CAR_Public/140130.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Thursday, January 30, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 21

                              Headlines


ALLSTATE PROPERTY: Removed "Larey" Class Suit to W.D. Arkansas
AMERICAN HONDA: "Keegan" Suit Settlement Gets Final Court Approval
AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls 23,800 Lawnmowers Due to Laceration Hazard
ASTON MARTIN: Recalls 576 Cars Due to Accelerator Pedal Arm Defect
ATLANTIC SPORTSWEAR: Recalls Girl's 4 Season Polar-Lined Jacket

B&B HOLDING: Class Seeks Unpaid Wages and Overtime Compensation
BALARINI RESTAURANT: Fails to Pay Minimum and OT Wages, Suit Says
BARNES & NOBLE: Faces "Taylor" Securities Class Suit in New York
BARNES & NOBLE: Pomerantz Law Firm Files Class Action in New York
BOSTON SCIENTIFIC: Loses Bid to Dismiss "Sanchez" Pelvic Mesh Suit

BURNBRAE FARMS: Recalls Dried Whole Eggs Over Allergen
CALIFORNIA: Judge Files Class Action v. Retirement Systems
CONTINENTAL AIRLINES: "Castro" Suit Removed to C.D. California
ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS: Sued by Firefighters Over Lidoderm Patch
EXXON MOBIL: Trial Court Ruling in Ex-Workers' Suit Upheld

FORD MOTOR: Recalls 2011-'12 Explorer Over Steering Gear Issues
FREEDOM INDUSTRIES: Bankruptcy Temporarily Halts Spill Suits
GLAVAL: Recalls Entourage and Universal Buses
GOLDMAN SACHS: Must Face Class Action for CDO Investor Fraud
GORFIEN & JACOBSOHN: Fails to Pay Regular/Minimum Wage, Suit Says

GREEN FOREST: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum and OT Wages
GUESS? INC: Faces Class Action in California Over TCPA Violation
HONDA CANADA: Recalls Honda GCV160LA0 Engine Equipped Lawn Mowers
INTERTEK: Warns of Counterfeit "Go with Gio" Halogen Heaters
JAMES HOLDINGS: Faces Class Action Over I10 Widening Project

JPMORGAN CHASE: Court Remands "Pham" Suit to Alameda County Ct.
KAMA PIGMENTS: Recalls Lead White Oil Paint and Lead White Pigment
KINNIKINNICK FOODS: Recalls Food Products Over Undeclared Milk
KMART CORP: Obtains Final OK of $28,000 Cashiers' Suit Settlement
MASTIC ASSOCIATES: Remaining Complaint in Sandy Suit Dismissed

MY THAI I: Faces Suit Over Unpaid Minimum and Overtime Wages
NEW JERSEY: Governor Faces Class Action Over Second-Hand Bullying
OVERWAITEA FOOD: Recalls Hickory Smoked Spiral Sliced Ham
PHILIPS ENTERTAINMENT: Recalls Stage Light Barndoors
PILOT FLYING J: 3 Ex-Employees Plead Guilty in Rebate Scheme

PLUMREWARD LLC: Illegally Contacted Class, California Suit Claims
RIDDELL INC: Football Helmets Don't Reduce Concussions, Suit Says
RSI HOME: Recalls Bathroom Medicine Cabinets Due to Injury Hazard
SANITATION SALVAGE: Class Seeks Unpaid Wages for Overtime Work
SEARS HOLDINGS: Recalls Kenmore Oscillating Fan Heaters

STATE FARM: "Littleton" Class Suit Removed to the W.D. Arkansas
TACO MEX: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Waitresses Say
TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL: Faces Antitrust Suit Over ACTOS Product
TARGET CORP: Faces "Prado" Suit Over 2013 Data Security Breach
THINGS REMEMBERED: "Boylan" Class Suit Transferred to N.D. Ohio

THORATEC CORP: Pomerantz Law Firm Files Class Action in California
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Deceives Consumers Over Charges, Suit Says
ULTA SALON: Removed "Galvez" Class Suit to N.D. California
UNDER ARMOUR: Recalls Infant Sports Jersey Kits
UNILIFE CORP: Plaintiff Dismisses Shareholder Class Action

VIKING RANGE: "Piemonte" Suit Removed to New Jersey District Court
WOODBURY: Orange County Ct. Ruling in United Fairness Suit Flipped
WORLD SAVINGS: Suit Seeks Cancellation of Assignment of Deed

* Securities Class Actions Up 9% in 2013, Cornerstone Report Shows


                              *********


ALLSTATE PROPERTY: Removed "Larey" Class Suit to W.D. Arkansas
--------------------------------------------------------------
Allstate Property and Casualty Company removed the class action
lawsuit captioned Larey, et al. v. Allstate Property and Casualty
Company, Case No. 46CV-13-283-2, from the Miller County Circuit
Court to the U. S. District Court for the Western District of
Arkansas (Texarkana).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
4:14-cv-04008-SOH to the proceeding.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

           D. Matt Keil, Esq.
           John C. Goodson, Esq.
           KEIL & GOODSON
           406 Walnut Street
           P.O. Box 618
           Texarkana, AR 75504-0618
           Telephone: (870) 772-4113
           Facsimile: (870) 773-2967
           E-mail: mkeil@kglawfirm.com
                   jcgoodson@kglawfirm.com

                - and -

           George L. McWilliams, Esq.
           LAW OFFICE OF GEORGE L. MCWILLIAMS, P.C.
           406 Walnut
           Texarkana, AR 71854
           Telephone: (870) 772-2055
           Facsimile: (870) 773-2967
           E-mail: glmlawoffice@gmail.com

                - and -

           A.F. (Tom) Thompson, III, Esq.
           Kenneth (Casey) Castleberry, Esq.
           MURPHY, THOMPSON, ARNOLD, SKINNER & CASTLEBERRY
           P. O. Box 2595
           1141 East Main Street, Suite 300
           Batesville, AR 72503
           Telephone: (870) 793-3821
           Facsimile: (870) 793-3815
           E-mail: aftomt2001@yahoo.com
                   caseycastleberry2003@yahoo.com

                - and -

           Stephen C. Engstrom, Esq.
           WILSON, ENGSTROM, CORUM & COULTER
           200 South Commerce, Suite 600
           P.O. Box 71
           Little Rock, AR 72203
           Telephone: (501) 375-6453
           E-mail: stephen@wecc-law.com

The Defendant is represented by:

           Christopher J. Heller, Esq.
           FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK
           400 West Capitol, Suite 2000
           Little Rock, AR 72201
           Telephone: (501) 370-1506
           Facsimile: (501) 376-2147
           E-mail: heller@fridayfirm.com


AMERICAN HONDA: "Keegan" Suit Settlement Gets Final Court Approval
------------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Margaret M. Morrow entered final judgment approving
the settlement agreement in DAVID J. KEEGAN, LUIS GARCIA, ERIC
ELLIS, CHARLES WRIGHT, BETTY KOLSTAD, CAROL HINKLE, AND JONATHAN
ZDEB, individually, and on behalf of a class of similarly situated
individuals, Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC.,
Defendant, NO. 2:10-CV-09508-MMM-AJW, (C.D. Cal.).

The Court approved the terms of the Settlement Agreement as fair,
reasonable, and adequate and in the best interests of the
Settlement Class.

Judge Morrow affirmed the certification of the Settlement Class
defined as: "All residents of the United States, the Commonwealth
of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Guam who currently
own or lease, or previously owned or leased, 2006 and 2007 Honda
Civics, 2006 and 2007 Honda Civic Hybrids, and 2008 Honda Civic
Hybrids with a VIN range of JHMFA3 85000001-JHMFA3 85010456,
distributed for sale or lease in the United States (including
Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands)".

Judge Morrow affirmed its certification of the Settlement Si
Subclass defined as: All members of the Settlement Class who
currently own or lease, or previously owned or leased, a
Settlement Class Vehicle designated as a "Civic Si."

The court found that plaintiffs David J. Keegan, Luis Garcia, Eric
Ellis, Charles Wright, Bet Kolstad, Carol Hinkle, Shawn Phillips,
and Benettia Hall are members of the class, their claims are
typical of the class, and they fairly and adequately protected the
interests of the class throughout the proceedings in the
litigation. Accordingly, the court appointed David J. Keegan, Luis
Garcia, Eric Ellis, Charles Wright, Bet Kolstad, Carol Hinkle,
Shawn Phillips, and Benettia Hall as class representatives.
Additionally, the court found that plaintiff Shawn Phillips is a
member of the subclass, his claims are typical of the subclass,
and he fairly and adequately protected the interests of the
subclass throughout the proceedings in the litigation.
Accordingly, the court appointed Shawn Phillips as representative
of the Si subclass.

Judge Morrow appointed Michael A. Caddell, Cynthia B. Chapman, and
Cory S. Fein of Caddell & Chapman; Payam Shahian of Strategic
Legal Practices, APC; Robert L. Starr of The Law Office of Robert
L. Starr; and Matthew R. Mendelsohn and David A. Mazie of Mazie
Slater Katz & Freeman, LLC as Class Counsel on behalf of the class
and the subclass.

The Court approved attorneys' fees to Class Counsel in the amount
of $2,853,585.  The Court further approved expenses to Class
Counsel in the amount of $303,197.  Within 30 days after the
Effective Date, or within 30 days after the date when all appeals
with respect to Class Counsel fees and expenses have been fully
resolved, whichever occurs later, Honda will pay these amounts to
Michael A. Caddell of Caddell & Chapman to be distributed to Class
Counsel.

The Court awarded a service award of $35,000 in total and directed
Honda to pay this amount to the Representative Plaintiffs through
Class Counsel, to be distributed as:

      PLAINTIFF                    AWARD
      ---------                    -----
    David J. Keegan               $5,500
    Luis Garcia                   $5,500
    Eric Ellis                    $5,500
    Charles Wright                $5,500
    Bet Kolstad                   $5,500
    Carol Hinkle                  $5,500
    Shawn Phillips                $1,000
    Benittia Hall                 $1,000
                                  ------
    Total                        $35,000

A copy of the District Court's January 21, 2014 Order is available
at http://is.gd/eTtMC6from Leagle.com.

Michael A. Caddell, Esq., Cynthia B. Chapman, Esq., Cory S. Fein,
Esq., at CADDELL & CHAPMAN in Houston, Texas; and Payam Shahian,
Esq., at STRATEGIC LEGAL PRACTICES, APC, in Los Angeles,
California, represent the Plaintiffs.


AMERICAN HONDA: Recalls 23,800 Lawnmowers Due to Laceration Hazard
------------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
American Honda Motor Company, of Torrance, Calif., announced a
voluntary recall of about 20,800 Honda brand in U.S. and 48
Columbia brand lawnmowers in U.S. and 3,000 in Canada Walk-behind
21" lawnmowers.  Consumers should stop using this product unless
otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to
resell a recalled consumer product.

The engine stop switch can malfunction allowing the blade to
continue to rotate after the handlebar blade control lever is
released, which poses a laceration hazard.

Honda has received 11 reports of the lawnmower's blade continuing
to rotate after the handlebar control lever was released.  No
injuries were reported.

The recall involves two Honda models and one Columbia brand
electric start lawnmowers with Honda engines and 21" cutting
blades.  The Honda lawnmowers are red and silver (HRR) and red and
gray (HRX).  Both have "Honda" on the engine cover.  The model and
serial numbers are located on the certification label that is
affixed to the cutter housing deck behind the engine.  Honda
recalled lawnmowers are:

    Honda Models           Serial Number Range
    ------------           -------------------
    HRR2169VLA           MZCG-8764914  ~  MZCG-8824353
    HRX2174VLA           MAGA-2255148  ~  MAGA-2260227

The Columbia brand lawnmower, model number 12ALD33Q897, comes in
orange and black.  "Honda" is printed on the engine cover.  The
Honda engine serial number is located on a label on the back of
the engine.  It is also stamped into the engine block adjacent to
the oil filler cap/dipstick.  A range of affected Honda engines
installed in Columbia brand lawnmowers sold in the U.S. follows:

    Columbia Model          Honda Engine Serial Number Range
    --------------          --------------------------------
    1A313KC0835           GJARA 3641724  through  GJARA 3642215

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/EIif5Z

The recalled products were manufactured in USA and sold at Honda
brand lawnmowers at Honda Power Equipment dealers and Home Depot
stores nationwide from January 2013 through December 2013 for
between $580 and $780.  Columbia brand lawnmowers were sold at
Beaver Valley Supply, Denver, Colo; Lawn Equipment Parts Co, Inc.,
Marietta, Penn. and at Smiths South-Central Sales Co., Spring
Hill, La. from January  2013 through December 2013 for $500.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled lawnmowers.
Honda model owners should contact a Honda Power Equipment dealer
to schedule a free repair.  Columbia model owners should contact a
Honda Engine dealer to schedule a free repair.  American Honda is
contacting all registered customers directly.


ASTON MARTIN: Recalls 576 Cars Due to Accelerator Pedal Arm Defect
------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 21, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Powertrain
Units affected:           576
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014012
TC ID number:             2014012
Manufacturer recall
number:                   RA-03-0017

On certain vehicles, the accelerator pedal arm may fail.  This
would cause the throttle control to return to the idle position,
causing a reduction in engine power and propulsive force.  Loss of
vehicle propulsion, in conjunction with traffic and road
conditions, and the driver's reactions, could increase the risk of
a crash causing property damage and/or personal injury.

Dealers will replace the accelerator pedal assembly and adjust the
foot well scuff plate.  The recall supersedes recalls 2013185 and
2013367.  Vehicles that were repaired under the previous campaigns
will also need to be repaired under this campaign.

Affected products:

      Maker            Model           Model year(s) affected
      -----            -----           ----------------------
    ASTON MARTIN       DB9               2012, 2013
    ASTON MARTIN       VANTAGE V8        2012, 2013
    ASTON MARTIN       V8 VANTAGE S      2012, 2013
    ASTON MARTIN       V12 VANTAGE       2012, 2013
    ASTON MARTIN       DBS               2012, 2013
    ASTON MARTIN       VIRAGE            2012, 2013
    ASTON MARTIN       RAPIDE            2012, 2013
    ASTON MARTIN       RAPIDE S          2012, 2013


ATLANTIC SPORTSWEAR: Recalls Girl's 4 Season Polar-Lined Jacket
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 20, 2014
Posting date:             January 20, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Children's Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Strangulation Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-37629

Affected products: Atlantic Sportswear Girl's 4 Season Polar-Lined
Jacket model G2511 (PSG Sport brand) with Drawstrings in hood

The recall involves Atlantic Sportswear Girl's 4 Season Polar-
Lined Jacket model G2511 (PSG Sport brand) with Drawstrings in
hood.

Health Canada's sampling and evaluation program has revealed that
the recalled drawstrings on children's upper outerwear can become
caught on playground equipment, fences or other objects and result
in strangulation, or in the case of vehicle, the child being
dragged.

Health Canada has not received any reports of incidents or
injuries related to the use of this product.

For more information on the hazards related to drawstrings on
children's upper outerwear and for tips to help consumers
eliminate these hazards, see Health Canada's:  'Is Your Child
Safe', 'Industry Guide to Second-hand Products', and 'Children's
Sleepwear: Flammability Requirement Guidelines'.

Approximately 1495 jackets were sold at l'Aubainerie.

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold from
June 2013 to December 2013.

Companies:

   Distributor     Atlantic Sportswear
                   Montreal
                   Quebec
                   Canada

Consumers should immediately remove the drawstring from the jacket
to eliminate the hazard.


B&B HOLDING: Class Seeks Unpaid Wages and Overtime Compensation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Adam Parente, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. B&B Holding Enterprises, Inc., a Florida corporation,
and Joel Campo, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-20086-JAL (S.D.
Fla., January 8, 2014) is brought for violations of the Fair Labor
Standards Act, as amended.  The Plaintiff seeks unpaid wages,
unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages or pre-judgment
interest, post-judgment interest, reasonable attorney's fee and
costs from the Defendants.

B&B Holding Enterprises, Inc., is a Florida corporation and was,
at all relevant times, the Plaintiff's employer.  Joel Campo owned
and operated B & B, where the Plaintiff was employed.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Brian J. Militzok, Esq
           MILITZOK & LEVY, P.A.
           The Yankee Clipper Law Center
           3230 Stirling Road, Suite 1
           Hollywood, FL 33021
           Telephone: (954) 727-8570
           Facsimile: (954) 241-6857
           E-mail: bjm@mllawfl.com


BALARINI RESTAURANT: Fails to Pay Minimum and OT Wages, Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Diblasi and Eduardo Calle, on behalf of themselves, FLSA
Collective Plaintiffs and the Class v. Five "M" Corp., Balarini
Restaurant Corp., Ocinomled, Ltd., 50/50 Restaurant Corp., Milan
Licul, Branko Turcinovic, Dennis Turcinovic, Omer Grgurev and
Ferdo Grgurev, Case No. 1:14-cv-00125-UA (S.D.N.Y., January 8,
2014) alleges that pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
Plaintiffs and the class are entitled to recover from the
Defendants: (1) unpaid overtime, (2) unpaid minimum wages, (3)
lost compensation due to time shaving, (4) liquidated damages, and
(5) attorneys' fees and costs.

The Defendants operate a restaurant enterprise under the trade
name "Delmonico's Restaurant Group."

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

           C.K. Lee, Esq.
           Anne Melissa Seelig, Esq.
           LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
           30 East 39th Street, 2nd Floor
           New York, NY 10016
           Telephone: (212) 465-1124
           Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
           E-mail: cklee@leelitigation.com
                   anne@leelitigation.com


BARNES & NOBLE: Faces "Taylor" Securities Class Suit in New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Taylor, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., Leonard Riggio, William J.
Lynch, Jr. and Michael P. Huseby, Case No. 1:14-cv-00108-KMW
(S.D.N.Y., January 8, 2014) is a securities class action brought
on behalf of all purchasers of the common stock of Barnes & Noble
between February 25, 2013, and December 5,2013, inclusive.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants engaged in acts,
practices and a course of business that operated as a fraud or
deceit upon the Plaintiff and others similarly situated in
connection with their purchases of Barnes & Noble securities
during the Class Period.  The Plaintiff adds that the Defendants'
false statements maintained, and at certain times increased, the
stock price inflation in Barnes & Noble's stock price throughout
the Class Period.

Barnes & Noble is a New York City-based retailer of books and
digital media and digital media devices.  The Individual
Defendants are directors and officers of the Company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
           David A. Rosenfeld, Esq.
           ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
           58 South Service Road, Suite 200
           Melville, NY 11747
           Telephone: (631) 367-7100
           Facsimile: (631) 367-1173
           E-mail: srudman@rgrdlaw.com
                   drosenfeld@rgrdlaw.com

                - and -

           Corey D. Holzer, Esq.
           Marshall P. Dees, Esq.
           HOLZER & HOLZER, LLC
           200 Ashford Center North, Suite 300
           Atlanta, GA 30338
           Telephone: (770) 392-0090
           Facsimile: (770) 392-0029
           E-mail: cholzer@holzerlaw.com
                   mdees@holzerlaw.com


BARNES & NOBLE: Pomerantz Law Firm Files Class Action in New York
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP on Jan. 23 disclosed that it has filed a class
action lawsuit against Barnes & Noble, Inc. and certain of its
officers.  The class action, filed in United States District
Court, Southern District of New York, and docketed under 14 cv
0406, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or
entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Barnes & Noble
securities between July 27, 2012 and November 5, 2013, both dates
inclusive.  This class action seeks to recover damages against
Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws
pursuant to Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

If you are a shareholder who purchased Barnes & Noble securities
during the Class Period, you have until March 10, 2014 to ask the
Court to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.  A copy of
the Complaint can be obtained at http://www.pomerantzlaw.com
To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at
rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888-476-6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll
free, x237.  Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include
their mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares
purchased.

Barnes & Noble is one of the nation's largest booksellers,
providing customers easy and convenient access to books,
magazines, newspapers and other content across its multi-channel
distribution platform.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to
disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects.  Specifically, Defendants made false
and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1)
the Company engaged in improper accounting practices, including by
inappropriately allocating expenses between the Company's NOOK and
Retail segments; (2) the Company lacked adequate internal controls
over financial reporting; and, (3) as a result of the foregoing,
the Company's statements were materially false and misleading at
all relevant times.

On June 25, 2013, the Company announced that it would not be able
to file its annual report on time, and would need to evaluate its
prior financial statements in order to provide investors with
accurate financial statements.

On this news, the Company's shares fell $3.21 to close at $15.61
per share, a decline of more than 17%, on June 25, 2013.

On December 5, 2013, the Company announced in its Form 8-K, that,
"on October 16, 2013, the SEC's New York Regional office notified
the Company that it had commenced an investigation into: (1) the
Company's restatement of earnings announced on July 29, 2013, and
(2) a separate matter related to a former non-executive employee's
allegation that the Company improperly allocated certain
Information Technology expenses between its NOOK and Retail
segments for purposes of segment reporting.  The Company is
cooperating with the SEC, including responding to requests for
documents."

On this news, Barnes & Noble securities declined $1.96 per share,
or over 11%, to close at $14.43 per share on December 6, 2013.

With offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and San Diego, The
Pomerantz Firm -- http://www.pomerantzlaw.com-- concentrates its
practice in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust
class litigation.  Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known
as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered
the field of securities class actions.


BOSTON SCIENTIFIC: Loses Bid to Dismiss "Sanchez" Pelvic Mesh Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Brad Perriello, writing for MassDevice, reports that a federal
judge rejected a Boston Scientific bid to toss one of the
bellwether lawsuits in the multi-district litigation filed over
its pelvic mesh products, ruling that the statute of limitations
hadn't expired when the lawsuit was filed.

Roseanne Sanchez sued Boston Scientific in November 2012, alleging
product liability and personal injury claims over the implantation
of the Pinnacle pelvic floor repair kit and the Advantage
transvaginal mid-urethral sling in January 2010.  Boston
Scientific asked Judge Roger Goodwin of the U.S. District Court
for Southern West Virginia to dismiss the case, arguing that a
2-year statute of limitations had lapsed by the time Ms. Sanchez
filed suit.

Ms. Sanchez, who had 4 revision surgeries in 2010, should have
known then that there was a problem with the devices; that means
the statute was triggered then, the Natick, Mass.-based medical
device company argued, according to court documents.  Ms. Sanchez
countered that she didn't realize the persistent problems could be
due to a defective device until August 2011, according to the
documents.


BURNBRAE FARMS: Recalls Dried Whole Eggs Over Allergen
------------------------------------------------------
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:           Burnbrae Farms Ltd.
Distribution:             Alberta, Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Hotel/Restaurant/Institutional
CFIA reference number:    8564

Affected products: 22.7 kg. Burnbrae Farms Dried Whole Eggs with
UPC 10065651003012


CALIFORNIA: Judge Files Class Action v. Retirement Systems
----------------------------------------------------------
Michael J. Peil, writing for Metropolitan News, reports that Court
of Appeal Presiding Justice Robert M. Mallano has filed a class
action complaint against State Controller John Chiang, the judges'
retirement systems, and 100 unnamed defendants.

The complaint, filed on Jan. 21, seeks a declaration that since
2008, judicial salaries have been underpaid in light of the pay
increases mandated by Government Code Sec. 68203, which provides
that judicial salaries "shall be increased" each year by the
average percentage of salary increases of state employees, and
shall not be subject to the discretion of state officials.

                          The Complaint

Justice Mallano claims that he did not receive -- and does not
believe that any class member -- received an increase in salary or
derivative benefit from 2008-14.  He asserts, however, that
California state employees received average salary increases of at
least 0.97 percent from fiscal year 2007-08, and further increases
in 2009-11 of at least 0.21 percent.

Justice Mallano says the class of similarly situated persons for
this action consists of at least 1,600 active judges and justices,
and at least 1,800 judicial retirees, pension beneficiaries, and
survivors.  The latter group of the class, he explains, is listed
because the benefits from which they are to be paid corresponds to
the final judicial salaries of active judges.

Justice Mallano asserts in his complaint that the Los Angeles
Superior Court should retain jurisdiction.  Explaining that "all
California judges have at least an involuntary financial interest
in this case," so the rule of necessity applies.  He estimated
last December that a complete accounting of the additional pay he
was due by law would amount to about $15,000.

Since 1978, Justice Mallano has served as on the South Bay
Municipal Court, Los Angeles Superior Court, and Court of Appeal
for this district.  He has filed an application for retirement
with the Judges' Retirement System to be effective Feb. 28, 2014.

Justice Mallano is represented by Raoul D. Kennedy --
raoul.kennedy@skadden.com -- James P. Schaefer --
james.schaefer@skadden.com -- and William J. Casey --
william.casey@skadden.com -- of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher &
Flom LLP.


CONTINENTAL AIRLINES: "Castro" Suit Removed to C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The putative class action lawsuit titled Benjamin Castro v.
Continental Airlines Inc., et al., Case No. BC529105, was removed
from the Superior Court of California for the County of Los
Angeles to the United States District Court for the Central
District of California (Los Angeles).  The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 2:14-cv-00169-SVW-AGR to the proceeding.

The lawsuit alleges that the Defendants failed to provide accurate
wage statements to the Plaintiff and similarly situated employees.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Daniel H. Chang, Esq.
           Larry W. Lee, Esq.
           DIVERSITY LAW GROUP APC
           550 South Hope Street, Suite 2655
           Los Angeles, CA 90071
           Telephone: (213) 488-6555
           Facsimile: (213) 488-6554
           E-mail: dchang@diversitylaw.com
                   lwlee@diversitylaw.com

                - and -

           Edward Wonkyu Choi, Esq.
           Thomas Min Lee, Esq.
           LAW OFFICES OF CHOI AND ASSOCIATES APLC
           3435 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 2410
           Los Angeles, CA 90010
           Telephone: (213) 381-1515
           Facsimile: (213) 233-4409
           E-mail: edward.choi@calaw.biz
                   leethomas.esq@gmail.com

The Defendants are represented by:

           Carlos Jimenez, Esq.
           Craig Gerald Staub, Esq.
           LITTLER MENDELSON PC
           633 West 5th Street, 63rd Floor
           Los Angeles, CA 90071
           Telephone: (213) 443-4300
           Facsimile: (213) 443-4299
           E-mail: cajimenez@littler.com
                   cstaub@littler.com


ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS: Sued by Firefighters Over Lidoderm Patch
--------------------------------------------------------------
International Association of Fire Fighters Local 22 Health &
Welfare Fund, on behalf of itself and all others similarly
situated v. Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc.; Teikoku Pharma USA, Inc.;
Teikoku Seiyaku Co. Ltd.; Actavis, Inc.; Watson Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.; Watson Laboratories, Inc.; Anda, Inc.; Anda Pharmaceuticals,
Inc.; and Valmed Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-00092-GP
(E.D. Pa., January 8, 2014) is brought on behalf of a class of
end-payors, who purchased, reimbursed or otherwise paid for the
lidocaine patch, 5% that Endo sold under the name "Lidoderm."

Lidoderm is a pain patch that delivers the drug lidocaine
subcutaneously for the treatment of pain associated with post-
herpetic neuralgia.  The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants
violated antitrust laws through an overarching anticompetitive
scheme to delay illegally the entry onto the market of a less-
expensive, generic Lidoderm.

Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered
in Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania.  Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc. is a
specialty pharmaceutical company engaged in the research,
development, sale and marketing of prescription pharmaceuticals
used primarily to treat and manage pain.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Krishna B. Narine, Esq.
           Joel C. Meredith, Esq.
           MEREDITH & NARINE
           100 S. Broad St., Suite 905
           Philadelphia, PA 19110
           Telephone: (215) 564-5182
           Facsimile: (267) 687-1628
           E-mail: knarine@m-npartners.com
                   jmeredith@m-npartners.com

                - and -

           Stewart L. Cohen, Esq.
           Michael Coren, Esq.
           Jacob A. Goldberg, Esq.
           COHEN PLACITELLA & ROTH, P.C.
           Two Commerce Square, Suite 2900
           2001 Market Street
           Philadelphia, PA 19103
           Telephone: (215) 567-3500
           E-mail: scohen@cprlaw.com
           mcoren@cprlaw.com
           jgoldberg@cprlaw.com

                - and -

           Deborah R. Willig, Esq.
           Stuart W. Davidson, Esq.
           WILLIG, WILLIAMS & DAVIDSON
           1845 Walnut Street, 24th Floor
           Philadelphia, PA 19103
           Telephone: (215) 656-3600
           E-mail: dwillig@wwdlaw.com
                   sdavidson@wwdlaw.com

                - and -

           William H. London, Esq.
           Douglas A. Millen, Esq.
           FREED KANNER LONDON & MILLEN LLC
           2201 Waukegan Road, Suite 130
           Bannockburn, IL 60015
           Telephone: (224) 632-4521
           Facsimile: (224) 632-4521
           E-mail: blondon@fklmlaw.com
                   dmillen@fklmlaw.com


EXXON MOBIL: Trial Court Ruling in Ex-Workers' Suit Upheld
----------------------------------------------------------
The Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Two
affirmed a trial court's award of summary judgment to the
defendant in GEORGE VRANISH, JR., et al., Plaintiffs and
Appellants, v. EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION, Defendant and Respondent,
NO. B243443.

The Plaintiffs are Exxon employees who worked at Exxon's on-shore
facility near Gaviota, California.

On May 22, 2012, the trial court granted Exxon's motion for
summary judgment holding, among other things, that "undisputed
material facts establish that Plaintiffs' claims for additional
overtime compensation under Labor Code section 510 fails as a
matter of law."

A copy of the Appeals Court's January 22, 2014 Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/6xrKJLfrom Leagle.com.

For Plaintiffs and Appellants:

    Brian F. Van Vleck, Esq.
    VAN VLECK TURNER & ZALLER LLP
    6310 San Vicente Blvd., Ste. 430
    Los Angeles, CA 90048
    Telephone: (323)592-3505
    Facsimile: (323)592-3506

Stradling Yocca Carlson & Rauth's Jeffrey A. Dinkin, Esq. --
jdinkin@sycr.com -- John F. Cannon, Esq. -- jcannon@sycr.com --
and Gannon E. Johnson, Esq. -- gjohnson@sycr.com -- for Defendant
and Respondent.


FORD MOTOR: Recalls 2011-'12 Explorer Over Steering Gear Issues
---------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Mercuro, writing for Auto World News, reports that Ford has
decided to recall 395 2011-'12 Ford Explorer SUVs that might have
been serviced with a faulty steering gear, according to Edmunds.

The automaker said models serviced after September 1, 2013 are
affected.

If there is a software issue, the steering gear could become
locked, which would prevent drivers from being able to steer the
vehicle, increasing the chance of a crash, according to Ford.

"It is important to note that the vehicles being recalled are only
those that may have received a suspect replacement steering gear
after September 1, 2013," the Ford statement said.  "Check their
records to identify any customers who bought suspect parts and to
contact those customers about the recall if their information is
not already in the Ford system," according to Ford.

Ford said it is not aware of any accidents or injuries as a result
of the defect.

The recall was set to begin on January 24.

"We are also requesting our authorized parts distributors check
their records to identify customers who bought suspect parts and
advise them to visit a local Ford or Lincoln dealer to have the
recall performed," said Ford.

Dealers are being instructed to install a new steering gear to
help fix the issue, free of charge.

Owners with more questions can contact Ford at 1-866-436-7332.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration website has not
commented on the recall yet.


FREEDOM INDUSTRIES: Bankruptcy Temporarily Halts Spill Suits
------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that Freedom Industries Inc., the
company blamed for a chemical spill that left 300,000 West
Virginians without safe drinking water, filed for bankruptcy on
Jan. 17, temporarily shielding them from dozens of lawsuits, most
by businesses that were forced to shut down for days.

The company filed a Chapter 11 petition with the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court in the Southern District of West Virginia, eight days after
the spill began.  Freedom Industries used its bankruptcy papers as
a forum to speculate on how the spill might have happened.

Company president Gary Southern signed the paperwork, which
lists both the company's assets and liabilities as being between
$1 million and $10 million.  It says the company has at least 200
creditors and owes its top 20 creditors $3.66 million.

The bankruptcy proceedings temporarily halt the lawsuits against
Freedom Industries, said Charleston attorney Anthony Majestro --
amajestro@powellmajestro.com -- who is representing several small
businesses that sued the company.  Mr. Majestro said his clients
are weighing an option to petition the court to proceed in hopes
of collecting on Freedom's insurance policy.  It depends on the
company's level of coverage, Mr. Majestro said.

The bankruptcy filing doesn't stall lawsuits against other parties
targeted in the spill, said Washington D.C. attorney H. Jason
Gold.  Nor does it strip Freedom Industries' responsibility to
rectify environmental damage caused by the spill, said Department
of Environmental Protection spokesman Tom Aluise.

Some of the lawsuits in Kanawha County Circuit Court against
Freedom Industries also name West Virginia American Water Company
and Eastman Chemical, the producer of the coal-cleaning chemical
that spilled.  Freedom Industries also owes the Tennessee-based
company $127,475, bankruptcy documents show.

Mark E. Freedlander, an attorney with the law firm representing
Freedom Industries, said in a statement on Jan. 17 that "the
petition and related pleadings speak for themselves."

According to bankruptcy documents, Freedom Industries is wholly
owned by Chemstream Holdings, Inc., a company located at the
Pennsylvania headquarters of Rosebud Mining Company.

In the documents, the company also gives a possible explanation
for what caused the spill: Freedom Industries says a water line
burst during frigid temperatures, the ground beneath a storage
tank froze, and some kind of object punctured a hole in its side,
causing it to leak.  The water was tainted after a chemical used
to clean coal leaked from a storage tank and then a containment
area at a facility owned by Freedom Industries.  The water ran
into the Elk River, contaminating the state's largest water
system.

After the spill, residents in a nine-county area around the state
capital of Charleston were told not to use the water for anything
other than flushing toilets.  Some businesses and schools were
forced to close for several days.  The water restrictions have
since been lifted for most residents.

The spill has become the focal point of the state's 60-day
lawmaking session, which started the day before the Jan. 9 spill.
Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin announced plans on Jan. 17 to push for
regulation of above-ground storage tanks.  He also wants to
require contingency plans for water companies.  State Sen. John
Unger, D-Berkeley, has spelled out specifics to regulate and
inspect storage facilities in SB 373.

In Congress, Sens. Jay Rockefeller and Joe Manchin, both West
Virginia Democrats, have introduced a bill requiring state
inspections of above-ground chemical storage facilities, letting
states recoup costs for emergency responses and setting industry
standards for emergency responses.  Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.,
is also a bill sponsor.

Government entities ranging from the U.S. Attorney's Office to a
West Virginia legislative panel on water resources are
investigating the spill.

The terminal that leaked had not been inspected by state officials
since 2001, when it was owned by a different company operating
under more stringent rules.  State officials said Freedom
Industries bought the terminal last month, though the firm has
long been tied to the property.

Freedom bought the terminal from Etowah River Terminal LLC, a
company that Freedom formed the purpose of buying the terminal
site, according to a 2005 court filing.  State records show the
former president of Freedom Industries was listed as the manager
of Etowah.

A spokeswoman for Gov. Earl Ray Tomblin did not answer a phone
call for comment.


GLAVAL: Recalls Entourage and Universal Buses
---------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 13, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Bus
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Electrical
Units affected:           2
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014004
TC ID number:             2014004

On certain buses, the alternator wiring harness may be pinched
between the alternator mount plate and a heater hose clamp.  This
could damage the wiring insulation and eventually cause a
spark/arcing, increasing the risk of a fire causing property
damage and/or personal injury.

Dealers will inspect and, if necessary, reposition the heater hose
clamp.

Affected products:

    Maker       Model        Model year(s) affected
    -----       -----        ----------------------
    GLAVAL     UNIVERSAL      2011
    GLAVAL     ENTOURAGE      2010


GOLDMAN SACHS: Must Face Class Action for CDO Investor Fraud
------------------------------------------------------------
Jonathan Stempel, writing for Reuters, reports that Goldman Sachs
Group Inc. must face a class-action lawsuit accusing it of
defrauding investors to whom it sold $2 billion of risky debt
linked to subprime mortgages that it was betting against before
the 2008 financial crisis, a federal judge ruled on Jan. 23.

U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero in Manhattan rejected Goldman's
argument that claims by investors, led by the hedge fund Dodona I
LLC, over collateralized debt obligations known as Hudson
Mezzanine Funding were too "rife with differences, idiosyncrasies
and conflicts" to be pursued together.

Judge Marrero said that to require individual lawsuits over the
CDOs, which he once characterized as "Rube Goldberg-like," would
"exponentially" raise costs and waste judicial resources.

Lawrence Lederer -- llederer@bm.net -- a lawyer for Dodona, was
not immediately available to comment.

Dodona was formed in 2007 by Alan Brody, who also created the firm
Epirus Capital Management LLC.  Dodona accused Goldman of creating
Hudson Mezzanine Funding 2006-1 and 2006-2, which were backed by
residential mortgage-backed securities, in late 2006 to offload
subprime risk on unwitting investors and then secretly selling the
CDOs short.

Selling short involves betting that an investment will fall in
value.

Dodona said it bought $4 million of Hudson notes in early 2007,
but lost 97 percent of its investment when it sold them at 2.5
cents on the dollar just nine months later.

In April 2011, the U.S. Senate Permanent Subcommittee on
Investigations cited the Hudson CDOs as evidence that Goldman
tried to profit at clients' expense ahead of the financial crisis
by shedding exposure to subprime mortgages.

Dodona is represented by law firm Berger & Montague, which Judge
Marrero named as class counsel in the Hudson CDO case.

The case is Dodona I LLC v. Goldman Sachs & Co et al, U.S.
District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 10-07497.


GORFIEN & JACOBSOHN: Fails to Pay Regular/Minimum Wage, Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Cynthia Dean, individually and behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Gorfien & Jacobsohn, P.A., a Florida corporation,
Joseph Gorfien, individually, and Henry Jacobsohn, individually,
Case No. 0:14-cv-60042-JIC (S.D. Fla., January 8, 2014) accuses
the Defendants of not paying the Plaintiff her regular rate of pay
or the minimum wage for all hours she worked.

Gorfien & Jacobsohn, P.A., is a for-profit Florida corporation.
G&J is primarily engaged in the practice of dentistry.  The
Individual Defendants managed, owned, and operated G&J.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Michael A. Kaufman, Esq.
           LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL A. KAUFMAN, P.A.
           1655 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, Suite 1012
           West Palm Beach, FL 33401
           Telephone: (561) 478-2878
           Facsimile: (561) 584-5555
           E-mail: michael@mkaufmanpa.com


GREEN FOREST: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum and OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Pablo Reyes, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. Green Forest Food Corp. d/b/a Associated Supermarket,
Johnny Diaz, and Johnny Diaz, Jr., Case No. 1:14-cv-00124-LGS
(S.D.N.Y., January 8, 2014) alleges that pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act, he is entitled to recover from the Defendants
unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated
damages, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, and attorneys'
fees and costs.

The Defendants knowingly and willfully operated their business
with a policy of not paying either the FLSA minimum wage or the
New York State minimum wage to the Plaintiff and other similarly
situated employees, according to the complaint.

Green Forest Food Corp., doing business as Associated Supermarket,
is a New York domestic business corporation headquartered in
Bronx, New York.  The Individual Defendants are owners and
officers, directors, managers, and proprietors of the Company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Justin Cilenti, Esq.
           Peter Hans Cooper, Esq.
           CILENTI & COOPER, PLLC
           708 Third Avenue, 6th Floor
           New York, NY 10017
           Telephone: (212) 209-3933
           Facsimile: (212) 209-7102
           E-mail: icilenti@icpclaw.com
                   pcooper@jcpclaw.com


GUESS? INC: Faces Class Action in California Over TCPA Violation
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kyla Asbury, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that a class
action has been filed against Guess? Inc. in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of California after consumers
claim it negligently contacted them through text messaging and
violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Farideh Haghayeghi claims over the course of an extended period
beginning no later than 2009, the defendant and/or its agents
directed the mass transmission of text messages to cellular phones
nationwide in an attempt to reach customers or potential customers
of the defendant's products.

In 2013, Ms. Haghayeghi received several unsolicited text messages
on her cell phone from Guess?, which she claims constituted as
"calls" under the TCPA that were not for emergency purposes,
according to the suit.  Ms. Haghayeghi claims she did not provide
Guess? or its agents prior express consent to receive unsolicited
text messages and the defendant never told her that it would use
her cell phone number to send her promotional text messages.
Each text message was made using equipment that had the capacity
to store or produce 3 telephone numbers to be called, using a
random or sequential number generator, according to the suit.

Ms. Haghayeghi claims the defendants actions violated the TCPA and
caused her, and other class members, damages.  Ms. Haghayeghi is
seeking $500 for herself and each class member in statutory
damages.  She is being represented by Karen E. Nakon of Strategic
Legal Practices.

The case has been assigned to District Judge John A. Houston.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California at San
Diego case number: 3:14-cv-00020


HONDA CANADA: Recalls Honda GCV160LA0 Engine Equipped Lawn Mowers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 15, 2014
Posting date:             January 15, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Outdoor Living
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Laceration Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-37575

Affected products: Honda GCV160LA0 Engine Equipped MTD Lawn Mowers

The recall involves four brands of lawn mowers that are equipped
with a Honda GCV160LA0 engine.

Affected mowers and their descriptions are as follows:

    Mower Brands      MTD Model
    ------------      ---------
    YardMan           12AEB23Q501
    Columbia          12ALD33Q897
    Troy-Bilt         12ALD37Q563
    Cub-Cadet         12ARD23Q596

The engine stop switch can malfunction allowing the blade to
continue to rotate after the handlebar blade control lever is
released, posing a laceration hazard.

Honda Canada and MTD Products have received one report of a failed
switch in Canada with no related injuries.  There have been 11
reported cases of failed switches in the United States with no
reported injuries.

Health Canada has not received any reports of incidents or
injuries associated with the use of these lawn mowers.

Approximately 2,973 units of the recalled mowers were sold in
Canada at Canadian Tire, Home Hardware and various independent
retailers.  Approximately 20,850 Honda and MTD brand mowers were
sold in the United States at various retailers.

The affected mowers were sold from February 2013 to December 2013
in Canada and from January 2013 to December 2013 in the United
States.

The engine was manufactured in the United States and the lawn
mowers were assembled in the United States.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     Honda Power Equipment Manufacturing, Inc. (HPE)
                    Swepsonville
                    North Carolina
                    United States

   Distributor      MTD Products Inc.
                    Cleveland
                    Ohio
                    United States

Consumers should stop using the lawn mower immediately and contact
an authorized Honda Power Equipment dealer for a free repair.


INTERTEK: Warns of Counterfeit "Go with Gio" Halogen Heaters
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 16, 2014
Posting date:             January 16, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Tools and Electrical Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Unauthorized products
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-37561

Affected products: Counterfeit Go With Gio Halogen Heaters

The recall involves portable Go With Gio halogen heaters that bear
a counterfeit Intertek (ETL) certification mark.  The label
identifies the heater by model HG-160C and serial number 0392.

The Go With Gio halogen heater bears a counterfeit cETLus
certification mark and has not been evaluated by Intertek.  It is
unknown if this product is in compliance with the applicable
safety standard.

Health Canada has not received any reports of incidents or
injuries related to the use of these halogen heaters.

The number of units sold is unknown, but they were sold at various
retail and secondary market outlets.

The time period sold is unknown.

Consumers should stop using the affected halogen heaters
immediately.


JAMES HOLDINGS: Faces Class Action Over I10 Widening Project
------------------------------------------------------------
Kyle Barnett, writing for The Louisiana Record, reports that a
group of Jefferson Parish residents have filed a class action
lawsuit against those responsible for a widening project on
Interstate 10.

Richard Bagot, Joan Bagot, Wilson Revelle, Darla Rvelle, Mark
Guillote and Lashan Guillote, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated sued James Holdings LLC, Volkert Inc.,
Parish of Jefferson and the State of Louisiana throughout the
Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development in the 24th
Judicial District Court on Jan. 10.

Ms. Bagot claims that properties were damaged during construction
of the $42.2 million I-10 widening project, administered by
Volkert Inc. and the Louisiana Department of Transportation and
Development, that expanded Interstate 10 from six to 10 lanes and
added a sound wall between Clearview Parkway and Veterans
Boulevard in Metairie.

Mr. Bagot alleges that a proper permit was required for the street
to be used in such a manner and that any permit issued restricts
vehicle weight to five tons.  The plaintiffs claims the defendants
routinely drove trucks in the area in excess of eight tons and did
not have proper permits to do so.

The defendants are accused of negligence.

An unspecified amount in damages is sought for costs necessary to
remedy damages, compensatory costs, mental anguish, grief,
distress, loss of market value, attorney's fees and expert witness
fees.

Bagot et al are represented by Neil F. Nazareth of New Orleans-
based Martzell & Bickford APC.

The case has been assigned to Division O Judge Ross P. LaDart.

Case no. 734-522.


JPMORGAN CHASE: Court Remands "Pham" Suit to Alameda County Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Jeffrey S. White remanded the case captioned DINAH
PHAM, PAULA BERNAL, MARY F. BAILEY, on their behalf and on behalf
of those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK,
N.A., et al. Defendants, NO. C 13-04209 JSW, (N.D. Cal.) to the
Alameda County Superior Court.

This case is related to and is a continuation of Pham, et al. v.
JPMorgan Chase, et al., 12-CV-6579 (Pham I), in which Plaintiffs
sued, inter alia, JPMorgan Chase Bank and Wells Fargo Bank (Bank
Defendants), Money Mutual, Effective Marketing Solutions, Aaron
Shoaf, Montel Williams (Money Mutual Defendants), Cash Yes,
Gateway Holdings Group, LLC, Horizon Opportunities Group, SCS
Processing, LLC, Payday Valet, and VIP PDL Services, LLC (Offshore
Lender Defendants). On November 7, 2012, the Plaintiffs filed a
First Amended Complaint in Alameda County Superior Court.
Plaintiffs alleged that the Offshore Lender Defendants, based
primarily in the Caribbean or Central America, and unlicensed by
the state of California, entered into illegal deferred deposit
transactions (colloquially "payday loans") with the Plaintiffs.
Plaintiffs also alleged that Money Mutual, a payday lender
referral service, brokered some of these loans. According to the
Plaintiffs, the Bank Defendants withdrew money from the
Plaintiffs' checking accounts and electronically transmitted it to
bank accounts belonging to the Offshore Lender Defendants. Based
on these allegations, Plaintiffs brought claims for violations of
the California Deferred Deposit Transaction Law, aiding and
abetting violations of the CDDTL, violations of California's
Unfair Competition Law, and negligence. The Plaintiffs sought
relief in the form of compensatory damages, cancellation of unpaid
debt, punitive damages, attorney fees, a declaratory judgment, and
injunctive relief.

On December 31, 2012, Money Mutual filed a notice of removal
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sections 1332, 1441, 1446, and 1453. The
Bank Defendants subsequently joined in Money Mutual's removal.
Money Mutual and the Bank Defendants argued that the Court had
jurisdiction under the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA),
which grants federal district courts original jurisdiction over
certain class action suits. The Court concluded Defendants did not
meet their burden to show that the amount in controversy exceeded
$5,000,000 and granted Plaintiffs' motion to remand.

The parties continued to litigate this matter in state court, and
on July 15, 2013, Plaintiffs amended their complaint to substitute
PartnerWeekly, LLC and TSS Acquisition Company LLC for Doe
defendants. On July 30, 2013, the state court granted the Bank
Defendants' motions to compel arbitration, ordered those parties
to arbitration, and it stayed all claims against the Bank
Defendants pending arbitration. On August 9, 2013, Plaintiffs
amended their complaint to substitute Rare Moon Media LLC for a
Doe defendant. On August 30, 2013, the Court issued an Order in
Gilbert v. Bank of America, N.A., 13-CV-1171, which involves
allegations substantially similar to the allegations in this case
and involves many of the same defendants. The Court denied the
Gilbert plaintiff's motion to remand and found that the Court had
jurisdiction under the Edge Act, 12 U.S.C. section 632.

On September 11, 2013, PartnerWeekly and TSS filed a notice of
removal, in which they assert the Court has jurisdiction under the
Edge Act. On September 27, 2013, Rare Moon filed a joinder in and
consent to the notice of removal filed by Partnerweekly and TSS.
Rare Moon also asserts that the Court has jurisdiction under CAFA.

Plaintiffs Dinah Pham, Paula Bernal, and Mary F. Bailey filed a
motion to remand.

Judge White concluded that the Defendants have not met their
burden to show that the Bank Defendants are parties for purposes
of Edge Act jurisdiction.  Rare Moon has also failed to meet its
burden to show that this Court has jurisdiction under CAFA, he
said.  With regards, the Plaintiffs request for an award of
attorneys' fees and costs incurred as a result of Defendants'
allegedly improper removal, Judge White held that the Court does
not find that removal was frivolous or motivated by bad faith.

The Court, therefore, denied the request for attorneys' fees, and
granted the motion to remand the action to the Alameda County
Superior Court.

A copy of the District Court's January 21, 2014 Order is available
at http://is.gd/YwYbmefrom Leagle.com.


KAMA PIGMENTS: Recalls Lead White Oil Paint and Lead White Pigment
------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 15, 2014
Posting date:             January 15, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Chemicals
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Labelling and Packaging
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-37539

Affected products:

      Product Name            Size              UPC
      ------------            ----              ----
    Lead white oil paint     1 L           825250054456
    Lead white oil paint     37 mL tube    825250054395
    Lead white oil paint     125 mL tube   825250054425
    Lead white pigment Pw1   1/8 lb        825250065902
    Lead white pigment Pw1   1/4 lb        825250065933
    Lead white pigment Pw1   1/2 lb        825250065964
    Lead white pigment Pw1   1 lb          825250065995

Health Canada's sampling and evaluation program has revealed that
the recalled paint and pigment contain lead and do not have the
required warning statements for lead on their labels.  Paints used
by adults in arts, crafts or hobbies that contain lead over a
specified level are required by Canadian law to have bilingual
warning statements on their labels.

The lack of appropriate English and French warnings on the label
could result in the products being used improperly, and thereby
unintentionally exposing the user to lead.  Lead is a toxic heavy
metal and can cause adverse health effects if ingested.

Neither Health Canada nor Kama Pigments has received reports of
incidents or injuries to Canadians related to the use of the
recalled products.

Approximately 230 units of the recalled products were sold in
Canada.

The recalled products were manufactured in Canada and sold from
January 2009 to December 2013.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     Kama Pigments
                    Montreal
                    Quebec
                    Canada

Consumers should stop using the recalled products and contact the
manufacturer, Kama Pigments, at 1-866-972-2173 to obtain a
corrective label.


KINNIKINNICK FOODS: Recalls Food Products Over Undeclared Milk
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 15, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Updated Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Kinnikinnick Foods Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8556

The food recall warning issued on January 13, 2014 has been
updated to include additional codes.  The additional information
was identified during the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's (CFIA)
food safety investigation.

Kinnikinnick Foods is recalling the Kinnikinnick Foods brand
products listed below from the marketplace because they contain
milk which is not declared on the label.  People with an allergy
to milk should not consume the recalled products described below.

If you have an 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 these products.

The recall was triggered by the company.  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 products
from the marketplace.

Affected products:

   Brand name       Common name          Size        UPC
   Kinnikinnick    Original Homestyle    210 g.   6 20133 00198 1
   Foods            Waffles
   Kinnikinnick    Cinnamon &            210 g.   6 20133 00199 8
   Foods            Brown Sugar
                    Homestyle
                    Waffles
   Kinnikinnick    Kinni-Kwik Bread      465 g.   6 20133 10550 4
   Foods            & Bun Mix
   Kinnikinnick    Pancake               454 g.   6 20133 10512 2
   Foods            & Waffle Mix
   Kinnikinnick    Panko Style           350 g.   6 20133 60015 3
   Foods            Bread Crumbs


KMART CORP: Obtains Final OK of $28,000 Cashiers' Suit Settlement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge William Alsup granted final approval of a class
action settlement in LISA GARVEY and COLLETTE DELBRIDGE,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. KMART CORPORATION, Defendant, NO. C 11-02575 WHA,
(N.D. Cal.).

In this class action, Lisa Garvey alleged that Kmart Corporation
violated California Wage Order 7-2001(14) by not providing seats
to its checkout stands cashiers.  Ms. Garvey pursued her Private
Attorney General Act claim as a class action, seeking to represent
other Kmart cashiers in California.

Judge Alsup held that the proposed class settlement is fair,
reasonable, and adequate, and approved the $280,000 settlement
amount.

The California Labor and Workforce Development Agency will receive
$103,500. Individual plaintiffs Lisa Garvey and Collette Delbridge
will receive $1,000 each for their release. A total of $34,500
will go to the participating class members in accordance with the
settlement agreement. The sum of $140,000 will be reserved for
plaintiffs' costs to be paid once plaintiffs' counsel have
certified that the terms of the settlement have been carried out.

Ms. Garvey's motion under FRCP 60(b) and a March 2013 taxable
costs order are set aside in accordance with the class settlement.

"Final judgment is hereby entered in accordance with the class
settlement, the preliminary approval order, and this order," ruled
Judge Alsup.

A copy of the District Court's January 21, 2014 Order is available
at http://is.gd/kEHYazfrom Leagle.com.


MASTIC ASSOCIATES: Remaining Complaint in Sandy Suit Dismissed
--------------------------------------------------------------
Zachary Kussin, writing for The Real Deal, reports that
Briana Adler, the remaining plaintiff in a proposed Hurricane
Sandy-related class action that sought rent reimbursements from
landlords of storm-affected properties in New York, has had her
complaint dismissed with prejudice, according to state Supreme
Court documents filed on Jan. 24.

In a decision last month, New York State Supreme Court Judge
Shirley Werner Kornreich gave Ms. Adler 20 days to file a new
class action -- limited only to representing the tenants at her
155 East 31st Street building and against landlord Mastic
Associates of New York -- but nothing came of it.

"She did not do so, and her attorney has informed the court that
he does not intend to do so," wrote Judge Kornreich of filing the
new complaint in this most recent order.

But the two other initial plaintiffs in the case, Lauren Shoenfeld
and Perri Steiner, have appealed their cases to the Appellate
Division, according to documents filed on Jan. 22.  Judge
Kornreich last month dismissed the claims of Ms. Shoenfeld and
Ms. Steiner because they were not present in their apartments
during the Oct. 29, 2012 storm, as The Real Deal reported.
Ms. Shoenfeld left her 145 East 16th Street apartment before the
storm hit and returned after conditions were back to normal.
Ms. Steiner returned to her East Village apartment at 17
Stuyvesant Street in early November, though the judge said other
tenants here had working stoves, hot water, and temperatures
outside at that time were in the 40s and 50s.

"They did not suffer any loss by residing in an apartment lacking
essential services," ruled Judge Kornreich in December, referring
to Ms. Shoenfeld and Ms. Steiner.

Barbara Hart represents Ms. Adler, Ms. Shoenfeld and Ms. Steiner.

Mara Levin represents the defendant landlord, said that she was
happy with the result.  Mastic Associates did not immediately
respond to a request for comment.

The three young women launched their case last January on behalf
of all state tenants who paid rent in the aftermath of the
storm -- a time when many residents did not have heat, hot water,
functional elevators or electricity, as The Real Deal first
reported.  The crux of their argument: under New York Real
Property Law, landlords and management companies had an obligation
to keep their buildings habitable for all leases.

The initial defendants included two entities affiliated with the
estate of Sol Goldman and Ogden Cap Properties.  Judge Kornreich
dismissed the claims against the three last month because they
function as managing agents, not as building landlords, and are
not parties to any leases.


MY THAI I: Faces Suit Over Unpaid Minimum and Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Luis Toledo, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated v.
My Thai I, Corp. and Flower Drum Inc., d/b/a My Thai Restaurant,
Case No. 1:14-cv-00126 (N.D. Ill., January 8, 2014) arises under
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law for
the Defendants' failure to pay the Plaintiff the state mandated
minimum wage for all hours worked and their failure to pay
overtime wages to the Plaintiff.

My Thai I Corp. and Flower Drum, Inc. are corporations that
operate two restaurants in Chicago, Illinois under the name "My
Thai Restaurant."

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Carlos G. Becerra, Esq.
           Perla M. Gonzalez, Esq.
           BECERRA LAW GROUP, LLC
           332 S. Michigan Ave., Suite 1020
           Chicago, IL 60604
           Telephone: (312) 957-9005
           Facsimile: (773) 890-7780
           E-mail: cbecerra@law-rb.com
                   pgonzalez@law-rb.com


NEW JERSEY: Governor Faces Class Action Over Second-Hand Bullying
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Spencer Green, writing for Huffington Post, reports that the firm
of Leach, Parrasyte & Scumm LLC announced a class-action lawsuit
has been filed on behalf of approximately fifty million Americans
against New Jersey Governor Chris Christie for damages caused by
second-hand bullying.  "Our clients have sustained grave and
irreversible psychic injuries through the mere act of witnessing
the effects of Governor Christie's menacing administrative style
on others," said Elmer A. Tyro, a lawyer at Leach.  "And just
because the Governor didn't directly bully our clients doesn't
mean he wouldn't have actually done it if he had had the chance."

The lead plaintiff in the lawsuit is 78-year-old Trudy Rosenlawn.


OVERWAITEA FOOD: Recalls Hickory Smoked Spiral Sliced Ham
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 18, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Listeria
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Overwaitea Food Group
Distribution:             Alberta, British Columbia
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8570

Overwaitea Food Group is recalling Ripple Creek Farm brand Hickory
Smoked Spiral Sliced Ham from the marketplace due to possible
Listeria contamination.  Consumers should not consume the recalled
product described below.

The following product has been sold in British Columbia and
Alberta.

Check to see if you have recalled product in your home.  Recalled
product should be thrown out or returned to the store where they
were purchased.

Food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes may not look or
smell spoiled but can still make you sick.  Symptoms can include
vomiting, nausea, persistent fever, muscle aches, severe headache
and neck stiffness.  Pregnant women, the elderly and people with
weakened immune systems are particularly at risk.  Although
infected pregnant women may experience only mild, flu-like
symptoms, the infection can lead to premature delivery, infection
of the newborn or even stillbirth.  In severe cases of illness,
people may die.

There have been no reported illnesses 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.

Affected products: Ripple Creek Farm Hickory Smoked Spiral Sliced
Ham


PHILIPS ENTERTAINMENT: Recalls Stage Light Barndoors
----------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Philips Entertainment/Philips Selecon, of Dallas, announced a
voluntary recall of about 5,500 Stage Light Barndoors.  Consumers
should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is
illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer
product.

The heat of the stage lights can make the barndoors detach from
the light and fall, posing an impact injury hazard to individuals
below it.

Philips Selecon has received three reports of barndoors used
outside the United States detaching. No injuries were reported.
No incidents or injuries have been reported in the U.S.

The recall involves 6-inch barndoors with four and eight leaves.
The recalled barndoors are used on Rama Fresnel and Rama PC stage
lights.  The barndoors are made of hinged, rectangular, black
metal flaps/leaves attached to a moveable, round, plastic collar.
The collar is six inches in diameter.  Four-leaf barndoors are
part number 20BDSF12 and eight-leaf barndoors are part number
20BDSF128.  The part numbers are only on the invoice for the
product.

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

The recalled products were manufactured in Strand Selecon
Lighting, a division of Philips Lighting New Zealand, of Auckland,
New Zealand and sold at theatrical, electrical and lighting supply
dealers nationwide from January 2003 to January 2013 for between
$75 and $105.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled barndoors and
contact Philips Selecon for a free safety cable and installation
instructions.


PILOT FLYING J: 3 Ex-Employees Plead Guilty in Rebate Scheme
------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that three former employees of the
truck stop company owned by the family of Cleveland Browns owner
Jimmy Haslam and Tennessee Gov. Bill Haslam have pleaded guilty to
federal charges involving a scheme where trucking companies were
cheated out of promised fuel rebates.

The three entered their pleas on Jan. 27.  They are among 10
former Pilot Flying J employees to plead guilty since federal
agents raided the company's Knoxville headquarters last year.

One of the former employees who appeared in court on Jan. 27 is
Brian Mosher, a former director of sales, who admitted to training
other company employees on how to cheat customers.

Company CEO Jimmy Haslam has denied involvement in the rebate
scheme.  Gov. Bill Haslam says he is not involved with the
company's operations.  The company has been forced to pay millions
because of the fraud.


PLUMREWARD LLC: Illegally Contacted Class, California Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Susan Pathman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Plumreward, LLC, Case No. 2:14-cv-00167-RGK-AGR (C.D.
Cal., January 8, 2014) alleges that beginning sometime in May
2013, the Defendant began to utilize the Plaintiff's cellular
telephone number in an attempt to solicit her business.

The Plaintiff contends that text message the Defendant placed to
her cellular telephone were placed via an "automatic telephone
dialing system," which is prohibited under the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.  She asserts that she is neither a subscriber nor
a client of the Defendant's services, and she has neither
contacted the Defendant nor provided it with her personal
information or cellular telephone number.

Plumreward, LLC is a Florida corporation conducting business in
the state of California and in the County of Ventura.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
           Nicholas J. Bontrager, Esq.
           LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, PC
           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


RIDDELL INC: Football Helmets Don't Reduce Concussions, Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Douglas Aronson and Denise Aronson on Behalf of Themselves and All
Others Similarly Situated v. Riddell Inc.; All American Sports
Corporation d/b/a Riddell/All American; Riddell Sports Group,
Inc.; Easton-Bell Sports, LLC; EB Sports Corporation, Case No.
1:14-cv-00126-JBS-JS (D.N.J., January 8, 2014) is brought on
behalf of a class of similarly-situated consumers, who purchased
certain Riddell Revolution football helmets manufactured and
marketed by the Defendants on the false belief that the Revolution
football helmets were more effective in preventing concussions.

Despite the Defendants' promises of concussion reductions, the
Football Helmets are unable to actually reduce concussions, the
Plaintiffs contend.

The Defendants are in the business of designing, manufacturing and
marketing a line of football helmets, which they claim can
actually reduce concussions.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

           James E. Cecchi, Esq.
           Caroline F. Bartlett, Esq.
           CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
           5 Becker Farm Road
           Roseland, NJ 07068
           Telephone: (973) 994-1700
           Facsimile: (973) 994-1744
           E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
                   cbartlett@carellabyrne.com

                - and -

           Jeffrey A. Leon, Esq.
           Jamie E. Weiss, Esq.
           COMPLEX LITIGATION GROUP LLC
           513 Central Avenue, Suite 300
           Highland Park, IL 60035
           Telephone: (847) 433-4500
           Facsimile: (847) 433-2500
           E-mail: jeff@complexlitgroup.com


RSI HOME: Recalls Bathroom Medicine Cabinets Due to Injury Hazard
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
RSI Home Products, of Anaheim, Calif., announced a voluntary
recall of about 14,000 Bathroom medicine cabinets.  Consumers
should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is
illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer
product.

The mirror or its back panel can separate and fall out, posing an
injury hazard to consumers.

RSI has received two reports of the cabinet's mirror or back panel
detaching and falling out.  No injuries have been reported.

The recall involves four models of Glacier Bay-branded bathroom
medicine cabinets, manufactured between July 15, 2013 and October
10, 2013.  They have a mirrored door, two adjustable and two fixed
interior shelves.  Some models have exterior display side shelves.
They were sold in 21, 23 and 30-inch widths and in three finishes:
cognac, java and white.  "VOC" and the manufacture date are
stamped on the exterior of the cabinet's back panel.  The models
below are included in this recall.  The model and SKU number
appear on the product's box.

     Model        SKU Number          Product Description
     -----        ----------          -------------------
   S2327OS-ACO   1000004766     23" Swing Med Cab Open Side Cognac
   S3027OS-ACO   1000004797    30" Swing Med Cab Open Sides Cognac
   S2127C-JAV    1000004819          21" Curved Swing Med Cab Java
   S2127C-WHT    1000004822         21" Curved Swing Med Cab White

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

The recalled products were manufactured in United States and sold
exclusively at The Home Depot stores nationwide from August 2013
through October 2013 for between $70 and $90.

Consumers should immediately stop using and uninstall the recalled
bathroom medicine cabinet; and return it to The Home Depot for a
full refund.


SANITATION SALVAGE: Class Seeks Unpaid Wages for Overtime Work
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey H. Walden, Individually and on Behalf of All Other Persons
Similarly Situated v. Sanitation Salvage Corp., Andrew Squitieri,
John Squitieri, and Steve Squitieri, Jointly and Severally, Case
No. 1:14-cv-00112-ER (S.D.N.Y., January 8, 2014) alleges that the
Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees are entitled to
(i) unpaid wages from the Defendants for overtime work for which
they did not receive any compensation, and (ii) liquidated damages
under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Sanitation Salvage Corp. is a New York domestic corporation
headquartered in Bronx, New York.  The Individual Defendants own,
operate and control the day-to-day operations and management of
Sanitation Salvage and jointly employed the Plaintiff and other
similarly situated employees at all relevant times.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Douglas Brian Lipsky, Esq.
           BRONSON LIPSKY LLP
           630 Third Avenue, 5th Floor
           New York, NY 10017
           Telephone: (212) 392-4772
           Facsimile: (212) 444-1030
           E-mail: dl@bronsonlipsky.com

                - and -

           Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq.
           Dana Lauren Gottlieb, Esq.
           GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
           150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR
           New York, NY 10003
           Telephone: (212) 228-9795
           Facsimile: (212) 982-6284
           E-mail: nyjg@aol.com
                   danalgottlieb@aol.com


SEARS HOLDINGS: Recalls Kenmore Oscillating Fan Heaters
-------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Sears Holdings, of Hoffman Estates, Ill., announced a voluntary
recall of about 42,500 Kenmore oscillating fan heaters.  Consumers
should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is
illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer
product.

Broken motor mounts can cause the units to overheat, catch fire
and ignite nearby items, posing a fire and burn hazard to
consumers.

Sears and Kmart have received seven reports of the fan heaters
smoking or catching fire, including two reports of injuries.
Injuries include one report of smoke inhalation and one report of
a blister to a consumer's finger.

The recall involves Kenmore oscillating fan heaters with model
number 127.90914310.  The model number and Kenmore are printed on
a silver sticker on the bottom of the unit.  The fan heaters are
gray and white, measure about 12 inches tall by 9 inches wide,
have two dials at the top for temperature and fan speed and a red
on-off button on the front base.  Kenmore is printed on the front
bottom of the fan heaters.

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

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at Sears
and Kmart stores nationwide from September 2013 through November
2013 for between $35 and $40.

Consumers should immediately turn off and unplug the recalled fan
heaters and return them to any Sears or Kmart store for a full
refund.


STATE FARM: "Littleton" Class Suit Removed to the W.D. Arkansas
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Littleton v. State Farm Mutual
Automobile Insurance Company, Case No. CV-2012-2674-4, was removed
from the Circuit Court of Washington County, Arkansas, to the U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Arkansas
(Fayetteville).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 5:14-
cv-05007-JLH to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Joseph Henry Bates, III, Esq.
           Randall K. Pulliam, Esq.
           CARNEY BATES & PULLIAM, PLLC
           11311 Arcade Drive, Suite 200
           Little Rock, AR 72212
           Telephone: (501) 312-8500
           Facsimile: (501) 312-8505
           E-mail: hbates@carneywilliams.com
                   rpulliam@cbplaw.com

                - and -

           William Gene Horton, Esq.
           NOLAN, CADDELL & REYNOLDS, PA
           5434 Walsh Lane
           Rogers, AR 72758
           P.O. Box 184
           Fort Smith, AR 72902
           Telephone: (479) 464-8269
           Facsimile: (479) 782-5184
           E-mail: bhorton@justicetoday.com

The Defendant is represented by:

           John E. Moore, Esq.
           MUNSON, ROWLETT, MOORE & BOONE, P.A.
           1900 Regions Center
           400 W. Capitol, Suite 1900
           Little Rock, AR 72201
           Telephone: (501) 374-6535
           Facsimile: (501) 374-5906
           E-mail: john.moore@mrmblaw.com

                - and -

           Ashleigh Phillips, Esq.
           MUNSON, ROWLETT, MOORE & BOONE, P.A.
           400 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 1900
           Little Rock, AR 72201
           Telephone: (501) 374-6535
           E-mail: ashleigh.phillips@mrmblaw.com


TACO MEX: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Waitresses Say
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ruth Preza, Irma Huerta and Cristina Gonzalez, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Taco Mex Inc., Taco Mex
II Inc., Tex Mex Inc., Tex Mex II Inc., Tex Mex III d/b/a Tacos
Matamoros and Armando Munoz, Case No. 1:14-cv-00138-ERK-RML
(E.D.N.Y., January 8, 2014) is brought on behalf of those who were
employed as waitresses at the Defendants' restaurant.

The Plaintiffs assert that they performed work for the Defendants
for which they did not receive lawful minimum wages and overtime
premium pay.

The Taco Mex entities are New York domestic corporations that own
and operate Tacos Matamoros.  Armando Munoz is a principal of the
Taco Mex entities.  He operates Tacos Matamoros and exercises
sufficient control over the restaurant.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

           Jonathan A. Bernstein, Esq.
           LEVY DAVIS & MAHER LLP
           39 Broadway, Suite 1620
           New York, NY 10006
           Telephone: (212) 371-0033
           Facsimile: (212) 371-0463
           E-mail: jbernstein@levydavis.com


TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICAL: Faces Antitrust Suit Over ACTOS Product
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fraternal Order of Police Fort Lauderdale Lodge 31 Insurance Trust
Fund, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly Situated
v. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. Ltd., Takeda America Holdings, Inc.,
Takeda Pharmaceuticals U.S.A., Inc., Takeda Development Center
Americas, Inc., Mylan Inc., Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Actavis
PLC f/k/a Actavis, Inc., Watson Laboratories, Inc., Ranbaxy
Laboratories, Ltd., Ranbaxy, Inc., Ranbaxy Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd. and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00116-UA (S.D.N.Y., January 8, 2014) arises
out of the Defendants' alleged overarching anticompetitive scheme
to allocate, and unreasonably delay competition in, the market for
pioglitazone hydrochloride tablets, which Takeda sells under the
brand name ACTOS.

The Plaintiff also alleges that there were further anticompetitive
agreements between Takeda and each of Mylan and Teva to allocate,
and unreasonably delay competition in, the market for the fixed
dose combination product containing both pioglitazone
hydrochloride and metformin (biguanide), which Takeda sells under
the brand name ACTOplus met.

Doctors prescribe ACTOS for the improvement of glycemic control in
patients with Type 2 diabetes, either as a monotherapy treatment
or as a combination therapy consisting of two separate drugs --
pioglitazone hydrochloride together with sulfonylurea, metformin,
or insulin.  Doctors prescribe ACTOplus met as a fixed dose
combination of pioglitazone hydrochloride and metformin to improve
blood sugar control in adults with Type 2 diabetes, who are
already either taking ACTOS and metformin separately or taking
metformin alone and it is not controlling blood glucose at normal
levels.

Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited is a Japanese company with
its principal place of business in Osaka, Japan.  ACTOS became one
of Takeda's biggest selling products.  Together, ACTOS and
ACTOplus met generated over $3 billion in annual sales for Takeda.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Adam Giffords Kurtz, Esq.
           POMERANTZ LLP
           600 Third Ave., 20th Floor
           New York, NY, 10016
           Telephone: (212) 661-1100
           Facsimile: (212) 661-8665
           E-mail: AGKurtz@pomlaw.com

                - and -

           Jayne A. Goldstein, Esq.
           POMERANTZ LLP
           1792 Bell Tower Lane, Suite 203
           Weston, FL 33326
           Telephone: (954) 315-3454
           Facsimile: (954) 315-3455
           E-mail: jagoldstein@pomlaw.com

                - and -

           Mark B. Goldstein, Esq.
           POMERANTZ LLP
           10 South LaSalle Street, Suite 3505
           Chicago, IL 60603
           Telephone: (312) 377-1181
           Facsimile: (312) 377-1184
           E-mail: mbgoldstein@pomlaw.com

                - and -

           Robert D. Klausner, Esq.
           Stuart A. Kaufman, Esq.
           KLAUSNER KAUFMAN JENSEN & LEVINSON
           10059 Northwest 1st Court
           Plantation, FL 33324
           Telephone: (954) 916-1202
           Facsimile: (954) 916-1232
           E-mail: Bob@robertdklausner.com
                   Stu@robertdklausner.com


TARGET CORP: Faces "Prado" Suit Over 2013 Data Security Breach
--------------------------------------------------------------
Linda Prado, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Target Corporation, Case No. 0:14-cv-00077 (D. Minn.,
January 8, 2014) is brought on behalf of millions of customers of
Target stores whose payment card data was disclosed to one or more
criminals in what is the second largest consumer data security
breach in retail history.

The Plaintiff seeks relief under Federal and Minnesota law on
behalf of all consumers in the United States who shopped at Target
stores in the United States between November 27, 2013, and
December 15, 2013.  The Plaintiff also seeks relief under
Pennsylvania law on behalf of the hundreds of thousands of
customers, who shopped at Target stores in Pennsylvania between
November 27, 2013, and December 15, 2013.

Target Corporation is a Minnesota corporation headquartered in
Minneapolis, Minnesota.  Target is the second largest general
merchandise retailer in the United States operating 1,797 retail
stores nationwide, in addition to its online store.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

                - and -

           Daniel R. Karon, Esq.
           GOLDMAN SCARLATO KARON & PENNY, P.C.
           700 W. St. Clair Avenue, Suite 204
           Cleveland, OH 44113
           Telephone: (216) 622-1851
           Facsimile: (216) 241-8175
           E-mail: karon@gskplaw.com

                - and -

           Mark S. Goldman, Esq.
           Laura Killian Mummert, Esq.
           GOLDMAN SCARLATO KARON & PENNY, P.C.
           101 E. Lancaster Avenue, Suite 204
           Wayne, PA 19087
           Telephone: (484) 342-0700
           E-mail: goldman@gskplaw.com
                   mummert@gskplaw.com


THINGS REMEMBERED: "Boylan" Class Suit Transferred to N.D. Ohio
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Boylan v. Things Remembered,
Inc., Case No. 3:13-cv-02020, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of California to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Cleveland).  The
Ohio District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-00049-CAB to
the proceeding.  The case asserts Right to Privacy Act claims.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Ronald Marron, Esq.
           Alexis Marie Wood, Esq.
           LAW OFFICE OF RONALD MARRON
           651 Arroyo Drive
           San Diego, CA 92103
           Telephone: (619) 696-9006
           Facsimile: (619) 564-6665
           E-mail: ron@consumersadvocates.com
                   abornhoft@gordonrees.com

The Defendant is represented by:

           Christopher H. Doyle, Esq.
           JEFFER MANGELS BUTLER & MITCHELL LLP
           Two Embarcadero Center, 5th Floor
           San Francisco, CA 94111
           Telephone: (415) 398-8080
           Facsimile: (415) 398-5584
           E-mail: CDoyle@JMBM.com


THORATEC CORP: Pomerantz Law Firm Files Class Action in California
------------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP on Jan. 24 disclosed that it has filed a class
action lawsuit against Thoratec Corporation and certain of its
officers.  The class action, filed in United States District
Court, Northern District of California, and docketed under 14-cv-
00360, is on behalf of a class consisting of all persons or
entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Thoratec securities
between April 29, 2010 and November 27, 2013 both dates inclusive.
This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for
alleged violations of the federal securities laws pursuant to
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder.

If you are a shareholder who purchased Thoratec securities during
the Class Period, you have until March 24, 2014 to ask the Court
to appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.  A copy of the
Complaint can be obtained at http://www.pomerantzlaw.com
To discuss this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at
rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888-476-6529 (or 888-4-POMLAW), toll
free, x237.  Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include
their mailing address, telephone number, and number of shares
purchased.

Thoratec researches, develops, manufactures, and markets medical
devices for circulatory support and vascular graft applications.
The Company's products include a ventricular assist device, an
implantable left ventricular heart assist device, a vascular
access graft, and a coronary artery bypass graft.  Thoratec also
supplies whole-blood coagulation testing equipment.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to
disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects.  Specifically, Defendants failed to
disclose that the Company's HeartMate II Left Ventricular Assist
Device had significant risk of pump thrombosis, causing numerous
fatalities.  As a result of the foregoing, the Company's
statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant
times.

On April 4, 2012, U.S. regulators ordered a recall for the
company's HeartMate II heart pumps for a potentially deadly
defect.  In a regulatory posting by the Food and Drug
Administration, the agency stated that the recall "was initiated
after Thoratec found that a component of the implanted device,
which pumps blood for heart failure patients, may sometimes be
improperly attached to the HeartMate II."  On the news, Thoratec
shares tumbled $1.52 or almost 4.5% to close at $32.83 on April 4,
2012.

On November 27, 2013, after the market closed, The New England
Journal of Medicine released a study entitled, "Unexpected Abrupt
Increase in Left Ventricular Assist Device Thrombosis" concluding
that the "rate of pump thrombosis related to the use of the
HeartMate II has been increasing at our centers and is associated
with substantial morbidity and mortality."  On this news, Thoratec
shares declined $2.75 per share or 6.5%, to close at $39.37 per
share on November 29, 2013.

With offices in New York, Chicago, Florida, and San Diego, The
Pomerantz Firm -- http://www.pomerantzlaw.com-- concentrates its
practice in the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust
class litigation.  Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known
as the dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered
the field of securities class actions.


UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Deceives Consumers Over Charges, Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
Caren Ehret, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly
situated persons v. Uber Technologies, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation, Case No. 3:14-cv-00113-MEJ (N.D. Cal., January 8,
2014) is brought on behalf of a class of similarly situated
individuals, who were subjected to Uber's alleged illegal and
deceptive practices of misrepresenting to consumers the true
nature of charges made to consumers in connection with these
services.

Uber advertises and represents on its Web site and other marketing
materials that gratuity will be automatically added at a set
percentage of the metered fare, Ms. Ehret says.  Uber, however,
does not remit the full amount of gratuity represented to
consumers to the taxi driver/owner and/or company actually
providing the transportation service, she contends.  Instead, she
alleges, Uber keeps a substantial portion of this additional
charge for itself as its own additional revenue and profit on each
ride arranged and paid for by consumers.  She argues that Uber's
uniform conduct is equally applicable to the class and constitutes
an unfair, unlawful and fraudulent business practice in violation
of the Unfair Competition Law, California Business and Professions
Code.

Uber Technologies, Inc., is a Delaware corporation that provides a
mobile phone application that provides consumers with a means to
obtain transportation services from third party taxi and other
transportation providers.  Payment for transportation arranged
through Uber's app is made via consumers' credit card accounts,
after the consumer provides the necessary credit card account
information to Uber.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
           MYRON M. CHERRY & ASSOCIATES LLC
           30 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2300
           Chicago, IL 60602
           Telephone: (312) 372-2100
           Facsimile: (312) 853-0279
           E-mail: mcherry@cherry-law.com


ULTA SALON: Removed "Galvez" Class Suit to N.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action lawsuit titled Galvez v. Ulta Salon,
Cosmetics & Fragrance, Inc., et al., Case No. 113CV257110, was
removed from the California Superior Court for the County of Santa
Clara to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (San Jose).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
5:14-cv-00110-HRL to the proceeding.

The case was brought as a class action lawsuit alleging various
violations of the California Labor Code on behalf of a class and
subclasses of current and former retail store employees of the
Defendant, who worked in California during the period from
December 4, 2009, to the present.  The Plaintiff seeks unpaid
minimum wage, unpaid overtime wages, among other things.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

           Larry W. Lee, Esq.
           Daniel Hyo-Shik Chang, Esq.
           DIVERSITY LAW GROUP, P.C.
           550 S Hope Street, Suite 2655
           Los Angeles, CA 90071
           Telephone: (213) 488-6555
           Facsimile: (213) 488-6554
           E-mail: lwlee@diversitylaw.com
                   dchang@diversitylaw.com

                - and -

           William Lucas Marder, Esq.
           POLARIS LAW GROUP, LLP
           501 San Benito Street, Suite 200
           Hollister, CA 95023
           Telephone: (831) 531-4214
           Facsimile: (831) 634-0333
           E-mail: bill@polarislawgroup.com

The Defendants are represented by:

           John C. Kloosterman, Esq.
           Alexis Anne Sohrakoff, Esq.
           Kai-Ching Cha, Esq.
           LITTLER MENDELSON PC
           650 California Street, 20th Floor
           San Jose, CA 94108-2693
           Telephone: (415) 433-1940
           Facsimile: (415) 399-8490
           E-mail: jkloosterman@littler.com
                   asohrakoff@littler.com
                   kcha@littler.com


UNDER ARMOUR: Recalls Infant Sports Jersey Kits
-----------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Under Armour, Inc., of Baltimore, Md., announced a voluntary
recall of about 62 Tottenham Hotspur Infant Home Kits.  Consumers
should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is
illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer
product.

The shoulder snaps on the jersey can detach, posing laceration and
choking hazards.

There were no injuries reported.

The infant home kit consists of a white jersey and navy blue
shorts and socks in sizes 0, 6 months, 12 months and 18 months.
The jersey has style #1238534 printed on a side seam label.  The
jerseys are white with navy blue trim and navy blue UA and
Tottenham Hotspur logos.  The navy blue shorts have white trim and
white UA and Tottenham Hotspur logos.  The socks are navy blue.

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

The recalled products were manufactured in Philippines and sold at
Pegasus Sporting Goods and Upper 90 Soccer + Sport between August
and December 2013 for about $50.

Consumers should immediately take the recalled home kits away from
children and return the kits to the retailer where purchased or
contact Under Armour for a full refund.


UNILIFE CORP: Plaintiff Dismisses Shareholder Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------
Unilife Corporation on Jan. 23 disclosed that a recent shareholder
class action lawsuit against the Company and certain corporate
officers in the United States District Court for the Middle
District of Pennsylvania alleging violations of federal securities
laws was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff.

The notice of voluntary dismissal was filed by the plaintiff after
no additional shareholders of the Company petitioned the court to
serve as lead plaintiff in the lawsuit before the December 31,
2013 deadline.

Unilife added that the class action lawsuit was always considered
to be frivolous and based mainly on the meritless allegations made
by a former employee of the Company.

                    About Unilife Corporation

Unilife Corporation -- http://www.unilife.com-- is a U.S. based
developer and commercial supplier of injectable drug delivery
systems.  Unilife's broad portfolio includes prefilled syringes
with automatic needle retraction, drug reconstitution delivery
systems, auto-injectors, wearable injectors, intraocular delivery
systems and novel delivery systems.  Each of these innovative,
differentiated technology platforms can be customized to address
specific customer, drug and patient requirements.  Unilife's
global headquarters and state-of-the-art manufacturing facilities
are located in York, PA.


VIKING RANGE: "Piemonte" Suit Removed to New Jersey District Court
------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Piemonte, et al. v. Viking Range,
LLC, et al., Case No. MRS L 3145 13, was removed from the Superior
Court of New Jersey, Morris County, to the U.S. District Court for
the District of New Jersey (Newark).  The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 2:14-cv-00124-DMC-JBC to the proceeding.

The lawsuit alleges that Viking Range, an appliance maker, sells
certain refrigerators that have defective door hinges.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

           Kevin E. Barber, Esq.
           NIEDWESKE BARBER HAGER, LLC
           98 Washington Street
           Morristown, NJ 07960
           Telephone: (973) 401-0064
           E-mail: kbarber@n-blaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

           Edward J. Fanning, Jr., Esq.
           MCCARTER & ENGLISH, LLP
           Four Gateway Center
           100 Mulberry Street
           PO Box 652
           Newark, NJ 07101-0652
           Telephone: (973) 622-4444
           E-mail: efanning@mccarter.com


WOODBURY: Orange County Ct. Ruling in United Fairness Suit Flipped
------------------------------------------------------------------
In UNITED FAIRNESS, INC., ETC., Appellant, v. TOWN OF WOODBURY, ET
AL., Respondents, ET AL., Defendants, 2012-01144, 2012-01172,
INDEX NO. 10884/10, the plaintiff appealed, as limited by its
brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Orange
County, dated November 15, 2011, as denied that branch of its
motion which was for leave to amend the complaint to substitute
Zigmond Brach as the plaintiff and add two causes of action, and
from an order of the same court, also dated November 15, 2011,
which granted the separate motions of the defendants Town of
Woodbury and Village of Woodbury pursuant to Rule 3211(a) of the
New York Civil Practice Law and Rules to dismiss the complaint
insofar as asserted against each of them.

The plaintiff commenced this action in September 2010 for
declaratory and injunctive relief against, among others, the Town
of Woodbury and the Village of Woodbury. The Town and the Village
separately moved pursuant to CPLR 3211(a) to dismiss the complaint
insofar as asserted against each of them, inter alia, on the
ground of lack of standing. Thereafter the plaintiff moved, among
other things, for leave to amend the complaint to substitute
Zigmond Brach as the plaintiff and add two causes of action. In an
order dated November 15, 2011, the Supreme Court granted the
motions of the Town and the Village on the ground that the
plaintiff lacked standing to commence the action. In another
order, also dated November 15, 2011, the Supreme Court denied the
plaintiff's motion because "the original complaint is dismissed."

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second
Department ruled that the first order dated November 15, 2011, is
reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law and in the exercise
of discretion, and that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was
for leave to amend the complaint to substitute Zigmond Brach as
the plaintiff and add two causes of action is granted.  The second
order dated November 15, 2011, is reversed, on the law, and the
motions of the defendants Town of Woodbury and Village of Woodbury
to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against each of them
are denied. One bill of costs is awarded to the plaintiff, the
Appeals court added.

The Appellate Court held that the Supreme Court should have
decided, on the merits, that branch of the plaintiff's motion
which was for leave to amend the complaint before the court
decided the motions of the Town and the Village to dismiss the
complaint. Leave to amend a pleading should be freely given absent
prejudice or surprise to the opposing party, unless the proposed
amendment is palpably insufficient or patently devoid of merit, it
said.  Moreover, a court shall not examine the legal sufficiency
or merits of a pleading unless such insufficiency or lack of merit
is clear and free from doubt, the Court added.

Accordingly, that branch of the plaintiff's motion which was for
leave to serve an amended complaint should have been granted, the
Appellate Court concluded. Additionally, since the proposed
amended complaint rectified the plaintiff's lack of standing, the
Supreme Court should not have granted the motions to dismiss the
complaint on the basis of lack of standing, said the Court.

A copy of the Appeals Court's January 22, 2014 Opinion is
available at http://is.gd/7Nst6Cfrom Leagle.com.

James Klatsky -- jklatsky@klatskylaw.com -- New York, N.Y., for
appellant.

Joseph G. McKay -- jmckay@cmmrlegal.com -- Newburgh, N.Y., for
respondent Town of Woodbury.

For respondent Village of Woodbury:

    Brian D. Nugent, Esq.
    Feerick Lynch MacCartney
    Attorneys at Law
    96 South Broadway
    South Nyack, New York 10960
    Telephone: (845) 353-2000
    Facsimile: (845) 353-2789


WORLD SAVINGS: Suit Seeks Cancellation of Assignment of Deed
------------------------------------------------------------
Iris Hecker, individual, on behalf of themselves and all other
similarly situated v. World Savings Bank, FSB; Golden West Savings
Association Service Co., Wells Fargo Bank National Association,
aka Wachovia Mortgage, a Division of Wells Fargo Bank, NA, NDEX
West, LLC, Granite Ranch Opportunities, LLC and all persons
unknown, claiming any legal or equitable right, title, estate,
lien, or interest in the property described in the complaint
adverse to Plaintiffs' title, or any cloud on Plaintiffs' title
thereto and, does, 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 3:14-cv-
00119-MEJ (N.D. Cal., January 8, 2014) alleges that the Defendants
have engaged in unfair, unlawful, and fraudulent business
practices in the state of California.

The Plaintiff alleges there are major defects in the foreclosure
instruments filed with the San Mateo County Recorder's Office.
She explains that the Assignment of Deed of Trust, which purports
to vest an interest in her real property to the Defendants, is
invalid and has no legal force or effect.  Through this action,
the Plaintiff seeks cancellation of the Assignment of Deed of
Trust and invalid foreclosure instruments, damages resulting from
the Defendants' unlawful conduct and a declaratory judgment
establishing the future rights and obligations of the parties.

The Plaintiffs is not represented by any law firm.


* Securities Class Actions Up 9% in 2013, Cornerstone Report Shows
------------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs filed 166 new federal securities class actions in 2013,
a 9 percent increase over 2012, according to Securities Class
Action Filings -- 2013 Year in Review, an annual report prepared
by Cornerstone Research and the Stanford Law School Securities
Class Action Clearinghouse.  The 2013 filings, although boosted by
a second-half surge, are still 13 percent below the historical
average from 1997 to 2012.

One possible explanation for filings remaining below the
historical average in recent years is the decline in the number of
unique companies listed on the NYSE and NASDAQ.  A new analysis in
the report shows that the number of companies on these exchanges
has decreased 46 percent since 1998, providing fewer companies for
plaintiffs to target as the subject of federal securities class
actions.

The report also analyzes the recent increase in IPOs on major U.S.
exchanges.  The 150 IPOs in 2013 represent the highest number in
the last five years.  In addition, there has been an increase in
larger companies undertaking IPOs in recent years, particularly in
2013.

"While the almost 50 percent decrease in listed companies has
played a part in the recent trend of low numbers of class action
filings, the sharp increase in IPOs in 2013 may provide fuel for a
new wave of filings in the next few years," noted Dr. John Gould,
senior vice president of Cornerstone Research.

A new analysis of class certification rulings for filings between
2002 and 2010 reveals that class certification was denied in less
than 2 percent of cases due to a decision based on the merits of
the motion.  During the same period, increasing proportions of
cases were dismissed before class certification motions were
filed.

The report also examines factors that could influence future
securities class action filings, specifically Halliburton v. Erica
P. John Fund, a closely watched U.S. Supreme Court case scheduled
for oral arguments in March.

"If Halliburton prevails in its case before the U.S. Supreme
Court, then the entire market for class action securities fraud
litigation is likely to be disrupted because it will become
impossible to certify a large number of Section 10(b) class
actions," said Professor Joseph Grundfest, director of the
Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse.  "Large
investors with substantial losses in the biggest of the frauds
will likely be able to litigate their claims on an individual
basis, but small investors will then have to look to Congress to
fashion an alternative remedy."

Key Findings

     * Filing activity increased by 21 percent in the second half
of 2013, with the largest number of non-merger-and-acquisition
filings in recent years.

     * Rule 10b-5 claims continued at heightened rates in 2013.

     * Approximately one in 29 companies in the S&P 500 was a
defendant in a class action filed during the year.

     * There was no new filing activity in the Financials sector of
the S&P 500 for the first time in the last
14 years.

     * Healthcare, biotechnology, and pharmaceutical companies
together accounted for 21 percent of total filings in 2013.  As in
2012, companies in this industry grouping were most commonly the
subject of a class action.

     * Foreign filings, led by filings against Chinese companies,
continued in 2013 at historically high rates.  Filings against
Canadian companies picked up in 2013.

     * In 2013 there was a return to the more typical mix of
filings in which NASDAQ companies were more frequently the subject
of class action filings than NYSE companies.

     * Filing activity in 2013 was more concentrated in the Second
and Ninth Circuits than in most years.

     * In three of the last four years, the median lag time between
the end of the alleged class period and the filing date has been
markedly shorter than the historical average.

     * The total Disclosure Dollar Loss(TM) (DDL) of $104 billion
in 2013 increased 7 percent from 2012, but is still 17 percent
below the historical average of $126 billion.

     * The total Maximum Dollar Loss(TM) (MDL) decreased
significantly in 2013, and is at its lowest level since 1998.  MDL
was $279 billion in 2013; 31 percent below the total MDL in 2012,
and 57 percent below the historical average MDL.

Dr. Gould and Professor Grundfest are available to speak with the
media about Securities Class Action Filings -- 2013 Year in
Review.  The report can be downloaded from --
http://www.cornerstone.com/
-- Cornerstone Research and the -- http://securities.stanford.edu/
-- Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse.

Cornerstone Research -- http://www.cornerstone.com-- and its
affiliated testifying experts provide economic and financial
analysis of complex issues arising in commercial litigation and
regulatory proceedings.  Cornerstone Research cosponsors the
Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse.

The Securities Class Action Clearinghouse --
http://securities.stanford.edu-- is an authoritative source of
data and analysis on the financial and economic characteristics of
federal securities fraud class action litigation.


                              *********

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  * * *