/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/250131.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Friday, January 31, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 23
Headlines
3M COMPANY: Larcom Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Leverette Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
3M COMPANY: Marquez Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
3M COMPANY: Mattson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
3M COMPANY: McCoy Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
ADVANCED REAL ESTATE: Garcia Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
AKUMIN OPERATING: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Guerra Says
ALLOCATION SERVICES: Jackson Suit Removed to C.D. California
AMERICAN FAMILY: Parties in Hirsch Seek to Extend Briefing Deadline
AMERICAN FAMILY: Parties in Varney Seek to Extend Briefing Deadline
AMERICAN TEXTILE: Garcia Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
AMS NATIONAL: Liu Seeks Unpaid Wages for Nurse Anesthetists
AMSCO U.S. INC: Puga Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
ANINE BING: Riley Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
APPLE INC: Faces Suit Over Toxic Chemicals in Apple Watch Bands
ATKORE INC: Barnett Sues Over Anticompetitive Action
BIOLIFE PLASMA: Wooten Files Suit in E.D. California
BRAVO PIZZA: Gonzalez Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper OT
CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES: Sued Over Failure to Safeguard PII & PHI
CAVENDISH FARMS: Cardoso Alleges Price Fixing of Frozen Potatoes
CENTURY SNACKS: Gomez Suit Removed to N.D. California
CHRISTIAN DIOR: Larsen Suit Removed to C.D. California
COCOCARE PRODUCTS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Tucker Claims
CONSOLIDATED HOUSEKEEPING: Kalli Balks at Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
CROCS INC: Carretta Sues Over Securities Exchange Act Breach
CYCLO THERAPEUTICS: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Rafael Holdings
D'ARTAGNAN INC: Faces McGonigle Suit Over TCPA Violations
ELIGO ENERGY: Bodkin Sues Over Deceptive and Bad Faith Pricing
ESS PHARMA: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Masofaniten Claims
EVOLVE BANK: Espinola Sues Over Alleged Cash Deposit Mismanagement
FEDERAL SAVINGS: Sapan Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action
FIRST CHOICE: Fails to Provide Proper Wages, Kelly Suit Says
FOOD SYSTEMS: Enguerra and Ravelas Sue Over Labor Law Breaches
FRENCH WEST: Faces Henry Suit Over Website Inaccessibility
GAMESTOP INC: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Dalton Suit Claims
GENTING NEW YORK: Gil Sues Over ADA Non-Compliant Facilities
GRACO CHILDREN'S: Carder Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
GSS PROPERTIES: Property Violates ADA, Cheli Says
HABANERO SALVADOREAN: Jarquin Sues Over Unpaid OT, Retaliation
INTERNATIONAL COFFEE: Wendt Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
INTERPUBLIC GROUP: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Omnicom
KENROSE PERFUMES: Cole Sues Over Website Inaccessibility
MALLINCKRODT PLC: $46MM Class Settlement to be Heard on April 15
NEXT SOLUTIONS: Faces Lee Suit Over Unpaid Minimum, OT Wages
NOVO NORDISK: Faces Class Action Suit for Misleading Investors
OKCOIN USA: Watt Files RICO Class Suit in Calif.
PAYPAL HOLDINGS: Coleman Sues Over Deceptive Affiliate Marketing
POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS: Giles Sues Over Data Security Failures
PRO CUSTOM: Plaintiffs Must Serve Bid to Certify FLSA Collective
PTT LLC: Larsen Bid for Discovery Sanctions Partly OK'd
QUALCOMM INC: Parties Seek to Extend Class Cert Filing to March 10
QUOTEWIZARD.COM: Bid to Reopen Discovery in Manthan Suit Tossed
REAL NEW YORK: General Pre-Trial Management Order Entered
RESHAPE LIFESCIENCES: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Vyome
SHIVJI KRUPA: Cheli Sues Over Facilities' Noncompliance of ADA
SP PLUS: Carter Sues Over Wage and Hour Law Violations
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: $4.75MM Settlement to be Heard on April 11
STUBHUB INC: Issues Ticket Refunds Amid Class Action Lawsuit
TENG TEA: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Liz Suit Says
TOEZPECUNIA INC: Lemon Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Forced Tip Sharing
TOYOTA INDUSTRIES: Bid for Class Certification Due June 5, 2026
TYCON MEDICAL: Bullock Sues Over Unprotected Sensitive Information
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: Jones Seeks to Modify March 11, 2021 Order
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: Settlement Deal in R.B. Suit Gets Initial Nod
WALMART INC: Seeks Leave to File Declaration Under Seal
WESTFIELD BANK: Settles Overdraft Fees Class Suit for $510,000
YANKEE CANDLE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Dalton Suit Says
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Awards $22MM for Negligence in J&J Talc Case
*********
3M COMPANY: Larcom Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
------------------------------------------------------------
Glenn Larcom, 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-06752-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: Leverette Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Aqueous Foams
---------------------------------------------------------------
Edward Leverette, 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-06758-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: Marquez Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
------------------------------------------------------------------
Ernest Marquez, 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-06757-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: Mattson Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Chemicals & Foams
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Keith Mattson, 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-06741-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: McCoy Sues Over Exposure to Toxic Film-Forming Foams
----------------------------------------------------------------
Herbert McCoy, 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-06747-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
ADVANCED REAL ESTATE: Garcia Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against ADVANCED REAL ESTATE
SERVICES INC., et al. The case is styled as Carlos D. Alvarado
Garcia, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v.
ADVANCED REAL ESTATE SERVICES INC., Case No. 25STCV01570 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 21, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
Advanced Realty Services, Inc. --
https://www.advancedrealestate.com/ -- specializes in finding the
perfect homes for our clients.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Lavi, Esq.
LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
8889 W Olympic Blvd., Ste. 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-3638
Phone: 310-432-0000
Fax: 310-432-0001
Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com
AKUMIN OPERATING: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Guerra Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
MICHELE MARIANO GUERRA, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AKUMIN OPERATING CORP. f/k/a
AKUMIN CORP., Defendant, Case No. 0:25-cv-60067 (S.D. Fla., January
10, 2025) is a class action against Akumin for its failure to
properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly
situated Akumin patients' personally identifiable information and
protected health information from criminal hackers.
Defendant Akumin's investigation revealed that unauthorized party
had access to certain files that contained sensitive patient
information, and that such access took place on October 11, 2023.
Yet, Akumin waited more than a year to notify the public that they
were at risk. As a result of this delayed response, the Plaintiff
and Class Members had no idea for over a year that their private
information had been compromised, and that were, and continue to
be, at significant risk of identity theft and various other forms
of personal, social, and financial harm, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms on behalf of herself and
all similarly situated individuals whose private information was
accessed and/or compromised during the data breach. Accordingly,
the Plaintiff, on behalf of herself and the Class, asserts claims
for negligence, negligence per se, breach of contract, breach of
implied contract, unjust enrichment, breach of fiduciary duty,
breach of confidence, and declaratory judgment.
Akumin Operating Corp., based in Plantation, Florida, is an
oncology and radiology healthcare organization and provider that
serves patients in 47 U.S. states.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jessica Wallace, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
20200 West Dixie Highway, Suite 902
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (786) 244-5660
E-mail: jwallace@sirillp.com
- and -
Tyler Bean, Esq.
SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP
745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500
New York, NY 10151
Telephone: (212) 532-1091
E-mail: tbean@sirillp.com
ALLOCATION SERVICES: Jackson Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------------
The case is styled as Sharon Jackson, individually and on behalf
and all others similarly situated v. Allocation Services, Inc.
doing business as IMPAXX, DOES 1 through 10, Case No.
30-02024-01446982 was removed from the Orange County Superior Court
of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California on Jan. 22, 2025.
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:25-cv-00112-JVS-DFM to
the proceeding.
The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud.
Allocation Services, Inc. doing business as IMPAXX --
https://www.impaxx.com/ -- offers intelligent products and services
that save time, money, and frustration.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shahin Rezvani, Esq.
Chumahan Benjamin Bowen, Esq.
Jennifer M. Leinbach, Esq.
Reuben Aguirre, Esq.
Thiago Merlini Coelho, Esq.
WILSHIRE LAW FIRM
3055 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Phone: (213) 381-9988
Fax: (213) 381-9989
Email: srezvani@wilshirelawfirm.com
chumahan.bowen@wilshirelawfirm.com
jennifer.leinbach@wilshirelawfirm.com
thiago@wilshirelawfirm.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Jason Alan Orr, Esq.
BAKER AND HOSTETLER LLP
1801 California Street Suite 4400
Denver, CO 80202
Phone: (303) 861-0600
Fax: (303) 861-7805
Email: jorr@bakerlaw.com
AMERICAN FAMILY: Parties in Hirsch Seek to Extend Briefing Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KYLE HIRSCH, SARAH HIRSCH,
and DENNIS FRITTER, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,
Case No. 2:23-cv-04005-SRB (W.D. Mo.), the Parties ask the Court to
enter an order granting joint motion to further extend the class
certification briefing deadlines by 30 days.
Specifically, the parties request the following:
Event Current Proposed
Deadline Deadline
Plaintiff's motion for class Jan. 19, 2025 Feb. 19, 2025
Certification:
Opposition Brief: Feb. 28, 2025 Mar. 28, 2025
Reply Brief: Mar. 20, 2025 Apr. 21, 2025
Contemporaneous to the filing of the motion, counsel for the
parties have also filed a substantially identical motion in the
Hirsch litigation also pending in this Court, requesting that the
Court further extend the class certification briefing deadlines to
align the Hirsch deadlines with the deadlines in this case, the
lawsuit says.
The extension will not prejudice the parties or unnecessarily delay
the proceedings. Rather, this extension will allow the parties to
continue making progress toward resolving this case, the lawsuit
adds.
On Nov. 4, 2024, the parties engaged in formal in-person mediation
with Michael Ungar of UB Greensfelder, who has successfully
mediated multiple cases that are similar to the present one. During
this mediation, an agreement in principle was reached on certain
material aspects of a settlement. The parties are continuing to
discuss remaining open issues with one
another.
American Family is an American private mutual company that focuses
on property, casualty, and auto insurance.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=mSUl2y at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Erik D. Peterson, Esq.
ERIK PETERSON LAW OFFICES PSC
110 W. Vine Street, Ste. 300
Lexington, KY 40507
Telephone: (800) 614-1957
E-mail: erik@eplo.law
- and -
David T. Butsch, Esq.
Christopher E. Roberts, Esq.
BUTSCH ROBERTS & ASSOCIATES LLC
7777 Bonhomme Avenue, Suite 1300
Clayton, MO 63105
Telephone: (314) 863-5700
Facsimile: (314) 863-5711
E-mail: Butsch@ButschRoberts.com
Roberts@ButschRoberts.com
- and -
J. Brandon McWherter, Esq.
MCWHERTER SCOTT BOBBITT PLC
109 Westpark Drive, Suite 260
Brentwood, TN 37027
Telephone: (615) 354-1144
Facsimile: (731) 664-1540
E-mail: brandon@msb.law
- and -
T. Joseph Snodgrass, Esq.
SNODGRASS LAW LLC
100 South Fifth Street, Suite 800
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 339-1421
E-mail: jsnodgrass@snodgrass-law.com
- and -
Douglas J. Winters, Esq.
THE WINTERS LAW GROUP, LLC
7700 Bonhomme, Suite 575
St. Louis, MO 63105
Telephone: (314) 499-5200
Facsimile: (314) 499-5201
E-mail: dwinters@winterslg.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Leah Bruno, Esq.
Brian Cohen, Esq.
Mark Hanover, Esq.
Kristine M. Schanbacher, Esq.
Jake Thessen, Esq.
DENTONS US LLP
233 South Wacker Drive, Ste 7800
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 876-7456
E-mail: leah.bruno@dentons.com
brian.cohen@dentons.com
mark.hanover@dentons.com
kristine.schanbacher@dentons.com
jake.thessen@dentons.com
AMERICAN FAMILY: Parties in Varney Seek to Extend Briefing Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHERI VARNEY, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated, v. AMERICAN FAMILY
MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 2:23-cv-04004-SRB (W.D. Mo.),
the Plaintiff and the Defendant request that the Court enter an
order granting joint motion to further extend the class
certification briefing deadlines by 30 days.
Specifically, the parties request the following:
Event Current Proposed
Deadline Deadline
Plaintiff's motion for class Jan. 19, 2025 Feb. 19, 2025
Certification:
Opposition Brief: Feb. 28, 2025 Mar. 28, 2025
Reply Brief: Mar. 20, 2025 Apr. 21, 2025
Contemporaneous to the filing of the motion, counsel for the
parties have also filed a substantially identical motion in the
Hirsch litigation also pending in this Court, requesting that the
Court further extend the class certification briefing deadlines to
align the Hirsch deadlines with the deadlines in this case, the
lawsuit says.
The extension will not prejudice the parties or unnecessarily delay
the proceedings. Rather, this extension will allow the parties to
continue making progress toward resolving this case, the lawsuit
adds.
On Nov. 4, 2024, the parties engaged in formal in-person mediation
with Michael Ungar of UB Greensfelder, who has successfully
mediated multiple cases that are similar to the present one. During
this mediation, an agreement in principle was reached on certain
material aspects of a settlement. The parties are continuing to
discuss remaining open issues with one
another.
American Family is an American private mutual company that focuses
on property, casualty, and auto insurance.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 16, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4gyr0x at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Erik D. Peterson, Esq.
ERIK PETERSON LAW OFFICES PSC
110 W. Vine Street, Ste. 300
Lexington, KY 40507
Telephone: (800) 614-1957
E-mail: erik@eplo.law
- and -
David T. Butsch, Esq.
Christopher E. Roberts, Esq.
BUTSCH ROBERTS & ASSOCIATES LLC
7777 Bonhomme Avenue, Suite 1300
Clayton, MO 63105
Telephone: (314) 863-5700
Facsimile: (314) 863-5711
E-mail: Butsch@ButschRoberts.com
Roberts@ButschRoberts.com
- and -
J. Brandon McWherter, Esq.
MCWHERTER SCOTT BOBBITT PLC
109 Westpark Drive, Suite 260
Brentwood, TN 37027
Telephone: (615) 354-1144
Facsimile: (731) 664-1540
E-mail: brandon@msb.law
- and -
T. Joseph Snodgrass, Esq.
SNODGRASS LAW LLC
100 South Fifth Street, Suite 800
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (612) 339-1421
E-mail: jsnodgrass@snodgrass-law.com
- and -
Douglas J. Winters, Esq.
THE WINTERS LAW GROUP, LLC
7700 Bonhomme, Suite 575
St. Louis, MO 63105
Telephone: (314) 499-5200
Facsimile: (314) 499-5201
E-mail: dwinters@winterslg.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Leah Bruno, Esq.
Brian Cohen, Esq.
Mark Hanover, Esq.
Kristine M. Schanbacher, Esq.
Jake Thessen, Esq.
DENTONS US LLP
233 South Wacker Drive, Ste 7800
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 876-7456
E-mail: leah.bruno@dentons.com
brian.cohen@dentons.com
mark.hanover@dentons.com
kristine.schanbacher@dentons.com
jake.thessen@dentons.com
AMERICAN TEXTILE: Garcia Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AMERICAN TEXTILE
MAINTENANCE, et al. The case is styled as Heidy Yulisssa Nataren
Garcia, an individual, on behalf of herself and all similarly
situated v. AMERICAN TEXTILE MAINTENANCE, LEWIS MICHELLE, MEDICO
PROFESSIONAL LINEN SERVICES, SHAMES BRADLEY, SHAMES GREGORY, SHAMES
JULIE, Case No. 25STCV01694 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.,
Jan. 21, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
American Textile Maintenance -- https://www.americantextile.com/ --
are one of the largest bedding manufacturers in the world.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Orion S. Robinson, Esq.
ROBINSON DI LANDO
801 S Grand Ave., Ste. 500
Los Angeles, CA 90017-4633
Phone: 213-229-0100
Fax: 213-229-0114
Email: orobinson@rdwlaw.com
AMS NATIONAL: Liu Seeks Unpaid Wages for Nurse Anesthetists
-----------------------------------------------------------
JIA LIU, for herself and on behalf of those similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. AMS NATIONAL, LLC, a Foreign Limited Liability
Company, and ANESTHESIA MANAGEMENT SOLUTIONS LLC, a Florida Limited
Liability Company, Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-00011-MCR-ZCB (N.D.
Fla., January 10, 2025) is a putative collective action brought by
Plaintiff for herself and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, seeking overtime compensation for hours worked over 40 in
a workweek pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The complaint alleges that the Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff
and other certified registered nurse anesthetists they employed one
and one-half times their regular rate of pay for all hours worked
over 40 in a workweek as required by federal law.
The Plaintiff worked as a certified registered nurse anesthetist
for Defendants from approximately August 2023 to December 2023 at
Advent Health Sebring in Sebring, Florida.
AMS National, LLC operate in interstate commerce by, among other
things, offering and providing its services in hospitals and
clinics in multiple states across the U.S.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Angeli Murthy, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
8151 Peters Rd., Ste 4000
Plantation, FL 33324
Telephone: (954) 318-0268
Facsimile: (954) 327-3016
E-mail: amurthy@forthepeople.com
AMSCO U.S. INC: Puga Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AMSCO U.S., INC., et
al. The case is styled as Alejandro Calderon Puga, on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated v. AMSCO U.S., INC., SAMUEL
HALE LLC, YAZDI FAMILY INC., Case No. 25STCV01637 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
Los Angeles Cty., Jan. 21, 2025).
The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case
(General Jurisdiction)."
AMSCO U.S. Inc. -- https://amscous.com/ -- is a manufacturer of
wire harness and cable assemblies and a preferred supplier to many
Fortune 500 companies and today's industry leaders.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph Lavi, Esq.
LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
8889 W Olympic Blvd., Ste. 200
Beverly Hills, CA 90211-3638
Phone: 310-432-0000
Fax: 310-432-0001
Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com
ANINE BING: Riley Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
------------------------------------------------------
Amanie Riley, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Anine Bing Corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-00575 (N.D.
Ill., Jan. 21, 2025), is brought arising from the Defendant's
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate their website
to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and
other blind or visually-impaired persons.
The Defendant is denying blind and visually impaired persons
throughout the United States with equal access to the goods and
services Dan Post Boot provides to their non-disabled customers
through https://www.aninebing.com (hereinafter "Aninebing.com" or
"the website"). The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to
its website, and therefore denial of its products and services
offered, and in conjunction with its physical locations, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act (the "ADA").
Because Defendant's website, Aninebing.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 Anine Bing's policies, practices, and procedures to that
Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and
visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory
damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to
unlawful discrimination, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who
requires screen-reading software to read website content using the
computer.
Anine Bing provides to the public a website known as Aninebing.com
which provides consumers with access to an array of goods and
services, including, the ability to view a rich collection of high-
end apparel, including jackets, blazers, shirts, T-shirts, pants,
shorts, dresses, swimwear, lingerie, bags and jewelry.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Asher Cohen, Esq.
ASHER COHEN PLLC
2377 56th Dr,
Brooklyn, NY 11234
Phone: +1 (718) 914-9694
Email: acohen@ashercohenlaw.com
APPLE INC: Faces Suit Over Toxic Chemicals in Apple Watch Bands
---------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Younker, writing for Tom's Guide, reports that Apple is
facing a class action lawsuit in California that accuses the tech
giant of false advertising regarding the company's Apple Watch
bands, some of which allegedly contain toxic 'forever' chemicals.
The chemicals known as per- and polyfluroalkyl substances (PFAS)
break down very slowly and can build up in the blood of people and
animals over time, as well as the environment, including drinking
water. According to a guide to PFAS from the Environmental
Protection Agency, most research suggests that exposure to PFAS can
lead to "adverse health outcomes."
Which Apple Watch bands are called out?
The lawsuit asserts, "[Apple] advertises these Products as designed
to support and further human health and wellness, environmentally
sustainable, and suitable for everyday use and wear. However, in
truth, they contain excessive levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl
substances("PFAS"), which are toxic to human health and the
environment."
The complaint cites a study released in December 2024 that found at
least 22 watch bands contained "high levels" of PFAS, claiming that
those chemicals can be absorbed through the skin. The Guardian
reported that the study tested bands from Apple, Fitbit, Google and
Nike, though neither the study nor the Guardian named any specific
smartwatch bands that may contain PFAS.
Apple has asserted that the company works to remove harmful
chemicals from its products, claiming that its efforts exceed
current regulatory requirements.
Apple to phase out PFAS
Apple has previously stated that is working on phasing PFAS out of
its products. In November 2022, Apple released a white paper that
detailed how it would "completely phase out" PFAS in products and
its manufacturing process.
The project is ongoing though Apple did not provide any details on
how its efforts have succeeded or failed since 2022.
From the paper:
"The environmental implications of the use of PFAS are significant,
and we're responding with focus and dedication. We want to
thoughtfully phase out PFAS in a way that does not result in
regrettable substitutions. We're prioritizing our phaseout
activities on applications that result in the highest volumes of
PFAS reductions and the most meaningful environmental impact. It
will take time for Apple to completely phase out PFAS from our
products and processes because of the challenges related to
compiling a comprehensive catalog of PFAS use, identifying and
developing non-PFAS alternatives that can meet the performance
needs for certain critical applications, and taking into account
the time needed for material qualification."
What happens now?
Tom's Guide reached out to Apple for information on which Apple
Watch bands may contain PFAS, if any. Apple declined to provide
more details.
As of this writing, a judge must decide whether or not the lawsuit
will move forward. [GN]
ATKORE INC: Barnett Sues Over Anticompetitive Action
----------------------------------------------------
Joshua Barnett, Austin Clark, Rod Davis, and Robert Mason,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
ATKORE, INC.; CANTEX INC.; DIAMOND PLASTICS CORPORATION; IPEX USA
LLC; PIPELIFE JETSTREAM, INC.; J-M MANUFACTURING COMPANY, INC.
D/B/A JM EAGLE; NATIONAL PIPE & PLASTICS, INC.; NORTHERN PIPE
PRODUCTS, INC.; OTTER TAIL CORPORATION; PRIME CONDUIT, INC.;
SANDERSON PIPE CORPORATION; SOUTHERN PIPE, INC.; WESTLAKE
CORPORATION; WESTLAKE PIPE & FITTINGS CORPORATION; VINYLTECH
CORPORATION and OIL PRICE INFORMATION SERVICE, LLC, Case No.
1:25-cv-00688 (N.D. Ill., Jan. 21, 2025), is brought against
Defendants for injunctive relief under the antitrust laws of the
United States, and on behalf of a single multistate class of end
users for damages under the various state antitrust, consumer
protection, and unjust enrichment laws, and demand a trial by jury
as a result of the Defendants' anticompetitive action.
The manufacturers of PVC Pipe are called converters. The Converter
Defendants in this case are the leading manufacturers of PVC Pipe
in the United States: Atkore, Inc.; Cantex Inc.; Diamond Plastics
Corporation; IPEX USA LLC; PipeLife Jetstream, Inc.; J-M
Manufacturing Company, Inc. d/b/a JM Eagle; National Pipe &
Plastics, Inc.; Northern Pipe Products, Inc.; Otter Tail
Corporation; Prime Conduit, Inc.; Sanderson Pipe Corporation;
Southern Pipe, Inc.; Westlake Corporation; Westlake Pipe & Fittings
Corporation; and Vinyltech Corporation.
During the Class Period, Defendants and their Co-Conspirators
conspired and combined to fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize the
price of PVC Pipe in the United States. Defendants did so by
communicating through an information-exchange firm called Oil Price
Information Service, LLC ("OPIS"), which enabled the Defendants to
discuss and signal their pricing activities, gain access to
standardized pricing data from their competitors, and collectively
extract artificially inflated profits from their customers. OPIS
went far beyond just facilitating the private and non-public
sharing of information: OPIS repeatedly served as a conduit between
the Converter Defendants, allowing them to communicate their
intentions on pricing in furtherance of their antitrust
conspiracy.
The United States Department of Justice's Antitrust Division
("DOJ") has launched an investigation into the alleged price-fixing
in the PVC Pipe industry in August 2024. In a SEC filing, Otter
Tail Corporation, a PVC Pipe manufacturer and named defendant,
disclosed that it had received a grand jury subpoena from the DOJ
on August 27, 2024. The Defendants' anticompetitive actions widened
the spread between the price that the Converter Defendants pay to
manufacture PVC Pipe and the price at which they sold PVC Pipe,
injuring Plaintiffs and the Classes.
While the purchases made by Plaintiffs and members of the proposed
Classes were for end use, their claims may be considered indirect
claims or direct claims depending on the Court's eventual finding,
after discovery, regarding the distributors' involvement in the
conspiracy. Therefore, Plaintiffs reserve their rights to seek
damages under Section 1 of the Sherman Act on behalf of a
nationwide class of end users who purchased from co-conspirator
non-converter resellers and thus have direct-purchaser claims
against Defendants, says the complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased in Oregon PVC Pipe manufactured by one or
more Defendants or their Co-Conspirators.
Atkore, Inc. is a publicly traded Delaware corporation
headquartered in Harvey, Illinois.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Terry Rose Saunders, Esq.
THE SAUNDERS LAW FIRM
120 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2000
Chicago, IL 60602
Phone: (312) 444-9656
Email: tsaunders@saunders-lawfirm.com
- and -
Christopher T. Micheletti, Esq.
Qianwei Fu, Esq.
ZELLE LLP
555 12th Street, Suite 1230
Oakland, CA 94607
Phone: (415) 693-0700
Email: cmicheletti@zellelaw.com
qfu@zellelaw.com
BIOLIFE PLASMA: Wooten Files Suit in E.D. California
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against BioLife Plasma
Services L.P., et al. The case is styled as Evan Wooten,
individually and on behalf all others similarly situated v. BioLife
Plasma Services L.P., Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., Case No.
1:25-cv-00099-KES-SKO (E.D. Cal., Jan. 22, 2025).
The Nature of Suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury.
BioLife Plasma Services -- https://www.biolifeplasma.com/ --
collects high-quality plasma that is processed into lifesaving
plasma-based therapies.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua Glatt, Esq.
Lawrence Timothy Fisher, Esq.
BURSOR & FISHER P.A.
1990 N. California Blvd., Ste. 910
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Phone: (925) 300-4451
Email: jglatt@bursor.com
ltfisher@bursor.com
BRAVO PIZZA: Gonzalez Sues Over Failure to Pay Proper OT
--------------------------------------------------------
JORGE GONZALEZ, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. BRAVO PIZZA ENTERPRISES, INC., PHILLIP GRATZ and
KENNETH FELLUS, individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00268
(S.D.N.Y., January 12, 2025) is brought under the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, as recently amended by the
Wage Theft Prevention Act, and related provisions from New York
Codes, Rules, and Regulations arising from the Defendants' alleged
unlawful labor practices.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants uphold a policy and
practice of obligating him and other employees to work without
providing the legally obligated overtime compensation. He further
asserts the Defendants' willful failure to provide written notice
of wage rates and furnish accurate wage statements.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants from November 2020 to
December 31, 2024. Initially handling the role of a host, where he
managed customer seating arrangements, the Plaintiff transitioned
to the role of a cook assisting in pizza preparation.
Bravo Pizza Enterprises, Inc. is a pizza company with principal
place of business located in New York City.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lina Stillman, Esq.
STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.
42 Broadway, 12th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 203-2417
CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES: Sued Over Failure to Safeguard PII & PHI
---------------------------------------------------------------
Contessa Atchison, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. CARDIOLOGY ASSOCIATES OF MOBILE, INC., Case No.
1:25-cv-00028-TFM-B (S.D. Ala., Jan. 21, 2025), is brought arising
out of the public exposure of the confidential, private information
of Defendant's current and former patients, Personally Identifying
Information ("PII") and Protected Health Information ("PHI"
(collectively "Personal Information"), including of Plaintiff and
the Class Members, which was in the possession of Defendant during
on its systems, on October 22, 2023, caused by Defendant's failures
to adequately safeguard that Personal Information ("the Data
Breach").
As a result of the Data Breach, Plaintiff and Class Members
suffered injury and ascertainable losses in the form of the present
and imminent threat of fraud and identity theft, loss of the
benefit of their bargain, out-of-pocket expenses, loss of value of
their time reasonably incurred to remedy or mitigate the effects of
the attack, and the loss of, and diminution in, value of their
personal information.
In addition, Plaintiff's and Class Members' sensitive Personal
Information--which was entrusted to Defendant--was compromised and
unlawfully accessed due to the Data Breach. This information, while
compromised and taken by unauthorized third parties, remains also
in the possession of Defendant, and without additional safeguards
and independent review and oversight, remains vulnerable to future
cyberattacks and theft.
The Data Breach was a direct result of Defendant's failure to
implement adequate and reasonable cyber-security procedures and
protocols necessary to protect victims' Personal Information. The
Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit on behalf of those
similarly situated to address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding
of Class Members' Personal Information that Defendant collected and
maintained, and for failing to provide timely and adequate notice
to Plaintiff and other Class Members that their information had
been subject to the unauthorized access by an unknown third party,
says the complaint.
The Plaintiff's data was exposed because she was a patient of
Defendant.
The Defendant provides cardiovascular care.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
R. Brent Irby, Esq.
LYONS IRBY, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
2201 Arlington Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 35205
Phone: (205) 936-8281
Email: brent@lyonsirby.com
- and -
Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
Joseph Kanee, Esq.
EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
20900 NE 30TH Ave, #417
Aventura, FL 33180
Phone: (786) 933-2775
Email: scott@edelberglaw.com
joseph@edelsberglaw.com
CAVENDISH FARMS: Cardoso Alleges Price Fixing of Frozen Potatoes
----------------------------------------------------------------
DOLORES CARDOSO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CAVENDISH FARMS, INC.; CAVENDISH FARMS LTD.;
J.R. SIMPLOT COMPANY; LAMB WESTON HOLDINGS, INC.; LAMB WESTON,
INC.; LAMB WESTON BSW, LLC; LAMB WESTON SALES, INC.; LAMB
WESTON/MIDWEST, INC.; MCCAIN FOODS LTD; MCCAIN FOODS USA, INC.;
NATIONAL POTATO PROMOTION BOARD, D/B/A POTATOES USA; CIRCANA, LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00304 (N.D. Ill., January 10, 2025)
seeks to recover damages and obtain injunctive relief against
Defendants for violations of the antitrust laws of the United
States as well as the antitrust, consumer protection, and common
law of the states.
Starting as early as January 1, 2021 and continuing to the present,
the Defendants and their co-conspirators allegedly conspired to
fix, raise, maintain, and stabilize prices of frozen potato
products sold in the United States above competitive levels. As a
result, staggering price increases for frozen potato products
occurred.
Cavendish Farms, Inc. manufactures frozen french fries and potato
products at facilities throughout the United States. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Rachel Dapeer, Esq.
DAPEER LAW, P.A.
20900 NE 30th Avenue, #417
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (954) 799-5914
E-mail: rachel@dapeer.com
- and -
Michelle C. Clerkin, Esq.
SPIRO HARRISON & NELSON
1111 Lincoln Road, Suite 500
Miami Beach, FL 33139
Telephone: (786) 841-1181
E-mail: mclerkin@shnlegal.com
- and -
Jason C. Spiro, Esq.
David B. Harrison, Esq.
40 Exchange Place, Suite 1100
New York, NY 10005
Telephone.: (646) 880-8850
E-mail: jspiro@shnlegal.com
dharrison@shnlegal.com
CENTURY SNACKS: Gomez Suit Removed to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Tracie Gomez, individually, and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. CENTURY SNACKS, LLC, Case No.
24CV453580 was removed from the Superior Court of California in and
for the County of Santa Clara, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California on Jan. 21, 2025, and assigned Case
No. 5:25-cv-00708.
The Complaint alleges three causes of action against Defendants:
Consumer Legal Remedies Act; California Unfair Competition Law; and
Breach of Express Warranty. The claims arise out of Defendant's
alleged "unfair" and/or "unlawful" labeling claims relating to
certain of Defendant's Snak Club products (the "Products").[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
David T. Biderman, Esq.
Jasmine W. Wetherell, Esq.
PERKINS COIE LLP
1888 Century Park East, Suite 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90067-1721
Phone: +1.310.788.9900
Facsimile: +1.310.788.3399
Email: DBiderman@perkinscoie.com
JWetherell@perkinscoie.com
CHRISTIAN DIOR: Larsen Suit Removed to C.D. California
------------------------------------------------------
The case styled as Clifford Larsen, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. CHRISTIAN DIOR PERFUMES LLC; LVMH
FRAGRANCE BRANDS US LLC; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No.
24STCV32414 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for Los Angeles County, to the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California on Jan. 21, 2025, and assigned
Case No. 2:25-cv-00539.
On December 9, 2024, Plaintiff submitted a Notice to the
California
Labor and Workforce Development Agency ("LWDA") and under the
Private Attorneys General Act of 2004.[BN]
The Defendants are represented by:
Christina Tellado, Esq.
Mary Vu, Esq.
POLSINELLI LLP
2049 Century Park East, Suite 2900
Los Angeles, CA 90067
Phone: (310) 556-1801
Facsimile: (310) 556-1802
Email: ttellado@polsinelli.com
mvu@polsinelli.com
COCOCARE PRODUCTS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Tucker Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
HENRY TUCKER, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. COCOCARE PRODUCTS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-00262 (S.D.N.Y., January 10, 2025) arises from Defendant's
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive
website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the
Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons.
According to the complaint, the Defendant failed to make its
website available in a manner compatible with computer screen
reader programs, depriving blind and visually-impaired individuals
the benefits of its online goods, content, and services and thereby
increasing the sense of isolation and stigma among those persons
that Americans with Disabilities Act's Title III was meant to
redress.
Cococare Products, Inc. owns and maintains the website,
https://cococare.com, which provides consumers with access to an
array of goods and services including information about health &
beauty aid products. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael A. LaBollita, Esq.
Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC
150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
New York, NY 10003
Telephone: (212) 228-9795
Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal
Dana@Gottlieb.legal
Michael@Gottlieb.legal
CONSOLIDATED HOUSEKEEPING: Kalli Balks at Unpaid Wages, Retaliation
-------------------------------------------------------------------
MOREINE KALLI, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. CONSOLIDATED HOUSEKEEPING INC. and JERRY
DROMCOBUFTE, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00177 (E.D.N.Y., January
10, 2025) is a class action pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act, the New York Labor Law, and New York Commissioner of Labor's
Wage Order arising from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor
practices.
The Plaintiff alleges the Defendants' failure to pay overtime
compensation, failure to pay spread of hours compensation,
retaliatory conduct, and failure to provide with accurate wage
statements and a wage notice.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a cleaner from
early March 2019 until October 2, 2023.
Consolidated Housekeeping Inc. is a privately owned and operated
company that provides commercial cleaning services in New
York.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Madeline Howard, Esq.
SACCO & FILLAS LLP
3119 Newtown Ave, Seventh Floor
Astoria, NY 11102
Telephone: (718) 269-2251
Facsimile: (718) 679-9660
E-mail: mhoward@saccofillas.com
CROCS INC: Carretta Sues Over Securities Exchange Act Breach
------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Anthony Carretta, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. CROCS, INC., ANDREW REES, ANNE MEHLMAN, and
SUSAN HEALY, Case No. 1:25-cv-00096-UNA (D. Del., Jan. 22, 2025),
is brought on behalf of a class of all persons and entities who
purchased or otherwise acquired Crocs common stock between November
3, 2022, and October, 28 2024, inclusive (the "Class Period"),
seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act"), and SEC Rule 10b-5, promulgated
thereunder.
The Defendants misled investors by concealing the fact that the
strong revenue growth exhibited by the Company's HEYDUDE brand
following its acquisition in February 2022, was largely driven by a
conscious decision on the part of Crocs management to aggressively
stock its third-party wholesaler pipeline with HEYDUDE products,
regardless of the level of retail demand being experienced by those
wholesalers. Defendants pursued this overstocking strategy despite
assurances to investors by Defendant Andrew Rees, the Company's
Chief Executive Officer, that Crocs would not "play the game of
forcing inventory into wholesalers and getting them overstocked."
As a result, unbeknownst to investors, the Company reported HEYDUDE
revenue numbers in 2022 that were not indicative of actual retail
demand for HEYDUDE shoes and, over the longer term, were entirely
unsustainable. Moreover, after the Company's retail partners began
to destock this excess inventory, Defendants further misled
investors by concealing that waning product demand for HEYDUDE
shoes would further impact the Company's financial results.
Investors began to learn the truth about the nature and
unsustainability of HEYDUDE's revenue growth on April 27, 2023,
when Defendant Rees revealed during the Company's first quarter
2023 earnings call that much of HEYDUDE's revenue growth in 2022
was attributable to efforts to stock the Company's wholesale
partners with HEYDUDE products and was not necessarily indicative
of actual downstream retail sales. On this news, the price of Crocs
common stock declined $23.46 per share, or nearly 16%, from a close
of $147.78 per share on April 26, 2023, to close at $124.32 per
share on April 27, 2023.
Then, on October 29, 2024, investors learned more about HEYDUDE's
prospects when the Company reported its financial results for the
third quarter of 2024. During the accompanying earnings call,
Defendant Rees disclosed that HEYDUDE revenues fell below the
Company's expectations and revealed that "HEYDUDE's recent
performance and the current operating environment are signaling it
will take longer than we had initially planned for the business to
turn the corner." Rees attributed HEYDUDE's struggles to "excess
inventories in the market" and admitted that "we've made good
progress, but frankly, not quite all the progress we want to make"
in resolving the inventory issue. Moreover, Rees admitted that "if
you think about this sort of 2022 into 2023 timeframe, in
retrospect, we absolutely shipped too much product," calling that
decision "wrong" and highlighting that a lack of product demand
exacerbated the issue. On this news, the price of Crocs common
stock declined $26.47 per share, or approximately 19.2%, from a
close of $138.05 per share on October 28, 2024, to close at $111.58
per share on October 29, 2024.
As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the
significant decline in the market value of the Company's common
stock pursuant to the revelation of the fraud, Plaintiff and other
members of the Class have suffered significant damages, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiff purchased Crocs common stock at artificially inflated
prices during the Class Period.
Crocs, a Delaware corporation with its principal executive offices
in Broomfield, Colorado, is a casual lifestyle footwear brand.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory V. Varallo, Esq.
Andrew Blumberg, Esq.
BERNSTEIN, LITOWITZ, BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
500 Delaware Avenue, Suite 901
Wilmington, DE 19801
Phone: (302) 364-3600
Email: greg.varallo@blbglaw.com
andrew.blumberg@blbglaw.com
- and -
Naumon A. Amjed, Esq.
Ryan T. Degnan, Esq.
KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
280 King of Prussia Road
Radnor, PA 19087
Phone: (610) 667-7706
Facsimile: (610) 667-7056
Email: namjed@ktmc.com
rdegnan@ktmc.com
CYCLO THERAPEUTICS: M&A Probes Proposed Merger With Rafael Holdings
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating:
-- Cyclo Therapeutics, Inc. (Nasdaq: CYTH), relating to its
proposed merger with Rafael Holdings, Inc. Under the terms of the
agreement, Cyclo common stock will automatically be converted into
the right to receive shares of Rafael common stock.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/cyclo-therapeutics-inc/. It is free
and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- AlloVir, Inc. (NASDAQ: ALVR), relating to its proposed merger
with Kalaris Therapeutics. Under the terms of the agreement,
AlloVir will acquire 100% of the outstanding equity interest of
Kalaris. Upon completion of the Merger, pre-Merger AlloVir
stockholders are expected to own approximately 25.05% of the
combined company and pre-Merger Kalaris stockholders are expected
to own approximately 74.95% of the combined company.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/allovir-inc-alvr/. It is free and
there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- William Penn Bancorporation (Nasdaq: WMPN), relating to its
proposed merger with Mid Penn Bancorp, Inc. Under the terms of the
agreement, shareholders of William Penn will receive 0.4260 shares
of Mid Penn common stock for each share of William Penn common
stock. Additionally, all options of William Penn will be rolled
into Mid Penn equivalent options. The implied transaction value is
approximately $13.58 per William Penn share.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/william-penn-bancorporation-wmpn/.
It is free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- Omnicom Group Inc. (NYSE: OMC), relating to the proposed
merger with The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc. Under the
terms of the agreement, Omnicom shareholders will own 60.6% of the
combined company.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/omnicom-group-inc-omc/. It is free
and there is no cost or obligation to you.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3. What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders…and
we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are a
national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in any of the above listed companies and have concerns or
wish to obtain additional information free of charge, please visit
our website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341 [GN]
D'ARTAGNAN INC: Faces McGonigle Suit Over TCPA Violations
---------------------------------------------------------
ANDREW JAMES MCGONIGLE, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. D'ARTAGNAN, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-00052-AJT-LRV (E.D. Va., January 11, 2025) arises under the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant violated the Title 47 of
the Code of Federal Regulations and the Title 47 of the United
States Code by delivering, or causing to be delivered, more than
one advertisement or marketing text message to his residential or
cellular telephone number registered with the National Do-Not-Call
Registry without prior express invitation or permission required by
the TCPA.
D'Artagnan, Inc. is a food seller and manufacturer headquartered in
Union, NJ. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William Robinson, Esq.
319 N. Piedmont St., #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
ELIGO ENERGY: Bodkin Sues Over Deceptive and Bad Faith Pricing
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tina Bodkin and Thomas Bodkin, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. ELIGO ENERGY, LLC and ELIGO ENERGY PA,
LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-00094 (W.D. Pa., Jan. 21, 2025), is brought
seeking to redress Eligo's deceptive and bad faith pricing
practices that have caused tens of thousands of commercial and
residential customers in Pennsylvania, Illinois, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, New Jersey, New York, Ohio, and
Washington, D.C. to pay considerably more for their electricity and
natural gas than they should otherwise have paid.
Eligo's representations to consumers about how variable energy
rates are calculated are false and deceptive, and designed to take
advantage of customers' good faith and their lack of knowledge
about, and access to, accurate information about how Eligo in fact
sets its variable rates.
In reality, Eligo did not charge variable rates based on PJM
wholesale market prices and a $0.01 per kWh adder. Nor did Eligo
calculate its variable rates based on the factors outlined
elsewhere in its contract. Instead, Eligo used a pricing
methodology, undisclosed to the consumer, that set variable rates
based on Eligo's assessment of how high of a rate it could charge
before too many customers quit. This methodology was employed with
the intent of depriving customers of the benefits of a rate
calculated in the ways Eligo represented to customers.
Eligo's conduct represents a classic bait and switch: tell
customers specific facts about how Eligo's variable rates are
derived and then charge as much as Eligo thinks the customer will
stomach (or not notice). Indeed, Eligo has always followed a
uniform policy of charging a rate not calculated in accordance with
the way Eligo describes to customers. Eligo has also admitted that
its variable rates are set using factors that are not listed in
Eligo's contract.
As a result of Eligo's unlawful acts described herein, tens of
thousands of unsuspecting customers have been, and continue to be,
fleeced by Eligo out of tens of millions of dollars in exorbitant
charges for electricity and natural gas. Defendants' scheme, which
often affects society's most vulnerable citizens, is immoral,
unethical, oppressive, and unscrupulous.
The Plaintiffs and other Eligo customers (the "Class") have been
injured by Eligo's unlawful practices. Plaintiffs and the Class
therefore seek damages, restitution, statutory penalties, and
declaratory and injunctive relief for Eligo's breach of contract,
breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, violation of
state consumer protection statutes, and unjust enrichment, says the
complaint.
The Plaintiffs enrolled their home's electricity account with Eligo
on June 2018.
Eligo is an independent energy service company ("ESCO") that sells
electricity and natural gas in deregulated energy markets across
the United States.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nicholas Katko, Esq.
EDGAR SNYDER & ASSOCIATES
U.S. Steel Tower, 10th Floor
600 Grant Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Phone: (412) 394-4516
Fax: (412) 391-1830
Email: nkatko@edgarsnyder.com
- and -
Jessica L. Hunter, Esq.
J. Burkett McInturff, Esq.
WITTELS MCINTURFF PALIKOVIC
305 Broadway, 7th Floor
New York, New York 10007
Phone: (917) 775-8862
Fax: (914) 775-8862
Email: jlh@wittelslaw.com
jbm@wittelslaw.com
- and -
D. Greg Blankinship, Esq.
FINKELSTEIN BLANKINSHIP FREI-PEARSON & GARBER, LLP
One North Broadway, Suite 900
White Plains, New York 10601
Phone: (914) 298-3281
Fax: (914) 824-1561
Email: gblankinship@fbfglaw.com
ESS PHARMA: Faces Class Action Lawsuit Over Masofaniten Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins LLP informs investors that a class action was filed on
behalf of all persons and entities that purchased or otherwise
acquired ESSA Pharma Inc. (NASDAQ: EPIX) securities between
December 12, 2023 and October 31, 2024. ESSA is a clinical stage
pharmaceutical company that focuses on the development of small
molecule drugs for the treatment of prostate cancer. The Company's
lead product candidate was masofaniten, which was in clinical trial
in combination with enzalutamide compared with enzalutamide alone
in patients with metastatic CRPC.
For more information, submit a form, email attorney Aaron Dumas,
Jr., or give us a call at (800) 350-6003.
The Allegations: Robbins LLP is Investigating Allegations that ESSA
Pharma Inc. (EPIX) Misled Investors Regarding the Efficacy of its
Drug Candidate Masofaniten
According to the complaint, during the class period, defendants
failed to disclose to investors that: (i) masofaniten in
combination with enzalutamide had no clear efficacy benefit over
enzalutamide alone; (ii) accordingly, masofaniten in combination
with enzalutamide was less effective in treating prostate cancer
than defendants had led investors to believe; (iii) the M-E
Combination Study was unlikely to meet its prespecified Phase 2
primary endpoint; and (iv) accordingly, defendants had overstated
masofaniten's clinical, regulatory, and commercial prospects.
The complaint alleges that on October 31, 2024, ESSA issued a press
release announcing its decision to terminate Phase 2 of the M-E
Combination Study, citing "a protocol-specified interim review of
the safety, PK [pharmacokinetics] and efficacy data, which showed a
much higher rate of PSA90 response in patients treated with
enzalutamide monotherapy . . . than were expected based upon
historical data" and "no clear efficacy benefit seen with the
combination of masofaniten plus enzalutamide compared to
enzalutamide single agent." The Company further advised that "a
futility analysis determined a low likelihood of meeting the
prespecified primary endpoint of the study" and that, "[a]s part of
the effort to focus its resources," it was "planning to terminate
the other remaining company-sponsored and investigator-sponsored
clinical studies evaluating masofaniten either as a monotherapy or
in combination with other agents." On this news, ESSA's stock price
fell $3.80 per share, or 73.08%, to close at $1.40 per share on
November 1, 2024.
What Now: You may be eligible to participate in the class action
against ESSA Pharma Inc. Shareholders who want to serve as lead
plaintiff for the class should contact Robbins LLP. A lead
plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other
class members in directing the litigation. You do not have to
participate in the case to be eligible for a recovery. If you
choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member.
For more information, click here.
All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay
no fees or expenses.
About Robbins LLP: A recognized leader in shareholder rights
litigation, the attorneys and staff of Robbins LLP have been
dedicated to helping shareholders recover losses, improve corporate
governance structures, and hold company executives accountable for
their wrongdoing since 2002.
To be notified if a class action against ESSA Pharma Inc. settles
or to receive free alerts when corporate executives engage in
wrongdoing, sign up for Stock Watch today. [GN]
EVOLVE BANK: Espinola Sues Over Alleged Cash Deposit Mismanagement
------------------------------------------------------------------
CORY ESPINOLA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situatied, Plaintiff v. EVOLVE BANK & TRUST, an Arkansas bank;
EVOLVE BANCORP, INC., an Arkansas limited liability company; AMG
NATIONAL TRUST, a Colorado bank; LINEAGE BANK, a Tennessee bank;
and AMERICAN BANK, Inc. a Pennsylvania bank, Defendants, Case No.
1:25-cv-00075 (D. Colo., January 10, 2025) accuses the Defendants
of gross mismanagement of consumer cash deposits.
The Plaintiff and class members used various financial technology
platforms (FinTech) to deposit hundreds of millions of dollars at
these partner banks, who then outsourced critical account
management tasks to Synapse Financial Technologies, Inc. an
intermediary tasked with opening accounts, processing transactions,
and maintaining the financial ledgers for about 100 FinTech
companies and their users. Unfortunately for Plaintiff and all
members of the class, this arrangement collapsed when significant
discrepancies were discovered in Synapse's account ledgers. The
inaccurate records left the partner banks claiming they were unable
to verify customer balances or properly allocate funds, says the
suit.
Accordingly, the Plaintiff now brings this class action lawsuit to
account for the missing funds and have them immediately returned to
their rightful owners and asserts several claims including
negligence, conversion, breach of implied contract, breach of
fiduciary duty, and unjust enrichment.
American Bank, Inc. is a community bank headquartered in Allentown,
PA. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
14 NE First Avenue, Suite 705
Miami, FL 33132
Telephone: (305) 479-2299
E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
- and -
Brian Levin, Esq.
LEVIN LAW, P.A.
2665 South Bayshore Drive, PH2B
Miami, FL 33133
Mobile: (305) 613-0318
Telephone: (305) 539-0593
(248) 270-7338
E-mail: brian@levinlawpa.com
- and -
Adam A. Schwartzbaum, Esq.
EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
20900 NE 30th Ave., Suite 417
Aventura, FL 33180
Telephone: (786) 289-2643
E-mail: adam@edelsberglaw.com
FEDERAL SAVINGS: Sapan Suit Seeks to Certify Rule 23 Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as PAUL SAPAN, individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, v. THE FEDERAL
SAVINGS BANK, Case No. 8:23-cv-00075-SSS-ADS (C.D. Cal.), the
Plaintiff will move the Court on April 4, 2025, pursuant to Rule 23
of the Federal Rules of civil Procedure for an order certifying the
case as a class action.
The Plaintiff's motion seeks certification of the class since all
requirements of subsections (a) and (b)(3) are met in this case.
The class numbers in the hundreds of thousands, the claims are
common, the named plaintiff is typical, and the representation by
the named plaintiff and counsel are more than adequate. Common
issues and facts predominate in this simple Telephone Consumer
Protection Act (TCPA) case, Class treatment is clearly superior
where the individual cases would be for small damages awards and
potentially disparate injunctive relief.
Federal Savings Bank is veteran owned bank.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OlKu4P at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Christopher J. Reichman, Esq.
Justin Prato, Esq.
PRATO & REICHMAN, APC
3675 Ruffin Road, Suite 220
San Diego, CA 92123
Telephone: (619) 886-0252
E-mail: ChrisR@Parto-Reichman.com
FIRST CHOICE: Fails to Provide Proper Wages, Kelly Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------
JASON KELLY, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. FIRST CHOICE AUTOMOBILE CORP. and DAVID PASCUAL,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00186 (E.D.N.Y., January
12, 2025) is an action against the Defendants pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act, the New York Labor Law, and associated
provisions from Title 12 of New York Codes, Rules, and
Regulations.
The complaint alleges that Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff the
applicable minimum and overtime compensation at rates of one and
one-half times the regular rate of pay for each hour worked in
excess of 40 hours in a workweek, failed to provide notice at time
of hiring, and failed to provide accurate wage statements.
The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants from approximately
August 2016 until September 21, 2024 as a mechanic.
First Choice Automobile Corp. is a duly organized New York
corporation.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lina Stillman, Esq.
STILLMAN LEGAL, P.C.
42 Broadway, 12th Floor
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 203-2417
FOOD SYSTEMS: Enguerra and Ravelas Sue Over Labor Law Breaches
--------------------------------------------------------------
RYAN ENGUERRA and FROILEX RAVELAS, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. FOOD SYSTEMS UNLIMITED,
INC., CHINA CHAO, INC., BIAGIO SCHIANO, and ROY HUI, Defendants,
Case No. 2:25-cv-00182 (E.D.N.Y., January 11, 2025) accuses the
Defendants of violating the Fair Labor Standards Act, the New York
Labor Law, and the supporting New York State Department of Labor
Regulations.
Plaintiffs Enguerra and Ravelas performed non-exempt duties for the
Defendants, including the
preparation, cooking and serving of foods for Defendants' two
restaurants. They regularly worked
in excess of 40 hours each workweek but were not always paid
overtime at the rate of one
and one-half times their regular hourly rate, say the Plaintiffs.
Food Systems Unlimited, Inc. owns and/or operates fast-food
restaurants at the Roosevelt Field Mall on Long Island. [BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Felix Q. Vinluan, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF FELIX VINLUAN
6910 Roosevelt Avenue, 2nd Floor
Woodside, NY 11377
Telephone: (718) 478-4488
E-mail: fqvinluan@yahoo.com
FRENCH WEST: Faces Henry Suit Over Website Inaccessibility
----------------------------------------------------------
CONSTANCE HENRY, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. French West, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-00280 (N.D. Ill., January 10, 2025) arises from Defendant's
failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website,
Halebob.com, to be fully accessible to and independently usable by
Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons.
The Plaintiff has been denied the full enjoyment of the facilities,
goods and services of Defendant's website as a result of
accessibility barriers. Moreover, the inaccessibility of website
has deterred Plaintiff from making an online purchase of women's
clothing. Accordingly, the Plaintiff now seeks redress for
Defendant's unlawful conduct and asserts claims for violations of
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Headquartered in Los Angeles, CA, French West, Inc. owns and
maintains the website which provides consumers with the ability to
view information of and purchase dresses, sweaters, hoodies,
blouses, pants, shorts, skirts, scarves, bags, and perfumes. [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
GAMESTOP INC: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Dalton Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Gamestop, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
0:25-cv-00126-DSD-SGE (D. Minn., January 10, 2025) asserts claims
for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the
Minnesota Human Rights Act.
The Defendant's policies regarding the maintenance and operation of
its website fail to ensure its website is fully accessible to, and
independently usable by Plaintiff and other individuals with
vision-related disabilities. Moreover, the Plaintiff and the
putative class have been discriminated against by Defendant's
failure to provide its online website content and services in a
manner that is compatible with screen reader technology.
Gamestop, Inc. owns and maintains the website, www.gamestop.com,
offers gaming supplies and accessories for sale including, but not
limited to, gaming consoles, video games, gaming merchandise,
collectibles, and more. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
Jason Gustafson, Esq.
THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC
80 South 8th Street, Suite 900
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
E-mail: pat@throndsetlaw.com
chad@throndsetlaw.com
jason@throndsetlaw.com
GENTING NEW YORK: Gil Sues Over ADA Non-Compliant Facilities
------------------------------------------------------------
JUAN CARLOS GIL, Plaintiff v. GENTING NEW YORK LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, d/b/a Resorts World New York City;
HYATT HOTELS CORPORATION; and THE NEW YORK RACING ASSOCIATION,
INC., a New York corporation, d/b/a Aqueduct Racetrack, Defendants,
Case No. 1:25-cv-00170 (E.D.N.Y., January 10, 2025), is a class
action asserting claims under the Americans with Disabilities Act,
the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New York City Human
Rights Law.
The Defendants have discriminated, and continue to discriminate,
against Plaintiff in violation of the ADA by failing to have
accessible facilities at their commercial properties. In addition,
the Defendants' websites provided insufficient or misinformation
regarding accessible features in their rooms or their hotels, says
the suit.
Genting New York, LLC owns and/or operates casinos and hotels
including Resorts World New York City. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph M. Horn, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH M. HORN LLC
580 Sylvan Avenue, Suite 1-G
Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
Telephone: (201) 884-6000
Facsimile: (201) 205-1382
GRACO CHILDREN'S: Carder Suit Seeks to Certify Classes
------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KELLIE CARDER, et al.,
individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v.
GRACO CHILDREN'S PRODUCTS, INC., Case No. 2:20-cv-00137-LMM (N.D.
Ga.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting their
motion for class certification.
The Plaintiffs contend that their claims meet each of the
requirements of Rule 23(a) and, as required by Rule 23(b)(3),
common issues predominate over individual issues and a class action
is superior to other available methods for fairly and efficiently
adjudicating the controversy.
Graco is an American baby products company.
A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=lpAPSa at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
James M. Evangelista, Esq.
EVANGELISTA WORLEY, LLC
10 Glenlake Parkway
South Tower Suite 130
Atlanta, GA 30328
Telephone: (404) 205-8400
Facsimile: (404) 205-8395
E-mail: Jim@ewlawllc.com
- and -
Martha A. Geer, Esq.
Katharine R. Batchelor, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON
PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
900 W. Morgan St. Raleigh, NC 27603
Telephone: (919) 600-5000
Facsimile: (919) 600-5035
E-mail: mgeer@milberg.com
kbatchelor@milberg.com
- and -
Melissa R. Emert, Esq.
Gary S. Graifman, Esq.
KANTROWITZ, GOLDHAMER &
GRAIFMAN, P.C.
747 Chestnut Ridge Road
Chestnut Ridge, NY 10977
Telephone: (845) 356-2570
Facsimile: (845) 356-4335
E-mail: memert@kgglaw.com
ggraifman@kgglaw.com
- and -
Gayle M. Blatt, Esq.
P. Camille Guerra, Esq.
CASEY GERRY SCHENK
FRANCAVILLA BLATT & PENFIELD
LLP
110 Laurel Street
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 238-1811
Facsimile: (619) 544-9232
E-mail: gmb@cglaw.com
camille@cglaw.com
- and -
Stacey Slaughter, Esq.
ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
800 LaSalle Ave., Suite 2800
Minneapolis, MN, 55409
Telephone: (612) 349-8500
Facsimile: (612) 339-4181
E-mail: sslaughter@robinskaplan.com
- and -
Mark P. Chalos, Esq.
LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN
& BERNSTEIN, LLP
222 2nd Avenue South, Suite 1640
Nashville, TN 37201
Telephone: (615) 313-9000
Facsimile: (615) 313-9965
E-mail: mchalos@lchb.com
GSS PROPERTIES: Property Violates ADA, Cheli Says
-------------------------------------------------
CHARLENE CHELI, an individual, Plaintiff v. GSS PROPERTIES NJ,
INC., a New Jersey Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00280
(D.N.J., January 10, 2025) is a class action brought by the
Plaintiff, on her own behalf and on the behalf of all other
similarly situated mobility impaired persons, for injunctive
relief, damages, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act and the New Jersey
Law Against Discrimination.
The Defendant owns a property/place of public accommodation -- a
restaurant known as Denny's -- located in Vineland, New Jersey.
According to the complaint, Ms. Cheli has visited the property many
times over the years -- both before and after becoming a disabled
person -- her last visit to the property occurred on September 30,
2024. Ms. Cheli visited the property as a prospective patron with
the intent to avail herself of the goods and services offered to
the public within; however, she found it was rife with violations
of the ADA -- both in architecture and in policy.
The suit alleges that the Defendant has discriminated against the
Plaintiff, and other similarly situated mobility impaired persons,
by denying access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the goods,
services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations
of the property, as prohibited by the ADA.
GSS Properties NJ, Inc. owns a parcel of land which encompasses a
place of public accommodation alleged by the Plaintiff to be
operating in violation of Title III of the ADA and the LAD.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jon G. Shadinger Jr., Esq.
SHADINGER LAW, LLC
2220 N. East Ave.
Vineland, NJ 08360
Telephone: (609) 319-5399
E-mail: js@shadingerlaw.com
HABANERO SALVADOREAN: Jarquin Sues Over Unpaid OT, Retaliation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lesvia Jarquin, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiff v. Habanero Salvadorean & Mexican Grill LLC
a/k/a Habanero Taqueria Deysi M. Castro Santos Alonzo Galvez,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-00024 (M.D. Fla.,
January 10, 2025) is an action to recover monetary damages for
Plaintiff's unpaid overtime wages and retaliation under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiff alleges that Defendants failed to pay her and other
similarly situated employees overtime hours at the rate of time and
one-half their regular rate for every hour that they worked over
40.
On or about November 17, 2024, the Defendants fired Plaintiff after
she requested to be paid for overtime hours. The Plaintiff was
fired due to her continued complaints about unpaid overtime hours
and due to discriminatory reasons, says the suit.
Plaintiff Jarquin worked for the Defendants as a non-exempt,
full-time, hourly restaurant employee from approximately December
18, 2022 to November 17, 2024.
Habanero Salvadorean & Mexican Grill LLC is a Mexican restaurant
performing business in Lee County, Florida.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
9100 S. Dadeland Blvd. Suite 1500
Miami, FL 33156
Telephone: (305) 446-1500
Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
E-mail: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com
INTERNATIONAL COFFEE: Wendt Sues Over Unprotected Personal Info
---------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES DAVID WENDT, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. INTERNATIONAL COFFEE & TEA, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00311 (C.D. Cal., January 12, 2025) is
a class action complaint against the Defendant for its failure to
properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable
information of Plaintiff and other similarly situated individuals.
On December 19, 2024, the Defendant sent Plaintiff a notice of data
breach letter informing him that Defendant had lost control of his
PII to cybercriminals, informing him that the Data Breach included
his name, Social Security number, Passport number, and financial
account information. During the Data Breach, cybercriminals stole
Plaintiff's and the Class Members' PII, including their Social
Security numbers, for the purpose of extortion and identity theft,
totaling at least 53,901 consumers.
According to Defendant's letter, it became aware of the malicious
activity on June 6, 2024. But Defendant's notice explains that
hackers broke into their email systems between April 5, 2024, and
May 29, 2024, then again on June 6, 2024, and again between August
28 and 29, 2024. In other words, the Defendant failed to identify
the intrusion for a month, all the while hackers were roaming
around its information systems identifying valuable information and
stealing it, says the Plaintiff.
Because of Defendant's failures, the Plaintiff and the Class have
suffered a severe invasion of privacy and must now face a
substantially increased risk of harm from identity theft and fraud
for years to come, the suit alleges.
International Coffee & Tea, LLC retails and distributes
non-alcoholic beverages.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John J. Nelson, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS
GROSSMAN, PLLC
280 S. Beverly Drive
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone: (858) 209-6941
E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com
- and -
J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
Grayson Wells, Esq.
STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC
223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200
Nashville, TN 37203
Telephone: (615) 254-8801
E-mail: gstranch@stranchlaw.com
gwells@stranchlaw.com
INTERPUBLIC GROUP: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Omnicom
----------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating:
-- The Interpublic Group of Companies, Inc. (NYSE: IPG), relating
to the proposed merger with Omnicom Group Inc. Under the terms of
the agreement, Interpublic shareholders will own 39.4% of the
combined company.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/interpublic-group-of-companies-inc-ipg/.
It is free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- Vitesse Energy, Inc. (NYSE: VTS), relating to the proposed
merger with Lucero Energy Corp. Under the terms of the agreement,
Vitesse stockholders are expected to own approximately 80% of the
Company and Lucero shareholders are expected to own 20%.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/vitesse-energy-inc-vts/. It is free
and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- Aerovate Therapeutics, Inc. (NASDAQ: AVTE), relating to a
proposed merger with Jade Biosciences. Under the terms of the
agreement, pre-merger Aerovate stockholders are expected to own
approximately 1.6% of the combined company, while pre-merger Jade
stockholders are expected to own approximately 98.4% of the
combined entity.
Click link for more information
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/aerovate-therapeutics-inc-avte/. It
is free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- Maiden Holdings, Ltd. (NASDAQ: MHLD), relating to the proposed
merger with Kestrel Group LLC. Under the terms of the agreement,
each issued and outstanding common share of Maiden will be
converted into the right to receive one common share in the
combined company.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/maiden-holdings-ltd-mhld/. It is
free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3.What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders…and
we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are a
national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in any of the above listed companies and have concerns or
wish to obtain additional information free of charge, please visit
our website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341 [GN]
KENROSE PERFUMES: Cole Sues Over Website Inaccessibility
--------------------------------------------------------
HARON COLE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
Plaintiff v. Kenrose Perfumes, Inc., Defendant, Case No.
1:25-cv-00284 (N.D. Ill., January 10, 2025) alleges violations of
the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Plaintiff Haron Cole brings this civil rights action against
Kenrose Perfumes for their failure to design, construct, maintain,
and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently
usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons.
Kenrose Perfumes' website contains significant access barriers that
make it difficult if not impossible for blind and visually-impaired
customers to use the website.
Headquartered in Englewood, NJ, Kenrose Perfumes, Inc. owns and
operates the commercial website, Twistedlily.com, which offers
fragrant products for online sale. [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
MALLINCKRODT PLC: $46MM Class Settlement to be Heard on April 15
----------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP issued a statement regarding the
Mallinckrodt Securities Litigation:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
BARBARA STROUGO, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated,
Plaintiff,
vs.
MALLINCKRODT PUBLIC LIMITED COMPANY, et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. 3:20-cv-10100-RK (TJB)
CLASS ACTION
SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION
TO: ALL PERSONS OR ENTITIES WHO PURCHASED OR OTHERWISE ACQUIRED
MALLINCKRODT PLC COMMON STOCK BETWEEN MAY 3, 2016, AND MARCH 13,
2020, INCLUSIVE
THIS NOTICE WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE COURT. IT IS NOT A LAWYER
SOLICITATION. PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS
ENTIRETY.
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey, that the above-captioned action has
been certified as a class action, except for certain persons and
entities who are excluded from the Class by definition as set forth
in the Stipulation of Settlement dated September 18, 2024 and the
detailed Notice of Pendency and Proposed Settlement of Class
Action. The Stipulation and Notice can be viewed at
www.MallinckrodtSecuritiesSettlement.com.
YOU ARE ALSO HEREBY NOTIFIED that Canadian Elevator Industry
Pension Trust Fund and City of Sunrise Police Officers' Retirement
Plan, and defendants Mark C. Trudeau, Bryan M. Reasons, George A.
Kegler, Matthew K. Harbaugh, Kathleen A. Schaefer, Angus C.
Russell, Melvin D. Booth, JoAnn A. Reed, Paul R. Carter, and Mark
J. Casey have reached a proposed settlement of the Litigation on
behalf of the Class for $46 million in cash. If approved by the
Court, the Settlement will resolve all claims in the Litigation.
YOU ARE ALSO HEREBY NOTIFIED that a hearing will be held on April
15, 2025, at 11:00 a.m., before the Honorable Tonianne J.
Bongiovanni at the United States District Court, District of New
Jersey, Clarkson S. Fisher Building & U.S. Courthouse, 402 East
State Street, Trenton, NJ 08608, to determine whether: (1) the
Settlement of the above-captioned Litigation as set forth in the
Stipulation for $46 million in cash should be approved by the Court
as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) the Judgment as provided
under the Stipulation should be entered dismissing the Litigation
with prejudice; (3) to award Plaintiffs' Counsel attorneys' fees
and expenses out of the Settlement Fund (as defined in the Notice)
and, if so, in what amounts; (4) to award Plaintiffs their costs
and expenses in representing the Class out of the Settlement Fund
and, if so, in what amounts; and (5) the Plan of Allocation should
be approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate.
The Court may decide to change the date and/or time of the
Settlement Hearing, conduct the hearing by video or telephonic
conference, or otherwise allow Class Members to appear at the
hearing by telephone or videoconference, without further written
notice to the Class. It is important that you check the Settlement
website, www.MallinckrodtSecuritiesSettlement.com, before making
any plans to attend the Settlement Hearing. Any updates regarding
the Settlement Hearing, including any changes to the date or time
of the hearing or updates regarding in-person or telephonic
appearances at the hearing, will be posted to the Settlement
website. Also, if the Court requires or allows Class Members to
participate in the hearing by telephone or videoconference, the
access information will be posted to the website.
IF YOU PURCHASED OR OTHERWISE ACQUIRED MALLINCKRODT COMMON STOCK
BETWEEN MAY 3, 2016, AND MARCH 13, 2020, INCLUSIVE, YOUR RIGHTS ARE
AFFECTED BY THE SETTLEMENT OF THIS LITIGATION.
To share in the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must
establish your rights by submitting a Proof of Claim and Release
form by mail (postmarked no later than April 14, 2025) or
electronically via the Settlement website (no later than April 14,
2025). Failure to submit your Proof of Claim by April 14, 2025,
will subject your claim to rejection and preclude you from
receiving any of the recovery in connection with the Settlement of
this Litigation. If you are a Class Member and do not request
exclusion from the Class, you will be bound by the Settlement and
any judgment and release entered in the Litigation, including, but
not limited to, the Judgment, whether or not you submit a Proof of
Claim.
The Notice, which more completely describes the Settlement and your
rights thereunder (including your right to object to the
Settlement), the Proof of Claim, the Stipulation (which, among
other things, contains definitions for the capitalized terms used
in this Summary Notice), and other important documents, may be
accessed online at www.MallinckrodtSecuritiesSettlement.com, or by
writing to:
Mallinckrodt Securities Settlement
Claims Administrator
c/o Gilardi – a Verita Company
P.O. Box 301135
Los Angeles, CA 90030-1135
Inquiries should NOT be directed to Individual Defendants, the
Court, or the Clerk of the Court.
Inquiries, other than requests for the Notice or for a Proof of
Claim, may be made to Lead Counsel:
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
Ellen Gusikoff Stewart
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: 1-800-449-4900
settlementinfo@rgrdlaw.com
IF YOU DESIRE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CLASS, YOU MUST SUBMIT A
REQUEST FOR EXCLUSION SUCH THAT IT IS POSTMARKED OR RECEIVED BY
MARCH 25, 2025, IN THE MANNER AND FORM EXPLAINED IN THE NOTICE. IF
YOU PROPERLY EXCLUDE YOURSELF FROM THE CLASS, YOU WILL NOT BE BOUND
BY ANY RELEASES, JUDGMENTS, OR ORDERS ENTERED BY THE COURT IN THE
LITIGATION AND YOU WILL NOT RECEIVE ANY BENEFITS FROM THE
SETTLEMENT. EXCLUDING YOURSELF FROM THE CLASS IS THE ONLY OPTION
THAT MAY ALLOW YOU TO BE PART OF ANY OTHER CURRENT OR FUTURE
LAWSUIT AGAINST THE INDIVIDUAL DEFENDANTS OR ANY OF THE OTHER
RELEASED DEFENDANT PARTIES CONCERNING THE CLAIMS BEING RESOLVED BY
THE SETTLEMENT.
IF YOU ARE A CLASS MEMBER, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO OBJECT TO THE
SETTLEMENT, THE PLAN OF ALLOCATION, THE REQUEST BY LEAD COUNSEL FOR
AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES NOT TO EXCEED ONE-THIRD OF THE $46
MILLION SETTLEMENT AMOUNT AND EXPENSES NOT TO EXCEED $1.5 MILLION,
PLUS INTEREST ON BOTH AMOUNTS, AND/OR THE REQUEST FOR AN AWARD TO
PLAINTIFFS FOR THEIR COSTS AND EXPENSES. ANY OBJECTIONS MUST BE
FILED WITH THE COURT AND SENT TO LEAD COUNSEL AND THE INDIVIDUAL
DEFENDANTS' COUNSEL BY MARCH 25, 2025, IN THE MANNER AND FORM
EXPLAINED IN THE NOTICE.
Dated: December 23, 2024
BY ORDER OF THE COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
NEXT SOLUTIONS: Faces Lee Suit Over Unpaid Minimum, OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
JARED LEE, individually, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. NEXT SOLUTIONS, LLC and ALLAN GOODSON,
Individually and MORGAN MCCHESNEY, Individually, Defendants, Case
No. 5:25-cv-00003-BJB (W.D. Ky., January 10, 2025) is brought
against the Defendants as a multi-plaintiff action under the Fair
Labor Standards Act to recover the applicable minimum wage and
overtime compensation rates of pay owed to Plaintiff and others
similarly situated.
The Plaintiff was employed as a drop bury technician by the
Defendants.
The complaint alleges that the Plaintiffs and those similarly
situated were not paid the applicable FLSA minimum wage and
overtime compensation rates of pay for all hours worked within
weekly pay periods during all times material to this action.
Instead, the Plaintiff and those similarly situated were paid based
on the footage of cable they buried on behalf of Defendants --
pursuant to the work orders Defendants provided them.
Next Solutions, LLC provides cable installation and related
services to Internet and television end users in Kentucky,
Tennessee, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, North
Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Indiana, Michigan, and Maryland.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lori J. Keen, Esq.
MILLER HAHN, PLLC
2660 West Park Drive, Suite 2
Paducah, KY 42001
Telephone: (270) 554-0051
Facsimile: (866) 578-2230
E-mail: lkeen@millerlaw-firm.com
- and -
J. Russ Bryant, Esq.
JACKSON, SHIELDS, YEISER, HOLT OWEN & BRYANT
262 German Oak Drive
Memphis, TN 38018
Telephone: (901) 754-8001
Facsimile: (901) 754-8524
E-mail: rbryant@jsyc.com
NOVO NORDISK: Faces Class Action Suit for Misleading Investors
--------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins LLP informs stockholders that a class action was filed on
behalf of all investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Novo
Nordisk A/S (NYSE: NVO) securities between November 2, 2022 and
December 19, 2024. Novo is a healthcare company, focused on the
research, development, manufacturing, and distribution of
pharmaceutical productions globally.
For more information, submit a form, email attorney Aaron Dumas,
Jr., or give us a call at (800) 350-6003.
The Allegations: Robbins LLP is Investigating Allegations that Novo
Nordisk A/S (NVO) Misled Investors Regarding REDEFINE-1, Novo's
Phase 3 CagriSema Study on Obesity
According to the complaint, during the class period, defendants
misled investors as to the nature of the dosages provided to
patients in the study. Further, defendants noted significant
confidence in Novo's expectations for the study, in particular a
minimum expected 25% average weight loss for obesity patients
treated with CagriSema. The complaint alleges that on December 20,
2024, Novo announced headline results for its REDEFINE-1 trial,
which determined CagriSema had achieved a weight loss average of
only 22.7% after 68 weeks. On this news, the price of Novo fell
from $103.44 per share on December 19, 2024, to $85.00 per share on
December 20, 2024, a decline of about 17.83% in the span of just a
single day.
What Now: You may be eligible to participate in the class action
against Novo Nordisk A/S. Shareholders who want to serve as lead
plaintiff for the class must file papers with the court by March
25, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on
behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. You do
not have to participate in the case to be eligible for a recovery.
If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class
member. For more information, click here.
All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay
no fees or expenses.
About Robbins LLP: A recognized leader in shareholder rights
litigation, the attorneys and staff of Robbins LLP have been
dedicated to helping shareholders recover losses, improve corporate
governance structures, and hold company executives accountable for
their wrongdoing since 2002.
To be notified if a class action against Novo Nordisk A/S settles
or to receive free alerts when corporate executives engage in
wrongdoing, sign up for Stock Watch today. [GN]
OKCOIN USA: Watt Files RICO Class Suit in Calif.
--------------------------------------------------
ALISTER WATT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. OKCOIN USA INC., OKX GROUP, OKCOIN EUROPE
LTD., and AUX CAYES FINTECH CO. LTD., Defendants, Case No.
3:25-cv-00368 (N.D. Cal., January 10, 2025) alleges claims for
violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act, conversion, and aiding and abetting conversion.
The Plaintiff brings claims on behalf of himself and all persons or
entities in the United States whose cryptocurrency was removed from
a non-OKX digital wallet, account, or protocol as a result of a
hack, ransomware, or theft and, between January 10, 2021 and the
date of Judgment, transferred to an OKX account, and who have not
recovered all of their cryptocurrency that was transferred to OKX.
According to the complaint, the Defendants knowingly failed to
register its primary exchange at OKX.com (formerly OkEx.com) as a
money transmitting business, willfully violated the Bank Secrecy
Act by failing to implement and maintain an effective anti-money
laundering program, and disregarded crucial Know Your Customer
rules -- all in a deliberate and calculated effort to profit from
the U.S. market, without implementing controls required by U.S.
law.
The Defendants' willful disregard of these important laws and
regulations turned the OKX Platform into a magnet and hub for
criminals, users from sanctioned jurisdictions, terrorists, and
other bad actors -- becoming a critical part of their efforts to
launder crypto which was stolen or obtained by other unlawful
means, says the suit.
OKX Group, founded by Mingxing Xu aka Star Xu in 2013, is a made up
of a group of legal entities which created and operate one of the
largest cryptocurrency platforms in the world, where customers
deposit, trade, and withdraw, hundreds of types of digital assets,
including cryptocurrencies and tokens, such as Bitcoin, Ethereum,
and others. OKX Group and its composite entities operate
cryptocurrency exchanges accessible at several websites, including
OKCoin.com and OKX.com, as well as through smartphone apps and
other services.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric I. Niehaus, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101-8498
Telephone: (619) 231-1058
E-mail: ericn@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
Evan J. Kaufman, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
58 South Service Road, Suite 200
Melville, NY 11747
Telephone: (631) 367-7100
E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com
ekaufman@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
David C. Silver, Esq.
Jason S. Miller, Esq.
SILVER MILLER
4450 NW 126th Avenue, Suite 101
Coral Springs, FL 33065
Telephone: (954) 516-6000
E-mail: dsilver@silvermillerlaw.com
jmiller@silvermillerlaw.com
PAYPAL HOLDINGS: Coleman Sues Over Deceptive Affiliate Marketing
----------------------------------------------------------------
SHONNA COLEMAN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PAYPAL HOLDINGS, INC., a California
Corporation, PAYPAL, INC., a California Corporation, Defendants,
Case No. 5:25-cv-00367 (N.D. Cal., January 10, 2025) asserts claims
for unjust enrichment, interference with prospective economic
advantage, conversion, and for violations of California's Unfair
Competition Law, Nebraska's Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act,
and the Nebraska Consumer Protection Act.
Plaintiff Shonna Coleman is an influencer and content creator who
earns commission payments from affiliate marketing links she shares
on social media, including Facebook. Allegedly, PayPal programmed
the Honey browser extension that is causing Plaintiff and other
content creators to lose out on commissions to which they are
entitled during the online checkout process. This is done by Honey
substituting its own affiliate marketing cookie in place of the
content creator's affiliate marketing cookie, even when the online
shopper had used the content creator's specific affiliate web link
to navigate to the purchase page, says the Plaintiff.
PayPal Holdings, Inc. is a financial technology company
headquartered in San Jose, CA. The company owns and operates Honey
Science Corporation, which originally developed the Honey browser
extension. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joshua P. Davis, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
505 Montgomery Street, Suite 625
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 215-0962
Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
E-mail: jdavis@bm.net
- and -
Sophia M. Rios, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
8241 La Mesa Blvd., Suite A
La Mesa, CA 91942
Telephone: (619) 489-0300
E-mail: srios@bm.net
- and -
E. Michelle Drake, Esq.
Marika K. O’Connor Grant, Esq.
BERGER MONTAGUE PC
1229 Tyler Street NE, Suite 205
Minneapolis, MN 55413
Telephone: (612) 594-5999
Facsimile: (612) 584-4470
E-mail: emdrake@bm.net
moconnorgrant@bm.net
POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS: Giles Sues Over Data Security Failures
------------------------------------------------------------
LAURA GILES, on behalf of herself and as parent and guardian of her
minor child, Jane Doe, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. POWERSCHOOL HOLDINGS, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 2:25-at-00060 (E.D. Cal., January 10, 2025) arises from
Defendant's 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.
On or about January 7, 2025, the Defendant confirmed that it
suffered a cybersecurity incident that allowed a threat actor to
steal the personal information of students and teachers from school
districts using its platform. The Defendant declined to disclose
how many individuals have been affected by the data breach. In
addition, the 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.
Accordingly, Plaintiff brings claims for (i) negligence; (iii)
breach of implied contract; (v) breach of fiduciary duty; (iv)
invasion of privacy; (v) declaratory judgment and (vi) unjust
enrichment.
Headquartered in Folsom, CA, PowerSchool Holdings, Inc. is an
education technology company specializing in data collection,
storage, and analytics. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John R. Parker, Jr., Esq.
ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC
3550 Watt Avenue, Suite 140
Sacramento, CA 95821
Telephone: (916) 616-2936
E-mail: jrparker@almeidalawgroup.com
PRO CUSTOM: Plaintiffs Must Serve Bid to Certify FLSA Collective
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Murrell, et al., v. Pro
Custom Solar LLC, et al., Case No. 2:19-cv-02656 (E.D.N.Y., Filed
May 6, 2019), the Hon. Judge Kiyo A. Matsumoto entered an order
adopting report and recommendations order on motion to certify FLSA
collective action order on report and recommendations:
-- The Plaintiffs shall serve, but not file, their renewed motion
for Final Certification of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
Class and Class Certification under Rule 23 by Feb. 6, 2025.
-- The Defendants shall serve, but not file, their opposition by
February 27, 2025.
-- On March 13, 2025, the Plaintiffs shall serve their reply
brief and, on that date, the parties shall file their motion
papers on the docket in logical order.
-- The Court reminds the parties that two courtesy copies of each
submission must be sent to Chambers by FedEx or messenger on
the day the submission is due.
The Court understands Defendant Pro Custom Solar LLC intends to
move for summary judgment.
The Court shall not set any deadlines for summary judgment briefing
until the parties certify the close of discovery. The deadline for
the parties to submit a joint pre-trial order is adjourned sine
dine. Defendant's request for a pre-motion conference is denied as
moot.
The nature of suit states civil rights -- employment.
Pro Custom provides renewable energy services. The Company
specializes in solar designing and engineering.[CC]
PTT LLC: Larsen Bid for Discovery Sanctions Partly OK'd
--------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as RICK LARSEN, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. PTT, LLC, doing
business as High 5 Games, LLC; HIGH 5 ENTERTAINMENT LLC, Case No.
3:18-cv-05275-TMC (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Tiffany Cartwright
entered an order granting in part and denying in part Larsen's
motion for discovery sanctions.
High 5 Games will be prohibited from:
(1) opposing the admission at trial of any untimely-produced
documents related to the targeting of gambling addiction on
the basis that those documents relate to non-Washington
users; and
(2) arguing to the factfinder that those documents are
insufficient to show that H5G targeted Class members with
gambling addiction because they relate to non-Washington
users.
H5G and its counsel from Holland & Hart must also pay the
reasonable expenses caused by their discovery misconduct.
The award of expenses will be joint and several against H5G and
H&H.
Because the parties are in the midst of trial preparations, and the
Court's resolution of this motion was delayed, the Court will set a
deadline for Plaintiff's fee petition to determine the amount of
the sanction following the conclusion of the damages trial against
H5G.
The Court finds that H5G failed to produce millions of responsive
documents over several years, even after the Court had ordered it
to do so by granting Larsen's motions to compel.
The Court declines to impose Plaintiff's requested monetary
sanction of $100,000, because the Plaintiff has not demonstrated
that it is connected to the discovery misconduct at issue, or the
reasonable expenses incurred by the Plaintiff because of the
misconduct.
In April 2018, the Plaintiff1 Rick Larsen sued Defendant High 5
Games, alleging violations of state law and seeking certification
of a class of all persons in Washington who bought and lost virtual
coins playing H5G's games.
The litigation is now in its seventh year, and a damages trial
begins next month after this Court found that H5G is liable to the
Class.
PTT operates as an independent casino games provider.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=X9XMA3 at no extra
charge.[CC]
QUALCOMM INC: Parties Seek to Extend Class Cert Filing to March 10
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANTONIO PEREZ-CRUET,
individually and as a representative of a class of participants and
beneficiaries on behalf of the Qualcomm Incorporated Employee
Savings and Retirement Plan, v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED and QUALCOMM
INCORPORATED US RETIREMENT COMMITTEE, Case No.
3:23-cv-01890-AGS-MMP (S.D. Cal.), the Parties ask the Court to
enter an order that Plaintiff's time within which to file a motion
for class certification shall be extended to March 10, 2025.
The Defendants will have up to and including April 10, 2025, to
file any response to Plaintiff's motion for class certification and
Plaintiff will have up to and including May 1, 2025, to file any
reply in support of that motion.
All other deadlines set forth in the Oct. 1, 2024, Scheduling Order
shall remain unchanged.
On Oct. 16, 2023, the Plaintiff filed the class action complaint in
this matter asserting putative class action claims against
Defendants under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
("ERISA") challenging the allocation of forfeited employer
contributions in the Qualcomm Incorporated Employee Savings and
Retirement Plan.
On Oct. 11, 2024, the Defendants began a rolling production of
documents responsive to Plaintiff’s written discovery.
Qualcomm engages in the development and commercialization of
foundational technologies for the wireless industry worldwide.
A copy of the Parties' motion dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tHEHcc at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew B. Hayes, Esq.
Kye D. Pawlenko, Esq.
HAYES PAWLENKO LLP
1414 Fair Oaks Avenue, Unit 2B
South Pasadena, CA 91030
Telephone: (626) 808-4357
E-mail: mhayes@helpcounsel.com
kpawlenko@helpcounsel.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeremy P. Blumenfeld, Esq.
Jennifer B. Zargarof, Esq.
Samson Huang, Esq.
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
101 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10178-0060
QUOTEWIZARD.COM: Bid to Reopen Discovery in Manthan Suit Tossed
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mantha v. Quotewizard.com,
LLC, Case No. 1:19-cv-12235 (D. Mass., Filed Oct. 29, 2019), the
Hon. Judge Leo T. Sorokin entered an order denying Defendant's
motion to re-open discovery:
Scheduling deadlines may be modified only for good cause and with
the Judge's consent. The Defendant fails to make this showing for
the reasons explained in the Opposition.
In addition, the Defendant could have (1) sought this information
during discovery, or (2) upon receiving the expert report from
Plaintiff in September 2023.
The Defendant did neither. Instead, Defendant elected to litigate
other discovery issues and class certification before deciding to
seek to reopen discovery. Moreover, the discovery Defendant seeks
both its main and alternative request far exceed the scope of
discovery ordinarily permitted under the Federal Rules.
Also pending is Plaintiff's motion for order to approve the notice
plan. It proposes reasonable efforts to accomplish the best notice
that is practicable under the circumstances.
The nature of suit states Other Statutory Actions.
QuoteWizard.com provides online insurance services.[CC]
REAL NEW YORK: General Pre-Trial Management Order Entered
----------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as KENNETH SALE v. REAL NEW
YORK, LLC, Case No. 1:24-cv-06070-JHR-GWG (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon.
Judge Gabriel Gorenstein entered an order for general pre-trial
purposes:
-- All pre-trial applications, including those relating to
scheduling and discovery, shall be made to the undersigned
(except motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings,
for injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class
certification).
-- All applications must comply with this Court's Individual
Practices, which are available through the Clerk's Office or
at: https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-gabriel-w-gorenstein
-- The parties should write to the Court at any time that they
wish to participate in Courtsponsored mediation.
-- All fact and expert discovery must be initiated in time to be
concluded by the deadline for that particular type of
discovery as set forth in Docket No. 28.
-- Discovery motions -- that is, any application pursuant to
Rules 26 through 37 or 45 -- not only must comply with par.
2.A. of the Court's Individual Practices but also must be made
promptly after the cause for such a motion arises. In
addition, absent extraordinary circumstances no such
application will be considered if made later than 30 days
prior to the close of discovery. Untimely applications will be
denied.
-- Any application for an extension of the time limitations with
respect to any deadlines in this matter must be made as soon
as the cause for the extension becomes known to the party
making the application and must be made in accordance with ¶
1.E of the Court's Individual Practices.
Real New York is a full-service real estate company.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=CYIke9 at no extra
charge.[CC]
RESHAPE LIFESCIENCES: M&A Investigates Proposed Merger With Vyome
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Monteverde & Associates PC (the "M&A Class Action Firm"),
headquartered at the Empire State Building in New York City, is
investigating:
-- ReShape Lifesciences Inc. (Nasdaq: RSLS), relating to the
proposed merger with Vyome Therapeutics, Inc. Under the terms of
the agreement, ReShape and Vyome will combine in an all-stock
transaction, with ReShape stockholders owning approximately 11.1%
of the combined company.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/reshape-lifesciences-inc-rsls/. It
is free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- 180 Degree Capital Corp. (Nasdaq: TURN), relating to the
proposed merger with Mount Logan Capital Inc. Under the terms of
the agreement, the estimated post-merger shareholder ownership
would be approximately 40% for current 180 Degree Capital
shareholders.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/180-degree-capital-corp-turn/. It is
free and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- Redwire Corporation (NYSE: RDW), relating to the proposed
merger with Edge Autonomy Ultimate Holdings, LP. Under the terms of
the agreement, Redwire will acquire Edge Autonomy using $150M in
cash and $775M in shares of Redwire common stock.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/redwire-corporation-rdw/. It is free
and there is no cost or obligation to you.
-- NeueHealth, Inc. (NYSE: NEUE), relating to the proposed merger
with New Enterprise Associates. Under the terms of the agreement,
holders of NeueHealth common stock will receive $7.33 per share in
cash.
Click link for more
https://monteverdelaw.com/case/neuehealth-inc-neue/. It is free and
there is no cost or obligation to you.
NOT ALL LAW FIRMS ARE THE SAME. Before you hire a law firm, you
should talk to a lawyer and ask:
1. Do you file class actions and go to Court?
2. When was the last time you recovered money for
shareholders?
3. What cases did you recover money in and how much?
About Monteverde & Associates PC
Our firm litigates and has recovered money for shareholders…and
we do it from our offices in the Empire State Building. We are a
national class action securities firm with a successful track
record in trial and appellate courts, including the U.S. Supreme
Court.
No company, director or officer is above the law. If you own common
stock in any of the above listed companies and have concerns or
wish to obtain additional information free of charge, please visit
our website or contact Juan Monteverde, Esq. either via e-mail at
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com or by telephone at (212) 971-1341.
Contact:
Juan Monteverde, Esq.
MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
The Empire State Building
350 Fifth Ave. Suite 4740
New York, NY 10118
United States of America
jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com
Tel: (212) 971-1341 [GN]
SHIVJI KRUPA: Cheli Sues Over Facilities' Noncompliance of ADA
--------------------------------------------------------------
CHARLENE CHELI, an Individual Plaintiff v. SHIVJI KRUPA LLC, a New
Jersey Limited Liability Company, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00275
(D.N.J., January 10, 2025) is a class action seeking for injunctive
relief, damages, attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Among other things, the Defendant's designated accessible parking
area in its property leads to improper curb ramps which contains
excessive sloping, abrupt changes in level, and lack level landing
areas. The Defendant's property also failed to ensure that their
reservation services include the accessibility information
necessary for disabled people to enjoy the services as fully as
non-disabled people.
Shivji Krupa LLC owns and operates the hotel known as Day's Inn,
which is located at 1001 W Landis Ave, Vineland, NJ. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jon G. Shadinger Jr., Esq.
Shadinger Law, LLC
2220 N. East Ave
Vineland, NJ 08360
Telephone: (609) 319-5399
E-mail: js@shadingerlaw.com
SP PLUS: Carter Sues Over Wage and Hour Law Violations
------------------------------------------------------
RASHAAN CARTER, for himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. SP PLUS CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00312
(N.D. Ill., January 10, 2025) accuses the Defendant of violating
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act
of 1968.
The Plaintiff worked as a full-time valet parker and valet manager
for Defendant at several hotel and casino locations in and around
Philadelphia, PA from February 2023 to August 2024. The Defendant
typically paid Plaintiff for a scheduled 40-hour workweek despite
routinely permitting, requiring, and/or suffering him to work 45-48
hours per week. In addition, the Defendant maintained standardized,
company-wide policies, procedures, and systems that do not keep
accurate, contemporaneous records of its valet parkers' and valet
managers’ actual work time for payroll purposes, says the suit.
SP Plus Corporation is a parking management solutions company
headquartered in Chicago, IL. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James B. Zouras, Esq.
Teresa M. Becvar, Esq.
STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLC
222 W. Adams Street, Suite 2020
Chicago, IL 60606
Telephone: (312) 233-1550
E-mail: jzouras@stephanzouras.com
tbecvar@stephanzouras.com
- and -
David J. Cohen, Esq.
STEPHAN ZOURAS LLC
604 Spruce Street
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Telephone: (215) 873-4836
E-mail: dcohen@stephanzouras.com
STRONGHOLD DIGITAL: $4.75MM Settlement to be Heard on April 11
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. on Jan. 20 announced that the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York has
approved the following announcement of a proposed class action
settlement that would benefit purchasers of Class A common stock of
Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. (NASDAQ: SDIG):
SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY OF CLASS ACTION, PROPOSED
SETTLEMENT, AND MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES
To: All persons and entities who or which purchased or otherwise
acquired Stronghold Digital Mining, Inc. Class A common stock on or
before December 20, 2021, pursuant and/or traceable to the Offering
Documents issued in connection with the Class A common stock
initial public offering in October 2021, and were damaged thereby
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules
of Civil Procedure and an Order of the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York, that Class Representative
Allegheny County Employees Retirement System, on behalf of itself
and all other members of the Settlement Class; and Stronghold
Digital Mining, Inc., Gregory A. Beard, William B. Spence, B. Riley
Securities, Inc., Cowen and Company, LLC, Tudor, Pickering, Holt &
Co. Securities, LLC, D.A. Davidson & Co., Compass Point Research &
Trading, LLC, and Northland Securities, Inc., and Ricardo R. A.
Larroude,, have reached a proposed settlement of the claims in the
above-captioned class action and related claims in the amount of
$4,750,000 and 25 Bitcoins.
A hearing will be held before the Honorable Ronnie Abrams on April
11 2025, at 3:00 p.m. in Courtroom 1506 at the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York, Thurgood
Marshall United States Courthouse, 40 Foley Square, New York, NY
10007 to determine whether the Court should: (i) approve the
proposed Settlement as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (ii) dismiss
the Action with prejudice as provided in the Stipulation and
Agreement of Settlement, dated November 6, 2024; (iii) approve the
proposed Plan of Allocation for distribution of the proceeds of the
Settlement to Settlement Class Members; and (iv) approve Lead
Counsel for an award of attorneys' fees of up to one-third plus
interest of the Settlement Amount, reimbursement of litigation
expenses of not more than $250,000, plus interest, and a service
payment of no more than $10,000 to Lead Plaintiff. The Court may
change the date of the Settlement Hearing, or hold it remotely,
without providing another notice. You do NOT need to attend the
Settlement Hearing to receive a distribution from the Net
Settlement Fund.
IF YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE SETTLEMENT CLASS, YOUR RIGHTS WILL BE
AFFECTED BY THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AND YOU MAY BE ENTITLED TO A
MONETARY PAYMENT. If you have not yet received a long-form Notice
and Claim Form, you may obtain copies by visiting the website for
the Settlement, www.strategicclaims.net/Stronghold, or by
contacting the Claims Administrator at:
Stronghold Securities Litigation
c/o Strategic Claims Services
P.O. Box 230
600 N. Jackson Street, Suite 205
Media, PA 19063
info@strategicclaims.net
866-274-4004
Inquiries, other than requests for information about the status of
a claim, may also be made to Lead Counsel:
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
Jonathan Stern, Esq.
275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
New York, NY 10016
www.rosenlegal.com
212-686-1060
If you are a Settlement Class Member, to be eligible to share in
the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must submit a
Claim Form postmarked or submitted online no later than April 4,
2025. If you are a Settlement Class Member and do not timely submit
a valid Claim Form, you will not be eligible to share in the
distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, but you will nevertheless
be bound by all judgments or orders entered by the Court, whether
favorable or unfavorable.
If you are a Settlement Class Member and wish to exclude yourself
from the Settlement Class, you must submit a written request for
exclusion in accordance with the instructions in the long-form
Notice so that it is received no later than March 21, 2025. If you
properly exclude yourself from the Settlement Class, you will not
be bound by any judgments or orders entered by the Court, whether
favorable or unfavorable, but you will not be eligible to share in
the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund.
Any objections to the proposed Settlement, Lead Counsel's Fee and
Expense Application, and/or the proposed Plan of Allocation must be
filed with the Court, either by mail or in person, and be mailed to
counsel for the parties in accordance with the instructions in the
long-form Notice, so that they are received no later than March 21
2025.
PLEASE DO NOT CONTACT THE COURT, DEFENDANTS, OR DEFENDANTS' COUNSEL
REGARDING THIS NOTICE
DATED: DECEMBER 16, 2024
BY ORDER OF THE COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
STUBHUB INC: Issues Ticket Refunds Amid Class Action Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Jankowski, writing for Willamette Week, reports that StubHub
issued a full refund to Portlander Amy Hoffman after WW reported on
her class action lawsuit against the ticket reselling platform.
Hoffman sought a refund Oct. 30 immediately after being informed
that tickets she purchased to see Wicked at Keller Auditorium had
already been scanned by other patrons. Though she was initially
promised one, Hoffman described a frustrating situation in which
her credit card company and the Oregon Department of Justice hadn't
been able to get a refund of $446.79 after having to buy new
tickets for the show.
Michael Fuller, Hoffman's attorney, says he received a call from a
"high-powered East Coast attorney" after WW's article was
published, but before StubHub had been formally served with his
client's lawsuit. Though he says the attorney tried to chalk up
Hoffman's predicament as a one-off due to "a dropped ball," Fuller
says the attorney implied that StubHub has a system to flag fraud
claims as fraudulent themselves. In essence, Fuller tells WW he was
told that Hoffman's claim of bogus tickets may have been flagged as
bogus, which seemingly contradicted the claim of simple human
error.
The class action lawsuit is not yet resolved simply because
Hoffman's refund was processed. Though he said StubHub's attorney
indicated that interest and attorney fees are likely forthcoming,
Fuller requires that the ticket reselling platform swear under oath
that no other Oregon customers are awaiting fraud refunds. He said
this could come at any time from days to months. Meanwhile, state
Rep. Pam Marsh's bill to regulate ticket reselling in Oregon awaits
a hearing in Salem.
Hoffman's refund came in time for her birthday, which she said was
"a good gift." She thanked Fuller and his team for their work, and
also believes that WW's reporting resulted in her refund. Hoffman
says her cousin is still monitoring the Book of Mormon tickets she
purchased through StubHub.
"My hope is that people will see this and feel like they can speak
up for themselves," Hoffman says. "Knowledge is power, so
definitely do your research before you purchase tickets for
anything, ever. Don't be afraid to speak up if you feel like you
are against all the odds. [Fuller's team] were my little guardian
angels through all this, and if I didn't reach out to them, I
probably just would have been dismissed like I assume other people
have, even though [StubHub] said I was a one-off." [GN]
TENG TEA: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Liz Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------
PEDRO LIZ, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Teng Tea, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00248
(S.D.N.Y., January 10, 2025) is a civil rights action against Teng
Tea for their failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate
their website, https://www.teadrunk.com, to be fully accessible to
and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with
Disabilities Act, the New York State Human Rights Law, and the New
York City Human Rights Law.
The complaint alleges that the website contains access barriers
that prevent free and full use by Plaintiff and blind persons using
keyboards and screen-reading software. These barriers are pervasive
and include, but are not limited to: inaccurate landmark structure,
inadequate focus order, ambiguous link texts, unclear labels for
interactive elements, and the requirement that transactions be
performed solely with a mouse, says the suit.
The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in
Teng Tea's policies, practices, and procedures so that its website
will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired
consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to
compensate Class members for having been subjected to unlawful
discrimination.
Teng Tea, LLC operates the website that offers consumers with
access to an array of goods and services, including, the ability to
view high quality loose leaf tea, tea classes, tea tasting and
events, teaware and merchandise, corporate and private tea
events.[BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gabriel A. Levy, Esq.
GABRIEL A. LEVY, P.C.
1129 Northern Blvd, Suite 404
Manhasset, NY 11030
Telephone: (347) 941-4715
E-mail: Glevyfirm@gmail.com
TOEZPECUNIA INC: Lemon Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Forced Tip Sharing
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NOVIA LEMON, STELLA MORGAN, LAURA PALMER, MELISSA SPICER, and
MADISON HILL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. TOEZPECUNIA, INC. dba SWEET ILLUSIONS, an
Oregon Corporation; SANDRA ROSSI, an individual; SONIA "JASMINE"
RAHIMI, an individual, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 6:25-cv-00048-MTK (D. Ore., January 10, 2025)
arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiffs seek damages due to Defendants evading the mandatory
minimum wage provisions of the FLSA, illegally absconding with
Plaintiffs' tips and demanding illegal kickbacks including in the
form of "House Fees."
These causes of action arise from Defendants' willful actions while
Plaintiffs, at various times, were employed by Defendants from 2021
to recently. During Plaintiffs' time being employed by Defendants,
they were denied minimum wage payments as part of Defendants'
scheme to classify Plaintiffs and other dancers/entertainers as
"independent contractors," says the suit.
Toezpecunia, Inc. operates an adult-oriented entertainment facility
in Eugene, Oregon.[BN]
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
S. Amanda Marshall, Esq.
S. AMANDA MARSHALL LLC
4545 SW Angel Avenue, Suite 104
Beaverton, OR 97005
Telephone: (503) 472-7190
E-mail: amanda@maclaw.com
- and -
John P. Kristensen, Esq.
KRISTENSEN LAW GROUP
120 Santa Barbara St., Suite C9
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Telephone: (805) 837-2000
E-mail: john@kristensen.law
- and -
Jarrett L. Ellzey, Esq.
EKSM, LLP
4200 Monroe Street
Houston, TX 77006
Telephone: (713) 244-6363
E-mail: jellzey@eksm.com
TOYOTA INDUSTRIES: Bid for Class Certification Due June 5, 2026
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as BROADMOOR LUMBER & PLYWOOD
CO., et al., v. TOYOTA INDUSTRIES CORPORATION, et al., Case No.
3:24-cv-06640-JSC (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Jacqueline Scott
Corley entered an order imposing the following class certification
deadlines as follows:
-- Plaintiffs' amended complaint: Dec. 23, 2024
-- Defendants' response to amended Jan. 31, 2025
complaint:
-- Plaintiffs' opposition to motion March 7, 2025
to dismiss:
-- Defendants' reply brief: March 28, 2025
-- Motions to dismiss hearing: April 24, 2025
-- Written discovery substantial Jan. 9, 2026
completion:
-- Motion for class certification: June 5, 2026
-- Plaintiffs' class cert. Rule June 5, 2026
26(a)(2) disclosures:
-- Class certification opposition: Aug. 7, 2026
-- Defendants' class cert. Rule Aug. 7, 2026
26(a)(2) disclosures:
-- Class certification replies: Sept. 11, 2026
-- Class certification hearing: Oct. 8, 2026
Toyota is a Japanese machine maker.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=AI3rRE at no extra
charge.[CC]
TYCON MEDICAL: Bullock Sues Over Unprotected Sensitive Information
------------------------------------------------------------------
APRIL BULLOCK, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. TYCON MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 2:25-cv-00021 (E.D. Va., January 10, 2025) arises from
Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard sensitive
information of its patients.
According to the complaint, the Defendant's investigation revealed
that certain personal information was accessed and acquired without
authorization by an unknown actor on or about October 17, 2024.
However, the Defendant only began sending Plaintiff and other data
breach victims a Notice of Data Security Incident letter. In
addition, the Defendant's letter failed to provide the identity of
the cybercriminals who perpetrated this data breach, the details of
the root cause of the data breach, the vulnerabilities exploited,
and the remedial measures undertaken to ensure such a breach does
not occur again, says the suit.
Headquartered in Norfolk, VA, Tycon Medical Systems, Inc. sells
medical equipment to its patients. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Lee A. Floyd, Esq.
Justin M. Sheldon, Esq.
BREIT BINIAZAN, PC
2100 East Cary Street, Suite 310
Richmond, VA 23223
Telephone: (804) 351-9040
Facsimile: (804) 351-9170
E-mail: Lee@bbtrial.com
Justin@bbtrial.com
- and -
David K. Lietz, Esq.
MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC
5335 Wisconsin Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20015-2052
Telephone: (866) 252-0878
Facsimile: (202) 686-2877
E-mail: dlietz@milberg.com
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: Jones Seeks to Modify March 11, 2021 Order
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARY JONES, through her
agent, on her own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, v. UNITED BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, Case No. 3:19-cv-06999-RS
(N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiff will move the Court on April 10, 2025,
pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(1)(C) to modify
the Court's March 11, 2021 order granting motion for class
certification.
The relief Plaintiff requests in this motion is an order:
(1) modifying the Court's order granting motion for class
certification, to (a) amend the class definition and (b)
certify the proposed Reprocessing Subclass defined as:
"Any member of the Class who incurred expenses for
residential treatment for which benefits were not paid,
except that the Reprocessing Subclass shall not include
Class members whose written notification of denial, as
reflected in UBH's records, (a) identifies a reason for
denying the request for coverage other than the Class
member's failure to satisfy UBH's 2017 LOCGs or a Coverage
Determination Guideline that incorporates the 2017 LOCGs,
and/or (b) specifies that the member's failure to satisfy
the applicable Guideline was based, even in part, on a
portion of the applicable Guideline that was unchallenged
in this action";
(2) appointing Plaintiff as representative for the Reprocessing
Subclass; and
(3) appointing Zuckerman Spaeder LLP and Psych-Appeal, Inc. as
Co-Lead Class Counsel for the Subclass.
The Plaintiff's motion is made pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil
Procedure 23(c)(1)(C) and 23(b)(3).
The Plaintiff "Mary Jones" (a pseudonym) brought this action on her
own behalf and on behalf of the now-certified Class seeking redress
for UBH's violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act
of 1974 ("ERISA").
United Behavioral was founded in 1996. The Company's line of
business includes providing management services on a contract and
fee basis.
A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available
from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=02tVOZ at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Meiram Bendat, Esq.
PSYCH-APPEAL, INC.
7 West Figueroa Street, Suite 300
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
Telephone: (310) 598-3690, x 101
Facsimile: (888) 975-1957
E-mail: mbendat@psych-appeal.com
- and -
Caroline E. Reynolds, Esq.
D. Brian Hufford, Esq.
Jason S. Cowart, Esq.
ZUCKERMAN SPAEDER LLP
1800 M St., NW, Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 778-1800
Facsimile: (202) 822-8106
E-mail: creynolds@zuckerman.com
dbhufford@zuckerman.com
jcowart@zuckerman.com
UNITED BEHAVIORAL: Settlement Deal in R.B. Suit Gets Initial Nod
----------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as R.B., individually, and on
behalf of all those similarly situated; v. United Behavioral
Health; Case No. 1:21-cv-00553-DNH-CFH (N.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge
David Hurd entered an order that:
The terms and conditions set forth in the Settlement Agreement
place the Settlement Agreement within the range of fair and
reasonable settlements, making appropriate further consideration at
a hearing held pursuant to notice to the Class.
The Court therefore preliminarily approves the Settlement Agreement
and directs the parties to perform and satisfy the terms and
conditions of the Settlement Agreement that are triggered.
A Final Fairness Hearing shall be held on Wed., May 28, 2025, at
1:00pm by telephone conference call.
The Court appoints RG/2 Claims Administration to serve as
Settlement Administrator.
United was founded in 1996. The Company's line of business includes
providing management services on a contract and fee basis.
A copy of the Court's order dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=9X3mwO at no extra
charge.[CC]
WALMART INC: Seeks Leave to File Declaration Under Seal
-------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit captioned as EDIE GOLIKOV, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. WALMART INC.,
Case No. 2:24-cv-08211-RGK-MAR (C.D. Cal.), the Defendant asks the
Court to enter an order granting its application for leave to file
under seal Walmart's declaration of Walmart's Avocado Oil Supplier
in support of opposition to motion for class certification, which
contains the identity of Walmart's Avocado Oil supplier, by
redacting only identification of the supplier and declarant.
Walmart and its supplier make great efforts to protect the
confidentiality of their supplier relationship because disclosure
of this information would lead to financial and competitive harm.
Recognizing the presumption in favor of public access to court
filings, Walmart has narrowly tailored the information subject to
sealing by publicly filing the declaration but redacting only the
supplier name information.
Walmart is a multi-channel retailer.
A copy of Defendant's motion dated Jan. 17, 2025, is available from
PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Prsoe8 at no extra
charge.[CC]
The Defendant is represented by:
Jacob M. Harper, Esq.
Heather F. Canner, Esq.
Joseph Elie-Meyers, Esq.
Peter K. Bae, Esq.
DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP
350 South Grand Avenue, 27th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 633-6800
Facsimile: (213) 633-6899
E-mail: jacobharper@dwt.com
heathercanner@dwt.com
josepheliemeyers@dwt.com
peterbae@dwt.com
WESTFIELD BANK: Settles Overdraft Fees Class Suit for $510,000
--------------------------------------------------------------
Namu Sampath, writing for MassLive, reports that a federal judge
has signed off on Westfield Bank paying roughly half a million
dollars to people affected by alleged double-dipping on overdraft
fees, according to court filings.
Last January, Matthew Levy and Anthony Rodoletto filed a
class-action lawsuit against the bank for an "abusive and predatory
practice" of charging overdraft fees on transactions, and then
charging insufficient funds fees on those same transactions, the
complaint said, which breached the bank's contract and violated the
Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act.
The plaintiffs, in their complaint, said they required refunds for
the improper charges.
After months of negotiations between the plaintiffs, the bank and a
neutral third-party, Westfield Bank has agreed to pay $510,000 in
monetary relief to Levy, Rondoletto and "all others similarly
situated," according to a court filing requesting a judge to sign
off on the settlement.
More than 8,830 members of the settlement class action lawsuit are
set to receive the payment from Westfield Bank, the document says.
"The reaction of the Settlement Class represents an overwhelmingly
positive response to the Settlement and only further justifies a
grant of final approval," the document said.
Newton attorney Ellen Tanowitz, who represented Levy and Rondoletto
and filed a memorandum for a judge's approval of the class action
settlement, could not be immediately reached for comment.
Judge Michael G. Mastroianni signed off on the settlement on Jan.
23.
Mastroianni emphasizes that his order was "not a finding of the
validity or invalidity of any of the claims asserted or defenses
raised in the action," it is simply the approval of the
settlement.
Both Levy and Rondoletto are set to receive $5,000 each for their
representation in the class-action filing. Their attorneys will
receive close to $170,000 in fees.
Attorney Alyssa Sussman of New York, who represented the bank,
could not be reached for comment. [GN]
YANKEE CANDLE: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Dalton Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------------
Julie Dalton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. The Yankee Candle Company, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 0:25-cv-00120 (D. Minn., January 10, 2025) accuses the
Defendant of violating the general non-discriminatory mandate and
the effective communication and auxiliary aids and services
requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act and asserts a
companion cause of action under the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
The Plaintiff found Defendant's website has a number of digital
barriers that deny screen-reader users like Plaintiff full and
equal access to important website content -- content Defendant
makes available to its sighted website users. Accordingly, the
Plaintiff now seeks a permanent injunction requiring a change in
Defendant's corporate policies to cause its online store to become,
and remain, accessible to individuals with visual disabilities; a
civil penalty payable to the state of Minnesota.
Headquartered in Atlanta, GA, The Yankee Candle Company, Inc. owns
and operates the website, www.yankeecandle.com, which offers
candles and accessories for sale including, but not limited to, jar
candles, tumblers, 3-Wick candles, studio candles, home fragrances,
room sprays, and more. [BN]
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Chad A. Throndset, Esq.
Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq.
Jason Gustafson, Esq.
80 S. 8th Street, Suite 900
Minneapolis, MN 55402
Telephone: (763) 515-6110
E-mail: chad@throndsetlaw.com
pat@throndsetlaw.com
jason@throndsetlaw.com
Asbestos Litigation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Awards $22MM for Negligence in J&J Talc Case
------------------------------------------------------------------
Travis Rodgers, writing for asbestos.com, reports that the jury in
a mesothelioma case against Johnson & Johnson attempted to award
plaintiff Michelle Felton $22 million even though J&J won the case.
Jessica Dean, Felton's attorney, said she had never seen a jury
award damages on an issue not meant to be considered before.
Michelle Felton is executor of the estate of Michaeleen Lee who
died of mesothelioma. Lee used J&J's talcum powder for decades. The
suit alleged the talc was contaminated with asbestos.
While J&J achieved a victory in the case, the jury members
indicated on their verdict slip that there was negligence on the
company's part. When asked "Were any of the following entities
negligent?" the jury checked "yes" for J&J.
When asked, "Was the negligence of any entity below a factual cause
of any harm to Michaeleen Lee?" the jury checked "no." The jury
also didn't fill out the "percentage of fault" for "factually
causing harm to Michaeleen Lee."
The jury did answer "yes" to question 6, however. It asks if the
deceased relied "on any statement made by Johnson & Johnson, to
conceal or omit material information about the safety of the
product at issue as proven by clear and convincing evidence."
The jury didn't feel J&J's "negligence" was "a factual cause of any
harm to Michaeleen Lee." But they did respond "yes" when asked if
"Johnson & Johnson's conduct in this case warrants a finding of
Punitive Damages."
The verdict slip concludes with question 10 that asks the amount of
punitive damages they recommend be awarded to the plaintiff. The
jury members wrote in "$22 million." But because they'd found in
favor of J&J on the issue of factual harm, the jury wasn't meant to
fill in question 10.
*********
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 ***