CAR_Public/140924.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

          Wednesday, September 24, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 190

                             Headlines


21 VIANET GROUP: Sued Over Violation of Fair Labor Standards Act
A.K.O. PLUMBING: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages & Damages
ABBOTT IRELAND: Recalls Architect I System - Total T3 Assay
ALFRED NICKLES: Faces "Twiddy" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
ALTEGRITY INC: Sued Over Violation of Fair Credit Reporting Act

APPLE INC: Judge Cites Factors for Class Action Deal Approval
APPLE INC: Appeals Court Revives iPhone 3G Class Action
ARONA CORPORATION: "Moreno" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
ASSOCIATED MATERIALS: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
AVIS BUDGET: Court Cites Factors for Class Action Deal Approval

BANK OF AMERICA: "Leyse" Suit Dismissed for Lack of Standing
BIOSCRIP INC: Briefing on Motion to Dismiss Completed in July
BLUE CROSS: "Simon" Suit Remanded to Jackson Cty. Circuit Court
BOSA FOODS: Recalls Mediterranean Gourmet Oregano
BP SOLAR: Court Tosses Bid to Dismiss 1st Amended "Allagas" Case

BUILDING MATERIALS: Faces "Narducci" Suit Over Decking Products
CAAVERI ENTERPRISES: Recalls MD Cordials Due to Sulphites
CENTAK ENTERPRISES: "Garcia" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
CENTENE MANAGEMENT: Faces "Randolph" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
CENTRAL TRANSPORT: "Bell" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages

CHIPOTLE MEXICAN: "Harris" Suit Certified as Collective Action
COAST SUSHI: Faces "Choi" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Hours
CONAN FOODS: Recalls Ellada Greek Oregano Leaves
CONTANGO OIL: Defending Against Class Suits Over Crimson Merger
CONVERGYS CORPORATION: Settlement Reached in Suit v. Hyundai

DANSON DECOR: Recalls Halloween Feathered Boas
DATTANI FOODS: Recalls Star Guava Drink Due to Sulphites
DENDREON CORPORATION: Class Action Over PROVENGE in Discovery
DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS: Sued in Madison County Over Hip Implants
DREAMGEAR LLC: Recalls Potentially Hazardous Battery Packs

EL GINETE: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Padilla" Suit Says
EPIRUS BIOPHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Merger Suits in Massachusetts
EPIRUS BIOPHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Delaware Actions Over Merger
EXTRA CLEAN: Sued in Md. Over Breach of Fair Labor Standards Act
F.A.S.T. FIRST: Recalls Disposable Gloves

FIRST NATIONAL: "Antonik" Action in Discovery Stage
FIRST NATIONAL: "Saxe" Action in Discovery Phase
FTS USA: Faces "Estrada" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Hours
GAMESTOP INC: Lusby Deal Has Initial OK; Final Hearing in March
GE MEDICAL: Recalls Precision 500D X-Ray Imaging System

GEL SPICE: Recalls 3.53 oz Fresh Finds Brand Ground Black Pepper
GENTIVA HEALTH: Mediation Held in "Rindfleisch" Lawsuit
GENTIVA HEALTH: June 2015 Status Conference in "Wilkie" Action
GENTIVA HEALTH: Securities Class Action in Preliminary Stage
GINGERBREAD HOUSE: Recalls Baked Goods Due to Milk and Wheat

GMB LANDSCAPING: "Mendez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
GOODYEAR TIRE: Settlement Opt-Out Deadline Set for Dec. 5
GREAT STATES: Recalls Homelite & Earthwise Electric Lawn Mowers
GREEN WORLD: Recalls Al-Barakah Dates Due to Insect Infestation
HEWLETT-PACKARD: Sept. 26 Hearing on Class Action Settlement

HIMALAYA GOURMET: Recalls Gourmet Products Due to Mustard
HOME DEPOT: Faces "Khalaf" Suit in California Over Data Breach
HOME DEPOT: Faces "Riveron" Suit in S.D. Florida Over Data Breach
HUB GROUP: Does Not Pay Drivers Properly, "Lubinski" Suit Claims
INTERBAY FOOD: Recalls Pork Sausage Product Due to Misbranding

INTERSECTIONS INC: Ninth Circuit Upheld Dismissal of Class Action
INTERSECTIONS INC: Discovery Commenced in Illinois Class Action
J.M. HOLLISTER: Faces "Wat" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
J2 GLOBAL: Discovery Period in "Paldo" Case to Close August 2015
J2 GLOBAL: Court Dismisses Claims in "Jenkins" Suit

J2 GLOBAL: Faces "Free-Vychine" Suit Over Late Fees
JAKKS PACIFIC: Second Amended Complaint Filed in "Melot" Action
JERKY BY ART: Recalls Beef Jerky Products Due to Misbranding
KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Settled Wage and Hour Cases in California
KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Expects Dismissal of Ill. Wage & Hour Case

KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Class Cert. Bid in Pines Nursing Case Denied
LADENBURG THALMANN: Dismissal of Suit v. FriendFinder on Appeal
LADENBURG THALMANN: MOU in Suit v. WEMU Subject to Court Approval
LEROS POINT: Does Not Pay Drivers Properly, "Paster" Suit Claims
LIFE ALERT: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "McGreevy" Suit Says

LVNV FUNDING: Illegally Collects Debt, "Tinajero" Suit Claims
MAGNA-RX INC: Falsely Marketed Dietary Supplements, Suit Claims
MARRONE BIO: Faces "Oldham" Suit Over Registration Statement
MICHIGAN: Judge Recommends Denial of "Dunbar" Case Dismissal Bid
MONEYTREE INC: Has Send Unsolicited Text Messages, Action Claims

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: "Jordan" Case Returns to Chelan County Court
NII HOLDINGS: Lead Plaintiffs Filed Second Amended Complaint
NORMAN DIRECT: Removes "Demirjian" Suit to C.D. California
OCI HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Overtime Hours, "Henry" Suit Claims
OMNI HOTELS: Summary Judgment Bid in "Ades" Case Denied

OMNI HOTELS: Court Grants Class Certification in "Ades" Case
PERNIX THERAPEUTICS: Final Settlement Approved in April 2014
PFIZER INC: Judge Dismisses Antitrust Claims Over Lipitor Deal
PFIZER INC: Plaintiffs Expert in Chantix MDL Seeks Documents
PRICELINE GROUP: Faces Suits Related to Travel Transaction Taxes

PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY: Bid to Quash Subpoena in A&R Case Okayed
QR ENERGY: Faces "Berlin" Suit in Texas Over Sale of Partnership
RIZQ ENTERPRISE: Faces "Acuna" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
SEARS HOLDINGS: "Holstein" Case Returns to Kanawha County Court
SECOND ROUND: Faces "Burton" Suit Over Illegal Debt Collection

SOURCE 1 BUILDING: Fails to Pay OT Hours, "Hernandez" Suit Says
SYNGENTA AG: Sued Over Failure to Warn Dangers of Corn Products
TD AMERITRADE: Sued in D.N.J. Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties
TELETECH HOLDINGS: Class Action Settled for Immaterial Amount
TEXAS ANTI-CRIME: "Byrd" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages

TINLEY PARK: Faces "Santiago" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
TOMATO THYME: Sued Over Violation of Fair Labor Standards Act
TOMMY'S REDHOTS: Faces "Vargas" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Deal Has Initial OK; Final Hearing in Jan.
TRAYLOR BROS: Sued in Wash. Over Alleged Racial Discrimination

TRINITY REALTY: "Vega" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
VICCINO'S PIZZA: Faces "Gallardo" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
VISION WIRELESS: Faces "Cooper" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT Wages
WARNER MUSIC: Plaintiffs' Lawyers Bid for Intern Jury Trial Nixed
WILHELMINA INT'L: Bid to Dismiss "Shanklin" Case Under Advisement

XEROX EDUCATION: Court Denies Bid to Dismiss Reynolds Class Suit
XPRESSIGNS INC: Faces "Herrera" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
YELP! INC: 9th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of "Levitt" Class Action


                            *********


21 VIANET GROUP: Sued Over Violation of Fair Labor Standards Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ranjit Singh, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. 21 Vianet Group, Inc., Sheng Chen, and Shang-Wen
Hsiao, Case No. 2:14-cv-00894 (E.D. Tex. September 12, 2014), is
brought against the Defendant for violation of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

21 Vianet Group, Inc. is a provider of carrier-neutral Internet
data center services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

       R. Dean Gresham, Esq.
       PAYNE MITCHELL LAW GROUP
       2911 Turtle Creek Blvd., Suite 1400
       Dallas, TX 75219
       Telephone: (214) 252-1888
       Facsimile: (214) 252-1889
       Email: dean@paynemithcell.com

         - and -

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


A.K.O. PLUMBING: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages & Damages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Yunier Gonzalez, and other similarly-situated individuals V.
A.K.O. Plumbing Corporation, a Florida Profit Corporation, Case
No. 1:14-cv-23373 (S.D. Fla. September 12, 2014), seeks to recover
unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, and the costs
and reasonable attorney's fees pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

A.K.O. Plumbing Corporation is a plumbing company in Miami
Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Anthony Maximillien Georges-Pierre, Esq.
      REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC
      Court House Tower
      44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200
      Miami, FL 33130
      Telephone: (305) 416-5000
      Facsimile: (305) 416-5005
      E-mail: agp@rgpattorneys.com


ABBOTT IRELAND: Recalls Architect I System - Total T3 Assay
-----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 15, 2014
Posting date:             September 22, 2014
Type of communication:    Medical Device Recall
Subcategory:              Medical Device
Hazard classification:    Type II
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Medical Devices
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
                          Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-41455

Recalled products: Architect I System - Total T3 Assay

Two reagent lots may exhibit lower relative light units (RLUS)
than expected, which in turn may result in controls out of range
or patient results higher than expected.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     Abbott Ireland Diagnostics Division
                    lisnamuck, longford,
                    Ireland


ALFRED NICKLES: Faces "Twiddy" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Twiddy, Sr. an individual, on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated v. Alfred Nickles Bakery, Inc., Case No. 5:14-
cv-02053 (N.D. Ohio, September 15, 2014), is brought against the
Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for any hours worked
over 40 per week.

Alfred Nickles Bakery, Inc. is engaged in the business of baking
and distributing breads, buns and pastries.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Shannon M. Draher
      Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
      NILGES DRAHER LLC
      Ste. 201, 4580 Stephen Circle, NW
      Canton, OH 44718
      Telephone: (330) 858-2828
      Facsimile: (330) 754-8967
      E-mail: sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com
              hans@ohlaborlaw.com


ALTEGRITY INC: Sued Over Violation of Fair Credit Reporting Act
---------------------------------------------------------------
Carrie E. Wirt, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated
v. Altegrity, Inc. and Hireright, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-07414
(S.D.N.Y. September 12, 2014), is brought against the Defendant
for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Altegrity, Inc. and Hireright, Inc. are consumer reporting
agencies that provide consumer reports for employment purposes.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

       Monica Welby, Esq.
       Sally B. Friedman, Esq.
       LEGAL ACTION CENTER OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK
       225 VarickStreet, 4th Floor
       New York, NY 10014
       Telephone: (212) 243-1313
       Facsimile: (212) 675-0286
       E-mail: mwelby@lac.org
               sfriedman@lac.org

          - and -

      James A. Francis, Esq.
      Mark D. Mailman, Esq.
      David A. Searles, Esq.
      FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.
      100 S. Broad Street, 19th Floor
      Philadelphia, PA 19110
      Telephone: (215)735-8600
      Facsimile: (215)940-8000
      Email: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
             mmailman@consumerlawfirm.com
             dsearles@consumerlawfirm.com

         - and -

      Irv Ackelsberg, Esq.
      LANGER GROGAN & DIVER, P.C.
      1717 Arch Street, Suite 4130
      Philadelphia, PA 19103
      Telephone: (215)320-5660
      Facsimile: (215)320-5703
      Email: iackelsberg@langergrogan.com


APPLE INC: Judge Cites Factors for Class Action Deal Approval
-------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge William Alsup signed a notice regarding factors to
be evaluated for any proposed class settlement in the case
captioned URIEL MARCUS and BENEDICT VERCELES, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. APPLE
INC., Defendant, NO. C 14-03824 WHA, (N.D. Cal.).

In the notice dated September 9, 2014, a copy of which is
available at http://is.gd/hA7Kiufrom Leagle.com, Judge Alsup
ordered the parties' counsel to review the Procedural Guidance for
Class Action Settlements, which is available on the website for
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California at www.cand.uscourts.gov/ClassActionSettlementGuidance.
He added that counsel should review these substantive and timing
factors that will be considered in determining whether to grant
preliminary and/or final approval to a proposed class settlement:

1. ADEQUACY OF REPRESENTATION
2. DUE DILIGENCE
3. COST-BENEFIT FOR ABSENT CLASS MEMBERS
4. THE RELEASE
5. EXPANSION OF THE CLASS
6. REVERSION
7. CLAIM PROCEDURE
8. ATTORNEY'S FEES
9. DWINDLING OR MINIMAL ASSETS
10. TIMING OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
11. A RIGHT TO OPT OUT IS NOT A CURE-ALL
12. INCENTIVE PAYMENT
13. NOTICE TO CLASS MEMBERS

Uriel Marcus, Plaintiff, represented by Omar Weaver Rosales, The
Rosales Law Firm, LLC.

Benedict Verceles, Plaintiff, represented by Omar Weaver Rosales,
The Rosales Law Firm, LLC.

Apple Inc, Defendant, represented by David Michael Walsh, Esq. --
dwalsh@mofo.com -- Morrison & Foerster, David M. Walsh --
dwalsh@mofo.com -- Morrison & Foerster LLP, Edward Michael
Rodriguez -- mrodriguez@atlashall.com -- Atlas Hall & Rodriguez
LLP, Erin Hudson -- ehudson@atlashall.com -- Atlas, Hall &
Rodriguez, LLP, Kai S Bartolomeo -- kbartolomeo@mofo.com --
Morrison Foerster LLP, Rose S Lee -- roselee@mofo.com -- Morrison
& Foerster LLP & William Michael Mills -- mkmills@atlashall.com --
Atlas Hall LLP.


APPLE INC: Appeals Court Revives iPhone 3G Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
Marisa Kendall, writing for The Recorder, reports that a state
court of appeal has resurrected allegations that Apple Inc.
falsely claimed its iPhone 3G was "twice as fast" as the earlier
model.

The lower court erred when it dismissed the false advertising
class action because the complaint did not also target AT&T
Mobility, the network carrier for the iPhone 3G, a Sixth District
Court of Appeal panel unanimously ruled on Sept. 12.

The decision is a major victory for plaintiffs, as it means Apple
can't take shelter in AT&T's formidable arbitration agreement and
class arbitration waiver.  That waiver became famous in 2011 as
the basis of the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark ruling in AT&T
Mobility v. Concepcion.

Apple's lawyers at Morrison & Foerster had argued the iPhone's
speed is directly tied to its network, making AT&T an
indispensable party to the litigation. The appellate panel
disagreed.

Even if AT&T shared some fault for the iPhone 3G's performance, it
is not required that all involved parties be named as defendants
in a single lawsuit, Justice Miguel Marquez wrote.

"Apple does not claim, and cannot claim, that findings or rulings
in this action would have any preclusive effect on [AT&T],"
Justice Miguel Marquez wrote. "The mere possibility of unfavorable
evidentiary findings is insufficient to require joinder."

Presiding Justice Conrad Rushing and Justice Eugene Premo
concurred.  Plaintiffs lawyer J. Gerard Stranch IV --
gerards@BSJFirm.com -- of Nashville firm Branstetter, Stranch &
Jennings, applauded the Sixth District's decision.  A ruling for
the other side would have forced plaintiffs to sue parties who
were merely peripheral to the alleged wrongdoing.

"If the court accepted Apple's argument, it would paralyze
litigation within the state of California," Mr. Stranch said.
"For example, any litigation over whether a car reached the
promised miles per gallon . . . would require naming every gas
station that the person bought gas at."

Ingrid Van Zant sued Apple for false advertising in Santa Clara
County in 2010, after she compared her iPhone 3G with her old
iPhone 2G and found they performed at the same speed.

Last year, Santa Clara Judge James Kleinberg, now retired, ordered
Ms. Van Zant to add AT&T as a defendant.  Her lawyers refused,
arguing they could not do so in good faith because they believed
the network provider had done nothing wrong, according to the
Sixth District opinion.

The iPhone 3G failed to live up to its promised speed because of
internal hardware and software flaws, not because of any fault in
the AT&T network, according to Ms. Van Zant's lawyers with
Branstetter, Stranch & Jennings and San Francisco firm Altshuler
Berzon.

Ms. Van Zant's claims followed a spate of federal suits
coordinated as multidistrict litigation before former U.S.
District Chief Judge James Ware.  Following Concepcion, Judge Ware
ordered that federal claims against Apple and AT&T over the iPhone
3G's speed be resolved through individual arbitration.

But Justice Marquez faulted Judge Kleinberg for relying too
heavily on the federal court proceedings to conclude
Ms. Van Zant's claims should also be brought jointly against Apple
and AT&T.

"The trial court attached undue significance to the pleadings and
rulings in the MDL proceedings," Justice Marquez wrote.  "Contrary
to Apple's assertion, Van Zant's complaint departed from the MDL
allegations in several important ways."

Altshuler Berzon associate P. Casey Pitts --
cpitts@altshulerberzon.com -- argued the appeal on behalf of Van
Zant.  Miriam Vogel -- mvogel@mofo.com -- senior of counsel with
Morrison & Foerster's Los Angeles office, argued on behalf of
Apple.


ARONA CORPORATION: "Moreno" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Moreno, and all others similarly situated v. Arona
Corporation, a Foreign Corporation, Case No. 0:14-cv-62101 (S.D.
Fla. September 12, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Arona Corporation owns and operates several stores within the
Southern District of Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Robert Scott Norell, Esq.
      ROBERT S. NORELL P.A.
      300 NW 70th Avenue, Suite 305
      Plantation, FL 33317
      Telephone: (954) 617-6017
      Facsimile: (954) 617-6018
      E-mail: robnorell@aol.com


ASSOCIATED MATERIALS: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Edward Krumholz, Carolyn Degregorio, Jakub Denis, Carmen Froloff,
and Lou Volpe v. Associated Materials, LLC, Associated Materials,
Inc., Alside, Inc., Alside, Alside Supply Center, Alside N.Y.
Distrib. Corp., and John Does 1-12, Case No. 2:14-cv-05371
(E.D.N.Y. September 12, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
wages and declaratory damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Defendants own and operate retail stores throughout the United
States including Alside Wholesale Distributors.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Saul D. Zabell, Esq.
      ZABELL & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
      Corporate Drive, Suite 103
      Bohemia, NY 11716
      Telephone: (631) 589-7242
      Facsimile: (631) 563-7475
      E-mail: SZabell@laborlawsny.com


AVIS BUDGET: Court Cites Factors for Class Action Deal Approval
---------------------------------------------------------------
In TYWAIN WILLIS, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AVIS BUDGET GROUP, INC., AVIS
BUDGET CAR RENTAL, LLC, and AB CAR RENTAL SERVICES INC.,
Defendants, NO. C 14-03926 WHA, (N.D. Cal.), District Judge
William Alsup signed a notice regarding factors to be evaluated
for any proposed class settlement.

Judge Alsup ordered the parties to review the Procedural Guidance
for Class Action Settlements, which is available on the website
for the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California at www.cand.uscourts.gov/ClassActionSettlementGuidance.
In addition, he said, counsel should review these substantive and
timing factors that will be considered in determining whether to
grant preliminary and/or final approval to a proposed class
settlement:

1. ADEQUACY OF REPRESENTATION
2. DUE DILIGENCE
3. COST-BENEFIT FOR ABSENT CLASS MEMBERS
4. THE RELEASE
5. EXPANSION OF THE CLASS
6. REVERSION
7. CLAIM PROCEDURE
8. ATTORNEY'S FEES
9. DWINDLING OR MINIMAL ASSETS
10. TIMING OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT
11. A RIGHT TO OPT OUT IS NOT A CURE-ALL
12. INCENTIVE PAYMENT
13. NOTICE TO CLASS MEMBERS

A copy of the notice dated September 9, 2014, is available at
http://is.gd/eIq94Pfrom Leagle.com.

Tywain Willis, Plaintiff, represented by Chaim Shaun Setareh --
shaun@setarehlaw.com -- Setareh Law Group, Neil Michael Larsen --
neil@setarehlaw.com -- Setareh Law Group & Tuvia Korobkin,
Eisenberg and Associates.

Avis Budget Group, Inc., Defendant, represented by Jody Ann Landry
-- jlandry@littler.com -- Littler Mendelson & Jerrilyn Takada
Malana -- jmalana@littler.com -- Littler Mendelson, P.C..

AB Car Rental Services Inc., Defendant, represented by Jerrilyn
Takada Malana -- jmalana@littler.com -- Littler Mendelson, P.C. &
Jody Ann Landry -- jlandry@littler.com -- Littler Mendelson.


BANK OF AMERICA: "Leyse" Suit Dismissed for Lack of Standing
------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Susan D. Wigenton dismissed the case captioned MARK
LEYSE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated
Plaintiff, v. BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Defendant,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-7128 (SDW) (MCA), (D. N.J.).

Defendant Bank of America filed the motion to dismiss pursuant to
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6).  Bank of
America moved alternatively to transfer the action to the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section 1404(a).

"Because Plaintiff has failed to adequately demonstrate that he
has standing to bring this suit, this Court grants Defendant's
motion to dismiss," wrote Judge Wigenton in an opinion dated
September 8, 2014, a copy of which is available at
http://is.gd/3nkbFYfrom Leagle.com.

MARK LEYSE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

BANK OF AMERICA, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, Defendant, represented by
DAVID JOHN FIOCCOLA -- dfioccola@mofo.com -- MORRISON & FOERSTER
LLP.


BIOSCRIP INC: Briefing on Motion to Dismiss Completed in July
-------------------------------------------------------------
BioScrip, Inc., in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the quarterly
period ended June 30, 2014, provided updates on the Securities
Class Action Litigation in the Southern District of New York.

On September 30, 2013, a putative securities class action lawsuit
was filed against the Company and certain of its officers on
behalf of the putative class of purchasers of the Company's
securities between August 8, 2011 and September 20, 2013,
inclusive.

On November 15, 2013, a putative securities class action lawsuit
was filed against the Company and certain of its directors and
officers and certain underwriters in the Company's April 2013
underwritten public offering of its common stock, on behalf of the
putative class of purchasers of the Company's securities between
August 8, 2011 and September 23, 2013, inclusive.

On December 19, 2013, the United States District Court for the
SDNY entered an order consolidating the two class action lawsuits
and appointing a lead plaintiff. The Company denies any
allegations of wrongdoing in the consolidated class action
lawsuit. The lead plaintiff filed a consolidated complaint on
February 19, 2014 against the Company, certain of its directors
and officers, certain underwriters in the Company's April 2013
underwritten public offering of its common stock, and a certain
stockholder of the Company. The consolidated complaint is brought
on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of the Company's
securities between November 9, 2012 and November 6, 2013,
inclusive, and persons and entities who purchased the Company's
securities pursuant or traceable to two underwritten public
offerings of the Company's common stock conducted in April 2013,
and August 2013. The consolidated complaint alleges generally that
the defendants made material misstatements and/or failed to
disclose matters related the Legacy Division's distribution of the
Medication as well as the Company's PBM Services segment. The
consolidated complaint asserts claims under Sections 11, 12(a)(2)
and 15 of the Securities Act and Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. All defendants
in the case moved to dismiss the consolidated complaint on April
28, 2014. Briefing on the motion to dismiss was complete on July
28, 2014.

The Company believes all of the claims in these class action
lawsuits are without merit and intends to vigorously defend
against these claims. However, there is no assurance that the
Company will be successful in its defense or that insurance will
be available or adequate to fund any settlement or judgment or the
litigation costs of these actions. Additional similar lawsuits may
be filed. Moreover, the Company is not able to predict the outcome
or reasonably estimate a range of possible loss at this time.

The Company is a national provider of infusion and home care
management solutions.


BLUE CROSS: "Simon" Suit Remanded to Jackson Cty. Circuit Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Senior District Judge Ortrie D. Smith remanded the case captioned
DEBRA SIMON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF
KANSAS CITY, Defendant, CASE NO. 14-0587-CV-W-ODS, (W.D. Mo.) to
the Circuit Court for Jackson County, Missouri.

The Plaintiff filed the Motion to Remand.

Judge Smith, in order and opinion dated September 9, 2014, a copy
of which is available at http://is.gd/DRg7DIfrom Leagle.com,
concluded that the Court is exercising its discretion to decline
jurisdiction over the case pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Section
1332(d)(3).

Debra Simon, Plaintiff, represented by Chad C. Beaver, Beaver Law
Firm, LLC, Eric L. Dirks, Williams Dirks Dameron LLC, Matthew Lee
Dameron -- matt.dameron@ago.mo.gov -- Williams Dirks Dameron LLC &
Michael Anthony Williams, Williams Dirks Dameron LLC.

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City, Defendant, represented
by Catesby Ann Major -- catesby.major@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave,
LLP, W. Perry Brandt -- perry.brandt@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave,
LLP & Timothy John Davis -- tim.davis@bryancave.com -- Bryan Cave,
LLP.


BOSA FOODS: Recalls Mediterranean Gourmet Oregano
-------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 17, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Salmonella
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Bosa Foods
Distribution:             British Columbia
Extent of the product
distribution:             Hotel/Restaurant/Institutional
CFIA reference number:    9260

Affected products: 1 kg. Mediterranean Gourmet Oregano Rubbed


BP SOLAR: Court Tosses Bid to Dismiss 1st Amended "Allagas" Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL ALLAGAS, ARTHUR RAY, AND BRETT MOHRMAN, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. BP SOLAR INTERNATIONAL INC., HOME DEPOT U.S.A.,
INC., AND DOES 1-10, inclusive, Defendants, NO. C 14-00560 SI,
(N.D. Cal.) is a purported class action that was initially filed
in Contra Costa County Superior Court on January 8, 2014, and was
removed by defendants to the United States District Court for the
Northern District of California on February 16, 2014.  On February
27, 2014, defendants filed a motion to dismiss plaintiffs'
complaint, which the Court granted in part and denied in part,
with leave to amend.  Plaintiffs amended their complaint on May
23, 2014.  The defendants then filed a motion to dismiss the
plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint and defendants' motion to
strike plaintiffs' class allegations.

District Judge Susan Illston, in an order dated September 8, 2014,
a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/2GvtLLfrom
Leagle.com, denied the motion to dismiss and motion to strike.

Michael Allagas, Plaintiff, represented by Mindy Monhai Wong --
mwong@birka-white.com -- Birka White Law Offices, David Michael
Birka-White -- dbw@birka-white.com -- David M. Birka-White Law
Offices & Stephen Oroza, Birka-White Law Offices.

Arthur Ray, Plaintiff, represented by Mindy Monhai Wong, Birka
White Law Offices, David Michael Birka-White, David M. Birka-White
Law Offices & Stephen Oroza, Birka-White Law Offices.

Brett Mohrman, Plaintiff, represented by Mindy Monhai Wong, Birka
White Law Offices, David Michael Birka-White, David M. Birka-White
Law Offices & Stephen Oroza, Birka-White Law Offices.

BP Solar International, Inc., Defendant, represented by Matthew T.
Heartney -- Matthew.Heartney@aporter.com -- Arnold & Porter &
Eskandar Alex Beroukhim -- Alex.Beroukhim@aporter.com -- Arnold &
Porter LLP.

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., Defendant, represented by Eskandar Alex
Beroukhim -- Alex.Beroukhim@aporter.com -- Arnold & Porter LLP &
Matthew T. Heartney -- Matthew.Heartney@aporter.com -- Arnold &
Porter.


BUILDING MATERIALS: Faces "Narducci" Suit Over Decking Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Narducci and Leanne Claxton, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Building Materials Corporation of
America d/b/a/ GAF Materials Corporation, Case No. 4:14-cv-13569
(E.D. Mich., September 15, 2014), is brought against the Defendant
for failure to disclose defects of Cross Timbers Decking products
while simultaneously placing the Products in the market and
continuing its marketing campaign and representations that it
requires low maintenance and easy for installation with superior
engineering that does not require staining or sealing.

Building Materials Corporation of America is a manufacturer of
residential exterior building products in North America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alyson L. Oliver, Esq.
      950 W. University Drive, Suite 200
      Rochester, MI 48307
      Telephone: (248) 327-6556
      Facsimile: (248) 436-3385
      E-mail: notifications@oliverlg.com


CAAVERI ENTERPRISES: Recalls MD Cordials Due to Sulphites
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 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:           Caaveri Enterprises
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9172


CENTAK ENTERPRISES: "Garcia" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
------------------------------------------------------------
Marcia Garcia, and other similarly-situated individuals v. Centak
Enterprises, Inc., Florida Profit Corporation, Case No. 14-cv-
23372 (S.D. Fla. September 12, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid
overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Centak Enterprises, Inc. is a procurement and logistics company
based in Miami, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Anthony Maximillien Georges-Pierre, Esq.
      REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC
      Court House Tower
      44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200
      Miami, FL 33130
      Telephone: (305) 416-5000
      Facsimile: (305) 416-5005
      E-mail: agp@rgpattorneys.com


CENTENE MANAGEMENT: Faces "Randolph" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sybilla Randolph, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Centene Management Company, LLC, Case No.
3:14-cv-05730 (W.D. Wash. September 12, 2014), is brought against
the Defendant for failure to pay overtime compensation under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Centene Management Company, LLC is a multi-line healthcare
enterprise that provides programs and related services to a number
of under-insured and uninsured individuals.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Erika L. Nusser, Esq.
      Toby James Marshall, Esq.
      TERRELL MARSHALL DAUDT & WILLIE PLLC
      936 North 34th Street, Ste 300
      Seattle, WA 98103-8869
      Telephone: (206) 816-6603
      Facsimile: (206) 350-3528
      E-mail: enusser@tmdwlaw.com
              tmarshall@tmdwlaw.com


CENTRAL TRANSPORT: "Bell" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tyron Bell, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly
situated v. Central Transport, LLC, Case No. 4:14-cv-01598 (E.D.
Mo. September 12, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
compensation and liquidated damages, attorney fees, and other
relief in violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Central Transport, LLC provides transportation and logistics
services to 98 percent of the major manufacturing areas in North
America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Kevin J. Dolley, Esq.
      Laura Spencer Garth, Esq.
      Michael Robert Kruse, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF KEVIN J. DOLLEY, LLC
      2726 S. Brentwood Blvd.
      St. Louis, MO 63144
      Telephone: (314) 645-4100
      Facsimile: (314) 736-6216
      E-mail: kevin@dolleylaw.com
              laura.garth@dolleylaw.com
              michael.kruse@dolleylaw.com

         - and -

      Cyrus C. Dashtaki, Esq.
      DASHTAKI LAW FIRM LLC
      5201 Hampton Ave
      St. Louis, MO 63109
      Telephone: (314) 832-9600
      Facsimile: (314) 353-0181
      E-mail: cyrus@dashtaki.com


CHIPOTLE MEXICAN: "Harris" Suit Certified as Collective Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Harris, Julius Caldwell, DeMarkus Hobbs, and Dana Evenson,
on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc., Defendant, CASE NO.
13-CV-1719 (SRN/SER), (D. Minn.) is before the Court on
Defendant's objections to the April 10, 2014 Report and
Recommendation (R&R) on Plaintiffs' motion for conditional
collective action certification.  The Magistrate Judge recommended
that the motion be granted in part and denied in part.

Accordingly, on September 9, 2014, District Judge Susan Richard
Nelson ruled that the Defendant's objections are sustained in part
and overruled in part, and the Court adopts the R&R in part.

The collective action is conditionally certified as: All current
and former hourly-paid restaurant employees of Chipotle Mexican
Grill, Inc. who were employed at Chipotle's Crystal, Minnesota
restaurant and, on or after April 10, 2011, were automatically
punched off the clock by the Aloha timekeeping system at 12:30
a.m. and continued to work, or who otherwise worked "off the
clock" during closing shifts, resulting in nonpayment of regular
wages or overtime wages.

A copy of Judge Nelson's memorandum opinion and order is available
at http://is.gd/1VMukXfrom Leagle.com.

Kent M. Williams, Williams Law Firm, 1632 Homestead Trail, Long
Lake, MN 55356; Kyle Bachus -- kbachus@coloradolaw.net -- and
Karen O'Connor -- Karen.OConnor@coloradolaw.net -- Bachus &
Schanker, LLC, 899 Wynkoop Street, Suite 700, Denver, CO 80202;
and Adam S. Levy, Law Office of Adam S. Levy, LLC, P.O. Box 88,
Oreland, PA 19075; for Plaintiffs.

Jennifer M. Robbins -- jmrobbins@rkmc.com -- Robins, Kaplan,
Miller & Ciresi LLP, 2800 LaSalle Plaza, 800 LaSalle Avenue,
Minneapolis, MN 55402; John K. Shunk -- jshunk@messner.com -- and
Andrew A. Smith asmith@messner.com -- Messner Reeves LLP, 1430
Wykoop Street, Suite 300, Denver, CO 80202; and Richard J. Simmons
-- rsimmons@sheppardmullin.com -- Sheppard Mullin Richter &
Hampton LLP, 333 South Hope Street, Forty-Third Floor, Los
Angeles, CA 90071, for Defendant.


COAST SUSHI: Faces "Choi" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Hours
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Y. Choi, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated known and unknown v. Coast Sushi Corporation, Coast
Central Corporation, South Coast Sushi Corporation, Thipa Thumha
Thai, Nattawut Chaowsaowapa, and Prokchon Soyluang, Case No. 1:14-
cv-07126 (N.D. Ill. September 12, 2014), is brought against the
Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for work in excess of
40 hours per week.

The Defendants own and operate a Japanese restaurant within the
State of Illinois.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ryan J. Kim, Esq.
      INSEED LAW PC
      2454 E. Dempster St., Suite 301
      Des Plaines, IL 60016
      Telephone: (847) 905-6262
      E-mail: ryan@inseedlaw.com


CONAN FOODS: Recalls Ellada Greek Oregano Leaves
------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 20, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Salmonella
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Conan Foods
Distribution:             Ontario, Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail

Conan Foods is recalling Ellada brand Greek Oregano Leaves from
the marketplace due to possible Salmonella contamination.
Consumers should not consume the recalled product described.

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

Food contaminated with 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.

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

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

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


CONTANGO OIL: Defending Against Class Suits Over Crimson Merger
---------------------------------------------------------------
Contango Oil & Gas Company said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that in connection with the
Crimson Exploration Inc. ("Crimson"), several class action
lawsuits have been brought by Crimson stockholders in Delaware
Chancery Court seeking damages and injunctive relief including,
among other things, compensatory damages and costs and
disbursements relating to the lawsuits.  Various combinations of
the Company, certain subsidiaries of the Company, members of
Crimson's pre-merger board of directors, members of Crimson's pre-
merger management team and Oaktree Capital Management L.P. have
been named as defendants in these lawsuits.

The Delaware lawsuits have been consolidated into a single action
referred to as In Re: Crimson Exploration Inc. Stockholder
Litigation; C.A. 8541-VCP. Additionally, on July 13, 2013, a
separate and similar complaint was filed in the District Court of
Harris County Texas, in the matter of Fisichella Family Trust v.
Crimson Exploration Inc. It is possible that additional similar
lawsuits may be filed.

The merger-related lawsuits allege, among other things, that
Crimson's board of directors failed to take steps to obtain a fair
price, failed to properly value Crimson, failed to protect against
alleged conflicts of interest, failed to conduct a reasonably
informed evaluation of whether the transaction was in the best
interests of stockholders, failed to fully disclose all material
information to stockholders, acted in bad faith and for improper
motives, engaged in self-dealing, discouraged other strategic
alternatives, took steps to avoid competitive bidding, and agreed
to allegedly unreasonable deal protection mechanisms, including
the no-shop, fiduciary-out provisions and termination fee. The
lawsuits also allege that Contango and certain other defendants
aided and abetted the other defendants in violating duties to the
Crimson stockholders. The known plaintiffs in these lawsuits
collectively owned a very small percentage of the total
outstanding shares of Crimson common stock at the time of the
Merger, which was approved by Contango's pre-merger shareholders
(89% of outstanding shares and 99% of voted shares were voted in
favor of the Merger) and Crimson's pre-merger shareholders (69% of
outstanding shares and 88% of voted shares were voted in favor of
the Merger).

The Company believes that these merger-related lawsuits are
without merit and is contesting them vigorously.

Contango Oil & Gas Company is a Houston, Texas based, independent
natural gas and oil company.


CONVERGYS CORPORATION: Settlement Reached in Suit v. Hyundai
------------------------------------------------------------
Convergys Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that in November 2011, one
of the Company's call center clients, Hyundai Motor America
("Hyundai"), tendered a contractual indemnity claim to Convergys
Customer Management Group Inc., a subsidiary of the Company,
relating to a putative class action captioned Brandon Wheelock,
individually and on behalf of a class and subclass of similarly
situated individuals, v. Hyundai Motor America, Orange County
Superior Court, California, Case No. 30-2011-00522293-CU-BT-CJC.
The lawsuit alleges that Hyundai violated California's telephone
recording laws by recording telephone calls with customer service
representatives without providing a disclosure that the calls
might be recorded.

Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. is not named as a
defendant in the lawsuit, and there has been no determination as
to whether Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. will be
required to indemnify Hyundai.

The Company believes Convergys Customer Management Group Inc. has
meritorious defenses to Hyundai's demand for indemnification and
also believes there are meritorious defenses to Plaintiff's claims
in the lawsuit.

Pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding dated April 29, 2014,
Hyundai, Plaintiff and Convergys Customer Management Group Inc.
agreed in principle to settle the lawsuit. The agreement in
principle is subject to execution of a formal settlement agreement
and approval by the Court.

As a result of the agreement in principle to settle the lawsuit,
the Company accrued a liability that is representative of the best
estimate of the loss expected to be incurred with the resolution
of Hyundai's contractual indemnity claim. The ultimate resolution
of the indemnity claim is not expected to have a material impact
on the Company's liquidity, results of operations or financial
condition.

Convergys Corporation is a global leader in customer management,
focused on bringing value to our clients through every customer
interaction.


DANSON DECOR: Recalls Halloween Feathered Boas
----------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 22, 2014
Posting date:             September 22, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Children's Products, Clothing and
                          Accessories
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Flammability Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-41447

Affected products: Halloween feathered boas

The recall involves feathered boas sold under the Danson Decor
brand across Canada.  These boas come in green, yellow, white,
black, purple and pink colour.

Health Canada's sampling and evaluation program has determined
that the feather boas child/adult Halloween costume does not meet
the requirements for textile flammability under Canadian law.

If exposed to flames such as from candles, matches or lighters,
the feather boas could catch fire and possibly cause burns to
consumers.

Neither Danson Decor nor Health Canada has received reports of
consumer incidents or injuries to Canadians related to the use of
these costumes.

For tips to help consumers celebrate Halloween safely, see the
following Health Canada's publications: Halloween Safety and
Reminding Canadians to have a safe Halloween.

Approximately 8640 of the recalled feather boas were sold in
various stores across Canada.

The recalled feather boas were manufactured in China and sold from
Aug. 2013 to Sept. 2014.

Companies:

   Distributor     Danson Decor Inc.
                   Montreal
                   Quebec
                   Canada

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled feathered
boas and return them to their original place of purchase for a
refund.


DATTANI FOODS: Recalls Star Guava Drink Due to Sulphites
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 10, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Sulphites
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Dattani Foods Ltd. O/A Dattani Wholesale
Distribution:             Alberta, Manitoba, Saskatchewan
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9232

Affected products: 250 ml. Star Guava Drink with all codes where
sulphites are not declared on the label


DENDREON CORPORATION: Class Action Over PROVENGE in Discovery
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dendreon Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that the Company and three
former officers are named defendants in a securities action
pending in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Washington (the "District Court") and brought by a
group of individual investors who elected to opt out of a
securities class action lawsuit that was settled in August 2013.
The pending action, filed May 16, 2013, is captioned Christoph
Bolling, et al. v. Dendreon Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:13-cv-
0872 JLR. Plaintiffs allege generally that the Company made
various false or misleading statements between April 29, 2010 and
August 3, 2011 concerning the Company, its finances, business
operations and prospects with a focus on the market launch of
PROVENGE and related forecasts concerning physician adoption, and
revenue from sales of PROVENGE.

Based on information provided informally by plaintiffs' counsel,
the plaintiff group, which totals approximately 30 persons,
purports to have purchased approximately 250,000 shares of
Dendreon common stock during the relevant period. The Bolling
plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on July 16, 2013, alleging
both violations of certain provisions of the federal Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and provisions of Washington state law and
seeking unspecified damages.

In response to a motion by defendants, the federal claims were
dismissed with leave to amend in January 2014.

On February 17, 2014, plaintiffs filed a Second Amended Complaint
which defendants moved to dismiss on March 24, 2014. After
briefing, the District Court, by order dated June 5, 2014, again
dismissed the federal claims, but denied the motion as to the
plaintiffs' Washington state law claims for fraudulent and
negligent misrepresentation. The case is now in the discovery
phase.

"We cannot predict the outcome of the litigation; however, the
Company intends to continue defending against claims vigorously,"
the Company said.

Dendreon Corporation is a biotechnology company focused on the
discovery, development and commercialization of novel therapeutics
that may significantly improve cancer treatment options for
patients.


DEPUY ORTHOPAEDICS: Sued in Madison County Over Hip Implants
------------------------------------------------------------
The Madison-St. Clair Record reports that a McLean County woman is
suing in Madison County over allegations she was implanted with a
hip replacement product that doctors knew was defective.

Carole Owen filed the lawsuit against DePuy Orthopaedics Inc. of
Warsaw, Ind., DePuy International Limited, Johnson & Johnson of
New Brunswick, N.J.; Dr. Thomas Schmalzried, Vail Consulting of
San Francisco, and Dr. Thomas Park Vail on Aug. 21 in Madison
County Circuit Court.

According to the complaint, Ms. Owen underwent a hip replacement
procedure and was fitted with a DePuy XL Acetabular System, or
ASR.  She says the manufacturers and surgeons who suggested she
use an ASR promoted the system as being safe and effective for hip
replacements.  Ms. Owen says they failed to disclose a history of
mounting problems that had allegedly caused the product to fail in
other patients.

Ms. Owen contends the defendants knew the hip replacement products
they were manufacturing, selling or implanting were defective and
likely to break or malfunction and cause patients significant
injury.  She alleges they knew of the dangers but have failed to
warn consumers.  As a result, Owen says she agreed to use the hip
implant that eventually failed and caused her serious injuries.

Ms. Owen accuses the defendants of negligence, strict liability,
intentional infliction of emotional distress and failure to warn.
She says they also violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud Act.  She
seeks more than $300,000 in damages from each of the defendants to
compensate for lost wages, medical costs, pain and suffering,
mental anguish and disfigurement.

Attorney Roy C. Dripps -- royd@adwblaw.com -- of Armbruster,
Dripps, Winterscheidt & Blotevogel in Alton represents Owen.  They
seek a jury trial.

The case number is Madison County Circuit case 14-L-1175.


DREAMGEAR LLC: Recalls Potentially Hazardous Battery Packs
----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 17, 2014
Posting date:             September 17, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Tools and Electrical Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Fire Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-41403

Affected products: i.Sound portable power battery packs

These products are included:

DGIPAD-4543 -- i.Sound
http://www.isound.net
Portable Power 8,000 mAh
Input: 12V 1A
Output: 5V 2.1A on each connector 2.5A together
Capacity: 30Wh Lithium Polymer Battery
cULus listing number: MH47109
Bears an unauthorized UL Mark

I.Sound
Portable Power
8,000 mAh backup battery
i.Sound: The New Sound
by dreamGEAR
PO Box 478
Torrance CA 90508 USA

DGIPAD-4544
i.Sound
http://www.isound.net
Portable Power 16,000 mAh
Input: 12V 1A
Output: 5V 2.1A on each connector 2.5A together
Capacity: 60Wh Lithium Polymer Battery
cULus listing number: MH47109

Bears an unauthorized UL Mark

I.Sound
Portable Power
16,000 mAh backup battery

i.Sound: The New Sound
by dreamGEAR
PO Box 478
Torrance CA 90508 USA

UL has determined that the battery packs are not authorized to
bear the UL Mark.  Also, the products do not comply with the
appropriate safety standards and may pose a risk of fire.

Health Canada has not received any reports of consumer incidents
or injuries related to these battery packs.

The number sold is unknown.  However, the product is known to have
been sold online and may have been sold at other locations.

The recalled product was manufactured in China.

Companies:

   Distributor     dreamGEAR LLC
                   Torrance
                   California
                   United States

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled battery packs
and dispose of them following municipal waste guidelines.


EL GINETE: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Padilla" Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Lauro Zarco Padilla, for himself and all others similarly situated
v. El Ginete, Inc. and Ruben M. Pelayo, Case No. 3:14-cv-00305
(S.D. Ohio September 12, 2014), is brought against the Defendant
for failure to pay overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

El Ginete, Inc. owns and operates El Sombrero restaurant with a
principal place of business in Miami County, Ohio.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      James P. Langendorf, Esq.
      1081 N. University Blvd., Suite A
      Middletown, OH 45042
      Telephone: (513) 705-4104
      Facsimile: (513) 705-4106
      E-mail: jamesplang@aol.com

         - and -

      Christopher D. Clark
      ROBERTS KELLY BUCIO, LLP
      10 North Market St.
      Troy, OH 45373
      Telephone: (937) 332-9300
      Facsimile: (937) 552-7666
      Email: cclark@rkblawyers.com


EPIRUS BIOPHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Merger Suits in Massachusetts
--------------------------------------------------------------
Epirus Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014,
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that between April
28, 2014 and May 2, 2014, three putative class action lawsuits
were filed by purported stockholders of the Company in the
Business Litigation Session of the Massachusetts Superior Court,
Suffolk County, against the Company, EB Sub, the members of the
Company's board of directors and Old Epirus. These actions are:
Paul Patrick Laky v. Zalicus Inc., et al., Civ. A. No. 14-1380;
Michael Ma v. Zalicus Inc., et al ., Civ. A. No. 14-1381; Diane
Harrypersaud v. Zalicus Inc., et al., Civ. A. No. 14-1455
(collectively, the "Massachusetts Actions").

On May 21, 2014, plaintiffs Michael Ma and Diane Harrypersaud
filed a consolidated amended complaint. The Massachusetts Actions
allege that the Company's board of directors breached its
fiduciary duties, and that Old Epirus, the Company and EB Sub
aided and abetted the purported breaches, in connection with the
proposed Merger. The Massachusetts Actions seek relief including,
among other things, to enjoin defendants from proceeding with the
Merger, to enjoin defendants from consummating the Merger unless
additional procedures are implemented and rescind the Merger if
consummated (or to award rescissionary damages), an award of
compensatory damages, and an award of all costs of the
Massachusetts Actions, including reasonable attorneys' fees and
experts' fees.

On July 15, 2014, EPIRUS Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., formerly known
as Zalicus Inc., a Delaware corporation completed its merger with
the former entity EPIRUS Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware
corporation and private company ("Old Epirus"), pursuant to the
terms of that certain Agreement and Plan of Merger and
Reorganization (as amended, the "Merger Agreement"), dated as of
April 15, 2014, by and among the Company, Old Epirus and EB Sub,
Inc. ("EB Sub"), formerly known as BRunning, Inc., a Delaware
corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (the
"Merger").

The Company is a commercial-stage biotechnology company focused on
improving patient access to important biopharmaceuticals by
developing, manufacturing, and commercializing biosimilar
therapeutics, or biosimilars, in targeted geographies worldwide.


EPIRUS BIOPHARMACEUTICALS: Faces Delaware Actions Over Merger
-------------------------------------------------------------
Epirus Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014,
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that between May 1,
2014, and May 16, 2014, three putative class action lawsuits were
filed by purported stockholders of the Company in the Court of
Chancery of the State of Delaware against the Company, EB Sub, the
members of the Company's board of directors and Old Epirus. These
actions are: Harvey Stein v. Zalicus, Inc. et al., Case No. 9602;
Tuan Do v. Zalicus, Inc. et al., Case No. 9636; and Sy Simcha
Mendlowitz and Bennet Mattingly v. Zalicus, Inc., et al., Case No.
9664 (collectively, the "Delaware Actions"). On May 23, 2014,
plaintiff Harvey Stein filed a verified amended complaint, and on
May 27, 2014, plaintiff Tuan Do filed a verified amended
complaint.

The Delaware Actions allege that the Company's board of directors
breached its fiduciary duties, and that Old Epirus and EB Sub
aided and abetted the purported breaches, in connection with the
proposed Merger. The Delaware Actions seek relief including, among
other things, to preliminarily and permanently enjoin the proposed
Merger, to enjoin consummation of the proposed Merger and rescind
the Merger if consummated (or to award rescissionary damages), an
award of compensatory damages, and an award of all costs of the
Delaware Actions, including reasonable attorneys' fees and
experts' fees.

On June 6, 2014, plaintiffs' counsel in the Delaware Actions filed
a motion seeking to schedule a preliminary injunction hearing in
advance of the stockholder vote on the proposed Merger, and
seeking expedited discovery in advance of that hearing. Old
Epirus, the Company, and the individual defendants opposed the
motion. After a hearing, on June 13, 2014, the Delaware Court of
Chancery denied plaintiffs' motion.

On July 15, 2014, EPIRUS Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., formerly known
as Zalicus Inc., a Delaware corporation completed its merger with
the former entity EPIRUS Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware
corporation and private company ("Old Epirus"), pursuant to the
terms of that certain Agreement and Plan of Merger and
Reorganization (as amended, the "Merger Agreement"), dated as of
April 15, 2014, by and among the Company, Old Epirus and EB Sub,
Inc. ("EB Sub"), formerly known as BRunning, Inc., a Delaware
corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company (the
"Merger").

The Company is a commercial-stage biotechnology company focused on
improving patient access to important biopharmaceuticals by
developing, manufacturing, and commercializing biosimilar
therapeutics, or biosimilars, in targeted geographies worldwide.


EXTRA CLEAN: Sued in Md. Over Breach of Fair Labor Standards Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Julio E. Cisneros Rivera v. Angela Dixson a/k/a Angela Gitelson
and Extra Clean, Inc., Case No. 8:14-cv-02901 (D. Md. September
12, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay
overtime wages, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Extra Clean, Inc. is a cleaning company owned and operated by
Angela Dixson.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Justin Zelikovitz, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF JUSTIN ZELIKOVITZ, PLLC
      519 H Street NW, Second Floor
      Washington, DC 20001
      Telephone: (202) 803-6083
      Facsimile: (202) 683-6102
      E-mail: justin@dcwagelaw.com


F.A.S.T. FIRST: Recalls Disposable Gloves
-----------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 10, 2014
Posting date:             September 16, 2014
Type of communication:    Medical Device Recall
Subcategory:              Medical Device
Hazard classification:    Type III
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Medical Devices
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
                          Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-41361

Recalled products: Disposable gloves

Unlicensed disposable gloves were repackaged and added to first
aid kits manufactured by F.A.S.T.

More than 10 numbers, contact manufacturer.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     F.A.S.T. First Aid and Survival Technologies
                     Limited
                    8850 River Road, Delta
                    V4G 1B5
                    British Columbia
                    Canada


FIRST NATIONAL: "Antonik" Action in Discovery Stage
---------------------------------------------------
First National Community Bancorp, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q
Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August
11, 2014, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that
Steven Antonik, individually, as Administrator of the Estate of
Linda Kluska, William R. Howells, and Louise A. Howells, on behalf
of themselves and others similarly situated, filed on August 13,
2013, a consumer protection class action against the Company and
Bank in the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas, seeking
equitable, injunction and monetary relief to address an alleged
pattern and practice of wrong doing by the Bank relating to the
repossession and sale of the Plaintiffs' and class members'
financed motor vehicles.  This matter is in the discovery stage.
At this time the Company cannot reasonably determine the outcome
or potential range of loss.

The Company is in the business of providing customary retail and
commercial banking services to individuals and businesses within
its primary market located in Northeastern Pennsylvania.


FIRST NATIONAL: "Saxe" Action in Discovery Phase
------------------------------------------------
First National Community Bancorp, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q
Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August
11, 2014, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that
Charles Saxe, III individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated filed on September 17, 2013, a consumer class
action against the Bank in the Lackawanna County Court of Common
Pleas alleging violations of the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial
Code in connection with the repossession and resale of financed
vehicles.  This matter is in the discovery stage.  At this time
the Company cannot reasonably determine the outcome or potential
range of loss.

The Company is in the business of providing customary retail and
commercial banking services to individuals and businesses within
its primary market located in Northeastern Pennsylvania.


FTS USA: Faces "Estrada" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Hours
----------------------------------------------------------------
Orlando Estrada and all others similarly situated under 29 U.S.C.
216(b) v. FTS USA, LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-23388 (S.D. Fla.,
September 15, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure
to pay overtime and minimum wages for work performed in excess of
40 hours weekly.

FTS USA, LLC is a foreign limited liability company that provides
engineering services, cable installation and maintenance in Dade
County, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


GAMESTOP INC: Lusby Deal Has Initial OK; Final Hearing in March
---------------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Howard R. Lloyd granted preliminary approval of a
settlement in the class action captioned THOMAS LUSBY, SCOTT
WILSEY, RUDAE BROWN, and DINA LE FEVRE, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. GAMESTOP,
INC., and GAMESTOP CORPORATION, Defendants, CASE NO. 12-CV-03783-
HRL, (N.D. Cal.).

The Court conditionally certified the proposed Settlement Class
and included Subclasses defined as:

Class: All persons who are and/or were employed as overtime-
eligible employees by GameStop, in one or more of GameStop's
California retail stores, between June 21, 2010 and June 30, 2012.
SM Subclass: Class Members who held the position of Store Manager
or SM, Store Manager in Training or SMIT, and Area Manager or AM
during the Class Period.

ASM Subclass: Class Members who held the position of Assistant
Store Manager or ASM during the Class Period.

SGA Subclass: Class Members who held the position of Senior Game
Advisor or SGA during the Class Period.

GA Subclass: Class Members who held the position of Game Advisor
or GA and Lead Game Advisor or LGA during the Class Period.

Former SM Subclass: Class Members whose employment with Game Stop
terminated during the Class Period while holding the position of
Store Manager or SM, Store Manager in Training or SMIT, or Area
Manager or AM.

Former ASM Subclass: Class Members whose employment with GameStop
terminated during the Class Period while holding the position of
Assistant Store Manager or ASM.

Former SGA Subclass: Class Members whose employment with GameStop
terminated during the Class Period while holding the position of
Senior Game Advisor or SGA.

Former GA Subclass: Class Members whose employment with GameStop
terminated during the Class Period while holding the position of
Game Advisor or GA and Lead Game Advisor or LGA.

The Court held that Scott Cole & Associates, APC may act as Class
Counsel.

The Court appointed Thomas Lusby, Scott Wilsey, Rudae Brown, and
Dina Le Fevre as Class Representatives.

The Court appointed Gilardi & Co., LLC as Claims Administrator.

A final approval hearing will be held on March 24, 2015, at 10:00
a.m., to determine whether the proposed Settlement is fair,
adequate, reasonable, and should be approved.

A copy of Judge Lloyd's September 9, 2014 order is available at
http://is.gd/4TIHnkfrom Leagle.com.

Thomas Lusby, Plaintiff, represented by Molly Ann DeSario --
mdesario@scalaw.com -- Scott Cole & Associates, APC & Scott Edward
Cole -- scole@scalaw.com -- Scott Cole & Associates, APC.

Gamestop, Inc, Defendant, represented by Carrie Anne Gonell --
cgonell@morganlewis.com -- Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP & John David
Hayashi -- jhayashi@morganlewis.com -- Morgan Lewis Bockius LLP.

Gamestop Corporation, Defendant, represented by Carrie Anne
Gonell, Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP & John David Hayashi, Morgan
Lewis Bockius LLP.


GE MEDICAL: Recalls Precision 500D X-Ray Imaging System
-------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 12, 2014
Posting date:             September 22, 2014
Type of communication:    Medical Device Recall
Subcategory:              Medical Device
Hazard classification:    Type II
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Medical Devices
Audience:                 General Public, Healthcare
                          Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number:    RA-41395

Recalled products: Precision 500D X-ray imaging system

Potential incorrect installation of overhead video monitor if
mounting screws are missing.  This may increase risk of monitor
becoming disengaged from mounting tray and falling which could
result in injury.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     GE Medical Systems LLC
                    3200 North Grandview Blvd.
                    Waukesha 53188
                    Wisconsin
                    United States


GEL SPICE: Recalls 3.53 oz Fresh Finds Brand Ground Black Pepper
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gel Spice Company, Inc., of Bayonne, NJ, is issuing a voluntary
recall notice for 16,443 cases of Fresh Finds-Ground Black Pepper,
3.53 oz, plastic jars, because it has the possibility to be
contaminated with Salmonella, an organism which can cause serious
and sometimes fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly
people, and others with weakened immune systems.  Healthy persons
infected with Salmonella often experience fever, diarrhea (which
may be bloody), nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain.  In rare
circumstances, infection with Salmonella can result in the
organism getting into the bloodstream and producing more severe
illnesses such as arterial infections (i.e., infected aneurysms),
endocarditis and arthritis.

Product was distributed via Big Lots Stores, Inc. nationwide, with
the exception of Alaska and Hawaii.

There are 16,443 cases of the recalled product sold in 3.53
oz.(100 g) plastic jars with Best By Dates of 6/30/17, 7/01/17,
7/02/17, 7/22/17, and 7/23/17 with the Fresh Finds brand label
with UPC Code 4 11010 98290 1 is sold exclusively at Big Lots
Retail Stores, Inc.  The Best By dates are printed on the neck of
the bottle above the label.

There have been no reported illnesses related to this product to
date.

The recall was issued as the result of sampling by the FDA which
revealed that the finished products contained the bacteria.

If you have the recalled product, please dispose of the product.
No other size container or best by dates of Fresh Finds Ground
Black Pepper are affected by this recall.


GENTIVA HEALTH: Mediation Held in "Rindfleisch" Lawsuit
-------------------------------------------------------
Global mediation was conducted in the Rindfleisch lawsuit, Gentiva
Health Services, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014.

On May 10, 2010, a collective and class action complaint entitled
Lisa Rindfleisch et al. v. Gentiva Health Services, Inc. was filed
in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
New York against the Company in which five former employees
("Plaintiffs") alleged wage and hour law violations. The former
employees claimed they were paid pursuant to "an unlawful hybrid"
compensation plan that paid them on both a per visit and an hourly
basis, thereby voiding their exempt status and entitling them to
overtime pay. Plaintiffs alleged continuing violations of federal
and state law and sought damages under the Fair Labor Standards
Act ("FLSA"), as well as under the New York Labor Law and North
Carolina Wage and Hour Act ("NCWHA").

On October 8, 2010, the Court granted the Company's motion to
transfer the venue of the lawsuit to the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Georgia. On April 13, 2011, the
Court granted Plaintiffs' motion for conditional certification of
the FLSA claims as a collective action.

On May 26, 2011, the Court bifurcated the FLSA portion of the suit
into a liability phase, in which discovery closed on January 15,
2013, and a potential damages phase, to be scheduled pending
outcome of the liability phase.

Following a motion for partial summary judgment by the Company
regarding the New York state law claims, Plaintiffs agreed
voluntarily to dismiss those claims in a filing on December 12,
2011. Plaintiffs filed a motion for certification of a North
Carolina state law class for NCWHA claims on January 20, 2012.

On August 29, 2012, the Court denied Plaintiffs' motion for
certification of a North Carolina state law class. The Company
filed a motion for partial summary judgment on Plaintiffs' claims
under the NCWHA on March 22, 2012, which the Court granted on
January 16, 2013.

On February 14, 2013, the Company filed two motions for partial
summary judgment with regard to the Company's liability for
Plaintiffs' FLSA claims. On the same day, Plaintiffs filed a
motion for partial summary judgment in their favor with regard to
the Company's liability.

On July 26, 2013, the Court denied the Company's motion for
summary judgment with regard to the Company's liability for
Plaintiffs' FLSA claims and granted Plaintiffs' motion for summary
judgment. On November 4, 2013, the Court denied the Company's
motion to amend the District Court's July 26 Order to certify two
legal issues for immediate interlocutory appeal to the Eleventh
Circuit Court of Appeals. In its Order, the Court established a
30-day deadline for the Company to file its motion for
decertification of the FLSA collective action class, which the
Company then filed on December 4, 2013.

On April 18, 2014, the Court issued an Order granting the
Company's motion for decertification and dismissing the opt-in
plaintiffs from the lawsuit without prejudice. On the same day,
Plaintiffs filed a motion to amend the Court's Order to delay the
effective date of the dismissal of the opt-in plaintiffs' claims
for 60 days, until June 17, 2014.  On May 8, 2014, the Court
entered an Order granting Plaintiffs' motion to amend, thereby
extending the effective date of dismissal through June 17, 2014.

On June 17, 2014, approximately 194 of the former 999 opt-in
plaintiffs who had been dismissed from this case filed a new
Complaint against the Company in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Georgia as a separate, follow-on
lawsuit with identical claims captioned Cynthia Bailey et al. v.
Gentiva Health Services, Inc. These were some of the individuals
who had been dismissed from the Rindfleisch lawsuit and who wished
to continue to pursue their claims.

Given the filing of the follow-on lawsuit, at the June 19, 2014
settlement conference in respect of the Rindfleisch lawsuit, it
was determined that this case would be stayed and administratively
closed pending the outcome of global mediation of both lawsuits,
which was scheduled for September 12, 2014.

Because of this, the trial date that had been scheduled for July
was reset. Accordingly, on June 24, 2014, the District Judge
administratively closed this case.

If there is no settlement which resolves all issues in the
Rindfleisch lawsuit as a result of the September 12 mediation,
this lawsuit will be re-opened upon the request of either party,
so long as the request is made within 90 days of the September 12,
2014 mediation.

Plaintiffs in this lawsuit are seeking attorneys' fees, back wages
and liquidated damages going back three years from the filing of
the complaint under the FLSA.

Gentiva Health Services, Inc. is a provider of home health
services, hospice services and community care services serving
patients through approximately 500 locations in 40 states.


GENTIVA HEALTH: June 2015 Status Conference in "Wilkie" Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
A status conference is scheduled for June 22, 2015, in the
"Wilkie" class action, Gentiva Health Services, Inc. said in its
Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on August 11, 2014, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014.

On June 11, 2010, a collective and class action complaint entitled
Catherine Wilkie, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Gentiva Health Services, Inc. was filed in
the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
California against the Company in which a former employee alleged
wage and hour violations under the FLSA and California law. The
complaint alleged that the Company paid some of its employees on
both a per visit and hourly basis, thereby voiding their exempt
status and entitling them to overtime pay. The complaint further
alleged that California employees were subject to violations of
state laws requiring meal and rest breaks, overtime pay, accurate
wage statements and timely payment of wages. The plaintiff sought
class certification, attorneys' fees, back wages, penalties and
damages going back three years on the FLSA claim and four years on
the state wage and hour claims.

The Company denies the plaintiff's allegations but, following a
March 2012 mediation, agreed to pay a total settlement amount of
$5 million to settle the collective and class action claims.

The federal district court granted final approval of the
settlement on March 26, 2013, and funds were disbursed to the
participating class members, 99 percent of whom timely negotiated
their settlement checks. The unclaimed wages will escheat to the
State of California, and any balance remaining will be distributed
to a cy pres beneficiary at the conclusion of the escheat process.

A status conference is scheduled for June 22, 2015, at which time
the parties will present a final accounting of the settlement
fund, and the court is expected to approve distribution of the
residual to the cy pres beneficiary and dismiss the case.

Gentiva Health Services, Inc. is a provider of home health
services, hospice services and community care services serving
patients through approximately 500 locations in 40 states.


GENTIVA HEALTH: Securities Class Action in Preliminary Stage
------------------------------------------------------------
Between November 2, 2010 and October 25, 2011, five shareholder
class actions were filed against Gentiva Health Services, Inc. and
certain of its current and former officers and directors in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York.
Each of these actions asserted claims under Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "1934 Act") in
connection with the Company's participation in the Medicare Home
Health Prospective Payment System ("HH PPS"). Following
consolidation of the actions and the appointment of Los Angeles
City Employees' Retirement System as lead plaintiff, on April 16,
2012, a consolidated shareholder class action complaint, captioned
In re Gentiva Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 10-CV-5064,
was filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern
District of New York.

The complaint, which named Gentiva and certain current and former
officers and directors as defendants, asserted claims under
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the 1934 Act, as well as Sections 11
and 15 of the Securities Act of 1933 (the "1933 Act"), in
connection with the Company's participation in the HH PPS. The
complaint alleged, among other things, that the Company's public
disclosures misrepresented and failed to disclose that the Company
improperly increased the number of in-home therapy visits to
patients for the purposes of triggering higher reimbursement rates
under the HH PPS, which caused an artificial inflation in the
price of Gentiva's common stock during the period between July 31,
2008 and October 4, 2011.

On June 15, 2012, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
complaint. On March 25, 2013, the court granted defendants' motion
to dismiss with leave to amend the complaint in accordance with
the court's rulings as set forth in its March 25 order.

On May 10, 2013, lead plaintiff filed a consolidated amended class
action complaint, and, on June 24, 2013, defendants filed a motion
to dismiss. On September 19, 2013, the court granted in part and
denied in part defendants' motion to dismiss.

As a result of the court's decision, the named current officers
and directors were dismissed from the action, and certain claims
against Gentiva and a former officer and a former officer/director
remained. On October 3, 2013, the remaining defendants moved for
partial reconsideration of the court's September 19 order.

On December 10, 2013, the court granted in part and denied in part
the remaining defendants' motion for partial reconsideration. As a
result of the court's decision, Gentiva and the former officer
were dismissed from the action, and only a Section 10(b) claim
against the former officer/director remains.

On January 9, 2014, the former officer/director filed an answer to
the consolidated amended class action complaint. On January 28,
2014, lead plaintiff filed a motion for the entry of final
judgment under Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

On March 3, 2014, the court granted in part and denied in part
lead plaintiff's motion under Rule 54(b), granting the motion to
the extent lead plaintiff sought final judgment for the claims
brought pursuant to the 1933 Act as to all defendants, and denying
the motion to the extent lead plaintiff sought final judgment for
the claims brought pursuant to the 1934 Act as to all defendants
other than the former officer/director.

As a result of the court's decision, on March 6, 2014, the court
entered final judgment in favor of all defendants on lead
plaintiff's claims under Sections 11 and 15 of the 1933 Act.

Given the preliminary stage of the action, the Company is unable
to assess the probable outcome or potential liability, if any,
arising from the action on the business, financial condition,
results of operations, liquidity or capital resources of the
Company. The Company does not believe that an estimate of a
reasonably possible loss or range of loss can be made for the
action at this time. The defendants intend to defend themselves
vigorously in the action.

Gentiva Health Services, Inc. is a provider of home health
services, hospice services and community care services serving
patients through approximately 500 locations in 40 states.


GINGERBREAD HOUSE: Recalls Baked Goods Due to Milk and Wheat
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 12, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Milk, Allergen - Wheat
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           The Gingerbread House Bakery
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9204


GMB LANDSCAPING: "Mendez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Mendez, Salvadore Rosales Sanchez, Wilfredo Juarez, and
Milton Ezequiel Vasquez Mazariego, on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated v. Guiseppe Buro and GMB Landscaping,
Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-05396 (E.D.N.Y., September 15, 2014), seeks
to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages, liquidated damages,
prejudgment and post-judgment interest and attorney's fees and
costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

GMB Landscaping, Inc. is a New York based landscaping company with
a principal place of business at 32 Cherry Lane, Carle Place, NY
11514.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Nadia M. Pervez, Esq.
      Aneeba Rehman, Esq.
      PERVEZ & REHMAN, PC
      68 South Service, Suite 100
      Melville, NY 11747
      Telephone: (631) 427-0700
      Facsimile: (631) 824-9020
      E-mail: npervez@pervezlaw.com
              aneeba.r@gmail.com


GOODYEAR TIRE: Settlement Opt-Out Deadline Set for Dec. 5
---------------------------------------------------------
DAVID HELMER, FELICIA MUFTIC, and MICHAEL MUFTIC, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v.
THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO., an Ohio corporation, Defendant,
CIVIL ACTION NO. 12-CV-00685-RBJ, (D. Col.) is before the Court on
the plaintiffs' motion to provide notice to potential class
members.  The parties have conferred on a proposed notice and
notice plan, but defendant Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. still
objects to certain portions of the notice and plan.  The
Plaintiffs contend that Goodyear has no standing to object at this
stage of the proceedings, and they also offer substantive reasons
why Goodyear's objections are misplaced.

District Judge R. Brooke Jackson, in an amended order dated
September 9, 2014, a copy of which is available at
http://is.gd/fdVsvjfrom Leagle.com, granted the Plaintiff's
motion with certain modifications.

Class Members will have until December 5, 2014 to opt out.

David Helmer, Plaintiff, represented by David K. TeSelle, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Meghan C. Quinlivan, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Seth Alan Katz, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Alexandra C. Warren, Cuneo
Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, Charles J. LaDuca, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca,
LLP, Daniel Caleb Levin, Levin Fishbein Sedran & Berman, Gary E.
Mason, Mason Law Firm, LLP, Jason S. Rathod, Whitifield Bryson &
Mason LLP, Jonas Palmer Mann, Audet & Partners LLP, Michael James
Flannery, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, Rick D. Bailey, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Victoria Olegovna
Romanenko, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP & William Harold Anderson,
Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP.

Felicia Muftic, Plaintiff, represented by David K. TeSelle, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Meghan C. Quinlivan, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Seth Alan Katz, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Alexandra C. Warren, Cuneo
Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, Charles J. LaDuca, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca,
LLP, Daniel Caleb Levin, Levin Fishbein Sedran & Berman, Gary E.
Mason, Mason Law Firm, LLP, Jason S. Rathod, Whitifield Bryson &
Mason LLP, Jonas Palmer Mann, Audet & Partners LLP, Michael James
Flannery, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, Rick D. Bailey, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Victoria Olegovna
Romanenko, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP & William Harold Anderson,
Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP.

Michael Muftic, Plaintiff, represented by David K. TeSelle, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Meghan C. Quinlivan, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Seth Alan Katz, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Alexandra C. Warren, Cuneo
Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, Charles J. LaDuca, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca,
LLP, Daniel Caleb Levin, Levin Fishbein Sedran & Berman, Gary E.
Mason, Mason Law Firm, LLP, Jason S. Rathod, Whitifield Bryson &
Mason LLP, Jonas Palmer Mann, Audet & Partners LLP, Michael James
Flannery, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP, Rick D. Bailey, Burg,
Simpson, Eldredge, Hersh & Jardine, PC, Victoria Olegovna
Romanenko, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP & William Harold Anderson,
Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, LLP.

The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. an Ohio Corporation, Defendant,
represented by Chad James Schmit, Garfield & Hecht, PC, David L.
Lenyo, Garfield & Hecht, PC, David Matthew Stauss, Ballard Spahr,
LLP, Lawrence Michael Brooks, Jr., Wells, Anderson & Race, LLC,
Mary Alice Wells, Wells, Anderson & Race, LLC, Roger P. Thomasch,
Ballard Spahr, LLP & Stephen Eugene Baumann, II, Wells, Anderson &
Race, LLC.


GREAT STATES: Recalls Homelite & Earthwise Electric Lawn Mowers
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 17, 2014
Posting date:             September 17, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Tools and Electrical Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Improper Safety Mechanisms
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-41393

Affected products: Homelite and Earthwise 20-inch cordless
electric lawn mowers

The recall involves Homelite and Earthwise cordless 24 Volt
battery and 20 Amp electric lawn mowers.  The mowers have a 20-
inch (51-centimetre) cutting width and come with a 3-in-1 side
discharge/mulch/bagger.  The brand names "Homelite" or
"Earthwise", "3 in 1" and "20"" appear on the front of the mowers.

If the mower handle is collapsed for storage, the starting cable
can be stretched to a point in which the starting mechanism will
be engaged and the mower can start without the key in place,
posing a risk of injury to the user.

Great States Corporation has received three incident reports in
Canada, in which one report documented the amputation of three
finger tips.

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

There were 394 Homelite lawn mowers sold at Home Depot stores and
137 Earthwise lawn mowers sold at Federated Co-op stores across
Canada.

The recalled lawn mowers were manufactured in China and sold
between Feb. 2014 and August 2014.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     YAT Electrical Appliance Co., Ltd.
                    Jiaxing
                    China

   Distributor     Great States Corporation
                   Shelbyville
                   Indiana
                   United States

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled lawn mowers
and remove the battery.  Do not collapse the mower for storage
unless the battery has been removed.  Consumers can contact the
Great States Corporation for a full refund.


GREEN WORLD: Recalls Al-Barakah Dates Due to Insect Infestation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 11, 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:           Green World Food Express Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9214

Affected products: 1 kilogram Al-Barakah Dates


HEWLETT-PACKARD: Sept. 26 Hearing on Class Action Settlement
------------------------------------------------------------
Amanda Bronstad, writing for The National Law Journal, reports
that a federal judge in Santa Ana, Calif., on Sept. 15 approved a
$57 million class action settlement for shareholders of Hewlett-
Packard Co. who sued after the company halted plans for a mobile
operating system.

The hearing came as lawyers in a separate shareholder case against
HP seek to restore a settlement after a federal judge in San
Francisco rejected its unusual fee arrangement.

Gregg Levin -- glevin@motleyrice.com -- a member of Motley Rice in
Mt. Pleasant, S.C., and Jonathan Gardner -- jgardner@labaton.com
-- a partner at New York's Labaton Sucharow, are co-lead
plaintiffs attorneys in the Santa Ana case.

"We are very gratified that the court approved the settlement,"
Mr. Levin said via email.  "We were pleased that we were able to
secure a result that provides significant recovery for class
members."

HP attorney Robert Gooding -- rgooding@morganlewis.com -- a
partner in the Irvine, Calif., office of Morgan, Lewis & Bockius,
did not respond to a request for comment.

Shareholders alleged that former chief executive officer
Leo Apotheker and two other executives made dozens of misleading
statements about HP's plans to develop its own operating system
for mobile phones after purchasing Palm Inc. for $1.2 billion in
2010.  The other executives named were R. Todd Bradley, executive
vice president of the personal systems group until this year, and
chief financial officer Catherine Lesjak, who served as interim
chief executive officer before Mr. Apotheker.

In 2012, U.S. District Judge Andrew Guilford of the Central
District of California dismissed the case but allowed the
plaintiffs to amend their complaint.  Last year, he allowed some
of the revised claims to go forward against HP, Messrs. Apotheker
and Bradley.

Mr. Apotheker's attorney, Gregory Weingart --
Gregory.Weingart@mto.com -- a partner at Los Angeles-based Munger
Tolles & Olson, declined to comment, and Mr. Bradley's lawyer,
Kevin Muck -- kmuck@fenwick.com -- chairman of the securities
litigation group in the San Francisco office of Mountain View,
Calif.'s Fenwick & West, did not respond to a request for comment.

On May 2, Guilford preliminarily approved a settlement for class
members who purchased HP shares between Nov. 22, 2010, and
Aug. 18, 2011.

Co-lead firms Labaton Sucharow and Motley Rice, as well as
Philadelphia's Barrack, Rodos & Bacine, sought $14.2 million in
attorney fees and $335,000 in expenses.  Judge Guilford approved
those requests on Sept. 15.

In the San Francisco case, U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer of
the Northern District of California last month rejected portions
of a settlement in a shareholder derivative case over HP's $11
billion acquisition of Autonomy Inc. in 2011.  The settlement
included an arrangement by which HP would retain plaintiffs
lawyers at Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy of Burlingame, Calif., and
San Diego's Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd to sue Autonomy
executives.

Judge Breyer has scheduled a Sept. 26 hearing on the settlement.


HIMALAYA GOURMET: Recalls Gourmet Products Due to Mustard
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            September 11, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Mustard
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Himalaya Gourmet Sauces and Chutneys
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9211


HOME DEPOT: Faces "Khalaf" Suit in California Over Data Breach
--------------------------------------------------------------
Walid Khalaf, Jasmin Gonzalez, Stefanie Smith and Steve O'Brien,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., a Delaware corporation, Case No. 3:14-cv-
02175 (S.D. Cal. September 12, 2014), is brought against the
Defendant for failure to secure and safeguard its customers'
credit and debit card numbers and other payment card data,
personally identifiable information such as cardholder's names,
mailing addresses, and other personal information.

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. is a Delaware corporation that operates
retail stores throughout the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Tina Wolfson, Esq.
      Robert Ahdoot, Esq.
      Theodore W. Maya, Esq.
      Keith Custis, Esq.
      AHDOOT & WOLFSON, P.C.
      1016 Palm Street
      West Hollywood, California 90069
      Telephone: (310) 474-9111
      Facsimile: (310) 474-8585
      E-mail: twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com
              rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com
              tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com
              keith@custis-law.com

          - and -

      John A. Yanchunis, Esq.
      MORGAN & MORGAN
      201 N. Franklin Street, 7th Floor
      Tampa, Florida 33602
      Telephone: (813) 223-5505
      Facsimile: (813) 223-5402
      E-mail: jyanchunis@forthepeople.com

         - and -

      Paul C. Whalen, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF PAUL C. WHALEN, P.C.
      768 Plandome Road
      Manhasset, New York 11030
      Telephone: (516) 627-5610
      Facsimile: (212) 658-9685
      E-mail: pcwhalen@gmail.com


HOME DEPOT: Faces "Riveron" Suit in S.D. Florida Over Data Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jasmani Riveron and Krista Riveron, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Home Depot USA, Inc. a Georgia
corporation, Case No. 9:14-cv-81175 (S.D. Fla. September 12,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to adequately
safeguard and secure the personal, financial data, including the
names, email addresses, telephone numbers, buying habits, and
credit card information of the Plaintiffs and members of the
Class.

Home Depot USA, Inc. is a retailer of home improvement and
construction project products and services that boasts it created
the do-it-yourself concept, spawning an entire industry that spans
the globe.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael Thomas Fraser, Esq.
      THE LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD W. RUBINSTEIN, P.A.
      1615 Forum Place, Suite 4C
      West Palm Beach, FL 33401
      Telephone: (800) 436-6437
      Facsimile: (415) 692-6607
      E-mail: mfraser@hwrlawoffice.com

         - and -

      Michael James Pascucci, Esq.
      Joshua Harris Eggnatz, Esq.
      THE EGGNATZ LAW FIRM
      5400 South University Drive 413
      Davie, FL 33328
      Telephone: (954) 889-3359
      E-mail: mpascucci@eggnatzlaw.com
              JEggnatz@eggnatzlaw.com


HUB GROUP: Does Not Pay Drivers Properly, "Lubinski" Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Christian Lubinski, individually and on behalf of all other
similarly situated v. Hub Group Trucking, Inc., f/k/a Comtrak
Logistics, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-07117 (N.D. Ill. September 12,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to properly
compensate delivery drivers for all hours worked in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Hub Group Trucking, Inc. offers comprehensive intermodal, highway
and logistics services throughout the United States, Canada and
Mexico.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alejandro Caffarelli, Esq.
      CAFFARELLI & SIEGEL LTD
      Two Prudential Plaza, 180 North Stetson, #3150
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Telephone: (312) 540-1230
      E-mail: acaffarelli@cslaw.com


INTERBAY FOOD: Recalls Pork Sausage Product Due to Misbranding
--------------------------------------------------------------
Interbay Food Company, LLC, a Woodinville, Wash., establishment,
is recalling approximately 4,820 pounds of pork Banger-style
sausage products due to misbranding and an undeclared allergen,
the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection
Service (FSIS) announced.  The products contain milk, a known
allergen, which is not declared on the products' label.

These products were subject to recall:

   -- 1-lb. (5 links per package) Refrigerated packages of "The
      British Pantry Ltd., British Style Bangers"

   -- 1-lb. (16 links per package) Refrigerated packages of "The
      British Pantry Ltd., British Style Bangers"

   -- 5-lb. Logs of "The British Pantry Ltd., British Style
      Bangers"

The products were cooked in a Redmond, Wash., restaurant and sold
to the general public.  The products were produced using bread
crumbs that came from a vendor who listed wheat, soy and milk on
the label.  Although the label for the bangers listed wheat and
soy, it did not list milk as an ingredient.  The products were
produced on March 17, 2014, March 24, 2014, May 5, 2014, June 2,
2014, June 30, 2014, July 15, 2014, July 29, 2014, August 26, 2014
and Sept. 8, 2014.  The products' package codes are also its
production dates.  The products bear the establishment number
"Est. 6267" inside the USDA mark of inspection, and have a 6-month
shelf life.

The problem was discovered by an FSIS inspector who saw that the
products were incorrectly labeled.

FSIS and the company have received no reports of adverse reactions
due to consumption of these products.  Anyone concerned about a
reaction should contact a healthcare provider.

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to ensure that
steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer
available to consumers.  When available, the retail distribution
list(s) will be posted on the FSIS website.

Consumers and media with questions about the recall should contact
Robert Petschl at (206) 612-7559 or via email at:
rob.petschl@interbayfoods.com

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at AskKaren.gov or
via smartphone at m.askkaren.gov.  The toll-free USDA Meat and
Poultry Hotline 1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in
English and Spanish and can be reached from l0 a.m. to 4 p.m.
(Eastern Time) Monday through Friday.  Recorded food safety
messages are available 24 hours a day.  The online Electronic
Consumer Complaint Monitoring System can be accessed 24 hours a
day at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/reportproblem.


INTERSECTIONS INC: Ninth Circuit Upheld Dismissal of Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit has
upheld the dismissal of a class action against Intersections
Insurance Services Inc. and Bank of America, Intersections Inc.
said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the quarterly period
ended June 30, 2014.

Intersections Insurance Services Inc. was served on May 21, 2012,
with a putative class action complaint (filed on May 14, 2012)
against Intersections Insurance Services Inc. and Bank of America
in the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California. The complaint alleges various claims based on the sale
of an accidental death and disability program. Intersections
Insurance Services Inc. and Bank of America moved to dismiss the
claims and to transfer the action to the United States District
Court for the Central District of California. The motion to
transfer to the Central District was granted, and Intersections
Insurance Services Inc. and Bank of America then moved to dismiss
the claims. The motions to dismiss were granted with prejudice on
October 1, 2012. The plaintiffs appealed, and on June 24, 2014,
the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit upheld
the dismissal.


INTERSECTIONS INC: Discovery Commenced in Illinois Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
Discovery has commenced in the class action lawsuit in Illinois
against Intersections Inc., Intersections Insurance Services Inc.,
and Ocwen Financial Corporation, Intersections Inc. said in its
Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on August 11, 2014, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014.

In September 2013, a putative class action lawsuit was filed in
Illinois in Cook County Circuit Court against Intersections Inc.,
Intersections Insurance Services Inc., and Ocwen Financial
Corporation, alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act. The case was removed to the United States District
Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division. On
October 30, 2013, Plaintiffs filed a stipulation voluntarily
dismissing, without prejudice, Intersections Inc. from the case.
On November 14, 2013, the plaintiffs filed an amended complaint
against Intersections Insurance Services Inc. and Ocwen Loan
Servicing, LLC. On November 27, 2013, Intersections Insurance
Services Inc. and Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC jointly filed a Motion
to Dismiss and to Strike Class Allegations. On March 5, 2014, the
motion was granted in part, and denied in part. Discovery has
commenced in the case.


J.M. HOLLISTER: Faces "Wat" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Cassandra Wat, on behalf of herself and all others similarly-
situated v. J.M. Hollister, LLC d/b/a Hollister Company and
Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-05361 (E.D.N.Y.
September 12, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure
to pay overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants are retail clothing companies that operate hundreds
of stores throughout the United States of America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexander T. Coleman, Esq.
      Michael J. Borrelli, Esq.
      Michael John Palitz, Esq.
      BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES PLLC
      1010 Northern Blvd, Suite 328
      Great Neck, NY 11201
      Telephone: (516) 248-5550
      Facsimile: (516) 248-6027
      E-mail: atc@employmentlawyernewyork.com
              mjb@employmentlawyernewyork.com
              mjp@employmentlawyernewyork.com


J2 GLOBAL: Discovery Period in "Paldo" Case to Close August 2015
----------------------------------------------------------------
j2 Global, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that on January 18, 2013,
Paldo Sign and Display Company ("Paldo") filed an amended
complaint adding two j2 Global affiliates and a former j2 Canada
employee, Tyler Eyamie ("Eyamie"), as additional defendants in an
existing purported class action pending in the Northern District
of Illinois. The amended complaint alleged violations of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), the Illinois Consumer
Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act ("ICFA"), and common
law conversion, arising from a customer's alleged use of the j2
Canada system to send unsolicited facsimile transmissions. On
August 23, 2013, Paldo filed a second amended complaint to add a
second plaintiff, Sabon, Inc. ("Sabon").

The j2 Global affiliates filed a motion to dismiss the ICFA and
conversion claims, which was granted. Paldo and Sabon seek
statutory damages, costs, attorneys' fees and injunctive relief
for the remaining TCPA claims. Eyamie filed a motion to dismiss
for lack of personal jurisdiction, which was granted on March 11,
2014. The discovery period commenced on April 17, 2014, and will
close in August 2015. The case is set for trial in late January
2016.

j2 Global, Inc., together with its subsidiaries ("j2 Global" or
the "Company"), is a provider of Internet services. Through its
Business Cloud Services Division, the Company provides cloud
services to businesses of all sizes, from individuals to
enterprises, and licenses its intellectual property ("IP") to
third parties. The Digital Media Division operates a portfolio of
web properties providing technology, gaming and lifestyle content
and an innovative data-driven platform connecting advertisers with
visitors to those properties and to visitors of third party
websites that are part of the Digital Media Division's advertising
network.


J2 GLOBAL: Court Dismisses Claims in "Jenkins" Suit
---------------------------------------------------
j2 Global, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that on December 16, 2013,
Anthony Jenkins filed a purported class action against a j2 Global
affiliate "carrying on business as eFax" in the Central District
of California. An amended complaint was filed on March 18, 2014
adding two additional named plaintiffs. The amended complaint
includes causes of action for breach of contract, several state
statutory violations, and conversion. The claims arose either out
of alleged difficulties some users encountered in canceling their
eFax(R) online fax accounts or from the j2 Global affiliate
allegedly being unjustly enriched and converting users' funds. The
potential class representatives are seeking damages, attorneys'
fees, interest, costs, and injunctive relief on behalf of
themselves and a purported nationwide class of persons allegedly
similarly situated.

On May 23, 2014, the Court dismissed with prejudice the
plaintiffs' breach of contract, conversion, and certain statutory
claims. Other statutory claims were dismissed without prejudice.

j2 Global, Inc., together with its subsidiaries ("j2 Global" or
the "Company"), is a provider of Internet services. Through its
Business Cloud Services Division, the Company provides cloud
services to businesses of all sizes, from individuals to
enterprises, and licenses its intellectual property ("IP") to
third parties. The Digital Media Division operates a portfolio of
web properties providing technology, gaming and lifestyle content
and an innovative data-driven platform connecting advertisers with
visitors to those properties and to visitors of third party
websites that are part of the Digital Media Division's advertising
network.


J2 GLOBAL: Faces "Free-Vychine" Suit Over Late Fees
---------------------------------------------------
j2 Global, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that on June 23, 2014, Andre
Free-Vychine ("Free-Vychine") filed a purported class action
against a j2 Global affiliate in the Superior Court for the State
of California, County of Los Angeles. The complaint alleges two
statutory violations involving the late fees levied in certain
eVoice(R) accounts. Free-Vychine is seeking damages and injunctive
relief on behalf of himself and a purported nationwide class of
persons allegedly similarly situated. The j2 Global affiliate has
not yet filed an answer to the complaint.

j2 Global, Inc., together with its subsidiaries ("j2 Global" or
the "Company"), is a provider of Internet services. Through its
Business Cloud Services Division, the Company provides cloud
services to businesses of all sizes, from individuals to
enterprises, and licenses its intellectual property ("IP") to
third parties. The Digital Media Division operates a portfolio of
web properties providing technology, gaming and lifestyle content
and an innovative data-driven platform connecting advertisers with
visitors to those properties and to visitors of third party
websites that are part of the Digital Media Division's advertising
network.


JAKKS PACIFIC: Second Amended Complaint Filed in "Melot" Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
On July 25, 2013, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California captioned Melot v. JAKKS Pacific, Inc. et al., Case No.
CV13-05388 (JAK) against Stephen G. Berman, Joel M. Bennett
(collectively the "Individual Defendants"), and the Company
(collectively, "Defendants").  On July 30, 2013, a second
purported class action lawsuit was filed containing similar
allegations against Defendants captioned Dylewicz v. JAKKS
Pacific, Inc. et al., Case No.CV13-5487 (OON).  The two cases
(collectively, the "Class Action") were consolidated on December
2, 2013 under Case No. CV13-05388 JAK (SSx) and lead plaintiff and
lead counsel appointed.

On January 17, 2014, Plaintiff filed a consolidated class action
complaint (the "First Amended Complaint") against Defendants which
alleged that the Company violated Section 10(b) of the Securities
Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making false
and/or misleading statements concerning Company financial
projections and performance as part of its public filings and
earnings calls from July 17, 2012 through July 17, 2013.

Specifically, the First Amended Complaint alleged that the
Company's forward looking statements, guidance and other public
statements were false and misleading for allegedly failing to
disclose (i) certain alleged internal forecasts, (ii) the
Company's alleged quarterly practice of laying off and rehiring
workers, (iii) the Company's alleged entry into license agreements
with guaranteed minimums the Company allegedly knew it was unable
to meet; and (iv) allegedly poor performance of the Monsuno and
Winx lines of products after their launch.  The First Amended
Complaint also alleged violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange
Act by Messrs. Berman and Bennett.  The First Amended Complaint
sought compensatory and other damages in an undisclosed amount as
well as attorneys' fees and pre-judgment and post-judgment
interest.

The Company filed a motion to dismiss the First Amended Complaint
on February 17, 2014, and the motion was granted, with leave to
replead.  A Second Amended Complaint was filed on July 8, 2014 and
it set forth similar allegations to those in the First Amended
Complaint about discrepancies between internal projections and
public forecasts and the other allegations except that the claim
with respect to guaranteed minimums that the Company allegedly
knew it was unable to meet was eliminated.

"We believe that the claims in the Class Action are without merit,
and we intend to defend vigorously against them.  However, because
the Class Action is in a preliminary stage, we cannot assure you
as to its outcome, or that an adverse decision in such action
would not have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition or results of operations," JAKKS Pacific, Inc.
said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the quarterly period
ended June 30, 2014.

The Company is a worldwide producer and marketer of children's
toys and other consumer products, principally engaged in the
design, development, production, marketing and distribution of its
diverse portfolio of products.


JERKY BY ART: Recalls Beef Jerky Products Due to Misbranding
------------------------------------------------------------
Jerky By Art, an Albuquerque, N.M. establishment, is recalling an
undetermined amount of beef jerky products because they were
produced without the benefit of inspection, the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced.
In addition, the beef jerky products contain wheat and anchovies,
known allergens that are not declared on the product label.

The products subject to recall are:

All vacuum-packed plastic bags of Claude's Beef Jerky with Red
Chile

The products, which contain the establishment number "EST. 34270"
inside the USDA Mark of Inspection, were sold primarily over the
internet.  Although the products were packed mostly in 4-oz bags
they may also have been packed in bags of other sizes.  There are
no identifying dates or codes on any packaging.  Therefore, all
products produced prior to Sept. 12, 2014 are being recalled.

The problem was discovered during an ongoing investigation into
the establishment.

FSIS and the company have received no reports of adverse reactions
due to consumption of these products.  Anyone concerned about a
reaction should contact a healthcare provider.

FSIS routinely conducts recall effectiveness checks to verify
recalling firms notify their customers of the recall and that
steps are taken to make certain that the product is no longer
available to consumers.

Media or consumers with questions about the recall should contact
Mr. Arthur Sandoval at (505) 262-0240.

Consumers with food safety questions can "Ask Karen," the FSIS
virtual representative available 24 hours a day at:
http://www.AskKaren.govor via smartphone at m.askkaren.gov. "Ask
Karen" live chat services are available Monday through Friday from
10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET.  The toll-free USDA Meat and Poultry Hotline
1-888-MPHotline (1-888-674-6854) is available in English and
Spanish and can be reached from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET Monday
through Friday.  Recorded food safety messages are available 24
hours a day.  For information on how to report a problem with a
meat, poultry or processed egg product to FSIS at any time, visit
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/reportproblem.


KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Settled Wage and Hour Cases in California
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kindred Healthcare Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that four wage and hour
class action lawsuits are currently pending against the Company in
federal district court for the Central District of California, and
are being addressed together by the court. Each case pertains to
alleged errors made by the Company with respect to regular pay and
overtime pay calculations, waiting times, meal period waivers and
wage statements under California law. The Company tentatively
settled this claim in June 2014, subject to finalizing settlement
details and court approval. The Company recorded an additional
$4.6 million loss provision in the second quarter of 2014 (for a
total loss reserve of $16.6 million) related to this lawsuit.

The Company is a healthcare services company that through its
subsidiaries operates TC hospitals, IRFs, nursing centers,
assisted living facilities, a contract rehabilitation services
business and a home health and hospice business across the United
States.


KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Expects Dismissal of Ill. Wage & Hour Case
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kindred Healthcare Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that a wage and hour class
action lawsuit against the Company alleging violations of federal
and state wage and hour laws is pending in federal district court
for the Northern District of Illinois. This lawsuit pertains to
the Company's previous automatic meal break deduction practice for
non-exempt employees in the Company's hospitals located outside
California. The court granted conditional class certification in
part on June 11, 2013. This lawsuit was settled on January 31,
2014 by the Company's agreement to pay $0.7 million to claimants
from the Company's five Illinois hospitals, plaintiffs' attorney's
fees and certain administrative costs. The Company had previously
recorded a $0.7 million loss provision related to this lawsuit.
The Company expects this lawsuit to be dismissed upon completion
of the claims administration process currently underway.

The Company is a healthcare services company that through its
subsidiaries operates TC hospitals, IRFs, nursing centers,
assisted living facilities, a contract rehabilitation services
business and a home health and hospice business across the United
States.


KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Class Cert. Bid in Pines Nursing Case Denied
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kindred Healthcare Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that a purported class
action complaint was filed on January 6, 2014, in the federal
district court for the Southern District of Florida against the
Company and one of its subsidiaries. The lawsuit, styled Pines
Nursing Home, et al. v. Polaris and RehabCare Group, Inc., et al.
alleges that one of the Company's subsidiaries sent "junk" faxes
in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 and
the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005. The complaint seeks statutory
damages, penalties, attorneys' fees and an injunction prohibiting
such conduct in the future.

The court denied plaintiff's motion for class certification on
June 20, 2014.

Subsequently, the Company filed an offer of judgment for $49,900
which was accepted by the plaintiff on July 29, 2014.

No estimate of the possible loss or range of loss resulting from
this lawsuit in excess of this amount can be made at this time.
The Company continues to dispute the allegations in the complaint.

The Company is a healthcare services company that through its
subsidiaries operates TC hospitals, IRFs, nursing centers,
assisted living facilities, a contract rehabilitation services
business and a home health and hospice business across the United
States.


LADENBURG THALMANN: Dismissal of Suit v. FriendFinder on Appeal
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services Inc. said in its Form 10-Q
Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August
11, 2014, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that a
purported class action suit was filed in December 2011, in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida
("District Court") against FriendFinder Networks, Inc.
("FriendFinder"), various individuals, Ladenburg and another
broker-dealer as underwriters for the May 11, 2011 FriendFinder
initial public offering. On June 20, 2013, the plaintiff filed its
second amended complaint, alleging that the defendants, including
Ladenburg, are liable for violations of federal securities laws.
The amended complaint did not specify the amount of damages
sought. In September 2013, FriendFinder filed a voluntary petition
under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code in federal bankruptcy
court in Delaware, and in December 2013, the bankruptcy court
confirmed the FriendFinder plan of reorganization. As a result,
the plaintiff is precluded from pursuing claims against
FriendFinder.

On March 18, 2014, the District Court granted the remaining
defendants' motions to dismiss and dismissed the complaint with
prejudice. The plaintiff's appeal of the dismissal order is
currently pending. The Company believes that the claims are
without merit and intends to vigorously defend against them.

Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services Inc. is a diversified
financial services company engaged in independent brokerage and
advisory services, investment banking, equity research,
institutional sales and trading, asset management services,
wholesale life insurance brokerage and trust services through its
principal subsidiaries, Securities America, Inc. (collectively
with related companies, "Securities America"), Triad Advisors,
Inc. ("Triad"), Investacorp, Inc. (collectively with related
companies, "Investacorp"), Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc.
("Ladenburg"), Ladenburg Thalmann Asset Management Inc. ("LTAM"),
Highland Capital Brokerage, Inc. ("Highland") and Premier Trust,
Inc. ("Premier Trust").


LADENBURG THALMANN: MOU in Suit v. WEMU Subject to Court Approval
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services Inc. said in its Form 10-Q
Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August
11, 2014, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that a
purported class action suit was filed in December 2012 in the
Superior Court of California for San Mateo County against
Worldwide Energy & Manufacturing, Inc. ("WEMU"), certain
individuals, and Ladenburg as placement agent for a 2010 offering
of WEMU securities. The complaint alleges that the defendants,
including Ladenburg, are liable for violations of state securities
laws, and does not specify the amount of damages sought.

On January 27, 2014, the parties entered into a memorandum of
understanding that, once memorialized in a settlement agreement
would be subject to court approval, resolve all claims in the
complaint. The amount expected to be paid by Ladenburg in
settlement was accrued at December 31, 2013.

Ladenburg Thalmann Financial Services Inc. is a diversified
financial services company engaged in independent brokerage and
advisory services, investment banking, equity research,
institutional sales and trading, asset management services,
wholesale life insurance brokerage and trust services through its
principal subsidiaries, Securities America, Inc. (collectively
with related companies, "Securities America"), Triad Advisors,
Inc. ("Triad"), Investacorp, Inc. (collectively with related
companies, "Investacorp"), Ladenburg Thalmann & Co. Inc.
("Ladenburg"), Ladenburg Thalmann Asset Management Inc. ("LTAM"),
Highland Capital Brokerage, Inc. ("Highland") and Premier Trust,
Inc. ("Premier Trust").


LEROS POINT: Does Not Pay Drivers Properly, "Paster" Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Randal Paster v. Leros Point To Point, Inc. and Leros Management,
Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-07442 (S.D.N.Y., September 15, 2014), is
brought against the Defendant for failure to pay limousine drivers
overtime compensation.

Leros Point To Point, Inc. and Leros Management, Inc. provides
limousine and chauffeured ground transportation services within
the State of New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      John A. Beranbaum, Esq.
      BERANBAUM MENKEN LLP
      80 Pine Street
      New York, NY 10005


LIFE ALERT: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "McGreevy" Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Margaret McGreevy, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Life Alert Emergency Response, Inc., Case
No. 1:14-cv-07457 (S.D.N.Y., September 15, 2014), is brought
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime for all hours
worked over 40 in a workweek

Life Alert Emergency Response, Inc. is a nationwide company that
provides safety, home security, and emergency protection services
to the elderly and disabled.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Melissa Lardo Stewart, Esq.
      Rachel Megan Bien, Esq.
      OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP
      3 Park Avenue 29th Floor
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 425-1000
      Facsimile: (212) 977-4005
      E-mail: mstewart@outtengolden.com
              rmb@outtengolden.com


LVNV FUNDING: Illegally Collects Debt, "Tinajero" Suit Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Eberardo Tinajero, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. LVNV Funding LLC, Case No. 2:14-cv-07206
(C.D. Cal., September 15, 2014), is brought against the Defendant
for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

LVNV Funding LLC is a national debt collector incorporated in
Delaware with its principal place of business in Columbia, South
Carolina.

The Plaintiff is represented by:
      Matthew M. Loker, Esq.
      KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC
      245 Fishcer Avenue Unit D1
      Costa Mesa, CA 92626
      Telephone: (800) 400-6808
      Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
      E-mail: ml@kazlg.com


MAGNA-RX INC: Falsely Marketed Dietary Supplements, Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Trevor Dixon, on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated
and the general public v. Magna-Rx, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-07196
(C.D. Cal., September 15, 2014), alleges that the Defendant
falsely markets the dietary supplement Magna-Rx+ as having
beneficial health and aphrodisiac properties to improve male
strength and performance, despite that none of the ingredients in
the Product, individually or in combination, provide such
benefits.

Magna-Rx, Inc. is a manufacturer and distributor of dietary
supplements with its principal place of business located at 31324
Via Colinas in Westlake Village, California 91362.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ronald A. Marron, Esq.
      Skye Resendes, Esq.
      Alexis M. Wood, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC
      651 Arroyo Drive
      San Diego, CA 92103
      Telephone: (619) 696-9006
      Facsimile: (619) 564-6665
      E-mail: ron@consumersadvocates.com
              skye@consumersadvocates.com
              alexis@consumersadvocates.com


MARRONE BIO: Faces "Oldham" Suit Over Registration Statement
------------------------------------------------------------
Kent Oldham, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc., James B. Boyd, Donald
J. Glidewell, Pamela G. Marrone, Elin Miller, Ranjeet Bhatia, Tim
Fogarty, Lawrence Hough, Joseph Hudson, Richard Rominger, Sean
Schickedanz, Shaugn Stanley, Piper Jaffray & Co., Stifel, Nicolaus
& Company, Incorporated, Roth Capital Partners, LLC and Jefferies
LLC, Case No. 2:14-cv-02130 (E.D. Cal., September 15, 2014),
alleges that the Defendants issued numerous untrue and misleading
statements in its Registration Statement and related materials.
The Registration Statement misrepresented that many products in
its pipeline were near commercial viability when they were not. It
misleadingly stated that its products had efficacy and applied
indications which they did not. Finally, the Registration
contained revenue and sales projections which the Defendants knew,
because of its fraudulent accounting practices, that it had no
reasonable expectation of meeting.

Marrone Bio Innovations, Inc. is a leading provider of bio based
pest management and plant health products for the agriculture,
turf and ornamental and water treatment markets.

The Individual Defendants are officers and directors of Marrone
Bio Innovations, Inc.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Robert S. Green, Esq.
      GREEN & NOBLIN, P.C.
      700 Larkspur Landing Circle, Suite 275
      Larkspur, CA 94939
      Telephone: (415) 477-6700
      Facsimile: (415) 477-6710
      E-mail: gnecf@classcounsel.com

         - and -

      Jeffrey C. Block, Esq.
      Jason M. Leviton, Esq.
      Steven P. Harte, Esq.
      BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
      155 Federal Street, Suite 400
      Boston, MA 02110
      Telephone: (617) 398-5600
      Facsimile: (617) 507-6020
      E-mail: Jeff@blockesq.com
              Jason@blcokesq.com
              Steven@blockesq.com


MICHIGAN: Judge Recommends Denial of "Dunbar" Case Dismissal Bid
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH GREGORY DUNBAR, Plaintiff, v. JOHN PRELESNIK, et al.,
Defendants, CASE NO. 1:13-CV-1100, (W.D. Mich.) is a civil rights
action brought by a state prisoner incarcerated by the Michigan
Department of Corrections (MDOC) pursuant to 42 U.S.C. Section
1983.  In the complaint, the plaintiff alleged that he and others
"who are infected with Hepatitis C and B, as well as other
prisoners who are infected with HIV, and kidney diseases" face an
imminent danger to their health at the Richard A. Handlon
Correctional Facility (MTU), where MDOC officials "refuse to
remedy the contaminated water which has been continuously coming
out of the fixtures yellowish to dark brown with the smell of raw
sewage."

The matter is before the court on defendant Cathleen Stoddard and
Daniel Heyns' motion to dismiss, defendant John Prelesnik's motion
to dismiss, plaintiff's motion for default judgment as to
defendant John Prelesnik, and plaintiff's ex parte "motion for
preliminary injunction and restraining order".

Magistrate Judge Hugh W. Brenneman, Jr., in his report and
recommendation dated September 3, 2014, a copy of which is
available at http://is.gd/wsanfOfrom Leagle.com, recommended that
defendants' motions to dismiss be denied.

He further recommended that plaintiff's motion for default
judgment as to defendant Warden John Prelesnik and plaintiff's ex
parte motion for a preliminary injunction and TRO be denied.

Joseph Gregory Dunbar #129278, plaintiff, Pro Se.

John Prelesnik, Warden, defendant, represented by Kevin R.
Himebaugh, MI Dept Attorney General.

Cathleen Stoddard, defendant, represented by Kevin R. Himebaugh,
MI Dept Attorney General.

Daniel H. Heyns, et al., defendant, represented by Kevin R.
Himebaugh, MI Dept Attorney General.


MONEYTREE INC: Has Send Unsolicited Text Messages, Action Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Krystiana Ruddle, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Moneytree, Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-02189
(S.D. Cal., September 15, 2014), is brought against the Defendant
for negligently contacting the Plaintiff on the cellular
telephone, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Moneytree, Inc. is a provider of check cashing and payday loan
services with more than 120 branches throughout British Columbia,
California, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada and Washington.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Abbas Kazerounian, Esq.
      KAZEROUNIAN LAW GROUP, APC
      245 Fischer Avenue, Suite D1
      Costa Mesa, CA 92626
      Telephone: (800) 400-6808
      Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
      E-mail: ak@kazlg.com


NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: "Jordan" Case Returns to Chelan County Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Thomas O. Rice remands the case captioned LAURA
ZAMORA JORDAN, as her separate estate, and on behalf of others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company, Defendant, NO. 2:14-CV-0175-
TOR, (E.D. Wash.) to the Chelan County Superior Court, State of
Washington.

The Plaintiff asked the Court to remand this case, arguing that
the Defendant filed its notice of removal more than two years
after Plaintiff's initial pleading in violation of the removal
statute.  The Defendant objected saying the thirty-day window to
remove "reopened" when the case first became removable under the
Class Action Fairness Act.

The Court agreed with the Plaintiff that removal is time-barred.

A copy of Judge Rice's September 9, 2014 order is available at
http://is.gd/37BMFAfrom Leagle.com.

Laura Zamora Jordan, Plaintiff, represented by Beau C Haynes --
bhaynes@tmdwlaw.com -- Terrell Marshall Daudt & Willie PLLC, Clay
M Gatens -- clayg@jdsalaw.com -- Jeffers Danielson Sonn & Aylward
PS, Michael D Daudt -- mdaudt@tmdwlaw.com -- Terrell Marshall
Daudt & Willie PLLC & Michelle A Green -- michelleg@jdsalaw.com --
Jeffers Danielson Sonn and Aylward PS.

Nationstar Mortgage LLC, Defendant, represented by John Alan Knox
-- jknox@williamskastner.com -- Williams Kastner & Gibbs, Andrew W
Noble -- awn@severson.com -- Severson & Werson PC & Jan T Chilton
-- jtc@severson.com -- Severson & Werson PC.


NII HOLDINGS: Lead Plaintiffs Filed Second Amended Complaint
------------------------------------------------------------
NII Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that a purported class
action lawsuit was filed on March 4, 2014, against the Company,
NII Capital Corp. and certain of the Company's current and former
directors and executive officers in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on behalf of a putative
class of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the
securities of the Company or NII Capital Corp. between February
25, 2010 and February 27, 2014. The lawsuit is captioned In re NII
Holdings, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case Number 14-CV-227.

On July 18, 2014, the parties that have been designated as the
lead plaintiffs in the lawsuit filed a second amended complaint,
which generally alleges that the defendants made false or
misleading statements or concealed material adverse information
about the Company's financial condition and operations in
violation of Section 10(b), Rule 10b-5 and Section 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint seeks class
certification and unspecified damages, fees and injunctive relief.
The Company and the named individuals intend to vigorously defend
themselves in this matter.

NII Holdings Inc. provides wireless communication services under
the NextelTM brand, primarily targeted at meeting the needs of
subscribers who use the Company's services to improve the
productivity of their businesses and subscribers who make the
individual decision to use the service for both professional and
personal needs.


NORMAN DIRECT: Removes "Demirjian" Suit to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Sevag Demirjian v. Norman Direct,
LLC, Christopher Morgan, LLC, and Christopher M. Rebholz, Case No.
CIVDS1411874, was removed from the Superior Court of California,
County of San Bernardino, to the United States District Court for
the Central District of California. The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 5:14-cv-01917 to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff asserts claims for violation of unfair competition
law, false and misleading advertising, violation of the California
Legal Remedies Act, and common law fraud, and seeks compensation
for the Plaintiffs alleged losses, treble damages, punitive
damages, and attorneys' fees.

Norman Direct, LLC and Christopher Morgan, LLC are Wisconsin
limited liability companies with its principal place of business
at 16595 W. Stratton Dr., New Berlin, Wisconsin.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Gillian L. Wade, Esq.
      Allison R. Willett, Esq.
      MILSTEIN ADELMAN, LLP
      2800 Donald Douglas Loop North
      Santa Monica, CA 90405
      Telephone: (310)396-9600
      Facsimile: (310)396-9635

The Defendants are represented by:

      Stephen H. Turner, Esq.
      LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
      221 N. Figeroa Street, Suite 1200
      Los Angeles, CA 90012
      Telephone: (213) 250-1800
      Facsimile: (213) 250-7900


OCI HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay Overtime Hours, "Henry" Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Natashia Henry, individually and for others similarly situated v.
OCI Holdings LLC, Case No. 3:14-cv-03318 (N.D. Tex., September 13,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay
overtime for hours worked excess of 40 in a workweek.

OCI Holdings LLC provides provide speech therapy, occupational
therapy and physical therapy services in Texas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Richard J. Burch, Esq.
      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: rburch@brucknerburch.com
              jjones@brucknerburch.com

         - and -

      J. Derek Braziel, Esq.
      LEE & BRAZIEL LLP
      1801 Lamar Blvd, Suite 325
      Dallas, TX 75202
      Telephone (214) 749-1400
      Facsimile: (214): 749-1010
      E-mail: jdbraziel@l-b-law.com


OMNI HOTELS: Summary Judgment Bid in "Ades" Case Denied
-------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Christina A. Snyder denied a motion for summary
judgment filed by the defendant in the case captioned STEVEN ADES,
ET AL. v. OMNI HOTELS MANAGEMENT CORP., ET AL., CASE NO. 2:13-CV-
2468-CAS(MANX), (C.D. Cal.).

Steven Ades and Hart Woolery filed this putative class action on
March 15, 2013 in Los Angeles County Superior Court. Defendant
Omni Hotels removed the case to the United States District Court
for the Central District of California based on diversity of
citizenship on April 8, 2013.  Plaintiffs have since sought to
substitute Jonathan Murphy for Woolery as class representative.

On April 29, 2013, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint
(FAC). Plaintiffs alleged that when they placed their calls to
Omni's toll-free telephone numbers, they were not apprised that
the call might be recorded. Plaintiffs further allege that Omni
has a company-wide policy of recording inbound telephone
conversations with consumers without seeking permission or
informing consumers about the monitoring.  Omni filed a motion for
summary judgment on July 30, 2014.

A copy of Judge Snyder's September 8, 2014 decision is available
at http://is.gd/gTvc2Afrom Leagle.com.

Steven Ades, Plaintiff, represented by Zachariah Paul Dostart --
zdostart@sdlaw.com -- Dostart Clapp and Coveney LLP, Zev B Zysman
-- zev@zysmanlawca.com -- Law Offices of Zev B. Zysman, A
Professional Corporation, James F Clapp -- jclapp@sdlaw.com --
Dostart Clapp and Coveney LLP & James T Hannink --
Jim.Hannink@sdlaw.com -- Dostart Clapp & Coveney, LLP.

Hart Woolery, Plaintiff, represented by Zachariah Paul Dostart,
Dostart Clapp and Coveney LLP, Zev B Zysman, Law Offices of Zev B.
Zysman, A Professional Corporation, James F Clapp, Dostart Clapp
and Coveney LLP & James T Hannink, Dostart Clapp & Coveney, LLP.

OMNI Hotels Management Corporation, Defendant, represented by
Angela Christine Agrusa -- aagrusa@linerlaw.com -- Liner LLP,
David Brian Farkas -- dfarkas@linerlaw.com -- Liner Grode Stein
Yankelevitz Sunshine Regents and Taylor LL, Randall J Sunshine --
rsunshine@linerlaw.com -- Liner LLP & Robert M Hoffman --
rhoffman@gardere.com -- Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP.


OMNI HOTELS: Court Grants Class Certification in "Ades" Case
------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Christina A. Snyder granted a motion for class
certification in the case captioned STEVEN ADES & HART WOOLERY v.
OMNI HOTELS MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, ET AL., CASE NO. 2:13-CV-
02468-CAS(MANX), (C.D. Cal.).

The Court certified the class defined as: All individuals who,
between March 15, 2012 and March 22, 2013, inclusive, while
physically present in California, participated in a telephone call
with a live representative of Omni that was: (1) placed to one of
the following Omni numbers: (888) 444-6664, (800) 843-6664, 877)
440-6664, (800) 788-6664, or (800) 809-6664; (2) made from a
telephone number that includes a California area code (i.e., 209,
213, 310, 323, 408, 415, 424, 442, 510, 530, 559, 562, 619, 626,
650, 657, 661, 669, 707, 714, 747, 760, 805, 818, 831, 858, 909,
916, 925, 949, or 951); and (3) transmitted via cellular telephone
on the network of AT&T, Verizon Wireless, or Sprint. The class
excludes all employees of defendant and plaintiffs' counsel and
their employees.

The Court appointed as class counsel the Law Offices of Zev B.
Zysman, A Professional Corporation, and Dostart Clapp & Coveney,
LLP.

A copy of the court's September 8, 2014 is available at
http://is.gd/AM4bv0from Leagle.com.

Steven Ades, Plaintiff, represented by Zachariah Paul Dostart,
Dostart Clapp and Coveney LLP, Zev B Zysman, Law Offices of Zev B.
Zysman, A Professional Corporation, James F Clapp, Dostart Clapp
and Coveney LLP & James T Hannink, Dostart Clapp & Coveney, LLP.

Hart Woolery, Plaintiff, represented by Zachariah Paul Dostart,
Dostart Clapp and Coveney LLP, Zev B Zysman, Law Offices of Zev B.
Zysman, A Professional Corporation, James F Clapp, Dostart Clapp
and Coveney LLP & James T Hannink, Dostart Clapp & Coveney, LLP.

OMNI Hotels Management Corporation, Defendant, represented by
Angela Christine Agrusa, Liner LLP, David Brian Farkas, Liner
Grode Stein Yankelevitz Sunshine Regents and Taylor LL, Randall J
Sunshine, Liner LLP & Robert M Hoffman, Gardere Wynne Sewell LLP.


PERNIX THERAPEUTICS: Final Settlement Approved in April 2014
------------------------------------------------------------
Pernix Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11,
2014, for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that a
purported class action lawsuit was filed in the Superior Court of
California County of San Diego by Daniele Riganello, who, prior to
the consummation of the merger between Pernix and Somaxon on March
6, 2013 (the "Merger"), was an alleged stockholder of Somaxon
(Riganello v. Somaxon, et al., No. 37-201200087821-CU-SLCTL). A
second purported class action was also filed in the court by
another alleged stockholder (Wasserstrom vs. Somaxon, et al., No.
37-2012-00029214-CU-SL-CTL). Both plaintiffs filed amended
complaints on January 18, 2013. The lawsuits were consolidated
into a single action captioned In re Somaxon Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Shareholder Litigation (Lead Case No. 37-201200087821-CU-SLCTL).
The operative complaint named as defendants Somaxon, Pernix,
Pernix Acquisition Corp. I, as well as each of the former members
of Somaxon's board of directors (the "Individual Defendants").

On January 24, 2013, solely to avoid the costs, risks and
uncertainties inherent in litigation, and without admitting any
liability or wrongdoing, Pernix and the other named defendants in
such litigation signed a memorandum of understanding (the "MOU")
to settle such litigation. The MOU resolves the claims brought in
such litigation and provides a release and settlement by the
purported class of Somaxon's former stockholders of all claims
against the defendants and their affiliates and agents in
connection with the Merger. The parties executed a stipulation of
settlement setting forth a plaintiff's fee of $185,000 on July 3,
2013.

The court approved the final settlement on April 25, 2014, and
Pernix paid the $185,000 plaintiff's fee and $15,000 for
plaintiff's legal fees on April 29, 2014. On April 25, 2014, the
court dismissed the case with prejudice.

Pernix Therapeutics Holdings, Inc. is a pharmaceutical company
that has traditionally sold products addressing a variety of
therapeutic areas.


PFIZER INC: Judge Dismisses Antitrust Claims Over Lipitor Deal
--------------------------------------------------------------
Charles Toutant, writing for New Jersey Law Journal, reports that
a federal judge in Trenton, N.J., has dismissed antitrust claims
against drug makers Pfizer and Ranbaxy over a deal the two
companies struck to delay production of a generic version of the
popular statin drug Lipitor.

The court said drug wholesalers and retailers who sued Pfizer and
Ranbaxy failed to prove that the defendants engaged in
anticompetitive conduct when they struck the deal that postponed
the launch of generic Lipitor.  The agreement between Pfizer and
Ranbaxy included certain nonmonetary consideration between those
companies, but the plaintiffs did not show an antitrust violation
because their pleadings did not put an estimated dollar value on
the terms, U.S. District Judge Peter Sheridan of the District of
New Jersey said In re Lipitor Antitrust Litigation.

The ruling relied on the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Federal
Trade Commission v. Actavis, decided in June 2013, which held that
such deals between drug companies could be deemed restraint of
trade if they involved a payment between the patent holder and the
alleged infringer that was large and unjustified.

In dismissing the plaintiffs' suits in the Lipitor case,
Judge Sheridan found the plaintiffs' antitrust allegations were
"implausible" because they only made "broad characterizations"
about the value of the consideration that Pfizer gave to Ranbaxy.

Judge Sheridan dismissed from the case six drug wholesalers that
make direct purchases of Lipitor and eight major retailers who
sell the drug.  The case is still pending on behalf of a group of
six plaintiffs who are California pharmacists.  Judge Sheridan
said additional briefing was needed to determine whether their
claims should be dismissed for the same reasons as the other
plaintiffs' claims.

The suit concerns a June 2008 agreement between Pfizer and Ranbaxy
that resolved several legal disputes between the two companies,
according to Sheridan's opinion.  The disputes concern Ranbaxy's
plans to produce generic versions of Lipitor and two other Pfizer
drugs, Caduet and Accupril.  The agreement called for Ranbaxy
to begin producing generic Lipitor in November 2011.  The
agreement also resolved 23 lawsuits between the two companies, in
13 foreign countries, relating to Lipitor.  Also under the
agreement, Pfizer forgave a claim against Ranbaxy for infringing
its patent on Accupril and allowed it to sell generic Lipitor in
foreign markets immediately.

The deal between the companies is known as a reverse payment
settlement agreement, Judge Sheridan said.  The U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Third Circuit considered such deals prima facie
evidence of unreasonable restraint of trade, while some other
circuits dismissed antitrust challenges as long as the
anticompetitive effects fall within the exclusionary potential of
the patent.

The Supreme Court's ruling in Actavis sought to strike a balance
between the two approaches taken by appeals courts, Judge Sheridan
said. The Actavis ruling said analysis of reverse payment
settlement agreements should consider whether the restraint at
issue has the potential for great adverse effects on competition,
whether there are justifications for the anticompetitive
consequences, whether the patent holder has the market power to
bring about anticompetitive harm, whether the size of an
unexplained settlement suggests an intent by the patent holder to
maintain supracompetitive prices, and whether the parties could
have settled in a way that did not involve a reverse payment.

Applying Actavis, Judge Sheridan set out to determine whether a
large and unjustified reverse payment was made.  But the
plaintiffs gave no basis to evaluate the value of Pfizer's
concessions allowing Ranbaxy to market generic Lipitor in 13
foreign countries and forgiving a patent infringement claim on the
drug Accupril, Judge Sheridan said.

"The lack of any foundation pervades the entire complaint," Judge
Sheridan said.

Pfizer said in a statement that the company has "always believed
that the procurement and enforcement of its Lipitor patents and
the settlement of litigation relating thereto was at all times
proper and lawful.  The company will continue to vigorously
protect and defend its intellectual property, which is vital to
developing new medicines like Lipitor that save and enhance
patient lives."

Allyn Lyte of Lyte DePalma Greenberg in Newark, representing
Ranbaxy, did not return a call, nor did a company spokesman.
Peter Pearlman -- psp@njlawfirm.com -- of Cohn, Lifland, Pearlman,
Herrman & Knopf in Saddle Brook, N.J., representing the
wholesalers, did not return a call.  Christopher Seeger --
cseeger@seegerweiss.com -- and Stephen Weiss --
sweiss@seegerweiss.com -- of Seeger Weiss in New York,
representing plaintiff Meijer Distribution Inc., and Barry Refsin
-- brefsin@hangley.com -- of Hangley, Aronchick, Segal & Pudlin in
Philadelphia, representing Rite Aid, also did not return calls.


PFIZER INC: Plaintiffs Expert in Chantix MDL Seeks Documents
------------------------------------------------------------
Amaris Elliott-Engel, writing for The National Law Journal,
reports that a plaintiffs expert in the multidistrict litigation
over the Chantix antismoking drug has moved to unseal court
records in the advance of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration
meeting next month to consider whether warnings about suicide risk
are warranted.

Dr. Joseph Glenmullen, an expert causation witness for the
plaintiffs, and Thomas Moore, a drug-safety researcher who also
was a consulting expert in the Chantix litigation, called for the
unsealing of thousands of Pfizer Inc. internal documents.
Both wrote about how smoking cessation treatments like Chantix
were associated with a higher incidence of depression, suicide and
violence toward other people.

They "want to ensure the public debate about the psychiatric side
effects of Chantix includes a balanced scientific record, which
was examined in depth in the Chantix litigation," court papers
said.  The FDA meeting is slated for Oct. 16.

New data the FDA will consider during its meeting next month is
partially sourced to Dr. Robert Gibbons, Pfizer's expert witness
in the litigation, according to Glenmullen and Moore.  They have
specifically requested that documents in support of the
plaintiffs' claim for punitive damages be unsealed.  They argue
that the documents were sealed because they were stamped
confidential by Pfizer, not because the documents contain trade
secrets, personal information or any other type of information
that should be legitimately kept out of the public record.

"Documents revealed in litigation often times provide the only
mean by which the playing field can be leveled between the
pharmaceutical industry with its huge financial incentive to
minimize risks and the public's interest in their health and
safety," the two scientists' counsel, Eric Hoaglund of McCallum
Hoaglund Cook & Irby in Vestavia Hills, Ala., wrote.  "These
documents do no public good sitting in a company's or court's
archives."

Mr. Moore also said that Pfizer subpoenaed him for documents
related to his research, personal communications and publications
about the risks of using Chantix.  He said Pfizer did so to
"harass and intimidate him because of the independent drug safety
research he conducts.  The use and potential abuse of nonparty
subpoenas in pharmaceutical litigation is also an important public
policy issue separate from but part of the overall objective to
provide the public with a fair and balanced record of the risks
and benefits of Chantix."

The multidistrict litigation is pending in Alabama federal court.
There have been 3,000 cases in the MDL, but it was down to a
single case of Aug. 15, according to court statistics.


PRICELINE GROUP: Faces Suits Related to Travel Transaction Taxes
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Priceline Group Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that the Company and certain
third-party online travel companies ("OTCs") are currently
involved in approximately forty lawsuits, including certified and
putative class actions, brought by or against states, cities and
counties over issues involving the payment of travel transaction
taxes (e.g., hotel occupancy taxes, excise taxes, sales taxes,
etc.).  The Company's subsidiaries priceline.com LLC,
Lowestfare.com LLC and Travelweb LLC are named in some but not all
of these cases.

Generally, each complaint alleges, among other things, that the
OTCs violated each jurisdiction's respective relevant travel
transaction tax ordinance with respect to the charges and
remittance of amounts to cover taxes under each law.  Each
complaint typically seeks compensatory damages, disgorgement,
penalties available by law, attorneys' fees and other relief.

In addition, approximately seventy-nine municipalities or
counties, and at least eleven states, have initiated audit
proceedings (including proceedings initiated by more than forty
municipalities in California, which have been inactive for several
years), issued proposed tax assessments or started inquiries
relating to the payment of travel transaction taxes.  Additional
state and local jurisdictions are likely to assert that the
Company is subject to travel transaction taxes and could seek to
collect such taxes, retroactively and/or prospectively.


PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY: Bid to Quash Subpoena in A&R Case Okayed
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, A&R BODY SPECIALTY AND COLLISION WORKS, INC., FAMILY
GARAGE, INC. and THE AUTO BODY ASSOCIATION OF CONNECTICUT on
Behalf of Themselves and all Others Similarly Situated, v.
PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY and PROGRESSIVE DIRECT
INSURANCE COMPANY, CIV. NO. 3:07CV929 (WWE), (D. Conn.), non-party
Hartford Fire Insurance Company moved for an order quashing a
subpoena served by plaintiffs, A&R Body Specialty, Family Garage
and the Auto Body Association of Connecticut, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, or, in the
alternative, moved for a protective order.  Plaintiffs opposed
this motion.  On June 2, 2014, the Court held oral argument on the
pending motion to quash.

"[T]he motion to quash or, alternatively, for a protective order
is granted on the current record," wrote Magistrate Judge Holly B.
Fitzsimmons in an order dated September 9, 2014, a copy of which
is available at http://is.gd/UtXz9Afrom Leagle.com.

"This is not a Recommended Ruling. This is a discovery ruling or
order which is reviewable pursuant to the "clearly erroneous"
statutory standard of review. 28 U.S.C. Section 636(b)(1)(A); Fed.
R. Civ. P. 72(a); and D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 72.2. As such, it is an
order of the Court unless reversed or modified by the district
judge upon motion timely made," Magistrate Judge Fitzsimmons
added.

A & R Body Specialty, Plaintiff, represented by Alan Neigher,
Byelas & Neigher, Dana Statsky Smith, Bernstein Liebhard LLP,
David L. Belt, Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, David A.
Slossberg, Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, Robert J. Berg,
Denlea & Carton LLP, Ronald J. Aranoff, Robert J. Berg, PLLC,
Tania T. Taveras, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, David C Shufrin, Hurwitz
Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, Jeffrey P. Nichols, Hurwitz Sagarin
Slossberg & Knuff LLC & Sheryle Levine, Byelas & Neigher.

Family Garage, Plaintiff, represented by Alan Neigher, Byelas &
Neigher, Dana Statsky Smith, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, David L.
Belt, Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, David A. Slossberg,
Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, Robert J. Berg, Denlea &
Carton LLP, Ronald J. Aranoff, Robert J. Berg, PLLC, Tania T.
Taveras, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, David C Shufrin, Hurwitz Sagarin
Slossberg & Knuff LLC & Jeffrey P. Nichols, Hurwitz Sagarin
Slossberg & Knuff LLC.

Auto Body Assn of CT, Plaintiff, represented by Alan Neigher,
Byelas & Neigher, Dana Statsky Smith, Bernstein Liebhard LLP,
David L. Belt, Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, David A.
Slossberg, Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, Robert J. Berg,
Denlea & Carton LLP, Ronald J. Aranoff, Robert J. Berg, PLLC,
Tania T. Taveras, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, David C Shufrin, Hurwitz
Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC & Jeffrey P. Nichols, Hurwitz
Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC.

Progressive Casualty Ins Co, Defendant, represented by Alan J.
Sobol, Pullman & Comley, Kymberly Kochis, Nelson Levine de Luca &
Hamilton, LLC, Matthew S. Vuolo, Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton,
LLC, Michael R. Nelson, Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton, LLC &
Veronica Wayner, Nelson Levine de Luca & Horst, LLC.

Progressive Direct Ins Co, Defendant, represented by Alan J.
Sobol, Pullman & Comley, Kymberly Kochis, Nelson Levine de Luca &
Hamilton, LLC, Matthew S. Vuolo, Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton,
LLC, Michael R. Nelson, Nelson Levine de Luca & Hamilton, LLC &
Veronica Wayner, Nelson Levine de Luca & Horst, LLC.

Robert A Kehmna, ThirdParty Defendant, represented by James F.
Sullivan, Howard, Kohn, Sprague & Fitzgerald.

Insurance Association of Connecticut, Witness, represented by
James F. Sullivan, Howard, Kohn, Sprague & Fitzgerald.

Brian Mathis, Witness, represented by Jamie Jackson Spannhake,
Spannhake Law, LLC & Rebecca Lee Rigdon, Law Offices of Rebecca L.
Rigdon, LLC.

Hartford Fire Insurance Company, Witness, represented by Thomas G.
Rohback, Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP.

Patrons Mutual Insurance Co. of CT, Witness, represented by David
Bondanza, Hassett & George, Louis N. George, Hassett & George &
Michael C. Conroy, Hassett & George.

Progressive Casualty Ins Co, Counter Claimant, represented by Alan
J. Sobol, Pullman & Comley, Kymberly Kochis, Nelson Levine de Luca
& Hamilton, LLC, Matthew S. Vuolo, Nelson Levine de Luca &
Hamilton, LLC, Michael R. Nelson, Nelson Levine de Luca &
Hamilton, LLC & Veronica Wayner, Nelson Levine de Luca & Horst,
LLC.

Progressive Direct Ins Co, Counter Claimant, represented by Alan
J. Sobol, Pullman & Comley, Kymberly Kochis, Nelson Levine de Luca
& Hamilton, LLC, Matthew S. Vuolo, Nelson Levine de Luca &
Hamilton, LLC, Michael R. Nelson, Nelson Levine de Luca &
Hamilton, LLC & Veronica Wayner, Nelson Levine de Luca & Horst,
LLC.

Family Garage, Counter Defendant, represented by Alan Neigher,
Byelas & Neigher, Dana Statsky Smith, Bernstein Liebhard LLP,
David L. Belt, Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, David A.
Slossberg, Hurwitz Sagarin Slossberg & Knuff LLC, Robert J. Berg,
Denlea & Carton LLP, Ronald J. Aranoff, Robert J. Berg, PLLC &
Tania T. Taveras, Bernstein Liebhard LLP.


QR ENERGY: Faces "Berlin" Suit in Texas Over Sale of Partnership
----------------------------------------------------------------
Irwin J. Berlin, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Alan L. Smith, John H. Campbell,
Jr., Donald D. Wolf, Stephen A. Thorington, Donald E. Powell,
Richard K. Herbert, Toby R. Neugebauer, S. Wil Vanloh, Jr., QR
Energy LP, QRE GP, LLC, Breitburn Energy Partners LP, Breitburn
GP, LLC, and Boom Merger Sub, LLC, Case No. 4:14-cv-02644 (S.D.
Tex. September 12, 2014), arises from the Defendants' attempt to
sell the Partnership to Breitburn by means of an unfair process
and for an unfair price.

The Defendants are engaged in oil and natural gas production
business.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Thomas E. Bilek, Esq.
      THE BILEK LAW FIRM LLP
      700 Louisiana, Ste 3950
      Houston, TX 77002
      Telephone: (713) 227-7720
      Facsimile: (713) 227-9404
      E-mail: tbilek@bileklaw.com

         - and -

      L. Kendall Satterfield, Esq.
      Michael G. McLellan, Esq.
      Rosalee B.C. Thomas, Esq.
      FINKELSTEIN THOMPSON LLP
      1077 30th Street NW, Suite 150
      Washington, D.C. 20007
      Telephone: (202) 337-8000


RIZQ ENTERPRISE: Faces "Acuna" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Senovio Acuna and William Gordillo, individually and on behalf of
other employees similarly situated v. Rizq Enterprise LLC, and
Mohammad F. Khan, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-07147 (N.D. Ill.,
September 13, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure
to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a
week.

Rizq Enterprise LLC is an Illinois based company engaged in
commerce and is owned by Mohammad F. Khan.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


SEARS HOLDINGS: "Holstein" Case Returns to Kanawha County Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
Martin V. Holstein filed a class action in the Circuit Court of
Kanawha County on May 21, 2014, alleging violations of the West
Virginia Wage Payment and Collection Act (WPCA).  Defendants
Sears, Roebuck and Co., Sears Holdings Corporation, and Kmart
Corporation removed the case on July 8, 2014.

The Plaintiff timely filed a motion to remand on August 7, 2014,
arguing that the amount in controversy element is not satisfied
and therefore the district court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction.

District Judge John T. Copenhaver, Jr. granted the plaintiff's
motion to remand in a memorandum opinion and order dated September
9, 2014, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/YDPe72 from
Leagle.com.

The case is MARTIN V. HOLSTEIN, individually and on behalf of
those similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION
doing business as SEARS and SEARS, ROEBUCK AND CO. and KMART
CORPORATION and KMART PHARMACY and SEARS and SEARS AUTO CENTER and
SEARS HOME SERVICES and SEARS PROMOTIONS, LLC, Defendants, CIVIL
ACTION NO. 2:14-21166, (S.D. W. Va.).

Martin V. Holstein, Plaintiff, represented by Jonathan R. Marshall
-- jmarshall@baileyglasser.com -- BAILEY & GLASSER, Joy B. Mega,
BAILESS LAW, Rodney Arthur Smith -- rsmith@baileyglasser.com --
BAILEY & GLASSER & Todd S. Bailess, BAILESS LAW.

Sears Holdings Corporation, Defendant, represented by David A.
Hughes -- David.Hughes@jacksonlewis.com -- JACKSON LEWIS, Eric W.
Iskra -- eiskra@spilmanlaw.com -- SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE & Justin
Robert Barnes -- BarnesJr@jacksonlewis.com -- JACKSON LEWIS.

Sears, Roebuck and Co., Defendant, represented by David A. Hughes,
JACKSON LEWIS, Eric W. Iskra, SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE & Justin
Robert Barnes, JACKSON LEWIS.

Kmart Corporation, Defendant, represented by David A. Hughes,
JACKSON LEWIS, Eric W. Iskra, SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE & Justin
Robert Barnes, JACKSON LEWIS.

Kmart Pharmacy, Defendant, represented by David A. Hughes, JACKSON
LEWIS & Eric W. Iskra, SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE.

Sears, Defendant, represented by David A. Hughes, JACKSON LEWIS &
Eric W. Iskra, SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE.

Sears Auto Center, Defendant, represented by David A. Hughes,
JACKSON LEWIS & Eric W. Iskra, SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE.

Sears Home Services, Defendant, represented by David A. Hughes,
JACKSON LEWIS & Eric W. Iskra, SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE.

Sears Promotions, LLC, Defendant, represented by David A. Hughes,
JACKSON LEWIS & Eric W. Iskra, SPILMAN THOMAS & BATTLE.


SECOND ROUND: Faces "Burton" Suit Over Illegal Debt Collection
--------------------------------------------------------------
Linda Burton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Second Round, LP, Case No. :14-cv-07173 (C.D. Cal.,
September 14, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for
unlawfully and abusively collects a debt allegedly owed by the
Plaintiff, in violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Second Round, LP is a Texas limited corporation that engages in
debt collection business.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew M. Loker, Esq.
      KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC
      245 Fishcer Avenue Unit D1
      Costa Mesa, CA 92626
      Telephone: (800) 400-6808
      Facsimile: (800) 520-5523
      E-mail: ml@kazlg.com


SOURCE 1 BUILDING: Fails to Pay OT Hours, "Hernandez" Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jose M. Hernandez, individually and on behalf of other employees
similarly situated v. Source 1 Building Maintenance Services,
Inc., and Timothy J. Berger, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-07146
(N.D. Ill. September 12, 2014), is brought against the Defendant
for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40
hours in a week.

Source 1 Building Maintenance Services, Inc. provides janitorial
services for residential and commercial building.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


SYNGENTA AG: Sued Over Failure to Warn Dangers of Corn Products
---------------------------------------------------------------
Trans Coastal Supply Company, Inc. v. Syngenta AG, Syngenta Crop
Protection AG, Syngenta Corporation, Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC
and Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-02221 (C.D. Ill.
September 12, 2014), alleges that the Defendants fail to provide
an adequate warning regarding the dangers of planting, growing,
harvesting, transporting, or otherwise utilizing Viptera corn at
the time Viptera corn was sold.

The Defendants are international exporters of corn and dried
distillers grain with soluble.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Paul A. Lesko, Esq.
      SIMMONS BROWDER GIANARIS ANGELIDES & BARNERD LLC
      One Court Street
      Alton, IL 62002
      Telephone: (618) 259-2222
      Facsimile: (618) 259-2251
      E-mail: plesko@simmonsfirm.com


TD AMERITRADE: Sued in D.N.J. Over Breach of Fiduciary Duties
-------------------------------------------------------------
Gerald J. Klein, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
v. TD Ameritrade Holding Corporation, TD Ameritrade, Inc., and
Fredric Tomczyk, Case No. 3:14-cv-05738 (D.N.J., September 15,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for breach of fiduciary
duties in connection with self-interested routing of the Company's
clients' orders to venues which paid the maximum liquidity rebate
and/or paid for order flow, irrespective of whether such routing
would optimize execution quality.

The Defendants acted as brokers and engaged in routing its
client's orders to different venues to be executed.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Joseph J. Depalma, Esq.
      LITE, DEPALMA, GREENBERG, LLC
      Two Gateway Center, 12th Floor
      Newark, NJ 07102-5003
      Telephone: (973) 623-3000
      E-mail: jdepalma@litedepalma.com

         - and -

      Eduard Korsinsky, Esq.
      Nancy A. Kulesa, Esq.
      Christopher J. Kupka, Esq.
      Sebastian Tonatore, Esq.
      LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP
      30 Broad Street, 24th Floor
      New York, NY 10004
      Telephone: (212) 363-7500
      Facsimile: (866) 367-6510


TELETECH HOLDINGS: Class Action Settled for Immaterial Amount
-------------------------------------------------------------
TeleTech Holdings, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014, for the
quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that in the fourth quarter
of 2012, a class action complaint was filed in the State of
California against a TeleTech subsidiary and Google Inc.
("Google"), as co-defendants. Pursuant to its contractual
commitments, the Company has agreed to indemnify Google for costs
and expenses related to the complaint. The Company settled the
matter for an immaterial amount during the first quarter of 2014.

TeleTech Holdings, Inc. is a provider of customer strategy,
analytics-driven and technology-enabled customer engagement
management solutions with 40,000 employees delivering services
across 25 countries from 53 delivery centers on five continents.


TEXAS ANTI-CRIME: "Byrd" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Coninja Byrd, individually and all others similarly situated v.
Texas Anti-Crime Security Services, L.L.C. and Joel Izaguirre,
Case No. 4:14-cv-02640 (S.D. Tex. September 12, 2014), seeks to
recover unpaid overtime wage under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Texas Anti-Crime Security Services, L.L.C. provides security and
investigation services to corporate and individual clients across
Texas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lionel Martinm, Esq.
      GARCIA-MARTIN & MARTIN PC
      10707 Corporate Drive, Ste 100
      Stafford, TX 77477
      Telephone: (281) 277-3066
      Facsimile: (281) 277-3067
      E-mail: lmartin@mgmartinlaw.com


TINLEY PARK: Faces "Santiago" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Audelia Santiago on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated persons, known and unknown v. Tinley Park Hotel &
Convention Center, LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-07138 (N.D. Ill.
September 12, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure
to pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per week.

Tinley Park Hotel & Convention Center owns and operates a hotel
and restaurant located at 18501 South Harlem Avenue, Suite 100,
Tinley Park, Illinois 60477.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexis D. Martin, Esq.
      Alejandro Caffarelli, Esq.
      CAFFARELLI & SIEGEL, LTD.
      Two Prudential Plaza, 180 N Stetson, Suite 3150
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Telephone: (312) 540-1230
      E-mail: amartin@cslaw.com
              acaffarelli@cslaw.com


TOMATO THYME: Sued Over Violation of Fair Labor Standards Act
-------------------------------------------------------------
Maria Lora, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated v.
Tomato Thyme Corporation, Case No. 8:14-cv-02304 (M.D. Fla.,
September 15, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure
to pay overtime wages as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Tomato Thyme Corporation is a Florida corporation that is engaged
in the packaging and distribution of tomatoes for sale.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Gregory Scott Schell, Esq.
      Victoria Mesa, Esq.
      MIGRANT FARMWORKER JUSTICE PROJECT
      508 Lucerne Ave
      Lake Worth, FL 33460
      Telephone: (561) 582-3921
      Facsimile: (561) 582-4884
      E-mail: Greg@Floridalegal.org
              victoria@floridalegal.org


TOMMY'S REDHOTS: Faces "Vargas" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rene Vargas on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated
persons, known and unknown v. Tommy's Redhots, Inc., Tommy's/Lake
In The Hills, Ltd., Tommy's/Mchenry, Ltd., Homas Grieco,
individually, and Daniel Grieco, individually, Case No. :14-cv-
07144 (N.D. Ill. September 12, 2014), is brought against the
Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for hours worked in
excess of 40 per work week.

The Defendants own and operate restaurants in Illinois under the
trade name Tommy's Red Hots.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexis D. Martin, Esq.
      Alejandro Caffarelli, Esq.
      CAFFARELLI & SIEGEL, LTD.
      Two Prudential Plaza, 180 N Stetson, Suite 3150
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Telephone: (312) 540-1230
      E-mail: amartin@cslaw.com
              acaffarelli@cslaw.com


TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Deal Has Initial OK; Final Hearing in Jan.
--------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Gene E.K. Pratter granted preliminary approval of a
settlement in the case captioned DENISE HARLAN, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v.
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS, INC., d/b/a, NORTH SHORE AGENCY, INC.
Defendant, CIVIL ACTION NO. 13-5882, (E.D. Penn.).

The Settlement Agreement defines the Settlement Class as "All
persons with addresses in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, who were
sent an initial collection letter from NSA in which the statutory
1692g validation notice was printed on the reverse of the letter,
in uppercase and lowercase type, among paragraphs which were not
indented or spaced, and placed along other copy that was
capitalized, and the phrase "NOTICE-SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR IMPORTANT
INFORMATION" in all capital letters was on the front of the letter
where the underlying debt was incurred primarily for personal,
family or household use, where the letter bears a date from
October 12, 2012 to October 4, 2013."

Under the Settlement Agreement, each of the 222 Class members will
receive a check for $100 from a $22,200 settlement fund. Any
remaining amount will be awarded cy pres to Clarifi, a nonprofit
organization dedicated to financial literacy in the Delaware
Valley.  Without reduction of the settlement fund, as Class
Representative, Denise Harlan will receive an additional $2,000:
$1,000 as an individual settlement sum and $1,000 as an incentive
payment. North Shore has also agreed to revise the Subject Letter
to make the disputed notice of validation rights more prominent.

Under the Settlement Agreement, North Shore agrees to pay Counsel,
Cary L. Flitter, Theodore E. Lorenz, and Andrew M. Milz, of
Flitter Lorenz, P.C., $44,450 in attorneys' fees and costs. North
Shore also agrees to pay the costs of notice to the Class and
administration of the Settlement Amount.  This amount will not
reduce the settlement fund.

Denise Harlan is preliminarily appointed Class Representative and
the law firm of Flitter Lorenz, P.C., is preliminarily appointed
Class Counsel.

A Final Fairness Hearing will be held at 2:00 p.m. on Friday,
January 16, 2015, in Courtroom 10B, United States Courthouse, 601
Market Street, Philadelphia, PA 19106.

A copy of Judge Pratter's a September 8, 2014 Memorandum is
available at http://is.gd/vfP23Gand September 9, 2014 Order is
available at http://is.gd/g7V9rrfrom Leagle.com.

DENISE HARLAN, Plaintiff, represented by ANDREW M. MILZ, FLITTER
LORENZ PC & CARY L. FLITTER, FLITTER LORENZ, P.C..

TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS, INC., Defendant, represented by AARON R.
EASLEY -- aeasley@sessions-law.biz -- SESSIONS FISHMAN NATHAN &
ISRAEL LLC.


TRAYLOR BROS: Sued in Wash. Over Alleged Racial Discrimination
--------------------------------------------------------------
Leonard Rollins, Anthony Smith, Rashad Pearson, Jarlin Diaz-Lerma,
Alexander Watkins Sr., and Reginald Wright, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. Traylor Bros.,
Inc., and Traylor/Frontier-Kemper JV, Case No. 2:14-cv-01414 (W.D.
Wash., September 13, 2014), alleges that the Defendants wrongly
scrutinized African American Workers, treated them more harshly,
failed to provide them with meaningful work or training, and
wrongly dismissed African Americans Workers because of or
motivated by race and the color of their skin.

Traylor Bros., Inc. is a construction company with its
headquarters in Evansville, Indiana.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Gregory Arthur Hitzel, Esq.
      Stephen A. Teller, Esq.
      TELLER AND ASSOCIATES PLLC
      1139 34th Avenue Ste B
      Seattle, WA 98122
      Telephone: (206) 324-8969
      Facsimile: (206) 860-3172
      E-mail: greg@stellerlaw.com
              steve@stellerlaw.com


TRINITY REALTY: "Vega" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------
Josue Vega, on behalf of himself and others similarly-situated v.
Trinity Realty Corp., Joseph Phan, and Philip Phan, in their
individual and professional capacities, Case No. 1:14-cv-07417
(S.D.N.Y. September 12, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Trinity Realty Corp. owns and operates multiple residential
buildings in New York, New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexander Todd Coleman, Esq.
      Anthony Patrick Malecki, Esq.
      Michael John Borrelli, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES
      1010 Northern Blvd., St. 328
      Great Neck, NY 11021
      Telephone: (516) 248-5550
      Facsimile: (516) 248-6027
      E-mail: atc@employmentlawyernewyork.com
              apm@employmentlawyernewyork.com
              mjb@employmentlawyernewyork.com


VICCINO'S PIZZA: Faces "Gallardo" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fernando Vasquez Gallardo a/k/a Luis E. Vasquez on behalf of
himself and all other similarly situated persons, known and
unknown v. Viccino's Pizza Company, Viccino's Pizza Company -
Glenbrook, Viccino's Pizza Company - HP, LLC, Viccino's Pizza
Company - Libertyville, LLC, Viccino's Pizza Company - Northfield,
LLC, Alan Denenberg, individually; and BRAD HATTRIE, individually,
Case No. 1:14-cv-07143 (N.D. Ill. September 12, 2014), is brought
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for hours
worked in excess of 40 per work week.

The Defendants own and operate a restaurant and does business as
Viccino's Pizza Company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexis D. Martin, Esq.
      Alejandro Caffarelli, Esq.
      CAFFARELLI & SIEGEL, LTD.
      Two Prudential Plaza
      180 N Stetson, Suite 3150
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Telephone: (312) 540-1230
      E-mail: amartin@cslaw.com
              acaffarelli@cslaw.com


VISION WIRELESS: Faces "Cooper" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Cooper, an individual, on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated v. Vision Wireless Communications, LLC, Case
No. 5:14-cv-02052 (N.D. Ohio, September 15, 2014), is brought
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for hours
worked in excess of 40 hours per workweek.

Vision Wireless Communications, LLC is in the business of
installing and repairing fiber optic cables on cellular towers,
throughout the State of Ohio at various cell tower locations.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
      Shannon M. Draher, Esq.
      NILGES DRAHER LLC
      Ste. 201, 4580 Stephen Circle, NW
      Canton, OH 44718
      Telephone: (330) 354-8967
      Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
      E-mail: hans@ohlaborlaw.com
              sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com


WARNER MUSIC: Plaintiffs' Lawyers Bid for Intern Jury Trial Nixed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
David Bario, writing for The Litigation Daily, reports that over
the last two years, a trickle of employment class actions brought
on behalf of unpaid interns has become a flood.  Two of the
plaintiffs firms spearheading the cases, Virginia & Ambinder and
Leeds Brown Law, have filed at least a half-dozen suits against
employers whose internship programs allegedly violated the Fair
Labor Standards Act, including Viacom Inc., Warner Music Group
and, most recently, CBS Broadcasting Inc.

Now, thanks to a dustup with one erstwhile client and unfavorable
rulings by two judges, the firms' case against CBS is dead on
arrival, and the Warner Music and Viacom cases are left without
the threat of a jury trial hanging over the defendants.

The CBS class action blew up, when the plaintiff -- a former David
Letterman intern named Mallory Musallam -- filed a notice of
discontinuance on Sept. 10.  Ms. Musallam didn't just back out of
the suit, however: She also sent a letter to "The Late Show with
David Letterman" in which she attacked her own lawyers and
apologized desperately for bringing the case the week before.

According to the New York Daily News, Ms. Musallam wrote in the
letter that "a beguiling legion of lawsuit-hungry attorneys" had
exploited her at "a weak vulnerable time." She was "hastily
coerced into a lawsuit masked in equivocal language and ambiguous
pretenses," Ms. Musallam wrote.

Virginia & Ambinder name partner Lloyd Ambinder declined to go
into specifics when asked about Ms. Musallam's letter.  "After
intense media scrutiny, she directed us to discontinue the case,"
Mr. Ambinder said.  "We immediately complied."

The Warner Music and Viacom cases, on the other hand, are very
much still alive, having each won conditional certification as
FLSA collective actions earlier this year.  The problem the
plaintiffs lawyers face in those cases isn't a missing client --
it's a missing jury.

U.S. District Judge Paul Gardephe in Manhattan refused on Sept. 12
to grant Virginia & Ambinder and Leeds Brown a belated request for
a jury trial in the Warner Music case.  The plaintiffs lawyers had
explicitly told the court at first that they weren't seeking a
jury trial, but they changed course more than six months after
filing the lawsuit, arguing that they meant to have a jury hear
the case all along.

Warner Music Group's lawyers at Vedder Price, led by Laura Sack --
lsack@vedderprice.com -- strongly opposed the request.  Among
other things, Ms. Sack pointed out that the same firms had also
waived a jury demand in a parallel case against WMG filed in state
court, and that Ambinder and cocounsel Jeffrey Brown were hardly
novices when it came to bringing employment cases.

The judge agreed. "There is no evidence that plaintiff intended to
demand a jury when the complaint was filed," Judge Gardephe wrote,
"The notion that in both of these high-profile actions counsel
accidentally omitted the customary jury demand is implausible."
U.S. District Judge Jesse Furman reached a similar conclusion in
the Viacom case in April, refusing to allow the same plaintiffs
firms to amend their case management plan to add a jury trial.
Vedder Price also represents the defendants in that case.

The fate of all the intern cases, meanwhile, most likely hinges on
two consolidated appeals now pending at the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit.  A panel is weighing whether unpaid
interns at Hearst Corporation and Fox Searchlight Pictures Inc.
qualify as employees under state and federal labor laws, which
would entitle them to back pay and potential damages.

Rachel Bien of Outten & Golden is representing the plaintiffs at
the Second Circuit.  Neal Katyal -- neal.katyal@hoganlovells.com
-- of Hogan Lovells represents Fox along with lawyers at Proskauer
Rose.  Hearst is relying on an in-house team led by deputy general
counsel Jonthan Donnellan.


WILHELMINA INT'L: Bid to Dismiss "Shanklin" Case Under Advisement
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Wilhelmina International, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 11, 2014,
for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2014, that on October 24,
2013, a purported class action lawsuit brought by former
Wilhelmina model Alex Shanklin and others (the "Shanklin
Litigation"), naming the Company's subsidiaries Wilhelmina
International and Wilhelmina Models, Inc. (the "Wilhelmina
Subsidiary Parties"), was initiated in New York State Supreme
Court (New York County) by the same lead counsel who represented
plaintiffs in the prior, now-dismissed action brought by Louisa
Raske (the "Raske Litigation"). The claims in the Shanklin
Litigation include breach of contract and unjust enrichment and
are alleged to arise out of matters relating to those matters
involved in the Raske Litigation, such as the handling and
reporting of funds on behalf of models and the use of model
images. Other parties named as defendants in the Shanklin
Litigation include other model management companies, advertising
firms, and certain advertisers.

The Company believes the claims are without merit and intends to
vigorously defend itself and its subsidiaries. On January 6, 2014,
the Wilhelmina Subsidiary Parties moved to dismiss the Amended
Complaint in the Shanklin Litigation for failure to state a cause
of action upon which relief can be granted and other grounds, and
other defendants have also filed motions to dismiss.

On March 3, 2014, the judge assigned to the Shanklin Litigation
wrote the Office of the New York Attorney General bringing the
case to its attention, generally describing the claims asserted
therein against the model management defendants, and stating that
the case "may involve matters in the public interest." The judge's
letter also enclosed a copy of his decision in the Raske
Litigation, which dismissed that case.

The defendants' motions to dismiss were orally argued on July 28,
2014, at which time the court took the motions under advisement.
The court has stayed all discovery in the case pending resolution
of these motions.

The Company's primary business is fashion model management, which
is headquartered in New York City.  The Company's predecessor was
founded in 1967 by Wilhelmina Cooper, a renowned fashion model,
and is one of the oldest, best known and largest fashion model
management companies in the world.  Since its founding, it has
grown to include operations located in Los Angeles and Miami, as
well as a growing network of licensees comprising leading modeling
agencies in various local markets across the U.S., as well as in
Thailand, Dubai, Vancouver and Tokyo. The Company provides
traditional, full-service fashion model and talent management
services, specializing in the representation and management of
models, entertainers, artists, athletes and other talent to
various customers and clients, including retailers, designers,
advertising agencies and catalog companies.


XEROX EDUCATION: Court Denies Bid to Dismiss Reynolds Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
In JEFFREY D. REYNOLDS, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. XEROX EDUCATION SERVICES, INC.,
f/k/a ACS EDUCATION SERVICES, INC.; and WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.,
Defendants, NO. 6:13-CV-1223 (LEK/TWD), (N.D. N.Y.), the Plaintiff
alleges various causes of action relating to the servicing of his
student loans.  Wells Fargo filed a motion to dismiss the
Plaintiff's unjust enrichment claim.  The Defendants also filed a
joint motion to dismiss the amended complaint.

In a memorandum-decision and order dated September 9, 2014, a copy
of which is available at http://is.gd/nInuGgfrom Leagle.com,
District Judge Lawrence E. Kahn denied Well Fargo's Motion as
moot, as well as the Defendants' Joint Motion in its entirety.

Jeffrey D. Reynolds, Plaintiff, represented by Justin A. Kuehn --
kuehn@bespc.com -- Bragar, Eagel Law Firm & Lawrence P. Eagel --
eagel@bespc.com -- Bragar Wexler & Eagel, P.C..

Xerox Education Services, Inc., formerly known as ACS Education
Services, Inc., Defendant, represented by Edward K. Lenci --
elenci@hinshawlaw.com -- Hinshaw, Culbertson Law Firm.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendant, represented by Allison J.
Schoenthal -- allison.schoenthal@hoganlovells.com -- Hogan,
Lovells Law Firm & Robin L. Muir -- robin.muir@hoganlovells.com --
Hogan, Lovells Law Firm.


XPRESSIGNS INC: Faces "Herrera" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Agustin G. Herrera, individually and on behalf of other employees
similarly situated v. Xpressigns, Inc., and Aslam A. Shariff,
individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-07186 (N.D. Ill., September 15,
2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay
overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week.

Xpressigns, Inc. is a one stop sign shop doing business within the
State of Illinois.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


YELP! INC: 9th Cir. Affirms Dismissal of "Levitt" Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yelp! Inc. provides an online forum on which its users express
opinions as to services ranging from dog walkers to taco trucks.
Boris Levitt, Cats and Dogs Animal Hospital, Inc., John Mercurio,
and Dr. Tracy Chan, are small business owners who allege that Yelp
extorted or attempted to extort advertising payments from them by
manipulating user reviews and penning negative reviews of their
businesses. The business owners filed a class-action lawsuit
against Yelp for violations of California's Unfair Competition
Law, California Business & Professions Code Section 17200 et seq.,
civil extortion, and attempted civil extortion.  The district
court dismissed the lawsuit for failure to state a claim.

The United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, affirmed the
district court's judgment in an opinion dated September 2, 2014.
The Ninth Circuit said the facts and legal theories alleged in the
business owners' complaint are insufficient to make out a prima
facie case of unlawful or unfair business practices against Yelp.
The business owners' Third Amended Complaint fails to state a
claim under California's unfair competition laws, and fails to
sufficiently allege extortion or attempted extortion, the Ninth
Circuit added.

A copy of the Ninth Circuit's ruling is available at
http://is.gd/gIMrqVfrom Leagle.com.

The case is BORIS Y. LEVITT, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, DBA Renaissance Restoration; CATS AND DOGS
ANIMAL HOSPITAL, INC.; TRACY CHAN, DBA Marina Dental Care; JOHN
MERCURIO, DBA Wheel Techniques, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. YELP!
INC., Defendant-Appellee, NO. 11-17676.

Lawrence Dale Murray (argued), John Henning III, and Robert C.
Strickland, Murray & Associates, San Francisco, California, for
Plaintiffs-Appellants.

S. Ashlie Beringer -- ABeringer@gibsondunn.com -- (argued) and
Molly Cutler, Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Palo Alto, California; Gail
Ellen Lees -- glees@gibsondunn.com -- Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, Los
Angeles, California; and Aaron Schur -- aschur@yelp.com -- Yelp
Inc., San Francisco, California, for Defendant-Appellee.


                              *********

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  * * *