/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/160203.mbx
C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R
Wednesday, February 3, 2016, Vol. 18, No. 24
Headlines
ABC CORP: "Wang" Suit Seeks Minimum & Overtime Pay
ACCURATE BACKGROUND: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Breach
ACCURATE MECHANICAL: "Quow" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
AIRPORT VAN RENTAL: "Simon" Suit Unpaid Commissions, Overtime
ANTHEM INSURANCE: "Conway" Suit Moved to N.D. Alabama
ANTHEM INSURANCE: Dialysis One Suit Goes to N.D. Alabama
APPLE INC: Faces "Palmer" Suit Over False Product Advertisement
AUTISM RESPONSE TEAM: "Halcomb" Seeks Overtime Pay
AVID LIFE MEDIA: "Doe" Suit Moved from to E.D. Ark. to E.D. Mo.
BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA: Twin City Pension Suit Hits Securities Scam
BEAVEX INC: "Coorey" Suit Moved to Massachusetts District Court
BEVERLY HILLS RIDES: "Tucker" Suit Seeks OT & Last Pay
BLAINE LARSEN: Faces "Duarte" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
BRIDGEPORT FINANCIAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Action Claims
BRUMBAUGH & QUANDAHL: Illegally Collects Debt, Action Claims
CAMPBELL-EWALD: Class Action Ruling Favorable for Plaintiffs' Bar
CAMPBELL-EWALD: Defense Lawyers Say Clients Still Have Options
CBE GROUP: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection
CELADON GROUP: Judgment in "Wilmoth" Case under Appeal
CELADON GROUP: Judgment in "Day" Class Suit under Appeal
CENTRINEX LLC: Faces "Howard" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
CORE-MARK: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
CREDIT ONE BANK: "Waldron" Suit Hits Tele-Collection
DIRECTV: "Shepperd" FLSA Suit Goes to M.D. Florida
DRAFTKINGS INC: "Price" Suit Goes from Circuit Court to E.D. Ark.
EBIX INC: Delaware Chancery Court Narrows Stockholder Suit
EXPERIAN NORTH AMERICA: "Switaj" Suit Goes to New Mexico
EZCORP INC: Bid to Dismiss Securities Litigation Pending
FACEBOOK INC: Settles Class Action Over Minors' Online Purchases
FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR: "Laidlaw" Action Hits ON Merger Deal
FANDUEL INC: "Coleman" Moved from Superior Court to C.D. Cal.
FIDELITY RESOURCES: "Clinton" Suit Seeks Back Pay, OT Wages
FMA ALLIANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Stapinski" Suit Claims
FTS INTERNATIONAL: "Garcia" Suit Moved from S.D. to N.D. Texas
GENERAL CABLE: 6th Circuit Appeal Pending
GENERAL MOTORS: Scheuer Evidence in Ignition Switch Case Weak
GRAFTECH INTERNATIONAL: Facing Suits over Brookfield Deal
HARVEST NATURAL: Supreme Court Denies Petition for Rehearing
HARVEST NATURAL: Seeks Dismissal of Securities Class Suits
HAIN CELESTIAL: Working to Finalize Accord in Calif. Suit
HEXAGON METROLOGY INC: "Yelle" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay
INDIANA FAMILY & SOCIAL SVCS: "Jackson" Seeks Treatment for Hep C
IDENTIV INC: "Rok" Suit Seeks Damages from Share Price Drop
ILLINOIS VEHICLE INSURANCE: "Cardenas" Suit Seeks Back Wages, OT
INVESTMENT PROFESSIONALS INC: "Herron" Suit Seeks OT, Deductions
INVESTMENT TECHNOLOGY: Defending N.Y. Class Suits over SEC Probe
ISLAMIC DAY SCHOOL: "Beyah" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages
ISS FACILITY: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
J&S KIDSWEAR: Faces "Tepperman" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
JANI-KING: 3rd Circuit Hears Oral Arguments in Franchisee Suit
JOHNNY ROCKETS GROUP: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks OT, Back Wages
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
KING MEAT: "Alvarado" Suit Moved from State Court to C.D. Cal.
KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION: Awaits Final Judgment in Oregon Suit
LA MICHOACANA: "Castro" Suit Seeks Recovery of Overtime Pay
LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: Oral Arguments Heard in Securities Suit
LINDA YU: "Yeh" Alleges Shady Insurance Deal
MAXWELL & MORGAN: Illegally Collects Debt, "Lowe" Action Claims
MCCORMICK & CO: "Barnes" Suit Moved to S.D. Ill. to Wash. D.C.
MCCORMICK & CO: "Ferreri" Suit Moved from S.D.N.Y. to Wash. D.C.
MCCORMICK & CO: "Vladimirsky" Suit Goes to Wash. D.C.
MCGOVERN & CO: "Artisan" Seeks Payment of Contract Job
MDL 2196: Settlements of Direct & Indirect Purchaser Claims OK'd
MDL 2591: "Orebaugh" Suit Goes from S.D. Indiana to Kansas
MDL 2667: "Llewellyn" Suit Transferred to N.D. Indiana
MDL 2667: "Kulha" Suit Transferred to N.D. Indiana
MDL 2673: St. Louis Police Retirement Sys. Suit Goes to S.D.N.Y.
MEDICREDIT INC: Illegally Collects Debt, "Hartman" Suit Claims
MIDLAND CREDIT: Illegally Collects Debt, "Jeffreys" Action Claims
MIDLAND CREDIT: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection
MONITRONICS INTERNATIONAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Suit Says
MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Settling Non-Class Foam Purchaser Claims
MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Settles Class Action in Canada
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: "DaCosta" Suit Moved to R.I. Dist. Court
NEW RIVER: "Dale" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum Wages
NEWS CORP: Loses Bid to Derail Online-Store Promotions Suit
NEW YORK FOUNDATION: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
PAUL MICHAEL: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection
PCH POULTRY: Faces "Zaragosa" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
PIZZA-RANT CAFE: "Castro" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages
PRESIDENTIAL ROOFING: "Sanchez" Suit Seeks Overtime Wage
PRIMOS STORES: "Borge" Suit Alleges Payroll Fraud, Racketeering
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: Illegally Collects Debt, Action Claims
PUENTE HILLS HYUNDAI: "Kennon" Seeks Minimum Wage & OT Pay
RALEY'S: "Williams" Hits Lack of Amenities for Disabled
RENTECH INC: Defending Against Mustard & Sloan Suits
SABEREH PIZZA: "Chanda" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay, Damages
SANTANDER CONSUMER: Faces "Kleinberg" Suit Over Automated Calls
SEARS ROEBUCK: Faces "Oaks" Suit Over Defective Grill Design
SHOPPERS DRUG: Recalls Indoor and Outdoor Seasonal Light Sets
SHOPPER'S DRUG: Recalls Digital Temple Thermometers
SODEXO INC: "Savannah" Suit Goes from Superior Court to N.D. Cal.
SONEPAR MANAGEMENT GROUP: "Guy" Suit to Recover Overtime Wages
SOTHEBY'S: Supreme Court Won't Review Ruling in Royalties Suit
SOUTHWEST ROYALTIES: Suit by Opt-Out Plaintiff Pending
SPS TECHNOLOGIES: "Jackson" Labor Suit Goes to C.D. California
ST. ANDREW'S PLACE: "Hendrix" Suit Transferred to E.D. Arkansas
STARS TRADING: Recalls Pepper Products Due to Gluten
STERICYCLE INC: Illinois MDL in Discovery Stage
STERICYCLE INC: To Pay $13 Million on Valid TCPA Claims
SUNNY'S LIMO SERVICE: "Ali" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay, Damages
SURE SIGNAL: Recalls Heat-Activated Fire Alarms
TC HEARTLAND: Appeals Court Agrees to Hear Oral Arguments
TIFFIN: Recalls Multiple Phaeton Models Due to Fire Risk
TORO COMPANY: Recalls Toro and Exmark Mowers 2015 Models
TRAILS WEST: Recalls Multiple Trailer Models Due to Crash Risk
TRUE NORTH: Recalls Modern BCAA+ Powder
TWIN SPRINGS ESTATES: "Abourjaili" Suit Hits Identical House
TWINING NORTH: Recalls Chocolate Malt Drinks Due to Milk
UNCLE BILL: Recalls Anchovies with Sesame Due to Gluten
UNIVERSAL FIDELITY: Illegally Collects Debt, "Watkins" Suit Says
URS CORP: "Hunter" Suit Transferred from N.D. Cal. to M.D. Fla.
UNITED CENTRAL: Fails to Pay Workers OT, "Sanlana" Suit Says
UNITED CENTRAL: Faces "Sanlana" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
VENTANA MEDICAL: Recalls Automated Immunostaining System
VERATHON INC: Recalls BladderScan BVI 9600 and AortaScan AMI 9700
VERTEX REFINING: Defending Class Suit over Louisiana Refinery
VIP TRANSPORTATION: "Bishop" Suit Seeks Minimum, Overtime Pay
VIZIO INC: "Hodges" Suit Hits Illegal Data Gathering
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Did Not Lie to U.S. Regulators, New CEO Says
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Buklad" Suit Moved from D.C. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Fries" Suit Moved from S.D. Ill. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Turnau" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Barnard" Suit from Maryland to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Bowlin" Suit Goes from E.D. Va. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Germain-Cummings" Consolidated in MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Gaskins" Suit Moved from Arizona to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Helms" Suit Moved from S.D. Ala. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Kirkwood" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Kolomeets-Darovsky" Consolidated in MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lamproe" Suit Goes from W.D. Ark. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lanham" Suit Goes from W.D. Va. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Maston" Suit Moved from Vermont to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Moyer" Suit Goes to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Newton" Suit Goes from S.D. Tex. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Parsons" Suit Goes from N.D Tex. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Richards" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Sanders" Suit Goes from W.D. Wis. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Schafer" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Sims" Suit Moved from W.D. Wash. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Turner" Suit Moved from D.C. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Wenger" Suit Goes from D.C. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Whitcomb" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Wise" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Yordy" Suit Moved from M.D. Pa. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Silverman" Suit Goes to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Witcher" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Cornell" Suit Goes from Vermont to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Di Mauro" Suit Goes from Montana to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Goodwin" Suit Moved from Mass. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Hutton" Suit Goes from N.D. Ill. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Johnson" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lemieux" Suit Goes from M.D Ga. to N.D. Cal.
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lively" Suit Goes from S.D. W.Va. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Ross" Suit Goes from New Mexico to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Siegel" Suit Moved from N.D Ill. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Smith" Suit Moved from M.D. Fla. to MDL 2672
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Valdez" Suit Goes from New Mexico to MDL 2672
VOLVO TRUCKS: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Injury Risk
WALMART CANADA: Recalls Popping Corn Products Due to Insects
YAMAHA: Recalls YZF-R1 2015 Models Due to Crash Risk
ZEVEX INC: Recalls Pump Delivery Sets Due to Leaking
ZIMMER INC: Recalls Trilogy Style Allofit IT Inserters
* FDA Seeks Public Input on "Natural Food" Labeling Use
*********
ABC CORP: "Wang" Suit Seeks Minimum & Overtime Pay
--------------------------------------------------
Xue Ming Wang, individually and on behalf all other employees
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. ABC Corp., Abumi Sushi Inc.,
John Doe and Jane Doe # 1-10, Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-09860-
GHW (S.D. N.Y., December 18, 2016), seeks unpaid minimum wages,
unpaid overtime wages, reimbursement for expenses relating to
tools of the trade, liquidated damages, prejudgment and post-
judgment interest and reasonable attorneys' and expert fees
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York Labor
Law.
Wang was employed as a delivery worker by ABC Corp which operates
a Japanese restaurant by the name of Abumi Sushi located at 209
East 26th Street, New York NY 10010 from December 10, 2013 to
December 15, 2015. Plaintiff has not received overtime pay and
spread-of-hour pay for work performed in excess of 10 hours per
day and/or when working split shifts.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jian Hang, Esq.
136-18 39th Ave., Suite 1003
Flushing, New York 11354
Tel: (718) 353-8588
Email: jhang@hanglaw.com
ACCURATE BACKGROUND: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Breach
---------------------------------------------------------------
Theo Feldstein, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Accurate Background, Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-08581-MAS-
TJB (D.N.J., December 11, 2015) is brought against the Defendant
for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Accurate Background, Inc. is in the business of employee
screening, pre-employment background checks and human resources
support services, helping clients hire and retain the talent.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.
Land Title Building 19th Fl., 100 South Broad Street
Philadelphia,, PA 19110
Telephone: (215) 735-8600
E-mail: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
ACCURATE MECHANICAL: "Quow" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
--------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Quow and Clyde Reaves, on behalf of themselves and
all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Accurate
Mechanical Inc., John O'Shea and Daniel Reilly, Defendants, Case
No. Case 1:15-cv-09852-WHP (S.D.N.Y., December 17, 2015), seeks
compensatory award of unpaid compensation under the Fair Labor
Standards Act and the New York Labor Law, compensatory damages for
failure to pay plaintiffs all wages owed as required by New
York Labor Law, liquidated and statutory damages, recovery of back
pay and prejudgment and post-judgment interest as well as
reasonable attorneys' and expert fees and under the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201, New York Labor Law and
New York Wage Theft Prevention Act.
Defendants owned and operated a plumbing company at 941 McLean
Avenue, Yonkers, New York where Quow and Reaves were employed as
plumbers. They were generally required to work ten or more hours
per day resulting in 50 to 60 hours per week. Plaintiffs received
their regular rates of pay for all hours worked and did not
receive any overtime premium for hours worked beyond 40 hours.
They also allege that their paystubs did not accurately record
either their overtime hours worked or their overtime rate of pay
for those hours.
Accurate Mechanical Inc. is co-owned by John O'Shea and Daniel
Reilly.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Stein, Esq.
David Nieporent, Esq.
SAMUEL & STEIN
38 West 32nd Street Suite 1110
New York, NY 10001
Tel: (212) 563-9884
Email: dstein@samuelandstein.com
AIRPORT VAN RENTAL: "Simon" Suit Unpaid Commissions, Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Carlos Simon, on behalf of himself, and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff(s), v. Airport Van Rental, Inc., and Does
1-50, inclusive, Defendant, Case No. CIV536624 (Cal. Super, San
Mateo County, December 17, 2015), seeks unpaid wages, statutory
penalties, declaratory relief, equitable and injunctive relief,
actual damages, statutory damages, liquidated damages,
restitution, prejudgment and postjudgment interest, costs of
suit, reasonable attorneys' fees and such other relief under
California Labor Code, Industrial Welfare Commission Order No.
9- 2001.
Airport Van Rental, Inc. is a transport company registered in
California. Plaintiff works as a rental agent stationed in their
South San Francisco, California location.
Defendants allegedly failed to include commissions that the
Plaintiff earned, overtime pay for work weeks worked more than
eight 8 hours in a workday or more than 40 hours in a workweek
including off-the-clock work and missed meal periods.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Spivak, Esq.
Patrick White, Esq.
THE SPIVAK LAW FIRM
9454 Wilshire Blvd., Ste 303
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Telephone (310) 499-4730
Fax: (310) 499-4739
Email: david@spivaklaw.com
Patrick@spivaklaw.com
ANTHEM INSURANCE: "Conway" Suit Moved to N.D. Alabama
-----------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Conway et al. v. Blue Cross and
Blue Shield of Alabama et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-00109, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of North
Dakota, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern of District of
Alabama (Southern). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 2:15-cv-02295-RDP to the proceeding.
Anthem Insurance Companies, doing business as Anthem Blue Cross
and Blue Shield, provides health insurance plans and Medicare
solutions to individuals, families, and employers in the United
States. It offers wellness, dental, vision, life disability, small
business, and group health insurance coverage plans. The company
is based in Indianapolis, Indiana with additional offices and
locations in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana,
Kentucky, Maine, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, and New York.
Health Care Service through its operating divisions and
subsidiaries, provide various health and life insurance products
and related services in Illinois, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma,
and Texas. It offers group life, disability, and dental solutions,
as well as a range of other individual solutions. The company is
headquartered in Chicago, Illinois.
As of Dec. 21, 2015, a Request of Conditional Transfer Order is
carried for transferring the case to N.D. Alabama and be included
in MDL Docket No. 2406.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Daniel E. Phillips, Esq.
Mike Miller, Esq.
SOLBERG STEWART MILLER
PO Box 1897
Fargo, ND 58107-1897
Telephone: (701) 237 3166
Facsimile: (701) 237 4627
E-mail: mmiller@solberglaw.com
- and -
Edith M. Kallas, Esq.
Patrick J. Sheehan, Esq.
Henry C. Quillen, Esq.
Joe R. Whatley, Jr., Esq.
Tucker Brown, Esq.
Deborah J. Winegard, Esq.
WHATLEY KALLAS, LLP
1180 Avenue of the Americas, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 447 7060
Facsimile: (800) 922 4851
Email: ekallas@whatleykallas.com
psheehan@whatleykallas.com
hquillen@whatleykallas.com
jwhatley@whatleykallas.com
tbrown@whatleykallas.com
dwinegard@whatleykallas.com
- and -
E. Kirk Wood, Jr., Esq.
WOOD LAW FIRM LLC
P.O. Box 382434
Birmingham, AL 35238
Telephone: (205) 612 0243
Facsimile: (205) 705 1223
Email: ekirkwood1@bellsouth.net
- and -
Debra B. Hayes
Charles Clinton Hunter
THE HAYES LAW FIRM
700 Rockmead, Suite 210
Kingwood, TX 77339
Telephone: (281) 815 4963
Facsimile: (832) 575 4759
E-mail: dhayes@dhayeslaw.com
chunter@dhayeslaw.com
- and -
Aaron S. Podhurst, Esq.
Peter Prieto, Esq.
PODHURST ORSECK, P.A.
25 West Flagler Street, Suite 800
Miami, FL 33130
Telephone: (305) 358 2800
Facsimile: (305) 358 2382
E-mail: apodhurst@podhurst.com
pprieto@podhurst.com
- and -
Dennis Pantazis, Esq.
Brian Clark, Esq.
WIGGINS CHILDS PANTAZIS FISHER
GOLDFARB
The Kress Building
301 Nineteenth Street North
Birmingham, AL 35203
Telephone: (205) 314 0500
Facsimile: (205) 254 1500
E-mail: dgp@wcqp.com
bclark@wcqp.com
- and -
U.W. Clemon, Esq.
J. Mark White, Esq.
Augusta S. Dowd, Esq.
Linda G. Flippo, Esq.
WHITE ARNOLD & DOWD, P.C.
The Massey Building
2025 Third Avenue North, Suite 500
Birmingham, AL 35203
Telephone: (205) 323-1888
Facsimile: (205) 323-8907
E-mail: uwclemon@whitearnolddowd.com
adowd@whitearnolddowd.com
mwhite@whitearnolddowd.com
lflippo@whitearnolddowd.com
- and -
Dennis C. Reich, Esq.
REICH & BINSTOCK, LLP
4265 San Felipe, Suite 1000
Houston, TX 77027
Telephone: (713) 622 7271
Facsimile: (713) 623 8724
Email: dreich@rbfirm.net
- and -
Van Bunch, Esq.
BONNETT FAIRBOURN FRIEDMAN &
BALINT, P.C.
2325 E. Camelback Road, Suite 300
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: (602) 274 1100
Facsimile: (602) 274 1199
Email: vbunch@bffb.com
- and -
Nicholas B. Roth, Esq.
Julia Smeds Roth, Esq.
EYSTER KEY TUBB ROTH MIDDLETON
& ADAMS, LLP
402 East Moulton Street, SE
Decatur, AL 35602
Telephone: (256) 353 6761
Facsimile: (256) 353 6767
Email: nroth@eysterkey.com
jroth@eysterkey.com
- and -
Robert J. Axelrod, Esq.
AXELROD & DEAN LLP
830 Third Avenue, 5th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (646) 448 5263
Facsimile: (212) 840 8560
Email: rjaxelrod@axelroddean.com
- and -
David A. Balto, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF DAVID A. BALTO
1350 I Street, N.W., Suite 850
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 789 5424
Facsimile: (202) 589 1819
Email: david.balto@dcantitrustlaw.com
- and -
W. Daniel Miles, III, Esq.
BEASLEY ALLEN CROW METHVIN PORTIS & MILES, P.C.
218 Commerce Street
Montgomery, AL 36104
Telephone: (800) 898 2034
Facsimile: (334) 954 7555
Email: dee.miles@beasleyallen.com
- and -
Joey K. James, Esq.
BUNCH & JAMES
P. O. Box 878
Florence, AL 35631
Telephone: (256) 764 0095
Facsimile: (256) 767 5705
Email: joey@bunchandjames.com
- and -
Richard S. Frankowski, Esq.
THE FRANKOWSKI FIRM, LLC
231 22nd Street South, Suite 203
Birmingham, AL 35233
Telephone: (205) 390 0399
Facsimile: (205) 390 1001
Email: richard@frankowskifirm.com
- and -
Peter H. Burke, Esq.
J. Allen Schreiber
BURKE HARVEY, LLC
535 Grandview Parkway, Suite 100
Birmingham, AL 35243
Telephone: (205) 930 9091
Facsimile: (205) 930 9054
E-mail: pburke@burkeharvey.com
aschreiber@burkeharvey.com
- and -
John C. Davis, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. DAVIS
623 Beard Street
Tallahassee, FL 32303
Telephone: (850) 222 4770
Email: john@johndavislaw.net
- and -
Michael C. Dodge, Esq.
GLAST PHILLIPS & MURRAY, P.C.
14801 Quorum Drive, Suite 500
Dallas, TX 75254
Telephone: (972) 419 7172
Email: mdodge@gpm-law.com
- and -
Mark K. Gray, Esq.
GRAY & WHITE
713 E. Market Street, Suite 200
Louisville, KY 40202
Telephone: (502) 805 1800
Facsimile: (502) 618 4059
Email: mgray@grayandwhitelaw.com
- and -
Stephen M. Hansen, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF STEPHEN M. HANSEN
1821 Dock Street
Tacoma, WA 98402
Telephone: (253) 302 5955
Facsimile: (253) 301 1147
Email: steve@stephenmhansenlaw.com
- and -
Michael E. Gurley, Jr., Esq.
24108 Portobello Road
Birmingham, AL 35242
Telephone: (205) 908 6512
Email: Michael@gurleylaw.net
- and -
Lynn W. Jinks, III, Esq.
Christina D. Crow, Esq.
JINKS CROW & DICKSON, P.C.
219 North Prairie Street
Union Springs, AL 36089
Telephone: (334) 738 4225
Facsimile: (334) 738 4229
E-mail: ljinks@jinkslaw.com
ccrow@jinkslaw.com
- and -
Harley S. Tropin, Esq.
Javier A. Lopez, Esq.
KOZYAK TROPIN &
THROCKMORTON, P.A.
2525 Ponce De Leon Boulevard, 9th Floor
Miami, FL 33134
Telephone: (305) 372 1800
Facsimile: (305) 372 3508
E-mail: hst@kttlaw.com
jal@kttlaw.com
- and -
Myron C. Penn, Esq.
PENN & SEABORN, LLC
53 Highway 110
Post Office Box 5335
Union Springs, AL 36089
Telephone: (334) 738 4486
Facsimile: (334) 738 4432
Email: myronpenn28@hotmail.com
- and -
C. Wes Pittman, Esq.
THE PITTMAN FIRM, P.A.
432 McKenzie Avenue
Panama City, FL 32401
Telephone: (850) 784 9000
Facsimile: (850) 763-6787
Email: wes@pittmanfirm.com
- and -
Troy A. Doles, Esq.
SCHLICHTER BOGARD & DENTON, LLP
100 S. 4th Street, Suite 900
St. Louis, MO 63102
Telephone: (314) 621 6115
Facsimile: (314) 621 7151
Email: tdoles@uselaws.com
- and -
Robert B. Roden, Esq.
SHELBY RODEN, LLC
2956 Rhodes Circle
Birmingham, AL 35205
Telephone: (205) 933 8383
Facsimile: (205) 933 8386
Email: rroden@shelbyroden.com
- and -
Gary E. Mason, Esq.
WHITFIELD BRYSON & MASON, LLP
1625 Massachusetts Ave. NW, Suite 605
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 429 2290
Facsimile: (202) 640 1160
Email: gmason@wbmllp.com
- and -
J. Preston Strom, Jr., Esq.
STROM LAW FIRM, LLC
2110 N. Beltline Boulevard, Suite A
Columbia, SC 29204-3905
Telephone: (803) 252 4800
Facsimile: (803) 252 4801
Email: petestrom@stromlaw.com
- and -
Thomas V. Bender, Esq.
WALTERS BENDER STROHBEHN & VAUGHAN, P.C.
2500 City Center Square, 1100 Main
Kansas City, MO 64105
Telephone: (816) 421 6620
Facsimile: (816) 421 4747
Email: tbender@wbsvlaw.com
- and -
Michael L. Murphy, Esq.
BAILEY GLASSER LLP
910 17th Street, NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 463 2101
Facsimile: (202) 463 2103
E-mail: mmurphy@baileyglasser.com
- and -
Brian E. Wojtalewicz, Esq.
WOJTALEWICZ LAW FIRM, LTD.
139 N. Miles Street
Appleton, MN 56208
Telephone: (320) 289 2363
Facsimile: (320) 289 2369
Email: brian@wojtalewiczlawfirm.com
- and -
Lance Michael Sears, Esq.
SEARS & SWANSON, P.C.
First Bank Building
2 North Cascade Avenue, Suite 1250
Colorado Springs, CO 80903
Telephone: (719) 471 1984
Facsimile: (719) 577 4356
Email: lance@searsandswanson.com
- and -
Archie C. Lamb, Jr., Esq.
ARCHIE LAMB & ASSOCIATES, LLC
2900 1st Avenue South
Birmingham, AL 352333
Telephone: (205) 324 4644
Facsimile: (205) 324 4649
E-mail: alamb@archielamb.com
- and -
Jessica Dillon, Esq.
Ray R. Brown, Esq.
Molly Brown, Esq.
DILLON & FINDLEY, P.C.
1049 W. 5th Avenue, Suite 200
Anchorage, AK 99501
Telephone: (907) 277 5400
Facsimile: (907) 277 9896
E-mail: Jessica@dillonfindley.com
Ray@dillonfindley.com
Molly@dillonfindley.com
- and -
Paul Lundberg, Esq.
LUNDBERG LAW, PLC
600 4TH Street, Suite 906
Sioux City, IA 51101
Telephone: (712) 234 3030
Facsimile: (712) 234 3034
Email: paul@lundberglawfirm.com
- and -
James Redmond, Esq.
Cynthia C. Moser, Esq.
HEIDMAN LAW FIRM
1128 Historic 4th Street
P. O. Box 3086
Sioux City, IA 51101
Telephone: (712) 255 8838
Facsimile: (712) 258 6714
E-mail: Jim.Redmond@heidmanlaw.com
Cynthia.Moser@heidmanlaw.com
- and -
Gwen Simons, Esq.
SIMONS & ASSOCIATES LAW, P.A.
P.O. Box 1238
Scarborough, ME 04070-1238
Telephone: (207) 205 2045
Facsimile: (207) 883 7225
Email: gwen@simonsassociateslaw.co
ANTHEM INSURANCE: Dialysis One Suit Goes to N.D. Alabama
--------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Quality Dialysis One, L.L.C.,
f/k/a Quality Dialysis One, L.P. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of
Alabama, et al., Case No. 4:15-cv-03491, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama
(Southern). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
2:15-cv-02296-RDP to the proceeding.
According to the complaint, the Defendants have allegedly engaged
in a horizontal market allocation, which is illegal under quick
look or rule of reason analysis. The quid pro quo for this illegal
Market Allocation Conspiracy is a horizontal Price-Fixing and
Boycott Conspiracy under which every other Blue gets the benefit
of the artificially reduced prices that each Blue pays to
healthcare providers. The Price Fixing and Boycott Conspiracy
fixes those prices for all Blues, gives them the benefit of those
reduced, fixed prices and further provides that the participating
Blues will collectively boycott all Providers outside of their
Service Areas.
Quality Care Dialysis provides dialysis services. The company was
incorporated in 2010 and is based in Newtown, Pennsylvania.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Earnest W. Wotring, Esq.
David George, Esq.
Karen Dow, Esq.
BAKER WOTRING LLP
700 JPMorgan Chase Tower
600 Travis Street
Houston, TX 77002
Telephone: (713) 980 1700
Facsimile: (713) 980 1701
E-mail: ewotring@bakerwotring.com
dgeorge@bakerwotring.com
kdow@bakerwotring.com
- and -
Joe R. Whatley, Jr., Esq.
W. Tucker Brown, Esq.
Edith M. Kallas, Esq.
WHATLEY KALLAS, LLP
2001 Park Place North
1000 Park Place Tower
Birmingham, AL 35203
Telephone: (205) 488 1200
Facsimile: (800) 922 4851
E-mail: jwhatley@whatleykallas.com
tbrown@whatleykallas.com
ekallas@whatleykallas.com
- and -
Dennis C. Reich, Esq.
REICH & BINSTOCK, LLP
4265 San Felipe, Suite 1000
Houston, TX 77027
Telephone: (713) 622 7271
Facsimile: (713) 623 8724
E-mail: dreich@rbfirm.net
APPLE INC: Faces "Palmer" Suit Over False Product Advertisement
---------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Palmer, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Apple Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-05808 (N.D. Cal.,
December 17, 2015) is brought against the Defendant for failure to
disclose in its advertisements for Apple Devices that it does not
ensure that all versions of iOS 6 and 7 and iOS 8.0 would prevent
the Apple Device's CPUs from triggering the Wi-Fi connection to
sever when it went into sleep mode so that it would instead stream
data over the AT&T cellular network without the subscribers'
knowledge and causing the consumer to incur significant data
charges.
Apple Inc. is a designer, developer, and retailer of computer
software, online services, and consumer electronics including the
iPhone.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeff D. Friedman, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202
Berkeley, CA 94710
Telephone: (510) 725-3000
Facsimile: (510) 725-3001
E-mail: jefff@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Christopher R. Pitoun, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
301 N. Lake Avenue, Suite 203
Pasadena, CA 91101
Telephone: (213) 330-7150
Facsimile: (213) 330-7152
E-mail: christopherp@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 623-7292
E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com
- and -
Andrew Levetown, Esq.
LEVETOWN & JENKINS, LLP
One Metro Center
700 12th Street, N.W., Suite 700
Washington, DC 20005
Telephone: (202) 379-4899
Facsimile: (866) 278-2973
E-mail: alevetown@levjen.com
AUTISM RESPONSE TEAM: "Halcomb" Seeks Overtime Pay
--------------------------------------------------
Marisa Lopez Halcomb, an individual, and all others similarly
situated Plaintiff, v. Autism Response Team Inc., Behavior Respite
in Action, Inc., California Psychcare, Inc., California Respite
Care Inc., Respite Works Inc. and Does 1 through 50, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. BC604363 (Cal. Super., Los Angeles County,
December 16, 2015), seeks unpaid wages and statutory penalties,
preliminary and permanent injunctions enjoining and restraining
Defendants, restitution of all unpaid wages and benefits,
declaratory relief, attorney's fees and costs, damages and
penalties pursuant to the California Labor Code Sec. 218.6.
Halcomb was employed by the Defendants to service families with
special needs persons, including autistic children and served as a
behavior instructor in the families' homes. She claims she did not
receive the overtime compensation, rest and meal periods and
compensation due upon separation.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brad S. Kane, Esq.
Roselle Pantig, Esq.
KANE LAW FIRM
1154 S. Crescent Heights Blvd.
Los Angeles, CA 90035
Telephone: (323) 697-9840
Facsimile: (323)571-3579
Email: bkane@kanelaw.la
rpantig@kanelaw.la
- and -
Victor Look, Esq.
LOOK LAW OFFICE
595 Lincoln Ave., Ste. 200
Pasadena CA 91101
Tel: (626) 389-5001 ext. 108
Fax: (626)628-1854
Email: victor@looklawfirm.com
AVID LIFE MEDIA: "Doe" Suit Moved from to E.D. Ark. to E.D. Mo.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Doe v. Avid Life Media Inc. et
al., Case No. 4:15-cv-00640, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, to the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri (St. Louis).
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:15-cv-01914-JAR to
the proceeding.
Avid Life Media is a social entertainment company that operates
online social networking and dating communities for women and men
worldwide. The company was founded in 2007 and is based in
Toronto, Canada.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles D. Davidson, Esq.
DAVIDSON LAW FIRM, LTD.
Post Office Box 1300
Little Rock, AR 72203-1300
Telephone: (501) 374-9977
E-mail: skipd@dlf-ar.com
- and -
Christopher D. Jennings, Esq.
JOHNSON VINES PLLC
2226 Cottondale Lane, Suite 210
Little Rock, AR 72202
Telephone: (501) 372 1300
Facsimile: (888) 505 0909
E-mail: cjennings@johnsonvines.com
- and -
David Louis Gershner, Esq.
Stephanie A. Linam, Esq.
DAVIDSON LAW FIRM, LTD.
Post Office Box 1300
Little Rock, AR 72203-1300
Telephone: (501) 374 9977
E-mail: davidg@dlf-ar.com
stephaniealinam@gmail.com
The Defendant is represented by:
E.B. Chiles IV, Esq.
QUATTLEBAUM, GROOMS & TULL PLLC
111 Center Street, Suite 1900
Little Rock, AR 72201-3325
Telephone: (501) 379 1700
E-mail: cchiles@qgtb.com
BANK OF NOVA SCOTIA: Twin City Pension Suit Hits Securities Scam
----------------------------------------------------------------
Twin City Iron Workers Pension Fund and Twin City Iron Workers
Health & Welfare Fund, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Bank of Nova Scotia, New York
Agency, BMO Capital Markets Corp., BNP Paribas Securities Corp.,
Barclays Capital Inc., Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., Citigroup Global
Markets Inc., Countrywide Securities Corporation, Credit Suisse
Securities (USA) LLC, Daiwa Capital Markets America Inc., Deutsche
Bank Securities Inc., Goldman, Sachs & Co., HSBC Securities (USA)
Inc., Jefferies LLC, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Merrill Lynch,
Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, Mizuho Securities USA Inc.,
Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, Nomura Securities International, Inc.,
RBC Capital Markets, LLC, RBS Securities Inc., SG Americas
Securities, LLC, TD Securities (USA) LLC and UBS Securities LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-09169 (S.D.N.Y., November 20, 2015),
seeks to recover damages against Defendants for their violations
of the Sherman Act, Clayton Act and Commodity Exchange Act.
According to the Complaint, Defendants allegedly colluded and
manipulated the market for U.S. Treasury securities, including
Treasury bills, notes, bonds, Treasury Inflation-Protected
Securities and floating rate notes as well as derivative
instruments based on such securities, including U.S. Treasury
futures and options resulting in reduced competition in bond
auctions and raises costs for taxpayers and investors.
Twin City Iron Workers Pension Fund and Twin City Iron Workers
Health & Welfare Fund is a Taft-Hartley fund that is authorized
pursuant to the National Labor Relations Act. They allegedly paid
excessively competitive prices for the Treasury Instruments.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian Murray, Esq.
George Linkh, Esq.
Thomas Kennedy, Esq.
GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
122 E 42nd Street, Suite 2920
New York, NY 10168
Tel: (212) 682-5340
Fax: (212) 884-0988
- and -
W. Joseph Bruckner, Esq.
Heidi M. Silton, Esq.
Anna M. Horning Nygren, Esq.
Richard A. Lockridge, Esq.
LOCKRIDGE GRINDAL NAUEN P.L.L.P.
Suite 2200 100 Washington Avenue South
Minneapolis, MN 55401-2159
Tel. (612) 339-6900
Email: wjbruckner@locklaw.com
hmsilton@locklaw.com
amhorningnygren@locklaw.com
ralockridge@lockaw.com
- and -
Christian M Sande, Esq.
CHRISTIAN SANDE LLC
310 Clifton Avenue, #300
Minneapolis, MN 55403
Tel: (612) 387-1430
Fax: (612) 677-3078
Email: Christian@christiansande.com
BEAVEX INC: "Coorey" Suit Moved to Massachusetts District Court
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Coorey v. BeavEx Incorporated et
al., Case No. 1584 cv 03311, was removed from Superior Court
Dept., Suffolk, to the U.S. District Court for the District of
Massachusetts (Boston). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:15-cv-14200-RGS to the proceeding.
BeavEx offers same-day transportation and logistics services to
financial from local businesses to Fortune 1000 companies. It
services, pharmaceutical distribution, office supply, and other
distribution companies in the United States. The company is
headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia.
Google is a global technology company that designs and offers
various products and services. The Company is focused on web-based
search and display advertising and tools, desktop and mobile
operating systems, consumer content, enterprise solutions,
commerce, and hardware products. The company is headquartered in
Mountain View, California.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Shannon E. Liss-Riordan, Esq.
LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C.
729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 994 5800
E-mail: sliss@llrlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Kevin M. Duddlesten, Esq.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP
2000 McKinney Avenue, Suite 1400
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 932 6400
Facsimile: (214) 273 7484
E-mail: kduddlesten@mcguirewoods.com
- and -
Alexandra S. Tuffuor, Esq.
Lisa Stephanian Burton, Esq.
MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
One Federal Street
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (617) 341 7700
Facsimile: (617) 341 7701
E-mail: atuffuor@morganlewis.com
lburton@morganlewis.com
BEVERLY HILLS RIDES: "Tucker" Suit Seeks OT & Last Pay
------------------------------------------------------
Csonka Tucker, individually, on behalf of all others similarly
situated, and as representative of other aggrieved employees,
Plaintiffs, v. Beverly Hills Rides, Black & White Car Rental,
Black & White Luxury Transport, LLC, Sergine Investments, Inc. and
Does 1 through 250, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. BC604703 (Cal.
Super, Los Angeles County, December 17, 2015), seeks recovery of
unpaid overtime in violation of California Labor Code Sec. 510,
1194 and 1198, unpaid meal period premiums in violation of
California Labor Code Sec. 226.7 and 512(a), unpaid rest period
premiums in violation of California Labor Code Sec. 226.7, last
pay upon termination under Labor Code Sec. 201 and 202, damages
resulting from non-issuance of wage statements in violation of
California Labor Code Sec. 226 and the California Business and
Professions Code Sec. 17200, et seq.
Defendants are chauffeured limousine service providers in Los
Angeles, California, providing both hourly and daily chauffeured
services in Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, as well as LAX and
Burbank Airports. Plaintiff worked as a driver and dispatcher.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary R. Carlin, Esq.
Brent S. Buchsbaum, Esq.
Laurel N. Haag, Esq.
Jean P. Buchanan, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF CARLIN & BUCHSBAUM LLP
555 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 818
Long Beach, CA 90802
Tel: (562) 432-8933
Fax: (562) 435-1656
Email: gary@carlinbuchsbaum.com
brent@carlinbuchsbaum.com
laurel@carlinbuchsbaum.com
jean@carlinbuchsbaum.com
BLAINE LARSEN: Faces "Duarte" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Duarte, Ricardo Pena Ramirez, Jorge Ruiz, and Jose Ramon Ruiz
Esparza v. Blaine Larsen Farms, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00352-J
(N.D. Tex., December 17, 2015) is brought against the Defendant
for failure to pay migrant workers' overtime wages for work in
excess of 40 hours per week.
Blaine Larsen Farms, Inc. has numerous business operations in
Texas, including potato growing and processing facilities outside
the town of Dalhart, Texas.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Brian Jacobi, Esq.
PASO DEL NORTE CIVIL RIGHTS PROJECT
1317 E. Rio Grande Ave.
El Paso, TX 79902
Telephone: (915) 532-3799
Facsimile: (915) 532-8892
E-mail: jacobi@texascivilrightsproject.org
- and -
J.E. Sauseda, Esq.
HOFFMAN, SHEFFIELD, SAUSEDA & HOFFMAN, P.L.L.C.
1008 S. Madison
Amarillo, TX 79101
Telephone: (806) 376-8903
Facsimile: (806) 376-5345
E-mail: jesauseda@hsshlaw.com
BRIDGEPORT FINANCIAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Action Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Elizabeth Vancleave, on behalf of herself, and all others
similarly situated v. Bridgeport Financial, Inc., Case No. 5:15-
cv-05652 -RMW (N.D. Cal., December 10, 2015) seeks to put an end
to the Defendant's practice of making unsolicited calls.
Bridgeport Financial, Inc. operates a collection agency located at
1111 Willow St, San Jose, CA 95125.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Albert Rudolph Limberg, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF ALBERT R. LIMBERG
3667 Voltaire Street
San Diego, CA 92106
Telephone: (619) 344-8667
Facsimile: (619) 344-8657
E-mail: alimberg@limberglawoffice.com
- and -
Alexis Marie Wood, Esq.
Kas Larene Gallucci, Esq.
Ronald A. Marron, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC
651 Arroyo Drive
San Diego, CA 92103
Telephone: (619) 696-9006
Facsimile: (619) 564-6665
E-mail: alexis@consumersadvocates.com
kas@consumersadvocates.com
ron@consumersadvocates.com
BRUMBAUGH & QUANDAHL: Illegally Collects Debt, Action Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Tamerra F. Washington, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. Brumbaugh & Quandahl, P.C., LLO, et al.,
Case No. 8:15-cv-00444-LSC-FG3 (D. Neb., December 11, 2015) seeks
to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect
a debt.
Brumbaugh & Quandahl, P.C. operates a law firm located at 4885 S
118th St #100, Omaha, NE 68137.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
O. Randolph Bragg, Esq.
HORWITZ, HORWITZ LAW FIRM
25 East Washington Street, Suite 900
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 372-8822
Facsimile: (312) 372-1673
E-mail: rand@horwitzlaw.com
- and -
Pamela A. Car, Esq.
William L. Reinbrecht, Esq.
CAR, REINBRECHT LAW FIRM
8720 Frederick Street, Suite 105
Omaha, NE 68124
Telephone: (402) 391-8484
Facsimile: (402) 391-1103
E-mail: pacar@cox.net
billr205@gmail.com
CAMPBELL-EWALD: Class Action Ruling Favorable for Plaintiffs' Bar
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tony Mauro, writing for Law.com, reports that so far, so good for
the plaintiffs' bar in the latest batch of class action cases the
U.S. Supreme Court is considering this term.
The court ruled, 6-3, in Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez on Jan. 20 that a
plaintiff's refusal to accept a settlement offer does not mean the
lawsuit is over--thereby limiting the ability of the defense to
"pick off" plaintiffs by offering them relief.
"The plaintiffs' bar remains firmly in control of class actions"
as a result of the ruling, said Ropes & Gray litigation partner
John Donovan. "They can continue to press class claims -- and
receive windfall attorneys' fees -- even though the ostensible
'representative' of the class has been offered complete relief and
has no claim of his own."
Because of the decision, according to Dorsey & Whitney partner
Ryan Mick, corporate defendants "may have lost an opportunity to
head off potentially massive class actions by offering to satisfy
the alleged damages of the usually small number of individuals who
may step forward" in cases involving relatively minor damages.
Paired with the November arguments in Tyson Foods v. Bouphakeo, in
which the justices seemed skeptical of the food company's effort
to defeat an employee class action, the Campbell-Ewald ruling
suggests that plaintiffs can still win class actions at the high
court.
"Contrary to what some corporations and their counsel believe, the
court is not willing to twist and pervert every aspect of the law
to limit or eliminate class actions," said Arthur Bryant, chairman
of Public Justice, which filed a brief in the case for the
plaintiffs. In a recent National Law Journal column, Bryant
forecast possible trouble for defendants in several of the pending
class action cases this term.
In the case decided on Jan. 20, Jose Gomez was an unwilling
recipient of a text message promoting a career in the U.S. Navy,
sent by Campbell-Ewald Co., an advertising firm on contract to the
Navy. Mr. Gomez initiated a class action based on the federal
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.
Just before Gomez sought class certification, the company offered
to pay him more than $1,500 for each text message he received,
plus other costs but not attorney fees. Mr. Gomez declined, but
the company claimed the settlement offer mooted the lawsuit. The
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit disagreed, keeping the
suit alive, and the high court upheld the decision.
"An unaccepted settlement offer has no force," Ginsburg wrote,
citing Rule 68 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "Like
other unaccepted contract offers, it creates no lasting right or
obligation." To rule otherwise, Ginsburg said, "would place the
defendant in the driver's seat." Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a
concurrence.
Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. wrote a sharply worded dissent,
joined by Justices Antonin Scalia and Samuel Alito Jr.
"The problem for Gomez is that the federal courts exist to resolve
real disputes, not to rule on a plaintiff's entitlement to relief
already there for the taking," Justice Roberts wrote. "Campbell
agreed to fully satisfy Mr. Gomez's claims. That makes the case
moot, and Gomez is not entitled to a ruling on the merits of a
moot case."
Justice Roberts added, "Although Gomez nonetheless wants to
continue litigating, the issue is not what the plaintiff wants,
but what the federal courts may do."
The chief justice's dissent offered an alternative to class action
defendants that could lessen the impact of the decision. If a
defendant actually deposited a check representing the settlement
made payable to the plaintiff, rather than merely making a
settlement offer, Roberts said, the case for mootness might turn
out differently.
"This court leaves that question for another day--assuming there
are other plaintiffs out there who, like Gomez, won't take 'yes'
for an answer," Justice Roberts wrote. In the majority opinion,
Ginsburg acknowledged that her ruling did not extend to the
scenario of a settlement check being deposited for a plaintiff.
Class action defense lawyers seized on the suggestion as a
possible way to make a plaintiff's suit moot. "The court may have
just moved the target," said Roger Meyers, a litigation partner at
Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn in Detroit. Roberts' dissent,
Meyers said, is "effectively an invitation to try that approach.
I think we will see defendants viewing that as a practical
suggestion."
CAMPBELL-EWALD: Defense Lawyers Say Clients Still Have Options
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ross Todd, writing for The Recorder, reports that the class
action defense bar learned on Jan. 20 that it won't be getting
everything it asked for this term from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Ruling 6-3 in Campbell-Ewald v. Gomez, the high court held that a
defendant can't kill a class action simply by offering to pay
named plaintiffs in full.
The decision, which affirms a ruling from the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, drew cheers from plaintiffs lawyers
who hope that it signals that the court may go their way in the
term's other blockbuster class action cases. Meanwhile both sides
acknowledge that the ruling leaves the door open to other defense
tactics meant to pick off lead plaintiffs.
Specifically, the majority declined to address whether a case
could be mooted if a defendant goes beyond offering a settlement
and actually deposits funds with the court.
"I foresee us going back to the Supreme Court on these exact
issues in three to four years," said plaintiffs lawyer Abbas
Kazerounian from the Kazerouni Law Group in Costa Mesa.
In the case decided on Jan. 20, Jose Gomez sued the Detroit-based
advertising firm Campbell-Ewald Co. after receiving an unwanted
text message promoting career opportunities in the U.S. Navy.
Gomez sued the company under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
on behalf of himself and similarly situated individuals.
Prior to a hearing on class certification, lawyers for Campbell-
Ewald sought to resolve the case by offering Gomez $1,500, the
full amount of statutory damages he could claim under the TCPA.
In the majority opinion, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote that
the settlement offer had the effect of any other unaccepted
contract and once the offer had lapsed, Mr. Gomez remained
"emptyhanded."
"Like other unaccepted contract offers, it creates no lasting
right or obligation. With the offer off the table, and the
defendant's continuing denial of liability, adversity between the
parties persists," she wrote.
Ruling otherwise, Judge Ginsburg wrote, would "place the defendant
in the driver's seat."
The decision is a win for visiting Stanford Law School professor
Jonathan Mitchell, a former solicitor general of Texas. Gregory
Garre of Latham & Watkins, a former U.S. solicitor general, argued
for Campbell-Ewald.
Defense lawyers had hoped for a different outcome that would allow
them to dismantle class actions by offering to make lead
plaintiffs whole. In an interview with The National Law Journal,
a Recorder affiliate, Dorsey & Whitney partner Ryan Mick said
corporate defendants "may have lost an opportunity to head off
potentially massive class actions."
Despite the apparent setback, some defense lawyers said that the
opinion left their clients with options.
Severson & Werson's Eric Troutman, who often defends clients in
TCPA cases, said he doesn't see signs that the court is shifting
toward a more class action-friendly posture. Mr. Troutman called
the majority's approach "pretty narrow." The court didn't address
what would follow if a defendant fully paid out the potential
damages to a lead plaintiff, he noted.
Morrison & Foerster's Sylvia Rivera agreed. "I think this will
cause practitioners and defendants to consider whether it might
make sense to not only make an offer of settlement but actually
tender the funds, and deposit them in an account in the plaintiffs
name," Ms. Rivera said.
CBE GROUP: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection
-----------------------------------------------------------
Esther Frankel, on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. The CBE Group, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-07023-
FB-SMG (E.D.N.Y., December 9, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's
unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt.
The CBE Group, Inc. provides accounts receivable management and
debt collection services for clients in the education, financial,
and healthcare services.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Maxim Maximov, Esq.
MAXIM MAXIMOV, LLP
1701 Avenue P
Brooklyn, NY 11229
Telephone: (718) 395-3459
Facsimile: (718) 408-9570
E-mail: m@maximovlaw.com
CELADON GROUP: Judgment in "Wilmoth" Case under Appeal
------------------------------------------------------
Celadon Group, Inc. has taken an appeal from an adverse judgment
in the "Wilmoth" class action lawsuit, the Company said in its
Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on November 9, 2015, for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2015.
"Our subsidiary has been named as the defendant in Wilmoth et al.
v. Celadon Trucking Services, Inc., a class action proceeding,"
the Company said. "A summary judgment was recently granted in
favor of the plaintiffs. We have appealed this judgment. We
believe that we will be successful on appeal, but that it is also
reasonably possible the judgment will be upheld."
"We estimate the possible range of financial exposure associated
with this claim to be between $0 and approximately $5 million. We
currently do not have a contingency reserved for this claim, but
will continue to monitor the progress of this claim to determine
if a reserve is necessary in the future.
CELADON GROUP: Judgment in "Day" Class Suit under Appeal
--------------------------------------------------------
Celadon Group, Inc. has taken an appeal from an adverse judgment
in the "Day" class action lawsuit, the Company said in its Form
10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
November 9, 2015, for the quarterly period ended September 30,
2015.
"We have been named as the defendant in Day et al. v. Celadon
Trucking Services, Inc., a class action proceeding," the Company
said. "A judgment was recently granted in favor of the plaintiffs.
We have appealed this judgment. We believe that we will be
successful on appeal, but that it is also reasonably possible the
judgment will be upheld."
"We estimate the possible range of financial exposure associated
with this claim to be between $0 and approximately $2 million. We
currently do not have a contingency reserved for this claim, but
will continue to monitor the progress of this claim to determine
if a reserve is necessary in the future."
CENTRINEX LLC: Faces "Howard" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Keyle Howard and Barbara Bates, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Centrinex, LLC, et al., Case No.
2:15-cv-09918-JWL-TJJ (D. Kan., December 17, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.
Centrinex, LLC is an outsource call center in the online short
term loan industry.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Geoffrey L. Gross, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF GROSS LLC
Manor Square Building
4050 Pennsylvania Avenue, Suite 115
Kansas City, MO 64111
Telephone: (816) 945-9591
Facsimile: (816) 945-9578
E-mail: ggross@grossllc.com
- and -
David W. Garrison, Esq.
Scott P. Tift, Esq.
BARRETT JOHNSTON MARTIN & GARRISON, LLC
Bank of America Plaza
414 Union Street, Suite 900
Nashville, TN 37219
Telephone: (615) 244-2202
Facsimile: (615) 252-3798
E-mail: dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com
stift@barrettjohnston.com
CORE-MARK: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
--------------------------------------------------------
Sharon Crosby, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Core-Mark Distributors, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-04198-
CAP-JFK (N.D. Ga., December 2, 2015) is brought against the
Defendant for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Core-Mark Distributors, Inc. distributes fresh, chilled and frozen
merchandise mainly to convenience stores in the United States.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric Scott Fortas, Esq.
FORTAS LAW GROUP, LLC
Suite 100B
1934-B N. Druid Hills Road
Atlanta, GA 30319
Telephone: (404) 315-9936
Facsimile: (404) 636-5418
E-mail: sfortas@fortaslaw.com
CREDIT ONE BANK: "Waldron" Suit Hits Tele-Collection
----------------------------------------------------
Eileen Waldron, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Credit One Bank, N.A., a national bank,
Defendant, Case No. Case 1:15-cv-09852-WHP (S.D.N.Y., December 17,
2015), seeks redress for its placing of unsolicited telephone
calls in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 47
U.S.C. Sec. 227, et seq.
Credit One, a consumer credit card bank, manages credit card
accounts. They allegedly use auto-dialers to make collection
calls. Plaintiff received such a call on her mobile phone without
her expressed consent and was charged accordingly.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jonathan M. Shapiro, Esq.
SHAPIRO LAW OFFICES, LLC
104 Court Street
Middletown, CT 06457
Tel: (860) 347-3325
Fax: (860) 347-3874
Email: jshapiro@shapirolawofficesct.com
- and -
Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
Ari J. Scharg, Esq.
Alicia E. Hwang, Esq.
EDELSON PC
350 North LaSalle Street, Suite 1300
Chicago, IL 60654
Tel: (312) 589-6370
Fax: (312) 589-6378
Email: rbalabanian@edelson.com
ascharg@edelson.com
ahwang@edelson.com
- and -
Stefan Coleman, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF STEFAN COLEMAN, LLC
1072 Madison Avenue, Suite 1
Lakewood, NJ 08701
Tel: (877) 333-9427
Fax: (888) 498-8946
Email: law@stefancoleman.com
DIRECTV: "Shepperd" FLSA Suit Goes to M.D. Florida
--------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Shepperd et al. v. DIRECTV Global
Holdings, LLC et al., Case No. 2015-CA-001405, was removed from
the Fifth Judicial Circuit, in and for Hernando County, Florida,
to the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida
(Tampa). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:15-cv-02886-
EAK-AEP to the proceeding.
Defendants allegedly failed to comply with the Fair Labor
Standards Act, because Plaintiffs were regularly required to work
in excess of 40 hours a workweek but were not paid overtime
compensation.
DIRECTV is based in El Segundo, California. The company provides
direct-to-home digital television services and multi-channel video
programming distribution (MVPD) services in the United States. It
provides access to various channels of digital-quality video
entertainment and CD-quality audio programming that are
transmitted directly to subscribers' homes or businesses via
geosynchronous satellites.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jason M. Melton, Esq.
Jay P. Lechner, Esq.
WHITTEL & MELTON, LLC
11020 Northcliffe Blvd
Spring Hill, FL 34608
Telephone: (352) 683 2016
Facsimile: (352) 556 4839
E-mail: jason@thefllawfirm.com
lechnerj@thefllawfirm.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jessica Theresa Travers, Esq.
LITTLER MENDELSON, PC
333 SE 2nd Ave., Suite 2700
Miami, FL 33131
Telephone: (305) 400 7500
E-mail: jtravers@littler.com
DRAFTKINGS INC: "Price" Suit Goes from Circuit Court to E.D. Ark.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Price v. Draftkings Inc., Case No.
58-CV-15-00538, was removed from the Pope County Circuit Court, to
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas
(Little Rock). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:15-cv-
00778-JM to the proceeding.
According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly violated the
Arkansas Code in relation to gambling activities.
DraftKings provides online daily and weekly fantasy sports
contests for cash prizes in major sports in the United States and
Canada. The company is based in Boston, Massachusetts. The
defendants offer leagues for fantasy football, baseball,
basketball, hockey, golf, college football, and college
basketball.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Alex G. Streett, Esq.
James A. Streett, Esq.
Robert M. Veach, Esq.
STREETT LAW FIRM, P.A.
107 West Main
Russellville, AR 72801
Telephone: (479) 968 2030
E-mail: james@streettlaw.com
Alex@StreettLaw.com
Robert@StreettLaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Jess L. Askew, III, Esq.
KUTAK ROCK LLP
124 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000
Little Rock, AR 72201-3740
Telephone: (501) 975 3000
Facsimile: (501) 975 3001
E-mail: jess.askew@kutakrock.com
- and -
Luke K. Burton, Esq.
KUTAK ROCK LLP
124 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 2000
Little Rock, AR 72201-3740
Telephone: (501) 975 3000
E-mail: luke.burton@kutakrock.com
EBIX INC: Delaware Chancery Court Narrows Stockholder Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
Vice Chancellor John Noble of the Delaware Court of Chancery
granted, in part, the motion to dismiss in the case captioned, In
re Ebix, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, Case No. 8526-vcn (Del.
Ch.).
Ebix, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2015, that on June 6, 2013, the Company
was notified that the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of
Georgia had opened an investigation into allegations of
intentional misconduct that had been brought to its attention from
the pending shareholder class action lawsuit against the Company's
directors and officers, the media and other sources. The Company
has cooperated with the U.S. Attorney's office.
Following the announcement on May 1, 2013 of the Company's
execution of a merger agreement with affiliates of Goldman Sachs &
Co., twelve putative class action complaints challenging the
proposed merger were filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery.
These complaints name as Defendants some combination of the
Company, its directors, Goldman Sachs & Co. and affiliated
entities. On June 10, 2013, the twelve complaints were
consolidated by the Delaware Court of Chancery, now captioned In
re Ebix, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, CA No. 8526-VCN.
On June 19, 2013, the Company announced that the merger agreement
had been terminated pursuant to a Termination and Settlement
Agreement dated June 19, 2013. After Defendants moved to dismiss
the consolidated proceeding, Lead Plaintiffs amended their
operative complaint to drop their claims against Goldman Sachs &
Co. and focus their allegations on an Acquisition Bonus Agreement
("ABA") between the Company and Robin Raina.
On September 26, 2013, Defendants moved to dismiss the Amended
Consolidated Complaint. On July 24, 2014, the Court issued its
Memorandum Opinion that granted in large part the Company's Motion
to Dismiss and narrowed the remaining claims. The only remaining
counts are as follows: (i) Counts II and IV, but only to the
extent the Plaintiffs seek non-monetary relief for alleged
material misstatements related to the ABA base price in the 2010
Proxy Statement; (ii) Count II, but only to the extent it
challenges the continued existence of the ABA as an alleged
unreasonable anti-takeover device; and, (iii) Count V, but only to
the extent that it relates to the compensation the Board received
under the Company's 2010 Stock Incentive Plan.
On September 15, 2014, the Court entered an Order implementing its
Memorandum Opinion. On January 16, 2015, the Court entered an
Order permitting Plaintiffs to file a Second Amended and
Supplemented Complaint.
As currently pled, the Second Amended and Supplemented Complaint
asserts (i) a purported class and derivative claim for breach of
fiduciary duty by the individual Defendants in improperly
maintaining the ABA as an unreasonable anti-takeover device; (ii)
a purported class claim against the individual Defendants for
breach of the fiduciary duty of disclosure to the stockholders
with respect to the Company's 2010 Proxy Statement and 2010 Stock
Incentive Plan, (iii) a purported derivative claim against the
individual Defendants for breach of fiduciary duty to the Company
in causing incentive compensation to be awarded to themselves and
others under the 2010 Stock Incentive Plan, (iv) a purported class
and derivative claim for breach of fiduciary duty by the
individual Defendants in adopting the August 5, 2014 Credit
Agreement, the November 26, 2014 Director Nomination Agreement
with Barrington Capital Group, L.P. and certain bylaw amendments
adopted December 19, 2014, (v) a purported class and derivative
claim seeking invalidation of the December 19, 2014 bylaw
amendments under Delaware law, and (vi) a purported class claim
for breach of fiduciary duty by the individual Defendants for
issuing a purportedly materially misleading and incomplete 2014
Proxy Statement.
On February 10, 2015, Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss the
Second Amended and Supplemented Complaint. The Company denies any
liability and intends to defend the action vigorously.
Defendants have moved to dismiss on the grounds that two
settlements approved by the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Georgia extinguished the Second Amended
Complaint's counts related to executive compensation, certain
claims are moot, and remaining counts fail under Court of Chancery
Rule 12(b)(6).
In the Memorandum Opinion and Order dated January 15, 2016,
available at http://is.gd/Ah7OGTfrom Leagle.com, Judge Noble held
that Plaintiffs' attempt to nip Defendants' release defense in the
bud fails and Plaintiffs are correct that the Federal Derivative
Action Settlement does not bar any direct claims asserted in
Counts I-III. Neither federal settlement had the capacity to
preclude Counts I-III of the action.
Plaintiffs are represented by Michael Hanrahan, Esq. --
mhanrahan@prickett.com -- Paul A. Fioravanti, Jr., Esq. --
pafioravanti@prickett.com -- Kevin H. Davenport, Esq. --
khdavenport@prickett.com -- Eric J. Juray, Esq. --
ejjuray@prickett.com -- John G. Day, Esq. -- jgday@prickett.com
-- PRICKETT, JONES & ELLIOTT, P.A., Stuart M. Grant, Esq. --
sgrant@gelaw.com -- Michael J. Barry, Esq. -- mbarry@gelaw.com --
GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A., and Michael A. Wagner, Esq. --
mwagner@ktmc.com -- KESSLER TOPAZ MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
Defendants are represented by Samuel A. Nolen, Esq. --
nolen@rlf.com -- Catherine G. Dearlove, Esq. -- dearlove@rlf.com,
Susan M. Hannigan, Esq. -- hannigan@rlf.com -- Christopher H.
Lyons, Esq. -- lyons@rlf.com -- RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER, P.A.,
Charles W. Cox, Esq. -- brady.cox@alston.com -- John A. Jordak
Jr., Esq. -- john.jordak@alston.com -- ALSTON & BIRD LLP
EXPERIAN NORTH AMERICA: "Switaj" Suit Goes to New Mexico
--------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Switaj v. Experian North America,
Inc. et al., Case No. CV-15-09080, was removed from Second
Judicial District Court, to the U.S. District Court for the
District of New Mexico (Albuquerque). The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-01162-WJ-SCY to the proceeding.
Experian North America, based in Washington DC, operates as credit
monitoring company. The company offers information on the credit
worthiness of individuals.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Nicholas Koluncich, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF NICHOLAS KOLUNCICH LLC
500 Marquette Ave NW, Suite 1200
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 881 2228
Facsimile: (505) 881 4288
E-mail: nkoluncich@newmexicoclassactions.com
- and -
Erika E Anderson, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF ERIKA E. ANDERSON
201 3rd Street, NW, Suite 500
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 944 9039
E-mail: erika@eandersonlaw.com
The Defendants is represented by:
Charles J. Vigil, Esq.
RODEY DICKSON SLOAN AKIN & ROBB, P.A.
P. O. Box 1888
Albuquerque, NM 87103
Telephone: (505) 768 7377
E-mail: cvigil@rodey.com
EZCORP INC: Bid to Dismiss Securities Litigation Pending
--------------------------------------------------------
EZCORP, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that motions to dismiss
a federal securities litigation remains pending.
On August 22, 2014, Jason Close, a purported holder of Class A
Non-voting Common Stock, for himself and on behalf of other
similarly situated holders of Class A Non-voting Common Stock,
filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York styled Close v. EZCORP, Inc., et al.
(Case No. 1:14-cv-06834-ALC).
"The complaint names as defendants EZCORP, Inc., Paul E. Rothamel
(our former chief executive officer) and Mark Kuchenrither (our
current chief financial officer and our chief operating officer)
and asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934," the Company said. "In general,
the complaint alleges that the implementation of certain strategic
and growth initiatives were less successful than represented by
the defendants, that certain of the Company's business units and
investments were not performing as well as represented by the
defendants and that, as a result, the defendants' disclosures and
statements about the Company's business and operations were
materially false and misleading at all relevant times."
"On October 17, 2014, the Automotive Machinists Pension Plan, also
purporting to be the holder of Class A Non-voting Common Stock and
acting for itself and on behalf of other similarly situated
holders of Class A Non-voting Common Stock, filed a lawsuit in the
United Stated District Court for the Southern District of New York
styled Automotive Machinists Pension Plan v. EZCORP, Inc., et al
(Case No. 1:14-cv-8349-ALC). The complaint names EZCORP, Inc., Mr.
Rothamel and Mr. Kuchenrither as defendants, but also names Mr.
Cohen and MS Pawn Limited Partnership. The complaint likewise
asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as well as Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, alleging generally that (1) EZCORP and the officer
defendants (Mr. Rothamel and Mr. Kuchenrither) issued false and
misleading statements and omissions concerning the business and
prospects, and compliance history, of the Company's online lending
operations in the U.K. and the nature of the Company's consulting
relationship with entities owned by Mr. Cohen and the process the
Board of Directors used in agreeing to it, and (2) Mr. Cohen and
MS Pawn Limited Partnership, as controlling persons of EZCORP,
participated in the preparation and dissemination of the Company's
disclosures and controlled the Company's business strategy and
activities.
"On October 21, 2014, the plaintiff in the Automotive Machinists
Pension Plan action filed a motion to consolidate the Close action
and the Automotive Machinists Pension Plan action and to appoint
the Automotive Machinists Pension Plan as the lead plaintiff. On
November 18, 2014, the court consolidated the two lawsuits under
the caption In Re EZCORP, Inc. Securities Litigation (Case No.
1:14-cv-06834-ALC), and on January 16, 2015, appointed the lead
plaintiff and lead counsel.
On March 13, 2015, the lead plaintiff filed a Consolidated Amended
Class Action Complaint (the "Amended Complaint"). The Amended
Complaint asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as well as Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, alleging generally that:
* EZCORP and the officer defendants (Mr. Rothamel and Mr.
Kuchenrither) issued false and misleading statements and omissions
regarding the Company's online lending operations in the U.K.
(Cash Genie) and Cash Genie's compliance history;
* EZCORP and the officer defendants issued false and
misleading statements and omissions regarding the nature of the
Company's consulting relationship with Madison Park LLC (an entity
owned by Mr. Cohen) and the process the Board of Directors used in
agreeing to it;
* EZCORP's financial statements were false and misleading,
and violated GAAP and SEC rules and regulations, by failing to
properly recognize impairment charges with respect to the
Company's investment in Albemarle & Bond; and
* Mr. Cohen and MS Pawn Limited Partnership, as controlling
persons of EZCORP, were aware of and controlled the Company's
alleged false and misleading statements and omissions.
The defendants have filed motions to dismiss, and the parties have
submitted their respective supporting and opposing briefs. That
motion is pending before the Court.
"We cannot predict the outcome of the litigation, but we intend to
continue to defend vigorously against all allegations and claims,"
the Company said.
FACEBOOK INC: Settles Class Action Over Minors' Online Purchases
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ross Todd, writing for Law.com, reports that as part of a deal to
settle a class action lawsuit, Facebook Inc. has agreed to make it
simpler for minors to get refunds for online purchases.
In court papers on Jan. 15, the company agreed to make it clearer
to minors that they need their parents' permission when making
purchases on Facebook.
The proposed deal, which provides no cash to class members, is
subject to approval from U.S. District Judge Beth Labson Freeman
of the Northern District of California.
C. Brooks Cutter, of Cutter Law, lead counsel for the plaintiffs,
said that Judge Freeman made it clear at the class certification
hearing in the case last year that she was "never going to certify
a class for damages."
"Given that, we achieved everything that we thought that was
obtainable for the class," said Mr. Cutter, whose group is seeking
$1.25 million in attorney fees and roughly $29,000 in costs.
The plaintiffs, a group of parents suing on behalf of children who
allegedly racked up hundreds of dollars in charges making
purchases in Facebook applications, sued the social networking
site in 2012. They claimed that the company's refusal to refund
the money violated various California state consumer protection,
business and family laws.
Judge Freeman, who took the case over in 2014 after taking the
federal bench, certified a nationwide class of minor Facebook
users in March on claims for injunctive and declaratory relief
under the California Family Code. Judge Freeman, however, denied
the plaintiffs' bid to certify a class to pursue restitution
finding that the amount due each class member would depend on
individual circumstances and "thus cannot be determined
formulaically."
Following Judge Freeman's decision, the parties met for an all-day
mediation session in August with Edward Infante, the Northern
District of California's former chief magistrate judge who is now
a mediator at JAMS. Judge Infante continued to supervise
settlement discussions through December when the current deal was
reached. In a declaration filed with the settlement papers on
Jan. 15, Judge Infante wrote that he backed the proposed
settlement.
"In my opinion, given the only claim available to plaintiffs after
Facebook's successive motions to dismiss was their claim for
declaratory relief, I do not think any kind of class-wide remedy
of damages or restitution could ever be awarded in this case,"
Judge Infante wrote.
As part of the deal, Facebook has agreed to keep language in its
app developer agreements for three years that makes clear that
transactions with minors may be voidable. The company also agreed
to include a checkbox on its refund request form to indicate when
a purchase was made by a minor and to train employees to deal with
those requests. The company also agreed to include the following
statement on purchase receipts sent to minors in the U.S.: "Please
always make sure you have your parent or guardian's consent to use
their payment sources."
A Facebook spokesperson said in an emailed statement that the
proposed deal "provides a fair and reasonable resolution of the
claims raised in the case."
"Although our existing practices comply with applicable law, we
have agreed to enhance our disclosures and processes relating to
refund requests," the spokesperson wrote.
Facebook was represented in the suit by a team from Cooley led by
Michael Rhodes.
Sacramento's Cutter Law, Washington, D.C.'s Katz, Marshall &
Banks, and Brookline, Mass., solo practitioner Benjamin Edelman
represented plaintiffs.
FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR: "Laidlaw" Action Hits ON Merger Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------
Cody Laidlaw, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Fairchild Semiconductor International
Inc., Mark S. Thompson, Charles P. Carinalli, Randy W. Carson,
Terry A. Klebe, Anthony Lear, Catherine P. Lego, Kevin J.
Mcgarity, Bryan R. Roub, Ronald W. Shelly, Goldman, Sachs & Co.,
and Does 1-5, inclusive, Case No. 15CV289120 (Cal. Super, Sta.
Clara County, December 17, 2015), seeks damages resulting from
breach of fiduciary duties to Plaintiff, compensatory and/or
rescissory damages, attorney's fees and other costs under the
Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 or the Securities Litigation
Uniform Standards Act.
Fairchild Semiconductor International entered into an agreement to
be bought by ON Semiconductor for $20.00 per share, a price highly
contested by the Plaintiff.
Fairchild is a publicly traded corporation, headquartered at 3030
Orchard Parkway, San Jose, California, 95134. It develops,
manufactures and sells power management solutions, manufactures
non-power semiconductor and microelectromechanical systems based
solutions. Mark S. Thompson, Charles P. Carinalli, Randy W.
Carson, Terry A. Klebe, Anthony Lear, Catherine P. Lego, Kevin J.
Mcgarity, Bryan R. Roub and Ronald W. Shelly serve as Board of the
Directors.
Goldman Sachs is an investment bank which provides advisory,
underwriting and financing, principal investing, sales and
trading, research, investment management and other financial and
non-financial activities and services.
Laidlaw is the owner of shares of Fairchild's common stock.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Blake Muir Harper, Esq.
HULETT HARPER STEW ART LLP
550 West C Street, Suite 1500
San Diego, CA 92101
Tel: (619) 338-1133
Fax: (619) 338-1139
- and -
Richard B. Brualdi, Esq.
Gaitri Boodhoo, Esq.
Lauren C. Watson, Esq.
THE BRUALDI LAW FIRM,P.C.
29 Broadway, Suite 2400
New York, NY 10006
Tel: (212) 952-0602
Fax: (212) 952-0608
FANDUEL INC: "Coleman" Moved from Superior Court to C.D. Cal.
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled David Coleman v. Fanduel Inc et
al., Case No. BC600889, was removed from the Los Angeles County
Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California (Western Division - Los Angeles). The
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:15-cv-09876-FMO-KS to the
proceeding.
FanDuel operates an online fantasy sports platform that enables
users to play fantasy games and win cash prizes. The company, a
Delaware Corporation, is based in New York, New York with an
additional office in Edinburgh, Scotland.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Behram V Parekh, Esq.
Heather Marie Baker Dobbs, Esq.
Michael L Kelly, Esq.
KIRTLAND AND PACKARD LLP
2041 Rosecreans Avenue 3rd Floor
El Segundo, CA 90245
Telephone: (310) 536 1000
Facsimile: (310) 536 1001
E-mail: bvp@kirtlandpackard.com
hmb@kirtlandpackard.com
mlk@kirtlandpackard.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Jui-Ting Anna Hsia
ZwillGen Law LLP
235 Montgomery Street Suite 425
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 590 2341
Facsimile: (415) 636 5965
E-mail: anna@zwillgen.com
FIDELITY RESOURCES: "Clinton" Suit Seeks Back Pay, OT Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Craig Clinton, Plaintiff, v. Fidelity Resources, Inc. Defendant,
Case No. 1:15-cv-03854-ELH (D.Md., December 16, 2015), seeks to
recover unpaid wages, liquidated damages, interest, reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs under Section 16(b) of the Federal Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938, as amended, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201, et
seq., unpaid wages, liquidated damages, interest, reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs under Maryland Wage and Hour Law,
Maryland Code Annotated, Labor and Employment Article Sec. 3-401
et seq.
Fidelity Resources Inc. is a non-profit business in Baltimore
County. It owns and operates a large assisted living facility
where the Plaintiff worked in supervisory care services. Defendant
provides a range of care options to their clients, including
family support services, community supported living arrangements,
mental health care, speech and language impairment care, and other
neurological impairment care.
Clinton consistently worked as much as 60-80 hours per week
without overtime premium.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Lanier, Esq.
Benjamin L. Davis, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF PETER T. NICHOLL
36 South Charles Street, Suite 1700
Baltimore, MD 21201
Tel: (410) 244-7005
Fax: (410) 244-8454
Email: jlanier@nicholllaw.com
bdavis@nicholllaw.com
FMA ALLIANCE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Stapinski" Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
John Kenneth Stapinski, on behalf of himself and other similarly
situated consumers v. FMA Alliance, Ltd., Case No. 2:15-cv-08618-
MCA-MAH (D.N.J., December 14, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's
unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt.
FMA Alliance, Ltd. operates a debt collection firm in New Jersey.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew Taylor Sheffield, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL LUPOLOVER
120 Sylvan Avenue, Suite 300
Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632
Telephone: (201) 461-0059
E-mail: ms@lupoloverlaw.com
FTS INTERNATIONAL: "Garcia" Suit Moved from S.D. to N.D. Texas
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Garcia et al. v. FTS,
International, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-00250, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Fort
Worth). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 4:15-
cv-00963-Y to the proceeding.
According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly misclassified
Plaintiffs as being exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiffs' job duties, as well as those of all other Service
Supervisors, do not fit within any exemption to the FLSA's
overtime requirements.
FTS International Services, together with its subsidiaries,
provides oil and natural gas well stimulation services to the oil
and gas industry in the United States. The company is
headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
John T Holleman, Esq.
Tim Steadman, Esq.
HOLLEMAN AND ASSOCIATES PA
1008 W 2nd Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Telephone: (501) 975 5040
Facsimile: (501) 975 5043
E-mail: jholleman@johnholleman.net
The Defendant is represented by:
John B Brown, Esq.
Joseph Andrew Magliolo, Esq.
OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART PC
Preston Commons West
8117 Preston Road, Ste 500
Dallas, TX 75225
Telephone: (214) 987 3800
Facsimile: (214) 987 3927
E-mail: john.brown@ogletreedeakins.com
joseph.magliolo@ogletreedeakins.com
GENERAL CABLE: 6th Circuit Appeal Pending
-----------------------------------------
General Cable Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for
the quarterly period ended October 2, 2015, that an appeal by
class action plaintiffs to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals is
pending.
"We have been reviewing, with the assistance of external counsel,
certain commission payments involving sales to customers of our
subsidiary in Angola," the Company said. "The review has focused
upon payment practices with respect to employees of public utility
companies, use of agents in connection with such payment
practices, and the manner in which the payments were reflected in
our books and records. We have determined at this time that
certain employees in our Portugal and Angola subsidiaries directly
and indirectly made or directed payments at various times from
2002 through 2013 to officials of Angola government-owned public
utilities that raise concerns under the FCPA and possibly under
the laws of other jurisdictions. Based on an analysis completed
with the assistance of our external counsel and forensic
accountants, we have concluded at this time, that we are able to
reasonably estimate the profit derived from sales made to the
Angolan government-owned public utilities in connection with the
payments described above which we believe is likely to ultimately
be disgorged. As a result, we recorded an estimated charge in the
amount of $24 million as an accrual as of December 31, 2014. There
was no change to the accrual in the three or nine months ended
October 2, 2015. The accrued amount reflects the probable and
estimable amount of the Angola-related profits that the Company
believes is subject to being disgorged, and does not include any
provision for any fines, civil or criminal penalties, or other
relief, any or all of which could be substantial."
"We also have been reviewing, with the assistance of external
counsel, our use and payment of agents in connection with our
Thailand and India operations and certain transactions in our
Egypt and China businesses, which may have implications under the
FCPA. We have voluntarily disclosed these matters to the SEC and
the DOJ and have provided them with additional information at
their request, including information in response to an SEC
subpoena. The SEC and DOJ inquiries into these matters are
ongoing. We continue to cooperate with the DOJ and the SEC with
respect to these matters. At this time, we are unable to predict
the nature of any action that may be taken by the DOJ or SEC or
any remedies these agencies may pursue as a result of such
actions.
"We have hired a stand-alone Chief Compliance Officer who is
responsible for the day-to-day management of our compliance
function and reports to our Chief Executive Officer with a
reporting relationship to the Audit Committee. The Chief
Compliance Officer has hired a compliance team that is focused on
building a robust ethics and compliance program that incorporates
systems and disciplined processes for ongoing risk assessments,
training, communications, proactive compliance audits and
management of reporting concerns. We are continuing to implement
an approval program for third parties that we use outside of the
United States including a review of the agreements under which
they were retained and a risk-based assessment of these third
parties to determine the scope of due diligence measures to be
performed by a third-party investigative firm. We also have
provided specific anti-corruption training to our global sales
force, and provided an interactive online anti-corruption training
to all salaried employees.
"We conducted internal investigations, subject to the oversight of
the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors and with the
assistance of external counsel, principally relating to matters
resulting in restatements of a number of our previously issued
financial statements. The matters addressed in the investigations
included (i) inventory accounting errors addressed in the
restatements, including those resulting from inventory theft in
Brazil, as well as the timing of internal reporting of the
inventory accounting issues to senior corporate management at our
headquarters in Highland Heights, Kentucky and (ii) historical
revenue recognition accounting practices with regard to "bill and
hold" sales in Brazil related to aerial transmission projects,
including instances where we determined that the requirements for
revenue recognition under GAAP with respect to the bill and hold
sales were not met. ("Bill and hold" sales generally are sales
meeting specified criteria under GAAP that enable the seller to
recognize revenue at the time title to goods and ownership risk is
transferred to the customer, even though the seller does not ship
the goods until a later time. In typical sales transactions other
than those accounted for as bill and hold, title to goods and
ownership risk is transferred to the customer at the time of
shipment or delivery.)
"In connection with these matters, among others, our management
identified control deficiencies that constituted material
weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. These
material weaknesses resulted in accounting errors that caused us
to issue two sets of restated financial statements.
"In March 2013, principally to correct the inventory accounting
errors, we issued restated consolidated financial statements as of
December 31, 2011 and 2010 and for the years ended December 31,
2011, 2010 and 2009, and unaudited restated financial statements
for interim periods in 2011 and interim periods ended on March 30,
2012 and June 29, 2012.
"In January 2014, principally to correct errors relating to
revenue recognition with respect to the bill and hold sales, we
issued restated consolidated financial statements (which also
encompassed matters addressed in the earlier restatement) as of
December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 and for the years ended December
31, 2012, 2011, 2010 and 2009, and unaudited restated financial
statements for interim periods in 2011 and 2012 and the interim
period ended on March 29, 2013.
"We voluntarily contacted the SEC to advise it of our initial
internal investigation, and we have continued to provide
information to the SEC on an ongoing basis, including, among other
things, information regarding the matters described above and
certain earnings management activities by employees prior to the
end of 2012. . . . These earnings management activities (none of
which identified to date had a material effect on our consolidated
financial statements) were designed to delay the reporting of
expenses or other charges, including improper capitalization of
costs, misuse of accruals and failure to timely report inventory
shortfalls identified through physical inventory counts. The SEC
has issued a formal order of investigation. Pursuant to the formal
order, the SEC issued subpoenas to us seeking relevant documents
and to certain of our current and former employees seeking their
testimony. The SEC has requested information regarding, among
other things, the above-described Angola matter, matters that were
subject to our internal investigations and earnings management
activities by employees. We continue to cooperate with the SEC in
connection with its investigation.
"Any determination that our operations or activities are not in
compliance with existing laws or regulations could result in the
imposition of substantial fines, civil and criminal penalties, and
equitable remedies, including disgorgement and injunctive relief.
Because the government investigations and our review regarding
commission payment practices and our use and payment of agents
described above are ongoing, we are unable to predict their
duration, scope, results, or consequences. Dispositions of these
types of matters can result in modifications to business practices
and compliance programs, and in some cases the appointment of a
monitor to review future business and practices with the objective
of effecting compliance with the FCPA and other applicable laws.
At this time, we cannot reasonably estimate the amount or range of
additional possible loss that we may incur above the amount
accrued to date in connection with the foregoing matters.
"Litigation was initiated against us and certain of our current
and former directors, executive officers and employees following
the restating of our financial statements principally as a result
of the matters . . . relating to our Brazilian business.
"Two civil complaints were filed in the United States District
Court for the Southern District of New York on October 21, 2013
and December 4, 2013 by named plaintiffs, on behalf of purported
classes of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired our
publicly traded securities, against us, Gregory Kenny, our former
President and Chief Executive Officer, and Brian Robinson, our
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.
"On our motion, the complaints were transferred to the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, the
actions were consolidated, and a consolidated complaint was filed
in that Court on May 20, 2014 by City of Livonia Employees
Retirement System, as lead plaintiff on behalf of a purported
class of all persons or entities who purchased our securities
between November 3, 2010 and October 14, 2013 (the "City of
Livonia Complaint"). The City of Livonia Complaint alleged claims
under the antifraud and controlling person liability provisions of
the Exchange Act, alleging generally, among other assertions, that
we employed inadequate internal financial reporting controls that
resulted in, among other things, improper revenue recognition,
understated cost of sales, overstated operating income, net income
and earnings per share, and the failure to detect inventory lost
through theft; that we issued materially false financial results
that had to be restated on two occasions; and that statements of
Messrs. Kenny and Robinson that they had tested and found
effective our internal controls over financial reporting and
disclosure were false. The City of Livonia Complaint alleged that
as a result of the foregoing, our stock price was artificially
inflated and the plaintiffs suffered damages in connection with
their purchase of our stock. The City of Livonia Complaint sought
damages in an unspecified amount; reasonable costs and expenses,
including counsel and experts fees; and such equitable injunctive
or other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
"On January 27, 2015, the Court dismissed the City of Livonia
Complaint, with prejudice, based on plaintiff's failure to state a
claim upon which relief could be granted. On February 24, 2015,
plaintiff filed a motion to alter or amend the January 27, 2015
judgment and for leave to file the proposed amended complaint,
which the lower Court also denied.
"On June 9, 2015, plaintiff appealed the lower Court's decisions
to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which appeal is currently
pending."
GENERAL MOTORS: Scheuer Evidence in Ignition Switch Case Weak
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Hamblett, writing for New York Law Journal, reports that the
first bellwether trial chosen by plaintiffs to try to hold General
Motors liable for defective ignition switches fell apart on Jan.
21.
With lawyers for the automaker poised to present evidence that
plaintiff Robert Scheuer and his wife, Lisa Scheuer, lied about
his injuries following the 2014 crash of his Saturn Ion and
misrepresented the financial consequences of those injuries,
Southern District Judge Jesse Furman said he had to assume the
couple had committed "a fraud on the court and on the jury."
Judge Furman told both sides that, given the new evidence and the
weakness of the Scheuer evidence to date, "It might make sense to
make this case go away," and he urged settlement talks that began
almost immediately.
"I don't think it's even a close call," Furman said about
admitting General Motors' evidence that just came to light.
Judge Furman allowed GM, set to begin its case on Jan. 22, to add
two witnesses to its list:
Robert Kleven, an Oklahoma realtor who GM said would testify that
Robert Scheuer apparently altered or fabricated a $441,431 check
stub from the federal government's retirement fund "and then
texted a picture of the check stub to Mr. Kleven to induce him to
allow plaintiff and his wife to live in their 'dream house,'" even
though Scheuer knew he didn't have the money to close on the
house. Mr. Kleven, GM said in court papers, reached out to GM
after hearing a radio account about the start of the trial.
The second witness is a forensics expert who will analyze the
authenticity of text messages and other communications and
documents exchanged between Messrs. Kleven and Scheuer that would
undermine Mr. Scheuer's claim of being incapacitated in the months
following the accident. The papers note that, in addition to the
judge and the jury, the 49-year-old mailman may have "misled his
own counsel."
It had already been rough going for Mr. Scheuer in the first of
six bellwether trials, with each side picking three, to set the
parameters for settlement of some 300 cases in the multi-district
litigation.
The problem for the plaintiffs was that the Scheuer case was one
they selected.
General Motors was forced to issue a massive and belated recall of
cars in 2014 after it was revealed that the ignition switch could
inadvertently be turned from the "on" to the "accessory" position,
thus shutting down the car's power steering and brake system and
preventing air bags from deploying.
Mr. Scheuer testified that he got the recall notices and followed
instructions to have only the ignition key on his keychain, but he
still asserted ignition failure was the reason his air bags failed
to deploy when he swerved to avoid another vehicle and crashed
into the trees in Bristow, Oklahoma, on May 28, 2014. He claimed
he was rendered unconscious for roughly three hours.
Mr. Scheuer claimed back and neck injuries from the accident, but
he did not fare well on the witness stand, as he was grilled by GM
lawyers about pre-existing back and neck injuries, including
surgeries, going back over 20 years before the accident, and the
fact that he made two calls to his voicemail while supposedly
passed out behind the wheel of his damaged car.
Armed with the new evidence, GM lawyer Richard Godfrey, a partner
at Kirkland & Ellis, asked for Lisa Scheuer to return to the
witness stand to challenge her testimony on both the home loan and
her husband's injuries -- injuries Robert Scheuer testified made
him unable to recall anything concerning the loan transaction in
the months following the accident.
"This jury is entitled to hear the truth," Mr. Godfrey said.
GRAFTECH INTERNATIONAL: Facing Suits over Brookfield Deal
---------------------------------------------------------
GrafTech International Ltd., in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for
the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, disclosed pending
litigation related to the Company's merger deal with Brookfield.
On August 17, 2015, the Company was acquired by affiliates of
Brookfield Asset Management Inc. A number of putative class action
complaints have been filed relating to the merger. The lawsuits,
which contain substantially similar allegations, include
allegations that the transactions do not appropriately value the
Company, were the result of an inadequate process, include
preclusive deal protection devices, involved conflicts of
interests and further allege that the public disclosures made by
the Company in connection with such transactions were materially
misleading. GrafTech, Brookfield and Brookfield's affiliates are
alleged to have aided and abetted the alleged fiduciary breaches.
The lawsuits seek a variety of equitable relief, including
rescission of the Merger, in addition to damages arising from the
defendants' alleged breaches and attorneys' fees and costs. The
defendants believe that the allegations are without merit and
intend to vigorously defend the lawsuits.
The lawsuits include:
-- a lawsuit captioned David Widlewski v. Randy Carson,
Thomas A. Danjczek, Karen Finerman, Joel L. Hawthorne, David R.
Jardini, Nathan Milikowsky, M. Catherine Morris, BCP IV GrafTech
Holdings LP, and Athena Acquisition Subsidiary Inc. (Civil Action
No. 11086-VCL) filed on June 2, 2015, in the Court of Chancery of
the State of Delaware;
-- a lawsuit captioned Walter Watson. v. GrafTech
International Ltd., Randy Carson, Thomas A. Danjczek, Karen
Finerman, Joel L. Hawthorne, David R. Jardini, Nathan Milikowsky,
M. Catherine Morris, Brookfield Asset Management, Inc., Brookfield
Capital Partners Ltd., Brookfield Capital Partners IV L.P., BCP IV
GrafTech Holdings LP, and Athena Acquisition Subsidiary Inc.
(Civil Action No. 11096-VCL) filed on June 4, 2015, in the Court
of Chancery of the State of Delaware;
-- a lawsuit captioned CyHyoung Park v. GrafTech
International Ltd., Randy Carson, Thomas A. Danjczek, Karen
Finerman, Joel L. Hawthorne, David R. Jardini, Nathan Milikowsky,
M. Catherine Morris, BCP IV GrafTech Holdings LP, and Athena
Acquisition Subsidiary Inc. (Civil Action No. 11125-VCL) filed on
June 9, 2015, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware;
-- a lawsuit captioned Charles Daeda v. GrafTech
International Ltd., Randy Carson, Thomas A. Danjczek, Karen
Finerman, Joel L. Hawthorne, David R. Jardini, Nathan Milikowsky,
M. Catherine Morris, Brookfield Asset Management Inc., BCP IV
GrafTech Holdings LP, and Athena Acquisition Subsidiary Inc.
(Civil Action No. 11145-VCL) filed on June 15, 2015, in the Court
of Chancery of the State of Delaware;
-- a lawsuit captioned Abraham Grinberger, v. GrafTech
International Ltd., Randy Carson, Thomas A. Danjczek, Karen L.
Finerman, Joel L. Hawthorne, David R. Jardini, Nathan Milikowsky,
M. Catherine Morris, Brookfield Asset Management Inc., Brookfield
Capital Partners Ltd., BCP IV GrafTech Holdings LP, Athena
Acquisition Subsidiary Inc. (Civil Action No. 11148-VCL) filed on
June 15, 2015, in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware;
and
-- a lawsuit captioned Bruce Wells v. GrafTech International
Ltd., Randy Carson, Thomas A. Danjczek, Karen Finerman, Joel L.
Hawthorne, David R. Jardini, Nathan Milikowsky, M. Catherine
Morris, BCP IV GrafTech Holdings LP, Athena Acquisition Subsidiary
Inc., and Brookfield Capital Partners Ltd. (Civil Action No.
11166-VCL) filed on June 17, 2015, in the Court of Chancery of
the State of Delaware.
Two lawsuits filed in Ohio, a lawsuit captioned Travis J.
Kelleher, etc. v. GrafTech International Ltd., et al. (Case No.
CV-15-846032) filed on May 22, 2015, in the Court of Common Pleas
in the State of Ohio and a lawsuit captioned Mark O'Neill and
Adoracion Guerrero, et al. v. Joel L. Hawthorne, et al. (Case No.
CV-15-847670) filed on June 29, 2015, in the Court of Common Pleas
in the State of Ohio, were dismissed without prejudice by the
Court of Common Pleas on September 24, 2015.
HARVEST NATURAL: Supreme Court Denies Petition for Rehearing
------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court of the United States has denied a petition for
rehearing in the case, Kensho Sone, et al., v. Harvest Natural
Resources, Inc., No. 15-279 (U.S.).
Harvest Natural Resources, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that on July
24, 2013, 70 individuals, all alleged to be citizens of Taiwan,
filed an original complaint and application for injunctive relief
relating to the Company's interest in the WAB-21 area of the South
China Sea. The case is, Kensho Sone, et al. v. Harvest Natural
Resources, Inc., in the United States District Court, Southern
District of Texas, Houston Division.
The complaint alleged that the area belonged to the people of
Taiwan and sought damages in excess of $2.9 million and
preliminary and permanent injunctions to prevent the Company from
exploring, developing plans to extract hydrocarbons from,
conducting future operations in, and extracting hydrocarbons from,
and the WAB-21 area.
The Company filed a motion to dismiss the suit, which was granted
by the district court in August 2014. The plaintiffs appealed the
dismissal. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral
arguments on June 3, 2015 and affirmed the district court's
dismissal on June 4, 2015. The plaintiffs filed a petition for
writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court of the United States. On
October 13, 2015, the Supreme Court denied the petition. On
December 7, 2015, the Supreme Court denied the petition for
rehearing.
HARVEST NATURAL: Seeks Dismissal of Securities Class Suits
----------------------------------------------------------
Harvest Natural Resources, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that the
Company and other named defendants are seeking dismissal of
consolidated class action lawsuits in Texas.
These related class action lawsuits were filed on the dates
specified in the United States District Court, Southern District
of Texas: John Phillips v. Harvest Natural Resources, Inc., James
A. Edmiston and Stephen C. Haynes (March 22, 2013) ("Phillips
case"); Sang Kim v. Harvest Natural Resources, Inc., James A.
Edmiston, Stephen C. Haynes, Stephen D. Chesebro', Igor Effimoff,
H. H. Hardee, Robert E. Irelan, Patrick M. Murray and J. Michael
Stinson (April 3, 2013); Chris Kean v. Harvest Natural Resources,
Inc., James A. Edmiston and Stephen C. Haynes (April 11, 2013);
Prastitis v. Harvest Natural Resources, Inc., James A. Edmiston
and Stephen C. Haynes (April 17, 2013); Alan Myers v. Harvest
Natural Resources, Inc., James A. Edmiston and Stephen C. Haynes
(April 22, 2013); and Edward W. Walbridge and the Edward W.
Walbridge Trust v. Harvest Natural Resources, Inc., James A.
Edmiston and Stephen C. Haynes (April 26, 2013).
The complaints allege that the Company made certain false or
misleading public statements and demand that the defendants pay
unspecified damages to the class action plaintiffs based on stock
price declines. All of these actions have been consolidated into
the Phillips case. The Company and the other named defendants have
filed a motion to dismiss and intend to vigorously defend the
consolidated lawsuits.
HAIN CELESTIAL: Working to Finalize Accord in Calif. Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
The Hain Celestial Group, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that the
Company is currently working with the plaintiffs in a consolidated
class action lawsuit in California to finalize a settlement.
On May 11, 2011, Rosminah Brown, on behalf of herself and all
other similarly situated individuals, as well as a non-profit
organization, filed a putative class action in the Superior Court
of California, Alameda County against the Company. The complaint
alleged that the labels of certain Avalon Organics(R) brand and
JASON(R) brand personal care products used prior to the Company's
implementation of ANSI/NSF-305 certification in mid-2011 violated
certain California statutes.
Defendants removed the case to the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California. The action was
consolidated with a subsequently-filed putative class action
containing substantially identical allegations concerning only the
JASON(R) brand personal care products. The consolidated actions
sought an award for damages, injunctive relief, costs, expenses
and attorney's fees.
In July 2015, the Company reached an agreement in principle with
the plaintiffs to settle the class action for $7,500,000 in
addition to the distribution of consumer coupons up to a value of
$2,000,000. In connection with the proposed settlement, the
Company recorded a charge of $5,725,000 in the fourth quarter of
fiscal 2015 (a separate charge of $1,975,000 was recorded in prior
years). The Company is currently working with the plaintiffs to
finalize the matter.
HEXAGON METROLOGY INC: "Yelle" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay
------------------------------------------------------
Taren Yelle, individually and on behalf of a class of persons
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Hexagon Metrology, Inc., and
John Doe Companies, 1-10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-
00534 (D.R.I., December 17, 2015), seeks compensatory and
liquidated damages, as well as attorneys' fees, litigation
expenses and other equitable relief in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201, et seq., the Rhode Island
Minimum Wage Act, Sec. 28-12-1, et seq.
Yelle was employed as an inside salesperson and alleges the
Defendant for failing to pay overtime compensation for the hours
rendered in excess of 40 per work week.
Hexagon Metrology, Inc. is a Delaware corporation and maintains a
principal place of business in North Kingstown, County of
Washington, State of Rhode Island.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
V. Edward Formisano, Esq.
Michael D. Pushee, Esq.
FORMISANO & COMPANY, P.C.
100 Midway Place, Suite 1
Cranston, RI 02920-5707
Tel: (401) 944-9691
Fax: (401) 944-9695
INDIANA FAMILY & SOCIAL SVCS: "Jackson" Seeks Treatment for Hep C
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah Jackson, on her own behalf and on behalf of a class of those
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Secretary Of The Indiana Family
And Social Services Administration, in his official capacity,,
Defendants., Case No. 0:15-cv-62630-JIC (S.D. Ind., Indianapolis
Division, November 25, 2015), seeks preliminary injunction
enjoining the defendant from enforcing its requirement on
"Harvoni" treatment, attorneys' fees and costs and all other
proper relief.
Ms. Jackson has been diagnosed with Hepatitis C and was denied
Harvoni treatment because she was not infected with HIV or AIDS
and she is not a liver transplant.
Drug combination ledipasvir/sofosbuvir has been marketed under the
trade name Harvoni and allegedly cures Hepatitis C in 94-99% of
patients, irrespective of the fibrosis level or the presence or
absence of liver cirrhosis.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gavin M. Rose, Esq.
ACLU OF INDIANA
1031 E. Washington St.
Indianapolis, IN 46202
Tel: (317) 635-4059, Ext. 106
Email: grose@aclu-in.org
- and -
Fran Quigley, Esq.
HEALTH AND HUMAN RIGHTS CLINIC
Indiana Univ. McKinney School of Law
530 West New York Street
Indianapolis, IN 46202
Tel: (317) 274-1911
Email: quigley2@iupui.edu
IDENTIV INC: "Rok" Suit Seeks Damages from Share Price Drop
-----------------------------------------------------------
Likar Rok, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Identiv, Inc., Jason Hart, Brian Nelson, James
Ousley, Steven Humphreys, Steven Finney, Gary Kremen and Daniel
Wenzel, Defendants, Case No. 3:15-cv-05775 (N.D. Cal., December
16, 2015), seeks to recover damages including interest, reasonable
attorneys' fees and equitable/injunctive or other relief in
violation of the federal securities laws under Sections 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5.
Identiv is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of
the State of Delaware. It is a global security technology company
that provides trust solutions in the connected world. It Company
has allegedly and repeatedly made material misrepresentations and
omitted material information concerning, among other things, the
Company's revenue recognition practices, key accounting metrics,
and its internal controls. Identiv common stock sank from $2.95 to
$2.49 per share on December 1, 2015 after news that its
independent accounting firm refused to conform to the Company's
accountants.
Plaintiff lost from purchases and sales of the Company's
securities.
Hart is the President of the Company, and he also serves on the
Board of Directors. Nelson was the Company Chief Financial Officer
from December 2013 to November 2015. Ousley is the Chairman of the
Board of the Company, and he has served as director since July
2014. He also currently serves as chairman of the Audit Committee.
Humphreys is the Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and he
also serves as a Director. Finney is the Interim Chief Financial
Officer of the Company. Kremen and Wenzel serve as directors.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark Punzalan, Esq.
PUNZALAN LAW, P.C.
600 Allerton Street, Suite 201
Redwood City, California 94063
Tel: (650) 362-4150
Fax: (650) 362-4151
Email: markp@punzalanlaw.com
- and -
Na'il Benjamin, Esq.
BENJAMIN LAW GROUP, A.P.C.
101 California St., Ste. 2710
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: (415) 633-8833
Fax: (415) 349-3334
Email: nbenjamin@BenjaminLawGroup.com
ILLINOIS VEHICLE INSURANCE: "Cardenas" Suit Seeks Back Wages, OT
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cristina Cardenas, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Illinois Vehicle Insurance
Agency, L.L.C, Defendant., Case No. 1:15-cv-11326 (N.D. Ill.,
December 16, 2015), seeks to recover overtime wages, damages and
attorney's fees and costs pursuant to Fair Labor Standards Act, as
amended, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201 et. seq. and the New Jersey State Wage
and Hour Law, 34:11-56a et seq.
Cardenas worked as an Insurance Agent for the Defendant. She
claims instances of working in excess of 40 hours in a workweek
without overtime compensation. Cardenas took a medical leave and
was relieved of her full time position upon her return, thus
deprived of benefits due the former.
Illinois Vehicle Insurance Agency is an Illinois corporation,
headquartered in Oakbrook Terrace, Illinois and is registered with
the Illinois Secretary of State.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alejandro Caffarelli, Esq.
Lorrie T. Peeters, Esq.
Alexis D. Martin, Esq.
CAFFARELLI & ASSOCIATES LTD.
224 N. Michigan Ave., Ste. 300
Chicago, IL 60604
Tel: (312) 763-6880
INVESTMENT PROFESSIONALS INC: "Herron" Suit Seeks OT, Deductions
----------------------------------------------------------------
Joseph R. Herron, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Investment Professionals Inc.,
Defendant., Case No. Case 2:15-cv-01664-MPK (W.D. Pa., December
16, 2015), seeks compensatory damages, including restitution for
both regular and overtime compensation due, restitution and
reimbursement of all employee expenses not reimbursed, temporary,
preliminary and permanent enjoinment restraining Defendant from
engaging in similar unlawful conduct, accounting of all wages and
all sums unlawfully charged back and withheld from compensation
due to Plaintiff, imposition of a constructive trust upon the
assets of the Defendant, appropriate penalties as applicable for
Defendant's failure to timely pay wages, impermissible deductions
from the compensation, overtime wages, reasonable attorneys' fees,
litigation expenses and costs of suit under the federal Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201.
Defendant is an independent investment and insurance brokerage and
asset management firm specializing in the on-site delivery of
investment programs for community financial institutions. It
conducts business at #3 Temple Road, Aliquippa, PA 15001 with its
principal headquarters located at 16414 San Pedro Ave, Suite 150,
San Antonio, TX 78232.
Plaintiff was employed by Investment Professionals Inc. as a
broker. He claims to have rendered in excess of 40 hours per work
week without overtime compensation and was not reimbursed for his
business-related expenses.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
Jamisen A. Etzel, Esq.
CARLSON LYNCH SWEET & KILPELA, LLP
1133 Penn Ave., 5th Floor
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
Tel: (412) 322-9243
Fax: (724) 656-1556
Email: glynch@carlsonlynch.com
INVESTMENT TECHNOLOGY: Defending N.Y. Class Suits over SEC Probe
----------------------------------------------------------------
Investment Technology Group, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9,
2015, for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that the
Company is a party to putative class action lawsuits have been
filed with respect to the Company and certain of its current and
former executives in connection with the Company's announcement of
an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
On August 12, 2015, the Company reached a final settlement with
the staff of the Division of Enforcement of the SEC in connection
with the SEC's investigation into a proprietary trading pilot
operated within AlterNet for sixteen months in 2010 through mid-
2011. The investigation was focused on customer disclosures, Form
ATS regulatory filings and customer information controls relating
to the pilot's trading activity, which included (a) crossing
against sell-side clients in POSIT and (b) violations of Company
policy and procedures by a former employee. These violations
principally involved information breaches for a period of several
months in 2010 regarding sell-side parent orders flowing into
ITG's algorithms and executions by all customers in non-POSIT
markets that were not otherwise available to ITG clients.
According to the terms of the settlement, the Company paid an
aggregate amount of $20.3 million, representing a civil penalty of
$18 million, disgorgement of approximately $2.1 million in trading
revenues and prejudgment interest of approximately $250,000. The
$20.3 million settlement amount was reserved in the second quarter
of 2015. During the three and nine months ended September 30,
2015, the Company incurred legal and other costs related to this
matter of $2.6 million, and $4.9 million, respectively.
In connection with the announcement of the SEC investigation, two
putative class action lawsuits were filed with respect to the
Company and certain of its current and former executives. One
lawsuit, captioned Shah v. Investment Technology Group, Inc. et
al., was filed on August 5, 2015, in the United States District
Court for the Central District of California (the "CDCA"), while
the other, Bernacchi v. Investment Technology Group, Inc. et al.,
was filed on August 12, 2015, in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York (the "SDNY"). The
complaints allege, among other things, that the defendants made
material misrepresentations or omitted to disclose material facts
concerning, among other subjects, the matters that were the
subject of the SEC settlement regarding AlterNet, and the SEC
investigation that led to the SEC settlement. The complaints seek
an unspecified amount of damages under the federal securities
laws.
In October 2015, the Shah action was transferred to the SDNY,
where it is anticipated it will be consolidated with the Bernacchi
action. The Company cannot predict the outcome of these actions,
but intends to defend them vigorously.
ISLAMIC DAY SCHOOL: "Beyah" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Habib Beyah, Plaintiff, v. Islamic Day School, Inc., and Eliyah
Allen, individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:15-cv-08668-ES-MAH
(D.N.J., December 16, 2015), seeks to recover overtime wages,
damages and attorney's fees and costs pursuant to Fair Labor
Standards Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201 et. seq. and the New
Jersey State Wage and Hour Law, 34:11-56a et seq.
Defendants operate a school in East Orange, Essex County, New
Jersey where Beyah was employed full time as a cook. Beyah
routinely worked five days per week and approximately 45 hours per
week at the rate of $12 per hour and claims to be paid the same
rate for overtime in excess of 40 hours.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jodi J. Jaffe, Esq.
JAFFE GLENN LAW GROUP, P.A.
301 N. Harrison Street, Suite 9F, #306
Princeton, NJ 08540
Tel: (201) 687-9977
Fax: (201) 595-0308
E-mail: JJaffe@JaffeGlenn.com
ISS FACILITY: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------
Curtis Lamar Sweet, on his own behalf and all similarly situated
individuals v. ISS Facility Services, Inc., Case No. 8:15-cv-
02849-SDM-TBM (M.D. Fla., December 14, 2015) is brought against
the Defendants for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
ISS Facility Services, Inc. operates a facility services company
in North America.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Andrew Ross Frisch, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
Suite 400, 600 N Pine Island Rd
Plantation, FL 33324
Telephone: (954) 318-0268
Facsimile: (954) 333-3515
E-mail: afrisch@forthepeople.com
- and -
C. Ryan Morgan, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
Ste 1600, 20 N. Orange Ave
Orlando, FL 32801
Telephone: (407) 420-1414
Facsimile: (407) 245-3401
E-mail: rmorgan@forthepeople.com
- and -
Marc Reed Edelman, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN
201 N. Franklin Street, Ste. 700
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 223-5505
Facsimile: (813) 257-0572
E-mail: MEdelman@forthepeople.com
J&S KIDSWEAR: Faces "Tepperman" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Shari Tepperman, on behalf of herself, individually, and on behalf
of all others similarly-situated v. J&S Kidswear, Inc., d/b/a
Denny's Childrenswear, Case No. 2:15-cv-07113-SJF-GRB (E.D.N.Y.,
December 14, 2015) is brought against the Defendant for failure to
pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standard Act.
J&S Kidswear, Inc. operates a children's and infants' wear store
located in Plainview, New York.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Alexander T. Coleman, Esq.
Michael J. Borrelli, Esq.
Melanie J. Lazarus, Esq.
BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES PLLC
1010 Northern Blvd, Suite 328
Great Neck, NY 11201
Telephone: (516) 248-5550
Facsimile: (516) 248-6027
E-mail: atc@employmentlawyernewyork.com
mjb@employmentlawyernewyork.com
ml@employmentlawyernewyork.com
JANI-KING: 3rd Circuit Hears Oral Arguments in Franchisee Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
P.J. D'Annunzio, The Legal Intelligencer, reports that attorneys
representing parties embroiled in a class action over pay
deductions argued in federal appeals court over whether--workers
in a cleaning service franchise were considered independent
contractors or employees of the franchisor.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit heard argument on
Jan. 20 in Williams v. Jani-King of Philadelphia. The defendant,
the Jani-King cleaning franchise, appealed the district court's
certification of a class consisting of those who signed franchise
agreements with Jani-King. The plaintiffs claimed that they were
mischaracterized as independent contractors and not as employees
under Pennsylvania's Wage Payment and Collection Law, resulting in
improper wage deductions by the franchisor.
To determine whether the franchisees were employees or independent
contractors, the question of who had control over the day-to-day
operations of the individual cleaning business had to be answered,
Jani-King's counsel, Aaron D. Van Oort, argued.
Mr. Van Oort told the three-judge panel consisting of Third
Circuit Judges D. Michael Fisher, Michael A. Chagares and Robert
E. Cowen that even though Jani-King offered its franchisees the
business model and use of its name, it did not control the way the
individual shops did business.
"Simply deciding what work is offered does not indicate control,"
Mr. Van Oort said, adding the franchisor did not have the right to
micromanage the individual franchisees.
Chagares said that rather than quibble about who had control over
the end result of the work, it should be determined whether Jani-
King had the ability to amend the franchise agreement to change
how the cleaning work was done.
"Couldn't you amend everything?" he asked.
Mr. Van Oort said there were constraints on Jani-King's right to
amend what it can control. The agreement stated, according to Van
Oort, that the franchisee has the responsibility of time and
method of providing services.
Mr. Van Oort said the plaintiffs' claims that Jani-King oversaw
quality control did not prove that it had control over day-to-day
-operations, nor was it relevant.
"Quality controls, even really invasive ones, are not the
evidence," Mr. Van Oort said.
Judge Fisher asked Mr. Van Oort to explain how the evidence fit
within the context of the appeal against class certification.
Mr. Van Oort claimed the only evidence the class members had to
show that Jani-King was in charge were the quality controls in
place for each business. That evidence, he said, was not uniform
and had to be examined on an individual basis, making a class
unnecessary.
Expressing concern about the widespread implications of Mr. Van
Oort's argument, Judge Fisher asked, "Doesn't that say that
franchisors are exempt from collective actions?"
Mr. Van Oort said they wouldn't be if there was common evidence of
control, but more importantly, it was the type of control that
mattered.
JOHNNY ROCKETS GROUP: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks OT, Back Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Noe Hernandez, individually and on behalf of other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. The Johnny Rockets Group, Inc.,
a Delaware Corporation and Does 1-10, Defendants, Case No.
BC604536 (Cal. Super, Central Los Angeles County, December 17,
2015), seeks to recover unpaid wages, penalties, equitable relief
and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs as well as injunctive
relief, restitution, and disgorgement of all benefits obtained by
the Defendants in violation of Labor Code Sec. 200, 500 and 1194,
et seq. issued by the California Industrial Welfare Commission.
Plaintiff works as a cook and dishwasher at the Johnny Rockets
restaurant located at 1322 3rd Street Promenade, Santa Monica,
California 90401. Plaintiff claims to have not been paid all his
wages, deprived of lawful meal and rest periods, did not receive
itemized wage statements and overtime compensation as well as
failing to pay all wages due at the termination.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Zorik Mooradian, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OFZORIK MOORADIAN
5023 N. Parkway Calabasas
Calabasas, CA 91302
Tel: (818)876-9627
Fax: (888)783-1030
Email: zorik@mooradianlaw.com
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
----------------------------------------------------------------
T. Jason Noye, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-02382-YK
(M.D. Pa., December 11, 2015) is brought against the Defendants
for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.
Johnson & Johnson is a medical device, pharmaceutical and consumer
packaged goods manufacturer.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David A. Searles, Esq.
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
FRANCIS & MAILMAN, PC
Land Titile Building, 19th Floor
100 South Broad Street
Philadelphia, PA 19110
Telephone: (215) 735-8600
E-mail: dsearles@consumerlawfirm.com
jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com
jsoumilas@consumerlawfirm.com
- and -
Marielle R. Macher, Esq.
COMMUNITY JUSTICE PROJECT
118 Locust Street
Harrisburg, PA 17101
Telephone: (717) 236-9486 ext. 214
E-mail: mmacher@cjplaw.org
KING MEAT: "Alvarado" Suit Moved from State Court to C.D. Cal.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Leonel Alvarado v. King Meat, Inc.
et al., Case No. BC579974, was removed from the Los Angeles
Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California (Western Division - Los Angeles).
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:15-cv-09766-RGK-AS to
the proceeding.
King Meat was founded in 1975 and is headquartered in Vernon,
California. The company's line of business includes wholesale
distribution of packaged quick-frozen vegetables, juices, meats,
fish and other deep freeze products.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric B Kingsley, Esq.
Liane Katzenstein Ly, Esq.
KINGSLEY AND KINGSLEY APC
16133 Ventura Boulevard Suite 1200
Encino, CA 91436
Telephone: (818) 990 8300
Facsimile: (818) 990 2903
E-mail: eric@kingsleykingsley.com
lkatzenstein@kingsleykingsley.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Amber S Healy, Esq.
Scott K Dauscher, Esq.
ATKINSON ANDELSON LOYA RUDD AND ROMO APC
12800 Center Court Drive, Suite 300
Cerritos, CA 90703
Telephone: (562) 653 3200
Facsimile: (562) 653 3333
E-mail: ahealy@aalrr.com
SDauscher@aalrr.com
KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION: Awaits Final Judgment in Oregon Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Knight Transportation, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that a final
judgment has not yet been entered in an Oregon class action
lawsuit.
"We are a defendant in a class action lawsuit which was filed on
May 8, 2008, in the California Superior Court for Tulare County,"
the Company said. "The plaintiffs, who are current and former
drivers and who worked for us during the period of May 8, 2004
through August 6, 2015, allege claims for failure to provide meal
periods, inaccurate itemized pay statements and other items under
the California Labor Code."
"During the second quarter of 2015, we reached a preliminary
settlement with the plaintiffs. Should the settlement not be
approved by the court, further negotiations may take place that
could result in a different settlement, or the case may continue
on to trial, which could result in a judgment for a different
amount.
"We are also a defendant in a class action lawsuit which was filed
on June 10, 2010, in the Oregon Circuit Court for Multnomah
County. The plaintiffs, who are current and former drivers who
worked for us during the period of June 10, 2004 through June 10,
2010, allege the Company failed to pay minimum wage for attending
pre-employment orientation and failed to pay minimum wage for work
performed during certain pay periods after the start of
employment.
"On July 2, 2015, the court, following a bench trial, issued a
decision finding that we failed to pay minimum wage to some class
members for work performed during certain pay periods and assessed
statutory penalties and prejudgment interest related to our
failure to comply with minimum wage obligations. A final judgment
has not yet been entered.
"Shortly after the end of the third quarter of 2015, we reached a
preliminary settlement with the plaintiffs and the current and
former drivers who worked for us during the period June 11, 2010
through September 30, 2015. Should the settlement not be approved
by the court, further negotiations may take place that could
result in a different settlement, or a final judgment may be
entered, which could result in a judgment for a different amount.
"As a result of the California settlement and the Oregon decision,
during the second quarter of 2015, we accrued a total of $7.2
million, including the plaintiffs' estimated attorneys' fees and
related costs and excluding attorneys' fees and costs related to
our defense, in our condensed consolidated financial statements.
We had previously accrued $0.2 million as of December 31, 2014
related to these cases."
LA MICHOACANA: "Castro" Suit Seeks Recovery of Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------
Jose Castro and Luis Antonio Castro, on behalf of themselves and
all other similarly situated persons, known and unknown,
Plaintiffs, v. La Michoacana Premium, La Michoacana Tradicional De
Joliet, LLC, La Michoacana Tradicional De Bolingbrook, LLC and
Enrique Diaz Pacheco a.k.a. Genaro Arciga, individually,
Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-11409 (N.D. Ill., Eastern Division,
December 17, 2015), seeks recovery of all back wages due with
interest, injunction and other and further relief under the Fair
Labor Standards Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec 201 and the Illinois Minimum
Wage Law, 820 ILCS 105/1 et seq.
Defendants operate ice cream shops where Plaintiffs worked. They
claimed to have worked in excess of 40 hours per week without
overtime premium. The shops are owned by Genaro Arciga.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas M. Werman, Esq.
Maureen A. Salas, Esq.
Sarah J. Arendt, Esq.
Zachary C. Flowerree, Esq.
WERMAN SALAS P.C.
77 W. Washington, Suite 1402
Chicago, Il 60602
Tel: (312) 419-1008
Email: dwerman@flsalaw.com
msalas@flsalaw.com
sarendt@flsalaw.com
zflowerree@flsalaw.com
LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: Oral Arguments Heard in Securities Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
A Pennsylvania court has heard oral arguments in a securities
litigation involving Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, the
Company said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the quarterly period
ended September 30, 2015.
On June 8, 2012, a federal securities class action and shareholder
derivative lawsuit was filed in the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania alleging that the Company and its CEO assisted
various breaches of fiduciary duties based on the Company's
purchase of a licensing interest in a development-stage
pharmaceutical program from the Genaera Liquidating Trust in May
2010 and the Company's subsequent sale of half of its interest in
the transaction to Biotechnology Value Fund, Inc.
Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in February 2015, which
the Company moved to dismiss on March 20, 2015. The court heard
oral arguments on September 30, 2015.
The Company intends to continue to vigorously defend against the
claims against the Company and its CEO. Due to the complex nature
of the legal and factual issues involved, however, the outcome of
the matter is not presently determinable.
LINDA YU: "Yeh" Alleges Shady Insurance Deal
--------------------------------------------
Suyih A. Yeh, an individual, Plaintiff, v. Linda Yu, an
individual, Pacific Advisors LLC, The Guardian Life Insurance
Company of America and Does 1 to 50, Defendants, Case No.
15CV289087 (Cal. Super., Sta. Clara County, December 16, 2015),
seeks monetary damages plus interest and disgorgement and
restitution of all money paid resulting from fraud (intentional
and negligent misrepresentation), violation of Consumer Legal
Remedies Act, Civil Code Sec. 1750 and violation of Unfair
Competition Law and Business and Profession Code Sec. 17200.
Plaintiff purchased a life insurance policy under Guardian. Yu
allegedly inflated Yeh's assets to raise premiums payments and
eventually the Plaintiff could no longer afford them.
The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America is a New York
Corporation authorized to do business in the State of California.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Vance Chang, Esq.
WONG & HUNG
413 Third Street
Oakland, CA 94607
Tel: (510) 451-2124
Fax: (510) 451-2448
MAXWELL & MORGAN: Illegally Collects Debt, "Lowe" Action Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Lowe, individually and on behalf of those similarly
situated v. Maxwell & Morgan PC, Case No. 2:15-cv-02481 (D. Ariz.,
December 7, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and
unconscionable means to collect a debt.
Maxwell & Morgan PC operates a law firm located at 4854 E Baseline
Rd # 104, Mesa, AZ 85206.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Douglas Clark Wigley, Esq.
Francis Robert Connelly II, Esq.
Jonathan Adam Dessaules, Esq.
DESSAULES LAW GROUP
5353 N 16th St., Ste. 110
Phoenix, AZ 85016
Telephone: (602) 274-5400
Facsimile: (602) 274-5401
E-mail: dwigley@dessauleslaw.com
rconnelly@dessauleslaw.com
jdessaules@dessauleslaw.com
MCCORMICK & CO: "Barnes" Suit Moved to S.D. Ill. to Wash. D.C.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Barnes v. McCormick & Co. Inc.,
Case No. 3:15-cv-01224, was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Illinois, to the U.S. District
Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC). The District
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-02226-ESH to the proceeding.
McCormick manufactures, markets, and distributes spices, seasoning
mixes, condiments, and other flavorful products to the food
industry worldwide. It operates through two segments, Consumer and
Industrial. The company is based in Sparks, Maryland.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew H. Armstrong, Esq.
ARMSTRONG LAW FIRM LLC
8816 Manchester Rd., No. 109
St. Louis, MO 63144
Telephone: (314) 258 0212
E-mail: matt@mattarmstronglaw.com
MCCORMICK & CO: "Ferreri" Suit Moved from S.D.N.Y. to Wash. D.C.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Ferreri v. McCormick & Company,
Incorporated, Case No. 7:15-cv-06760, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, to the
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, DC).
The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-02240-ESH to
the proceeding.
McCormick manufactures, markets, and distributes spices, seasoning
mixes, condiments, and other flavorful products to the food
industry worldwide. It operates through two segments, Consumer and
Industrial. The company is based in Sparks, Maryland.
MCCORMICK & CO: "Vladimirsky" Suit Goes to Wash. D.C.
-----------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Vladimirsky et al. v. Mccormick
and Company, Incorporated et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-08102,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the District
of Columbia (Washington, DC). The District Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 1:15-cv-02215-ESH to the proceeding.
According to the complaint, the Defendants were unjustly enriched
at the expense of Plaintiffs, thus brought claims for violation of
Section 1 of the Sherman Act, state consumer protection statutes,
and unjust enrichment. The Plaintiffs paid for full containers of
pepper that in fact contained just 75% pepper and 25% air, and
thus were overcharged, did not receive the benefit of the bargain
and/or suffered out-of-pocket loss.
McCormick manufactures, markets, and distributes spices, seasoning
mixes, condiments, and other flavorful products to the food
industry worldwide. It operates through two segments, Consumer and
Industrial. The company is based in Sparks, Maryland.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq.
Daniel J. Kurowski, Esq.
Steve W. Berman, Esq.
HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
455 N. Cityfront Plaza Drive, Suite 2410
Chicago, IL 60611
Telephone: (708) 628 4949
Facsimile: (708) 628 4950
E-mail: beth@hbsslaw.com
dank@hbsslaw.com
dank@hbsslaw.com
steve@hbsslaw.com
- and -
J. Barton Goplerud, Esq.
HUDSON, MALLANEY, SHINDLER &
ANDERSON, P.C.
5015 Grand Ridge Drive, Suite 100
West Des Moines, Iowa 50265
Telephone: (515) 223 4567
E-mail: jbgoplerud@hudsonlaw.net
- and -
David Freydin, Esq.
Timothy A. Scott, Esq.
FREYDIN LAW OFFICES
8707 Skokie Blvd. No. 305
Skokie, IL 60077
Telephone: (866) 308 0051
E-mail: david.freydin@freydinlaw.com
Timothy.scott@freydinlaw.com
MCGOVERN & CO: "Artisan" Seeks Payment of Contract Job
------------------------------------------------------
Artisan Kitchens, LLC d/b/a Artisans & Company, on behalf of
itself and all other persons similarly situated as trust fund
beneficiaries of Lien Law Trusts of which McGovern & Company, LLC,
is Trustee, Plaintiff, v. MCGOVERN & COMPANY, LLC, DANIEL MCGOVERN
and JOHN DOES 1 through 5, Defendants, Case No. 654226/2015 (N.Y.
Sup., December 16, 2015), seeks to recover compensatory and
punitive damages from the Defendants for their breach of trust
obligations, reasonable costs and expenses including reasonable
attorneys' fees.
McGovern has failed and refused to pay Artisan the balance of
$147,158.40 due and owing to Artisan for a construction project in
885 Third Avenue, New York, New York, being situated in Block
1327, Lot 1. The Lien Law Trust Funds were required to be used by
McGovern for the payment of "trust claims" as defined in the Lien
Law which McGovern has failed to pay. Defendants allegedly have
improperly diverted Lien Law Trust Funds contrary to the
requirements of the Lien Law.
Plaintiff Artisan Kitchens, LLC d/b/a Artisans & Company is a
limited liability company created and existing by virtue of the
laws of the State Delaware and authorized to do business in the
State of New York with principal place of business located at
41-D Germay Drive, Wilmington, Delaware, 19804.
McGovern & Company, LLC is a New York limited liability company
with place of business at 286 Madison Avenue, 6th Floor, New York,
New York, 10017.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jose A. Aquino, Esq.
DUANE MORRIS LLP
1540 Broadway
New York, NY 10036
Tel: (212) 692-1000
Email: jaaquino@duanemorris.com
MDL 2196: Settlements of Direct & Indirect Purchaser Claims OK'd
----------------------------------------------------------------
Mohawk Industries, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for
the quarterly period ended October 3, 2015, that beginning in
August 2010, a series of civil lawsuits were initiated in several
U.S. federal courts alleging that certain manufacturers of
polyurethane foam products and competitors of the Company's carpet
underlay division had engaged in price fixing in violation of U.S.
antitrust laws. The Company has been named as a defendant in a
number of individual cases (the first filed on August 26, 2010),
as well as in two consolidated amended class action complaints
(the first filed on February 28, 2011, on behalf of a class of all
direct purchasers of polyurethane foam products, and the second
filed on March 21, 2011, on behalf of a class of indirect
purchasers). All pending cases in which the Company has been named
as a defendant were filed in or transferred to the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Ohio for consolidated pre-trial
proceedings under the name In re: Polyurethane Foam Antitrust
Litigation, Case No. 1:10-MDL-02196.
In these actions, the plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and/or a
class of purchasers, seek damages allegedly suffered as a result
of alleged overcharges in the price of polyurethane foam products
from at least 1999 to the present. Any damages actually awarded at
trial are subject to being tripled under U.S. antitrust laws.
On March 23, 2015, the Company entered into an agreement to settle
all claims brought by the class of direct purchasers, and on April
30, 2015, the Company entered into an agreement to settle all
claims brought by the class of indirect purchasers. Both
settlement agreements are subject to court approval, which the
Company expects to receive. The Company denies all allegations of
wrongdoing but settled the class actions to avoid the uncertainty,
risk, expense and distraction of protracted litigation.
Approval of Direct Purchaser Class Settlements
District Judge Jack Zouhary on Nov. 19, 2015, granted final
approval of six class settlements, entered into by the Direct
Purchaser Class with Defendants FFP Holdings, LLC, Foamex
Innovations, Inc., Future Foam, Inc., Hickory Springs
Manufacturing Co., Mohawk Industries Inc., and the Woodbridge
Defendants. In the same order, the Court granted, in part, the
Direct Purchaser Class Counsel's request for an award of attorney
fees, reimbursement of expenses, and incentive awards for
representative Plaintiffs; and denied Direct Action Plaintiff
Ashley Furniture Industries, Inc.'s request to withdraw its
exclusion from the Direct Purchaser Class, so that it may
participate in four of the six settlements.
The settlements provided for substantial payments:
* FFP: single lump-sum payment of $16 million;
* FXI: single lump-sum payment of $60 million;
* Future Foam: $32 million, using a payment schedule ending
in March 2016;
* Hickory Springs: $19.5 million, using a payment schedule
ending in January 2017;
* Mohawk: single lump-sum payment of $98 million;
and
* The Woodbridge Defendants: $50 million, using a payment
schedule ending in November 2017
A copy of the Nov. 19 Memorandum Opinion and Order is available at
http://bit.ly/20lMXupfrom Leagle.com.
Approval of Indirect Purchaser Class Settlements
District Judge Zouhary on Jan. 27, 2016, granted final approval of
nine class settlements, entered into by the Indirect Purchaser
Plaintiffs with these defendants:
Settling Gross Portions of Settlement Amount that are Docket
Defendants Settlement Contingent or Payable More than 3 Weeks
Number of Amount in the Future Agreement
Settlement Amount Contingent Portion
----------------- -------------------
Carpenter Co. $63,500,000 $43.5 million is not
payable until all
appellate rights are
exhausted
FFP Holdings, LLC $2,750,000 none
Future Foam, Inc. $10,500,000 $2.5 million is not due
until July 31, 2016;
$4 million is contingent
on a successful outcome
in separate litigation
against Dow Chemical
FXI Holdings, Inc. $9,500,000 none
Hickory Springs $10,250,000 $1.5 million is not due
until June 30, 2016;
another $1.5 million is
not due until June 30,
2017; and $5.25 million
is contingent on a
successful outcome in
separate litigation
against Dow Chemical
Leggett & Platt $26,500,000 none
Mohawk Industries $16,000,000 none
Vitafoam Products $2,750,000 none
Canada Limited and
Vitafoam, Inc.
Woodbridge Foam $9,500,000 $2.25 million is not due
Corporation until a year from now;
Woodbridge and Sales $2.25 million is not due
& Engineering, Inc., until December 31, 2017
and Woodbridge Foam
Fabricating, Inc.
-------------- --------------
TOTAL $151,250,000 $62.75 million
A copy of the Jan. 27 Memorandum Opinion and Order is available at
http://bit.ly/1nK8DPDfrom Leagle.com.
MDL 2591: "Orebaugh" Suit Goes from S.D. Indiana to Kansas
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Orebaugh et al. v. Syngenta AG et
al., Case No. 1:15-cv-01915, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Kansas (Kansas City). The
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:15-cv-09922-JWL-JPO to
the proceeding.
Syngenta produces crop protection products and seeds. The company
produces herbicides, insectides, and fungicides, and seeds for
field crops, vegetables, and flowers. The company is based in
Basil, Switzerland.
The Orebaugh is being consolidated with MDL 2591 in re: Syngenta
AG MIR162 Corn Litigation. The MDL was created by Order of the
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on
December 14, 2014. All actions involve common factual questions
regarding Syngenta's decision to commercialize the MIR162
genetically modified corn trait in the absence of Chinese approval
to import corn with that trait. In its December 14, 2014 Order,
the MDL Panel found that the actions in this litigation involve
common questions of fact, and that centralization in the District
of Kansas will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. e John W. Lungstrum, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 2:14-md-02591-JWL-JPO.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jason Ruskin Reese, Esq.
Stephen M. Wagner, Esq.
WAGNER REESE & CROSSEN, LLP
11939 North Meridian Street
Carmel, IN 46032
Telephone: (317) 569 0000
Facsimile: (317) 569 8088
The Defendants are represented by:
Andrew W. Hull, Esq.
HOOVER HULL BAKER & HEATH LLP
111 Monument Circle-Ste. 4400
Indianapolis, IN 46244-0989
Telephone: (317) 822 4400
Facsimile: (317) 822 0234
E-mail: awhull@hooverhull.com
MDL 2667: "Llewellyn" Suit Transferred to N.D. Indiana
------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Llewellyn v. Medical Informatics
Engineering, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01352, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana,
to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana
(South Bend). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-
00616-RLM-CAN to the proceeding.
Medical Informatics Engineering provides Web-based software
solutions for physician practices and enterprises operating on-
site employee health clinics. Its solutions include WebChartNow,
pre-configured version of WebChart that enables solo or small
practices to create a WebChartNow account over the Internet;
WebChart EHR, a Web-based longitudinal patient record to meet the
specific workflow requirements and documentation preferences of
each practice and each individual clinician; and WebChart
Enterprise Health, a suite of electronic health record solutions
for employee health clinics, occupational health applications, and
corporate health and wellness programs. The company is based Fort
Wayne, Indiana.
The Llewellyn case is being consolidated with MDL 2667 in re:
Medical Informatics Engineering, Inc., Customer Data Security
Breach Litigation. The MDL was created by Order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on December 10,
2015. These actions share factual questions arising from a data
security breach that allegedly occurred sometime between May 7 and
May 26, 2015. According to plaintiffs, this data breach resulted
in the electronic theft of personally identifiable information and
personal health information of some 3.9 million individuals whose
healthcare providers used electronic medical record services
provided by MIE. In its December 10, 2015, the MDL Panel concluded
that the Northern District of Indiana is the appropriate
transferee district for this litigation. The majority of the
actions are pending in that District, and numerous plaintiffs
support centralization there. Presiding Judges in the MDL is Hon.
Robert L. Miller, Jr., United States District Judge. The lead case
is 3:15-md-02667-RLM-CAN.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Piatt, Esq.
Joseph N. Williams, Esq.
William N. Riley, Esq.
RILEY WILLIAMS & PIATT LLC
301 Massachusetts Ave
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 633 5270
Facsimile: (317) 426 3348
E-mail: jpiatt@rwp-law.com
jwilliams@rwp-law.com
wriley@rwp-law.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Claudia D. McCarron, Esq.
LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
550 E Swedesford Rd Ste 270
Wayne, PA 19087
Telephone: (215) 977 4100
Facsimile: (215) 966 4101
E-mail: claudia.mccarron@lewisbrisbois.com
MDL 2667: "Kulha" Suit Transferred to N.D. Indiana
--------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Kulha et al. v. Medical
Informatics Engineering, Inc., Case No. 8:15-cv-02185,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Middle
District of Florida, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Indiana (South Bend). The Northern District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-00614-RLM-CAN to the proceeding.
Medical Informatics Engineering provides Web-based software
solutions for physician practices and enterprises operating on-
site employee health clinics. Its solutions include WebChartNow,
pre-configured version of WebChart that enables solo or small
practices to create a WebChartNow account over the Internet;
WebChart EHR, a Web-based longitudinal patient record to meet the
specific workflow requirements and documentation preferences of
each practice and each individual clinician; and WebChart
Enterprise Health, a suite of electronic health record solutions
for employee health clinics, occupational health applications, and
corporate health and wellness programs. The company is based Fort
Wayne, Indiana.
The Kulha case is being consolidated with MDL 2667 in re: Medical
Informatics Engineering, Inc., Customer Data Security Breach
Litigation. The MDL was created by Order of the United States
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on December 10, 2015.
These actions share factual questions arising from a data security
breach that allegedly occurred sometime between May 7 and May 26,
2015. According to plaintiffs, this data breach resulted in the
electronic theft of personally identifiable information and
personal health information of some 3.9 million individuals whose
healthcare providers used electronic medical record services
provided by MIE. In its December 10, 2015, the MDL Panel concluded
that the Northern District of Indiana is the appropriate
transferee district for this litigation. The majority of the
actions are pending in that District, and numerous plaintiffs
support centralization there. Presiding Judges in the MDL is Hon.
Robert L. Miller, Jr., United States District Judge. The lead case
is 3:15-md-02667-RLM-CAN.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Joel R. Rhine, Esq.
RHINE LAW FIRM, P.C.
1612 Military Cutoff Road, Ste. 300
Wilmington, NC 28403
Telephone: (910) 777 7651
- and -
John Allen Yanchunis, Sr., Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, PA
201 N Franklin Street, 7th Floor
Tampa, FL 33602
Telephone: (813) 223 5505
Facsimile: (813) 223 5402
- and -
Steven William Teppler, Esq.
ABBOTT LAW GROUP, PA
2929 Plummer Cove Rd
Jacksonville, FL 32223-6672
Telephone: (904) 292 1111
Facsimile: (904) 292 1220
The Defendant is represented by:
Kelly S. Weaver, Esq.
LEWIS, BRISBOIS, BISGAARD & SMITH, LLP-TAMPA
3812 Coconut Palm Dr., Suite 200
Tampa, FL 33619
Telephone: (813) 739 1900
Facsimile: (813) 739 1919
MDL 2673: St. Louis Police Retirement Sys. Suit Goes to S.D.N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled The Police Retirement System of St
Louis v. Bank of Nova Scotia et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-08417,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois, to the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York (Foley Square). The Southern District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 1:15-cv-09968-PGG to the proceeding.
The Bank of Nova Scotia provides financial services in North
America, Latin America, the Caribbean and Central America, and
parts of Asia. The company serves 23 million customers through a
range of advice, products and services, including personal and
commercial banking, wealth management and private banking,
corporate and investment banking and capital markets. The bank is
headquartered in Halifax, Canada.
Barclays Capital provides securities brokerage and financial
advisory services. The company is based in New York, New York.
Barclays operates as a subsidiary of Barclays Group US, Inc. The
company is headquartered in New York, New York.
The Police Retirement System case is being consolidated with MDL
2673 in re: Treasury Securities Auction Antitrust Litigation. The
MDL was created by Order of the United States Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict Litigation on December 8, 2015. These actions share
common factual questions arising out of allegations that over 20
financial institutions, referred to as primary dealers, conspired
to manipulate the pricing of U.S. Treasury securities (Treasury
bills, notes, bonds, and related debt instruments) at Treasury
auctions overseen by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; and
derivative financial products, such as Treasury futures and
options, that are based on or otherwise tied to the price of
Treasury securities. In its December 8, 2015 Order, the MDL Panel
found that the cases involve common questions of fact, and that
centralization will serve the convenience of the parties and
witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of this
litigation. Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Paul G.Gardephe,
United States District Judge. The lead case is 1:15-md-02673-PGG.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
George Carlos Aguilar, Esq.
ROBBINS ARROYO LLP
600 B Street, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 525 3990
Facsimile: (619) 525 3991
E-mail: gaguilar@robbinsarroyo.com
- and -
Norman Rifkind
LASKY & RIFKIND, LTD.
11 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1600
Chicago, IL 60603
Telephone: (312) 634 0057
The Defendants are represented by:
Robert G. Houck, Esq.
David J. Yeres, Esq.
John D. Friel, Esq.
CLIFFORD CHANCE US, LLP
31 West 52nd Street
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 878 3224
Facsimile: (212) 878 8375
E-mail: robert.houck@cliffordchance.com
david.yeres@cliffordchance.com
john.friel@cliffordchance.com
- and -
Jay B. Kasner, Esq.
Shepard Goldfein, Esq.
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM LLP
Four Times Square
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 735 3000
Facsimile: (212) 735 2000
E-mail: jkasner@skadden.com
pmeckles@skadden.com
- and -
Jonathan Lucas Shapiro, Esq.
Penny Shane, Esq.
Stephen Ehrenberg, Esq.
SULLIVAN & CROMWELL LLP
125 Broad St.
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 558 3410
Facsimile: (212) 291 9490
E-mail: shapirojl@sullcrom.com
shanep@sullcrom.com
ehrenbergs@sullcrom.com
- and -
Robert Y. Sperling, Esq.
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
35 West Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 558 5600
Facsimile: (312) 558 5700
E-mail: rsperling@winston.com
- and -
Susannah P. Torpey, Esq.
Elizabeth P Papez, Esq.
Joseph Laurence Motto, Esq.
WINSTON & STRAWN LLP
200 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10166
Telephone: (212) 294 6700
Facsimile: (212) 294 4700
E-mail: storpey@winston.com
epapez@winston.com
jmotto@winston.com
- and -
Kenneth Ian Schacter, Esq.
MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP
101 Park Avenue
New York, NY 10178
Telephone: (212) 309 6815
Facsimile: (212) 309 6001
E-mail: kenneth.schacter@morganlewis.com
- and -
Brad Scott Karp, Esq.
Kenneth Anthony Gallo, Esq.
Richard A. Rosen, Esq.
Susanna Michele Buergel, Esq.
PAUL, WEISS, RIFKIND, WHARTON & GARRISON LLP
1285 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10019
Telephone: (212) 373 2384
Facsimile: (212) 373 2384
E-mail: bkarp@paulweiss.com
kgallo@paulweiss.com
rrosen@paulweiss.com
sbuergel@paulweiss.com
- and -
Edward Nathaniel Moss, Esq.
Pamela Addison Miller, Esq.
O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP
7 Times Square
New York, NY 10036
Telephone: (212) 326 2000
Facsimile: (212) 326 2061
E-mail: emoss@omm.com
pmiller@omm.com
MEDICREDIT INC: Illegally Collects Debt, "Hartman" Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Melissa Hartman, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Medicredit, Inc. and John Does 1-25, Case No. 2:15-cv-
01596 (W.D. Pa., December 7, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's
unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt.
Medicredit, Inc. owns and operates a debt collection firm in
Pennsylvania.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Mark G. Moynihan, Esq.
MOYNIHAN LAW
112 Washington Pl Ste 1-N
Pittsburgh, PA 15219
Telephone: (412) 889-8535
Facsimile: (800) 997-8192
E-mail: mark@moynihanlaw.net
MIDLAND CREDIT: Illegally Collects Debt, "Jeffreys" Action Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Vickey Jeffreys, on behalf of herself and those similarly situated
v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-08470
(D.N.J., December 4, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair
and unconscionable means to collect a debt.
Midland Credit Management, Inc. operates a financial service
company in New Jersey.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yongmoon Kim, Esq.
KIM LAW FIRM LLC
411 Hackensack Ave 2 Fl.
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 273-7117
Facsimile: (201) 273-7117
E-mail: ykim@kimlf.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Robert Anthony Diehl, Esq.
MARSHALL DENNEHEY WARNER COLEMAN & GOGGIN
425 Eagle Rock Avenue, Suite 302
Roseland, NJ 07068
Telephone: (973) 618-4100
E-mail: radiehl@mdwcg.com
MIDLAND CREDIT: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tara Wolin, Robert Greenwald, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Midland Credit Management, Inc., et
al., Case No. 2:15-cv-06996-LDW-AYS (E.D.N.Y., December 8, 2015)
seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to
collect a debt.
Midland Credit Management, Inc. operates a financial service
company in New York.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Craig B. Sanders, Esq.
BARSHAY SANDERS, PLLC
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (516) 203-7600
Facsimile: (516) 706-5055
E-mail: csanders@sanderslawpllc.com
- and -
David M. Barshay, Esq.
SANDERS LAW, PLLC
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (516) 203-7600
Facsimile: (516) 706-5055
E-mail: dbarshay@sanderslawpllc.com
MONITRONICS INTERNATIONAL: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Valerie Colletti, on behalf of herself and all similarly situated
persons v. Monitronics International Inc., Docket No. 0:15-cv-
04838 (D.S.C., December 4, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's
practice of sending unsolicited calls to consumer's wireless
telephone.
Monitronics International Inc. owns and operates a security alarm
monitoring company in South Carolina.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James Mixon Griffin, Esq.
Margaret Nicole Fox, Esq.
GRIFFIN AND DAVIS
1116 Blanding Street, First Floor
Columbia, SC 29201
Telephone: (803) 744-0800
Facsimile: (803) 744-0805
E-mail: jgriffin@griffindavislaw.com
mfox@griffindavislaw.com
MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Settling Non-Class Foam Purchaser Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mohawk Industries, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for
the quarterly period ended October 3, 2015, that the Company
remains a defendant in a number of cases involving other
purchasers of polyurethane foam products not sold by the Company.
On April 23, 2015, the Court consolidated twelve of these lawsuits
involving non-class claims filed against the Company by direct
purchasers of polyurethane foam. These consolidated cases had been
scheduled for trial to begin August 18, 2015.
The Company has executed agreements to settle all of the cases set
for trial in August and ten additional individual cases. The
Company has also reached an agreement in principle to settle one
additional individual case.
Three individual cases remain pending against the Company, all of
which were brought by purchasers of polyurethane foam products not
sold by the Company. The amount of the damages in the remaining
cases varies or has not yet been specified by the plaintiffs. Each
plaintiff also seeks attorney fees, pre-judgment and post-judgment
interest, court costs and injunctive relief against future
violations.
MOHAWK INDUSTRIES: Settles Class Action in Canada
-------------------------------------------------
Mohawk Industries, Inc. has reached a deal to settle a class
action lawsuit in Canada, the Company said in its Form 10-Q Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9,
2015, for the quarterly period ended October 3, 2015.
In December 2011, the Company was named as a defendant in a
Canadian Class action, Hi! Neighbor Floor Covering Co. Limited v.
Hickory Springs Manufacturing Company, et al., filed in the
Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, Canada and Options
Consommateures v. Vitafoam, Inc. et.al., filed in the Superior
Court of Justice of Quebec, Montreal, Canada, both of which allege
similar claims against the Company as raised in the U.S. actions
and seek unspecified damages and punitive damages.
On June 12, 2015, the Company entered into an agreement to settle
all claims brought by the class of Canadian plaintiffs. The
Company continues to deny all allegations of wrongdoing but is
settling to avoid the uncertainty, risk, expense and distraction
of protracted litigation.
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: "DaCosta" Suit Moved to R.I. Dist. Court
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled DaCosta v. Nationstar Mortgage,
LLC et al., Case No. 15-05242, was removed from the Providence
County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the District
of Rhode Island (Providence). The District Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 1:15-cv-00542-M-PAS to the proceeding.
Nationstar Mortgage, doing business as Champion Mortgage Company,
provides mortgage servicers for customers in the United States. It
also offers reverse mortgage services. Nationstar Mortgage LLC was
formerly known as Centex Credit Corporation and changed its name
to Nationstar Mortgage LLC in 2006. The company is headquartered
in Dallas, Texas.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Todd S. Dion, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF TODD S. DION.
1599 Smith Street
North Providence, RI 02911
Telephone: (401) 649 4330
Facsimile: (401) 649 4331
E-mail: toddsdion@msn.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Joseph A. Farside, Jr., Esq.
LOCKE LORD LLP
2800 Financial Plaza
Providence, RI 02903
Telephone: (401) 274 9200
Facsimile: (401) 276 6111
E-mail: joseph.farside@lockelord.com
NEW RIVER: "Dale" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Minimum Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Glenn Phillip Dale, Jr., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. New River Hospitality Holdings, LLC, et al.,
Case No. 0:15-cv-62626-WJZ (S.D. Fla., December 16, 2015) is an
action seeking to recover, under the Fair Labor Standards Act,
monetary damages for unpaid minimum wages.
New River Hospitality Holdings, LLC owns and operates a hotel and
restaurant in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Steven L. Schwarzberg, Esq.
Lisa M. Kohring, Esq.
SCHWARZBERG & ASSOCIATES
625 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 600
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
Telephone: (561) 659-3300
Facsimile: (561) 693-4540
E-mail: steve@schwarzberglaw.com
lkohring@schwarzberglaw.com
NEWS CORP: Loses Bid to Derail Online-Store Promotions Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Mark Hamblett, writing for New York Law Journal, reports that News
Corporation's attempt to derail a class action alleging an illegal
monopoly over in-store consumer goods promotions has been denied
by a federal judge.
Paving the way for a trial or settlement, Southern District Judge
William Pauley rejected the company's motions for summary judgment
in a suit filed by H.J. Heinz Co., Smithfield Foods, and other
non-retailer consumer packaged goods firms.
The firms sued in 2013, charging that News Corp., News America
Marketing In-Store Services and other subsidiaries maintain a
stranglehold on in-store promotions such as shelf signage, coupon
distribution, end-of-aisle advertising and sampling products at
some 52,000 retail stores across America.
Pauley certified the class action of Dial Corporation v. News
Corp., 13-cv-6802, in June 2015, finding issue of common proof
prevailed among retailers which purchased in-store promotions
known as ISPs directly from News Corp. starting April 8, 2008
(NYLJ, June 22, 2015).
The plaintiff consumer packaged goods firms (CPGs) alleged
violations of sections one and two of the Sherman Act, section
three of the Clayton Act, New York's Donnelly Act and Michigan's
Antitrust Reform Act. They charged that the anticompetitive
conduct included exclusive agreements maintained for in-store
promotions, the "staggered" expiration date of those agreements
and the guarantees that News Corp. pays for access to retail
stores.
During the damages period recognized by Pauley, News Corp. locked
up exclusive deals with 73 percent of participating retail stores
and more than 80 percent of retail grocer volume under exclusive
contract.
In News Corp.'s summary judgment motion, and in the plaintiffs'
response, the two sides differed over how long the exclusive
contracts were in place and at what pace the contracts expired.
The judge noted that by 2014, "News Corp.'s only remaining
competitor, Valassis, lost its key contracts and exited the third-
party ISP business."
On the "staggering" of contract expiration, the plaintiffs quoted
former News America Marketing CEO Martin Garofalo, who said, "News
America intentionally staggers the time of major retail deals to
minimize the risk of losing a major number of stores in any short
time period. . . .[T]his strategy serves as a deterrent to other
major companies from joining the in-store fray."
Reviewing the guarantees to retailers, the judge noted plaintiffs'
evidence that "News Corp. pays retailers fixed commissions that
'guarantee revenue even if the activity does not support it'," and
"those commissions increased dramatically when Valassis entered
the third-party ISP market."
In fact, he noted, after Valassis gave up and left the market,
"Within months, News Corp. was able to re-sign the retailers it
lost to Valassis."
The judge rejected the main argument made by News Corp. and denied
summary judgment under section one of the Sherman Act.
"News Corp. contends that its exclusive contracts are pro-
competitive because CPGs benefit from retail exclusivity," Pauley
said. "However, on the current record, this court cannot conclude
as a matter of law that the pro-competitive benefits of the
exclusive contracts are outweighed by the harm to competition."
The judge went on analyze the allegations of monopolization under
section two of the Sherman Act, agreeing on the plaintiffs'
contention that the third-party ISP market is distinct one, and
that News Corp. had a 90.5 percent of that market by 2009.
NEW YORK FOUNDATION: Sued Over Failure to Pay Overtime Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Bethania Rodriguez, individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated v. New York Foundation for Senior
Citizens Home Attendant Services,Inc., William R. Pawson and John
Does #1-10, Case No. 1:15-cv-09817 (S.D.N.Y., December 16, 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 home care facility located at
11 Park Pl Rm. 1416, New York, NY 10007.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
William Coudert Rand, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM COUDERT RAND
501 Fifth Ave., 15th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Telephone: (212) 286-1425
Facsimile: (646) 688-3078
E-mail: wcrand@wcrand.com
PAUL MICHAEL: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Debt Collection
--------------------------------------------------------------
Miriam Bassul, individually all other similarly situated consumers
v. Paul Michael Marketing Service Inc. d/b/a Paul Michael
Associates, Case No. 1:15-cv-06952 (E.D.N.Y., December 7, 2015)
seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to
collect a debt.
Paul Michael Marketing Service Inc. is a collection agency which
provides financial and insurance services, business administration
services, business facilities oversight and management support
services.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David Palace, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF DAVID PALACE
383 Kingston Avenue, #113
Brooklyn, NY 11213
Telephone: (347) 651-1077
Facsimile: (347) 464-0012
E-mail: davidpalace@gmail.com
PCH POULTRY: Faces "Zaragosa" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Oliverio Zaragosa v. PCH Poultry & Market, LLC, SRKH Investments,
LLC, and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. BC604215 (Cal.
Super. Ct., December 15, 2015) is brought against the Defendants
for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the California
Labor Code.
The Defendants own and operate a butcher shop that supplies a
range of poultry, including halal chickens, pigeon & quail.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Kevin A. Lipeles, Esq.
Thomas H. Schelly, Esq.
LIPELES LAW GROUP, APC
880 Apollo Street, Suite 336
El Segundo, CA 90245
Telephone: (310) 322-2211
Facsimile: (310) 322-2252
PIZZA-RANT CAFE: "Castro" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Edwin Portillo Castro and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Pizza-Rant Cafe, Inc. and Antonio Silvestro,
Defendants, Case No. 0:15-cv-62634-PAS (S.D. Fla., December 16,
2015), seeks to recover overtime wages, double damages and
reasonable attorney fees from Defendants, jointly and severally,
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff worked as a cook and claims to have worked an average of
58 hours a week for Defendants and paid an average of $14.39 per
hour but was never paid the extra half time rate for any hours
worked over 40 hours in a week.
Pizza-Rant Cafe, Inc. operates a restaurant under the name
Antonio's Pizza-Rant and is owned by Antonio Silvestro.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
J.H. Zidell, Esq.
J.H. ZIDELL, P.A.
300 71st Street, Suite 605
Miami Beach, Florida 33141
Tel: (305) 865-6766
Fax: (305) 865-7167
Email: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM
PRESIDENTIAL ROOFING: "Sanchez" Suit Seeks Overtime Wage
--------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Pureco-Sanchez, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Presidential Roofing And
Restoration, LLC and Jason Hatt, in his individual and corporate
capacities, Defendants, Case No. 1:15-cv-02726-PAB-KMT (D. Colo.,
December 16, 2015), seeks recovery of unpaid overtime compensation
and liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, costs and expenses,
declaratory and/or injunctive relief and other and further relief
as may be necessary and appropriate in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938 as amended, 29 U.S.C. Sec. 201, et seq. and
the Colorado Wage Act, C.R.S. Sec. 8-6-101, et seq.
Plaintiff is a roofer whose responsibilities include the teardown
of existing roof structures and replacing them with new roof
structures. He receives $21/hour and regularly renders in excess
of 40 hours per week but still receives the same rate instead of
the mandated overtime premium.
Presidential Roofing is a Colorado limited liability company that
specializes in commercial and industrial roofing with its
principal place of business located at 19029 E. Plaza Dr. Ste.
252, Parker, Colorado 80134 with Jason Hatt as owner.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffry M. Dougan, Esq.
MARATHON LAW, LLC
1045 Lincoln St. Ste. 104
Denver, CO 80203
Tel: (303) 704-1222
Fax: (303) 835-9010
Email: jeff@marathonlawdenver.com
PRIMOS STORES: "Borge" Suit Alleges Payroll Fraud, Racketeering
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ana Frances Borge, and and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. Grocery Primos, Inc., Super Primos, Inc., Primos
Supermarket Corp., Primos Convenience, LLC, Naser Othman,
individually, Ahmand Othman, individually, Fidel Othman,
individually and Petrona Garcia, individually, Defendants, Case
No. 1:15-cv-24616-KMW (S.D. Fla., Miami Division, December 16,
2015), seeks damages resulting from breach of agreement, recovery
of unpaid wages and retaliation under the Fair Labor Standards
Act, 29 U.S.C. Sec 201-219, violation of the Federal Racketeer
Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1961 et
seq., Florida Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act Sec.
501.203 and for injunctive relief pursuant to Federal Rule of
Civil Procedure 65.
Plaintiff alleges Defendants of wire fraud, mail fraud, failure to
pay minimum wages, failure to pay overtime wages, pyramiding of
employment taxes, misclassifying employees as independent
contractors, failing to file payroll taxes, forcing employees to
commit SNAP/EBT fraud and harboring of numbers of illegal workers
for whom federal payroll taxes were unpaid or understated by
Defendants.
Defendants operate a group of retail stores, jointly owned and
operated by Naser Othman, Ahmand Othman, Fidel Othman and Petrona
Garcia.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Peter M. Hoogerwoerd, Esq.
REMER & GEORGES-PIERRE, PLLC
44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200
Miami, FL 33130
Tel: (305) 416-5000
Fax: (305) 416-5005
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES: Illegally Collects Debt, Action Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Kimberly Impellizzeri, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Professional Services of NY, Ltd., Case No.
2:15-cv-06998 (E.D.N.Y., December 8, 2015) seeks to stop the
Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt.
Professional Services of NY, Ltd. is a repossession, commercial,
and retail collection agency located at 1 S Ocean Ave, Patchogue,
NY 11772.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Craig B. Sanders, Esq.
BARSHAY SANDERS, PLLC
100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
Garden City, NY 11530
Telephone: (516) 203-7600
Facsimile: (516) 706-5055
E-mail: csanders@sanderslawpllc.com
PUENTE HILLS HYUNDAI: "Kennon" Seeks Minimum Wage & OT Pay
----------------------------------------------------------
Megan Kennon, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Puente Hills Hyundai, LLC and Does 1-50,
Defendants, Case No. BC604270 (Cal. Super, Los Angeles County,
December 16, 2015), seeks declaratory injunction, equitable
relief, restitution for all costs incurred and/or losses,
enjoinment, statutory penalties, compensatory, punitive and
liquidated damages pursuant to Labor Code section 1194.2, pre-
judgment and post-judgment interest, injunctive and equitable
relief and attorneys' fees and cost of suit pursuant to Labor Code
sections 218.5 and 1194, Cal. Code Civil Procedure sections
1021.5.
Puente Hills Hyundai is an auto dealership in Los Angeles into
selling, servicing and repairing automobiles where Plaintiff
worked as a service advisor.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Glenn C. Nunes, Esq.
Anthony J. Nunes, Esq.
NUNES LAW GROUP, APC
2425 Olympic Blvd, Suite 4000-W
Santa Monica, CA 90404
Tel: (424) 252-4240
Fax: (424) 252-4301
Email: glenn@nuneslawgroup.com
tony@nuneslawgroup.com
RALEY'S: "Williams" Hits Lack of Amenities for Disabled
-------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Williams, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Raley's, Defendant, Case No. RG15796942
(Cal. Super., Alameda County, December 16, 2015), seeks minimum
statutory damages, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs in
violation of Americans with Disabilities Act, Unruh Civil Rights
Act and the California Disabled Persons Act.
Plaintiff is a T-6 paraplegic and requires a wheelchair to move
about. Plaintiff visited the Raley's located at 270 Sunset Avenue,
20 Suisun City, CA to purchase various groceries and suffered
discrimination as a result of being denied full and equal access,
inadequate parking space and restroom amenities to name a few.
Raley's is a California corporation located at 500 West Capitol
Avenue, West Sacramento, CA 95605. It operates a supermarket
chain.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Evan J. Smith, Esq.
BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC
9595 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 900
Beverly Hills, CA 90212
Tel: (877) 534-2590
Fax: (310) 247-0160
RENTECH INC: Defending Against Mustard & Sloan Suits
----------------------------------------------------
Rentech, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that the Company is
defending class action lawsuits related to a merger transaction
with CVR Partners, LP:
-- On August 29, 2015, Mike Mustard, a purported unitholder
of RNP, filed a class action complaint on behalf of the public
unitholders of RNP against RNP, Rentech Nitrogen GP, LLC (the
"General Partner"), RNHI, Rentech, CVR Partners, DSHC, LLC, Lux
Merger Sub 1 LLC ("Merger Sub 1") and Lux Merger Sub 2 LLC
("Merger Sub 2"), and the members of the General Partner's Board,
in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the "Mustard
Lawsuit").
-- On October 6, 2015, Jesse Sloan, a purported unitholder of
RNP, filed a class action complaint on behalf of the public
unitholders of RNP against RNP, the General Partner, CVR Partners,
Merger Sub 1, Merger Sub 2 and members of the General Partner's
Board in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (the "Sloan Lawsuit" and together with the Mustard
Lawsuit, the "Lawsuits").
The Lawsuits allege, among other things, that the consideration
offered by CVR Partners is unfair and inadequate and that, by
pursuing the proposed transaction with CVR Partners, RNP's
directors have breached their contractual and fiduciary duties to
RNP's unitholders. The Lawsuits also allege that the non-director
defendants aided and abetted the director defendants in their
purported breach of contractual and fiduciary duties. Furthermore,
the Sloan Lawsuit alleges that the registration statement filed
with the SEC with respect to the transaction fails to disclose
material information leading up to the Merger, fails to disclose
or contains misleading disclosures concerning Morgan Stanley & Co.
LLC's financial analyses and fails to disclose or contains
misleading disclosure concerning financial projections. The
Lawsuits seek to enjoin the Merger.
The Lawsuits are at a preliminary stage. RNP cannot predict the
outcome of the Lawsuits or any other lawsuit that might be filed
with respect to the Merger, nor can it predict the amount of time
and expense that will be required to resolve these or other
lawsuits. RNP believes the Lawsuits are without merit and intend
to defend against them vigorously.
SABEREH PIZZA: "Chanda" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay, Damages
--------------------------------------------------------
Ajit Chanda and Mohmmed Abutaher Sarder, in behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Sabereh Pizza,
Inc. d/b/a Tuscany and John Ghatan, Defendants, Case No.
654219/2015 (N.Y. Sup., New York County-Commercial Division,
December 16, 2015), seeks including unpaid overtime compensation,
unpaid spread-of-hours compensation and liquidated damages plus
interest, equitable and injunctive relief, enjoinment and
attorneys' fees and costs of suit in violation of New York Labor
Laws.
Sabereh Pizza Inc. is a New York corporation operating under the
name Tuscany, with its principal place of business located at 61
West 55th Street, New York, NY 10019, owned and operated by John
Ghatan.
Chanda and Sarder were employed by Defendants as deliverymen. They
allege Defendant of not paying overtime premium for work rendered
in excess of 40 hours per week, spread of hours premium, failing
to properly compensate the hourly minimum wage and non-issuance of
wage notices and pay stubs.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
John Troy, Esq.
TROY LAW, PLLC
41-25 Kissena Blvd., Suite 119
Flushing, NY 11355
Tel: (718) 762-1324
SANTANDER CONSUMER: Faces "Kleinberg" Suit Over Automated Calls
---------------------------------------------------------------
Eliezer Kleinberg v. Santander Consumer USA, Inc., Case No. 3:15-
cv-08677-AET-LHG (D.N.J., December 16, 2015) is brought against
the Defendant for placing autodialled calls and prerecorded
messages to the Plaintiff's cell phone without his prior, express
consent.
Santander Consumer USA, Inc. operates an automotive finance
company in Dallas, Texas.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Benjamin G. Kelsen, Esq.
THE LAW OFFICES OF BENJAMIN G. KELSEN, ESQ. LLC
1415 Queen Anne Road, Suite 206
Teaneck, NJ 07666
Telephone: (201) 692-0073
Facsimile: (201) 692-0151
E-mail: info@kelsenlaw.com
SEARS ROEBUCK: Faces "Oaks" Suit Over Defective Grill Design
------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Oaks, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Sears, Roebuck and Co., Case No. 1:15-cv-11318 (N.D.
Ill., December 16, 2015) arises from the alleged design defect of
Sears Kenmore grills that causes their firebox tray to rust and
fail prematurely, resulting in a safety hazard and the consumers'
inability to use the Grills as intended.
Sears, Roebuck and Co. is in the business of distributing and
selling Kenmore brand grills and other household appliances
through more than 2,400 Sears-branded and affiliated stores in the
United States and Canada.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James B. Zouras, Esq.
Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
205 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2560
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 233-1550
Facsimile: (312) 233-1560
Website: www.stephanzouras.com
- and -
Mark Schlachet, Esq.
3515 Severn Road
Cleveland, OH 44118
Telephone: (216) 225-7559
Facsimile: (216) 932-5390
E-mail: markschlachet@me.com
- and -
James C. Shah, Esq.
Natalie Finkelman, Esq.
SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN, MILLER & SHAH, LLP
35 East State Street
Media, PA 19063
Telephone: (610) 891-9880
Facsimile: (866) 300-7367
E-mail: jshah@sfmslaw.com
nfinkelman@sfmslaw.com
- and -
Raymond C. Zanney, Esq.
9425 Brookpark Road, 2nd Floor
Parma OH 44129
Telephone: (216) 739-2600
Facsimile: (216) 661-9292
E-mail: Rzesq@cs.com
- and -
Brian Ruschel, Esq.
925 Euclid Avenue, Suite 660
Cleveland, OH 44115
Telephone: (216) 621-3370
Facsimile: (216) 621-3371
E-mail: bruschel@aol.com
SHOPPERS DRUG: Recalls Indoor and Outdoor Seasonal Light Sets
-------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 27, 2015
Posting date: November 27, 2015
Type of communication: Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory: Household Items, Tools and Electrical Products
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Fire Hazard
Audience: General Public
Identification number: RA-56038
This recall involves various Indoor and Indoor/Outdoor Light and
Mini Light seasonal light sets.
Product Model Number UPC
------- ------------ ---
Indoor 100 Lights Mini ZHCA100BX/2S 057800905455
Light Set (Warm White)
Indoor 100 Lights Mini ZHCA100BX/2S 057800905462
Light Set (Multicolored)
Indoor 200 Lights Mini ZHCA200BX/4S 057800905479
Light Set (Multicolored)
Indoor 200 Lights Mini ZHCA200BX/4S 057800905486
Light Set (Clear)
Outdoor/Indoor 100 ZHCAL100WCX/2S 057800905585
Lights LED C6 (Warm White)
Outdoor/Indoor 100 Lights ZHCAL100WCX/2S 057800905592
LED C6 (Multicolored)
Consumers can locate the model number and CSA file number 263917
on the white tag affixed to the wire. The UPC code is located on
the back of the product's packaging.
Testing completed by Shoppers Drug Mart has determined that the
seasonal lights may pose an electric shock, overheating and/or
fire hazard.
Neither Health Canada nor Shoppers Drug Mart has received any
reports of consumer incidents or injuries related to the use of
these products.
Approximately 337 units were sold in Canada.
The recalled products were sold from October 1, 2015 to November
20, 2015 at Shoppers Drug Mart and Pharmaprix stores.
Manufactured in China.
Importer: Shoppers Drug Mart
Toronto
Ontario
CANADA
Manufacturer: Ningbo Ego International Co. Ltd.
3/F, No.168 East Road Songjiang, Yinzhou Area,
Ningbo
Zhejiang
315100
CHINA
Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled seasonal
lights and return it to any Shoppers Drug Mart or Pharmaprix store
for a full refund.
For additional information, please contact Shoppers Drug Mart toll
free at 1-800-746-7737 (1-800-SHOPPER) from 8:00 a.m. to 8:00
p.m., EST, Monday to Saturday.
Please note that the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act prohibits
recalled products from being redistributed, sold or even given
away in Canada.
Health Canada would like to remind Canadians to report any health
or safety incidents related to the use of this product or any
other consumer product or cosmetic by filling out the Consumer
Product Incident Report Form.
This recall is also posted on the OECD Global Portal on Product
Recalls website. You can visit this site for more information on
other international consumer product recalls.
For the complete list of recalls posted as a result of this
sampling and evaluation project, visit the Consumer Product Update
on seasonal lights.
Pictures of the Recalled Products available at:
http://is.gd/x9ybdb
SHOPPER'S DRUG: Recalls Digital Temple Thermometers
---------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 3, 2015
Posting date: December 22, 2015
Type of communication: Medical Device Recall
Subcategory: Medical Device
Hazard classification: Type I
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Medical Devices
Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number: RA-56414
The main issue for the product is that it was not calibrated
properly, and may give inaccurate temperature readings. As such, a
person using this may not realize the severity of a temperature.
We were informed of this issue as a result of a recall in the
United States.
Affected products:
A. Life Brand Digital Temple Thermometer
Lot or serial number: All lots.
Model or catalog number: 057800711568
Manufacturer: Shopper's Drug Mart/Pharmaprix
243 Consumer Road
Toronto, Ontario
M2J 4W8
CANADA
SODEXO INC: "Savannah" Suit Goes from Superior Court to N.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Savannah et al. v. Sodexo, Inc. et
al., Case No. C15-02147, was removed from the Contra Costa County
Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California (San Francisco). The District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05845-VC to the proceeding.
Sodexo, a Delaware corporation, designs, manages, and delivers on-
site, benefits and rewards, and personal and home services in the
United States, Canada, and Mexico. It provides quality of life
services in corporate, education, government, health care, senior
living, sports and leisure, and remote site segments. The Company
was formerly known as Sodexho, Inc. and changed its name to
Sodexo, Inc. in April 2008. The company was founded in 1966 and is
based in Gaithersburg, Maryland.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Andrew Clayton Ellison, Esq.
PALAY LAW FIRM
121 N. Fir Street Ste. F
Ventura, CA 93001
Telephone: (805) 641 6600
E-mail: andrew@palaylaw.com
- and -
Alejandro Pedro Gutierrez, Esq.
Hathaway Building
5450 Telegraph Road, #200
Ventura, CA 93003
Telephone: (805) 644 7111
Facsimile: (805) 644 8296
E-mail: agutierrez@hathawaylawfirm.com
- and -
Michael Anthony Strauss, Esq.
STRAUSS LAW GROUP
1484 E Main Street Second Floor
Ventura, CA 93001
Telephone: (805) 641 9992
E-mail: mas@palaylaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey David Wohl, Esq.
PAUL HASTINGS LLP
55 Second Street, 24th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-3441
Telephone: (415) 856 7000
Facsimile: (415) 856 7100
E-mail: jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
SONEPAR MANAGEMENT GROUP: "Guy" Suit to Recover Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Joe Guy, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, Sonepar Management Group Us, Inc. and World Electric
Supply, Inc., Defendants., Case No. 0:15-cv-62630-JIC (S.D. Fla.,
Fort Lauderdale Division, December 16, 2015), seeks damages in the
amount of the unpaid overtime compensation owed and reasonable
attorneys' fees pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.
Plaintiff worked for Defendants as a warehouse manager and claims
to have work in excess of 40 hours a workweek without overtime
compensation.
World Electric Supply, Inc. is an electrical supply and
distribution company with 10 locations in Florida and is part of
the Sonepar Management Group U.S., Inc.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jay P. Lechner, Esq.
Jason M . Melton, Esq.
WHITTEL & MELTON, LLC
One Progress Plaza
200 Central Avenue, #400
St. Petersburg, FL 33701
Tel: (727) 822-1111
Fax: (727) 898-2001
Email: Pleadings@theFLlawfirm.com
lechnerj@theFLlawfirm.com
shelley@theFLlawfirm.com
SOTHEBY'S: Supreme Court Won't Review Ruling in Royalties Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
The U.S. Supreme Court on Jan. 11, 2016, denied a petition for
writ of certiorari, declining to review last year's ruling by the
U.S. Appeals Court for the Ninth Circuit in the case, Sam Francis
Foundation, et al., Petitioners v. Christies, Inc., et al., No.
15-280 (U.S.).
The lawsuit was brought by artists against auction houses over
resale royalties.
Brian Boucher, writing for Artnet News, noted that the California
Resale Royalties Act of 1976 requires auction houses to pay a 5%
royalty to artists when their works sell at auction for more than
$1,000, including to parties outside California. A California
appellate court ruled in May 2015 that the part of the law
applying to interstate commerce was unconstitutional, saying that
it violated the Commerce Clause. The artists sued Christie's,
Sotheby's, and eBay for failing to pay royalties for some sales
that were conducted in California.
Sotheby's said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the quarterly
period ended September 30, 2015, that the Estate of Robert Graham,
et al. v. Sotheby's, Inc. is a purported class action commenced in
the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California in
October 2011 on behalf of U.S. artists (and their estates) whose
artworks were sold by Sotheby's in the State of California or at
auction by California sellers and for which a royalty was
allegedly due under the California Resale Royalties Act (the
"Resale Royalties Act"). Plaintiffs seek unspecified damages,
punitive damages and injunctive relief for alleged violations of
the Resale Royalties Act and the California Unfair Competition
Law.
In January 2012, Sotheby's filed a motion to dismiss the action on
the grounds, among others, that the Resale Royalties Act violates
the U.S. Constitution and is preempted by the U.S. Copyright Act
of 1976. In February 2012, the plaintiffs filed their response to
Sotheby's motion to dismiss. The court heard oral arguments on the
motion to dismiss on March 12, 2012.
On May 17, 2012, the court issued an order dismissing the action
on the ground that the Resale Royalties Act violated the Commerce
Clause of the U.S. Constitution. The plaintiffs appealed this
ruling.
On May 5, 2015, an en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit issued a decision affirming the lower court
decision that the Resale Royalties Act was unconstitutional
insofar as it sought to apply to sales outside of the state of
California. The plaintiffs filed a motion for certiorari to the
U.S. Supreme Court in September 2015.
Attorneys for Petitioners Sam Francis Foundation, et al.:
Kent L. Richland, Esq.
GREINES MARTIN STEIN & RICHLAND LLP
5900 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90036
Tel: (310) 859-7811
E-mail: Krichland@gmsr.com
Attorneys for Respondent eBay Inc.:
John C. Dwyer, Esq.
COOLEY LLP
3175 Hanover Street
Palo Alto, CA 94304
Tel: (650) 843-5000
E-mail: dwyerjc@cooley.com
Attorneys for Respondents Christie's Inc., Southeby's Inc., and
eBay Inc.:
Deanne E. Maynard, Esq.
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W., Suite 6000
Washington, DC 20006
Tel: (202) 887-8740
E-mail: DMaynard@mofo.com
Attorneys for Respondent Christie's Inc.:
Jason D. Russell, Esq.
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER & FLOM, LLP
300 South Grand Avenue 36th Floor
Los Angeles, CA 90071
Tel: (213)-687-5328
E-mail: jason.russell@skadden.com
Attorneys for California Lawyers for the Arts:
Steven A. Hirsch, Esq.
KEKER & VAN NEST LLP
633 Battery Street
San Francisco, CA 94111
Tel: (415)-391-5400
SOUTHWEST ROYALTIES: Suit by Opt-Out Plaintiff Pending
------------------------------------------------------
Clayton Williams Energy, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015,
for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that the
lawsuit by a plaintiff who opted out of a class action settlement
remains pending.
Southwest Royalties, Inc. ("SWR"), a wholly owned subsidiary of
CWEI, is a defendant in a suit filed in April 2011 in the Circuit
Court of Union County, Arkansas where the plaintiffs initially
sought in excess of $8 million for the costs of environmental
remediation to a lease on which operations were commenced in the
1930s. In June 2013, the plaintiffs, SWR and the remaining
defendants agreed to a settlement of $0.8 million, of which SWR
would pay $0.7 million. To accomplish the settlement, the case was
converted to a class action, and each member of the class was
offered the right to either participate or opt out of the class
and continue a separate action for damages.
One plaintiff opted out and will be subject to all previous
rulings of the court, including an order dismissing certain claims
on the basis that such claims were time barred. A loss on
settlement of $0.7 million was recorded for the year ended
December 31, 2013 in connection with this proposed settlement. The
settlement was entered by the Court on December 19, 2014, and all
settlement funds were paid to plaintiffs' counsel in January 2015.
The case by the single remaining plaintiff continues.
SPS TECHNOLOGIES: "Jackson" Labor Suit Goes to C.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Jontian Jackson v. SPS
Technologies, LLC et al., Case No. BC596401, was removed from
Los Angeles County Superior Court, to the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California (Western Division - Los
Angeles). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:15-cv-
09854-AB-JC to the proceeding.
SPS Technologies designs and manufactures high performance
fasteners and precision components for critical applications and
severe environments. It provides metal locknuts and bolts, non-
metallic insert locknuts, and precision components, as well as
bolts and screws, nuts, collars, washers, greers, and flex locs.
The company serves various markets, such as medical technologies,
high performance engines used in automobile racing, marine
applications, and gas turbine engines used in power generation. It
markets and sells its products through distributors in the United
States. The company was founded in 1903 and is based in
Jenkintown, Pennsylvania.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Samuel A Wong, Esq.
AEGIS LAW FIRM PC
9811 Irvine Center Drive Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
Telephone: (949) 379 6250
Facsimile: (949) 379 6251
E-mail: swong@aegislawfirm.com
- and -
Jessica L Campbell, Esq.
Kashif Haque, Esq.
AEGIS LAW FIRM PC
9811 Irvine Center Drive Suite 100
Irvine, CA 92618
Telephone: (949) 379 6250
Facsimile: (949) 379 6251
E-mail: jcampbell@aegislawfirm.com
khaque@aegislawfirm.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Julie Westcott O'Dell, Esq.
Steven Allan Witt, Esq.
Julie E Patterson, Esq.
BRYAN CAVE LLP
3161 Michelson Drive Suite 1500
Irvine, CA 92612-4414
Telephone: (949) 223 7000
Facsimile: (949) 223 7100
E-mail: julie.odell@bryancave.com
steven.witt@bryancave.com
ST. ANDREW'S PLACE: "Hendrix" Suit Transferred to E.D. Arkansas
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Hendrix v. St. Andrew's Place Inc
et al., Case No. 60CV-15-04043, was removed from Pulaski County
Circuit Court, to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Arkansas (Little Rock). The District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 4:15-cv-00777-BSM to the proceeding.
According to the complaint, the Defendant allegedly violated the
FLSA and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act (AMWA).
St. Andrew's Place was founded in 974 and is based in Conway,
Arizona. The Company's line of business includes providing
inpatient nursing and rehabilitative services to patients who
require continuous health care.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Luther Oneal Sutter, Esq.
SUTTER & GILLHAM, PLLC
Post Office Box 2012
Benton, AR 72018
Telephone: (501) 315 1910
Facsimile: (501) 315 1916
E-mail: luthersutter.law@gmail.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Jeffrey Wahl Hatfield, Esq.
HARDIN, JESSON & TERRY
1401 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 190
Little Rock, AR 72201
Telephone: (501) 850 0015
Facsimile: (501) 372 361
E-mail: jhatfield@hardinlaw.com
- and -
Kirkman T. Dougherty, Esq.
Kynda Almefty, Esq.
HARDIN, JESSON & TERRY
Post Office Box 10127
Fort Smith, AR 72903-0127
Telephone: (479) 452 2200
E-mail: kdougherty@hardinlaw.com
kalmefty@hardinlaw.com
STARS TRADING: Recalls Pepper Products Due to Gluten
----------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 26, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Alert sub-type: Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory: Allergen - Gluten
Hazard classification: Class 2
Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm: Stars Trading Co. Ltd.
Distribution: Alberta, British Columbia, Manitoba, Saskatchewan
Extent of the product distribution: Retail
CFIA reference number: 10188
Brand name Common name Size Code(s) on UPC
---------- ----------- ----- product ---
----------
Wu Hsing Chuen Wild 29 g All codes 4 710868 801102
Pepper where gluten
is not
declared on
the label.
Wu Hsing Five Spice 74 g All codes 4 710868 508148
Powder where gluten
is not
declared on
the label.
Wu Hsing White Pepper 42 g All codes 4 710868 801010
Powder where gluten
is not
declared on
the label.
Wu Hsing White Pepper 75 g All codes 4 710868 801027
Salt where gluten
is not
declared on
the label.
Chen Chen White Pepper 42 g All codes 0 20616 10058 1
Powder where gluten
is not
declared on
the label.
STERICYCLE INC: Illinois MDL in Discovery Stage
-----------------------------------------------
Stericycle, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that a Multidistrict
litigation involving the Company is in the discovery stage.
"We were served on March 12, 2013 with a class action complaint
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Pennsylvania by an individual plaintiff for itself and on behalf
of all other "similarly situated" customers of ours," the Company
said. "The complaint alleges, among other things, that we imposed
unauthorized or excessive price increases and other charges on our
customers in breach of our contracts and in violation of the
Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act. The
complaint sought certification of the lawsuit as a class action
and the award to class members of appropriate damages and
injunctive relief."
"The Pennsylvania class action complaint was filed in the wake of
a settlement with the State of New York of an investigation under
the New York False Claims Act which arose out of the Qui Tam
Action.
"Following the filing of the Pennsylvania class action complaint,
we were served with class action complaints filed in federal court
in California, Florida, Illinois, Mississippi and Utah and in
state court in California. These complaints asserted claims and
allegations substantially similar to those made in the
Pennsylvania class action complaint. All of these cases appear to
be follow-on litigation to our settlement with the State of New
York.
"On August 9, 2013, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
(MDL) granted our Motion to Transfer these related actions to the
Northern District of Illinois for centralized pretrial
proceedings. On December 10, 2013, we filed our answer to the
Amended Consolidated Class Action Complaint in the MDL action,
generally denying the allegations therein. The MDL action is in
the discovery stage.
"We believe that we have operated in accordance with the terms of
our customer contracts and that these complaints are without
merit. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves against each of
these lawsuits."
STERICYCLE INC: To Pay $13 Million on Valid TCPA Claims
-------------------------------------------------------
Stericycle, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that the Company was
expected to pay a total of approximately $13.0 million in respect
of valid claims submitted by members of a class action lawsuit
within the claims period sometime during the fourth quarter of
2015.
"On May 20, 2015, we entered into a settlement agreement to
resolve all claims made against us and certain of our subsidiaries
in Sawyer v. Stericycle, et al., Case No. 2015 CH 07190 (the "TCPA
Action"), a class action complaint pending in the Circuit Court of
Cook County, Illinois (the "Court")," the Company said. "The TCPA
Action is the successor lawsuit to the class action complaint
filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois (Case 1:14-cv-02070) that we have previously disclosed
and that was dismissed pursuant to the parties' joint stipulation
of dismissal. The TCPA Action alleges that from 2010 to 2014 we
violated the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, as amended
by the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005, by sending facsimile
advertisements to plaintiffs or putative class members that either
were unsolicited and/or did not contain a valid opt-out notice. We
have denied all liability for the claims made in the TCPA Action
but have agreed to settle to avoid the expense, burden and
inherent risk and uncertainty of litigation."
"Under the terms of the settlement agreement entered into with the
two class representatives, we agreed to make available a fund of
$45.0 million (the "Settlement Fund") to pay class members who
submit a valid claim form within a 90-day period, to pay an
incentive award to each of the class representatives, to pay
attorneys' fees and expenses to plaintiffs' attorneys, and to pay
fees and costs of a third-party settlement administrator (the
"TCPA Settlement"). The plaintiffs' attorneys sought attorneys'
fees of one-third of the Settlement Fund, plus out-of-pocket
expenses, to be paid from the Settlement Fund.
"As part of the TCPA Settlement, we do not admit to any of the
allegations in the TCPA Action and will be completely released
from any claims related to faxes sent by us or on our behalf from
March 25, 2010 through April 30, 2015.
"In view of the TCPA Settlement, we recorded a pre-tax accrual of
$45.0 million in accrued liabilities on our consolidated balance
sheet and a pre-tax charge of $45.0 million in selling, general
and administrative expenses on our consolidated statement of
income during the second quarter of 2015. We made payments
totaling approximately $15.2 million in respect of the incentive
awards to each of the class representatives and the attorneys'
fees and expenses of plaintiffs' attorneys during August 2015.
"Based on information provided by the third-party settlement
administrator, we will pay a total of approximately $13.0 million
in respect of valid claims submitted by class members within the
claims period sometime during the fourth quarter of 2015. As a
result, we will retain the balance of the Settlement Fund, or
approximately $16.8 million, with no further obligation to make
payments in respect of the TCPA Settlement. We have adjusted the
accrual on our consolidated balance sheet as of September 30, 2015
and the charge on our consolidated statement of income for the
three months ended September 30, 2015 accordingly."
SUNNY'S LIMO SERVICE: "Ali" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay, Damages
------------------------------------------------------------
Saqib Ali, Shah Ghori, Adnan Imtiaz and Shehzad Khan, Plaintiffs,
v. Shafqat Chaudhry and Sunny's Limousine Service Inc.,
Defendants, Case No. 515202/2015 (N.Y. Sup., December 16, 2015),
seeks unpaid minimum wage, overtime wages, spread of hour wages
and damages for failure to provide wage statement in violation of
the New York Labor Law.
Sunny's is a luxury chauffeur service located in located at 43
11385, 88-43 76tl' Avenue, Flushing, New York 11385 owned by
Shafqat Chaudhry. It operates a fleet of luxury vehicles and
provides transportation services to companies and business
professionals.
Defendants paid Plaintiffs only for their time spent driving and
did not pay Plaintiffs any wages for the time that they were
required to wait on duty/call between transporting passengers thus
resulting in being paid less than the minimum wage. They were also
required to work 6:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through Friday,
approximately 70 hours per week without overtime premium.
Defendant also did not maintain any time-keeping records.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Matthew P. Madzelan, Esq.
SLATER SLATER SCHULMAN LLP
445 Broad Hollow Road, Suite 334
Melville, NY 11747
Tel: (631) 420-9300
SURE SIGNAL: Recalls Heat-Activated Fire Alarms
-----------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 27, 2015
Posting date: November 27, 2015
Type of communication: Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory: Household Items, Electronics
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Product Safety
Audience: General Public
Identification number: RA-56034
Sure Signal Products heat-activated fire alarms sold under the
following brand names and models: MasterGuard QR50, Thermalink
QR50, and DeTech FST2004H.
Product description
The recall involves Sure Signal Products heat activated fire
alarms. These alarms are white, round and measure about 18 cm (7
inches) in diameter. The alarms have a round fuse at the center.
The fuse is white or chrome and about 4 cm (1.5 inches) in
diameter.
The fuses are marked 117 degrees F or 136 degrees F on the label
on the back of the fuse, with a date code range from 04001 -
15182. Date codes are listed in "YYDDD" format.
The alarms were manufactured from January 1, 2004 through July 1,
2015. The alarm's model is printed on a label on the back of the
alarm. "SSP", the temperature rating and the date code can be
found on the label on the back of the fuse.
The functionality of the replaceable fusible link sensor (also
referred to as the fuse) on the fire alarm can degrade with time,
which can cause the alarm to fail to alert a consumer to a fire.
Neither Sure Signals Products nor Health Canada has received any
reports of injuries or consumer incidents related to the use of
these alarms.
Approximately 4,500 units of the fire alarms were sold in Canada,
and approximately 375,000 were sold in the United States.
The fire alarms were sold from January 2004 to June 2015.
Manufactured in the United States of America.
Manufacturer: Sure Signal Products, Inc.
Garden Grove
California
UNITED STATES
Consumers should immediately contact Sure Signal Products by
telephone toll-free at 855-202-3083 from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. PT
Monday through Friday for free replacement fuses or on-line and
click on CPSC Heat Sensor Recall in the upper right of the page
for more information. A video with instructions on how to replace
the fuse is available.
Please note that the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act prohibits
recalled products from being redistributed, sold or even given
away in Canada.
Health Canada would like to remind Canadians to report any health
or safety incidents related to the use of this product or any
other consumer product or cosmetic by filling out the Consumer
Product Incident Report Form.
This recall is also posted on the OECD Global Portal on Product
Recalls website. You can visit this site for more information on
other international consumer product recalls.
Pictures of the Recalled Products available at:
http://is.gd/jqcD92
TC HEARTLAND: Appeals Court Agrees to Hear Oral Arguments
---------------------------------------------------------
Lisa Shuchman, writing for Corporate Counsel, reports that the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has agreed to hear
oral arguments in a case that could result in a major shift in the
geographic distribution of patent cases and make it more difficult
to sue for infringement in the plaintiff-friendly Eastern District
of Texas.
For years, lawyers have complained that the court's interpretation
of the patent statute has made it easy for patent holders to sue
in any district court, even if the parties have no connection to
the jurisdiction. That interpretation has had the unforeseen
consequence of allowing plaintiffs to flock to the Eastern
District of Texas, which is considered the most plaintiff and
patent friendly of all jurisdictions. As a result, almost half of
all patent cases filed last year landed there. In fact,
plaintiffs filed 2,540 patent cases in the Eastern District in
2015, or 43.6 percent of all patent cases filed last year. Nearly
a third of all patent cases filed in 2015 ended up before U.S.
District Judge Rodney Gilstrap. This was more cases than were
filed in the next 17 districts combined.
But on Jan. 15, the Federal Circuit agreed to hear arguments in a
case that could change all that. The case, In Re: TC Heartland,
stems from a patent infringement suit filed by Kraft Foods in the
District of Delaware against TC Heartland, an Indiana-based
company. TC Heartland tried to get the case transferred from
Delaware to Indiana, but its request was denied. The company then
filed a mandamus petition with the Federal Circuit, asking it to
direct the lower court to transfer the case, and also to
reconsider its previous interpretation of the patent venue
statute.
The ruling said a panel of judges would hear oral arguments in the
case on March 11. The court has discretion to hear mandamus
petitions. Historically, most such petitions are denied. So the
order is an incremental victory for companies that have filed
amicus briefs supporting TC Heartland's arguments.
The per curiam decision means the Federal Circuit will reconsider
its 1990 ruling in VE Holding v. Johnson Gas Appliance, which held
that amendments to the general venue statute passed by Congress in
1988 meant the restrictive venue for patent cases, which had
limited venue in patent cases to where a company is incorporated
or has a regular place of business, no longer applied. That
decision opened the floodgates for patent plaintiffs to engage in
forum shopping to a degree rarely seen.
Congress again changed the general venue statute in 2011, adding
that the more permissive definition applies in all civil cases
"except as otherwise provided by law." TC Heartland is arguing
that this amendment made clear the patent statute should be viewed
as separate from the general venue statute. By agreeing to have a
panel hear arguments, as opposed to having the case argued en
banc, it appears the court is accepting the view that the
intervening legislation passed in 2011 means it is not bound by
the court's earlier 1990 decision.
If the court accepts the petitioner's arguments, it would have
huge implications for the Eastern District of Texas, a venue
popular among non-practicing entities who sue with the aim of
extorting settlements, a group often referred to as patent trolls.
Two dozen companies that have frequently been sued for
infringement in the Eastern District of Texas, including eBay Inc.
and Google Inc., filed an amicus brief in support of the
petitioner, as did the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
James Dabney, John Fitzgerald Duffy, Richard Koehl, Wanda French-
Brown and David Lansky of Hughes Hubbard & Reed represent TC
Heartland. John Luken, Joshua Lorentz, Eric Combs and Robert
Zimmerman of Dinsmore & Shohl are counsel for Kraft Foods.
TIFFIN: Recalls Multiple Phaeton Models Due to Fire Risk
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 24, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Motorhome
Notification type: Safety Mfr
System: Engine
Units affected: 10
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2015565TC
ID number: 2015565
On certain vehicles built on a Powerglide chassis, insufficient
clearance exists between the exhaust pipe and the floor. This
could cause the floor insulation to melt and make the floor area
above the engine extremely hot, increasing the risk of personal
injury or possibly resulting in a fire. Correction: Dealers will
install a revised exhaust configuration to increase clearance.
Make Model Model year(s) affected
---- ----- ----------------------
TIFFIN PHAETON 2010, 2011, 2012
TORO COMPANY: Recalls Toro and Exmark Mowers 2015 Models
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 24, 2015
Posting date: November 24, 2015
Type of communication: Consumer Product Recall
Subcategory: Household Items
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Fire Hazard
Audience: General Public
Identification number: RA-55924
This recall involves various 2015 models of Toro and Exmark
mowers. The 2015 Toro TimeCutter riding mowers are red and black,
with a grey seat. The 2015 Exmark Quest riding mowers are red,
black, and grey.
The model number and serial number are located on a decal affixed
to the frame, under the seat.
The following Toro and Exmark models and serial number ranges were
sold in Canada and are equipped with the identified fuel filter:
Toro TimeCutter Brand Recalled Products
Model Number Serial Number Range
------------ -------------------
74710 315000898 through 315001935
74720 315000138 through 315003182
74731 315000173 through 315000429
74750 315000232 through 315000882
74780 315000389 through 315001568
74784 315000492 through 315000976
74797 315000671 through 315000693
The fuel filters on these mowers may become excessively brittle
and fail. This may result in a fuel leak which may present a fire
hazard.
The Toro Company has received reports of six incidents with the
recalled mowers. None of the incidents originated in Canada.
Health Canada has not received any reports of consumer incidents
or injuries to Canadians related to the use of these recalled
mowers.
Approximately 393 units of the recalled products were sold at
authorized Toro and Exmark dealers across Canada; and
approximately 500 units of the Exmark and 8,600 units of the Toro
were sold in the United States.
The recalled products were sold from January 2015 through October
2015.
Manufactured in the United States of America.
Distributor: Whole good units utilizing recalled fuel filters:
The Toro Company
Bloomington
Minnesota
UNITED STATES
Distributor: Whole good units utilizing recalled fuel filters:
Exmark Manufacturing Company, Inc.
Beatrice
Nebraska
UNITED STATES
Manufacturer: Recalled fuel filters were manufactured by:
Chongqing Aoqiang Industry & Trade Stock Co., Ltd.
Yubei District
Chongqing
CHINA
Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled mowers and
contact a Toro or Exmark dealer for a replacement fuel filter and
repair instructions.
For more information, consumers may contact Toro toll-free at
(844) 521-2384 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday
or visit the Toro's website and click on Safety and then Product
Recall Information.
Consumers may view the release by the US CPSC on the Commission's
website.
Exmark consumers may contact Exmark toll-free at (800) 667-5296
between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday or visit the
Exmark's website and click on Service & Support, then on Safety,
then on Recalls for more information.
Consumers may view the release by the US CPSC on the Commission's
website.
Please note that the Canada Consumer Product Safety Act prohibits
recalled products from being redistributed, sold or even given
away in Canada.
Health Canada would like to remind Canadians to report any health
or safety incidents related to the use of this product or any
other consumer product or cosmetic by filling out the Consumer
Product Incident Report Form.
This recall is also posted on the OECD Global Portal on Product
Recalls website. You can visit this site for more information on
other international consumer product recalls.
Pictures of the Recalled Products available at:
http://is.gd/jzlkO9
TRAILS WEST: Recalls Multiple Trailer Models Due to Crash Risk
--------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 1, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Light Trailer
Notification type: Safety Mfr
System: Suspension
Units affected: 58
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2015576TC
ID number: 2015576
On certain trailers equipped with 3500 lbs torsion axles, the
torsion arm attachment bar may have been made too small, or the
hole in which it is inserted into is too large. This could result
in the torsion arm, spindle, tire and wheel assembly separating
from the trailer. This could pose a risk to other road users
and/or result in a loss of vehicle stability and control,
increasing the risk of a crash causing injury and/or damage to
property. Correction: Owners are advised to look for the letters
"SMG" that are cast into the center section (on one side) of the
torsion arm. If the letters "SMG" are found, dealers will replace
the torsion axle. If owners are not comfortable inspecting their
trailer, dealers will perform the inspection.
Make Model Model year(s) affected
---- ----- ----------------------
TRAILS WEST CLASSIC 2015, 2016, 2015, 2016, 2015, 2016,
2015, 2016, 2015, 2016, 2015, 2016,
2015, 2016, 2015, 2016
TRAILS WEST SANTE FE 2015, 2016
TRAILS WEST SIERRA 2015, 2016
TRUE NORTH: Recalls Modern BCAA+ Powder
---------------------------------------
Starting date: November 24, 2015
Type of communication: Drug Recall
Subcategory: Natural health products
Hazard classification: Type III
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Product Safety
Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number: RA-56078
Product recalled as a precautionary measure in response to actions
taken by the FDA against the USPlabs, LLC.
Depth of distribution: Retailers (BC, AB, MB, YT, SK, ON, QC, NS,
NL)
Affected products:
Modern BCAA+
DIN, NPN, DIN-HIM
NPN 80044264
Dosage form: Powder
Strength: S 2 amino 3 methylbutanoic acid 387.5mg
2 aminoethanesulfonic acid 3874.0mg
Aminoacetic acid 3.125gL Alanine 3875.0mg
L Alany L-Glutamine 25.0mg
L Lysine 226.0mg
L isoleucine 387.5mg
L leucine 3100.0m
Lot or serial number
Fruit Punch: Q03206AL-B
Q02099AL-B
P07388A
P03144-H
N11601-B
M04216-C
White Blue Raspberry: Q02100AL-B
P10569-B
P04235-B
P03145-E
N11600-A
M05283-A
Grape Bubblegum: Q05336AL
Q2112AL
P04184-C
O01006-A
M05284-B
Recalling Firm: True North Nutrition
88 East Beaver Creek Road, Bldg. A
Richmond Hill
L4B 4A8
Ontario
CANADA
Marketing Authorization Holder: USPlabs, LLC
10761 King William Drive
Dallas
75220
Texas
UNITED STATES
TWIN SPRINGS ESTATES: "Abourjaili" Suit Hits Identical House
------------------------------------------------------------
Youssef Abourjaili, Plaintiff, v. Twin Springs Estates Limited
Partnership, Twin Springs Development Corporation, General Partner
Defendant(s), Case No. 15-2037B (D. Mass., December 16, 2015),
seeks compensatory damages and reasonable attorneys' fees, costs
in breach of fiduciary duties and contract and in violation of
Massachusetts Gen. Law c. 93A, Sec. 2 and 9, Unfair and Deceptive
Practices.
Abourjaili alleges that the Defendant is constructing a house
across his that is similar-looking which is against the deed of
restrictions set forth by the subdivision.
Twin Springs Development Corporation, General Partner, is a duly
organized and existing Massachusetts corporation, with a principal
place of business known as and located at 15 Bisbee Road, Saugus,
Massachusetts 01906.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael Magerer, Esq.
MICHAEL MAGERER & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
109 Highland Avenue
Needham, MA 02494-3091
Tel: (781) 453-0800
Fax: (781) 453-0506
EMail: mmagerer@maglaw.us
TWINING NORTH: Recalls Chocolate Malt Drinks Due to Milk
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 25, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Alert sub-type: Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory: Allergen - Milk
Hazard classification: Class 2
Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm: Twining North America Inc.
Distribution: National
Extent of the product distribution: Retail
CFIA reference number: 10177
Brand name Common name Size Code(s) on UPC
---------- ----------- ----- product ---
----------
Ovaltine Chocolate 400 g All codes 7 612100 054352
Malt Drink where milk
Mix is not
declared on
the label.
Ovaltine Malted 1200 g All codes 7 612100 054024
Chocolate where milk
Drink Mix is not
declared on
the label.
UNCLE BILL: Recalls Anchovies with Sesame Due to Gluten
-------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 3, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Alert sub-type: Food Recall Warning (Allergen)
Subcategory: Allergen - Gluten
Hazard classification: Class 3
Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm: Uncle Bill Trading Inc.
Distribution: Ontario
Extent of the product distribution: Retail
CFIA reference number: 10242
Brand Common name Size Code(s) on UPC
name ----------- ----- product ---
---- ----------
Uncle Spicy Crispy 227 g A2323115 7 70162 02190 7
Bill Anchovies
with Sesame
UNIVERSAL FIDELITY: Illegally Collects Debt, "Watkins" Suit Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tremaine K. Watkins, on behalf of herself and those similarly
situated v. Universal Fidelity, LP, et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-08503
(D.N.J., December 8, 2015) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair
and unconscionable means to collect a debt.
Universal Fidelity, LP operates a debt collection firm in Texas.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Yongmoon Kim, Esq.
KIM LAW FIRM LLC
411 Hackensack Ave 2 Fl.
Hackensack, NJ 07601
Telephone: (201) 273-7117
Facsimile: (201) 273-7117
E-mail: ykim@kimlf.com
URS CORP: "Hunter" Suit Transferred from N.D. Cal. to M.D. Fla.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Hunter v. URS Corporation, Case
No. 3:15-cv-02300, was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the Northern District of California, to the U.S. District
Court for the Middle District of Florida (Orlando). The Middle
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 6:15-cv-02127-PGB-KRS to
the proceeding.
URS provides engineering, construction, and technical services to
public agencies and private sector clients worldwide. The company
modernizes weapons systems; refurbishes military vehicles and
aircraft; trains pilots; manages military and government
installations; and provides logistics support for military
operations and supports the decommissioning of former military
bases for redevelopment, as well as supports programs to eliminate
nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons. The company is based in
San Francisco, California.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James A. Francis, Esq.
John Soumilas, Esq.
FRANCIS & MAILMAN, P.C.
Land Title Bldg., 19th FL
100 S. Broad St.
Philadelphia, PA 19110
Telephone: (215) 735 8600
Facsimile: (215) 940 8000
- and -
Adrienne Beatty, Esq.
Arthur Michael Stock, Esq.
Sarah Rebecca Schalman-Bergen, Esq.
Shanon Jude Carson, Esq.
BERGER AND MONTAGUE, P.C.
1622 Locust Street
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 875 3015
Facsimile: (215) 875 4604
- and -
Stephanie R. Tatar, Esq.
TATAR LAW FIRM, APC
3500 West Olive Ave.
Suite 300
Burbank, CA 91505
Telephone: (323) 744 1146
Facsimile: (888) 778 5695
The Defendant is represented by:
Laura J. Maechtlen, Esq.
Pamela Quigley Devata, Esq.
Alex de Souza Drummond, Esq.
Tamara Helen Fisher, Esq.
William David, Esq.
SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
560 Mission Street, Suite 3100
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 397 2823
Facsimile: (415) 397 8549
E-mail: adrummond@seyfarth.com
UNITED CENTRAL: Fails to Pay Workers OT, "Sanlana" Suit Says
------------------------------------------------------------
Ana Sanlana, individually and all other similarly situated persons
v. United Central Orchids, Inc., Ching Yann Meng, and Ann Tsai,
Case No. 1:15-cv-11341 (N.D. Ill., December 16, 2015) is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages for hours
worked more than 40 hours in a week.
The Defendants own and operate an orchid nursery located at 3550
Bell Rd, Minooka, IL 60447.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Susan J. Best, Esq.
CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC
6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200
Chicago, IL 60646
Telephone: (312) 878-1263
E-mail: sbest@yourclg.com
UNITED CENTRAL: Faces "Sanlana" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ana Sanlana, individually and all other similarly situated
persons, known and unknown v. United Central Orchids, Inc., Ching
Yann Meng, and Ann Tsai, Case No. 1:15-cv-11353 (N.D. Ill.,
December 16, 2015) is brought against the Defendants for failure
to pay overtime wages for hours worked more than 40 hours in a
week.
The Defendants own and operate an orchid nursery located at 3550
Bell Rd, Minooka, IL 60447.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Susan J. Best, Esq.
CONSUMER LAW GROUP, LLC
6232 N. Pulaski, Suite 200
Chicago, IL 60646
Telephone: (312) 878-1263
E-mail: sbest@yourclg.com
VENTANA MEDICAL: Recalls Automated Immunostaining System
--------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 26, 2015
Posting date: January 7, 2016
Type of communication: Medical Device Recall
Subcategory: Medical Device
Hazard classification: Type III
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Medical Devices
Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number: RA-56516
This recall is related to a potential issue with the BenchMark
ULTRA VSS software version 11.9 up to and including 12.3 regarding
issues with the keycodes when reprinting labels.
Affected products:
A. BENCHMARK ULTRA AUTOMATED IMMUNOSTAINING SYSTEM
Lot or serial number: Versions 11.9 to 12.3
Model or catalog number: N750-BMKU-FS
Manufacturer: Ventana Medical Systems Inc.
1910 E Innovation Park Drive,
Tucson
85755
Arizona
UNITED STATES
VERATHON INC: Recalls BladderScan BVI 9600 and AortaScan AMI 9700
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 30, 2015
Type of communication: Medical Device Recall
Subcategory: Medical Device
Hazard classification: Type I
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Medical Devices
Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number: RA-55982
Notification that use of medical device was not intended to
include detection of abdominal aortic aneurysms (AAA). A negative
result may underreport the actual diameter of a patient's
abdominal aorta and may result in a false negative AAA detection.
Affected products
A. BladderScan BVI 9600
Lot or serial number: All lots.
Model or catalog number: BVI 9600 SYSTEM
B. AortaScan AMI 9700
Lot or serial number: All lots.
Model or catalog number: AMI 9700 SYSTEM
Manufacturer: Verathon Inc.
20001 NORTH CREEK PARKWAY
BOTHELL
98011
Washington
UNITED STATES
VERTEX REFINING: Defending Class Suit over Louisiana Refinery
-------------------------------------------------------------
Vertex Energy, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on November 9, 2015, for the
quarterly period ended September 30, 2015, that Vertex Refining
LA, LLC, the wholly-owned subsidiary of Vertex Operating, the
Company's wholly-owned subsidiary, was named as a defendant in a
lawsuit filed in the Twenty-Fourth Judicial District For the
Parish of Jefferson, Louisiana on January 6, 2015. Pursuant to the
lawsuit, Stacy Davis, Becky Vallee and James A. Block (the
"Plaintiffs") made certain allegations against Vertex Refining LA,
LLC, Omega Refining and the manager of the Marrero, Louisiana
facility (the "Defendants").
"The claims are structured as class actions relating to certain
operations performed at our newly acquired re-refinery located in
Marrero, Louisiana, including the alleged emission of noxious and
harmful substances," the Company said.
The Plaintiffs allege they are part of a valid class due to the
fact that they live and work near the facility. The lawsuit
relates to alleged actions and inactions related to the facility
between 2012 to present and includes allegations relating to
violations of various Louisiana statutes, allegations relating to
the misrepresentation of information to the Louisiana Department
of Environmental Quality, allegations relating to violations of
hourly permitted emission limits, and alleged failure to report an
un-permitted point-source.
The suit seeks damages for physical and emotional injuries, pain
and suffering, medical expenses and deprivation of the use and
enjoyment of Plaintiffs' homes. The Plaintiffs further allege that
there are estimated to be over 1,000 class members to the suit,
provided that the proposed class is yet to be certified.
"We intend to vigorously defend ourselves against the allegations
made in the complaint, provided that at this stage of the
litigation, the Company has no basis of determining whether there
is any likelihood of material loss associated with the claims
and/or the potential outcome of the litigation," the Company said.
VIP TRANSPORTATION: "Bishop" Suit Seeks Minimum, Overtime Pay
-------------------------------------------------------------
Laurie Bishop, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. VIP Transportation Group, LLC, Barbara
White, individually and Simon White, individually, Defendants,
Case No. 6:15-cv-02118-ACC-KRS (M.D. Fla., December 17, 2016),
seeks to recover unpaid minimum wages and overtime wages and other
relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938.
Bishop worked as a driver for Defendants from November 6, 2014
until July 20, 2015. She regularly worked between 65 and 80 hours
each week without compensation for hours exceeding 40 per
workweek.
VIP Transportation is a Florida Limited Liability Company with a
principal place of business in Orlando, Florida. It is in the
business of providing intrastate transportation services in the
Tampa metropolitan area and is owned and operated by Barbara White
and Simon White.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marc R. Edelman, Esq.
MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
201 N. Franklin Street, #700
Tampa, FL 33602
Tel: (813) 223-5505
Fax: 813-257-0572
Email: Medelman@forthepeople.com
VIZIO INC: "Hodges" Suit Hits Illegal Data Gathering
----------------------------------------------------
Dieisha Hodges, an individual, and Simone Richardson, an
individual, on behalf of themselves, all others similarly
situated, and the general public, Plaintiffs, v. Vizio, Inc., a
California Corporation and Cognitive Media Networks, Inc., a
Delaware corporation, Defendants, (C.D. Cal., Southern Division,
November 25, 2015), seeks actual, compensatory, punitive or treble
damages, declaratory, retrospective and prospective injunctive
relief as permitted by law or equity, costs of suit, including
reasonable attorneys' fees in violation of the Federal
Video Privacy Protection Act, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2710, violations of
Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 1799.3, violations of California's Customer
Records Act, Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 1798.80, et seq., violations of
California's Consumers Legal Remedies Act, Cal. Civ. Code Sec.
1750, et seq., False Advertisement, Cal. Bus. and Prof. Code Sec.
17500, et seq., Unfair Competition, Cal Bus. and Prof. Code Sec.
17200, et seq., Fraudulent Concealment, Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 1709,
1710(3), Intentional Misrepresentation, Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 1709,
1710(1), Negligent Misrepresentation, Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 1709,
1710(2), violations of Illinois' Consumer Fraud and Deceptive
Business Practices Act and Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act,
815 ILCS Sec. 505/1, et seq., 815 ILCS Sec. 510/2 11) Breach of
Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, Intrusion into Private
Affairs and Unjust Enrichment.
Dieisha Hodges purchased a Vizio 55" Smart TV from a Walmart store
located in Oakland, California.
Vizio, Inc. is a corporation duly organized and existing under the
laws of the State of California with its headquarters and
principal place of business located at 39 Tesla, Irvine,
California 92618.
Cognitive Media Networks, Inc. is a provider of real-time services
powered by Automatic Content Recognition technology and provides
Vizio the software used to track and collect consumers'
information and viewing data.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Ronald A. Marron, Esq.
Skye Resendes, Esq.
William B. Richards, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON, APLC
651 Arroyo Drive
San Diego, CA 92103
Tel: (619) 696-9006
Fax: (619) 564-6665
Email: ron@consumersadvocates.com
skye@consumersadvocates.com
bill@consumersadvocates.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: Did Not Lie to U.S. Regulators, New CEO Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan McConnell and Meagan Baker, writing for Corporate Counsel,
report that at the Detroit auto show, VW focused on electric
technology -- introducing the BUDD-e Concept, a long-range
electric van. VW's new CEO, Matthias Mueller, was at the show.
During an interview with National Public Radio, Mueller noted the
company was "truly sorry" for the emissions scandal. But he took
issue with the characterization that VW lied to U.S. regulators.
Instead he said, "Frankly spoken, it was a technical problem. We
made a default, we had . . . not the right interpretation of the
American law. And we had some targets for our technical
engineers, and they solved this problem and reached targets with
some software solutions which haven't been compatible to American
law. That is the thing. And the other question you mentioned --
it was an ethical problem? I cannot understand why you say that .
. . We didn't lie. We didn't understand the question first. And
then we worked since 2014 to solve the problem."
On Jan. 8, The New York Times reported that the company had
invoked European Union privacy laws in refusing to turn over
documents to U.S. regulators. Despite Mr. Mueller's promise for
"maximum transparency," shortly after his appointment as CEO, VW
cited Germany's strict privacy laws that limit access to data
outside the EU, in this case hampering U.S. investigators' ability
to identify employees who may have known or were responsible for
the misconduct.
It didn't start out this way. VW was initially cooperating with
U.S. regulators in efforts to alleviate backlash from the scandal.
Soon after news of the scandal broke and Mueller took over as CEO,
Mueller had a much more conciliatory tone, promising to "implement
the most stringent compliance and governance standards in our
industry."
This column suggested back in September that VW needed to regain
trust with consumers. The company understands the "what" but
seems lost on the "how." In fact, VW's response to crisis stands
in stark contrast to other global companies that have weathered
significant storms.
In October 2015, BP reached a settlement with the U.S. and five
Gulf Coast states worth $20.8 billion. At the time the settlement
was announced, Carl-Henric Svanberg, BP's chairman, reinforced the
company's commitment to restore the Gulf economy and environment.
Other BP executives made statements describing the oil spill as
"tragic" and describing the company's eagerness to reach a
collective solution. Just months after the April 2010 explosion
on the Deepwater Horizon rig, BP and the U.S. government agreed
that BP would create the Deepwater Horizon Trust Fund to
compensate victims. As a result of the fund's creation, BP did
not pay shareholder dividends for the rest of the year. BP also
tripled its advertising budget following the oil spill, spending
more than $93 million on newspaper and TV advertisements.
According to BP, "its primary goal was to inform the public about
clean-up efforts and, more importantly, the claims process that
allows oil-spill victims to receive compensation for lost wages or
property damage."
General Motors Co. also faced huge fines following its faulty
ignition switch scandal, which resulted in over 100 deaths.
Following the scandal, Mary Barra, the GM CEO, stressed the need
to show how the company's culture had changed as a result of the
problem. GM agreed to pay $900 million to end the criminal
inquiry into its failure to issue a timely recall of the vehicles.
According to the DOJ, since the investigation GM took, "exemplary
actions to demonstrate acceptance and acknowledgement for its
conduct." These actions included conducting an internal
investigation, voluntarily providing documents to the government
in efforts to remain transparent, terminating wrongdoers, and
establishing a victim compensation program.
VW has done some things right. Then-CEO, Martin Winterkorn,
resigned shortly after news of the scandal broke. The company
also said it would seek prosecution of any VW employees involved
in the misconduct and would establish a special investigative
committee to discover what happened and who is responsible.
Gina McCarthy, the EPA administrator, even told the Wall Street
Journal that she was "pleased that Volkswagen is taking such an
aggressive stance on admitting the problem and attacking it."
Rebuilding trust with consumers, however, takes time. VW's new
electric van is impressive. And electronic technology seems to
represent the future of the automotive industry. To be a leader,
the company will need consumers to follow. That requires
rebuilding trust. Whether the company can do that remains to be
seen.
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Buklad" Suit Moved from D.C. to MDL 2672
-----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Buklad v. Volkswagen A.G. et al.,
Case No. 1:15-cv-01650, was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the District of Columbia, to the U.S. District Court for
the Northern District of California (San Francisco). The Northern
District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-
05988-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America, a New Jersey Corporation, designs,
manufactures, and sells automobiles in the United States and
internationally. The company operates as a subsidiary of
Volkswagen AG, and is based in Herndon, Virginia.
The Buklad case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Linda Phyllis Nussbaum, Esq.
NUSSBAUM LAW GROUP, P.C.
570 Lexington Avenue, 19th Floor
New York, NY 10022
Telephone: (212) 702 7053
Facsimile: (212) 681 0300
E-mail: lnussbaum@nussbaumpc.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Fries" Suit Moved from S.D. Ill. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Fries v. Volkswagen AG et al.,
Case No. 3:15-cv-01108, was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Illinois, to the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco). The
Northern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:15-cv-05977-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Fries case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Gregory J. Pals, Esq.
John J. Driscoll, Esq.
DRISCOLL FIRM, P.C.
211 N. Broadway, Suite 2440
St. Louis, IL 63102
Telephone: (314) 932 3232
Facsimile: (314) 932 3233
E-mail: greg@thedriscollfirm.com
john@thedriscollfirm.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Turnau" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
-------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Turnau et al. v. Volkswagen AG et
al., Case No. 5:15-cv-00214, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of Vermont, to the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco). The
Northern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:15-cv-05964-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Turnau case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Marc B. Heath, Esq.
Tristram J. Coffin, Esq.
DOWNS RACHLIN MARTIN PLLC
199 Main Street
P.O. Box 190
Burlington, VT 05402-0190
Telephone: (802) 863 2375
Facsimile: (802) 862 7512
E-mail: mheath@drm.com
tcoffin@drm.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Andrew R Levin, Esq.
David A. Barry, Esq.
SUGARMAN ROGERS BARSHAK & COHEN, PC
101 Merrimac Street, 9th Floor
Boston, MA 02114
Telephone: (617) 227 3030
Facsimile: (617) 523 4001
E-mail: levin@srbc.com
barry@srbc.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Barnard" Suit from Maryland to MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Barnard v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-03051, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05972-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Barnard case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Emily Claire Malarkey, Esq.
Gregory Gene Hopper, Esq.
Ryan S. Perlin, Esq.
SALSBURY CLEMENTS BEKMAN MARDER AND ADKINS LLC
300 W Pratt St Ste 450
Baltimore, MD 21201
Telephone: (410) 539 6633
Facsimile: (410) 625 9555
E-mail: malarkey@scbmalaw.com
hopper@scbmalaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
John L. Hone, Esq.
Ronald G. DeWald, Esq.
LIPSHULTZ AND HONE CHTD
8630 Fenton Street, Suite 108
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone: (301) 587 8500
Facsimile: (301) 495 9759
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Bowlin" Suit Goes from E.D. Va. to MDL 2672
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Bowlin v. Volkswagen Group of
America Inc. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-01328, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06029-CRB to the proceeding.
According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly included a
defeat device in its 2.0 liter TDI Clean Diesel engines. This
defeat device was designed specifically to mask the inability of
the 2.0 liter TDI Clean Diesel engine to comply with applicable
federal and state emissions standards and requirements.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Bowlin case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Francis J. Balint, Jr., Esq.
BONNETT, FAIRBOURN, FRIEDMAN
& BAMNT, P.C.
Joshua Gumiell House, Suite 4
4023 Chain Bridge Road
Fairfax, VA 22030
Telephone: (602) 776-5903
Facsimile: (602) 274 1199
E-mall: fbalint@bffb.com
- and -
Jeffrey W. Golan
BARRACK, RODOS & BACINE
Two Commerce Square
2001 Market Street, Suite 3300
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 963 0600
Facsimile: (215) 963 0838
E-mall: jgolan@barraclc.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Germain-Cummings" Consolidated in MDL 2672
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Germain-Cummings v. Volkswagen
Group of America, Inc. et al., Case No. 4:15-cv-40153, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of
Massachusetts, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California (San Francisco). The Northern District of
California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06008-CRB to the
proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Germain-Cummings case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in
re: Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and
Products Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On
December 8, 2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and
3.0 Liter diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of
America, Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly
contain software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions
requirements by engaging full emissions controls only when
Official Emissions Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order,
the MDL panel found that the actions in this litigation involve
common questions of fact, and that centralization in the Northern
District of California will serve the convenience of the parties
and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the
litigation. Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer,
United States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Anthony Tarricone, Esq.
Kreindler and Kreindler LLP
855 Boylston Street, Suite 1101
Boston, MA 02116
Telephone: (617) 424 9100
E-mail: Srusso@kreindler.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Gaskins" Suit Moved from Arizona to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Gaskins et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America Incorporated, Case No. 4:15-cv-00532, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05856-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Gaskins case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Matthew David Karnas, Esq.
BELLOVIN & KARNAS PC
4810 E Broadway Blvd.
Tucson, AZ 85711
Telephone: (520) 571 9700
Facsimile: (520) 571 8556
E-mail: karnas@bellovinkarnas.com
- and -
Steven Eric Weinberger, Esq.
Rosette, LLP
565 W. Chandler Blvd.
Chandler, AZ 85225
Telephone: (480) 889 8990
Facsimile: (480) 889 8997
E-mail: s.weinberger@layfieldbarrett.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Helms" Suit Moved from S.D. Ala. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Helms v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00508, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Alabama to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05979-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Helms case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David G. Wirtes, Jr, Esq.
William Earl Bonner, Esq.
Gregory B. Breedlove, Esq.
CUNNINGHAM BOUNDS LLC
1601 Dauphin Street
Mobile, AL 36604
Telephone: (251) 471 6191
E-mail: web@cunninghambounds.com
sln@cunninghambounds.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Harlan I. Prater IV, Esq.
LIGHTFOOT, FRANKLIN & WHITE
400 North 20th Street
Birmingham, AL 35203
Telephone: (205) 581 0700
Facsimile: (205) 581 0799
E-mail: hprater@lfwlaw.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Kirkwood" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Kirkwood v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-01104, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
Northern (San Francisco).The Northern District of California Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05947-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Kirkwood case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles P. Yezbak III, Esq.
YEZBAK LAW OFFICES
2002 Richard Jones Road, Suite B-200
Nashville, TN 37215
Telephone: (615) 250 2000
Facsimile: (615) 250 2020
E-mail: yezbak@yezbaklaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
John Randolph Bibb Jr., Esq.
Ryan Nelson Clark, Esq.
LEWIS, THOMASON, KING, KRIEG & WALDROP, P.C.
424 Church Street, Suite 2500
Nashville, TN 37219
Telephone: (615) 259 1366
Facsimile: (615) 259 1389
E-mail: rbibb@lewisthomason.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Kolomeets-Darovsky" Consolidated in MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Kolomeets-Darovsky et al. v.
Volkswagen Group of America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01229, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District
of Virginia, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of California (San Francisco). The Northern District of California
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06020-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Kolomeets-Darovsky case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in
re: Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and
Products Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On
December 8, 2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and
3.0 Liter diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of
America, Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly
contain software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions
requirements by engaging full emissions controls only when
Official Emissions Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order,
the MDL panel found that the actions in this litigation involve
common questions of fact, and that centralization in the Northern
District of California will serve the convenience of the parties
and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct of the
litigation. Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer,
United States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
William Wesley Coleman Harty, Esq.
PATTEN WORNOM HATTEN DIAMONSTEIN LC
12350 Jefferson Ave, Suite 300
Newport News, VA 23602
Telephone: (757) 223 4500
E-mail: wharty@pwhd.com
- and -
Walter Dekalb Kelley Jr., Esq.
JONES DAY
51 Louisiana Ave NW
Washington, DC 20001
Telephone: (202) 879 3939
Facsimile: (202) 626 1700
E-mail: wdkelley@jonesday.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Kenneth Abrams, Esq.
MCGUIRE WOODS LLP
Gateway Plaza
800 East Canal Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Telephone: (804) 775 4771
Facsimile: (757) 640 3950
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lamproe" Suit Goes from W.D. Ark. to MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Lamproe v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-02221, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Arkansas, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06009-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Lamproe case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Phillip J. Milligan, Esq.
MILLIGAN MEDLOCK GRAMLICH LLP
500 So. 16th Street
P.O. Box 2347
Fort Smith, AR 72902
Telephone: (479) 783 2213
Facsimile: (479) 783 4329
E-mail: patsylund@sbcglobal.net
The Defendant is represented by:
Gail Ponder Gaines, Esq.
Michael E. Hale, Esq.
BARBER LAW FIRM PLLC
425 West Capitol Avenue, Suite 3400
Little Rock, AR 72201
Telephone: (501) 372 6175
Facsimile: (501) 375 2802
E-mail: ggaines@barberlawfirm.com
mhale@barberlawfirm.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lanham" Suit Goes from W.D. Va. to MDL 2672
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Lanham et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-13507, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05954-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Lanham case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Benjamin L. Bailey, Esq.
Eric B. Snyder, Esq.
Jonathan D. Boggs, Esq.
Katherine E. Charonko, Esq.
Robert P. Lorea, Esq.
BAILEY & GLASSER, LLP
209 Capitol Street
Charleston, WV 25301-1386
Telephone: (304) 345 6555
Facsimile: (304) 342-1110
E-mail: bbailey@baileyglasser.com
esnyder@baileyglasser.com
jboggs@baileyglasser.com
kcharonko@baileyglasser.com
rlorea@baileyglasser.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Meghan Mitchell Cloud, Esq.
MCGUIRE WOODS
P. O. Box 1288
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Telephone: (434) 977 2534
Facsimile: (434) 980 2254
E-mail: mcloud@mcguirewoods.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Maston" Suit Moved from Vermont to MDL 2672
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Maston v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-00213, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05945-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Maston case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Norman C. Williams, Esq.
GRAVEL & SHEA PC
76 St. Paul Street, 7th Floor
P.O. Box 369
Burlington, VT 05402-0369
Telephone: (802) 658 0220
Facsimile: (802) 658 1456
E-mail: nwilliams@gravelshea.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Moyer" Suit Goes to MDL 2672
-----------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Moyer v. Volkswagen Group of
America Incorporated et al., Case No. 4:15-cv-00462, was
transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of
Arizona, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (San Francisco).The Northern District of California
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05840-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Moyer case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
A. Bates Butler III, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF A BATES BUTLER III LLC
177 N Church Ave., Ste. 1013
Tucson, AZ 85701
Telephone: (520) 624 6200
E-mail: bates@abbutlerlaw.com
- and -
William B. Federman, Esq.
Federman & Sherwood
2926 Maple Ave., Ste 200
Dallas, TX 75201
Telephone: (214) 696 1100
E-mail: wbf@federmanlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Amanda Emily Heitz, Esq.
Curtis James Busby, Esq.
Paul G Cereghini, Esq.
BOWMAN & BROOKE LLP
2901 N Central Ave., Ste. 1600
Phoenix, AZ 85012
Telephone: (602) 643 2311
Facsimile: (602) 248 0947
E-mail: amanda.heitz@bowmanandbrooke.com
curtis.busby@phx.bowmanandbrooke.com
paul.cereghini@bowmanandbrooke.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Newton" Suit Goes from S.D. Tex. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Newton et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-02969, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05875-CRB to the proceeding.
The Defendant allegedly violated the United States Environmental
Protection Agency regulations on emission of harmful and toxic
pollutant that extend to car manufacturers. Since at least 2009,
the Defendant evaded these laws and regulations by selling in the
United States vehicles manufactured by its affiliates Volkswagen
AG and Audi AG that had installed in them illegal defeat devices.
These defeat devices are found in Volkswagen's diesel vehicles for
model years 2009-2015.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Newton case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Dennis Reich, Esq.
REICH AND BINSTOCK, LLP
Texas Bar # 16739600
4265 San Felipe, Suite 1000
Houston, TX 77027
Telephone: (713) 622 7271
E-mail: dreich@reichandbinstock.com
- and -
Richard Schechter, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD SCHECHTER PC
One Greenway Plaza, Ste 740
Houston, TX 77046
Telephone: (713) 623 8919
Facsimile: (713) 622 1680
E-mail: richard@rs-law.com
The Defendant is represented by:
C. Vernon Hartline Jr., Esq.
HARTLINE DACUS BARGER DREYER LLP
8750 N. Central Expwy, Suite 1600
Dallas, TX 75231
Telephone: (214) 346 3700
Facsimile: (214) 267 4200
E-mail: hartline@flash.net
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Parsons" Suit Goes from N.D Tex. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Parsons v. Volkswagen Group of
America Inc et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-03132, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05978-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Parsons case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles W Branham III, Esq.
DEAN OMAR & BRANHAM, LLP
3900 Elm Street
Dallas, TX 75226
Telephone: (214) 722 5990
Facsimile: (214) 722 5991
E-mail: tbranham@dobllp.com
- and -
William B. Federman, Esq.
FEDERMAN & SHERWOOD
10205 N. Pennsylvania
Oklahoma City, OK 73120
Telephone: (405) 235 1560
Facsimile: (405) 239 2112
E-mail: wbf@federmanlaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
C. Vernon Hartline Jr., Esq.
John C Dacus, Esq.
HARTLINE DACUS BARGER DREYER LLP
8750 N. Central Expwy, Suite 1600
Dallas, TX 75231
Telephone: (214) 346 3700
Facsimile: (214) 267 4200
E-mail: hartline@flash.net
jdacus@hdbdlaw.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Richards" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Richards v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01575, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05834-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Richards case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Joseph N. Williams, Esq.
William N Riley, Esq.
RILY WILLIAMS & PIATT, LLC
301 Massachusetts Avenue
Indianapolis, IN 46204
Telephone: (317) 633 8787
Facsimile: (317) 426 3348
E-mail: jwilliams@price-law.com
wriley@rwp-law.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Edward W. Hearn, Esq.
Susan Kathleen Swing, Esq.
JOHNSON & BELL, PC
11051 Broadway, Ste B
Crown Point, IN 46307
Telephone: (219) 791 1900
Facsimile: (219) 791 1901
E-mail: hearne@jbltd.com
swingS@jbltd.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Sanders" Suit Goes from W.D. Wis. to MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Sanders, Linda v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-00636, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of
Wisconsin, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (San Francisco). The Northern District of California
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05955-CRB to the proceeding.
According to the complaint, the Defendants allegedly engaged in
unfair and deceptive business practices in violation of Deceptive
Trade Practices Act (DTPA) by failing to disclose and activity
concealing the defeat device and the true emissions profile and
performance of the Clean Diesel engine system as well as marketing
the Affected Vehicles as safe, efficient, environmentally sound,
and of high quality, and by presenting itself as a reputable
manufacturer that valued the environment, efficiency, and safety.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Sanders case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James P. Scoptur, Esq.
AIKEN AND SCOPTUR
2600 N. Mayfair Rd., Suite 1030
Milwaukee, WI 53226
Telephone: (414) 225 0260
Facsimile: (414) 225 9666
E-mail: james@aikenandscoptur.com
- and -
Neil D. Overholtz, Esq.
Bryan F. Aylstock, Esq.
Justin G. Witkin, Esq.
Douglass A. Kreis, Esq.
Stephen H. Echsner, Esq.
E. Samuel Geisler, Esq.
AYLSTOCK, WITKIN, KREIS & OVERHOLTZ, PLLC
17 E. Main Street, Suite 200
Pensacola, FL 32502
Telephone: 850-202-1010
Facsimile: 850-916-7449
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Schafer" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Schafer et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-13460, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05975-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Schafer case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Eric R. Arnold, Esq.
R. Scott Long, Esq.
Raj A. Shah, Esq.
HENDRICKSON & LONG
P. O. Box 11070
Charleston, WV 25339
Telephone: (304) 346 5500
Facsimile: (304) 346 5515
E-mail: scott@handl.com
rshah@handl.com
- and -
Jodi Westbrook Flowers, Esq.
Joseph F. Rice, Esq.
Kevin R. Dean, Esq.
Motley Rice LLC
28 Bridgeside Boulevard
Mount Pleasant, SC 29464
Telephone: (843) 216 9163
Facsimile: (843) 216 9027
E-mail: jflowers@motleyrice.com
jrice@motleyrice.com
kdean@motleyrice.com
The Defendant is represented by:
J. Brian Jackson, Esq.
James F. Neale, Esq.
Meghan Mitchell Cloud, Esq.
MCGUIRE WOODS
P. O. Box 1288
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Telephone: (434) 977 2562
Facsimile: (434) 980 2278
E-mail: bjackson@mcguirewoods.com
jneale@mcguirewoods.com
mcloud@mcguirewoods.com
- and -
Jeffrey L. Chase, Esq.
Michael B. Gallub, Esq.
HERZFELD AND RUBIN
125 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 471 8500
Facsimile: (212) 344 3333
E-mail: jchase@herzfeld-rubin.com
mgallub@herzfeld-rubin.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Sims" Suit Moved from W.D. Wash. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Sims v. Volkswagen Group of
America Inc et al., Case No. 3:15-cv-05692, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06004-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Sims case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Darrell L Cochran, Esq.
PFAU COCHRAN VERTETIS AMALA PLLC
911 Pacific Ave, Ste 200
Tacoma, WA 98402
Telephone: (253) 777 0799
E-mail: darrell@pcvalaw.com
- and -
Debra Brewer Hayes
The Hayes Law Firm
700 Rockmead, Suite 210
Houston, TX 77339
Telephone: (281) 815 4972
E-mail: dhayes@dhayeslaw.com
- and -
Scott P Nealey, Esq.
NEALEY LAW
71 Stevenson St., Ste 400
San Francisco, CA 94105
Telephone: (415) 231 5311
E-mail: snealey@nealeylaw.com
- and -
Stephen M Hansen, Esq.
LAW OFFICES OF STEPHEN M. HANSEN
1821 Dock Street, Suite 103
Tacoma, WA 98402
Telephone: (253) 302 5955
E-mail: steve@stephenmhansenlaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
John Alan Knox, Esq.
WILLIAMS KASTNER & GIBBS
601 Union St., Ste 4100
Seattle, WA 98101
Telephone: (206) 628 6600
Facsimile: (206) 628 6611
E-mail: jknox@williamskastner.com
- and -
P. Arley Harrel, Esq.
WILLIAMS KASTNER & GIBBS, PLLC
601 Union Street, Suite 4100
PO Box 21926
Seattle, WA 98111
Telephone: (206) 628 6600
Facsimile: (206) 628 6611
E-mail: aharrel@williamskastner.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Turner" Suit Moved from D.C. to MDL 2672
-----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Turner v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-01660, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06027-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Turner case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Patrick J. Coughlin, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Telephone: (619) 231 1058
Facsimile: (619) 231 7423
E-mail: PatC@rgrdlaw.com
- and -
Scott E Gant, Esq.
BOIES, SCHILLER AND FLEXNER LLP
5301 Wisconsin Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20015
Telephone: (202) 273 2727
Facsimile: (202) 237 6131
E-mail: sgant@bsfllp.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Anand Vijay Ramana, Esq.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP
2001 K Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006-1040
Telephone: (202) 857 1734
Facsimile: (202) 828 2973
E-mail: aramana@mcguirewoods.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Wenger" Suit Goes from D.C. to MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Wenger v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01575, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the District of District of Columbia, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06014-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Wenger case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Michael L. Murphy, Esq.
BAILEY & GLASSER, LLP
910 17th Street, NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20006
Telephone: (202) 463 2101
Facsimile: (202) 463 2103
E-mail: mmurphy@baileyglasser.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Whitcomb" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Whitcomb v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-01315, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-06030-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Whitcomb case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
James Wells Harrell, Esq.
BOIES SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP (DC)
5301 Wisconsin Ave NW, Suite 800
Washington, DC 20015-2015
Telephone: (202) 237 2727
Facsimile: (202) 237 6131
E-mail: wharrell@bsfllp.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Wise" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
-----------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Wise v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Case No. 8:15-cv-03125, was transferred from the U.S.
District Court for the District of Maryland, to the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco). The
Northern District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:15-cv-05974-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Wise case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Stephen M Gensemer, Esq.
ASHCRAFT AND GEREL LLP
11300 Rockville Pike Ste 1002
Rockville, MD 20852
Telephone: (301) 770 3737
Facsimile: (301) 881 6132
E-mail: sgensemer@ashcraftlaw.com
The Defendant is represented by:
John L. Hone, Esq.
Ronald G. DeWald, Esq.
LIPSHULTZ AND HONE CHTD
8630 Fenton Street, Suite 108
Silver Spring, MD 20910
Telephone: (301) 587 8500
Facsimile: (301) 495 9759
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Yordy" Suit Moved from M.D. Pa. to MDL 2672
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Yordy et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 3:15-cv-02317, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District of California Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05908-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Yordy case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group of America,
Volkswagen AG and affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the Northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David Samuel Senoff, Esq.
Paola Pearson, Esq.
ANAPOL SCHWARTZ WEISS COHAN FELDMAN & SMALLEY P.C.
One Logan Square
130 North 18th Street, Suite 1600
Philadelphia, PA 19103
Telephone: (215) 735 1130
E-mail: dsenoff@anapolweiss.com
- and -
Michael J. Cefalo, Esq.
CEFALO & ASSOCIATES
309 Wyoming Avenue
West Pittston, PA 18643
Telephone: (570) 655 5555
E-mail: info@cefaloandassociates.com
- and -
Sol H. Weiss, Esq.
1900 Delancey Place
Philadelphia, PA 19103-6690
Telephone: (215) 735 1130
Facsimile: (215) 735 2211
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Silverman" Suit Goes to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Silverman v. Volkswagen AG et al.,
Case No. 1:15-cv-03332, was transferred from the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of Georgia, to the U.S. District
Court for the Northern District of California (San Francisco). The
Northern California District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-
cv-05817-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Silverman case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Craig G. Kunkes, Esq.
James Matthew Brigman, Esq.
Lisa L Heller, Esq.
Richard Lance Robbins, Esq.
Daniel John Monahan, Esq.
ROBBINS ROSS ALLOY BELINFANTE LITTLEFIELD LLC
999 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 1120
Atlanta, GA 30309
Telephone: (678) 701 9381
E-mail: ckunkes@robbinsfirm.com
matt.brigman@robbinsfirm.com
lheller@robbinsfirm.com
rrobbins@robbinsfirm.com
dmonahan@robbinsfirm.com
The Defendants is represented by:
Hugh Brown McNatt, Esq.
MCNATT, GREENE & PETERSON
P.O. Drawer 1168
Vidalia, GA 30475
Telephone: (912) 537 9343
Facsimile: (404) 261 3656
E-mail: hmcnatt@mcnattandgreene.com
Elizabeth Righton Johnson, Esq.
James L. Hollis, Esq.
BALCH & BINGHAM LLP
30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard, NW. Suite 700
Atlanta, GA 30308
Telephone: (404) 962 3544
E-mail: erjohnson@balch.com
jhollis@balch.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Witcher" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Witcher v. Volkswagen A.G., Case
No. 1:15-cv-01618, was transferred from the U.S. District Court
for the District of Columbia, to the U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California (San Francisco). The Northern
District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05987-CRB to the
proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Witcher case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Hassan Ali Zavareei, Esq.
TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
1828 L Street, N.W., Suite 1000
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 973 0900
Facsimile: (202) 973 0950
E-mail: hzavareei@tzlegal.com
- and -
Jonathan K. Tycko, Esq.
TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
2000 L Street, NW, Suite 808
Washington, DC 20036
Telephone: (202) 973 0900
Facsimile: (202) 973 0950
The Defendants are represented by:
Anand Vijay Ramana, Esq.
MCGUIREWOODS LLP
2001 K Street, NW, Suite 400
Washington, DC 20006-1040
Telephone: (202) 857-1734
Facsimile: (202) 828 2973
E-mail: aramana@mcguirewoods.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Cornell" Suit Goes from Vermont to MDL 2672
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Cornell et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 5:15-cv-00222, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont,
to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 3:15-cv-05942-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Cornell case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Patrick J. Bernal, Esq.
WITTEN, WOOLMINGTON & CAMPBELL & BERNAL, P.C.
4900 Main Street
P.O. Box 2748
Manchester Center, VT 05255
Telephone: (802) 362 2560
Facsimile: (802) 362 7109
E-mail: pjb@wittenetal.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Di Mauro" Suit Goes from Montana to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Di Mauro et al. v. Volkswagen
Group of America, Inc. et al., Case No. 9:15-cv-00127,
was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of
Montana, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (San Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05894-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Di Mauro case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
David R. Paoli, Esq.
PAOLI KUTZMAN, P.C.
257 W. Front Street, Suite A
PO Box 8131
Missoula, MT 59802-8131
Telephone: (406) 542 3330
Facsimile: (406) 542 3332
E-mail: davidpaoli@paoli-law.com
- and -
William A. Rossbach, Esq.
ROSSBACH LAW, PC
401 North Washington Street
P.O. Box 8988
Missoula, MT 59807-8988
Telephone: (406) 543-5156
E-mail: bill@rossbachlaw.com
- and -
Paul M. Leisher, Esq.
PAOLI LAW FIRM, P.C.
257 W. Front Street
Missoula, MT 59801
Telephone: (406) 542 3330
Facsimile: (406) 542 3332
E-mail: paulleisher@paoli-law.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Goodwin" Suit Moved from Mass. to MDL 2672
-------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Goodwin v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-13646, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, to the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:15-cv-05895-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Goodwin case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Charles Dee Hopper, Esq.
LYNCH, HOPPER, SALZANO & SMITH, LLP
1640 Alta Drive, Suite 11
Las Vegas, NV 89101
Telephone: (702) 868 1115
Facsimile: (702) 868 1114
E-mail: cdhopper@lhsnvlaw.com
- and -
George T. Campbell, III, Esq.
BACKUS, MEYER & BRANCH, LLP
116 Lowell Street
P.O. Box 516
Manchester, NH 03105-0326
Telephone: (603) 668 7272
Facsimile: (603) 668 0730
E-mail: gcampbell@backusmeyer.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Andrew R Levin, Esq.
David A. Barry, Esq.
SUGARMAN ROGERS BARSHAK & COHEN, PC
101 Merrimac Street, 9th Floor
Boston, MA 02114
Telephone: (617) 227 3030
Facsimile: (617) 523 4001
E-mail: evin@srbc.com
barry@srbc.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Hutton" Suit Goes from N.D. Ill. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Hutton et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-10099, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern California District Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 3:15-cv-05858-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Hutton case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Jeffrey Alan Berman, Esq.
Brian John Wanca, Esq.
ANDERSON WANCA
3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 500
Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
Telephone: (847) 368 1500
Facsimile: (847) 368 1501
E-mail: jberman@andersonwanca.com
bwanca@andersonwanca.com
The Defendant is represented by:
James K. Toohey, Esq.
Brian C. Langs, Esq.
Garrett L. Boehm, Jr., Esq.
JOHNS & BELL LTD
33 West Monroe Street, Suite 2700
Chicago, IL 60603
E-mail: toohey@jbltd.com
langs@jbltd.com
boehmg@jbltd.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Johnson" Suit Moved to MDL 2672
--------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Johnson v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-00261, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Georgia, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:15-cv-05899-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Johnson case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Jeffery L. Arnold, Esq.
ARNOLD, STAFFORD, RANDOLPH & SCHAEFER
P.O. Box 339
Hinesville, GA 31310
Telephone: (912) 369 4529
Facsimile: (912) 369 4542
E-mail: jarnold@coastallawyers.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lemieux" Suit Goes from M.D Ga. to N.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Lemieux v. Volkswagen Group of
America Inc., Case No. 4:15-cv-00157, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San
Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:15-cv-05847-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Lemieux case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
George Walton Walker, III, Esq.
THE FINLEY FIRM, P.C.
PO BOX 3596
Auburn, AL 36831
Telephone: (334) 209 6371
Facsimile: (334) 209 6373
E-mail: gwwalker@thefinleyfirm.com
- and -
J. Benjamin Finley, Esq.
Marybeth V Gibson, Esq.
THE FINLEY FIRM
3535 Piedmont Rd Bldg 14 STE 230
Atlanta, GA 30305
Telephone: (404) 320 9979
E-mail: bfinley@thefinleyfirm.com
mgibson@thefinleyfirm.com
- and -
R. Walker Garrett, Esq.
PO Box 2645
Columbus, GA 31902
Telephone: (706) 323 7711
E-mail: rwalkergarrett@gmail.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Hugh Brown McNatt, Esq.
MCNATT, GREENE & PETERSON
P.O. Drawer 1168
Vidalia, GA 30475
Telephone: (912) 537 9343
Facsimile: (404) 261 3656
- and -
Jeffrey Chase, Esq.
125 Broad St.
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 471 8459
Facsimile: (212) 344 3333
E-mail: jchase@herzfeld-rubin.com
- and -
James L. Hollis, Esq.
BALCH & BINGHAM
30 Ivan Allen Jr. Boulevard, NW, Suite 700
Atlanta, GA 30308
Telephone: (404) 261 6020
E-mail: jhollis@balch.com
- and -
Michael B. Gallub, Esq.
Ningur Akoglu, Esq.
HERZFELD AND RUBIN
125 Broad Street
New York, NY 10004
Telephone: (212) 471 8500
Facsimile: (212) 344 3333
E-mail: mgallub@herzfeld-rubin.com
nakoglu@herzfeld-rubin.com
- and -
Righton Johnson, Esq.
300 Ivan Allen Jr Blvd NW, Suite 700
Atlanta, GA 30308
Telephone: (404) 962 3544
Facsimile: (404) 261 3656
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Lively" Suit Goes from S.D. W.Va. to MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Lively v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc. et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-13773, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of West
Virginia, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (San Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05960-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Lively case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
David R. Barney, Jr., Esq.
Kevin W. Thompson, Esq.
THOMPSON BARNEY
2030 Kanawha Boulevard, East
Charleston, WV 25311-2204
Telephone: (304) 343 4401
Facsimile: (304) 343 4405
E-mail: drbarneywv@gmail.com
kwthompsonwv@gmail.com
- and -
Mark F. Underwood, Esq.
UNDERWOOD LAW OFFICE
923 Third Avenue
Huntington, WV 25701
Telephone: (304) 522 0508
Facsimile: (304) 399 5449
E-mail: markunderwood@underwoodlawoffice.com
- and -
P. Rodney Jackson, Esq.
LAW OFFICE OF P. RODNEY JACKSON
401 Fifth Third Center
700 Virginia Street, East
Charleston, WV 25301
Telephone: (304) 720-6783
Facsimile: (304) 344 9566
E-mail: prodjackson27@yahoo.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Ross" Suit Goes from New Mexico to MDL 2672
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Ross et al. v. Volkswagen
Aktiengesellschaft et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-00968, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, to
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
(San Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case
No. 3:15-cv-05941-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Ross case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiffs are represented by:
Brian F. Egolf, Jr, Esq.
THE EGOLF LAW FIRM, LLC
128 Grant Ave., Suite 301
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Telephone: (505) 986 9641
Facsimile: (800) 520 8345
E-mail: brian@egolflaw.com
- and -
Jamison Barkley, Esq.
John W. Day, Esq.
Katherine M Ferlic, Esq.
EGOLF FERLIC & DAY, LLC
128 Grant Ave., Suite 301
Santa Fe, NM 87501
Telephone: (505) 986 9641
Facsimile: (505) 955 6748
E-mail: jamison@egolflaw.com
jday@egolflaw.com
kate@egolflaw.com
The Defendants are represented by:
Eric R. Burris, Esq.
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK
201 Third St NW, Suite 1700
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 244-0770
Facsimile: (505) 244-9266
E-mail: eburris@bhfs.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Siegel" Suit Moved from N.D Ill. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Siegel v. Volkswagen of America,
Inc. et al., Case No. 1:15-cv-09265, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
Northern, to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California (San Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. to the 3:15-cv-05885-CRB proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Siegel case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Larry Daniel Drury, Esq.
LARRY D. DRURY, LTD.
100 N. LaSalle St.,Suite 1010
Chicago, IL 60602
Telephone: (312) 346 7950
Facsimile: (312) 346 5777
E-mail: ldrurylaw@aol.com
- and -
William M. Sweetnam, Esq.
SWEETNAM LLC
100 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 1010
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 757 1888
Facsimile: (312) 754 8090
The Defendants are represented by:
James K. Toohey, Esq.
Brian C. Langs, Esq.
Garrett L. Boehm, Jr., Esq.
JOHNS & BELL LTD
33 West Monroe Street, Suite 2700
Chicago, IL 60603
E-mail: toohey@jbltd.com
langs@jbltd.com
boehmg@jbltd.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Smith" Suit Moved from M.D. Fla. to MDL 2672
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Smith v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc., Case No. 2:15-cv-00570, was transferred from the
U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida, to the
U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California
District (San Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 3:15-cv-05861-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Smith case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Marcus W. Viles, Esq.
Maria Alaimo, Esq.
Michael Lewis Beckman, Esq.
VILES & BECKMAN, LLC
6350 Presidential Ct., Suite A
Ft. Myers, FL 33919
Telephone: (239) 334 3933
Facsimile: (239) 334 7105
E-mail: marcus@vilesandbeckman.com
maria@vilesandbeckman.com
michael@vilesandbeckman.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Larry Martin Roth, Esq.
Michael D. Begey, Esq.
RUMBERGER, KIRK & CALDWELL, PA
300 S Orange Ave Ste 1400
P.O. Box 1873
Orlando, FL
Telephone: (407) 872 7300
Facsimile: (407) 841 2133
E-mail: mbegey@rumberger.com
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP: "Valdez" Suit Goes from New Mexico to MDL 2672
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Valdez et al. v. Volkswagen Group
of America, Inc., Case No. 1:15-cv-00900, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico, to the
U.S. District Court for the District of Northern California (San
Francisco). The Northern District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
3:15-cv-05958-CRB to the proceeding.
Volkswagen Group of America designs, manufactures, and sells
automobiles in the United States and internationally. The company
operates as a subsidiary of Volkswagen AG, and is based in
Herndon, Virginia.
The Valdez case is being consolidated with MDL 2672 in re:
Volkswagen Clean Diesel Marketing, Sales Practices, and Products
Liability Litigation. The MDL was created by order of the United
States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation On December 8,
2015. These cases primarily concern certain 2.0 and 2 3.0 Liter
diesel engines sold By Defendants Volkswagen Group Of America,
Volkswagen AG And affiliated companies, which allegedly contain
software that enables the vehicles to evade emissions requirements
by engaging full emissions controls only when Official Emissions
Testing Occurs. In its December 8, 2015 order, the MDL panel found
that the actions in this litigation involve common questions of
fact, and that centralization in the northern District of
California will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation.
Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Charles R. Breyer, United
States District Judge. The lead case is 3:15-md-02672-CRB.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Sean M Lyons, Esq.
HENDLER LAW, P.C.
1301 W. 25th Street, Suite 400
Austin, TX 78705
Telephone: (512) 439 3200
Facsimile: (512) 439 3201
E-mail: slyons@hendlerlaw.com
- and -
George B. Davis, Esq.
THE DAVIS LAW FIRM, LLC
111 Tulane Dr. SE
Albuquerque, NM 87106
Telephone: (505) 750 8742
Facsimile: (505) 559 4808
E-mail: bdavis@tdlf-law.com
The Defendant is represented by:
Eric R. Burris, Esq.
BROWNSTEIN HYATT FARBER SCHRECK
201 Third St NW, Suite 1700
Albuquerque, NM 87102
Telephone: (505) 244-0770
Facsimile: (505) 244-9266
E-mail: eburris@bhfs.com
VOLVO TRUCKS: Recalls Multiple Vehicle Models Due to Injury Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 24, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Truck - Med. & H.D.
Notification type: Safety Mfr
System: Steering
Units affected: 2001
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2015561TC
ID number: 2015561
Manufacturer recall number: RVXX1512
On certain vehicles manufactured with a 2-piece steering shaft,
the bolt torque on the joint that couples the upper and lower
steering shaft could be lower than specification. This could cause
the bolt to loosen, which may result in separation of the two
shafts. Separation of the two shafts would result in complete loss
of steering, increasing the risk of a crash causing injury and/or
damage to property. Correction: Instructions will be sent to
owners advising them to tighten the bolt as an interim measure.
Dealers will inspect the steering shaft, and affect repairs as
necessary.
Make Model Model year(s) affected
---- ----- ----------------------
VOLVO VNL 2016
VOLVO VNM 2016
VOLVO VNX 2016
WALMART CANADA: Recalls Popping Corn Products Due to Insects
------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 2, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Alert sub-type: Notification
Subcategory: Extraneous Material
Hazard classification: Class 3
Source of recall: Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm: Walmart Canada Corp.
Distribution: National
Extent of the product distribution: Retail
CFIA reference number: 10193
Brand Common name Size Code(s) on UPC
name ----------- ----- product ---
---- ----------
Great Popping Corn 1 kg 2016AU10G 6 81131 76007 2
Value
YAMAHA: Recalls YZF-R1 2015 Models Due to Crash Risk
----------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 24, 2015
Type of communication: Recall
Subcategory: Motorcycle
Notification type: Safety TC
System: Powertrain
Units affected: 240
Source of recall: Transport Canada
Identification number: 2015559TC
ID number: 2015559
Manufacturer recall number: M15-126
On certain motorcycles, the second gear wheel and the pinion gears
in the transmission may be of inadequate strength. In high stress
cases, this could cause internal components in the transmission to
deform or break. If gears were to fail, the transmission could
lock up, which would also cause the rear wheel to lock up. This
could result in loss of control and/or a crash, increasing the
risk of injury and/or damage to property. Correction: Dealers will
replace the transmission assembly with one that includes gears of
a different design.
Make Model Model year(s) affected
---- ----- ----------------------
YAMAHA YZF-R1 2015
ZEVEX INC: Recalls Pump Delivery Sets Due to Leaking
----------------------------------------------------
Starting date: December 1, 2015
Posting date: January 14, 2016
Type of communication: Medical Device Recall
Subcategory: Medical Device
Hazard classification: Type II
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Medical Devices
Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number: RA-56600
The manufacturer has become aware of an increase in the number of
complaints for EnterLite Infinity Enteral Pump Delivery sets with
ENFit connector system and transitional stepped connectors
(administration sets) that are used with the EnteraLite Infinity
Enteral Feeding Pump. Customers are reporting formula leaking
between the purple ENFit connector and the white transitional
stepped connector due to cracking or breaking of the purple
connector.
Affected products:
A. ENTERALITE INFINITY BAG SET
Lot or serial number: All lots.
Model or catalog number: INF0500-A
INF0500-A
INF1200-A
INF1200-A
B. Enteralite Infinity Spike Set
Lot or serial number: All lots.
Model or catalog number: INF0020-A
INF0020-A
Manufacturer: Zevex Inc.
also trading as Moog Medical Devices Group
4314 Zevex Park Lane
Salt Lake City
84123
Utah
UNITED STATES
ZIMMER INC: Recalls Trilogy Style Allofit IT Inserters
------------------------------------------------------
Starting date: November 24, 2015
Posting date: January 14, 2016
Type of communication: Medical Device Recall
Subcategory: Medical Device
Hazard classification: Type III
Source of recall: Health Canada
Issue: Medical Devices
Audience: General Public, Healthcare Professionals, Hospitals
Identification number: RA-56598
Zimmer Biomet is initiating a lot specific recall of the Trilogy
style Allofit it inserters, part number 82-0174-140-00. Zimmer
Biomet received two complaints for three devices which had bent
and cracked at the weld which connects the Allofit it inserter
handle to the Allofit it inserter tip. The affected devices were
distributed between 25 June 2011 and 28 December 2012.
A. CUSTOM TRILOGY STYLE ALLOFIT IT INSERTER
Lot or serial number: All lots.
Model or catalog number: 82-0174-140-00
Manufacturer: Zimmer Inc.
1800 West Center Street
Warsaw
46580
UNITED STATES
* FDA Seeks Public Input on "Natural Food" Labeling Use
-------------------------------------------------------
Amy P. Lally, Livia M. Kiser and Rachel Goldberg, writing for
Corporate Counsel, report that for years, many have asked the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) to define the term "natural" for use
in food labeling. Private citizens asked. Corporations asked.
Even federal courts asked. But until recently, aside from an
attempt at rulemaking in the early 1990s (an attempt that the FDA
formally abandoned in 1993), the FDA had taken no steps to
formally define the term. Rather, the FDA relied upon its policy
regarding the use of "natural" as meaning that nothing artificial
or synthetic (including all color additives, regardless of source)
has been included in, or has been added to, a food.
Finally, however, the FDA has taken some long-awaited action; it
opened a docket on November 12, 2015 to get input from the public,
asking:
-- Is it appropriate for the FDA to define the term "natural"?
-- If so, how should the agency define "natural"?
-- How should the agency make this determination?
Docket submissions can be made electronically or by mail and will
be accepted until May 10, 2016.
Even prior to the close of the FDA's docket, the FDA's actions
could have a substantial impact on food and supplement label
litigation challenging the use of the word. This litigation is
pending in courts all over the country. In light of the FDA's
request for input, counsel representing parties involved in actual
(or even threatened) litigation should consider raising (or re-
raising) arguments based on the primary jurisdiction doctrine and
preemption principles.
Background
The word "natural" on food and supplement products has been
challenged in false and misleading advertising litigation for a
variety of reasons. These include allegations that one or more of
the ingredients was claimed to have been: (i) processed (Pelayo v.
Nestle USA Inc. [C.D. Cal. Oct. 25, 2013]); (ii) genetically
modified (Barnes v. Campbell Soup Co., [N.D. Cal. Jan. 24, 2014]);
(iii) contaminated with pesticide residue from crop treatment (In
re Hain Celestial Seasonings Prods. Consumer Litig. [C.D. Cal.
Nov. 6, 2013]); (iv) synthetic (Thurston v. Bear Naked, Inc. [S.D.
Cal. July 30, 2013]); and (v) not organic (In re Hain Celestial
Seasonings Prods. Consumer Litig. [C.D. Cal. Nov. 6, 2013]).
Before the FDA made its most recent request for comment,
defendants in food labeling litigation across the country moved to
stay or dismiss suits based on the primary jurisdiction doctrine
and/or preemption principles. Courts rulings on these motions
were not uniform. Some rejected such claims. Other courts
thought defendants raised legitimate concerns.
The uncertainty was deemed significant enough that three federal
judges (two in the northern district of California and one in the
district of New Jersey) wrote a letter to the FDA asking for
guidance on the proper definition of "natural" in labeling.
Specifically, these three judges wanted to know if bioengineered
and/or genetically modified food could properly be labeled
"natural."
In response, on January 7, 2014 the FDA declined to make a
determination or provide guidance on the issue. Consequently,
many assumed that the FDA's letter meant that the FDA never
intended to rule on the use of "natural" in food labels. The
three judges who requested guidance, for example, lifted their
stays. The parties in these cases settled soon after.
But the assumption about the FDA's intentions has been called into
question by the recent notice. While the FDA has not formally
begun the rulemaking process, it has taken action in a meaningful
way that may be a precursor to future rulemaking. (The FDA's
rulemaking on Gluten-Free labels, for example, also started with a
request for input). Thus, the FDA's request for input can and
should affect ongoing litigation, and the primary jurisdiction and
preemption arguments that defendants were raising a few years ago
now should be back on the table.
Primary Jurisdiction Doctrine
The FDA's newest action revitalizes arguments based on the primary
jurisdiction doctrine because the reasons that courts previously
denied such arguments in the past no longer apply. For instance,
a district court in one case found that the primary jurisdiction
doctrine was inapplicable in part because there was no "risk of
undercutting the FDA's judgment and authority" given that the FDA
had affirmatively indicated it did not plan to exercise its power
to regulate the use of "natural" on food labels. But that
assumption is no longer true now that the FDA has asked for public
input on an issue. Thus, prudent counsel defending against such
litigation will consider raising (or
re-raising) this doctrine.
The specter of favorable rulings on primary jurisdiction staying
or dismissing "natural" food label litigation may well impact the
filing of this type of litigation, as knowledgeable counsel may be
able to persuade plaintiffs' counsel that the potential for such a
ruling augers in favor of informal, early resolution.
Preemption Principles
If, as a result of its initial action, FDA promulgates a formal
rulemaking, defense lawyers should be prepared to assert -- or re-
assert -- arguments based on preemption principles. The outcome
of these "natural" label suits may well be dependent on the
outcome of any promulgated rulemaking. Plaintiffs may argue that
there are many steps (and much time) before the FDA could make any
preemptive decisions. Nevertheless, preemption is an argument
defendants should make. Prior to the November, 2015 call for
comments (but after its letter denying guidance to the district
judges), the assertion that preemption was imminent, i.e. that the
FDA would make making rules regulating the use of "natural" in
labeling, thus preempting conflicting state law, was weak at best.
But now, even if there are many steps the FDA must go through to
preempt the states' laws in this area, arguments on dismissal
based on preemption principles should not be given short shrift.
*********
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 2016. 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 * * *