CAR_Public/140115.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Wednesday, January 15, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 10

                             Headlines


ABLE CREDIT: Uses Unfair Means to Collect Debt, Class Claims
ADVANCE AMERICA: Payday Lenders Charge Usurious Rates, Suit Says
ADVENTURE SPORTS: Recalls H2 Hydra Series Binding Over Injury Risk
AIRSTREAM INT'L: Recalls Trailers Due to Defective Propane System
AMARIN CORP: Faces "Bove" Securities Class Suit in New York

ARIZONA, USA: Same-Sex Couples Sue Over Ban on Same-Sex Marriage
BALDOR ELECTRIC: Fails to Enforce "No Layoff Strategy," Suit Says
BANK OF AMERICA: Accused of Not Paying Home Service Specialists
BLUE DIAMOND: Sued Over All Natural, Evaporated Cane Juice Claims
CLIENT SERVICES: Accused of Illegal Credit & Collection Practices

COMPASS GROUP: "Mojica" Class Suit Removed to C.D. California
DEAN FOODS: Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Antitrust Suit
DOLE FRESH: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Suit Claims
DONG PHUONG: Recalls Non-Permitted Food Colours in Titsi Jelly
EQUINOX HOLDINGS: Makes Clients Renew Gym Memberships, Suit Says

FACEBOOK INC: Lieff Cabraser Files Privacy Class Action
FLAX USA: Faces "Madenlian" Suit Over "All Natural" Claims
FORD MOTOR: MyFord Touch Too Broke to Fix, Fusion Owner Claims
GANNETT CO: Sued for Spam Calling People on Do Not Call Registry
GOLDMAN SACHS: Accused of Restraining Trade & Supply of Aluminum

GOOGLE INC: 9th Cir. Rejects Bid to Rehear Privacy Suit Ruling
HAIN CELESTIAL: Faces Suit Over Products' "All Natural" Claim
HEALTHCARE STAFFING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Class Says
INCREDIBLE NOVELTIES: Recalls Candy Sweet Spots Due to Eggs
JOOVY: Recalls Zoom Car Seat Adapter Due to Fall Hazard

KENTUCKY, USA: Accused of Discrimination by Deaf Inmates' Class
LEESE ENTERPRISES: Recalls Simply Lite Choco Over Undeclared Milk
LEGEND ENERGY: Faces "Pratt" Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
LOBLAW COMPANIES: Recalls Certain No Name Tomato Condensed Soup
LOVELACE HEALTH: Sued Over Provision of Mental Health Services

LSI CORP: Being Sold to Avago for Too Little, Shareholder Says
MEDICAL MGMT: Deceives Optimum Wellness Plan Clients, Suit Claims
MTI GROUPS: Recalls Motha Wattalappan Pudding Mix
NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Faces Suit Over Sale of Super Bowl Tickets
NY FIRE DEP'T: Faces "Ramos" Suit Seeking Payment for Back Wages

OAKLEY TRANSPORT: Fails to Pay Overtime Premium, Suit Claims
OCWEN LOAN: Duns People for Discharged Mortgage Loans, Class Says
PRESSLER & PRESSLER: Faces "Lechtrecker" Suit Over FDCPA Violation
QUEST DIAGNOSTICS: Illegally Took Fund From Bank Acct., Suit Says
RBD STAFFING: Removes "Gongora" Class Suit to S.D. California

REGAL CONFECTIONS: Recalls Super Candy Buttons Due to Egg
SCHOOL OUTFITTERS: Recalls Science Tables Due to Injury Hazard
SHINE 1023 INC: Class Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum & OT Wages
SICILIAN ICE: Recalls Pistachio Nut Ice Cream Due to Cashews
SPECIALIZED BICYCLE: Recalls Source 11 & Source Expert Disc Bikes

TARGET CORP: Faces "Casey" Suit Over Computer and Network Breach
TARGET ENTERPRISE: Sued by Group Leaders Over Unpaid Overtime
TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Antitrust Suit by Cafeteria Employees
THRIFTY FOODS: Recalls Nanaimo Hot Barbecue Chicken Products
UNITED STATES: Justice Dep't Opposes Injunction in Nuns' Suit

UNITED STATES: Black Farmers Dispute Denial of Settlement Claims
WAL-MART STORES: Recalls Card Table & Chair Set Due to Fall Hazard
WELLS FARGO: Court Dismissed Suit Related to Mortgage Default
WESTERN RICE: Recalls Grande Harvest Rice Over Gluten Presence
WILLIAM QUINN: Accused of Not Paying Time Spent Going to Worksite


                             *********


ABLE CREDIT: Uses Unfair Means to Collect Debt, Class Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Renee Farman, Individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Able Credit Services Group, Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-
06723-PGS-TJB (D.N.J., November 5, 2013) seeks redress from the
Defendant's alleged use of unfair and unconscionable means to
collect a debt.

The Plaintiff contends that the Company's debt collection efforts
attempted and directed towards her violated various provisions of
the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Able Credit Services Group, Inc., is headquartered in Fair Haven,
New Jersey.  The Company is a debt collector as defined under the
FDCPA.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ari Hillel Marcus, Esq.
          MARCUS LAW LLC
          1500 Allaire Avenue, Suite 101
          Ocean, NJ 07712
          Telephone: (732) 660-8169
          Facsimile: (732) 298-6256
          E-mail: ari@marcuslawyer.com


ADVANCE AMERICA: Payday Lenders Charge Usurious Rates, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Koeninger at Courthouse News Service reports that Elizabeth
Burger sued Advance America Cash Advance and a slew of other
short-term lenders in federal court in a lawsuit replete with
alarming statistics about the rapid growth of payday lenders.

Burger claims that payday lenders are governed by Ohio's Short-
Term Loan Act (STLA), which they systematically violate by "making
loans pursuant to the Second Mortgage Loan Act," to collect more
fees and charge higher interest rates.

Burger and co-plaintiff Patricia Martaus claim the lenders from
which they obtained short-term loans violated the STLA by charging
more than 28 percent interest on loans that were either less than
$500 or had a term of less than 31 days.

Page 6 of the 22-page lawsuit describes the explosive growth of
the short-term, high-interest loan industry.  It states: "The
number of payday lending offices licensed in Ohio grew from 107 in
1996 to 1,562 in 2006.  In that year, Ohio had more payday lending
locations than McDonalds, Burger King and Wendy's restaurants
combined.

"The payday lenders, along with lenders not named as defendants in
this action, charged $318,789,535 in fees in 2006, leaving 317,990
borrowers trapped in a cycle of debt.

"From 2008 through January 2013, the number of Ohio residents who
have borrowed from the CashNetUSA defendants alone is at least
14,000.

"In 2009, over 4 million unsecured loans were made in Ohio under
the Second Mortgage Loan Act, with a total value in excess of $2
billion. . . .

"By 2006, every Ohio county except for Ottawa and Vinton had at
least one payday lender; 35 counties had more than 10 locations,
and nine counties had 40 or more.  By 2006, Franklin County had
183, Hamilton County had 123, and Cuyahoga County had 160 payday
lender offices. . . .

"Just one percent of payday loans go to borrowers who repay within
two weeks and borrow less than once a year, while 99 percent go to
repeat borrowers.  The average borrower takes out nine loans per
year."

The plaintiffs seek class certification, declaratory judgment that
the defendants' loans are subject to the STLA, and punitive
damages for violations of the Second Mortgage Loan Act, the
Consumer Sales Practices Act and the Ohio General Usury Act.

The defendants operate by names that include Advance America,
Checksmart, Express Consumer Loans, Express Loan Services and
CashNetUSA.

The defendants are Advance America Small Loans of Ohio Inc. dba
Advance America Cash Advance Centers dba Advance America Cash
Advance dba Advance America; Buckeye Lending Solutions LLC dba
Checksmart dba Checksmart Consumer Loans dba Express Consumer
Loans dba Express Loan Services; Community Choice Financial Inc.;
National Loans LLC; Cash America International Inc dba CashNetUSA;
Ohio Consumer Financial Solutions LLC; dba CashNetUSA; Cash
America Net Holdings LLC dba CashNetUSA; NCP Finance Ohio LLC; and
Dinsmore & Shohl LLP dba NCP Finance Ohio LLC CIC dba NCP Finance
Ohio LLC CLD dba NCP Finance Ohio LLC dba NCP Finance Ohio LLC dba
NCP Finance Ohio LLC dba NCP Finance Ohio LLC.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jack D'Aurora, Esq.
          John Manuel Gonzales, Esq.
          Gilbert Joseph Gradisar, Esq.
          THE BEHAL LAW GROUP LLC
          501 South High Street
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (614) 643-5050
          Facsimile: (614) 224-8708
          E-mail: jdaurora@behallaw.com
                  jgonzales@behallaw.com
                  ggradisar@behallaw.com

The case is Burger, et al. v. Advance America Small Loans of Ohio,
Inc., et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-00010-MHW-TPK, in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Ohio (Columbus).


ADVENTURE SPORTS: Recalls H2 Hydra Series Binding Over Injury Risk
------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Adventure Sports Inc., dba Pryde Group Americas, of Miami, Fla.,
announced a voluntary recall of 57 in the U.S. and 5 in Canada
Cabrinha H2 Hydra Series Binding.  Consumers should stop using
this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell
or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The binding can detach from its base while riding and lead to loss
of control, which poses a risk of injury.

There were no injuries that were reported.

The recall involves the standard size H2 Hydra Series Binding.
The binding mounts on the twintip style kiteboards and is used to
connect the rider by his feet to the board.  The H2 binding is
blue and black and has dual adjusting straps with 'Cabrinha' and
'H2' on the footstrap.  The product was manufactured in June and
July 2013.  The H2 binding comes in two sizes: standard and small.
The product code is KB4H2BDSL which is found on the retail
packaging.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/7NHkxe

The recalled products were manufactured in Neil Pryde Limited,
Hong Kong and sold at specialty watersports stores worldwide from
August 2013 through December 2013 for about $180.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled binding and
contact any Cabrinha authorized dealer for a free replacement
binding.  A list of authorized dealers can be found at
http://www.cabrinhakites.com/dealers.html


AIRSTREAM INT'L: Recalls Trailers Due to Defective Propane System
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 13, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Travel Trailer
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Accessories
Units affected:           40
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2013444
TC ID number:             2013444

Affected products: 2013, 2014 Airstream International

Certain travel trailers may have been manufactured with a
defective propane system.  This could result in a propane gas leak
which, in the presence of an ignition source, could result in a
fire or an explosion, causing property damage and/or personal
injury.

Dealers will replace the propane regulator.


AMARIN CORP: Faces "Bove" Securities Class Suit in New York
-----------------------------------------------------------
Joseph A. Bove and Joseph J. Bove, individually and On Behalf of
All Others Similarly Situated v. Amarin Corporation, PLC, Joseph
S. Zakrzewski, John F. Thero, and Steven B. Ketchum, Case No.
1:13-cv-07882-AT (S.D.N.Y., November 5, 2013) is brought on behalf
of those who purchased Amarin securities between August 8, 2012,
and October 16, 2013, seeking to recover damages caused by the
Defendants' alleged violations of the federal securities laws.

Throughout the Class Period, the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements regarding the Company's business in
general and the prospects for approval of the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration of its Vascepa product for the ANCHOR Indication in
particular, the Plaintiffs alleges.

Amarin is an English corporation headquartered in Dublin, Ireland.
Amarin is a biopharmaceutical company focused on the
commercialization and development of drugs to improve
cardiovascular health.  The Individual Defendants are directors
and officers of the Company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeremy Alan Lieberman, Esq.
          Lesley Frank Portnoy, Esq.
          Fei-Lu Qian, Esq.
          POMERANTZ HAUDEK BLOCK GROSSMAN & GROSS LLP
          600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 661-1100
          Facsimile: (212) 661-8665
          E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
                  lfportnoy@pomlaw.com
                  flqian@pomlaw.com

               - and -

          Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq.
          POMERANTZ HAUDEK BLOCK GROSSMAN & GROSS LLP
          10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 377-1181
          Facsimile: (312) 377-1184
          E-mail: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com

               - and -

          J. Elazar Fruchter, Esq.
          WOHL & FRUCHTER LLP
          570 Lexington Avenue, 16th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 758-4000
          Facsimile: (212) 758-4004
          E-mail: jfruchter@wohlfruchter.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          William Michael Regan, Esq.
          Allison Michele Wuertz, Esq.
          Bruce G. Vanyo, Esq.
          KATTEN MUCHIN ROSENMAN, LLP (NYC)
          575 Madison Avenue
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 940-8800
          Facsimile: (212) 940-8776
          E-mail: william.regan@kattenlaw.com
                  allison.wuertz@kattenlaw.com
                  bruce@kattenlaw.com


ARIZONA, USA: Same-Sex Couples Sue Over Ban on Same-Sex Marriage
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jamie Ross at Courthouse News Service reports that four couples
commenced a federal class action over Arizona's ban on same-sex
marriages.

Joseph Connolly sued Gov. Jan Brewer, Attorney General Tom Horne
and Maricopa County Clerk Michael Jeanes, seeking declaratory
judgment and an injunction.  Joseph Connolly and Terrel Pochert
say they were married in California, and that Arizona's refusal to
recognize their marriage "harms them by denying them the rights,
protections, and benefits associated with marriage, such as
Terry's spousal pension benefits, other spousal survivorship
rights, the right to loss-of-consortium damages in civil lawsuits,
the privilege not to testify against one another, and so on."

Plaintiffs Holly Mitchell and Suzanne Cummins say that though they
were able to become certified foster care parents, only Cummins
was allowed to adopt their two children because "Arizona law
strongly prefers heterosexual couples in permanent adoption
proceedings and permits only a husband and wife to jointly adopt."

Plaintiff Clark Rowley claims he has no legal authority if
something were to happen to his partner, David Chaney, who suffers
from diabetes.

Christopher Devine and Mason Hite IV were also married in
California, and claim the state's refusal to recognize their
marriage "prevents them from attaining equal legal status as
fathers to their son."  Hite's name is the only one that appears
on their son's birth certificate, burdening the couple when it
comes to "the mundane (permission slips and bank accounts) to the
profound (decision-making in end-of-life situations)," the couple
claims.

The plaintiffs seek class certification and ask the court to
"enforce their fundamental right to equal protection and due
process under the United States Constitution, and declare as
unconstitutional" the amendment to the Arizona Constitution.  They
also seek to "permanently enjoin the enforcement of any and all
other provisions of Arizona law that may deny plaintiffs equal
access to the benefits of marriage in the State of Arizona,
including the right of same-sex couples to marry in or have their
out-of-state marriages recognized by the State of Arizona."

Utah in December became the 18th state to legalize same-sex
marriage, but the U.S. Supreme Court put the law on hold pending
appeal.

Same-sex marriage is legal in California, Iowa, Connecticut,
Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island, Vermont, Maine,
Maryland, Washington, and Washington D.C.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ellen Kristine Aiken, Esq.
          SACKS TIERNEY PA
          4250 N Drinkwater Blvd., 4th Fl.
          Scottsdale, AZ 85251-3647
          Telephone: (480) 945-1800
          E-mail: ellen.aiken@sackstierney.com

               - and -

          Shawn Keith Aiken, Esq.
          Heather Ann Macre, Esq.
          William Henry Knight, Esq.
          AIKEN SCHENK HAWKINS & RICCIARDI PC
          2390 E Camelback Rd., Suite 400
          Phoenix, AZ 85016
          Telephone: (602) 248-8203
          Facsimile:: (602) 248-8840
          E-mail: ska@ashrlaw.com
                  hmacre@mhlevine.com
                  whk@ashrlaw.com

The case is Connolly, et al. v. Brewer, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-
00024-JWS, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
(Phoenix Division).


BALDOR ELECTRIC: Fails to Enforce "No Layoff Strategy," Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nancy K. Mouser, Wayne P. Gullion, and Russell W. Reed, on behalf
themselves, and all others similarly situated v. Baldor Electric
Company, Case No. 4:13-cv-00207-SEB-WGH (S.D. Ind., December 31,
2013) is brought by previous employees at a manufacturing plant
operated by Baldor in Madison, Indiana.

The Plaintiffs allege that Baldor discriminated against them by
failing to apply and enforce its "no layoff strategy" to them
because they were members of a union.  During the course of their
employment with the Company, the Plaintiffs were represented by
Local 1109 of the International Association of Machinists.

Baldor is a Missouri corporation headquartered in Fort Smith,
Arkansas.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Thomas Joseph Gaunt, Esq.
          1416 N. Pennsylvania Street
          Indianapolis, IN 46202
          Telephone: (317) 216-7000
          E-mail: tjgattorney@sbcglobal.net


BANK OF AMERICA: Accused of Not Paying Home Service Specialists
---------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Bank of America stiffs its
"home service specialists" for overtime, a class action claims in
California Superior Court.


BLUE DIAMOND: Sued Over All Natural, Evaporated Cane Juice Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley Melvin and Taline Keshishian on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated v. Blue Diamond Growers, and Does 1
through 10, inclusive, Case No. 8:13-cv-01746-AG-AN (C.D. Cal.,
November 5, 2013) seeks redress on behalf of a nationwide class of
consumers, who purchased Blue Diamond Products, which claimed to
be "All Natural" and claimed to contain "Evaporated Cane Juice."

Blue Diamond manufactures several food products, including a line
of "Almondmilk" products, which include the Almond Breeze
Almondmilk Chocolate (refrigerated), Almond Breeze Almondmilk
Vanilla Unsweetened (refrigerated), and Almond Breeze Almondmilk
Coconutmilk Blend Almond Coconut Unsweetened (shelf stable)
products.  The Plaintiffs contend that Blue Diamond prominently
and repeatedly labels these products as "All Natural" when in fact
they contain artificial ingredients.

Blue Diamond Growers is a California corporation.  The Company
manufactures, markets, and sells its products throughout
California and the United States.  The Company is a leading
producer of retail food products that it sells to consumers
through grocery and other retail stores throughout the United
States.  The Plaintiffs do not know the true names and capacities
of the Doe Defendants.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Chant Yedalian, Esq.
          CHANT AND COMPANY APLC
          1010 N. Central Avenue
          Glendale, CA 91202
          Telephone: (877) 574-7100
          Facsimile: (877) 574-9411
          E-mail: chant@chant.mobi

Blue Diamond Growers is represented by:

          Geoffrey R. Pittman, Esq.
          HANSON BRIDGETT LLP
          425 Market Street 26th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 777-3200
          Facsimile: (415) 541-9366
          E-mail: Gpittman@hansonbridgett.com


CLIENT SERVICES: Accused of Illegal Credit & Collection Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry K. Wong, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Client Services, Inc., Case No. 2:13-cv-06727-SRC-CLW
(D.N.J., November 5, 2013) is brought to secure redress from the
alleged unlawful credit and collection practices engaged in by
Client Services, Inc.

Client Services, Inc., headquartered in Charles, Missouri, is
engaged in the business of collecting debts using the mail and
telephone.  The Company regularly collects or attempts to collect,
directly or indirectly, debts owed or due (or asserted to be owed
or due) another.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan Gentile, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF GUS MICHAEL FARINELLA, PC
          147 West 35th Street, Suite 1008
          New York, NY 10001
          Telephone: (201) 873-7675
          Facsimile: (212) 675-4367
          E-mail: rlg@lawgmf.com


COMPASS GROUP: "Mojica" Class Suit Removed to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit styled Gerardo Mojica v. Compass Group USA Inc., et
al., Case No. 30-2010-00417438, was removed from the Orange County
Superior Court to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California.  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:13-
cv-01754-DSF-AGR to the proceeding.

The lawsuit alleges that the Defendants failed to pay hourly and
overtime wages, among other causes of action.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alvin B. Lindsay, Esq.
          Gregory E. Mauro, Esq.
          James R. Hawkins, Esq.
          JAMES HAWKINS LAW OFFICES
          9880 Research Drive, Suite 200
          Irvine, CA 92618
          Telephone: (949) 387-7200
          Facsimile: (949) 387-6676
          E-mail: al@jameshawkinsaplc.com
                  greg@jameshawkinsaplc.com
                  james@jameshawkinsaplc.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Anthony Gerald Ly, Esq.
          Douglas A. Wickham, Esq.
          Michelle Marie Holmes, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON PC
          2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067-3107
          Telephone: (310) 553-0308
          Facsimile: (310) 553-5583
          E-mail: aly@littler.com
                  dwickham@littler.com
                  mholmes@littler.com

               - and -

          Nancy E. Pritikin, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON PC
          650 California Street, 20th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94108-2693
          Telephone: (415) 433-1940
          Facsimile: (415) 399-8490
          E-mail: nepritikin@littler.com


DEAN FOODS: Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Antitrust Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Sheri Qualters, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit on Jan. 3 remanded
the antitrust complaint, Food Lion LLC v. Dean Foods Co., to
Eastern District of Tennessee U.S. District Judge Ronnie Greer,
ruling that the trial judge used the wrong standard for excluding
an expert witness.

Retailers Food Lion and Fidel Breto filed the action over milk
they bought from defendants Dean Foods and the National Dairy
Holdings partnership of processing plants.  The partnership was
set up to compete with Dean under a settlement with federal
regulators related to Dean's 2001 merger with Suiza Foods Corp.
The Dairy Farmers of America partially owned National Dairy
Holdings during the relevant time.

The suit accused Dean of striking a secret deal to buy the raw
milk it needed from Dairy Farmers of America.  For its part, Dairy
Farmers allegedly imposed non-price restrictions that harmed
National Dairy's ability to compete.  The conspiracy allegedly
harmed retail buyers of processed milk.

After excluding the plaintiffs' experts' testimony in March 2012,
Greer ruled they lacked proof of injury and failed to establish
the relevant antitrust geographic market.  The plaintiffs
appealed.

Eastern District of Kentucky U.S. District Judge Gregory Van
Tatenhove, sitting by designation, wrote for the Sixth Circuit,
joined by circuit judges John Rogers and Deborah Cook him.  The
court criticized the exclusion of testimony, which concerned the
relevant geographic market for the antitrust claims and was
offered by Luke Froeb, a former director of the Bureau of
Economics at the Federal Trade Commission now attached to
Vanderbilt University's graduate school of management.

The trial judge ruled that the expert relied on facts not in the
case record, Judge Tatenhove continued, instead relying on
economic modeling plus "government studies, academic publications,
and the record itself as he created a geographic market."  But the
judge misread the U.S. Supreme Court precedents, Judge Tatenhove
said.

"It's an important decision in the Sixth Circuit as well as in the
other appellate courts on the use of expert testimony in antitrust
cases and [how to apply the Supreme Court's] Daubert standard,"
said Food Lion lawyer Richard Wyatt Jr., co-leader of the
litigation group at Hunton & Williams in Richmond, Va.

Hunton Washington partner Neil Gilman argued for the plaintiffs.

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld also represented Food Lion and
Gordon Ball of Knoxville, Tenn. represented Fidel Breto.
Paul Friedman, a Washington partner at Dechert, argued for the
defendants.

In a formal statement, Dean Foods spokesman Jamaison Schuler
expressed disappointment at the outcome.  "We remain confident
that we have operated lawfully and fairly at all times in the
Southeast," he said.

Dairy Farmers of America declined to comment, according to
spokeswoman Jennifer Huson.


DOLE FRESH: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Adrian Vasquez, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated
v. Dole Fresh Vegetables, Inc., a corporation; New Koosharem
Corporation, a corporation; and Does 1 to 100, inclusive, Case No.
BC532138 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., January 3, 2014)
alleges that the Defendants violated the Labor Code by failing to,
among other things:

   * pay wages for all time worked at minimum wage rate;

   * pay overtime wages for daily overtime and all time worked;
     and

   * provide meal periods or pay meal period premium wages.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Lavi, Esq.
          Jeffrey Nakao, Esq.
          LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
          8889 W. Olympic Blvd., Suite 200
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211
          Telephone: (310) 432-0000
          Facsimile: (310) 432-0001
          E-mail: jnakao@lelawfirm.com

               - and -

          Sahag Majarian II, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SAHAG MAJARIAN, II
          18250 Ventura Boulevard
          Tarzana, CA 91356
          Telephone: (818) 609-0807
          Facsimile: (818) 609-0892
          E-mail: sahagii@aol.com


DONG PHUONG: Recalls Non-Permitted Food Colours in Titsi Jelly
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 27, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Chemical
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Dong Phuong Oriental Market Ltd.
Distribution:             Alberta, Manitoba
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8533

Affected products: 500 g. and 1000 g Titsi Fruit Jelly with all
lot codes which contain carmoisine and ponceau and UPC numbers 8
936055 240394 and 8 936055 240387


EQUINOX HOLDINGS: Makes Clients Renew Gym Memberships, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lesley McCarthy and Kim Kennedy on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. Equinox Holdings, Inc., John Does
1-25, Case No. 2:14-cv-00037-FSH-JBC (D.N.J., January 3, 2014) is
brought on behalf of similarly situated New Jersey consumers
relating to the Defendants' alleged violations of the Health Club
Services Act, the Consumer Fraud Act, the Retail Installment Sales
Act, the Truth in Lending Act and the Truth-in-Consumer Contract,
Warranty and Notice Act.  The Plaintiffs and all others similarly
situated are buyers of health club services.

The Defendants have violated the CFA by their cancellation
policies and billing practices, which have the primary and sole
purpose of discouraging and impeding their customers from
canceling what are otherwise perpetual and automatically self-
renewing monthly memberships, the Plaintiffs allege.

Equinox Holding, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in
New York.  Equinox owns and operates fitness and health clubs in
the United States.  John Does 1-25, are fictitious names of
individuals and businesses, whose identities will be disclosed in
discovery.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joseph K. Jones, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF JOSEPH K. JONES, LLC
          375 Passaic Avenue, Suite 100
          Fairfield, NJ 07004
          Telephone: (973) 227-5900
          Facsimile: (973) 244-0019
          E-mail: jkj@legaljones.com


FACEBOOK INC: Lieff Cabraser Files Privacy Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
Chelsea Allison, writing for The Recorder, reports that Lieff
Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein filed a privacy class action against
Facebook on Dec. 30 accusing the social networking site of
scanning the content of messages it touts as private and using the
information to sell targeted ads.  The 36-page complaint cites
studies by security researchers indicating that Facebook
systematically intercepts private messages to examine embedded
URLs and assign "likes" to them as part of a business model based
on aggregating user information. Though this practice is
acknowledged in Facebook guidance for developers, it is not
disclosed in the company's user agreements, according to the suit
filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California.

Plaintiffs lawyers led by Lieff Cabraser partner Michael Sobol
contend Facebook's scanning of messages without users' consent
violates the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 and
California's Invasion of Privacy Act as well as the state's Unfair
Competition Law.  They seek to represent a class of Facebook
account holders who used its private messaging service and
included URLs within the last two years.

Mr. Sobol did not respond to a request for comment.

A Facebook spokesman wrote in an email the company "believe[s] the
allegations are without merit and we will continue to defend
ourselves vigorously."

A law firm has not yet entered an appearance for Facebook.  In
other privacy suits, including one targeting its "Sponsored
Stories" feature, Facebook has turned to Cooley's Michael Rhodes.


FLAX USA: Faces "Madenlian" Suit Over "All Natural" Claims
----------------------------------------------------------
Garo Madenlian, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Flax USA, Inc., and Does l through 10, inclusive, Case
No. 8:13-cv-01748-JVS-JPR (C.D. Cal., November 5, 2013) seeks
redress on behalf of a nationwide class of consumers, who
purchased Flax USA Products, which claimed to be "All Natural."

Flax USA manufactures several food products, including a line of
"Flaxmilk" beverage products that include the Flax USA Flaxmilk
(Unsweetened) product.  Mr. Madenlian alleges that Flax USA
prominently labels its products as "All Natural" when in fact they
contain artificial ingredients.

Flax USA, Inc., is a North Dakota corporation.  The Company
manufactures, markets, and sells its products throughout
California and the United States.  The Plaintiff does not know the
true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Chant Yedalian, Esq.
          CHANT AND COMPANY APLC
          1010 N. Central Avenue
          Glendale, CA 91202
          Telephone: (877) 574-7100
          Facsimile: (877) 574-9411
          E-mail: chant@chant.mobi


FORD MOTOR: MyFord Touch Too Broke to Fix, Fusion Owner Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Writing for Courthouse News Service, Jack Bouboushian reports that
Sandra Storto, who owns a Ford Fusion, has sued Ford Motor Co.,
alleging fraud, unjust enrichment, deceptive trade and Magnuson-
Moss Warranty Act violations.

Storto bought a 2013 Ford Fusion in March 2013, with a MyFord
Touch system, powered by a Microsoft operating system.  Installed
in Ford, Lincoln and Mercury models since 2011, the system costs
$1,795, and incorporates GPS navigation system, Sirius satellite
radio and Bluetooth communication, controls the heat and air, and
may be used to contact emergency services.

Her lawsuit says the MyFord Touch software freezes, endangering
drivers, leaving them unable to defrost windows or dial 911, and
Ford's "updates" have made the system worse.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Vincent Louis DiTommaso, Esq.
          DITOMMASO LUBIN, P.C.
          17W 220 22nd Street, Suite 410
          Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181
          Telephone: (630) 333-0000
          E-mail: vdt@ditommasolaw.com

The case is Storto v. Ford Motor Company, Case No. 1:14-cv-00037,
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois (Chicago).


GANNETT CO: Sued for Spam Calling People on Do Not Call Registry
----------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Casagrand and Dylan Schlossberg individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Gannett Co., Inc., a Delaware
corporation, and Marketing Plus, Inc., a New Jersey corporation,
Case No. 2:14-cv-00022-SRC-CLW (D.N.J., January 2, 2014) seeks to
stop the Defendants' alleged practice of making unsolicited calls
to the telephones of consumers nationwide, and to obtain redress
for all persons injured by their conduct.

The Defendants placed telemarketing calls to consumers, who had
registered their telephone numbers with the National Do Not Call
Registry for the specific reason of avoiding telemarketing calls,
the Plaintiffs contend.  They argue that by making the phone calls
at issue in this Complaint, the Defendants caused the Plaintiffs
and the other members of the Classes actual harm, including the
aggravation and nuisance that necessarily accompanies the receipt
of unsolicited phone calls and the monies paid to their telephone
carriers for the receipt of those calls.

Gannett Co., Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in
McLean, Virginia.  Gannett is a media and marketing company with a
portfolio of broadcast, digital, mobile and publishing companies.
Gannett's 82 daily newspapers, including USA TODAY, reach over 10
million readers nationwide.

Marketing Plus, Inc. is a New Jersey corporation headquartered in
Woodbridge, New Jersey.  Marketing Plus is a full service
telemarketing company that specializes in newspaper promotion.
Marketing Plus is the primary telemarketer for Gannett and works
closely with Gannett to promote its stable of newspaper
properties.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jay Edelson, Esq.
          Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
          Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
          Christopher L. Dore, Esq.
          EDELSON PC
          350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (312) 589-6370
          Facsimile: (312) 589-6378
          E-mail: jedelson@edelson.com
                  rbalabanian@edelson.com
                  brichman@edelson.com
                  cdore@edelson.com

               - and -

          Stefan L. Coleman, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF STEFAN COLEMAN, LLC
          1072 Madison Avenue, Suite 1
          Lakewood, NJ 08701
          Telephone: (877) 333-9427
          E-mail: law@stefancoleman.com


GOLDMAN SACHS: Accused of Restraining Trade & Supply of Aluminum
----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Javorsky and Brick Pizzeria LLC, on behalf of themselves,
and all others similarly situated v. The Goldman Sachs Group,
Inc., GS Power Holdings LLC, Metro International Trade Services
LLC, JPMorgan Chase & Company, Henry Bath LLC, Glencore Xstrata
PLC, Pacorini Metals AG, Pacorini Metals USA LLC, Nems (USA) Inc.,
London Metal Exchange Limited, LME Holdings Limited, and John Does
1-25, Case No. 1:13-cv-09222-UA (S.D.N.Y., December 31, 2013)
accuses the Defendants of engaging in illegal acts and practices
to restrain trade and supply of aluminum stored in London Metal
Exchange-approved warehouses.

The Defendants own or operate a majority of LME-approved
warehouses in seven of the nine regions in which the warehouses
exist in the United States of America.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Rosalee Belinda Connell Thomas, Esq.
          Douglas G. Thompson, Esq.
          Michael Glenn McLellan, Esq.
          Eugene J. Benick, Esq.
          FINKELSTEIN, THOMPSON & LOUGHRAN LLP
          1077 30th Street, NW, Suite 150
          Washington, DC 20007
          Telephone: (202) 337-8000
          Facsimile: (202) 337-8090
          E-mail: rbcthomas@finkelsteinthompson.com
                  dthompson@finkelsteinthompson.com
                  mmclellan@finkelsteinthompson.com
                  ebenick@finkelsteinthompson.com


GOOGLE INC: 9th Cir. Rejects Bid to Rehear Privacy Suit Ruling
--------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Graham, writing for The Recorder, reports that the Ninth
Circuit has rejected Google's bid for rehearing of a privacy
decision involving its Street View mapping project.  But the
appellate court retracted language declaring that unencrypted
Wi-Fi transmissions are not "readily accessible to the general
public" -- a holding that Google and its lawyers had argued was
premature.

"The factual question the panel resolved was not decided by the
district court; it was not argued by the parties; and it was
beyond the proper scope of the appeal," Wilmer Cutler Pickering
Hale and Dorr partner Seth Waxman had argued in Google's petition
for rehearing.

The Dec. 27 order in Joffe v. Google leaves intact the appellate
court's main holding, that Wi-Fi transmissions are not "radio
communications" exempt from the privacy protections of the Wiretap
Act and the Electronic Communications Privacy Act.  The practical
effect is that a potentially massive class of home computer users
can move forward against Google in multidistrict litigation in San
Francisco federal court before U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer.
Plaintiffs are led by Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, Cohen
Milstein Sellers & Toll and Spector Roseman Kodroff & Wills.

Google set out six years ago to map street-level views of cities
and neighborhoods around the world.  Google says the goal was only
to map wireless access points, and blames a rogue engineer for
developing a program that also captured payload content --
including user names, passwords, email addresses and other
sensitive data -- as it streamed across those wireless networks.
The engineer invoked the Fifth Amendment before the Federal
Communications Commission.

Google sought to dismiss the suit on the ground that Wi-Fi
transmissions are "radio communications" that are "readily
accessible to the general public."  U.S. District Judge James Ware
disagreed and a Ninth Circuit panel led by Judge Jay Bybee
affirmed. Bybee wrote that Congress would not have considered
"radio" to include Wi-Fi broadcasts.  And because Wi-Fi signals
travel only a few hundred feet and require sophisticated software
to decode, they are not "readily accessible to the general
public," he concluded.

Google argued that the Ninth Circuit had essentially granted
summary judgment to plaintiffs without the development of any
factual record.  Google enlisted Waxman to join its legal team at
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati and took the unusual step of
filing not only a petition for rehearing but also a reply brief in
support of its own petition.


HAIN CELESTIAL: Faces Suit Over Products' "All Natural" Claim
-------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Anderson, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., and Does 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. 8:13-cv-01747-DOC-AN (C.D. Cal., November 5,
2013) accuses the Defendant of exploiting the market for natural
products by representing that its products are "All Natural."

Hain Celestial prominently labels its products as "All Natural"
when in fact they contain artificial ingredients, Ms. Anderson
contends.

The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., is a Delaware Corporation.  Hain
Celestial manufactures several food products, including a line of
"Dream" drink products that include the Sunflower Dream Sunflower
Drink Unsweetened (Original) product.  The Plaintiff does not know
the true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Chant Yedalian, Esq.
          CHANT AND COMPANY APLC
          1010 N. Central Avenue
          Glendale, CA 91202
          Telephone: (877) 574-7100
          Facsimile: (877) 574-9411
          E-mail: chant@chant.mobi


HEALTHCARE STAFFING: Fails to Pay Overtime Wages, Class Says
------------------------------------------------------------
Tymeco Jones, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated,
826 South 6th Street, Camden, NJ 08104; Iesha Bullock, on behalf
of herself and those similarly situated, 6202 Cresent Court,
Glassboro, NJ 08028; and Teairra Pizarro, on behalf of herself and
those similarly situated, 1038 N. 31st Street Apt. 8, Camden, NJ
08105 v. Healthcare Staffing/Silver Care d/b/a Alaris Health at
Cherry Hill, 1417 Brace Road, Cherry Hill, NJ 08034; and John Does
1-10, Case No. 1:13-cv-07910-NLH-AMD (D.N.J., December 31, 2013)
seeks redress from violations by the Defendants of the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New Jersey Wage and Hour Law and New Jersey
Wage Payment Law.

The Plaintiffs assert that the Defendants failed to pay the
Plaintiffs and those similarly situated proper overtime
compensation in violation of the FLSA and New Jersey Wage Laws.

Healthcare Staffing/Silver Care d/b/a Alaris Health at Cherry Hill
is an entity operating a nursing home in Cherry Hill, New Jersey.
The Doe Defendants are presently unknown persons.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Justin L. Swidler, Esq.
          Richard S. Swartz, Esq.
          Matthew D. Miller, Esq.
          SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC
          1878 Marlton Pike East, Ste. 10
          Cherry Hill, NJ 08003
          Telephone: (856) 685-7420
          Facsimile: (856) 685-7417
          E-mail: jswidler@swartz-legal.com
                  rswartz@swartz-legal.com
                  mmiller@swartz-legal.com


INCREDIBLE NOVELTIES: Recalls Candy Sweet Spots Due to Eggs
-----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 19, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Egg
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Incredible Novelties Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8525

Affected products: 56 g. Candy Sweet Spots with codes 2158613 and
2335613 and UPC 0 73563 00471 6

Incredible Novelties Inc., is recalling Candy Sweet Spots from the
marketplace because they contain egg which is not declared on the
label.  People with an allergy to egg should not consume the
recalled product.

If you have an allergy to egg, do not consume the recalled product
as it may cause a serious or life-threatening reaction.

There has been one reported reaction associated with the
consumption of this product.

The recall was triggered by a recall in another country.  The
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is conducting a food safety
investigation, which may lead to the recall of other products.  If
other high-risk products are recalled the CFIA will notify the
public through updated Food Recall Warnings.

The CFIA is verifying that industry is removing recalled product
from the marketplace.


JOOVY: Recalls Zoom Car Seat Adapter Due to Fall Hazard
-------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Joovy, announced a voluntary recall of about 1,500 Zoom Car Seat
Adapter.  Consumers should stop using this product unless
otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to
resell a recalled consumer product.

Adapter clips can loosen on the stroller frame, posing a fall
hazard.

The firm has received nine reports of incidents involving loose
adapters on stroller frames.  There are no injuries reported.

The recall involves all Joovy's Zoom gray metal car seat stroller
adapters.  The adapters are gray with black plastic clips designed
to attach infant car seats to stroller frames.  The adapter
frame's dimensions are approximately 17" x 13" x 10".  Recalled
car seat adapter models include 00945 for Graco, 00946 for Chicco
and 00947 for Peg Perego frames.  "Joovy" and the model numbers
can be found on the label at the center of the end bar of the
adapter.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/QsPfPN

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at
independent specialty juvenile retailers and online at Joovy.com
between May 2012 and August 2013 for about $25.

Consumers should stop using these adapters and contact Joovy for a
free repair kit to help assure proper attachment to Zoom stroller
frames.


KENTUCKY, USA: Accused of Discrimination by Deaf Inmates' Class
---------------------------------------------------------------
Oscar Adams and Michael Knights, Individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. the Commonwealth of Kentucky, et al.,
Case No. 3:14-cv-00001-GFVT (E.D. Ky., January 1, 2014) alleges
that the Department of Corrections and other Defendants
discriminated against the Plaintiffs by refusing to provide them
the accommodations required by the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

The Plaintiffs, who are deaf and hearing-impaired inmates in
Kentucky, seek to force the Corrections Department to provide
interpreter services for medical visits, video phones that allow
deaf callers to see sign language and other hearing devices,
according to Brett Barrouquere at The Associated Press.  Without
the devices, the inmates said they can't adequately communicate
with prison staff, other inmates and their lawyers, which deprives
them of rights and privileges granted to other inmates.

The Defendants are the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Kentucky Justice
and Public Safety Cabinet, Kentucky Department of Corrections, J.
Michael Brown, LaDonna Thompson, Kimberly Potter-Blair, Paula
Holden, Deputy Commissioner Jim Erwin, Randy White, Gregory Howard
and Clark Taylor.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregory Allen Belzley, Esq.
          Camille Bathurst, Esq.
          BELZLEY BATHURST, ATTORNEYS
          P.O. Box 278
          Prospect, KY 40059
          Telephone: (502) 292-2452
          E-mail: gbelzley@aol.com

               - and -

          Deborah Golden, Esq.
          WASHINGTON LAWYER'S COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS
          AND URBAN AFFAIRS
          11 Dupont Circle, N.W., Suite 400
          Washington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 319-1000
          Facsimile: (202) 319-1010

               - and -

          Patrick J. McCarthy, Esq.
          WEIL GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP - DC
          1300 Eye Street NW, Suite 900
          Washington, DC 20005-3314
          Telephone: (202) 682-7240
          Facsimile: (202) 857-0940
          E-mail: edward.mccarthy@weil.com


LEESE ENTERPRISES: Recalls Simply Lite Choco Over Undeclared Milk
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 3, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Leese Enterprises International Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Leese Enterprises
International Inc. are warning people with allergy to milk not to
consume certain Simply Lite brand Dark Chocolate.  The affected
product contains milk protein which is not declared on the label.

The following product has been distributed in Alberta, British
Columbia, Manitoba, Ontario, and may have been further distributed
in other provinces.

If you have allergy to milk, do not consume the recalled product
as it may cause a serious or life-threatening reaction.

There have been no reported illnesses associated with the
consumption of this product.

The recall was triggered by CFIA test results.  The CFIA is
conducting a food safety investigation, which may lead to the
recall of other products.  If other high-risk products are
recalled the CFIA will notify the public through updated Food.

Affected products: 85 g. Simply Lite 50% Cacao Low Carb Sugar Free
Dark Chocolate with UPC 0 00790 20012 3


LEGEND ENERGY: Faces "Pratt" Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
James Pratt, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
employees v. Legend Energy Services, LLC, Case No. 6:13-cv-00090
(S.D. Tex., December 31, 2013) is brought for unpaid overtime
wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.  The Plaintiff, on
behalf of himself and all similarly situated employees, seeks
damages and reasonable attorney's fees.

Legend Energy Services, LLC, is a Delaware limited liability
company.  The Company is one of the oil industry's premier coiled
tubing service specialists with service centers in Victoria and
Andrews, Texas, Elk City, Oklahoma, Ft. Lupton, Colorado and
Dickinson, North Dakota.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Charles L. Scalise, Esq.
          ROSS LAW GROUP
          1104 San Antonio Street
          Austin, TX 78701
          Telephone: (512) 474-7677
          Facsimile: (512) 474-5306
          E-mail: charles@rosslawgroup.com

               - and -

          Amie Pratt, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF AMIE PRATT
          710 Buffalo Street, Suite 401
          Corpus Christi, TX 78401
          Telephone: (361) 947-3693
          Facsimile: (866) 497-3864
          E-mail: Amie@amieprattlaw.com


LOBLAW COMPANIES: Recalls Certain No Name Tomato Condensed Soup
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 19, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Nutrition
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Loblaw Companies Limited
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8517

Affected products: 284 ml. No Name Tomato Condensed Soup with all
lot codes where sodium is declared as 500 mg per serving and UPC
number 0 60383 01083 6


LOVELACE HEALTH: Sued Over Provision of Mental Health Services
--------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Forshay and her daughter Emily Haddaway, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. Lovelace Health
Plan doing business as Lovelace Health System, Inc., and as
Lovelace Insurance Company, and Health Care Service Corporation
doing business as Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Mexico, Case
No. 1:13-cv-01248-KBM-RHS (D.N.M., December 31, 2013) alleges
violations of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974
and the New Mexico Mental Health Parity Law.

The complaint seeks to rectify Lovelace Health Plan's alleged
failure to provide mental health services on par with other
medical services as required by the ERISA and the Parity Law.

Lovelace Health Plan owns and operates the Lovelace Health Plan
HMO based in New Mexico.  The Plan is available as a fully-insured
benefit to group subscribers of any size and to their
employee/dependent beneficiaries.  Lovelace Health Plan does
business in New Mexico as Lovelace Health System, Inc., and
Lovelace Insurance Company.

Health Care Service Corporation, doing business in New Mexico as
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Mexico, announced on
November 11, 2013, that it had reached an agreement with Lovelace
to acquire Lovelace, and will assume the management and
liabilities of Lovelace.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          John W. Boyd, Esq.
          Josh Ewing, Esq.
          FREEDMAN BOYD HOLLANDER GOLDBERG URIAS & WARD, P.A.
          20 First Plaza, NW, Suite 700
          Albuquerque, NM 87102
          Telephone: (505) 842-9960
          Facsimile: (505) 842-0761
          E-mail: jwb@fbdlaw.com
                  je@fbdlaw.com

               - and -

          Meiram Bendat, Esq.
          PSYCH-APPEAL, INC.
          8560 West Sunset Blvd., Suite 500
          West Hollywood, CA 90069
          Telephone: (310) 598-3690
          Facsimile: (310) 564-0040
          E-mail: meiram@psych-appeal.org


LSI CORP: Being Sold to Avago for Too Little, Shareholder Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Northern California Pipe Trades Pension Plan, on behalf of itself
and all other similarly situated shareholders of LSI Corporation
v. Charles A. Haggerty, Richard S. Hill, John H.F. Miner, Arun
Netravali, Charles C. Pope, Gregorio Reyes, Michael G. Strachan,
Abhijit Y. Talwalkar, Susan Whitney, LSI Corporation, Avago
Technologies Limited, Avago Technologies Wireless (U.S.A.)
Manufacturing Inc., Leopold Merger Sub, Inc., Case No. 9220-VCN
(Del. Ch. Ct., January 2, 2014) arises from the LSI Board's
decision to inappropriately "lockup" the sale of the Company
through, among other things, a provision in the merger agreement
that contractually prohibits the Board from releasing any
interested suitor from a previously entered into confidentiality
agreement and standstill provision.

The LSI Board agreed on December 15, 2013, to sell the Company to
Avago in exchange for $11.15 in cash per LSI share, yielding an
aggregate purchase price of $6.6 billion.

The most likely bidders for LSI -- those who would have already
conducted diligence on the Company -- are barred from presenting a
superior proposal, the Plaintiff contends.  The Plaintiff adds
that by contractually tying their hands, the Board members have
breached their fiduciary duty to maximize value in this all-cash
sale.

Northern California Pipe Trades Pension Plan is a stockholder of
LSI.

LSI was incorporated in Delaware and is headquartered in San Jose,
California.  LSI designs semiconductors and software that
accelerate storage and networking in datacenters, mobile networks
and client computing.  The Individual Defendants are directors and
officers of the Company.

Avago Technologies Limited is a Singaporean limited liability
company.  Avago is a leading designer, developer and global
supplier of a broad range of analog semiconductor devices with a
focus on compound III-V semiconductor-based products.  Avago's
product portfolio includes thousands of products in three primary
target markets: wireless communications, wired infrastructure and
industrial and other.

Avago Technologies Wireless (U.S.A.) Manufacturing Inc. is a
Delaware corporation, an indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary of
Avago Technologies Limited.  Leopold Merger Sub., Inc. is a
Delaware corporation and a direct wholly-owned subsidiary of Avago
Technologies Limited formed for purposes of the Proposed
Transaction.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Stuart M. Grant, Esq.
          Cynthia A. Calder, Esq.
          Justin K. Victor, Esq.
          GRANT & EISENHOFER PA
          123 Justison Street
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 622-7000
          Facsimile: (302) 622-7100
          E-mail: sgrant@gelaw.com
                  ccalder@gelaw.com
                  jvictor@gelaw.com

               - and -

          Mark Lebovitch, Esq.
          David Wales, Esq.
          Amy Miller, Esq.
          Jeremy Friedman, Esq.
          BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
          1285 Avenue of the Americas
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (212) 554-1400
          Facsimile: (212) 554-1444
          E-mail: markl@blbglaw.com
                  DWales@blbglaw.com
                  amym@blbglaw.com
                  JeremyF@blbglaw.com


MEDICAL MGMT: Deceives Optimum Wellness Plan Clients, Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory T. Pero, an individual, et al.; on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Medical Management International,
Inc., d.b.a. Banfield Pet Hospital, a Delaware corporation, Case
No. 8:13-cv-01749-JLS-AN (C.D. Cal., November 5, 2013) alleges
that Banfield does not provide the promised savings and discounts
under its "Optimum Wellness Plans," and that Banfield upsells
unnecessary pet car to OWP clients.

The class action lawsuit seeks to remedy Banfield's alleged
deceptive marketing of savings and discounts under OWPs, and
Banfield's deceptive and coercive upselling of additional pet care
products and services.

Banfield is part of the multi-billion dollar Mars, Inc.
conglomerate, which is best known for selling branded candy
products.  Banfield operates hundreds of pet care outlets through
PetSmart stores around the country.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lee M. Gordon, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
          301 North Lake Avenue, Suite 203
          Pasadena, CA 91101
          Telephone: (213) 330-7150
          Facsimile: (213) 330-7152
          E-mail: lee@hbsslaw.com

               - and -

          Steve W. Berman, Esq.
          HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
          1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300
          Seattle, WA 98101
          Telephone: (206) 623-7292
          Facsimile: (206) 623-0594
          E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          John K. Rubiner, Esq.
          BIRD MARELLA BOXER WOLPERT NESSIM DROOKS & LINCENBERG PC
          1875 Century Park East 23rd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90067-2561
          Telephone: (310) 201-2100
          Facsimile: (310) 201-2110
          E-mail: jkr@birdmarella.com

               - and -

          Mara W. Murphy, Esq.
          WILLIAMS & CONNOLLY
          725 12th St. NW
          Washington, DC 20005-5901
          Telephone: (202) 434-5000
          E-mail: mmurphy@wc.com


MTI GROUPS: Recalls Motha Wattalappan Pudding Mix
-------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 24, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Allergy Alert
Subcategory:              Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           MTI Groups Inc.
Distribution:             Ontario, Quebec
Extent of the product
Distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8480

Affected products: 110 g. Motha Wattalappan Pudding Mix with
Expiry Date: 2015.05.21, MFD: 2013.05.22, Batch No.: 0522T0515 and
UPC 4 792551 010039


NATIONAL FOOTBALL: Faces Suit Over Sale of Super Bowl Tickets
-------------------------------------------------------------
A federal class action claims the NFL is unjustly enriching itself
and violating state law by following its traditional practice of
allowing only 1 percent of Super Bowl tickets to be sold to the
public at face value, reports Cheryl Armstrong, writing for
Courthouse News Service.

Just 775 of the 77,500 tickets for this year's Super Bowl will be
available at face value to the general public.

Lead plaintiff Josh Finkelman cites a 2001 New Jersey consumer
fraud law -- N.J.S.A. 56:8-35.1 -- which prohibits withholding of
more than 5 percent of seating for any event from the general
public.  The Legislature passed the law to prevent price gouging.

In the two-count lawsuit, Finkelman claims the NFL unjustly
enriches itself by violating the state's consumer fraud law.

The NFL allots Super Bowl tickets to insiders and corporations,
leaving few tickets available for common sports fans.

Super Bowl XLVIII will be held on Feb. 2 at MetLife Stadium, in
East Rutherford, N.J.  It has a seating capacity of 77,500.

Of these 77,500 seats, the complaint states, the NFL will allow
the general public 775 tickets, or 1 percent.

"These tickets are distributed via a random drawing from entries
submitted from February to March of the previous year," the
complaint states.  "Those who are selected can then purchase
tickets at the face value of the tickets.

"The remaining tickets are distributed with seventy-five percent
(75%), split among the thirty-two (32) NFL teams: five percent
(5%) to the host team, seventeen and a half percent (17.5%) to
each team represented in the Super Bowl, while thirty-five percent
(35%) are split among the remaining twenty-nine (29) teams, with
each getting 1.2%.  The remaining twenty-five percent (25%) is
controlled by the NFL for distribution to companies, broadcast
networks, media sponsors, the host committee and other league
insiders."  (Parentheses in complaint).

Finkelman claims that the individual NFL teams do not make their
allotments of Super Bowl tickets available to the general public,
but offer them to resellers.

These resellers have "lucrative contracts" with the NFL and their
franchises and purchase tickets in bulk to regular season games
"to secure a small allotment of Super Bowl tickets."

This secondary market allows resellers to grossly inflate the
price of tickets and sell them in costly packages that include
transportation, hotels and other entertainment.

One package for the upcoming game is selling for more than $18,000
per person.

"According to the NFL itself, research on the secondary market
during the 2013 Super Bowl shows that many six hundred dollar
($600.00) tickets sold for three thousand dollars ($3,000.00),
while seats near midfield went for up to six thousand, one hundred
dollars ($6,100.00) and premium club seats went for six thousand,
four hundred dollars ($6,400.00) -- multiples of their seat
value," the complaint states.

Despite having tax-exempt status that saves it millions of
dollars, and despite being paid $4 billion by networks this season
for rights to broadcast games, the NFL is planning to nearly
double the price of tickets for Super Bowl XLVIII, the class
claims.

"It is anticipated that tickets to club-level mezzanine seats will
sell for approximately two thousand, six hundred dollars
($2,600.00) per ticket, up from the same ticket selling for one
thousand, two hundred fifty dollars ($1,250.00) at the 2013 Super
Bowl game in New Orleans.

"MetLife's seating capacity of approximately 77,500 seats will
bring in revenues that could exceed two hundred million dollars
($200,000,000)."

Finkelman seeks class certification, an injunction, and damages
for unjust enrichment and violations of the New Jersey Consumer
Fraud Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bruce Heller Nagel, Esq.
          NAGEL RICE, LLP
          103 Eisenhower Parkway, Suite 201
          Roseland, NJ 07068
          Telephone: (973) 618-0400
          Facsimile: (973) 618-9194
          E-mail: bnagel@nagelrice.com

The case is Finkelman v. National Football League, Case No. 3:14-
cv-00096-PGS-DEA, in the U.S. District Court for the District of
New Jersey (Trenton).


NY FIRE DEP'T: Faces "Ramos" Suit Seeking Payment for Back Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Manuel Ramos, both individually and on behalf of all other
similarly situated persons v. The City of New York Fire
Department, Salvatore J. Cassano, as Commissioner of The City of
New York Fire Department, Michael R. Bloomberg, as Mayor of the
City of New York, The City of New York, Case No. 1:13-cv-09225-KBF
(S.D.N.Y., December 31, 2013) alleges that the Plaintiff and the
Class are entitled to back wages for unpaid wages and other relief
from the Defendants for all work performed pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Fausto Ernesto Zapata, Jr., Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF FAUSTO E. ZAPATA, JR., P.C
          277 Broadway, Suite 206
          New York, NY 10007
          Telephone: (212) 766-9870
          Facsimile: (212) 766-9869
          E-mail: fz@fzapatalaw.com


OAKLEY TRANSPORT: Fails to Pay Overtime Premium, Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Jeannette Liciaga, on behalf of herself and those similarly
situated v. Oakley Transport, Inc., a Florida Profit Corporation,
Case No. 8:13-cv-03276-RAL-TGW (M.D. Fla., December 31, 2013)
alleges that the Plaintiff and similarly situated employees of
Oakley worked in excess of 40 hours in a week without receiving
pay at one and one-half times their regular rate for hours worked
in excess of 40 hours.

Oakley Transport, Inc., is a Florida Profit Corporation,
headquartered in Polk Country, Florida.  The Company is primarily
engaged in operating a trucking and recruiting service.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Richard Bernard Celler, Esq.
          RICHARD CELLER LEGAL, P.A.
          7450 Griffin Road, Suite 230
          Davie, FL 33314
          Telephone: (954) 318-0268
          Facsimile: (954) 337-2771
          E-mail: richard@floridaovertimelawyer.com


OCWEN LOAN: Duns People for Discharged Mortgage Loans, Class Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that Ocwen Loan Servicing duns
people for mortgage loans that have been discharged in bankruptcy,
a class action claims in Ohio Federal Court.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael B. Zieg, Esq.
          James E. Nobile, Esq.
          NOBILE & THOMPSON CO., LPA
          4876 Cemetery Rd.
          Hillard, OH 43026
          E-mail: mzieg@ntlegal.com
                  jenobile@ntlegal.com

The case is Amerine v. Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, Case No. 2:14-cv-
00015-MHW-MRA, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Ohio (Columbus).


PRESSLER & PRESSLER: Faces "Lechtrecker" Suit Over FDCPA Violation
------------------------------------------------------------------
Joshua J. Lechtrecker, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. Pressler & Pressler, LLP, a/k/a Pressler and Pressler,
LLP, Case No. 2:13-cv-06733-FSH-JBC (D.N.J., November 5, 2013)
alleges violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew Wei Li, Esq.
          THE WOLF LAW FIRM, LLC
          1520 U.S. Highway 130, Suite 101
          North Brunswick, NJ 08902
          Telephone: (732) 545-7900
          Facsimile: (732) 545-1030
          E-mail: ali@wolflawfirm.net

               - and -

          Christopher J. Mcginn, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF CHRISTOPHER J. MCGINN
          75 Raritan Ave., Suite 220
          New Brunswick, NJ 08904
          Telephone: (732) 937-9400
          Facsimile: (800) 931-2408
          E-mail: mcginn.chris@gmail.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Mitchell L. Williamson, Esq.
          PRESSLER & PRESSLER, LLP
          7 Entin Road
          Parsippany, NJ 07054
          Telephone: (973) 753-5100
          E-mail: mwilliamson@pressler-pressler.com


QUEST DIAGNOSTICS: Illegally Took Fund From Bank Acct., Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nadene Moore, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Quest Diagnostics Incorporated, and Does 1 through 10,
inclusive, and each of them, Case No. 8:14-cv-00015 (C.D. Cal.,
January 6, 2014) is brought pursuant to the Electronic Funds
Transfer Act.

The Plaintiff brings the Complaint for damages, injunctive relief,
and any other available legal or equitable remedies, resulting
from the alleged illegal actions of the Defendant debiting her and
also the putative Class members' bank accounts on a recurring
basis without obtaining a written authorization for preauthorized
electronic fund transfers from their accounts.

Quest Diagnostics Incorporated is a collection agency
headquartered in Dauphin, Pennsylvania.  The Company is a business
entity that offers health screening and diagnostic testing.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd M. Friedman
          Nicholas J. Bontrager
          Suren N. Weerasuriya
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
          369 S. Doheny Dr., #415
          Beverly Hills, CA 90211
          Telephone: (877) 206-4741
          Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
          E-mail: tfriedman@attorneysforconsumers.com
                  nbontrager@attorneysforconsumers.com
                  sweerasuriya@attorneysforconsumers.com


RBD STAFFING: Removes "Gongora" Class Suit to S.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Gongora v. RBD Staffing, Inc., et
al., Case No. ECU07969, was removed from the Superior Court of
California for Imperial County to the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of California (San Diego).  The District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 3:13-cv-03193-L-WMC to the proceeding.
The lawsuit alleges employment discrimination.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alex P. Katofsky, Esq.
          GAINES & GAINES, APLC
          21550 Oxnard Street, Suite 980
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (818) 703-8985
          Facsimile: (818) 703-8984
          E-mail: alex@gaineslawfirm.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Timothy L. Johnson, Esq.
          OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C.
          10620 Treena Street, Suite 230
          San Diego, CA 92131
          Telephone: (858) 935-6043
          Facsimile: (877) 509-9090
          E-mail: tim.johnson@ogletreedeakins.com


REGAL CONFECTIONS: Recalls Super Candy Buttons Due to Egg
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 20, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Egg
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Regal Confections Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8528

Affected products: 54 g. Super Candy Buttons with 605262 code and
6 62572 45130 9 UPC

Regal Confections Inc. is recalling Super Candy Buttons from the
marketplace because they may contain egg which is not declared on
the label.  People with an allergy to egg should not consume the
recalled product described below.

If you have an allergy to egg, do not consume the recalled product
as it may cause a serious or life-threatening reaction.

There have been no reported reactions associated with the
consumption of this product.

The recall was triggered by a recall in another country.  The
Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is conducting a food safety
investigation, which may lead to the recall of other products.  If
other high-risk products are recalled the CFIA will notify the
public through updated Food Recall Warnings.

The CFIA is verifying that industry is removing recalled product
from the marketplace.


SCHOOL OUTFITTERS: Recalls Science Tables Due to Injury Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
School Outfitters of Norwood, Ohio, announced a voluntary recall
of 655 Norwood Furniture Science Tables.  Consumers should stop
using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to
resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The wooden legs can split causing instability which poses an
injury hazard to those using the table

There have been eight reports of instability of the tables, three
of which are reports of the legs splitting.  No reported injuries.

The recall involves Norwood Furniture's science tables.  The
rectangular tables have a black laminate finish tabletop with a
light brown hardwood base and four legs.  There are black floor
grips at the bottom of each wooden leg.  The table has two
rectangular, front open compartments.  The affected products
include item numbers, NOR-PIH1027-SO for the 24" W x 48" L x 30" H
table, NOR-PIH1028-SO for the 24" W x 54" L x 30" H table and
NOR-PIH1029-SO for the 24" W x 60" L x 30" H table.  Consumers can
locate the item number on the underside of the tabletop which is
listed with the Commercial Furniture phone number, the OCI# and
Country of Origin: China.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/nJnzYD

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold
exclusively at online at http://www.schooloutfitters.comfrom June
2013 through September 2013 for about $190 to $220.

Customers should contact School Outfitters to set up repair
appointments with installation experts to replace the legs on all
affected tables free of charge.  School Outfitters is contacting
customers directly.


SHINE 1023 INC: Class Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum & OT Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lamberto Guzman, Rey Alberto Guzman, Viva Habal and Javier
Hernandez, on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated v.
Shine 1023 Inc., d/b/a Sunac Natural Food Market, Albert Hyun Moon
Shin, John Doe 1 a/k/a "Mr. Charlie" and John Does #2-10, jointly
and severally, Case No. 1:13-cv-09240-LTS (S.D.N.Y., December 31,
2013) seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime,
spread-of-hours premiums, and statutory penalties for notice-and-
recordkeeping violations and unlawful retaliation for the
Plaintiffs.

Shine 1023 Inc., is a New York domestic corporation, which is
based and does business in New York as Sunac Natural Food Market.
Albert Hyun Moon Shin, Mr. Charlie and the Doe Defendants are
shareholders of Sunac.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Eugene Gerald Eisner, Esq.
          EISNER & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          113 University Place
          New York, NY 10003
          Telephone: (212) 473-8700
          Facsimile: (212) 473-8705
          E-mail: gene@eisnermirer.com


SICILIAN ICE: Recalls Pistachio Nut Ice Cream Due to Cashews
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 19, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Allergy Alert
Subcategory:              Allergen - Tree Nut
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Sicilian Ice Cream Co. Ltd.
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail, Hotel/Restaurant/Institutional
CFIA reference number:    8524

Affected products:

  Brand Name             Common Name                   UPC
  ----------             -----------                   ----
  Sicilian Ice Cream    Pistachio Nut Ice Cream    7 71146 00014 7
  Sicilian Ice Cream    Pistachio Nut Ice Cream    Item #: 45008


SPECIALIZED BICYCLE: Recalls Source 11 & Source Expert Disc Bikes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Specialized Bicycle Components, Inc., of Morgan Hill, Calif.,
announced a voluntary recall of about 173 2012 Source Eleven and
Source Expert Disc bicycles with Supernova Switchable Dynamo Front
Hubs.  Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise
instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a
recalled consumer product.

The set screws in the front hub of the recalled bicycles can
loosen and stop the front wheel from turning, posing a fall hazard
to consumers.

No incidents or injuries were reported.

The recalled products are 2012 model year Source Eleven and Source
Expert Disc bicycles with Supernova Switchable Dynamo Front Hubs
as part of the original equipment.  The name "Specialized" is
printed on the bicycle's down tube and "Source Eleven" or "Source
Expert" are printed on the top tube.  The front hubs have
"www.supernova-lights.com" and one of the following model numbers
printed on them: 1207, 1208, 1226, 1227, 1228, 1241, 1254, 1263,
1284 and 1344.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/AQJQJh

The recalled products were manufactured in Taiwan and sold at
authorized Specialized Bicycle dealers in the United States from
October 2011 to September 2013 from about $2,000 to 2,700.

Customers should immediately stop riding the recalled bicycles and
bring them to an authorized Specialized dealer for a free
replacement front wheel and new Supernova front hub.  For a list
of authorized dealers go to http://www.specialized.com/and click
on Dealers in the upper right hand corner of the page.


TARGET CORP: Faces "Casey" Suit Over Computer and Network Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
Winston Casey, Rick Hauss and Sandy Hauss on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated v. Target Corporation, Case No.
1:13-cv-13296-FDS (D. Mass., Dec 31, 2013) arises from the
nationwide breach in Target's point-of-sale retail credit/debit
card processing network and computer system, and "cardholder data
environment" compromised personal and financial data connected to
millions of Target customers' credit and debit card accounts
between November 27, 2013, and December 15, 2013.

Target Corporation is organized under the laws of Minnesota, with
a principal place of business in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          David Pastor, Esq.
          PASTOR LAW OFFICE, LLP
          63 Atlantic Avenue, 3rd Floor
          Boston, MA 02110
          Telephone: (617) 742-9700
          Facsimile: (617) 742-9701
          E-mail: dpastor@pastorlawoffice.com

               - and -

          Preston W. Leonard, Esq.
          LEONARD LAW OFFICE, LLP
          139 Charles St., Suite A121
          Boston, MA 02114
          Telephone: (617) 595-3640
          E-mail: pleonard@theleonardlawoffice.com

               - and -

          Janine L. Pollack
          Stacey Kelly Breen
          Lydia Keaney Reynolds
          WOLF HALDENSTEIN ADLER FREEMAN & HERZ, LLP
          270 Madison Avenue
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 545-4600
          E-mail: Pollack@whafh.com
                  Breen@whafh.com
                  Reynolds@whafh.com


TARGET ENTERPRISE: Sued by Group Leaders Over Unpaid Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rene Moya, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated who consent to their inclusion v. Target Enterprise,
Inc., Case No. 1:13-cv-01377-GTS-CFH (N.D.N.Y., November 5, 2013)
is a collective action brought on behalf of all "group leaders" of
Target, who are or were employed by Target at one of their
distributions centers within the last three years to recover
unpaid overtime pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Target's slogan is: "Expect More. Pay Less," Mr. Moya says.
Unfortunately, he contends, Target took this slogan too literally
by expecting "more" hours out of its employees and paying them
"less" wages.

Target Enterprise, Inc., is a foreign for-profit corporation
organized in Minnesota.  Target is one of the largest retail
discount stores in the world, with more than 361,000 employees
worldwide.  Target has 37 distributions centers located in 22
states, including the Plaintiff's former place of employment at
Target-Wilton.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dale J. Morgado, Esq.
          MORGADO LEGAL, P.A.
          14 Wall Street
          20th Floor, Suite 2040
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 991-8431
          Facsimile: (212) 991-8439
          E-mail: dmorgado@ffmlawgroup.com


TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Antitrust Suit by Cafeteria Employees
-----------------------------------------------------------------
School Cafeteria Employees Local No. 634 Health and Welfare Fund,
on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated v. Teva
Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Limited,
Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc., Barr Laboratories Inc., Duramed
Pharmaceuticals Inc. (n/k/a Teva Women's Health Inc.), Duramed
Pharmaceuticals Sales Corp., Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GMBH &
Co. KG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GMBH, and Boehringer
Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. 0:13-cv-03650-MJD-SER
(D. Minn., December 31, 2013) alleges violation of civil antitrust
laws on behalf of a Class of indirect purchasers of the drug
Aggrenox since August 14, 2009.

Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and its affiliates
developed Aggrenox, combining extended-release dipyridamole with
acetylsalicylic acid, aspirin, to lower the risk of stroke in
patients whose blood clots have caused a transient ischemic attack
or stroke.  The Plaintiff and members of the Class indirectly
purchased, reimbursed or otherwise paid for Aggrenox at a time
when Boehringer orchestrated a scheme to prevent Plaintiff and the
Class from purchasing a less expensive, generic equivalent of
Aggrenox, the Plaintiff contends.

School Cafeteria Employees Local No. 634 Health and Welfare Fund
is a trust/fund headquartered in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  The
Fund is a trust established and administered under the laws of the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and is a "governmental plan" as
defined by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.
The Fund is a "voluntary employees' beneficiary association"
providing for the payment of sick benefits (prescription, vision,
dental, and related benefits) to the Fund Participants and their
eligible dependents.

Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Teva
Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited, is a Delaware corporation
headquartered in North Wales, Pennsylvania.  Teva Pharmaceuticals
USA, Inc., manufactures and distributes generic drugs for sale
throughout the United States at the direction, under the control,
and for the direct benefit of its parent company.  Teva
Pharmaceuticals Industries Limited is an Israeli corporation
headquartered in Petach Tikva, Israel.  Teva is a leading
manufacturer of generic drugs, and is one of the largest sellers
of generic drugs in the United States.  Teva purchased Barr
Pharmaceuticals Inc. on December 23, 2008.

Barr Pharmaceuticals Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered
in Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey.  On December 23, 2008, Barr became
a wholly-owned subsidiary of Teva.  Barr Laboratories Inc. is a
Delaware corporation headquartered in Woodcliffe Lake, New Jersey.
Barr Laboratories, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in
Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey.  On December 23, 2008, Barr became a
wholly-owned subsidiary of Teva.

Duramed Pharmaceuticals Inc. is a Delaware corporation
headquartered in Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey.  Until 2008, Duramed
was a subsidiary of Barr.  In December 2008, when Teva purchased
Barr, Duramed became a subsidiary of Teva and is now known as Teva
Women's Health Inc.  Duramed Pharmaceuticals Sales Corp. is a
Delaware corporation headquartered in Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey.
Duramed Pharmaceuticals Sales Corp. was a subsidiary of Barr until
December 2008, when it became a subsidiary of Teva.

Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG is a German limited
partnership headquartered in Ingelheim, Germany.  Boehringer
Ingelheim International GmbH is a German limited liability company
headquartered in Ingelheim, Germany.  Boehringer Ingelheim
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered in
Ridgefield, Connecticut.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David Woodward, Esq.
          Renae D. Steiner, Esq.
          HEINS MILLS & OLSON, P.L.C.
          310 Clifton Avenue
          Minneapolis, MN 55403
          Telephone: (612) 338-4605
          Facsimile: (612) 338-4692
          E-mail: dwoodward@heinmills.com
                  rsteiner@heinsmills.com

               - and -

          Krishna Narine, Esq.
          Joel Meredith, Esq.
          MEREDITH & NARINE
          100 S. Broad St., Suite 905
          Philadelphia, PA 19110
          Telephone: (267) 800-2639
          Facsimile: (267) 687-1628
          E-mail: knarine@m-npartners.com
                  jmeredith@m-npartners.com


THRIFTY FOODS: Recalls Nanaimo Hot Barbecue Chicken Products
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 4, 2014
Type of communication:    Advisory
Alert sub-type:           Food Safety Warning
Subcategory:              Chemical
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Thrifty Foods
Distribution:             British Columbia
Extent of the product
distribution:             Consumer

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) and Thrifty Foods Port
Place are warning the public not to consume the products due to
possible chemical contamination.

The affected products have been sold at Thrifty Foods - Port
Place, 650 South Terminal Avenue, Nanaimo, British Columbia, on
January 3, 2014, between 3-6 p.m. only.

Check to see if you have the product in your home.  If the product
is in your home do not consume it.  Consumers who are unsure if
they have the affected products are advised to check with their
retailer.

There have been no reported illnesses associated with the
consumption of these products.

Affected products:

  Brand Name      Common Name      Size   Code(s) on Product
  ----------      -----------      ----   ------------------
  Thrifty Fresh!  Whole Barbecue   Whole Chicken   Best Before
                  Chicken Regular                  2014JA04

  Thrifty Fresh!  BBQ Chicken      Various         Best Before
                  Breasts Hot!!                    2014JA04
                                                   2014JA04

  Thrifty Fresh!  Chicken Legs     Various         Best Before
                   Hot                             2014JA04


UNITED STATES: Justice Dep't Opposes Injunction in Nuns' Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
According to an article posted by Marcia Coyle at The Blog of
Legal Times, the Obama Administration on Jan. 3 told the U.S.
Supreme Court that an order of Catholic nuns had no legal basis to
argue that the federal healthcare law involves them in providing
contraceptive insurance coverage.

"They need only self-certify that they are non-profit
organizations that hold themselves out as religious and have
religious objections to providing coverage for contraceptive
services, and then provide a copy of their self-certification to
the third-party administrator of their self-insured group health
plan," wrote Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr.  "At that
point, the employer-applicants will have satisfied all their
obligations under the contraceptive coverage provision."

Mr. Verrilli was responding to an order by Justice Sonia Sotomayor
on Dec. 31 that the government respond to a request for an
injunction by the Little Sisters of the Poor, a Catholic order of
nuns who care for the elderly sick and poor in Denver and
Baltimore.  They provide employee benefits through Christian
Brothers Employee Benefit Trust, a self-insured church plan, which
is administered by Christian Brothers Services, also a party to
the high court case.

Justice Sotomayor imposed a temporary injunction blocking the
Jan. 1 effective date by which, the nuns argued, they were
required to provide contraceptive insurance to their employees.
With the government's response now filed, Justice Sotomayor or the
full court will likely issue an additional order today or in the
next few days.

The nuns' counsel, Mark Rienzi of the Becket Fund for Religious
Liberty, reacted quickly to the government's arguments, saying,
the government was asking the Supreme Court "to look the other way
while it coerces the Little Sisters."  He added that the
government devoted its reply to trying to keep the court out of
the issue "which would leave hundreds of religious organizations
subject to massive fines for following their religion."

In addition to urging the court to reject the nuns' requested
injunction, Mr. Verrilli also said their alternative request --
that the justices grant full review of their claims before an
appeals court heard the case -- was premature.  "The lack of even
one court of appeals decision addressing the merits of applicants'
claim is reason enough to deny their petition for certiorari
before judgment," he wrote.

The Affordable Care Act requires some employers to provide
coverage for preventive services in their employee group health
plans.  Under the law's regulations, those services include
coverage for all FDA-approved contraceptive methods, including
emergency contraceptives, sterilization procedures, and related
patient education and counseling.

Mr. Verrilli said both the federal district court and the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit had recognized that the
nuns' case involves a church insurance plan that is exempt from
regulation under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974.  Because of that exemption, their plan's administrator is
under no legal obligation to provide the coverage after the nuns
certify their objections.

In fact, he added, the church plan administrator has said it will
not provide contraceptive coverage.  "As a result, a signed
certification will discharge all employer- applicants'
responsibilities under the contraceptive-coverage provision, and
their employees will not receive such coverage from the third-
party administrator," he wrote.

The nuns filed their lawsuit in September challenging the
contraception requirement under the Religious Freedom Restoration
Act, the First Amendment, the 14th Amendment, and the
Administrative Procedure Act.  The nuns argue they do not qualify
for any of the law's exemptions because their Trust is not a
grandfathered plan and they do not meet the definition of
"religious employers" because they are not directly owned or
controlled by local Catholic bishops.  They are part of an
international order of nuns.

A federal district court on Dec. 27 denied the Little Sisters'
request for an injunction after finding that their rights were not
violated, and the Tenth Circuit affirmed on Dec. 31.  In their
application to Justice Sonia Sotomayor on Dec. 31, the Little
Sisters argued that they have "sincere and undisputed religious
objections" to the provision of those preventative care services
in their health insurance plan.  The requirement, they said, "will
expose the Little Sisters of the Poor to draconian fines unless
they abandon their religious convictions and participate in the
government's system to distribute and subsidize contraception,
sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs and devices."

Although the healthcare law allows them to opt out of the
requirement by submitting a "self certification" attesting to
their religious objections, they contend that the form makes them
complicit in providing contraception coverage because it then
authorizes their insurer or a third party administrator to issue
the coverage.  The insurer could then seek reimbursement from the
federal government.

"The result is a case that should be straightforward and easy
under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act ("RFRA")," wrote the
Becket Fund's Rienzi. "(Little Sisters) face a substantial burden
on their religious exercise because their religious beliefs and
objections are undisputed and sincere, and because the government
is imposing massive pressure on them to violate those beliefs."

However, the government told the court that the nuns were "simply
wrong as a factual matter" when they claim that self-certification
would be used to provide the services to which they object.

The case is Little Sisters of the Poor v. Sebelius.

The justices have granted review in two cases in which for profit
companies contend that the contraception requirement violates
their owners' deeply held religious beliefs. Those cases are
expected to be heard sometime in March.

The Becket Fund reports that there are 91 lawsuits challenging the
contraception requirement: 45 nonprofit lawsuits and 46 for-profit
challenges.  Injunctions have been granted in 19 of the nonprofit
cases and a denial in one.  In the for-profit cases, 33
injunctions have been approved and six denied.

The Little Sisters of the Poor responded to the Obama
Administration's arguments on Dec. 27 by saying the government is
"simply blind to the religious exercise at issue: the Little
Sisters and other Applicants cannot execute the (certification)
form because they cannot deputize a third party to sin on their
behalf."  The government's "casual dismissal of that religiously
forbidden act as a mere 'stroke of their own pen,' perpetuates
their claim below that the Little Sisters are fighting an
'invisible dragon.'  But minimizing someone's religious beliefs
does not make them disappear."

The nuns' counsel urged the justices to consider a grant of review
before judgment in their case as an alternative to an injunction.
"This dispute is unique: it is playing out in dozens of courts
across the country, with most having obtained the protection of
injunction, but not all.  Allowing this to run its course without
this Court's supervision means some religious organizations will
be forced into either hypocrisy or financial ruin, while others
are protected.  This state of affairs is not tolerable," argued
their lawyer.

There has been no action yet by Justice Sonia Sotomayor or the
full court.


UNITED STATES: Black Farmers Dispute Denial of Settlement Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
According to an article posted by Zoe Tillman at The Blog of Legal
Times, hundreds of potential claimants in the high-profile black
farmers discrimination case are challenging the denial of their
claims for a share of a $1.25 billion settlement fund.

The federal government agreed to settle claims of loan
discrimination by the U.S. Department of Agriculture not covered
by a previous settlement in 1999.  U.S. District Senior Judge Paul
Friedman approved the new settlement in 2011.

Since then, Judge Friedman wrote in a recent court filing, he has
received a flood of challenges from claimants who sought
compensation in the latest deal.  In his Dec. 31 opinion,
Judge Friedman told lawyers for the class and the U.S. Department
of Justice to respond to issues raised by the challengers by
Jan. 30.

The judge submitted a sample of the letters and motions he
received explaining the challengers' positions.  Many non-
prevailing claimants said their claims were wrongfully denied on
the grounds that they failed to prove they complained about
discrimination by July 1, 1997, in time to qualify for the
settlement.

Some non-prevailing claimants said the claims administrator
wrongly found that they failed to apply for certain assistance
from the U.S. Department of Agriculture between January 1981 and
December 1996, the time period covered by the settlement.  Others
filed general form letters seeking reconsideration.

A spokeswoman for the Justice Department could not immediately be
reached.  A lead attorney for the class, Andrew Marks --
amarks@coffeyburlington.com -- of Coffey Burlington, also could
not be reached.

The 2011 settlement was designed to resolve claims brought by
plaintiffs who didn't meet the deadline to file claims for the
first settlement, which was approved in 1999.  According to court
filings, the 2011 settlement would resolve pending claims filed by
approximately 40,000 plaintiffs.


WAL-MART STORES: Recalls Card Table & Chair Set Due to Fall Hazard
------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Wal-Mart Stores Inc., of Bentonville, Ark., announced a voluntary
recall of about 73,400 Mainstays five-piece card table and chair
sets.  Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise
instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a
recalled consumer product.

The chairs can collapse unexpectedly, posing a fall hazard and a
risk of finger injury, including finger amputation.

Walmart has received 10 reports of injuries from collapsing
chairs.  Injury reports include one finger amputation, three
fingertip amputations, sprained or fractured fingers and one
report of a sore back.

The recall involves the Mainstays card table sets with a black
padded metal folding table and four black padded metal folding
chairs.  "Made by: Dongguan Shin Din Metal & Plastic Products Co,"
the company that made the chair cushions, is printed on a white
label on the bottom of the chairs.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/ZC5fYF

The recalled products were manufactured in China and Taiwan and
sold exclusively at Walmart stores nationwide and online at
http://www.walmart.comfrom May 2013 through November 2013 for
about $50.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled card table
and chair sets and return the entire set to Walmart for a full
refund.


WELLS FARGO: Court Dismissed Suit Related to Mortgage Default
-------------------------------------------------------------
A man whose mother died before paying off a reverse mortgage has
no right to buy her property at 95 percent of its value, reports
Heather Johnson at Courthouse News Service, citing a federal court
ruling.

Home equity conversion mortgages (HECM), more commonly known as
reverse mortgages, involve a homeowner taking out a loan against
the property's equity.

"In the reverse of a typical mortgage, an HECM borrower generally
receives the loan proceeds in gradual payments and pays back the
loan in a lump sum," according to the ruling.

The death of the borrower is a qualifying event that triggers full
repayment of the loan, and Wells Fargo thus informed Robert
Chandler that he had to pay off a full loan balance of $388,000
when his mother died in January 2010 with a reverse mortgage
encumbering her home in Elk Grove, Calif.

Bought by Chandler's mother in the 1940s, the Elk Grove home had a
value of approximately $252,000.

When the bank put the loan in default, Chandler filed a putative
class action against the bank and Fannie Mae, which had bought the
reverse mortgage at some point.

Noting that Housing and Urban Development insured his mother's
reverse mortgage, Chandler accused the banks of violating HUD
guidance that allows for a borrower's heirs to satisfy mortgage
debt by paying the lesser of the loan balance or 95 percent of the
current appraised value of the property.

Wells Fargo and Fannie Mae countered that they are not obligated
by the 95 percent rule under the HECM deed issued to Chandler's
mother.

HUD regulations also do not support an heir's claim of right to
notice and opportunity to purchase mortgaged property at 95
percent of its appraised value, the companies claimed.

U.S. District Judge Samuel Conti agreed with the defendants and
dismissed the case with prejudice Friday, January 3, 2014.

"There are a few problems with plaintiff's contention that
paragraph 9(d) [of the HECM deed] entitles him to notice and an
opportunity to take advantage of the 95 percent rule," Conti
wrote.  "First and foremost, paragraph 9(d) specifically omits any
reference to paragraph 9(a)(i), which pertains to the death of a
borrower, as a triggering event for notice.  Second, paragraph
9(d) refers to the rights of the borrower, not the borrower's
heirs.  Third, because paragraph 9(d) provides that notice is only
required where the HECM becomes due and payable pursuant to
paragraphs 9(a)(ii) and 9(b), neither of which pertain to the
death of the borrower, and because paragraph 9(d) only allows for
options such as the purchase of the property for 95 percent of the
appraised value 'after notice,' it follows that the HECM deed does
not expressly provide the borrower's heirs with the right to take
advantage of the 95 percent rule after the death of the borrower."

Conti noted that another paragraph of the deed "merely provides
that the lender shall not be permitted to obtain a deficiency
judgment against the borrower if HECM deed is foreclosed."

"Nothing in this provision is inconsistent with refusing to allow
a borrower's heirs to purchase a borrower's property for 95
percent of its appraised value," the judge added.

Chandler had also tried to rely on guidance that HUD issued in
2011 even though, at the time of his mother's death in 2010, less
favorable HUD guidance from 2008 was controlling, according to the
ruling.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael Kai Ng, Esq.
          Kelly Anne Corcoran, Esq.
          KERR & WAGSTAFFE LLP
          100 Spear Street, Suite 1800
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 371-8500
          Facsimile: (415) 371-0500
          E-mail: mng@kerrwagstaffe.com
                  corcoran@kerrwagstaffe.com

               - and -

          Craig L. Briskin, Esq.
          Steven A. Skalet, Esq.
          MEHRI & SKALET, PLLC
          1250 Connecticut Ave., NW, Suite 300
          Wasington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 822-5100 x116
          E-mail: cbriskin@findjustice.com
                  sskalet@findjustice.com

               - and -

          Jean Marie Constantine-Davis, Esq.
          AARP FOUNDATION LITIGATION
          601 E Street, NW
          Washington, DC 20049
          Telephone: (202) 434-2058
          Facsimile: (202) 434-2064
          E-mail: jcdavis@aarp.org

The Defendants are represented by:

          Rebecca Snavely Saelao, Esq.
          SEVERSON & WERSON, A.P.C.
          One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94111-3715
          Telephone: (415) 398-3344
          Facsimile: (415) 956-0439
          E-mail: rss@severson.com

The case is Chandler v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., et al., Case No.
3:11-cv-03831-SC, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California (San Francisco).


WESTERN RICE: Recalls Grande Harvest Rice Over Gluten Presence
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 2, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Allergy Alert
Subcategory:              Allergen - Gluten
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Western Rice Mills Ltd.
Distribution:             Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba,
                          Saskatchewan
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8536

Affected products: 907 g. Grande Harvest 12 Grain Blended Rice
with all codes bearing a "Gluten Free" claim and UPC 0 61052
91408 0


WILLIAM QUINN: Accused of Not Paying Time Spent Going to Worksite
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Luis Roman, on behalf of himself, and all other plaintiffs
similarly situated, known and unknown v. William Quinn and Sons,
Inc., and William Quinn, individually, Case No. 1:13-cv-09320
(N.D. Ill., December 31, 2013) is brought under the Fair Labor
Standards Act, the Portal-to-Portal Act, the Illinois Minimum Wage
Law, and the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants did not compensate him
for time spent traveling between their company shop and the
worksites where landscaping and maintenance work was performed nor
for travel between a given day's worksites.

William Quinn And Sons, Inc., provides landscaping and snow
removal services.  William Quinn is the owner of William Quinn &
Sons, Inc.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John William Billhorn, Esq.
          Meghan VanLeuwen, Esq.
          BILLHORN LAW FIRM
          120 S. State Street, Suite 400
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 853-1450
          E-mail: jbillhorn@billhornlaw.com
                  mvanleuwen@billhornlaw.com

               - and -

          Vincent Beckman III, Esq.
          FARMWORKER AND LANDSCAPER ADVOCACY PROJECT
          33 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 900
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 784-3541



                             *********

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.  Noemi Irene A.
Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Valerie Udtuhan, Julie Anne L. Toledo,
Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2014. 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 or Nina Novak at 202-241-8200.



                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *