causes of action: (1) minimum wage violations; (2) failure to pay all overtime wages; (3) meal period violations; (4) rest period violations; (5) paid sick leave violations; (6) untimely payment of wages; (7) wage statement violations; (8) waiting time penalties; (9) failure to provide records; and (10) unfair competition. Ormat Nevada, Inc. supplies alternative and renewable geothermal power equipment and owns and operates geothermal power plants. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Kent J. Sprinkle, Esq. Desiree J. Ho, Esq. Taylor Wendland, Esq. CDF LABOR LAW LLP 4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 740 San Diego, CA 92122 Telephone: (858) 646-0007 E-mail: ksprinkle@cdflaborlaw.com dho@cdflaborlaw.com twendland@cdflaborlaw.com PARTS AUTHORITY: Casey and Foust Sue Over Worker Misclassification ------------------------------------------------------------------ CECIL CASEY and RODNEY FOUST, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. PARTS AUTHORITY, LLC, PARTS AUTHORITY, INC., NORTHEAST LOGISTICS, INC. d/b/a "Diligent Delivery Systems", and DAO LOGISTICS, INC. d/b/a "Diligent Delivery Systems," Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-02659 (D.D.C., September 17, 2024) accuses the Defendants of failing to pay overtime wages to the delivery drivers misclassified as independent contractors in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the District of Columbia Minimum Wage Act, and the Maryland Wage and Hour Law. The Plaintiffs were employed as automotive parts delivery drivers. They were allegedly required to work in excess of 40 hours per week. However, the Defendants failed and refused to pay them with proper overtime wages. Among other things, Defendants also did not pay them the applicable federal or state minimum wage rate, say the Plaintiffs. Parts Authority, LLC and Parts Authority, Inc. together own and operate a chain of approximately 200 automobile parts sales and distribution stores, including stores located in the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gregory K. McGillivary, Esq. Sarah M. Block, Esq. MCGILLIVARY STEELE ELKIN LLP 1101 Vermont Ave NW, Suite 1000 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 833-8855 E-mail: gkm@mselaborlaw.com smb@mselaborlaw.com - and - Jeremiah Frei-Pearson, Esq. Todd Garber, Esq. FINKELSTEIN, BLANKINSHIP, FREI-PEARSON & GARBER, LLP One North Broadway, Suite 900 White Plains, NY 10601 Telephone: (914) 298-3281 Facsimile: (914) 824-1561 E-mail: jfrei-pearson@fbfglaw.com tgarber@fbfglaw.com - and - Mark Potashnick, Esq. WEINHAUS & POTASHNICK 11500 Olive Blvd., Suite 133 St. Louis, MO 63141 Telephone: (314) 997-9150 ext. 2 E-mail: markp@wp-attorneys.com POLITICO LLC: Khamooshi Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Politico LLC, et al. The case is styled as Saber Khamooshi, Brian Carolus, Ryan Wu, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated v. Politico LLC, Does 1 Through 100, Inclusive, Case No. CGC24618459 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., Sept. 26, 2024). The case type is stated as "Other Non-Exempt Complaints." Politico -- https://www.politico.com/ -- known originally as The Politico, is an American political digital newspaper company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Eric Andrew Grover, Esq. KELLER GROVER LLP 1965 Market St. San Francisco, CA 94103 Phone: 415-543-1305 Email: eagrover@kellergrover.com POOH-BAH: Baez Sues Over Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------- Jazlene Baez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. POOH-BAH ENTERPRISES, INC., RCI HOSPITALITY HOLDINGS, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-08995 (N.D. Ill., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought by the Plaintiff against Defendants as a result of Defendants' policy and practice of failing to pay Plaintiff sufficient minimum wages and overtime wages in violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (the "FLSA"), and for violations of the Illinois Minimum Wage Law ("IMWL"). The Defendants did not pay Plaintiff and other Dancers the applicable minimum wage for all hours worked. The Defendants did not pay Plaintiff and other Dancers 1.5 times their base hourly rate for each hour worked over 40 each week. The Defendants did not pay Plaintiff and other Dancers an hourly or salary rate; rather Plaintiff and other Dancers were paid per dance. The Defendants knew or should have known that the FLSA and the IMWL applied to the operation of an adult entertainment club. The Plaintiff and other Dancers are entitled to wages and compensation based on the standard minimum wage for all hours worked. The Defendants knew, or showed reckless disregard for whether, the way they paid Plaintiff and other Dancers violated the FLSA and AMWA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a Dancer from June 9, 2019 until November 1, 2023. The Defendants own and operate a nightclub in Chicago called Rick's Cabaret (hereinafter, "the Club").[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sean Short, Esq. SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC Kirkpatrick Plaza 10800 Financial Centre Pkwy, Suite 510 Little Rock, AK 72211 Phone: (501) 221-0088 Facsimile: (888) 787-2040 Email: sean@sanfordlawfirm.com PRACTICE RESOURCE: Class Settlement in Data Suit Gets Initial Nod ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit re Practice Resource, LLC, Data Security Breach Litigation, Case No. 6:22-cv-00890-LEK-DJS (N.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Lawrence Kahn entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' unopposed motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement and providing notice. Solely for purposes of the Settlement, the Court conditionally certifies the following class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and (b)(3) ("Settlement Class): "All natural persons whose Private Information was compromised in the Data Breach, including all individuals who were sent the Notice of Data Privacy Incident on or around August 23, 2022." Excluded from the Settlement Class are: (i) Defendant and its respective officers and directors; (ii) all Settlement Class Members who timely and validly request exclusion from the Settlement Class; (iii) the Judge assigned to evaluate the fairness of this settlement; and (iv) any other Person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding or abetting the criminal activity occurrence of the Data Incident or who pleads nolo contendere to any such charge. The Court appoints Migliaccio & Rathod LLP, Weitz & Luxenberg P.C., and Almeida Law Group LLC as Settlement Class Counsel, having determined that the requirements of Rule 23(g) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are fully satisfied by this appointment. The Court hereby appoints James Stewart, Susan Stewart, John Bachura, Brenda Sparks and Steven N. Esce as the Class Representatives for settlement purposes only on behalf of the Settlement Class. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=TrZ6Up at no extra charge.[CC] RAEN OPTICS LLC: Karim Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ----------------------------------------------------------- Jessica Karim, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Raen Optics, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-07271 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 26, 2024), is brought against the Defendant for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons. The Defendant is denying blind and visually-impaired persons throughout the United States with equal access to the goods and services FaceGym provides to their non-disabled customers through https://www.raen.com (hereinafter "Raen.com" or "the website"). The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its products and services offered, and in conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act (the "ADA"). The Website contains significant access barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind and visually-impaired customers to use the website. In fact, the access barriers make it impossible for blind and visually-impaired users to even complete a transaction on the website. Because Defendant's website, Raen.com, is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Raen Optics' policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using her computer. Raen.com is a commercial website that offers products and services for online sale.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gabriel Levy, Esq. GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C. 1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404 Manhasset, NY 11030 Phone: +1 347-941-471 Email: Glevyfirm@gmail.com RODEO RESTAURANT: Castillo Suit Seeks Proper Overtime Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- EDGAR CASTILLO, as an individual and on the behalf of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. RODEO RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-08511 (N.D. Ill., September 17, 2024) arises under the Fair Labor Standards Act for Defendant's failure to pay overtime wages to Plaintiff and other similarly situated persons. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a main cook (a non-exempt employee) beginning on November 20, 2023, until his termination on or around August 8, 2024. Allegedly, the Plaintiff and other non-exempt employees worked in excess of 40 hours per week but Defendant did not pay them overtime wages at a rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay. Additionally, the Defendant did not pay them minimum wages for all hours worked, says the Plaintiff. Rodeo Restaurant Group owns and operates a Mexican restaurant located at 11111 S Harlem Avenue Unit W, Worth, IL. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chad W. Eisenback, Esq. SULAIMAN LAW GROUP LTD. 2500 S. Highland Avenue, Suite 200 Lombard, IL 60148 Telephone: (331) 307-7632 Facsimile: (630) 575-8188 E-mail: ceisenback@sulaimanlaw.com ROYCE JUPITER: Architectural Barriers Violate ADA, Feltzin Says --------------------------------------------------------------- LAWRENCE FELTZIN, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated mobility-impaired individuals, Plaintiff v. ROYCE JUPITER LLC, Defendant, Case No. 9:24-cv-81162-RLR (S.D. Fla., Sept. 20, 2024) is an action against the Defendant for injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Defendant owned and operated the commercial buildings located in Jupiter, Florida and conducted a substantial amount of business in that place of public accommodation in Palm Beach County, Florida. Plaintiff Feltzin is an individual with disabilities as defined by and pursuant to the ADA. He visits the commercial property and businesses located within the area and encountered multiple violations of the ADA that directly affected his ability to use and enjoy the commercial property, asserts the complaint. The Plaintiff has encountered architectural barriers that are in violation of the ADA at the subject commercial property and the business. The barriers to access at the commercial property, and the business within, have each denied or diminished Plaintiff's ability to visit the commercial property and have endangered his safety in violation of the ADA, the complaint adds. Center Street Plaza, Corp., owns and/or operates a place of public accommodation as defined by the ADA.[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 Telephone: (305) 553-3464 E-mail: bvirues@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 Telephone: (305) 350-3103 E-mail: rdiego@lawgmp.com SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE: Zdrojewski Seeks Team Leads' Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------------------------------- JESSICA ZDROJEWSKI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SAINT-GOBAIN PERFORMANCE PLASTICS CORP., Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-01561 (N.D. Ohio, September 12, 2024) seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorney's fees, costs, and other relief as appropriate under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Zdrojewski was employed by Defendant as a non-exempt quality assurance team lead from approximately June 2015 through April 2024. In addition to the base rate of pay, the Defendant incorporated various routine and non-discretionary bonuses into its payment structure, along with other forms of remuneration. However, the Defendant failed to incorporate its non-discretionary bonuses into its hourly employees' regular hourly rate calculation, resulting in FLSA violations, says the suit. Headquartered in Solon, OH, Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics Corp. maintains manufacturing facilities in the United States. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jesse L. Young, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. 141 E. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600 Kalamazoo, MI 49007 Telephone: (269) 250-7500 E-mail: jyoung@sommerspc.com - and - Matthew L. Turner, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. One Town Square, 17th Floor Southfield, MI 48076 Telephone: (248) 355-0300 E-mail: mturner@sommerspc.com - and - Jonathan Melmed, Esq. Laura Supanich, Esq. MELMED LAW GROUP, P.C. 1801 Century Park East, Suite 850 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Telephone: (310) 824-3828 E-mail: jm@melmedlaw.com lms@melmedlaw.com SALESFORCE INC: Class Cert. Bid Filing in Yockey Due April 24, 2025 ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as PATRICK YOCKEY, et al., v. SALESFORCE, INC., Case No. 4:22-cv-09067-JST (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jon Tigar entered an order granting the class certification stipulation as follows: Event Proposed Schedule Deadline to add parties or amend the pleadings: Oct. 6, 2023 Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification and April 24, 2025 Plaintiffs' Expert Disclosures for all experts due: Defendant's Opposition to Plaintiffs' Motion Aug. 7, 2025 for Class Certification, Defendant's Expert Disclosures, and Defendant's Daubert Motions due: Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of Motion for Sept. 18, 2025 Class Certification, Plaintiffs' Opposition to Defendant's Daubert Motions, and Plaintiffs' Daubert Motions due: Plaintiffs' Reply in Support of their Daubert Oct. 28, 2025 Motions due: Salesforce is an American cloud-based software company headquartered in San Francisco, California. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EeTqKM at no extra charge.[CC] SAM'S WEST: Sanchez Appeals Class Cert. Bid Denial to 9th Circuit ----------------------------------------------------------------- CARLOS SANCHEZ is taking an appeal from a court order denying his motion for class certification in the lawsuit entitled Carlos Sanchez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Sam's West Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:21-cv-05122-SVW-JC, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff filed this case on June 23, 2021, alleging that the Defendant failed to compensate its employees for time spent waiting for them to be released during closing. On Sept. 27, 2021, the Plaintiff filed an amended complaint. The Plaintiff amended his complaint again on Jan. 14, 2022. On Mar. 8, 2022, the Court granted in part the Defendant's motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's second amended complaint. On Apr. 11, 2022, the Plaintiff filed a motion to certify class, which the Defendant opposed on May 11, 2022. On May 4, 2023, the Court denied without prejudice the Plaintiff's motion to certify class through an Order entered by Judge Stephen V. Wilson. On Jan. 3, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a renewed motion to certify class, which the Court denied through an Order entered by Judge Wilson on Sept. 10, 2024. The Court found that the deficiencies in the Plaintiff's putative classes cannot be remedied through further renewed motions. Accordingly, the Plaintiff's motion is dismissed with prejudice. The appellate case is captioned Sanchez v. Sam's West Inc., Case No. 24-5799, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on September 24, 2024. [BN] SAP AMERICA INC: Khoo Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Chai Kay Khoo, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated v. SAP AMERICA, INC., a Delaware corporation, SAP EUROPEAN COMPANY, a German corporation, and DOES 1 - 25, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV16747 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on Sept. 26, 2024, and assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-08292. On July 5, 2024, Plaintiff filed a Class Action Complaint attempting to plead claims for Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Failure to Pay Overtime Wages; Failure to Provide Rest Periods; Failure to Provide Meal Periods; Failure to Reimburse Business Expenses; Failure to Pay All Wages Upon Separation; Failure to Furnish Accurate Itemized Wage Statements; Unlawful and/or Unfair Business Practices; and an Individual Complaint attempting to plead claims for Discrimination Based on Gender Identity, Sexual Orientation, and/or Gender Expression; and Wrongful Termination in Violation of Public Policy.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Brian L. Johnsrud, Esq. Hassan Aburish, Esq. DUANE MORRIS LLP 260 Homer Avenue, Suite 202 Palo Alto, CA 94301-2777 Phone: +1 650 847 4150 Fax: +1 650 847 4151 - and - Aaron T. Winn, Esq. DUANE MORRIS 750 B Street, Suite 2900 San Diego, CA 92101-4681 Phone: +1 619 744 2200 Fax: +1 619 744 2201 Email: bjohnsrud@duanemorris.com atwinn@duanemorris.com haburish@duanemorris.com SKY CLIMBER: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Olmedo Suit Due Oct. 19 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROEL OLMEDO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SKY CLIMBER WIND SOLUTIONS LLC D/B/A SKY CLIMBER RENEWABLES, Case No. 3:24-cv-05303-DGE (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge entered an order the minute order setting class certification briefing schedule: -- The Plaintiff shall file a motion for conditional certification no later than Sept. 27, 2024. -- The Defendant shall file its response within 30 days of the date Plaintiff's motion is filed, and the Plaintiff shall have 14 days to file a Reply. -- The deadline for parties to join is May 1, 2025. -- The discovery deadline is Sept. 18, 2025. -- The deadline for the Plaintiff to file a motion seeking Rule 23 Class Certification, for the Defendant to file a motion seeking decertification of a conditionally certified collective, and for either party to file a dispositive motion is Oct. 19, 2025. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=3swDWC at no extra charge.[CC] SMARTMATCH INSURANCE: Cocciolillo Files TCPA Suit in W.D. Missouri ------------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against SmartMatch Insurance Agency, LLC. The case is styled as Lisa Cocciolillo, sindividually, and on behalf of others similarly situated v. SmartMatch Insurance Agency, LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-00627-SRB (W.D. Mo., Sept. 26, 2024). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. SmartMatch Insurance Agency -- https://smartmatch.com/ -- provides personalized assistance in finding and comparing medical care insurance.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher E Roberts, Esq. BUTSCH ROBERTS & ASSOCIATES LLC 7777 Bonhomme Avenue, Suite 1300 Clayton, MO 63105 Phone: (314) 863-5700 Fax: (314) 863-5711 Email: Roberts@butschroberts.com SOUTHWEST AIRLINES: Harper Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Discrimination ----------------------------------------------------------------- JALA HARPER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO., a foreign corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-01799 (D. Nev., September 24, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for failure to pay for all hours worked, including overtime, and failure to timely pay wages in violation of the Nevada Revised States and the Fair Labor Standards Act and for discrimination, harassment, and retaliation in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Nevada's equal employment opportunity laws. Ms. Harper was hired by the Defendants as customer representative from on or about September 12, 2022, until her termination on March 25, 2023. Southwest Airlines Co. is an airline company, headquartered in Dallas, Texas. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason Kuller, Esq. Rachel Mariner, Esq. Shay Digenen, Esq. RAFII & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 1120 N. Town Center Dr., Ste. 130 Las Vegas, NV 89144 Telephone: (725) 245-6056 Facsimile: (725) 220-1802 Email: jason@rafiilaw.com rachel@rafiilaw.com shay@rafiilaw.com SOVENA USA: Sells Adulterated & Impure Avocado Oil, Morrison Claims ------------------------------------------------------------------- EBONY MORRISON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOVENA USA, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-08144 (C.D. Cal., September 23, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for violations of the California's False Advertising Law, California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, and California's Unfair Competition Law, and for breach of express warranty, negligent misrepresentation, intentional misrepresentation, and quasi-contract. The case arises from the Defendant's false, deceptive, and misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of Olivari brand avocado oil. The Defendant represents the product that it contains 100 percent pure cold pressed avocado oil. The ingredient list also lists only "avocado oil." But the truth is, it does not contain 100 percent pure avocado oil. Instead, a recent study has shown that the oil is adulterated and impure. As a result of the Defendant's misrepresentations, the Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers paid a premium price for the product. Sovena USA, Inc. is a distributor of consumer products, headquartered in Rome, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christin Cho, Esq. DOVEL & LUNER, LLP 201 Santa Monica Blvd., Suite 600 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Telephone: (310) 656-7066 Facsimile: (310) 656-7069 Email: christin@dovel.com SPECIALTY NETWORKS: Bryson Balks at Unprotected Personal Info ------------------------------------------------------------- LISA BRYSON, individually, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SPECIALTY NETWORKS, LLC, and SPECIALTY NETWORKS II, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-00319 (E.D. Tenn., Sept. 20, 2024) is a civil action seeking monetary damages and injunctive and declaratory relief from the Defendants arising from their failure to safeguard certain personally identifying information and protected health information of hundreds of thousands of their patients, including Plaintiff. On August 15, 2024, Specialty Networks notified the public that it had "learned of a data security incident that may have impacted personal and/or protected health information belonging to certain current and former patients." The data security incident impacted a multitude of its patients, as Specialty Networks reported to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office for Civil Rights that the PII belonging to 411,0375 of its patients was compromised. The Plaintiff and members of the Class have been significantly injured by the Data Breach and have incurred out-of-pocket expenses associated with the reasonable mitigation measures they were forced to employ, asserts the complaint. Plaintiff and the Class also now forever face an amplified risk of fraud and identity theft due to their sensitive PII falling into the hands of cybercriminals, the complaint adds. On behalf of herself and the nationwide Class preliminarily defined below, the Plaintiff brings causes of action sounding in negligence, per se negligence, invasion of privacy, breach of confidence, breach of contract, including breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, trespass to chattels, bailment, unjust enrichment, and conversion. Specialty Networks, LLC provides radiology information systems, digital transcription services, and enterprise practice management solutions for medical facilities.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joe P. Leniski, Jr. HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL, LENISKI & WALL PLLC 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 300 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 800-6225 E-mail: joey@hsglawgroup.com - and - Peter J. Jannace, Esq. HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL, LENISKI & WALL PLLC 515 Park Avenue Louisville, KY 40208 Telephone: (502) 636-4333 E-mail: peter@hsglawgroup.com TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL: Plaintiffs Seek to File Reply Under Seal --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as FWK Holdings LLC, et al., v. Takeda Pharmaceutical Company, Ltd. et al. (RE AMITIZA ANTITRUST LITIGATION), Case No. 1:21-cv-11057-MJJ (D. Mass.), the Direct Purchaser Class Plaintiffs asks Court to enter an order granting for leave to file under seal portions of their Reply in Support of their motion for class certification. Takeda is a Japanese multinational pharmaceutical company. It is the third largest pharmaceutical company in Asia, behind Sinopharm and Shanghai Pharmaceuticals, and one of the top 20 largest pharmaceutical companies in the world by revenue. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=eazU6L at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Erin C. Burns, Esq. Thomas M. Sobol, Esq. Jessica R. MacAuley, Esq. Rebekah Glickman-Simon, Esq. Daniel Polonsky, Esq. Mark T. Vazquez, Esq. HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP 1 Faneuil Hall Square Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 482-3700 Facsimile: (617) 482-3003 E-mail: erinb@hbsslaw.com tom@hbsslaw.com jessicam@hbsslaw.com rebekahgs@hbsslaw.com danielp@hbsslaw.com markv@hbsslaw.com - and - Michael L. Roberts, Esq. Stephanie E. Smith, Esq. ROBERTS LAW FIRM US, PC 20 Rahling Cir. Little Rock, AR 72223 Telephone: (501) 821-5575 E-mail: mikeroberts@robertslawfirm.us stephaniesmith@robertslawfirm.us - and - Joseph M. Vanek, Esq. David P. Germaine, Esq. Eamon P. Kelly, Esq. John P. Bjork, Esq. SPERLING & SLATER, LLC 55 W. Monroe St., Suite 3200 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 641-3200 E-mail: jvanek@sperling-law.com dgermaine@sperling-law.com ekelly@sperling-law.com jbjork@sperling-law.com - and - John D. Radice, Esq. RADICE LAW FIRM, P.C. 475 Wall St. Princeton, NJ 08540 Telephone: (646) 245-8502 Facsimile: (609) 385-0745 E-mail: jradice@radicelawfirm.com TOYOTA INDUSTRIES: Faces Broadmoor Lumber's False Ad Suit in Cal. ----------------------------------------------------------------- BROADMOOR LUMBER & PLYWOOD CO., MARDERS, and FERRARO FOODS, Plaintiffs v. TOYOTA INDUSTRIES CORPORATION, TOYOTA MATERIAL HANDLING N.A., TOYOTA MATERIAL HANDLING, INC., and TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION, Defendants, Case No. 3:24-cv-06640 (N.D. Cal., Sept. 22, 2024) is a class action brought by the Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, against the Defendants for Breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty of merchantability, and violation of the New York General Business Law. Plaintiff Broadmoor Lumber & Plywood Co. is a family-owned landscaping supply business operating in South San Francisco and the neighboring communities. The Plaintiff owns eight vehicles: five of model 8FGU25 (serial numbers 38696, 38530, 83351, 75075, 69169) and three of model 8FGU30 (serial numbers 61639, 73786, 76798) -- the Class Vehicles. The Plaintiff purchased the Class Vehicles new from an authorized Toyota forklift dealer. According to the complaint, in the course of their business, Defendants concealed and suppressed material facts concerning the Class Vehicles. The Defendants accomplished this by (a) manipulating the data in the emissions certification and output testing for the Class Engines such that they falsely represented emissions data and performance data, and/or (b) falsely attesting that Class Vehicles could pass emissions tests when they in fact did not. The Plaintiff and New York State Class members had no way of discerning that Defendants' representations were false and misleading because Plaintiff and New York State Class members did not have access to Defendants' emissions certification and output test engines and data. The Defendants' false advertising was likely to and did in fact deceive regulators and reasonable consumers, including Plaintiff and the New York State Class, about the illegality and true characteristics of the Class Vehicles, the quality of Defendants' brand and the true value of the Class Vehicles, says the suit. Toyota Industries Corp. manufactures and sells textile machinery, materials handling equipment, automobiles, and automobile parts in Japan and internationally.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Elizabeth J. Cabraser, Esq. Kevin Budner, Esq. Phong-Chau G. Nguyen, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 956-1000 Facsimile: (415) 956-1008 E-mail: ecabraser@lchb.com kbudner@lchb.com pgnguyen@lchb.com - and - David Stellings, Esq. Katherine McBride, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor New York, NY 10013 Telephone: (212) 355-9500 Facsimile: (212) 355-9592 E-mail: dstellings@lchb.com kmcbride@lchb.com - and - Roland Tellis, Esq. BARON & BUDD, P.C. 15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600 Encino, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 839-2333 Facsimile: (818) 986-9698 E-mail: rtellis@baronbudd.com TRICOLOR CALIFORNIA: Rivera Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Julio K. Cordoba Rivera, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. TRICOLOR CALIFORNIA AUTO GROUP, LLC, a limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV20001 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on Sept. 26, 2024, and assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-08304. The Complaint filed in the State Court Action alleges the following causes of action: failure to pay minimum wages; failure to pay overtime compensation; failure to provide meal periods; failure to authorize and permit rest breaks; failure to indemnify necessary business expenses; failure to timely pay final wages at termination; failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements; and unfair business practices.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kane Moon, Esq. Allen Feghali, Esq. Jacquelyne P. Yanemmerik, Esq. MOON LAW GROUP, PC 725 South Figueroa Street, 31st Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 232-3128 Facsimile: (213) 232-3125 Email: kmoon@moonlawgroup.com afeghali@moonlawgroup.com jvanemmerik@moonlawgroup.com jenoh@moonlawgroup.com The Defendants are represented by: Eugene Ryu, Esq. Paul M. Suh, Esq. K&L GATES LLP 10100 Santa Monica Boulevard, 8th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (310) 552-5000 Fax: (310) 552-5001 Email: Gene.Ryu@klgates.com Paul.Suh@klgates.com TWENTY-SIX DESIGNS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Herrera Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- EDERY HERRERA, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TWENTY-SIX DESIGNS LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-07134 (S.D.N.Y., Sept. 19, 2024) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website https://boggbag.com to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. During Plaintiff's visits to the website, the last occurring on August 27, 2024, in an attempt to purchase an Original Bogg Bag-L/XL from Defendant and to view the information on the website, he encountered multiple access barriers that denied him 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. He was denied the full enjoyment of the goods, and services of the website by being unable to purchase an Original Bogg Bag-L/XL, as well as other products available online and to ascertain information relating to Defendant's bags and accessories, as well as other types of goods, pricing, privacy policies and internet pricing specials, says the suit. The 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. Twenty-Six Designs LLC operates the website that offers bags and other accessories.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 228-9795 Facsimile: (212) 982-6284 E-mail: Michael@Gottlieb.legal Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal Dana@Gottlieb.legal VINEYARD VINES: Agnone Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ----------------------------------------------------------- PASQUALE AGNONE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Vineyard Vines, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-06598-LDH-JMW (E.D.N.Y., Sept. 19, 2024) is a civil rights action against Vineyard Vines for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate their website https://www.vineyardvines.com to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human Rights Law. On August 16, 2024, the Plaintiff was browsing online for a new sweater to refresh his wardrobe, as he typically buys new clothing for the cold season in advance at the end of summer. While exploring the Defendant's website, and trying to find a product, he encountered several accessibility issues, such as ambiguous links, unlabeled buttons, unannounced pop-ups, and interactive elements that were unfocusable. These issues created a frustrating shopping experience and prevented him from completing his purchase. Amongst other access barriers experienced, the Plaintiff was unable to learn more information about store locations and hours of operation, compare prices and benefits and learn more information about the goods and services in its physical location, says the suit. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Vineyard Vines' policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to unlawful discrimination. Vineyard Vines, LLC offers a wide range of men's, women's and kid's apparel and accessories such as pants, sweaters, jackets, vests, shirts, polos, belts, hats, bags, shoes, dresses, and skirts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Uri Horowitz, Esq. HOROWITZ LAW PLLC 14441 70th Road Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (718) 705-8706 Facsimile: (718) 705-8705 E-mail: uri@horowitzlawpllc.com VITAL FARMS: Bid for Summary Judgment Partly OK'd ------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICHOLAS A. USLER, et al., v. VITAL FARMS, INC., Case No. 1:21-cv-00447-RP (W.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge Robert Pitman entered an order adopting the report and recommendation (RR) of United States Magistrate Judge Mark Lane. The Court further entered an order that Defendant's motion for summary judgment, is granted in part and denied in part. Specifically, the Plaintiffs Tanze and Godze's claims are dismissed with prejudice and the New York, Florida, and Michigan express warranty claims are dismissed with prejudice. The motion is otherwise denied without prejudice. Because Plaintiffs timely objected to the report and recommendation on Defendant's motion for summary judgment and Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, the Court reviews the report and recommendation de novo. A copy of the Court's order dated Sept. 23, 2024, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=yAyfvJ at no extra charge.[CC] ZOETIS INC: California Spine Sues Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties ----------------------------------------------------------------- CALIFORNIA SPINE AND NEUROSURGERY INSTITUTE dba SAN JOSE NEUROSPINE, a California Corporation, Plaintiff v. ZOETIS INC., a New Jersey Corporation, UNITED HEALTHCARE SERVICES INC.; UNITED HEALTHCARE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendants, Case No. 5:24-cv-06528 (N.D. Cal., September 17, 2024) is a class action accusing the Defendants of violating the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The Zoetis Plan is a self-funded employee benefit plan established to provide health benefits for employee participants and their dependents. According to the complaint, the Defendants unlawfully retain Plan funds that are due and owing to Plaintiff for valid medically necessary services rendered and use those funds for alternative purposes while obstructing Plaintiff's access to those funds by simultaneously violating fiduciary rights. Headquartered in Parsipanny, NJ, Zoetis Inc. sponsors the Zoetis Plan, a self-funded employee benefit plan established to provide health benefits for employee participants and their dependents. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mina Hakakian, Esq. WILLIAMS WOLLITZ HAKAKIAN PC 1539 Westwood Blvd., Second Floor Los Angeles, CA 90024 Telephone: (310) 982-2733 E-mail: mhakakian@wwlawcorp.com ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2024. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272. This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior written permission of the publishers. Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is not guaranteed. The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof are $25 each. For subscription information, contact Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000. *** End of Transmission ***