CAR_Public/150212.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Thursday, February 12, 2015, Vol. 17, No. 31


                             Headlines

ADVANCED RECOVERY: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
ADVENTURE GUIDE: Recalls Outdoor BleacherBack Stadium Seats
AGT CLIC: Recalls Clic Royal Couscous Spices
ALORICA INC: Judge Grants Final Approval of Settlement Agreement
ALTEC INDUSTRIES: Recalls A65 Model

ARTHROCARE CORP: Judge Denied Claims of Violation of Fair Trial
ATLANTA, GA: Lawyers Seek Attorney Fees in Pension Fund Suit
AUSTRALIAN THERAPEUTIC: Recalls Zhansheng Weige Chaoyue Xilishi
AVALON BAY: Sued by Tenants Displaced in Massive New Jersey Fire
B&H EDUCATION: Benjamin, et al. May File 2nd Amended Complaint

BANK OF AMERICA: Supreme Court Reverses Ruling in "Gelboim" Case
BANK OF AMERICA: Loses Bid to Retry Countrywide Mortgage Case
BARNES & NOBLE: Violates Disabilities Act, "Mielo" Suit Claims
BEAUVAIS LTEE: Recalls Granny Smith Apples & Gala Apples
BLOOMBERG LP: Removes "Harutyunyan" Suit to N.D. California

BRIDGE TRANSPORT: Trial in "Hoa" Case Set for February 2016
C.H. ROBINSON: Bid to Compel Arbitration in "Poublon" Case Denied
CALIFORNIA: Court Okays Class Settlement With Auditors
CALIFORNIA: Bryd's Writ of Habeas Corpus Petition Dismissed
CALIFORNIA: Judge Rejects Inmate's Equal Protection Claim

CARRIER IQ: Bulk of Spying Claims vs. Smartphone Makers Dismissed
CARRINGTON MORTGAGE: Faces "Santos" Class Suit in New Jersey
CHRYSLER: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models
CLARK COUNTY, NV: 12 Constables and Servers Challenge Mass Firing
COMPLETE PAYMENT: Class Allegations Stricken in "Zarichny" Case

COOSEMANS MONTREAL: Recalls Granny Smith Apples & Gala Apples
DELBERT SERVICES: Hayes et al., Compelled to Arbitration
ENDO HEALTH: Removes "Mahaffay" Class Suit to N.D. California
ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS: "Garcia" Suit May Be Amended in 21 Days
EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Sued for Violating Fair Credit Reporting Act

EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Cannot Reduce Information in Random Sampling
FEDERAL EXPRESS: "Minor" Wrongful Termination Suit Dismissed
FINISH LINE: "Arreola" Suit Moved From N.D. Cal. to C.D. Cal
FORD: Recalls MKC Model Over Defective Powertrain Control Module
GENERAL ELECTRIC: Opt-In Plaintiffs Not Required to Arbitrate

GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Cobalt, G5 and Pursuit Models
GODADDY.COM INC: Summary Judgment Order in "Harris" Upheld
GOOGLE INC: Sued Over Automatic Renewal of Google Drive Plan
HEALTH CANADA: Recalls LX1 Due to Undeclared Substance
IC SYSTEM: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act in N.Y.

IKEA U.S.A.: Class in "Yeoman" Suit Decertified
INTERTEK: Recalls Certain Crane Brand Wi-Fi Infrared Heaters
J & G TRANSPORT: Fails to Sink "Collado" TILA Suit
KELLOGG CANADA: Recalls MorningStar Farms Spicy Black Bean Burger
KENT'S MEAT: Faces "Duckworth" Suit Alleging Job Discrimination

LES PLATS: Recalls Cuisines Adventures Mini Sausages
LOS ANGELES, CA: Ruling Over Document Production Affirmed
LOUISVILLE DISTILLING: Removes "Aliano" Suit to N.D. Illinois
MAPLE LEAF: Recalls Schneiders Deli Best Blue Ribbon Bologna
MARVELL TECHNOLOGY: "Voss" Suit Dismissed With Leave to Amend

MCKESSON CORP: N.D. Cal. Judge Resolves Discovery Issues
MCKESSON CORP: Court Won't Split Discovery in "True Health" Suit
NATIONAL FOOTBALL: NFL Retirees Ask 9th Cir. to Revive Class Suit
NGS INC: "McCown" Suit Remanded to Putnam County Circuit Court
NISOURCE CORPORATE: "Philibotte" TILA Suit Dismissed

NORTHERN MEAT: Recalls Roland Bruschetta Due to Glass Pieces
NOVO NORDISK: Obtains Final Court Approval of Antitrust Suit Deal
NUVASIVE INC: "Mauss" Securities Fraud Suit Dismissed
PALME D'OR: Recalls Duck Products Due to Container Issues
PAPA JOHNS: Court Struck Down Bid to Dismiss "Schojan" Suit

PATRICK CUDAHY: "Rangel" Suit Stays in E.D. Wis. Federal Court
PGA TOUR: Caddies File Class Action Over Endorsement Policy
PHILLIPS & COHEN: Accused of Illegally Contacting Class Members
POLARIS: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models
PRESTIGE TRANSPORTATION: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & OT

PRINCESS AUTO: Recalls Kitchener Meat Grinders
RANGER CONSTRUCTION: Sued Over Retaliation and Wrongful Discharge
REGENT MANAGEMENT: Faces Suit Alleging Disabilities Act Violation
RHEEM MANUFACTURING: Sued Over Refrigerant Leak in HVAC Products
ROC HOUSE: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages, OT and Damages

ROCKY MOUNTAIN: Recalls Caramel Apples Due to Listeria
SAGE HOSPITALITY: Accused of Violating Disabilities Act in Colo.
SHEARER'S FOODS: Court Narrows Claims in "Bohlke" False Ad Case
SHERIDAN PRODUCTION: Removes "Whisenant" Suit to W.D. Oklahoma
SINGAPORE HEALTH: Recalls Joint-Soft Kebigutaijiaonang

STANDARD & POOR'S: Connecticut to Get $1.38 Mil. From Settlement
SYNGENTA CORP: "Boatwright" Suit Consolidated in MIR162 Corn MDL
TASTE CULINARY: Recalls Umi's Kitchen Butter Chicken Simmer Sauce
THOR MOTOR: Recalls Chateau, Miramar, Palazzo & Windsport Models
TOYOTA MOTOR: Must Pay $11 Million to 1996 Camry Crash Victims

UNCLE T FOOD: Recalls Trung Nguyen G7 Black Instant Coffee 2-in-1
UNITED BANK: Harbortouch Gets OK to Amend Answer to "Corona" Suit
UNITED STATES: Dist. Court Dismisses Class Action Suit vs. DOE
UNITED STATES: Obamacare Improperly Taxes States, Ohio Claims
US FOOD & DRUG: Recalls Natural Health Foreign Products

VIVO BRAND: Forta for Men Due to Homosildenafil Recalled
WAH LEE: Recalls FEEMA Cordless Electric Kettle
WAL-MART INC: Judge Narrows Claims in "Cortina" Class Suit
WESTON TRANSPORTATION: "Brown" Suit Transferred to W.D. Missouri
WESTOWER COMMS: April 8 Final Settlement Approval Hearing


                            *********


ADVANCED RECOVERY: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Wendy McWilliams, Individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Advanced Recovery Systems, Inc., and Young Wells
Williams, P.A., Case No. 3:15-cv-00070-CWR-LRA (S.D. Miss.,
February 4, 2015) accuses the Defendants of violating the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Shireen Hormozdi, Esq.
          HORMOZDI LAW FIRM, LLC
          1770 Indian Trail Lilburn Road, Suite 175
          Norcorss, GA 30093
          Telephone: (678) 395-7795
          Facsimile: (866) 929-2434
          E-mail: shireen@norcrosslawfirm.com


ADVENTURE GUIDE: Recalls Outdoor BleacherBack Stadium Seats
-----------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 31, 2014
Posting date:             December 31, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Outdoor Living
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Product Safety
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-43095

Affected products: GCI Outdoor BleacherBack stadium seats

The recall involves GCI Outdoor BleacherBack stadium seats.  The
seats are made of a powder-coated steel frame, a stitched fabric
backrest and a fabric-covered padded bottom.  The backrest has a
mesh pocket on the back side.  The seat bottom has a strap that
runs from one side through two D rings on the upper part of the
backrest and back down to the other side. The strap has a yellow
buckle.  The backrest and seat bottoms were sold in the colours
black, green, maroon, navy blue, red and royal blue.  When open,
the seats measure 41 centimetres (16 inches) wide x 30.5
centimetres (12 inches) deep x 44.5 centimetres (17.5 inches)
high. The backrest folds forward to a height of 10 centimetres (4
inches).

Recalled stadium seats have these purchase order (PO) numbers:

41223, 41269, 41273, 41332, 41348, 41367, 41368, 41371, 41372,
41379, 41380, 41390, 41401, 41515, 41520, 41537, 41538, 41539,
41540, 41541, 41542, 41627, 41628, 41629, 41630, 41631, 41632,
41633, 41634, 41635, 41636, 41639, 41640, 41641, 41642, 41643,
41644, 41645, 41646, 41647, 41648, 41649, 41668, 41715, 41716,
41717 and 41718.

The PO number is on a small white tag under the product
information label sewn onto the back of the chair inside the
pocket.

The backrest can fail, posing a risk of injury.

Neither Health Canada nor Adventure Guide Inc. has received any
reports of consumer incidents or injuries related to the use of
this product.

Approximately 9 units were sold at the Adventure Guide Inc. store
in Canada.

The recalled products were manufactured in China and sold from
Jan. 1, 2013 to Aug. 30, 2014.

Companies:

   Importer     Adventure Guide Inc.
                Kitchener
                Ontario
                Canada

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled stadium
chairs and contact Adventure Guide Inc. for a free strap repair
kit that includes installation instructions, an additional safety
strap and a new warning sticker.


AGT CLIC: Recalls Clic Royal Couscous Spices
--------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 8, 2015
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:           AGT Clic Foods Inc.
Distribution:             Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick,
                          Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec,
                          Newfoundland and Labrador
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9569

Affected products: 100 g. Clic Royal Couscous Spices (Mild) and
100g. Clic Royal Couscous Spices (Hot)


ALORICA INC: Judge Grants Final Approval of Settlement Agreement
----------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge James D. Whittemore of the Middle District of
Florida, Tampa Division approved the agreement between defendant
and the settlement class in the case LAQUISHA BANKS, MARY BEST,
AUBREE BURRIS, JULIA DELCID, REBECCA HOWELL, ANGEL HULSBERG,
ALEXANDRA MARCANO, JOAN THOMAS, SAMARIS TOLEDO, REBEKAH WEAVER,
LAWANA WILLIAMS, WANDA WORKS, JASYLINE SMITH, ROBERT WOMACK,
VICTOR HORRELL, RACHEL ANGLADA, IRMA LAUREANO, WALTER JACOBSEN,
CARMEN MERCADO, NITOSHA DIAZ, SANDRA MORENO, LONETTE POSEY, CHERYL
THORPE, CYNTHIA GORDON, MARCE A. RICE, and PLATO M. MATHIS on
behalf of themselves and on behalf of a Class Comprised of other
Similarly Situated Former Employees of Defendant, Plaintiffs, v.
ALORICA INC., Defendant, Case No. 8:13-CV-00985-T27 TBM (M.D.
Fla.).

The Court noted that the alleged liability of the defendant was
highly disputed and that the terms of the settlement and the
settlement amount are fair, reasonable, and adequate, considering
the strengths and weaknesses of plaintiffs' case; the risk,
expense, complexity, and likely duration of litigation; the
experience and views of counsel; and the amount of the settlement
compared to the maximum amount of damages the class would be
entitled to recover if successful at trial. The settlement
negotiations were arm's-length and were not the result of fraud or
collusion, and the settlement amount is fair and adequate in light
of the potential outcome and the costs of litigation.

The Plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion for an order approving
the agreement between the defendant and the settlement class.

For the purposes of the settlement, (i) the class, consisting of
82 settlement class members, is so numerous that joinder of all
settlement class members is impracticable; (ii) there are
questions of law or fact common to the settlement class; (iii) the
claims of the class representatives are typical of the settlement
class; (iv) plaintiffs' counsel, the law firm of Wenzel Fenton
Cabassa, P.A. and Cynthia M. Gonzalez, have fairly and adequately
protected the interests of the settlement class and have had
experience handling class action litigation, collective actions,
and multi-plaintiff employment cases; (v) the class
representatives do not have interests antagonistic to those of the
settlement class; (vi) questions of law or fact common to the
settlement class members predominate over questions affecting only
the individual settlement class members; and (vii) the class
settlement mechanism is superior to other available methods of
resolving the alleged WARN Act claims and the other claims
released in the settlement agreement.

Named Plaintiffs Mary L. Best, Samaris Toledo, and Robert Womack
acted as class representatives, and the participation payment
allocated to each class representative by the settlement agreement
is fair and reasonable. Counsel for plaintiffs have vigorously
protected, asserted, and prosecuted the interests of the class
throughout this litigation. An attorney fee award in the maximum
allowed under the settlement agreement is fair, reasonable, and
justified considering the efforts put forth on behalf of the
class, the experience of class counsel, the hours worked, and the
other factors presented during the hearing and considered by the
court. The court authorizes payments of the above fees to class
counsel as provided in the parties' settlement agreement.

Judge Whittemore granted plaintiffs' motion and the action is
dismissed on the merits with prejudice.

A copy of Judge Whittemore's order dated December 3, 2014, is
available at http://is.gd/G1Ce0zfrom Leagle.com.

Laquisha Banks, Mary Best, Aubree Burris, Julia Delcid, Rebecca
Howell, Angel Hulsberg, Alexandra Marcano, Joan Thomas, Samaris
Toledo, Rebekah Weaver, Lawana Williams, Wanda Works, Jasyline
Smith,, Robert Womack, Victor Horrell, Rachel Anglada, Irma
Laureano, Walter Jacobsen, Carmen Mercado, Nitosha Diaz, Sandra
Moreno, Lonette Posey, Plato M. Mathis, Marce A. Rice, Plaintiffs,
represented by:

     Cynthia M. Gonzalez, Esq.
     CYNTHIA GONZALEZ LAW OFFICES
     6301 Memorial Highway, Suite 301
     Tampa, FL 33615
     Telephone: 813-952-0009
     E-mail: cynthia@wagesdue.com

         - and -

     Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
     WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, PA
     1110 N Florida Ave, Ste 300
     Tampa, FL 33602
     Tel: 813-579-2483
     Fax: 813-229-8712

Cynthia Gordon, Defendant, Plaintiff, represented by:

     Cynthia M. Gonzalez, Esq.
     CYNTHIA GONZALEZ LAW OFFICES
     6301 Memorial Highway, Suite 301
     Tampa, FL 33615
     Telephone: 813-952-0009
     E-mail: cynthia@wagesdue.com

          - and -

     Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
     WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, PA
     1110 N Florida Ave, Ste 300
     Tampa, FL 33602
     Tel: 813-579-2483
     Fax: 813-229-8712

Cheryl Thorpe, Plaintiff, represented by:

     Cynthia M. Gonzalez, Esq.
     CYNTHIA GONZALEZ LAW OFFICES
     6301 Memorial Highway, Suite 301
     Tampa, FL 33615
     Telephone: 813-952-0009
     E-mail: cynthia@wagesdue.com

          - and -

     Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
     WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, PA
     1110 N Florida Ave, Ste 300
     Tampa, FL 33602
     Tel: 813-579-2483
     Fax: 813-229-8712

Alorica, Inc., Defendant, represented by Allegra J. Lawrence-Hardy
-- allegra.lawrence-hardy@sutherland.com -- Amelia T. Rudolph --
amelia.rudolph@sutherland.com -- Laurance J. Warco --
laurance.warco@sutherland.com -- Sorelle B. Brown --
sorelle.brown@sutherland.com -- at Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan,
LLP; Dineen Pashoukos Wasylik -- dineen.wasylik@ip-appeals.com --
at Dineen Pashoukos Wasylik, PA


ALTEC INDUSTRIES: Recalls A65 Model
-----------------------------------
Starting date:            January 8, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Equipment
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Brakes
Units affected:           64
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2015004
TC ID number:             2015004
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14V-745

On certain aerial devices installed on utility service vehicles
(to elevate personnel in order to facilitate working on overhead
service lines, for tree trimming, etc.), unintended boom movement
could occur in severe cold temperature operation if hydraulic oil
warm-up procedures are not followed.  This could allow the aerial
device to move unexpectedly, which could result in property damage
and/or personal injury.

Preset pressure transducers will be added or updated as necessary.
Owners may contact Altec at 1-877-462-5832.

Affected products: 1999 ALTEC A65


ARTHROCARE CORP: Judge Denied Claims of Violation of Fair Trial
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Sam Sparks of the U.S. District Court for the
Western District of Texas, Austin Division, ruled on defendants'
motions in the case entitled UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN, v. MICHAEL
BAKER (1) MICHAEL GLUK (2), CAUSE No. A-13-CR-346-SS (W.D. Tex.)

Michael Gluk and Michael Baker are the CEO and CFO of ArthroCare
Corporation, a medical device company founded in Austin, Texas,
which grew from a small business into a publicly-traded
corporation and employed many residents of the Austin area.

Preceding Baker and Gluk's case were two national class action
suits, one against ArthroCare's Board of Directors and one against
the corporation itself; an action against ArthroCare filed by the
SEC; and a criminal action against two ArthroCare officers who
pleaded guilty one day before their trial was set to begin. Baker
and Gluk's indictments followed.

The jury returned a unanimous verdict finding both guilty of all
counts charged in the Superseding Indictment. Both Baker and Gluk
now contend their Sixth Amendment right to a public trial, as
articulated by the Supreme Court in Presley v. Georgia, 558 U.S.
209 (2010) (per curiam), was violated during their criminal
proceedings, entitling them to a reversal of their convictions and
a new trial. Specifically Baker filed a motion for new trial under
F.R.C.P. 33(b)(1), Gluk filed a joinder of Baker's motion for new
trial.

Judg Sparks granted Gluk's motion for joinder of Baker's motion
for new trial but denied Baker's motion for new trial in which
Gluk joins.

A copy of Judge Sparks's order dated December 4, 2014, is
available at http://is.gd/S1gEFxfrom Leagle.com

Arthrocare Corporation, Movant, represented by Benjamin I. Koplin
-- ben.koplin@nortonrosefulbright.com -- R. Jeffrey Layne --
jeff.layne@nortonrosefulbright.com -- at Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP

United States Securities and Exchange Commission, Movant,
represented by:

     Juanita C. Hernandez
     U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
     100 F Street, NE
     Washington, DC
     Telephone: 202-942-8088

USA, Plaintiff, represented by:

     Joseph H. Gay, Jr. - Assistant U.S. Attorney
     Benjamin D. Singer
     Darrin L. McCullough
     Henry Parker Van Dyck
     William S.W. Chang
     U.S. Department of Justice
     Criminal Division
     950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
     Washington, DC 20530-0001
     Telephone: 202-353-4641
     E-mail: Criminal.Division@usdoj.gov


ATLANTA, GA: Lawyers Seek Attorney Fees in Pension Fund Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Greg Land, writing for Daily Report, reports that the city of
Atlanta says lawyers who launched an unsuccessful challenge to
Mayor Kasim Reed's 2011 pension fund reform should pay the city
more than $400,000 in attorney fees and expenses because the
lawsuit was frivolous.

John Bell Jr. -- john@bellbrigham.com -- and Lee Brigham --
lee@bellbrigham.com -- of Augusta's Bell & Brigham, who brought
the suit on behalf of city workers, have appealed a judge's
dismissal of the suit to the Supreme Court of Georgia.  In a
response to the city's motion, Messrs. Bell and Brigham wrote that
the suit involves "question of first impression about which
reasonable minds might disagree," and asked the court to defer any
ruling until the appeal has played out.

"The city's been represented by very competent counsel, and I have
great respect for them," said Mr. Bell in an interview.  "But I
don't think, by any stretch of the imagination, our claims are
frivolous."

The case raises serious constitutional questions and was destined
to go to the Supreme Court no matter how Judge John Goger of
Fulton County Superior Court ruled, Mr. Bell said.

"Of course, they have a right to file [the fee motion]," said
Mr. Bell.  "I've been trying cases for 40 years, and I've never
filed one of these."

Last November, Judge Goger dismissed the putative class action,
filed on behalf of seven members of the city police, firefighters
and general employees' pension funds.

In December, Atlanta Chief Counsel Robin Shahar and Assistant City
Attorney Seth Eisenberg said that they warned the plaintiffs'
lawyers about attorney fees in January 2014.  That's when the city
sent a formal notice to the plaintiffs' counsel that the lawsuit
"lacked substantial justification."  At the same time, it said,
they filed a motion for summary judgment containing the same law
and facts Judge Goger relied upon in dismissing the case.

"Defendants' formal notice afforded plaintiffs the opportunity to
dismiss their case by Jan. 17, 2014, to avoid defendants' request
for attorney fees," the motion said.  Instead, they pursued the
litigation and "continue to ignore the frivolity of this lawsuit
as evidence by their notice of appeal," it said.

The suit sought to reverse changes to the city's pension plan that
increased the amount employees pay into their plans by 5
percentage points.  Before the revision, employees were required
to contribute 7 or 8 percent of their salary to the pension,
depending upon whether they had a designated beneficiary.  In mid-
2011, the City Council increased those percentages to 12 and 13
percent.

The plaintiffs sued in 2013, arguing that the change violated the
Georgia Constitution's impairment clause, which bars the passage
of any "laws impairing the obligation of contract."  According to
the suit, Georgia law mandates that a government employee's
pension plan is part of his employment contract; unless there is a
specific provision allowing his employer to change the terms of
the plan, it may not be changed if it reduces the value of the
employee's benefits.

The city argued that several prior cases have made clear that
public employees do not have a constitutionally protected interest
in their pension benefits if the plans expressly authorize their
employer to make future changes to those plans.  The pension cards
Atlanta employees signed specified that they had given their
"irrevocable consent" to participate in the plan, "as amended, or
as may hereinafter be amended."

Messrs. Bell and Brigham brought the putative class action in
2013, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief stopping the city
from collecting the additional payments and demanding that any
sums collected above the pre-revision rates be refunded.

Their suit and subsequent filings argued that, unlike the other
pension plans that Georgia courts have ruled were allowed to be
changed, Atlanta pension plan enrollment documents did not include
"necessary" language warning employees that they had no vested
rights in their pensions or that their benefits were subject to
future revision.

In November, Judge Goger granted summary judgment to the city,
writing that in prior cases upholding pension changes, the plans'
language had varied widely and no particular language warned that
their terms might be altered.

"The courts in each of those cases evaluated a different pension
plan and, importantly, the wording of each plan is unique," Judge
Goger wrote.  "No 'necessary' language is referenced and the court
finds nothing in those decisions suggesting that the holding was
based on the exact language of the amendment provisions at issue."

The plaintiffs' lawyers file a notice of appeal, and on Dec. 26
the city filed a motion seeking $400,091 in attorney fees and
$35,656 for legal expenses. The figures were tabulated from
Jan. 17, 2014, the deadline the city's notice had given the
plaintiffs to dismiss the complaint or face action to recover fees
and expenses.

Although as salaried city attorneys Ms. Shahar and Mr. Eisenberg
earn only $49 an hour, they calculated their fee demand based on
rates of private attorneys with comparable education, background
and experience.  They deemed Ms. Shahar's time worth $540 an hour,
Mr. Eisenberg's at $375, and that of a paralegal at $150 per hour.
The motion noted that, had the plaintiffs' class action been
successful, the amount of compensatory damages due to them would
have been about $36.6 million, of which Messrs. Bell and Brigham
would have likely billed one-third, or $12 million.

"An award of attorney fees to defendants for a fraction of this
amount is completely reasonable and justified under Georgia law,"
the city's motion said.

Ms. Shahar and Mr. Eisenberg said they had to file the motion for
fees within 45 days after Judge Goger's ruling to preserve the
city's right to seek fees under the Rules of Civil Procedure.

Asked why the city is seeking fees only from the plaintiffs'
lawyers and not the city workers who are plaintiffs, the city
attorneys said the plaintiffs' lawyers were the ones who should
have known to drop the suit.

"We think this is really about the lawyers' due diligence," said
Mr. Eisenberg.  "After we provided our summary judgment [brief]
that provided all the law, they had all they needed to dismiss the
case. It's really a due diligence question for them, not the
plaintiffs -- the plaintiffs aren't lawyers."

"The city did not charge for any time prior to submitting our
motion for summary judgment," said Ms. Shahar.  "The reason for
that goes back to legal due diligence.  Giving those attorneys the
benefit of the doubt, we actually performed their legal analysis
for them, and handed them a brief containing the case law.  So our
point in our letter was, 'Here's the law, if you drop the suit we
won't go forward [with a fee demand].'"

A Jan. 16 response brief from the plaintiffs said the facts of the
Atlanta case differ significantly from those Judge Goger cited in
his order. It also quotes a Georgia law barring fee recovery
against a lawyer or party making "a good faith attempt to
establish a new theory of law in Georgia if such new theory of law
is based on some recognized precedential or persuasive authority."

Mr. Bell and the city lawyers said they had discussed asking
Judge Goger to withhold ruling on the fee motion until after the
Supreme Court decides the case, but on Feb. 2 the judge notified
the attorneys that he intended to stay the fee request until after
the high court rules.

Ms. Shahar said that decision should bolster the city's case for
fees if, as she predicts, it goes against the plaintiffs.

"The city is confident we will win on appeal and that Judge
Goger's order will be upheld," said Ms. Shahar.  "It seems logical
that the appeal will factor into [the fee] case."

Mr. Bell, reached in Augusta office, joked about the hefty fee
request.

"I've told my wife to start looking for a double-wide for us to
move into," he said with a laugh.  "Something on the South
Carolina side, where they can't attach it."

The case is Borders v. City of Atlanta, No. 2013CV239021.


AUSTRALIAN THERAPEUTIC: Recalls Zhansheng Weige Chaoyue Xilishi
---------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Type of communication:    Foreign Product Alert (FPA)
Subcategory:              Natural health products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Source of alert:          Australian Therapeutic Goods
                          Administration United States Food and
                          Drug Administration

These products are not authorized for sale in Canada and have not
been found in the Canadian marketplace, but it is possible they
may have been brought into the country by travellers or purchased
over the Internet.

Affected products: Zhansheng Weige Chaoyue Xilishi, Chong Cao Zhag
Bian Bao, Night Man, MMC Sex Men capsules, O.M.G., Arize, Herbal
Vigor Quick Fix, Zhansheng Weige Chaoyue Xilishi, Chong Cao Zhag
Bian Bao, Night Man, MMC Sex Men capsules, and O.M.G.

These products are promoted for sexual enhancement.

The Australian Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) warned
consumers not to use the products Zhansheng Weige Chaoyue Xilishi,
Chong Cao Zhag Bian Bao, Night Man, and MMC Sex Men capsules and
the United Stated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned
consumers not to use the product O.M.G. after they were found to
contain sildenafil.

Sildenafil is a prescription drug used to treat erectile
dysfunction and should only be taken under the supervision of a
healthcare professional.

Sildenafil should not be used by individuals taking any kind of
nitrate drug (e.g., nitroglycerine) as it can cause potentially
life-threatening low blood pressure.  Individuals with heart
problems are at increased risk of cardiovascular side effects such
as heart attack, stroke, chest pain, high blood pressure and
abnormal heartbeat.  Other side effects include headache, facial
flushing, indigestion, dizziness, abnormal vision, and hearing
loss.

This product is promoted for sexual enhancement.

The United Stated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned
consumers not to use the product Arize after it was found to
contain sulfoaildenafil.

Sulfoaildenafil is an unauthorized substance similar to
sildenafil, a prescription drug used to treat erectile dysfunction
and may pose similar health risks.  Sildenafil should only be
taken under the supervision of a healthcare professional.
Place of origin

Sildenafil should not be used by individuals taking any kind of
nitrate drug (e.g., nitroglycerine) as it can cause potentially
life-threatening low blood pressure.  Individuals with heart
problems are at increased risk of cardiovascular side effects such
as heart attack, stroke, chest pain, high blood pressure and
abnormal heartbeat.  Other side effects include headache, facial
flushing, indigestion, dizziness, abnormal vision, and hearing
loss.

This product is promoted for sexual enhancement.

The United Stated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned
consumers not to use the product Herbal Vigor Quick Fix after it
was found to contain tadalafil.

Tadalafil is a prescription drug used to treat erectile
dysfunction and should only be taken under the supervision of a
healthcare professional.

Tadalafil should not be used by individuals taking any kind of
nitrate drug (e.g., nitroglycerine) as it can cause potentially
life-threatening low blood pressure.  Individuals with heart
problems are at increased risk of cardiovascular side effects such
as heart attack, stroke, chest pain, high blood pressure and
abnormal heartbeat.  Other side effects include headache, facial
flushing, indigestion, dizziness, abnormal vision, and hearing
loss.


AVALON BAY: Sued by Tenants Displaced in Massive New Jersey Fire
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Fry at Courthouse News Service reports that tenants
displaced from a massive residential apartment fire along the
Hudson River in Edgewater, N.J., claim in court that the lack of
sprinklers in attics of their complex and use of lightweight wood
construction "may have accelerated the spread of the fire."

The class action against Avalon Bay Communities in Bergen County
Superior Court comes just days after a Jan. 21 fire burned to the
ground the 408-unit luxury housing complex known as Avalon Bay at
Edgewater, constructed in 2002.

Citing New York Times coverage of the fire, the residents say
maintenance workers sparked the fire while using a blowtorch in
the basement of the complex to fix a plumbing issue.

The fire displaced more than 1,000 people, half of them
permanently, and completely destroyed 230 units, according to the
complaint.

Both of the class action's named plaintiffs, Robert Loposky and
Richard Kemp, say all of his personal belongings they kept in
their apartments, including Loposky's dogs, were lost in the fire.

The fire started at around 4:30 in the afternoon and continued
overnight, drawing response from more than 35 different local fire
departments in New York and New Jersey, including the FDNY,
according to the complaint.

Though no person died in or because of the fire, two residents and
two firefighters were reportedly treated for minor injuries, and
others like Loposky lost pets, the complaint states.

The residents blame Avalon for ignoring that "the risk was
increased when using lightweight wood construction and/or in
allowing a blowtorch to be used in close proximity to flammable
materials."

While local and state authorities have noted that the building was
up to code, the class quotes Edgewater's Fire Chief Tom Jacobson
as saying in a press conference after the fire: "If [the building]
was made out of concrete and cinder block, we wouldn't have this
sort of problem."

The class also faults Avalon for initially downplaying the fire.
"At approximately 6:25 p.m., two hours after the fire was first
reported, a mass email was sent to tenants of the Avalon advising
them that there was a 'minor fire' at the complex," the comlaint
states.

This description was false since "this was, in fact, a devastating
fire that, at its peak, emitted smoke that was visible from across
the Hudson River in Manhattan," the complaint states.

The class faults Avalon's developers for moving ahead with the
project after settling lawsuits associated with a different fire
at the same location 15 years earlier.  New York Times reporting
on that earlier incident quotes fire officials as calling it "the
worst blaze they had seen in decades," according to the complaint.

Avalon used lightweight wood construction that is "faster to build
with, but also more flammable," the class says.

"It has also been reported that the Avalon apartments did not have
sprinklers in the attics or concealed spaces," possibly
accelerating the spread of the fire, according to the 21-page
complaint.

Other Avalon properties have also allegedly experienced safety
issues.  In 2012, a fire broke out at the company's Avalon Garden
City complex in Garden City, N.Y., while it was still under
construction, the complaint says.

Maryland-based Avalon Bay has ownership interests in 274 apartment
communities across the country and reported $1.4 billion in
revenue for 2013, the class notes.

Edgewater, thrust into the regional spotlight on account of the
Avalon fire, is a small borough just south of the George
Washington Bridge across from Manhattan's Upper West Side.

The borough and the surrounding area have seen a huge construction
boom the last 20 years, with Edgewater more than doubling in size,
going from about 5,000 residents in 1990 to just over 12,000 in
2010.

Pressed for an interview, Avalon Bay said it had "no comment at
this time."

The company's chief construction officer, Michael Feigin, said in
a statement after the fire, however that the wood-frame
construction used on the project is "a standard, common, and safe
construction method for multifamily housing used throughout the
United States."

"The community was built in accordance with the fire and safety
codes applicable at the time," Feigin said.

NJ Advance Media has also reported that AvalonBay has pro-rated
all of January leases of its Edgewater tenants, returned security
deposits to permanently displaced tenants and offered $1,000 to
help tenants find short-term accommodations.

Multiple media sources have additionally reported that Avalon Bay
did require that tenants obtain renter's insurance as a condition
of the lease.

The class, represented by Bruce Greenberg, Esq., at Lite DePalma &
Greenberg, in Newark, New Jersey -- bgreenberg@litedepalma.com --
seeks damages for negligence and nuisance.

Greenberg told the Newark Star Ledger that "at this point we don't
have a specific amount in damages, but that will come out as the
case proceeds."


B&H EDUCATION: Benjamin, et al. May File 2nd Amended Complaint
--------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Vince Chhabria signed on January 21, 2015, a joint
stipulation pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2) regarding the
filing of a second amended collective and class action complaint
in JACQUELINE BENJAMIN, BRYAN GONZALEZ, and TAIWO KOYEJO, on
behalf of themselves and classes of those similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. B&H EDUCATION, INC., a corporation, dba "MARINELLO
SCHOOLS OF BEAUTY"; and DOES 1 through 100, Defendants, CASE NO.
CV 13-04993-VC, (N.D. Cal.).

The Plaintiffs and Defendant, through their respective counsel of
record, agreed that Plaintiffs may file a proposed Second Amended
Collective and Class Action Complaint, which will be deemed filed
as of the date of filing of the Stipulation and Defendant will
file its responsive pleading to the Second Amended Collective and
Class Action Complaint no later than 30 days from the date of
filing of the Stipulation.

A copy of the court-approved stipulation is available at
http://is.gd/pmPF1g from Leagle.com.

LEON GREENBERG -- leongreenberg@overtimelaw.com -- DANA SNIEGOCKI
-- dana@overtimelaw.com -- LAW OFFICE OF LEON GREENBERG, Las
Vegas, NV, BRYAN J. SCHWARTZ -- bryan@bryanschwartzlaw.com --
ADETUNJI OLUDE -- adetunji@bryanschartzlaw.com -- BRYAN SCHWARTZ
LAW, Oakland, CA, Attorneys for Plaintiffs.

KEITH ZAKARIN -- KZakarin@duanemorris.com. Keith -- JULIE A.
VOGELZANG -- jvogelzang@duanemorris.com -- COURTNEY L. BAIRD --
CLBaird@duanemorris.com -- DUANE MORRIS LLP, San Diego, CA, DAVID
A. LOWE -- dal@rezlaw.com -- CHAYA M. MANDELBAUM -- cmm@rezlaw.com
-- MICHELLE G. LEE, RUDY, EXELROD, ZIEFF & LOWE, LLP, San
Francisco, CA, Attorneys for Defendant B&H Education, Inc.


BANK OF AMERICA: Supreme Court Reverses Ruling in "Gelboim" Case
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ellen Gelboim and Linda Zacher filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York a class-action
complaint raising a single claim. They alleged that a number of
banks, acting in concert, had violated federal antitrust law.
Their case was consolidated for pretrial proceedings together with
some 60 other cases, commenced in different districts, raising
"one or more common questions of fact," Section 1407(a).
The defendant banks moved to dismiss the Gelboim-Zacher complaint
on the ground that the plaintiffs had suffered no antitrust
injury. The District Court granted the motion, denied leave to
amend the complaint, and dismissed the case in its entirety. Other
cases made part of the multidistrict pretrial proceedings,
however, presented discrete claims and remained before the
District Court.

The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, acting on its own
motion, dismissed the appeal filed by Gelboim and Zacher for want
of appellate jurisdiction.

The Supreme Court of the United States, in an opinion entered
January 21, 2015, a copy of which is available at
http://is.gd/SiasLK from Leagle.com, reversed the Second
Circuit's judgment and held that the Gelboim-Zacher complaint
retained its independent status for purposes of appellate
jurisdiction under Section 1291. The Supreme Court said the
Petitioners' right to appeal ripened when the District Court
dismissed their case, not upon eventual completion of
multidistrict proceedings in all of the consolidated cases.

The Supreme Court remanded the case for further proceedings
consistent with its opinion.

The case is ELLEN GELBOIM, ET AL., PETITIONERS v. BANK OF AMERICA
CORPORATION ET AL., NO. 13-1174.


BANK OF AMERICA: Loses Bid to Retry Countrywide Mortgage Case
-------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Flaherty, writing for The Litigation Daily, reports that
never one to mince words, U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in
Manhattan had a few harsh ones for Bank of America Corp. on
Feb. 3, ruling that it "utterly failed" to offer a compelling
reason to retry a mortgage fraud case that put the bank on the
hook for $1.27 billion.

In a 15-page decision, Judge Rakoff rejected a motion for judgment
as a matter of law or a new trial lodged by Bank of America's
lawyers at Williams & Connolly.

"The jury's conclusion that this was a massive and intentional
fraud was amply supported by the evidence," Judge Rakoff wrote.

The ruling marks the latest win for the U.S. Department of Justice
in the civil fraud case, which accuses the bank's Countrywide
Financial unit and former Countrywide executive Rebecca Mairone of
duping Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into buying shoddy mortgages.
The case was first brought in 2012 by whistleblower Edward
O'Donnell, a former Countrywide Home Loans vice president.

A jury found against the bank in October 2013, determining that
Countrywide misrepresented to Fannie and Freddie the quality of
mortgages it originated through a program known internally as
high-speed swim lane (HSSL), or "hustle."  In July, Judge Rakoff
leveled a fine of $1.27 billion against BofA and hit Ms. Mairone
with a $1 million penalty for her role in the scheme. (Mr.
O'Donnell, a key witness in the government's case, eventually
raked in a $57.7 million whistleblower award.)

In the wake of Judge Rakoff's July decision, the bank asked for a
new trial and asserted that there wasn't enough evidence of a
"material misrepresentation" on Countrywide's part to support the
jury's fraud findings.  Judge Rakoff sniped at that argument in
the Feb. 3 ruling, writing that it "borders on the frivolous."

A BofA spokesman confirmed on Feb. 3 that the company will appeal.
The bank's legal team includes Williams & Connolly's Brendan
Sullivan -- bsullivan@wc.com -- and Enu Maingini --
emainigi@wc.com

Marc Mukasey -- marc.mukasey@bgllp.com -- of Bracewell & Giuliani,
who represents Ms. Mairone, said he was "quite optimistic" about
the prospects for a successful appeal.

"Remember, the government's case was built on the testimony of a
witness who was a willing participant in the High Speed Swim Lane
process and who, unbeknownst to us during trial, will recover $58
million dollars for turning on his former colleagues," Mr. Mukasey
said.


BARNES & NOBLE: Violates Disabilities Act, "Mielo" Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Mielo, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Barnes & Noble, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-
00148-CRE (W.D. Pa., February 4, 2015) alleges violations of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          R. Bruce Carlson, Esq.
          CARLSON LYNCH
          115 Federal Street, Suite 210
          Pittsburgh, PA 15212
          Telephone: (412) 322-9243
          E-mail: bcarlson@carlsonlynch.com


BEAUVAIS LTEE: Recalls Granny Smith Apples & Gala Apples
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 7, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Updated Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Listeria
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Beauvais Ltee., Courchesne Larose
Distribution:             Ontario, Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9575

The food recall warning issued on Dec. 24, 2014 has been updated
to include additional product information.

Industry is recalling Granny Smith apples and Gala apples exported
by Bidart Bros. in the United States (US) from the marketplace due
to possible Listeria monocytogenes contamination.  Identified
importers of the recalled products include Beauvais Ltee. and
Courchesne Larose.  Consumers should not consume and retailers,
restaurants and institutions should not sell or use the recalled
products.

Furthermore, recalled products were imported by and sold at
Coosemans Montreal Inc., located at 1605 rue de Beauharnois Ouest,
Montreal, QC.


BLOOMBERG LP: Removes "Harutyunyan" Suit to N.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit entitled Harutyunyan v. Bloomberg L.P., et al., Case
No. CGC-14-543337, was removed from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of San Francisco to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-
00388-EDL to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff is Armenian and his national origin/ancestry is
Armenia.  The Plaintiff brings the action to obtain relief and
damages under California law and alleges certain causes of action,
including National Origin/Ancestry Discrimination, Disability/
Medical Condition Discrimination and Harassment and Hostile Work
Environment.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John Akopian, Esq.
          JOHN AKOPAIN & ASSOCIATES
          1101 E. Broadway, Suite 200
          Glendale, CA 91205
          Telephone: (818) 244-0050
          Facsimile: (818) 244-0051
          E-mail: john@akopianlaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Margaret A. Keane, Esq.
          DLA PIPER LLP (US)
          555 Mission Street, Suite 2400
          San Francisco, CA 94105-2933
          Telephone: (415) 836-2500
          Facsimile: (415) 836-2501
          E-mail: margaret.keane@dlapiper.com

               - and -

          Yin Zheng, Esq.
          DLA PIPER LLP (US)
          2000 University Ave.
          East Palo Alto, CA 94303-2214
          Telephone: (650) 833-2000
          Facsimile: (650) 833-2001
          E-mail: lily.zheng@dlapiper.com


BRIDGE TRANSPORT: Trial in "Hoa" Case Set for February 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Edward M. Chen of the Northern District of
California approves the parties' joint case management and
proposed order in the case PAUL HOA, an individual, Plaintiff, v.
RICHARD RILEY, an individual; RONALD CHAN, an individual; DAVID
MOORE, an individual; RAYMOND MATTEUCCI, an individual; THOMAS
ALIOTO, an individual; GEORGE MOON, an individual; TAMMY FOSS, an
individual, DAVID F. LOPEZ, an individual; T. GREGORY STAGNITTO,
an individual; BRIDGE TRANSPORT, an entity of unknown form; STAG
LEASING, INC., a California corporation; and DOES 1 to 20,
Inclusive. Defendants, Case No. 3:12-CV-02078-EMC (N.D. Cal.)

The plaintiff Paul Hoa was a prisoner in the custody of California
Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). Plaintiff was
expected to be paroled in April 2012. Plaintiff, as part of his
prison work duties, was working between a raised loading dock and
commercial containers trucks at Waterfront Warehouse, without any
reasonable safety precautions. On July 27, 2011, plaintiff met an
accident while performing the dangerous task of opening the doors
on the container prior to it approaching the raised loading dock,
surged towards him in moments. Plaintiff was crushed between the
back of the container and the raised loading dock. As a result,
plaintiff was pinned against the wall by the commercial vehicle,
which continued to back up as the driver was unaware that
plaintiff was pinned. Plaintiff suffered permanent and
catastrophic injuries to his spinal column at the neck, leaving
him permanently paralyzed from the neck down. Plaintiff also
suffered a fractured jaw, severed nerves, crushed tissue, and deep
lacerations.

Plaintiff sued T. Gregory Stagnitto, Bridge Transport, Stag
Leasing, Inc. and David F. Lopez, the driver of the vehicle for
negligence. Plaintiff filed a workers' compensation action and the
Claim number is 05721930.

Defendants Bridge Transport, LLC, Stag Leasing, David F. Lopez,
and T. Gregory Stagnitto dispute liability for the incident and
contend that fault rests exclusively with plaintiff, CDCR, State
of California, State employees, and potentially other unknown
entities/persons.

State defendants Richard Riley, Thomas Alioto, Tammy Foss, George
Moon, David Moore, Ronald Chan, and Raymond Matteucci disputes
liability for the incident and contend that fault rests
exclusively with Plaintiff, Bridge Transport, LLC, Stag Leasing,
David F. Lopez, and T. Gregory Stagnitto, and potentially other
unknown entities/persons.

The parties jointly submit a Joint Case Management Statement and
proposed order pursuant to the Standing Order for All Judges of
the Northern District of California and Civil Local Rule 16-9.

Judge Chen approved the Joint Case Management Statement and
Proposed Order as the Case Management Order for the case and re-
set the case management for January 2, 2015.  The Joint CMC
statement was due January 22/2015, or the court has adopted and
affirmed this schedule:

"Action Plaintiff Defendant State Defendant Non-State ADR
completion date October 30, 2015 Expert Witness disclosure
Supplemental expert disclosure Discovery cut off Pretrial motion
cut off November 2, 2015 Filing of Joint Pretrial January 26, 2016
conference statement due 21 days before Joint Pretrial Conference
date Lodging of Exhibits January 26, 2016 Serving and filing brief
January 26, 2016 of disputed issues of law: Procedural and
evidence Serving Jury January 26, 2016 Instructions and proposed
findings of fact Serving and filing January 26, 2016 statements
from designating information from discovery Objections due January
26, 2016 proposed information from discovery or evidence Final
Pretrial February 16, 2016 Conference (Tuesday at 2:30 PM) Trial
Date (Thursday is February 22, 2016 dark)"

A copy of Judge Chen's approved case management order dated
December 5, 2014, is available at http://is.gd/EkCpzgfrom
Leagle.com.

Gene H. Shioda, James A. Kim, Jason Y. Lie, LAW OFFICE OF GENE H.
SHIODA, Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for PLAINTIFF PAUL HOA.

John F. Geary, Raymond J. Fullerton, Robert W. Henkels, GEARY,
SHEA, O'DONNELL, GRATTAN, AND MITCHELL, Santa Rosa, CA, Attorneys
for David F. Lopez, T. Gregory Stagnitto, Bridge Transport Stag
Leasing, Inc.

KAMALA D. HARRIS, Attorney General of California, MARISA Y.
KIRSCHENBAUER, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, EDWARD R.
FLUET, MANEESH SHARMA, Deputy Attorney General, San Francisco, CA,
Attorneys for R. Riley, T. Alioto, T. Foss, G. Moon, D. Moore, R.
Chan, and R. Matteucci.


C.H. ROBINSON: Bid to Compel Arbitration in "Poublon" Case Denied
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lorrie Poublon filed a putative class action against C.H. Robinson
Company, C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., and Does 1 through 50 on
June 13, 2012. Defendants removed the action to federal court on
August 1, 2012.  Plaintiff filed the operative First Amended
Complaint ("FAC") on September 7, 2012. Plaintiff alleges that
defendants, her former employers, misclassified her and other
employees as exempt from overtime pay requirements. The FAC
asserts claims under California's Unfair Competition Law, Cal.
Bus. & Prof. Code Sections 17200, et seq., and several provisions
of the California Labor Code.  Plaintiff brings these claims on
behalf of herself and a class of similarly situated employees, as
well as on behalf of the State of California pursuant to the
Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA"), California Labor Code
Sections 2698, et seq.

On November 5, 2012, defendants filed a motion to compel
arbitration of plaintiff's individual claims, stay this
litigation, and dismiss plaintiff's class and representative
allegations pursuant to the arbitration agreement.  The plaintiff
filed an opposition, arguing that the arbitration provision is
unenforceable.

District Judge Christina A. Snyder agreed with the plaintiff
saying the arbitration agreement is unenforceable. Accordingly,
the Court denies defendants' motion to compel arbitration, stay
proceedings, and dismiss class and representative allegations and
claims.

A copy of the Court's January 12, 2015 ruling is available at
http://is.gd/FLVPIyfrom Leagle.com.

The case is LORRIE POUBLON v. C.H. ROBINSON COMPANY, ET AL., CASE
NO. 2:12-CV-06654-CAS(MANX), (C.D. Cal.).

Piya Mukherjee Attorneys Present for Plaintiffs.

Christopher Decker -- christopher.decker@ogletreedeakins.com --
Jack Sholkoff -- jack.sholkoff@ogletreedeakins.com -- Attorneys
Present for Defendants.


CALIFORNIA: Court Okays Class Settlement With Auditors
------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reports that a federal judge on Jan. 26
approved settlement of 255 auditors' overtime lawsuit against the
(California) State Compensation Insurance Fund, with $304,000 in
attorneys' fees and expenses.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Mary-Alice Coleman, Esq.
          Michael S. Ahmad, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF MARY-ALICE COLEMAN
          1109 Kennedy Place, Suite #2
          Davis, CA 95616
          Telephone: (916) 498-9131
          Facsimile: (916) 304-0880
          E-mail: lawoffice@maryalicecoleman.com
                  mike.ahmad@lawofficemac.com

               - and -

          Harvey Sohnen, Esq.
          Patricia Kelly, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF SOHNEN & KELLY
          2 Theatre Square, Suite 230
          Orinda, CA 94563-3346
          Telephone: (925)258-9300
          Facsimile: (925) 258-9315

The Defendant is represented by:

          Brandon R. McKelvey, Esq.
          MEDINA MCKELVEY LLP
          983 Reserve Dr.
          Roseville, CA 95678
          Telephone: (916) 960-2211
          Facsimile: (916) 742-5151
          E-mail: brandon@medinamckelvey.com

               - and -

          Mark P. Grajski, Esq.
          Julie G. Yap, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
          400 Capitol Mall, Suite 2350
          Sacramento, CA 95814
          Telephone: (916) 498-7025
          E-mail: mgrajski@seyfarth.com
                  jyap@seyfarth.com

The case is Andrea Sewell, Conrad Silva, and Edith Viera,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
State Compensation Insurance Fund, Case No. 3:13-cv-00588-TEH, in
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco Division).


CALIFORNIA: Bryd's Writ of Habeas Corpus Petition Dismissed
-----------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Barbara A. McAuliffe dismissed state prisoner
Kenneth R. Bryd's petition for writ of habeas corpus without leave
to amend.

Mr. Bryd alleges that his claim comes within the Coleman v. Brown
litigation and that he is a member of the class.

The Coleman v. Brown lawsuit (Case No. 2:90-cv-00520-LKK-JFM,
E.D. Cal.) is a class action involving prison conditions.
Defendants include the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation, California Department of Mental Health, and the
State of California.  Plaintiffs in the case refer to "All inmates
with serious mental disorders who were or would be confined within
the California Department of Corrections."

On review, Judge McAuliffe opined that Bryd's petition is
premature because he has not obtained a decision from the
California Supreme Court on his claim. Therefore, Petitioner
failed to meet his burden to establish exhaustion of state court
remedies, the judge held.  Accordingly, the petition will be
dismissed without prejudice for failure to exhaust state court
remedies, the judge ruled.

The District Court also declined to issue a certificate of
appealability on the Bryd matter.

The Court Clerk is directed to close the case because dismissal
will terminate the proceeding in its entirety.

The case is KENNETH R. BYRD, Petitioner, v. DAVE DAVIES,
Respondent, Case No. 1:14-CV-02022-BAM-HC (E.D. Cal.).  A copy of
the District Court's Jan. 21, 2015 is available for free at
http://is.gd/Y0xrVefrom Leagle.com.


CALIFORNIA: Judge Rejects Inmate's Equal Protection Claim
---------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Ralph R. Beistline denied Plaintiff's Motion for
Reconsideration in the case captioned ROBERT COLEMAN, Plaintiff,
v. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS and REHABILITATION, et
al., Defendants Case No. 1:11-cv-01587-RRB (E.D. Cal.).

Coleman is state prisoner who filed a motion for reconsideration
of the Court's Order dismissing his complaint without leave to
amend by arguing that (1) because he is a member of a class action
brought against officials of the State, he is a member of a
protected class within the scope of the Fourteenth Amendment and
(2) the Court erred in not permitting him to amend to correct the
deficiencies in his Complaint.

In denying Coleman's motion, Judge Beistline held that the mere
fact that a plaintiff may properly be a member of the class
bringing a class action lawsuit does not also make that person a
member of a protected class within the scope of the Fourteenth
Amendment. To be a member of a class for the purpose of a class
action lawsuit, the person need only hold a claim that involves
questions of law and fact common to the class and is typical of
the class as a whole.

In rejecting Coleman's equal protection claim, Judge Beistline
determined that Coleman was neither a member of a protected class
for the purpose of the Fourteenth Amendment nor, under the facts
pleaded, was he being treated differently than other similarly
situated prisoners. Nothing in Coleman's motion addresses the
determination, let alone meets the requirement for
reconsideration.  Moreover, nothing in the clinical documentation
provided, whether originally or in conjunction with the pending
motion, comes close to establishing that the Court's prior
disposition was clearly erroneous and, if uncorrected, would work
a manifest injustice.

A copy of the Order dated December 9, 2014, is available at
bit.ly/1vPBu0D from Leagle.com.


CARRIER IQ: Bulk of Spying Claims vs. Smartphone Makers Dismissed
-----------------------------------------------------------------
William Dotinga at Courthouse News Service reports that a federal
judge has dumped the bulk of a sprawling class action accusing
smartphone makers of installing software that spies on customers,
logs keystrokes and other data, sends information to telecom
providers and drains batteries -- in violation of federal and
state wiretap laws.

Carrier IQ and various telecoms were hit in 2011 with a raft of
class actions alleging that it used a device called IQRD to access
smartphones while hiding its presence and subverting standard
operating system functions or other applications.

A consolidated amended class action in San Francisco federal court
alleges violations of the Federal Wiretap Act, the Computer Fraud
and Abuse Act, and the Stored Communications Act, as well as
multiple federal and state-law warranty and consumer-protection
claims.

Carrier IQ agreed in principle to settle the class action this
past November, leaving smartphone makers HTC, Huawei, LG and
Samsung on the hook.

The manufacturers moved to dismiss the action this past summer,
arguing that consumers had failed to show that information had
been illegally acquired and that the smartphone makers had only
installed Carrier IQ on the phones and sold them.

In a 96-page ruling issued Jan. 21, U.S. District Judge Edward
Chen agreed that none of the manufacturers -- save HTC -- had ever
received customers' text messages or data from Internet searches.
And in HTC's case, receipt of text messages through an error-
reporting tool on Android operating systems was not intentional as
required to prove federal wiretap law violations, the judge said.

Instead, the plaintiffs only showed that smartphone makers
provided a conduit through which cellular providers and Carrier IQ
could intercept data -- by making the phones.

"Plaintiffs have failed to cite any case that would support the
imposition of Wiretap Act liability on a party who merely provided
a means through which a third party subsequently intercepts
communications," Chen wrote.  "To the contrary, authority has
consistently rejected such a theory of liability."

Chen also dismissed most of the state-law eavesdropping and data-
protection claims, but afforded the plaintiffs another chance to
make their case with more specificity.  And he declined to address
the issue of standing -- with claims brought under 35 state laws
by named plaintiffs from 13 different states -- until the group
brings forth more plaintiffs from states not currently
represented.

"The court has reservations of subjecting the device manufacturers
to the expense and burden of nationwide discovery without
plaintiffs first securing actual plaintiffs who clearly have
standing and are willing and able to assert claims under these
state laws," Chen wrote.

Plaintiffs have until March 23 to find new representatives and
file a third amended complaint, the judge concluded.

The multidistrict litigation is captioned In re Carrier IQ, Inc.,
Consumer Privacy Litigation, Case No. C-12-md-2330 EMC, in the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.


CARRINGTON MORTGAGE: Faces "Santos" Class Suit in New Jersey
------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Santos, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Carrington Mortgage Services, LLC, American Modern
Insurance Group, American Modern Home Insurance Company, Midwest
Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Ameritrac Business Solutions, and
Southwest Business Corporation, Case No. 2:15-cv-00864-WHW-CLW
(D.N.J., February 4, 2015) is brought over alleged breach of
contract.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Roosevelt N. Nesmith, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF ROOSEVELT N. NESMITH, LLC
          363 Bloomfield Avenue, Suite 2C
          Montclair, NJ 07042
          Telephone: (973) 259-6990
          Facsimile: (866) 848-1368
          E-mail: roosevelt@nesmithlaw.com


CHRYSLER: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models
-----------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 6, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car, Light Truck & Van, SUV
Notification type:        Service Campaign Mfr
System:                   Airbag
Units affected:           258600
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2015003
TC ID number:             2015003

Chrysler Canada is conducting a voluntary Safety Improvement
Campaign concerning the driver's airbag inflator on certain
vehicles equipped with Takata airbags.  Chrysler Canada will
replace the driver's inflator on affected vehicles.  This action
is not being conducted under the requirements of the Motor Vehicle
Safety Act.

Affected products:

   Maker          Model        Model year(s) affected
   -----          -----        ----------------------
   DODGE          CHARGER      2005, 2006, 2007
   CHRYSLER       ASPEN        2007
   DODGE          MAGNUM       2005, 2006, 2007
   DODGE          RAM          2004, 2005, 2006, 2007
   DODGE          DAKOTA       2004, 2005, 2006, 2007
   DODGE          DURANGO      2004, 2005, 2006, 2007
   CHRYSLER       300          2005, 2006, 2007


CLARK COUNTY, NV: 12 Constables and Servers Challenge Mass Firing
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In a federal class action, 12 deputy constables and process
servers say Clark County officials conspired to abolish the Las
Vegas Township Constable's Office and fire them
unconstitutionally, reports Mike Heuer at Courthouse News Service.

Lead plaintiff Austin Dowd claims that the class of deputy
constables and process servers are "victims of what can only be
properly termed as a systematic 'shakedown' and conspiracy against
the elected constable perpetrated by defendants under the pretext
of authority and enforcement of an unconstitutional statute, NRS
258.010(3), (3)(b)."

The statute allows a county board of commissioners to determine if
a township constable is necessary and to appoint a replacement
when there is a township constable vacancy.

The Clark County Board of Commissioners in March 2013 voted to
abolish the constable's office.  The vote came after a reality TV
pilot episode depicted "foul-mouthed deputies," conflicts with
county officials over financial matters and jurisdictional
arguments with other constables, the Las Vegas Review Journal
reported.

Constable John Bonaventura challenged the commission's decision in
Clark County Court but lost.  He claimed the commission had
violated the Open Meetings Act by agreeing before its March
meeting to abolish the office to get rid of him, and intended to
restore it afterward, the Review Journal reported.

In the new lawsuit, filed Jan. 23, Dowd "seeks redress for the
defendants' unlawful oppression under color of law, due process
and civil rights violations."  He says "oppression" includes
violations of Nevada's Peace Officers Bill of Rights, which
requires cause to remove a peace officer.  He seeks class
certification declaratory judgment that NRS 258.010(3), (3)(b) is
unconstitutional, and an injunction.

He claims that Bonaventura's removal cost the plaintiffs
"meaningful constitutional property interests in their employment
and pay," in violation of the Fourth, Fifth and 14th Amendments,
and that the commissioners and other county officials conspired to
remove Bonaventura and keep him off the November ballot, which
caused his term as constable to end on Jan. 4.

"It is this very conspiracy," Dowd says, that deprived the class
of "substantial constitutionally protected interests in their
employment and income without due process rights."

The Clark County Board of Commissioners and Las Vegas Metropolitan
Police Department announced on Jan. 2 that the constable's office
would become part of the police department's Detention Services
Division.

Dowd says the deputy constables and process servers received
emails from the police department stating that they no longer were
qualified for employment based on undisclosed issues with their
backgrounds, and that none were notified of any cause for their
removal, as required by Nevada law.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert B. Pool, Esq.
          ROBERT B. POOL, PC
          7472 W. Sahara Ave., Suite 102B
          Las Vegas, NV 89117
          Telephone: (702) 834-5602
          Facsimile: (702) 834-5601


COMPLETE PAYMENT: Class Allegations Stricken in "Zarichny" Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, SANDRA ZARICHNY v. COMPLETE PAYMENT RECOVERY
SERVICES, INC et al., CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-3197, (E.D. Penn.),
District Judge Stewart Dalzell ruled on defendants' motion to
dismiss and/or strike plaintiff Sandra Zarichny's first amended
complaint and the defendants' motion for leave to file a reply
brief.  Specifically, Judge Dalzell ordered that:

1. Defendants' motion for leave to file a reply brief is granted;

2. Defendants' motion to dismiss is granted in part and denied in
part;

3. Defendants' motion to dismiss defendant Fidelity National
Information Services (FIS) is granted;

4. Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's claim against
defendant Complete Payment Recovery Services, Inc. (CPRS) pursuant
to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA), 47 U.S.C.
Section 227 et seq., is denied;

5. Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's claim against CPRS
pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), 15
U.S.C. Sections 1692c, 1692d, and 1692f is granted;

6. Defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's claim against CPRS
pursuant to the FDCPA, 15 U.S.C. Sections 1692g, is denied;

7. Defendants' motion to strike plaintiff's class action
allegations is granted;

8. Parties must jointly inform the Court whether they agree that
settlement discussions before the Honorable Jacob P. Hart would
likely be productive; and

9. Further scheduling will abide the parties' communication.

A copy of the Court's order dated on January 21, 2015, is
available at http://is.gd/yvw8mJfrom Leagle.com.

SANDRA ZARICHNY, Plaintiff, represented by ARKADY ERIC RAYZ --
erayz@kalraylaw.com -- KALIKHMAN & RAYZ LLC & GERALD D. WELLS III
-- gwells@cwg-law.com -- CONNOLLY WELLS & GRAY, LLP.

COMPLETE PAYMENT RECOVERY SERVICES, INC., Defendant, represented
by GERALD E. ARTH -- garth@foxrothschild.com -- FOX ROTHSCHILD
O'BRIEN & FRANKEL LLP, JOSHUA HORN -- jhorn@foxrothschild.com --
FOX ROTHSCHILD O'BRIEN & FRANKEL LLP & NICHOLAS T. SOLOSKY --
nsolosky@foxrothschild.com -- FOX ROTHSCHILD LLP.


COOSEMANS MONTREAL: Recalls Granny Smith Apples & Gala Apples
-------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 9, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Updated Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Listeria
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Beauvais Ltee., Coosemans Montreal Inc.,
                          Courchesne Larose, Fruits et Legumes
                          Gaetan Bono Inc.
Distribution:             New Brunswick, Newfoundland and
                          Labrador, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Prince
                          Edward Island, Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9575

The food recall warning issued on January 8, 2015 has been updated
to include additional information.  This additional information
was identified during the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's (CFIA)
food safety investigation.

Industry is recalling Granny Smith apples and Gala apples exported
by Bidart Bros. in the United States (US) from the marketplace due
to possible Listeria monocytogenes contamination.  Identified
importers of the recalled products include Beauvais Ltee.,
Courchesne Larose, Coosemans Montreal Inc. and Fruits et Legumes
Gaetan Bono Inc.  Consumers should not consume and retailers,
restaurants and institutions should not sell or use the recalled
products.

Check to see if you have recalled products.  Recalled products
should be thrown out or returned to the location where they were
purchased.  If you are unsure as to whether products are included
in this recall, contact the location where they were purchased.

Food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes may not look or
smell spoiled but can still make you sick. Symptoms can include
vomiting, nausea, persistent fever, muscle aches, severe headache
and neck stiffness.  Pregnant women, the elderly and people with
weakened immune systems are particularly at risk.  Although
infected pregnant women may experience only mild, flu-like
symptoms, the infection can lead to premature delivery, infection
of the newborn or even stillbirth.  In severe cases of illness,
people may die.

PHAC is monitoring the US outbreak investigation.  For more
information see the Public Health Notice issued by PHAC dated
Dec. 28, 2014.

The recall was triggered by a recall initiated by the US producer
which may be related to a foodborne illness outbreak.  The CFIA is
working with its federal partners, the Public Health Agency of
Canada (PHAC) and Health Canada, and the United States Food and
Drug Administration and 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.


DELBERT SERVICES: Hayes et al., Compelled to Arbitration
--------------------------------------------------------
Borrowers from Internet payday lender Western Sky Financial, LLC,
led by James Hayes commenced an action on behalf of themselves and
others similarly situated against Delbert Services Corporation, a
third-party debt collector.  Hayes, et al., allege that Delbert
violated the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA) and the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) in the course of its
collection efforts.

Delbert moved to dismiss based on the Loan Agreements' forum-
selection clause or on the basis of the tribal exhaustion
doctrine.  Alternatively, Delbert moved to compel arbitration.

In an Jan. 21, 2015 Opinion available at http://is.gd/KapO6Gfrom
Leagle.com, District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr., granted the motion
to compel arbitration under the terms of the Loan Agreement and
dismissed the claims without prejudice.  The judge opines that the
arbitration agreement controls the present dispute between the
plaintiffs and Delbert.

James Hayes, Plaintiff, represented by Dale Wood Pittman --
dale@pittmanlawoffice.com -- The Law Office of Dale W. Pittman,
P.C., Andrew Joseph Guzzo -- aguzzo@kellyandcrandall.com -- Kelly
& Crandall PLC, Casey Shannon Nash -- casey@clalegal.com --
Consumer Litgation Associates PC, James Wilson Speer, Virginia
Proverty Law Center, Kristi Cahoon Kelly --
kkelly@kellyandcrandall.com -- Kelly & Crandall PLC, Leonard
Anthony Bennett -- leonard@clalegal.com -- Consumer Litigation
Associates, Matthew James Erausquin -- matt@clalegal.com --
Consumer Litgation Associates PC & Susan Mary Rotkis --
susan@clalegal.com -- Consumer Litigation Associates.

Debera Grant, Plaintiff, represented by Dale Wood Pittman, The Law
Office of Dale W. Pittman, P.C., Andrew Joseph Guzzo, Kelly &
Crandall PLC, Casey Shannon Nash, Consumer Litgation Associates
PC, James Wilson Speer, Virginia Proverty Law Center, Kristi
Cahoon Kelly, Kelly & Crandall PLC, Leonard Anthony Bennett,
Consumer Litigation Associates, Matthew James Erausquin, Consumer
Litgation Associates PC & Susan Mary Rotkis, Consumer Litigation
Associates.

Herbert White, Plaintiff, represented by Andrew Joseph Guzzo,
Kelly & Crandall PLC, Casey Shannon Nash, Consumer Litgation
Associates PC, Dale Wood Pittman, The Law Office of Dale W.
Pittman, P.C., Matthew James Erausquin, Consumer Litgation
Associates PC, Susan Mary Rotkis, Consumer Litigation Associates &
Kristi Cahoon Kelly, Kelly & Crandall PLC.

Delbert Services Corporation, Defendant, represented by Julie
Moore Carpenter -- jcarpenter@jenner.com -- Jenner & Block LLP &
Brian Jason Fischer -- bfischer@jenner.com -- Jenner & Block.


ENDO HEALTH: Removes "Mahaffay" Class Suit to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Mahaffay v. Endo Health
Solutions Inc., et al., Case No. HG14752254, was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Alameda to the U.S. District Court for the California Northern
District (Oakland).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
4:15-cv-00387-DMR to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is brought on behalf of a proposed class of end-
payors, who indirectly purchased, reimbursed or otherwise paid for
all dosage strengths of extended release oxymorphone hydrochloride
tablets, which Endo has sold under the brand name Opana ER and
which Actavis and Impax have sold in generic form.  Opana ER is
used to treat moderate to severe pain in patients requiring
continuous around-the-clock opioid treatment for an extended
period.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph R. Saveri, Esq.
          Andrew M. Purdy, Esq.
          James Dallal, Esq.
          Ryan J. McEwan, Esq.
          JOSEPH SAVERI LAW FIRM, INC.
          505 Montgomery Street, Suite 625
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 500-6800
          Facsimile: (415) 395-9940
          E-mail: jsaveri@saverilawfirm.com
                  apurdy@saverilawfirm.com
                  jdallal@saverilawfirm.com
                  rmcewan@saverilawfirm.com

Defendants Endo Health Solutions Inc. and Endo Pharmaceuticals
Inc. are represented by:

          Joshua D.N. Hess, Esq.
          DECHERT LLP
          One Bush Street, Suite 1600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 262-4500
          Facsimile: (415) 262-4555
          E-mail: joshua.hess@dechert.com

Defendants Actavis, Inc. and Actavis South Atlantic LLC are
represented by:

          James P. Schaefer, Esq.
          SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
          525 University Avenue
          Palo Alto, CA 94301
          Telephone: (650) 470-4500
          Facsimile: (650) 470-4570
          E-mail: james.schaefer@skadden.com

Defendant Impax Laboratories, Inc. is represented by:

          Susan Harriman, Esq.
          Benedict Hur, Esq.
          KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
          633 Battery Street
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 391-5400
          Facsimile: (415) 397-7188
          E-mail: sharriman@kvn.com
                  bhur@kvn.com

               - and -

          Kenneth R. O'Rourke, Esq.
          Anna Fabish, Esq.
          Stephen McIntyre, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP
          400 South Hope Street
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-6000
          Facsimile: (213) 430-6407
          E-mail: korourke@omm.com
                  afabish@omm.com
                  smcintyre@omm.com


ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS: "Garcia" Suit May Be Amended in 21 Days
------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiffs have 21 days to amend a federal class action accusing
Zimride and Lyft of selling customers' personal information to
marketers, or it will be dismissed with prejudice, a federal judge
ruled on January 23, according to Courthouse News Service.

The case is Miguel Garcia, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Enterprise Holdings, Inc., d/b/a
Zimride, a Missouri corporation, and Lyft Inc., a Delaware
corporation, Case No. 4:14-cv-00596-SBA, in the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California (Oakland Division).


EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Sued for Violating Fair Credit Reporting Act
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Rivera, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Equifax Information Services, LLC, Experian
Information Solutions, Inc. and Trans Union LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-
00137-CKK (D.D.C., January 27, 2015) alleges violations of the
Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeffery Warren Styles, Esq.
          THE WASHINGTON LEGAL GROUP, LLC
          1990 M Street, NW, Suite 200
          Washington, DC 20036
          Telephone: (202) 503-1708
          Facsimile: (202) 503-1708
          E-mail: jstyles@washlegal.com


EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Cannot Reduce Information in Random Sampling
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Accused of reporting released water liens as unpaid, Equifax
Information Services cannot reduce how much information it must
provide in a random sampling of 100 customers, a federal judge
ruled, according to Courthouse News Service.

The case is Albert C. Ceccone v. Equifax Information Services,
LLC, Case No. 13-1314 (KBJ/AK), in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Columbia.


FEDERAL EXPRESS: "Minor" Wrongful Termination Suit Dismissed
------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Lucy h. Koh granted a motion to dismiss in its
entirety, without leave to amend, the case GARY MINOR, Plaintiff,
v. FEDEX OFFICE AND PRINT SERVICES, INC., FEDERAL EXPRESS
CORPORATION, and DOES 3 to 50, Defendants, CASE NO. 14-CV-01117-
LHK, (N.D. Cal.).

Mr. Minor filed this action against his former employer, FedEx
Office, as well as Federal Express Corporation. He asserts five
claims under California's Fair Employment and Housing Act
("FEHA"), Cal. Gov. Code Sections 12900 et seq., and a sixth claim
for wrongful termination in violation of public policy.

In his order entered January 16, 2015, a copy of which is
available at http://is.gd/c8xdV2 from Leagle.com, Judge Koh held
that "the Court previously granted Minor leave to amend to allege
(1) that Minor exhausted administrative remedies as to his FEHA
claims; and (2) additional facts indicating that either the
general release provision did not bar Minor's wrongful termination
claim, or that FedEx Office obtained Minor's consent to the
general release provision by fraud or misrepresentation.  Minor
has failed to correct any of these defects. Nor does Minor, in his
opposition, claim that he could allege additional facts to salvage
his claims. Therefore, granting leave to amend would likely be
futile. Accordingly, all of Minor's claims are dismissed with
prejudice."

Gary Minor, Plaintiff, represented by Barbara Emily Cowin Figari
-- barbara@figarilaw.com -- The Figari Law Firm.

Fedex Office and Print Services, Inc., Defendant, represented by
Brooke Sikora Purcell -- brooke.purcell@ogletreedeakins.com --
Ogletree Deakins Nash Smoak & Stewart, P.C. & Gregory Clement
Cheng -- gregory.cheng@ogletreedeakins.com -- Ogletree Deakins
Nash Smoak & Stewart, P.C.


FINISH LINE: "Arreola" Suit Moved From N.D. Cal. to C.D. Cal
------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Lucy H. Koh granted Finish Line's Motion to
Transfer in the case captioned HERIBERTO ARREOLA, an individual,
on behalf of himself, and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. THE FINISH LINE, Defendant, Case No. 14-CV-03339-
LHK) (N.D. Cal.).

Finish Line is a retailer of athletic shoes, apparel, and
accessories, with its headquarters in Indiana.

Arreola, a former hourly employee of The Finish Line, being a
Sales Lead, filed an action in Santa Clara Superior Court,
alleging wage and hour violations under various provisions of the
California Labor Code and Business and Professions Code.  Arreola
alleges that, among others, Finish Line failed to pay regular and
overtime wages; failed to compensate its hourly employees for
certain tasks; and failed to maintain adequate time records and
itemized wage statements.

Finish Line removed Arreola's complaint to the Northern District
of California based on three reasons: (1) Arreola's complaint
meets the requirements of Class Action Fairness Act because
Arreola seeks to represent a class of over 100 individuals; (2) a
labor class action lawsuit regarding wages, hours, or working
conditions is preempted by the National Labor Relations Act; (3)
the Court has diversity jurisdiction because Arreola and Finish
Line are citizens of different states, and Arreola's individual
claim puts at least $75,000 at issue.

Arreola filed a motion to remand the action back to state court.

Finish Line filed a motion to transfer venue to the Central
District of California.

In his Order granting Finish Line's Motion to Transfer, District
Judge Koh ruled that Finish Line has carried its burden to show
that it would be more convenient for non-party witnesses to
testify in the Central District and in light of the fact that
Arreola is not a resident of the Northern District, his claim
stems from conduct that did not occur in this District, and that
Arreola seeks to bring a class action on behalf of individuals
dispersed throughout the state, the Court accords Arreola's choice
of forum minimal deference.

Moreover, Judge Koh held that Finish Line has shown by a
preponderance of the evidence that Arreola's claim for unpaid
wages and overtime satisfies CAFA's minimum amount-in-controversy
requirement. Hence, denied Arreola's motion to remand.

A copy of the Order dated December 9, 2014, is available at
bit.ly/1BNp5T8 from Leagle.com.

Heriberto Arreola, Plaintiff, represented by Eric B. Kingsley --
eric@kingsleykingsley.com -- Kingsley & Kingsley, APC, Liane
Katzenstein Ly -- liane@kingsleykingsley.com -- Kingsley &
Kingsley, APC & Sahag Majarian, II, Law Office of Sahag Majarian
II.

The Finish Line, Inc.,, Defendant, represented by Scott J. Witlin
-- Scott J. Witlin - switlin@akingump.com -- Barnes & Thornburg,
LLP, Steve Lou Hernandez, Barnes & Thornburg LLP & Tiffany L
Koenig -- tiffany.koenig@jacksonlewis.com -- BARNES and THORNBURG
LLP.


FORD: Recalls MKC Model Over Defective Powertrain Control Module
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 9, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              SUV
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Powertrain
Units affected:           2033
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2015007
TC ID number:             2015007
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14S29

On certain vehicles equipped with Push-to-Start/Stop (PTS) switch
located at the bottom of the transmission shift controls, the
switch could be inadvertently actuated, unintentionally causing
the engine to shut off.  An inadvertent actuation of the PTS
switch would result in an audible chime through the radio speakers
and a "Vehicle Switched Off" message on the vehicle information
display.  If the PTS switch is inadvertently actuated while
driving, the restraint system may not perform as intended during a
crash, which would increase the risk of injury and/or property
damage.

Dealers will reprogram the powertrain control module (PCM), and
replace the Gear Shift Module (GSM), which relocates the PTS
switch.

Affected products: 2015 Lincoln MKC


GENERAL ELECTRIC: Opt-In Plaintiffs Not Required to Arbitrate
-------------------------------------------------------------
Senior District Judge Joseph E. Irenas of the New Jersey federal
district court denied defendant's Motion to Compel Arbitration in
the lawsuit MADDY v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY.

The Defendant sought to compel arbitration of claims asserted by
two opt-in Plaintiffs, Jeremy Gifford and Jesse Guerra, who are
not represented by unions.

The District Court finds that Gifford and Guerra are not "Covered
Employees" under GE's "Solutions" program -- an alternative
dispute resolution procedure -- and therefore not bound by the
Solutions procedure.

The complaint is DONALD MADDY, KURT FREDRICK, FREDRICK R.
SHELLHAMMER, III, FRANK MICHIENZI, MARIO LAUREANO, ANOTHONY
CHELPATY, WILLIAM MADDEN, STEVEN LE BLANC, JEFFREY SCOTT
WILKERSON, JEFFREY NACARETTE, PHILLIP ERIC BENSON, BRADLEY PALMER,
THOMAS KISS, Individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, a New York
corporation, Defendant, Civil Action No. 14-0490 (JEI/KMW) (D.
N.J.).  Plaintiffs, service technicians for General Electric
Company's Appliances Division, brought the putative collective
action pursuant to Sec. 216(b) of the Fair Labor Standards Act
(FLSA) to recover allegedly unpaid overtime compensation from
Defendant.

A copy of the District Court's Jan. 21, 2015 Opinion is available
at http://is.gd/g1ed0Bfrom Leagle.com.

Counsel for Plaintiffs:

     SWARTZ SWIDLER, LLC
     Justin L. Swidler, Esq.
     Richard S. Swartz, Esq.
     1101 Kings Hwy N, Suite 402
     Cherry Hill, NJ 08034
     Tel: (856) 685-7420
     Fax: (856) 685-7417

          - and -

ROBERT D. SOLOFF, P.A., Robert D. Soloff, Esq. --
soloffpa@bellsouth.net -- Plantation, Florida.

          - and -

ALLEN EICHENBAUM, Allen Eichenbaum, Esq., Plantation, Florida.

Counsel for Defendant General Electric Company are: LITTLER
MENDELSON, P.C., Nina Markey, Esq. -- nmarkey@littler.com , Rachel
Fendell Satinsky, Esq. -- rsatinsky@littler.com , Aaron Reed, Esq.
(pro hac vice) -- areed@littler.com , Daniel B. Boatright, Esq.
(pro hac vice) -- dboatright@littler.com , Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania.


GENERAL MOTORS: Recalls Cobalt, G5 and Pursuit Models
-----------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 9, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Car
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Steering
Units affected:           1988
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2015010
TC ID number:             2015010
Manufacturer recall
number:                   14115

Certain vehicles equipped with electric power steering may
experience a sudden loss of power steering assist that could occur
at any time while driving.  If the power steering assist is lost,
a message is displayed on the Driver Information Centre and a
chime sounds to inform the driver.  Steering control can be
maintained, as the vehicle will revert to a manual steering mode,
but will require greater driver effort.  The sudden change in
steering may increase the risk of a crash causing injury and/or
property damage.

Dealers will affect repairs as necessary.  Note: This recall is an
expansion of recall 2014-104 for vehicles that may have received
defective parts through prior servicing for recall 2010-059.

Affected products:

   Maker          Model        Model year(s) affected
   -----          -----        ----------------------
   PONTIAC        PURSUIT      2005, 2006
   CHEVROLET      COBALT       2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010
   PONTIAC        G5           2007, 2008, 2009, 2010


GODADDY.COM INC: Summary Judgment Order in "Harris" Upheld
----------------------------------------------------------
Toby Harris, a former employee of defendant GoDaddy.Com, Inc.,
appeals the superior court's decision granting GoDaddy's motion
for summary judgment on Harris's claims related to his employment
termination.

Finding no error, the Court of Appeals of Arizona affirms the
superior court order.

GoDaddy hired Harris in November 2009 as a sales and support
representative. In February 2010, GoDaddy dismissed Harris for
security breaches that violated GoDaddy's policies. One of the
breaches occurred when Harris transmitted to his personal e-mail
account a "CRM screenshot" depicting confidential information
regarding Harris's sales over a ten-day period.

Harris and other plaintiffs filed a putative class action in
superior court, alleging (in one federal law claim and various
Arizona law claims) GoDaddy failed to compensate them for overtime
work and pay bonuses, and as to Harris, wrongfully terminated him.
The case is TOBY HARRIS, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. GODADDY.COM,
INC., an Arizona corporation, Defendant/Appellee, Case No. 1-CA-
CV-14-0151.

Judge Michael J. Brown delivered the decision of the Court, in
which Presiding Judge Samuel A. Thumma and Judge Patricia A.
Orozco joined.  A copy of the Court's Jan. 22, 2015 is available
at http://is.gd/YZQH0Ifrom Leagle.com.

Toby Allen Harris, Phoenix, Plaintiff/Appellant in Propria
Persona.

BurnsBarton LLP, Phoenix, By David T. Barton --
David@burnsbarton.com , C. Christine Burns --
Christine@burnsbarton.com , Benjamin J. Naylor --
Ben@burnsbarton.com , Counsel for Defendant/Appellee.


GOOGLE INC: Sued Over Automatic Renewal of Google Drive Plan
------------------------------------------------------------
Google fails to make consumers aware that paid subscriptions to
its data-storage service Drive are renewed automatically, a class
action alleges, reports Barbara Leonard, writing for Courthouse
News Service.

Eric Mayron, the North Hollywood-based lead plaintiff behind the
complaint filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court, says he has
been paying for Google Drive since 2014.

Though Google offers 15 gigabytes of Google Drive storage for
free, subscribers can upgrade their memberships to store more
files by purchasing a storage plan, according to the Jan. 23
complaint.

The two most basic paid subscription plans run $1.99 a month for
100 GB and $9.99 a month for a terabyte.

But Mayron says Google failed to clearly present the terms of its
automatic renewal offer, and charges the credit or debit cards of
its subscribers every month without affirmative consent.

Google also fails to provide subscribers with acknowledgement that
includes the offer terms for continuous service, or a cancelation
policy and information regarding how to cancel, according to the
complaint.

The terms are buried in a "vague and ambiguous" Terms of Service
agreement for Google Wallet, the company's service for storing
credit card information, Mayron says.

"These Google Wallet Terms of Service are accessible via an
inconspicuous hyperlink at the bottom of the Google Wallet
webpage," the complaint states.  "The font of the hyperlink itself
is smaller and lighter in color than the remainder of the website.
In addition, the disclosures that are actually provided are hidden
in the lengthy, 30-page, densely-worded, single-spaced Google
Wallet Terms of Service.  And the disclosures are buried in the
middle of the Google Wallet Terms of Service itself."

Mayron says Google failed within its TOS pages to state its
continuous-service terms "in clear and conspicuous language, i.e.,
in larger type than the surrounding text, or in contrasting type,
font, or color to the surrounding text of the same size, or set
off from the surrounding text of the same size by symbols or other
marks, in a manner that clearly calls attention to the language."

The complaint goes on to describe an online-checkout odyssey that
never mentions "the automatic renewal offer terms or continuous
service offer terms."

"After plaintiff and class members clicked on the 'buy' hyperlink,
plaintiff's and class members' storage plans commenced and
defendant charged plaintiff's and class members' payment method on
a recurring, monthly basis," the complaint states.  "The
disclosures that defendant made on the above-shown 'review your
purchase' page are in smaller font than the rest of the 'review
your purchase page' for the item and price descriptions."

Mayron says the failure "to present the automatic renewal offer
terms, or continuous service offer terms, in a clear and
conspicuous manner before the subscription or purchasing agreement
was fulfilled and in visual proximity to the request for consent
to the offer" violates the California Business & Professional
Code.

The complaint notes that Google Drive, available via Google Apps,
had 190 million monthly active users as of June 2014, a rise of 85
percent in the past year.

Google, valued at $400 billion as of July 2014, reports that 8
percent of Fortune 500 companies used Google Drive, according to
the complaint.

Mayron wants to represent a class of California residents who
bought subscriptions to Google Drive since April 24, 2012, the
date that Google launched the service.  He seeks restitution and
injunction for such violations and unfair competition.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd Seaver, Esq.
          BERMAN DEVALERIO
          One California Street, Suite 900
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 433-3200
          Facsimile: (415) 433-6382
          E-mail: tseaver@bermandevalerio.com


HEALTH CANADA: Recalls LX1 Due to Undeclared Substance
------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Type of communication:    Foreign Product Alert (FPA)
Subcategory:              Natural health products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Source of alert:          United States Food and Drug
                          Administration

These products are not authorized for sale in Canada and have not
been found in the Canadian marketplace, but it is possible they
may have been brought into the country by travellers or purchased
over the Internet.

LX1 is promoted for weight loss.

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned
consumers not to use this product after it was found to contain
undeclared 1,3-dimethylamylamine (DMAA).

DMAA is a drug that is not approved for sale in Canada.

Side effects associated with DMAA include high blood pressure,
shortness of breath, chest pain, stroke and psychiatric disorders.

Health Canada advises Canadians to contact the Health Products and
Food Branch Inspectorate at 1-800-267-9675 if they find the
products in the Canadian marketplace.

Canadians who have these products are advised not to use them, and
should consult with a healthcare professional if they have
concerns about their health related to the use of these products.


IC SYSTEM: Accused of Violating Fair Debt Collection Act in N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nathan Spira, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
consumers v. I.C. System, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-00412 (E.D.N.Y.,
January 27, 2015) accuses the Defendant of violating the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq.
          ADAM J. FISHBEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW
          483 Chestnut Street
          Cedarhurst, NY 11516
          Telephone: (516) 791-4400
          Facsimile: (516) 791-4411
          E-mail: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com


IKEA U.S.A.: Class in "Yeoman" Suit Decertified
-----------------------------------------------
District Judge Cynthia Bashant of the Southern District of
California granted defendant's motion to decertify the class in
the case REID YEOMAN, ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. IKEA U.S.A. WEST,
INC., Defendant, CASE NO. 11-CV-00701-BAS(BGS) (S.D. Cal.)

Plaintiff Reid Yeoman initiated a complaint against defendant Ikea
U.S. West, Inc. (IKEA), in the Superior Court of California for
the County of San Diego, containing a claim for violations of the
Song-Beverly Credit Card Act of 1971. The case was removed to the
Southern District of California court by the defendant. Plaintiff
subsequently filed a first amended class action complaint and
added plaintiff Rita Medellin. Plaintiff filed a motion for class
certification. The motion was granted on May 4, 2012. IKEA
subsequently moved to decertify the class, which the court granted
in part.

The parties agreed to a bench trial before the Court. The Court
granted IKEA's motion in limine to bifurcate the liability phase
on plaintiff's class action claim from the damages phase. The
proceedings on the liability phase took place on November 12-13,
2014. The Court heard and weighed the testimony and evidence
presented by plaintiff. Following plaintiff's presentation of
evidence in the liability phase of the trial, IKEA moved for
judgment on partial findings pursuant to Rule 52(c) of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure, or, in the alternative, to decertify the
class.

Judge Bashant granted IKEA's motion to decertify the class. As the
class has been decertified, IKEA's motion pursuant to Rule 52(c)
for judgment on partial findings as to the class is moot. However,
Ikea's Rule 52(c) motion is denied as to plaintiff. Plaintiff has
established liability as to her transactions.

The damages phase of the trial on plaintiff's individual claim was
set for January 27, 2015.

A copy of Judge Bashant's order dated December 4, 2014, is
available at http://is.gd/0CgEDxfrom Leagle.com

Reid Yeoman, Plaintiff, represented by Gene J. Stonebarger --
gstonebarger@stonebargerlaw.com -- at Stonebarger Law, APC; Leslie
E. Hurst -- lhurst@bholaw.com -- Paula M. Roach --
proach@bholaw.com -- Thomas Joseph O'Reardon, II --
toreardon@bholaw.com -- Timothy Gordon Blood -- tblood@bholaw.com
-- at Blood Hurst & O'Reardon LLP

Rita Medellin, Plaintiff, represented by Elaine W. Yan -- Gene J.
Stonebarger -- gstonebarger@stonebargerlaw.com -- Richard D.
Lambert -- rlambert@stonebargerlaw.com -- at Stonebarger Law, AP;
Hallie Von Rock -- hallievonrock@yahoo.com  -- at Aiman-Smith &
Marcy; and Timothy Gordon Blood -- tblood@bholaw.com -- at Blood
Hurst & O'Reardon LLP

Ikea U.S.A. West, Inc., Defendant, represented by Ashkan Matthew
Soleimanpour -- Kenneth Shoji Kawabata -- ksk@manningllp.com -- at
Manning & Kass Ellrod Ramirez Trester LLP; Jill S. Casselman --
jscasselman@rkmc.com -- Michael A Geibelson --
mageibelson@rkmc.com -- at Robins Kaplan Miller and Ciresi.


INTERTEK: Recalls Certain Crane Brand Wi-Fi Infrared Heaters
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 31, 2014
Posting date:             December 31, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Tools and Electrical Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Electrical Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-43083

Affected products: Crane brand Wi-Fi Infrared Heaters

The recall involves Crane brand Wi-Fi infrared heaters
manufactured by Wachsmuth & Krogmann.  The heaters are identified
by model EE-8077xxxxx, where "x" means A-Z, 0-9, symbols or blanks
spaces.  The date codes included in this recall are 0814, 0914 and
1014.

The infrared heater bears an unauthorized ETLus and cETLus
Certification Mark.  It is unknown if this product is in
compliance with the applicable safety standard.  Additionally, the
label on the product references incorrect Standards, cautionary
markings are missing from the product and cautionary markings are
missing from the cordset.

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

Approximately 2,500 units were distributed to Wachsmuth & Krogmann
facilities in the United States, along with 483 units to unknown
US locations; however, some units may have been sold in Canada.

The units were manufactured in China and sold from August 2014 to
October 2014 at various retailers.

Companies:

   Manufacturer     Wachsmuth & Krogmann
                    Hamburg
                    Germany

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled infrared
heaters.


J & G TRANSPORT: Fails to Sink "Collado" TILA Suit
--------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Goodman of the Southern District of Florida,
Miami Division, declined to dismiss the case ENRIQUE COLLADO, and
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. J. & G. TRANSPORT, INC.
et al., Defendants, Case No. 14-80467-CIV-GOODMAN (S.D. Fla.)

Plaintiffs Enrique Collado and Juan Giron were employed by
defendant J & G Transport Inc. as truck drivers. J & G Transport
is a Florida corporation that transports garbage, debris, mulch,
sugar, sugar cane, and molasses exclusively within the State of
Florida.  Collado filed his amended complaint alleging that
defendant failed to pay him and other similarly situated employees
the overtime rate for hours worked over forty hours a week and/or
a minimum wage, in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29
U.S.C. Section 201, et seq., he was later joined by Giron as named
plaintiffs.

Collado and Giron allege that J & G Transport intentionally
misclassifies all of its truck drivers as independent contractors.
Plaintiffs further allege that all similarly situated truck
drivers routinely work more than forty hours per week and are not
paid overtime or a minimum wage.

Plaintiffs amended their joint statement of claim, stating that
Collado is owed $4.078.12 in unpaid overtime wages, and $2,805.00
for unpaid minimum wages. Giron allegedly is owed $2,966.40 for
unpaid overtime.  Giron does not have an unpaid minimum wage
claim.

Magistrate Judge Goodman issued an order granting a motion for
conditional class certification on October 23, 2014. That Order
required, among other things, that defendants provide plaintiffs
with an excel spreadsheet detailing certain contact information of
putative class members no later than November 7, 2014. Defendants
instead filed on November 6, a Motion to Dismiss and Stay
Discovery. Two days later, plaintiffs filed an Expedited Motion to
Compel production of the list of putative class members.

Magistrate Judge Goodman denied defendant's motion to dismiss and
granted plaintiffs' motion to compel discovery.  Defendants were
to provide plaintiffs, in excel format, with a list of names,
addresses, telephone numbers, fax numbers, e-mail addresses and
dates of birth of all putative class members on or before December
10, 2014 and potential opt-in, similarly situated plaintiffs must
consent to opt into this litigation no later than February 9, 2015
and those opt-in notices must be filed with the Court no later
than February 16, 2015.

A copy of Magistrate Judge Goodman's order dated December 5, 2014,
is available at http://is.gd/DRWnJdfrom Leagle.com.

Juan Giron, Enrique Collado, and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, represented by, Christopher Francisco Zacarias --
czacarias@zacariaslaw.com -- at Law Offices of Christopher F.
Zacarias, P.A.

Defendants, represented by Charles Robert Pickett --
rpickett@taylorattorneys.net -- at Taylor & Associates, Attorneys
at Law, P.L.


KELLOGG CANADA: Recalls MorningStar Farms Spicy Black Bean Burger
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 9, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Peanut
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Kellogg Canada Inc.
Distribution:             Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, New
                          Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Ontario, Quebec,
                          Saskatchewan
Extent of the product
distribution:             Hotel/Restaurant/InstitutionalCFIA
reference number:         9591

Affected products: 48 count (93 g) MorningStar Farms Spicy Black
Bean Burger


KENT'S MEAT: Faces "Duckworth" Suit Alleging Job Discrimination
---------------------------------------------------------------
Theresa Duckworth, on behalf of herself, all others similarly
situated, and the general public, and as an "aggrieved employee"
on behalf of other "aggrieved employees" under the Labor Code
Private Attorneys General Act of 2004 v. Kent W. Pfrimmer, Kent's
Meat & Groceries, Inc., a California Corporation and Jerry Wobbe,
Case No. 2:15-cv-00292-TLN-CMK (E.D. Cal., February 4, 2015)
asserts claims arising from alleged job discrimination.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David Glenn Spivak, Esq.
          THE SPIVAK LAW FIRM
          9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 303
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (310) 499-4730
          Facsimile: (310) 499-4739
          E-mail: david@spivaklaw.com


LES PLATS: Recalls Cuisines Adventures Mini Sausages
----------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 2, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Extraneous Material
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Les Plats du Chef Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9558

Affected products: 1.2 kg. Cuisine Adventures Mini Sausages with
Best Before 2015AU16 / 3534


LOS ANGELES, CA: Ruling Over Document Production Affirmed
---------------------------------------------------------
Justice Earle Jeffrey Burke, Judge of the Superior Court of San
Luis Obispo County, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art.
6, Sec. 6 of the Cal. Const., affirmed a trial court judgment over
document production in the case captioned ESTUARDO ARDON,
Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CITY OF LOS ANGELES, Defendant and
Appellant, No. 2d Civil No. B252476 (Cal. App.).

Ardon claimed that the City of Los Angeles improperly collected a
Telephone Users Tax ('TUT') excluding from taxation all services
not subject to taxation under a similar Federal Excise Tax
('FET'). Further, he contended that the TUT was tied to the scope
of the federal tax and that the City did not have legal authority
to collect taxes on long distance telephone service charged solely
by the minute and that the 2007 amendment was illegal because it
expanded an excise tax that required approval by a majority of
voters.

Rachele R. Rickert, Ardon's counsel, requested from the City
documents pertaining to the subject matter of the complaint which
was eventually given to the former after paying the required
payment.

The City demanded from Ms. Ricket to return the documents to the
City asserting that it had been inadvertently produced in response
to the request but the latter declined to do so contending that
the City had waived any claim of privilege.

The City moved to compel the return of the three documents claimed
to be privileged and to disqualify Ms. Rickert. However, the trial
court denied the City's motion concluding that the City's
production of the documents in response to Ms. Rickert's Public
Records Act (PRA) request waived any privilege that previously
attached to the records whether or not the document production was
the product of mistake, inadvertence or excusable neglect.

The City filed an appeal.

In affirming the trial court's judgment, Justice Burke ruled that
the City's position finds no support in the statute or the
legislative history that surrounds the enactment of the PRA, and
held that disclosures pursuant to the PRA that are made
inadvertently, by mistake or through excusable neglect are not
exempted from the provisions of section 6254.5 that waive any
privilege that would otherwise attach to the production.  Further,
Justice Burke held that nothing in the PRA gives the entity
producing it either the right to recover it or a mechanism to seek
its return. Furthermore, because the documents were disclosed to
Ms. Rickert, the City is precluded from denying disclosure to
anyone who asks. Also, there is no basis to disqualify her or any
members of her law firm under Rule of Professional Conduct 2-100.

A copy of the Order dated December 10, 2014, is available at
bit.ly/1Aat3Bt from Leagle.com.

Colantuono, Highsmith & Whatley, Holly O. Whatley --
hwhatley@chwlaw.us -- Amy C. Sparrow -- asparrow@chwlaw.us --
Tiana J. Murillo -- tjm@msk.com -- Office of the City Attorney,
Noreen S. Vincent, Beverly A. Cook -- Beverly.Cook@lacity.org --
for Defendant and Appellant.

Dennis J. Herrera, San Francisco City Attorney, Christine Van Aken
-- christine.van.aken@sfgov.org -- Chief of Appellate Litigation
and Warren Metlitzky, Deputy City Attorney for Amicus Curiae The
League of California Cities and the California State Association
of Counties on behalf of Defendant and Appellant.

Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz, Francis M. Gregorek,
Rachele R. Rickert, Marisa C. Livesay; Chimicles & Tikellis,
Timothy N. Mathews; Cuneo Gilbert & Laduca, Sandra W. Cuneo;
Tostrud Law Group, Jon A. Tostrud for Plaintiff and Respondent.


LOUISVILLE DISTILLING: Removes "Aliano" Suit to N.D. Illinois
-------------------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit titled Aliano, et al. v. Louisville Distilling
Company, LLC, Case No. 2014 CH 17428, was transferred from the
Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, to the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of Illinois (Chicago).  The District
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-00794 to the proceeding.

The Plaintiffs allege that the Defendant's marketing and
advertising of Angel's Envy Rye Whiskey Finished in Caribbean Rum
Casks is "intentionally false and misleading."  The Plaintiffs
purport to bring this action on behalf of "[a]ll persons and
entities who purchased a bottle or bottles of Angel's Envy."

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Thomas A. Zimmerman, Jr., Esq.
          Adam M. Tamburelli, Esq.
          Frank J. Stretz, Esq.
          ZIMMERMAN LAW OFFICES, P.C.
          77 West Washington St., Suite 1220
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 440-0020
          Facsimile: (312) 440-4180

               - and -

          Francis A. Citera, Esq.
          Thomas E. Dutton, Esq.
          GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
          77 W. Wacker Drive, Suite 3100
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Telephone: (312) 456-8400
          Facsimile: (312) 456-8435
          E-mail: citeraf@gtlaw.com
                  duttont@gtlaw.com


MAPLE LEAF: Recalls Schneiders Deli Best Blue Ribbon Bologna
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 31, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Extraneous Material
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Maple Leaf Foods Inc.
Distribution:             Ontario, Quebec
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9550

Affected products: 4.8 kg. Schneiders - Deli Best Blue Ribbon
Bologna


MARVELL TECHNOLOGY: "Voss" Suit Dismissed With Leave to Amend
-------------------------------------------------------------
Arvin Temkar, writing for Courthouse News Service, reports that a
federal judge on January 26 dismissed a securities class action
against semiconductor developer Marvell Technology Group.

U.S. District Judge Lucy Koh granted Marvell's motion to dismiss
the April 2014 lawsuit filed by lead plaintiff Lee Voss on behalf
of company shareholders.

Koh found the plaintiffs did not satisfy requirements for bringing
derivative claims under the laws of Bermuda, where Marvell is
incorporated.

Koh also ruled that even if the plaintiffs could make a claim
under Bermuda law, the shareholders' claimed injury was too
speculative.

The lawsuit stems from a 2014 judgment of $1.5 billion against
Marvell for a patent infringement against Carnegie Mellon
University.

Marvell staff referred to their own chips as "coffee warmers"
because of their ineffectiveness, and used Carnegie Mellon's
technology without licensing it for nearly a decade, according to
a Courthouse News report.  The company sold more than 2 billion
chips at a profit margin of more than $2 a chip using the
university's technology.

Named as defendants in the shareholders' lawsuit were company
founders Sehat and Pantas Sutardja, Sehat's wife Weili Dai, and
several members of the company's board.

Voss et al. claimed the defendants made false and misleading
statements to shareholders about the patent infringement and made
money from revenue inflated by the scandal.

They also claimed that the huge judgment could make it difficult
for the company to pay dividends to shareholders.

The company has continued to pay dividends to shareholders since
the judgment, Koh noted in her order.

The case is Lee Voss, et al. v. Marvell Technology Group, Ltd., et
al., Case No. 14-CV-01581-LHK, in the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California (San Jose Division).


MCKESSON CORP: N.D. Cal. Judge Resolves Discovery Issues
--------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Donna M. Ryu of the Northern District of
California ruled on the joint discovery letter submitted by the
parties in the case TRUE HEALTH CHIROPRACTIC, Plaintiff(s), v.
McKESSON CORPORATION, Defendant(s), No. C-13-02219-JST (DMR) (N.D.
Cal.)

Plaintiffs brought a putative class action under the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act of 1991, as amended by the Junk Fax
Prevention Act of 2005, 47 U.S.C. Section 227 (TCPA), challenging
defendants' alleged practice of sending unsolicited facsimile
advertisements, or so-called junk faxes. On November 13, 2014, the
court held a hearing on the parties' three previous disputes and
issued an order the following day compelling defendants to produce
discovery after meeting and conferring with plaintiffs to narrow
the scope of discovery.

Plaintiffs moved to compel defendants to produce exemplars of all
fax advertisements that did not include an opt-out notice that
defendants sent during the class period.  Plaintiffs also moved to
compel documents showing that the recipients of fax advertisements
sent by Defendants had given Defendants prior express permission
to send those faxes, and to compel the production of documents
containing information about recipients of the fax ads sent by
Defendants during the class period, including their identities and
fax numbers, and the dates and times they received transmissions.

Magistrate Judge Ryu said the plaintiffs' proposal is reasonable
in that it describes the relevant documents while also
incorporating measures likely to reduce burden and weed out non-
responsive documents.  The court also found the information to be
relevant to class certification issues, and further held that
defendants' concerns about the recipients' confidential
information are adequately addressed by the parties' protective
order and therefore granted plaintiffs' motion to compel.

A copy of Magistrate Judge Ryu's order dated December 5, 2014, is
available at http://is.gd/b6lFINfrom Leagle.com.

True Health Chiropractic Inc, an Ohio Corporation, Individually
and as the Representative of a class of similarly situated
persons, Plaintiff, represented by Robert C. Schubert --
rschubert@schubertlawfirm.com -- Willem F. Jonckheer --
wjonckheer@schubertlawfirm.com -- Dustin Lamm Schubert --
dschubert@schubertlawfirm.com -- at Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe
LLP; Brian John Wanca - Bwanca@andersonwanca.com -- Glenn L. Hara
-- Ghara@andersonwanca.com -- Ross Michael Good --
Rgood@andersonwanca.com -- Ryan Michael Kelly --
Rkelly@andersonwanca.com -- at Anderson + Wanca; George Demetrios
Jonson -- gjonson@mrjlaw.com -- Matthew Elton Stubbs --
mstubbs@mrjlaw.com -- at Montgomery Rennie Jonson

McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc., Plaintiff, represented
by Brian John Wanca -- Bwanca@andersonwanca.com -- Glenn L. Hara
-- Ghara@andersonwanca.com -- Ross Michael Good --
Rgood@andersonwanca.com -- at Anderson + Wanca; Dustin Lamm
Schubert -- dschubert@schubertlawfirm.com -- Willem F. Jonckheer
-- wjonckheer@schubertlawfirm.com -- at Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe
LLP

McKesson Corporation, Defendant, represented by Tyree P. Jones,
Jr. -- tpjones@reedsmith.com -- Andrew Amoroso --
aamoroso@reedsmith.com -- David S. Reidy -- dreidy@reedsmith.com
-- at Reed Smith LLP

McKesson Technologies, Inc., Defendant, represented by Andrew
Amoroso -- aamoroso@reedsmith.com -- Tyree P. Jones Jr. --
tpjones@reedsmith.com -- at Reed Smith, LLP

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Intervenor, represented by Warren
Metlitzky -- AskDOJ@usdoj.gov -- at United States Attorney


MCKESSON CORP: Court Won't Split Discovery in "True Health" Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
A California district court denied a motion to bifurcate discovery
in the class action TRUE HEALTH CHIROPRACTIC INC v. McKESSON
CORPORATION, CASE NO. 13-CV-02219-JST (N.D. Cal.).

The lawsuit was commenced in 2013, where plaintiffs allege
defendants sent to them unsolicited faxes in violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA).

Defendants asked the Court to bifurcate discovery so as to allow
the parties to resolve whether the named class representatives,
True Health Chiropractic Inc. and McLaughlin Chiropractic
Associates, Inc., received unsolicited faxes (as opposed to
solicited ones), and therefore whether they are able to represent
a class of individuals, each of whom allegedly received
unsolicited faxes. Defendants ask for a 45-day period in which to
conduct discovery regarding the individual named plaintiffs and
then to file a motion for partial summary judgment as to True
Health and McLaughlin's adequacy as class representatives.
Defendants effectively seek to stay class discovery during this
period.

In a Jan. 20, 2015 Order available at http://is.gd/OOpFkMfrom
Leagle.com, District Judge Jon S. Tigar cites that (1) facts that
are relevant to class determination overlap between individual and
class discovery, (2) discovery bifurcation would not promote class
certification at "an early practicable time," and (3) discovery
bifurcation will not have streamlined anything or otherwise served
the interest of judicial economy.

Having weighed these factors, Judge Tigar finds that bifurcation
of discovery at this time is not warranted. Accordingly, the Court
denies Defendants' motion and orders the parties to proceed with
both class and individual discovery.

True Health Chiropractic Inc, Plaintiff, represented by Robert C.
Schubert -- rschubert@schubertlawfirm.com -- Schubert Jonckheer &
Kolbe LLP, Willem F. Jonckheer -- wjonckheer@schubertlawfirm.com
-- Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP, Brian John Wanca --
BWanca@andersonwanca.com -- Anderson + Wanca, Dustin Lamm Schubert
-- dschubert@schubertlawfirm.com -- Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe
LLP, George Demetrios Jonson -- gjonson@mrjlaw.com -- Montgomery
Rennie Jonson, Glenn L. Hara, Anderson + Wanca, Matthew Elton
Stubbs -- mstubbs@mrjlaw.com -- Montgomery Rennie Jonson, Ross
Michael Good -- RGood@andersonwanca.com -- Anderson + Wanca & Ryan
Michael Kelly -- RKelly@andersonwanca.com

McLaughlin Chiropractic Associates, Inc., Plaintiff, represented
by Brian John Wanca, Anderson + Wanca, Dustin Lamm Schubert,
Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP, George Demetrios Jonson,
Montgomery Rennie Jonson, Glenn L. Hara, Anderson + Wanca, Ross
Michael Good, Anderson + Wanca & Willem F. Jonckheer, Schubert
Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP.

McKesson Corporation, Defendant, represented by Tyree P. Jones,
Jr. -- tpjones@reedsmith.com -- Reed Smith LLP, Andrew Amoroso --
aamoroso@reedsmith.com -- Reed Smith LLP & David S. Reidy --
dreidy@reedsmith.com -- Reed Smith LLP.

McKesson Technologies, Inc., Defendant, represented by Andrew
Amoroso, Reed Smith LLP & Tyree P. Jones, Jr., Reed Smith, LLP.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Intervenor, represented by Warren
Metlitzky, United States Attorney -- warren.metlitzky@sfgov.org


NATIONAL FOOTBALL: NFL Retirees Ask 9th Cir. to Revive Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NFL retirees appealed to the 9th Circuit on January 27 to save
their class action over painkillers allegedly doled out to mask
serious injuries, reports Maria Dinzeo, writing for Courthouse
News Service.

Lead plaintiff Richard Dent, a former Chicago Bear, says the
league treated players' injuries on the field for decades with
nonprescription opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and
local anesthetics, with little regard for the side effects or the
players' medical histories.

U.S. District Judge William Alsup dismissed the action in December
2014, finding the lawsuit must be settled under the collective
bargaining agreements between the NFL and the players' union, as
the crux of the claim is that players' teams mistreated them, and
that the league did nothing to stop it.

Alsup said the players' retired statuses should not prevent them
from arbitrating their grievances, and cited the NFL's long
history of trying to address player medical care through
provisions in the collective bargaining agreements.

Steven Silverman, an attorney for the retirees, said his clients'
claims are not covered.  "The tortious conduct as alleged in the
second amended complaint is not something that is subject to a CBA
under any circumstances," Silverman said in an interview.  "These
are allegations that the NFL Players Association clearly stated
were not grieve able under the bargaining agreement."

He added: "we believe there is precedent in the circuit which is
consistent with our views and we're looking forward to briefing
the issues."

The Plaintiffs-Appellants are represented by:

          William N. Sinclair, Esq.
          Steven D. Silverman, Esq.
          Andrew G. Slutkin, Esq.
          Stephen G. Grygiel, Esq.
          Joseph F. Murphy, Jr., Esq.
          Phillip J. Closius, Esq.
          SILVERMAN THOMPSON SLUTKIN WHITE LLC
          201 N. Charles St., Suite 2600
          Baltimore, MD 21201
          Telephone: (410) 385-2225
          Facsimile: (410) 547-2432
          E-mail: bsinclair@mdattorney.com
                  ssilverman@mdattorney.com
                  aslutkin@mdattorney.com
                  sgrygiel@mdattorney.com
                  JosephMurphy@mdattorney.com
                  pclosius@mdattorney.com

               - and -

          Thomas J. Byrne, Esq.
          Mel T. Owens, Esq.
          NAMANNY, BYRNE & OWENS, P.C.
          2 South Pointe Drive, Suite 245
          Lake Forest, CA 92630
          Telephone: (949) 452-0700
          Facsimile: (949) 452-0707
          E-mail:  tbyrne@nbolaw.com
                   mowens@nbolaw.com

               - and -

          Stuart A. Davidson, Esq.
          Mark J. Dearman, Esq.
          Kathleen B. Douglas, Esq.
          Janine D. Arno, Esq.
          120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500
          Boca Raton, FL 33432
          Telephone: (561) 750-3000
          Facsimile: (561) 750-3364
          E-mail: SDavidson@rgrdlaw.com
                  mdearman@rgrdlaw.com
                  kdouglas@rgrdlaw.com
                  jarno@rgrdlaw.com

The Defendant-Appellee is represented by:

          Allen J. Ruby, Esq.
          Jack P. DiCanio, Esq.
          Timothy A. Miller
          SKADDEN ARPS SLATE MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
          525 University Avenue
          Palo Alto, CA 94301
          Telephone: (650) 470-4500
          Facsimile: (650) 470-4570
          E-mail: allen.ruby@skadden.com
                  jack.dicanio@skadden.com
                  timothy.miller@skadden.com


NGS INC: "McCown" Suit Remanded to Putnam County Circuit Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
In STACEY F. McCOWN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. NGS, INC., a West Virginia
Corporation, NGS, INC., a West Virginia Corporation d/b/a BUDGET
INN, NGS, INC., a West Virginia Corporation d/b/a AMERICAN INN,
NAVNIT G. SANGANI, individually and as officer of NGS, INC., and
John Doe Corporations, Defendants, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:14-27719,
(S.D. W.Va.), pending before the Court is Plaintiff's Motion to
Remand for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28
U.S.C. Sections 1441 and 1447.

On January 16, 2015, Chief District Judge Robert C. Chambers, in a
memorandum opinion and order, ruled that Plaintiff's Motion to
Remand is granted in part and denied in part. The Court granted
Plaintiff's request to remand and denied Plaintiff's request for
reasonable costs and attorney fees incurred as a result of
Defendant's improper removal.

The Court remands the matter to the Circuit Court of Putnam
County, West Virginia.

A copy of the Court's ruling is available at http://is.gd/5Pde2V
from Leagle.com.

Stacy F. McCown, Plaintiff, represented by:

   Matthew Stonestreet, Esq.
   Troy N. Giatras, Esq.
   THE GIATRAS LAW FIRM
   118 Capitol Street, Suite 400
   Charleston, WV 25301
   Telephone: 888-819-1281

NGS, Inc., Defendant, represented by Patrick C. Timony --
ptimony@bowlesrice.com -- BOWLES RICE, Stuart A. McMillan --
smcmillan@bowlesrice.com -- BOWLES RICE, Patrick C. Timony, BOWLES
RICE, Stuart A. McMillan, BOWLES RICE, Patrick C. Timony, BOWLES
RICE & Stuart A. McMillan, BOWLES RICE.

Navnit G. Sangani, Defendant, represented by Patrick C. Timony,
BOWLES RICE & Stuart A. McMillan, BOWLES RICE.

NGS, Inc., Defendant, represented by Patrick C. Timony, BOWLES
RICE & Stuart A. McMillan, BOWLES RICE.


NISOURCE CORPORATE: "Philibotte" TILA Suit Dismissed
----------------------------------------------------
District Judge Mark G. Mastroianni granted Defendant's Motion to
Dismiss in the case captioned KIM PHILIBOTTE, individually and as
a representative of other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff,
v. NISOURCE CORPORATE SERVICES COMPANY, d/b/a Nisource Services
Inc., d/b/a Bay State Gas Company, d/b/a Northern Utilities, Inc.,
d/b/a Columbia Gas of Massachusetts, and AGL RESOURCES
INCORPORATED, d/b/a Nicor Energy Services Company, d/b/a Columbia
Home Solutions, Defendants, Civil Action No. 14-11300-MGM (D.
Mass.).

Kim filed a putative class action against Nisource Corporate
Services Company and AGL Resources Incorporated claiming that the
purported lease of a water heater was actually a disguised credit
sale and, therefore, Defendants were required to make certain
disclosures under the Truth In Lending Act ("TILA"), the
Massachusetts Consumer Credit Cost Disclosure Act ("CCCDA"), and
the Massachusetts Retail Installment Sales and Services Act
("RISSA"). Also, Kim asserted claims for unjust enrichment and
violations of Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 93A (Count IV).

Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss arguing that Plaintiff's
complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief maybe granted
pursuant to CCCDA, TILA, RISSA. In addition, Defendant alleged
that the water heater lease was not a credit sale for purposes of
CCCDA and TILA or a retail installment sale for purposes of RISSA.
Further, Defendants argued that Plaintiff's unjust enrichment
claim is not viable because of the existence of a contract.

Plaintiff, in response, argued that unjust enrichment claims are
available even though a contract exists if the contract is invalid
due to fraud, misrepresentation, mistake, illegality,
indefiniteness, or incapacity. Hence, Plaintiff contended that the
contract falls within exceptions.

In granting Defendants' Motion to Dismiss, Judge Mastroianni ruled
that Kim failed to state claims pursuant to CCCDA, TILA, and RISSA
and concluded that Kim's Chapter 93A claim is subject to
dismissal. Judge Mastroianni held that although Kim contended that
the agreement constitutes a fake lease, she did not set forth
affirmative claims or allegations demonstrating that the contract
is otherwise unenforceable due to freestanding fraud,
misrepresentation, mistake, illegality, indefiniteness, or
incapacity.

Moreover, Judge Mastroianni agreed with Defendants that Kim has
not sufficiently alleged that any of these unjust enrichment
exceptions apply through the existence of an express contract
which precluded Plaintiff's claim for unjust enrichment.

A copy of the Memorandum and Order dated December 9, 2014, is
available at  bit.ly/1wxmyrZ from Leagle.com.

Kim Philibotte, Plaintiff, represented by Valeriano Diviacchi --
val@diviacchi.com -- Diviacchi Law Office.

Nisource Corporate Services Company, Defendant, represented by J.
Christopher Allen, Jr. -- cpallen@sianalaw.com -- Nixon & Peabody,
LLP, and Troy K. Lieberman, Nixon Peabody LLP.

AGL Resources Inc., Defendant, represented by J. Christopher
Allen, Jr., Nixon & Peabody, LLP, and Troy K. Lieberman, Nixon
Peabody LLP.


NORTHERN MEAT: Recalls Roland Bruschetta Due to Glass Pieces
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Extraneous Material
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Northern Meat Service
Distribution:             Manitoba
Extent of the product
distribution:             Hotel/Restaurant/Institutional
CFIA reference number:    9553

Affected products: 340 g. Roland Bruschetta with 0 41224 46740 8
UPC


NOVO NORDISK: Obtains Final Court Approval of Antitrust Suit Deal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Avern Cohn issued a final judgment approving the
class action settlement in IN RE PRANDIN DIRECT PURCHASER
ANTITRUST LITIGATION, C.A. NO. 2:10-CV-12141-AC-DAS, (E.D. Mich.).

The class is defined as "All persons and entities in the United
States and its Territories who purchased Prandin directly from
Defendants from May 6, 2009 until the June 30, 2014. Excluded from
the Class are Defendants and their parents, employees,
subsidiaries, and affiliates, and all federal governmental
entities."

The Settlement provides a recovery for the class in the amount of
$19 million in cash.

The Court awards Class Counsel attorneys' fees in the amount of
$6,333,000.00 or one third of the $19 million Settlement Fund, and
approves reimbursement of $147,975.82 in expenses, which expenses
were reasonable and necessary to the representation of the Class.

The Class Representatives American Sales Company, LLC and
Rochester Drug Co-Operative, Inc. are each granted an award of
$50,000 each, payable from the Settlement Fund, for their role in
bringing about this recovery on behalf of the Class.

A copy of the Court's January 20, 2015 order is available at
http://is.gd/oe7eFH from Leagle.com.

American Sales Company, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by David S.
Nalven -- davidn@hbsslaw.com -- Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP,
J. Douglas Richards -- drichards@cohenmilstein.com -- Cohen
Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC & Patrick E. Cafferty --
pcafferty@caffertyclobes.com -- Cafferty Clobes Meriwether &
Sprengel LLP.

Rochester Drug Co-Operative, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by
Archana Tamoshunas -- atamoshunas@tcllaw.com -- Taus, Cebulash &
Landau, LLP, David F. Sorensen -- dsorensen@bm.net -- Berger &
Montague, P.C., Patrick E. Cafferty, Cafferty Clobes Meriwether &
Sprengel LLP & Peter R. Kohn -- pkohn@faruqilaw.com -- Faruqi &
Faruqi, LLP.

American Sales Company, Inc., Plaintiff, represented by J. Douglas
Richards, Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC & Patrick E.
Cafferty, Cafferty Clobes Meriwether & Sprengel LLP.

Novo Nordisk A/S, Defendant, represented by David A. Ettinger --
dettinger@honigman.com -- Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn LLP,
David B. Tulchin -- tulchind@sullcrom.com -- Sullivan & Cromwell
LLP, Herschel P. Fink -- hfink@freepress.com -- Detroit Free
Fress, Marc De Leeuw -- deleeuwm@sullcrom.com -- Sullivan &
Cromwell LLP, Michael S. Royall -- sroyall@gibsondunn.com --
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher & Michael A. Sitzman --
msitzman@gibsondunn.com -- Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.

Novo Nordisk, Incorporated, Defendant, represented by David A.
Ettinger, Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn LLP, David B.
Tulchin, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Herschel P. Fink, Detroit Free
Fress, Michael S. Royall, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher & Michael A.
Sitzman, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.

Novo Nordisk A/S, Defendant, represented by David A. Ettinger,
Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn LLP, David B. Tulchin,
Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Herschel P. Fink, Detroit Free Fress,
Michael S. Royall, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher & Michael A. Sitzman,
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.

Novo Nordisk, Incorporated, Defendant, represented by David A.
Ettinger, Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn LLP, David B.
Tulchin, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Herschel P. Fink, Detroit Free
Fress, Marc De Leeuw, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, Michael S. Royall,
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher & Michael A. Sitzman, Gibson, Dunn &
Crutcher LLP.


NUVASIVE INC: "Mauss" Securities Fraud Suit Dismissed
-----------------------------------------------------
District Judge Jeffrey T. Miller of the Southern District of
California granted Defendant's Motion to Dismiss in the case
captioned BRAD MAUSS, individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. NUVASIVE, INC.; ALEXIS
V. LUKIANOV; KEVIN C. O'BOYLE; and MICHAEL J. LAMBERT, Defendants
Case No. 13-cv-2005 JM (JLB) (S.D. Cal.).

Plaintiff, a purchaser of NuVasive securities filed a putative
class action against the Company but was eventually dismissed by
the court for failure to state a claim and not meeting the
heightened requirements for pleading falsity and scienter in a
securities-fraud case.

Plaintiff alleged that NuVasive failed to disclose the following:
(1) that it used kickbacks in violation of federal and state laws
and regulations; (2) that it submitted false or otherwise improper
claims to Medicare and Medicaid; (3) that it advised customers on
how to code NuVasive products and procedures in order to take
advantage of loopholes and maximize reimbursement; and (4) that
its earnings and revenues were earned, in part, as a result of
violations of healthcare fraud and abuse laws.

Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint asserting two causes of
action: (1) securities fraud, in violation of Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Securities and Exchange
Commission ("SEC") Rule 10b-5, against all Defendants; and (2)
control-person liability, pursuant to Section 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act. Further, Plaintiff alleges the Defendants
engaged in these practices knowing that the resulting increases in
sales and revenues would be paid, in part, by government
healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid.

The Defendants moved for the dismissal of Plaintiff's Section
10(b) claim on the grounds that Plaintiff did not adequately plead
loss causation, falsity, or scienter and asserted that dismissal
should be without leave to amend because Plaintiff's case is
fundamentally defective. Further, the Defendants contended that
such is premised on the announcement of an investigation which
cannot be the basis for loss causation, falsity, or scienter.

In granting the Defendant's Motion to Dismiss, Judge Miller ruled
that in the absence of some further disclosure to the market
substantiating Plaintiff's allegations of fraud, Plaintiff has not
adequately alleged loss causation. In addition, Judge Miller held
that because Plaintiff has not adequately pleaded falsity, he has
also not adequately pleaded scienter.

However, Judge Miller granted Plaintiff's request for leave to
amend because according to him, dismissal with prejudice and
without leave to amend is not appropriate unless it is clear that
the complaint could not be saved by amendment.

A copy of the Order dated December 9, 2014, is available at
bit.ly/16n17RO from Leagle.com.

Danny Popov, Plaintiff, represented by Cheryl D. Hamer --
chamer@pomlaw.com -- Pomerantz LLP, Lionel Z Glancy --
info@glancylaw.com -- Glancy Binkow and Goldberg & Jeremy A.
Lieberman -- jalieberman@pomlaw.com -- Pomerantz LLP.

Brad Mauss, Plaintiff, represented by Cheryl D. Hamer, Pomerantz
LLP, Lionel Z Glancy, Glancy Binkow and Goldberg, Michael M
Goldberg, Glancy Blinkow & Goldberg LLP & Jeremy A. Lieberman,
Pomerantz LLP.

Nuvasive, Inc., Defendant, represented by Robert W Brownlie --
robert.brownlie@dlapiper.com -- DLA Piper LLP, Kellin Maurine
Chatfield, DLA Piper LLP & Noah A Katsell -- nkatsell@graycary.com
-- DLA Piper LLP.

Alexis V. Lukianov, Defendant, represented by Robert W Brownlie,
DLA Piper LLP, Kellin Maurine Chatfield, DLA Piper LLP & Noah A
Katsell, DLA Piper LLP.

Kevin C. O'Boyle, Defendant, represented by Robert W Brownlie, DLA
Piper LLP, Kellin Maurine Chatfield, DLA Piper LLP & Noah A
Katsell, DLA Piper LLP.

Michael J. Lambert, Defendant, represented by Robert W Brownlie,
DLA Piper LLP, Kellin Maurine Chatfield, DLA Piper LLP & Noah A
Katsell, DLA Piper LLP.


PALME D'OR: Recalls Duck Products Due to Container Issues
---------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 7, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Other
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Elevages Perigord (1993) Inc.
Distribution:             National
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9284


PAPA JOHNS: Court Struck Down Bid to Dismiss "Schojan" Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington of the Middle
District of Florida, Tampa Division, denied defendant's motion to
dismiss counts III, IV and V in the case BRUCE SCHOJAN,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, ET
AL., Plaintiffs, v. PAPA JOHNS INTERNATIONAL, INC., ET AL.,
Defendants, Case No. 8:14-CV-1218-T-33MAP (M.D. Fla.)

Bruce Schojan filed a suit against defendant Papa John's
International, Inc., alleging that defendant negligently
misrepresented a sales tax for food delivered to customers that
included a sales tax on the Papa John's delivery fee. Plaintiff
allege that Papa John's included in the base amount upon which the
tax was calculated a $3.00 delivery fee that Plaintiff claims is
exempt from taxation under Florida law because it is not part of
the sales. The suit was filed in the state court but was removed
by the defendant to the federal court.

The parties filed agreed motions to seal the motion for summary
judgment and motion for class certification.  The court, however,
denied the parties' request to seal documents. Plaintiff then
filed a motion to certify class, in which the court denies without
prejudice and granted plaintiff leave to amend the complaint and
directed that the motion to certify class could be refiled in
conjunction with the new complaint.

Papa John's filed its response in opposition to the motion and
simultaneously, Papa John's filed a motion to dismiss the Second
Amended Class Action Complaint and Strike Demand for Injunctive
and Declaratory Relief. Specifically defendant seeks to dismiss
counts III, IV and V of the Second Amended Complaint.

Judge Covington denied defendant's request for dismissal.

The defendant's answer to the second amended complaint was due
December 15, 2014.

A copy of Judge Covington's order dated December 8, 2014, is
available at http://is.gd/KhUKb6from Leagle.com.

Bruce Schojan, Sean Timmons, Christopher Tollerton, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff,
represented by:

     Alan Frederick Wagner, Esq.
     Jason Kyle Whittemore, Esq.
     WAGNER, VAUGHAN & MCLAUGHLIN, PA
     601 Bayshore Blvd., Suite 910
     Tampa, FL 33606
     Telephone: 813-225-400
     Facsimile: 813-225-4010

Papa John's International, Inc. and Papa John's USA, Inc.,
Defendants, represented by:

     Andrew J. Patch, Esq.
     David Barnett Weinstein, Esq.
     GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
     Court House Plaza
     625 East Twiggs Street
     Tampa, FL 33602
     Telephone: 813-318-5700
     Facsimile: 813-318-5900
     Email: patcha@gtlaw.com
            weinsteind@gtlaw.com

Peter J. Grilli, Mediator, represented by:

     Peter John Grilli, Esq.
     PETER J. GRILLI, PA
     3001 West Azeele Street
     Tampa, FL 33609
     Telephone: 813-874-1002


PATRICK CUDAHY: "Rangel" Suit Stays in E.D. Wis. Federal Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Rudolph T. Randa of the Eastern District of
Wisconsin denied plaintiff's request to remand the case MARTHA
RANGEL, MARIA GUADALUPE MOLINA, ROXANA HERRARA, and ALICIA
BEDOLLA, on behalf of themselves and similarly situated employees,
Plaintiffs, v. PATRICK CUDAHY, LLC, Defendant, CASE NO. 14-C-799
(E.D. Wis.)

The named plaintiffs seek to represent a class consisting of all
current and former hourly production employees required to don and
doff personal protection equipment (PPE) at the Patrick Cudahy
processing plant in Cudahy, Wisconsin within two years preceding
the filing of the action. The suit against Cudahy is for unpaid
wages pursuant to Wisconsin's wage payment and overtime laws.

Plaintiffs allege that there are 1,000 members of the putative
class seeking overtime compensation. Plaintiffs do not allege how
much time they are seeking compensation for, but Cudahy posits
that it is reasonable to assume that plaintiffs seek at least 20
additional minutes of compensation each day. Using an average
overtime rate over a two-year period brings the claim to just
under $4 million; plaintiffs' claim for a 50% civil penalty pushes
the claim over the requisite jurisdictional amount.

Cudahy removed the suit from Milwaukee County Circuit Court and
the plaintiffs move to remand.  Cudahy's first ground for removal
is that the plaintiffs' state law claims are completely preempted
by Section 301 of the Labor Management Relations Act. Cudahy also
removed pursuant to the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA) 28 U.S.C.
Section 1332(d); 28 U.S.C. Section 1453.

For CAFA purposes, Lisa Swaney declared that Cudahy is a citizen
of Delaware and Wisconsin. In her initial declaration, Swaney
stated that there are multiple former employees who, according to
their addresses on record with the Company, are in states other
than Wisconsin and Delaware, including Arizona, Florida, Michigan,
Mississippi, and Pennsylvania, as well as Puerto Rico. Swaney
later clarified that those employees were employed within the two
year period prior to the filing of this lawsuit. Finally, Swaney
explained that all references to employees in her prior
declarations included only hourly employees.

Defendant filed a motion for leave to file the third Declaration
of Swaney, while plaintiffs filed a motion to remand the case to
Milwaukee County Circuit Court.

Judge Randa granted defendant's motion and denied plaintiffs'
motion to remand the case and plaintiffs must, within 60 days of
the date of the order, they must file a motion to remand or a
statement indicating that they will not be pursuing remand.

A copy of Judge Randa's decision and order dated December 5, 2014,
is available at http://is.gd/0uChgkfrom Leagle.com.

Plaintiffs, represented by:

     Kurt C Kobelt, Esq.
     Victor M Arellano, Esq.
     ARELLANO & PHEBUS SC
     1468 North High Point Road, Suite 202
     Middleton, WI 53562
     Telephone: 608-509-9374
     Facsimile: 608-827-7681

Patrick Cudahy LLC, Defendant, represented by D. Christopher
Lauderdale -- LauderdC@jacksonlewis.com -- L Dale Owens --
OwensD@jacksonlewis.com -- Brian A Price --
Brian.Price@jacksonlewis.com -- at Jackson Lewis PC.


PGA TOUR: Caddies File Class Action Over Endorsement Policy
-----------------------------------------------------------
Marisa Kendall, writing for The Recorder, reports that a group of
professional golf caddies have taken aim at the PGA Tour in a
class action claiming the organization forces them to serve as
walking billboards without compensation.

The caddies say PGA Tour Inc. violated federal antitrust law by
making them wear colorful bibs that display advertisements for
tournament sponsors.  The bibs brings in about $50 million a year,
according to the complaint filed in the Northern District of
California on Feb. 3, but the caddies never see a penny.

"It's essentially theft," said the caddies' lawyer, Eugene Egdorf
of The Lanier Law Firm in Houston.  "The caddies are making them
millions upon tens of millions of dollars, and the PGA treats them
like second-class citizens."

A PGA Tour spokesman declined to comment on Feb. 3, citing company
policy.

The caddies are employed as contractors by the professional
golfers they serve -- not by PGA Tour -- but they are governed by
the company's endorsement policy.  That policy allows caddies to
wear and be compensated for sponsor logos on their clothing, as
long as the logos are "in accordance with the standards of decorum
expected of professional golf," according to the plaintiffs
lawyers.  Nevertheless, the lawyers say PGA Tour has threatened to
prevent plaintiffs from caddying at tournaments unless they wear
the pre-approved bibs, and has asked professional golfers if they
would be willing to fire caddies who refused to wear the bibs.

"Defendant constricts plaintiffs' endorsement potential and usurps
plaintiffs' endorsement opportunities," the plaintiffs' lawyers
wrote.

Requiring caddies to wear the bibs not only limits their potential
to make money, but it also illegally restricts the endorsement
market, according to plaintiffs lawyers. Without the bibs, caddies
could advertise a broader scope of products and services.

Plaintiffs also accuse the PGA Tour of misappropriation of
likeness, claiming the company uses their images to promote
products advertised on the bibs.
The Lanier Law Firm, which represents more than 80 caddies who
have signed on to the suit as plaintiffs, says the allegations
stem from a larger, systemic problem inside the PGA Tour.  The
company has created a culture that mistreats and undervalues its
caddies, according to the lawyers. The caddies are denied access
to necessary areas of tournament venues, are forced to use
portable lavatories without running water, and are denied basic
health coverage and pension plans, according to the complaint.

Mr. Egdorf said the firm is not bringing legal claims based on
those problems, but mentions them in the complaint to put the
antitrust and misappropriation-of-likeness claims in context.

"These caddies are not treated fairly as a whole," Mr. Egdorf
said.  "The best financial opportunity for them to take care of
themselves and their families is the money they would make from
those bibs."

Plaintiffs lawyers also say PGA Tour clearly understands the need
to compensate for advertising opportunities, as the company pays
caddies who opt to wear Nature Valley caps during tournaments.

"Defendant cannot reasonably deny knowing that plaintiffs expect
to be paid to endorse sponsors on their other attire," the lawyers
wrote.

Plaintiffs have demanded damages, an injunction prohibiting PGA
Tour from forcing caddies to wear bibs and disgorgement of the
money the company has made from the allegedly illegal advertising.
Contact the reporter at mkendall@alm.com


PHILLIPS & COHEN: Accused of Illegally Contacting Class Members
---------------------------------------------------------------
April Dyer, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
v. Phillips & Cohen Associates, Ltd., Case No. 2:15-at-00177 (E.D.
Cal., February 4, 2015) seeks damages and other remedies resulting
from the alleged illegal actions of the Defendant in negligently
communicating with the Plaintiff, in violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Phillips & Cohen Associates, Ltd. is a company engaged in the
business of collecting debts alleged to be due another.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          G. Thomas Martin, III, Esq.
          Nicholas J. Bontrager, Esq.
          MARTIN & BONTRAGER, APC
          6565 W. Sunset Blvd., Suite 410
          Los Angeles, CA 90028
          Telephone: (323) 940-1700
          Facsimile: (323) 238-8095
          E-mail: tom@mblawapc.com
                  nick@mblawapc.com


POLARIS: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models
----------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Motorcycle
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Fuel Supply
Units affected:           401
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2015001
TC ID number:             2015001
Manufacturer recall
number:                   V-15-01 A/B

On certain motorcycles, the fuel pump body may have been
incorrectly crimped during assembly.  This could result in the
fuel pump seizing due to insufficient clearance within the fuel
pump, which could cause the engine to stall, increasing the risk
of a crash causing injury and/or damage to property.

Dealers will replace the fuel pump.

Affected products:

   Maker     Model                 Model year(s) affected
   -----     -----                 ----------------------
   VICTORY   JACKPOT                 2014
   VICTORY   CROSS COUNTRY           2013, 2014
   VICTORY   CROSS ROADS             2013
   VICTORY   HARD BALL               2013
   VICTORY   VEGAS 8 BALL            2013, 2014
   VICTORY   HAMMER 8 BALL           2013, 2014
   VICTORY   HIGH BALL               2014
   VICTORY   CROSS COUNTRY 8-BALL    2014
   VICTORY   CROSS COUNTRY TOUR      2013, 2014
   VICTORY   CROSS ROADS 8-BALL      2014


PRESTIGE TRANSPORTATION: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages & OT
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gelacio Mas v. Prestige Transportation Service, LLC, A Florida
Profit Corporation, and Ricardo Hernandez, Individually, Case No.
1:15-cv-20297-CMA (S.D. Fla., January 27, 2015) seeks to recover
money damages for alleged unpaid wages and overtime wages.

Prestige is a Florida Corporation with its principal place of
business located in Miami, Florida.  Ricardo Hernandez is a
corporate officer, owner or manager of the Company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ricardo Corona, Esq.
          Krista Bordatto, Esq.
          CORONA LAW FIRM, P.A.
          3899 NW 7th Street, 2nd Floor
          Miami, FL 33126
          Telephone: (305) 266-1150
          Facsimile: (305)266-1151
          E-mail: kbordatto@coronapa.com
                  rcorona@coronapa.com


PRINCESS AUTO: Recalls Kitchener Meat Grinders
----------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 7, 2015
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Household Items
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Product Safety
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-43185

Affected products: Kitchener Manual Meat Grinders, #32 and #10

Product may introduce metal shavings into the meat it grinds,
posing an ingestion hazard to the consumer.

Health Canada has received one report of metal shavings coming off
the meat grinder.  No consumer injuries have been reported.

Princess Auto has not received any reports of consumer incidents
or injuries related to the use of these meat grinders.

Approximately 2,890 of the #32 meat grinders and 7,142 of the #10
meat grinders were sold at Princess Auto stores across Canada.

The recalled meat grinders were manufactured in China and sold
between January 2007 and November 2014.

Companies:

Manufacturer      Intradin Machinery Company Limited
                  Shanghai
                  China

Importer          Princess Auto Ltd.
                  Winnipeg
                  Manitoba
                  Canada

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled product and
return it to a Princess Auto store for a refund.


RANGER CONSTRUCTION: Sued Over Retaliation and Wrongful Discharge
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ben F. Jenkins v. Ranger Construction Industries, Inc., a Florida
profit corporation, Case No. 2:15-cv-14036-RLR (S.D. Fla.,
February 4, 2015) is an action for discrimination, retaliation and
wrongful discharge under the Florida Civil Rights Act.

The Plaintiff is a resident of Indian River County, Florida, but
at all times was employed with the Defendant in Saint Lucie
County, Florida.

Ranger has a principal location in West Palm Beach, Florida, but
operates a facility in Saint Lucie County.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Cathleen Scott, Esq.
          CATHLEEN SCOTT & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
          Jupiter Gardens, Suite 104-A
          250 South Central Boulevard
          Jupiter, FL 33458
          Telephone: (561) 653-0008
          Facsimile: (561) 653-0020
          E-mail: CScott@floridalaborlawyer.com


REGENT MANAGEMENT: Faces Suit Alleging Disabilities Act Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lawrence Feltzin, Individually v. Regent Management, Inc., a New
York Corporation, Case No. 2:15-cv-00545 (E.D.N.Y., February 4,
2015) is brought against the Defendant for injunctive relief, and
attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and costs pursuant to the
Americans with Disabilities Act.

Mr. Feltzin, a Florida resident, is a paraplegic and uses a
wheelchair to ambulate.

Regent Management, Inc., a New York Corporation, owns, leases,
leases to, or operates a shopping center located in New Hyde Park,
New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Asaad K. Siddiqi, Esq.
          WALDER HAYDEN, P.A.
          5 Becker Farm Road
          Roseland, NJ 07068
          Telephone: (973) 992-5300
          Facsimile: (973) 436-4226
          E-mail: aksiddiqi@walderhayden.com

               - and -

          Lawrence A. Fuller, Esq.
          FULLER, FULLER & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
          12000 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 502
          North Miami, FL 33181
          Telephone: (305) 891-5199
          Facsimile: (305) 893-9505
          E-mail: Lfuller@fullerfuller.com


RHEEM MANUFACTURING: Sued Over Refrigerant Leak in HVAC Products
----------------------------------------------------------------
Craig Adelman, On behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Rheem Manufacturing Company, Case No. 2:15-cv-00190-
JWS (D. Ariz., February 4, 2015) is brought on behalf of persons
or entities, who purchased air conditioners, air handlers and heat
pumps manufactured by Rheem, or who own or have owned a home or
other structure in which the Rheem Products have been installed,
and who suffered damages related to leakage of refrigerant from
the Rheem copper evaporator or condenser coil products.

Rheem is a Delaware corporation with its corporate headquarters
located in Atlanta, Georgia.  Rheem is in the business of
engineering, manufacturing, distributing and marketing heating,
ventilation and air conditioning products for residential,
manufactured homes and structures, and light commercial use.
Rheem designs, manufactures, markets, and distributes HVAC
products under these brand or trade names in the United States:
Rheem, Ruud and WeatherKing.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          B. Lance Entrekin, Esq.
          THE ENTREKIN LAW FIRM
          One E. Camelback Road, Suite 710
          Phoenix, AZ 85012
          Telephone: (602) 954-1123
          Facsimile: (602) 682-6455
          E-mail: Lance@entrekinlaw.com

               - and -

          Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
          Lisa A. White, Esq.
          GREG COLEMAN LAW PC
          550 Main Avenue, Suite 600
          Knoxville, TN 37902
          Telephone: (865) 247-0080
          Facsimile: (865) 522-0049
          E-mail: greg@gregcolemanlaw.com
                  lisa@gregcolemanlaw.com

               - and -

          Shanon J. Carson, Esq.
          Russell D. Paul, Esq.
          BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C.
          1622 Locust Street
          Philadelphia, PA 19103
          Telephone: (215) 875-3000
          Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
          E-mail: scarson@bm.net
                  rpaul@bm.net


ROC HOUSE: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages, OT and Damages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Lachandra Mackey v. ROC House Fitness Spa, LLC, Larry Hughes,
Tynetta Ali, Case No. 1:15-cv-00253-LMM (N.D. Ga., January 27,
2015) seeks payment for alleged unpaid wages, overtime wages,
liquidated damages, actual damages, and compensatory damages, for
the Defendants' violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

ROC House Fitness Spa, LLC, is a foreign Limited Liability
Corporation registered in the state of Missouri, with a principal
place of business in St. Louis, Missouri, and conducts business
within the state of Georgia in Atlanta.  ROC describes its
business as a unique concept in women's fitness and wellness, with
a mission to physically, spiritually and emotionally eliminate the
stress of its customer's daily lives.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher D. Vaughn, Esq.
          A. Brian Henson, Esq.
          THE VAUGHN LAW FIRM, LLC
          246 Sycamore Street, Suite 150
          Decatur, GA 30030
          Telephone: (404) 378-1290
          Facsimile: (404) 378-1295
          E-mail: cvaughn@thevaughnlawfirm.com
                  bhenson@thevaughnlawfirm.com

               - and -

          Frank DeMelfi, Esq.
          DEMELFI LAW GROUP, LLC
          4651 Woodstock Road, Suite 208-103
          Roswell, GA 30075
          Telephone: (678) 948-7808
          Facsimile: (866) 674-7808
          E-mail: fdemelfi@gmail.com


ROCKY MOUNTAIN: Recalls Caramel Apples Due to Listeria
------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 9, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning
Subcategory:              Microbiological - Listeria
Hazard classification:    Class 1
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory
Distribution:             Newfoundland and Labrador
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9579

Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, St. John's, NL, is recalling
caramel apples that used recalled apples sourced from the United
States (US) from the marketplace due to possible Listeria
monocytogenes contamination. Consumers should not consume the
recalled products described below.

The products were sold at Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory, 23
Rowan St., St. John's, NL.

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

Food contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes may not look or
smell spoiled but can still make you sick.  Symptoms can include
vomiting, nausea, persistent fever, muscle aches, severe headache
and neck stiffness.  Pregnant women, the elderly and people with
weakened immune systems are particularly at risk.  Although
infected pregnant women may experience only mild, flu-like
symptoms, the infection can lead to premature delivery, infection
of the newborn or even stillbirth.  In severe cases of illness,
people may die.

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

The recall was triggered by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency's
(CFIA) inspection activities related to the recall of Granny Smith
and Gala apples exported by Bidart Bros. in the US.  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.


SAGE HOSPITALITY: Accused of Violating Disabilities Act in Colo.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Civil Rights Education and Enforcement Center, on behalf of
its members, and Margaret Denny, on behalf of herself and a
proposed class of similarly situated persons v. Sage Hospitality
Resources LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-00236-REB-MEH (D. Colo., Feb. 4,
2015) alleges violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Timothy Patrick Fox, Esq.
          Sarah Marie Morris, Esq.
          CIVIL RIGHTS EDUCATION AND ENFORCEMENT CENTER
          104 Broadway, Suite 400
          Denver, CO 80203
          Telephone: (303) 757-7901
          Facsimile: (303) 595-9705
          E-mail: tfox@creeclaw.org
                  smorris@creeclaw.org

               - and -

          Bill Lann Lee, Esq.
          Joshua T.K. Davidson, Esq.
          Julie Hayden Wilensky, Esq.
          LEWIS FEINBERG LEE RENAKER & JACKSON, P.C.
          476 9th Street
          Oakland, CA 94607
          Telephone: (510) 839-6824
          Facsimile: (510) 839-7839
          E-mail: blee@lewisfeinberg.com
                  jdavidson@lewisfeinberg.com
                  jwilensky@lewisfeinberg.com

               - and -

          Julia Campins, Esq.
          CAMPINS BENHAM-BAKER, LLP
          8 California Street, Suite 703
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 373-5333
          Facsimile: (415) 373-5334
          E-mail: julia@cbbllp.com

               - and -

          Kevin William Williams, Esq.
          COLORADO CROSS-DISABILITY COALITION
          655 Broadway, #775
          Denver, CO 80203
          Telephone: (303) 839-1775
          Facsimile: (303) 839-1782
          E-mail: kwilliams@ccdconline.org


SHEARER'S FOODS: Court Narrows Claims in "Bohlke" False Ad Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Robin L. Rosenberg granted in part and denied in
part a motion to dismiss the case captioned ELIZABETH BOHLKE, as
an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. SHEARER'S FOODS, LLC, formerly known as SHEARER'S
FOODS, INC., an Ohio limited liability company, Defendant, CASE
NO. 9:14-CV-80727-ROSENBERG/BRANNON, (S.D. Fla.).  A copy of the
Court's January 20, 2015 order is available at http://is.gd/mzZG3g
from Leagle.com.

The parties to this action are Plaintiff Elizabeth Bohlke, as an
individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and
Defendant Shearer's Foods, LLC. Defendant makes Riceworks Gourmet
Brown Rice Crisps, which are available in several different flavor
varieties. Plaintiff purchased three varieties of Riceworks: the
Sweet Chili Flavor, the Sea Salt Flavor, and the Salsa Fresca
Flavor.  The Products' packaging states that the Products are "All
Natural" and contain "No Artificial Ingredients."  However, the
Products contain unnatural, synthetic, and/or artificial
ingredients such as Masa Corn Flour, Canola Oil, Maltodextrin, and
Caramel Color.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff alleges that Defendant's "All Natural"
and "No Artificial Ingredients" claims are untrue, misleading, and
likely to deceive reasonable consumers, such as Plaintiff and
members of the proposed Classes. The Plaintiff has asserted these
causes of action against Defendant: (1) Violations of Florida's
Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act ("FDUTPA"); (2) Negligent
Misrepresentation; (3) Breach of Express Warranty; (4) Violation
of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act ("MMWA"); and (5) Unjust
Enrichment.

The Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the case requesting that
the Court strike Plaintiff's nationwide class-action allegations
and dismiss all counts.

Judge Rosenberg held that: (1) Plaintiff's claims are limited to
the flavors of Riceworks that she herself purchased, and her
claims as to the flavors she did not purchase (Tangy Barbeque and
Parmesan & Sundried Tomato) are dismissed without prejudice, and
(2) in all other respects, Defendant's Motion is denied.

Elizabeth Bohlke, Plaintiff, represented by Howard Weil
Rubinstein, The Law Offices of Howard W. Rubinstein, P.A., Michael
James Pascucci, The Eggnatz Law Firm & Joshua Harris Eggnatz, The
Eggnatz Law Firm, P.A..

Shearer's Foods, LLC, Defendant, represented by Kelly A. Kosek --
kkosek@hahnlaw.com -- Hahn Loeser & Parks LLP, Michael B. Pascoe
-- mpascoe@hahnlaw.com -- Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLP, Royce R.
Remington -- rrremington@hahnlaw.com -- Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLp,
Scott J. Kelly -- skelly@hahnlaw.com -- Hahn Loeser & Parks, LLP &
Justin Benjamin Mazzara -- jmazzara@hahnlaw.com -- Hahn Loeser &
Parks LLP.


SHERIDAN PRODUCTION: Removes "Whisenant" Suit to W.D. Oklahoma
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Whisenant v. Sheridan Production
Company LLC, Case No. CJ-14-19, was removed from the District
Court of Beaver County, Oklahoma, to the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Oklahoma (Oklahoma City).  The Western
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 5:15-cv-00081-HE to the
proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings claims based upon the Defendant's alleged
prior underpayment or nonpayment of royalties on natural gas and
for constituents of the gas stream produced from wells in Oklahoma
through improper accounting methods.  The Plaintiff has a royalty
interest in wells in Beaver County, Oklahoma.  The Defendant owned
a part of the working interest in and paid royalty to the
Plaintiff on the wells.  During some or all of the relevant times,
the Defendant operated the wells.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Rex A. Sharp, Esq.
          GUNDERSON SHARP, LLP
          5301 W. 75th Street
          Prairie Village, KS 66208
          Telephone: (913)901-0500
          Facsimile: (913) 901-0419
          E-mail: rsharp@midwest-law.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          John J. Griffin, Jr., Esq.
          L. Mark Walker, Esq.
          Erin Potter Sullenger, Esq.
          CROWE & DUNLEVY, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
          Braniff Building
          324 North Robinson Avenue, Suite 100
          Oklahoma City, OK 73102
          Telephone: (405) 235-7700
          Facsimile: (405) 239-6651
          E-mail: john.griffin@crowedunlevy.com
                  mark.walker@crowedunlevy.com
                  erinpotter.sullenger@crowedunlevy.com


SINGAPORE HEALTH: Recalls Joint-Soft Kebigutaijiaonang
------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Type of communication:    Foreign Product Alert (FPA)
Subcategory:              Natural health products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Source of alert:          Singapore Health Sciences Authority

These products are not authorized for sale in Canada and have not
been found in the Canadian marketplace, but it is possible they
may have been brought into the country by travellers or purchased
over the Internet.

Affected products: JOINT-SOFT KEBIGUTAIJIAONANG Pil Raja Urat Asli
JOINT-SOFT

The product is promoted for joint pain relief.

The Singapore Health Sciences Authority warned consumers not to
use the product JOINT-SOFT after it was found to contain piroxicam
and dexamethasone.

Piroxicam is a prescription drug in the family known as non-
steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and is used to treat
pain, fever and inflammation.

Dexamethasone is a steroidal prescription drug used to treat
inflammatory conditions such as arthritis and allergic reactions.
Prescription drugs such as piroxicam and dexamethasone should only
be taken under the supervision of a healthcare professional.
Place of origin

Side effects associated with piroxicam include changes in blood
pressure, gastrointestinal disorders (with or without bleeding),
anemia, kidney failure and reduced blood-clotting ability.

Side effects associated with dexamethasone include irregular
heartbeat; increased blood pressure; stomach ulcer; blood
disorders; skin, muscle and bone damage; and nervous system
disorders.  Consult with your healthcare professional prior to
stopping use, as sudden discontinuation of dexamethasone may cause
symptoms of withdrawal.

KEBIGUTAIJIAONANG is promoted for joint pain relief.

The Singapore Health Sciences Authority warned consumers not to
use the product KEBIGUTAIJIAONANG after it was found to contain
piroxicam, hydrochlorothiazide, and prednisone.

Piroxicam is a prescription drug in the family known as non-
steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and is used to treat
pain, fever and inflammation.

Hydrochlorothiazide is a diuretic (water pill) prescription drug
used to remove excess fluid from the body.

Prednisone is a steroidal prescription drug used to treat
inflammatory conditions such as arthritis and allergic reactions.
Prescription drugs such as piroxicam, hydrochlorothiazide, and
prednisone should only be taken under the supervision of a
healthcare professional.
Place of origin

Side effects associated with piroxicam include changes in blood
pressure, gastrointestinal disorders (with or without bleeding),
anemia, kidney failure and reduced blood-clotting ability.

Side effects associated with hydrochlorothiazide include changes
in electrolytes (specifically potassium), muscle cramps,
dizziness, low blood pressure, headache and nausea.

Side effects associated with prednisone include irregular
heartbeat; increased blood pressure; stomach ulcer; blood
disorders; skin, muscle and bone damage; and nervous system
disorders.  Consult with your healthcare professional prior to
stopping use, as sudden discontinuation of prednisone may cause
symptoms of withdrawal.

Pil Raja Urat Asli is promoted for pain relief.

The Singapore Health Sciences Authority warned consumers not to se
the product Pil Raja Urat Asli after it was found to contain
piroxicam and indomethacin.

Piroxicam and indomethacin are prescription drugs in the family
known as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and are
used to treat pain, fever and inflammation.  Piroxicam and
indomethacin should only be taken under the supervision of a
healthcare professional.

Side effects associated with piroxicam and indomethacin include
changes in blood pressure, gastrointestinal disorders (with or
without bleeding), anemia, kidney failure and reduced blood-
clotting ability.

Health Canada advises Canadians to contact the Health Products and
Food Branch Inspectorate at 1-800-267-9675 if they find the
products listed above in the Canadian marketplace.

Canadians who have these products are advised not to use them, and
should consult with a healthcare professional if they have
concerns about their health related to the use of these products.


STANDARD & POOR'S: Connecticut to Get $1.38 Mil. From Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jay Stapleton, writing for The Connecticut Law Tribune, reports
that in 2010, during the depths of the financial crisis, then-
Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal filed a lawsuit
against securities- and bond-rating company Standard & Poor's,
accusing it of inflating ratings of risky, mortgage-backed
investments whose collapse helped trigger the Wall Street
meltdown.

Now that litigation has paid off for Connecticut, the federal
government and the other 18 states that joined in.  Connecticut
will receive $36 million from a national settlement that will
total $1.38 billion.  Half the national settlement total will go
to the 19 states and the District of Columbia and the other half
to the federal government.

Mr. Blumenthal is now in the U.S. Senate.  His successor, George
Jepsen, and Mr. Jepsen's staf pursued the litigation after taking
office in 2011 and announced the settlement on Feb. 3.  The
settlement reportedly came after months of negotiations.

"The settlement is the product of years of hard-fought litigation
and reflects the strength of the cases developed by our coalition
of states with the Department of Justice," Mr. Jepsen said during
a conference call.  "We alleged that S&P's ratings of structured
finance securities, including risky mortgage-backed securities,
were directly influenced by the demands of the powerful investment
banking clients who issued the securities and paid S&P to rate
them.  In effect, S&P considered its own business interests,
contrary to its public statements that its ratings were
objective."

The faulty ratings, Mr. Jepsen said, "had a very direct and
serious impact on our national economy that is still being felt in
communities and households in Connecticut and across our country."

Under the agreement, S&P admitted that it issued and confirmed
positive ratings from 2004 to 2007 despite knowing that those
assessments were unjustified and, in many cases, assigned to
packages of mortgages that it knew were likely to default.

Not only was Connecticut the first in the nation to bring a
lawsuit against S&P for its ratings, but it also found a way to
get around a key legal defense the S&P had relied on to fend off
similar lawsuits.  "That legal theory was developed right here in
our office," Mr. Jepsen said.

Essentially, Assistant Attorney General Matthew Budzik explained,
lawyers for S&P had relied on a First Amendment argument to stave
off lawsuits, stating it had a "right" to say what they wanted
about their business, including their ratings.

But Connecticut attacked how the ratings were obtained, rather
than the ratings themselves.  "What we did is we said, 'We're not
going to complain about the ratings, we're going to complain about
how you did your analysis,'" Mr. Budzik said.  That paved the way
for an unfair trade practices claim that alleged the S&P used the
ratings to secure "their own business interests" rather than to
inform the public.

"We were able to obviate the defense, in a very hard-fought
argument," Mr. Budzik said.

The Justice Department and other states latched onto the
Connecticut theory, which put pressure on S&P and led to the
settlement.

As part of the deal, S&P also agreed to retract its earlier
allegation that the U.S. Department of Justice had joined the
action in retaliation for its downgrade of the United States'
credit rating in 2011.

Company executives "complained that the company declined to
downgrade underperforming assets because it was worried that doing
so would hurt the company's business," Attorney General Eric
Holder said Feb. 3.  "While this strategy may have helped S&P
avoid disappointing its clients, it did major harm to the larger
economy, contributing to the worst financial crisis since the
Great Depression.

The Justice Department filed its own civil fraud charges against
S&P two years ago last week.  At that time, it demanded $5 billion
in penalties. The $1.38 billion payment represents a little more
than half of S&P's 2013 revenues of $2.27 billion.

S&P initially disputed the government's allegations, calling the
legal action "meritless" and the claims "simply not true."  The
company insisted its ratings were based on a good-faith assessment
of the performance of home mortgages during a time of market
turmoil.  On Feb 3, McGraw Hill Financial Inc., the parent company
of S&P, said in a statement that the settlement contains no
findings of violations of law by itself, S&P Financial Services or
Standard & Poor's Ratings Services.

The three big rating agencies -- S&P, Moody's Investors Service
and Fitch Ratings -- have been blamed for helping fuel the 2008
crisis by giving high ratings to high-risk mortgage securities.
The high ratings made it possible for banks to sell trillions of
dollars' worth of those securities.  Some investors, such as
pension funds, can only buy securities that carry high credit
ratings.  Those investments soured when the housing market went
bust in 2006.

Experts say the Justice Department's lawsuit against S&P could
serve as a template for action against Fitch and Moody's.
Last month, S&P agreed to pay the federal government, New York
state and Massachusetts more than $77 million to settle separate
charges by the Securities and Exchange Commission related to its
ratings of high-risk mortgage securities after the crisis.  The
SEC had accused S&P of fraudulent misconduct, saying the company
loosened standards to drum up business in 2011 and 2012.


SYNGENTA CORP: "Boatwright" Suit Consolidated in MIR162 Corn MDL
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Boatwright Farms Partnership v.
Syngenta Corporation, et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-00018, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Western District
of Kentucky to the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas
(Kansas City).  The Kansas District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:15-cv-02323-JWL-JPO to the proceeding.

The lawsuit is consolidated in the multidistrict litigation known
as In re: Syngenta AG MIR162 Corn Litigation, MDL No. 2:14-md-
02591-JWL-JPO.

The cases concern the Syngenta defendants' alleged decision to
commercialize corn seeds containing a genetically modified trait,
known as "MIR162," that reportedly controls certain insects.  Corn
with this trait has entered U.S. corn stocks but has not been
approved for import by the Chinese government, which has imposed a
complete ban on U.S. corn with this trait.  The Plaintiffs are
corn growers and grain exporters, who allegedly suffered economic
losses resulting from China's refusal to accept MIR162 corn.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Adam J. Levitt, Esq.
          Edmund S. Aronowitz, Esq.
          GRANT & EISENHOFER, PA
          30 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1200
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 214-0000
          Facsimile: (312) 214-0001
          E-mail: alevitt@gelaw.com
                  earonowitz@gelaw.com

               - and -

          James J. Pizzirusso, Esq.
          Mindy Pava, Esq.
          HAUSFELD LLP
          1700 K. Street Northwest, Suite 650
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 540-7154
          Facsimile: (202) 540-7201
          E-mail: jpizzirusso@hausfeldllp.com
                  mpava@hausfeld.com

               - and -

          Mark P. Bryant, Esq.
          BRYANT LAW CENTER, PSC
          601 Washington Street
          Paducah, KY 42003
          Telephone: (270) 442-1422
          Facsimile: (270) 443-8788
          E-mail: mark.bryant@bryantpsc.com

               - and -

          Thomas V. Bender, Esq.
          WALTERS BENDER STROHBEHN & VAUGHAN, PC
          2500 City Center Square
          1100 Main Street
          Kansas City, MO 64105
          Telephone: (816) 421-6620
          Facsimile: (816) 421-4747
          E-mail: tbender@wbsvlaw.com


TASTE CULINARY: Recalls Umi's Kitchen Butter Chicken Simmer Sauce
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 7, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Notification
Subcategory:              Extraneous Material
Hazard classification:    Class 3
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Taste Culinary Solutions Inc.
Distribution:             British Columbia
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9560

Affected products: 450 ml. Umi's Kitchen Butter Chicken Simmer
Sauce


THOR MOTOR: Recalls Chateau, Miramar, Palazzo & Windsport Models
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 8, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Subcategory:              Motorhome
Notification type:        Safety Mfr
System:                   Accessories
Units affected:           8
Source of recall:         Transport Canada
Identification number:    2015006
TC ID number:             2015006

On certain motorhomes outfitted with Carefree awnings, the screws
that secure the awning to the mounting bracket can break.  If the
mounting bracket assembly were to break apart, the awning can
collapse, which could strike another vehicle, a stationary object,
or a bystander, causing injury and/or property damage.

Dealers will replace the defective screws.

Affected products:

   Maker               Model          Model year(s) affected
   -----               -----          ----------------------
  THOR MOTOR COACH     CHATEAU        2015
  THOR MOTOR COAC      WINDSPORT      2015
  THOR MOTOR COACH     PALAZZO        2015
  THOR MOTOR COACH     MIRAMAR        2015


TOYOTA MOTOR: Must Pay $11 Million to 1996 Camry Crash Victims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Amy Forliti, writing for The Associated Press, reports that a
federal jury decided on Feb. 3 that the design of the 1996 Toyota
Camry had a dangerous defect that was partly to blame for a fatal
2006 crash, and the automaker must pay nearly $11 million to
victims.

Jurors said the company was 60 percent to blame for the accident,
which left three people dead and two seriously injured.  But they
also found that Koua Fong Lee, who has long insisted he tried to
stop his car before it slammed into another vehicle, was 40
percent at fault.

Mr. Lee, his family members, the family of a girl who died, and
two people who were seriously injured sued Toyota Motor Corp. in
U.S. District Court in Minneapolis.  The lawsuit alleged the crash
was caused by an acceleration defect in Mr. Lee's vehicle, but
Toyota argued there was no design defect and that Mr. Lee was
negligent.

"No amount of money . . . will bring my life back, my life is not
the same anymore," Mr. Lee said after the verdict, adding that he
wanted the victims and their families to know: "I tried everything
I could to stop my car."

Toyota released a statement saying the company respects the jury's
decision but believes the evidence clearly showed the vehicle
wasn't the accident's cause.  The company said it will study the
record and consider its legal options going forward.

After the 2006 wreck, Mr. Lee was convicted of vehicular homicide
and sentenced to prison.  He won a new trial after reports
surfaced about sudden acceleration in some Toyotas, and questions
were raised about the adequacy of his defense.  Prosecutors opted
against a retrial and he went free after spending 2 1/2 years
behind bars.  He later sued.

The civil trial lasted three weeks, and jurors spent four full
days deliberating.

Under Minnesota law, the way the jury allocated fault means Toyota
is responsible for paying all damages, minus 40 percent of the
amount awarded to Mr. Lee, said Mr. Lee's attorney, Bob Hilliard.
That brings Toyota's total liability to $10.94 million.  Mr. Lee
will receive $750,000 of that total.

During the trial, Mr. Hilliard, told jurors there was a defect in
the car's design.  He said the Camry's auto-drive assembly could
stick, and when tapped or pushed while stuck, it could stick again
at a higher speed.  He also accused Toyota of never conducting
reliability tests on nylon resin pulleys that could be damaged
under heat and cause the throttle to stick.

"This is what makes the car go.  This is what turns it into a
torpedo, a missile, a deadly weapon," Mr. Hilliard said during his
closing argument.

Toyota said there was no defect in the design of the 1996 Camry.
The company's attorney, David Graves, suggested that Mr. Lee was
an inexperienced driver and mistook the gas pedal for the brake.

Toyota also noted that Mr. Lee's car was never subject to the
recalls of later-model Toyotas.

Mr. Hilliard said the verdict means that other 1996 Toyota Camrys
have defects, and perhaps the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration needs to take a look at the car, while owners of
those vehicles need to make sure they are safe.

"I am 100 percent convinced in my heart and mind that there is a
defect in this Camry, and that this defect caused this accident,"
he said.

The crash killed the driver of the other vehicle, Javis Trice-
Adams Sr., and his 9-year-old son, Javis Adams Jr.  They were not
part of this case.

Trice-Adams' 6-year-old niece, Devyn Bolton, was paralyzed and
died in October 2007.  The jury awarded her estate $4 million.

Trice-Adams' daughter, Jassmine Adams, who was 12 at the time, was
seriously injured, as was his father, Quincy Ray Adams.  Jassmine
Adams was awarded $4 million, and Quincy Adams was awarded $1.25
million.  Lesser damages were awarded to Mr. Lee and four family
members who were in his car at the time.

Terrell Damar Adams, a cousin of Javis Adams Sr., called the
verdict a blessing.

"I think it's kind of amazing that they found Toyota at fault," he
said, but added that the monetary award "doesn't bring back our
family."


UNCLE T FOOD: Recalls Trung Nguyen G7 Black Instant Coffee 2-in-1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            January 8, 2015
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory:              Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Uncle T Food Ltd.
Distribution:             Alberta, British Columbia
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    9570

Affected products: 15 x 16 g. Trung Nguyen G7 Black Instant Coffee
2-in-1 with all codes where milk is not declared on the label


UNITED BANK: Harbortouch Gets OK to Amend Answer to "Corona" Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
AMADOR L. CORONA, Attorney at Law, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated persons, Plaintiff, v. UNITED BANK
CARD, INC., a corporation, Defendant, NO. 8:12CV89, (D. Neb.)
is before the Court on Defendant Harbortouch Payments, LLC's
Motion for Leave to File Amended Answer.

"[T]he Court will grant Defendant leave to amend its answer,"
ruled Magistrate Judge F.A. Gossett in an order dated January 21,
2015, a copy of which is available at http://is.gd/z4a1Hs from
Leagle.com.

"Through its amendment, Defendant is attempting to make clear its
contention that any merchant having a contract with a New Jersey
forum selection clause is not part of Plaintiff's proposed class
and is bound by the terms of a recent settlement reached in a New
Jersey lawsuit involving similar issues. The New Jersey settlement
was given preliminary approval on or about September 24, 2014.
Defendant notified Plaintiff of its desire to amend its answer on
or about October 17, 2014, and Plaintiff was provided a copy of
Defendant's proposed answer on November 5, 2014. Defendant filed
its motion to amend on November 17, 2014. Granting Defendant leave
to amend at this time would not prejudice Plaintiff because, in
accordance with the parties' agreement, the class certification
phase of discovery has just begun and no dates, including a trial
date, have been set that might be affected by the proposed
amendment," Mag. Judge Gossett added.

Amador L. Corona, Plaintiff, represented by Christopher J.
Roberts, ROBERTS LAW FIRM, Gary R. Pearson --
pearsonlaw@neb.rr.com -- PEARSON LAW FIRM, Joel J. Ewusiak --
joel@ewusiaklaw.com -- EWUSIAK LAW FIRM & Scott E. Schutzman --
schutzy@msn.com -- LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT E. SCHUTZMAN.

United Bank Card, Inc., Defendant, represented by J. Scott Paul --
spaul@mcgrathnorth.com -- MCGRATH, NORTH LAW FIRM & Michaela A.
Smith -- msmith@mcgrathnorth.com -- MCGRATH, NORTH LAW FIRM.


UNITED STATES: Dist. Court Dismisses Class Action Suit vs. DOE
--------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Robert W. Sweet granted a motion to dismiss an
amended class action complaint in ANA SALAZAR, MARILYN MERCADO,
ANA BERNARDEZ, JEANNETTE POOLE, EDNA VILLATORO, LISA BRYANT and
CHERRYLINE STEVENS, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. ARNE DUNCAN, in his official
capacity as Secretary of the United States Department of
Education, Defendant, NO. 14 CIV. 1230 (RWS), (S.D. N.Y.).

"While the spirit behind the enactment of 20 U.S.C. [Section]
1087(c) arguably supports Plaintiffs cause, the statute and its
implementing regulations' construction do not. Defendant's
arguments regarding injunctive relief and motion for class
certification are denied as moot in light of the dismissal of the
Plaintiffs' [Amended Complaint]," wrote Judge Sweet in an opinion
dated January 9, 2015, a copy of which is available at
http://is.gd/Sd8buM from Leagle.com.

Yisroel Schulman, Esq. -- yschulman@nylag.org -- Jane Greengold
Stevens, Esq. -- jstevens@nylag.org -- Michelle Movahed, Esq.,
Eileen Connor, Esq. -- econnor@nylag.org -- NEW YORK LEGAL
ASSISTANCE GROUP, New York, NY, Attorneys for the Plaintiffs.

Christine S. Poscablo, Esq., Ellen London, Esq., PREET BHARARA,
United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, New
York, NY, Attorneys for the Defendant.


UNITED STATES: Obamacare Improperly Taxes States, Ohio Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Koeninger at Courthouse News Service reports that the
program used to fund Obamacare improperly taxes states and local
governments, a federal class action led by the state of Ohio
alleges.

Ohio filed the complaint on January 26 alongside Warren County,
the Ohio Department of Administrative Services, the University of
Akron, Shawnee State University, Bowling Green State University
and Youngstown State University.

It says that, by implementing the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act's "Transitional Reinsurance Program," the
federal government has "assessed and now collected mandatory
monetary 'contributions' not only from insurance companies and
certain private self-insured health care plans, but also directly
from state and local governments that provide self-insured health
care plans for their employees."

"The federal bureaucracy overreaches and acts beyond its statutory
authority in purporting to apply these taxes to plaintiff the
State of Ohio and its instrumentalities including the Ohio
Department of Administrative Services, plaintiff universities, and
Warren County," the complaint continues.

Ohio says there is a reason Congress limited the mandatory
contributions to administrators of welfare-benefit plans under the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act.

That is because, if applied to state governments, "such taxation
would alter radically the balance of authority between the federal
government and the states: it would violate important federalism
protections of the United States Constitution, including the Tenth
Amendment and the related Anti-Commandeering doctrine and the
doctrine of Intergovernmental Tax Immunity," the complaint states.

Ohio also accuses Uncle Sam of misusing the funds collected under
the "Transitional Reinsurance Program."

"The federal government has acknowledged . . . that a significant
portion of the monies so collected will not fund 'transitional
reinsurance,' but instead will be directed into the general fund
of the United States Treasury," the complaint states.

"Thus, not only is the federal government purporting to tax the
states and their instrumentalities directly, but it is doing so in
part to fund federal programs unrelated to the specified objects
of the tax and its central stated purpose," Ohio notes.

A letter Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine sent to the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, informing it that the
reinsurance tax does not apply to state and local government
entities, has allegedly gone unanswered.

"Defendants have responded to that letter only by proceeding to
collect the disputed taxes from the state of Ohio and its
instrumentalities," the complaint states.

Ohio and the other plaintiffs want all money collected by the U.S.
government for the Reinsurance Program, a figure they put at more
than $6.3 million, refunded.  They are represented by Frederick
Nelson, Esq., senior adviser to Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine.

The United States of America is names as a defendant, as are the
Department of Health and Human Services and its secretary, Sylvia
Mathews Burwell.


US FOOD & DRUG: Recalls Natural Health Foreign Products
-------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Type of communication:    Foreign Product Alert (FPA)
Subcategory:              Natural health products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Source of alert:          United States Food and Drug
                          Administration, Hong Kong Department of
                          Health, Australian Therapeutic Goods
                          Administration

These products are not authorized for sale in Canada and have not
been found in the Canadian marketplace, but it is possible they
may have been brought into the country by travellers or purchased
over the Internet.

Affected products:

Slim Perfect Arm
Slim Perfect Legs
Lingzhi Cleansed Slim Tea
Trim-Fast Slimming Softgel
Sliming Diet By Pretty White
Lipo 8 Burn Slim
Best Line Suplemento Alimenticio Capsules
Slyn Both Green capsules
Mezo
Mix Fruit Slimming
Slim Perfect Arm, Slim Perfect Legs, Lingzhi Cleansed Slim Tea,
Trim-Fast Slimming Softgel, Sliming Diet By Pretty White, Lipo 8
Burn Slim, Best Line Suplemento Alimenticio Capsules, Slyn Both
Green capsules, and Mezo

These products are promoted for weight loss.

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned
consumers not to use the products Lingzhi Cleansed Slim Tea, Trim-
Fast Slimming Softgel, Sliming Diet By Pretty White, Lipo 8 Burn
Slim, and Best Line Suplemento Alimenticio Capsules.  The Hong
Kong Department of Health warned consumers not to use the products
Slim Perfect Arm and Slim Perfect Legs and the Australian
Therapeutics Goods Administration (TGA) warned consumers not to
use the product Slyn Both Green capsules after they were found to
contain undeclared sibutramine.  The United States Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) also warned consumers not to use the product
Mezo after it was found to contain benzylsibutramine.

Sibutramine was previously used to treat obesity but is no longer
authorized for sale in Canada because of its association with an
increased risk of cardiovascular sideeffects such as heart attack
and stroke.

Benzylsibutramine is an unauthorized substance similar to
sibutramine and may pose similar health risks.
Place of origin

In addition to heart attack and stroke, side effects associated
with sibutramine include increased blood pressure and heart rate,
dry mouth, difficulty sleeping and constipation.

This product is promoted for weight loss.

The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned
consumers not to use this product after it was found to contain
undeclared sibutramine and phenolphthalein.

Sibutramine was previously used to treat obesity but is no longer
authorized for sale in Canada because of its association with an
increased risk of cardiovascular side effects such as heart attack
and stroke.

Phenolphthalein was previously used as a laxative but is no longer
authorized for sale in Canada because it may cause cancer.
Place of origin

In addition to heart attack and stroke, side effects associated
with sibutramine include increased blood pressure and heart rate,
dry mouth, difficulty sleeping and constipation.

Additional side effects associated with phenolphthalein include
decreased blood pressure, skin rash and gastrointestinal bleeding.

Health Canada advises Canadians to contact the Health Products and
Food Branch Inspectorate at 1-800-267-9675 if they find the
products listed above in the Canadian marketplace.

Canadians who have these products are advised not to use them, and
should consult with a healthcare professional if they have
concerns about their health related to the use of these products.


VIVO BRAND: Forta for Men Due to Homosildenafil Recalled
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Posting date:             December 31, 2014
Type of communication:    Drug Recall
Subcategory:              Natural health products
Hazard classification:    Type I
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Product Safety
Audience:                 General Public, Hospitals, Healthcare
                          Professionals
Identification number:    RA-43169

Recalled products: Forta for Men

Product was found to be adulterated with undeclared unauthorized
homosildenafil.

Affected products:

A. Forta for Men
DIN, NPN, DIN-HIM

NPN 80045132

Strength:

Cinnamomum aromaticum 70.0 mg
Epimedium brevicornu 130.0 mg
Lycium barbarum 80.0 mg
Ophiocordyceps sinensis 120.0 mg
Panax ginseng 100.0 mg

Lot or serial number: 318

Companies:

   Recalling Firm     Vivo Brand Management
                      830 Campbell St.
                      Cornwall K6H 6L7
                      Ontario
                      Canada


WAH LEE: Recalls FEEMA Cordless Electric Kettle
-----------------------------------------------
Starting date:            December 30, 2014
Posting date:             December 30, 2014
Type of communication:    Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory:              Tools and Electrical Products
Source of recall:         Health Canada
Issue:                    Electrical Hazard
Audience:                 General Public
Identification number:    RA-43059

Affected products: FEEMA 1.5L Cordless Electric Kettle

This voluntary recall involves FEEMA 1.5L cordless electric
kettles identified by model number FM1500 and UPC number
4893153394579.

The product has an auto shut off function and boil dry protection.
The kettles are made of stainless steel with dimensions measuring
21 centimetres in height and 14.5 centimetres in diameter.

The kettles are lacking an approved certification mark and it is
unknown if they are in compliance with the applicable electrical
safety standard.

Neither Health Canada nor Wah Lee Household has received any
reports of consumer incidents or injuries related to the use of
these kettles.

Approximately 23 units of the recalled kettles were sold in
Canada.

The units were manufactured in China and sold from September 2014
to November 13, 2014.

Companies:

   Importer     Wah Lee Household Products Inc.
                Toronto
                Ontario
                Canada

Images (select thumbnail to enlarge)

Consumers should immediately stop using the affected FEEMA
cordless electric kettles and return them to Wah Lee Household.


WAL-MART INC: Judge Narrows Claims in "Cortina" Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
In the action THAMAR SANTISTEBAN CORTINA, on behalf of herself,
all others similarly situated, and the general public, Plaintiff,
v. WAL-MART, INC., Defendant, Case No. 13-CV-2054 BAS (DHB) (S.D.
Cal.), District Judge Cynthia Bashant entered an order (1)
granting in part and denying in part Defendant's Motion to
Dismiss, and (2) Terminating in part and Denying in part
Defendant's Motion to Strike.

Plaintiff Thamar Cortina alleges Wal-Mart's coenzyme Q10
supplement, sold under its "Equate" brand, was deceptively
advertised under various common law and statutory provisions.

Defendant moved to dismiss the Plaintiff's First Amended
Complaint.

The judge notes: "Now, Plaintiff again seeks to assert a claim
under the [Arkansas Deceptive Trade Practices Act -- "ADTPA"] on
behalf of a nationwide class. However, Plaintiff's injuries
occurred in California, and California's interest in protecting
customers in this state outweighs Arkansas' interests. Similarly,
all other states have a superior interest in asserting their laws
to protect transactions taking place in their state, whether or
not their law conflicts with Arkansas'.  At this point, Plaintiff
cannot possibly allege any facts consistent with the First Amended
Complaint that could give rise to a cause of action under Arkansas
law for plaintiffs who did not purchase Equate in Arkansas."

Accordingly, the Court grants in part the motion to dismiss
insofar as it is seeks to dismiss the ADTPA claim, and the Court
dismisses the Plaintiff's second claim for relief under the ADTPA
without leave to amend to assert it on behalf of a nationwide
class.

In a separately-noticed "Motion to Strike", Defendant moved to
dismiss the causes of action Plaintiff has asserted on behalf of a
prospective nationwide class.  Defendant asserted the Court should
"strike" the causes of action both by restating the previously
asserted grounds for dismissal and contending that the Magnuson-
Moss Warranty Act (MMWA) "cannot support certification of a
national class[.]" The Court holds that insofar as this motion
seeks to dismiss the ADTPA claim, it is terminated as moot because
that claim has been dismissed. As to the prospective nationwide
class, the Court determines they are not "redundant, immaterial,
impertinent, or scandalous" such that they may be stricken under
Rule 12(f). Further, at this point a motion opposing class
certification is premature.  For those reasons, the remainder of
the motion to strike is denied, the Court rules.

A copy of the District Court's Jan. 20, 2015 Order is available at
http://is.gd/byZwzdfrom Leagle.com.

Thamar Santisteban Cortina, Plaintiff, represented by Jack
Fitzgerald, IV -- jack@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com -- The Law Office of
Jack Fitzgerald, PC, Ronald Marron, Law Office of Ronald Marron,
Alexis M. Wood, Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron, Beatrice Skye
Resendes, Law Offices of Ronald A. Marron APLC & Trevor Flynn --
trevor@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com -- Hillcrest Professional Building.

Wal-Mart, Inc., Defendant, represented by David C Allen --
dallen@btlaw.com -- Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Jade Jurdi --
jade.jurdi@btlaw.com -- Barnes & Thornburg LLP, Kevin Dale Rising
-- kevin.rising@BTLaw.com -- Barnes & Thornburg LLP & Sarah
Elizabeth Johnston -- sjohnston@btlaw.com -- Barnes & Thornburg
LLP.


WESTON TRANSPORTATION: "Brown" Suit Transferred to W.D. Missouri
----------------------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit styled Ronald Brown v. Weston Transportation, Case No.
2:14-cv-02456, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the District of Kansas to the U.S. District Court for the Western
District of Missouri (Kansas City).  The Missouri District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 4:15-cv-00073-HFS to the proceeding.

Mr. Brown, proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, filed the
action alleging violations under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, and a claim for
retaliation based on his complaint about disparate treatment.

The Defendant is represented by:

          Jacob L. Kurtz, Esq.
          Kevin D. Case, Esq.
          Michael C. Skidgel, Esq.
          CASE LINDEN, PC
          2600 Grand Blvd., Suite 300
          Kansas City, MO 64108
          Telephone: (816) 979-1500
          Facsimile: (816) 979-1501
          E-mail: jacob.kurtz@caselinden.com
                  kevin.case@caselinden.com
                  mike.skidgel@caselinden.com


WESTOWER COMMS: April 8 Final Settlement Approval Hearing
---------------------------------------------------------
District Judge John A. Mendez of the Eastern District of
California granted the motion for preliminary approval of class
action settlement, conditional certification, approval of class
notice, and setting of final approval hearing in the case TROY
CRAYTHORN, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. WESTOWER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a Delaware
Corporation, Defendant, No. 2:12-CV-01328-JAM-EFB (E.D. Cal.)

The Court notes that defendant has agreed to pay the Gross
Settlement Amount of $1,140,000 in full satisfaction of the claims
as specifically described in the Settlement Agreement.  The court
finds the settlement as fair and reasonable to class members when
balanced against the probable outcome of further litigation
relating to class action certification, liability and damages
issues, and potential appeals of rulings. The Court finds that
settlement at this time will avoid substantial costs, delay and
risks that would be presented by the further prosecution of the
litigation, and that the proposed Settlement has been reached as
the result of intensive, informed and non-collusive and arm's-
length negotiations between the parties.

The court conditionally certified these classes for settlement
purposes only:

     (1) The "Roseville Class": all non-exempt field civil
technicians, tower technicians, electricians, and foremen employed
by WesTower and who worked out of a Northern California location
at any time during the period of March 9, 2008 through July 30,
2014. a. "Roseville Subclass": all Roseville Class members
employed at any time on or after March 9, 2009 and who were no
longer employed as of July 30, 2014;

     (2) The "Los Angeles Class": all non-exempt Foremen employed
by WesTower and who worked out of a Southern California location
at any time during the period of March 9, 2008 through July 30,
2014. a. "Los Angeles Subclass": all Los Angeles Class members
employed at any time on or after March 9, 2009 and who were no
longer employed as of July 30, 2014.

The Court approves and appoints Plaintiff Troy W. Craythorn as the
Class Representative and approves and appoints Cohelan Khoury &
Singer and Vaughan & Associates as Class Counsel.  The Court
approves and appoints CPT Group, Inc., as the Claims Administrator
to administrate the Settlement pursuant to the terms of the
Settlement Agreement.

The Final Approval hearing shall be held before Judge Mendez at
9:30 a.m. on April 8, 2015 in Courtroom 6, located at the Robert
I. Matsui United States Courthouse, 501 I Street, 14th Floor,
Sacramento, California 95814, to consider the fairness, adequacy
and reasonableness of the proposed Settlement preliminarily
approved by this Order of Preliminary Approval, and to consider
the application of Class Counsel Cohelan, Khoury & Singer and
Vaughan & Associates for an award of reasonable attorneys' fees
and litigation expenses, Class Representative service payment to
Plaintiff, and for the Claims Administration expenses incurred.
All briefs in support of the proposed Settlement and the Final
Approval hearing shall be served and filed with the Court on or
before March 20, 2015 and that all briefs in support of Class
Counsels' requests for awards of attorneys' fees and litigation
costs, Class Representative service payment and Claims
Administration expenses shall be filed with the Court on or before
March 20, 2015.

A copy of Judge Mendez's order dated December 5, 2014, is
available at http://is.gd/4BNXSvfrom Leagle.com.

Troy Craythorn, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated,
Plaintiff, represented by Diana Marie Khoury -- dkhoury@ckslaw.com
-- James Jason Hill -- jhill@ckslaw.com -- Kimberly Dawn Neilson
-- kneilson@ckslaw.com -- Michael D. Singer -- msinger@ckslaw.com
-- at Cohelan Khoury and Singer; Cris C. Vaughan --
ccvaughan@sbcglobal.net -- at Vaughan & Associates

WesTower Communications, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Defendant,
represented by Jennifer M. Holly -- hollyj@gtlaw.com -- James M.
Nelson -- nelsonj@gtlaw.com -- at Greenberg Traurig, LLP; Angela
Lee Diesch -- adiesch@kmtg.com -- at Kronick, Moskovitz, Tiedemann
& Girard


                             *********

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 2015. 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  * * *