/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/250116.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, January 16, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 12
Headlines
ADVOCATE AURORA: Court Amends Scheduling Order in Shaw
ADVOCATE AURORA: Court Amends Scheduling Order in UPHWP Suit
AMERICAN NEIGHBORHOOD: Faces Sojka Personal Injury Claims in D.N.J.
ANTADI LLC: Faces Class Action Over Aroeve Air Purifiers Filters
BEST BUY: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Appliance Fake Sale
BIOAGE LABS: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set March 10, 2025
BLOOMBERG LP: Ndugga Seeks Leave to File Class Exhibits Under Seal
BLUE NILE: Tracks Website Visitors, Kishnani Class Suit Says
BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS: Romero Files Suit in California State Court
BYTEDANCE INC: S. J. Files Suit in C.D. California
CDK GLOBAL: Fails to Protect Customers' Data, Manderbach Ford Says
CHERVON NORTH: Faces Class Action Over Lithium Batteries Recall
CHIRP INNOVATION: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Crumwell Says
CINNAMON INDIAN: Villegas Seeks Wages & OT Pay Under FLSA, NYLL
COHU INC: Palmer Seeks to Invalidate Charter's Removal Provision
COOPERSURGICAL INC: Faces Class Suit Over Defective Medical Product
COSTO WHOLESALE: Faces Overpricing Class Action Suit in Montreal
CSU FULLERTON: Schaub Files Labor Suit in California State Court
DISCOUNTMAGS.COM LLC: Tracks Website Visitors, Garcia Alleges
DRAFTKINGS INC: Beyer Sues Over Fraudulent Practices
EPIC AIRCRAFT: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Price Hikes
EQUINOX INC: Carter Files Suit in N.D. New York
ESSA BANCORP: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With CNB Financial
EVOLVE BANK: Margul Sues Over Mismanagement of Customers' Funds
GLOBAL EXCHANGE: Avery Seeks to File Exhibit Unredacted
GOODRX INC: Lakhani TX Sues Over Sherman Antitrust Act Breach
HOYU AMERICA: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Tucker Alleges
HP HOOD: Fails to Pay Clerks' Minimum & OT Wages, Rubio Suit Says
JORIKI USA: Gretano Class Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under WARN Act
L.T.D. COMMODITIES: Blood Suit Removed to S.D. California
LISA WOLFE: Seeks More Time for Class Cert Response in Weinberg
LISONBEE: Potts Files Personal Injury Class Suit in Kansas
LOTTERY.COM INC: Court Dismisses Securities Class Action
LOWE'S COMPANIES: Carbajal Suit Removed to D. Arizona
LUXOTTICA OF AMERICA: Velasquez Suit Removed to C.D. California
MAISON SOLUTIONS: Faces Green Suit in CA Court Over IPO
MDL 2873: AFFF Products "Defective," Shields Suit Alleges
MDL 2873: AFFF Products Can Cause Cancer, Marshall Suit Alleges
MDL 2873: AFFF Products Harmful to Human Health, D'Armenia Claims
MDL 2873: Clark Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products
MDL 2873: Craig Suit Claims Toxic Exposure From AFFF Products
MDL 2873: Dedeaux Sues Over Exposure to PFAS From AFFF Products
MDL 2873: Exposed Firefighters to Toxic Products, O'Leary Suit Says
MDL 2873: Faces Cappelano Suit Over AFFF Products' Harmful Effects
MDL 2873: Faces Lucero Suit Over AFFF Products' Toxic Elements
MDL 2873: Faces Moffitt Suit Over AFFF Products' PFAS Exposure
MDL 2873: Katuls Sues Over Firefighters' Exposure to PFAS
MDL 2873: Ronning Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
MDL 2873: Transfer of UPFFA v. 3M to D.S.C. Denied
MDL 2873: Vanwinkle Sues Over Exposure to PFAS From AFFF Products
MDL 2873: Vargas Suit Claims PFAS Exposure From AFFF Products
MDL 2873: Wilson Sues Over Toxic Effects of AFFF Products
MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Faces Securities Class Action Suit
MITSUBISHI MOTORS: Faces Class Action Over Defective Airbags
MOBILE MEDIC: Oliver Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action
MOUNT CARMEL CARE: Stasiewski Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
NANO NUCLEAR ENERGY: Continues to Defend Yang Securities Class Suit
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Attias Sues Over Unlawful Debt Collection
NEW YOU BARIATRIC: Colvin Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
PDM STEEL SERVICE: Payne Suit Removed to C.D. California
QUICK BOX: Tan Seeks Final Approval of Class Action Settlement
RAD POWER: Faces Conohan Suit Over Tiktok Software Installation
REGAL CINEMAS: Class Cert. Bid in Springett Extended to March 21
REMARKABLE FOODS: Roman Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Filing for Class Status Bid Extended
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Pietoso Wins Class Certification Bid
RUSSI USA: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Henry Suit Alleges
SOLAIRUS AVIATION: Fails to Safeguard Employees' Info, Funes Claims
SONIC SYSTEMS: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Vega Suit Alleges
SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY: To Appeal Decision on ICE Detainer Class Suit
UNITED SURGICAL: Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement Sought
VAIL RESORTS: Skiers Sue Over Park City Mountain Labor Strike
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Wappinger Sues Over Lead Cables Disposal
VOLVO CAR: Fails to Pay "Off-the-Clock" Work, Gardenhire Says
ZILLOW INC: Faces TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Over Text Messages
ZURU LLC: Dauod Class Suit Removed from State Court to C.D. Cal.
[*] CLASS ACTION MONEY & ETHICS CONFERENCE: Register Now!
*********
ADVOCATE AURORA: Court Amends Scheduling Order in Shaw
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PATRICK SHAW, et al., v.
ADVOCATE AURORA HEALTH, INC., et al. Case No. 2:24-cv-157-LA (E.D.
Wis.), the Hon. Judge Lynn Adelman entered an order granting the
Parties' joint motion to amend the scheduling order.
Advocate Aurora is a non-profit, faith-based health care system.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 3, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=8snuox at no extra
charge.[CC]
ADVOCATE AURORA: Court Amends Scheduling Order in UPHWP Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as URIEL PHARMACY HEALTH AND
WELFARE PLAN, et al., v. ADVOCATE AURORA HEALTH, INC., et al., Case
No. 2:22-cv-610-LA (E.D. Wis.), the Hon. Judge Lynn Adelman entered
an order granting the Parties' joint motion to amend the scheduling
order.
Advocate Aurora is a non-profit, faith-based health care system.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 3, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qVFF8a at no extra
charge.[CC]
AMERICAN NEIGHBORHOOD: Faces Sojka Personal Injury Claims in D.N.J.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Neighborhood
Mortgage Acceptance Company LLC. The case is captioned as WILLIAM
SOJKA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
v. AMERICAN NEIGHBORHOOD MORTGAGE ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC, Case No.
1:24-cv-10678-RMB-MJS (D.N.J., November 22, 2024).
The Plaintiff brings personal injury claims against the Defendant.
American Neighborhood Mortgage Acceptance Company LLC is a mortgage
loan provider in New Jersey. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary S. Graifman, Esq.
KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER & GRAIFMAN, PC
135 Chestnut Ridge Road, Suite 200
Montvale, NJ 07645
Telephone: (201) 391-7000
Facsimile: (201) 307-1086
Email: ggraifman@kgglaw.com
ANTADI LLC: Faces Class Action Over Aroeve Air Purifiers Filters
----------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed class action lawsuit alleges certain Aroeve air
purifiers were falsely advertised as equipped with HEPA filters.
According to the 27-page lawsuit, high efficiency particulate air
(HEPA) filters are strictly designed to meet specific standards for
capturing small, airborne pathogens. The U.S. Department of Energy
states that a filtration system must trap at least 99.97 percent of
dust, pollen, mold, bacteria or other particles as small as 0.3
microns in order to qualify as HEPA, the filing relays.
Although Aroeve represented its air purifiers -- specifically,
models MK01, MK04 and MK06—as having HEPA-grade filters,
independent laboratory testing showed that the products were "not
even remotely close" to meeting the required standards, the
complaint claims.
Per the case, testing also revealed that the air purifiers did not
meet their claims of using H13 HEPA filters, which capture at least
99.95 percent of particles and are considered medical grade.
In 2024, a competing company challenged Aroeve's allegedly
misleading HEPA and H13 representations in a dispute brought before
the National Advertising Division of the Better Business Bureau,
the case says. The defendant has since agreed to remove such claims
from its product pages and packaging, but the suit argues that the
effort is "a day late and a dollar short."
"[Aroeve] has profited greatly from the explosion in the
air-purifier market brought about by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic
and yearly 'once-in-a-lifetime' wildfires that have ravaged the
United States. Consumers are rightfully concerned about maintaining
indoor spaces that are free of harmful pathogens and contaminants.
As a result, a large portion of [the defendant's] enormous profits
are attributable to the HEPA filtration claims that it falsely made
about its Products."
The plaintiff, a New York City resident who suffers from asthma and
allergies, says he bought an Aroeve air purifier after smoke from
Canadian wildfires drifted into the Big Apple in June 2023. As the
case tells it, the plaintiff was willing to pay a premium price for
the product due to its HEPA label and promises of high-quality
filtration. The man asserts that he would not have bought the air
purifier, or paid significantly less for the product, had he known
its filter did not meet HEPA standards.
The lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United States who
purchased an Aroeve MK01, MK04 or MK06 air purifier or replacement
filter during the applicable statute of limitations period. [GN]
BEST BUY: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Appliance Fake Sale
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that a proposed class
action lawsuit accuses Best Buy of tricking customers into thinking
they're getting a better deal on TVs and major appliances than they
actually are.
The 44-page lawsuit claims the company has engaged in a "massive"
and illegal fake sales scheme at its retail locations and on
BestBuy.com. According to the case, Best Buy has, since at least
February 2023, advertised certain products—including TVs,
refrigerators, ranges, dishwashers, microwaves, wall ovens,
cooktops, freezers, washers and dryers—at discounts from higher,
"regular" prices at which they were never, or almost never,
actually sold.
"Consumers that are presented with discounts are substantially more
likely to make the purchase," the Best Buy lawsuit says.
The filing also claims Best Buy deceptively promotes "limited-time"
offers that it knows will be extended or never end, creating a
false sense of urgency for customers that pushes them to buy its
products.
Per the suit, the defendant's alleged misconduct has duped
consumers into paying more for TVs and major appliances than they
otherwise would.
"Best Buy's false discount advertising scheme artificially
increases consumer demand for Best Buy's Products, which shifts the
demand curve and allows Best Buy to charge more for its Products
than it otherwise could have charged (i.e., a price premium) absent
the misrepresentations," the complaint contends.
One plaintiff, a California resident, says she fell victim to Best
Buy's alleged scam while shopping for a washing machine at one of
its retail stores in December 2023. The plaintiff claims she viewed
a price placard affixed to an LG washer stating that the product
was $1,099.99 but currently on sale for $799.99 for a limited
time.
The woman bought the washer based on the belief that she was taking
advantage of a legitimate sale, the case says. However, in reality
and unbeknownst to the plaintiff, Best Buy had, for at least three
months, continually offered the appliance at its purported sales
price and never offered it for $1,099.99, the lawsuit charges. The
supposed sale was "perpetual or near-perpetual," the filing
contends.
The complaint argues that the plaintiff and other Best Buy
customers would not have made their purchases had they known the
defendant's discounts were fake.
The lawsuit looks to represent anyone who, while in California,
purchased from Best Buy a TV or major appliance advertised with a
discount on or after February 2, 2023. [GN]
BIOAGE LABS: Bids for Lead Plaintiff Deadline Set March 10, 2025
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Gross Law Firm issues the following notice to shareholders of
BioAge Labs, Inc. (NASDAQ: BIOA).
Shareholders who purchased shares of BIOA during the class period
listed are encouraged to contact the firm regarding possible lead
plaintiff appointment. Appointment as lead plaintiff is not
required to partake in any recovery.
CONTACT US HERE:
https://securitiesclasslaw.com/securities/bioage-labs-inc-loss-submission-form/?id=121492&from=4
CLASS PERIOD: This lawsuit is on behalf of all shareholders that
purchased stock pursuant and/or traceable to BioAge's registration
statement for the initial public offering held on or about
September 26, 2024.
ALLEGATIONS: According to the complaint, on December 6, 2024,
BioAge announced that it would discontinue the ongoing STRIDES
Phase 2 trial for azelaprag, its lead product candidate, citing
safety concerns over elevated liver transaminase levels in
participants. This came as a surprise because, at the time of its
IPO less than three months earlier, BioAge highlighted azelaprag's
potential in patients undergoing obesity therapy with incretin
drugs. Following this news, BioAge's stock price declined from
$20.09 per share on December 6, 2024 to $4.65 per share on December
7, 2024.
DEADLINE: March 10, 2025 Shareholders should not delay in
registering for this class action. Register your information here:
https://securitiesclasslaw.com/securities/bioage-labs-inc-loss-submission-form/?id=121492&from=4
NEXT STEPS FOR SHAREHOLDERS: Once you register as a shareholder who
purchased shares of BIOA during the timeframe listed above, you
will be enrolled in a portfolio monitoring software to provide you
with status updates throughout the lifecycle of the case. The
deadline to seek to be a lead plaintiff is March 10, 2025. There is
no cost or obligation to you to participate in this case.
WHY GROSS LAW FIRM? The Gross Law Firm is a nationally recognized
class action law firm, and our mission is to protect the rights of
all investors who have suffered as a result of deceit, fraud, and
illegal business practices. The Gross Law Firm is committed to
ensuring that companies adhere to responsible business practices
and engage in good corporate citizenship. The firm seeks recovery
on behalf of investors who incurred losses when false and/or
misleading statements or the omission of material information by a
company lead to artificial inflation of the company's stock.
Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar
outcomes.
CONTACT:
The Gross Law Firm
15 West 38th Street, 12th floor
New York, NY, 10018
Email: dg@securitiesclasslaw.com
Phone: (646) 453-8903 [GN]
BLOOMBERG LP: Ndugga Seeks Leave to File Class Exhibits Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as NAULA NDUGGA, ON BEHALF OF
HERSELF AND SIMILARLY SITUATED WOMEN, v. BLOOMBERG, L.P., Case No.
1:20-cv-07464-GHW-GWG (S.D.N.Y.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order granting her motion for leave to file under seal
exhibits to Plaintiff's motion for class certification.
These exhibits are documents produced by the Defendant in discovery
in this matter, expert reports derived from data produced by
Defendant, and excerpts from deposition testimony, all of which
Defendant has designated as confidential pursuant to the Court's
Discovery Confidentiality Order.
The Defendant directed that portions of some of the exhibits and
deposition be redacted, with an unredacted copy filed under seal,
as well requiring entire exhibits be filed under seal. Consistent
with Defendant’s designations, Plaintiff redacted corresponding
portions of the publicly filed copy of her brief in support of
class certification.
Pursuant to Magistrate Judge Gorenstein's individual practices ¶
2(E), and the Court's Discovery Confidentiality Order, the
Defendant was required submit the application explaining why the
sealing of documents Defendant has designated as Confidential is
required.
Although Plaintiff's motion, only involves confidential
designations by Defendant, Defendant did not take a position on
Plaintiff’s motion.
Bloomberg is an American privately held financial, software, data,
and media company.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 2, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qMUvWe at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christine E. Webber, Esq.
Rebecca A. Ojserkis, Esq.
Dana Busgang, Esq.
COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC
1100 New York Ave. NW, Fifth Floor
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 408-4600
Facsimile: (202) 408-4699
E-mail: cwebber@cohenmilstein.com
rojserkis@cohenmilstein.com
dbusgang@cohenmilstein.com
- and -
Donna H. Clancy, Esq.
THE CLANCY LAW FIRM, P.C.
40 Wall Street, 61st Floor
New York, NY 10005
Telephone: (212) 747-1744
Facsimile: (646) 693-7229
E-mail: dhc@dhclancylaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Elise M. Bloom, Esq.
Rachel S. Philion, Esq.
Allison L. Martin, Esq.
Mark W. Batten, Esq.
PINCHOS GOLDBERG
Eleven Times Square
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 969-3000
Facsimile: (212) 969-2900
E-mail: ebloom@proskauer.com
rphilion@proskauer.com
amartin@proskauer.com
pgoldberg@proskauer.com
mbatten@proskauer.com
BLUE NILE: Tracks Website Visitors, Kishnani Class Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------
KIEREN KISHNANI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. BLUE NILE, INC., a New York corporation; and DOES 1
through 25, inclusive, Case No. 2:25-cv-0010 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 6,
2025) alleges that the Defendant installed on its Website software
created by TikTok in order to identify website visitors, in
violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act.
The TikTok Software acts via a process known as "fingerprinting."
The Software gathers device and browser information, geographic
information, referral tracking, and url tracking by running code or
"scripts" on the Website to send user details to TikTok, the suit
says.
Furthermore, the TikTok Software begins to collect information the
moment a user lands on the Website. Thus, even though the Website
has a "cookie banner" the information has already been sent to
TikTok regarding the user's visit.
Additionally, since Blue Nile has decided to use TikTok's "Auto
Advanced Matching" technology, TikTok scans every website for
information, such as name, date of birth, and address, the
information is sent simultaneously to TikTok, so that TikTok can
isolate with certainty the individual to be targeted.
The Defendant did not obtain Class Members' express or implied
consent to be subjected to data sharing with TikTok for the
purposes of fingerprinting and de-anonymization, the Plaintiff
adds.
Blue Nile is the proprietor of www.bluenile.com, an online platform
that sells fine jewelry and diamonds.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert Tauler, Esq.
Narain Kumar, Esq.
TAULER SMITH LLP
626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 927-9270
E-mail: robert@taulersmith.com
nkumar@taulersmith.com
BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS: Romero Files Suit in California State Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bridgestone Americas
Tire Operations LLC. The case is captioned as JUAN ROMERO,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
BRIDGESTONE AMERICAS TIRE OPERATIONS LLC, Case No. CIVSB2435208
(Cal. Super., San Bernardino Cty., November 22, 2024).
The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged employment
violation.
Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations LLC is a tire and rubber
company doing business in California. [BN]
BYTEDANCE INC: S. J. Files Suit in C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bytedance, Inc. et
al. The case is styled as S. J., individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. BYTEDANCE INC., BYTEDANCE LTD., TIKTOK
LTD., TIKTOK PTE. LTD., TIKTOK U.S. DATA SECURITY INC., Case No.
2:25-cv-00175 (C.D. Cal., Jan. 7, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
ByteDance Ltd. -- http://www.bytedance.com/en/-- is a Chinese
internet technology company headquartered in Haidian, Beijing, and
incorporated in the Cayman Islands.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John J. Nelson, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC
280 South Beverly Drive, Penthouse
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Phone: (858) 209-6941
Email: jnelson@milberg.com
CDK GLOBAL: Fails to Protect Customers' Data, Manderbach Ford Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE D. MANDERBACH, INC. d/b/a MANDERBACH FORD, DLR AUTO GROUP
LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. CDK GLOBAL, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-12256
(N.D. Ill., January 7, 2025) is a class action against the
Defendant for negligence, breach of contract, unjust enrichment,
and invasion of privacy.
The case arises from the Defendant's failure to maintain adequate
data security measures, which led to two cybersecurity incidents on
June 18 and June 19, 2024. The data breaches have had debilitating
effects on car dealerships, automotive repair shops, and other
automotive business who use CDK Global's systems throughout the
United States, such as the Plaintiff, which have been unable to
timely process hundreds of millions of dollars in sales and
services. The data breaches forced the Defendant to shut down its
servers and services, depriving the Plaintiff and Class members
access to critical software and information necessary to run their
businesses.
George D. Manderbach, Inc., doing business as Manderbach Ford, DLR
Auto Group LLC, is an independent Ford dealership located in
Hamburg, Pennsylvania.
CDK Global, LLC is a software-as-a-service provider doing business
in Illinois. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Benjamin F. Johns, Esq.
Jonathan Shub, Esq.
Samantha E. Holbrook, Esq.
Andrea L. Bonner, Esq.
SHUB & JOHNS LLC
Four Tower Bridge
200 Barr Harbor Drive, Suite 400
Conshohocken, PA 19428
Telephone: (610) 477-8380
Email: bjohns@shublawyers.com
jshub@shublawyers.com
sholbrook@shublawyers.com
abonner@shublawyers.com
- and -
Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq.
FEGAN SCOTT LLC
150 S. Wacker Dr., 24th Floor
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 741-1019
Email: beth@feganscott.com
- and -
Adam E. Polk, Esq.
Anthony Rogari, Esq.
GIRARD SHARP LLP
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 981-4800
Email: apolk@girardsharp.com
arogari@girardsharp.com
CHERVON NORTH: Faces Class Action Over Lithium Batteries Recall
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that Chervon North
America, Inc. faces a proposed class action lawsuit after recalling
about 63,000 SKIL PWRCORE 40 Lithium 5.0Ah 40V batteries at risk of
overheating and catching fire.
The 22-page case claims that consumers have suffered injuries and
financial losses due to Chervon's failure to disclose the dangerous
fire hazard associated with the recalled SKIL lithium-ion
batteries, which are used to charge lawnmowers and outdoor power
tools.
According to the lawsuit, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety
Commission (CPSC) has documented 100 incidents of the batteries
overheating, melting, smoking or igniting. Among these, eight
reports involved minor burns and/or smoke inhalation, and 49 cases
involved property damage, the complaint relays.
In a recall announcement published on December 19, 2024, Chevron
urged consumers to immediately stop using the affected batteries.
Check out the CPSC's page for details about which battery model and
manufacturing date codes are covered by the recall.
The defendant also stated that consumers can get a free replacement
or refund by returning their impacted battery. To receive a
replacement or refund, consumers must first register their battery
on SKIL's recall website. Once a valid registration is submitted, a
collection kit will be shipped to the consumer to return the
battery, according to an FAQ page for Chervon's SKIL lithium-ion
battery recall.
The lawsuit accuses Chevron of negligence, claiming that the fire
risk is the result of a "demonstrably avoidable" and "possibly
deadly" design defect.
"As a result of the defect in the Products, [the plaintiff] and
members of the Classes have suffered damages including, but not
limited to, the cost of the defective product, loss of use of the
product and other related damage," the case contends.
The SKIL battery lawsuit looks to represent anyone in the United
States who purchased SKIL PWRCORE 40 Lithium 5.0Ah 40V batteries
during the applicable statute of limitations period. [GN]
CHIRP INNOVATION: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Crumwell Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
DENISE CRUMWELL, on behalf of herself and all other persons
similarly situated v. CHIRP INNOVATION, INC., Case No.
1:25-cv-00118 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 6, 2025) sues the Defendant for its
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive
website, https://gochirp.com/, to be fully accessible to and
independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons, pursuant to the Americans with
Disabilities Act.
During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
Dec. 16, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a Chirp RPM Mini and to
view the information on the Website, the Plaintiff encountered
multiple access barriers that denied her a shopping experience
similar to that of a sighted person and full and equal access to
the goods and services offered to the public and made available to
the public, the suit says.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue to
contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation and segregation, the
suit asserts.
The Plaintiff 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.
Ms. Crumwell is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using her
computer.
The Defendant offers back pain and tension relief devices.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
CINNAMON INDIAN: Villegas Seeks Wages & OT Pay Under FLSA, NYLL
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cinnamon Indian
Cuisine Inc. The case is captioned as Jesus Villegas v. Cinnamon
Indian Cuisine Inc. et al., Case No. 7:24-cv-08555-JGLC (S.D.N.Y.,
Nov. 12, 2024).
The case is a collection action brought on behalf of all kitchen
workers and bussers to recover unpaid overtime compensation under
the Fair Labor Standards Act. The suit also seeks to remedy
violations of the wage-and-hour provisions of the New York Labor
Law.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke.
The Plaintiff worked as a kitchen worker for Cinnamon, an Indian
restaurant controlled and operated by Defendants.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jacob Aronauer, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JACOB ARONAUER
250 Broadway Suite 600
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 323-6980
E-mail: jaronauer@aronauerlaw.com
COHU INC: Palmer Seeks to Invalidate Charter's Removal Provision
----------------------------------------------------------------
KEITH PALMER, on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated
stockholders of COHU, INC. v. COHU, INC., WILLIAM E. BENDUSH,
STEVEN J. BILODEAU, ANDREW M. CAGGIA, and YON Y. JORDEN, Case No.
2025-0015 (Del. Ch., Jan. 6, 2025) seeks declaratory relief
invalidating a provision in the Company's Amended and Restated
Certificate of Incorporation (the "Charter") that violates Section
141(k) of the Delaware General Corporation Law.
The suit says that Cohu has included a provision in its Charter
that impermissibly restricts the stockholders' ability to remove a
director for "cause." That provision, referred as the "Removal
Provision," impermissibly insulates directors from removal. It must
be invalidated and removed from the Charter so that Cohu
stockholders are aware of, and can freely exercise, their
fundamental right to seek the removal of Cohu's directors.
On Nov. 1, 2024, Plaintiff's counsel, on behalf of a Cohu
stockholder, sent a letter to the Board detailing the Section
141(k) violation and demanding that the Board take remedial action
to eliminate the Removal Provision from the Charter.
In breach of their fiduciary duties to the Company and its
stockholders, the members of the Board's Nominating and Governance
Committee (the "NGC Committee") -- each of whom has an interest in
keeping the Removal Provision in place -- reviewed the Demand
Letter, insisted on the Removal Provision's validity based on
untenable arguments, and refused to take remedial action, the
Plaintiff avers.
So long as the Removal Provision remains a part of the Charter,
Cohu stockholders will not even attempt to remove a director for
conduct that might constitute "cause" under Section 141(k) but not
under the Removal Provision because the Removal Provision expressly
and unambiguously says that there are only two specific grounds for
removing a director, the Plaintiff adds.
Plaintiff Palmer has continuously owned shares of Cohu's common
stock since January 2023.
Cohu is a supplier of test handling equipment used by semiconductor
manufacturers in final test operations.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian E. Farnan, Esq.
Michael J. Farnan, Esq.
FARNAN LLP
919 North Market Street, 12th Floor
Wilmington, DE 19801
Telephone: (302) 777-0300
Facsimile: (302) 777-0301
E-mail: bfarnan@farnanlaw.com
mfarnan@farnanlaw.com
- and -
Steven J. Purcell, Esq.
Robert H. Lefkowitz, Esq.
Stephen C. Childs, Esq.
Omer Kremer, Esq.
PURCELL & LEFKOWITZ LLP
600 Mamaroneck Avenue, Suite 400
Harrison, NY 10528
Telephone: (212) 725-1000
COOPERSURGICAL INC: Faces Class Suit Over Defective Medical Product
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Genevieve Curtis, writing for FOX13 News reports that dozens of
couples say their emotional journey to become parents was destroyed
by a defective medical product.
-- A Georgia couple sued CooperSurgical over a defective IVF
product that destroyed16 of their embryos.
-- CooperSurgical has filed a separate lawsuit accusing another
company of failing to test the product appropriately.
It is one of the most precious journeys, starting a family. For
those struggling to conceive, IVF may be their only option.
Now, dozens of couples say their emotional journey to become
parents was destroyed by a defective medical product.
In a lawsuit filed this week, a Georgia couple sued CooperSurgical
over a defective IVF product.
The couple sought fertility treatments at a clinic in Sarasota,
hoping to start a family.
Instead, their 16 embryos were destroyed.
They, along with dozens of other couples, are now suing
CooperSurgical, the maker of a product used to treat those
embryos.
"It's expensive. It is physically painful. It is very emotionally
draining," said attorney Patrick Johnson.
Johnson said his firm, Girard Sharp, represents dozens of couples
suing CooperSurgical in individual cases and a federal class action
lawsuit.
Johnson said his clients Brittany Lanier and Joshua Yarboro's hopes
of having a baby depended on the IVF treatment.
READ: St. Pete police release video of $21K art gallery heist in
hopes of capturing second suspect
The lawsuit alleges the promising future of a family was crushed by
a defective product used on their embryos.
"When they found out that all of their embryos had been destroyed
by the defect were just really devastated," Johnson said.
CooperSurgical manufactures a product that helps embryos grow. In
December 2023, the FDA recalled batches of the product.
The lawsuit cites information that 481 bottles of the product were
purchased by clinics in the US, and of that, as many as 20,000
patients could have had their embryos destroyed by the product.
Johnson believes these cases highlight a lack of regulation in the
fertility industry.
"Since it's such a new industry and new industries will always have
some sort of lag between their innovation and when regulators start
taking a closer example of them," Johnson said. "As we see defects
increasing around the country, it just feels like it's a space that
needs more attention to it."
Johnson said that they had lost precious time trying to start their
family in Brittany and Josh's case.
While most of their embryos were destroyed outright by the product,
a few grew in ways that would be unhealthy to transfer, leaving
them in a painful limbo.
"It goes against their religion to destroy an embryo. So they're in
a really hard position of what to do with an embryo that they know
did not really grow to a point to be viable to transfer because of
the defect," Johnson said. "It's currently sitting on ice, and they
are paying every month for that expense."
FOX 13 contacted CooperSurgical for a comment but did not receive a
response.
CooperSurgical has filed a separate lawsuit accusing another
company of failing to test the product appropriately. [GN]
COSTO WHOLESALE: Faces Overpricing Class Action Suit in Montreal
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jacob Serebrin, writing for The Gazette, reports that Costco
illegally overcharged customers who made purchases on its website
and misled them about how it charged shipping and handling, a
proposed class action lawsuit alleges. The proposed suit, filed in
Federal Court in Montreal, claims that the popular warehouse
retailer charged customers more for products sold online than it
charged for those same products in its physical stores.
Jocelyn Ouellette, a lawyer at Perrier Attorneys who represents
plaintiffs in the proposed suit, said that violates a section of
Canada's Competition Act that forbids a practice known as "double
ticketing" -- when retailers display more than one price and charge
the higher one. "In fact, it says that if you advertise the same
product at two different prices, then you are bound to sell it at
the lower price, which is not what Costco does," Ouellette said in
an interview Thursday, January 9. The proposed suit also alleges
that Costco violated another section of the Competition Act, which
bans false and misleading representations, Ouellette said. While
one part of the Costco website informs online shoppers that
shipping and handling fees are included in the in the higher online
price, when customers check out, they're presented with
calculations that show the cost of shipping and handling as $0.
That could lead a customer to believe there aren't any shipping and
handling fees, Ouellette said. "When you fulfill your purchase on
the internet, you might think that you're not paying some shipping
and handling fees, when fact you are," Ouellette said. "If you were
able to compare the prices in store and on the internet, and let's
say, you see a difference of $10, you could see that there's $10 in
shipping fees that you would not know about, but if you buy three
or four of the same item, then you'd be paying that $10 three or
four times, which is something that the internet customer is
unaware of." According to the proposed suit, one part of the Costco
website tells customers that it will indicate which products can be
found for a lower price at a nearby store, but the website doesn't
actually do that in a systematic way. The proposed suit alleges
that is also a violation of the ban on false and misleading
representations. "In the absence of this message, the consumer is
likely to think that the product is only available online and to
not know that it could be purchased at a lower price in store," the
proposed suit reads. The proposed suit's representative plaintiff,
Ibrahim El Bechara, purchased a blender from the Costco website
last July, but when he later went to a Laval Costco, he found that
it was being sold for $5 less in the store, according to a court
filing. El Bechara made several further purchases from the website
in October and November, including food storage containers, a
vacuum sealer and socks, only to find that those products were
being sold for between $4 and $10 less in Costco stores, according
to the proposed suit. But when he made those purchases, the website
displayed shipping and handling fees of $0. Other products,
including water filters, irons, crock pots and mixing bowls, were
also found to be selling for between $7 and $10 more online than in
stores.
The lawsuit must be certified by a judge before it is allowed to
move forward as a class action. If it is certified, it would
include all Canadians who purchased a product on Costco's website
or mobile application since Dec. 23, 2022 and who paid a higher
price than what was displayed in Costco stores for the same
product. Ouellette said he doesn't yet know how many people would
be included in the class. The suit seeks an injunction ordering
Costco to end the practice of charging more online than it does in
store, as well as damages for customers who made purchases online.
"We're seeking for them to change their practices and to respect
the law, and we're seeking monetary compensation. Precise figures
are unknown at this point because we're way too early in the
proceedings, but it will be monetary compensation," Ouellette said.
Costco did not respond to a request for comment made on January
9.[GN]
CSU FULLERTON: Schaub Files Labor Suit in California State Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against CSU Fullerton
Auxiliary Services Corporation. The case is captioned as SALEAH
LORAYNE SCHAUB, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. CSU FULLERTON AUXILIARY SERVICES CORPORATION, Case No.
30-2024-01441801-CU-OE-CXC (Cal. Super., Orange Cty., November 22,
2024).
The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged employment
violation.
CSU Fullerton Auxiliary Services Corporation is a non-profit
organization in Fullerton, California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Natalie Haritoonian, Esq.
D.LAW, INC.
450 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 840
Glendale, CA 91203
Telephone: (818) 962-6465
Email: n.haritoonian@d.law
DISCOUNTMAGS.COM LLC: Tracks Website Visitors, Garcia Alleges
-------------------------------------------------------------
SILVIA GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. DISCOUNTMAGS.COM LLC, Delaware entity, d/b/a
WWW.DISCOUNTMAGS.COM, Case No. 25CU000905C (Cal. Super., Jan. 6,
2025) alleges that the Defendant installed on its Website software
created by TikTok in order to identify website visitors, in
violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act.
The TikTok Software gathers device and browser information,
geographic information, referral tracking, and url tracking by
running code or "scripts" on the Website to send user details to
TikTok, the suit says.
Furthermore, the TikTok Software begins to collect information the
moment a user lands on the Website before any pop-up or cookie
banner advises users of the invasion or seeks their consent.
The Plaintiff contends the Defendant secretly monetized visitors'
personal information by enabling TikTok to spy on those visitors,
surveil their journey across the web, track their location and
lifestyle habits, and bombard them with targeted advertising.
The Defendant did not obtain Class Members' express or implied
consent to be subjected to data sharing with TikTok for the
purposes of fingerprinting and de-anonymization, the Plaintiff
adds.
The Defendant is an entity that sells books and magazine
subscriptions to consumers throughout California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
David W. Reid, Esq.
Victoria C. Knowles, Esq.
PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone: (949) 706-6464
Facsimile: (949) 706-6469
E-mail: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com
dreid@pacifictrialattorneys.com
vknowles@pacifictrialattorneys.com
DRAFTKINGS INC: Beyer Sues Over Fraudulent Practices
----------------------------------------------------
James Beyer and Wyatt Robinson, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. DraftKings, Inc.; Crown KY Gaming LLC,
Case No. 1:25-cv-00003-GNS (W.D. Ky., Jan. 7, 2025), is brought
against the Defendants unethical and fraudulent practices.
DraftKings advertises an all-upside gambling experience, falsely
promising new users that they will get free money which they can
wager without any risk. In reality, DraftKings has created an
all-upside opportunity only for itself: the contracts require new
users to deposit and gamble almost exclusively with their own
money, which they almost always lose. DraftKings also engages in
other, undisclosed, manipulations, forcing those users who are able
to initially win to make worse and worse bets until their funds are
exhausted.
These unethical and fraudulent practices by DraftKings are the
present face of competition in the obscenely profitable, and
formerly illegal, industry. DraftKings' business model has long
involved pushing the boundaries of the law, misleading consumers,
and luring naïve gamblers into developing addictions.
DraftKings uses false promises of the opportunity to win big with
no risk to lure users into committing more money to the platform
than they otherwise would have. DraftKings uses these tactics to
identify and cultivate the people it wants on its platform: those
who are susceptible to these sorts of advertisements and most
likely to lose a lot of money sports betting. In other words,
marks, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff created his first account on DraftKings in Illinois
when he was under eighteen years old.
DraftKings, Inc. is a Nevada gambling and entertainment corporation
headquartered in Boston, Massachusetts.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Kanovitz, Esq.
Jon Loevy, Esq.
Aaron Tucek, Esq.
Isaac Green, Esq.
LOEVY & LOEVY
311 N. Aberdeen, 3rd FL
Chicago, IL 60607
EPIC AIRCRAFT: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Price Hikes
----------------------------------------------------------
Jenna Greene, writing for Reuters, reports that in some ways, it's
hard to feel too badly for several dozen people who say they
plunked down deposits to buy their own six-seat turboprop
airplanes, only to find, after years of waiting, that manufacturer
Epic Aircraft discontinued the model, replacing it with an updated
version that would cost them hundreds of thousands of dollars more
than the originally agreed-upon price.
I know. Oh, the humanity. You can't buy a new Epic airplane ("the
luxurious and spacious handcrafted interior is a flawless extension
of the aircraft's sleek and elegant lines . . . ") for $2.75
million anymore.
What's notable to me is that the case, which is pending in federal
court in Eugene, Oregon, has been certified, opens new tab as a
breach of contract class action. Never mind that there are at most
50 class members (the defense argues that there are actually 34),
seeking compensatory damages of up to $1.1 million each, plus
punitive damages and legal fees, according to court papers.
It's like a class action upside-down world. Instead of a large
number of people seeking small payouts, a small number of people
are seeking large payouts.
Epic and its lawyers did not respond to requests for comment, but
the privately held, Bend, Oregon-based company in its answer, opens
new tab to the complaint filed last week argues there was "no
breach of contract, no bad faith or unlawful dealing."
The case raises wider questions to me on the applicability of Rule
23's numerosity criteria, opens new tab for certifying a class.
Shouldn't the lawsuits be reserved for vindicating "the rights of
groups of people who individually would be without effective
strength to bring their opponents into court at all," as the U.S.
Supreme Court put it in 1997, opens new tab? (I'm fairly sure
airplane buyers do not fall into this category.)
Or perhaps there's something to be said for petite class actions?
Even a small class promotes judicial economy, and the class size
means it's possible to ensure every member is notified of the case,
the ability to opt out, and of their right to claim a share of any
settlement.
Class action expert Brian Fitzpatrick, a Vanderbilt Law School
professor who is not involved in the case, told me it's unusual but
not unprecedented to have such a small class size, and "extremely
unusual" for individual members to have seven-figure damage
claims.
"Most class actions are small-change affairs, where people have $50
at stake," he said.
While class members here stand to benefit by paying smaller legal
fees -- class action lawyers typically take 25% of the recovery,
versus up to 40% for individual lawyers, he said -- they also give
up control over the case.
Those who don't opt out are "putting all their eggs in one basket,"
Fitzpatrick said.
The airplane dispute began in 2014, six years before Epic's E1000
model was approved for sale by the U.S. Federal Aviation
Administration, when the two named plaintiffs each put down a fully
refundable deposit of $27,500. The deposits gave the men first dibs
on buying the 28th and 38th airplanes that Epic would produce.
Plaintiffs' lawyers from Leiman Law in Eugene and The Bruno Firm in
Chicago, who did not respond to requests for comment, allege, opens
new tab that the agreements "locked in" a base price of $2.75
million, $2.95 million or $3.25 million, depending on when the
deals were executed.
But Epic's lawyers from Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle in New
York and Rosen & Schneider in Portland, Oregon, argue that the
reservation deposit language specified it "shall not be construed
or interpreted as a purchase agreement," and that it "does not
contain any obligation on the part of Customer to purchase or Epic
to sell an Aircraft."
It's not disputed that Epic originally estimated it would take
three years and cost $20 million to obtain FAA certification, but,
instead, it took nearly seven years and cost $200 million.
Plaintiffs say Epic, looking to boost its bottom line, "knew that
it could make substantially more revenue in the marketplace if it
devised a way to be released from its contractual obligations" to
honor the prices in its reservation agreements.
A competing aircraft with similar features had a retail price of
$4.1 million in 2016, the plaintiffs note -- more than a million
dollars higher than Epic's E1000.
Shortly after receiving FAA approval, the plaintiffs say Epic in
2020 sent a letter to reservation holders informing them that the
E1000 aircraft was no longer for sale, and that instead, it was
introducing a new model, the E1000 GX, which had a retail base
price of $3.85 million. The named plaintiffs say there were asked
to pay $635,000 more.
The new model had a different autopilot system (the old one was no
longer available) and a five-blade propeller rather than four. But
the plaintiffs allege the GX model "was not a new aircraft" and
that its primary features and equipment were "identical" to the
original.
The new model was a "pretextual reason" for refusing to honor the
customer reservation agreement prices, they say.
U.S. District Judge Michael McShane last year certified the class,
noting that there are "few bright-line rules and district courts
have broad leeway in making class certification decisions."
Epic asked the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to intervene and
reverse the decision but was rebuffed, opens new tab in July.
Which means at least for now, Epic is stuck litigating the lawsuit
as a class. Buckle up for turbulence ahead. [GN]
EQUINOX INC: Carter Files Suit in N.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equinox, Inc. The
case is styled as Andrea Carter, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Equinox, Inc., Case No.
1:25-cv-00026-MAD-DJS (N.D.N.Y., Jan. 7, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Equinox, Inc. -- https://www.equinox.com/ -- is a gym in New
York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Randi A. Kassan, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, NY 11530
Phone: (516) 741-5600
Fax: (516) 741-0128
Email: rkassan@milberg.com
ESSA BANCORP: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With CNB Financial
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating ESSA Bancorp, Inc. (Nasdaq: ESSA), relating to the
proposed merger with CNB Financial Corporation. Under the terms of
the agreement, ESSA shareholders will receive 0.8547 shares of CNB
common stock for each outstanding share of ESSA common stock.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3.What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders . . .
and we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are
a national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in the above listed company and have concerns or wish to
obtain additional information free of charge, please visit our
website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341
Attorney Advertising. (C) 2024 Monteverde & Associates PC. The law
firm responsible for this advertisement is Monteverde & Associates
PC (www.monteverdelaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee a
similar outcome with respect to any future matter. [GN]
EVOLVE BANK: Margul Sues Over Mismanagement of Customers' Funds
---------------------------------------------------------------
OLGA MARGUL, KELLI JO CLAXTON, HENRY YEH, COLIN SMITH, ROD GENDRON,
and KAYLA MORRIS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. EVOLVE BANK & TRUST, an Arkansas
bank; EVOLVE BANCORP, INC., an Arkansas limited liability company;
AMG NATIONAL TRUST, a Colorado bank; LINEAGE BANK, a Tennessee
bank; and AMERICAN BANK, Inc. a Pennsylvania bank, Defendants, Case
No. 1:24-cv-03259-STV (D. Colo., November 22, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendant for money had and received, unjust
enrichment, negligence, conversion, breach of fiduciary duty,
accounting, and constructive trust.
The case arises from the Defendants' failure to adequately maintain
and safeguard customers' funds. The Plaintiffs and Class members
created accounts on various financial technology platforms
(FinTechs) and initiated cash deposits. Because FinTechs are not
themselves banks, they cannot maintain custody of customer funds.
Instead, customer funds were maintained by the Defendants.
Significant ledger irregularities were discovered by the Defendants
indicating the account balances set forth in Synapse Financial
Technologies, Inc.'s account ledger were materially inaccurate and,
therefore, could not be used as the basis for distributing funds to
end users. As a result, many customers' funds were either lost,
stolen, or misplaced, with one Defendant blaming the next.
Thousands of customers are left stranded without access to their
funds. And despite demanding the return of their funds, the
Defendants refused.
Evolve Bank & Trust is a banking company headquartered in Memphis,
Tennessee.
Evolve Bancorp, Inc. is a bank holding company headquartered in
Memphis, Tennessee.
AMG National Trust is a banking company headquartered in Greenwood
Village, Colorado.
Lineage Bank is a banking company headquartered in Franklin,
Tennessee.
American Bank, Inc. is a banking company headquartered in
Allentown, Pennsylvania. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
M. Anderson Berry, Esq.
Gregory Haroutunian, Esq.
CLAYEO C. ARNOLD, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
865 Howe Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95825
Telephone: (916) 239-4778
Email: aberry@justice4you.com
gharoutunian@justice4you.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W. Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
- and -
Alexander E. Wolf, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
280 South Beverly Drive, Penthouse
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (872) 365-7060
Email: awolf@milberg.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Ste. 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
GLOBAL EXCHANGE: Avery Seeks to File Exhibit Unredacted
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JONATHAN AVERY,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
GLOBAL EXCHANGE VACATION CLUB, et al., Case No.
8:23-cv-02071-JFW-DFM (C.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to
enter an order permitting him to file the unredacted version of
Exhibit A to Avery's Declaration, which are excerpts of Avery's
phone bill- under seal.
The Plaintiff cannot be overusing sealed documents in this
litigation, as portions of one exhibit (Avery's phone bill) is the
only item Plaintiff seeks to seal in a motion for class
certification with dozens of exhibits, and the only sealed exhibit
thus far in the course of this litigation.
Global Exchange provides quality vacation ownership.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 1, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=WQHg4o at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ethan Preston, Esq.
PRESTON LAW OFFICES
4054 McKinney Avenue, Suite 310
Dallas, TX 75204
Telephone: (972) 564-8340
Facsimile: (866) 509-1197
E-mail: ep@eplaw.us
- and -
Jacob U. Ginsburg, Esq.
KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, P.C.
30 East Butler Pike
Ambler, PA 19002
Telephone: (267) 468-5374
Facsimile: (877) 788-2864
E-mail: jginsburg@creditlaw.com
GOODRX INC: Lakhani TX Sues Over Sherman Antitrust Act Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lakhani TX Inc., d/b/a GARDEN DRUG PHARMACY, on behalf of itself
and all others similarly situated v. GOODRX, INC.; GOODRX HOLDINGS
INC. CVS CAREMARK CORPORATION; EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDING COMPANY,
MEDIMPACT HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, INC.; and NAVITUS HEALTH SOLUTIONS
LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00003 (D.R.I., Jan. 3, 2025), is brought as
an antitrust action under Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act on
behalf of independent pharmacies, which are the lifeblood of the
United States' healthcare system, arising from an illegal agreement
to suppress the prices paid by PBMs to independent pharmacies for
generic prescription medication.
Pharmacy Benefit Managers or "PBMs" are third patty companies that
function as intermediaries between pharmaceutical manufacturers and
third-party payors ("TPPs"), including health insurance providers.
PBMs create formularies, negotiate rebates (the discount paid from
a pharmaceutical manufacturer to a PBM), process claims, create
pharmacy networks, review drug utilization and occasionally manage
mail-order specialty pharmacies. Put simply, PBMs negotiate prices
that TPPs pay to pharmacies for chugs as well as work with the
pharmacies on reimbursement claims on those prices.
As part of GoodRx's Integrated Savings Program ("ISP"), each of the
PBMs agreed to supply competitively sensitive information to GoodRx
and, using that competitively sensitive information, GoodRx works
as a common decisionmaker to set the rates for reimbursement by
PBMs to independent pharmacies for generic prescription medication.
As part of the ISP program, the PBMs, who are horizontal
competitors and should be competing in the Relevant Market to
provide the best prices possible, agree not to bid against each
other for the prices that they will pay pharmacies for generic
prescription medication. Additionally, as part of the ISP program,
GoodRx agrees with the PBMs to use GoodRx's pricing algorithm to
determine pharmacy reimbursement rates for generic prescription
medication prescriptions filled for patients insured by TPPs.
But for this ISP scheme, the PBMs would need to necessarily compete
with each other (and with GoodRx) for independent pharmacies, like
Plaintiff and Class members, to join their networks--this includes
offering higher rebates and rates of reimbursement for generic
prescription medication than their horizontal competitors. As a
result of this conduct, independent pharmacies suffer economically
in the form of lower rebates and rates of reimbursement for generic
prescription medication from TPPs.
Against this back drop, Plaintiff Garden Drug Pharmacy, an
independent pharmacy, brings this Action against Defendants on
behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated independent
pharmacies under Section 1 the Shennan Antitrust Act, seeking
actual damages, restitution, treble damages, declaratory relief,
injunctive relief, pre- and post- judgment interest, as well as
reasonable costs and attorney's fees associated with the
prosecution of this Action, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff Garden Drug Pharmacy is a corporation with its
principal place of business located in Florida.
GoodRx, Inc. is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
business located in Santa Monica, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dawen Corrente, Esq.
CORRENTE LAW
226 South Main Street, 31d Fl.
Providence, Rhode Island 02903
Phone: (401) 331-7720
- and -
Charles E. Schaffer, Esq.
SEDRAN & BERMAN
50 Walnut Steet, Suite 500
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Phone: (215) 592-1500
cschaffer@lfsblaw.com
HOYU AMERICA: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Tucker Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
HENRY TUCKER, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated v. HOYU AMERICA CO., Case No. 1:25-cv-00117 (S.D.N.Y.,
Jan. 6, 2025) sues the Defendant for its failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website,
https://bigen-usa.com, to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired
persons, under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
During Plaintiff's visits to the Website, the last occurring on
Dec. 26, 2024, in an attempt to purchase a Bigen hair coloring
product for men from the Defendant and to view the information on
the Website, the Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers
that denied the Plaintiff a shopping experience similar to that of
a sighted person and full and equal access to the goods and
services offered to the public and made available to the public,
the suit alleges.
The Plaintiff has suffered and continues to suffer frustration and
humiliation as a result of the discriminatory conditions present on
the Defendant's Website. These discriminatory conditions continue
to contribute to Plaintiff's sense of isolation and segregation,
the suit adds.
The Plaintiff 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.
Mr. Tucker is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
The Defendant offers air care products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
HP HOOD: Fails to Pay Clerks' Minimum & OT Wages, Rubio Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BENJAMIN RUBIO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. HP HOOD, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company
doing business in California; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,
Case No. 24CV022987 (Cal. Super., Nov. 12, 2024) alleges that the
Defendants had a corporate policy, pattern, and practice of failing
to pay all earned regular, minimum, and overtime wages to the
Plaintiff and Class Members, in violation of the California Labor
Code and the applicable IWC Wage Orders.
The suit says that the Defendant suffered and permitted employees
to work in excess of eight hours in a workday and/or over 40 hours
in a workweek without overtime pay. In addition, the Plaintiff and
Meal Break Sub-Class members were suffered and permitted to work
through legally required meal breaks and were denied the
opportunity to take their duty-free rest breaks.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks penalties and/or damages for
failure to provide accurate, itemized wage statements, penalties
and/or damages for failure to pay all minimum and overtime wages
for hours worked, penalties and/or damages for failure to provide
off-duty meal and rest periods, failure to reimburse business
expenses, penalties under California Labor Code statutes, and
restitution for unfair business practices in violation of Business
and Professions Code section 17200, et seq.
The Plaintiff worked for Defendants as an hourly, non-exempt
warehouse clerk from Dec. 18, 2017 to Jan. 13, 2024.
HP Hood provides dairy products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Justin Lo, Esq.
WORK LAWYERS PC
22939 Hawthorne Blvd., Suite 300
Torrance, CA 90505
Telephone: (310)248-2944
Facsimile: (424) 355-8335
E-mail: justin@caworklawyer.com
JORIKI USA: Gretano Class Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under WARN Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
KEANAN GRETANO on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. JORIKI USA INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-00014-UNA (D. Del.,
Jan. 6, 2025) is a civil action for collection of unpaid wages and
benefits for 60 calendar days pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and
Retraining Notification Act.
On Dec. 31, 2024 and thereafter, the Defendant ordered the
termination of Plaintiff's employment together with the termination
of 229 other employees who worked at or reported to or were
assigned work from its Facility as part of a plant closing as
defined by the WARN Act, for which they were entitled to receive 60
days advance written notice under the WARN Act.
Prior to their terminations, neither Plaintiff nor the Other
Similarly Situated Employees received written notice that complied
with the requirements of the WARN Act, the suit says.
The Defendant failed to pay the Plaintiff and the Other Similarly
Situated Employees their respective wages, salary, commissions,
bonuses, accrued holiday pay and accrued vacation for 60 days
following their respective terminations and failed to make 401(k)
contributions and provide them with health insurance coverage and
other employee benefits, the suit asserts.
Plaintiff Gretano was an employee who was employed by the Defendant
and worked at or reported to a facility located at 575 Research
Drive, Pittston, PA 18640 until her termination without cause on
Dec. 31, 2024.
Joriki is a contract manufacturer of beverages and beverage
packaging.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James E. Huggett, Esq.
MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN
300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 800
Wilmington, DE 19801
Telephone: (302) 888-1112
Facsimile: (302) 888-1119
- and -
Stuart J. Miller, Esq.
LANKENAU & MILLER, LLP
100 Church Street, 8th FL
New York, NY 10078
Telephone: (212) 581-5005
Facsimile: (212) 581-2122
- and -
Mary E. Olsen, Esq.
M. Vance McCrary, Esq.
THE GARDNER FIRM, PC
182 St. Francis Street, Suite 103
Mobile, AL 36602
Telephone: (251) 433-8100
Facsimile: (251) 433-8181
L.T.D. COMMODITIES: Blood Suit Removed to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Sue A. Blood; Eleanor Burgess, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. L.T.D. COMMODITIES
LLC, an Illinois limited liability company (now known as OLDCO LTD
LLC); and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. 37-2020-00034050-CU-BT-CTL
was removed from the Superior Court of California, San Diego
County, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California on Jan. 6, 2025, and assigned Case No.
3:25-cv-00029-LL-SBC.
The Complaint alleged that LTD failed to adequately disclose
material terms of its membership program operated under the name
LTD Commodities Perks (the "Perks" membership) and that LTD did not
obtain consumers' consent to charges associated with a Perks
membership. The Complaint asserted causes of action for false
advertising, based on violation of the California Automatic Renewal
Law, violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"), and
violation of the Unfair Competition Law.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
William A. Munoz, Esq.
FREEMAN MATHIS & GARY, LLP
2281 Lava Ridge Court, Suite 250
Roseville, CA 95661
Phone: (916) 472-3300
Fax: (833) 297-6235
Email: Bill.Munoz@fmglaw.com
LISA WOLFE: Seeks More Time for Class Cert Response in Weinberg
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROBERT PAUL WEINBERG, v.
Lisa Wolfe, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-13035-WGY (D. Mass.), Dr. Wolf
ask the Court to enter an order extending deadline to respond to
the motion for class certification up to and including Feb. 14,
2025.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Jan. 3, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=62CtsQ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Victoria M. Ranieri, Esq.
David B. Chaffin, Esq.
WHITE AND WILLIAMS LLP
101 Arch St., Suite 1930
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (617) 748-5200
E-mail: ranieriv.whiteandwilliams.com
chaffind@whiteandwilliams.com
LISONBEE: Potts Files Personal Injury Class Suit in Kansas
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lisonbee et al. The
case is captioned as Angelic Potts v. Lisonbee et al., Case No.
6:24-cv-01205-TC-TJJ (D. Kan., Nov. 12, 2024).
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Toby Crouse.
The suit arises from personal injury claims.
Lisonbee is the co-founder and chairman of 4Life Research,
LLC.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Wickham Ruhlmann, Esq.
Michael J. Wyatt, Esq.
MANN WYATT TANKSLEY
201 East 1st Avenue
Hutchinson, KS 67501
Telephone: (620) 200-8938
E-mail: josh@mannwyatt.com
mike@mannwyatt.com
- and -
Macy Grace Marlett, Esq.
Nathan A. Kakazu, Esq.
Sarah Tankard Bradshaw, Esq.
SHARP LAW, LLP
4820 W. 75th Street
Prairie Village, KS 66208
Telephone: (559) 287-0502
E-mail: mmarlett@midwest-law.com
nkakazu@midwest-law.com
sbradshaw@midwest-law.com
LOTTERY.COM INC: Court Dismisses Securities Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------
Lottery.com Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2024, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on December 16, 2024, that on
February 6, 2024, the court granted the company's motion to dismiss
a class action as plaintiffs amended their complaint within the
twenty-one day period provided by the judge.
On June 12, 2024, plaintiffs amended their complaint while on July
12, 2024, the company filed its motion to dismiss the Third Amended
Complaint. On August 8, 2024, the plaintiffs filed their response
in opposition to the complaint and on August 22, 2024 the company
filed its reply to plaintiffs response in opposition to the MTD
Third Amended Complaint.
On August 19, 2022, a certain Preston Million filed a class action
complaint against the company and certain of its former officers
and directors in the United States District Court for Southern
District of New York, styled "Preston Million, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated vs. Lottery.com, Inc. f/k/a
Trident Acquisitions Corp., Anthony DiMatteo, Matthew Clemenson and
Ryan Dickinson" (Case No. 1:22-cv-07111-JLR).
It alleged violations by all defendants of Sections 10(b) and 20(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended by the Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PSLRA).
On November 18, 2022, the court ordered the appointment of RTD
Bros, LLC, Todd Benn, Tom Benn and Tomasz Rzedian (collectively the
"Lottery Investor Group") as lead plaintiff and Glancy Prongay &
Murray, LLP as lead counsel for plaintiffs and for the class in the
case. On December 5, 2022, the court stipulated a Scheduling Order
in the case.
On January 12, 2023, the company's legal counsel timely filed its
Notice of Appearance. On January 31, 2022, plaintiffs filed their
Amended Complaint adding Kathryn Lever, Marat Rosenberg, Vadim
Komissarov, Thomas Gallagher, Gennadii Butkevych, Ilya Ponomarev as
additional defendants in the case. It alleged, among other things,
that defendants made materially false and misleading statements in
violation of Section 10(b),14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and
plaintiffs seek compensatory damages, reasonable costs and expenses
including counsel fees and expert fees.
Pursuant to the Scheduling Order, the company filed its motion to
dismiss the Amended Complaint on April 3, 2023, under the newly
consolidated caption and its proposed order to dismiss the matter.
Plaintiffs were expected to file their opposition to the motion to
dismiss no later than May 18, 2023, which would trigger the
company's deadline to file its reply brief in support of their
motion to dismiss no later than June 20, 2023.
Lottery.com Inc., a digital publisher based in Spicewood TX,
provides lottery data results, jackpots, results, and other data.
LOWE'S COMPANIES: Carbajal Suit Removed to D. Arizona
-----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Ivonne Carbajal, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Lowe's Companies, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation, and Salesforce, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Case No.
CV2024-028476 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
Arizona, In and For the County of Maricopa, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of Arizona on Jan. 6, 2025, and assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-00041-DJH.
According to Plaintiff, through the use of the Salesforce "tracking
pixels" embedded in Lowe's email communications to Plaintiff and
the putative class members, Defendants "surreptitiously procured
and collected records of, and information regarding" the
recipients, such as "time logs of their email access," "the amount
of times they opened the email," "the associated email address,"
and other information. Based on these allegations, she pleads that
Defendants violated the Arizona Telephone, Utility and
Communication Service Records Act ("TUCSRA").[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
David B. Rosenbaum, Esq.
Colin M. Proksel, Esq.
OSBORN MALEDON, P.A.
2929 North Central Avenue, Suite 2000
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Phone: (602) 640-9000
Email: drosenbaum@omlaw.com
cproksel@omlaw.com
- and -
Teresa Michaud, Esq.
Ariana E. Bustos, Esq.
COOLEY LLP
355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1560
Phone: (213) 561-3250
Email: tmichaud@cooley.com
abustos@cooley.com
- and -
Tiana Demas, Esq.
COOLEY LLP
110 N. Wacker Drive, Suite 4200
Chicago, IL 60606-1511
Phone: (312) 881-6500
Email: tdemas@cooley.com
- and -
Reece Trevor, Esq.
COOLEY LLP
3 Embarcadero Center, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-4004
Phone: (415) 693-2000
Email: rtrevor@cooley.com
LUXOTTICA OF AMERICA: Velasquez Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The case is styled as Melissa Velasquez, on behalf of herself, all
others similarly situated, and the general public v. Luxottica of
America, Inc., John Does 1-10, Case No. 24STCV31555 was removed
from the Los Angeles Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California on Jan. 3, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-00074 to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated Other Fraud.
Luxottica of America Inc. -- http://www.luxottica.com/-- offers
prescription glasses and sunglasses.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
The Defendants are represented by:
Anahit Tagvoryan, Esq.
BLANK ROME LLP
2029 Century Park East 6th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: (424) 239-3400
Fax: (424) 239-3434
Email: atagvoryan@blankrome.com
MAISON SOLUTIONS: Faces Green Suit in CA Court Over IPO
-------------------------------------------------------
Maison Solutions Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly
period ended October 31, 2024, filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on December 16, 2024, that on January 4, 2024,
the company, its executive officers and directors, as well as
Joseph Stone Capital LLC, and AC Sunshine Securities LLC, the
underwriters in the company's initial public offering were named in
a class action complaint filed in the United States District Court
for the Central District of California alleging violations of
Sections 11 and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, as
well as violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended "Rick Green and Evgenia Nikitina
v. Maison Solutions Inc., et. al.," (Case No. 2:24-cv-00063).
As relief, the plaintiffs are seeking, among other things,
compensatory damages.
Maison Solutions Inc. is a retail company that operates grocery
stores and is based in Monterey Park, CA.
MDL 2873: AFFF Products "Defective," Shields Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL SHIELDS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.
(f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCT USA, INC.; KIDDE PLC INC.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
LLC, MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES, INC.; and 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06816-RMG
(D.S.C., November 22, 2024) is a class action against the
Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design
defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express
and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with testicular cancer and other
injuries.
The Shields case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Allstar Fire Equipment is a fire equipment manufacturer in
California.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment
in Ohio.
Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety
services and equipment in New Hampshire.
Honeywell Safety Product USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety
services and equipment in Rhode Island.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia,
Ohio.
Mallory Safety and Supply LLC is a safety equipment supplier in
Portland, Oregon.
Mine Safety Appliances Co., LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety
products in Pennsylvania.
Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company
offering fire equipment services based in Utah.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting
equipment in North Carolina.
Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing
fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia.
Stedfast USA, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective barrier
technologies in Tennessee.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida.
W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational
manufacturing company in Delaware.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric W. Cracken, Esq.
Steven D. Davis, Esq.
TORHOERMAN LAW LLC
210 S. Main Street
Edwardsville, IL 62025
Telephone: (618) 656-4400
Facsimile: (618) 656-4401
MDL 2873: AFFF Products Can Cause Cancer, Marshall Suit Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
KARIN MARSHALL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06829-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with kidney cancer.
The Marshall case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: AFFF Products Harmful to Human Health, D'Armenia Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BLENDA D'ARMENIA, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining
and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06822-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease.
The D'Armenia case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Clark Suit Alleges Complications From AFFF Products
-------------------------------------------------------------
REBECCA CLARK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06835-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease.
The Clark case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Craig Suit Claims Toxic Exposure From AFFF Products
-------------------------------------------------------------
ROBIN CRAIG, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06827-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with kidney cancer.
The Craig case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Dedeaux Sues Over Exposure to PFAS From AFFF Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
SANDRA DEDEAUX, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06834-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease.
The Dedeaux case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Exposed Firefighters to Toxic Products, O'Leary Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
KRISTIN O'LEARY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06824-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with kidney cancer.
The O'Leary case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Faces Cappelano Suit Over AFFF Products' Harmful Effects
------------------------------------------------------------------
WENDY CAPPELANO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06826-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with kidney cancer.
The Cappelano case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Faces Lucero Suit Over AFFF Products' Toxic Elements
--------------------------------------------------------------
THERESA LUCERO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06831-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease.
The Lucero case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Faces Moffitt Suit Over AFFF Products' PFAS Exposure
--------------------------------------------------------------
JANELLE MOFFITT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06819-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid cancer.
The Moffitt case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Katuls Sues Over Firefighters' Exposure to PFAS
---------------------------------------------------------
JUSTIN KATULS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE
EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.; ARKEMA, INC.;
BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CHEMOURS COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE, LTD; CLARIANT CORP.;
CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.
(f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS
AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC;
HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCT USA, INC.; KIDDE PLC INC.; LION GROUP,
INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES CO.,
LLC, MUNICIPAL EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL
COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.;
SOUTHERN MILLS, INC.; STEDFAST USA, INC.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS LP, as successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company; UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; UTC FIRE & SECURITY
AMERICAS CORPORATION, INC. (f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES, INC.; and 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06817-RMG
(D.S.C., November 22, 2024) is a class action against the
Defendants for negligence, battery, inadequate warning, design
defect, strict liability, fraudulent concealment, breach of express
and implied warranties, wantonness, and fraudulent transfer.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with testicular cancer and other
injuries.
The Katuls case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Allstar Fire Equipment is a fire equipment manufacturer in
California.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Chubb Fire, Ltd is a provider of security and fire protection
systems based in United Kingdom.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Fire-Dex, LLC is a provider of fire safety services and equipment
in Ohio.
Globe Manufacturing Company LLC is a provider of fire safety
services and equipment in New Hampshire.
Honeywell Safety Product USA, Inc. is a provider of fire safety
services and equipment in Rhode Island.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
Lion Group, Inc. is a protective clothing supplier in Vandalia,
Ohio.
Mallory Safety and Supply LLC is a safety equipment supplier in
Portland, Oregon.
Mine Safety Appliances Co., LLC is a manufacturer of fire safety
products in Pennsylvania.
Municipal Emergency Services, Inc. is a public safety company
offering fire equipment services based in Utah.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
PBI Performance Products, Inc. is a manufacturer of firefighting
equipment in North Carolina.
Southern Mills, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective clothing
fabric for industrial and military use in Georgia.
Stedfast USA, Inc. is a manufacturer of protective barrier
technologies in Tennessee.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin.
United Technologies Corporation was an American multinational
conglomerate headquartered in Farmington, Connecticut. It merged
with the Raytheon Company in April 2020 to form Raytheon
Technologies.
UTC Fire & Security Americas Corporation, Inc., f/k/a GE
Interlogix, Inc., is a manufacturer of security and fire control
systems based in Bradenton, Florida.
W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. is an American multinational
manufacturing company in Delaware.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric W. Cracken, Esq.
Steven D. Davis, Esq.
TORHOERMAN LAW LLC
210 S. Main Street
Edwardsville, IL 62025
Telephone: (618) 656-4400
Facsimile: (618) 656-4401
MDL 2873: Ronning Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
LISA RONNING, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06836-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam (AFFF) products containing synthetic, toxic per-
and polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid disease.
The Ronning case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Transfer of UPFFA v. 3M to D.S.C. Denied
--------------------------------------------------
In "In re: Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability
Litigation," MDL No. 2873, Chairperson Karen K. Caldwell of the
U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation denied a motion to
transfer the case captioned "Uniformed Professional Fire Fighters
Association of Connecticut, et al. v. 3M Company, et al.," C.A. No.
3:24−01101 (D. Conn.) to the U.S. District Court for the District
of South Carolina for inclusion in MDL No. 2873.
The case is a putative class action brought on behalf of
firefighters in the State of Connecticut who allegedly were exposed
to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contained in personal
protection equipment and turnout gear (TOG) used by firefighters.
On its face, the complaint does not involve allegations pertaining
to the manufacture, use, or disposal of aqueous film-forming foams
(AFFFs).
MDL No. 2873 involves allegations that AFFFs used at airports,
military bases, or other locations to extinguish liquid fuel fires
caused the release of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and/or
perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) collectively, these and other per- or
polyfluoroalkyl substances are referred to as PFAS, into local
groundwater and contaminated drinking water supplies. The MDL also
includes claims by firefighters and others alleging that direct
exposure to AFFF caused them injuries. However, the panel did not
expand the scope of this MDL to encompass actions brought by
firefighters asserting claims solely for PFAS exposure through the
use of turnout gears.
3M argued, among other things, that transfer is warranted because
over a thousand actions in the MDL involve claims by firefighters
who allege injury from PFAS-containing TOG.
But the panel disagrees saying MDL No. 2873 remains an AFFF MDL,
not a PFAS MDL. Expanding the scope of the litigation to encompass
all non-AFFF claims would greatly complicate the efficient
management of the litigation, which already involves a wide range
of AFFF claims and parties.
"3M has not met its significant burden of demonstrating that
transfer of this non- AFFF action is warranted," the panel rules.
A full-text copy of the court's December 12, 2024 order is
available at
https://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/MDL-2873-Order_Denying_Transfer-12-24.pdf
MDL 2873: Vanwinkle Sues Over Exposure to PFAS From AFFF Products
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ALMA VANWINKLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06820-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid cancer.
The Vanwinkle case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Vargas Suit Claims PFAS Exposure From AFFF Products
-------------------------------------------------------------
MARIE VARGAS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06830-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with thyroid cancer.
The Vargas case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MDL 2873: Wilson Sues Over Toxic Effects of AFFF Products
---------------------------------------------------------
PAMELA WILSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a Minnesota Mining and
Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS AMERICAS INC.; AMEREX
CORPORATION; ANGUS FIRE ARMOUR CORPORATION; ARCHROMA U.S. INC.;
ARKEMA, INC.; BASF CORPORATION; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT COMPANY;
CARRIER FIRE & SECURITY AMERICAS CORP., INC.; CARRIER GLOBAL
CORPORATION; CHEMDESIGN PRODUCTS, INC.; CHEMGUARD, INC.; CHEMICALS,
INC.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS,
INC.; DU PONT DE NEMOURS INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU PONT DE
NEMOURS AND COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; NATION
FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; ROYAL CHEMICAL COMPANY,
LTD.; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS COMPANY; THE CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS
1-20, Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-06825-RMG (D.S.C., November 22,
2024) is a class action against the Defendants for products
liability; strict products liability; negligence; concealment
misrepresentation and fraud; negligence per se; past and continuing
trespass and battery; and negligent, intentional, and reckless
infliction of emotional distress.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of her exposure to the Defendants' aqueous
film forming foam products containing synthetic, toxic per- and
polyfluoroalkyl substances collectively known as PFAS. The
Defendants failed to use reasonable and appropriate care in the
design, manufacture, labeling, warning, instruction, training,
selling, marketing, and distribution of their PFAS-containing AFFF
products and also failed to warn military and/or civilian
firefighters, including the Plaintiff, who they knew would
foreseeably come into contact with their AFFF products that use of
and/or exposure to the products would pose a danger to human
health. Due to inadequate warning, the Plaintiff was exposed to
toxic chemicals and was diagnosed with kidney cancer.
The Wilson case has been consolidated in MDL No. 2873, In Re:
Aqueous Film-Forming Foams Products Liability Litigation. The case
is assigned to the Hon. Judge Richard Gergel.
3M Company, f/k/a Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Co., is a
multinational conglomerate corporation and designer, marketer,
developer, manufacturer, distributor of firefighting equipment,
including those with AFFF. It is located at 3M Center, St. Paul.
Minnesota.
ACG Chemicals Americas Inc. is a manufacturer of chemical products
based in Exton, Pennsylvania.
Amerex Corporation is a manufacturer of firefighting products based
in Trussville, Alabama.
Angus Fire Armour Corporation is a firefighting technology company
based in North Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Archroma U.S. Inc. is a global specialty chemicals company
headquartered in Charlotte, North Carolina.
Arkema, Inc. is a diversified chemicals manufacturer in North
America, based in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania.
BASF Corporation is a chemicals company based in New Jersey.
Buckeye Fire Equipment Co. is a manufacturer of line of handheld
and wheeled fire extinguishers, suppressing foam concentrates &
hardware, and kitchen suppression systems, with principal place of
business located at 110 Kings Road, Mountain, North Carolina.
Carrier Fire & Security Americas Corp., Inc. is a producer of
security and fire control systems in Florida.
Carrier Global Corporation is a heating, ventilation, and air
conditioning company based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida.
Chemdesign Products, Inc. is a chemical toll manufacturing company
based in Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemguard, Inc. is a manufacturer of fire suppression and specialty
chemicals, including AFFF, with principal place of business located
at One Stanton Street, Marinette, Wisconsin.
Chemicals, Inc. is a chemical manufacturing company based in
Baytown, Texas.
Clariant Corp. is a specialty chemical company based in Charlotte,
North Carolina.
Corteva, Inc. is an American agricultural chemical and seed company
based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Deepwater Chemicals, Inc. is a producer of organic and inorganic
iodine derivatives based in Woodward, Oklahoma.
Du Pont De Nemours Inc., f/k/a DowDuPont Inc., is a chemical
company based in Wilmington, Delaware.
Dynax Corporation is a company that specializes in the production
of fluorochemicals based in Pound Ridge, New York.
E.I Dupont De Nemours & Co. is a provider of agriculture and
specialty products with its principal place of business at 1007
Market Street, Wilmington, Delaware.
Mine Safety Appliances Company, LLC is a manufacturer of fire
safety products in Pennsylvania.
Nation Ford Chemical Company is a manufacturer of specialty organic
chemicals based in Fort Mill, South Carolina.
National Foam, Inc. is a fire protection system supplier in West
Chester, Pennsylvania.
Perimeter Solutions, LP is a chemicals company in Missouri.
Raytheon Technologies Corporation is an aerospace and defense
company in Virginia.
Royal Chemical Company, Ltd. is a chemical manufacturer based in
Ohio.
The Chemours Company is a manufacturer of agricultural chemicals
with principal place of business at 1007 Market Street, Wilmington,
Delaware.
The Chemours Company FC, LLC is a manufacturer of titanium
technologies, fluoroproducts and chemical solutions based in
Wilmington, Delaware.
Tyco Fire Products L.P., successor-in-interest to The Ansul
Company, is a manufacturer of water-based fire suppression system
components and ancillary building construction products, including
Ansul brand of AFFF, headquartered at One Stanton Street,
Marinette, Wisconsin. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
MICRON TECHNOLOGY: Faces Securities Class Action Suit
-----------------------------------------------------
Gainey McKenna & Egleston announces that a securities class action
lawsuit has been filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Florida on behalf of all persons or entities
who purchased or otherwise acquired Micron Technology, Inc.
("Micron Technology" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: MU) securities
between September 28, 2023 and December 18, 2024, inclusive (the
"Class Period").
The Complaint alleges that Defendants made false and/or misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) demand for the
Company's products in consumer markets, especially the Company's
NAND products, had significantly deteriorated; (ii) accordingly,
Defendants had overstated the extent to which demand for the
Company's products had recovered, particularly in consumer markets
and for its NAND products, and/or had overstated the sustainability
of demand for such products, as well as the normalization of
inventory for such products; and (iii) as a result, the Company's
public statements were materially false and misleading at all
relevant times.
On December 18, 2024, Micron Technology issued a press release
announcing its financial results for the first quarter of its
fiscal year 2025. Among other items, the Company reported a
greater-than-expected revenue decline in NAND flash memory for the
quarter. Micron Technology also issued disappointing guidance for
the second quarter of its fiscal year 2025, including adjusted
earnings between $1.33 and $1.53 per share, well below the $1.92
per share estimate; sales between $7.7 billion and $8.1 billion,
with the midpoint well below the $8.99 billion estimate; and
adjusted gross margins between 37.5% and 39.5%, well below the
41.3% estimate; citing weakness in the Company's consumer-oriented
markets.
The next day, multiple analysts lowered their price targets for
Micron Technology stock, citing the Company's disappointing
guidance for the second quarter of its fiscal year 2025, while
noting significant weakness in demand in its consumer markets,
especially for its NAND products. Following these developments,
Micron Technology's stock price fell $16.81 per share, or 16.18%,
to close at $87.09 per share on December 19, 2024.
Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired shares of Micron
Technology should contact the Firm prior to the March 10, 2025 lead
plaintiff motion deadline. A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. If you wish to discuss your rights or interests
regarding this class action, please contact Thomas J. McKenna, Esq.
or Gregory M. Egleston, Esq. of Gainey McKenna & Egleston at (212)
983-1300, or via e-mail at tjmckenna@gme-law.com or
gegleston@gme-law.com. [GN]
MITSUBISHI MOTORS: Faces Class Action Over Defective Airbags
------------------------------------------------------------
Kelly Mehorter of ClassAction.org reports that an $8.5 million
class action settlement resolves multidistrict litigation over an
alleged airbag defect in certain Mitsubishi vehicles.
The Mitsubishi airbag settlement will provide cash payments to
individuals or entities who, on November 1, 2024, had owned or
leased one of the following vehicles that contained a ZF-TRW airbag
control unit and was originally sold or leased in the United States
or any of its territories or possessions:
-- 2013-2017 Mitsubishi Lancer;
-- 2013-2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution;
-- 2013-2015 Mitsubishi Lancer Ralliart;
-- 2013-2016 Mitsubishi Lancer Sportback; and
-- 2013 Mitsubishi Outlander.
The official website for the Mitsubishi settlement can be found at
ACUSettlement.com. The deal was preliminarily approved by the court
on November 1, 2024.
According to the lawsuit, the Mitsubishi vehicles at issue were
equipped with airbag control units that are prone to malfunctions
due to electrical overstress. This alleged defect posed a
significant safety risk, as it could prevent airbags from deploying
and other safety features from activating during a crash, the case
claimed.
Class members must file a valid claim form by May 8, 2026 to
receive a Mitsubishi settlement payout.
Eligible class members will receive up to $250 per covered vehicle,
although this amount may increase or decrease on a pro rata basis
depending on how many valid claims are submitted.
"If more than one Class Member submits a valid claim for the same
Mitsubishi Class Vehicle, then the original owner who purchased
that Mitsubishi Class Vehicle new shall receive 60% of the funds
allocated to that Mitsubishi Class Vehicle, and the remaining 40%
will be distributed evenly to or among the remaining Class
Member(s) that submit a valid claim on that Mitsubishi Class
Vehicle," the settlement site says.
Also as part of the settlement, Mitsubishi has agreed to operate a
"robust" inspection program. Court documents say the program will
run for 10 years and provide inspections for covered vehicles
involved in certain frontal crashes where the car's airbags or
seatbelt pretensioners did not deploy.
A final approval hearing for the Mitsubishi class action settlement
is set for April 7, 2025. It is typically after the court grants
final approval to a class action settlement, and any appeals have
been resolved, that class members begin to receive benefits. [GN]
MOBILE MEDIC: Oliver Seeks to Certify FLSA Collective Action
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRANDIN OLIVER, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated, v. MOBILE MEDIC
AMBULANCE SERVICE, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-00180-HSO-BWR (S.D.
Miss.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order certifying
collective action.
The Plaintiff commenced the action as a collective action pursuant
to 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) on behalf of himself and all similarly
situated employees who were or are employed by Mobile Medic.
The Plaintiff's Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") allegations
pertain to how Mobile Medic calculated its current and former
employees "regular rate of pay" and whether its calculations
resulted in the Plaintiff and the other similarly situated
employees being undercompensated for their overtime hours worked.
More than two hundred current and former employees of Mobile Medic
earned retention bonuses or sign on bonuses in weeks they worked
more than 40 hours.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff is similarly situated with the current
and former employees of Mobile Medic who earned retention bonuses
or sign on bonuses in weeks they worked more than 40 hours.
Mobile Medic provides emergency medical systems services. The
Company offers healthcare facilities, health systems, medical and
security, disaster response, air ambulance, and managed
transportation services.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 3, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=c1O3Aj at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William "Jack" Simpson, Esq.
SIMPSON, PLLC
100 South Main Street
Booneville, MS 38829-0382
Telephone: (662) 913-7811
Facsimile: (662) 728-1992
E-mail: jack@simpson-pllc.com
MOUNT CARMEL CARE: Stasiewski Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mount Carmel Care
Center Inc. The case is styled as Kirsten Stasiewski, individually
and on Behalf of All others similarly situated v. Mount Carmel Care
Center Inc., Case No. 2576CV00003 (Mass. Super. Ct., Berkshire
Cty., Jan. 6, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Torts."
Mount Carmel Care Center Inc. -- https://mountcarmelcare.org/ --
provide skilled nursing, short term rehabilitation and long term
care for seniors.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Randi A. Kassan, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, LLC
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, NY 11530
Phone: (516) 741-5600
Fax: (516) 741-0128
Email: rkassan@milberg.com
NANO NUCLEAR ENERGY: Continues to Defend Yang Securities Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Nano Nuclear Energy Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-K Report for the
fiscal period ending September 30, 2024 filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on December 30, 2024, that the Company
continues to defend itself from the Yang securities class suit in
the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York.
On August 9, 2024, a putative securities class action lawsuit was
filed against us and certain of its officers in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, captioned
Yvette Yang v. Nano Nuclear Energy Inc., et al., No. 1:24-cv-06057
(S.D.N.Y.). The complaint asserts claims for alleged violations of
federal securities laws related to statements concerning its
business and prospects, including its progress toward microreactor
development.
The plaintiff seeks to represent a class of certain persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired its common stock during the period
from May 8, 2024 through July 18, 2024 and seeks unspecified
damages and other relief.
On October 28, 2024, the court entered an order appointing Hongyu
Xie as lead plaintiff.
On November 4, 2024, the court entered a scheduling order for the
filing of lead plaintiff's amended complaint and a briefing
schedule for its anticipated motion to dismiss, under which lead
plaintiff must file an amended complaint by January 6, 2025, and it
must file a motion to dismiss by February 21, 2025.
The Company disputes the allegations in the complaint and intend to
defend the case vigorously. The case is at an early stage and it
cannot reasonably estimate the amount of any potential financial
loss or cost that could result from the lawsuit.
NANO Nuclear Energy Inc. operates as a nuclear energy company. The
Company develops portable clean energy solutions utilizing
proprietary reactor designs, intellectual property, and research
methods. [BN]
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Attias Sues Over Unlawful Debt Collection
--------------------------------------------------------------
Anna Attias, Individually and on behalf of all those similarly
situated v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC D/B/A MR COOPER, Case No.
0:25-cv-60041-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 7, 2025), is brought agaisnt
the Defendant for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act ("FDCPA") the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act
("FCCPA") as a result of the Defendants unlawful debt collection.
On a date better known by Defendant, the Current Creditor
contracted with Defendant to collect, or attempt to collect, money
allegedly owed to it by Plaintiff in connection with the Subject
Account (the "Consumer Debt"). On June 6, 2024, Defendant
communicated with Plaintiff at 9:53 PM in an attempt to collect the
Consumer Debt.
The Defendant lacked consent directly from Plaintiff to communicate
with Plaintiff in connection with collection of the Consumer Debt
between 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM. The Defendant knew it lacked
Plaintiff's express consent to communicate with Plaintiff between
9:00 PM and 8:00 AM. The Defendant knew that, without Plaintiff's
direct express consent, it was inconvenient to communicate with
Plaintiff between 9:00 PM and 8:00 AM.
After reviewing the Communication and learning the subject matter
thereof, Plaintiff became upset and frustrated, as Defendant was
attempting to collect a debt from Plaintiff at 9:53 PM without
Plaintiff's direct consent or permission. Plaintiff wasted
approximately 5 minutes of time retrieving Plaintiff's cellular
telephone and reviewing the Communication sent by Defendant at 9:53
PM.
The Defendant's willful and otherwise reckless disregard for the
privacy rights enjoyed by Florida consumers to be free for
communications in connection with the collection of a debt between
9:00 PM and 8:00 AM warrants punitive damages to ensure Defendant's
compliance with the law in the future, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a natural person, and a citizen of the State of
Florida.
The Defendant is a Delaware limited liability company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas J. Patti, Esq.
Victor Zabaleta, Esq.
The Law Offices of Jibrael S. Hindi
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Phone: 561-542-8550
Email: tom@pzlg.legal
Victor@pzlg.legal
NEW YOU BARIATRIC: Colvin Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against New You Bariatric
Group, LLC. The case is styled as Dyshawn Colvin, individually, and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. New You Bariatric
Group, LLC, Case No. 154686/2023 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty.,
Jan. 7, 2025).
New York Bariatric Group --
https://bariatric.stopobesityforlife.com/ -- is the largest private
bariatric practice in the country with locations throughout New
York, Connecticut and New Jersey.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Abdul K. Hassan, Esq. (AH6510)
215-28 Hillside Avenue
Queens Village, NY 11427
Phone: 718-740-1000
Fax: 718-355-9668
Email: abdul@abdulhassan.com
PDM STEEL SERVICE: Payne Suit Removed to C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Calvin Payne and Johnny Williams, individually
and on behalf of other similarly situated v. PDM STEEL SERVICE
CENTERS, INC.; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No.
24STCV00942 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California, County of Los Angeles, to the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California on Jan. 6, 2025, and assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-00130.
The Plaintiff's Complaint asserts causes of action on a class wide
basis for: failure to pay minimum wages; failure to pay overtime
wages; failure to provide meal periods; failure to provide rest
periods; untimely pay; failure to furnish accurate wage statements;
waiting time penalties and unfair business practices against
PDM.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Spencer C. Skeen, Esq.
Cameron O. Flynn, Esq.
OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 900
San Diego, CA 92122
Phone: 858-652-3110
Facsimile: 858-652-3101
Email: spencer.skeen@ogletree.com
cameron.flynn@ogletree.com
QUICK BOX: Tan Seeks Final Approval of Class Action Settlement
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as LEANNE TAN, Individually
and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. QUICK BOX, LLC,
et al, Case No. 3:20-cv-01082-LL-DDL (S.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff
asks the Court to enter an order granting final approval after
consideration at the final approval hearing.
The Plaintiff and the Konnektive Defendants (Konnektive LLC,
Converging Resources Corporation, Konnektive Rewards LLC, Matthew
MArtorano, and Kathryn Martorano) have agreed to a Class Settlement
to resolve the putative Class's claims against those Defendants in
exchange for a minimum of $2 million and a maximum of $5 million.
That amount will be determined via a summary bench trial before
Judge Leshner.
As of December 27, 2024, there have been no objections to the
settlement and no requests for exclusion.
The Plaintiff submits that on these facts, the proposed settlement
with the Konnektive Defendants (will be a minimum of $2 million,
and a maximum of $5 million), when combined with a settlement with
the Quick Box Defendants for $5.5 million, is not only a reasonable
settlement, but an excellent result for the Class that guarantees
them a substantial recovery which exceeds the actual damages in
this case.
The adequacy of the settlement amount is further evidence that both
counsel and Ms. Tan have adequately represented the Class.
This lawsuit was filed on June 12, 2020. Three separate groups of
parties filed their own motions to dismiss.
QuickBox is a third-party fulfillment partner of D2C and B2B
brands.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 2, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=nQxNl7 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kevin Kneupper, Esq.
A. Cyclone Covey, Esq.
A. Lorraine Weekes, Esq.
KNEUPPER & COVEY, PC
17011 Beach Blvd., Suite 900
Huntington Beach, CA 92647
Telephone: (512) 420-8407
E-mail: kevin@kneuppercovey.com
cyclone@kneuppercovey.com
lorraine@kneuppercovey.com
RAD POWER: Faces Conohan Suit Over Tiktok Software Installation
---------------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT CONOHAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. RAD POWER BIKES, INC., a Washington corporation; and
DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. 2:25-cv-00106 (C.D. Cal.,
Jan. 6, 2025) alleges that the Defendant installed on its Website
software created by TikTok in order to identify website visitors
(the "TikTok Software"), in violation of the California Invasion of
Privacy Act.
According to the complaint, TikTok Software gathers device and
browser information, geographic information, referral tracking, and
url tracking by running code or "scripts" on the Website to send
user details to TikTok.
Furthermore, the TikTok Software begins to collect information the
moment a user lands on the Website. Thus, even though the Website
has a "cookie banner" the information has already been sent to
TikTok regarding the user's visit.
Additionally, since Rad Power Bikes has decided to use TikTok's
"AutoAdvanced Matching" technology, TikTok scans every website for
information, such as name, date of birth, and address, the
information is sent simultaneously to TikTok, so that TikTok can
isolate with certainty the individual to be targeted, the Plaintiff
avers.
The Defendant did not obtain Class Members' express or implied
consent to be subjected to data sharing with TikTok for the
purposes of fingerprinting and de-anonymization, the Plaintiff
adds.
Plaintiff Conohan is a citizen of California residing and located
within the Central District of California.
Rad Power is the proprietor of www.radpowerbikes.com, an online
platform selling power bicycles and bicycle accessories.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert Tauler, Esq.
Narain Kumar, Esq.
TAULER SMITH LLP
626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Telephone: (213) 927-9270
E-mail: robert@taulersmith.com
nkumar@taulersmith.com
REGAL CINEMAS: Class Cert. Bid in Springett Extended to March 21
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Springett v. Regal
Cinemas, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-01401 (N.D.N.Y., Filed Nov. 7,
2023), the Hon. Judge Mae A D'Agostino entered an order extending
the deadlines and schedules as follows:
(1) Defendant Expert Disclosure is due by: March 7, 2025
(2) Rebuttal Expert Disclosure is due by: March 21, 2025
(3) All Discovery, including all April 21, 2025
depositions, shall be completed by:
(4) Any Class Certification Motion shall March 21, 2025
be filed by:
(5) Dispositive Motions shall be filed by: June 23, 2025
The nature of suit states labor litigation.
Regal Cinemas is an American movie theater chain that operates the
theater circuit in the United States.[CC]
REMARKABLE FOODS: Roman Files FLSA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Remarkable Foods
Hospitality LLC. The case is styled as Nicolas Roman, on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated v. Remarkable Foods
Hospitality LLC doing business as: Wonder Restaurants, Case No.
1:25-cv-00085 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 3, 2025).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Remarkable Foods Hospitality LLC doing business as Wonders
Restaurants -- https://www.wonder.com/restaurants -- provides an
end-to-end digital operating system for independent restaurants,
from handling phone orders to payment processing to marketing
promotions.[BN]
The Plaintiff appears pro se.
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Filing for Class Status Bid Extended
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as CIS Communications,
L.L.C., et al v. Republic Services, Inc., Case No. 4:21-cv-00359
(E.D. Mo., Filed March 22, 2021), the Hon. Judge John A. Ross
entered an order granting consent motion for extension of time to
file plaintiff's motion for class certification.
The nature of suit states Diversity-Breach of Contract.
Republic Services provides the most complete set of recycling,
waste and environmental solutions from a single-source
provider.[CC]
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Pietoso Wins Class Certification Bid
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Pietoso, Inc. v. Republic
Services, Inc. et al., Case No. 4:19-cv-00397 (E.D. Mo., Filed
March 1, 2019), the Hon. Judge John A. Ross entered an order
granting the Plaintiff's motion for class certification.
The nature of suit states breach of contract.
Republic Services provides the most complete set of recycling,
waste and environmental solutions from a single-source
provider.[CC]
RUSSI USA: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Henry Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
CONSTANCE HENRY, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Russi USA, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-00093 (N.D. Ill.,
Jan. 6, 2025) is an action against Russi for their failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other
blind or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to the goods and
services Russi provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://sherpani.com, in violation of the Plaintiff's rights under
the Americans with Disabilities Act, the suit alleges.
On Dec. 16, 2024, the Plaintiff was looking for a durable and
lightweight backpack as a Christmas gift for her friend. She
browsed on Google and encountered the Defendant's website. She
tried to examine the Sedona Backpack but encountered accessibility
issues, such as unlabeled interactive elements, that prevented her
from making the purchase and having full access to the website.
As a result of direct and proximate cause of Defendant's conduct,
the Plaintiff suffers interference with daily activities, as well
as emotional distress, including emotional and mental anguish, loss
of sleep, violation of privacy, humiliation, stress, anger,
frustration, shock, embarrassment, and anxiety, the Plaintiff
avers.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Russi's policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers.
This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to compensate Class
members for having been subjected to unlawful discrimination.
Ms. Henry is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using her
computer.
Russi offers a wide variety of functional and stylish backpacks,
totes, crossbody bags, purses, luggage, and travel
accessories.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Reyes, Esq.
ASHER COHEN LAW PLLC
2377 56th Dr,
Brooklyn, NY 11234
Telephone: (630)-478-0856
E-mail: dreyes@ashercohenlaw.com
SOLAIRUS AVIATION: Fails to Safeguard Employees' Info, Funes Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
FATASHA FUNES, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. SOLAIRUS AVIATION LLC, Case No. 4:25-cv-00147 (N.D.
Cal., Jan. 6, 2025) alleges that cybercriminals were able to breach
Defendant's systems because the Defendant failed to adequately
train its employees on cybersecurity, failed to adequately monitor
its agents, contractors, vendors, and suppliers in handling and
securing the personally identifiable information of Plaintiff, and
failed to maintain reasonable security safeguards or protocols to
protect the Class' PII.
On Aug. 31, 2024, Solairus discovered it had lost control over its
computer network and the highly sensitive personal information
stored on its computer network in a data breach perpetrated by
multiple cybercriminals. The Data Breach has impacted over 4,900 of
current and former employees.
Following an internal investigation, the Defendant learned
cybercriminals had gained unauthorized access to employees' PII,
including name, Social Security number, driver's license
information, financial information, and health insurance
information, the Plaintiff avers.
On Oct. 25, 2024–almost two months after the Data Breach first
occurred–the Defendant finally began notifying Class Members
about the Data Breach. In failing to adequately protect its
employees' information, adequately notify them about the breach,
and obfuscating the nature of the breach, the Defendant violated
state law and harmed thousands of current and former employees, the
lawsuit asserts.
The Plaintiff has already spent and will continue to spend
considerable time and effort monitoring her accounts to protect
herself from identity theft. The Plaintiff fears for her personal
financial security and uncertainty over what PII was exposed in the
Data Breach. The Plaintiff has and is experiencing feelings of
anxiety, sleep disruption, stress, fear, and frustration because of
the Data Breach, the lawsuit says.
Ms. Funes is employed by the Defendant as a contractor and is a
data breach victim.
Solairus is an aviation service company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew G. Gunem, Esq.
STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC
980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (872) 263-1100
Facsimile: (872) 263-1109
E-mail: agunem@straussborrelli.com
SONIC SYSTEMS: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Vega Suit Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE JUAN PEREZ VEGA and ROSHANDA SHERIE THOMAS, individually, on
behalf of all others similarly situated, and on behalf of the State
of California and other aggrieved persons v. SONIC SYSTEMS
INTERNATIONAL, LLC, a limited liability company; and DOES 1 through
10, inclusive, Case No. 24CV099357 (Cal. Super., Nov. 12, 2024)
alleges that the Defendants maintained a policy and practice of not
paying the Plaintiffs, the Class, and the Aggrieved Employees for
all hours worked, including minimum, straight time, and overtime
wages.
The Defendants required Plaintiffs, the Class, and the Aggrieved
Employees to work "off-the-clock," uncompensated, by, for example,
requiring them to perform during unpaid meal periods. Some of this
unpaid work should have been paid at the overtime rate, the suit
contends.
In addition, the Defendants used a system of time rounding and/or
synthetic timekeeping that resulted, over a period of time, in
failing to compensate the Plaintiffs, the Class, and the Aggrieved
Employees properly for all the time they have actually worked, even
though the realities of the Defendants' operations are such that it
is possible, practical, and feasible to count and pay for work time
to the minute.
Furthermore, the Defendants wrongfully failed to provide
Plaintiffs, the Class, and the Aggrieved Employees with legally
compliant meal periods.
Mr. Jose Juan Perez Vega is a California resident who worked for
the Defendants in Alameda County, California as an hourly-paid,
non-exempt employee from October 2022 to May 2024.
Ms. Roshanda Sherie Thomas is a California resident who worked for
the Defendants in Alameda County, California as an hourly-paid,
non-exempt employee from September 2022 to April 2024.
Sonic Systems operates as a utility contracting services.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Justin F. Marquez, Esq.
Arrash T. Fattahi, Esq.
Arman A. Salehi
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Telephone: (213) 381-9988
Facsimile: (213) 381-9989
E-mail: justin.marquez@wilshirelawfirm.com
arrash.fattahi@wilshirelawfirm.com
arman.salehi@wilshirelawfirm.com
SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY: To Appeal Decision on ICE Detainer Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Denise Civiletti, writing for Riverhead Local, reports that Suffolk
County will appeal a decision made last week by a federal district
court judge holding the county liable for damages to approximately
650 people detained by the Suffolk County Sheriff's Office at the
request of the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement between
July 18, 2014 and Nov. 15, 2018.
County Executive Ed Romaine said the county faces liability for as
much as $60 million in damages for honoring ICE detention requests
-- which Romaine called "nothing short of ridiculous."
We will fight this all the way, Romaine said at a press conference
in Hauppauge yesterday.
The federal class action lawsuit was filed on behalf of a class of
persons detained by the Suffolk County Sheriff's Office from July
18, 2014 and Nov. 15, 2018, alleging that the sheriff's office held
them beyond its legal authority to do so, on detainer requests by
ICE. The detention violated the plaintiffs' rights under the fourth
and 14th amendments to the U.S. Constitution and under Article I of
the New York State Constitution, according to the plaintiffs'
complaint.
U.S. District Court Judge William Kuntz II in the Eastern District
of New York on Jan. 2 granted the plaintiffs' motion for summary
judgment as to the county's liability.
In 2016, former Suffolk County Sheriff Vincent DiMarco directed
that the Suffolk County jail would honor ICE detainers accompanied
by a Department of Homeland Security warrant of
arrest/removal/deportation and that prisoners subject to the ICE
detainers would be "held for up to 48 hours after the time the
prisoner would otherwise be released."
A 2018 New York State appellate court decision determined that the
Suffolk Sheriff lacked the authority to detain the prisoners
pursuant to ICE detainers and administrative warrants. DeMarco's
successor, Sheriff Errol Toulon Jr. directed that the practice be
immediately discontinued.
ICE was dismissed from the federal class action lawsuit that ensued
and last week the federal court ruled in that suit that the county
was liable for honoring the ICE detainer requests.
Toulon said at yesterday's press conference that penalizing the
county for following the law as it was interpreted at the time "is
unjustifiable."
"When New York State determined that we could no longer honor ICE
detainers … we immediately complied, ceasing the practice
following the court's decisions," Toulon said.
"I vow to fight a court decision that may cost county taxpayers $60
million through a lawsuit brought by people in this country
illegally and charged with crimes in Suffolk County," Romaine said
in an Instagram post yesterday. "We will not accept this decision.
We will not put those who are here illegally and being charged with
crimes before Suffolk County veterans, families and children," the
county executive wrote.
Last month, the City of New York settled a similar class action
lawsuit, filed over a decade ago, by agreeing to pay $92.5 million
to improperly detained immigrants. The plaintiffs in that case
argued that the city unlawfully detained more than 20,000 people
after their scheduled release dates between 1997 and 2012.
According to the New York Times, the city's law department said in
a statement that city officials had "operated with the assumption
that compliance with ICE detainers was mandated under federal
law."
The statement continued, the Times wrote: "Court rulings eventually
clarified that localities could not hold a detainee beyond their
release date based solely on the contents of a federal detainer and
that a court order is needed. New York City changed its policies in
2012 to conform with these court rulings." [GN]
UNITED SURGICAL: Prelim. Approval of Class Settlement Sought
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMANDA PERKINS, HEATHER C.
HOLST, TERRY J. WILLIAMS, TANYA C. STANDIFER and KARLEY MAYHILL,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
UNITED SURGICAL PARTNERS INTERNATIONAL, INC., and THE RETIREMENT
PLAN ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE OF UNITED SURGICAL PARTNERS
INTERNATIONAL, INC., Case No. 3:21-cv-00973-X (N.D. Tex.), the
Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting unopposed
motion for:
-- preliminary approval of class action settlement,
-- preliminary certification of class for settlement
purposes,
-- approval of form and manner of settlement notice,
-- preliminary approval of plan of allocation, and
-- scheduling a date for a final approval hearing.
The Plaintiffs include, Heather C. Holst, Terry J. Williams, Tanya
C. Standifer, and Karley Mayhill, by and through their attorneys,
and on behalf of the United Surgical Partners International, Inc.
401(k) Plan.
United Surgical is an American ambulatory care company.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 3, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tSMXCy at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Mark K. Gyandoh, Esq.
James A. Maro, Esq.
James A. Wells, Esq.
CAPOZZI ADLER, P.C.
312 Old Lancaster Road
Merion Station, PA 19066
Telephone: (610) 890-0200
E-mail: markg@capozziadler.com
jamesm@capozziadler.com
jaywells@capozziadler.com
- and -
Dan E. Martens, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF DAN E. MARTENS
17101 Preston Road, Suite 160 S
Dallas, TX 75248
Telephone: (972) 335-3888
Facsimile: (972) 335-5805
E-mail: dmartens@danielmartens.com
VAIL RESORTS: Skiers Sue Over Park City Mountain Labor Strike
-------------------------------------------------------------
Parker Malatesta and Connor Thomas of KPCW report that skiers said
they spent thousands of dollars to visit Park City Mountain and
Vail Resorts didn't disclose the strike or its impacts.
The primary plaintiff, Christopher Bisaillon from Illinois, is
suing on behalf of anyone who purchased a Park City Mountain lift
ticket from Dec. 27 through Jan. 8, during the ski patrol strike.
That could be thousands of skiers and riders, according to the
lawsuit.
Bisaillon alleges skiers didn't get the experience they paid for,
claiming it's normal to spend $10,000 to $20,000 on a full ski trip
to Park City.
Bisaillon says in the lawsuit he spent $15,000 and skied fewer than
10 runs during a week-long Christmas vacation. He says he learned
about the strike after he arrived, a day after it began.
The lawsuit claims that less than 20% of the mountain was open
during the 13-day strike, which resulted in lift lines that lasted
for up to 3 hours at times.
Bisaillon claims he and his family skied to lifts advertising
30-minute wait times on Park City Mountain's digital trail maps
that in reality had hour-long lines.
The lawsuit says Vail Resorts should have warned guests about
strike impacts and that the company should have seen it coming as
early as Dec. 16. That's when the Park City Professional Ski Patrol
Association began filing federal unfair labor practice charges
against the company over delays in contract negotiations, which
began in April 2024.
The 204 unionized ski patrollers and mountain safety staff voted to
authorize a strike Dec. 14 and walked out two weeks later, leaving
as few as 20 mountain safety personnel on the mountain.
The union said Vail brought in around 30 replacement patrollers
from its other resorts.
In the subsequent two weeks, resort officials say the limited
staffing hampered operations, especially at Canyons Village.
At times the resort acknowledged strike impacts on X, but those
posts were deleted and mentions of the strike removed. By the
second week of the strike, resort officials made statements
acknowledging affected guests' experiences.
During the strike, Park City Mountain removed the metric on its
website displaying the percentage of terrain open. After the
strike, Vail Resorts Mountain Division President Bill Rock
apologized to guests who were impacted.
The strike coincided with peak holiday ski traffic and led to
widespread news coverage of unhappy guests and long lines at Park
City Mountain.
There were also reports of skiers and riders ducking ropes to
traverse closed runs and concerns about unsafe conditions on the
mountain.
Local lodging companies reported an uptick in cancellations and
said guests were leaving early due to the on-mountain conditions.
The plaintiffs are seeking an unspecified amount of damages in
excess of $5 million. They are represented by Illinois attorneys
from Tarpey Wix and Meyers and Flowers, as well as the Spence Law
Firm in Jackson, Wyoming.
Vail Resorts declined to comment on pending litigation. [GN]
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Wappinger Sues Over Lead Cables Disposal
----------------------------------------------------------------
TOWN OF WAPPINGER, NY, on behalf of itself and all others similarly
situated v. VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC., VERIZON NEW YORK, INC., et
al., Case No. 160566/2024 (N.Y. Sup., Nov. 12, 2024) sues the
Defendants for their negligent operation, assessment, and disposal
of a sprawling network of toxic lead-sheathed telecommunications
cables, which resulted, and continues to result, from Defendants
using Plaintiff and Class Members as part of a massive, undisclosed
human health experiment without the knowledge and/or consent of
Plaintiff or Class Members.
The suit says that the Defendants failed to exercise reasonable
care in performing their duties, including failing to reasonably
install, and/or maintain, and/or operate, and/or service,
lead-sheathed cables, which were unsafe, toxic and unsuitable for
human exposure; failing to warn the Plaintiffs about the risks
posed by Defendants' cables; and failing to reasonably dispose of
the lead-sheathed cables and run-off lead and to not abandon them.
The population in the Town of Wappinger and other geographic areas
in New York have been exposed to lead from these toxic cables for
years. That exposure has significantly increased the public's risk
of developing lead-related health conditions, the suit contends.
The Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of the Class, seeks
relief in the form of compensatory, punitive and treble damages in
an amount sufficient to fairly and completely compensate the
Plaintiff and Class Members for all damages; penalties, costs of
suit, including reasonable attorneys' fees, as provided by law;
injunctive relief to prevent future violations of New York law;
medical monitoring to permit early detection of future lead-related
conditions among persons living and working within the communities
governed by the Plaintiff and Class Members; and abatement, to
remove and properly dispose of the lead-sheathed cables in New York
and the surrounding lead contamination.
Town of Wappinger is a town located within the Hudson River Valley
National Heritage Area in Dutchess County, New York, with a
population of approximately 28,000 residents.
The Defendants include MCIMETRO ACCESS TRANSMISSION SERVICES LLC,
MCI COMMUNICATIONS SERVICES LLC dba VERIZON BUSINESS SERVICES,
METROPOLITAN FIBER SYSTEMS OF NEW YORK, INC., XO COMMUNICATIONS
SERVICES, LLC; AMERICAN TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY, AT&T
ENTERPRISES, LLC, AT&T COMMUNICATIONS OF NEW YORK, INC., SBC LONG
DISTANCE, LLC, TC SYSTEMS, INC.; FRONTIER TELEPHONE OF ROCHESTER,
INC., FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF SENECA-GORHAM, INC., OGDEN
TELEPHONE COMPANY, FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF SYLVAN LAKE, INC.,
FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF AUSABLE VALLEY, INC., CITIZENS
TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC., FRONTIER
COMMUNICATIONS OF AMERICA, INC., FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF NEW
YORK, INC., FRONTIER COMMUNICATIONS OF ROCHESTER, INC.; CHAUTAUQUA
& ERIE COMMUNICATIONS, INC dba CHAUTAUQUA & ERIE TELEPHONE
CORPORATION; CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS OF NEW YORK COMPANY dba
TACONIC TELEPHONE CORPORATION; WINDSTREAM NEW YORK, INC.; ONTARIO &
TRUMANSBURG TELEPHONE COMPANIES dba TRUMANSBURG TELEPHONE COMPANY,
INC.; DFT COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION dba DUNKIRK AND FREDONIA
TELEPHONE COMPANY; and DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20.
Verizon Communications provides wire line voice, data services,
wireless, and internet services.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Hunter J. Shkolnik, Esq.
Paul J. Napoli, Esq.
Nestor D. Galarza, Esq.
NS PR LAW SERVICES
1302 Avenida Ponce de Leon
Santurce, PR 00907
Telephone: (787) 493-5088
Facsimile: (646) 843-7603
E-mail: Hunter@nsprlaw.com
PNapoli@nsprlaw.com
NGalarza@NSPRLaw.com
- and -
Salvatore C. Badala, Esq.
Shayna E. Sacks, Esq.
NAPOLI SHKOLNIK, PLLC
400 Broadhollow Road, Suite 305
Melville, NY 11747
Telephone: (212) 397-1000
E-mail: SBadala@napolilaw.com
SSacks@napolilaw.com
VOLVO CAR: Fails to Pay "Off-the-Clock" Work, Gardenhire Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
ANTONIO GARDENHIRE, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. VOLVO CAR USA, LLC, Case No.
2:25-cv-00127-BHH (D.S.C., Jan. 6, 2025) challenges Defendant's
unlawful failure to pay for "off-the-clock" work prior to and after
Plaintiff's and Class Members' regularly scheduled shifts without
receiving compensation for such "off-the-clock" activities in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and South Carolina
Payment of Wages Act.
Prior to their scheduled shift time, the Plaintiff and Class
Members routinely performed a variety of activities that
constituted compensable work, including walking to defendant's time
clock; walking to defendant's locker room/changing area; donning
specialized protective equipment and clothing issued and stored by
Defendant, including safety boots, full body suit coverings, nylon
cap coverings, safety glasses, and bump caps; and walking to the
work deck to report to their scheduled shifts, the suit says.
It took the Plaintiff 10-15 minutes from the parking lot to the
timeclock to swipe into his shift and then another 10-15 minutes to
walk to the changing room to don his PPE.
The Defendant allegedly failed to pay the Plaintiff and Class
Members for the time spent working prior to beginning of their
scheduled shift. Further, the Plaintiff typically took a 40-minute
meal break that was automatically deducted from his pay statements.
The Plaintiff could not leave Defendant's premises during his meal
break because it would require him to don and doff his PPE and
there was not enough time to do so.
Regardless of the time the Plaintiff swiped in for his shift, the
Plaintiff's hours were adjusted to reflect his shift start and
shift end times, the suit asserts.
The Plaintiff worked as a non-exempt hourly employee in the Volvo
facility located in Ridgeville, South Carolina from February 2024
to Sept. 2024. The Plaintiff and other Class Members are not
members of a union. The Plaintiff worked as a "Team Member" in the
Defendant's Paint Shop, located in "Building B," in quality
Stations 15 and 16.
Volvo Car is an automotive company, specializing in the
distribution and sale of Volvo vehicles.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert L. Wehrman, Esq.
DUFFY & YOUNG LLC
96 Broad Street
Charleston, SC 29401
Telephone: (843) 720-2044
E-mail: rwehrman@duffyandyoung.com
- and -
Camille Fundora Rodriguez, Esq.
Olivia S. Lanctot, Esq.
Mariyam Hussain, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1818 Market Street, Suite 3600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 875-4635
E-mail: crodriguez@bm.net
olanctot@bm.net
mhussain@bm.net
ZILLOW INC: Faces TCPA Class Action Lawsuit Over Text Messages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Eric J. Troutman of Troutman Amin, LLP, in an article with National
Law Review, reports that with the new FCC TCPA one-to-one consent
rules about to take effect in just 18 days everyone at (and in)
Lead Generation World was (and is) focused on finalizing their
go-to-market strategies with their new solutions.
One company I am constantly asked about is Zillow.
The real estate monster seems to be adopting a multi-pronged
approach in response to the new rules and many of its strategies
are raising eyebrows as they don't seem to be completely consistent
with one-to-one requirements (not throwing shade, just an
observation.)
But if the allegations in a new class action are true Zillow may
have a very serious problem with its lead gen funnel that is even
more basic than anything having to do with one-to-one. (or it could
just be the latest version of one of the oldest TCPA scams in the
books.)
In CHET MICHAEL WILSON v. ZILLOW, INC. (W.D. Wash. Case No.
2:25-cv-00048) a Plaintiff sues Zillow over the receipt of multiple
text messages related to various Zillow services–including
apparently both mortgage and real estate offerings– related to
multiple properties.
Per the complaint the plaintiff did not request the messages and
the messages continued after Plaintiff texted "stop."
Most problematically the text messages seem to have all been sent
to a single number but are related to different properties and are
directed to different recipient names. This suggests the messages
are related to different form fills by different consumers, or that
Zillow has a big problem with its lead gen engine.
Then again, the last four digits of the Plaintiff's alleged phone
number are allegedly "9999" so this could be another one of those
"designed number" lawsuit scams where a Plaintiff buys a specialty
number–like (310) 999-9999– just to collect TCPA dollars from
companies errantly calling fake numbers. (I helped fight off a
series of these sorts of cases any years ago and the experience
made me realize how terrible frivolous lawsuits are.)
Still for a company as large as Zillow preventing multiple leads
from looping to the same number for different people and property
should be viewed as a priority– again Zillow is a massive lead
gen engine relied on by so many– so I would be shocked if this is
as simple as Zillow not picking up on a simple 9999 scam (but maybe
it is.)
I should note I have no idea if the claims are even true and the
Plaintiff could be lying. But the complaint does contain multiple
screenshots.
In addition to the text messages Zillow also apparently used
prerecorded calls to contact the Plaintiff -- eesh -- so the TCPA's
regulated technology provisions are also at play here.
The Complaint seeks to represent three classes:
Robocall Class: All persons in the United States (1) to whom
Zillow, Inc. placed, or caused to be placed, a call, (2) directed
to a number assigned to a cellular telephone service, but not
assigned to a person with an account with Zillow, Inc., (3) in
connection with which Zillow, Inc. used an artificial or
prerecorded voice, (4) from four years prior to the filing of this
complaint through the date of class certification.
IDNC Class: All persons in the United States who, within the four
years prior to the filing of this lawsuit through the date of class
certification, received two or more telemarketing calls within any
12-month period, from or on behalf of Zillow, Inc., regarding
Zillow, Inc.'s goods or services, to said person's residential
telephone number, including at least one call after communicating
to Zillow, Inc. that they did not wish to receive such calls.
DNC CLASS: All persons in the United States who, within the four
years prior to the filing of this action through the date of class
certification, (1) were sent more than one telemarketing call
within any 12-month period; (2) where the person's telephone number
had been listed on the National Do Not Call Registry for at least
thirty days but not assigned to a person with an account with
Zillow, Inc.,; (3) regarding Zillow, Inc.'s property, goods, and/or
services; (4) to said person's residential telephone number.
Very interesting stuff and we will keep an eye on it for you. [GN]
ZURU LLC: Dauod Class Suit Removed from State Court to C.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as Leyth Dauod, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Zuru LLC et al., Case
No. 24STCV27674, was removed from the Los Angeles Superior Court to
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California on Nov. 12, 2024.
The Central California District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:24-cv-09737-JLS-RAO to the proceeding.
The nature of suit states Personal Injury.
The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Josephine L. Staton.
Zuru manufactures multiple brands of toys and consumer goods
products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lauren Anaelle Bochurberg, Esq.
Paul D. Stevens, Esq.
STEVENS LC
1855 Industrial Street, Suite 518
Los Angeles, CA 90021
Telephone: (858) 353-6583
E-mail: lbochurberg@stevenslc.com
pstevens@stevenslc.com
Defendant Zuru LLC is represented by:
Micah Aaron Chavin, Esq.
Erik K. Swanholt, Esq.
FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP
555 California Street, Suite 1700
San Francisco, CA 94104-1520
Telephone: (415) 434-4484
Facsimile: (415) 434-4507
E-mail: micah.chavin@foley.com
eswanholt@foley.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 ***