/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/250123.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Thursday, January 23, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 17
Headlines
1138 METRO CHOICE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Dorce Suit Alleges
3M COMPANY: Henry Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Kratz Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Lakes Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Lamey Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: Landers Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Films
3M COMPANY: Michel Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Miller Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Ruiz Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Schmidt Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Films
3M COMPANY: Smalling Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Solomon Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
ADVENTIST HEALTH: Faces Beck Labor Suit in Calif.
AFFLUENT STAFFING: Faces Gonzalez Employment Suit in Calif.
ALBERTSON'S LLC: Martinez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
ALBERTSONS CO: Faces Otte Suit Over Unwanted Text Messages
ALTERRA MOUNTAIN: Garcia Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
APOLLO ENERGY: Fouse Files Suit Over TCPA Violation
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Bids & Briefs to Certify Class Due Feb. 4, 2026
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Court Amends Class Cert Bid Deadlines in Todd
B M 770: Montilla Seeks Minimum Wages, OT Under FLSA & NYLL
BANK OF AMERICA: March Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Three Classes
BARRETT FINANCIAL: Court Stays Discovery in Blair Suit
BECHTEL GLOBAL: Court Tosses Hanigan Second Amended Complaint
BH SOUTH: Property Inaccessible to Disabled People, Pardo Says
BJ'S RESTAURANTS: Illegally Collects Personal Info, Casillas Says
BYLT LLC: Martin Balks at Products' Fake Discount Prices
CASAD CO: Faces Chitalu Suit in N.D. Ohio
CHARGEPOINT HOLDINGS: Brown Sues Over Unlawful Waiver Provision
CHEVRON NORTH: Desparrois Sues Over Defective Batteries
DEEL INC: Damian Sues Over Unlicensed Money Transmission
DR. MARTENS: Faces Blank Suit Over TCPA Violations
ENZO BIOCHEM: Agrees to Settle Ransomware Attack Class Action
FANDUEL INC: Rodriguez Sues Over Website's Trap & Trace Process
FLOATME CORP: Judge Rejects Attempt to Enforce Arbitration
FOX CORP: Faraji Sues Over Sexual Harassment & Discrimination
FTAI AVIATION: Rosen Law Investigates Potential Securities Claims
G6 HOSPITALITY: Snyder Files Personal Injury Suit in C.D. Calif.
GOODRX HOLDINGS: C&H Pharmacy Sues Over Price Fixing Conspiracy
GUARDIAN VETERINARY: Palladino Sues to Recover Underpayment
HEATONIST LLC: Sandra Files Class Suit in Florida
HILTON WORLDWIDE: Crano Personal Injury Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
HOT TOPIC: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Weatherford Says
KINGS AND QUEENS: Beatty Sues to Recover Compensation
KINGSDOWN INC: Sandoval Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
KROGER CO: Morgan Removed from State Ct. to D. Colo.
LAMB WESTON: All Sports Alleges Price Fixing Conspiracy
LAND OF INDIANA: Fuesler Sues Over Worker Misclassification
LASERSHIP INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Taboada Alleges
LCP LAKE: Mott Files Labor Class Suit in Calif. Super.
LG ELECTRONICS: Faces McGonigle Suit Over Unwanted Messages
LINER'S SECURITY: Hoskins Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
LIVONIA COMFORT: Brothers Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
LONG ISLAND PLASTIC: Auli Suit Removed to E.D.N.Y.
LONG ISLAND PLASTIC: Niessing Suit Removed to E.D. New York
LOYA INSURANCE: Swiech Suit Removed to D. New Mexico
LUXOTTICA OF AMERICA: Oaks Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
MADISON SQUARE: Cheli Sues Over Inaccessible Property
MDL 2873: Burrows Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
MEDICAL MUTUAL: Peppers Sues Over ERISA Violation
MEDUSIND INC: Caldwell-Jock Files Suit in S.D. Florida
MENTHOLATUM COMPANY: Fagnani Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Boycat Sues Over Wrongful Conduct
MIELLE ORGANICS: Gomes Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
MONSANTO COMPANY: Smith Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Weaver Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Welton Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Whitsell Suit Transferred to N.D. California
MONSANTO COMPANY: Wilson Suit Transferred to N.D. California
NATIONAL CENTER: Doe & Bird Sue Over Alleged Data Breach
NATROL LLC: Daly Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois
NEW RIVER ELECTRICAL: Walker Files Suit in W.D. Virginia
NORTHEAST REHABILITATION: Minicucci Sues Over Unprotected Info
OMNI FAMILY HEALTH: Aaron Suit Removed to E.D. California
PATRICK M. SHANAHAN: Coburn Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct.
PERFUME VENTURES: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Cole Alleges
POINT QUEST GROUP: Levingston Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
POLARIS INDUSTRIES: Seeks to Decertify Class in Guzman Suit
POLESTAR AUTOMOTIVE: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
POLESTAR AUTOMOTIVE: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
POWERSCHOOL GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Strelzin Says
POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS: Baker Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Suit Says
PPM GROUP: Martinez Seeks to Recover Minimum Wages, OT Under FLSA
PRINX CHENGSHAN: Smith Sues Over Sale of Defective Tires
PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL: Williams Alleges Fair Housing Act Violation
PROGRESSIVE PREMIER: Burress Files FCRA Suit in N.D. Ohio
PROJECT HOME: Novack Suit Removed to E.D. Pennsylvania
PROPERTY PROBLEM: Mott Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
PUBLIX SUPER: Roberts Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
PURE FREIGHT: Williams Personal Injury Suit Removed to N.D. Ill.
QUALTEK WIRELESS: Dodge Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Calif.
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Pietoso Seeks Class Certification
RETINA SACRAMENTO: Gotishan Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
RETREAT BEHAVIORAL: Williams Class Cert. Bid Denied as Moot
SCORPION SERVICES: Pangelinan Seeks Minimum Wages Under Labor Code
SELECTBLINDS: Scoville Sues Over Failure to Secure Information
SEOUL PROVIDENCE: Guerrero Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
SET FORTH INC: Cruz Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
SET FORTH: Garcia Files Suit Over Contract Violation
SIRIUS XM: Faces McTee Suit Over Unsolicited Telephone Calls
SONESTA INTERNATIONAL: Class Cert Filing in Mitchell Due May 30
STANDARD PLUMBING: Rounsaville Files Suit in California State Court
SUPERIOR EQUIPMENT: Vera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
TESLA INC: Parties Seeks More Time to File Class Certification
TIME USA: Herrera Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
TR APPAREL LLC: Trippett Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
TRAVELERS PARTNERS: Pardo Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
TRICON RESIDENTIAL: Williams Suit Alleges Fair Housing Act Breach
UTAH HIGH: Parties Seek to Extend Class Cert-Related Deadlines
WALMART INC: Ct. Stays Myers Suit Pending Dismissal Ruling in Kahn
WALMART INC: Settlement Agreement in Haro Gets Final Nod
WB WASTE: Parties in Lopez Seek Final Approval of Settlement
WESTERN WASHINGTON: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due Sept. 19
WYNN LAS VEGAS: Elias Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
XTEND HEALTHCARE: Dargon Balks at Termination Without Prior Notice
YANWEN EXPRESS: Claudio Files Labor Suit in California State Court
YINOVA MANAGEMENT: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Picon Says
[*] Families Object to Settlement Amounts in Nursing Home Suit
*********
1138 METRO CHOICE: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Dorce Suit Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
PRINCESS DORCE, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MOHAMMED SULEIMAN; ALI SULEIMAN; FARID
SULEIMAN; 1133 METRO CHOICE, INC.; 1133 METRO CHOICE OF FULTON
INC.; BK86ST, INC.; BK86ST OF NY INC.; SULZ WIRELESS INC; SULZ
WIRELESS1458 INC.; FLATBUSH CELL INC; T-MOBILE USA, INC.; and
METROPCS NEW YORK LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00049
(E.D.N.Y., January 3, 2025) accuses the Defendants of violating the
Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York City Fair Workweek Law, and
the York City Earned Safe and Sick Time Act.
The Plaintiff began to work for the Suleiman Defendants as a retail
employee in or about February 2024. Allegedly, the Defendants never
paid Plaintiff proper overtime premium for the hours she worked in
excess of 40 per week. In addition, the Defendants also never paid
Plaintiff spread of hours premium for the hours she worked in
excess of 10 per day, says the Plaintiff.
The 1138 Metro Choice, Inc. is one of owners and/or franchisors of
numerous Metro by T-Mobile retail stores throughout Brooklyn. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric Hecker, Esq.
Alexander Goldenberg, Esq.
Daniel Mullkoff, Esq.
WANG HECKER LLP
305 Broadway, Suite 607
New York, NY 10007
Telephone: (212) 620-2602
3M COMPANY: Henry Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Henry, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I.
DUPONT 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 FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No.
2:24-cv-06762-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Army.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Kratz Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fred Kratz, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I.
DUPONT 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 FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No.
2:24-cv-06754-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Army.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Lakes Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Booker Lakes, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I.
DUPONT 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 FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No.
2:24-cv-06767-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Army.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Lamey Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Lamey, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I.
DUPONT 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 FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No.
2:24-cv-06733-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Army.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Landers Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Films
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Billy Landers, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I.
DUPONT 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 FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No.
2:24-cv-06768-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Air Force.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Michel Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
------------------------------------------------------------
David Michel, and others similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION;
ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA INC.; BASF CORPORATION, individually
and as successor in interest to Ciba, Inc.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT, INC.; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS INC.; CHEMGUARD INC.; CHEMICALS INCORPORATED; CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE LTD.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS INC.; DUPONT DE
NEMOURS, INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS,
INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS
USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.;
L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC
MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING
COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, 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 CORP., INC.
(f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., and DOE
DEFENDANTS 1-20, fictious names whose present identities are
unknown, Case No. 2:24-cv-06499-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 15, 2024), is
brought for damages relating to Defendants' development, marketing,
release, training users of, instructional materials, warnings,
sale, handling, and use in connection with Aqueous Film-Forming
Foam ("AFFF") containing Perfluorooctanoic Acid ("PFOA"),
Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid ("PFOS"), Perfluorononanoic acid
("PFNA"), Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid ("PFHxS"),
Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid ("PFBS"), Hexafluoropropylene Oxide
("HFPO", also known as "Gen-X"), and/or their precursors and
derivatives, and other fluorochemicals and for damages for personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing
"fluorochemical products."
The Defendants failed to warn users and consumers of their
fluorochemical products' persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxic
properties, as well as the fluorochemical products' propensity to
contaminate water supplies, which was known or knowable to the
Defendants.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS as well
as result in the contamination of Plaintiff's public drinking water
supply. Further, Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or
TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF or TOG products caused Plaintiff to
develop the serious medical conditions and complications alleged
herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of
Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities and arising from
the intentional, malicious, knowing, reckless and/or negligent acts
and/or omissions of Defendants in connection with the contamination
of the Plaintiff's drinking water supply with Defendants'
fluorochemical products to which Plaintiff was exposed. Plaintiff
further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising
from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed
with Kidney Cancer.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of
PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nicholas Wilson, Esq.
THE DRISCOLL FIRM, PC
434 Fayetteville Street, Suite 560
Raleigh, NC 27601
Phone: (314) 932-3232
Fax: (314) 932-3233
Email: nicholas@thedriscollfirm.com
- and -
John J. Driscoll, Esq.
THE DRISCOLL FIRM, LLC
1311 Avenida Ponce de Leon, Suite 501
San Juan, PR 00907
Phone: (314) 932-3232
Fax: (314) 932-3233
Email: john@thedriscollfirm.com
- and -
Heidi J. Johnson, Esq.
THE DRISCOLL FIRM, PC
211 N. Broadway, Ste 4050
St. Louis, MO 63102
Phone: (314) 932-3232
Fax: (314) 932-3233
Email: heidi@thedriscollfirm.com
3M COMPANY: Miller Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
------------------------------------------------------------
Colin Miller, and others similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY (f/k/a
Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company); AGC CHEMICALS
AMERICAS, INC.; ALLSTAR FIRE EQUIPMENT; AMEREX CORPORATION;
ARCHROMA U.S., INC.; ARKEMA INC.; BASF CORPORATION, individually
and as successor in interest to Ciba, Inc.; BUCKEYE FIRE EQUIPMENT
COMPANY; CARRIER GLOBAL CORPORATION; CB GARMENT, INC.; CHEMDESIGN
PRODUCTS INC.; CHEMGUARD INC.; CHEMICALS INCORPORATED; CHEMOURS
COMPANY FC, LLC; CHUBB FIRE LTD.; CLARIANT CORPORATION; CORTEVA,
INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS INC.; DUPONT DE
NEMOURS, INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.; DYNAX CORPORATION; E.I. DU
PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; FIRE-DEX, LLC; FIRE SERVICE PLUS,
INC.; GLOBE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LLC; HONEYWELL SAFETY PRODUCTS
USA, INC.; INNOTEX CORP.; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE PLC, INC.;
L.N. CURTIS & SONS; LION GROUP, INC.; MALLORY SAFETY AND SUPPLY LLC
MILLIKEN & COMPANY; MINE SAFETY APPLIANCES COMPANY, LLC; MUNICIPAL
EMERGENCY SERVICES, INC.; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL
FOAM, INC.; PBI PERFORMANCE PRODUCTS, INC.; PERIMETER SOLUTIONS,
LP; RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION; RICOCHET MANUFACTURING
COMPANY, INC; SAFETY COMPONENTS FABRIC TECHNOLOGIES, 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 CORP., INC.
(f/k/a GE Interlogix, Inc.); VERIDIAN LIMITED; W.L. GORE &
ASSOCIATES INC.; WITMER PUBLIC SAFETY GROUP, INC., and DOE
DEFENDANTS 1-20, fictious names whose present identities are
unknown, Case No. 2:24-cv-06496-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 15, 2024), is
brought for damages relating to Defendants' development, marketing,
release, training users of, instructional materials, warnings,
sale, handling, and use in connection with Aqueous Film-Forming
Foam ("AFFF") containing Perfluorooctanoic Acid ("PFOA"),
Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid ("PFOS"), Perfluorononanoic acid
("PFNA"), Perfluorohexanesulfonic acid ("PFHxS"),
Perfluorobutanesulfonic acid ("PFBS"), Hexafluoropropylene Oxide
("HFPO", also known as "Gen-X"), and/or their precursors and
derivatives, and other fluorochemicals and for damages for personal
injury resulting from exposure to aqueous film forming foams
("AFFF") and firefighter turnout gear ("TOG") containing
"fluorochemical products."
The Defendants failed to warn users and consumers of their
fluorochemical products' persistence, bioaccumulation, and toxic
properties, as well as the fluorochemical products' propensity to
contaminate water supplies, which was known or knowable to the
Defendants.
The Defendants collectively designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise released
into the stream of commerce AFFF or TOG with knowledge that it
contained highly toxic and bio persistent PFAS, which would expose
end users of the product to the risks associated with PFAS as well
as result in the contamination of Plaintiff's public drinking water
supply. Further, Defendants designed, marketed, developed,
manufactured, distributed, released, trained users, produced
instructional materials, promoted, sold, and/or otherwise handled
and/or used underlying chemicals and/or products added to AFFF or
TOG which contained PFAS for use in firefighting.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic
chemicals. Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain
in the human body while presenting significant health risks to
humans.
The Defendants' PFAS-containing AFFF or TOG products were used by
Plaintiff in their intended manner, without significant change in
the products' condition. Plaintiff was unaware of the dangerous
properties of Defendants' AFFF or TOG products and relied on
Defendants' instructions as to the proper handling of the products.
Plaintiff's consumption, inhalation and/or dermal absorption of
PFAS from Defendants' AFFF or TOG products caused Plaintiff to
develop the serious medical conditions and complications alleged
herein.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages arising out of the permanent and significant
damages sustained as a direct result of exposure to Defendants'
AFFF or TOG products at various locations during the course of
Plaintiff's training and firefighting activities and arising from
the intentional, malicious, knowing, reckless and/or negligent acts
and/or omissions of Defendants in connection with the contamination
of the Plaintiff's drinking water supply with Defendants'
fluorochemical products to which Plaintiff was exposed. Plaintiff
further seeks injunctive, equitable, and declaratory relief arising
from the same, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF and TOG in training and to extinguish fires during his working
career as a military and/or civilian firefighter and was diagnosed
with Kidney Cancer.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors, and/or sellers of
PFAS-containing AFFF and TOG products or underlying PFAS containing
chemicals used in AFFF and TOG production.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nicholas Wilson, Esq.
THE DRISCOLL FIRM, PC
434 Fayetteville Street, Suite 560
Raleigh, NC 27601
Phone: (314) 932-3232
Fax: (314) 932-3233
Email: nicholas@thedriscollfirm.com
- and -
John J. Driscoll, Esq.
THE DRISCOLL FIRM, LLC
1311 Avenida Ponce de Leon, Suite 501
San Juan, PR 00907
Phone: (314) 932-3232
Fax: (314) 932-3233
Email: john@thedriscollfirm.com
- and -
Heidi J. Johnson, Esq.
THE DRISCOLL FIRM, PC
211 N. Broadway, Ste 4050
St. Louis, MO 63102
Phone: (314) 932-3232
Fax: (314) 932-3233
Email: heidi@thedriscollfirm.com
3M COMPANY: Ruiz Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Ruiz, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I.
DUPONT 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 FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No.
2:24-cv-06742-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Navy.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Schmidt Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Films
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Schmidt, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX
CORPORATION; E. I. DUPONT 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 FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE
DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No. 2:24-cv-06763-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21,
2024), is brought for damages for personal injuries resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Navy.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Smalling Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Smalling, and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX CORPORATION; E. I.
DUPONT 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 FC, LLC;
TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No.
2:24-cv-06739-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21, 2024), is brought for damages
for personal injuries resulting from exposure to aqueous
film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the toxic chemicals
collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl substances ("PFAS").
PFAS includes, but is not limited to, perfluorooctanoic acid
("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid ("PFOS") and related
chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Marine.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
3M COMPANY: Solomon Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory Solomon Sr., and others similarly situated 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.; DUPONT DE NEMOURS, INC. DYNAX
CORPORATION; E. I. DUPONT 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 FC, LLC; TYCO FIRE PRODUCTS, LP; and JOHN DOE
DEFENDANTS 1-20, Case No. 2:24-cv-06748-RMG (D.S.C., Nov. 21,
2024), is brought for damages for personal injuries resulting from
exposure to aqueous film-forming foams ("AFFF") containing the
toxic chemicals collectively known as per and polyfluoroalkyl
substances ("PFAS"). PFAS includes, but is not limited to,
perfluorooctanoic acid ("PFOA") and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid
("PFOS") and related chemicals including those that degrade to PFOA
and/or PFOS.
PFAS, known as "forever chemicals" because they resist
biodegradation, persist in the environment, and accumulate in
people and other living organisms, have contaminated the land, air,
and water, through the use of AFFF containing PFAS for fire
suppression activities. AFFF is a specialized substance designed to
extinguish petroleum-based fires. Defendants' AFFF contained PFOS,
PFOA, PFBS, and/or the chemical precursors to PFOS and/or PFBS.
PFAS binds to proteins in the blood of humans exposed to the
material and remains and persists over long periods of time. Due to
their unique chemical structure, PFAS accumulates in the blood and
body of exposed individuals. PFAS are man-made compounds that are
persistent, toxic, and bioaccumulative when released into the
environment, and pose a significant risk to human health and
safety. PFAS are highly toxic and carcinogenic chemicals.
Defendants knew, or should have known, that PFAS remain in the
human body while presenting significant health risks to humans.
Not knowing the true nature of the products consumers were required
to use, PFAS, and/or AFFF containing PFAS has been used for decades
by military and civilian firefighters to extinguish fires in
training and in response to Class B fires.
Through this action, Plaintiff seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages, costs incurred and to be incurred by Plaintiff,
and any other damages that the Court or jury may deem appropriate
for bodily injury arising from the intentional, malicious, knowing,
reckless and/or negligent acts and/or omissions of Defendants in
connection with the permanent and significant damages sustained as
a direct result of exposure to Defendants' AFFF products at various
locations during the course of Plaintiff's training and
firefighting activities. Plaintiff further seeks injunctive,
equitable, and declaratory relief arising from the same, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff regularly used, and was thereby directly exposed to,
AFFF in training and during Plaintiff's service in the United
States Army.
The Defendants are designers, marketers, developers, manufacturers,
distributors, releasers, instructors, promotors and sellers of PFAS
containing AFFF products.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James L. Ferraro, Jr., Esq.
THE FERRARO LAW FIRM
600 Brickell Avenue, 38th Floor
Miami, FL 33131
Phone (305) 375-0111
Email: james@ferrarolaw.com
ADVENTIST HEALTH: Faces Beck Labor Suit in Calif.
-------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Adventist Health. The case is
styled as Lilly Beck, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Adventist Health, dba Reedley Community
Hospital, Case No. 24CECG04970 (Cal. Super., Fresno Cty., November
13, 2024).
The suit arises from the Defendant's alleged employment
violations.
A case management conference is set for March 27, 2025 before Judge
Tyler D. Tharpe.
Adventist Health, doing business as Reedley Community Hospital, is
a faith-based, nonprofit, integrated health system.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James R. Hawkins, Esq.
JAMES HAWKINS APLC
9880 Research Dr Ste 200
Irvine, CA 92618-4342
Telephone: (949) 387-7200
AFFLUENT STAFFING: Faces Gonzalez Employment Suit in Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Affluent Staffing,
LLC, et al. The case is captioned as DANILO GONZALEZ, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. AFFLUENT
STAFFING, LLC, et al., Case No. 24STCV34113 (Cal. Super., Los
Angeles Cty., December 24, 2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendants' alleged employment
violations.
Affluent Staffing, LLC is a staffing firm in California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David D. Bibiyan, Esq.
BIBIYAN LAW GROUP, PC
1460 Westwood Blvd., Ste. 300
Los Angeles, CA 90024
Telephone: (310) 438-5555
- and -
Sarah H. Cohen, Esq.
BIBIYAN LAW GROUP, PC
8484 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 500
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
Telephone: (310) 438-5555
ALBERTSON'S LLC: Martinez Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JOSEPH MARTINEZ, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ALBERTSON'S LLC, a Delaware
Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 30-2024-01436977-CU-OECXC, was removed from
the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Orange to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California on January 3, 2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Central District of California assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-00076 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendants' (1) breach of contract (meal
periods); (2) failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements;
and (3) failure to pay all wages due at separation, in violation of
the California Labor Code.
Headquartered in Boise, ID, Albertson's LLC operates as grocery
store chain in the United States. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Mara D. Curtis, Esq.
Brian M. Noh, Esq.
Brittany M. Hernandez, Esq.
REED SMITH LLP
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, CA 90071-1514
Telephone: (213) 457-8000
Facsimile: (213) 457-8080
E-mail: mcurtis@reedsmith.com
bnoh@reedsmith.com
bmhernandez@reedsmith.com
ALBERTSONS CO: Faces Otte Suit Over Unwanted Text Messages
----------------------------------------------------------
JASMINE OTTE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ALBERTSONS COMPANIES, INC., Case No.
2:25-cv-00028-DLM-GBW (D.N.M., Jan. 10, 2025) contends that the
Defendant promotes and markets its merchandise, in part, by sending
unsolicited text messages to wireless phone users, in violation of
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Accordingly, the Defendant has caused multiple text messages to be
transmitted to Plaintiff's cellular telephone number ending in
9241.The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt Defendant's
illegal conduct, which has resulted in the invasion of privacy,
harassment, aggravation, and disruption of the daily life of
thousands of individuals.
The Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages on behalf of Plaintiff
and members of the Class, and any other available legal or
equitable remedies.
The Plaintiff brings this case on behalf of the Classes defined
as:
"All persons within the United States who, within the four
years prior to the filing of this Complaint through the date of
class certification, (1) were sent more than one text message
within any 12 month period, (2) regarding Defendant's goods,
products or services, (3) to said person's residential cellular
telephone number, (4) after making a request to Defendant to
not receive further text messages by replying with a "stop" or
similar opt-out instruction in response to Defendant’s text
message(s)."
Albertsons is an American grocery company founded and headquartered
in Boise, Idaho.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Eisenband, Esq.
EISENBAND LAW P.A.
New Mexico No. 24-368
515 E. Las OlasBoulevard, Suite 120
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com
Telephone: 954.732.2792
- and -
Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
HIRALDO P.A.
401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33301
E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com
Telephone: (954) 400-4713
ALTERRA MOUNTAIN: Garcia Suit Removed to C.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as SILVIA GARCIA, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ALTERRA MOUNTAIN COMPANY,
Defendant, Case No. 24STCV26800, was removed from the Superior
Court of the County of Los Angeles, California to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California on November
21, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-10062-GW-PD to
the proceeding.
On October 14, 2024, Plaintiff Silvia Garcia, a California
resident, filed this putative class action lawsuit in state court
against Alterra, a Delaware company that is headquartered in
Colorado.
The Plaintiff alleges that Alterra violated California's Trap and
Trace Law by purportedly installing on the website,
www.steamboat.com, software created by TikTok in order to identify
website visitors. The Plaintiff purports to bring her claim on
behalf of herself and a class of individuals whose personal
information was shared with TikTok or other third parties by
Defendant without their effective and informed prior consent.
Alterra Mountain Company is an American hospitality company
established in 2018 with headquarters in Denver, Colorado.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Scott S. Humphreys, Esq.
Brianna R. Howard, Esq.
BALLARD SPAHR LLP
2029 Century Park East, Suite 1400
Los Angeles, CA 90067-2915
Telephone: (424) 204-4400
Facsimile: (424) 204-4350
E-mail: humphreyss@ballardspahr.com
howardbr@ballardspahr.com
APOLLO ENERGY: Fouse Files Suit Over TCPA Violation
---------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Apollo Energy Company
Incorporated. The case is captioned as ROGER LEE FOUSE,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
APOLLO ENERGY COMPANY INCORPORATED, Case No. 2:24-cv-01555-CBB
(W.D. Pa., November 13, 2024).
The suit alleges Defendant's violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.
The case is assigned to Magistrate Judge Christopher B. Brown.
Apollo Energy Company Incorporated is a locally owned and operated
solar company in Denver, Colorado.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
PARONICH LAW, P.C.
350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (508) 221-1510
Facsimile: (508) 221-1510
E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com
- and -
Jeremy C. Jackson, Esq.
P.O. Box 244
Bellefonte, PA 16823
Telephone: (814) 777-5080
E-mail: jjackson@bower-law.com
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Bids & Briefs to Certify Class Due Feb. 4, 2026
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JAMIE TODD, et al., v.
ASHLEY FURNITURE INDUSTRIES, INC. et al., Case No.
3:24-cv-00615-wmc (W.D. Wis.), the Hon. Judge Anita Marie Boor
entered an amended preliminary pretrial conference order:
-- Disclosure of proponents' class Aug. 29, 2025
experts:
-- Disclosure of respondents' Oct. 28, 2025
class experts:
-- Motions & Briefs to Certify/ Feb. 4, 2026
Decertify Classes:
Responses: March 11, 2026
Replies: March 25, 2026
-- Disclosure of liability experts
Proponents: July 20, 2026
Respondents: Sept. 2, 2026
-- Deadline for filing dispositive Oct. 19, 2026
motions:
Responses: Nov. 23, 2026
Replies: Dec. 10, 2026
-- Discovery Cutoff: April 23, 2027
-- Rule 26(a)(3) Disclosures and May 7, 2027
all motions in limine:
Objections: May 28, 2027
-- First Final Pretrial Conference: June 16, 2027
Ashley is an American home furnishings manufacturer and retailer.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9hJR4l at no extra
charge.[CC]
ASHLEY FURNITURE: Court Amends Class Cert Bid Deadlines in Todd
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Todd, Jaime, et al., v.
Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc., et al.,Case No. 3:24-cv-00615
(W.D. Wisc., Filed Aug. 30, 2024), the Hon. Judge William M. Conley
entered an order granting the parties joint motion to amend
deadlines for class certification motions and dispositive motions
in the preliminary pretrial conference order.
The nature of suit states Torts -- Personal Injury -- Product
Liability.
Ashley is an American home furnishings manufacturer and retailer,
headquartered in Arcadia, Wisconsin.[CC]
B M 770: Montilla Seeks Minimum Wages, OT Under FLSA & NYLL
-----------------------------------------------------------
YHONNY MONTILLA v. B M 770, INC. (DBA BUGGY SERVICE CENTER) and
AKIVA "DOE," individually, Case No. 1:25-cv-00185 (E.D.N.Y., Jan.
10, 2025) is a class action suit brought by the Plaintiff on behalf
of all other similarly situated employees seeking unpaid minimum
and overtime wage compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act,
the New York Labor Law, and the Wage Theft Prevention Act.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants deliberately failed to
meet their wage payment obligations. Accordingly, under New York
State law, the Defendants were required to pay the Plaintiff at a
minimum rate of $16.00 per hour. However, the Plaintiff was
compensated at rates of $10.71, $12.86, $14.29, and $15.71 per hour
for a 40-hour workweek.
The Plaintiff is a former mechanic employed by the Defendant.
B M 770, INC., a Florida Profit Corporation, is a business entity
located in Miami.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lina Stillman, Esq.
STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.
www.StillmanLegalPC.com
42 Broadway, 12th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 203-2417
BANK OF AMERICA: March Labor Suit Seeks to Certify Three Classes
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICHARD MARCH and BELINDA
HOLLINS individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Case No. 2:23-cv-02360-EFM-TJJ
(D. Kan.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting
class certification under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23:
1. Breach of Contract Class
"All current and former Bank of America employees who worked
overtime any workweek while assigned to work on the PPP loan
program and who during that workweek either (1) earned a PPP
incentive; or (2) was classified as exempt, while working in
a Breach of Contract State."
2. Unpaid Overtime Class
"All current and former Bank of America employees who worked
overtime any workweek while assigned to work on the PPP loan
program and who during that workweek either (1) earned a PPP
incentive; or (2) was classified as exempt, while working in
an Unpaid Overtime State."
3. Wage Payment Class
"All current and former Bank of America employees who worked
overtime any workweek while assigned to work on the PPP loan
program and who during that workweek either (1) earned a PPP
incentive; or (2) was classified as exempt, while
working in a Wage Payment State."
4. In the alternative, the Court should certify the Classes
under Rule 23(c)(4).
5. Excluded from the Classes are Bank of America, any entity in
which Bank of America has a controlling interest, any of the
officers or directors of Bank of America, the legal
representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns of Bank of
America, anyone employed with Plaintiffs' counsel's firms,
and any Judge to whom this case is assigned, and his or her
immediate family.
The Plaintiffs also move this Court for an order appointing them as
class representatives and appointing George A. Hanson, Alexander T.
Ricke, and Caleb J. Wagner as Class Counsel.
Bank of America is a financial institution, serving individual
consumers, small and middle-market businesses and large
corporations.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=E0eoN1 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
George A. Hanson, Esq.
Alexander T. Ricke, Esq.
Caleb J. Wagner, Esq.
STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP
460 Nichols Road, Suite 200
Kansas City, MO 64112
Telephone: (816) 714-7100
Facsimile: (816) 714-7101
E-mail: hanson@stuevesiegel.com
ricke@stuevesiegel.com
wagner@stuevesiegel.com
BARRETT FINANCIAL: Court Stays Discovery in Blair Suit
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Jennifer Blair, v. Barrett
Financial Group LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-03157-DJH (D. Ariz.), the
Hon. Judge Diane Humetewa entered an order granting Defendant's
motion to stay discovery.
The Court will stay discovery in this matter until it decides
Defendant's motion to compel arbitration.
The Plaintiff argues that the existence of other opt-in plaintiffs
renders this Motion non-dispositive. However, Plaintiff ignores
that the Motion to Compel Arbitration cites to an agreement wherein
she waived her right to bring a class or collective action.
Furthermore, other potential opt-in Plaintiffs have also signed
this same agreement as part of their employment with Defendant. So,
Defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration is potentially dispositive
of the entire case.
The Plaintiff has filed a Motion to Certify Class, but the Court
has yet to rule on it or grant authorization to give notice to
potential plaintiffs.
Without having granted such authorization of notice, the Court
cannot have its "own notice to prospective plaintiffs" undermined.
Moreover, like the Plaintiffs in a pre-certification class action,
any potential opt-in plaintiffs to this action are not yet
represented by counsel; so, communication from the defense to these
prospective plaintiffs should generally be permitted. Thus, the
Court will deny Plaintiff's request, but it will do so without
prejudice to renew.
The Plaintiff, Defendant's former employee, has brought this action
against Defendant for Failure to Pay Overtime under the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA).
Barrett is a mortgage broker.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=87Svck at no extra
charge.[CC]
BECHTEL GLOBAL: Court Tosses Hanigan Second Amended Complaint
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as DEBRA D. HANIGAN,
individually, and as a representative of a Class of Participants
and Beneficiaries of the Bechtel Trust and Thrift Plan, v. BECHTEL
GLOBAL CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00875-AJT-LRV (E.D.
Va.), the Hon. Judge Anthony Trenga entered an order:
-- granting the motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's second amended
complaint, and
The Court further entered an order that the Plaintiff's motion to
certify class is, denied as moot.
The Clerk is directed, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
58, to enter final judgment in favor of Defendants; to send a copy
of the Memorandum Opinion and Order to all counsel of record; and
to close this civil action.
Because Hanigan has not plausibly alleged another breach of
fiduciary duty, the failure to monitor claim must also be dismissed
the Court adds.
Hanigan filed this class action complaint alleging two claims under
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act ("ERISA"): (1) breach
of the duty of prudence for excessive fees and (2) breach of the
duty to adequately monitor investments.
Bechtel is an engineering, procurement, construction, and project
management company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=NmkHqC at no extra
charge.[CC]
BH SOUTH: Property Inaccessible to Disabled People, Pardo Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
NIGEL FRANK DE LA TORRE PARDO, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BH SOUTH DIXIE SL MALL LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-20160-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 10, 2025)
alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's
commercial property at 20505 South Dixie Highway, Miami, Florida,
33189, is not accessible to mobility-impaired individuals in
violation of ADA.
BH South Dixie SL Mall LLC owns and operates commercial properties
in Miami, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Beverly Virues, Esq.
Armando Mejias, Esq.
GARCIA-MENOCAL, P.L.
350 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 200
Coral Gables, Fl 33134
Telephone: (305) 553-3464
E-mail: bvirues@lawgmp.com
amejias@lawgmp.com
- and -
Ramon J. Diego, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF RAMON
J. DIEGO, P.A.
5001 SW 74th Court, Suite 103
Miami, FL, 33155
Telephone: (305) 350-3103
E-mail: rdiego@lawgmp.com
BJ'S RESTAURANTS: Illegally Collects Personal Info, Casillas Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
MILTITA CASILLAS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BJ'S RESTAURANTS, INC., a
California corporation, d/b/a www.bjsrestaurants.com, Defendant,
Case No. 30-2025-01450897-CU-MT-CXC (Cal. Super., Orange Cty.,
January 6, 2025) arises from the Defendant's alleged violation of
California's Trap and Trace Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant aids a third party
ByteDance, a Beijing-based company that owns and controls TikTok,
to surveil its interactions with visitors to its website, thereby
allowing TikTok to create detailed portraits of Plaintiff and other
website visitors' interests, needs, and desires.
Specifically, 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, says the suit.
BJ'S Restaurants, Inc. is an American restaurant chain,
headquartered in Huntington Beach, California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
David W. Reid, Esq.
Victoria C. Knowles, Esq.
PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
A Professional Corporation
4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone: (949) 706-6464
Facsimile: (949) 706-6469
E-mail: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com
dreid@pacifictrialattomeys.com
vknowles@pacifictrialattorneys.com
BYLT LLC: Martin Balks at Products' Fake Discount Prices
--------------------------------------------------------
RUTH MARTIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. BYLT, LLC, California entity, d/b/a
www.bylt.com, Defendant, Case No. 25CU000814C (Cal. Super., San
Diego Cty., January 6, 2025) arises from the Defendant's misleading
and false advertisements of its products in violation of the
California False Advertising Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant advertises fictitious
regular prices (and corresponding phantom discounts) on products
sold through its website. This practice allows Defendant to
fabricate a fake reference price, and present the actual price as
"discounted," when it is not.
Specifically, the product that Plaintiff purchased was not
substantially marked down or discounted, because the product had
not been offered on Defendant's website at the reference price for
at least the 90-day period prior to Plaintiff's purchase. In other
words, the reference price was a fake price used in Defendant's
deceptive marketing scheme, the suit asserts.
BYLT, LLC, California entity, d/b/a WWW.BYLT.COM, is a retailer
that sells products nationwide and in California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
Victoria C. Knowles, Esq.
PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
A Professional Corporation
4100 Newport Place Drive, Ste. 800
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone: (949) 706-6464
Facsimile: (949) 706-6469
E-mail: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com
vknowles@pacifictrialattorneys.com
CASAD CO: Faces Chitalu Suit in N.D. Ohio
-----------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Casad Company, Inc. The case
styled as Chitalu Chitalu, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Casad Company, Inc., Case No.
3:24-cv-01975-JZ (N.D. Ohio, November 13, 2024).
The suit arises from issues related to diversity-contract dispute.
The case is assigned to Judge Jack Zouhary.
Casad Company, Inc was founded in 1992. The company's line of
business includes commercial or job printing such as bags, business
forms, calendars, cards, and other printed material.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Sanford, Esq.
SANFORD LAW
10800 Financial Centre Pkwy
Little Rock, AR 72211
Telephone: (501) 221-0088
Facsimile: (888) 787-2040
The Defendant is represented by:
Claudia D. McCarron, Esq.
MULLEN COUGHLIN
426 West Lancaster Avenue, Ste. 200
Devon, PA 19333
Telephone: (267) 930-4770
Facsimile: (267) 930-4771
E-mail: cmccarron@mullen.law
- and -
Meghan J. Wood, Esq.
MULLEN COUGHLIN
350 South Northwest Highway, Ste. 300
Park Ridge, IL 60068
Telephone: (267) 930-1410
E-mail: mwood@mullen.law
- and -
Thomas I. Moran, Esq.
MULLEN COUGHLIN
70 Birch Alley, Ste. 240
Beavercreek, OH 45440
Telephone: (267) 930-2085
E-mail: tmoran@mullen.law
CHARGEPOINT HOLDINGS: Brown Sues Over Unlawful Waiver Provision
---------------------------------------------------------------
SHERVIN BROWN, Plaintiff v. CHARGEPOINT HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware
Corporation, BRUCE CHIZEN, RICK WILMER, ROXANNE BOWMAN, ELAINE L.
CHAO, MITESH DHURV, AXEL HARRIES, JEFFREY HARRIS, SUSAN HEYSTEE,
MARK LESCHLY, MICHAEL LINSE, EKTA SING-BUSHELL, and G. RICHARD
WAGONER, JR., Defendants, Case No. 2025-0009 (Del. Ch., January 3,
2025) is a class action lawsuit seeking for declaratory relief
relating to the company's violations of Delaware General
Corporation Law Sections 102(b)(7) and 122(17) and Delaware common
law and public policy.
The alleged violations stem from Defendants' waiver provision in
which Defendant ChargePoint Holdings, Inc renounces the application
of the corporate opportunity doctrine contrary to Delaware law.
Plaintiff Brown alleges that the waiver provision is invalid
because it contains no specification of line or type of business,
opportunities, identities of any parties having an interest in the
business opportunity, no periods of time or geographical location,
and no specification. The Plaintiff further asserts that waiver
provision lacks the specificity as required by Section 122(17) of
the Delaware General Corporation Law.
Headquartered in Campbell, CA, ChargePoint Holdings, Inc. sells
hardware, software and services related to the charging of electric
vehicles, such as the operation of networked charging stations,
across the United States and abroad. The company is listed on NYSE
and its single class of common stock trades under the symbol
"CHPT." [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Blake A. Bennett, Esq.
COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A.
The Brandywine Building
1000 N. West Street, Suite 1500
Wilmington, DE 19801
Telephone: (302) 984-3800
E-mail: bbennett@coochtaylor.com
CHEVRON NORTH: Desparrois Sues Over Defective Batteries
-------------------------------------------------------
ANTHONY DESPARROIS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CHERVON NORTH AMERICA, INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00052 (N.D. Ill., January 3, 2025)
arises from the Defendants' marketing and sale of defective SKIL
PWRCORE 40 Lithium 5.0Ah 40V Batteries.
The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit on behalf of all
individuals who purchased the said Defendants' batteries for normal
household use. Allegedly, the Defendant's batteries are defective
because they can overheat and catch on fire. Accordingly, the
Plaintiff asserts several claims for, among other things, unjust
enrichment, breach of express warranty, breach of implied warranty,
fraudulent concealment, and negligence.
Headquartered in Naperville, IL, Chervon North America, Inc., is a
foreign corporation that manufactures and sells power tools and
outdoor power equipment. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Roy T. Willey, IV, Esq.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO, LLC
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (803) 222-2222
E-mail: roy@poulinwilley.com
DEEL INC: Damian Sues Over Unlicensed Money Transmission
--------------------------------------------------------
MELANIE DAMIAN, in her capacity as a court-appointed Receiver, on
behalf of Surge Capital Ventures, LLC and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DEEL INC., a Delaware corporation, DPayments
LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, and Jeremy Berger,
Individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-20017-XXXX (S.D. Fla.,
January 3, 2025) seeks to recover damages, including money paid by
Surge and other members of the putative class to Deel, in
connection with an enterprise involving unlicensed money
transmission and money laundering around the world in violation of
state and federal Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization
Act.
The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to enjoin all Defendants'
future and continued illegal conduct that has caused, and continues
to cause, harm to members of the Class and the public. This harm
results from, inter alia, Defendants' failure to implement and
comply with approved Anti-Money Laundering and "Know Your Customer"
policies and procedures as required by the Bank Secrecy Act and
state money transmitter licensing laws, and violation of the Office
of Foreign Assets Control regulations (including doing or enabling
others to do business in Russia in violation of United States
sanctions), says the Plaintiff.
Headquartered in San Francisco, CA, Deel, Inc. provides services in
payroll, compliance, human resource and more. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Guy M. Burns, Esq.
JOHNSON POPE BOKOR RUPPEL & BURNS, LLP
400 N. Ashley Drive, Suite 3100
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 225-2500
E-mail: guybjpfirm.com
connieljpfirm.com
- and -
Thomas R. Grady, Esq.
GRADYLAWTM
720 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 200
Naples, FL 34102
E-mail: trgradygradylaw.com
DR. MARTENS: Faces Blank Suit Over TCPA Violations
--------------------------------------------------
ALLISON BLANK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. DR. MARTENS AIRWAIR USA LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 5:25-cv-00019 (C.D. Cal., January 3, 2025) accuses the
Defendant of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Between December 19, 2023, and November 29, 2024, the Defendant
caused three marketing text messages to be transmitted to
Plaintiff's cellular telephone number before 8:00 AM and after 9:00
PM, in violation of the TCPA, says the suit.
Headquartered in Portland, OR, Dr. Martens Airwair USA LLC
manufactures and markets boots, shoes, sandals, and accessories.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gerald D. Lane Jr., Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI
110 SE 6th Street, Suite 1744
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
Telephone: (754) 444-7539
E-mail: gerald@jibraellaw.com
ENZO BIOCHEM: Agrees to Settle Ransomware Attack Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Greig, writing for The Record, reports that a large
biotech company decided to settle a class action lawsuit for $7.5
million after facing backlash for a ransomware attack that exposed
the diagnostic test information and personal data of nearly 2.5
million people.
Enzo Biochem filed a report to the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission on Wednesday, January 15, announcing a settlement to
conclude the civil suit.
The company was hit with ransomware in April 2023 in an attack that
it said involved the "unauthorized access to or acquisition of
clinical test information of approximately 2,470,000 individuals,"
it said previously. The company was able to maintain operations but
discovered on April 11, 2023, that names, test information, and
approximately 600,000 Social Security numbers were accessed.
In a new filing, Enzo Biochem said the $7.5 million settlement fund
"provides for the full and final release of the Company and its
subsidiaries from any and all claims." The company also noted that
it previously committed to "make certain upgrades to its data
protection systems, which have been made."
The settlement comes after Enzo Biochem agreed last year to pay
three state governments $4.5 million for the same ransomware
attack.
An investigation led by New York's Office of the Attorney General
(OAG) found that the attackers -- who were never identified and
never came forward publicly -- accessed Enzo's networks using two
employee login credentials.
"The OAG later found that those two login credentials were shared
between five Enzo employees and one of the login credentials hadn't
been changed in the last ten years, putting Enzo at heightened risk
of a cyberattack," the OAG said. The company also did not use
multi-factor authentication for remote access to email,
investigators said.
Enzo Biochem warned investors in 2023 that it would likely face
financial penalties from regulators and lawsuits in relation to the
ransomware attack. The company reported fiscal 2022 revenue of
$32.6 million and is well-known for being one of the first
biotechnology companies to go public.
Healthcare organizations are facing increasing scrutiny for
ransomware attacks that expose patient data.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has secured
eight settlements related to ransomware attacks on healthcare
industry companies.
The department said ransomware has become one of the primary
threats to healthcare and provided data showing a 264% increase
since 2018 in large breaches involving ransomware that were
reported to its Office for Civil Rights. [GN]
FANDUEL INC: Rodriguez Sues Over Website's Trap & Trace Process
---------------------------------------------------------------
REBEKA RODRIGUEZ, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FANDUEL INC., a Delaware
corporation d/b/a WWW.FANDUEL.COM, Defendant, Case No. 24STCV30655
(Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., November 20, 2024) is a class
action brought by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated California citizens, whose personal
information was shared with TikTok or other third parties by
Defendant without their effective and informed prior consent in
violation of California's Trap and Trace Law.
According to the complaint, the Defendant uses a trap and trace
process on its website by deploying the TikTok Software on its
website because the software is designed to capture the phone
number, email, routing, addressing and other signaling information
of website visitors. As such, the TikTok Software is solely to
identify the source of the incoming electronic and wire
communications to the website.
The Defendant falsely promised website visitors that it would
protect their privacy, but then secretly monetized their 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, says the suit.
Fanduel Inc. develops and publishes an online daily fantasy sports
game.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
21301 Ventura Blvd, Suite 340
Woodland Hills, CA 91364
Telephone: (323) 306-4234
Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
abacon@toddflaw.com
FLOATME CORP: Judge Rejects Attempt to Enforce Arbitration
----------------------------------------------------------
Saul Ewing LLP, in an article with JDSupra, reports that for the
past decade, many courts have found class action waivers in
consumer contracts to be valid and enforceable under the Federal
Arbitration Act. However, recently, the Allegheny Court of Common
Pleas in Pittsburgh recognized not all clauses warrant enforcement
in Pierce v. FloatMe Corp., No. GD 24-2169 (Pa. Com. Pl. 2024).
What You Need to Know
-- Judge Hertzberg rejected loan provider FloatMe's attempt to
enforce arbitration and class action waiver clauses linked to in a
mobile app.
-- The opinion found the agreement failed to meet the standards
of unambiguous consent and conspicuous notice required under
Pennsylvania and Texas law.
-- The FloatMe ruling relied in part on Chilutti v. Uber
Technologies, Inc., which is on appeal to the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court -- a case that, like FloatMe, will likely be eagerly watched
as in-app agreements continue to proliferate.
In a putative consumer class action filed against FloatMe, Corp.
(FloatMe) alleging excessive fees for payday advances acquired
through the company's mobile application, Judge Alan D. Hertzberg
denied the company's attempt to enforce arbitration and class
action waiver clauses contained in the in-app agreement. Judge
Hertzberg ruled that the clauses, contained in an optional
hyperlink on one of 16 screens plaintiff encountered while
enrolling for the app, were too ambiguous and not reasonably
conspicuous to satisfy the requirements for contractual consent
under Pennsylvania and Texas law.
The FloatMe ruling relied in part on Chilutti v. Uber Technologies,
Inc., 300 A.3d 430 (Pa. Super. 2023), which is currently on appeal
to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court -- a case that, like FloatMe,
will likely be eagerly watched as in-app agreements continue to
proliferate.
The Court's Decision
Plaintiff Natalie Pierce (plaintiff) alleges that she used the
company's app to receive 26 instant monetary advances and that,
despite promises of "interest-fee" loans, she was charged amounts
exceeding Pennsylvania's maximum interest rates. FloatMe filed
preliminary objections asserting the plaintiff waived her right to
bring a class action and agreed to resolve all disputes by
arbitration based on screens she encountered in FloatMe's app,
which contained a hyperlink to the company's terms and conditions
(the terms). The terms also stated Texas law would govern all
claims.
On December 19, 2024, Judge Hertzberg rejected the enforcement of
those provisions under both Texas and Pennsylvania (where the
plaintiff resides) law. With respect to Texas law, the Court found
the clauses were not sufficiently conspicuous because they were
only accessible from an in-app hyperlink that was on the third of
16 screens required for registration, was in a smaller font than
the other words on the screen, and was not underlined or in capital
letters. Further, the provisions themselves were on page 18 out of
22 of the linked document. The Court did note that while the link
to the terms was in pink text, the words preceding the hyperlink --
"by continuing, you agree to FloatMe's" terms -- were in gray text
on a black background, which in Judge Hertzberg's words, made "the
entire sentence unlikely to draw the attention of a reasonably
prudent smartphone user." The Court also stated that because the
plaintiff had to agree to the terms on the third of 16 sign-up
screens and still had to provide information on at least seven
additional screens before enrollment, her manifestation of assent
was not "temporally coupled" with enrollment, as is required under
Texas law to establish unambiguous consent.
Judge Hertzberg's analysis of Pennsylvania law reached the same
conclusion with respect to conspicuousness. He also explained there
could not be an unambiguous manifestation of assent to the
arbitration provision because there was no notification regarding
waiver of a right to jury trial and that any such waiver should
appear at the top of the first page in bold, capitalized text. The
Pennsylvania portion of the opinion relied largely on Chilutti), an
en banc opinion from the Pennsylvania Superior Court. There, the
appellate court found that although it is permissible to disclose
terms and conditions in a hyperlink, such hyperlink must be readily
apparent and must clearly denote that the user is agreeing to the
arbitration and class action waiver provisions.
While companies hoping to include arbitration and class action
waivers in mobile apps should err on the side of conspicuousness,
the FloatMe opinion may not end up being the last word in
Pennsylvania. Both the FloatMe decision and the Chilutti opinion
are currently being appealed; FloatMe is now in front of the
Pennsylvania Superior Court, while Chilutti will be examined by the
Pennsylvania Supreme Court.
Moreover, Chilutti's status as a pending appeal already has been
noted by federal courts. For example, a judge in the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania expressed hesitancy
on relying on Chilutti given the pending appeal. See Happy v.
Marlette Funding, LLC, 2024 WL 3744234, 2024 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
142212 (W.D. Pa. Aug. 9, 2024). However, the facts in Happy are
distinguishable from Chilutti, as it involved a website and bold,
underlined text stating that checking a box meant acknowledgement
of the linked terms and conditions.
Similarly, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit upheld
the validity of website and app-based arbitration clauses in
Emmanuel v. Handy Technologies, Inc., 992 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2021).
However, as with Happy, the facts of Emmanuel are instructive
though arguably distinguishable from FloatMe. In Emmanuel, the
First Circuit, applying Massachusetts law, affirmed a bench trial
verdict enforcing an arbitration clause. Unlike in FloatMe, the
Emmanuel plaintiff agreed to the arbitration provision three times
-- on a web-based job application with a prominent hyperlink to the
Terms of Use; during app-based enrollment to work for the company
following orientation; and to accept updated terms on the same app.
Based on a "totality of the circumstances" test, the First Circuit
found Emmanuel had reasonable notice of the arbitration clause.
Emmanuel, 992 F.3d at 10.
Because of the subjective nature of conspicuousness and lack of
ambiguity, as well as the continuing updates to apps and mobile
devices, it is likely that the issue of enforceability will
continue to be litigated. Contrasting font colors, use of capital
letters and larger font, and multiple confirmations are some ways
companies may ensure awareness and enforceability of arbitration
provisions and class action waivers, when delivered via hyperlink.
It is also important for companies to remember that regardless of
format -- whether an app, website, or paper -- a contract is a
contract and as such all required elements of enforceability should
be observed. While formatting and additional prompts may seem at
first glance to be inconsequential or design-focused changes, the
difference between individual arbitration and a class action
outweighs the expense and burden of reviewing and refining the way
in which website and app users are presented with potentially
dispositive clauses. [GN]
FOX CORP: Faraji Sues Over Sexual Harassment & Discrimination
-------------------------------------------------------------
NOUSHIN FARAJI, individually, and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. FOX CORPORATION ET AL., Defendants, Case No.
25STCV00101 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., January 3, 2025) arises
from Defendants' alleged violations of the California Labor Code
and California's Unfair Competition Law.
Plaintiff Faraji was employed at Fox as a hairstylist on a
part-time basis from approximately 2012 to
2016 and on a full-time basis from approximately 2016 to August
2024. However, Fox allegedly failed to compensate Ms. Faraji and
Class Members for all overtime hours worked because Fox failed to
incorporate all non-discretionary remuneration, including but not
limited to, shift differential pay, bonus pay, multiple base rates
of pay and/or other non-discretionary pay into the regular rate of
pay used to calculate the owed overtime rate(s), resulting in the
miscalculation and underpayment of overtime wages. Among other
things, the Plaintiff was also subjected to sexual harassment and
discrimination in her workplace, says the suit.
Fox Corporation is a publicly traded corporation listed on the
Nasdaq stock exchange. It is a mass media company headquartered in
New York. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rana Ayazi, Esq.
Devin Abney, Esq.
AYAZI ABNEY APC
1801 Century Park East, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 432-2854
E-mail: rana@aacalifornia.com
devin@aacalifornia.com
FTAI AVIATION: Rosen Law Investigates Potential Securities Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces an
investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of FTAI Aviation Ltd. (NASDAQ: FTAI) resulting from
allegations that FTAI Aviation may have issued materially
misleading business information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased FTAI Aviation securities you may be
entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees
or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm
is preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
What to do next: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=33693 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
What is this about: On January 15, 2025, Muddy Waters Research
issued a report about FTAI Aviation. In this report, Muddy Waters
stated its belief that, among other things, "FTAI is exaggerating
the size of its aftermarket aerospace business" that FTAI is
"[m]isleading investors by presenting whole engine sales as
individual module sales," and "[e]ngaging in channel stuffing."
On this news, the price of FTAI Aviation stock fell by $37.21 per
share, or 24.2%, to close $116.08 on January 15, 2025.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contacts
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
G6 HOSPITALITY: Snyder Files Personal Injury Suit in C.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against G6 Hospitality LLC. The case
is styled as Cynthia Snyder, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. G6 Hospitality LLC, Case No.
5:24-cv-02423-AH-SHK (C.D. Cal., November 13, 2024).
The case is brought against the Defendant for alleged personal
injury claims.
The suit is assigned to District Judge Anne Hwang.
G6 Hospitality LLC is an economy lodging franchisor.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sarah Westcot, Esq.
BURSOR AND FISHER P.A.
701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 2100
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 330-5512
E-mail: swestcot@bursor.com
GOODRX HOLDINGS: C&H Pharmacy Sues Over Price Fixing Conspiracy
---------------------------------------------------------------
C&H PHARMACY INC. et al., Plaintiffs v. GOODRX HOLDINGS, INC. ET
AL., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-00082 (C.D. Cal., January 3,
2025) is a class action arising from Defendants' conspiracy to fix
prices paid to pharmacies for reimbursement of prescription drug
claims.
The Plaintiffs bring this class action complaint to recover treble
damages, injunctive relief, and other relief as appropriate, based
on Defendants' violations of federal antitrust laws. The Plaintiffs
allege that the Defendants exert their market power by employing
various anti-competitive tactics to restrain competition in the
prescription drug dispensing market, forcing independent pharmacies
out of business and thereby increasing the market share of the
Defendants' affiliated pharmacies. In addition, Plaintiffs assert
that the Defendants charge inflated prices to the specialty
pharmacies they own and collect reimbursement for the full price of
specialty pharmaceuticals from health plans.
Headquartered in Santa Monica, CA, GoodRX Holdings is a healthcare
company that operates a telemedicine platform and free-to-use
website and mobile app that track prescription drug prices in the
US. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Daniel L. Warshaw, Esq.
Bobby Pouya, Esq.
Naveed Abaie, Esq.
PEARSON WARSHAW, LLP
15165 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 400
Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
Telephone: (818) 788-8300
Facsimile: (818) 788-8104
E-mail: dwarshaw@pwfirm.com
bpouya@pwfirm.com
nabaie@pwfirm.com
- and -
Eric J. Artrip, Esq.
MASTANDO & ARTRIP, LLC
301 Holmes Ave NE, Suite 100
Huntsville, AL 35801
Telephone: (256) 532-2222
E-mail: artrip@mastandoartrip.com
GUARDIAN VETERINARY: Palladino Sues to Recover Underpayment
-----------------------------------------------------------
Lucille Palladino, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. GUARDIAN VETERINARY MANAGEMENT LLC; 18E
KINGSBRIDGE RD LLC; 4 HARDSCRABBLE HEIGHTS LLC; HARDSCRABBLE
VETERINARY HOSPITAL PLLC; and JASON BERG, individually, Case No.
1:25-cv-00355 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 14, 2025), is brought pursuant to
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the New York Labor Law
("NYLL") to recover underpayment caused by failure to pay overtime
compensation, untimely wage payments, and other damages for
Plaintiff and similarly situated nonexempt manual positions
including but not limited to veterinary technicians, veterinary
assistants, and facilities workers (collectively, "Veterinary
Workers") who work or have worked for the Defendants.
The Defendants have compensated Plaintiff and all other Veterinary
Workers in New York on a bi-weekly basis. Despite being manual
workers, Defendants failed to properly pay Plaintiff and other
Veterinary Workers in New York their wages within seven calendar
days after the end of the week in which these wages were earned as
required by NYLL. In this regard, Defendants failed to provide
timely wages to Plaintiff and all other similarly situated
Veterinary Workers in New York as required by the NYLL.
The Defendants also failed to provide Plaintiff and all other
similarly situated Veterinary Workers with proper time of hire
notices as required by the NYLL. The Defendants similarly failed to
provide Plaintiff and all other similarly situated Veterinary
Workers with accurate statements of wages pursuant to NYLL as
Plaintiff's wage statement failed to show her regular rate of pay,
her regular hours worked, overtime hours worked, and her proper
overtime rate, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a veterinary technician
from December 2017 through November 2021.
Guardian Vet is a premier veterinarian provider in New York State
that has employed over 300 workers throughout various locations
since it existence.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian S. Schaffer, Esq.
Armando Ortiz, Esq.
Katherine Bonilla, Esq.
FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP
28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor
New York, NY 10005
Phone: (212) 300-0375
HEATONIST LLC: Sandra Files Class Suit in Florida
-------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against HEATONIST LLC. The case is
captioned as Sandra Wurm, on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. HEATONIST LLC, Defendant, Case No.
24-CA-007559 (Fla. Cir., Lee Cty., November 20, 2024).
The case is assigned to Judge James R. Shenko.
Heatonist LLC is an online shop that sells hot sauces.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shawn Heller, Esq.
SOCIAL JUSTICE LAW COLLECTIVE, PL
974 Howard Ave
Dunedin, FL 34698-4923
Telephone: (727) 371-5720
HILTON WORLDWIDE: Crano Personal Injury Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Suellen Crano et al. v. Hilton Worldwide
Holdings Inc. et al., Case No. 24STCV26306, was removed from the
Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, to the United
States District Court for the Central District of California on
November 13, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-09809-SVW-AJR to
the proceeding.
The case arises from personal injury claims against the Defendant.
The suit is assigned to Judge Stephen V. Wilson.
Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc. is an American multinational
hospitality company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Kevin Michael Osborne, Esq.
Elizabeth A. Kramer, Esq.
Julie Christine Erickson, Esq.
ERICKSON KRAMER OSBORNE LLP
44 Tehama Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 635-0631
E-mail: kevin@eko.law
elizabeth@eko.law
julie@eko.law
- and -
Eric S. Dwoskin, Esq.
DWOSKIN WASDIN LLP
433 Plaza Real, Suite 275
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Telephone: (561) 849-8060
E-mail: edwoskin@dwowas.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Isabelle Louise Ord, Esq.
DLA PIPER LLP
555 Mission Street Suite 2400
San Francisco, CA 94105-2933
Telephone: (415) 836-2500
Facsimile: (415) 836-2501
E-mail: isabelle.ord@dlapiper.com
- and -
Ashley Lauren Barton, Esq.
Matthew Danaher, Esq.
Oliver Moody Kiefer, Esq.
DLA PIPER LLP US
4365 Executive Drive Suite 1100
San Diego, CA 92121
Telephone: (661) 619-3001
E-mail: ashley.barton@us.dlapiper.com
matt.danaher@us.dlapiper.com
oliver.kiefer@us.dlapiper.com
HOT TOPIC: Fails to Secure Personal Info, Weatherford Says
----------------------------------------------------------
ANASTASIA WEATHERFORD, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HOT TOPIC, INC. d/b/a HOT TOPIC
and BOXLUNCH, TORRID, LLC, Defendants, Case No.
2:24-cv-09805-MEMF-AS (C.D. Cal., November 13, 2024) is a class
action against the Defendants for their failure to properly secure
and safeguard sensitive information of Plaintiff and other
customers and loyalty account members.
According to the complaint, the Plaintiff's and Class Members'
sensitive personal identifying information -- which they entrusted
to Defendants on the mutual understanding that Defendants would
protect it against disclosure -- was targeted, compromised and
unlawfully accessed.
As a result of the data breach, the Plaintiff and Class Members
have been exposed to a heightened and imminent risk of fraud and
identity theft. The Plaintiff and Class Members must now and in the
future closely monitor their financial accounts to guard against
identity theft. Through this complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to
remedy these harms on behalf of herself and all similarly situated
individuals whose PII was accessed during the data breach, says the
suit.
Hot Topic operates a chain of retail stores under multiple brand
names, including Hot Topic and BoxLunch.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel S. Robinson, Esq.
Michael W. Olson, Esq.
ROBINSON CALCAGNIE, INC.
19 Corporate Plaza Dr.
Newport Beach, CA 92660
Telephone: (949) 720-1288
Facsimile: (949) 720-1292
E-mail: drobinson@robinsonfirm.com
molson@robinsonfirm.com
- and -
John J. Nelson, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS
GROSSMAN, PLLC
280 S. Beverly Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (858) 209-6941
E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com
KINGS AND QUEENS: Beatty Sues to Recover Compensation
-----------------------------------------------------
Cassandra A. Beatty, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. KINGS AND QUEENS HOME HEALTH CARE, LLC, NIARY
HICKS, and EBONY REYNOLDS, Case: 2:25-cv-00018-MHW-EPD (S.D. Ohio,
Jan. 9, 2025), is brought to recover compensation, liquidated
damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and other equitable relief
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act of 1939 ("FLSA") and the
Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act, (the "Ohio Wage Act"), the
Ohio Prompt Pay Act ("OPPA").
The Plaintiff and those similarly situated are current and former
non-exempt employees of Defendants who were not paid for all hours
worked over 40 hours in a work—week at 150% their regular rate.
(hereafter, "Putative Plaintiffs"). Under the FLSA and the Ohio
Wage Acts, Defendants were required to pay for all hours Putative
Plaintiffs worked and pay them 150% of their regular rate for all
hours worked over 40 in a workweek by willfully failing to
compensate the Plaintiff and Putative Plaintiffs at the statutorily
required overtime rate, Defendants violated the FLSA and the Ohio
Act, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a Hane Health from
February 2020 until July 2024.
The Defendants centrally control employment policies and practices
for all of their employees.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
Anna R. Caplan, Esq.
BARKAN MEIZLISH DEROSE COX, LLP
4200 Regent Street, Suite 210
Columbus, OH 43219
Phone: 614-221-4221
Fax: 614-744-2300
Email: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
acaplan@barkanmeizlish.com
KINGSDOWN INC: Sandoval Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Kingsdown,
Incorporated. The case is styled as Gloria Saldana Sandoval,
individually, and on behalf of all other similarly situated v.
Kingsdown, Incorporated, Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2025-0000386 (Cal.
Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., Jan. 9, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment."
Kingsdown -- https://kingsdown.com/ -- are one of the largest
independent mattress manufacturers in the world with operations in
the United States, Canada, Europe and Asia.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kane Moon, Esq.
MOON & YANG, APC
725 South Figueroa St., 31st Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: 213-232-3128
Fax: 213-232-3125
Email: kane.moon@moonyanglaw.com
KROGER CO: Morgan Removed from State Ct. to D. Colo.
----------------------------------------------------
VALARIE MORGAN, individually and behalf of all those similarly
situated v. THE KROGER CO.; and ALBERTSONS COMPANIES, INC., Case
No. 2024CV33653 (Filed Nov. 25, 2024) was removed from the Colorado
State District Court to the United States District Court for the
District of Colorado on Jan. 10, 2025.
The District of Colorado Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:25-cv-00083-CYC to the proceedings.
Accordingly, the amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000. The
Complaint defines the proposed class as:
"All persons who worked at, or who will work at, a Kroger King
Soopers or Citymarket or Albertsons Safeway location in
Colorado at any time from Jan. 9, 2022, to final judgment in
this action."
Kroger is an American retail company that operates (either directly
or through its subsidiaries) supermarkets and multi-department
stores throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David H. Seligman, Esq.
Alexander Hood, Esq.
Juno Turner, Esq.
TOWARDS JUSTICE
303 E. 17th Ave., Suite 400
Denver, CO 80203
E-mail: david@towardsjustice.org
alex@towardsjustice.org
juno@towardsjustice.org
- and -
Yaman Salahi, Esq.
SALAHI PC
505 Montgomery St., 11th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111
E-mail: yaman@salahilaw.com
- and -
Natasha J. Fernandez-Silber
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle Street, 14th Floor
Chicago, IL 60653
E-mail: nfernandezsilber@edelson.com
Defendant Albertsons Companies, Inc., is represented:
Maureen R. Witt, Esq.
Alexander D. White, Esq.
Adrianne K. Rosenbluth, Esq.
HOLLAND & HART LLP
555 17th Street, Suite 3200
Denver, CO 80202
Telephone: (303) 293-5245
Defendant The Kroger Co. is represented by:
Randall H. Miller, Esq.
Lucas Westerman, Esq.
ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP
1144 Fifteenth Street, Suite 3100
Denver, CO 80202
E-mail: randy.miller@arnoldporter.com
lucas.westerman@arnoldporter.com
LAMB WESTON: All Sports Alleges Price Fixing Conspiracy
-------------------------------------------------------
ALL SPORTS HOSPITALITY LLC dba THE DERBY ROOM POMONA; CALIFORNIA
HORSE RACING & SPORTS LLC dba THE DERBY ROOM NORCO; CALIFORNIA
SPORTS & HOSPITALITY LLC dba THE DERBY ROOM PERRIS; and ZENNZENN
LLC dba THE DERBY ROOM SAN BERNARDINO, Plaintiffs v. LAMB WESTON
HOLDINGS, INC.; LAMB WESTON, INC. LAMB WESTON BSW, LLC; LAMB
WESTON/MIDWEST, INC.; LAMB WESTON SALES, INC.; MCCAIN FOODS
LIMITED; MCCAIN FOODS USA, INC.; J.R. SIMPLOT CO.; CAVENDISH FARMS
LTD; and CAVENDISH FARMS, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00051
(N.D. Ill., January 3, 2025) alleges violations of Section 1 of the
Sherman Act, state antitrust laws, state consumer protection laws,
and common law.
Leveraging their market control, beginning no later than 2021,
Defendants allegedly conspired to raise, fix, stabilize or maintain
prices of frozen potato products above competitive levels during
the Class period. Rather than competing, this cartel of massive
producers implemented lockstep price increases, announcing highly
similar price raises very close in in lockstep with each other.
Headquartered in Eagle, ID, Lamb Weston Holdings, Inc. produces,
distributes, and markets of frozen potato products to both
individuals and businesses in the food service industry. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Lee Albert, Esq.
Brian Murray, Esq.
Brian D. Brooks, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
230 Park Avenue, Suite 358
New York, NY 10169
Telephone: (212) 682-5340
Facsimile: (212) 884-0988
E-mail: lalbert@glancylaw.com
bmurray@glancylaw.com
bbrooks@glancylaw.com
LAND OF INDIANA: Fuesler Sues Over Worker Misclassification
-----------------------------------------------------------
TRAVIS FUESLER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. LAND OF INDIANA, INC. and LARRY MORIN,
Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-00004-TWP-KMB (S.D. Ind., January 3,
2025) arises from Defendant's alleged violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Allegedly, the Defendants misclassified Plaintiff Fuesler and other
similarly situated employees as exempt employees even though they
are non-exempt under the FLSA and either paid them on a salary
basis or on an hourly basis without any guaranteed, predetermined
amount of pay per week. As a result of the misclassification, the
Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated
employees overtime at one and one-half times their regular rates of
pay even though these employees worked in excess of 40 hours during
their regular workweeks, says the suit.
Land of Indiana is a supplier of hardwood logs that operates a
logging company in Bedford, IN. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Robert A. Hicks, Esq.
MACEY SWANSON HICKS & SAUER
429 N. Pennsylvania Street, Suite 204
Indianapolis, IN 46204-1800
Telephone: (317) 637-2345
Facsimile: (317) 637-2369
E-mail: rhicks@maceylaw.com
LASERSHIP INC: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Taboada Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------
NIDIA TABOADA; and JUAN PABLO TABOADA ALVARADO, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LASERSHIP,
INC. d/b/a OnTrac Final Mile; ONTRAC LOGISTICS LLC; SUBCONTRACTING
CONCEPTS, LLC d/b/a SCI, LI LOGISTICS CORP; and JULIO GIRALDO,
Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00166 (E.D.N.Y., Jan. 10, 2025) seeks
to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime
compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and
costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as shippers.
Lasership, Inc. d/b/a OnTrac Final Mile operates as a courier
services. The Company offers pickup, delivery of letters, small
packages, and documents. Lasership serves customers worldwide.
[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Madeline Howard, Esq.
SACCO & FILLAS, LLP
3119 Newtown Ave, Seventh Floor
Astoria, NY 11102
Telephone: (718) 269-2251
Facsimile: (718) 679-9660
Email: mhoward@saccofillas.com
LCP LAKE: Mott Files Labor Class Suit in Calif. Super.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against LCP LAKE TAHOE EMP, LLC. The
case is captioned as MICHAEL MOTT, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. LCP LAKE TAHOE EMP, LLC, a
California Limited Liability Company, et al., Case No. 24CV2608
(Cal. Super., November 20, 2024).
The suit arises from the Defendants' alleged labor law violations.
A case management conference is scheduled for March 5, 2025.
LCP LAKE TAHOE EMP, LLC is a business that operates at the Beach
Retreat & Lodge at Tahoe, a hotel on the south shore of Lake Tahoe,
California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory E. Mauro, Esq.
James R. Hawkins, Esq.
JAMES HAWKINS, APLC
9880 Research Drive, Suite 200
Irvine, CA 92618
Telephone: (949) 387-7200
Facsimile: (949) 387-6676
LG ELECTRONICS: Faces McGonigle Suit Over Unwanted Messages
-----------------------------------------------------------
ANDREW JAMES MCGONIGLE, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. LG ELECTRONICS U.S.A., INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-00051
(E.D. Va., Jan. 10, 2025) contends that the Defendant promotes and
markets its merchandise, in part, by sending unsolicited text
messages to wireless phone users, in violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
Accordingly, the Defendant routinely violates 47 C.F.R. section
64.1200(c) and, in turn, 47 U.S.C. section 227(c)(5), by
delivering, or causing to be delivered, more than one advertisement
or marketing text message to residential or cellular telephone
numbers registered with the National Do-Not-Call Registry without
prior express invitation or permission required by the TCPA.
The Plaintiff is, and since August 5, 2024, was the regular and
sole user of his cellular telephone number (804) 238-XXXX.
The Defendant delivered, or caused to be delivered, text messages
to telephone number (804) 238-XXXX in 2024, including on September
9 and 11, 2024.
The Plaintiff brings this action under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23, and as a representative of the following class:
"All persons throughout the United States (1) who did not
provide their telephone number to LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.,
(2) to whom LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc. delivered, or caused to
be delivered, more than one voice message or text message
within a 12-month period, promoting LG Electronics U.S.A., Inc.
goods or services, (3) where the person's residential or
cellular telephone number had been registered with the National
Do Not Call Registry for at least thirty days before LG
Electronics U.S.A., Inc. delivered, or caused to be delivered,
at least two of the voice messages or text messages within the
12-month period, (4) within four years preceding the date of
this complaint and through the date of class certification."
Excluded from the class is Defendant, its officers and
directors, members of their immediate families and their legal
representatives, heirs, successors, or assigns, and any entity
in which Defendant has or had a controlling interest.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William Robinson, Esq.
WPR LEGAL
319 N. Piedmont St., No. 1
Arlington VA. 22203
Telephone: (703) 789-4800
E-mail: wprlegal@gmail.com
- and -
Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
PARONICH LAW, P.C.
350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
Hingham, MA 02043
Telephone: (508) 221-1510
E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com
LINER'S SECURITY: Hoskins Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Liner's Security and
Patrol, et al. The case is styled as Ayanna Hoskins, on behalf of
herself, the State of California, and all others similarly situated
v. Liner's Security and Patrol, Darryl Liner, Does 1-50, Inclusive,
Case No. 25CV000780 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Jan. 9,
2025).
The case type is stated as "Wrongful Termination."
Liner's Security and Patrol -- https://www.liners-security.com/ --
offer full investigative services for civil cases, criminal cases
and everything in between.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lori Costanzo, Esq.
COSTANZO LAW FIRM
111 W Saint John St., Ste. 700
San Jose, CA 95113-1106
Phone: 408-993-8493
Fax: 408-993-8496
Email: lori@costanzo-law.com
LIVONIA COMFORT: Brothers Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ebony Brothers, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. LIVONIA COMFORT CARE, LLC, Case No.
2:25-cv-10131-DPH-CI (E.D. Mich., Jan. 14, 2025), is brought as a
result of Defendant's practices and policies of failing to pay
Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees for all hours
worked, including meal periods during which the performed work and
were not completely relieved from duty and overtime compensation in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").
The amount of time Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees
spent on this required and unpaid worked amounted to approximately
one hour per day. When Plaintiff and other similarly situated
employees clocked in early to perform these principal activities,
Defendant and the other Comfort Care entities deducted the hours
worked from the time keeping system. As a result of Defendant's
practices and policies, Plaintiff and other similarly situated
employees were not compensated for all of the time they worked,
including all of the overtime hours they worked over 40 each
workweek, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant as a caregiver from
January 2023 through December 2023 at its Livonia, Michigan
location.
The Defendant is a nursing and rehabilitation center with several
facilities located in Michigan, including facilities in Livonia,
Bay City, Brighton, Chesaning, Shelby, Shields, and Vassar.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lori M. Griffin, Esq.
Matthew S. Grimsley, Esq.
Anthony J. Lazzaro, Esq.
THE LAZZARO LAW FIRM, LLC
The Heritage Building, Suite 250
34555 Chagrin Boulevard
Moreland Hills, OH 44022
Phone: 216-696-5000
Facsimile: 216-696-7005
Email: lori@lazzarolawfirm.com
matthew@lazzarolawfirm.com
anthony@lazzarolawfirm.com
LONG ISLAND PLASTIC: Auli Suit Removed to E.D.N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------
The case styled as ALEXANDRA AULI, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LONG ISLAND PLASTIC
SURGICAL GROUP, P.C., Defendant, Case No. 618267/2024, was removed
from the New York Supreme Court, Nassau County to the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of New York on November 20,
2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-08086-ST to the
proceeding.
On October 16, 2024, Plaintiff Alexandra Auli filed her Class
Action Complaint asserting claims for (i) negligence, (ii) breach
of implied contract, (iii) breach of fiduciary duty, (iv) violation
of New York Deceptive Trade Practices Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 349,
and (v) unjust enrichment in New York Supreme Court, Nassau
County.
Headquartered in Garden City, New York, Long Island Plastic
Surgical Group provides health care services including
reconstructive and cosmetic surgery.[BN]
The Defendant is represented by:
Leah S. Murphy, Esq.
JONES DAY
250 Vesey Street
New York, NY 10281
Telephone: (212) 326-3425
Facsimile: (212) 755-7306
E-mail: leahmurphy@jonesday.com
LONG ISLAND PLASTIC: Niessing Suit Removed to E.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as John Niessing, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. LONG ISLAND PLASTIC SURGICAL
GROUP, P.C., Case No. 618588/2024 was removed from the New York
Supreme Court, Nassau County, to the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of New York on Nov. 27, 2024, and assigned Case
No. 2:24-cv-08266-ST.
On October 21, 2024, Plaintiff filed his Class Action Complaint New
York Supreme Court, Nassau County, asserting claims for negligence,
breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, and invasion of
privacy.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Vicki Maniatis, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
405 East 50th Street
New York, NY 10022
Phone: (516) 491-4665
Email: vmaniatis@milberg.com
- and -
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW, Suite 440
Washington, D.C. 20015-2052
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
Email: dlietz@milberg.com
- and -
Daniel O. Herrera, Esq.
Nickolas J. Hagman, Esq.
CAFFERTY CLOBES MERIWETHER & SPRENGEL LLP
135 S. LaSalle, Suite 3210
Chicago, IL 60603
Phone: (312) 782-4880
Facsimile: (312) 782-4485
Email: dherrera@caffertyclobes.com
nhagman@caffertyclobes.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Leah S. Murphy, Esq.
JONES DAY
250 Vesey Street
New York, NY 10281
phone: 212-326-3425
Fax: 212-755-7306
Email: leahmurphy@jonesday.com
LOYA INSURANCE: Swiech Suit Removed to D. New Mexico
----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Thomas Swiech, individually and on behalf of
Other similarly situated individuals v. LOYA INSURANCE COMPANY,
Case No. D-202-CV-2024-09620 was removed from the New Mexico Second
Judicial District Court, County of Bernalillo, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of New Mexico on Jan. 14, 2025, and assigned
Case No. 1:25-cv-00047.
In the Complaint, Plaintiff alleges that he purchased an automobile
insurance policy from Loya that was in effect on March 24, 2013
(the "Policy"). The Plaintiff alleges that the Policy provided
liability coverage on one vehicle in the amount of $25,000 each
person and $50,000 per accident, per vehicle. Plaintiff also
alleges that the Policy provided uninsured and underinsured
motorist ("UM/UIM") coverage in the amount of up to $25,000 per
person/$50,000 per accident.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Meena H. Allen, Esq.
ALLEN LAW FIRM, LLC
6121 Indian School Rd. NE, Suite 230
Albuquerque, NM 87110
Phone: (505) 298-9400
Email: mallen@mallen-law.com
- and -
Michael E. Mumford, Esq.
BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP
127 Public Square, Suite 2000
Cleveland, OH 44114
Phone: (216) 621-0200
Email: mmumford@bakerlaw.com
LUXOTTICA OF AMERICA: Oaks Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Oaks, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. LUXOTTICA OF AMERICA, INC., Case No. ESX-L-007997-24 (N.J. Sup.
Ct., Essex Cty., Nov. 15, 2024), is brought for its violations of
the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") as a result of the
Defendants blind-inaccessible website.
Upon visiting Defendant's website, https://www.oakley.com/en-us
(hereinafter referred to as "Website"), Plaintiff quickly became
aware of Defendant's failure to maintain and operate its website in
a way to make it fully accessible for himself and for other blind
or visually-impaired people. The Defendant's denial of full and
equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its goods and
services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights
under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Plaintiff
seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's
corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a blind, visually-impaired handicapped person.
The Defendant is and was at all relevant times a company doing
business and marketing to New Jersey customers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel Zemel, Esq.
ZEMEL LAW LLC
400 Sylvan Ave, Suite 200
Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
Phone: (862) 227-3106
Email: dz@zemellawllc.com
MADISON SQUARE: Cheli Sues Over Inaccessible Property
-----------------------------------------------------
Charlene Cheli, an individual, on her own behalf and on the behalf
of all other similarly situated v. MADISON SQUARE CONDOMINIUM
ASSOCIATION, INC., a New Jersey Corporation, & KAYADUR
INCORPORATED, a New Jersey Corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-00430
(D.N.J., Jan. 14, 2025), is brought pursuant to the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA") and the New Jersey Law Against
Discrimination ("LAD") as a result of the Defendant's inaccessible
property.
The Plaintiff encounters architectural barriers at many of the
places that she visits. Seemingly trivial architectural features
such as cracked asphalt/concrete, access aisles, parking spaces,
curb ramps, and door handles are taken for granted by the
non-disabled but, when improperly designed or implemented, can be
arduous and dangerous to those who use wheelchair.
The Plaintiff has visited the Property on several occasions over
the years, her last visit as a patron of the occurred on November
30, 2024. The Plaintiff visited the Property as a bone fide patron
with the intent to avail herself of the goods and services offered
to the public within but found that the Property contained several
violations of the ADA--both in architecture and in policy.
The ADA has been law for over 30 years and the Property remains
non-compliant. Thus, the Plaintiff has actual notice and reasonable
grounds to believe that she will continue to be subjected to
discrimination by the Defendants, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a mobility impaired person.
Madison Square Condo, holds title to a parcel of land which
encompasses a place of public accommodation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jon G. Shadinger Jr., Esq.
SHADINGER LAW, LLC
717 E. Elmer Street, Suite 7
Vineland, NJ 08360
Phone: (609) 319-5399
Email: js@shadingerlaw.com
MDL 2873: Burrows Sues Over Injury Sustained From AFFF Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
NATE BURROWS, 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; 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 CORPORATION;
CORTEVA, INC.; DAIKIN AMERICA, INC.; DEEPWATER CHEMICALS, INC.; DU
PONT DE NEMOURS INC. (f/k/a DOWDUPONT INC.); DYNAX CORPORATION;
E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS AND COMPANY; JOHNSON CONTROLS, INC.; KIDDE
PLC; NATION FORD CHEMICAL COMPANY; NATIONAL FOAM, INC.; PERIMETER
SOLUTIONS, LP; 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.), Defendants, Case No. 2:24-cv-07624-RMG
(D.S.C., December 24, 2024) is a class action against the
Defendants for negligence, battery, abnormally dangerous activity,
fraudulent concealment, nuisance, wantonness, strict liability, and
inadequate warning.
The case arises from severe personal injuries sustained by the
Plaintiff as a result of his 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 hypothyroidism, the suit
says.
The Burrows 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.
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.
Daikin America, Inc. is a chemicals manufacturer based in New
York.
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.
Johnson Controls, Inc. is a global diversified technology company
based in Wisconsin.
Kidde PLC is a manufacturer of fire safety products based in
Mebane, North Carolina.
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.
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. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Richard Zgoda, Jr., Esq.
Steven D. Gacovino, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN GACOVINO PC
270 West Main Street
Sayville, NY 11782
Telephone: (631) 600-0000
Facsimile: (631) 761-0467
MEDICAL MUTUAL: Peppers Sues Over ERISA Violation
-------------------------------------------------
Dana Peppers, Randy D. Gipson, Cynthia Gipson, and William Borden,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
MEDICAL MUTUAL OF OHIO, RESERVE NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY; and
KEMPER LIFE AND HEALTH COMPANY, Case No. 1:24-cv-00103 (M.D. Tenn.,
Nov. 27, 2024), is brought against Defendants seeking declaratory
and affirmative injunctive relief pursuant to the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”).
The Plaintiffs each found themselves in this situation in late
December 2022. Although each opened a claim after receiving a
cancer diagnosis which Defendants determined to be entitled to
coverage, Plaintiffs each received a letter from Kemper Health on
behalf of Reserve National dated December 19, 2022, or December 20,
2022, announcing coverage as a participant in their employer’s
group plan was being withdrawn and canceled. No reasons were
provided in this letter for this coverage cessation. With that
coverage ending effective February 28, 2023, as this notice
instructed, Defendants halted Plaintiffs’ benefit payments beyond
that date.
The Plaintiffs are not alone. Upon information and belief,
participants in such ERISA group plans nationally who were insured
through Reserve National’s ported Cancer and Specified Disease
supplemental coverage abruptly lost their insurance after Reserve
National was acquired by Medical Mutual.
This case challenges Defendants’ blatant disregard of the terms
of their policies and, more importantly, their indifference toward
the group insurance participants for whom this coverage was
obtained by their employers to be there for these participants in
their most critical time of need--that being when these
participants had an actual ongoing loss (a covered diagnosis) for
which coverage was found to exist, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs were participants in an ERISA Plan having certain
supplemental coverage benefits insured pursuant to a Group Cancer
and Specified Disease Policy issued by Reserve National, which, at
the time of issuance, was a subsidiary of Kemper Health.
Medical Mutual is an Ohio corporation with its principal place of
business in Cleveland, Ohio.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ben Boston, Esq.
Ryan P. Durham, Esq.
Cameron Hoffmeyer, Esq.
Wyatt Boston, Esq.
BOSTON, HOLT & DURHAM, PLLC
P.O. Box 357
Lawrenceburg, TN 38464
Phone: (931) 762-7167
Email: bboston@bhsdlaw.com
rdurham@bhsdlaw.com
choffmeyer@bhsdlaw.com
wboston@bhsdlaw.com
- and -
Lawrence J. Tucker, Jr., Esq.
H. Scot Spragins (BPR# 020573)
1305 Madison Ave., PO Box 668
Oxford, MS 38655
Phone: (662) 234-4000
Email: ltucker@hickmanlaw.com
- and -
Miles Clay Williams, Esq.
THE MARTIN LAW GROUP
Birmingham Office
300 Vestavia Pkwy, Suite #2300
Birmingham, AL 35216
Phone: (205) 286-5576
Email: clay@erisacase.com
- and -
David P. Martin, Esq.
THE MARTIN LAW GROUP
Tuscaloosa Office
2117 Jack Warner Pkwy STE 1
Tuscaloosa, AL 35401
Phone: (205) 343-1771
Email: david@erisacase.com
- and -
Ralph E. Chapman, Esq.
CHAPMAN LEWIS & SWAN, PLLC
501 First Street, P.O. Box 428
Clarksdale, MS 38614
Phone: 662-627-4105, ext. 104
Email: ralph@chapman-lewis-swan.com
MEDUSIND INC: Caldwell-Jock Files Suit in S.D. Florida
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Medusind, Inc. The
case is styled as Jennifer Caldwell-Jock, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Progressive Premier Insurance
Company of Illinois doing business as: Progressive Insurance, Case
No. 1:25-cv-20215-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 14, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Breach of Contract.
Medusind -- https://www.medusind.com/ -- is a leading medical and
dental billing and revenue cycle management company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jessica Ann Wallace, Esq.
SIRI GLIMSTAD LLP
20200 West Dixie Highway, Suite 902
Aventura, FL 33180
Phone: (786) 244-5660
Fax: (646) 417-5967
Email: jwallace@sirillp.com
MENTHOLATUM COMPANY: Fagnani Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mykayla Fagnani, Individually and as the representative of a class
of similarly situated persons v. THE MENTHOLATUM COMPANY, Case No.
1:25-cv-00336 (S.D.N.Y., Jan. 14, 2025), is brought this civil
rights action against the Defendant for their failure to design,
construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website,
https://rohtoeyedrops.com/, including all portions thereof or
accessed thereon (collectively, the "Website" or "Defendant's
Website"), is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers, it violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent
injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies,
practices, and procedures so that Defendant's Website will become
and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers.
By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and
visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen reading software to read website content using the
computer.
THE MENTHOLATUM COMPANY, operates the Rohto Eye Drops online retail
store, as well as the Rohto Eye Drops interactive Website and
advertises, markets, and operates in the State of New York and
throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: michael@gottlieb.legal
jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
dana@gottlieb.legal
MICROSOFT CORPORATION: Boycat Sues Over Wrongful Conduct
--------------------------------------------------------
Boycat, Inc., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated
v. Microsoft Corporation, Case No. 2:25-cv-00088 (W.D. Wash., Jan.
14, 2025), is brought to recover the damages it has sustained and
to enjoin Microsoft's wrongful conduct going forward.
The Microsoft Shopping browser extension, however, is designed to
steal commissions from online marketers, including but not limited
to website operators, online publications, YouTubers, bloggers,
influencers, and other types of content creators. Online marketers
earn money by participating in affiliate marketing programs. As
part of these programs, the online marketer is assigned unique
affiliate marketing links and tracking tags, including affiliate
marketing cookies. Correspondingly, online merchants use these
tracking tags and affiliate marketing cookies to determine who gets
credit for referrals and earns sales commissions.
Online marketers direct their followers and viewers to specific
products or services via affiliate marketing links they share on
their respective platforms and social media channels. When someone
clicks the online marketer's affiliate link and makes a purchase,
the online marketer gets credit for the referral and earns a sales
commission. However, the Microsoft Shopping browser extension
cheats these online marketers out of commissions they are entitled
to by altering the checkout process and removing their tracking
tags and affiliate marketing cookies.
Microsoft programmed the Microsoft Shopping browser extension to
systematically appropriate commissions that belong to influencers
like Plaintiff and Class members. It does so by substituting its
own affiliate marketing cookie in place of the online marketer's
affiliate marketing cookie, and this happens even though the
customer used the online marketer's specific affiliate web link to
access the website on which they purchased the product or service.,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is an online marketer whose commission payments
Microsoft has wrongfully misappropriated.
Microsoft Corporation is a Washington corporation with a principal
place of business at 1 Microsoft Way, Redmond in King County,
Washington.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jason T. Dennett, Esq.
Joan Pradhan, Esq.
TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC
1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700
Seattle, WA 98101
Phone: (206) 682-5600
Email: jdennett@tousley.com
jpradhan@tousley.com
- and -
Gary M. Klinger, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
227 W Monroe Street, Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Email: gklinger@milberg.com
- and -
Alexandra M. Honeycutt, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
800 S. Gay St., STE 1100
Knoxville, TN 37929
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Email: ahoneycutt@milberg.com
MIELLE ORGANICS: Gomes Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mielle Organics LLC,
et al. The case is styled as Georgina Gomes, individually and on
behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated persons,
known and unknown v. Mielle Organics LLC, The Procter & Gamble
Company, Case No. 1:24-cv-12019 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 21, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Mielle Organics -- https://mielleorganics.com/ -- is a hair care
and beauty brand that believes healthier ingredients encourage
healthier hair and skin.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Daniel I. Schlade, Esq.
James Dore, Esq.
6232 N. Pulaski, #300
Chicago, IL 60646
Phone: (773) 550-3775
Email: dschlade@justicialaboral.com
jdore@justicialaboral.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Smith Suit Transferred to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Eric Smith, and others similarly situated v.
Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01628 was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Jan.
14, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-00483-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Weaver Suit Transferred to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Daniel Weaver, and others similarly situated
v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01629 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on
Jan. 14, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-00484-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Welton Suit Transferred to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Lorynda Welton, Individually and as
Representative of the Estate of Larry Welton, deceased, and others
similarly situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01630 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on Jan. 14, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-00486-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Whitsell Suit Transferred to N.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as William Whitsell, and others similarly
situated v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01631 was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California on Jan. 14, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-00490-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
MONSANTO COMPANY: Wilson Suit Transferred to N.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Annette Wilson, and others similarly situated
v. Monsanto Company, Case No. 4:24-cv-01632 was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on
Jan. 14, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-00492-VC to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability for
Product Liability.
The Monsanto Company -- https://www.monsanto.com/ -- was an
American agrochemical and agricultural biotechnology corporation
founded in 1901 and headquartered in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Tara K. King, Esq.
THE WAGSTAFF LAW FIRM
940 Lincoln Street
Denver, CO 80203
Phone: (303) 376-6360
Email: tking@wagstafflawfirm.com
NATIONAL CENTER: Doe & Bird Sue Over Alleged Data Breach
--------------------------------------------------------
JANE DOE and PATRICIA BIRD, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR
CONSTRUCTION EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, LTD. CORP., Defendant, Case
No. 2:25-cv-00033-DAD-CSK (E.D. Cal., January 3, 2025) arises from
Defendant's failure to protect highly sensitive data about its
current and former employees.
On January 26, 2023, the Defendant was hacked via email phishing.
However, the Defendant did not learn that it was hacked until March
2, 2023. Moreover, the Defendant waited until March 24, 2023--over
three weeks after Defendant learned about its data breach--before
it began notifying the Class. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs now seek
redress for Defendant's unlawful conduct and asserts claims for
negligence, breach of implied contract, invasion of privacy, unjust
enrichment, and breach of fiduciary duty.
Based in Alachua, FL, the National Center for Construction
Education and Research, Ltd. Corp. is a non-stock corporation that
sells "construction training, assessments, credentials, research,
and career development" programs. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are 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
NATROL LLC: Daly Suit Removed to N.D. Illinois
----------------------------------------------
The case styled as John Daly, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. NATROL, LLC, Case No. 2024CH09688 was
removed from the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, Chancery
Division, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois on Nov. 27, 2024, and assigned Case No. 1:24-cv-12275.
The Complaint alleges that the labeling on and advertising of
Natrol’s Melatonin Gummies products (the “Products”) are
false and misleading because the label states that the Products
contain “No Artificial Preservatives” and contain sodium
citrate and citric acid.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Michael J. Duvall, Esq.
DENTONS US LLP
601 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2500
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Phone: (213) 623-9300
Fax: (213) 623-9924
Email: michael.duvall@dentons.com
- and -
Grant J. Ankrom, Esq.
DENTONS US LLP
101 South Hanley Road, Suite 600
St. Louis, MO 63105
Phone: (314) 241-1800
Fax: (314) 259-5959
Email: grant.ankrom@dentons.com
- and -
Emily C. Eggmann, Esq.
DENTONS US LLP
233 South Wacker Drive, Suite 5900
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (312) 876-8000
Fax: (312) 876-7934
Email: emily.eggmann@dentons.com
NEW RIVER ELECTRICAL: Walker Files Suit in W.D. Virginia
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against New River Electrical
Corporation. The case is styled as Amy Walker, on behalf of herself
and all others similarly situated v. New River Electrical
Corporation, Case No. 7:25-cv-00014-RSB-CKM (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Joaquin Cty., Jan. 9, 2025).
The nature of suit is stated Other P.I.
New River Electrical -- https://www.newriverelectrical.com/ -- is
an employee-owned OH & VA electrical construction company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Hilton Wise, Esq.
WISE LAW FIRM, PLC
10640 Page Ave, Ste 320
Fairfax, VA 22030-7409
Phone: (703) 934-6377
Fax: (703) 934-6379
Email: dwise@wiselaw.pro
NORTHEAST REHABILITATION: Minicucci Sues Over Unprotected Info
--------------------------------------------------------------
DIANE MINICUCCI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. NORTHEAST REHABILITATION HOSPITAL NETWORK, Case No.
1:25-cv-00024 (D.N.H., Jan. 10, 2025) seeks monetary damages and
injunctive and declaratory relief arising from the Defendant's
failure to safeguard the Personally Identifiable Information and
Protected Health Information of its patients, which resulted in
unauthorized access to its information systems between May 13, 2024
and May 22, 2024 and the compromised and unauthorized disclosure of
that Private Information, causing widespread injury and damages to
Plaintiff and the proposed Class.
On May 22, 2024, NRHN detected unusual activity in its computer
systems and determined that an unauthorized third party accessed
its network and obtained certain files from its systems between May
13, 2024, and May 22, 2024 ("Data Breach").
As a result of the Data Breach, which the Defendant failed to
prevent, the Private Information of Defendant's patients, including
Plaintiff and the proposed Class members, were stolen, including
their name, other health insurance information, patient account
number, treatment information, and medical billing/claims
information. The Defendant's investigation concluded that the
Private Information compromised in the Data Breach included
Plaintiff's and other individuals' information. The Defendant's
failure to safeguard Patients' highly sensitive Private Information
as exposed and unauthorizedly disclosed in the Data Breach violates
its common law duty, New Hampshire law, and Defendant's implied
contract with its Patients to safeguard their Private Information,
says the suit.
The Plaintiff received medical services from Defendant. As a
condition of receiving services, Defendant required Plaintiff to
provide them with her PII/PHI.
Northeast Rehabilitation provides inpatient and outpatient
rehabilitation care2 with its principle place of business in New
Hampshire.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Adam H. Weintraub, Esq.
WEINTRAUB LAW, LLC
170 Commerce Way, Suite 200
Portsmouth, NH 03801
Telephone: (603) 212-1785
E-mail: aweintraub@ahwfirm.com
- and -
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
Leanna A. Loginov, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 400
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: 305-479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
OMNI FAMILY HEALTH: Aaron Suit Removed to E.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Daniel Aaron, individually, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Omni Family Health, Case No.
BCV-24-103632 was removed from the Superior Court Kern County, to
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on
Jan. 9, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-00054-CDB to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
Omni Family Health -- https://omnifamilyhealth.org/ -- is a growing
network providing primary and preventative healthcare located
throughout Kern, Kings, Tulare, and Fresno counties.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Laura Grace Van Note, Esq.
Mark Thomas Freeman, Esq.
Scott Cole, Esq.
COLE & VAN NOTE
555 12th Street, Suite 2100
Oakland, CA 94607
Phone: (510) 891-9800
Fax: (510) 891-7030
Email: lvn@colevannote.com
mtf@colevannote.com
sec@colevannote.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Tambry L. Bradford, Esq.
TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP
350 S. Grand Ave., Suite 3400
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: (213) 928-9805
Email: tambry.bradford@troutman.com
- and -
Ronald I. Raether, Esq.
TROUTMAN PEPPER
100 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1500
Irvine, CA 92614
Phone: (949) 622-2722
Fax: (949) 622-2739
Email: ron.raether@troutman.com
PATRICK M. SHANAHAN: Coburn Files Suit in Del. Chancery Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Patrick M. Shanahan,
et al. The case is styled as Royal B. Coburn, Jr., individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Patrick M. Shanahan,
Irene M. Esteves, James R. Ray, Jane P. Chappell, John L. Plueger,
Laura H. Wright, Paul E. Fulchino, Robert D. Johnson, Ronald T.
Kadish, Spirit Aerosystems Holdings, Inc., Stephen A. Cambone,
William A. Fitzgerald, Case No. 2025-0029 (Del. Chancery Ct., Jan.
9, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Breach of Fiduciary Duties."
Patrick Michael Shanahan (born June 27, 1962) is an American
businessman and the president and chief executive officer of Spirit
AeroSystems.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Blake Bennett, Esq.
COOCH & TAYLOR PA-WILMINGTON
1000 W St Suite 1500
Wilmington, DE 19899
Phone: (302) 984-3889
Fax: (302) 984-3939
Email: bbennett@coochtaylor.com
PERFUME VENTURES: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Cole Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HARON COLE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. Perfume Ventures, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-00286 (N.D. Ill., Jan.
10, 2025) seeks to recover alleges that Perfume Ventures failed to
design, construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons.
According to the complaint, the Defendant is denying blind and
visually impaired persons throughout the United States with equal
access to the goods and services Perfume Ventures provides to their
non-disabled customers through https://microperfumes.com/. The
Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered, and in
conjunction with its physical locations, is a violation of
Plaintiff’s rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Microperfumes.com provides to the public a wide array of the goods,
services, price specials and other programs offered by Perfume
Ventures. Yet, Microperfumes.com contains significant access
barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind and
visually-impaired customers to use the website. In fact, the access
barriers make it impossible for blind and visually-impaired users
to even complete a transaction on the website.
The Plaintiff uses the terms "blind" or "visually-impaired" to
refer to all people with visual impairments who meet the legal
definition of blindness in that they have a visual acuity with
correction of less than or equal to 20 x 200. Some blind people who
meet this definition have limited vision; others have no vision.
Based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1
million people in the United States are visually impaired,
including 2.0 million who are blind, and according to the American
Foundation for the Blind’s 2015 report, approximately 400,000
visually impaired persons live in the State of Illinois.
Microperfumes.com provides consumers with access to an array of
goods and services, including the ability to view a wide variety of
fragrances in different sizes, including sample vials, travel
sprays, and retail bottles, from renowned brands such as Louis
Vuitton, Prada, Chanel, Valentino, Versace, Dolce & Gabbana, and
many others. Co.[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
POINT QUEST GROUP: Levingston Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Point Quest Group,
Inc., et al. The case is styled as Bashir Levingston, on behalf of
the general public similarly situated and as an aggrieved employee
pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act v. Point Quest Group,
Inc., Point Quest Inc., Does 1-50, Case No. 25CV000761 (Cal. Super.
Ct., Sacramento Cty., Jan. 9, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."
Point Quest Group -- https://pointquestgroup.com/ -- is a leading
national provider of specialized educational, behavioral, and
therapeutic services for students ages 3 to 22.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Francis Anthony DiGiacco, Esq.
HILLIER DIGIACCO LLP
600 W Broadway, Ste. 700
San Diego, CA 92101-3370
Email: frankie@hdlawllp.com
POLARIS INDUSTRIES: Seeks to Decertify Class in Guzman Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PAUL GUZMAN, et al., v.
POLARIS INDUSTRIES INC., et al., Case No. 8:19-cv-01543-FLA-KES
(C.D. Cal.), the Defendants will move the Court on Feb. 7, 2025,
ask the Court to decertify the class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.
23.
First, the plaintiffs cannot meet the predominance requirement for
class certification, Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3), because they do not
have a damages model "capable of measurement on a class-wide basis
and attributable to their theory of liability."
Second, plaintiffs cannot demonstrate predominance because
inherently individual and predominating class-member inquiries are
necessary to actually identify who "purchased a Class Vehicle with
a sticker stating the ROPS complied with § 1928.53."
Polaris designs, engineers, manufactures and markets off-road
vehicles, including all-terrain vehicles.
A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=QYDQN3 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendants are represented by:
Richard Godfrey, Esq.
R. Allan Pixton, Esq.
Paul D. Collier, Esq.
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
SULLIVAN, LLP
191 N. Wacker, Suite 2700
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 705-7400
Facsimile: (312) 705-7401
E-mail: richardgodfrey@quinnemanuel.com
allanpixton@quinnemanuel.com
paulcollier@quinnemanuel.com
- and -
David A. Klein, Esq.
Andrew B. Bloomer, Esq.
KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
2049 Century Park East, Suite 3700
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 552-4200
Facsimile: (310) 552-5900
E-mail: david.klein@kirkland.com
andrew.bloomer@kirkland.com
POLESTAR AUTOMOTIVE: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
an investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC (NASDAQ: PSNY)
resulting from allegations that Polestar may have issued materially
misleading business information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased Polestar securities you may be entitled
to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs
through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is
preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
What to do next: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=33703 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
What is this about: On January 16, 2025, before the market opened,
Polestar filed a current report on Form 6-K with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission. In this current report,
Polestar announced that it had been concluded that "the Company's
previously issued audited financial statements included within
Annual Reports on Form 20-F for the years ended December 31, 2022
and December 31, 2023 (the "Audited Affected Financials") and the
unaudited interim financial information included within Current
Reports on Form 6-K for the quarterly periods ending on and falling
between September 30, 2022 and June 30, 2024 (the "Unaudited
Affected Financials" and together with the Audited Affected
Financials, the "Affected Financials") contain errors that warrant
restatement of the Audited Affected Financials and the interim
financial information for the six-month periods ended June 30,
2023, and June 30, 2024."
On this news, Polestar Class A American Depositary Shares fell over
11% in intraday trading on January 16, 2025.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contacts
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
POLESTAR AUTOMOTIVE: Rosen Law Probes Potential Securities Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces
an investigation of potential securities claims on behalf of
shareholders of Polestar Automotive Holding UK PLC (NASDAQ: PSNY)
resulting from allegations that Polestar may have issued materially
misleading business information to the investing public.
So What: If you purchased Polestar securities you may be entitled
to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs
through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is
preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.
What to do next: To join the prospective class action, go to
https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=33703 or call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email case@rosenlegal.com
for information on the class action.
What is this about: On January 16, 2025, before the market opened,
Polestar filed a current report on Form 6-K with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission. In this current report,
Polestar announced that it had been concluded that "the Company's
previously issued audited financial statements included within
Annual Reports on Form 20-F for the years ended December 31, 2022
and December 31, 2023 (the "Audited Affected Financials") and the
unaudited interim financial information included within Current
Reports on Form 6-K for the quarterly periods ending on and falling
between September 30, 2022 and June 30, 2024 (the "Unaudited
Affected Financials" and together with the Audited Affected
Financials, the "Affected Financials") contain errors that warrant
restatement of the Audited Affected Financials and the interim
financial information for the six-month periods ended June 30,
2023, and June 30, 2024."
On this news, Polestar Class A American Depositary Shares fell over
11% in intraday trading on January 16, 2025.
Why Rosen Law: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel
with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms
issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or
any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not
actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting
counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the
globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the
largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese
Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class
Action Services for number of securities class action settlements
in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013
and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In
2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In
2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a
Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been
recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar
outcome.
Contacts
Laurence Rosen, Esq.
Phillip Kim, Esq.
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
Tel: (212) 686-1060
Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
Fax: (212) 202-3827
case@rosenlegal.com
www.rosenlegal.com [GN]
POWERSCHOOL GROUP: Fails to Prevent Data Breach, Strelzin Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
JILL STRELZIN, on behalf of J.S., a minor, and R.S., a minor, and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. POWERSCHOOL GROUP, LLC;
and POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:25-at-00061
(E.D. Cal., Jan. 10, 2025) alleges that the Defendant failed to
maintain reasonable and appropriate data security for consumers'
sensitive personal information.
As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's inadequate data
security measures, and its breach of its duty to handle PII with
reasonable care, the Plaintiff's minor children's and Class
Members' PII have been accessed by hackers and exposed to an untold
number of unauthorized individuals.
The Plaintiff's minor children and Class Members are now at a
significantly increased and certainly impending risk of fraud,
identity theft, misappropriation of health insurance benefits,
intrusion of their privacy, and similar forms of criminal mischief,
risk which may last for the rest of their lives. Consequently,
Plaintiff's minor children and Class Members must devote
substantially more time, money, and energy to protect themselves,
to the extent possible, from these crimes.
PowerSchool Group LLC provides K-12 education technology solutions.
The Company offers platform that assists schools and districts to
manage instruction, learning, grading, attendance, assessment,
analytics, state reporting, special education, student
registration, talent, finance, and HR. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Amber L. Schubert, Esq.
SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP
2001 Union Street, Suite 200
San Francisco, CA 94123
Telephone: (415) 788-4220
Facsimile: (415) 788-0161
Email: aschubert@sjk.law
POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS: Baker Sues Over Failure to Safeguard PII
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tyler Baker, on behalf of himself and as parent and guardian of his
minor child, Jane Doe, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS, INC., Case No. 3:25-cv-00343
(N.D. Cal., Jan. 9, 2025), is brought against Defendant for its
failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's minor child's
and other similarly affected persons including students' parents'
and Defendant's employees' personally identifiable information
("PII") including names, addresses, Social Security numbers,
medical information, and other personally identifiable information
(collectively, the "Private Information") from cybercriminals.
PowerSchool disclosed that hackers accessed its customers' highly
sensitive information--including student Social Security numbers,
grades, and medical information, "and other unspecified personally
identifiable information belonging to students and teachers" by
breaking into PowerSchool's internal customer support portal using
a stolen credential (the "Data Breach"). To date, Defendant
declined to disclose how many individuals have been affected by the
Data Breach. Moreover, on information and belief, Defendant failed
to mount any meaningful investigation into the breach itself, the
causes, or what specific information of Plaintiff and the proposed
Class was lost to criminals.
The Defendant's "disclosure" amounts to no real disclosure at all,
as it fails to inform, with any degree of specificity, Plaintiff,
his minor child and Class Members of the Data Breach's critical
facts. Without these details, Plaintiff's and Class Members'
ability to mitigate the harms resulting from the Data Breach has
been severely diminished. As a direct and proximate result of
Defendant's failure to implement and to follow basic security
procedures, Plaintiff's and Class Members' PII is now in the hands
of cybercriminals, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs provided their Private Information to Defendant.
PowerSchool is an EdTech platform specializing in data collection,
storage, and analytics. It went public in 2021 and shortly
thereafter was valued at nearly $7 billion.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew J. Langley, Esq.
ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC
849 W. Webster Avenue
Chicago, Illinois 60614
Phone: (312) 576-3024
Email: matt@almeidalawgroup.com
POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
A.A., a minor, by and through her guardian ad litem, Samuel Adams,
individually and on behalf all others similarly situated, v.
PowerSchool Holdings, Inc., and PowerSchool Group, LLC, Case No.
2:25-at-00062 (E.D. Cal., Jan. 10, 2025) alleges that the Defendant
failed to properly secure and safeguard personally identifiable
information including, but not limited to full names, Social
Security numbers, grades, email addresses, telephone numbers,
addresses, dates of birth, protected health information including
medical information.
To provide these services, and in the ordinary course of
Defendant's business, Defendant acquires, possesses, analyzes, and
otherwise utilizes Plaintiff's and Class Members' Private
Information.
On Jan. 8, 2025, the Defendant notified its customers, including
public and private school districts throughout the United States,
about the widespread Data Breach.
Accordingly, the Defendant did not directly notify Plaintiff or
Class Members of the Data Breach. The Defendant's website or social
media channels have no mention of the data breach or directions for
people who may have been affected.
The Plaintiff and Class Members were unaware of the Data Breach
until they received Notice Letters from their schools or school
districts. During this time, Plaintiff and Class Members were
unaware that their sensitive Private Information had been
compromised, and that they were -- and continue to be -- at
significant risk of identity theft and various other forms of
personal, social, and financial harm.
PowerSchool Group is a subsidiary company of PowerSchool Holding
Inc.
The Defendant is a national education technology firm that provides
cloud based education software for K-12 students and educators. The
Defendant maintains offices in the state of California.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
M. Anderson Berry, Esq.
Gregory Haroutunian, Esq.
CLAYEO C. ARNOLD
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
865 Howe Avenue
Sacramento, CA 95765
Telephone: (916) 777-7777
Facsimile: (916) 924-1829
E-mail: gharoutunian@justice4you.com
aberry@justice4you.com
- and -
Paul M. Demarco, Esq.
MARKOVITS, STOCK & DEMARCO, LLC
119 East Court Street, Suite 530
Cincinnati, OH 45202
Telephone: (513) 651-3700
Facsimile: (513) 665-0219
E-mail: pdemarco@msdlegal.com
PPM GROUP: Martinez Seeks to Recover Minimum Wages, OT Under FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
OSCAR MARTINEZ, DODA CHAVEZ, MIGUEL GONZALES, JOSE CHOM, JOSE
AGUILAR and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PPM GROUP
LLC, PARISH PROPERTY MANAGEMENT INC, PPM RESTORATION LLC, PPM
CONTRACTING, INC., and WILLIAM O'CONNOR, Case No. 7:25-cv-00245
(S.D.N.Y., Jan. 10, 2025) seeks to recover overtime and minimum
wage pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York
Labor Law.
Allegedly, the Defendants required the FLSA Plaintiffs to work more
than 40 hours per week. However, the Defendants failed to provide
any compensation for hours worked beyond 40 in a workweek, in
direct violation of the FLSA. The Defendants did not pay the
legally mandated overtime premium of 1.5 times the Plaintiffs’
regular hourly rate and failed to compensate Plaintiffs for these
hours in any manner, the suit says.
As a result, the Defendants owe the Plaintiffs, and all similarly
situated FLSA Plaintiffs, full payment for all hours worked over 40
per week, including the overtime premium required by law.
The Defendants own and operate a unified enterprise through Parish
Property Management, which provides comprehensive facilities
management services, including real estate transactions, master
planning, construction management, and building operations and
maintenance.
Parish Property Management also operates as a construction company
specializing in interior renovations, exterior restoration, and new
construction.
Corporate Defendants primarily serve not-for-profit institutions,
offering maintenance, property management, and real estate
transaction services with professional staff experienced in
addressing the unique needs of clients' facilities, including
historic buildings.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jordan El-Hag, Esq.
EL-HAG & ASSOCIATES, P.C
www.elhaglaw.com
777 Westchester Ave, Suite 101
White Plains, N.Y, 10604
Telephone: (914) 218-6190
Facsimile: (914) 206-4176
E-mail: Jordan@elhaglaw.com
PRINX CHENGSHAN: Smith Sues Over Sale of Defective Tires
--------------------------------------------------------
GARY SMITH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PRINX CHENGSHAN TIRE NORTH AMERICA INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00166 (E.D. Pa., Jan. 10, 2025) is an
action seeking to remedy various violations of law in connection
with the Defendant's manufacture, marketing, advertising, selling,
and certification of the Defendant's tires.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the tires sold by the
Defendant are defective in that they fail to meet the required
North American snow traction standards despite being marked with
the three-peak mountain snowflake symbol, a certification intended
to signify compliance with the snow traction safety standards.
This defect exposes users to increased risks of accidents,
injuries, and fatalities in winter conditions, says the suit.
Prinx Chengshan Tire North America Inc. produces and distributes
automobile tires, truck tires, and other products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stuart A. Carpey, Esq.
CARPEY LAW, PC
600 W. Germantown Pike Suite 400
Plymouth Meeting, PA 19462
Telephone: (610) 834-6030
Facsimile: (610) 825-7579
Email: scarpey@carpeylaw.com
- and -
Paul J. Doolittle, Esq.
POULIN | WILLEY | ANASTOPOULO
32 Ann Street
Charleston, SC 29403
Telephone: (803) 222-2222
Facsimile: (843) 494-5536
Email: paul.doolittle@poulinwilley.com
cmad@poulinwilley.com
PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL: Williams Alleges Fair Housing Act Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against PROGRESS RESIDENTIAL, LLC et
al. The case is captioned as MARCKUS WILLIAMS, et al. v. PROGRESS
RESIDENTIAL, LLC et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-02050-JRS-CSW (S.D. Ind.,
November 20, 2024).
The case arises from the Defendants' alleged violation of the Fair
Housing Act.
The class action is assigned to Judge James R. Sweeney II.
Progress Residential, LLC operates as a real estate owner and
developer.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ellora Thadaney Israni, Esq.
Lila Miller, Esq.
Valerie Comenencia Oritz, Esq.
RELMAN COLFAX PLLC
1225 19th St. NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 728-1888
E-mail: eisrani@relmanlaw.com
lmiller@relmanlaw.com
- and -
Matthew B. Keyes, Esq.
Russell B. Cate, Esq.
RILYECATE, LLC
11 Municipal Drive, Suite 320
Fishers, IN 46038
Telephone: (317) 588-2866
Facsimile: (317) 458-1785
E-mail: mkeyes@rileycate.com
rcate@rileycate.com
The Defendants are represented by:
M. Patrick Yingling, Esq.
REED SMITH LLP
10 South Wacker Drive, 40th Floor
Chicago, IN 60606
Telephone: (312) 207-2834
Facsimile: (312) 207-6400
E-mail: mpyingling@reedsmith.com
PROGRESSIVE PREMIER: Burress Files FCRA Suit in N.D. Ohio
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Progressive Premier
Insurance Company of Illinois. The case is styled as James Burress,
on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v.
Progressive Premier Insurance Company of Illinois doing business
as: Progressive Insurance, Case No. 1:25-cv-00062-BMB (W.D.N.C.,
Jan. 14, 2025).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act.
Progressive Premier Insurance Company of Illinois --
https://www.progressive.com/ -- operates as an insurance
company.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John A. Love, Esq.
LOVE CONSUMER LAW
2500 Northwinds Parkway, Ste. 330
Alpharetta, GA 30009
Phone: (404) 855-3600
Email: tlove@loveconsumerlaw.com
- and -
Robert W. Murphy, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF ROBERT W. MURPHY
440 Premier Circle, Ste. 240
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Phone: (434) 328-3100
Fax: (434) 328-3101
Email: rwmurphy@lawfirmmurphy.com
PROJECT HOME: Novack Suit Removed to E.D. Pennsylvania
------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Jason P. Novack, Patricia Bates, John Doe, Jane
Doe, (H/W), on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated v. PROJECT HOME, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department
of Community and Economic Development, City of Philadelphia, Office
of Homeless Services, Case No. 522 MD 2024 was removed from the
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, to the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of Pennsylvania on Dec. 6, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:24-cv-06531-KBH to the
proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Accommodations Civil Rights.
Project Home -- https://www.projecthome.org/ -- offer permanent,
subsidized housing for individuals and families who had been
homeless.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Greg B. Emmons, Esq.
GREG B. EMMONS & ASSOC. P.C.
One Settlers Drive
Doylestown, PA 18901-2401
Phone: (215) 348-9815
Email: gemmonsesq@aol.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Rufus A. Jennings, Esq.
DEASEY, MAHONEY & VALENTINI, LTD
1601 Market Street, Suite 3400
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Phone: (215) 587-9400
Fax: (215) 587-9456
Email: rjennings@dmvlawfirm.com
PROPERTY PROBLEM: Mott Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Property Problem
Solvers, LLC. The case is styled as William Mott, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. Property Problem
Solvers, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00167-MLB (N.D. Ga., Jan. 14,
2025).
The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.
Property Problem Solvers, LLC --
https://wesolvepropertyproblems.com/ -- are a full-service real
estate company focused on Purpose over Profit.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John A. Love, Esq.
LOVE CONSUMER LAW
2500 Northwinds Parkway, Ste. 330
Alpharetta, GA 30009
Phone: (404) 855-3600
Email: tlove@loveconsumerlaw.com
- and -
Max Scott Morgan, Esq.
1515 Market Street, Ste #1100
Philadelphia, PA 19102
Phone: (267) 587-6240
Fax: (215) 689-0875
Email: max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com
PUBLIX SUPER: Roberts Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------
Christopher Roberts, Caitlin Throckmorton, Brandy Moore, Carter
Hubbs, and Jessica Schafer individually on behalf of themselves,
and all others similarly situated v. PUBLIX SUPER MARKETS, INC.,
Case No. 8:25-cv-00112-WFJ-CPT (M.D. Fla., Jan. 14, 2025), is
brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ("FLSA")
as a result of Defendant's violations of the FLSA by failing to pay
overtime wages.
The Defendant willfully violated the FLSA by failing to pay its
non-exempt hourly Assistant Department Managers and Department
Managers who are similarly paid and perform similar duties
(hereinafter referred together as "Non-exempt Hourly Managers"),
including Plaintiffs and all other similarly situated employees,
for all of their overtime hours worked based upon its unlawful
policies and practices.
While Defendant required Non-exempt Hourly Managers to work
overtime hours, it did not pay them for all hours worked including
but not limited to time spent working inside Publix stores
performing pre- and post-shift work off-the-clock required by
Publix; time spent working during unpaid meal breaks; and time
spent outside of Publix stores doing pick-ups or deliveries,
communicating with supervisors and coworkers, and other directives,
off-the-clock, says the complaint.
The Plaintiffs worked for the Defendant.
The Defendant operates more than 1,300 supermarkets in the United
States including in Florida, Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina,
Tennessee, North Carolina and Virginia.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
Loren B. Donnell, Esq.
SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
951 Yamato Road
Boca Raton, FL 33431
Phone: (561) 447-8888
Email: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
- and -
Ryan Morgan, Esq.
Andrew Frisch, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
20 N. Orange Ave., Suite 1600
Orlando, FL 32801
Phone: (407) 418-2069
Email: RMorgan@forthepeople.com
afrisch@forthepeople.com
PURE FREIGHT: Williams Personal Injury Suit Removed to N.D. Ill.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Walter Williams, individually and on behalf of
other persons similarly situated v. Pure Freight Lines Ltd. et al.,
Case No. 2024-CH-05618, was removed from the Illinois Circuit
Court, Cook County, to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Illinois on November 13, 2024.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:24-cv-11683 to the
proceeding.
The case arises from personal injury claims against the
Defendants.
The suit is assigned to Honorable Jeffrey I. Cummings.
Pure Freight Lines Ltd. is a fast asset-based, family-owned
business out of Franklin Park, Ilinois.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William Henry Beaumont, Esq.
Aaron S. Welo, Esq.
BEAUMONT COSTALES LLC
107 W. Van Buren, #209
Chicago, IL 60605
Telephone: (773) 831-8000
E-mail: whb@beaumontcostales.com
The Defendants are represented by:
John C. Ochoa, Esq.
Molly Anne Arranz, Esq.
AMUNDSEN DAVIS, LLC
150 N. Michigan Ave., #3300
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 894-3200
E-mail: Jochoa@amundsendavislaw.com
marranz@amundsendavislaw.com
Mchang@amundsendavislaw.com
- and -
Ambria Dominise Mahomes, Esq.
Justin O'Neill Kay, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP
320 South Canal Street, Suite 3300
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 569-1110
Facsimile: (312) 569-3000
E-mail: ambria.mahomes@faegredrinker.com
justin.kay@faegredrinker.com
- and -
Paul Andrew Rosenthal, Esq.
FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH
600 Campus Drive, 07932
Florham Park, NJ 07932
Telephone: (973) 549-7030
E-mail: paul.rosenthal@faegredrinker.com
QUALTEK WIRELESS: Dodge Labor Suit Removed to E.D. Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------
The case styled JOSHUA DODGE, individually and for all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. QUALTEK WIRELESS LLC & DOES 1
THROUGH 50, INCLUSIVE, Defendants, Case No. 24CV021086, was removed
from the Superior Court of the State of California in and for the
County of Sacramento to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of California on January 3, 2025.
The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of California assigned
Case No. 2:25-at-00017 to the proceeding.
The case arises from Defendants' alleged violations of the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.
Qualtek Wireless LLC designs, builds, optimizes, upgrades, and
maintains wireless infrastructure in the US. [BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Daniel V. Kitzes, Esq.
FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP
10250 Constellation Boulevard, Suite 900
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Telephone: (310) 598-4150
Facsimile: (310) 556-9828
E-mail: DKitzes@FoxRothschild.com
REPUBLIC SERVICES: Pietoso Seeks Class Certification
----------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PIETOSO, INC. D/B/A CAFE
NAPOLI, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated,
v. REPUBLIC SERVICES, INC., et al., Case No. 4:19-cv-00397-JAR
(E.D. Mo.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order
authorizing the filing of Plaintiff's Motion for class
certification and memorandum in support, expert report of Mr.
Kilbourne, and any related exhibits under seal.
The Defendants have designated as confidential several documents,
deposition transcripts and testimony, and other evidence, such as
Allied's Fourth Supplemental Answers and Objections to Plaintiff's
First Set of Interrogatories.
The Plaintiff finds it necessary to attach and cite these
confidential materials throughout its Motion for Class
Certification, Memorandum in Support, Expert Report of Mr.
Kilbourne, and as Exhibit(s) in support of same.
In short, the Plaintiff believes this evidence strengthen its
position and serve as valuable evidence for the Court's
consideration. Plaintiff further believes Defendants'
confidentiality designations are best honored by filing the
necessary materials under seal, and that this will not result in
prejudice to any party.
Republic Services is a provider of recycling processes and
non-hazardous solid waste management services.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=X3LKIm at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ryan A. Keane, Esq.
Tanner A. Kirksey, Esq.
KEANE LAW LLC
7711 Bonhomme Ave, Suite 600
St. Louis, MO 63105
Telephone: (314) 391-4700
Facsimile: (314) 244-3778
E-mail: ryan@keanelawllc.com
tanner@keanelawllc.com
- and -
Michael C. Seamands, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL C. SEAMANDS, LLC
1401 S. Brentwood Blvd, Suite 825
St. Louis, MO 63144
Telephone: (314) 802-7730
Facsimile: (314) 260-9645
E-mail: mcs@mcs-legal.com
RETINA SACRAMENTO: Gotishan Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against RETINA SACRAMENTO
MSO, LLC. The case is styled as Lily Gotishan, individually, and on
behalf of other similarly situated employees v. RETINA SACRAMENTO
MSO, LLC, Case No. 24CV024962 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty.,
Dec. 6, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case."
RETINA SACRAMENTO MSO, LLC (RCMG) -- https://www.retinalmd.com/ --
provides the highest level of diagnostics and treatments for all
vitreoretinal conditions.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan M. Genish, Esq.
BLACKSTONE LAW
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442
Phone: 855-786-6355
Fax: 855-786-6356
Email: jgenish@blackstonepc.com
RETREAT BEHAVIORAL: Williams Class Cert. Bid Denied as Moot
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MIA WILLIAMS, et al., v.
RETREAT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, LLC, et a1., Case No. 9:24-cv-80787-DMM
(S.D. Fla.), the Hon. Judge Donald Middlebrooks entered an order
denying various motions as moot as follows:
-- The Plaintiffs' Motion for Default Judgment,
-- The Plaintiffs' Consent Motion to Extend the Time to Serve the
Complaint upon Various Estates,
-- The Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify Class, and
-- Plaintiffs' Motion for Certification of a Collective Action.
Retreat provides effective inpatient and outpatient treatment for
substance abuse and mental health disorders.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=0qe2uV at no extra
charge.[CC]
SCORPION SERVICES: Pangelinan Seeks Minimum Wages Under Labor Code
------------------------------------------------------------------
CLAYTON PANGELINAN, STEPHANIE MAYBERRY, TRAVIS CURRY, CHRISTEN
PEACE, WILLIAM SALMERON, OMAR RAMIREZ, JR., individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. SCORPION SERVICES INC, a
California Corporation; VERENA BAUER, an individual; ARTEL
TALLEDOS, an individual; DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No.
25STCV00690 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 10, 2025) seeks to
recover minimum wages and overtime wages under the California Labor
Code.
The Plaintiffs were residents and worked for Defendants in the
State of California.
Scorpion is a provider of comprehensive security solutions.
Scorpion was a corporation doing business in the State of
California, and throughout this county was the employer of the
Plaintiffs, as well as the employer of other employees throughout
this county and the State of California.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Michael L. Kennedy, Esq.
Stephen Shaw Esq.
Paul Suppa, Esq.
ESTELLE & KENNEDY
367 N. 2nd Ave.
Upland, CA 91786
Telephone: (909) 608-0466
Facsimile: (909) 608-0477
E-mail: stephen@estellekennedylaw.com
SELECTBLINDS: Scoville Sues Over Failure to Secure Information
--------------------------------------------------------------
Janine Scoville, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. SelectBlinds, LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-03389-DGC (D.
Ariz., Nov. 27, 2024), is brought against Defendant for its failure
to properly secure and safeguard sensitive information of its
customers.
The Plaintiff’s and Class Members’ sensitive personal
information which they entrusted to Defendant on the mutual
understanding that Defendant would protect it against
disclosure--was targeted, compromised and unlawfully accessed due
to the Data Breach. The Defendant collected and maintained certain
personally identifiable information and protected health
information of Plaintiff and the putative Class Members, who are
(or were) customers at Defendant.
The PII compromised in the Data Breach included Plaintiff’s and
Class Members’ full names, email addresses, shipping and billing
addresses, phone numbers, payment card information (“personally
identifiable information” or “PII”). The PII compromised in
the Data Breach was exfiltrated by cyber-criminals and remains in
the hands of those cyber-criminals who target PII for its value to
identity thieves.
The Data Breach was a direct result of Defendant’s failure to
implement adequate and reasonable cyber-security procedures and
protocols necessary to protect consumers’ PII from a foreseeable
and preventable cyber-attack. Moreover, upon information and
belief, Defendant was targeted for a cyber-attack due to its status
as a retail company that collects and maintains highly valuable PII
on its system, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff and Class Members are current and former customers at
Defendant.
The Defendant is a retail company that sells blinds, shades,
curtains, and other products to its customers.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Cristina Perez Hesano, Esq.
PEREZ LAW GROUP, PLLC
7508 N. 59th Avenue
Glendale, AZ 85301
Phone: (602) 730-7100
Fax: (602) 794-6956
Email: cperez@perezlawgroup.com
- and -
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW
Washington, D.C. 20015-2052
Phone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
Email: dlietz@milberg.com
SEOUL PROVIDENCE: Guerrero Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Guerrero, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. SEOUL PROVIDENCE, LLC doing business as PROVY'S SEAFOOD
& TAPAS and JUN ZHANG, Case No. 1:25-cv-00021 (D.R.I., Jan. 14,
2025), is brought to recover unpaid overtime wages and other
damages from SEOUL PROVIDENCE, LLC doing business as the
Defendants, under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and
specifically, its collective action provision for nonpayment of
overtime wages and for retaliation in violation of the FLSA, and
Rhode Island wage and hour laws, Rhode Island Minimum Wage Act
("RIMWA") and Rhode Island Payment of Wages Act ("RIPWA") for non
payment of overtime wages in violation of Rhode Island law.
PROVY'S failed to pay Plaintiff overtime for all hours worked in
violation of the FLSA, RIMWA, and RIPWA, and on information and
belief PROVY'S failed to pay Provy's Employees for all overtime
hours worked, also in violation of the FLSA, RIMWA, and RIPWA. The
Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and similarly
situated current and former Provy's Employees who elect to opt-in
to this action pursuant to the FLSA. The Plaintiff also brings this
action on behalf of himself and all similarly situated current and
former Provy's Employees, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 23, to remedy violations for unpaid overtime and other
damage pursuant to the RIMWA and RIPWA, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff worked for PROVY'S as a cook from August 2024 through
December 2024.
PROVY'S is a Rhode Island business that operates a seafood and
tapas restaurant in Providence, Rhode Island.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stacy W. Thomsen, Esq.
Andrew J. Adams, Esq.
DARROWEVERETT LLP
One Turks Head Place, Suite 1200
Providence, RI 02903
Email: sthomsen@darroweverett.com
aadams@darroweverett.com
SET FORTH INC: Cruz Files Suit in N.D. Illinois
-----------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against SET FORTH, INC. The
case is styled as Juan Cruz, individually, and on behalf of other
similarly situated consumers v. SET FORTH, INC., Case No.
1:24-cv-12323 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 27, 2024).
The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
SET FORTH, INC. has been serving consumers who are exiting
debt.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Frank P. Venis, Esq.
VENIS AND COPP LLP
231 S. LaSalle St., Suite 2100
Chicago, IL 60604
Phone: (312) 965-9476
Email: venis@venisandcopp.com
- and -
Daniel Zemel, Esq.
ZEMEL LAW LLC
1373 Broad Street, Suite 203-C
Clifton, NJ 07013
Phone: (862) 227-3106
Email: dz@zemellawllc.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Ronald I. Raether
TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP
100 Spectrum Center Drive, Suite 1500
Irvine, CA 92618
Phone: (949) 622-2722
Email: ronald.raether@troutman.com
Seth Martin Erickson
TROUTMAN PEPPER HAMILTON SANDERS LLP
227 West Monroe Street, Suite 3900
Chicago, IL 60606
Phone: (312) 759-5930
Email: seth.erickson@troutman.com
SET FORTH: Garcia Files Suit Over Contract Violation
----------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Set Forth, Inc. The case is
captioned as Rene Garcia, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Set Forth, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-11688 (N.D.
Ill., November 13, 2024).
The suit is brought over Defendant's alleged contract violation.
The case is assigned to the Honorable Martha M. Pacold.
Set Forth, Inc. provides online account management services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jarrett Lee Ellzey, Jr., Esq.
ELLZEY & ASSOCIATES PLLC
4200 Montrose, Suite 200
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (888) 350-3931
Facsimile: (888) 276-3455
E-mail: jarrett@ellzeylaw.com
SIRIUS XM: Faces McTee Suit Over Unsolicited Telephone Calls
------------------------------------------------------------
Shana McTee, Plaintiff v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:24-cv-00191-DBB (D. Utah, November 20, 2024) is a class action
against the Defendant for alleged violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.
The complaint alleges that Sirius XM violated the law by
initiating, or causing to be initiated, calls to Plaintiff McTee
and members of the Do Not Call Class without first instituting the
requisite telemarketing procedures.
Plaintiff McTee and members of the Do Not Call Class have been
damaged and are entitled to an award of $500 in statutory damages
for each call after receiving a stop request, says the suit.
Sirius XM Radio Inc. provides satellite radio services in the
United States and Canada.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Thomas Alvord, Esq.
LAWHQ, PC
299 S. Main St. #1300
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone: (385) 285-1090
E-mail: thomas@lawhq.com
SONESTA INTERNATIONAL: Class Cert Filing in Mitchell Due May 30
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KENTOYA MITCHELL,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
SONESTA INTERNATIONAL HOTELS CORPORATION, Case No.
2:24-cv-02603-GW-SSC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge George Wu entered
an order granting the Parties' stipulation continuing hearing on
class certification and setting briefing schedule as follows:
1. Plaintiff's motion for class certification is due on, or
before, May 30, 2025;
2. Defendant's opposition to class certification is due on, or
before June 27, 2025;
3. Plaintiff's reply in support of class certification is due
on, or before, July 25, 2025; and
4. The hearing on class certification and further case
management conference are continued to August 11, 2025 at
8:30 a.m.
Sonesta is an American hotel company founded in 1937.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=svcd9K at no extra
charge.[CC]
STANDARD PLUMBING: Rounsaville Files Suit in California State Court
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Standard Plumbing
Supply Company, Inc. The case is captioned as NICHOLAS ROUNSAVILLE,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
STANDARD PLUMBING SUPPLY COMPANY, INC., Case No.
STK-CV-UOE-2024-0018008 (Cal. Super., San Joaquin Cty., December
24, 2024).
A case management conference is set for September 19, 2025, before
Judge George J. Abdallah.
Standard Plumbing Supply Company, Inc. is a distributor of plumbing
equipment in California. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Arash Sadat, Esq.
MILLS SADAT DOWLAT LLP
333 South Hope Street, Floor 40
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 613-9434
SUPERIOR EQUIPMENT: Vera Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Superior Equipment
Solutions, et al. The case is styled as Miguel Vera, individually,
and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. Superior
Equipment Solutions, Jeffrey Bernstein, Case No. 24STCV33804 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Dec. 20, 2024).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
Superior Equipment Solutions --
https://www.superiorequipsolutions.com/ -- is a Construction
Company offering general contracting services, land clearing,
mechanics and more.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan M. Genish, Esq.
BLACKSTONE LAW
8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442
Phone: 855-786-6355
Fax: 855-786-6356
Email: jgenish@blackstonepc.com
TESLA INC: Parties Seeks More Time to File Class Certification
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Matsko v. Tesla, Inc., et
al. (re Tesla Advanced Driver Assistance Systems Litigation), Case
No. 3:22-cv-05240-RFL (N.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to
enter an order extending the deadline for Plaintiff's motion for
class certification and expert disclosures and reports relating to
class certification to May 6, 2025; extending the deadline for
Defendants' opposition and related rebuttal expert materials to
June 3, 2025; and extending the deadline for Plaintiff's reply to
July 1, 2025.
The Court set a deadline for the Plaintiff's Motion for Class
Certification and expert disclosures and reports relating to class
certification of Feb. 4, 2025.
The Court set March 4, 2025, as the date for the Defendants'
Opposition to Motion for Class Certification and disclosures of
rebuttal expert witnesses and expert reports, and April 1, 2025, as
the date for the Plaintiff's reply.
The parties have engaged in substantive discovery but, due to the
complexity of the issues in this case, there are issues remaining
to be resolved between the parties which Plaintiff believes are
necessary in order to move for class certification.
The court's June 5, 2024, order also sets March 14, 2025, as the
deadline for completion of ADR.
The parties' jointly selected mediator Robert Meyer currently does
not have any available dates prior to March 14, 2025, and the
parties are working to obtain a mutually agreeable mediation date.
Tesla is an American multinational automotive and clean energy
company.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=LhcsTH at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Frank M. Pitre, Esq.
Thomas E. Loeser, Esq.
Julie L. Fieber, Esq.
COTCHETT PITRE & MCCARTHY LLP
840 Malcolm Road
Burlingame, CA 94010
Telephone: (650) 697-6000
E-mail: fpitre@cpmlegal.com
tloeser@cpmlegal.com
jfieber@cpmlegal.com
- and -
Francis A. Bottini, Jr., Esq.
BOTTINI & BOTTINI, INC.
7817 Ivanhoe Avenue, Suite 102
La Jolla, CA 92037
Telephone: (858) 914-2001
E-mail: fbottini@bottinilaw.com
- and -
David S. Casey, Jr., Esq.
Gayle M. Blatt, Esq.
Jeremy Robinson, Esq.
P. Camille Guerra, Esq.
CASEY GERRY SCHENK FRANCAVILLA
BLATT & PENFIELD LLP
110 Laurel Street
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 238-1811
E-mail: dcasey@cglaw.com
gmb@cglaw.com
jrobinson@cglaw.com
camille@cglaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
David C. Marcus, Esq.
Alan Schoenfeld, Esq.
Allison Bingxue Que, Esq.
WILMER CUTLER PICKERING
HALE AND DORR LLP
350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2400
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 443-5312
E-mail: david.marcus@wilmerhale.com
alan.schoenfeld@wilmerhale.com
allison.que@wilmerhale.com
TIME USA: Herrera Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------
Edery Herrera, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated v. TIME USA, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00338 (S.D.N.Y., Jan.
14, 2025), is brought this civil rights action against the
Defendant for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and
operate their website to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website,
https://time.com, including all portions thereof or accessed
thereon (collectively, the "Website" or "Defendant's Website"), is
not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it
violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a
change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures
so that Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to
blind and visually-impaired consumers.
By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible
with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and
visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods,
content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled
individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma
among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen reading software to read website content using the
computer.
TIME USA, LLC, operates the Time online retail store, as well as
the Time interactive Website and advertises, markets, and operates
in the State of New York and throughout the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, N.Y. 10003-2461
Phone: (212) 228-9795
Fax: (212) 982-6284
Email: michael@gottlieb.legal
jeffrey@gottlieb.legal
dana@gottlieb.legal
TR APPAREL LLC: Trippett Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alfred Trippett, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. TR Apparel, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00347 (D.N.J., Jan.
14, 2025), is brought against the Defendant for their failure to
design, construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to services Stadium
Enterprises provides to their non-disabled customers through
https://www.therow.com (hereinafter "Therow.com" or "the website").
Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its services offered, and in conjunction with
its physical locations, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under
the Americans with Disabilities Act (the "ADA").
Because Defendant's website, Therow.com is not equally accessible
to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA.
Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in TR
Apparel's policies, practices, and procedures to that Defendant's
website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using his
computer.
TR Apparel provides to the public a website known as Therow.com
which provides consumers with access to an array of goods and
services, including, the ability to view jackets, sweaters, tops,
dresses, pants, shorts, bags, wallets, totes, shoes, coats,
shirts.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd., Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Phone: +1 347-941-4715
Email: glevy@glpcfirm.com
TRAVELERS PARTNERS: Pardo Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
--------------------------------------------------------------
NIGEL FRANK DE LA TORRE PARDO, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TRAVELERS PARTNERS LLC
d/b/a DAYS INN MIAMI AIRPORT NORTH, Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-20158-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Jan. 10, 2025) alleges violation of
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's
commercial property at 4767 NW 36th Street, Miami Springs, Florida,
33166, is not accessible to mobility-impaired individuals in
violation of ADA.
TRAVELERS PARTNERS LLC d/b/a DAYS INN MIAMI AIRPORT NORTH owns and
operates commercial properties in Miami, Florida. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Beverly Virues, Esq.
Armando Mejias, Esq.
GARCIA-MENOCAL, P.L.
350 Sevilla Avenue, Suite 200
Coral Gables, Fl 33134
Telephone: (305) 553-3464
Email: bvirues@lawgmp.com
amejias@lawgmp.com
- and -
Ramon J. Diego, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICE OF RAMON
J. DIEGO, P.A.
5001 SW 74th Court, Suite 103
Miami, FL, 33155
Telephone: (305) 350-3103
Primary E-Mail: rdiego@lawgmp.com
TRICON RESIDENTIAL: Williams Suit Alleges Fair Housing Act Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action has been filed against Tricon Residential, Inc. et
al. The case is captioned as Marckus Williams, on behalf of himself
and those similarly situated, and Fair Housing Center of Central
Indiana v. Tricon Residential, Inc., et al., Case No.
8:24-cv-02534-DOC-DFM (C.D. Cal., November 20, 2024).
The suit arises from the Defendants' alleged violation of the
Federal Fair Housing Act.
The case is assigned to Judge David O. Carter.
Tricon Residential, Inc. is a Canadian real estate company.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Ellora Thadaney Israni, Esq.
Lila Rebecca Miller, Esq.
RELMAN COLFAX PLLC
1225 19th Street NW, Suite 600
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: (202) 969-4727
Facsimile: (202) 728-0848
E-mail: eisrani@relmanlaw.com
lmiller@relmanlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Robyn Eileen Bladow, Esq.
KIRKLAND AND ELLIS LLP
555 South Flower Street Suite 3700
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 680-8400
Facsimile: (213) 680-8500
E-mail: rbladow@kirkland.com
- and -
Aaron H. Marks, Esq.
KIRKLAND AND ELLIS LLP
601 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 446-4856
Facsimile: (212) 446-4900
E-mail: aaron.marks@kirkland.com
UTAH HIGH: Parties Seek to Extend Class Cert-Related Deadlines
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ZACHARY SZYMAKOWSKI, an
individual, and JOHANNA A. URIBE, on behalf of FELIPE A. URIBE, a
minor, on behalf of themselves and a proposed class of similarly
situated F-1 students, v. UTAH HIGH SCHOOL ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATION,
INC.; ROBERT CUFF, an individual; MARILYN RICHARDS, an individual;
AMBER SHILL, an individual; BURKE STAHELI, an individual; DAVID
WARREN, an individual; DAVID LUND, an individual; ZACK MCKEE, an
individual; PAUL SWEAT, an individual; LUKE RASMUSSEN, an
individual; JERRE HOLMES, an individual; JASON SMITH, an
individual; MIKE MEES, an individual; DEVIN SMITH, an individual;
BRYAN DURST, an individual; and BRENT STRATE, an individual, Case
No. 2:24-cv-00751-RJS-CMR (D. Utah), the Plaintiffs and the
Defendants ask the Court to enter an order extending the deadlines
related to Plaintiffs' motion for class certification as follows:
Current Date Proposed Date
Plaintiffs' Opening Brief Jan. 14, 2025 Jan. 21, 2025
and supporting materials:
Defendants' Opposition Brief Feb. 11, 2025 Feb. 18, 2025
and supporting materials:
Plaintiffs' Reply Brief and Feb. 25, 2025 Mar. 4, 2025
supporting materials:
Good cause exists for the requested extension. The time to file the
Motion has not expired, and Plaintiffs need additional time to
prepare their opening brief and supporting materials. Further, the
requested extension is relatively short and does not affect the
other deadlines in the case.
The parties request that the Court extend the deadlines related to
Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification by one week, and enter
the proposed order submitted with this motion.
Utah High is an organization for high school athletic and fine arts
activities in Utah.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5oQLhf at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David J. Jordan, Esq.
Wesley F. Harward, Esq.
Tanner B. Camp, Esq.
Tyler A. Dever, Esq.
Charles D. Morris, Esq.
FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
95 South State Street, Suite 2500
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone: (801) 401-8900
Facsimile: (385) 799-7576
E-mail: djordan@foley.com
wharward@foley.com
tcamp@foley.com
tdever@foley.com
charlie.morris@foley.com
The Defendants are represented by:
D. Craig Parry, Esq.
Chaunceton B. Bird, Esq.
Daniel J. Nelson, Esq.
PARR BROWN GEE & LOVELESS
101 S 200 E 700,
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
Telephone: (801) 532-7840
WALMART INC: Ct. Stays Myers Suit Pending Dismissal Ruling in Kahn
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as QUINA MYERS, Individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, V. WALMART, INC.,
Case No. 5:24-cv-05182-TLB (W.D. Ark.), the Hon. Judge Timothy
Brooks entered an order staying the case pending a dismissal or
class certification decision in Kahn v. Walmart Inc., No.
1:22-cv-04177 (N.D. Ill.), or until some other substantial change
in circumstances justifies lifting the stay.
On Jan. 8, 2025, the Court held a hearing on the pending Motion, at
which the Court received oral argument on the Motion and ruled from
the bench.
All pleading, discovery, and other obligations of the parties in
this matter are held in abeyance while the stay is in effect.
However, the parties are directed to file tri-annual status reports
of activity in the Kahn case, with the first such report being due
on Aug. 29, 2025, and at the end of every December, April, and
August thereafter.
Walmart operates discount stores, supercenters, and neighborhood
markets.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zerQMo at no extra
charge.[CC]
WALMART INC: Settlement Agreement in Haro Gets Final Nod
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMADO HARO and ROCHELLE
ORTEGA, On Behalf of Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated,
v. WALMART, INC., Case No. 1:21-cv-00239-KES-SKO (E.D. Cal.), the
Hon. Judge Sheila Oberto entered an order approving the Settlement
Agreement:
2. Plaintiff's motion for final approval of a class action
settlement is granted, and the Court approves the settlement
as fair, reasonable, and adequate;
3. Named Plaintiffs Amado Haro and Rochelle Ortega are
confirmed as class representatives; Plaintiff's counsel Don
Foty of Hodges & Foty, LLP is appointed as counsel for the
Class; and Rust Consulting, Inc. is confirmed as the
settlement administrator;
4. Plaintiff's motion for attorney's fees, costs, service
award, and administrative expenses is granted;
5. The Court awards the following sums:
a. Class counsel shall receive $1,733,160 in attorney's fees
and $261,751.87. in expenses. Class counsel shall not
seek or obtain any other compensation or reimbursement
from Defendant, Plaintiffs, or Class Members;
b. Plaintiffs shall receive $10,000 as a service award each;
c. Rust Consulting, Inc., shall receive $432,522.00 for
settlement administration;
d. The parties shall direct payment of 75 percent of the
settlement allocated to the PAGA payment, or $37,500, to
the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency as
required by California law, and the remainder of the PAGA
payment, or $12,500, shall be distributed per the
Settlement Agreement;
6. The parties are directed to effectuate all terms of the
Settlement Agreement and any deadlines or procedures for
distribution set forth therein;
Walmart operates discount stores, supercenters, and neighborhood
markets.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=VbRuqr at no extra
charge.[CC]
WB WASTE: Parties in Lopez Seek Final Approval of Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as JUAN GABRIEL BLANCO LOPEZ,
et al., v. WB WASTE SOLUTIONS, LLC, Case No. 8:23-cv-00963-DLB (D.
Md.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order:
A. granting this joint motion for final settlement approval;
B. approving the class settlement between the Parties as final
and dispositive of all claims in this litigation;
C. certifying the settlement class pursuant to Rule 23(e)(1);
and
D. granting such other and further relief as justice and the
nature of the cause so require.
The Plaintiffs filed the Complaint in this action on April 10,
2023, alleging that Defendant had violated the federal Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection
Law, and the Maryland Wage and Hour Act, by failing to compensate
Plaintiffs for all time worked.
On Feb. 2, 2024, the Court conditionally certified case to proceed
as a collective action under Section 216(b) of FLSA and as a class
action under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See
Order.
The Court granted preliminary approval of the Parties’ settlement
on Oct. 3, 2024.
WB Waste is a comprehensive waste management company that offers a
variety of services to the D.C., MD, and VA areas.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=oPouke at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Mark Hanna, Esq.
Joni S. Jacobs, Esq.
Jennifer Vail, Esq.
MURPHY ANDERSON PLLC
1401 K Street NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 223-2620
E-mail: mhanna@murphypllc.com
jjacobs@murphypllc.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Randi K. Hyatt, Esq.
Megan E. Lensink, Esq.
WHITEFORD, TAYLOR & PRESTON, LLP
7 Saint Paul Street, Suite 1400
Baltimore, MD 21202
Telephone: (410) 347-8700
E-mail: rhyatt@whitefordlaw.com
mlensink@whitefordlaw.com
WESTERN WASHINGTON: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due Sept. 19
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as TERRANCE JOHNSON, et al.,
v. CARPENTERS OF WESTERN WASHINGTON BOARD OF TRUSTEES, et al., Case
No. 2:22-cv-01079-JHC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge John Chun
entered an order setting the following deadlines:
Deadline to complete discovery on Aug. 22, 2025
class certification (not to be
construed as a bifurcation of discovery):
Deadline for Plaintiffs to file motion Sept. 19, 2025
for class certification (noted on the
fourth Friday after filing and service of
the motion pursuant to Local Rules W.D.
Wash. LCR 7(d)(3) unless the parties
agree to different times for filing the
response and reply memoranda):
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=gX3BL3 at no extra
charge.[CC]
WYNN LAS VEGAS: Elias Seeks to Certify Class of Employees
---------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Ike Elias, v. Wynn Las
Vegas LLC, a Nevada Limited, Case No. 2:23-cv-02111-ART-BNW (D.
Nev.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order certifying a
class of:
"All current and former employees of Defendant Wynn Las Vegas,
LCC, who has been subjected to discrimination on the basis of
disability, in violation of the Americans with Disabilities
Act (ADA)."
The Plaintiff is a former if wynn Las Vegas, alleges that the
Defendant failed to provide reasonable accommodations for her
disability and subjected her to adverse employment actions due to
his disability.
The Plaintiff claims that Wynn's policies and practices
systematically violated the ADA, including failing to accommodate
employees with disabilities, engaging in discriminatory hiring and
firing practices, and creating a hostile work environment for
employees with disabilities.
Wynn is a luxury resort and casino located on the Las Vegas.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 10, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=rRhj4x at no extra
charge.[CC]
XTEND HEALTHCARE: Dargon Balks at Termination Without Prior Notice
------------------------------------------------------------------
KRISTAL DARGON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. XTEND HEALTHCARE, LLC, Defendant, Case No.
3:25-cv-00013 (M.D. Tenn., January 3, 2025) arises from
Defendant's failure to give Plaintiff and the other similarly
situated employees 60 days' advance notice of termination, as
required by the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act
and the New Jersey Millville Dallas Airmotive Plant Job Loss
Notification Act.
The Plaintiff was hired by Xtend and worked as a Call Center
Supervisor/Operations Manager until her termination on or about
February 24, 2022. Allegedly, Plaintiff was terminated without
cause and advance written notice of her termination.
Headquartered in Hendersonville, TN, Xtend Healthcare, LLC offers
contact center services to federal, state and local government
agencies. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented:
Heather M. Collins, Esq.
HMC CIVIL RIGHTS
7000 Executive Center Drive, Suite 320
Brentwood, TN 37027
Telephone: (615) 724-1996
E-mail: heather@hmccivilrights.com
- and -
Jack A. Raisner, Esq.
Rene S. Roupinian, Esq.
RAISNER ROUPINIAN LLP
270 Madison Avenue, Suite 1801
New York, NY 10016
Telephone: (212) 221-1747
Facsimile: (212) 221-1747
E-mail: jar@raisnerroupinian.com
rsr@raisnerroupinian.com
YANWEN EXPRESS: Claudio Files Labor Suit in California State Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Yanwen Express, LLC.
The case is captioned as RICHARD CLAUDIO, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, v. YANWEN EXPRESS, LLC,
Case No. 24STCV34120 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., December 24,
2024).
The suit is brought over the Defendant's alleged employment
violations.
Yanwen Express, LLC is a delivery services provider in California.
[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Evelina M. Serafini, Esq.
EVELINA M. SERAFINI, ESQ. PC
20901 Sailmaker Cir.
Huntington Beach, CA 92648
Telephone: (657) 329-1182
YINOVA MANAGEMENT: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Picon Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
YELITZA PICON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Yinova Management Company, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-00250
(S.D.N.Y., Jan. 10, 2025) alleges that Yinova failed to design,
construct, maintain, and operate their website to be fully
accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind
or visually-impaired persons.
According to the complaint, the Defendant is denying blind and
visually impaired persons throughout the United States with equal
access to the goods and services Yinova Management Company provides
to their non-disabled customers through
https://www.yinovacenter.com. The Defendant's denial of full and
equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its products
and services offered, and in conjunction with its physical
locations, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans
with Disabilities Act.
The Plaintiff uses the terms "blind" or "visually-impaired" to
refer to all people with visual impairments who meet the legal
definition of blindness in that they have a visual acuity with
correction of less than or equal to 20 x 200. Some blind people who
meet this definition have limited vision; others have no vision.
Based on a 2010 U.S. Census Bureau report, approximately 8.1
million people in the United States are visually impaired,
including 2.0 million who are blind, and according to the American
Foundation for the Blind's 2015 report, approximately 400,000
visually impaired persons live in the State of New York.[BN]
Yinovacenter.com provides to the public a wide array of the goods,
services, price specials and other programs offered by Yinova
Management Company. Yet, Yinovacenter.com contains significant
access barriers that make it difficult if not impossible for blind
and visually-impaired customers to use the website.
In fact, the access barriers make it impossible for blind and
visually-impaired users to even complete a transaction on the
website. Thus, Yinova Management Company excludes the blind and
visually-impaired from the full and equal participation in the
growing Internet economy that is increasingly a fundamental part of
the common marketplace and daily living. In the wave of
technological advances in recent years, assistive computer
technology is becoming an increasingly prominent part of everyday
life, allowing blind and visually-impaired persons to fully and
independently access a variety of services, says the suit.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel A. Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
Telephone: (347) 941-4715
Manhasset, NY 11030
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
E-mail: Glevyfirm@gmail.com
[*] Families Object to Settlement Amounts in Nursing Home Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
On January 16, 2025, a Jefferson Parish judge announced that
families involved in a class action suit against disgraced nursing
home owner Bob Dean would receive final payments soon.
This, as some plaintiffs appeared in court and pleaded for more
money.
Hundreds sued Dean for transporting their older family members to a
warehouse in Tangipahoa Parish during Hurricane Ida.
About a dozen people died at the site.
Mitchell Harris is the son of Debra Whiltberger.
"We didn't get justice through Bob Dean. He's living in a nice,
beautiful mansion. We are here with nothing," Harris said.
Harris said his mom was 60 years old when she died just weeks after
enduring horrid conditions at a warehouse in Independence in the
wake of Hurricane Ida.
"She was bedridden. She had had several strokes. Couldn't walk or
eat by herself. Had no water, during that time, no nothing. Just
laid there. I don't know how she did it," Harris said.
Harris said his family was allocated $10,000 in an initial
settlement, and he has to pay attorney fees out of that amount.
It's why he went before the judge to object.
"I'd rather take a loss and fight it than someone offer me an
insult on what they think my mom's life was worth," Harris said.
He is not alone. Jeanette Triplette said her mom is still dealing
with the latest effects from the terrible experience.
"You can't put a price on someone's life. You can't put a price on
someone's quality of life," Triplette said.
More than 400 patients or their living family members are to split
under $9 million in Bob Dean's insurance proceedings. Each of the
families who participated in the class action lawsuit received
allocation letters based on how much officials believed they are
owed.
People received different amounts.
These requests come as attorneys said they feel the process has
been smooth, given the circumstances.
"Watching from the outside, it seems like it's been longer. But
inside the legal system, it has moved very quickly," said attorney
Rob Couhig Jr.
Attorneys said most should have received at least two payments. The
biggest lump sum is expected to go out to families. Another payment
could follow based on what is left after that.
WDSU spoke with at least one family who said they received their
allocation letter, but so far, no payments.
"None whatsoever. They sent like $1,000 and $1,700 out. We never
got none of that," said Rachael Ayo, daughter of Ella May Alario.
Dean was sentenced to three years' probation last July and ordered
to pay $2 million in restitution. There is expected to be another
hearing to address the plaintiff's request.
The judge also said if he agrees to the objection it will slow the
process for those families who objected. But he will look into the
matter. [GN]
*********
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 ***