/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/141020.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, October 20, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 208 Headlines 661 NORTHERN: Sued in N.Y. Over Failure to Properly Pay Employees AMBIT BIOSCIENCES: Faces Suit in Delaware Over Proposed Merger AMERICAN HEALTHCARE: "Atienza" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT AMERICAN STANDARD: "Seabron" Suit Bifurcated; New Cases Opened ADAMA AGRICULTURAL: Denial of Cert. in Nuisance Lawsuit Appealed AGFEED USA: Hires Epiq as Class Action Noticing & Claims Agent AIR SERV: NY App. Court Upholds Certification in "Williams" Suit AUSNET ELECTRICITY: Faces Class Action Over Jack River Fire BANKRATE INC: Faces "Tong" Securities Lawsuit in Florida Court BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Judge Tosses Mini Cooper Pump Class Action BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Warranty Settlement Gets Prelim. Court OK BP PLC: National Chamber Supports Oil Spill Settlement Challenge BUDDY'S KITCHEN: Recalls 62,488 Lbs. of Meat and Poultry Products BURGER KING: Faces "Schadt" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime CALIFORNIA OLIVE: Recalls Pumpkin Seed Pesto CAMIN CARGO: Faces "Monceaux" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime CANACCORD GENUITY: Sued in N.H. Over Misleading Financial Reports CAREFUSION CORP: Being Sold for Too Little, Shareholder Claims CARMAX INC: Labor Suit v. Superstores Remanded to Appeals Court CARMAX INC: Receives $20.9MM Settlement in Toyota Liability Suit CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Class Cert. Bid in Davenport Case Tossed CHIPOTLE MEXICAN: Ct. Rules on Plaintiffs' Bid to Strike Answer CHIQUITA BRANDS: Faces Shareholder Suit Over Fyffes Merger COCA-COLA CO: Vitaminwater Settlement Gets Prelim. Court Okay CORRECTIONS CORPORATION: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime COUNTRY NISSAN: "Ontiveros" Suit Settlement Gets Final Court Nod COVIDIEN LLC: Recalls Puritan Bennett 980 Series Ventilator DHW WELL: Faces "Bouchard" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime DIMENSION INDUSTRIES: Recalls Sling Cafe Sets Due to Fall Hazard DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Judge Won't End Education System Monitoring FEDEX CORP: Ruling in Drivers' Class Action Based on Old Practice FIRST FINANCIAL: Faces "Wallace" Suit Over Violation of FLSA FLUID HANDLING: Recalls Low Water Cut-Off Control Units FORD MOTOR: Faces "Campbell" Suit in Illinois District Court FRESH FOOD: Recalls 1,008 Lbs. of Italian Style Wedding Soup GALANT FOOD: Recalls 410 Lbs. of Beef Products GALANT FOOD: Recalls 130 Lbs. of Beef Products GEMINI SURFACES: "Mijares" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime GERBER PRODUCTS: Must Face Fifth Amended Probiotic Complaint GROVE CITY, PA: Former USIS Employee Files Suit Over Termination HOSPIRA INC: Recalls Several Products in LifeCare Line ITT EDUCATIONAL: Faces "Jindal" Suit Over Deceptive Fin'l Reports JEFFERIES GROUP: Bares Updates on Suits Over Leucadia Transaction KUM & GO: Bid to Strike Offer of Judgment in "Claxton" Okayed KUO HUA: Recalls 3:15 PM Products Due to Undeclared Milk KWIKWETLEM FIRST NATION: Members Sue Chief Over Bonus KYMCO USA: Recalls ATVs Due to Burn & Fire Hazards LES ALIMENTS: Recalls Star Mixed Fruit Drink LINKEDIN CORPORATION: Sued Over Breach of Credit Reporting Law LOS ANGELES, CA: Accused of Withholding Psychotropic Medication LUNADA BIOMEDICAL: Order Striking Declaratory Relief Case Upheld MCDONALD'S USA: "Hornsby" Lawsuit Denied Class Certification MICHAELS STORES: Recalls Folding Tables Due to Fall Hazard MILLENNIAL MEDIA: Faces Shareholder Class Action in New York MISSOURI: Civil Trials Put on Hold Amid SORTS Class Action NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Class Cert. Bid in "Burton" Case Denied NEW ENERGY SYSTEMS: Court Dismisses Securities Litigation OCWEN FINANCIAL: Alfred Yates Law Firm Files Class Action OPTIMUM NUTRITION: Falsely Marketed Protein Products, Suit Claims PENNSYLVANIA: App. Court Vacates Dismissal of "Pelzer" Case PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Sued in California Over Violation of FDCPA R&A OYSTERS: Accused of Not Properly Paying Mexican Guest Workers SCOPE SERVICES: Faces "Gray" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime SIGMA-ALDRICH CORP: Robbins Arroyo Files Class Action Over Buyout SIMPLICITY BANCORP: Being Sold for Too Little, Class Suit Claims SOUTH FLORIDA REFINISHING: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime SUNSOF INC: FLSA Case by Factory Workers Dismissed SUPER NICE: "Pierre" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages SYNGENTA CORPORATION: Sued Over Damages Caused by Viptera Corn TIBCO SOFTWARE: Faces 3 Class Actions Over Merger Agreement TPE INC: "Bonilla-Diaz" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime TURKEY VALLEY: Sued Over Violation of Fair Labor Standards Act TURKISH REPUBLIC: Court Dismissed Suit Over Cyprus Property Spat UEBT RETIREE: Sued in N.D. California Over Violation of ERISA VOXX INTERNATIONAL: No Lead Plaintiff Yet in N.Y. Stock Lawsuit WYNDHAM VACATION: Court Says Meeting Recordings Are Not Protected * William Holder Joins Cornerstone Research as Senior Advisor ********* 661 NORTHERN: Sued in N.Y. Over Failure to Properly Pay Employees ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ashraf Hussain, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. 661 Northern Blvd, LLC d/b/a Burton & Doyle Steakhouse, Burton and Doyle of Great Neck LLC, Mario Sbarro, Joseph Zangri, and Bert E. Brodsky, Case No. 2:14-cv-05924 (E.D.N.Y., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants own and operate Burton & Doyle restaurant at 661 Northern Boulevard, Great Neck, New York 11021. The Plaintiff is represented by: Yesenia Francisco, Esq. BERKE-WEISS & PECHMAN LLP 488 Madison Avenue, Suite 1120 New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 583-9500 Facsimile: (212) 308-8582 E-mail: francisco@bwp-law.com - and - Louis Pechman, Esq. BERKE-WEISS & PECHMAN LLP 488 Madison Avenue, 11th Floor New York, NY 10022 Telephone: (212) 583-9500 Facsimile: (212) 208-8582 E-mail: pechman@bwp-law.com AMBIT BIOSCIENCES: Faces Suit in Delaware Over Proposed Merger -------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that directors are selling Ambit Biosciences too cheaply through an unfair process to Daiichi Sankyo, for $15 a share or $410 million, shareholders claim in a class action in Delaware Chancery Court. AMERICAN HEALTHCARE: "Atienza" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT -------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Atienza, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. American Healthcare Facility Management Group, Inc., Axis Point Alternative Solutions, Inc., American Manpower Resource Provider, Inc., and Michael Urbino, Case No. 1:14-cv-08137 (S.D.N.Y., October 9, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation and for other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants own and operate an employment, recruitment, and staffing business location at 80 River Street, Hoboken, New Jersey. The Plaintiff is represented by: Neil H. Greenberg, Esq. NEIL H. GREENBERG & ASSOCIATES, PC 900 Merchants Concourse, Suite 314 Westbury, NY 11590 Telephone: (516)228-5100 AMERICAN STANDARD: "Seabron" Suit Bifurcated; New Cases Opened -------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge William J. Martinez entered an order directing court clerk to open new cases in the action KATHLEEN SEABRON, ROBERT LAYS, CARLA LAYS, and KRISTY LARSON, Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, and AMERICAN STANDARD INSURANCE COMPANY OF WISCONSIN, Defendants, CIVIL ACTION NO. 11-CV-01096-WJM-KMT (D. Colo). The case was originally filed as a class action brought on behalf of all Colorado residents who have had claims on their uninsured/underinsured motorist policies submitted to Defendants' medical services or legal services divisions. However, because the Court denied Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification, the action is proceeding only as to the named Plaintiffs. On August 6, 2014, the Court granted Defendants' Motion to Bifurcate and held that this case will proceed to three separate trials. The Final Pretrial Order was entered on September 25, 2014, and anticipates the setting of three trials. Thus, the Court finds that keeping the four Plaintiffs claims together in the action has the potential to confuse the parties, and will unnecessarily complicate case management for the Court and the parties. Accordingly, the Court ruled that: -- The Court Clerk will open new cases, one for the claims brought by Plaintiffs Carla and Robert Lays, and one for the claims brought by Plaintiff Kristy Larsen; and -- Plaintiff Kathleen Seabron's claims will remain pending in this case. The District Court's Oct. 3, 2014 Order is available at http://is.gd/aJtXoRfrom Leagle.com. American Standard Insurance Company of Wisconsin, Defendant, is represented by Daniel David Williams, Esq. -- dan.williams@FaegreBD.com , Hetal Janak Doshi, Esq. -- hetal.doshi@FaegreBD.com , Michael S. McCarthy, Esq. -- michael.mccarthy@FaegreBD.com , Russell O. Stewart, Esq. -- russell.stewart@FaegreBD.com -- of Faegre Baker Daniels LLP; as well as Debra K. Sutton, Esq. -- dsutton@suttonbooker.com , and Scott Calvin James, Esq. -- sjames@suttonbook.com -- of Sutton Booker, P.C. ADAMA AGRICULTURAL: Denial of Cert. in Nuisance Lawsuit Appealed ---------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiffs in a suit against Adama Agricultural Solutions Ltd., alleging damages caused due to odor and noise nuisances, are appealing a decision rejecting a request for certification of the case, according to the company's Oct. 8, 2014, Amendment No. 2 to Form F-1 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. On July 24, 2011, a financial claim and a request for approval of the claim as a class action were received in the offices of Agan, which were filed by two residents of Moshav Nir Galim and a resident of Ashdod alleging damages caused due to odor and noise nuisances. To the extent the claim will be approved as a class action, the plaintiffs assess that the amount claimed from Agan is about NIS 642 million ($185 million). On December 8, 2013, a decision was rendered by the District Court in Be'er Sheva rejecting the request for certification of the claim as a class action and charging the plaintiffs for expenses. Subsequent to the date of the statement of financial position, on February 10, 2014, the plaintiffs filed an appeal of the said court decision to the Supreme Court. In the Company's estimation, based on its legal advisors, the chances the appeal will be accepted are less than the chances it will be rejected. AGFEED USA: Hires Epiq as Class Action Noticing & Claims Agent -------------------------------------------------------------- AgFeed USA, LLC and its debtor-affiliates seek authorization from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware to employ Epiq Class Action and Claims Solutions, Inc. as their class action noticing and claims administration agent, nunc pro tunc to Sept. 16, 2014, according to a report by the Troubled Company Reporter. The Debtors require Epiq to: (a) create and disseminate notices to the Class Claimants regarding settlements reached in these Cases affecting their recoveries; (b) create and disseminate notices to the Class Claimants regarding the treatment of their claims under the Plan; (c) identify, collect and aggregate claims of the Class Claimants to determine the amount and proportion of distributions to be made to Class Claimants as Holders of Class 6B claims under the Plan; and (d) provide other services consistent with the Engagement Agreement. Epiq charges for its services on a mixed flat fee and hourly basis as reflected in the Engagement Agreement. Epiq will charge the Debtors under these agreed rates in accordance with its ordinary and customary rates in effect on the dates services are rendered. Epiq will be paid at these hourly rates: Clerical and Data Entry $50 Contac Center (Dedicated) $50 Claims Analyst & Check Coordinator $70 Contact Center Agent - Training $75 Claims Specialist, Noticing Coordinator and Account Reconciliation $80 Project Coordinator $100 Data Analyst/IT Support $140 Project Manager & Disbursement Manager $165 Sr. Project Manager & Software Engineer $190 Project Director $225 Client Services and Call Center Managers $275 Executive Management and Testimony $375 Under the terms of the Engagement Agreement, Epiq has agreed to cap its fees for this engagement at $130,000 (the "Cost Cap"), subject to certain exceptions for additional hard out of pocket costs that may be incurred over the Cost Cap as identified in the Engagement Agreement. Epiq will also be reimbursed for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred. Stephanie Thurin, project manager of Epiq, assured the Court that the firm is a "disinterested person" as the term is defined in Section 101(14) of the Bankruptcy Code and does not represent any interest adverse to the Debtors and their estates. The Court for the District of Delaware will hold a hearing on the application on Oct. 27, 2014, at 10:30 a.m. Objections were due Oct. 10, 2014. Epiq can be reached at: Andrew Shimek EPIQ CLASS ACTION & CLAIMS SOLUTIONS, INC. 10300 S.W. Allen Blvd. Beaverton, OR 97005 Tel: (503) 350-5900 Fax: (503) 350-5890 E-mail: ashimek@epiqsystems.com AgFeed Industries, Inc., has 21 farms and five feed mills in China producing more than 250,000 hogs annually. In the U.S., the business included 10 sow farms in three states and two feed mills producing more than one million hogs a year. AgFeed's revenue in 2012 was $244 million. AgFeed and its affiliates filed voluntary petitions under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (Bankr. D. Del. Case No. 13-11761) on July 15, 2013, with a deal to sell most of its subsidiaries to The Maschhoffs, LLC, for cash proceeds of $79 million, absent higher and better offers. The Debtors estimated assets of at least $100 million and debts of at least $50 million. AIR SERV: NY App. Court Upholds Certification in "Williams" Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York affirmed the May 23, 2013 order of the Supreme Court of New York County (Lucy Billing, J.), which granted class certification in the case BRENDA WILLIAMS, ET AL., Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. AIR SERV CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellant, 13113, 108648/10. In an Oct. 7, 2014 Order available at http://is.gd/YcnYzFfrom Leagle.com, the New York Supreme Court Appellate Division certified a class of all persons, other than managers, corporate officers or directors, or clerical or office workers who performed work for Air Serv Corp at John F. Kennedy International Airport between June 2004 and the present. The appellate panel is composed of Sweeny, J.P., Renwick, Andrias, Moskowitz, Manzanet-Daniels, JJ. Virginia & Ambinder, LLP, New York (LaDonna M. Lusher, Esq. of counsel -- llusher@vandallp.com ), represents the respondents. AUSNET ELECTRICITY: Faces Class Action Over Jack River Fire ----------------------------------------------------------- Gippsland Times reports that Maddens lawyers have commenced a class action on behalf of victims of the Jack River bushfire, which burnt farmland in the Jack River area on February 9. The firm issued proceedings on September 25 against energy provider AusNet Electricity Services, on behalf of residents and business owners burnt out by the a fire that burned 5000 hectares between Jack River and Madalya, west of Yarram, on February 9. According to the Statement of Claim issued in the Victorian Supreme Court, the Jack River fire started when poorly-maintained trees came into contact with a power line north-west of the Egans Rd and Yarram-Morwell Road intersection, around 10:20 a.m. on Sunday, February 9. The ensuing blaze destroyed at least one home, fencing, pastures, outbuildings, native trees and a large proportion of a local timber plantation. It is estimated the claim will exceed $2.5 million in property loss and damage, with 25 local residents already registered as part of the class. Maddens' Senior Partner Brendan Pendergast said the class action was a secure and low-risk means for the residents and businesses marred by the fire to claim losses, including losses not covered by insurance. "In this instance, the failure to properly clear trees from beneath a power line has led to devastating consequences," he said. "Quite simply, the residents of this area have suffered losses that are not their fault. "They are losses that would not have occurred had the right procedures been followed. "There is no reason these residents should sit back and just accept that this fire occurred, and accept the damage that it did whilst incurring the substantial expense associated with re-establishing their properties." AusNet Electricity Services had until Oct. 7 to indicate whether it intends to defend the action, but it is believed it would do so. Mr. Pendergast urged any residents or business owners who may have not already registered to be part of the class action to phone Maddens Lawyers tollfree on 1800 139 290, or by registering online at maddenslawyers.com.au BANKRATE INC: Faces "Tong" Securities Lawsuit in Florida Court -------------------------------------------------------------- Bankrate, Inc. is facing the lawsuit Tong v. Evans, et al., No. 14-cv-8113 in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, according to the company's Oct. 8, 2014, Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The United States Department of Justice (the "DOJ") has informed the Company that it is investigating the matters that are the subject of the previously announced SEC Investigation. The Company is cooperating with the DOJ in its investigation. It is not possible to predict when the DOJ investigation will be completed, the final outcome of the investigation, and what if any actions may be taken by the DOJ. In September 2014, a putative class action lawsuit, captioned Tong v. Evans, et al., No. 14-cv-8113, was brought in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against the Company and certain current and former officers and directors of the Company, alleging violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5. On the basis of the press release and Form 8-K issued by the Company on September 15, 2014 regarding the SEC Investigation and the review being conducted by the Company's Audit Committee, the complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendants made false and misleading statements about, and failed to disclose, alleged errors in the Company's financial statements relating to the improper recognition of revenues and expenses, and allegedly inadequate internal controls over financial reporting; and that, as a result, the Company's financial statements were materially false and misleading. The complaint seeks to recover damages on behalf of a proposed class consisting of all persons, other than the defendants, who purchased the Company's securities between March 1, 2013 and September 15, 2014, inclusive. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Judge Tosses Mini Cooper Pump Class Action ---------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Lipkin and Daniel Siegal, writing for Law360, report that a California federal judge on Oct. 3 tossed an $85 million putative class action accusing BMW of North America LLC of concealing defective water pumps in some Mini Cooper vehicles, ruling the plaintiff only vaguely alleged BMW knew about the defects. U.S. District Judge Margaret M. Morrow granted BMW's motion to dismiss the suit after finding plaintiff Trish Herremans didn't properly state a claim under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act or California's Unfair Competition Law. Ms. Herremans referenced internal testing, records of customer complaints, dealership repair records and other internal sources, but gave no information about when BMW supposedly knew about the faulty designs, according to the opinion. The complaint gives "little, if any, factual foundation to her conclusion that BMW knew of the defect," Judge Morrow wrote. "Herremans does not describe the internal testing or what it shows. She does not identify the repair records, their volume or how they revealed the defect." Judge Morrow gave Ms. Herremans 20 days to amend her complaint. The court also dismissed the suit's fraud claim and gave another ground for tossing the CLRA claim because Ms. Herremans had not shown she could take advantage of exceptions to the claims' three- year statute of limitations. Ms. Herremans admitted she was first aware of the defect in February 2011, when the water pump in her car failed and was replaced while her car was under warranty. That was more than three years before she filed her suit in March 2014. She argued she could invoke the delayed discovery and fraudulent concealment rules because the BMW dealer had told her there was no problem with her pump after the initial repair. It wasn't until the pump failed again last January that she learned about the defect, Ms. Herremans claimed. Judge Morrow, however, held the complaint didn't have any specific allegations as to how or when Ms. Herremans first discovered the defect, or show why she couldn't have discovered it earlier. Ms. Herremans filed suit in California federal court on March 27, alleging BMW had actively concealed and failed to disclose evidence to consumers that a design defect is likely to cause failures in water pumps found in over 50,000 Mini Coopers from the 2007 to 2013 model years. The pump defect can allegedly cause engines to overheat and fail. The defect cost Ms. Herremans $1,700 when her water pump failed for a second time after her warranty had expired. The total damages in the suit are over $85 million, according to the complaint, based on 50,000 class vehicles. Ms. Herremans is represented by Stephen M. Harris of Knapp Petersen & Clarke APC and Robert L. Starr and Adam Rose of the Law Offices of Robert L. Starr. BMW is represented by Eric Y. Kizirian -- Eric.Kizirian@lewisbrisbois.com -- Michael K. Grimaldi -- Michael.Grimaldi@lewisbrisbois.com -- and Kimberly T. Chung -- Kimberly.Chung@lewisbrisbois.com -- of Lewis Brisbois Bisgaard & Smith LLP. The case is Trish Herremans v. BMW of North America LLC, case number 2:14-cv-02363, in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Warranty Settlement Gets Prelim. Court OK --------------------------------------------------------------- Tom Zanki and Juan Carlos Rodriguez, writing for Law360, report that a New Jersey federal judge preliminarily approved a class action settlement on Oct. 6 involving BMW of North America LLC, in which plaintiffs alleged the luxury carmaker improperly sold demonstration vehicles as new, cheating customers of warranty coverage. U.S. District Judge Claire C. Cecchi's preliminary approval applies to U.S. consumers who bought a BMW sales demonstration or service demonstration vehicle after Sept. 28, 2006, that was identified in the sales contract as "new" and were not informed that the warranty had begun before the purchase. Under terms of the settlement, crafted with the help of a court- appointed mediator, BMW has agreed to extend its warranty at least three months for eligible vehicles and reimburse owners whose warranty already expired for necessary repair costs that occurred within three months after expiration, court documents say. The settlement, first proposed May 29, also requires BMW to pay plaintiff's attorneys fees up to $600,000. Additional financial details and an estimate of how many consumers are affected was not immediately clear. A final approval hearing is scheduled for March 12, in federal court offices in Newark, N.J. Counsel for the parties could not immediately be reached. Messages to BMW seeking comment were not immediately be returned. In the suit filed in October 2012, plaintiff and BMW consumer Sanjay Saini claimed the carmaker's "Ultimate Warranty" begins to accrue on the sale date to a customer for new cars but on the sale date to a dealer for demonstration cars. This meant when demonstration vehicles were sold as "new" to consumers, they necessarily came with less than the four years of the warranty coverage promised by BMW, according to the complaint. The "ultimate service" warranty includes four years of no-cost maintenance and repair, the complaint said. The suit alleged BMW's practices breached its contractual covenant to provide four years of comprehensive warranty coverage for all new BMW vehicles, unjustly enriched BMW at the expense of Mr. Saini and class members, and entitled Mr. Saini and the class to a declaration of their rights under the federal Declaratory Judgments Act, the complaint said. BMW sought to dismiss the suit on grounds that Mr. Saini, who bought a BMW 335d at a Sterling, Virginia, dealership in 2011, suffered no damages and lacked standing to sue. The carmaker also claimed that Mr. Saini, as a Virginia resident, improperly invoked the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. Demonstration vehicles are vehicles sold to and operated by a dealership solely for the purpose of promoting motor vehicle sales and permitting potential purchasers to drive the vehicle for pre-purchase or pre-lease evaluation, the lawsuit said. These vehicles can be used for test drives, floor models or be held in the dealership's inventory for later use. As such, a demonstration vehicle's mileage and condition vary depending on the role in which it was used. Mr. Saini is represented by Bruce D. Greenberg of Lite DePalma Greenberg LLC and by Jeffrey R. Krinsk, Mark L. Knutson and William R. Restis of Finkelstein & Krinsk LLP. BMW is represented by Christopher J. Dalton -- christopher.dalton@bipc.com -- and Rosemary J. Bruno -- rosemary.bruno@bipc.com -- of Buchanan Ingersoll & Rooney PC. Retired federal Judge John J. Hughes of Philadelphia was appointed mediator. The case is Sanjay Saini v. BMW of North America LLC, number 2:12- cv-06105 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. BP PLC: National Chamber Supports Oil Spill Settlement Challenge ---------------------------------------------------------------- Marcia Coyle, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that Gulf Coast chambers of commerce told the U.S. Supreme Court last week that their mothership, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, does not represent them in its support of BP PLC's challenge to the class action settlement stemming from the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. In an unusual public display of disagreement with the national chamber, the local affiliates said: "The Chamber did not seek the input nor approval of the amici affiliates, nor to our knowledge any Gulf Coast area affiliate, prior to filing its amicus brief in support of petitioner's petition for a writ of certiorari." The national chamber, represented by Catherine Stetson -- cate.stetson@hoganlovells.com -- of Hogan Lovells, filed an amicus brief in BP Exploration & Production v. Lake Eugenie Land & Development. Joining in its brief were the American Tort Reform Association, the National Association of Manufacturers and the U.S. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. The chamber supports BP's argument that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit erred when it upheld certification of a class that included members who had not suffered any injuries related to the spill. The company, represented by Theodore Olson -- tolson@gibsondunn.com -- of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, contends that the certification violated Rule 23 of the federal rules of civil procedure and the Constitution. The Fifth Circuit decision, it adds, also conflicts with rulings by the Seventh, Eighth and D.C. circuits. In filing their amicus brief disputing the national chamber's views and representation, the local chambers "realized more clearly than most that the national organization does not in this instance and perhaps in other instances speak for them," said Thomas Young of Tampa, their counsel. "It's more than policy or political. It's a matter of great personal importance to the organizations and their members. They felt they had to say something at this stage." The local chambers on the brief represent more than 7,000 businesses and 200,000 employees, Mr. Young said. As a group, they are fairly widely distributed, he added, representing Mobile and Pensacola in the northern Gulf; from Tampa toward Fort Meyers in southwestern Florida; and New Orleans and other parts of Louisiana. "I had heard from several of the amici that they had reached out on their own to the national chamber through various avenues and were met with either silence or lip service," he said. "These are businesspeople and they operate on a handshake, and when an agreement is reduced to paper and a contract, to them it's sacrosanct. It struck these several chambers and their thousands of members as odd to renege on a deal or an agreement that seems so clear-cut." A U.S. Chamber spokesman said in a statement: "The U.S. Chamber of Commerce provides a national voice on behalf of businesses of every size in every sector on policy and legal issues affecting our country's economy, and that's the case here. From time to time local groups will take a different position on a particular issue and we respect their right to do so." However, in their amicus brief, the local chambers suggest the national organization's interests are much narrower than it would have the high court believe. Citing research by Public Citizen, the group told the high court that "only 1,500 entities (significantly less than 3 million) provided 94 percent of [the Chamber's] contributions in 2012. More than half of its contributions came from just 64 donors. So the bulk of the Chamber's funding appears to come from large, well-funded corporate concerns, not the 'mom-and-pop shops' the Chamber claims and certainly not these amici affiliates." The U.S. Chamber spokesman said: "Some members of the plaintiffs' bar have seized on the settlement agreement as an opportunity to seek a windfall for persons who cannot show any injury caused by the spill. The Chamber's brief explains that this type of opportunism is inconsistent with the agreement's provisions and the settling parties' expectations." However, the local chambers argue in their brief that, contrary to the national chamber's brief, BP designed the compensation system; lobbied for district court approval; attested to its adequacy and fairness under oath; and initially defended it before the Fifth Circuit. By reinforcing BP's version of the facts, the local group said, the national chamber "serves the express interests of a foreign corporation at the expense of a very large number of its affiliates and individual business members." Mr. Young, assisted on the brief by Jean Champagne of the Landson Response Group, an environmental and catastrophic-claims firm, said the local chambers have learned a harsh lesson: "The smaller local chambers are Main Street and the U.S. Chamber is Wall Street. And, like everyone else in America, they're realizing that Wall Street is not on their side." BUDDY'S KITCHEN: Recalls 62,488 Lbs. of Meat and Poultry Products ----------------------------------------------------------------- Buddy's Kitchen, a Burnsville, Minn. establishment, is recalling approximately 62,488 pounds of meat and poultry products due to possible contaminate on with Listeria monocytogenes, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced. The meat and poultry breakfast products were produced on various dates from July 16, 2014 through Sept. 25, 2014, and then shipped to distributors, retail locations, and airlines nationwide. These products are subject to recall: -- "Swiss Cheese and Mushroom Omelet with Seasonal Tid-Bit Potatoes & Turkey Buffet Sausage Link" trays with the production codes "07/16/14 9", "08/08/14 9" and "08/27/14 9". -- "Savory Scrambled Eggs with Seasoned Red Skin Potatoes and Turkey Buffet Links" with the production codes "09/19/14 9" and "09/22/14 9". -- "Garden Omelet w/ Parslied Potatoes & Chicken Sausage Links" with the production codes "07/16/14 9", "07/17/14 9", "07/18/14 9", "07/22/14 9", "07/25/14 9", "08/22/14 9", "08/25/14 9", "09/02/14 9", "09/09/14 9" and "09/16/14 9". -- "Fiesta Scramble Bowl with Sausage Links" with the production code "10I14 9". -- "Breakfast Skillet Burrito with eggs, sausage and cheese" with the production codes "18G14 2", "06I14 4", "16G14 4", "17G14 2", "07H14 4", "20H14 2", "21H14 4", "22H14 4" and "25H14 4". Case labels or packaging may bear the establishment number "EST. 4226" or "P-4226" inside the USDA mark of inspection. The problem was discovered when an FSIS product sample confirmed positive for Listeria monocytogenes (Lm). The tested product was held, and the recalling firm tested raw materials from the product and found that the roasted red skin potatoes, which were provided by an independent supplier, tested positive for Lm. The firm is recalling all products that used the confirmed positive potatoes. FSIS and the company have received no reports of illnesses associated with consumption of these products. Consumption of food contaminated with L. monocytogenes can cause listeriosis, a serious infection that primarily affects older adults, persons with weakened immune systems, and pregnant women and their newborns. Less commonly, persons outside these risk groups are affected. Listeriosis can cause fever, muscle aches, headache, stiff neck, confusion, loss of balance and convulsions sometimes preceded by diarrhea or other gastrointestinal symptoms. An invasive infection spreads beyond the gastrointestinal tract. In pregnant women, the infection can cause miscarriages, stillbirths, premature delivery or life-threatening infection of the newborn. In addition, serious and sometimes fatal infections in older adults and persons with weakened immune systems. Listeriosis is treated with antibiotics. Persons in the higher-risk categories who experience flu-like symptoms within two months after eating contaminated food should seek medical care and tell the health care provider about eating the contaminated food. FSIS and the company are concerned that some product may be frozen and in consumers' freezers. 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. When available, the retail distribution list will be posted on the FSIS website at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls FSIS advises all consumers to reheat ready-to-eat product until steaming hot. Media with questions regarding the recall can contract Dave Smith, CEO, at (952) 894-2540 and consumers with questions regarding the recall can contact Tom Webber, Director of Food Safety, at (952) 894-2540 or info@buddyskitchen.com. BURGER KING: Faces "Schadt" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------- Rebecca L. Schadt, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Burger King Corporation, Case No. 0:14-cv- 62326 (S.D. Fla., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages. Burger King Corporation owns and operates Burger King Restaurants throughout the United States. The Plaintiff is represented by: Mitchell Lloyd Feldman, Esq. FELDMAN MORGADO, P.A. 501 North Reo Street Tampa, FL 33609 Telephone: (813) 639-9366 Facsimile: (813) 639-9376 E-mail: mfeldman@ffmlawgroup.com CALIFORNIA OLIVE: Recalls Pumpkin Seed Pesto -------------------------------------------- California Olive and Vine, LLC of Sutter, CA is taking precautionary measures and voluntarily recalling Pumpkin Seed Pesto because of irregular lab results. The company found that the jarred pesto may have been improperly processed, making it susceptible to contamination with Clostridium botulinum. This food product was distributed under the Williams-Sonoma label, nationwide, since Sept. 2014. The product labels have the following SKU numbers 6404305, 6389043 and is sold in an 8 ounce glass jar, as pictured below. The company has made the deliberate decision to recall this product to ensure the safety of their customers. The company has not been notified of any illness associated with this product. No other products from this company are affected. Ingestion of botulism toxin may lead to serious illness and death. To date, there have been no reports of any illnesses or contamination of the product. Symptoms from Botulism are as follows: general weakness, dizziness, double vision and trouble with speaking or swallowing. Difficulty in breathing, weakness of other muscles, abdominal distention and constipation may also be common symptoms. People experiencing these problems should seek immediate medical attention. Consumers are warned not to use the product even if it does not look or smell spoiled. California Olive and Vine immediately segregated its entire inventory of this product and has notified Williams-Sonoma and CDPH directly. Consumers who have purchased the recalled Pumpkin Seed Pesto are urged to dispose of the product or return it to the place of purchase for a refund. Consumers with questions may contact the company Monday through Friday between 10am and 4pm. CAMIN CARGO: Faces "Monceaux" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime --------------------------------------------------------------- Clifton Monceaux and Alejandro Garcia-Sanchez on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Camin Cargo Control, Inc., Case No. 4:14-cv-02884 (S.D. Tex., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for worked 40 hours per week. Camin Cargo Control, Inc. provides inspecting, sampling, and inventory control to its clients in the oil and gas industry. The Plaintiff is represented by: Galvin B. Kennedy, Esq. KENNEDY HODGES LLP 711 W Alabama Street Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: (713) 523-0001 E-mail: gkennedy@kennedyhodges.com - and - Don J. Foty, Esq. KENNEDY HODGES, L.L.P. 711 W. Alabama St. Houston, TX 77006 Telephone: (713) 523-0001 Facsimile: (713) 523-1116 E-mail: DFoty@kennedyhodges.com CANACCORD GENUITY: Sued in N.H. Over Misleading Financial Reports ----------------------------------------------------------------- Adam S. Levy on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. Thomas Gutierrez, Richard J. Gaynor, Raja Bal, J. Michael Conaway, Kathleen A. Cote, Ernest L. Godshalk, Matthew E. Massengill, Mary Petrovich, Robert E. Switz, Noel G. Watson, Thomas Wroe, Jr., Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Goldman, Sachs & Co., and Canaccord Genuity Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-00443 (D.N.H., October 9, 2014), alleges that the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements in its Debt Offering and Equity Offering. Canaccord Genuity Inc. is a manufacturer of materials for consumer electronics. The Individual Defendants are officers and directors of Canaccord Genuity Inc. Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC and Goldman, Sachs & Co. are underwriters of the Offerings made by the Canaccord Genuity Inc. The Plaintiff is represented by: Jennifer A. Eber, Esq. Jeffrey C. Spear, Esq. ORR & RENO, P.A. 45 S. Main Street, PO Box 3550 Concord, NH 03302-3550 Telephone: (603) 224-2381 Facsimile: (603) 224-2318 E-mail: jeber@orr-reno.com jspear@orr-reno.com - and - Gerald H. Silk, Esq. Avi Josefson, Esq. BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP 1285 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10019 Telephone: (212) 554-1400 Facsimile: (212) 554-1444 E-mail: jerry@blbglaw.com avi@blbglaw.com CAREFUSION CORP: Being Sold for Too Little, Shareholder Claims -------------------------------------------------------------- Cindy Algase Gradl, On Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly Situated v. CareFusion Corporation, Kieran T. Gallahue, J. Michael Losh, Supratim Bose, Philip L. Francis, Robert F. Friel, Jacqueline B. Kosecoff, Gregory T. Lucier, Edward D. Miller, Michael D. O'Halleran, Robert P. Wayman, Becton, Dickinson and Company, and Griffin Sub, Inc., Case No. 10214-VCN (Del. Ch. Ct., October 8, 2014) is brought on behalf of the public stockholders of CareFusion to enjoin a proposed transaction announced on October 6, 2014, pursuant to which CareFusion will be acquired by Becton, Dickinson and Company and Griffin Sub, Inc. CareFusion is a Delaware corporation and maintains its principal executive offices in San Diego, California. The Company, a medical technology company, provides various healthcare products and services. The Company offers product lines in the areas of medication management, infection prevention, operating room effectiveness, and respiratory care. The Individual Defendants are directors and officers of the Company. Dickinson and Company is a New Jersey corporation headquartered in Franklin Lakes, New Jersey. Griffin Sub, Inc., is a Delaware corporation and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent. The Plaintiff is represented by: Seth D. Rigrodsky, Esq. Brian D. Long, Esq. Gina M. Serra, Esq. Jeremy J. Riley, Esq. RIGRODSKY & LONG, P.A. 2 Righter Parkway, Suite 120 Wilmington, DE 19803 Telephone: (302) 295-5310 E-mail: sdr@rl-legal.com bdl@rl-legal.com gms@rl-legal.com gms@rl-legal.com The Defendants are represented by: Edward P. Welch, Esq. SKADDEN ARPS SLATE MEAGHER & FLOM LLP PO Box 636 Wilmington, DE 19899-0636 Telephone: (302) 651-3060 E-mail: ewelch@skadden.com - and - Kevin R. Shannon, Esq. POTTER ANDERSON & CORROON LLP 1313 N Market St., Floor 6 Wilmington, DE 19801-6101 Telephone: (302) 984-6000 E-mail: kshannon@potteranderson.com CARMAX INC: Labor Suit v. Superstores Remanded to Appeals Court --------------------------------------------------------------- The United States Supreme Court remanded a labor case against CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC and CarMax Auto Superstores West Coast, Inc. to the California Court of Appeal, according to Carmax, Inc.'s Oct. 8, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2014. On April 2, 2008, Mr. John Fowler filed a putative class action lawsuit against CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC and CarMax Auto Superstores West Coast, Inc. in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles. Subsequently, two other lawsuits, Leena Areso et al. v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC and Justin Weaver v. CarMax Auto Superstores California, LLC, were consolidated as part of the Fowler case. The allegations in the consolidated case involved: (1) failure to provide meal and rest breaks or compensation in lieu thereof; (2) failure to pay wages of terminated or resigned employees related to meal and rest breaks and overtime; (3) failure to pay overtime; (4) failure to comply with itemized employee wage statement provisions; (5) unfair competition; and (6) California's Labor Code Private Attorney General Act. The putative class consisted of sales consultants, sales managers, and other hourly employees who worked for the company in California from April 2, 2004, to the present. On May 12, 2009, the court dismissed all of the class claims with respect to the sales manager putative class. On June 16, 2009, the court dismissed all claims related to the failure to comply with the itemized employee wage statement provisions. The court also granted CarMax's motion for summary adjudication with regard to CarMax's alleged failure to pay overtime to the sales consultant putative class. The plaintiffs appealed the court's ruling regarding the sales consultant overtime claim. On May 20, 2011, the California Court of Appeal affirmed the ruling in favor of CarMax. The plaintiffs filed a Petition of Review with the California Supreme Court, which was denied. As a result, the plaintiffs' overtime claims are no longer a part of the lawsuit. The claims currently remaining in the lawsuit regarding the sales consultant putative class are: (1) failure to provide meal and rest breaks or compensation in lieu thereof; (2) failure to pay wages of terminated or resigned employees related to meal and rest breaks; (3) unfair competition; and (4) California's Labor Code Private Attorney General Act. On June 16, 2009, the court entered a stay of these claims pending the outcome of a California Supreme Court case involving unrelated third parties but related legal issues. Subsequently, CarMax moved to lift the stay and compel the plaintiffs' remaining claims into arbitration on an individual basis, which the court granted on November 21, 2011. The plaintiffs appealed the court's ruling to the California Court of Appeal. On March 26, 2013, the California Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's order granting CarMax's motion to compel arbitration. On October 8, 2013, CarMax filed a petition for a writ of certiorari seeking review in the United States Supreme Court. On February 24, 2014, the United States Supreme Court granted CarMax's petition for certiorari, vacated the California Court of Appeal decision and remanded the case to the California Court of Appeal for further consideration. The Fowler lawsuit seeks compensatory and special damages, wages, interest, civil and statutory penalties, restitution, injunctive relief and the recovery of attorneys' fees. CARMAX INC: Receives $20.9MM Settlement in Toyota Liability Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Carmax Inc. received $20.9 million in the settlement of the lawsuit In Re Toyota Motor Corp. Unintended Acceleration Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litigation, according to Carmax, Inc.'s Oct. 8, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended June 30, 2014. The Company is a class member in a consolidated and settled class action lawsuit (In Re Toyota Motor Corp. Unintended Acceleration Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products Liability Litig., Case No. 10-2151 (C.D. Cal.), consolidated as of April 9, 2010) against Toyota Motor Corp. and Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. (collectively, "Toyota") related to the economic loss associated with certain Toyota vehicles equipped with electronic throttle controls systems and the potential unintended acceleration of these vehicles. On July 9, 2014, the company received $20.9 million in the settlement of this matter and recorded the gain at the time of receipt. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Class Cert. Bid in Davenport Case Tossed ---------------------------------------------------------------- Penny Davenport and three other named Plaintiffs brought an action on their own behalf and on behalf of similarly situated call center employees who worked on an hourly basis at Charter Communications, LLC. Plaintiffs claim that Charter violated the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), 29 U.S.C. Section 207; the state wages and hours laws of Missouri, Kentucky, and Michigan; and Missouri common law, by failing to pay them for the time it took them to access computer applications when beginning to work and to close down computer applications at the end of work. Plaintiffs moved for conditional collective action certification under the FLSA, and the Court granted Plaintiffs' motion, requiring that notice be disseminated to putative plaintiffs consisting of: All persons who, between September 25, 2009 and August 31, 2011 worked as a nonsupervisory hourly employee whose primary duty was to respond to incoming calls from a queue on Charter's toll-free lines, commonly referred to as "advisors," "representatives," or "agents," who were hired and had completed training before September 1, 2011, and who worked at Defendant Charter Communications, LLC's call centers located in Town and Country, Missouri; Walker, Michigan; Louisville, Kentucky; Greenville, South Carolina; Vancouver, Washington; Rochester, Minnesota; Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; and Worcester, Massachusetts, but excluding persons who were hired by Defendant but worked only as trainees. Several hundred putative plaintiffs have filed consents to join the FLSA collective action. Ms. Davenport moved to certify as class actions under Rule 23(b)(3) her claim for violation of the Missouri Minimum Wage Law, Mo. Rev. Stat. Section 290.500, et seq., and her claims for breach of contract, quantum meruit, and unjust enrichment under Missouri common law. Unlike the FLSA collective action, these Rule 23 class actions, if certified, will require individuals to opt out of the suit or be bound by the judgment in the case. Charter opposed the motion for class certification and, in support of its opposition, submitted several declarations of putative class members. Plaintiffs moved to strike these declarations. District Judge Audrey G. Fleissig, in a memorandum and order dated September 30, 2014, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/C2bvOifrom Leagle.com, denied the motion for class certification and the motion to strike. The case is PENNY DAVENPORT, et al., individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, Defendant, CASE NO. 4:12CV00007 AGF, (E.D. Mo.). Charter Communications, LLC, Defendant, represented by Clifford A. Godiner -- cgodiner@thompsoncoburn.com -- THOMPSON COBURN, LLP, Laura M. Jordan -- ljordan@thompsoncoburn.com -- THOMPSON COBURN, LLP, Roy N. Williams -- rwilliams@thompsoncoburn.com -- THOMPSON COBURN, LLP & Tabitha G. Davisson -- tdavisson@thompsoncoburn.com -- THOMPSON COBURN, LLP. CHIPOTLE MEXICAN: Ct. Rules on Plaintiffs' Bid to Strike Answer --------------------------------------------------------------- Danisha Harris, Antanisha Wiley, Deonte Mask, and Jason Ryan brought an action on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated against Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc.; Chipotle Mexican Grill Service Co., LLC; CMG Service Co., LLC; and Chipotle Services, LLC, arising out of defendants' allegedly discriminatory employment practices. Presently before a California district court is plaintiffs' motion to strike portions of defendants' Answer to plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. In an Oct. 7, 2014 Memorandum and Order available at http://is.gd/RSctaEfrom Leagle.com, District Judge William B. Shubb ordered that plaintiffs' motion to strike defendants' affirmative defenses be, and the same is, GRANTED as to the fourth defense ("Failure to Exhaust Internal Complaint Resolution Procedures"), seventh defense ("Managerial Privilege"), eighth defense ("No Vicarious Liability"), ninth defense ("Workers Compensation as Exclusive Remedy"), and fourteenth defense ("Unclean Hands"), and DENIED in all other respects. Defendant has 20 days from the date of the Order to file an amended answer if it can do so consistent with the Order. The case is DANISHA HARRIS; ANTANISHA WILEY; DEONTE MASK; JASON RYAN; individually, and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. CHIPOTLE MEXICAN GRILL, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Civil Case No: 2:13-2472 WBS EFB (E.D. Calif.). Chipotle Services, LLC, Defendant, is represented by Jason W. Kearnaghan, Esq. -- jkearneaghan@sheppardmullin.com -- of Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP. CHIQUITA BRANDS: Faces Shareholder Suit Over Fyffes Merger ---------------------------------------------------------- Charles Toutant, writing for New Jersey Law Journal, reports that Chiquita Brands International has been hit with a shareholder suit in federal court in Camden, N.J., over its plans to merge with an Irish produce distributor after rejecting a more lucrative deal with two Brazilian companies. The suit, filed on behalf of Chiquita shareholders, seeks to halt a shareholder vote on the merger until the company's alleged breach of its fiduciary duty to shareholders is remedied. Chiquita announced in March that it reached an agreement to merge with Fyffes, of Dublin, Ireland, the suit says. But in August, Cutrale Group and Safra Group announced that they had made an offer to acquire all outstanding shares of Chiquita common stock for $13 per share. Cutrale and Safra said the implied value Chiquita shareholders would receive under the Fyffes transaction was only $10 per share. According to the suit, the Chiquita board initially refused to negotiate with Cutrale and Safra, even though the original Fyffes transaction permitted the board of Chiquita to negotiate with third parties and provide them with confidential information if a superior offer was made. Eventually, however, amid pressure, Chiquita announced that it made certain confidential information available to Cutrale and Safra. Soon after making due diligence materials available to Cutrale and Safra, the Chiquita board announced that it agreed to new terms with Fyffes. The initial terms would have given Chiquita 50.7 percent of the combined entity, but that increased to 59.6 percent under the revised transaction. Cutrale and Safra, however, said the revised terms would value Chiquita shares at $11.89 per share, which is 10 percent less than the amount provided by its own offer, according to the suit. The suit says the Chiquita-Fyffes transaction heavily favors Fyffes shareholders over those of Chiquita. Furthermore, the proposed transaction carries significant risk that the combined company will not realize the $60 million in synergies that Chiquita has promised, the suit claims. Under the terms of the Chiquita-Fyffes merger, Edward Lonergan, the chief executive officer of Chiquita, would become chairman of the board of the combined company, and David McCann, the executive chairman of Fyffes, would become CEO. In addition, the chief financial officer and chief operating officer of the new company would come from Fyffes. "By relinquishing key management roles to Fyffes, and securing themselves positions with the combined ChiquitaFyffes company, the Chiquita board negotiated an unfair deal for the Chiquita shareholders," the suit says. The suit was filed by the City of Birmingham Firemen's and Policemen's Supplemental Pension System on behalf of itself and similarly situated shareholders. Chiquita and the eight members of its board of directors are the defendants. Chiquita spokesman Ed Loyd said in a statement in response to the suit that "Chiquita's board of directors has always acted solely in what it believes to be the best interest of the company and its shareholders. Accordingly, Chiquita believes this lawsuit is without merit and intends to defend itself vigorously." The suit was filed by Jonathan Stein -- jstein@saxenawhite.com -- and Adam Warden -- awarden@saxenawhite.com -- of Saxena White in Boca Raton, Fla., with James Cecchi of Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello in Roseland, N.J., serving as local counsel. They did not return calls about the case. COCA-COLA CO: Vitaminwater Settlement Gets Prelim. Court Okay ------------------------------------------------------------- The Coca-Cola Company and Energy Brands Inc. on Oct. 6 announced the preliminary approval of a settlement agreement in a class action lawsuit concerning the labeling and marketing of Glaceau vitaminwater brand beverages, Volz v. The Coca-Cola Company in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio. The hearing on final approval of the settlement is scheduled for December 2, 2014, at 12:30 p.m. at the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, 100 East Fifth Street, Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. The plaintiffs brought the lawsuit for alleged deceptive labeling and marketing of the vitaminwater product. The Coca-Cola Company and Energy Brands deny the allegations of deceptive labeling and marketing, but have agreed to the settlement to resolve the class action. Under the proposed settlement terms, the companies will state the amount of calories per bottle of the product on the front label; will place in bold type the reference "see nutrition facts for more detail" on the front label of the product; and will refrain from making certain statements on the product's labeling and marketing regarding the product and the effect of the product on the structure and function of the body. The settlement applies to residents of the States of Florida, Ohio, Illinois, and Missouri, and the U.S. Virgin Islands who purchased vitaminwater brand beverages from January 1, 2003 to September 25, 2014 in those jurisdictions. Additional information, including the deadline for submitting any objections to the settlement, is available at http://www.vitaminwaterclassactionsettlement.com About Energy Brands Inc. Energy Brands, also doing business as Glaceau, is a privately owned subsidiary of The Coca-Cola Company based in New York that manufactures and distributes various lines of enhanced water including vitaminwater brand beverages. The company was acquired by The Coca-Cola Company in May 2007. CORRECTIONS CORPORATION: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- James Walker, on behalf of himself and similarly situated employees v. Corrections Corporation of America, Case No. 4:14-cv- 00142 (N.D. Miss., October 9, 2014), seeks unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, costs of suit, and attorney's fees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Corrections Corporation of America operates the Tallahatchie County Corrections Facility. The Plaintiff is represented by: Joseph Harland Webster, Esq. CHAPMAN, LEWIS & SWAN P. O. Box 428 Clarksdale, MS 38614-0428 Telephone: (662) 627-4105 E-mail: harland@chapman-lewis-swan.com - and - Ross E. Webster, Esq. GLANKLER BROWN, PLLC 6000 Poplar Avenue, Suite 400 Memphis, TN 38119 Telephone: (901) 525-1322 E-mail: rwebster@glankler.com COUNTRY NISSAN: "Ontiveros" Suit Settlement Gets Final Court Nod ---------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge William B. Shubb granted a joint motion for final approval of a class and collective action settlement in the case captioned JOSE ONTIVEROS, Plaintiff, v. ROBERT ZAMORA; ZAMORA AUTOMOTIVE GROUP; STOCKTON AUTO CARS, INC., dba Stockton Honda & Stockton Mazda; AUTO TOWN, INC., dba Toyota Town & Stockton Scion; HAMMER LANE VOLKSWAGEN, INC.; QUALITY MOTOR CARS OF STOCKTON, dba Acura of Stockton, Go Hyundai, & Kia of Stockton; SATURN OF STOCKTON, dba Saturn of Modesto; LODI MOTORS INC., dba Lodi Honda; MERCED AUTO CARS, INC., dba Merced Toyota & Merced Scion; CLOVIS AUTO CARS, INC., dba Clovis Volkswagen; and COUNTRY NISSAN, dba Nissan Kia Country, Defendants, CIV. NO. 2:08-567 WBS DAD, (E.D. Cal.). The court certifies the class defined as all nonexempt automotive technicians who have been employed by one or more of the defendants at any time from March 12, 2004, through July 7, 2014. Defendants agreed to pay a gross settlement amount of $2,000,000. The settlement administrator calculated that after all other payments are deducted, the net settlement amount available to pay participating class members is $1,135,118.47. The court appointed Jose Ontiveros, as representative of the class, and these lawyers as counsel to the settlement class: Stan S. Mallison and Hector R. Martinez, Law Offices of Mallison & Martinez, 1939 Harrison Street, Suite 730, Oakland, California 94612. Class administrator Simpluris, Inc. was awarded $9,700 for their services as settlement administrator. Ms. Ontiveros was awarded $15,000 as an incentive payment. Mallison & Martinez was awarded $500,000 of the gross recovery in attorneys' fees and $50,000 in costs. The California Labor Code PAGA payment of $40,000 to the State of California was also approved. A copy of Judge Shubb's October 8, 2014 order is available at http://is.gd/OgKlq3from Leagle.com. Country Nissan, Defendant, represented by John E. Lattin, IV -- jlattin@laborlawyers.com -- Fisher & Phillips, Llp & Linda J Gulledge -- lgulledge@laborlawyers.com -- Fisher & Phillips Llp. COVIDIEN LLC: Recalls Puritan Bennett 980 Series Ventilator ----------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: October 6, 2014 Posting date: October 14, 2014 Type of communication: Medical Device Recall Subcategory: Medical Device Source of recall: Health Canada Issue: Medical Devices Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals Identification number: RA-41777 Recalled Products: Puritan Bennett 980 Series Ventilator There are 2 issues related to a capacitor failure in the backlight inverter printed circuit board assembly (PCBA) in the ventilator display that can cause a dimming of the display that may be accompanied by a burning ODO software related and can lead to a "ventilator inoperative" condition when the ventilator should resume ventilation. Affected products: Puritan Bennett 980 Series Ventilator Companies: Manufacturer Covidien LLC 15 Hampshire Street Mansfield 02048 Massachusetts United States DHW WELL: Faces "Bouchard" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------ John T. Bouchard, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. DHW Well Service, Inc., Case No. 2:14-cv-00418 (S.D. Tex., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for all hours worked over 40 in a workweek. DHW Well Service, Inc. provides well-site and safety services to oil companies. The Plaintiff is represented by: Lawrence Morales II, Esq. Allison Sarah Hartry, Esq. THE MORALES FIRM, P.C. 115 E. Travis, Suite 1530 San Antonio, TX 78205 Telephone: (210) 225-0811 Facsimile: (210) 225-0821 E-mail: lawrence@themoralesfirm.com allison@themoralesfirm.com DIMENSION INDUSTRIES: Recalls Sling Cafe Sets Due to Fall Hazard ---------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Dimension Industries Company Ltd., of Taiwan, announced a voluntary recall of about 18,000 sling fabric cafe sets. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The recalled chairs can break due to a missing metal washer plate, posing a fall hazard to consumers. There were no incidents that were reported. The three-piece sling fabric cafe sets include two aluminum swivel chairs with medium brown-colored stretched fabric seats and backs, a round aluminum base and aluminum arm rests, and a rectangular table with a tabletop made from porcelain tile with a natural stone look. The chairs are about 44 inches H x 26 inches L x 30 inches W. The table is about 29 inches H x 30 inches L x 26 inches W. Costco Item #966710 is printed on the hangtag, label and on the packaging. Pictures of the recalled products are available at: http://is.gd/YKEhvO The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold exclusively at Costco Wholesale stores nationwide from Dec. 2013 through May 2014 for about $400. Consumers should immediately stop using the chairs and contact Dimension to receive a free repair kit or a full refund. DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: Judge Won't End Education System Monitoring ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ryan Abbott at Courthouse News Service reports that a federal judge rejected the District of Columbia's request to end years of monitoring of its special education system, holding that only the court-ordered monitor can say whether the city fulfilled its obligations under a standing consent decree. Two separate classes sued the D.C. Public School system in 1997, accusing the city of shirking due process hearings and not issuing timely decisions in regard to special education students' access to public education. A federal judge combined the two cases, now known as the consolidated Blackman/Jones case, and ruled that city broke the law and should pay a penalty. In a 2006 consent decree, the city agreed to provide a compensatory education to the kids hurt by the inadequacies of the district's special education system. To make sure the district fulfilled its obligations, the court assigned a monitor to keep track for the city's progress in righting past wrongs. But last year, the city moved to terminate the consent decree and dismiss the case, declaring that it had satisfied the terms; this prompted the plaintiffs in both cases to file for an extension, and to ask that the court monitor verify the city's claims. They contend the city has repeatedly declared the success of its efforts only to be found non-compliant by the court's auditor. "If the past is prologue, the Court will be unable to determine whether defendants have in fact complied with the terms of the Consent Decree until the Court Monitor has conducted his own independent assessment," states U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman in his order. "This is particularly true considering the fact that defendants have asserted compliance with the Consent Decree in 2010, 2011, and 2013, but have been found non-compliant in each of those years after an independent evaluation by the Court Monitor." The judge dismissed the city's motion and agreed to plaintiff's request for an extension of the decree. D.C. public schools have been plagued with scandals and poor performance for years. Last week, a federal judge gave standing to sue to 22 former principals and assistant principals who say they were fired for being black or Hispanic. But in July, the parents of kids displaced by numerous school closings in poor city neighborhoods weren't so lucky: a federal judge ruled that their claims of discrimination could not be heard in court, but instead needed to be addressed in elections. The case is Mikeisha Blackman, et al. v. District of Columbia, et al., Case No. 97-1629 (PLF), in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. FEDEX CORP: Ruling in Drivers' Class Action Based on Old Practice ----------------------------------------------------------------- Edvard Pettersson, writing for Bloomberg News, reports that FedEx Corp. said a ruling by the Kansas Supreme Court that, under state law, its drivers are employees rather than independent contractors applies to a business practice it hasn't been using since 2011. The company said in a statement posted on its website that it has switched to contracting with businesses that treat the drivers as their employees. The ruling by the Kansas court comes in a more than 10-year-old battle with former and current drivers who seek compensation for overtime and expenses they incurred on the job. "We fundamentally disagree with this ruling and are committed to protecting the rights of thousands of independent business owners to continue owning and operating their own businesses," the Memphis-based company said in the statement. The Kansas top court issued its decision Oct. 3 in response to a request by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Chicago, which had sought clarification as it reviews a 2010 ruling by a federal judge in Indiana who had agreed with FedEx that the drivers aren't employees. The Kansas drivers are the lead case in 21 consolidated class-action lawsuits. The appellate court can use the decision by the Kansas Supreme Court to overturn the 2010 ruling in FedEx's favor. The judge in Indiana, who was presiding over the class-action lawsuits by drivers from across the U.S., had applied his decision in the case of the Kansas drivers to those from other states as well. Operating Agreements "The company carefully structured its drivers' operating agreements so that it could label the drivers as independent contractors in order to gain a competitive advantage, i.e., to avoid the additional costs associated with employees," according to the ruling. Those efforts don't trump the substance of the drivers' relationship with the company, which is that of employees under Kansas law, the court said. The Kansas decision follows an August ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco. That court overturned the 2010 ruling by the Indiana judge and found that FedEx's drivers in California and Oregon are employees. The case is Craig v. FedEx Ground Package System Corp., 108,526, Kansas Supreme Court. FIRST FINANCIAL: Faces "Wallace" Suit Over Violation of FLSA ------------------------------------------------------------ Carolyn Wallace, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. First Financial Insurance Group, Inc., a Michigan corporation, Ernest Thompson, individually, Case No. 2:14-cv-13914 (E.D. Mich., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. First Financial Insurance Group, Inc. is engaged in the business of marketing and selling insurance policies. The Plaintiff is represented by: Bryan Yaldou, Esq. YALDOU LAW 23000 Telegraph, Suite 5 Brownstown, MI 48134 Telephone: (734) 692-9200 Facsimile: (734) 692-9201 E-mail: bryan.yaldou@gmail.com FLUID HANDLING: Recalls Low Water Cut-Off Control Units ------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Fluid Handling LLC, of Morton Grove, Ill., a division of Xylem Inc., announced a voluntary recall of about 1,200 McDonnell & Miller Low Water Cut-Off control units for hot water or steam boilers. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The ground wire and probe wires could be incorrectly assembled in the units by the manufacturer, posing fire and explosion hazards. There were no incidents that were reported. The recall involves McDonnell & Miller series 750 Low Water Cut- Off control units, which in connection with a water level sensor, are used as a primary or secondary safety control on hot water or steam boilers to signal the boiler to provide protection in low water conditions. The unit is mounted on the outside of a boiler, generally near the boiler's main electrical panel. They are black and measure about 6 inches high x 5 inches wide x 2 1/2 inches deep. The units have a green LED "On" light, a red LED "Low Water" light and test and manual reset buttons on the top. "McDonnell & Miller," "Guard Dog," "Low Water Cut-Off" and model numbers 750-MT-120, 751-MT-120, 751P-MT-120 or 752P-MT-24 are printed on a white label on the outside of the unit. Date codes G41 or H41 are inked on the inside back plate. Pictures of the recalled products are available at: http://is.gd/txPtxj The recalled products were manufactured in United States and distributed by wholesale plumbing product distributors to plumbing suppliers from July 2014 through August 2014 for between $80 and $125. Contact Fluid Handling/Xylem for a free inspection, repair or free installation of a replacement low water cut-off unit. The firm is contacting purchasers directly. FORD MOTOR: Faces "Campbell" Suit in Illinois District Court ------------------------------------------------------------ Jaclyn Campbell, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. Ford Motor Company, Case No. 1:14-cv-07855 (N.D. Ill., October 8, 2014) is brought under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. In another story, Courthouse News Service reports that Ford sold 2012 Fiestas with defective transmissions that cannot be repaired, citing a class action filed in Illinois. The Plaintiff is represented by: Vincent Louis DiTommaso, Esq. Andrew Charles Murphy, Esq. John Auchter, Esq. John Robert McInerney, Esq. Patrick Doyle Austermuehle, Esq. Peter Scott Lubin, Esq. DITOMMASO LUBIN, P.C. 17W 220 22nd Street, Suite 410 Oakbrook Terrace, IL 60181 Telephone: (630) 333-0000 Facsimile: (630) 333-0333 E-mail: vdt@ditommasolaw.com amurphy@ditommasolaw.com jauchter@ditommasolaw.com jrm@ditommasolaw.com paustermuehle@ditommasolaw.com psl@ditommasolaw.com FRESH FOOD: Recalls 1,008 Lbs. of Italian Style Wedding Soup ------------------------------------------------------------ Fresh Food Manufacturing, a Freedom, Pa., establishment, is recalling approximately 1,008 pounds of Italian Style Wedding Soup due to misbranding and undeclared allergens, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced. The soup contains soy and egg, known allergens which are not declared on the product label. The product subject to recall: -- 24-oz. cups of "Giant Eagle Market District Italian Style Wedding Soup." The ingredients panel on the back of the soup cup is from a chili product that the company also produces at the facility. The chili label does not list soy and egg, which are ingredients in the Italian Style Wedding Soup. The product subject to recall bears the establishment number "EST. 40211" inside the USDA mark of inspection. The product was produced on Oct. 9, 2014, and shipped to retail stores in Ohio and Pennsylvania. The problem was discovered when a store employee noticed that the back label was different from the other labels on the product. FSIS and the company have received no reports of adverse reactions due to consumption of this product. Anyone concerned about an injury or illness 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. When available, the retail distribution list(s) will be posted on the FSIS website at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls Consumers with questions about the recall can contact Giant Eagle Customer Care at 1-800-553-2324, Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. (Eastern time). Media with questions about the recall should call (412) 967-4551. GALANT FOOD: Recalls 410 Lbs. of Beef Products ---------------------------------------------- Galant Food Company, a San Leandro, Calif. establishment, is recalling approximately 410 pounds of beef products because the meat filling used in the products did not meet its cooking critical limit, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced. The products subject to the recall include: -- 4.5-oz. Galina's Original Beef and Cheese Piroshki, 12 or 24 per case, with case codes 092214, 092314 and 092414 -- 5-oz. Paramount Beef Piroshki, 25 per case, with case codes 092314 The products, which bear the establishment number "EST.9014," were produced Sept. 22 through 24, 2014 and then shipped to a retailer in the San Francisco Bay area and a distributor in Northern California. The problem was discovered by FSIS personnel who were at the establishment reviewing records. FSIS and the company have received no reports of adverse illnesses due to consumption of these products. Anyone concerned about an illness 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. When available, the retail distribution list(s) will be posted on the FSIS website at: http://www.fsis.usda.gov/recalls Consumers and media with questions about the recall may contact Len Galant at (510) 614-7150. GALANT FOOD: Recalls 130 Lbs. of Beef Products ---------------------------------------------- Galant Food Company, a San Leandro, Calif. establishment, is recalling an additional 130 pounds of beef products because the meat filling used in the products did not meet its cooking critical limit, the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced. The additional products subject to the recall include: -- 6.5-oz. Paramount Beef and Cheese Piroshki, 12 per case, with case codes 092214 -- 7-oz. Galinas Original Beef and Cheese Piroshki, 12 per case, with case codes 092314 The products, which bear the establishment number "EST. 9014," were produced Sept. 22 through 23, 2014 and then shipped to a distributor in the San Francisco Bay area. The problem was discovered by the company when visiting its distributor and identifying that the products, as those in the initial recall, contained the same filling that did not reach lethality. FSIS and the company have received no reports of adverse illnesses due to consumption of these products. Anyone concerned about an illness 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. Consumers and media with questions about the recall may contact Len Galant at (510) 614-7150. GEMINI SURFACES: "Mijares" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime ---------------------------------------------------------------- Humberto Luis Fustes Mijares and other similarly situated individuals v. Gemini Surfaces, Inc. a/k/a J&S Holdings Group Corporation f/k/a Gemini Tile Service, Inc. and Miguel Blanco, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-23729 (S.D. Fla., October 9, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime and minimum wages under the Fair Labor Standards Act. The Defendants are suppliers and distributors of ceramic floor tiles. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ruben Martin Saenz, Esq. SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC 20900 N.E. 30th Avenue, Suite 800 Aventura, FL 33180 Telephone: (305) 503-5131 Facsimile: (888) 270-5549 E-mail: msaenz@saenzanderson.com GERBER PRODUCTS: Must Face Fifth Amended Probiotic Complaint ------------------------------------------------------------ Gerber Products must face a fifth consolidated amended complaint alleging that its pricey probiotic baby formula does not actually strengthen child immune systems, Courthouse News Service reports, citing a federal court ruling. The case is In re Gerber Probiotic Sales Practices Litigation, Case No. 2:12-cv-00835-JLL-CLW, in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. GROVE CITY, PA: Former USIS Employee Files Suit Over Termination ---------------------------------------------------------------- Mike Gauntner, writing for wfmj.com, reports that one of the 1,200 employees who lost their jobs when the U.S. Investigation Services shut down in Grove City has filed a class action lawsuit claiming the company failed to follow federal laws during the layoffs. Thomas Karaniewsky filed the suit in U.S. District Court in Pittsburgh alleging that USIS did not give workers the federally mandated 60 day notice to the 3,000 employees who were terminated after the company lost a government contract. The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act, (WARN Act) is designed to protect workers, their families, and communities by requiring most employers with 100 or more employees to provide notification 60 calendar days in advance of plant closings and mass layoffs. Mr. Karaniewsky says he worked as a record searcher at the USIS facility on Lincoln Avenue in Grove City until he was terminated without pay on August 7, 2014. He says he did not receive the termination letter until September 24. Mr. Karaniewsky, who is represented by Pittsburgh attorney Samuel Cordes, is asking the judge to declare the lawsuit a class action, which would allow other former employees to become party to the action. The suit says that the number of employees who would be eligible to become part of the class action are so numerous that it would be impracticable to estimate. The suit seeks to recover unpaid wages, salary, commissions, bonuses, accrued holiday pay and accrued vacation for 60 days following their respective terminations. It also alleges that USIS failed to make the pension and 401(k) contributions and provide employee benefits under COBRA for 60 days from and after the dates of their respective terminations. A wfmj.com review of the online database from the Pennsylvania Department of Labor and Industry shows no WARN notice filed by USIS in 2014. USIS has not yet filed an answer to the lawsuit. A spokesperson for USIS emailed a short statement saying, "As a matter of policy, the Company does not comment on litigation." US Investigative Services handled background checks for government employees, including the military, but lost its contract with the government. The Office of Personnel Management (OPM) cited a lack of confidence in the agency. Several high profile cases have called into question the company's effectiveness. The company did not do the initial investigation but did the re-check into Edward Snowden, who leaked classified information from the National Security Agency in May of 2013. USIS also did the background check into Aaron Alexis, who shot up the Naval Yard in September 2013, killing 12 people. USIS released a statement in September in response questions about background checks conducted on Snowden and Alexis. It read in part: OPM confirmed in sworn testimony before Congress on February 11, 2014 that the investigative file compiled by USIS on Aaron Alexis "was complete and in compliance with all investigative standards." USIS followed all OPM-mandated procedures and protocols in its background investigation of Edward Snowden. According to public statements by OPM, neither the Snowden nor the Alexis background investigations are at issue in the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ") civil action that was filed against the Company last year. In August 2014, the USIS computer system was hacked, possibly compromising the records of up to 25,000 government employees. HOSPIRA INC: Recalls Several Products in LifeCare Line ------------------------------------------------------ Hospira, Inc. (NYSE: HSP), announced the voluntary recall of certain lots of several products in its LifeCare line of flexible intravenous solutions due to the potential for leakage. The issue, which Hospira notified customers about in a Dear Health Care Provider letter issued earlier this year, was identified during re-inspection of a manufactured product lot in which a single puncture mark was identified going through the overwrap and primary container. The puncture in the primary container may result in leakage that is difficult to detect. Leakage may result in an open system, which has the potential for contamination, compromised sterility, drug waste, spillage, inadequate or inconsistent solution/medication dosing, and/or delay in therapy, all of which may require medical intervention and should be reported to Hospira and/or the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Hazardous topical exposure may occur if a hazardous drug is added to the flexible container. Hospira's product insert packaged with LifeCare flexible intravenous containers recommends providers do not administer unless solution is clear and the container is undamaged. The root cause is attributed to a defect in a conveyance system, and corrective actions have since been implemented to prevent a reoccurrence. To date there have been no reports of adverse events associated with this issue for the impacted lots. The manufacturing issue that caused this incident has been addressed. Hospira recommends impacted customers check with their local Hospira representative or with Hospira Customer Care regarding replacement product. The affected lots were originally distributed by Hospira to direct accounts from Sept. 2013 through Oct. 2014. Anyone with an existing inventory of the recalled lots should stop use and distribution and quarantine the product immediately. This recall is being carried out to the medical facility/retail level (both human and veterinary). Please notify all users in your facility. If you have further distributed the recalled product please notify any accounts or additional locations which may have received the recalled product from you and instruct them if they have redistributed the product to notify their accounts, locations or facilities to the medical facility/retail level. In addition, customers should inform potential users of these products in their organizations of this notification. Hospira will be notifying its direct customers via a recall letter and will arrange for impacted product to be returned to Stericycle. For additional assistance, call Stericycle at 1-844-861-6221 between the hours of 8am to 5pm ET, Monday through Friday. ITT EDUCATIONAL: Faces "Jindal" Suit Over Deceptive Fin'l Reports ----------------------------------------------------------------- Kumud Jindal, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Kevin M. Modany, Daniel M. Fitzpatrick, and ITT Educational Services, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-01651 (S.D. Ind., October 9, 2014), alleges that the Defendants misled investors regarding the integrity of its financial reporting, including the reporting of the trust that purchased, owns and collects private education loans under the PEAKS Private Student Loan Program. ITT Educational Services, Inc. is a provider of postsecondary degree programs in the United States. The Individual Defendants are officers and directors of ITT Educational Services, Inc. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ronald J. Waicukauski, Esq. Brad A. Catlin, Esq. PRICE WAICUKAUSKI & RILEY, LLC 301 Massachusetts Avenue Indianapolis, IN 46204 Telephone: (317) 633-8787 Facsimile: (317) 633-8797 Email: rwaicukauski@price-law.com bcatlin@price-law.com - and - Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. Francis P. McConville, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Telephone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (212) 661-8665 Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com fmcconville@pomlaw.com - and - Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505 Chicago, IL 60603 Telephone: (312) 377-1181 Facsimile: (312) 377-1184 Email: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com JEFFERIES GROUP: Bares Updates on Suits Over Leucadia Transaction ----------------------------------------------------------------- The actions concerning the Leucadia Transaction filed against Jefferies Group, Inc., in New York have been stayed, the actions filed in Delaware are proceeding and the claims against certain of the directors have been dismissed, according to Jefferies Group LLC's Oct. 8, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2014. Seven putative class action lawsuits have been filed in New York and Delaware concerning the Leucadia Transaction. The class actions, filed on behalf of the company's shareholders prior to the Leucadia Transaction, name as defendants Jefferies Group, Inc., the members of the board of directors of Jefferies Group, Inc., Leucadia and, in certain of the actions, certain subsidiaries. The actions allege that the directors breached their fiduciary duties in connection with the Leucadia Transaction by engaging in a flawed process and agreeing to sell Jefferies Group, Inc. for inadequate consideration pursuant to an agreement that contains improper deal protection terms. The actions allege that Jefferies Group, Inc. and Leucadia aided and abetted the directors' breach of fiduciary duties. The actions filed in New York have been stayed, the actions filed in Delaware are proceeding and the claims against certain of the directors have been dismissed. KUM & GO: Bid to Strike Offer of Judgment in "Claxton" Okayed ------------------------------------------------------------- District Judge Douglas Harpool granted Plaintiff's Motion to Strike Defendant's Offer of Judgment in the putative class action COLTON CLAXTON, Plaintiff, v. KUM & GO, L.C. d/b/a KUM & GO Defendant, CASE NO. 6:14-CV-03385-MDH (W.D.Miss.) The Plaintiff seeks recovery on behalf of himself and all other similarly situated, alleging that Defendant sold to its consumers unleaded gasoline that improperly contained diesel fuel at Kum & Go store number 473. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's faulty gasoline caused damage to his truck and he seeks to recover based on six different legal theories: (1) violation of the Missouri Merchandising Practice Act (MMPA), (2) breach of the implied warranty of merchantability, (3) negligence, (4) strict products liability, (5) breach of the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and (6) breach of contract. On September 12, 2014, Defense counsel served on Plaintiff's counsel an offer of judgment pursuant to Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, whereby Defendant agreed to allow judgment granted in favor of Plaintiff on all counts for a sum of $6,250, inclusive of attorney fees and costs. The offer of judgment did not address the claims on behalf of the putative class. In response, Plaintiff filed a motion to strike the offer of judgment. "Defendant's offer of judgment at this stage of litigation placed an impermissible conflict-of-interest situation upon Plaintiff and the putative class. Thus, although mootness issues are not implicated, Plaintiff's motion to strike is warranted," the District Court said in a Sept. 30, 2014 order. The District Court's Sept. 30, 2014 Order is available at http://is.gd/7uMVqMfrom Leagle.com. Kum & Go, L.C., Defendant, is represented by Tristan L. Duncan, Shook, Esq. -- tlduncan@shb.com -- and Zach Chaffee-McClure, Esq. -- zmcclure@shb.com -- of Shook, Hardy & Bacon, LLP. KUO HUA: Recalls 3:15 PM Products Due to Undeclared Milk -------------------------------------------------------- Starting date: October 14, 2014 Type of communication: Recall Alert sub-type: Food Recall Warning (Allergen) Subcategory: Allergen - Milk Hazard classification: Class 2 Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency Recalling firm: Kuo Hua Trading Company Ltd. Distribution: British Columbia, Ontario Extent of the product distribution: Retail CFIA reference number: 9326 Affected products: 3:15 PM products with all codes where milk is not declared on the label KWIKWETLEM FIRST NATION: Members Sue Chief Over Bonus ----------------------------------------------------- CFJC TV in Kamloops, BC, Canada, reports that a chief in the Lower Mainland is facing a class-action lawsuit over a bonus he received which made him the highest paid chief in the land. A total of 82 members of the Kwikwetlem First Nation are launching the action against Ron Giesbrecht. Mr. Giesbrecht made over C$900 thousand last year as chief, much of it from a 10 percent bonus he took as the economic development officer. He negotiated an C$8 million land deal with the province. Band members want the courts to decide if Mr. Giesbrecht breached his fiduciary duties by accepting the bonus. KYMCO USA: Recalls ATVs Due to Burn & Fire Hazards -------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with KYMCO USA, of Spartanburg, S.C., announced a voluntary recall of about 540 all-terrain vehicles. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. In hot environments or high elevations, the fuel cap can fail to vent properly, causing the fuel to heat up and pressure to build up in the tank. The pressure can cause the fuel tank to rupture or the fuel to boil out of the tank onto the operator or hot engine, resulting in burns to the operator or a fire. There were no incidents that were reported. The recall involves model year 2013, 2014 and 2015 KYMCO MXU 700 all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) including standard, LE and Camo versions. The vehicles came in black, camouflage, gold, green, red and silver. The words KYMCO and MXU 700, MXU 700 LE or MXU 700 Camo are on the front of the hood and on each rear fender. The vehicle identification number (VIN) in the format RFBLU45U*xBxxxxxx is located on the frame behind the right front wheel. The 10th digit of the VIN indicates the model year: D = 2013, E = 2014 and F = 2015. ATVs with the last six VIN digits in these ranges are being recalled: Model year VIN RANGE (VINs begin with RFBLU45U*) ---------- ------------------------------------- 2013 DB120111 through DB130158 2014 EB120203 through EB130204 2015 FB120315 through FB320123 * represents a check digit that varies in each VIN Pictures of the recalled products are available at: http://is.gd/U4BdP8 The recalled products were manufactured in Taiwan and sold at KYMCO dealers nationwide from April 2013 to August 2014 for about $9,000. Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled ATVs and contact an authorized KYMCO dealer for a free repair. The original gas caps must be collected by the dealer to confirm the repair. LES ALIMENTS: Recalls Star Mixed Fruit Drink -------------------------------------------- Starting date: October 6, 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: Les Aliments Nutrifresh Ltee Distribution: Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec, Saskatchewan Extent of the product distribution: Retail CFIA reference number: 9314 Affected products: 1.5 liter Star Mixed Fruit Drink with all codes where sulphites are not declared on the label LINKEDIN CORPORATION: Sued Over Breach of Credit Reporting Law -------------------------------------------------------------- Tracee Sweet, Lisa Jaramillo, James Ralston, and Tiffany Thomas, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. LinkedIn Corporation, Case No. 5:14-cv-04531 (N.D. Cal., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, specifically by failing to comply with the certification and disclosure requirements for credit reporting agencies who furnish consumer reports for employment purposes. LinkedIn Corporation operates an online professional network called LinkedIn, through which the company's subscribers are able to create, manage and share their professional identities online, build and engage with their professional networks, and apply for jobs, and through which businesses can search for potential employees and post job listings, among other things. The Plaintiff is represented by: Todd M. Friedman, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C 324 S. Beverly Dr., #725 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Telephone: (877) 206-4741 Facsimile: (866) 633-0228 E-mail: tfriedman@attorneysforconsumers.com - and - James L. Davidson, Esq. GREENWALD DAVIDSON PLLC 5550 Glades Road, Suite 500 Boca Raton, FL 33431 Telephone: (561) 826-5477 Facsimile: (561) 961-5684 E-mail: jdavidson@mgjdlaw.com * * * Business networking site LinkedIn faces yet another federal class action, this time over allegations that it furnishes users' consumer reports to paid subscribers, reports Julie Baker-Dennis, writing for Courthouse News Service. Lead plaintiffs Tracee Sweet, Lisa Jaramillo, James Ralston and Tiffany Thomas sued LinkedIn in San Francisco federal court last week, claiming multiple violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) in a 24-page complaint. The plaintiffs accuse the company of furnishing potential employers -- and any LinkedIn member that has a premium subscription - with consumer reports packaged as reference reports, without meeting all the requirements under FCRA. According to the complaint, employers looking to hire can look at names and employment positions of other LinkedIn members who are "linked" to the candidate because they have worked together. Once the employer pays the required subscription fee, it can generate its own list of what LinkedIn calls "trusted references" for the potential employee. But LinkedIn never informs the prospective employee that a third party has been given the information, the plaintiffs say in their complaint. Employers and other premium subscription users can then use LinkedIn's search function to view the profile of any trusted reference and message them through the company's internal messaging system, InMail. This provides employers with a powerful tool to "anonymously dig into the employment history of any LinkedIn member, and make hiring and firing decisions based upon the information they gather, without the knowledge of the member, and without safeguards in place to the accuracy of the information that the potential employer has obtained," the plaintiffs state in the complaint. But the real problem is that the accuracy of the report received by the employer relies not just on the candidate being completely honest about their own work history, but also the honesty of the trusted reference the employer uses to research the applicant. Any departure from the truth by a trusted reference could cost a potential employee a job opportunity, the plaintiffs claim. Sweet says in the complaint that she was denied a job in the hospitality industry after being viewed on LinkedIn by an unnamed company's general manager, who called her in for an interview and initially offered her a job on the spot. But the company rescinded its offer several days later, according to the complaint. Sweet says that when she asked why she was no longer being offered the job, "the general manager told her that the company had checked some references and, based on those references, had changed its mind." The general manager had refused Sweet's offer to provide them with references, however, leaving Sweet to suspect that the information gleaned from LinkedIn had derailed her chances, according to the complaint. Plaintiff Ralston, Thomas and Jaramillo say they all had similar outcomes after connecting with potential employers through LinkedIn. The plaintiffs say in their complaint that LinkedIn provides paid subscribers with the equivalent of a user's credit report without also giving a summary of the consumer's rights -- a requirement of FCRA. Furthermore, LinkedIn gives up the reports to any paid user without verifying identity, intent, or even the accuracy of the information the reports are based on -- two more violations of the credit reporting law, the complaint states. The jilted jobseekers ask for class certification and statutory, actual and punitive damages for five alleged violations of FCRA. LinkedIn says on its website that generated $427 million -- 80 percent of its revenue stream -- from its premium subscriptions and talent solutions services in the second quarter of this year alone. The company claims to be the world's largest web-based professional network with over 300 million members worldwide. The company is no stranger to accusations over its business practices. In 2013, another federal class action accused LinkedIn of hacking into users' accounts and harvesting their email contacts for a barrage of promotional spam. In that case, a federal judge found earlier this year that while users give LinkedIn permission to collect email addresses from their accounts when they sign up for the service, their consent might not extend to the onslaught of "reminder" emails that come later, the judge said. LOS ANGELES, CA: Accused of Withholding Psychotropic Medication --------------------------------------------------------------- Courthouse News Service reports that Los Angeles County withholds psychotropic medication from mentally ill inmates, a class action claims in California Federal Court. LUNADA BIOMEDICAL: Order Striking Declaratory Relief Case Upheld ---------------------------------------------------------------- Attorneys for Laura Nunez, a consumer, served on Lunada Biomedical a notice required for damages under the Consumer Legal Remedies Act, Civil Code section 1750 et seq. (CLRA), setting forth alleged violations of the CLRA and demanding action. The company then brought a declaratory relief action against the consumer and her attorneys seeking a declaration that it had not violated the CLRA. The consumer and the attorneys moved to strike the complaint under Code of Civil Procedure section 425.161 (anti-SLAPP statute), which motions the trial court granted. The Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Five affirmed, holding that the declaratory relief action is subject to the anti-SLAPP statute as it arose out of protected activity provided by that statute, and that the trial court properly granted the special motions to strike because the company's declaratory relief action had no probability of success. The Appeals Court held that under the reasoning of Filarsky v. Superior Court (2002) 28 Cal.4th 419 (Filarsky), a potential defendant in a CLRA damages action after receiving the statutory notice may not maintain a declaratory relief action to establish that there was no violation of the CLRA. The Appeals Court, therefore, affirmed the order striking the complaint, as well as the award of attorney fees. A copy of the Appeals Court's October 9, 2014 opinion is available at http://is.gd/2gUoW8from Leagle.com. The case is LUNADA BIOMEDICAL, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. LAURA NUNEZ et al., Defendants and Respondents, NO. B243205, CONSOLIDATED WITH NO. B246602. Milstein Adelman, Gillian L. Wade -- gwade@milsteinadelman.com -- Mayo L. Makarczyk, Sara D. Avila -- savila@milsteinadelman.com -- Erich D. Schiefelbine -- eschiefelbine@gibsondunn.com -- for Defendants and Respondents. MCDONALD'S USA: "Hornsby" Lawsuit Denied Class Certification ------------------------------------------------------------ In the putative class action SHERYL HORNSBY, Plaintiff, v. MCDONALD'S USA, LLC and JTS ENTERPRISES OF TAMPA, LTD, Defendants, CASE NO. 8:14-CV-2288-T-30TBM (M.D. Fla.), Plaintiffs allege that Defendants violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) with respect to the Plaintiff and putative class members through their use of undisclosed consumer report information including, (1) taking adverse employment action without allowing reasonable opportunity to respond; (2) procuring consumer reports without making proper disclosures; and (3) obtaining consumer reports without proper authorization. In an Oct. 7, 2014 Order available at http://is.gd/n4RKsnfrom Leagle.com, District Judge James S. Moody ordered that: 1. Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification is denied without prejudice as premature. 2. Defendants' Unopposed Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification is denied as moot. 3. Defendants' Unopposed Joint Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to the Class Action Complaint is granted to the extent that Defendants shall file their responses to the Complaint on or before October 26, 2014. JTS Enterprises of Tampa, LTD, doing business as Caspers Company, Defendant, is represented by Kevin D. Johnson, Esq. -- kjohnson@tsghlaw.com -- of Thompson, Sizemore, Gonzalez & Hearing, PA. MICHAELS STORES: Recalls Folding Tables Due to Fall Hazard ---------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with Michaels Stores, Inc., of Irving, Texas, announced a voluntary recall of about 8,400 folding tables. Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise instructed. It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product. The folding tables can collapse under excessive weight, posing an impact or falling hazard. There have been four reports of consumers sitting on the tabletop and falling when the tables collapsed, resulting in injuries to the back, leg or hip. The Ashland Summer Living Vintage Wood Folding Table has a 14-inch round tabletop made of red medium density fiberboard. The table legs are brown metal, and the table stands about 22.5 inches high. A latch on the underside of the tabletop secures the table in an upright position when the table legs are separated forming an "X" position. When the table leg is released from this latch, the legs fold together and the tabletop folds down against the legs in a flat position. SKU 309950 and UPC 886946388804 are printed on a hangtag on the tables. Phase MDF and 01276 are printed on a black and white label under the table. Pictures of the recalled products are available at: http://is.gd/QptxUa The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold exclusively at Michaels Stores nationwide from April 2014 to May 2014 for about $30. Consumers should immediately stop using the tables and return them to any Michaels store for a full refund. MILLENNIAL MEDIA: Faces Shareholder Class Action in New York ------------------------------------------------------------ Scott Dance, writing for The Baltimore Sun, reports that a class action lawsuit accuses Millennial Media executives of hiding information that reflected poorly on the company, and, once released publicly, sent the company's stock price tumbling. The Mississippi state pension system's complaint, filed in federal court in New York, accuses the Baltimore mobile advertising firm and its leaders of making "false and misleading statements" and failing to disclose material information that investors should have known. Two New York law firms filed the lawsuit on the pension's behalf, and are seeking more Millennial stockholders as plaintiffs. Millennial Media sold $152 million in what was considered a successful initial public stock offering in March 2012, but shares have since lost more than 90 percent of their value. Shares closed at $1.92 each on Oct. 6. Millennial officials said they do not comment on litigation. The law firms allege the company withheld information on the development and functionality of key technology, the benefits of some corporate acquisitions and the outlook for the company's future performance. But when that information came to light, Millennial's stock price plummeted. After a May conference call that revealed mounting losses and the departure of the company's chief financial officer, shares fell 40 percent in a day. "The true state of Millennial Media's technology, acquisitions, and outlook was revealed through a series of disclosures that included revelations of disappointing financial results and guidance, additional corporate acquisitions, and the resignation of its Chief Financial Officer, Michael B. Avon to 'pursue other career interests,'" the law firms Labaton Sucharow LLP and Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP said in a statement. Millennial has grown from a startup founded in 2006 in Baltimore's Emerging Technology Center to take over most of the Can Company development in Canton, which is being renamed the Millennial Media Center at the Can Company. MISSOURI: Civil Trials Put on Hold Amid SORTS Class Action ---------------------------------------------------------- Jesse Bogan, writing for St. Louis Post-Dispatch, reports that the Missouri attorney general's office has agreed to take a limited break from civil trials that seek to indefinitely commit sexually violent predators to secure treatment facilities run by the Missouri Department of Mental Health. Sexually violent predators are held at Sex Offender Rehabilitation and Treatment Services, or SORTS, in Farmington and Fulton after completing lengthy prison sentences. Law enforcement officials try to commit about 20 men each year to the controversial program through civil commitment trials. According to a stipulation filed on Oct. 2 in federal court, the attorney general's office agreed not to set civil commitment cases for trial between Dec. 1 and May 1. The decision clears the deck for a large federal lawsuit against Missouri that alleges SORTS is unconstitutional. An April 21 trial date was recently set for the federal case, an attorney said. "There is a fundamental constitutional issue that has to be resolved, and until that is resolved the process should be stopped," said Eric Selig, lead attorney representing about 200 sex offenders who are plaintiffs in the class-action suit. "The AG's office was pretty reasonable to agree with us to put everything on hold." The break is expected to affect seven civil commitment trials. Six separate cases set for trial before Dec. 1 will go forward. As part of the agreement, plaintiffs in the federal lawsuit withdrew a motion for preliminary injunction that asked the judge in the case to stop the civil commitment process, including filing new petitions for commitment. Eric Slusher, a spokesman for the Missouri attorney general's office, said officials agreed to allow continuances in the seven civil commitment cases leading up to the federal lawsuit trial in April "in the interest of saving resources and disposing of the motion for preliminary injunction." The civil commitment process was the topic of an in-depth story in the Post-Dispatch that outlined the case of Lester Bradley, a sex offender who has refused treatment at SORTS. He was committed despite a unanimous decision by a panel of state mental health officials that he wasn't more likely than not to commit another sex offense if not held in a secure facility. He won his appeal in June and is expected to be transferred home to Kansas City soon for a new trial that hasn't been set. Macon Baker, a sex offender from Des Peres, was a rare sex offender to win his civil commitment trial in February. The attorney general's office had failed to get a unanimous verdict to commit him at three previous trials. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Class Cert. Bid in "Burton" Case Denied ------------------------------------------------------------ Magistrate Judge Jennifer L. Thurston denied a motion for class certification filed by plaintiffs in the case captioned DENNIS BURTON, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, Defendant, CASE NO. 1:13- CV-00307-LJO-JLT, (E.D. Cal.). A copy of Judge Thurston's October 8, 2014 findings and recommendations is available at http://is.gd/MeE5NZfrom Leagle.com. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, Defendant, represented by Erik Wayne Kemp -- ek@severson.com -- Severson & Werson, PC, John B. Sullivan -- jbs@severson.com -- Severson & Werson & Mary Catherine Kamka -- mkk@severson.com -- Severson and Werson. NEW ENERGY SYSTEMS: Court Dismisses Securities Litigation --------------------------------------------------------- A federal district court in New York dismissed the case IN RE NEW ENERGY SYSTEMS SECURITIES LITIGATION, Case No. 12-CV-01041 (LAK)(S.D.N.Y.), which concerns purchases of New Energy Systems Group stock between April 15, 2010, and November 14, 2011. Plaintiffs assert claims under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 based on alleged misstatements regarding revenue and earnings in the Company's 2009 form 10-K. Plaintiffs bring an additional claim for violation of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against four individual defendants who held various officer roles with the Company. District Judge Lewis A. Kaplan granted the motion to dismiss brought by New Energy and defendants Weihe Yu and Junfeng Chen in a Sept. 30, 2014 Memorandum Opinion available at http://is.gd/nyj9jFfrom Leagle.com. New Energy is a Nevada corporation with its headquarters and main operating divisions in Shenzhen, China. As of 2008, most of New Energy's operations were conducted by a subsidiary, Shenzhen E'Jenie Technology Development Co., Ltd. The Company manufactures and distributes lithium battery shells and related products, primarily in China. Caryn G. Schechtman, Esq. -- caryn.schechtman@dlapiper.com , Joshua S. Sohn, Esq. -- Joshua.sohn@dlapiper.com , David V. Sack, Esq. -- david.sack@dlapiper.com , Robert D. Weber, Esq. -- robert.weber@dlapiper.com of DLA PIPER LLP (US), Attorneys for Defendants. OCWEN FINANCIAL: Alfred Yates Law Firm Files Class Action --------------------------------------------------------- The Law Office of Alfred G. Yates Jr., PC on Oct. 6 disclosed that it has filed a class action in the United States District Court for the District of the U.S. Virgin Islands on behalf of purchasers of Ocwen Financial Corporation common stock during the period between October 3, 2012 and August 11, 2014. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than October 11, 2014. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. The complaint alleges materially false and misleading statements or omitted adverse facts about the Company's true financial condition and business prospects related to residential and commercial mortgage loans throughout the Class Period. The firm is also investigating actions on behalf of investors for the following companies: Athlon Energy, Inc., Bankrate, Inc., Dresser-Rand Group, Move, Inc., PDL BioPharma, Inc., Pike Corp., Sigma-Aldrich Corp., TIBCO Software Inc., Viasystems Group. If you are an investor in any of the above companies and wish to learn more about any of the investigations or have any questions, please contact Alfred G. Yates Jr., Esquire at 1-800-391-5164, toll free. You may also contact him by email at yateslaw@aol.com or through the law office web site at http://yatesclassactionlaw.com/contact_us.php OPTIMUM NUTRITION: Falsely Marketed Protein Products, Suit Claims ----------------------------------------------------------------- Omari Bobo, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated v. Optimum Nutrition, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Case No. 3:14-cv-02408 (S.D. Cal., October 9, 2014), alleges that the Defendant's Protein Products do not exclusively contain protein derived from the primary protein ingredients, as communicated by the names and labeling of each of the Defendant's Products. Instead, each Optimum product contains other ingredients that are not protein. Optimum Nutrition, Inc. manufactures sports-oriented nutritional products. The Plaintiff is represented by: Trenton R. Kashima, Esq. William R. Restis, Esq. Mark L. Knutson, Esq. Jeffrey R. Krinsk, Esq. FINKELSTEIN & KRINSK LLP 501 West Broadway, Suite 1250 San Diego, CA 92101-3579 Telephone: (619) 238-1333 Facsimile: (619) 238-5425 E-mail: trk@classactionlaw.com wrr@classactionlaw.com mlk@classactionlaw.com jrk@classactionlaw.com PENNSYLVANIA: App. Court Vacates Dismissal of "Pelzer" Case ----------------------------------------------------------- The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania vacated the April 8, 2014, order of the Court of Common Pleas of Greene County (trial court) dismissing the complaint initiated by Caine Pelzer, et al., alleging unlawful conditions in a Pennsylvania prison. The putative class action was filed by Pelzer, et al., in March 2014 against the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections (DOC), Secretary John Wetzel, Superintendent Louis Folino, Deputy Superintendent Lorinda Winfield, Deputy Superintendent Robert Gilmore, Superintendent Brian Coleman, Major Wallace Leggett, Major John Doe, Captain Durco, Unit Manager Paul Payla, Grievance Coordinator Tracy Shawley, and the SCI-Greene Security Threat Group Management Unit (STGMU), alleging that Defendants violated the constitutional rights of Pelzer and his fellow inmates in the STGMU by, inter alia, maintaining unlawful prison conditions. On April 8, 2014, the trial court entered an order dismissing Pelzer's complaint without a hearing. In an Oct. 6, 2014 order available at http://is.gd/cINovyfrom Legle.com, the appellate court agrees with Pelzer that the trial court abused its discretion in dismissing his complaint without allowing him to either amend his complaint or file a response to the preliminary objections and without holding a hearing. The case is remanded for further proceedings. The appeals case is Caine Pelzer, Addam Sloane, et al., Appellants, v. Sec. John Wetzel, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections, et al., Case No. 670 C.D. 2014, Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. The appellate court panel is composed of HONORABLE DAN PELLEGRINI, President Judge, HONORABLE PATRICIA A. McCULLOUGH, Judge, and HONORABLE ROCHELLE S. FRIEDMAN, Senior Judge. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Sued in California Over Violation of FDCPA -------------------------------------------------------------- Lorraine Hunting, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, Case No. 2:14-cv-07847 (C.D. Cal., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC is engaged in debt collection business. The Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew M. Loker, Esq. KAZEROUNI LAW GROUP APC 245 Fishcer Avenue, Suite D1 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 Telephone: (800) 400-6808 Facsimile: (800) 520-5523 E-mail: ml@kazlg.com R&A OYSTERS: Accused of Not Properly Paying Mexican Guest Workers ----------------------------------------------------------------- Tracey Dalzell Walsh, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that two migrant workers filed a federal class action against R&A Oysters Inc., claiming the company refuses to properly compensate the 100 Mexican "guest workers" it employs in Alabama. In a complaint filed in the federal court in Mobile, Ala., plaintiffs Miguel Angel Fuentes Cordova and Leobardo Morales Inclan say R&A Oysters recruited them from Mexico to work in its processing plants "because of an apparent shortage of U.S. workers" willing to shuck oysters. The two men say they spent considerable sums to obtain temporary H-2B work visas, including the costs of travel from their home villages to a larger city so they could attend their consular interviews. Cordova and Inclan claim that once they arrived in the United States, R&A required them to pay $170 to ride on the company's chartered bus to work. The plaintiffs say they have not been reimbursed for these expenses, in violation of the Migrant and Seasonal Worker Protection Act, and other rules promulgated by the U.S. Department of Labor. According to the men, the Labor Department allows only "reasonable" deductions from wages, and that the expenses they incurred fall well outside what the federal government deems reasonable. In addition, Cordova and Inclan say that Rodney and Ann Fox, owners and officers of the company, unfairly subject their Mexican workers to paycheck deductions for tools and equipment -- including gloves, overalls, boots and knives -- that are necessary for them to do their jobs. These deductions caused their pay to fall below the minimum wage under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the plaintiffs say. Additionally, Cordova and Inclan claim they were forced to live in housing owned and controlled by defendants, but the property did not receive certification that it complied with health and safety codes. Cordova and Inclan seek actual and liquidated damages for themselves and the class, payment of the wages they are currently owed, injunctive relief, and court costs. The Plaintiffs are represented by: Samuel Brooke, Esq. SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER 400 Washington Avenue Montgomery, AL 36104 Telephone: (334) 956-8200 Facsimile: (334) 956-8481 E-mail: Samuel.brooke@splcenter.org - and - Meredith B. Stewart, Esq. SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER 1055 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 505 New Orleans, LA 70130 Telephone: (504) 526-1497 Facsimile: (504) 486-8947 E-mail: Meredith.stewart@splcenter.org - and - Eunice Hyunhye Cho, Esq. James M. Knoepp, Esq. SOUTHERN POVERTY LAW CENTER 1989 College Ave. NE Atlanta, GA 30317 Telephone: (404) 521-6700 Facsimile: (404) 221-5857 E-mail: Eunice.cho@splcenter.org Jim.knoepp@splcenter.org The case is Miguel Angel Fuentes Cordova and Leobardo Morales Inclan, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. R & A Oysters, Inc., Rodney L. Fox, and Ann P. Fox, Case No. 1:14-cv-00462-CB-M, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama. SCOPE SERVICES: Faces "Gray" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime -------------------------------------------------------------- Robin Cynthia Gray, Alvin Carl Addison, Steven Paul Johnson, Dearell Charlie Brevard, Andrew Saunders, and Warren Kenneth Turner, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. Scope Services, Inc., Case No. 1:14-cv-01700 (D.D.C., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime compensation for worked in excess of hours per work week. Scope Services, Inc. is a mechanical, electrical, plumbing, construction, maintenance contractor, and temporary staffing specialist to commercial and energy related industries. The Plaintiff is represented by: Gregg Cohen Greenberg, Esq. Jason D. Friendman, Esq. ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC 836 Bonifant Street Silver Spring, MD 20910 Telephone: (301) 587-9373 Facsimile: (301) 587-9397 E-mail: ggreenberg@zagfirm.com jfriendman@zagfirm.com SIGMA-ALDRICH CORP: Robbins Arroyo Files Class Action Over Buyout ----------------------------------------------------------------- Shareholder rights law firm Robbins Arroyo LLP on Oct. 6 disclosed that it has filed a class action lawsuit on September 23, 2014, in the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court of St. Louis, Missouri, opposing the proposed acquisition of Sigma-Aldrich Corporation by Merck KGaA. On September 22, 2014, the companies announced that Sigma- Aldrich and Merck signed a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which Merck will acquire all outstanding shares of Sigma-Aldrich for $140.00 per share in cash. The complaint seeks relief on behalf of the named plaintiffs and all other similarly situated shareholders of Sigma-Aldrich. The named plaintiffs are represented by Robbins Arroyo LLP. Robbins Arroyo LLP's class action focuses on whether the board of directors at Sigma-Aldrich is undertaking a fair process to obtain maximum value and adequately compensate its shareholders. If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact attorney Darnell R. Donahue at (800) 350-6003, ddonahue@robbinsarroyo.com or via the shareholder information form on the firm's website. Robbins Arroyo LLP is a nationally recognized leader in securities litigation and shareholder rights law. The law firm represents individual and institutional investors in shareholder derivative and securities class action lawsuits, and has helped its clients realize more than $1 billion of value for themselves and the companies in which they have invested. SIMPLICITY BANCORP: Being Sold for Too Little, Class Suit Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen Bushansky, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. Simplicity Bancorp, Inc., Donald R. Voss, John H. Cochrane, Dustin Luton, Robert C. Steinbach, James L. Breeden, Giovani O. Dacumos, Michael J. Sacher, Laura G. Weisshar, Homestreet, Inc., and Does 1-25, inclusive, Case No. BC560508 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., October 10, 2014) arises out of the Defendants' alleged breaches of their fiduciary duty, or the aiding and abetting of those breaches, in connection with the proposed acquisition of the publicly owned shares of Simplicity common stock by HomeStreet. Simplicity is a Maryland corporation headquartered in Covina, California. Simplicity operates as a bank holding company for Simplicity Bank, which was originally founded in 1953 as a credit union. Today, the Bank is a federally chartered savings bank institution, which operates seven retail branches in Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties. The Individual Defendants are directors and officers of the Company. HomeStreet is a Washington corporation headquartered in Seattle, Washington. The Plaintiff is represented by: Leigh A. Parker, Esq. WEISSLAW LLP 1516 South Bundy Drive, Suite 309 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Telephone: (310) 208-2800 Facsimile: (310) 209-2348 E-mail: lparker@weisslawllp.com - and - Richard A. Acocelli, Esq. WEISSLAW LLP 1500 Broadway, 16th Floor New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 682-3025 Facsimile: (212) 682-3010 E-mail: racocelli@weisslawllp.com SOUTH FLORIDA REFINISHING: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------ Yuri Zelaya, and other similarly situated individuals v. South Florida Refinishing Corp. d/b/a The Finishing Center f/k/a The Finishing Center Inc., William Carrazana, Fray Landaeta, and Leidy Carrazana a/k/a Lis Carrazana a/k/a Lisbeth Landaeta, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-23730 (S.D. Fla., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for worked in excess of 40 hours per week. South Florida Refinishing Corp. provides tile and bathtub refinishing services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Ruben Martin Saenz, Esq. SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC 20900 N.E. 30th Avenue, Suite 800 Aventura, FL 33180 Telephone: (305) 503-5131 Facsimile: (888) 270-5549 E-mail: msaenz@saenzanderson.com SUNSOF INC: FLSA Case by Factory Workers Dismissed -------------------------------------------------- District Judge Federico A. Moreno granted in part a motion to dismiss the case captioned JONATHAN BAIDE, WILMER CABALLERO, YONI CUBAS, GEIKER J. ALVARADO, Plaintiffs, v. SUNSOF, INC. and EDGARDO D. ARMANDO, Defendants, CASE NO. 14-22255-CIV-MORENO, (S.D. Fla.). Plaintiffs are factory workers at Defendant Sunsof, Inc., a food manufacturing business, and are suing for unpaid overtime compensation under the Fair Labor Standards Act. One of the Plaintiffs, Jonathan Baide, is also suing for retaliatory discharge, claiming his employment was terminated when his uncle filed a Fair Labor Standards Act case against the Defendants. The complaint is framed as a putative class action. The Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on July 30, 2014. The Court found that the Plaintiffs' complaint is sufficiently pled, except for the class action claim, which lacks factual support. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the class allegations without prejudice and granted leave to amend the complaint. "Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint by no later than October 22, 2014 consistent with this order," ruled Judge Moreno in his order entered October 7, 2014, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/YdBaz3from Leagle.com. Edgardo D. Armando, individually, Defendant, represented by Devand Anthony Sukhdeo -- Sukhdeod@jacksonlewis.com -- Jackson Lewis P.C., Jeremiah Richard Jones -- Jeremiah.Jones@jacksonlewis.com -- Jackson Lewis P.C. & Nicholas Paul Banegas -- Nicholas.Banegas@jacksonlewis.com -- Jackson Lewis P.C. SUPER NICE: "Pierre" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages ---------------------------------------------------------------- Joseph Pierre v. Super Nice STS, Inc., a Florida corporation, Case No. 1:14-cv-23733 (S.D. Fla., October 9, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, post-judgment interest, reasonable attorney's fee and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Super Nice STS, Inc. provides paratransit special transportation services. The Plaintiff is represented by: Brian Jay Militzok, Esq. MILITZOK & LEVY, P.A. 3230 Stirling Road, Suite 1 Hollywood, FL 33021 Telephone: (954) 727-8570 Facsimile: (954) 241-6857 E-mail: bjm@mllawfl.com SYNGENTA CORPORATION: Sued Over Damages Caused by Viptera Corn -------------------------------------------------------------- Marlen Greer, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Syngenta Corporation, Syngenta Crop Protection, LLC, and, Syngenta Seeds, Inc., Case No. 0:14-cv-04197 (D. Minn., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendants for failure to provide an adequate warning to farmers, grain elevators, grain exporters, and the general public regarding the dangers of planting, growing, harvesting, transporting, or otherwise using Viptera corn at the time Viptera corn was sold. The Defendants are engaged in commercial seed business, developing, producing, and selling, through dealers and distributors or directly to growers, a wide range of agricultural products throughout the United States, including corn seed with certain genetically modified traits. The Plaintiff is represented by: Hart L. Robinovitch, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED, PLLP 14646 N. Kierland Blvd, Suite 145 Scottsdale, AZ 85254 Telephone: (480) 348-6400 Facsimile: (480) 348-6415 E-mail: hart.robinovitch@zimmreed.com - and - David M. Cialkowski, Esq. ZIMMERMAN REED, PLLP 1100 IDS Center, 80 South 8th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 341-0400 Facsimile: (612) 341-0844 E-mail: David.Cialkowski@zimmreed.com - and - Caleb Marker, Esq. RIDOUT LYON + OTTOSON, LLP 555 E. Ocean Boulevard, Suite 500 Long Beach, CA 90802 Telephone: (562) 216-7380 Facsimile: (562) 216-7385 E-mail: c.marker@rlollp.com TIBCO SOFTWARE: Faces 3 Class Actions Over Merger Agreement ----------------------------------------------------------- In connection with TIBCO Software Inc.'s entry into a merger agreement and the transactions contemplated thereby, three purported class action lawsuits have been filed against the company, according to its Oct. 8, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2014. Two complaints, captioned Brian Ford, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly Situated v. TIBCO Software Inc., et al. (filed on October 6, 2014) (the "Ford Complaint") and Bona Tilahun, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. TIBCO Software Inc., et al. (filed on October 7, 2014) (the "Tilahun Complain") were filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware. A third complaint, captioned Jeff Cole v. TIBCO Software Inc., et al. (filed on October 3, 2014) (the "Cole Complaint"), was filed in the Santa Clara Superior Court, in the State of California. In general, each of the complaints asserts that, among other things, the members of the Board of Directors breached their fiduciary duties to the company's stockholders by initiating a process that undervalues the company and by agreeing to a transaction that does not adequately reflect the company's true value, and that TIBCO, Balboa Intermediate Holdings LLC, Balboa Merger Sub, Inc. and Vista Equity Partners V., L.P. aided and abetted the Board's breaches of fiduciary duties. The complaints generally seek to enjoin the Merger or, alternatively, seek rescission of the Merger in the event the defendants are able to consummate it. TPE INC: "Bonilla-Diaz" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime ------------------------------------------------------------- Acencion Bonilla-Diaz and Modesto Bonilla-Diaz, individually and in behalf of all other persons similarly situated v. TPE Inc. d/b/a The Plumbing Exchange and Zalmen L. Blau, jointly and severally, Case No. 1:14-cv-05941 (E.D.N.Y., October 9, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation and for other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. TPE Inc. is a merchant wholesale distributor of plumbing and heating equipment and supplies. The Plaintiff is represented by: John Gurrieri, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF JUSTIN A. ZELLER 277 Broadway Suite 408 New York, NY 10007 Telephone: (212) 229-2249 Facsimile: (212) 229-2246 E-mail: jmgurrieri@zellerlegal.com TURKEY VALLEY: Sued Over Violation of Fair Labor Standards Act -------------------------------------------------------------- Alma M. Gonzalez, Sherman D. Spradley and Ahmed A. Duale, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Turkey Valley Farms, L.L.C., Case No. 0:14-cv-04192 (D. Minn., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Turkey Valley Farms, L.L.C. owns and operates a turkey processing facility in Marshall, Minnesota. The Plaintiff is represented by: Aram V. Desteian, Esq. Janine M. Loetscher, Esq. Lewis A. Remele Jr., Esq. BASSFORD REMELE, PA 33 S 6th St Ste 3800 Mpls, MN 55402-3707 Telephone: (612) 746-1088 Facsimile: (612) 746-1288 E-mail: adesteian@bassford.com jloetscher@bassford.com lewr@bassford.com - and - Daniel J. Sheran, Esq. Thomas R. Sheran, Esq. SHERAN LAW OFFICE 222 South 9th Street, Suite 1600 Mpls, MN 55402 Telephone: (612) 337-9001 Facsimile: (612) 338-0359 E-mail: danielsheran@sheranlaw.com thomassheran@sheranlaw.com TURKISH REPUBLIC: Court Dismissed Suit Over Cyprus Property Spat ---------------------------------------------------------------- Greek Cypriots cannot claim here that the government in control of Northern Cyprus gave their homes to Turkish Cypriots, reports Ryan Abbott at Courthouse News Service, citing a federal court ruling. U.S. District Judge Paul Friedman noted on October 9, 2014, that United Nations peacekeeping forces still maintain the "Green Line" that has separated the Turkish-occupied north from the rest of Cyprus since a brutal conflict in 1974. The Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC) has been the name of the government for sectioned-off segment of Cyprus since 1983. Although the United States does not recognize it as a state, the TRNC purportedly operates as a democratic republic with a president, prime minister, legislature and judiciary, Friedman said. The Greek-descended Cypriots make up about three-quarters of the population of Cyprus and practice Christianity. Turkish-descended Cypriots are Muslim. In a 2009 federal class action, Michali Toumazou and other Greek Cypriots who fled south in 1974 complained that the TRNC confiscated their property and redistributed the land to Turkish Cypriots. HSBC was named as a defendant for allegedly facilitating the deal, which required the Turkish Cypriots to renounce their rights to property in southern Cyprus. Judge Friedman found no showing on October 9, however, that that the TRNC is vulnerable to a lawsuit in Washington. He dismissed the claims against it for lack of personal jurisdiction. "Even if true, [the plaintiffs' allegations] fall woefully short of demonstrating that the TRNC is 'at home' in the District of Columbia," the ruling states. The homeowners also failed to state a claim against HSBC, according to the ruling. Friedman said the class failed to distinguish its claims between the TRNC and HSBC, and therefore violated federal procedure. "It would be futile to permit plaintiffs to file an amended complaint," the judge added. The ruling makes no mention of a multibillion RICO class action brought in 2012 by Brits who bought some of the northern Cyprus property from the TRNC as vacation homes. That complaint, which also named HSBC as a defendant, said that the TRNC operates illegally in the republic of Cyprus through the "brute force" of 40,000 Turkish troops. The TRNC previously defeated a complaint by singer Julio Iglesias, who claimed that he was duped into agreeing to perform an illegal concert in Cyprus by a military organization. Earlier this year, a talent agency complained that certain Turkish Cypriots tricked it into booking that Iglesias gig. The case is Michali Toumazou, et al. v. Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus, et al., Case No. 09-1967 (PLF), in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. A copy of the decision is available at http://is.gd/7BBezXfrom Leagle.com. HSBC BANK USA, N.A., is represented by: Michael Orth Ware, Esq. Andrew John Pincus, Esq. MAYER BROWN, LLP 1675 Broadway New York, NY 10019-5820 Tel: 212 506 2593 Fax: 212 849 5593 E-mail: mware@mayerbrown.com apincus@mayerbrown.com UEBT RETIREE: Sued in N.D. California Over Violation of ERISA ------------------------------------------------------------- Harold Barling, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. UEBT Retiree Health Plan, UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust Fund, and Board of Trustees of The UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust, Case No. 4:14-cv-04530 (N.D. Cal., October 9, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. UEBT Retiree Health Plan, UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust Fund provides healthcare benefits as a secondary payor for certain plan participants, including Medicare-eligible retirees and their dependents. The Plaintiff is represented by: Teresa S. Renaker, Esq. LEWIS, FEINBERG, LEE, RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C. 476 - 9th Street Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: (510) 839-6824 Facsimile: (510) 839-7839 E-mail: trenaker@lewisfeinberg.com - and - James P. Keenley, Esq. BOLT KEENLEY KIM LLP 1010 Grayson Street, Suite Three Berkeley, CA 94710 Telephone: (510) 225-0696 Facsimile: (510) 225-1095 E-mail: jkeenley@bkkllp.com VOXX INTERNATIONAL: No Lead Plaintiff Yet in N.Y. Stock Lawsuit --------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York has not entered an order appointing a lead plaintiff in the suit Brian Ford vs. VOXX International Corporation, et al., according to the company's Oct. 8, 2014, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended Aug. 31, 2014. As described in the company's Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended May 31, 2014, on July 8, 2014, a purported class action suit, styled Brian Ford vs. VOXX International Corporation, et al., was filed against the company and two of the company's present executive officers in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. The suit alleges that defendants violated the federal securities laws by making false or misleading statements between May 15, 2013 and May 14, 2014 regarding the company's earnings guidance for fiscal 2014 and the anticipated future performance of the company's business. Plaintiff claims that these statements artificially inflated the price of the company's stock and that purchasers of the company's stock during the relevant period were damaged when the stock price later declined. Plaintiff seeks the award of unspecified amount of damages on behalf of the alleged class, counsel fees and costs. The company believes it has meritorious legal positions and defenses and will continue to represent the company's interests vigorously in this matter. On September 8, 2014, three members of the alleged class moved to be appointed the lead plaintiff in the action. To date, the Court has not entered an order appointing a lead plaintiff. WYNDHAM VACATION: Court Says Meeting Recordings Are Not Protected ----------------------------------------------------------------- Surreptitious recordings of a meeting between potential class action plaintiffs and their counsel are not protected by attorney- client privilege, reports Kevin Lessmiller at Courthouse News Service, citing a federal court ruling. Jesse and Michael Pierce, sales reps at resorts owned by defendant Wyndham Vacation Resorts Inc., hired Dickson Wright PLLC to represent them and others in a Fair Labor Standards Act lawsuit against the company. On October 17, 2013, counsel from Dickson Wright conducted a meeting with more than forty other Wyndham sales reps to see if they would like to join the litigation. Unbeknownst to attendees at the time, someone in the room recorded the meeting, and that recording is now in the possession of Wyndham attorneys, who say they have not yet listened to it. One recording captures a Dickson Wright attorney is head asking "that any mole or person recording the meeting leave the room" and later joking "that counsel will later find any such person and 'and beat you to within an inch of your life'," the ruling says. Another attorney at the meeting also says, "This is an attorney- client meeting; everything we say here is confidential." But a federal judge in Knoxville, Tenn., disagreed this week, denying a motion to compel Wyndham to produce the audio recordings. "The majority of the audible portions of the recording are plaintiffs' counsel discussing their own qualifications, the lawsuit generally, and the opt-in procedure under the FLSA," wrote U.S. Magistrate Judge Clifford Shirley, Jr. "The recording does not include any questions from the attendees with regard to any of counsel's presentation. The only feedback from the attendees is applause, laughter, and an occasional wisecrack. The conversations amongst the attendees themselves certainly cannot be considered communications by the clients to the attorneys for the purposes of obtaining legal advice." Because the recordings are not protected under attorney-client privilege, Wyndham is allowed to listen to them, the judge ruled. The court also denied Wyndham's motion to protect the identity of the person who recorded the meeting because retaliation is unlikely, and the plaintiffs' counsel already has that person's information as both parties believe he or she was an opt-in plaintiff at the meeting. "The court finds that plaintiffs' counsel's off-the-cuff comment about tracking down any person acting as a mole at the meeting was a joke, and the court has no reason to expect anything but the most professional behavior from plaintiffs' counsel," Shirley wrote. The case is Jesse Pierce and Michael Pierce v. Wyndham Vacation Resorts, Inc., and Wyndham Vacation Ownership, Inc., Case No. 3:13-CV-641-PLR-CCS, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee at Knoxville. * William Holder Joins Cornerstone Research as Senior Advisor ------------------------------------------------------------- Cornerstone Research, a provider of economic and financial consulting and expert testimony, on Oct. 8 disclosed that William W. Holder, dean of the Leventhal School of Accounting at the University of Southern California, has joined the firm as a senior advisor. He is also the Alan Casden Dean's Chair and Professor of Accounting. Professor Holder has extensive experience as an expert witness in high-profile trials involving questions of accounting. "Bill Holder is one of the foremost experts on accounting issues that arise in legal and regulatory matters," said Cornerstone Research President and CEO Michael E. Burton. "His expertise and reputation in financial accounting and reporting, auditing, governmental accounting, and cost accounting are a major addition to the firm's outstanding network of experts." Professor Holder has served on several governance and standard- setting bodies for the accounting profession, including as a member of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB), on committees of the American Accounting Association, and on the Board of Directors (chair of the Audit Committee) of the American Institute of CPAs (AICPA). At the invitation of the Congressional Subcommittee on Capital Markets, Insurance, and Government- Sponsored Enterprises, he provided testimony on corporate accounting practices during the Sarbanes-Oxley Act hearings. The accounting profession has bestowed many honors on Professor Holder for his service and lifetime achievements, including the AICPA's Gold Medal Award for Distinguished Service, the organization's highest honor for a CPA. He has won numerous outstanding teaching awards, including Best Professor in the University of Southern California master's degree program. Professor Holder is the author or coauthor of six books on accounting, and his research has been widely published in journals, including the Accounting Review, the Journal of Accountancy, Financial Executive, and the CPA Journal. "I'm pleased to continue as an expert working with Cornerstone Research in the role of senior advisor," said Professor Holder. "I've been impressed by Cornerstone Research's high standards, rigorous methodology, and the level of support they provide." About Cornerstone Research Cornerstone Research -- http://www.cornerstone.com-- provides high-quality economic and financial consulting and expert testimony in all phases of complex litigation and regulatory proceedings. The firm works with an extensive network of prominent faculty and industry practitioners to identify the best- qualified expert for each assignment. Staff consultants bring specialized knowledge and experience as well as a commitment to produce outstanding results. Currently marking its 25th anniversary, Cornerstone Research has more than 500 staff, and offices in Boston, Chicago, London, Los Angeles, Menlo Park, New York, San Francisco, and Washington. ********* 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 202-362-8552. * * * End of Transmission * * *