251124.mbx

251124.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, November 24, 2025, Vol. 27, No. 234 Headlines 3M COMPANY: Aceves Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina 3M COMPANY: Adams Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina 3M COMPANY: Kling Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina 7-ELEVEN: Brown Loses Class Certification Bid 7TH HAVEN: Standing Order Entered in Anji Class Action A1 DEVELOPMENT: Operates Illegal Casino Websites, Ruiz Alleges ADJ PRODUCTS: Perez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ALDI FOODS INC: Bacajol Suit Removed to C.D. California AMAZON.COM INC: Bernard Files Bid for Class Certification AMAZON.COM INC: Bid for Class Cert. in Cross Due August 19, 2026 AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Rios Suit Removed to W.D. Washington AMERICAN HONDA: Bid to Modify Class Cert Hearing Date Tossed AMERICAN RENAL: Villodas Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct. AMERICAN WELL CORP: Polk Files Suit in W.D. Michigan APPFOLIO INC: Beach Files Personal Injury Suit in C.D. Cal. ARB GAMING: Anderson Sues Over Illegal Online Gaming Platform ARCHERY TRADE: Aceves Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ARCHERY TRADE: Butter Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ARCHERY TRADE: Simcik Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ASSET REALTY: Bid for Initial OK of Settlement Tossed w/o Prejudice ATHENA BITCOIN: Vaughan Files Suit in S.D. Florida AUTOMATED HEALTH: Delk Bid for Conditional Cert Partly OK'd AYLO USA: Class Cert Hearing Set for April 10, 2026 BACKCHECKED LLC: Santos Seeks Initial OK of $535K Settlement Fund BALANCED BODY: Cross Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. BAMBU SYSTEMS: Carrasco Sues Over WARN Act Violation BANK OF AMERICA: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Nov. 9, 2026 BIG FISH: Campos Allowed to Seal Exhibits BIG STAR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Crespo Suit Alleges BOWTECH INC: Dunkin Suit Transferred to D. Colorado BRUCE PON: Fetch Compute Files Suit in S.D. New York CARENEXA LLC: Faces Gillard Suit Over Compromised Clients' Info CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Labaton Keller Named Lead Counsel CHURCH STREET: Class Cert. Bids in Slaven Suit Due Feb. 13, 2026 CLEAN BEAUTY: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Echols Says CLEAN CAUSE: Faces Evans Suit Over Blind's Equal Access to Website CLEVELAND-CLIFFS STEEL: Kuhns Suit Transferred to S.D. Ohio COCHLEAR AMERICAS: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website COHEN FASHION OPTICAL: Aiello Files Suit in E.D. New York CONDUENT BUSINESS: Berkenfeld Files Suit in D. New Jersey CONDUENT BUSINESS: Waters Files Suit in D. New Jersey CONTINENTAL CASUALTY: Mitchell Suit Removed to N.D. California COOKUNITY INC: Thurston Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. COSTCO WHOLESALE: Glazer Sues Over Tequila's Agave Azul Labels CRAIG HOSPITAL: Collins Suit Removed to N.D. California CURRY COLLEGE: Court Dismisses Claims in "MacIntyre" DANIEL YU: Scheduling Order Entered in Grifols Class Action DNC PARKS & RESORTS: Peraino Suit Transferred to E.D. California DREAM DUFFEL: Henry Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Online Store ELLIOTT'S TENNESSEE BOOT: Cole Suit Transferred to C.D. Illinois EPIC HOLIDAY: Moya Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri FARMERS NEW WORLD: Marino Suit Removed to W.D. Washington FASTENAL CO: Buckley Allowed Leave to File Amended Complaint FCA US: Ludwig Suit Transferred to E.D. Pennsylvania FEDEX GROUND: Atwood Suit Transferred From W.D. Pa. to N.D. Tex. FINCANTIERI MARINE: Court Grants Prelim Settlement OK in "Malvitz" FISHPOND INC: Evans Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website FLAGSHIP RESTAURANT: FLSA Collective Class Wins Certification FRAN VUE: Vogeney Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California FUJIFILM HOLDINGS: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Guillen Says GEICO INDEMNITY: Class Cert Briefs Deadline in "Shiloah" Extended GERBER PRODUCTS: Conry Suit Transferred From D. Minn. to E.D.N.Y. GREEK MODERN KITCHEN: Faldonie Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website HANESBRANDS INC: Jackson Suit Removed to E.D. Washington HAPPY STATE: Williams Appeals Court Order to Tex. Court of Appeals HARD EIGHT: Court Lifts Stay of Miran Class Suit HARD ROCK: Bid to Conditional Certify Action Tossed as Moot HEALTH CARE: Fails to Secure Clients' Personal Info, Jackson Says HEALTHFIRST PHSP: Publishes Network Provider Directory, Greene Says HENLEY PACIFIC: Staples Suit Removed to C.D. California HERITAGE SPORTS: Snedeker Balks at Illegal Online Casino Operation HIGH LEVEL: Dilone Seeks Unpaid Wages for Construction Workers HILTON GRAND: Rice Suit Removed to W.D. Washington HIRT'S LLC: Davis Seeks Equal Website Access for Blind Users HOBBY LOBBY: Aguilar Suit Removed to N.D. California HOME DEPOT: Court Narrows Claims in Amos Class Action HOME DEPOT: Wong Suit Removed to W.D. Washington HOMEBODY INSURANCE: Heffner Suit Removed to D. Maryland HOSPITAL SISTERS: Bid to Compel Class Discovery in Million OK'd HOYT ARCHERY INC: Janochoski Suit Transferred to D. Colorado HUBSPOT INC: Lorenc Suit Removed to D. Massachusetts HUSQVARNA PROFESSIONAL: Settlement in Douglass Gets Initial Nod INSPIRE MEDICAL: PRGERS Sues Over Misleading Statements JEFFERSON INDUSTRIES: Peyton Sues Over Failure to Pay Wages KNEW CONSCIOUS: Barlow Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages LALIQUE NORTH AMERICA: Castro Sues Over Discriminative Website LAND O'LAKES INC: Lenz Suit Removed to E.D. California LFRC FT. WAYNE: Foster Sues Over Disabled's Access to Properties LGI HOMES CORPORATE: Harbour Suit Removed to W.D. Washington LIV GRP. INC: Sanchez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. LLOYD & MCDANIEL: Franklin Files FDCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia LUXURY PRESENCE: Rogers Files TCPA Suit in D. Delaware MACY'S RETAIL: Agnew Fraud Suit Removed to W.D. Wash. MANO DELIVERY: Rayo Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. MARIETTA AUTO SALES: Anderson Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia MCCAIN FOODS USA: Preciado Suit Removed to E.D. Washington MERCY HEALTH - REGIONAL MEDICAL: Flint Suit Removed to N.D. Ohio MI MILK LLC: Escobar Files TCPA Suit in N.D. California MIAMI DOLPHINS: Hernandez Sues Over Discriminative Website ML4 LLC: Frost Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website MR. COOPER: Class Cert Scheduling Order Modified in Cabezas Suit MURPHY REHABILITATION: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response NAPCO SECURITY: Continues to Defend Patel Securities Class Suit NATIONWIDE HEALTHCARE: Williams Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages NEW YORK BLOOD CENTER: Sarkar Files Suit in S.D. New York NOVU FUSION CUISINE: Gonzalez Sues Over Disability Discrimination NUNA BABY ESSENTIALS: Roberts Suit Removed to W.D. Washington O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE: Hawley Sues Over Uncompensated Employees OHIO SUPREME COURT: All Discovery Due Sept. 30, 2026 ONE CAPITAL: Laccinole Files FCRA Suit in N.D. Ill. PACIFIC MARITIME: Williams Suit Removed to N.D. California PEOPLE DATA LABS: Cochrane Suit Removed to N.D. California PFIZER INC: Crosby Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind PORSCHE CARS: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due May 20, 2026 PORTLAND PRODUCT: Blind Users Can't Access Website, Davis Claims PRECISTION STRIP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Diehl Alleges PRUSSIAN INC: CEO Loses Bid to Dismiss "Wang" Employment Suit PUBLIC SERVICE: Continues to Defend Sherman Act-Related Suit RADIUS GLOBAL: Hart Files FDCA Suit in S.D. Fla. REPUBLIC SERVICES: Peterson Files TCPA Suit in D. Delaware ROBOT FACTORY: Cole Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind RTX CORPORATION: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Jan. 12, 2027 RXO LAST: Richardson Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification SAGENT TREATMENT: Discloses Patients' Info to Google, Ward Says SANGAMON COUNTY, IL: Bid for Class Certification Due June 18, 2027 SERVICEQUIK INC: Court Extends Time to File Class Cert Bid SHAUN FERGUSON: Williams Seeks Ruling on Pending Bids SIRIUS XM: Class Settlement in Campbell Suit Gets Initial Nod SNAP INC: Awaits Court OK of Settlement in Securities Suit SNAP INC: Continues to Defend Platform-related Suits SNAP INC: Continues to Defend Securities Suit in California SPOTIFY USA: Artificially Inflates Streamed Music, Collins Claims STAR FUTURE INC: White Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. STEAM LOGISTICS: Court Dismisses "Shelton" STEELE-WEDDLE RUNNING: Hampton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website STRATEGY INC: Continues to Defend Dodge Class Suit in Delaware SUNFLOWER LIMITED: Faces Damron Suit Over Illegal Casino Websites SUNFLOWER LTD: Franklin Sues Over Illegal Online Gambling SUNPATH LTD: Morales Loses Bid for Class Certification SUPERIOR AIR-GROUND: Filing for Class Cert. bid Due Feb. 20, 2026 TECH ZONE: Gardner Sues Over Illegal Online Casino Operation TRADER JOE'S: Palacios Suit Removed to S.D. California TRIPLE CANOPY: Bid for Conditional Certification Due Feb. 13, 2026 TROPHYSMACK INC: Johnson Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California TYRONE OLIVER: Benjamin Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes UNICOIN INC: Arochi Sues Over Crypto Token Fraudulent Scheme UNITED BANK: $2MM Settlement in Davis Suit Gets Initial Nod UNIVERSAL ACCOUNTING CENTER: King Files FLSA Suit in D. Utah VENEZUELA: Parties Seek to Modify Class Cert Briefing Schedule VGW HOLDING: Ecklund Sues Over Illegal Casino Websites and Apps VGW HOLDING: Operates Illegal Online Sweepstakes Casino, Gafa Says VIA RENEWABLES: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss "Glikin" VIA RENEWABLES: Continues to Defend TCPA Suits VIA RENEWABLES: Oral Arguments in Merger Suit Set for April 2026 VITAC CORPORATION: Parties Seek Initial OK of $500K Settlement WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Hearing Date WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Seeks to Shorten Time on Class Cert Hearing WEBTPA EMPLOYER: Court Denies Discovery Request in "Harrell" WHOLE FOODS: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due Feb. 14, 2026 WHY DIRECT LLC: McGonigle Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Virginia WILLIAMS-SONOMA INC: Youngren Sues Over Blind's Access to Website XPO LAST: Class Cert Bid Filing in Lopez Due April 10, 2026 ZOOMINFO TECHNOLOGIES: Continues to Defend Colorado Consumer Suit ZOOMINFO TECHNOLOGIES: Continues to Defend Quebec Privacy Suit ********* 3M COMPANY: Aceves Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina -------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Alejandro Aceves, et al, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 3M Company, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-15828 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on Nov. 4, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-13268-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: Alan T. Friedman, Esq. BAGOLIE-FRIEDMAN, LLC 648 Newark Avenue Jersey City, NJ 07306 Phone: (201) 656-8500 Fax: (201) 656-4703 Email: alan@bagoliefriedman.com 3M COMPANY: Adams Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina ------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as David Adams, et al, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 3M Company, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-15882 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on Nov. 4, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-13271-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: Alan T. Friedman, Esq. BAGOLIE-FRIEDMAN, LLC 648 Newark Avenue Jersey City, NJ 07306 Phone: (201) 656-8500 Fax: (201) 656-4703 Email: alan@bagoliefriedman.com 3M COMPANY: Kling Suit Transferred to D. South Carolina ------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Cynthia Kling, et al, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 3M Company, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-15831 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court for the District of South Carolina on Nov. 4, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-13269-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: Alan T. Friedman, Esq. BAGOLIE-FRIEDMAN, LLC 648 Newark Avenue Jersey City, NJ 07306 Phone: (201) 656-8500 Fax: (201) 656-4703 Email: alan@bagoliefriedman.com 7-ELEVEN: Brown Loses Class Certification Bid --------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DERRICK BROWN, v. 7-ELEVEN, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-03343-RMR-SBP (D. Colo.), the Hon. Judge Regina Rodriguez entered an order adopting magistrate Judge's recommendation. 1) The recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge is accepted and adopted; 2) The Plaintiff's motion for class certification pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23 is denied; 3) The Plaintiff's motion for class action relief and damages in the Amount of $1,000,000 is denied; and 4) The Plaintiff's motion for default judgment on Public Health Violations and Failure to Respond to Verified Contamination Claims is denied. 7-Eleven is an American convenience store chain. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=3cwSGH at no extra charge.[CC] 7TH HAVEN: Standing Order Entered in Anji Class Action ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ANJI COZY HOME CO LTD, v. THE 7TH HAVEN INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-10102-AH-SSC (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Anne Hwang entered a standing order as follows: All counsel must immediately review and comply with the Court’s Civility and Professionalism Guidelines, available at http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/attorneys/admissions/civility-and-professionalism guidelines. Neither counsel nor a party shall initiate contact with the Court or its Chambers’ staff by telephone, or by any other improper ex parte means. All discovery matters are referred to the assigned Magistrate Judge. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5(d)(3), Local Rule 5-4, and General Order 10-07, counsel shall electronically file all filings. Motions shall be filed in accordance with Local Rules 6 and 7. This Court hears civil motions on Wednesdays, beginning at 1:30 p.m. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=EqCI9M at no extra charge.[CC] A1 DEVELOPMENT: Operates Illegal Casino Websites, Ruiz Alleges -------------------------------------------------------------- VICTOR RUIZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. A1 DEVELOPMENT LLC, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-00997 (D. Utah, November 2, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of Utah's Gambling Act. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged illegal gambling operation in Utah through its online sweepstakes casinos available at www.taofortune.com, www.nolimitcoins.com, and www.funrize.com. According to the complaint, the websites offer chance games, which are already declared unlawful and unconstitutional in Utah. As a result of the Defendant's misconduct, the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals wagered money or other things of value on the Defendant's casino websites and lost. A1 Development LLC is a casino website operator, with a place of business in Meridian, Idaho. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elliot O. Jackson, Esq. HEDIN LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 Email: ejackson@hedinllp.com - and - David W. Scofield, Esq. PETERS SCOFIELD, Esq. 7430 Creek Road, Suite 303 Sandy, UT 84093 Telephone: (801) 322-2002 Email: dws@psplawyers.com - and - Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. GUCOVSCHI ROZENSHTEYN, PLLC 140 Broadway, FL 46 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 Email: adrian@gr-firm.com ADJ PRODUCTS: Perez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against ADJ PRODUCTS, LLC, et al. The case is styled as Jose Lopez Perez, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ADJ PRODUCTS LLC, ACCLAIM LIGHTING LLC, AMERICAN AUDIO LLC, AMERICAN D.J. SUPPLY INC., ELATION LIGHTING INC., EMPLOYER SOLUTIONS STAFFING GROUP II LLC, GLOBAL TRUSS AMERICA LLC, Case No. 25STCV32451 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Nov. 5, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." ADJ Products, LLC -- https://www.adj.com/ -- is a global manufacturer of entertainment lighting, LED video and atmospheric effects equipment with an expansive portfolio of products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Molly DeSario, Esq. BIBIYAN LAW GROUP, P.C. 1460 Westwood Blvd., Ste. 300 Los Angeles, CA 90024-4937 Phone: 310-438-5555 Fax: 310-300-1705 Email: mdesario@tomorrowlaw.com ALDI FOODS INC: Bacajol Suit Removed to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Nery Bacajol, an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ALDI FOODS INC., a Illinois Corporation doing business as ALDI FOODS; ADAN GONZALEZ BRAVO, an individual; OMAR CRUZ, an individual; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. CVRI2504257 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Riverside, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-02963. The Complaint asserts ten causes of action for 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 Quota Laws; and Unfair Competition.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Laura Wilson Shelby, Esq. Christopher A. Crosman, Esq. Reiko Furuta, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, CA 90067-3021 Phone: (310) 277-7200 Facsimile: (310) 201-5219 Email: lshelby@seyfarth.com ccrosman@seyfarth.com rfuruta@seyfarth.com AMAZON.COM INC: Bernard Files Bid for Class Certification --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRISTOPHER M. BERNARD, individually and on behalf of LAST MILE NATIONAL CITY, LLC, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, V. AMAZON.COM, INC., AMAZON LOGISTICS, INC. ET AL., Case No. 2:25-cv-02037-JLR (W.D. Wash.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting motion for class certification, request for oral argument and prioritize non arbitrable claims. The Plaintiff moves the Court to enter a case management order prioritizing resolution of the following issues ahead of any ruling under the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA): 1. Whether the Plaintiff's claims for injunctive and equitable relief under Washington and federal law are not subject to arbitration under prevailing legal standards; 2. Whether the Plaintiff satisfies the prerequisites for class certification under Rule 23 as to non-arbitrable claims; 3. Scheduling of a bifurcated briefing and hearing sequence to address these threshold legal determinations in advance of any FAA applicability analysis. Amazon.com is an American multinational technology company. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=KZZsMz at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ronald G. Rossi, Esq. ROSSI & CO, P.C. 24577 Giant Gulch Road Evergreen, CO 80439 Telephone: (303) 679-0200 AMAZON.COM INC: Bid for Class Cert. in Cross Due August 19, 2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Cross, et al., v. Amazon.com Inc., et al., Case No. 1:23-cv-02099 (D. Colo., Filed Aug. 17, 2023), the Hon. Judge Nina Y. Wang entered an order amending case scheduling order as follows: Deadline for Service of Written Discovery: Feb. 20, 2026 Fact Discovery cut-off: March 6, 2026 Affirmative Experts Disclosures: May 14, 2026 Rebuttal Experts Disclosures: June 15, 2026 Expert Discovery cut-off: July 13, 2026 Motion for Class Certification: Aug. 19, 2026 The nature of suit states Civil Rights -- Employment. Amazon.com is an American multinational technology company.[CC] AMAZON.COM SERVICES: Rios Suit Removed to W.D. Washington --------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Christine Rios, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. AMAZON.COM SERVICES, LLC, a foreign limited liability company; AMAZON RETAIL LLC, a foreign limited liability company; and DOES 1-20, as yet unknown Washington entities, Case No. 24-2-22659-1 SEA was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for King County, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Nov. 6, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02220. The Plaintiff seeks $5,000 in statutory damages on behalf of herself and each class member based on Defendants' alleged failure to disclose wage or salary ranges on job postings for positions in Washington, purportedly in violation of RCW 49.58.110. Additionally, the Complaint seeks a statutory award of attorneys fees.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Damon C. Elder, Esq. Andrea Delgadillo Ostrovsky, Esq. Katie Finrow, Esq. MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP 1301 Second Avenue, Suite 3000 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 274-6400 Fax: (206) 274-6401 Email: damon.elder@morganlewis.com andrea.ostrovsky@morganlewis.com katie.finrow@morganlewis.com AMERICAN HONDA: Bid to Modify Class Cert Hearing Date Tossed ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Aguirre v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc., Case No. 4:22-cv-06909 (N.D. Cal., Filed Nov. 4, 2022), the Hon. Judge Haywood S. Gilliam, Jr. entered an order denying stipulation to modify class certification hearing date. The Court is not available on Dec. 11, 2025. The hearing date (Dec. 18, 2025) and reply deadline (Nov. 25, 2025) shall remain as is. The nature of suit states Contract Product Liability. American is the North American subsidiary of Japanese Honda Motor Company.[CC] AMERICAN RENAL: Villodas Files Suit in Mass. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Renal Management, LLC. The case is styled as Jessica Villodas, on behalf of Herself and all others similarly situated v. American Renal Management, LLC d/b/a Innovative Renal Care, Case No. 2579CV00738 (Mass. Super. Ct., Hampden Cty., Nov. 6, 2025). The case type is stated as "Contract / Business." American Renal Management, LLC doing business as Innovative Renal Care -- https://innovativerenal.com/ -- is a network of dialysis professionals devoted to helping people with kidney disease lead their best lives as they undergo treatment.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Raymond Dinsmore, Esq. Ryan B. Guers, Esq. HAYBER, MCKENNA AND DINSMORE, LLC One Monarch Place, Suite 1340 Springfield, MA 01144 - and - Alexander R. Sneirson, Esq. SNEIRSON LAW FIRM 1414 Main St Suite 1345 Springfield, MA 01144 Phone: (413) 750-8008 AMERICAN WELL CORP: Polk Files Suit in W.D. Michigan ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Well Corp. The case is styled as Virginia Polk, on behalf of all others person similarly situated v. American Well Corp., Case No. 25CV026746 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 5, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Non-Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death Tort." American Well Corporation doing business as Amwell -- https://business.amwell.com/ -- is a telemedicine company based in Boston, Massachusetts, that connects patients with doctors over secure video.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip L. Fraietta, Esq. BURSON & FISHER, P.A. (NY) 888 Seventh Ave. New York, NY 10019 Phone: (646) 837-7150 Email: pfraietta@bursor.com APPFOLIO INC: Beach Files Personal Injury Suit in C.D. Cal. ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Appfolio, Inc. The case is captioned as CARESS BEACH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. APPFOLIO, INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-09856-MEMF-KS (C.D. Cal., October 15, 2025). The Plaintiff brings personal injury claims against the Defendant. Appfolio, Inc. is a software company headquartered in Goleta, California. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Edward Cole, Esq. Laura Grace Van Note, Esq. COLE AND VAN NOTE 555 12th Street, Suite 2100 Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: (510) 891-9800 Email: sec@colevannote.com lvn@colevannote.com ARB GAMING: Anderson Sues Over Illegal Online Gaming Platform ------------------------------------------------------------- BETHANY ANDERSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ARB GAMING, LLC, d/b/a Modo.us, Defendant, Case No. 6:25-cv-02069-AP (D. Or., Nov. 6, 2025) alleges violation of the Unlawful Internet Gambling Enforcement Act. According to the Plaintiff in the complaint, although the Defendant advertises "free" play, those free plays do not award the prizes that attract Oregon residents, including the Plaintiff, to the Modo Casino Website. In reality, Modo's "free" play serves only as a psychological teaser to induce players to gamble with real money. Oregon residents access the Modo Casino Website to win prizes—exactly as the Defendant intends—and the only way to win those prizes is to wager with coins that, apart from a nominal allotment Modo provides new users, can be obtained only through purchase. Because the Defendant requires participants to risk money or other things of value for a chance to win a prize, its Casino Website constitutes an illegal gambling operation under Oregon law, says the suit. ARB Gaming, LLC is an Arizona-based company operating in the IT industry, primarily through its social casino platform, Modo Casino. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marilyn Heiken, Esq. JOHNSON JOHNSON LUCAS & MIDDLESTON, PC 975 Oak Street, Suite 1050 Eugene, OR 97401 Telephone: (541) 484-2434 Facsimile: (541) 484-0882 Email: mheiken@justicelawyers.com ARCHERY TRADE: Aceves Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ----------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Erick Babst, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Archery Trade Association, Inc, BowTech, Inc., BPS Direct LLC doing business as: Bass Pro Shops, Cabela's LLC, Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc., Hoyt Archery, Inc., Jay's Sporting Goods, Kinsey's Outdoors, Inc., Lancaster Archery Supply, Inc., Mathews Archery, Inc., Precision Shooting Equipment, Inc., Case No. 0:25-cv-02721 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03545-PAB-TPO to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. The Archery Trade Association (ATA) -- https://archerytrade.org/ -- is the trade group representing manufacturers, retailers, distributors, sales representatives and others working in the archery and bowhunting industry.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Anthony Stauber, Esq. Daniel E. Gustafson, Esq. Daniel C. Hedlund, Esq. Michelle J. Looby, Esq. GUSTAFSON GLUEK PLLC-MN 120 South Sixth Street, Suite 2600 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: (612) 333-8844 Fax: (612) 339-6622 Email: tstauber@gustafsongluek.com dgustafson@gustafsongluek.com dhedlund@gustafsongluek.com ARCHERY TRADE: Butter Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ----------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Shawn Butter, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Archery Trade Association, Inc, BowTech, Inc., BPS Direct LLC doing business as: Bass Pro Shops, Cabela's LLC, Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc., Hoyt Archery, Inc., Jay's Sporting Goods, Kinsey's Outdoors, Inc., Lancaster Archery Supply, Inc., Mathews Archery, Inc., Precision Shooting Equipment, Inc., Case No. 2:25-cv-01004 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on Nov. 6, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03549-PAB-TPO to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. The Archery Trade Association (ATA) -- https://archerytrade.org/ -- is the trade group representing manufacturers, retailers, distributors, sales representatives and others working in the archery and bowhunting industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gregory S. Asciolla, Esq. DICELLO LEVITT LLP 485 Lexington Avenue Tenth Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (646) 933-1000 Fax: (646) 494-9648 - and - D. Aaron Rihn, Esq. Sara J. Watkins, Esq. ROBERT PEIRCE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 437 Grant Street, Suite 1100 Pittsburgh, PA 15219 Phone: (412) 281-7229 Fax: (412) 281-4229 - and - Kelly K. Iverson, Esq. LYNCH CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Phone: (412) 322-9243 Email: kelly@lcllp.com The Defendants are represented by: Terry Eugene Welch, Esq. Bentley Tolk, Esq. Sean Martin Sigillito, Esq. PARR BROWN GEE & LOVELESS 101 South 200 East, Ste. 700 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Phone: (801) 532-7840 ARCHERY TRADE: Simcik Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ----------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Matt Simcik, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Archery Trade Association, Inc, BowTech, Inc., BPS Direct LLC doing business as: Bass Pro Shops, Cabela's LLC, Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc., Hoyt Archery, Inc., Jay's Sporting Goods, Kinsey's Outdoors, Inc., Lancaster Archery Supply, Inc., Mathews Archery, Inc., Precision Shooting Equipment, Inc., Case No. 0:25-cv-02875 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03542-PAB-TPO to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. The Archery Trade Association (ATA) -- https://archerytrade.org/ -- is the trade group representing manufacturers, retailers, distributors, sales representatives and others working in the archery and bowhunting industry.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Anthony Carter, Esq. Jon Tostrud, Esq. TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, P.C. 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (310) 278-2600 Fax: (310) 278-2640 ASSET REALTY: Bid for Initial OK of Settlement Tossed w/o Prejudice ------------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DAVID J. KOVANEN, v. ASSET REALTY LLC, et al., Case No. 3:25-cv-05078-LK (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge King entered an order denying without prejudice Mr. Kovanen's motion for preliminary approval of class action Settlement. The parties are cautioned that the deficiencies identified in this Order may not include all deficiencies in the Settlement Agreement. Before submitting a revised agreement for approval, the parties should take care to ensure there are no mistakes. Within 90 days, if another motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement has not yet been filed, the parties must file a Joint status report for the Court's use in setting a schedule for the prompt resolution of this case. Under the Settlement Agreement, the "Settlement Class" includes: "All persons, as that term is defined in RCW 19.190.010(11) [i.e., an individual, corporation, business trust, estate, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, government, governmental subdivision, agency or instrumentality, public corporation, or any other legal or commercial entity] and RCW 19.86.010(1) [i.e., natural persons, corporations, trusts, unincorporated associations and partnerships]; (1) to whose telephone numbers Defendants initiated or assisted in the transmission of one or more commercial electronic text messages for the purpose of promoting Asset Realty LLC d/b/a Century 21 Northwest's real estate services; (2) where such message was sent while such person was a Washington resident; (3) and while the number to which the message was sent was assigned to a cellular telephone or pager service that is equipped with short message capability or any similar capability allowing the transmission of text messages; (4) without obtaining the recipients' clear and affirmative consent to receive messages in advance of sending the text message; (5) between Dec. 10, 2017 through June 17, 2022. The Settlement Class does not include the Defendants, any entity that has a controlling interest in Defendants, and Defendants' current or former directors, officers, counsel, and their immediate families. The Settlement Class also does not include any persons who validly request exclusion from it. This case involves allegedly "unsolicited commercial text messages" sent in violation of Washington's Consumer Protection Act, Washington's Commercial Electronic Mail Act, and the National Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Asset is a real estate company. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=1KH7c9 at no extra charge.[CC] ATHENA BITCOIN: Vaughan Files Suit in S.D. Florida -------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Athena Bitcoin, Inc. The case is styled as Chris Vaughan, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Athena Bitcoin, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-25141-KMW (S.D. Fla., Nov. 6, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Athena Bitcoin Global -- https://athenabitcoin.com/ -- provides various crypto asset transaction platforms in the United States, El Salvador, Argentina, Colombia, and Mexico.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Edwin Eliu Elliott, Esq. Andrew John Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A. 14 NE 1st Ave, Suite 705 Miami, FL 33132 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@sflinjuryattorneys.com - and - Scott Adam Edelsberg, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW PA 20900 NE 30th Ave., 417 Aventura, FL 33180 Phone: (305) 975-3320 Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com AUTOMATED HEALTH: Delk Bid for Conditional Cert Partly OK'd ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JULIE DELK, INDIVIDUALLY, AND ON BEHALF OF OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED; AMY BABCOCK, MICHELLE ROLDAN, v. AUTOMATED HEALTH SYSTEMS, INC., Case No. 2:24-cv-00802-MJH (W.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Marilyn J. Horan will grant in part and deny in part the Plaintiffs' pre-discovery motion for conditional certification and court-authorized notice. The Court will not determine whether Defendant's alleged violations were willful at this stage. Plaintiffs' allegations that Defendant willfully violated the FLSA are sufficient to warrant notice based upon a three-year statute of limitation. The Court will rule on the size and scope of the class after discovery is complete and if final certification of the class occurs. On March 14, 2025, Plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint, bringing Class/Collective action claims under 29 U.S.C. section 216(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, alleging violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act for overtime compensation, ("FLSA"), the Massachusetts Wage Act, the Massachusetts Overtime Act, and for common law breach of contract or unjust enrichment. On March 14, 2025, the Plaintiff filed a Pre-Discovery Motion for Conditional Certification and Court-Authorized Notice and accompanying brief. The Plaintiffs request that this Court issue an order conditionally certifying two FLSA collectives, defined as: "All persons who work or worked for the Defendant at any time from June 3, 2021, in hourly non-exempt positions, were required to bootup a computer to perform their jobs, and who were subject to the time rounding policy (the "Time Rounding Collective")"; and "All persons who work or worked for Defendant as an hourly non-exempt remote customer service representative ("CSR") at any time from May 13, 2024 to present (the "Computer Bootup Collective")." As such, the Court will certify more limited conditional collectives, as follows: "All persons who work or worked for the Defendant at any time from June 3, 2021 until May 13, 2024 as a full-time hourly non-exempt customer service representative, were required to bootup a computer to perform their jobs, and who were subject to the time rounding policy (the "Time Rounding Collective")"; and "All persons who work or worked for the Defendant as a full-time hourly non-exempt remote Customer Service Representative ("CSR") at any time from May 13, 2024 to present (the "Computer Bootup Collective")." The Defendant provides business process outsourcing services to businesses and government agencies throughout the United States. A copy of the Court's memorandum opinion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qomG0N at no extra charge.[CC] AYLO USA: Class Cert Hearing Set for April 10, 2026 --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Scott Adair et al., v. Aylo USA Incorporated et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-06351-WLH-KS (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Hsu entered a CIVIL PRETRIAL SCHEDULE AND TRIAL ORDER as follows: Jury trial: Nov. 16, 2026 Final pretrial conference: Oct. 23, 2026 Last date to hear motion to amend Feb. 13, 2026 pleadings/add parties [Friday]: Last date to hear motion for class Apr. 10, 2026 certification [Friday]: Expert discovery cut-Off: July 17, 2026 Last date to hear Daubert motions: Aug. 26, 2026 Aylo offers adult entertainment. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=K3c3RC at no extra charge.[CC] BACKCHECKED LLC: Santos Seeks Initial OK of $535K Settlement Fund ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RAUL SANTOS, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. BACKCHECKED, LLC, Case No. 2:24-cv-03690-JJT (D. Ariz.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting unopposed motion for preliminary approval of class action settlement. The $535,000.00 Settlement Fund for 26,524 Class Members is a substantial recovery for the Settlement Class. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs request that the Court grant Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement because the Settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate. On Dec. 22, 2024, the Plaintiff Raul Santos filed a class action complaint against Backchecked alleging various claims arising from the data incident. The Plaintiffs here seek certification of Settlement Class consisting of: "All living individuals residing in the United States whose private information may have been impacted in the data incident." Excluded from the Settlement Class are (a) all persons who are employees, directors, officers, and agents of Defendant; (b) governmental entities; and (c) the Judge assigned to the Action, that Judge’s immediate family, and Court staff. BackChecked is an independent software company. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=CWfBHr at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE P.A. 14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 705 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: (305) 479-2299 E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com - and - Jeff Ostrow, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW P.A. 1 W. Las Olas Blvd., Ste. 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 525-4100 E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com BALANCED BODY: Cross Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. -------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Balanced Body, Inc. The case is styled as Anthony Cross, on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated v. Balanced Body, Inc., Does 1 to 100, Case No. 25CV026549 (Cal. Super. Ct., Sacramento Cty., Nov. 4, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case." Balanced Body doing business as Pilates -- https://www.pilates.com/company/ -- is the global leader in Pilates equipment and education.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas Han, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION 751 N Fair Oaks Ave, Ste. 101 Pasadena, CA 91103 Phone: (818) 230-7502 Fax: (818) 230-7259 Email: dhan@justicelawcorp.com BAMBU SYSTEMS: Carrasco Sues Over WARN Act Violation ---------------------------------------------------- Yuleidis Carrasco, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated v. Bambu Systems, LLC, Case No. 9:25-cv-81384-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Nov. 6, 2025), is brought under the Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act (the "WARN Act"), by Plaintiff on her own behalf and on behalf of the other similarly situated persons against Defendant, their employer for WARN Act purposes. The Defendant abruptly terminated at least 100 employees, including Plaintiffs, unilaterally and without proper notice to employees or staff. The Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of other similarly situated former employees who worked for Defendant and were terminated as part of the foreseeable mass lay off or plant closing ordered by Defendant on or around November 3, 2025 and within 90 days of that date and who were not provided 60 days' advance written notice of their terminations by Defendant, as required by the WARN Act. The Plaintiffs should have received the full protection afforded by the WARN Act. The Defendant did not provide proper WARN Act Notice, 60 days' in advance, as required by the WARN Act even though it planned to abolish, terminate, and/or layoff at least 50 employees and 33% of the employees employed at the Facilities. By failing to provide its affected employees who were temporarily or permanently terminated on or around November 3, 2025, with proper WARN Act Notices and other benefits, the Defendant acted willfully and cannot establish it had any reasonable grounds or basis for believing its actions were not in violation of the WARN Act, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was terminated from a worksite located in West Plam Beach, Florida on November 3, 2025, as part of a mass layoff without proper notice. The Defendant is a Delaware limited liability company with its headquarters and principal place of business located in Palm Beach, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeff Ostrow, Esq. Steven Sukert, Esq. KOPELOWITZ OSTROW, P.A. 1 West Las Olas Blvd., Suite 500 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: (954) 525-4100 Email: ostrow@kolawyers.com sukert@kolawyers.com - and - J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Michael C. Tackeff, Esq. Andrew 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 - and - Lyn A. Toops, Esq. COHENMALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317) 636-6481 Email: ltoops@chenmalad.com - and - 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 BANK OF AMERICA: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Nov. 9, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as NANCY GEORGION; SUSAN PURDY; THAN SILVERLIGHT; CHRISTINA SMITH; and DONNA WILLIAMS on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated; v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., Case No. 3:22-cv-00618-TMR-WCM (W.D.N.C.), the Hon. Judge Metcalf entered an initial pretrial order and case management plan as follows: Rule 26 Disclosures: Nov. 21, 2025 Designation of Mediator: Dec. 5, 2025 Expert Reports – Party w/ Burden: May 8, 2026 - Responsive: June 12, 2026 - Rebuttal: July 10, 2026 Discovery (Class Certification): Oct. 9, 2026 Mediation: Oct. 23, 2026 Class Certification Motion: Nov. 9, 2026 Bank of America is a financial institution. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=OqZBOJ at no extra charge.[CC] BIG FISH: Campos Allowed to Seal Exhibits ----------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as NATHAN CAMPOS, et al., v. BIG FISH GAMES, INC., et al., Case No. 2:22-cv-01806-RSM (W.D. Wash.), the Hon. Judge Ricardo Martinez entered an order granting motions to seal. (1) The Plaintiffs' motion to seal is granted. (2) The Defendants' motion to seal is granted. (3) The parties must meet and confer regarding the exhibits to the Ryan Declaration, and notify the Court in a joint submission of which seven exhibits were not previously discussed and any further updates, including any effects on other current filings, by Nov. 21, 2025. The Defendants note that Exhibits 12, 18, and 35 to the declaration of Andrew Ryan are not referenced in the Plaintiff's Motion and argue that these should be stricken. The Defendants also argue that Exhibits 5-9, 11, 13-17, 19-23, 25-34, 36-37, and 40-83 should remain under seal because they contain confidential financial and strategy information. The Court agrees, and these will remain under seal The parties do not note which of the seventy-five exhibits were or were not discussed during the meet-and-confer. Because the parties failed to confer on these seven exhibits and the Court cannot determine which exhibits are which, the Ryan Declaration will remain under seal. Furthermore, it appears that the Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, and Kahn Declaration have been filed under seal mostly for referencing the Ryan Declaration Exhibits. Accordingly, these will remain under seal. On the Defendants' motion to seal, they request certain redacted portions of their motions, oppositions, and declarations, as well as some exhibits, be filed under seal for containing non-public financial, sales strategy, and proprietary information. The Defendant is a casual game company. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=TvQ0GJ at no extra charge.[CC] BIG STAR: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Crespo Suit Alleges -------------------------------------------------------- TOMAS CRESPO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BIG STAR TRANSIT, LLC; LATANYA BIGGERS; LARRY BIGGERS; and LARRY BIGGERS, JR., Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-03031-S (N.D. Tex., Nov. 6, 2025) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Crespo was employed by the Defendants as a driver. Big Star Transit, LLC specializes in non-emergency medical transportation (NEMT) and paratransit services, offering a network of trained Owner-Operators and Small Business Enterprise partners. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew R. McCarley, Esq. Colby Qualls, Esq. FORESTER HAYNIE, PLLC 11300 N Central Expy, Suite 550 Dallas, TX 75243 Telephone: (214) 210-2100 Facsimile: (469) 399-1070 Email: mccarley@foresterhaynie.com cqualls@foresterhaynie.com BOWTECH INC: Dunkin Suit Transferred to D. Colorado --------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Gary T. Dunkin, and all others similarly situated v. BowTech, Inc., Archery Trade Association, Inc, BPS Direct LLC doing business as: Bass Pro Shops, Cabela's LLC, Dick's Sporting Goods, Inc., Hoyt Archery, Inc., Jay's Sporting Goods, Kinsey's Outdoors, Inc., Lancaster Archery Supply, Inc., Mathews Archery, Inc., Precision Shooting Equipment, Inc., Case No. 4:25-cv-00546 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03539-PAB-TPO to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. Bowtech Archery -- https://bowtecharchery.com/ -- offers premium archery equipment.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ashlea G. Schwarz, Esq. David Bodenheimer, Esq. Megan Duffield, Esq. Richard M. Paul, III, Esq. PAUL LLP 601 Walnut, Suite 300 Kansas City, MO 64106 Phone: (816) 984-8100 Email: Ashlea@PaulLLP.com The Defendants are represented by: Connor J. Sears, Esq. SHOOK, HARDY & BACON, LLP-KCMO 2555 Grand Boulevard Kansas City, MO 64108-2613 Phone: (816) 474-6550 Fax: (816) 421-2708 BRUCE PON: Fetch Compute Files Suit in S.D. New York ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bruce Pon, et al. The case is styled as Fetch Compute, Inc., Seth Ian, Greg Graves, Victor Larivee, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Bruce Pon, Trent McConaghy, Christina Pon, Ocean Protocol Foundation Ltd., Ocean Expeditions Ltd., OceanDAO, Case No. 1:25-cv-09210 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 4, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Bruce Pon is the Founder at Ocean Protocol -- https://oceanprotocol.com/ -- a decentralized data exchange protocol that lets people share and monetize data.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Thomas Anthony Warns, Esq. K&L GATES LLP (NYC) 599 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10022-6030 Phone: (212) 536-3900 Fax: (212) 536-3901 Email: tom.warns@klgates.com CARENEXA LLC: Faces Gillard Suit Over Compromised Clients' Info --------------------------------------------------------------- ANGELINA GILLARD and COLE GILLARD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. CARENEXA, LLC f/k/a BLACKFLY INVESTMENTS, LLC, d/b/a MOLECULAR TESTING LABS, and NTIRETY, INC., Defendants, Case No. 3:25-cv-05971-GJL (W.D. Wash., October 31, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgement and injunctive relief. The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) of the Plaintiffs and similarly situated individuals stored within their network systems following a data breach from March 7, 2025, to March 11, 2025. The Defendants also failed to timely notify the Plaintiffs and similarly situated individuals about the data breach. As a result, the private information of the Plaintiffs and Class members was compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties. Carenexa, LLC, formerly known as Blackfly Investments, LLC, doing business as Molecular Testing Labs, is a medical laboratory services provider, with its principal place of business located in Vancouver, Washington. Ntirety, Inc. is an information technology solutions provider, with its principal place of business in Chicago, Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Joan M. Pradhan, Esq. TOUSLEY BRAIN STEPHENS PLLC 1200 5th Avenue, Suite 1700 Seattle, WA 98101 Telephone: (206) 682-5600 Email: jpradhan@tousley.com - and - Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq. Philip Krzeski, Esq. CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Telephone: (612) 339-7300 Facsimile: (612) 336-2940 Email: bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com pkrzeski@chestnutcambronne.com CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Labaton Keller Named Lead Counsel --------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned as MARK SANDOVAL, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., JESSICA FISCHER, and CHRIS WINFREY, Case No.: 1:25-cv-06747-LJL-KHP (S.D.N.Y) Judge Lewis J. Liman of the United States District Court of Newyork granted the motion of the Rhode Island Office of the General Treasurer, on behalf of the Employees' Retirement System of the State of Rhode Island, for Appointment as Lead Plaintiff and Approval of Selection of Lead Counsel motion. Rhode Island is appointed to serve as Lead Plaintiff pursuant to Section 21D(a)(3)(B) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, 15 U.S.C. Sec. 78u-4(a)(3)(B), as amended by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, in the above captioned action and any subsequently filed, removed, or transferred actions that are related to the claims asserted in the above-captioned action. Rhode Island's selection of Lead Counsel is approved and Labaton Keller Sucharow LLP and Saxena White P.A. are appointed to serve as Lead Counsel for the Class in the above-captioned action and all related actions. A copy of the Court's order is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=He8dnX from PacerMonitor.com CHURCH STREET: Class Cert. Bids in Slaven Suit Due Feb. 13, 2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Slaven v. Church Street Restaurant Associates of Saratoga, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:25-cv-00227 (N.D.N.Y., Filed Feb. 19, 2025), the Hon. Judge David N. Hurd entered an order resetting the following deadlines: -- Pre-class discovery deadline is moved to Jan. 9, 2026 -- Class Certification Motions due by Feb. 13. 2026 The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).[CC] CLEAN BEAUTY: Web Site Not Accessible to the Blind, Echols Says --------------------------------------------------------------- TAZINIQUE ECHOLS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CLEAN BEAUTY FOR ALL, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13622 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 6, 2025) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, https://saiehello.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Clean Beauty For All, Inc. provides personal care products. The Company offers beauty products and fragrances crafted with safe ingredients. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Ohrenberger, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Email: mohrenberger@ealg.law CLEAN CAUSE: Faces Evans Suit Over Blind's Equal Access to Website ------------------------------------------------------------------ JAMES EVANS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CLEAN CAUSE, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13409 (N.D. Ill., November 2, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, declaratory relief, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed 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 website, https://cleancause.com, contains access barriers which hinder the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online goods, content, and services offered to the public through the website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not limited to: ambiguous link texts, unclear labels for interactive elements, lack of alt-text on graphics, and the requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse. The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals. Clean Cause, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and services, doing business in Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alison Chan, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Email: achan@ealg.law CLEVELAND-CLIFFS STEEL: Kuhns Suit Transferred to S.D. Ohio ----------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Ryan Kuhns, Adam Sizemore, Gerald Esposito, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Corporation, Case No. 1:25-cv-01216 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-01289-EAS-EPD to the proceeding. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Cleveland-Cliffs -- https://www.clevelandcliffs.com/ -- is North America's largest flat-rolled steel producer and supplier of iron ore pellets serving various industries, mainly automotive.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian E. Farnan, Esq. Michael J. Farnan, Esq. FARNAN LLP 919 North Market Street, 12th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 777-0300 Fax: (302) 777-0301 Email: bfarnan@farnanlaw.com mfarnan@farnanlaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Lauren Elizabeth Moak Russell, Esq. Malisa Dang, Esq. POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP 1313 N. Market Street, 6th Floor Wilmington, DE 19899 Phone: (302) 984-6003 Email: lrussell@potteranderson.com mdang@potteranderson.com COCHLEAR AMERICAS: Williams Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ---------------------------------------------------------------- Wendy Williams, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Cochlear Americas, Case No. 0:25-cv-04240-LMP-SGE (D. Minn., Nov. 6, 2025), is brought arising because the Defendant's Website (www.cochlear.com) is not fully and equally accessible to people who are blind or who have low vision in violation of both the general non-discriminatory mandate and the effective communication and auxiliary aids and services requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the "ADA") and the Minnesota Human Rights Act ("MHRA"). As a consequence of the Plaintiffs experience visiting Defendant's Website, including in the past year, and from an investigation performed on their behalf, the Plaintiffs found Defendant's Website has a number of digital barriers that deny screen-reader users like the Plaintiffs full and equal access to important Website content--content the Defendant makes available to its sighted Website users. Still, the Plaintiffs would like to, intend to, and will attempt to access the Defendant's Website in the future to browse, research, or shop online and purchase the products and services that the Defendant offers. The Defendant's policies regarding the maintenance and operation of its Website fail to ensure its Website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with vision-related disabilities. The Plaintiffs and the putative class have been, and in the absence of injunctive relief will continue to be, injured, and discriminated against by the Defendant's failure to provide its online Website content and services in a manner that is compatible with screen reader technology, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is and has been legally blind and is therefore disabled under the ADA. The Defendant offers cochlear solutions and accessories for sale including, but not limited to, cochlear implants, sound processors, wireless hearing devices, and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chad A. Throndset, Esq. Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq. Jason Gustafson, Esq. THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC 80 South 8th Street, Suite 900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: (763) 515-6110 Email: chad@throndsetlaw.com pat@throndsetlaw.com jason@throndsetlaw.com COHEN FASHION OPTICAL: Aiello Files Suit in E.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cohen Fashion Optical, LLC. The case is styled as Laura Aiello, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Cohen Fashion Optical, LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-06209-SJB-SIL (E.D.N.Y., Nov. 6, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Fraud or Truth-In-Lending. Cohen Fashion Optical, LLC -- https://www.cohensfashionoptical.com/ -- provides eye care solutions. The Company offers sale of eye and sun glasses, optical, and contact lenses.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mark S. Reich, Esq. LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP 33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor New York, NY 10004 Phone: (212) 363-7500 Email: mreich@zlk.com CONDUENT BUSINESS: Berkenfeld Files Suit in D. New Jersey --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Conduent Business Services, LLC. The case is styled as Brandon Berkenfeld, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Conduent Business Services, LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-17197-MEF-MAH (D.N.J., Nov. 4, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for the Federal Trade Commission Act. Conduent Inc. -- https://www.conduent.com/ -- is an American business services provider company headquartered in Florham Park, New Jersey.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Catherine B. Derenze, Esq. Joseph J. Depalma, Esq. LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG & AFANADOR, LLC 570 Broad Street, Ste. 1201 Newark, NJ 07102 Phone: (973) 623-3000 Fax: (973) 623-0858 Email: cderenze@litedepalma.com jdepalma@litedepalma.com CONDUENT BUSINESS: Waters Files Suit in D. New Jersey ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Conduent Business Services, LLC. The case is styled as Andrew Waters, Marianne Williams, Teresa Mann, Morie Adams-Griffin, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Conduent Business Services, LLC, Health Care Service Corporation, Case No. 2:25-cv-17218 (D.N.J., Nov. 5, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. Conduent Inc. -- https://www.conduent.com/ -- is an American business services provider company headquartered in Florham Park, New Jersey.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Mark K. Svensson, Esq. MILBERG COLEMAN BRYSON PHILLIPS GROSSMAN PLLC 405 East 50th Street New York, NY 10022 Phone: (202) 975-0468 Email: msvensson@zlk.com CONTINENTAL CASUALTY: Mitchell Suit Removed to N.D. California -------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Bricine Mitchell, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. CONTINENTAL CASUALTY INSURANCE, an Illinois Corporation; and DOES 1-50 inclusive, Case No. CGC-25-625512 was removed from the Superior Court for the State of California for the County of Alameda, to the United States District Court for Northern District of California on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-09553. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendant violated the Business and Professions Code and asserts two causes of action: Violation of Business & Professions Code Sections 16600, 16600.1, and 16600.5, and Unlawful Business Practices in Violation of Business & Professions Code Section 17200.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Jesse L. Miller, Esq. Afshin Najafi, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 560 Mission Street, 31st Floor San Francisco, California 94105 Phone: (415) 397-2823 Facsimile: (415) 397-8549 Email: jmiller@seyfarth.com anajafi@seyfarth.com COOKUNITY INC: Thurston Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ----------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cookunity Inc. The case is styled as Cheryl Thurston, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v. Cookunity Inc., Case No. 25CV153179 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., Nov. 4, 2025). CookUnity -- https://www.cookunity.com/ -- is the first chef-to-consumer meal marketplace, connecting award-winning chefs with food lovers nationwide.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott J. Ferrell, Esq. PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS APC 4100 Newport Place Drive Suite 800 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Phone: (949) 706-6464 Fax: (949) 706-6469 Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com COSTCO WHOLESALE: Glazer Sues Over Tequila's Agave Azul Labels -------------------------------------------------------------- ARIEL GLAZER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-25057 (S.D. Fla., October 31, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for common law negligence, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and violation of Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The case arises from the Defendant's false, deceptive, and misleading advertising, labeling, and marketing of its Kirkland Signature brand tequila. According to the complaint, the Defendant labels and markets the tequila as "100% DE AGAVE" and as "100% AGAVE AZUL." However, testing of the products has uncovered that they contain material amounts of ethanol not derived from agave plants, and, as such, they were adulterated with ethanol other than that obtained from Blue Weber agave. Had the Plaintiff and similarly situated consumers known the truth, they would not have purchased the products or would have paid less for them. Costco Wholesale Corporation is a retail company, headquartered in Issaquah, Washington. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel S. Maland, Esq. Robert M. Stein, Esq. Sandra E. Mejia, Esq. RENNERT VOGEL MANDLER & RODRIGUEZ, P.A. Miami Tower, Suite 2900 100 S.E. Second Street Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 577-4177 Email: dmaland@rvmrlaw.com rstein@rvmrlaw.com smejia@rvmrlaw.com CRAIG HOSPITAL: Collins Suit Removed to N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Rachel Collins and Crystal Nash, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. CRAIG HOSPITAL, Case No. 2025-CV-31581 was removed from the District Court for Arapahoe County, Colorado, to the United States District Court for District of Colorado on Nov. 6, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03562. In the Complaint, Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and the potential class members, claim that they were not provided with meal and rest breaks as required under Colorado law. They assert three claims for relief under various Colorado wage laws: violation of the Colorado Wage Claim Act ("CWCA"), for alleged failure to pay wages due; violation of the Colorado Minimum Wage Act ("Minimum Wage Act"), for alleged failure to pay minimum wages due; and Civil Theft under for failure to pay minimum wages due."[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Micah D. Dawson, Esq. Hillary R. Ross, Esq. FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP 1125 17th Street, Suite 2400 Denver, CO 80202 Phone: (303) 218-3650 Facsimile: (303) 218-3651 Email: mdawson@fisherphillips.com hross@fisherphillips.com CURRY COLLEGE: Court Dismisses Claims in "MacIntyre" ---------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned as Emily MacIntyre, et al., Plaintiffs, v. Curry College, Defendant, Civil Action No. 25-10585-NMG (D. Mass.), Senior United States District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts granted the Defendant's motion to dismiss all claims. The case arose from an alleged violation of the Massachusetts Wage Act, M.G.L. ch. 149 Section 148. Plaintiffs Emily MacIntyre and Keith Fitts alleged that Curry College paid wages in a monthly cadence, rather than weekly or biweekly, in violation of the Wage Act. The Defendant moved to dismiss the claims based on federal preemption and a new state statute immunizing nonprofit, higher education institutions from such liability. Curry College is a private university located in Milton, Massachusetts, that employs different categories of faculty to teach courses throughout the year. Emily MacIntyre worked at Curry College from August, 2014, until December, 2022 as an Associate Professor and taught an overload course during the fall 2022 semester. Keith Fitts is currently employed at Curry College, worked as an associate lecturer from August, 2020, through August, 2023, and was promoted to lecturer in August, 2023. Payment to members of these classes is made pursuant to single semester contracts and is disbursed in four equal installments. Payments are made on the first day of each month, starting in October and March, of the respective semesters. Those paychecks note the associated pay periods as being for the entire month after the date it is issued. In March, 2025, Plaintiffs filed a class-action complaint against Curry alleging violations of the Wage Act, which regulates the cadence at which employers are required to pay wages and provides remedies for their failure to do so. Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendant's policy of paying four equal installments of wages violates the requirements of Wage Act that they are to be paid weekly or biweekly unless an employee elects otherwise. In July, 2025, the Massachusetts Legislature passed Section 113 of Chapter 9 of the Acts and Resolves of 2025 granting immunity from certain Wage Act claims to nonprofit higher education institutions. Section 113 provides that nonprofit institutions of higher education shall be immune from liability with regard to any claim commenced between July 1, 2024 and September 30, 2028, inclusive, that alleges that the institution's payment of wages on a monthly basis or pursuant to any written policy, schedule, or agreement presented or made available to an employee concerning payment for work performed over an academic term violated the Wage Act; provided, however, that earned wages shall have been paid in full within 6 days of the termination of a pay period. The Court concluded that Section 113 foreclosed the Plaintiffs' claims. The Court found that while Section 113 includes the requirement that wages be paid within six days of the termination of a pay period, it also permits pay periods to be established by a policy or schedule concerning payment for work performed over a specific period or an academic term. The appointment letters furnished to Plaintiffs clearly stated that payment for fall and spring semesters would be made in monthly installments from October through January and March through June, respectively. Because Plaintiffs have not alleged any incomplete or late payments under that schedule, Section 113 foreclosed their claims. Plaintiffs asserted several arguments that Section 113 was enacted in violation of the Massachusetts and United States Constitutions. First, Plaintiffs asserted that Section 113 violates Article 10 of the Declaration of Rights to the Massachusetts Constitution. The Court concluded that Section 113 exempts all universities and health care delivery systems from liability under these specific Wage Act claims and that curtailing the financial impact of Wage Act claims on nonprofit employers is a legitimate public interest that outweighs the impact the law may have on private parties. Second, Plaintiffs asserted that Section 113 is impermissibly retroactive under the United States Constitution and Massachusetts Constitution. The Court reaffirmed its finding that mitigating the financial impact on nonprofit organizations is a legitimate policy motivation underlying Section 113. The Court concluded that the rights infringed, if any, emanate from statutory provisions of the Wage Act and that Plaintiffs have no viable claim because they do not purport to have been underpaid or paid later than promised. The Court concluded that Section 113 is narrowly tailored to address the concerns of the legislature and is constitutional. Finally, Plaintiffs asserted that Section 113 violates Article 11 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights, which guarantees a certain remedy, by having recourse to the laws, for all injuries or wrongs. The Court concluded that Article 11 has never been interpreted as providing a vested interest in a statute or as rendering any statute immutable and that the Plaintiffs' Article 11 claim is not viable. Accordingly, the Defendant's motion to dismiss was allowed and the case was dismissed. A copy of the Court's order is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=DZUrSi from PacerMonitor.com DANIEL YU: Scheduling Order Entered in Grifols Class Action ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as GRIFOLS, S.A. et al., v. DANIEL YU et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-00576-LJL-GWG (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Gabriel Gorenstein entered an order as follows: 1. All discovery (as well as requests for admissions) must be initiated in time to be concluded by the deadline for all discovery. 2. Discovery motions -- that is, any application pursuant to Rules 26 through 37 or 45 - not only must comply with & 2.A. of the Court's Individual Practices but also must be made promptly after the cause for such a motion arises. 3. Any application for an extension of the time limitations with respect to any deadlines in this matter must be made as soon as the cause for the extension becomes known to the party making the application and must be made in accordance with & 1.E of the Court=s Individual Practices. 4. The parties are required to make affirmative attempts to settle this matter through discussions among counsel. 5. If a recipient of this Order is aware of any attorneys or parties who should receive notice of Court action in this case other than any attorneys or parties currently listed on the docket sheet, please notify the Deputy Clerk at (212) 805-4260 immediately. 6. The Court understands that at a conference held on November 6, 2025, Judge Liman directed the parties to propose a schedule for the briefing of a planned motion by plaintiff to compel discovery. The undersigned waives its own pre-motion conference requirement with respect to that motion. The letter proposing the motion schedule shall be addressed to the undersigned. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bqiW99 at no extra charge.[CC] DNC PARKS & RESORTS: Peraino Suit Transferred to E.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Richard Peraino, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. DNC Parks & Resorts at Tenaya Inc., DNC Parks & Resorts Reservations, Inc., DNC Parks & Resorts at Asilomar, Inc., DNC Parks & Resorts at King's Canyon, Inc., DNC Parks & Resorts at Sequoia, Inc., DNC Parks & Resorts Fish Camp Lodging, Inc., Delaware North Companies Parks & Resorts, Inc., Delaware North Companies Incorporated, Case No. 3:25-cv-01130 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California on Nov. 4, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-01481-HBK to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Jobs Civil Rights. DNC Parks & Resorts at Tenaya Inc provides hotel and motel services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Desiree Ruiz Alfaro, Esq. Fawn F. Bekam, Esq. Jacquelyn Annabel Silva, Esq. ABRAMSON LABOR GROUP 1700 West Burbank Boulevard Burbank, CA 91506 Phone: (213) 493-6300 Email: desiree.ruizalfaro@abramsonlabor.com fawn.bekam@wilshirelawfirm.com jackie.silva@abramsonlabor.com - and - Diego Francisco Aviles, Esq. Hayrapet Erganyan, Esq. John G. Yslas, Esq. Mariam Nazaretyan, Esq. WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC 660 S. Figueroa Street, Sky Lobby Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 381-9988 Fax: (213) 381-9989 Email: daviles@wilshirelawfirm.com harry.erganyan@wilshirelawfirm.com john.yslas@wilshirelawfirm.com mariam.nazaretyan@wilshirelawfirm.com The Defendants are represented by: Bethany Anne Pelliconi, Esq. Matthew Isaac, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (310) 277-7200 Fax: (310) 201-5219 Email: bpelliconi@seyfarth.com misaac@seyfarth.com - and - Jon D. Meer, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 601 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 3300 Los Angeles, CA 90017 Phone: (213) 270-9600 Email: jmeer@seyfarth.com DREAM DUFFEL: Henry Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Online Store ------------------------------------------------------------- CONSTANCE HENRY, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. DREAM DUFFEL, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13408 (N.D. Ill., November 2, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, declaratory relief, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed 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 website, https://www.dreamduffel.com, contains access barriers which hinder the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online goods, content, and services offered to the public through the website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not limited to: inadequate focus order, ambiguous link texts, changing of content without advance warning, unclear labels for interactive elements, inaccurate alt-text on graphics, inaccessible drop-down menus, the lack of navigation links, the denial of keyboard access for some interactive elements, and the requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse. The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals. Dream Duffel, LLC is a company that sells online goods and services, doing business in Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alison Chan, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Email: achan@ealg.law ELLIOTT'S TENNESSEE BOOT: Cole Suit Transferred to C.D. Illinois ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Morgan Cole, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Petitioner v. Elliott's Tennessee Boot Company, LLC, Respondent, Case No. 1:25-cv-11020 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 Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:25-cv-04202-SLD-RLH to the proceeding. The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Elliott's Tennessee Boot Company, LLC -- https://www.elliottsboots.com/ -- manufactures footwear.[BN] The Petitioner 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 EPIC HOLIDAY: Moya Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri ------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Victor Moya, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. EPIC HOLIDAY, LLC, and Mark McKEE, Case No. 2516-CV30095 was removed from the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri, to the United States District Court for Western District of Missouri on Nov. 6, 2025, and assigned Case No. 4:25-cv-00872-FJG. In his Petition, Plaintiff asserts class action claims for failure to pay wages pursuant to the Missouri Minium Wage Law ("MMWL"), and for quantum meruit/unjust enrichment.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Michael L. Blumenthal, Esq. Daniel O. Ramon, Esq. SEYFERTH BLUMENTHAL & HARRIS LLC 4801 Main Street, Suite 310 Kansas City, MO 64112 Phone:(816) 756-0700 Facsimile: (816) 756-3700 Email: mike@sbhlaw.com danny@sbhlaw.com FARMERS NEW WORLD: Marino Suit Removed to W.D. Washington --------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Sheila Marino, an individual, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. FARMERS NEW WORLD LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 25-2-28917-6 SEA was removed from Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of King, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02200. The Plaintiff asserts causes of action for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and violation of Washington's Consumer Protection Act.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Timothy W. Snider, Esq. Jenna M. Poligo, Esq. Sara J. Wadsworth, Esq. STOEL RIVES LLP 600 University Street, Ste. 3600 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 624-0900 Facsimile: (206) 386-7500 Email: timothy.snider@stoel.com jenna.poligo@stoel.com sara.wadsworth@stoel.com FASTENAL CO: Buckley Allowed Leave to File Amended Complaint ------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as CHRISTOPHER BUCKLEY, BRADLEY SOUTER, JAMES EIDE, PATRICK KUUSELA, v. FASTENAL COMPANY, Case No. 4:25-cv-04012-CCT (D.S.D.), the Hon. Judge Camela Theeler entered an order granting the Plaintiffs' motion for leave to file amended complaint. The Court finds that the Plaintiffs' proposed claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing is not futile. Upon review of the Contest brochure, the Court further finds that the brochure does not contain any express waiver of the implied covenant. Accordingly, the Court grants Plaintiffs' motion to amend with respect to their claim for breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. All claims in this action arise out of a Super Bowl contest held by Defendant for its employees. Under the terms of the Contest, the Defendant promised to award the winning team a free trip to the Super Bowl and to cover all related expenses for each team member and one accompanying guest per member. The total value of the trip and related expenses was approximately $25,000 per person. During the 2024 contest, the Defendant initially reported Plaintiffs as the winning team. On Dec. 11, 2024, however, the Defendant retracted its announcement, accused the Plaintiffs of cheating, and subsequently terminated their employment. On Dec. 20, 2024, the Plaintiffs filed a complaint in South Dakota state court, asserting claims for wrongful revocation, false and wrongful termination, defamation, and punitive damages. Fastenal sells industrial and construction supplies in a wholesale and retail fashion. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=S6dNeq at no extra charge.[CC] FCA US: Ludwig Suit Transferred to E.D. Pennsylvania ---------------------------------------------------- The case is styled as Nancy Ludwig, Joseph Spillane, Andrew Debruyne, Breck Jackson, Michael Weldon, Jacob Andress, Christopher Martinez, Tina Legere, Gabriel Clinton, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. FCA US LLC, Case No. 3:24-cv-08906 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-06297-MKC to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated Contract Product Liability. FCA US LLC -- https://fcagroup-me.com/ -- designs, engineers, manufactures, and sells vehicles.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Peter A. Muhic, Esq. MUHIC LAW LLC 923 Haddonfield Rd., Ste. 300 Cherry Hill, NJ 08002 Phone: (856) 242-1802 Email: peter@muhiclaw.com - and - Michele Marie Vercoski, Esq. MCCUNE LAW GROUP MCCUNE WRIGHT AREVALO VERCOSKI KUSEL WECK B 3281 E Guasti Road, Suite 100 Ontario, CA 91761 Phone: (909) 557-1250 Fax: (909) 557-1275 The Defendant is represented by: Christopher M. Lucca, Esq. CLARK HILL PLC Two Commerce Square 2001 Market Street, Suite 2620 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Phone: (215) 864-8073 Fax: (215) 864-0062 FEDEX GROUND: Atwood Suit Transferred From W.D. Pa. to N.D. Tex. ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case TIMOTHY ATWOOD and PHOEBE GRANADO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC. and FEDEX CORPORATION, Case No. 2:24-cv-01127, was transferred from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas on October 15, 2025. The Clerk of Court for the Northern District of Texas assigned Case No. 6:25-cv-00081-H to the proceeding. The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. FedEx Corporation is an American multinational holding company based in Memphis, Tennessee. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. is a subsidiary of FedEx Corporation based in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. Harold Lichten, Esq. Sarah Schalman-Bergen, Esq. Matthew Carrieri, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Telephone: (617) 994-5800 Email: sliss@llrlaw.com hlichten@llrlaw.com ssb@llrlaw.com mcarrieri@llrlaw.com - and - Jeremy Abay, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, PC 76 E. Euclid Avenue, Suite 101 Haddonfield, NJ 08035 Telephone: (856) 509-5346 Email: jabay@llrlaw.com FINCANTIERI MARINE: Court Grants Prelim Settlement OK in "Malvitz" ------------------------------------------------------------------ Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted preliminary approval of a class action settlement in the case captioned as Crystal Malvitz and Christopher Fredrickson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Fincantieri Marine Group, LLC, Defendant, Civil Action No. 24-cv-238 (TSC). The Court preliminarily found that the proposed Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, and a product of informed, arm's-length negotiations between experienced counsel and with the assistance of a mediator, within the range of possible approval under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e). For settlement purposes only, the Court conditionally certified the Settlement Class under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3), which includes all individuals in the United States whose personally identifiable information was impacted as a result of the data breach announced by Defendant in January 2024. The Court found that the Settlement Class is ascertainable, consists of approximately 16,769 members, and is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable. Common questions of law and fact arise from the same alleged data breach, including whether Defendant had a duty to protect the Class Members' data and whether Defendant failed to implement and maintain reasonable data security protections. The claims of Plaintiffs Crystal Malvitz and Christopher Fredrickson are typical of those of the Settlement Class because Malvitz and Fredrickson had their personally identifiable information disclosed during the data breach. The Court determined that Malvitz, Fredrickson, and Class Counsel will fairly and adequately represent the interests of the Settlement Class, and that common issues predominate and a class action is superior to individual litigation for resolving the claims. The Court appointed Malvitz and Fredrickson as Class Representatives and designated David K. Lietz of Milberg Coleman Bryson Phillips Grossman, PLLC, and Philip J. Krzeski of Chestnut Cambronne PA as Class Counsel. Verita Group, LLC was appointed to serve as the Settlement Administrator. The Court approved the form and content of the proposed notice and notice plan, finding that the notice plan satisfies the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(c)(2)(B) and due process and is the best notice practicable under the circumstances. A Final Approval Hearing was scheduled for April 28, 2026, at 10:30 a.m. to determine whether the proposed Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, whether to grant Final Approval, whether the notice plan conducted was appropriate, whether the claims process under the Settlement Agreement is fair, reasonable, and adequate, and whether the Class Representatives and Class Counsel should receive the requested amounts. The Court ordered that all requests to opt out of the proposed Settlement must be in writing and postmarked or received by the Settlement Administrator no later than 60 days after the Notice Date. All objections to the proposed Settlement must be postmarked or received by the Settlement Administrator no later than 60 days after the Notice Date. All claims must be submitted using the claim form and postmarked or received by the Settlement Administrator no later than 90 days after the Notice Date. Pending final determination of the settlement, Plaintiffs and all members of the Settlement Class are enjoined from initiating or prosecuting any claims released under the Settlement Agreement against Defendant or any other released party. The Court retained jurisdiction over all matters arising from or related to the implementation, administration, and enforcement of the Settlement Agreement. A copy of the Court's order is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=rLyzqn from PacerMonitor.com FISHPOND INC: Evans Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website -------------------------------------------------------- JAMES EVANS, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Fishpond, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13576 (N.D. Ill., November 5, 2025) is a civil rights action against Fishpond for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website, https://fishpondusa.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. On October 16, 2025, the Plaintiff was searching for fishing equipment and a backpack suitable for fishing trips and outdoor use. While searching Google for waterproof backpack for fishing, the Plaintiff encountered Defendant's website. He browsed the product collection with the intention of making a purchase. However, he encountered accessibility barriers that hindered his ability to proceed. Many image links and buttons did not provide proper descriptions, leaving him uncertain about their purpose and content. Also, the "Cart" button on the Defendant's website was not focusable, preventing Plaintiff from navigating to the cart page to review his selected items and to proceed with or complete his purchase. These access barriers have caused Fishpondusa.com to be inaccessible to, and not independently usable by, blind and visually impaired persons, says the suit. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Fishpond's policies, practices, and procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to unlawful discrimination. Fishpond, Inc. operates the website that offers a selection of fly fishing gear, including bags and packs, landing nets, fly boxes, storage accessories, fishing tools, and luggage.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alison Chan, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Office: (844) 731-3343 Direct: (929) 442-2154 E-mail: Achan@ealg.law FLAGSHIP RESTAURANT: FLSA Collective Class Wins Certification ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BRITTNEY HALLMAN, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated, v. FLAGSHIP RESTAURANT GROUP, LLC, Case No. 8:24-cv-00222-JFB-JMD (D. Neb.), the Hon. Judge Joseph Bataillon entered an order as follows: 1. The Plaintiff's motion for conditional certification of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) collective class action is granted. This action is certified as an FLSA collective class action consisting of: "All people employed as servers/bartenders by Flagship Restaurant Group since June 14, 2021." 2. The FLSA collective class action shall have an opt-in period of 90 days from the date of this order. 3. The Plaintiff's proposed Notice, and Consent to Join Form modified as set forth in this Memorandum and Order, are approved. 4. The Plaintiff is granted leave to send the approved Notice and Consent to Join Form to potential opt-in plaintiffs via U.S. mail and email. 5. The Plaintiff is denied leave to follow up with a text notice to potential collective members who do not respond within 30 days before the opt-in deadline. 6. The Defendant shall post the Notice and Consent to Join From in relevant worksites. 7. The Defendant shall provide to the plaintiff the first and last name, last known mailing addresses, and email address, in an electronically manipulable format, such as a spreadsheet, within 21 days of the date of this order. The Plaintiff Brittney Hallman, on behalf of herself and other similarly situated employees, asserts defendant Flagship Restaurant Group, LLC, operated unlawful tip credit practices and failed to pay lawful overtime compensation. The Court finds the plaintiff’s motion for conditional certification should be granted. Based on the factual record, the Court finds the plaintiffs are likely similarly situated employees based on potential FLSA violations, that if proven, would give rise to class wide liability. Hallman has met her lenient burden of establishing she and the collective class members were victims of a single decision, policy, or plan. Flagship owns and operates a number of restaurant brands in several states1, including twenty locations of Blue Sushi Sake Grill ("Blue Sushi"). A copy of the Court's memorandum and order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=2qyReK at no extra charge.[CC] FRAN VUE: Vogeney Files TCPA Suit in S.D. California ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Fran Vue. The case is styled as Joseph Vogeney, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. Fran Vue, Case No. 3:25-cv-02998-JO-AHG (S.D. Cal., Nov. 4, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. FranVue -- https://franvue.com/ -- offers no-charge, no-obligation services to people who want to become business owners with the help and guidance of a qualified franchise consultant.[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 FUJIFILM HOLDINGS: Fails to Protect Personal Info, Guillen Says --------------------------------------------------------------- ERICK GUILLEN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. FUJIFILM HOLDINGS AMERICA CORPORATION d/b/a FUJIFILM BIOTECHNOLOGIES, Defendant, Case No. 7:25-cv-09056 (S.D.N.Y., October 31, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for negligence, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, and declaratory judgement. The case arises from the Defendant's failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) and protected health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within its network systems following a data breach beginning on September 4, 2025. The Defendant also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the data breach. As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties. FUJIFILM Holdings America Corporation, doing business as FUJIFILM Biotechnologies, is a manufacturing, consumer goods, and drug discovery company, headquartered in Valhalla, New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gary E. Mason, Esq. MASON LLP 5335 Wisconsin Avenue, NW, Suite 640 Washington, DC 20015 Telephone: (202) 429-2290 Email: gmason@masonllp.com GEICO INDEMNITY: Class Cert Briefs Deadline in "Shiloah" Extended ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned as Renata Shiloah, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. GEICO Indemnity Company, Defendant, Case No. 24-CV-6447 EAW CDH (W.D.N.Y.), Magistrate Judge Colleen D. Holland of the United States District Court for the Western District of New York issued an amended scheduling order granting an 11-day extension of deadlines for class certification proceedings. The Court amended the class certification submission schedule and discovery schedule. The Plaintiff's anticipated class certification motion and all papers in support thereof shall be served on the Defendant on November 25, 2025. If the Plaintiff submits a declaration or report of any expert or summary witnesses in support of the anticipated motion for class certification, the Defendant will have the opportunity to depose those witnesses. At the time of service of the papers that submit or include a declaration or report of any expert or summary witnesses, the Plaintiff will provide at least three dates within the thirty days following service of those declarations or reports, on or before December 26, 2025, for which those witnesses are available for deposition. The parties shall work cooperatively to schedule the deposition of those witnesses on or before December 26, 2025, including providing alternative dates if there are scheduling conflicts with the initial proposed dates. The Defendant shall serve its certification on the Plaintiff on January 16, 2026. If the Defendant submits a declaration or report of any expert or summary witnesses in support of the response in opposition to the motion for class certification, the Plaintiff will have the opportunity to depose those witnesses. The Defendant will provide at least three dates within the thirty days following service of those declarations or reports, on or before February 16, 2026, for which those witnesses are available for deposition. The parties shall work cooperatively to schedule the deposition of those witnesses on or before February 16, 2026. The Plaintiff shall serve her reply to the anticipated motion for class certification on March 9, 2026. If the Plaintiff submits a declaration or report of any rebuttal expert or summary witnesses in support of the reply to the motion for class certification, the Defendant will have the opportunity to depose those rebuttal witnesses. The Plaintiff will provide at least three dates within the thirty days following service of those declarations or reports, on or before April 6, 2026, for which those rebuttal witnesses are available for deposition. The Court ordered that after the parties have fully briefed the anticipated motion for class certification, they shall meet and confer regarding whether they can file a joint compendium of exhibits in lieu of separate exhibits to their respective anticipated motion for class certification and response or reply. If so, they shall file a stipulation with the Court within seven days of the anticipated motion for class certification becoming fully briefed, on or before March 16, 2026. The Court will also require the parties to bundle for filing any motions to limit or exclude any witness in connection with class certification briefing that may be filed, as well as the response and reply to such motion. Any motion to limit or exclude any witness in connection with class certification and all papers in support thereof shall be served on the opposing party by May 8, 2026. The opposing party shall serve any response in opposition and papers in support thereof by June 8, 2026. The moving party shall serve any reply and papers in support thereof by June 29, 2026. To the extent any party seeks to seal any papers submitted in connection with the anticipated class certification motion and response or reply or in connection with any motion to limit or exclude witnesses in connection with class certification and response or reply, that party shall take all steps necessary to submit a narrowly tailored and properly submitted motion to seal. Motions to seal shall be filed on the electronic docket as soon as practicable but no later than two weeks after the parties have fully briefed the anticipated motion for class certification and any motions to limit or exclude witnesses in connection with class certification, on or before July 13, 2026. The Court will determine if an evidentiary hearing is required on exclude witnesses in connection with class certification, and, if so, will inform the parties of the date and time of such hearing. Within seven days resolution of jointly submit to the undersigned at least three proposed dates and times at which they are mutually available for a telephonic status conference, to be held for the purpose of setting any necessary remaining deadlines in this matter. A copy of the Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=w3bkUv from PacerMonitor.com GERBER PRODUCTS: Conry Suit Transferred From D. Minn. to E.D.N.Y. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case THOMAS CONRY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. GERBER PRODUCTS COMPANY, Case No. 0:25-mc-00038, was transferred from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on October 15, 2025. The Clerk of Court for the Eastern District of New York assigned Case No. 1:25-mc-04205-NG to the proceeding. The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged antitrust law violations. Gerber Products Company is a manufacturer of baby food products, headquartered in Michigan. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adrian John Buonanoce, Esq. Bobby Pouya, Esq. PEARSON WARSHAW, LLP 15165 Ventura Blvd., Suite 400 Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Telephone: (818) 788-8300 Email: abuonanoce@pwfirm.com bpouya@pwfirm.com - and - Melissa S. Weiner, Esq. Ryan Thomas Gott, Esq. PEARSON WARSHAW, LLP 328 Barry Avenue S., Suite 200 Wayzata, MN 55391 Telephone: (612) 389-0600 Facsimile: (612) 389-0610 Email: mweiner@pwfirm.com rgott@pwfirm.com GREEK MODERN KITCHEN: Faldonie Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------------- Sophia Faldonie, and all others similarly situated v. GREEK: MODERN KITCHEN LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-13306 (D. Mass., Nov. 6, 2025), is brought arising from Defendant's failure to make its website, www.salonikigreek.com (the "Website") accessible to legally blind individuals, which violates the effective communication and equal access requirements of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"). The Defendant fails to communicate effectively with Plaintiff because its digital properties are not properly formatted to allow legally blind users such as content. Accordingly, legally blind customers such as Plaintiff are Plaintiff to access its digital deprived from accessing information about Defendant's products and using its online services, all of which are readily available to sighted customers. Because Defendant's website is not and has never been fully accessible, and because upon information and belief Defendant does not have, and has never had, adequate corporate policies that are reasonably calculated to cause its website to become and remain accessible, says the complaint. The Plaintiff suffers from a permanent eye and medical condition that substantially and significantly impairs her vision and limits her ability to see. The Defendant specializes in authentic Greek cuisine and Mediterranean-inspired dishes, offering a diverse menu featuring freshly made pita sandwiches, customizable plates, salads, sides, and traditional desserts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Ohrenberger, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11367 Phone: (844) 731-3343 Email: mohrenberger@ealg.law HANESBRANDS INC: Jackson Suit Removed to E.D. Washington -------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Jessica L. Jackson, on her own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated v. HANESBRANDS, INC., Case No. 25-2-04876-32 was removed from the Superior Court for Spokane County, to the United States District Court for Eastern District of Washington on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-00440. The Plaintiff alleges that she is a resident of Washington. The Plaintiff also "reserves 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 - Lyn A. Toops, Esq. Natalie A. Lyons, Esq. Ian R. Bensberg, Esq. COHENMALAD, LLP One Indiana Square, Suite 1400 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Phone: (317) 636-6481 Email: ltoops@chenmalad.com nlyons@chenmalad.com ibensberg@chenmalad.com - and - J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq. Michael C. Tackeff, Esq. Andrew 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 Rainwater, Esq. Rachel Herd, Esq. Caleah N. Whitten, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104-1610 Phone: 206.622.3150 Facsimile: 206.757.7700 HAPPY STATE: Williams Appeals Court Order to Tex. Court of Appeals ------------------------------------------------------------------ JAMIE LYNN WILLIAMS is taking an appeal from a court order in the lawsuit entitled Jamie Lynn Williams, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Happy State Bank, Defendant, Case No. 44794, in the Trial Court of Hutchinson County, Texas. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, Jamie Lynn Williams initiated a class action suit against Happy State Bank for breached contract. The appellate case is entitled Jamie Lynn Williams, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, vs. Happy State Bank, Case No. 07-25-00288-CV, in the Texas Court of Appeals, filed on October 15, 2025. [BN] Plaintiff-Appellant JAMIE LYNN WILLIAMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Daniel H. Charest, Esq. BURNS CHAREST LLP 900 Jackson Street, Suite 500 Dallas, TX 75202 Telephone: (469) 904-4550 Facsimile: (469) 444-5002 - and - Grant Martinez, Esq. Constance H. Pfeiffer, Esq. YETTER COLEMAN LLP 811 Main Street, Suite 4100 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (713) 632-8017 (713) 632-8065 Email: gmartinez@yettercoleman.com cpfeiffer@yettercoleman.com Defendant-Appellee HAPPY STATE BANK is represented by: C. Henry Kollenberg, Jr., Esq. 1401 McKinney St., Ste. 1700 Houston, TX 77010 Telephone: (713) 658-2323 - and - William P. Huttenbach, Esq. David Polsinelli, Esq. CRAIN, CATON & JAMES, PC 1401 McKinney St., Ste. 1700 Houston, TX 77010 - and - Matt W. Sherwood, Esq. MCCARN, WEIR, & SHERWOOD ATTORNEYS AT LAW 905 S. Fillmore, Suite 530 Amarillo, TX 79101 HARD EIGHT: Court Lifts Stay of Miran Class Suit ------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Sean Miran v. Hard Eight Nutrition LLC, Case No. 5:24-cv-00807-SSS-SHK (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Sunshine Sykes entered an order lifting stay, reopening case, and directing parties to file a stipulation: The Court is in receipt of the parties' Post-Mediation Joint Status Report and Proposed Class Certification Schedule. The Court had previously stayed this matter on July 15, 2025, pending the parties' mediation. The Report states that the matter did not resolve during the mediation that took place on October 29, 2025. The parties now request the stay be lifted and the schedule be amended according to their proposed schedules. The Court lifts the stay, and directs the Clerk to reopen this action. However, seeing that the parties propose different dates for the schedule, the Court directs the parties to file a stipulation with agreed upon class certification dates by Nov. 21, 2025. The Defendant is a manufacturer of nutritional supplements. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Zv91AV at no extra charge.[CC] HARD ROCK: Bid to Conditional Certify Action Tossed as Moot ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JETNIK SYLA, et al., v. HARD ROCK INTERNATIONAL (USA), INC., et al., Case No. 1:24-cv-08247-JLR-HJR (S.D.N.Y.), the Hon. Judge Henry Ricardo entered an order terminating as moot motion to certify Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) conditional certification of collective action. Hard is an operator of a chain of theme restaurants intended to offer collectible fashion and music-related merchandise. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Bjfav7 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: William Brown, Esq. Angela Kwon, Esq. BROWN KWON & LAM, LLP 521 Fifth Avenue, 17th Floor New York, NY 10175 Telephone: (212) 295-5828 Facsimile: (718) 795-1642 E-mail: wbrown@bkllawyers.com akwon@bkllawyers.com The Defendants are represented by: Kathleen McLeod Caminiti, Esq. Sarah Wieselthier, Esq. Robert W. Dickson, Esq. FISHER & PHILLIPS LLP 400 Connell Drive, Suite 4000 Berkeley Heights, NJ 07922 Telephone: (908) 516-1064 E-mail: kcaminiti@fisherphillips.com swiesselthier@fisherphillips.com rdickson@fisherphillips.com HEALTH CARE: Fails to Secure Clients' Personal Info, Jackson Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- ALEXIS JACKSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HEALTH CARE SERVICE CORPORATION dba BLUE CROSS BLUE SHIELD OF MONTANA, INC., and JOHN DOES 1-10, Defendants, Case No. 4:25-cv-00099-JTJ (D. Mont., October 30, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence, negligence per se, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, violations of the Montana Consumer Protection Act, breach of fiduciary duty, and declaratory relief. The case arises from the Defendants' failure to properly secure and safeguard the personally identifiable information (PII) and protected health information (PHI) of the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals stored within the network systems of the Defendants' third-party vendor following a data breach from October 2024 through January 2025. The Defendants also failed to timely notify the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals about the data breach. As a result, the private information of the Plaintiff and Class members was compromised and damaged through access by and disclosure to unknown and unauthorized third parties. Health Care Service Corporation, doing business as Blue Cross Blue Shield of Montana, Inc., is a health insurance provider, headquartered in Montana. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: J. Devlan Geddes, Esq. Cameron Clevidence, Esq. GOETZ, GEDDES & GARDNER, P.C. 35 N. Grand Ave. P.O. Box 6580 Bozeman, MT 59771 Email: devlan@goetzlawfirm.com cclevidence@goetzlawfirm.com - and - Raph Graybill, Esq. Rachel Parker, Esq. GRAYBILL LAW FIRM, P.C. 300 4th Street North Great Falls, MT 59403 Telephone: (406) 452-8566 Email: raph@graybilllawfirm.com rachel@graybilllawfirm.com - and - John Heenan, Esq. HEENAN & COOK 1631 Zimmerman Trail Billings, MT 59102 Telephone: (406) 839-9091 Email: john@lawmontana.com - and - David R. Paoli, Esq. PAOLI LAW FIRM, PC 257 West Front St., Ste. A Missoula, MT 59802 Telephone: (406) 542-3330 Email: davidpaoli@paoli-law.com HEALTHFIRST PHSP: Publishes Network Provider Directory, Greene Says ------------------------------------------------------------------- JOSEPH GREENE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HEALTHFIRST PHSP, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-09058 (S.D.N.Y., October 31, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, fraudulent misrepresentation, negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment, and violations of New York Deceptive Acts and Practices Act, New York False Advertising Act, and New York Insurance Law. The case arises from the Defendant's alleged deceptive business practices of knowingly publishing an inaccurate and misleading provider directory. According to the complaint, the Defendant does so for several reasons: 1) a robust provider network is attractive to potential customers; 2) a seemingly robust directory of providers gives the Defendant the appearance of compliance with state and federal network adequacy laws (without the costs associated with creating and maintaining an adequate network and accurate directory); and 3) when members forego care after a time-consuming and frustrating provider search, the Defendant does not have to pay for the care they would have received. As a result of the Defendant's unlawful business practices, the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals paid inflated premiums for an insurance plan that does not actually offer an adequate provider network to meet their needs, says the suit. Healthfirst PHSP, Inc. is a not-for-profit corporation in New York. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Steve Cohen, Esq. POLLOCK COHEN LLP 111 Broadway, Suite 1804 New York, NY 10006 Telephone: (212) 337-5361 Email: Scohen@PollockCohen.com - and - Jacob Gardener, Esq. WALDEN MACHT HARAN & WILLIAMS LLP 250 Vesey St., 27th Floor New York, NY 10281 Telephone: (212) 335-2965 Email: jgardener@wmhwlaw.com HENLEY PACIFIC: Staples Suit Removed to C.D. California ------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Darren P. Staples, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. HENLEY PACIFIC LA LLC, a Delaware limited liability; and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No. CIVRS2507511 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of San Bernardino, to the United States District Court for Central District of California on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 5:25-cv-02965. The Complaint also sets forth the following eleven causes of action: Failure to Pay for All Hours Worked: Failure to Provide Paid Rest Breaks and Pay Missed Rest Break Premiums; Failure to Provide Meal Periods and Pay Missed Meal Period Premiums; Failure to Pay All Wages Owed in a Timely Manner; Failure to Provide Complete Wage Statements; Waiting Time Penalties for Failure to Pay Final Pay; Waiting Time Penalties for Failure to Pay All Wages Due Upon Termination; Failure to Pay All Overtime Wages; Failure to Reimburse Business Expenses; the Private Attorneys General Act (the "PAGA"); and Unfair Competition in Violation of California Business and Professions Code.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Peter B. Maretz, Esq. Amy K. Todd, Esq. Claudia E. Murga, Esq. JACKSON LEWIS P.C. 225 Broadway, Suite 1800 San Diego, CA 92101 Phone: (619) 573-4900 Facsimile: (619) 573-4901 Email: Peter.Maretz@jacksonlewis.com Amy.Todd@jacksonlewis.com Claudia.Murga@jacksonlewis.com HERITAGE SPORTS: Snedeker Balks at Illegal Online Casino Operation ------------------------------------------------------------------ KURT SNEDEKER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HERITAGE SPORTS HOLDINGS LTD.; and SPORTY CITY COSTA RICA S.A., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00178-TS (D. Utah, November 5, 2025) seeks redress from Defendants' alleged widespread violations of Utah's Gambling Act. The Defendants own, operate, and receive revenue from the online casinos available at www.heritagesports.eu and www.bet105.ag, where they offer casino-style slots, sportsbooks, racebooks, and table games to anyone interested in wagering money to play them (the "Heritage Gambling Platform"). During the applicable three-year period preceding this action, the Defendants have systematically accepted wagers from Utah residents -- many of whom, including Plaintiff, have lost significant sums of their hard-earned money playing the games offered on the Heritage Gambling Platform -- and have reaped enormous profits from the losses sustained by these people, says the suit. The Utah's Gambling Act prohibits persons from operating or receiving revenue from "fringe gaming devices," "video gaming devices," or "gambling devices or records." The games offered on the Heritage Gambling Platform constitute all three of these things, and Defendants have amassed significant revenue from Plaintiff and numerous others in Utah who have played them, the suit alleges. Heritage Sports Holdings Ltd. is a private company organized and existing under the laws of British Virgin Islands, with a place of business in Costa Rica.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elliot O. Jackson, Esq. HEDIN LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140 Miami, FL 33131-3302 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 E-mail: ejackson@hedinllp.com - and - David W. Scofield, Esq. PETERS ❘ SCOFIELD A Professional Corporation 7430 Creek Road, Suite 303 Sandy, UT 84093-6160 Telephone: (801) 322-2002 E-mail: dws@psplawyers.com - and - Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. GUCOVSCHI LAW FIRM, PLLC 140 Broadway, Fl 46 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 E-mail: adrian@gr-firm.com HIGH LEVEL: Dilone Seeks Unpaid Wages for Construction Workers -------------------------------------------------------------- JUNIOR ANTONIO CRUZ DILONE, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. HIGH LEVEL CONCRETE CORP., CONCRETE COURSES CONCEPTS CORP., and BROADWAY CONSTRUCTION GROUP LLC, and RUI PEDRO RALHA, MARIO C. PERES, and LUIS M. PEREIRA, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-06095 (E.D.N.Y., October 31, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law including failure to pay minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages, failure to provide wage notice, and failure to provide accurate wage statements. The Plaintiffs worked for the Defendants as carpenters and woodworkers until June 2025. High Level Concrete Corp. is a construction company based in New York. Concrete Courses Concepts Corp. is a construction company based in New York. Broadway Construction Group LLC is a construction company based in New York. [BN] The Plaintiffs are 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 HILTON GRAND: Rice Suit Removed to W.D. Washington -------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Kelley Rice, on her own behalf and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Hilton Grand Vacations Inc., Case No. 25-00002-28766-1-SEA was removed from the King County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02205 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. -- https://www.hiltongrandvacations.com/ -- is recognized as a leading global timeshare company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Charles Tackeff, Esq. STRANCH JENNINGS & GARVEY PLLC (TN) 223 Rosa L. Parks Ave., Ste. 200 Nashville, TN 37203 Phone: (615) 254-8801 Fax: (615) 250-3937 Email: mtackeff@stranchlaw.com - and - Samuel J. Strauss, Esq. STRAUSS BORRELLI PLLC 980 N. Michigan Ave., Ste. 1610 Chicago, IL 60611 Phone (872) 263-1100 Fax: (872) 263-1109 Email: sam@turkestrauss.com The Defendant is represented by: Dailey Koga, Esq. Erin M Wilson, Esq. Jeffrey M Odom, Esq. BALLARD SPAHR LLP (SEA) 1301 2nd Ave., Ste. 2800 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 223-7000 Email: kogad@ballardspahr.com wilsonem@ballardspahr.com odomj@ballardspahr.com HIRT'S LLC: Davis Seeks Equal Website Access for Blind Users ------------------------------------------------------------ NICOLE DAVIS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. HIRT'S, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13619 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 6, 2025) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, https://hirts.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Hirt's, LLC offers plant & fruit seeds, plant bulbs & indoor house plants for sale online. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Ohrenberger, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Email: mohrenberger@ealg.law HOBBY LOBBY: Aguilar Suit Removed to N.D. California ---------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Maria Aguilar, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, and as aggrieved employees pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA") v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES, INC., an Oklahoma corporation; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 25CV146211 was removed from the Superior Court for the State of California for the County of Alameda, to the United States District Court for Northern District of California on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-09554. The Plaintiff's first cause of action is for the alleged failure to pay overtime compensation pursuant to California Labor Code Sections 510 and 1198. The Plaintiff's second cause of action alleges failure to pay minimum wages for all hours worked. In the third and fourth causes of action, Plaintiff alleges that she and others were not provided legally compliant meal periods. The Plaintiff's fifth cause of action is a derivative claim for waiting time penalties for the failure to timely pay wages earned and unpaid prior to termination, pursuant to California Labor Code sections 201, 202, and 203. The Plaintiff's sixth cause of action alleges that Defendants "failed to provide employees with or retain complete and accurate wage statements."[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Brent Giddens, Esq. Cory D. Catignani, Esq. VORYS, SATER, SEYMOUR AND PEASE LLP 2211 Michelson Drive, Suite 500 Irvine, CA 92612 Phone: (949) 526-7904 Facsimile: (949) 526-7904 Email: bgiddens@vorys.com cdcatignani@vorys.com HOME DEPOT: Court Narrows Claims in Amos Class Action ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as HERMAN M. AMOS, V. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-01297-NJB-KWR (E.D. La.), the Hon. Judge Nannette Jolivette Brown entered an order granting in part and denying in part the motion to dismiss the Plaintiff's amended complaint. The motion is granted to the extent it seeks dismissal of the proposed class allegations. The motion is denied to the extent it seeks dismissal of the individual claims. The Court further entered an order that the proposed class allegations raised in the Amended Complaint are dismissed. The class allegations do not satisfy the pleading requirements of Rule 9(b), fail to state a claim because they contradict the terms of the ESPP, and fail to meet the pleading requirements of Rule 23. The Plaintiff was previously granted leave to file an Amended Complaint to address these pleading deficiencies, and he failed to do so. The litigation involves a dispute over Home Depot stock owned by Plaintiff Herman M. Amos. On May 19, 2024, the Plaintiff filed a complaint in this Court against the Defendants. The Plaintiff is a 70-year-old former employee of the Defendant. Home operates home improvement retail stores. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kB8MnR at no extra charge.[CC] HOME DEPOT: Wong Suit Removed to W.D. Washington ------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Cynthia Wong, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., Case No. 25-2-01088-08 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of Washington, Cowlitz County, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Nov. 6, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-05989. The Plaintiff filed her initial Complaint, asserting violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Action ("CPA"), and Washington's Commercial Electronic Mail Act ("CEMA"), on behalf of herself and a putative Washington class. The Plaintiff alleges that Home Depot violated the Washington CEMA and CPA by transmitting commercial emails with subject lines that are "false or misleading."[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Alexandra M. Shulman, Esq. Jeffrey R. Kaatz, Esq. BUCHALTER A Professional Corporation 1420 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3100 Seattle, WA 98101 Phone: 206-319-7052 Email: ashulman@buchalter.com jkaatz@buchalter.com HOMEBODY INSURANCE: Heffner Suit Removed to D. Maryland ------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Brittany Heffner, on behalf of herself and all similarly situated individuals v. HOMEBODY INSURANCE AGENCY, LLC and WP&M REAL ESTATE GROUP, LLC, Case No. C-24-CV-25-008216 was removed from the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, to the United States District Court for District of Maryland on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03634-BAH. On September 26, 2025, the Plaintiff filed a class action against Defendants alleging violation of the Credit Repair Organizations Act ("CROA"), violation of the Maryland Real Property Article, violation of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act ("MCPA"), and (violation of the Maryland Credit Services Business Act. The Plaintiff also asserts claims for declaratory and injunctive relief.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Sabrina Rose-Smith, Esq. GOODWIN PROCTER LLP 1900 N Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Phone: +1 202 346 4000 Fax: +1 202 346 4444 Email: SRoseSmith@goodwinlaw.com - and - David M. Wyand, Esq. ROSENBERG MARTIN GREENBERG, LLP 25 S. Charles Street, 21st Floor Baltimore, MD 21201 Phone: +1 410 727 6600 Fax: +1 410 727 1115 Email: dwyand@rosenbergmartin.com HOSPITAL SISTERS: Bid to Compel Class Discovery in Million OK'd --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MARY MILLION, v. HOSPITAL SISTERS HEALTH SYSTEM, et al., Case No. 3:24-cv-03357-SEM-DJQ (C.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge Sue E. Myerscough entered an order: -- granting the Plaintiff's motion to compel the Defendants to participate in class discovery; -- denying as moot the Defendants' motion to stay discovery; -- granting the Plaintiff's motion to compel the Defendants to produce ESI information; and -- denying the Defendants' motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and Rule 11 sanctions. The Plaintiff is directed to submit an affidavit setting forth her reasonable expenses and attorney's fees within 7 days of this Order. This case is referred back to the Magistrate Judge for further management of discovery, including resetting the fact discovery deadline currently set for Nov. 30, 2025. In sum, Defendants have not complied with their discovery obligations under the Court’s ESI Order. Defendants have not disclosed the methods of limitation used to identify relevant ESI (including databases, custodians, and date ranges) and have not met and conferred in good faith with Plaintiff's counsel to identify additional search terms likely to produce responsive documents. Under the plain language of the ESI Order, the Defendants must do so. Pursuant to the Complaint, the proposed class is defined as: "All individuals in Illinois who, within the applicable limitations period [5 years]: (i) applied for employment with Hospital Sisters Health System or St. Francis Hospital, of the Hospital Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, or were employed by them; and (ii) from whom Hospital Sisters Health System and St. Francis Hospital, of the Hospital Sisters of the Third Order of St. Francis, or its employees, agents, assigns, contractors, or other third parties acting on their behalf, requested, solicited, required, and/or obtained genetic information, including family medical history." On Dec. 19, 2024, the Plaintiff Mary Million, individually and on behalf of those similarly situated, filed a one-count Class Action Complaint in this Court, asserting that she was required to undergo a preemployment medical screening and answer questions regarding family history of illnesses, in a manner that violated the Illinois Genetic Information Privacy Act (GIPA). Hospital is a multi-institutional health care system. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=kRGv9E at no extra charge.[CC] HOYT ARCHERY INC: Janochoski Suit Transferred to D. Colorado ------------------------------------------------------------ The case styled as Alex Janochoski, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Hoyt Archery, Inc., Archery Trade Association, Inc., BowTech, Inc., BPS Direct LLC, Cabela's LLC, Jay's Sports, Inc., Kinsey's Outdoors, Inc., Lancaster Archery Supply, Inc., Mathews Archery, Inc., NeuIntel LLC, Precision Shooting Equipment, Inc, Trackstreet, Inc., Case No. 0:25-cv-02788 was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-03544-PAB-TPO to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Anti-Trust for Antitrust Litigation. Hoyt Archery -- https://hoyt.com/ -- is an American manufacturer of recurve and compound bows located in Salt Lake City, Utah.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Heidi M. Silton, Esq. Jessica N Servais, Esq. Joseph C. Bourne, Esq. Michael Kinane, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN PLLP 100 Washington Ave S Ste 2200 Mpls, MN 55401-2179 Phone: (612) 596-4092 Fax: (612) 339-0981 The Defendant is represented by: F. Matthew Ralph, Esq. Michael A Lindsay, Esq. DORSEY & WHITNEY LLP 50 South Sixth Street, Suite 1500 Minneapolis, MN 55402-1498 Phone: (612) 492-6964 Email: ralph.matthew@dorsey.com HUBSPOT INC: Lorenc Suit Removed to D. Massachusetts ---------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Toby Lorenc, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. HUBSPOT, INC., Case No. 2584-CV-02686-BLS2 was removed from the Massachusetts Superior Court, Suffolk County, to the United States District Court for District of Massachusetts on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-13293. The Plaintiff, who alleges that he is a resident and citizen of Colorado Springs, Colorado, brings this suit on behalf of himself and others similarly situated under Colorado's Prevention of Telemarketing Fraud Act ("PTFA"). The Plaintiff alleges that HubSpot violated the PTFA by "knowingly listing" his and "thousands" of other "Coloradans' cell phone numbers on clearbit.com" for a commercial purpose, without consent, thereby violating "Coloradans' statutory privacy rights under the PTFA."[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Joan B. Tucker Fife, Esq. WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 101 California Street, 21st Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-5891 Phone: +1 415-591-1000 Facsimile: +1 415-591-1400 Email: JFife@winston.com HUSQVARNA PROFESSIONAL: Settlement in Douglass Gets Initial Nod --------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BLAIR DOUGLASS, v. HUSQVARNA PROFESSIONAL PRODUCTS, INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-00771-CCW (W.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Christy Criswell Wiegand will grant Mr. Douglass' motion and enter an order: (1) preliminarily approving the settlement; (2) provisionally certifying the class for settlement purposes only; (3) directing notice to be given consistent with Mr. Douglass' notice plan; (4) appointing Kevin Tucker, Kevin Abramowicz, Chandler Steiger, Stephanie Moore, Kayla Conahan, and Jessica Liu of East End Trial Group LLC as Class Counsel; (5) adopting the objection procedures set forth in the settlement; and (6) setting a fairness hearing and associated deadlines. In sum, there being "no obvious deficiencies" and the settlement "falling within the range of reason," Zimmerman, 2011 WL 65912, the Court finds for the purposes of preliminary approval that the proposed settlement appears to be "fair, reasonable, and adequate" pursuant to Rule 23(e)(2). Because Mr. Douglass has made a preliminary showing that he can satisfy the requirements of Rule 23(a) and 23(b)(2), the Court will provisionally certify a class of "individuals who are Blind and/or who have a Visual Disability and who use Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services to navigate digital content and who have accessed, attempted to access, or been deterred from attempting to access, or who will access, attempt to access, or be deterred from attempting to access, the Website from the United States." On April 21, 2022, Mr. Douglass, who is blind, filed a class-action complaint against Husqvarna, LCC, alleging that Husqvarna "failed to effectively communicate with Douglass because [Husqvarna's] Website is not sufficiently compatible with screen reader auxiliary aids" in violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Specifically, Mr. Douglass alleges that he attempted to access Husqvarna’s online store using a screen reader but was unable to because Husqvarna’s online store is incompatible with screen-access software. Turning to provisional certification, Mr. Douglass seeks to certify "a national class" under Rule 23(b)(2), of: "individuals who are Blind and/or who have a Visual Disability and who use Appropriate Auxiliary Aids and Services to navigate digital content and who have accessed, attempted to access, or been deterred from attempting to access, or who will access, attempt to access, or be deterred from attempting to access, the Website from the United States." Husqvarna is a company that produces outdoor power products. A copy of the Court's opinion dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=KvV6Gx at no extra charge.[CC] INSPIRE MEDICAL: PRGERS Sues Over Misleading Statements ------------------------------------------------------- City Of Pontiac Reestablished General Employees' Retirement System, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. INSPIRE MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC., TIMOTHY HERBERT, RICHARD BUCHHOLZ and CARLTON WEATHERBY, Case No. 0:25-cv-04247-PJS-ECW (D. Minn., Nov. 6, 2025), is brought under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act"), and U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission against Defendants, arising from materially false and misleading statements made to investors by Inspire and its senior executives concealing significant problems with the launch of its most important new product, a sleep apnea device called "Inspire V." Throughout the Class Period, Defendants assured investors that Inspire had satisfied all regulatory, technical, and commercial conditions for the launch of its "next generation" product; that demand for Inspire V was high; and that the Company's commercial launch of its new device was proceeding successfully. None of these statements were true. In reality, and unbeknownst to investors, the Inspire V launch was a disaster. Contrary to Defendants' public statements, demand for Inspire V was minimal because Inspire's customers were already flush with inventory--older, unsold versions of Inspire's sleep apnea device. Moreover, Defendants had failed to take basic steps to ensure clinician and payor uptake of the new device leading to massive delays in adoption. By the end of the Class Period, Defendants could no longer hide the serious problems with the Inspire V rollout and, on August 4, 2025, were forced to admit the truth, causing the price of Inspire stock to plummet by 32% and wiping out more than $1.5 billion in shareholder value, says the complaint. The Plaintiff City of Pontiac Reestablished General Employees' Retirement System ("PGERS") is a public retirement plan that provides retirement benefits to employees (and their beneficiaries) of the City of Pontiac, Michigan. Inspire Medical Systems, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that operates as a medical technology company.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gregg M. Fishbein, Esq. LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN, PLLP 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 2200 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: (612) 339-6900 Fax: (612) 339-0981 Email: gmfishbein@locklaw.com - and - Karin E. Fisch, Esq. Vincent J. Pontrello, Esq. GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A. 485 Lexington Avenue New York, NY 10017 Phone: (646) 722-8500 Facsimile: (610) 722-8500 Email: kfisch@gelaw.com vpontrello@gelaw.com - and - Cynthia J. Billings-Dunn, Esq. ASHER KELLY 25800 Northwestern Highway - Ste 1100 Southfield, MI 48075 Phone: (646) 722-8500 Email: cbdunn@asherkellylaw.com - and - Jeffrey A. Reeves, Esq. REEVES LAW FIRM PC 1100 Peachtree Street, Suite 250 Atlanta, GA 30309 Phone: (404) 795-6139 Email: jeff@reeveslawfirmpc.com JEFFERSON INDUSTRIES: Peyton Sues Over Failure to Pay Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- Nathan Peyton, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. JEFFERSON INDUSTRIES CORPORATION, Case No. 2:25-cv-01281-ALM-KAJ (S.D. Ohio, Nov. 5, 2025), is brought against the Defendant for its failure to pay employees overtime wages, seeking all available relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The Defendant failed to track, keep, or transmit the hours accurately worked each day by the Plaintiff and other similarly situated production/manufacturing employees. The Defendant willfully transmitted inaccurate and/or incomplete records to payroll for compensation purposes, which did not include all work performed. The inaccurate and/or incomplete records had the direct effect of reducing Defendant's labor costs to the detriment of the Plaintiff and other similarly situated production/manufacturing employees. Thus, the Defendant willfully did not record and pay all hours worked in violation of the FLSA and violated the FLSA's recordkeeping requirements. The Defendant applied these same policies to all its hourly, non-exempt production/manufacturing employees at all its locations. As a result of the Defendant's companywide policies and/or practices, Defendant knew or had reason to know that it was not compensating the Plaintiff and other similarly situated production/manufacturing employees for all hours worked, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from January 2008 until July 2025. The Defendant offers design and development for press dies and other tools necessary to produce automotive products.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew J.P. Coffman, Esq. Adam C. Gedling, Esq. Tristan T. Akers, Esq. COFFMAN LEGAL, LLC 1550 Old Henderson Rd., Suite #126 Columbus, OH 43220 Phone: 614-949-1181 Fax: 614-386-9964 Email: mcoffman@mcoffmanlegal.com agedling@mcoffmanlegal.com takers@mcoffmanlegal.com KNEW CONSCIOUS: Barlow Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages --------------------------------------------------- Jeffrey Barlow, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. KNEW CONSCIOUS COLLECTIVE INC. AND LEAH HAGEMANN, Case No. 1:25-cv-03554 (D. Colo., Nov. 6, 2025), is brought to recover unpaid wages against Defendants for their violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act (hereinafter the "FLSA") and the Colorado Overtime and Minimum Pay Standards ("COMPS") the Colorado Minimum Wage Act ("CMWA"), and the Colorado Wage Claim Act ("CWCA"). The Defendants carried out an unlawful payroll policy and practice by failing to pay Plaintiff for all hours worked as required by law and, inter alia, misclassifying Plaintiff and others as independent contractors to evade minimum wage and/or overtime obligations. Indeed, the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment's Division of Unemployment Insurance has found that Defendants misclassified Plaintiff and that Plaintiff was an employee, says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants in the State of Colorado during the period of August 2021 through March 2024. The Defendant is a business entity organized under the laws of Colorado.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Emanuel Kataev, Esq. SAGE LEGAL LLC 18211 Jamaica Avenue Jamaica, NY 11423-2327 Office: (718) 412-2421 Cellular: (917) 807-7819 Facsimile: (718) 489-4155 Email: emanuel@sagelegal.nyc LALIQUE NORTH AMERICA: Castro Sues Over Discriminative Website -------------------------------------------------------------- Arantza Castro, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. LALIQUE NORTH AMERICA, INC., a Foreign Profit Corporation D/B/A LALIQUE, Case No. 1:25-cv-25112-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Nov. 5, 2025), is brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), as a result of the Defendant's discriminative website. 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 Plaintiff attempted to purchase a gift card on Defendant's website. However, the Plaintiff was not able to freely and fully use Defendant's website because it contains access barriers that make it inaccessible to persons with disabilities, and for which there is no reasonable accommodation for the Plaintiff. 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. Although the Website appeared to have an "accessibility" statement displayed and an "accessibility" widget/plugin added, the "accessibility" statement and widget/plugin, when tested, still could not be effectively accessed by, and continued to be a barrier to, blind and visually disabled persons, including Plaintiff as a completely blind person. Plaintiff, although she attempted to access the statement, thus, was unable to receive any meaningful or prompt assistance through the "accessibility" statement and the widget/plugin to enable her to quickly, fully, and effectively navigate the Website, says the complaint. The Plaintiff uses the computer regularly, but due to her visual disability, Plaintiff cannot use her computer without the assistance of appropriate and available auxiliary aids, screen reader software, and other technology and assistance. LALIQUE, is a company that sells decorative objects, tableware, jewelry, perfumes, lighting, furniture, and art. There is a retail location in Miami-Dade County.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Diego German Mendez, Esq. MENDEZ LAW OFFICES, PLLC P.O. BOX 228630 Miami, FL 33172 Phone: 305.264.9090 Facsimile: 1-305.809.8474 Email: info@mendezlawoffices.com - and - Richard J. Adams, Esq. ADAMS & ASSOCIATES, P.A. 6500 Cowpen Road, Suite 101 Miami Lakes, FL 33014 Phone: 786-290-1963 Facsimile: 305-824-3868 Email: radamslaw7@gmail.com LAND O'LAKES INC: Lenz Suit Removed to E.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Cody Lenz, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. LAND O'LAKES, INC.; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. VCU325340 was removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Tulare, to the United States District Court for Eastern District of California on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-01499-KES-EPG. On September 26, 2025, the Plaintiff filed a class action against Defendants in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland alleging violation of the Credit Repair Organizations Act ("CROA"), violation of the Maryland Real Property Article, violation of the Maryland Consumer Protection Act ("MCPA"), and (violation of the Maryland Credit Services Business Act. The Plaintiff also asserts claims for declaratory and injunctive relief.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Joan B. Tucker Fife, Esq. WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 101 California Street, 21st Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-5891 Phone: +1 415-591-1000 Facsimile: +1 415-591-1400 Email: JFife@winston.com - and - Caitlin McCann, Esq. WINSTON & STRAWN LLP 333 S. Grand Avenue Los Angeles, CA 90071-1543 Phone: +1 415-591-1000 Facsimile: +1 415-591-1400 Email: CMcCann@winston.com LFRC FT. WAYNE: Foster Sues Over Disabled's Access to Properties ---------------------------------------------------------------- LELAND FOSTER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. LFRC FT. WAYNE RE LLC and LFRC FT. WAYNE LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00582 (N.D. Ind., October 31, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants have failed to design, construct, maintain, and operate their facilities to be fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and other persons with disabilities. The Defendants have continued to discriminate against people who are disabled in ways that block them from access and use of their properties and business. The Plaintiff and similarly situated disabled individuals encountered architectural barriers in common areas such parking and accessible routes and restrooms. The Plaintiff and Class members seek injunctive relief to remove the existing architectural barriers to the physically disabled when such removal is readily achievable for the place of public accommodation. LFRC Ft. Wayne RE LLC is a restaurant owner and operator doing business in Indiana. LFRC FT. Wayne LLC is a restaurant owner and operator doing business in Indiana. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Owen B. Dunn, Jr., Esq. LAW OFFICES OF OWEN DUNN, JR. 6800 W. Central Ave., Suite C-1 Toledo, OH 43617 Telephone: (419) 241-9661 Facsimile: (419) 241-9737 Email: obdjr@owendunnlaw.com LGI HOMES CORPORATE: Harbour Suit Removed to W.D. Washington ------------------------------------------------------------ The case captioned as Jennifer Harbour, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. LGI HOMES CORPORATE, LLC, a Texas limited liability company, Case No. 25-2-03574-06 was removed from the Superior Court of Washington, Clark County, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-05985. On October 2, 2025, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, sued Defendant for wage and hour violations under Washington's Minimum Wage Act and other related statutes.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Douglas Han, Esq. Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq. April Rheaume, Esq. JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION 751 North Fair Oaks Avenue, Suite 101 Pasadena, CA 91103 Phone: (818) 230-7502 Email: dhan@justicelawcorp.com statavos@justicelawcorp.com arheaume@justicelawcorp.com The Defendants are represented by: Hana A. Kern, Esq. Julia J. Fleming, Esq. RYAN, SWANSON & CLEVELAND, PLLC 401 Union Street, Suite 1500 Seattle, Washington 98101-2668 Phone: (206) 464-4224 Email: kern@ryanlaw.com jfleming@ryanlaw.com LIV GRP. INC: Sanchez Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Liv Grp. Inc. The case is styled as Monica Sanchez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Liv Grp. Inc., a Delaware corporation, d/b/a WWW.LIQUIDIV.COM, Case No. 25STCV32501 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Nov. 4, 2025). Liv Grp. Inc. doing business as Liquid I.V. -- https://www.liquid-iv.com/ -- is a functional hydration company based in Los Angeles, California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott J. Ferrell, Esq. PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS APC 4100 Newport Place Drive Suite 800 Newport Beach, CA 92660 Phone: (949) 706-6464 Fax: (949) 706-6469 Email: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com LLOYD & MCDANIEL: Franklin Files FDCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Lloyd & McDaniel, LLC. The case is styled as Tanya Franklin, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Lloyd & McDaniel, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-06354-TWT-JSA (N.D. Ga., Nov. 5, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Lloyd & McDaniel, LLC -- https://lloydmc.com/ -- is a debt collector in Illinois.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Misty Oaks Paxton, Esq. THE OAKS FIRM 3895 Brookgreen Pt. Decatur, GA 30034 Phone: (404) 500-7861 Email: attyoaks@yahoo.com LUXURY PRESENCE: Rogers Files TCPA Suit in D. Delaware ------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Luxury Presence, Inc. The case is styled as Matthew Rogers, individually and on behalf of a class of all persons and entities similarly situated v. Luxury Presence, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-01345-UNA (D. Del., Nov. 4, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Luxury Presence -- https://www.luxurypresence.com/ -- provides technology and marketing tools to real estate agents and brokers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dean R. Roland, Esq. COOCH AND TAYLOR The Brandywine Building 1000 N. West Street, 10th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 984-3851 Fax: (302) 984-3939 Email: droland@coochtaylor.com MACY'S RETAIL: Agnew Fraud Suit Removed to W.D. Wash. ----------------------------------------------------- The case STEPHANIE AGNEW, et al., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MACY'S RETAIL HOLDINGS LLC, Case No. 25-00002-26322-3 SEA, was removed from the King County Superior Court to the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on October 15, 2025. The Clerk of Court for the Western District of Washington assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02006-JHC to the proceeding. The suit is brought against the Defendants for fraud claims. Macy's Retail Holdings LLC is a retail company headquartered in New York, New York. [BN] The Defendant is represented by: Meegan B. Brooks, Esq. BENESCH FRIEDLANDER COPLAN & ARONOFF LLP 100 Pine St., Ste. 3100 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (628) 600-2250 Email: mbrooks@beneschlaw.com MANO DELIVERY: Rayo Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mano Delivery Corp. The case is styled as Teodoro Altamirano Rayo, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Mano Delivery Corp. doing business as Amazon Trucking & Distribution, Affluent HR, Affluent Staffing LLC, Case No. 25STCV32522 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Nov. 5, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case (General Jurisdiction)." Mano Delivery Corp in Compton specializes in providing top-notch trucking, distribution, and container delivery services in Los Angeles and Long Beach, 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 MARIETTA AUTO SALES: Anderson Files TCPA Suit in N.D. Georgia ------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Marietta Auto Sales, LLC. The case is styled as Belinda Anderson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Marietta Auto Sales, LLC doing business as: Autonomous Auto Group, Case No. 1:25-cv-06387-VMC (N.D. Ga., Nov. 6, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Marietta Auto Sales, LLC doing business as Autonomous Auto Group -- https://www.autonomousjoy.com/ -- is a used car dealership located in Kennesaw and Marietta, Georgia.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, PA 26 Grand Georgian Ct. Cantersville, GA 30121 Phone: (305) 479-2299 Fax: (786) 623-0915 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com MCCAIN FOODS USA: Preciado Suit Removed to E.D. Washington ---------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Ricardo Preciado, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MCCAIN FOODS USA, INC., a Maine corporation; Case No. 25-2-00154-01 was removed from the Superior Court for Adams County, Washington, to the United States District Court for Eastern District of Washington on Nov. 6, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-00445. The Complaint asserted putative class claims for allegedly failing to provide rest breaks and meal periods, failing to pay minimum wages and overtime wages, failing to accrue and allow use of sick leave, making unlawful deductions and rebates from employees' wages, and other wage and hour violations.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Devin M. Smith, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 920 Fifth Avenue, Suite 3300 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: 206.622.3150 Facsimile: 206.757.7700 - and - Rebecca R. Lynch, Esq. DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP 929 108th Avenue NE, Suite 1500 Bellevue, WA 98004 Phone: 425.646.6100 Facsimile: 425.646.6199 MERCY HEALTH - REGIONAL MEDICAL: Flint Suit Removed to N.D. Ohio ---------------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Brittny Flint, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Mercy Health - Regional Medical Center, LLC, Case No. 25CV218215 was removed from the Lorain County Court of Common Pleas, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois on Nov. 4, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:25-cv-02382-JPC to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. Mercy Health's -- https://www.mercy.com/ -- 600+ health care locations provide faith-based ministry and compassionate care to the residents of Ohio and Kentucky.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dylan J. Gould, Esq. Spencer D. Campbell, Esq, Terence Coates, Esq. MARKOVITS STOCK & DEMARCO 119 East Court Street, Ste. 500 Cincinnati, OH 45002 Phone: (513) 651-3700 Fax: (513) 665-0219 Email: dgould@msdlegal.com scampbell@msdlegal.com tcoates@msdlegal.com The Defendant is represented by: Christopher A. Wiech, Esq. BAKER & HOSTETLER-ATLANTA 1170 Peachtree Street NE, Ste. 2400 Atlanta, GA 30309 Phone: (404) 946-9814 Email: cwiech@bakerlaw.com - and - Melissa Bilancini, Esq. BAKER & HOSTETLER-CLEVELAND 127 Public Square, Ste. 2000 Cleveland, OH 44114 Phone: (216) 621-0200 Fax: (216) 696-0740 Email: mbilancini@bakerlaw.com MI MILK LLC: Escobar Files TCPA Suit in N.D. California ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mi Milk, LLC. The case is styled as Rebecca Escobar, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Mi Milk, LLC, Case No. 4:25-cv-09597 (N.D. Cal., Nov. 6, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Mi Milk, LLC -- https://www.mimilk.com/ -- is a milk marketing cooperative and processor owned by dairy farmers in Michigan, Indiana, Ohio and Wisconsin.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. MIAMI DOLPHINS: Hernandez Sues Over Discriminative Website ---------------------------------------------------------- Yudy Hernandez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. MIAMI DOLPHINS, LTD., a Florida Limited Partnership D/B/A MIAMI DOLPHINS, Case No. 1:25-cv-25106-RAR (S.D. Fla., Nov. 5, 2025), is brought under the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA"), as a result of the Defendant's discriminative website. The Defendant's Website, https://www.miamidolphins.com/, contains access barriers that prevent free and full use by blind and visually disabled individuals using keyboards and available screen reader software. Plaintiff attempted to purchase clothing on Defendant's website. However, the Plaintiff was not able to freely and fully use Defendant's website because it contains access barriers that make it inaccessible to persons with disabilities, and for which there is no reasonable accommodation for the Plaintiff. 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. Although the Website appeared to have an "accessibility" statement displayed and an "accessibility" widget/plugin added, the "accessibility" statement and widget/plugin, when tested, still could not be effectively accessed by, and continued to be a barrier to, blind and visually disabled persons, including Plaintiff as a completely blind person. Plaintiff, although she attempted to access the statement, thus, was unable to receive any meaningful or prompt assistance through the "accessibility" statement and the widget/plugin to enable her to quickly, fully, and effectively navigate the Website, says the complaint. The Plaintiff uses the computer regularly, but due to her visual disability, Plaintiff cannot use her computer without the assistance of appropriate and available auxiliary aids, screen reader software, and other technology and assistance. MIAMI DOLPHINS, is a company that sells tickets, jerseys, men, women, and kids clothing, t-shirts, sweatshirts, hats, shoes, accessories, home, and office decor.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Diego German Mendez, Esq. MENDEZ LAW OFFICES, PLLC P.O. BOX 228630 Miami, FL 33172 Phone: 305.264.9090 Facsimile: 1-305.809.8474 Email: info@mendezlawoffices.com - and - Richard J. Adams, Esq. ADAMS & ASSOCIATES, P.A. 6500 Cowpen Road, Suite 101 Miami Lakes, FL 33014 Phone: 786-290-1963 Facsimile: 305-824-3868 Email: radamslaw7@gmail.com ML4 LLC: Frost Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website --------------------------------------------------- Clarence and Tammy Frost, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. ML4, LLC d/b/a HValley Tools, Case No. 0:25-cv-04231 (D. Minn., Nov. 5, 2025), is brought arising because the Defendant's Website (www.hvalleytools.com) is not fully and equally accessible to people who are blind or who have low vision in violation of both the general non-discriminatory mandate and the effective communication and auxiliary aids and services requirements of the Americans with Disabilities Act (the "ADA") and the Minnesota Human Rights Act ("MHRA"). As a consequence of the Plaintiffs experience visiting Defendant's Website, including in the past year, and from an investigation performed on their behalf, the Plaintiffs found Defendant's Website has a number of digital barriers that deny screen-reader users like the Plaintiffs full and equal access to important Website content--content the Defendant makes available to its sighted Website users. Still, the Plaintiffs would like to, intend to, and will attempt to access the Defendant's Website in the future to browse, research, or shop online and purchase the products and services that the Defendant offers. The Defendant's policies regarding the maintenance and operation of its Website fail to ensure its Website is fully accessible to, and independently usable by, individuals with vision-related disabilities. The Plaintiffs and the putative class have been, and in the absence of injunctive relief will continue to be, injured, and discriminated against by the Defendant's failure to provide its online Website content and services in a manner that is compatible with screen reader technology, says the complaint. The Plaintiffs are and have been legally blind and are therefore disabled. The Defendant offers woodworking equipment and accessories for sale including, but not limited to, routers, router bits, saws, planers, sanders, sharpening tools, and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Chad A. Throndset, Esq. Patrick W. Michenfelder, Esq. Jason Gustafson, Esq. THRONDSET MICHENFELDER, LLC 80 South 8th Street, Suite 900 Minneapolis, MN 55402 Phone: (763) 515-6110 Email: chad@throndsetlaw.com pat@throndsetlaw.com jason@throndsetlaw.com MR. COOPER: Class Cert Scheduling Order Modified in Cabezas Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JENNIFER CABEZAS et al., individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, v. MR. COOPER GROUP, INC., and NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC d/b/a MR. COOPER, Case No. 3:23-cv-02453-N (N.D. Tex.), the Hon. Judge David C. Godbey entered an order granting joint motion to modify class certification scheduling order: Event Deadline Deadline for Plaintiffs to serve 90 days after Order on motion for class certification on pending Motion to Compel the Defendants (and any expert reports in support thereof): Class certification discovery 126 days after Plaintiffs closes: serve Motion for class certification Deadline for Defendants to serve 141 days after Plaintiffs opposition to motion for class serve Motion for Class certification on Plaintiffs (and Certification any expert reports in support thereof): Deadline for Plaintiffs to serve 171 days after Plaintiffs reply in support of class serve Motion for class certification (and any rebuttal certification experts in support thereof): Class certification briefing 186 days after Plaintiffs submission date: serve motion for class certification Mr. Cooper is a U.S. mortgage servicer. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=XvFqK9 at no extra charge.[CC] MURPHY REHABILITATION: Seeks More Time to File Class Cert Response ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as TERESA FLEMING, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. MURPHY REHABILITATION, INC., Case No. 1:24-cv-00206-MOC-WCM (W.D.N.C.), the Defendant asks the Court to enter an order extending the time to respond to the Plaintiff's motion for conditional certification of a collective action by 14 days, up to and including Wednesday, Nov. 26, 2025. The Defendant reasonably requires additional time to prepare an appropriate response to the Motion. Counsel for the Defendant has conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, and counsel for the Plaintiff does not oppose the requested extension of time. Murphy provides non-acute medical and skilled nursing care services, therapy and social services. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=NYWPSK at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendant is represented by: Kelly A. Brewer, Esq. Benjamin L. Williams, Esq. GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP 150 Fayetteville Street, Suite 1120 Raleigh, NC 27601 Telephone: (919) 787-4555 E-mail: kbrewer@grsm.com blwilliams@grsm.com NAPCO SECURITY: Continues to Defend Patel Securities Class Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- NAPCO Security Technologies Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2025 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 3, 2025, that the Company continues to defend itself from the Patel securities class suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York. On April 25, 2025, a purported class action, brought on behalf of a putative class who acquired publicly traded NAPCO securities between February 5, 2024 and February 3, 2025, was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York against the Company, its Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and its former Chief Financial Officer (who is currently the President and Chief Operating Officer). The action, captioned Patel v. NAPCO Security Technologies, Inc. et al., asserts securities fraud claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 in connection with statements made in quarterly earnings releases and calls during the period of February 5, 2024 through February 3, 2025. The Court has not yet appointed a lead plaintiff. The Company believes it has meritorious defenses and intends to vigorously defend against the Action. Napco Security Technologies, Inc. is a manufacturer and designer of high-tech electronic security devices, cellular communication services for intrusion and fire alarm systems as well as a leading provider of school safety solutions. NATIONWIDE HEALTHCARE: Williams Sues to Recover Unpaid Wages ------------------------------------------------------------ Aplonda Williams, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated v. Nationwide Healthcare Services, LLC, Case No. 2:25-cv-01285-SDM-CMV (S.D. Ohio, Nov. 5, 2025), is brought against the Defendant to recover unpaid wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act (OMFWSA) and the Ohio Prompt Pay Act stemming from Defendant's failure to pay wages due for overtime hours worked. Pursuant to Defendant's compensation policies and practices, Plaintiff and were not compensated at the statutorily mandated overtime rate of one and one-half times their regular hourly rate for hours worked in excess of forty in a workweek. Instead, Defendant compensated non-exempt employees at their regular hourly rate for all hours worked, regardless of the amount of overtime accrued during the applicable pay period. The Defendant did not notify Plaintiff of the substandard overtime policy. The Defendant's employment policy results in the unlawful failure to pay wages due under the FLSA and OMFWSA., says the complaint. The Plaintiff was employed by Nationwide Home Health Cared as a Certified Home Health Aide from September 2024 to November 2024. Nationwide is a health care company offering individualized and comprehensive in-home health services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip J. Krzeski, Esq. Elizabeth A. Orrick, Esq. CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA 100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700 Minneapolis, MN 55401 Phone: (612) 767-3613 Fax: (612) 336-2940 Email: pkrzeski@chestnutcambronne.com eorrick@chestnutcambronne.com - and - Terence R. Coates, Esq. MARKOVITS, STOCK & DE MARCO, LLC 119 E. Court Street, Suite 530 Cincinnati, OH 45202 Phone: (513) 651-3700 Fax: (513) 665-0219 Email: tcoates@msdlegal.com NEW YORK BLOOD CENTER: Sarkar Files Suit in S.D. New York --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against New York Blood Center, Inc. The case is styled as Sabayasachi Sarkar, Greg Bolanos, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. New York Blood Center, Inc. doing business as: New York Blood Center Enterprises, Case No. 1:25-cv-09261-UA (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2025). The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. New York Blood Center, Inc. (NYBC) -- https://www.nybc.org/ -- is a community-based blood supplier in New York, New Jersey & Connecticut.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gary F. Lynch, Esq. LYNCH CARPENTER LLP 1133 Penn Avenue 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Phone: (412) 322-9243 Email: Gary@lcllp.com NOVU FUSION CUISINE: Gonzalez Sues Over Disability Discrimination ----------------------------------------------------------------- Jesus Gonzalez, on behalf of others similarly situated v. NOVU FUSION CUISINE, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-25161-XXXX (S.D. Fla., Nov. 6, 2025), is brought 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 ("ADA"). On October 19, 2025, Plaintiff personally visited the "Novu Fusion" restaurant, to inquire about and/or use its services and to test its compliance with the ADA and ADAAG. Due to the fact that he uses a wheelchair for mobility, but because he perambulates with the assistance of a wheelchair, Plaintiff was denied full and equal access, and enjoyment of the facilities, services, goods, and amenities, because of the architectural barriers met at the Subject Property. Based on the access barriers Plaintiff encountered, Plaintiff has been denied full and equal access, in violation of Title III of the ADA, says the complaint. The Plaintiff is disabled with neuropathy and nerve damage due to radiation and utilizes a wheelchair for mobility. Novu Fusion Cuisine, LLC, is the owner and operator of the restaurant "Novu Fusion."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Juan Courtney Cunningham, Esq. J. COURTNEY CUNNINGHAM, PLLC 8950 SW 74th Court, Suite 220, Miami, FL 33156 Phone: 305-351-2014 Email: cc@cunninghampllc.com legal@cunninghampllc.com NUNA BABY ESSENTIALS: Roberts Suit Removed to W.D. Washington ------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Morgan Roberts, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. NUNA BABY ESSENTIALS, INC., was removed from Superior Court of the State of Washington in and for the County of King, to the United States District Court for Western District of Washington on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-02209. The Complaint sets forth five causes of action asserting breaches of express and implied warranties, failure to disclose material facts, and violations of the Washington Consumer Protection Act.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Blake Marks-Dias, Esq. Emily J. Harris, Esq. Kristin E. Bateman, Esq. CORR CRONIN LLP 1015 Second Ave., Floor 10 Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 625-8600 Fax: (206) 625-0900 Email: bmarksdias@corrcronin.com eharris@corrcronin.com kbateman@corrcronin.com O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE: Hawley Sues Over Uncompensated Employees ------------------------------------------------------------- George Brian Hawley, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. O'REILLY AUTOMOTIVE STORES, INC., Case No. 1:25-cv-01013 (M.D.N.C., Nov. 5, 2025), is brought against the Defendant under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), and the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act ("NCWHA"), not fully compensating employees who work or have worked for Defendant. The Defendant had a systemic company-wide policy, pattern, or practice of failing to pay employees for all hours worked, including, but not limited to, pre-shift and post-shift compensable work activities, uncompensated lunch breaks, unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and related penalties and damages. Throughout the relevant period, Defendant maintained a corporate policy of failing to compensate route drivers for all hours worked, including "wait time" hours during their scheduled shift, as well as hours up to 40 per week and hours in excess of 40 per week. Specifically, Plaintiff and other similarly situated route drivers did not receive the appropriate promised straight and/or regular rates, premium and/or overtime rate(s) when their hours worked were in excess of 40 hours per week, in violation of the FLSA's statutory obligations and the NCWHA's payday statute, as applicable, says the complaint. The Plaintiff began working for Defendant as a Relief Route Driver at the Distribution Center on September 2021. The Defendant is "one of the largest specialty retailers of automotive aftermarket parts, tools, supplies, equipment, and accessories in the United States."[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gilda A. Hernandez, Esq. Samuel Byron Frazelle, Esq. Laura Fisher, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF GILDA A. HERNANDEZ, PLLC 215 S. Academy Street Cary, NC 27511 Phone: (919) 741-8693 Fax: (919) 869-1853 Email: ghernandez@gildahernandezlaw.com sbfrazelle@gildahernandezlaw.com lfisher@gildahernandezlaw.com OHIO SUPREME COURT: All Discovery Due Sept. 30, 2026 ---------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as DANNIE SMITH, v. OHIO SUPREME COURT, et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-00773-SDM-EPD (S.D. Ohio), the Hon. Judge Elizabeth Preston Deavers entered a preliminary pretrial order as follows: -- Any initial disclosures shall be made by Dec. 15, 2025. -- Any motion to amend the pleadings or to join additional parties shall be filed by Sept. 30, 2026. -- All discovery shall be completed by Sept. 30, 2026. -- Any dispositive motion shall be filed by Nov. 30, 2026. -- Primary expert reports must be produced by Aug. 1, 2026. -- Rebuttal expert reports must be produced by Aug. 30, 2026. -- The Plaintiff shall make a settlement demand by Sept. 30, 2026. -- The Defendants shall respond by Oct. 15, 2026. The parties agree to make a good faith effort to settle this case. The parties understand that this case will be referred to an attorney mediator, or to the Magistrate Judge, for a settlement conference in November 2026. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=qkzgKb at no extra charge.[CC] ONE CAPITAL: Laccinole Files FCRA Suit in N.D. Ill. --------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against One Capital Lending, LLC. The case is captioned as CHRISTOPHER LACCINOLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. ONE CAPITAL LENDING, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-12601 (N.D. Ill., October 15, 2025). The suit is brought against the Defendant for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. One Capital Lending, LLC is a loan solutions provider, doing business in Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Max Scott Morgan, Esq. THE WEITZ FIRM, LLC 1515 Market Street, Ste. 1100 Philadelphia, PA 19102 Telephone: (267) 587-6240 Facsimile: (215) 689-0875 Email: max.morgan@theweitzfirm.com - and - John Anthony Love, Esq. LOVE CONSUMER LAW 2500 Northwinds Parkway, Suite 330 Alpharetta, GA 30009 Telephone: (404) 855-3600 Email: tlove@loveconsumerlaw.com PACIFIC MARITIME: Williams Suit Removed to N.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned as Lashawna Lashae Williams, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. PACIFIC MARITIME ASSOCIATION, a California nonprofit corporation; PACIFIC MARITIME ASSOCIATION, INC., a business entity of form unknown; APM TERMINALS PACIFIC LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; APS STEVEDORING, LLC, a Washington limited liability company; BENICIA PORT TERMINAL COMPANY, a California corporation; CERES TERMINALS INCORPORATED, a Delaware corporation; CRESCENT CITY MARINE WAYS & DRY DOCK CO., INC., a California corporation; FENIX MARINE SERVICES, LTD formerly known as EAGLE MARINE SERVICES, LTD., a Delaware corporation; EVERPORT TERMINAL SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation; HARBOR INDUSTRIAL SERVICES CORPORATION, a California corporation; INNOVATIVE TERMINAL SERVICES, INC., a California corporation; INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SERVICE INC., a California corporation; KINDER MORGAN BULK TERMINALS LLC, a Louisiana limited liability company; LBCT LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; MARINE TERMINALS CORPORATION, a Nevada corporation; MARINE TERMINALS CORPORATION OF LOS ANGELES, a business entity of form unknown; MATSON NAVIGATION COMPANY, INC., a Hawaii corporation; MATSON TERMINALS, INC., a Hawaii corporation; METROPOLITAN STEVEDORE COMPANY, a California corporation; OCEAN TERMINAL SERVICES, INC., a California corporation; PACIFIC CRANE MAINTENANCE COMPANY LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; PACIFIC RO-RO STEVEDORING, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; PASHA STEVEDORING & TERMINALS L.P., a California limited partnership; PORT MAINTENANCE GROUP, INC., a California corporation; SSA MARINE, INC., a Washington corporation; SSA TERMINALS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; TERMINAL EQUIPMENT SERVICES INC., a California corporation; TOTAL TERMINALS INTERNATIONAL, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; TRANSPAC TERMINAL SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; TRAPAC, LLC, a California limited liability company; YUSEN TERMINALS INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 25CV138350 was removed from the Superior Court for the State of California for the County of Alameda, to the United States District Court for Northern District of California on Nov. 5, 2025, and assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-09548. The Plaintiff alleges that Defendants violated the California Labor Code and the Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders and asserts ten causes of action: Failure to Provide Meal Periods as Required by Cal. Labor Code and IWC Wage Order No. 9-2001; Failure to Authorize and Permit Rest Periods as Required by Cal. Labor Code and IWC Wage Order No. 9-2001; Failure to Pay Minimum Wages as Required by Cal. Labor Code and IWC Wage Order No. 9-2001; Failure to Pay Overtime Wages as Required by Cal. Labor Code and IWC Wage Order No. 9-2001; Failure to Timely Pay Wages During Employment as Required by Cal. Labor Code; Failure to Furnish Accurate Itemized Wage Statements as required by Cal. Labor Code and IWC Wage Order No. 9-2001; Failure to Maintain Required Records as required by Cal. Labor Code and IWC Wage Order No. 9 2001; Failure to Indemnify Employees for Necessary Expenditures Incurred in Discharge of Duties as required by Cal. Labor; Failure to Pay Reporting Time Pay as required by IWC Wage Order No. 9-2001; and, Unfair and Unlawful Business Practices in violation of Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Clifford D. Sethness, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 601 South Figueroa Street, Suite 3300 Los Angeles, CA 90017-5793 Phone: (213) 270-9600 Facsimile: (213) 270-9601 Email: csethness@seyfarth.com - and - Kent M. Roger, Esq. Taylor D. Horn, Esq. SEYFARTH SHAW LLP 560 Mission Street, 31st Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Phone: (415) 397-2823 Facsimile: (415) 397-8549 Email: kroger@seyfarth.com thorn@seyfarth.com PEOPLE DATA LABS: Cochrane Suit Removed to N.D. California ---------------------------------------------------------- The case styled as Janelle Cochrane, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. People Data Labs, Inc., Case No. CGC-25-629675 was removed from the San Francisco Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California on Nov. 5, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:25-cv-09533 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other P.I. for Personal Injury. People Data Labs -- https://www.peopledatalabs.com/ -- builds B2B data for developers, engineers, and data scientists.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. The Defendant is represented by: Michael Constantine Bleicher, Esq. ZWILLGEN PLLC 1900 M St NW, Ste 250 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: (202) 296-3585 Email: michael.bleicher@zwillgen.com PFIZER INC: Crosby Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind ----------------------------------------------------------- DANIEL CROSBY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PFIZER, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-09269 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 6, 2025) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, www.pfizer.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Pfizer Inc. operates as a pharmaceutical company. The Company offers medicines, vaccines, medical devices, and consumer healthcare products for oncology, inflammation, cardiovascular, and other therapeutic areas. [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 Email: rschonfeld@employeejustice.com PORSCHE CARS: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due May 20, 2026 -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as BLAKE STANLEY, v. PORSCHE CARS NORTH AMERICA, INC., et al., Case No. 2:25-cv-05916-MWC-JPR (C.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge entered a civil trial order. Jury Trial: Mar. 15, 2027 Final Pretrial Conference, Hearing on Mar. 5, 2027 Motions in Limine: Last Date to Hear Motion to Amend Jan. 9, 2026 Pleadings or Add Parties: Last Date to File Class Certification Motion: May 20, 2026 Fact Discovery Cut-Off: Sept. 18, 2026 Expert Discovery Cut-Off: Oct. 23, 2026 A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=67qoMA at no extra charge.[CC] PORTLAND PRODUCT: Blind Users Can't Access Website, Davis Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- NICOLE DAVIS, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PORTLAND PRODUCT WERKS, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13399 (N.D. Ill., November 1, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, declaratory relief, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed 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 website, https://dovetailworkwear.com, contains access barriers which hinder the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online goods, content, and services offered to the public through the website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not limited to: inadequate focus order, changing of content without advance warning, unclear labels for interactive elements, inaccurate alt-text on graphics, redundant links where adjacent links go to the same URL address, and the requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse. The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals. Portland Product Werks, LLC is a company that sells online goods and services, doing business in Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David B. Reyes, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Email: Dreyes@ealg.law PRECISTION STRIP: Fails to Pay Proper Wages, Diehl Alleges ---------------------------------------------------------- NATHAN DIEHL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. PRECISTION STRIP INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:25-cv-02403 (N.D. Ohio, Nov. 6, 2025) seeks to recover from the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Plaintiff Diehl was employed by the Defendant as a line operator. Precistion Strip Inc. processor of steel, aluminum, and copper to the automotive, appliance, beverage can, and industrial productions industries. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel I. Bryant, Esq. BRYANT LEGAL, LLC 4400 N. High St., Suite 310 Columbus, OH 43214 Telephone: (614) 704-0546 Facsimile: (614) 573-9826 Email: dbryant@bryantlegalllc.com - and - Esther E. Bryant, Esq. BRYANT LEGAL, LLC 3450 W Central Ave., Suite 370 Toledo, OH 43606 Telephone: (419) 824-4439 Facsimile: (419) 932-6719 Email: ebryant@bryantlegalllc.com PRUSSIAN INC: CEO Loses Bid to Dismiss "Wang" Employment Suit ------------------------------------------------------------- In the case captioned as Zhiheng Wang, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Prussian, Inc. and Mike Yin Liang, Defendants, Case No. 22-CV-4576 (OEM)(RML) (E.D.N.Y.)Judge Orelia E. Merchant, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of New York denied Defendant Mike Yin Liang's motion to dismiss in a putative class action brought by Plaintiff Zhiheng Wang. The Plaintiff filed this putative class action on August 3, 2022, asserting employment discrimination claims under the New York State Human Rights Law and New York City Human Rights Law. The Plaintiff also asserts claims under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor Law Section 190 et seq. Defendant Prussian, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that provides active hedging, monetization and intelligence services to corporations and investment firms. Defendant Liang is a California resident and the President and Chief Executive Officer of Prussian. On December 14, 2022, the Defendants, represented by counsel, answered the Complaint, and on November 28, 2023, the Defendants' counsel moved to withdraw representation. On May 19, 2025, Liang, proceeding pro se, filed a motion to dismiss. Liang first requested that the Court dismiss the action due to improper service. The Court construed this to be an assertion of insufficient service of process. The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure are clear that the ability to raise improper service as a defense is waived when it is not raised in a defendant's initial response to the complaint. Liang did not raise improper service as a defense in his answer. Thus, he waived this defense and cannot raise it at this stage in the litigation. Liang also claimed that jurisdiction is wrong due to his doubts regarding the Plaintiff's identity and place of residence. The Court construed this to be a challenge for lack of personal jurisdiction. This defense is also waived when it is not raised in a defendant's initial response. Liang did not assert a defense for lack of personal jurisdiction in his answer. Consequently, he has also waived this defense and cannot raise it at this stage in the litigation. In addition to the foregoing procedural challenges, Liang challenged the veracity of the allegations contained in the Complaint. He claimed that he has presented clear evidence that the Plaintiff was dishonest regarding her identity, her work for Prussian, and her allegations of discrimination. While the Court acknowledged Liang's assertions, it may not dismiss the action based on mere allegations of dishonesty. The test of a claim's substantive merits is more appropriately reserved for the summary judgment procedure where both parties conduct appropriate discovery and submit the additional supporting material necessary to develop their positions. As such, Liang's assertions that the Plaintiff's claims are false do not provide grounds for dismissal. . A copy of the Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=k49Cfn from PacerMonitor.com PUBLIC SERVICE: Continues to Defend Sherman Act-Related Suit ------------------------------------------------------------ Public Service Enterprise Group Incorporated disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2025 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 3, 2025, that the Company continues to defend itself from Sherman act antitrust class suit in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. In July 2025, a putative class action complaint was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland against 26 nuclear generation power companies, including PSEG, and two consulting companies. The plaintiffs allege defendants violated federal antitrust laws by conspiring to fix the compensation and exchange information regarding compensation for nuclear generation workers. The alleged class includes all persons employed in nuclear power generation by the defendants and their subsidiaries from 2003 until the present, and the relief sought includes treble damages. PSEG cannot predict the outcome of this matter. PSEG (NYSE: PEG), a diversified energy holding company with more than $25 billion in assets has its headquarters in Newark, NJ. PSEG's primary subsidiaries are Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G), New Jersey's largest electric and gas distribution utility; PSEG Power, one of the nation's leading independent energy producers; and PSEG Energy Holdings which operates PSEG's other non-regulated businesses. RADIUS GLOBAL: Hart Files FDCA Suit in S.D. Fla. ------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Radius Global Solutions LLC. The case is captioned as SHADAE HART, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. RADIUS GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LLC, Case No. 0:25-cv-62071-JB (S.D. Fla., October 15, 2025). The suit is brought against the Defendant for alleged violation of the Fair Debt Collection Act. Radius Global Solutions LLC is a business process outsourcing (BPO) company based in Pennsylvania. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Gerald Donald Lane, Jr., Esq. Mitchell David Hansen, Esq. Zane Charles Hedaya, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI, PLLC 1515 NE 26th St. Wilton Manors, FL 33305 Telephone: (754) 444-7539 (734) 730-9959 (813) 340-8838 Email: gerald@jibraellaw.com mitchell@jibraellaw.com zane@jibraellaw.com REPUBLIC SERVICES: Peterson Files TCPA Suit in D. Delaware ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Republic Services, Inc. The case is styled as Keith Peterson, individually and on behalf of a class of all persons and entities similarly situated v. Republic Services, Inc., Case No. 1:25-cv-01344-GBW (D. Del., Nov. 4, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. Republic Services -- https://www.republicservices.com/ -- provides the most complete set of recycling, waste and environmental solutions from a single-source provider.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dean R. Roland, Esq. COOCH AND TAYLOR The Brandywine Building 1000 N. West Street, 10th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801 Phone: (302) 984-3851 Fax: (302) 984-3939 Email: droland@coochtaylor.com ROBOT FACTORY: Cole Seeks Equal Website Access for the Blind ------------------------------------------------------------ HARON COLE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. ROBOT FACTORY, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13624 (N.D. Ill., Nov. 6, 2025) alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's Web site, https://www.giantrobot.com, is not fully or equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, including the Plaintiff, in violation of the ADA. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's Web site will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Robot Factory Inc/The was founded in 1993. The company's line of business includes the wholesale distribution of durable goods. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Ohrenberger, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street, Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Email: mohrenberger@ealg.law RTX CORPORATION: Filing for Class Cert. Bid Due Jan. 12, 2027 ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mark Goldstein, Ducamp Beaulieu, and John Bryan, on behalf of themselves and all other similarly situated, v. RTX Corporation (f/k/a Raytheon Technologies Corporation, f/k/a Raytheon Company), Raytheon Company (f/k/a Raytheon Intelligence & Space and Raytheon Missiles & Defense), Pratt & Whitney, Collins Aerospace, Rockwell Collins, Inc., and Arinc Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-01169-JLH-SRF (D. Del.), the Hon. Judge Sherry Fallon entered a scheduling order as follows: -- All motions to join other parties, and to amend or supplement the pleadings shall be filed on or before March 6, 2026. -- All fact discovery shall be initiated on or before Aug. 31, 2026. -- The initial Federal Rule (26)(a)(2) disclosure of expert testimony is due on or before Oct. 5, 2026. -- Joint interim report due March 16, 2026. -- Plaintiffs' motion, if any, for Rule 23 class certification, shall be filed on or before Jan. 12, 2027 The Plaintiff FAC seeks to bring collective action claims under the federal Age Discrimination in Employment Act. RTX manufactures aircraft engines, avionics, aerostructures, cybersecurity solutions, guided missiles, air defense systems, satellites, and drones. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ngyMhW at no extra charge.[CC] RXO LAST: Richardson Seeks Rule 23 Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as ISAIAH RICHARDSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. RXO LAST MILE, INC.; and RXO, INC., Case No. 2:25-cv-02996-TLP-cgc (W.D. Tenn.), the Plaintiff asks the Court to enter an order granting Rule 23 certification for the Tennessee class. The Plaintiff, moves the Court pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 to certify a Tennessee Rule 23 Class for violations of Tennessee wage and labor laws, including: -- Tennessee Wage Regulations Act (Tenn. Code Ann. § 50-2-101) – unpaid wages -- Tennessee common law - quantum meruit, unjust enrichment The Proposed Class Definition is: "All individuals who performed last-mile delivery services for RXO in Tennessee under the Delivery Service Agreement (DSA) or Lease Agreement from Nov. 10, 2022, to present, and were classified as independent contractors." RXO provides third-party logistics and last mile delivery services. A copy of the Plaintiff's motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Fewt8H at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff appears pro se: Isaiah Richardson 4986 Pheasant Ridge Cv Memphis, TN 38141 E-mail: R.isaiah@@ymail.com SAGENT TREATMENT: Discloses Patients' Info to Google, Ward Says --------------------------------------------------------------- SARA WARD, PER SANDUM, and JADE RUCINSKI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. SAGENT TREATMENT, LLC d/b/a SAGENT BEHAVIORAL HEALTH, Defendant, Case No. 0:25-cv-04167-KMM-EMB (D. Minn., October 31, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for common law invasion of privacy, negligence, breach of implied contract, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act and the Minnesota Wiretap Statute. According to the complaint, the Defendant allows third parties, including Alphabet, Inc. ("Google") to intercept potential patients' private personal and health information on its website, www.sagentbh.com, without prior consent. The Defendant secretly installed tracking technologies on its website which serve to track and disclose its patients' activity, in real time, including their protected health information (PHI) and personally identifiable information (PII), to Google, suit says. In doing so, the Defendant undermined the importance of safeguarding the identities and personal medical information of individuals seeking mental services and breached its potential patients' trust, violating state and federal law. Sagent Treatment, LLC, doing business as Sagent Behavioral Health, is a mental healthcare provider based in New Brighton, Minnesota. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jacob R. Rusch, Esq. Zackary S. Kaylor, Esq. JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC 444 Cedar Street, Suite 1800 Saint Paul, MN 55101 Telephone: (612) 436-1800 Email: jrusch@johnsonbecker.com zkaylor@johnsonbecker.com - and - David S. Almeida, Esq. Christopher M. Nienhaus, Esq. ALMEIDA LAW GROUP LLC 849 W. Webster Ave. Chicago, IL 60614 Telephone: (708) 529-5418 Email: david@almeidalawgroup.com chris@almeidalawgroup.com SANGAMON COUNTY, IL: Bid for Class Certification Due June 18, 2027 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as Link, et al., v. County of Sangamon, Case No. 3:25-cv-03246 (C.D. Ill., Filed Aug. 22, 2025), the Hon. Judge Colleen R. Lawless entered an order setting the following deadlines: -- Initial disclosures due by Jan. 30, 2026 -- Initial interrogatories and requests to produce served by Feb. 16, 2026 -- The Plaintiffs' depositions taken by May 8. 2026 -- The Defendants' depositions taken by July 8. 2026 -- Third Party actions and amendment of pleadings by Aug. 14. 2026 -- The Plaintiffs disclose experts by Oct. 30, 2026 -- The Plaintiffs disclose expert reports by Oct. 30, 2026 -- The Plaintiffs' experts deposed by Dec. 31, 2026 -- The Defendants disclose experts by Jan. 29, 2027 -- The Defendants disclose expert reports by Jan. 29, 2027 -- The Defendants' experts deposed by April 2, 2027 -- All discovery completed by May 28, 2027 -- The Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification including Memorandum in Support by June 18, 2027 -- The Defendants' Memorandum in Opposition to Class Certification by July 16, 2027 -- The Plaintiffs' Reply, if any, by Aug. 6, 2025 -- Case dispositive motions by Sept. 3, 2026 -- Responses by Oct. 1, 2027 -- Replies, if any, by Oct. 2, 2027 The suit alleges violation of the Civil Rights Act. Sangamon is a county located near the center of the U.S. state of Illinois.[CC] SERVICEQUIK INC: Court Extends Time to File Class Cert Bid ---------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Connor v. Servicequik, Inc., Case No. 1:24-cv-02286 (D. Colo., Filed Aug. 19, 2024), the Hon. Judge Charlotte N. Sweeney entered an order granting unopposed motion for extension of time to seek class certification. The deadline for filing a class certification motion will be extended to align with the parties' deadline to file dispositive motions. The suit alleges violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).[CC] SHAUN FERGUSON: Williams Seeks Ruling on Pending Bids ----------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as REMINGTYN A. WILLIAMS, et al, v. SHAUN FERGUSON, et al. Case No. 2:21-cv-00852-DJP-MBN (E.D. La.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order granting motion ex parte to issue a ruling on the following pending motions: -- The Plaintiffs request rulings on these matters given the approaching trial date, currently scheduled for April 27, 2026. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs' motion for class certification is filed April 17, 2024. The Defendants filed their opposition on July 2, 2024. The Plaintiffs filed a reply on July 9, 2024. The Defendants' motion for summary judgment filed on Aug. 28, 2024. The Plaintiffs filed their opposition on Sept. 10, 2024. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=YbtwY6 at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Jahmy S. Graham, Esq. Mary C. Biscoe-Hall, Esq. Jennifer E. Ciarrocchi, Esq. Ashia Crooms-Carpenter, Esq. NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP 19191 S. Vermont Avenue, Suite 900 Torrance, CA 90502 Telephone: (424) 221-2700 E-mail: jahmy.Graham@nelsonmullins.com mary.biscoehall@nelsonmullins.com Jennifer.ciarrochi@nelsonmullins.com ashia.carpenter@nelsonmullins.com - and - Stephanie Willis, Esq. Nora Ahmed, Esq. Nora Ahmed, Esq. ACLU FOUNDATION OF LOUISIANA 1340 Poydras St., Suite 2160 New Orleans, LA 70156 Telephone: (504) 522-0628 E-mail: swillis@laaclu.org nahmed@laaclu.org SIRIUS XM: Class Settlement in Campbell Suit Gets Initial Nod ------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as JULIE CAMPBELL, KEITH SADAUSKAS, DIANA BICKFORD and KERRIE MULHOLLAND, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, v. SIRIUS XM RADIO, INC., Case No. 2:22-cv-02261-CSB-EIL (C.D. Ill.), the Hon. Judge Colin Bruce entered an order granting preliminary approval of class action settlement: 1. The Court preliminarily certifies, for settlement purposes only, the following Settlement Class as defined in the Settlement Agreement: "All natural persons in the United States: (1) who received more than one telephone solicitation call in a 12-month period between Apr. 27, 2019 and Oct. 31, 2025 on their landline, wireless, cell or mobile telephone numbers made by or on behalf of Sirius XM, (2) where such calls were received more than 31 days after registering their telephone number with the National Do-Not-Call Registry, and (3) the person was not a self-paying Sirius XM subscriber at the time of the first call or before the start of the second call." "All natural persons in the United States: (1) who received more than one telephone solicitation call in a 12-month period between Apr. 27, 2019 and Oct. 31, 2025 on their landline, wireless, cell or mobile telephone numbers made by or on behalf of Sirius XM, and (2) where such calls were received after the person asked to register the landline, wireless, cell or mobile telephone number on which they received those telephone calls on Sirius XM's internal Do- Not-Call list." Excluded from the Settlement Class are: any employees, officers, directors of the Defendant, and attorneys appearing in this case, and any judge assigned to hear this action, and their immediate family and staff. 2. The Court appoints the Plaintiffs Julie Campbell, Diana Bickford and Kerrie Mulholland as the class representatives for the Settlement Class. 3. The Court appoints Jarrett L. Ellzey of Ellzey & Associates, PLLC; Daniel M. Hutchinson of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP; Mason A. Barney of Siri & Glimstad LLP; and Carl R. Draper of Feldman Wasser Draper & Cox as Class Counsels for the Settlement. 4. The Court will hold a Final Approval Hearing on March 30, 2026 at 1:15 p.m. C.S.T. via Zoom teleconference. Sirius operates as a satellite radio broadcasting company. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=ZCht1Y at no extra charge.[CC] SNAP INC: Awaits Court OK of Settlement in Securities Suit ---------------------------------------------------------- Snap Inc. disclosed in a Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it is awaiting court approval of a settlement in the federal securities class action lawsuit pending in a California court. "On November 11, 2021, we, and certain of our officers, were named as defendants in a federal securities class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The lawsuit was purportedly brought on behalf of purchasers of our Class A common stock. The lawsuit alleges that we and certain of our officers made false or misleading statements and omissions concerning the impact that Apple's App Tracking Transparency framework would have on our business. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages and other relief. "We recently settled this case, but that settlement is subject to court approval. If the settlement is not approved, we will continue to litigate the case. Although we believe we have meritorious defenses to the lawsuit, litigation is inherently uncertain and an unfavorable outcome could seriously harm our business," the Company stated. SNAP INC: Continues to Defend Platform-related Suits ---------------------------------------------------- Snap Inc. disclosed in a Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it continues to defend itself against numerous lawsuits, including a multi-district litigation, alleging that the design and use of the Company's platform, and those of our competitors, is addictive and harmful to users. "Beginning on January 20, 2022, we were named as a defendant in various federal and state courts by plaintiffs alleging that the design and use of our platform, and those of our competitors, is addictive and harmful to users, with most of the cases focused on mental health harms and users under 18-years old. The majority of cases have been consolidated in either a federal Multi-District Litigation pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, or MDL, or a California Judicial Council Coordinated Proceeding, or JCCP, pending in the Complex Division of the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Trials are scheduled for the individual plaintiff bellwether cases in the JCCP starting in January 2026. A putative class action asserting similar allegations was also filed in Canada. "Numerous school districts, municipalities and tribal nations have filed public nuisance and other claims based on similar allegations, which also were consolidated in either the MDL or JCCP. In the JCCP proceeding, the court dismissed the school district and municipality plaintiffs' claims without prejudice, which ruling is now on appeal. Some of those dismissed plaintiffs have refiled their claims in the MDL or other venue. Trials are scheduled for the school district bellwether cases in the MDL starting in June 2026. We have received similar claims in Canada and Israel. "Beginning on January 30, 2024, certain U.S. state attorneys general have filed lawsuits against us in their respective state courts making similar allegations as well as allegations regarding harmful and mature content, child safety concerns, sexual exploitation of minors, misuse by bad actors, unlawful data collection, privacy violations, and allegedly misleading safety and marketing campaigns. These lawsuits assert various legal claims, including violations of state consumer protection laws, unfair business practices, product liability, and negligence. "On October 13, 2022, we were named as a defendant in a lawsuit in Los Angeles Superior Court alleging that we should be responsible for the deaths of young people who died from ingesting fatal doses of fentanyl after allegedly communicating on Snapchat with drug dealers concerning drug transactions. Other similar lawsuits were filed on behalf of other families, which were coordinated with the first-filed case and assigned to the same judge. On January 2, 2024, the judge granted in part and overruled in part our demurrer to the lawsuit, allowing several of the claims to proceed. "On January 16, 2025, the U.S. Federal Trade Commission referred a complaint against us to the Department of Justice that pertains to our deployment of our My AI feature and the allegedly resulting risks of harm to young users. The DOJ did not act on the referred complaint within the time defined by statute, thereby returning the complaint to the FTC's jurisdiction. The FTC has not taken further action to advance the complaint, and we have no indication they will do so. "We believe we have meritorious defenses to these lawsuits, and plan to continue to defend them vigorously, but litigation is inherently uncertain and an unfavorable outcome, including substantial potential damages, penalties, fines and injunctive relief, could seriously harm our business. "We are also subject to government investigations and inquiries from multiple regulators in various jurisdictions globally concerning the use of our products and features, and the alleged mental and physical health and safety impacts on users, in particular younger users. We plan to continue to engage with the regulators productively and believe we have meritorious defenses to any legal proceedings that may arise out of these investigations and inquiries, but any legal proceedings that may arise are inherently uncertain and an unfavorable outcome, including substantial potential damages, penalties, fines and injunctive relief, could seriously harm our business. Any violation of existing or future regulatory orders or consent decrees, or new regulatory investigations or proceedings, could subject us to substantial monetary fines and other penalties that could seriously harm our business. "We are currently involved in, and may in the future be involved in, legal proceedings, claims, inquiries, and investigations in the ordinary course of our business, including claims for infringing intellectual property rights related to our products and the content contributed by our users and partners. Although the results of these proceedings, claims, inquiries, and investigations cannot be predicted with certainty, we do not believe that the final outcome of these matters is reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. Regardless of final outcomes, however, any such proceedings, claims, inquiries, and investigations may nonetheless impose a significant burden on management and employees and may come with costly defense costs or unfavorable preliminary and interim rulings," the Company stated. SNAP INC: Continues to Defend Securities Suit in California ----------------------------------------------------------- Snap Inc. disclosed in a Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it continues to defend itself against a federal securities class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California purportedly on behalf of purchasers of our Class A common stock. "On August 21, 2025, we, and certain of our officers, were named as defendants in a federal securities class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The lawsuit was purportedly brought on behalf of purchasers of our Class A common stock. The lawsuit alleges that we and certain of our officers made false or misleading statements concerning an ad platform change that impacted revenue in the first half of 2025. Plaintiffs seek monetary damages and other relief. "We believe we have meritorious defenses to the lawsuit, and will defend it vigorously, but litigation is inherently uncertain, and an unfavorable outcome could seriously harm our business," the Company stated. SPOTIFY USA: Artificially Inflates Streamed Music, Collins Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- ERIC DWAYNE COLLINS a/k/a "RBX," individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SPOTIFY USA, INC., SPOTIFY TECHNOLOGY, SA, and SPOTIFY AB, Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-10525 (C.D. Cal., November 2, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for negligence and violation of Unfair Competition Law. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful, deceptive and fraudulent practice of artificially inflating the number of instances in which music is streamed from Spotify. According to the complaint, the Defendants use bots to artificially increase the number of music streams for certain artists at the expense of the Plaintiff and other rights holders whose revenue shares are diminished by this unlawful streaming fraud. As a result of the Defendants' insufficient measures and/or their turning a blind eye, streaming fraud is rampant, accounting for a substantial percentage of the total music streams on Spotify. Spotify USA, Inc. is an audio streaming subscription service provider, headquartered in New York, New York. Spotify Technology, SA is the parent company of Spotify USA, Inc. and Spotify AB, headquartered in Stockholm, Sweden. Spotify AB is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Spotify Technology SA. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Daniel Alberstone, Esq. Mark Pifko, Esq. Peter Klausner, Esq. BARON & BUDD, PC 15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600 Los Angeles, CA 91436 Telephone: (818) 839-2333 Email: dalberstone@baronbudd.com mpifko@baronbudd.com pklausner@baronbudd.com - and - Anthony Irpino, Esq. Pearl Robertson, Esq. IRPINO LAW FIRM, LLC 2216 Magazine Street New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 525-1500 Email: airpino@irpinolaw.com probertson@irpinolaw.com STAR FUTURE INC: White Files Suit in Cal. Super. Ct. ---------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Star Future, Inc. The case is styled as Kiara White, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Star Future, Inc., Case No. 25CV152948 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda Cty., Nov. 4, 2025). The case type is stated as "Other Employment Complaint Case." Star Future -- https://autismstarfuture.com/ -- provides Center-based and In-home behavior & Speech & occupational treatment to children such as Autism, ADHD, etc.[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 STEAM LOGISTICS: Court Dismisses "Shelton" ------------------------------------------ In the case captioned as Blanche Shelton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Steam Logistics, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:24-cv-393 (E.D. Tenn.), Judge Curtis L. Collier of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Chattanooga granted the parties' joint motion for entry of deadlines and permission to dismiss the action without settlement approval. Defendant sells and provides freight brokerage and logistics services to help its customers transport commodities across multiple states. Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a sales coordinator in Chattanooga, Tennessee, from approximately March 2022 to July 2023. Plaintiff alleged Defendant required her and other sales coordinators to work long hours to handle all shipment-related tasks, including those occurring late in the evening and early in the morning, and to hit certain sales and prospecting targets. She alleged Defendant violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. Section 201 et seq. by allowing her and other sales coordinators to work more than forty hours per week without overtime pay. Plaintiff brought this collective action individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated to recover unpaid overtime pay from Defendant on December 19, 2024. On March 27, 2025, the Court held a scheduling conference where the parties indicated they were working cooperatively to set a mediation for this case. On May 1, 2025, the parties renewed their joint motion for approval of court-authorized notice to potential plaintiffs, which the Court granted on June 2, 2025. From June 16, 2025, to September 4, 2025, Plaintiff notified the Court that numerous plaintiffs had opted in to the lawsuit. On September 24, 2025, the parties attended a full-day mediation with third-party neutral John Harrison. The mediation was successful and the parties agreed to monetary terms of a settlement. Following mediation, the parties executed a terms sheet on non-monetary terms on September 30, 2025. The parties moved the Court for permission to dismiss the case by stipulation without court approval of the settlement. The parties proposed that they would: (1) finalize the terms of the settlement agreement on or before October 22, 2025; (2) disseminate the notice of the settlement to each of the 124 plaintiffs on or before November 5, 2025; and (3) file a stipulation of dismissal on or about January 14, 2026. The Court noted that generally, parties may resolve a matter privately without a court order by filing a stipulation of dismissal signed by all parties who have appeared. However, the right to dismiss a case by stipulation is subject to Rules 23(e), 23.1(c), 23.2, and 66 and any applicable federal statute. The question presented was whether the FLSA is one of those federal statutes that requires judicial approval of settlement agreements. The Court acknowledged there is no authority from the Sixth Circuit addressing whether an FLSA settlement must be judicially approved to be valid. The Court examined a recent line of district court decisions within this Circuit that have held that judicial approval is not required, and in some cases, have held that the district court lacks authority to provide it. The lead case was Gilstrap v. Sushinati LLC, 734 F. Supp. 3d 710 (S.D. Ohio 2024), which found there was nothing in the FLSA's text or in binding case law that required, or even allowed, district courts authority to approve or to reject FLSA settlements. The district court in Gilstrap also found that mandatory court approval of these settlements would be incompatible with Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides that parties may freely dismiss lawsuits without court approval. The Court noted that one district court in this Circuit disagreed with Gilstrap and found that the purpose, text, and history of the FLSA, as well as policy considerations, support a requirement of judicial approval. However, the Court found Gilstrap and Askew persuasive. The Court determined that nothing in the text of the FLSA, or in any Sixth Circuit case, requires or even authorizes court approval for private-party FLSA settlement agreements. A court should not lightly assume that Congress has omitted from its adopted text requirements that it nonetheless intends to apply. The text of the FLSA contains no provision limiting dismissal or displacing Rule 41(a)(1)(A). The Court disagreed with policy-based arguments and found there is a meaningful distinction between a Rule 23 class action and an FLSA collective action. Unlike a Rule 23 class action, an FLSA collective action is not representative, meaning that all plaintiffs in an FLSA action must affirmatively choose to become parties by opting into the collective action. Thus, the principal-agent problems involving absent class members are not as much of a concern in an FLSA collective action. Additionally, extra procedural protections are generally not necessary in FLSA collective actions because there is usually nothing to support the fear that employees will be coerced into harmful settlements. The Court found the policy rationales in play counsel against a court-approval regime, not in favor of it. There is often more harm done to employees by forcing satisfied parties to keep litigating against their wishes. Even if the policy rationales were in favor of a court-approval regime, courts cannot impose their own policy preferences. Policy considerations ordinarily fall to the legislative branch. Unless or until Congress amends the FLSA or either the Sixth Circuit or the Supreme Court gives guidance to whether court approval for FLSA settlement agreements is required, the Court found it need not approve the FLSA settlement agreement. Accordingly, the Court granted the parties' joint motion. The parties shall privately finalize their settlement and file a stipulation of dismissal on or about January 14, 2026. A copy of the Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=la9NIc from PacerMonitor.com STEELE-WEDDLE RUNNING: Hampton Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------------- PHYLLIS HAMPTON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated Plaintiff v. Steele-Weddle Running Centre Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13580 (N.D. Ill., November 5, 2025) is a civil rights action against Steele-Weddle Running Centre for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired persons in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. On June 12, 2025, the Plaintiff searched Google for online stores offering athletic footwear and found the Defendant's website. While exploring their offerings, she decided to purchase the Hoka Women's Clifton, a lightweight cushioned running shoe. However, as she tried to navigate the website and complete her purchase, she encountered accessibility barriers that significantly hindered her progress. Specifically, when she was browsing the Product Detail page, the color buttons did not announce their role. As a result, she did not know how the element would behave after activation, whether the page would reload or remain the same. In addition, the state was not announced, which made it impossible for her to know if she had selected the desired product color correctly, says the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in Steele-Weddle Running Centre's policies, practices, and procedures so that its website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. This complaint also seeks compensatory damages to compensate Class members for having been subjected to unlawful discrimination. Steele-Weddle Running Centre Inc. operates the website that offers athletic footwear for men and women.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Alison Chan, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Office: (844) 731-3343 Direct: (929) 442-2154 E-mail: Achan@ealg.law STRATEGY INC: Continues to Defend Dodge Class Suit in Delaware -------------------------------------------------------------- Strategy Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2025 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 3, 2025, that the Company continues to defend itself from the Dodge class suit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. Dodge Class Action. On July 21, 2025, David Dodge filed a purported class action lawsuit in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware against the Company and the Company's board of directors alleging violations of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the "DGCL"), and asserting a claim against the Company's board of directors for breach of fiduciary duty in connection with the purported DGCL violation. Plaintiff Dodge purports to assert claims on behalf of himself and similarly situated holders of the Company's common stock alleging that pursuant to Section 242 of the DGCL ("Section 242"), the holders of the Company's common stock were entitled to vote on the STRK Amendment (as defined in Note 9, Redeemable Preferred Stock) the Company filed on July 7, 2025 with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware. Refer to Note 9, Redeemable Preferred Stock, for additional information on the STRK Amendment. Plaintiff Dodge seeks, among other things, an order (i) finding, determining and declaring that the Company violated Section 242; (ii) finding, determining and declaring that the board of directors has breached its fiduciary duties; (iii) deeming the STRK Amendment ineffective and requiring that the Company file a certificate of correction with the Delaware Secretary of State invalidating the STRK Amendment; (iv) awarding unspecified damages to Plaintiff Dodge and the class, including interest; (v) awarding attorneys' fees and costs; and (vi) granting other relief. At this time, the Company cannot predict the outcome or provide a reasonable estimate or range of estimates of the possible outcome or loss, if any, in this matter. Strategy Inc. operates a bitcoin treasury company. The Company offers an equity and fixed income instruments to provide investors varying degrees of economic exposure to bitcoin, as well as develops enterprise analytics software to explore improvement in bitcoin applications. Strategy serves customers worldwide. [BN] SUNFLOWER LIMITED: Faces Damron Suit Over Illegal Casino Websites ----------------------------------------------------------------- DILLON DAMRON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SUNFLOWER LIMITED and SUNFLOWER TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-00992 (D. Utah, November 2, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violation of Utah's Gambling Act. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged illegal gambling operation in Utah through their online sweepstakes casinos available at www.crowncoinscasino.com and www.icasino.com. According to the complaint, the websites offer chance games, which are already declared unlawful and unconstitutional in Utah. As a result of the Defendants' misconduct, the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals wagered money or other things of value on the Defendants' casino websites and lost. Sunflower Limited is a casino website operator, with a place of business in Arlington, Virginia. Sunflower Technology, Inc. is a casino website operator, with a place of business in Fredericksburg, Virginia. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elliot O. Jackson, Esq. HEDIN LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 Email: ejackson@hedinllp.com - and - David W. Scofield, Esq. PETERS SCOFIELD, Esq. 7430 Creek Road, Suite 303 Sandy, UT 84093 Telephone: (801) 322-2002 Email: dws@psplawyers.com - and - Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. GUCOVSCHI ROZENSHTEYN, PLLC 140 Broadway, FL 46 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 Email: adrian@gr-firm.com SUNFLOWER LTD: Franklin Sues Over Illegal Online Gambling --------------------------------------------------------- CALEB FRANKLIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. SUNFLOWER LTD., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-00160-GNS (D. Ky., Nov. 6, 2025) alleges that the Defendant has violated Kentucky law by operating an online casino. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendant's online casino games constitute gambling because the players provide consideration, e.g., purchase coins and wager the coins, and by an element of chance, e.g., by spinning a virtual slot machine, which create a right to some things of value, e.g., additional coins that would otherwise be purchased for cash and that award additional replays. As a direct and proximate result of the Defendant's operation of its online casino, the Plaintiff and each member of the Class have lost money wagering on Defendant's games of chance, says the suit. Sunflower Ltd. is a games software development Company, owning and operating the www.crowncoinscasino.com website. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Philip G. Fairbanks, Esq. Bartley K. Hagerman, Esq. MEHR FAIRBANKS TRIAL LAWYERS, PLLC 201 West Short Street, Suite 800 Lexington, KY 40507 Telephone: (859) 225-3731 Facsimile: (859) 225-3830 Email: pgf@austinmehr.com bkh@austinmehr.com - and - Philip L. Fraietta, Esq. Matthew A. Girardi, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 50 Main Street, Suite 475 White Plains, NY 10606 Telephone: (914) 874-0710 Facsimile: (914) 206-3656 Email: pfraietta@bursor.com - and - Alec M. Leslie, Esq. Julian C. Diamond, Esq. BURSOR & FISHER, P.A. 1330 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (646) 837-7150 Facsimile: (212) 989-9163 E-mail: aleslie@bursor.com SUNPATH LTD: Morales Loses Bid for Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as KURT MORALES II, et al., individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. SUNPATH LTD., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01376-JLH-SRF (D. Del.), the Hon. Judge Jennifer L. Hall entered an order adopting report and recommendation as follows: -- The Objections are overruled; -- Judge Fallon's report and recommendation is adopted-in-part insofar as it concludes (i) that class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) is inappropriate because the Plaintiffs failed to satisfy the predominance requirement and (ii) that certification under Rule 23(b)(2) is also inappropriate; and -- the motion for class certification is denied. The Court further entered an order that, on or before Nov. 21, 2025, the parties shall meet and confer and submit a joint status letter setting forth their position(s) regarding how this action should proceed. The Court finally ordered that the pretrial conference currently scheduled for Dec. 19, 2025, and the trial currently scheduled for Jan. 5, 2026, are continued to a date to be determined after the Court receives the parties' joint status report. Sunpath is a solar installation company. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=vx4MWo at no extra charge.[CC] SUPERIOR AIR-GROUND: Filing for Class Cert. bid Due Feb. 20, 2026 ----------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Bernstein v. Superior Air-Ground Ambulance Service of Wisconsin Inc., Case No. 2:24-cv-00892 (E.D. Wisc., Filed July 16, 2024), the Hon. Judge Pamela Pepper entered an order that the Plaintiff must file her motion for class certification by the end of the day on Feb. 20, 2026. The defendant's response is due within 30 days of service of the plaintiff's motion. The plaintiff may file a reply within 14 days of service of the Defendant's response. The parties filed an amended Rule 26(f) report, indicating they've agreed on a deadline for the plaintiff to file her motion for class certification and briefing on the motion. The suit alleges violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). The Defendant offers air and ground transport services.[CC] TECH ZONE: Gardner Sues Over Illegal Online Casino Operation ------------------------------------------------------------ BAILEY GARDNER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TECH ZONE INC.; ANDEN ONLINE N.V.; and ANDEN HOLDINGS LIMITED, Defendant, Case No. 2:25-cv-01013 (D. Utah, November 5, 2025) is a class action complaint brought by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, to redress Defendants' alleged widespread violations of Utah's Gambling Act. The Defendants own, operate, and receive revenue from the online casinos available at www.yabbycasino.com, www.limitlesscasino.com, www.bonusblitz.com, www.pacificspins.com, and www.orbitspins.com, where they offer casino-style slots, table games, and video poker to anyone interested in wagering money to play them (the "Tech Zone Gambling Platform"). During the applicable three-year period preceding this action, the Defendants have systematically accepted wagers from Utah residents -- many of whom, including Plaintiff, have lost significant sums of their hard-earned money playing the games offered on the Tech Zone Gambling Platform -- and have reaped enormous profits from the losses sustained by these people, says the suit. Through their widespread marketing and promotional campaigns, the Defendants have advertised and presented the Tech Zone Gambling Platform to persons in Utah as a legitimate online business, giving it an aura of legitimacy and legality to Plaintiff and Class members. In reality, the Platform is an illegal, unregulated gambling enterprise. By making the Tech Zone Gambling Platform available in Utah, and receiving millions of dollars in revenue from the losses sustained on the Tech Zone Gambling Platform by Utah residents, Defendants directly violated the state law on an enormous scale, the suit alleges. Tech Zone Inc. is a private company organized and existing under the laws of Comoros, with a place of business in Comoros.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elliot O. Jackson, Esq. HEDIN LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140 Miami, FL 33131-3302 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 E-mail: ejackson@hedinllp.com - and - David W. Scofield, Esq. PETERS ❘ SCOFIELD A Professional Corporation 7430 Creek Road, Suite 303 Sandy, UT 84093-6160 Telephone: (801) 322-2002 E-mail: dws@psplawyers.com - and - Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. GUCOVSCHI LAW FIRM, PLLC 140 Broadway, Fl 46 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 E-mail: adrian@gr-firm.com TRADER JOE'S: Palacios Suit Removed to S.D. California ------------------------------------------------------ The case styled as Mario Palacios, individually and on behalf of all those similarly situated v. Trader Joe's Company, Inc., Case No. 25STCV28613 was transferred from the Los Angeles Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California on Nov. 4, 2025. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:25-cv-10584 to the proceeding. The nature of suit is stated as Other Fraud. Trader Joe's -- https://www.traderjoes.com/home -- is an American chain of grocery stores headquartered in Monrovia, California.[BN] The Plaintiff appears pro se. The Defendants are represented by: Dawn Sestito, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS 400 South Hope Street, Suite 1050 Los Angeles, CA 90071-2899 Phone: (213) 430-6000 Email: dsestito@omm.com TRIPLE CANOPY: Bid for Conditional Certification Due Feb. 13, 2026 ------------------------------------------------------------------ In the class action lawsuit captioned as SHYHIRA JACKSON v. TRIPLE CANOPY, INC. Case No. 2:25-cv-04268-MAK (E.D. Pa.), the Hon. Judge Kearney entered an order as follows: -- All motions to further amend the pleadings and to join or add additional parties shall be filed by Jan. 7, 2026, with a response filed no later than Jan. 13, 2026. -- All fact and expert discovery shall be served, noticed and completed by July 3, 2026 -- The Plaintiff leave to move for conditional certification under the Fair Labor Standards Act by no later than Feb. 13, 2026 (providing Plaintiff with her requested 120 days of discovery before moving for relief) with a response due no later than Feb. 23, 2026. -- The Plaintiff leave to move for class certification of the state law claims as warranted by no later than May 1, 2026, with a response due ten calendar thereafter. -- All motions for summary judgment or under Federal Rule of Evidence 702 may be filed no later than July 10, 2026. -- Responses may be filed no later than July 22, 2026 Triple is an American private security company and private military company. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=zqObbk at no extra charge.[CC] TROPHYSMACK INC: Johnson Files TCPA Suit in C.D. California ----------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Trophysmack, Inc. The case is styled as Brandon Johnson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Trophysmack, Inc., Case No. 8:25-cv-02474 (C.D. Cal., Nov. 4, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment. TrophySmack -- https://www.trophysmack.com/ -- is the ultimate destination for custom fantasy football trophies, baseball trophies, basketball trophies, and more.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott A. Edelsberg, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW PA 20900 NE 30th Avenue, Suite 417 Aventura, FL 33180 Phone: (305) 975-3320 Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com TYRONE OLIVER: Benjamin Suit Seeks to Certify Two Classes --------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ISIS BENJAMIN; FANTASIA HORTON; NAEOMI MADISON; BRYNN WILSON; and JOHN DOE; on behalf of themselves and all persons similarly situated, v. COMMISSIONER TYRONE OLIVER, in his official capacity; ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER RANDY SAULS, in his official capacity; STATEWIDE MEDICAL DIRECTOR DR. MARLAH MARDIS, in her official capacity; and CENTURION OF GEORGIA, LLC, Case No. 1:25-cv-04470-VMC (N.D. Ga.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to enter an order certifying the Receiving Class and the Requesting Class for purposes of entering a permanent injunction against SB185's blanket ban on hormone therapy. The Receiving Class comprises: "All individuals incarcerated in GDC facilities who are receiving hormone therapy now proscribed by S.B. 185 or who were receiving hormone therapy proscribed by S.B. 185 on May 8, 2025." The Requesting Class comprises : "All individuals incarcerated in GDC facilities not in the Receiving Class who identify as transgender and request hormone treatment now proscribed by S.B. 185." The requested class certification is identical to the provisional classes the Court certified on the Plaintiffs' motion for provisional class certification in connection with their motion for preliminary injunction. A copy of the Plaintiffs' motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=HVPq5Z at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Emily C. R. Early, Esq. A. Chinyere Ezie, Esq. Celine Zhu, Esq. Kayla Vinson, Esq. D. Korbin Felder, Esq. CENTER FOR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS 666 Broadway, 7th Floor New York, NY 10012 Telephone: (212) 614-6464 E-mail: eearly@ccrjustice.org cezie@ccrjustice.org czhu@ccrjustice.org kfelder@ccrjustice.org kvinson@ccrjustice.org - and - Amanda Kay Seals, Esq. Matthew R. Sellers, Esq. BONDURANT, MIXSON & ELMORE, LLP 1201 W Peachtree St NW, Suite 3900 Atlanta, GA 30309 Telephone: (404) 881-4100 Facsimile: (404) 881-4111 E-mail: seals@bmelaw.com sellers@bmelaw.com UNICOIN INC: Arochi Sues Over Crypto Token Fraudulent Scheme ------------------------------------------------------------ GERMAN AROCHI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. UNICOIN, INC. f/k/a TransparentBusiness, Inc.; ALEXANDER KONANYKHIN; MARIA SILVINA MOSCHINI; ALEJANDRO DOMINGUEZ; and RICHARD DEVLIN, Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-09273 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 6, 2025) alleges violation of the Securities Act of 1933, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants orchestrated and engaged in a fraudulent scheme to market and sell Certificates that promised to provide purchasers with "asset-backed" and "equity-backed" cryptocurrency tokens ("Unicoin tokens"), if and when such tokens were created. The Defendants falsely represented the Certificates as "asset-backed" and "equity-backed," when in reality, Defendants' representations were materially false and misleading, as Unicoin held only a fraction of the real estate it claimed to own, and the Unicoin tokens at the center of the scheme were never issued. The Defendants' extensive marketing campaign conveyed the false and misleading impression that the Unicoin Rights Certificates constituted safe, legally compliant, and highly sought-after "next-generation" crypto assets. In reality, however, the Unicoin Rights Certificates were nothing more than worthless unregistered securities that Defendants issued in violation of state and federal law, and almost everything that Defendants said when promoting them to unsuspecting investors was a lie, alleges the suit. Unicoin Inc. is a technology company operating in the digital assets and crypto-currency markets. The Company seeks to minimize volatility and improve transparency and compliance for investors. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Marc H. Edelson, Esq. Eric Lechtzin, Esq. EDELSON LECHTZIN LLP 411 S. State Street, Suite N-300 Newtown, PA 18940 Telephone: (215) 867-2399 Email: medelson@edelson-law.com elechtzin@edelson-law.com UNITED BANK: $2MM Settlement in Davis Suit Gets Initial Nod ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as RUTH DAVIS and JIM OGLETREE, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, v. UNITED BANK CORPORATION RETIREMENT PLAN COMMITTEE, JENNIFER W. EAVENSON, JAMES J. EDWARDS, JR., J. JOSEPH EDWARDS, SR., ALLIE E. ARMISTEAD, CHRISTOPHER C. EDWARDS, JOHN W EDWARDS, JR., LAURIE E. FISHER, C. THOMAS HOPKINS, JR., STEVE C. KEADLE, DOUGLAS J. TUTTLE, AND FORREST A. WATSON, JR., UNITED BANK CORPORATION, UNITED BANK, JOHN DOES 1-10, and JANE DOES 1-10. Defendant, and THE UNITED BANK EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN, Case No. 5:24-cv-00328-MTT (M.D. Ga.), the Hon. Judge Marc Treadwell entered an order certifying class and granting preliminary approval of class action settlement. The case came before the Court on Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion for Class Certification, and Unopposed Motion for Preliminary Approval of Class Action Settlement. 1. Counts I through IX in the Complaint (the "Class Claims") are preliminarily certified as a class action for settlement purposes pursuant to Rule 23(b)(1) and (b)(2) on behalf of the following Class: "All participants in the United Bank Corporation Employee Stock Ownership Plan who terminated employment with UBC and who had not reached age 65 when the UBC stock in their Plan account was liquidated (in whole or in part) between Sept. 23, 2021 and Oct. 31, 2021, and the beneficiaries of such participants, except the Excluded Persons. "Excluded Persons" means the following persons are excluded from the Class: (1) the Defendants and their immediate families, (2) any other fiduciaries of the Plan and their immediate families; (3) the officers and directors of United Bank Corporation and their immediate families; (4) the directors and executive officers of United Bank and (5) the legal representatives, successors, and assigns of any such excluded persons. 2. The proposed Settlement provides substantial relief to the Class and falls within the range of reason. The monetary component of the Settlement Agreement provides for payment of $2,000,000.00 to a settlement fund for the benefit of the Class, which Class Counsel represents is approximately 43% of the maximum amount that Class members could potentially recover at trial based on the valuation claims. 3. Class Counsel will file any Motion for Attorneys' fees, expenses and costs, pursuant to Section VII.1, by Jan. 29, 2026. 4. Class Counsel shall file a Motion for final approval of the settlement by March 5, 2026. 5. The Court will hold a final fairness hearing on March 26, 2026 at 10:00 a.m. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=bSOD22 at no extra charge.[CC] UNIVERSAL ACCOUNTING CENTER: King Files FLSA Suit in D. Utah ------------------------------------------------------------ A class action lawsuit has been filed against Universal Accounting Center, Inc. The case is styled as Deborah King, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Universal Accounting Center, Inc., Case No. 2:25-cv-01009 (D. Utah, Nov. 5, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act for Denial of Overtime Compensation. Universal Accounting -- https://universalaccounting.com/ -- offers seminars, interactive tutorial software, training guides and booklets, as well as personal coaching and even pre-packaged marketing programs to help its students be successful.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Andrew G. Deiss, Esq. DEISS LAW PC 10 W. 100 S., Ste 700 Salt Lake City, UT 84101 Phone: (801) 433-0226 Email: deiss@deisslaw.com - and - Seth A. Nichamoff, Esq. NICHAMOFF LAW PC 2444 Times Blvd., Ste. 270 Houston, TX 77005 Phone: (713) 503-6706 Email: seth@nichamofflaw.com VENEZUELA: Parties Seek to Modify Class Cert Briefing Schedule -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Mazzaccone v. Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Case No. 1:24-cv-06168-DLC (S.D.N.Y.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order granting a modification to the current class certification briefing schedule. Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 1(D) of your Honor's Individual Practices, the parties request that the deadline for filing any opposition to class certification be extended to Nov. 26, 2025, and the deadline for filing any reply in support of class certification be extended to Dec. 19, 2025. Under the Court’s September 22, 2025, Order, the deadline to oppose Plaintiff’s motion for class certification is November 17, 2025, and the deadline to file a reply in support of class certification is December 8, 2025. The parties seek this extension in light of recent depositions related to the class certification motion. The Plaintiff, Mr. Mazzaccone, was deposed on Nov. 3, 2025. Based on Mr. Mazzaccone's deposition testimony, Defendant has asked that he either supplement his production or confirm that it is complete. Additionally, the Plaintiff's expert witness, Mr. Hector Fernandez, was deposed on Nov. 6, 2025. The requested adjustments to the current briefing schedule will allow the Defendant sufficient time to incorporate information from both depositions, and any supplemental production, into its opposition brief. The requested extensions will not affect any other scheduled deadlines. This is the parties' third joint request to extend any deadlines set forth in the Pretrial Scheduling Order and second joint request to modify the class certification briefing schedule, and it is submitted with the consent of all parties. Venezuela is a country on the northern coast of South America with diverse natural attractions. A copy of the Parties' motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Q8Jd3P at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony J. Costantini, Esq. Arti Fotedar, Esq. Stephanie Lamerce, Esq. Jillian M. Dreusike, Esq. Harvey W. Gurland, Jr., Esq. DUANE MORRIS LLP 22 Vanderbilt 335 Madison Avenue, 23rd Floor New York, NY 10017-4669 Telephone: (212) 692-1000 Facsimile: (212) 692-1020 E-mail: ajcostantini@duanemorris.com afotedar@duanemorris.com slamerce@duanemorris.com jdreusike@duanemorris.com hwgurland@duanemorris.com The Defendant is represented by: Marisa F. Antonelli, Esq. Camilo Cardozo, Esq. Dora Georgescu, Esq. VINSON & ELKINS LLP The Grace Building 1114 Avenue of the Americas, 32nd Floor New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 237-0000 E-mail: mantonelli@velaw.com ccardozo@velaw.com dgeorgescu@velaw.com VGW HOLDING: Ecklund Sues Over Illegal Casino Websites and Apps --------------------------------------------------------------- KENNY ECKLUND, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VGW HOLDING US, INC.; and VGW US, INC., Defendants, Case No. 1:25-cv-00171 (D. Utah, November 2, 2025) is a class action against the Defendants for violation of Utah's Gambling Act. The case arises from the Defendants' alleged illegal gambling operation in Utah through their online sweepstakes casinos available at www.chumbacasino.com, www.luckylandslots.com, and www.globalpoker.com, and on various mobile apps. According to the complaint, the Defendants' websites and mobile apps offer chance games, which are already declared unlawful and unconstitutional in Utah. As a result of the Defendants' misconduct, the Plaintiff and similarly situated individuals wagered money or other things of value on the Defendants' casino websites and mobile apps and lost. VGW Holding US, Inc. is an online casino operator, with a place of business in Boulder, Colorado. VGW US, Inc. is an online casino operator, with a place of business in Boulder, Colorado. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elliot O. Jackson, Esq. HEDIN LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 Email: ejackson@hedinllp.com - and - David W. Scofield, Esq. PETERS SCOFIELD, Esq. 7430 Creek Road, Suite 303 Sandy, UT 84093 Telephone: (801) 322-2002 Email: dws@psplawyers.com - and - Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. GUCOVSCHI ROZENSHTEYN, PLLC 140 Broadway, FL 46 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 Email: adrian@gr-firm.com VGW HOLDING: Operates Illegal Online Sweepstakes Casino, Gafa Says ------------------------------------------------------------------ JOHN GAFA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VGW HOLDING US, INC.; VGW US, INC.; and LUCKYLAND, INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:25-cv-01010-JNP (D. Utah, November 5, 2025) is a class action complaint brought by the Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, seeking redress for Defendants' widespread violations of Utah's Gambling Act. Defendants VGW Holding US, Inc. VGW US, Inc., and Luckyland, Inc own, operate, and receive significant revenue from their online "sweepstakes" casinos available at www.chumbacasino.com, www.luckylandslots.com, www.globalpoker.com, and on various mobile apps, where they offer casino-style table games, poker, and slots to anyone willing to spend real money wagering on them (the "VGW Gambling Platform"). While Defendants advertise and promote the VGW Gambling Platform to persons in Utah as a legitimate online business, the VGW Gambling Platform is actually a dangerous and plainly unlawful gambling enterprise. The scheme gets in when Defendants sell digital "coins" to consumers on the VGW Gambling Platform and then immediately accept those coins back (from the consumers who purchased them) as wagers on the outcomes of the various casino-style games of chance offered on the VGW Gambling Platform. Consumers who purchase and then wager "coins" on the VGW Gambling Platform do so in the hopes of winning more "coins," which can be used to place more wagers and, in some instances, are redeemable for cash, says the suit. The Plaintiff and numerous other Utah residents have lost significant sums of their hard-earned money placing wagers on the VGW Gambling Platform, and Defendants have in turn reaped enormous profits from the losses these people have sustained, the suit asserts. VGW Holding US, Inc. operates an online gaming portal with an online casino, allowing players to interact via social gaming.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Elliot O. Jackson, Esq. HEDIN LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1140 Miami, FL 33131-3302 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 E-mail: ejackson@hedinllp.com - and - David W. Scofield, Esq. PETERS ❘ SCOFIELD A Professional Corporation 7430 Creek Road, Suite 303 Sandy, UT 84093-6160 Telephone: (801) 322-2002 E-mail: dws@psplawyers.com - and - Adrian Gucovschi, Esq. GUCOVSCHI LAW FIRM, PLLC 140 Broadway, Fl 46 New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 884-4230 E-mail: adrian@gr-firm.com VIA RENEWABLES: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss "Glikin" -------------------------------------------------------- Via Renewables, Inc., disclosed in a Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it is awaiting court ruling on its motion to dismiss the lawsuit styled Glikin, et al. v. Major Energy Electric Services, LLC. Similar to other energy service companies ("ESCOs") operating in the industry, from time-to-time, the Company is subject to class action lawsuits in various jurisdictions where the Company sells natural gas and electricity. On January 14, 2021, Glikin, et al. v. Major Energy Electric Services, LLC, a purported variable rate class action was filed by a Maryland customer in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, attempting to represent a class of all Major Energy customers (including customers of companies Major Energy acts as a successor to) in the United States charged a variable rate for electricity or gas by Major Energy during the applicable statute of limitations period up to and including the date of judgment. The Company moved this case to the United States District Court for the District of Maryland (Case No. 1:21-cv-03251-MJM) and in December 2023 filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. In September 2024, the Court granted the Company's motion that argued that Glikin had failed to exhaust her administrative remedies and that, if she wishes to proceed, she must first go to the Maryland Public Service Commission ("Maryland PSC"). On November 6, 2024, Glikin filed a complaint with the Maryland PSC. The Company responded to her complaint on February 28, 2025. On May 2025, the PSC ruled in favor of the Company, finding no fraudulent conduct. Plaintiff filed a motion to lift the federal court stay on June 16, 2025. The Company filed a motion to dismiss in federal court; the federal court heard oral arguments on October 7, 2025. The parties are waiting for the court's decision on the motion to dismiss. VIA RENEWABLES: Continues to Defend TCPA Suits ---------------------------------------------- Via Renewables, Inc., disclosed in a Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that it continues to defend lawsuits alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991. From time-to-time the Company and its operating subsidiaries receive TCPA-based lawsuits, which are without merit as the Company has a robust telemarketing compliance program in place. Three cases are pending, at early stages of litigation: (1) Clark v. Via Renewables, Inc. (filed January 30, 2024), and (2) Grant v. Via Renewables, Inc. (November 15, 2024). The Company is vigorously defending these claims. VIA RENEWABLES: Oral Arguments in Merger Suit Set for April 2026 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Via Renewables, Inc., disclosed in a Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2025, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that oral arguments on a motion to dismiss the class action complaint relating to merger pursuant to the agreement among the Company, Retailco, and wholly owned subsidiary of Retailco. On July 19, 2024, Joshua Amburgey, a purported stockholder of the Company at the time of the Merger, filed a verified class action complaint in the Delaware Court of Chancery (C.A. No. 2024-0762-KSJM) alleging that the Company's directors and controlling stockholder breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the Merger. On July 25, 2024, Bruce Taylor, another purported stockholder, filed a related class action (C.A. No. 2024-0794) asserting fiduciary-duty and disclosure claims concerning the proxy statement for the Merger. A prior Section 220 books-and-records action filed by Michael Stutzman (C.A. No. 2024-0545-LM) was subsequently expanded to assert similar claims. The Delaware Court of Chancery has consolidated these actions under the caption In re Via Renewables, Inc. Merger Litigation (C.A. No. 2024-0762-KSJM), and appointed lead counsel and a lead plaintiff. The consolidated action remains pending before Vice Chancellor McCormick. Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss this matter which is pending before the Delaware Chancery Court. Oral arguments on such motion are scheduled for April/May 2026. VITAC CORPORATION: Parties Seek Initial OK of $500K Settlement -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as KATELYN ANDERSON, v. VITAC CORPORATION, Case No. 1:25-cv-00329-PAB-NRN (D. Colo.), the Parties ask the Court to enter an order pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 23, to certify the proposed settlement class and to approve their proposed settlement. Specifically, Parties ask the Court to enter as follows: 1. Granting preliminary approval of the class action settlement and release agreement attached as Exhibit 1; 2. Certifying a Rule 23 Settlement Class defined as: "All current and former closed captioners in Colorado who worked for the Defendant from Jan. 31, 2022 to Jan. 31, 2025."; 3. Appointing Sara A. Green as Class Counsel; 4. Appointing Katelyn Anderson as the Class Representative; 5. Approving the attached Rule 23 notice of settlement and exclusion form; 6. Requiring the Parties to disseminate the Rule 23 notice to the appropriate Class Members in accordance with the settlement agreement; and 7. Setting a fairness hearing to consider final approval of the settlement. On Jan. 31, 2025, the Plaintiff Katelyn Anderson filed a class and collective action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against Defendant. The lawsuit alleges that Defendant violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and the Colorado Wage Act (CWA) by failing to pay Captioners for mandatory pre-shift "prep time" and related off-the-clock work performed by Plaintiff and all similarly situated employees. The Plaintiff claims this unpaid work resulted in lost wages and overtime compensation. The Settlement Agreement provides that Defendant will make a payment of $500,000.00. VITAC provides services such as closed captioning, dubbing, and audio description services. A copy of the Defendant's motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=sSDKHm at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sara A. Green, Esq. HARDIN THOMPSON, P.C. 2301 Blake Street, Suite 100 Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: (303) 785-5359 E-mail: sgreen@hardlinlawpc.net The Defendant is represented by: Melisa H. Panagakos, Esq. Emely Y. Garcia, Esq. JACKSON LEWIS P.C. 1400 Wewatta Street, Suite 900 Denver, CO 80202 Telephone: (303) 892-0404 Facsimile: (303) 409-3833 E-mail: Melisa.Panagakos@jacksonlewis.com Emely.Garcia@jacksonlewis.com WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Seeks to Continue Class Cert Hearing Date -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as ROSARIO CASILLAS, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated; v. WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., a Delaware corporation; WALMART, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 3 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 2:25-cv-06086-RGK-BFM (C.D. Cal.), the Defendants, on Dec. 8, 2025, will move the Court for an order continuing the hearing date on the Plaintiff's anticipated class certification motion to Feb. 9, 2026, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(b)(1) and L.R. 6-3. Based on the foregoing, Walmart requests the Court continue the class certification hearing date and extend the briefing schedule as follows: Event Proposed Date The Plaintiff's certification motion Nov. 24, 2025 (no filing deadline: change) The Defendants' opposing papers: Jan. 16, 20265 The Plaintiff's reply papers: Jan. 26, 2026 Hearing on motion for class Feb. 9, 2026 (or other certification: date convenient for the Court) The Plaintiff filed this putative wage and hour class action on May 15, 2025. According to the operative Second Amended Complaint, the Plaintiff seeks to represent a putative class of: "All current and former California non-exempt employees since May 15, 2021, on at least six different claims." Walmart is an American multinational retail corporation. A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6oc2No at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendants are represented by: Paloma P. Peracchio, Esq. Melis Atalay, Esq. Mitchell A. Wrosch, Esq. Catherine N. Van farowe, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 239-9800 Facsimile: (213) 239-9045 E-mail: paloma.peracchio@ogletree.com melis.atalay@ogletree.com mitchell.wrosch@ogletree.com catherine.vanfarowe@ogletree.com WAL-MART ASSOCIATES: Seeks to Shorten Time on Class Cert Hearing ---------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as OSARIO CASILLAS, individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated; v. WAL-MART ASSOCIATES, INC., a Delaware corporation; WALMART, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 3 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 2:25-cv-06086-RGK-BFM (C.D. Cal.), the Defendants ask the Court to enter an order shortening the time on the hearing for motion to continue class certification hearing date, which was filed on Nov. 10, 2025. The Motion is set for hearing on Dec. 8, 2025, pursuant to this Court's Standing Order Regarding Newly Assigned Cases. Walmart seeks ex parte relief because its motion will not be heard before Walmart's deadline to oppose the Plaintiff's forthcoming class certification, which falls on either Dec. 1, 2025, or Dec. 8, 2025. The Plaintiff's counsel did not respond about whether the Plaintiff intends to oppose this ex parte application. Accordingly, Walmart requests that the Court set the hearing on Walmart's motion to continue the class certification hearing date for Nov. 24, 2025. To the extent that Plaintiff wishes to oppose Walmart's motion, she may file an Opposition by November 14, and Walmart may file a Reply by November 19. Wal-Mart operates a chain of hypermarkets, discount stores, and grocery stores. A copy of the Defendants' motion dated Nov. 10, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=Z73W6i at no extra charge.[CC] The Defendants are represented by: Paloma P. Peracchio, Esq. Melis Atalay, Esq. Mitchell A. Wrosch, Esq. Catherine N. Van farowe, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 239-9800 Facsimile: (213) 239-9045 E-mail: paloma.peracchio@ogletree.com melis.atalay@ogletree.com mitchell.wrosch@ogletree.com catherine.vanfarowe@ogletree.com WEBTPA EMPLOYER: Court Denies Discovery Request in "Harrell" ------------------------------------------------------------ In the case captioned as David Harrell, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. WebTPA Employer Services, LLC; Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company; Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company; and Elevance Health, Inc., Defendants, Civil Action No. 3:24-cv-1158-L-BN (N.D. Tex.), United States Magistrate Judge David L. Horan denied Alejandro T. Gonzalez's motion for discovery in a consolidated class action settlement matter. The Court has preliminarily approved the class action settlement and set a final approval hearing before the undersigned for December 2, 2025. On October 14, Alejandro T. Gonzalez submitted a filing pro se titled Rule 23(e)(5) Objection and Motion for Limited Discovery, Protective Order, Short Continuance, and Temporary Stay. The Plaintiffs responded to the Motion, and Gonzalez replied and moved to amend his reply. The Court granted Gonzalez's motion to amend his reply and denied the Motion for the following reasons. First, although Gonzalez appears to bring his motion primarily for discovery under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(e), to the extent that the Motion is intended to be an objection, Gonzalez does not raise substantive objections. Even if he had, the Motion does not comply with the procedures in the Preliminary Approval Order, and, so, Gonzalez waived the right to object to any aspect of the Settlement and to the Application for Attorney's Fees, Costs, and Service Awards. The Court finds that Gonzalez is not entitled to the discovery that he seeks, which includes executed retainer agreements between class counsel and named plaintiffs and itemized mediation invoices and proof of payment. Class members who object to a settlement of a class action do not have an absolute right to conduct discovery and presentation of evidence. The scope of the discovery to be conducted in each case rests with the sound discretion of the trial judge. As to Gonzalez's requests, he has not shown that he represents more than himself and his interests. Nor has he shown that there is a reasonable basis for his requests in the context of this litigation or that his obtaining the information requested is necessary to further the Court's evaluation of the fairness and adequacy of the settlement before it. A copy of the Court's decision is available at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=5BJy76 from PacerMonitor.com WHOLE FOODS: Filing for Class Cert Bid Due Feb. 14, 2026 -------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as Silberstein v. Whole Foods Market Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-04229 (E.D.N.Y., Filed June 14, 2024), the Hon. Judge Joan M. Azrack entered a Scheduling Order as follows: (1) Fact discovery by Aug. 15, 2026 (2) The last day to complete the first step in class certification motion practice is Feb. 14, 2026 (3) Exchange of expert report(s), if any, by June 18, 2026 (4) Exchange of expert rebuttal report(s), if any, by July 17, 2026 (5) Expert discovery by July 17, 2026 The nature of suit states Torts -- Personal Property -- Other Fraud. The Defendant is an American multinational supermarket chain.[CC] WHY DIRECT LLC: McGonigle Files TCPA Suit in E.D. Virginia ---------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Why Direct LLC. The case is styled as Andrew McGonigle, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v. Why Direct LLC, Case No. 3:25-cv-00934-RCY (E.D. Va., Nov. 4, 2025). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act for Restrictions of Use of Telephone Equipment.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: William Peter Robinson, III, Esq. 1934 Old Gallows Road, Suite 350K Vienna, VA 22181 Phone: (703) 789-4800 Email: william@robinsonslaw.com WILLIAMS-SONOMA INC: Youngren Sues Over Blind's Access to Website ----------------------------------------------------------------- DUSTIN YOUNGREN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. WILLIAMS-SONOMA, INC., Defendant, Case No. 1:25-cv-13400 (N.D. Ill., November 1, 2025) is a class action against the Defendant for violation of Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, declaratory relief, and negligent infliction of emotional distress. According to the complaint, the Defendant has failed 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 website, https://www.potterybarn.com, contains access barriers which hinder the Plaintiff and Class members to enjoy the benefits of its online goods, content, and services offered to the public through the website. The accessibility issues on the website include but not limited to: inadequate focus order, changing of content without advance warning, unclear labels for interactive elements, inaccurate alt-text on graphics, redundant links where adjacent links go to the same URL address, and the requirement that transactions be performed solely with a mouse. The Plaintiff and Class members seek permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually impaired individuals. Williams-Sonoma, Inc. is a company that sells online goods and services, doing business in Illinois. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David B. Reyes, Esq. EQUAL ACCESS LAW GROUP, PLLC 68-29 Main Street Flushing, NY 11367 Telephone: (844) 731-3343 Email: Dreyes@ealg.law XPO LAST: Class Cert Bid Filing in Lopez Due April 10, 2026 ----------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned as MAYNOR MEJIA LOPEZ, an individual; individually and on Behalf of All Similarly Situated Individuals, v. XPO LAST MILE, INC., A Georgia Corporation, and DOES 1 through 25, Inclusive, Case No. 3:22-cv-08976-SI (N.D. Cal.), the Hon. Judge Susan Illston entered an order revising the motion for class certification briefing schedule: The Plaintiff shall file his moving papers by April 10, 2026. The Defendant shall file their opposition by June 12, 2026. The Plaintiff shall file his reply by July 17, 2026. The hearing shall be set for Aug. 7, 2026. XPO provides third-party logistics and last mile delivery services. A copy of the Court's order dated Nov. 7, 2025, is available from PacerMonitor.com at https://urlcurt.com/u?l=MCGF6p at no extra charge.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael H. Boyamian, Esq. Armand R. Kizirian, Esq. BOYAMIAN LAW, INC. 550 North Brand Blvd., Suite 1500 Glendale, CA 91203 Telephone: (818) 547-5300 Facsimile: (818) 547-5678 E-mail: michael@boyamianlaw.com armand@boyamianlaw.com The Defendants are represented by: Benjamin J. Schnayerson, Esq. Dahn A. Levine, Esq. JACKSON LEWIS P.C. 50 California Street, 9th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-4615 Telephone: (415) 394-9400 Facsimile: (415) 394-9401 E-mail: Ben.Schnayerson@jacksonlewis.com Dahn.Levine@jacksonlewis.com ZOOMINFO TECHNOLOGIES: Continues to Defend Colorado Consumer Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- ZoomInfo Technologies Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2025 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 3, 2025, that the Company continues to defend itself from the Colorado consumer protection class suit in the Superior Court of the State of Washington, Clark County. On April 16, 2025, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against ZoomInfo Technologies LLC in the Superior Court of the State of Washington (Clark County), alleging that ZoomInfo Technologies LLC violated the State of Colorado's Prevention of Telemarketing Fraud Act by listing cell phone numbers of Colorado residents in the Company's online directory for commercial purposes without obtaining their consent. The suit seeks statutory damages, injunctive and other equitable relief, costs and attorneys' fees. The Company intends to vigorously defend against this lawsuit. ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. is a software and data company which provides data for companies and business individuals.[BN] ZOOMINFO TECHNOLOGIES: Continues to Defend Quebec Privacy Suit -------------------------------------------------------------- ZoomInfo Technologies Inc. disclosed in its Form 10-Q Report for the quarterly period ending September 30, 2025 filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 3, 2025, that the Company continues to defend itself from the Quebec privacy class suit in the Superior Court of Quebec. On March 17, 2025, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against ZoomInfo Technologies Inc., ZoomInfo Technologies LLC, and ZoomInfo Canada Corp. in the Superior Court of Quebec, alleging that the Company's collection and publication of personal information violated the Quebec Civil Code, Quebec’s statute regarding the protection of personal information in the private sector (LPRPSP), and the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms. The plaintiffs seek statutory, compensatory and punitive damages, as well as costs and legal fees. The Company intends to vigorously defend against this lawsuit. ZoomInfo Technologies, Inc. is a software and data company which provides data for companies and business individuals.[BN] ********* 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 ***