CAR_Public/140626.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Thursday, June 26, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 126

                             Headlines


A&S BROADWAY: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime and Damages
AC QUALITY: Faces "Forte" Suit for Failing to Pay Overtime
ADVANTAGE HEALTH: Recalls Products with Chia Seeds Due to E Coli
ADVANTAGE HEALTH: Recalls Various Products Containing Chia Seeds
AGFA DIGITAL: Recalls Radiography X-Ray System DX-D 100

ALCON LABORATORIES: Recalls Eye-Pak Tray Support Cover
ALERE SAN DIEGO: Recalls Triage B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Test
ANNIE'S INC: Faces "Taormina" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l Reports
BAUSCH & LOMB: Recalls Muro 128 5% Ointment
BAY AREA CREDIT: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Ong" Action Claims

BAYAN GROCERS: Recalls Kopiko Astig 3inOne Instant Coffee
BED HANDLES INC: Recalls Adult Portable Bed Handles
BLUE BIRD: Recalls 182 School Buses Due to Steering Issues
BLUE BIRD: Recalls 36 Non-School Buses Due to Steering Issues
BLUE BIRD: Recalls 9 Vision School Buses Due to Fuel Line Defect

BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Sued Over Timing Chain Tensioners Defect
BOB MILLS: Faces "Thomas" Suit in Texas for Failing to Pay OT
BOULANGERIE L'ESCALE: Recalls Products Due to Undeclared Soy
CANADA: May Face Class Action Over Chinese Visa Applications
CARESTREAM: Recalls Kodak Directview DR 9000 System

CARNEGIE LINEN: "Larios" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
CAVALRY STAFFING: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Copper" Action Claims
CHICO'S FAS: Faces "Delfierro" Labor Suit in Calif. Super. Court
CHRYSLER: Recalls 2,430 Light Trucks Due to Airbag Problems
CHRYSLER: Recalls 949 Cherokee, Durango and Grand Cherokee SUVs

CITIZENS OF HUMANITY: Sued in California Over "Made In USA" Label
COWBOY'S MOBILE: "Rodriquez" Suit Seeks to Reclaim Unpaid OT
CRAFTY NUANCE: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime & Damages
CRESCENT DIRECTIONAL: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Lucas" Suit Says
CYCLE GEAR: "Bowers" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages

DEJONG CONSTRUCTION: Sued Over Breach of Fair Labor Standards Act
DOMINO'S PIZZA: Sued Over Unlawful Retention of Service Charges
DSI FOOD: Recalls Imitation Meat Products
EMERGENCY ONE: Recalls 8 Cyclone II and Typhoon Trucks
ERICK FLOWBACK: Faces "Saenz" Suit for Failing to Pay Overtime

FEDERATED COOPERATIVES: Recalls 2-Step Household Ladder
FLORIDA GAS: Sued Over Pipeline Explosion in Enon, Louisiana
FOREST LABS: July 16 Hearing on Settlement in Celexa/Lexapro Suit
FOREST LABS: MDL Order Suspends Celexa/Lexapro Suit in Missouri
FOREST LABS: Seeks to Junk Sales Rep Gender Discrimination Suit

FOREST LABS: Faces Suit Over Proposed Furiex Acquisition
FOREST LABS: FCC Issues Notice Related to TCPA Lawsuit
FOREST LABS: Plaintiffs Balk at Dismissal of Antidepressant Suits
FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Denenberg" Suit Over Proposed SanDisk Sale
FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Hassani" Suit Challenging Sale to SanDisk

FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Li" Suit Seeking to Enjoin Sale to SanDisk
FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Seltzer" Merger-Related Shareholder Suit
GENERAL MOTORS: Faces "Ross" Suit Over Defective Airbag System
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Sierra & Silverado Due to Airbag Problems
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Encore and Spark Due to Airbag Problems

GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Corvettes Due to Airbag Problems
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 5,003 Camaro, Cruze, Sonic, and Verano
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 5,439 Trucks & SUVs Over Radio Defect
GENERAL MOTORS: Court Tactics May Delay Injury, Death Suits
H K SECOND AVE: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages

HANCOCK CO: Faces Class Action Over Wrongful Termination
LAC BASKETBALL: "Cooper" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
MAX'S HARVEST: Suit Seeks to Reclaim Unpaid OT & Minimum Wages
MONTREAL MAINE: Train Derailment Class Action Enters Phase One
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Head Says Paying Athletes Could Ruin System

NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: President Grilled Over Athletes' Privileges
OPENTABLE INC: Class Suit Seeks to Enjoin Merger With Priceline
OPENTABLE INC: Faces "Raul" Merger-Related Class Suit in Delaware
PHILIP MORRIS: Ill. High Court to Review "Light" Cigarette Suit
PRIMUS GROUP: Challenges Cantaloupe Food-Poisoning Litigation

RAYTHEON CO: Former Workers Lose Bid for Medical Monitoring
RICHMOND VALLEY: "Coccaro" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
SAFI-G INC: Faces "Eslava" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
SP AUSNET: Closing Arguments Heard in Black Saturday Fire Suit
ST GEORGE TREATS: Fails to Pay Drivers Overtime, Suit Claims

STANDARD & POOR'S: Court Dismisses Class Action Appeal
STRONGSVILLE, OH: Faces Class Action Over Ongoing Flooding
TANAKA JAPANESE: Fails to Pay Minimum Wages, "Cuahua" Suit Claims
TEASE LOUNGE: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Pursuant to FLSA
TIERRA CALIENTE: Sued Over Fair Labor Standards Act Violations

TWIN KEGS: Faces "Glass" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wage
VANTAGE FOODS: Faces "Pacheco" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
VODAFONE: Customers' Class Action Over Network Issues Faces Delay
WESTWAY TRANSPORTATION: Does Not Pay OT, "Kaufman" Suit Says
WORLD PIZZA: Does Not Pay Employees Overtime, "Ruiz" Suit Claims

WYNDHAM VACATION: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Reynolds" Suit Claims
ZALE CORP: Faces Lawsuits by Former Piercing Pagoda Employees
ZALE CORP: Still Faces Shareholder Suit Over Signet Merger

* Seven Auto Makers to Recall Millions of Vehicles Over Air Bags


                            *********


A&S BROADWAY: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime and Damages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Ordonez and Hugo R. Morales, on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated v. A&S Broadway Produce, Inc., dba
Top Tomato Supermarket, and Salvatore Sciandra, Anthony Sciandra,
and Steven Papakonscantis, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-04152
(S.D.N.Y., June 10, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid wages and
minimum wages, unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest; and attorneys' fees and
costs.

A&S Broadway Produce, Inc., is a New York corporation with a
principal place of business at 420 S. Broadway, Yonkers, New York,
10705.

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: pcooper@jcpclaw.com


AC QUALITY: Faces "Forte" Suit for Failing to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------
Frank P. Mora Forte and all others similarly situated under
29 U.S.C. 216(B) v. AC Quality Electric, LLC, Alan Capps, Case No.
1:14-cv-22139 (S.D. Fla., June 10, 2014), is brought against the
Defendant for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

AC Quality Electric, LLC, is a limited liability company that
regularly transacts business within Broward and Dade Counties.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jamie H. Zidell, Esq.
      J.H. ZIDELL, P.A.
      300 71st Street, Suite 605,
      Miami Beach, FL 33141
      Telephone: (305) 865-6766
      Facsimile: 865-7167
      E-mail: zabogado@aol.com


ADVANTAGE HEALTH: Recalls Products with Chia Seeds Due to E Coli
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 4, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Updated Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Salmonella
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Advantage Health Matters
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8937

The food recall warning issued on June 3, 2014 has been updated to
include additional product information.  This additional
information was identified during the Canadian Food Inspection
Agency's (CFIA) food safety investigation.

Advantage Health Matters is recalling various products containing
sprouted chia seeds from the marketplace due to possible
Salmonella contamination.  Consumers should not consume the
recalled products.

The following products have been sold nationally and through
Internet sales.

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

Food contaminated with Salmonella may not look or smell spoiled
but can still make you sick.  Young children, pregnant women, the
elderly and people with weakened immune systems may contract
serious and sometimes deadly infections.  Healthy people may
experience short-term symptoms such as fever, headache, vomiting,
nausea, abdominal cramps and diarrhea.  Long-term complications
may include severe arthritis.

This recall has been issued as part of a foodborne illness
outbreak investigation; however, there are no reported illnesses
associated with the consumption of these particular products.

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

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


ADVANTAGE HEALTH: Recalls Various Products Containing Chia Seeds
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Updated Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Salmonella
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Advantage Health Matters, Back 2 the
                          Garden
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8938

The food recall warning issued on June 4, 2014 has been updated to
include additional product information.  This additional
information was identified during the Canadian Food Inspection
Agency's (CFIA) food safety investigation.

Advantage Health Matters and Back 2 the Garden are recalling
various products containing chia seeds or sprouted chia seed
powder from the marketplace due to possible Salmonella
contamination.  Consumers should not consume the recalled products
described below.

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

The recall has been issued as part of a foodborne illness outbreak
investigation.  There have been reported illnesses associated with
the consumption of some of these products.

The recall was triggered by findings by the CFIA during its
investigation into a foodborne illness outbreak.  The CFIA is
conducting a food safety investigation, which may lead to the
recall of other products.  If other high-risk products are
recalled the CFIA will notify the public through updated Food
Recall Warnings.

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


AGFA DIGITAL: Recalls Radiography X-Ray System DX-D 100
-------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Posting date:             June 12, 2014
Type of communication:    Medical Device Recall
Subcategory:              Medical Device
Hazard classification:    Type I
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Medical Devices
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
                          Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-40007

Recalled products: AGFA Digital Radiography X-ray System DX-D 100
Lot or serial number: More than 10 numbers, contact manufacturer.
Model or catalog number: SM-40HF-B-D-C

The reason for the recall is to inform users of the potential
issue that can occur if the DX-D 100 Capacitive Touch Screen
endures unintentional activation due to liquids coming in contact
with the touch screen.

Companies:

   Manufacturer      AGFA Healthcare N.V.
                     Septestraat 27
                     Mortsel
                     2640
                     Belgium


ALCON LABORATORIES: Recalls Eye-Pak Tray Support Cover
------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Posting date:             June 18, 2014
Type of communication:    Medical Device Recall
Subcategory:              Medical Device
Hazard classification:    Type II
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Medical Devices
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
                          Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-40137

Potential sterility breach of tray support covers used to cover
the console tray.  The Tyvek pouch holding the tray support cover
may not have a complete seal.

Affected products:
Eye-Pak Tray Support Cover
Lot or serial number: 352699V/ 613207-07V/ 613256-07V
Model or catalog number: 8065740745

Companies:

   Manufacturer      Alcon Laboratories Inc.
                     6201 South Freeway
                     Fort Worth 76134
                     Texas
                     United States


ALERE SAN DIEGO: Recalls Triage B-Type Natriuretic Peptide Test
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 3, 2014
Posting date:             June 18, 2014
Type of communication:    Medical Device Recall
Subcategory:              Medical Device
Hazard classification:    Type II
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Medical Devices
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
                          Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-40075

The issue is limited to a single lot of the product. In a portion
of lot K328163, the bottle labeled as calibrator level 5 actually
contains calibrator level 4.  This results in a calibration
failure when attempting to calibrate using a calibrator kit which
contains the affected level 5 calibrator.  Although not all kits
from this lot are impacted, it cannot determine which specific
calibrator level 5 bottles in this lot are affected.  Therefore it
is recommended that customers stop using all products from this
lot and discard any unused product.

Affected products: Triage B-type Natriuretic Peptide (BNP) test
for the Beckman Coulter Immunoassay Systems

Lot or serial number: K328163

Model or catalog number: 98202

Companies:

   Manufacturer      Alere San Diego, Inc.
                     9975 Summers Ridge Road
                     San Diego
                     92121
                     California
                     United States


ANNIE'S INC: Faces "Taormina" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Taormina, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Annie's, Inc., John M. Foraker, Kelly J.
Kennedy, and Zahir M. Ibrahim, Case No. 5:14-cv-02711 (N.D. Cal.,
June 11, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for the alleged
false and misleading financial statement of the Company.

Annie's, Inc., is a natural and organic food company, with its
principal executive offices located at 1610 Fifth Street,
Berkeley, CA 94710.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Elaine Chang, Esq.
      Michael M. Goldberg, Esq.
      Robert Vincent Prongay, Esq.
      Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq.
      GLANCY BINKOW GOLDBERG LLP
      1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100,
      Los Angeles, CA 90067
      Telephone: (310) 201-9150
      Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
      E-mail: echang@glancylaw.com
              mmgoldberg@glancylaw.com
              rprongay@glancylaw.com
              info@glancylaw.com


BAUSCH & LOMB: Recalls Muro 128 5% Ointment
-------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 2, 2014
Posting date:             June 18, 2014
Type of communication:    Drug Recall
Subcategory:              Natural health products
Hazard classification:    Type II
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Product Safety
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
                          Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-40021

Recalled Products: Muro 128 5% Ointment

Global Safety and Vigilance signal alert associated with an
Adverse Drug Event with an observed increase in complaints
associated with gritty, sand like feeling in the eye.  Sample
analysis revealed crystal precipitates in the product.

The recalled products were distributed in retailers, pharmacies,
clinics in Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, British Columbia, Quebec,
Newfoundland, New Brunswick Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia.

   Manufacturer     Pascal Bai Yun Shan Industrial Zone

Companies:

   Recalling Firm   Bausch & Lomb Canada Inc.
                    520 Applewood Crescent
                    Vaughan
                    L4K 4B4
                    Ontario
                    Canada

   Marketing
   Authorization
   Holder           Bausch & Lomb Inc.
                    8500 Hidden River Parkway
                    Tampa 33637
                    Florida
                    United States


BAY AREA CREDIT: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Ong" Action Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Geraldine Ong, on behalf of herself, and all others similarly
situated v. HOVG, LLC dba Bay Area Credit Service, a Nevada
limited liability company, Case No. 3:14-cv-01334 (S.D. Cal., May
30, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for negligently, and
willfully contacting the Plaintiff through telephone calls on the
Plaintiff's cellular telephone, in violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.

HOVG, LLC dba Bay Area Credit Service, is an international
recovery services organization whose primary offices are located
in Georgia.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ronald Marron, 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


BAYAN GROCERS: Recalls Kopiko Astig 3inOne Instant Coffee
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Bayan Grocers Inc.
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8927

Affected products: 200 g. Kopiko Astig 3inOne Instant Coffee with
all packages where milk is not declared on the label.


BED HANDLES INC: Recalls Adult Portable Bed Handles
---------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 3, 2014
Posting date:             June 3, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Household Items
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Physical Hazard, Strangulation Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-39723

Affected products:

Portable bed handles that lack safety retention straps.
Recalled models include the Original Bedside Assistant (BA10W),
the Travel HandlesTM (BA11W) which is sold as a set of two bed
handles, and the Adjustable Bedside Assistant (AJ1) sold between
January 1994 and December 2007.

The recall involves the Original Bedside Assistant (BA10W), the
Travel HandlesTM (BA11W) which is sold as a set of two bed
handles, and the Adjustable Bedside Assistant (AJ1).

The L-shaped bed handles are made out of 3/4inch tubular steel,
measure 20 inches wide, 16 to 20 inches tall and have 3 ft. poles
that extend under the mattress.  The Original Bedside Assistant
(BA10W) and the Travel HandlesTM (BA11W) have a white handle with
white poles that go under the mattress.  The Adjustable Bedside
Assistant (AJ1) is gold in color and has a black cushioned foam
handle.  The bed handles are intended to assist adults with
getting in and out of bed by giving them a bar to grip.  Bed
Handles Inc. and the model number are printed on a white label on
the bed handles.

The recalled portable bed handles were sold without safety
retention straps.  When attached to an adult's bed without the use
of safety retention straps, the handle can shift out of place,
creating a dangerous gap between the bed handle and the side of
the mattress.  This poses a serious risk of entrapment,
strangulation and death.

Neither Bed Handles Inc. nor Health Canada has received any
reports of consumer incidents or injuries related to the use of
these products in Canada.  There have been 3 deaths reported in
the United States.

Approximately 2000 bed handles were sold in Canada by home health
care stores, drug stores and medical equipment stores and in home
and health care catalogs.

The bed handles were manufactured in United States and sold from
January 1994 through December 2007.

Companies:

   Manufacturer      Bed Handles, Inc.
                     Blue Springs
                     Missouri
                     United States

Consumers should immediately stop using all recalled bed handles
that were sold without safety retention straps.  To request safety
retention strap kits consumers can contact Bed Handles website or
by email.  Consumers can also call 1-816-224-6000 from 8:30 a.m.
to 4:30 p.m. CST Monday through Friday.


BLUE BIRD: Recalls 182 School Buses Due to Steering Issues
----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 5, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              School Bus
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Steering
Units affected:           182
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014211
TC ID number:             2014211
Manufacturer recall
number:                   R14XE-C

On certain school buses, the steering shaft lower clamp could
contact the rubber close out boot.  This would increase the
steering effort force necessary to steer the vehicle, which could
increase the risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to
property.

Correction: Dealers will relocate the clamp. If the rubber boot is
found to be torn, the boot will be replaced.

Affected products: 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 Blue Bird All American
School Bus


BLUE BIRD: Recalls 36 Non-School Buses Due to Steering Issues
-------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 5, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Bus
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Steering
Units affected:           36
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014212
TC ID number:             2014212
Manufacturer recall
number:                   R14XE-C

On certain buses, the steering shaft lower clamp could contact the
rubber close out boot.  This would increase the steering effort
force necessary to steer the vehicle, which could increase the
risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to property.

Correction: Dealers will relocate the clamp. If the rubber boot is
found to be torn, the boot will be replaced.

Affected products: 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 Blue Bird All American
Non-School Bus


BLUE BIRD: Recalls 9 Vision School Buses Due to Fuel Line Defect
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 5, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              School Bus
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Fuel Supply
Units affected:           9
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014209
TC ID number:             2014209
Manufacturer recall
number:                   R14XD

On certain propane-powered school buses, the aluminum fuel line
fitting at the propane tank can experience dissimilar metal
corrosion where it contacts the brass supply housing on the fuel
tank.  This could result in a propane leak, which in the presence
of an ignition source, could result in a fire causing property
damage and/or injury.

Correction: Dealers will replace the aluminum fuel line fitting at
the fuel tank with a new stainless steel fitting.

Affected products: 2012, 2013 Blue Bird Vision School Bus


BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Sued Over Timing Chain Tensioners Defect
--------------------------------------------------------------
Judy Quinlan, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. BMW of North America, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company, Case No. 1:14-cv-00485 (S.D. Ohio, June 11,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for the alleged timing
chain tensioners defect of Mini Cooper vehicles.

BMW of North America, LLC, is a Delaware limited liability company
with its principal place of business at 300 Chestnut Ridge Road,
Woodcliff Lake, New Jersey 07677.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Robert R. Sparks, Esq.
      STRAUSS TROY CO., LPA
      150 East Fourth Street,
      Cincinnati, OH 45202
      Telephone: (513) 621-2120
      Facsimile: (513) 241-8259
      E-mail: rrsparks@strausstroy.com


BOB MILLS: Faces "Thomas" Suit in Texas for Failing to Pay OT
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rinda J. Thomas and Miriam Moore v. Bob Mills Furniture Co. of
Texas, LP, Case No. 6:14-cv-00219 (W.D. Tex., June 10, 2014), is
brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime and
minimum wages pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Bob Mills Furniture Co., is a Texas limited partnership, or other
form of business entity, that may be served with process through
its registered agent, BMF Texas GP Holdings, LLC, 2100 S. 61st
Street, Temple, Texas 76504.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Danny Clark Wash, Esq.
      WASH & THOMAS
      6613 Sanger Avenue,
      Waco, TX 76710
      Telephone: (254) 776-3611
      Facsimile: (254) 776-9217
      E-mail: danwash@washthomas.com

           - and -

      Clyde Vance Dunnam, Esq.
      James R. Dunnam, Esq.
      DUNNAM & DUNNAM, L.L.P.
      4125 West Waco Dr.,
      Waco, TX 76710
      Telephone: (254) 753-6437
      Facsimile: (254) 753-7434
      E-mail: karen@dunnamlaw.com
              jimdunnam@swbell.net


BOULANGERIE L'ESCALE: Recalls Products Due to Undeclared Soy
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Soy
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Boulangerie l'Escale
Distribution:             Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8925


CANADA: May Face Class Action Over Chinese Visa Applications
------------------------------------------------------------
Kristiaan Yeo, writing for CCTV.com, reported that Canada's
immigration ministry could be forced to re-open the case-files of
around 1,500 Chinese visa applicants, or face a $16.5 billion
penalty.  A judge in Canada is considering a class action lawsuit
filed by wealthy Chinese investors who had applied for Canadian
residency under the Immigrant Investor Program, which had been
cancelled earlier in the year.

It's a legal challenge by 1,469 Chinese nationals who'd applied
under the now defunct Immigrant Investor Program.  Their class
action lawsuit could force Citizenship and Immigration Canada to
assess their applications "on merit," or pay each of them $5
million compensation.  Their lawyer is Tim Leahy.

"If Justice Gleeson either issues the order the way I've written
or requested it, at this point it would cost the treasury 16.5
billion dollars if the minister chooses not to comply with the
order to process the applicants on their merits.  But they will."
Tim Leahy, immigration lawyer with Forefront Migration Ltd., said.

The immigrant investor program allowed foreigners, in effect, to
buy Canadian passports payment to the treasury of 800,000 Canadian
dollars.  Due to rampant demand, the government suspended the
scheme in 2012, leaving around 65,000 foreigners in limbo.  The
majority of cases -- about 70 percent -- were Chinese.

Canada told those applicants in February this year that their
cases would never be processed.

"You can't believe anything they say.  Some people ask me (what's
going to happen) -- and I tell them -- I can't tell you what's
going to happen next week, because everything that happens is done
retrospectively," Mr. Leahy said.

The government says the program failed to bring economic benefits
to Canada -- and it's planning new schemes, which it hopes are
more effective.

Mr. Leahy believes the program was flawed from the start and only
became popular because wait times for other visas were so bad.

"I used to say to people if you want to set up a business, come as
an entrepreneur.  If you don't want to live here, come as an
investor.  But then they made entrepreneurs wait 5-7 years to be
processed.  How can you plan a future when you don't know when
you're gonna come? So a lot of entrepreneurs really came as
investors," Mr. Leahy said.

Reaction in China has been critical, with some suggesting that
Canada no longer wants Chinese immigrants, or their cash.

"I think the Chinese have been overly sensitive.  They're not
drawing the drawbridge up on the Chinese.  They're drawing it up
on everyone," Mr. Leahy said.

Citizenship and Immigration Canada has told us that it cannot
comment specifically on legal action taken by investor immigrant
applicants.  But it's promising to return all application fees to
those affected.  More details on that process will be announced in
the coming weeks.


CARESTREAM: Recalls Kodak Directview DR 9000 System
---------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 2, 2014
Posting date:             June 18, 2014
Type of communication:    Medical Device Recall
Subcategory:              Medical Device
Hazard classification:    Type II
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Medical Devices
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-40053

Carestream has identified that in the case of a control system
failure, the DR 9000 u-arm may move downward unexpectedly when the
radiology technologist is positioning the equipment using the "up"
or "down" device control buttons.  This downward movement occurs
at three times the normal rate of speed and will continue until
the device control button is released, the emergency stop button
is activated or the equipment bump sensor contacts an object.
There is a potential for injury if this issue occurs for patients
positioned under the u-arm for decubitus exams.

Affected products:

Kodak Directview DR 9000 System
Lot or serial number:
102
123
140
1603U0024

Model or catalog number:
851 9530

Companies:

   Manufacturer     Carestream Health Inc.
                    150 Verona Street
                    Rochester
                    14608
                    New York
                    United States


CARNEGIE LINEN: "Larios" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
--------------------------------------------------------
Domingo Larios, on behalf of himself and all others similarly-
situated v. Carnegie Linen Services, Inc. and Eric Schweitzer, in
his individual and professional capacities, Case No. 1:14-cv-04235
(S.D.N.Y., June 11, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage,
and overtime compensation, liquidated damages, interest, and
attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

Carnegie Linen Services, Inc., is a New York corporation located
at 874 East 139th Street, Bronx, New York 10454.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael J. Palitz, Esq.
      Alexander T. Coleman, Esq.
      Michael J. Borrelli, Esq.
      BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C.
      1010 Northern Boulevard, Suite 328,
      Great Neck, NY 11021
      Telephone: (516)248-5550
      Facsimile: (516)248-6027


CAVALRY STAFFING: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Copper" Action Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Derek Copper and Mitchell Raife, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly-situated v. Cavalry Staffing, LLC, and Enterprise
Holdings, Inc., and Tracy Lee Hester, in his individual and
professional capacities, Case No. 1:14-cv-03676 (E.D.N.Y., June
11, 2014) is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay
overtime and minimum wages pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Cavalry Staffing, LLC, owns and operates a staffing agency
responsible for hiring and paying employees with its principal
place of business located at 5400 Transportation Boulevard, Suite
128, Garfield Heights, Ohio 44125.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jeffrey Robert Maguire, Esq.
      BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES
      1010 Northern Boulevard, Suite 328,
      Great Neck, NY 11021
      Telephone: (516) 248-5550
      Facsimile: (516) 248-6027
      E-mail: jrm@employmentlawyernewyork.com


CHICO'S FAS: Faces "Delfierro" Labor Suit in Calif. Super. Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chico's FAS, Inc. was named a defendant in a putative class action
filed in February 2014 in the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Sacramento: Toni Delfierro, et al, v.
White House Black Market, Inc., according to the company's May 30,
2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended May 3, 2014.

The Complaint alleges numerous violations of California law
related to wages, meal periods, rest periods, wage statements, and
failure to reimburse business expenses, among other things. The
Company denies the material allegations of the Complaint. The
Company believes that its policies and procedures for paying its
associates comply with all applicable California laws.


CHRYSLER: Recalls 2,430 Light Trucks Due to Airbag Problems
-----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 4, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Light Truck & Van
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Electrical
Units affected:           2430
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014208TC
ID number:                2014208
Manufacturer recall
number:                   P32

On some vehicles, water ingress around the in-floor battery cover
and door footwell trim could cause electrical circuit corrosion,
potentially causing the engine to stall resulting in a loss of
motive power and could also disable the airbags, turn signals,
parking, stop and/or reverse lamps.  These issues could increase
the risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to property.
Correction: Dealers will apply sealer, relocate electrical
components and apply dielectric grease as necessary.

Affected products: 2014 RAM Promaster


CHRYSLER: Recalls 949 Cherokee, Durango and Grand Cherokee SUVs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 4, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              SUV
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Accessories
Units affected:           949
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014207
TC ID number:             2014207
Manufacturer recall
number:                   P31

On certain vehicles, when cruise control is engaged and the
accelerator pedal is depressed to override the cruise control, a
defect in cruise control software could cause momentary continued
acceleration after releasing the accelerator pedal.  Depending on
traffic and road conditions, and the rider's reactions, this could
increase the risk of a crash causing injury and/or property
damage.  Correction: Dealers will reprogram the driver assistance
module.

Affected products:

   Maker        Model         Model year(s) affected
   -----        -----         ----------------------
   JEEP        CHEROKEE           2014
   JEEP        GRAND CHEROKEE     2014
   DODGE       DURANGO            2014


CITIZENS OF HUMANITY: Sued in California Over "Made In USA" Label
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Lipkin, writing for Law360, reports that denim company
Citizens of Humanity LLC and Macy's Inc. were hit with a putative
class action on June 9 in California federal court accusing them
of misleading customers into thinking COH's "Boyfriend" jeans were
made entirely in the U.S. when the jeans' fabric, thread and
buttons were actually made abroad.

Plaintiff Louise Clark claims the COH line of jeans are labeled as
"made in the U.S.A." but have several components that are foreign-
made, including fabric, thread, rivets and buttons.  Other COH
jeans also have zipper parts that are manufactured outside the
U.S., according to the suit.

Ms. Clark alleges that COH and Macy's fraudulently concealed
information from consumers and were motivated "solely by profit."
Consumers often believe U.S.-made products are of higher quality
than foreign goods, the suit said, and the defendants charged more
than their competitors.  Foreign clothes are not subject to the
same environmental, labor and safety regulations and are often
"inherently of lower quality," according to the suit.

"Due to defendants' scheme to defraud the market, members of the
general public were fraudulently induced to purchase defendants'
products at inflated prices," the complaint said.  "Defendants'
scheme to defraud consumers is ongoing and will victimize
consumers each and every day until altered by judicial
intervention."

Even though Ms. Clark bought a pair of the "Boyfriend" jeans in a
San Diego Macy's last month, she seeks to represent all California
purchasers of any COH clothing labeled as made in the U.S. that
had foreign-made components over the past four years.  She also
wants to create a subclass of consumers who bought COH clothes
with "made in U.S.A. of imported fabric" labels that had more than
just foreign-made fabric.

Ms. Clark alleges that she believed she was supporting the U.S.
economy when she bought the jeans, and that most of COH's
competitors do not claim their clothes are made in the U.S.

"This is a material factor in many individuals' purchasing
decisions, as they believe they are supporting American companies
and American jobs," the complaint said.

Ms. Clark is represented by John H. Donboli and JL Sean Slattery
of Del Mar Law Group LLP.

The case is Louise Clark v. Citizens of Humanity LLC et al., case
number 3:14-cv-01404, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of California.


COWBOY'S MOBILE: "Rodriquez" Suit Seeks to Reclaim Unpaid OT
------------------------------------------------------------
Ramon Rodriguez, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Cowboy's Mobile Homes, Inc., Cowboy's
Services, Inc. and Keith Jannise, Case No.  3:14-cv-00193 (S.D.
Tex., June 11, 2014) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages
pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Cowboy's Mobile Homes, Inc., provides logistical solutions for
oilfield housing, turnkey 'man camps' and specialized
transportation.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Curt Christopher Hesse, Esq.
      Melissa Moore, Esq.
      MOORE & ASSOCIATES
      440 Louisiana St, Ste 675,
      Houston, TX 77002-1637
      Telephone: (713) 222-6775
      Facsimile: (713) 222-6739
      E-mail: curt@mooreandassociates.net
              melissa@mooreandassociates.net


CRAFTY NUANCE: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime & Damages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Leon Salinas and Juan Pech, on behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated v. Crafty Nuance Group, LLC, dba Hop Devil
Grill and The Belgian Room, and Michael Nersesian and Alexis
Gomez, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-04214 (S.D.N.Y., June 11,
2014), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage, and overtime
compensation, liquidated damages, interest, and attorneys' fees
and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Crafty Nuance Group, LLC, is a bar and restaurant known as
"Hop Devil Grill," located at 129 St. Marks Place, New York, New
York 10009.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


CRESCENT DIRECTIONAL: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Lucas" Suit Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Edward Lucas, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Crescent Directional Drilling, LP, Case No. 4:14-cv-
01635 (S.D. Tex., June 11, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
wages pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Crescent Directional Drilling, LP, is a directional drilling
service provider headquartered in Houston, Texas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Richard J. Burch, Esq.
      BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
      8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500,
      Houston, TX 77046
      Telephone: (713) 877-8788
      Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
      E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com


CYCLE GEAR: "Bowers" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-------------------------------------------------------
Lannden Bower, as an individual, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Cycle Gear, Inc., a California Corporation;
and DOES 2 through 10, Case No. 4:14-cv-02712 (N.D. Cal., June 11,
2014) seeks to recover unpaid wages and penalties under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

Cycle Gear, Inc., is a retailer of motorcycle parts and apparel in
California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Paul Haines, Esq.
      BOREN OSHER & LUFTMAN
      5900 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 920,
      Los Angeles, CA 90036
      Telephone: (213) 612-7423
      E-mail: phaines@bollaw.com


DEJONG CONSTRUCTION: Sued Over Breach of Fair Labor Standards Act
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Efrain Delgado, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Dejong Construction LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-22146 (S.D.
Fla., June 10, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for
violations of the overtime and minimum wage provisions of the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

Dejong Construction LLC, is a construction company that has its
principal address on 603 Castle Drive in Palm Beach Gardens, FL
33410.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      R. Edward Rosenberg, Esq.
      FELDMAN MORGADO, PA
      100 N. Biscayne Blvd, Suite 2902,
      Miami, FL 33132
      Telephone: (609) 335-1586
      E-mail: erosenberg@ffmlawgroup.com


DOMINO'S PIZZA: Sued Over Unlawful Retention of Service Charges
---------------------------------------------------------------
Marilia Prinholato, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Domino's Pizza, Inc., Domino's, Inc., Domino's Pizza,
LLC, Pmlra Pizza, Inc.; and Henry Askew, Case No. 1:14-cv-12483
(D. Mass., June 11, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for
the unlawful retention of service charges paid by customers, and
resulting minimum wage violations.

Domino's Pizza, Inc., is known as the number one pizza delivery
company in the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Stephen S. Churchill, Esq.
      FAIR WORK, P.C.
      192 South Street, Suite 450,
      Boston, MA 02111
      Telephone: (617) 607-3260
      E-mail: steve@fairworklaw.com


DSI FOOD: Recalls Imitation Meat Products
-----------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Updated Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Egg, Allergen - Mustard
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           DSI Food Corporation, Reshine Trading
                          Ltd.
Distribution:             Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba,
                          Ontario, Possibly National, Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution:             Consumer
CFIA reference number:    8929

The food recall warning issued on May 30, 2014 has been updated to
include additional product information.  This additional
information was identified during the Canadian Food Inspection
Agency's (CFIA) food safety investigation.

Industry is recalling imitation meat products from the marketplace
because they contain egg and mustard which are not declared on the
label.  People with an allergy to egg or mustard should not
consume the recalled products described below.

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

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

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

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


EMERGENCY ONE: Recalls 8 Cyclone II and Typhoon Trucks
------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Truck - Med. & H.D.
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Electrical
Units affected:           8
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014218
TC ID number:             2014218

On certain vehicles, a programming defect exists in the vehicle
input module.  If the vehicle Master Power Switch is shut off
while the brake pedal is depressed and the switch is turned back
on, the brake lights could remain illuminated when the brakes are
not applied.  Erratic brake lamp function could increase the risk
of a crash causing injury and/or property damage.

Correction: Dealers will update software.

Affected products:

   Maker       Model           Model year(s) affected
   -----       -----           ----------------------
   E-ONE       CYCLONE II      2014
   E-ONE       TYPHOON         2014


ERICK FLOWBACK: Faces "Saenz" Suit for Failing to Pay Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy Saenz, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Erick Flowback Services LLC, Mark Snodgrass, Case No.
5:14-cv-00593 (W.D. Okla., June 10, 2014), is brought against the
Defendant for failure to pay overtime and minimum wages pursuant
to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Erick Flowback Services LLC, is a domestic limited liability
company doing business throughout the United States including
Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Amber L. Hurst, Esq.
      HAMMONS GOWENS HURST & ASSOCIATES
      325 Dean A McGee Ave,
      Oklahoma City, OK 73102
      Telephone: (405) 235-6100
      Facsimile: (405) 235-6111
      E-mail:  amberh@hammonslaw.com


FEDERATED COOPERATIVES: Recalls 2-Step Household Ladder
-------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 4, 2014
Posting date:             June 4, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Household Items
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Fall Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-39763

Affected products: SC-2B, 2 Step Household Ladder

The recall involves the foldable SC-2B, 2 Step Household Ladder
with non-rust powder coated finish, non-slip plastic tips and
sponge back rest with a capacity of 225 lbs.

The step ladder can be identified by the UPC 771448524617 and item
number Item #4468443.

The bottom step may not be able hold up to the stated 225 lb
capacity, causing the step to bend and potentially collapse,
posing a fall hazard to the user.

Neither Federated Cooperatives Ltd. nor Health Canada are aware of
any injuries associated with the use of this product.

Approximately 205 ladders may have been distributed at Co-op
stores in Western Canada.

The product was manufactured in China and sold between Feb. 8,
2014 and May 16, 2014.

Companies:

   Importer     Federated Cooperatives Ltd.
                Saskatoon
                Saskatchewan
                Canada

Consumers who have purchased the two step ladder should stop using
it and return it to the store where it was purchased for a full
refund.


FLORIDA GAS: Sued Over Pipeline Explosion in Enon, Louisiana
------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that a federal class actions seeks
damages from Florida Gas Transmission Co. for a June 18, 2013
explosion and fire at a natural gas line near Enon, Louisiana.


FOREST LABS: July 16 Hearing on Settlement in Celexa/Lexapro Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A hearing on whether the court should grant final approval of the
$7.65 million settlement reached in "In re Celexa and Lexapro
Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation" is scheduled for July
16, 2014, according to Forest Laboratories, Inc.'s May 30, 2014,
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2014.

The company is a defendant in three federal court actions filed on
behalf of individuals who purchased Celexa and/or Lexapro for
pediatric use, all of which have been consolidated for pretrial
purposes in a Multi-District Litigation (MDL) proceeding in the
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts under the
caption "In re Celexa and Lexapro Marketing and Sales Practices
Litigation."  These actions, two of which were originally filed as
putative nationwide class actions, and one of which is a putative
California-wide class action, allege that Forest marketed Celexa
and/or Lexapro for off-label pediatric use and paid illegal
kickbacks to physicians to induce prescriptions of Celexa and
Lexapro.  The complaints assert various similar claims, including
claims under the Missouri and California consumer protection
statutes, respectively, and state common laws.  On February 5,
2013, the district judge overseeing the MDL denied all plaintiffs'
motions for class certification.  On February 18, 2013, the
plaintiff in the California action filed a petition seeking leave
to appeal this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First
Circuit.  On April 16, 2013, the First Circuit denied the
petition.  On April 30, 2013, plaintiffs in the other two actions
filed an Amended Complaint seeking to certify state-wide class
actions in Illinois, Missouri, and New York under those states'
consumer protection statutes.  On January 13, 2014, the district
judge denied plaintiffs' motion with respect to the proposed
Illinois and New York classes and allowed it with respect to the
proposed Missouri class.  The company filed a petition seeking
leave to appeal this decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
First Circuit on January 27, 2014.  On March 12, 2014, the company
reached agreement with the MDL plaintiffs to settle the Missouri
class claims, including claims by both individuals and third party
payors that purchased Celexa or Lexapro for use by a minor from
1998 to December 31, 2013.  In exchange for a release from class
members, the company paid $7.65 million into a fund that will
cover (1) the settlement benefits paid to class members, (2)
administration costs, (3) incentive awards to be paid to the
representative plaintiffs, and (4) attorneys' fees and costs.  If
valid claims are greater than $4.215 million, the company will pay
up to $2.7 million more to pay for the additional valid claims
(the company's total settlement payment shall not exceed $10.35
million).  The district court judge preliminarily approved the
settlement on March 14, 2014 and issued an order enjoining all
class members and other persons from litigating claims relating to
those covered by the settlement.  A hearing on whether the court
should grant final approval of the settlement is scheduled for
July 16, 2014.

On May 3, 2013, another action was filed in the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California on behalf of
individuals who purchased Lexapro for adolescent use, seeking to
certify a state-wide class action in California and alleging that
the company's promotion of Lexapro for adolescent depression has
been deceptive.  This action was transferred to the MDL mentioned
in the preceding paragraph and, on July 29, 2013, the company
moved to dismiss the complaint.  The district court judge granted
the company's motion to dismiss on March 5, 2014.  Plaintiff filed
a Notice of Appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First
Circuit on March 17, 2014.

On November 13, 2013, another action was filed in the U.S.
District Court for the District of Minnesota seeking to certify a
nationwide class of third-party payor entities that purchased
Celexa and Lexapro for pediatric use.  The complaint asserts
claims under the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt
Organizations Act, alleging that Forest engaged in an off-label
marketing scheme and paid illegal kickbacks to physicians to
induce prescriptions of Celexa and Lexapro.  This action was
transferred to the MDL mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, and
the company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on January 15,
2014.  On February 5, 2014, the plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed
the complaint and filed a First Amended Complaint, which, among
other things, added claims on behalf of a Minnesota class of
entities and consumers under Minnesota's consumer protection
statutes.  The company filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended
Complaint on April 9, 2014.

On March 13, 2014, an action was filed in the U.S. District Court
for the District of Massachusetts by two third-party payors
seeking to certify a nationwide class of persons and entities that
purchased Celexa and Lexapro for use by pediatric use.  The
complaint asserts claims under the federal Racketeer Influenced
and Corrupt Organizations Act, state consumer protection statutes,
and state common laws, alleging that Forest engaged in an off-
label marketing scheme and paid illegal kickbacks to physicians to
induce prescriptions of Celexa and Lexapro.  This action was filed
as a related action to the action in the preceding paragraph.  The
company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on April 30, 2014.


FOREST LABS: MDL Order Suspends Celexa/Lexapro Suit in Missouri
---------------------------------------------------------------
The parties in "Luster v. Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,"
agreed that the action is stayed in light of the injunction
contained in the "In re Celexa and Lexapro Marketing and Sales
Practices Litigation" Preliminary Approval Order, according to
Forest Laboratories, Inc.'s May 30, 2014, Form 10-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year
ended March 31, 2014.

The company is also named as defendants in two actions filed on
behalf of entities or individuals who purchased or reimbursed
certain purchases of Celexa and Lexapro for pediatric use pending
in the Missouri Circuit Court, Twenty-Second Judicial Circuit, and
arising from similar allegations as those contained in the federal
actions.  The first action, filed on November 6, 2009 under the
caption "St. Louis Labor Healthcare Network et al. v. Forest
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Forest Laboratories, Inc.," is brought
by two entities that purchased or reimbursed certain purchases of
Celexa and/or Lexapro.   The complaint asserts claims under the
Missouri consumer protection statute and Missouri common law, and
seeks unspecified damages and attorneys' fees.  The company
reached an agreement with the plaintiffs to resolve this action
for payments that are not material to the company's financial
condition or results of operations.  The second action, filed on
July 22, 2009 under the caption "Crawford v. Forest
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.," and now known as "Luster v. Forest
Pharmaceuticals, Inc.," is a putative class action on behalf of a
class of Missouri citizens who purchased Celexa for pediatric use.
The complaint asserts claims under the Missouri consumer
protection statute and Missouri common law, and seeks unspecified
damages and attorneys' fees.  In October 2010, the court certified
a class of Missouri domiciliary citizens who purchased Celexa for
pediatric use at any time prior to the date of the class
certification order, but who do not have a claim for personal
injury.  On December 9, 2013, the company filed a motion for
summary judgment, which was argued on January 8, 2014.  On
February 21, 2014, the company filed a motion to de-certify the
class.  Decisions on these motions are pending.  On March 12,
2014, the company informed the judge of the MDL Missouri class
settlement, including that the federal class encompasses the
members of the certified Missouri class in Luster.  At a status
conference on April 2, 2014, the parties agreed that the action is
stayed in light of the injunction contained in the MDL Preliminary
Approval Order.


FOREST LABS: Seeks to Junk Sales Rep Gender Discrimination Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Forest Laboratories Inc. is seeking the dismissal of a
discrimination case filed by Megan Barrett on behalf of former
female Sales Representatives, according to the company's May 30,
2014, Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2014.

In July 2012, the company was named as defendants in an action
brought by Megan Barrett, Lindsey Houser, Jennifer Jones, and
Jennifer Seard, former Company Sales Representatives, in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York under the
caption "Megan Barrett et al. v. Forest Laboratories Inc. and
Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc."  In November 2012, Plaintiffs
amended the complaint, adding six additional plaintiffs: Kimberly
Clinton, Erin Eckenrode, Julie Smyth, Marie Avila, Andrea Harley,
and Christy Lowder, all of whom alleged that they were current or
former Company Sales Representatives or Specialty Sales
Representatives.  In March 2013, Plaintiffs filed a Second Amended
Complaint, adding one additional plaintiff: Tracy Le, a now-former
Company Sales Representative.  The action is a putative class and
collective action, and the Second Amended Complaint alleges class
claims under Title VII for gender discrimination with respect to
pay and promotions, as well as discrimination on the basis of
pregnancy, and a collective action claim under the Equal Pay Act.
The proposed Title VII gender class includes all current and
former female Sales Representatives (defined to include Territory
Sales Representatives, Field Sales Representatives, Medical Sales
Representatives, Professional Sales Representatives, Specialty
Sales Representatives, Field Sales Trainers, and Regional Sales
Trainers) employed by Forest throughout the U.S. from 2008 to the
date of judgment, and the proposed Title VII pregnancy sub-class
includes all current and former female Sales Representatives who
have been, are, or will become pregnant while employed by Forest
throughout the U.S. from 2008 to the date of judgment.  The
proposed Equal Pay Act collective action class includes current,
former, and future female Sales Representatives who were not
compensated equally to similarly-situated male employees during
the applicable liability period.  The Second Amended Complaint
also includes non-class claims on behalf of certain of the named
Plaintiffs for sexual harassment and retaliation under Title VII,
and for violations of the Family and Medical Leave Act.  The
company filed a motion to dismiss certain claims on April 29,
2013, which was argued on January 16, 2014.


FOREST LABS: Faces Suit Over Proposed Furiex Acquisition
--------------------------------------------------------
Forest Laboratories Inc. is facing shareholder lawsuits seeking to
enjoin its proposed acquisition of Furiex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,
according to the company's May 30, 2014, Form 10-K filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the fiscal year ended
March 31, 2014.

In May 2014, three putative stockholder class actions were brought
against the company, Furiex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Furiex), and
Furiex's board of directors.  Two actions were filed in the
Delaware Court of Chancery under the captions "Steven Kollman v.
Furiex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al." and "Donald Powell v. Furiex
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al."  One action was brought in North
Carolina state court under the caption "Walter Nakatsukasa v.
Furiex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al."  These actions seek to enjoin
the company's proposed acquisition of Furiex and allege, among
other things, that the members of the Furiex Board of Directors
breached their fiduciary duties by agreeing to sell Furiex for
inadequate consideration and pursuant to an inadequate process.
These actions also allege that Forest aided and abetted these
alleged breaches.


FOREST LABS: FCC Issues Notice Related to TCPA Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a Public
Notice in response to several petitions related to the suit "St.
Louis Heart Center, Inc. v. Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and The
Peer Group, Inc.," according to the company's May 30, 2014, Form
10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for
the quarter ended March 31, 2014.

In October 2012, the company was named as a defendant, along with
The Peer Group, Inc. (TPG), in a putative class action brought by
the St. Louis Heart Center (SLHC) under the caption "St. Louis
Heart Center, Inc. v. Forest Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and The Peer
Group, Inc."  The action is now pending in the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of Missouri.  On May 17, 2013, SLHC filed
a Fourth Amended Complaint, alleging that Forest and TPG violated
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, as amended by the
Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005, 47 U.S.C. Section 227 (TCPA), on
behalf of a proposed class that includes all persons who, from
four years prior to the filing of the action, were sent telephone
facsimile messages of material advertising the commercial
availability of any property, goods, or services by or on behalf
of defendants, which did not display an opt-out notice compliant
with a certain regulation promulgated by the Federal
Communications Commission (FCC).  The Fourth Amended Complaint
seeks $500 for each alleged violation of the TCPA, treble damages
if the Court finds the violations to be willful, knowing or
intentional, interest, and injunctive and other relief.  On May
21, 2013, in Nack v. Walburg, a separate case in which the company
is not a party, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
ruled that the district court in that case lacked jurisdiction to
determine the validity of this FCC regulation and that the
defendant in that case could only challenge the validity of this
regulation through an administrative petition submitted directly
to the FCC, a decision that would then be appealable to the
appropriate court of appeals.  On June 27, 2013, the company filed
a Petition for Declaratory Ruling with the FCC requesting that the
FCC find that (1) the faxes at issue in the action complied, or
substantially complied with the FCC regulation, and thus did not
violate it, or (2) the FCC regulation was not properly promulgated
under the TCPA.  On July 17, 2013, the district court granted the
company's motion to stay the action pending the administrative
proceeding initiated by the company's FCC Petition, including any
appeal therefrom.  On January 31, 2014, the FCC released a Public
Notice in response to several related petitions, including ours.
The comment and reply period for this Public Notice closed on
February 14 and February 21, 2014, respectively.


FOREST LABS: Plaintiffs Balk at Dismissal of Antidepressant Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Amaris Elliott-Engel, writing for The National Law Journal,
reports that if the plaintiffs have their way, a federal judge
should not dismiss their complaint that Forest Laboratories Inc.
misrepresented the safety of using antidepressants Celexa and
Lexapro in a pediatric population.

In a lawsuit in Massachusetts federal court, the plaintiffs assert
that the defendants suppressed negative study results, made false
representations in advertising and marketing materials,
selectively disseminated medical publications in order to mislead
physicians and patients, and induced prescribers by giving
physicians research grants, honoraria, gifts and paying them for
promotional speeches.

Forest agreed to pay $313 million to resolve criminal charges and
civil claims under the False Claims Act for their off-label
promotion of Celexa and Lexapro for use in pediatric patients,
according to court papers.

The plaintiffs are Allied Services Division Welfare Fund and New
Mexico UFCW Union's and Employer's Health and Welfare Trust Fund.
They are third-party payors who assert that they would not have
paid for Celexa and Lexapro but for the defendants conduct, and
they seek to represent a national class of third-party payors.

"The defendants' unlawful promotion and marketing of
Celexa/Lexapro for pediatric uses resulted in the denial of
plaintiffs' and other class members' opportunity to make fully
informed decisions about whether and how to include Celexa/Lexapro
on their formularies and caused them to pay for more prescriptions
than plaintiff would have absent defendants' unlawful conduct,"
the plaintiffs said in court papers.

Their claims against Forest allege violations of the federal
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, violations of
state consumer protection laws and unjust enrichment.

The plaintiffs said their case is timely because the statute of
limitations was tolled during the pendency of a prior class
action.

Arguing against the defendants' motion to dismiss, the plaintiffs
said they have sufficiently alleged in their complaint that
physicians, consultants and marketing firms were members of a
joint enterprise to increase the off-label use of Celexa and
Lexapro, including describing the incentives used to attract them
to the enterprise.

"The injury to plaintiffs is not speculative or conjectural," the
plaintiffs said.  "It is concrete in that plaintiffs and other
]third-party payors] paid for prescriptions that resulted from
defendants' illegal marketing scheme."


FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Denenberg" Suit Over Proposed SanDisk Sale
----------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Denenberg, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Fusion-Io, Inc., Shane V. Robison, Scott D.
Sandell, Forest Baskett, H. Raymond Bingham, Dana L. Evan, Edward
H. Frank, John F. Olsen, Sandisk Corporation, and Flight Merger
Sub, Inc., Case No. 9784-VCP (Del. Ch. Ct., June 18, 2014) is
brought on behalf of the public stockholders of Fusion alleging
breaches of fiduciary duties in connection with the proposed
acquisition of the Company by SanDisk.

SanDisk will acquire the outstanding shares of Fusion in a deal
valued at approximately $1.1 billion, with each Fusion stockholder
receiving $11.25 per share (net of cash assumed, without interest)
of Company stock upon consummation of the merger.

Fusion-Io, Inc., is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Salt
Lake City, Utah.  Founded in 2005, the Company provides next
generation hardware and software solutions that accelerate
processing of data stored by companies in data centers.  The
Individual Defendants are directors and officers of the Company.

SanDisk is a Delaware corporation with its corporate headquarters
located in Milpitas, California.  SanDisk holds itself out as a
leader in the digital storage industry, and boasts that its flash
data technologies are used by many of the world's largest data
centers and are embedded in the most advanced smartphones,
tablets, and laptops.  Flight Merger Sub, Inc. is a Delaware
corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of SanDisk that was
formed for the sole purpose of effectuating the Acquisition.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Blake A. Bennett, Esq.
          COOCH AND TAYLOR, P.A.
          The Brandywine Building
          1000 West St., 10th Floor
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 984-3800
          E-mail: bbennett@coochtaylor.com

               - and -

          W. Scott Holleman, Esq.
          JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP
          99 Madison Avenue, 5th Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 602-1592
          E-mail: ScottH@JohnsonandWeaver.com


FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Hassani" Suit Challenging Sale to SanDisk
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sasan Hassani, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Fusion-Io, Inc., Shane Robison, Scott D. Sandell,
Forest Baskett, H. Raymond Bingham, Dana L. Evan, Edward H. Frank,
John F. Olsen, Sandisk Corporation, and Flight Merger Sub, Inc.,
Case No. 9785-VCP (Del. Ch. Ct., June 18, 2014) is brought on
behalf of the public stockholders of Fusion to enjoin a proposed
transaction announced on June 16, 2014, pursuant to which Fusion
will be acquired by SanDisk through its wholly-owned subsidiary,
Flight Merger Sub, Inc.

SanDisk will acquire the outstanding shares of Fusion in a deal
valued at approximately $1.1 billion, with each Fusion stockholder
receiving $11.25 per share (net of cash assumed, without interest)
of Company stock upon consummation of the merger.

Fusion is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Salt Lake City,
Utah.  Founded in late 2005, Fusion is a computer hardware and
software systems company that designs and manufactures products
using flash memory technology.  Fusion develops, markets, and
sells storage memory platforms in the United States and
internationally, offering integrating hardware and software
solutions for enterprises, hyperscale datacenters, and small to
medium enterprises.

SanDisk is a Delaware corporation headquartered in Milpitas,
California.  Merger Sub is a Delaware corporation and a wholly
owned subsidiary of SanDisk.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan M. Ernst, Esq.
          Daniel P. Murray, Esq.
          O'KELLY ERNST & BIELLI, LLC
          901 North Market Street, Suite 1000
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 778-4000
          Facsimile: (302) 295-2873
          E-mail: rernst@oeblegal.com
                  dmurray@oeblegal.com

               - and -

          Shannon L. Hopkins, Esq.
          Sebastiano Tornatore, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
          733 Summer Street, Suite 304
          Stamford, CT 06901
          Telephone: (212) 363-7500
          E-mail: shopkins@zlk.com
                  stornatore@zlk.com


FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Li" Suit Seeking to Enjoin Sale to SanDisk
----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Li, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated
v. Fusion-Io, Inc., Forest Baskett, H. Raymond Bingham, Dana L.
Evan, Edward H. Frank, Ph.D., John F. Olsen, Shane Robinson, Scott
D. Sandell, Sandisk Corporation, and Flight Merger Sub, Inc., Case
No. 9777-VCP (Del. Ch. Ct., June 17, 2014) seeks to enjoin a
proposed transaction announced on June 16, 2014, pursuant to which
SanDisk will acquire the outstanding shares of Fusion in a deal
valued at approximately $1.1 billion, with each Fusion stockholder
receiving $11.25 per share (net of cash assumed, without interest)
of Company stock upon consummation of the merger.

Fusion is a Delaware corporation with principal executive offices
located in Salt Lake City, Utah.  Fusion develops flash-based PCIe
hardware and software solutions that enhance application
performance in enterprise and hyperscale datacenters.  The
Individual Defendants are directors and officers of the Company.

SanDisk is a Fortune 500 and S&P 500 company that designs,
develops, markets and manufactures data storage solutions in a
variety of form factors using Fusion's flash memory, controller
and firmware technologies.  Flight is a Delaware corporation and a
wholly-owned subsidiary of SanDisk.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James R. Banko, Esq.
          FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
          20 Montchanin Road, Suite 145
          Wilmington, DE 19807
          Telephone: (302) 482-3182
          Facsimile: (302) 482-3612
          E-mail: jbanko@faruqilaw.com

               - and -

          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          James M. Wilson, Jr., Esq.
          Innessa S. Melamed, Esq.
          FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
          369 Lexington Avenue, 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 983-9330
          Facsimile: (212) 983-9331
          E-mail: jmonteverde@faruqilaw.com
                  jwilson@faruqilaw.com
                  imelamed@faruqilaw.com


FUSION-IO INC: Faces "Seltzer" Merger-Related Shareholder Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dennis Seltzer, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated v. Shane Robison, Forest Baskett, H. Raymond Bingham,
Dana L. Evan, John F. Olsen, Scott D. Sandell, Fusion-Io, Inc.,
Sandisk Corporation, and Flight Merger Sub, Inc., Case No. 9810
(Del. Ch. Ct., June 20, 2014) arises out of SanDisk's proposed
acquisition of the Company.

SanDisk will acquire the outstanding shares of Fusion in a deal
valued at approximately $1.1 billion, with each Fusion stockholder
receiving $11.25 per share (net of cash assumed, without interest)
of Company stock upon consummation of the merger.

In pursuing the Proposed Transaction, each of the Defendants has
violated applicable law by directly breaching and aiding breaches
of fiduciary duties of loyalty and due care owed to the Plaintiff
and the other public stockholders of Fusion, Mr. Seltzer contends.

Fusion, a computer hardware and software systems company that
designs and manufactures products using flash memory technology,
is a Delaware Corporation headquartered in Utah.  The Individual
Defendants are directors and officers of the Company.

Sandisk, a developer and manufacturer of flash memory storage
solutions and software, is a Delaware Corporation headquartered in
Milpitas, California.  Merger Sub is a Delaware corporation and
wholly-owned subsidiary of SanDisk formed for the purpose of
effectuating the Proposed Transaction.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Peter B. Andrews, Esq.
          Craig J. Springer, Esq.
          ANDREWS & SPRINGER, LLC
          3801 Kennett Pike
          Building C, Suite 305
          Wilmington, DE 19807
          Telephone: (302) 504-4957
          Facsimile: (302) 397-2681
          E-mail: pandrews@andrewsspringer.com
                  cspringer@andrewsspringer.com

               - and -

          Joseph E. White, III, Esq.
          Jonathan M. Stein, Esq.
          Adam Warden, Esq.
          SAXENA WHITE, P.A.
          2424 North Federal Highway, Suite 257
          Boca Raton, FL 33431
          Telephone: (561) 394-3399
          Facsimile: (561) 394-3382
          E-mail: jwhite@saxenawhite.com
                  jstein@saxenawhite.com
                  awarden@saxenawhite.com


GENERAL MOTORS: Faces "Ross" Suit Over Defective Airbag System
--------------------------------------------------------------
William Ross, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. General Motors LLC; General Motors Holding, LLC;
Delphi Automotive PLC; and DPH-DAS LLC F/K/A Delphi Automotive
Systems, LLC, Case No. 2:14-cv-03670 (E.D.N.Y., June 10, 2014),
seeks injunctive relief in the form of repair to fully remedy the
defects in the Key System and Airbag System such that the
defective vehicles have their economic value restored and can be
operated safely.

General Motors Corporation is a Delaware corporation with its
headquarters in Detroit, Michigan.  GM through its various
entities designed, manufactured, marketed, distributed and sold
Pontiac, Saturn, Chevrolet and other brands of automobiles in New
York and multiple other locations in the United States and
worldwide.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Sudarsana Srinivasan, Esq.
      LIEFF, CABRASER, HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN
      250 Hudson Street, Fl 8,
      New York, NY 10013
      Telephone: (212) 355-9500
      Facsimile: (212) 355-9592
      E-mail: dsrinivasan@lchb.com


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Sierra & Silverado Due to Airbag Problems
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 4, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Light Truck & Van
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Engine
Units affected:           9
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014206
TC ID number:             2014206
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14251

On certain vehicles, an internal fault in the Sensing and
Diagnostic Module may set a diagnostic trouble code, illuminating
the airbag warning lamp and disabling the airbags and seatbelt
pretensioners for the duration of the drive cycle.  This could
increase the risk of injury in a crash.

Correction: To be determined.

Affected products:

   Maker           Model        Model year(s) affected
   -----           -----        ----------------------
   GMC             SIERRA       2014, 2015
   CHEVROLET       SILVERADO    2014, 2015


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Encore and Spark Due to Airbag Problems
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Airbag
Units affected:           25
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014214
TC ID number:             2014214
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14211

On certain vehicles, welds on the passenger airbag end caps could
separate from the airbag inflator.  If this occurs, the airbag may
not deploy properly.  Failure of the passenger airbag to fully
deploy during a crash (where deployment is warranted) could
increase the risk of personal injury to the seat occupant.

Correction: Dealers will inspect and, if necessary, replace the
passenger airbag assembly.

Affected products:

   Maker        Model       Model year(s) affected
   -----        -----       ----------------------
   BUICK        ENCORE      2013
   CHEVROLET                2013


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Corvettes Due to Airbag Problems
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Airbag
Units affected:           3
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014215TC
ID number:                2014215
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14219

On certain vehicles, an internal fault in the Sensing and
Diagnostic Module may set a diagnostic trouble code, illuminating
the airbag warning lamp and disabling the airbags and seatbelt
pretensioners.  The occupant sensing passenger airbag light would
also not illuminate.  This could increase the risk of injury in a
crash.

Correction: Dealers will replace the Sensing and Diagnostic
Module.

Affected products: 2014 Chevrolet Corvette


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 5,003 Camaro, Cruze, Sonic, and Verano
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Airbag
Units affected:           5003
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014213
TC ID number:             2014213
Manufacturer recall
number:                   12261

On certain vehicles, the primary or secondary stage of the
driver's airbag may not deploy during a crash (where deployment is
warranted).  Failure of an airbag to deploy correctly could
increase the risk of personal injury to the seat occupant.

Correction: Dealers will replace the steering wheel airbag coil.
Note: This recall is an expansion of recall 2012368.

Affected products:

   Maker          Model      Model year(s) affected
   -----          -----      ----------------------
   CHEVROLET      CAMARO     2012
   CHEVROLET      CRUZE      2012
   CHEVROLET      SONIC      2012
   BUICK          VERANO     2012


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 5,439 Trucks & SUVs Over Radio Defect
-------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 6, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Light Truck & Van, SUV
Notification type:        Compliance Mfr
System:                   Accessories
Units affected:           5439
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014216
TC ID number:             2014216
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14315

Certain vehicles equipped with a base radio and internal amplifier
may fail to conform to Canada Motor Vehicle Safety Standard
(CMVSS) 114 - Theft Protection and Rollaway Protection, and CMVSS
208 - Occupant Crash Protection.  The radio may become
inoperative, causing a no-chime condition and disabling the
audible warning if the key is in the ignition and the driver's
door is opened, or if a front outboard seat belt is not buckled.
A loss of the seat belt audible warning may increase the
likelihood of a front outboard occupant being unbelted, increasing
the risk of injury in a crash.  Similarly, the loss of an audible
warning when a key is left in the ignition may increase the risk
of vehicle theft.

Correction: Dealers are to program the radio with updated
software.

Affected products:

   Maker          Model           Model Year(s) Affected
   -----          -----           ----------------------
   CHEVROLET      SUBURBAN        2015
   CHEVROLET      TAHOE           2015
   GMC            YUKON           2015
   GMC            SIERRA          2014, 2015
   CHEVROLET      SILVERADO       2014, 2015
   GMC            YUKON XL        2015


GENERAL MOTORS: Court Tactics May Delay Injury, Death Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------
Amanda Bronstad, writing for The National Law Journal, reports
that although General Motors Co. has pledged to compensate the
families of people injured or killed because of its defective
ignition switch, the automaker has been in court trying to halt
lawsuits on behalf of those victims.

Chief executive officer Mary Barra appeared a second time before
Congress on June 18 to answer questions about the defects, which
have been linked to 13 deaths and prompted recalls of nearly 6
million vehicles.  GM, turning to the provisions of its 2009
bankruptcy, already has sought to toss out dozens of class actions
filed on behalf of consumers seeking economic damages.  Those
cases have been stayed until Sept. 1.

GM has said the bankruptcy proceedings won't affect personal
injury and wrongful death cases, many of which have been brought
in state courts across the country.  But during the past week, GM
had successfully removed some of those cases to federal courts,
prompting a separate judicial panel to bundle them with the class
actions, now coordinated for pretrial purposes in U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York.

On June 12, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation,
which ordered that coordination before U.S. District Judge Jesse
Furman, sent 64 additional cases to Judge Furman's court, followed
by 15 more on June 18.

It's unclear what effect the transfers might have on each
individual case.  But the immediate effect is to slow their
progress as they get folded into a procedurally more complex MDL
process.  GM, meanwhile, has asked federal judges to halt
discovery in some cases.

Bob Hilliard of Hilliard Munoz Gonzales in Corpus Christi, who had
two of his cases transferred, called GM's tactic a "slick move."
"I've instructed our legal staff to start objections," he said.
Attorneys have seven days to object to the transfer orders,
although the MDL panel is unlikely to rule on the matters until
its next hearing on July 31.

GM spokesman Greg Martin did not respond to a request for comment.
One of Mr. Hilliard's cases was brought on May 6 by the parents of
Trenton Buzard, 6, who was paralyzed when the family's 2005 Chevy
Cobalt crashed on April 2, 2009.  His aunt, 13, and great-
grandmother, who was driving, died in the accident.

GM has asked U.S. District Judge Paul Diamond of the Eastern
District of Pennsylvania to stay the case, which it removed from
the Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas.

Another plaintiffs attorney, Lance Cooper, has opposed the
transfer of at least one of his cases.  That case was filed by the
parents of Brooke Melton, who died on March 10, 2010, when her
2005 Cobalt slid off the road and into a tree.  The Meltons
originally settled a case against GM last year -- which has been
largely credited for exposing the ignition-switch defects -- but
they filed a new lawsuit following this year's recalls.

Mr. Cooper, founding partner of The Cooper Firm in Marietta, Ga.,
said GM improperly removed the Melton case to U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia.

"It's clear they don't want to have to go back to the place where
they were, given what they did," he said.  "Their intent in Melton
is to delay it."

GM has asked U.S. District Judge Orinda Evans to stay the Melton
case.


H K SECOND AVE: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & Damages
------------------------------------------------------------
Jemal S. Hyman individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated v. H.K. Second Ave Restaurant Inc. d/b/a
"Bait and Hook Seafood Shack", and Miha Khondoker, Jointly and
Severally, Case No. 1:14-cv-04190 (S.D.N.Y., June 10, 2014), seeks
to recover unpaid minimum wages, unpaid overtime, civil penalties
for record keeping violations, unpaid spread-of-hours pay,
illegally retained tips, and liquidated damages.

H.K. Second Ave Restaurant Inc. d/b/a "Bait and Hook Seafood
Shack", is a New York Restaurant located at 231 14th Street, New
York, New York 10003.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Douglas Lipsky, Esq.
      BRONSON LIPSKY LLP
      630 Third Avenue, Fifth Floor,
      New York, NY 10017-6705
      Telephone: (212) 392-4772
      Facsimile: (212) 444-1030
      E-mail: dl@bronsonlipsky.com

             - and -

      Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
      Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
      GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
      150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR,
      New York, NY 10003
      Telephone: (212) 228-9795
      E-mail: nyjg@aol.com
              danalgottlieb@aol.com


HANCOCK CO: Faces Class Action Over Wrongful Termination
--------------------------------------------------------
Ben Hart, writing for The West Virginia Record, reports that a
West Virginia man has filed a potential class action, alleging his
employer terminated his position unlawfully.

Blaine Pannet, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, filed a lawsuit May 1 in Hancock Circuit Court against
Environmental Drilling Solutions LLC, citing violation of public
policy, retaliation and disability discrimination.

Mr. Pannet claims he was employed by the defendant to work at its
Hancock County facility until Feb. 12, 2013.  The suit alleges
Mr. Pannet repeatedly complained to the defendant about safety
concerns he had performing the necessary jobs without a helper to
assist him with the heavy labor.

According to the brief, Mr. Pannet sprained his back Feb. 9, 2013,
and gave the defendant a doctor's note requiring five days off
work.  In turn, the defendant terminated Mr. Pannet on Feb. 12,
2013, for filing a workers' compensation claim.

Mr. Pannet is seeking damages, past and future lost wages,
attorney's fees and court costs.

He is being represented in the case by attorneys Frank X. Duff and
Sandra K. Law of Schrader Byrd and Companion PLLC.

Hancock Circuit Court Case No. 14-C-65M


LAC BASKETBALL: "Cooper" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Frank Cooper, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. LAC Basketball Club, Inc., a California Corporation,
and The Sterling Family Trust, Case No. 2:14-cv-04445 (C.D. Cal.,
June 10, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages pursuant to
Fair Labor Standards Act.

LAC Basketball Club, Inc., is located at 1111 South Figueroa
Street, Los Angeles, California 90015, and is engaged in the
business of professional athletic team management and promotion.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Nicholas R. Ranallo, Esq.
      NICHOLAS RANALLO LAW OFFICES
      371 Dogwood Way,
      Boulder Creek, CA 95006
      Telephone: (831) 703-4011
      Facsimile: (831) 533-5073
      E-mail: nick@ranallolawoffice.com


MAX'S HARVEST: Suit Seeks to Reclaim Unpaid OT & Minimum Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ann Bobenrieth, on her own behalf and others similarly situated
v. 169 NE 2nd, LLC d/b/a Max's Harvest and Dennis Max,
individually, Case No. 9:14-cv-80780 (S.D. Fla., June 10, 2014),
seeks to recover unpaid overtime and minimum wages pursuant to
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Max's Harvest is a restaurant located in Delray Beach, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lisa Michelle Kohring, Esq.
      Steven Leo Schwarzberg, Esq.
      SCHWARZBERG & ASSOCIATES
      222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 210,
      West Palm Beach, FL 33401
      Telephone: (561) 659-3300
      E-mail: lkohring@schwarzberglaw.com
              steve@schwarzberglaw.com


MONTREAL MAINE: Train Derailment Class Action Enters Phase One
--------------------------------------------------------------
CTV Montreal News reports that more than 50 lawyers descended on a
Sherbrooke courtroom on June 9 to discuss the financial future of
the people of Lac-Megantic.  One legal team is fighting on behalf
of 3,500 Lac-Megantic residents, who are part of a class action
lawsuit.  The others represent the Canadian government and the
dozens of companies alleged to share some responsibility for the
tragic derailment and explosion almost one year ago.

Phase one of the class action process is seeking a judge's
authorization for the lawsuit to proceed.

Fifty-three groups or individuals are being sued, including
Transport Canada.

"We're starting right with the wellhead in North Dakota.  We're
moving up through the various shippers and transporters, including
World Fuel, CP Rail, MMA, of course, and Irving as the importer,"
said Joel Rochon, a lawyer for the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs believe these parties and others share
responsibility -- and aim to prove it in court.

There are two main allegations:

First, lawyers allege some of the highly explosive fuel in the
tanker cars was mislabeled.

"Secondly, with respect to the tanker cars, why were they using
thee old dilapidated tanker cars that had served their use 30, 40
years ago? Why were they still using them when they had a
propensity to blow up, especially when they're carrying volatile
fuels like this Bakken shale liquid?" said Mr. Rochon.

The lawyers for the Lac-Megantic plaintiffs said a transportation
safety report shows the government knew for years there were
problems with the Dot-111 tankers, but they weren't recalled nor
were they upgraded.

The derailment and subsequent explosion killed 47 people in
July 2013, and also destroyed the centre of town.

"I think psychologically it was important for the judge that this
be heard before the first anniversary and we're hoping that this
will propel the case into overdrive and hopefully come up with a
fair resolution for the people of Lac-Megantic shortly," said
Mr. Rochon.

A decision about whether or not the class action lawsuit will be
authorized is expected in the fall.  If it is allowed to proceed,
the plaintiffs could stand to win hundreds of millions of dollars.


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Head Says Paying Athletes Could Ruin System
----------------------------------------------------------------
Maria Dinzeo at Courthouse News Service reports that colleges are
so turned off by the idea of paying student athletes for licensing
their images that they will leave Division 1 sports in droves,
NCAA president Mark Emmert testified on June 19, 2014, in the
antitrust trial pitting college football and basketball players
against the governing body of collegiate sports.

"They believe in an amateurism model and don't want to participate
in a professional model," Emmert said, adding that the second
reason is "sheer cost."

Emmert claimed that schools barely make any money off of sports,
and what revenue they do bring in goes toward keeping athletic
programs afloat.

"The emphasis is always placed on the top line revenue produced by
intercollegiate athletics.  The financial realities for most
universities is they subsidize their athletic programs pretty
significantly and they are constantly worried about ways to
support their athletic departments," Emmert said.

Onlookers in the courtroom scoffed as Emmert speculated that any
school remaining in the NCAA would be forced to cut scholarships
and redirect funding from other sports to football and men's
basketball.  "Going to students and asking for a tuition increase
would be exceedingly unpopular," Emmert testified.  "Their only
alternative would be reallocation."

NCAA attorney Glenn Pomerantz asked Emmert if conferences would
still play together for national championships if some allowed
schools to pay players for the use of their names, images and
likenesses and others didn't.

Emmert answered no, as some schools would pay the best high school
athletes directly to attend their schools, which would be
uncompetitive.

"Direct payment is different from saying you're going to get to be
in this locker room or stadium.  Member schools would find that an
uncompetitive situation and would not want to be part of a
championship driven by that."

He added, "The schools in D1- all but a handful of them, 25 or
fewer today operate at a loss.  So if you took away all that
revenue they would not be able to operate as they do now."

The focus of Emmert's testimony was on the NCAA's "core value" of
amateurism, meaning college athletes must be students and not paid
professionals.  Paying players anything beyond the cost of
attending college would be inconsistent with the principle
established when the NCAA was formed in 1905, he said.

In 2009, the NCAA was sued by a class of college football and
men's basketball players led by former UCLA basketball player Ed
O'Bannon.  The class claims student athletes should share in the
revenues flowing into universities and big conferences from
television broadcasts.

Emmert's highly anticipated testimony before U.S. District Judge
Claudia Wilken on June 19, 2014, drew a packed courtroom.
O'Bannon himself sat at the plaintiff's table, and Emmert walked
over to shake his hand before taking the stand.

Plaintiff attorney Bill Isaacson hammered away at the commercial
exploitation of student athletes during cross-examination, asking
Emmert if broadcast companies made money off of using "symbols of
a student athlete's identity."

Emmert replied that under NCAA rules, broadcast companies can use
athletes' names, images and likenesses "to promote broadcasts of
games."

"To promote a game broadcast on TV from which the TV companies do
get financial gain," Isaacson said.

I'm sure you're well aware that the NCAA rule for the use of the
name, image and likeness of a student-athlete is solely for the
purpose of promoting that event," Emmert insisted.

"But when the broadcast company uses it solely for that, even
they're doing it solely for financial gain," Isaacson asked, to
which Emmert replied, "You have to ask someone who is an expert in
the broadcast industry."

Emmert also claimed ignorance on a number of other topics,
including virtually every memo, speech and email exchange between
NCAA executives that Isaacson showed him.

Pomerantz objected to what he called a "parade of documents."

Many of those documents were from former NCAA presidents and
officials, including former senior police adviser Wally Renfro,
whom Emmert in his testimony called a "provocateur."

The emails and memos expressed concern over the commercialization
of college athletics and the commercial exploitation of student-
athletes.  Isaacson showed Emmert one email Renfro sent him about
a month after he became NCAA president in 2010, which stated:
". . . the notion that athletes are students is the great
hypocrisy of college athletics."

"He was making a statement that this was the notion some people
had, as to what he thought were the beliefs of some people.  We
did not spend a great deal of time talking about that memo,"
Emmert said.

"It didn't strike you as needing to do any follow up?" Isaacson
asked.

"No," Emmert said, drawing snorts from the courtroom audience.

Isaacson asked if Emmert had any thoughts about Renfro's question
of what Emmert planned to do about it.

"I treated that as a rhetorical question," Emmert said.

Emmert's testimony was to continue June 20, 2014.  Next week, NCAA
lawyers are slated to call the commissioner of the Southeastern
Conference Greg Sankey and the commissioner of the Big Ten
Conference, Jim Delaney.

This seemed to satisfy Judge Wilken, who said: "I have some
questions about the conferences, who regulates them and how the
money comes in and out of them."


NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: President Grilled Over Athletes' Privileges
----------------------------------------------------------------
Maria Dinzeo at Courthouse News Service reports that student
athletes are already in a class of their own on college campuses,
attorneys for plaintiffs in the NCAA class-action antitrust trial
argued on June 20, 2014.  Plaintiffs attorney Bill Isaacson
questioned NCAA President Mark Emmert on the luxury accommodations
colleges provide to student athletes, asking how that squared with
his opposition to the "monetization" that Emmert claimed would
come from paying them for the use of their names and images on
television.

Emmert has said that even a trust fund set up for players that
they could access after graduation would be too much of a
monetization, and would set college athletes apart from the
general student population.

Isaacson asked Emmert about Auburn's Donahue Hall, a "$51 million
suite-style residence hall in which the entire football lives,"
and Oklahoma's "$75 million Headington Hall with a game room and
75-seat movie theater."

"You had concerns about students being in a separate class if
revenue was shared.  Does this put them in a different class?"
Isaacson asked.

"Residence halls -- they vary radically. What you're describing
are residence halls that are extremely attractive.  And the
students who live in them are very privileged," Emmert said.

"If the football team lives together in the most grandiose
residence hall on campus . . . have we created a different class
for those football players from all the students that aren't in
that dorm?" Isaacson asked.

"I think I answered that," Emmert replied.

Isaacson said, "We'll let the record decide."

Friday, June 21, 2014, was the second day of Emmert's testimony in
what has been called the most important class action against the
NCAA.  Led by former UCLA basketball player Ed O'Bannon, college
athletes are suing the governing body for college sports for the
right to a share in the television broadcast revenue for their
names, images and likenesses.

The NCAA has tried show that its core principle of amateurism that
prohibits college players from being paid is not anti-competitive.

After Emmert's seven hours of testimony before U.S. District Judge
Claudia Wilken, Big Ten Conference Commissioner Jim Delany took
the stand.

Delany, a former college basketball player at the University of
North Carolina Chapel Hill, was adamant that the primary job of a
student-athlete is to get an education.

"The opportunity to pursue a degree has always been woven in that
experience.  What it means to be an amateur is the opportunity to
purse a degree while engaging in college athletics.  For me the
idea has always been integrated.  It's always been about the
educational part," Delany said.

Delany said he fiercely opposes athletes' being allowed to share
in television broadcast revenues as compensation for their names
and images being shown in televised games, and said fan interest
would wane if student athletes were paid.

"I think the following that has developed over decades has come to
serve a common understanding that these individuals represent
their institution.  They are not professional.  That separates us
from the NBA and the NFL," Delany said.

"So whatever we tried to do is reinforce the structure, a system
that rewards and encourages education and to avoid as far as
possible commercial elements that might confuse us with the NBA or
NFL."

NCAA attorney Luis Li, with Munger, Tolles and Olson, asked Delany
if anyone in the Big Ten "ever advocated paying student athletes
for appear in televised games."

"No," Delany replied.  "These games are owned by the institution
and the notion of paying athletes for participation in these games
is foreign to the notion of amateurism."

Li asked if the Big Ten would pay college players for their names,
images and likenesses.

"No," Delany replied.  "It invades an area of understanding that
intercollegiate athletics is different form professional athletics
and how the participant ought to be about education and support
for that purpose."

Li asked if the Big Ten would play schools in other conferences if
they paid their players.

"If your teams were not paying student athletes for their NILs
[names, images and likenesses] on televised games, would you want
your teams playing teams in the Pac-12 if they were paying their
players?" Li asked.

"No.  The very basis of games is a sense of sportsmanship or
fairness.  If one team is buying players and other is not, you
won't get the same sense of competitive balance," Delany said.

"If Pac-12 choose to do it, and the Big Ten chooses not to do it
then would the Big Ten refuse to play the Rose Bowl with the
Pac-12?" Wilken asked.

Delany said it was unlikely that the Rose Bowl would ever be
canceled, especially if one conference paid its players a few
cents and another didn't.

"I would have a hard time thinking anyone would cancel the Rose
Bowl over a dime," he said, noting that it wasn't off the table
"if there was a significant difference in how players were
recruited and retained."

Both Emmert and Delany said they would support increased
scholarships to college athletes to cover the full cost of
attending school beyond tuition, board and books.  "I believe the
full cost of education is the appropriate way for us to go forward
in the future and that should provide the full cost of going to
any institution in this country," Delany said.

He added that schools need to reconsider the time athletes spend
on their sports, and allow students the personal time to pursue
educational opportunities off the field or basketball court,
citing "voluntary" summer workouts as a big problem.

"We probably ought to just put a lock on the gym," he said.  "The
opportunity to go junior year abroad and do internship has got to
be created."

The NCAA is slowly working its way through a lengthy list of
witnesses.  Expected early next week is the continuation of
Stanford Athletic Director Bernard Muir's testimony and
Southeastern Conference Commissioner Greg Sanky.

Wilken, who has already started asking about closing arguments,
said, "I hope you'll be efficient with your witnesses and make
sure you're not spending time on things that might be nice but not
terribly relevant."

NCAA attorneys said they were certain they could get through all
of their witnesses by Friday, June 27, 2014.


OPENTABLE INC: Class Suit Seeks to Enjoin Merger With Priceline
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kathy Guerra, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. OpenTable, Inc., Matthew Roberts, Thomas H. Layton,
Paul S. Pressler, A. George Battle, J. William Gurley, Robert
Hohman, Danny Meyer, Priceline Group Inc., and Rhombus, Inc., Case
No. 9786-CB (Del. Ch. Ct., June 18, 2014), seeks to enjoin a
proposed transaction announced on June 13, 2014, pursuant to which
Priceline will acquire the outstanding shares of OpenTable in a
deal valued at approximately $2.6 billion, with each OpenTable
stockholder receiving $103.00 per share (net to the seller in
cash, without interest) of Company stock upon consummation of the
merger.

OpenTable is a Delaware corporation headquartered in San
Francisco, California.  OpenTable is the world's leading provider
of online restaurant reservations, seating more than 15 million
diners per month via online bookings across more than 31,000
restaurants.  The OpenTable network connects restaurants and
diners, helping diners discover and book the perfect table and
helping restaurants deliver personalized hospitality to keep
guests coming back.

The Priceline Group, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered
in Norwalk, Connecticut.  Priceline is an online travel company
focused connecting consumers seeking to make travel reservations
with providers of travels services worldwide.  Rhombus, Inc., is a
Delaware corporation and wholly owned direct subsidiary of
Priceline that was created for the purposes of effectuating the
Proposed Transaction.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          James R. Banko, Esq.
          FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
          20 Montchanin Road, Suite 145
          Wilmington, DE 19807
          Telephone: (302) 482-3182
          Facsimile: (302) 482-3612
          E-mail: jbanko@faruqilaw.com

               - and -

          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          Innessa S. Melamed, Esq.
          FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
          369 Lexington Avenue, 10th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 983-9330
          Facsimile: (212) 983-9331
          E-mail: jmonteverde@faruqilaw.com
                  imelamed@faruqilaw.com


OPENTABLE INC: Faces "Raul" Merger-Related Class Suit in Delaware
-----------------------------------------------------------------
David Raul as custodian for Pinchus E. Raul Utma Ny, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. OpenTable, Inc.,
A. George Battle, J. William Gurley, Robert Hohman, Thomas H.
Layton, Daniel Meyer, Paul Pressler, Matthew Roberts, The
Priceline Group, Inc., and Rhombus, Inc., Case No. 9776-CB (Del.
Ch. Ct., June 17, 2014) is brought on behalf of the public
stockholders of OpenTable against its Board of Directors for
allegedly failing to maximize stockholder value in connection with
their attempt to sell the Company to Priceline.

OpenTable is a Delaware corporation headquartered in San
Francisco, California.  OpenTable is an online network, which
connects reservation-taking restaurants and people, who dine at
these restaurants.  The Individual Defendants are directors and
officers of the Company.

The Priceline Group, Inc. is a Delaware corporation headquartered
in Norwalk, Connecticut.  Priceline is an online travel company
focused connecting consumers seeking to make travel reservations
with providers of travels services worldwide.  Rhombus, Inc., is a
Delaware corporation and wholly owned direct subsidiary of
Priceline that was created for the purposes of effectuating the
Proposed Transaction.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan M. Ernst, Esq.
          Daniel P. Murray, Esq.
          O'KELLY ERNST & BIELLI, LLC
          901 N. Market Street, Suite 1000
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 778-4000
          E-mail: rernst@oeblegal.com
                  dmurray@oeblegal.com

               - and -

          Donald J. Enright, Esq.
          LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
          1101 30th Street NW, Suite 115
          Washington, DC 20007
          Telephone: (202) 524-4290
          Facsimile: (202) 333-2121
          E-mail: denright@zlk.com


PHILIP MORRIS: Ill. High Court to Review "Light" Cigarette Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ameet Sachdev, writing for Chicago Tribune, reports that a
$10.1 billion verdict against cigarette-maker Philip Morris USA
has come back to life after it was overturned about nine years
ago.  The class-action case is up for review at the state Supreme
Court, again.

"Many people had discounted the case, and it's still facing an
uphill battle," said Mark Gottlieb, executive director of the
Public Health Advocacy Institute at Northeastern University School
of Law.  "But amazingly, it's not dead yet."

The long legal battle has to do with sale of cigarettes labeled
"light" or "lowered tar and nicotine."  Smokers accused the
company of consumer fraud by advertising light versions as safer
than regular, or full-flavored, cigarettes and sought monetary
damages.  The class-action suit has been going on so long that
cigarettes can no longer be marketed as "light" or "mild."  So
long that this is the second time the Illinois Supreme Court has
been asked to review the case.  So long that the Illinois trial
judge who presided over the suit when it was first filed in 2000
is now retired.

The case was brought back from the dead because of the efforts of
a St. Louis lawyernamed Stephen Tillery, who has worked on the
case from the beginning.  Mr. Tillery has spent his career
fighting big corporations and has been both touted as a dedicated
consumer activist and vilified as a greedy trial lawyer.  He
surprised the legal and business worlds when he won the
multibillion-dollar verdict against Philip Morris in 2003 in
Madison County, near St. Louis, the largest judgment in Illinois
history, according to legal documents.  Mr. Tillery has pulled out
all the stops since then to preserve the judgment and the nearly
$1.8 billion in legal fees he and his team of lawyers were
awarded.

His latest tactic: Mr. Tillery has asked state Supreme Court
Justice Lloyd Karmeier to recuse himself from the case because
Mr. Tillery alleges that Philip Morris helped get Justice Karmeier
elected to the high court in 2004.

The Price case as it is known, named after lead plaintiff
Sharon Price, of East Alton, is not your typical tobacco lawsuit.
Ms. Price, now 63, who started smoking when she was 15 and
switched to Cambridge Lights in 1986, did not sue Philip Morris
because she got lung cancer.  She asked for a refund for all the
money she had spent on "light" cigarettes because she thought they
were safer, the suit said.

After the landmark surgeon general's report in 1964 on the health
consequences of smoking, Philip Morris and other tobacco companies
began selling "light," "mild" or "low tar" cigarettes that they
marketed as less harmful because they had ventilated filters and
less nicotine.

"Light" cigarettes, when tested by smoking machines, did deliver
less nicotine.  But Mr. Tillery presented evidence during the 2003
trial that many smokers blocked the ventilation holes with their
lips or fingers and inhaled more tar and nicotine than measured by
machines.  Many smokers also inhaled longer, harder and more
frequently when smoking "light" cigarettes to get more nicotine,
Mr. Tillery said.

Madison County Judge Nicholas Byron concluded that Philip Morris
had deceived smokers into believing that "light" cigarettes were
safer than regular varieties.  He awarded a class of more than 1
million people $7.1 billion in compensatory and $3 billion in
punitive damages.

The Illinois Supreme Court in 2005 reversed Byron's decision,
holding that the Federal Trade Commission specifically authorized
U.S. tobacco companies to use words like "light" and "low." Thus,
Philip Morris was immune to claims brought under state consumer
fraud laws.

After the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear Mr. Tillery's appeal
in late 2006, many thought the case had reached its end.

Not Mr. Tillery.  His break came in 2008, when the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled in an unrelated cigarette case involving Philip Morris
USA's parent, Altria Group Inc.  The court held that a Maine law
prohibiting deceptive advertising was not pre-empted by a federal
law regulating cigarette advertising.  The case revealed that the
FTC had never authorized the use of the terms "light" or "lower
tar," Mr. Tillery said.

With the new evidence, Mr. Tillery went back to Madison County
court to request that the original $10.1 billion judgment be
reinstated. He argued that the Illinois Supreme Court would have
ruled differently had he presented evidence of the FTC's policy.

A trial judge didn't agree, stating the state Supreme Court would
have likely overturned the verdict on other grounds.  Mr. Tillery
appealed to the Illinois Appellate Court.  On April 29, a three-
judge panel of the 5th District Appellate Court in Mount Vernon
reversed the trial judge and reinstated the $10.1 billion verdict.
The court found that the trial judge had overstepped his authority
when he tried to predict how the state high court would rule on
other issues, including how monetary damages were calculated.

Mr. Tillery said his zealous pursuit of the case is not being
driven by his potential legal fees.

"Anybody who works on a case for as long as I have would hope to
at least get paid," Mr. Tillery said.  "But at this point, the
pursuit of this case has been about something that goes way beyond
these (monetary) issues."

He cites public health reports finding that changing cigarette
designs over the last five decades, including filtered, low-tar
and light variations, have not reduced the overall risk of disease
among smokers and may have hindered prevention and cessation
efforts.  In 2009, the Family Prevention and Tobacco Control Act
became law and banned the use of claims such as "light," "low" or
"mild."

Mr. Tillery said the evidence on which the state Supreme Court
overturned the verdict was wrong. "That gets you motivated," he
said.

Philip Morris has asked the state Supreme Court to review the
appellate court's ruling, arguing that the lower court erred in
ordering reinstatement. The Illinois high court has not indicated
whether it will hear the appeal.

"Only this court can overrule its own decisions," Michele
Odorizzi, one of Philip Morris' attorneys, wrote in a brief
submitted last month.  "The notion that trial or appellate courts
can nullify any Supreme Court decision is dangerous and
unprecedented . . .  The 5th District's decision below threatens
the stability of the law."

Mr. Tillery countered by filing a petition at the end of May
seeking Justice Karmeier's removal from the proceedings. According
to court documents, Mr. Tillery contends that Philip Morris and
the company's supporters, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce
and the Illinois Civil Justice League, "funneled" almost $3.4
million of the $4.8 million the judge raised in his campaign a
decade ago in the most expensive judicial race in state history.

A year after his election to the bench, Justice Karmeier voted
with the 4-2 majority in overturning the $10.1 billion verdict
against Philip Morris.

Mr. Tillery's argument for recusal is bolstered by a 2009 U.S.
Supreme Court decision.  The court found that a West Virginia
appellate judge should have recused himself from a case where the
judge received $3 million in campaign contributions, then
overturned a verdict against a large contributor.

Justice Karmeier's "participation in this renewed appeal certainly
creates an 'objective and reasonable perception' of bias,"
Mr. Tillery said in court papers, citing the U.S. Supreme Court
case.

In legal papers filed on June 9, Philip Morris USA said the
company, its affiliates and their respective employees "never gave
a penny" to Justice Karmeier's campaign and had no influence on
the outcome of the election.  The company called Mr. Tillery's
motion "cynical" and "dishonest" and said Justice Karmeier is not
required to recuse himself from the case.

A spokesman for the Illinois Supreme Court declined to comment on
the recusal request.


PRIMUS GROUP: Challenges Cantaloupe Food-Poisoning Litigation
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jenna Greene, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that a
month before William Beach collapsed on his living room floor, an
independent food safety auditor surveyed Jensen Farms.

Inspector James DiIorio liked what he saw -- he gave the Colorado
cantaloupe grower a 96 percent "superior" rating on July 25, 2011.
Except some of the farm's harvest that summer was poisonous,
tainted with the pathogen listeria.  In the following weeks,
contaminated cantaloupe from Jensen Farms killed Mr. Beach and 32
others, sickening many more in the deadliest food poisoning
outbreak in more than 25 years, according to the Centers for
Disease Control and Prevention.

Sixty-six victims filed suits in 12 states, going after the
farmers, the produce distributor and retailers including Wal-Mart
Stores Inc. and The Kroger Co. that sold the cantaloupe, seeking
more than $150 million in damages.

In a first for food-poisoning litigation, they've also sued the
food safety auditor, Primus Group Inc., hired by the Jensen
brothers to evaluate their farm.  Whether Primus can be held
liable is a matter of first impression for courts around the
country -- one with potentially far-reaching policy implications.

"If Primus had done what they should have done, this outbreak
likely would not have happened," said William Marler, a name
partner at food-poisoning boutique Marler Clark who represents 46
of the plaintiffs and is co-counsel to another 10.  "There's no
question these people deserve to be compensated.  The real
question is who is liable and who pays."

Primus counsel Jeffrey Whittington -- jwhittington@kbrlaw.com -- a
partner at Kaufman, Borgeest & Ryan, countered that the outbreak
was not Primus' fault.  "It's not right or fair that a party that
has literally no control over the production, distribution, retail
or consumption of a product should bear the responsibility for an
injury arising from the product," he said.

To date, nine courts in seven states have split on whether to let
Primus off the hook.  Five U.S. district courts and one state
court denied Primus' motions to dismiss, while two federal courts
and one state court released the California auditor from
litigation.  Some 60 additional cases are pending, including a
newly filed cross-claim against Primus by Kroger.

Mr. Marler is pushing hard for a settlement before Primus exhausts
what he said is a $5 million insurance policy, spending it all on
legal fees with nothing left for the victims.  "They're burning
through their money," he said.  "I'm all for principle. But to go
down in flames for a principle, this seems like it's not the right
case."

Primus co-counsel Steven Weiner -- sweiner@kbrlaw.com -- also a
partner at Kaufman Borgeest, said his clients "know they're
putting themselves at great risk," but stand by their actions.
"They believe the audit met the standards and followed the
dictates of what they were asked to do," Mr. Weiner said.
"Everyone appreciates that individuals and families were harmed by
what occurred. But they believe strongly in what they did."

                       THIRD-PARTY AUDITS

The case began in summer 2011, when fourth-generation cantaloupe
farmers Eric and Ryan Jensen hired Primus to conduct an audit.
Most major retailers require their produce suppliers to obtain
third-party food-safety audits.  Primus is one of the biggest
providers, conducting about 15,000 audits each year for 3,000
clients worldwide, according to a 2012 report by the House
Committee on Energy and Commerce.  Almost everyone passes -- 98.7
percent in 2010, 97.5 percent in 2009.

The Jensen brothers asked Primus (which used a subcontractor, Bio
Food Safety) to perform a basic audit of their on-site
packinghouse.  "It's a misconception to think that an audit
somehow means microbiological testing was done on the facility and
the food and [the listeria] was missed," Whittington said.

Instead, the auditor, Mr. DiIorio, spent about four hours looking
around the facility.  In his report, he dinged the Jensens for
some shortcomings: There was no hot water for employees to wash
their hands; the packing and unloading tables were wood, which can
harbor bacteria; doors were left open, potentially allowing pests
to enter.

On the front page of the report, and four more times inside, he
stated the Jensens did not use an antimicrobial wash to rinse the
cantaloupe or equipment.

Using such a wash was "key . . . to whether or not there was an
outbreak," Whittington said.  The nubby skin of cantaloupes
provides a hospitable environment for listeria, which can
contaminate the fruit in the field or after it's harvested.  When
the cantaloupe is sliced, the pathogen may transfer to the melon's
flesh as the knife passes through the rind.

Those who eat the tainted fruit fall ill -- fever, muscle aches,
nausea, diarrhea, sometimes convulsions, sepsis and death.  The
elderly and the very young are most at risk, and pregnant women
may miscarry.

However, Mr. DiIorio did not downgrade the Jensens for failing to
use a germ-killing wash.  That's because the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) does not specifically require growers to do
so, though it's considered a good practice. Following optional
guidelines wasn't part of the score.

Kroger in its suit against Primus argues that it should have been.
In a cross-claim filed in Arapahoe County, Colo., District Court,
Kroger counsel Michael Lancto of Nathan, Bremer, Dumm & Myers
wrote that Primus knew or should have known that retailers would
reasonably conclude from its 96 percent score that the farm "met
or exceeded applicable standards of care related to the production
of cantaloupe," and that the fruit was fit for human consumption.
Days after DiIorio's audit, people began getting sick. Federal
investigators quickly traced the source to cantaloupe from Jensen
Farms.  On Sept. 10, officials from the FDA and the state of
Colorado made an unannounced visit.  They took swabs, which
revealed strains of listeria that matched those afflicting the
victims, but they also found numerous violations that the
plaintiffs argue Primus should have caught.

For example, water was pooling on the packing floor, creating a
potential reservoir for listeria.  The packing equipment was dirty
and couldn't be properly cleaned because it was originally
designed for potatoes, not cantaloupe.  The Jensens said they
bought it second-hand and modified it based on a recommendation
the year before by another Primus auditor.

                       FARM GOES BANKRUPT

As more people fell sick, the lawsuits piled up.  The Jensens
declared bankruptcy, paying the victims $3.8 million from the
farm's insurance policy. (An administrator in the bankruptcy
valued the claims at $46 million.) In January, the brothers
pleaded guilty to criminal charges of introducing adulterated food
into interstate commerce and were sentenced to six months of home
detention.

Some of the other defendants have also struck deals with the
plaintiffs.  In May, Wal-Mart settled 23 suits for an undisclosed
amount.  The retailer faced litigation primarily in New Mexico,
Montana and Wyoming, which hold every party in the chain of
distribution jointly liable -- which meant Wal-Mart could have
been forced to pay the entire tab for damages had the cases gone
to trial.

Kroger, which faces about 30 suits, has yet to settle -- but most
of its cases are in Colorado, where liability is apportioned based
on each party's share of the blame. Other claims are outstanding
against Frontera Produce, which distributed the melons.

The fiercest fight, one uniting virtually all of the other players
in opposition, is against Primus.  For courts, the threshold
question is: Does Primus owe a duty of care to the people who ate
the melons?

In Oklahoma, U.S. district courts in the western and eastern
divisions both said yes.  The problems at Jensen Farms were "so
far-reaching and fundamental that it is reasonable to infer that a
food safety auditor should detect these types of deficiencies,"
U.S. District Judge David Russell in Oklahoma City wrote in March.
As precedent, he pointed to a decision by the Oklahoma Supreme
Court holding a security inspection company liable after it
recommended that a school's security measures be reduced.  A
student subsequently was shot and killed.  Judge Russell found
there was "no meaningful difference" between holding someone
liable for a negligent school safety inspection and a negligent
food safety audit.

His decision allows William Beach's claim against Primus to go
forward.  Mr. Beach, an 87-year-old retired mechanic from Mustang,
Okla., became ill after eating cantaloupe and died on Sept. 1.
Mr. Marler said Mr. Beach's wife suffers from Alzheimer's disease
and has to be told every morning that her husband is dead.

In other states, the courts must stretch to find precedents.  In
Louisiana, for example, federal judges cited the same case but
reached opposite conclusions.  In Shreveport, U.S. District Senior
Judge Tom Stagg sided with the plaintiff, Allen Ray Gilbert, whose
wife died after eating cantaloupe.  The judge relied on a
Louisiana Supreme Court decision in a real estate case, in which a
seller reported that a house was termite-free.  It wasn't, and the
buyers sued the termite inspector.

The state high court allowed the case to proceed, reasoning that
the inspector knew the report was for the benefit of the home
buyers, even if they weren't the ones who hired him.  Likewise,
Stagg reasoned, a consumer might rely on the designation that
Jensen Farms cantaloupe were "Primus-certified" and therefore must
be safe.

But U.S. District Chief Judge Brian Jackson in Baton Rouge saw it
differently.  "No evidence is offered to support a finding that
Primus intended its work product to impact anyone beyond Jensen
Farms," he wrote.  Furthermore, "There are no facts suggesting a
failing score would have stopped Jensen Farms' production."

Mr. Jackson's decision pointed to a wider weakness in the audit
system: The inspectors play a crucial role in ensuring food
safety, but have no power to stop unsafe practices or even make
them known to the government or the public.  As the FDA implements
the landmark Food Safety Modernization Act, which relies on third-
party auditors to ensure the safety of imported food, the matter
is likely to become more pressing.

"Big-box stores, retailers, restaurant chains -- they all want
some assurance that their food is safe," Mr. Marler said.
"Private inspection is a multibillion-dollar business, but it's
not really an inspection or audit."  He added: "Everyone thinks
they're doing something, but they really aren't doing anything at
all."


RAYTHEON CO: Former Workers Lose Bid for Medical Monitoring
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Sistrunk, Gavin Broady and Richard Vanderford, writing for
Law360, report that the First Circuit on June 10 upheld a district
court ruling rejecting a bid by former Raytheon Co. workers to
secure medical monitoring in a proposed class action over exposure
to hazardous beryllium, agreeing with the lower court that the
plaintiffs' case fails because they haven't proved they suffered
subcellular damage.

A three-judge panel affirmed U.S. District Judge Mark L. Wolf's
June 2013 decision granting summary judgment to Raytheon.  The
district held that, under the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial
Court's ruling in the case of Donovan et al. v. Philip Morris
Inc., actual subcellular damage must be proven in order for
plaintiffs to qualify for medical monitoring protection.

The panel agreed that the plaintiffs in the instant case haven't
proved they suffered such damage, and said they can't shift gears
on appeal to rely on the alternative theory that a cause of action
for medical monitoring under Massachusetts law doesn't require a
showing of subcellular change.

"The plaintiffs made a strategic decision to press a theory of the
case that relied on the elements of the cause of action explicitly
recognized in [Donovan]," Judge Bruce M. Selya wrote for the
panel.  "That theory having failed, they cannot now disavow their
earlier decision and attempt to change horses midstream in hopes
of finding a swifter steed."

The class action plaintiffs filed suit against Raytheon in
September 2010, seeking to represent a class of workers exposed to
the chemical as well as a class composed of those workers'
families who were allegedly harmed by beryllium particles the
workers brought home.  The class action was later consolidated
with another individual suit.

Named plaintiffs Ernest Betucchy, Francis Balint, Claire Balint
and Peter Hanley each worked at Raytheon's Waltham, Massachusetts,
plant at various times in the 1980s and 1990s.  The fifth named
plaintiff, Elizabeth Hanley, was exposed to beryllium brought
home, according to the complaint.

Individual plaintiff Suzanne Genereux, meanwhile, alleged she was
hospitalized several times during the 1980s for asthma and upper
respiratory illnesses, and was diagnosed with chronic beryllium
disease in August 2002.  She launched claims against three
beryllium manufacturers who allegedly supplied Raytheon with the
products, and while she later settled those claims, her family is
still seeking medical monitoring expenses.

In his ruling on summary judgment, Judge Wolf wrote that the
record indicated the plaintiffs suffered only an "increased risk"
of subcellular change and therefore didn't satisfy the Donovan
criterion.

Judge Selya noted in the June 10 appellate opinion that the
plaintiffs' main expert, Dr. Lee Newman, couldn't confirm that any
named plaintiff nor any particular member of either class had
contracted beryllium sensitization, the first manifestation of
subcellular change resulting from beryllium exposure.

"The bottom line is that the summary judgment record discloses no
evidence that any plaintiff -- named or unnamed, employee class or
take-home class -- has as yet developed [beryllium
sensitization]," Judge Selya wrote.  "This gap in the proof is
fatal to the plaintiffs' principal theory of liability."

In the alternative, the plaintiffs argued that a showing of
subcellular change isn't necessary to prevail in a medical
monitoring action under Massachusetts law.  They contended that
the Donovan ruling in fact didn't establish such a requirement.

But the First Circuit panel rebuffed that argument, saying Donovan
unambiguously required a showing of subcellular change and that
the plaintiffs read the case "through rose-colored glasses."

"[W]e decline the plaintiffs' brash invitation to cast aside the
[Supreme Judicial Court's] unambiguous language," Judge Selya
wrote.

The plaintiffs also cited part of the Donovan ruling in which the
Massachusetts high court ruminated about -- but didn't address --
the question of whether a cause of action for medical monitoring
might exist when "no symptoms or subclinical changes have
occurred," according to court documents.

Judge Wolf concluded that the plaintiffs hadn't preserved a claim
under this alternative theory, relying heavily on a status
conference in which the plaintiffs' counsel indicated it wouldn't
press a claim based on that part of the Donovan ruling.

The appellate panel said that the plaintiffs' counsel let slide
multiple opportunities to press the alternative theory.

"At the status conference, plaintiffs' counsel time and again
expressly represented to the court that the plaintiffs' case
depended on their ability to prove subcellular change," Judge
Selya wrote.

Circuit Judges Juan R. Torruella and Bruce M. Selya and District
Judge Steven J. McAuliffe sat on the First Circuit panel.

The plaintiffs are represented by Ruben Honik and Kevin W. Fay of
Golomb & Honik PC and Michael B. Bogdanow of Meehan Boyle Black &
Fitzgerald PC.

Raytheon is represented by Jonathan M. Albano --
jonathan.albano@bingham.com -- and Janice W. Howe
-- janice.howe@bingham.com -- of Bingham McCutchen LLP and James
F. Kavanaugh Jr. and Ronald M. Jacobs -- rjacobs@connkavanaugh.com
-- of Conn Kavanaugh Rosenthal Peisch & Ford LLP.

The case is Barry Genereux et al. v. Raytheon Company, case number
13-1921, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit.


RICHMOND VALLEY: "Coccaro" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Coccaro and Vincent Coccaro individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated persons v. Richmond Valley Veterinary
Practice, P.C., TLC Veterinary P.C., D/B/A Richmond Valley Animal
Hospital, Paul W. Kinnear, Tara Purcell, Lisa A. Esposito, John
Maccia, and Christopher J. Powell, Case No. 1:14-cv-03681
(E.D.N.Y., June 11, 2014) seeks to recover unpaid wages, unpaid
overtime, liquidated damages, reasonable attorneys' fees and
costs, and all other appropriate legal and equitable relief,
pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Richmond Valley Veterinary Practice, P.C, is a New York State
corporation that operates a veterinary hospital and crematory at
4915 Arthur Kill Road, Staten Island, NY 10309.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      David Harrison, Esq.
      HARRISON, HARRISON & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
      110 Highway 35, 2nd Floor,
      Red Bank, NJ 07701
      Telephone: (718) 799-9111
      Facsimile: (718) 799-9171
      E-mail: nycotlaw@gmail.com


SAFI-G INC: Faces "Eslava" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------
Juan Maldonado Eslava, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. Safi-G Inc. (d/b/a Cafe Buon Gusto), John
Doe Inc. (d/b/a Cafe Buon Gusto) and Nasser Ghorchian, Case No.
1:14-cv-04175 (S.D.N.Y., June 10, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid
overtime and minimum wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards.

Safi-G Inc. d/b/a Cafe Buon Gusto, is a restaurant owned by Nasser
Ghorchian located at 236 E. 77th Street, New York, New York 10075.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael Faillace, Esq.
      MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES
      60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2020,
      New York, New York 10165
      Telephone: (212) 317-1200
      Facsimile: (212) 317-1620


SP AUSNET: Closing Arguments Heard in Black Saturday Fire Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Peta Carlyon, writing for ABC News, reported that Victoria's
biggest ever class action involving 10,000 people affected by the
giant Kilmore East blaze on Black Saturday has entered its final
week.

Relatives of the 119 people killed in the fire, people injured and
people who lost their homes and property have taken part in the
case against power distributor SP Ausnet and asset managers
Utility Services Group.  There has been at least 200 sitting days
in a specially designed courtroom in Melbourne over the last 15
months, and closing arguments were heard first week of June.

The trial came about after Victoria's Bushfires Royal Commission
found the Kilmore East blaze that started on February 7, 2009, was
caused by an ageing SP Ausnet power line.  But SP Ausnet has
submitted the finding was wrong, and the Commission hearing was
too brief to consider adequate scientific analysis.

In a closing submission to the trial of more than 1000 pages, SP
Ausnet argued it did not owe a duty of care to the class action
members because the outcome of the fire was not "reasonably
foreseeable".

The Utility Services Group (USG) made a similar closing
submission.

Lawyers acting for the fire victims described the argument as
"extraordinary".

"That's never been argued by any power company in any bushfire
case in Australia ever," principal lawyer Martin Hyde said.

Mr. Hyde argued if a $10 plastic "dampener" had been installed on
the power line, the Kilmore East bushfire would have been
prevented.

"In light winds a line will vibrate up to 200 times per second and
that puts enormous strain on the conductor, particularly at the
very end points where it becomes stiff and joins onto the
conductor," he said.

"We say that their standards from 1992 provided that they should
have had a $10 plastic dampener on this line . . . as a result you
wouldn't have had this line come down on Black Saturday and cause
such devastation."

SP Ausnet and USG have counter-sued the state's emergency
agencies, arguing it was up to them to issue timely bushfire
warnings.

A decision by Justice Jack Forrest is not expected before February
next year.


ST GEORGE TREATS: Fails to Pay Drivers Overtime, Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Nelson Vasquez v. St. George Treats, Inc. d/b/a St. George NY
Limo, and Rimon Kamel, Individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-04209
(S.D.N.Y., June 11, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for
failure to pay limousine drivers overtime wages pursuant to Fair
Labor Standards Act.

St. George Treats, Inc., is a New York Corporation engaged in
passenger transportation business.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jodi J. Jaffe, Esq.
      JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, P.A.
      168 Franklin Corner Road, Bldg. 2, Suite 220
      Lawrenceville, NY 08648
      Telephone: (201) 687-9977
      Facsimile: (201) 595-0308
      E-mail: jjaffe@JaffeGlenn.com


STANDARD & POOR'S: Court Dismisses Class Action Appeal
------------------------------------------------------
Kerrie O'Connor, writing for Batemans Bay Post, reports that
almost $200,000 frozen during legal action can now be spent in the
Eurobodalla Shire after the full bench of the Federal Court
dismissed a global financial crisis (GFC) appeal.

In a case now attracting international interest, Eurobodalla Shire
Council was one of several local governments which joined a class
action against a global ratings agency.  Through legal firm
Bentham IMF, the group argued they had been misled when Standard
and Poor's rated investment products proved toxic in the GFC.  The
shire was awarded $197,000 of a total $19 million judgment against
Standard and Poor's last year, but the agency lodged an immediate
appeal.  The full bench of the Federal Court dismissed the appeal
and upheld the original judgment.

The shire's chief financial officer, Anthony O'Reilly, says he now
feels confident to release the original award for allocation.

"The full court basically dismissed all of the appellant's appeal
grounds," he said on June 10.

"What that means for the Eurobodalla is that the money we received
from winning this case many months ago can now be used as part of
the general services and activities of the council.

"At the time, Standard and Poor's lodged an immediate appeal, so I
thought it prudent to restrict that money.

"We kept it to one side, just in case."

The shire's legal advice is that legal action is now closed,
however other GFC-related cases continue.

Many regional councils were burned when they invested in products
after receiving misleading advice before the GFC.

As a globally recognized ratings agency, one that rates national
economies, Standard and Poor's had endorsed complex investment
products that ultimately went sour.

The Federal Court decision could well have international
implications, as others stung in the crisis consider their
options.

"That is certainly the case," Mr. O'Reilly said.

"I understand people in the Netherlands have started looking with
interest at this case.

"Obviously there is no jurisdiction from the Australian court, but
it assists the judicial systems across the world to focus on the
legal arguments."

Mr. O'Reilly said councillors would ultimately decide how the
damages would be spent.

"The best guide is the delivery program and operational plan that
is currently on exhibition," he said.

"That document shows how we will spend just over $95 million.

"It is nice to have that cash available, but the decision on how
it is spent is up to councillors."

Mr. O'Reilly remains hopeful the shire will break even on a raft
of legal attempts to wrestle money back from parties such as
Lehman Brothers.

"The net position, when this decision was upheld, brought us into
a small loss over the life of the CDO (collateralized debt
obligation) investment positions from council, and includes
purchase price, buying and selling, interest received and legal
costs," he said.

"There is always hope we will come out with a break-even position,
which is really good compared to a lot of other councils."


STRONGSVILLE, OH: Faces Class Action Over Ongoing Flooding
----------------------------------------------------------
Bob Sandrick, writing for Cleveland Plain Dealer, reports that a
Strongsville, Ohio resident is considering a class-action lawsuit
against the city due to ongoing flooding in his subdivision.

Rick Beechy, of Glen Cairn Way in Waterford Crossing, said the
severe May 12 rainstorm left two to three inches of water in his
basement.  He said it was the third time his house flooded over
the past five years.

"Homes (in the neighborhood) flood relatively often when it
rains," Mr. Beechy told Northeast Ohio Media Group.  "It doesn't
have to be a storm of biblical proportions.

"The city knows the storm sewers are ineffective," Mr. Beechy
said.  "I'm under the impression they put a Band-Aid on them."

Mr. Beechy said some houses in Waterford Crossing contained two to
three feet of water during the May 12 storm.  Properties flooded
throughout Greater Cleveland, not just in Strongsville, but that
was no comfort for Mr. Beechy.

"It's a disaster," Mr. Beechy said.  "You have half-million-dollar
homes in an affluent city that is overbuilt.  They keep building
and the storm sewers can't handle a simple rainstorm."

Mr. Beechy said he has consulted with an attorney and talked to
neighbors about possible legal action against the city. He said
nothing has been decided yet.

Mayor Thomas Perciak did not return calls prior to this story's
publication.  However, during a City Council Finance Committee
meeting, city Engineer Ken Mikula said the city has spent $14
million in stormwater management repairs over the past 10 years.

At that meeting, council talked about possibly hiring an
engineering firm to do a stormwater study of the city, in the wake
of the March 12 storm. Council has not yet decided the matter.

Service Director Joseph Walker did not return calls regarding the
number of Strongsville residents who complained about flooding
after the May 12 storm.  Mr. Beechy estimated that 75-100 homes in
Waterford Crossing, and in The Woods subdivision next door,
experienced flooding. He said cars floated on Glen Cairn during
the height of the storm.

Afterword, tree lawns were filled with water-soaked furniture from
finished basements, including Mr. Beechy's.  Mr. Beechy and his
wife were planning to sell their home in three years -- after
their son graduates from Strongsville High School -- and move into
a smaller house closer to their jobs.

However, a real estate agent told Mr. Beechy that the number of
people who would buy his house has been cut by 50 percent due to
flooding issues.  He said the market price of his house, which he
said should sell for about $350,000, has been reduced by 10-20
percent.

"Whoever buys it will need to hire a waterproofing company, but
nobody knows if that will work because the problem is the city
sewers," Mr. Beechy said, adding that he doesn't know precisely
why his and neighboring homes take in water.  He said it might be
due to a nearby retention basin that sometimes overflows during
heavy rains.

At a June 2 council meeting, Mr. Perciak said some residents
allowed backyard sewer drains to clog with leaves and debris, but
Mr. Beechy said his yard doesn't contain a drain.

Mr. Mikula, the city engineer, could not [be] reached on June 10
regarding the flooding in Waterford Crossing.

Mr. Beechy said the city, in 2011 or 2012, did replace an L-shaped
sewer joint in Waterford Crossing with a joint that has a softer
angle.  The idea was to allow stormwater to flow more smoothly,
but Mr. Beechy said it must not have helped.

One resident who said he would support Mr. Beechy in a class-
action lawsuit is Jerry Kiffer, who lives on Sandalwood Lane in
the Meadows West subdivision.  Meadows West, near Prospect and
Drakes roads, is a stone's throw from Waterford Crossing, in the
city's southwest quadrant.

Mr. Kiffer said he lives in a 25-year-old colonial that never took
in water until May 12.  He said about 50 basements in Meadows West
were flooded.  Mr. Kiffer said the stormwater ruined furniture and
artwork in his basement.

"We've had these types of storms over the past 25 years and we've
never had a problem," Mr. Kiffer said.  "This time it was
widespread all over town."


TANAKA JAPANESE: Fails to Pay Minimum Wages, "Cuahua" Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Eliseo Cuahua, Rodrigo Cuahua, Raul Cuahua and Orlando
Tlaxcaltecatl Flores, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. Tanaka Japanese Sushi Inc. (d/b/a Tanaka),
Jin Jiang, John Doe 1, and John Doe 2, Case No. 1:14-cv-04177
(S.D.N.Y., June 10, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage
and overtime compensation pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Tanaka Japanese Sushi Inc., owns, operates, or controls a Japanese
restaurant located at 222 E. 51st Street, New York, New York 10022
under the name Tanaka.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael Faillace, Esq.
      MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES
      60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2020,
      New York, NY 10165
      Telephone: (212) 317-1200
      Facsimile: (212) 317-1620


TEASE LOUNGE: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Pursuant to FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lorraine Calway, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Tease Lounge, Inc., d/b/a T's Lounge and
Gary Odle, individually, Case No. 9:14-cv-80779 (S.D. Fla., June
10, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay
minimum and overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Tease Lounge, Inc., d/b/a T's Lounge, is an adult entertainment
establishment located at 312 Congress Avenue, West Palm Beach
Florida, 33406.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Mitchell Lloyd Feldman, Esq.
      FELDMAN MORGADO
      501 North Reo Street,
      Tampa, FL 33609
      Telephone: (813) 639-9366
      Facsimile: (813) 639-9376
      E-mail: mfeldman@ffmlawgroup.com


TIERRA CALIENTE: Sued Over Fair Labor Standards Act Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Angel Flores, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated persons, known and unknown v. Tierra Caliente Inc., and
Fermin Saucedo, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-04355 (N.D. Ill.,
June 11, 2014) is brought against the Defendant for violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act specifically for failure to pay the
Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees their earned
minimum wage and overtime wages.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Raisa Alicea, Esq.
      CONSUMER LAW GROUP
      6232 N. Pulaski Rd, Ste. 200,
      Chicago, IL 60646
      Telephone: (312) 878-1263
      E-mail: ralicea@yourclg.com


TWIN KEGS: Faces "Glass" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wage
---------------------------------------------------------------
Melanie Glass, individually and on behalf of all other similarly
situated employees v. Twin Kegs and Todd Rossbach, Case No. 3:14-
cv-01286 (M.D. Tenn., June 11, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid
straight time, unpaid minimum wage, and overtime compensation,
liquidated damages, interest, and attorneys' fees and costs
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Twin Kegs is located at 413 West Thompson Lane in Nashville,
Tennessee.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Kara B. Huffstutter, Esq.
      Michael L. Russell, Esq.
      GILBERT RUSSELL MCWHERTER PLC
      5409 Maryland Way, Suite 150,
      Brentwood, TN 37027
      Telephone: (615) 354-1144
      Facsimile: (731) 664-1540
      E-mail: khuffstutter@gilbertfirm.com
              mrussell@gilbertfirm.com


VANTAGE FOODS: Faces "Pacheco" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Leannish Velez Pacheco, on behalf of herself and similarly
situated employees v. Vantage Foods, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-01127
(M.D. Pa., June 11, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages
pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Vantage Foods, Inc., is a corporate entity headquartered in
Calgary, Alberta, Canada, that operates four state-of-the-art food
processing facilities in Camp Hill, PA.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Eric L. Young, Esq.
      YOUNG LAW GROUP, PC
      123 S. Broad Street, Suite 192
      Philadelphia, PA 19109
      Telephone: (215) 367-5151
      Facsimile: (215) 367-5143
      E-mail: eyoung@eganyoung.com

           - and -

      Peter D. Winebrake, Esq.
      WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
      Twining Office Center, Suite 211
      715 Twining Rd
      Dresher, PA 19025
      Telephone: (215) 884-2491
      Facsimile: (215) 884-2492
      E-mail: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com


VODAFONE: Customers' Class Action Over Network Issues Faces Delay
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Taylor, writing for ZDNet, reported that despite widespread
reports of an impending class action lawsuit against the company,
Vodafone has not had any contact from LCM Litigation, or its legal
firm Piper Alderman, over a lawsuit that was due to be filed in
August 2013 on behalf of disgruntled ex-Vodafone customers that
left the company during the peak of its network troubles in 2010
to 2011.

Piper Alderman commenced plans to sue the telco in 2010, at the
peak of the "Vodafail" complaints about the network's poor
performance.  At that time, it signed up 23,000 interested
customers who were looking at getting compensation for their
network woes.  But it took two years for the campaign to
resurface, and it returned in February 2013, when Piper Alderman
received the backing of litigation funder LCM.

The firm said at the time that it was looking for tens of millions
of dollars in compensation from the telco for customers who had
suffered due to Vodafone's network issues, but it needed those
23,000 customers to re-sign up and confirm that they had a valid
case against the company before the class-action suit could go
ahead.  LCM would take a 33 percent cut of any damages awarded to
ex-Vodafone customers.

At the time, the firm indicated that it wanted to capture all of
the 700,000 customers who had left Vodafone since 2011.  The
company has now lost well over 2 million of its mobile customer
base through combined customer churn and removal of inactive SIMs
by Vodafone.

It was widely reported in July last year that the case was set to
get underway in August 2013, with "tens of thousands" of customers
signed up to participate in the class action suit.

"The lawyers will then need to finish preparing the necessary
court documents.  We will then need to speak to Vodafone to comply
with the rules of the Federal Court of Australia.  We are aiming
to issue the court case against Vodafone by the end of August,"
LCM managing director Patrick Coope was reported to have said at
the time.

In the subsequent 10 months, however, there has been no filing in
the Federal Court of Australia against Vodafone Hutchison
Australia. Vodafone itself has not been contacted by LCM
Litigation, a spokesperson told ZDNet.

"We have not seen or heard anything about the threatened class
action since some press reports in August 2013 and look forward to
leaving this matter behind us," the spokesperson said.

"Customer service remains a key priority for Vodafone.  Our call
centre teams, including our Australian based teams in Hobart
continue to work hard to provide our customers with the highest
standard of service every day.  We want our customers to have a
positive experience and where there are any issues, make sure they
are resolved swiftly and fairly."

ZDNet made repeated attempts over the past week to contact both
LCM Litigation and Piper Alderman, but no comment had been
provided at the time of writing.  LCM's website is currently
listed as "being updated".  Mr. Coope contacted ZDNet early this
morning but did not provide any specifics on the current state of
the case.

The class action suit's failure to launch comes as Vodafone
continues to shed mobile customers.  In the first three months of
2014, Vodafone lost 44,000 mobile subscribers, bringing its
customer base down to below 5 million.


WESTWAY TRANSPORTATION: Does Not Pay OT, "Kaufman" Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Kaufman, and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C.
216(b) v. Westway Transportation Systems, Inc. d/b/a Westway
Automotive Service, also d/b/a American Fleet Automotive, Julie
Abdulahad, Henry M Abdulahad, individually, Case No. 0:14-cv-61362
(S.D. Fla., June 11, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage,
and overtime compensation, liquidated damages, interest, and
attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

Westway Transportation Systems, Inc., is a Florida profit
corporation doing business in Broward County, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Eric Aaron Jacobs, Esq.
      BELOFF, PARKER, JACOBS
      1691 Michigan Avenue, Suite 320
      Miami Beach, FL 33139
      Telephone: (305) 673-1101
      Facsimile: (305) 673-5505
      E-mail: ejacobs@BeloffParker.com


WORLD PIZZA: Does Not Pay Employees Overtime, "Ruiz" Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Refugio Ruiz, Tomas Ruiz, Javier Ponce Aguillar, and Omar
Castillo, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v.
World Pizza, Inc. d/b/a Pizza 2000, and John Diluna, Case No.
1:14-cv-04153 (S.D.N.Y., June 10, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid
overtime compensation, liquidated damages, prejudgment and post-
judgment interest, and attorneys' fees and costs.

World Pizza, Inc. d/b/a Pizza 2000, is a New York corporation with
a principal place of business at 337 Halstead Avenue, Harrison,
New York 10528.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


WYNDHAM VACATION: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Reynolds" Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Reynolds, Sharon Linick, Linda Neely, Joseph Schubert, and
Doreen Mastandrea, individually and on behalf of other employees
similarly situated v. Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc. Case No.
4:14-cv-02261 (D.S.C., June 10, 2014), seeks to recover
declaratory relief, unpaid overtime, liquidated damages,
attorney's fees, and taxable costs of court.

Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc., is a Delaware incorporated with
its principal place of business in Orlando Florida doing regular
business in the State of South Carolina.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      William James Luse, Esq.
      WILLIAM J. LUSE LAW OFFICE
      1601 Oak Street, Suite 201,
      Myrtle Beach, SC 29577
      Telephone: (843) 455-6049
      E-mail: lusewilliam@yahoo.com


ZALE CORP: Faces Lawsuits by Former Piercing Pagoda Employees
-------------------------------------------------------------
Zale Corporation is facing wage and hour suits filed on behalf of
current and former Piercing Pagoda and Zale's employees, according
to the company's May 30, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended April 30,
2014.

The Company is a defendant in three purported class action
lawsuits, Tessa Hodge v. Zale Delaware, Inc., d/b/a Piercing
Pagoda which was filed on April 23, 2013 in the Superior Court of
the State of California, County of San Bernardino, Naomi Tapia v.
Zale which was filed on July 3, 2013 in the U.S. District Court,
Southern District of California, and Melissa Roberts v. Zale
Delaware, Inc. which was filed on October 7, 2013 in the Superior
Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles. All three
cases include allegations that the Company violated various wage
and hour labor laws. Relief is sought on behalf of current and
former Piercing Pagoda and Zale's employees. The lawsuits seek to
recover damages, penalties and attorneys' fees as a result of the
alleged violations.


ZALE CORP: Still Faces Shareholder Suit Over Signet Merger
----------------------------------------------------------
The suit In re Zale Corporation Shareholders Litigation continues
in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware, according to
the company's May 30, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended April 30,
2014.

The Company and its directors have been named as defendants in
five purported shareholder class action lawsuits filed in the
Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware: Andrew Breyer v. Zale
Corporation, et al. filed on February 24, 2014, Marc Stein v. Zale
Corporation, et al. and Ravinder Singh v. Zale Corporation, et al.
each filed on March 3, 2014, Mary Smart v. Zale Corporation, et
al. filed on March 6, 2014, and David Pill v. Zale Corporation, et
al., filed on March 12, 2014.

Each lawsuit alleges that, in connection with the proposed
transaction between the Company and Signet, entered into on
February 19, 2014, the Company's directors breached their
fiduciary duties to the Company's shareholders and that the
Company, Signet and Merger Sub aided and abetted such breaches.
Each lawsuit seeks injunctive relief, rescission in the event the
Merger is consummated, monetary damages and attorneys' and other
fees and costs. On March 25, 2014, the lawsuits were consolidated
under the caption In re Zale Corporation Shareholders Litigation
and co-lead plaintiffs were appointed. On April 23, 2014, the
plaintiffs filed an amended consolidated complaint, adding
allegations related to the Company's preliminary proxy statement
and moved for expedited proceedings and a preliminary injunction
preventing consummation of the Merger. The parties subsequently
resolved plaintiffs' motion for expedited proceedings and, on May
23, 2014, the plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction was
denied.


* Seven Auto Makers to Recall Millions of Vehicles Over Air Bags
----------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Pfanner, Christina Rogers and Megumi Fujikawa, writing for
The Wall Street Journal, report that seven major auto makers on
June 23 disclosed they combined would recall millions of vehicles
equipped with air bags that could explode under certain
circumstances.

The moves expand on earlier efforts to find and fix potentially
defective air bag inflators made by Takata Corp. and highlight the
challenges for auto makers to contain mass recalls.

Tokyo-based Takata is one of three major manufacturers of air bags
and supplies similar components to auto makers around the world.
That strategy allows car makers to save money on parts through
economies of scale, but heightens the risk of large-scale recalls.
General Motors Co., under pressure from U.S. regulators, has
recalled 20 million vehicles world-wide this year over a variety
of defects.

The problems with Takata air bag inflators have led to recalls of
10 million vehicles since 2009.  Takata says it knows of at least
six incidents in which the cylinder-shaped inflators exploded,
sending metal fragments flying.

In one incident cited by U.S. highway safety regulators, a
one-inch piece of metal propelled from an exploding air bag hit
the right eye of the driver of a 2005 Honda Civic, causing loss of
sight and facial lacerations that required 100 stitches, according
to a complaint describing the August 2013 accident.

Honda Motor Co., Mazda Motor Corp. and Nissan Motor Co. on June 23
recalled 2.9 million cars world-wide for potentially faulty Takata
air bags.

The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration on Monday
said Toyota Motor Corp., BMW AG, Chrysler Group LLC and Ford Motor
Co. in addition to Honda, Mazda and Nissan would conduct regional
recalls on vehicles equipped with Takata air bags.  Its recall
targets Southern states and territories with hot, humid weather
and a precise number of vehicles involved isn't yet available.

NHTSA is still investigating the issue.  The air-bag recalls
appear to involve inflators made in the early and middle part of
the last decade in plants in Washington state and in Mexico.

The latest actions follow Toyota's June 11 recall of 2.2 million
vehicles equipped with Takata air bags.  Many of its recalled
vehicles had already been recalled once for inspection in 2013,
but Toyota said it had received an incomplete list of potentially
faulty parts from Takata the first time around.

Takata first notified U.S. safety regulators in April 2013 it
needed to recall vehicles with the faulty air bags.  That month,
auto makers including Toyota, Honda and Nissan announced a recall
of more than three million vehicles, including about 1 million in
the U.S.

At the time, Takata said it didn't know how many vehicles would be
affected by the recall but identified six auto makers that had
installed the air bags on their vehicles: Toyota, Honda, Nissan,
Mazda, BMW and GM.

Takata says the car makers are responsible for handling the
recalls, including notifying owners and replacing the air bags.

Takata last week said the NHTSA investigation was prompted by six
incidents that occurred in either Florida or Puerto Rico, and it
said their humid climates may be one reason for the air bag
problems.

"We currently believe the high levels of absolute humidity in
those states are important factors; and as a result our engineers
are analyzing the impact that humidity may have on the potential
for an inflator malfunction, as well as other possible
contributing factors," said Takata Chief Executive Shigehisa
Takada last week.

Air bags are Takata's biggest business, accounting for 43% of its
JPY556.9 billion ($5.47 billion) in sales in its latest fiscal
year.  Takata posted net income of JPY11.1 billion for the year
ended in March, from a net loss of JPY21.1 billion a year earlier.

A Takata spokesman said the company hadn't yet determined how the
new recalls might affect its earnings.  Last year, it took a $300
million charge related to the previous recall.

In addition to air bags, Takata makes other auto parts, including
steering wheels, seat belts and lane-departure warning systems.
Takata, originally a textile company founded in 1933, acquired
auto parts maker Petri AG of Germany in 2000.

Its biggest air bag rivals include Sweden's Autoliv Inc. and TRW
Automotive Holdings Corp. of the U.S.

The air-bag recalls aren't the only problem that Takata has faced
recently.  Last year, the company agreed to plead guilty to settle
U.S. antitrust charges that it had participated in a scheme to fix
the prices of seat belts and to pay $71.3 million.

Takata was involved in a large recall in the U.S. in 1995, when
nearly nine million cars were recalled for repairs to potentially
faulty seat belts it had supplied.

In the latest recall, Honda said it would recall two million cars
world-wide, including its top-sellers Accord and Civic, to fix
possibly defective air bag inflators supplied by Takata.

Nissan is recalling 755,000 vehicles, including some Sentra,
Pathfinder and Maxima models and certain Infiniti I30/I35, QX4 and
FX luxury models.

Mazda said it was recalling about 160,000 vehicles, mostly Mazda6,
RX-8 and MPV models.

In Japan, Honda, Nissan and Mazda said they would turn off
passenger air bags in vehicles now on the road to prevent an
possible inflator explosion.

As a temporary remedy, Toyota has disabled air bags in affected
cars in Japan, said spokesman Brian Lyons.  He said the company
had taken this step as a stop-gap measure because Japanese
regulators require a remedy in case of recalls, and parts are
running short.  The procedure hasn't been used in other markets,
he added.

Takata's shares rose nearly 3% to JPY2,111 in trading in Tokyo on
June 23 and remain slightly above the level at which they were
trading before the April 2013 recall announcement, though they
have been sliding this year since January.


                             *********

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.  Ma. Cristina
Canson, 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  * * *