/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/241219.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, December 19, 2024, Vol. 26, No. 254
Headlines
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Sorensen Suit Removed to C.D. California
ADORAMA INC: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Knowles Says
AEFFE GROUP INC: Murphy Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Connelly Seeks Leave to File Class Reply Brief
AMERICAN HEALTH: Arinatwe Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid
AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR: Bissell Files Suit in S.D. California
AMPAC FINE: Bussey Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
APPLE INC: Amy Sues Over Defective Products
AVICA LLC: Wade Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
BAYLOR SCOTT: Kunze Appeals Attorney's Fees Ruling to 5th Circuit
BIMBO BAKERIES: Files 2nd Circuit Appeal in Provencher Case
BYTEDANCE INC: TikTok Secretly Collects Minor's Info, Lanser Says
C&S LOGISTICS: Appeals Remand Order in Tercero Suit to 9th Circuit
CAMERA LAND: Faces Knowles Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
CCC GROUP: Mood Sues Over Unlawful Employment Practices
CDA PIZZA: Small Sues to Recover Unpaid Minimum Wages
DELOITTE & TOUCHE: Appeals Class Cert. Order in IBEW Suit
DYNAVAX TECHNOLOGIES: Ignasiak Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duty
EARL SCOTT: Duvall Must File Class Cert. Bid by Jan. 8, 2025
ELECTROLUX HOME: Faces Stern Suit Over Defective Refrigerators
ELEMENT 7 LLC: Lover Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
ENFORMION LLC: Aufrichtig Files Suit in D. Colorado
EZ LENDER LLC: Scott Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
F C EQUITIES: Pardo Sues Over Discriminative Property
FCA US LLC: Snowman Suit Transferred to D. Delaware
FROEDTERT HEALTH: Luz Wins Class Certification Bid
GENERAL MILLS: Basile Suit Removed to S.D. New York
GOODRX INC: MNindys Balks at Illegal Price-Fixing Scheme
HIGOODS INC: Herrera Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
HOME COMFORT: Daniels Suit Removed to C.D. California
HUGO BOSS: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
IRISNDT INC: Anandan Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
JACKSON LABORATORY: Seijas Suit Removed to E.D. California
KIA AMERICA: Appeals Arbitration Bid Denial in Young Suit
KING CONTRACTING: Faces Mejia Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
KRAFT HEINZ: Velasco Suit Removed to N.D. California
LAKIN TIRE WEST: Delgado Suit Removed to C.D. California
LCA-VISION INC: Carroll Sues Over Breach of Confidentiality
LEAD GROUP: Aburto Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages
M. KHORDIPOUR INC: Agostini Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
MANSCAPED INC: Elyashiv Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida
MARC SALKOVITZ: Corbin Suit Transferred to D. Delaware
MPC PROMOTIONS: Martinez Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
OP PHARMACY: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Howey Says
PATRICK LABAT: Hambrick Files Suit in N.D. Georgia
PRISMA ENTERTAINMENT: Vallaire Sues Over Unpaid Wages
QUEST CONSUMER: Da Silva Sues Over Private Health Info Disclosure
RADHA DONUT CORP: Cheli Sues Over Inaccessible Property
RRCA ACCOUNTS: Koch Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
SAG-AFTRA HEALTH: Barr Sues Over Data Breach
SALT & STONE INC: Murphy Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
SHARON & CRESCENT: Charges Improper Overdraft Fees, Pais Says
SKINFIX INCORPORATED: Murphy Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
U.S. BANCORP: Opens Fake Bank Accounts, DeSilva Suit Says
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Valley Drugs Sues Over Illegal Reimbursements
UNIVERSALPEGASUS: Tannehill Files Suit in S.D. Texas
VENEZUELA: Mazzaccone Files Suit for Breach of Contract
VF OUTDOOR: Isakov Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
WREN LOGISTICS: Acosta Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages
YIPPEE ENTERTAINMENT: Appeals Arbitration Bid Denial in Morrison
ZOI FOODS: Faces Agnone Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
*********
ABBOTT LABORATORIES: Sorensen Suit Removed to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case is styled as Matthew Sorensen, and on behalf of all other
similarly situated v. Abbott Laboratories, Does 1 through 25,
inclusive, Case No. 24STCV28779 was removed from the Los Angeles
Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California on Dec. 6, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-10537-JPR to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Abbott Laboratories -- https://www.abbott.com/ -- is an American
multinational medical devices and health care company with
headquarters in Abbott Park, Illinois, United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert Tauler, Esq.
Wendy Robinson Miele, Esq.
TAULER SMITH LLP
626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: (310) 590-3927
Fax: (310) 943-1455
Email: robert@taulersmith.com
wmiele@taulersmith.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Stacey Hsiang Chun Wang, Esq.
Ashley L. Shively, Esq.
Wendy Qiu, Esq.
HOLLAND AND KNIGHT LLP
400 South Hope Street 8th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071-2040
Phone: (213) 896-2480
Fax: (213) 896-2450
Email: stacey.wang@hklaw.com
ashley.shively@hklaw.com
wendy.qiu@hklaw.com
ADORAMA INC: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Knowles Says
------------------------------------------------------------
CARLTON KNOWLES, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ADORAMA INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-09090 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2024) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its interactive website, www.adorama.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
November 15, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a CyberPower
CP1500AVRLCD3 1500VA/900W Intelligent LCD Mini-Tower UPS, NEMA
5-15P from Defendant and to view the information on the website,
the Plaintiff 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. The Plaintiff has suffered and
continues to suffer frustration and humiliation as a result of the
discriminatory conditions present on Defendant's website. These
discriminatory conditions continue to contribute to Plaintiff's
sense of isolation and segregation, 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.
Adorama Inc. operates the online interactive website that sells
cameras, lenses, audio, video, drones and instruments.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
AEFFE GROUP INC: Murphy Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------
James Murphy, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated v. AEFFE GROUP INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-09379 (S.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 10, 2024), is brought against the Defendants for its failure
to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully
and equally accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website,
https://www.moschino.com/us_en, 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. 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.
By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and
visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
AEFFE GROUP INC., operates the Moschino online retail store, as
well as the Moschino interactive Website and advertises, markets,
and operates in the State of New York and throughout the United
States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: dana@gottlieb.legal
michael@gottlieb.legal
jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Connelly Seeks Leave to File Class Reply Brief
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RENEE CONNELLY, on Behalf
of Herself and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, V.
AMAZON.COM SERVICES, LLC, Case No. 5:23-cv-02768-JMG (E.D. Pa.),
the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting her consent
motion for leave to file reply brief in support of Plaintiff's
motion for class certification and consent motion for leave to
exceed page limits.
There is good cause for the Court to grant this Motion for Leave,
the
Plaintiff contends:
-- First, Plaintiff seeks to file a Reply Brief to respond to the
arguments Amazon has made for the first time. Second,
Plaintiff
wishes to provide full and complete information to the Court
so
that the Court can make an informed decision.
-- Third, Amazon has produced new information with its Response
that
was not previously disclosed during the Phase I discovery
period.
-- Plaintiff is entitled to address the new information.
The Plaintiff has conferred with Counsel for Amazon. Amazon is
unopposed to Plaintiff filing a Reply Brief and is unopposed to
Plaintiff having an additional five pages of briefing for the Reply
Brief.
This lawsuit is a class action alleging that Amazon should have
paid its employees for the time spent undergoing COVID-19 symptom
screenings prior to the start of their shifts.
On Nov. 15, 2024, Plaintiff filed her Motion for Class
Certification.
On Dec. 2, 2024, Amazon filed its Response to Plaintiff's Motion
for Class Certification.
Amazon.com retails books, diamond jewelry, electronics, appliances,
apparels, and accessories.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 9, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=DWB6xo at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Don J. Foty, Esq.
HODGES & FOTY, L.L.P.
2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 250
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 523-0001
Facsimile: (713) 523-1116
E-mail: dfoty@hftrialfirm.com
- and -
Matthew Parmet, Esq.
PARMET PC
2 Greenway Plaza, Suite 250
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 999-5229
E-mail: matt@parmet.law
AMERICAN HEALTH: Arinatwe Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Bid
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAN ARINATWE, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, v. AMERICAN HEALTH
ASSOCIATES, INC., Case No. 0:24-cv-61678-AHS (S.D. Fla.), the
Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting an extension
of:
-- the Dec. 27, 2024, joinder deadline to March 7, 2025, or
include a
March 7, 2025,
-- deadline in the Scheduling Order for Plaintiff to file a
Section
216(b) and/or Rule 23 Class Certification Motion,
-- and for any such further relief this Court deems just and
proper
under the circumstance.
The requested extension will permit the Plaintiff to conduct the
necessary discovery to file a Section 216(b) and/or Rule 23 Class
Certification Motion. Similarly, the inclusion of a March 7, 2025,
deadline for Plaintiff to file a Section 216(b) and/or Rule 23
Class Certification Motion will accomplish the same objective. The
extension or insertion of the deadline will not prejudice Defendant
or the Court and will provide clarity to the deadlines currently
imposed within ECF No. 27. None of the remaining deadlines in the
Scheduling Order would require modification.
On Sept. 12, 2024, the Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, filed his hybrid Collective and Class
Action Complaint for Damages and Demand for Jury Trial. The
Plaintiff's Complaint seeks to recover unpaid wages, liquidated
damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under the Fair
Labor Standards Act (the "FLSA") and the Virginia Overtime Wage Act
("VOWA").
American Health is a provider of clinical laboratory services to
long term care in the United States.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Dec. 9, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OO025U at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zev Antell, Esq.
BUTLER CURWOOD, PLC
140 Virginia Street, Suite 302
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone: (804) 648-4848
E-mail: zev@butlercurwood.com
- and -
Timothy Coffield, Esq.
COFFIELD PLC
106-F Melbourne Park Circle
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Telephone: (434) 218-3133
Facsimile: (434) 321-1636
E-mail: tc@coffieldlaw.com
- and -
Jordan Richards, Esq.
Michael Miller, Esq.
USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS –
JORDAN RICHARDS PLLC
1800 SE 10th Ave. Suite 205
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
Telephone: (954) 871-0050
E-mail: jordan@jordanrichardspllsc.com
michael@usaemploymentlawyers.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Steven Appelbaum, Esq.
SAUL EWING LLP
200 E. Las Olas Blvd. Suite 1000
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (305) 428-4500
Facsimile: (305) 374-4744
E-mail: Steven.appelbaum@saul.com
Susan.lewis@saul.com
AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR: Bissell Files Suit in S.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Honda Motor
Co., Inc., et al. The case is styled as Chris Bissell, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situate v. American Honda
Motor Co., Inc., Honda Motor Company Limited, Case No.
3:24-cv-02286-AJB-MMP (S.D. Cal., Dec. 6, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud for Breach of
Warranty.
The American Honda Motor Company, Inc. -- https://www.honda.com/ --
(sometimes abbreviated as AHM) is the North American subsidiary of
Japanese Honda Motor Company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Bucci, Esq.
Paula R. Brown, Esq.
Thomas Joseph O'Reardon, II, Esq.
Timothy G. Blood, Esq.
BLOOD HURST & O'REARDON LLP
501 West Broadway, Suite 1490
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: (619) 338-1100
Fax: (619) 338-1101
Email: abucci@bholaw.com
pbrown@bholaw.com
toreardon@bholaw.com
tblood@bholaw.com
AMPAC FINE: Bussey Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------
D'Andre Bussey, Jesse Cave, and Christopher Dale Markham. on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated v. AMPAC FINE
CHEMICALS VIRGINIA, LLC, and AMPAC FINE CHEMICALS, LLC, Case No.
3:24-cv-00881 (E.D. Va., Dec. 10, 2024), is brought for unpaid
overtime in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
("FLSA") and the Virginia Overtime Wage Act ("VOWA").
The Defendants have violated and continue to violate the FLSA and
VOWA by having the following policies and practices at its Virginia
facility located at 2820 Normandy Drive, Petersburg, Virginia (the
"Virginia Facility"). Within the last three years, Defendants have
had a policy of requiring nonexempt employees working on its
factory floor to wear Personal Protective Equipment ("PPE"),
specifically Fire Retardant ("FR") or Protective clothing.
Defendants required Putative Plaintiffs to don such FR clothing
prior to commencing their shifts and to doff such FR clothing
following the conclusion of their shifts. But Defendants had a
policy of only paying for shifts and not compensating for the time
spent donning and doffing required FR clothing. Putative Plaintiffs
were scheduled to work 40 hours a week and thus this policy led to
a substantial amount of unpaid overtime, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants at the Virginia
Facility.
The Defendants are a U.S. Based custom manufacturer of
pharmaceutical chemicals.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zev H. Antell, Esq.
Craig Juraj Curwood, Esq.
Samantha R. Galina, Esq.
BUTLER CURWOOD, PLC
140 Virginia Street, Suite 302
Richmond, VA 23219
Phone: (804) 648-4848
Fax: (804) 237-0413
Email: craig@butlercurwood.com
zev@butlercurwood.com
samantha@butlercurwood.com
APPLE INC: Amy Sues Over Defective Products
-------------------------------------------
Amy of the Misty Series and Jessica of the Jessica Series, on
behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. APPLE, INC.,
Case No. 5:24-cv-08832 (N.D. Cal., Dec. 7, 2024), is brought
arising out of the Defendant's violations of federal criminal child
pornography statute as a result of Apple's defective products.
Apple not only failed to properly manufacture and design products
that harmed the Plaintiffs, but once it was aware of the dangers
inherent in its products, it then failed to disclose these safety
hazards to consumers.
Before August 2021, Apple knew its products contained defects as
customers, law enforcement, and non-governmental watchdogs reported
various concerns about Apple's failure to stop or limit the spread
of known child pornography images and videos ("child pornography"
or "CSAM") through its products despite available alternative
designs and widespread technological solutions.
Having taken unnecessary risks in the design and manufacture of its
products and knowing of those risks to consumers, Apple addressed
the faulty design of its products with a widely touted improved
design aimed at protecting children, including Plaintiffs and
members of the proposed class, but then failed to implement those
designs or take any measures to detect and limit CSAM on iCloud or
any other Apple product. Because Apple failed to stop or limit the
spread of known CSAM, the vast majority of the Class, as victims of
CSAM, continue to suffer harm caused and facilitated by Apple's
defectively designed products and defective features.
The Plaintiffs and members of the proposed Class, as CSAM victims,
experience lifelong harm and trauma because of the known design
defects Apple failed to remedy. Not only did Apple fail to stop or
limit the spread of known CSAM through its products, but it
publicly announced that it affirmatively would not implement
product design changes to stop or limit the spread of known CSAM
through its products, thereby amplifying the already significant
risk and harm to the Plaintiffs and Class members, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiffs "Amy" is a pseudonym for the victim depicted in the
Misty child pornography series and "Jessica" is a pseudonym for the
victim depicted in the Jessica child pornography series.
Apple is one of the world's most valuable public companies, with
over $2.5 trillion market capitalization.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Micha S. Liberty, Esq.
LIBERTY LAW
1999 Harrison Street, Ste. 1800
Oakland, CA 94612
Phone: (510) 645-1000
Email: micha@libertylaw.com
- and -
James R. Marsh, Esq.
Margaret E. Mabie, Esq.
Helene M. Weiss, Esq.
MARSH LAW FIRM PLLC
31 Hudson Yards, 11th Fl
New York, NY 10001
Phone: (212) 372-3030
Email: jamesmarsh@marsh.law
margaretmabie@marsh.law
heleneweiss@marsh.law
- and -
Hillary Nappi, Esq.
HACH ROSE SCHIRRIPA & CHEVERIE LLP
112 Madison Avenue, 10th Fl
New York, NY 10016
Phone: (212) 213-8311
Email: hnappi@hrsclaw.com
AVICA LLC: Wade Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------
Keryann Wade, and other similarly situated individuals v. AVICA
LLC, Case No. 8:24-cv-02826 (M.D. Fla., Dec. 7, 2024), is brought
to recover unpaid wages under Florida common law, the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("the Act" or the "FLSA"), the Florida Minimum Wage
Act (the "FMWA") as a result of the Defendant's failure to pay
overtime wages.
In October 2024, Plaintiff was constructively discharged when the
Defendant refused to pay her wages owed to her. The Plaintiff and
those similarly situated to her routinely worked in excess of 40
hours per week as part of her regular job duties. Despite working
more than 40 hours per week, Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff, and
those similarly situated to her, overtime compensation at a rate of
time and a half of her regular rate of pay for hours worked over 40
during one or more workweeks. The Defendant also failed to pay
Plaintiff, and those similarly situated to her, the statutory
minimum wage per workweek and regular wages during one or more
workweeks, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a caregiver since April
2024.
The Defendant is a home care services provider that hires/recruits
home healthcare employees.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
R. Martin Saenz, Esquire
THE SAENZ LAW FIRM, PA
20900 NE 30th Avenue, Ste. 800
Aventura, FL 33180
Phone: (305)482-1475
Email: martin@legalopinionusa.com
BAYLOR SCOTT: Kunze Appeals Attorney's Fees Ruling to 5th Circuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BENJAMIN KUNZE, et al. are taking an appeal from a court order in
the lawsuit entitled Benjamin Kunze, et al., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Baylor
Scott & White Health, et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:20-CV-1276, in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiffs
bring this complaint against the Defendants for alleged failure to
pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
On Oct. 29, 2024, Judge David C. Godbey entered an order awarding
the Plaintiffs $919,000 in attorneys' fees and $16,519.82 in costs,
and post-judgment interest at the rate of 4.86 percent, compounded
annually from the date of the final judgment until paid.
The appellate case is captioned Kunze v. Baylor, Case No. 24-11040,
in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, filed
on December 2, 2024. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellants BENJAMIN KUNZE, et al., on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated, are represented by:
John R. Fabry, Esq.
CARLSON LAW FIRM
559 S. IH-35
Round Rock, TX 78664
Telephone: (521) 671-7277
Defendants-Appellees BAYLOR SCOTT & WHITE HEALTH, et al. are
represented by:
Shauna Johnson Clark, Esq.
NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US, LLP
1550 Lamar Street
Houston, TX 77010
Telephone: (713) 651-5601
BIMBO BAKERIES: Files 2nd Circuit Appeal in Provencher Case
-----------------------------------------------------------
BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC., et al. are taking an appeal from a court
order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) Conditional Certification and judicial notice in the lawsuit
entitled Arthur Provencher, et al., individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Bimbo Bakeries USA,
Inc., et al., Defendants, Case No. 2:22-cv-198, in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Vermont.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiffs
bring this complaint against the Defendants for alleged violations
of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Vermont Employment
Practices Laws.
On Jan. 23, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a motion for Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA) Conditional Certification and judicial
notice.
On Apr. 1, 2024, Plaintiff Ronald Martel voluntarily filed a motion
to dismiss.
On Apr. 2, 2024, Judge William K. Sessions III entered an Order
granting the Plaintiffs' motion for Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
Conditional Certification and judicial notice.
On June 3, 2024, Judge Sessions granted Mr. Martel's motion to
dismiss.
The appellate case is captioned Provencher v. Bimbo Bakeries USA,
Inc., Case No. 24-3112, in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Second Circuit, filed on December 3, 2024. [BN]
Plaintiffs-Appellees ARTHUR PROVENCHER, et al., on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, are represented by:
Merrill Bent, Esq.
WOOLMINGTON CAMPBELL BENT & STASNY, P.C.
P.O. Box 2748 4900 Main Street
Manchester Center, VT 05255
Defendants-Appellants BIMBO BAKERIES USA, INC., et al. are
represented by:
Randall M. Levine, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
1111 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20004
BYTEDANCE INC: TikTok Secretly Collects Minor's Info, Lanser Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
KATHLEEN LANSER as guardian and next of kin on behalf of A.L.,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. BYTEDANCE, INC.; BYTEDANCE LTD.; TIKTOK LTD.; TIKTOK
INC.; TIKTOK PTE. LTD.; AND TIKTOK U.S. DATA SECURITY, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-10818 (D.N.J., November 27, 2024) is a
class action against the Defendants for its failure disclose that
it collects and sells personally identifiable information of
millions of minor children, without the consent of the minors or
their parents in violation of the Children's Online Privacy
Protection Act of 1998 and Children's Online Privacy Protection
Rule.
According to the complaint, TikTok collects and uses young
children's personal information without providing direct notice to
their parents or gaining their parents' verifiable consent in
violation of the federal statute and regulations that protect
children's privacy and safety online. It also defies an order that
this Court entered in 2019 to resolve a lawsuit in which the United
States alleged that TikTok Inc.'s and TikTok Ltd.'s predecessor
companies similarly violated COPPA and the COPPA Rule by allowing
children to create and access accounts without their parents'
knowledge or consent, collecting data from those children, and
failing to comply with parents' requests to delete their children's
accounts and information.
Plaintiff Lanser is the mother of A.L., a 14-year-old minor who
used TikTok.
Bytedance, Inc. operates as a multinational Internet technology
holding company. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher A. Seeger, Esq.
Jennifer R. Scullion, Esq.
Christopher L. Ayers, Esq.
SEEGER WEISS LLP
55 Challenger Road 6th Fl.
Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660
Telephone: (973) 639-9100
E-mail: cseeger@seegerweiss.com
jscullion@seegerweiss.com
cayers@seegerweiss.com
C&S LOGISTICS: Appeals Remand Order in Tercero Suit to 9th Circuit
------------------------------------------------------------------
C&S LOGISTICS OF SACRAMENTO/TRACY, LLC, et al. are taking an appeal
from a court order granting the Plaintiff's motion to remand in the
lawsuit entitled Teniah Tercero, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. C&S Logistics of
Sacramento/Tracy, LLC, et al., Defendants, Case No.
2:24-cv-0963-DC-JDP, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of California.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit,
which was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California in and for the County of Sacramento to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of California, is brought
against the Defendants for alleged multiple violations of the
California Labor Code.
On May 31, 2024, the Defendants filed a motion to compel
arbitration and motions to dismiss the complaint.
On June 13, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a motion to remand, which
Judge Dena M. Coggins granted on Nov. 19, 2024. The Court ruled
that none of the Defendants' asserted bases for subject matter
jurisdiction exist, thus the Plaintiff's motion to remand is
granted. The Defendants' motion to compel arbitration and motions
to dismiss were denied as moot.
The appellate case is captioned Tercero v. C&S Logistics of
Sacramento/Tracy, LLC, et al., Case No. 24-7197, in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, filed on November
27, 2024. [BN]
Plaintiff-Respondent TENIAH TERCERO, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:
John Gregory Yslas, Esq.
Jeffrey Bils, Esq.
Aram Boyadjian, Esq.
Andrew Sandoval, Esq.
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
3055 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
CAMERA LAND: Faces Knowles Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
---------------------------------------------------------------
CARLTON KNOWLES, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CAMERA LAND, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 1:24-cv-09091 (S.D.N.Y., November 27, 2024) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://cameralandny.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
November 15, 2024, in an attempt to purchase Zeiss Terra ED 10x42
Binoculars-Black/Black from Defendant for a gift and to view the
information on the website, the Plaintiff 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 unable to locate pricing and was not able to add the item to
the cart due to broken links, pictures without alternate attributes
and other barriers on Defendant's website, which prevented him from
doing so, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
its website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
Camera Land, Inc. operates the website that sells cameras, repairs,
binoculars, apparel & accessories.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
CCC GROUP: Mood Sues Over Unlawful Employment Practices
-------------------------------------------------------
Wayne Mood, et al., individually and on behalf of a class of
similarly situated persons v. CCC GROUP, INC., Case No.
2:24-cv-07084-DCN-MGB (D.S.C., Dec. 7, 2024), is brought under
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, and Title I
of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, to correct unlawful employment
practices on the basis of race and to provide appropriate relief to
44 aggrieved employees, all of which being Charing Parties and
Plaintiffs in this matter.
The Defendant subjected Plaintiffs to a hostile work environment
based on their race. The Defendant subjected a class of other Black
employees to a hostile work environment based on their race. The
Defendant wrongfully terminated Plaintiffs on the basis of race,
ethnicity and/or color. The Defendant wrongfully terminated a class
of other Black employees on the basis of race, ethnicity and/or
color. The Defendant demonstrated unlawful employment practices by
discriminating Plaintiffs on the basis of race, color and/or
ethnicity. The Defendant demonstrated unlawful employment practices
by discriminating a class of other Black employees on the basis of
race, color and/or ethnicity, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs all comprise a protected class of Black employees
that worked out of Defendant CCC Group, Inc.'s ("CCC") Pratt Paper
Mill job site located in Henderson, Kentucky.
The Defendant is a nationally ranked heavy industrial general
construction contractor.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph E. Donohue, IV, Esq.
J. DONOHUE LAW, LLC
431 Saint James Ave. Ste. L PMB 194
Goose Creek, SC 29445
Phone: 854-854-5253
Fax: 854-205-4353
Email: joey@jdonohuelaw.com
CDA PIZZA: Small Sues to Recover Unpaid Minimum Wages
-----------------------------------------------------
Benjamin Small, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
persons v. CDA PIZZA, INC. d/b/a DOMINO'S PIZZA, Case No.
1:24-cv-01589-WCG (E.D. Wis., Dec. 10, 2024), is brought under the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Michigan Workforce
Opportunity Wage Act ("WOWA"), to recover unpaid minimum wages owed
to Plaintiff and similarly situated delivery drivers employed by
Defendant at their Domino's Pizza stores.
The Defendant employs delivery drivers who use their own
automobiles to deliver pizza and other food items to their
customers. However, instead of reimbursing delivery drivers for the
reasonably approximate costs of the business use of their vehicles,
Defendant used a flawed method to determine reimbursement rates
that neither reimburses the drivers for their actual expenses, nor
at the IRS business mileage rate which is legally required and a
reasonable approximation of those expenses. This
under-reimbursement causes their wages to fall below the federal
minimum wage during some or all workweeks, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from February 2021 to April
2024 as a delivery driver at Defendant's Domino's Pizza store.
The Defendant operates numerous Domino's Pizza franchise
stores.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
C. Ryan Morgan, Esq.
Jolie N. Pavlos, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
20 N. Orange Ave., 15th Floor
P.O. Box 4979
Orlando, FL 32802-4979
Phone: (407) 420-1414
Facsimile: (407) 245-3401
Email: RMorgan@forthepeople.com
JPavlos@forthepeople.com
DELOITTE & TOUCHE: Appeals Class Cert. Order in IBEW Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, et al. are taking an appeal from a court
order granting the Plaintiff's motion for class certification,
appointment of class representative, and appointment of class
counsel in the lawsuit entitled International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers Local 98 Pension Fund, on behalf of itself and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Deloitte & Touche LLP,
et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-03304-JDA, in the U.S.
District Court for the District of South Carolina.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, on Nov. 22,
2019, Samuel R. Floyd, III, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, brought this securities class action against
Deloitte, alleging a violation of Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC")
Rule 10b-5.
On Jan. 15, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a motion to certify class.
On Feb. 5, 2024, the Defendants filed a motion to exclude
damages-related expert opinions of Dr. Matthew D. Cain.
On Nov. 12, 2024, Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin granted the Plaintiff's
motion for class certification, appointment of class
representative, and appointment of class counsel. International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 98 Pension Fund (IBEW) was
appointed as Class Representative; Cohen Milstein was appointed as
Class Counsel; and the Tinkler Law Firm was appointed as Liaison
Counsel. Deloitte's motion to exclude damages-related expert
opinion of Dr. Cain was denied.
The appellate case is captioned Deloitte & Touche LLP v.
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Case No. 24-258,
in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, filed
on November 27, 2024. [BN]
Plaintiff-Respondent INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL
WORKERS LOCAL 98 PENSION FUND, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, is represented by:
Jan Eurenius Messerschmidt, Esq.
Steven J. Toll, Esq.
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
1100 New York Avenue, NW, East Tower
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 408-4600
- and -
Laura Helen Posner, Esq.
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
88 Pine Street
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 838-7797
- and -
William Paul Tinkler, Esq.
TINKLER LAW FIRM LLC
P.O. Box 31813
Charleston, SC 29417
Telephone: (843) 853-5203
Defendants-Petitioners DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, et al. are
represented by:
Katrin Alissandra Cassidy-Ginsberg, Esq.
Scott Alexander Edelman, Esq.
Andrew Browning Lichtenberg, Esq.
Atara Miller, Esq.
Jed Mastren Schwartz, Esq.
MILBANK LLP
55 Hudson Yards
New York, NY 10001
Telephone: (212) 530-5030
(212) 530-5000
(212) 530-5542
(212) 530-5421
(212) 530-5283
- and -
John Anderson Fagg, Jr., Esq.
Mark A. Nebrig, Esq.
Nader Saeed Raja, Esq.
MOORE & VAN ALLEN
100 North Tryon Street
Charlotte, NC 28202
Telephone: (704) 331-3622
(704) 331-3602
(704) 331-3621
- and -
Lesley Anne Firestone, Esq.
Daniel Fuerst, Esq.
Tiffany E. Payne, Esq.
Lauren Nicole Vriesinga, Esq.
MOORE & VAN ALLEN, PLLC
P.O. Box 22828
Charleston, SC 29413
Telephone: (843) 579-7027
(843) 579-7000
(843) 579-7054
(843) 579-7022
DYNAVAX TECHNOLOGIES: Ignasiak Alleges Breach of Fiduciary Duty
---------------------------------------------------------------
TERRY IGNASIAK, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated stockholders, Plaintiff v. DYNAVAX TECHNOLOGIES
CORPORATION, a Delaware Corporation, SCOTT MYERS, RYAN SPENCER,
FRANCIS R. CANO, Ph.D., JULIE EASTLAND, DANIEL L. KISNER, M.D.,
BRENT MACGREGOR, PETER R. PARADISO, Ph.D., PEGGY V. PHILLIPS, and
ELAINE D. SUN, Defendants, Case No. 2024-1219 (Del. Ch., November
26, 2024) is a verified class action complaint against Dynavax and
members of the Company's board of directors for declaratory relief
relating to the Company's violation of Delaware General Corporation
Law.
Under Delaware law the directors of a for-profit corporation are
bound by the fiduciary duties and standards that accompany that
form. As alleged in this complaint, the Company's currently
effective stockholder rights plan, adopted and maintained by
Defendants, has a provision which purports to eliminate the
liability of Dynavax directors for breaches of fiduciary duty in
violation of DGCL.
The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and all other
holders of the respective rights against Dynavax and members of its
Board, seeking a declaratory judgment that the relevant rights plan
provision violates Delaware law and public policy and is invalid.
Dynavax Technologies Corporation is a commercial stage
biopharmaceutical company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Blake A. Bennett, Esq.
COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A.
The Brandywine Building
1000 N. West St., Suite 1500
Wilmington, DE 19801
Telephone: (302) 984-3800
E-mail: bbennett@coochtaylor.com
- and -
Brian P. Murray, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
230 Park Ave., Suite 358
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 682-5340
E-mail: bmurray@glancylaw.com
- and -
Werner R. Kranenburg, Esq.
KRANENBURG
80-83 Long Lane London EC1A 9ET
United Kingdom
Telephone: (44) 20-3174-0365
E-mail: werner@kranenburgesq.com
EARL SCOTT: Duvall Must File Class Cert. Bid by Jan. 8, 2025
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN C. DUVALL, v. EARL D.
SCOTT, et al., Case No. 2:23-cv-04160-SRB (W.D. Mo.), the Hon.
Judge Stephen Bough entered a scheduling order as follows:
1. The case is scheduled for a bench trial, commencing at 8:30
a.m., on May 4, 2026, at the United States District
Courthouse
in Jefferson City, Missouri.
2. A final pretrial conference in this case will be held at 9:00
a.m., on April 1, 2026, at the United States District
Courthouse
in Jefferson City, Missouri.
3. The Plaintiff's motion for class certification shall be filed
on
or before Jan. 8, 2026.
The Defendants' class certification opposition shall be filed
on
or before Feb. 19, 2026.
The Plaintiff's class certification reply shall be filed on
or
before March 19, 2026.
4. All pretrial discovery authorized by the Federal Rules of
Civil
Procedure shall be completed on or before Oct. 15, 2025.
Each plaintiff shall designate any expert witnesses it
intends
to call at trial on or before Oct. 30, 2025.
5. All dispositive motions, except those under Rule 12(h)(2) or
3), shall be filed on or before January 8, 2026.
All dispositive motion oppositions shall be filed on or
before
Feb. 19, 2026.
All dispositive motion replies shall be filed on or before
March
19, 2026.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 9, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=wCrcrc at no extra
charge.[CC]
ELECTROLUX HOME: Faces Stern Suit Over Defective Refrigerators
--------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID STERN, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ELECTROLUX HOME PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-08204 (E.D.N.Y., November 26, 2024) is an action
for actual damages, equitable relief, including restitution,
injunctive relief, and disgorgement of profits, and all other
relief available on behalf of the Plaintiff and all
similarly-situated individuals and entities who own or have owned
refrigerators sold by the Defendant allegedly containing a defect.
The complaint asserts that the refrigerators are designed and
manufactured with a uniform and inherent design and/or
manufacturing defect that causes the product to have faulty shelves
and drawers which are very flimsy and repeatedly crack, break and
fall apart. Because of the defect, the refrigerators are deficient;
do not meet advertised standards and fail of their essential
purpose, says the suit.
Electrolux is a Delaware corporation, with its principal place of
business in Charlotte, North Carolina. Frigidaire is Electrolux's
largest brand in North America.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph LoPiccolo, Esq.
John N. Poulos, Esq.
Anthony Almeida, Esq.
POULOS LOPICCOLO, PC
1305 South Roller Rd.
Ocean, NJ 07712
Telephone: (732) 757-0165
E-mail: lopiccolo@pllawfirm.com
poulos@pllawfirm.com
almeida@pllawfirm.com
- and -
Bruce H. Nagel, Esq.
Randee M. Matloff, Esq.
NAGEL RICE, LLP
103 Eisenhower Parkway
Roseland, NJ 07068
Telephone: (973) 618-0400
E-mail: bnagel@nagelrice.com
rmatloff@nagelrice.com
ELEMENT 7 LLC: Lover Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against ELEMENT 7 LLC, et al.
The case is styled as Cydney Lover, individually, and on behalf of
others similarly situated v. ELEMENT 7 LLC, JOSH BLACK, AN
INDIVIDUAL, DOES 1 TO 25, INCLUSIVE Case No. CGC24620437 (Cal.
Super. Ct., San Francisco Cty., Dec. 9, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Other Non-Exempt Complaints."
Element 7 -- https://e7ca.com/ -- is California's local cannabis
retailer.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rana Ayazi, Esq.
AYAZI ABNEY APC
1801 Century Park East, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: 310-432-2854
ENFORMION LLC: Aufrichtig Files Suit in D. Colorado
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Enformion, LLC. The
case is styled as Meaghan Aufrichtig, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Enformion, LLC formerly known as:
Confi-Check, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-03405-DDD-MDB (D. Colo., Dec.
9, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Consumer Credit.
Enformion -- https://www.enformion.com/ -- is designed to meet the
advanced data and research needs of business and government
professionals.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick H. Peluso, Esq.
WOODROW & PELUSO, LLC
865 Albion Street, Suite 250
Denver, CO 80220
Phone: (720) 805-2008
Email: ppeluso@woodrowpeluso.com
EZ LENDER LLC: Scott Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against EZ Lender LLC. The
case is styled as Kivon Scott, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. EZ Lender LLC, Case No.
1:24-cv-05611-JPB (N.D. Ga., Dec. 6, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
E Z Lending -- https://www.ezlendingllc.com/ -- is a locally owned,
independent mortgage brokerage serving Virginia and Maryland
clients exclusively.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA
14 NE 1st Ave., Ste. 1205
Miami, FL 33132
Phone: (305) 479-2299
Fax: (786) 623-0915
Email: ashamis@sflinjuryattorneys.com
F C EQUITIES: Pardo Sues Over Discriminative Property
-----------------------------------------------------
Nigel Frank De La Torre Pardo, individually and on behalf of all
other similarly situated v. F C EQUITIES, LLC and FRITANGA FLORIDA
CITY INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-24779-JEM (S.D. Fla., Dec. 6, 2024), is
brought for injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation
expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act
("ADA") as a result of the Defendant's discrimination against the
individual Plaintiff by denying him access to, and full and equal
enjoyment of, the goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages and/or accommodations of the commercial property and
restaurant and bar business within the commercial property.
Although over 32 years has passed since the effective date of Title
III of the ADA, Defendant has yet to make its/their facilities
accessible to individuals with disabilities. The Plaintiff found
the commercial property and commercial restaurant business located
within the commercial property to be rife with ADA violations. The
Plaintiff encountered architectural barriers at the commercial
property and commercial restaurant business located within the
commercial property and wishes to continue his patronage and use of
the premises.
The Plaintiff has encountered architectural barriers that are in
violation of the ADA at the subject places of public accommodation.
The barriers to access at Defendant's commercial property and
commercial restaurant business have each denied or diminished
Plaintiff's ability to visit these places of public accommodation
and have endangered his safety in violation of the ADA. The
barriers to access have likewise posed a risk of injury(ies),
embarrassment, and discomfort to Plaintiff and others similarly
situated.
The Defendants have discriminated against the individual Plaintiff
by denying him access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the
goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or
accommodations of the commercial property, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair to ambulate.
F C EQUITIES, LLC, owns, operates and/or oversees the Commercial
Property.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony J. Perez, Esq.
ANTHONY J. PEREZ LAW GROUP, PLLC
7950 w. Flagler Street, Suite 104
Miami, FL 33144
Phone: (786) 361-9909
Facsimile: (786) 687-0445
Primary Email: ajp@ajperezlawgroup.com
Secondary Email: jr@ajperezlawgroup.com
FCA US LLC: Snowman Suit Transferred to D. Delaware
---------------------------------------------------
The case is styled as Mitchell Snowman, individually and on behalf
of all other similarly situated v. FCA US LLC, Case No.
3:24-cv-02126 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the
District of Delaware on Dec. 6, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:24-cv-01324-UNA to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated Contract Product Liability.
FCA US LLC -- https://fcagroup-me.com/ -- designs, engineers,
manufactures, and sells vehicles.[BN]
FROEDTERT HEALTH: Luz Wins Class Certification Bid
--------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NICHOLE LUTZ, v. FROEDTERT
HEALTH, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-00974-WED (E.D. Wis.), the Hon.
Judge William Duffin entered an order granting motion for class
certification.
The court finds that "the class is so numerous that joinder of all
members is impracticable," "there are questions of law or fact
common to the class," "the claims or defenses of the representative
parties are typical of the claims or defenses of the class," and
plaintiff Nichole Lutz "will fairly and adequately protect the
interests of the class."
The first subclass is defined as:
"All hourly, non-exempt employees employed by Froedtert who, for
the time period after Nov. 7, 2021, to the present, during any
workweek worked over 40 hours and received overtime pay at a
rate
lower than time and a half the regular rate earned for the
workweek."
The second subclass is defined as:
"All hourly, non-exempt employees employed by Froedtert who, for
the time period after Nov. 7, 2021, to the present, during any
workweek worked over 40 hours and also received pay for working
on
a holiday, in that same workweek, that was computed at an hourly
rate lower than time and a half the regular rate earned that
same
workweek."
Attorney Yingtao Ho is appointed as class counsel.
Class counsel is directed to provide the Notice of Class Action
Lawsuit by United States mail, electronic means, or other
appropriate means, to all class members who can be identified
through reasonable effort.
Froedtert is a health system that provides cost-effective health
care to residents in Wisconsin.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 9, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=CF32L8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
GENERAL MILLS: Basile Suit Removed to S.D. New York
---------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Deidre Basile, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. GENERAL MILLS SALES INC., Case No.
812324/2024E was removed from the Supreme Court of the State of New
York, County of Bronx, to the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on Dec. 6, 2024, and assigned Case
No. 1:24-cv-09329.
The Complaint asserts a single cause of action: violation of New
York General Business Law ("GBL"). The claim concerns the labeling
and packaging of a product manufactured by General Mills,
Gardetto's Special Request Garlic Rye Chips (the "Product"), and
Plaintiff's alleged purchase, application, use, and/or consumption
of the Product.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Adam R. Mandelsberg, Esq.
Gabriella M. Romanos Abihabib, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
1155 Avenue of the Americas, 22nd Floor
New York, NY 10036-2711
Phone: (212) 261-6867
Email: amandelsberg@perkinscoie.com
GOODRX INC: MNindys Balks at Illegal Price-Fixing Scheme
--------------------------------------------------------
MINNESOTA INDEPENDENT PHARMACISTS (MNindys), individually and on
behalf of a class of those similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GOODRX,
INC.; GOODRX HOLDINGS, INC.; CVS CAREMARK CORP.; EXPRESS SCRIPTS,
INC.; MEDIMPACT HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, INC.; and NAVITUS HEALTH
SOLUTIONS, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-10297 (C.D. Cal.,
November 27, 2024) is an antitrust class action to put a stop to
Defendants' illegal price-fixing scheme, which targets independent
pharmacies like Plaintiff's members.
According to the complaint, the Defendants, a generic-drug coupon
provider (GoodRx) and four leading pharmacy benefit managers, or
PBMs (Caremark, Express Scripts, MedImpact, and Navitus, are
ostensibly competitors for pharmacy reimbursements when patients
fill prescriptions for generic medications. But rather than
compete, GoodRx and the PBM Defendants agreed to artificially
suppress prescription drug reimbursement rates paid to independent
pharmacies, and to increase fees charged to pharmacies, on all
GoodRx-related transactions. This conspiracy has caused harm to
independent pharmacies throughout the United States.
The Defendants' collusive agreement to fix the price of pharmacy
reimbursements for generic medicine is per se illegal under the
federal antitrust laws. The Defendants may not accomplish this
forbidden price-fixing activity by passing their pricing
information through an algorithm -- especially not an algorithm
maintained and operated by a horizontal competitor, says the suit.
Plaintiff Minnesota Independent Pharmacists is a Minnesota
501(c)(4) nonprofit organization that educates patients, employers,
unions, and legislators on PBM practices and issues in Minnesota.
GoodRx, Inc. is a generic-drug coupon provider.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel L. Warshaw, Esq.
Bobby Pouya, Esq.
Naveed Abaie, Esq.
PEARSON WARSHAW, LLP
15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Telephone: (818) 788-8300
Facsimile: (818) 788-8104
E-mail: dwarshaw@pwfirm.com
bpouya@pwfirm.com
- and -
Heidi M. Silton, Esq.
David W. Asp, Esq.
Joseph C. Bourne, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-6900
Facsimile: (612) 339-0981
E-mail: hmsilton@locklaw.com
dwasp@locklaw.com
jcbourne@locklaw.com
HIGOODS INC: Herrera Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-------------------------------------------------------------
EDERY HERRERA, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HIGOODS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-09089 (S.D.N.Y., November 26, 2024) is a civil rights
action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://icosiest.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
September 13, 2024, in an attempt to purchase an Apricity Blue
3-Piece Bistro Rocking Chair Set from Defendant and to view the
information on the website, the Plaintiff 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.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
Defendant's website, 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.
Higoods, Inc. operates the website that sells outdoor furniture and
home décor products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
HOME COMFORT: Daniels Suit Removed to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Albert Daniels and Jacob Nails, individually,
and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly
situated v. HOME COMFORT USA HEATING, COOLING, PLUMBING &
ELECTRICAL, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; KEN STARR,
INC., a California corporation; APEX CALIFORNIA REGION HOLDCO, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive; Case No. 30-2024-01437782-CU-OE-CXC was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, to the
United States District Court for the Central District of California
on Dec. 9, 2024, and assigned Case No. 8:24-cv-02671.
The Plaintiff's Complaint brings claims on a class action basis,
alleging the following causes of action in Violation of California
Labor Codes for Unpaid Overtime; Unpaid Meal Period Premiums;
Unpaid Rest Period Premiums; Unpaid Minimum Wages; Final Wages not
Timely Paid; Non-Compliant Wage Statements; Unreimbursed Business
Expenses; and Violation of California Business & Professions
Code.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Jason E. Murtagh, Esq.
Mary R. Hackett, Esq.
Arielle A. Seidman, Esq.
BUCHANAN INGERSOLL & ROONEY LLP
600 West Broadway, Suite 1100
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: 619 239 8700
Fax: 619 702 3898
Email: jason.murtagh@bipc.com
mary.hackett@bipc.com
arielle.seidman@bipc.com
HUGO BOSS: Dalton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------
Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Hugo Boss Retail, Inc., Case No. 0:24-cv-04404 (D.
Minn., Dec. 6, 2024), is brought arising because Defendant's
Website (www.worldmarket.com) (the "Website" or "Defendant's
Website") is not fully and equally accessible to people who are
blind or who have low vision in violation of both the general
non-discriminatory mandate and the effective communication and
auxiliary aids and services requirements of the Americans with
Disabilities Act (the "ADA") and its implementing regulations. In
addition to her claim under the ADA, Plaintiff also asserts a
companion cause of action under the Minnesota Human Rights Act
(MHRA).
The Defendant owns, operates, and/or controls its Website and is
responsible for the policies, practices, and procedures concerning
the Website's development and maintenance. As a consequence of her
experience visiting Defendant's Website, including in the past
year, and from an investigation performed on her behalf, Plaintiff
found Defendant's Website has a number of digital barriers that
deny screen reader users like Plaintiff full and equal access to
important Website content--content Defendant makes available to its
sighted Website users.
Still, Plaintiff would like to, intends to, and will attempt to
access Defendant's Website in the future to browse, research, or
shop online and purchase the products and services that Defendant
offers. 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. The Plaintiff and the putative class
have been, and in the absence of injunctive relief will continue to
be, injured, and discriminated against by Defendant's failure to
provide its online Website content and services in a manner that is
compatible with screen reader technology, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is and has been legally blind.
The Defendant offers home furnishings and accessories for sale
including, but not limited to, holiday items, furniture, rugs,
pillows, décor, and more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
Jason Gustafson, Esq.
THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC
Jason Gustafson (#0403297)
222 South Ninth Street, Suite 1600
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Phone: (763) 515-6110
Email: chad@throndsetlaw.com
pat@throndsetlaw.com
jason@throndsetlaw.com
IRISNDT INC: Anandan Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------
Indra Anandan, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. IRISNDT INC., Case No. 4:24-cv-04839 (S.D. Tex., Dec.
10, 2024), is brought to recover unpaid overtime that is required
by the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").
During the time he worked for IRIS, the Plaintiff regularly worked
more than 40 hours per week. IRIS paid the Plaintiff overtime pay
(time and a half) for some of the hours that the Plaintiff worked
over 40 in some workweeks. On the other hand, IRIS did not pay the
Plaintiff overtime pay for many hours that he worked over 40 in
many workweeks. In addition, IRIS also did not pay the Plaintiff
ANY pay for many hours that he worked over 40 in a workweek.
The Defendant has a business plan that includes paying non-exempt
hourly employees the same hourly rate for all non-billable hours
worked, even those hours over 40 per workweek. The Defendant's
failure to pay the overtime premiums required by law allows it to
gain an unfair advantage over competitors who follow the law in
their employment practices. The Plaintiff is one of the workers
hired by Defendant as an hourly employee and not paid all the
overtime pay that he was owed, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff worked for IRIS as an inspector and safety
manager/instructor from August 2023 until June 2024.
IRIS is an Oklahoma corporation with its primary place of business
in Texas.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Josef F. Buenker, Esq.
THE BUENKER LAW FIRM
P.O. Box 10099
Houston, TX 77206
Phone: 713-868-3388
Facsimile: 713-683-9940
Email: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com
JACKSON LABORATORY: Seijas Suit Removed to E.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Emmalie Seijas, individually, and on behalf of
other members of the general public similarly situated and on
behalf of other aggrieved employees pursuant to the California
Private Attorneys General Act v. THE JACKSON LABORATORY, an unknown
business entity; THE JACKSON LABORATORY, WEST, a Maine corporation;
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 24CV020626 was removed
from the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of California
on Dec. 9, 2024, and assigned Case No. 2:24-at-01555.
The Complaint alleges eight causes of action for alleged violations
of the California Labor Codes for unpaid overtime; unpaid meal
period premiums; unpaid rest period premiums; unpaid minimum wages;
final wages not timely paid; untimely payment of wages during
employment; non-compliant wage statements; failure to keep
requisite records; unreimbursed business expenses; California
Business and Professions Code; and civil penalties under the
California Attorneys General Act of 2004.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Justin T. Curley, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
560 Mission Street, 31st Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105
Phone: (415) 397-2823
Facsimile: (415) 397-8549
Email: jcurley@seyfarth.com
- and -
Jeffrey A. Nordlander, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350
Sacramento, CA 95814-4428
Phone: (916) 448-0159
Facsimile: (916) 558-4839
Email: jnordlander@seyfarth.com
KIA AMERICA: Appeals Arbitration Bid Denial in Young Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
KIA AMERICA, INC., et al. are taking an appeal from a court order
denying their motion to compel arbitration in the lawsuit entitled
Ahmand Young, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Kia America, Inc., et al., Defendants, Case
No. 8:24-cv-00690-JVS-ADS, in the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff
brings this class action complaint against the Defendants for
violations of California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act,
California's Unfair Competition Law, for breach of express warranty
under California Law and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, for breach
of implied warranty under the Song-Beverly Consumer Warranty Act,
California Law, and the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, and for
fraudulent concealment/omission, and unjust enrichment.
On Aug. 12, 2024, the Defendants filed a motion to compel
arbitration, which Judge James V. Selna denied on Nov. 11, 2024.
The appellate case is captioned Young v. Kia America, Inc., et al.,
Case No. 24-7249, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit, filed on December 2, 2024.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Appellant's Mediation Questionnaire was due on December 9,
2024;
-- Appellant's Appeal Opening Brief is due on January 13, 2025;
and
-- Appellee's Appeal Answering Brief is due on February 10,
2025. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellee AHMAND YOUNG, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, is represented by:
Tarek Zohdy, Esq.
Cody Robert Padgett, Esq.
CAPSTONE LAW, APC
1875 Century Park East, Suite 1000
Los Angeles, CA 90067
- and -
Russell David Paul, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE, PC
1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Defendants-Appellants KIA AMERICA, INC., et al. are represented
by:
Amir Nassihi, Esq.
SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP
555 Mission Street, Suite 2300
San Francisco, CA 94105
KING CONTRACTING: Faces Mejia Wage-and-Hour Suit in E.D.N.Y.
------------------------------------------------------------
FRANKLIN VINICIO LASSO MEJIA, BRAYAN VINICIO CHARCO PACA, DEYBI
LARRI VERA TOMALA, DIOGENES ESTUARDO ZUMBANA ANDAGANA, FRANKLIN
RAUL MATAVACA TOAPANTA, JEFERSON ERNESTO GUEVARA VILLAROEL, JORDY
IVAN CANAR JIMENEZ, OSCAR HARVEY JIMENEZ BARBOSA, PACHA GAVILANES
KLEBER HERMEL, WILMER STALIN ZUMBANA ANDACHE, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. KING
CONTRACTING GROUP NY INC., PRINCE CONTRACTING NY, LLC, and RSC
GROUP NY INC. and BRETT STEINBERG and FRANCISCO TAVARES, as
individuals, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-08273 (E.D.N.Y., November
27, 2024) arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor
practices in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New
York Labor Law.
The Plaintiff asserts the Defendants' failure to pay minimum and
overtime wages, failure to pay wages for all hours worked, failure
to pay wages owed on a weekly basis in which his wages were earned,
failure to provide wage statements, and failure to furnish with a
written wage notice.
The Plaintiffs are former construction employees of Defendants who
performed work primarily at a job site located at 102 Middle Neck
Road, Great Neck, New York.
King Contracting Group NY Inc. is a general contractor in New
York.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Roman Avshalumov, Esq.
HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601
Kew Gardens, NY 11415
Telephone: (718) 263-9591
Facsimile: (718) 263-9598
KRAFT HEINZ: Velasco Suit Removed to N.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Maria Velasco, as an individual, and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. KRAFT HEINZ FOODS COMPANY, LLC,
a Pennsylvania limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, Case No. C24-02489 was removed from the Superior Court
of the State of California for the County of Contra Costa, to the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on Dec. 9, 2024, and assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-08840.
The Plaintiff's Complaint alleges the following nine causes of
action: Minimum Wage Violations; Failure to Pay All Overtime Wages;
Meal Period Violations; Rest Period Violations; Waiting Time
Penalties; Wage Statement Violations; Unfair Competition; Failure
to Reimburse for Necessary Business Expenses; and civil penalties
under the Private Attorneys General Act.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Aaron H. Cole, Esq.
Vi N. Applen, Esq.
Stacey M. Shim, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: 213-239-9800
Facsimile: 213-239-9045
Email: aaron.cole@ogletree.com
vi.applen@ogletree.com
stacey.shim@ogletree.com
LAKIN TIRE WEST: Delgado Suit Removed to C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Mellissa Marie Delgado, on behalf of herself and
current and former aggrieved employees v. LAKIN TIRE WEST, LLC, and
DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV14080 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los
Angeles, to the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on Dec. 9, 2024, and assigned Case No.
2:24-cv-10602.
The Complaint seeks unpaid wages and penalties related to
Defendant's alleged violations of the California Labor Code
including, Defendant's purported failure to pay wages for all hours
worked at minimum wage rate and the employees' overtime rate(s),
failure to authorize and permit all legally required and/or legally
compliant meal and rest breaks (including the payment of penalty
premiums at the regular rate of pay), failure to timely pay earned
wages at the separation of employment and related waiting time
penalties, failure to provide complete and accurate wage
statements, and restitution for violating California's Unfair
Competition Law (Business & Professions Code).[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Michael J. Nader, Esq.
Paul M. Smith, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2800
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-840-3150
Facsimile: 916-840-3159
Email: Michael.Nader@ogletree.com
paul.smith@ogletree.com
LCA-VISION INC: Carroll Sues Over Breach of Confidentiality
-----------------------------------------------------------
Artisha Carroll, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. LCA-VISION, Inc., also d/b/a LASIKPLUS, Case No.
1:24-cv-12691 (N.D. Ill., Dec. 10, 2024), is brought to recover
damages and restitution for violation of the Electronic
Communications Privacy Act ("ECPA") and negligence as a result of
the Defendants breach of duties of confidentiality and unlawfully
disclosed personally identifiable information.
When booking medical services online, patient privacy is crucial.
Patients expect, as they should, that their information will be
held in confidence and not shared with third parties without their
knowledge or consent. Moreover, information concerning an
individual's healthcare, including medical procedures, is protected
by state and federal law. Despite these protections and Defendant's
duty as a healthcare provider, Defendant aided, employed, agreed,
and conspired with Facebook4 to intercept communications sent and
received by Plaintiff and Class Members, including communications
containing protected medical information.
Unbeknownst to Plaintiff, Defendant assisted third parties with
intercepting sensitive information pertaining to her LASIK surgery
consultation. Pursuant to the systematic process described herein,
Defendant assisted Facebook with intercepting Plaintiff's
communications, including those that contained individually
identifiable health information. Defendant assisted these
interceptions without Plaintiff's knowledge, consent, or express
written authorization. As a consequence, Plaintiff has received
targeted advertisements on Facebook.
By failing to receive the requisite consent, Defendant breached its
duties of confidentiality and unlawfully disclosed Plaintiff's
personally identifiable information and protected health
information, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff booked a consultation for LASIK surgery through
Defendant's Website.
The Defendant is a healthcare provider for Laser-Assisted In Situ
Keratomileusis ("LASIK").[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sarah N. Westcot, Esq.
Stephen A. Beck, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2100
Miami, FL 33131
Phone: (305) 330-5512
Facsimile: (305) 676-9006
Email: swestcot@bursor.com
sbeck@bursor.com
LEAD GROUP: Aburto Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages
------------------------------------------------------
Abraham Aburto, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. THE LEAD GROUP LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-01585-WED (E.D.
Wis., Dec. 10, 2024), is brought pursuant to the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act (the "TCPA") as a result of the Defendant's
unsolicited text messaging.
To promote its goods and services, Defendant engages in unsolicited
text messaging and continues to text message consumers after they
have opted out of Defendant's text messages. Through this action,
Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt Defendant's unlawful
conduct, which has resulted in the invasion of privacy, harassment,
aggravation, and disruption of the daily life of thousands of
individuals. Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages on behalf of
Plaintiff and members of the Class, and any other available legal
or equitable remedies, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff received multiple text messages from the Defendant.
The Defendant is a corporation whose principal office is located in
Leawood, Kansas.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Eisenband, Esq.
EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
515 E Las Olas Blvd., Suite 120
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (954) 533-4092
Email: meisenband@eisenbandlaw.com
M. KHORDIPOUR INC: Agostini Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lunique Agostini, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. M. Khordipour, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-09258 (E.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 9, 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 services Stadium
Enterprises provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://www.estatediamondjewelry.com (hereinafter
"Estatediamondjewelry.com" or "the website"). Defendant's denial of
full and equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its
services offered, and in conjunction with its physical locations,
is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (the "ADA").
Because Defendant's website, Estatediamondjewelry.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 Stance's policies, practices, and procedures to 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, 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.
M. Khordipour provides to the public a website known as
Estatediamondjewelry.com which provides consumers with access to an
array of goods and services, including, the ability to view a
variety of antique and vintage rings, bracelets, earrings and
necklaces.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: +1 347-941-4715
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
MANSCAPED INC: Elyashiv Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Florida
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Manscaped, Inc. The
case is styled as Joshua Elyashiv, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Manscaped, Inc., Case No.
0:24-cv-62329-KMM (S.D. Fla., Dec. 10, 2024).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone
Equipment.
Manscaped LLC -- https://www.manscaped.com/ -- is a male grooming
company based in San Diego, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq.
Zane Charles Hedaya, Esq.
Faaris Kamal Uddin, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI, PLLC
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1700
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (754) 444-7539
Email: gerald@jibraellaw.com
zane@jibraellaw.com
faaris@jibraellaw.com
MARC SALKOVITZ: Corbin Suit Transferred to D. Delaware
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Christopher Corbin, Rich Seronick,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Marc
Salkovitz, Pam Salkovitz, Hilco Merchant Resources LLC, Case No.
1:23-cv-12807 was transferred from the United States District Court
for the District of Massachusetts, to the United States District
Court for the District of Delaware on Dec. 10, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:24-cv-01353-UNA to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Labor.
Hilco Merchant Resources provides analytical, advisory, asset
monetization, and capital investment services to the retail
sector.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven M. Cowley, Esq.
McKenna K. Heath, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
100 High Street, Suite 2400
Boston, MA 02110
Phone: 857-488-4200
Fax: 857-488-4201
Email: smcowley@duanemorris.com
mheath@duanemorris.com
MPC PROMOTIONS: Martinez Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PEDRO MARTINEZ, individually and as the representative of a class
of similarly situated persons, Plaintiff v. MPC PROMOTIONS, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-08255 (E.D.N.Y., November 27, 2024) is
a civil rights action against MPC for their failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate their website through
http//:www.Shopcaterpillar.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.
Plaintiff Martinez has made numerous attempts to complete a
purchase on Shopcaterpillar.com, most recently on October 13, 2024,
October 26, 2024, and November 14, 2024, but was unable to do so
independently because of the many access barriers on Defendant's
website. These access barriers have caused Shopcaterpillar.com to
be inaccessible to, and not independently usable by, blind and
visually-impaired persons. Amongst other access barriers
experienced, the Plaintiff was unable to make an online purchase of
the Cat(R) Snowdozer Sweater and the Bluetooth Cat Earbuds for
delivery to his home, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
MPC'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.
MPC Promotions, LLC operates the website the offers Caterpillar
branded products including apparel, scale models, accessories, home
décor, footwear, and related products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dan Shaked, Esq., Esq.
SHAKED LAW GROUP, P.C.
14 Harwood Court, Suite 415
Scarsdale, NY 10583
Telephone: (917) 373-9128
Email: ShakedLawGroup@gmail.com
OP PHARMACY: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Howey Says
-------------------------------------------------------
RYAN HOWEY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. OP PHARMACY, LLC a/k/a ONEPOINT PATIENT
CARE, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00695-DJH (W.D. Ky.,
November 27, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for its
failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other
similarly situated individuals' personally identifying information
and personal health information.
On or about August 8, 2024, the Defendant detected suspicious
activity on its computer network. The Defendant identified
customers whose personal information may be involved and determined
that the data at issue includes customer names, residence
information, medical record number, diagnosis and prescription
information.
The complaint alleges that Defendant disregarded the rights of
Plaintiff and Class Members by intentionally, willfully,
recklessly, or negligently failing to ensure that Defendant had
adequate and reasonable safeguards and measures in place to protect
the PII/PHI of Plaintiff and Class Members after that information
was transferred and entrusted to it in the regular course of
business.
The Plaintiff and Class Members seek to remedy these harms and
prevent any future data compromise on behalf of themselves and all
similarly situated persons whose PII/PHI was compromised and stolen
as a result of the data breach and who remain at risk due to
Defendant's inadequate data security practices.
OnePoint is a hospice-dedicated pharmacy and pharmacy benefits
manager with its principal place of business in Louisville,
Kentucky.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Leslie Pescia, Esq.
Tyler J. Bean, Esq.
SIRI GLIMSTAD LLP
101 North Seventh Street, #827
Louisville, KY 40202
Telephone: (772) 783-8463
E-mail: lpescia@sirillp.com
tbean@sirillp.com
- and -
Andrew W. Ferich, Esq.
AHDOOT & WOLFSON, PC
201 King of Prussia Road, Suite 650
Radnor, PA 19087
Telephone: (310) 474-9111
Facsimile: (310) 474-8585
E-mail: aferich@ahdootwolfson.com
- and -
Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A.
One West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 525-4100
E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com
PATRICK LABAT: Hambrick Files Suit in N.D. Georgia
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fulton County Sheriff
Patrick Labat, et al. The case is styled as Nkenegen Hambrick,
Shannon Jackson, on behalf of themselves and Others similarly
situated v. Fulton County Sheriff Patrick Labat, Fulton County
Chief Jailer John Jackson, Case No. 1:24-cv-05658-SEG-CCB (N.D.
Ga., Dec. 10, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Prison Condition for Prisoner Civil
Rights.
Sheriff Patrick "Pat" Labat serves as the 28th Sheriff of Fulton
County, Georgia overseeing a staff of 875 employees, and manages an
annual budget of more than $143 million.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Dexter Harper, Esq.
Michael D. Harper, P.C.
3017 Bolling Way, N.E., Suite 150
Atlanta, GA 30305
Phone: (404) 271-6618
Fax: (404) 600-2146
Email: mharper@mharperlaw.com
- and -
Patrick William Leed, Esq.
GRAY RUST ST. AMAND MOFFETT & BRIESKE, LLP
Salesforce Tower Atlanta
950 East Paces Ferry Rd., N.E., Suite 1700
Atlanta, GA 30326
Phone: (770) 424-8281
Email: pwleed@gmail.com
PRISMA ENTERTAINMENT: Vallaire Sues Over Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------
Cambria Vallaire, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. PRISMA ENTERTAINMENT, LLC, dba PLAN B
GENTLEMEN'S CLUB, a California corporation; FRANK GRUNDEL, an
individual; DOE MANAGERS 1- 3; and DOES 4-10, inclusive, Case No.
2:24-cv-10554 (C.D. Cal., Dec. 7, 2024), is brought against the
Defendants for damages due to Defendants evading the mandatory
minimum wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards
Act ("FLSA"), and illegally absconding with Plaintiff's tips.
These causes of action arise from Defendants' willful actions while
Plaintiff was employed by Defendants within the last three years
from the filing of the demand for arbitration. During her time
being employed by Defendants, Plaintiff was denied minimum wage
payments and denied overtime as part of Defendants' scheme to
classify Plaintiff and other dancers/entertainers as "independent
contractors."
The Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff's minimum wages for all
hours worked in violation of the FLSA. Furthermore, Defendants'
practice of failing to pay tipped employees pursuant to the FLSA's
minimum wage provision. As a result of Defendants' violations,
Plaintiff seeks to recover double damages for failure to pay
minimum wage, liquidated damages, interest, and attorneys' fees,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants and qualifies as an
"employee" of Defendants.
The Defendants operate an adult-oriented entertainment facility
located in Los Angeles, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John P. Kristensen (SBN 224132)
KRISTENSEN LAW GROUP
120 Santa Barbara St., Suite C9
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Phone: (805) 837-2000
Email: john@kristensen.law
QUEST CONSUMER: Da Silva Sues Over Private Health Info Disclosure
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MARIA OLIVEIRA DA SILVA, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. QUEST CONSUMER, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, Defendant, Case No. 2:24-cv-10791 (D.N.J., November
27, 2024) is a class action against the Defendant for
surreptitiously implementing technology on its website
QuestHealth.com that causes Plaintiff and other customers'
sensitive and private health information to be rerouted to a
third-party company called Tealium.
Through its website, QuestHealth.com, Quest offers consumers
at-home lab tests that do not require a doctor's referral. These
tests include those for STDs -- such as herpes, chlamydia, and
gonorrhea -- and for HIV, pregnancy, and ovarian reserve. Given the
sensitive nature of services on QuestHealth.com and its reputation
as a lab testing company, customers reasonably expect that their
communications with the website are only received by Quest.
However, Quest uses software that deliberately reroutes website
visitors' and customers' first-party data (the records that they
view and the personal health details they submit) to Tealium, says
the suit.
The Plaintiff and members of the putative class are Quest customers
whose personal health details were intercepted as alleged herein.
They were neither informed of nor consented to having highly
sensitive personal and private information rerouted to a
third-party in the manner set forth herein, the suit asserts.
Quest Consumer, Inc. is a brand name used by Quest Diagnostics
Inc., a clinical diagnostics company providing lab testing for a
significant portion of the U.S. population.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew A. Schiappa, Esq.
LOMURRO MUNSON, LLC
Monmouth Executive Center
4 Paragon Way, Suite 100
Freehold, NJ 07728
Telephone: (732) 414-0300
Facsimile: (732) 431-4043
E-mail: mschiappa@lomurrolaw.com
- and -
Michael Ovca, Esq.
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor
Chicago, IL 60654
Telephone: (312) 589-6370
Facsimile: (312) 589-6378
E-mail: movca@edelson.com
RADHA DONUT CORP: Cheli Sues Over Inaccessible Property
-------------------------------------------------------
Charlene Cheli, an individual, on her own behalf and on the behalf
of all other similarly situated v. RADHA DONUT CORP., a New Jersey
Corporation, Case No. 1:24-cv-11010 (D.N.J., Dec. 10, 2024), is
brought pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") and
the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination ("LAD") as a result of
the Defendant's inaccessible property.
The Plaintiff encounters architectural barriers at many of the
places that she visits. Seemingly trivial architectural features
such as cracked asphalt/concrete, access aisles, parking spaces,
curb ramps, and door handles are taken for granted by the
non-disabled but, when improperly designed or implemented, can be
arduous and dangerous to those who use wheelchairs and other
mobility devices.
The Plaintiff has visited the Property on several occasions over
the years, her last visit as a patron of the occurred on or about
September 14, 2024. The Plaintiff visited the Property as a bone
fide patron with the intent to avail herself of the goods and
services offered to the public within but found that the Property
contained several violations of the ADA.
The ADA has been law for over 30 years and the Property remains
non-compliant. Thus, the Plaintiff has actual notice and reasonable
grounds to believe that she will continue to be subjected to
discrimination by the Defendant, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a mobility impaired person.
RADHA DONUT CORP., operates a place of public accommodation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jon G. Shadinger Jr., Esq.
SHADINGER LAW, LLC
717 E. Elmer Street, Suite 7
Vineland, NJ 08360
Phone: (609) 319-5399
Email: js@shadingerlaw.com
RRCA ACCOUNTS: Koch Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
--------------------------------------------------------------
RICHARD KOCH, ANASTAZIA SCHULTZ, EDWARD BAILEY, BRITTANY HARDY,
STEPHANIE THAYER, JOHN THAYER, JAYNA RAMIREZ, and DIANE STUTZKE,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs v. RRCA ACCOUNTS MANAGEMENT, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:24-cv-50480 (N.D. Ill., November 26, 2024) is a class action
against RRCA for its failure to secure and safeguard approximately
115,837 individuals' personally identifying information and
personal health information, including Plaintiffs.
On or about June 6, 2024, an unauthorized third party gained access
to RRCA's network systems and obtained files containing the PII/PHI
of RRCA's clients' customers. As a result of RRCA's inadequate
security and breach of its duties and obligations, the data breach
occurred, and Plaintiffs' and Class members' PII/PHI was accessed
and disclosed. This action seeks to remedy these failings and their
consequences.
The Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all other Class
members, assert claims for negligence, unjust enrichment, and
violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business
Practices Act, and seek declaratory relief, injunctive relief,
monetary damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, equitable
relief, and all other relief authorized by law.
RRCA Accounts Management, Inc. is a debt collection agency that
operates along the Lincoln Highway between DeKalb, Illinois, and
Clinton, Iowa.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ben Barnow, Esq.
Anthony L. Parkhill, Esq.
Riley W. Prince, Esq.
Nicholas W. Blue, Esq.
BARNOW AND ASSOCIATES, P.C.
205 West Randolph Street, Suite 1630
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 621-2000
Facsimile: (312) 641-5504
E-mail: b.barnow@barnowlaw.com
aparkhill@barnowlaw.com
rprince@barnowlaw.com
nblue@barnowlaw.com
SAG-AFTRA HEALTH: Barr Sues Over Data Breach
--------------------------------------------
Steven Barr, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. SAG-AFTRA HEALTH PLAN, Case No. 2:24-cv-10642 (C.D.
Cal., Dec. 10, 2024), is brought arising out of a recent email
phishing attack against Defendant, which led to unauthorized third
parties accessing and stealing highly sensitive personal
information of Plaintiff and similarly situated Plan participants
(the "Data Breach").
During the regular course of conducting its business, Defendant
collects, stores, and transfers the PII of its participants
(collectively the "Class Members"). On September 18, 2024,
Defendant learned an employee's email account had been compromised
through a phishing scam. After engaging forensic experts, Defendant
learned that unauthorized third parties had accessed PII entrusted
to Defendant.
Despite knowing of the Data Breach since September 18, 2024,
Defendant did not send a Notice of Data Security Incident
("Notice") to individuals affected by the Data Breach until
December 2, 2024. Plaintiff was not notified of the Data breach
until he received the Notice on December 9, 2024, approximately 10
weeks after the Data Breach.
Because cyberattacks targeting large organizations are ubiquitous,
it was foreseeable that Defendant would be the target of a
cyberattack, and it should have taken appropriate precautions. The
Data Breach was a direct result of Defendant's failure to implement
adequate and reasonable cybersecurity procedures and protocols
necessary to protect PII from the foreseeable threat of a
cyberattack, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff entrusted his PII to Defendant in connection with his
enrollment and participation in the Plan.
The Defendant is a labor management trust that provides healthcare
coverage and benefits to members of the Screen Actors Guild and
American Federation of Television and Radio Artists unions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James F. Clapp, Esq.
Marita M. Lauinger, Esq.
CLAPP & LAUINGER LLP
701 Palomar Airport Road, Suite 300
Carlsbad, CA 92011
Phone: 760-209-6565 ext. 101
Fax: 760-209-6565
Email: jclapp@clapplegal.com
mlauinger@clapplegal.com
- and -
Edward J. Wynne, Esq.
George R. Nemiroff, Esq.
WYNNE LAW FIRM
80 E. Sir Francis Drake Blvd., Ste. 3G
Larkspur, CA 94939
Phone: 415-461-6400
Fax: 415-461-3900
Email: Ewynne@wynnelawfirm.com
Gnemiroff@wynnelawfirm.com
SALT & STONE INC: Murphy Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
James Murphy, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated v. SALT & STONE, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-09332 (S.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 7, 2024), is brought against the Defendants for its failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully
and equally accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website,
https://www.saltandstone.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. 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.
By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and
visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
SALT & STONE, INC., operates the Salt and Stone online retail
store, as well as the Salt and Stone interactive Website and
advertises, markets, and operates in the State of New York and
throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: dana@gottlieb.legal
michael@gottlieb.legal
jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
SHARON & CRESCENT: Charges Improper Overdraft Fees, Pais Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
SUZANNE DOS SANTOS PAIS, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SHARON & CRESCENT UNITED CREDIT
UNION, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-12954 (D. Mass., November 27,
2024) is an action brought by the Plaintiff, individually and on
behalf of all similarly situated consumers against the Defendant
arising from (1) SCUCU's routine practice of assessing more than
one non-sufficient funds fee or overdraft fee on the same
transaction, and (2) SCUCU's improper assessment and collection of
OD Fees on accounts that were never actually overdrawn.
According to the complaint, SCUCU misleadingly and deceptively
misrepresents the practices in its publicly available marketing
materials, including its own account contracts.
The Plaintiff seeks to end SCUCU's abusive and predatory practices
and force it to refund the improper charges. She asserts a claim
for breach of contract, including breach of the covenant of good
faith and fair dealing, and for violations of the Massachusetts
Consumer Protection Action, and seeks damages, restitution, and
injunctive relief.
Sharon & Crescent United Credit Union is a credit union with its
principal place of business located in Brockton,
Massachusetts.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ellen Rappaport Tanowitz, Esq.
TANOWITZ LAW OFFICE, P.C.
1340 Centre Street, Suite 103
Newton, MA 02459
Telephone: (617) 965-1130
E-mail: ellen@tanowitzlaw.com
- and -
David M. Berger, Esq.
GIBBS LAW GROUP LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 2100
Oakland, CA 94607
Telephone: (510) 350-9700
Facsimile: (510) 350-9701
E-mail: dmb@classlawgroup.com
- and -
Shawn K. Judge, Esq.
Mark H. Troutman, Esq.
GIBBS LAW GROUP LLP
1554 Polaris Parkway, Suite 325
Columbus, OH 43240
Telephone: (510) 350-9700
Facsimile: (510) 350-9701
E-mail: skj@classlawgroup.com
- and -
Jeffrey Kaliel, Esq.
Sophia Gold, Esq.
KALIEL GOLD PLLC
1100 14th Street NW, 4th Fl.
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 250-4783
E-mail: jkaliel@kalielpllc.com
sgold@kalielgold.com
SKINFIX INCORPORATED: Murphy Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-----------------------------------------------------------------
James Murphy, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated v. SKINFIX INCORPORATED, Case No. 1:24-cv-09331 (S.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 7, 2024), is brought against the Defendants for its failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully
and equally accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually impaired people.
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://skinfix.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. 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.
By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and
visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
SKINFIX INCORPORATED, operates the Skinfix online retail store, as
well as the Skinfix interactive Website and advertises, markets,
and operates in the State of New York and throughout the United
States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: dana@gottlieb.legal
michael@gottlieb.legal
jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
U.S. BANCORP: Opens Fake Bank Accounts, DeSilva Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------
ELIZABETH DESILVA and NILHARN DESILVA, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, v. U.S. BANCORP, d/b/a US Bank
and U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, d/b/a US Bank, Case No.
0:24-cv-04391-JWB-SGE (D. Minn., Dec. 5, 2024) alleges that the
Defendants have a routine practice of:
(a) opening bank accounts without the knowledge or consent of its
customers; and
(b) processing debits or deposits without Plaintiffs' knowledge
or
consent.
On March 14, 2024, without the knowledge or consent of the
Plaintiffs, the Defendants processed a deposit of $2,581.66 of
Plaintiff Elizabeth DeSilva's money into what the CFPB would refer
to as a fake account.
On March 25, 2024, without the knowledge or consent of the
Plaintiffs, Defendants processed a debit in the amount of $18.75
out of what the CFPB would refer to as one fake account and
processed a deposit in the amount of $18.75 into what the CFPB
would refer to as a second fake account.
The complaint contends that U.S. Bank's improper practices have
unjustly enriched U.S. Banks to the detriment of the Plaintiffs and
the Class Members and are a violation of the Minnesota Unfair and
Deceptive Trade Practices Act.
The Plaintiffs, individually and on behalf of Classes, seeks
damages, restitution, and public injunctive relief for Defendants'
violations.
U.S. Bancorp is the fifth largest commercial bank in the country
with over $28 billion in annual revenue and 18 million
customers.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Kate M. Baxter-Kauf, Esq.
Karen Hanson Riebel, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP
100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200
Minneapolis, MN 55401
Telephone: (612) 339-6900
Facsimile: (612) 339-0981
E-mail: kmbaxter-kauf@locklaw.com
khriebel@locklaw.com
- and -
Tiffany Marko Yiatras, Esq.
Francis J. "Casey" Flynn, Jr., Esq.
CONSUMER PROTECTION LEGAL, LLC
308 Hutchinson Road
Ellisville, MO 63011-2029
Telephone: (314) 541-0317
E-mail: tiffany@consumerprotectionlegal.com
casey@consumerprotectionlegal.com
UNITEDHEALTH GROUP: Valley Drugs Sues Over Illegal Reimbursements
-----------------------------------------------------------------
VALLEY DRUGS, INC., individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INCORPORATED,
OPTUM, INC., OPTUMRX, INC., AND OPTUMRX HOLDINGS, LLC, Defendants,
Case No. 3:24-cv-00366-DMB-RP (N.D. Miss., November 26, 2024) is an
action for Defendants' violation of Mississippi's Pharmacy Benefit
Prompt Pay Act concerning the reimbursement of prescription drug
claims.
According to the complaint, evidence of Optum's unlawful conduct
came to light on October 14, 2024, when the Mississippi Board of
Pharmacy released a report concerning its audit of Optum's 2022
claims. In that report, the Board found that, on the whole, "chain
drug stores were paid 19% less than affiliate pharmacies, while
independent pharmacies were paid 145% less than affiliate
pharmacies during the audit period.
Optum's favoring of its affiliates is in clear violation of
Mississippi's law, which explicitly states that "a pharmacy benefit
manager shall not reimburse a pharmacy or pharmacist in the state
an amount less than the amount that the pharmacy benefit manager
reimburses a pharmacy benefit manager affiliate for providing the
same pharmacist services."
Given this conduct, Plaintiff Valley Drugs, on behalf of itself and
the members of a class, seeks to hold Defendants responsible for
the illegally lowered reimbursements they were paid by Optum, the
suit contends.
Plaintiff Valley Drugs, Inc. is a community pharmacy in
Mississippi.
UnitedHealth Group Incorporated is an American multinational health
insurance and services company based in Minnetonka, Minnesota.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John W. Barrett, Esq.
Katherine Barrett Riley, Esq.
Sterling Aldridge, Esq.
BARRETT LAW GROUP, P.A.
404 Court Square N P.O. Box 927
Lexington, MS 39095
Telephone: (662) 834-2488
E-mail: dbarrett@barrettlawgroup.com
KBRiley@barrettlawgroup.com
saldridge@barrettlawgroup.com
- and -
Charles J. LaDuca, Esq.
Christian Hudson, Esq.
CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
2445 M Street, NW Suite 740
Washington, DC 20037
Telephone: (202) 789-3960
E-mail: charlesl@cuneolaw.com
christian@cuneolaw.com
UNIVERSALPEGASUS: Tannehill Files Suit in S.D. Texas
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against UniversalPegasus
International, LLC. The case is styled as Christopher Tannehill, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v.
UniversalPegasus International, LLC, Case No. 4:24-cv-04841 (S.D.
Tex., Dec. 10, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.
UniversalPegasus International -- https://universalpegasus.com/ --
is a leading engineering and project management firm that offers a
comprehensive range of services to clients across the globe.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Bruce W. Steckler, Esq.
STECKLER WAYNE & LOVE PLLC
12720 Hillcrest Road, Suite 1045
Dallas, TX 75230
Phone: (972) 387-4040
Fax: (972) 387-4041
Email: bruce@stecklerlaw.com
- and -
Jeffrey Ostrow, Esq.
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A.
One West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: (954) 525-4100
Fax: (954) 525-4300
Email: ostrow@kolawyers.com
VENEZUELA: Mazzaccone Files Suit for Breach of Contract
-------------------------------------------------------
MASSIMO MAZZACCONE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF
VENEZUELA, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-09114 (S.D.N.Y., November
27, 2024) is a proposed class action for breach of contract arising
from the Republic's failure to make certain contractually mandated
payments of principal and interest on certain of the Republic's
debt securities.
On or about December 1, 2003, the Republic issued $1,000,000,000
principal amount of 7.0% notes maturing on December 1, 2018,
referred here as the "AD26 Notes." These sovereign notes were
issued pursuant to a 2001 Fiscal Agency Agreement and are governed
by New York law and subject to the jurisdiction of this Court.
By its terms, this issuance has the maturity date, December 1,
2018, and semi-annual interest payment dates, June 1 and December
1. The Republic failed to repay principal on December 1, 2018 and
failed to make the semi-annual interest payment on December 1, 2017
on the AD26 Notes, and has failed to make accruing semi-annual
interest payments thereafter, says the suit.
For their relief, the Plaintiff and the other Class members seek
payment of the unpaid principal and the accrued and unpaid interest
on their securities, and interest thereon, as provided in the 2001
FAA and in the AD26 Notes themselves, under New York law.
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela is a foreign state as defined
in 28 U.S.C. Section 1603.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony J. Costantini, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
1540 Broadway
New York, NY 10036-4086
Telephone: (212) 692-1032
Facsimile: (212) 202-4715
E-mail: AJCostantini@duanemorris.com
VF OUTDOOR: Isakov Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
-----------------------------------------------------------
SIMON ISAKOV, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VF Outdoor, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-09094 (S.D.N.Y., November 27, 2024) is a civil rights
action against VF Outdoor for their failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate their website, https://www.timberland.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 November 11, 2024, the Plaintiff searched online for a brand
specializing in durable apparel designed for outdoor activities.
Thus, he discovered the Defendant's website and tried to explore
their offerings. However, he encountered many accessibility issues
while navigation. The main problem was that tabbing through the
interactive elements and links did not follow the page layout,
making it difficult for him to locate the "Add to Cart" button.
This, and other accessibility challenges prevented him from making
a purchase or finding more information about the store's locations.
These access barriers have caused Timberland.com to be inaccessible
to, and not independently usable by blind and visually-impaired
persons, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in VF
Outdoor's policies, practices, and procedures so that its 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.
VF Outdoor, LLC operates the website that offers clothing,
outerwear, and accessories designed for outdoor activities,
including boots, sneakers, sandals, slippers, jackets, vests,
sweaters, T-shirts, pants, bags, belts, wallets, hats, and
socks.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Asher Cohen, Esq.
ASHER COHEN PLLC
2377 56th Dr.,
Brooklyn, NY 11234
Telephone: (718) 914-9694
E-mail: acohen@ashercohenlaw.com
WREN LOGISTICS: Acosta Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------
Jorge Acosta, Darrell Taylor, Raydin Mateo and Jerry Colston, on
behalf of themselves and all other persons similarly situated v.
WREN LOGISTICS, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-08461 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 10,
2024), is brought to recover unpaid wages, liquidated damages,
statutory damages, pre-judgment interest, and attorneys' fees and
costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the New York
Labor Law and the supporting New York State Department of Labor
Regulations ("NYLL").
The Plaintiffs regularly worked more than 40 hours in a single
workweek, but Defendant failed to pay them and other similarly
situated persons at a rate of time and one-half for all hours
worked after 40 hours in a workweek. The Defendant failed to pay
Plaintiffs and other similarly situated former and current
employees premium overtime wages for all hours worked in excess of
forty hours per week in violation of the FLSA and NYLL, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiffs were employed by Defendant as drivers and helpers to
deliver fully assembled kitchen cabinets to the homes of its
customers.
The Defendant is a manufacturer and retailer of fitted
kitchens.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter A. Romero, Esq.
ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC
490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277
Hauppauge, NY 11788
Phone: (631) 257-5588
Email: Promero@RomeroLawNY.com
YIPPEE ENTERTAINMENT: Appeals Arbitration Bid Denial in Morrison
----------------------------------------------------------------
YIPPEE ENTERTAINMENT, INC. is taking an appeal from a court order
denying its motion to compel arbitration in the lawsuit entitled
Brittany Morrison, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Yippee Entertainment, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-00797-MMA-KSC, in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of California.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff
brings this class action complaint against the Defendant for
knowingly and intentionally disclosing its users' personally
identifiable information (PII) to unrelated third parties to
further its marketing and advertising objectives and increase
revenue, in violation of the Video Privacy Protection Act.
On July 17, 2024, the Defendant filed a motion to compel
arbitration, which Judge Michael M. Anello denied on Oct. 31, 2024.
The Court held that there is no enforceable arbitration agreement,
and the Court need not examine subsidiary questions of
arbitrability or whether, had such agreement existed, the Defendant
would have a right to enforce it.
The appellate case is captioned Morrison v. Yippee Entertainment,
Inc., Case No. 24-7235, in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit, filed on December 2, 2024.
The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case states that:
-- Appellant's Mediation Questionnaire was due on December 9,
2024;
-- Appellant's Appeal Opening Brief is due on January 13, 2025;
and
-- Appellee's Appeal Answering Brief is due on February 10,
2025. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellee BRITTANY MORRISON, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:
Lawrence Timothy Fisher, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, PA
1990 N. California Boulevard, Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Defendant-Appellant YIPPEE ENTERTAINMENT, INC. is represented by:
Rajiv Dharnidharka, Esq.
Jeanette T. Barzelay, Esq.
Guadalupe Raymond Laguna, Esq.
FOLEY & LARDNER, LLP
555 California Street, Suite 1700
San Francisco, CA 94104
ZOI FOODS: Faces Agnone Suit Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------
PASQUALE AGNONE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Zoi Foods Corp., Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-08202 (E.D.N.Y., November 26, 2024) is a civil rights
action against Zoi Foods for their failure to design, construct,
maintain, and operate their website, https://www.wmarketnyc.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 September 6, 2024, the Plaintiff searched online for grocery
stores nearby and came across the Defendant's website. When he
tried to review the products offered on the site, he encountered
accessibility errors that prevented him from easily navigating the
site and completing the purchase process. One of the main issues
was that after the Plaintiff added the desired products to the
cart, he could not access it because the Cart dialog did not
receive focus after the cart button was pressed. As a result, he
was unable to finalize his grocery shopping, which left him
frustrated and unable to proceed with his plans. These access
barriers have caused Wmarketnyc.com to be inaccessible to, and not
independently usable by blind and visually-impaired persons, the
suit alleges.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Zoi
Foods' policies, practices, and procedures so that its 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.
Zoi Foods Corp. operates the website that offers groceries,
including fresh produce, meats, seafood dairy products, and baked
goods.[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
*********
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 ***