CAR_Public/160411.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Monday, April 11, 2016, Vol. 18, No. 72


                            Headlines


21ST CENTURY: Faces "Delgado" Suit in Fla. Over Contract Breach
21ST CENTURY: Faces "Radauscher" Suit Over Contract Breach
21ST CENTURY: Faces "Trelease" Suit in Fla. Over Contract Breach
24 HOUR FITNESS: "O'Shea" Suit Alleges Breach of Contract
A1 SOUVLAKI: "Papakleovoulou" Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay

ABC COMPONENTS: "Useche" Suit Seeks Damages, Overtime Wages
ABITINO FOODS: "Tadeo" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
ACADIA PHARMACEUTICALS: May 20 Hearing on Motion to Dismiss
ALLIED INTERSTATE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Carrano" Suit Claims
AMC ENTERTAINMENT: Violated Disabilities Act, "Diaz" Suit Claims

AMR STAFFING: Does Not Properly Pay Employees, Action Claims
ANHEUSER-BUSCH: Faces "Vazquez" Class Suit in S. Dist. Florida
ANNAPOLIS JUNCTION: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
ANYTIME PRODUCTION: "Padluny" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
APPFOLIO INC: Illegally Collects Screening Fees, Action Claims

ARENA PHARMACEUTICALS: Class Action Appeal Remains Pending
AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES: Suits Over Edgewater Fire Remain Pending
BEALLS INC: "Maar" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages & Damages Under FLSA
BERBERIAN ENTERPRISES: Sued Over Disability Discrimination
BERKSHIRE HILLS: Still Defends Hampden Bancorp Merger Class Suit

BLB ENTERPRISES: "Reeves" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
BLUE CROSS: Violated Sherman Act, "Horner" Suit Claims
CALFRAC WELL SERVICES: "Hunt" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA
CAREER EDUCATION: Order Striking Class Allegations Upheld
CAREER EDUCATION: Order in "Surrett" Case Reversed

CAREER EDUCATION: Appeal in "Wilson" Case Still Pending
CHELSEA BAGEL: Faces "Sandoval" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
CENERGY INTERNATIONAL: "Wright" Suit Seeks OT Wages Under FLSA
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: "Cova" Suit Seeks Damages Under CCPA
CONSOLIDATED FOUNDRIES: Removed "Santoyo" Suit to C.D. California

CONSUMERS UNION: Faces "Ruppel" Suit in S. District New York
DAVITA HEALTHCARE: Settlement in Wage and Hour Suit Approved
DAVITA HEALTHCARE: Discovery Due May 25 in "Oldershaw" Class Suit
ENERGY TRANSFER: Dieckman Action in Delaware Remains Pending
ESSEX PROPERTY: "Foster" Class Action Still Pending

EURO DESIGN: Faces "Santos" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
EXPEDITORS AND PRODUCTION: Violated FLSA & NMMWA, "Cox" Suit Says
FIDELITY MANAGEMENT: "Wilson" Sues Over Mismanaged Trust Fund
FLEETWOOD-FIBRE: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Villa" Suit Claims
FORSTER GARBUS: Illegally Collects Debt, "Mendoza" Suit Claims

GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC: "Stevenson" Sues Over Zofran Side-effects
GLENTEX INC: "Mansel" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages, OT Under FLSA
GLOBAL EQUITY: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Wegen" Action Claims
HONEST COMPANY: Violated CCLRA, "Glover" Suit Claims
HSNI LLC: Faces "Grossman" Suit in Florida Over Contract Breach

ICAHN ENTERPRISES: MOU Reached in Mustard and Sloan Suits
INLAND REAL ESTATE: Consolidated Amended Suit Filed in Baltimore
INTERSPACE BATTERY: Faces "Montoya" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
J2 GLOBAL: Parties Prepare Dispositive Motions in Paldo Sign Case
J2 GLOBAL: Accord in LEO Action Remains Pending

JACKSONVILLE BANCORP: MOU Reached in Merger Class Action
JARDEN CORP: Individual Defendants Still Face "Hirsch" Action
JCB ASSOCIATES: Faces "Nenos" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
KOSMIC OF KEY WEST: "Mansel" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages Under FLSA
KRAFT HEINZ: Faces "Ford" Suit in Penn. Over Product Misbranding

LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: Class Action Dismissal Under Appeal
LIZARD O'S INC: "Vicuna" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA, NYLL
LTD FINANCIAL: Illegally Collects Debt, "Preisler" Suit Claims
MAIN LLC: Does Not Properly Pay Employees, "Crisostomo" Suit Says
MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: "Zeman" Suit Removed to S.D. California

MASSAGE ENVY: Faces "Zizian" Class Suit in S.D. California
MDC PARTNERS: Pension Funds Oppose Motion to Dismiss
MDL 2328: Pool Corp. Still Defends Antitrust Case
MOBILE PELUSO: "Kaiabneh" Suit Seeks Overtime Wages Under FLSA
MONTGOMERY, MD: Faces "Yi" Suit Over Constitutional Rights Breach

MR. CHOW: "Rojas" Suit Seeks Back & Front Pay Under FLSA
NAVIENT SOLUTIONS: Faces "Manson" Class Suit in N. Dist. Illinois
NRG ENERGY: Natural Gas Litigation Proceeding in Nevada Court
NRG ENERGY: Continues to Defend TCPA Class Actions
OAKLAND AUTOMOTIVE: Sued Over Retail Installment Sale Contract

PACESETTERS PERSONNEL: Violated FLSA, "Robinson" Suit Claims
PACIFIC GLASS CORP: "Romero" Suit to Recover Minimum Wages
PANKL AEROSPACE: "Cepeda" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
PC RICHARD: Removed "Sharp" Class Suit to Dist. New Jersey
PETSMART INC: "Steeger" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay

PGA INC: "Nickell" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
PNC BANK: "Shalabi" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay, Final Pay
QUANTA SERVICES: "Benton" Action Still Pending in Calif.
R&G ESPANOLA: "Marantes" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
SCHOLASTIC BOOK: Faces "Zuidam" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime

ST. MORITZ SECURITY: "Robinson" Suit Seeks OT Wages Under FLSA
SWEET PEAS DAYCARE: "Frazier" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay
SYSCO CORPORATION: Faces "Navarro" Class Suit in California
TEAM REAL ESTATE: Silver Crown Files Suit Over Shady Land Deal
TSA REWINDS: "Pineda" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay

VASCO DATA: "Rossbach" Class Action Pending in N.D. Ill.
VEOLIA WATER: "Siratsamy" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
WALTER INVESTMENT: "Beck" Class Action in Discovery
WALTER INVESTMENT: May 12 Final Settlement Approval Hearing
WORLD VARIETY: "Mondragon" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime

ZIONS BANCORPORATION: "Reyes" Class Action Pending in E.D. Pa.


                            *********


21ST CENTURY: Faces "Delgado" Suit in Fla. Over Contract Breach
---------------------------------------------------------------
George Delgado, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. 21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc., Case No. 2:16-
cv-00259-UA-MRM (M.D. Fla., April 6, 2016), arises out of the
Defendants' alleged breach of contract.

21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc. is a provider of state-of-
the-art radiation therapy and integrated cancer treatments.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew S. Mokwa, Esq.
      Steven R. Maher, Esq.
      THE MAHER LAW FIRM, PA
      Suite 200, 631 W Morse Blvd
      Winter Park, FL 32789
      Telephone: (407) 839-0866
      Facsimile: (407) 425-7958
      E-mail: mmokwa@maherlawfirm.com
              smaher@maherlawfirm.com


21ST CENTURY: Faces "Radauscher" Suit Over Contract Breach
----------------------------------------------------------
Wilhelm Radauscher, Elizabeth Cetrulo, and David Glickman,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-00257-UA-
MRM (M.D. Fla., April 5, 2016), arises out of the Defendants'
alleged breach of contract.

21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc. is a provider of state-of-
the-art radiation therapy and integrated cancer treatments.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      David Marc Buckner, Esq.
      BUCKNER + MILES
      3350 Mary Street
      Miami, FL 33133
      Telephone: (305) 442-8666
      Facsimile: (305) 285-1668
      E-mail: david@bucknermiles.com

        - and -

      Jason Lichtman, Esq.
      LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERNSTEIN, LLP
      250 Hudson Street, 8th Floor
      New York, NY 10013
      Telephone: (888) 321-1510
      Facsimile: (212) 355-9592

         - and -

      Michael Levin-Gesundheit, Esq.
      Michael Sobol, Esq.
      Roger Heller, Esq.
      LIEFF CABRASER HEIMANN & BERSTEIN, LLP
      257 Battery Street, Floor 29
      San Francisco, CA 94111
      Telephone: (415) 956-1000
      Facsimile: (415) 956-1008

21ST CENTURY: Faces "Trelease" Suit in Fla. Over Contract Breach
----------------------------------------------------------------
Maureen Trelease, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. 21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc., Case
No. 2:16-cv-00257-UA-MRM (M.D. Fla., April 5, 2016), arises out of
the Defendants' alleged breach of contract.

21st Century Oncology Holdings, Inc. is a provider of state-of-
the-art radiation therapy and integrated cancer treatments.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Curtis B. Miner, Esq.
      Julie Braman Kane, Esq.
      Stephanie Anne Casey,Esq.
      COLSON HICKS EIDSON
      255 Alhambra Circle
      Coral Gables, FL 33134-7414
      Telephone: (305) 476-7400
      Facsimile: (305) 476-7444
      E-mail: curt@colson.com
              julie@colson.com
              scasey@colson.com

         - and -

      William deForest Thompson, Jr., Esq.
      WILLIAM DEFOREST THOMPSON, JR, P.A.
      2051 McGregor Blvd.
      Ft. Myers, FL 33901
      Telephone: (239) 332-3655
      E-mail: wdeft@thethompsonlawfirm.net


24 HOUR FITNESS: "O'Shea" Suit Alleges Breach of Contract
---------------------------------------------------------
Kevin O'Shea, Mark Vitcov and Rod Morris, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. 24 Hour
Fitness USA, Inc., California corporation, Defendant, Case No.
3:16-cv-01668-EDL (N.D. Cal., San Francisco Division, April 1,
2016), seeks reformation of written contracts between the parties
to reflect a lifetime membership with its attended guarantees,
damages, including restitutionary, statutory and punitive damages,
attorneys' fees and costs, pre-judgment and post-judgment
interest, injunctive and declaratory relief resulting from fraud,
violation of California Legal Remedies Act, Unfair Competition
Law, Health Studio Services Contract Law, Unlawful Trade Practices
Act, Texas Health Spa Act and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices
Act.

24 Hour Fitness USA, Inc. is a corporation existing under the laws
of the State of California with its principal place of business
located at 12647 Alcosta Boulevard, Suite 500, San Ramon,
California 94583, and operates the largest fitness center chain in
the United States. It allegedly did not honor the lifetime
membership fee guarantee that it used to offer to its members.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Todd M. Logan, Esq.
      EDELSON PC
      329 Bryant Street, Suite 2C
      San Francisco, CA 94107
      Tel: (415) 212-9300
      Email: tlogan@edelson.com


A1 SOUVLAKI: "Papakleovoulou" Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------
Charalambos Papakleovoulou, on behalf of himself, Plaintiff, v. A1
Souvlaki Corp. and Antonias Manolas in his individual and
professional capacity, Defendants, Case 1:16-cv-01626 (E.D.N.Y.,
April 1, 2016), seeks recovery of minimum and overtime pay,
spread-of-hours premium, liquidated damages, reasonable attorney's
fees and costs and such other and further relief under the Fair
Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Laws.

Defendants operate a food truck where Plaintiff prepared food,
serviced customers and manned the cash register. He worked over 68
hours per week without overtime compensation and was not issued
work stubs.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ariadne Anna Panagopoulou Alexandrou, Esq.
      PARDALIS & NOHAVICKA, LLP
      3510 Broadway, Suite 201
      Astoria, NY 11106
      Tel: (718) 777-0400
      Fax: (718) 777-0599
      Email: ari@pnlawyers.com


ABC COMPONENTS: "Useche" Suit Seeks Damages, Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
Yelithze Del Carmen Useche and all others similarly situated, the
Plaintiff, v. ABC Components, Inc., and Mine Gulec, the
Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-21206-JAL (S.D. Fla., April 5, 2016),
seeks to recover overtime wages, double damages and reasonable
attorney fees from Defendants, pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA).

ABC Components provides aviation and aircraft parts, active
components, passive components, electromechanical and interconnect
products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J.H. Zidell, Esq.
          J.H. ZIDELL, P.A.
          300 71st Street, Suite 605
          Miami Beach, FL 33141
          Telephone: (305) 865 6766
          Facsimile: (305) 865 7167
          E-mail: ZABOGADO@AOL.COM


ABITINO FOODS: "Tadeo" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
---------------------------------------------------------
Miguel Tadeo, Ernesto Villegas and Aureliano Tletalpa,
individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated
who were employed by Abitino Foods, Inc. and Mario Abitino,
individually, Plaintiff, v. Abitino Foods, Inc. d/b/a Abitino's
Pizzeria and Mario Abitino, individually, Defendants, Case 1:16-
cv-02432 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2016), seeks recovery of minimum and
overtime pay, spread-of-hours premium, liquidated damages,
reasonable attorney's fees and costs and such other and further
relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Laws.

Abitino Foods, Inc. operates Abitino Pizzeria located at 733
Second Avenue, New York, New York 10016 where the Plaintiffs
worked as food service crew and delivery. They claim to have not
been paid overtime compensation for work rendered in excess of 40
hours per week.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lloyd Ambinder, Esq.
      Milana Dostanitch, Esq.
      VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP
      40 Broad Street, 7th Floor
      New York, NY 10004
      Tel: (212) 943-9080
      Fax: (212) 943-9082
      Email: lambinder@vandallp.com


ACADIA PHARMACEUTICALS: May 20 Hearing on Motion to Dismiss
-----------------------------------------------------------
Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that a hearing on the
Company's motion to dismiss a class action lawsuit is scheduled
for May 20, 2016.

The Company said, "In March 2015, following our announcement of
the update to the timing of our planned NDA submission to the FDA
for NUPLAZID for the treatment of PDP and the subsequent decline
of the price of our common stock, two putative securities class
action complaints (captioned Rihn v. ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.,
Case No. 15-cv-0575-BTM-DHB, and Wright v. ACADIA Pharmaceuticals
Inc., Case No. 15-cv-0593- BTM-DHB) were filed in the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of California, or the
Court, against us and certain of our current and former officers.
The complaints generally alleged that the defendants violated
Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by
making materially false and misleading statements regarding the
timing of our planned NDA submission to the FDA for NUPLAZID,
thereby artificially inflating the price of our common stock. The
complaints sought unspecified monetary damages and other relief."

On April 10 and June 1, 2015, the Court entered orders deferring
the defendants' response to the Rihn and Wright complaints until
after the Court appointed a lead plaintiff and assigned lead
counsel.

On May 12, 2015, several putative stockholders filed separate
motions to consolidate the two actions and be appointed lead
plaintiff. On September 8, 2015, the Court issued an order
consolidating the two actions, appointing lead plaintiff, and
assigning lead counsel.

On November 16, 2015, lead plaintiff filed a consolidated
complaint with the Court which, like the prior complaints, accuses
the defendants of making materially false and misleading
statements regarding the anticipated timing of our planned NDA
submission to the FDA for NUPLAZID.

"On January 15, 2016, we filed a motion to dismiss the
consolidated complaint," the Company said.

"Subject to court approval, the parties stipulated that plaintiffs
shall file their opposition to our motion to dismiss on March 22,
2016 and that we shall file our reply to plaintiffs' opposition on
April 21, 2016. The hearing on our motion to dismiss is scheduled
for May 20, 2016. We plan to continue to vigorously defend against
the claims advanced."

Acadia is a biopharmaceutical company focused on the development
and commercialization of innovative medicines to address unmet
medical needs in central nervous system disorders.


ALLIED INTERSTATE: Illegally Collects Debt, "Carrano" Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Cathleen Carrano and Rose Powe, individually and on behalf of all
those similarly situated v. Allied Interstate, LLC and LVNV
Funding, LLC, Case No. 2:16-cv-01655 (E.D.N.Y., April 6, 2016),
seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable means to
collect a debt.

The Defendants operate a collection agency that works for
creditors to collect on charged-off debt accounts.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Craig B. Sanders, Esq.
      SANDERS LAW, PLLC
      100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 50
      Garden City, NY 11530
      Telephone: (516) 203-7600
      Facsimile: (516) 281-7601
      E-mail: csanders@sanderslawpllc.com


AMC ENTERTAINMENT: Violated Disabilities Act, "Diaz" Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Cristhian Diaz, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, v. AMC Entertainment, Inc., the Defendant, Case No.
1:16-cv-02546-VEC (S.D.N.Y., April 5, 2016), seeks declaratory and
injunctive relief to correct AMC's policies and practices to
include measures necessary to ensure compliance with federal and
state law and to include monitoring of such measures, to update
and remove accessibility barriers on Amctheatres.com so that
Plaintiff and customers who are blind will be able to
independently and privately use Defendant's website, pursuant to
the Disabilities Act.

AMC Entertainment, through its subsidiaries, engages in the
theatrical exhibition business. As of December 31, 2015, it owned,
operated, or held interests in 387 theatres with a total of 5,426
screens primarily in North America. The company was founded in
1920 and is headquartered in Leawood, Kansas. The Company is a
subsidiary of AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C.K. Xee, Esq.
          Anne Seelig, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          30 East 39th Street, Second Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 465 1188
          Facsimile: (212) 465 1181


AMR STAFFING: Does Not Properly Pay Employees, Action Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Fernando Carrillo, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. AMR Staffing, Inc., Custom Goods, LLC, and
Does 1 through 20, inclusive, Case No. BC616055 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
April 5, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to
pay minimum and overtime wages in violation of the California
Labor Code.

AMR Staffing, Inc. operates an employment agency located at 9858
Artesia Blvd, Bellflower, CA 90706.

Custom Goods, LLC operates a logistics company located at 1035 E
Watson Center Rd, Carson, CA 90745.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Kashif Haque, Esq.
      Samuel A. Wong,
      Jessica L. Campbell, Esq.
      AEGIS LAW FIRM, PC
      9811 Irvine Center Drive, Suite 100
      Irvine, CA 92618
      Telephone: (949) 379-6250
      Facsimile: (949)379-6251


ANHEUSER-BUSCH: Faces "Vazquez" Class Suit in S. Dist. Florida
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been commenced against Anheuser-Busch
Companies, LLC.

The case is captioned Dr. Henry Vazquez, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated v. Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC,
Case No. 1:16-cv-21181-UU (S.D. Fla., April 4, 2016).

Anheuser-Busch Companies, LLC owns and operate a brewing company
headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ervin Amado Gonzalez, Esq.
      COLSON HICKS EIDSON
      255 Alhambra Circle, Penthouse
      Coral Gables, FL 33134-2351
      Telephone: (305) 476-7400
      Facsimile: (305) 476-7444
      E-mail: Ervin@colson.com


ANNAPOLIS JUNCTION: Sued Over Fair Credit Reporting Act Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tiffany Jade Smith, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Annapolis Junction Rail Solutions, LLC, North American
Rail Solutions, LLC, and CSX Transportation, Inc., Case No. 1:16-
cv-00968-RDB (D. Md., April 1, 2016), is brought against the
Defendants for violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

The Defendants own and operate a railroad construction company in
Maryland.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      E. David Hoskins, Esq.
      THE LAW OFFICES OF E DAVID HOSKINS LLC
      16 E. Lombard Street, Suite 400
      Baltimore, MD 21202
      Telephone: (410) 662-6500
      Facsimile: (410) 662-7800
      E-mail: davidhoskins@hoskinslaw.com


ANYTIME PRODUCTION: "Padluny" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
----------------------------------------------------------------
Marcos G. Padluny, and other similarly-situated individuals,
Plaintiff, v. Anytime Production Rentals, Inc. and David F. Rojas,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-21169-JLK (S.D. Fla,
Miami Division, April 1, 2016), seeks all back wages with
liquidated damages, reasonable attorney's fees and costs,
reinstatement, injunctive relief and front wages under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

Anytime Rentals is a party rental business located at 387 NE 69
ST, Miami FL 33138, where Plaintiff was employed as a driver.
Padluny claims overtime pay and reimbursement of work-related
expenses.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
      ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
      9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
      Miami, FL 33156
      Telephone: (305) 446-1500
      Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
      Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com


APPFOLIO INC: Illegally Collects Screening Fees, Action Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Victoria Clark, individually and on behalf of the proposed Rule 23
classes v. AppFolio, Inc., and College Property Management, LLC
d/b/a CPM Property Management, Case No. 27-CV-16-4607 (Minn. 4th
Cir. Ct., April 5, 2016), arises out of the Defendant's unlawful
collection of applicant screening fees in connection with property
rental applications.

AppFolio, Inc. operates an online property management software for
modern residential and rental property managers.

College Property Management, LLC provides property management
services and leasing representation to a large group of Minnesota
property owners.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Anna P. Prakash, Esq.
      Eleanor E. Frisch, Esq.
      NICHOLS KASTER, PLLP
      80 South Eighth Street 4600 IDS Center
      Minneapolis, MN 55402-2242
      Telephone: (612) 256-3200
      Facsimile: (612)338-4878
      E-mail: aprakash@nka.com
              efrisch@nka.com


ARENA PHARMACEUTICALS: Class Action Appeal Remains Pending
----------------------------------------------------------
Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that an appeal in a
class action lawsuit remains pending.

The appellate case is Case No. 14-55633, pending before the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.  According to the calendar
for the Richard H. Chambers US Court of Appeals, in Pasadena,
Calif., there's a hearing on the matter set for May 4, 2016, at
9:00 a.m.  Calendar entries may change up until the hearing date.

The Company said, "Beginning on September 20, 2010, a number of
complaints were filed in the US District Court for the Southern
District of California against us and certain of our current and
former employees and directors on behalf of certain purchasers of
our common stock. The complaints were brought as purported
stockholder class actions, and, in general, include allegations
that we and certain of our current and former employees and
directors violated federal securities laws by making materially
false and misleading statements regarding our BELVIQ program,
thereby artificially inflating the price of our common stock. The
plaintiffs sought unspecified monetary damages and other relief."

"On August 8, 2011, the Court consolidated the actions and
appointed a lead plaintiff and lead counsel. On November 1, 2011,
the lead plaintiff filed a consolidated amended complaint. On
March 28, 2013, the Court dismissed the consolidated amended
complaint without prejudice. On May 13, 2013, the lead plaintiff
filed a second consolidated amended complaint.

"On November 5, 2013, the Court dismissed the second consolidated
amended complaint without prejudice as to all parties except for
Robert E. Hoffman, who was dismissed from the action with
prejudice. On November 27, 2013, the lead plaintiff filed a motion
for leave to amend the second consolidated amended complaint.

"On March 20, 2014, the Court denied plaintiff's motion and
dismissed the second consolidated amended complaint with
prejudice. On April 18, 2014, the lead plaintiff filed a notice of
appeal, and on August 27, 2014, the lead plaintiff filed his
appellate brief in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

"On October 24, 2014, we filed our answering brief in response to
the lead plaintiff's appeal. On December 5, 2014, the lead
plaintiff filed his reply brief.

"Due to the stage of these proceedings, we are not able to predict
or reasonably estimate the ultimate outcome or possible losses
relating to these claims.

The district court case is, Arena Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Securities
Litigation, Case No. 10-cv-1959 CAB (S.D. Cal.).

Laurence D. King, Esq. -- lking@kaplanfox.com -- and Jeffery P.
Campisi, Esq. -- jcampisi@kaplanfox.com -- at Kaplan Fox are the
court-appointed lead counsel in this securities class action.

Kaplan Fox retained Stris & Maher LLP to file an appeal on the
plaintiffs' behalf in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Ninth Circuit.  The firm may be reached at:

     Peter K. Stris, Esq.
     Dana Berkowitz, Esq.
     Victor O'Connell, Esq.
     STRIS & MAHER LLP
     19210 S. Vermont Ave., Bldg. E
     Gardena, CA 90248
     Telephone: (424) 212-7090
     Facsimile: (424) 212-7001

Attorneys for Defendants-Appellees"

     William E. Grauer, Esq.
     Koji F. Fukumura, Esq.
     Mary Kathryn Kelley, Esq.
     Ryan E. Blair, Esq.
     Cooley LLP
     4401 Eastgate Mall
     San Diego, CA 92121-1909
     Tel: (858) 550-6139

Arena seeks to bring innovative medicines targeting G protein-
coupled receptors, or GPCRs, to patients. The Company's focus is
discovering, developing and commercializing drugs to address unmet
medical needs, and it has an internally discovered drug,
lorcaserin, that is being marketed and a pipeline of novel drug
candidates that it intends to advance.


AVALONBAY COMMUNITIES: Suits Over Edgewater Fire Remain Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
Avalonbay Communities, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company
continues to defend class action lawsuits related to the fire at
the Avalon at Edgewater apartment community.

In January 2015, a fire occurred at the Company's Avalon at
Edgewater apartment community in Edgewater, NJ.  The Company
believes that the fire was caused by sparks from a torch used
during repairs being performed by a Company employee who was not a
licensed plumber. The Company has since revised its maintenance
policies to require that non-flame tools be used for plumbing
repairs where possible or, where not possible inside the building
envelope, that a qualified third party vendor perform the work in
accordance with AvalonBay policies.

The Company is aware that third parties incurred significant
property damage and are claiming other losses, such as relocation
costs, as a result of the fire. The Company has established
protocols for processing claims and has encouraged any party who
sustained a loss to contact the Company's insurance carrier to
file a claim. Through the date of this Form 10-K, of the 229
occupied apartments destroyed in the fire, the residents of
approximately 76 units have settled claims with the Company's
insurer, and claims from an additional 44 units are being
evaluated by the Company's insurer.

To date, four putative class action lawsuits have been filed
against the Company on behalf of Avalon at Edgewater residents and
others who may have been harmed by the fire. The court has
consolidated these actions in the United States District Court for
the District of New Jersey.

In addition, 18 lawsuits representing approximately 145 individual
plaintiffs have been filed in the Superior Court of New Jersey
Bergen County - Law Division. These cases have been consolidated
by the court.

The Company believes that it has meritorious defenses to the
extent of damages claimed. Having incurred applicable deductibles,
the Company currently believes that all of its remaining liability
to third parties will be substantially covered by its insurance
policies. However, the Company can give no assurances in this
regard and continues to evaluate this matter.

AvalonBay Communities, Inc. is a Maryland corporation that has
elected to be treated as a real estate investment trust ("REIT")
for federal income tax purposes.  It develops, redevelops,
acquires, owns and operates multifamily communities primarily in
New England, the New York/New Jersey metro area, the Mid-Atlantic,
the Pacific Northwest, and Northern and Southern California.


BEALLS INC: "Maar" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages & Damages Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Eric Maar and Lindiane Wess, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Bealls, Inc., the
Defendant, Case No. 2:16-cv-14121-DMM (S.D. Fla., April 5, 2016),
seeks to recover unpaid wages from Defendant for overtime work,
liquidated damages, and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs,
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Bealls is a United States retail corporation of 500 stores founded
in 1915 in Bradenton, Florida. Bealls consists of three chains,
Bealls Department Stores, Bealls Outlet Stores, and Bunulu. Bealls
Inc. serves as the parent corporation.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
          Susan H. Stern, Esq.
          Paolo C. Meireles, Esq.
          SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
          1515 South Federal Highway, Suite 404
          Boca Raton, FL 33432
          Telephone: (561) 447 8888
          Facsimile: (561) 447 8831
          E-mail: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
                  sstern@shavitzlaw.com
                  pmeireles@shavitzlaw.com

               - and -

          Marc S. Hepworth, Esq.
          Charles Gershbaum, Esq.
          David A. Rot, Esq.
          Rebecca S. Predovan, Esq.
          HEPWORTH, GERSHBAUM & ROTH, PLLC
          192 Lexington Avenue, Suite 802
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 545 1199
          Facsimile: (212) 532 3801
          E-mail: mhepworth@hgrlawyers.com
                  cgershbaum@hgrlawyers.com
                  droth@hgrlawyers.com
                  rpredovan@hgrlawyers.com


BERBERIAN ENTERPRISES: Sued Over Disability Discrimination
----------------------------------------------------------
Jesse Anderson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Berberian Enterprises, Inc. t/a Jon's Market Place,
Case No. BC615117 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 1, 2016), arises out of
the Defendants' alleged discriminatory practices based on
disability.

Berberian Enterprises, Inc. owns and operates 13 grocery stores in
Los Angeles, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Evan J. Smith, Esq.
      BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC
      9595 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 900
      Beverly Hills, CA 90212
      Telephone: (877) 534-2590
      E-mail: esmith@brodsky-smith.com


BERKSHIRE HILLS: Still Defends Hampden Bancorp Merger Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company
continues to defend a class action lawsuit related to the merger
with Hampden Bancorp, Inc.

Following the public announcement of the execution of the
Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated November 3, 2014 (the "Merger
Agreement"), by and among the Company and Hampden Bancorp, Inc.
("Hampden"), on or about February 11, 2015, a purported
shareholder of Hampden filed a shareholder class action lawsuit in
the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts for
Hampden County against Hampden, the Directors of Hampden and the
Company (the "Hampden shareholder litigation"). The Hampden
shareholder litigation purports to be brought on behalf of all of
Hampden's public stockholders and alleges that (i) the directors
of Hampden breached their fiduciary duties to its stockholders by,
among other things, failing to take steps necessary to obtain a
fair and adequate price for Hampden's common stock, (ii) Hampden
and its directors failed to disclose material facts in its proxy
solicitation materials for its shareholder vote to approve the
transaction set forth in the Merger Agreement, and (iii) the
Company knowingly aided and abetted Hampden's directors' breach of
fiduciary duty.

Hampden, its Directors and the Company all deny and are vigorously
defending each of the allegations asserted in the Hampden
shareholder litigation. Management of the Company believes the
Hampden shareholder litigation will not have any material adverse
effect on the financial condition or operations of the Company.

Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc. ("Berkshire" or "the Company") is
headquartered in Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Berkshire is a
Delaware corporation and the holding company for Berkshire Bank
("the Bank") and Berkshire Insurance Group.


BLB ENTERPRISES: "Reeves" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
John B. Reeves, as an individual and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. BLB Enterprises, Inc. and Does 1 through
100, Case No. BC615724 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 1, 2016), seeks to
recover unpaid overtime wages and penalties under California Labor
Code.

BLB Enterprises, Inc. operates a security guard company providing
security and parking enforcement services to business and
residential communities.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Paul K. Haines, Esq.
      Tuvia Korobkin, Esq.
      Fletcher W. Schmidt, Esq.
      2274 East Maple Ave., Suite A
      El Segundo, CA 90245
      Telephone: (424) 292-2350
      Facsimile: (424) 292-2355
      E-mail: phaines@haineslaw.com
              tkoribkin@haineslaw.com
              fschmidt@haineslaw.com


BLUE CROSS: Violated Sherman Act, "Horner" Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------
Chelsea L. Horner and Montis, Inc., the Plaintiff, v. Blue Cross
Blue Shield (BCBS) of Alabama; Premera Blue Cross, also d/b/a
Premera Blue Cross Blue Shield of Alaska; Blue Cross Blue Shield
of Arizona; Usable Mutual Insurance Company, d/b/a Arkansas Blue
Cross and Blue Shield; Anthem, Inc., f/k/a Wellpoint, Inc., d/b/a
Anthem Blue Cross Life and Health Insurance Company, Blue Cross of
California, Blue Cross of Southern California, Blue Cross of
Northern California, Rocky Mountain Hospital and Medical Service
Inc. d/b/a Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Colorado and Anthem
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Nevada, Anthem Health Plans, Inc., d/b/a
Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Connecticut, Blue Cross Blue
Shield of Georgia, Anthem Insurance Companies, Inc.,
d/b/a Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of Indiana, Anthem Health
Plans of Kentucky, Inc., d/b/a Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of
Kentucky, Anthem Health Plans of Maine, Inc., d/b/a Anthem Blue
Cross Blue Shield of Maine, Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of
Missouri, Rightchoice Managed Care, Inc., Healthy Alliance Life
Insurance Company, HMO Missouri Inc., Anthem Health Plans of New
Hampshire d/b/a Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Hampshire,
Empire Healthchoice Assurance, Inc. as Empire Blue Cross Blue
Shield, Community Insurance Company d/b/a Anthem Blue Cross
Blue Shield of Ohio, Anthem Health Plans of Virginia, Inc., d/b/a
Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Virginia, and Anthem Blue
Cross Blue Shield of Wisconsin, Compcare Health Services Insurance
Corporation; California Physicians' Service, d/b/a Blue
Shield of California; Highmark, Inc.; Highmark Bluecross Blue
Shield Delaware, Inc.; Highmark West virginia, Inc.; Carefirst,
Inc.; Group Hospitalization and Medical Services, Inc. d/b/a
Carefirst Bluecross Blueshield; Carefirst of Maryland, Inc. d/b/a
Carefirst Bluecross Blueshield; Blue Cross and Blue Shield of
Florida, Inc.; Hawai'i Medical Service Association d/b/a Blue
Cross and Blue Shield of Hawaii; Blue Cross of Idaho Health
Service, Inc., d/b/a Blue Cross of Idaho; Cambia Health Solutions,
Inc., f/d/ba/a Regence Blueshield of Idaho, Regence Blue Cross
Blue Shield of Oregon, Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield of Utah, and
Regence Blue Shield (in Washington); Health Care
Service Corporation, d/b/a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Illinois,
Blue Cross and Blue Shield of New Mexico, Blue Cross and Blue
Shield of Oklahoma, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Montana, and
Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas; Caring for Montanans, Inc.;
Wellmark, Inc., d/b/a Wellmark Blue Cross and
Blue Shield of Iowa; Wellmark of South Dakota, Inc., d/b/a Blue
Cross and Blue Shield of South Dakota; Blue Cross and Blue Shield
of Kansas, Inc.; Louisiana Health Service & Indemnity Company
d/b/a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Louisiana; Blue Cross and Blue
Shield of Massachusetts, Inc.; Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan;
BCBSM, Inc., d/b/a Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota; Blue
Cross Blue Shield of Mississippi; Blue Cross and Blue Shield of
Kansas City; Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Nebraska; Horizon
Healthcare Services, Inc., d/b/a Horizon Blue Cross and Blue
Shield of New Jersey; Healthnow New York Inc., d/b/a Bluecross
Blueshield of Western New York and Blueshield of Northeastern New
York; Excellus Health Plan, Inc., d/b/a Excellus Bluecross
Blueshield; Blue Cross and Blue Shield of North Carolina, Inc.;
Noridian Mutual Insurance Company d/b/a Blue Cross Blue Shield of
North Dakota; Hospital Service Association of Northeastern
Pennsylvania d/b/a Blue Cross of Northeastern Pennsylvania;
Capital Bluecross; Independence Hospital Indemnity
Plan, Inc., F/K/A Independence Blue Cross; Triple-S Salud, Inc.;
Blue Cross & Blue Shield of Rhode Island; Blue Cross and Blue
Shield of South Carolina; Blue Cross Blue Shield of Tennessee,
Inc.; Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Vermont; Blue Cross Blue
Shield of Wyoming; and Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association, the
Defendants, Case No. 4:16-cv-00307-NKL (W.D. Mo., April 5, 2016),
seeks to enjoin an ongoing conspiracy between and among
Blue Cross Blue Shield companies to allocate markets in violation
of the prohibitions of the Sherman Act. The plaintiffs also seek
to recover damages for supra-competitive premiums and difference
between what subscribers have paid and the lower competitive
premiums that non-competing Blue plans would have charged.

BCBS of Alabama provides health insurance services. It offers and
administers health care plans for individuals, families, Medicare
beneficiaries, and groups. The company's services include baby
yourself, a prenatal wellness program, which helps ensure
expectant mothers and their babies receive health care during
pregnancy; air medical services; care management, a disease
management program that helps customers manage their chronic
conditions, including diabetes, asthma, COPD, heart failure, and
coronary artery diseases; and case management, a program that
helps customers with long-term illnesses or injuries by providing
a nurse to help manage their care. The Company is based in
Birmingham, Alabama.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael J. Fleming, Esq.
          Quentin M. Templeton, Esq.
          FORBES LAW GROUP, LLC
          6900 College Boulevard, Ste. 840
          Overland Park, KS 66211
          Telephone: (913) 341 8600
          Facsimile: (913) 341 8606
          E-mail: mfleming@forbeslawgroup.com
                  qtempleton@forbeslawgroup.com

               - and -

          Patrick W. Pendley, Esq.
          PENDLEY BAUDIN & COFFIN
          P.O. Drawer 71
          24110 Eden Street
          Plaquemine, LA 70765
          Telephone: (225) 687 6396
          Facsimile: (225) 687 6398
          E-mail: pwpendley@pbclawfirm.com


CALFRAC WELL SERVICES: "Hunt" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Waylon Hunt, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Calfrac Well Services Corp., Calfrac Well Services
Ltd., Charles Leykum, Fred Toney, Ben Bodishbaugh and Kevin
Moffet, each Individually and as an Officer of Mission Well
Services, LLC, Case No. 5:16-cv-325 (W.D. Tex., San Antonio
Division, April 1, 2016), seeks monetary damages, liquidated
damages, prejudgment interest, civil penalties and costs,
including reasonable attorney's fees and such other and further
relief pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Calfrac Well Services Corp. is based at 717 17th Street, Suite
1445, Denver, Colorado 80202 and is currently operating Mission
Well Services, LLC where Hunt worked as a Service Supervisor.
Plaintiff worked more than 40 hours in almost all workweeks
without overtime compensation, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


CAREER EDUCATION: Order Striking Class Allegations Upheld
---------------------------------------------------------
Career Education Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that an appellate
court has affirmed the trial court's order striking the class
allegations in the case, Enea, et al. v. Career Education
Corporation, California Culinary Academy, Inc., SLM Corporation,
and Sallie Mae, Inc.

Plaintiffs filed this putative class action in the Superior Court
State of California, County of San Francisco, on or about June 27,
2013. Plaintiffs allege that California Culinary Academy ("CCA")
materially misrepresented the placement rates of its graduates,
falsely stated that admission to the culinary school was
competitive and that the school had an excellent reputation among
restaurants and other food service providers, represented that the
culinary schools were well-regarded institutions producing skilled
graduates who employers eagerly hired, and lied by telling
students that the school provided graduates with career placement
services for life. The class purports to consist of persons who
executed Parent Plus loans or co-signed loans for students who
attended CCA at any time between January 1, 2003 and December 31,
2008. Plaintiffs seek restitution, damages, civil penalties and
attorneys' fees.

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss and to strike class action
allegations on October 31, 2013. A hearing on the motions was
conducted on March 14, 2014. Thereafter, the Court issued two
separate orders granting the motion to strike the class
allegations and the motion to dismiss without leave to amend.

Plaintiffs filed a motion seeking leave to file a third amended
complaint and/or for reconsideration of the Court's orders. On May
9, 2014, the Court denied plaintiffs' motion to reconsider its
order striking the class allegations and granted plaintiffs leave
to file a third amended complaint as to some, but not all, of
plaintiffs' claims.

On May 15, 2014, plaintiffs appealed the Court's ruling with
respect to the motion to strike the class allegations. On February
4, 2016, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's order
striking the class allegations.

Career Education's academic institutions offer a quality education
to a diverse student population in a variety of disciplines
through online, campus-based and hybrid learning programs.  Its
two universities -- American InterContinental University ("AIU")
and Colorado Technical University ("CTU") -- provide degree
programs through the master's or doctoral level as well as
associate and bachelor's levels.


CAREER EDUCATION: Order in "Surrett" Case Reversed
--------------------------------------------------
Career Education Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that an appellate
court has reversed a trial court's order in the case, Surrett, et
al. v. Western Culinary Institute, Ltd. and Career Education
Corporation.

On March 5, 2008, a complaint was filed in Portland, Oregon in the
Circuit Court of the State of Oregon in and for Multnomah County
naming Western Culinary Institute, Ltd. ("WCI") and the Company as
defendants. Plaintiffs filed the complaint individually and as a
putative class action and alleged two claims for equitable relief:
violation of Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act ("UTPA") and
unjust enrichment.

Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint on April 10, 2008, which
added two claims for money damages: fraud and breach of contract.
Plaintiffs allege WCI made a variety of misrepresentations to
them, relating generally to WCI's placement statistics, students'
employment prospects upon graduation from WCI, the value and
quality of an education at WCI, and the amount of tuition students
could expect to pay as compared to salaries they could expect to
earn after graduation. WCI subsequently moved to dismiss certain
of plaintiffs' claims under Oregon's UTPA; that motion was granted
on September 12, 2008.

On February 5, 2010, the Court entered a formal Order granting
class certification on part of plaintiff's UTPA and fraud claims
purportedly based on omissions, denying certification of the rest
of those claims and denying certification of the breach of
contract and unjust enrichment claims. The class consists of
students who enrolled at WCI between March 5, 2006 and March 1,
2010, excluding those who dropped out or were dismissed from the
school for academic reasons.

Plaintiffs filed a fifth amended complaint on December 7, 2010,
which included individual and class allegations by Nathan Surrett.
Class notice was sent on April 22, 2011, and the opt-out period
expired on June 20, 2011. The class consisted of approximately
2,600 members. They are seeking tuition refunds, interest and
certain fees paid in connection with their enrollment at WCI.

On May 23, 2012, WCI filed a motion to compel arbitration of
claims by 1,062 individual class members who signed enrollment
agreements containing express class action waivers. The Court
issued an Order denying the motion on July 27, 2012.

On August 6, 2012, WCI filed an appeal from the Court's Order and
on August 30, 2012, the Court of Appeals issued an Order granting
WCI's motion to compel the trial court to cease exercising
jurisdiction in the case. The oral argument on the appeal was
heard on May 9, 2014 and on January 21, 2016, the appellate court
reversed the trial court and held that the claims by the 1,062
individual class members referenced above should be compelled to
arbitration.

Career Education's academic institutions offer a quality education
to a diverse student population in a variety of disciplines
through online, campus-based and hybrid learning programs.  Its
two universities -- American InterContinental University ("AIU")
and Colorado Technical University ("CTU") -- provide degree
programs through the master's or doctoral level as well as
associate and bachelor's levels.


CAREER EDUCATION: Appeal in "Wilson" Case Still Pending
-------------------------------------------------------
Career Education Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that an appeal in the
case, Wilson, et al. v. Career Education Corporation, remains
pending.

On August 11, 2011, Riley Wilson, a former admissions
representative based in Minnesota, filed a complaint in the U.S.
District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. "The two-
count complaint asserts claims of breach of contract and unjust
enrichment arising from our decision to terminate our Admissions
Representative Supplemental Compensation ("ARSC") Plan," the
Company said. "In addition to his individual claims, Wilson also
seeks to represent a nationwide class of similarly situated
admissions representatives who also were affected by termination
of the plan."

"On October 6, 2011, we filed a motion to dismiss the complaint,"
the Company said.  "On April 13, 2012, the Court granted our
motion to dismiss in its entirety and dismissed plaintiff's
complaint for failure to state a claim. The Court dismissed this
action with prejudice on May 14, 2012."

On June 11, 2012, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal with the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit appealing the final
judgment of the trial court. Briefing was completed on October 30,
2012, and oral argument was held on December 3, 2012.

On August 30, 2013, the Seventh Circuit affirmed the district
court's ruling on plaintiff's unjust enrichment claim but reversed
and remanded for further proceedings on plaintiff's breach of
contract claim.

"On September 13, 2013, we filed a petition for rehearing to seek
review of the panel's decision on the breach of contract claim and
for certification of question to the Illinois Supreme Court, but
the petition was denied," the Company said.

The case now is on remand to the district court for further
proceedings on the sole question of whether CEC's termination of
the ARSC Plan violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair
dealing. The parties have completed fact discovery as to the issue
of liability.

"On March 24, 2015, we filed a motion for summary judgment which
the court granted on December 18, 2015. Plaintiff filed his notice
of appeal on January 16, 2016," the Company said.

No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report.

Career Education's academic institutions offer a quality education
to a diverse student population in a variety of disciplines
through online, campus-based and hybrid learning programs.  Its
two universities -- American InterContinental University ("AIU")
and Colorado Technical University ("CTU") -- provide degree
programs through the master's or doctoral level as well as
associate and bachelor's levels.


CHELSEA BAGEL: Faces "Sandoval" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Gerardo Sandoval, Victor Lopez, Andres Sandoval, and Andres
Sandoval, on behalf of others similarly situated v. Chelsea Bagel
& Cafe Inc., d/b/as Chelsea Bagel & Cafe Inc., Dmitriy Mikhaylov,
and Mark Mikhaylov, Case No. 1:16-cv-02434 (S.D.N.Y., April 1,
2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate a restaurant located at 139 W 14th
St, New York, NY 10011.

Gerardo Sandoval, Victor Lopez, Andres Sandoval, and Andres
Sandoval are pro se plaintiffs.


CENERGY INTERNATIONAL: "Wright" Suit Seeks OT Wages Under FLSA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Isaac Wright, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
the Plaintiff, v. Cenergy International Services, LLC, the
Defendant, Case No. 4:16-cv-00580-CCC (M.D. Penn., April 5, 2016),
seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and prejudgment interest;
liquidated damages; and litigation costs, expenses, and attorneys'
fees under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), and Pennsylvania
Minimum Wage Act (PMWA).

Cenergy was founded in 2007. The company's line of business
includes providing help supply and personnel supply services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark J. Gottesfeld, Esq.
          R. Andrew Santillo, Esq.
          Peter Winebrake, Esq.
          WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC
          715 Twining Road, Suite 211
          Dresher, PA 19025
          Telephone: (215) 884 2491
          E-mail: mgottesfeld@winebrakelaw.com


CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: "Cova" Suit Seeks Damages Under CCPA
------------------------------------------------------------
Reno Cova, Logan O'connor, and Zach Splaingard; on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v.
Charter Communications, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 4:16-cv-00469-
RLW (E.D. Mo., April 5, 2016), seeks injunctive relief, statutory
damages, punitive damages and attorney fees and costs, pre-
judgment and post-judgment interest, and other relief as the Court
deems just and reasonable, pursuant to the Cable Communications
Policy Act of 1984 (CCPA).

Charter Communications, through its subsidiaries, provides cable
services in the United States. The company offers various
entertainment, information, and communications solutions to
residential and commercial customers. Its video service offerings
include a package of basic video programming, video on demand,
subscription on demand, pay-per-view, high definition television,
digital video recorder, Spectrum TV app on mobile devices,
Spectrum TV app on immobile devices, and Spectrum guide services.
The company also provides Internet services, such as residential
Internet services. The Company is based in Stamford, Connecticut.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ryan P. Horace, Esq.
          Stephanie L. Gold, Esq.
          SWMK Law, LLC
          701 Market Street, Suite 1000
          St. Louis, MO 63101
          Telephone: (314) 480 5180
          Facsimile: (314) 932 1566
          E-mail: ryan@swmklaw.com
                  stephanie@swmklaw.com


CONSOLIDATED FOUNDRIES: Removed "Santoyo" Suit to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit styled Gustavo Segura Santoyo, on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated v. Consolidated
Foundries Inc., Consolidated Precision Products Corp., Resource
Employment Solutions LLC and Does 1 - 100, inclusive, Case No.
BC612298, 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. 2:16-cv-02232 to the proceeding.

The Plaintiff asserts labor-related claims.

The Defendants are in the business of providing precision and
function-critical parts for aerospace, military, medical,
electronic equipment and commercial markets.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Gustavo Segura Santoyo
      PRO SE

CONSUMERS UNION: Faces "Ruppel" Suit in S. District New York
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been commenced against Consumers Union
of United States, Inc.

The case is captioned Don Ruppel, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Consumers Union of United States,
Inc., Case No. 7:16-cv-02444 (S.D.N.Y., April 4, 2016).

Consumers Union of United States, Inc. is a non-profit
organization whose mission is to advocate on policy issues related
to telecommunications, mass media, vehicle safety, health care,
product safety, financial services, investing, food safety,
housing, and energy and utility deregulation.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Joseph Ignatius Marchese, Esq.
      BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
      888 Seventh Ave.,
      New York, NY 10019
      Telephone: (212) 989-9113
      Facsimile: (212) 989-9163
      E-mail: jmarchese@bursor.com


DAVITA HEALTHCARE: Settlement in Wage and Hour Suit Approved
------------------------------------------------------------
Davita Healthcare Partners Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the settlement
in a wage and hour class action lawsuit has been approved.

In April 2008, a wage and hour lawsuit was filed against the
Company in the Superior Court of California which was styled as a
class action and was subsequently amended. The complaint, as
amended, alleged that the Company failed to provide meal periods,
failed to pay compensation in lieu of providing rest or meal
periods, failed to pay overtime, and failed to comply with certain
other California Labor Code requirements. After the Company
prevailed on certain trial court rulings, the plaintiffs later
appealed to the California Court of Appeals, and some of the
issues on appeal were remanded to the trial court.

The Company reached an agreement with the plaintiffs to settle the
case in June 2015. The settlement has now been approved by the
court. The amount of the settlement is not material to the
Company's consolidated financial statements.

The Company consists of two major divisions, Kidney Care and
HealthCare Partners (HCP). Kidney Care is comprised of the
Company's U.S. dialysis and related lab services, its ancillary
services and strategic initiatives, including its international
operations and corporate administrative support.  The U.S.
dialysis and related lab services business is the Company's
largest line of business, which is a leading provider of kidney
dialysis services in the U.S. for patients suffering from chronic
kidney failure, also known as end stage renal disease (ESRD).  The
HCP division is a patient- and physician-focused integrated
healthcare delivery and management company with over two decades
of providing coordinated, outcomes-based medical care in a cost-
effective manner.


DAVITA HEALTHCARE: Discovery Due May 25 in "Oldershaw" Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
In the case, KELSEY OLDERSHAW, individually and on behalf of
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. DaVITA HEALTHCARE
PARTNERS, INC., AND TOTAL RENAL CARE INC., Defendants, Civil
Action No. 15-cv-01964-JLK-NYW (D. Colo., September 9, 2015), the
Defendants filed on April 8, 2016, an answer to Plaintiff's
Amended Collective and Class Action Complaint.

A telephone conference scheduled for in the case for April 1,
2016, has been vacated.

In January 2016, the Court entered a Stipulated Scheduling and
Discovery Order, which provides that:

     Discovery due by 5/25/2016
     Dispositive Motions due by 6/24/2016

Judge John L. Kane presides over the case.

Kelsey Oldershaw, Plaintiff, represented by Colleen Therese
Calandra -- ccalandra@ramosinjuryfirm.com -- Ramos Law, LLC.

DaVita Healthcare Partners, Inc., and Total Renal Care Inc.,
Defendants, represented by Austin E. Smith --
austin.smith@ogletreedeakins.com -- David Daniel Powell, Jr. --
david.powell@ogletreedeakins.com -- and Dorothy Diane Parson --
dorothy.parson@ogletreedeakins.com -- at Ogletree, Deakins, Nash,
Smoak & Stewart, P.C.

Davita Healthcare Partners consists of two major divisions, Kidney
Care and HealthCare Partners (HCP). Kidney Care is comprised of
the Company's U.S. dialysis and related lab services, its
ancillary services and strategic initiatives, including its
international operations and corporate administrative support.
The U.S. dialysis and related lab services business is the
Company's largest line of business, which is a leading provider of
kidney dialysis services in the U.S. for patients suffering from
chronic kidney failure, also known as end stage renal disease
(ESRD).  The HCP division is a patient- and physician-focused
integrated healthcare delivery and management company with over
two decades of providing coordinated, outcomes-based medical care
in a cost-effective manner.


ENERGY TRANSFER: Dieckman Action in Delaware Remains Pending
------------------------------------------------------------
Energy Transfer Partners, L.P. said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the lawsuit by
Adrian Dieckman related to the Regency merger remains pending in
Delaware court.

Following the January 26, 2015 announcement of the definitive
merger agreement with Regency, purported Regency unitholders filed
lawsuits in state and federal courts in Dallas, Texas and Delaware
state court asserting claims relating to the proposed transaction.

On February 3, 2015, William Engel and Enno Seago, purported
Regency unitholders, filed a class action petition on behalf of
Regency's common unitholders and a derivative suit on behalf of
Regency in the 162nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County,
Texas (the "Engel Lawsuit"). The lawsuit names as defendants the
Regency General Partner, the members of the Regency General
Partner's board of directors, ETP, ETP GP, ETE, and, as a nominal
party, Regency. The Engel Lawsuit alleges that (1) the Regency
General Partner's directors breached duties to Regency and the
Regency's unitholders by employing a conflicted and unfair process
and failing to maximize the merger consideration; (2) the Regency
General Partner's directors breached the implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing by engaging in a flawed merger process; and
(3) the non-director defendants aided and abetted in these claimed
breaches. The plaintiffs seek an injunction preventing the
defendants from closing the proposed transaction or an order
rescinding the transaction if it has already been completed. The
plaintiffs also seek money damages and court costs, including
attorney's fees.

On February 9, 2015, Stuart Yeager, a purported Regency
unitholder, filed a class action petition on behalf of the
Regency's common unitholders and a derivative suit on behalf of
Regency in the 134th Judicial District Court of Dallas County,
Texas (the "Yeager Lawsuit"). The allegations, claims, and relief
sought in the Yeager Lawsuit are nearly identical to those in the
Engel Lawsuit.

On February 10, 2015, Lucien Coggia a purported Regency
unitholder, filed a class action petition on behalf of Regency's
common unitholders and a derivative suit on behalf of Regency in
the 192nd Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas (the
"Coggia Lawsuit"). The allegations, claims, and relief sought in
the Coggia Lawsuit are nearly identical to those in the Engel
Lawsuit.

On February 3, 2015, Linda Blankman, a purported Regency
unitholder, filed a class action complaint on behalf of the
Regency's common unitholders in the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas (the "Blankman Lawsuit"). The
allegations and claims in the Blankman Lawsuit are similar to
those in the Engel Lawsuit. However, the Blankman Lawsuit does not
allege any derivative claims and includes Regency as a defendant
rather than a nominal party. The lawsuit also omits one of the
Regency General Partner's directors, Richard Brannon, who was
named in the Engel Lawsuit. The Blankman Lawsuit alleges that the
Regency General Partner's directors breached their fiduciary
duties to the unitholders by failing to maximize the value of
Regency, failing to properly value Regency, and ignoring conflicts
of interest. The plaintiff also asserts a claim against the non-
director defendants for aiding and abetting the directors' alleged
breach of fiduciary duty. The Blankman Lawsuit seeks the same
relief that the plaintiffs seek in the Engel Lawsuit.

On February 6, 2015, Edwin Bazini, a purported Regency unitholder,
filed a class action complaint on behalf of Regency's common
unitholders in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas (the "Bazini Lawsuit"). The allegations, claims,
and relief sought in the Bazini Lawsuit are nearly identical to
those in the Blankman Lawsuit. On March 27, 2015, Plaintiff Bazini
filed an amended complaint asserting additional claims under
Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

On February 11, 2015, Mark Hinnau, a purported Regency unitholder,
filed a class action complaint on behalf of Regency's common
unitholders in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of Texas (the "Hinnau Lawsuit"). The allegations, claims,
and relief sought in the Hinnau Lawsuit are nearly identical to
those in the Blankman Lawsuit.

On February 11, 2015, Stephen Weaver, a purported Regency
unitholder, filed a class action complaint on behalf of Regency's
common unitholders in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas (the "Weaver Lawsuit"). The
allegations, claims, and relief sought in the Weaver Lawsuit are
nearly identical to those in the Blankman Lawsuit.

On February 11, 2015, Adrian Dieckman, a purported Regency
unitholder, filed a class action complaint on behalf of Regency's
common unitholders in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas (the "Dieckman Lawsuit"). The
allegations, claims, and relief sought in the Dieckman Lawsuit are
similar to those in the Blankman Lawsuit, except that the Dieckman
Lawsuit does not assert an aiding and abetting claim.

On February 13, 2015, Irwin Berlin, a purported Regency
unitholder, filed a class action complaint on behalf of Regency's
common unitholders in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas (the "Berlin Lawsuit"). The
allegations, claims, and relief sought in the Berlin Lawsuit are
similar to those in the Blankman Lawsuit.

On March 13, 2015, the Court in the 95th Judicial District Court
of Dallas County, Texas transferred and consolidated the Yeager
and Coggia Lawsuits into the Engel Lawsuit and captioned the
consolidated lawsuit as Engel v. Regency GP, LP, et al. (the
"Consolidated State Lawsuit").

On March 30, 2015, Leonard Cooperman, a purported Regency
unitholder, filed a class action complaint on behalf of Regency's
common unitholders in the United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas (the "Cooperman Lawsuit"). The
allegations, claims, and relief sought in the Cooperman Lawsuit
are similar to those in the Blankman Lawsuit.

On March 31, 2015, the Court in United States District Court for
the Northern District of Texas consolidated the Blankman, Bazini,
Hinnau, Weaver, Dieckman, and Berlin Lawsuits into a consolidated
lawsuit captioned Bazini v. Bradley, et al. (the "Consolidated
Federal Lawsuit"). On April 1, 2015, plaintiffs in the
Consolidated Federal Lawsuit filed an Emergency Motion to Expedite
Discovery. On April 9, 2015, by order of the Court, the parties
submitted a joint submission wherein defendants opposed
plaintiffs' request to expedite discovery. On April 17, 2015, the
Court denied plaintiffs' motion to expedite discovery.

On June 10, 2015, Adrian Dieckman, a purported Regency unitholder,
filed a class action complaint on behalf of Regency's common
unitholders in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware (the
"Dieckman DE Lawsuit"). The lawsuit alleges that the transaction
did not comply with the Regency partnership agreement because the
Conflicts Committee was not properly formed.

On July 6, 2015, Defendants filed Motions to Dismiss and the
briefing has since been completed. Oral argument on the Motions
was held in December 2015. On September 29, 2015, Chancellor
Bouchard ordered discovery stayed, pending a ruling on Defendants'
Motions to Dismiss.

On June 5, 2015, the Dieckman Lawsuit was dismissed. On July 23,
2015, the Blankman, Bazini, Hinnau, Weaver and Berlin Lawsuits
were dismissed. On August 20, 2015, the Cooperman Lawsuit was
dismissed. The Consolidated Federal Lawsuit was terminated once
all named plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed.

On January 8, 2016, the plaintiffs in the Consolidated State
Lawsuit filed a notice of non-suit without prejudice. The Dieckman
DE Lawsuit is the only lawsuit that remains.

The Defendants cannot predict the outcome of this lawsuit, or the
amount of time and expense that will be required to resolve it.
The Defendants intend to vigorously defend the lawsuit.

Energy Transfer Partners, L.P., is one of the largest publicly
traded master limited partnerships in the United States in terms
of equity market capitalization (approximately $15.05 billion as
of January 29, 2016).


ESSEX PROPERTY: "Foster" Class Action Still Pending
---------------------------------------------------
Essex Property Trust, Inc. and Essex Portfolio, L.P. said in their
Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on February 26, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015,
that the "Foster" class action lawsuit remains pending.

On December 19, 2014, a putative class action was filed against
the Company in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California, entitled Foster v. Essex Property Trust,
Inc. alleging that the Company failed to properly secure the
personally-identifying information of its residents. The lawsuit
seeks the recovery of unspecified damages and certain
injunctive relief. This lawsuit was filed in connection with a
cyber-intrusion that the Company discovered in the third quarter
of 2014.

No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC Report.


EURO DESIGN: Faces "Santos" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
Pablo Santos, individually and other similarly situated
individuals v. Euro Design Group Inc. and Ted Platon, Case No.
2016-008281-CA-01 (Fla. Cir. Ct., April 4, 2016), is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate a furniture business in Miami,
Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Anthony M. Georges-Pierre, Esq.
      Remer & Georges-Pierre, PLLC
      44 West Flagler Street, Suite 2200
      Miami, FL 33130
      Telephone: (305) 416-5000
      Facsimile: (305) 416-5005
      E-mail: agp@rgpattorneys.com


EXPEDITORS AND PRODUCTION: Violated FLSA & NMMWA, "Cox" Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Cox, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. Expeditors and Production Services
Company, the Defendant, Case No. 6:16-cv-00454 (D. N. Mex., April
5, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages
under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and the New Mexico
Minimum Wage Act (NMMWA).

The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant in the oilfield performing
manual labor job duties surrounding the rigging up, operation, and
rigging down of oil and gas equipment such as manifolds,
separators, flow iron, and other equipment used in well testing
and flow back related jobs.

Expeditors & Production provides logistics management solutions to
oil and gas sector. The company was founded in 1997 and is based
in Lafayette, Louisiana.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Justin R. Kaufman, Esq.
          Rosalind B. Bienvenu, Esq.
          HEARD ROBINS CLOUD, LLP
          505 Cerrillos Road, Suite A209
          Santa Fe, NM 87501
          Telephone: (505) 986 0600
          Facsimile: (505) 986 0632
          E-mail: jkaufman@heardrobins.com
                  rbienvenu@heardrobins.com

               - and -

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
          Lindsay R. Itkin, Esq.
          FIBICH, LEEBRON, COPELAND
          BRIGGS & JOSEPHSON
          1150 Bissonnet St.
          Houston, TX 77005
          Telephone: (713) 751 0025
          Facsimile: (713) 751 0030
          E-mail: mjosephson@fibichlaw.com
                  litkin@fibichlaw.com
                  adunlap@fibichlaw.com

               - and -

          Richard J. (Rex) Burch
          BRUCKNER BURCH, P.L.L.C.
          8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 877 8788
          Facsimile: (713) 877 8065
          E-mail: rburch@brucknerburch.com


FIDELITY MANAGEMENT: "Wilson" Sues Over Mismanaged Trust Fund
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jack Wilson, William Gaudette and all other individuals similarly
situated, Plaintiff's, v. Fidelity Management Trust Company, the
Investment and Administrative Committee of the Walt Disney Company
Sponsored Qualified Benefit Plans and Key Employees Deferred
Compensation and Retirement Plan, Christine M. Mccarthy,
James A. Rasulo, Alan N. Braverman, Mary Jayne Parker and Jeffrey
E. Shapiro, Defendants, Case No. 2:16-cv-02251-PA-JC (C.D. Cal.,
April 1, 2016), seeks recovery of all profits from the Disney
Savings and Investment Plan and Disney Hourly Savings and
Investment Plan's assets, enjoinment from any further violations
of ERISA fiduciary obligations, actual damages, account losses
including the lost opportunity costs attributable to the decline
in share prices, rescissisory and/or money damages, including pre-
judgment interest, attorneys' fees, equitable restitution and
other appropriate equitable monetary relief and such other and
further relief the Court deems just and equitable under the
Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974.

Plaintiffs are former employees of the Disney Company who
participated in the Disney Savings and Investment Plan and Disney
Hourly Savings and Investment Plan. The latter invested in the
Sequoia Fund in which Fidelity was the assigned fiduciary.
Plaintiffs allege that the Defendants failed to monitor the fund's
investments, specifically in Valeant Pharmaceuticals, whose stock
price crashed and resulted in substantial losses.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael L Kirby, Esq.
      KIRBY NOONAN LANCE AND HOGE LLP
      350 Tenth Avenue Suite 1300
      San Diego, CA 92101-8700
      Tel: (619) 231-8666
      Fax: (619) 231-9593
      Email: mkirby@knlh.com

           - and -

      Samuel Bonderoff, Esq.
      Jacob H. Zamanski, Esq.
      Edward H. Glenn, Esq.
      ZAMANSKI LLC
      50 Broadway, 32nd Floor
      New York, NY 10004
      Tel: (212) 742-1414
      Fax: (212) 742-1177


FLEETWOOD-FIBRE: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Villa" Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Francisco Villa, an individual, on behalf of himself and all
others similarly situated v. Fleetwood-Fibre Packaging & Graphics,
Inc. and Does 1 through 100, Case No. BC616014 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
April 5, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to
pay overtime wages in violation of the California Labor Code.

Fleetwood-Fibre Packaging & Graphics, Inc. is in the business of
designing and manufacturing cardboard and plastic product
packaging as well as permanent product displays.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Paul K. Haines, Esq.
      Tuvia Korobkin, Esq.
      Fletcher W. Schmidt, Esq.
      HAINES LAW GROUP, APC
      2274 East Maple Ave., Suite A
      El Segundo, CA 90245
      Telephone: (424) 292-2350
      Facsimile: (424) 292-2355
      E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com
              tkorobkin@haineslawgroup.com
              fschmidt@haineslawgroup.com


FORSTER GARBUS: Illegally Collects Debt, "Mendoza" Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Mendoza, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated
v. Forster, Garbus & Garbus, Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
and John Does 1 to 10, Case No. 2:16-cv-01901-SDW-SCM (D.N.J.,
April 6, 2016), seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and
unconscionable means to collect a debt.

Forster, Garbus & Garbus, Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC
operates a debt collection law firm in New York.

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


GLAXOSMITHKLINE LLC: "Stevenson" Sues Over Zofran Side-effects
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lenel Stevenson, Individually and as natural parent of C.S.,
Deceased, Plaintiff, v. Glaxosmithkline LLC, Defendant, Case 1:16-
cv-10638 (D. Mass., April 1, 2016), seeks compensatory damages,
economic damages in the form of medical, incidental, hospital, out
of pocket expenses, lost earnings and other economic damages,
general damages, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, full
refund of all purchase costs of Zofran, attorneys' fees, expenses
and costs resulting from negligence, product defect/liability,
breach of express and implied warranty, fraudulent
misrepresentation and concealment, negligent misrepresentation and
unfair and deceptive trade practices.

Zofran is a powerful drug developed by GSK to treat only those
patients with severe nausea, usually for cancer patients who
require chemotherapy or radiation therapy.

Plaintiff's child, C.S., was stillborn in 2013 with numerous
congenital defects after his mother was prescribed and began
taking Zofran beginning in her first trimester of pregnancy to
alleviate the symptoms of morning sickness. In utero, C.S. was
diagnosed with hypoplastic left heart syndrome, probable abnormal
pulmonary valve, abnormal right side of the heart, tricuspid
insufficiency, mitral insufficiency, aortic insufficiency,
hypertrophied and poorly functioning right ventricle.

GlaxoSmithKline LLC is pharmaceutical company organized under the
laws of the State of Delaware.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Joseph J. Zonies, Esq.
      REILLY POZNER, LLP
      1900 16th Street, Suite 1700
      Denver, CO 80202
      Tel: 303-893-6100
      Fax: 303-893-6110


GLENTEX INC: "Mansel" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages, OT Under FLSA
------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley Mansel, Monic Bailey, and Connie Idgaf, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v.
Glentex, Inc. d/b/a Woody's, a Florida Corporation, the Defendant,
Case No. 4:16-cv-10015-JEM (S.D. Fla., April 5, 2016), seeks
redress over unpaid minimum wage and overtime under the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA).

Glentex is a Hotels and Restaurants - Permanent Food Service
company licensed to practice in Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Chad E. Levy, Esq.
          LEVY & LEVY, P.A.
          915 Middle River Drive, Suite 518
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304
          Telephone: (954) 763 5722
          Facsimile: (954) 763 5723
          E-mail: chad@levylevylaw.com


GLOBAL EQUITY: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, "Wegen" Action Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Celine Van Wegen, on behalf of herself, and all others similarly
situated v. Global Equity Finance, Inc., Case No. 3:16-cv-00815-W-
MDD (S.D. Cal., April 6, 2016), seeks to stop the Defendants'
practice of making unsolicited calls to consumers' wireless
telephone.

Global Equity Finance, Inc. operates a financial services company
located at 4747 Morena Blvd # 201, San Diego, CA 92117.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ronald Marron, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF RONALD MARRON
      651 Arroyo Drive
      San Diego, CA 92103
      Telephone: (619) 696-9006
      Facsimile: (619) 564-6665
      E-mail: ron@consumersadvocates.com

HONEST COMPANY: Violated CCLRA, "Glover" Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------
Amy Glover, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. The Honest Company, Inc., and Jessica
Warren a/k/a Jessica Alba, the Defendants, Case No. 3:16-cv-00812-
W-NLS (S.D. Cal., April 5, 2016), seeks actual damages for
Defendants' breach of warranty, pursuant to the California
Consumers Legal Remedies Act (CCLRA); the California False
Advertising Law; the California Unfair Competition Law; and the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act.

Honest Co. designs and manufactures bundles, baby, bath and body,
cleaning, health and wellness, collective, and gift products. It
offers diapers and wipes bundle, essentials bundle, health and
wellness bundle, diapers, wipes, healing balm, diaper rash cream,
organic baby powder, soothing bottom wash, organic breathe easy
rub, training pants, organic shave oil, discovery set, shampoo and
body wash, conditioner, conditioning detangler, sunscreen,
sunscreen spray, sunscreen stick, bug spray, laundry detergent,
laundry packs, dryer cloths, multi-surface cleaner, bathroom
cleaner, glass and window cleaner, floor cleaner, stain remover,
and organic breathe easy rub. The Company is based in Santa
Monica, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brian J. Robbins, Esq.
          Kevin A. Seely, Esq.
          Ashley R. Rifkind, Esq.
          Leonid Kandinov, Esq.
          ROBBINS ARROYO LLLP
          600 B Street, Suite 1900
          San Diego, CA 92101 1Y
          Telephone: (619) 525 3990
          Facsimile: (619) 525 3991
          E-mail: brobbins@robbinsarroyo.com
                  kseely@robbinsarroyo.com
                  arifkind@robbinsarroyo.com
                  lkandinov@robbinsarroyo.com

               - and -

          Jack Fitzgerald, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICE OF
          JACK FITZGERALD, PC
          Hillcrest Professional Building
          3636 Fourth Avenue, Suite 202
          San Diego, CA 92103
          Telephone: (619) 692 3840
          Facsimile: (619) 362 9555
          E-mail: jack@jackfitzgeraldlaw.com


HSNI LLC: Faces "Grossman" Suit in Florida Over Contract Breach
---------------------------------------------------------------
Shelly Grossman, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. HSNi, LLC and HSN Interactive, LLC, Case No. 8:16-cv-
00815-JDW-JSS (M.D. Fla., April 5, 2016), arises out of the
Defendants' alleged breach of contract.

The Defendants are interactive entertainment and lifestyle
retailers, offering a curated assortment of exclusive products and
top brand names to its customers.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Avi Robert Kaufman, Esq.
      CARLTON FIELDS JORDEN BURT, PA
      Suite 4200, 100 SE 2nd St
      Miami, FL 33131-9101
      Telephone: (305) 384-7270
      E-mail: akaufman@kolawyers.com

         - and -

      Jeffrey M. Ostrow, Esq.
      Scott A. Edelsberg, Esq.
      KOPELOWITZ OSTROW, PA
      One West Las Olas Blvd Ste 500
      Ft Lauderdale, FL 33301
      Telephone: (954) 525-4100 Ext 215
      Facsimile: (954) 525-4300
      E-mail: ostrow@kolawyers.com
              edelsberg@kolawyers.com


ICAHN ENTERPRISES: MOU Reached in Mustard and Sloan Suits
---------------------------------------------------------
Icahn Enterprises L.P. and Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P. said in
their Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on February 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2015, that a memorandum of understanding has been
reached in the class action lawsuits by Mike Mustard and Jesse
Sloan.

On August 29, 2015, Mike Mustard, a purported unitholder of
Rentech Nitrogen, filed a class action complaint on behalf of the
public unitholders of Rentech Nitrogen against Rentech Nitrogen,
Rentech Nitrogen GP, Rentech Nitrogen Holdings, Inc., Rentech,
Inc., CVR Partners, DSHC, LLC, Merger Sub 1 and Merger Sub 2, and
the members of the board of directors of Rentech Nitrogen GP (the
"Rentech Nitrogen Board"), in the Court of Chancery of the State
of Delaware (the "Mustard Lawsuit").  The Mustard Lawsuit alleges,
among other things, that the consideration offered by CVR Partners
is unfair and inadequate and that, by pursuing a transaction that
is the result of an allegedly conflicted and unfair process,
certain of the defendants have breached their duties owed to the
unitholders of Rentech Nitrogen, and are engaging in self-dealing.

Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that the director defendants:
(i) failed to take steps to maximize the value of Rentech Nitrogen
to its public shareholders, (ii) failed to properly value Rentech
Nitrogen, and (iii) ignored or did not protect against the
numerous conflicts of interest arising out of the proposed
transaction. The Mustard Lawsuit also alleges that Rentech
Nitrogen, Rentech Nitrogen GP, Rentech Nitrogen Holdings, Inc.,
Rentech, Inc., CVR Partners, DSHC, LLC, Merger Sub 1 and Merger
Sub 2 aided and abetted the director defendants in their purported
breach of fiduciary duties.

On October 6, 2015, Jesse Sloan, a purported unitholder of Rentech
Nitrogen, filed a class action complaint on behalf of the public
unitholders of Rentech Nitrogen against Rentech Nitrogen, Rentech
Nitrogen GP, CVR Partners, Merger Sub 1 and Merger Sub 2, and the
members of the Rentech Nitrogen Board, in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California (the "Sloan
Lawsuit"). The Sloan Lawsuit alleges, among other things, that the
attempted sale of Rentech Nitrogen to CVR Partners was conducted
by means of an unfair process and for an unfair price.

Specifically, the lawsuit alleges that (i) Rentech Nitrogen GP and
the Rentech Nitrogen Board breached their obligations under the
partnership agreement and their implied duty of good faith and
fair dealing by causing Rentech Nitrogen to enter into the CVR
Partners Merger Agreement and failing to disclose material
information to unitholders of Rentech Nitrogen, (ii) the Rentech
Nitrogen Board violated fiduciary duties owed to the unitholders
of Rentech Nitrogen based primarily on allegations of inadequate
consideration, restrictive deal protection devices and improper
disclosure, (iii) each of the defendants aided and abetted in the
foregoing breaches described in items (i) and (ii), and (iv)
Rentech Nitrogen and the Rentech Nitrogen Board violated Sections
14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule
14a-9 thereunder based on improper disclosure contained in the
Registration Statement on Form S-4 (Registration No. 333-206982),
which was originally filed with the SEC by CVR Partners on
September 17, 2015.

Among other remedies, the plaintiffs in these actions seek to
enjoin the CVR Partners Mergers and seek unspecified money
damages. The lawsuits are at a preliminary state, and the outcome
of any such litigation is uncertain. An adverse ruling in these
actions may cause the CVR Partners Mergers to be delayed or not be
completed, which could cause the Nitrogen Fertilizer Partnership
not to realize some or all of the anticipated benefits of the CVR
Partners Mergers. No amounts have been recognized in these
consolidated financial statements regarding the lawsuits.

On February 1, 2016, the parties to the Mustard Lawsuit and the
Sloan Lawsuit entered into a memorandum of understanding ("MOU")
providing for the proposed settlement of the lawsuits. While the
defendants believe that no supplemental disclosure is required
under applicable laws, in order to avoid the burden and expense of
further litigation, they have agreed, pursuant to the terms of the
MOU, to make certain supplemental disclosures related to the
proposed mergers. The MOU contemplates that the parties will enter
into a stipulation of settlement. The stipulation of settlement
will be subject to customary conditions, including court approval
following notice to Rentech Nitrogen's unitholders.

In the event that the parties enter into a stipulation of
settlement, a hearing will be scheduled at which the United States
District Court for the Central District of California (the
"Court") will consider the fairness, reasonableness and adequacy
of the proposed settlement. If the proposed settlement is finally
approved by the Court, it will resolve and release all claims by
unitholders of Rentech Nitrogen challenging any aspect of the
proposed mergers, the CVR Partners Merger Agreement and any
disclosure made in connection therewith, including in the
prospectus and definitive proxy statement, pursuant to terms that
will be disclosed to such unitholders prior to final approval of
the proposed settlement.

In addition, in connection with the proposed settlement, the
parties contemplate that plaintiffs' counsel will file a petition
in the Court for an award of attorneys' fees and expenses to be
paid by Rentech Nitrogen or its successor. The proposed settlement
is also contingent upon, among other things, the CVR Partners
Mergers becoming effective under Delaware law. There can be no
assurance that the Court will approve the proposed settlement
contemplated by the MOU. In the event that the proposed settlement
is not approved and such conditions are not satisfied, the
defendants will continue to vigorously defend against the
allegations in the lawsuits.

Icahn is a diversified holding company owning subsidiaries
currently engaged in the following continuing operating
businesses: Investment, Automotive, Energy, Metals, Railcar,
Gaming, Mining, Food Packaging, Real Estate and Home Fashion.


INLAND REAL ESTATE: Consolidated Amended Suit Filed in Baltimore
----------------------------------------------------------------
Inland Real Estate Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2016,
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that plaintiffs have
filed a consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint related to the
proposed merger with DRA Growth.

"On December 14, 2015, we entered into an Agreement and Plan of
Merger (the "Merger Agreement") with DRA Growth and Income Fund
VIII, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Parent"), DRA
Growth and Income Fund VIII (A), LLC, a Delaware limited liability
company (together with Parent, the "Parent Parties"), and Midwest
Retail Acquisition Corp., a Maryland corporation and an indirect
wholly owned subsidiary of the Parent Parties ("Merger Sub"). The
Merger Agreement provides for the merger of Merger Sub with and
into our company (the "Merger"), with our company surviving as a
wholly owned subsidiary of the Parent Parties (the "Surviving
Entity")," the Company said.

Three putative class action complaints challenging the Merger-
related transactions were filed on January 5, 2016 and January 6,
2016: Mattos v. Inland Real Estate Corp., et al.; Perrone v.
Inland Real Estate Corp., et al.; and Rosen v. Inland Real Estate
Corp., et al. All three complaints were filed in Maryland state
court, in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, and each brought
claims against the Company, members of the Board, the Parent
Parties and Merger Sub.

On February 5, 2016 the parties filed a stipulation to consolidate
the three pending shareholder complaints and any additional
related complaints received in the future.  On February 23, 2016
plaintiffs filed a consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint
(the "Amended Complaint").

The allegations in the Amended Complaint raise putative class
claims against the Company, members of the Board, the Parent
Parties and Merger Sub. In particular, the Amended Complaint
alleges that the Merger Consideration was insufficient, the Merger
Agreement contained unreasonable deal protection devices,
including, for example, use of a "no-solicitation" provision, and
that the Company issued inadequate proxy disclosures in relation
to the Merger. The Amended Complaint generally alleges breaches of
fiduciary duty by members of the Board in connection with the
Merger Agreement. Further, the Amended Complaint alleges that some
or all of the Company, the Parent Parties and Merger Sub aided and
abetted the purported breaches of fiduciary duty. The Amended
Complaint seeks unspecified damages and attorneys' fees, as well
as, or in substitution for, certain equitable and injunctive
relief, including an order enjoining the defendants from
completing the Merger, or, in the event the Merger is consummated,
rescission of the transaction.

The Company believes these civil actions are wholly without merit
and intends to vigorously defend against them. Additional civil
actions may be filed against the Company, the Parent Parties,
Merger Sub and/or any of their respective directors in connection
with the Merger. The Company cannot currently assess the likely
outcome of these matters.


INTERSPACE BATTERY: Faces "Montoya" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
---------------------------------------------------------------
Juan Montoya, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Interspace Battery, Inc. and Does 1 through 100, Case
No. BC615092 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 1, 2016), is brought against
the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the California Labor Code.

Interspace Battery, Inc. is a California corporation that
manufactures batteries.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael Nourmand, Esq.
      James A. De Sario, Esq.
      THE NOURMAND LAW FIRM, APC
      8822 West Olympic Boulevard
      Beverly Hills, CA 90211
      Telephone: (310) 553-3600
      Facsimile: (310) 553-3603


J2 GLOBAL: Parties Prepare Dispositive Motions in Paldo Sign Case
-----------------------------------------------------------------
j2 Global Inc., said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the parties are
preparing dispositive motions in the class action lawsuit by Paldo
Sign and Display Co.

On January 18, 2013, Paldo Sign and Display Co. ("Paldo") filed an
amended complaint adding two j2 Global affiliates and a former
employee as additional defendants in an existing purported class
action pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Illinois ("Northern District of Illinois") (No. 1:13-
cv-01896). The amended complaint alleged violations of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), the Illinois Consumer
Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act ("ICFA"), and common
law conversion, arising from an indirect customer's alleged use of
the j2 Global affiliates' systems to send unsolicited facsimile
transmissions.

On August 23, 2013, a second plaintiff, Sabon, Inc. ("Sabon"), was
added.

The j2 Global affiliates filed a motion to dismiss the ICFA and
conversion claims, which was granted. The Northern District of
Illinois also dismissed the former employee for lack of personal
jurisdiction.  Discovery closed on January 11, 2016. The parties
are preparing dispositive motions.

j2 Global, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, provides cloud
services to businesses of all sizes, from individuals to
enterprises, and license its intellectual property ("IP") to third
parties.


J2 GLOBAL: Accord in LEO Action Remains Pending
-----------------------------------------------
j2 Global Inc., said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the settlement reached
in the class action lawsuit filed by Law Enforcement Officers,
Inc., remains subject to court approval.

On June 23, 2014, Andre Free-Vychine ("Free-Vychine") filed a
purported class action against a j2 Global affiliate in the
Superior Court for the State of California, County of Los Angeles
("Los Angeles Superior Court") (No. BC549422). The complaint
alleges two California statutory violations relating to late fees
levied in certain eVoice(R) accounts. Free-Vychine is seeking,
among other things, damages and injunctive relief on behalf of
himself and a purported nationwide class of similarly situated
persons.

On August 26, 2014, Law Enforcement Officers, Inc. ("LEO") and IV
Pit Stop, Inc. ("IV Pit Stop") filed a separate purported class
action against the same j2 Global affiliate in Los Angeles
Superior Court (No. BC555721). The complaint alleges three
California statutory violations, negligence, breach of the implied
covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and various other common
law claims relating to late fees levied on any of the j2 Global
affiliate's customers, including those with eVoice(R) and
Onebox(R) accounts. The plaintiffs are seeking, among other
things, damages and injunctive relief on behalf of themselves and
a purported nationwide class of similarly situated persons.

On September 29, 2014, the Los Angeles Superior Court ordered both
cases related and consolidated for discovery purposes. On March
13, 2015, a third amended complaint was filed in this action,
which no longer included IV Pit Stop as a plaintiff but added
Christopher Dancel ("Dancel") as a plaintiff.

On or around June 26, 2015, the case filed by Free-Vychine was
dismissed pursuant to a settlement agreement. On October 7, 2015,
the parties reached a tentative class-based settlement that
remains subject to court approval.

j2 Global, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, provides cloud
services to businesses of all sizes, from individuals to
enterprises, and license its intellectual property ("IP") to third
parties.


JACKSONVILLE BANCORP: MOU Reached in Merger Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------
Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. said in its Form 8-K Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016, that
a Memorandum of Understanding has been reached in a class action
lawsuit related to the plan of merger with Ameris Bancorp.

On February 4, 2016, Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. ("JAXB") filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") a
definitive proxy statement (the "Definitive Proxy Statement"),
which was mailed on or about February 8, 2016, with respect to the
special meeting of JAXB's shareholders scheduled to be held on
March 11, 2016 (the "Special Meeting") to approve, among other
things, the Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated as of September
30, 2015, by and between JAXB and Ameris Bancorp, a Georgia
corporation ("ABCB"), and the transactions contemplated in the
merger agreement, including the merger of JAXB with and into ABCB.

As previously disclosed in the Definitive Proxy Statement, two
putative shareholder class action lawsuits relating to the merger
have been filed against JAXB, the directors of JAXB and ABCB in
the Circuit Court of Duval County, Florida (the "Court"), which
lawsuits were subsequently consolidated by the Court: (i) Paul
Parshall v. Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. et al., Case No. 16-2015-
CA-006607, filed on October 16, 2015; and (ii) Patrick Donovan v.
Kendall Spencer et al., Case No. 16-2015-CA-006738, filed on
October 22, 2015.

In the Florida Actions, plaintiffs initially alleged that the
individual director defendants breached their fiduciary duties to
JAXB shareholders in negotiating and approving the merger
agreement through an unfair process, that the merger consideration
does not adequately value JAXB, that JAXB shareholders will not
receive fair value for their shares of JAXB common stock in the
merger and that the terms of the merger agreement impose improper
deal-protection devices that allegedly preclude competing offers.
The complaints in the Florida Actions further alleged that JAXB
and ABCB aided and abetted the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty
by JAXB's directors. In the Florida Actions, plaintiffs sought
preliminary and permanent injunctive relief, including enjoining
or rescinding the merger, an award of unspecified damages,
attorneys' fees and other relief.

In an amended complaint filed on December 15, 2015, plaintiffs in
the Florida Actions repeated those same allegations and sought the
same relief. The amended complaint also alleged that the recently
filed registration statement was misleading, as it omitted to
disclose certain information about, inter alia, the formation of
JAXB's merger committee, other information about the process of
the merger, certain management financial projections and valuation
information, and other information about the fairness opinion
provided by Hovde. The parties engaged in expedited discovery,
including the production of documents and deposition testimony.

JAXB believes that the Florida actions are without merit and that
no further disclosure is required to supplement the Definitive
Proxy Statement under any applicable rule, statute, regulation or
law.  However, to avoid the costs, risks and uncertainties
inherent in litigation, on February 29, 2016, the defendants
entered into a memorandum of understanding (the "Memorandum of
Understanding") regarding settlement of the Florida Actions. The
Memorandum of Understanding outlines the terms of the parties'
agreement in principle to settle and release all claims which were
or could have been asserted in the Florida Actions.

In consideration for such settlement and release, the parties to
the Florida Actions have agreed that JAXB will make certain
supplemental disclosures to the Definitive Proxy Statement.  The
Memorandum of Understanding contemplates that the parties will
attempt in good faith to agree promptly upon a stipulation of
settlement to be submitted to the Court for approval at the
earliest practicable time.  The stipulation of settlement will be
subject to approval by the Court, which will consider the
fairness, reasonableness and adequacy of such settlement. Under
the terms of the proposed settlement, following final approval by
the Court, the action will be dismissed with prejudice. There can
be no assurance that the parties will ultimately enter into a
stipulation of settlement or that the Court will approve the
settlement even if the parties were to enter into such
stipulation. In such event, or if the merger is not consummated
for any reason, the proposed settlement will be null and void and
of no force and effect.

The settlement will not affect the timing of the Special Meeting
or the amount of merger consideration to be paid to JAXB's
shareholders in connection with the proposed merger.


JARDEN CORP: Individual Defendants Still Face "Hirsch" Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Jarden Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the individual director
defendants continue to defend the class action lawsuit, Vincent A.
Hirsch v. James E. Lillie, Martin E. Franklin, Ian G.H. Ashken,
Michael S. Gross, Robert L. Wood, Irwin D. Simon, William P.
Lauder, Ros L'esperance, Peter A. Hochfelder, Newell Rubbermaid
Inc., NCPF Acquisition Corp. I and NCPF Acquisition Corp. II, Case
No. 9:16-CV-80258 (United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida)

Ian G.H. Ashken, Martin E. Franklin, Michael S. Gross, Peter A.
Hochfelder, William P. Lauder, Ros Lesperance, James E. Lillie,
Irwin D. Simon, Robert L. Wood have until April 29, 2016, to
respond to the complaint.

Senior Judge Kenneth L. Ryskamp presides over the case.

The lawsuit, which was filed on February 24, 2016, is a putative
class action, purportedly on behalf of Jarden shareholders filed
against the individual director defendants, who are directors of
Jarden Corporation. Newell Rubbermaid Inc., NCPF Acquisition Corp.
I and NCPF Acquisition Corp. II are also named as defendants. The
Complaint alleges claims under Sec. 14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; SEC Rule 14a-9 against all defendants; and
Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act against the
individual director defendants. Plaintiff alleges that the joint
proxy/prospectus of Newell Rubbermaid and Jarden concerning the
merger transactions contemplated by the Merger Agreement omitted
certain information. Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the proposed merger
transactions, rescission in the event the merger is consummated,
and the award of attorneys' fees and costs.

The individual director defendants deny the allegations and intend
to vigorously defend the action.

Plaintiff is represented by Stuart Andrew Davidson, Esq. --
sdavidson@rgrdlaw.com -- Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP; and
Stephen J. Oddo, Esq. -- soddo@robbinsarroyo.com -- Robins Arroyo,
LLP

Lillie and the other individual defendants are represented by:

     Joseph C. Coates III, Esq.
     Greenberg Traurig
     West Palm Beach
     777 South Flagler Drive
     Suite 300 East
     West Palm Beach, FL 33401
     Direct: +1 561.650.7903
     E-mail: coatesj@gtlaw.com

Newell Rubermaid's counsel is not immediately known.

Jarden Corporation is a global consumer products company that
enjoys leading positions in a broad range of primarily niche
markets for branded consumer products.


JCB ASSOCIATES: Faces "Nenos" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Meghan Nenos, individually and on behalf of other persons
similarly situated v. JCB Associates, Inc., Bagel and Deli
Creations, LLC, Robert Bunt, and any other related entities, Case
No. 600842/2016 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., April 6, 2016), is brought against
the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate a restaurant headquartered at 320
Central Park West, Apt 10A, New York, NY 10025.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Jeffrey K. Brown, Esq.
      Michael A. Tompkins, Esq.
      LEEDS BROWN LAW, P.C.
      One Old Country Road, Suite 347
      Carle Place, NY 11514
      Telephone: (516) 873-9550


KOSMIC OF KEY WEST: "Mansel" Suit Seeks Minimum Wages Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ashley Mansel, and Lea Mackenzie-Kerr, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Kosmic of Key
West, Inc. d/b/a Bare Assets, a Florida Corporation, the
Defendant, Case No. 4:16-cv-10016-JEM (S.D. Fla., April 5, 2016),
seeks to recover mandatory minimum wage and overtime provisions,
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Kosmic of Key West is in the Drinking Places (Alcoholic Beverages)
industry in Key West, Florida.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Chad E. Levy, Esq.
          LEVY & LEVY, P.A.
          915 Middle River Drive, Suite 518
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304
          Telephone: (954) 763 5722
          Facsimile: (954) 763 5723
          Email: chad@levylevylaw.com


KRAFT HEINZ: Faces "Ford" Suit in Penn. Over Product Misbranding
----------------------------------------------------------------
Karen Ford, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
v. Kraft Heinz Foods Company, Case No. 2:16-cv-00398-MRH (W.D.
Penn., April 6, 2016), alleges that the Defendant has been
manufacturing, marketing, distributing and selling containers of
its 100% Grated Parmesan Cheese products and 100% Parmesan &
Romano Cheese product throughout the United States for many years,
in an unlawful, false, misleading and deceptive manner.

Kraft Heinz Foods Company owns and operates a food company located
at 3000 Executive Pkwy, San Ramon, CA 94583.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Charles E. Schaffer, Esq.
      LEVIN, FISHBEIN, SEDRAN & BERMAN
      510 Walnut Street, Suite 500
      Philadelphia, PA 19106-3697
      Telephone: (215) 592-1500
      Facsimile: (215) 592-4663
      E-mail: CSchaffer@lfsblaw.com


LIGAND PHARMACEUTICALS: Class Action Dismissal Under Appeal
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ligand Pharmaceuticals Incorporated said in its Form 10-K Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26,
2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that a
plaintiff has appealed the dismissal of a securities class action
the Third Circuit.

"In 2012, a federal securities class action and shareholder
derivative lawsuit was filed in Pennsylvania alleging that the
Company and its CEO assisted various breaches of fiduciary duties
based on our purchase of a licensing interest in a development-
stage pharmaceutical program from the Genaera Liquidating Trust in
2010 and our subsequent sale of half of our interest in the
transaction to Biotechnology Value Fund, Inc.," the Company said.

"Plaintiff filed a second amended complaint in February 2015,
which we moved to dismiss in March 2015," the Company said.

"The district court granted the motion to dismiss on November 11,
2015.  The plaintiff has appealed that ruling to the Third
Circuit.  The Company intends to continue to vigorously defend
against the claims against the Company and its CEO.  The outcome
of the matter is not presently determinable."

Ligand Pharmaceuticals is a biopharmaceutical company focused on
developing and acquiring technologies that help pharmaceutical
companies discover and develop medicines.


LIZARD O'S INC: "Vicuna" Suit Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA, NYLL
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Juan Vicuna, Soraida Mendez, Valery Roldan and Tomas Rivera,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the
Plaintiffs, v. Lizard O's Inc. d/b/a Two Lizards Mexican Bar &
Grill, Juan Liz and Manuel Melchor, jointly and severally, the
Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-02545 (S.D.N.Y., April 5, 2016),
seeks to recover full unpaid minimum wages, damages for
unreasonably delayed payment of wages, liquidated damages,
reasonable attorneys' fees, and costs and disbursements of the
Action, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New
York Labor Law (NYLL).

Lizard O's operates a restaurant in New York, New York serving
grilled skirt steak, Mexican chorizo, chicken, grilled cactus and
jalapenos.

Plaintiffs are former bartenders, servers, bussers, kitchen
helpers and delivery employees at the Defendants' restaurant
located in the Upper East Side neighborhood of Manhattan.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brent E. Pelton, Esq.
          Taylor B. Graham, Esq.
          PELTON GRAHAM LLC
          111 Broadway, Suite 1503
          New York, NY 10006
          Telephone: (212) 385 9700
          E-mail: www.PeltonGraham.com
                  pelton@peltongraham.com
                  graham@peltongraham.com


LTD FINANCIAL: Illegally Collects Debt, "Preisler" Suit Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Eliezer T. Preisler, on behalf of himself and all other similarly
situated consumers v. LTD Financial Services, LP, Case No. 1:16-
cv-01648 (E.D.N.Y., April 5, 2016), seeks to stop the Defendant's
unfair and unconscionable means to collect a debt.

LTD Financial Services, LP operates a debt collection firm
headquartered at 7322 Southwest Fwy #1600, Houston, TX 77074

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

MAIN LLC: Does Not Properly Pay Employees, "Crisostomo" Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Flor Crisostomo, Maribel Hernandez, and Juan Sergio Esquivel,
individually and acting in the interest of other current and
former employees v. Main LLC and Does 1 through 20, inclusive,
Case No. RG16809772 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 1, 2016), is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay minimum and overtime
wages in violation of the California Labor Code.

Main LLC owns and operates a restaurant in Oakland, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Stan S. Mallison, Esq.
      Hector R. Martinez, Esq.
      Marco A. Palau, Esq.
      Joseph D. Sutton, Esq.
      Eric S. Trabuco, Esq.
      MALLISON & MARTINEZ
      1939 Harrison Street, Suite 730
      Oakland, CA 94612
      Telephone: (510) 832-9999
      Facsimile: (510) 832-1101


MARRIOTT INTERNATIONAL: "Zeman" Suit Removed to S.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit entitled Ryan Zeman, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. Marriott International,
Inc., Marriott Resorts Hospitality Corporation, and Marriott
Rewards Subsidiary, Inc., Case No. 37-02016-00007069-CU-MC-CTL,
was removed from the San Diego Superior Court to the U.S. District
Court Southern District of California (San Diego). The District
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:16-cv-00775-MMA-JMA to the
proceeding.

The case asserts claims for violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.

The Defendants own and operate a hospitality company that manages
and franchises a broad portfolio of hotels and related lodging
facilities.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Zachariah Paul Dostart, Esq.
      DOSTART HANNINK COVENEY LLP
      4180 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 530
      La Jolla, CA 92037
      Telephone: (858) 623-4200
      Facsimile: (858) 623-4299
      E-mail: zdostart@sdlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

      Colin Matthew Proksel, Esq.
      Steven D. Allison, Esq.
      CROWELL & MORING LLP
      3 Park Plaza, 20th Floor
      Irvine, CA 92614
      Telephone: (949) 263-8400
      E-mail: cproksel@crowell.com
              SAllison@crowell.com


MASSAGE ENVY: Faces "Zizian" Class Suit in S.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been commenced against Massage Envy
Franchising, LLC.

The case is captioned Donna Zizian, individually and on behalf of
all other similarly situated California Residents v. Massage Envy
Franchising, LLC, Case No. 3:16-cv-00783-WQH-JLB (S.D. Cal., April
1, 2016).

Massage Envy Franchising, LLC is in the business of providing
therapeutic massage and spa services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Brett M. Weaver, Esq.
      JOHNSON & WEAVER, LLP
      600 West Broadway, Suite 1540
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 230-0063
      Facsimile: (619) 255-1856
      E-mail: brettw@johnsonandweaver.com


MDC PARTNERS: Pension Funds Oppose Motion to Dismiss
----------------------------------------------------
MDC Partners Inc. continues to defend a class action lawsuit filed
by North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District Firefighter
Pension Plan, MDC Partners said in its Form 10-K Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2016, for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015.

Defendants have filed a motion to dismiss the Plaintiffs' amended
complaint and on April 8, 2016, Plaintiff filed its opposition.

On July 31, 2015, North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District
Firefighter Pension Plan ("North Collier") filed a putative class
action suit in the Southern District of New York, naming as
defendants the Company, CFO David Doft, Mr. Nadal, and Mr.
Sabatino.

On December 11, 2015, North Collier and co-lead plaintiff Plymouth
County Retirement Association filed an amended complaint, adding
two additional defendants, Mr. Gendel and Senator Kirby.  The
plaintiff alleges in the amended complaint violations of Sec.
10(b), Rule 10b-5, and Sec. 20 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, based on allegedly materially false and misleading
statements in the Company's SEC filings and other public
statements regarding the Company's financial disclosures,
executive compensation, goodwill accounting, and internal
controls.

The Company intends to vigorously defend this suit.

The case is, NORTH COLLIER FIRE CONTROL AND RESCUE DISTRICT
FIREFIGHTER PENSION PLAN, Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, vs. MDC PARTNERS, INC., MILES S.
NADAL, DAVID B. DOFT, and MICHAEL C. SABATINO, Case 1:15-cv-06034
(S.D.N.Y., July 31, 2015).

Lead Counsel for Lead Plaintiffs Plymouth County Retirement
Association and North Collier Fire Control and Rescue District
Firefighter Pension Plan:

     BERMAN DEVALERIO
     Kathleen M. Donovan-Maher, Esq.
     Steven J. Buttacavoli, Esq.
     Steven L. Groopman, Esq.
     One Liberty Square
     Boston, MA 02109
     Telephone: (617) 542-8300
     Fax: (617) 542-1194
     Email: kdonovanmaher@bermandevalerio.com

          - and -

     Joseph J. Tabacco, Jr., Esq.
     1 California Street, Suite 900
     San Francisco, CA 94111
     Telephone: (415) 433-3200
     Fax: (415) 433-6382
     Email: jtabacco@bermandevalerio.com

          - and -

     ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
     Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
     58 South Service Road, Suite 200
     Melville, NY 11747
     Telephone: (631) 367-7100
     Fax: (631) 367-1173
     Email: srudman@rgrdlaw.com

MDC is represented by Paul C. Curnin, Esq. -- pcurnin@stblaw.com
-- Craig Scott Waldman, Esq. -- cwaldman@stblaw.com -- and Daniel
Joseph Stujenske, Esq. -- dstujenske@stblaw.com -- at Simpson
Thacher & Bartlett LLP

Judge Richard J Sullivan presides over the case.

MDC is a provider of global marketing, advertising, activation,
communications and strategic consulting solutions.


MDL 2328: Pool Corp. Still Defends Antitrust Case
-------------------------------------------------
Pool Corporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 26, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company continues to
defend an antitrust class action lawsuit.

"A number of purported anti-trust class action suits were filed
against us in various United States District Courts in 2012," the
Company said.  "The cases were transferred and consolidated before
the Judicial Panel for Multidistrict Litigation, MDL Docket No.
2328, and are presently pending in the Eastern District of
Louisiana.  The plaintiffs include indirect purchaser plaintiffs,
purporting to represent indirect purchasers of swimming pool
products in Arizona, California, Florida and Missouri, and direct
purchaser plaintiffs, who are current or former customers."

The plaintiffs also named three additional defendants: Hayward
Industries, Inc., Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Inc. and Zodiac Pool
Systems, Inc. The plaintiffs seek unspecified compensatory and
enhanced damages, interest, costs and fees and other equitable
relief.

The Court gave final approval of a class action settlement between
Hayward Industries, Inc., Pentair Water Pool and Spa, Inc. and
Zodiac Pool Systems, Inc. and the direct purchaser plaintiffs. The
Court also gave final approval of class action settlements between
the indirect purchaser plaintiffs and each of Hayward Industries,
Inc., Zodiac Pool Systems, Inc. and Pentair Water Pool and Spa,
Inc.

On January 27, 2016, the Court granted summary judgment in our
favor on the direct purchasers' horizontal conspiracy claim.

"We continue to defend ourselves in this matter," the Company
said.

Richard C Stanley, Special Master, represented by Richard C.
Stanley -- rcs@stanleyreuter.com -- Stanley, Reuter, Ross,
Thornton & Alford, LLC

Direct Purchaser Plaintiffs' Liaison Counsel, Plaintiff,
represented by Russ M. Herman -- rherman@hhklawfirm.com -- Herman,
Herman, Katz & Cotlar, LLP

Indirect Purchaser Plaintiffs' Liaison Counsel, Plaintiff,
represented by Thomas J. H. Brill, Law Office of Thomas H. Brill
Plaintiffs' Steering Committee, Plaintiff, represented by Arnold
Levin, Levin, Fishbein, Sedran & Berman, Daniel W. Krasner, Wolf,
Haldenstein, Adler, Freeman & Herz, LLP, Douglas G. Thompson,
Finkelstein Thompson LLP, Jay L. Himes, Labaton Sucharow, LLP, pro
hac vice, Linda P Nussbaum, Nussbaum Law Group, P.C., Matthew B.
Moreland, Becnel Law Firm, LLC, Richard J. Arsenault, Neblett,
Beard & Arsenault, Robert N. Kaplan, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP,
Ronald J. Aranoff, Bernstein Liebhard LLP, Russ M. Herman, Herman,
Herman, Katz & Cotlar, LLP, Scott R. Bickford, Martzell & Bickford
& Vincent J. Esades, Heins, Mills & Olson, PLC

Plaintiffs' Executive Committee, Plaintiff, represented by Jay L.
Himes, Labaton Sucharow, LLP, pro hac vice, Robert N. Kaplan,
Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP, Ronald J. Aranoff, Bernstein Liebhard
LLP & Russ M. Herman, Herman, Herman, Katz & Cotlar, LLP
Defendants' Liaison Counsel, Defendant, represented by William
Bernard Gaudet, Adams & Reese, LLP

Defendants' Lead Counsel, Defendant, represented by David H.
Bamberger -- david.bamberger@dlapiper.com -- DLA Piper, LLP &
Deana L. Cairo -- deana.cairo@dlapiper.com -- DLA Piper, LLP, pro
hac vice

Manufacturer Defendants' Liaison Counsel, Defendant, represented
by Wayne J. Lee, Stone, Pigman, Walther, Wittmann, LLC
Federal Trade Commission, Movant, represented by Lisa Zeidner
Marcus, U.S. Dept of Justice, Civil Div

Pool Corporation is the world's largest wholesale distributor of
swimming pool supplies, equipment and related leisure products and
is one of the top three distributors of irrigation and landscape
products in the United States.


MOBILE PELUSO: "Kaiabneh" Suit Seeks Overtime Wages Under FLSA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Hasan Kaiabneh, on behalf of himself and other employees and
former employees similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v Mobile
Peluso, LLC, and Roberto Peluso, individually, the Defendants,
Case No. 8:16-cv-00821-SCB-MA (M.D. Fla., Tampa Div., April 5,
2016), seeks to recover overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA).

Defendants are Florida corporations and Florida residents. The
Defendants operate petrol stations located in Hillsborough County.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marc R. Edelman, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          201 N. Franklin Street, #700
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Telephone: (813) 223 5505
          Facsimile: (813) 257 0572
          E-mail: MEdelman@forthepeople.com


MONTGOMERY, MD: Faces "Yi" Suit Over Constitutional Rights Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Chong Su Yi and people of similarly situated v. Montgomery County
Department of Health and Human Services, Case No. 8:16-cv-00970-
GJH (D. Md., April 4, 2016), is brought against the Defendant for
violation of constitutional rights.

Montgomery County Department of Health and Human Services is a
county government that is responsible for public health and human
services that help address the needs of the most vulnerable
children, adults and seniors.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Chong Su Yi, Esq.
      8210 Dixon Avenue
      Silver Spring, MD 20910
      Telephone: (301) 585-6463
      PRO SE


MR. CHOW: "Rojas" Suit Seeks Back & Front Pay Under FLSA
--------------------------------------------------------
Erick Rojas, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
the Plaintiff, v. Mr. Chow New York Enterprises, Inc., Mr. Chow
Enterprises Ltd., ABC Corp., doing business as: TC Ventures, Inc.,
Michael Chow, the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-02511 (S.D.N.Y.,
April 5, 2016), seeks to recover damages including back pay, front
pay, punitive damages, and liquidated damages. Pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Mr. Chow New York Enterprises operates a restaurant business in
New York, New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq.
          JOSEPH, HERZFELD, HESTER, & KIRSCHENBAUM
          233 Broadway, 5th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 688 5640
          Facsimile: (212) 688 5639
          E-mail: maimon@jhllp.com


NAVIENT SOLUTIONS: Faces "Manson" Class Suit in N. Dist. Illinois
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been commenced against Navient
Solutions, Inc.

The case is captioned Heidi Manson, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated v. Navient Solutions, Inc., Case No.
1:16-cv-04015 (N.D. Ill., April 5, 2016).

Navient Solutions, Inc. is a Delaware corporation that offers
finance and loans for education purpose.

Heidi Manson is a pro se plaintiff.


NRG ENERGY: Natural Gas Litigation Proceeding in Nevada Court
-------------------------------------------------------------
NRG Energy, Inc.said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Natural Gas
Litigation is proceeding in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Nevada.

GenOn is party to several lawsuits, certain of which are class
action lawsuits, in state and federal courts in Kansas, Missouri,
Nevada and Wisconsin. These lawsuits were filed in the aftermath
of the California energy crisis in 2000 and 2001 and the resulting
FERC investigations and relate to alleged conduct to increase
natural gas prices in violation of state antitrust law and similar
laws. The lawsuits seek treble or punitive damages, restitution
and/or expenses. The lawsuits also name as parties a number of
energy companies unaffiliated with NRG.

In July 2011, the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada,
which was handling four of the five cases, granted the defendants'
motion for summary judgment and dismissed all claims against GenOn
in those cases. The plaintiffs appealed to the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Ninth Circuit which reversed the decision of the
District Court.

GenOn along with the other defendants in the lawsuit filed a
petition for a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court
challenging the Court of Appeals' decision and the Supreme Court
granted the petition.

On April 21, 2015, the Supreme Court affirmed the Ninth Circuit's
holding that plaintiffs' state antitrust law claims are not field-
preempted by the federal Natural Gas Act and the Supremacy Clause
of the U.S. Constitution.  The Supreme Court left open whether the
claims were preempted on the basis of conflict preemption. The
U.S. Supreme Court directed that the case be remanded to the U.S.
District Court for the District of Nevada. The case is proceeding
in that court.

GenOn has agreed to indemnify CenterPoint against certain losses
relating to these lawsuits.


NRG ENERGY: Continues to Defend TCPA Class Actions
--------------------------------------------------
NRG Energy, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company continues to
defend lawsuits alleging violations of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.

Three purported class action lawsuits have been filed against NRG
Residential Solar Solutions, LLC, one in California and two in New
Jersey.  The plaintiffs generally allege misrepresentation by the
call agents and violations of the TCPA, claiming that the
defendants engaged in a telemarketing campaign placing unsolicited
calls to individuals on the "Do Not Call List." The plaintiffs
seek statutory damages of up to $1,500 per plaintiff, actual
damages and equitable relief. The Company is vigorously defending
against these lawsuits. NRG requested and was granted a stay in
the California case and one of the New Jersey cases pending a
decision of an unrelated case by the U.S. Supreme Court, the
results of which could materially affect these lawsuits.

NRG Energy, Inc., or NRG or the Company, is an integrated
competitive power company, which produces, sells and delivers
energy and energy products and services in major competitive power
markets in the U.S. while positioning itself as a leader in the
way residential, industrial and commercial consumers think about
and use energy products and services.


OAKLAND AUTOMOTIVE: Sued Over Retail Installment Sale Contract
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Vela, an individual, and on behalf of himself, and all others
similarly situated v. Oakland Automotive Company, LLC, d/b/a Honda
of Oakland, The Golden 1 Credit Union, Bank of   America, National
Association, and Does 1 through 500, inclusive, Case No.
RG16809825 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 1, 2016), is an action for
damages as a result of the Defendants' failure to include in its
Retail Installment Sale Contract the line item precisely
corresponding to the $895.00 "Protection Package" that the Dealer
had supposedly "added" for the purchase of the New 2015 Honda
Accord.

Oakland Automotive Company, LLC is engaged in the business of
buying, repairing and re-selling used vehicles to the general
public, and taking vehicles in trade.

The Golden 1 Credit Union, Bank of America, National Association
are financial institutions engaged in the business of holding
conditional sale contracts and collecting payments made by
consumers.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Louis A. Liberty, Esq.
      LOUIS LIBERTY & ASSOCIATES, APLC
      553 Pilgrim Drive, Suite A
      Foster City, CA 94404
      Telephone: (650) 341-0300
      Facsimile: (650) 403-1783
      E-mail: lou@carlawyer.com


PACESETTERS PERSONNEL: Violated FLSA, "Robinson" Suit Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Darryl Robinson Jr. and Dominick Robinson, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v.
Pacesetters Personnel Services Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 4:16-
cv-00911 (S.D. Tex., Houston, Div., April 5, 2016), seeks to
recover unpaid wages, overtime compensation, litigation expenses,
expert witness fees, attorney's fees, costs of court, pre-judgment
and post-judgment interest, liquidated damages, applicable
penalties, and all other available remedies pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

Pacesetter Personnel Services offers labor management and
personnel services in Texas. The company is based in Austin,
Texas.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Taft L. Foley II, Esq.
          THE FOLEY LAW FIRM
          3003 South Loop West, Suite 108
          Houston, Texas 77054
          Telephone: (832) 778 8182
          Facsimile: (832) 778 8353
          E-mail: Taft.Foley@thefoleylawfirm.com


PACIFIC GLASS CORP: "Romero" Suit to Recover Minimum Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Luis S. Romero and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v.
Pacific Glass Corp. and Eduardo Arrastia, Defendants, Case No.
1:16-cv-21183-JEM (S.D. Fla., April 2, 2016), seeks double and
punitive damages and reasonable attorney fees from the Defendants,
jointly and severally, recovery of all minimum wages still owing,
costs, interest and any other relief pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Romero claims he received less than the mandatory minimum wages
and rendered in excess of 40 hours per workweek without overtime
compensation.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alberto Naranjo, Esq.
      AN LAW FIRM, P.A.
      1900 N. Bayshore Dr.
      #3606 Miami, FL 33132
      Phone: 305-942-8070
      Email: AN@ANLawFirm.com


PANKL AEROSPACE: "Cepeda" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ramiro Cepeda, an individual, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Pankl Aerospace Systems and Does 1through
100, Case No. BC61606 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 5, 2016), seeks to
recover unpaid overtime wages and penalties under the California
Labor Code.

Pankl Aerospace Systems is in the business of manufacturing high
performance mechanical components for the commercial and
governmental aerospace industry.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Paul K. Haines, Esq.
      Tuvia Korobkin, Esq.
      Fletcher W. Schmidt, Esq.
      HAINES LAW GROUP, APC
      2274 East Maple Ave., Suite A
      El Segundo, CA 90245
      Telephone: (424) 292-2350
      Facsimile: (424) 292-2355
      E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com
              tkorobkin@haineslawgroup.com
              fschmidt@haineslawgroup.com


PC RICHARD: Removed "Sharp" Class Suit to Dist. New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned Gillian Sharp, individually and
as a class representative on behalf of others similarly situated
v. P.C. Richard & Son and John Doe Individual and Business 1-20,
Case No. L-37016, was removed from the Superior Court of
Burlington County to the U.S. District Court
District of New Jersey (Camden). The District Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 1:16-cv-01885-NLH-JS to the proceeding.

The case asserts product liability claims.

P.C. Richard & Son operates a chain of private, family-owned
electronics and appliances stores in the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lewis G. Adler, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF LEWIS ADLER
      26 Newton Avenue
      Woodbury, NJ 08096
      Telephone: (856) 845-1968
      E-mail: lewisadler@verizon.net

The Defendant is represented by:

      Lauri A. Mazzuchetti, Esq.
      KELLEY, DRYE & WARREN, LLP
      One Jefferson Road, 2nd Floor
      Parsippany, NJ 07054
      Telephone: (973) 503-5900
      E-mail: lmazzuchetti@kelleydrye.com


PETSMART INC: "Steeger" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Pay
----------------------------------------------------------
Michael Steeger, Davian Williams, Annette Walter, Robert Menard
and Aaron Escobar, individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Petsmart, Inc., Defendant, Case
No. 1:16-cv-02450 (S.D.N.Y., April 1, 2016), seeks unpaid wages
with liquidated damages, employer's share of FICA, FUTA, state
unemployment insurance and any other required employment taxes,
penalties under New York Labor Laws, prejudgment and post-judgment
interest, reasonable attorneys' and expert fees and such other and
further relief as the court deems just and proper pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act, New York Labor Laws, Conn. Gen. Stat.
Ann. Sec. 31, et seq., Missouri Minimum Wage Law and the
California Business & Professional Code Sec. 17200, et. seq.

PetSmart, Inc. is an Arizona corporation with its principal place
of business located at 19601 N. 27th Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona
85027 with a chain of 1,237 stores in the United States.

Steeger, William, Walter, Menard and Escobar worked for the
Defendants as Operations Managers for the Defendant's Connecticut,
New York, Missouri, California and Florida stores respectively.
They all claim they were not being paid overtime compensation.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Rebecca S. Predovan, Esq.
      Marc Hepworth, Esq.
      David Roth, Esq.
      Charles Gershbaum, Esq.
      HEPWORTH GERSHBAUM & ROTH PLLC
      192 Lexington Avenue, Suite 802
      New York, NY 10016
      Tel: (212) 545-1199
      Fax: (212) 532-3801


PGA INC: "Nickell" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Eugene Nickell, Eric Schilling and Blaine Krohn, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated Plaintiffs v. PGA
Inc. Defendant, Case No. 3:16-cv-00202-WMC (W.D. Wis., April 1,
2016), seeks to recover all unpaid overtime pay with liquidated
damages, attorney's fees and costs under the Fair Labor Standards
Act and Wisconsin Labor Laws and such other and further relief.

PGA Inc. is a Wisconsin corporation with a principal place of
business located at 7306 Zinser Street in Weston, Wisconsin. It
performs plumbing, heating, cooling, electrical and excavating
work on projects throughout Wisconsin. Defendant allegedly failed
to consider the Plaintiff's travel time as work rendered thus
failing to compensate them for overtime.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Yingtao Ho, Esq.
      THE PREVIANT LAW FIRM S.C.
      1555 North RiverCenter Drive, Suite 202
      P.O. Box 12993
      Milwaukee, WI 53212
      Telephone: (414) 271-4500
      Fax: (414) 271-6308
      Email: yh@previant.com


PNC BANK: "Shalabi" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay, Final Pay
-----------------------------------------------------------
Nael Shalabi, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. PNC Bank, N.A and PNC Financial Services
Group, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-03964 (N.D. Ill.,
Eastern Division, April 1, 2016), seeks overtime wages owed to
Plaintiffs, compensatory damages, interests, liquidated damages,
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act, Illinois Minimum Wage Law and the Illinois Wage
Payment and Collection Act.

Shalabi worked for the Defendants as a Financial Consultant,
selling financial products to customers. Plaintiff claims to have
not received overtime pay and did not receive full and final wages
upon separation.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
      Jorge A. Gamboa
      STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
      205 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2560
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Tel: (312) 233-1550
      Fax: (312) 233-1560
      Email: rstephan@stepahnzouras.com


QUANTA SERVICES: "Benton" Action Still Pending in Calif.
--------------------------------------------------------
Quanta Services, Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the Company continues to
defend a class action case, Lorenzo Benton v. Telecom Network
Specialists, Inc., et al.

In June 2006, plaintiff Lorenzo Benton filed a class action
complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Los
Angeles, alleging various wage and hour violations against Telecom
Network Specialists (TNS), a former subsidiary of Quanta. Benton
seeks to represent a class of workers that includes all persons
who worked on TNS projects between June 2002 and the present,
including individuals that TNS retained through 29 staffing
agencies. An amended complaint was filed in August 2007, naming
two additional class representatives, one of whom has since
settled directly with his employer. The plaintiffs' motion for
class certification was heard and denied in May 2012; however,
that decision was appealed, and the case was ultimately remanded
for reconsideration.

In September 2015, after a hearing in the remanded proceeding, the
trial court certified the class as to workers from the various
staffing companies at issue. The plaintiffs seek approximately $16
million for class damages and $5 million in attorneys' fees.
Quanta retained liability associated with this matter pursuant to
the terms of Quanta's sale of TNS in December 2012.

Additionally, in November 2007, TNS filed cross complaints for
indemnity against the staffing agencies, which employed many of
the individuals in question. In December 2012, the trial court
heard cross-motions for summary judgment filed by TNS and the
staffing agencies pertaining to TNS's demand for indemnity. The
court denied TNS's motion and granted the motions filed by the
staffing agencies. TNS appealed the court's ruling, and in April
2015, the California Appellate Court reversed the trial court's
decision, vacated its award of attorneys' fees, and instructed the
trial court to reconsider its earlier ruling on TNS's indemnity
claims. At this time, Quanta does not believe this matter will
have a material adverse effect on its consolidated financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.

Quanta Services, Inc. (Quanta) is a provider of specialty
contracting services, offering infrastructure solutions primarily
to the electric power and oil and gas industries in the United
States, Canada and Australia and select other international
markets.


R&G ESPANOLA: "Marantes" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------
Alfredo Montestno Marantes, individually; and other similarly
situated individuals v. R&G Espanola LLC d/b/a Piccola Cuccina and
Marco Civoli, Case No. 3974267 (Fla. 11th Ct., April 1, 2016),
seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

R&G Espanola LLC owns and operates a restaurant in Miami Dade,
Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


SCHOLASTIC BOOK: Faces "Zuidam" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Walter Van Zuidam, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated v. Scholastic Book Fairs, Inc., Case No. 6:16-cv-00575-
GKS-TBS (Fla. 11th Cir. Ct., April 5, 2016), is brought against
the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Scholastic Book Fairs, Inc. owns and operates a publishing,
education and media company known for publishing, selling, and
distributing books and educational materials for schools,
teachers, parents, and children.

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
      Telephone: (727) 822-1111
      Facsimile: (727) 898-2001
      E-mail: Pleadings@theFLlawfirm.com
              lechnerj@theFLlawfirm.com
              shelley@theFLlawfirm.com


ST. MORITZ SECURITY: "Robinson" Suit Seeks OT Wages Under FLSA
--------------------------------------------------------------
Dominick Robinson, on behalf of himself individually, and all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. St. Moritz Security
Services, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 4:16-cv-00917 (S.D. Tex.,
Houston Div., April 5, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
wages, equitable relief, compensatory and liquidated damages,
attorney's fees, taxable costs of court, and post-judgment
interest, under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA).

St. Moritz Security Services provides security services. The
Company offers services including security guards, loss
prevention, national accounts, special events, emergency, jewelry
escorts, federal contracting, technology, and executive protection
services. St. Moritz Security Services serves customers in the
United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Taft L. Foley II, Esq.
          THE FOLEY LAW FIRM
          3003 South Loop West, Suite 108
          Houston, Texas 77054
          Telephone: (832) 778 8182
          Facsimile: (832) 778 8353
          E-mail: Taft.Foley@thefoleylawfirm.com


SWEET PEAS DAYCARE: "Frazier" Suit Seeks Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------
Rhonda Renee Frazier, Plaintiff, v. Ashley Cross individually,
Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-00077 (E.D. Tenn., April 1, 2016),
seeks injunctive and declaratory relief, compensation due for work
required and an equal amount of liquidated damages, penalties and
interest, prejudgment interest and attorneys' fees and costs under
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Cross operates Sweet Peas Daycare in Bradley County, Tennessee,
where Frazier worked as director. Plaintiff claims to have
rendered an average of 45 hours a week and not compensated for
such additional overtime work in excess of 40 hours.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Donna J. Mikel, Esq.
      BURNETTE, DOBSON & PINCHAK
      711 Cherry Street
      Chattanooga, TN 37402
      Phone: (423) 266-2121
      Fax: (423) 266-3324
      Email: dmikel@bdplawfirm.com


SYSCO CORPORATION: Faces "Navarro" Class Suit in California
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been commenced against Defendant
Sysco Corporation, Sysco Los Angeles, Inc., Sysco Riverside, Inc.,
and Does 1-100.

The case is captioned Frank Navarro, on behalf of himself, all
others similarly situated, and on behalf of the general public v.
Sysco Corporation, Sysco Los Angeles, Inc., Sysco Riverside, Inc.,
and Does 1-100, Case No. BC616001 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 6,
2016).

The Defendants operate a multinational corporation involved in
marketing and distributing food products to restaurants,
healthcare and educational facilities, hotels and inns, and other
foodservice and hospitality businesses.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      William Turley, Esq.
      THE TURLEY LAW FIRM, APLC
      7428 Trade Street
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 234-2833
      Facsimile: (619) 234-4048
      E-mail: bturley@turleylawfirm.com


TEAM REAL ESTATE: Silver Crown Files Suit Over Shady Land Deal
--------------------------------------------------------------
Silver Crown Investments, LLC, Cosmo Estate Management, LLC, GBG
Development USA, LLC, International BC, LLC, M&A USA, LLC,
Investment Group AO1, LLC, JP & LO Investments, LLC, Gold Coast
Investments, LLC, Millage, LLC, Tomacla LLC, BA Investments USA,
LLC and CMH Group International, LLC, Plaintiffs, v. Team Real
Estate Management, LLC, Team Real Estate Development, LLC, Team
Real Estate Title Services, LLC, Atlanta R.E. Investments Group
LLC, Valeria Seminara, Christian Finkelberg, Lidia Salerno, Andres
Roberto Finkelberg, Ruben Santurian, Diego Besga and Alex
Nahabetian, individually and as corporate directors of Team Real
Estate Management, LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-21179-JEM
(S.D. Fla., April 1, 2016), seeks recovery of losses, reasonable
expenses including attorney's fees and costs resulting from fraud,
unjust enrichment, breach of contract and fiduciary duties.

Defendants solicit investments from the Plaintiffs for a
guaranteed return on their investment of 12% but withheld
disclosing its books of account. Defendants misrepresented the
purchase price of an agreed property resulting in substantial
monetary losses.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alexander Stephen Orlofsky, Esq.
      THE ORLOFSKY LAW FIRM, P.L.
      767 Arthur Godfrey Road
      Miami Beach, FL 33140
      Tel: (305) 538-2344
      Fax: (305) 907-5248
      Email: alex@orlofskylawfirm.com


TSA REWINDS: "Pineda" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
--------------------------------------------------
Jorge Pineda, and other similarly-situated individuals, Plaintiff,
v. TSA Rewinds Florida Inc. d/b/a Aircraft Armature, Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-21167-KMM (S.D. Fla., Miami Division,
April 1, 2016), seeks actual damages in the amount of unpaid
overtime compensation, double/liquidated damages and attorney's
fees and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Aircraft Armature specializes in rewinding armatures, stators and
fields for aircraft electric motors where Pineda worked as a
repairman. He claims to have commenced work at 6:30 but was only
allowed to clock in at 7:30, thus incurring substantial unpaid
overtime.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Zandro E. Palma, Esq.
      ZANDRO E. PALMA, P.A.
      9100 S. Dadeland Blvd., Suite 1500
      Miami, FL 33156
      Telephone: (305) 446-1500
      Facsimile: (305) 446-1502
      Email: zep@thepalmalawgroup.com


VASCO DATA: "Rossbach" Class Action Pending in N.D. Ill.
--------------------------------------------------------
VASCO Data Security International, Inc. said in its Form 10-K
Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 29, 2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015,
that the Company continues to defend a class action lawsuit by
Linda J. Rossbach.

On July 28, 2015 a putative class action complaint was filed in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
Illinois, captioned Linda J. Rossbach v. Vasco Data Security
International, Inc., et al., case number 1:15-cv-06605, naming
VASCO and certain of its current executive officers as defendants
and alleging violations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
as amended. The suit was purportedly filed on behalf of a putative
class of investors who purchased VASCO securities between February
18, 2014 and July 21, 2015, and seeks to recover damages allegedly
caused by the defendants' alleged violations of the federal
securities laws and to pursue remedies under Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder. The complaint seeks certification as a
class action and unspecified compensatory damages plus interest
and attorneys' fees.

Pursuant to a September 1, 2015 scheduling order entered by the
court, the lead plaintiff, once appointed, will have sixty days to
file an amended complaint or notify the defendants that the lead
plaintiff intends to rely on the current complaint. The defendants
will then have sixty days to answer or otherwise respond to the
operative complaint.

Although the ultimate outcome of litigation cannot be predicted
with certainty, the Company believes that this lawsuit is without
merit and intends to defend against the action vigorously.

VASCO is an IT security company that designs, develops and markets
security and business enablement solutions that secure and manage
access to digital assets, and protect and facilitate transactions
online, via mobile devices, and in-person. VASCO is a world leader
in providing two-factor authentication and electronic signature
solutions to financial institutions. VASCO solutions secure access
to data, assets, and applications for global enterprises; provide
tools for application developers to easily integrate security
functions into their web-based and mobile applications; and
facilitate digital transactions involving the signing, sending and
managing of documents. Our core technology, two-factor
authentication (also known as 2FA) strengthens the process of
verifying the identity of users by means of a combination of two
different components. These components may consist of something
that the user knows, such as a username, and another item that the
user possesses, such as a VASCO hardware or software authenticator
that generates a one-time password (OTP). Two-factor
authentication is a type of multi-factor authentication.


VEOLIA WATER: "Siratsamy" Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Vannala Siratsamy, Plaintiff, v. Veolia Water North America
Operating Services, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 4:16-cv-0872 (S.D.
Tex., Houston Division, April 1, 2016), seeks unpaid overtime
wages with an equal amount of liquidated damages, attorney's fees
and costs incurred and such further relief under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Defendant performs services for chemical, industrial and oil and
gas-related companies globally where Siratsamy worked maintaining
and servicing machinery that separates water, oil and solids at
the work site of a Veolia customer. He claims not to have been
paid overtime.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Josef F. Buenker, Esq.
      Vijay A. Pattisapu, Esq.
      2030 North Loop West, Suite 120
      Houston, TX 77018
      Tel: 713-868-3388
      Fax: 713-683-9940
      Email: jbuenker@buenkerlaw.com
             vijay@buenkerlaw.com


WALTER INVESTMENT: "Beck" Class Action in Discovery
---------------------------------------------------
Walter Investment Management Corp. said in its Form 10-K Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29,
2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that the
parties in the "Beck" class action lawsuit are currently engaged
in discovery.

On March 7, 2014, a putative shareholder class action complaint
was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida against the Company, Mark O'Brien, Charles
Cauthen, Denmar Dixon, Marc Helm and Robert Yeary captioned Beck
v. Walter Investment Management Corp., et al., No. 1:14-cv-20880
(S.D. Fla.).

On July 7, 2014, an amended class action complaint was filed. The
amended complaint named as defendants the Company, Mark O'Brien,
Charles Cauthen, Denmar Dixon, Keith Anderson, Brian Corey and
Mark Helm, and is captioned Thorpe, et al. v. Walter Investment
Management Corp., et al. No. 1:14-cv-20880-UU. The amended
complaint asserted federal securities law claims against the
Company and the individual defendants under Section 10(b) of the
Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. Additional
claims are asserted against the individual defendants under
Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act.

On December 23, 2014, the court granted the defendants' motions to
dismiss and dismissed the amended complaint without prejudice.

On January 6, 2015, plaintiffs filed a second amended complaint.
The second amended complaint asserted the same legal claims and
alleged that between May 9, 2012 and August 11, 2014 the Company
and the individual defendants made material misstatements or
omissions relating to the Company's internal controls over
financial reporting, the processes and procedures for compliance
with applicable regulatory and legal requirements by Ditech
Financial, the liabilities associated with the Company's
acquisition of RMS, and RMS's internal controls. The complaint
sought class certification and an unspecified amount of damages on
behalf of all persons who purchased the Company's securities
between May 9, 2012 and August 11, 2014.

On January 23, 2015, all defendants moved to dismiss the second
amended complaint. On June 30, 2015, the court issued a decision
that granted the motions to dismiss in part and denied the motions
in part. Among other things, the court dismissed the claims
against Messrs. O'Brien, Cauthen, Dixon and Helm and the claims
relating to statements about the Company's acquisition of RMS.

On July 10, 2015, plaintiffs filed a third amended complaint that,
among other things, added certain allegations concerning the
Company's settlement with the FTC and CFPB. On July 24, 2015, the
Company and Messrs. Anderson and Corey filed an answer to the
third amended complaint, which denied the substantive allegations
and asserted various defenses.

On August 30, 2015, Plaintiffs filed a motion for class
certification and briefing on that motion was completed on
December 11, 2015. The parties are currently engaged in discovery.

The Company cannot provide any assurance as to the outcome of the
putative shareholder class action or that such an outcome will not
have a material adverse effect on its reputation, business,
prospects, results of operations, liquidity or financial
condition.

The Company is a diversified mortgage banking firm focused
primarily on servicing and originating residential loans,
including reverse loans.


WALTER INVESTMENT: May 12 Final Settlement Approval Hearing
-----------------------------------------------------------
Walter Investment Management Corp. said in its Form 10-K Report
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29,
2016, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that a hearing
for final approval has been scheduled for May 12, 2016, of the
settlement in the case, Circeo-Loudon v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC
et al.

Ditech Financial is subject to several putative class action
lawsuits related to lender-placed insurance. These actions allege
that Ditech Financial and its affiliates improperly received
benefits from lender-placed insurance providers in the form of
commissions for work not performed, services provided at a reduced
cost, and expense reimbursements that did not reflect the actual
cost of the services rendered. Plaintiffs in these suits assert
various theories of recovery and seek remedies including
compensatory, actual, punitive, statutory and treble damages,
return of unjust benefits, and injunctive relief.

One such matter is Circeo-Loudon v. Green Tree Servicing, LLC et
al. filed in the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Florida on April 17, 2014 and amended on October 16,
2014. A settlement agreement was reached between the parties in
the Circeo-Loudon matter on September 11, 2015. This settlement
received preliminary approval by the court on December 8, 2015 and
a hearing for final approval has been scheduled for May 12, 2016.

Pursuant to the settlement agreement, all of the defendants
collectively, including Ditech Financial, are required to pay
damages to class members who timely file a claim, administrative
costs to effectuate the settlement and attorneys' fees and costs.
The Company believes it has accrued the full amount expected to be
paid under the settlement agreement in its consolidated financial
statements as of December 31, 2015. The settlement agreement also
provides that Ditech Financial and its subsidiary, Green Tree
Insurance Agency, Inc., and their affiliates will be released from
certain claims and may no longer receive commissions on the
placement of certain lender-placed insurance for a period of five
years commencing 120 days from the effective date of the
settlement.

The Company expects that this settlement, if approved by the
court, will lead to the ultimate resolution of the other putative
class action lawsuits related to lender-placed insurance to which
Ditech Financial is currently subject, although the proposed
settlement does not apply to potential claims by class members who
opt out of the proposed settlement.

The Company is a diversified mortgage banking firm focused
primarily on servicing and originating residential loans,
including reverse loans.


WORLD VARIETY: "Mondragon" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime
----------------------------------------------------------------
Pastor Mondragon, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. World Variety Produce, Inc. and Does 1 through 100,
inclusive, Case No. BC615626 (Cal. Super. Ct., April 1, 2016), is
brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages
in violation of the California Labor Code.

World Variety Produce, Inc. offers organic produce, soy items, and
specialty food items to retailers across the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Bruce Kokozian, Esq.
      KOKOZIAN LAW FIRM, APC
      9440 South Santa Monica Boulevard, Suite 510
      Beverly Hills, CA 90210
      Telephone: (323) 857-5900


ZIONS BANCORPORATION: "Reyes" Class Action Pending in E.D. Pa.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Zions Bancorporation said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 29, 2016, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2015, that as of December 31, 2015,
the Company is subject to a class action case, Reyes v. Zions
First National Bank, et al., which was brought in the United
States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in
early 2010.

"This case relates to our banking relationships with customers
that allegedly engaged in wrongful telemarketing practices," the
Company said.  The plaintiff is seeking a trebled monetary award
under the federal RICO Act.

"In the third quarter of 2013, the District Court denied the
plaintiff's motion for class certification in the Reyes case. The
plaintiff appealed the District Court decision to the Third
Circuit Court of Appeals.

In the third quarter of 2015, the Third Circuit vacated the
District Court's decision denying class certification and remanded
the matter to the District Court with instructions to reconsider
the class certification determination in light of particular
standards articulated by the Third Circuit in its opinion.

Following the Third Circuit's decision, the parties participated
in mediation sessions in the fourth quarter of 2015 and the first
quarter of 2016.

"We do not know whether these discussions will result in a
settlement."

Zions Bancorporation owns and operates a commercial bank with a
total of 450 domestic branches at year-end 2015.


                            *********

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  * * *