CAR_Public/151126.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

           Thursday, November 26, 2015, Vol. 17, No. 236


                            Headlines


ACHIEVEMENT FIRST: Sued Over Failure to Provide Public Education
ADECCO USA: "Shepardson" Class Suit Removed to N.D. California
BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA: Sued Over Treasury Securities Manipulation
BEST BUY: Deposition Okayed in "Harris" Wage & Hour Suit
BLACKBERRY: Investors Has Permit to Seek Class Status of Suit

BOFI HOLDING: Dec. 14 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline
BROADCAST INTERNATIONAL: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
CAPE FEAR: CA Affirms Summary Judgment on Point South Claim
CAPSTONE TURBINE: Gainey McKenna Files Securities Class Suit
CAPSTONE TURBINE: Jan. 15, 2016 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline

CATERPILLAR INC: Ruling in Suit by Workers' Spouses Stands
CHARLIE SHEEN: Could Face Class Action Over HIV Diagnosis
CHEVRON USA: Court Grants Motion to Remand, Denies Fee Request
CREDIT ONE: Must Defend Against "Schwartz" in E.D. Pa.
CROWDFLOWER INC: Court Denies Bid to Modify Settlement Agreement

CUSTOM COMMUNICATIONS: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
D & J CONCRETE: Faces "Gomez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
DEER CONSUMER: Rosen Firm Inks $1.4-Mil. Settlement of Class Suit
DEER MEADOWS: Faces "Cadeau" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
DIRECT SOURCE: Faces Pacleb Suit in Cal. Over Automated Calls

DR. REDDY: Faces Class Action Suit by Two US Law Firms
EDGAR ADULT: Former Residents Reach $35.9-Mil. Settlement
ENERSAFE INC: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Hamilton" Suit Says
EOG RESOURCES: Faces "Wise" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
EXCELL SERVICES: Fails to Pay Workers OT, "Knight" Suit Says

FANDUEL INC: Employee Playing Policy Strengthens Class Action
FANDUEL INC: Faces "Cadapan" Suit Over DFS Website Operation
FIFTH GENERATION: Court Trims Claims in "Terlesky" Complaint
GENERAL CHEMICAL: Faces Chester Suit Over Liquid Aluminum Sulfate
GENERAL CHEMICAL: Faces Suit in N.J. Over Liquid Aluminum Sulfate

GEORGIA: Suit Accuses State of Massive Data Breach
GES GLADIATOR: Faces "Bridgewater" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
GILBERT ENTERPRISES: "Walsh" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
HANDLON CORRECTIONAL: Class Suit Barred, Most Plaintiffs Tossed
ILLINOIS BELL: Court Denies Motion to Dismiss "Ballard" Case

INFOOBJECTS INC: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
IQOR HOLDINGS: Call Center Workers' Suit Wins Class Status
ISOPURE CO: Faces "Zakhour" Suit for Deceptive Packaging
JACK IN THE BOX: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
JASA MARKETING: "Ortega" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages

JASCOR INC: Sued Over Hepatitis Incident at McDonald's
JC PENNEY: "Knatt Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
JP MORGAN: Court Grants Motion to Dismiss "Keen" TILA Case
KTTG LLC: Faces "Urjbe" Suit in Cal. Over Alleged Overpricing
LASERSHIP INC: Faces "Crosby" Suit Alleging Violation of FLSA

LAWRENCE, KS: Attys Seek Class Status for Voter Registration Suit
LEMON GREEN: Faces "Zhang" Sit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
LIBERTY MUTUAL: "Lafollette" Class Suit Goes to Trial
LSP ENTERPRISES: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
M&S MARKET: Faces "Hurtado" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime

MARCHEX INC: Gainey McKenna Files Securities Class Suit
MARCHEX INC: Jan. 18, 2016 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline
MERLE PHARMACY: Court Tosses Certain Claims in "Williams"
METROPOLITAN LIFE: "Creighton" Race Bias Suit Goes to S.D.N.Y.
MTS TAXES: "Murat" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages

NORI O: Faces "Goh" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
PERSONNEL SUPPLY: Faces "Gabbidon" Suit Over Wage Practices
PORSCHE AG: Faces "Brown" Suit Over Defeat Devices on Vehicles
RP INC.: "McCoy" Class Suit Wins Conditional Certification
OSADO WATER: Faces "Lawton" Suit Alleging FLSA Violation

PARAMOUNT FOODS: Faces "Perez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
PASCO COUNTY: Clerk Faces "Bishop" Suit Alleging FLSA Violation
PRIME SHUTTLE: Does Not Properly Pay Workers, "Lizardo" Suit Says
RECEIVABLES PERFORMANCE: "Sanchez" Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
SAGAR CHINESE: "Rosales" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS: Magistrate Judge's Order in "Avram" Upheld
SCHERZINGER CORPORATION: "Colley" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
SENSATION NEO: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Qin" Suit Says
ST. JOSEPH'S HEALTHCARE: Dismissal of "Chalfin" Suit Upheld
ST. MATTHEWS, SC: Police Dept. Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime

STERLING GROUP: Faces "Barnett" Suit Alleging Harassment, Bias
TEXAS LAWMAN: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
THINKDIRECT MARKETING: Court Narrows "Heidbrink" FLSA Suit
UNIRUSH LLC: Faces "Jones" Suit Over Access to Debit Card Account
UTOPIA HOME: Must Defend Against "Cowell" FLSA Class Suit

VISTA ENERGY: Faces "Robinson" Suit in Cal. Over Automated Calls
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Akyaz" Suit in Fla. Over Defeat Devices
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Hutton" Suit Over Defeat Devices
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Scoggins" Suit Over Defeat Devices
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Zhu" Suit Over Defeat Devices

WASTEWATER SPECIALTIES: Faces "Breed" Suit Over FLSA Violation


                            *********


ACHIEVEMENT FIRST: Sued Over Failure to Provide Public Education
----------------------------------------------------------------
M.W. and Z.W. by N.C., B.B. by A.B., D.W by D.M., and S.Z. by
A.Z., individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated
v. Achievement First Crown Heights, Achievement First Inc., New
York City Department of Education, New York State Department of
Education, Case No. cv156342 (E.D.N.Y., November 5, 2015) is
brought against the Defendants for failure to provide students
with disabilities a free appropriate public education.

Achievement First Inc. operates a charter school consisting of an
elementary school, a middle school, and a high school in Crown
Heights, Brooklyn.

New York City Department of Education is the local educational
agency responsible for AF Crown Heights.

New York State Department of Education is the state educational
agency responsible for IDEA compliance by New York public schools.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jane Greengold Stevens, Esq.
      Danielle Tarantolo, Esq.
      Michelle Movahed, Esq.
      NEW YORK LEGAL ASSISTANCE GROUP
      7 Hanover Square, 18th Floor
      New York, NY 10004
      Telephone: (212) 613-5000
      Facsimile: (212) 750-0820
      E-mail: jstevens@nylag.org
              dtarantolo@nylag.org
              mmovahed@nylag.org


ADECCO USA: "Shepardson" Class Suit Removed to N.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Kaitlyn Shepardson, individually
and on behalf of other members of the general public similarly
situated v. Adecco USA, Inc., Case No. CIV535091, was removed from
the San Mateo County Superior Court to the U.S. District Court
California Northern District (San Francisco). The District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05102-JCS to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff asserts labor-related claims.

Adecco USA, Inc. owns and operates a staffing and recruiting
agency in California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew Righetti, Esq.
      John Glugoski, Esq.
      Michael C. Righetti, Esq.
      RIGHETTI GLUGOSKI, P.C.
      456 Montgomery Street, Suite 1400
      San Francisco, CA 94101
      Telephone: (415) 983-0900
      Facsimile: (415) 397-9005
      E-mail: matt@righettilaw.com
              jglugoski@righettilaw.com
              mike@righettilaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

      Julie Erin Patterson, Esq.
      Julie Westcott O'Dell, Esq.
      BRYAN CAVE LLP
      3161 Michelson Drive, Suite 1500
      Irvine, CA 92612
      Telephone: (949) 223-7144
      Facsimile: (949) 223-7100
      E-mail: jepatterson@bryancave.com
              julie.odell@bryancave.com


BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA: Sued Over Treasury Securities Manipulation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mayor and City Council of Baltimore, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Bank of Nova Scotia, New York
Agency, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-08766 (S.D.N.Y., November 6,
2015) arises from Defendants' collusive manipulation of the market
for U.S. Treasury bills, notes, and bonds, as well as derivative
financial products related to Treasury Securities, such as futures
and options Treasury Securities.

Bank of Nova Scotia is a New York based branch of a Canadian
financial services and banking company with its principal place of
business at 250 Vesey Street, New York, New York 10080.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      William Christopher Carmody, Esq.
      Arun Subramanian, Esq.
      Seth Ard, Esq.
      SUSMAN GODFREY L.L.P.
      560 Lexington Avenue, 15th Floor
      New York, NY 10022
      Telephone: (212) 336-8330
      E-mail: bcarmody@susmangodfrey.com
              asubramanian@susmangodfrey.com
              sard@susmangodfrey.com


BEST BUY: Deposition Okayed in "Harris" Wage & Hour Suit
--------------------------------------------------------
Magistrate Judge Kandis A. Westmore of the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California granted in part
Plaintiff's request to compel Rule 30(b)(6) deposition testimony
in the case captioned, STARVONA HARRIS, Plaintiff, v. BEST BUY
STORES, L.P., Defendant, Case No. 15-CV-00657-HSG(KAW)(N.D. Cal.)

Plaintiff Starvona Harris filed a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
collective action and California class action lawsuit against her
former employer Best Buy Stores, L.P. for violations of wage and
hour laws. Plaintiff was employed by Best Buy from October 2013 to
September 2014. Specifically, Plaintiff alleges that she and other
non-exempt employees "were paid an hourly rate of pay for the work
performed, along with a nondiscretionary bonus," which should have
been included in determining the regular rate of pay for overtime
purposes, but was not.

On September 30, 2015, the parties filed a joint letter in which
Plaintiff seeks to compel Rule 30(b)(6) testimony regarding 11
noticed deposition topics including the hours worked by Plaintiff,
all compensation listed on Plaintiff's wage statements, Best Buy's
timekeeping system, documents distributed during Plaintiff's
employment, the Points Received GU and Merchandise Received, and
Defendant's corporate structure.

In the Order dated October 16, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/x8V0Yqfrom Leagle.com, Judge Westmore ordered
Defendant to produce a corporate witness to testify on Topic No. 5
regarding all STI bonus programs in effect during Plaintiff's
employment, and may not limit the scope to FY 2015.  Best Buy is
also ordered to produce a corporate witness to testify regarding
Topic No. 28 only as it pertains to complaints regarding the STI
bonus program, and Topic No. 29 only as it pertains to California
or federal agency investigations related to the inclusion of
bonuses or STI payments in calculating the overtime rate of pay.

Starvona Harris is represented by:

Kevin Francis Woodall, Esq.
WOODALL LAW OFFICES
1201 Main St
Columbia, SC 29201
Tel: (803)386-1862

Best Buy Stores is represented by Barbara Jean Miller, Esq. --
barbara.miller@morganlewis.com -- Jennifer Lea Bradford, Esq. --
jbradford@morganlewis.com -- Sacha Marie Steenhoek, Esq. --
ssteenhoek@morganlewis.com -- MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP


BLACKBERRY: Investors Has Permit to Seek Class Status of Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
Aman Jain, writing for Value Walk, reported that
BlackBerry investors, who were hoping to sue the company for
allegedly misrepresenting the financial success of BB10 devices,
have got some good news.

Such investors have now got the permission to ask that a court
certify a proposed class-action under the Ontario Securities Act,
says a report from Financial Post.

Plaintiffs have enough evidence in support

The plaintiffs in the proposed action are capable of producing
enough evidence at the trial for winning the case, an Ontario
judge said. On Tuesday, Justice Edward Belobaba of the Ontario
Supreme Court issued a decision, saying, "I am satisfied on the
evidence before me that both the alleged misrepresentation and the
public correction have been sufficiently established and that
there is a reasonable possibility that the action will be resolved
in the plaintiff's favor at trial."

The case dates back to September 20, 2013. The BB10 devices from
the company -- the touch-screen BlackBerry Z10 and BlackBerry Q10
with a QWERTY keyboard -- on which the Canadian firm was relying
for the revival of its fortunes, sold very poorly. On January 30,
2013, the company launched those devices.

Thereafter, the company disclosed a $1 billion writedown and
slashed its workforce by 40%. Following the move, Blackberry's
stock lost over 15%.

BlackBerry used wrong accounting method

The plaintiffs accused the Canadian firm of making use of improper
'sell-in' accounting for several months under which they booked
revenue as soon as they shipped BB10 devices to the distributors.
Instead, they should have used of 'sell-through' accounting in
which the company's book revenue only after the device has reached
the end user. Use of 'sell-in' accounting method resulted in a
misrepresentation of the company's financial position, which got
inflated due to it.

The plaintiffs further argue that in the September 20, 2013 news
release, BlackBerry publicly corrected the alleged
misrepresentation. The Canadian firm acknowledged that it will
only account for Z10 and Q10 sales that were sold to end
customers. The judge agreed that the company was making a public
correction in admitting to this switch.

Justice Belobaba wrote that "in sum" he agrees with the plaintiffs
claims that the company's announcement regarding the switch it
made to sell-through accounting and the associated $1 billion
inventory change, when read in context, does suggest that the
company made a public correction of the sell-in method of revenue
recognition it used in the previous two quarters.


BOFI HOLDING: Dec. 14 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline
-------------------------------------------------
Scott+Scott, Attorneys at Law, LLP ("Scott+Scott"), reminds
investors that they have until December 14, 2015 to file lead
plaintiff applications in a securities class action lawsuit
against BofI Holding, Inc. ("BofI" or the "Company") (Nasdaq:BOFI)
if they purchased BofI shares between September 4, 2013 through
October 13, 2015 inclusive (the "Class Period"). This action is
pending in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of California. If you are a BofI shareholder, you are
encouraged to contact Scott+Scott for additional information.

BofI operates as the holding company for Bank of Internet Federal
Bank ("BofI Federal Bank"), a provider of consumer and business
banking products through the Internet in the United States. BofI
Federal Bank's deposit products include consumer and business
checking, demand, savings, and time deposit accounts.

On October 13, 2015, The New York Times reported that one of
BofI's former auditors sued the Company after being fired for
"revealing what he believed to be wrongdoing at the bank to
federal regulators and management at Bank of Internet," including
allegations that BofI failed to maintain adequate internal
controls and underwriting standards. On this news, shares of BofI
fell $42.87, or 30.2%, to close at $99.13 on October 14, 2015.

What You Can Do

If you are a BofI shareholder and wish to serve as a lead
plaintiff in the class action, you must move the Court no later
than December 14, 2015. Any member of the class may move the Court
to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of its choice or may
choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. If you
wish to discuss this action or have questions concerning this
notice or your rights, please contact attorney Joseph V. Halloran
at (800) 404-7770 or (646) 582-0121 or at jhalloran@scott-
scott.com.

About Scott+Scott, Attorneys at Law, LLP

Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major
securities, antitrust, and employee retirement plan actions
throughout the United States. The firm represents pension funds,
foundations, individuals, and other entities worldwide.

Contacts
Scott+Scott, Attorneys at Law, LLP
Joseph V. Halloran, 646-582-0121
jhalloran@scott-scott.com


BROADCAST INTERNATIONAL: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Luis Arevalo, and others similarly-situated v. Broadcast
International Group, Inc., Ana Maria Sagastegui, Jean Yacobellis,
Myriam Vasquez, Case No. 1:15-cv-24162-DPG (S.D. Fla., November 6,
2015) seeks to recover unpaid minimum and overtime wages,
liquidated damages, interests, costs and attorney's fees pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants are in the business of providing building and
construction services to locations within Miami-Dade County,
Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Daniel T. Feld, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF DANIEL T. FELD, P.A.
      20801 Biscayne Blvd., Suite 403
      Aventura, FL 33180
      Telephone: (786) 923-5899
      E-mail: DanielFeld.Esq@gmail.com

         - and -

      Isaac Mamane, Esq.
      MAMANE LAW LLC
      1150 Kane Concourse, Second Floor
      Bay Harbor Islands, FL 33154
      Telephone (305) 773-6661
      E-mail: mamane@gmail.com


CAPE FEAR: CA Affirms Summary Judgment on Point South Claim
-----------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned, POINT SOUTH PROPERTIES, LLC, and SANCO
BUILDERS CORPORATION, Plaintiffs, v. CAPE FEAR PUBLIC UTILITY
AUTHORITY and NEW HANOVER COUNTY, Defendants, and CB WINDSWEPT,
LLC, SELLAR'S COVE, LLC, TELFAIR SUMMIT, LLC, and CB SNOWS CUT
LANDING, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. CAPE FEAR PUBLIC UTILITY AUTHORITY
and NEW HANOVER COUNTY, Defendants, Case No. CAO15-371, 15-374
(N.C. App. Ct.), Judge Valerie Johnson Zachary of the Court of
Appeals of North Carolina affirmed a trial court order granting
summary judgment in favor of the plaintiffs on their claim that
the defendants' imposition of impact fees was ultra vires and
beyond their authority, and for recovery of plaintiffs' damages
resulting therefrom.

Plaintiffs' claims stemmed from the payment of impact fees
assessed by defendants. The cases were consolidated for oral
argument. In the complaint plaintiffs seek the refund of the
impact fees plaintiffs had paid, together with interest and
attorney's fees. On September 4, 2014 the trial court conducted a
single hearing on the summary judgment motions of the parties in
both cases, at which all plaintiffs were represented by the same
law firm. The trial court entered identical orders in both cases
granting summary judgment for the plaintiffs in each case.

On appeal, Defendants argue that plaintiffs' claims are barred by
the applicable statute of limitations. Defendants contend that the
parties have no disagreement over defendants' authority to impose
the impact fees at issue and that plaintiffs "simply allege that
the manner in which Defendants have exercised this statutory
authority has resulted in liability." In addition, defendants
maintain that plaintiffs have claimed that defendants "acted
improperly under these statutes by not actually providing sewer
service to the Properties."

In the Order dated October 20, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/moNmuTfrom Leagle.com, Justice Zachary held that the
trial court did not err and did not abuse its discretion.
Defendants have failed to demonstrate that a genuine issue of
material fact exists that made it improper for the trial court to
award summary judgment in favor of plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs are represented by William G. Wright, Esq. --
wwright@shipmanlaw.com -- Gary K. Shipman, Esq. --
gshipman@shipmanlaw.com -- SHIPMAN & WRIGHT, LLP

Defendants are represented by Jeremy M. Wilson, Esq. --
jw@wardandsmith.com -- Ryal W. Tayloe, Esq. --
rwt@wardandsmith.com -- WARD AND SMITH, P.A.


CAPSTONE TURBINE: Gainey McKenna Files Securities Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
Gainey McKenna & Egleston announces that a class action lawsuit
has been filed in the United States District Court for the Central
District of California on behalf of all persons or entities that
purchased the securities of Capstone Turbine Corp ("Capstone" or
the "Company") (Nasdaq:CPST) between November 7, 2013 through
November 5, 2015 (the "Class Period"), alleging violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of
its officers (the "Complaint").

The Complaint alleges that Defendants issued materially false and
misleading statements to investors and/or failed to disclose that:

   (1) BPC Engineering ("BPC"), one of Capstone's main Russian
distributors, was unlikely to be able to fulfill many of its legal
and financial obligations to Capstone;

   (2) Capstone failed to make appropriate adjustments to its
accounts receivable and backlog to account for BPC's inability to
fulfill its obligations to Capstone;

   (3) Capstone issued financial statements in violation of
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles;

   (4) Capstone lacked adequate internal controls over accounting;
and

   (5) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' public statements
about Capstone's business, operations, and prospects were false
and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant
times.  When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit
claims that investors suffered damages.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than January 15, 2016.  A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation.  If you wish to join the litigation, or to discuss
your rights or interests regarding this class action, please
contact Thomas J. McKenna, Esq. or Gregory M. Egleston, Esq. of
Gainey McKenna & Egleston at (212) 983-1300, or via e-mail at
tjmckenna@gme-law.com or gegleston@gme-law.com


CAPSTONE TURBINE: Jan. 15, 2016 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline
-----------------------------------------------------------
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC notifies investors that a
securities class action has been filed in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California on behalf of
those who purchased shares of Capstone Turbine Corp ("Capstone" or
the "Company") (NasdaqCM: CPST), during the period between
November 7, 2013 and November 5, 2015 inclusive (the "Class
Period").

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to
disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business,
operations, and prospects. Specifically, during the Class Period,
defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed
to disclose that: (i) that BPC Engineering ("BPC"), an important
Russian distributer, was unlikely to be able to fulfill many of
its legal and financial obligations to Capstone; (ii) that
Capstone did not make the proper adjustments to its accounts
receivable and backlog to account for BPC's inability to fulfill
its obligations to Capstone; (iii) that some of Capstone's
financial statements were in violation of Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles ("GAAP"); and (iv) that the Company lacked
adequate internal controls over accounting. When the truth was
revealed, shares dropped causing investors harm.

No Class has yet been certified in the above 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 Capstone you have until January 15, 2016 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. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee
similar outcomes.

Contact:
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
Peretz Bronstein or Eitan Kimelman 212-697-6484
info@bgandg.com


CATERPILLAR INC: Ruling in Suit by Workers' Spouses Stands
----------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Aleta Trauger of the United States District Court
for the Middle District of Tennessee denied a motion to reconsider
filed by Caterpillar and a motion to reconsider filed by
Plaintiffs in the case captioned, JUDITH K. KERNS, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. CATERPILLAR INC., Defendant/Third-Party Plaintiff,
v. INTERNATIONAL UNION, UAW, et al., Third-Party Defendants, Case
No. 3:06-CV-1113 (M.D. Tenn.).

The class-action is brought on behalf of surviving spouses of
former employees of Caterpillar who retired on or after March 16,
1998, and before January 10, 2005. The plaintiffs filed the action
in 2006, seeking relief under Sec. 301 of the Labor Management
Relations Act  29 U.S.C. Sec. 185, and under Sec. 502 of the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 1132. The
plaintiffs allege that Caterpillar breached its contractual
obligation to provide lifetime health benefits to surviving
spouses of Caterpillar retirees at no cost.

The court entered judgment for the plaintiffs on their claims
related to Caterpillar's imposition of premiums. The summary
judgment order resolved all liability issues between the
plaintiffs and Caterpillar. Still pending at the time of the
court's March 26, 2010 summary judgment ruling was Caterpillar's
October 16, 2008 appeal of the court's preliminary injunction
order for a subclass of the Winnett plaintiffs. On June 22, 2010,
the Sixth Circuit reversed the Winnett preliminary injunction
order, finding that the claims of the subclass were barred by the
statute of limitations.

A copy of the Court's Memorandum Opinion dated November 17, 2015,
is available at http://is.gd/yT1UpPfrom Leagle.com.

Plaintiffs are represented by Lisa M. Smith, Esq. --
lsmith@michworklaw.com -- Samuel C. McKnight, Esq. --
smcknight@michworklaw.com -- KLIMIST, MCKNIGHT, SALE, MCCLOW &
CANZANO, P.C.

     - and -

Samuel Morris, Esq.
Deborah Godwin, Esq.
GODWIN, MORRIS, LAURENZI & BLOOMFIELD, PC
50 N Front St # 800
Memphis, TN 38103
Tel: (901)528-1702

Defendants are represented by Columbus R. Gangemi, Jr., Esq. --
cgangemi@winston.com -- Derek Grady Barella, Esq. --
dbarella@winston.com -- Joseph J. Torres, Esq. --
jtorres@winston.com -- Heather S. Lehman, Esq. --
hlehman@winston.com -- WINSTON & STRAWN LLP, Lawrence Slade
Eastwood, Jr., Esq. -- leastwood@bakerdonelson.com -- BAKER,
DONELSON, BEARMAN, CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, PC


CHARLIE SHEEN: Could Face Class Action Over HIV Diagnosis
---------------------------------------------------------
The Toronto Sun reported that Gloria Allred, the top lawyer who
has made Bill Cosby's life a living hell for much of 2015, has
revealed she's considering leading a class action lawsuit against
Charlie Sheen.

The actor went public with his HIV-positive diagnosis during a
candid U.S. TV interview on Tuesday, revealing he was coming
forward with the news in an effort to stop ongoing extortion
attempts from ex-lovers.

But it now appears he could be facing more pay-outs from a group
of women, who have asked Allred to represent them.

They all claim Sheen put them at risk by sleeping with them.
"Since Charlie Sheen's interview, I will now confirm that I have
been contacted by women with reference to Charlie Sheen and their
rights," Allred tells TMZ.com. "I have no comment on what will
happen next."

In his interview with Today show host Matt Lauer, Sheen insisted
he has told every woman he has slept with following his HIV
diagnosis in 2011 that he had contracted the disease.

Former porn star Bree Olson and a host of other women have already
come forward with claims they weren't told Charlie was ill while
they were sleeping with him. Sheen's representative insists that's
because his client did not know he was HIV-positive at the time.

Sheen has confessed that he had unprotected sex with two women
post-2011, but insists both knew of his condition.

Allred has had a busy 2015 -- she has been representing 28 of the
40-plus women who have hit funnyman Bill Cosby with accusations of
sexual abuse, rape and drugging. She recently deposed the comedian
on behalf of one of her clients.


CHEVRON USA: Court Grants Motion to Remand, Denies Fee Request
--------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Susie Morgan of the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Louisiana granted Plaintiffs' motion
to remand and denied Plaintiffs' request for costs and attorney's
fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1447(c) in the case captioned,
EARL A. ADAMS, JR., ET AL., Plaintiffs, v. CHEVRON USA, INC., ET
AL., SECTION: "E" (1) Defendant, Case No. 15-4360 (E.D. La.).

Earl A. Adams, Jr. and hundreds of other plaintiffs filed suit in
Civil District Court for the Parish of Orleans on December 16,
2002, asserting personal injury and property damage claims from
alleged exposure to contamination from oil field pipe. Plaintiffs
filed an Amending and Supplemental Petition for damages on January
8, 2004, and a Second Amending and Supplemental Petition on
January 14, 2015. Plaintiffs filed their Third Amending and
Supplemental Petition on August 12, 2015.

The case was transferred from another section of the Court
pursuant to Local Rule 3.1.1 after it was discovered that the
matter relates to a case previously before the Court, Robertson,
et al. v. Chevron USA, Inc., et al.  Robertson involved many of
the same defendants, the same allegations, the same property, and
the same causes of action. Robertson was remanded to state court
on September 2, 2015.

In the motion, Plaintiffs argue (1) removal was untimely; (2) the
Court lacks subject-matter jurisdiction over this matter; (3)
Defendants failed to meet the jurisdictional burden under the
Class Action Fairness Act of 2005; and (4) Plaintiffs' action
falls under CAFA's mandatory abstention provisions, namely the
local controversy exception and the home state exception.
Plaintiffs also assert they are entitled to all costs and
attorney's fees incurred as a result of the removal pursuant to 28
U.S.C. Sec. 1447(c).

In her Order and Reasons dated November 16, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/5u3A20from Leagle.com, Judge Morgan found that
removal was untimely, and remand is appropriate because under the
Louisiana relation-back doctrine, the amended pleading relates
back to the original petition. The Court also found that awarding
Plaintiffs costs and attorney's fees under Sec. 1447(c) would be
improper because there is nothing to suggest Defendants removed
the case to prolong litigation or otherwise impose greater costs
on Plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs are represented by:

Darleen Marie Jacobs, Esq.
DARLEEN M. JACOBS, APLC
823 St. Louis Street
New Orleans, LA 70112
Tel: (504)522-0155

     - and -

Robert G. Harvey, Sr., Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF TAMARA KLUGER JACOBSON, LLC
600 North Carrollton Ave.,
New Orleans, LA 70119
Tel :(504)822-2136

Defendants are represented by Stephen Porter Hall, Esq. --
stephen.hall@phelps.com -- PHELPS DUNBAR, LLP


CREDIT ONE: Must Defend Against "Schwartz" in E.D. Pa.
------------------------------------------------------
District Judge J. Curtis Joyner of the United States District
Court for Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied Defendant's
motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint for lack of subject matter
jurisdiction and to compel arbitration in the case captioned,
PATRICIA SCHWARTZ, Plaintiff, v. CREDIT ONE FINANCIAL, d/b/a
CREDIT ONE BANK, Defendant, Case No. 15-CV-3938 (E.D. Pa.).

Plaintiff instituted the action on July 16, 2014 against Defendant
Credit One pursuant to the provisions of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act, 47 U.S.C. Sec. 227, et seq. In her complaint,
Plaintiff alleges that Defendant violated Section 227(b)(1)(A) of
the Act by repeatedly using an automatic telephone dialing system
or automatic/pre-recorded messages to call her on her cell phone
about an account belonging to her son. Plaintiff seeks to recover
actual, statutory and treble damages for these alleged violations
as well as injunctive relief pursuant to 47 U.S.C. Sec. 227(b)(3).

Defendant seeks the dismissal of the complaint and to compel
Plaintiff to arbitrate her claims against it. Alternatively,
Defendant moves to stay the proceedings pending arbitration.
Defendant contends that Plaintiff "agreed to binding arbitration
of any and all disputes arising out of her Credit One credit card
account" which she opened on or about March 3, 2014.

In the Memorandum and Order dated October 14, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/J5JxQSfrom Leagle.com, Judge Joyner concluded that
inasmuch as the arbitration agreement does not appear to cover the
situation, and given that a court may order arbitration of a
particular dispute only where it is satisfied that the parties
agreed to arbitrate that dispute, the Court cannot make the
requisite finding based on the presently-existing record that this
matter is properly within the scope of the arbitration clause
contained within Plaintiff's cardholder agreement. The Court is
compelled to deny the motion to dismiss and/or to compel
arbitration, albeit with the proviso that Defendant is free to re-
raise the matter of arbitrability by filing a motion for summary
judgment following the taking of discovery on the issue.

Patricia Schwartz is represented by:

Craig Thor Kimmel, Esq.
KIMMEL & SILVERMAN PC
30 E Butler Ave
Ambler, PA 19002
Tel: (215)540-8888

Credit One Financial is represented by Aaron R. Easley, Esq. --
aeasley@sessions.legal -- SESSIONS FISHMAN NATHAN & ISRAEL LLC


CROWDFLOWER INC: Court Denies Bid to Modify Settlement Agreement
----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge Jon S. Tigar of the United States District Court for
Northern District of California denied without prejudice the
parties' motion to modify the Court's July 2 order and to approve
the suggested modifications to the settlement agreement in the
case captioned, CHRISTOPHER OTEY, et al., Plaintiffs, v.
CROWDFLOWER, INC., et al., Defendants, Case No. 12-CV-05524-JST
(N.D. Cal.).

Named Plaintiffs Christopher Otey and Mary Greth performed tasks
for CrowdFlower through a website called Amazon Mechanical Turk
(AMT). The gravamen of their Complaint is that CrowdFlower pays
its contributors, whom it classifies as independent contractors,
less than the minimum wage under FLSA, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 206(a), and
Oregon law, ORS Sections 653.025 and 652.150. Plaintiffs brought
their Oregon law claims as class action claims under Rule 23.

On August 27, 2013, the Court granted Plaintiffs' Motion for
Conditional Certification of a Collective Action, and
conditionally certified a class "All persons who performed
crowdsourced work in the United States and its territories in
response to any online request by CrowdFlower for crowdsourced
work, or any online notification by CrowdFlower that crowdsourced
work was available at any time from three years prior to the date
on which notice is issued to the date on which notice is issued."
The Court had previously approved the agreement on July 2, 2015.

The Settlement called for Defendants to pay a total of
$585,507.00, to be allocated as follows:

     (1) a net settlement amount available for class member's
         claims estimated at $297,672.66;

     (2) claims administration expenses not to exceed
         $70,000.00;

     (3) class representative service awards not to exceed
         $5,000.00 for Plaintiff Greth and $6,000.00 for
         Plaintiff Otey;

     (4) reasonable costs incurred in obtaining a response to
         a subpoena issued to AMT;

     (5) attorneys' fees in an amount not to exceed $146,377.00;
         and

     (6) costs in an amount not to exceed $50,457.34.

The parties have jointly asked for the Court's approval of several
changes to their Second Modified FLSA Collective Action
Settlement.

In the Order dated October 20, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/oEykN0from Leagle.com, Justice Zachary concluded
that the parties have not sufficiently explained why the proposed
re-definition of the class is fair and reasonable. The Court seeks
an explanation from the parties as to why these particular class
members may be asked to verify their identities, and how the
claims administrator will determine when to ask for proof of
identity.

Plaintiffs are represented by William Thomas Payne, Esq. --
wpayne@fdpklaw.com -- Edward J. Feinstein, Esq. --
efeinstein@fdpklaw.com -- Ellen Mary M. Doyle, Esq. --
edoyle@fdpklaw.com -- FEINSTEIN DOYLE PAYNE & KRAVEC, LLC,
Jennifer Lynn Connor, Esq. COHELAN KHOURY & SINGER & Mark Alan
Potashnick, Esq. -- markp@wp-attorneys.com -- WEINHAUS &
POTASHNICK

Defendants are represented by Tracy Thompson, Esq. --
tracythompson@dwt.com -- M. Michael Cole, Esq. --
mmichaelcole@dwt.com -- DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LLP


CUSTOM COMMUNICATIONS: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Adolpho Beasley, Johnathan Clark, and Calvin Mcintyre,
individually and on behalf of all persons similarly situated v.
Custom Communications, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-00583-F (E.D.N.C.,
November 8, 2015) is brought against the Defendant for failure to
pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

Custom Communications, Inc. is in the business of providing cable
and wireless technology installation services and offers the sale
and installation of Dish Network packages.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      David E. Rothstein, Esq.
      ROTHSTEIN LAW FIRM, PA
      1312 Augusta Street
      Greenville, SC 29605
      Telephone: (864) 242-5870
      Facsimile: (864) 241-1386
      E-mail: drothstein@rothsteinlawfirm.com

         - and -

      Shanon J. Carson, Esq.
      Sarah R. Schalman-Bergen, Esq.
      Alexandra K. Piazza, Esq.
      Camille Fundora, Esq.
      BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C.
      1622 Locust Street
      Philadelphia, PA 19103
      Telephone: (215) 875-3000
      Facsimile: (215) 875-4604
      E-mail: scarson@bm.net
              sschalman-bergen@bm.net
              apiazza@bm.net
              cfundora@bm.net

         - and -

      Harold Lichten, Esq.
      Benjamin J. Weber, Esq.
      LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
      729 Boylston St., Suite 2000
      Boston, MA 02116
      Telephone: (617) 994-5800
      Facsimile: (617) 994-5801
      E-mail: hlichten@llrlaw.com
              bweber@llrlaw.com


D & J CONCRETE: Faces "Gomez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fernando Gomez and Angel Vasquez v. D & J Concrete Corp., and Jack
Pereira, Case No. 7:15-cv-08706 (S.D.N.Y., November 5, 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 a concrete-related construction
company located at 5 Schuman Rd., Millwood, NY 10546.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Penn Dodson, Esq.
      ANDERSONDODSON, P.C.
      11 Broadway, Suite 615
      New York, NY 10004
      Telephone: (212) 961-7639
      Facsimile: (646) 998-8051
      E-mail: penn@andersondodson.com


DEER CONSUMER: Rosen Firm Inks $1.4-Mil. Settlement of Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Rosen Law Firm, P.A. announces that the United States District
Court Central District of California has approved the following
announcement of a proposed class action settlement that would
benefit purchasers of common stock  of Deer Consumer Products,
Inc. (OTCMKTS:DEER):

SUMMARY NOTICE OF PENDENCY AND SETTLEMENT OF CLASS ACTION

TO: ALL PERSONS WHO PURCHASED DEER CONSUMER PRODUCTS, INC.
("DEER") COMMON STOCK DURING THE PERIOD FROM MARCH 31, 2009
THROUGH AUGUST 10, 2012, INCLUSIVE.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED, pursuant to an Order of the United States
District Court for the Central District of California, that a
hearing will be held on March 11, 2016 before the Honorable Dolly
M. Gee, United States District Judge for the Central District of
California, Courtroom 7, 312 North Spring Street, Los Angeles, CA
90012-4701 (the "Settlement Hearing") for the purpose of
determining: (1) whether the proposed Settlement consisting of the
sum of $1,425,000.00 should be approved by the Court as fair,
reasonable, and adequate; (2) whether the proposed plan to
distribute the settlement proceeds is fair, reasonable, and
adequate; (3) whether the application for an award of attorneys'
fees of $475,000.00, or one-third of the Settlement Fund, and
reimbursement of expenses of not more than $100,000.00 and an
incentive payment of no more than $30,000.00 to Lead Plaintiffs,
should be approved; and (4) whether the Litigation should be
dismissed with prejudice.

If you purchased Deer common stock during the class period from
March 31, 2009 through August 10, 2012, inclusive, your rights may
be affected by the Settlement of this action. If you have not
received a detailed Notice of Pendency and Settlement of Class
Action and a copy of the Proof of Claim and Release, you may
obtain copies by writing to: Deer Consumer Products, Inc.
Litigation (Auditor), c/o Strategic Claims Services, P.O. Box 230,
600 N. Jackson St., Ste. 3, Media, PA 19063 (866-274-4004 (Tel)
610-565-7985 (Fax); info@strategicclaims.net, or going to the
website, www.strategicclaims.net). If you are a member of the
Settlement Class, in order to share in the distribution of the Net
Settlement Fund, you must submit a Proof of Claim and Release to
the Claims Administrator postmarked no later than January 18,
2016, establishing that you are entitled to recovery. Unless you
submit a written exclusion request, you will be bound by any
judgment rendered in the Litigation whether or not you make a
claim. If you wish to be excluded from the Settlement Class, you
must submit a request for exclusion postmarked no later than
February 26, 2016, in the manner and form explained in the
detailed Notice to the Claims Administrator.

Any objection to the Settlement, Plan of Allocation, or the Lead
Plaintiffs' Counsel's request for an award of attorneys' fees and
reimbursement of expenses must be in the manner and form explained
in the detailed Notice and postmarked no later than February 26,
2016, to each of the following:

COUNSEL FOR LEAD PLAINTIFFS AND THE CLASS:

Laurence M. Rosen
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 785-2610
Fax: (213) 226-4684
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS:
John W. Sheller
Renee C. Ohlendorf
HINSHAW & CULBERTSON LLP
11601 Wilshire Blvd.
Suite 800
Los Angeles, CA 90025

If you have any questions about the Settlement, you may call or
write to the Claims Administrator or Lead Plaintiffs' Counsel:

Deer Consumer Products, Inc. Litigation (Auditor)
c/o Strategic Claims Services
P.O. Box 230
600 N. Jackson St., Ste. 3
Media, PA 19063
Telephone:  (866) 274-4004
Fax:  (610) 565-7985
info@strategicclaims.net
Laurence M. Rosen
THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
355 South Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Telephone: (213) 785-2610
Fax: (213) 226-4684


DEER MEADOWS: Faces "Cadeau" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------
Yoosllnn Cadeau, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Deer Meadows Operating, LLC d/b/a Deer
Meadows Home Health and Support Services, Case No. 2:15-cv-05997-
JHS (E.D. Penn., November 5, 2015) is brought against the
Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the
Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants operate a non-profit senior care, nursing facility
located at 8301 Roosevelt Blvd., Philadelphia, PA 19152.


DIRECT SOURCE: Faces Pacleb Suit in Cal. Over Automated Calls
-------------------------------------------------------------
Florencio Pacleb, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Direct Source Mortgage Services, Ltd. and
Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 2:15-cv-08689-BRO-JPR (C.D.
Cal., November 6, 2015) arises out of the Defendants' alleged use
of automatic dialing system to place calls to the Plaintiff and
class members' cellular telephone seeking to collect the debt
allegedly owned by them.

Direct Source Mortgage Services, Ltd is a full service mortgage
broker with an experienced staff offering expertise in every area
of mortgage lending.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
      Arvin Ratanavongse, 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
              aratanavongse@attorneysforconsumers.com


DR. REDDY: Faces Class Action Suit by Two US Law Firms
------------------------------------------------------
Business Standard reported that Dr Reddy's Laboratories denied
allegations of misrepresentation of facts regarding its financial
performance as claimed by a couple of US law firms even as the
company stock fell as much as 7.5% in morning trade over a
possible class action suit.

Lundin Law PC, a Los Angeles law firm said it was investigating
claims against Dr Reddy's concerning possible violations of
federal securities laws in the US.

"The investigation is related to allegations that certain
statements issued by Dr Reddy's were false and misleading
concerning the company's financial performance," the law firm
said.

Khang and Khang LLP, another California-based law firm, issued a
similar statement, saying it was focusing its investigation on
whether the company and its officers violated securities laws by
issuing misleading information to investors.

Responding to the allegations, a company spokesperson said in a
statement: "Dr Reddy's has always adhered to all disclosure
requirements both of the Securities and Exchange Commission(SECs)
and Indian Stock Exchanges; including accounting practices as per
the International Financial Reporting Standards(IFRS) and the

Indian Accounting Standards. The company has no further comment on
what might be advertorial press releases by law firms and refutes
all these allegations."

The company shares fell 15% on November 6 following a warning
letter issued by the US drug regulator the US Food and Drug
Administration (USFDA) over the quality issues involving three of
its manufacturing plants in AP and Telangana states. The down
slide continued for a couple of more sessions there after with a
fall of 5-6 per cent in each session.

The law firms, which said they are investigating into possible
violations, have also cited this warning letter as an immediate
trigger for their action. They have asked investors to join the
possible class action law suit against the company.


EDGAR ADULT: Former Residents Reach $35.9-Mil. Settlement
---------------------------------------------------------
Sara Carson, writing for Simcoe, reported that a $35.9-million
settlement agreement has been reached between the province and
former residents of 12 institutions for the developmentally
delayed, including Edgar Adult Occupational Centre in Oro-Medonte.

Barrie resident Jim Templin, who was institutionalized at Edgar
from 1983 to 1986, is surprised the suit, launched in August, was
settled so quickly.

"This one is actually progressing quite nicely. More rapidly than
what we had anticipated," the 49-year-old said.

It took five years to settle a similar class action lawsuit
between the province and former residents of Huronia Regional
Centre (HRC) in Orillia.

Christine Burke, spokesperson for the Office of the Attorney
General of Ontario, said the 2013 HRC settlement helped set the
model for this current agreement.

"The settlement in HRC was a fair and reasonable compromise of the
claim and served as a model on which the settlement of the current
action could be based, including the claims process," she said.

Jody Brown, associate lawyer with Toronto law firm Koskie Minsky
LLP, said the timing is a relief to former residents, who will not
have to wait years for compensation.

"It's a good sign the government decided they should get this done
sooner rather than later," he said.

Koskie Minsky represents roughly 8,000 individuals who lived at
the 12 institutions.

A settlement approval hearing will be held in early 2016 at the
Superior Court of Justice in Toronto. If approved, claimants will
follow the same compensation process as those involved in the 2013
settlement of HRC.

In a prepared statement, Ontario Attorney General Madeleine
Meilleur said: "This tentative agreement is a step to address a
painful chapter of our province's history. It is my hope that a
settlement in this matter will help former residents who suffered
harm move forward with dignity."

The case began last year with former Edgar resident and plaintiff
Marlene McIntyre, who lived in the institution between August 1973
and December 1974. She was also housed in the HRC. The class
action alleged negligence and breach of fiduciary duty in respect
of the province's operation and management of the 12 facilities.
The parties agreed to settle all issues among themselves and 'the
plaintiff and class counsel concluded this settlement agreement
provides substantial benefits to the class members and is fair,
reasonable and in the best interests of the class members.'

Former residents who submit a claim will receive between $2,000
and $42,000, Brown said.

"People will be able to write down what happened to them. There is
no need to testify or provide witnesses or anything," he said.

Compensation is determined based on the nature of harm suffered
and the sufficiency of the evidence provided, states the
agreement. Types of harm include sexual assault, physical assault
and repeated, persistent and excessive wrongful acts constituting
demeaning behaviour, humiliation or excessive physical punishment.

Those who cannot, or who do not want to explain the abuse they
faced will get a maximum $2,000, Brown said.

About $28 million has been set aside for the claims process. The
lawyers' fees are capped at $3.7 million and the remaining cash
goes to other expenses, Brown said.

The money is not enough for Templin. He wants to province to
apologize for how he was treated at Edgar.

"It's not the monetary value that matters most. It's the fact that
the government made a mistake in the mismanagement of these
institutions and if we can get the government to admit they made a
mistake that would be better than anything else," he said.

This settlement does not include an apology. Ontario Premier
Kathleen Wynne apologized in December 2013 after the HRC
settlement.

"In the past we have taken responsibility for the suffering of
those who were harmed in a place that was intended to provide them
with support," Burke said. "This settlement is designed to give
those former residents who suffered harm while at these facilities
access to compensation."

Brown expects less than 8,000 people to submit claims because some
former residents have died. Claims can be submitted for any former
resident who was alive as of June 16, 2012.

Any money remaining in the settlement fund after the claims are
processed will be returned to the province.

The 12 institutions in this class action include: the St. Lawrence
Regional Centre, D'Arcy Place, the Edgar Adult Occupational
Centre, Pine Ridge, Muskoka Centre, Oxford Regional Centre,
Midwestern Regional Centre, L.S. Penrose Centre, Bluewater Centre,
Durham Centre for Developmentally Handicapped, Prince Edward
Heights and Northwestern Regional Centre.


ENERSAFE INC: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Hamilton" Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Hamilton, Cody George, and Martin W. Kolodzire, individually
and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Enersafe, Inc. f/k/a
Enersafe LLC, et al., Case No. 5:15-cv-00965 (W.D. Tex., November
6, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime compensation for the hours in excess of 40 hours in a
single week.

The Defendants are in the business of providing energy safety
solutions to various companies such as Defendant EOG, Conoco
Phillips, XTO Energy, Calumet Refining, and EP Energy.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Glenn D. Levy, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF GLENN D. LEVY
      906 Basse, Suite 100
      San Antonio, TX 78212
      Telephone: (210) 822-5666
      Facsimile: (210) 822-5650


EOG RESOURCES: Faces "Wise" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alfredo Wise and Micah Cannady, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. EOG Resources, Inc., f/k/a Enron Oil
and Gas Company, and Enersafe, Inc. a/k/a TCSafety and TCSafety,
Inc. & f/k/a Enersafe, LLC, Case No. 5:15-cv-00973 (W.D. Tex.,
November 7, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to
pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants are engaged in interstate oil and natural gas
exploration and production services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Allen R. Vaught, Esq.
      BARON & BUDD, P.C.
      3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 1100
      Dallas, TX 75219
      Telephone: (214) 521-3605
      Facsimile: (214) 520-1181
      E-mail: avaught@baronbudd.com


EXCELL SERVICES: Fails to Pay Workers OT, "Knight" Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Knight, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated v. Excell Services, LLC, Case No. 1:15-cv-02458 (D.
Colo., November 6, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for
failure to pay overtime wages for all hours worked over 40 during
each seven day workweek.

Excell Services, LLC owns and operates drilling rigs in and around
the DJ Basin oilfield play.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Allen R. Vaught, Esq.
      Ryan J. Burton
      Melinda Arbuckle
      BARON & BUDD, P.C.
      3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 1100
      Dallas, TX 75219
      Telephone: (214) 521-3605
      Facsimile: (214) 520-1181
      E-mail: avaught@baronbudd.com
              rburton@baronbudd.com
              marbuckl@baronbudd.com


FANDUEL INC: Employee Playing Policy Strengthens Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Flushdraw.net reported that the filing for an indictment against
DFS (daily fantasy sports) market giants FanDuel and DraftKings by
New York State Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman adds new
levels of complexity to the legal battleground now facing the
fledging DFS industry within the US.

Not only will the pending New York State lawsuit likely make it
more difficult for the DFS sites to retain their current size or
expand within the US market, but it will also add fuel to the
class-action fire already facing the two companies, perhaps even
triggering a second wave of consumer complaints.

The reason for this is the release, as an appendix accompanying
injunction filing, of an internal FanDuel employee document which
will likely be portrayed as a template for how employees of that
site were virtually instructed on how to use their insider
advantage in moderate ways while competing against more casual
players on other sites.  Employees of FanDuel and DraftKings
notably and prominently competed against players on each other's
sites, though that practice was curtailed after a public furor
arose over DraftKings employee Ethan Haskell's $350,000 score in a
major NFL contest on FanDuel.

Haskell himself was specifically exonerated by DraftKings
regarding his possible use of DraftKings' user data regarding that
contest, but the company never addressed whether Haskell or other
employees had used such data in other contests.  Over at FanDuel,
employee Matthew Boccio was named as a co-defendant in one of the
class-action cases filed in October. Boccio was a big, high-volume
winner in DFS contests at DraftKings, and he has been described as
a "model employee" at FanDuel.

The problem that FanDuel now faces is that the employee document
that emerged now paints the company as actively promoting its
employees' efforts in competing unfairly against casual DFS
players even if it's being done on other sites.

DraftKings will face the same heat as well, if a similar document
from within that company ever emerges.

The document in question is called the "FanDuel Employee DFS
Information and Playing Policy," and this writer believes it's
going to be a big thorn in the side of FanDuel's ongoing class-
action legal defense.  The entire exercise was rationalized under
the concept of "Playing on other sites helps employees do their
jobs better," but a thorough reading of the three-page document
suggests an alternate meaning: "Go ahead and make money elsewhere,
but do it in moderation, so as not to arouse suspicion."

Here's the initial section on "Goals," or what the FanDuel policy
was designed to accomplish:

Goals: These outline what we're hoping to accomplish by asking
you (and other employees) to agree to this policy.

   -- Limit ability of employees to exploit "inside information"
such as the picks of top users, or the win rates of potential
opponents.

   -- Reassure any concerned site users that employees aren't
exploiting inside info.

   -- Reduce chance of users questioning ability of employees to
exploit inside info against them when they play on other sites.

Big problems, right from the start.  When you're talking about
"limiting" or "reducing" access, you're admitting that the access
exists, and that the information has the potential to be used by
employees elsewhere in unfair ways.

From there it's on to "Principles," or what passed for them within
FanDuel's corporate culture:

Principles: These are some of the factors that played into the
specific set of rules that we're asking you to agree to.

   -- Playing on other sites helps employees do their jobs better

   -- 'Do no harm' through play on other sites, so users are less
likely to be suspicious or angry.

   -- Minimize internal flow of exploitable information where
possible, so that there are fewer opportunities for exploitation.

   -- We hire people we trust, so we don't have any scandals.

   -- This document should provide clarity to employees on what is
and isn't acceptable.

"Do no harm" is supposed to mean what, exactly?  Play to lose?
Don't win too much?  Hide your winnings as efficiently as
possible?  The answers to some of those questions do appear in
what follows in the document, in ways the company won't be happy
have been exposed.  Onward.

Risks: These are some of the things that could go wrong if we
didn't have a policy or if the policy wasn't followed.

   -- Employees copying user's picks. Although this is the one
that users sometimes ask about, it isn't much of a risk because
the salary structures on each site are completely different. In
addition, there are differences in scoring and roster
configurations. At best, employees might get an idea of a player
to research from a top user's lineups. . . but that kind of
information is available lots of places.

   -- Employees targeting weak users as opponents on other sites.
This seems to concern users less, but is more of a real threat. In
fact, in a sense, it is happening already. Information that is
known can't be unknown, so it's important that we put some
controls in place to limit it.

   -- Leakage of personal information (including win rate) of
users outside of company.

There's less in that section of a legally dangerous nature, but
the true minefield looms:

Internal Controls & Guidelines: These are rules about how you
will treat confidential information.

   -- Only discuss our users' success and lineups where necessary.
The less awareness of this information internally, the less
chances for exploitation.

   -- There is an expectation that employees will only look up
info such as user lineups or user win rates where needed to do
job.

Wow to that last one.  This implies that at FanDuel, there have
been no specific controls over access to user data, and it's been
available to all on some sort of honor system.

Rules for Employee Play on Other Sites:

   -- Never be among the top five players by volume on any one
site (based on site leaderboards). Never be among the top ten
overall on the RotoGrinders leaderboard. Top players frequently
become targets for accusations by other users.

   -- Never account for more than 2% of entries in any tournament
of more than 1,000 entries. Never account for more than 5% of
entries in any tournament of more than 100 entries. Players who
swamp big tournaments with entries frequently become targets of
accusations.

   -- Don't be the 2nd person into a head to head contest against
the same opponent in more than one contest per day. This rule will
greatly limit the ability to exploit information about user
performance, and will also limit the likelihood of complaints from
users.

   -- Never use information gained from viewing users' lineups.

   -- Seek to avoid playing anyone whose lineups you saw for that
time period.

By quantifying some of these things and specifying that it's
necessary to do so to avoid arousing suspicion and accusations
among casual players, it says (in this writer's opinion) that
FanDuel is tacitly admitting that its employees have access to
information that provides a competitive advantage and that they
are encouraging the application of that information on competing
sites, largely DraftKings.  That's going to be big trouble in
these legal cases down the road, both amid the consumer class-
action filings and regarding AG Schneiderman's claims of fraud and
misrepresentation by the company.

Though it's only a brief, large-type, three-page form, it's a
highly damaging document.  And it concluded with a demand to
FanDuel's employees to provide their usernames on all other DFS
sites, along with agreeing to a 12-month "playing on FanDuel" non-
compete following termination of employment for any reason.  It's
very odd that FanDuel would be more worried about former employees
coming back to play on FanDuel than they would be about those
employees heading off to work for other companies.


FANDUEL INC: Faces "Cadapan" Suit Over DFS Website Operation
------------------------------------------------------------
Dave Cadapan, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated, v. Fanduel, Inc. and Draftkings, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-
08719 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2015), alleges that the two companies
operate daily fantasy sports (DFS) websites in a manner that
violates California law, and analogous common and consumer
protection laws in each state in which they operate, including New
York.

DFS websites exist as a non-regulated industry where individuals
compete against other individuals in fantasy sports games on a
daily basis. Defendants operate contests or tournaments where
individuals accumulate points based on the real-life statistics of
players in professional sporting events that occur on a particular
day. Individuals can play for free or pay money to compete for
cash prizes.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael A. Toomey, Esq.
     BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE
     11 Times Square, 640 8th Ave.
     10th Floor
     New York, NY 10036
     Phone: (212) 688-0782
     Fax: (212) 688-0783
     E-mail: mtoomey@barrack.com

        - and -

     Stephen R. Basser, Esq.
     BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE
     600 West Broadway, Suite 900
     San Diego, CA 92101
     Phone: 619/230-0800
     Fax: (619)230-1874
     E-mail: sbasser@barrack.com


FIFTH GENERATION: Court Trims Claims in "Terlesky" Complaint
------------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned, Anne Terlesky, and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. Fifth Dimension, Inc., Defendant, Case
No. 1:15-CV-374 (S.D. Ohio), District Judge Susan J. Dlott of the
United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio
granted in part Defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint with
respect to Plaintiff's ODTPA claim, OCSPA class claim, and fraud
claim.

The action is brought by Plaintiff on behalf of herself and class
members who purchased Tito's Handmade Vodka because the label
described the product as both "Handmade" and "Crafted in an Old
Fashioned Pot Still by America's Original Microdistillery."

Defendant was named in the Complaint as "Fifth Dimension, Inc."
but asserts in its Motion to Dismiss that its proper party name is
"Fifth Generation, Inc." The Court will accordingly refer to the
Defendant as Fifth Generation, Inc.

Fifth Generation, Inc., is alleged to manufacturer, distribute,
market, and/or sell Tito's Handmade Vodka. Plaintiff alleges that
the product is not actually handmade, because it is made from
commercially manufactured neutral grain spirit that is trucked and
pumped into an industrial facility, distilled in a large
industrial complex with modern, technologically advanced stills,
and produced and bottled in extremely large quantities.

Plaintiff asserts the following claims: violation of the Ohio
Deceptive Trade Practices Act, violation of the Ohio Consumer
Sales Practices Act, unjust enrichment, promissory estoppel,
negligent misrepresentation, fraud, and declaratory
judgment/injunctive relief.

Defendant argues that each of Plaintiff's claims is subject to
dismissal. Defendant claims Plaintiff lacks standing to allege a
claim under the Ohio Deceptive Trade Practices Act and fails to
allege notice sufficient to pursue a class action under the Ohio
Consumer Sales Practices Act. Defendant claims Plaintiff's
remaining claims are either inadequately plead or fail as a matter
of law.

In her Order dated November 17, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/SdmZKDfrom Leagle.com, Judge Dlott held that a
"consumer" does not have standing to commence a civil action under
the ODTPA and that Delahunt controlling, and because Plaintiff has
not alleged an injury proximately caused by the reliance, her
claim for fraud cannot stand.

Anne Terlersky is represented by Brian T. Giles, Esq. --
Brian@GilesLenox.com -- Bryce A. Lenox, Esq. --
Bryce@GilesLenox.com -- GILES & LENOX LLC

Fifth Generation Inc. is represented by Aaron Micah Bernay, Esq. -
- abernay@fbt.com -- Susan Grogan Faller, Esq. -- sfaller@fbt.com
-- FROST BROWN TODD LLC & Ricky Lynn Shackelford, Esq. --
shacklefordr@gtlaw.com -- GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP


GENERAL CHEMICAL: Faces Chester Suit Over Liquid Aluminum Sulfate
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Chester Water Authority, individually and on behalf of all those
similarly situated v. General Chemical Corporation, et al., Case
No. 2:15-cv-07928-JLL-JAD (D.N.J., November 6, 2015) arises from
the Defendants' and others' alleged unlawful combination,
agreement and conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition in
the sale and marketing of liquid aluminum sulfate.

General Chemical Corporation is a Delaware corporation that
manufactures a line of carpet cleaning products.

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
      E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
              ltaylor@carellabyrne.com

         - and -

      Barbara Hart, Esq.
      Gerald Lawrence, Esq.
      Sung-Min Lee, Esq.
      LOWEY DANNENBERG COHEN & HART, P.C.
      One North Broadway, Suite 509
      White Plains, NY 10601-2301
      Telephone: (914) 997-0500
      E-mail: bhart@lowey.com
              glawrence@lowey.com
              SLee@lowey.com

         - and -

      Stephen R. Neuwirth, Esq.
      Steig D. Olson, Esq.
      QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
      51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
      New York, NY 10010
      Telephone: (212) 849-7000
      E-mail: stephenneuwirth@quinnemanuel.com
              steigolson@quinnemanuel.com


GENERAL CHEMICAL: Faces Suit in N.J. Over Liquid Aluminum Sulfate
-----------------------------------------------------------------
City of Winter Park, individually and on behalf of all those
similarly situated v. General Chemical Corporation, et al., Case
No. 2:15-cv-08031-SRC-CLW (D.N.J., November 7, 2015) arises from
the Defendants' and others' alleged unlawful combination,
agreement and conspiracy to suppress and eliminate competition in
the sale and marketing of liquid aluminum sulfate.

General Chemical Corporation is a Delaware corporation that
manufactures a line of carpet cleaning products.

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 07068-1739
      Telephone: (973) 994-1700
      Facsimile: (973) 994-1744
      E-mail: jcecchi@carellabyrne.com
              ltaylor@carellabyrne.com

         - and -

      Linda P. Nussbaum, Esq.
      Susan R. Schwaiger, Esq.
      NUSSBAUM LAW GROUP, P.C.
      570 Lexington Avenue, 19th Floor
      New York, NY 10022
      Telephone: (212) 702-7053
      E-mail: lnussbaum@nussbaumpc.com
              sschwaiger@nussbaumpc.com

         - and -

      Michael E. Criden, Esq.
      CRIDEN & LOVE, P.A.
      7301 SW 57TH Court, Suite 515
      South Miami, FL 33143
      Telephone: (305) 357-9000
      E-mail: mcriden@cridenlove.com


GEORGIA: Suit Accuses State of Massive Data Breach
--------------------------------------------------
Kristina Torres, writing for The Atlanta Journal Constitution,
reported that two Georgia women have filed a class action lawsuit
alleging a massive data breach by Secretary of State Brian Kemp
involving the Social Security numbers and other private
information of more than six million voters statewide.

The suit, filed in Fulton County Superior Court, alleges Kemp's
office released the information including personal identifying
information to the media, political parties and other paying
subscribers who legally buy voter information from the state.

In response, Kemp's office blamed a "clerical error" and said that
they did not consider it to be a breach of its system. It said 12
organizations, including statewide political parties, news media
organizations and Georgia GunOwner Magazine, received the file.

"Our office shares voter registration data every month with news
media and political parties that have requested it as required by
Georgia law," Kemp said in a statement. "Due to a clerical error
where information was put in the wrong file, 12 recipients
received a disc that contained personal identifying information
that should not have been included. This violated the policies
that I put in place to protect voters personal information.

"My office undertook immediate corrective action, including
contacting each recipient to retrieve the disc, and I have taken
additional administrative action within the agency to deal with
the error," Kemp said.

The suit alleges the unauthorized information released in October
in the voter lists also involved dates of birth and drivers'
license numbers. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution independently
confirmed the inclusion of the personal data in the October file.
The AJC did so by accessing the October data disc, looking up
information for an AJC staffer and confirming his Social Security
number and driver's license information was included.

The AJC has returned its copy of the disc to the state.
It is unclear how the private information came to be included in
the file, and whether it was an internal error or the fault of an
outsider contractor.

"Kemp has not notified a single Georgia citizen that his or her
information may have been compromised," the suit said. "Nor has he
notified any consumer reporting agencies about the breach that
could compromise 'the security, confidentiality, or integrity of
personal information' of each Georgia voter as required under
Georgia law," it said.

Third parties can legally buy the voter lists from the state, but
the lists are only supposed to include a voter's name, residential
or mailing address, race, gender, registration date and last
voting date.
The alleged breach, which the suit says happened internally
because of lax controls in Kemp's office, would be one of the
largest ever by a state.

In 2012, a massive data breach reported by South Carolina
officials exposed 3.8 million Social Security numbers of the
state's residents. At the time, Georgia officials said the state
used data encryption and other controls not in place when hackers
breached South Carolina's Department of Revenue.


GES GLADIATOR: Faces "Bridgewater" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
--------------------------------------------------------------
Danny Bridgewater and Coty David, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. GES Gladiator Energy Services
Texas, LLC, La Chemical, LLC, and Steven "Cloy" Gantt, Case No.
5:15-cv-00975 (W.D. Tex., November 8, 2015) is brought against the
Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the
Fair Labor Standard Act.

GES Gladiator Energy Services Texas, LLC provides coil tubing
completion services.

La Chemical, LLC provides oilfield chemical services to various
oil and gas companies located in Bakken, Barnett, Brown Dense,
Eagle Ford, Fayetteville, Haynesville, Marcellus, Permian Basin,
Terryville, and Tuscaloosa Shales.

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


GILBERT ENTERPRISES: "Walsh" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Arielle Walsh, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Gilbert Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Club Fantasies, and
Francis Deluca, Case No. 1:15-cv-00472 (D.R.I., November 6, 2015)
seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages, liquidated damages, pre-
and post-judgment interest, and attorneys' fees pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants own and operate an adult club located at 28 Sims
Avenue, Providence, Rhode Island.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      John T. Longo, Esq.
      CITADEL CONSUMER LITIGATION, P.C.
      996 Smith Street
      Providence, RI 02098
      Telephone: (401) 383-7550
      E-mail: jtlongo@citadelpc.com

         - and -

      Harold Lichten, Esq.
      Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq.
      Peter Delano, Esq.
      LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
      729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000
      Boston, MA 02116
      Telephone: (617) 994-5800
      E-mail: hlichten@llrlaw.com
              sliss@llrlaw.com
              pdelano@llrlaw.com


HANDLON CORRECTIONAL: Class Suit Barred, Most Plaintiffs Tossed
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Robert Holmes Bell of the United States District
Court for Western District of Michigan dismissed all of the
Plaintiffs, except for Joseph Gregory Dunbar, and denied a motion
to file a class action, ex-parte motion for injunctive relief,
motion for evidentiary hearing, motion to waive fees and costs
temporarily in the case captioned, JOSEPH GREGORY DUNBAR et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. YVONNE ROSE, Defendant, Case No. 1:15-CV-881 (W.D.
Mich.).

The civil rights action brought by 33 state prisoners pursuant to
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1983. Plaintiffs assert violations of their First
Amendment right of access to the courts. Plaintiffs allege that
the legal books in the Richard A. Handlon Correctional Facility
have been replaced by an electronic law library with four work
stations. Plaintiffs also claim that they have not been trained in
how to use the computer system for legal research. Plaintiffs
further allege that due to limited capacity, a prisoner may wait
up to three days after making a request to be called out to the
law library.

In addition, Plaintiffs contend that prisoners with GEDs, who do
not qualify for assistance through the Legal Writer Program, are
not permitted to talk or pass notes in the library, and, thus, are
effectively barred from receiving assistance from other prisoners
with greater legal experience and knowledge.

In the motion, Plaintiffs seek to file a class action and ex parte
motion for injunctive relief, motion for evidentiary hearing,
motion to waive fees and costs temporarily.

In his Opinion dated October 19, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/qRafhdfrom Leagle.com, Judge Bell concluded that
Plaintiffs are not appropriate representatives of a class because
they are incarcerated pro se litigants. Plaintiffs cannot seek
relief jointly because each Plaintiff must specifically allege how
the lack of legal resources or assistance caused him to suffer
actual injury to a pending or contemplated habeas corpus or civil
rights action. Plaintiff's motion for preliminary is denied
because they lack sufficient showing of a violation of
constitutional rights. Plaintiff has failed to file the required
prisoner trust account statement and affidavit of indigence in
order to proceed in forma pauperis.

Plaintiff Dunbar is required by the Court to file an amended
complaint on the form provided by the Court.


ILLINOIS BELL: Court Denies Motion to Dismiss "Ballard" Case
------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Amy J. St. Eve of the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Illinois denied Illinois Bell's
motion to dismiss in the case captioned, VICTOR BALLARD,
Plaintiff, v. ILLINOIS BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY, d/b/a AT&T
Illinois, Defendant, Case No. 15 C 2687 (N.D. Ill.).

On July 29, 2015, Ballard filed an Amended Complaint alleging
violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201 et
seq. (FLSA), and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, 820 ILCS 105/1, et
seq. (IMWL) based on Defendant Illinois Bell Telephone Company's
(Illinois Bell) alleged failure to pay overtime compensation for
all hours worked in excess of 40 hours in a week. Ballard's
allegations include:

     (1) a claim based on his reviewing assignments, getting
         supplies, preparing his truck, and meeting with
         supervisors before his shift started,

     (2) a claim based on eating lunch while on the job site,
         and

     (3) a claim based on working after his shift had ended
         in order to enter his time and clean out his truck.

Illinois Bell argues that the FLSA's and IMWL's limitations
periods prohibit Ballard from bringing his pre-shift, lunch break,
and post-shift claims that are broader than the claims initially
certified in the case, Blakes v. Ill. Bell Tel. Co., Case No. 11 C
0336; and that, absent tolling, Ballard's broader pre-February 28,
2011 claims are barred by the limitations periods based on the
assumption that the filing date of the lawsuit before Chief Judge
Castillo, namely, February 28, 2014, is the relevant date for
limitations purposes.

In her Memorandum Opinion and Order dated October 21, 2015
available at http://is.gd/OtIR5zfrom Leagle.com, Judge Eve
concluded that all of Ballard's claims are timely because
Ballard's present Amended Complaint relates back to the Blakes
lawsuit in which Ballard filed a written consent on July 27, 2011.

Victor Ballard is represented by:

Brian Massatt, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF BRIAN D. MASSATT
8824 Glenshire St
Tinley Park, IL 60487

Illinois Bell Telephone Company is represented by George Alan
Stohner, Esq. -- George.stohner@FaegreBD.com -- Ellen E. Boshkoff,
Esq. -- ellen.boshkoff@FaegreBD.com -- Lindsey M. Hogan, Esq. --
lindsey.hogan@FaegreBD.com -- FAEGRE BAKER DANIELS LLP


INFOOBJECTS INC: Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Goldberg, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Infoobjects, Inc., and Does 1 through 100, inclusive,
Case No. 115CV287730 (Cal. Super. Ct., November 4, 2015) seeks to
recover unpaid overtime compensation liquidated damages and other
penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief, and reasonable
attorneys ' fees and costs under California Labor Code.

Infoobjects, Inc. operates a software company in Santa Clara
County, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew R. Bainer, Esq.
      Sonny Hoang, Esq.
      SCOTT COLE & ASSOCIATES, APC
      1970 Broadway, Ninth Floor
      Oakland, CA 94612
      Telephone: (510) 891-9800
      Facsimile: (510) 891-7030
      E-mail: mbainer@scalaw.com
              shoang@scalaw.com


IQOR HOLDINGS: Call Center Workers' Suit Wins Class Status
----------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Susan Richard Nelson of the United States District
Court for the District of Minnesota granted Plaintiffs' motion for
conditional class certification and court-authorized notice
pursuant to 29 U.S.C. Sec. 216(b); and denied Defendant's motion
for Judgment on the Pleadings in the case captioned, Paris Shoots,
Jonathan Bell, Maxwell, Turner, Tammy Hope, and Phillipp Ostrovsky
on behalf of themselves, the Proposed Rule 23 Classes, and others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. iQor Holdings US Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 15-CV-563(SRN/SER)(D. Minn.).

On January 21, 2015, Plaintiff Paris Shoots filed the action in
Hennepin County District Court on behalf of himself and a proposed
Rule 23 class of call center workers employed by Defendant iQor
Holdings US Inc. Plaintiffs allege that in their offers of
employment, iQor did not refer to the TimeQey system nor did iQor
indicate that certain time would not be compensated. Plaintiffs
also allege that iQor fails to explain the TimeQey system to new
hires and fails to explain its policies on non-compensable time or
employees' ability to request idle time reimbursement.

On April 3, 2015, Shoots filed a First Amended Complaint (FAC)
adding as named Plaintiffs Jonathan Bell, Maxwell Turner, Tammy
Hope, and Phillipp Ostrovsky. In the FAC, Plaintiffs assert 23
state-law claims under the laws of Minnesota, New York, Ohio, and
Arizona seeking to recover straight time and overtime wages, and a
nationwide collective action claim for unpaid overtime wages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

In the motion, Plaintiffs seek the Court's conditional
certification of the instant case as a nationwide collective
action as to their overtime claims under the FLSA. Plaintiffs
contend that at this very early stage of litigation, the evidence
demonstrates that the named Plaintiffs who assert FLSA claims, the
opt-in Plaintiffs, and members of the proposed class are similarly
situated.

In her Memorandum Opinion and Order dated October 19, 2015
available at http://is.gd/E4yooqfrom Leagle.com, Judge Nelson
found that Plaintiffs have sufficiently pleaded their claims to
survive a motion for judgment on the pleadings. The Court granted
conditional certification of "All persons employed by Defendant as
a CCA in the United States, at any time from October 19, 2012 to
December 31, 2014, who used TimeQey for timekeeping purposes,
including each individual's (1) name, (2) last known mailing
address, (3) last known email address (whether work or personal),
(4) dates of employment, and (5) employee identification number."
The Court also found that the requested information may prove
necessary in order to facilitate notice of a potentially large
number of putative class members.

Plaintiffs are represented by Timothy C. Selander, Esq. --
selander@nka.com -- Rachhana T. Srey, Esq. -- srey@nka.com -- Carl
F. Engstrom, Esq. -- cengstrom@nka.com -- Ashley R. Thronson, Esq.
-- athronson@nka.com -- E. Michelle Drake, Esq. -- drake@nka.com -
- John F. Albanese, Esq. -- jalbanese@nka.com -- NICHOLS KASTER,
PLLP

iQOR Holdings US Inc. is represented by Brian T. Benkstein, Esq. -
- Brian.Benkstein@jacksonlewis.com -- Gina K. Janeiro, Esq. --
JaneiroG@jacksonlewis.com -- JACKSON LEWIS P.C., Kevin F. Gaffney,
Esq. -- kgaffney@morganlewis.com -- Sari M. Alamuddin, Esq. --
salamuddin@morganlewis.com -- Stephanie L. Sweitzer, Esq. --
ssweitzer@morganlewis.com -- MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP


ISOPURE CO: Faces "Zakhour" Suit for Deceptive Packaging
--------------------------------------------------------
Sammer Zakhour and John Martinez, Individually And On Behalf Of
All Others Similarly Situated, v. The Isopure Company, LLC, Case
No. 3:15-cv-02512-W-NLS (S.D.Cal., Nov. 5, 2015), charges
Defendant with intentionally packaging its Whey products in large,
opaque containers that contain approximately 30% empty space.
Thus, Plaintiff seeks compensation for damages, injunctive relief,
and any other available legal or equitable remedies, resulting
from the alleged unlawful and deceptive actions of The Isopure
Company, LLC with respect to the packaging of its Whey Products.

Isopure is a marketer of premium, protein-based sports nutrition
products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
     Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
     GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
     150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
     New York, NY 10003
     Phone: (212) 228-9795
     Fax: (212) 982-6284
     E-mail: NYJG@aol.com
             danalgottlieb@aol.com

        - and -

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

        - and -

     Joshua B. Swigart, Esq.
     Naomi Spector, Esq.
     HYDE & SWIGART
     2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101
     San Diego, CA 92108
     Phone: (619) 233-7770
     Fax: (619) 297-1022
     E-mail: josh@westcoastlitigation.com
             naomi@westcoastlitigation.com


JACK IN THE BOX: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph Rico, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Jack In The Box Inc., and Does 1-50, inclusive, Case
No. BC599920 (Cal. Super. Ct., November 3, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum and overtime
wages in violation of the California Labor Code.

Jack In The Box Inc. operates approximately 400 Jack in the Box
restaurants in California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Carolyn Hunt Cottrell, Esq.
      Keenan L. Klein, Esq.
      SCHNEIDER WALLACE COTTRELL KONECKY WOTKYNS LLP
      2000 Powell Street, Suite 1400
      Emeryville, CA 94608
      Telephone: (415) 421-7100
      Facsimile: (415) 421-7105
      E-mail: ccottrell@schneiderwallace.com

         - and -

      John F. Edgar, Esq.
      Alexander T. Pucke, Esq.
      EDGAR LAW FIRM LLC
      1032 Pennsylvania Avenue
      Kansas City, MO 64105
      Telephone: (816) 531-0033
      Facsimile: (816) 531-3322


JASA MARKETING: "Ortega" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Juan Ortega v. Jasa Marketing Group Inc. and Aldo Enderica, Case
No. 34019838 (Fla. 11th Ct., November 3, 2015) seeks to recover
unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standard Act.

The Defendants operate a management consulting service company
located in Sunny Isles Beach, 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) 416-5005
      E-mail: agp@rgpattomeys.com


JASCOR INC: Sued Over Hepatitis Incident at McDonald's
------------------------------------------------------
David L. Shaw, writing for Finger Lakes Times, reported that the
attorney who represented plaintiffs in the 2005 cryptosporidium
bacteria outbreak at the Seneca Lake State Park sprayground has
filed a class-action complaint in connection with the hepatitis A
exposure involving a local McDonald's worker.

Paul Nunes of Rochester-based Underberg & Kessler filed the
litigation on behalf of Christopher Welch of Waterloo and "other
similarly situated" people who may have been exposed to hepatitis
A. That number could be at least a thousand, the complaint stated.

Jascor Inc., the independent operator of the Seneca Falls
McDonald's, is named as the defendant.

The lawsuit was filed in state Supreme Court of Seneca County in
Waterloo. No date has been set for arguments.

Nunes is being assisted by Seattle-based Marler Clark, a firm
that's been involved in class-action lawsuits involving
restaurants nationwide.

State and Seneca County Public Health officials announced that
customers who patronized the Mound Road McDonald's on Oct. 31 and
Nov. 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 may have been exposed to hepatitis A from an
infected employee. All potentially affected people were advised to
get a vaccine shot.

Clinics were set up at Mynderse Academy, and shots are being
offered at the county office building.

The complaint alleges McDonald's was liable because it sold food
and drink that may have been contaminated with hepatitis A,
exposing customers to possible illness and forcing them to receive
a vaccine or take a blood test.

It also claims the restaurant failed to exercise proper care in
assuring that its employees obtained hepatitis A immunization and
for allowing one or more employee to work while infected with the
virus.

It does not ask for specific monetary damages at this time.
The litigation states the losses could be for lost wages; medical
and medical-related expenses; travel and travel-related expenses;
emotional distress; fear of harm and humiliation; physical pain;
physical injury; and other incidental and consequential damages
that could arise.

Jascor CEO Jim Coriale said he was unaware of the complaint.


JC PENNEY: "Knatt Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------
Desiree Knatt and Sarah Lowe, individually, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. J.C. Penney
Corporation, Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-02516-JAH-JLB (S.D. Cal.,
November 6, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and
damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act.

J.C. Penney Corporation, Inc. owns, operates and manages retail
department stores throughout the State of California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Sheldon A. Ostroff, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF SHELDON A. OSTROFF
      A Professional Corporation
      1441 State Street
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 544-0881
      Facsimile: (619) 544-0892
      E-mail: sostrofflaw@aol.com

         - and -

      James C. Kostas, Esq.
      David Huffman, Esq.
      HUFFMAN & KOSTAS
      1441 State Street
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 544-0880
      Facsimile: (619-544-0892
      E-mail: jkostas@aol.com


JP MORGAN: Court Grants Motion to Dismiss "Keen" TILA Case
----------------------------------------------------------
District Judge William H. Orrick of the United States District
Court for Northern District of California granted Defendant's
motion to dismiss in the case captioned, KEVIN J. KEEN, et al.,
Plaintiffs, v. JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., Defendant, Case No. 15-
CV-10806-WHO (N.D. Cal.).

The instant case a putative class action asserting a single claim
for relief under the Truth in Lending Act (TILA), 15 U.S.C. Sec.
1601 et seq. Plaintiffs Kevin Keen, Tamra Keen, Curt Conyers, and
Kelly are co-borrowers on a mortgage loan from defendant JPMorgan
Chase Bank, N.A. (Chase). They accuse Chase of violating TILA by
failing to disclose to them the finance charge they would
hypothetically incur if Chase were to apply a particular method of
calculating interest on their loan. Plaintiffs allege that Chase
failed to comply with the requirement of TILA, making Chase liable
for statutory damages under 15 U.S.C. Sec. 1640(a). The Plaintiffs
bring the TILA claim on behalf of themselves and on behalf of a
putative class of California residents who obtained Fannie-Mae-
approved residential mortgage loans from Chase.

Chase makes two arguments in support of dismissal. It argues (1)
that plaintiffs' claim is not sufficiently ripe to qualify as a
justiciable case or controversy; and (2) that the claim fails on
the merits, because TILA did not require Chase to disclose to
plaintiffs the finance charge they would hypothetically incur
under the 365/360 method in the event that Chase were to apply it.

In his Order dated October 16, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/1kXaxgfrom Leagle.com, Judge Orrick concluded that
the First Amended Complaint "lacks a cognizable legal theory" and
must be dismissed. The Court found that TILA did not require Chase
to disclose to plaintiffs the finance charge they would incur
under an interest calculation method that Chase does not use and
does not intend to use.

Plaintiffs are represented by William McGrane, Esq. --
william.mcgrane@mcgranellp.com -- MCGRANE LLP, Mark A. Ozzello,
Esq. -- mozzello@mzclaw.com -- MARKUN ZUSMAN FRENIERE COMPTON LLP
& Matthew J. Shier, Esq. -- mshier@shierkatz.com -- SHIERKATZ RLLP

JP Morgan Chase is represented by Leonard A. Gail, Esq. --
lgail@masseygail.com -- Jonathan Massey, Esq. --
Jmassey@masseygail.com -- Pamela T. Johann, Esq. --
pjohann@masseygail.com -- MASSEY & GAIL LLP


KTTG LLC: Faces "Urjbe" Suit in Cal. Over Alleged Overpricing
-------------------------------------------------------------
Isidro Urjbe and Guadalupe Carbajal, individually, and on behalf
of themselves, and all others similarly situated v. KTTG LLC,
d/b/a Cars 2 Go, Lobel Financial Corporation, d/b/a Lobel, and
Does 1 through 500, inclusive, Case No. 115CV287747 (Cal. Super.
Ct., November 5, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for
violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act, specifically by
selling the used 2000 Chevrolet Camaro to the Plaintiffs at more
than the advertised price and thereby charging higher price to a
credit customer than a cash customer.

The Defendants are engaged in the business of buying, repairing
and re-selling used vehicles to the general public, and, taking
vehicles in trade.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Louis Liberty, Esq.
      LOUIS LIBERTY & ASSOCIATES
      553 Pilgrim Drive, Suite A-I
      Foster City, CA 94404
      Telephone: (650) 341-0300
      Facsimile: (650) 403-1783


LASERSHIP INC: Faces "Crosby" Suit Alleging Violation of FLSA
-------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Crosby and John Lewis, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated, v. Lasership, Inc. and Mahmoud, Inc.,
Case No. 1:15-cv-08694 (S.D.N.Y., Nov. 5, 2015), seeks to recover
unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid commissions, and all
applicable wages and penalties for Plaintiffs and their similarly
situated co-workers -- delivery persons or "walkers -- under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

LaserShip is a last mile delivery specialist.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Joseph A. Fitapelli, Esq.
     Frank J. Mazzaferro, Esq.
     Nicholas P. Melito, Esq
     FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP
     475 Park Avenue South, 12th Floor
     New York, New York 10016
     Phone: (212) 300-0375

        - and -

     Troy L. Kessler, Esq.
     SHULMAN KESSLER LLP
     Marijana Matura 534 Broadhollow Road, Ste. 275
     Melville, NY 11747
     Phone: (631) 499-9100


LAWRENCE, KS: Attys Seek Class Status for Voter Registration Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nick Viviani, writing for WIBW, reported that attorneys who filed
a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn a Kansas voter registration
law are seeking to make the suit a class action.

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach suspended the pending
registrations of more than 36,000 would-be Kansas voters earlier
this year until they provide proof of insurance. Former Lawrence
Rep. Paul Davis and William Lawrence, an attorney in Davis' law
firm, filed a suit Sept. 30 lawsuit seeking a preliminary
injunction.

They filed an amendment for class action status.

The Lawrence Journal-World reports the plaintiffs are two Douglas
County residents who applied to register to vote in December and
March. Kobach filed a motion saying the lawsuit was moot because
he had registered the two after pulling their birth certificates
from Kansas Vital Records.


LEMON GREEN: Faces "Zhang" Sit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Li Gang Zhang, individually and on behalf all other employees
similarly situated v. Lemon Green Corp. d/b/a Long Grain, Asia Kan
Inc. d/b/a Long Grain Asia Kan, Xiao Yong Huang, Qun Lin, Ah Hua
"Doe", John Doe and Jane Doe # 1-10, Case No. 1:15-cv-08776
(S.D.N.Y., November 6, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for
failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40
hours each workweek.

The Defendants own and operate a restaurant in Manhattan located
at 2534 Broadway, New York, NY 10025.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jian Hang, Esq.
      HANG & ASSOCIATES, PLLC
      136-18 39th Ave., Suite 1003
      Flushing, NY 11354
      Telephone: (718) 353-8588
      E-mail: jhang@hanglaw.com


LIBERTY MUTUAL: "Lafollette" Class Suit Goes to Trial
-----------------------------------------------------
District Judge Nanette K. Laughrey of the United States District
Court for the Western District of Missouri denied Defendant's
motion for summary judgment in the case captioned, ERIC LAFOLLETTE
and CAMILLE LAFOLLETTE, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 2:14-CV-04147-NKL (W.D. Mo.).

Plaintiffs, Eric and Camille Lafollette, purchased a deluxe
homeowners' insurance policy from Defendant, Liberty Mutual Fire
Insurance Company.  Their policy has an endorsement for wind and
hail damage. The Lafollette's property was damaged by hail and
they sought payment from Liberty Mutual for that hail damage.

Liberty Mutual contends that because the Wind/Hail Endorsement
limits payments on losses that exceed the windstorm or hail
deductible, both ACV and RCV payments are subject to a deductible.
The Lafollettes argue that there is no deductible for an ACV
payment because the loss settlement provision of the Home
Protector Plus Endorsement controls and it provides for a
deductible only when the RCV option is exercised.

Liberty Mutual moved for summary judgment because it interprets
the Lafollettes' Policy to require the payment of a deductible
regardless of whether the insured opts for an ACV or RCV payment
for losses covered by the Policy.

In her Order dated October 19, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/iO6QQtfrom Leagle.com, Judge Laughrey concluded that
the Lafollettes have not challenged the amount of their premium or
the amount of the deductible where it applies and the Court has
not made any findings or conclusions regarding the propriety of
the means by which the insurance rates were determined or the
deductible structure. As the Court has merely interpreted the
Policy at issue and has not made any conclusions regarding the
propriety of the content of the Policy or the overarching rate
scheme, the filed rate doctrine is inapplicable.

Plaintiffs are represented by:

David L. Steelman, Esq.
STEELMAN, GAUNT & HORSEFIELD
01 Pine Street, Suite 110
Rolla, MO 65401
Tel: (573)341-8336

     - and -

Thomas H. Hearne, Esq.
HEARNE & PIVAC
B., 3830 S Lone Pine Ave,
Springfield, MO 65804
Tel: (417)883-3399

     - and -

Derrick L. Morton, Esq.
Douglas A. Terry, Esq.
NELSON TERRY MORTON DEWITT PARUOLO & WOOD
3540 S Boulevard # 300
Edmond, OK 73013
Tel: (405)551-8927

Liberty Mutual Fire Insurance Company is represented by Michael L.
Blumenthal, Esq. -- mike@sbhlaw.com -- Bruce A. Moothart, Esq. --
bruce@sbhlaw.com -- SEYFERTH BLUMENTHAL & HARRIS LLC


LSP ENTERPRISES: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Rebecca Evans, individually v. LSP Enterprises, Inc., and Does 1
through 100, inclusive, Case No. BC600183 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
November 4, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to
pay minimum and overtime wages in violation of the California
Labor Code.

LSP Enterprises, Inc. operates an adult night club in California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Galvin B. Kennedy, Esq.
      Gabriel Assaad, Esq.
      KENNEDY HODGLES, L.L.P.
      711 W. Alabama Street
      Houston, TX 77006
      Telephone: (713) 523-000
      Facsimile: (713) 523-1116/Fax
      E-mail: gkennedy@kennedyhodges.com
              gassaad@kennedyhodges.com


M&S MARKET: Faces "Hurtado" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alberto Martinez Hurtado, individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated v. M&S Market 2350 LLC d/b/a Cafe 86,
Case No. 1:15-cv-08736 (S.D.N.Y., November 6, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

M&S Market 2350 LLC owns and operates a full-service restaurant
doing business as Cafe 86 located at 2350 Broadway, New York, new
York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      John M. Gurrieri, Esq.
      Brandon D. Sherr, Esq.
      Justin A. Zeller, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF JUSTIN A. ZELLER, P.C.
      277 Broadway, Suite 408
      New York, N.Y. 10007-2036
      Telephone: (212) 229-2249
      Facsimile: (212) 229-2246
      E-mail: jmgurrieri@zellerlegal.com
              bsherr@zellerlegal.com
              jazeller@zellerlegal.com


MARCHEX INC: Gainey McKenna Files Securities Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------
Gainey McKenna & Egleston announces that a class action lawsuit
has been filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York on behalf of all persons or entities
that purchased the securities of Marchex, Inc. ("Marchex" or the
"Company") (Nasdaq:MCHX) between March 19, 2014 through September
18, 2014 (the "Class Period"), alleging violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 against the Company and certain of
its officers (the "Complaint").

The Complaint alleges that Defendants issued materially false and
misleading statements to investors and/or failed to disclose that:
(1) Allstate sought to switch its business with Marchex to a
fixed-fee basis from payments made for each call; (2)
consequently, Marchex's revenue would be negatively impacted; and
(3) as a result of the foregoing, defendants' public statements
about Marchex's business, operations, and prospects were false and
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times.
On September 18, 2014, the Company reported to investors the need
to lower future guidance as a result of a shift in one of its key
customer's payment model. The Company stated, in relevant part,
that it, "lower[ed] its 2014 call-driven revenue outlook . . .
[a]s a result of revised commitments from Allstate in the fourth
quarter." The Company further stated that Allstate sought to
switch its business with Marchex to a fixed-fee basis from
payments made for each call. On this news, shares of the Company
fell by $3.38 per share, or over 45%, to close at $4.01 per share
on September 18, 2014, on unusually heavy volume.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than January 18, 2016. A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. If you wish to join the litigation, or to discuss your
rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact
Thomas J. McKenna, Esq. or Gregory M. Egleston, Esq. of Gainey
McKenna & Egleston at (212) 983-1300, or via e-mail at
tjmckenna@gme-law.com or gegleston@gme-law.com


MARCHEX INC: Jan. 18, 2016 Lead Plaintiff Bid Deadline
------------------------------------------------------
The securities litigation law firm of Brower Piven, A Professional
Corporation, announces that a class action lawsuit has been
commenced in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of New York on behalf of purchasers of Marchex, Inc.
(Nasdaq:MCHX) ("Marchex" or the "Company") securities during the
period between March 19, 2014 and September 18, 2014, inclusive
(the "Class Period").  Investors who wish to become proactively
involved in the litigation have until January 18, 2016 to seek
appointment as lead plaintiff.

If you have suffered a loss from investment in Marchex securities
purchased on or after March 19, 2014 and held through the
revelation of negative information during and/or at the end of the
Class Period, and would like to learn more about this lawsuit and
your ability to participate as a lead plaintiff, without cost or
obligation to you, please visit our website at
http://www.browerpiven.com/currentsecuritiescases.html. You may
also request more information by contacting Brower Piven either by
email at hoffman@browerpiven.com or by telephone at (410) 415-
6616.  No class has yet been certified in the above action.
Members of the Class will be represented by the lead plaintiff and
counsel chosen by the lead plaintiff.

If you wish to choose counsel to represent you and the Class, you
must apply to be appointed lead plaintiff and be selected by the
Court.  The lead plaintiff will direct the litigation and
participate in important decisions including whether to accept a
settlement for the Class in the action.  The lead plaintiff will
be selected from among applicants claiming the largest loss from
investment in Company securities during the Class Period.  Brower
Piven also encourages anyone with information regarding the
Company's conduct during the period in question to contact the
firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and
others.

The complaint accuses the defendants of violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of the defendants'
failure to disclose during the Class Period that Allstate sought
to switch its business with Marchex to a fixed-fee basis from
payments made for each call such that Marchex's revenue would be
negatively impacted.  According to the complaint, upon revelation
of this information by the Company on September 18, 2014, the
value of Marchex shares declined substantially.

Attorneys at Brower Piven have extensive experience in litigating
securities and other class action cases and have been advocating
for the rights of shareholders since the 1980s.  If you choose to
retain counsel, you may retain Brower Piven without financial
obligation or cost to you, or you may retain other counsel of your
choice.  You need take no action at this time to be a member of
the class.

CONTACT:
Charles J. Piven
Brower Piven, A Professional Corporation
1925 Old Valley Road
Stevenson, Maryland 21153
Telephone: 410-415-6616
hoffman@browerpiven.com


MERLE PHARMACY: Court Tosses Certain Claims in "Williams"
---------------------------------------------------------
Senior District Judge Joe Billy McDade of the United States
District Court for the Central District of Illinois granted in
part Defendants' motion to dismiss certain claims in the case
captioned, RHONDA S. WILLIAMS, on behalf of herself and other
similarly situated employees and all others who consent to become
Plaintiffs, Plaintiff, v. MERLE PHARMACY, INC., CENTRAL ILLINOIS
MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, INC., AND WILLIAM M. MARTIN, Defendants, Case
No. 1:14-CV-01575 (CKK)(C.D. Ill.).

Plaintiff was employed by Merle Pharmacy, Central Illinois
Medical, and/or Martin (Defendants) from on or about November 2004
until July 29, 2014, when she was fired. During all relevant
times, Plaintiff was an hourly employee. Neither she nor any of
Defendants' other employees were salaried employees exempt from
the overtime requirements of the FLSA or the IMWL. Plaintiff
alleges the termination was because she disclosed to the elderly
customer that Martin and Merle Pharmacy were not billing her
insurance for her medications and/or that the billing arrangement
between Martin and her attorney may be financially harmful to her.

Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint which consists of nine
counts alleging violations of the federal Fair Labor Standards Act
(Counts I and II), the Illinois Minimum Wage Law (Counts III and
IV), the Illinois Wage Payment and Collection Act (Counts V and
VI), Illinois common law of retaliatory discharge (Count VII), the
Illinois Whistleblower Act, (Count VIII), and the Illinois Adult
Protective Services Act (Count IX).

In the motion, Defendants assert that Counts II, V, VI, VII, VIII
and IX should be dismissed under Rule 12(b)(6) because Plaintiff
has failed to plead claims for which relief can be granted.

In his Order & Opinion dated October 19, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/YxfpNAfrom Leagle.com, Judge McDade found that
Counts II, IV, V, VII and VIII are dismissed with prejudice for
failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The
Court found the issue of whether Plaintiff is a mandated reporter
wholly irrelevant and that Plaintiff is an employee protected by
the straightforward language of 320 Ill. Comp. Stat Sec.20/4.1.

Rhonda S. Williams is represented by Athena M. Herman, Esq. --
lawfirm@benassi.com -- BENASSI & BENASSI PC

Defendants are represented by James S. Zmuda, Esq. --
jzmuda@califf.com & Jonathon C. Fox, Esq. -- jfox@califf.com --
CALIFF & HARPER PC


METROPOLITAN LIFE: "Creighton" Race Bias Suit Goes to S.D.N.Y.
--------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge David R. Herndon of the United States District
Court for the Southern District of Illinois denied Defendant's
motion to dismiss Plaintiff's complaint in the case captioned,
MARCUS CREIGHTON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY, Defendant, Case No. 15-0959-DRH (S.D. Ill.).

Judge Herndon, instead, transferred the matter to the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York for
disposition.

On May 15, 2015, Creighton filed a two-count purported class
action complaint for race discrimination pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1981 against MetLife, Inc., MetLife Securities, Inc., and
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company in the Northern District of
Illinois. Count I is for race discrimination and Count II is for
retaliation. Creighton seeks to represent the following class:

     "African Americans who worked for Defendants as FSRs and who
were subjected to discrimination by Defendants due to their race."
On August 27, 2015, District Judge Samuel Der-Yeghiayan granted in
part Metropolitan's motion to transfer and transferred this case
to the Southern District of Illinois pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec.
1404(a).

On September 3, 2015, Metropolitan filed the motion to dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction or in the alternative, transfer venue. In
opposition, Creighton filed a motion to strike and response to
defendant's second motion to dismiss plaintiff's complaint or, in
the alternative, transfer venue.

In his Memorandum and Order dated October 18, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/QdjYuVfrom Leagle.com, Judge Herndon concluded that
the previous transfer order was based on misinformation. The Court
found that it would serve the convenience of the parties and
witnesses if the matter be transferred in the Southern District of
New York.

Marcus Creighton is represented by George S. Robot, Esq. --
grobot@sfltd.com -- Patricia A. Bronte, Esq. -- pbronte@sfltd.com
-- Suzanne E. Bish, Esq. -- sbish@sfltd.com -- Linda Debra
Friedman, Esq. -- lfriedman@sfltd.com -- STOWELL & FRIEDMAN, LTD

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is represented by Steven J.
Pearlman, Esq. -- spearlman@proskauer.com -- Katharine Huth
Parker, Esq. -- kparker@proskauer.com -- Keisha-Ann G. Gray, Esq.
-- kgray@proskauer.com -- PROSKAUER ROSE LLP


MTS TAXES: "Murat" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jean Murat and other similarly situated individuals v. MTS Taxes &
More, LLC d/b/a Tax USA, Mitchlin Delivrance, and Finder
Delivrance, Case No. 34020750 (Fla. 17th Ct., November 3, 2015)
seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the
Florida Minimum Wage Act.

The Defendants own and operate a tax consulting services company
in Broward 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) 416-5005
      E-mail: agp@rgpattomeys.com


NORI O: Faces "Goh" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jit Shi Goh, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated v.
Nori O, Inc. d/b/a Sushi O, Otaya Sushi II Inc. d/b/a Sushi O,
Peng L. Tam a/k/a Alan Tam, Yuk Yen Chai a/k/a Ivy Chai and Yuk
Wing Chai, Case No. 2:15-cv-07963-MCA-LDW (D.N.J., November 7,
2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40 hours each
workweek.

The Defendants are manufacturers of Sushi Nori products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jonathan Hernandez, Esq.
      John Troy, Esq.
      TROY LAW, PLLC
      41-25 Kissena Blvd., Suite 119
      Flushing, NY 11355
      Telephone: (718) 762-1324
      Facsimile: (718) 762-1342
      E-mail: johntroy@troypllc.com


PERSONNEL SUPPLY: Faces "Gabbidon" Suit Over Wage Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Gabbidon and Edward Robertson, on behalf of themselves and
all other similarly situated employees, v. Personnel Supply Co.
Inc., d/b/a North Shore Ambulance & Oxygen Services, Inc., Case
No. 711421/2015 (N.Y. Sup., County of Queens, Nov. 3, 2015)
alleges that Defendant has engaged and continues to engage in
illegal and improper wage practices, including: (a) requiring
Ambulance Workers to perform work without compensation during meal
breaks; (b) requiring Ambulance Workers to perform work without
compensation before the start of their shift; (c) unlawfully
paying Ambulance Workers based upon their schedules and not based
upon their actual time worked; (d) failing to pay Ambulance
Workers at their appropriate rate of pay for all hours worked on
holidays; and (e) failing to pay Ambulance Workers for the correct
amount of hours that were worked on holidays.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Louis Ginsberg, Esq.
     THE LAW FIRM OF LOUIS GINSBERG, P.C.
     1613 Northern Boulevard
     Roslyn, N.Y. 11576
     Phone: (516) 625-0105 X. 18


PORSCHE AG: Faces "Brown" Suit Over Defeat Devices on Vehicles
--------------------------------------------------------------
Harry Brown, Jr., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, v. Porsche AG, and Volkswagen AG, Case No.
1:15-cv-03867-SCJ (N.D.Ga., Nov. 5, 2015), alleges that Defendants
falsely claimed its "defeat devices" on Porsche-branded vehicles
with 3.0-liter diesel engines, including but not limited to Model
Year 2014-2016 Porsche Cayenne Diesel vehicles, is environmentally
friendly.

Porsche AG is the parent corporation and sole owner of Porsche
Cars North America, Inc. (PCNA), a corporation organized under the
laws of Delaware and with its principal place of business in
Georgia. PCNA is the exclusive importer of Porsche vehicles for
distribution, sale, and use in every state in the United States of
America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Stephen G. Lowry, Esq.
     Jeffrey R. Harris, Esq.
     Darren W. Penn, Esq.
     Jed D. Manton, Esq.
     Madeline E. McNeeley, Esq.
     Kristy S. Davies, Esq.
     HARRIS PENN LOWRY LLP
     400 Colony Square
     1201 Peachtree St. NE, Suite 900
     Atlanta, GA 30361
     Phone: (404) 961-7650
     Fax: (404) 961-7651


RP INC.: "McCoy" Class Suit Wins Conditional Certification
----------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Patrick Michael Duffy of the United States District
Court for the District of South California granted in part
Plaintiff's Motion to Conditionally Certify a class, denied
Defendants' Motion to Strike, and denied Plaintiff's Motion to
Equitably Toll the Statute of Limitations in the case captioned,
Tyler McCoy, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. RP, Inc. d/b/a/ Kickin' Chicken; RPM Mt.
Pleasant, Inc.; RPM West Ashley, Inc.; RPM James Island, Inc.; RPM
Summerville, Inc.; R. David Miller, individually; William G.
"Chip" Roberts, III, individually; and Robert Perry, individually,
Defendants, Case No. 2:14-CV-3171-PMD (D. S.C.).

On August 7, 2014, Plaintiff commenced the action on behalf of
himself and others similarly situated, seeking unpaid minimum
wages and unpaid overtime wages pursuant to the FLSA. Plaintiff is
a former employee of RP, Inc., and seeks recovery from all
Defendants. Plaintiff primarily alleges that Defendants used tip
pools that violated the FLSA. Specifically, Plaintiff asserts that
Defendants paid some of their employees an hourly wage lower than
the statutory minimum wage using the FLSA's Tip Credit provision,
29 U.S.C. Sec. 203(m).

In the motion, Plaintiff moves to conditionally certify a Proposed
Class of "Any individual employed at Kickin' Chicken (Downtown
Charleston; James Island; Mt. Pleasant; West Ashley; or
Summerville) at any time since who at any time was paid an hourly
rate less than the statutory minimum wage of Seven and 25/100
dollars ($7.25) per hour and either contributed money to a tip
pool or received money from a tip pool. Defendants filed a Motion
to Strike portions of Plaintiff's affidavit and Plaintiff filed a
Motion for Equitable Tolling.

In his Order dated October 19, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/POfGBhfrom Leagle.com, Judge Duffy concluded that
equitable tolling is not warranted because Plaintiff has made no
showing of an extraordinary circumstance that would justify
equitable tolling, Defendants' argument that Plaintiffs have
personal knowledge failed. The Court conditionally certified
Plaintiff's Proposed Class with some of the modifications
requested by Defendants and defined a class of "All Kickin'
Chicken servers at each location who were paid an hourly rate less
than the statutory minimum wage of Seven and 25/100 dollars
($7.25) per hour at any time since October 19, 2012."

Tyler McCoy is represented by:

Bruce E. Miller, Esq.
BRUCE E MILLER LAW OFFICE
147 Wappoo Creek Dr #603,
Charleston, SC 29412
Tel: (843)579-7373

Defendants are represented by Ashley Kutz Kelley, Esq. --
akelley@wcsr.com -- David Brian McCormack, Esq. --
dmccormack@wcsr.com -- David Stewart Yandle, Esq. --
dyandle@wcsr.com -- WOMBLE CARLYLE SANDRIDGE AND RICE


OSADO WATER: Faces "Lawton" Suit Alleging FLSA Violation
--------------------------------------------------------
Opio Lawton, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated, v. Osado Water Transfer Company, LLC, 7.62, LLC, Midland
Heating Group, LLC, and Austen S. Campbell, Individually, Case No.
7:15-cv-00189 (W.D.Tex., Nov. 5, 2015), alleges that Defendants
violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay Plaintiff
and Potential Plaintiffs for all hours of work at the rates and
misclassifying them as "exempt" and paid Plaintiff and Potential
Plaintiffs on a salary and/or day rate basis that failed to
properly pay overtime.

Defendants provide water transfer solutions to the oil and gas
industry.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Derek J. Braziel, Esq.
     J. Forester, Esq.
     LEE & BRAZIEL, L.L.P.
     1801 N. Lamar Street, Suite 325
     Dallas, Texas 75202
     Phone: (214) 749-1400
     Fax: (214) 749-1010
     Web site: http://www.overtimelayer.com


PARAMOUNT FOODS: Faces "Perez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Aristeo Juarez Perez, Francisco Luna Altamirano, Luis Perez
Zarate, Oropeza Castro Rodriguez, and Raul Castro, individually
and on behalf of others similarly situated v. Paramount Foods Inc.
d/b/a Baluchi's and Rakesh Aggarwal, Case No. 1:15-cv-08762
(S.D.N.Y., November 6, 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 an Indian restaurant located at
1724 2nd Ave., New York, NY 10128.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael Faillace, Esq.
      MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, PC
      60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2540
      New York, NY 10165
      Telephone: (212) 317-1200
      E-mail: Michael@Faillacelaw.com


PASCO COUNTY: Clerk Faces "Bishop" Suit Alleging FLSA Violation
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michelle Bishop, Individually, and on behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated Who Consent to Their Inclusion in a Collective
Action, v. Clerk Of The Circuit Court & County Comptroller, Pasco
County, Case No. 8:15-cv-02604-RAL-TBM (M.D.Fla., Nov. 5, 2015)
seeks payment for overtime compensation and other relief under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Mitchell L. Feldman, Esq.
     FELDMAN LAW GROUP P.A
     1715 N. Westshore Blvd., Suite 400
     Tampa, FL 33609
     Phone: 813-639-9366
     Fax: 813-639-9376
     E-mail: Mfeldman@ffmlawgroup.com


PRIME SHUTTLE: Does Not Properly Pay Workers, "Lizardo" Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Lizardo, an individual v. Prime Shuttle, Inc., et al., Case
No. BC599951 (Cal. Super. Ct., November 4, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum and overtime
wages in violation of the California Labor Code.

Prime Shuttle, Inc. operates an airport ground transportation
company in Los Angeles, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      OPHIR J. Bitton, Esq.
      BITTON & ASSOCIATES
      7220 Melrose Avenue, 2nd Floor
      Los Angeles, CA 90046
      Telephone: (310) 356-1006
      Facsimile: (818) 524-1224


RECEIVABLES PERFORMANCE: "Sanchez" Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Regina Sanchez, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Receivables
Performance Management, LLC, Case No. CIVDS 1512500, was removed
from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California (Eastern Division - Riverside). The District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 5:15-cv-02294-VAP-DTB to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff asserts claims for violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act.

Receivables Performance Management, LLC owns and operates a debt
collection company in California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
      Suren N. Weerasuriya, 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
              sweerasuriya@attorneysforconsumers.com
              abacon@attorneysforconsumers.com

The Defendant is represented by:

      Sean P. Flynn, Esq.
      Evan M. Rothman, Esq.
      GORDON AND REES LLP
      2211 Michelson Drive Suite 400
      Irvine, CA 92612
      Telephone: (949) 255-6950
      Facsimile: (949) 474-2060
      E-mail: sflynn@gordonrees.com
              erothman@gordonrees.com


SAGAR CHINESE: "Rosales" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Cayetano Rosales, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. Sagar Chinese, Inc. d/b/a sagar chinese, sagar
Restaurant inc. d/b/a Sagar Chinese, Shamiur Rahman and Rukshana
Akter, Case No. CV156392 (E.D.N.Y., November 6, 2015) seeks to
recover unpaid minimum wage, unpaid overtime, liquidated damages
and attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard
Act.

The Defendants operate two restaurants in New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS: Magistrate Judge's Order in "Avram" Upheld
---------------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Kevin McNulty of the United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey affirmed Magistrate Judge Clark's
July 24, 2015 in the case captioned, LYNNE AVRAM, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SAMSUNG
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC. and LOWE'S HOME CENTERS, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 11-6973(KM)(JBC)(D.N.J.).

Plaintiff Lynne Avram brought this putative class action against
Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (Samsung) and Lowe's Home
Centers, Inc. (Lowe's) seeking damages for violations of the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, breach of an express warranty, breach
of the implied warranty of merchantability, unjust enrichment and
violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, relating to the
marketing and sale of Samsung RF26VAB refrigerators as ENERGY STAR
compliant.

Avram maintains that appliances with the ENERGY STAR logo are sold
for higher prices than non-ENERGY STAR appliances with the
inherent promise that the buyer will, over time, recoup the cost
of the upfront surcharge (and perhaps save even more money)
because of lower energy bills.

Magistrate Judge Clark conducted a conference call with the
parties on July 24, 2015. Following that call, Magistrate Judge
Clark issued a letter order denying Avram's request for discovery
on the so-called B Goods.

On appeal, Avram argues that information relating to the B Goods
is relevant to the determination of damages because it shows the
decrease in the value of the refrigerators without the ENERGY STAR
label. Magistrate Judge Clark, according to Avram, based his
decision on an erroneous factual finding that the refrigerators
were taken off the shelves due to factors other than the ENERGY
STAR label. Avram contends that she is prejudiced by the lack of
discovery on the B Goods because one avenue of analyzing damages
has been foreclosed.

In his Order and Opinion dated October 20, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/BA6GM4from Leagle.com, Judge McNulty found that
Magistrate Judge Clark was within his discretion to conclude that
the requested B Goods information would be at best marginally
relevant; at worst, it would be irrelevant or even misleading as
to the economic value of the ENERGY STAR label. That finding is
neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law, nor is it an abuse
of discretion.

Lynne Avram is represented by Antonio Vozzolo, Esq. --
avozzolo@faruqilaw.com -- FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP, Caroline F.
Bartlett, Esq. -- cbartlett@carellabyrne.com, James E. Cecchi,
Esq. -- cececchi@carellabyrne.com -- Lindsey H. Taylor, Esq. --
ltaylor@carellabyrne.com -- CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLSTEIN, BRODY
& AGNELLO & Yitzchak Kopel, Esq. & Frederick John Klorczyk, III,
Esq. -- fklorczyk@bursor.com -- BURSOR & FISHER PA

Defendants are represented by James J. O'Hara, Esq. --
johara@grahamcurtin.com -- John Maloney, Esq. --
jmaloney@grahamcurtin.com -- Brian Brady Mcevoy, Esq. --
bmcevoy@grahamcurtin.com -- George C. Jones, Esq. --
gjones@grahamcurtin.com -- Joseph Christopher Brennan, Esq. --
jbrennan@grahamcurtin.com -- GRAHAM CURTIN & Sean Patrick Neafsey,
Esq. -- sean.neafsey@squirepb.com -- SQUIRE PATTON BOGGS


SCHERZINGER CORPORATION: "Colley" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Robert R. Colley, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
employees v. The Scherzinger Corporation, Case No. 1:15-cv-00720-
SSB-KLL (S.D. Ohio, November 8, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid
overtime wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard
Act.

The Scherzinger Corporation is an Ohio corporation providing
commercial and residential pest control services in the
Cincinnati, Northern Kentucky, Dayton, and Columbus areas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ryan K. Hymore, Esq.
      MANGANO LAW OFFICES CO., L.P.A.
      3805 Edwards Road, Suite 550
      Cincinnati, OH 45209
      Telephone: (513) 255-5888
      Facsimile: (216) 397-5845
      E-mail: rkhymore@bmanganolaw.com

         - and -

      Basil W. Mangano, Esq.
      Joseph J. Guarino, Esq.
     MANGANO LAW OFFICES CO., L.P.A.
      2245 Warrensville Center Road, Suite 213
      Cleveland, OH 44118
      Telephone: (216) 397-5844
      Facsimile: (216) 397-5845
      E-mail: bmangano@bmanganolaw.com
              jguarino@bmanganolaw.com


SENSATION NEO: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Qin" Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
Zhong Fa Qin, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated
v. Sensation Neo Shanghai Cuisine, Inc. d/b/a Sensation Neo
Shanghai Cuisine, Wei Chun Gao, Zhongxia Shen, and "John" Zhang,
Case No. 1:15-cv-06399 (E.D.N.Y., November 8, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime compensation
for all hours worked over 40 hours each workweek.

The Defendants own and operate a restaurant located at 208 Grand
Street, Brooklyn, NY 11211.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      John Troy, Esq.
      TROY LAW, PLLC
      41-25 Kissena Boulevard Suite 119
      Flushing, NY 11355
      Telephone: (718) 762-1324
      Facsimile: (718) 762-1342
      E-mail: johntroy@troypllc.com


ST. JOSEPH'S HEALTHCARE: Dismissal of "Chalfin" Suit Upheld
-----------------------------------------------------------
Judge Thomas Hardiman of the United States Court of Appeals, Third
Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the complaint in the case
captioned, MATTHEW CHALFIN, M.D.; VENUS COBA, M.D.; CLIFTON COLBY
DAVIS, M.D.; PAMELA D'AMATO, M.D.; GREG PAKONIS, M.D.; ANDRE
ROBONSON; KIRAN KUNA, M.D., and all others similarly situated,
Appellants, v. ST. JOSEPH'S HEALTHCARE SYSTEM, Case No. 14-4623
(3rd Cir.).

Plaintiffs were medical residents at St. Joseph's Regional Medical
Center between 2003 and 2006. St. Joseph's collected the employee
portion of the Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) taxes
from Plaintiffs and remitted them to the IRS. In February 2014,
Plaintiffs brought suit in the Superior Court of New Jersey,
alleging that St. Joseph's acted negligently by failing to submit
the paperwork they needed to receive refunds from the IRS. In
March 2014, St. Joseph's removed the action to federal court
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1441. Plaintiffs moved to remand to
state court, while St. Joseph's moved to dismiss Plaintiffs'
complaint.

Adopting the report and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge,
the District Court granted St. Joseph's motion to dismiss,
concluding that Plaintiffs' suit was essentially a claim for a tax
refund.  As such, Plaintiffs were required by Sec. 7422(a) to
exhaust their administrative remedies, and because they failed to
do so, the District Court dismissed the complaint. Likewise, the
District Court denied Plaintiffs' motion to remand the case to
state court because their claim arose under federal law.

On appeal, Plaintiffs argued that the District Court erred when it
dismissed the complaint for negligent failure to obtain tax
refunds.

In the Opinion dated October 21, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/uMqaqLfrom Leagle.com, Judge Hardiman concluded that
Plaintiffs' failure to file a claim with the IRS for a refund
means that they have failed to exhaust their administrative
remedies and that removal to federal court was proper because
Plaintiffs' claims were within the ambit of Sec. 7422.


ST. MATTHEWS, SC: Police Dept. Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Andrew Hayes v. St. Matthews Police Department and Michael Smalls,
Jr., Case No. 5:15-cv-04486-JMC (D.S.C., November 5, 2015) is
brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages
in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants operate government facilities in Calhoun County,
South Carolina.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Allan R. Holmes, Esq.
      Timothy O, Lewis, Esq.
      GIBBS & HOLMES
      Suite 110, 171 Church Street
      Charleston, SC 29401
      Telephone: (843) 722-0033
      Facsimile: (843) 722-0114
      E-mail: aholmes@gibbs-holmes.com
              timolewis@gibbs-holmes.com


STERLING GROUP: Faces "Barnett" Suit Alleging Harassment, Bias
--------------------------------------------------------------
Rolanzo Barnett, and other similarly situated dishwashers, v.
Sterling Group Foods Inc., a Florida Profit Corporation d/b/a
Sterling Kosher Caterers, Inc. and Jennifer Rapp, individually,
Case no. CACE-15-019448 (Fla. Circ. 17th Judicial Circuit in and
for Broward County, Nov. 2, 2015), seeks damages in excess of
$15,060.00, independent of attorney's fees, costs, and interest,
as a result of Defendant's alleged sexual harassment and sex
discrimination against Plaintiff in violation of the Florida Civil
Rights Act, and Florida Statutes; unpaid overtime compensation,
and an additional equal amount as liquidated damages, obtain
declaratory relief, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Sterling Group Foods offers catering services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jason S. Remer, Esq.
     Brody M. Shulman, Esq.
     REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC
     44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200
     Miami, FL 33130
     Phone: (305) 416-5000
     Fax: (305) 416-500
     E-mail: jremer@rgpattorneys.com


TEXAS LAWMAN: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Steven Hernandez, Joshua Cameron, and Jason Lasher, on behalf of
themselves individually and all others similarly situated v. Texas
Lawman Security & Traffic Control Services, LLC, Anthony A.
Alvarado II, and James E. Falkenbach, Case No. 5:15-cv-00966-OLG
(W.D. Tex., November 6, 2015) seeks to recover unpaid overtime
wages and damages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants are in the business of providing security guards to
various locations in and around San Antonio, Texas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lance C. Blankenship, Esq.
      Kennard Blankership Robinson, P.C.
      2211 IH-35, Suite 303
      Austin, TX 78741
      Telephone: (512) 243-7924
      Facsimile: (210) 314-5687
      E-mail: Lance.blankenship@kennardlaw.com

         - and -

      Arnoldo J. Rodriguez, Esq.
      85 N.E. Loop 410, Ste. 603
      San Antonio, TX 78216
      Telephone: (210) 314-5688
      Facsimile: (210) 314-5687
      E-mail: aj.rodriguez@kennardlaw.com


THINKDIRECT MARKETING: Court Narrows "Heidbrink" FLSA Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
District Judge James S. Moody, Jr. of the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Florida grants in part
Defendants' motion for summary judgment in the case captioned,
ELIZABETH HEIDBRINK and L. ROXANA MARION, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. THINKDIRECT
MARKETING GROUP, INC., et al., Defendants, Case No. 8:14-CV-1232-
T-30AEP (M.D. Fla.).

On April 1, 2014, the case was filed in state court as a purported
collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act against
Defendants ThinkDirect Marketing Group, Inc., Thomas H. Ripley,
Dennis Cahill, Patrick Dall, and Dave Macey to recover unpaid
overtime wages and liquidated damages.

Plaintiffs filed the complaint on January 14, 2015, asserting the
following claims for relief: (1) violation of the Magnuson-Moss
Warranty Act; (2) violation of the Consumers Legal Remedies Act,
California Civil Code Sec. 1750, et seq.; (3) deceptive
advertising, pursuant to California Business & Professions Code
Sec. 17500, et seq.; (4) unfair business practices, pursuant to
California Business and Professions Code Sec. 17200 et seq.; (5)
deceptive advertising, pursuant to Florida Statute Sec. 501.201,
et seq.; (6) breach of express warranty.

In the motion, With respect to Heidbrink, ThinkDirect argues that
it is entitled to summary judgment on her overtime claims because
she failed to participate in this litigation as follows: (1) she
did not timely file her Court-mandated interrogatories and (2) she
failed to appear for her deposition. In her response, Heidbrink
states that her counsel volunteered to reschedule her deposition
and that she belatedly served her interrogatory answers on
Plaintiff's counsel but neglected to file them with the Court. She
maintains that these failures were not intentional or made in bad
faith and that any prejudice to Defendants can easily be cured
prior to trial.

In his Order dated November 17, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/D3qetIfrom Leagle.com, Judge Moody, Jr. held that
there is no reason to employ the drastic sanction of dismissing
Heidbrink's claims or granting summary judgment against her for
failure to participate in the litigation and as to Plaintiffs'
overtime claims fail as a matter of law. The Court granted only to
the extent that individual Defendants Thomas H. Ripley, Dennis
Cahill, and Dave Macey are entitled to judgment as a matter of
law.

Plaintiffs are represented by:

Christopher D. Gray, Esq.
FLORIN ROEBIG, PA
7627 Little Rd
New Port Richey, FL 34654
Tel: (727)849-9280

Defendants are represented by Dabney D. Ware, Esq. --
dware@foley.com -- Kevin E. Hyde, Esq. -- khyde@foley.com --
Leonard V. Feigel, Jr., Esq. -- lfeigel@foley.com -- FOLEY &
LARDNER, LLP


UNIRUSH LLC: Faces "Jones" Suit Over Access to Debit Card Account
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Nicole Jones, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, v. UNIRUSH, LLC d/b/a Unirush Financial Services, Rush
Communications, Llc, Rush Communications Of Nyc, Inc., Metabank,
and Meta Financial Group, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-05996-JLS
(E.D.Pa., Nov. 5, 2015), arises because RushCard's prepaid debit
card services were allegedly unable to access their accounts or
funds after a system computer update.  The case alleges violations
of the Pennsylvania consumer protection statute, breach of
contract, breach of the fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment,
conversion, negligence and common law fraud.

UniRush issues prepaid debit cards.  Defendant MetaBank is a
federally charted savings bank.  MetaBank is the entity
responsible for issuing the RushCards to the public.  Meta
Financial Group Inc. is the holding company for MetaBank.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Benjamin F. Johns, Esq.
     Joseph G. Sauder, Esq.
     Matthew D. Schelkopf, Esq.
     Joseph B. Kenney, Esq.
     CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP
     One Haverford Centre
     361 West Lancaster Avenue
     Haverford, PA 19041
     Phone: (610) 642-8500
     Fax: (610) 649-3633
     E-mail: JGS@chimicles.com
             MDS@chimicles.com
             JBK@chimicles.com

        - and -

     Thomas B. Malone, Esq.
     THE MALONE FIRM, LLC
     1650 Arch Street, Suite 1903
     Philadelphia, PA 19103
     Phone: 215-987-5200
     E-mail: tmalone@themalonefirm.com


UTOPIA HOME: Must Defend Against "Cowell" FLSA Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
District Judge Leonard D. Wexler of the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York denied Defendant's
motion to dismiss and granted Defendant's motion to strike in the
case captioned, SHENITHIA COWELL, individually and on behalf of
all similarly situated individuals, Plaintiff, v. UTOPIA HOME
CARE, INC., Defendant, Case No. CV-14-0736 (E.D.N.Y.).

Plaintiff Shenithia Cowell brings the action, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated, against Defendant Utopia Home
Care, Inc. for failure to pay proper wages owed under Fair Labor
Standards Act 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201, et seq. and under New York law,
specifically the New York Payment of Wages, Sec. 190, et seq., New
York Minimum Wage Act, Sec. 650, et seq., and 12 N.Y.C.R.R. Sec.
142, et seq.  Plaintiff alleges she regularly worked more than 40
hours per week in the home of Utopia's clients providing domestic
services.

Plaintiff asserts claims under the FLSA, NYMWA and NYPOW for
failure to pay overtime and for failure to compensate Plaintiff
for her pre-shift work, and for failure to keep accurate records.
Plaintiff also asserts a claim for breach of contract for
Defendant's failure to pay Plaintiff her hourly rate for
uncompensated pre-shift work and a breach of good faith and fair
dealing for not keeping proper records of Plaintiffs work.

In the motion, Defendant argues that the breach of contract claim
for her unpaid time is not permitted under the FLSA or New York
wage laws, and even if not dismissed on the merits, should be
referred to state court since it raises a novel question.
Defendant also moves to strike paragraphs 4, 27 and 28 from
Plaintiffs complaint, arguing they contain inflammatory,
extraneous and immaterial references not appropriate for a
complaint.

In his Memorandum and Order dated November 16, 2015 available at
http://is.gd/tbI5unfrom Leagle.com, Judge Wexler declines to
dismiss the FLSA claims finding that Plaintiff's allegations cited
above sufficiently state a claim for breach of contract for unpaid
wages. As to the motion to strike, the Court agreed that
references to other litigations against the Defendant are
"immaterial, impertinent or scandalous" and inappropriate in a
complaint, and are not necessary to allege wilfullness.

The Court directed the Plaintiffs to file a third amended
complaint within two weeks. Counsel are directed to Magistrate
Judge Steven Locke to complete discovery.

Plaintiffs are represented by Jacob R. Rusch, Esq. --
jrusch@johnsonbecker.com -- JOHNSON BECKER, PLLC

Utopia Home Care is represented by Paul J. Siegel, Esq. --
siegelp@jacksonlewis.com -- Ana C. Shields, Esq. --
shieldsa@jacksonlewis.com -- Noel P. Tripp, Esq. --
trippn@jacksonlewis.com -- JACKSON LEWIS, P.C.


VISTA ENERGY: Faces "Robinson" Suit in Cal. Over Automated Calls
----------------------------------------------------------------
Sandy Robinson, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Vista Energy Marketing, L.P., Case No. 5:15-cv-02303
(C.D. Cal., November 6, 2015) is brought against the Defendants
for placing calls on the Plaintiff and class members' cellular
telephone via an automatic telephone dialing system, using an
artificial or prerecorded voice.

Vista Energy Marketing, L.P. is a natural gas supplier with a
primary corporate address at 4306 Yoakum Blvd., Suite 48, Houston,
Texas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

         - and -

      Joshua B. Swigart, Esq.
      HYDE & SWIGART
      2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101
      San Diego, CA 92108-3551
      Telephone: (619) 233-7770
      Facsimile: (619) 297-1022
      E-mail: josh@westcoastlitigation.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Akyaz" Suit in Fla. Over Defeat Devices
----------------------------------------------------------------
Nanette Akyaz, as an individual and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No.
0:15-cv-62356-UU (S.D. Fla., November 6, 2015) arises out of the
Defendant's alleged installation of defeat devices in
approximately 482,000 Volkswagen and Audi vehicles sold in the
United States, to bypass, defeat, or render inoperative elements
of the vehicles' emission control system.

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:

      Joseph M. Pustizzi, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH PUSTIZZI, P.A.
      3440 Hollywood Blvd., Suite 415
      Hollywood, FL 33021
      Telephone: (954) 241-4244
      E-mail: joseph@pustizzilaw.com

         - and -

      Michael T. Fraser, Esq.
      THE FRASER LAW FIRM, P.C.
      4120 Douglas Blvd., Suite 306-262
      Granite Bay, CA 95746
      Telephone: (888) 557-5115
      Facsimile: (866) 212-8434
      E-mail: mfraser@thefraserlawfirm.net


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Hutton" Suit Over Defeat Devices
---------------------------------------------------------
James Jackson Hutton, Scott D. Anderson, and Nick Hutchings, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v.
Volkswagen Group Of America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-10099 (N.D.
Ill., November 6, 2015) arises out of the Defendant's alleged
installation of defeat devices in approximately 482,000 Volkswagen
and Audi vehicles sold in the United States, to bypass, defeat, or
render inoperative elements of the vehicles' emission control
system.

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:

      Brian J. Wanca, Esq.
      Jeffrey A. Berman, Esq.
      David M. Oppenheim, Esq.
      Ryan M. Kelly, Esq.
      ANDERSON + WANCA
      3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 500
      Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
      Telephone: (847) 368-1500
      Facsimile: (847) 368-1501
      E-mail: bwanca@andersonwanca.com
              jberman@andersonwanca.com
              doppenheim@andersonwanca.com
              rkelly@andersonwanca.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Scoggins" Suit Over Defeat Devices
-----------------------------------------------------------
Amy Campion Scoggins, individually and on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. Volkswagen Group of America,
Inc., et al., Case No. BC599850 (Cal. Super. Ct., November 3,
2015) arises out of the Defendant's alleged installation of defeat
devices in approximately 482,000 Volkswagen and Audi vehicles sold
in the United States, to bypass, defeat, or render inoperative
elements of the vehicles' emission control system.

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:

      Thomas V. Girardi, Esq.
      Alexandra T. Steele, Esq.
      GIRARDI|KEESE
      1126 Wilshire Boulevard
      Los Angeles, CA 90017
      Telephone: (213) 977-0211
      Facsimile: (213) 481-1554
      E-mail: tgirardi@girardikeese.com
              asteele@girardikeese.com


VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Faces "Zhu" Suit Over Defeat Devices
------------------------------------------------------
Chenggang Zhu, Wei Hao, on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated v. Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No.
2:15-cv-08720 (C.D. Cal., November 7, 2015) arises out of the
Defendant's alleged installation of defeat devices in
approximately 482,000 Volkswagen and Audi vehicles sold in the
United States, to bypass, defeat, or render inoperative elements
of the vehicles' emission control system.

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:

      Frank Carleo, Esq.
      Shin P. Yang, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF SHIN P. YANG
      110 W. Las Tunas Dr., Ste. F
      San Gabriel, CA 91776
      Telephone: (626) 451-0882
      Facsimile: (626) 451-6766
      E-mail: Attorneyshinpyang@gmail.com


WASTEWATER SPECIALTIES: Faces "Breed" Suit Over FLSA Violation
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tommy Breed v. Wastewater Specialties, LLC, Case 1:15-cv-00443-MAC
(E.D.Tex., Nov. 5, 2015), was brought on behalf of non-exempt
employees who were not paid time and a half for all hours worked
in excess of forty hours in a week in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Wastewater Specialties, LLC is in the environmental service and
industrial cleaning industries.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     John Werner, Esq.
     REAUD, MORGAN & QUINN, L.L.P
     801 Laurel Street
     P.O. BOX 26005
     Beaumont, TX 77720-6005
     Phone: (409) 838-1000
     Fax: (409) 833-8236


                            *********

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  * * *