251031.mbx

251031.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Friday, October 31, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 218 Headlines 3M COMPANY: Crowder Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina 3M COMPANY: Harris Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina 3M COMPANY: Minton Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina 60TH STREET RESTAURANT: Dharry Sues Over Discrimination on Premises 7−ELEVEN: Class Scheduling Conference Set in Pop Mart Lawsuit A & M PROPERTIES: Pardo Sues Over Discriminative Property ABBOTT CARDIOVASCULAR: Romo Suit Removed to N.D. California ACADIA HEALTHCARE: Bid to Stay Hamm Class Action Tossed AHLSTROM NA: Crawford Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA, WWPCL ALMA REALTY CORP: Estevez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages AMAZON LOGISTICS: Rigby Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Oberstar Suit Removed to D. Colorado AMEDISYS HOLDING: Baucom Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages AMERICAN AIRLINES: John Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas AMERICAN COLLOID: Edwards Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA AMERICAN EXPRESS: Underpays Customer Care Representatives, Lee Says AMERICAN EXPRESS: Wins Antitrust Suit over Merchant Fees ANTHONY MARTIN MILLS: Torres Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. APRO LLC: Lain Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ARAMARK SERVICES: Adams Suit Removed to N.D. California ARTCLASS LLC: Diouf Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. AT&T MOBILITY: Sample Suit Removed to C.D. California AUDUBON FIELD: Hardy Suit Transferred to N.D. New York AUM ASHANTI AUM: Brown Sues Over Discrimination on Premises AUTOMAXX OF ARBERDEEN: Weatherford Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Ill. BATTERIES PLUS: Demaio Suit Removed to S.D. Florida BBG INC: Bittan Suit Transferred to N.D. Texas BCI ACRYLIC: Hoffman TCPA Suit Transferred to W.D. Washington BENEFICIENT COMPANY: Settlement Reached in Bayati Suit BENWORTH CAPITAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Eckard Says BLOCKERS FURNITURE: Evans Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website CAMPERS INN: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Marshall Alleges CAPSTONE LOGISTICS: Alamillo Suit Removed to C.D. California CARMAX INC: Glass Suit Removed to C.D. California CATALENT INC: Class Briefing Schedule Dates Extended CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS: Randle Suit Removed to E.D. California CFX LABS INC: Welsh Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Illinois CLAREMONT CLUB: Nicholson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. CONSERVICE LLC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to Dec. 15 COOPERFRIEDMAN ELECTRIC: Settlement in Clark Suit Gets Final Nod CSX CORP: Faces Consolidated Antitrust Suit over Fuel Surcharge DAILY CRUNCH INC: Moran Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website DELTA AIR LINES: Valdovinos Suit Removed to W.D. Washington DELTA AIR: Allowed Leave to Leave to File Opposition Under Seal DEXCOM INC: Grisoli Sues Over Defective Glucose Monitoring System DISA GLOBAL: Faces Guy Suit Over Unfair Background Check DISCORD INC: Faces Nguyen Suit Over Unprotected Personal Info DISCORD INC: Fails to Safeguard Personal Info, Shah Says DISCOUNT TIRE CO: Hutton Suit Removed to W.D. Washington DISNEY WORLDWIDE: C.R. Suit Removed to C.D. California DIVERSIFIED HEALTH: Jackson Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania DJI TECHNOLOGY: Smith Sues Over Defective Cameras DUKE UNIVERSITY: Class Settlement in Franklin Suit Gets Initial OK EDDIE BAUER: Parra Suit Removed to C.D. California ELEVATE RECOVERY: Christensen Files Suit in Fla. Cir. Ct. ENSOFTEK INC: Ebner Sues Over Failure to Secure Personal Info EOSSO BROTHERS: Underpays Paving Laborers, Torres Suit Says ESTEE LAUDER: Faces Dawkins Suit Over Illegal Data Trackers ETHOS MANAGEMENT: Bricker Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages EUSD BOARD: Court Grants Class Certification in "Mirabelli" EVOLVE BANK & TRUST: Felton Suit Transferred to D. Colorado FEDEX GROUND: Fails to Pay Delivery Drivers' OT Wages Under FLSA FEDEX GROUND: Plaintiffs Allowed Leave to File Amended Complaint FOND DU LAC COUNTY: Zimmerman Sues Unpaid Overtime Compensation GIUSEPPE PAMPENA: Isaacson Suit Transferred to S.D. New York HAIRMAX INTERNATIONAL: Garcia Renewal Suit Removed to S.D. Calif. HALO INNOVATIONS: Class Settlement in Bender Gets Final Nod HARCROS CHEMICALS: Faces Tucker Class Suit in Kansas Fed. Court HUMANGOOD AFFORDABLE: Khanlaryan Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages HYWIN HOLDINGS: Settlement Reached in Perrier Suit IMC GLOBAL LLC: Mackey Suit Removed to S.D. Florida JOHNSON CONTROLS: Kaufman Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. JPMORGAN CHASE: Normandin Sues Over Interest Rate-Fixing Conspiracy KKC AUTO: Zaragoza Suit Seeks Overtime Wages Under FLSA, NYLL KOHL'S CORP: McCormick Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind L'OREAL USA: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Hicks Due July 28, 2026 LENOVO (UNITED STATES): Court Extends Response Deadline to Nov. 10 LIBERTY MUTUAL: Perez Sues Over Mismanaged 401k Retirement Plans LIVE NATION: Class Cert Bid Filing in Witt Suit Due Oct. 9, 2026 LUCID SOFTWARE: Lyons Balks at Illegal Use of Data Broker Software MEDITERRANEAN MAISON: Ventre Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages META PLATFORMS: A.A. Suit Removed to N.D. California MICHAEL MICHAUD: Lopez Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind MISTR INC: Faces C.T. Suit Over Disclosure of Private Info MY REALTY GROUP: Faces Mokled Suit Over Unwanted Text Messages NATIONAL BAR: J.L. Turner Files Suit Over 2025 Board Elections NEWCOLD SEATTLE: Ehresman Seeks Unpaid Wages Under WARN Act NISSAN NORTH AMERICA: Azar Sues Over Defective Vehicles NLU PRODUCTS: Porcelli Suit Removed to S.D. Florida NORCO INC: Easa Suit Removed to W.D. Washington NORDSTROM INC: Lee Sues Over False or Misleading Email Marketing NORTHERN WOLVES: Castro Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages OTB ACQUISITION: Illegally Uses Data Broker Software, Kishnani Says PANDA EXPRESS: Chen Class Suit Removed to W.D. Wash. PATRIOT PROPERTY: Cheng Files TCPA Suit in S.D. New York PATROL SOLUTIONS: Barandiaran Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. PNC FINANCIAL: Faces Blunt Suit Over Unprotected Personal Info PODS ENTERPRISES: Hutton Suit Removed to W.D. Washington POSSIBLE FINANCE: Faces Gage Over Predatory Lending Practices PREMISES CAPITAL: Redick Files TCPA Suit in E.D. California PREMIUM BRANDS: Hasselkus Suit Removed to C.D. California PRESS-SEAL: Aguilar Sues Over Failure to Include Overtime PRIME NOW LLC: Rabinovich Suit Removed to N.D. California PRIMELINK EXPRESS: Lewis Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. QUEST HOSPITALITY: Anich Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages RB GLOBAL INC: PS Bruckel Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois RB GLOBAL: Enterprise Lodging Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois RB GLOBAL: Strupp Trucking Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois REAM FRANCHISE: Plascencia Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California REGENCY GENERAL: Juarez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. RELIANT SERVICES: Morgenstein Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California RIDGE WALLET: Benson Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind SALESFORCE INC: Fails to Secure Sensitive Info, Espada Alleges SALESLOFT INC: Exposes Customers Personal Info, O'Donnell Says SALESLOFT INC: Fails to Secure Sensitive Data, Stevens Alleges SANSMARK INC: Quintana Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. SAUCE LLC: Trotti Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. SAVVY SLIDERS: Campbell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC: Cabezola-Perez Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime SHENZHEN SMOORE: B.Z. Suit Transferred to N.D. California SHENZHEN SMOORE: Rukeyser Suit Transferred to N.D. California SIMPLIFIED LABOR STAFFING: Byrd Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. SOCIAL GAMING: Faces Krivatch Suit Over Illegal Gambling Scheme SONDER HOLDINGS: Duffaydar Securities Suit Ongoing in CA Court SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SPECIALTY: Faces Lara Wage-and-Hour Suit SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: Lara Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: Tripp Seeks Minimum, OT Pay Under Labor Code SOUTHERN GRAPHICS: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Bust Claims SRI ELEVEN: Case Management Schedule Entered in Wells Fargo Suit STAFFING NETWORK: Ortega Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. STEVEN LABEL LLC: Cervantes Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. SUMMIT APPAREL: Cole ADA Suit Transferred to C.D. Illinois TAJ EXPRESS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Says TEKNI-PLEX INC: Faces Peckinpaugh Fraud Suit in E.D. Pa. THC – ORANGE COUNTY: Tjoa Suit Removed to C.D. California TOPIX PHARMACEUTICALS: Cole Files Suit in S.D. New York TRANSUNION LLC: Williams-Diggins Balks at Unprotected Personal Info U-HAUL CO: Watson-Ali Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. U-HAUL INTERNATIONAL: Barnett Suit Removed to C.D. California UNITED STATES: Faces Suit Over Syria's Nov. 21 TPS Termination UNITED STATES: Parole Comm. Continues Operation Amid Abolishment VICIOUS BISCUIT: Drummond Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website VIVID SEATS INC: Cheezum Suit Removed to D. Maryland VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Sargent Suit Removed to N.D. California WAKEFERN FOOD CORP: Schottenstein Suit Removed to S.D. New York WERTHEIMER & SONS: Drury Files Suit in N.J. Super. Ct. WESTJET AIRLINES: Willis Files Suit in S.D. California WILKES UNIVERSITY: Fails to Secure Personal, Health Info, Suit Says WISCONSIN PHYSICIANS: Boyd Sues Over Deprivation of Overtime XLCUSIVE TRADING: Alier Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation ZAVZA SEAL: Altamirano Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: States Ask Court to Review Brenntag Talc Ruling ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Cos. Has $1.45BB Reserves at Sept. 30 ********* 3M COMPANY: Crowder Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina --------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Steven Crowder, et al, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 3M Company, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-01428 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on Oct. 9, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-12925-RMG to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability. 3M -- http://www.3m.com/-- is an American multinational conglomerate operating in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Brett H. Hollett, Esq. Douglas Brett Turnbull, Esq. Zachary J. Peagler, Esq. TURNBULL, HOLCOMB & LEMOINE 2101 6th Ave N Ste. 1100 Birmingham, AL 35203 Phone: (205) 831-5040 Fax: (205) 848-6300 Email: bhollett@turnbullfirm.com bturnbull@turnbullfirm.com zpeagler@turnbullfirm.com 3M COMPANY: Harris Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina -------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Regina Harris, et al, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 3M Company, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-01429 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on Oct. 9, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-12924-RMG to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability. 3M -- http://www.3m.com/-- is an American multinational conglomerate operating in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Brett H. Hollett, Esq. Douglas Brett Turnbull, Esq. Zachary J. Peagler, Esq. TURNBULL, HOLCOMB & LEMOINE 2101 6th Ave N Ste. 1100 Birmingham, AL 35203 Phone: (205) 831-5040 Fax: (205) 848-6300 Email: bhollett@turnbullfirm.com bturnbull@turnbullfirm.com zpeagler@turnbullfirm.com 3M COMPANY: Minton Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina -------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Ronald Minton, Jr., et al, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 3M Company, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-01476 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on Oct. 10, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-12906-RMG to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Personal Inj. Prod. Liability. 3M -- http://www.3m.com/-- is an American multinational conglomerate operating in the fields of industry, worker safety, healthcare, and consumer goods.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gary A. Anderson, Esq. Gregory A. Cade, Esq. Kevin B. McKie, Esq. Yahn Eric Olson, esq. ENVIRONMENTAL LITIGATION GROUP PC 2160 Highland Avenue South Birmingham, AL 35205 Phone: (205) 328-9200 Fax: (205) 328-9206 Email: gary@elglaw.com GregC@elglaw.com kmckie@elglaw.com yolson@elglaw.com 60TH STREET RESTAURANT: Dharry Sues Over Discrimination on Premises ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jhapeth Dharry, and other similarly situated disabled individuals v. 60TH STREET RESTAURANT CORP., and P.T.Z. REALTY, L.L.C., Case No. 1:25-cv-08647 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought seeking equitable, injunctive, and declaratory relief; monetary and nominal damages; along with attorney's fees, costs, and expenses pursuant to: Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"); the New York City Human Rights Law ("NYCHRL"); and the New York State Human Rights Law ("NYSHRL") due to the Defendants' discrimination on their Premises. The Defendants' Premises is a commercial space as defined by the NYSHRL, and NYCHRL because, inter alia, a portion of the building and structure thereof used or intended to be used as a business, office, and commerce. On March 30, 2025, Plaintiff attempted to enter Defendants' Premises, a traditional Italian and New York-style restaurant known as "Patsy's Pizzeria." Plaintiff wanted to experience Patsy's classic coal-fired brick oven New York-style pizza, and other authentic Italian dishes and desserts. Defendants' Premises is less than 11.6 miles from Plaintiff's home and is at an approximate midpoint along the route Plaintiff regularly travels for ongoing medical treatments, and where he routinely stops to eat and take breaks. Because the existing barriers prevent access and restrict the paths of travel, such as 2 steps at the entrance, Plaintiff was unable to enter Defendants' Premises. Because the existing barriers prevent access and restrict the paths of travel, such as 2 steps at the entrance, Plaintiff was denied full and equal access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the commercial space and public accommodations within Defendants' Premises. The Defendants denying Plaintiff the opportunity to participate in and benefit from the services or accommodations offered within Defendants' Premises because of his disability has caused Plaintiff to suffer an injury in fact. The Plaintiff intends on immediately returning to Defendants' Premises once the barriers to access are removed and Defendants' Premises are ADA compliant. The Defendants' failure to comply with the ADA, NYSHRL, NYCHRL, et seq. impedes upon the rights of Plaintiff, and other similarly situated disabled individuals, to travel free of discrimination and independently access Defendants' Premises, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a paraplegic who uses a wheelchair for mobility. 60th Street Restaurant owns, leases, operates, maintains, and controls all, or the relevant portions, of Defendants' Premises.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bradly G. Marks, Esq. THE MARKS LAW FIRM, PC 155 E 55th Street, Suite 4H New York, NY 1002 Phone:(646) 770-3775 Fax: (646) 867-2639 Email: brad@markslawpc.com 7−ELEVEN: Class Scheduling Conference Set in Pop Mart Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as POP MART AMERICAS INC., et al., v. 7−ELEVEN, INC., et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-06555-MEMF-MBK (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong entered an order setting scheduling conference: Joint Rule 26(f) Report The Joint Rule 26(f) Report must be filed no later than seven (7) days after the meeting of counsel and fourteen (14) days before the Scheduling Conference. A short statement by each party, not to exceed two (2) pages, setting forth that party’s factual summary of the case, including the basis for any claims, counterclaims, or defenses. A statement of the specific basis for federal jurisdiction, including supplemental jurisdiction. If there is a federal question, cite the federal law, under which the claim arises. The provision shall apply in any case in which there is a claim, counterclaim, or crossclaim for misappropriation of trade secrets in violation of either the California Uniform Trade Secret Act (CUTSA) or Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). 7-Eleven is an American convenience store chain. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=pnsIEO at no extra charge.[CC] A & M PROPERTIES: Pardo Sues Over Discriminative Property --------------------------------------------------------- Nigel Frank De La Torre Pardo, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated v. A & M PROPERTIES OF THE GULFCOAST INC., and LEHIGH DISCOUNT LIQUOR, INC. D/B/A LEHIGH DISCOUNT LIQUOR, Case No. 2:25-cv-00944 (M.D. Fla., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought for injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, litigation expenses, and costs pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA") as a result of the Defendant's discrimination against the individual Plaintiff by denying him access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations of the Commercial Property and business located therein, as prohibited by the ADA. Although over 33 years have passed since the effective date of Title III of the ADA, Defendant has yet to make their facilities accessible to individuals with disabilities. Congress provided commercial businesses one and a half years to implement the Act. The effective date was January 26, 1992. In spite of this abundant lead-time and the extensive publicity the ADA has received since 1990, Defendant has continued to discriminate against people who is disabled in ways that block them from access and use of Defendant's property and the businesses therein. The Plaintiff found the Commercial Property and the businesses named herein located within the Commercial Property to be rife with ADA violations. The Plaintiff encountered architectural barriers at the Commercial Property, and businesses named herein located within the Commercial Property, and wishes to continue his patronage and use of each of the premises. The Plaintiff has encountered architectural barriers that are in violation of the ADA at the subject Commercial Property and businesses located within the Commercial Property. The barriers to access at the Commercial Property, and businesses within, have each denied or diminished Plaintiff's ability to visit the Commercial Property and have endangered his safety in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff has a realistic, credible, existing and continuing threat of discrimination from the Defendants' non-compliance with the ADA with respect to the described commercial property and restaurant, including but not necessarily limited to the allegations of this Complaint. Plaintiff has reasonable grounds to believe that he will continue to be subjected to discrimination at the commercial property, in violation of the ADA. The Defendants have discriminated against the individual Plaintiff by denying him access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the goods, services, facilities, privileges, advantages and/or accommodations of the commercial property, as prohibited by the ADA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff uses a wheelchair to ambulate. A & M PROPERTIES OF THE GULFCOAST INC., owns, operates and/or oversees the commercial property.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony J. Perez, Esq. ANTHONY J. PEREZ LAW GROUP, PLLC 7950 w. Flagler Street, Suite 104 Miami, FL 33144 Phone: (786) 361-9909 Facsimile: (786) 687-0445 Email: ajp@ajperezlawgroup.com Secondary Email: jr@ajperezlawgroup.com ABBOTT CARDIOVASCULAR: Romo Suit Removed to N.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Helen Romo, individually, and on behalf of all other similarly situated, as well as fellow Aggrieved Employees v. ABBOTT CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS, INC., a California corporation; DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Case No. 25CV473960 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Santa Clara, to the United States District Court for Northern District of California on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-08935. The Plaintiff alleges nine causes of action against Abbott: failure to pay all earned wages; failure to pay all earned overtime wages; failure to permit paid 10 minute rest periods; failure to provide 30 minute meal periods; failure to timely pay all earned wages and compensation; failure to pay all earned wages and compensation upon termination; failure to provide lawful wage statements; unlawful mandate for execution of release; and unfair business practices.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Michele J. Beilke, Esq. Julia Y. Trankiem, Esq. Alexander W. Simon, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 601 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3300 Los Angeles, CA 90017-5793 Phone: (213) 270-9600 Facsimile: (213) 270-9601 Email: mbeilke@seyfarth.com jtrankiem@seyfarth.com asimon@seyfarth.com ACADIA HEALTHCARE: Bid to Stay Hamm Class Action Tossed ------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as AMY HAMM, ET AL., v. ACADIA HEALTHCARE CO., INC., ET AL., Case No. 2:20-cv-01515-SM-DPC (E.D. La.), the Hon. Judge Susie Morgan entered an order denying the Defendants' motion to stay. The Court is not persuaded the Defendants will suffer irreparable harm absent a stay. As the Plaintiffs note, the cases Defendants cite for the proposition that unnecessary pre-trial litigation constitutes irreparable harm involved much larger classes than the one in this case. Furthermore, this case is five years old, and a stay further increases the risk of witnesses' memories failing them when litigation resumes. Considering these factors, the Court finds that proceeding with this case will not cause Defendants irreparable harm, while its delay would prejudice Plaintiffs. On Sept. 13, 2024, the Court issued an order and reasons finding the Plaintiffs had satisfied the requirements of Rule 23(a) but deferred determination of the remaining portions of the Motion to Certify. On Sept. 2, 2025, after supplemental briefing, the Court issued an order and reasons granting the Motion to Certify in its entirety and defining the class as: "All current and former hourly, non-exempt Mental Health Technicians ("MHTs"), Behavioral Health Associates ("BHAs"), nurses, non-exempt therapists, and intake coordinators employed by any Defendants at the River Place Behavioral Health Hospital at any time until the date of the Court's order granting certification." The Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint asserting claims against the Defendants, as parent companies of River Place, alleging the Defendants violated Section 207 of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") by failing to properly compensate their employees for work performed. The Plaintiff Amy Hamm worked as a nurse at Red River Hospital in Wichita Falls, Texas, from February 2015 to December 2019, and then at River Place Behavioral Health in LaPlace, Louisiana (“River Place”), from December 2019 to September 2020. The Plaintiff Joye Wilson worked as a mental health technician at River Place from 2018 to January 2020. Acadia is an American provider of for-profit behavioral healthcare services. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ARVnt9 at no extra charge.[CC] AHLSTROM NA: Crawford Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA, WWPCL --------------------------------------------------------------- SEAN CRAWFORD, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. AHLSTROM NA SPECIALTY SOLUTIONS LLC, , Case No. 1:25-cv-01597-BBC (E.D. Wisc., Oct. 20, 2025) seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid straight time (regular) and/or agreed upon wages, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees, declaratory and/or injunctive relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws. According to the complaint, the Defendant operated an unlawful compensation system that deprived and failed to compensate Plaintiff and all other current and former hourly-paid, non-exempt employees for all hours worked and work performed each workweek, including at an overtime rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek, by: (1) shaving time (via electronic timeclock rounding) from Plaintiff's and all other hourly-paid, non-exempt employees' weekly timesheets for pre-shift and post-shift hours worked and/or work performed, to the detriment of said employees and to the benefit of Defendant, in violation of the FLSA and WWPCL; and (2) failing to include all forms of non-discretionary compensation, such as monetary bonuses, incentives, awards, and/or other rewards and payments, in said employees’ regular rates of pay for overtime calculation purposes, in violation of the FLSA and WWPCL. The Plaintiff and all other similarly situated are current and former hourly-paid, non-exempt employees of the Defendant. Ahlstrom is a manufacturer of fiber-based products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James A. Walcheske, Esq. Scott S. Luzi, Esq. David M. Potteiger, Esq. WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC 235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240 Brookfield, WI 53005 Telephone: (262) 780-1953 Facsimile: (262) 565-6469 E-Mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com ALMA REALTY CORP: Estevez Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages --------------------------------------------------------- Angel Estevez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. ALMA REALTY CORP., Case No. 1:25-cv-08560 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 16, 2025), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the New York Labor Law ("NYLL"), that he and others similarly situated are entitled to recover from Defendant: unpaid wages, including overtime wages, due to time shaving, liquidated damages, and attorneys' fees and costs. The Plaintiff, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and Class Members were only ever paid for their first 40 hours of work in their workweek. The work hours of Plaintiff, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs, and Class Members that were beyond 40 in a workweek went uncompensated. For Plaintiff, who worked over 50 hours in a week, Defendant's unlawful policy resulted in over 10 hours of unpaid overtime per week of work. Plaintiff, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and Class members were similarly worked overtime hours for which no compensation was provided, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was hired to work for Defendant at one of its Buildings located in Queens, New York as a superintendent in April 2015. The Defendant is a real estate management company with properties under management ranging from residential, commercial, retail, and warehouse throughout New York State.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Kansao, Esq. JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC 825 Third Ave., Suite 2100 New York, NY 10022 Phone: (212) 227-5700 Email: robert@employeejustice.com AMAZON LOGISTICS: Rigby Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri ----------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Myeeshia Rigby, on behalf others similarly situated v. AMAZON LOGISTICS, INC., Case No. 25BU-CC01405 was removed from the Circuit Court of Buchanan County, Missouri, to the United States District Court for Western District of Missouri on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-06178-FJG. The Petition alleges three counts against Amazon, each of which allege that Amazon violated sections of the Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"). The Plaintiff's first count alleges that Amazon took "adverse action" against the Plaintiff and putative class members in violation of the FCRA. The Plaintiff's second count alleges that Amazon committed "authorization violations" against the Plaintiff and putative class members in violation of the FCRA. The Plaintiff's third and final count alleges that Amazon committed "certification violations" against Plaintiff and other putative class members, in violation of the FCRA.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Corey Franklin, Esq. FORD HARRISON LLP 7777 Bonhomme Ave., Suite 1710 St. Louis, MO 63105 Phone: 314.257.0301 Email: cfranklin@fordharrison.com AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Oberstar Suit Removed to D. Colorado --------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Michelle Oberstar, individually and on behalf of a class of all similarly situated persons v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES, LLC DBA AMAZON FLEX, Case No. 2025CV32207 was removed from the Eighteenth Judicial District, Arapahoe County, Colorado, to the United States District Court for District of Colorado on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03293. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant failed to pay certain wages due to employees under the Colorado Wage Claim Act. First, she claims that Defendant "failed to pay Plaintiff and Proposed Class Members at least minimum wage" for time allegedly spent "waiting to clock in before the start of each assigned shift." Second, she claims that Defendant failed to provide her and the putative class members with the "10-minute rest breaks to which they were entitled" and "failed to pay" for those missed breaks.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Sari M. Alamuddin Kevin F. Gaffney, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 110 North Wacker Drive, Suite 2800 Chicago, IL 60606-1511 Phone: 312-324-1000 Email: sari.alamuddin@morganlewis.com kevin.gaffney@morganlewis.com AMEDISYS HOLDING: Baucom Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages ----------------------------------------------------- Jessica Baucom, individually and for others similarly situated v. AMEDISYS HOLDING, L.L.C., Case No. 1:25-cv-05817-SEG (N.D. Ga., Oct. 9, 2025), is brought to recover unpaid wages and other damages from the Defendant in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"). The Plaintiff and the other Patient Care Employees regularly work more than 40 hours a week. But the Defendant does not pay the Plaintiff and its other Patient Care Employees premium overtime wages. Instead, the Defendant pays the Plaintiff and the other Patient Care Employees predetermined dollar amounts for completing assigned tasks, regardless of how much time completing each task requires, and the Defendant does not pay these employees premium overtime wages when they work in excess of 40 hours in a week. (the Defendant's "piece rate pay scheme"). The Defendant's piece rate pay scheme violates the FLSA by depriving the Plaintiff and the other Patient Care Employees of overtime premium wages of at least 1.5 times their regular rates of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek, says the complaint. The Plaintiff worked for Amedisys as a registered nurse (RN) from April 2023 through November 2024 based out of Amedisys's Lawrenceville, Georgia healthcare facility. Amedisys touts itself as "a leading provider of in-home healthcare, providing home health care, hospice care, palliative care and high acuity care to more than 465,000 patients each year" and operates in 38 states.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremy Stephens, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, 191 Peachtree Street, NE, Suite 4200 P.O. Box 57007 Atlanta, GA 30303-1007 Phone: (404) 965-1682 Email: jstephens@forthepeople.com - and - C. Ryan Morgan, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 20 N. Orange Ave., 15th Floor P.O. Box 4979 Orlando, FL 32802-4979 Phone: (407) 420-1414 Fax: (407) 245-3401 Email: RMorgan@forthepeople.com - and - Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: 713-352-1100 Facsimile: 713-352-3300 Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com AMERICAN AIRLINES: John Files Suit in Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Airlines Inc. The case is styled as Christopher John, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. American Airlines Inc., Case No. 251001153 (Pa. Ct. of Common Pleas, Philadelphia Cty., Oct. 9, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract. American Airlines, Inc. -- https://www.aa.com/homePage.do -- is a major airline in the United States headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter Winebrake, Esq. WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC 715 Twining Road, Suite 211 Dresher, PA 19025 Phone: (215) 884-2491 Email: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com AMERICAN COLLOID: Edwards Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------ STEVEN EDWARDS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. AMERICAN COLLOID COMPANY, Case No. 1:25-cv-01604 (E.D. Wis., Oct. 20, 2025) seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid straight time (regular) and/or agreed upon wages, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees, declaratory and/or injunctive relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws. According to the complaint, the Defendant operated an unlawful compensation system that deprived and failed to compensate Plaintiff and all other current and former hourly-paid, non-exempt employees for all hours worked and work performed each workweek, including at an overtime rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek, by: (1) shaving time (via electronic timeclock rounding) from Plaintiff's and all other hourly-paid, non-exempt employees' weekly timesheets for pre-shift and post-shift hours worked and/or work performed, to the detriment of said employees and to the benefit of Defendant, in violation of the FLSA and WWPCL; and (2) failing to include all forms of non-discretionary compensation, such as monetary bonuses, incentives, awards, and/or other rewards and payments, in said employees' regular rates of pay for overtime calculation purposes, in violation of the FLSA and WWPCL. The Defendant's failure to compensate its hourly paid, non-exempt employees for compensable work performed each workweek, including but not limited to at an overtime rate of pay, was intentional, willful, and violated federal law as set forth in the FLSA and state law as set forth in the WWPCL, says the suit. American Colloid, now part of Minerals Technologies Inc., is a major producer of bentonite clay and other specialty minerals, founded in 1927. The company serves various markets, including metal-casting, pet products, and agriculture, and its products are used for everything from pet litter to industrial binders and agricultural soil additives.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James A. Walcheske, Esq. Scott S. Luzi, Esq. David M. Potteiger, Esq. WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC 235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240 Brookfield, WI 53005 Telephone: (262) 780-1953 Facsimile: (262) 565-6469 E-Mail: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com AMERICAN EXPRESS: Underpays Customer Care Representatives, Lee Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- JAMILA LEE, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. AMERICAN EXPRESS TRAVEL RELATED SERVICES COMPANY, INC., a New York corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-08468 (S.D.N.Y., October 14, 2025) is a collective and class action brought by Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all similarly situated persons, arising from Defendant's willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and common law. The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a remote Customer Care Representative from approximately August 2022 to June 2024. According to the complaint, the Defendant compensated its Customer Care Representatives on an hourly basis and classified them as nonexempt employees under the FLSA. Despite having express and constructive knowledge of its Customer Care Representatives' mid-shift off-the-clock work, the Defendant failed to exercise reasonable diligence to determine the amount of unpaid overtime owed to its Customer Care Representatives. American Express Travel Related Services Company, Inc. is a company specializing in offering credit cards, debit cards and gift cards to consumers and businesses around the world.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Bernstein, Esq. ISAACS BERNSTEIN, P.C. 2108 Yardley Road Yardley, PA 19067 Telephone: (917) 693-7245 E-mail: jb@lijblaw.com - and - Kevin J.Stoops, Esq. Alana A. Karbal, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. One Towne Square, 17th Floor Southfield, MI 48076 Telephone: (248) 355-0300 E-mail: kstoops@sommerspc.com akarbal@sommerspc.com AMERICAN EXPRESS: Wins Antitrust Suit over Merchant Fees -------------------------------------------------------- American Express Company disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 16, 2025, that after a trial in August 2025, the jury returned a verdict finding in favor of the company on all claims except an Illinois consumer law claim for the class of non-rewards credit card holders in Illinois for which the jury awarded $12.5 million in damages. The process for post-trial motions and appeals is ongoing. On January 29, 2019, the company was named in a putative class action brought in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York, captioned David Moskowitz, et al. (formerly Oliver) v. American Express Company and American Express Travel Related Services Company Inc., in which the plaintiffs are holders of MasterCard, Visa and/or Discover credit and/or debit cards (but not American Express cards) and allege they paid higher prices as a result of the anti-steering and non-discrimination provisions in its merchant agreements in violation of federal antitrust law and the antitrust and consumer laws of various states. Plaintiffs seek unspecified damages and other forms of relief. The court dismissed plaintiffs' federal antitrust claim, numerous state antitrust and consumer protection claims and their unjust enrichment claim. For the remaining state antitrust or consumer protection claims, the court certified classes for (i) holders of Visa and MasterCard debit cards in eight states and Washington, D.C.; and (ii) holders of Visa, MasterCard and Discover credit cards that do not offer rewards or charge an annual fee in two states and Washington, D.C. American Express is a global payments and premium lifestyle brand founded in 1850 and headquartered in New York. Its card-issuing, merchant-acquiring and card network businesses offer products and services to a broad range of customers, including consumers, small businesses, mid-sized companies and large corporations around the world. ANTHONY MARTIN MILLS: Torres Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against ANTHONY MARTIN MILLS, M.D. The case is styled as Victor Torres, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. ANTHONY MARTIN MILLS, M.D., A MEDICAL CORPORATION, Case No. 25STCV30281 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 15, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Dr. Anthony M. Mills is an anesthesiologist in West Hollywood, California and is affiliated with Cedars-Sinai Medical Center.[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 APRO LLC: Lain Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against APRO, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Lisa Lain, individually and for others similarly situated v. APRO, LLC, dba UNITED PACIFIC, Does 1 through 100 inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2529231 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Bernardino Cty., Oct. 8, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case." San Bernardino 937 Inc. doing business as IHOP -- https://www.ihop.com/en -- is an American multinational pancake house restaurant chain that specializes in American breakfast foods. It is owned by Dine Brands.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: THE MYERS LAW GROUP 4695 MacArthur Court, Suite 200 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Phone: 949-825-5590 ARAMARK SERVICES: Adams Suit Removed to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Garrian Deshone Adams, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ARAMARK SERVICES, INC., a Delaware Corporation; and DOES 1-50, inclusive, Case No. 25CV135962 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Alameda, to the United States District Court for Northern District of California on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-08903-SK. The Plaintiff alleges five separate causes of action for: Failure to Pay Wages Including Overtime; Failure to Pay Timely Wages; Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements; Failure to Indemnify Necessary Business Expenses; and Violation of Business & Professions Code.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Eric Meckley, Esq. Sarah Zenewicz, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP One Market Spear Street Tower San Francisco, CA 94105-1596 Phone: +1.415.442.1000 Fax: +1.415.442.1001 Email: eric.meckley@morganlewis.com sarah.zenewicz@morganlewis.com - and - Ashlee N. Cherry, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1400 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, CA 94304 Phone: +1.415.442.1000 Fax: +1.415.442.1001 Email: ashlee.cherry@morganlewis.com ARTCLASS LLC: Diouf Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against ArtClass, LLC. The case is styled as Sadyr Diouf, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ArtClass, LLC, Case No. 25STCV30318 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." ArtClass -- https://www.artclasscontent.com/ -- is an award winning multi-disciplinary live action & post production studio.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Frank H. Kim, Esq. KIM LEGAL, APC 3435 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 2700 Los Angeles, CA 90010-2013 Phone: 323-482-3300 Email: fkim@kim-legal.com AT&T MOBILITY: Sample Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Walter Sample, individually, and on behalf of members of the general public and the putative class members similarly situated v. AT&T MOBILITY SERVICES LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 25STCV26939 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-10000. This case is brought as a putative class action for damages and/or penalties under the California Labor Code by Plaintiff on behalf of himself and other putative class members and against AT&T Mobility. Plaintiff brings claims for AT&T Mobility's alleged failure to pay minimum wages for all hours worked; failure to timely pay final wages; failure to furnish accurate, itemized wage statements; and unlawful deductions from employee wages.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Adam J. Karr, Esq. Allison N. Bader, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 400 South Hope Street, 18th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899 Phone: + 1 213 430 6000 Facsimile: + 1 213 430 6407 Email: akarr@omm.com abader@omm.com - and - Deanna M. Rice, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 1625 Eye Street NW Washington, D.C. 20006 Phone: + 1 202 383 5300 Facsimile: + 1 202 383 5414 Email: drice@omm.com AUDUBON FIELD: Hardy Suit Transferred to N.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------ The case styled as Joshua Hardy, individually and for others similarly situated v. Audubon Field Solutions, LLC, Audubon Engineering Company, LLC, Case No. 4:25-cv-1382 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of New York on Oct. 20, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-mc-00023-AMN-PJE to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Motion to Compel. Audubon Companies -- https://auduboncompanies.com/ -- is a construction and architecture firm founded in 1997 that provides multidisciplinary engineering and technical solutions for complex projects.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Andrew Dunlap, Esq. Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Richard J. Burch, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: (713) 352-1100 Fax: (713) 352-3300 Email: adunlap@mybackwages.com mjosephson@mybackwages.com rburch@brucknerburch.com AUM ASHANTI AUM: Brown Sues Over Discrimination on Premises ----------------------------------------------------------- Altaune Brown, and other similarly situated disabled individuals v. AUM ASHANTI AUM INC., and 230 EAST 14TH STREET LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-08668 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought seeking equitable, injunctive, and declaratory relief; monetary and nominal damages; along with attorney's fees, costs, and expenses pursuant to: Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"); the New York City Human Rights Law ("NYCHRL"); and the New York State Human Rights Law ("NYSHRL") due to the Defendants' discrimination on their Premises. The Defendants' Premises is a commercial space as defined by the NYSHRL, and NYCHRL because, inter alia, a portion of the building and structure thereof used or intended to be used as a business, office, and commerce. On February 7, 2025, and other occasions, Plaintiff attempted to enter Defendants' Premises, which operates one of New York City's most unique and affordable indie store that is known for specializing in Eastern and Western spirituality, selling related items like crystals, candles, incense, sage, and even offers tarot card reading services. Defendants' Premises is less than 1.8 miles from Plaintiff's home. Because the existing barriers prevent access and restrict the paths of travel, such as 2 steps at the entrance, Plaintiff was unable to enter Defendants' Premises. Because the existing barriers prevent access and restrict the paths of travel, such as 2 steps at the entrance, Plaintiff was denied full and equal access to, and full and equal enjoyment of, the commercial space and public accommodations within Defendants' Premises. The Defendants denying Plaintiff the opportunity to participate in and benefit from the services or accommodations offered within Defendants' Premises because of his disability has caused Plaintiff to suffer an injury in fact. The Plaintiff intends on immediately returning to Defendants' Premises once the barriers to access are removed and Defendants' Premises are ADA compliant. The Defendants' failure to comply with the ADA, NYSHRL, NYCHRL, et seq. impedes upon the rights of Plaintiff, and other similarly situated disabled individuals, to travel free of discrimination and independently access Defendants' Premises, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a paraplegic who uses a wheelchair for mobility. Aum Shanti owns, leases, operates, maintains, and controls all, or the relevant portions, of Defendants' Premises.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bradly G. Marks, Esq. THE MARKS LAW FIRM, PC 155 E 55th Street, Suite 4H New York, NY 1002 Phone:(646) 770-3775 Fax: (646) 867-2639 Email: brad@markslawpc.com AUTOMAXX OF ARBERDEEN: Weatherford Files TCPA Suit in S.D. Ill. --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Automaxx of Arberdeen, Inc. The case is styled as Amanda Weatherford, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Automaxx of Arberdeen, Inc., Case No. 3:25-cv-01923 (S.D. Ill., Oct. 17, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. AutoMaxx of Aberdeen -- https://www.automaxxaberdeen.com/ -- specializes in selling high-quality used cars, trucks, and SUVs to customers in Brown County, South Dakota.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 14 NE 1st Ave., Ste. 1205 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com BATTERIES PLUS: Demaio Suit Removed to S.D. Florida --------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Desiree Demaio, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BATTERIES PLUS, LLC, Case No. CACE-25-013607 was removed from the Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit in and for Broward County, Florida, to the United States District Court for Southern District of Florida on Oct. 15, 2025, and assigned Case No. 0:25-cv-62080-XXXX. The Plaintiff alleges that every text message sent by Defendant "transmitted to Plaintiffs' caller identification service a telephone number that was not capable of receiving telephone calls." The Plaintiff further alleges that Defendant is liable for $500 "for each violation," i.e. for every text message.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Patricia Lehtinen Silva, Esq. LATHROP GPM LLP 2345 Grand Blvd., Suite 2200 Kansas City, MO 64108 Phone: (816) 460-2618 Email: patricia.silva@lathropgpm.com - and - David C. Archer, Esq. LATHROP GPM LLP 3100 IDS Center 80 South Eighth Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: 612.632.3000 Email: David.archer@lathropgpm.com BBG INC: Bittan Suit Transferred to N.D. Texas ---------------------------------------------- The case styled as Bruce Bittan, Jack Enright, Patrick Smith, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. BBG, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-01008 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas on Oct. 20, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-02839-S to the proceeding. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act for Denial of Overtime Compensation. BBG, Inc. -- https://bbginc.net/ -- is an employee benefits firm offering SharedFunding, ICHRA, Medicare plans, total benefits administration, and innovative health plan solutions.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Russell D. Paul, Esq. BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C. 800 N West Street, Suite 200 Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 691-9545 Email: rpaul@bergermontague.com The Defendant is represented by: Lauren Elizabeth Moak Russell, Esq. POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP 1313 N. Market Street, 6th Floor Wilmington, DE 19899 Phone: (302) 984-6003 Email: lrussell@potteranderson.com - and - Mason G Jones, Esq. BELL NUNNALLY & MARTIN LLP 2323 Ross Avenue, Suite 1900 Dallas, TX 75201 Phone: (214) 740-1400 Fax: (214) 740-1499 Email: mjones@bellnunnally.com BCI ACRYLIC: Hoffman TCPA Suit Transferred to W.D. Washington ------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Mark Hoffman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. BCI Acrylic LLC doing business as: Bath Planet; Northwest Bath Specialists LLC doing business as: Bath Planet of Seattle; Case No. 1:25-cv-06107-LCJ was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Oct. 15, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02032-TLF to the proceeding. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. BCI Acrylic LLC doing business as Bath Planet -- https://www.bathplanet.com/ -- is your premier nationwide Bathroom Remodeler.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln St., Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Phone: (615) 485-0018 Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Ashni Gandhi, Esq. MICHAEL BEST & FRIEDRICH LLP 444 W Lake St., Suite 3200 Chicago, IL 60614 Phone: (847) 987-9850 Email: ashni.gandhi@michaelbest.com - and - Alexandra Lauren Rogers, Esq. Christopher Raymond Sullivan, Esq. Nicholas A Gowen, Esq. BURKE WARREN MACKAY & SERRITELLA PC 330 North Wabash Avenue, 21st Floor Chicago, IL 60611 Phone: (312) 840-7111 Email: arogers@burkelaw.com csullivan@burkelaw.com ngowen@burkelaw.com BENEFICIENT COMPANY: Settlement Reached in Bayati Suit ------------------------------------------------------ Beneficient Company Group, L.P. (BCG) disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission in October 16, 2025, that on December 26, 2024, parties in "In re GWG Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation" filed a motion informing the court that they had reached an agreement in principle to settle the claims on a class-wide basis. The lead plaintiff has not yet filed a motion for preliminary approval. The settlement in principle does not require any payment by the company or its affiliates and officers and directors, and it would resolve both the Adversary Proceedings and a securities class action. On February 18, 2022, Shirin Bayati and Mojan Kamalvand, on behalf of themselves and of all others similarly situated, filed a class action lawsuit in the United States District Court for Northern District of Texas against GWG Holdings Inc., its former President and Chief Executive Officer, Murray Holland, its former Chief Financial Officer, Timothy Evans, and certain past and present members of the board of directors and BCG (Roy Bailey, Peter T. Cangany, Jr., David Chavenson, Brad K. Heppner, Thomas O. Hicks, Dennis P. Lockhart, Bruce W. Schnitzer, and David H. de Weese). On May 3, 2023, Thomas Horton and Frank Moore, in their capacities as the Lead Plaintiffs in said action, filed a motion to lift the automatic stay in the Chapter 11 Cases in order to file a motion in the Northern District of Texas seeking to consolidate this into another action under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act. On September 12, 2023, the court entered an order consolidating the case into "In re GWG Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation." The court lifted the bankruptcy stay and ordered the Lead Plaintiffs to file a new consolidated complaint within 20 days. On October 2, 2023, the Lead Plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Class Action Complaint against BCG, Brad K. Heppner, Peter T. Cangany, Jr., Thomas O. Hicks, Dennis P. Lockhart, Bruce W. Schnitzer, Murray T. Holland, Timothy L. Evans, David H. de Weese, Roy W. Bailey, David F. Chavenson, and Whitley Penn LLP, alleging Securities Act violations arising out of the Offering. The complaint alleges that the individual defendants violated Sections 11, 12(a)(2), and 15 of the Securities Act, and further alleges that the Company violated Section 15 of the Securities Act. The Company, Brad K. Heppner, Peter T. Cangany, Jr., Thomas O. Hicks, Dennis P. Lockhart, and Bruce W. Schnitzer filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on November 7, 2023. On January 4, 2024, defendants Murray Holland, Tim Evans, Roy Bailey, Whitley Penn, David Chavenson and David H. de Weese filed motions to dismiss. The Lead Plaintiffs' responded to the various motions to dismiss on February 20, 2024, and the defendants (other than Whitley Penn) filed replies in support of the motions to dismiss on March 21, 2024. On October 24, 2024, the court granted defendants' motions to dismiss and dismissed the claims without prejudice. The Lead Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on November 14, 2024. While the settlement has been approved by the Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas as it relates to the GWG Litigation Trust Adversary Proceedings as described above, this matter has not yet been approved by the relevant court. the lead plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval and, on September 25, 2025, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas granted the motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. A hearing on whether to grant final approval of the settlement has been set for January 13, 2026. Beneficient, a Nevada corporation, is a technology-enabled financial services holding company. GWG Holdings Inc.'s assets to the GWG Wind Down Trust and the Litigation Trust historically owned a substantial percentage of the Beneficient. BENWORTH CAPITAL: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Eckard Says ------------------------------------------------------------- SCOTT ECKARD, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BENWORTH CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-24361 (S.D. Fla., September 23, 2025) is a class action against Benworth for its failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiff's and other similarly situated Benworth customers' names, addresses, taxpayer identification numbers, phone numbers, and financial or loan account numbers, as well as maturity dates, closing dates, and loan amounts which relate to loans (the "Private Information") from hackers. On or about September 16, 2025, Benworth sent out data breach letters to individuals whose information was compromised as a result of a hacking incident. The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit to address Benworth's inadequate safeguarding of Class Members' Private Information that it collected and maintained, and its failure to provide timely and adequate notice to Plaintiff and Class Members of the types of information that were accessed, and that such information was subject to unauthorized access by cybercriminals. The Plaintiff's and Class Members' identities are now at risk because of Benworth's negligent conduct as the Private Information that Benworth collected and maintained is now in the hands of data thieves and other unauthorized third parties, says the suit. Accordingly, the Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and the Class, assert claims for negligence, negligence per se, breach of contract, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment. Benworth Capital Partners LLC, based in Coral Gables, Florida, is a private money lender that provides hard money loans to purchase or refinance residential and commercial property nationwide.[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 Facsimile: (646) 417-5967 E-mail: jwallace@sirillp.com - and - Tyler J. Bean, Esq. Neil P. Williams, Esq. SIRI & GLIMSTAD LLP 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Telephone: (212) 532-1091 E-mail: tbean@sirillp.com nwilliams@sirillp.com BLOCKERS FURNITURE: Evans Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website -------------------------------------------------------------- MAKEDA EVANS, Plaintiff v. BLOCKERS FURNITURE & CARPETS INCORPORATED, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00299-AW-HTC (N.D. Fla., September 23, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Beginning in July 2025, the Plaintiff attempted on a number of occasions to utilize the Defendant's website, www.blockersfurniture.com, to browse through the merchandise and online offers. Upon navigating the site, the Plaintiff encountered significant accessibility barriers. After applying filters to narrow down the products by category, the website did not announce how many items remained, leaving her uncertain about the results. The navigation experience was confusing due to incorrect focusability on filter elements and the absence of a clear heading structure. These issues made it difficult for Plaintiff to orient herself within the website and browse the products efficiently. The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with websites. However, Defendant's website contains access barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software, asserts the Plaintiff. Blockers Furniture & Carpets Incorporated operates the website that provides furniture and mattresses, including upholstery, dining sets, bedroom furniture, and outdoor pieces.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Aleksandra Kravets, Esq. ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A. 865 SW 113 Lane Pembroke Pines, FL 33025 Telephone: (347) 268-9533 E-mail: ak@akesqpa.com CAMPERS INN: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Marshall Alleges ------------------------------------------------------------- WESTLEY MARSHALL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CAMPERS INN RV OF JACKSONVILLE NORTH INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-01232 (M.D. Fla., October 14, 2025) is a class action lawsuit on behalf of the Plaintiff and all persons who entrusted Defendant with sensitive personally identifiable information and that was impacted in a data breach incident. The Plaintiff's claims arise from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard private information that was entrusted to it, and its accompanying responsibility to store and transfer that information. According to the complaint, the Defendant, despite having the financial wherewithal and personnel necessary to prevent the data breach, nevertheless failed to use reasonable security procedures and practice appropriate to the nature of the sensitive, unencrypted information it maintained for Plaintiff and Class Members, causing the exposure of Plaintiff's and Class Members' private information. The Plaintiff seeks to remedy these harms and prevent any future data compromise on behalf of himself, and all similarly situated persons whose personal data was compromised and stolen as a result of the data breach and who remain at risk due to Defendant's inadequate data security practices. Campers Inn RV of Jacksonville North Inc. sells camper units across the U.S. and is based in Jacksonville, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. One West Las Olas Blvd, Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 Facsimile: (954) 525-4300 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com CAPSTONE LOGISTICS: Alamillo Suit Removed to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Ashley Alamillo, an individual, and other similarly situated v. CAPSTONE LOGISTICS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES, 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. CIVVS2505603 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernadino, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 15, 2025, and assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-02723. In the Complaint, the Plaintiff asserts various claims against Capstone for alleged wage and hour violations. The Plaintiff alleges claims for: Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Failure to Pay Overtime Wages; Failure to Provide Meal Periods; Failure to Permit Rest Breaks; Failure to Reimburse Business Expenses; Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements; Failure to Pay All Wages Due Upon Separation of Employment; and Violations of Business and Professions Code.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Gerald L. Maatman, Jr., Esq. DUANE MORRIS LLP 190 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3700 Chicago, IL 60603-3433 Phone: +1 312 499 6700 Fax: +1 312 499 6701 Email: GMaatman@duanemorris.com - and - Jennifer A. Riley, Esq. Daniel D. Spencer, Esq. Samson C. Huang, Esq. DUANE MORRIS LLP 865 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3100 Los Angeles, CA 90017-5450 Phone: +1 213 689 7400 Facsimile: +1 213 689 7401 Email: JARiley@duanemorris.com ddspencer@duanemorris.com SCHuang@duanemorris.com - and - Caitlin Capriotti, Esq. DUANE MORRIS LLP 260 Homer Avenue, Suite 202 Palo Alto, CA 94301-2777 Phone: +1 650 847 4157 Facsimile: +1 650 429 2144 Email: CCapriotti@duanemorris.com CARMAX INC: Glass Suit Removed to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Patricia Glass, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CARMAX, INC., Case No. 25STCV26448 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-09975. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant implemented a technology--the ADNXS Tracker (the "Tracker")--on its website, www.carmax.com (the "Website"), which purportedly collected Plaintiff's device IP address and other device information in violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act's ("CIPA") pen register provisions.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Vassi Iliadis, Esq. James Ettinger, Esq. HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1400 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (310) 785-4600 Facsimile: (310) 785-4601 Email: vassi.iliadis@hoganlovells.com jay.ettinger@hoganlovells.com - and - Adam Cooke, Esq. HOGAN LOVELLS US LLP 555 Thirteenth Street NW Washington, D.C. 20004 Phone: (202) 637-5600 Email: adam.a.cooke@hoganlovells.com CATALENT INC: Class Briefing Schedule Dates Extended ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CITY OF WARWICK RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. CATALENT, INC., JOHN CHIMINSKI, ALESSANDRO MASELLI, and THOMAS CASTELLANO, Case No. 3:23-cv-01108-ZNQ-JTQ (D.N.J.), the Hon. Judge Justin T. Quinn entered a stipulated order extending the remaining briefing schedule for lead plaintiffs' class certification motion: The deadline for the Defendants to serve their opposition shall be extended from Oct. 16, 2025, to Oct. 30, 2025. The deadline for Lead Plaintiffs to serve their reply shall be extended from Dec. 19, 2025, to Jan. 15, 2026. Catalent is a global contract development and manufacturing organization. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OKBXd5 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: James E. Cecchi, Esq. Michael A. Innes, Esq. Kevin G. Cooper, Esq. CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C. 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, NJ 07068 Telephone: (973) 994-1700 E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com minnes@carellabyrne.com kcooper@carellabyrne.com - and - Joshua E. D'Ancona, Esq. Andrew L. Zivitz, Esq. Matthew L. Mustokoff, Esq. Jamie M. McCall, Esq. David A. Bocian, Esq. Max S. S. Johnson, Esq. KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP 280 King of Prussia Road Radnor, PA 19087 Telephone: (610) 667-7706 Facsimile: (610) 667-7056 E-mail: jdancona@ktmc.com azivitz@ktmc.com mmustokoff@ktmc.com jmccall@ktmc.com dbocian@ktmc.com mjohnson@ktmc.com - and - Christine M. Fox, Esq. Adam M. Federer, Esq. Emily Gault, Esq. LABATON SUCHAROW LLP 140 Broadway New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 907-0700 Facsimile: (212) 818-0477 E-mail: cfox@labaton.com afederer@labaton.com egault@labaton.com - and - John L. Davidson, Esq. DAVIDSON BOWIE, PLLC 1062 Highland Colony Parkway 200 Concourse, Suite 275 Ridgeland, MS 39157 Telephone: (601) 932-0028 E-mail: jdavidson@dbslawfirm.net The Defendants are represented by: Kevin H. Marino, Esq. John D. Tortorella, Esq. MARINO TORTORELLA & BOYLE, P.C. 437 Southern Boulevard Chatham, NJ 07928-1488 Telephone: (973) 824-9300 Facsimile: (973) 824-8425 E-mail: kmarino@khmarino.com jtortorella@khmarino.com - and - Eric C. Lyttle, Esq. Jesse Bernstein, Esq. Hope D. Skibitsky, Esq. Jaclyn M. Palmerson, Esq. Phillip B. Jobe, Esq. Amy Shehan, Esq. Danielle Zoellner, Esq. Emily M. Erickson, Esq. Kelsey Bloodworth, Esq. QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP 1300 I Street NW, Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 538-8000 E-mail: ericlyttle@quinnemanuel.com jessebernstein@quinnemanuel.com hopeskibitsky@quinnemanuel.com jaclynpalmerson@quinnemanuel.com phillipjobe@quinnemanuel.com amyshehan@quinnemanuel.com daniellezoellner@quinnemanuel.com emilyerickson@quinnemanuel.com kelseybloodworth@quinnemanuel.com CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS: Randle Suit Removed to E.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Kionna Randle, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated v. CATERPILLAR LOGISTICS INC., a Delaware corporation; CATERPILLAR INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. BCV-25-103228 was removed from the Superior Court of California, County of Kern, to the United States District Court for Eastern District of California on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-at-00956. The Complaint alleges nine causes of action for: unpaid overtime wages under Labor Code; unpaid meal period premiums under Labor Code; unpaid rest period premiums under Labor Code; unpaid minimum wages under Labor Code; final wages not timely paid under Labor Code; noncompliant wage statements under Labor Code; unreimbursed business expenses under Labor Code; violation of California's Private Attorneys' General Act ("PAGA") under Labor Code; and violation of California Business & Professions Code.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Phillip J. Ebsworth, Esq. Kyle W. Owen, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2300 Sacramento, CA 95814 Phone: (916) 448-0159 Facsimile: (916) 558-4839 Email: pebsworth@seyfarth.com kowen@seyfarth.com CFX LABS INC: Welsh Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Illinois ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against CFX Labs Inc. The case is styled as Domonique Welsh, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CFX Labs Inc. doing business as: Movemoney.com, Case No. 1:25-cv-12790 (N.D. Ill., Oct. 20, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment CFX Labs Inc. -- https://www.cfxlabs.com/ -- is a financial technology company, not a bank.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE PA 14 NE 1st Ave., Ste. 705 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com CLAREMONT CLUB: Nicholson Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Claremont Club LLC. The case is styled as Kristin Nicholson, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. The Claremont Club LLC, Case No. 25STCV30275 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." The Claremont Club -- https://www.claremontclub.com/ -- is a health club located in Claremont, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph Lavi, Esq. LAVI EBRAHIMIAN, LLP 8889 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Phone: (310) 432-0000 Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com CONSERVICE LLC: Class Cert Bid Filing Extended to Dec. 15 --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Amanda Jolicoeur-Louis and Sophie Philips, v. Conservice LLC, a Utah Limited Liability Company, Case No. 2:24-cv-03253-HDV-BFM (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Vera entered an order extending the deadline for filing the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification from Oct. 15, 2025 to Dec. 15, 2025. All other provisions of the Court's scheduling order remain in effect. Conservice provides utility management and billing solutions to property owners and managers. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=eyfy6W at no extra charge.[CC] COOPERFRIEDMAN ELECTRIC: Settlement in Clark Suit Gets Final Nod ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOHN R. CLARK, individually and on behalf of all putative class members, v. COOPERFRIEDMAN ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO., INC. d/b/a COOPER POWER SYSTEMS and COOPER ELECTRIC SUPPLY CO., Case No. 1:23-cv-07806-JPC-BCM (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge John Cronan entered an order as follows: 1. The Court grants final approval of the Settlement on behalf of Named Plaintiff and the Settlement Class, as memorialized in the Settlement Agreement. 2. Class Counsel's application for attorneys' fees in the amount of $94,957.50, and request for reimbursement of costs in the amount $5,032.50 is granted. These fees and costs shall be paid from the Settlement Fund. 3. For services rendered on behalf of the Settlement Class, Named Plaintiff shall be awarded a service payment in the amount of $3,000, payable from the Settlement Fund. 4. The Court finds reasonable, and approves, fees and expenses for the Claims Administrator up to $10,250, payable from the Settlement Fund. 5. This action is dismissed with prejudice. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment and to close this case. Cooper is a construction services company. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=RJbP1V at no extra charge.[CC] CSX CORP: Faces Consolidated Antitrust Suit over Fuel Surcharge --------------------------------------------------------------- CSX Corporation disclosed in its Form 10-Q report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 16, 2025, that it is facing a consolidated case by individual shippers with regards to a fuel surcharge antitrust litigation. In May 2007, class action lawsuits were filed against CSXT and three other U.S.-based Class I railroads alleging that the defendants' fuel surcharge practices relating to contract and unregulated traffic resulted from an illegal conspiracy in violation of antitrust laws. The class action lawsuits were consolidated into one case in federal court in the District of Columbia. In 2017, the District Court issued its decision denying class certification. On August 16, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit affirmed the District Court's ruling. In March 2024, the original case was reassigned to the judge in the later-filed case who will now preside over all pre-trial proceedings. The railroads filed motions for summary judgment on July 17, 2024, with the briefing completed in December 2024. The judge held a hearing on the railroads' summary judgment motions on June 18, 2025, and granted summary judgment in favor of the railroads on June 24, 2025, ordering the cases closed. Most of the individual shippers have appealed the summary judgment ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, which has not yet set a schedule for the appeal proceedings. CSX Corporation together with its subsidiaries provides rail-based transportation services including traditional rail service, the transport of intermodal containers and trailers, as well as other transportation services such as rail-to-truck transfers and bulk commodity operations. DAILY CRUNCH INC: Moran Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------ Washington Moran, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. DAILY CRUNCH INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-08497 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 15, 2025), is brought against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons. The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and therefore denial of its products and services offered thereby, is a violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). Because Defendant's interactive website, https://www.dailycrunchsnacks.com/, including all portions thereof or accessed thereon (collectively, the "Website" or "Defendant's Website"), is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's Website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. By failing to make its Website available in a manner compatible with computer screen reader programs, Defendant deprives blind and visually-impaired individuals the benefits of its online goods, content, and services--all benefits it affords nondisabled individuals--thereby increasing the sense of isolation and stigma among those persons that Title III was meant to redress, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using his computer. DAILY CRUNCH INC., operates the Daily Crunch Snacks online retail store, as well as the Daily Crunch Snacks interactive Website and advertises, markets, and operates in the State of New York and throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, N.Y. 10003-2461 Phone: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: Jeffrey@gottlieb.legal Danalgottlieb@aol.com Michael@Gottlieb.legal DELTA AIR LINES: Valdovinos Suit Removed to W.D. Washington ----------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Mireya Valdovinos, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DELTA AIR LINES, INC., a Delaware Corporation and DOES 1-20, inclusive, Case No. 25-2-27248-6-KNT was removed from the Superior Court of Washington for King County, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02026. On behalf of themselves and the putative Class, Plaintiff seeks compensatory and exemplary damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and pre-judgment interest from Delta for: failure to provide statutorily compliant meal periods; failure to provide statutorily compliant rest periods; failure to pay all wages owed; failure to pay overtime wages; willful refusal to pay wages; and record keeping violations.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Damon C. Elder, Esq. Claire M. Lesikar, Esq. T. Ray Ivey, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1301 Second Avenue, Suite 3000 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 274-6400 Email: damon.elder@morganlewis.com claire.lesikar@morganlewis.com ray.ivey@morganlewis.com DELTA AIR: Allowed Leave to Leave to File Opposition Under Seal --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAYANNA BERRIN, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. DELTA AIR LINES, INC., Case No. 2:23-cv-04150-MEMF-AS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Maame Ewusi-Mensah Frimpong entered an order granting Delta Air's application for leave to file under seal as follows: 1. The application for leave to file under seal related to Delta's opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for class Certification, is granted. 2. Delta is to file the unredacted Exhibit B to the declaration of Allison White in support of Delta's opposition to the Plaintiff's motion for class certification under seal pursuant to L.R. 79-5.2.2(c). Delta is a major airline in the United States. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=KyGPDA at no extra charge.[CC] DEXCOM INC: Grisoli Sues Over Defective Glucose Monitoring System ----------------------------------------------------------------- KELLY GRISOLI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DEXCOM, INC. and DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 8:25-cv-02333 (C.D. Cal., October 15, 2025) is a nationwide consumer class action arising from Dexcom's manufacture, marketing, and sale of its Dexcom G7 Continuous Glucose Monitoring System, a medical device marketed as a safe, accurate, and reliable glucose monitoring product for individuals managing diabetes. According to the complaint, Dexcom's representations were false, misleading, and deceptive to consumers. Despite marketing the G7 CGM as a superior, Dexcom sold and distributed G7 CGMs that were defective, prone to dangerous alert failures, and subject to recall by the United States Food and Drug Administration. The G7 CGM places users at risk of severe hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia, seizure, coma, or death due to design and software defects that cause inaccurate blood glucose readings and suppressed, delayed, or failed alerts. The G7 CGM also fails to last the intended 10-day wear period as advertised, alleges the suit. On June 16, 2025, and again on September 4, 2025, the FDA announced nationwide Class I recalls, its most serious classification, for components of the G7 CGM due to safety issues that caused failures or delays in providing critical low- or high-glucose alerts. Despite knowledge of the G7 CGM defects, Dexcom continued to market and sell the G7 CGM to consumers, touting its reliability and safety while minimizing and/or concealing the risks. Dexcom's conduct violates multiple consumer protection and warranty statutes, including the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition Law, and False Advertising Law, as well as express and implied warranty provisions under state and federal law, including the Song Beverly Consumer Warranty Act and Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, and other common law claims, the suit contends. The Plaintiff purchased the G7 CGM in Orange County, California in early 2024 for personal and medical use for her minor child, L.G., a Type 1 diabetic. Dexcom, Inc. is an American healthcare company that develops, manufactures, produces and distributes a line of continuous glucose monitoring systems for diabetes management.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: C. Moze Cowper, Esq. Paige Miller, Esq. COWPER LAW LLP 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 303 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (877) 529-3707 E-mail: mcowper@cowperlaw.com pmiller@cowperlaw.com - and - Adam J. Levitt, Esq. DICELLO LEVITT LLC Ten North Dearborn Street, Sixth Floor Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 214-7900 E-mail: alevitt@dicellolevitt.com DISA GLOBAL: Faces Guy Suit Over Unfair Background Check -------------------------------------------------------- LAWRENCE GUY on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DISA GLOBAL SOLUTIONS INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01974 (D. Nev., October 15, 2025) seeks statutory damages, punitive damages, costs and attorneys' fees arising from the Defendant's violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. According to the complaint, the Defendant produces background screening reports to third-party entities for employment purposes for a fee. The reports produced by the Defendant, concerning the Plaintiff and other members of each Putative Class, contained items which were matters of public record and were likely to have an adverse effect on a consumer's ability to obtain employment. The reports provided by the Defendant contained information that would mislead the reader. The Defendant's production of misleading Consumer Reports results in an inaccurate report, says the suit. The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of himself and similarly situated consumers for violations of the FCRA. Disa Global Solutions Inc. is a consumer reporting agency based in Dallas, Texas.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lee Iglody, Esq. IGLODY LAW 2580 St Rose Pkwy #330 Henderson, NV 89074 Telephone: (702) 425-5366 E-mail: lee@iglody.com - and - Jayson A. Watkins, Esq. SIRI | GLIMSTAD 745 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500 New York, NY 10151 Direct: (929) 274-2944 Main: (888) SIRI-LAW E-mail: jwatkins@sirillp.com DISCORD INC: Faces Nguyen Suit Over Unprotected Personal Info ------------------------------------------------------------- MYAH NGUYEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DISCORD INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-08767 (N.D. Cal., October 14, 2025) is a class action against Defendant for its failure to properly secure Plaintiff's and Class Members' personally identifiable information. The Defendant discovered a data breach on October 3, 2025, that had occurred exposing the PII of millions of Defendant's U.S. consumers, including Plaintiff. The complaint asserts that Defendant failed to comply with industry standards to protect information systems that contain PII. The Defendant knowingly obtained sensitive PII and had a resulting duty to securely maintain that information in confidence. The Plaintiff and Class Members would not have provided their PII to Defendant if they had known that Defendant would not ensure that it used adequate security measures, says the suit. The Plaintiff seeks, among other things, orders requiring Defendant to fully and accurately disclose the nature of the information that has been compromised and to adopt sufficient security practices and safeguards to prevent incidents like the disclosure in the future. Discord Inc. is a privately owned American communication and social media platform.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kristen Lake Cardoso, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. 1 W Las Olas Blvd, Suite 500 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: cardoso@kolawyers.com DISCORD INC: Fails to Safeguard Personal Info, Shah Says -------------------------------------------------------- VISHAL SHAH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DISCORD, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-08913-SK (N.D. Cal., October 16, 2025) seeks damages, injunctive relief, and equitable remedies arising from Defendant's failure to properly secure, safeguard, and protect sensitive personal information belonging to Plaintiff and Class members which resulted in unauthorized access to confidential consumer data as an unfair act of practice prohibited by the Federal Trade Commission Act. The complaint states that on September 20, 2025, an unauthorized third party gained access to a customer support system operated by a third-party vendor for Discord and exfiltrated sensitive data belonging to Discord users. The compromised information included names, government identification images (e.g., driver's licenses, passports), Discord usernames, email addresses and other contact details if provided to Discord customer support, limited billing details such as payment type and the last four digits of credit card numbers, purchase history linked to Discord accounts, IP addresses, and messages exchanged with Discord's customer service agents. Discord subsequently conducted an internal investigation and confirmed that certain private information had been acquired by the threat actor. However, the company did not publicly disclose the breach until October 3, 2025, leaving users unaware of the compromise for nearly two weeks. As a result, the Plaintiff and Class Members face a significantly heightened and imminent risk of fraud, identity theft, and other misuse of their private information. They must now devote additional time and resources to monitor accounts, safeguard their identities, and protect themselves from further harm, says to the suit. Plaintiff Vishal Shah is a resident of Buena Park, California. Discord is a technology company that operates a widely used online communication platform enabling users to connect through voice, video, and text chat across communities and private groups.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John R. Parker, Jr., Esq. ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC 3550 Watt Avenue, Suite 140 Sacramento, CA 95608 Telephone: (916) 616-2936 E-mail: jrparker@almeidalawgroup.com - and - Elena Belov, Esq. ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC 849 W. Webster Ave. Chicago, IL 60614 Telephone: (708) 437-6476 E-mail: elena@almeidalawgroup.com DISCOUNT TIRE CO: Hutton Suit Removed to W.D. Washington -------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Colby Hutton, on his own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DISCOUNT TIRE CO. OF WASHINGTON, INC., and DISCOUNT TIRE CO., INC., Case No. 25-2-08460-31 was removed from the Superior Court for Snohomish County, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Oct. 15, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02008. The Plaintiff has alleged no facts to even imply that Discount Tire Co. of Washington, Inc. is uniquely or disproportionately responsible for the wrongs alleged by the entire class, as required for application of the local controversy exception. The Plaintiff alleges that Discount Tire is "engaged in persistent marketing through mass email campaigns across the United States" and that the "sheer volume of Discount Tire's email marketing put it on notice that Washington residents would receive its emails."[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Lauren B. Rainwater, Esq. Rachel Herd, Esq. Caitlyn Courtney, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104-1610 Phone: 206-622-3150 Email: laurenrainwater@dwt.com rachelherd@dwt.com caitlyncourtney@dwt.com DISNEY WORLDWIDE: C.R. Suit Removed to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as C.R., C.R., and C.R., minors, by and through their guardian ad litem, Kimberly Sobalvarro, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated individuals v. DISNEY WORLDWIDE SERVICES, INC., a corporation; DISNEY ENTERTAINMENT OPERATIONS LLC, a limited liability company, Case No. 25STCV26733 was removed from the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-09928. That complaint alleged that the Disney Defendants violated the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("COPPA"), by failing to mark certain videos that Disney uploaded to YouTube as "child-directed" using the "made for kids" designation, which resulted in serving targeted advertising to them and collecting personal information.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Rebecca B. Durrant, Esq. KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP 350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3800 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (858) 795-0426 Email: rdurrant@kelleydrye.com DIVERSIFIED HEALTH: Jackson Files TCPA Suit in M.D. Pennsylvania ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Diversified Health Marketers Inc., et al. The case is styled as Gerard Jackson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Diversified Health Marketers Inc., UnitedHealthCare Services Inc., Case No. 4:25-cv-01970-MWB (M.D. Pa., Oct. 20, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Diversified Health Marketers Inc. is a leader in the Final Expense industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey M. Bower, Esq. BOWER LAW ASSOCIATES, PLLC 403 South Allen Street, Suite 210 State College, PA 16801 Phone: (814) 234-2626 Fax: (814) 237-8700 Email: jbower@bower-law.com DJI TECHNOLOGY: Smith Sues Over Defective Cameras ------------------------------------------------- Anthony Smith, Robert Dunlap, and Miguel Soto, individuals, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. DJI TECHNOLOGY, INC., a California Corporation, Case No. 2:25-cv-09941 (C.D. Cal., Oct. 16, 2025), is brought on behalf of all others similarly situated in the United States who purchased the DJI Action 2 camera (hereinafter referred to as the "Camera(s)"), which suffers from a defect that causes the camera to overheat and shut down after just a few minutes when used as intended to record video in 4K. DJI's representation that the Cameras can be used to record video content in 4K is materially false and misleading because the Cameras suffer from an inherent defect (the "Defect") that causes the Cameras to overheat and shut down after just a few minutes of 4K recording -- which is not even close to the advertised recording time of 70 minutes to 180 minutes based on the capacity of the battery. Essentially, rather than the recording capability in 4K being limited by the camera's battery life – which is what a reasonable consumer would expect -- it is instead limited by the camera overheating and shutting down after just a few minutes of use. The Defect renders the Cameras unsuitable for recording video content in 4K, and DJI's representations that the Cameras can be used to record video content in 4K are false and misleading to reasonable consumers. Implicitly acknowledging the Defect and its inability to provide a countermeasure to address the Defect, DJI has stopped selling the Cameras in the United States and no longer sells a highly compact "action camera" with the same form factor as the Cameras. The Plaintiffs and the proposed class have suffered damages because they paid a premium for an ultra-compact wearable camera that was to be capable of recording in 4K/120 fps, with capabilities that are of little or no practical use due to the Defect. Plaintiffs and the Class would not have purchased the Cameras or would not have paid as much for them had DJI disclosed the Defect, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs purchased the Defendant's Cameras. DJI designed, manufactured, and marketed the Cameras containing the Defect and purposefully caused them to be placed into the stream of commerce within this District and throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Daniel E. Sobelsohn, Esq. THE SOBELSOHN LAW FIRM 21550 Oxnard Street, Suite 480 Woodland Hills, CA 91367 Phone: (818) 722-8995 Email: daniel@sobelsohnlawfirm.com DUKE UNIVERSITY: Class Settlement in Franklin Suit Gets Initial OK ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as JOY G. FRANKLIN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. DUKE UNIVERSITY, THE RETIREMENT BOARD FOR DUKE UNIVERSITY, and JOHN/JANE DOES 1–10, Case No. 1:23-cv-00833-CCE-JLW (M.D.N.C.), the Court entered an order preliminarily approving class action settlement, approving notice procedures, and scheduling fairness hearing. The requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 have been met as to the Settlement Class, which is defined as: "All participants and beneficiaries of the Plan who: (1) began receiving benefits on or after Sept. 29, 2017, but before July 1, 2023, (2) are receiving a joint and survivor annuity with a spousal survivor benefit of at least 50% and no more than 100% of the benefit paid during the retiree's life, or are receiving a qualified preretirement survivor annuity. Excluded from the Class are Defendants and any individuals determined to be fiduciaries of the Plan." The Court appoints the plaintiff Joy Franklin to represent the Settlement Class and Siri & Glimstad LLP as Class Counsel. A hearing is scheduled at the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, before the Honorable District Court Judge Catherine C. Eagles presiding, at 2 p.m. on Wednesday, Jan. 21, 2026 Duke University is a private research university. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=LRqgxQ at no extra charge.[CC] EDDIE BAUER: Parra Suit Removed to C.D. California -------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Brandon Parra, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. EDDIE BAUER LLC, a Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 25STCV14446 was removed from the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-09998. The Plaintiff's Complaint asserts nine causes of action for: "Unfair Competition in Violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code Sections 17200"; "Failure to Pay Minimum Wages in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Sections 1194, 1197 & 1197.1"; "Failure to Pay Overtime Wages in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Section 510"; "Failure to Provide Required Meal Periods in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Sections 226.7 & 512 And The Applicable IWC Wage Order"; "Failure to Provide Required Rest Periods in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Sections 226.7 & 512 And The Applicable IWC Wage Order"; "Failure to Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Section 226"; "Failure to Reimburse Employees for Required Expenses in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Section 2802"; "Failure to Provide Wages When Due in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Sections 201, 202 And 203"; and "Failure to Pay Sick Pay Wages in Violation of Cal. Lab. Code Sections 201-203, 233, 246."[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Jon D. Meer, Esq. Michael Afar, Esq. Romtin Parvaresh, Esq. Mackenzie Mullin, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, CA 90067-3021 Phone: (310) 277-7200 Facsimile: (310) 201-5219 Email: jmeer@seyfarth.com mafar@seyfarth.com rparvaresh@seyfarth.com mmullin@seyfarth.com ELEVATE RECOVERY: Christensen Files Suit in Fla. Cir. Ct. --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Elevate Recovery and Med Spa LLC. The case is styled as Paige Christensen, on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Gateway Community Services, Inc., Case No. 16-2025-CA-006420-AXXX-MA (Fla. Cir. Ct., Duval Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Circuit Civil." Elevate Recovery and Medspa -- https://www.elevaterecoveryandmedspa.com/ -- offers a wide variety of wellness, and aesthetics services, such as weight loss management, muscle toning, and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mitchell Hansen, Esq. David Private Attorney (1065929) 15057 Shady Palms LN Nokomis, FL 34275-4340 ENSOFTEK INC: Ebner Sues Over Failure to Secure Personal Info ------------------------------------------------------------- LISA EBNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ENSOFTEK, INC. d/b/a DR CLOUD EHR, Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-01714-AR (D. Ore., September 23, 2025) is a class action lawsuit on behalf of the Plaintiff and all customers who entrusted Defendant with sensitive personally identifiable information and protected health information and that was impacted in a data breach. The Plaintiff's claims arise from Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard private information that was entrusted to it, and its accompanying responsibility to store and transfer that information. As a result of Defendant's inadequate digital security and notice process, Plaintiff's and Class Members' private information was exposed to criminals. The Plaintiff and the Class Members have suffered and will continue to suffer injuries including: financial losses caused by misuse of their private information; the loss or diminished value of their private information as a result of the data breach; lost time associated with detecting and preventing identity theft; and theft of personal and financial information, says the suit. Ensoftek, Inc. is an electronic health records provider that collects a wide variety of information from its clients across the U.S.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kaleigh N. Boyd, Esq. TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC 1200 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1700 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 682-5600 E-mail: kboyd@tousley.com - and - Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW 1 W Las Olas Blvd, Suite 500 Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com - and - John J. Nelson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 280 S. Beverly Drive, Penthouse Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (858) 209-6941 E-mail: jnelson@milberg.com EOSSO BROTHERS: Underpays Paving Laborers, Torres Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------------- HECTOR JAVIER PALADINES TORRES, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated who were employed by EOSSO BROTHERS, INC. aka EOSSO BROTHERS PAVING, and/or any other entities affiliated with, controlling, or controlled by EOSSO BROTHERS, INC. aka EOSSO BROTHERS PAVING, PAVE AMERICA INTERCO, LLC aka PAVE AMERICA, and any other entities affiliated with, controlling, or controlled by EOSSO BROTHERS, INC. aka EOSSO BROTHERS PAVING, PAVE AMERICA INTERCO, LLC aka PAVE AMERICA, GARY EOSSO, individually, and THOMAS EOSSO, individually, Plaintiffs v. EOSSO BROTHERS, INC. aka EOSSO BROTHERS PAVING, and/or any other entities affiliated with, controlling, or controlled by EOSSO BROTHERS, INC., aka EOSSO BROTHERS PAVING, PAVE AMERICA INTERCO, LLC aka PAVE AMERICA, GARY EOSSO, individually, and THOMAS EOSSO, individually, Defendants, Case No. MID-L-007284-25 (N.J. Super., Middlesex Cty., October 14, 2025) is brought against the Defendants for alleged violations of the New Jersey Prevailing Wage Act. The Plaintiff asserts that Defendants willfully failed to pay him and the putative class the statutorily required overtime compensation for the time they worked in excess of 40 hours a week for the Defendants on both the New Jersey Public Works Projects and on the Private Projects. Subcontractor Defendants also breached the Public Works Contracts by failing to pay Plaintiff and putative class members the prevailing rates of wages and supplemental benefits for all labor performed upon the Public Works Projects, says the suit. Plaintiff Torres worked for Defendants as a paving laborer from March 2021 through September 2024. He worked for Subcontractor Defendants as a paving laborer on public jobs, some of which were Public jobs where Prime Contractor performed work. Eosso Brothers, Inc. was founded in 1992. The company's line of business includes highway and street construction.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew I. Glenn, Esq. JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, P.A. 300 Carnegie Center, Suite 150 Princeton, NJ 08540 Telephone: (201) 687-9977 E-mail: Aglenn@jaffeglenn.com ESTEE LAUDER: Faces Dawkins Suit Over Illegal Data Trackers ----------------------------------------------------------- MONICA DAWKINS, on behalf of herself and all similarly situated persons v. THE ESTEE LAUDER COMPANIES INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No. 2:25-at-01429 (E.D. Cal., Oct. 20, 2025) is a class action lawsuit brought on behalf of all California residents who have accessed and used www.origins.com, a website that Defendant owns and operates. The Defendant allegedly installs and operates tracking software on the Website without providing users with adequate notice or obtaining their informed consent. The software is intentionally deployed to accomplish Defendant's commercial objectives, including identity resolution, targeted advertising, and the monetization of consumer data. To achieve these goals, the Defendant enables third-party technologies, that function as unlawful pen registers and/or trap and trace devices, to capture detailed information about users' electronic communications such as Internet Protocol (IP) addresses, session data, and clickstream activity in real time. These tools operate covertly and without judicial authorization, violating the California Invasion of Privacy Act (CIPA) where, as here, Plaintiff and Class Members did not consent to the interception, nor did Defendant secure a court order permitting such surveillance. A pixel tracker, also known as a web beacon, is a tracking mechanism embedded in a website that monitors user interactions. It typically appears as a small, transparent 1x1 image or a lightweight JavaScript snippet that activates when a webpage is loaded, or a user performs a tracked action., The Trackers are operated by distinct third parties, including Google LLC (Google Trackers), Meta Platforms, Inc. (Facebook Tracker), Tapad, Inc., a registered California data broker (Tapad Tracker), and FullStory, Inc. (FullStory Tracker). Estee Lauder is a multinational beauty company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Reuben D. Nathan, Esq. NATHAN & ASSOCIATES, APC 2901 W. Coast Hwy., Suite 200 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Telephone: (949) 270-2798 E-mail: rnathan@nathanlawpractice.com - and - Ross Cornell, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF ROSS CORNELL, APC 40729 Village Dr., Suite 8, 1989 Big Bear Lake, CA 92315 Telephone: (562) 612-1708 E-mail: rc@rosscornelllaw.com ETHOS MANAGEMENT: Bricker Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------------------ John Bricker, individually and for others similarly situated v. ETHOS MANAGEMENT PARTNERS LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-01045 (D.N.M., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and New Mexico Minimum Wage Act ("NMMWA") to recover unpaid wages and other damages from the Defendant. The Plaintiff and the other Hourly Employees regularly work more than 40 hours in a workweek. But the Defendant does not pay the Plaintiff and the other Hourly Employees at least 1.5 times their regular rates of pay--based on all remuneration--for hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek. Instead, the Defendant pays the Plaintiff and the other Hourly Employees non-discretionary bonuses that it fails to include in these employees' regular rates of pay for overtime purposes (the Defendant's "bonus pay scheme"). And the Defendant pays the Plaintiff and the other Hourly Employees "per diems" each workday that it did not included in their regular rates of pay for overtime purposes (the Defendant's "per diem pay scheme"). The Defendant's bonus pay scheme and per diem pay scheme violate the FLSA and the NMMWA by failing to compensate the Plaintiff and the other Hourly Employees at rates of at least 1.5 times their regular rates of pay--based on all remuneration--for hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed the Defendant as a solids control technician from June 2023 until May 2024. Ethos touts that "with yards and teams in New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, and Pennsylvania, it delivers reliable comprehensive Solids Control Services through a full suite of high-performance equipment designed to enhance drilling efficiency and fluid management."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. Josephson, Esq. Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq. JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: 713-352-1100 Facsimile: 713-352-3300 Email: mjosephson@mybackwages.com adunlap@mybackwages.com - and - Richard J. (Rex) Burch, Esq. BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC 11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3025 Houston, TX 77046 Phone: (713) 877-8788 Facsimile: 713-877-8065 Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com EUSD BOARD: Court Grants Class Certification in "Mirabelli" ----------------------------------------------------------- Judge Roger T. Benitez of the United States District Court for the Southern District of California granted class certification in the case captioned as Elizabeth Mirabelli, and Lori Ann West, individually and on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Mark Olson, in his official capacity as President of the EUSD Board of Education, et al., Defendants, Case No. 3:23-cv-768-BEN-WVG (S.D. Cal.). The certified class includes all individuals participating in California's public education system, whether as employees or parents/guardians of students, without having to subject themselves to Parental Exclusion Policies. The class includes four subclasses: (1) employees who object to complying with Parental Exclusion Policies; (2) employees who submit a request for a religious exemption or opt-out to complying with Parental Exclusion Policies; (3) parents/guardians who object to having Parental Exclusion Policies applied against them and have children attending California public schools; and (4) parents/guardians who submit a request for a religious exemption or opt-out to having Parental Exclusion Policies applied against them and have children attending California public schools. The State Defendants protested to the class certification arguing that there is no statewide policy and asserted that there are 1,000 separate public school districts and each school district sets its own policy. However, the Court found that California local school districts are ultimately state agents under state control. The Court cited Sato v. Orange County Department of Education, noting that California law treats public schooling as a statewide or central governmental function and that the state itself has decided to give its local agents more autonomy does not change the fact that the school districts remain state agents under state control. The California Supreme Court also recognizes this structure, stating that management and control of the public schools is a matter of state, not local, care and supervision. The Court found that joinder would be impracticable and the numerosity requirement is easily met. Richard Barrera, designated by the California Department of Education as its most knowledgeable person, testified that there are approximately 5,837,690 students enrolled in California public schools and California public school teachers number approximately 319,000. Based on polling data suggesting 72.1 percent of parents hold the opinion that parents should be notified if their child identifies as transgender in school, the Court determined that putative parent class members and teacher class members number in the thousands. The State Defendants did not contest this issue. The Court held that the Plaintiffs have provisionally shown commonality because they ask for a legal declaration that the Parental Exclusion Policies violate the Fourteenth Amendment right of parents to direct the healthcare and upbringing of one's own children and parents' FERPA rights to school records. The Court found that the representatives' claims are typical of the class members because they all seek similar relief from the application and enforcement of the Parent Exclusion Policies against them. The Court determined that the plaintiff parents and the plaintiff teachers do not have conflicting interests and are adequate to represent the proposed class and subclasses. Regarding class counsel, the Court found that the Plaintiffs' current counsel is certainly adequate for the task and the Defendants did not contest the question. The State Defendants' principal objection was that the proposed class cannot be certified because it lacks ascertainability and would be administratively impractical to manage such a class. However, the Court rejected this argument, noting that the Ninth Circuit does not impose an ascertainability requirement or an administrative feasibility requirement for class certification. The Court cited Briseno v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., which held that the language of Rule 23 does not impose a freestanding administrative feasibility prerequisite to class certification. The Court stated that ascertainability is not required at the certification stage and other judicial management tools are available. The Court conducted a rigorous analysis and determined that the Rule 23 requirements are met. The Court found that the Plaintiffs' claims depend upon a common contention, and the contention is capable of class-wide resolution and that determination will resolve one or more issues that are central to the validity of each one of the claims in one stroke. The Court noted that injunctive relief on behalf of the proposed class would achieve systemic changes to the California Department of Education that would obviate the need for future lawsuits seeking similar relief. Accordingly, the proposed class fits squarely within Rule 23(b)(2) and is appropriate for certification. The Court granted the motion for class certification and certified the class and four subclasses in accordance with Rule 23(b)(2). A copy of the Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=4VjD9S from PacerMonitor.com EVOLVE BANK & TRUST: Felton Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ----------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Ashley Felton, an individual, and all those similarly situated v. Evolve Bank & Trust, Evolve Bancorp Inc., Lineage Bank, American Bank, Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-10317 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03284-NYW to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud for Tort Action. Evolve Bank & Trust -- https://www.getevolved.com/ -- is a best-in-class technology-focused financial services organization and Banking-as-a-Service ("BaaS") provider.[BN] NOTE: There are no professionals stated in the doc. FEDEX GROUND: Fails to Pay Delivery Drivers' OT Wages Under FLSA ---------------------------------------------------------------- ANGEL SULLIVAN-BLAKE and HORACE CLAIBORNE, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-13276-MAG-APP (W.D. Pa., Oct. 17, 2025) is a class action suit brought by the Plaintiffs and other similarly situated individuals who have been employed by FedEx through intermediary employers to perform delivery services on FedEx's behalf and who have been eligible to receive overtime pay but have not been paid time-and-a-half compensation for their hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act FedEx employs thousands of package delivery drivers within the United States, including the named Plaintiffs and others similarly situated, who: (a) work for FedEx through intermediary employers called "independent service providers"; (b) are classified as "employees" of the FedEx ISPs; (c) have worked more than forty hours per week delivering packages for FedEx but are not paid time-and-a-half compensation for hours worked over forty; and (d) drive, in whole or in part, vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less. FedEx operates a package pickup and delivery business servicing customers throughout the United States. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Peter Winebrake, Esq. R. Andrew Santillo, Esq. Mark J. Gottesfeld, Esq. WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC 715 Twining Road, Suite 211 Dresher, PA 19025 Telephone: (215) 884-2491 E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com - and - Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. Michelle Cassorla, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com mcassorla@llrlaw.com FEDEX GROUND: Plaintiffs Allowed Leave to File Amended Complaint ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANGEL SULLIVAN-BLAKE and HORACE CLAIBORNE, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-03419-MJM (W.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Robert J. Colville will grant the Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file amended complaint. In light of all of the above, the Court is satisfied that the Plaintiffs have not unduly delayed in bringing their Motion to Amend, and that any prejudice to FedEx or burden on the Court has simply not been sufficiently established such that denial of the Motion to Amend would be warranted. Given the relatively light briefing on the futility issue, as well as the fact that FedEx seemingly concedes that some of the state law claims are not, at this juncture, futile, the Court rejects FedEx’s assertion that futility is an adequate basis on which the Court should deny Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend at this time. Accordingly, FedEx has not carried its burden of establishing prejudice, bad faith, undue delay, or futility, and the Court will grant Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend. The Plaintiffs seek leave to file an amended complaint to add additional named plaintiffs in this Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") conditionally certified collective action and to assert Rule 23 state law overtime class action claims on behalf of drivers who have worked in the following states: Arkansas, Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Wisconsin.1 On Oct. 8, 2019, Judge Dodge entered an Order conditionally certifying the following nationwide (excluding Massachusetts) collective: "All individuals (outside Massachusetts) who worked as a FedEx delivery driver under an independent service provider (ISP) or a contracted service provider (CSP) since Nov. 27, 2015, who operated a vehicle weighing less than 10,001 pounds at any time since Nov. 27, 2015, and were not paid overtime compensation for all hours worked over forty each week." The Plaintiff Sullivan-Blake is a resident of Texas and worked as a delivery driver for FedEx through an ISP from November 2015 through October 2018. The Plaintiff Claiborne resides in North Carolina and has worked as a delivery driver for FedEx through ISPs since 2011. FedEx is an American ground package delivery company. A copy of the Court's opinion dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5Nh5dL at no extra charge.[CC] FOND DU LAC COUNTY: Zimmerman Sues Unpaid Overtime Compensation --------------------------------------------------------------- Gavin Zimmerman, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. FOND DU LAC COUNTY, Case No. 2:25-cv-01613-SCD (E.D. Wis., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought for purposes of obtaining relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ("FLSA"), for unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees, declaratory and/or injunctive relief, and/or any such other relief the Court may deem appropriate. The Defendant operated an unlawful compensation system that deprived and failed to compensate Plaintiff and all other current and former hourly-paid, non-exempt employees for all hours worked and work performed each workweek, including at an overtime rate of pay for each hour worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek, by: shaving time (via electronic timeclock rounding) from Plaintiff's and all other hourly-paid, non-exempt employees' weekly timesheets for pre-shift and post-shift hours worked and/or work performed, to the detriment of said employees and to the benefit of Defendant, in violation of the FLSA; and failing to include all forms of non-discretionary compensation, such as monetary bonuses, incentives, awards, and/or other rewards and payments, in said employees' regular rates of pay for overtime calculation purposes, in violation of the FLSA. The Defendant's failure to compensate its hourly paid, non-exempt employees for compensable work performed each workweek, including but not limited to at an overtime rate of pay, was intentional, willful, and violated federal law as set forth in the FLSA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was hired by the Defendant as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee in the position of Registered Nurse. Fond du Lac County, is a municipality located in the State of Wisconsin.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James A. Walcheske, Esq. Scott S. Luzi, Esq. David M. Potteiger, Esq. WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC 235 N. Executive Drive, Suite 240 Brookfield, WI 53005 Phone: (262) 780-1953 Fax: (262) 565-6469 Email: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com GIUSEPPE PAMPENA: Isaacson Suit Transferred to S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Walter Isaacson, Petitioner v. Giuseppe Pampena, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Respondent Case No. 3:22-cv-05937-CRB was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-mc-00457 to the proceeding.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elizabeth A. McNamara, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP (NYC) 1251 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10020 Phone: (212) 489-8230 Fax: (212) 489-8340 Email: lizmcnamara@dwt.com HAIRMAX INTERNATIONAL: Garcia Renewal Suit Removed to S.D. Calif. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned as SILVIA GARCIA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HAIRMAX INTERNATIONAL, LLC, a Florida entity, d/b/a WWW.HAIRMAX.COM, Case No. 25CU046605C, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Diego, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of California on October 20, 2025. The Southern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-02790-JO-SBC to the proceeding. The Plaintiff seeks to represent this class: All persons who, while in California, purchased any product or service from Defendant's Website in response to an offer constituting an "Automatic renewal" as defined by section 17601(a)(1) of the California Business and Professions Code within the statute of limitations period. The Plaintiff alleges that had Defendant properly disclosed its automatic renewal policy, she would not have purchased the product or enrolled in the subscription, and she seeks restitution for all monies paid. In light of the volume of Defendant's California online sales, damages or restitution for all monies paid for the entire class would easily exceed $5 million. The Complaint therefore places more than $5 million in controversy. Hairmax is the pioneer and global leader in transformative hair regrowth.[BN] The Defendant is represented by: Alex Terepka, Esq. WATSTEIN TEREPKA LLP 515 South Flower Street, 19th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 839-3317 E-mail: alex@wtlaw.com HALO INNOVATIONS: Class Settlement in Bender Gets Final Nod ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CASSIDY BENDER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. HALO INNOVATIONS, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-04371-JGLC (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' unopposed motions for final approval of class action settlement and for fees and costs. Settlement Class On February 10, 2025, in its Preliminary Approval Order, pursuant to Rule 23(b)(3) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court preliminarily certified the following Settlement Class: All Persons in the United States (including in its states, districts, territories, or tribal reservations) who purchased one or more of the Class Products before the date of the Preliminary Approval Order. The Settlement Class excludes: (1) any Judge or Magistrate Judge presiding over this Action and members of their families; (2) Defendant, Defendant’s subsidiaries, parent companies, successors, predecessors, and any entity in which the Defendant or its parents have a controlling interest and their current or former officers, members, directors, agents, attorneys, and employees; (3) Persons who properly execute and file a timely request for exclusion from the class; (4) the legal representatives, successors, or assigns of any such excluded Persons; (5) any and all wholesalers, distributors, or retailers of the Class Products; and (6) any and all second-hand purchasers of the Class Products Common Fund The Settlement Agreement provides for a common fund of one million five-hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000) for the benefit of the Settlement Class Members from which payments will be made for (1) Cash Payments to Class Members who submit valid Claim Form, (2) all Notice and Administrative Costs, (3) any service award payments to Class Representatives approved by the Court and (4) attorneys’ fees and expenses as awarded by the Court. For the reasons stated on the record during the October 9, 2025 hearing, the Court certifies the proposed Settlement Class and grants Plaintiffs’ motion for final approval. The Court finds that the Settlement Class satisfies the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(a) and 23(b), and that the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable and adequate. The Court also grants fees and costs, as specified in ECF No. 67. The Clerk of Court is directed to terminate ECF Nos. 67 and 76, docket this order in the instant action (Case No. 23-cv-11048) and its consolidated counterpart (Case No. 24 cv-4371), and close both cases. Halo develops sleeping products. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6RlGw0 at no extra charge.[CC] HARCROS CHEMICALS: Faces Tucker Class Suit in Kansas Fed. Court --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action has been filed against Harcros Chemicals Inc. The case is captioned as Vanessa Tucker, Individually and on behalf of those similarly situated v. Harcros Chemicals Inc., et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-02569-KHV-ADM (D. Kan., Oct. 1, 2025). The case is assigned to the Hon. District Judge Kathryn H. Vratil. The Defendants include Harcros Chemicals Inc., Philips Electronics North America Corporation, Koninklijke Philips N.V., Elementis Chemicals, Inc., Elementis PLC, and ABC Corporations (1-5). Harcros Chemicals Inc. is a distributor and manufacturer of industrial and specialty chemicals.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joanna B. Orscheln, Esq. KRAUSE & KINSMAN GROUP, LLC 4717 Grand Avenue, Suite 300 Kansas City, MO 64112 Telephone: (816) 760-2700 Facsimile: (816) 760-2800 E-mail: joanna@krauseandkinsman.com - and - Robert L. Kinsman, Esq. KRAUSE & KINSMAN LAW FIRM 93 Francisco Escudero No. 1002 Dorado, PR 00646 Telephone: (816) 760-2700 Facsimile: (816) 760-2800 E-mail: robert@krauseandkinsman.com HUMANGOOD AFFORDABLE: Khanlaryan Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages -------------------------------------------------------------- ANAIT KHANLARYAN, an individual, Plaintiff v. HUMANGOOD AFFORDABLE HOUSING, INC., a corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV30129 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., October 15, 2025) is a class action arising from the Defendants' alleged unlawful labor practices in violation of the California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions Code. The complaint alleges the Defendants' failure to pay proper wages, failure to compensate wages for meal and wage breaks, failure to provide accurate itemized wage statements, and engagement in unfair competition in violation of the state labor laws. The Plaintiff was hired by Humangood as a part-time Office Assistant at the Palmer House property, located in Glendale, California in February 2009. In or about 2010, the Plaintiff was promoted to a full-time assistant to the Housing Administrator and transferred to the Castle Argyle property located in Los Angeles, California, which was reserved for low-income residents, and is managed by the Defendant Humangood. In or about April 2015, the Plaintiff was promoted to full-time Housing Administrator (HA) for the Andres Duarte Terrace 2 property located in Duarte, California, which was also managed by Defendant Humangood and reserved for low-income residents. On or about April 16, 2018, Plaintiff transferred back to Castle Argyle to assume the position of Castle Argyle's HA. HAs were classified by Humangood as an exempt position. In her position as a HA, the Plaintiff was salaried and remained salaried throughout the rest of her tenure at Humangood. On or about December 22, 2022, Humangood terminated Plaintiff's employment. Humangood Affordable Housing, Inc. is a California-based nonprofit provider of senior housing.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: William W. Bloch, Esq. LA SUPERLAWYERS INC. Wilshire Boulevard, Penthouse 40 Los Angeles, CA 90036 Telephone: (310) 477-7767 E-mail: lasuperlawyers@gmail.com HYWIN HOLDINGS: Settlement Reached in Perrier Suit -------------------------------------------------- Santech Holdings Limited disclosed in its Form 20-F report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 16, 2025, that the company reached settlement with the plaintiff to dismiss all claims and agreed to pay US$1 million. In August 2025, a final judgment by the Court approved the settlement. In March 2024, a securities class action was filed against Hywin Holdings Ltd., the company's previous name, in the Supreme Court of New York in the County of New York captioned "Daniel Perrier, et al. vs. Hywin Holdings Ltd.," docket number 152554/2024. The plaintiff complained that the registration statement and prospectus issued in the company's initial public offering in 2021 contained misleading or materially false information, and alleged the company of fraud, as a result of which investors suffered financial losses on their investments. Santech Holdings Limited is a Cayman Islands holding company, with operating subsidiaries in Hong Kong and the United States. It is a technology company focusing on developing early stage technology businesses and is currently developing businesses in e-commerce, digital assets, consumer healthcare, and may target opportunities in other areas of consumer and enterprise technology. On July 17, 2024, the company's English name was changed from Hywin Holdings Ltd. to Santech Holdings Limited. IMC GLOBAL LLC: Mackey Suit Removed to S.D. Florida --------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Hunter Mackey, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. IMC Global, LLC, Case No. CACE-25-013626 was removed from the 17th Judicial Circuit, Broward County, Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on Oct. 15, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 0:25-cv-62074-XXXX to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. IMC Global was a mining and production company.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. The Defendant is represented by: Matthew A. Keilson, Esq. WATSTEIN TEREPKA LLP 218 Northwest 24th Street, Ste. 3rd Floor Miami, FL 33127 Phone: (305) 498-3216 Email: mkeilson@wtlaw.com JOHNSON CONTROLS: Kaufman Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. --------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned MATTHEW KAUFMAN, an individual, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROTECTION LP, a Limited Partnership; AND DOES 1 through 50, inclusive (Case No. 2025CUOE04933), was removed from Ventura County Superior Court to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on Oct. 2, 2025. The Central District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-09426-FMO-PD to the proceeding. The Plaintiff seeks recovery for unpaid wages (including minimum wages, regular rate wages, and overtime wages), meal and rest period violations, waiting time penalties, unreimbursed business expenses, sick pay violations, and itemized wage statement penalties, on behalf of himself and the putative class under California Labor Code. Members of the proposed class are defined as all persons who are currently or who have previously worked for Defendant in California at any time during the period beginning four years prior to the filing of this Complaint and ending on the date as determined by the Court. JOHNSON CONTROLS FIRE PROTECTION LP is a subsidiary of Johnson Controls that provides fire and life safety solutions.[BN] The Defendant is represented by: Marlene M. Moffitt, Esq. Thomas R. Boswell, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 4660 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 900 San Diego, CA 92122 Telephone: (858) 652-3100 Facsimile: (858) 652-3101 E-mail: marlene.moffitt@ogletree.com thomas.boswell@ogletree.com JPMORGAN CHASE: Normandin Sues Over Interest Rate-Fixing Conspiracy ------------------------------------------------------------------- TRACY NORMANDIN; and J. ALLEN SENSABAUGH, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A.; BANK OF AMERICA N.A.; WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.; CITIBANK, N.A.; U.S. BANK, N.A.; PNC BANK, N.A.; TRUIST BANK; and JOHN DOE BANKS 1-5; Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-01749 (D. Conn., October 16, 2025) is a class action complaint against the Defendants concerning an alleged conspiracy among the largest U.S. banks to fix, raise, and stabilize interest rates on an extraordinarily large number of consumer and small-business loans, in violation of federal law. The complaint alleges that banks accomplish this by agreeing with each other on the rate each charges its most creditworthy customers for short-term loans--their "prime rates." Each Defendant's collusively-determined prime rate is then reported by The Wall Street Journal (the "Journal") as the "Wall Street Journal U.S. Prime Rate" (the "WSJ Prime Rate" or "WSJ Prime"). WSJ Prime, in turn, serves as a component of the interest rate on trillions of dollars in variable-rate loans, which are set at WSJ Prime plus an additional margin. Approximately 70% of all consumer loans issued by domestic banks for amounts under $1 million are indexed to WSJ Prime; approximately 75% of all floating-rate small-business loans are indexed to WSJ Prime; and substantially all variable-rate credit cards in the United States are indexed to WSJ Prime. By coordinating their interest rates for prime customers, Defendant banks not only charge these customers supracompetitive rates, but also artificially inflate interest rates for millions of loans explicitly tied to the WSJ Prime Rate, asserts the complaint. Pertinent to this action, substantially all Home Equity Lines of Credit ("HELOCs") and Consumer Credit Cards are indexed to WSJ Prime. Dow Jones, through its publication of WSJ Prime in The Wall Street Journal--which began in 1975--materially contributed to the banks' ability to coordinate and stabilize prime rates, facilitating a broader conspiracy involving unnamed co-conspirators, the complaint adds. As a result of this alleged collusion, Plaintiffs claim they incurred higher interest costs on their WSJ Prime-linked accounts and continue to suffer financial harm due to the Defendants' violations of the law. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs seek to recover damages for the supracompetitive interest payments made as a result of Defendants' conspiracy to fix, raise, and stabilize their respective prime rates, and consequently, WSJ Prime. Plaintiff Normandin has transacted in financial instruments indexed to WSJ Prime, including a HELOC obtained from Defendant Bank of America around June 2023 that he continues to hold, while Plaintiff Sensabaugh has transacted in financial instruments indexed to WSJ Prime, including a WSJ Prime-Indexed Consumer Credit Card issued by Defendant Citibank that he continues to hold. The Defendants are the largest banks in the U.S. Defendants John Doe Banks 1-5 represent currently unknown banks that participated in the WSJ Prime index rate setting process during the Class Period.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Peter Cherepanov, Esq. Patrick McGahan, Esq. Michael Srodoski, Esq. Erin Dennehy, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 156 S Main Street P.O. Box 192 Colchester, CT 06415 Telephone: (860) 537-5537 E-mail: pcherepanov@scott-scott.com pmcgahan@scott-scott.com msrodoski@scott-scott.com edennehy@scott-scott.com - and - Carmen Medici, Esq. Patrick Rodriguez, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 600 W. Broadway, Suite 3300 San Diego, CA 92101 Telephone: (619) 233-4565 E-mail: cmedici@scott-scott.com prodriguez@scott-scott.com - and - Karin E. Garvey, Esq. Matthew Perez, Esq. SCOTT+SCOTT ATTORNEYS AT LAW LLP 230 Park Ave., 24th Floor New York, NY 11069 Telephone: (212) 223-6444 600 E-mail: kgarvey@scott-scott.com mperez@scott-scott.com KKC AUTO: Zaragoza Suit Seeks Overtime Wages Under FLSA, NYLL ------------------------------------------------------------- FRANCISCO JAVIER RIVERA ZARAGOZA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. KKC AUTO LLC d/b/a MAACO, and KEVIN CHEAN and JUSTO ALVAREZ, as individuals, Case No. 1:25-cv-05818 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 17, 2025) alleges that the Defendants did not pay Plaintiff time and a half for hours worked over 40 in violation of the overtime provisions contained in the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a car painter and detailer while performing related miscellaneous duties, from in or around July 2020 until in or around September 2025. The Defendants operate a car shop.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Roman Avshalumov, Esq. HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 80-02 Kew Gardens Road, Suite 601 Kew Gardens, NY 11415 Telephone: (718) 263-9591 KOHL'S CORP: McCormick Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind --------------------------------------------------------------- GRACE MCCORMICK, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. KOHL'S CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-08531 (S.D.N.Y., October 15, 2025) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website, https://www.kohls.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, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the New York State Civil Rights Law. The Plaintiff uses NVDA screen-reading software, a free and widely adopted tool among blind users. She has received structured training from other disabled accessibility experts and is proficient in navigating compliant websites. Despite this, she attempted to access the website twice in August 2025 and once in September 2025, each time encountering barriers that rendered the site unusable. These repeated failures occurred despite her technical proficiency and the use of industry-standard assistive technology. By failing to make the website accessible to blind persons, Defendant is violating basic equal access requirements under both state and federal law, alleges the suit. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Kohl's policies, practices, and procedures so that Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to unlawful discrimination. Kohl's Corporation operates as an omnichannel retailer.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Schonfeld, Esq. JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC 825 Third Avenue, Suite 2100 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 227-5700 Facsimile: (212) 656-1889 L'OREAL USA: Filing for Class Cert Bid in Hicks Due July 28, 2026 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ZAIDA HICKS, et al., v. L'OREAL U.S.A., INC., et al., Case No. 1:22-cv-01989-JPC-HJR (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Henry Ricardo entered an order granting in part and denying in part the Parties' joint letter motion requesting a six-month extension of the current case management schedule. The Court will grant an extension of the deadlines in the case management plan by four months. The new deadlines are as follows: -- The Parties shall meet and confer regarding expert disclosures by Jan. 12, 2026; -- Fact Discovery shall be completed by March 12, 2026; -- Depositions shall be completed by March 12, 2026; -- Expert discovery shall be completed by July 14, 2026; -- The Plaintiff shall move for class certification by July 28, 2026. L'Oreal manufactures and markets cosmetic products. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2bZFEJ at no extra charge.[CC] LENOVO (UNITED STATES): Court Extends Response Deadline to Nov. 10 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the case captioned as Stephen Liss and Joshua Taylor, on their own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., Defendant, No. 3:25-cv-05840-JNW (W.D. Wash.), Judge Jamal N. Whitehead of the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington granted the parties' second stipulated motion to extend the deadline for Defendant to respond to the Complaint through and including November 10, 2025. On August 20, 2025, Plaintiffs filed their Complaint in the Superior Court for Thurston County, Case No. 25-2-03220-34. Plaintiffs served the Summons and Complaint on Defendant's registered agent on August 22, 2025. On September 19, 2025, Defendant removed the case to federal court. On September 23, 2025, the parties filed a Stipulated Motion and Proposed Order to Extend Time for Defendant to Respond to Complaint. The Court granted the parties' stipulated motion. Absent an additional extension, Defendant's deadline to respond to the Complaint is October 20, 2025. A separate, related matter is currently pending at the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle: Giaunie Hendrix v. Lenovo (United States) Inc., No. 2:25-cv-01663 (W.D. Wash.), also assigned to Judge Jamal N. Whitehead. To allow time for the parties to continue discussing and make informed decisions regarding the potential consolidation of this matter with the Hendrix Action and the potential arbitrability of these claims, the parties agreed and stipulated, subject to Court approval, to extend the deadline for Defendant to respond to the Complaint up to, and including, November 10, 2025. The parties agreed that good cause exists under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 6(b) to extend the parties' deadlines as set forth in the motion. Good cause exists to extend the deadline to respond to the Complaint in order to provide the parties additional time to discuss and make informed decisions regarding the potential consolidation of this matter with the Hendrix Action. The additional time will allow the parties to make decisions regarding potential consolidation at an early stage in the litigation, before filing substantive responses or engaging in motions practice, and potentially avoid duplicative work from the parties, counsel, and the Court. Lenovo also continues to explore the arbitrability of Plaintiffs' claims and reserves all rights to move to compel arbitration. The extension request is the second extension the parties have requested or obtained in this matter. Defendant concurrently requested similar extensions in the Hendrix Action via separate stipulated motion. For good cause shown, the Court granted the parties' stipulated motion and extended the time for Defendant to respond to the Complaint through and including November 10, 2025. The Court issued its order on October 16, 2025 and can be accessed at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=tBWIc4 from PacerMonitor.com LIBERTY MUTUAL: Perez Sues Over Mismanaged 401k Retirement Plans ---------------------------------------------------------------- LESTER ANTHONY PEREZ, individually and as representative of a class of participants and beneficiaries and on behalf of the Liberty Mutual 401K Plan, Plaintiff v. LIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP, INC.; LIBERTY MUTUAL RETIREMENT COMMITTEEE; FIDELITY MANAGEMENT TRUST COMPANY; and STRATEGIC ADVISORS, INC. Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-08775 (N.D. Cal., October 14, 2025) arises out of the Defendants' wrongful conduct in connection with employees' 401k retirement plan in violation of the Employment Retirement Income Security Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants paid prohibited and excessive fees to parties in interest, used forfeited plan assets to reduce its employer contribution obligations, rather than for the benefit of plan participants, and failed to properly monitor the Plan's management and administration, in violation of the ERISA and Defendants' fiduciary responsibilities. In this action, the Plaintiff seeks damages in connection with Defendants' wrongful conduct in misusing and mismanaging Plan assets. Liberty Mutual Group, Inc. is an American diversified global insurer and the sixth-largest property and casualty insurer in the world.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua H. Haffner, Esq. Alfredo Torrijos, Esq. Vahan Mikayelyan, Esq. HAFFNER LAW PC 15260 Ventura Blvd., Suite 1520 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (213) 514-5681 Facsimile: (213) 514-5682 E-mail: jhh@haffnerlawyers.com at@haffnerlawyers.com vh@haffnerlawyers.com - and - Shaun C. Setareh, Esq. Thomas A. Segal, Esq. SETAREH LAW GROUP 9665 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 430 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (310) 888-7771 Facsimile: (310) 888-0109 E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com thomas@setarehlaw.com LIVE NATION: Class Cert Bid Filing in Witt Suit Due Oct. 9, 2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as LARI WITT, v. LIVE NATION ENTERTAINMENT, INC., Case No. 5:24-cv-06445-PCP (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge P. Casey Pitts entered a case management order as follows: -- Joinder and other amendments: Aug. 10, 2026 -- Close of fact discovery: Sept. 9, 2026 -- Motion for class certification, including Oct. 9, 2026 the Plaintiff's expert reports relied on in motion: -- Depositions and document productions for Nov. 9, 2026 the Plaintiff's experts re: class certification: -- Opposition to class certification, Dec. 8, 2026 including the Defendant's expert reports relied on in opposition: -- Depositions and document productions for Jan. 7, 2027 the Defendant's experts re: class certification: -- Reply to opposition, including Plaintiff's Feb. 8, 2027 expert reports relied on in reply: -- Hearing on motion for class certification: Mar. 11, 2027 Live is an American multinational entertainment company. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=jYokuv at no extra charge.[CC] LUCID SOFTWARE: Lyons Balks at Illegal Use of Data Broker Software ------------------------------------------------------------------ JOHN LYONS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LUCID SOFTWARE INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-at-01393 (E.D. Cal., October 14, 2025) arises from the Defendant's installation and use of data broker software without obtaining consent which is a violation of the California Trap and Trace Law. According to the complaint, the Defendant uses data broker software on its website, lucidchart.com, to secretly collect data about a Website visitor's computer, location, and browsing habits. The data broker software then compiles this data, and correlates it with extensive external records the data broker already has about most Californians, for the purpose of learning the identity of the website visitor. The Defendant has partnered with registered California Data Brokers in order to deanonymize and develop clandestine user profiles on otherwise anonymous website visitors. The Defendant has done this by installing at least one Data Broker Software Development Kit on the Website. These DBSDKs are designed to track and correlate visitors by capturing electronic impulses designed to identify them. This is accomplished through "browser fingerprinting," a process by which Data Brokers are able to ascertain the identity of a website visitor by plotting hundreds of personal identifiers, a direct violation of the state law, says the suit. Lucid Software Inc. operates LucidChart, which sells subscriptions to cloud-based diagramming and visual collaboration software.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Tauler, Esq. J. Evan Shapiro, Esq. TAULER SMITH LLP 626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 927-9270 E-mail: rtauler@taulersmith.com eshapiro@taulersmith.com MEDITERRANEAN MAISON: Ventre Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages --------------------------------------------------------------- NICOLE VENTRE, Plaintiff v. MEDITERRANEAN MAISON, INC., a California corporation; MEDITERRANEAN MAISON MAISON 3, INC., a California corporation; MEDITERRANEAN MAISON 7 INC., a California corporation; MEDITERRANEAN MAISON 8, INC., a California corporation; MM9, INC., a California corporation; MM10, INC., a California corporation; MARWAN KARAME, a natural person; and DOES 1–50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV30015 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., October 14, 2025) is a class action for Defendants' alleged violations of the California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions Code. The complaint alleges that Defendants are liable to her for unpaid wages, statutory penalties, interest, and related relief. These claims are based on Defendants' failures to: (a) classify the Plaintiff as a non-exempt employee and not as an exempt executive or administrator; (b) pay all wages, including overtime, earned for all hours worked at the correct rates of pay; (c) provide all meal periods; (d) authorize and permit all rest breaks; (e) pay premium wages for unprovided meal periods; (f) pay premium wages for unprovided rest breaks; (g) indemnify for necessary work-related expenditures; (h) issue only accurate and complete itemized wage statements; and (i) timely pay wages upon termination of employment. Accordingly, the Plaintiff seeks to recover unpaid wages, interest, liquidated damages, restitution, statutory penalties, attorneys' fees, costs, and related relief through this action. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants on December 16, 2019 in Manhattan Beach in the position of general manager, paid hourly. The Defendants promoted Plaintiff Ventre to district manager in September of 2020, paid by salary, then added to her position the additional non-administrative, non-managerial/executive duties of director of catering in January 2021. The Defendants did not increase Ventre's salary to reflect the addition of her catering duties. The Defendants continuously employed her in that capacity until December 26, 2022, when her employment ended. Mediterranean Maison, Inc. is a corporation that does business as Chicken Maison and is organized and existing under the laws of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David Glenn Spivak, Esq. Julia Rose McCoy, Esq. THE SPIVAK LAW FIRM 8605 Santa Monica Bl., PMB 42554 West Hollywood, CA 90069 Telephone: (213) 725-9094 Facsimile: (213) 634-2485 E-mail: david@spivaklaw.com julia@spivaklaw.com META PLATFORMS: A.A. Suit Removed to N.D. California ---------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as A.A. and C.M., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. META PLATFORMS, INC., Case No. 25-CIV-06074 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Mateo, to the United States District Court for Northern District of California on Oct. 15, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-08852. On September 19, 2025, Meta accepted service of the Complaint and Summons. The Complaint asserts claims against Meta for violation of the California Invasion of Privacy Act, Section 632 and Invasion of Privacy.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Melanie M. Blunschi, Esq. Kristin Sheffield-Whitehead, Esq. LATHAM & WATKINS LLP 505 Montgomery St., Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: +1.415.391.0600 Email: melanie.blunschi@lw.com kristin.whitehead@lw.com MICHAEL MICHAUD: Lopez Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind --------------------------------------------------------------- VICTOR LOPEZ, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MICHAEL MICHAUD DESIGNS INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-08459 (S.D.N.Y., October 14, 2025) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website, https://www.michael-michaud-us.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, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the New York State General Business Law. During Plaintiff's visits to the website, the last occurring on October 9, 2025, in an attempt to purchase Eucalyptus Napkin Rings from Defendant and to view the information on the website, the Plaintiff encountered multiple access barriers that denied Plaintiff a shopping experience similar to that of a sighted person and full and equal access to the goods and services offered to the public and made available to the public. He was unable to locate pricing and was not able to add the item to the cart due to broken links, pictures without alternate attributes and other barriers on Defendant's website, says the suit. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Michael Michaud Designs Inc. operates the website that offers handmade botanical jewelry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael A. LaBollita, Esq. Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq. Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq. GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES PLLC 150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 228-9795 Facsimile: (212) 982-6284 E-mail: Jeffrey@Gottlieb.legal Dana@Gottlieb.legal Michael@Gottlieb.legal MISTR INC: Faces C.T. Suit Over Disclosure of Private Info ---------------------------------------------------------- C.T., on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MISTR, Inc. d/b/a MISTR, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-05785 (E.D.N.Y., October 15, 2025) is a class action brought on behalf of all individuals who accessed and used Defendant's website, heymistr.com, and whose browsing data was collected by embedded tracking technologies. According to the complaint, MISTR aided, employed, agreed, and conspired with a number of third-party advertisers to intercept sensitive and confidential communications sent and received by Plaintiff and members of the putative class. Those communications include communications revealing patients' health conditions and prescribed medications. The Plaintiff and Class members did not consent to MISTR's disclosure of their private information to third parties, for advertising purposes or otherwise. To address MISTR's misconduct, the Plaintiff, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, brings this action, seeking actual, punitive, and statutory damages, restitution, injunctive relief and a declaratory judgment, as well as pre- and post-judgment interest and reasonable costs and attorneys' fees. MISTR, Inc. provides online prevention and treatment for HIV predominantly to gay men across the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jennifer J. Sosa, Esq. Jennifer Czeisler, Esq. Edward Ciolko, Esq. Arturo Peña Miranda, Esq. STERLINGTON, PLLC 228 Park Avenue South, Suite 97956 New York, NY 10003 Telephone: (212) 433-2993 E-mail: jenn.sosa@sterlingtonlaw.com jen.czeisler@sterlingtonlaw.com edward.ciolko@sterlingtonlaw.com arturo.pena@sterlingtonlaw.com - and - Jean Sutton Martin, Esq. Francesca Burne, Esq. Serena Premjee, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 201 N. Franklin St., 7th Floor Tampa, FL 33602 Telephone: (813) 559-4908 E-mail: jeanmartin@forthepeople.com fburne@forthepeople.com serena.premjee@forthepeople.com MY REALTY GROUP: Faces Mokled Suit Over Unwanted Text Messages -------------------------------------------------------------- JEAN MOKLED, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MY REALTY GROUP, LLC, Case No. CACE-25-014940 (Fla. Cir., Broward Cty., Oct. 1, 2025) contends that the Defendant promotes and markets its merchandise, in part, by sending unsolicited text messages to wireless phone users, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to halt the Defendant's unlawful conduct which has resulted in intrusion into the peace and quiet in a realm that is private and personal to Plaintiff and the Class members. On Nov. 29, 2021, the Defendant made telephone solicitations to Plaintiff's cellular telephone. The class that Plaintiff seeks to represent is defined as: "All persons in the United States who from four years prior to the filing of this action through the date of class certification (1) Defendant, or anyone on Defendant's behalf, (2)placed more than one call within any 12-month period; (3) where the person's telephone number that had been listed on the National Do Not Call Registry for at least thirty days; (4) regarding Defendant's property, goods, and/or services; (5) who did not purchase or transact business with Defendant during eighteen months immediately preceding the date of the first call; and (6)who did not contact Defendant during the three months immediately preceding the date of the first call with an inquiry about a product, good, or service offered by Defendant." The Defendant is a real state company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mitchell D. Hansen, Esq. Zane C. Hedaya, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI 1515 NE 26th Street Wilton Manors, FL E-mail: mitchell@jibraellaw.com zane@iibraellaw.com gerald@jibraellaw.com NATIONAL BAR: J.L. Turner Files Suit Over 2025 Board Elections -------------------------------------------------------------- J. L. TURNER LEGAL ASSOCIATION and HOUSTON LAWYERS ASSOCIATION, on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. NATIONAL BAR ASSOCIATION, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-08495 (S.D.N.Y., October 14, 2025) arises from the failure of the Defendant to conduct its 2025 Board elections in accordance with its own Constitution and Bylaws. On or about July 29, 2025, the NBA held its annual election of Officers and Members-at-Large of the NBA during its centennial convention in Chicago, Illinois as prescribed in Article VII, Section 3, of the Constitution and Bylaw Chapter IV. According to the complaint, approximately 1,500 individuals registered in advance and on-site at the Annual Meeting. Notwithstanding the Bylaws' express formula for allocating Affiliate votes based on "members of that Affiliate registered at the Annual Meeting," the NBA did not assign or credit Affiliate vote entitlements for several registrants to the relevant Affiliates -- including both on-site registrants, as well as a significant number of Affiliate members registered ahead of time. The Defendant, acting through its Elections Committee, officers, and Board of Governors, failed to allocate and count those Affiliate votes, thereby disregarding clear provisions of the governing documents and depriving Plaintiffs of rights owed to them. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's breaches, the Plaintiffs have suffered irreparable harm, including but not limited to disenfranchisement in the election of the Association's officers and the erosion of trust in the legitimacy of the Association's officer governance, alleges the suit. Plaintiff J.L. Turneer Legal Association is a duly chartered Affiliate organization of the NBA, comprised of attorneys licensed and practicing within the State of Texas. The National Bar Association is a nonprofit membership corporation incorporated under the laws of the State of Iowa. It is the oldest and largest global network of predominantly African American attorneys.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Reginald J. Richter, Esq. RICHTER RESTREPO, PLLC 1120 6th Avenue, Suite 4102 New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (347) 745-0375 NEWCOLD SEATTLE: Ehresman Seeks Unpaid Wages Under WARN Act ----------------------------------------------------------- SETH EHRESMAN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. NEWCOLD SEATTLE OPERATIONS, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-01284-UNA (D. Del., Oct. 20, 2025) is a civil action for collection of unpaid wages and benefits for 60 calendar days pursuant to the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act of 1988 and the Securing Timely Notification And Benefits For Laid-Off Employees Act (Washington State WARN Act). The Plaintiff was an employee of Defendant until he was terminated as part of, or as a result of a mass layoff ordered by Defendant. As such, the Defendant is liable under the WARN Acts for the failure to provide Plaintiff and the other similarly situated former employees at least 60 days' advance written notice of termination, as required by the WARN Acts. The Plaintiff was an employee who was employed by Defendant and worked at or reported to the Facility until his termination without cause on or about September 30, 2025. NewCold is an automated warehouse and cold chain logistics company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: James E. Huggett, Esq. MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN 300 Delaware Avenue Suite 800 Wilmington, De 19801 Telephone: (302) 888-1112 Facsimile: (302) 888-1119 - and - Stuart J. Miller, Esq. LANKENAU & MILLER, LLP 100 Church Street, 8th Fl. New York, NY 10078 Telephone: (212) 581-5005 Facsimile: (212) 581-2122 - and - Mary E. Olsen, Esq. M. Vance McCrary, Esq. THE GARDNER FIRM, PC Francis Street, Suite 103 Mobile, AL 36602 Telephone: (251) 433-8100 Facsimile: (251) 433-8181 NISSAN NORTH AMERICA: Azar Sues Over Defective Vehicles ------------------------------------------------------- Virginia Azar and Chyvonne Williams, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. NISSAN NORTH AMERICA, INC., Case No. 3:25-cv-01178 (M.D. Tenn., Oct. 10, 2025), is brought as a result of the Defendant's breach of fundamental duties by manufacturing, marketing, and selling defective 2019-2022 Nissan Leaf electric vehicles equipped with a "quick charge" port (the "Class Vehicles") that were dangerous and prone to catching fire while charging with a Level 3 charger, the fastest battery charging functionality available on these vehicles. Even though Nissan knew of the fire risk prior to launching the vehicles, it did nothing to warn owners and lessees prior to sale/lease. The Class Vehicles are powered by a high-voltage lithium ion battery supplied by Automotive Energy Supply Corporation, and were designed with a specialized "quick charge" port to enable fast charging through a Level 3 charger. There is a defect, however, in the Class Vehicles' high-voltage battery system that can cause the vehicles to overheat and catch fire during Level 3 fast charging (the "Spontaneous Fire Risk Defect"). The Spontaneous Fire Risk Defect exposes Plaintiffs and Class Members to an unreasonable risk of injury, death, or property damage if their vehicle catches fire, including while the vehicle is parked at the Class Member's home, on a public street, or in a public parking lot. The Spontaneous Fire Risk Defect also exposes passengers, other drivers on the road, neighbors, owners of other cars parked near the Class Vehicles, and other bystanders to an unreasonable risk of injury, death, and/or property damage. Because of Nissan's sale and marketing of these defective vehicles and its fraudulent concealment of the Spontaneous Fire Risk Defect, Nissan has violated state consumer protection acts, breached its express warranties to Plaintiffs and Class Members, breached the implied warranties of merchantability codified in state law, and been unjustly enriched. Owners and lessees of Class Vehicles have been injured in fact, incurred damages, and suffered ascertainable losses in money and property. Had Plaintiffs and Class Members known of the Spontaneous Fire Risk Defect, then they would either not have purchased or leased those vehicles or would have paid substantially less for them. Plaintiffs and Class Members did not receive the benefit of their bargain. Plaintiffs have suffered a classic "pocketbook" injury, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs purchased one of the Defendant's vehicles. Nissan North America, Inc., d/b/a Nissan USA, is a motor vehicle manufacturer and a licensed distributor of new, previously untitled motor vehicles.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Mark P. Chalos, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 222 2nd Avenue South, Suite 1640 Nashville, TN 37201 Phone: (615) 313-9000 Email: mchalos@lchb.com - and - Phong-Chau G. Nguyen, Esq. LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP 275 Battery Street, 29th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-3339 Phone: (415) 956-1000 Email: pgnguyen@lchb.com - and - E. Powell Miller, Esq. Dennis A. Lienhardt, Esq. Dana E. Fraser, Esq. THE MILLER LAW FIRM PC 950 W. University Drive, Suite 300 Rochester, MI 48307 Phone: (248) 841-2200 Email: epm@millerlawpc.com dal@millerlawpc.com def@millerlawpc.com NLU PRODUCTS: Porcelli Suit Removed to S.D. Florida --------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Madison Porcelli, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. NLU PRODUCTS, LLC, Case No. 50-2025-CA-009527 was removed from the Circuit Court of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, to the United States District Court for Southern District of Florida on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 9:25-cv-81285-XXXX. The Complaint alleges that Defendants violated the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act ("FTSA"), and seeks an award of statutory damages, injunctive and declaratory relief, attorneys' fees, costs, and interest.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Emanuel L. McMiller, Esq. FAEGRE DRINKER BIDDLE & REATH LLP 300 N. Meridian Street, Suite 2500 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317) 237-0300 Fax: (317) 237-1000 Email: manny.mcmiller@faegredrinker.com NORCO INC: Easa Suit Removed to W.D. Washington ----------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Tina Easa, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. NORCO, INC., an Idaho Corporation, and DOES 1-20, inclusive, Case No. 25-2-26626-5 SEA was removed from the Superior Court of Washington for King County, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02028. The Complaint asserts that Defendant engaged "in a systematic scheme of wage and hour violations." The Plaintiff states that she worked eight-hour shifts and was typical of class members, with claims stemming "from the same practices and course of conduct." More specifically, the Complaint asserts causes of action against Defendant on behalf of Plaintiff and the putative classes for "systemic failure to comply with Washington wage and hour laws and regulations regarding the payment of missed and/or interrupted rest periods and late, missed, and/or interrupted first meal periods, and the underpayment of wages." As result of these wage and hour violations, Plaintiff seeks damages for missed breaks, damages for unpaid break time, damages for other unpaid time before and after shifts, overtime wages, double damages under RCW 49.52.070, and attorneys' fees.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Collin J. Cox, Esq. GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 811 Main Street, Suite 3000 Houston, TX 77002-6117 Phone: 346.718.6600 Facsimile: 346.718.6620 Email: ccox@gibsondunn.com NORDSTROM INC: Lee Sues Over False or Misleading Email Marketing ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jewel Lee and Megan Trama, for themselves, as private attorneys general, and/or on behalf of all others similarly situated v. NORDSTROM, INC., Case No. 25-2-29677-6 SEA (Wash. Super. Ct., King Cty., Oct. 8, 2025), is brought against Nordstrom for false or misleading email marketing concerning discounts at its Nordstrom Rack retail website and Nordstrom Rack retail stores, in violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act ("CPA"), and the Washington Commercial Electronic Mail Act ("CEMA"). The advertised discounts are viewed both under the law and by reasonable consumers to refer to discounts from Defendant's regular offering prices for the products. However, the advertised discounts are false because Nordstrom never or almost never offered or sold the products at their list price. Nordstrom also falsely advertises that the purported savings at Nordstrom Rack are for a limited time and indicates that the products will return to the full price after the sale ends, when in fact the advertised savings are perpetual and never-ending. An important part of Defendant's false discount advertising scheme is to send a constant stream of Nordstrom Rack marketing emails to consumers nationwide that prominently advertise these false discounts in the subject line. The Washington Supreme Court recently held that CEMA "prohibits sending Washington residents commercial e-mails that contain any false or misleading information in the subject lines of such e-mails." The Plaintiffs bring this lawsuit individually and on behalf of a nationwide class of consumers under Washington State law who received emails from Nordstrom which contained false or misleading discount advertising in the subject line, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs have been receiving Defendant's Nordstrom Rack promotional emails. Nordstrom owns and operates the Nordstrom Rack brand, including the Nordstrom Rack retail website and 289 Nordstrom Rack retail stores.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel M. Hattis, Esq. Che Corrington, Esq. HATTIS & LUKACS 11711 SE 8th st, Ste 120 Bellevue, WA 98005 Phone: (425) 233-8650 Fax: 425.412.7171 Email: dan@hattislaw.com che@hattislaw.com NORTHERN WOLVES: Castro Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages ---------------------------------------------------- Salvador Castro, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. NORTHERN WOLVES INC. and RUSLAN ZHDAMAROV, Case No. 1:25-cv-05794 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 16, 2025), is brought to recover unpaid wages on behalf of himself and all individuals similarly situated under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the New York Labor Law Articles and the supporting New York State Department of Labor Regulations ("NYLL"). The Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees premium overtime wages for hours worked in excess of forty hours per week in violation of both the FLSA and NYLL. The Defendants paid Plaintiff at his regular rate of pay for all hours worked each week, including those hours worked after 40 hours per workweek. As a result, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff at the rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay for hours worked after 40 hours per workweek. The Defendants failed to provide Plaintiff with a notice and acknowledgement of his wage rate upon Plaintiff's hire as required by Labor Law, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a laborer from January 2021 to August 2025. The Defendants design, install and maintain commercial HVAC systems.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter A. Romero, Esq. ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC 490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277 Hauppauge, NY 11788 Phone: (631) 257-5588 Email: Promero@RomeroLawNY.com OTB ACQUISITION: Illegally Uses Data Broker Software, Kishnani Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- KIEREN KISHNANI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. OTB ACQUISITION, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-09838 (C.D. Cal., October 14, 2025) arises from the Defendant's installation and use of data broker software without obtaining consent in violation of the California Trap and Trace Law. According to the complaint, the Defendant uses data broker software on its website, www.ontheborder.com, to secretly collect data about Website visitors' computer, location, and browsing habits. The Defendant has partnered with at least one registered California Data Broker in order to deanonymize and develop clandestine user profiles on otherwise anonymous visitors to the Website. The Defendant has done this by installing at least one Data Broker Software Development Kit on the Website. These DBSDKs are designed to track and correlate visitors by capturing electronic impulses designed to identify them. This is accomplished through "browser fingerprinting," a process by which Data Brokers are able to ascertain the identity of a website visitor by plotting hundreds of personal identifiers in violation of the state law, says the suit. OTB Acquisition, LLC is Delaware limited liability company that operates a chain of restaurants, including at least two restaurants located in California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Tauler, Esq. J. Evan Shapiro, Esq. TAULER SMITH LLP 626 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 550 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 927-9270 E-mail: rtauler@taulersmith.com eshapiro@taulersmith.com PANDA EXPRESS: Chen Class Suit Removed to W.D. Wash. ---------------------------------------------------- The case styled CHENG CHEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PANDA EXPRESS, INC., a foreign profit corporation; PANDA RESTAURANT GROUP, INC., a foreign profit corporation; and DOES 1-20, as yet unknown Washington entities, Defendants, Case No. 25-00002-19229-6, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of King to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington at Seattle on September 23, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-01847 to the proceeding. This class action lawsuit seeks to remedy the Defendants' business practice of illegally restricting, restraining, and prohibiting low-wage workers from engaging in lawful professions, trades, and businesses and from accepting or transacting business with customers in violation of Washington's noncompetition law. Panda Express, Inc. owns and operates fast food restaurants in the U.S.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Douglas E. Smith, Esq. Laura Y. Davis, Esq. LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C. One Union Square 600 University Street, Suite 3200 Seattle, WA 98101-3122 Telephone: (206) 623-3300 E-mail: desmith@littler.com ladavis@littler.com PATRIOT PROPERTY: Cheng Files TCPA Suit in S.D. New York -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Patriot Property Holdings, LLC. The case is styled as Christopher Cheng, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Patriot Property Holdings, LLC, Case No. 9:25-cv-81287-XXXX (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 16, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment Patriot Holdings -- https://www.patriotholdings.com/ -- is a real estate private equity group that invests in alternative commercial real estate assets.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew John Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A. 14 N.E. 1st Ave., Ste. 1205 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@sflinjuryattorneys.com PATROL SOLUTIONS: Barandiaran Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Patrol Solutions, LLC. The case is styled as Amali Yenevier Barandiaran, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. Patrol Solutions, LLC, Case No. 25STCV30315 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Patrol Solutions -- https://www.patrolsolutions.com/ -- is a private security company serving all of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey D. Klein, Esq. Joseph Lavi, Esq. Vincent C. Granberry, Esq. LAVI EBRAHIMIAN, LLP 8889 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Phone: (310) 432-0000 Email: jklein@lelawfirm.com jlavi@lelawfirm.com vgranberry@lelawfirm.com - and - Harita Nandivada, Esq. KNIGHT LAW GROUP 1331 North California Blvd., Ste. 205 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Phone: 310-552-2250 Email: haritan@knightlaw.com PNC FINANCIAL: Faces Blunt Suit Over Unprotected Personal Info -------------------------------------------------------------- MADONNA BLUNT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE PNC FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC. Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01469 (W.D. Pa., September 23, 2025) is a class action lawsuit on behalf of the Plaintiff and all persons who entrusted defendant with sensitive personally identifiable information and that was impacted in a data breach. In early September 2025, the Defendant disclosed that that sensitive customer information was mistakenly provided to another client without authorization. The Defendant attributed the incident to an internal disclosure error. As a result of Defendant's inadequate digital security and notice process, Plaintiff's and Class Members' private information was exposed to criminals. The Plaintiff and the Class Members have suffered and will continue to suffer injuries including: financial losses caused by misuse of their private information; the loss or diminished value of their private information as a result of the Data Breach; lost time associated with detecting and preventing identity theft; and theft of personal and financial information, says the suit. The Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of a Nationwide Class of similarly situated individuals against Defendant for negligence; negligence per se; unjust enrichment, breach of implied contract, and breach of fiduciary duty. The PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. is a financial services corporation headquartered in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ken Grunfeld, Esq. Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. 65 Overhill Road Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: grunfeld@kolawyers.com ostrow@kolawyers.com - and - Mariya Weekes, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN, PLLC 333 SE 2nd Avenue, Suite 2000 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (866) 252-0878 E-mail: mweekes@milberg.com PODS ENTERPRISES: Hutton Suit Removed to W.D. Washington -------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Colby Hutton and Kelley Rice, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. PODS ENTERPRISES, LLC, Case No. 25-2-27007-6 SEA was removed from the Superior Court of Washington for King County, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02025. The Plaintiffs seek to represent a class that comprises the following: "All Washington citizens holding an email address to which Defendant sent or caused to be sent any email. The Plaintiffs also "reserve the right to amend the Class definition as discovery reveals additional emails containing false or misleading information in the subject line that Defendant sent or caused to be sent during the Class Period to email addresses held by Washington residents."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel J. Strauss, Esq. Raina C. Borrelli, Esq. STRAUSS & BORRELLI PLLC 980 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 1610 Chicago, IL 60611 Phone: (872) 263-1100 Fax: (872) 263-1109 Email: sam@straussborrelli.com raina@straussborrelli.com - and - Lynn A. Toops, Esq. Natalie A. Lyons, Esq. Ian R. Bensberg, Esq. COHEN & MALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317) 636-6481 Email: ltoops@cohenandmalad.com nlyons@cohenmalad.com ibensberg@cohenmalad.com - and - Gerard J. Stranch, IV, Esq. Michael C. Tackeff, Esq. Andrew K. Murray, Esq. STRANCH, JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Phone: 615-254-8801 Email: gstranch@stranchlaw.com mtackeff@stranchlaw.com amurray@stranchlaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Lauren B. Rainwater, Esq. Rachel Herd, Esq. Caitlyn Courtney, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104-1610 Phone: 206-622-3150 Email: laurenrainwater@dwt.com rachelherd@dwt.com caitlyncourtney@dwt.com POSSIBLE FINANCE: Faces Gage Over Predatory Lending Practices ------------------------------------------------------------- NIPARATT GAGE, individually, on behalf of all others similarly situated v. POSSIBLE FINANCE INC., Case No. 5:25-cv-01335 (W.D. Tex., Oct. 20, 2025) seeks to protect active-duty military servicemembers from the Defendant's predatory lending practices in violation of the Military Lending Act. The MLA was enacted to protect United States active-duty servicemembers and their dependents from predatory lending. Excessive debt endangers our nation's military readiness and is detrimental to servicemember retention, morale, household stability, security clearances, and career advancement. According to the complaint, the Defendant touts its compliance with the Military Lending Act yet makes no effort to actually fulfill its duty to determine whether it is lending to Covered Members or to provide legally mandated protections for them. The Defendant makes loans to borrowers -- including Plaintiff -- who repay principal and finance charges within eight weeks over four installment payments. The Defendant's short-term, high-cost loans extract substantial fees from workers, encourage serial usage and dependence on repeat borrowing, worsen borrowers' financial circumstances, and trap them in a cycle of debt, the Plaintiff contends. The Defendant's consumer credit agreements allegedly violate the MLA in at least two ways: By (1) charging interest above the 36% statutory MAPR cap; and (2) using a method of access to a deposit, savings, or other financial account maintained by the borrower as security for the obligation. The Defendant is a financial technology company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Bart Dalton, Esq. Katarzyna Brozynski, Esq. BROZYNSKI & DALTON PC 5700 Tennyson Parkway, Suite 300 Plano, TX 75024 Telephone: (972) 371-0679 E-mail: bart@bdlegalgroup.com kasia@bdlegalgroup.com - and - Lee Lowther, Esq. Randall K. Pulliam, Esq. Courtney Ross Brown, Esq. CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC One Allied Drive, Suite 1400 Little Rock, AR 72207 Telephone: (501) 312-8500 E-mail: llowther@cbplaw.com cbrown@cbplaw.com rpulliam@cbplaw.com PREMISES CAPITAL: Redick Files TCPA Suit in E.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Premises Capital Incorporated. The case is styled as William Redick, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Premises Capital Incorporated, Case No. 1:25-cv-01376-JLT-CDB (E.D. Cal., Oct. 16, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Premise Capital is an investment advisory & asset management firm that developed an asset allocation process to access investment strategy.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gerald D. Lane, Jr., Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI 1515 NE 26TH Street Wilton Manors, FL 33305 Phone: (754) 444-7539 Email: gerald@jibraellaw.com PREMIUM BRANDS: Hasselkus Suit Removed to C.D. California --------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Jacqueline Hasselkus, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PREMIUM BRANDS OPCO LLC; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. CIVSB2522114 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-02730. The Complaint seeks damages, penalties, injunctive relief, and restitution on behalf of a putative class for: failure to pay minimum wages; failure to pay overtime wages; failure to provide meal periods; failure to authorize and permit rest breaks; failure to reimburse business expenses; failure to provide accurate, itemized wage statements; failure to pay all wages due upon separation of employment (waiting time penalties; and violation of California's Unfair Competition Law.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Carrie A. Gonell, Esq. David J. Rashe, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 600 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1800 Costa Mesa, CA 92626-7653 Phone: +1.714.830.0600 Fax: +1.714.830.0700 Email: carrie.gonell@morganlewis.com david.rashe@morganlewis.com PRESS-SEAL: Aguilar Sues Over Failure to Include Overtime --------------------------------------------------------- Percilla Aguilar, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PRESS-SEAL CORPORATION, Case No. 1:25-cv-00556 (N.D. Ind., Oct. 16, 2025), is brought pursuant the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), arising from Defendant's systematic failure to include all remuneration in their overtime computations. Throughout the relevant time period, Defendant maintained a corporate policy and practice of willfully refusing to pay Plaintiff and all similarly situated employees the legally required amount of overtime compensation for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek, in violation of the FLSA. In particular, Defendant failed to include non-discretionary pay such as shift premiums into the regular rate of pay for Plaintiff and all others similarly situated when calculating their overtime rates. As a result of Defendant's willful failure to compensate Plaintiff and all similarly situated employees at a rate not less than 1.5 times the regular rate of pay for work performed in excess of 40 hours in a workweek, Defendant violated the FLSA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is a current employee of Defendant and has worked for Defendant since December 2023. The Defendant designs and manufactures rubber gaskets.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kimberly D. Jeselskis, Esq. JESELSKIS BRINKERHOFF AND JOSEPH, LLC 320 North Meridian Street, Suite 428 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317) 220-6290 Facsimile: (317) 220-6291 Email: kjeselskis@jbjlegal.com - and - Kevin J. Stoops, Esq. SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C. One Town Square, 17thFloor Southfield, MI 48076 Phone: (248) 355-0300 Email: kstoops@sommerspc.com PRIME NOW LLC: Rabinovich Suit Removed to N.D. California --------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Konstantin Rabinovich, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PRIME NOW LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; AMAZON.COM SERVICES LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; JOHN FARRELL, an individual; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 25CV123529 was removed from the Alameda County Superior Court, State of California, to the United States District Court for Northern District of California on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-08925. In his First Amended Class and Representative Action Complaint ("FAC"), the Plaintiff alleges 12 causes of action against Defendants: failure to pay overtime wages; failure to pay minimum wages; failure to provide meal periods; failure to provide rest periods; waiting time penalties; wage statement violations; failure to timely pay wages; failure to indemnify; violation of Labor Code Section 227.3; violation of quota laws; unfair competition; and civil penalties under the Labor Code Private Attorneys' General Act for violation of Labor Code.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Bradley J. Hamburger, Esq. Cynthia Chen Mcternan, Esq. GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 333 South Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197 Phone: 213.229.7000 Facsimile: 213.229.7520 Email: BHamburger@gibsondunn.com CMcTernan@gibsondunn.com - and - Megan Cooney, Esq. GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP 3161 Michelson Drive Irvine, CA 92612-4412 Phone: 949.451.3800 Facsimile: 949.451.4220 Email: MCooney@gibsondunn.com PRIMELINK EXPRESS: Lewis Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Primelink Express Inc. The case is styled as Camron Lewis, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Primelink Express Inc., Case No. STK-CV-UOE-2025-0015334 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Unlimited Civil Other Employment." Primelink Express -- http://primelinkexpress.com/-- is an asset-based carrier established in 2002.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Fawn F Bekam, Esq. ABRAMSON LABOR GROUP 1700 W Burbank Blvd. Burbank, CA 91506-1313 Phone: 213-493-6300 Fax: 213-336-3704 Email: fawn@abramsonlabor.com QUEST HOSPITALITY: Anich Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages -------------------------------------------------------- Jay Anich, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, and Krystle Anich v. QUEST HOSPITALITY CONCEPTS, LLC D/B/A THE CITIZEN, Case No. 3:25-cv-01994-TKW-ZCB (N.D. Fla., Oct. 16, 2025), is brought under the Florida Minimum Wage Amendment ("FMWA") alleging that the Plaintiff is entitled to: all tips unlawfully retained, diverted, or distributed to ineligible recipients; unpaid federal wages; an equal amount as liquidated damages; and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. The Plaintiff asserts claim based on Defendant's failure to provide legally sufficient tip-credit notice to Plaintiff and all other servers before paying a reduced direct cash wage during the applicable limitations period and failure to pay at least the full Florida minimum wage for hours Plaintiff and all other servers spent performing non-tipped duties, including side-work, in amounts exceeding "more than occasional" limits, instead paying a reduced direct cash wage during the applicable limitations period. As a result of the foregoing violations, any tip credit claimed by Defendant is forfeited and invalid. Plaintiff and the putative Rule 23 classes are entitled to recover the full Florida minimum wage for all hours worked during the affected workweeks, together with liquidated damages, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, says the complaint. The Plaintiff worked for Defendant as an hourly-paid, non-exempt restaurant server at The Citizen. The Defendant is the owner and operator of The Citizen.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael V. Miller, Esq. Jordan Richards, Esq. USA EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS JORDAN RICHARDS, PLLC 1800 SE 10th Ave, Suite 205 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316 Phone: (954) 871-0050 Email: Michael@usaemploymentlawyers.com Jordan@jordanrichardspllc.com RB GLOBAL INC: PS Bruckel Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois ----------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as PS Bruckel, Inc, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. RB Global Inc., Rouse Services LLC, United Rentals Inc., Sunbelt Rentals, Inc., Herc Rentals Inc., Herc Rentals Inc., H&E Equipment Services Inc., Sunstate Equipment Co., LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-01191 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-10293 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. RB Global, Inc. -- https://rbglobal.com/ -- is a leading provider of asset disposition and marketplace solutions, leveraging a diversified platform that integrates physical and digital channels.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seth R. Lesser, Esq. KLAFTER LESSER LLP Two International Drive, Suite 350 Rye Brook, NY 10573 Phone: (914) 934-9200 Email: slesser@klafterlesser.com RB GLOBAL: Enterprise Lodging Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois --------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Enterprise Lodging of Huntsville, L.L.C., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated v. RB Global Inc., Rouse Services LLC, United Rentals Inc., Sunbelt Rentals, Inc., Herc Rentals Inc., Herc Rentals Inc., H&E Equipment Services Inc., Sunstate Equipment Co., LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-00823 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-12736 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. RB Global, Inc. -- https://rbglobal.com/ -- is a leading provider of asset disposition and marketplace solutions, leveraging a diversified platform that integrates physical and digital channels.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alexander E. Barnett, Esq. Gregory S. Asciolla, Esq. Jonathan S. Crevier, Esq. DICELLO LEVITT LLP 485 Lexington Avenue, Suite 1001 New York, NY 10017 Phone: (646) 933-1000 Fax: (646) 494-9648 Email: abarnett@dicellolevitt.com gasciolla@dicellolevitt.com jcrevier@dicellolevitt.com - and - David A. Slossberg, Esq. Erica Oates Nolan, Esq. Julie Vassar Pinette, Esq. Timothy Cowan, Esq. HURWITZ SAGARIN SLOSSBERG & KNUFF, LLC 135 Broad Street Milford, CT 06460 Phone: (203) 877-8000 Fax: (203) 878-9800 Email: dslossberg@hssklaw.com enolan@hssklaw.com jpinette@hssklaw.com tcowan@hssklaw.com - and - Stephen J. Teti, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P. 265 Franklin Street, Ste. 1702 Boston, MA 02110 Phone: (617) 456-7701 Fax: (612) 339-0981 Email: sjteti@locklaw.com RB GLOBAL: Strupp Trucking Suit Transferred to N.D. Illinois ------------------------------------------------------------ The case styled as Strupp Trucking, Inc., individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. RB Global Inc., Rouse Services LLC, United Rentals Inc., Sunbelt Rentals, Inc., Herc Rentals Inc., Herc Rentals Inc., H&E Equipment Services Inc., Sunstate Equipment Co., LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-00846 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-12740 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. RB Global, Inc. -- https://rbglobal.com/ -- is a leading provider of asset disposition and marketplace solutions, leveraging a diversified platform that integrates physical and digital channels.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel C. Hedlund, Esq. Daniel J. Nordin, Esq. Shashi K Gowda, Esq. GUSTAFSON GLUEK PLLC Canadian Pacific Plaza 120 South Sixth Street, Suite 2600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: (612) 333-8844 Email: dhedlund@gustafsongluek.com dnordin@gustafsongluek.com sgowda@gustafsongluek.com - and - Seth R. Lesser, Esq. KLAFTER LESSER LLP Two International Drive, Suite 350 Rye Brook, NY 10573 Phone: 914.934.9200 Email: slesser@klafterlesser.com REAM FRANCHISE: Plascencia Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Ream Franchise Group LLC. The case is styled as Michael Plascencia, individually and on behalf of a class of all persons and entities similarly situated v. Ream Franchise Group LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-02780-BAS-KSC (S.D. Cal., Oct. 17, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment Ream Franchise Group is the exclusive licensor of the Gameday Men's Health brand.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Carly Roman, Esq. Strauss Borrelli PLLC 713 Pitman Street Escondido, CA 92027 Phone: (872) 263-1100 Email: croman@straussborrelli.com REGENCY GENERAL: Juarez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Regency General Contractors, Inc. The case is styled as Jose Juarez, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Regency General Contractors, Inc., Case No. 25CV149562 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., Oct. 17, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case." Regency General Contractors, Inc. -- https://www.regencygc.com/ -- is a full-service company that specializes in all phases of construction. RGC-Logo-Footer.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Fawn F. Bekam, Esq. ABRAMSON LABOR GROUP 1700 W Burbank Blvd. Burbank, CA 91506-1313 Phone: 213-493-6300 Fax: 213-336-3704 Email: fawn@abramsonlabor.com RELIANT SERVICES: Morgenstein Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Reliant Services Group, LLC. The case is styled as Mike Morgenstein, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Reliant Services Group, LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-02753-AGS-KSC (S.D. Cal., Oct. 16, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Reliant Services -- https://www.reliant-servicesllc.com/ -- is a plumbing company specializing in residential plumbing, drain cleaning, sewer repair, and excavations.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Adam Edelsberg, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW PA 1925 Century Park East, Suite 1700 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (305) 975-3320 Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com RIDGE WALLET: Benson Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind ------------------------------------------------------------- ANTHONY BENSON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. THE RIDGE WALLET LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-07876 (S.D.N.Y., September 23, 2025) is a civil action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its interactive website, www.ridge.com, in a manner that is fully accessible to and independently usable by blind and visually impaired individuals in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, the New York City Human Rights Law, and the New York General Business Law. On July 15 and 16, 2025, Plaintiff Benson attempted to purchase a Carbon Fiber Ridge Wallet and a Frequent Flyer Kit from www.ridge.com but was unable to do so due to persistent accessibility barriers. These barriers include unlabeled buttons and graphics on product pages; missing alt text on promotional banners and product thumbnails, including the homepage graphic stating "Slim, RFID-blocking, Guaranteed for Life" and the frequent flyer kit thumbnail; navigation traps and inaccessible dropdown menus; checkout forms incompatible with screen-reading software; and broken links on support and FAQ pages. Because Defendant's interactive website including all portions thereof or accessed thereon is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals. The Ridge Wallet LLC is a private consumer goods company headquartered in Santa Monica, California, focusing in direct-to-consumer sales of RFI (Radio Frequency Identification)-blocking wallets, travel gear, and men's accessories.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert Schonfeld, Esq. JOSEPH & NORINSBERG, LLC 825 Third Avenue, Suite 2100 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 227-5700 Facsimile: (212) 656-1889 E-mail: rschonfeld@employeejustice.com SALESFORCE INC: Fails to Secure Sensitive Info, Espada Alleges -------------------------------------------------------------- YAJAIRA DE LA ESPADA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SALESFORCE, INC. and TRANSUNION LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-09020 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 20, 2025) contends that the Defendants failed to implement adequate safeguards to protect sensitive information. According to the complaint, in early June 2025, a major data breach occurred when hackers infiltrated Salesforce systems used by thousands of Salesforce customers -- this breach was discovered by Google. The attack was carried out by an organized cybercrime group known as "The Com," linked to the infamous "ShinyHunters" collective (Threat Actors). The Threat Actors used social engineering and software manipulation to access Salesforce's systems. Once inside, the Threat Actors downloaded massive amounts of customer data and issued ransom demands on those customers. This initial attack spread further through an AI chatbot platform that integrates with Salesforce. By stealing digital access tokens, the Threat Actors were able to enter hundreds of Salesforce databases containing sensitive business information such as customer records, account details, and internal sales data. Salesloft, Inc., the owner of the affected chatbot platform called Drift, later confirmed that the attackers were primarily targeting passwords, cloud access keys, and other credentials that could be used to compromise additional systems (the "Salesforce Data Breaches"). The stolen data for the Data Breaches included extremely sensitive personal information such as names, Social Security numbers, addresses, and birthdates (Data). Unlike passwords, these details cannot be changed, making them especially valuable to identity thieves and data brokers. Such personal information also holds measurable financial value in today's digital economy, as many technology companies rely on user data for advertising and analytics revenue. Accordingly, the Plaintiff and Class Members face a substantial risk of imminent and certainly impending harm, heightened here by the loss of their Social Security numbers -- a class of PII which is particularly valuable to identity thieves. The Plaintiff and Class Members have and will continue to suffer injuries associated with this risk, including, but not limited to, a loss of valuable time and opportunity costs and mitigation expenses over the misuse of their PII. Plaintiff seeks all available relief. The Plaintiff received a notice of the TransUnion Data Breach on September 2, 2025, that informed her that her PII was compromised in the TransUnion Data Breach, including her Social Security Number and Date of Birth. Salesforce is a privately held cloud-based software company with its headquarters and principal place of business at 415 Mission Street, San Francisco, San Francisco County, California. TransUnion operates as an international information and insights company with its headquarters and principal place of business at 555 West Adams Street, Chicago, Cook County, Illinois.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dena C. Sharp, Esq. Adam E. Polk, Esq. GIRARD SHARP LLP 601 California Street, Suite 1400 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-4800 Facsimile: (415) 981-4846 E-mail: dsharp@girardsharp.com apolk@girardsharp.com - and - James E. Cecchi, Esq. CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C. 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, NJ 07068 Telephone: (973) 994-1700 Facsimile: (973) 994-1744 E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com SALESLOFT INC: Exposes Customers Personal Info, O'Donnell Says -------------------------------------------------------------- KYLE O'DONNELL, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SALESLOFT, INC., and APPFOLIO, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-05880-ELR (N.D. Ga., October 14, 2025) arises out of the Defendants' public exposure of the confidential, private information of thousands of customers' personally identifying information, including of Plaintiff and the Class Members, which was in the possession of Defendants in a cyberattack on Salesloft systems and AppFolio's CRM system between August 8 to August 18, 2025. According to the complaint, the Defendants failed to undertake adequate measures to safeguard the private information of Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' failures to protect current and former customers' sensitive private information and warn them promptly and fully about the data breach, the Plaintiff and the proposed Class Members have suffered widespread injury and damages necessitating Plaintiff seeking relief on a class wide basis. Salesloft, Inc. provides a revenue generation platform designed to help sales teams automate and manage the entire sales process with a principal place of business in Atlanta, Georgia.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Casondra Turner, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 260 Peachtree Street, NW Suite 2200 Atlanta, GA 30303 Telephone: (866) 252-0878 Facsimile: (771) 772-3086 E-mail: cturner@milberg.com - and - A. Brooke Murphy, Esq. MURPHY LAW FIRM 4116 Will Rogers Pkwy, Suite 700 Oklahoma City, OK 73108 Telephone: (405) 389-4989 E-mail: abm@murphylegalfirm.com SALESLOFT INC: Fails to Secure Sensitive Data, Stevens Alleges -------------------------------------------------------------- JASMINE STEVENS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. SALESLOFT, INC.; and APPFOLIO, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-06008-ELR (N.D. Ga., Oct. 20, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for their failure to exercise reasonable care in securing and safeguarding individuals' sensitive personal data on a massive scale. Between approximately August 18 and August 22, 2025, cybercriminals obtained access to Salesloft's server systems and copied a number of files out of its network (the Data Breach). The stolen data included individuals' full names, dates of birth, addresses, and Social Security numbers. The Defendants only recently notified the Plaintiff and putative "Class" members that the Data Breach involved this highly sensitive data. The Defendants' data security failures enabled the hackers to steal and misuse the Private Information of Plaintiff and Class members. These failures led to the compromise and fraudulent misuse of Plaintiff and other Class members' Private Information and placed them at a serious, immediate, and ongoing risk of continued misuse, says the suit. Additionally, Defendants' failures resulted in Plaintiff and Class members incurring costs and expenses associated with the time spent and the loss of productivity addressing and attempting to ameliorate the negative impacts of the Data Breaches, as well as emotional distress associated with constant monitoring of personal banking and credit accounts and knowing their Private Information is in the hands of cybercriminals. Mitigation efforts and dealing with the actual and future consequences of the Data Breach has and/or will also create a number of future consequences for the Plaintiff and Class members -- including, as appropriate, reviewing records of fraudulent charges for services billed but not received, purchasing credit monitoring and identity theft protection services, the imposition of withdrawal and purchase limits on compromised accounts, initiating and monitoring credit freezes, the loss of property value of their personal information, and the stress, nuisance, and annoyance of dealing with all issues resulting from the Data Breaches. Accordingly, the Plaintiff asserts claims for negligence, breach of third-party beneficiary contract, and unjust enrichment/quasi-contract; Plaintiff also seeks injunctive relief, monetary damages, statutory damages, as well as all other relief as authorized in equity or by law. Salesloft is a sales engagement platform.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Kyle G.A. Wallace, Esq. SHIVER HAMILTON CAMPBELL LLC 3490 Piedmont Road, Suite 640 Atlanta, GA 30305 Telephone: (404) 593-0020 Facsimile: (888) 501-9536 E-mail: kwallace@shiverhamilton.com - and - Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq. Jason Rathod, Esq. MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD, LLP 412 H Street NE Washington, D.C. 20002 Telephone: (202) 470-3520 E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com jrathod@classlawdc.com SANSMARK INC: Quintana Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Sansmark, Inc. The case is styled as Santiago Chavez Quintana, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Sansmark, Inc. d/b/a Randy's Donuts, Case No. 25STCV30536 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 17, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Sansmark, Inc. doing business as Randy's Donuts -- https://randysdonuts.com/ -- is a donut shop chain originated in the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey D. Klein, Esq. Joseph Lavi, Esq. Vincent C. Granberry, Esq. LAVI EBRAHIMIAN, LLP 8889 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Phone: (310) 432-0000 Email: jklein@lelawfirm.com jlavi@lelawfirm.com vgranberry@lelawfirm.com - and - Harita Nandivada, Esq. KNIGHT LAW GROUP 1331 North California Blvd., Ste. 205 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Phone: 310-552-2250 Email: haritan@knightlaw.com SAUCE LLC: Trotti Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Sauce, LLC. The case is styled as Domenico Trotti, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. The Sauce, LLC, Case No. 25STCV30343 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." The Sauce -- https://www.thesaucesuppliers.com/ -- is a global supply company of premium custom made product with dedicated sales and production teams in Australia and California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph Lavi, Esq. LAVI EBRAHIMIAN, LLP 8889 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 Phone: (310) 432-0000 Email: jlavi@lelawfirm.com SAVVY SLIDERS: Campbell Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------ ANDREE CAMPBELL, Plaintiff v. SAVVY SLIDERS ADVERTISING, LLC, a Michigan Limited Liability Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 0:25-cv-61897 (S.D. Fla., September 23, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plaintiff Campbell's blindness limits him in the performance of major life activities, including sight, and he requires assistive technologies, auxiliary aids, and services for effective communication, including communication in connection with her use of a computer. Beginning in July 2025, the Plaintiff attempted on several occasions to use Defendant's website, www.savvysliders.com, to browse through the online offers with the intent of making an online order through the website or at, from, and through the physical locations. Specifically, the Plaintiff wanted to order burgers for a home dinner and was specifically looking for a place that offers meat. Upon navigating the site, the Plaintiff encountered a significant accessibility barrier that prevented her from completing an order. After adding items to the shopping cart, she was unable to locate or access the cart itself, as it was not focusable using keyboard navigation. The barriers that exist on the Website result in discriminatory and unequal treatment of individuals with visual disabilities, including Plaintiff, says the suit. Savvy Sliders Advertising operates the website that offers catering services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Aleksandra Kravets, Esq. ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A. 865 SW 113 Lane Pembroke Pines, FL 33025 Telephone: (347) 268-9533 E-mail: ak@akesqpa.com SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC: Cabezola-Perez Sues to Recover Unpaid Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------------ Paola Cabezola-Perez, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-24774-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Oct. 16, 2025), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (the "FLSA"), for retaliation and to recover unpaid overtime wages, an additional equal amount as liquidated damages, obtain declaratory relief, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. The Plaintiff has been a salaried, non-exempt employee, meaning that she was paid a salary, but also entitled to pay at a rate of one-half times her regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a single work week ("overtime hours"). Notwithstanding, Defendant did agree to review Plaintiff's claim for overtime, and asked Plaintiff to provide it with a calculation of how many hours of overtime she had worked that had not been paid. Despite Plaintiff timely complying with Defendant's request for a calculation of all of the unpaid overtime hours she worked, Defendant has failed to compensate Plaintiff, and those similarly situated, at a rate of one-half times Plaintiff's regular rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a single work week. Under the FLSA, Plaintiff, and those similarly situated to her, should be, and were required to be, properly compensated at the rate of one and one-half times Plaintiff's regular rate for those hours that Plaintiff worked in excess of 40 hours per week, says the complaint. The Plaintiff has worked for Defendant since January 24, 2005. The Defendant was a foreign profit corporation engaged in business in Florida, with a principle place of business in Boston, Massachusetts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Fabian A. Ruiz, Esq. RUIZ TRIAL LAW, PLLC 9100 S Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500 Miami, FL 33156 Phone: (866) 784-9247 Fax: (866) 487-2599 Email: fabian@ruiztriallaw.com SHENZHEN SMOORE: B.Z. Suit Transferred to N.D. California --------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as B.Z., and all others similarly situated v. Shenzhen Smoore Technology Company, Ltd., Smoore International Holdings Limited, Jupiter Research LLC, CB Solutions, LLC doing business as: Canna Brand Solutions, Greenlane Holdings, Inc., 3Win Corp., Case No. 1:25-cv-07482 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-08978-VC to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust. Shenzhen Smoore Technology Company, Ltd. -- https://en.smooretech.com/ -- are the world's leading atomization technology company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nick Suciu, III, Esq. BRYSON HARRIS SUCIU & DEMAY PLLC 6905 Telegraph Rd., Suite 115 Bloomfield Hills, MI 48301 Phone: (616) 678-2180 Email: nsuciu@brysonpllc.com - and - Russell Busch, Esq. BRYSON HARRIS SUCIU & DEMAY PLLC 900 West Morgan Street Raleigh, NC 27603 Phone: (919) 926-7948 Email: rbusch@brysonpllc.com SHENZHEN SMOORE: Rukeyser Suit Transferred to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Martin Rukeyser, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Shenzhen Smoore Technology Company, Ltd., Smoore International Holdings Limited, Jupiter Research LLC, CB Solutions, LLC doing business as: Canna Brand Solutions, Greenlane Holdings, Inc., 3Win Corp., Case No. 2:25-cv-14238 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-08980-VC to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. Shenzhen Smoore Technology Company, Ltd. -- https://en.smooretech.com/ -- are the world's leading atomization technology company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Marc Streisfeld, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW FERGUSON WEISELBERG GILBERT One West Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: (954) 525-4100 Fax: (954) 525-4300 Email: streisfeld@kolawyers.com - and - Jeffrey Miles Ostrow, Esq. THE KOPELOWITZ & OSTROW FIRM PA 200 S.W. 1st Avenue, 12th Floor Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301-4216 Phone: (954) 525-4100 Fax: (954) 525-4300 Email: ostrow@kolawyers.com SIMPLIFIED LABOR STAFFING: Byrd Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Simplified Labor Staffing Solutions, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Octavius Byrd, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Simplified Labor Staffing Solutions, Inc., Performance Team Logistics LLC, Case No. 25STCV30597 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 17, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Simplified Labor Staffing Solutions Inc. -- https://yourstaffingfirm.com/ -- is a leading recruiting and staffing provider that specializes in placing administrative, clerical, customer service, information technology and light industrial candidates in temporary or full-time opportunities throughout the United States.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seung L. Yang, Esq. THE SENTINEL FIRM, APC 355 S. Grand Ave., Suite 1450 Los Angeles, California 90071 Phone: (213) 985-1150 Fax: (213) 985-2155 Email: seung.yang@thesentinelfirm.com SOCIAL GAMING: Faces Krivatch Suit Over Illegal Gambling Scheme --------------------------------------------------------------- BRENDA KRIVATCH, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOCIAL GAMING LLC, d/b/a Fortune Coins, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00742-JPH (S.D. Ohio, October 14, 2025) is a class action lawsuit brought by Plaintiff seeking damages, declaratory, injunctive, and equitable relief individually on behalf the other Class members, each of whom are Ohio residents who have paid and lost money or other things of value on fortunecoins.com due to Defendant's alleged illegal gambling operation in Ohio. According to the complaint, on Defendant's website, users can play hundreds of Casino-Style Games, like blackjack, slots and other classic table games. Even then, free play doesn't offer the prizes that attract Ohio residents, including Plaintiff, to Fortune Coins. Instead, Ohio residents, including Plaintiff, access Fortune Coins to win prizes, just as Fortune Coins intends. And the only way to win prizes is with Sweep Coins. Since Fortune Coins requires participants to submit consideration for a chance to win a prize, it is an illegal gambling operation in Ohio, alleges the suit. The Plaintiff and Class members each wagered money or other things of value on fortunecoins.com and lost. Moreover, Fortune Coins engaged in unconscionable, false, misleading, or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of trade or commerce in Ohio, including causing Plaintiff and Class members to believe Fortune Coins was approved and certified by the State of Ohio when in fact it is illegal gambling. Social Gaming LLC, d/b/a Fortune Coins, owns and operates the popular, casino-oriented Internet gaming website, www.fortunecoins.com.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alyson Steele Beridon, Esq. HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL, LENISKI, AND WALL PLLC 600 Vine Street, Suite 2720 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Telephone: (513) 381-2224 Facsimile: (615) 994-8625 E-mail: alyson@hsglawgroup.com - and - Benjamin A. Gastel, Esq. HERZFELD, SUETHOLZ, GASTEL, LENISKI, AND WALL PLLC 1920 Adelicia Street, Suite 300 Nashville, TN 37212 Telephone: (615) 716-9163 Facsimile: (615) 994-8625 E-mail: ben@hsglawgroup.com - and - W. Daniel "Dee" Miles, III, Esq. James Mitchell "Mitch" Williams, Esq. Dylan T. Martin, Esq. Trenton H. Mann, Esq. BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW, METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C. 272 Commerce Street Post Office Box 4160 Montgomery, AL 36103-4160 Telephone: (334) 269-2343 Facsimile: (334) 954-7555 E-mail: dee.miles@beasleyallen.com mitch.williams@beasleyallen.com dylan.martin@beasleyallen.com Trent.mann@beasleyallen.com - and - Joel D. Smith, Esq. SMITH KRIVOSHEY, PC 867 Boylston Street, 5th Floor #1520 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 377-4704 Facsimile: (888) 410-0415 E-mail: joel@skclassactions.com SONDER HOLDINGS: Duffaydar Securities Suit Ongoing in CA Court -------------------------------------------------------------- Sonder Holdings Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2025, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on October 14, 2025, that on April 11, 2024, a putative securities class action lawsuit titled "Duffaydar v. Sonder Holdings Inc., et al.," Case No. 24-cv-2952 was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California naming the company and certain of its current and former officers and directors as defendants. A lead plaintiff and lead counsel were appointed, and an amended complaint was filed on December 23, 2024. On September 8, 2025, the parties filed a stipulation confirming that the plaintiff would not file an amended complaint, that the action would accordingly be dismissed with prejudice, that no appeal would be filed, and that the parties would bear their own fees and costs in the action. The amended complaint purports to bring suit on behalf of stockholders who purchased or otherwise acquired the company's securities between March 16, 2023 and March 15, 2024, and alleges that the defendants made false and misleading statements about the company's financial results and condition, including the company's valuation of operating lease right of use assets, in violation of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The amended complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages, fees and costs. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss on February 21, 2025 and the Central District Court took the defendant's motion to dismiss under submission. Following briefing, the Central District Court granted the motion to dismiss on August 27, 2025, dismissed all claims against all defendants with leave to amend by September 8, 2025, and stated that if no amended complaint was filed by that date, the plaintiff's claims would be dismissed with prejudice. Sonder Holdings Inc., provides short and long-term accommodations to travelers in various cities across North America, Europe, and the Middle East. It also operates boutique hotels. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SPECIALTY: Faces Lara Wage-and-Hour Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ JUAN LARA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SPECIALTY CARE, LLC; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 25STCV30175 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., October 15, 2025) alleges that Defendants engaged in a systematic pattern of wage and hour violations under the California Labor Code and Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders, all of which contribute to Defendants' deliberate unfair competition. The Plaintiff contends that Defendants have increased their profits by violating state wage and hour laws by, among other things: failing to pay all wages (including minimum wages and overtime wages); failing to provide lawful meal periods or compensation in lieu thereof; failing to authorize or permit lawful rest breaks or provide compensation in lieu thereof; failing to reimburse necessary business-related costs; failing to provide accurate itemized wage statements; failing to pay wages timely during employment; and failing to pay all wages due upon separation of employment. The Plaintiff and other California residents were employed as non-exempt employees by the Defendants. Southern California Specialty Care, LLC offers pulmonary and wound care, pain management, antibiotic theory, dialysis, and rehabilitation services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Samuel A. Wong, Esq. Kashif Haque, Esq. Jessica L. Campbell, Esq. AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC 9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100 Irvine, CA 92618 Telephone: (949) 379-6250 Facsimile: (949) 379-6251 E-mail: jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: Lara Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. --------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit captioned JUAN LARA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SPECIALTY CARE, LLC; and DOES 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. 25STCV21656 (Filed July 22, 2025) was removed from the Los Angeles County Superior Court to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The Central District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-09844-AGR to the proceeding. The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants failed to pay minimum wages, permit rest breaks, reimburse, and provide accurate itemized wage statements under the labor Code. The Defendant offers pulmonary and wound care, pain management, antibiotic theory, dialysis, and rehabilitation services.[BN] The Defendant is represented by: Paul G. Sherman, Esq. Nicholas L. Ramirez, Esq. KABAT CHAPMAN & OZMER LLP 333 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 2225 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 493-3980 E-mail: psherman@kcozlaw.com nramirez@kcozlaw.com SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA: Tripp Seeks Minimum, OT Pay Under Labor Code ----------------------------------------------------------------- CARMEN L TRIPP, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA CONFERENCE OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS, a California nonprofit corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 25STCV30616 (Cal. Super., Oct. 17, 2025) alleges that Defendant failed to pay minimum wages and overtime wages, failed to provide meal periods and authorize and permit rest periods, and failed to maintain accurate records of hours worked and meal periods in violation of the California Labor Code. The Class consists of Plaintiff and all other persons who have been employed by any Defendants in California as an hourly-paid, non-exempt employee during the statute of limitations period applicable to the pleaded claims. The Plaintiff is a California resident who worked for Defendants in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, as a Preschool Teacher during the statutory period. Plaintiff was typically scheduled to work 5 days in a workweek, and typically in excess of 8 hours in a single workday. Southeastern California is a conference under the supervision and within the territory of the Pacific Union Conference of Seventh-day.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seung L. Yang, Esq. Tiffany Hyun, Esq. Christine Noh, Esq. THE SENTINEL FIRM, APC 355 S. Grand Ave., Suite 1450 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 985-1150 Facsimile: (213) 985-2155 E-mail: seung.yang@thesentinelfirm.com tiffany.hyun@thesentinelfirm.com christine.noh@thesentinelfirm.com SOUTHERN GRAPHICS: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Bust Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- RICHARD BUST, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SOUTHERN GRAPHICS, INC. d/b/a SGS & CO, Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-00617-GNS (W.D. Ky., September 23, 2025) is a class action lawsuit against SGS for its negligent failure to protect and safeguard Plaintiff's and Class Members' highly sensitive personally identifiable information and protected health information, culminating in a massive and preventable data breach. On December 2, 2024, SGS became aware of a cyber incident involving unauthorized access to certain of its IT systems that it believes occurred on November 18, 2024. SGS concluded its investigation in late July 2025 and determined that an unauthorized party obtained certain private information from its systems. According to the complaint, due to SGS's negligent failure to secure and protect Plaintiff's and Class Members' private information, cybercriminals have stolen and obtained everything they need to commit identity theft and wreak havoc on the financial and personal lives of thousands of customers and employees. The Plaintiff brings this action individually and on behalf of the Class, seeking compensatory damages, punitive damages, nominal damages, restitution, injunctive and declaratory relief, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and all other remedies this Court deems just and proper. Southern Graphics, Inc. is a brand consulting agency that provides services in brand strategy, marketing, AI automation solutions, and audience analytics.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew E. Mize, Esq. J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Grayson Wells, Esq. STRANCH JENNINGS & GARVEY, PLLC The Freedom Center 223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Suite 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Telephone: (615) 254-8801 E-mail: amize@stranchlaw.com gstranch@stranchlaw.com gwells@stranchlaw.com - and - William B. Federman, Esq. FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD 10205 North Pennsylvania Avenue Oklahoma City, OK 73120 Telephone: (405) 235-1560 E-mail: wbf@federmanlaw.com SRI ELEVEN: Case Management Schedule Entered in Wells Fargo Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as WELLS FARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE HOLDERS OF BBCMS 2019-BWAY MORTGAGE TRUST, COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE PASSTHROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2019-BWAY, v. SRI ELEVEN 1407 BROADWAY LLC, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-06870-VSB-BCM (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Moses entered an order scheduling initial case management conference: All pretrial motions and applications, including those related to scheduling and discovery (but excluding motions to dismiss or for judgment on the pleadings, for injunctive relief, for summary judgment, or for class certification under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23) must be made to Judge Moses and in compliance with this Court's Individual Practices in Civil Cases, available on the Court's website at https://nysd.uscourts.gov/hon-barbara-moses. It appears to the Court that no initial case management and scheduling conference has yet taken place in this action. The Court further entered an order that counsel must meet and confer in accordance with Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(f) no later than 21 days prior to the initial case management conference. No later than Nov. 12, 2025 prior to the conference, the parties must file a Pre-Conference Statement, via ECF, signed by counsel for all parties. The date of the conference and appearances for the parties, including the names of the individual attorneys who will attend, their law firms, addresses, and telephone numbers, and the party or parties represented. The Court expects each party's principal trial attorney to attend the conference. A concise statement of the nature of the case and the issues as they appear on the date of the Statement, including any issues as to jurisdiction or venue and any anticipated motions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b) or (c). A proposed deadline for joining additional parties, amending the pleadings, or moving for leave to do so. SRI provides construction services. A copy of the Court's order dated Oct. 14, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1aOZtJ at no extra charge.[CC] STAFFING NETWORK: Ortega Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Staffing Network Holdings, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Maritza Ortega, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Staffing Network Holdings, LLC, Atco Industries, Inc., Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 25CV147546 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 6, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Staffing Network (SN) -- https://staffingnetwork.com/ -- is a full-service staffing and recruiting firm headquartered in the greater Chicago metropolitan area.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seung L. Yang, Esq. THE SENTINEL FIRM, APC 355 S. Grand Ave., Suite 1450 Los Angeles, California 90071 Phone: (213) 985-1150 Fax: (213) 985-2155 Email: seung.yang@thesentinelfirm.com STEVEN LABEL LLC: Cervantes Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Steven Label, LLC. The case is styled as Ignacio Cervantes, individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. Steven Label, LLC, Case No. 25STCV30627 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Oct. 20, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Steven Label -- https://www.stevenlabel.com/ -- offer a comprehensive range of solutions tailored to meet the unique demands of the various industries.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Miriam Leigh Schimmel BLACKSTONE LAW, APC 8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745 Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442 Phone: 310-622-4278 Fax: 855-786-6356 Email: mschimmel@blackstonepc.com SUMMIT APPAREL: Cole ADA Suit Transferred to C.D. Illinois ---------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Morgan Cole, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Summit Apparel, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-09662 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of Illinois on Oct. 16, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:25-cv-04184-SLD-RLH to the proceeding. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Summit Apparel, Inc. -- https://www.summitapparel.ca/ -- is a company that operates in the Apparel & Accessories Retail industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David Baldemar Reyes, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing New York, NY 11367 Phone: (718) 554-0237 Email: dreyes@ealg.law TAJ EXPRESS: Website Inaccessible to the Blind, Fernandez Says -------------------------------------------------------------- NELSON FERNANDEZ, Plaintiff v. TAJ EXPRESS INDIAN CUISINE, INC., a Florida for-profit corporation, Defendant, Case No. 9:25-cv-81175 (S.D. Fla., September 23, 2025) is a class action for declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Beginning in March 2025, the Plaintiff attempted on a number of occasions to utilize the Defendant's website, www.tajexpresskitchen.com, to browse through the food and beverage and other offers with the intent to make a purchase through the Website or in the Boca Raton restaurant. The Plaintiff utilizes available screen reader software that allows individuals who are blind and visually disabled to communicate with company websites. However, Defendant's website contains access barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software, says the suit. Taj Express Indian Cuisine, Inc. operates the website that offers Indian cuisine.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Roderick V. Hannah, Esq. RODERICK V. HANNAH, ESQ., P.A. 4800 N. Hiatus Road Sunrise, FL 33351 Telephone: (954) 362-3800 Facsimile: (954) 362-3779 E-mail: rhannah@rhannahlaw.com - and - Pelayo M. Duran, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF PELAYO DURAN, P.A. 6355 N.W. 36th Street, Suite 307 Virginia Gardens, FL 33166 Telephone: (305) 266-9780 Facsimile: (305) 269-8311 E-mail: duranandassociates@gmail.com TEKNI-PLEX INC: Faces Peckinpaugh Fraud Suit in E.D. Pa. -------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has filed against Tekni-Plex, Inc. The suit is captioned as Kenneth Peckinpaugh, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. TEKNI-PLEX, INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-05650-CFK (E.D. Pa., Oct. 1, 2025). The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Chad F. Kenney. The suit arises from fraud claims in relation to violations demanding $5MM in damages.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Benjamin F. Johns, Esq. SHUB JOHNS & HOLBROOK LLP Four Tower Bridge 200 Barr Harbor Dr., Suite 400 Conshohocken, PA 19428 Telephone: (610) 477-8380 E-mail: bjohns@shublawyers.com The Defendant is represented by: Paulyne A. Gardner, Esq. MULLEN COUGHLIN 426 W. Lancaster Avenue, Suite 200 Devon, PA 19333 Telephone: (267) 930-2098 Facsimile: (267) 930-4771 E-mail: pgardner@mullen.law THC – ORANGE COUNTY: Tjoa Suit Removed to C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Hannah Tjoa, an individual, on behalf of herself and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. THC – ORANGE COUNTY, LLC, a limited liability company; SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA SPECIALTY CARE, LLC; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 30-2025-01507958-CU-OE-CXC was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Orange, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 8:25-cv-02366. The First Cause of Action for Violation of California Business and Professions Code Section 17200, et seq.; Second Cause of Action for Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Fourth Cause of Action for Failure to Provide Meal Periods; Fifth Cause of Action for Failure to Provide Rest Breaks; remaining portions of the Sixth Cause of Action for Failure Provide Accurate Itemized Wage Statements; Seventh Cause of Action for Failure to Reimburse; remaining portions of her Eighth Cause of Action for Failure to Pay Wages When Due; Ninth Cause of Action for Failure to Pay Sick Wages; Tenth Cause of Action for Retaliation; and Eleventh Cause of Action for Wrongful Termination.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Jospeh W. Ozmer, II, Esq. Paul G. Sherman, Esq. Nicholas L. Ramirez, Esq. KABAT CHAPMAN & OZMER LLP 333 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 2225 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: (213) 493-3980 Email: jozmer@kcozlaw.com psherman@kcozlaw.com nramirez@kcozlaw.com TOPIX PHARMACEUTICALS: Cole Files Suit in S.D. New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Topix Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al. The case is styled as Magdalene Cole, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Topix Pharmaceuticals Inc., Think Operations, LLC., Case No. 1:25-cv-08577 (Cal. Super. Ct., San Joaquin Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud for Deceptive Trade Practices. Topix Pharmaceuticals -- https://topixpharm.com/ -- has been the #1 practice branded skincare provider serving dermatologists and physicians worldwide since 1981.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. GUCOVSCHI LAW FIRM, PLLC 140 Broadway, Ste. FL. 46 New York, NY 10005 Phone: (212) 884-4230 Email: adrian@gucovschilaw.com TRANSUNION LLC: Williams-Diggins Balks at Unprotected Personal Info ------------------------------------------------------------------- LINDSEY WILLIAMS-DIGGINS, LOLETHA CAMMON, JONATHAN MILLER, and JONATHON WADE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. TRANSUNION LLC; and SALESFORCE, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-11525 (N.D. Ill., September 23, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for their failure to properly secure and safeguard Plaintiffs' highly valuable, protected, personally identifiable information in their possession and/or control, including, but not limited to, individuals' names, dates of birth, and Social Security numbers. As part of TransUnion's business operations, TransUnion uses Salesforce's cloud based customer relationship management platform to store consumers' PII, including the PII of Plaintiffs and Class Members. Despite Defendants' duties to safeguard the PII they collect and maintain, on or about August 28, 2025, TransUnion began notifying consumers that it had suffered a cybersecurity incident which impacted personal data on a third-party application used by TransUnion. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' failure to implement and follow basic, standard data security procedures, Plaintiffs' and Class Members' PII has been compromised by cybercriminals, says the suit. The Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the Class, bring claims for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgment, seeking damages, with attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses, and appropriate injunctive and declaratory relief. TransUnion LLC is one of the three major credit reporting agencies in the United States.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gary F. Lynch, Esq. Nicholas A. Colella, Esq. Patrick D. Donathen, Esq. LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: (412) 322-9243 E-mail: gary@lcllp.com nickc@lcllp.com patrick@lcllp.com - and - Christopher L. Cornelius, Esq. LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP 111 W. Washington Street, Suite 1240 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 750-1265 E-mail: chris@lcllp.com - and - James A. Francis, Esq. FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS, P.C. 1600 Market Street, Suite 2510 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 735-8600 E-mail: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com - and - Jordan M. Sartell, Esq. FRANCIS MAILMAN SOUMILAS, P.C. 310 S. County Farm Rd., Suite H Wheaton, IL 60187 Telephone: (215) 735-8600 E-mail: jsartell@consumerlawfirm.com - and - Norman E. Siegel, Esq. STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP 460 Nichols Rd., Ste. 200 Kansas City, MO 64112 Telephone: (816) 714-7100 E-mail: siegel@stuevesiegel.com U-HAUL CO: Watson-Ali Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against U-Haul Co. of California. The case is styled as Eniya Watson-Ali, individually, and on behalf of other similarly situated employees v. Lin R. Rogers Electrical Contractors, Inc., Rogers Electric Service Corporation, Does 1-25, Case No. 25CV149379 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., Oct. 16, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case." U-Haul Co. of California -- https://www.uhaul.com/ -- is a regional subsidiary of the U-Haul International company that was founded in 1971.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Karen I. Gold, Esq. BLACKSTONE LAW 8383 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 745 Beverly Hills, CA 90211-2442 Phone: 310-439-5208 Email: kgold@blackstonepc.com U-HAUL INTERNATIONAL: Barnett Suit Removed to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Christopher Barnett, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. U-HAUL INTERNATIONAL, INC., a Nevada corporation; and Does 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. 25STCV27089 was removed from the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-09893. The Complaint, styled as a class action, purports to bring six causes of action, for: violation of California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act ("CLRA"); violation of California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL"); violation of California's False Advertising Law ("FAL"); intentional misrepresentation (fraud); negligent misrepresentation; and quasi-contract. The Plaintiff alleges that UHI deceives consumers and gains an unfair advantage against competitors by charging a "hidden environmental fee" at the end of the checkout process for certain purchases.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Steven M. Selna, Esq. BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER, COPLAN & ARONOFF LLP 100 Pine Street, Suite 3100 San Francisco, CA 94111 Phone: 628.600.2250 Facsimile: 628.221.5828 Email: sselna@beneschlaw.com UNITED STATES: Faces Suit Over Syria's Nov. 21 TPS Termination -------------------------------------------------------------- DAHLIA DOE; SARA DOE; NESMA DOE; LAILA DOE; WALEED DOE; MUSTAFA DOE; and AHMAD DOE, on their own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Kristi NOEM, Secretary, United States Department of Homeland Security, in her official capacity; UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; UNITED STATES CITIZENSHIP AND IMMIGRATION SERVICES; and UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Case No. 1:25-cv-08686 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 20, 2025) challenges the Defendants' alleged unlawful decision to terminate Syria's Temporary Protected Status (TPS) designation, effective Nov. 21, 2025. According to the complaint, the Defendants' actions put the Plaintiffs with existing TPS at imminent risk of losing the critical humanitarian protection that TPS provides and rob Plaintiffs with pending applications of the opportunity to have their applications adjudicated. Should TPS for Syria be terminated, all Plaintiffs will face impossible choices: to uproot their lives yet again in search of a pathway to safety in a third country; to remain in the United States without lawful immigration status, at risk of imminent immigration detention and removal; or to relocate -- some for the first time -- to Syria, a country plagued by violent conflict, including air strikes, civil unrest, humanitarian crisis, and volatile country conditions. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem's decision to terminate TPS for Syria -- giving TPS -- holders merely 60 days to plan for life without TPS -- is the latest in a series of premeditated terminations of TPS for several non-white, non-European countries. The decisions to terminate TPS for these countries, including Syria, were made as part of the Trump Administration's ongoing effort to effectively eliminate the Congressionally-authorized TPS program and significantly reduce the number of non-white immigrants in the United States, the suit says. Specifically, the Defendants' decision to terminate TPS for Syria -- made prior to consulting appropriate executive agencies, without regard to Syria's dire country conditions, and by relying on impermissible factors -- violates the TPS program’s statutory requirements and the Administrative Procedure Act, added the suit. Plaintiff Dahlia Doe is a Syrian national and TPS holder who has lived in the United States since 2015 and currently resides in Bronx, New York. Kristi Noem is sued in her official capacity as the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security. As the highest-ranking officer for DHS, Defendant Noem has ultimate statutory authority over all TPS extension, termination, and designation decisions. Department of Homeland Security is a Cabinet-level department in the U.S. federal government and is an "agency" within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. section 551(1).[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Guadalupe Aguirre, Esq. Ghita Schwarz, Esq. Megan Hauptman, Esq. INTERNATIONAL REFUGEE ASSISTANCE PROJECT One Battery Park Plaza, Fl 33 New York, NY 10004 Telephone: (929) 246-0154 E-mail: laguirre@refugeerights.org gschwarz@refugeerights.org mhauptman@refugeerights.org - and - Golnaz Fakhimi, Esq. Sadaf Hasan, Esq. MUSLIM ADOVCATES 1032 15th Street N.W. No. 362 Washington, D.C. 20005 Telephone: (202) 655-2969 E-mail: golnaz@muslimadvocates.org sadaf@muslimadvocates.org - and - Marc Van Der Hout, Esq. Johnny Sinodis, Esq. Oona Cahill, Esq. VAN DER HOUT LLP 360 Post Street, Suite 800 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-3000 Facsimile: (415) 981-3003 E-mail: ndca@vblaw.com UNITED STATES: Parole Comm. Continues Operation Amid Abolishment ---------------------------------------------------------------- KENAN BRAXTON AND MICHAEL DUNBAR, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. UNITED STATES PAROLE COMMISSION, PATRICIA K. CUSHWA, in her official capacity as Acting Chairman of the United States Parole Commission, PAMELA BONDI, in her official capacity as Attorney General of the United States, and U.S. Department of Justice and JOE PAGE III, in his official capacity as Warden of the D.C. Jail, Case No. 1:25-cv-03534-SLS (D.D.C., Oct. 1, 2025) contends that the United States Parole Commission has been abolished by Congress but is continuing its "normal operations" unabated. The Plaintiffs are individuals who have been arrested and detained by the United States Parole Commission, an agency that Congress decided to abolish over 40 years ago. This decades-long "quandary" of the Commission's continued existence finally ended when its enabling statute expired last night, on September 30, 2025. But the Commission has decided to ignore Congress and instead continue jailing individuals who allegedly violated the conditions of their supervision. These individuals are either accused of solely technical violations of supervision or have been released by a judge in their criminal matter. Because the Commission does not have Congressional authority to exist, let alone issue arrest warrants and incarcerate individuals, the Court should declare the Commission's actions unlawful and release Plaintiffs and putative class members from custody, the suit says. Plaintiff Braxton is a 51-year-old individual on supervised release who the Parole Commission is holding at the D.C. Jail pending a final revocation hearing for alleged technical violations of supervised release, currently scheduled for October 29, 2025. Plaintiff Stanley Petty is a 57-year-old individual on supervised release who the Commission is holding at the D.C. Jail pending a probable cause hearing for alleged violations of supervised release, currently scheduled for October 6, 2025. The United States Parole Commission is the federal agency responsible for the administration of parole and supervised release in Washington, D.C., including decisions regarding the continuation, termination, and revocation of their supervision.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Hanna Perry, Esq. Zoe Friedland, Esq. Teressa Hamsher, Esq. Megan Yan, Esq. PUBLIC DEFENDER SERVICE FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 633 3rd St. N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 Telephone: (202) 824-2198 Facsimile: (202) 824-2093 E-mail: hperry@pdsdc.org zfriedland@pdsdc.org thamsher@pdsdc.org myan@pdsdc.org VICIOUS BISCUIT: Drummond Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website -------------------------------------------------------------- JONATHAN DRUMMOND, Plaintiff v. VISCIOUS BISCUIT FRANCHISING, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 6:25-cv-01831 (M.D. Fla., September 23, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for declaratory and injunctive relief, attorney's fees, costs, and litigation expenses for unlawful disability discrimination in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Plaintiff Drummond's blindness limits him in the performance of major life activities, including sight, and he requires assistive technologies, auxiliary aids, and services for effective communication, including communication in connection with her use of a computer. Beginning in August 2025, the Plaintiff attempted on a number of occasions to utilize the Defendant's website, https://viciousbiscuit.com, to browse services and online offerings in order to educate himself about the available services, menu items, their ingredients and prices, brick-and-mortar locations, and operating hours, with the intent of placing an order through the Website or at, from, and through the physical restaurants. Upon navigating the website, the Plaintiff encountered significant accessibility barriers that prevented him from completing an order. Specifically, after adding items to the shopping cart, he was unable to focus on or access the cart to review his selections. In addition, the product images lacked descriptive alternative text, making it difficult for Plaintiff to understand what the food items looked like. These barriers created confusion during the ordering process and ultimately prevented Plaintiff from completing his purchase on Defendant's website, says the suit. The Defendant's website contains access barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software, the suit asserts. Viscious Biscuit Franchising is a fast-casual breakfast and brunch restaurant under the Vicious Biscuit brand.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Aleksandra Kravets, Esq. ALEKSANDRA KRAVETS, ESQ. P.A. 865 SW 113 Lane Pembroke Pines, FL 33025 Telephone: (347) 268-9533 E-mail: ak@akesqpa.com VIVID SEATS INC: Cheezum Suit Removed to D. Maryland ---------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Laura Cheezum, on her own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. VIVID SEATS, INC. AND VIVID SEATS, LLC, Case No. C-05-CV-25-000127 was removed from the Circuit Court of the State of Maryland for Caroline County, to the United States District Court for District of Maryland on Oct. 16, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03432-MJM. On September 10, 2025, Plaintiff filed a Class Action Complaint ("CAC") against Vivid Seats. The CAC sets forth two causes of action under the Maryland Consumer Protection Act ("MCPA").[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Jerrold A. Thrope, Esq. GORDON FEINBLATT LLC 1001 Fleet Street Suite 700 Baltimore, MD 21202 Phone: 410-576-4295 Email: jthrope@gfrlaw.com - and - Timothy B. Hardwicke, Esq. Kathryn L. Couey, Esq. Glenna E. Siegel, Esq. GOODSMITH GREGG & UNRUH LLP 150 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 3150 Chicago, IL 60606 Phone: 312-322-1980 Facsimile: 312-322-0056 Email: thardwicke@ggulaw.com kcouey@ggulaw.com gsiegel@ggulaw.com VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Sargent Suit Removed to N.D. California --------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Hilary Sargent, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. doing business as: Audi of America; Fletcher Jones Motor Cars, Inc. doing business as: Audi Fletcher Jones; Does 1-10 Inclusive; Case No. 1:15-cv-13452 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Oct. 17, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-08976-CRB to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. -- https://www.volkswagengroupofamerica.com/ -- is the North American operational headquarters, and subsidiary of the Volkswagen Group of automobile companies of Germany.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. Michael P. Thornton, Esq. THORNTON LAW FIRM LLP 1 Lincoln Street, 25th Floor Boston, MA 02111 Phone: (617) 720-1333 Email: mthornton@tenlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Andrew R Levin, Esq. David A. Barry, Esq. SUGARMAN ROGERS BARSHAK & COHEN, PC 101 Merrimac Street, 9th Floor Boston, MA 02114 Phone: (617) 227-3030 Fax: (617) 523-4001 Email: levin@srbc.com barry@srbc.com WAKEFERN FOOD CORP: Schottenstein Suit Removed to S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Alexis Schottenstein, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. WAKEFERN FOOD CORP., Case No. 656002/2025 was removed from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Commercial Division, to the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York on Oct. 17, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-08635. The Complaint alleges that Wakefern's use of biometric facial identification technology to deter theft and shoplifting constitutes unjust enrichment and is a violation of New York City's biometrics law and the state of New York's privacy statutes and consumer protection law.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Maximilian D. Cadmus, Esq. Lauren B. Cooper, Esq. BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, PC Phone: (609) 490-4847 Email: mcadmus@bakerdonelson.com WERTHEIMER & SONS: Drury Files Suit in N.J. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Wertheimer & Sons, Inc., et al. The case is styled as Kevin Michael Drury, and all others similarly situated v. Wertheimer & Sons, Inc., John Does #1-10, Jane Does #1-10, ABC Companies #1-10, DEF Companies #1-10, GHI Companies #1-10, XYZ Companies #1-10, fictitiously named Case No. L-007685-25 (N.J. Super. Ct., Essex Cty., Oct. 7, 2025). The case type is stated as "Personal Injury." Wertheimer & Sons, Inc. are a family-owned company that has specialized in the restoration of residential homes and commercial businesses.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marco A. Laracca, Esq. LARACCA LAW GROUP, LLC 120 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 325 East Hanover, NJ 07936 Phone: (973) 675-6006 Fax: (973) 675-7333 WESTJET AIRLINES: Willis Files Suit in S.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Westjet Airlines LTD. The case is styled as Gabriele Willis, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Westjet Airlines LTD., Case No. 3:25-cv-02785-LL-MSB (S.D. Cal., Oct. 17, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Breach of Contract. WesJjet Airlines Ltd. -- https://www.westjet.com/en-us -- provides airline services. The Company offers scheduled and charter air services and travel packages.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Amber Love Schubert, Esq. SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE LLP 2001 Union St Ste 200 San Francisco, CA 94123 Phone: (415) 788-4220 Fax: (415) 788-0161 Email: aschubert@sjk.law - and - Robert C. Schubert, Esq. SCHUBERT JONCKHEER & KOLBE, LLP 3 Embarcadero Center, Suite 1650 San Francisco, CA 94111-4003 Phone: (415) 788-4220 Fax: (415) 788-0161 Email: rschubert@schubertlawfirm.com WILKES UNIVERSITY: Fails to Secure Personal, Health Info, Suit Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- NICHOLE DUDEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. WILKES UNIVERSITY, Case No. 3:25-cv-01971-JKM (M.D. Pa., Oct. 20, 2025) arises out of the recent data security incident and data breach that was perpetrated against Wilkes, which held in its possession certain personally identifiable information and protected health information of Plaintiff and other current and former students and applicants of Defendant. The Data Breach occurred between January 25 and January 26, 2025. The Private Information compromised in Defendant Wilkes University's Data Breach included certain personal or protected health information of individuals, including Plaintiff. This Private Information included but is not limited to "date of birth, social security number, student id number, home address, home phone number, email address and financial aid information." The Private Information was accessed and/or acquired by cyber-criminals who perpetrated the attack and remains in the hands of those cyber-criminals. According to Defendant's report to Office of the Attorney General of Maine, 27,632 or more individuals' Sensitive Data was compromised. The Data Breach resulted from Defendant's failure to implement adequate and reasonable cyber-security procedures and protocols necessary to protect individuals' Private Information with which they were entrusted for either treatment or employment or both. The Plaintiff brings this class action lawsuit on behalf of those similarly situated to address Defendant's inadequate safeguarding of Class Members' Private Information that they collected and maintained, and for failing to provide timely and adequate notice to Plaintiff and other Class Members that their information was subjected to unauthorized access by an unknown third party and precisely what type of information was accessed. The Plaintiff was a student of the Defendant. Wilkes University is a Pennsylvania-based entity incorporated in Pennsylvania that provides higher education for residents of many states.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jacob U. Ginsburg, Esq. KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, P.C. 30 E. Butler Ave. Ambler, PA 19002 Telephone: (267) 468-5374 E-mail: jginsburg@creditlaw.com teamkimmel@creditlaw.com - and - Sean Short, Esq. EKSM, LLP Service only: service@eksm.com 4200 Montrose Blvd., Ste. 200 Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: (888) 350-3931 E-mail: sean@sanfordlawfirm.com WISCONSIN PHYSICIANS: Boyd Sues Over Deprivation of Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------ Aubre Boyd, on behalf of herself and all those similarly situated v. WISCONSIN PHYSICIANS SERVICE INSURANCE CORPORATION d/b/a WPS HEALTH SOLUTIONS, Case No. 3:25-cv-00856 (W.D. Wis., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought against the Defendant pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), as amended, and the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), because of WPS' unlawful deprivation of current and former Claims Representatives' rights to overtime compensation under the FLSA. During Plaintiff Boyd's employment, WPS discriminated and retaliated against her in violation of the ADA by refusing to accommodate her known disability and subjecting her to discipline and constructive discharge for pretextual reasons after she filed a complaint regarding disability discrimination. Further, WPS failed to compensate Plaintiff, as well as all similarly situated employees, for overtime work suffered or permitted before and after scheduled work shifts, in violation of the FLSA., says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed as a call center employee with Defendant WPS Health Solutions. WPS Health Solutions is a corporation established, regulated, and operated pursuant to the laws of the State of Wisconsin, regulations, and customs.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John W. Stewart, Esq. Matthew D. Purushotham, Esq. McGILLIVARY STEELE ELKIN LLP 1101 Vermont Avenue, N.W., Suite 1000 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 833-8855 Fax:(202) 452-1090 Email: jws@mselaborlaw.com mdp@mselaborlaw.com - and - Christopher Aherns, Esq. Alex J. Sterling, Esq. THE PREVIANT LAW FIRM S.C. 310 West Wisconsin Avenue, Suite 100 MW Milwaukee, WI 53203 Phone: (414) 271-4500 Fax: (414) 271-6308 Email: cja@previant.com XLCUSIVE TRADING: Alier Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Compensation -------------------------------------------------------------- Marilyn Alier, individually on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. XLCUSIVE TRADING FL LLC d/b/a Metro by T-Mobile, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Case No. 6:25-cv-02016 (M.D. Fla., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), on behalf of Plaintiff and all other persons similarly situated (hereinafter "the FLSA Collective Members") who suffered damages, as a result of the Company's failure to pay them the appropriate overtime compensation. The Company's uniform practice and policy of failing to properly pay Plaintiff and the FLSA Collective Members overtime compensation for all hours worked in excess of 40 each work week violates the overtime provisions of Section 207 of the FLSA. When Plaintiff raised these unlawful practices to the Company and thereafter retained the undersigned counsel, she was terminated in retaliation for these complaints, in violation of the FLSA. Accordingly, Plaintiff brings this collective action to recover her and the FLSA Collective Members unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, declaratory relief, and all other applicable relief under the FLSA owed at any time during the three-year period preceding the filing of this Complaint, up to the present, as well as damages owed as the result of Plaintiff's retaliatory termination, says the complaint. The Plaintiff worked for the Company from June 2024 to July 2025. The Company operates as a retail partner of Metro by T-Mobile, providing wireless services in multiple states, including Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Khusbu A. Patel, Esq. C. Ryan Morgan, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A. 20 N. Orange Ave, 15th Floor Orlando, FL 32801 Phone: (689) 256-2032 Fax: (689) 256-2019 Email: kpatel@forthepeople.com rmorgan@forthepeople.com ZAVZA SEAL: Altamirano Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages --------------------------------------------------- Danilo Altamirano, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated v. ZAVZA SEAL, LLC and JACOB KAMIN, Case No. 2:25-cv-05852 (E.D.N.Y., Oct. 20, 2025), is brought to recover unpaid wages on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the New York Labor Law Articles, and the supporting New York State Department of Labor Regulations ("NYLL"). The Plaintiff regularly worked more than 40 hours in a single workweek. the Defendants paid Plaintiff a fixed, daily rate regardless of the actual number of hours that Plaintiff worked each workweek. As a result, Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff at the rate of one- and one-half times his regular rate of pay for hours worked after 40 hours per workweek. The Defendants failed to pay Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees premium overtime wages for hours worked in excess of forty hours per week in violation of both the FLSA, and the NYLL, and failed to pay Plaintiff and members of the collective action prevailing wages and supplemental benefits for work that they performed on Public Works Projects, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a laborer from 2022 to July 2025. The Defendants provide waterproofing services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter A. Romero, Esq. ROMERO LAW GROUP PLLC 490 Wheeler Road, Suite 277 Hauppauge, NY 11788 Phone: (631) 257-5588 Email: Promero@RomeroLawNY.com Asbestos Litigation ASBESTOS UPDATE: States Ask Court to Review Brenntag Talc Ruling ---------------------------------------------------------------- Alex Wolf of Bloomberg Law reports that a coalition representing 14 states and Washington, D.C., asked the Third Circuit Court of Appeals to rethink its September 10, 2025 ruling favoring Brenntag SE, arguing the decision could strip states and victims of their ability to pursue asbestos-related injury claims. The ruling determined that successor liability claims against the former Berkshire Hathaway-owned talc supplier Whittaker Clark & Daniels Inc. belong to its bankruptcy estate. The attorneys general warned that the decision imperils states advocacy for their residents, cautioning that it may embolden corporations to use bankruptcy to shield themselves from accountability to consumers and victims. ASBESTOS UPDATE: Travelers Cos. Has $1.45BB Reserves at Sept. 30 ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Travelers Companies, Inc., has reported net asbestos reserves of $1.45 billion and $1.42 billion as of September 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Travelers Cos. states, "In the ordinary course of its insurance business, the Company has received and continues to receive claims for insurance arising under policies issued by the Company asserting alleged injuries and damages from asbestos-related exposures that are the subject of related coverage litigation. The Company is defending asbestos-related litigation vigorously and believes that it has meritorious defenses; however, the outcomes of these disputes are uncertain. In this regard, the Company employs dedicated specialists and comprehensive resolution strategies to manage asbestos loss exposure, including settling litigation under appropriate circumstances. Currently, it is not possible to predict legal outcomes and their impact on future loss development for claims and litigation relating to asbestos claims. Any such development could be affected by future court decisions and interpretations, as well as future changes, if any, in applicable legislation. Because of these uncertainties, additional liabilities may arise for amounts in excess of the Company's current insurance reserves. In addition, the Company's estimate of ultimate claims and claim adjustment expenses may change. These additional liabilities or changes in estimates, or a range of either, cannot now be reasonably estimated and could result in income statement charges that could be material to the Company’s results of operations in future periods. "Net asbestos paid loss and loss adjustment expenses in the first nine months of 2025 and 2024 were $171 million and $201 million, respectively." A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=FoeDfa ********* 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 ***