CAR_Public/141204.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Thursday, December 4, 2014, Vol. 16, No. 241


                             Headlines

ACTIVISION BLIZZARD: Settles Shareholder Class Action for $275MM
AETERNA ZENTARIS: Faces "Friedman" Suit Over Misleading Reports
AIDA RESTAURANT: "Yuwono" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
ALCOBRA LTD: Glancy Binkow Files Class Action in New York
AMERICAN INT'L: Settles Securities Class Action for $970.5 Mil.

AMERICAN REALTY: Two Law Firms File Shareholder Class Action
AP SPECIALTIES: Recalls Power Bank Chargers Due to Fire Hazard
APCO OIL: Faces "Assad" Suit Over Misleading Proxy Statements
BAGEL TIME: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum and OT Wages
BARRETT BUSINESS: Faces Securities Class Action in Washington

BLACK DIAMOND: Recalls Whippet Ski Poles Due to Risk of Injury
BRIDGEGATE FIN'L: Court Certifies OM1 Investors' Class Action
BUSHNELL HOLDINGS: Recalls Semi-Auto Bore Cleaner
CD MODERN: Faces "Zetina" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
CENTAURI ENTERPRISES: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages

CHICAGO, IL: Obtains Favorable Ruling in Red Light Camera Suit
CLASSIC DAVILA: "Sanchez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
COLLECTION BUREAU: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
COSCENTRIX LLC: Expands Recall of DD Brand Candles Over Fire Risk
COSTCO WHOLESALE: Judge Tosses Two Claims in Food Mislabeling Suit

CREDIT BUREAU: Faces Suit Over Fair Debt Collection Act Violation
CRUNCH SAN DIEGO: Plaintiffs Want Judge to Revive Class Action
DCS FINANCIAL: Sued in W.D. Washington Over Violation of FDCPA
DURACELL: Faces Class Action Over Leaky Duralock Batteries
FLUVANNA, VA: Judge Allows Female Inmates' Class Suit to Proceed

FORM WORKS: Judge Revives Construction Workers' Class Action
GATEWAY: Settles LCD Monitor Class Action; Feb. 27 Hearing Set
GMG INDUSTRIES: "Paula" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
GRACO CHILDREN'S: Recalls 11 Models of Strollers
HANGER INC: Bernstein Litowitz Files Securities Class Action

HBOS: 8,000 Investors Join Class Action Over 2008 Takeover
HEARTY BOYS: Faces "Trinidad" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT Wages
HELP WORKS: "Lawson" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
HONDA NORTH AMERICA: Court Okays Air Bag Class Action Settlement
IMPAX LABORATORIES: Engineers Union Files Shareholder Class Suit

INGRAM & ASSOCIATES: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
INVESTORSHUB.COM: Global Holdings to File Class Action
JAMBA JUICE: Faces Class Action in California Over Unpaid Wages
KIRKLAND ASSET: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Claims
LEATHERMAN TOOL: Recalls Kids' Tool Kit Due to Laceration Hazard

LIBERTY TIRE: Faces Class Action Over Kentucky Tire Fire
METHODIST HOSPITAL: Judge Certifies Class in Meal Breaks Suit
METROPCS: 11th Circuit Remands Fraud Class Action to State Court
MICHAEL HARRISON: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Says
MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Recalls Rugs Due to Fire Hazard

MOUNT VERNON, NY: Accused of Race & Gender Bias by Black Officer
NESTLE USA: Lawyer Notes Rise in False Advertising Class Actions
OLYMPUS IMAGING: Recalls Digital Audio Recorders Due to Burn Risk
OSKAR SPECIALTY: Recalls Hommus Products Due to Undeclared Sesame
PARKINSON'S SPECIALTY: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages

PAYMENT RESOLUTION: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Says
PJD ENTERTAINMENT: Faces "Diaz" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
PURITY FACTORIES: Recalls Chocolate Kisses and Butterscotch Kisses
RAYONIER INC: Faces "Christie" Sue Over Misleading Fin'l Reports
RAYONIER INC: Bernstein Litowitz Files Securities Class Action

REGIONAL ADJUSTMENT: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
RESOURCE SOLUTIONS: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
SCHILLER GROUNDS: Recalls Zero Turn Mowers Due to Crash Hazard
SIRIUS XM: Judge Tosses Summary Judgment Motion in Royalties Suit
SPECIALTY OILFIELD: Sued Over Breach of Fair Labor Standards Act

SOCAL WINGS: Removes "Levanoff" Class Suit to C.D. California
SONY CORP: Settles FTC Charges Over Game Console Ad Claims
TAKATA CORP: Faces "Day" Suit Over Defective Airbags
TAKATA CORP: Faces "McLeod" Suit Over Defective Airbags
TAKATA CORP: Faces "Neto" Suit Over Defective Airbags

TAKATA CORP: Faces "Scheuerman" Suit Over Defective Airbag
TAKATA CORP: Faces "Seals" Suit Over Defective Airbags
TAKATA CORP: Kessler Topaz Files Defective Airbag Class Action
TAKATA CORP: Two Wilmington, NC Residents File Class Action
TARGET CORP: "Tober" Suit Included in Data Security Breach MDL

TAKATA CORP: Anapol Schwartz Files Class Suit Over Airbag Defect
TERMINI BROTHERS: Sued in E.D. Pa. Over Failure to Pay Overtime
TYCO FIRE: Recalls Simplex Fire Alarm Control Panels
US FORENSIC: Manipulated Engineering Reports, NY Suit Claims
USP LABS: Settles Class Action Over Weight Loss Supplement

VELDOS LLC: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Class Suit Claims
VIVINT SOLAR: Faces "Hyatt" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l Reports
VVV STAFFING: Sued Over Failure to Pay Employees Overtime Wages
WHOLE FOODS: Faces Class Action Over Greek Yogurt Sugar Level

* Chief Justice Allsop Vows to Reign in Class Action Surge
* Lawyers Argue Over $200-Mil. Tobacco Settlement Funds


                            *********


ACTIVISION BLIZZARD: Settles Shareholder Class Action for $275MM
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brenna Hillier, writing for VG 24/7, reports that Activision
Blizzard bought itself from former parent company Vivendi last
year, which didn't please every shareholder, but the consequent
class-action lawsuit has now been settled.

The publisher announced on Nov. 19 that it has reached a
settlement agreement in which "multiple insurance companies, along
with various defendants, will pay Activision Blizzard $275
million".

Additionally, two unaffiliated company directors will be named,
voting rights will be adjusted, all claims against the defendants
will be dropped and the plaintiff's legal fees and costs will be
paid.

"The Company believes the settlement, which acknowledges no
wrongdoing by any party, is in the interest of all stakeholders,"
Activision Blizzard said in a press release.

"The transaction, structured through the efforts and significant
personal investment of Bobby Kotick and Brian Kelly, has
contributed to the creation of over $3 billion of value for
shareholders.  We are pleased to be able to put this matter to
rest," the Board of Directors said in a statement.

Last year CEO Bobby Kotick and Chairman Brian Kelly led an
investor group which purchased 88% of Vivendi's stake in
Activision Blizzard, freeing it from the French conglomerate's
control.

Shareholders responded with a class-action lawsuit based on
allegations that the buyback was "breach of fiduciary duties,
waste of corporate assets and unjust enrichment" brought about by
a conflict of interest related to members of both companies'
boards.


AETERNA ZENTARIS: Faces "Friedman" Suit Over Misleading Reports
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Friedman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
SITUATED v. Aeterna Zentaris, Inc., David A. Dodd, Juergen Engel,
Dennis Turpin, Jude Dinges, Richard Sachse, and Paul Blake, Case
No. 3:14-cv-07301 (D.N.J., November 21, 2014), alleges that the
Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and
omissions concerning the safety and efficacy of the Company's drug
Macrilen, which was meant to serve as a diagnostic test for adult
growth hormone deficiency.

Aeterna Zentaris, Inc. is a specialty Biopharmaceutical Company
engaged in developing novel treatments in oncology and
endocrinology.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Bruce D. Greenberg, Esq.
      Jeffrey A. Shooman, Esq.
      LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG, LLC
      Two Gateway Center, Suite 1201
      Newark, NJ 07102
      Telephone: 973-623-3000
      Facsimile: 973-623-0858
      E-mail: bgreenberg@litedepalma.com
              jshooman@litedepalma.com


AIDA RESTAURANT: "Yuwono" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Yuwono, on behalf of himself and FLSA Collective Plaintiffs
v. Aida Restaurant Corp. and Nakao Hirakata, Case No. 1:14-cv-
09296 (S.D.N.Y., November 21, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid
overtime wages, liquidated damages and statutory penalties, and
attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Defendants own and operate Mishima restaurant located at 164
Lexington Avenue, New York, NY 10016.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


ALCOBRA LTD: Glancy Binkow Files Class Action in New York
---------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, representing investors of Alcobra,
Ltd., on Nov. 19 disclosed that it has filed a class action
lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of a class comprising purchasers of
Alcobra securities between March 28, 2014 and November 14, 2014,
inclusive.

"While a complete ITT analysis by ADHD subtypes is still ongoing
. . . the magnitude of symptom improvement appears to be similar
in all subtypes, and the Predominantly-Inattentive ADHD (PI-ADHD)
subtype alone did not produce a statistically significant
outcome."

Please contact Lesley Portnoy at (310) 201-9150, or at
shareholders@glancylaw.com to discuss this matter.  If you inquire
by email, please include your mailing address, telephone number
and number of shares purchased.

Alcobra is a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development
and commercialization of proprietary drug candidates, including
its most advanced product, MDX, for the treatment of attention
deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and other cognitive
dysfunctions.  The Complaint alleges that defendants made false
and/or misleading statements and failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's operations and financial
prospects.  Specifically, defendants misrepresented and/or failed
to disclose that: (1) MDX did not show a statistical benefit over
placebo until patients were removed from the Company's analysis of
the Phase III study; (2) the Company was presenting it analyses
inconsistently, including post hoc analysis outside the original
protocols; and (3), as a result of the foregoing, defendants'
statements about Alcobra's business, operations and prospects,
including statements about the clinical success of MDX, were false
and misleading and or lacked a reasonable basis.

On October 6, 2014, the Company announced topline results from its
Phase III study of MDX in Adult ADHD, and declared that MDX
demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in ADHD
symptoms.  Then on October 22, 2014, the Company announced that
the MDX Phase III study, in fact, did not demonstrate a
statistically significant improvement in patient symptoms, stating
in relevant part: "While a complete ITT analysis by ADHD subtypes
is still ongoing . . . the magnitude of symptom improvement
appears to be similar in all subtypes, and the Predominantly-
Inattentive ADHD (PI-ADHD) subtype alone did not produce a
statistically significant outcome."

Then, on November 17, 2014, Alcobra announced that the Company
plans to meet with the FDA and launch a second adult Phase III
study in 2015.  According to the Company, Alcobra is "currently
evaluating changes to the design and monitoring of the second
trial to control the unusually high placebo response and wide
response variability observed in the first Phase III study."
Following this news, Alcobra shares declined 6%, or $0.21 per
share, and declined an additional 6% per share the next day, to a
closing price of $3.24 per share on November 18, 2014, on
unusually heavy volume.

If you are a member of the Class described above, you may move the
Court no later than 60 days from the date of this Notice, to serve
as lead plaintiff, if you meet certain legal requirements.  To be
a member of the Class you need not take any action at this time;
you may retain counsel of your choice or take no action and remain
an absent member of the Class.  If you wish to learn more about
this action, or if you have any questions concerning this
announcement or your rights or interests with respect to these
matters, please contact Lesley Portnoy, Esquire, of Glancy Binkow
& Goldberg LLP, 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100, Los Angeles,
California 90067, at (310) 201-9150, by e-mail to
shareholders@glancylaw.com or visit our website at
http://www.glancylaw.com

If you inquire by email, please include your mailing address,
telephone number and number of shares purchased.

Contacts:
Glancy Binkow & Goldberg LLP, Los Angeles, CA
Lesley Portnoy
310-201-9150
888-773-9224
shareholders@glancylaw.com
www.glancylaw.com


AMERICAN INT'L: Settles Securities Class Action for $970.5 Mil.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Kyla Asbury, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that American
International Group has agreed to a $970.5 million settlement in a
class action lawsuit alleging the company violated federal
securities laws.

The plaintiffs and AIG entered into a stipulation and agreement of
settlement on Sept. 12, and it was approved on Oct. 7, according
to a settlement document filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York.

"Defendants have denied . . . that defendants acted fraudulently
or wrongfully in any way," the settlement document states.

The defendants maintained that they have meritorious defenses to
all claims alleged in the action.

All persons or entities who purchased AIG securities on a U.S.
public exchange during the period from March 16, 2006, through
Sept. 16, 2008, or who purchased or acquired AIG securities in or
traceable to a public offering during the class period could be
eligible for a claim in the settlement.

All proofs of claim must be submitted no later than May 5 in order
to be eligible to receive a payment under the settlement.

Any fees and expenses awarded will be paid from the settlement
fund to lead counsel promptly upon entry of the order awarding
such attorneys fees and expenses, according to the settlement
document.

The State of Michigan Retirement Systems, as lead plaintiff in the
consolidation of eight class action lawsuits, claimed it lost
between $110 million and $142 million because of AIG, according to
the 2008 complaint.

If approved by the court, the total settlement amount will be
among the largest recoveries ever achieved in a securities fraud
class action stemming from the 2008 financial crisis.

"This settlement represents an outstanding result for the State of
Michigan and other investors," E. Powell Miller of The Miller Law
Firm said in a press release.

The plaintiffs and class members are represented by Leonard
Barrack -- lbarrack@barrack.com -- Jeffrey W. Golan, Robert A.
Hoffman -- rahoffman@Venable.com -- Lisa M. Port and Julie B.
Palley -- jpalley@barrack.com -- of Barrack, Rodos & Bacine in
Philadelphia; A. Arnold Gershon and Michael A. Toomey --
mtoomey@barrack.com -- of Barrack, Rodos & Bacine in New York; and
Miller, Marc L. Newman and Jaysen E. Blake --
jblake@millerlawpc.com -- of The Miller Law Firm PC in Rochester,
Mich.

A fairness hearing will be held on March 20 before District Judge
Laura Taylor Swain.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York case
number: 1:08-cv-04772


AMERICAN REALTY: Two Law Firms File Shareholder Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------
TheGrantLawFirm, PLLC and Stull, Stull & Brody on Nov. 20 filed a
lawsuit seeking class action status on behalf of all shareholders
of American Realty Capital Healthcare Trust, Inc. who will be
entitled to vote on the merger between HCT and Ventas, Inc.
against HCT's Board of Directors, among others, in the United
States District Court for the District of Maryland, Civil Action
No. 1:14-cv-02019-GLR.  A copy of the operative complaint may be
obtained from the Court, from Lynda J. Grant (t/212-292-4441) or
Jason D'Agnenica (t/1-800-337-4983).

Among other claims, the Complaint charges that certain of the
defendants violated Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, and SEC Regulation 14a-9, by attempting to
solicit shareholder approval for the Transaction by way of a
materially false and misleading proxy, which will result in injury
to Plaintiff and the proposed Class.

Plaintiff seeks to recover damages on behalf of Class members
and/or to enjoin the Transaction, and is represented by the
TheGrantLawFirm, PLLC and Stull, Stull & Brody, which have
significant experience and expertise in prosecuting class actions
on behalf of investors and shareholders, as described below.

If you are a member of the Class described above, you may, no
later than 60 days from today (January 19, 2015), move the Court
to serve as lead plaintiff. In order to serve as lead plaintiff,
you must meet certain legal requirements. Any member of the
proposed Class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff in
this action through counsel of his or her choice, or may remain an
absent Class member.  There are certain legal requirements to
serve as lead plaintiff, which we would be pleased to discuss with
you.

A lead plaintiff is a representative party that acts on behalf of
other class members in directing the litigation.  In order to be
appointed lead plaintiff, the Court must determine that the class
member's claim is typical of the claims of other class members,
and that the class member will adequately represent the class.
Under certain circumstances, one or more class members may
together serve as "lead plaintiff."  Your ability to share in any
recovery is not affected by the decision whether to serve as a
lead plaintiff.

You may retain TheGrantLawFirm, PLLC and/or Stull, Stull & Brody,
or other counsel of your choice, to serve as your counsel in this
action.

For 30 years, Lynda J. Grant has represented aggrieved investors
and consumers in a variety of actions including: securities fraud
class actions; derivative actions; and unfair mergers and
acquisitions.  She has been the chair of the American Bar
Association's Securities Litigation and Class and Derivative
Actions Committees, and is a frequent speaker and writer on class
and derivative action topics.  In October 2014, Lynda J. Grant was
selected as a 2014 New York Metro Super Lawyer.  TheGrantLawFirm
recently celebrated its fifth anniversary.

Stull, Stull & Brody is a major force in the class action field
and has litigated class actions for violations of securities laws
in federal courts for over 40 years, obtaining multi-millions of
dollars in court approved settlements.  Stull, Stull & Brody
maintains offices in New York and Beverly Hills.

If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions
concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to
these matters, please contact Lynda J. Grant at 212-292-4441 or e-
mail her at lgrant@grantfirm.com or contact Stull, Stull & Brody
by calling Howard T. Longman or Jason D'Agnenica at 1-800-337-
4983, or by email to hct@ssbny.com

You can also visit our websites at www.grantfirm.com and
www.ssbny.com


AP SPECIALTIES: Recalls Power Bank Chargers Due to Fire Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
AP Specialties, announced a voluntary recall of about 172,000 Two-
Tone Power Bank Charger.  Consumers should stop using this product
unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt
to resell a recalled consumer product.

When unit is being charged or being used to charge another device,
it can overheat, causing a fire hazard.

There are three reported incidents of the Power Bank overheating.
One incident resulted in fire damage.  No injuries have been
reported.

Power Bank charger is a self-contained energy source used to
charge cell phones and other devices when an electrical outlet is
not available.  The unit is rectangular in shape and measures
approximately 3.6 inches long by 1 inch high by 1 inch wide.  It
has a white top and the sides are either black, dark blue, lime
green, light blue, orange, pink, purple, red, white or yellow.  On
the white top of the charger in black letters are "OUT DC5V" and
"IN DC5V".  Units with a period after the lettering -- reading
"OUT DC5V." -- are not involved in this recall.  The name and/or
logo of the organization that gave away the charger as a
promotional item appears on the side of the power bank.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/4dQhrE

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at Power
banks were given as promotional items at various meetings, trade
shows and industry conventions from Nov. 2013 to Aug. 2014. The
products sold for about $8 to $11.

Consumers should immediately stop using the charger and contact AP
Specialties for a replacement.  AP Specialties will send consumer
an envelope and label with instructions on how to return the power
bank free of charge.  Upon receipt of the power bank, AP
Specialties will send the consumer a replacement product.


APCO OIL: Faces "Assad" Suit Over Misleading Proxy Statements
-------------------------------------------------------------
George P. Assad, Jr., On Behalf of Himself and All Others
Similarly Situated v. Apco Oil and Gas International, Inc.,
Richard E. Muncrief, Bryan K. Guderian, J. Kevin Vann, Keith
Bailey, Piero Ruffinengo, Robert Lafortune, Pluspetrol Resources
Corporation, and Pluspetrol Black River Corporation, Case No.
4:14-cv-00707 (N.D. Okla., November 24, 2014), alleges that the
Defendants made materially incomplete and misleading disclosures
in the Proxy Statement filed with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission, and failed to provide adequate disclosure of
all material information related to the Proposed Merger with
Pluspetrol Resources Corporation.

Apco Oil and Gas International, Inc. is an international oil and
gas exploration and production company with interests in nine oil
and gas concessions and two exploration permits in Argentina, and
three exploration and production contracts in Colombia.

The Individual Defendants are directors and officers of Apco Oil
and Gas International, Inc.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      William B. Federman, Esq.
      Gregg J. Lytle, Esq.
      FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
      10205 N. Pennsylvania Ave.
      Oklahoma City, OK 73120
      Telephone: (405) 235-1560
      Facsimile: (405) 239-2112
      E-mail: wbf@federmanlaw.com
              gjl@federmanlaw.com

         -and-

      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

         - and -

      Katharine M. Ryan, Esq.
      Richard A. Maniskas, Esq.
      RYAN & MANISKAS, LLP
      995 Old Eagle School Rd., Suite 311
      Wayne, PA 19087
      Telephone: (484) 588-5516


BAGEL TIME: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum and OT Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Rouse v. Bagel Time Inc., et al.,
Case No. 14-028604 CA 01, was removed from the 11th Judicial
Circuit in and for Miami-Dade County, Florida, to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Florida (Miami).  The
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:14-cv-24479-JEM to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit is brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act to
recover alleged unpaid wages, unpaid minimum wage compensation,
and additional equal amount as liquidated damages, obtain
declaratory relief, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason S. Remer, Esq.
          Brody M. Shulman, Esq.
          REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC
          44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200
          Miami, FL 33130
          Telephone: (305) 416-5000
          Facsimile: (305) 416-5005
          E-mail: jremer@rgpattorneys.com
                  bshulman@rgpattorneys.com

The Defendants are represented by:

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


BARRETT BUSINESS: Faces Securities Class Action in Washington
-------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Newsline reports that a class action lawsuit has been
brought against a workplace safety company alleging it understated
Workers' Compensation reserves by at least $80 million.

The lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Washington on behalf of anyone that purchased stock in
Barrett Business Services between Feb. 12, 2013, and Oct. 28.

The complaint states the business allegedly knowingly filed false
information with the Securities and Exchange Commission during
that time period.

A report published by Copperfield Research on Sept. 16 revealed
that Barrett's Workers' Compensation reserves "have systemically
been under reserved" causing overstatements in earnings, the
complaint said.

Barrett said on Oct. 28 it had begun new standards for reserving
Workers' Compensation claims in 2013, the complaint said.

The new standards caused a "disruption in the incurred and paid
trends in the claims data during 2014, making it difficult for the
company's actuary to provide management with the best estimate of
probable liability," the complaint says.

As a result, the company announced it was increasing the reserve
by an additional $80 million, a 65 percent increase.  The lawsuit
claims the announcement proved the company's prior statements
about its procedures in estimating Workers' Compensation were
false.

Stock for the company fell by 59 percent on Oct. 29 to $18.28 per
share after the company made the announcement.

The plaintiffs are represented by Dan Drachler --
ddrachler@zsz.com -- of Zwerling, Schachter & Zwerling in Seattle
and Robert Finkel -- rfinkel@wolfpopper.com -- and Fei-Lu Qian --
fqian@wolfpopper.com -- of Wolf Popper in New York.

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington case
number 3:14-cv-05903.


BLACK DIAMOND: Recalls Whippet Ski Poles Due to Risk of Injury
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Black Diamond Inc., of Salt Lake City, announced a voluntary
recall of about 3,000 Ski Poles.  Consumers should stop using this
product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or
attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The stainless steel pick in the handgrip can break and fail to
slow or stop users from sliding downhill on a snow or ice covered
slope, posing a risk of injury.

There were no incidents that were reported.

The recall includes Black Diamond Whippet and Whippet Carbon ski
poles manufactured May 2013 through Jan. 2014.

The Whippet is gray with two telescoping shafts and the Carbon
Whippet is black with three telescoping shafts.

The upper shaft of both models is made of aluminum and has a black
and orange rubber handgrip with a built-in, stainless steel,
serrated pick and a black nylon wrist strap with a an orange Black
Diamond logo.  "Black Diamond" and the Black Diamond logo are on
the upper shaft of both models.

The Whippet has an aluminum lower shaft with an orange and silver
locking mechanism.  "Whippet" and the logo are on the lower shaft.
The middle and lower shafts of the Carbon Whippet are made of
carbon fiber and have orange and silver locking mechanisms.
"Carbon Whippet" and the logo are on the lower shaft.

Both models have a 4-inch plastic powder basket on the lower shaft
near the tip and graduation marks on the shafts to show the
various lengths of the pole in centimeters.  The Whippet can be
extended from 99 centimeters (39 inches) to 142 centimeters (56
inches) long.  The Carbon Whippet can be extended from 67.9
centimeters (26.75 inches) to 142 centimeters (56 inches) long.

Recalled poles have picks with polished surfaces, a notch in the
top of the pick and a date code between 13121 and 14015 etched on
the pole.  The date code can be found by removing the locking
mechanism on the middle shaft of the Carbon Whippet and the lower
shaft of the Whippet.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/OZQ8St

The recalled products were manufactured in Taiwan and sold at
major outdoor retailers globally from Jan. 2014 to Nov. 2014 for
between about $100 for the Whippet and about $140 for the Carbon
Whippet.  The poles are sold individually.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled ski poles and
contact Black Diamond to receive a free replacement for the upper
shaft.


BRIDGEGATE FIN'L: Court Certifies OM1 Investors' Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Patrick Heinsen (Partner) and Locklyn Price (Associate) as counsel
for the Representative Plaintiffs, successfully applied to certify
Court of Queen's Bench Action No. 1001-16318 as a Class
Proceeding, pursuant to the Alberta Class Proceedings Act, SA
2000, c C-16.5.  The Honourable Justice A.D. Macleod of the
Alberta issued the Certification Order.

The Class Proceeding alleges that the Defendants made fraudulent
misrepresentations in an offering memorandum offered by Bridgegate
Financial Corporation issued, January 9, 2006 (the "OM1").  Once
invested the funds were shortly thereafter used in a manner
contrary to that disclosed in the Offering Memorandum, for the
Defendants' own benefit, and to the detriment of the OM1
investors.

For the purposes of the Certification, the Court defines the Class
as follows:

All persons, individuals, entities or corporations who remitted
funds to the Defendants, or any of them, to purchase investment
units through the OM1 (the "Class")


BUSHNELL HOLDINGS: Recalls Semi-Auto Bore Cleaner
-------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Bushnell Holdings, Inc. d/b/a Hoppe's, Overland Park, Kan.,
announced a voluntary recall of about 110,000 Hoppe's Semi-Auto
Gun Bore Cleaner.  Consumers should stop using this product unless
otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to
resell a recalled consumer product.

Bottles have a child-resistant cap that can become loose.
Chemicals in this product can cause skin irritation, internal
injury or death if ingested.

Hoppe's has received one report of a child opening a loose cap and
spilling the product on himself.  No injuries have been reported.

The recall involves Hoppe's Semi-Auto Gun Bore Cleaner.  This
product is packaged in a brown 5 ounce plastic bottle with a blue
and yellow label and black cap.  The recalled item number is SA904
and can be found above the UPC code on the label.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/Bh3sTt

The recalled products were manufactured in TriPack Inc., Vandalia,
Mich. and sold at Gander Mountain, Walmart and various retail
distribution outlets from Jan. 2010 through July 2014 for about
$12.

Consumers should immediately discontinue use of the product,
ensure that the cap is secured on the bottle, keep out of the
reach and sight of children and contact Hoppe's for a free
replacement product and disposal instructions.


CD MODERN: Faces "Zetina" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Octavio Zetina, individually and on behalf of other employees
similarly situated v. CD Modern Remodeling, Inc. and Cornelius
Covaci, individually, Case No. 1:14-cv-09348 (N.D. Ill., November
21, 2014), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week.

CD Modern Remodeling, Inc. is a remodeling contractor operating
within the State of Illinois.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      David Erik Stevens, Esq.
      CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC
      6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200
      Chicago, IL 60646
      Telephone: (312) 624-8958
      E-mail: Dave@StevensLawLLC.com


CENTAURI ENTERPRISES: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Calvert, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Centauri Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Complete Landcare,
Case No. 8:14-cv-02914 (M.D. Fla., November 21, 2014), is brought
against the Defendant for failure to pay appropriate overtime rate
for all hours worked in excess of 40 each week.

Centauri Enterprises, Inc. owns and operates a commercial and
residential landscaping company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Christina Jean Thomas, Esq.
      Kimberly De Arcangelis Woods, Esq.
      MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
      Ste 1600, 20 N. Orange Ave, PO Box 4979
      Orlando, FL 32801
      Telephone: (407) 420-1414
      Facsimile: (407) 245-3401
      E-mail: cthomas@forthepeople.com
              kwoods@forthepeople.com


CHICAGO, IL: Obtains Favorable Ruling in Red Light Camera Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Brockway, writing for DNAinfo, reports that a legal challenge
to Chicago's red light cameras was dismissed on Nov. 20 by the
Illinois Supreme Court -- a result that came about after two
judges recused themselves and the remaining four were split on the
matter.

The class action lawsuit argued that all Chicago red light tickets
issued between 2003 and 2006, before a state law was passed to
allow red light camera enforcement in eight counties -- Cook,
DuPage, Kane, Lake, Madison, Will, McHenry and St. Clair -- were
invalid.

The lawsuit also contended every red light camera ticket issued in
the city beyond 2006 was invalid because Chicago never drafted a
new ordinance after the state enacted its red light camera law in
2006.  The city has always argued it had the right to establish
the program under home rule authority.

Mike Brockway says it's an anti-climactic end for the case:

It was not explained why Justices Lloyd Krameir and Ann Burke
recused themselves.  Justice Burke is the wife of Ald. Ed Burke
(14th), who serves as Chairman of the City Council's Finance
Committee.

"In this case, two Justices of this Court have recused themselves
and the remaining members of the Court are divided so that it is
not possible to secure the constitutionally required concurrence
of four judges for a decision," the short decision states.
"Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The effect of this
dismissal is the same as an affirmance by an equally divided court
of the decision under review but is of no precedential value.

The original class action lawsuit, Keating v. City of Chicago, was
filed in Cook County Circuit Court in 2010 but was dismissed in
2012 and upheld on appeal last year.  Oral arguments were heard by
the court on May 22nd of this year.

The attorney representing the plaintiffs said he was disappointed.

"We respect the efforts the justices put into this case," said
attorney Patrick Keating, adding that he was heartened that the
justices who sided with his argument "felt so strongly about it
that they would not agree to become a majority opinion upholding
the case."

In a statement, the city's law department said, "We are pleased
that the Supreme Court decision leaves that important ruling --
and the red light camera program's proven public safety benefits
-- in place."

Chicago has the nation's largest red light camera enforcement
program.  At its peak it had 384 cameras at 191 intersections and
has generated over half a billion dollars in revenue for the city
over the last 11 years.

This case does not end challenges to the city's red light camera
program, though. Mr. Keating and his legal team filed a similar
class action (Cata v. City of Chicago) in 2012, which is pending
in Cook County Ciruit Court.


CLASSIC DAVILA: "Sanchez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Roberto Sanchez, and other similarly situated individuals v.
Classic Davila Floors, Inc. and Manrrique Davila, Case No. 1:14-
cv-24451 (S.D. Fla., November 21, 2014), seeks to recover unpaid
overtime wages, liquidated damages and attorneys' fees and costs
under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate a floor covering store located in
Miami Lakes, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


COLLECTION BUREAU: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rivka Eisikovits, on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Collection Bureau Hudson Valley, Inc., Case
No. 1:14-cv-06893 (E.D.N.Y., November 24, 2014) accuses violations
of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Maxim Maximov, Esq.
          MAXIM MAXIMOV, LLP
          1701 Avenue P
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (718) 395-3459
          Facsimile: (718) 408-9570
          E-mail: m@maximovlaw.com


COSCENTRIX LLC: Expands Recall of DD Brand Candles Over Fire Risk
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
CoScentrix, announced a voluntary recall of about 256,000 (about
126,000 candles sold in tins were previously recalled in April
2014) DD Brand Candles.  Consumers should stop using this product
unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt
to resell a recalled consumer product.

The candles' high flame can ignite the surface of the wax, posing
a fire hazard.

CoScentrix has received 29 reports of the candle's surface
igniting and nine reports of property damage.  One injury has been
reported.

The recall involves DD branded candles sold in 5- and 12- ounce
Mason jars, 10- and 20-ounce decorative jars, 13-ounce coffee tins
and 13-ounce holiday-themed jars.  The single-wick candles were
sold in a variety of fragrances and colors.  The 5-ounce Mason
jars are 2.25 inches wide by 3.75 inches high.  The 12-ounce Mason
jars are 3 inches wide by 5 inches high with plain metal lids.
The DD logo and the word Handcrafted are in raised letters on the
front of the jars.  The candle fragrance and size are printed on a
hang tag attached to the mouth of the jars.

The 10-ounce decorative jars are 4 inches wide by 3 inches high.
The 20-ounce decorative jars are 5 inches wide by 4 inches high
and hold a candle.  The jars have metal lids with the DD logo in
raised letters on the top.  The candle fragrance and size are
printed on a rectangular label on the front of the jar.

The 13-ounce coffee tins are 3.5 inches wide by 4 inches high and
have a plain metal lid.  The candle size and fragrance are printed
on a label that wraps around the outside of the tin.

The 13-ounce Holiday candle jars are 3.75 inches wide by 4 inches
high and have metal lids with the DD logo in raised letters on the
top.  The DD logo inside a floral wreath, the fragrance and size
are printed directly onto the front of the jar in silver.

The SKU number is on a label on the underside of each container.
Candles with these scents and SKU numbers are being recalled:

   Scent                                         SKU#
   -----                                         -----
5-ounce Mason jar Apple Brown Betty             746776
Blackberry Jam                                  706622
Black Peppercorn                                713982
Candied Pecans                                  760520
Candy Apple                                     747204
Caramel Popcorn                                 755595
Cotton Candy                                    748335
Eucalyptus Sage                                 713784
Neapolitan Ice Cream                            706093
Red Velvet Cake                                 704841
Root Beer Float                                 752972
12-ounce Mason jar Apple Brown Betty            956953
Blueberry Crumble                               949172
Candied Pecans                                  957134
Candy Apple                                     956979
Candy Corn                                      5441340*
Caramel Popcorn                                 957001
Chocolate Chip Cookie                           956326
Cotton Candy                                    956987
Jack O' Lantern                                 5441332*
Key Lime Pie                                    956748
Orange Dreamsicle                               909234
Pumpkin Pie                                     956276
Root Beer Float                                 956995
Rosemary Bay                                    956813
Shortbread Biscuit                              910950
Spice Cake                                      5441423*
10-ounce decorative jar Autumn Harvest          5441407*
Chocolate Caramel                               5441415*
Cinnamon Embers                                 957985
Eucalyptus Verbena                              957217
Grapefruit Cinnamon                             957688
Italian Linen                                   957381
Lavender and Sage                               957415
Lemonseed and Parsley                           957753
Mulberry Apple                                  958058
Pink Pepper                                     957656
Pumpkin Souffle                                 5441399*
Spiced Amber                                    957670
Spiced Cider                                    5441381*
20-ounce decorative jar Cinnamon Embers         890947
Eucalyptus Verbena                              863894
Grapefruit Cinnamon                             881342
Italian Linen                                   869784
Lavender and Sage                               875369
Lemonseed and Parsley                           889535
Mulberry Apple                                  907097
Pink Pepper                                     881797
Spiced Amber                                    879007
13-ounce coffee tin Chai Tea                    571190
Hazelnut Latte                                  574350
Kona Coffee                                     575019
Sweet Tea                                       583096
Warm Milk                                       589416
13-ounce Holiday candle Spiced Pomander         505362

*Candles with seven-digit SKUs are seasonal.

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

The recalled products were manufactured in United States and sold
at Hobby Lobby stores nationwide and online at HobbyLobby.com from
June 2014 through Oct. 2014 for between $6 and $20.

Consumers should immediately stop using the candles and return
them to the nearest Hobby Lobby.  Consumers with a receipt will
receive a full refund.  Consumers without a receipt will be issued
a store credit.  Online purchasers should contact CoScentrix for
instructions on returning the product.


COSTCO WHOLESALE: Judge Tosses Two Claims in Food Mislabeling Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Laura Castro, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that a
California federal judge has dismissed two claims in a proposed
class action alleging that Costco Wholesale Corp. misled consumers
by mislabeling products in its Kirkland Signature food line.

Judge Beth Labson Freeman of the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California granted Costco's partial motion to
dismiss two causes of action -- breach of the implied warranty of
merchantability and negligent misrepresentation -- that were
asserted for the first time in plaintiff Lisa Liddle's third
amended complaint.

However, the judge deferred ruling on Costco's motion for partial
summary judgment as to other claims relating to six of the eight
products at issue, saying the motion was premature because
additional discovery on issues related to Costco's safe harbor
argument was needed.

Ms. Liddle has alleged that she purchased eight of defendant's
Kirkland Signature food products and that their labels contain
various misrepresentations about sugar content and preservatives
that are misleading and deceptive to consumers.

Those products include Whole Dried Blueberries, Cashew Clusters
with Almonds and Pumpkin Seeds, Organic Chocolate Reduced Fat
Milk, Canola Oil Cooking Spray, Newman's Own 100% Grape Juice,
Real Sliced Fruit -- Fuji Apple, Strawberry Banana, and Fuji Apple
with Cinnamon, Boathouse Farms Organic 100% Carrot Juice, and
Ancient Grains Granola with Almonds.

Judge Freeman ruled that Ms. Liddle's allegation in her complaint
that the products are "illegal and unsellable" is not enough to
plead a violation of the implied warranty of merchantability.
Ms. Liddle would have to allege that the products in question
lacked a basic degree of fitness for ordinary use.

"Mislabeling of a product is not the sort of "fundamental defect"
that the implied warranty of merchantability is designed to
protect against -- instead, the warranty hopes to protect
consumers who purchase products that are not fit to be used in the
way those products are normally used -- they are contaminated or
lack any minimum level of quality such that they would be unsafe
for consumption," the judge said.

Judge Freeman also said the claim of negligent misrepresentation
was dismissed because the plaintiff "has not cited a single
affirmative misrepresentation, and instead has attempted to plead
a negligent misrepresentation claim based on omissions."
The judge agreed to Costco's request to stay Ms. Liddle's
"evaporated cane juice" (ECJ) claim related to the use of the term
on the label of a chocolate milk product until the FDA issues
final guidance about ECJ labeling. However, Freeman added, "the
Court simply finds it implausible that a reasonable consumer could
purchase a chocolate milk product and believe that it only
contained naturally occurring sugars such as milk (lactose)."


CREDIT BUREAU: Faces Suit Over Fair Debt Collection Act Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rachel Klein, on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Credit Bureau of Lancaster County, Inc.,
Case No. 1:14-cv-06895 (E.D.N.Y., November 24, 2014) seeks relief
under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Maxim Maximov, Esq.
          MAXIM MAXIMOV, LLP
          1701 Avenue P
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (718) 395-3459
          Facsimile: (718) 408-9570
          E-mail: m@maximovlaw.com


CRUNCH SAN DIEGO: Plaintiffs Want Judge to Revive Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
David Siegel and Caroline Simson, writing for Law360, report that
plaintiffs asked a California federal judge on Nov. 19 to
reconsider her decision granting gym chain Crunch San Diego LLC a
pretrial win in a proposed class action accusing it of violating
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, arguing the decision
conflicts with rulings from the Federal Communications Commission.

The motion for reconsideration filed on behalf of plaintiff
Jeffrey Marks says U.S. District Judge Cynthia Bashant made a
reversible error in October by granting a motion for summary
judgment filed by Crunch in a suit accusing it of spamming its
members' cellphones with promotional text messages.  According to
the plaintiffs, the court relied on a different definition of an
automated telephone dialing system than that used by the FCC, and
under the Hobbs Act only circuit courts can invalidate FCC
rulings.

According to the plaintiffs, the "textmunication" platform used by
Crunch meets the definition of an ATDS under FCC rulings from 2003
and 2008, even though those rulings dealt specifically with
predictive telephone dialing systems.  The plaintiffs argue an
automated text message system is equivalent to an ATDS, because it
has the capacity to store cellular telephone numbers in a database
and send text messages to those numbers automatically and without
human intervention.

"The FCC's expanded definition has not been invalidated by the
Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals pursuant to The Hobbs Act," the
plaintiffs' motion states.  "Thus, failure to apply the FCC's
rulings to find that the Textmunication platform is an ATDS was
reversible legal error."

Filed in February, Mr. Marks' proposed class action accused Crunch
of violating the TCPA by sending him three unsolicited promotional
text messages advertising specials on membership prices or
personal training rates from November 2012 until October 2013.  He
sought to represent a nationwide class of consumers who had
received the unwanted messages from Crunch.

In dismissing the suit with prejudice, Judge Bashant determined
that the platform used by Crunch to send the messages to its
members couldn't be considered an autodialer because it couldn't
store or produce telephone numbers.  She noted that previous
courts have expressed concern that relying on the system's
potential to store numbers to bring liability under the TCPA could
encompass devices like smartphones, which would lead to "absurd"
results.

Falling in line with other court findings in recent months, Judge
Bashant rejected a broader interpretation of the term "automated
telephone dialing system" adopted by the FCC, saying the agency
doesn't have the statutory authority to change the TCPA's
definition.  The FCC has interpreted the term to include equipment
that contains the capacity to generate numbers, according to Judge
Bashant's order.

The broader issue of what constitutes an autodialer has been
addressed by other courts in recent months, including a recent
case in a Florida federal court where a judge concluded that an
autodialer must have the present capacity to generate random or
sequential telephone numbers.

In October 2013, a California state judge made a similar ruling
when he determined that Credit Management LP couldn't be exposed
to liability under the TCPA because the calling technology the
company allegedly used to place unwanted calls to plaintiff
Cynthia Stockwell didn't have a number generator.

Ian Ballon -- Ballon@gtlaw.com -- of Greenberg Traurig LLP, who
represents Crunch, told Law360 he and his client feel the motion
for reconsideration is not well-founded.

"It rehashes arguments previously made to, and rejected by, the
district court, and asks the court to ignore the plain text of the
statute and controlling Ninth Circuit precedent," Mr. Ballon said.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs declined to comment.

Crunch San Diego LLC is represented by Ian Ballon, Lori Chang,
Nina Boyajian -- Bovajian@gtlaw.com -- and Justin Barton --
Barton@gtlaw.com -- of Greenberg Traurig LLP.

Jordan Marks is represented by Jason A. Ibey and Abbas Kazerounian
of Kazerounian Law Group APC and Todd M. Friedman of Law Offices
of Todd M. Friedman PC.

The case is Marks v. Crunch San Diego, LLC, case number 3:14-cv-
00348, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
California.


DCS FINANCIAL: Sued in W.D. Washington Over Violation of FDCPA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Emelia Walker, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated
v. DCS Financial, Inc., Case No. 3:14-cv-05927 (W.D. Wash.,
November 21, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for violation
of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

DCS Financial, Inc. is in the business of collecting consumer
debt.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew J. Cunanan, Esq.
      DC LAW GROUP NW LLC
      101 Warren Ave N
      Seattle, WA 98109
      Telephone: (206) 494-0400
      Facsimile: (855) 494-0400
      E-mail: matthew@dclglawyers.com

         - and -

      Aaron D. Radbil, Esq.
      GREENWALD DAVIDSON PLLC
      5550 Glades Road, Suite 500
      Boca Raton, FL 33431
      Telephone: (561) 826-5477
      Facsimile: (561) 961.5684
      E-mail: aradbil@mgjdlaw.com


DURACELL: Faces Class Action Over Leaky Duralock Batteries
----------------------------------------------------------
Lalita Clozel, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that
a class action filed on Nov. 24 alleges that Duracell Duralock
batteries touted by parent company Gillette Co. to last 10 years
are leaky.

Lauren Carlson and Jamal Yusuf filed the case seeking class-action
status in the U.S. District Court of Massachusetts.  Putative
class members are purchasers who bought Duracell Coppertop AA and
AAA batteries with the "Duralock" guarantee in Massachusetts from
June 1, 2012 to the date of notice.

Although Duracell acknowledged the possibility of leakage on the
back of its battery packages, the complaint states, it only
referred to exceptional circumstances, including cases where the
battery is placed in fire, inserted backwards or disassembled.
"Nowhere on the packaging of the Duracell Batteries is the
disclosure that the batteries may leak when used in a normal and
expected manner," the plaintiffs claim.

Plaintiffs allege that Duracell "did knowingly conceal pertinent
facts from the ultimate consumer to enhance sales," by not
acknowledging the possibility of leakage over time, which they
call a "defect."

Other complaints have been filed against Gillette over these
leaks, according to the complaint.

Plaintiffs' attorneys are with the firms Mirabella Law, LLC; the
Barrett Law Group; Barrett J. Clisby; Lovelace and Associates;
Charles Barrett; the Thrash Law Firm; Pratt & Associates; and
Cuneo Gilbert & Laduca.


FLUVANNA, VA: Judge Allows Female Inmates' Class Suit to Proceed
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsplex.com reports that a lawsuit filed on behalf of four
inmates alleging cruel and unusual punishment at the Fluvanna
Correctional Center for Women has been certified as a class-action
lawsuit.   Judge Norman K. Moon ruled on Nov. 20 that the lawsuit
filed by the Legal Aid Justice Center against the Department of
Corrections and medical staff at FCCW applies to all women
incarcerated at the facility in Troy.

The lawsuit was originally filed in July of 2012 on behalf of four
inmates, accusing the women's prison of providing inadequate
health care.  The allegations of mistreatment include denying
inmates access to prescribed medications, under staffing at the
prison's infirmary, and delays in diagnosing and treating
prisoners with life-threatening medical issues.  As a class-action
lawsuit, the outcome of the trial will impact all 1,200 inmates at
FCCW, not just the four original defendants in the lawsuit.

"We are hoping that we will get an order from the federal court
saying that the Virginia Department of Corrections and the
Fluvanna prison have to fix the health care system there and have
to put in procedures and hopefully a monitor in place to ensure
that corrections are made to the problems we have seen and the
women are getting adequate health care," said Brenda Castaneda, an
attorney with the Legal Aid Justice Center.

A trial date was set for December 1 in U.S. District Court in
Charlottesville.


FORM WORKS: Judge Revives Construction Workers' Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------
Lalita Clozel, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that
the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh
Circuit might not be the biggest Miami Marlins fan -- or one at
all.

In a decision on Nov. 14, Ed Carnes at once revived a class action
on behalf of construction workers for the baseball team's new
stadium -- while, at the same time, noting the Marlins'
"unremarkable record." (The team, for the record, lost 85 games
this season.)

In Arle Calderon et al. v. Form Works/Baker JV LLC, construction
workers appealed the dismissal of their putative class action,
brought in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of
Florida court in April 2013.  The suit, filed on behalf of all
former employees of the construction contractor Form Works who
participated in building the stadium, was defeated on subject
matter jurisdiction grounds.

In their original complaint, the plaintiffs had referred to claims
related to unpaid and underpaid overtime compensation, federal
causes of action according to the Fair Standards Labor Act.  But
they did not cite them again in a subsequent statement of claims,
focusing instead on allegations that the workers were underpaid
because they were misclassified under a Miami-Dade county
ordinance that sets a variable minimum wage for different
categories of construction work.

As a result, Form Works moved to dismiss the complaint, arguing
the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the
second set of claims.

The district court initially ruled it did have subject matter
jurisdiction, because the misclassification claims were tied to
overpay claims under the FSLA.  But when Form Works threatened an
interlocutory appeal, the court reversed its decision, ruling it
did not have jurisdiction over the claims.

In his ruling, Mr. Carnes argued that the plaintiffs had not lost
subject matter jurisdiction by failing to refer to allegations of
FLSA violations in the statement of claims, a local practice that
is not required under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and as
such, he wrote, "does not have the status of a pleading and . . .
is not an amendment."


GATEWAY: Settles LCD Monitor Class Action; Feb. 27 Hearing Set
--------------------------------------------------------------
Kyla Asbury, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that Gateway has
agreed to a settlement in a class action lawsuit against it
claiming one type of its LCD monitors provided sub-par
performance.

Those who purchased a Gateway 30-inch XHD 3000 LCD monitor and
experienced a problem with the monitor and/or the monitor did not
perform as advertised could receive $195 in the settlement.

Under the proposed settlement, each class member who submits a
valid claim will receive $195 in cash for each monitor purchased,
according to a settlement document filed Nov. 7 in the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California.

Class counsel will apply to the court for an award of attorneys
fees and will receive litigation expenses in an amount not to
exceed $620,000, according to the settlement document.

Mark Lima, the named plaintiff in the suit, will receive an
incentive award in an amount not to exceed $8,000.

In April 2008, Mr. Lima purchased the monitor for $1,638.75.  The
monitor delivered sub-par performance and after six or seven
months, its display began producing abnormal visual artifacts and
would not perform as represented, he claimed.

On Nov. 23, 2009, Mr. Lima filed his class action lawsuit on
behalf of himself and others who purchased the monitor and
experienced problems with it.

Those who wish to submit claims have until May 21 to submit them
either by mail or online.

A fairness hearing is scheduled for Feb. 27.

Mr. Lima and the class members are represented by Rosemary M.
Rivas -- rrivas@finkelsteinthompson.com -- and Tracy H. Tien --
ttien@finkelsteinthompson.com -- of Finkelstein Thompson LLP in
San Francisco; Mila F. Bartos -- mbartos@finkelsteinthompson.com
-- of Finkelstein Thompson in Washington, D.C.; and Gordon M.
Fauth Jr. -- gmf@classlitigation.com -- and Alexis A. Phocas --
aap@classlitigation.com -- of Litigation Law Group in Alameda,
Calif.

Gateway is represented by Rhianna S. Hughes -- rsh@paynefears.com
-- of Payne & Fears LLP in Irvine, Calif.; and Eric M. Kennedy and
Paul F. Rafferty -- pfrafferty@jonesday.com -- of Jones Day in
Irvine, Calif.

The case is assigned to District Judge Dolly M. Gee.

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California case
number: 8:09-cv-01366


GMG INDUSTRIES: "Paula" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jansel Paula, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective Plaintiffs and
the Class v. GMG Industries Inc. d/b/a Babylon, Akcafe Of New York
LLC d/b/a Babylon, Ali Riza Dogan and Gregory Roman, Case No.
1:14-cv-09295 (S.D.N.Y., November 21, 2014) seeks to recover
unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages and attorneys' fees and
costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate two lounge and bar under the common
trade name Babylon in New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


GRACO CHILDREN'S: Recalls 11 Models of Strollers
------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Graco Children's Products, of Atlanta, Ga., announced a voluntary
recall of about 4.7 million in United States, about 202,000 in
Canada, and about 10,300 in Mexico Aspen, Breeze, Capri, Cirrus,
Glider, Kite, LiteRider, Sierra, Solara, Sterling and TravelMate
Model Strollers and Travel Systems.  Consumers should stop using
this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell
or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The folding hinge on the sides of the stroller can pinch a child's
finger, posing a laceration or amputation hazard.

Graco has received 11 reports of finger injuries including six
reports of fingertip amputation, four reports of partial-fingertip
amputation and one finger laceration.

The recall includes eleven Graco and Century-branded strollers
with model names Aspen, Breeze, Capri, Cirrus, Glider, Kite,
LiteRider, Sierra, Solara, Sterling and TravelMate.  All models
are a single-occupant stroller with an external sliding fold-lock
hinge on each side and a one-hand fold release mechanism on the
handle.  Strollers with a manufacture date from Aug. 1, 2000 to
Sept. 25, 2014 are included in the recall.  Model numbers and the
date of manufacture are printed on the white label located at the
bottom of the stroller leg just above the rear wheel.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/FKKDR5

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at
Target, Toys R Us, Walmart and other retail stores nationwide and
online at Amazon.com, Walmart.com and other online retailers from
Aug. 2000 through Nov. 2014 for about $40-70 for the stroller and
about $140-$170 for the Travel System.

Contact Graco immediately for a free repair kit.  Repair kits will
be available from the firm at the beginning of Dec. 2014.  While
waiting for a repair kit, caregivers should exercise extreme care
when unfolding the stroller to be certain that the hinges are
firmly locked before placing a child in the stroller.  Caregivers
are advised to immediately remove the child from a stroller
that begins to fold to keep their fingers from the side hinge
area.


HANGER INC: Bernstein Litowitz Files Securities Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP on Nov. 19 disclosed
that it has filed the first and only securities class action
lawsuit against Hanger, Inc. and certain of its executive officers
on behalf of the City of Pontiac General Employees' Retirement
System.  The action, which was filed in the Western District of
Texas, asserts claims under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 on
behalf of investors in Hanger securities during the period of
August 1, 2013 through August 7, 2014, inclusive.  The case has
now been docketed as # 14-cv-01026 and has been assigned to U.S.
District Judge Sam Sparks.

The Complaint alleges that during the Class Period defendants
misrepresented and/or concealed the effect that an increase in
Medicare audits had on Hanger's business, including on its
reserves for bad debt and accounts receivable.  On August 7, 2014,
the Company announced a shocking 23% decline in its earnings per
share due to the pressure it experienced from Medicare audits.  On
this news, the price of Hanger stock declined 25% from $29.87 per
share to $22.48 per share.

On November 16, Hanger canceled its previously scheduled earnings
conference call and announced that it was again postponing the
release of its third quarter 2014 financial results to allow
additional time for the completion and review of its third quarter
financial statements.

If you wish to serve as Lead Plaintiff for the Class, you must
file a motion with the Court no later than 60 days from the date
the complaint was filed on November 12, 2014.  Accordingly, the
deadline for filing a motion for appointment as Lead Plaintiff is
January 12, 2015.  Any member of the proposed Class may move the
Court to serve as Lead Plaintiff through counsel of their choice,
or may choose to do nothing and remain a member of the proposed
Class.

If you wish to discuss this Action or have any questions
concerning this notice or your rights or interests, please contact
Avi Josefson of BLB&G at 212-554-1493, or via e-mail at
avi@blbglaw.com

Since its founding in 1983, BLB&G -- http://www.blbglaw.com--
specializes in securities fraud, corporate governance,
shareholders' rights, employment discrimination, and civil rights
litigation, among other practice areas, BLB&G prosecutes class and
private actions on behalf of institutional and individual clients
worldwide.


HBOS: 8,000 Investors Join Class Action Over 2008 Takeover
----------------------------------------------------------
James Titcomb, writing for The Telegraph, reports that around
8,000 investors have put their name to a lawsuit claiming Lloyds
misled shareholders ahead of the bank's acquisition of HBOS six
years ago.

The investors, which include around 140 institutions such as
pension funds, asset managers and charities, claim they lost
around GBP300 million when approving the takeover in 2008.

A claim against the state-backed bank is understood to have been
filed on Nov. 18 after thousands of shareholders added their names
to the lawsuit in the last two weeks ahead of a deadline.  The
claim had to be made ahead of a Nov. 19 deadline -- the six-year
anniversary of shareholders approving the deal.

Shareholders claim that Lloyds breached its fiduciary duty by
neglecting to reveal the true state of HBOS's dire finances ahead
of the vote.  The bank will file a defense next month.

The claimants, represented by the law firm Harcus Sinclair, are
believed to have held around 300m shares and are seeking
compensation of roughly GBP1 per share.  The identity of the
institutions is unknown, but can be expected to be revealed in the
coming days as the claim document becomes public.

However, it is believed to include a mix of investors in the UK,
US and elsewhere.  A spokesman for the group did not comment on
the number or identity of the investors.

The final number of investors involved in the lawsuit could
change.  It is believed that a parallel claim naming more
shareholders could arrive up until the six-year anniversary of the
takeover being completed in January.

It was reported that 5,000 investors had joined in the lawsuit,
meaning there has been a last-minute rush to join the case.  It is
understood that institutions are still being added to the claim,
and that the total number involved could rise yet higher.

Sir Victor Blank and Eric Daniels, the bank's chairman and chief
executive at the time, are named in the lawsuit, as are other
executives.  The shareholders say the bank concealed the fact that
HBOS was being propped up by GBP25.4 billion of emergency
assistance from the Bank of England, US$18 billion (GBP11.5
billion) from the Federal Reserve and a GBP10 billion loan from
Lloyds.

It says the total losses suffered by shareholders were
approximately GBP6 billion.

A Lloyds spokesman said: "The group's position remains that we do
not consider there to be any legal basis to these claims and we
will robustly contest this legal action."


HEARTY BOYS: Faces "Trinidad" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Uriel Trinidad and Juan Trinidad, individually and on behalf of
other employees similarly situated v. The Hearty Boys Caterers,
Inc. and Daniel J. Smith, Case No. 1:14-cv-09346 (N.D. Ill.,
November 21, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure
to pay overtime wages for hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a
week.

The Defendants own and operate a catering company in Chicago.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      David Erik Stevens, Esq.
      CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC
      6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200
      Chicago, IL 60646
      Telephone: (312) 624-8958
      E-mail: Dave@StevensLawLLC.com


HELP WORKS: "Lawson" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Deborah L. Lawson, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Help Works, Inc., a Domestic Not for Profit
Corporation, Case No. 4:14-cv-00702 (N.D. Okla., November 21,
2014), seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, prejudgment
interest, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs.

Help Works, Inc. is an Oklahoma company that provides employment
to individuals with disabilities.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Terry Arthur Hall, Esq.
      HALL NALLEY & HOLLOWAY PLLC
      1101 N HARRISON AVE STE D
      SHAWNEE, OK 74801
      Telephone: (405) 948-6982
      Facsimile: (405) 260-9330
      E-mail: thall@okhnhlaw.com


HONDA NORTH AMERICA: Court Okays Air Bag Class Action Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Daniel Siegal and Kat Greene and Sindhu Sundar, writing for
Law360, report that Honda North America Inc. on Nov. 19 won final
approval in California federal court for its settlement of a class
action alleging some Honda Accord side air bags deploy
inadvertently, with the automaker agreeing to make repairs worth
more than $6 million on thousands of affected vehicles.

Named plaintiffs Heather Gutierrez and Connie Kaupa had alleged
that Honda Accord coupes and sedans from model years 2003, 2004
and 2008 had a mechanical defect that caused their side air bags
to deploy during normal driving.

At a fairness hearing in Pasadena, Ohio U.S. District Judge Jack
Zouhary, sitting by designation in California's Central District,
granted final approval to the settlement, under which Honda agrees
to provide free repairs for roughly 1,800 class members whose
cars' air bags deployed but who never sought repairs.

The repairs cost owners $3,000 to $5,000, according to the
plaintiffs' motion for settlement approval, putting the value to
consumers at $6 million at a minimum, as Honda has also agreed to
provide repairs for Accord owners whose vehicles' airbags
inadvertently deploy in the next two years.  A small number of
class members will be reimbursed for repairs they paid for out of
pocket, as well.

Ms. Gutierrez and Ms. Kaupa filed suit in California federal court
in August 2009, alleging the Accord models contained a common,
inherent defect causing side air bags to deploy during normal
driving.  The suit accused Honda of refusing to take corrective
action despite being aware of the defect, including failing to
notify owners and telling customers there was nothing wrong with
the side air bag system.

The suit is unrelated to litigation being brought against Honda
and other carmakers over the Takata Inc. air bag defect, counsel
for the parties told Judge Zouhary on Nov. 19.

On Nov. 19, Mike Arias -- marias@aogllp.com -- of Arias Ozzello &
Gignac LLP, representing the class, told Judge Zouhary that the
settlement merited approval because despite plaintiffs' confidence
in their case, it would have presented significant technical
hurdles to prove classwide that the air bags had deployed
inadvertently.

"Where I am proud of the settlement is, in spite of those issues,
we got a settlement that takes care of class members' damages," he
said.

Class counsel requested $924,000 in attorneys' fees, a negative
multiplier of their lodestar of $1.3 million, Mr. Arias said, and
$250,000 for costs, a number that could have doubled or tripled if
the "expert-heavy" litigation had proceeded to trial.

Judge Zouhary said that the fees were reasonable and approved the
award.

The plaintiffs are represented by Mike Arias and Alfredo Torrijos
of Arias Ozzello & Gignac LLP Robert L. Esensten --
jesensten@esenstenlaw.com -- and Jordan S. Esensten of Esensten
Law and Brian D. Chase of Bisnar Chase.

Honda is represented by Derek S. Whitefield --
dwhitefield@dykema.com -- and Terri S. Reiskin
-- treiskin@dykema.com -- of Dykema Gossett PLLC and Mark S.
Mester and Kathleen P. Lally -- kathleen.lally@lw.com -- of Latham
& Watkins LLP.

The case is Heather Gutierrez et al. v. American Honda Motor Co.
Inc., case number 5:09-cv-01517, in the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California.


IMPAX LABORATORIES: Engineers Union Files Shareholder Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Newsline reports that a local chapter of an engineers union
has filed a verified shareholder derivative complaint for breach
of fiduciary duty against Impax Laboratories Inc., its board of
directors and current and former members of its executive team.

The Connecticut-based International Union of Operating Engineers
Local 478 represents heavy equipment operators, mechanics and
support personnel.  It has been an Impax shareholder since
September 2012 for its pension plan and annuity fund.

Its lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California, claiming officials of the pharmaceutical
drug manufacturer made false and misleading statements regarding
quality control matters at the company's production facilities in
Hayward, Calif., and Taiwan.

Named in the lawsuit are Impax Board of Directors members Larry
Hsu, Leslie Benet, Robert Burr, Allen Chao, Nigel Fleming, Michael
Markbreiter, Mary Pendergast and Peter Terreri; Impax President
and CEO G. Frederick Wilkinson; former CFO Arthur Koch; current
CFO Bryan Reasons; and Division President Michael Nestor.

Impax was issued a "Form 483" from the Food and Drug
Administration each year since 2009 indicating serious
manufacturing issues at its Hayward facility and a warning letter
in 2011 that documented significant, recurring problems, the
complaint says.

The lawsuit claims Impax senior management knew of the problems
and the consequences of continued violations, but "allowed those
violations to fester" while assuring shareholders that the company
was addressing the issues.

Because of the recurring violations, Impax announced in January
2013 that the FDA did not approve a new drug application for the
manufacturing of Rytary, an extended release capsule for the
treatment of Parkinson's disease.  As a result, commercial partner
GlaxoSmithKline withdrew from an agreement with Impax to develop
and commercialize Rytary globally, the complaint says.

Impax settled a federal securities class action case in 2013, the
complaint says.

Still, the IUOC Local 478 court filings claim Impax did not take
adequate corrective actions.  As a result, in July, the FDA issued
a Form 483 for violations at the company's manufacturing facility
in Taiwan, where it planned to manufacture Rytary, the complaint
says.

"Impax has suffered and continues to suffer substantial harm
directly flowing from defendants' breaches of fiduciary duty,
which this action seeks to redress," the lawsuit said.

The union is represented by attorneys in Bernstein Litowitz Berger
& Grossman's San Diego office, with Brett Middleton signing the
complaint.  Frank R. Schirripa -- fschirripa@hrsclaw.com -- of
Hach Rose Schirripa & Cheverie in New York is also representing
the union.

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California case
number 3:14-cv-04980.


INGRAM & ASSOCIATES: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Yael Sokol, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
v. Ingram & Associates, LLC and John Does 1-25, Case No. 2:14-cv-
07322-CCC-JBC (D.N.J., November 24, 2014) alleges violations of
the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF ALAN J. SASSON PC
          1669 East 12th Street
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (718) 339-0856
          E-mail: yzelman@sassonlaw.com


INVESTORSHUB.COM: Global Holdings to File Class Action
------------------------------------------------------
Global Holdings, Inc. recently reported on its legal suit against
InvestorsHub.com, Inc. (IHUB) for allegedly interfering with
contractual relations and existing and prospective economic rights
of the GBHD shareholders.  It has come to the attention of GBHD's
management that hundreds of other public companies and their
shareholder have also fallen victims under these same issues.

Mr. Matthew Brown, the operator for IHUB, is jailed for using the
site for market manipulation schemes. Unfortunately, the lack of
internal governances and blatant disrespects of its own rules, it
appears as if Mr. Brown has left a criminal legacy within current
operations at IHUB.

Merle Ferguson, CEO states, "Lies, 1/2 truths, libelous attacks,
fear mongering post, deceitful intents to do harm, ignore or
encouraging harmful postings, removals of factual and verifiable
postings, and other serious issues, as such, we believe that such
activities at IHUB warrants a class-action suit.  These
aforementioned harmful tactics which we believe have caused
current and economic loss for GBHD, its shareholders, other public
companies and other public companies' shareholders values, needs
to be stopped and stopped, NOW."

Investorhub's parent Company, ADVFN.com believes because they are
based in London, England, that they are exempted from United
States laws which protect citizens and companies form civil and
criminal disobediences. Further, Merle Ferguson, CEO states, "GBHD
under United States and Great Britain treaty rights will also
purse an international suit against the parent operator; an
international suit beyond our current suit in the US Federal Court
in California."

GBHD welcomes other interested public companies and their
shareholders to join this class-action suit against such a
despicable, dishonestly ran organization, Investorhub.com, Inc.-
Tallahassee, FL., and its parent company, ADVFN.COM-London,
England.

To inquire, please contact, Mr. Richard Kaiser, Global Holdings,
Inc., 757-306-6091, info@gbhd.net  www.gbhd.net


JAMBA JUICE: Faces Class Action in California Over Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Erica Teichert, writing for Law360, reports that smoothie chain
Jamba Juice Co. was hit with a putative class action in California
state court on Nov. 19 when two shift leaders alleged the company
had shorted them on their wages and made them work through their
meal and rest breaks.

Rosa Arteaga and Jessica Glover alleged Jamba Juice routinely
required them to punch out during meal breaks but continue working
off the clock and use their personal vehicles to make bank
deposits for the stores.  They're looking to represent a class of
shift leaders who experienced similar conditions at Jamba Juice's
California stores over the last four years.

According to the complaint, Ms. Arteaga and Ms. Glover weren't
paid for their working meal breaks, and they did not receive 10-
minute rest breaks every four hours as required under the
California labor code.

"Those meal periods were not waived by mutual consent of the
defendants and plaintiffs," the complaint said.  "Defendants
required plaintiffs to 'clock out' for meal periods and keep
working 'off the clock.' There is no applicable exemption that
would permit defendants to fail or to refuse to provide plaintiffs
with the required meal periods."

Ms. Arteaga worked for Jamba Juice from February 2009 through
February 2014, while Ms. Glover started in February 2011 and
continues to work for the chain, the complaint said.

In addition to the meal and rest break claims, the Arteaga and
Glover hit the company with claims for unfair business practices,
failure to pay minimum wage, failure to maintain adequate records
and other employment-related claims stemming from the company's
alleged worker policies.  Ms. Arteaga alleged that Jamba Juice had
failed to pay all of her earned wages when she left the company,
and other shift leaders received similar treatment due to the meal
and rest break policies.

"Plaintiffs are informed and believe and on such basis allege that
defendants have engaged in such practices over a number of years
and have failed to indicate, in any way, that they plan to cease
such activities any time in the future," the complaint said.

Although California's hourly minimum wage was hiked from $8 to $9
per hour during the class period, the plaintiffs claimed Jamba
Juice had paid its hourly shift leaders a flat rate without
considering their overtime or off-the-clock hours, violating the
state labor code.

Ms. Arteaga and Ms. Glover requested the company to compensate
them for their unpaid wages, interest and attorneys' fees.  They
also asked the court to issue injunctive relief preventing the
company from continuing to force employees to work through their
breaks or use personal vehicles for business purposes without
reimbursement.

"The harm to plaintiffs outweighs any utility of defendants'
policies and practices, as alleged herein, and consequently
constitute unfair business acts or practices," the complaint said.

The plaintiffs are represented by Stephen Glick and Anthony
Jenkins of the Law Offices of Stephen Glick.

The case is Rosa Arteaga et al. v. Jamba Juice Co. et al., case
number BC564304, in the Superior Court of California, County of
Los Angeles.


KIRKLAND ASSET: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Monica Kenney, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Kirkland Asset Management LLC, Case No. 2:14-cv-06749-
JHS (E.D. Pa., November 24, 2014) is brought for alleged
violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Richard N. Lipow, Esq.
          LIPOW LAW OFFICE
          629 Swedesford Road
          Swedesford Corp Ctr.
          Malvern, PA 19355
          Telephone: (610) 251-2500
          E-mail: richard@lipowlaw.com


LEATHERMAN TOOL: Recalls Kids' Tool Kit Due to Laceration Hazard
----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., of Portland, Ore., announced a
voluntary recall of about 8,000 in the U.S. and 400 in Canada
Leatherman Leap multi-tool.  Consumers should stop using this
product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or
attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The lock mechanism on the optional knife blade can inadvertently
release the blade, posing a laceration hazard.

There were no incidents that were reported.

The recall involves the Leatherman Leap multi-purpose tool that
was designed for users age nine and up.  The multi-tool has a
green, blue or red plastic casing with two screws, one on each
handle of the tool.  It consists of combination needlenose and
regular pliers, wire cutters, wood saw, ruler, tweezers, soda
bottle opener,  optional 420HC (high carbon stainless steel) knife
blade, scissors, phillips screwdriver, and small and medium
slotted screwdrivers.  The words Leatherman and LeapTM appear on
one side of the multi-tool.

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

The recalled products were manufactured in United States and sold
at Bass Pro Shop, Cabela's and retailers nationwide, including
knife and sporting goods online stores, from Aug. 2014 through
Sept. 2014 for about $54..

Consumers should not install the optional knife blade or should
immediately stop using the multi-tool with the installed optional
knife.  Consumers should contact Leatherman for a free replacement
multi-tool, including shipping.


LIBERTY TIRE: Faces Class Action Over Kentucky Tire Fire
--------------------------------------------------------
TireBusiness.com reports that two residents of a Louisville
neighborhood near a Liberty Tire Recycling L.L.C. facility where a
fire in a scrap tire pile occurred have filed a class-action
lawsuit in Jefferson County Circuit Court.

The plaintiffs claim the company was negligent in allowing the on-
site conditions that caused the fire to occur.

A spokesman for the Kentucky Department of Environmental
Protection (DEP) told Tire Business that Liberty Tire had been in
violation of state tire storage and fire safety regulations since
last June.

Meanwhile, Liberty Tire said it had established a hotline and call
center for residents of Louisville's Valley Station neighborhood
who were affected by the fire.

The fire at Liberty Tire's Bohannon Avenue location began Nov. 3
in a 30-foot outdoor pile of scrap tires, just as inspectors from
the DEP's Division of Waste Management arrived to see if the
company had brought itself into compliance with state tire storage
regulations after a June 2014 citation from the state.

Inspectors also visited the site Aug. 13 and Sept. 4 of this year,
according to a DEP fact sheet dated Nov. 3.  Liberty Tire was
found in violation of state regulations on those dates as well as
on Nov. 3, the fact sheet said.

The DEP had cited the Liberty Tire site previously in October
2012, but declared it back in compliance in January 2013,
according to the fact sheet.

The Nov. 3 fire burned for more than 30 hours, and during the
blaze police ordered residents within a one-mile radius to stay in
their homes and seal their doors, windows and ventilation systems
against smoke, soot and particulate matter, according to news
reports.  More than 40 firefighters were on the scene during the
fire, according to local news outlets.

Betty Manning and Michael Bickel, who filed the lawsuit Nov. 7,
seek compensatory and punitive damages for themselves and the
approximately 1,000 residents of the Valley Station neighborhood.

Tire Business is trying to obtain a copy of the court brief.

Meanwhile, Liberty Tire has invited Valley Station residents to
call 502-603-4698 between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday to ask questions and voice concerns with a
team of Liberty Tire representatives.

"We recognize the difficulties that our neighbors have faced as a
result of the fire, and we are here to assist anyone whose
property was affected," said Liberty Tire Recycling President Bill
Fry in a Nov. 14 press release.

Liberty Tire is working to complete the cleanup effort at the
Bohannon Avenue site in time for the Thanksgiving holidays, in
order to minimize any further inconvenience, the company said.


METHODIST HOSPITAL: Judge Certifies Class in Meal Breaks Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kyla Asbury, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that a Texas
federal judge has approved class certification in a class action
lawsuit against Methodist Hospital for allegedly making thousands
of nurses work through unpaid meal periods.

District Judge Lee Rosenthal approved the class certification on
Nov. 14 for a class of "nurses employed at Methodist's Texas
Medical Center, Willowbrook or San Jacinto locations at any time
during November 13, 2011 to the present, who were subject to an
automatic deduction of their meal-break times and who were either
interrupted or were subject to interruptions during a substantial
number of their meal breaks," according to the judge's memorandum
and order.

Methodist Hospital has until Dec. 12 to provide Joy Corcione with
the names, current and last known addresses, telephone numbers and
employment dates of the class members.  A status conference will
be held on Dec. 16.

Ms. Corcione, a nurse at Methodist Hospital, sued the hospital
under the Fair Labor Standards Act and alleged the hospital
improperly denied her and other nurses pay for meal break during
which they were not completely relieved of job duties and denied
them overtime compensation as a result.

Ms. Corcione filed her lawsuit on May 9 in the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Texas. She claims when she and other
nurses at Methodist's Texas Medical Center, Willowbrook and San
Jacinto locations worked eight-hour shifts, Methodist deducted a
30-minute meal break from their pay.

Ms. Corcione claims that although the meal break was not
compensated, Methodist required her and other nurses to be
available during the break and to respond to frequent
interruptions for work issues.

The plaintiff and other nurses were still on duty even if they
left their stations because they had to carry phones or pagers;
respond to questions from doctors or other nurses; address
patients' medical needs, test results and families' concerns; and
respond to "codes," according to the judge's order.

"Corcione contends that because the meal-break time was not
included in the nurses' paid hours, Methodist improperly recorded
that the nurses did not work more than 40 hours per week and
denied them overtime pay," the order states.  "Methodist responded
that its policies discourage meal-break interruptions and state
that employees should turn off their pagers or phones or give them
to on-duty employees during the meal break."

Methodist also allows employees whose meal breaks are
automatically deducted to manually reverse the deduction if work
interruptions reduce their actual break to less than 20 minutes,
according to the order.

"Methodist instructs such employees to log in to the time-
recording system at the end of their shifts and enter a 'No Lunch'
code to signify that they should be paid for the meal break," the
order states.  "Employees can also manually revise the entry to
show payment for part of a meal break that was interrupted by
work."

Most of the nurses testified that they were permitted to leave
Methodist's premises during their break.  However, Ms. Corcione
claims that she was required to stay at her station during the
break.

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, each employee must be
completely relieved of all duties for employers to deduct wages
for a meal break.  The nurses involved in this lawsuit contend
that it is virtually impossible to take a completely uninterrupted
meal break.

Under the law, employers must compensate employees for all of the
time spent performing work duties, and that includes the time
nursing employees spend working through automatically deducted
meal breaks.

Galvin Kennedy, one of Ms. Corcione's attorneys, said the nurses
are not complaining about putting patient safety before meal
periods.

"They are professionals who care for their patients first,"
Mr. Kennedy said in a prepared statement.  "They only ask for the
hospital to pay them for their meal periods because they continue
to be responsible for patient care and the hospital knows this."

Mr. Kennedy said more than 50 nurses have identified interrupted
meal periods and none have been fired or suffered any form of
retaliation.

"Methodist has told me no nurse would be retaliated against for
claiming their wages in this lawsuit," Mr. Kennedy said.  "The
ruling from the court means Methodist nurses can make a claim for
their earned wages without fear."

Mr. Kennedy estimates there are at least 4,000 nurses who can join
the class action lawsuit for back wages.

Ms. Corcione is being represented by Kennedy and David W. Hodges
of Kennedy Hodges LLP in Houston.

The defendant is represented by G. Mark Jodon and Kevin S. Little
of Littler Mendelson PC in Houston.

The defendant's attorneys could not be reached for comment.

U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas case
number: 3:14-cv-00160


METROPCS: 11th Circuit Remands Fraud Class Action to State Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kyla Asbury, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that a federal
appeals court has ruled that because MetroPCS failed to establish
the minimum amount in controversy, a class action lawsuit against
it should be remanded back to state court.

Chief Judge Edward Earl Carnes and circuit judges Charles R.
Wilson and Adalberto Jordan voted in the majority for the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.

"The defendant can take into account damages and any equitable
relief the plaintiff seeks, as long as the estimate is not overly
speculative," the Nov. 14 per curiam opinion states.

"Here, in estimating the amount placed in controversy, MetroPCS
cited its total Florida revenue during the class period.  MetroPCS
justifies that method by asserting that the complaint alleges
fraudulent inducement and that, under Florida law, rescission of
contract is a form of relief available to plaintiffs who, like
[Jorge] Porter, allege fraudulent inducement."

Mr. Porter filed his class action lawsuit in Miami-Dade Circuit
Court on May 1, 2012.  It was removed to the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of Florida on Oct. 15, 2013.  On July
11, District Judge Joan A. Lenard granted an order remanding the
class action lawsuit back to state court.

Mr. Porter and the class purchased cell phones from MetroPCS in
Florida.  He claims MetroPCS overcharged and collected illegal
sales tax from the class members.

"The notice of removal then cites the 'substantial' costs of
complying with the equitable relief Porter seeks," the opinion
states.  "We are certain that the costs of compliance would be
substantial.  Like the fees, costs, and punitive damages, though,
MetroPCS fails to put any concrete number on these compliance
costs."

Using them to calculate the amount in controversy would again
require the panel to engage in unguided speculation, according to
the opinion.

"As it stands, the estimates put forth by MetroPCS in its notice
of removal to which we can give credit provide us with an
approximate amount in controversy of $5,285.00, which comes
entirely from the tax class," the opinion states.  "Because
MetroPCS failed to establish the minimum amount in controversy,
the district court was correct to grant Porter's motion to
remand."

Assuming that rescission is available to Porter, MetroPCS has
failed to establish the minimum amount in controversy, according
to the opinion.

MetroPCS's revenue includes not just that realized from the
service agreements that may be rescinded as a result of this
litigation, but also the revenue it receives from the sale of cell
phones, other devices and accessories without any corresponding
commitment to MetroPCS.

"There is no reason to believe that any of that revenue would have
to be returned to customers should the class action succeed on the
merits," the opinion states.  "Without any breakdown of MetroPCS's
revenue, the district court would have to engage in hopeless
speculation in assessing what amount may be subject to rescission;
this it cannot do."

Mr. Porter is represented by Gonzalo R. Dorta -- grd@dortalaw.com
-- of Gonzalo R. Dorta PA in Coral Gables, Fla.

MetroPCS is represented by Michael J. Stortz --
Michael.Stortz@dbr.com -- of Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP in San
Francisco; Michael P. Daly -- Michael.Daly@dbr.com -- and
Meredith C. Slawe -- Meredith.Slawe@dbr.com -- of Drinker Biddle &
Reath LLP in Philadelphia; Aaron S. Weiss -- aweiss@cfjblaw.com --
of Carlton Fields PA in Miami, Fla.; and James B. Baldinger --
jbaldinger@cfjblaw.com -- of Carlton Fields PA in West Palm Beach,
Fla.

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit case number: 14-14239


MICHAEL HARRISON: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yael Sokol, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
v. Michael Harrison, Esq., and John Does 1-25, Case No. 2:14-cv-
07313-KM-SCM (D.N.J., November 24, 2014) alleges violations of the
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yitzchak Zelman, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF ALAN J. SASSON PC
          1669 East 12th Street
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (718) 339-0856
          E-mail: yzelman@sassonlaw.com


MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Recalls Rugs Due to Fire Hazard
--------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Mohawk Industries Inc., of Calhoun, Ga., announced a voluntary
recall of about 101,000 in the U.S. and Puerto Rico and about
2,800 in Canada Altitude Gold shag rugs.  Consumers should stop
using this product unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to
resell or attempt to resell a recalled consumer product.

The large rugs fail to meet federal standards for flammability and
could ignite, posing fire and burn hazards to consumers.  The
small rugs fail to meet federal labeling requirements.  Small rugs
are not required to meet the federal flammability standard;
however, they are required to be permanently labeled with the
following statement: "FLAMMABLE (FAILS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
STANDARD FF 2-70): SHOULD NOT BE USED NEAR SOURCES OF IGNITION."

There were no incidents that were reported.

The recall involves large and small Altitude shag area rugs.
Large rugs came in sizes 59 inches x 84 inches with SKU number
1000012476 or 1000037219, 72 inches x 120 inches with SKU number
1000012477 and 84 inches x 120 inches with SKU number 1000037220.
Small rugs came in sizes 24 inches x 36 inches with SKU number
1000037217 and 24 inches x 48 inches with SKU number 1000037218.
The rugs are made of polyester and were available in the color
gold. "Altitude Gold", the size and the SKU number are on a label
on the underside of the product.

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

The recalled products were manufactured in India and sold
exclusively at The Home Depot stores nationwide and online at
HomeDepot.com from August 2013 through Sept. 2014 for between $20
and $247.

Consumers should contact Mohawk to receive a refund for the large
rugs and a warning label to be affixed to the underside of the
small rugs.


MOUNT VERNON, NY: Accused of Race & Gender Bias by Black Officer
----------------------------------------------------------------
Janie McKennie v. The City of Mount Vernon and Michael Marcucilli,
as Sergeant, Police Department City of Mount Vernon, being sued
individually and in his official capacity as an employees of the
City of Mount Vernon, Case No. 1:14-cv-09340 (S.D.N.Y., November
24, 2014) alleges that the City through its agents has violated
the Plaintiff's civil service and civil rights.

Ms. McKennie is an African-American female employed by the City as
a Police Officer.  She alleges that from February 28, 2009, to the
present, African-Americans and officers of color have complained
about race and gender discrimination in the workplace over many
years to various police administrators and union officials but
they are ignored; therefore, no one complains.

The City of Mount Vernon is a municipal corporation organized and
existing under the law of the state of New York.  Michael
Marcucilli is a sergeant of the Police Department of the City of
Mount Vernon.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Eric Sanders, Esq.
          THE SANDERS FIRM, P.C.
          1140Avenue of the Americas, 9th Floor
          New York, NY 10036
          Telephone: (888) 892-8952
          Facsimile: (844) 205-7214


NESTLE USA: Lawyer Notes Rise in False Advertising Class Actions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ben James, writing for Law360, reports that when the plaintiffs
bar set its sights on false advertising suits against the food
industry and targeted Mayer Brown LLP client Nestle USA Inc., the
firm's Dale Giali shifted his focus to fighting those high-stakes
cases and has since racked up a series of wins that landed him on
Law360's list of Class Action MVPs.

Los Angeles-based partner Mr. Giali, who started off doing general
consumer class action and antitrust work, said it became apparent
in about 2008 that plaintiffs attorneys were filing a growing
number of suits accusing defendants like Nestle, the world's
biggest food company, of deceiving consumers.

Mayer Brown, which had already been handling antitrust and general
litigation matters for Nestle, was poised to step in when the
company found itself caught up in the wave advertising litigation.

"When they found themselves in the crosshairs of the consumer
class action false advertising cases, we certainly made it quite
clear to Nestle that we were ready, willing and able to assist
them in any way appropriate," Mr. Giali recalled.

Exactly what caused the boom in false advertising class actions
over food remains unclear, but Mr. Giali said possible catalysts
include securities class actions drying up because of changes in
federal law, and high-value settlements in private and government
lawsuits over Dannon Co.'s Activia yogurt, which plaintiffs
claimed was advertised as providing health benefits that weren't
backed up by science.

At the same time, more products were being advertised as
"functional food" that were said to have positive health effects
for the consumer, Mr. Giali noted.

From 2009 through 2011 there was a "meteoric expansion of lawsuits
filed against the food industry as to numerous types of labeling
claims," according to Mr. Giali, who added that the once-surging
numbers of such suits has reached a plateau, but remain at a high
level.

"We have seen over last five years an influx of plaintiffs
lawyers, who clearly have the time and excess capacity to take on
these cases, expanding into this field," Mr. Giali said.

Mr. Giali pointed to a late October 2013 win he and other Mayer
Brown lawyers secured for Nestle in a proposed nationwide false
advertising class action over the labeling of Buitoni stuffed
pasta products as "all natural" as an important decision.

"That is a very hot area of the false advertising siege against
the food industry, and make no mistake about it, it's a war,"
Mr. Giali said of "all natural" claims.  "The cases are being
filed at an incredible clip."

It's extremely tough to get a class action challenging "all
natural" labeling thrown out early in a case because judges need
to accept a lawsuit's allegations as true when ruling on a motion
to dismiss, Mr. Giali pointed out.  And, he added, defining
exactly what qualifies as natural is tricky even for government
experts like those at the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

However, Mr. Giali and Mayer Brown got that case -- Pelayo v.
Nestle -- thrown out with prejudice on a motion to dismiss.

"It is what I'd call an exceptional decision in the sense that
very few other food companies have obtained that kind of result,"
Mr. Giali said.

More recently, Mr. Giali helped steer food manufacturer Kind LLC
to a victory in a case accusing it of violating Illinois consumer
protection laws by saying products had "no refined sugar" despite
including an ingredient called "evaporated cane juice."

Though an amended complaint was filed and the case is still
pending, Mayer Brown convinced the court to grant a motion to
dismiss in July and rule that the plaintiff -- who sued over
Kind's Vanilla Blueberry Clusters and five other products --
hadn't adequately alleged that she had been injured or deceived.

In April, Mr. Giali obtained a partial dismissal of a consolidated
proposed class action against Gerber Product Co. alleging that the
company falsely advertised baby probiotic products.  Mr. Giali,
who also got the Gerber litigation -- at one point 10 cases in six
jurisdictions -- consolidated in New Jersey, called the litigation
"the incredible shrinking case."

Another case where Mr. Giali prevailed was filed in federal court
in Florida and accused Amy's Kitchen Inc. of disguising sugar in
its products as evaporated cane juice.  In that suit the plaintiff
sued over a slew of products despite having only purchased a
handful of those products herself, Mr. Giali said.

Amy's argued in a motion to dismiss for that the plaintiff
couldn't sue over products she hadn't purchased and convinced the
court to toss more than 57 products from the case in December
2013.

Then, because the suit invoked Florida law, Mr. Giali was able to
get it dismissed from federal court because the amount of damages
at issue no longer met the $5 million jurisdictional threshold in
the Class Action Fairness Act.

The question of whether the amount in controversy should be based
on the sales of products at issue when the suit was filed or on
only those still in play after a court rules on what's appropriate
to include was an issue of first impression in the Florida federal
court, Mr. Giali said.

The plaintiffs sought reconsideration of the ruling that cleaved
away the 57 out of 60 original products, but the court denied that
motion and dismissed the case in March. A subsequent appeal was
dismissed in July.

According to Mr. Giali, the false advertising class actions he
defends against are products of the plaintiffs bar as opposed to
genuinely injured consumers.

"It's quite clear this is a litigation mill," he said.  "These
come from the lawyer side, they don't come from the consumer
side."


OLYMPUS IMAGING: Recalls Digital Audio Recorders Due to Burn Risk
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Olympus Imaging America Inc., of Center Valley, Pa., announced a
voluntary recall of about 500 Olympus DS-5500 digital audio
recorders.  Consumers should stop using this product unless
otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to
resell a recalled consumer product.

The recalled recorders can overheat when charging, posing a burn
hazard to consumers and property.

Olympus has received three reports of the recorders overheating.
No injuries or property damage have been reported.

This recall involves Olympus digital audio recorders with model
number DS-5500.  The recorders are black, measure about 4.5 inches
tall by 1.9 inches wide by .67 inches thick.  "Olympus" and
"Digital Voice Recorder DS-5500" are printed on the front of the
recorder.  The recorder has three smart buttons, slide switches,
edit functions, 2 GB of memory, an external SD card slot and a 1.7
inch LCD display on the front.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/E1BUsU

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold at
camera and electronics stores and mass merchandisers nationwide
from Feb. 2014 through June 2014 for about $450.

Consumers should stop using the recorders immediately and contact
Olympus, or the retailer where the recorder was purchased, to
receive a full refund, free repair or a free replacement recorder.


OSKAR SPECIALTY: Recalls Hommus Products Due to Undeclared Sesame
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            November 3, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Sesame Seeds
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Oskar Specialty Foods
Distribution:             Ontario
Extent of the product
distribution:             Hotel/Restaurant/Institutional
CFIA reference number:    9390


PARKINSON'S SPECIALTY: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Joisy Mbuli Epse Ketty, individually and on behalf of all
similarly situated individuals v. Parkinson's Specialty Care, LLC,
Case No. 0:14-cv-04849 (D. Minn., November 24, 2014), is brought
against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages for work
performed in excess of 40 hours per week.

Parkinson's Specialty Care, LLC operates five assisted living
residences throughout the western Twin Cities metropolitan area.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Shawn J. Wanta, Esq.
      BAILLON THOME JOZWIAK & WANTA LLP
      222 South Ninth Street, Suite 2955
      Minneapolis, MN 55402
      Telephone: (612) 252-3570
      Facsimile: (612) 252-3571
      E-mail: sjwanta@baillonthome.com


PAYMENT RESOLUTION: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rachel Klein, on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Payment Resolution Services, LLC, Case No.
1:14-cv-06896 (E.D.N.Y., November 24, 2014) seeks relief with
respect to alleged violations of the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Maxim Maximov, Esq.
          MAXIM MAXIMOV, LLP
          1701 Avenue P
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (718) 395-3459
          Facsimile: (718) 408-9570
          E-mail: m@maximovlaw.com


PJD ENTERTAINMENT: Faces "Diaz" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Angelique Britne Diaz, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. PJD Entertainment, LLC d/b/a Savannah's on
Hanna, Philip Dobson, and Joshua Kesler, Case No. 1:14-cv-02242
(M.D. Pa., November 24, 2014), is brought against the Defendants
for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate an exotic dance club in Harrisburg,
Pennsylvania.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Zachary E. Nahass, Esq.
      CGA LAW FIRM
      135 North George Street
      York, PA 17401
      Telephone: (717) 848-4900
      Facsimile: (717) 843-9039
      E-mail: znahass@cgalaw.com

         - and -

      Gregg C. Greenberg, 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

         - and -

      Ken C. Gauvey, Esq.
      THE LAW PRACTICE OF KEN C. GAUVEY, LLC
      4334 Farragut Street, Suite I
      Hyattsville, MD 20781
      Telephone: (410) 385-5264
      Facsimile: (866) 487-1154
      E-mail: kgauvey@gauveylaw.com


PURITY FACTORIES: Recalls Chocolate Kisses and Butterscotch Kisses
------------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            November 1, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning
(Allergen)Subcategory:    Allergen -- Wheat
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Purity Factories Ltd.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9415

Purity Factories Ltd. is recalling Purity brand Chocolate Kisses
and Butterscotch Kisses from the marketplace because they contain
wheat which is not declared on the label.  People with an allergy
to wheat or sensitivity to gluten should not consume the recalled
products.

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

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

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

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

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


RAYONIER INC: Faces "Christie" Sue Over Misleading Fin'l Reports
----------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Christie, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Rayonier Inc., Paul G. Boynton, David L
Nunes, H. Edwin Kiker, and Hans E. Vanden Noort, Case No. 3:14-cv-
01429 (M.D. Fla., November 21, 2014), alleges that the Defendants
made false and misleading statements as well as failed to disclose
material facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects.

Rayonier Inc. is an international forest products company and is
structured as a real estate investment trust.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Casey E. Sadler, Esq.
      Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq.
      Michael Goldberg, Esq.
      GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG, LLP
      1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
      Los Angeles, CA 90067
      Telephone: (310) 201-9150
      Facsimile: (310) 201-9160

          - and -

      Howard Smith, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD G. SMITH
      3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112
      Bensalem, PA 19020
      Telephone: (215) 638-4847
      Facsimile: (215) 638-4867

          - and -

      Joseph E. White III, Esq.
      Lester R. Hooker, Esq.
      SAXENA WHITE, PA
      5200 Town Center Cir. Ste 601
      Boca Raton, FL 33486-1033
      Telephone: (561) 394-3399
      Facsimile: (561) 394-3382
      E-mail: jwhite@saxenawhite.com
              lhooker@saxenawhite.com


RAYONIER INC: Bernstein Litowitz Files Securities Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Newsline reports that a securities class action lawsuit was
recently filed against Rayonier Inc. and members of its executive
team alleging the company misrepresented its financial results
between January and November.

Brought on behalf of the Lake Worth, Fla., Firefighters Pension
Trust Fund by Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossmann LLP and a
Plantation, Fla. firm, the complaint also alleges Rayonier
misrepresented or concealed from investors that its internal
controls were defective.  It further claims that Rayonier, a
Jacksonville, Fla.-based forest products company with timber
forests in the United States and New Zealand, was engaging in
unsustainable timber harvesting practices.

The class action period specified in the lawsuit starts on
Jan. 27, 2014, when Rayonier announced shareholders would be best
served by spinning off a performance fibers business and a
corresponding overhaul of its leadership, with senior executives
leaving Rayonier to join Rayonier Advanced Materials Inc.

In a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing on Nov. 10,
Rayonier revealed that it overstated its income by approximately
$1.9 million in the first quarter of 2014 and by approximately $2
million in the second quarter, the complaint says.

By misreporting its timber inventory -- some of which was learned
to be in environmentally protected areas -- the lawsuit claims
shareholders bought stock at artificially high prices and lost
money when stock fell after the company corrected the numbers. In
the same report, Rayonier disclosed that "management determined
that there was a material weakness in the company's internal
controls related to merchantable timber inventory," the complaint
says.

The news of the improper inventory calculation caused an
approximately 15 percent drop in the price of Rayonier stock, from
$33.90 per share to $28.82 per share.

The suit claims the Lake Worth Firefighters Pension Trust Fund
purchased Rayonier securities on the New York Stock Exchange
during the class period and suffered damages as a result of the
company's violations of the federal securities.

Robert D. Klausner -- bob@robertdklausner.com -- of Klausner,
Kaufman, Jensen & Levinson in Plantation filed the complaint,
along with Gerald Silk -- jerry@blbglaw.com -- and Avi Josefson --
avi@blbglaw.com -- of Bernstein Litowitz Berger & Grossman in New
York.

U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida case number
3:14-cv-01403.


REGIONAL ADJUSTMENT: Sued for Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Elias Mueller, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. The Regional Adjustment Bureau, Incorporated
dba Regional Adjustment Bureau, Case No. 1:14-cv-06897 (E.D.N.Y.,
November 24, 2014)

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Maxim Maximov, Esq.
          MAXIM MAXIMOV, LLP
          1701 Avenue P
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (718) 395-3459
          Facsimile: (718) 408-9570
          E-mail: m@maximovlaw.com


RESOURCE SOLUTIONS: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Carmen Sullivan, on behalf of herself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Resource Solutions Tampa, Inc., Case No.
8:14-cv-02918 (M.D. Fla., November 21, 2014), is brought against
the Defendant for failure to pay overtime compensation in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Resource Solutions Tampa, Inc. is a Florida-based mail marketing
company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
      WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, PA
      Suite 300, 1110 N Florida Ave
      Tampa, FL 33602
      Telephone: (813) 224-0431
      Facsimile: (813) 229-8712
      E-mail: lcabassa@wfclaw.com


SCHILLER GROUNDS: Recalls Zero Turn Mowers Due to Crash Hazard
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Schiller Grounds Care, Inc., of Johnson Creek, Wisc., announced a
voluntary recall of about 4,900 Bob-Cat Zero Turn Riding Mower.
Consumers should stop using this product unless otherwise
instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt to resell a
recalled consumer product.

The steering control arm component can break under normal use,
causing driver to lose control and crash.

Twenty-two incidents reported control arm failure, including
failure during use and initial set-up.  There have been no reports
of injuries.

The CRZ and XRZ model riding mowers have a chassis with an
adjustable10-gauge green steel mower deck.  The frame, fuel tank,
engine compartment and side discharge chute are made of black
metal and plastic components.  It has four black wheels, two user-
operated lever-arm controls and a gray adjustable high-back seat.
The mowers range in size from 76 inches to 79 inches long and 45
inches high.  The words "Bob Cat" appear in red lettering on the
front of the mower and on top of the mower deck, and in a red and
white designed logo on the sides of the mower.  The words
"TufDeck" and "Professional Cut" appear in white lettering on the
front face of the mower deck.

Pictures of the recalled products are available at:
http://is.gd/st3xED

The recalled products were manufactured in United States and sold
at Bob-Cat dealerships nationwide from Jan. 2013 to April 2014 for
$4,500 to $5,200.

Mower should be returned to the dealer where purchased for free
repair with a newly designed control arm component.  Consumers who
completed the warranty registration card were contacted directly
by Schiller Grounds Care, Inc, with instructions for obtaining the
repair.


SIRIUS XM: Judge Tosses Summary Judgment Motion in Royalties Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Laura Castro, writing for The National Law Journal, reports that a
New York federal judge has rejected Sirius XM Radio's motion for
summary judgment in a class action lawsuit, finding members of the
1960s band the Turtles have exclusive performing rights to their
recordings under New York State law.

Judge Colleen McMahon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York in Manhattan said in a 40-page order that
defendant Sirius reproduced Turtles recordings without
authorization by not obtaining licenses or paying royalties for
using pre-1972 recordings.

The New York judge ordered Sirius to advise the court by Dec. 5 of
any remaining disputes of material fact that would require a
trial.  Otherwise, Judge McMahon said she plans to enter summary
judgment in favor of plaintiff Flo & Eddie Inc. and rule Sirius XM
liable for infringement.

"In short, general principles of common law copyright dictate that
public performance rights in pre-1972 sound recordings do exist,"
Judge McMahon wrote in the order.

"New York has always protected public performance rights in works
other than sound recordings that enjoy the protection of common
law copyright.  Sirius suggests no reason why New York -- a state
traditionally protective of performers and performance rights --
would treat sound recordings differently," she said.

In addition to the New York lawsuit, Flo & Eddie filed similar
class action suits in California and Florida against Sirius for
allegedly committing common law copyright infringement and
engaging in unfair competition for every broadcast of The Turtles'
songs without paying license fees or royalties.

Judge McMahon's order is the latest setback for Sirius in the $100
million royalties dispute with the principals in Flo & Eddie,
which own the rights to The Turtles' songs that include the 1967
hit "Happy Together."

In September, a California federal court judge granted Eddie & Flo
summary judgment as to liability, although Sirius has been pushing
for an interlocutory appeal.  In early November, Eddie & Flo filed
a motion in the California case opposing Sirius's request for an
appeal to the Ninth Circuit.


SPECIALTY OILFIELD: Sued Over Breach of Fair Labor Standards Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy Niver, individually and on behalf of all persons similarly
situated v. Specialty Oilfield Solutions, Ltd., Calumet Specialty
Products Partners, L.P., and Anchor Drilling Fluids USA, Inc.,
Case No. 2:14-cv-01599 (W.D. Pa., November 21, 2014), is brought
against the Defendant for violation of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

Specialty Oilfield Solutions, Ltd. is a solids control and
drilling fluids company with operations in the Marcellus, Eagle
Ford and Utica shale plays.

Calumet Specialty Products Partners, LP is an independent producer
of specialty hydrocarbon products and fuel products in North
America.

Anchor Drilling Fluids USA, Inc. is a drilling fluids company that
provides customized fluid solutions and well-site services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Shanon J. Carson, Esq.
      BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C.
      1622 Locust Street
      Philadelphia, PA 19103
      Telephone: (215) 875-4656
      Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
      E-mail: scarson@bm.net


SOCAL WINGS: Removes "Levanoff" Class Suit to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Christopher Levanoff, et al. v.
Socal Wings LLC, et al., Case No. 30-2011-00511808, was removed
from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County
of Orange to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California (Santa Ana).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 8:14-cv-01861-CJC-RNB to the proceeding.

The lawsuit arose from labor-related disputes.

The Defendants are represented by:

          Amy S. Williams, Esq.
          Nancy Nicole Lubrano, Esq.
          Todd R. Wulffson, Esq.
          CAROTHERS DISANTE & FREUDENBERGER LLP
          2600 Michelson Drive, Suite 800
          Irvine, CA 92612
          Telephone: (949) 622-1661
          Facsimile: (949) 622-1669
          E-mail: awilliams@cdflaborlaw.com
                  nlubrano@cdflaborlaw.com
                  twulffson@cdflaborlaw.com


SONY CORP: Settles FTC Charges Over Game Console Ad Claims
----------------------------------------------------------
Jennifer C. Kerr, writing for The Associated Press, reports that
Sony is settling government charges that it misled consumers about
its PlayStation Vita hand-held gaming console.

The Federal Trade Commission announced the settlement on Nov. 25,
saying it took issue with some of the advertising claims that Sony
Computer Entertainment America, the U.S.-based arm of the
PlayStation business, made about "game changing" technology
features of its PS Vita gaming console.  Partial consumer refunds
are part of the agreement.

Among the claims challenged by the commission:

   -- That the pocket-sized console would revolutionize gaming
mobility by allowing consumers to play their PlayStation 3 games
via "remote play" on the console anywhere with a Wi-Fi connection.

   -- That people could engage in "cross platform" play by
starting a game on a PlayStation 3, pausing it, and continuing the
game with the PS Vita from where they left off.

Not really true, said the FTC.

"As we enter the year's biggest shopping period, companies need to
be reminded that if they make product promises to consumers -- as
Sony did with the "game changing" features of its PS Vita -- they
must deliver on those pledges," said Jessica Rich, head of the
agency's consumer protection bureau.

Sony did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

With cross-platform play, the commission says the feature was only
available for a few PS3 games, and the pause-save feature varied
from game to game.  For "remote play," the complaint says Sony
told consumers that PS Vita users could easily access their PS3
games on their hand-held consoles.  But most PS3 games, the FTC
said, were not remote playable on the PS Vita.

The advertising claims at issue were made during the U.S. launch
of the product, around the early days of 2012.  The console sold
for about $250.

As part of the proposed settlement, Sony will provide refunds to
people who bought the PS Vita console before June 1, 2012.
They'll be eligible for either a $25-cash or credit refund -- or a
$50 merchandise voucher from Sony.  The company will contact
consumers about the refunds or vouchers via email.

In a related move, the FTC also acted against Deutsch LA, Sony's
advertising agency for the PS Vita launch, which settled with the
commission.

According to the complaint, Deutsch LA knew or should have known
the advertisements had misleading claims.  The FTC also alleged
that Deutsch LA misled consumers by asking employees to post
positive tweets about the console on their personal Twitter
accounts -- without disclosing their connection to the ad agency
or Sony.


TAKATA CORP: Faces "Day" Suit Over Defective Airbags
----------------------------------------------------
Christopher Paul Day, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Takata Corporation, et al., Case No. 3:14-
cv-01427 (M.D. Fla., November 21, 2014) alleges that the Defective
Vehicles contain airbags manufactured by the Defendant that,
instead of protecting vehicle occupants from bodily injury during
accidents, violently explode and expel vehicle occupants with
lethal amounts of metal debris and shrapnel.

Takata Corporation is a specialized supplier of automotive safety
systems that designs, manufactures, tests, markets, distributes,
and sells airbags.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexander H. Schmidt, Esq.
      Janine L. Pollack, Esq.
      Malcolm T. Brown, Esq.
      Stacey Kelly Breen, Esq.
      WOLF, HALDERSTEIN, ADLER, FREEMAN & HERZ LLP
      270 Madison Avenue
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 545-4600
      Facsimile: (212) 545-4653
      E-mail: schmidt@whafh.com
              pollack@whafh.com
              brown@whafh.com
              breem@whafh.com

         - and -

      Richard J. Lantinberg, Esq.
      THE WILNER FIRM, PA
      2nd Floor, 444 E Duval St
      Jacksonville, FL 32202
      Telephone: (904) 446-9817
      Facsimile: (904) 446-9825
      E-mail: Rlantinberg@wilnerfirm.com


TAKATA CORP: Faces "McLeod" Suit Over Defective Airbags
-------------------------------------------------------
Michael McLeod, Gwendolyn Cody and Kostan Lathouris, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. Takata
Corporation, et al., Case No. 2:14-cv-09037 (C.D. Cal., November
21, 2014), alleges that the Defective Vehicles contain airbags
manufactured by the Defendant that, instead of protecting vehicle
occupants from bodily injury during accidents, violently explode
and expel vehicle occupants with lethal amounts of metal debris
and shrapnel.

Takata Corporation is a specialized supplier of automotive safety
systems that designs, manufactures, tests, markets, distributes,
and sells airbags.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Manfred P. Muecke, Esq.
      BONNETT, FAIRBOURN, FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C.
      600 West Broadway, Suite 900
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 756-7748
      Facsimile: (602) 274-1199
      E-mail: mmuecke@bffb.com

         - and -

      Andrew S. Friedman, Esq.
      Francis J. Balint Jr., Esq.
      Eric Zard, Esq.
      BONNETT, FAIRBOURN, FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C.
      2325 E. Camelback Road, Suite 300
      Phoenix, AZ 85016
      Telephone: (602) 274-1100
      Facsimile: (602) 274-1199
      E-mail: afriedman@bffb.com
              fbalint@bffb.com
              ezard@bffb.com


TAKATA CORP: Faces "Neto" Suit Over Defective Airbags
-----------------------------------------------------
David Neto, Individually and Behalf of All Those Similarly
Situated v. Takata Corporation, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-24446
(S.D. Fla., November 21, 2014), alleges that the Defective
Vehicles contain airbags manufactured by the Defendant that,
instead of protecting vehicle occupants from bodily injury during
accidents, violently explode and expel vehicle occupants with
lethal amounts of metal debris and shrapnel.

Takata Corporation is a specialized supplier of automotive safety
systems that designs, manufactures, tests, markets, distributes,
and sells airbags.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Joseph F. Rice, Esq.
      Jodi Westbrook Flowers, Esq.
      Kevin R. Dean, Esq.
      MOTLEY RICE LLC
      28 Bridgeside Boulevard
      Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
      Telephone: (843) 216-9000
      Facsimile: (843) 216-9450
      E-mail: jrice@motleyrice.com
              jflowers@motleyrice.com
              kdean@motleyrice.com

          - and -

      Scott P. Schlesinger, Esq.
      Jeffrey L. Haberman, Esq.
      SCHLESINGER LAW OFFICES, P.A.
      1212 Southeast Third Avenue
      Fort Lauderdale, FL 33316
      Telephone: (954) 320-9507
      Facsimile: (954) 320-9509
      E-mail: scott@schlesingerlaw.com
              jhaberman@schlesingerlaw.com


TAKATA CORP: Faces "Scheuerman" Suit Over Defective Airbag
----------------------------------------------------------
Kurt Scheuerman, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Takata Corporation, Case No. 1:14-cv-24445
(S.D. Fla., November 21, 2014), alleges that the Defective
Vehicles contain airbags manufactured by the Defendant that,
instead of protecting vehicle occupants from bodily injury during
accidents, violently explode and expel vehicle occupants with
lethal amounts of metal debris and shrapnel.

Takata Corporation is a specialized supplier of automotive safety
systems that designs, manufactures, tests, markets, distributes,
and sells airbags.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Laurence Rosen, Esq.
      THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
      275 Madison Avenue, 34th Floor
      New York, NY 10116
      Telephone: (212) 686-1060
      Facsimile: (212) 202-3827
      E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com

         - and -

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


TAKATA CORP: Faces "Seals" Suit Over Defective Airbags
------------------------------------------------------
Marc Seals, on behalf of himself and all those similarly situated
v. Takata Corporation, et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-24449 (S.D. Fla.,
November 21, 2014), alleges that the Defective Vehicles contain
airbags manufactured by the Defendant that, instead of protecting
vehicle occupants from bodily injury during accidents, violently
explode and expel vehicle occupants with lethal amounts of metal
debris and shrapnel.

Takata Corporation is a specialized supplier of automotive safety
systems that designs, manufactures, tests, markets, distributes,
and sells airbags.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jose A. Ortiz, Esq.
      Brian Lechich, Esq.
      HERRON ORTIZ
      255 Alhambra Cir., Suite 1060
      Coral Gables, FL 33134
      Telephone: (305) 779-8100
      Facsimile: (305) 779-8104
      E-mail: jortiz@herronortiz.com
              blechich@herronortiz.com

         - and -

      Corey D. Holzer, Esq.
      HOLZER & HOLZER, LLC
      1200 Ashwood Parkway, Suite 410
      Atlanta, GA 30338
      Telephone: (770) 392-0090
      Facsimile: (770) 392-0029


TAKATA CORP: Kessler Topaz Files Defective Airbag Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP on Nov. 19
disclosed that it has filed a class action lawsuit against Takata
Corporation, its subsidiaries TK Holdings, Inc. and Highland
Industries, Inc., and Honda Motor Company, Ltd. and American Honda
Motor Company, Inc. relating to the recent massive recall of
vehicles containing allegedly defective airbags manufactured by
Takata.

The complaint alleges that Takata and Honda concealed their
knowledge of the nature and extent of defects in Takata-
manufactured airbags from the public in disregard for public
safety.  The airbags have caused numerous injuries and fatalities.
According to the National Highway Transportation Safety
Administration ("NHTSA"), approximately 7.8 million vehicles are
potentially affected by Takata-manufactured airbags. NHTSA has
also urged owners of the affected vehicles to act immediately on
recall notices to replace defective Takata airbags.  In addition
to Honda, the Takata-manufactured airbags have been reportedly
installed in vehicles manufactured by Toyota, Mazda, BMW, Nissan,
Mitsubishi, Subaru, Chrysler, Ford and General Motors.  A list of
the recalled vehicles may be found here:
http://www.ktmc.com/takata-airbag-recall

The complaint further alleges that Plaintiffs and the Class have
suffered diminished market value of their vehicles as a direct
result of Takata and Honda's withholding and/or misleading
Plaintiffs and the Class about the safety and reliability of their
vehicles.

If you wish to discuss this action or have any questions
concerning this notice or your rights or interests with respect to
these matters, please contact Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, LLP
(James A. Maro, Esq. or Adrienne O. Bell, Esq.) at (888) 299-7706
or (610) 667-7706, or via e-mail at info@ktmc.com
Alternatively, you may view a list of the vehicles that are
potentially affected by Takata-manufactured airbags and request
more information about the class action online at
http://www.ktmc.com/takata-airbag-recall

KTMC -- http://www.ktmc.com-- prosecutes class actions in state
and federal courts throughout the country.  The firm represents
investors, consumers and whistleblowers (private citizens who
report fraudulent practices against the government and share in
the recovery of government dollars).  KTMC is a driving force
behind corporate governance reform, and has recovered billions of
dollars on behalf of institutional and individual investors as
well as consumers from the United States and around the world.


TAKATA CORP: Two Wilmington, NC Residents File Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------
Wayne Faulkner, writing for StarNews Online, reports that two
Wilmington, NC residents have filed a class-action lawsuit against
the maker of potentially lethal vehicle air bags and Honda Motor
Co.

Bonnie Young of Wilmington and Charles Calhoun Sr. of Rocky Point
allege in their suit that Takata Corp. and Honda Motor
fraudulently concealed dangerous defects in Takata's air bags in
certain of their vehicles.  The suit was filed on Nov. 17 in U.S.
District Court in Wilmington.

The Takata driver's-side air bags in several companies' vehicles
are equipped with inflators that can explode and send metal
fragments into the passenger compartment.  Several deaths have
been linked to the defects.

On Nov. 19, U.S. regulators called for a nationwide recall of
vehicles with the air bags.

Previously, cars with the inflators had been recalled only in
states with high humidity along the Gulf Coast.  The safety
regulators said their latest action is based on incidents
involving a death in California and an injury in North Carolina
where the air bags were implicated, the Associated Press reported.
Both states are outside the area covered by the earlier recalls.

Ms. Young and Mr. Calhoun do not claim bodily injuries resulting
from the exploding air bags.  They seek payment for out-of-pocket
expenses and damages they would incur in an attempt to rectify the
air bag defect in their vehicles and expenses if they must take
time off work, pay for rental cars or other transportation
arrangements, the suit said.

The suit also said that the ongoing danger to drivers and
passengers in the vehicles has drastically cut the cars' value.

"What do you do with a vehicle with a hand grenade in front of
you?" said H. Scott Overholt of the Overholt Law Firm in
Wilmington, attorney for Young and Calhoun.  "Do you park it?
You'll have to find alternative transportation."

The Wilmington suit is not the only potential class action
involving the air bags.

"There are multiple suits that have been filed in south Florida,
north Georgia and California alleging very similar damages and
requesting class-action status," Mr. Overholt said, adding that he
expects all of the cases will be combined and assigned to one
judge.

Ms. Young and Mr. Calhoun seek punitive damages, saying that
officers and directors of Takata and Honda Motor knew or should
have known about the defects in the air bags and "through their
failure to take corrective action, they condoned the willful,
wanton and malicious conduct."

Ms. Young owns a 2006 Acura MDX and Calhoun owns a 2005 Honda
Accord, according to the suit.  Acura is a division of Honda
Motor.


TARGET CORP: "Tober" Suit Included in Data Security Breach MDL
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Tober v. Target Corporation, Case
No. 2:14-cv-06799, was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the District of New Jersey to the U.S. District Court for the
District of Minnesota.  The Minnesota District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 0:14-cv-04848-PAM-JJK to the proceeding.

The case is consolidated in the multidistrict litigation known as
In re: Target Corporation Customer Data Security Breach
Litigation, MDL No. 0:14-md-02522-PAM, currently pending in
Minnesota and referred to Magistrate Judge Jeffrey J. Keyes.

The litigation arose from security breaches on Target's data
systems.  According to the Plaintiffs, in late 2013, the sensitive
financial and personal data of approximately 110 million shoppers
was compromised as a result of Target's failure to adequately
secure payment information on its systems.  The incident was one
of the largest data security breaches in United States history,
yet Target's security protocols were so deficient that the breach
continued for nearly three weeks while Target failed to even
detect it, the Plaintiffs allege.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Athan T. Tsimpedes, Esq.
          TSIMPEDES LAW FIRM
          11 Dupont Circle, NW, Suite 500
          Washington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 464-9910
          Facsimile: (202) 747-2947
          E-mail: athan@tsimpedeslaw.com


TAKATA CORP: Anapol Schwartz Files Class Suit Over Airbag Defect
----------------------------------------------------------------
Anapol Schwartz Shareholder Larry Coben filed a class action
lawsuit on Nov. 18 against Takata Corporation, Honda Motor Co.,
and numerous other manufacturers on behalf of about 20 million
people who own or lease vehicles with defective Takata airbags
that may explode and shoot shrapnel during an auto collision.

The staggering number of vehicles recalled for the potentially
deadly defect has led to an acute shortage of parts to correct the
problem.  The only solution offered by manufacturers to date is to
either disable the airbags completely or to encourage customers
not to drive their vehicles until the airbags can be fixed.

Customers have been left with either an unsafe vehicle or no
vehicle at all as a result.  The legal action seeks monetary
relief for millions of affected vehicle owners and a mandatory
order for prompt repair of the defective airbags.  The lawsuit
also seeks an injunction forcing Takata to turn over to competitor
airbag manufacturers the necessary technical information to help
manufacture and replace these unsafe safety systems.

"People rely on their vehicles to earn their incomes, take their
children to school, and for every day survival," Mr. Coben said.
"The response of the manufacturers to this recall has been as
grossly mismanaged as their response to the original problem 13
years ago."

The inadequate response of manufacturers has caught the attention
of Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Edward J. Markey (D-MA)
who point out that disabling safety equipment violates the Motor
Vehicle Safety Act (40 U.S.C) without a specific exemption from
the Department of Transportation. The Senators are urging
manufacturers to provide rental vehicles at no cost to consumers
if their cars cannot be fixed immediately.

Additionally, plaintiffs and class members were effectively
cheated by not receiving the benefit of their original bargain,
Coben contends.  The customers received vehicles that were of
lesser standard, grade and quality than represented by the
manufacturers.  Drivers did not receive vehicles that would
reliably operate with reasonable safety and not place them and
their passengers in danger of an ongoing and undisclosed risk of
harm.  As a result, all purchasers overpaid for their vehicles,
says the complaint.

The complaint alleges the airbag defects date back to at least
2000, and Takata -- the world's second largest manufacturer of
automotive safety devices -- became aware of the defects as early
as 2001.  Despite the red flags raised then, the airbags'
potentially lethal dangers were not disclosed to U.S. safety
regulators until seven years and the production of millions of
vehicles later in 2008.  Since then, 11 automakers have recalled
vehicle models worldwide.

The complaint details a long history of alleged deception and
failures to report problems on the part of Takata and auto
manufacturers.  Plaintiffs in the class action reside in New
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Arizona and California.

                     About Anapol Schwartz

Anapol Schwartz -- http://www.anapolschwartz.com- is a personal
injury law firm.


TERMINI BROTHERS: Sued in E.D. Pa. Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry B. Inthathirath, Christsna L. Ngem, any other past or
present employees who are similarly situated and hereafter become
Plaintiffs v. Termini Brothers, Inc., Joseph Termini, Jr., and
Vincent Termini, Jr., Case No. 2:14-cv-06695 (E.D. Pa., November
21, 2014), is brought against the Defendant for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate four retail bakery stores and an
online storefront.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Andrew S. Abramson, Esq.
      ABRAMSON EMPLOYMENT LAW LLC
      790 Penllyn Blue Bell Pike, Suite 205
      Blue Bell, PA 19422
      Telephone: (267) 470-4742
      Facsimile: (267) 470-4754
      E-mail: aabramson@abramsonlawfirm.com


TYCO FIRE: Recalls Simplex Fire Alarm Control Panels
----------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, in cooperation with
Tyco Fire Protection, SimplexGrinnell, of Boca Raton, Fla.,
announced a voluntary recall of about 750 Simplex 4100ES Fire
Alarm Control Panel.  Consumers should stop using this product
unless otherwise instructed.  It is illegal to resell or attempt
to resell a recalled consumer product.

A defective chip in the alarm panel can cause premature battery
failure and prevent activation of devices during alarm conditions,
posing a risk of injury and property damage.

There were no incidents that were reported.

The recalled Simplex 4100ES Fire Control Panel is an addressable
fire alarm control panel that can support up to 2,500 addressable
points, fire alarm and emergency voice communications and peer-to-
peer networking operations.  The metal cabinets containing the
panel are red or white and measure about 22 inches to 56 inches in
height, 24 inches in width and 7 inches in depth.  The panels have
Simplex 4100ES printed on the front of the panel.

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

The recalled products were manufactured in Mexico and sold
exclusively at SimplexGrinnell from March 2014 through June 2014
for about $4,000.

SimplexGrinnell is inspecting and replacing all circuit boards
with the defective chip.  Simplex Grinnell and Tyco are contacting
purchasers directly.


US FORENSIC: Manipulated Engineering Reports, NY Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Deborah Ramey and Robert Kaible, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. U.S. Forensic, LLC, Gary L. Bell,
Michael P. Garove, Harry George Hernemar, Wright National Flood
Insurance Company, Colonial Claims Corporation and David Maxime,
Case No. 2:14-cv-06861 (E.D.N.Y., November 21, 2014), arises out
of the altered or manipulated engineering reports relied on to
process insurance payments under the National Flood Insurance
Program that caused denial or underpayment of the Plaintiffs'
insurance claims.

U.S. Forensic, LLC is an engineering firm based in Louisiana with
its principal offices located in Metairie, Louisiana.

Wright National Flood Insurance Company and Colonial Claims
Corporation are private insurance companies in Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      John S. Mostyn, Esq.
      THE MOSTYN LAW FIRM
      3810 W Alabama Street
      Houston, TX 77027
      Telephone: (713) 861-6616
      Facsimile: (713) 861-8084
      E-mail: easkinner@mostynlaw.com

         - and -

      Denis G. Kelly, Esq.
      DENIS G. KELLY &ASSOCIATES, P.C.
      74 West Park Avenue
      Long Beach, NY 11561
      Telephone: (516) 897-0800
      Facsimile: (516) 897-0812


USP LABS: Settles Class Action Over Weight Loss Supplement
----------------------------------------------------------
5NBCDFW.com reports that the Dallas-based makers of controversial
weight loss supplement Oxy Elite Pro and GNC stores that sold it
are offering rebates of up to $300 per customer under the terms of
a settlement in a class-action lawsuit.

The lawsuit accused USP Labs and GNC Stores of false and
misleading claims about Oxy Elite Pro, Jack3d and VERSA-1.  The
companies deny any wrongdoing but agreed to the settlement to
avoid more costly litigation.

Older versions of Oxy Elite Pro were recalled and destroyed in
2013 after reports of liver failure, hepatitis and one death.

Customers must submit claims online or by mail before Feb. 5,
2015.


VELDOS LLC: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Class Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ephraim Steinwuzel, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. Veldos LLC, Case No. 1:14-cv-06894
(E.D.N.Y., November 24, 2014) seeks relief relating to alleged
violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Maxim Maximov, Esq.
          MAXIM MAXIMOV, LLP
          1701 Avenue P
          Brooklyn, NY 11229
          Telephone: (718) 395-3459
          Facsimile: (718) 408-9570
          E-mail: m@maximovlaw.com


VIVINT SOLAR: Faces "Hyatt" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l Reports
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brennen Hyatt, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Vivint Solar, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:14-cv-09283
(S.D.N.Y., November 21, 2014), alleges that the Defendants made
false and misleading statements as well as failed to disclose
material facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects.

Vivint Solar, Inc. is a residential solar energy unit installer
that leases solar energy systems to residential homeowners.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

         - and -

      Frank J. Johnson, Esq.
      JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP
      110 West "A" Street, Suite 750
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 230-0063
      Facsimile: (619) 255-1856
      E-mail: frankj@johnsonandweaver.com

         - and -

      W. Scott Holleman, Esq.
      JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP
      99 Madison Avenue, 5th Floor
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 802-1486
      Facsimile: (212) 602-1592
      E-mail: scotth@johnsonandweaver.com


VVV STAFFING: Sued Over Failure to Pay Employees Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Patricia Mancera-Mireles, individually and on behalf of all
similarly situated employees v. VVV Staffing Solutions, Inc., and
Ricardo Ruiz, Case No. 1:14-cv-09382 (N.D. Ill., November 24,
2014), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages for work performed in excess of 40 hours per week.

The Defendants own and operate a staffing agency in Illinois.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Valentin Tito Narvaez, Esq.
      CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC
      6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200
      Chicago, IL 60646
      Telephone: (312) 878-1302
      Facsimile: (888) 270-8983
      E-mail: vnarvaez@yourclg.com


WHOLE FOODS: Faces Class Action Over Greek Yogurt Sugar Level
-------------------------------------------------------------
Legal Newsline reports that a California man is suing Whole Foods
over its Greek yogurt brand, alleging it is sold with nutrition
labels listing sugar levels that are considerably lower than the
product's actual sugar content.

Stephen Kubick, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, filed a lawsuit Nov. 10 in the Austin Division of U.S.
District Court for the Western District of Texas against Whole
Foods Market Inc., alleging breach of express and implied
warranties.

According to the complaint, in June 2011, Mr. Kubick first
purchased Whole Foods' 365 Everyday Value Plain Greek Yogurt,
which is a product in Whole Foods' own healthy-eating product line
and labeled as containing two grams of sugar per 170-gram serving.

The lawsuit said Whole Foods' website said registered dietitians
examined the labels of its 365 Everyday Value line to ensure
accuracy, and Whole Foods holds itself out as a healthy
alternative to typical, non-organic grocery stores.  Mr. Kubick
said he was willing to pay Whole Foods' higher price for the
healthy yogurt option, which listed a significantly lower sugar
level on its label than competitors' brands, so he repeatedly
bought the product.

The lawsuit said Consumer Reports concluded that the yogurt
actually contains more than 11 grams of sugar, and that Whole
Foods either knew or should have known that its label was
inaccurate.  The lawsuit said competitors' products contained at
least five grams of sugar or more, and even plain Greek yogurt
naturally contains more than two grams of sugar as lactose.
Mr. Kubick says had he known the true sugar content of the
product, he would not have bought it or would have sought a
cheaper price.

Mr. Kubick brings this class action on behalf of anyone who has
purchased Whole Foods' 365 Everyday Value Plain Greek Yogurt since
Nov. 7, 2010.  Whole Foods is accused of violating the California
Consumers Legal Remedies Act and the Unfair Competition Law on
behalf of the California class and breach of express and implied
warranty on behalf of both classes.

Mr. Kubick is seeking certification of the class, appointment as
the class representative, judgment that the defendant must yield
all profits from the wrongful acts, damages, judgment enjoining
the defendant from continuing such unlawful practice, attorneys
fees and interest.  The complaint said damages are estimated to
exceed $5 million.

Mr. Kubick is being represented in the case by attorneys Marc
Stanley and Martin Woodward of Stanley Law Group in Dallas;
Shannon  Hopkins -- shopkins@zlk.com -- Nancy Kulesa --
nkulesa@zlk.com -- and Stephanie Bartone -- sbartone@zlk.com -- of
Levi & Korsinsky LLP in Stamford, Conn.; Janine Pollack --
pollack@whafh.com -- of Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz LLP
in New York; and Matthew Zevin of Stanley Law Group in San Diego.

U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas case number
1:14-cv-01013.


* Chief Justice Allsop Vows to Reign in Class Action Surge
----------------------------------------------------------
Business Spectator, citing Australian Financial Review, reports
that the Chief Justice of the Federal Court has vowed to reign in
the swell of class actions, with the time and cost weighing
heavily on the court system and businesses alike.

Chief Justice James Allsop has plans to introduce a second judge
or registrar for class actions in the hope of accelerating the
early stages of proceedings and cutting back on costly court time.

"Without having necessarily getting the docket judge bogged down,
the registrar can have conversations with professionals that are
practical, that are frank and that are effective," he told the
AFR.

Justice Allsop noted that the amount of fees involved raised
conflict of interest issues.  His plan is a response to business
concerns, with banks in particular targeted by expensive and time-
consuming class actions in recent years.


* Lawyers Argue Over $200-Mil. Tobacco Settlement Funds
-------------------------------------------------------
Lizzy McLellan, writing for The Legal Intelligencer, reports that
lawyers from Pennsylvania's executive and legislative branches
argued in front of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court over whether
legislation redirecting more than $200 million in tobacco
settlement funds was constitutionally enacted.

Parties involved in Sears v. Corbett and Weisblatt v. Corbett made
their arguments to the Supreme Court in a consolidated hearing.
The cases involve the redirection of funds from a 1998 settlement
between several tobacco companies and states including
Pennsylvania.

The 2001 Tobacco Settlement Act said the funds should be used for
certain programs to address health problems of Pennsylvanians,
including adultBasic, a health care program for low-income
workers.  The Commonwealth Court decided in 2013 that two acts
redirecting settlement funds were enacted unconstitutionally.
"It's actually hard to know where to start with this case.  There
are many different facets to it," said Karl S. Myers --
kmyers@stradley.com -- of Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young,
representing the General Assembly in the arguments.

The justices appeared to struggle with the remedies they could
impose no matter which side they agreed with, and one justice
suggested the case presented a serious separation of powers issue.
Meanwhile, the state Attorney General's Office suggested that the
whole matter is moot, because the money has already been
distributed.

Directing and Redirecting the Funds

The dispute stemmed from the General Assembly's enactment of two
laws changing the disposition of Pennsylvania's portion of the
1998 nationwide settlement between 47 state attorneys general and
the largest tobacco products manufacturers.

Those laws, passed in 2010 and 2011, effectively changed the
Tobacco Settlement Act, which had been enacted in 2001 to address
those proceeds and required the settlement money to go into an
earmarked fund to be used for health care and public health
programs.

With Act 46 of 2010, some settlement money was redirected to the
state's general fund.  This was done again a year later with Act
26 of 2011. Because the money was redirected, an opinion from the
Commonwealth Court said, adultBasic lacked funds and ceased
operations in 2011.

Sheryl Sears and Eric Weisblatt, each along with a group of other
former adultBasic beneficiaries, filed separate suits against the
state government.  The Democratic caucuses of the House of
Representatives and Senate filed an amicus brief with the
Commonwealth Court in support of the plaintiffs, specifically on
the issue of Gov. Tom Corbett's termination of adultBasic, which
they said violated constitutional separation of powers.

The plaintiffs argued that the legislation violated the Tobacco
Settlement Act and the Pennsylvania Constitution.  They sought an
order directing all future tobacco settlement funds to be
deposited in accordance with the TSA and redirected funds to be
repaid to the Tobacco Settlement Fund.

While Act 46 required that the money held back from adultBasic and
another health program be appropriated for health-related
purposes, Sears and Weisblatt's joint appellees' brief said, "the
act also provided for a transfer of $250 million from the tobacco
fund to the general fund for fiscal year 2010-11 without any
provision that this money would be used for health-related
purposes."

The act said a certain proportion of the money in the tobacco fund
should be retained. But it also specified a $121 million transfer
to an account within the general fund that would be used "to
augment the appropriation for payment of required contribution of
public school employees' retirement."

The Commonwealth Court struck down Acts 46 and 26 as
unconstitutional in March 2013 in the combined cases of Sears v.
Corbett and Weisblatt v. Corbett.  However, the court said it
could not allow the plaintiffs to recoup the money that had been
withheld from the fund during the 2010-11 and 2011-12 fiscal
years.  Doing so would require legislative action, President Judge
Dan Pellegrini wrote for the court, because sovereign immunity
barred the plaintiffs from seeking reimbursement from the
defendants.

Since the Commonwealth Court made its decision, the General
Assembly enacted Act 71 of 2013, which repealed the parts of the
TSA that required settlement funds to go toward certain health
care programs.

Corbett, Budget Secretary Charles Zogby and the General Assembly
appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that Acts 46 and 26 were
constitutionally enacted.

Sears and Weisblatt filed a joint appellees' brief, while
Weisblatt filed a separate cross-appeal, seeking a mandamus to
return the diverted money back to the Tobacco Settlement Fund.
The Treasury Department took no position in the case at the
Supreme Court level.

Defeating the Fund's Purpose?

In his arguments for the joint appellees, David S. Senoff of
Caroselli, Beachler, McTiernan & Conboy said the government
amended the funding stream unconstitutionally to plug holes in the
budget.

"The [settlement] money is not some fund to be dipped into on a
willy-nilly basis," he said. "It's a fund with a very specific
purpose."

During arguments, Justice Thomas G. Saylor addressed the
appropriation for school employees' retirement.

"I thought this tobacco settlement was to take care of future
health problems in the state," Justice Saylor said to Sean A.
Kirkpatrick, deputy attorney general, during his argument.
"What's that have to do with schoolteachers' pensions?"

The appellants defended the constitutionality of Acts 46 and 26,
saying the laws follow the single-subject rule and clear title
requirement, and that they did not violate procedural
requirements.

Each of the acts covers the subject of fiscal appropriation, Myers
said.

The appellees disagreed with this explanation, saying Act 71
complied with the single-subject rule, and differed from Acts 46
and 26.

"When they want to do it, they know exactly how to do it.  But
they didn't do it in Acts 46 and 26," said Senoff.

But because of Act 71, and because adultBasic was terminated in
2011, the appellant parties argued that Sears, Weisblatt and the
similarly situated parties that filed with them could not see
money flow back to the program.

"Changes in facts and changes in law have mooted this case," said
Kirkpatrick during arguments.  "The money was in fact transferred
. . . and was spent."

'What Do We Do Then?'

Justices Thomas G. Saylor and Correale F. Stevens and Chief
Justice Ronald D. Castille all asked during arguments how the
Supreme Court would be able to address the funds if it did affirm
the Commonwealth Court's decision.

"If we find that it's unconstitutional what they did, what do we
do then?" Justice Castille asked during the appellees' argument.
Stevens suggested that the case could confront the court with a
separation of powers issue, because the judiciary may not
typically appropriate funds, a power generally assigned to the
legislative branch.

But David H. Weinstein -- weinstein@wka-law.com -- of Weinstein
Kitchenoff & Asher, an attorney for Weisblatt, said a mandamus
order would protect the separation of powers and constitutional
checks and balances by allowing the court to review even
legislative actions with a short duration.

"If a plaintiff comes and challenges, that claimant has a right to
have the unconstitutional act undone," said Mr. Weinstein.

Mr. Weinstein said the mandamus his client is seeking would only
apply to certain portions of Acts 46 and 26, not the entirety of
each law. Instead of ordering a legislative action, he said, the
court would order the treasurer to reverse a previous action.

"The writ sought here does not seek to have any money paid out of
the Treasury," the cross-appellant's reply brief said.  "Quite the
contrary, both the general fund and the tobacco fund are within
the Treasury, so all that is at issue is where in the Treasury the
money will be held."


                              *********

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  * * *