CAR_Public/140703.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Thursday, July 3, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 131

                             Headlines


AARON'S INC: Bid to Amend "Combs" Suit Gets Court's Nod
ACORD CORPORATION: Faces RICO Act Suit in Colorado
ALFRED BIGELOW: Court Certifies Class in "Redmond" Case
AMERICAN HONDA: Jury Awards $55.3MM to Plaintiff in Acura Suit
AMSPEC LLC: "Taylor" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages

AMYLIN PHARMACEUTICALS: "Santos-Richardson" Suit Moved to N.Y.
ASPIRE FINANCIAL: Sends Unsolicited Fax Messages, Suit Claims
AUTOLIV INC: Inks Settlement in Michigan Antitrust Litigation
BENNY'S BRICK OVEN: Does Not Pay Overtime, "Martinez" Suit Claims
BLUE BIRD: Recalls AARE School Bus Due to Defective Heater Hoses

BMW: Rear Shock Assembly Defect Prompts R1200RT Motorcycle Recall
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Sharma Suit Dismissed with Leave to Amend
BOCHI BROTHERS: Recalls Simon Chang Children's Raincoats
BOEING CO: Lawyer Wants Crash Suits Removed From State Court
CANADA: Court Reserves Decision in Vets Class Action Settlements

CAROUSEL SOFTOYS: Recalls Various Plush Toys Due to Choking Hazard
CATCH INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Fermin Dry Cured Iberico Pork Chorizo
CATERPILLAR INC: "G&G" Suit Transferred From Wisconsin to N.J.
CATERPILLAR INC: "S&M" Suit Moved From California to New Jersey
CHINA MOBILE: Sued Over False and Misleading Business Reports

CIDRERIE MCKEOWN: Recalls McKeown Ciders Due to Sulphites
CINMAR LLC: To Settle Charges Over Defective Three-Step Ladders
CLAYTON COUNTY, GA: Teachers Sue Over Employment Contracts
CONN'S INC: Faces Three Shareholder Litigations in S.D. Texas
CRANE CO: Jury Enters $25MM Verdict in Consolidated Asbestos Trial

DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS: Sued Over Defective Pinnacle Hip Implants
DIETARY EXPRESS: Recalls Sprouted Chia & Flax Seed Powder
DUN & BRADSTREET: Sued Over Inaccurate Business Information
FIRST AMERICAN: Court Denies Bid to Vacate Ruling in Slapikas Suit
FORD MOTOR: Recalls F150s Due to Incorrect Motor Sensor Magnet

FRED DEELEY: Recalls 4,759 Motorcycles Due to Damaged Brake Lines
GENERAL DYNAMICS: "Walden" Suit Transferred to S.D. California
GENERAL MOTORS: Ignition-Switch Compensation Plan Falls Short
GENERAL MOTORS: Unveils Details of Crash Victim Compensation Plan
GENERAL MOTORS: "Duarte" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL

GENERAL MOTORS: "Edwards" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Emerson" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Espineira" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Harris" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Knetzke" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL

GENERAL MOTORS: "Lannon" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Levine" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Markle" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Phillip" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: "Santiago" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL

GENERAL MOTORS: "Taylor" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 961 Cars Due to Defective Seat Belt
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 352 Lacrosse Cars Due to Harness Defect
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 6,135 Cars Due to Cable Not Fully Seated
GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Sierra & Silverado Due to Unattached Clamp

GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 61 Corvette Model Over Airbag Issues
GREE CO: Recalled Dehumidifiers Still Used Despite Fire Risk
HONDA: Recalls 394 ILX Cars Due to Headlamp Problems
HOSODA ENTERPRISES: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Suit Claims
IPPOLITO PRODUCE: Recalls Menthes et Aromates Fresh Mint

IRON MOUNTAIN: Removed "Casanova" Class Suit to C.D. California
JEN DELI: Faces "Arenas" Suit on E.D.N.Y. for Failing to Pay OT
JEWEL-OSCO: Tinley Woman Files Suit Over Salmonella Outbreak
LOS ANGELES CLIPPERS: Former Unpaid Intern Files Class Action
MASERATI NORTH AMERICA: Faces Class Suit Over Defective Antennas

MICHAELS STORES: Class of Former Cal. Store Managers Decertified
MICHAELS STORES: Faces Consolidated Data Security Breach Suit
MICHAELS STORES: Safety National Seeks Relief in Data Breach Suit
MID-CONTINENT WELL: Fails to Pay Overtime, "McKinley" Suit Says
MODELL'S SPORTING: Settles Mobility-Impaired Customers Class Suit

MORGAN KEEGAN: Discovery Bid in "Cromeans" Suit Partly Okayed
NAT'L FOOTBALL: To Remove $675 Million Cap on Concussion Damages
NAT'L FOOTBALL: "White" Suit Remanded to District Court
NEVADA: Health Insurance Exchange Faces Class Action
NEVIN'S BUSINESS: Faces "Alonso" Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages

PAULISON CAR WASH: Faces "Pareses" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
PAYTIME INC: Clients File Class Action Over Security Breach
PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Court Okays Bid to Quash Subpoenas
REGENCE BLUECROSS: Sued for Stockpiling Excess Funds to Pay CEOs
SCOTT DOLICH: Faces "Allison" Suit Over Unpaid Minimum Wages

SKINNY GIRL: Judge Denies Class Certification in Drinks Suit
STELLAR RESIDENTIAL: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT & Penalties
TAVERN P&L: Faces "Messick" Suit over Failure to Pay Overtime
THOMSON INC: Court Remands Suit Against Insurers
TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL: Removed "Hussey" Suit to W.D. Louisiana

TWITTER INC: Faces TCPA Class Action Over Unsolicited Texts
USAA CASUALTY: Faces "Mullins" Insurance-Related Suit in Georgia


                            *********


AARON'S INC: Bid to Amend "Combs" Suit Gets Court's Nod
-------------------------------------------------------
ANNETTE COMBS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. AARON'S INC. d/b/a/ AARON'S SALES & LEASE
OWNERSHIP, Defendant, CASE NO. 2:14-CV-00048-SPC-DNF, (M.D. Fla.)
is before the Court on these motions and corresponding responses:
(1) Defendant Aaron's, Inc. d/b/a Aaron's Sales & Lease
Ownership's Motion to Dismiss Count IX of Complaint filed on
February 28, 2014; (2) Plaintiff Annette Combs' Response in
Opposition to Defendant Aaron's, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss and
Cross-Motion to Amend the Complaint filed on March 28, 2014; (3)
Defendant's Motion to Strike filed on March 3, 2014; (4)
Plaintiff's Response in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Strike
filed on March 31, 2014; and (5) Defendant's Response in
Opposition to Plaintiff's Cross-Motion to Amend Complaint filed on
April 11, 2014.

In an order dated June 19, 2014, a copy of which is available at
http://is.gd/y3EwQHfrom Leagle.com, District Judge Sheri Polster
Chappell held that the Plaintiff will be permitted to file her
proposed First Amended Class Action Complaint.

"This matter is at an early stage in the litigation and amending
the Complaint would not delay this matter or prejudice Defendant,"
Judge Chappell said. "The Court, therefore, yields to Rule 15(a)'s
liberal standard and finds good cause to grant Plaintiff leave to
amend. To that end, filing the First Amended Class Action
Complaint will render moot Defendant's pending Motion to Dismiss
Count IX of Complaint and Defendant's Motion to Strike, which are
directed to the original Complaint."

Accordingly, Judge Chappell ruled that Plaintiff Annette Combs'
Cross-Motion to Amend the Complaint is granted.  The Clerk of the
Court was directed to docket the proposed First Amended Class
Action Complaint.  Defendant Aaron's, Inc. d/b/a Aaron's Sales &
Lease Ownership's Motion to Dismiss Count IX of Complaint was
denied as moot.  Defendant's Motion to Strike was also denied as
moot.

Annette Combs, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, represented by David S. Ratner --
DRatner@morellilaw.com -- Morelli Alters Ratner, Jeremy William
Alters -- Jeremy@alterslaw.com -- Morelli Alters Ratner, PA,
Martha McBrayer -- MMcBrayer@morellilaw.com -- Morelli Alters
Ratner, P.C. & Matthew T. Moore -- matthew@alterslaw.com --
Morelli Alters Ratner, PA.

Aarons, Inc, Defendant, represented by Patricia G. Griffith --
pgriffith@fordharrison.com -- Ford & Harrison, Shane T. Munoz --
smunoz@fordharrison.com -- Ford & Harrison, LLP, Todd Sidney
Aidman -- taidman@fordharrison.com -- Ford & Harrison, LLP &
Ashwin Robert Trehan -- atrehan@fordharrison.com -- Ford &
Harrison, LLP.


ACORD CORPORATION: Faces RICO Act Suit in Colorado
--------------------------------------------------
Dale Snyder, Marilyn Snyder, et al., v. Acord Corporation, a
Delaware non-profit corporation, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-01736
(D. Colo., June 20, 2014), arises from the alleged conspiracy
schemes used by the Defendants and co-conspirators to defraud the
Plaintiffs by use of mail, curriers and wires in violation of
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

Acord Corporation is a foreign nonprofit corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, having its
principal office and place of business located at 1 Blue Hill
Plaza 15th Floor, Pearl River, NY 10965.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Eddie Gene Dougherty, Esq.
      DOUGHERTY & HOLLOWAY, LLC
      7200 NW 86th Street, Suite D
      Kansas City, MO 64153
      Telephone: (816) 891-9990
      Facsimile: (816) 891-9905
      E-mail: edougherty@dh-law.com


ALFRED BIGELOW: Court Certifies Class in "Redmond" Case
-------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Dale A. Kimball granted a motion for class
certification filed in the case captioned TIMOTHY REDMOND, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. ALFRED BIGELOW, et al., Defendants, CASE NO.
2:13CV393DAK, (D. Utah).

Plaintiffs Timothy Redomond, Nick Watson, Justin Strong, George
Montfort, Daniel Lassche, and Kraig Canfield filed the Motion for
Class Certification pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.

The court certified two subclasses -- a Damages Class and an
Injunctive Class. The court also certified the named Plaintiffs as
class representatives, and certifies Plaintiffs' counsel as Class
Counsel.

A copy of the June 17, 2014 memorandum decision and order is
available at http://is.gd/RRUJimfrom Leagle.com.


AMERICAN HONDA: Jury Awards $55.3MM to Plaintiff in Acura Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Zack Needles, writing for The Legal Intelligencer, reports that a
Philadelphia jury awarded $55.3 million to a man who was paralyzed
when his head struck the roof of his 1999 Acura Integra as it
rolled after a tire blew out.

An examination of PaLaw magazine, an annual review of the legal
profession in Pennsylvania, indicates this is the largest reported
verdict in a Pennsylvania crashworthiness case since the magazine
began tracking data in 1994.

According to the verdict sheet, the jury found that plaintiff
Carlos Martinez's injury was caused by the Integra's defective
seat-belt design and that defendant American Honda Motor Co. was
negligent for failing both to redesign the seat belt and to warn
consumers that they were at risk for hitting their heads on the
roof if the vehicle rolled.

The verdict in Martinez v. American Honda Motor came down in
Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas Judge Shelley Robins New's
courtroom June 26 after a nine-day trial and an hour-and-a-half of
deliberation, according to the plaintiffs' attorney, Stewart J.
Eisenberg of Eisenberg Rothweiler Winkler Eisenberg & Jeck in
Philadelphia.

According to the verdict sheet, the jury awarded $25 million to
Martinez for past and future noneconomic damages, $15 million to
his wife, plaintiff Rosa De Los Santos De Martinez, for loss of
consortium, about $14.6 million for future medical expenses and
about $720,000 for past and future lost earnings.

According to the plaintiffs' pretrial memorandum, Carlos Martinez
was rendered quadriplegic when the tire on his Acura struck a
nail, blew a tire and rolled while he was driving in Maryland in
May 2010.

While Honda blamed Mr. Martinez's own negligence in its own
pretrial memorandum, saying his injuries "were caused by the
extreme forces involved in the vehicle veering off the highway,
impacting a ditch and then rolling over multiple times," the
plaintiffs' memorandum said Martinez was traveling at less than 33
miles per hour when his car started to roll over.

The plaintiffs' accident reconstruction expert, Micky Gilbert,
said Mr. Martinez was driving below the 55 mph posted speed limit
when he ran over a nail he could not have seen and reacted "in an
expected manner by trying to turn the vehicle back to the left,"
according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

Following an assessment of the 1999 Integra's design and multiple
vehicle inspections, the plaintiffs' automotive design expert,
Larry Sicher, found that "the restraint system and overall design
of the subject vehicle was defective and unreasonably dangerous,
and provided no protection to Mr. Martinez, even though the crash
was low-speed," according to the plaintiffs' memorandum.

The plaintiffs' biomechanical engineering expert, Brian Benda,
reached a similar conclusion, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

"The only reason Mr. Martinez sustained catastrophic and
paralyzing injuries was because the defective design of the
subject vehicle failed to keep him, a seat-belted occupant, from
loading his neck during the rollover event, resulting in serious
damage to his spine," the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

Mr. Eisenberg, who tried the case with Eisenberg Rothweiler
associate Daniel J. Sherry Jr., said he argued at trial that the
seat belt should have been attached to the seat, rather than one
of the "pillars" separating the vehicle's windows.

Honda, meanwhile, argued in its memorandum that there was "no
alternative seat-belt design that would have prevented or reduced"
Mr. Martinez's injuries.

Mr. Eisenberg said he also argued at trial that Honda had
performed rollover tests for the 1999 Integra in which the crash-
test dummy repeatedly hit its head on the roof, but never
corrected the problem before bringing the vehicle to market.

According to the jury sheet, the jury found that the Integra's
driver's side seat-belt was "defective in its design and that
there was an alternative, safer practicable design."

The jury also found that the Integra was defective because of
Honda's failure to warn and that those defects were "solely
attributable to the impact that occurred when the roof of the car
hit the ground," according to the jury sheet.

Mr. Eisenberg said that, during deliberation, the jury asked the
court to see a copy of the owner's manual.

The jury also inquired as to whether there were any guidelines or
precedence for awarding noneconomic damages and whether Honda
would be able to appeal the award, according to Mr. Eisenberg.

"We were gratified that the jury found Honda should have
redesigned their seat belt system when they knew there was a risk
of head or spinal cord injury during a rollover," Mr. Eisenberg
said. "The clients are very grateful that [Martinez] will now have
the ability to get care for the rest of his life."

The plaintiffs' medical expert, Dr. Guy Fried, said Mr. Martinez's
injuries were "'serious and permanent'" but that he is expected to
have a normal or nearly normal lifespan, according to the
plaintiffs' memorandum.

According to the plaintiffs' memorandum, Mr. Martinez has had
multiple urinary tract infections and gastroesophageal reflux
disease since the accident.

Mr. Martinez also continues to suffer from chronic weakness,
numbness, pain, spasticity, neurogenic bowel and neurogenic
bladder as a result of his paralysis, the plaintiffs' memorandum
said.

The plaintiffs' life care plan expert, Lorraine E. Buchanan,
estimated Mr. Martinez's future life care costs, without factoring
in inflation, at about $10.8 million, according to the plaintiffs'
memorandum.

The plaintiffs' economic expert, David Hopkins, then adjusted that
figure to about $14.6 million after inflation was accounted for.
Hopkins also estimated Martinez's future lost earnings at between
about $460,000 and $990,000 depending on whether Martinez retired
at age 62 or age 70, the plaintiffs' memorandum said.

Counsel for Honda, Christopher G. Mavros --
cmavros@campbell-trial-lawyers.com -- of Campbell Campbell Edwards
& Conroy in Berwyn, Pa., could not be reached for comment at press
time.


AMSPEC LLC: "Taylor" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Well Taylor, Jonathan Serianni, Joseph Cavallini and Richard
Hawkey, Individually and on behalf of all similarly situated
persons v. Amspec, L.L.C., f/k/a Amspec Services, L.L.C., Case No.
4:14-cv-01730 (S.D. Tex., June 20, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid
minimum wage and overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and
attorney's fees.

Amspec, L.L.C., is an enterprise engaged in interstate commerce,
operating on the interstate highways, purchasing materials through
commerce, transporting materials through commerce and on the
interstate highways, operating in numerous states, conducting
transactions through commerce, including the use of credit cards,
phones and/or cell phones, electronic mail and the Internet.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Josef Franz Buenker, Esq.
      1201 Prince Street
      Houston, TX 77008
      Telephone: (713) 868-3388
      Facsimile: (713) 683-9940
      E-mail: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com


AMYLIN PHARMACEUTICALS: "Santos-Richardson" Suit Moved to N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Eli Lilly and Company removed the lawsuit captioned
Santos-Richardson v. Amylin Pharmaceuticals, LLC, et al., Case No.
155373-14, from the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County
of New York, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of New York (Foley Square).  The District Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 1:14-cv-04646-VEC to the proceeding.

Plaintiffs Julissa Santos-Richardson and Michael Richardson allege
that Ms. Santos-Richardson developed thyroid cancer as a result of
using Byetta(R), which allegedly left her with "severe personal
injuries, which were permanent and lasting in nature."  The
Plaintiffs further allege that Ms. Santos-Richardson suffered
irreparable bodily injury, great pain of body and mind, great
embarrassment and humiliation and the loss of enjoyment of life.

The Defendants are represented by:

          Kenneth J. King, Esq.
          PEPPER HAMILTON, LLP (NYC)
          The New York Times Building
          620 Eighth Avenue
          New York, NY 10018
          Telephone: (212) 808-2700
          Facsimile: (212) 286-9806
          E-mail: kingk@pepperlaw.com


ASPIRE FINANCIAL: Sends Unsolicited Fax Messages, Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Minniti, individually and as the representative of a class
of similarly situated persons v. Christopher S. Eilers, Aspire
Financial Partners, Member Of John Hancock Financial Network, John
Hancock Financial Network, Inc., John Hancock Life & Health
Insurance Company, John Hancock Life Insurance Company (U.S.A.)
and John Does 1- 10, Case No. 1:14-cv-22294 (S.D. Fla., June 20,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for sending unsolicited
facsimiles in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Aspire Financial Partners is a Massachusetts corporation with its
principal place of business in Boston, Massachusetts.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ryan Michael Kelly, Esq.
      ANDERSON WANCA
      3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 760
      Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
      Telephone: (847) 368-1500
      Facsimile: (847) 368-1501
      E-mail: rkelly@andersonwanca.com


AUTOLIV INC: Inks Settlement in Michigan Antitrust Litigation
-------------------------------------------------------------
Autoliv, Inc. entered into a settlement agreement in the Occupant
Safety Systems segment of the Automotive Parts Antitrust Multi-
District Litigation, according to the company's June 2, 2014, Form
8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Autoliv, Inc. ("Autoliv") and certain of its subsidiaries are
defendants in multiple putative antitrust class actions that have
been consolidated in the Occupant Safety Systems segment of the
Automotive Parts Antitrust Multi-District Litigation ("MDL")
pending in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of Michigan. These class actions are brought on behalf of
three separate alleged classes of purchasers of occupant safety
systems in the United States, namely: direct purchasers, auto
dealers and end-payors.

On June 2, 2014, Autoliv announced in a press release that it
entered into separate settlement agreements with representatives
of each of the three classes. In entering into the settlement
agreements, Autoliv does not admit any liability and is settling
for the purpose of avoiding the uncertainty, risk, expense and
distraction of further class action litigation in the MDL.
Pursuant to the settlement agreements, Autoliv has agreed to pay
$40 million to the direct purchaser settlement class, $6 million
to the auto dealer settlement class, and $19 million to the end-
payor settlement class. The direct purchaser settlement amount is
subject to potential downward adjustments to a floor of $24
million based on the volume of Autoliv's sales represented by
direct purchasers who elect to be excluded, i.e. opt out, from the
settlement class. Each settlement agreement gives Autoliv the
option to void that settlement if the opt-outs from the settlement
class exceed varying thresholds. Each settlement agreement also
provides that such settlement class members will release Autoliv,
its subsidiaries, and its and their respective current and former
officers, directors and employees, from the claims and demands
that were or could have been asserted in the MDL, but class
members who affirmatively opt out of the settlement will not be
bound by the release and will not receive any settlement proceeds.
Each settlement is subject to certain conditions including court
approval following notice to the settlement class members. If
approved, the settlements will resolve the claims asserted against
Autoliv and its subsidiaries on behalf of the three settlement
classes.

These class action settlements do not include the three putative
indirect purchaser antitrust class actions that Autoliv is
defending in Canada and will not prevent claims by anyone who
elects to opt out of a settlement class.


BENNY'S BRICK OVEN: Does Not Pay Overtime, "Martinez" Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Martinez, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Benny's Brick Oven Inc. d/b/a Benny's Brick Oven
Pizza, Emunah Holdings Corp. d/b/a Benny's and Samuel Russ, Case
No. 1:14-cv-03868 (E.D.N.Y., June 20, 2014) arises from the
Defendant's failure to pay minimum wage and overtime pay required
by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Benny's Brick Oven Inc., is a pizzeria and restaurant that
prepares and serves Kosher cuisine, located at 1802 Avenue M,
Brooklyn, New York, 11230.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Louis Pechman, Esq.
      BERKE-WEISS & PECHMAN LLP
      488 Madison Avenue, 11th Floor
      New York, NY 10022
      Telephone: (212) 583-9500
      Facsimile: (212) 208-8582
      E-mail: pechman@bwp-law.com


BLUE BIRD: Recalls AARE School Bus Due to Defective Heater Hoses
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 12, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              School Bus
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Heater And Defroster
Units affected:           37
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014225
TC ID number:             2014225
Manufacturer recall
number:                   R14XF-C

On certain rear engine school buses, heater hoses in the passenger
compartment could rupture and allow hot coolant to enter the
passenger compartment, increasing the risk of injury.

Dealers will install a revised hose and thermostat, as well as
additional shielding.

Affected products: 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013 Blue Bird
AARE School Bus


BMW: Rear Shock Assembly Defect Prompts R1200RT Motorcycle Recall
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 12, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Motorcycle
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Suspension
Units affected:           202
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014222
TC ID number:             2014222

On certain motorcycles, the piston rod within the rear shock
absorber can break without warning. If this were to occur while in
motion, the motorcycle would lose stability, possibly resulting in
a loss of vehicle control and a crash causing personal injury
and/or damage to property.

Dealers will replace the rear shock and spring strut assembly.

Affected products: 2014 BMW R1200RT


BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Sharma Suit Dismissed with Leave to Amend
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Maxine M. Chesney dismissed the case captioned
MONITA SHARMA, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA, LLC,
Defendant, NO. C-13-2274 MMC, (N.D. Cal.).

Before the court were two motions, filed March 17, 2014, by
defendant BMW of North America, LLC: (1) "Motion to Dismiss for
Lack of Standing and Failure to State a Claim"; and (2) "Motion to
Strike Class Allegations."  Plaintiffs Monita Sharma and Eric
Anderson have filed opposition, to which BMW has replied.

In an order dated June 19, 2014, a copy of which is available at
http://is.gd/QaSMRBfrom Leagle.com, Judge Chesney granted BMW's
motion to dismiss, and dismissed the case for failure to state a
claim.  BMW's motion to strike is denied as moot.

"If plaintiffs wish to file a Third Amended Complaint for purposes
of curing any or all of the deficiencies identified above with
respect to the Second, Third, Fourth, Fifth, and/or Seventh Claims
for Relief, any such Third Amended Complaint shall be filed no
later than July 3, 2014," ruled Judge Chesney.  "Plaintiffs may
not, however, add new causes of action, new plaintiffs, or new
defendants without obtaining leave of court."

Monita Sharma, Plaintiff, represented by Stuart C. Talley --
stalley@kcrlegal.com -- Kershaw Cutter & Ratinoff LLP, Amy
Elisabeth Keller -- aek@wexlerwallace.com -- Wexler Wallace LLP,
Edward A. Wallace -- eaw@wexlerwallace.com -- Wexler Wallace LLP,
Ian James Barlow --  ibarlow@kcrlegal.com  -- Kershaw, Cutter &
Ratinoff LLP, Stephen Massong Harris --  smh@kpclegal.com --
Knapp, Petersen & Clarke & William Alter Kershaw, Kershaw Cutter &
Ratinoff LLP.

Eric Anderson, Plaintiff, represented by Stuart C. Talley, Kershaw
Cutter & Ratinoff LLP, Amy Elisabeth Keller, Wexler Wallace LLP,
Edward A. Wallace, Wexler Wallace LLP, Ian James Barlow, Kershaw,
Cutter & Ratinoff LLP, Stephen Massong Harris, Knapp, Petersen &
Clarke & William Alter Kershaw, Kershaw Cutter & Ratinoff LLP.

BMW of North America LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company,
Defendant, represented by Troy Masami Yoshino --
tyoshino@cbmlaw.com -- Carroll, Burdick & McDonough LLP & Aengus
Hartley Carr -- acarr@cbmlaw.com -- Carroll, Burdick & McDonough
LLP.


BOCHI BROTHERS: Recalls Simon Chang Children's Raincoats
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 19, 2014
Posting date:             June 19, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Children's Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Strangulation Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-40085

Affected products: Simon Chang children's packable raincoats with
neck drawstrings style number SCU62-760-81

Simon Chang children's unisex hooded raincoats with neck
drawstrings available in colors blue, green and red.  The
raincoats are made of 100% PVC, have a side pocket with a
reflective strip and are closed at the front with snaps.

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

Neither Bochi Brothers nor Health Canada has received reports of
incidents or injuries to Canadians related to the use of these
products.

Approximately 2376 raincoats were sold at various retail locations
across Canada.

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold from
Feb. 2014 to May 2014.

Companies:

   Distributor      Bochi Brothers
                    Montreal
                    Quebec
                    Canada

Consumers should immediately remove the drawstrings from the neck
area to eliminate the hazard.


BOEING CO: Lawyer Wants Crash Suits Removed From State Court
------------------------------------------------------------
Amanda Bronstad, writing for The National Law Journal, reports
that two days after a federal regulatory report concluded that
pilot error and a confusing auto-flight system contributed to last
year's Asiana Airlines crash, a lawyer for The Boeing Co. was in
court arguing that lawsuits brought by more than 100 of the
victims should be removed from state court.

Flight 214 crashed on July 6, 2013, while landing at San Francisco
International Airport, killing three people and injuring about
180.  In its report, released on June 24, the U.S. National
Transportation Safety Board determined that the flight's crew
mismanaged the landing approach and failed to monitor airspeed.
The report also found that the "complexities" of the auto-throttle
and autopilot systems in the 777 aircraft, made by Boeing,
contributed to the accident.  Boeing has said it disagreed with
the report's findings.

On June 26, Boeing's lawyer, Eric Wolff, told a panel of judges on
the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit that 16 cases
filed over the accident in Cook County, Ill., Circuit Court should
be removed to federal court, where they would be transferred to
multidistrict litigation in San Francisco.  New York University
School of Law Professor Arthur Miller, representing 172 passengers
in those cases, is fighting to keep the cases in state court,
which is considered friendlier for plaintiffs.

Boeing and Mr. Wolff, senior counsel at Seattle's Perkins Coie,
declined to comment about the litigation.  Mr. Miller did not
respond to a request for comment.

In its briefs, Boeing, the sole defendant in the cases, has argued
that federal admiralty jurisdiction applied because the aircraft,
which hit a seawall, was over the water when the pilots realized
that their speed was too slow for landing.  Boeing also claims
that the federal officer statute, which requires federal
jurisdiction in cases against anyone "acting under" a federal
officer, applied because Boeing's airplane had to meet FAA
certifications.

The plaintiffs disputed Boeing's claims, noting that the injuries
from the crash happened on land, not the sea.

Because they were remanded to state court, the lawsuits in
Illinois are not part of a multidistrict proceeding in San
Francisco coordinating dozens more lawsuits against Asiana and
Boeing. U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers, who is
overseeing that proceeding, has allowed some discovery, with a
hearing set for Sept. 26.  Both sides are talking settlement.

"We're also having discussions about a process for resolution of
those cases ready to be resolved -- perhaps those that don't have
severe injuries," said plaintiffs attorney Frank Pitre --
fpitre@cpmlegal.com -- of Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy in
Burlingame, Calif.

Although they can't use the NTSB report in their cases, plaintiffs
lawyers in California and Illinois agree that its findings bolster
their claims, particularly those against Boeing.  Keeping Boeing
in the litigation is important for the plaintiffs because most of
the passengers hailed from Asia and, under a federal treaty,
otherwise would be unable to sue South Korea's Asiana in U.S.
courts.

"Nobody in the litigation is suggesting that the pilots didn't
make mistakes," said plaintiffs attorney Justin Green, a partner
at New York's Kreindler & Kreindler.  "But I think there can be
more than one cause of an accident and, in this case, that's what
the NTSB found."


CANADA: Court Reserves Decision in Vets Class Action Settlements
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Canadian Press reports that the Federal Court in Halifax has
reserved a decision in two class-action lawsuit settlements
involving Royal Canadian Mounted Police and military veterans with
disabilities.

Lawyers for the veterans and the federal government were in court
on June 20 seeking the approval of settlements worth C$70 million
for retired RCMP officers and C$38.6 million for military
veterans.

The RCMP case involves officers whose long-term disability
payments were cut by the same amount they received in monthly
disability pension payments through Veterans Affairs.

David White, the lead plaintiff in the RCMP class-action, says the
roughly 1,000 retired Mounties with disabilities who would be
covered by their agreement are supportive of the deal and are
eager to close the case.

White says the C$70-million agreement would mean that the clawback
would end for all RCMP veterans now receiving benefits and
Mounties who are medically released in the future.

The C$38.6-million settlement in the lawsuit involving military
veterans was reached on the cost of living provisions with
veterans who were awarded an C$887.8-million settlement last year.

At issue in that case was a long-standing federal practice of
clawing back the military pensions of injured soldiers by the
amount of disability payments they received.


CAROUSEL SOFTOYS: Recalls Various Plush Toys Due to Choking Hazard
------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 19, 2014
Posting date:             June 19, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Toys
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Choking Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-40087

Affected products: Plush dog and bear cub

The recall involves plush toys in the shape of a dog and a bear
cub bearing the following product and UPC numbers:

   Product     Product Number        UPC Number
   -------     --------------        ----------
   Bear        LC-3257               872006056271
   Dog         LC-3261               872006056318

The product number is on a label sewn onto the plush toy.  The dog
comes in white or beige, has a satin bow around its neck and
measures approximately 35 centimetres.  Its legs and hands are
striped, as is the tuque that is affixed over its right ear.  The
bear cub comes in brown or grey, has a bow around its neck and
measures approximately 25 centimetres.

The eyes of the plush toys can become detached.  These small parts
pose a choking hazard to young children.

Neither Health Canada nor Carousel Soft Toys Inc. has received
reports of incidents or injuries related to the use of this toy.

Consumers can find information on how to choose safe toys and
protect their children when they play by visiting the General toy
safety tips page on the Healthy Canadians website.

Approximately 1,560 plush toys were distributed in Canada.

The recalled plush toys were manufactured in China and sold
between March 2013 and April 2014.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     Yangcheng Fengsheng Arts and Crafts Co. Ltd.
                    Dafeng City
                    China

   Importer         Carousel Softoys Inc.
                    Boisbriand
                    Quebec
                    Canada

Consumers should immediately remove the recalled plush toys from
children's reach and contact Carousel Softoys Inc. for a
replacement.  They can also discard the toy in such a way that it
could be no longer used.


CATCH INTERNATIONAL: Recalls Fermin Dry Cured Iberico Pork Chorizo
------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 17, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Extraneous Material
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Catch International Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             RetailC
FIA reference number:     8932

Affected products: 200 g. Fermin Dry Cured Iberico Pork Chorizo
Sausage


CATERPILLAR INC: "G&G" Suit Transferred From Wisconsin to N.J.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled G&G Specialized Carriers, LLC v.
Caterpillar, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-00567, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin to
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (Camden).
The New Jersey District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-
04043 to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is brought on behalf of a putative class of similarly
situated entities and persons, who purchased or leased a vehicle
with a 2007, 2008, 2009 or 2010 Caterpillar, Inc. C-13 or C-15
heavy duty on-highway diesel engine.

Caterpillar, Inc. is a Delaware Corporation with its principal
place of business located in Peoria, Illinois.  Caterpillar
designed, manufactured, distributed, delivered, supplied,
inspected, marketed, leased and sold for profit, and warranted the
MY2007 CAT Engine and in particular the exhaust emission control
to be free of defects in material and workmanship, the Plaintiff
asserts.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

               - and -

          Jonathan Shub, Esq.
          SEEGER WEISS LLP
          1515 Market Street, Suite 1380
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: (215) 553-7980
          Facsimile: (215) 851-8029
          E-mail: JShub@SeegerWeiss.com

               - and -

          Kevin T. Hoerner, Esq.
          BECKER, PAULSON, HOERNER & THOMPSON, P.C.
          5111 West Main Street
          Belleville, IL 62226
          Telephone: (618) 235-0020
          Facsimile: (618) 235-8558
          E-mail: KTH@bphlaw.com


CATERPILLAR INC: "S&M" Suit Moved From California to New Jersey
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled S&M Mercado, Inc., et al. v.
Caterpillar, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-03407, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California to
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.  The New
Jersey District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-04045-JBS-JS
to the proceeding.

The action arises out of allegations that an exhaust emission
control system, called the Caterpillar Regeneration System, used
in certain model year C13 and C15 engines manufactured by
Caterpillar, is defective.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

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

               - and -

          Mark P. Pifko, Esq.
          Roland K. Tellis, Esq.
          BARON & BUDD PC
          15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600
          Encino, CA 91436
          Telephone: (818) 839-2333
          Facsimile: (818) 986-9698
          E-mail: mpifko@baronbudd.com
                  rtellis@baronbudd.com


CHINA MOBILE: Sued Over False and Misleading Business Reports
-------------------------------------------------------------
Darryl Reitan, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly
Situated v. China Mobile Games & Entertainment Group, Ltd, Ken
Jian Xiao, Ying Shuling; Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC,
Barclays Capital, Inc., Jefferies LLC, Brean Capital, LLC, and
Nomura Securities International, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-04471
(S.D.N.Y., June 20, 2014), arises from false and misleading
statements made by the Defendants, and failure to disclose
material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations,
prospects and performance.

China Mobile Games & Entertainment Group, Ltd., is the largest
publisher and developer of mobile games in China.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Kevin Koon-Pon Chan, Esq.
      Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
      Phillip C. Kim, Esq.
      THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
      275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 686-1060
      Facsimile: (212) 202-3827
      E-mail: kchan@rosenlegal.com
              lrosen@rosenlegal.com
              pkim@rosenlegal.com


CIDRERIE MCKEOWN: Recalls McKeown Ciders Due to Sulphites
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 13, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Sulphites
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Cidrerie McKeown - Domaine Leduc
                          Piedimonte
Distribution:             Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8944


CINMAR LLC: To Settle Charges Over Defective Three-Step Ladders
---------------------------------------------------------------
James Limbach, writing for Consumer Affairs, reports that the U.S.
Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has agreed to accept a
payment of a $3.1 civil penalty by Cinmar LLC, of West Chester,
Ohio, to settle charges that the company knowingly failed to
report to a defect with its foldaway two-and three-step ladders.

CPSC staff charged the company knowingly failed to report
immediately -- as required by law -- that the steps of the step
ladders, made of mahogany wood and designed for use in walk-in
closets, could break unexpectedly, posing a fall hazard to
consumers.

The ladders were sold nationwide between November 2005, and July
2010, for $90 to $150.

                         Delayed reporting

According to CPSC, Cinmar did not file its full report with the
agency until July 29, 2010.  By that time, more than 1,200
consumers had returned their ladders to Cinmar, most citing
breakage, and others citing cosmetic problems.

Additionally, by that time, Cinmar had received notice of at least
two dozen injuries, one requiring surgery and another
necessitating hospitalization.  On January 20, 2011, Cinmar and
CPSC announced the recall of 38,000 wooden step ladders.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to
report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining
information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product
contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard,
creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails
to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule,
regulation, standard, or ban enforced by CPSC.

                    Compliance program ordered

In addition to paying a monetary penalty, Cinmar has agreed to
implement and maintain a compliance program designed to ensure
compliance with the safety statutes and regulations enforced by
CPSC.  Cinmar has also agreed to maintain and enforce a system of
internal controls and procedures designed to ensure that:

   -- information required to be disclosed by the firm to the
commission is recorded,processed and reported, in accordance with
applicable law;

   -- all reporting made to CPSC is timely, truthful, complete and
accurate; and

   -- prompt disclosure is made to Cinmar management of any
significant deficiencies or material weaknesses in the design or
operation of such internal controls that are reasonably likely to
adversely affect, in any material respect, the company's ability
to record, process and report to the Commission.

Cinmar further agreed to provide written documentation of such
improvements, processes and controls, upon request of CPSC staff;
to cooperate fully and truthfully with CPSC staff; and to make
available all information, materials and personnel deemed
necessary by staff to evaluate the company's compliance with the
terms of the agreement.

In agreeing to the settlement, Cinmar neither admits nor denies
CPSC staff's charges.


CLAYTON COUNTY, GA: Teachers Sue Over Employment Contracts
----------------------------------------------------------
Tom Jones, writing for WSB-TV, reports that Clayton County School
District teachers are getting notices in the mail asking them to
join a class action lawsuit over how the district pays them.  Some
teachers are calling it bait and switch.

John Stembridge is an attorney for two teachers who originally
filed the lawsuit.

"We refer to the contract, this whole situation, as a bait and
switch," he said.

Mr. Stembridge said he and his partner Blake Andrews filed the
lawsuit that has turned into a class action suit.  Mr. Stembridge
says Georgia law states there must be definite terms in the
teacher contracts.

"And we feel like by doing this bait and switch and changing the
terms of the contract, that the teachers don't know what they're
going to have going forward," Mr. Stembridge said.

The two attorneys said teachers would sign their employment
contracts based on a salary schedule.  They said for three years,
the district would then change the schedule, forcing the teachers
to work for lower pay.

"The teachers we've spoken with, it's had a very detrimental
effect on their morale.  It creates an atmosphere of 'we don't
know what we're going to expect,'" Mr. Andrews said.  The teachers
are also alleging the district paid them for five days they were
off during inclement weather in 2011, only to take that money back
at the end of the school year.

"It's a week's worth of pay that they lost," Mr. Andrews said.

The spokeswoman for the school system said the district was not
aware the lawsuit had reached class action status and because of
the pending litigation, it could not comment.

The attorneys said this could affect as many as 3,500 teachers if
they all choose to join the lawsuit.


CONN'S INC: Faces Three Shareholder Litigations in S.D. Texas
-------------------------------------------------------------
Conn's, Inc. is facing securities lawsuits in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Texas, according to
the company's June 2, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended April 30,
2014.

On March 5, 2014, the Company and three of its current executive
officers were sued in a purported securities class action in the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
captioned Milton S. Linder, Individually and on Behalf of All
Other Similarly Situated v. Conn's, Inc., Theodore M. Wright,
Brian E. Taylor, and Michael J. Poppe, Case No. 4:14-cv-00548. On
March 7, 2014, a similar suit was filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of Texas captioned Peter
Holman, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. Conn's, Inc., Theodore M. Wright, Brian E. Taylor, and
Michael J. Poppe, Case No. 4:14-cv-00570. A third and similar
lawsuit was filed on May 5, 2014 in the United States District
Court of the Southern District of Texas by Laborers Pension Trust
Fund-Detroit and Vicinity, Connecticut Carpenters Benefit Funds,
and St. Paul Teachers' Retirement Fund Association, Individually
and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated against the same
defendants named in the other cases, Case No. 4:14-cv-01229. Each
of these complaints allege that the defendants made false and
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose material adverse
facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. The
complaints allege violations of sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder. The complaints do not specify the amount of damages
sought.


CRANE CO: Jury Enters $25MM Verdict in Consolidated Asbestos Trial
------------------------------------------------------------------
Heather Isringhausen Gvillo, writing for Legal Newsline, reports
that a New York jury recently entered a $25 million verdict
against Crane Company and in favor of two electricians in a
consolidated asbestos trial.

After a four-week trial and two days of deliberation in New York
County Supreme Court, the six-panel jury reached a verdict on
June 16.

Judge Cynthia S. Kern presided over the trial.

The jury found that the plaintiffs were exposed to asbestos
products used in connection with Crane's valves as well as
products sold by Crane.  They also found that Crane failed to
provide adequate warnings regarding asbestos hazards when using
its equipment, which they agreed was a substantial contributing
factor in causing the claimants' mesothelioma.

They awarded Dorcas Hackshaw, as executor of the estate of
Selwyn A. Hackshaw, $10 million for past pain and suffering from
the onset of his mesothelioma to the date of his death.

They awarded Ivan and Laraine Sweberg $5 million for past pain and
suffering from the onset of his mesothelioma to the date of the
verdict and $10 million for future pain and suffering.  They
agreed that the award for future pain and suffering was intended
to cover 1 1/2 years.

The jury also found that Crane acted with reckless disregard for
the safety of others in each case, meaning Crane's percentage of
liability could increase.  In other words, it could be held liable
for the remaining amount after prior settlements have been
deducted from the total awards.

While both plaintiffs named several defendants in the trial, only
Crane was left at the time of trial.  The jury split liability
among roughly 20 defendants in Hackshaw's case and about 30
defendants in Sweberg's case, apportioning Crane's liability to 20
percent for Hackshaw and nine percent for Sweberg.

Other settled defendants that were apportioned liability for
contributing to the plaintiffs' mesothelioma and failing to warn
of potential asbestos hazards include Garlock Sealing
Technologies, General Electric, National Gypsum, Gould Pumps and
Westinghouse Electric Corp.

Mrs. Hackshaw alleged her husband worked as an electrician and
pipefitter before developing mesothelioma in late 2012, which
contributed to his death in August 2013 at the age of 74.

According to court records, Mr. Hackshaw was born in Curacao, a
Dutch Caribbean island off the coast of Venezuela, where he worked
as a pipefitter and electrician at a water distillation plant and
a Shell Oil refinery from 1957 to 1964.  He later came to the U.S.
in 1967, where he continued his work as an electrician.  As part
of his tasks as an electrician and pipefitter, Mr. Hackshaw was
responsible for making and changing asbestos-containing gaskets to
be used in the valves.  He would oftentimes use Crane's Cranite
Asbestos Sheet Gasketing Material to create the gaskets, which
contained between 75 percent and 85 percent asbestos.

Mr. Hackshaw testified that he made the gaskets by beating the
material with a ball-peen hammer and then cutting it, a task which
typically formed a cloud of asbestos dust.  He also had to apply
and remove asbestos-containing insulation in order to get to the
Crane valves.

Mr. Sweberg, who is 72 years old, also worked as a union
electrician, entering the trade by following in his father's
footsteps.  Mr. Sweberg was exposed to asbestos from 1962 to 1972
during the construction, renovation and repair of several New York
City schools and high-rise buildings, court records show.

Dan Kraft, Jr., one of the plaintiffs' trial attorneys, explained
that Sweberg's exposure resulted from others applying asbestos-
containing insulation to boilers, pumps, valves and other
equipment in close proximity to his work station.

Mr. Sweberg was diagnosed with asbestosis in 1997 and made sure to
receive CT scans of his chest to monitor for signs of progression
twice a year.  That's when doctors discovered his pleural
mesothelioma in 2012.

Both plaintiffs were represented by Kraft, Michael Fanelli and
Jerry Kristal of Weitz & Luxenberg.

Crane was represented by James Lowery and Tara Pehush of K&L
Gates.


DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS: Sued Over Defective Pinnacle Hip Implants
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Adams v. Depuy Orthopaedics, Inc., Johnson and Johnson
Services, Inc., and Johnson and Johnson, Case No. 3:14-cv-02306-K
(N.D. Tex., June 25, 2014) alleges that as a direct and proximate
result of the Defendants' defective hip implants, the Plaintiff
has experienced significant pain and suffering, and will continue
to suffer damages, including pain and suffering; severe injury;
emotional distress; disability; disfigurement; economic damages;
lost wages; rehabilitative and pharmaceutical costs; and loss of
the enjoyment of life.

DePuy Orthopaedics, Inc., is an Indiana corporation headquartered
in Warsaw, Indiana.  Johnson and Johnson Services, Inc., is a New
Jersey corporation headquartered in New Brunswick, New Jersey.
DePuy and Johnson and Johnson Services, Inc., are subsidiaries of
Johnson and Johnson.  Johnson and Johnson is a New Jersey
corporation headquartered in New Brunswick, New Jersey.

The Defendants design, manufacture, market and sell medical
devices, including reconstructive hip implants. Defendants
designed, tested, manufactured, marketed and sold the Pinnacle Hip
Replacement System and the Pinnacle Cup.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan Keane, Esq.
          THE SIMON LAW FIRM, P.C.
          800 Market Street, Suite 1700
          St. Louis, MO 63101
          Telephone: (314) 241-2929
          Facsimile: (314) 241-2029
          E-mail: rkeane@simonlawpc.com

               - and -

          Drew Parker, Esq.
          PARKER & PARKER
          411 Hamilton Blvd., Suite 1900
          Peoria, IL 61602
          Telephone: (309) 673-0069
          Facsimile: (309) 673-8791
          E-mail: parkerparker@mtco.com


DIETARY EXPRESS: Recalls Sprouted Chia & Flax Seed Powder
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 12, 2014
Starting date:            June 13, 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:           Dietary Express
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8957

The food recall warning issued on June 12, 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.

Dietary Express is recalling Dietary Express brand sprouted chia &
flax seed powder from the marketplace due to possible Salmonella
contamination.  Consumers should not consume the recalled product
described below.

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

The recall has been issued as part of a foodborne illness outbreak
investigation.  There have been no reported illnesses associated
with the consumption of this product.

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 product
from the marketplace.

Affected products: 454 g. Dietary Express Sprouted Chia & Flax
with packages sold from Sept. 26, 2013 to June 12, 2014 inclusive


DUN & BRADSTREET: Sued Over Inaccurate Business Information
-----------------------------------------------------------
Altaflo, LLC, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Dun & Bradstreet Credibility Corporation, Dun &
Bradstreet Corporation; and Dun & Bradstreet, Inc., Case No. 2:14-
cv-03961 (D.N.J., June 20, 2014), arises from false and inaccurate
information that the Defendants enter on swaths of small business
credit profiles, which it publishes to others and sends to Dun &
Bradstreet Credibility Corporation.

Dun & Bradstreet Credibility Corporation is the most powerful and
prominent reporter on small business credit.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Peter S. Pearlman, Esq.
      COHN, LIFLAND, PEARLMAN, HERRMANN & KNOPF, LLP
      Park 80 West Plaza One
      250 Pehle Avenue, Suite 401
      Saddle Brook, NJ 07663
      Telephone: (201) 845-9600
      Facsimile: (201) 845-9423
      E-mail: PSP@njlawfirm.com


FIRST AMERICAN: Court Denies Bid to Vacate Ruling in Slapikas Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
In the case ANTHONY L. SLAPIKAS, ALICE B. SLAPIKAS, and IVY FODOR,
for themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v.
FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. MEZZO LAND
SERVICES, LLC, Third-Party Defendant, CIVIL ACTION NO. 06-0084,
(W.D. Pa.), the Plaintiffs ask the court to vacate the order
entered on March 7, 2014, and administratively close the case
pending the Pennsylvania Supreme Court's decision in Grimes v.
Enterprise Leasing Company of Philadelphia LLC., No. 4 MAP 2014,
2014 WL 349263 (Pa. Jan. 30, 2014).  The Plaintiffs argue that
this relief is appropriate because: (1) the dispositive issue in
this case, i.e. whether individualized proof of justifiable
reliance is required under Pennsylvania's Unfair Trade Practices
and Consumer Protection Law's ("UTPCPL") catchall provision, may
be decided in Grimes; (2) awaiting the Pennsylvania Supreme
Court's decision in Grimes will avoid the irreparable injustice
that would result if plaintiffs claims are extinguished due only
to the "fortuity of the timing between proceedings in this case
and the decision in Grimes;" and (3) it will avoid, for both
plaintiffs and First American, the necessity and costs of further
proceedings.

District Judge Joy Flowers Conti, in a memorandum opinion dated
June 19, 2014, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/6qDRje
from Leagle.com, denied the Plaintiffs' motion.

"[P]laintiffs' claims are still incompatible with Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 23, and are not entitled to class treatment,"
ruled Judge Conti.  "Therefore, Grimes, even if decided favorably
to plaintiffs, would not revive plaintiffs' class action."

ANTHONY L. SLAPIKAS, Plaintiff, represented by Adrian N. Roe --
aroe@roelawoffice.com -- Adrian N. Roe P.C., David D. Yeagley --
dyeagley@ulmer.com -- Ulmer & Berne, LLP, Mark R. Koberna --
mkoberna@sonkinkoberna.com -- Sonkin & Koberna Co., LPA, Mark A.
Packman -- packmanm@gotofirm.com -- Gilbert Oshinsky, Shannan L.
Katz, Ulmer & Berne, LLP, William H. Narwold --
bnarwold@motleyrice.com -- Motley Rice, Andrew G. Nagurney, Law
Office of Adrian N. Roe, P.C. & Charles B. Watkins --
cwatkins@barnesdulac.com -- Barnes, Dulac & Watkins.

ALICE B. SLAPIKAS, Plaintiff, represented by Adrian N. Roe, Adrian
N. Roe P.C.., David D. Yeagley, Ulmer & Berne, LLP, Mark R.
Koberna, Sonkin & Koberna Co., LPA, Mark A. Packman, Gilbert
Oshinsky, Shannan L. Katz, Ulmer & Berne, LLP, William H. Narwold,
Motley Rice, Andrew G. Nagurney, Law Office of Adrian N. Roe, P.C.
& Charles B. Watkins, Barnes, Dulac & Watkins.

IVY FODOR, Plaintiff, represented by Adrian N. Roe, Adrian N. Roe
P.C.. & Charles B. Watkins, Barnes, Dulac & Watkins.

FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant, represented by
Charles A. Newman -- charles.newman@dentons.com -- Dentons US LLP,
David F. Russey -- drussey@cohenlaw.com -- Cohen & Grigsby,
Elizabeth T. Ferrick -- elizabeth.ferrick@dentons.com -- Dentons
US LLP, Larry K. Elliott -- lelliott@cohenlaw.com -- Cohen &
Grigsby, Roger K. Heidenreich -- roger.heidenreich@dentons.com --
Dentons US LLP, Bonnie Lau -- bonnie.lau@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP, Corey M. Shapiro -- corey.shapiro@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP, Jason Maschmann -- jason.maschmann@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP, Michael J. Duvall -- michael.duvall@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP & Sonia R. Martin -- sonia.martin@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP.

FIRST AMERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, ThirdParty Plaintiff,
represented by David F. Russey -- drussey@cohenlaw.com -- Cohen &
Grigsby, Roger K. Heidenreich -- roger.heidenreich@dentons.com --
Dentons US LLP, Bonnie Lau -- bonnie.lau@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP, Corey M. Shapiro -- corey.shapiro@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP, Jason Maschmann -- jason.maschmann@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP, Michael J. Duvall -- michael.duvall@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP & Sonia R. Martin -- sonia.martin@dentons.com -- Dentons US
LLP.

MEZZO LAND SERVICES, LLC, ThirdParty Defendant, represented by
Audrey Kathleen Bentz -- audrey.bentz@janiklaw.com -- Janik LLP,
Sean T. Needham -- sean.needham@janiklaw.com -- Janik L.L.P.,
Shari Pakravan, Weber Gallagher Simpson Stapleton Fires & Newby,
LLP & Steven G. Janik -- steven.janik@janiklaw.com -- Janik
L.L.P..


FORD MOTOR: Recalls F150s Due to Incorrect Motor Sensor Magnet
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 17, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Light Truck & Van
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Steering
Units affected:           914
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014233
TC ID number:             2014233
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14S09

On certain vehicles, the electric power assist steering (EPAS)
gears may contain an incorrectly installed motor position sensor
magnet.  An incorrectly installed motor position sensor may lead
to a loss of steering control.  A loss of steering control may
increase the risk of a crash causing injury and/or property
damage.

Dealers will replace the EPAS steering gear.

Affected products: 2014 FORD F150


FRED DEELEY: Recalls 4,759 Motorcycles Due to Damaged Brake Lines
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 17, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Motorcycle
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Brakes
Units affected:           4759
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014234
TC ID number:             2014234
Manufacturer recall
number:                   0157

On certain motorcycles with anti-lock brakes (ABS), the front
brake line may have been pinched between the fuel tank and the
frame at time of assembly or during subsequent servicing.  This
could cause front brake fluid pressure to increase while riding,
potentially resulting in an unexpected front wheel lockup and
could result in a loss of vehicle control and a crash causing
property damage and/or personal injury.

Dealers will inspect the brake lines for damage and replace
damaged lines as well as install additional retention devices as
necessary.

Affected products:

   Maker              Model                Model year(s) affected
   -----              -----                ----------------------
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   ROAD KING (FLHR)                       2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   POLICE ROAD KING (FLHP)                2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   POLICE ELECTRA GLIDE (FLHTP)           2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   STREET GLIDE (FLHX)                    2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   ELECTRA GLIDE ULTRA CLASSIC (FLHTCU)   2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   ULTRA LIMITED (FLHTK)                  2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   STREET GLIDE SPECIAL (FLHXS)           2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   CVO ROAD KING (FLHRSE)                 2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   CVO ULTRA LIMITED (FLHTKSE)            2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   ULTRA LIMITED SHRINE (FLHTKSHRINE)     2014
  HARLEY-DAVIDSON   STREET GLIDE SPECIAL SHRINE            2014


GENERAL DYNAMICS: "Walden" Suit Transferred to S.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Walden, et al. v. General
Dynamics Information Technology, Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-01699, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of California (San Diego).  The Southern California District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 3:14-cv-01541-LAB-JLB to the proceeding.

The lawsuit alleges violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant failed to pay them and
the putative class members hourly wages for all time worked,
including overtime wages.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Chaim S. Setareh, Esq.
          Adrienne Alayne Herrera, Esq.
          Sarah Christenson, Esq.
          SETAREH LAW GROUP
          9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 711
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (310) 888-7771
          Facsimile: (310) 888-0109
          E-mail: setarehlaw@sbcglobal.net
                  adrienne@setarehlaw.com
                  sarah@setarehlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Barbara A. Fitzgerald, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF BARBARA A. FITZGERALD
          300 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2200
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 612-7208
          Facsimile: (213) 612-2501
          E-mail: bfitzgerald@morganlewis.com

               - and -

          Jennifer A. Tomlin, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS AND BOCKIUS LLP
          2 Palo Alto Square
          300 El Camino Real, Suite 700
          Palo Alto, CA 94306
          Telephone: (650) 843-7509
          Facsimile: (650) 843-4001
          E-mail: jtomlin@morganlewis.com

               - and -

          Jason Scott Mills, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS AND BOCKIUS
          333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2200
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3132
          Telephone: (213) 612-2500
          Facsimile: (213) 612-2501
          E-mail: jmills@morganlewis.com


GENERAL MOTORS: Ignition-Switch Compensation Plan Falls Short
-------------------------------------------------------------
Amanda Bronstad, writing for The National Law Journal, reports
that General Motors Co. unveiled its plan to compensate victims of
its ignition-switch defect on June 30, but plaintiffs lawyers
complained that the program leaves out a large number of their
clients, many of whom will pursue their cases in court.

The uncapped fund, announced by claims attorney Kenneth Feinberg,
would pay millions of dollars to families of people killed in
accidents caused by the defects, which forced GM to recall 2.6
million cars.  It also would pay those who were seriously or
moderately injured.

Lawyers representing those victims said they were still evaluating
the details, but were quick to complain that the program fell
woefully short.

"I think Mr. Feinberg has made a very sincere effort here in
trying to come up with what he considers to be an appropriate
plan, but it's limited by what GM is letting him do," said
Lance Cooper, founding partner of The Cooper Firm in Marietta, Ga.
"It's going to be reasonable for some cases, and in others,
victims and clients will want to have their day in court."

For one thing, the plan is limited to the 2.6 million cars
recalled in three batches beginning in February over the ignition
switch defect, but the automaker has issued additional rounds of
recalls since then.  Late on June 30, in fact, GM announced six
recalls involving 8.4 million vehicles worldwide because of
ignition defects.  Earlier in June, it recalled nearly 3.2 million
cars to rework or replace ignition keys plus more than 500,000
Chevy Camaros because of ignition problems.

The plan, while a "good start," needs to parallel the scope of the
recalls over ignition problems, said Elizabeth Cabraser, a partner
at San Francisco's Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein.
"I realize there have been serial recalls, and there may be some
catching up to do," she said.  "But it is involving the same
key-system defect, and so it just makes sense to us that the
program would include those.  And that may be a matter of
discussion with GM."

The plan excludes accidents in which airbags deployed.  During a
June 18 congressional hearing, several officeholders raised
concerns that limiting the plan to crashes in which airbags failed
would reduce GM's liability; the defect, by shutting down engines,
could disable other features, such as power steering.

Plaintiffs attorneys echoed that concern.  "For GM to eliminate
all those crashes where an airbag may have deployed is likely
leaving out families from the plan who should be part of the
plan," Mr. Cooper said.

Anyone who accepts a payout must waive all legal claims against
GM.  Plaintiffs lawyers, many of whom unsuccessfully pushed for
punitive damages to be part of the plan, said clients in some
states might pursue those claims in court.

But consumers involved in accidents that predated GM's 2009
bankruptcy face an uphill battle, attorneys said.  Although those
victims could recover from Mr. Feinberg, GM has moved to bar any
such claims in bankruptcy court.

The next hearing in the bankruptcy was scheduled for July 2, but
lawyers don't expect U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Robert Gerber to render
a decision before GM begins processing claims on Aug. 1.

"This plan may be in effect and play out before the court makes
this decision," said Jere Beasley, founding shareholder of
Beasley, Allen, Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles in Montgomery, Ala.
"That would be a risk we'd have to explain to clients."

In addition, many families don't own their vehicles anymore, or
the black box recordings, to prove the defect caused their
crashes, he said.  The plan, as a result, favors victims who kept
especially good records.

It also means that Mr. Feinberg has considerable discretion in
deciding whether an accident was caused by the ignition defect,
said Carl Tobias, a professor at the University of Richmond School
of Law.

"How insistent is he going to be on very precise evidentiary
proof?" he said.  "He offered a lot of possibilities, but a lot of
this will be completely circumstantial.  There will be
difficulties of proof for some plaintiffs.  The question is
whether he'll accept that or not."

Robert Hilliard, a partner at Hilliard Munoz Gonzales in Corpus
Christi who represents a number of victims who settled claims with
GM before learning of the defect, noted that the plan, while
allowing those clients to participate, offsets the amount of their
earlier recoveries.  For a client who already got $1.5 million,
for example, the plan might not be worth it.

Some plaintiffs lawyers emphasized that a court should supervise
the claims process.  That's what happened with the compensation
fund that Mr. Feinberg administered for BP PLC following its
Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 2010.  That program was disbanded
after plaintiffs lawyers, pursuing cases in court in lieu of
participating, reached a settlement with BP to resolve economic
damages claims.  It's the only other fund in which Mr. Feinberg
doled out payments that were paid for by the company being sued.
"You need something like that attached here to take away the GM
control," Mr. Beasley said.  Mr. Feinberg, he said, "still works
for GM."


GENERAL MOTORS: Unveils Details of Crash Victim Compensation Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Ramonas, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that
victims of the General Motors Co. ignition-switch defect may
participate in a compensation fund established by the automaker
only if they agree not to sue, claims attorney Kenneth Feinberg
said on June 30 in unveiling the program in Washington.

The unlimited fund is open to all individuals who can prove the
defect injured them or killed a family member, Mr. Feinberg said.
Victims and their families, however, cannot seek punitive damages
in the courts if they agree to accept compensation through the
fund.

"This program is designed to help claimants," Mr. Feinberg told
victims' family members and reporters gathered for a news
conference.  "This program is not designed to punish General
Motors.  If people want punitive damages, if they want to use
litigation to go after General Motors, then voluntarily they
should not submit a claim to me."

To receive compensation, individuals must show that an airbag
didn't deploy in crashes involving Chevrolet Cobalts, Saturn Ions
and other GM cars from model years as early as 2003.  And GM won't
withhold money from people who were at fault for a crash because
of intoxication or speeding, for example.

GM, which will process claims between Aug. 1 and Dec. 31, has
recalled 2.6 million vehicles this year because of the defect,
which can shut down engines, disabling power steering, airbags and
other functions. The automaker has acknowledged that 13
individuals died in accidents in which airbags failed.

Mr. Feinberg didn't indicate how many claims GM expects to pay or
how much money the automaker expects to hand out in total.  But he
said individual payments could range from $20,000 to millions of
dollars, depending on the injury.

"GM may not challenge it in court," Mr. Feinberg said.  "GM may
not reject it."


GENERAL MOTORS: "Duarte" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Duarte v. General Motors LLC, et
al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21815, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley
Square).  The New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:14-cv-04667-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Harley Shepard Tropin, Esq.
          Robert J. Neary, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON, P.A.
          2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: AMM@kttlaw.com
                  hst@kttlaw.com
                  rn@kttlaw.com
                  tr@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Edwards" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Edwards, et al. v. General Motors,
LLC, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21949, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley
Square).  The New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:14-cv-04684-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Harley Shepard Tropin, Esq.
          Robert J. Neary, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          KOZYAK, TROPIN & THROCKMORTON, P.A.
          2525 Ponce De Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: hst@kttlaw.com
                  rn@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com
                  tr@kttlaw.com

               - and -

          Allan Aaron Joseph, Esq.
          FUERST ITTLEMAN DAVID & JOSEPH, PL
          1001 Brickell Bay Drive, 32nd Floor
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 350-5690
          Facsimile: (786) 364-7995
          E-mail: ajoseph@fuerstlaw.com

Defendant General Motors LLC is represented by:

          William L. Kirk, Jr., Esq.
          RUMBERGER KIRK & CALDWELL
          300 S Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          PO Box 1873
          Orlando, FL 32802-1873
          Telephone: (407) 872-7300
          E-mail: bkirk@rumberger.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Emerson" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action lawsuit entitled Emerson, et al. v.
General Motors LLC, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21713, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of Florida to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York (Foley Square).  The New York District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-04650-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Harley Shepard Tropin, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON, P.A.
          2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: AMM@kttlaw.com
                  hst@kttlaw.com
                  tr@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com

               - and -

          Gregory O. Wiggins, Esq.
          Kevin W. Jent, Esq.
          WIGGINS, CHILDS, QUINN & PANTAZIS, LLC
          The Kress Building
          301 19th Street North
          Birmingham, AL 35203
          Telephone: (205) 314-0500
          E-mail: gwiggins@wcqp.com
                  kjent@wcqp.com

Defendant General Motors LLC is represented by:

          William L. Kirk, Jr., Esq.
          RUMBERGER KIRK & CALDWELL
          300 S Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          PO Box 1873
          Orlando, FL 32802-1873
          Telephone: (407) 872-7300
          E-mail: bkirk@rumberger.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Espineira" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitle Espineira v. General Motors, LLC,
et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21417, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York.  The New
York District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-04637-JMF to
the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aaron Samuel Podhurst, Esq.
          John Gravante, III, Esq.
          Matthew Weinshall, Esq.
          Peter Prieto, Esq.
          PODHURST ORSECK, P.A.
          City National Bank Building
          25 W Flagler Street, Suite 800
          Miami, FL 33130-1780
          Telephone: (305) 358-2800
          Facsimile: (305) 358-2382
          E-mail: apodhurst@podhurst.com
                  jgravante@podhurst.com
                  mweinshall@podhurst.com
                  pprieto@podhurst.com

               - and -

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Harley Shepard Tropin, Esq.
          Robert J. Neary, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON, P.A.
          2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: AMM@kttlaw.com
                  hst@kttlaw.com
                  rn@kttlaw.com
                  tr@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com

               - and -

          Howard Mitchell Bushman, Esq.
          Lance August Harke, Esq.
          HARKE CLASBY & BUSHMAN LLP
          9699 NE Second Avenue
          Miami Shores, FL 33138
          Telephone: (305) 536-8220
          Facsimile: (305) 536-8229
          E-mail: hbushman@harkeclasby.com
                  lharke@harkeclasby.com

               - and -

          Manuel Leon Dobrinsky, Esq.
          FREIDIN & DOBRINSKY PA
          2 S Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 3100
          Miami, FL 33131
          Telephone: (305) 371-3666
          Facsimile: (305) 371-6725
          E-mail: mdobrinsky@fdlaw.net


GENERAL MOTORS: "Harris" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Harris, et al. v. General
Motors LLC, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21919, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York
(Foley Square).  The New York District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 1:14-cv-04672-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Harley Shepard Tropin, Esq.
          Robert J. Neary, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON, P.A.
          2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: AMM@kttlaw.com
                  hst@kttlaw.com
                  rn@kttlaw.com
                  tr@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com




                  tr@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com

               - and -

          Archie Cleveland Lamb, Jr., Esq.
          ARCHIE LAMB, ASSOCIATES
          P. O. Box 2088
          Birmingham, AL 35201
          Telephone: (205) 612-6789
          Facsimile: (205) 314-0785
          E-mail: alamb@archielamb.com

Defendant General Motors LLC is represented by:

          William L. Kirk, Jr., Esq.
          RUMBERGER KIRK & CALDWELL
          300 S Orange Avenue
          Suite 1400 PO Box 1873
          Orlando, FL 32802-1873
          Telephone: (407) 872-7300
          E-mail: bkirk@rumberger.com

Defendants Delphi Automotive PLC and Delphi Automotive Systems,
LLC are represented by:

          Eugene A. Schoon, Esq.
          SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
          One South Dearborn Street
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 853-7000
          Facsimile: (312) 853-7036
          E-mail: eschoon@sidley.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Knetzke" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Knetzke v. General Motors LLC,
et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21673, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley
Square).  The New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:14-cv-04641-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Harley Shepard Tropin, Esq.
          Robert J. Neary, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON
          2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: AMM@kttlaw.com
                  hst@kttlaw.com
                  rn@kttlaw.com
                  tr@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com

The Defendant General Motors LLC is represented by:

          William L. Kirk, Jr., Esq.
          RUMBERGER KIRK & CALDWELL
          300 S Orange Avenue
          Suite 1400 PO Box 1873
          Orlando, FL 32802-1873
          Telephone: (407) 872-7300
          E-mail: bkirk@rumberger.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Lannon" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action lawsuit captioned Lannon, et al. v.
General Motors LLC, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21933, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District
of Florida to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
New York (Foley Square).  The New York District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-04676-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Robert J. Neary, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON, P.A.
          2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: AMM@kttlaw.com
                  rn@kttlaw.com
                  tjl@kttlaw.com
                  tr@kttlaw.com

               - and -

          Jorge Alejandro Mestre, Esq.
          Andres Rivero, Esq.
          RIVERO MESTRE & CASTRO
          2525 Ponce De Leon Blvd., Suite 1000
          Coral Gables, FL 33134
          Telephone: (305) 445-2500
          Facsimile: (305) 445-2525
          E-mail: jmestre@riveromestre.com
                  arivero@riveromestre.com

Defendant General Motors LLC is represented by:

          William L. Kirk, Jr., Esq.
          RUMBERGER KIRK & CALDWELL
          300 S Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          PO Box 1873
          Orlando, FL 32802-1873
          Telephone: (407) 872-7300
          E-mail: bkirk@rumberger.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Levine" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Levine v. General Motors, LLC,
Case No. 1:14-cv-21752, was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley Square).  The
New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-04661-JMF
to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David Buckner, Esq.
          Seth Eric Miles, Esq.
          Brett Elliott von Borke, Esq.
          GROSSMAN ROTH, P.A.
          2525 Ponce de Leon Blvd., Suite 1150
          Miami, FL 33134
          Telephone: (305) 442-8666
          Facsimile: (305) 285-1668
          E-mail: dbu@grossmanroth.com
                  sem@grossmanroth.com
                  bvb@grossmanroth.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Markle" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action lawsuit styled Markle v. General Motors
LLC, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-21788, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley
Square).  The New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:14-cv-04662-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq.
          Harley Shepard Tropin, Esq.
          Robert J. Neary, Esq.
          Thomas A. Tucker Ronzetti, Esq.
          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN & THROCKMORTON, P.A.
          2525 Ponce de Leon Boulevard, Suite 900
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-6036
          Telephone: (305) 372-1800
          Facsimile: (305) 372-3508
          E-mail: AMM@kttlaw.com
                  hst@kttlaw.com
                  rn@kttlaw.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Phillip" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Phillip, et al. v. General Motors
LLC, Case No. 3:14-cv-08053, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of Arizona to the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley Square).  The
New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-04630-JMF
to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Charles S. Zimmerman, Esq.
          ZIMMERMAN REED PLLP
          1100 IDS Center, 80 S 8th St.
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 341-0400
          Facsimile: (612) 341-0844
          E-mail: charles.zimmerman@zimmreed.com

               - and -

          Hart Lawrence Robinovitch, Esq.
          ZIMMERMAN REED PLLP
          14646 N Kierland Blvd., Suite 145
          Scottsdale, AZ 85254-2762
          Telephone: (480) 348-6400
          Facsimile: (480) 348-6415
          E-mail: AZDocketing@zimmreed.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Andrew B. Bloomer, Esq.
          Leonid Feller, Esq.
          Richard C. Godfrey, Esq.
          KIRKLAND AND ELLIS LLP
          300 North LaSalle
          Chicago, IL 60654
          Telephone: (312) 862-2482
          Facsimile: (312) 862-2200
          E-mail: andrew.bloomer@kirkland.com
                  lfeller@kirkland.com
                  rgodfrey@kirkland.com

               - and -

          Robert B. Ellis, Esq.
          KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP
          200 E Randolph Dr.
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Telephone: (312) 861-2000
          Facsimile: (312) 861-2200
          E-mail: rellis@kirkland.com

               - and -

          Thomas M. Klein, Esq.
          BOWMAN & BROOKE LLP
          2901 N Central Ave., Suite 1600
          Phoenix, AZ 85012
          Telephone: (602) 643-2300
          Facsimile: (602) 248-0947
          E-mail: tom.klein@bowmanandbrooke.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Santiago" Suit Included in Ignition Switch MDL
---------------------------------------------------------------
The purported class action lawsuit titled Santiago v. General
Motors, LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-21147, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley
Square).  The New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:14-cv-04632-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David Henry Lichter, Esq.
          Michael Jerome Higer, Esq.
          HIGER LICHTER & GIVNER LLP
          18305 Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 402
          Aventura, FL 33160
          Telephone: (305) 933-9970
          Facsimile: (305) 933-0998
          E-mail: dlichter@hlglawyers.com
                  mhiger@hlglawyers.com

               - and -

          John Gravante, III, Esq.
          Peter Prieto, Esq.
          PODHURST ORSECK, P.A.
          25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
          Miami, FL 33130
          Telephone: (305) 358-2800
          Facsimile: (305) 358-2382
          E-mail: jgravante@podhurst.com
                  pprieto@podhurst.com

               - and -

          Tal J. Lifshitz, Esq.
          KOZYAK TROPIN THROCKMORTON
          2525 Ponce de Leon, 9th Floor
          Miami, FL 33134
          Telephone: (305) 728-2959
          E-mail: tjl@kttlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          William L. Kirk, Jr., Esq.
          RUMBERGER KIRK & CALDWELL
          300 S Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          PO Box 1873
          Orlando, FL 32802-1873
          Telephone: (407) 872-7300
          E-mail: bkirk@rumberger.com


GENERAL MOTORS: "Taylor" Suit Consolidated in Ignition Switch MDL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Taylor v. General Motors
Company, Case No. 9:14-cv-80618, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (Foley
Square).  The New York District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:14-cv-04686-JMF to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is transferred for coordinated or consolidated
pretrial proceedings in the multidistrict litigation captioned In
Re: General Motors LLC Ignition Switch Litigation, MDL No. 1:14-
md-02543-JMF.

The litigation arises from alleged deadly defect in the design of
GM vehicles.  The alleged defect is in the cars' ignition switch
system, which is susceptible to failure during normal driving
conditions.  When the ignition switch system fails, the switch
turns from the "run" or "on" position to either the "off" or
"accessory" position, which results in a loss of power, speed
control, and braking, as well as a disabling of the car's airbags.
GM subsequently recalled the affected vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Curtis Bradley Miner, Esq.
          COLSON HICKS EIDSON, P.A.
          255 Alhambra Circle, Penthouse
          Coral Gables, FL 33134-2351
          Telephone: (305) 476-7400
          Facsimile: (305) 476-7444
          E-mail: curt@colson.com


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 961 Cars Due to Defective Seat Belt
-----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 12, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Seats and Restraints
Units affected:           961
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014228
TC ID number:             2014228
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14222

On certain convertible model vehicles, the tensioning cable in the
driver's seat belt retractor may break, causing the belt to fail
to retract.  If a crash were to occur with a seat belt in this
condition, it could increase the risk of injury to the driver.

Correction: Dealers will replace seat belt retractor assemblies.

Affected products: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011
SAAB 09-Mar model


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 352 Lacrosse Cars Due to Harness Defect
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 12, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Electrical
Units affected:           352
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014230
TC ID number:             2014230
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14235

Certain vehicles may fail to conform to Canada Motor Vehicle
Safety Standard (CMVSS) 114 - Theft Protection and Rollaway
Protection, and/or CMVSS 118 - Power-Operated Window, Partition
and Roof Panel Systems.  A wiring splice in the driver's door may
corrode and break, allowing the power windows and sunroof (if
equipped) to function temporarily with the key removed, increasing
the risk of injury to unsupervised occupants.  This could also
disable the audible warning if the key is in the ignition,
increasing the risk of theft and/or damage to property.

Dealers are to inspect the door wiring harness and install a
splice if necessary.

Affected products: 2014 Buick Lacrosse


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 6,135 Cars Due to Cable Not Fully Seated
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 19, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Powertrain
Units affected:           6135
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014239
TC ID number:             2014239
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14179

On certain vehicles equipped with automatic transmissions, the
shift cable may not be fully seated on the shifter and/or
transmission bracket.  If the cable were to detach, the driver may
not be able to select a different gear position, or place the
transmission in the PARK position.  If the driver cannot place the
vehicle in the PARK position and exits the vehicle without
applying the parking brake, the vehicle could roll away, which
could result in a crash causing injury and/or damage to property.

Dealers will inspect and ensure the cable is fully seated at the
transmission and at the shifter bracket.

Affected products:

     Maker     Model     Model year(s) Affected
     -----     -----     ----------------------
   CADILLAC    CT        2014
   CADILLAC    ATS       2013, 2014


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Sierra & Silverado Due to Unattached Clamp
------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 19, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Light Truck & Van
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Steering
Units affected:           6778
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014241
TC ID number:             2014241
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14356

On certain model 2500/3500 HD vehicles, power steering hose clamps
may not have been properly attached.  This could allow the hose to
disconnect from the power steering pump or steering gear, causing
a power steering fluid leak.  This would result in a loss of power
steering assist and hydraulic assist brakes, unexpectedly
increasing steering and brake pedal effort and potentially
increasing stopping distances and the risk of a crash causing
injury and/or damage to property.

Dealers will inspect the clamps to ensure they are properly
attached.

Affected products:

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


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls 61 Corvette Model Over Airbag Issues
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 19, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Airbag
Units affected:           61
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014240
TC ID number:             2014240
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14240

Certain vehicles equipped with optional sport seats may pose a
greater risk of neck injury for small children who are unbelted,
out-of-position, and leaning against the side airbag in the event
of a crash involving a side airbag deployment.

Drivers should not allow a small child to sit in the passenger
seat until recall repairs are completed.

Dealers will replace the passenger side airbag.

Affected products: 2014 Chevrolet Corvette


GREE CO: Recalled Dehumidifiers Still Used Despite Fire Risk
------------------------------------------------------------
Firefighters tell Action 2 News they are continuing to see many
people using the dehumidifiers, despite a risk that they could
overheat and catch fire.  The recalled dehumidifiers have caused
$4.5 million in property damage nationwide.

Now a Fond du Lac woman is adding her home to the list.

"I left my house at 20 after 2:00 on June 4th to go do some
shopping.  I returned at 3:30, went to unlock my door, and not
sure if I was actually sucked in from the combustion or pushed
out, but it was just black soot and smoke," said Colleen Calvey
Kramer

Ms. Kramer called 911, and Fond du Lac firefighters responded to
put out the fire in her eight-unit condo complex.

"There was something left on the dehumidifier, and it was the tag
from the Gree Company out of China," said Ms. Kramer.

Fond du Lac firefighters tell Action 2 News they suspect the fire
started with the dehumidifier in her basement.

Colleen says she didn't know it had been recalled.

The Consumer Product Safety Commission urges people to heed these
warnings.

"Most products are recalled out of an abundance of caution, when
there have been no incidents at all," said Patty Davis, U.S.
Consumer Product and Safety Commission spokesperson.  "The Gree
dehumidifier, however, was recalled after there had been many
incidents."

The CPSC only issues recalls when there's a serious safety risk.
Firefighters say all recalls need to be taken seriously.

"A lot of people think, if it's a recall, maybe it's just going to
stop working and then I'll have to do something about it then, act
on it then," said Lt. Nick Craig, Green Bay Metro Fire Department.
"These are truly life and death, in some situations, as with the
dehumidifier recall, your house could start on fire.  It is a very
serious situation."

Firefighters are hoping everyone is checking their dehumidifier
right now to see if it has in fact been recalled.  Based on your
emails and Facebook posts, that's exactly what's happening.

"We got a fair amount of calls after the story aired. Actually,
the secretary said she couldn't keep up with the amount of calls
that were coming in," said Lt. Craig.


HONDA: Recalls 394 ILX Cars Due to Headlamp Problems
----------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 13, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Lights And Instruments
Units affected:           394
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2014231
TC ID number:             2014231

On certain vehicles equipped with halogen headlamps, headlamp
reflectors and lenses could overheat if the headlamps are operated
while the vehicle is not in motion.  This could damage the lamp
reflector, affecting photometric output.  If left on for extended
periods, the headlamps could melt, resulting in smoke and
increasing the risk of fire causing injury and/or damage to
property.

Dealers will replace the headlamps.

Affected products: 2013 ACURA ILX


HOSODA ENTERPRISES: Fails to Pay Minimum & OT Wages, Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Iwan Kuriyanto, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated
v. Hosoda Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Shinbashi, Akiko Katayama,
Shinchi Tomonari, Case No. 1:14-cv-04476 (S.D.N.Y., June 20,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum
and overtime wages pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Hosoda Enterprises, Inc., is a New York limited liability company
which operates Shinbashi restaurant located on 7 E. 48th Street,
New York, NY 10017.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      D. Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq.
      JOSEPH & KIRSCHENBAUM LLP
      233 Broadway, 5th Floor
      New York, NY 10279
      Telephone: (212) 688-5640
      Facsimile: (212) 688-2548


IPPOLITO PRODUCE: Recalls Menthes et Aromates Fresh Mint
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            June 19, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Other
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Ippolito Produce Ltd. - Toronto
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8966

Affected products: Menthe et Aromates Myriam Inc. Fresh Mint which
were inclusively distributed from June 8 to June 12, 2014


IRON MOUNTAIN: Removed "Casanova" Class Suit to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Marc Casanova, et al. v. Iron
Mountain Information Management Services, Inc., et al., Case No.
BC543256, from Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the Central
District Of California (Los Angeles).  The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 2:14-cv-04953-JAK-SH to the proceeding.

The lawsuit arises from labor-related disputes.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Janelle Christine Carney, Esq.
          Jason T. Hatcher, Esq.
          Joseph Antonelli, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH ANTONELLI
          14758 Pipeline Avenue, Suite E 2nd Floor
          Chino Hills, CA 91709
          Telephone: (909) 393-0223
          Facsimile: (909) 393-0471
          E-mail: jcarney@antonellilaw.com
                  jhatcher@antonellilaw.com
                  jantonelli@antonellilaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Emma Lee Dill, Esq.
          BRYAN CAVE LLP
          560 Mission Street, 25th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 675-3400
          Facsimile: (415) 675-3434
          E-mail: emma.dill@bryancave.com

               - and -

          Julie E. Patterson, Esq.
          BRYAN CAVE LLP
          3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500
          Irvine, CA 92612
          Telephone: (949) 223-7000
          Facsimile: (949) 223-7100
          E-mail: jepatterson@bryancave.com

               - and -

          Donald L. Samuels, Esq.
          BRYAN CAVE LLP
          120 Broadway, Suite 300
          Santa Monica, CA 90401
          Telephone: (310) 576-2100
          Facsimile: (310) 576-2200
          E-mail: donald.samuels@bryancave.com


JEN DELI: Faces "Arenas" Suit on E.D.N.Y. for Failing to Pay OT
---------------------------------------------------------------
Isaac Arenas, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Jen Deli Corp. (d/b/a Sal, Kris & Charlie's Deli) and
Nicholas Gordon, Case No. 1:14-cv-03865 (E.D.N.Y., June 20, 2014),
seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Jen Deli Corp., is a deli owned by Nicholas Gordon located at 33-
12 23rd Avenue, Astoria, New York 11105.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lina Marcela Franco, Esq.
      MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES
      60 East 42nd St, Suite 2020
      New York, NY 10165
      Telephone: (212) 317-1200
      Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
      E-mail: lfranco@faillacelaw.com


JEWEL-OSCO: Tinley Woman Files Suit Over Salmonella Outbreak
------------------------------------------------------------
Gregory Pratt, writing for Chicago Tribune, reports that a Tinley
Park woman has filed a lawsuit against a local Jewel-Osco over a
recent salmonella outbreak that she said caused her 11-year-old
son to be hospitalized.

Colleen Ghelfi filed a lawsuit June 19 in Cook County alleging
that her son ate food bought from Jewel's deli on 171st Street and
Harlem Avenue on June 3 and then became ill.  Three days later,
the boy began feeling sick, and his symptoms worsened over the
next two days "to include bouts of water diarrhea and severe
abdominal cramps," the complaint said.

On June 10, Ms. Ghelfi took her son to the emergency room.  His
salmonella infection was confirmed via testing, the complaint
said.

Public health officials are investigating a salmonella outbreak
potentially linked to the Jewel-Osco store in Tinley Park after 15
people recently became ill and four of them were hospitalized,
officials said.  Eleven of those people have been linked to the
same strain of salmonella, according to Public Health spokeswoman
Amy Poore.

County health officials are waiting for full test results from the
store's food handlers.  So far, 17 employees have come back
negative for the disease.  They are also awaiting test results
from the sick people to determine whether they all have the same
strain of salmonella.

Jewel officials temporarily closed the store's service deli
June 11 "out of an abundance of caution," the store's spokeswoman
Allison Sperling said at the time.

Ms. Ghelfi said her son was sick for nearly two weeks and deserves
compensation.

"I think Jewel needs to be held accountable for making someone so
ill if it is from Jewel," Ms. Ghelfi said.  She said that the
Jewel has been her main grocery store.

Public health officials don't believe there's any current threat
to customers from the Jewel.

Ms. Sperling, Jewel's spokeswoman, declined to comment on the
pending litigation.


LOS ANGELES CLIPPERS: Former Unpaid Intern Files Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kyla Asbury, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that a former
unpaid intern is suing the LA Clippers after he claims the team
misclassified him and other unpaid interns in an effort to reduce
labor costs.

Frank Cooper, who worked as a fan relations intern, claims LAC
Basketball Club Inc. and the Sterling Family Trust violated the
Fair Labor Standards Act and California labor laws.  Mr. Cooper
and other unpaid interns were required to do the same work as paid
employees, but without financial compensation, according to a
complaint filed June 10 in the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California.  Mr. Cooper claims he worked 40 to 50
hours per week during his unpaid internship from Sept. 28, 2012,
until Nov. 17, 2012.

While Mr. Cooper did not have a set schedule, he was required to
work as needed during game gays, which was frequently in excess of
eight hours per game day, according to the suit.  Mr. Cooper
claims he performed various tasks, including staffing the fan
booths throughout Staples Center, organizing basketball clinics
with fans, organizing children's camps, supervising autograph
sessions with players, performing office work and general office
management.

The defendants did not provide Mr. Cooper with academic or
vocational training, according to the suit.

"Plaintiff's unpaid work for defendants is part of a broader trend
where employees are being misclassified as unpaid 'interns' in an
effort by employers to avoid paying wages as required by state
laws and FLSA," the complaint states.  "These programs purport to
be training programs, but provide little value to the worker while
enriching the employer through the provision of free labor."

Without the contributions of Mr. Cooper and the other unpaid
intern, the Clippers would have had to hire additional employees
or require current staff to work additional hours, according to
the suit.

"The employer cannot derive any immediate advantage from the
intern's work or require the intern to do the work of regular
employees," the complaint states.  "Defendants' failure to pay
interns for years runs afoul of basic wage-and-hour laws."

Mr. Cooper is seeking all unpaid minimum wages and liquidated
damages; statutory penalties; continuation wages; restitutionary
disgorgement; pre-judgment interest; and general, special and
consequential damages.  He is represented by Nicholas Ranallo of
Nicholas Ranallo Law Offices; and Maurice Pianko of the Pianko Law
Group PLLC.

This is not the first lawsuit filed by unpaid interns in recent
past.  In 2011, former unpaid interns on the film "Black Swan"
sued Fox Searchlight Pictures in class action lawsuit in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York.

District Judge William H. Pauley III ruled that Fox should have
paid interns at least minimum wage because they were essentially
regular employees. Fox has appealed the decision.

On June 2, Maiko Maya King, Donald Sterling's former personal
assistant, filed a lawsuit against Sterling and the Clippers after
she claimed he withheld pay and eventually fired her when she
refused to perform sex acts and complained about racist remarks he
made about her children.

The lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court.  Ms. King
claims she had an affair with Sterling from 2005 until 2011.

The case has been assigned to District Judge John F. Walter.

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California case
number: 2:14-cv-04445


MASERATI NORTH AMERICA: Faces Class Suit Over Defective Antennas
----------------------------------------------------------------
Lisa Ryan, writing for Law360, reports that Maserati North America
Inc. was hit on June 17 with a putative class action in California
court accusing the luxury-car maker of knowingly selling vehicles
with defective antennas that prevented car owners from using
satellite radio services that were promised with the vehicles, and
refusing to fix the antennas.

The suit alleges the company misled consumers by marketing their
2014 luxury vehicles as being capable of receiving satellite radio
services and even coerced purchasers and lessors of the cars into
signing contracts with satellite radio provider Sirius XM Holdings
Inc., despite knowing that the cars' hi-fi stereo system antennas
were defective.

"As a direct result of these defects . . . members of the class
. . . have been damaged in that they paid more for the vehicles
than the actual value of the vehicles at the time of sale; in
addition, they have had to pay out of pocket for satellite
subscriptions which they cannot use," the complaint said.

Filed on behalf of all California consumers who purchased or
leased a 2014 Maserati vehicle, the suit says the luxury carmaker
engaged in an extensive advertising campaign for the afflicted
vehicles that emphasized the cars' luxury amenities and comfort,
claiming that they surpass those of other luxury cars.

Maserati has sold or leased at least 1,300 models since the
introduction of the 2014 vehicle into the U.S. market, with cars
selling for $77,000 to $140,000 each, according to the suit.  But
despite marketing the cars as having a high-end stereo system,
each of the vehicles suffer from an inherent defect in the antenna
that stops it from adequately receiving a satellite signal,
leading the satellite radio in the car to fail, the suit says.

"The satellite radio is an essential component of the car in that
it provides not only typical broadcasting but also highly sought
after features such as GPS and 'real time' traffic reports," the
complaint said.

Despite being aware that the 2014 vehicles cannot receive
satellite radio, the feature is "aggressively promoted" to
consumers to enhance the sale of the vehicles, the proposed class
alleges.

The suit says the luxury carmaker has chosen not to redesign the
antenna or take other steps to remedy the defect and inform
vehicle owners about the defect while continuing to promote the
feature.  The proposed class claims that Maserati has received
hundreds of customer complaints on various websites and forums
over the defect.

A few days after learning of the intention to initiate a class
action, the company allegedly attempted to "buy off" potential
plaintiffs by offering individual owners who complained about
their antenna with individual settlements in exchange for a
release of all future claims, as well as signing a confidentiality
agreement, the suit says.

The proposed class action includes claims for breach of contract,
unjust enrichment, state law violations and negligent
misrepresentation.  The suit is seeking class certification, an
order enjoining Maserati from selling the defective antennas,
restitution, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorneys'
fees and costs.

The proposed class is represented by Mitch Kalcheim of Kalcheim
Law Group PC.

The suit is Woody et al v. Maserati North America et al, case
number BC549074, in the Superior Court of California, County of
Los Angeles.


MICHAELS STORES: Class of Former Cal. Store Managers Decertified
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class of former Michaels Stores, Inc. store managers was
decertified in a suit now pending in the United States District
Court for the Central District of California, according to the
company's June 2, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended May 3, 2014.

On September 15, 2011, the Company was served with a lawsuit filed
in the California Superior Court in and for the County of Orange
("Superior Court") by four former store managers as a class action
proceeding on behalf of themselves and certain former and current
store managers employed by Michaels in California. The lawsuit
alleges that the Company stores improperly classified its store
managers as exempt employees and as such failed to pay all wages,
overtime, waiting time penalties and failed to provide accurate
wage statements. The lawsuit also alleges that the foregoing
conduct was in breach of various laws, including California's
unfair competition law. On December 3, 2013, the Superior Court
entered an Order certifying a class of approximately 200 members.
The Company subsequently successfully removed the case to the
United States District Court for the Central District of
California and on May 8, 2014, the class was de-certified.


MICHAELS STORES: Faces Consolidated Data Security Breach Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Michaels Stores, Inc. is facing a consolidated suit in the United
States District Court-Northern District of Illinois, Eastern
Division over data security incident, according to the company's
June 2, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended May 3, 2014.

Five putative class actions were filed relating to a recent Data
Breach. The plaintiffs generally allege that the Company failed to
secure and safeguard customers' private information including
credit and debit card information and as such, breached an implied
contract, violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act (and other
states' similar laws) and are seeking damages including
declaratory relief, actual damages, punitive damages, statutory
damages, attorneys' fees, litigation costs, remedial action, pre
and post judgment interest, and other relief as available. The
cases are as follows: Christina Moyer v. Michaels Stores, Inc. was
filed on January 27, 2014; Michael and Jessica Gouwens v. Michaels
Stores, Inc., was filed on January 29, 2014; Nancy Maize and
Jessica Gordon v. Michaels Stores, Inc., was filed on February 21,
2014; and Daniel Ripes v. Michaels Stores, Inc. was filed on March
14, 2014. All four of these cases were filed in the United States
District Court-Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. A
case, Mary Jane Whalen v. Michaels Stores, Inc., was filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York
on March 18, 2014, but was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff
on April 11, 2014, without prejudice to her right to re-file a
complaint. On April 16, 2014, an order was entered consolidating
the current actions.


MICHAELS STORES: Safety National Seeks Relief in Data Breach Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Teri Robinson, writing for SC Magazine, reports that with data
breaches on the rise and seemingly no end to the damage that a
breach can have on an organization, the issue of who pays has
heated up as an insurer petitions a court to find it's not
required to defend Michaels against a bevy of class action
lawsuits resulting from a breach and a retail group challenges a
credit union's call to shift greater liability for breaches to
retailers.

Safety National, which issued a commercial general liability
insurance policy to Michaels, told a U.S. District Court in Texas
on June 18 that it shouldn't be required to defend Michaels in the
breach cases because those lawsuits don't seek payout for bodily
injury or property damages that the policy covers.

The insurer notes that "at least four class action lawsuits" have
been filed against the retailer claiming Michaels didn't
adequately protect customer data, such as credit and debit card
information and asking for damages for the denial of privacy
protections, unauthorized charges and bank fees incurred, identity
theft costs as well as other costs.

In turn, Michaels petitioned "Safety National provide [it] with a
defense" against those claims, according to court documents.

In documents filed with the Court, the insurance provider said
Michaels had requested that it provide the retailer with "a
defense in the Consolidated Class Action and seeks coverage from
Safety National under the Policy for the claims asserted in the
Consolidated Class Action" and informed Michaels "there is no
coverage under the Policy for the claims asserted in the class
action lawsuits, based upon information provided and available to
Safety National."  The June 18 filing asked the court for relief.

The issue of who pays and how much will grow increasingly
important as companies struggle to mitigate the financial damage
done by a breach.  According to the Ponemon Institute, the average
cost of a data breach is $3.5 million.  But as Target's December
breach proves, organizations often don't have a firm fix on just
how much a breach might cost.  In fact, associated costs can
ripple out for months, even years.

In the past, financial institutions have routinely eaten the costs
of fraudulent charges resulting from a breach, but the wind is
beginning to shift there, too, as a groundswell of support has
grown in favor of putting the onus on retailers.


MID-CONTINENT WELL: Fails to Pay Overtime, "McKinley" Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
John McKinley, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated
v. Mid-Continent Well Logging Service, Inc., Case No. 5:14-cv-
00649 (W.D. Okla., June 20, 2014), arises from the Defendant's
failure to pay minimum wage and overtime pay required by the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

Mid-Continent Well Logging Service, Inc., is an Oklahoma
corporation that provides geological services and mud logging to
the oil & gas industry.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      James A. Jones, Esq.
      BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
      8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500
      Houston, TX 77046
      Telephone: (713) 877-8788
      Facsimile: (713) 877-8065
      E-mail: jjones@brucknerburch.com


MODELL'S SPORTING: Settles Mobility-Impaired Customers Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Joshua Alston, writing for Law360, reports that Modell's Sporting
Goods Inc. has settled a putative class action in Pennsylvania
federal court, according to a June 19 court filing, resolving
allegations that it discriminated against mobility-impaired
customers with inaccessible parking and restrooms at several New
Jersey and Pennsylvania stores.

According to a June 19 dismissal order signed by a clerk to U.S.
District Court Judge Gerald McHugh, Modell's settled a suit filed
against it by David Cornelsen, a paraplegic without the use of his
legs who sued the sporting goods chain in August 2013 alleging
violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.  The terms of
the settlement were undisclosed, and attorneys for Mr. Cornelsen
and Modell's did not respond to requests for comment on June 19.

According to the complaint, the suit was prompted by
Mr. Cornelson's June 2013 visit to a Modell's location in Willow
Grove, Pennsylvania, during which Mr. Cornelsen said he had
difficulty accessing the restroom because opening the door
required too much force and the door was not designed to remain
open to facilitate his entry.

Mr. Cornelsen said his accessibility issues worsened after he made
it into the restroom, according to the complaint.

"Once inside the restroom, Cornelsen was unable to use the men's
urinal because of the excessive height it was mounted from the
floor," the complaint said.  "In addition, he was unable to wash
his hands because the pipes under the sink were not covered,
raising the risk plaintiff would burn himself.  The plaintiff
would have also been unable to dry his hands because the paper
towel dispenser was too high."

Mr. Cornelsen hired Brodsky & Smith LLC to pursue his ADA claim,
the complaint said, and the firm hired professional building
experts to visit various Modell's locations throughout
Pennsylvania and New Jersey.  Mr. Cornelsen said those experts
found similar violations to the ones he witnessed at 11 New Jersey
Modell's stores and another eight stores in Pennsylvania.

The New Jersey locations identified in the suit are stores located
in Tom's River, Lakewood, West Berlin, Mount Laurel, Riverton,
Watchung, Union, Clifton, Woodbridge and Little Falls.
Mr. Cornelson said the violations at those stores, which include
restroom accessibility and the lack of signage designating
accessible parking, also constitute violations of New Jersey's
Disabled Persons Act.

The allegedly noncompliant Pennsylvania locations are in
Philadelphia, Warminster, Willow Grove and Clifton Heights.

The putative class was to consist of mobility-impaired Modell's
customers and potential customers in both states.  Mr. Cornelson
estimated the class size to be in the thousands, according to the
complaint.

Mr. Cornelsen is represented by Jason L. Brodsky --
jbrodsky@brodsky-smith.com -- and Jordan A. Schatz --
jschatz@brodsky-smith.com -- of Brodsky & Smith LLC.

Modell's is represented by Eric J. Bronstein and Gregory S.
Voshell -- gsv@elliottgreenleaf.com -- of Elliott Greenleaf &
Siedzikowski PC.

The case is David Cornelsen v. Modell's Sporting Goods Inc., case
number 2:13-cv-04632, in the U.S. District Court Eastern District
of Pennsylvania.


MORGAN KEEGAN: Discovery Bid in "Cromeans" Suit Partly Okayed
-------------------------------------------------------------
In JOHN W. CROMEANS, JR., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. MORGAN KEEGAN & COMPANY, INC.,
Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff, PELLEGRINO & ASSOCIATES, LLC, et
al., Third-Party Defendants, NO. 4:14-MC-00274-JAR, (E.D. Mo.),
Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc.
filed Amended Motions to Compel Production From Cunningham, Vogel
& Rost, P.C. and for Expedited Relief, and Non-Party Witness
Cunningham, Vogel & Rost, P.C.'s Motions to Quash Deposition
Subpoena.

In a memorandum and order entered June 18, 2014, a copy of which
is available at http://is.gd/0eiMY0from Leagle.com, District
Judge John A. Ross ruled that Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff
Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc.'s Amended Motion to Compel
Production From Cunningham, Vogel & Rost, P.C. and for Sanctions
is granted in part and denied in part.  Its Amended Motion for
Expedited Relief was denied as moot.

Non-Party Witness Cunningham, Vogel & Rost, P.C.'s Motions to
Quash Deposition Subpoena were denied.

Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc., Defendant, represented by Jeremy A.
Root, STINSON AND LEONARD LLP.

Cunningham, Vogel & Rost, PC, witness, represented by Jeremy D.
Shook -- jshook@shandselbert.com -- SHANDS AND ELBERT LLP, John
Gianoulakis -- jgianoulakis@shandselbert.com -- SHANDS AND ELBERT
LLP & Robert F. Murray -- rmurray@shandselbert.com -- SHANDS AND
ELBERT LLP.

Morgan Keegan & Company, Inc., ThirdParty Plaintiff, represented
by Jeremy A. Root -- jeremy.root@stinsonleonard.com -- STINSON AND
LEONARD LLP.


NAT'L FOOTBALL: To Remove $675 Million Cap on Concussion Damages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Barry Wilner, writing for The Associated Press, reports that a
revised concussions settlement between the NFL and former players
could shrink the league's coffers.  Only marginally, though, and
not for a long time.

The NFL agreed on June 25 to remove a $675 million cap on damages
from thousands of concussion-related claims.  A federal judge who
originally questioned whether there would be enough money to cover
as many as 20,000 retired players still must approve the new
terms.

The settlement is designed to last at least 65 years and cover
retired players who develop Lou Gehrig's disease, dementia or
other neurological problems believed to be caused by concussions
sustained during their careers.  Removing the cap might lead to
the NFL paying out more money to ailing former players, even
though the league and lawyers for the plaintiffs believe the $675
million won't be surpassed.

"If exceeding that number happens, it is well down the road," said
Marc Ganis, president of Chicago-based consulting firm SportsCorp
and a close observer of league business.  "I don't foresee
anything in the next four or five years.

"This has the benefit of getting money to the families and people
who need it now.  If the actuarials are wrong, the additional
money would not be paid for a while down the road.  By then, there
will be new TV contracts, the league will have grown more
(financially)."

Although the original settlement was trumpeted by both sides, U.S.
District Judge Anita Brody denied preliminary approval last
January.  Her concerns centered, simply, on whether there was
enough money in the pot to satisfy all the legitimate claims; some
4,500 retired players were part of the lawsuit.  Projections
indicate many more will need help.

Dozens of ex-players also have said they would not take part in
the original settlement, against the advice of the plaintiffs'
attorneys.

"Some of the players were concerned and asking questions about
whether they could be in a deal if they weren't sure there'd be
money there for them 40 years from now if they get sick, God
forbid. . . . That's what drove these changes," plaintiffs' lawyer
Christopher Seeger said.

The original settlement included $675 million for compensatory
claims for players with neurological symptoms; $75 million for
baseline testing; and $10 million for medical research and
education.  The NFL also would pay an additional $112 million to
the players' lawyers, for a total payout of more than $870
million.

The revised settlement eliminates the cap on overall damage
claims, but retains a payout formula for individual retirees that
considers their age and illness.  A young retiree with amyotrophic
lateral sclerosis, or Lou Gehrig's disease, would receive $5
million.  A 50-year-old with Alzheimer's disease would get $1.6
million.  An 80-year-old with early dementia would get $25,000.

Where will the money come from? The NFL isn't exactly hurting for
income as it approaches $10 billion in annual revenues.

"This comes out of their bottom line, although it is not a huge
part of their bottom line," said David Orentlicher, a law
professor at Indiana University's Robert H. McKinney School of
Law.  "But anytime a business' prices and costs increase, they try
to pass off as much as they can. If they can pass it all off, they
will.  Sometimes you have to eat some of it.

"The questions become, have they already maxed their prices for
tickets and broadcast rights and sponsorships and the like?"

With new TV deals upcoming and the surging popularity of pro
football, it seems unlikely the NFL has maxed out its earning
potential.

Critics of the deal have said the league is getting off lightly.
Others point out, as did Mr. Ganis, that the timing of getting
payments to the injured or ill is the most crucial element.

One of the plaintiffs is Kevin Turner, who played for the
Philadelphia Eagles and New England Patriots and is now battling
ALS.

"The compensation provided in this settlement will lift a heavy
burden off of the men who are suffering," he said in a statement.
"I am also personally comforted by the knowledge that this
settlement is guaranteed to be there for any retired player who
needs it."

Mr. Orentlicher projects the NFL will surpass the payouts of the
original settlement agreement.

"It would be very surprising if their ultimate payoff is not
significantly greater," Mr. Orentlicher said.  "I think they will
spend more money as a result of this. It's just the nature of
these kinds of settlements.

"If this is all the NFL has to pay, the owners will be very happy.
When you add up all the damage these players are suffering and all
the money teams have earned as a result, this isn't sufficient to
compensate for the harm."


NAT'L FOOTBALL: "White" Suit Remanded to District Court
-------------------------------------------------------
Legendary defensive end Reggie White passed away in 2004, but the
class action that bears his name lives on in federal court. In
1993, a class of plaintiffs represented by Mr. White settled an
antitrust lawsuit with the National Football League (NFL or
League) by signing an extensive collective bargaining agreement,
the Stipulation and Settlement Agreement (SSA), that governed
labor relations between the League and its players for almost two
decades. In 2011, the NFL Players' Association and several law
firms authorized to represent NFL players -- the Association --
sued the League, asserting that the League had violated the SSA in
2010 by instituting a secret cap on player salaries. The League
and the Association settled this lawsuit as well, this time by
signing a Stipulation of Dismissal.

The Association now seeks to set aside the Dismissal and reopen
its breach-of-SSA claim against the League, on two grounds. First,
the Association asserts that the Dismissal is invalid because the
district court never approved it as required by Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 23(e). Second, the Association asserts that the
Dismissal should be set aside under Federal Rule of Civil
Procedure 60(b) because the League procured the Dismissal by
fraud, misrepresentation, or misconduct.

The district court rejected both arguments.

The United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, on June 20,
2014, affirmed in part and reversed and remanded in part.  The
Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's Rule 23 ruling,
reversed the district court's Rule 60 ruling, and remanded for
further proceedings consistent with its opinion.

A copy of the Opinion is available at http://is.gd/0B2u2tfrom
Leagle.com.

The case is Reggie White; Michael Buck; Hardy Nickerson; Vann
McElroy; Dave Duerson, Plaintiffs-Appellants, NFL Players
Association Movant-Appellant, v. National Football League; The
Five Smiths; Buffalo Bills, Inc.; Chicago Bears Football Club,
Inc.; Cincinnati Bengals, Inc.; The Dallas Cowboys Football Club,
Ltd; PDB Sports, Ltd.; The Detroit Lions, Inc.; The Green Bay
Packers, Inc.; Houston Oilers, Inc.; Indianapolis Colts, Inc.;
Kansas City Chiefs Football Club, Inc.; The Los Angeles Raiders,
Ltd.; Los Angeles Rams Football Company, Inc.; Miami Dolphins,
Ltd.; Minnesota Vikings Football Club, Inc.; KMS Patriots Limited
Partnership; New York Football Giants, Inc.; New York Jets
Football Club, Inc.; B&B Holdings, Inc.; Pittsburgh Steelers
Sports, Inc.; The Chargers Football Company; Tampa Bay Area NFL
Football Club, Inc.; Pro-Football, Inc.; The Philadelphia Eagles
Football Club, Inc.; Cleveland Browns, Inc.; The Seattle Seahawks,
Inc.; The New Orleans Saints Limited Partnership; The San
Francisco Forty-Niners, Ltd., Defendants-Appellees, NOS. 13-1251,
13-1480.


NEVADA: Health Insurance Exchange Faces Class Action
----------------------------------------------------
Sandra Gonzalez, writing for KSNV & MyNEWS3, reports that patients
in a class action lawsuit against Nevada's Health Insurance
Exchange want action.  They're suing because they claim they've
gone uncovered, even though they paid for policies.

So many people have been caught up in the enrollment glitches
thinking they were enrolled, even paying their premiums.  In some
cases, by the time they got in to see a doctor it was too late.

"It's breaking all our hearts.  That's no lie, to see her in that
state when she didn't have to be if they had got to it," said
Robert Rolain about his wife Linda.

Linda is dying before his eyes.  He's upset because of the
problems they encountered trying to enroll for health insurance
through Nevada Health Link.  By the time Linda was covered for
brain cancer surgery, the cancer was too advanced.  Mr. Rolain
says he heard it from the nurse.

"Has a mass on her whole side and he said you have to prepare
yourself," Mr. Rolain said.

Now Linda is in hospice with little time.

"She's like a vegetable.  We gotta feed her.  We gotta change her,
bathe her," Mr. Rolain said.

Like the Rolains, Karen Cwikla also got caught in the confusion of
enrolling, paying, but not being covered.  She has multiple
myeloma, plasma cell cancer.

"I feel like my condition would probably be better if we had been
able to start treating it sooner," Ms. Cwikla said.

She is undergoing chemotherapy right now.

These are just a couple of examples of patients being represented
in the lawsuit against the state Health Insurance Exchange and
Xerox, the company recently fired by the state.  Through a writ,
lawyers are calling for an emergency task force to help get these
patients care immediately.

"North and south, manned by experienced private insurance brokers
who know how to get through that impenetrable barrier to get
coverage when it's urgent or emergent," said attorney
Matthew Callister.

This action is in addition to the class action lawsuit that
continues expand, as these patients continue to get sicker and
disheartened.

"It's just disposable, it's just numbers, that's what I feel
everybody is," Ms. Cwikla said.

The writ was filed in district court.


NEVIN'S BUSINESS: Faces "Alonso" Suit Over Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fernando Alonso v. Nevin's Business, LLC d/b/a Tommy Nevin'S
Evanston, Steven Cin, individually, and Rohit Sahajpal,
individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-04688 (N.D. Ill., June 20, 2014),
is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum wages
and overtime pay pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Nevin's Business, LLC, is a pub located in Evanston, Illinois.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


PAULISON CAR WASH: Faces "Pareses" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
--------------------------------------------------------------
Richardson Paredes and Hipolito Paredes individually and on behalf
of all other persons similarly situated who were employed by
Paulison Car Wash & Detailing, Inc. v. Paulison Car Wash &
Detailing, Inc., Salah Obeidalla and Samir Abuhaltam,
individually, Case No. 2:14-cv-03957 (D.N.J., June 20, 2014), is
brought against the Defendant for failure to pay minimum wages and
overtime pay pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act.

Paulison Car Wash & Detailing, Inc., New Jersey corporation, with
its principal location at 1041 Paulison Avenue, Clifton, New
Jersey 07011-3610 and is engaged in the car wash business.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lloyd R. Ambinder, Esq.
      BARNES, IACCARINO, VIRGINIA, AMBINDER & SHEPHERD, PLLC
      111 Broadway, Suite 403
      New York, NY 10006
      Telephone: (212) 943-9080
      E-mail: lambinder@bivas.net


PAYTIME INC: Clients File Class Action Over Security Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------
Matt Miller, writing for  PennLive.com, reports that saying
personal information for more than 230,000 clients is at risk,
three midstate residents are trying to mount a federal class-
action lawsuit over a security breach at a Cumberland County-based
payroll services firm.

The U.S. Middle District Court case was filed a month after
Paytime Inc. of Upper Allen Township told customers that hackers
had broken into its system, stealing information including Social
Security and bank account numbers.

All three plaintiffs in the suit, Daniel Storm of Lexington, Ky.,
Holly White of Lancaster, and Doris McMichael of New Cumberland,
work for employers who used Paytime.  The call on whether to
certify the suit as a class action, making other Paytime customers
parties to the case, will rest with Judge John E. Jones III.
Mr. Storm, Ms. White and Ms. McMichael contend that Paytime was
negligent for not preventing the breach, not promptly detecting
it, and delaying informing customers of the problem.  The breach
has put Paytime's customers at heightened exposure to identity
theft, the three claim.

They seek unspecified monetary damages and want the court to
require Paytime to provide the affected customers with credit and
bank monitoring services for 25 years.

Paytime has not yet filed a reply to the suit with the court.
However, Lindsay Strathmeyer, its manager of HR applications,
provided the following statement from the company regarding the
case on June 20:

"As Central Pennsylvania communities are aware, Paytime has been
taking, and continues to take the matter of the data security
incident very seriously.  We are working with internal and third
party investigators, the Secret Service, incident response
vendors, our business partners, our staff, our clients, their
employees and the community to address the concerns and issues
that may exist.  Now that a complaint has been filed, we must
respect the judicial process.  There is a formal process we must
follow to address the allegations and accusations in the
complaint.  At this time we are not free to discuss this further.
We are confident our good faith efforts to preserve the security
and confidentiality of information in our control will prevail in
this matter."

Paytime's vice president of sales and marketing, Chris Haverstick,
told PennLive that the firm didn't drag its feet in dealing with
the breach.  Federal law enforcement agencies were notified as
soon at the problem was discovered, he said, and alerts were
issued once at-risk customers were identified.

Company officials have said the cyber attack was mounted by
skilled hackers with foreign IP addresses.  The firm has offered a
free year of credit monitoring and identity restoration services
for those affected.

Employees of public libraries in Cumberland, Dauphin and York
counties, along with workers in several local municipalities,
including Silver Spring and East Pennsboro townships and Carlisle
and Dillsburg, also had personal information exposed by the
Paytime breach.


PRUDENTIAL FINANCIAL: Court Okays Bid to Quash Subpoenas
--------------------------------------------------------
In the miscellaneous action captioned CITY OF STERLING HEIGHTS
GENERAL EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM, Individually and on Behalf
of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiffs, v. PRUDENTIAL
FINANCIAL, INC., et al., Defendants, NO. C 14-80161 WHA, (N.D.
Cal.), a non-party in the action moved to quash subpoenas for the
production of documents and a deposition witness.

District Judge William Alsup granted the motion to quash and added
that, "If Judge Wigenton finds in the underlying action that
plaintiffs are entitled to evidence but Prudential no longer has
the evidence or stonewalls production of the evidence, then the
Court may consider enforcing a fresh subpoena (but will also then
consider the Department's further concern about confidentiality),"
he said. "The Department should ensure that it keeps and maintains
all documents relevant to the underlying action."

"This case is over," Judge William concluded.  "The Clerk shall
close the file."

A copy of the June 19, 2014 Order is available at
http://is.gd/JY4Us6from Leagle.com.

National Shopmen Pension Fund, Defendant, represented by Shawn A.
Williams -- shawnw@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd
LLP.

Heavy & General Laborers' Local 472 & 172 Pension & Annuity Funds,
Defendant, represented by Shawn A. Williams, Robbins Geller Rudman
& Dowd LLP.

Roofers Local No. 149 Pension Fund, Defendant, represented by
Shawn A. Williams, Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP.

California Department of Insurance, Movant, represented by David
Lew, California State Attorney General's Office.


REGENCE BLUECROSS: Sued for Stockpiling Excess Funds to Pay CEOs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nick Budnick, writing for The Oregonian, reports that lawyers have
filed a class-action lawsuit against Oregon nonprofit health
insurer Regence BlueCross BlueShield, saying it is acting like a
for-profit company by stockpiling excess funds that support large
salaries rather than health care for policyholders.

The lawsuit, filed on June 20 in Multnomah County Circuit Court,
asks a judge to rule that Regence is not fulfilling the public-
purpose clause of its own bylaws, and is failing to use its excess
earnings for the benefit of its members.

"What we see is what they pay their CEOs and how they give them
bonuses (based on earnings)," said Darian Stanford, the Portland
lawyer who is spearheading the case.  "This is what I call white-
hat litigation: the right thing to do."

Regence defended its business practices in a statement: "Our
values are rooted in always putting our members first and having
the financial stability to meet their medical needs, now and in
the future.  We believe this claim is meritless, and we will
aggressively defend these allegations and do everything in our
power to ensure assets dedicated to serving our members are not
used to enrich trial lawyers."

The suit lists Regence policyholder Tanya March and her two
children as plaintiffs as well as Dischinger Orthodontics of Lake
Oswego.

The lawsuit comes on top of criticism the insurer has received in
recent years for investing its surplus funds in for-profit
companies, while cutting benefits and increasing premiums.
Regence officials defend their investments as serving members, and
say their rate hikes and benefit changes have been necessary to
keep the insurer stable.

While Regence is required by the state to maintain a certain
amount of reserves, it, like many other insurers, has built up
funds well in excess of state minimums.

The lawsuit alleges Regence goes further than other Blue Cross
nonprofit insurers -- specifically maintaining four months worth
of operating expenses, rather than the three months used by other
carriers, or about $150 million in excess.

"They should do something to somehow use that money for their
nonprofit mission," said Philadelphia lawyer David Senoff, who is
assisting Stanford on the case.

The Regence statement defends its reserve levels as appropriate
and says its executive salaries are a tiny fraction of its overall
expenditures.  It says that more than 85 percent of the premiums
from Oregonians is paid to providers for care.

Cambia Health Solutions, the parent company for Regence and its
sister companies in Washington, Utah and Idaho, does not report
total executive compensation that includes income from for-profit
subsidiaries, making those figures difficult to ascertain.
However, in 2012, Cambia CEO Mark Ganz told The Oregonian he
earned $1.94 million.


SCOTT DOLICH: Faces "Allison" Suit Over Unpaid Minimum Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Nancy Allison and Holly Burney, both in their individual
capacities and, in addition, as a collective action on behalf of
others similarly situated v. Scott Dolich and Park Kitchen LLC, an
Oregon limited liability company, Case No. 3:14-cv-01005 (D. Ore.,
June 20, 2014), seeks to recover  unpaid minimum wages, liquidated
damages and declaratory relief.

Park Kitchen LLC is an Oregon limited liability company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jon M. Egan, Esq.
      JON M. EGAN, P.C.
      240 Sixth Street
      Lake Oswego, OR 97034-2931
      Telephone: (503) 697-3427
      Facsimile: (866) 311-5629
      E-mail: jegan@eganlegalteam.com


SKINNY GIRL: Judge Denies Class Certification in Drinks Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Toutant, writing for New Jersey Law Journal, reports that
a federal judge in Camden, N.J., denied class certification on
June 27 in a suit claiming reality TV star Bethenny Frankel
falsely promoted her "Skinny Girl" margaritas as all natural.

The class cannot be certified because the plaintiffs failed to
meet the requirement under R. 23(b)(3) for ascertainability of its
membership, U.S. District Judge Noel Hillman ruled in Stewart v.
Beam Global Spirits & Wine, 11-5149.  The lack of objective
evidence to verify who bought the defendant's product would force
the court to conduct a "mini-hearing" on the merits of each case,
the judge said, which would be unduly burdensome.

Lawyers for the plaintiffs suggested the class could be
ascertained through affidavits from putative class members, but
Judge Hillman rejected that method.  He agreed with the
defendants' assertions that such a method was self-serving and
unreliable and would deprive them of their due process rights.

The suit claims marketing for Skinny Girl Margarita represented it
to contain only natural ingredients and no preservatives.  Such
claims were made on taxi signboards, billboards, on product
packaging and in print and online media, the suit alleges.

However, the drink contains sodium benzoate, a chemical
preservative.  That ingredient can become carcinogenic when mixed
with acids such as the lime juice in margaritas, the suit claims.
In 2011, retailer Whole Foods announced it was pulling Skinny Girl
Margaritas off its shelves because the product includes sodium
benzoate, the suit said.

The defendants, in response to those claims, conceded that their
product contains "a minute amount" of sodium benzoate and that the
ingredient is "permitted for use as a preservative by the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration."

Ms. Frankel was a celebrity chef who promoted a healthy lifestyle
through cookbook sales, the suit said.  She developed Skinny Girl
Margaritas, the first in a line of low-calorie cocktails, before
selling the business to Beam Global Spirits and Wine in 2011.
Ms. Frankel appeared in two programs on the Bravo network, "The
Real Housewives of New York City," from 2008-10, and "Bethenny
Ever After" in 2010-12.

The suit names Frankel; her company, Skinny Girl Cocktails; and
Beam Global Spirits and Wine, as defendants.  The class
representatives, Maureen Steward and Kelly Lamicella, claim the
"all natural" claim induced them to buy Skinny Girl Margaritas.

The suit brings claims for violation of the New Jersey Consumer
Fraud Act and for negligent misrepresentation, breach of contract
and unjust enrichment.  It seeks certification of nationwide,
New Jersey and Pennsylvania classes of persons who bought the
product from the time it was introduced until the complaint was
filed on September 6, 2011.

Judge Hillman said the suit failed to make the demonstration under
23(b)(3) that class issues predominate over issues affecting
individual members.  Citing Marcus v. BMW of North America, 687
F.3d 583 (2012), he noted that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit had "increasingly emphasized the importance of
ascertainability of the class" with respect to classes certified
under 23(b)(3).  Marcus required a "reliable and administratively
feasible mechanism" for determining whether parties are members of
the class.

In the present case, the plaintiffs only suggested relying on
affidavits to determine class membership after the defendants
raised the issue of ascertainability, Judge Hillman said.  They
did not specify what information individuals would have to provide
in their affidavits, such as the date, location, quantity,
frequency or cost of such purchases, Judge Hillman said.  And
relying on affidavits would rely on individuals' unreliable
memories and "would be very likely to invite speculation, or
worse," he said.

The plaintiffs argued that courts routinely accept affidavits in
such circumstances, but the cases they cited as proof all predated
Marcus, Judge Hillman said.

The judge also rejected the plaintiffs' argument that reliability
of sworn affidavits could be bolstered by cross-checking them with
lists of persons who "liked" the Facebook pages of Skinny Girl and
Ms. Frankel or sent emails to the defendants.  Such a method, he
said, would identify "some unknown, unspecified portion of the
putative class and may very well include individuals who never
bought the product and in fact are not members of the class."

Judge Hillman said there was "simply no way for the court to know
that such a method will actually work, and plaintiffs have done
nothing but provide mere assurances that it will."

Judge Hillman also rejected the plaintiffs' reliance on a ruling
from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, In re Visa
Check/MasterMoney Antitrust Litigation, 280 F. 3d 124 (2001), that
failure to certify an action under R. 23(b)(3) on the ground that
it would be unmanageable is frowned upon.  Judge Hillman said the
ruling did not bind his court and that rulings from the Third
Circuit "appear to impose a far more exacting standard for
ascertainability than that required by the Second Circuit."

Plaintiff lawyer David Wolfe -- dwolfe@skoloffwolfe.com -- of
Skoloff & Wolfe in Livingston said in a statement about the
ruling, "the decision is unrelated to the merits and without
prejudice.  The plaintiffs remain committed to pursuing this
case."

John Kearney -- kearneyj@ballardspahr.com -- and Michael Carroll
-- carrollm@ballardspahr.com -- of Ballard Spahr in Cherry Hill,
representing Beam Global, and David Sellinger --
sellingerd@gtlaw.com -- of Greenberg Traurig in Florham Park,
representing Ms. Frankel and her company, did not respond to calls
about the ruling.


STELLAR RESIDENTIAL: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT & Penalties
----------------------------------------------------------------
Louis Stuhler, on his own behalf and all similarly situated
individuals v. Stellar Residential Services, LLC a Florida for
Profit Corporation and Leon Rouse, individually, Case No. 5:14-cv-
00353 (M.D. Fla., June 20, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
wages, minimum wages, an additional equal amount as liquidated
damages , obtain declaratory relief, and reasonable attorney's
fees and costs.

Stellar Residential Services, LLC, provides landscaping, pest
control and pressure washing services to its residential and
commercial customers.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Amanda E. Kayfus, Esq.
      MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
      Suite 400, 600 N Pine Island Rd
      Plantation, FL 33324
      Telephone: (954) 318-0268
      Facsimile: (954) 333-3515
      E-mail: akayfus@forthepeople.com


TAVERN P&L: Faces "Messick" Suit over Failure to Pay Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kortney A. Messick v. Tavern P&L LLC, F. Louis Reiderer, Ricky
Renfro, Patrick Roberts, Sean Haydock, Kyle Witherspoon, David B.
Allen, Nicholas Williams, Case No. 4:14-cv-00560 (W.D. Mo., June
20, 2014), arises from the Defendant's failure to pay minimum wage
and overtime pay required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Tavern P&L LLC owns and operates a bar located in Kansas City,
Missouri's Power and Light District.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      George E. Kapke , Jr., Esq.
      KAPKE & WILLERTH, LLC
      3304 NE Ralph Powell Rd.
      Lee's Summit, MO 64064
      Telephone: (816) 461-3800
      Facsimile: (816) 254-8014
      E-mail: ted@kapkewillerth.com


THOMSON INC: Court Remands Suit Against Insurers
------------------------------------------------
In 2004, a group of former factory workers and their heirs filed a
class-action lawsuit in Taiwan against Thomson Consumer
Electronics Television Taiwan Ltd. (TCETVT), a Taiwanese company
which owned and operated an electronics manufacturing plant in
Taiwan from the late 1980s to 1992. The workers sought damages for
bodily injury allegedly resulting from exposure to organic
solvents while working in the plant and living in dormitories near
the plant. Over 99% of TCETVT's stock is owned by Thomson Consumer
Electronics (Bermuda) Ltd. (TCEB), and less than 0.01% is owned by
Thomson Inc. n/k/a Technicolor USA, Inc. (Thomson), a Delaware
corporation with its headquarters in Indiana.  Both TCEB and
Thomson are wholly owned subsidiaries of French electronics
company Thomson SA.

The Taiwan Class Action was dismissed in 2005 and reinstated in
2006. In 2007, the plaintiffs attempted to name Thomson SA, TCEB,
and Thomson as additional defendants based on corporate-veil-
piercing and joint-liability theories. Those entities have not yet
been served or entered an appearance in the Taiwan Class Action.
In 2008, Thomson filed a declaratory judgment action against its
primary and umbrella liability insurers, seeking defense and
indemnification costs for the Taiwan Class Action. The primary
insurers included XL Insurance America, Inc. f/k/a Winterthur
International America Insurance Company (XL) and Century Indemnity
Company (Century).  The umbrella insurers included XL and
Travelers Casualty and Surety Company f/k/a The Aetna Casualty and
Surety Company and Travelers Property Casualty Company of America
f/k/a The Travelers Indemnity Company of Illinois.

In November 2009, Thomson filed a motion for summary judgment as
to the primary insurers' duty to defend, which the trial court
granted by interlocutory order in July 2010.  In the Duty to
Defend Order, the trial court ruled that XL and Century have a
duty to defend Thomson in the Taiwan Class Action and reimburse
Thomson for reasonable and necessary defense costs, which would be
determined later.  The insurers asked the trial court to certify
the Duty to Defend Order for discretionary interlocutory appeal,
and Thomson asked the trial court to certify it as a final
judgment. The trial court denied both requests.

In October 2010, Thomson filed a motion for summary judgment as to
trigger, allocation, occurrence, and the absence of aggregates in
the primary policies at issue. In August 2011, the trial court
entered a partial final judgment in favor of Thomson on certain
issues.  Thomson, XL, and Century appealed from the Allocation
Order.

In October 2011, Thomson filed a motion for summary judgment for
defense costs against XL and for defense costs coverage against
Travelers. In June 2012, the trial court granted Thomson's motion
to amend its complaint to add TCETVT as a plaintiff. The trial
court also entered a partial final judgment against XL (XL Defense
Costs Order) and a partial final judgment against Travelers
(Travelers Defense Costs Order).  XL and Travelers appealed from
the Defense Costs Orders. The appeals from the Allocation Order
and the Defense Costs Orders were consolidated. In May 2014,
Thomson notified the Court that it had reached a full settlement
on all issues with Travelers and had reached a partial settlement
with Century regarding Century's liability for defending Thomson
in the Taiwan Class Action. Travelers' appeal was dismissed, and
Century's appeal remained pending as to all indemnity issues.
The parties have raised numerous issues for review.

The Court of Appeals of Indiana, on June 19, 2014, issued an
Opinion affirming in part, reversing in part, and remanding the
case for further proceeding.  A copy of the Opinion is available
at http://is.gd/DRCJLEfrom Leagle.com.

The case is THOMSON INC. n/k/a TECHNICOLOR USA, INC., Appellant-
Plaintiff/Cross-Appellee, v. INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA
n/k/a CENTURY INDEMNITY COMPANY, et al., Appellees-
Defendants/Cross-Appellants, and XL INSURANCE AMERICA, INC. f/k/a
WINTERTHUR INTERNATIONAL AMERICA INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee-
Defendant/Cross-Appellant, and TRAVELERS PROPERTY CASUALTY CO., et
al., Appellee-Defendant/Cross-Appellant, NO. 49A05-1109-PL-470.

GEORGE M. PLEWS -- gplews@psrb.com -- FREDERICK D. EMHARDT --
emhardt@psrb.com KATHERINE E. WINDERS -- kwinders@psrb.com -- JOSH
S. TATUM -- jtatum@psrb.com -- SEAN M. HIRSCHTEN --
shirschten@psrb.com -- Plews Shadley Racher & Braun LLP,
Indianapolis, Indiana, Attorneys for Appellant/Cross-Appellee.

DALE W. EIKENBERRY -- deikenberry@woodmclaw.com -- Wooden &
McLaughlin LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, WILLIAM M. COHN --
william.cohn@mclolaw.com -- J. CHRISTOPHER MADDEN, Cohn Baughman &
Martin, Chicago, Illinois, Attorneys for Appellee/Cross-Appellant
Century Indemnity Company f/k/a Insurance Company of North
America.

STEPHEN J. PETERS -- speters@harrisonmoberly.com -- DAVID I. RUBIN
-- drubin@harrisonmoberly.com -- Harrison & Moberly, LLP,
Indianapolis, Indiana, MATTHEW S. PONZI -- mponzi@fgppr.com --
JAMES B. GLENNON -- jglennon@fgppr.com -- Foran Glennon Palandech
Ponzi & Rudloff PC, Chicago, Illinois, Attorneys for
Appellee/Cross-Appellant XL Insurance America, Inc. f/k/a
Winterthur International America Insurance Company.


TOTAL ENVIRONMENTAL: Removed "Hussey" Suit to W.D. Louisiana
------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Hussey, et al. v. Total
Environmental Solutions Inc., Case No. 20142523, was removed to
the 15th JDC Lafayette Parish to the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Louisiana (Lafayette).  The District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 6:14-cv-02186-RTH-CMH to the proceeding.

The Plaintiffs assert personal injury claims.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          L. Clayton Burgess, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF L. CLAYTON BURGESS
          605 W Congress St.
          Lafayette, LA 70501
          Telephone: (337) 234-7573
          Facsimile: (337) 233-3890
          E-mail: lcburgess@clayburgess.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          William A. Barousse, Esq.
          Ernest P. Gieger, Jr., Esq.
          John Michael DiGiglia, Esq.
          GIEGER LABORDE & LAPEROUSE
          701 Poydras St., Suite 4800
          New Orleans, LA 70139
          Telephone: (504) 561-0400
          Facsimile: (504) 561-1011
          E-mail: wbarousse@glllaw.com
                  egieger@glllaw.com
                  mdigiglia@glllaw.com


TWITTER INC: Faces TCPA Class Action Over Unsolicited Texts
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kurt Orzeck, Gavin Broady, Andrew Scurria and Michael Lipkin,
writing for Law360, report that Twitter Inc. was hit on June 19 in
California federal court with a $5 million putative class action
accusing it of violating the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by
sending unsolicited text messages after the social-networking
company recently defended the Los Angeles Lakers in a similar
suit.

Lead plaintiff Beverly Nunes' suit alleges mass violations of the
TCPA, accusing Twitter of spamming her and other cellphone users
with unwanted bulk automated text messages in an effort to
generate advertising revenue.

The TCPA bans companies such as Twitter from sending automated
short message service text messages to cellphones without first
obtaining consent, according to the class action, which seeks to
represent hundreds -- if not thousands -- of individuals and
entities.

"Twitter has caused consumers actual harm, including the
aggravation and privacy invasion that accompanies receiving
unsolicited text messages," the class action says.  "Moreover,
consumers are damaged by having to pay cellular telephone service
providers for the receipt of Twitter's unsolicited text messages."

Massachusetts resident Ms. Nunes claims she was sent unauthorized
text messages from Twitter to her recycled telephone number
despite expressly requesting not to be sent such messages.

She accuses the company, which is headquartered in San Francisco,
of collecting and storing user data -- including user cellular
telephone numbers -- for the purpose of sending automated en masse
text messages on its and the users' behalf.

Ms. Nunes also claims that more than 70 percent of Twitter's
advertising revenue came from mobile devices last year.

The putative class action filed against the Lakers by a ticket
holder contained similar allegations, leading Twitter and Path
Inc. to urge the Ninth Circuit in November to uphold the suit's
lower court dismissal.  Those companies said in a joint amicus
brief that the suit was emblematic of increasingly prevalent
efforts by the plaintiffs bar to use TCPA actions as "an
extortionist club."

The companies noted that in the prior year, more than 1,200 such
cases were filed against a vast array of defendants -- from banks
and debt collectors to social networking sites and retailers --
that go well beyond the abusive telemarketers originally targeted
by the law, according to the brief.

The ticket holder told the appeals court on Dec. 31 that he and
the organization had settled the closely watched suit, although
details weren't released.

In April, the Buffalo Bills won preliminary approval in Florida
federal court of a $3 million deal, settling class claims that a
mobile alert program for news on the team sent out more text
messages than fans had agreed to receive.

And earlier this month, plaintiffs in another $5 million TCPA
putative class action said the Los Angeles Clippers had agreed to
settle allegations that the team sent fans unsolicited text
messages, giving the class members up to two tickets to upcoming
home games.

Plaintiff and the class in the instant suit seek at least $500 in
damages for each alleged TCPA violation, as well as injunctive
relief and an award of statutory damages, together with costs and
reasonable attorneys' fees.

Counsel for the plaintiffs, as well as Twitter's representatives
and its attorneys in the amicus brief in the Lakers suit, didn't
immediately respond to requests for comment late on June 19.

Nunes and the putative class are represented by Jeffrey F. Keller,
Carey G. Been and Sarah R. Holloway -- sholloway@kellergrover.com
-- of Keller Grover LLP; John G. Jacobs --
jgjacobs@jacobskolton.com -- and Bryan G. Kolton --
bgkolton@jacobskolton.com -- of Jacobs Kolton Chtd.; and David
Schachman of the Law Offices of David Schachman PC.

The case is Beverly Nunes et al. v. Twitter Inc., case number
3:14-cv-02843, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California.


USAA CASUALTY: Faces "Mullins" Insurance-Related Suit in Georgia
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paula A. Mullins, Esq., Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. USAA Casualty Insurance Company, Case No.
5:14-cv-00237-MTT (M.D. Ga., June 25, 2014) asserts insurance-
related claims.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam P. Princenthal, Esq.
          C. Cooper Knowles, Esq.
          260 Peachtree St. NW, Suite 502
          Atlanta, GA 30303
          Telephone: (404) 524-4000
          E-mail: aprincenthal@akpfirm.com
                  cknowles@akpfirm.com

               - and -

          James C. Bradley, Esq.
          Nina Fields Britt, Esq.
          RICHARDSON, PATRICK, WESTBROOK & BRICKMAN, LLC
          PO Box 1007
          Mt. Pleasant, SC 29465
          Telephone: (843) 727-6500
          E-mail: jbradley@rpwb.com
                  nfields@rpwb.com

               - and -

          Michael J. Brickman, Esq.
          RICHARDSON, PATRICK, WESTBROOK & BRICKMAN, LLC
          174 E Bay St.
          Charleston, SC 29401
          Telephone: (843) 727-6520
          E-mail: mbrickman@rpwb.com

               - and -

          Richard Kopelman, Esq.
          KOPELMAN SITTON LAW GROUP, LLC
          1801 Peachtree St. NE, Suite 200
          Atlanta, GA 30309
          Telephone: (404) 351-5900
          E-mail: richard@kopelmansitton.com


                             *********

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  * * *