CAR_Public/151105.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

            Thursday, November 5, 2015, Vol. 17, No. 221


                            Headlines


715-723 SIXTH: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Business Deal
7-ELEVEN: Franchisees Sue Head Office Over Deal Disagreement
ADVANCED DISPOSAL: Faces "Okanovic" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
AMERICAN AIRLINES: Faces "Katz" Suit Over Air Ticket-Price Fixing
APPLE TEXAS: Faces "Lavender" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime

ASURION INSURANCE: Faces "Lee" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
AU OPTRONICS: Court Approves $25MM Deal to Settle Oregon Case
AVID LIFE: Ashley Madison Used "Fembots", "Poyet" Class Suit Says
BIMBO BAKERIES: Faces "Bracamontes" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
BIRCH COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Class Suit Alleging TCPA Violations

BMW: San Francisco Court Certifies Final Class Action Settlement
CAVALRY SPV: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Okla. Suit Says
CHRYSLER GROUP: Wrongful Death Suit Goes to E.D. Pa. Court
CITYSIGHTSEEING: "Riveros" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
COLLECTO INC: Has Invaded Class Members' Privacy, Action Claims

COMPUCOM SYSTEMS: Faces "Feamster" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
CONAGRA FOODS: "Negrete" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
DRAFTKINGS INC: Faces Suit for Deceptive Business Practices
ESCAPE MONTHLY: Sued in Cal. Over Vague Renewal Purchase Terms
EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Faces "Ciano" Suit in Cal. Over Data Breach

EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Faces "Zimmelman" Suit Over Data Breach
FORD MOTOR: W.Va. Judge Rejects Discovery Bid in "Johnson" Case
FRONTON HOLDINGS: Accused of Violating Disabilities Act in Fla.
GENERAL MILLS: Falsely Advertises Cheerios, Sacramento Suit Says
GLAXOSMITHKLINE: Continues to Face Zofran Birth-Defect Lawsuits

GOBBLE INC: Sued Over Extra Fee in "Dinner Kit Subscription"
JC FODALE: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Menchaca" Suit Says
KEITH SMITH: "Colgin" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
KEURIG GREEN: "Sanchez" Suit Removed to California District Court
LA NORIA: Faces "Castillo" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime

LOCAL LIGHTHOUSE: "Sitt" Suit Transferred From N.J. to California
MAGIC BUBBLE: Faces "Cosner" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
MASJID NUR AL ISLAM: Banned Payors from Worship, Suit Claims
MASSAY ENERGY: Court Excludes Evidence in Mine Trial
MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Accused of Violating Fair Labor Standards Act

MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Faces "Harris" Suit Alleging FLSA Violations
MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Faces "Harvey" Suit Alleging FLSA Violations
MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Md. Suit Claims
MAXPOINT INTERACTIVE: October 30 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline
MILWAUKEE BUCKS: Former Cheerleader Files Suit for Better Pay

MINNESOTA: Hospital Worker Sues Over Shortchanging OT Pay
MONUMENT SECURITY: Faces "Brown" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
MOVERS SPECIALTY: Accused of Violating Fair Credit Reporting Act
NEW YORK LIFE: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages
PEET'S COFFEE: Inflates Liquid Volume of Coffee, Suit Says

PRICELINE GROUP: Sued in Conn. Over Spirit Airlines Ticket Price
PRONTO PIZZA: Faces "Alvarez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
REGENTS OF THE UCLA: Faces "Edelstein" Suit Over Data Breach
ROYAL BANK: To Report Q3 Loss Due to Rising Misconduct Payments
SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Court Denies Bid to Release Detainees

SHAVIV CORPORATION: Cal. Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
SPRINT CORP: Illegally Obtains Background Reports, Suit Claims
SQUILLACE STEEL: Faces "Soto" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
TIFFANY AND COMPANY: "Ishmiel" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
TMI HOSPITALITY: Housekeepers Win Class Status in Minn. Action

TORQUED-UP ENERGY: "Guerra" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
UNITED STATES: Tea Party Class Suit Waiting for Certification
UPLAND VINEYARDS: "Alvarez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
USA PROPERTIES: Faces "Lemmons" Suit Over Tenancy Termination
VOLKSWAGEN: South Korean Audi Owners File Class Suit

VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: EPA Says Porsche & Audi Fail Emissions Test
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Chen" Suit in N.J. Over Defeat Devices
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Millington" Suit Over Defeat Devices
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Rolinski" Suit Over Defeat Devices
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Siegel" Suit Over Defeat Devices

VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Stoops" Suit Over Defeat Devices
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Stringer" Suit Over Clean Diesel Issue
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Cantor" Suit Removed to Kansas District Court
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Simmons" Class Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Weber" Suit Removed to Missouri District Court




                            *********

715-723 SIXTH: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Business Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dan Nainan, et al. v. 715-723 Sixth Avenue Owners Corp., et al.,
Case No. 160751/2015 (N.Y. Sup., October 20, 2015) is an action
for damages as a result of the Defendants' wrongful actions,
specifically by harassing, intimidating and coercing the
Plaintiffs into entering into a business deal in which a member of
the board of directors have significant personal financial
interests outside of their corporate roles.

715-723 Sixth Avenue Owners Corp. operates a cooperative apartment
building located at 101 West 23rd Street, New York County.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Andrew M. Wong, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF ANDREW M. WONG
      444 East 86th Street, Suite 21 C
      New York, NY 10028
      Telephone: (212) 772-6285
      E-mail: andrew.m.wong@verizon.net


7-ELEVEN: Franchisees Sue Head Office Over Deal Disagreement
------------------------------------------------------------
Broede carmody, writing for SmartCompany.com, reported that 7-
Eleven franchisees are furious the convenience chain's new
franchise model does not give them further concessions and are
threatening a class action lawsuit if the updated franchising
agreement is not made "sustainable for everyone".

In a recent email to franchisees seen by SmartCompany, 7-Eleven's
interim chief executive Bob Baily said all the "material
components" of the new franchising model had been signed off and
all franchisees had supported the updated business model.

"My position has not changed from last and we look forward to our
meetings with individual franchisees," Baily wrote.

However, a group of six franchisees representing 7-Eleven store
owners has fired back, saying there has been a "strong
misunderstanding" with head office and they were under the
impression they would consider the new agreement before consenting
to the final business model.

"To be clear, at no stage did we enter that meeting room on the
belief that we would be accepting or even rejecting the model on
the wholesome [sic] opinion of six people," the franchisees said.

"Our primary goal was to analyse this proposed model and put
forward our contributions."

In their reply to Baily, the six franchisees argue they brought up
a number of issues that head office promised to look into before
the finalisation of the contract.

"Now it has got to such a contradictory stage where we had walked
out of the meeting with a newly proposed model requiring countless
amendments and still un-finalised, but a week later, according to
your email we had already accepted the model," the franchisees
wrote.

"This caused great dissatisfaction and lack of trust amongst
franchisees as they were led to believe (by you) that we had
accepted the model on their behalf. This is not true, and we
reinforce again that acceptance of this model will never happen
until our terms and conditions are met."

As previously reported by SmartCompany, 7-Eleven franchisees say
the new franchise agreement does not go far enough to fix the
convenience chain's business model.

In particular, franchisees would like more generous fuel
commissions as well as for head office to cover additional costs
such as garden maintenance.

7-Eleven franchisees say these changes will go a long way in
helping store owners break even now as well as pay their employees
correctly.

One 7-Eleven franchisee told SmartCompany as many as 90% of store
owners do not want to sign the new franchising agreement.

"Most of the people aren't happy and they are worried they will go
bankrupt," the 7-Eleven franchisee says.

"Franchisees from all the different states are in talks with their
lawyers to take class action. We just want them to be fair in what
they are offering. We're asking basic things. If they want us to
open on public holidays, there should be a surcharge like Domino's
and a little bit more freedom in opening hours.

"We don't need to open five to six stores on the one road where
no-one is getting more than five or six customers a night."

7-Eleven district managers will begin discussions with franchisees
from in order to explain how the new franchising model will work.

The company is also asking 7-Eleven franchisees to handover
payroll records and CCTV footage so that it can check whether
individual stores are paying their employees correctly.


ADVANCED DISPOSAL: Faces "Okanovic" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
---------------------------------------------------------------
Adnan Okanovic, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Advanced Disposal Services North Georgia, Case No.
1:15-cv-03696-SCJ (N.D. Ga., October 20, 2015) is brought against
the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Advanced Disposal Services North Georgia provides collection,
transfer, disposal and recycling operations to more than 200,000
commercial customers and 2.8 million residential customers
throughout Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky,
Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,
Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South
Carolina, Tennessee, Vermont, Wisconsin and the Bahamas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Kevin D. Fitzpatrick Jr., Esq.
      Charles R. Bridgers, Esq.
      DELONG, CALDWELL, BRIDGERS, FITZPATRICK & BENJAMIN, LLC
      3100 Centennial Tower
      101 Marietta Street
      Atlanta, GA 30303
      Telephone: (404) 979-3150
      Facsimile: (404) 979-3170
      E-mail: kevin.fitzpatrick@dcbflegal.com
              charlesbridgers@dcbflegal.com


AMERICAN AIRLINES: Faces "Katz" Suit Over Air Ticket-Price Fixing
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Israel Katz, 17849 Margate Street, Apt. 306, Encino, CA 91316, on
behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v.  American
Airlines Group, Inc., American Airlines, Inc., Delta Airlines,
Inc., Southwest Airlines Co., United Continental Holdings, Inc.,
and United Airlines, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01741 (D. Colo.,
October 20, 2015) arises from the Defendants' alleged unlawful
combination, agreement and conspiracy to fix, raise, maintain or
stabilize prices for Domestic Airfare in the United States.

The Defendants operate the largest commercial airline companies in
the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jon Corey, Esq.
      QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
      777 6th Street, NW, 11th Floor
      Washington, DC 20001
      Telephone: (202) 538-8000

         - and -

      Stephen R. Neuwirth, Esq.
      Faith E. Gay, Esq.
      QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
      51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
      New York, NY 10010
      Telephone: (212) 849-7000

         - and -

      Adam B. Wolfson, Esq.
      QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
      865 S. Figueroa Street, 10th Floor
      Los Angeles, CA 90017
      Telephone: (213) 443-3000

         - and -

      Ronald J. Aranoff, Esq.
      Dana S. Smith, Esq.
      BERNSTEIN LIEBHARD LLP
      10 East 40th Street
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 779-1414
      E-mail: Aranoff@bernlieb.com
              Dsmith@bernlieb.com

         - and -

      Kit A. Pierson, Esq.
      Daniel A. Small, Esq.
      Daniel H. Silverman, Esq.
      COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL, PLLC
      1100 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 500 West
      Washington, DC 20005
      Telephone: (202) 408-4600
      E-mail: kpierson@cohenmilstein.com
              dsmall@cohenmilstein.com
              dsilverman@cohenmilstein.com


APPLE TEXAS: Faces "Lavender" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Nicholas Lavender, individually and on behalf of all similarly
situated v. Apple Texas Restaurants, Inc. d/b/a Applebees, Case
No. 3:15-cv-03387-C (N.D. Texas, October 20, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Apple Texas Restaurants, Inc. operates a chain of restaurants that
provides food and beverage services to its customers.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      J. Derek Braziel, Esq.
      J. Forester, Esq.
      LEE & BRAZIEL, L.L.P.
      1801 N. Lamar Street, Suite 325
      Dallas, TX 75202
      Telephone: (214) 749-1400
      Facsimile: (214) 749-1010
      E-mail: Info@L-B-Law.com


ASURION INSURANCE: Faces "Lee" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Aurora Lee, Antoinette Lavern, and Tracy Kramer, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated individuals v.
Asurion Insurance Services, Inc., and Asurion Corp., Case No.
3:15-cv-01111 (M.D. Tenn., October 20, 2015) is brought against
the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants offer insurance coverage and warranty support
services against loss, theft, damage, and malfunction of mobile
devices, electronics, appliances, jewelry, eyewear, sporting
goods, fitness equipment, and outdoor power equipment.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
      GREG COLEMAN LAW PC
      First Tennessee Plaza
      800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
      Knoxville, TN 37929
      Telephone: 865-247-0080
      Facsimile: 865-522-0049
      E-mail: greg@gregcolemanlaw.com

         - and -

      G. Tony Atwal, Esq.
      Jacob R. Rusch, Esq.
      JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC
      30 South Sixth Street, Suite 4530
      Minneapolis, MN 55402
      Telephone: (612) 436-1800
      Facsimile: (612) 436-1801
      E-mail: tatwal@johnsonbecker.com
              jrusch@johnsonbecker.com

         - and -

      Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
      Jesse L. Young, Esq.
      SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
      One Towne Square, Suite 1700
      Southfield, MI 48076
      Telephone: (248) 355-0300
      Facsimile: (248) 746-0300
      E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
              jyoung@sommerspc.com


AU OPTRONICS: Court Approves $25MM Deal to Settle Oregon Case
-------------------------------------------------------------
Nicholas Iovino, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported
that a federal judge in San Francisco, Calif., approved a $25.5
million agreement to settle the state of Oregon's antitrust claims
against nine liquid-crystal display panel makers.

The settlement marks the latest twist in a long-running,
multidistrict antitrust case dating back to 2007, when dozens of
LCD panel makers were charged with engaging in a price-fixing
conspiracy from 1999 to 2006.

LCD panels are used in a host of electronic products including
televisions, computer monitors, laptops, cellphones and digital
cameras.  Samsung previously settled antitrust claims with a class
of indirect buyers for $538.6 million in 2012. Three other
companies -- Toshiba, LG Display and AU Optronics -- also reached
a $571-million settlement deal with indirect buyers in 2013.

Oregon first entered the multidistrict case in 2010 along with
Washington and Illinois, when the three states objected to the
defendant companies' proposed settlements with indirect buyers.

During a hearing Oct. 30, 2015, U.S. District Judge Susan Illston
said she would approve a new agreement between the state of Oregon
and nine LCD panel sellers, making $25.5 million available to
Oregon residents and local government branches that purchased LCD
panel products between 2002 and 2006.

"I think Oregon has done a wonderful and actually a tenacious job
here on behalf of its constituents," Illston said. "It was quite a
good bit of lawyering on behalf of the attorney general's office
of the state of Oregon so you should be proud of yourself."

The settlement requires all defendants except Toshiba to cooperate
with Oregon's prosecution of any nonsettling defendants. The
companies must turn over all records and evidence related to the
alleged price-fixing conspiracy and make at least two to four
employees available for interviews and depositions.  It also
requires all defendants, excluding Toshiba and Epson, to
demonstrate ongoing compliance with federal antitrust laws.

The $25.5 million settlement package includes:

     $6.97 million from LG Display;
     $4.5 million from Samsung;
     $4.25 million from AU Optronics;
     $1.95 million from Sharp;
     $1.63 million from Chi Mei;
     $1 million from HannStar;
     $565,000 from Hitachi Displays;
     $525,000 from Toshiba; and
     $105,000 from Epson.

Seven of the companies already deposited their settlement funds
into an escrow account, which Oregon will take control of pending
the settlement's approval. HannStar and AU Optronics have not yet
paid their share of settlement funds but must do so by the end of
the year, according to Oregon's motion for settlement approval.

Oregon Department of Justice attorney Tim Nord, who appeared by
telephone at the Oct. 30 hearing, said Oregon law does not require
the judge hold a final approval hearing to certify the
settlements.

Oregon will use $815,000 of the $25.5-million package to cover the
costs of notifying indirect buyers in the state and processing
claims for relief, according to its motion for approval.

Within the next 15 days, the attorney general will send emails to
local government entities and public colleges and universities
alerting them to the pending settlement and giving them 60 days to
opt out of the deal.

Oregon will also notify residents by issuing press releases and
alerting the media, giving individuals 60 days to exclude
themselves from the award.  The settlement contracts give each
company the option to rescind their agreements with the state if
the level of opt-outs exceeds 5 percent.

Illiston imposed a Dec. 18 deadline for Oregon to file its motion
to recover attorneys' fees and costs from the settling companies,
which will not exceed 20 percent of the total settlement award or
$5.1 million, according to the Oregon Attorney General's office.

The case is, IN RE TFT.LCD (FLAT PANEL) ANTITRUST LITIGATION;
STATE OF OREGON, ex rel. Ellen F. Rosenblum, Attorney General,
Plaintiff, v. AU OPTRONICS CORPORATION, et al., Defendants, Case
No. Master File No. 3:07-md- I 827 SI, Case No. 3:10-4346 SI (N.D.
Cal.).

Special Assistant Attorneys General for Plaintiff:

Michael K. Kelley, Esq.
Michael G. Neff, Esq.
HAGLUND KELLEY LLP
200 SW MARKET Street, Suite 1777
Portland, OR 97201
Phone: (503)225-1257
E-mail: kelley@hk-law.com
        MNeff@hk-law.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff State of Oregon:


Tim D. Nord, Esq.
Special Counsel
Department of Justice
1162 Court Street NE
Salem, OR 97301-4096
Telephone: (503) 934-4400
E-mail: Tim.D.Nord@doj.state.or.us


AVID LIFE: Ashley Madison Used "Fembots", "Poyet" Class Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rebekah Kearn, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported that
online cheating site Ashley Madison not only embarrassed people in
a massive data leak, it cheated men by concealing that only 15% of
its users were real women, a subscriber claims in a federal class
action in Los Angeles, California.

David Poyet sued Avid Life Media and Avid Life Dating dba Ashley
Madison in Federal Court on Oct. 29.

More than 70,000 so-called women on the site were actually
"fembots," Poyet says: bogus profiles of imaginary women
supposedly interested in real men.

Ashley Madison made world headlines in July after hackers calling
themselves the Impact Team swiped the personal information of the
site's roughly 37 million subscribers, including passwords,
financial information and people's sexual fantasies.  The hackers
released enormous amounts of the information in a public data dump
on Aug. 18 after Avid Life refused their demands to shut the site
down. Names of thousands of U.S. government employees were among
the subscribers, as were addresses connected to the United Nations
and the Vatican.

Poyet claims the data breach also revealed that, contrary to the
site's advertisements, only 15 percent of its users were women.

"Ashley Madison went to extreme measures to fraudulently lure in
and profit from customers. Defendants' fraudulent and deceitful
actions include, but are not limited to: marketing that the site
had 5.5 million female profiles, when only a small percentage of
the profiles belonged to actual women who used the site; hiring
employees whose jobs were to create thousands of fake female
profiles; and creating over 70,000 female bots to send male users
millions of fake messages," the complaint states.

Since users are charged "credits" each time they communicate with
someone else, Poyet says, he and other male users were paying to
talk to robots more often than to real women.

Ashley Madison's computer code, which was revealed in the data
dump, showed that the site had created "fembots" programmed to
interact with male subscribers. Comments in the code include "host
bot mother creates engagers; [and] birth has been given! let the
engager find itself a man!" according to the complaint.

Poyet claims this "army of fembots" contacted male users more than
20 million times, reaping massive profits for Avid Life at the
expense of the men who believed they were talking with human
beings.  Had he known that most of the female profiles contacting
him were fake, Poyet says, he never would have joined.

"In short, defendants did not only mislead in marketing and
promoting the website, they purposefully induced members - like
plaintiff and the class -- to engage with the fake profiles by
sending out the initial communication to members. This directly
caused members to incur costs while believing it was an actual
person communicating with them," the complaint states.

Avid Life did not return request for comment.

Poyet seeks class certification, an injunction banning Avid Life
from using "undisclosed fake profiles" on its website,
restitution, and punitive damages for fraud, unfair competition,
false advertising, negligent misrepresentation, and unjust
enrichment.  He is represented by Brian Robbins with Robbins
Arroyo of San Diego, who declined to comment.


BIMBO BAKERIES: Faces "Bracamontes" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
---------------------------------------------------------------
Hector Bracamontes, Felipe Corrales-Guerrero, Adrian Davila
Dennis Garcia, Juan Garcia, Arturo Garcia-Martinez, Ruben Garcia-
Ponce, Carlos Herrera, Luis Martinez, Hector Paredes-Ramirez,
Aaron Payan, Ezequiel Perez, Samuel Romo, Gerardo Sandoval, Manuel
Sandoval, and Wilian Velasquez, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated v. Bimbo Bakeries U.S.A. Inc., Case No.
1:15-cv-02324 (D. Colo., October 20, 2015) is brought against the
Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the
Fair Labor Standard Act.

Bimbo Bakeries U.S.A. Inc. operates more than 60 bakeries, employs
more than 22,000 associates and distributes products through
11,000 routes in all 50 states in the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Colleen T. Calandra, Esq.
      RAMOS LAW
      3000 Youngfield Street
      Wheat Ridge, CO 80215
      Telephone: (303) 733-6353
      Facsimile: (303) 865-5666
      E-mail: colleen@ramoslaw.com


BIRCH COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Class Suit Alleging TCPA Violations
---------------------------------------------------------------
Abante Rooter and Plumbing, Inc., individually and on behalf of a
class of all persons and entities similarly situated v. Birch
Communications, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-03562-AT (N.D. Ga., October
7, 2015) seeks relief pursuant to the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Edward A. Broderick, Esq.
          Anthony Paronich, Esq.
          BRODERICK LAW, P.C.
          125 Summer Street, Suite 1030
          Boston, MA 02110
          Telephone: (508) 221-1510
          E-mail: ted@broderick-law.com
                  anthony@broderick-law.com

               - and -

          Matthew McCue, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF MATTHEW P. MCCUE
          1 South Avenue, Third Floor
          Natick, MA 01760
          Telephone: (508) 655-1415
          E-mail: mmccue@massattorneys.net

               - and -

          Steven Howard Koval, Esq.
          THE KOVAL FIRM, LLC
          3575 Piedmont Road
          Building 15, Suite 120
          Atlanta, GA 30305
          Telephone: (404) 350-5900
          Facsimile: (404) 549-4654
          E-mail: shkoval@aol.com


BMW: San Francisco Court Certifies Final Class Action Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reported that a federal judge in San
Francisco, Calif., certified a final settlement of a class action
claiming BMW style 296 alloy wheels crack, without stating an
amount, but awarding $635,000 in attorneys' fees.


CAVALRY SPV: Violates Fair Debt Collection Act, Okla. Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Roger D. Crockett, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Cavalry SPV I LLC, Case No. 5:15-cv-01119-HE
(W.D. Okla., October 7, 2015) is brought over alleged violations
of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          M. Kathi Rawls, Esq.
          Minal Gahlot, Esq.
          RAWLS LAW OFFICE PLC
          2404 S Broadway
          Moore, OK 73160
          Telephone: (405) 912-3225
          Facsimile: (405) 703-2769
          E-mail: mkr@rawlslawoffice.com
                  minal@rawlslawoffice.com


CHRYSLER GROUP: Wrongful Death Suit Goes to E.D. Pa. Court
----------------------------------------------------------
Rose Bouboushian, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported
that the widow of a man who died after his Plymouth Neon allegedly
collapsed on top of him as he worked underneath it, must fight
Chrysler in Pennsylvania, not New Jersey, a federal judge ruled.

Ted's Used Cars in Stroudsburg, Pa. sold a 1998 Plymouth Neon
compact car to Michael Gordet on Nov. 30, 2010, according to the
complaint.  About two years later, while Gordet was working
underneath the vehicle in Whiting, N.J., its mechanical jack
allegedly failed, causing the car to collapse on top of him on
Nov. 10, 2012.  Gordet ultimately died from his severe injuries,
according to the complaint.

His widow and administratrix of his estate, Tanya Gordet, filed a
wrongful death and product liability action against Chrysler Group
LLC; its parent, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV; Ted's Used Cars dba
Saylorsburg Auto Sales; and 15 anonymous defendants in Ocean
County, N.J. Superior Court on Dec. 29, 2014.

Chrysler later removed the suit to federal court.

Ted's moved to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction on March
24.  But U.S. District Judge Freda Wolfson in Newark dismissed the
motion and transferred the case to the Middle District of
Pennsylvania Oct. 21.

"Although plaintiff alleges that defendant 'regularly transacts
business in the State of New Jersey,' this allegation does not
meet the stringent requirement for general jurisdiction," Wolfson
wrote. "Indeed, discovery has revealed that from 2004 to 2015,
less than 1 percent of defendant's cars were sold to New Jersey
residents."

The judge tossed aside Mrs. Gordet's "stream of commerce" theory.

"Plaintiff argues that defendant not only placed the Neon in the
stream of commerce by selling it to Michael Gordet, but that
defendant 'targeted' New Jersey through its website (which
provided driving direction from New Jersey and stated that
defendant served New Jersey), appearing in yellowpages search
results, and by advertising in an Autoshopper circular in the
Poconos area," Wolfson wrote.

The judge later added: "The complaint fails to allege that
plaintiff's purchase of the Neon from defendant, or David Gordet's
death, would not have occurred in the absence of defendant's
contacts with New Jersey; plaintiff does not allege that
defendant's website (or other advertisements) enticed or led
Michael Gordet to travel to Pennsylvania to purchase the Neon.
Indeed, it is not apparent that defendant's website even contained
the same language 'targeting' New Jersey customers in November
2010, when Michael Gordet purchased the Neon, as the only
screenshots provided to the court are from March and April 2005.
Nor is there any allegation that defendant's other activities in
New Jersey, such as its unrelated sales to 51 New Jersey
residents, or its mechanic's disputed-residence in this state,
were a 'but-for' cause of plaintiff's instant litigation."

Mrs. Gordet's attorney, Christopher Koutsouris, said "Although I
am disappointed that this issue, decided on a technicality, will
force my grieving client to litigate this case and incur increased
expenses in a foreign jurisdiction, I remain convinced that we
will prevail on the merits regardless of the venue."

Fiat Chrysler spokesman Michael Palese declined to comment on the
ruling.  The firm posted a net loss of $330.4 million for the
quarter ended Sept. 30, to cover costs linked to safety recalls in
North America and vehicles destroyed in an explosion in China,
according to the Wall Street Journal. Revenue reportedly rose to
$30.2 billion over a year earlier.


CITYSIGHTSEEING: "Riveros" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Diana Riveros, Manuel Fernandez, and other similarly situated v.
Citysightseeing Miami, LLC, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-23933-JAL
(S.D. Fla., October 20, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid overtime
wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Citysightseeing Miami, LLC operates a tour bus company in Miami-
Dade County, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Anthony M. Georges-Pierre, Esq.
      REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC
      44 West Flagler St., Suite 2200
      Miami, FL 33130
      Telephone: (305) 416-5000
      Facsimile: (305) 416-5000
      E-mail: agp@rgattorneyes.com


COLLECTO INC: Has Invaded Class Members' Privacy, Action Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Walter Diaz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Collecto, Inc. d/b/a EOS CCA, Case No. 3:15-cv-04833
(N.D. Cal., October 20, 2015) is brought against the Defendants
for knowingly, and willfully employing and causing to be employed
certain recording equipment in order to record telephone
conversations with the Plaintiff without the knowledge or consent
of the Plaintiff, in violation of California Penal Code, thereby
invading Plaintiff's privacy.

Collecto, Inc. operates a debt collection services company in Los
Angeles California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
      Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
      324 S. Beverly Dr., #725
      Beverly Hills, CA 90212
      Telephone: (877) 206-4741
      Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
      E-mail: tfriedman@attorneysforconsumers.com
              abacon@attorneysforconsumers.com


COMPUCOM SYSTEMS: Faces "Feamster" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
--------------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Feamster, Robert Mihalic, and Earl Jeansonne,
individually and on behalf of all similarly situated individuals
v. Compucom Systems, Inc., Case No. 7:15-cv-00564 (W.D. Va.,
October 20, 2015) is brought against the Defendant for failure to
pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Compucom Systems, Inc. is engaged in the business of providing
computer technical service and technical resources to businesses
throughout the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Cindra M. Dowd, Esq.
      Richard J. Serpe, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF RICHARD J. SERPE, P.C.
      580 E. Main Street, Suite 310
      Norfolk, VA 23510
      Telephone: (757) 233-0009
      Facsimile: (757) 233-0455
      E-mail: cdowd@serpefirm.com
              rserpe@serpefirm.com

         - and -

      Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
      Jesse L. Young, Esq.
      SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
      One Towne Square, Suite 1700
      Southfield, MI 48076
      Telephone: (248) 355-0300
      Facsimile: (248) 936-2138
      E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
              jyoung@sommerspc.com

         - and -

      Timothy J. Becker, Esq.
      Jacob R. Rusch, Esq.
      JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC
      33 South Sixth Street, Suite 4530
      Minneapolis, MN 55402
      Telephone: (612) 436-1800
      Facsimile: (612) 436-1801
      E-mail: tbecker@johnsonbecker.com
              jrusch@johnsonbecker.com


CONAGRA FOODS: "Negrete" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moises Negrete, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Conagra Foods, Inc., et al., Case No. BC598468 (Cal.
Super. Ct., October 20, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid overtime
compensation, unpaid minimum wage, and unreimbursed business
expenses pursuant to the California Labor Code.

Conagra Foods, Inc. operates a packaged foods company
headquartered in Omaha, Nebraska.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew J. Matern, Esq.
      MATERN LAW GROUP
      1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200
      Manhattan Beach, CA90266
      Telephone: (310) 531-1900
      Facsimile: (310) 531-1901
      E-mail: info@maternlawgroup.com


DRAFTKINGS INC: Faces Suit for Deceptive Business Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------
Martin Frank, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. DraftKings, Inc., et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-02167-DSF-
DTB (C.D. Cal., October 20, 2015) seeks declaratory, injunctive
and monetary relief on behalf of all players victimized by
DraftKings' cynical and deceptive business practices, which
promises that when the Player signs up, he will "automatically
get" the additional matching deposit.

DraftKings, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that operates an online
fantasy sports contests.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Brian J. Robbins, Esq.
      Kevin A. Seely, Esq.
      Ashley R. Rifkin, Esq.
      Leonid Kandinov, Esq.
      600 B Street, Suite 1900
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 525-3990
      Facsimile: (619) 525-3991
      E-mail: brobbins@robbinsarroyo.com
              kseely@robbinsarroyo.com
              arifkin@robbinsarroyo.com
              lkandinov@robbinsarroyo.com

         - and -

      Charles J. LaDuca, Esq.
      CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
      8120 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 810
      Bethesda, MD 20814
      Telephone: (240) 483-4292
      Facsimile: (202) 789-1813
      E-mail: charles@cuneolaw.com


ESCAPE MONTHLY: Sued in Cal. Over Vague Renewal Purchase Terms
--------------------------------------------------------------
John Doe, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Escape Monthly, LLC, and Does - 10 inclusive, Case No.
3:15-cv-02378-BEN-JMA (S.D. Cal., October 20, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to present the automatic
renewal offer terms or continuous service offer terms, in a clear
and conspicuous manner and in visual proximity to the request for
consent to the offer before the subscription or purchasing
agreement was fulfilled.

Escape Monthly, LLC is a Wyoming limited liability company sells
luxury products from around the world, including artisan products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
      Richard H. Hikida, Esq.
      David W. Reid, Esq.
      Victoria C. Knowles, Esq.
      NEWPORT TRIAL GROUP
      A Professional Corporation
      4100 Newport Place, Ste. 800
      Newport Beach, CA 92660
      Telephone: (949) 706-6464
      Facsimile: (949) 706-6469
      E-mail: sferrell@trialnewport.com
              rhikida@trialnewport.com
              dreid@trialnewport.com
              vknowles@trialnewport.com


EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Faces "Ciano" Suit in Cal. Over Data Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
David Ciano and Melissa Merry, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc.,
Case No. 8:15-cv-01683-JLS-KES (C.D. Cal., October 20, 2015)
arises out of the massive hack on Experian's servers that
compromised the sensitive data of T-Mobile's customers and
individuals who applied for credit with T-Mobile.

Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is an Ohio corporation which
provides, among other things, credit check services to
corporations.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Rosemary M. Rivas, Esq.
      FINKELSTEIN THOMPSON LLP
      One California Street, Suite 900
      San Francisco, CA 94111
      Telephone: (415) 398-8700
      Facsimile: (415) 398-8704
      E-mail: rrivas@finkelsteinthompson.com


EXPERIAN INFORMATION: Faces "Zimmelman" Suit Over Data Breach
-------------------------------------------------------------
Stuart Zimmelman, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Experian Information Solutions, Inc., et al., Case No.
8:15-cv-01694-JLS-KES (C.D. Cal., October 20, 2015) arises out of
the massive hack on Experian's servers that compromised the
sensitive data of T-Mobile's customers and individuals who applied
for credit with T-Mobile.

Experian Information Solutions, Inc. is an Ohio corporation which
provides, among other things, credit check services to
corporations.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Stuart R. Fraenkel, Esq.
      Gabriel S. Barenfeld, Esq.
      NELSON & FRAENKEL LLP
      707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 3600
      Los Angeles, CA 90017
      Telephone: (213) 622-6469
      Facsimile: (213) 622-6019
      E-mail: stuart@nflawfirm.com
              gbarenfeld@nflawfirm.com

         - and -

      John A. Kehoe, Esq.
      KEHOE LAW FIRM P.C.
      2 Penn Center, Suite 1020
      Philadelphia, PA 19102
      Telephone: (215) 792-6676
      Facsimile: (212) 500-1329
      E-mail: jkehoe@kehoelawfirm.com

         - and -

      Joseph M. Profy, Esq.
      David M. Promisloff, Esq.
      Jeffrey J. Ciarlanto, Esq.
      PROFY PROMISLOFF & CIARLANTO, P.C.
      100 N 22nd Street, Unit 105
      Philadelphia, PA 19103
      Telephone: (215) 259-5156
      Facsimile: (215) 600-2642
      E-mail: profy@prolawpa.com
              profy@prolawpa.com
              ciarlanto@prolawpa.com


FORD MOTOR: W.Va. Judge Rejects Discovery Bid in "Johnson" Case
---------------------------------------------------------------
Yawana Wolfe, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported that a
federal judge rejected the Ford Motor Company's appeal of a
magistrate judge's order that it engage in additional discovery in
a case involving the alleged accidental acceleration of their
vehicles.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Cheryl Eifert issued her order on September
22. In early October, Ford Motor Company filed its motion,
appealing the order.

In it, Ford said, "Judge Eifert has worked diligently to manage
the discovery process in this case," but that "Plaintiffs' broad
theory of liability -- that the Electronic Throttle Control
systems in 34 different vehicles are defective because they are
not 'fault tolerant' and cause unintended acceleration -- has
resulted in equally broad discovery requests."

"[Because] Plaintiffs have refused to (or cannot) articulate what
they believe causes unintended acceleration in the class vehicles,
Plaintiffs have unfairly forced Judge Eifert to work even harder
to limit their requests to a reasonable and proportional scope,"
the motion continued.

Chief U.S. District Judge Robert Chambers found that Eifert's
discovery order addressed two substantive areas of relevant
information: Ford's engineering of the electronic throttle system,
and its receipt and investigation of unintended acceleration
incidents.

"Ford assails the discovery order by focusing on the undeniably
voluminous, costly, and contentious discovery already produced,
which has consumed thousands of hours of lawyers', witnesses' and
Ford employees' time and attention," Chambers wrote. "Ford also
complains that this new discovery is unduly burdensome, in that
depositions and computer document searches impose substantial
expenses on Ford, but are unlikely to produce meaningful evidence
for Plaintiffs."

Judge Chambers acknowledge Ford "has expended substantial time and
resources to comply with discovery to this point."

Nonetheless, he said he was "satisfied that overall discovery
ordered by the Magistrate Judge is reasonable and proportional."

"It is apparent that the Magistrate Judge examined the particular
circumstance of each of the custodians from whom Plaintiffs sought
a hard-drive search," he said. "The discovery Order identifies
each Ford employee whose files must be searched in full with new
search terms and those whose files are to be subjected to a
limited search for specific matters.'

"Further, two Ford representatives were scheduled for depositions,
which Plaintiffs apparently cancelled, so Ford objects to
rescheduling and re-preparing them. Plaintiffs' explanation was
accepted, implicitly, by the Magistrate Judge, and this Court also
accepts it," Chambers wrote.

The case is, CHARLES JOHNSON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. FORD MOTOR
COMPANY, Defendant, CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:13-6529 (S.D. W.Va.).


FRONTON HOLDINGS: Accused of Violating Disabilities Act in Fla.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Andres Gomez, on his own behalf, and on behalf of all other
individuals similarly situated v. Fronton Holdings, LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company, Case No. 1:15-cv-23747-PCH
(S.D. Fla., October 7, 2015) alleges violations of the Americans
with Disabilities Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brian Tse-Hua Ku, Esq.
          Louis I. Mussman, Esq.
          KU & MUSSMAN PA
          6001 NW 153 Street, Suite 100
          Miami Lakes, FL 33014
          Telephone: (305) 891-1322
          Facsimile: (305) 891-4512
          E-mail: brian@kumussman.com
                  louis@kumussman.com


GENERAL MILLS: Falsely Advertises Cheerios, Sacramento Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reported that General Mills falsely
advertises its Cheerios and Honey Nut Cheerios as gluten free, a
class action claims in Federal Court in Sacramento, California.


GLAXOSMITHKLINE: Continues to Face Zofran Birth-Defect Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Philip A. Janquart, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported
that GlaxoSmithKline pushed its chemotherapy drug Zofran for
morning sickness, an off-label use that causes birth defects,
"experimenting with the lives of unsuspecting mothers-to-be and
their babies," with a "profit maximization" slogan for doctors, a
mother claims in federal court in Boise.

Doctors are allowed to prescribe drugs for off-label uses, but
drug companies are not allowed to push the drugs to doctors or
patients for uses not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration.

In 2012, GlaxoSmithKline agreed to plead guilty and pay $3 billion
to settle criminal and civil fraud charges for promoting Zofran
and other drugs "in a manner that is false or misleading," the
Department of Justice said in a July 2, 2012 statement.

Yet in 1999 the FDA had ordered GlaxoSmithKline to "immediately
cease distribution" of ads that "promote() Zofran in a manner that
is false or misleading because it lacks fair balance," Deana Brown
says in her Oct. 29 lawsuit against GSK, citing statements from
the Department of Justice and the FDA.

Despite these warnings, Brown claims, GSK's "fraudulent marketing
campaign" made Zofran a "blockbuster" drug (a drug with more than
$1 billion in annual sales), selling $1.4 billion of it worldwide
in 2002, $1.1 billion of it in the United States.

Brown, whose baby was born with birth defects, says GSK offered
doctors a chance to get in on its lust for profits.

GlaxoSmithKline is the defendant in 193 lawsuits filed about
Zofran this year, according to the Courthouse News database -- 16
of them on Oct. 30 alone in Alabama federal courts, and 11 more
that day in Boston.

The FDA approved Zofran in 1991 to control nausea and vomiting for
chemotherapy patients. Brown claims that GSK knew that its safety
during pregnancy had not been established.

"But with more than 6 million annual pregnancies in the United
States since 1991 and an estimated 70 to 80 percent incidence of
pregnancy-related nausea, the absence of a prescription medication
that was approved by the FDA for pregnancy-related nausea
presented an extremely lucrative business opportunity for GSK to
expand its sales of Zofran, which before its patent ran out in
2006 was one of the most expensive drugs available in the U.S.
market," according to the complaint. "GSK seized that opportunity,
but the effect of its conduct was tantamount to experimenting with
the lives of unsuspecting mothers-to-be and their babies."

GlaxoSmithKline, based in the United Kingdom, was rated by Forbes
in 2014 as the sixth largest drug company in the world, with $35
billion in revenue that year.

Brown's complaint cites damning marketing material that she says
GSK provided its sales staff in the early 1990s, directing them to
"emphasize to medical providers not only the benefits of Zofran
but also the financial benefits to the providers by prescribing
Zofran. Specifically, '[b]y using a 32mg bag [of Zofran], the
physician provides the most effective dose to the patient and
increases his or her profit by $___ in reimbursement.'"

GlaxoSmithKline even developed a catchy motto for its sales staff
to pitch to doctors about its premixed Zofran bag: "Profit
Maximization -- It's in the Bag." Brown claims GSK did this until
the Department of Justice began investigating it in the early
2000s.

Brown's daughter was born in 2007 with congenital band syndrome
and teratologic clubfoot, she says in the complaint. She was
prescribed Zofran in her first trimester of pregnancy. She has no
family history of these conditions. She says she sued GSK last
week because she was not previously aware of the history of
Zofran.

"Plaintiffs did not suspect, nor did plaintiffs have reason to
suspect, the tortious nature of the conduct causing the injuries,
until a short time before filing this action," the complaint
states. "Additionally, plaintiffs were prevented from discovering
this information sooner because GSK has misrepresented to the
public and to the medical profession that Zofran is safe for use
in pregnancy, and GSK has fraudulently concealed facts and
information that could have led plaintiff to discover a potential
cause of action."

Andrea Fischer, press officer for the FDA's Center for Drug
Evaluation and Research, said she could not comment on Zofran
because of Brown's lawsuit.

Brown's attorney in Boise, Kira Dale Pfisterer, with Hepworth
Janis & Kluksdahl, would not comment on the case, referring
Courthouse News to lead counsel Aimee Wagstaff, of Andrus &
Wagstaff in Denver, who did not immediately respond to a request
for comment.

Brown seeks damages for negligence, product liability, fraudulent
misrepresentation and concealment, breach of express warranty,
breach of implied warranty, loss of consortium and violations of
Idaho's Consumer Protection Act, plus medical expenses and
attorneys' fees.

Congenital band syndrome, also known as amniotic band syndrome,
occurs when a fetus becomes entangled in fibrous, stringlike
amniotic bands in the womb that can wrap around fingers, toes and
limbs, restricting blood flow and normal development, and cause
complete amputation.

Teratologic clubfoot is one of two types of a deformity that cause
unborn babies' feet to rotate inward. Congenital clubfoot can be
classified as "idiopathic," an isolated skeletal anomaly, but
teratologic clubfoot is thought to be the result of genetic
syndromes, neurological disorders and "teratological anomalies,"
which can be manifestations of abnormal development caused by
toxic substances, according to the National Center for
Biotechnology Information.


GOBBLE INC: Sued Over Extra Fee in "Dinner Kit Subscription"
------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reported that a federal class action in
San Diego, California, claims that Gobble Inc. charged an extra
$71.70 for a week's "dinner kit subscription" without permission
after offering a free sample online.


JC FODALE: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Menchaca" Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nelson Menchaca, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated and Frank Menchaca, Jorge Zarate v. JC Fodale
Energy Services, LLC, Case No. 5:15-cv-00910 (W.D. Tex., October
20, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages for all hours worked in excess of 40 per week.

JC Fodale Energy Services, LLC is a service provider to the oil
and gas company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Josh Sanford, Esq.
      SANFORD LAW FIRM, PLLC
      One Financial Center
      650 S. Shackleford Road, Suite 411
      Little Rock, AR 72211
      Telephone: (501) 221-0088
      Facsimile: (888) 787-2040
      E-mail: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com


KEITH SMITH: "Colgin" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Josh Colgin and Kayla Walker, on behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated v. Keith Smith & Associates, Inc., d/b/a
Alexander's Antiques & Auctions, KBAS, LLC, and Keith Smith, Case
No. 3:15-cv-00624-MHL (E.D. Va., October 20, 2015) seeks to
recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants are engaged in an antiques and auction business in
Chesterfield, Virginia.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Philip Justus Dean, Esq.
      Craig Juraj Curwood, Esq.
      CURWOOD LAW FIRM
      530 E. Main Street, Suite 710
      Richmond, VA 23219
      Telephone: (804) 788-0808
      Facsimile: (804) 767-6777
      E-mail: pdean@curwoodlaw.com
              ccurwood@curwoodlaw.com


KEURIG GREEN: "Sanchez" Suit Removed to California District Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Sanchez v. Keurig Green
Mountain, Inc., et al., Case No. M132626, was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of
Monterey to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (San Jose).  The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
5:15-cv-04657-EJD to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff seeks damages for several violations of the
California Labor Code, including failure and refusal to pay agreed
wages and failure to pay minimum wages.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bernard James Fitzpatrick, Esq.
          FITZPATRICK SPINI & SWANSTON
          555 S. Main Street
          Salinas, CA 93901
          Telephone: (831) 755-1311
          Facsimile: (831) 755-1319
          E-mail: bjfitzpatrick@fandslegal.com


Defendant Keurig Green Mountain, Inc., is represented by:

          Laura P. Worsinger, Esq.
          Jon David Cantor, Esq.
          DYKEMA GOSSETT, LLP
          333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2100
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 457-1800
          Facsimile: (213) 457-1850
          E-mail: lworsinger@dykema.com
                  jdcantor@dykema.com


LA NORIA: Faces "Castillo" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
------------------------------------------------------------
Gabino Castillo, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. La Noria Entertainment, Inc. and Does 1
through 50, inclusive, Case No. BC598463 (Cal. Super. Ct., October
20, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the California Labor Code.

La Noria Entertainment, Inc. owns and operates a recording studio
located at 11003 Sports Arena Dr., Whittier, CA 90601.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Farzad Rastegar, Esq.
      RASTEGAR LAW GROUP, APC
      1010 Crenshaw Blvd., Suite 100
      Torrance, CA 90501
      Telephone: (310)961-9600
      Facsimile: (310)961-9094
      E-mail: farzad@rastegarlawgroup.com


LOCAL LIGHTHOUSE: "Sitt" Suit Transferred From N.J. to California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Eddie Sitt v. Local Lighthouse
Corp., et al., Case No. 3:15-CV-5775 FLW (DEAx), was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey to the
U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
(Southern Division - Santa Ana).  The California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 8:15-cv-01604-CJC-KES to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff brings the action against the Defendant and various
John Does on behalf of himself and all those throughout the States
of New Jersey and New York who purchased the Service or were
called by the Defendant during the relevant statute of limitations
period.  The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant orchestrated
unfair, deceptive and misleading marketing and sales practices and
violated a number of federal and state telemarketing laws.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph Lipari, Esq.
          THE SULTZER LAW GROUP, P.C.
          77 Water Street, 8th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (646) 722-4266
          Facsimile: (888) 749-7747
          E-mail: liparij@thesultzerlawgroup.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          David G. Tomeo, Esq.
          Evan Neadel, Esq.
          BECKER MEISEL LLC
          354 Eisenhower Parkway Plaza II, Suite 2800
          Livingston, NJ 07039
          Telephone: (973) 422-1100
          E-mail: dtomeo@beckermeisel.com
                  eneadel@beckermeisel.com


MAGIC BUBBLE: Faces "Cosner" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------
R. Cosner, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Magic Bubble Productions LLC, and Doe One through and
including Doe Ten, Case No. BC598376 (Cal. Super. Ct., October 20,
2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the California Labor Code.

Magic Bubble Productions LLC is the production company for the
production of the motion picture tentatively entitled "Half
Magic".

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alan Harris, Esq.
      David Garrett, Esq.
      Christina Nordsten, Esq.
      HARRIS & RUBLE
      655 North Central Avenue 17 Floor
      Glendale CA 91203
      Telephone: (323) 962-3777
      Facsimile: (323) 962-3004
      E-mail: aharris@harrisandruble.com
              dgarrett@harrisandruble.com
              cnordsten@harrisandruble.com


MASJID NUR AL ISLAM: Banned Payors from Worship, Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reported that dozens claim in court in
Brooklyn, New York, that they paid a mosque $350,000, but that
Masjid Nur al Islam will not let them worship and partake of all
services.


MASSAY ENERGY: Court Excludes Evidence in Mine Trial
----------------------------------------------------
Yawana Wolfe, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported that
the federal judge overseeing the trial of former Massay Energy
chief Don Blankenship has granted the government's motion to
exclude evidence related to the company's disagreement with a
regulation related to the mine ventilation system.

Blankenship, 65, is charged with conspiring to break mine safety
rules at the Upper Big Branch mine in order to boost production at
the facility. A massive explosion at the mine in 2010 killed 29
miners and led to an investigation that uncovered a host of
alleged problems at the mine.

On October 6, 2015, U.S. District Judge Irene Berger granted the
federal government's motion to exclude "claims that federal mine
safety standards were incorrect, misguided, or imprudent."

The prosecution then filed a motion asking Berger to exclude
defense arguments during opening statements and cross-examination
at trial that might seek to establish that the Mine Safety and
Health Administration forced the Massey Energy Upper Big Branch
mine to adopt a ventilation plan that did not use "belt air."

Belt air is the practice of bringing air into mines for miners to
breathe through the same tunnels that are used to take coal out of
the mine on conveyor belts.

The federal regulation governing the use of belt air in the
ventilation of a mine's working face, 30 C.F.R. Section 75.350(b),
states that belt air may be used to ventilate a "working section"
of a mine only when "evaluated and approved by the district
manager in the mine ventilation plan."

In opposing the motion, attorneys for Blankenship acknowledged
they would seek to introduce evidence about the difficulties
Massey encountered when attempting to comply with the agency's
mandates about the use of belt air at Upper Big Branch, and
Massey's disagreement with these mandates.

The defense claimed that such evidence "bears directly" on the
"cause of citations issued during the indictment period" and also
"bears on the relationship between MSHA and Massey."

Upon review, Judge Berger sided with the government.

"The plain language of this regulation requires MSHA to evaluate
mine ventilation plans that propose using belt air to ventilate
the mine's working face, and to reject plans that run afoul of
federal mine health and safety regulations," Berger wrote.
"Evidence and argument that Massey disagreed with MSHA's
enforcement of the belt air regulations at Upper Big Branch is
inadmissible."

"The same is true of evidence and argument that MSHA 'forced' the
Upper Big Branch mine to adopt a ventilation plan that did not use
belt air," Berger continued. "Such evidence clearly falls within
the Court's prior ruling on 'claims that federal mine safety
regulations were incorrect, misguided, or imprudent,' and must be
excluded."


MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Accused of Violating Fair Labor Standards Act
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Leggs v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc., Case No.
1:15-cv-03049-JFM (D. Md., October 7, 2015) seeks to recover an
award of unpaid wages and liquidated damages pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938.

Maxim Healthcare is a Maryland corporation which, through hundreds
of office locations nationwide, provides in-home personal care,
management and treatment of a variety of conditions by nurses,
therapists, medical social workers, and home health aides.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
          Neil B. Pioch, Esq.
          Jesse L. Young, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, Suite 1700
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
                  npioch@sommerspc.com
                  jyoung@sommerspc.com

               - and -

          G. Tony Atwal, Esq.
          Timothy J. Becker, Esq.
          JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC
          33 South Sixth Street, Suite 4530
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 436-1800
          Facsimile: (612) 436-1801
          E-mail: tatwal@johnsonbecker.com
                  tbecker@johnsonbecker.com

               - and -

          Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
          Robi J. Baishnab, Esq.
          BARKAN MEIZLISH HANDELMAN GOODIN DEROSE WENTZ, LLP
          250 E. Broad St., 10th Floor
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (614) 221-4221
          Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
          E-mail: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
                  rbaishnab@barkanmeizlish.com

               - and -

          Carlos Leach, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          20 North Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          Orlando, FL 32802
          Telephone: (407) 420-1414
          Facsimile: (407) 245-33414
          E-mail: CLeach@forthepeople.com


MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Faces "Harris" Suit Alleging FLSA Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Viodelda Harris v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc., Case No. 1:15-
cv-03043-JFM (D. Md., October 7, 2015) alleges that the Defendant
violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 by knowingly
suffering or permitting the Plaintiff to work in excess of 40
hours during a workweek without paying overtime compensation at a
rate of one-and-one-half times the regular rate.

Maxim Healthcare is a Maryland corporation which, through hundreds
of office locations nationwide, provides in-home personal care,
management and treatment of a variety of conditions by nurses,
therapists, medical social workers, and home health aides.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
          Neil B. Pioch, Esq.
          Jesse L. Young, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, Suite 1700
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
                  npioch@sommerspc.com
                  jyoung@sommerspc.com

               - and -

          G. Tony Atwal, Esq.
          Timothy J. Becker, Esq.
          JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC
          33 South Sixth Street, Suite 4530
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 436-1800
          Facsimile: (612) 436-1801
          E-mail: tatwal@johnsonbecker.com
                  tbecker@johnsonbecker.com

               - and -

          Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
          Robi J. Baishnab, Esq.
          BARKAN MEIZLISH HANDELMAN GOODIN DEROSE WENTZ, LLP
          250 E. Broad St., 10th Floor
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (614) 221-4221
          Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
          E-mail: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
                  rbaishnab@barkanmeizlish.com

               - and -

          Carlos Leach, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          20 North Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          Orlando, FL 32802
          Telephone: (407) 420-1414
          Facsimile: (407) 245-33414
          E-mail: CLeach@forthepeople.com


MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Faces "Harvey" Suit Alleging FLSA Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quinsetta Sue Harvey v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc., Case No.
1:15-cv-03045-JFM (D. Md., October 7, 2015) seeks a declaration
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 that the
Plaintiff's rights have been violated.

Maxim Healthcare is a Maryland corporation which, through hundreds
of office locations nationwide, provides in-home personal care,
management and treatment of a variety of conditions by nurses,
therapists, medical social workers, and home health aides.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
          Neil B. Pioch, Esq.
          Jesse L. Young, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, Suite 1700
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
                  npioch@sommerspc.com
                  jyoung@sommerspc.com

               - and -

          G. Tony Atwal, Esq.
          Timothy J. Becker, Esq.
          JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC
          33 South Sixth Street, Suite 4530
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 436-1800
          Facsimile: (612) 436-1801
          E-mail: tatwal@johnsonbecker.com
                  tbecker@johnsonbecker.com

               - and -

          Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
          Robi J. Baishnab, Esq.
          BARKAN MEIZLISH HANDELMAN GOODIN DEROSE WENTZ, LLP
          250 E. Broad St., 10th Floor
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (614) 221-4221
          Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
          E-mail: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
                  rbaishnab@barkanmeizlish.com

               - and -

          Carlos Leach, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          20 North Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          Orlando, FL 32802
          Telephone: (407) 420-1414
          Facsimile: (407) 245-33414
          E-mail: CLeach@forthepeople.com


MAXIM HEALTHCARE: Fails to Pay Proper Overtime, Md. Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Erica Holloman v. Maxim Healthcare Services, Inc., Case No. 1:15-
cv-03047-JFM (D. Md., October 7, 2015) alleges that the Defendant
violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 by knowingly
suffering or permitting the Plaintiff to work in excess of 40
hours during a workweek without paying overtime compensation at a
rate of one-and-one-half times the regular rate.

Maxim Healthcare is a Maryland corporation which, through hundreds
of office locations nationwide, provides in-home personal care,
management and treatment of a variety of conditions by nurses,
therapists, medical social workers, and home health aides.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
          Neil B. Pioch, Esq.
          Jesse L. Young, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, Suite 1700
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
                  npioch@sommerspc.com
                  jyoung@sommerspc.com

               - and -

          G. Tony Atwal, Esq.
          Timothy J. Becker, Esq.
          JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC
          33 South Sixth Street, Suite 4530
          Minneapolis, MN 55402
          Telephone: (612) 436-1800
          Facsimile: (612) 436-1801
          E-mail: tatwal@johnsonbecker.com
                  tbecker@johnsonbecker.com

               - and -

          Robert E. DeRose, Esq.
          Robi J. Baishnab, Esq.
          BARKAN MEIZLISH HANDELMAN GOODIN DEROSE WENTZ, LLP
          250 E. Broad St., 10th Floor
          Columbus, OH 43215
          Telephone: (614) 221-4221
          Facsimile: (614) 744-2300
          E-mail: bderose@barkanmeizlish.com
                  rbaishnab@barkanmeizlish.com

               - and -

          Carlos Leach, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          20 North Orange Avenue, Suite 1400
          Orlando, FL 32802
          Telephone: (407) 420-1414
          Facsimile: (407) 245-33414
          E-mail: CLeach@forthepeople.com


MAXPOINT INTERACTIVE: October 30 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline
------------------------------------------------------------
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC reminds investors that a
securities class action has been filed in the United States
District Court for the Southern District of New York on behalf of
those who purchased shares of MaxPoint Interactive, Inc., pursuant
and/or traceable to MaxPoint's initial public offering on or about
March 6, 2015 (the "IPO"). (the "Class Period").

The Lawsuit alleges that MaxPoint's IPO offering documents were
inaccurate because MaxPoint failed to disclose that it was
receiving two-thirds of its sales from only 50 customers and that
due to this high customer concentration, it was more exposed to
those 50 customers' budgetary proclivities and promotional
activities. Additionally, the suit also claims that MaxPoint had
been signing smaller customers with smaller advertising budgets in
the months leading up to the IPO and consequently, MaxPoint's
sales growth was declining at the time of the IPO. Since the IPO,
the price of MaxPoint common stock has declined approximately 60%
and is currently trading at below $5.00 per share.

No Class has yet been certified in the action. If you wish to
review a copy of the Complaint, to discuss this action, or have
any questions, please contact Peretz Bronstein, Esq. or his
Investor Relations Coordinator Eitan Kimelman of Bronstein,
Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484 or via email
info@bgandg.com. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to
include their mailing address and telephone number. If you
suffered a loss in MaxPoint you have until October 30, 2015 to
request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability
to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead
plaintiff.

Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation
boutique. Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of
litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to
representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class
action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general
corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities
arbitration.

         Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
         BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
         60 East 42nd Street Suite 4600
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 697-6484
         Fax: (212) 697-7296
         info@bgandg.com


MILWAUKEE BUCKS: Former Cheerleader Files Suit for Better Pay
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rebecca R. Ruiz, writing for The New York Times, reported that as
the N.B.A. starts a new season, the salary cap for players will
climb to a record $70 million per team at the same time that a
federal court considers charges that cheerleaders have been
cheated out of fair pay.

This fall, legal claims of wage theft in professional cheerleading
have spread from the N.F.L. to the N.B.A., and basketball teams'
treatment of female performers is under intense scrutiny.

Lauren Herington, a former dancer for the Milwaukee Bucks, sued
the team in federal court in Wisconsin, charging that she had been
paid well under the minimum wage during the 2013-14 season. Hers
is the first suit of its kind in the N.B.A., and it could have
implications both for the roughly 40 women who would qualify as
members of a Bucks class action and for the broader league.

While dancing for the Bucks, Ms. Herington said, she spent full
days practicing, performing and engaging in mandatory exercise and
beauty regimens. The flat fees she received -- $65 for games, $30
for practices and $50 for special appearances -- translated to an
average hourly wage of $5, according to her lawyers. On busier
weeks, hourly earnings fell as low as $3, the lawyers said, less
than half the $7.25 minimum required by both Wisconsin and federal
law.

"They told us it was a full-time commitment with part-time pay,"
Ms. Herington said. "If we had an issue, we'd be shown the door."

Since, another plaintiff has joined Ms. Herington, and her lawyers
said five others were considering doing the same.

In a statement, the Milwaukee Bucks said the team would fight the
suit in court.

"The lawsuit presents inaccurate information that creates a false
picture of how we operate," Jake Suski, a spokesman, wrote in an
email. "The Bucks value the contributions our dancers make to the
team. We treat all of our employees fairly, including our Bucks
dancers, and pay them fairly and in compliance with federal and
state law."

Mike Bass, a spokesman for the N.B.A., said: "Team dancers are an
important part of the N.B.A. game experience and are valued
members of the N.B.A. family. As for all employees, we work with
our teams to ensure that they comply with all applicable wage and
working condition laws."

Beyond wages paid, Ms. Herington's suit takes into account certain
expenses that she said the Bucks required her to cover: special
cleaning of her uniform, tanning sessions, false eyelashes,
regular manicures and hair appointments at Salon Nova and Lash
Boutique, where highlights can run more than $100.

Similar allegations emerged against N.F.L. teams, accumulating
after a woman sued the Oakland Raiders in January 2014. That case
paved the way for subsequent cases against the Buffalo Bills, the
Jets, the Tampa Bay Buccaneers and the Cincinnati Bengals.

Most but the Bills case have been settled, though teams have
avoided admitting wrongdoing. The Bengals proposed a settlement,
according to the lawyer who brought the class-action suit; the
team offered to pay $255,000, or $2,500 for every season a
qualifying cheerleader worked for the team, from 2011 to 2013.

The marginal difference between minimum wage and what plaintiffs
in these cases were paid is not large, said Sharon Vinick, an
employment lawyer in California who argued the first case of this
kind, against the Raiders. That team agreed to pay about $6,000 to
each woman who worked for the team from 2010 to 2012, and $2,500
for 2013, when pay was higher.

"That amount of money means nothing to these teams," Ms. Vinick
said. "We're not talking about mom-and-pop struggling businesses
that can't afford to pay. These are multimillion-dollar
organizations that are choosing not to follow the law when it
comes to compensating these women."

Responding to litigation, state lawmakers have sought protections
for professional cheerleaders, some of whom are independent
contractors rather than employees, an arrangement that can help
insulate teams from liability. In the case of the pending suit
against the Bills, for example, the dancers are contract workers.

In the wake of the Raiders suit, Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez of
California introduced a bill that Gov. Jerry Brown signed into law
last July, designating professional cheerleaders as employees and
entitling them to paid sick leave, family leave and workers'
compensation. It will take effect in January. In New York,
Assemblywoman Nily Rozic has introduced a similar bill.

Though both pieces of legislation were inspired by the higher-
profile allegations against N.F.L. teams, the lawmakers are not
limiting their focus to football.

On, Ms. Gonzalez and Ms. Rozic, together with another New York
assemblywoman, will send a letter to the N.B.A. commissioner, Adam
Silver. In it, they will ask the N.B.A. to disclose the terms and
conditions of cheerleader contracts for all 30 teams in the
league. (The lawmakers sent a similar letter to the N.F.L.'s
commissioner; it has gone unanswered.)

"We want a clear understanding of employment status and pay
scales," Ms. Rozic said, noting that a bit more information had
been made public in the N.F.L. because of suits and settlements,
but no sense of N.B.A. labor practices with respect to
cheerleaders existed.

At least one N.B.A. team is known to pay legal wages, said Ms.
Vinick, the California lawyer, and it indirectly inspired the
first suit of this kind. Ms. Vinick's former client Lacy T. of the
Raiders, whose last name was not released by the league, danced
for the N.B.A. before she joined the N.F.L. Ms. Vinick said the
Golden State Warriors of the N.B.A. had paid a legal hourly wage,
and that basis for comparison had informed her client's choice to
sue the Raiders.

"I know the Warriors pay dancers legally," Ms. Vinick said, "but I
don't have any sense of whether that's the norm in the N.B.A." She
said that after the Raiders case, several other women from N.F.L.
teams that have not been sued had approached her. They considered
bringing cases, too, she said, but ultimately decided not to for
various reasons, including fear of alienating teammates or harming
professional dancing careers. She said Ms. Herington's case might
prompt other women to come forward.

"A lot of employees don't even realize it's wage theft," Ms.
Vinick said. "There's this attitude: 'It's the Raiders -- why
would they do something illegal?' "

She called the state legislation positive but not essential -- it
has always been a violation of the law not to pay minimum wage,
she said. "If you're the owner of a team and you've continued
these practices after these cases, it's the height of arrogance to
think nobody's going to come and get you," she said, adding that
she was skeptical that league commissioners like Mr. Silver were
even aware of each team's unique compensation structure for
cheerleaders.

Her hope, and that of lawmakers, is for the leagues to issue labor
guidelines specific to team dancers.

"This shouldn't have to be done state by state," said Ms.
Gonzalez, the California assemblywoman. "This should be clear to
the N.B.A., N.F.L. and N.H.L."

In 2006, "Making the Team," a television show following hopeful
young women through tryouts for the Dallas Cowboys' cheerleading
team, made its debut on Country Music Television. It entered its
10th season on air. The show has raised consciousness about the
culture of professional cheerleading, showcasing women ridiculed
during body-fat evaluations or for not wearing enough makeup.

Ms. Herington, the former Bucks dancer, has her own stories to
that effect, having been chastised for choosing to eat a Subway
sandwich at a rest stop rather than a salad, or for snacking on
pieces of turkey that her coach mistook for beef jerky.

But such stories do not figure into her legal complaint. Instead,
her case focuses on the financial bottom line.

"We know the concessionaire selling you a hot dog is an employee
making minimum wage," said Ms. Rozic, the New York legislator.
"Why should that be different for the women dancing on the floor?"


MINNESOTA: Hospital Worker Sues Over Shortchanging OT Pay
---------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Tellier, writing for WDAY.com, reported that he works more
overtime hours than any other state worker -- often between 70 and
90 hours every week. Now, he's suing the State of Minnesota,
saying he's among thousands of workers who haven't been paid
enough for all that overtime.

Abu Kamara has been a security counselor at the Minnesota Security
Hospital in St. Peter for 33 years. He works so much overtime that
the Star Tribune recently profiled his prolific performance.

He filed a class-action federal lawsuit against the state, saying
they owe him.

"We've had many cases like this, just not at this scale," Paul
Lukas, an employment attorney representing Kamara, said.

Lukas said the state typically pays an extra 65 cents per hour for
late-night and early-morning shifts. But in the lawsuit, Kamara
claims the state is ignoring that higher rate when it calculates
overtime pay, tallying time-and-a-half at the lowest possible
hourly wage, instead of incorporating that slightly higher rate
into an average pay rate.

"It's strictly a math error. It's an error in calculating
overtime," Lukas said.

And Lukas said it could impact tens of thousands of state
employees.

"We're talking about law enforcement, nurses, security personnel,
a lot of essential employees that work odd hours," Lukas said.

"For the average employee, it's just cents on the week," Lukas
said. "But for someone like Abu Kamara, it can be $75, $100 [or]
$150 per week."

Lukas said that after taking thousands of other employees into
account, the state could be on the hook for millions of dollars in
unpaid overtime.

5 EYEWITNESS NEWS reached out to the state to try to find out how
it calculates overtime for its workers, and exactly how many
workers the issue could potentially impact. But the Minnesota
Management and Budget office would only say it has received the
lawsuit and is currently reviewing it.


MONUMENT SECURITY: Faces "Brown" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
------------------------------------------------------------
Sharon Brown v. Monument Security, Inc. and Does 1-50, Case No.
RG15790271 (Cal. Super. Ct., October 20, 2015) is brought against
the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the California Labor Code.

Monument Security, Inc. owns and operates a security service
company in California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Daniel L. Feder, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL FEDER
      332 Pine Street, Suite 700
      Alameda County, San Francisco, CA 94104
      Telephone: (415) 391-9476
      Facsimile: (415) 391-9432


MOVERS SPECIALTY: Accused of Violating Fair Credit Reporting Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Pfister, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Movers Specialty Service, Inc., a Pennsylvania
corporation, Case No. 2:15-cv-05530-LFR (E.D. Pa., October 7,
2015) seeks relief pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David F. McComb, Esq.
          ZARWIN BAUM DEVITO KAPLAN SCHAER TODDY P.C.
          1818 Market St., 13th Floor
          Philadelphia, PA 19102
          Telephone: (215) 569-2800
          E-mail: dfmccomb@zarwin.com


NEW YORK LIFE: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Brett Baffa, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. New York Life Insurance Company, et al., Case No.
2:15-cv-06027 (E.D.N.Y., October 20, 2015) is brought against the
Defendants for failure to pay minimum wages and overtime
compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

New York Life Insurance Company and its affiliates operate as a
company that sells insurance policies.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Joseph G. Dell, Esq.
      DELL & DEAN, PLLC
      1225 Franklin Avenue, Suite 450
      Garden City, New York 11530
      Telephone: (516) 880-9700


PEET'S COFFEE: Inflates Liquid Volume of Coffee, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reported that Peet's Coffee & Tea inflates
the liquid volume of coffee that its French press pots dispense by
25 percent, a class claims in court in Chicago, Illinois.


PRICELINE GROUP: Sued in Conn. Over Spirit Airlines Ticket Price
----------------------------------------------------------------
Austin Chapman, individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated v. The Priceline Group, Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-
01519-RNC (D. Conn., October 20, 2015) seeks monetary damages,
restitution and declaratory relief from the Defendant, arising
from the unfair and unconscionable breach of the company's "Best
Price Guaranteed" promise with respect to purchases for travel on
Spirit Airlines, Inc. through Priceline.com.

The Priceline Group, Inc. is a corporation incorporated in
Delaware that operates a commercial travel website known as
Priceline.com, as well as four other primary brands.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Laurie Rubinow, Esq.
      James E. Miller, Esq.
      SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP
      65 Main Street
      Chester, CT 06412
      Telephone: (860) 526-1100
      Facsimile: (866) 300-7367
      E-mail: lrubinow@sfmslaw.com
              jmiller@sfmslaw.com

         - and -

      James C. Shah, Esq.
      SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP
      35 East State Street
      Media, PA 19063
      Telephone: (610) 891-9880
      Facsimile: (866) 300-7367
      E-mail: jshah@sfmslaw.com

         - and -

      Hassan Zavareei, Esq.
      Jeffrey D. Kaliel, Esq.
      TYCKO AND ZAVAREEI LLP
      2000 L Street, N.W., Suite 808
      Washington, DC 20036
      Telephone: (202) 973-0900
      Facsimile: (202) 973-0950
      E-mail: hzavareei@tzlegal.com
              jkaliel@tzlegal.com


PRONTO PIZZA: Faces "Alvarez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Eliberto Alvarez, on behalf of himself, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly-situated v. Pronto Pizza & Grill,
Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-08277 (S.D.N.Y., October 21, 2015) is
brought against the Defendant for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Pronto Pizza & Grill, Inc. operates a popular pizzeria under the
name "Pronto Pizza" located at 62 West 48th Street, New York, New
York 10036.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexander T. Coleman, Esq.
      Michael J. Borrelli, Esq.
      BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C.
      1010 Northern Boulevard, Suite 328
      Great Neck, NY 11021
      Telephone: (516) 248-5550
      Facsimile: (516) 248-6027


REGENTS OF THE UCLA: Faces "Edelstein" Suit Over Data Breach
------------------------------------------------------------
Norah Edelstein, individually, and behalf of all others similarly
situated v. The Regents of the University of California, d/ b/a
UCLA Health, and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. BC598189
(Cal. Super. Ct., October 20, 2015) is brought against the
Defendants for failure to implement and maintain security measures
and protocols to protect the personal information of current and
former patients resulting in a massive data breach by third party
hackers.

The Regents of the University of California is a corporation
established under the Constitution of the State of California and
is charged with the duty under Section 9 of Article IX of the
Constitution of the State of California to administer the
University of California as a public trust.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Raymond P. Boucher, Esq.
      Shehnaz M. Bhujwala, Esq.
      BOUCHER LLP
      21600 Oxnard Street, Suite 600
      Woodland Hills, CA 91367-4903
      Telephone: (818) 340-5400
      Facsimile: (818) 340-5401
      E-mail: ray@boucher.la
              bhujwala@boucher.la


ROYAL BANK: To Report Q3 Loss Due to Rising Misconduct Payments
---------------------------------------------------------------
Scott McCulloch,writing for Daily record, reported that Royal Bank
of Scotland is expected to report third-quarter losses in the
region of GBP84 million later.

The Times reports the largely state-owned bank is expected to
reverse a pre-tax profit of GBP1.3 billion reported for the same
period as a result of charges booked for litigation and misconduct
payments.

The bank is expected to set aside a further GBP500 million to
cover mis-selling and litigation costs.

RBS, which was rescued with a GBP45.5 billion taxpayer-funded
bailout at the height of the financial crisis, agreed a US
litigation settlement for its role in fixing benchmark foreign
exchange rates.

RBS has agreed to pay $225 million (GBP146.2 million) in the US
class action settlement alongside fellow UK banks Barclays, who
have agreed to pay $384 million (GBP249.6 million) and HSBC who
will pay $285 million (GBP185.2 million).

The US law firm which secured the settlements, Scott + Scott, are
now preparing to raise a class action in London courts to pursue a
European class action case, stating the size of the action "is
almost double the size of that in the US".

In full year results posted last February, RBS noted 15 separate
litigation cases it is defending, including a multi-billion pound
claim raised by its shareholders who are suing the bank over its
GBP12 billion rights issue in 2008.

RBS had also noted it was "dealing with a large number of active
litigation claims in the UK in relation to the sale of interest
rate hedging products".

Other litigation cases RBS had noted in full-year results include
its role as issuer, depositor and/or underwriter in a number of
claims in the United States relating to $46 billion in mortgage-
backed securities issued between 2005 and 2007, with RBS named as
a defendant in more than 30 US lawsuits.

The Chancellor George Osborne sold off the first trance of the
government's 79 per cent stake in RBS in August, selling around
six per cent of its holding at a loss of GBP1.2 billion against
the price paid for shares at the height of the banking crisis.

Further share sales are expected in the coming months.

Shares in RBS opened down 0.5 per cent.


SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Court Denies Bid to Release Detainees
--------------------------------------------------------
Maria Dinzeo, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported that a
federal judge in San Francisco, Calif., refused to release pre-
trial detainees at San Francisco's County Jail being held because
they cannot afford to post bail.

The request for a temporary restraining order to end the practice
of bail stemmed from a class action lawsuit claiming that the city
unconstitutionally detains the poor because they cannot afford to
pay an arbitrary bail amount, while allowing wealthier arrestees
to buy their freedom.

Gonzalez Rogers was asked to immediately release without bail a
large number of detainees from pre-trial custody.

"The result of defendants' current policies is that the pretrial
detainees are those who are so poor and destitute that they do not
even know anyone who can come up with the money to free them.
Plaintiffs and other class members are therefore languishing in
jail solely because they and their families do not have enough
money to buy their release," the motion says. "Plaintiffs ask this
court to enjoin defendants, pending a final resolution of this
case on the merits, from keeping them in jail because they cannot
afford to pay cash up front to secure their release."

In denying the motion, Gonzalez Rogers wrote, "While the court
takes no position on the underlying merits of the claims,
plaintiffs have failed to establish at this juncture that a
temporary restraining order is in the public interest and granting
it as requested would constitute a significant departure from the
status quo," U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers wrote in a
three-page order.

The class action is led by two women arrested earlier this week-
Riana Buffin, 19, and Crystal Patterson, 29.  Both are now out of
jail as respective charges of grand theft and assault were
dropped, but they each spent several days behind bars because
neither could afford bail. Buffin's bond was set at $30,000;
Patterson's at $150,000.

Attorney Phil Telfeyan with the Washington, D.C.-based Equal
Justice Under the Law told reporters, "Nobody should be detained
because they're too poor to pay an arbitrary amount of money." His
group has successfully brought lawsuits to end the practice of
money bail in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana and Missouri.

Telfeyan's legal effort is backed by the city public defender and
San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi.

Noting that Buffin and Patterson had already been released,
Gonzalez Rogers said that pending a response from the city and
county of San Francisco, "the equities favor maintaining the
status quo."


SHAVIV CORPORATION: Cal. Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jose Mazariego, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Shaviv Corporation, Burger King, and Does 1 through
50, Case No. BC598467 (Cal. Super. Ct., October 20, 2015) seeks to
recover unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid minimum wage, and
unreimbursed business expenses pursuant to the California Labor
Code.

The Defendants own and operate a Burger King franchise restaurant
in California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew J. Matern, Esq.
      MATERN LAW GROUP
      1230 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 200
      Manhattan Beach, CA90266
      Telephone: (310) 531-1900
      Facsimile: (310) 531-1901
      E-mail: info@maternlawgroup.com


SPRINT CORP: Illegally Obtains Background Reports, Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Roberto Rodriguez, Jr., individually and as a representative of
the class v. Sprint Corp., and Sprint/United Management Company,
Case No. 2015-CH-15415 (Ill.Ch., October 20, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to provide required disclosures
prior to procuring background reports on applicants and employees.

The Defendants own and operate a telecommunication holding company
headquartered in Kansas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
      James B. Zouras, Esq.
      Jorge A. Gamboa, Esq.
      STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
      205 North Michigan Ave, Suite 2560
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Telephone: (312) 233-1550
      E-mail: rstephan@stephanzouras.com
              jzouras@stephanzouras.com

         - and -

      E. Michelle Drake, Esq.
      Anna P. Prakash, Esq.
      NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP
      4600 IDS Center
      80 South Eighth Street
      Minneapolis, MN 55402
      Telephone: (612) 256-3200
      Facsimile: (612) 338-4878
      E-mail: jalbanese@nka.com
              drake@nka.com
              aprakash@nka.com


SQUILLACE STEEL: Faces "Soto" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Eduardo Soto v. Squillace Steel Fabricators, LLC, and Richard
Squillace, Case No. 2:15-cv-07594-KM-MAH (D.N.J., October 20,
2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants own and operate numerous commercial buildings
throughout the State of New Jersey.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Andrew I. Glenn, Esq.
      Jodi J. Jaffe, Esq.
      JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, P.A.
      Lawrence Office Park
      168 Franklin Corner Road
      Building 2, Suite 220
      Lawrenceville, NJ 08648
      Telephone: (201) 687-9977
      Facsimile: (201) 595-0308
      E-mail: AGlenn@JaffeGlenn.com
              JJaffe@JaffeGlenn.com


TIFFANY AND COMPANY: "Ishmiel" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mohamed Ishmiel, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Tiffany and Company, Case No. 710908/2015
(N.Y. Super. Ct., October 20, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid
overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and
costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Tiffany and Company is engaged in the manufacturing and sales of
jewelry and accessories within the State of New York and
throughout the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Abdul Karim Hassan, Esq.
      ABDUL HASSAN GROUP, PLLC
      215-28 Hillside Avenue
      Queens Village, NY 11427
      Telephone: (718) 740-1000
      Facsimile: (718) 740-2000
      E-mail: abdul@abdulhassan.com


TMI HOSPITALITY: Housekeepers Win Class Status in Minn. Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reported that with trial on overtime
claims against TMI Hospitality slated for December, a federal
judge in St. Paul, Minn. certified a class of all current and
former housekeepers at the Fairfield Inn & Suites Minneapolis
Bloomington.


TORQUED-UP ENERGY: "Guerra" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Orlando Guerra, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Torqued-Up Energy Services, Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-
03097 (S.D. Texas, October 20, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid
overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and
costs, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Torqued-Up Energy Services, Inc. operates an oilfield services
company headquartered in Tyler, Texas and has locations throughout
the State of Texas and Louisiana.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Clif Alexander, Esq.
      Austin W. Anderson, Esq.
      PHIPPS ANDERSON DEACON LLP
      819 N. Upper Broadway
      Corpus Christi, TX 78401
      Telephone: (361) 452-1279
      Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
      E-mail: calexander@phippsandersondeacon.com
              aanderson@phippsandersondeacon.com


UNITED STATES: Tea Party Class Suit Waiting for Certification
-------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Dinan, writing for The Washington Times, reported that the
IRS is still holding up the nonprofit applications of tea party
groups, including one that has been waiting nearly six years for
approval, as conservatives panned the Justice Department's
announcement that it had cleared the tax agency, and former senior
executive Lois G. Lerner, of any wrongdoing.

The Obama administration's decision, outlined in a afternoon
letter to Congress, said the IRS did mishandle nonprofit status
applications from conservative groups but said the bad behavior
wasn't criminal.

Still, the decision does not end the legal jeopardy for the tax
agency, nor does it quell the political battle in which the IRS
has lost billions of dollars in funding from a Congress that
remains troubled by employees' behavior.

Several lawsuits, including one seeking to be certified as a class
action, are still pending against the IRS.

"It's no wonder why so many Americans have had it with Washington
and the elite political class who can get away with something like
this," said Mark Meckler, president of Citizens for Self-
Governance and one of the organizers of the class-action lawsuit.

Yet another case is pending before a federal appeals court after
tea party challengers lost at the district court level, where the
judge ruled that the IRS targeting stopped in 2013 so there was no
longer a case to be decided.

That was news to the Albuquerque Tea Party, which applied for
nonprofit status in December 2009 and is still awaiting approval,
according to the group's attorneys at the American Center for Law
and Justice. Another of the center's clients, Unite in Action, an
Ohio group, has been waiting more than three years for approval.

"It's an outrage -- a mockery of justice," Jay Sekulow, chief
counsel for the American Center for Law and Justice, wrote in a
Web memo. The center is pursuing a case on behalf of those and 36
other groups.

The Justice Department handed down its decision more than two
years after the internal IRS watchdog reported that auditors
singled out tea party groups' applications for special scrutiny
and delayed those applications beyond reasonable timelines,
preventing the groups from being able to say they were officially
recognized nonprofits.

Assistant Attorney General Peter J. Kadzik explained the Justice
Department's investigation, picking up from the inspector
general's report and detailing documents obtained from more than
80 employees and more than 100 interviews -- including with Ms.
Lerner, who cooperated with the investigation.

While concluding that IRS employees showed ignorance and a fear of
making decisions, Mr. Kadzik said there was no evidence of a
political intent to disadvantage the tea party groups -- even
though that was what resulted.

"Ineffective management is not a crime," Mr. Kadzik concluded.
"The Department of Justice's exhaustive probe revealed no evidence
that would support a criminal prosecution. What occurred is
disquieting and may necessitate corrective action -- but it does
not warrant criminal prosecution."

Some Republicans questioned the validity of the probe from the
start, after learning that one of the Justice Department lawyers
assigned to the investigation was a contributor to President
Obama's political campaigns.

In its letter, the Justice Department specifically cleared Ms.
Lerner, a senior executive in charge of approving the groups'
applications, who had authored a number of emails that suggested a
bias against the tea party movement.

Investigators said none of the witnesses they interviewed believed
Ms. Lerner acted out of political motives and that Ms. Lerner
seemed to try to correct the inappropriate scrutiny once she
"recognized that it was wrong."

"In fact, Ms. Lerner was the first IRS official to recognize the
magnitude of the problem and to take concerted steps to fix it,"
Mr. Kadzik wrote.

Congressional Democrats said the decision confirmed what they
figured out years ago -- that there was no underhanded political
dealing at the agency.

"Over the past five years, Republicans in the House of
Representatives have squandered literally tens of millions of
dollars going down all kinds of investigative rabbit holes -- IRS,
Planned Parenthood, Benghazi -- with absolutely no evidence of
illegal activity," said Rep. Elijah E. Cummings of Maryland, the
top Democrat on the Benghazi investigation and ranking member of
the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

The House Ways and Means Committee conducted its own investigation
into the tea party targeting, as did the Senate Finance Committee.
The House panel was the one that voted to refer Ms. Lerner's
behavior to the Justice Department for criminal investigation.

Rep. Paul Ryan, Wisconsin Republican and Ways and Means Committee
chairman, called the letter "deeply disappointing" but said it
wasn't a surprise given the bent of the Obama administration.

He said his committee's probe did find "serious and unprecedented
actions" by Ms. Lerner that deprived tea party groups of their
rights.

"The American people deserve better than this. Despite the DOJ
closing its investigation, the Ways and Means Committee will
continue to find answers and hold the IRS accountable for its
actions," said Mr. Ryan, who likely will become the next House
speaker.

Ms. Lerner's attorneys said in a statement that they were
"gratified but not surprised" by the announcement.

"Anyone who takes a serious and impartial look at the facts would
reach the same conclusion as the Justice Department," they said.

Ms. Lerner's cooperation with the Justice Department investigation
stands in contrast to her interaction with Congress, where she
refused to answer questions, invoking her Fifth Amendment right to
remain silent -- but only after she delivered a statement
declaring her innocence.

The House oversight committee concluded that she was not, in fact,
able to invoke the Fifth Amendment at that point, and when she
refused to answer questions, the House voted to hold her in
contempt of Congress.

The Justice Department declined to pursue that case, too, arguing
that her claim of Fifth Amendment rights was likely to succeed.


UPLAND VINEYARDS: "Alvarez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ulises Alvarez, individually and on behalf of all other similarly
situated persons v. Upland Vineyards L.L.C., Case No. 1:15-cv-
03185 (E.D. Wash., October 20, 2015) seeks compensation for unpaid
rest breaks during the 2012 and 2013 seasons and the
2014 cherry harvest under Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural
Workers Protection Act and Washington wage laws.

Upland Vineyards L.L.C. owns and operates a vineyard located in
Yakima County, Washington.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      David M. Solis, Esq.
      Lori Jordan Isley, Esq.
      Joachim Morrison, Esq.
      COLUMBIA LEGAL SERVICES
      6 South Second Street, Ste. 600
      Yakima, WA 98901
      Telephone: (509) 575-5593, ext.210
      E-mail: david.solis@columbialegal.org
              lori.isley@columbialegal.org
              joe.morrison@columbialegal.org


USA PROPERTIES: Faces "Lemmons" Suit Over Tenancy Termination
-------------------------------------------------------------
Barbara Lemmons, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. USA Properties Fund, Inc., USA Multifamily Management,
Inc., and Does 1 through 25, Case No. BC598362 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
October 20, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to
inform tenants living in subsidized housing what constitutes Good
Cause for termination of their tenancies.

The Defendants own and operate a property management company in
Roseville, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lorraine Grindstaff, Esq.
      PATTEN, FAITH & SANDFORD
      2670 South Myrtle Avenue, Suite 107
      Monrovia, CA 91016-5077
      Telephone: (626) 353-0867
      Facsimile: (626) 254-0418
      E-mail: lgrindstaff@pfslaw.com


VOLKSWAGEN: South Korean Audi Owners File Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------
SMN Weekly.com reported that Volkswagen said it was examining
whether the software might also be in earlier versions of its
latest EA 288 diesel engine. A second Volkswagen diesel engine
sold in Canada may have been fitted with software to cheat on
emissions tests, the company revealed. Authorities in Lower
Saxony, who have been investigating Volkswagen, said the file
mainly included "duplicates of documents most of which are
available online, as well as in-house notes on legal questions".
Overall, the company still estimates a few 11 million vehicles
worldwide could be affected by the scandal. The Amarok is
Volkswagen's only diesel option in Brazil's passenger-vehicle
market. While the software breaks clean air and emissions
regulations across Europe and the USA, Volkswagen is quick to
emphasize that affected models are still roadworthy and safe to
drive.

Volkswagen will freeze managerial promotions at its VW division as
part of a savings drive to help meet more than 30 billion euros of
costs arising from the diesel emissions tests scandal, a German
business magazine said on. "This is necessary for the
investigation, but it's really hard for us because we are now
missing their professional experience and knowledge". Incentives
for VW owners to buy new vehicles could help ensure that sales
remain stable after the scandal and take pressure off VW
dealerships to implement fixes quickly. The sales may not sustain
same levels in the future, as Volkswagen may lose its loyal
customers to other automakers. The company said it had conducted
the same tests and found no abnormalities and the independent TšV
testing agency had confirmed that the Zafira model complies with
the relevant standards. The organization has planned to recall 8.5
million vehicles in Europe, starting in January. "But we are not
getting anything from Volkswagen, so we don't have anything to
pass on to them". The EA288 engine is derived from the EA189 that
kicked off the whole scandal, of which there is no decision on a
European recall. The statement made no mention of EA288 engines
built to an earlier European standard -- Euro 4 -- but if any do
contain the offending software, the number is likely to be
relatively small.


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: EPA Says Porsche & Audi Fail Emissions Test
-------------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Warmerdam, writing for Courthouse News Service, reported
that Volkswagen failed to mention that Porsches and Audis also
cheat on emissions tests, U.S. regulators said, bringing new
charges against the automaker.

Whereas the charges that the Environmental Protection Agency
brought against Volkswagen in September involved 2-liter engine
vehicles since 2009, regulators announced that seven other SUV and
luxury cars fitted with 3-liter engines also incorporate the so-
called defeat-device software.  In addition to the 2014 VW
Touareg, the EPA has flagged the 2015 Porsche Cayenne and five
2016 Audi models: the A6 Quattro, A7 Quattro, A8, A8L and Q5.

Regulators say the software uses a sophisticated algorithm to kick
into full emissions-control mode only when it detects the vehicle
is undergoing inspections.

Volkswagen admitted in response to the initial accusations that 11
million cars fitted with the 2.0-liter engines had the cheating
software installed. The scandal led to the resignation of CEO
Martin Winterkorn, more than 100 class action lawsuits, and
multiple federal investigations.

The Clean Air Act violation notice that the EPA issued covers
approximately 10,000 diesel passenger cars sold in the United
States since model year 2014, plus an unknown number of 2016
vehicles.

Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for the EPA's Office for
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, said that Volkswagen "has
once again failed its obligation to comply with the law that
protects clean air for all Americans."

"All companies should be playing by the same rules," Giles said in
a statement.

After Winterkorn stepped down in the wake of the September notice
of violation, Volkswagen named Porsche chairman Matthias Mueller
as CEO.  Mueller said at the time that his most urgent task would
be to win back trust for the Volkswagen Group "by leaving no stone
unturned and with maximum transparency."

The EPA's announcement comes just weeks after Michael Horn,
president and CEO of Volkswagen Group of America, testified before
Congress that upper management was not aware of the presence of
the defeat devices. Horn said a few rogue engineers were to blame
for the scheme.

All of the 3-liter engine cars implicated by the new notice of
violation increase emissions of nitrogen oxide up to nine times
the EPA standards, the agency said.

Regulators say the list of affected vehicles could get longer as
California and federal environmental authorities continue their
investigation, which will include testing diesels from
manufacturers such as Mercedes-Benz and BMW.

The California Air Resources Board "sent letters to all
manufacturers letting them know we would be screening vehicles for
potential defeat devices," board executive officer Richard Corey
said in a statement.

Researchers at MIT published a peer-review paper finding that
about 60 Americans will die prematurely as a result of
Volkswagen's use of the defeat devices.

The study published in the journal Environmental Research Letters
also found that 140 more people would eventually die early if the
affected vehicles are not recalled.  The EPA advised owners of the
vehicles that, despite the alleged air violations, the vehicles do
not represent a safety hazard for the drivers and remain legal to
drive and sell.

Volkswagen is facing up to $37,500 per vehicle, meaning an
additional $375 million of penalties could be added to the already
projected tens of billions of dollars of fines, based on EPA's
most recent notice of violation. The company has not commented on
the latest round of allegations.


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Chen" Suit in N.J. Over Defeat Devices
---------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Chen, et al. v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., et al.,
Case No. 2:15-cv-07596-JLL-JAD (D.N.J., October 20, 2015) arises
from the Defendants' alleged intentional installation of so-called
"defeat devices" on 500,000 vehicles equipped with the 2.0 liter
TDI(R) Clean Diesel.

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is engaged in the business of
designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and selling
automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components
throughout the United States of America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

         - and -

      Roland Tellis, Esq.
      Mark Pifko, Esq.
      Pablo Orozco, Esq.
      BARON & BUDD, P.C.
      15910 Ventura Boulevard, Suite 1600
      Encino, CA 91436
      Telephone: (818) 839-2333

         - and -

      Christopher A. Seeger, Esq.
      Jeffrey S. Grand, Esq.
      Scott A. George, Esq.
      SEEGER WEISS LLP
      77 Water St., 26th Fl.
      New York, NY 10005
      Telephone: (212) 584-0700
      E-mail: cseeger@seegerweiss.com
              jgrand@seegerweiss.com
              sgeorge@seegerweiss.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Millington" Suit Over Defeat Devices
-------------------------------------------------------------
David Millington, Christopher Haitz, Jr. and Erin Seekamp
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-06029-
ADS-GRB (E.D.N.Y., October 20, 2015) arises out of the Defendants'
alleged intentional installation of defeat devices in its 2009-
2015 Volkswagen and Audi diesel, to evade clean air standards.

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is engaged in the business of
designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and selling
automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components
throughout the United States of America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Paul C. Whalen, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF PAUL C. WHALEN, P.C.
      768 Plandome Road
      Manhasset, NY 11030
      Telephone: (516) 426-6870
      Facsimile: (212) 658-9685
      E-mail: pcwhalen@paulwhalen.com

         - and -

      Jasper D. Ward IV, Esq.
      Alex C. Davis, Esq.
      JONES WARD PLC
      Marion E. Taylor Building
      312 South Fourth Street, Sixth Floor
      Louisville, KN 40202
      Telephone: (502) 882-6000
      Facsimile: (502) 587-2007
      E-mail: jasper@jonesward.com
              alex@jonesward.com

         - and -

      G. Oliver Koppell, Esq.
      Daniel Schreck, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF G. OLIVER KOPPELL & ASSOCIATES
      99 Park Avenue, Suite 1100
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 867-3838
      Facsimile: (212) 681-0810
      E-mail: okoppell@koppellaw.com
              dschreck@koppellaw.com

         - and -

      Roland W. Burris, Esq.
      ROLAND W. BURRIS & ASSOCIATES, LLC
      100 N. LaSalle, Suite 1515
      Chicago IL, 60602
      Telephone: (312) 364-9292
      Facsimile: (312) 364-9618
      E-mail: rburris@burrislawllc.com

         - and -

      Rufus Edmisten, Esq.
      William Woodward Webb, Sr., Esq.
      William Woodward Webb, Jr., Esq.
      THE EDMISTEN & WEBB LAW FIRM
      127 West Hargett Street, Suite 104
      Raleigh, NC 27601
      Telephone: (919) 831-8700
      Facsimile: (919) 831-8749


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Rolinski" Suit Over Defeat Devices
------------------------------------------------------------
William R. Rolinski, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No.
2:15-cv-13707-LJM-APP (E.D. Mich., October 20, 2015) arises out of
the Defendants' alleged intentional installation of defeat devices
in approximately 482,000 diesel Volkswagen and Audi vehicles
equipped with 2.0 liter engines.

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is engaged in the business of
designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and selling
automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components
throughout the United States of America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Marc Lipton, Esq.
      LIPTON LAW, P.C.
      18930 W. 10 Mile Road
      Southfield, MI 48075
      Telephone: (248) 557-1688
      E-mail: marc@liptonlaw.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Siegel" Suit Over Defeat Devices
---------------------------------------------------------
Michael Siegel, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-
09265 (N.D. Ill., October 20, 2015) arises out of the Defendants'
alleged intentional installation of defeat devices in
approximately 482,000 diesel Volkswagen and Audi vehicles equipped
with 2.0 liter engines.

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is engaged in the business of
designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and selling
automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components
throughout the United States of America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Larry D. Drury, Esq.
      LARRY D. DRURY, LTD.
      100 North LaSalle Street, Suite 2200
      Chicago, IL 60602
      Telephone: (312) 346-7950
      Facsimile: (312) 346-5777
      E-mail: ldd@larrydrury.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Stoops" Suit Over Defeat Devices
---------------------------------------------------------
Matthew R. Stoops, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-
00431 (D.N.H., October 20, 2015) arises out of the Defendants'
alleged intentional installation of defeat devices in
approximately 482,000 diesel Volkswagen and Audi vehicles equipped
with 2.0 liter engines.

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is engaged in the business of
designing, manufacturing, marketing, distributing, and selling
automobiles and other motor vehicles and motor vehicle components
throughout the United States of America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      George T. Campbell III, Esq.
      BACKUS, MEYER & BRANCH, LLP
      116 Lowell Street
      Manchester, NH 03104
      Telephone: (603) 668-7272

         - and -

      Charles "Dee" Hopper, Esquire
      LYNCH, HOPPER, SALZANO & SMITH, LLP
      1640 Alta Drive, Suite 11
      Las Vegas, NV 89106
      Telephone: (702) 868-1115


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Stringer" Suit Over Clean Diesel Issue
---------------------------------------------------------------
Phillip Stringer v. Volkswagen AG, Audi AG, and Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-00509-N (S.D. Ala., October 7,
2015) alleges that the Defendants charged, and the Plaintiff paid,
substantial premium for the "Clean Diesel" vehicle based upon the
representation that the vehicle was fuel efficient and
environmentally friendly while still maintaining a high
performance level.

Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. is a New Jersey corporation with
a principal place of business in the state of Virginia. Volkswagen
Group is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Volkswagen AG.  Volkswagen
AG is a German corporation.  Audi AG is a German corporation.
Audi AG is a related entity to Volkswagen.  The Defendants
designed, manufactured, and installed the 2.0 liter diesel engines
in certain of the Affected Vehicles and installed the defeat
devices on these vehicles.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Russell D. Johnson, Esq.
          Alexander Shunnarah, Esq.
          PHILLIP STRINGER
          59 St. Joseph St.
          Mobile, AL 36043
          Telephone: (251) 438-7400
          Facsimile: (251) 469-6387
          E-mail: rjohnson@asilpc.com
                  alexandershunnarah@gmail.com

               - and -

          Gerald J. Diaz, Jr., Esq.
          James R. Segars, III, Esq.
          THE DIAZ LAW FIRM, PLLC
          208 Waterford Square, Suite 300
          Madison, MS 39110
          Telephone: (601) 607-3456
          Facsimile: (601) 607-3393
          E-mail: joey@diazlawfirm.com
                  tripp@diazlawfirm.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Cantor" Suit Removed to Kansas District Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Cantor v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 15CV05901, was removed from the District
Court of Johnson County, Kansas, to the U.S. District Court for
the District of Kansas (Kansas City).  The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 2:15-cv-09306-CM-GEB to the proceeding.

The Petition seeks to certify a statewide class of all present and
former owners or lessees in Kansas of Volkswagen and Audi vehicles
with 2.0 liter "clean diesel" engines.  The Petition alleges that
relevant allegedly wrongful and fraudulent business practices
included, among other things, charging a "Clean Diesel price
premium" over the base Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price for
"the VW Vehicles," in amounts of between $2,600 and $6,000 per
vehicle; and that they "paid an increased price for those phantom
characteristics, and those vehicles are worth less than they would
be if they actually had those characteristics."

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Shane C. Mecham, Esq.
          Jason S. Leiker, Esq.
          LEVY CRAIG LAW FIRM
          1301 Oak Street
          Kansas City, MO 64106
          Telephone: (816) 474-8181
          Facsimile: (816) 382-6606
          E-mail: smecham@levycraig.com
                  jleiker@levycraig.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          John W. Cowden, Esq.
          David M. Eisenberg, Esq.
          BAKER STERCHI COWDEN & RICE, LLC
          9393 W. 110th Street, Suite 500
          Overland Park, KS 66210
          Telephone: (913) 451-6752
          Facsimile: (816) 472-0288
          E-mail: cowden@bscr-law.com
                  eisenberg@bscr-law.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Simmons" Class Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Simmons, et al. v. Volkswagen
Group of America, Inc., Case No. 15AC-CC00440, was removed from
the Circuit Court of Cole County, Missouri, to the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Missouri (Jefferson City).  The
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:15-cv-04218-MJW to the
proceeding.

The complaint seeks to certify a statewide class of all present
and former owners or lessees in Missouri of Volkswagen and Audi
vehicles with 2.0 liter "clean diesel" engines.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Joe D. Jacobson, Esq.
          Allen P. Press, Esq.
          Matthew B. Vianello, Esq.
          Cary Press, Esq.
          JACOBSON PRESS & FIELDS P.C.
          168 N. Meramec Ave., Suite 150
          Clayton, MO 63105
          Telephone: (314) 899-9789
          Facsimile: (314) 899-0282
          E-mail: Jacobson@ArchCityLawyers.com
                  Press@ArchCityLawyers.com
                  Vianello@ArchCityLawyers.com
                  CaryPress@ArchCityLawyers.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          John W. Cowden, Esq.
          David M. Eisenberg, Esq.
          BAKER STERCHI COWDEN & RICE, LLC
          2400 Pershing Road, Suite 500
          Kansas City, MO 64108-2533
          Telephone: (816) 471-2121
          Facsimile: (816) 472-0288
          E-mail: cowden@bscr-law.com
                  eisenberg@bscr-law.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Weber" Suit Removed to Missouri District Court
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Weber, Inc. v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 15AE-CV02557, was removed from the Circuit
Court of Platte County, Missouri, to the U.S. District Court for
the Western District of Missouri (St. Joseph).  The District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 5:15-cv-06135-BCW to the proceeding.

The Petition seeks to certify a statewide class of all present and
former owners or lessees in Kansas of Volkswagen and Audi vehicles
with 2.0 liter "clean diesel" engines.  The Petition alleges that
relevant allegedly wrongful and fraudulent business practices
included, among other things, charging a "Clean Diesel price
premium" over the base Manufacturer's Suggested Retail Price for
"the VW Vehicles," in amounts of between $2,600 and $6,000 per
vehicle; and that they "paid an increased price for those phantom
characteristics, and those vehicles are worth less than they would
be if they actually had those characteristics."

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason S. Leiker, Esq.
          LEVY CRAIG LAW FIRM
          1301 Oak Street
          Kansas City, MO 64106
          Telephone: (816) 474-8181
          Facsimile: (816) 382-6606
          E-mail: jleiker@levycraig.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          John W. Cowden, Esq.
          David M. Eisenberg, Esq.
          BAKER STERCHI COWDEN & RICE, LLC
          9393 W. 110th Street, Suite 500
          Overland Park, KS 66210
          Telephone: (913) 451-6752
          Facsimile: (816) 472-0288
          E-mail: cowden@bscr-law.com
                  eisenberg@bscr-law.com



                            *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N  I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  Marion
Alcestis A. Castillon, 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  * * *