/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/250109.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, January 9, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 7
Headlines
10 WEST: Appeals Denial of Bid for Initial OK of Lundeen Suit Deal
360TRAINING.COM INC: Discloses Viewing Info to FB, Cochenour Says
455 HOSPITALITY: Settlement Deal in Ocampo Gets Initial OK
4PATRIOTS LLC: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
ABC BREAD: Fernandez Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
ACCREDITATION COMMISSION: Plaintiffs Seek Initial OK of Settlement
ALBANY COUNTY, NY: Leto Balks at Taking of Property for Public Use
ALPINE TOWING: Moreira Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
ALTA RESOURCES: Fails to Protect Consumers' Info, Buscher Alleges
AMERICAN ADDICTION: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Cox Says
AMERICAN INTEGRATED: Faces Ruffin Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif.
ANITA SANDS: Lamborn Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct.
ANNA JAQUES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Leonard Says
ATHENS WOODWORKING: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Martin Says
AUDIO ADVICE INC: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
B.S.D. CAPITAL: Onisko & Scholz Sues Over Privacy Laws Violation
BANKFIRST FINANCIAL: Fenton Sues Over Unlawful Overdraft Fees
BLOOMSCAPE INC: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
BOOJA INC: Cantwell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
BRONXWORKS INC: Faces L.C. Class Action Suit in N.Y. Sup.
BROOKLYN CRAFT: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Layne Alleges
BYTE FEDERAL INC: Morris Files Suit in M.D. Florida
CAREER SYSTEMS: Crawford Files Employment Suit in Calif.
CELEBRATIONS SPEECH: Malloy Files Employment Suit in Calif.
CENTER FOR VEIN RESTORATION: Voron Files Suit in D. Maryland
CHEFS' WAREHOUSE: Removes Monzon Suit to C.D. Calif.
CLAY-PLATTE FAMILY: Taylor Files Personal Injury Suit in Mo.
CRITERION SUPPLY: Rojas Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
DIVIDEND SOLAR: Fails to Disclose Loan's Hidden Fee, Martinez Says
DNC TRAVEL: Mendoza Suit Removed From State Court to C.D. Cal.
EMPOWER SOLAR: Garcia Files Employment Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
ENTERPRISE FINANCIAL: Lowman Class Suit Removed to N.D. Tex.
FALFURRIAS MANAGEMENT: Bellyard Partners Files Suit in Georgia
FANDOM INC: Discloses Users' PII to Third Parties, Marquis Alleges
GLOBAL BLOOD: Jolly Files Suit Over Oxbryta Drug Recall
GOOGLE LLC: Daubert Bid Responses in Calhoun Extended to Jan. 13
GPS CAPITAL: Faces Murch Suit Over TCPA Violation
GRYPHON HEALTHCARE: Mendoza Files Consumer Credit Suit in Tex.
HALO COUNTRY: Foster Sues Over Non-ADA Compliant Facilities
HATCHITT TAX: Kalamay Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages
JEFFERSON PLAZA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ortega Alleges
JOANNA VARGAS: Cantwell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
LEXYL TRAVEL: Faces Suit Over Deceitful Negative Billing Practices
LOWES HOME: Wright Files Fraud Suit in W.D.N.C.
MADE TRADE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Alleges
MDL 3094: Wolfe v. Novo Nordisk Joins Diabetes Meds Liability Row
MONIQUE LHUILLIER: Cantwell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
MONSANTO COMPANY: Bergsma Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Evans Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Keesecker Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Kennedy Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Meyer Suit Transferred to N.D. California
NESPRESSO USA: Removes Jones Suit to E.D. Calif.
NOMATIC INC: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Jones Says
PJ OHIO: Fails to Pay Delivery Drivers' Wages, Baker Alleges
PREMIUM MERCHANT: Cardenas Sues Over Unsolicited Calls, Messages
REMEX INC: Hertzberg Files FDCPA Suit D.N.J.
SABRE GLBL: Castilleja Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
SEATGEEK INC: Carbonell Files Suit Over Hidden Junk Fees
SOLSPRING MARKET: Knowles Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
SREE HOTELS: Court Defers Decision on Motion to Dismiss Sikes Suit
TAYLOR FARMS: Sena Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Calif.
TEMBO GROUP: Licea CIPA Suit Removed From State Court to C.D. Cal.
TRU LIFE: Faces Smith Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages
WAYNE M. LOPEZ: Laccinole Balks at Illegal Consumer Report Access
XTO ENERGY: Loses Bid to Compel Arbitration in Salvatora Suit
[*] CLASS ACTION MONEY & ETHICS CONFERENCE: Register Now!
*********
10 WEST: Appeals Denial of Bid for Initial OK of Lundeen Suit Deal
------------------------------------------------------------------
10 WEST FERRY STREET OPERATIONS LLC, doing business as Logan Inn,
is taking an appeal from a court order denying its motion for
reconsideration in the lawsuit entitled Graham Lundeen,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. 10 West Ferry Street Operations LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 2-24-cv-00109, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania.
As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, this class
action lawsuit is brought against the Defendant for alleged
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania
Minimum Wage Act.
On Aug. 20, 2024, the Plaintiff filed an unopposed motion for
preliminary approval of class action settlement, which Judge Joshua
D. Wolson denied on Oct. 9, 2024.
On Oct. 23, 2024, the Defendant filed a motion for reconsideration
of the Oct. 9 Order, which Judge Wolson denied with respect to
reconsideration and granted with respect to certification of an
interlocutory appeal on Oct. 30, 2024.
The appellate case is captioned Graham Lundeen v. 10 West Ferry
Street Operations LLC, Case No. 24-3375, in the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit, filed on December 26, 2024. [BN]
Plaintiff-Appellee GRAHAM LUNDEEN, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, is represented by:
Michelle Tolodziecki, Esq.
Peter Winebrake, Esq.
WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO
715 Twinning Road, Suite 211
Dresher, PA 19025
Telephone: (215) 884-2491
Defendant-Appellant 10 WEST FERRY STREET OPERATIONS LLC, doing
business as Logan Inn, is represented by:
David J. Freedman, Esq.
Hannah M. Schroer, Esq.
BARLEY SNYDER
126 E. King Street
Lancaster, PA 17602
Telephone: (717) 299-5201
(717) 399-1510
360TRAINING.COM INC: Discloses Viewing Info to FB, Cochenour Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
KAREN COCHENOUR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. 360TRAINING.COM, INC., D/B/A MORTGAGE EDUCATORS AND
COMPLIANCE, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-00007 (WD, Jan. 2, 2025) is a
class action complaint to redress the Defendant's practices of
knowingly disclosing the Plaintiff's and its other customers'
identities and the titles of the prerecorded video materials that
they purchased to Meta Platforms, Inc., formerly known as Facebook,
Inc., in violation of the federal Video Privacy Protection Act.
Over the past two years, the Defendant has systematically
transmitted (and continues to transmit today) its customers'
personally identifying video viewing information to Meta using a
snippet of programming code called the "Meta Pixel," which the
Defendant chose to install and configure on its
www.mortgageeducators.com. The information Defendant disclosed (and
continues to disclose) to Meta via the Meta Pixel includes the
customer's Facebook ID ("FID") and the title of the specific
prerecorded video material that each of its customers purchased on
its Website. The Defendant disclosed and continues to disclose its
customers' Private Viewing Information to Meta without asking for
or obtaining their consent to these practices, says the suit.
The Plaintiff is a consumer of the video products and services
offered on Defendant's www.mortgageeducators.com website. Including
on or about December 7, 2023, the Plaintiff purchased prerecorded
video material from Defendant's www.mortgageeducators.com website
by requesting and paying for such material, providing her name,
email address, and home address for delivery of such material.
The Defendant operates and maintains the Website
www.mortgageeducators.com, where it sells various types of
pre-recorded videos.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Elliot O. Jackson, Esq.
HEDIN LLP
1395 Brickell Ave., Suite 610
Miami, FL 33131-3302
Telephone: (305) 357-2107
Facsimile: (305) 200-8801
E-mail: ejackson@hedinllp.com
455 HOSPITALITY: Settlement Deal in Ocampo Gets Initial OK
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Carlos Ocampo,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. 455
Hospitality LLC, et al., Case No. 7:14-cv-09614-KMK (S.D.N.Y.), the
Hon. Judge Victoria Reznik entered an order as follows:
-- The Court provisionally certifies, for settlement purposes only
(and for no other purpose and with no other effect upon this or
any action, including no effect upon this action should the
Settlement Agreement not ultimately be approved), the following
Rule 23 class:
"The Named Plaintiffs, Opt-In Plaintiffs, and all individuals
employed at the Doubletree by Hilton Hotel located at 455 S.
Broadway, Tarrytown, New York 10591 at any time from Dec. 4,
2008,
until Mar. 18, 2016, who held a nonexempt position within the
Food
and Beverage Department of the Housekeeping Department
including
positions as banquet server, waiter/waitress, host/hostess,
dishwasher, sous chef, cook, room service attendant, dining
room
attendant, banquet houseman, housekeeper, room attendant, and
housekeeping houseman."
-- The Court appoints, for settlement purposes only, the Named
Plaintiffs to represent the Class.
-- For settlement purposes only, Plaintiffs meet all the
requirements
for class certification under Rules 23(a) and (b)(3) of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
-- The Court grants the motion for preliminary approval of the
class
action settlement agreement.
-- For settlement purposes only, the Court appoints Smith, Buss &
Jacobs, LLP, and Vincent Volino, PLLC, as Class Counsel
because
they meet all the requirements under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23(g).
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 30, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=L5EAf6 at no extra
charge.[CC]
4PATRIOTS LLC: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Fernandez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. 4PATRIOTS, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-10024 (S.D.N.Y., Dec.
31, 2024), is brought against Defendant for the failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate Defendant's website,
www.4patriots.com (the "Website"), to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's website is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore,
Defendant is in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff now seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which Defendant ensures the delivery of
such goods throughout the United States, including New York
State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
ABC BREAD: Fernandez Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Sebastian Fernandez, individually and on behalf of all other
similarly situated individuals v. ABC BREAD COMPANY LLC and BRIAN
MAGEE, and NICK AMBROSECCHIO, individually, Case No. 3:24-cv-02055
(D. Conn., Dec. 31, 2024), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA") and the Connecticut Minimum Wage Act
(collectively "CMWA") as a result of failure to pay overtime
wages.
The Defendants have engaged in a widespread pattern and practice of
violating the provisions of the FLSA by failing to pay the
Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees and former
employees in accordance with the provisions of the FLSA.
the Plaintiff customarily and regularly worked between 50 and 60
hours per week. the Plaintiff was not required to "clock in" and
"clock out." the Plaintiff was only paid for the first 40 hours he
worked. the Plaintiff never received paystubs in the course of his
employment with Defendants. In September 2024, the Plaintiff
requested a pay stub from his employer to provide a hospital. In
response, Defendants provided a "pay stub" that only listed the
total payment amount without withholdings, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by ABC Bread as a delivery driver.
ABC Bread Company LLC is a Connecticut corporation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jacob Aronauer, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JACOB ARONAUER
250 Broadway, Suite 600
New York, NY 10007
Phone: (212) 323-6980
Email: jaronauer@aronauerlaw.com
ACCREDITATION COMMISSION: Plaintiffs Seek Initial OK of Settlement
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit re: Accreditation Commission for
Education in Nursing Data Breach Litigation, Case No.
1:23-cv-03337-LMM (N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter
an order:
-- granting preliminary approval of the proposed Settlement;
-- preliminarily certifying a class for purposes of Settlement;
-- appointing Plaintiffs as the Class Representatives;
-- appointing William B. Federman and Jessica A. Wilkes of
Federman & Sherwood as Lead Class Counsel and David
Hungeling
of Hungeling Rubenfield Law is Liaison Counsel;
-- approving the Parties’ proposed form and method of giving
notice of the pendency of this action and the Settlement to
the Settlement Class;
-- directing notice be given to the Settlement Class;
-- scheduling a hearing at which time the Court will consider
the
request for final approval of the Settlement and request for
attorneys' fees and expenses; and
-- granting such other and further relief as the Court deems
proper.
On July 27, 2023, Plaintiff Amanda Dry filed her Complaint against
ACEN.
On Aug. 1, 2023, Plaintiff Christin Fowler filed a related case
against ACEN.
On Aug. 14, 2023, this Court ordered the related cases
consolidated. The Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Complaint on Nov.
3, 2023.
The Plaintiffs request certification, for settlement purposes only,
a nationwide class of 11,980 individuals, defined as follows:
"All residents of the United States who were sent notice that
their personal information was accessed, stolen, or compromised
because of the Data Breach."
The Settlement Class specifically excludes: (i) Defendants and
its
respective officers and directors; (ii) all members of the
Settlement Class who timely and validly request exclusion from
the
Settlement Class; (iii) the Judge and Magistrate Judge assigned
to
evaluate the fairness of this settlement; and (iv) any other
Person found by a court of competent jurisdiction to be guilty
under criminal law of initiating, causing, aiding, or abetting
the
Data Incident or who pleads nolo contendere to any such
charge.
The Settlement negotiated on behalf of the Settlement Class
establishes a $820,000.00 Settlement Fund, which will be used to
pay for Administration and Notice Costs; Attorneys' Fees approved
by the Court; Expenses approved by the Court; and all approved
Claims.
Of the Settlement Fund, five hundred and twenty-five thousand
dollars ($525,000.00) is non-reversionary. Two hundred and
ninety-five thousand dollars ($295,000.00) is reversionary.
ACEN supports the interests of nursing education, nursing practice,
and the public by providing specialized accreditation for all
levels of nursing education and transition-to-practice programs.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Dec. 31, 2024, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Opi5hS at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
William B. Federman, Esq.
Jessica A. Wilkes, Esq.
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
10205 N. Pennsylvania Avenue
Oklahoma City, OK 73120
Telephone: (405) 235-1560
E-mail: wbf@federmanlaw.com
jaw@federmanlaw.com
ALBANY COUNTY, NY: Leto Balks at Taking of Property for Public Use
------------------------------------------------------------------
VICTORIA LETO and MARY ANN LEAVITT, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. ALBANY COUNTY, New
York, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-01571-FJS-MJK (N.D.N.Y., December 23,
2024) seeks relief from New York governmental taxing entities'
practice of unconstitutionally taking Plaintiffs' and Class
members' property for public use without providing just
compensation.
After Albany County and the Defendant Class foreclose on a property
for taxes owed, they sell, retain, or transfer the property. But
rather than keep the amount owed in taxes and reimburse the
taxpayer the remaining balance, Albany County and the Defendant
Class members unconstitutionally take all the property including
the "Surplus Proceeds," meaning the full amount of the sale
proceeds or the full equity of the property above and beyond what
was owed in taxes and associated fees, says the suit.
The Plaintiffs assert claims under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 for
violation of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution prohibiting takings without just compensation;
violation of the Takings Clause, Article I, Section 7 of the New
York Constitution; for a declaratory judgment that Article 11 of
New York's Real Property Tax Law, and more specifically Real
Property Tax Law Section 1136 violated the Fifth, Eighth, and
Fourteenth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution; for unjust
enrichment, money had and received, an equitable accounting, and
inverse condemnation, together with prejudgment interest, costs,
and attorneys' fees.
The Plaintiffs owned properties in Albany County, New York.
Albany County is a municipal corporation organized and existing
pursuant to the laws of the State of New York.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
George F. Carpinello, Esq.
Jenna Smith, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
30 South Pearl Street, 11th Floor
Albany, NY 12207
Telephone: (518) 434-0600
Facsimile: (518) 434-0665
E-mail: gcarpinello@bsfllp.com
jsmith@bsfllp.com
- and -
Jack Wilson, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP
333 Main Street
Armonk, NY 10504
Telephone: (914) 749-8200
Facsimile: (914) 749-8300
E-mail: jwilson@bsfllp.com
- and -
David H. Fink, Esq.
Nathan J. Fink, Esq.
FINK BRESSACK
38500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 350
Bloomfield Hills, MI 48304
Telephone: (248) 971-2500
E-mail: dfink@finkbressack.com
nfink@finkbressack.com
- and -
Jonathan D. Pincus, Esq.
JONATHAN D. PINCUS, ESQ.
10 Whitestone Ln
Rochester, NY 14618-4118
Telephone: (585) 732-8515
E-mail: jdp@jdpincus.com
- and -
Patrick J. Perotti, Esq.
Nicole T. Fiorelli, Esq.
Frank A. Bartela, Esq.
Patrick J. Brickman, Esq.
Shmuel S. Kleinman, Esq.
DWORKEN & BERNSTEIN CO., L.P.A.
60 South Park Place
Painesville, OH 44077
Telephone: (440) 352-3391
Facsimile: (440) 352-3469
E-mail: pperotti@dworkenlaw.com
nfiorelli@dworkenlaw.com
fbartela@dworkenlaw.com
pbrickman@dworkenlaw.com
skleinman@dworkenlaw.com
- and -
Gregory P. Hansel, Esq.
Shana M. Solomon, Esq.
Elizabeth F. Quinby, Esq.
Michael D. Hanify, Esq.
Kat Mail, Esq.
PRETI FLAHERTY BELIVEAU & PACHIOS,
CHARTERED, LLP
One City Center P.O. Box 9546
Portland, ME 04112
Telephone: (207)791-3000
E-mail: ghansel@preti.com
ssolomon@preti.com
equinby@preti.com
mhanify@preti.com
kmail@preti.com
- and -
Joseph C. Kohn, Esq.
William E. Hoese, Esq.
Zahra R. Dean, Esq.
Elias A. Kohn, Esq.
KOHN SWIFT & GRAF, P.C.
1600 Market Street, Suite 2500
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 238-1700
E-mail: jkohn@kohnswift.com
whoese@kohnswift.com
zdean@kohnswift.com
ekohn@kohnswift.com
- and -
Ronald P. Friedberg, Esq.
MEYERS, ROMAN, FRIEDBERG & LEWIS
28601 Chagrin Blvd., Suite 500
Cleveland, OH 44122
Telephone: (216) 831-0042
Facsimile: (216) 831-0542
E-mail: rfriedberg@meyersroman.com
ALPINE TOWING: Moreira Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Alpine Towing, Inc.,
et al. The case is styled as Jose J. Moreira, Rene Michael Perez,
Juan Carlos Corvalan, Aliander Castellanos Borroto, and all others
similarly situate v. Alpine Towing, Inc., Larry J. Saravia, Case
No. 2024-024806-CA-01 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Miami-Dade Cty., Dec. 31,
2024).
Alpine Towing, Inc. -- https://alpinetowinginc.com/ -- has New
Flatbed and Standard Trucks, Low-Clearance Trucks and a Dolly
Service is available.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jamie H. Zidell, Esq.
J.H. Zidell, P.A.
300 71st Street, Suite 605
Miami Beach, Florida 33141
Phone: (305) 865-6766
Email: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM
ALTA RESOURCES: Fails to Protect Consumers' Info, Buscher Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LORI BUSCHER, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ALTA RESOURCES CORP., Case No. 1:25-cv-00004 (E.D.
Wisc., Jan. 2, 2025) alleges that Alta Resources failed to fulfill
its obligation, as unauthorized cybercriminals breached Alta
Resources's information systems and databases and stole vast
quantities of private information belonging to Alta Resources's
customers, employees, and marketing targets, including Plaintiff
and Class members.
On Nov. 17, 2024, Alta Resources experienced a data breach incident
in which unauthorized cybercriminals accessed its information
systems and databases and accessed Private Information belonging to
Plaintiff and Class members (the "Data Breach"). Alta Resources
discovered this unauthorized access on November 18, 2024.
Subsequent investigation by Alta Resources determined that the
unauthorized actors were able to access Private Information
concerning Plaintiff and Class members.
On Dec. 20, 2024, Alta Resources sent a notice to individuals whose
information was accessed in the Data Breach. Because Alta Resources
stored and handled Plaintiff's and Class members' highly-sensitive
Private Information, it had a duty and obligation to safeguard this
information and prevent unauthorized third parties from accessing
this data. The Data Breach occurred because Alta Resources failed
to implement reasonable security protections to safeguard its
information systems and databases. Moreover, before the Data Breach
occurred, Alta Resources failed to inform the public that its data
security practices were deficient and inadequate, the suit
alleges.
The Plaintiff was an employee of Alta Resources.
Alta R provides shipping, sales, customer management, fundraising,
and marketing services for companies based in the United States and
Latin America. As part of its normal operations, Alta Resources
collects, maintains, and stores large volumes of Private
Information belonging to its current and former customers,
employees, and marketing targets.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel O. Herrera, Esq.
Nickolas J. Hagman, Esq.
Nabihah Maqbool, Esq.
CAFFERTY CLOBES MERIWETHER
& SPRENGEL LLP
135 S. LaSalle, Suite 3210
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 782-4880
Facsimile: (312) 782-4485
E-mail: dherrera@caffertyclobes.com
nhagman@caffertyclobes.com
AMERICAN ADDICTION: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Cox Says
-----------------------------------------------------------
COURTNEY COX, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. AMERICAN ADDICTION CENTERS, INC., Case No.
3:25-cv-00007 (M.D. Tenn., Jan. 2, 2025) is a class action against
thre Defendant for its failure to properly secure and safeguard
Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive personally identifiable
information and personal health information, which, as a result,
has been disclosed to cybercriminals and posted on the dark web.
In or around September 2024, the notorious criminal ransomware
group known as Rhysida accessed Defendant's network systems and
stole Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII and PHI stored therein,
including their names, dates of birth, addresses, phone numbers,
Social Security numbers, medical record numbers, health insurance
information, and other sensitive data (Private Information),
causing widespread injuries to Plaintiff and Class Members (the
"Data Breach").
According to its website, the Defendant is "the leading provider
for addiction treatment nationwide," providing substance use and
mental health treatment to patients across the country.
The Defendant could not perform its operations or provide the
services it does without collecting Plaintiff's and Class Members'
Private Information and retains it for many years, at least, even
after the patient-provider relationship has ended.
The Defendant breached these duties owed to Plaintiff and Class
Members by failing to safeguard their Private Information that it
collected and maintained, including by failing to implement
industry standards for data security to protect against
cyberattacks, which failures llowed criminal hackers to access and
steal hundreds of thousands of current and former patients' Private
Information from Defendant's care, the suit asserts.
The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former patients of
Defendant who, as a condition and in exchange for receiving
services from Defendant, were and are required to entrust Defendant
with highly sensitive Private Information, including their names,
addresses, contact information, Social Security numbers, medical
information, health insurance information, and other sensitive
data.
The Defendant is a healthcare and addiction treatment provider
furnishing inpatient and other services related to mental health
and substance use issues to patients throughout the United
States.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alexandra M. Honeycutt, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
Knoxville, TN 37929
Telephone: (865)-247-0080
E-mail: ahoneycutt@milberg.com
- and -
Jeff Ostrow, Esq.
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW
FERGUSON WEISELBERG GILBERT
One West Las Olas Blvd, Suite 500
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 525-4100
E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com
AMERICAN INTEGRATED: Faces Ruffin Wage-and-Hour Suit in Calif.
--------------------------------------------------------------
LOUIS RUFFIN, an individual; on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AMERICAN INTEGRATED SERVICES,
INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 24STCV28800 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty.,
October 31, 2024) arises from the Defendants' alleged violations of
various provisions of the California Labor Code, relevant orders of
the Industrial Welfare Commission, and the California Business &
Professions Code.
According to the complaint, the Defendants required Plaintiff and
the employees in the Class to work off the clock and failed to
record accurate time worked by these employees, failed to pay them
at the appropriate rates for all hours worked, failed to pay all
wages due and owing at termination or resignation, and provided
Plaintiff and the Class members with inaccurate wage statements
that prevented them from learning of these unlawful pay practices.
The Defendants also failed to provide Plaintiff and the Class with
lawful meal and rest periods, as employees were required to remain
under Defendants' control and were not provided with the
opportunity to take full uninterrupted and duty-free rest periods
and meal breaks, says the suit.
The Plaintiff and the Class members worked as hourly, non-exempt
employees for Defendants, including as environmental cleanup
workers and in similar and related positions pertaining to
providing environmental cleanup services to Defendants' customers
at cleanup sites throughout California.
American Integrated Services, Inc. is a California corporation that
provides turnkey environmental construction services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Emil Davtyan, Esq.
David Yeremian, Esq.
Alvin B. Lindsay, Esq.
Jean Hopkins Power, Esq.
D.LAW, INC.
450 N. Brand Blvd. Suite 840
Glendale, CA 91203
Telephone: (818) 962-6465
Facsimile: (818) 962-6469
E-mail: emil@d.law
d.yeremian@d.law
a.lindsay@d.law
j.power@d.law
ANITA SANDS: Lamborn Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct.
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Anita Sands, et al.
The case is styled as Amy Lamborn, Denise Alexander, and others
similarly situated v. Anita Sands, Dmitri Shklovsky, Enrico
Gaglioti, Khosla Ventures SPAC Sponsor II LLC, Khosla Ventures SPAC
Sponsor Services LLC, Khosla Ventures, LLC, Michael Doyle, Nextdoor
Holdings, Inc., Nextdoor, Inc., Peter Buckland, Samir Kaul, Sarah
Friar, SK SPAC Services, LLC, Vinod Khosla, VK Services, LLC, Case
No. 2024-1100-LWW (Del. Chancery Ct., Oct. 28, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Breach of Fiduciary Duties".[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stephen E Jenkins, Esq.
Phone: (302) 654-1888
Fax: (302) 654-2067
- and -
Tiffany Geyer Lydon, Esq.
ASHBY & GEDDES
PO Box 1150
Wilmington, DE 19899
Phone: (302) 654-1888
Email: tlydon@ashbygeddes.com
ANNA JAQUES: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Leonard Says
---------------------------------------------------------
PRESTON LEONARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. ANNA JAQUES HOSPITAL and BETH ISRAEL LAHEY
HEALTH, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:24-cv-13178 (D. Mass.,
December 23, 2024) is a class action against the Defendants for
their failure to secure and safeguard Plaintiff and other similarly
situated individuals' personally identifiable information and
personal health information that varies by individual.
On December 25, 2023, AJH identified suspicious activity on its
network. Its investigation determined that its network was subject
to a data security event, resulting in the access, exposure and
acquisition of files containing approximately 316,342 persons' PII
and PHI.
AJH, as well as its parent health system BILH, owed a duty to
Plaintiff and Class members to implement and maintain reasonable
and adequate security measures to secure, protect, and safeguard
their PII/PHI against unauthorized access and disclosure. But the
Defendant breached that duty by, among other things, failing to
implement and maintain reasonable security procedures and practices
to protect Plaintiff and other patients' PII/PHI from unauthorized
access and disclosure, says the suit.
The Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all other Class
members, asserts claims for negligence, breach of fiduciary duty,
breach of implied contract, and unjust enrichment. The Plaintiff
seeks declaratory relief, injunctive relief, monetary damages,
statutory damages, punitive damages, equitable relief, and all
other relief authorized by law.
Anna Jaques Hospital is a multi-location hospital that offers
services to the Merrimack Valley, North Shore, and Southern New
Hampshire areas.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sean K. Collins, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF SEAN K. COLLINS
184 High Street, Suite 503
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (855) 693-9256
Facsimile: (617) 227-2843
E-mail: skc@seankcollinslaw.com
- and -
Gary E. Mason, Esq.
Lisa A. White, Esq.
MASON LLP
5335 Wisconsin Avenue, NW, Suite 640
Washington, DC 20015
Telephone: (202) 429-2290
E-mail: gmason@masonllp.com
lwhite@masonllp.com
ATHENS WOODWORKING: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Martin Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
DAMIAN MARTIN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. ATHENS WOODWORKING, INC., D/B/A GOTHIC CABINET CRAFT,
Case No. 1:25-cv-00014 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 2, 2025) alleges that the
Defendant failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate
Defendant’s website, www.gothiccabinetcraft.com, to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired people.
The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant's denial of full and
equal access to the website, and therefore denial of the goods and
services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights
under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Accordingly, the Defendant's website is not equally accessible to
blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore, Defendant is in
violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff now 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.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which the Defendant ensures the delivery
of such goods throughout the United States, including New York
State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
AUDIO ADVICE INC: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Fernandez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. AUDIO ADVICE, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-10044 (S.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 31, 2024), is brought against Defendant for the failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate Defendant's website,
www.audioadvice.com (the "Website"), to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's website is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore,
Defendant is in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff now seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which Defendant ensures the delivery of
such goods throughout the United States, including New York
State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
B.S.D. CAPITAL: Onisko & Scholz Sues Over Privacy Laws Violation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Onisko & Scholz, LLP, Paul Scholz, and Cindy Schoelen, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. B.S.D. CAPITAL,
INC. DBA LENDISTRY, Case No. 24STCV28081 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 28, 2024), is brought against the Defendants
breach of contract as a result of the Defendants violation of
applicable privacy laws.
On April 25, 2023, the Defendant entered into a contract with the
Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development for the
administration of a statewide grant program to offset certain
payroll expenses of an estimated 17,685 California small businesses
and nonprofits affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.
This public contract contained various provisions intended to
benefit the thousands of small businesses, nonprofits, and
individuals who comprise the putative class, including without
limitation clauses requiring Lendistry to abide by applicable
privacy laws related to the protection of the putative class
members’ confidential business data and other sensitive
information.
In administering these programs, Lendistry’s heavy reliance on
third-party artificial intelligence (“AI”), third-party
advanced machine learning (“AML”), and other third-party
software has violated applicable privacy laws embedded in its state
contract by, among other things, harvesting and using class
members’ confidential business data, personal information,
behavioral data, and biometric data without adequate disclosure or
consent and, in the case of some categories of data, without any
disclosure or consent at all.
Some of these systems track, record, and transmit class member
behavior and data even after they log out of Lendistry’s services
or switch devices. For these and other reasons discussed herein,
Lendistry has breached its contract, which Plaintiffs, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, seeks to remedy on a
class-wide basis, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff Onisko & Schulz LLP (“O&S”) is a business located
in Los Angeles County.
B.S.D. Capital, Inc., does business under the name “Lendistry"
which is a California citizen with its principal place of business
in Los Angeles County.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J.R. Howell, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF J.R. HOWELL
2219 Main Street, Suite 436
Santa Monica, CA 90405
Phone: (323) 897-8656
Email: jr@lawofficejrhowell.com
BANKFIRST FINANCIAL: Fenton Sues Over Unlawful Overdraft Fees
-------------------------------------------------------------
Christina Fenton, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. BANKFIRST FINANCIAL SERVICES, Case No.
1:24-cv-00225-SA-DAS (N.D. Miss., Dec. 31, 2024), is brought
against Defendant over the improper assessment and collection of
overdraft fees ("OD Fees") on debit card transactions that were
authorized on sufficient funds, the improper assessment and
collections of multiple fees on a single item, and violation of
Regulation E of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act.
The Defendant's customers have been injured by the Bank's improper
practices to the tune of millions of dollars bilked from their
accounts in violation of Defendant's contractual commitments. The
Plaintiff seeks to end Defendant's abusive and predatory practices
and force it to refund all of these improper charges.
The Plaintiff asserts a claim for breach of contract, including
breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and seeks
damages, restitution, and injunctive relief. Further, Plaintiff
alleges that Defendant is unjustly enriched by these wrongful
practices.
The Plaintiff also alleges that because Defendant provided
inaccurate and untruthful overdraft information to Plaintiff and
the Classes regarding its overdraft practices, Defendant violated
Regulation E of the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff has maintained a checking account with Defendant.
BankFirst Financial Services is a Mississippi bank.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Winston S. Hudson
JENNINGS & EARLEY PLLC
500 President Clinton Ave, Suite 110
Little Rock, AR 72201
Phone: (601) 270-0197
Email: winston@jefirm.com
BLOOMSCAPE INC: Fernandez Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
--------------------------------------------------------------
Felipe Fernandez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. BLOOMSCAPE, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-10027 (S.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 31, 2024), is brought against Defendant for the failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate Defendant's website,
www.bloomscape.com (the "Website"), to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's website is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore,
Defendant is in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff now seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
BOOJA INC: Cantwell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
--------------------------------------------------------
Lisa Cantwell, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. BOOJA, INC. D/B/A OTTE, Case No. 1:24-cv-08922
(E.D.N.Y., Dec. 31, 2024), is brought against Defendant for the
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate Defendant's
website, www.otteny.com (the "Website"), to be fully accessible to
and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's website is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore,
Defendant is in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff now seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which Defendant ensures the delivery of
such goods throughout the United States, including New York
State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
BRONXWORKS INC: Faces L.C. Class Action Suit in N.Y. Sup.
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against BronxWorks, Inc. The case is
captioned as L.C. a minor, by and through their guardian, CHRISTINE
RAMIREZ, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
vs. BronxWorks, Inc., Case No. 817893/2024E (N.Y. Sup., Bronx Cty.,
November 7, 2024).
The case arises from tort-related claims.
BronxWorks, Inc. is a community-based organization in New
York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN
100 Garden City Plz Ste 500
Garden City, NY 11530-3207
The Defendant is represented by:
POLSINELLI PC
900 W 48th Pl Ste 900
Kansas City, MO 64112-1899
BROOKLYN CRAFT: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Layne Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
DALE LAYNE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. BROOKLYN CRAFT PRODUCTIONS, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00021
(E.D.N.Y., Jan. 2, 2025) alleges that the Defendant failed to
design, construct, maintain, and operate the Defendant's website,
www.brooklyncraftcompany.com, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.
The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant's denial of full and
equal access to the Website, and therefore denial of the goods and
services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights
under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer. The Plaintiff uses the terms "blind" or
"visually-impaired" as Plaintiff's central visual acuity with
correction is less than or equal to 20/200. Based on a 2020 U.S.
Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1 million people in the
United States are visually impaired1
, including 2.0 million who are blind. According a 2016 report
published by the National Federation of the Blind, 2016 report,
approximately 418,500 visually impaired persons live in the State
of New York.
The Plaintiff now 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.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which Defendant ensures the delivery of
such goods throughout the United States, including New York State.
The Defendant's Website offers products and services for online
sale and general delivery to the public. The Website offers
features which ought to allow users to browse for items, access
navigation bar descriptions, inquire about pricing, and avail
consumers of the ability to peruse the numerous items offered for
sale.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Rozenberg, Esq.
STEINSAK SLEGAL
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: mrozenberg@steinsakslegal.com
BYTE FEDERAL INC: Morris Files Suit in M.D. Florida
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Byte Federal, Inc.
The case is styled as Nelson Morris, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Byte Federal, Inc., Case No.
8:24-cv-03015 (M.D. Fla., Dec. 31, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor
Vehicle.
Byte Federal -- https://www.bytefederal.com/ -- is the 8th largest
Bitcoin ATM network in the US and actively expanding.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mariya Weekes, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
201 Sevilla Avenue, 2nd Floor
Coral Gables, FL 33134
Phone: (954) 647-1866
Email: mweekes@milberg.com
CAREER SYSTEMS: Crawford Files Employment Suit in Calif.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Career Systems Development
Corporation. The case is styled as GLORIA CRAWFORD, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated v. CAREER SYSTEMS
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, Case No.
24CV022776 (Calif. Super., Sacramento Cty., November 7, 2024).
The suit is brought over employment-related claims.
A case management conference is scheduled for August 15, 2025
before Hon. Christopher E. Krueger.
Career Systems Development Corporation offers free residential
education and job training program for young adults.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James Treglio, Esq.
POTTER HANDY, LLP
100 Pine St., Ste 1250
San Francisco, CA 94111-5235
Telephone: (858) 375-7385
Facsimile: (888) 422-5191
CELEBRATIONS SPEECH: Malloy Files Employment Suit in Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against CELEBRATIONS SPEECH GROUP,
INC. The case is captioned as ASHLEY MALLOY, an individual and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. CELEBRATIONS SPEECH
GROUP, INC., a California corporation, Case No. C24-03007 (Cal.
Super., Contra Costa Cty., November 7, 2024).
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged employment law
violation.
The suit is assigned to Judge Charles S. Treat.
A case management conference is schedule for March 12, 2025.
Celebrations Speech Group, Inc. provides speech and language
therapy services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Bijan Mohseni, Esq.
BIBIYAN LAW GROUP
1460 Westwood Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Telephone: (310) 438-5555
CENTER FOR VEIN RESTORATION: Voron Files Suit in D. Maryland
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against CENTER FOR VEIN
RESTORATION (MD), LLC. The case is styled as Barbara Voron,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
CENTER FOR VEIN RESTORATION (MD), LLC, Case No. 8:24-cv-03790-DLB
(D. Md., Dec. 31, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Tort/Non-Motor
Vehicle.
Center for Vein Restoration -- https://www.centerforvein.com/ -- is
nationally recognized as the leader in the treatment of varicose
veins and spider veins.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas A. Pacheco, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
900 W. Morgan Street
Raleigh, NC 27603
Phone: (212) 946-9305
Fax: (865) 522-0049
Email: tpacheco@milberg.com
CHEFS' WAREHOUSE: Removes Monzon Suit to C.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------
The Defendant in the case of FRANCISCO ROBLEDI FUENTES MONZON,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. THE CHEFS' WAREHOUSE, INC.; THE CHEFS' WAREHOUSE WEST
COAST, LLC; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, filed a
notice to remove the lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State
of California, County of Los Angeles (Case No. 24STCV31273) to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Dec.
31, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:24-cv-11224 to the proceeding.
The case is assigned to Judge Christina A. Snyder and referred to
Magistrate Karen L. Stevenson.
The Chefs' Warehouse, Inc. operates as a premier distributor of
specialty food products in the United States. The Company focused
on serving the specific needs of chefs who own and operate
restaurants, fine dining establishments, country clubs, hotels,
caterers, culinary schools, and specialty food stores. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Michele J. Beilke, Esq.
Julia Y. Trankiem, Esq.
Alexander W. Simon, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
601 South Figueroa Street | Suite 3300
Los Angeles, CA 90017-5793
Telephone: (213) 270-9768
Facsimile: (213) 270-9601
Email: mbeilke@seyfarth.com
jtrankiem@seyfarth.com
asimon@seyfarth.com
CLAY-PLATTE FAMILY: Taylor Files Personal Injury Suit in Mo.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Clay-Platte Family Medicine
Clinic, P.C., et al. The case is styled as Rachel Taylor, et al.,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Clay-Platte Family Medicine Clinic, P.C. et al., Case No.
4:24-cv-00716-BP (W.D. Mo., October 31, 2024).
The case arises from Plaintiff's personal injury claims against the
Defendants.
The case is assigned to Chief District Judge Beth Phillips.
Clay-Platte Family Medicine Clinic provides personal care to
patients throughout the Kansas City area at their Northland office
location.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Domenica Russo, Esq.
ONE US BANK PLAZA
Ste 1950
St. Louis, MO 63101
Telephone: (314) 314-9384
E-mail: drusso@peifferwolf.com
- and -
Brandon Wise, Esq.
PEIFFER WOLF CARR KANE CONWAY & WISE LLP
One US Bank Plaza, Suite 1950
St Louis, MO 63101
Telephone: (314) 833-4827
E-mail: bwise@pwcklegal.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jason K. Winslow, Esq.
GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI LLP
211 N. Broadway, Suite 2150
St. Louis, MO 63102
Telephone: (618) 304-4180
E-mail: jwinslow@grsm.com
CRITERION SUPPLY: Rojas Sues Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Luis Rojas, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. CRITERION SUPPLY, INC., a corporation; and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive, Case No. 24STCV28137 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los
Angeles Cty., Oct. 28, 2024), is brought against Defendant for
California Labor Code violations and unfair business practices
stemming from Defendants’ failure to pay for all hours worked
(minimum, straight time, and overtime wages), failure to provide
meal periods, failure to authorize and permit rest periods, failure
to timely pay final wages, failure to furnish accurate wage
statements, and failure to indemnify employees for expenditures.
The Defendants paid Plaintiff an hourly wage and classified him as
non-exempt from overtime. Defendants typically scheduled Plaintiff
to work at least five days in a workweek and at least eight hours
per day, but Plaintiff regularly worked more than eight hours in a
workday and/or more than 40 hours in a workweek. Throughout
Plaintiff’s employment, Defendants failed to pay for all hours
worked (including minimum, straight time, and overtime wages),
failed to provide Plaintiff with legally compliant meal periods,
failed to authorize and permit Plaintiff to take rest periods,
failed to timely pay all final wages to Plaintiff when Defendants
terminated his employment, failed to furnish accurate wage
statements to Plaintiff, and failed to indemnify Plaintiff for
expenditures, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff worked for Defendants in Los Angeles County,
California as an hourly paid, non-exempt employee from July 2023 to
October 2024.
The Defendants own/owned and operate/operated an industry,
business, and establishment within the State of California,
including Los Angeles County.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Justin F. Marquez, Esq.
Arrash T. Fattahi, Esq.
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone: (213) 381-9988
Facsimile: (213) 381-9989
Email: justin.marquez@wilshirelawfirm.com
arrash.fattahi@wilshirelawfirm.com
DIVIDEND SOLAR: Fails to Disclose Loan's Hidden Fee, Martinez Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
STACY MARTINEZ v. DIVIDEND SOLAR FINANCE, LLC, Case No.
7:24-cv-01206-FL (E.D.N.C., Dec. 31, 2024) is a class action
alleging that the Defendant violated the Truth in Lending Act and
state consumer protection laws by failing to disclose the existence
of a hidden fee it retained as part of the financing of consumer
loans for residential solar panel systems.
These solar panel systems are frequently marketed to consumers at
their homes by door-to-door salespeople. These salespeople pitch
the purchase, installation, and financing of Systems. The sales
pitch has three economic components: lowering energy costs,
reducing income taxes through government subsidy, and borrowing
cheaply from friendly lenders. This sales model is highly
profitable -- but also illegal. This is because, while the quoted
interest rates appear attractive, they conceal a large upfront fee
charged by Dividend and secretly added to the stated price of the
System. The hidden fee is never disclosed to the consumer, the
lawsuit asserts.
Thus, the amount financed, purportedly just for the purchase and
installation of the equipment, is over 30 percent more than the
actual cash purchase and installation price. Dividend retains the
difference between the loan amount and the amount paid to the
installer for the Systems as an undisclosed fee. This scheme raises
the effective cost of borrowing to predatory levels. The practical
result of the scheme is that its victims are tricked into financing
a hidden fee that is neither disclosed nor disbursed by Dividend.
The victims are forced to pay monthly principal and interest to
Dividend on the undisbursed amount, alleges the lawsuit.
Plaintiff Stacy Martinez is an adult resident of Columbus County,
North Carolina.
Dividend is a finance company specializing in consumer loans for
residential solar panel systems with its principal place of
business in San Francisco County, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric Richardson, Esq.
ER LAW
106 N. Elm Street, Suite 100
Greensboro, NC 27401
Telephone: (336) 904-9000
Facsimile: (336) 579-9531
E-mail: eric@erlaw-nc.com
- and -
Brad Ponder, Esq.
PONDER LEGAL GROUP
3221 M Street, NW, Upper Floor
Washington, DC 20007
Telephone: (888) 201-0305
Facsimile: (202) 988-2135
E-mail: brad@ponderlegalgroup.com
- and -
Luke Montgomery, Esq.
MONTGOMERY LAW FIRM, LLC
2226 1st Avenue South, Unit 105
Birmingham, AL 35233
Telephone: (205) 201-0303
Facsimile: (205) 288-9431
E-mail: luke@montgomeryponder.com
DNC TRAVEL: Mendoza Suit Removed From State Court to C.D. Cal.
--------------------------------------------------------------
HAYDEE MENDOZA and JAMAI SIMMONS, on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated v. DNC TRAVEL HOSPITALITY SVCS, an entity
of unknown form; DELAWARE NORTH, an entity of unknown form;
DELAWARE NORTH COMPANIES TRAVEL HOSPITALITY SERVICES, INC., a
Delaware corporation; DELAWARE NORTH COMPANIES, INCORPORATED, a
Delaware Corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No.
24STCV30675, was removed from Los Angeles County Superior Court to
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California on Dec. 31, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-11233 to the
proceeding.
The complaint asserts these causes of action:
(1) failure To Pay Minimum Wages;
(2) failure To Pay Wages and Overtime Under Labor Code section
510;
(3) meal-Period Liability Under Labor Code section 226.7;
(4) rest-Break Liability Under Labor Code section 226.7;
(5) failure to Pay Vacation Wages; and
(6) failure to Comply with Labor Code sections 245 et seq. and
246.
DNC TRAVEL HOSPITALITY SVCS is a hospitality and food service
management company.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Jon D. Meer, Esq.
Bethany A. Pelliconi, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500
Los Angeles, CA 90067-3021
Telephone: (310) 277-7200
Facsimile: (310) 201-5219
E-mail: jmeer@seyfarth.com
bpelliconi@seyfarth.com
EMPOWER SOLAR: Garcia Files Employment Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Empower Solar, Inc. The case
is captioned Marco Garcia, an individual, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Empower Solar, Inc., a California
Corporation, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2024-0015590 (Calif. Super., San
Joaquin Cty., November 7, 2024).
The case is brought over Defendant's alleged employment law
violation.
A case management conference is scheduled for May 6, 2025 before
Judge Robert T. Waters.
Empower Solar, Inc. develops, engineers, installs, and services
solar and battery systems for residential and commercial
clients.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Elkin, Esq.
ENTERPRISE FINANCIAL: Lowman Class Suit Removed to N.D. Tex.
------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Richard Lowman, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Enterprise Financial Group, Inc.,
Case No. DC-24-17176, was removed from the Texas 193rd Judicial
District Court of Dallas County to the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas on October 31, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Texas assigned Case
No. 3:24-cv-02752-L to the proceeding.
The lawsuit arises from personal injury claims and is assigned to
Judge Sam A. Lindsay.
Enterprise Financial Group, Inc. provides financial services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William B Federman, Esq.
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
212 W Spring Valley Road
Richardson, TX 75081
Telephone: (214) 696-1100
Facsimile: (214) 740-0112
E-mail: wbf@federmanlaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
David Carter Babb, Esq.
GORDON & REES LLP - DALLAS
2200 Ross Ave., Suite 3700
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 231-4460
E-mail: dbabb@grsm.com
FALFURRIAS MANAGEMENT: Bellyard Partners Files Suit in Georgia
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against FALFURRIAS MANAGEMENT
PARTNERS LP. The case is styled as BELLYARD PARTNERS, LLC, on
behalf of itself and all others similarly situated v. FALFURRIAS
MANAGEMENT PARTNERS LP d/b/a FALFURRIAS CAPITAL PARTNERS, and SLUSS
+ PADGETT INC., Case No. 24CV013883 (Ga. Super., Fulton Cty.,
October 31, 2024).
The civil case is assigned to Judge Paige Reese Whitaker.
FALFURRIAS MANAGEMENT PARTNERS LP provides investment advisory
services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Steffan T. Keeton, Esq.
THE KEETON FIRM LLC
100 S Commons, Ste. 102
Pittsburgh, PA 15212
FANDOM INC: Discloses Users' PII to Third Parties, Marquis Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------------
Rudolph Marquis III, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Fandom, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-10041
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 31, 2024) alleges that the Defendant knowingly and
intentionally discloses its users' personally identifiable
information -- including a record of every video viewed by the user
or audiovisual content purchased -- to unauthorized third parties
without first complying with the Video Privacy Protection Act.
Mr. Marquis is a citizen of New York, who resides in Bronx, New
York. The Plaintiff purchased a game containing cinematic cutscenes
from Defendant's Website within the last two years of filing of the
Complaint.
Throughout Plaintiff's interactions with Defendant's Website, the
Plaintiff maintained and used Plaintiff's Facebook account from the
same browser Plaintiff used to purchase the video game from the
Website, which contained cinematic cutscenes.
Accordingly, the Defendant caused Plaintiff Rudolph Marquis III's
video game purchase to be sent along with Plaintiff’s personally
identifiable information to Facebook and upon information and
belief, other third parties, without the Plaintiff's knowledge or
consent each time the Plaintiff requested and viewed video content
and video games sold through the Website, says the suit.
The Plaintiff contends that he never consented, agreed, nor
permitted Defendant to disclose his PII and viewing information to
Facebook or other third parties and certainly did not do so for
purposes violative of the VPPA.
Fandom owns and operates online and mobile applications ("Apps"),
including fanatical.com. Through its Website and Apps, the
Defendant sells and/or delivers audiovisual materials, such as
video games containing cinematic cutscenes.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adrian Gucovschi, Esq.
Nathaniel Haim Sari, Esq.
GUCOVSCHI ROZENSHTEYN, PLLC.
140 Broadway, FL 46
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 884-4230
Facsimile: (212) 884-4230
E-Mail: adrian@gr-firm.com
ben@gr-firm.com
nsari@gr-firm.com
GLOBAL BLOOD: Jolly Files Suit Over Oxbryta Drug Recall
-------------------------------------------------------
RICKY JOLLY, AMANDA WINBUSH, DARRYL WEEKLY and ANTONIO JOHNSON,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated Plaintiffs
v. GLOBAL BLOOD THERAPEUTICS, INC. and PFIZER, INC. Defendants,
Case No. 3:24-cv-09345 (N.D. Cal., December 23, 2024) is an action
for damages related to Defendants' alleged wrongful conduct in
connection with the development, design, testing, manufacturing,
labeling, packaging, promoting, advertising, marketing,
distribution, and selling of Oxbryta, a prescription medication
used to treat sickle cell disease.
On September 25, 2024, the Defendants announced that it was
voluntarily withdrawing all lots of Oxbryta, in all markets where
it is approved. The decision came after data showed an imbalance in
Vaso-occlusive crises (VOCs), a complication of the disease and
fatal events that required further assessment.
According to the complaint, the Defendants knew or should have
known for decades that Oxbryta, when administered and prescribed as
intended, can cause or substantially contribute to VOCs,
infections, stroke, and even death. For purposes of inducing
consumers to purchase Oxbryta, Defendants: (a) affirmatively
misrepresented the most important and material facts directly to
consumers regarding the safety of Oxbryta; and/or (b) misbranded
Oxbryta; and/or (c) fraudulently concealed from and/or failed to
disclose to consumers material facts regarding the safety of
Oxbryta, says the suit.
The Plaintiffs filed this litigation on behalf of themselves and
all consumers in the United States who purchased Oxbryta to hold
Defendants to account for their fraud, and to recover as damages
the money they spent as a result of that fraud. The Plaintiffs also
seek to enjoin Defendants from future violations of California's
consumer protection statutes, relief oriented to and for the
benefit of the general public.
Global Blood Therapeutics is a biopharmaceutical company with its
principal executive office in South San Francisco, California.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Marcus J. Bradley, Esq.
Kiley Lynn Grombacher, Esq.
BRADLEY/GROMBACHER, LLP
31365 Oak Crest Dr., Suite 240
Westlake Village, CA 91361
Telephone: (805) 270-7100
Facsimile: (805) 270-7589
E-mail: mbradley@bradleygrombacher.com
kgrombacher@bradleygrombacher.com
GOOGLE LLC: Daubert Bid Responses in Calhoun Extended to Jan. 13
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PATRICK CALHOUN, et al.,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v.
GOOGLE LLC, Case No. 4:20-cv-05146-YGR (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge
Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers entered an order extending the following
deadlines: \
-- The deadline for Google to file responses to the Daubert
Motions
is extended from Jan. 3, 2025 to Jan. 13, 2025.
-- The deadline for Plaintiffs to file their replies in support of
their Daubert Motions is extended from Jan. 10, 2025 to Jan.
24,
2025.
-- The deadline for the Omnibus Sealing Motion regarding the
Class
Certification Motion and Daubert Motions shall be Jan. 31,
2025.
-- The deadline for Parties to email any hearing demonstratives to
opposing counsel and chambers shall be Sunday, Feb. 2, 2025 at
5:00 p.m. Pacific time.
Google operates as a global technology company specializes in
internet related services and products.
A copy of the Court's order dated Dec. 27, 2024, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=s2Llbz at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Lesley E. Weaver, Esq.
Anne K. Davis, Esq.
Gregory S. Mullens, Esq.
Joshua D. Samra, Esq.
BLEICHMAR FONTI & AULD LLP
1330 Broadway, Suite 630
Oakland, CA 94612
Telephone: (415) 445-4003
Facsimile: (415) 445-4020
E-mail: lweaver@bfalaw.com
adavis@bfalaw.com
jsamra@bfalaw.com
gmullens@bfalaw.com
- and -
Jason 'Jay' Barnes, Esq.
An Truong, Esq.
Eric Johnson, Esq.
Jennifer 'Jenny' Paulson, Esq.
SIMMONS HANLY CONROY LLP
112 Madison Avenue, 7th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 784-6400
Facsimile: (212) 213-5949
E-mail: jaybarnes@simmonsfirm.com
atruong@simmonsfirm.com
ejohnson@simmonsfirm.com
jpaulson@simmonsfirm.com
- and -
David A. Straite, Esq.
Corban Rhodes, Esq.
Amy E. Keller, Esq.
Julia Veeser, Esq.
Adam Prom, Esq.
DiCELLO LEVITT LLP
485 Lexington Avenue, Suite 1001
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (646) 933-1000
E-mail: dstraite@dicellolevitt.com
crhodes@dicellolevitt.com
akeller@dicellolevitt.com
aprom@dicellolevitt.com
jveeser@dicellolevitt.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Andrew H. Schapiro, Esq.
Teuta Fani, Esq.
Joseph H. Margolies, Esq.
Stephen A. Broome, Esq.
Viola Trebicka, Esq.
Crystal Nix-Hines, Esq.
Alyssa G. Olson, Esq.
Xi ("Tracy") Gao, Esq.
Carl Spilly, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
191 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 2700
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 705-7400
Facsimile: (312) 705-7401
E-mail: andrewschapiro@quinnemanuel.com
teutafani@quinnemanuel.com
josephmargolies@quinnemanuel.com
stephenbroome@quinnemanuel.com
violatrebicka@quinnemanuel.com
crystalnixhines@quinnemanuel.com
alyolson@quinnemanuel.com
tracygao@quinnemanuel.com
carlspilly@quinnemanuel.com
GPS CAPITAL: Faces Murch Suit Over TCPA Violation
-------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against GPS Capital Markets, LLC. The
case is captioned as Jessica Murch, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. GPS Capital Markets, LLC, Case No.
3:24-cv-01854-SB (D. Ore., November 7, 2024).
The case is brought over the Defendant's alleged violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
The case is assigned to Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman.
GPS Capital Markets, LLC provides financial services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew Roman Perrong, Esq.
PERRONG LAW LLC
2657 Mt. Carmel Ave.
Glenside, PA 19038
Telephone: (215) 225-5529
Facsimile: (888) 329-0305
E-mail: a@perronglaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Jeffrey G. Bradford, Esq.
TONKON TORP LLP
888 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600
Portland, OR 97204-2099
Telephone: (503) 802-5724
Facsimile: (503) 972-7424
E-mail: jeff.bradford@tonkon.com
GRYPHON HEALTHCARE: Mendoza Files Consumer Credit Suit in Tex.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Gryphon Healthcare, LLC. The
case is styled as Elva Mendoza, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Gryphon Healthcare, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, Case No. 4:24-cv-04224 (S.D. Tex.,
October 31, 2024).
The suit is brought over Defendant's consumer credit law
violation.
The case is assigned to Judge David Hittner.
Gryphon Healthcare, LLC is a medical-billing services
provider.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thiago Coelho, Esq.
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
3055 Wilshire Blvd., Ste 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Telephone: (213) 381-9988
Facsimile: (213) 381-9989
E-mail: thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com
- and -
Craig David Cherry, Esq.
CHERRY JOHNSON SIEGMUND JAMES, PLLC
7901 Fish Pond Rd., Ste 2nd Floor
Waco, TX 76710
Telephone: (254) 732-2242
Facsimile: (866) 627-3509
E-mail: ccherry@cjsjlaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Brent Douglas Sedge, Esq.
CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH & PROPHETE, LLP
1201 Elm Street, Suite 2550
Dallas, TX 75270
Telephone: (214) 646-8970
E-mail: bsedge@constangy.com
HALO COUNTRY: Foster Sues Over Non-ADA Compliant Facilities
-----------------------------------------------------------
LELAND FOSTER, individually, and on behalf of individuals similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HALO COUNTRY LLC, a Michigan limited
liability company, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-13445-TGB-PTM (E.D.
Mich., December 23, 2024) is an action brought by the Plaintiff
against the Defendant pursuant to the enforcement provision of the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990.
The Plaintiff is an individual diagnosed with cerebral palsy and
permanently uses a wheelchair for mobility.
Halo Country LLC owns and operates the business located in Saginaw
County, Michigan known as the "Halo Burger" restaurant.
During the Plaintiff's most recent visits on October 26, 2024,
August 22, 2023, May 24, 2022, September 25, 2021, February 1, 2017
and other dates, the Plaintiff encountered many architectural
barriers at the facilities owned and operated by Halo Country LLC
that violate the ADA and its regulations.
These barriers at the property have endangered Plaintiff's safety,
says the suit.
The complaint asserts that the Defendant has discriminated against
the individual Plaintiff by denying him access to the full and
equal enjoyment of the goods, services, facilities, privileges,
advantages and/or accommodations of the buildings.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Owen B. Dunn, Jr., Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF OWEN DUNN, JR.
The Offices of Unit C
6800 W. Central Ave., Suite C-1
Toledo, OH 43617
Telephone: (419) 241-9661
Facsimile: (419) 241-9737
E-mail: obdjr@owendunnlaw.com
HATCHITT TAX: Kalamay Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages
---------------------------------------------------------
CRAIG KALAMAY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HATCHITT TAX CLUB, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-13157 (N.D. Ill., December 23, 2024) is a putative class
action pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
To promote its goods and services, the Defendant engages in
unsolicited text messaging and continues to text message consumers
after they have opted out of Defendant's solicitations, says the
suit.
Through this action, the 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. The Plaintiff also seeks statutory
damages on behalf of Plaintiff and members of the Class, and any
other available legal or equitable remedies.
Hatchitt Tax Club, Inc. is a virtual tax preparation service based
in Grandville, Michigan.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (305) 336-7466
E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
- and -
Michael Eisenband, Esq.
EISENBAND LAW P.A.
515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (954) 533-4092
E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com
JEFFERSON PLAZA: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Ortega Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------
HUGO ORTEGA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. JEFFERSON PLAZA COFFEE SHOP, LTD. d/b/a
STATION COFFEE SHOP; and NICK VOLIKAS, Defendants, Case No.
2:24-cv-08919 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 31, 2024) seeks to recover from the
Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as kitchen staff.
Jefferson Plaza Coffee Shop, Ltd. d/b/a Station Coffee Shop
operates a restaurant at Port Jefferson Station, New York 11776.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew J. Farnworth, Esq.
ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC
490 Wheeler Road, Suite 250
Hauppauge, NY 11788
Telephone: (631) 257-5588
Email: mfarnworth@romerolawny.com
JOANNA VARGAS: Cantwell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------------
Lisa Cantwell, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. JOANNA VARGAS, LTD., Case No. 1:24-cv-08921 (E.D.N.Y.,
Dec. 31, 2024), is brought against Defendant for the failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate Defendant's website,
www.joannavargas.com (the "Website"), to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to the Website, and
therefore denial of the goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant's website is not equally
accessible to blind and visually impaired consumers; therefore,
Defendant is in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff now seeks a
permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate
policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which Defendant ensures the delivery of
such goods throughout the United States, including New York
State.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Phone: (201) 282-6500
Fax: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
LEXYL TRAVEL: Faces Suit Over Deceitful Negative Billing Practices
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Percy Canteenwalla and Mr. Giuseppe Russo, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lexyl Travel
Technologies, LLC, Case No. 9:25-cv-80007-RS (S.D. Fla., Jan. 2,
2025) is a class action lawsuit against Lexyl for their scurrilous
business practices whereby the Defendant deceived and exploited the
Plaintiffs, their customers, and the purported class to unlawfully
collect travel insurance fees for hundreds of thousands of
transactions through deceitful negative billing practices.
According to the complaint, rather than allowing users to
affirmatively opt-in to the additional charge -- as required by
federal regulation and Florida statute -- the Defendant
automatically enrolled users in additional services, disguised the
enrollment as an upgrade, and disguised the ability to opt-out of
these additional services by obfuscating the option with greyed out
text in a smaller sized font.
As a result of the Defendant's deceptive and unfair billing
practices, transaction was accompanied by an undisclosed additional
fee resulting in tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars in
additional fees charged to the purported class, the lawsuit says.
The Plaintiffs bring this action, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, for the Defendant's violations of
Florida's Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, Federal
Regulations governing the sale of hotel rooms, Florida's statute
governing registered sellers of travel, New York's Deceptive Acts
and Practices statute, and the unjust enrichment they received
through their deceptive negative billing practices resulting in
tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars in additional fees paid
to Lexyl by the purported class.
The Defendant operates numerous websites whereby it acts as a
middleware to allow hotel and/or travel services vendors to sell
rooms and/or services at any posted rate.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam Werner, Esq.
Michael Hoffman, Esq.
WERNER HOFFMAN GREIG & GARCIA
3299 NW 2nd Ave
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Telephone: (800) 320-4357
E-mail: awerner@wernerhoffman.com
mhoffman@wernerhoffman.com
- and -
Adam Florek, Esq.
FLOREK LAW, PLLC
636 Broadway, Suite 514
New York, NY 10012
Telephone: (929) 229-2268
E-mail: aflorek@florekllc.com
LOWES HOME: Wright Files Fraud Suit in W.D.N.C.
-----------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Lowes Home Centers, LLC. The
case is styled as Lance Wright and Shauni Wright, for themselves,
as private attorneys general, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Lowes Home Centers, LLC, Case No. 5:24-cv-00237-KDB-DCK
(W.D.N.C., November 7, 2024).
The lawsuit arises from the Defendant's alleged fraud conduct.
The case is assigned to District Judge Kenneth D. Bell.
Lowes Home Centers, LLC retails home improvement, building
materials, and home appliances.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Daniel Hattis, Esq.
Paul Karl Lukacs, Esq.
HATTIS & LUKACS
11711 SE 8th Street, Suite 120
Bellevue, WA 98005
Telephone: (425) 233-8628
E-mail: dan@hattislaw.com
pkl@hattislaw.com
- and -
David B. Sherman, Jr., Esq.
WEAVER, BENNETT & BLAND, PA
196 N. Trade Street
Matthews, NC 28105
Telephone: (704) 844-1400
E-mail: dsherman@wbbatty.com
- and -
Michael David Bland, Esq.
WEAVER, BENNETT & BLAND
P.O. Box 2570
Matthews, NC 28106
Telephone: (704) 844-1400
Facsimile: (704) 845-1503
E-mail: dbland@wbbatty.com
The Defendant is represented by:
James M. Dedman, IV, Esq.
GALLIVAN, WHITE, & BOYD PA
6805 Carnegie Blvd., Suite 200
Charlotte, NC 28211
Telephone: (704) 552-1712
E-mail: jdedman@gwblawfirm.com
MADE TRADE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
FELIPE FERNANDEZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. MADE TRADE GROUP, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-10030
(S.D.N.Y., Dec. 31, 2024) alleges that the Defendant failed to
design, construct, maintain, and operate Defendant's website,
www.madetrade.com, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people in
violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The 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.
The Plaintiff was injured when Plaintiff attempted multiple times,
most recently on August 28, 2024, to access Defendant's Website
from Plaintiff's home in an effort to shop for Defendant's
products, but encountered barriers that denied the full and equal
access to Defendant's online goods, content, and services, the
lawsuit says.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
The Defendant is a company that owns and operates the Website,
offering features which should allow all consumers to access the
goods and services and by which the Defendant ensures the delivery
of such goods throughout the United States, including New York
State.
The Defendant's Website offers products and services for online
sale and general delivery to the public. The Website offers
features which ought to allow users to browse for items, access
navigation bar descriptions, inquire about pricing, and avail
consumers of the ability to peruse the numerous items offered for
sale.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
MDL 3094: Wolfe v. Novo Nordisk Joins Diabetes Meds Liability Row
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the multi-district action captioned "In re: Glucagon-like
Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (GLP-1 RAS) Products Liability
Litigation," MDL No. 3094, Judge Karen K. Caldwell, Chairperson of
the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, transfers the
case styled as "Wolfe v. Novo Nordisk A/S, et al.," C.A. No.
2:24−00992 (N.D. Ala.) from the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of Alabama to the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania and, with the consent of that court, assigned to Judge
Karen S. Marston for coordinated or consolidated pretrial
proceedings.
The plaintiff in the Wolfe action moved to transfer Wolfe to the
District of South Carolina for inclusion in MDL No. 3094.
Defendants Novo Nordisk Inc. and Novo Nordisk A/S supported
transfer.
This MDL encompasses personal injury actions stemming from use of
glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), medicines
that are prescribed for, among other things, the treatment of type
2 diabetes and to help certain obese or overweight individuals lose
excess weight. Plaintiffs allege that GLP-1 RAs caused them to
suffer gastroparesis, ileus, intestinal obstruction or
pseudo-obstruction, or other gastrointestinal injury.
The actions subject to the panel's initial centralization order
included five products: Ozempic, Wegovy, and Rybelsus, each of
which contains semaglutide as the active molecule and are
manufactured by the Novo Nordisk defendants, and Trulicity
(dulaglutide) and Mounjaro (tirzepatide), which are manufactured by
Eli Lilly and Company. Plaintiff in Wolfe sought expansion of the
scope of the MDL to include a sixth product: Saxenda (liraglutide),
which is manufactured by Novo Nordisk.
The panel had held that that the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
was an appropriate Section 1407 forum for personal injury actions
in which plaintiffs allege that GLP-1 RAs cause gastroparesis,
ileus, intestinal obstruction or pseudo-obstruction, or other
gastrointestinal injury. Plaintiff in Wolfe alleges that Saxenda is
a GLP-1 RA and that it causes gastrointestinal injuries. Thus,
Wolfe--and any other related actions that allege use of
Saxenda--will share common factual questions with the actions in
the MDL regarding, inter alia, whether defendants knew or should
have known that their GLP-1 RA products can cause gastroparesis and
other gastrointestinal injuries, whether defendants adequately
warned plaintiffs or their prescribing physicians about the alleged
dangers of these products, and whether defendants made false,
misleading, or incomplete representations regarding the safety of
these products, rules the panel.
Moreover, the panel finds that expanding MDL No. 3094 to include
the additional Novo Nordisk GLP-1 RA drug Saxenda will facilitate a
uniform and efficient pretrial approach to this litigation,
eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent rulings on
expert testimony and other pretrial issues, and conserve the
resources of the parties, their counsel, and the judiciary.
A full-text copy of the court's December 12, 2024 Transfer Order is
available at
https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-3094-Transfer_Order-12-24.pdf
MONIQUE LHUILLIER: Cantwell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
----------------------------------------------------------------
LISA CANTWELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MONIQUE LHUILLIER, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-08923 (E.D.N.Y., Dec. 31, 2024) alleges violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, www.moniquelhuillier.com, is not fully or equally accessible
to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff,
in violation of the ADA.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Monique Lhuillier, Inc. offers handbags, shoes, dresses, gowns,
jackets, tops, and bottoms. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Bergsma Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as William Bergsma, and others similarly
situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01597 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on Dec. 31, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-09538-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Evans Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Gary Evans, and others similarly situated v.
Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01604 was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Dec.
31, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-09529-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Keesecker Suit Transferred to N.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Andrew Keesecker, and others similarly
situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01607 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on Dec. 31, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-09548-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Kennedy Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Derrick Kennedy, and others similarly
situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01609 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on Dec. 31, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-09546-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Meyer Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Larry Meyer, and others similarly situated v.
Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01613 was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Dec.
31, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:24-cv-09555-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
NESPRESSO USA: Removes Jones Suit to E.D. Calif.
------------------------------------------------
The Defendant in the case of LANDON JONES, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. NESPRESSO
USA, INC.; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, filed a
notice to remove the lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State
of California, County of Los Angeles (Case No. 24STCV31330) to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Dec.
31, 2024.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:24-cv-11230 to the proceeding.
The case is assigned to Monica Ramirez Almadani and referred to
Magistrate Alicia G. Rosenberg.
Nespresso USA, Inc. provides coffee machines and accessories. The
Company offers cups, spoons, milk frothers, and cpasule dispensers.
[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Cory D. Catignani, Esq.
Jocelyn M. Hoffman, Esq.
Krystal V. Campos, Esq.
VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP
4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 700
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone: (949) 526-7904
Facsimile: (949) 526-7904
Email: cdcatignani@vorys.com
jmhoffman@vorys.com
kvcampos@vorys.com
NOMATIC INC: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Jones Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
CLAY LEE JONES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NOMATIC, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-10042 (S.D.N.Y., Dec. 31, 2024) alleges violation of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web
site, www.nomatic.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in
violation of the ADA.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the
Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that
the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind
and visually-impaired consumers.
Nomatic, Inc. sells travel bags, backpacks, camera bags, and more.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rami Salim, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
Email: rsalim@steinsakslegal.com
PJ OHIO: Fails to Pay Delivery Drivers' Wages, Baker Alleges
------------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA BAKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. PJ OHIO, LLC, and SERAZEN, LLC, Case No.
3:25-cv-00003-MJN-PBS (S.D. Ohio, Jan. 2, 2025) is a collective
action brought by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, against the Defendants for violations of
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage
Standards Act.
The Plaintiff seeks declaratory judgment, monetary damages,
liquidated damages, costs, and a reasonable attorneys' fee, as a
result of the Defendants' policy and practice of failing to pay.
The Defendants directly hired the Plaintiff and other Delivery
Drivers work on its behalf, paid them wages and benefits,
controlled their work schedules, duties, protocols, applications,
assignments and employment conditions, and kept at least some
records regarding their employment.
Accordingly, the Defendants classified Plaintiff as nonexempt from
the overtime provisions of the FLSA. The Defendants also classified
other Delivery Drivers as nonexempt from the overtime provisions of
the FLSA.
The Defendants own and operate Papa John's franchises in Ohio.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alyson S. Beridon, Esq.
HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL,
LENISKI AND WALL PLLC
600 Vine Street, Suite 2720
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
Telephone: (513) 381-2224
Facsimile: (615) 994-8625
E-mail: alyson@hsglawgroup.com
- and -
Matthew R. McCarley*
Texas Bar No. 24087532
FORESTER HAYNIE PLLC
11300 North Central Expressway, Ste 550
Dallas, TX 75243
Telephone: (214) 210-2100
Facsimile: (214) 346-5909
E-mail: mccarley@foresterhaynie.com
PREMIUM MERCHANT: Cardenas Sues Over Unsolicited Calls, Messages
----------------------------------------------------------------
ERICA CARDENAS, Plaintiff v. PREMIUM MERCHANT FUNDING ONE, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-08485-KPF (S.D.N.Y., November 7, 2024)
is a class action seeking to stop the Defendant from violating the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act by making telemarketing calls and
text messages to Plaintiff and other consumers without consent
including calls to phone numbers that are registered on the
National Do Not Call registry.
The complaint alleges that the Defendant places solicitation calls
to generate cash advances and business loans. In response to these
calls and text messages, Plaintiff Cardenas brings forward this
case seeking injunctive relief requiring the Defendant to cease
from violating the TCPA, as well as an award of statutory damages
to the members of the Classes and costs.
Premium Merchant Funding provides merchant cash advances and
business loans to businesses throughout the U.S.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stefan Coleman, Esq.
COLEMAN PLLC
11 Broadway, Suite 615
New York, NY 10001
Telephone: (877) 333-9427
E-mail: law@stefancoleman.com
- and -
Avi R. Kaufman, Esq.
KAUFMAN P.A.
237 South Dixie Highway, Floor 4
Coral Gables, FL 33133
Telephone: (305) 469-5881
E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com
REMEX INC: Hertzberg Files FDCPA Suit D.N.J.
--------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against REMEX, INC. The case is
captioned as ADAM HERTZBERG, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. REMEX, INC., Case No.
2:24-cv-10398-WJM-AME (D.N.J., November 8, 2024).
The case arises from the Defendant's alleged violation of the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act.
The suit is assigned to Judge William J. Martini.
REMEX, INC. is a full service accounts receivable management
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Cohen, Esq.
STEIN SAKS PLLC
One University Plaza, Ste 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
E-mail: jcohen@steinsakslegal.com
- and -
Yaakov Saks, Esq.
STEIN SAKS, PLLC
One University Plaza, Suite 620
Hackensack, NJ 07601-2726
Telephone: (201) 282-6500
E-mail: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Ross Steven Enders, Esq.
BEDARD LAW GROUP, P.C.
4855 River Green Parkway, Suite 310
Duluth, GA 30096
Telephone: (678) 253-1871
E-mail: renders@bedardlawgroup.com
SABRE GLBL: Castilleja Sues Over Failure to Protect Personal Info
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ALEJANDRO CASTILLEJA, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. SABRE GLBL INC., Case No. 4:25-cv-00002-O
(N.D. Tex., Jan. 2, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant
for its failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and
approximately 29,590 Class Members' sensitive and personally
identifying information, which, as a result, has been disclosed to
a notorious cybercriminal group and published on the dark web.
Beginning in July 2022, the cybercriminal organization known as
Dark Angels hacked into the Defendant's network systems and stole
at least 1.3 terabytes of files containing Plaintiff's and Class
Members' sensitive, confidential PII stored therein, including
their names, dates of birth, Social Security numbers, addresses,
emails, photocopied passports and work visas, employment
information, financial account numbers, signatures, and more,
causing widespread injuries to Plaintiff and Class Members (the
"Data Breach").
The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former employees of
Defendant who, in order to apply for employment and/or work for
Defendant, were and are required to entrust Defendant with their
sensitive, non-public Private Information.
The Defendant breached these duties owed to Plaintiff and Class
Members by failing to safeguard their Private Information it
collected and maintained, including by failing to implement
industry standards for data security to protect against
cyberattacks, which failures caused and allowed criminal hackers to
access and steal patients' Private Information from Defendant's
care, says the suit.
The Plaintiff is an adult individual who at all relevant times has
been a citizen and resident of Middlesex County, Massachusetts. The
Plaintiff is a former employee of Defendant, having worked for
Defendant from 2003–2004.
The Defendant is an information technology and logistics company
serving travel-industry clients like airlines, hotel chains, and
rental car companies across the country.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joe Kendall, Esq.
KENDALL LAW GROUP, PLLC
3811 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 825
Dallas, TX 75219
Telephone: (214) 744-3000
Facsimile: (214) 744-3015
E-mail: jkendall@kendalllawgroup.com
- and -
Kenneth Jay Grunfeld, Esq.
KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A.
65 Overhill Rd.
Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004
Telephone: (215) 888-3214
E-mail: grunfeld@kolawyers.com
SEATGEEK INC: Carbonell Files Suit Over Hidden Junk Fees
--------------------------------------------------------
MARS CARBONELL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SEATGEEK, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:24-cv-02087-JCM-NJK (D. Nev., November 7, 2024) is a class action
suit brought against the Defendant for ambushing consumers
purchasing tickets to entertainment events with alleged hidden junk
fees.
To get consumers to shop on its platform, SeatGeek advertises
fee-less ticket prices, strings consumers along several checkout
screens, and continues to represent that artificially low price as
consumers input their credit card information, billing information,
and ticket delivery information. Then, on the very final
confirmation screen, in tiny grey font on the right corner of the
screen, far away from the "Place Order" button, SeatGeek sneaks in
an eye-popping 35 percent fee.
Because SeatGeek repeatedly represents a fee-less ticket price
throughout the entire purchase process, a consumer has no reason to
be on the lookout for a tiny grey font fee that is hidden in plain
sight on the final confirmation page, after the consumer has
already input her credit card, billing, and delivery information,
says the suit.
For these reasons, the Plaintiffs seek relief in this action
individually, and on behalf of all other ticket purchasers for all
places of entertainment in the state of Nevada that used SeatGeek's
website or mobile phone application, for actual and/or statutory
damages, reasonable attorneys' costs and fees, and injunctive
relief under Nev. Rev. Stat. Ann.
SeatGeek Inc. is an online ticket exchange platform that offers
consumers the ability to purchase tickets to entertainment events
online, via its website or its smartphone app.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Philip L. Fraietta, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (646) 837-7150
Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
E-mail: pfraietta@bursor.com
- and -
Stefan Bogdanovich, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Telephone: (925) 300-4455
Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
E-mail: sbogdanovich@bursor.com
- and -
Michael Gayan, Esq.
KEMP JONES, LLP
3800 Howard Hughes Parkway, 17th Floor
Las Vegas, NV 89169
Telephone: (702) 385-6000
E-mail: m.gayan@kempjones.com
SOLSPRING MARKET: Knowles Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind
------------------------------------------------------------------
CARLTON KNOWLES, on behalf of himself and all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOLSPRING MARKET, LLC, Defendant,
Case No. 1:24-cv-09915 (S.D.N.Y., December 23, 2024) is a civil
rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website to be
fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
By failing to make its website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, the Defendant deprives blind
and visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services -- all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals -- thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
suit.
The 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.
Solspring Market, LLC operates the Mercola Market online retail
store, as well as the Mercola Market interactive website and
advertises, markets, and operates in the State of New York and
throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
SREE HOTELS: Court Defers Decision on Motion to Dismiss Sikes Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Kenneth D. Bell of the United States District Court for the
Western District of North Carolina deferred a decision on Sree
Hotels, LLC's motion to dismiss the first amended complaint in the
case captioned as BENJAMIN SIKES, Plaintiff, v. SREE HOTELS, LLC,
Defendant, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:24-CV-00679-KDB-DCK (W.D.N.C.).
Defendant Sree is a hotel ownership and management company
operating twenty-five hotels, as well as several restaurants,
throughout North Carolina, South Carolina, and Ohio. The Plaintiff
alleges that in the course of its business, Sree acquired,
collected, and stored Plaintiff's and the putative class members'
"private information," which he defines to mean "names and Social
Security numbers." On Feb. 29, 2024, unauthorized third-party
criminals gained access to this private information through a
cyber-attack.
The FAC alleges that the Defendant's Data Breach harms and
threatens to harm the Plaintiff and the class in the future by
requiring them to spend time and resources mitigating the risk that
their personal information will be used for criminal purposes and
financial gain.
In addition, the Plaintiff claims that he has experienced
significant anxiety, fear, and distress regarding the safety of his
personal information and risk of identity theft. With respect to
future harm, he alleges imminent and impending injury arising from
the substantially increased risk of fraud, identity theft, and
misuse resulting from his personal information being placed in the
hands of unauthorized third parties/criminals.
The Plaintiff filed this action in July 2024, asserting that this
Court has subject matter and diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.
Sec. 1332(d) because this is a class action where the amount in
controversy exceeds the sum or value of $5 million, exclusive of
interest and costs, there are more than 100 members in the proposed
class, and at least one class member is a citizen of a state
different from the Defendant.
The Plaintiff defines the putative classes he seeks to certify
under Rules 23(a), (b)(2), and (b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure to include: "All individuals within the United States of
America whose PII and/or financial information was exposed to
unauthorized third-parties as a result of the data breach
experienced by Defendant on February 29, 2024." The Defendant
timely filed a motion to dismiss for lack of standing, which in
turn led to the filing of the FAC on September 27, 2024, and
Defendant's renewed motion to dismiss on the same grounds.
With respect to the size of the proposed classes, the Plaintiff
alleges that the total number of individuals who have had their
data exposed is estimated to be in the tens/hundreds of thousands
based on Defendant's clientele. However, he is not one of the
Defendant's customers. Rather, he is a former employee of the
Defendant, which employs more than 443 people.
The Court emphasizes that there are no factual allegations in the
FAC from which it can plausibly conclude that any customer even
provided Defendant with his or her Social Security number or that
any of Defendant's employees or former employees other than
Plaintiff was a victim of actual misuse of personal data. Moreover,
the limited factual allegations in the FAC cannot support a
plausible inference of an imminent and substantial risk of data
misuse, the Court adds. Therefore, the Court cannot conclude that
the class, properly limited to those with standing to pursue a
valid claim, has at least 100 members.
Similarly, there are insufficient factual allegations from which
the Court can conclude that the amount in controversy exceeds $5
million. First, because the Court cannot determine the number of
putative class members, it cannot calculate the amount in
controversy with respect to the proposed classes. Moreover, there
are no factual allegations in the FAC that suggest how much in
actual damages the Plaintiff or the putative class members might be
entitled to receive if their claims are successful.
So, even if the Court were to generously assume that 500 current
and former employees were the victims of actual data misuse as a
result of the Data Breach, there are no factual allegations from
which the Court could find that they each have incurred or will
incur an average of $10,000 in potential damages. Therefore,
Plaintiff has not established the required amount in controversy to
support diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1332(d).
A copy of the Court's Order s available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8bPd7u from PacerMonitor.com.
TAYLOR FARMS: Sena Labor Suit Removed to N.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------
The case styled SOCORRO SENA, as an individual and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TAYLOR FARMS RETAIL, INC.,
and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 24CV004024,
was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for
the County of Monterey, to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California.
The Clerk of the Court for the Northern District of California
assigned Case No. 5:24-cv-07793-SVK to the proceeding.
The Plaintiff's complaint alleges two causes of action: (1)
violation of the California Labor Code; and (2) violation of the
Business and Professions Code.
Taylor Farms Retail, Inc. produces salads and fresh foods.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Ricardo R. Bours, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK
& STEWART, P.C.
Esplanade Center III, Suite 800
2415 East Camelback Road
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: (602) 778-3700
Facsimile: (602) 778-3750
E-mail: andy.levin@ogletree.com
ricardo.bours@ogletree.com
TEMBO GROUP: Licea CIPA Suit Removed From State Court to C.D. Cal.
------------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE LICEA, individually and behalf of all other similarly situated
v. TEMBO GROUP, LLC, a California limited liability company, d/b/a
WWW.KOYALWHOLSESALE.COM, Case No. 24STCV30352 (Filed Nov. 18,
2024), was removed from the California state court to the United
States District Court for the Central District Of California on
Dec. 31, 2024.
The Clerk of the District Court assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-11223 to
the proceeding.
The Plaintiff alleges Defendant, which operates an ecommerce
website, violated the California Invasion of Privacy Act by using
TikTok pixels to track some of his online activity.
Specifically, the Plaintiff alleges Defendant violated California's
Trap and Trace Law, codified at California Penal Code.
The Plaintiff fashions his claim as a class action, alleging that
"all California citizens whose personal information was shared
with TikTok or other third parties by Defendant without their
effective and informed prior consent.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
John M. Begakis, Esq.
ALTVIEW LAW GROUP, LLP
9454 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 825
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (310) 230-5580
Facsimile: (562) 274-8954
E-mail: john@altviewlawgroup.com
TRU LIFE: Faces Smith Suit Over Unsolicited Text Messages
---------------------------------------------------------
Sheila Smith, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Tru Life Real Estate, Inc., Defendant, Case
No. 4:24-cv-00149-TWP-KMB (S.D. Ind., October 31, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
The complaint asserts that Defendant routinely violates the law by
delivering more than one advertisement or marketing text message to
residential telephone numbers registered with the National
Do-Not-Call Registry without the prior express invitation or
permission required by the TCPA.
The Plaintiff registered her cellular telephone number with the DNC
Registry on July 2, 2003, and has maintained that registration
through the present date. Beginning in January 2024 and continuing
through the present, the Plaintiff began receiving text messages on
her cellular telephone from Defendant. The purpose of the text
messages at issue was to advertise and to market Defendant's real
estate business or services, says the Plaintiff.
Tru Life Real Estate, Inc. is a Kentucky corporation that runs a
real estate business headquartered in Lexington, Kentucky.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alex D. Kruzyk, Esq.
PARDELL, KRUZYK & GIRIBALDO, PLLC
7500 Rialto Blvd. Suite 1-250
Austin, TX 78735
Telephone: (561) 726-8444
E-mail: akruzyk@pkglegal.com
WAYNE M. LOPEZ: Laccinole Balks at Illegal Consumer Report Access
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER LACCINOLE, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. WAYNE M. LOPEZ d/b/a VARRO LEON,
Defendant, Case No. 3:24-cv-07764-SK (N.D. Cal., November 7, 2024)
is an action against the Defendant for statutory damages, punitive
damages, attorneys' fees, and costs, brought pursuant to the Fair
Credit Reporting Act.
According to the complaint, the Defendant requested and obtained
Plaintiff's consumer report, and, upon information and belief, the
consumer reports of other consumers similarly situated, from one or
more of the consumer reporting agencies, including Trans Union LLC,
without a permissible purpose under the FCRA.
As a result of Defendant's wrongful access to Plaintiff's consumer
report, and those of the Class, Plaintiff, and the Class, have
suffered an invasion of privacy, says the suit.
Wayne M. Lopez, d/b/a Varro Leon, is a California real estate
broker with his principal place of business in San Leandro,
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
21031 Ventura Boulevard, Suite #340
Woodland Hills, CA 91364-6522
Telephone: (323) 306-4234
Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
- and -
John A. Love, Esq.
LOVE CONSUMER LAW
2500 Northwinds Parkway Suite 330
Alpharetta, GA 30009
Telephone: (404) 855-3600
E-mail: tlove@loveconsumerlaw.com
XTO ENERGY: Loses Bid to Compel Arbitration in Salvatora Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Christopher B. Brown of the United States District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania denied XTO Energy
Inc.'s motion to compel arbitration in the case captioned as ROGER
A. SALVATORA, SANDRA E. SALVATORA, D&M MARBURGER FAMILY
ENTERPRISES, L.P., HEASLEY'S NURSERIES, INC., RODNEY L. LANG,
BONITA A. LANG, INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL THOSE SIMILARLY
SITUATED; Plaintiffs, vs. XTO ENERGY INC., Defendant, Civil Action
No. 2:19-CV-01097-WSS-CBB (W.D. Pa.).
In Marburger v. XTO Energy, Inc., 2:15-cv-910 (W.D.Pa. 2015),
certain landowners and royalty interest owners signed oil and gas
leases and XTO produced natural gas under those leases. Certain
leaseholders thereafter brought a class action for the alleged
improper deduction of postproduction expenses from their gas
royalty payments. During discovery, XTO's expert authored a report
in March 2017 indicating at least some of the class leases
contained arbitration provisions. The parties ultimately settled
the case on behalf of the class and the Court approved the
settlement. The settlement permitted XTO to deduct post-production
costs from royalties including all costs from and after the
wellhead to the point of sale incurred with the sale
of such production.
The Plaintiffs filed the instant class action against XTO on Aug.
29, 2019 after the Marburger settlement. They allege XTO has been
taking unreasonably high deductions from royalty payments for
processing and gathering gas after the Marburger action settled.
The Plaintiffs claim that XTO contracts with an affiliate company
instead of a third party to gather and process gas. In doing so,
the Plaintiffs claim the affiliate charges higher costs than a
third-party would charge, these costs are deducted from their
royalties and they now seek to recover the alleged excessive
charges.
The Plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification on March 23,
2022, which XTO responded to on April 27, 2022. It was then, for
the first time, XTO mentioned the lease arbitration provisions in
its response. In its response brief, XTO noted that while the named
Plaintiffs' leases do not contain arbitration clauses, there were
putative unnamed class members who had leases that contain
arbitration clauses and XTO argued that the named Plaintiffs'
leases were not typical of the class. XTO did not, however, move to
compel arbitration. Instead, and in tandem with its response, it
filed two Daubert motions to exclude the testimony of Plaintiffs'
expert witnesses. A two-day class certification hearing was held on
Feb. 9-10, 2023.
A Report and Recommendation was issued on the pending motions, XTO
filed objections thereto, and the Court adopted the R&R on June 22,
2023 and certified the class. The class generally consists of
lessors who were members of the Marburger class settlement or who
were parties to a lease that contained a Market Enhancement Clause.
As for XTO's arbitration argument, the Court declined to determine
whether XTO was entitled to compel arbitration because no formal
motion to compel arbitration was before it and found XTO could
raise the arbitration defense after
notice to the class and the opt-out period to provide better
context of these arbitration provisions.
Thereafter, XTO filed for permission to appeal the class
certification decision with the United States Court of Appeals for
the Third Circuit. Permission to appeal was denied.
On March 29, 2024, XTO filed the instant motion to compel
arbitration.
It is undisputed that the named class members' oil and gas leases
do not contain provisions mandating arbitration. XTO maintains out
of the 470 class leases, at least 16 leases contain an arbitration
provision and seek to compel the claims under these 16 leases to
arbitration. XTO maintains it identified these leases during
pre-certification discovery.
XTO now, after more than four and a half years of litigation, moves
to compel arbitration of those 16 (or 15) leases under the Federal
Arbitration Act and exclude them from the class.
The Plaintiffs respond that XTO has waived their right to compel
arbitration and alternatively argue that its proposed relief is too
speculative to grant. According to them, XTO submitted an expert
report in Marburger in which its expert opined that some of the
leases contained arbitration clauses. They argue that despite that
knowledge, XTO fully litigated the Marburger action for three
years, and settled those claims never seeking to compel
arbitration.
Now, XTO seeks to arbitrate claims in this case under at least four
of the leases that were at issue in Marburger. The Plaintiffs
further argue that XTO has fully litigated this case since 2019
without seeking to compel arbitration. They point out that XTO has
deposed each named Plaintiff, reviewed their documents, produced
masses of documents, conducted other discovery, and participated in
Court conferences and hearings. XTO had possession of all the
leases for at least 11 years, yet it did not move to compel
arbitration until March 2024, seven years after it knew about
arbitration clauses in the leases and eight months after each class
member had been identified.
XTO responds that it did not and could not move to compel
arbitration because the named class members in this case do not
have leases with arbitration provisions, the leases that have
arbitration provisions are held by unnamed class members and XTO
consistently maintained that the presence of the unnamed class
members with arbitration provisions prevented certification and
expressed its intent to enforce the provisions if the class was
certified. In sum, XTO maintains that it did not intentionally
relinquish its right to compel arbitration by waiting until
post-class certification to compel arbitration of unnamed class
members' claims when it is undisputed the named class members'
contracts do not include an arbitration provision.
According to the Court, given XTO's knowledge of the arbitration
provisions, this conduct illustrates a preference for litigation
and an abandonment of XTO's right to arbitrate.
In addressing that argument, the Court found to the extent that XTO
intends to raise the arbitration defense post-certification, a
motion may be made to amend the class definition to exclude such
members after the expiration of the opt-out period to enable the
Court to determine the class composition and analyze the specific
arbitration agreements that XTO wishes to enforce. This finding
does not address whether XTO could have raised the arbitration
issue sooner, and the Court declined to make any direct ruling as
to the waiver of the right to arbitrate. Even setting aside XTO's
litigation efforts from the time it first raised arbitration at the
class certification stage in April 2022 until it filed its formal
motion to compel arbitration in March 2024, this does not undo the
years of extensive litigation XTO engaged in prior to 2022 when it
did not mention any intention to arbitrate.
Considering the context and circumstances of this case and XTO's
actions, it has waived its right to compel arbitration.
A copy of the Court's Order is available at
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=v7d2Wg
from PacerMonitor.com.
[*] CLASS ACTION MONEY & ETHICS CONFERENCE: Register Now!
---------------------------------------------------------
Registration is now open for the 9TH ANNUAL CLASS ACTION MONEY &
ETHICS CONFERENCE, to be held in-person Thurs., May 8, 2025, at The
Harmonie Club, New York City.
Once a year, the top industry experts gather together to discuss
the latest topics and trends in class action. This value-packed
event features special presentations from keynote speakers and live
panel discussions with industry experts, and provides networking
opportunities with other professionals.
Register at https://www.classactionconference.com Breakfast and
lunch included.
Videos of last year's conference are available on-demand at
https://www.classactionconference.com/2024-video-replays.html
For sponsorship opportunities, contact:
Will Etchison
Tel: 305-707-7493
E-mail: will@beardgroup.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 2025. 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 ***