CAR_Public/161028.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

             Friday, October 28, 2016, Vol. 18, No. 216




                            Headlines

1 FRONT STREET: "Omar" Suit in N.Y. Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
1-800CONTACTS: Faces Antitrust Class Action Over Search Ads
A10 NETWORKS: January 13 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
A & A PEREZ: Faces "Sanchez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
A&E REAL ESTATE: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Rental Fees

A&S METAL: Sued in Cal. Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
ABC PHONES: "Nave" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
ACADEMY OF ART UNIVERSITY: Faces "Jones" Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
AHDS BAGEL: Faces "Agapito" Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
AKORN INC: Faces NECA-IBEW Suit Over Desonide-Price Fixing

ALERE INC: Faces ARcare Suit in District of Massachusetts
ALEX HANNA: Faces "Salcedo" Suit in Southern Dist. of Florida
ALLSAINTS USA: "Varoz" Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to S.D. Cal.
APOLLO MANAGEMENT: "Krokos" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
AUTOSPORT USA: "Rose" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Under FLSA

BEAUMONT PRODUCTS: Faces "Ciancio" Suit in S. Dist. of New York
BED BATH: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Thomas" Suit Claims
BLUE C CALIFORNIA: Faces "Twitchell" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
BUCKHEAD TOWING: "Curtis" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
CALIFORNIA SUBSHINE: Fails to Give Meal/Rest Periods, Miller Says

CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Faces Pressman Suit in S.D. of Florida
CIENEGA MEDICAL: Doesn't Properly Pay Employees, Action Claims
CITIMORTGAGE INC: Class Action Tossed for Lack of Standing
COLONY CAPITAL: Faruqi & Faruqi Files Securities Class Action
DEVON ENERGY: Oklahoma Women Drop Fracking Class Action

DOWNTOWN LLC: "G-Bowley" Suit Seeks to Recover Wages for Servers
ENSIGN SERVICES: Faces "Perez" Suit Central Dist. of California
ETHOS GALLERY: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
FEDCHOICE: Discovery Proceedings to Begin in Class Action
FEDERAL-MOGUL: Faces "Mecardo" Suit Over Share Sale to Icahn

FINISH LINE: Faces "Marquez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
FLINT, MI: Families File Class Action Over Lead-Tainted Water
FRESH & READY: Faces "Martinez" Suit in California Super. Ct.
GATESTONE & CO.: Faces "Fowles" Suit in E.D. of New York
GENPACT SERVICES: Faces "Pisk" Suit in Eastern Dist. of New York

GOLDCORP INC: Faces "White" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l. Reports
HERBAL GROUPS: Faces Class Action Over Unsolicited Calls
IMPETUS ENTERPRISE: Faces "McCurley" Suit in S.D. of California
INTERNATIONAL PAPER: Doesn't Properly Pay Employees, Suit Claims
INVESTMENTS LIMITED: "Gonzalez" Suit Seeks to Recoup Unpaid Wages

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: "Estrada" Suit Moved to Dist. of New Jersey
LANDRY'S RESTAURANTS: "Miller" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
LENDMARK FINANCIAL: "Mathis" Suit Removed to E.D. N. Car.
LOCUMS INC: Faces Comprehensive Health Suit in Florida
LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: "Kunicki" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2743

LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: "Williams" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2743
MARKET STREET: Faces "Gouge" Suit in Maryland Circuit Court
MASSAGE ENVY: Faces "Villafuerte" Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
MEDPORT INC: Faces "Richardson" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
MERIBEAR PRODUCTIONS: Sued in Cal. Over Failure to Pay Overtime

MYLAN NV: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over EpiPen Products
MYLAN PHARMA: Seeks Removal of Epipen Class Action to Fed. Court
NASSAU, NY: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Chodkowski" Suit Says
NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Sued in Georgia Over Deed to Secure Debt
PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNT: Faces "Nazario" Suit in M.D. Fla.

QL WHOLESOME: Faces "Rodriguez" Suit in S.D. of New York
ROBERT BINNS: Faces "McDonough" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
ROBERT HALF: Faces "Black" Suit in Northern Dist. of California
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS: Faces Class Action Over Galaxy Note 7
SANMEDICA INTERNATIONAL: Faces "Martin" Suit in C.D. Cal.

SERVICE AMERICA: Faces "Mandel" Class Suit in Broward Cty., Fla.
SHORENSTEIN HAYS-NEDERLANDED: Faces "Smith" Suit in Calif. Ct.
SONY CORP: Dec. 7 PS3 Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set
SOUTHERN RESPONSE: Canterbury Homeowners Reapply for Class Action
SOUTHWEST CREDIT: Faces "Roth" Suit in Eastern Dist. of New York

SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports
STANDARD INNOVATION: Faces We-Vibe Privacy Class Action
STEEL DYNAMICS: Settles Buyers' Class Action for $4.6 Million
TENNESSEE: 108 Muslim Prisoners Seek to Join Consolidated Suit
THERANOS INC: Sued in Ariz. Over Unreliable Laboratory Results

TIME WARNER: High Court Ruling Limits Consumers' Ability to Sue
TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Action Claims
TROPICAL SMOOTHIE: Faces "Kiker" Suit in N.D. of Georgia
TWITTER INC: Faces Securities Class Action in California
UNITED PARCEL: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Work Policies

VIKING CLIENT: Faces "Wagstaff" Suit in District of Maine
VIRTRA SYSTEMS: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Thorpe" Suit Says
WAGENER EQUITIES: Paldo Sign Files Appeal in U.S. Supreme Court
WELLS FARGO: Faces "Blanchard" Suit in District of New Jersey
WELLS FARGO: "Mirza" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages



                         Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Opischuk, Bryan, et al. Dropped in "Umphrey"
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 6th Court of App. Dismisses "Little" Appeal
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Denies La. Man's Bid to Amend PI Suit
ASBESTOS UPDATE: PI Suits vs. CNA Barred by WR Grace Plan
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Narrows Claims in Libby Victims vs. MCC

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dana's Bid to Dismiss "Murray" Granted
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Burnham Wins Summary Judgment Bid in "Holzworth"
ASBESTOS UPDATE: "Henry" Remanded to Louisiana State Court
ASBESTOS UPDATE: 2 Cos. Dropped as Defendants in "Floyd"
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Bid to Strike Witness in "Bell" Denied

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Widow Appeals For Help from Husband's Colleagues
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found at Melbourne Pub Demolition Site
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Victims Need Protection from Own Attys
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Dumps Scattered in Western Sydney
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rise in Terminal Illness Due to Asbestos

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Salem Company Fined for Asbestos Violation
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mechanic Blames Illness on Asbestos Exposure
ASBESTOS UPDATE: AG Garners Guilty Pleas Over Asbestos Violations
ASBESTOS UPDATE: SD 22 Fined $75K for Failed Asbestos Management
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Awards $4.6-Mil. in Asbestos Case

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Teaticket Asbestos Cleanup Now Close to $900K
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Work Kills Two or More New Zealanders Every Day
ASBESTOS UPDATE: PAC Spent Half Million vs. Appellate Candidates
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found at Portland Blast Site
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Clean-Up Firm Fined for Exposing Employees

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cancer Patient Pleads for Exposure Funding
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found in Virginia Beach Apt. Complex
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Bare Metal Defense Ruling Muddles Applicability


                            *********


1 FRONT STREET: "Omar" Suit in N.Y. Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Yaser Omar, Emmanuel Garcia, and Charles Garcia, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. 1 Front Street
Grimaldi, Inc. d/b/a Grimaldi's Pizzeria, Sixth Avenue Grimaldi,
Inc. d/b/a Grimaldi's Pizzeria, Grimaldi's Luna Park Inc. d/b/a
Grimalidi's Pizzeria, Frank Ciolli, and John Does #1-45, Jointly
and Severally, Case No. 1:16-cv-05824 (E.D.N.Y., October 18,
2016), seeks to recover unpaid minimum wage and overtime premium
pay owed to them pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate Grimaldi's Pizzeria restaurant at
673 City Island Avenue, Bronx, NY 10464.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Brent E. Pelton, Esq.
      Taylor B. Graham, Esq.
      Alison L. Mangiatordi, Esq.
      PELTON GRAHAM LLC
      111 Broadway, Suite 1503
      New York, NY 10006
      Telephone: (212) 385-9700
      Facsimile: (212) 385-0800
      E-mail: pelton@peltongranham.com
              graham@peltongranham.com
              mangiatordi@peltongranham.com


1-800CONTACTS: Faces Antitrust Class Action Over Search Ads
-----------------------------------------------------------
Wendy Davis, writing for MediaPost, reports that the Federal Trade
Commission recently alleged that contact lens retailer 1-
800Contacts violated antitrust laws and engaged in an unfair
business practice by preventing rivals from using its trademarks
in search ads.

Now the company is also facing two class-action complaints by
consumers who say they overpaid for contact lenses due to
1-800Contacts' alleged anti-competitive practices.

The retailer allegedly engaged in an "overarching scheme to
restrain competition in the direct-to-consumer and online markets
for contact lenses," California residents J Thompson and
William Duncanson say in a complaint filed in U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of California.  A separate class-action
complaint, filed in September, is pending in the Northern District
of California.

The lawsuits by consumers draw heavily on the FTC's allegations,
unveiled in August.  The FTC contends that between 2004 and 2013,
1-800Contacts sued or threatened to sue 15 competitors for
allegedly purchasing the term 1-800Contacts as a trigger for
pay-per-click search ads.  1-800Contacts argued in those matters
that this use of its name amounted to trademark infringement.
Only Lens.com fought the case, which ended in a ruling largely in
Lens.com's favor.

The other 14 retailers agreed to restrict their use of the term 1-
800Contacts in search ads, according to the FTC.  Those agreements
also require the other retailers to use "negative" keywords --
which direct search engines not to display ads in response to
queries with the term 1-800Contacts, according to the FTC.  The
agency alleged that the agreements distorted prices in search-ad
auctions, and also resulted in higher prices for some consumers.

Messrs. Duncanson and Thompson say in their complaint that they
"paid supracompetitive prices" for contacts.

"Because of the unlawful agreements, competitors could not
advertise against 1-800 Contacts, and therefore customers did not
receive information concerning competitors' products and pricing,"
they assert.  "Because of these agreements, 1-800 Contacts
continued to give the impression that it was a low-cost provider
of contact lenses, shielding the public from information that
would have driven the price of contact lenses down."

Messrs. Duncanson and Thompson also are suing some of 1-
800Contacts' competitors, including Vision Direct, which allegedly
entered into an agreement with 1-800Contacts.

"In a competitive marketplace, VisionDirect would have continued
to compete, in both advertising and on price," the complaint
alleges. "It could have covered its prices and increased its
market share, taking from 1-800 Contacts."

1-800Contacts' general counsel Cindy Williams says the class
action suits "have no merit whatsoever."

Ms. Williams adds that the company "strongly disagrees" with
claims that the trademark settlement agreements are
anticompetitive.  "We reject any assertion that competitors should
be allowed to violate our trademark rights through paid search,
and we look forward to the opportunity in court to present our
position fully," Ms. Williams says in a statement emailed to
MediaPost.

Courts haven't definitively resolved questions surrounding the use
of trademarks in search ads.  Google and Yahoo have prevailed in
several lawsuits alleging that they wrongly allowed a trademarked
term to trigger pay-per-click ads, as have several advertisers.
But judges have let some lawsuits between advertisers proceed to
jury trials.


A10 NETWORKS: January 13 Settlement Fairness Hearing Set
--------------------------------------------------------
TO: ALL PERSONS OR ENTITIES ("PERSONS") THAT PURCHASED OR
OTHERWISE ACQUIRED A10 NETWORKS, INC. ("A10" OR THE "COMPANY")
COMMON STOCK PURSUANT AND/OR TRACEABLE TO THE REGISTRATION
STATEMENT AND PROSPECTUS FOR THE COMPANY'S MARCH 21, 2014 INITIAL
PUBLIC OFFERING (THE "CLASS")

THIS NOTICE WAS AUTHORIZED BY THE COURT.  IT IS NOT A LAWYER
SOLICITATION.  PLEASE READ THIS NOTICE CAREFULLY AND IN ITS
ENTIRETY.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that a hearing will be held on
January 13, 2017, at 9:00 a.m., before the Honorable Peter H.
Kirwan at the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara,
191 North First Street, San Jose, CA 95113, to determine whether:
(1) the proposed Settlement as set forth in the Stipulation of
Settlement dated June 30, 2016 ("Stipulation") of the above-
captioned action ("Litigation") for $9,837,500 in cash should be
approved by the Court as fair, reasonable, and adequate; (2) the
Plan of Allocation should be approved by the Court as fair,
reasonable, and adequate; (3) to award Plaintiffs' Counsel
attorneys' fees and expenses out of the Settlement Fund (as
defined in the Notice of Proposed Settlement of Class Action
("Notice"), which is discussed below); and (4) to pay Plaintiffs
for their time and expenses they incurred in representing the
Class in this Litigation out of the Settlement Fund.

This Litigation is a securities class action brought on behalf of
those Persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the common stock
of A10 pursuant and/or traceable to the Registration Statement and
Prospectus ("Registration Statement") issued in connection with
A10's March 21, 2014 initial public offering ("IPO"), against A10
and certain of its executives and the Underwriters of the IPO for
allegedly misstating and omitting material facts from the
Registration Statement filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission ("SEC") in connection with the IPO.  Defendants deny
all of Plaintiffs' allegations.

IF YOU PURCHASED OR OTHERWISE ACQUIRED A10 COMMON STOCK PURSUANT
AND/OR TRACEABLE TO THE REGISTRATION STATEMENT FILED WITH THE SEC
IN CONNECTION WITH THE COMPANY'S MARCH 21, 2014 IPO, YOUR RIGHTS
MAY BE AFFECTED BY THE SETTLEMENT OF THIS LITIGATION.

To share in the distribution of the Net Settlement Fund, you must
establish your rights by submitting a Proof of Claim and Release
("Proof of Claim") by mail (postmarked no later than February 10,
2017) or submitted electronically no later than February 10, 2017.
Your failure to submit your Proof of Claim by February 10, 2017,
will subject your claim to possible rejection and may preclude you
from receiving any of the recovery in connection with the
Settlement of this Litigation.  If you are a Member of the Class
and do not request exclusion, you will be bound by the Settlement
and any judgment and release entered in the Litigation, including,
but not limited to, the Judgment, whether or not you submit a
Proof of Claim.  Lead Counsel represent you and other Members of
the Class.  If you want to be represented by your own lawyer, you
may hire one at your own expense.

If you have not received a copy of the Notice, which more
completely describes the Settlement and your rights thereunder
(including your right to object to the Settlement or exclude
yourself from the Class), and a Proof of Claim form, you may
obtain these documents, as well as a copy of the Stipulation
(which, among other things, contains definitions for the defined
terms used in this Summary Notice) and other Settlement documents,
online at www.A10securitiessettlement.com, or by writing to:

A10 Securities Litigation
Claims Administrator
c/o A.B. Data, Ltd.
P.O. Box 173012
Milwaukee, WI  53217
Phone:  1-877-241-7503
info@A10securitiessettlement.com

Inquiries may also be made to a representative of Lead Counsel:

ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN
     & DOWD LLP
Shareholder Relations
Rick Nelson
655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101
Phone: 1-800-449-4900
LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
Settlement Counsel
Nicole M. Zeiss
140 Broadway
New York, NY 10005
Phone: 1-888-219-6877
settlementquestions@labaton.com

Inquiries should NOT be directed to Defendants, the Court, or the
Clerk of the Court.

IF YOU DESIRE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE CLASS, YOU MUST SUBMIT A
REQUEST FOR EXCLUSION SUCH THAT IT IS POSTMARKED NO LATER THAN
DECEMBER 14, 2016, IN THE MANNER AND FORM EXPLAINED IN THE NOTICE.
ALL MEMBERS OF THE CLASS WHO HAVE NOT REQUESTED EXCLUSION FROM THE
CLASS WILL BE BOUND BY THE SETTLEMENT ENTERED IN THE LITIGATION
EVEN IF THEY DO NOT FILE A TIMELY PROOF OF CLAIM.

IF YOU ARE A CLASS MEMBER, YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO OBJECT TO THE
SETTLEMENT, THE PLAN OF ALLOCATION, THE REQUEST BY PLAINTIFFS'
COUNSEL FOR AN AWARD OF ATTORNEYS' FEES AND EXPENSES, AND/OR THE
PAYMENT TO PLAINTIFFS FOR THEIR TIME AND EXPENSES.  ANY OBJECTIONS
MUST BE FILED WITH THE COURT AND SENT TO LEAD COUNSEL POSTMARKED
BY DECEMBER 14, 2016, IN THE MANNER AND FORM EXPLAINED IN THE
NOTICE.

DATED:  OCTOBER 21, 2016
BY ORDER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF
CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
HONORABLE PETER H. KIRWAN


A & A PEREZ: Faces "Sanchez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------
Oscar Sanchez, and other similarly situated individuals v. A & A
Perez Trucking, Inc., Juan A. Perez, and Waste Management Inc. of
Florida, Case No. 9:16-cv-81740-KAM (S.D. Fla., October 17, 2016),
is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime
wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants are engaged in the business of transporting
garbage.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      R. Martin Saenz, Esq. Fla.
      SAENZ & ANDERSON, PLLC
      20900 N.E. 30th Avenue, Ste. 800
      Aventura, FL 33180
      Telephone: (305) 503-5131
      Facsimile: (888) 270-5549
      E-mail: msaenz@saenzanderson.com


A&E REAL ESTATE: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Rental Fees
-------------------------------------------------------------
John Stafford, Timothy Hickernell, Jeffrey Natt, Daniel Feyka,
Julian Jones, Donald g. Hall, Thomas Hunter, Seun Jae Oh, Jane
Kim, Denise Starakiewicz, Wojtek Starakiewicz, Ryan Korell, Eman
Asiri, Mohammad A. Haque, Ryan M. Haley, Marisol Martinez,
Winfield Cooper, Matthew Sullivan, Elise Czajkowski, John
Petralito, Roy A Bas Sam, Molly Croog, Sam T. Tanabe, Jason
Bailey, Alexander Richards, Hajera Dehqanzada, Ali Abidi, Deric
Mizokami, John Rivera, Al Yin Realuyo, F Abienne Ferreira, K.M.O.
Vera, Kristin Myers, Jesse Neil, Craig Nadeau, Annmarie Colucci,
Roshen Carman, Alvin Fernandez, Margaret Pless, Jose Calvillo,
Emmanuella Paul, Jesus Rios, Nina Chidichimo, Natalie Hirsh, Craig
Connole, Alexandria Kircher, Earl Barrett-Hollaway, Santa Pena,
Donna Dempsey, Serena Forbes, Sophia Greer, Ruxandra Stancu, Leah
O'reilly Mckune, Rasuel Mckune, David Warth, Mohammad Uddin, Eli
James, Richard Duro, Nicholas Na Viglia, Monica Thorne, Vincent
Wallgren, Eileen Wallgren, Jeannine Frumess, Evan Jacobs, William
Rivers, Grace Sierra Rivers, Daniel Reyes, and Oscar Valencia, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. A&E Real
Estate Holdings, LLC, A&E Real Estate Management, LLC, John
Arrillaga, Jr., and Douglas Eisenberg, Case No. 655500/2016 (N.Y.
Sup. Ct., October 18, 2016), arises out of the Defendants'
practice of collecting rents in the amounts that are not permitted
under the law based on misrepresentations as to an apartments'
legal regulated rent.

The Defendants own and operate of over 100 apartment buildings in
the City of New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Lucas A. Ferrara, Esq.
      Jarred L. Kassenoff, Esq.
      Jeffrey M. Norton
      Roger A. Sachar Jr., Esq.
      NEWMAN FERRARA LLP
      1250 Broadway, 27 Floor
      New York, NY 10001
      Telephone: (212) 619-5400
      E-mail: lferrara@nfllp.com
              jkassenoff@nfllp.com
              jnorton@nfllp.com
              rsachar@nfllp.com


A&S METAL: Sued in Cal. Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Guadalupe Acosta, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. A&S Metal Recycling, Inc., A&S Environmental Recovery,
Inc., and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. BC637654 (Cal.
Super. Ct., October 19, 2016), is brought against the Defendants
for failure to pay minimum and overtime wages in violation of the
California Labor Code.

The Defendants own and operate a recycling center 2261 E 15th St,
Los Angeles, CA 90021.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Heather Davis, Esq.
      Amir Na Yebdadash, Esq.
      Nicole R. Clancy, Esq.
      PROTECTION LAW GROUP, LLP
      136 Main Street, Suite A
      El Segundo, CA 90245
      Telephone: (424) 290-3095
      Facsimile: (866) 264-7880
      E-mail: heather@protectionlawgroup.com
              amir@protectionlawgroup.com

ABC PHONES: "Nave" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lauren Nave and Lucas Harrison, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. ABC Phones of North Carolina, Inc.
d/b/a A Wireless, Case No. CACE-16-019224 (Fla. Cir. Ct., October
19, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

ABC Phones of North Carolina, Inc. is a Verizon Wireless Retailer
selling cell phones and smart phones and Verizon service plans.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
      Susan H. Stern, 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
              xicm@shavitzlm.com


ACADEMY OF ART UNIVERSITY: Faces "Jones" Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Academy of Art
University Foundation. The case is captioned JONES, ANTHONY
INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, the
PLAINTIFF, v. DOES 1-10, INCLUSIVE and ACADEMY OF ART UNIVERSITY
FOUNDATION, the Defendants, Case No. CGC 16 554902 (Cal. Super.
Ct., Oct 18, 2016).

The Academy of Art Foundation is an innovative and unique school
of high artistic training.


AHDS BAGEL: Faces "Agapito" Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AHDS Bagel LLC. The
case is captioned Adolfo Patricio Agapito and Jose Francisco
Requelme Pliego, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, the Plaintiffs, v. AHDS Bagel LLC, doing business as
Pick A Bagel; 1101 Bagel Corp., doing business as Pick A Bagel;
Ariey Nussbaum; Avi Sharabani; and Haim Wysoki, the Defendants,
Case No. 1:16-cv-08170 (S.D.N.Y., Oct. 19, 2016).

AHDS Bagel is a retail bakery located in New York, New York.

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


AKORN INC: Faces NECA-IBEW Suit Over Desonide-Price Fixing
----------------------------------------------------------
NECA-IBEW Welfare Trust Fund, individually and on behalf of a
class of all those similarly situated v. Akorn, Inc., Hi-Tech
Pharmacal Co., Inc., Fougera Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Sandoz, Inc.,
Taro Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., Taro Pharmaceuticals USA,
Inc., Wockhardt Ltd. and Morton Grove Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Case
No. 1:16-cv-08109 (S.D.N.Y., October 17, 2016), arises from the
Defendants' and others' alleged unlawful combination, agreement
and conspiracy to raise and fix the prices of the primary
formulations of generic Desonide.

Desonide is a prescribed topical corticosteroid that health care
providers use to treat a variety of skin conditions, such as
eczema and dermatitis.

The Defendants operate a pharmaceutical company engaged in the
development, manufacture and marketing of multisource and branded
pharmaceuticals.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
      ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
      58 South Service Road, Suite 200
      Melville, NY 11747
      Telephone: (631) 367-7100
      Facsimile: (631) 367-1173
      E-mail: SRudman@rgrlaw.com

         - and -

      David W. Mitchell, Esq.
      Brian O. O'Mara, Esq.
      Alexandra S. Bernay
      Arthur L. Shingler III, Esq.
      Carmen A. Medici, Esq.
      ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
      655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
      San Diego, CA  92101
      Telephone: (619) 231-1058
      Facsimile: (619) 231-7423
      E-mail: davidm@rgrlaw.com
              bomara@rgrlaw.com
              xanb@rgrlaw.com
              ashingler@rgrlaw.com

         - and -

      Paul J. Geller, Esq.
      Mark J. Dearman, Esq.
      ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
      120 East Palmetto Park Road, Suite 500
      Boca Raton, FL  33432
      Telephone: (561) 750-3000
      Facsimile: (561) 750-3364
      E-mail: PGeller@rgrlaw.com
              dearman@rgrlaw.com

         - and -

      Damien J. Marshall, Esq.
      Duane L. Loft, Esq.
      BOIES, SCHILLER & FLEXNER LLP
      575 Lexington Avenue, 7th Floor
      New York, NY  10022
      Telephone: (212) 446-2300
      Facsimile: (212) 446-2350
      E-mail: dmarshall@bsfllp.com
              dloft@bsfllp.com

         - and -

      Patrick J. O'Hara, Esq.
      CAVANAGH & O'HARA
      2319 West Jefferson Street
      Springfield, IL  62702
      Telephone: (217) 544-1771
      Facsimile: (217) 544-9894


ALERE INC: Faces ARcare Suit in District of Massachusetts
---------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Alere, Inc. The case is styled
ARcare, Inc., an Arkansas Corporation, on behalf of itself and all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Alere, Inc. and Alere
Home Monitoring, Inc., the Defendants, Case No. 1:16-cv-12093 (D.
Mass., Oct. 19, 2016).

Alere is a global diagnostic device and service provider. The
company was founded in 2001 and is headquartered in Waltham,
Massachusetts.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alan L. Cantor, Esq.
          SWARTZ & SWARTZ
          Ten Marshall Street
          Boston, MA 02108
          Telephone: (617) 742 1900
          Facsimile: (617) 367 7193
          E-mail: acantor@swartzlaw.com


ALEX HANNA: Faces "Salcedo" Suit in Southern Dist. of Florida
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Law Offices of
Alex Hanna, P.A. The case is captioned John Salcedo, Individually
and on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Alex
Hanna, an individual and The Law Offices of Alex Hanna, P.A., a
Florida Professional Association, the Defendants, Case No. 0:16-
cv-62480-DPG (S.D. Fla., Oct. 20, 2016). The case is assigned to
Hon. Judge Darrin P. Gayles.

The Law Offices of Alex Hanna has criminal defense and accident
recovery lawyers.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott David Owens, Esq.
          SCOTT D. OWENS, P.A.
          3800 S. Ocean Drive, Suite 235
          Hollywood, FL 33019
          Telephone: (954) 589 0588
          Facsimile: (954) 337 0666
          E-mail: scott@scottdowens.com

               - and -

          Seth Michael Lehrman, Esq.
          FARMER, JAFFE, WEISSING,
          EDWARDS, FISTOS & LEHRMAN, P.L.
          425 N. Andrews Ave., Suite 2
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 524 2820
          Facsimile: (954) 524 2822
          E-mail: seth@pathtojustice.com


ALLSAINTS USA: "Varoz" Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to S.D. Cal.
--------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Miranda Varoz, on behalf of
herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
AllSaints USA Limited, doing business as AllSaints Spitalfields
USA Retail LTD, a foreign business corporation, and Does 1-50,
inclusive, the Defendant, Case No., 37-02016-00032584-CU-CTL, was
removed from the San Diego Superior Court, County of San Diego, to
the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California
(San Diego). The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:16-cv-
02597-MMA-AGS to the proceeding. The case is assigned to Hon.
Judge Michael M. Anello.

AllSaints USA retails and distributes apparel and accessories for
men and women.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd D. Carpenter, Esq.
          CARLSON LYNCH SWEET
          KILPELA & CARPENTER LLP
          402 West Broadway, 29th Floor
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 756 6994
          Facsimile: (619) 756 6991
          E-mail: tcarpenter@carlsonlynch.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Lary Alan Rappaport, Esq.
          PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
          2049 Century Park East, Suite 3200
          Los Angeles, CA 90067-3206
          Telephone: (310) 557 2900
          Facsimile: (310) 557 2193
          E-mail: lrappaport@proskauer.com


APOLLO MANAGEMENT: "Krokos" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid OT Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Panagiotis Krokos and Charles Tuttle, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated v. Apollo Management Group, LLC, and
The Fresh Market, Inc., Case No. 1:16-cv-12082 (D. Mass., October
18, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages and damages
pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants operate more than 170 stores in 23 states
throughout the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Hillary Schwab, Esq.
      Brant Casavant, Esq.
      FAIR WORK P.C.
      192 South Street, Suite 450
      Boston, MA 02111
      Telephone: (617) 607-3261
      Facsimile: (617) 488-2261
      E-mail: hillary@fairworklaw.com
              brant@fairworklaw.com

         - and -

      Justin M. Swartz, Esq.
      Michael J. Scimone, Esq.
      OUTTEN & GOLDEN LLP
      685 Third Avenue, 25th Floor
      New York, NY 10017
      Telephone: (212) 245-1000

         - and -

      Michael Palitz, Esq.
      SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
      830 3rd Avenue, 5th Floor
      New York, NY 10022
      Telephone: (800) 616-4000
      E-mail: mpalitz@shavitzlaw.com


AUTOSPORT USA: "Rose" Suit Seeks to Recover Overtime Under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE G. ROSE v. AUTOSPORT USA, INC., a Delaware corporation
authorized to do business in the State of Florida, Case No. 9:16-
cv-81759-WJZ (S.D. Fla., October 18, 2016), is brought on behalf
of the Plaintiff and other employees and former employees of the
Defendant similarly situated to him for overtime compensation and
other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Autosport USA, Inc., is a Delaware corporation authorized to do
business in the state of Florida, located in Palm Beach County,
Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher J. Rush, Esq.
          CHRISTOPHER J. RUSH & ASSOCIATES, P.A.
          Compson Financial Center, Suite 205
          1880 North Congress Avenue
          Boynton Beach, FL 33426
          Telephone: (561) 369-3331
          Facsimile: (561) 369-5902
          E-mail: crush@crushlawfl.com

               - and -

          Victoria Mesa-Estrada, Esq.
          MESA-ESTRADA LAW, P.A.
          1880 North Congress Avenue
          Compson Financial Center, Suite 206
          Boynton Beach, FL 33426
          Telephone: (561) 880-8062
          Facsimile: (561) 828-8359
          E-mail: victoria@mesacoelaw.com


BEAUMONT PRODUCTS: Faces "Ciancio" Suit in S. Dist. of New York
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Beaumont Products
Incorporated. The case is styled Silvio Ciancio and John Does (1-
100), individually on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiffs v. Beaumont Products Incorporated d/b/a
Clearly Natural Essentials, the Defendants, Case No. 7:16-cv-08124
(S.D.N.Y., Oct. 18, 2016).

Beaumont offers biodegradable and hypoallergenic products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


BED BATH: Fails to Pay Employees Overtime, "Thomas" Suit Claims
---------------------------------------------------------------
Danyell Thomas, Rashaun F. Frazer, Andrae Whaley, and Eleni
Miglis, on their own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Bed Bath And Beyond, Inc., Case No. 1:16-cv-08160-PAE
(S.D.N.Y., October 18, 2016), is brought against the Defendant for
failure to pay overtime compensation for all hours worked over 40
each workweek.

Bed Bath And Beyond, Inc. is a national chain of domestic
merchandise retail stores with stores across the states and has
its principal executive offices at 650 Liberty Avenue, Union, New
Jersey 07083.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


BLUE C CALIFORNIA: Faces "Twitchell" Suit Over Failure to Pay OT
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tyler Twitchell, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Blue C California, Inc. and Does 1-50, inclusive, Case
No. BC637759 (Cal. Super. Ct., October 19, 2016), is brought
against the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in
violation of the California Labor Code.

Blue C California, Inc. owns and operates Blue C sushi restaurants
in California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Louis Benowitz, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF LOUIS BENOWITZ
      9454 Wilshire Boulevard, Penthouse
      Beverly Hills, CA 90212
      Telephone: (310) 844-5141
      Facsimile: (310) 4924056
      E-mail: Louis@benowitzlaw.com

         - and -

      David Pourati, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF DAVID POURATI, APC
      12400 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 920
      Los Angeles, CA 90025
      Telephone: (310) 494-7900
      Facsimile: (310) 494-7901
      E-mail: david@pourati.com


BUCKHEAD TOWING: "Curtis" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
------------------------------------------------------------
Dante Curtis, on behalf of himself and those similarly situated v.
Buckhead Towing, and Beverly Elliott and Carnell Elliott, Case No.
1:16-cv-03849-TWT (N.D. Ga., October 17, 2016), seeks to recover
unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid wages, declaratory relief,
and other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate an automotive towing services
company in Atlanta, Georgia.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Adian Miller, Esq.
      MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
      191 Peachtree Street, N.E. Suite 4200
      Atlanta, GA 30303
      Telephone: (404) 496-7332
      Facsimile: (404) 496-7428
      E-mail: ARMiller@forthepeople.com


CALIFORNIA SUBSHINE: Fails to Give Meal/Rest Periods, Miller Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TABITHA MILLER, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, and on behalf of the general public v. CALIFORNIA
SUBSHINE, INC., a California corporation, and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Case No. BC637754 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.,
October 18, 2016), accuses the Defendants of failing to provide
meal and rest periods or premium wages in lieu thereof.

California Subshine, Inc., is a California corporation that
operates in Los Angeles County.  The true names and capacities of
the Doe Defendants are currently unknown to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kenneth S. Gaines, Esq.
          Daniel P. Gaines, Esq.
          Alex P. Katofsky, Esq.
          Sepideh Ardestani, Esq.
          GAINES & GAINES, APLC
          27200 Agoura Road, Suite 101
          Calabasas, CA 91301
          Telephone: (818) 703-8985
          Facsimile: (818) 703-8984
          E-mail: ken@gaineslawfirm.com
                  daniel@gaineslawfirm.com
                  alex@gaineslawfirm.com
                  sepideh@gaineslawfirm.com


CHANGE HEALTHCARE: Faces Pressman Suit in S.D. of Florida
-----------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Change Healthcare Holdings, Inc.
The case is entitled Pressman, Inc., doing business as Pill Box
Pharmacy & Medical Supply, a Florida corporation, individually,
and as the representative of a class of similarly situated
persons, the Plaintiff, v. Change Healthcare Holdings, Inc.;
Change Healthcare Engagement Solutions, Inc.; Change Healthcare
Solutions, LLC; PSKW, LLC; and John Does 1-12, the Defendant, Case
No. 0:16-cv-62472-WJZ (S.D. Fla., Oct. 19, 2016). The case is
assigned to Hon. Judge William J. Zloch.

Change Healthcare, through its subsidiaries, provides software and
analytics, network solutions, and technology-enabled services for
the healthcare market. The company operates in three segments:
Software and Analytics, Network Solutions, and Technology-Enabled
Services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Phillip A Bock, Esq.
          BOCK & HATCH, LLC
          134 N. La Salle St., Ste. 1000
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 658 5501
          Facsimile: (312) 658 5555
          E-mail: phil@bockhatchllc.com


CIENEGA MEDICAL: Doesn't Properly Pay Employees, Action Claims
--------------------------------------------------------------
Melissa Delgado, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Cienega Medical Spa, Inc., Cienega Spa,
Inc., Rose Nadalie-Werz, and Does 1 through 100, inclusive, Case
No. BC637702 (Cal. Super. Ct., October 19, 2016), was filed over
the Defendants' failure to provide legally compliant meal and rest
breaks and failure to provide proper compensation for missed and
otherwise unlawful meal and rest breaks, unpaid and illegally
calculated regular and overtime compensation, failure to pay all
wages due to discharged or quitting non-exempt employees,
Defendants' failure to maintain required records and failure to
provide accurate itemized wage statements, failure to indemnify
non-exempt employees for necessary expenditures and/or losses
incurred in discharging their duties and failure to provide
legally required sick leave.

The Defendants own and operate two spas in Santa Monica,
California and in West Hollywood, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Scott Ernest Wheeler, Esq.
      LAW OFFICE OF SCOTT ERNEST WHEELER
      250 West First Street, Suite 216
      Claremont, CA 91711
      Telephone: (909) 621-4988
      Facsimile: (909) 621-4622
      E-mail: sew@scottwheelerlawoffice.com

         - and -

      Aubry Wand, Esq.
      THE WAND LAW FIRM
      400 Corporate Pointe, Suite 300
      Culver City, CA 90230
      Telephone: (310) 590-4503
      Facsimile: (310) 590-4596
      E-mail: awand@wandlawfirm.com


CITIMORTGAGE INC: Class Action Tossed for Lack of Standing
----------------------------------------------------------
Barry Goheen, Esq. and Paige Nobles, Esq., of King & Spalding, in
an article for JDSupra, wrote that on October 6, 2016, the United
States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit issued its
opinion in Nicklaw v. CitiMortgage, Inc., dismissing, for lack of
Article III standing, a class action complaint that alleged
statutory violations and sought only statutory damages.

This important decision is the first published opinion in which
the Court has applied the framework set forth by the Supreme Court
in the Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins opinion, which issued in May 2016.
In Spokeo, the Supreme Court held that "Article III standing
requires a concrete injury even in the context of a statutory
violation" and instructed that "both history and the judgment of
Congress play important roles" in determining whether an
intangible harm rises to the level of a concrete injury-in-fact.
The Nicklaw opinion confirms that where a plaintiff brings suit
based only on alleged statutory violations, the plaintiff must, to
establish Article III standing, allege a concrete harm resulting
from the violation rather than relying simply on the alleged
statutory violation.

Background

The plaintiff, Roger Nicklaw, used the proceeds of a real estate
sale to satisfy the balance on his mortgage in July 2012.  Under a
New York statute, this triggered the mortgagee's obligation to
sign and record a certificate of discharge with the county clerk
evidencing the satisfaction of the mortgage within thirty days.
Failure to do so renders the mortgagee liable under that statute
to the mortgagor for $500 to $1,500, depending on the length of
the delay.  Because the mortgagee in Mr. Nicklaw, CitiMortgage,
allegedly failed to file a certificate of discharge within the
time required by the statute, Mr. Nicklaw filed a class-action
complaint based on the alleged statutory violation in federal
court, seeking statutory damages for himself and a putative class.
The district court dismissed Mr. Nicklaw's claims as moot due to
an earlier filing in another jurisdiction.  Mr. Nicklaw appealed
and CitiMortgage moved to dismiss the appeal for lack of standing.


COLONY CAPITAL: Faruqi & Faruqi Files Securities Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Notice is hereby given that Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP has filed a class
action lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
District of Maryland, case no. 1:16-cv-03282, on behalf of
shareholders of Colony Capital, Inc. ("Colony" or the "Company")
who are being harmed by Colony's and its board of directors' (the
"Board") alleged violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and
Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC") Rule 14a-9 in
connection with the proposed merger of the Company with NorthStar
Asset Management Group Inc. ("NSAM"), and NorthStar Realty Finance
Corp. ("NRF" and together with NSAM, "NorthStar").

On June 2, 2016, the Company announced it had entered into an
Agreement and Plan of Merger ("Merger Agreement") under which
Colony and the NorthStar companies will conduct an all-stock
merger of equals (the "Proposed Transaction").  The shareholder
vote on the Proposed Transaction is expected to occur prior to the
end of 2016.

If you wish to obtain information concerning this action or view a
copy of the complaint, you can do so by clicking here:
www.faruqilaw.com/CLNYnotice

Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, which was
unanimously approved by the Board, Colony class A and class B
common stockholders stand to receive 1.4663 shares of their
respective class of stock in the post-merger combined company,
Colony NorthStar, Inc.  Colony stockholders are expected to own
approximately 32.85% of the combined company.  The complaint
claims that this offer is inadequate in light of the Company's
recent financial performance and strong growth prospects, and that
the joint proxy statement/prospectus filed with the SEC provides
materially incomplete and misleading information about the Company
and the Proposed Transaction, in violation of Sections 14(a) and
20(a) of the Exchange Act.  The Proxy fails to provide Colony's
shareholders with material information concerning the financial
and procedural fairness of the Proposed Transaction.

Take Action

Plaintiff is represented by Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a law firm with
extensive experience in prosecuting class actions, and significant
expertise in actions involving corporate fraud.  Faruqi & Faruqi,
LLP, was founded in 1995 and the firm maintains its principal
office in New York City, with offices in Delaware, California, and
Pennsylvania.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than 60 days from October 18, 2016.  Any member of the
putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff
through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and
remain an absent class member.  If you wish to discuss this
action, or have any questions concerning this notice or your
rights or interests, please contact:

Nadeem Faruqi, Esq.
James M. Wilson, Jr., Esq.
FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
685 3rd Avenue, 26th Floor
New York, NY 10017
Tel.: (212) 983-9330
Fax: (212) 983-9331
E-mail: nfaruqi@faruqilaw.com
jwilson@faruqilaw.com


DEVON ENERGY: Oklahoma Women Drop Fracking Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
W.J. Kenned, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that two Oklahoma
women and their attorneys have dropped a class action lawsuit in
federal court that blames the recent spate of earthquakes in the
state on oil and gas exploration, but they will re-file their
claims against the fracking industry next year in a different
court.

Lawyers for Logan County residents April Marler and Lisa Griggs
say they will re-file the case in a state court after waiting a
year, which is required by law.

Attorneys representing the energy industry count numerous reasons
why the strategic legal move could pay off for the plaintiffs in
the long run.

What's more, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs,
William B. Federman -- wbf@federmanlaw.com -- of Federman &
Sherwood, said his firm is being "inundated" with requests for
even more legal action pertaining to the quakes.

Of course, his first lawsuit was originally filed in a state court
before Devon Energy removed it to federal court under the Class
Action Fairness Act of 2005.  That law gives federal courts
jurisdiction over class actions in which more than $5 million is
at issue.

It remains to be seen if one of the future defendants does the
same to the next lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Stephen Friot
refused the plaintiffs' request to send their case back to state
court on June 30, prompting the voluntary dismissal.

Industry attorney Carter Williams, in the Houston office of
Baker Donelson, said that he suspected the plaintiffs dropped the
case in federal court because of the concern their petition might
be found not to satisfy federal pleading standards.


DOWNTOWN LLC: "G-Bowley" Suit Seeks to Recover Wages for Servers
----------------------------------------------------------------
WHITNEY G-BOWLEY, on behalf of herself and all other employees
similarly situated v. THE DOWNTOWN LLC and RIVINGTON
HOSPITALITY GROUP LLC, d/b/a HOTEL ON RIVINGTON, PAUL STALLINGS,
COREY KUMPULAINIEN, ROBERTO BUCHELLI, and MARCANTHONY CRIMI, Case
No. 655513/2016 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., New York Cty., October 18, 2016),
seeks to recover damages in the form of unpaid wages on behalf of
the Plaintiff and similarly situated hourly banquet service
workers, including banquet servers and bartenders, who work or
have worked at the Hotel on Rivington in New York City.

The Downtown LLC and Rivington Hospitality Group LLC are New York
limited liability companies.  The Downtown LLC and Rivington
Hospitality Group LLC run, operate or own the Hotel on Rivington.
The Individual Defendants are owners, directors, officers or
employees of the Defendant Corporations.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Nelson Thomas, Esq.
          Michael J. Lingle, Esq.
          Sarah E. Cressman, Esq.
          Jessica L. Lukasiewicz, Esq.
          THOMAS & SOLOMON LLP
          693 East Avenue
          Rochester, NY 14607
          Telephone: (585) 272-0540
          E-mail: nthomas@theemploymentattorneys.com
                  mlingle@theemploymentattorneys.com
                  scressman@theemploymentattorneys.com
                  jlukasiewicz@theemploymentattorneys.com


ENSIGN SERVICES: Faces "Perez" Suit Central Dist. of California
---------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Ensign Services Inc. The case is
captioned Esther Perez, on behalf of herself, all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. Ensign Services Inc., a Nevada
Corporation, and Does 1-100, Inclusive, the Defendants, Case No.
8:16-cv-01914-JLS-JCG (C.D. Cal., Oct. 19, 2016). The case is
assigned to Hon. Judge Josephine L. Staton.

Ensign provides skilled nursing and rehabilitative care services
through the operation of over 100 skilled nursing facilities
located in Arizona, California, Colorado, Idaho, Iowa, Nebraska,
Nevada, Texas, Utah, Washington and Wisconsin.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C. Shaun Setareh, Esq.
          Howard Scott Leviant, Esq.
          Thomas Alistair Segal, Esq.
          SETAREH LAW GROUP
          9454 Wilshire Boulevard Suite 907
          Beverly Hills, CA 90212
          Telephone: (310) 888 7771
          Facsimile: (310) 8880109
          E-mail: shaun@setarehlaw.com
                  scott@setarehlaw.com
                  thomas@setarehlaw.com


ETHOS GALLERY: Sued Over Failure to Pay Minimum & OT Wages
----------------------------------------------------------
Ioannis Legantis and Nikolaos Papageorgiou, on behalf of
themselves and others similarly situated v. Ethos Gallery 51, LLC,
Old Northern Boulevard Restaurant LLC, Little West Restaurant LLC,
75 HA Restaurant LLC, Ioannis Chatiris, and Christos
Panagiotopoulos, Case No. 1:16-cv-08198 (S.D.N.Y., October 19,
2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
minimum wages and overtime compensation in violation of the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

The Defendants own and operate restaurants in New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ariadne Panagopoulou, Esq.
      PARDALIS & NOHAVICKA, LLP
      35-10 Broadway, Suite 201
      Astoria, NY 11106
      Telephone: (718) 777-0400
      Facsimile: (718) 777-0599
      E-mail: ari@pnlawyers.com

FEDCHOICE: Discovery Proceedings to Begin in Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------
Nicholas Malfitano, writing for The Pennsylvania Record, reports
that per a federal judge, discovery proceedings will begin in a
putative class action litigation between a credit union and any
customers who may have been affected by an arbitration clause in
the institution's Service Agreement.

Judge J. William Ditter Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania said Oct. 12 the Service
Agreement presented by credit union FedChoice contained an
arbitration clause of "questionable validity", and thus rejected a
motion to dismiss from the credit union while opening the doors
for discovery to begin in the case.

Plaintiff Sheila Horton filed a class action lawsuit, challenging
the fees charged for overdraft protection by a credit union,
FedChoice, and other unnamed individuals.  The defendants allege
the instant case should be stayed or dismissed because "Ms. Horton
and FedChoice are parties to a broad, written, enforceable
arbitration agreement that governs any dispute between them."

"Because I conclude that the methods and procedures which
defendants assert give them the right to arbitration may be of
questionable validity, I shall deny their motion and direct the
parties to engage in discovery," Judge Ditter said.

Horton opened her original checking account with the predecessor
to FedChoice on Feb. 13, 1986.  Then, on Sept. 21, 2015, Horton
may have signed up for an online service which permitted FedChoice
members to make electronic transfers between their FedChoice
accounts and accounts in other financial institutions.

In order to use the service, the defendants argue Horton was
required to accept an online Service Agreement which contains a
mandatory arbitration clause.  The defendants further asserted
Horton agreed to the terms of the Service Agreement -- while
Horton contends she did not and that, even if she did agree, the
arbitration clause was limited to "disputes about inter-bank
transfers of funds."

"Defendants have attached the Declaration of Phyllis Mauck, a
FedChoice employee, who described the process of registering for
the online electronic transfer service.  Ms. Mauck stated that the
Service Agreement was provided to Ms. Horton online," Judge Ditter
said.

Judge Ditter continued immediately following the Service Agreement
was the statement, "I acknowledge that I have the disclosure and
agree to all terms and conditions."  Still online, there is a
provision, "I accept."

"Unless a member had accepted the 'disclosure,' i.e. the Service
Agreement, he or she could not use FedChoice's inter-bank service.
As proof that she had accepted the Service Agreement, Ms. Mauck
states Ms. Horton later used that service," Judge Ditter stated.

Judge Ditter explained the defendants attached a copy of the
Service Agreement "as it appeared in a pop-up window and as it
would have been seen by anyone considering the service", with the
arbitration clause being listed on Page 10 of a 12-page agreement.

"Without question, the Service Agreement is a contract of
adhesion.  FedChoice has set the terms and conditions.  Ms. Horton
could either accept those terms or be denied FedChoice's
inter-bank transfer service.  She had no bargaining power.  The
contract was all or nothing," Judge Ditter stated.

Judge Ditter explained though contracts of adhesion may be
enforced, they "invite an inquiry into whether they are
procedurally and substantively unconscionable", with that same
inquiry in the instant case being labeled as "loud and clear."

"12 pages of legalese presented online with the arbitration clause
buried on Page 10, and arbitration procedures that might be found
to require too much with too little chance for success," Judge
Ditter said.  "I conclude that the validity of the Service
Agreement is a disputed issue. It follows that the parties are
entitled to discovery on the question of arbitrability."

The plaintiffs are represented by Richard D. McCune --
rdm@mccunewright.com -- Joseph G. Sauder -- jgs@mccunewright.com -
- and Matthew David Schelkopf of McCune Wright in Redlands,
Calif., Berwyn and Haverford, respectively.

The defendants are represented by John Michael Bredehoft --
jmbredehoft@kaufcan.com -- and Sharon Kerk Reyes --
skreyes@kaufcan.com -- of Kaufman & Canoles in Norfolk, Va., plus
Samuel W. Cortes -- scortes@foxrothschild.com -- and Ashley L.
Beach -- abeach@foxrothschild.com -- of Fox Rothschild, in Exton.

U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania case
2:16-cv-00318


FEDERAL-MOGUL: Faces "Mecardo" Suit Over Share Sale to Icahn
------------------------------------------------------------
Victor Mercado, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Daniel A. Ninivaggi, Rainer Jueckstock, Sunghwan Cho,
Thomas W. Elward, George Feldenkreis, James Michael Laisure,
Courtney Mather, Michael Nevin, Louis J. Pastor, Neil S. Subin,
Carl C. Icahn, Jack G. Wasserman, James L. Nelson, William A.
Leidesdorf, Keith Cozza, Icahn Enterprises L.P., IEH FM Holdings,
LLC, American Entertainment Properties Corp., Icahn Building LLC,
Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P., Icahn Enterprises G.P., Inc., and
Federal-Mogul Holdings Corporation, Case No. 12837 (Del. Ch. Ct.,
October 19, 2016), is brought on behalf of all public stockholders
of Federal-Mogul Holdings, Inc., to enjoin the proposed
acquisition of the outstanding minority shares of Federal Mogul
common stock by Icahn Enterprises, through a flawed process and
with a price that is not entirely fair to the Company's minority
stockholders.

Federal-Mogul Holdings Corporation supplies various components,
accessories, and systems to the manufacturers and servicers of
vehicles and equipment worldwide.

Icahn Building LLC, Icahn Enterprises Holdings L.P., and Icahn
Enterprises G.P., Inc. invest in various industries including auto
parts, energy, metals, rail cars, casinos, food packaging, real
estate and home fashion.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Seth D. Rigrodsky, Esq.
      Brian D. Long, Esq.
      Gina M. Serra, Esq.
      Jeremy J. Riley, Esq
      RIGRODSKY & LONG, P.A.
      2 Righter Parkway, Suite 120
      Wilmington, DE 19803
      Telephone: (302) 295-5310
      E-mail: sdr@rl-legal.com
              bdl@rl-legal.com
              gms@rl-legal.com
              jjr@rl-legal.com

         - and -

      Shane T. Rowley, Esq.
      Stephanie A. Bartone, Esq.
      LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP
      733 Summer Street, Suite 304
      Stamford, CT 06901
      Telephone: (203) 992-4523
      E-mail: srowley@zlk.com
              sbartone@zlk.com


FINISH LINE: Faces "Marquez" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
--------------------------------------------------------------
Jacqueline Lea Marquez, on behalf of herself and all others
similarly situated v. The Finish Line, Inc., Case No. 5-16-cv-
01038 (W.D. Tex., October 17, 2016), is brought against the
Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Finish Line, Inc. is an athletic retailer of brand name
footwear, apparel and accessories and operates more than 660
stores throughout the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael K. Burke, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL M. GUERRA, BURKE & KHIRALLAH, LLP
      3900 N. 10th St., Suite 850
      McAllen, TX 78501
      Telephone: (956) 682-5999
      Facsimile: (888) 317-8802
      E-mail: mburke@mmguerra.com

         - and -

      Carina C. Garza, Esq.
      GARZA GARCIA PLLC
      2416 Buddy Owens
      McAllen, TX 78504
      Telephone: (956) 585-0085
      Facsimile: (956) 587-0485
      E-mail: carina@garzagarcialaw.com


FLINT, MI: Families File Class Action Over Lead-Tainted Water
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that several families have filed a
class-action lawsuit against the state of Michigan and the Flint
school district, saying more needs to be done to help students
whose academic performance and behavior have worsened since
drinking the city's lead-tainted water.

The lawsuit, filed on Oct. 18 in federal court, says there "has
been no effective response" to the lead-related problems faced by
children in Flint's public schools.  Families say the state
Education Department, the Flint district and a countywide district
are not complying with laws intended to help disabled students.

The state declined to comment.  There was no immediate response
from Flint.

While Flint used the Flint River as a water source for 18 months,
lead leached from old pipes because the water wasn't properly
treated.  Lead affects the brain and nervous system.


FRESH & READY: Faces "Martinez" Suit in California Super. Ct.
-------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Fresh and Ready Foods LLC. The
case is styled MARTINEZ, JULIO ON BEHALF OF HIMSELF AND OTHERS
SIMILARLY SITUATED, the Plaintiff, v. RJ ARROYO INC., A
CORPORATION; LEHMAN FOODS INC., A CORPORATION; FRESH & READY FOODS
LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY; DOES 1-100, INCLUSIVE; and CL
ENTERPRISES INC., A BUSINESS ENTITY OF UNKNOWN FORM, the
Defendants, Case No. CGC 16 554927 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct. 19,
2016).

Fresh and Ready Foods takes fresh quality ingredients and
transforms them into value-added products.


GATESTONE & CO.: Faces "Fowles" Suit in E.D. of New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Gatestone & Co.
International, Inc. The case is titled Joseph Fowles, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Gatestone & Co. International, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 2:16-
cv-05810 (E.D.N.Y., Oct 18, 2016).

Gatestone has been providing Business Process Outsourcing (BPO)
and contact center solutions to a variety of markets across North
America.

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


GENPACT SERVICES: Faces "Pisk" Suit in Eastern Dist. of New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Genpact Services
LLC. The case is entitled Geraldine Pisk and Carole Balke, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the
Plaintiffs, v. Genpact Services LLC, the Defendant, Case No. 2:16-
cv-05809 (E.D.N.Y., Oct 18, 2016).

Genpact is involved in designing, transforming and running
business process operations, including those that are complex and
industry-specific.

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


GOLDCORP INC: Faces "White" Suit Over Misleading Fin'l. Reports
---------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Warren White, individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated v. Goldcorp Inc., Charles A. Jeannes, Lindsay
A. Hall, David Garofalo, and Russell Ball, Case No. 1:16-cv-08123
(S.D.N.Y., October 18, 2016), alleges that the Defendants made
false and misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose
material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations,
and prospects.

Goldcorp Inc. engages in the acquisition, exploration,
development, and operation of precious metal properties in Canada,
the United States, Mexico, and Central and South
America.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
      Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
      Marc C. Gorrie, Esq.
      POMERANTZ LLP
      600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
      New York, NY 10016
      Telephone: (212) 661-1100
      Facsimile: (212) 661-8665
      E-mail: ahood@pomlaw.com
              jalieberman@pomlaw.com
              mgorrie@pomlaw.com

         - and -

      Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq.
      POMERANTZ LLP
      10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505
      Chicago, IL 60603
      Telephone: (312) 377-1181
      Facsimile: (312) 377-1184
      E-mail:  pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com

         - and -

      Michael Goldberg, Esq.
      Brian Schall, Esq.
      GOLDBERG LAW PC
      1999 Avenue of the Stars
      Los Angeles, CA 90067
      Telephone: (800) 977-7401
      Facsimile: (800) 536-0065
      E-mail: michael@goldberglawpc.com
              brian@goldberglawpc.com


HERBAL GROUPS: Faces Class Action Over Unsolicited Calls
--------------------------------------------------------
Wadi Reformado, writing for Northern California Record, reports
that a Reseda individual has filed a class-action lawsuit against
a health products marketer alleging that it contacted him several
times in an attempt to solicit its services.

Dave Alan filed a complaint on Oct. 6 in the U.S. District Court
for the Central District of California against Herbal Groups Inc.
and Does 1 through 10 alleging violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that beginning
in July, he received numerous unwanted marketing calls on his
cellular telephone from the defendant despite being registered on
the National Do-Not-Call Registry.  The plaintiff holds Herbal
Groups Inc. and Does 1 through 10 responsible because the
defendants allegedly used an automatic telephone dialing system to
contact plaintiff and continued to call despite his requests to
stop.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks $500 in statutory
damages for each violation, $1,500 in treble damages for each
violation, and any other relief as the court deems just. He is
represented by Todd M. Friedman, Adrian R. Bacon and Meghan E.
George of Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman PC in Woodland Hills.

U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Case
number 2:16-cv-07492-SJO-JEM


IMPETUS ENTERPRISE: Faces "McCurley" Suit in S.D. of California
---------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Impetus Enterprise, Inc. The case
is captioned Joshua McCurley, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Impetus Enterprise, Inc.,
D/S/A Aiding Student Relief, the Defendant, Case No. 3:16-cv-
02603-JLS-BLM (S.D. Cal., Oct. 19, 2016). The case is assigned to
Hon. Judge Janis L. Sammartino.

Impetus Technologies provides software product development, and
technology research and development (R&D) services. It offers R&D
consulting, and architecture and design services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


INTERNATIONAL PAPER: Doesn't Properly Pay Employees, Suit Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jose Avila as an individual and on behalf of all employees
similarly situated v. International Paper Group, LLC and Does 1
through 50, inclusive, Case No. BC637025 (Cal. Super. Ct., October
17, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages and for failure to provide meal and rest periods or
compensation in lieu thereof pursuant to California Labor Code.

International Paper Group, LLC produces and distributes paper,
packaging and forest products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Kevin Mahoney, Esq.
      Katherine J. Odenbreit, Esq.
      Morgan E. Glynn, Esq.
      MAHONEY LAW GROUP, APC
      249 East Ocean Boulevard, Suite 814
      Long Beach, CA 90802
      Telephone: (562) 590-5550
      Facsimile: (562) 590-8400
      E-mail: kmahoney@mahoney-law.net
              kodenbreit@mahoney-law.net
              mglynn@mahoney-law.net


INVESTMENTS LIMITED: "Gonzalez" Suit Seeks to Recoup Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PATRICIA GONZALEZ and LESHA ROSARIO, Plaintiffs, v. JAMES
BATMASIAN, an individual d/b/a Investments Limited and
individually and MARTA BATMASIAN, an individual d/b/a Investments
Limited, and individually, Defendants, Case No. 9:16-cv-81696-DMM
(S.D. Fla., October 9, 2016), alleges that Defendant failed to
comply with the Fair Labor Standards Act in that Plaintiffs, and
all those similarly situated, performed services for Defendant for
which no provision was made to properly pay for those hours in
which overtime was required to be paid, and which requires the
payment of wages at time and one-half for all hours worked in
excess of 40 hours in each workweek.

Accordingly, for workweeks within three years of the filing of
this Complaint, the Plaintiffs, and all those similarly situated,
demand judgment against Defendant for the wages and overtime
payments due them for the hours worked by them for which they have
not been properly compensated (back pay), liquidated damages,
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit, and for all proper
relief including pre-judgment interest, and any further relief
that the Court deems necessary.

Defendant James Batmasian is an individual who owns and operates
Investments Limited with his wife Marta Batmasian.  Mr. Batmasian
is a Harvard-educated former attorney who also has a master's
degree in Business Administration from Harvard.

The Plaintiffs allege that Investments Limited is a fictitious
name owned 50/50 by James Batmasian and Marta Batmasian.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Chris Kleppin, Esq.
     Chelsea A. Lewis, Esa.
     GLASSER & KLEPPIN, P.A.
     8751 West Broward Blvd., Suite 105
     Plantation, FL 33324
     Phone: (954) 424-1933
     Fax: (954) 474-7405
     E-mail: ckleppin@gkemploymentlaw.com
             clewis@gkemploymentlaw.com
             esinclair@gkemploymentlaw.com
             dcano@gkemploymentlaw.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: "Estrada" Suit Moved to Dist. of New Jersey
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit titled Mona Estrada, On Behalf of Herself
and All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. JOHNSON &
JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES INC. Case No.
2:14-cv-01051, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Eastern District of California, to the U.S. District Court for
the District of New Jersey (Trenton). The New Jersey District
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 3:16-cv-07492 to the proceeding.

Johnson & Johnson is an American multinational medical devices,
pharmaceutical and consumer packaged goods manufacturer founded in
1886.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alison Douillard Hawthorne, Esq.
          Charles Lance Gould, Esq.
          W. Daniel PHV Miles, III, Esq.
          BEASLEY, ALLEN, CROW,
          METHVIN, PORTIS & MILES, P.C.
          272 Commerce Street
          P.O. Box 4160
          Montgomery, AL 36104
          Telephone: (334) 269 2343
          Facsimile: (334) 954 7555

               - and -

          Paula Michelle Roach, Esq.
          Timothy G. Blood, Esq.
          Thomas J. O'Reardon, II, Esq.
          BLOOD, HURST & O'REARDON, LLP
          701 B Street, Suite 1700
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 338 1100
          Facsimile: (619) 338 1101
          E-mail: tblood@bholaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Matthew David Powers, Esq.
          Victoria Weatherford, Esq.
          O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP-SAN FRANCISCO
          Two Embarcadero Center, 28th Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 984 8898
          Facsimile: (415) 984 8701


LANDRY'S RESTAURANTS: "Miller" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Scott Miller, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Landry's Restaurants, Inc., Landry's Seafood House
Arlington, Inc., Bubba Gump Shrimp Co., and Does 1-10, inclusive,
Case No. BC637514 (Cal. Super. Ct., October 17, 2016), seeks to
recover unpaid overtime wages, compensation for each meal period
not provided, damages and penalties pursuant to the California
Labor Code.

The Defendants operate a global corporation owning and operating
more than 450 properties, including more than 40 unique
restaurants, including Landry's Seafood, Chart House, Claim
Jumper, Morton's Steakhouse, McCormick & Schmicks, and Bubba Gump
Shrimp Co., and operates worldwide, including numerous restaurants
in California and Los Angeles County.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Joseph R. Becerra, Esq.
      BECERRA LAW FIRM
      4014 Long Beach Blvd., Suite 300
      Long Beach, CA 90807
      Telephone: (213) 542-8501
      Facsimile: (213) 542-5556
      E-mail: jbecerra@jrbecerralaw.com


LENDMARK FINANCIAL: "Mathis" Suit Removed to E.D. N. Car.
---------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Shane Mathis, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Lendmark Financial Services, LLC, the Defendant, Case No. 16-CVS-
3367, was removed from the Onslow County Superior Court, to the
U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina.
The North Carolina Eastern District Court Clerk assigned Case No.
7:16-cv-00355-FL to the proceeding. The case is assigned to Hon.
Judge Louise Wood Flanagan.

The Plaintiff appears pro se.

The Defendant is represented by:

          Andrew H. Erteschik, Esq.
          POYNER SPRUILL LLP
          P. O. Box 1801
          301 Fayetteville St., Suite 1900
          Raleigh, NC 27602-1801
          Telephone: (919) 783 6400
          Facsimile: (919) 783 1075
          E-mail: aerteschik@poynerspruill.com


LOCUMS INC: Faces Comprehensive Health Suit in Florida
------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Locums, Inc. The case is titled
Comprehensive Health Care Systems Of The Palm Beaches, Inc., a
Florida corporation, individually and as the representative of a
class of similarly situated persons, the Plaintiff, v. Locums,
Inc. and John Does 1-12, the Defendants, Case No. 9:16-cv-81762-
WPD (S.D. Fla., Oct. 19, 2016). The case is assigned to Hon. Judge
William P. Dimitrouleas.

Locums operates as a private company. The Company serves
individuals, medical professionals, and hospitals. Locums Inc.
matches qualified independent contractor physicians with
healthcare organizations. Locums Inc. offers educational
resources, research, and technological tools.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Phillip A Bock, Esq.
          BOCK & HATCH, LLC
          134 N. La Salle St., Ste. 1000
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 658 5501
          Facsimile: (312) 658 5555
          E-mail: phil@bockhatchllc.com


LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: "Kunicki" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2743
-----------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Jason Kunicki, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Lumber
Liquidators, Inc., Case No. 4:16-cv-11705, was transferred from
the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, to the
U.S. District Court for the District of Eastern District of
Virginia - (Alexandria). The Virginia Eastern District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 1:16-cv-05026-AJT-TRJ to the proceeding.

The Kunicki case is being consolidated with MDL 2743 in re: Lumber
Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Flooring Durability Marketing and
Sales Practices Litigation. The MDL was created by Order of the
United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation on
October 4, 2016. These cases concern the sale and marketing of
Chinese-manufactured laminate flooring sold by defendant Lumber
Liquidators. Despite being marketed as sufficiently durable for
residential use, the Plaintiffs allege that their laminate
flooring scratches too easily and fails to meet the advertised
industry standard. In its October 4, 2016 Order, the MDL Panel
found that the actions in this litigation involve common questions
of fact, and that centralization in the Eastern District of
Virginia will serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses
and promote the just and efficient conduct of the litigation. All
actions involve common factual questions regarding the durability
of Chinese-manufactured laminate flooring sold by Lumber
Liquidators under the "Dream Home" label, particularly the issue
of whether the laminates comply with the allegedly warranted
industry standard for use in residential settings. Presiding Judge
in the MDL is Hon. Anthony J. Trenga, United States District
Judge. The lead case is 1:16-md-02743-AJT-TRJ.

Lumber Liquidators is a specialty retailer of hardwood flooring.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexander Robertson, IV, Esq.
          Mark J. Uyeno, Esq.
          ROBERTSON & ASSOCIATES, LLP
          32121 Lindero Canyon Road, Suite 200
          Westlake Village, CA 91361
          Telephone: (818) 851 3850
          Facsimile: (818) 851 3850
          E-mail: arobertson@arobertsonlaw.com
                  muyeno@arobertsonlaw.com

               - and -

          Robert Ahdoot, Esq.
          Tina Wolfson, Esq.
          AHDOOT & WOLFSON, P.C.
          1016 Palm Avenue
          West Hollywood, CA 90069
          Telephone: 474-9111
          Facsimile: (310) 474 8585
          E-mail: rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com
                  twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Joshua L. Solomon, Esq.
          POLLACK SOLOMON DUFFY LLP
          133 Federal Street, Suite 902
          Boston, MA 02110
          Telephone: (617) 439 9800
          E-mail: jsolomon@psdfirm.com


LUMBER LIQUIDATORS: "Williams" Suit Consolidated in MDL 2743
------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Chris Williams, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, v.
Lumber Liquidators, Inc., Case No. 5:16-cv-00255, was transferred
from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida,
to the U.S. District Court for the District of Eastern District of
Virginia - (Alexandria). The Virginia Eastern District Court Clerk
assigned Case No. 1:16-cv-05027-AJT-TRJ to the proceeding.

The Williams case is being consolidated with MDL 2743 in re:
Lumber Liquidators Chinese-Manufactured Flooring Durability
Marketing and Sales Practices Litigation. The MDL was created by
Order of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation on October 4, 2016. These cases concern the sale and
marketing of Chinese-manufactured laminate flooring sold by
defendant Lumber Liquidators. Despite being marketed as
sufficiently durable for residential use, the Plaintiffs allege
that their laminate flooring scratches too easily and fails to
meet the advertised industry standard. In its October 4, 2016
Order, the MDL Panel found that the actions in this litigation
involve common questions of fact, and that centralization in the
Eastern District of Virginia will serve the convenience of the
parties and witnesses and promote the just and efficient conduct
of the litigation. All actions involve common factual questions
regarding the durability of Chinese-manufactured laminate flooring
sold by Lumber Liquidators under the "Dream Home" label,
particularly the issue of whether the laminates comply with the
allegedly warranted industry standard for use in residential
settings. Presiding Judge in the MDL is Hon. Anthony J. Trenga,
United States District Judge. The lead case is 1:16-md-02743-AJT-
TRJ.

Lumber Liquidators is a specialty retailer of hardwood flooring.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alexander Robertson, IV, Esq.
          Mark J. Uyeno, Esq.
          ROBERTSON & ASSOCIATES, LLP
          32121 Lindero Canyon Road, Suite 200
          Westlake Village, CA 91361
          Telephone: (818) 851 3850
          Facsimile: (818) 851 3850
          E-mail: arobertson@arobertsonlaw.com
                  muyeno@arobertsonlaw.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Emily Yandle Rottmann, Esq.
          Kimberly Tolland Mydock, Esq.
          Robert Eric Bilik, Esq.
          MCGUIREWOODS LLP
          50 N. Laura Street, Suite 3300
          Jacksonville, FL 32202
          Telephone: (904) 798 3224
          Facsimile: (904) 798 3263
          E-mail: erottmann@mcguirewoods.com
                  kmydock@mcguirewoods.com
                  ebilik@mcguirewoods.com


MARKET STREET: Faces "Gouge" Suit in Maryland Circuit Court
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Market Street
Management LLC. The case is captioned Gouge, William, Alias
Themselves And All Others In Similarly Situated, 300 Franklin
Street, Middletown, MD 21769; and Gregori, Lucas, 3698 Elliot
Road, West Union, WV 26456, the Plaintiffs, v. Market Street
Management LLC, Alias Family Meal Frederick, 228 N Market Street,
Frederick, MD 21701, 3622 Singleton Terrace, Frederick, MD 21704,
Case No. 10C16002872 (Md. Cir. Ct., Oct 18, 2016).

Market Street Management has long been recognized as the HOA
property management company of choice for communities and
homeowner associations.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Gregg Greenberg, Esq.
          Roy Lyford-Pike, Esq.,
          ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC
          8757 Georgia Avenue, Suite 400
          Silver Spring, MD 20910


MASSAGE ENVY: Faces "Villafuerte" Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Massage Envy
Franchising LLC. The case is entitled Jennifer Villafuerte, on
behalf of herself, all others similarly situated, and the general
public, the Plaintiff, v, Does 1-100, Four Points Massage Inc.,
and Massage Envy Franchising LLC, an Arizona Limited Liability
Corporation, the Defendants, Case No. 34-2016-00201867-CU-OE-GDS
(Cal. Super. Ct., Oct 18, 2016).

Massage Envy provides therapeutic massage and spa services in the
United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Stephen Noel Ilg, Esq.
          ILG LEGAL OFFICE
          555 California St Ste 4925
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 580 2574
          Facsimile: (440) 632 9843
          E-mail: silg@ilglegal.com


MEDPORT INC: Faces "Richardson" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ronald Richardson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. Medport, Inc., James J. Reinholz, and John Doe I and
John Doe II, Case No. 1:16-cv-02546 (N.D. Ohio., October 19,
2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Medport, Inc. provides transportation services for clients to and
from hospital and doctor appointments, nursing facilities,
daycares, school systems and the Cuyahoga County Board of
Developmental Disabilities.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Scott D. Perlmuter, Esq.
      TITTLE LAW FIRM
      2012 West 25th Street, Ste. 515
      Cleveland, OH 44113
      Telephone: (216) 308-1522
      E-mail: scott@tittlelawfirm.com

         - and -

      Thomas A. Downie, Esq.
      46 Chagrin Falls Plaza #104
      Chagrin Falls, OH 44022
      Telephone: (440) 973-9000
      E-mail: tom@chagrinlaw.com


MERIBEAR PRODUCTIONS: Sued in Cal. Over Failure to Pay Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------------
Juan Renteria, an Individual, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated v. Meribear Productions, Inc. and Does 1
through 100, Inclusive, Case No. BC637870 (Cal. Super. Ct.,
October 19, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure
to pay overtime wages in violation of the California Labor Code.

Meribear Productions, Inc. operates a home staging company in Los
Angeles, California.

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


MYLAN NV: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over EpiPen Products
----------------------------------------------------------
Rosetta Serrano and Shannon Clements, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. Mylan N.V. and Mylan Specialty
L.P., Case No. 2:16-cv-02711-JWL-KGG (D. Kan., October 18, 2016),
arises out of the Defendants' deliberate and reprehensible price
gouging, unconscionable sales and practices, and unlawful acts in
connection with the sales of the EpiPen, the EpiPen 2 Pak, the
EpiPen Jr., the EpiPen Jr. 2-Pak to Kansas and Missouri consumers.

The Defendants operate a generic and specialty pharmaceuticals
company located in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Rex A. Sharp, Esq.
      Ryan C. Hudson, Esq.
      REX A. SHARP, P.A.
      5301 W. 75th Street
      Prairie Village, KS  66208
      Telephone: (913) 901-0505
      Facsimile: (913) 901-0419
      E-mail: rsharp@midwest-law.com
              rhudson@midwest-law.com

         - and -

      W. Mark Lanier, Esq.
      Reagan E. Bradford, Esq.
      THE LANIER LAW FIRM
      6810 FM 1960
      West Houston, TX 77069
      Telephone: (713) 659-5200
      E-mail: WML@LanierLawFirm.com
              Reagan.Bradford@LanierLawFirm.com


MYLAN PHARMA: Seeks Removal of Epipen Class Action to Fed. Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
David Floyd, writing for Investopedia, reports that when
Linda Bates went to the pharmacist in 2015 to get an EpiPen for
her teenage son, who suffers from a peanut allergy, it cost her
$50.00.  A year later, her pharmacist told her the same drug would
cost $600.00, a 1,100% increase that rather outstrips 0.7% CPI
inflation for 2015.

1,100% Price Increase

In September, Ms. Bates sued Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., a
division of Mylan N.V., which markets the drug.  EpiPen injects
around $1 worth of epinephrine to treat potentially fatal allergic
reactions.  The proposed class action suit alleges
"unconscionable, outrageous and exorbitant price increases" on the
part of Mylan, which is only the latest drugmaker to come under
fire for price gouging.  Following a pattern most associated with
Martin Shkreli's Turing Pharmaceuticals, Mylan bought the rights
to market the 30-year-old drug in 2007, then ratcheted up the
price to take advantage of limited competition. Speaking to
analysts on the company's third-quarter conference call in
November, CEO Heather Bresch said EpiPen held an 85% share in its
market.

Class Action Filing

Ms. Bates's suit was initially filed in Ohio, but the firm Mylan
hired to defend it -- Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, commonly
known as Taft -- filed for removal to federal court.  Ms. Bates's
attorney, Cornelius "Carl" Lewis of The Lewis Law Firm Inc., LPA,
told Investopedia that he was not opposing removal, since it would
open up the proposed class to post-2007 EpiPen consumers
nationwide, rather than restricting it to Ohio residents.  On Oct.
17, he confirmed that the case had been removed to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.

The class has not yet been certified, and no date has been set for
a hearing.  Taft and Mylan did not immediately respond to a
request for comment.

Another proposed class action suit centers on Mylan's "deceptive
and unconscionable practice of requiring that EpiPens be sold in
sets of two as a pretense for charging unconscionable prices."
Mylan stopped selling single injectors shortly after the release
of federal guidelines recommending that allergy sufferers should
be prescribed two doses of epinephrine in 2010.  That case was
filed in August in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of Michigan.  The firm representing the plaintiff, The
Miller Law Firm PC, did not immediately respond to a request for
comment.

Mylan's 'Frustrated' CEO

Ms. Bresch, who is the daughter of Senator Joseph Mankin, a
Democrat representing West Virginia, told CNBC in August "no one's
more frustrated than me" about EpiPen pricing, and blamed a system
in which there are "four or five hands that the product touches
and companies that it goes through before it ever gets to that
patient at the counter."  The company has announced patient
assistance programs to reduce the out-of-pocket cost and said it
would launch a cheaper generic version.

Ms. Bresch's compensation -- $18.9 million in 2015 -- has risen
even faster than EpiPen prices.  Ms. Bresch was appointed
president in 2009, joined Mylan's board in 2011, and became CEO in
2012.

Aggressive Marketing

Mylan has pursued an aggressive marketing and lobbying effort to
expand the market for the EpiPen since 2007.  According to
OpenSecrets.org, the company has spent $11.5 million on lobbying
since acquiring the drug.  Jim Yocum, executive vice president at
Connecture, told Investopedia via in August that "Mylan has done a
masterful job of creating demand for the EpiPens as a necessary
stocked items in schools, restaurants, summer camps, etc.;
anywhere the risk of anaphylactic shock might exist." (See also,
Drug Prices: Name Brands Doubled in Last 5 Years.)

Mr. Yocum also brought up the way the company designed its
patents: "by focusing on the specific dosage control mechanisms
and actions that ensure firing a consistent dose into the
patient," Mylan has made it difficult for generic manufacturers to
enter the market.  Senator Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat representing
Minnesota, called on the Federal Trade Commission to investigate
Mylan for possible anti-trust violations in August. Specifically,
she wants the FTC to investigate the use of "incentives or
exclusionary contracts with insurers, distributors, or pharmacies,
to deny an alternative product access to the market."  Sanofi and
Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries Ltd. have both had trouble
bringing a EpiPen competitor to market.

Mylan reached a $465 million settlement with the Department of
Justice regarding its misclassification of EpiPen as a generic or
"non-innovator" drug under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program.
Mylan's "allergy" segment booked $1 billion in sales in 2015.


NASSAU, NY: Fails to Pay Workers Overtime, "Chodkowski" Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Susan Chodkowski, Helen Ebbert, Gary Volpe, Matthew Sarter,
Wendyneal, Deborah Pedenzin, Rosanna Lauro, Danielle Davidson and
all others similarly situated v. County of Nassau, Nassau County
Police Department, and Nassau County Civil Service Commission,
Case No. cv165770 (E.D.N.Y., October 17, 2015), is brought against
the Defendants for failure to pay overtime wages in violation of
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

County of Nassau is a municipal corporation duly incorporated
under the laws of the State of New York.

Nassau County Police Department is the Agency of the County of
Nassau.

Nassau County Civil Service Commission is an agency of the County
of Nassau and is responsible for the classification of county
positions and establishment of compensation for county employees.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Louis D. Stober Jr., Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF LOUIS D. STOBER, JR. LLC
      98 Front Street
      Mineola, NY 11501
      Telephone: (516)742-6546


NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE: Sued in Georgia Over Deed to Secure Debt
-------------------------------------------------------------
Christal Burdette Northrup, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Nationstar Mortgage, LLC and Spring
Leaf Financial Services, Inc. f/k/a American General Financial
Services, Inc., Case No. 1:16-cv-03912-WSD (N.D. Ga., October 19,
2016), is an action for damages as a result of the Defendants'
continued refusal, despite repeated demands, to mark the Deed to
Secure Debt satisfied of record, despite the underlying Promissory
Note being paid in full in 2006.

Nationstar Mortgage, LLC operates a mortgage service company
located at 40 Technology Parkway South, Suite 300, Norcross,
Georgia 30092.

Spring Leaf Financial Services, Inc. is a company whose primary
business is consumer lending, credit insurance, and other credit
related products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ben F. Windham, Esq.
      BEN F. WINDHAM, P.C.
      3838 Highway 42
      Locust Grove, GA 30248
      Telephone: (678) 565-8686
      Facsimile: (678) 565-8949
      E-mail: ben@windhamlaw.com

         - and -

      John C. Bell Jr., Esq.
      BELL & BRIGHAM, P.C.
      P.O. Box 1547
      Augusta, GA 30903-1547
      Telephone: (706) 722-2014
      Facsimile: (706) 722-7552
      E-mail: john@bellbrigham.com


PROFESSIONAL ACCOUNT: Faces "Nazario" Suit in M.D. Fla.
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Professional Account
Services, Inc. The case is styled Eliajalyn Nazario, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Professional Account Services, Inc., a foreign corporation and
Prime Healthcare Services - Lehigh Acres, LLC, doing business as
Lehigh Regional Medical Center, a foreign corporation, the
Defendants, Case No. 2:16-cv-00772-UA-MRM (M.D. Fla., Oct 18,
2016).

Professional Account provides various collection services
including self-pay, insurance and workers' compensation
collections.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marcus W. Viles, Esq.
          Maria Alaimo, Esq.
          VILES & BECKMAN, LLC
          6350 Presidential Ct., Suite A
          Ft Myers, FL 33919
          Telephone: (239) 334 3933
          Facsimile: (239) 334 7105
          E-mail: marcus@vilesandbeckman.com
                  maria@vilesandbeckman.com


QL WHOLESOME: Faces "Rodriguez" Suit in S.D. of New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against QL Wholesome Food,
Inc. The case is titled Castro Rodriguez, On behalf of all others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. QL Wholesome Food, Inc.,
doing business as Quantum Leap and Qui Ke Huynh, the Defendants,
Case No. 1:16-cv-08161 (S.D.N.Y., Oct 18, 2016).

QL Wholesome operates a restaurant in New York.

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


ROBERT BINNS: Faces "McDonough" Suit Over Failure to Pay Overtime
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan McDonough and Dennis Day, on behalf of themselves and those
similarly situated v. Robert Binns Roofing, Inc. and Robert W.
Binns, Case No. 8:16-cv-02950-JDW-AAS (M.D. Fla., October 17,
2016), is brought against the Defendants for failure to pay
overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Robert Binns Roofing, Inc. operates a full service commercial and
residential roofing company in Polk County, Florida.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michelle Erin Nadeau, Esq.
      KWALL, SHOWERS, BARACK & CHILSON, P.A.
      133 North Fort Harrison Avenue
      Clearwater, FL 33755
      Telephone: (727) 441-4947
      Facsimile: (727) 447-3158
      E-mail: mnadeau@ksbclaw.com


ROBERT HALF: Faces "Black" Suit in Northern Dist. of California
---------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Robert Half
International, Inc. The case is styled Thomas Black, also known as
Thomas Black, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, the Plaintiff, v. Robert Half International, Inc., a
Delaware Corporation and Unknown Robert Half International, Inc.,
the Defendants, Case No. 3:16-cv-06077 (N.D. Cal., Oct. 20, 2016).

Robert Half is an American human resource consulting firm based in
Menlo Park, California.

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS: Faces Class Action Over Galaxy Note 7
----------------------------------------------------------
Abinaya Vijayaraghavan, writing for Reuters, reports that Samsung
Electronics Co Ltd's U.S. unit is facing a proposed class action
lawsuit from three Galaxy Note 7 customers, according to a filing
in a federal court in Newark, New Jersey.

The complaint against Samsung Electronics America Inc seeks to
represent a nationwide class of Note 7 customers in Nevada,
Pennsylvania and California.

The world's top smartphone maker permanently ended sales of the
fire-prone Note 7 smartphone less than two months after its
launch.

Samsung announced the recall of 2.5 million Note 7s in early
September following numerous reports of the phones catching fire
in what could be one of the costliest product safety failures in
tech history.

A spokeswoman for Samsung Electronics America declined to comment
on the pending litigation.

The complaint, filed on Oct. 16, alleges that the consumers
discontinued using the phones after the recall, but were asked to
wait days or weeks for a replacement phone.

The complaint states that the consumers continued to incur monthly
device and plan charges for phones they could not use.

The case is re: Waudby vs Samsung Electronics America, U.S.
district court, district of New Jersey, Newark, No. 16-cv-07334-
CCC-JBC


SANMEDICA INTERNATIONAL: Faces "Martin" Suit in C.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Sanmedica International, LLC. The
case is captioned Paul Martin, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.  Sanmedica
International, LLC and DOES 1-10, inclusive, the Defendant, Case
No. 2:16-cv-07794 (C.D. Cal., Oct. 19, 2016).

SanMedica International operates in the pharmaceutical industry.

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


SERVICE AMERICA: Faces "Mandel" Class Suit in Broward Cty., Fla.
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOYCE MANDEL on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. SERVICE AMERICA ENTERPRISE, INC., Case No. CACE-16-
019123 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Broward Cty., October 18, 2016), alleges
that the Defendant violated the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade
Protection Act.

Service America Enterprise, Inc., is a Florida Corporation with
its principal place of business in Broward County, Florida.  The
Defendant advertised and offered its services for
maintenance/building upkeep to the Plaintiff and members of the
class.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff and the Defendant
entered into a service contract that became effective on Dec. 20,
2013.  Ms. Mandel alleges that the Defendant has employed
untrained, unlicensed, and incompetent repairmen to complete
repairs and improvements throughout the Plaintiff's residential
building.  She also alleges that the Defendant's employees often
have no experience with basic repairs of appliances commonly found
in residential apartments, and that on numerous occasions, she
contacted the Defendant to make a simple repair and the service
provided by the Defendant resulted in compounding issues, which
required additional repairs.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Justin R. Parafinczuk, Esq.
          Andrew S. Ramos, Esq.
          KOCH PARAFINCZUK & WOLF, P.A.
          110 East Broward Blvd., Suite 1630
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone (954) 462-6700
          Facsimile (954) 462-656
          E-mail: Parafinczuk@kpwlaw.com
                  Ramos@kpwlaw.com


SHORENSTEIN HAYS-NEDERLANDED: Faces "Smith" Suit in Calif. Ct.
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Shorenstein Hays-
Nederlanded Theatres LLC. The case is captioned SMITH, DAROL and
RODRIGUEZ, JOSEPH, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND ALL OTHERS
SIMILARLY SITUATED, the Plaintiffs, v. SHORENSTEIN HAYS-
NEDERLANDED THEATRES LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
the Defendant, Case No. CGC 16 554905 (Cal. Super. Ct., Oct 18,
2016).

SHN is a theatrical production company in San Francisco.


SONY CORP: Dec. 7 PS3 Settlement Claims Filing Deadline Set
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that good news for those of you who
purchased an original PlayStation 3: Sony may owe you $55 as part
of a 6-year-old class-action lawsuit.

Those who purchased the original launch PS3 console between
Nov. 1, 2006 and April 1, 2010 from an authorized US retailer can
now submit claims to receive a cash payment, according to a
settlement notice.  The lawsuit involved a console firmware update
that disabled the "Other OS" function, ending support for Linux.

Those who wanted to maintain the "Other OS" feature to continue
running Linux on their console could opt not to upgrade to 3.21,
but that would disable access to the PlayStation Network.  Sony
said it was a security-related move and permissable under its
terms of service, but detractors said it was just an anti-piracy
play.

Sony was sued, and while a California judge threw out the case in
2011, it was revived on appeal in 2014.  Sony and the plaintiffs
finally reached a settlement earlier this year; the tech giant has
agreed to pay PS3 users while maintaining that it didn't do
anything wrong.

Note that if you want that $55, you'll need to provide proof of
purchase for the console and proof that you used the Other OS
feature.  Acceptable proof of PS3 purchase includes a receipt,
credit card statement, or other documentation showing the date and
location of your purchase or the serial number of your console
plus the PlayStation Network sign-in ID that you used with it.  To
verify that you used the Other OS functionality, you'll need to
dig up your Linux proof of purchase, a screenshot showing Linux on
your PS3, or some other documented proof.

Those who submit a claim and don't have proof they used the
feature, but say they intended to use it will get $9.

All claims must be submitted by Dec. 7.


SOUTHERN RESPONSE: Canterbury Homeowners Reapply for Class Action
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TVNZ reports that a group of 40 Canterbury homeowners with
properties damaged by the Christchurch earthquakes are reapplying
for an order to resolve their Southern Response insurance claims
as a class action in court on Oct. 19.

The group, being represented by lawyer Grant Cameron, first
applied to the Christchurch High Court in December last year and
had the application rejected by Justice Mander on February 24.

Justice Mander suggested the application needed more evidence of a
common factor between the claimants for the order to proceed
jointly.

Southern Response is the government-owned agency set up in 2012 to
manage the insurance claims of AMI policy holders following the
earthquakes.

When the first application was rejected, Justice Mander said the
claimants could apply again if they revised their application to
address the "deficiencies and concerns" in the original
application.

Since then, several homeowners have stepped down from the class
action application.

The revised application alleges Southern Response has failed in
its responsibility to correctly reinstate policy holders, and used
a "cost-cutting" strategy designed to "systematically reduce the
cost of meeting the claims arising out of the Canterbury
earthquakes below its true liability," a Southern Response Class
Action representative said in the Christchurch High Court on
Oct. 19.  This allegedly involved "undertaking sub-standard repair
work" and "understating the extent of the work required, and the
cost of undertaking that work" among other claims.

A spokesperson for Southern Response said the revised claim that
Southern Response used this strategy is "absolute fiction and an
extravagant claim to make."

The second application does not deal with the 'deficiencies and
concerns' Justice Mander stated were present in the first
application and is "in substance the same as their original
claim," she said.

The Southern Response Class Action group said on their website
that they have "strong expectations" the order will be granted and
the case has "very significant implications" for unsettled policy-
holders and for the New Zealand government.

About 1700 policy-holders are yet to have their claims resolved, a
Southern Response spokesperson said.

The court application hearing is expected to continue for most of
the day in the Christchurch High Court.


SOUTHWEST CREDIT: Faces "Roth" Suit in Eastern Dist. of New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Southwest Credit
Systems, L.P. The case is titled David Roth, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. Southwest
Credit Systems, L.P., the Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-05860
(E.D.N.Y., Oct. 20, 2016).

Southwest Credit provides accounts receivable management and
consumer service solutions.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alan J. Sasson, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF
          ALAN J. SASSON, P.C.
          2687 Coney Island Avenue, 2nd Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11235
          Telephone: (718) 339 0856
          Facsimile: (347) 244 7178
          E-mail: alan@sassonlaw.com


SOUTHWESTERN ENERGY: Sued Over Misleading Financial Reports
-----------------------------------------------------------
St. Lucie County Fire District Firefighters' Pension Trust,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v.
Southwestern Energy Company, Steven L. Mueller, R. Craig Owen,
Josh C. Anders, John D. Gass, Catherine A. Kehr, Greg D. Kersley,
Terry L. Rathert, Vello A. Kuuskraa, Kenneth R. Mourton, Elliott
Pew, Alan H. Stevens, Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith
Incorporated, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., J.P. Morgan
Securities LLC, Wells Fargo Securities, LLC, BNP Paribas
Securities Corp., RBS Securities, Inc., BMO Capital Markets Corp.
Misubishi UFJ Securities (USA), Inc., Mizuho Securities USA Inc.,
SMBC Nikko Securities America, Inc., BBVA Securities Inc., Credit
Agricole Securities (USA), Inc., RBC Capital Markets, Robert W.
Baird & Co., Incorporated, Comerica Securities, Inc., Fifth Third
Securities, Inc., HSBC Securities (USA) Inc., Heikkinen Energy
Securities, LLC, Keybanc Capital Markets Inc., Macquarie Capital
(USA) Inc., PNC Capital Markets LLC, Scotia Capital (USA) Inc.,
Tudor Pickering, Holt & Co. Securities, Inc., and U.S. Bancorp
Investments, Inc., Case No. 2016-70651 (D. Tex., October 17,
2016), alleges that the Defendants made false and misleading
statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts
about the Company's business, operations, and prospects.

Southwestern Energy Company is an independent natural gas and oil
company that explores for, develops, and produces natural gas and
oil primarily in the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Thomas E. Bilek, Esq.
      THE BILEK LAW FIRM, LLP
      700 Louisiana, Suite 3950
      Houston, TX 77002
      Telephone: (713) 227-7720
      E-mail: tbilek@bileklaw.com

         - and -

      D.A. Broggi, Esq.
      Thomas L. Laughlin, Esq.
      Joseph V. Halloran, Esq.
      SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP
      230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
      New York, NY 10169
      Telephone: (212) 223-6444
      Facsimile: (212) 223-6334
      E-mail: dbroggi@scott-scott.com
              tlaughlin@scott-scott.com
              jhalloran@scott-scott.com

         - and -

      David R. Scott, Esq.
      SCOTT+SCOTT, ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP
      156 South Main Street
      PO Box 192
      Colchester, CT 06415
      Telephone: (860) 537-5537
      Facsimile: (860) 537-4432
      E-mail: david.scott@scott-scott.com


STANDARD INNOVATION: Faces We-Vibe Privacy Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
Lisa R. Lifshitz, Esq. -- llifshitz@torkinmanes.com -- of Torkin
Manes LLP, reports that while those of us who follow the growth of
the Internet of Things have become somewhat inured to the privacy
and security concerns associated with smart meters, networked
entertainment systems, refrigerators and autonomous cars, a recent
U.S. class action has presented something entirely new to stress
about: "smart" sex toys.

On Sept. 2, Illinois counsel for the plaintiff identified as
"N.P." brought a fascinating class action complaint and demand for
a jury trial against Standard Innovation (U.S.) Corp., a Canadian
company, for allegedly selling products that surreptitiously
collected and transmitted highly sensitive personal information
about the customers using them.  Standard sells a high-end
vibrator called the We-Vibe that permits users to download the
"We-Connect" application from the Apple App store or the Google
Play store and connect their smartphone via Bluetooth to the We-
Vibe, allowing them -- and their partners --remote control over
the vibrator's customizable settings and features.  Using the
"connect lover" feature, partners can exchange text messages,
engage in video chats and control a paired We-Vibe device.

When partners initiated a "connect lover" session, Standard
programmed We-Connect to show the following security promise:
"Connect and share control of your We-Vibe from anywhere. Create a
secure connection between your smartphones."  Marketing for the
product also emphasized the We-Connect app functionality as a key
selling point.

However, the action claims that Standard failed to notify or warn
customers that (i) We-Connect monitors and records, in real time,
how they use the device including the date and time of each use,
the vibration intensity level selected by the user, the vibration
mode or pattern selected by the user (collectively, the "usage
information") and, incredibly, the email address of We-Vibe
customers who had registered with the app, allowing Standard to
link the usage information to specific customer accounts; or (ii)
that all this data was being transmitted and stored in Standard's
servers located in Canada.  All We-Connect information was routed
from the "connect lover" feature to its servers, including
personal communications, We-Vibe temperatures and battery life --
despite promising secure connections between smartphones.  No
consent was ever obtained from any customers before intercepting,
monitoring, collecting and transmitting their usage information or
any other data.

The claim alleged that Standard concealed its actual data
collection policies from its customers knowing (i) that a personal
vibrator that monitors, collects and transmits highly sensitive
and intimate usage data back to the manufacturer is worth
significantly less than a personal vibrator that does not, and
(ii) most, if not all, of its customers would not have purchased a
We-Vibe in the first place had they known that it would monitor,
collect and transmit their usage information.  Not surprising, the
action asserts that N.P. would never have purchased a We-Vibe had
she known that, in order to use its full functionality, Standard
would be monitoring, collecting and transmitting her usage
information through We-Connect.

The suit alleges that Standard violated myriad U.S. federal and
state laws in its practices, including the Federal Wiretap Act,
the Illinois Eavesdropping Statute, the Illinois Consumer Fraud
and Deceptive Business Practice Act and constitutes "intrusion
upon seclusion" (a privacy tort) as well as unjust enrichment.
N.P., on her own behalf and on behalf of other Illinois
purchasers, is requesting that Standard cease its unfair practices
as well as seeking awards of actual, statutory and punitive
damages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

Since the claim was filed, Standard has been taking steps to
mitigate its reputational harm.  As noted in its "We-Connect and
Privacy Update" posted on Oct. 3, the company has vowed to
"clearly communicate our privacy and data practices and to
continue to enhance our app security measures."

Standard's updated privacy notice dated Sept. 26 now states: "You
can use We-Vibe products without the We-Connect app.  No
information related to your use of We-Vibe products is collected
from you if you don't install and use the app."  While Standard is
still collecting certain information, it promises this does not
include "your name, address or other personally identifying
information as part of the We-Connect app installation process or
otherwise."  Instead, an anonymous token will be provided the
first time a user launches the app to "facilitate connections and
share control of the We-Vibe with your partner using the Connect
Lover feature."

While the updated privacy notice repeatedly reassures that "data
is collected in a way that does not personally identify individual
We-Connect app users," questions remain.  The company still
collects certain "limited data" for the app to function, including
device hardware and operating system, unique device identifier, IP
address, language setting and data and at what time the We-Connect
app accesses its servers.  Information is also still collected to
"facilitate the exchange of messages between you and your partner
and to enable you to adjust vibration controls."  In Canada, the
Federal Privacy Commissioner has held IP addresses to be "personal
information" so I am not sure how Standard insists that no
personal information is being collected, at least from a Canadian
perspective.

Also, the company is still collecting analytical information to
help "improve our products and the quality of the We-Connect app"
-- namely, the app features used and the time spent on the app.
However, users are now able to "opt out" of sharing this
"aggregate anonymous data" through the We-Connect app settings
under privacy rather than opt-in to proactively share the
information, again contrary to Canadian privacy best practices and
recommendations.  Moreover, as the OPC is in the process of
reviewing submissions on its call for input on the issue of
consent under the Personal Information and Electronic Documents
Act, a more fundamental question remains: Assuming the allegations
in the class action complaint are true, given the nature of the
product in question, how could any company ever think it would be
reasonable to assume that the average consumer would actually
consent to having sensitive personal information, such as vibrator
settings, collected, used and stored by a third party, even with a
more robust privacy notice? Canadian We-Vibe users, please take
note!


STEEL DYNAMICS: Settles Buyers' Class Action for $4.6 Million
-------------------------------------------------------------
The Journal Gazette reports that Steel Dynamics Inc. has agreed to
pay $4.6 million to settle a class action lawsuit, company
officials announced on Oct. 18.

The Fort Wayne-based steelmaker was sued in 2008 in Chicago
federal court by a group of direct steel buyers who alleged Steel
Dynamics conspired with other steelmakers to limit production and
drive up prices.

Mark Millett, Steel Dynamics' president and CEO, said the company
was confident it would win the case but decided it would be
smarter to end the "costly, protracted and distracting litigation"
by settling out of court.

A separate claim brought by indirect steel buyers is unaffected by
the deal, which must be approved by the court before it becomes
final.  Steel Dynamics and other defendants in that case believe
the suit will be dismissed by the presiding judge.


TENNESSEE: 108 Muslim Prisoners Seek to Join Consolidated Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
A motion to intervene, to join, or seek class certification has
been filed in the lawsuit titled Corey A. Burley v. William
Stephens, Case No. 6:13-cv-00601-RWS-KNM (E.D. Tex.).

The petitioners are 108 Muslims in the Coffield Unit, a Texas
prison facility, located in Tennessee, Anderson County, Texas,
where four Muslims -- Corey A. Burley (6:13-cv-601), Timothy J.
Smith (6:13-cv-850), Michael Lane (6:14-cv-397), and Ralph J.
Bianchi (6:14-cv-356) are being allowed to grow a four-inch beard,
yet all the other Muslims are denied.

The Burley, Smith, Lane and Bianchi lawsuits were joined together
and is now pending before the Court.  The 108 Petitioners seek to
be a part of this lawsuit in any manner that the court will allow,
be it intervention, joinder, or class certification.

Plaintiffs contend that allowing Burley, Smith, Lane and Bianchi
to grow a four-inch beard and deny others is in violation of the
Equal Protection Act as well as infringement upon their Religious
Practice.

A copy of the Motion is available at no charge at
http://d.classactionreporternewsletter.com/u?f=ufNWW5GO


THERANOS INC: Sued in Ariz. Over Unreliable Laboratory Results
--------------------------------------------------------------
S.L., individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated
v. Theranos, Inc. and Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc., Case No.
2:16-cv-03599-ROS (D. Ariz., October 18, 2016), alleges that the
Defendants provide laboratory tests that were unreliable,
conducted in a manner that did not satisfy federal standards for
quality control, in laboratories that did not meet federal
standards for staffing, on inadequately maintained and calibrated
equipment.

Theranos, Inc. operates a healthcare technology company
headquartered at 1701 Page Mill Road in Palo Alto, California.

Walgreens Boots Alliance, Inc. operates over 8,100 drugstores in
the United States, offering pharmacy services alongside groceries
and dry goods.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Hart L. Robinovitch, Esq.
      ZIMMERMAN REED, PLLP
      14646 N. Kierland Blvd., Suite 145
      Scottsdale, AZ 85254
      Telephone: (480) 348-6400
      E-mail: Hart.Robinovitch@zimmreed.com

         - and -

      Laurence D. King, Esq.
      Linda M. Fong, Esq.
      KAPLAN FOX & KILSHEIMER LLP
      350 Sansome Street, Suite 400
      San Francisco, CA 94104
      Telephone: (415) 772-4700
      Facsimile: (415) 772-4707
      E-mail: lking@kaplanfox.com
              lfong@kaplanfox.com

         - and -

      Marc Wites, Esq.
      WITES & KAPETAN, P.A.
      4400 North Federal Highway
      Lighthouse Point, FL 33064
      Telephone: (954) 570-8989
      E-mail: mwites@wklawyers.com


TIME WARNER: High Court Ruling Limits Consumers' Ability to Sue
---------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Helenthal, writing for Legal Newsline, reports that a recent
U.S. Supreme Court decision limiting a consumer's ability to sue a
company's mishandling of personal information is protecting
companies like Time Warner from class action lawsuits.

The case, Spokeo v. Robins, was brought forward by a plaintiff who
complained Spokeo, a search engine company that specializes in
providing personal information, had provided wildly inaccurate
information about him that had affected his ability to find work.

The decision said that plaintiff Robins didn't have standing to
bring a suit under the Fair Credit Reporting Act because he hadn't
proved actual damages.

"This decision makes clear that bare statutory violations of
certain statutes will not confer standing on individual
plaintiffs," said Elizabeth Haas -- ehaas@foley.com -- a partner
and litigation attorney specializing in complex commercial
litigation, including class action defense work, with the law firm
Foley and Lardner.

"Plaintiffs will need to allege some type of concrete harm, beyond
the statutory violation, to bring a viable suit."

Ms. Haas said the decision already has been used in Wisconsin.

"In Gubala v. Time Warner Cable Inc., U.S. District Judge Pamela
Pepper dismissed a putative class action accusing Time Warner of
retaining subscribers' personal identification information after
they ended their service, ruling the former customer who brought
the suit lacked standing under Spokeo," she said.

In granting Time Warner's motion to dismiss, the court explained
that the plaintiff, who accused the data of not adequately
protecting personal data, didn't show damage because the
information collected by the company was correct and hadn't been
shared with a third party.

"Likewise, in August of this year," Ms. Haas said, "Judge Pepper
again relied on Spokeo and dismissed another proposed class action
against Time Warner for conducting credit checks on job applicants
in Groshek v. Time Warner Cable Inc."

"The court found that Spokeo called for a showing of real harm,
and Groshek's suit did not clear that hurdle," she said.

Haas said the "standing principles" in Spokeo had also been used
in Wisconsin courts to find standing for plaintiffs in an action
regarding Wisconsin's newly enacted voter identification law, and
it could lead to changes in the class action certification process
in that proving concrete harm may require the inquiry of each
class member.

She said the decision means companies won't have to face a lawsuit
every time incorrect information is collected.

"This is important to corporations defending against these types
of lawsuits, as they may be able to achieve dismissal of putative
class actions at the outset of the case when a specific injury is
not alleged," she said.

"Class action defense can be an expensive and burdensome
undertaking so early dismissal of these types of actions can
significantly reduce that expense and limit a defendant's'
exposure to damages."

Haas said Spokeo doesn't prevent plaintiffs from collecting
damages, but only when those damages can be proven.

"Where plaintiffs allege that their personal information has been
improperly disclosed, they may need to go one step further to
allege and prove that their information was actually misused and
how this harmed them," she said.  "The mere fact of disclosure may
not be enough to show a concrete injury for standing purposes."


TRANSWORLD SYSTEMS: Has Made Unsolicited Calls, Action Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ronald French, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Transworld Systems, Inc., Case No. 2016-CH-13197 (Ill.
Ch. Ct., October 6, 2016), seeks to stop the Defendants' practice
of using an artificial and prerecorded voice to deliver a message
without prior express consent of the called party.
Transworld Systems, Inc. is an Illinois corporation that
specializes in recovery of past due or delinquent accounts.
The Plaintiff is represented by:
Larry P. Smith, Esq.
David Marco, Esq.
SMITHMARCO, P.C.
20 S. Clark St., Suite 2120
Telephone: (888) 822-1777
Facsimile: (888) 418-1277
E-mail: lsmith@smithmarco.com
        dmarco@smithmarco.com

            - and -

       Alexander H. Burke, Esq.
BURKE LAW OFFICES, LLC
155 N. Michigan Ave., Suite 9020
Chicago, IL 60601
Telephone: (312) 729-5288
E-mail: ABurke@BurkeLawLLC.com


TROPICAL SMOOTHIE: Faces "Kiker" Suit in N.D. of Georgia
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tropical Smoothie
Cafe, LLC. The case is entitled Samantha Kiker, Yleela Rogers, and
Jullian Onstad, on behalf of herself and others similarly
situated, the Plaintiffs, v. Tropical Smoothie Cafe, LLC, the
Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-03923-AT (N.D. Ga., Oct. 20, 2016).
The case is assigned to Hon. Judge Amy Totenberg.

Tropical Smoothie offers smoothies, gourmet wraps, specialty
sandwiches and salads across the United States.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Christopher B. Hood, Esq.
          James F. McDonough, III, Esq.
          W. Lewis Garrison, Jr., Esq.
          HENINGER GARRISON & DAVIS, LLC - AL
          2224 1st Avenue North
          Birmingham, AL 35203
          Telephone: (205) 326 3336
          E-mail: chood@hgdlawfirm.com
                  jmcdonough@hgdlawfirm.com
                  wlgarrison@hgdlawfirm.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Alan M. Maxwell, Esq.
          Jennifer A. Adler, Esq.
          Joshua E. Swiger, Esq.
          Nicholas Peter Panayotopoulos, Esq.
          WEINBERG WHEELER HUDGINS
          GUNN & DIAL, LLC-ATL
          3344 Peachtree Road, NE, Suite 2400
          Atlanta, GA 30326
          Telephone: (404) 876 2700
          Facsimile: (404) 875 9433
          E-mail: amaxwell@wwhgd.com
                  jadler@wwhgd.com
                  jswiger@wwhgd.com
                  npanayo@wwhgd.com


TWITTER INC: Faces Securities Class Action in California
--------------------------------------------------------
Quinten Plummer, writing for Northern California Record, reports
that a class of investors is rallying around claims that Twitter
made "false and misleading statements" about the growth of its
social network.

The securities class-action, filed in U.S. District Court for the
Northern District of California, seeks to recover damage from
Twitter for allegedly artificially inflating its stock prices on
the winds of lofty promises.

The day before the class date, Feb. 6, 2015, Twitter reported
weaker than expected earnings, blaming them on seasonal factors
and hiccups with the roll out of iOS 8.  But Twitter "reiterated
its outlook" for a strong uptick in its monthly average user (MAU)
metric once it's new product initiative gained footing, court
documents stated.

After reassuring investors, Twitter's stock rose by approximately
17 percent.  But after reporting its results for the first quarter
of 2015 and lowering its financial outlook for the rest of the
year, Twitter's stock fell by about 18 percent, according to the
complaint.

"However, the stock continued to trade at artificially inflated
levels as defendants assured investors that new initiatives to
drive user growth and engagement were still in the early stages,"
stated the complaint.

After announcing its second quarter results, Twitter's stock fell
by about 15 percent that same day.  Twitter's stock continued to
trade at "artificially inflated prices," but news of that trading
leaked into the market and caused widespread sales of the
company's shares, the lawsuit stated.

Twitter misled investors by concealing or disregarding facts that
included the company internally switched to tracking daily active
users as its primary metric for growth, user engagement growth was
flat or declining and new product initiatives were generating much
growth, court documents stated.

Despite the popularity of Twitter, and hundreds of millions of
users it tracks every month, the lawsuit evidences that there is
"serious concern" from investors about the site's growth
trajectory, according to Neil Shah, principal analyst at
CounterPoint Research.

"This class-action suit is an extreme step from an investor
pointing to losing faith in the company," Mr. Shah told the
Northern California Record.

For years, Twitter has struggled to take its social network to the
next level and has looked for ways to light up those hundreds of
millions of logged out users it counts -- the ones who have
accounts, but rarely log into the site.

"There are multiple areas where Twitter has been unable to scale,"
Shah said.  "One is merely from a geographic reach perspective,
which has been at a standstill."

Also, Twitter's "ad engagement vehicles" are limited in comparison
to the more robust platforms for ad delivery found on Facebook and
Snapchat, Mr. Shah stated.  While there are tons of tweets and
retweets, Twitter still lags in "shareable content" when compared
with its rivals.

"So overall, it is the platform where users engage with each
other, but in very few ways marketers (or brands) can drive
engagement compared to the competition," Mr. Shah said.

The Northern California Record reached out to Twitter for a
statement, but no comments were offered.


UNITED PARCEL: Accused of Wrongful Conduct Over Work Policies
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sandra Theriault and Rose Ballesteros v. United Parcel Service,
Inc., Noel Massie, John Dana Holliday, John Greaves, and, Does 1-
100, inclusive, Case No. BC636247 (Cal. Super. Ct., October 6,
2016), arises out of the Defendant's illegal and unethical
employment policies and practices, specifically by using its Code
of Business Ethics in an arbitrary, capricious, and discriminatory
way.

The complaint asserts (i) illegal harassment, (ii) illegal
discrimination, (iii) illegal retaliation, (iv) wrongful
termination in violation of the Fair Employment and Housing Act,
(v) wrongful termination in breach of implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing, (vi) wrongful termination in breach of
implied covenant not to terminate without good cause, (vii)
whistleblower protection under Labor Code Sections 6310 and 6400,
(viii)whistleblower protection under the California False Claims
Act, (ix) whistleblower protection under Labor Code, Section
1102.5, (x) wrongful harassment, discrimination, retaliation and
discharge in violation of public policy, (xi) battery, (xii)
willful misconduct, (xiii) breach of contract (third party
beneficiary), and (xiv) violation of the unfair business practices
act.

The plaintiffs are also suing the Defendants on behalf of others
similarly situated, notes the complaint.

United Parcel Service, Inc. operates a package delivery company
and a provider of supply chain management solutions.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      John C. McCarty, Esq.
      McCARTY LEGAL
      240 & 1/2 Main Street 3
      Seal Beach, CA 90740-6318
      Telephone: (562) 296-5067
      Facsimile: (562) 296-5118
      E-mail: jmccarty@mccartylegal.com

         - and -

      Mark Dana, Esq.
      DANA & DANA ATTORNEYS AT LAW
      3635 East 5th
      Long Beach, CA 90814
      Telephone: (562) 212-1600
      E-mail: clancysbooking@gmail.com


VIKING CLIENT: Faces "Wagstaff" Suit in District of Maine
---------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against Viking Client Services Inc. The
case is entitled PAMELA WAGSTAFF, On behalf of herself and others
similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v. VIKING CLIENT SERVICES INC.,
the Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-00526-DBH (D. Maine, Oct. 19,
2016). The case is assigned to Hon. Judge D. Brock Hornby.

Viking Client provides collection services for banks and financial
institutions in the United States.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas F. Jennings, Esq.
          ALKER & JENNINGS
          P.O. Box 292
          144 Walter St.
          Hallowell, ME 04347
          Telephone: (207) 621 8188
          Facsimile: (207) 621 1343
          E-mail: dfjlaw@live.com


VIRTRA SYSTEMS: Fails to Pay Employees OT, "Thorpe" Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
Justin Thorpe, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. VirTra Systems, Inc., Case No. 2:16-cv-03612-ROS (D.
Ariz., October 19, 2016), is brought against the Defendants for
failure to pay one-and-one-half times the employees' regular rate
of pay for all time worked in excess of 40 hours in a given
workweek.

VirTra Systems, Inc. is an Arizona corporation providing firearm
training simulator systems.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Timothy F. Coons, Esq.
      Elena J. Cottam, Esq.
      DENTON PETERSON, P.C.
      1930 N. Arboleda Road, Suite 200
      Mesa, AZ  85213
      Telephone: (480) 325-9900
      Facsimile: (480) 325-9901
      E-mail: Brad@DentonPeterson.com
              Timothy@DentonPeterson.com


WAGENER EQUITIES: Paldo Sign Files Appeal in U.S. Supreme Court
--------------------------------------------------------------
Paldo Sign and Display Company, Individually and on Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated, Petitioner v. Wagener Equities, Inc.,
et al. (U.S. Supreme Ct., Oct. 19, 2016), is an appeal filed
before the United States Supreme Court from a lower court decision
in Case No. 15-1267 (7th Cir., June 16, 2016).

Wagener Equities is a full service commercial real estate company.

The Petitioner is represented by:

          Phillip A. Bock, Esq.
          BOCK & HATCH LLC
          134 N. LaSalle Street, Suite 1000
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 658 5500
          E-mail: phil@bockhatchllc.com


WELLS FARGO: Faces "Blanchard" Suit in District of New Jersey
-------------------------------------------------------------
A lawsuit has been filed against WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. The case
is titled LEE BLANCHARD, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A. and
WELLS FARGO & COMPANY, the Defendant, Case No. 1:16-cv-07509-NLH-
KMW (D.N.J., Oct. 19, 2016). The case is assigned to Hon. Judge
Noel L. Hillman.

Wells Fargo is an American international banking and financial
services.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Barry J. Gainey, Esq.
          GAINEY McKENNA & EGLESTON
          95 Route 17 South, Suite 310
          Paramus, NJ 07652
          Telephone: (201) 225 9001
          Facsimile: (201) 225 9002
          E-mail: bgainey@gme-law.com


WELLS FARGO: "Mirza" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
Hirra Mirza, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Wells Fargo, N.A., Case No. 2:16-cv-07381-CCC-MF
(D.N.J., October 17, 2016), seeks to recover unpaid overtime
compensation, liquidated damages, costs, and attorneys' fees for
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Wells Fargo, N.A. is a national banking association chartered
under the laws of the United States, with its primary of business
at 101 North Phillips Avenue, One Wachovia Center, Sioux Falls, SD
57104.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Nicholas Conlon, Esq.
      Jason T. Brown, Esq.
      JTB LAW GROUP, LLC
      155 2nd Street, Suite 4
      Jersey City, NJ 07302
      Telephone: (201) 630-0000
      Facsimile: (855) 582-5297
      E-mail: nicholasconlon@jtblawgroup.com
              jtb@jtblawgroup.com


                        Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Opischuk, Bryan, et al. Dropped in "Umphrey"
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned RALPH E. UMPHREY, Plaintiff, v. CEDARCROFT
HOME, INC., et al., Defendants, No. 3:15-cv-01094 (M.D. Tenn.),
Senior District Judge John T. Nixon of the United States District
Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division, in
an order dated October 13, 2016, granted Defendant Oleksandr
Opischuk's Motion to Dismiss and dismissed the Plaintiff's action
against him.

Judge Nixon also granted the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by
Defendants J. A. Bryan, Thomas Bryan, Cedarcroft Home, Inc., and
Peggy Zide, and dismissed the Plaintiff's claims against them.

A full-text copy of Judge Nixon's Decision is available at
https://is.gd/EMKTpy from Leagle.com.

Ralph E. Umphrey, Plaintiff, Pro Se.

Cedarcroft Homes Incorporated, Defendant, represented by Tricia T.
Olson, Adams and Reese LLP & Rocklan W. King, III, Esq. --
rocky.king@arlaw.com -- Adams and Reese LLP.

Peggy Zide, Defendant, represented by Tricia T. Olson, Adams and
Reese LLP & Rocklan W. King, III, Adams and Reese LLP.

Aleks Osipchuk, Defendant, represented by F. Laurens Brock, Adams
and Reese LLP & Tricia T. Olson, Adams and Reese LLP.

J. A. Bryan, Defendant, represented by Tricia T. Olson, Adams and
Reese LLP & Rocklan W. King, III, Adams and Reese LLP.

Thomas Bryan, Defendant, represented by Tricia T. Olson, Adams and
Reese LLP & Rocklan W. King, III, Adams and Reese LLP.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 6th Court of App. Dismisses "Little" Appeal
------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Little filed a notice of appeal in the 196th Judicial
District Court of Hunt County on August 10, 2016, and in the Fifth
Court of Appeals in Dallas on August 11, 2016.  Hunt County lies
in two different appellate districts.  Litigants from Hunt County
may choose to file a notice of appeal in either the Fifth or the
Sixth Court of Appeals.  Notwithstanding the fact that he
personally filed his notice in the Fifth Court of Appeals, Little
failed to indicate on the face of the notice whether he desired to
prosecute the appeal in the Fifth or the Sixth Court of Appeals.
Consequently, the Hunt County District Clerk's Office forwarded
Little's notice to the Sixth Court of Appeals on August 12, 2016.
As a result, Little's appeal is now pending in both the Fifth and
the Sixth Courts of Appeals.

Under these circumstances, the appellate court with dominant
jurisdiction is the court in which the notice of appeal was first
filed.  In this case, then, the Fifth Court of Appeals is the
court with dominant jurisdiction.

Pending before Court of Appeals of Texas, Sixth District,
Texarkana, is Little's motion to voluntarily dismiss his appeal in
this Court.  Because the Fifth Court of Appeals is the court with
dominant jurisdiction and because Little has expressed his desire
to proceed with his appeal in that court, his motion is well
taken.  Pursuant to Rule 42.1(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of
Appellate Procedure, the motion is granted.

Accordingly, the Court of Appeals of Texas dismisses the appeal
captioned MARK LITTLE, Appellant, v. THE SWAN ASBESTOS AND SILICA
SETTLEMENT TRUST, Appellees, No. 06-16-00055-CV (Tex. App.).

A full-text copy of the October 19, 2016, Memorandum Opinion
penned by Chief Justice Josh R. Morriss, III, is available at
https://is.gd/wiXD08 from Leagle.com.

Joe E. Weis, for The Swan Asbestos and Silica Settlement Trust,
Appellee.

W. Todd Hoeffner, for Mark Little, Appellant.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Denies La. Man's Bid to Amend PI Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned NOLAN LEGEAUX, ET AL., v. BORG-WARNER
CORPORATION, ET AL, SECTION:"I" (4), Civil Action No. 16-13773
(E.D. La.), Judge Karen Wells Roby of the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana on October 14, 2016,
issued an order denying the plaintiffs' motion for leave to file a
first supplemental and amended complaint to add Taylor-Seidenbach,
Inc., as a defendant and to reflect additional facts and
information.

Taking into consideration the factors laid out in Hensgens v.
Deere & Co., 833 F.2d 1179, 1182 (5th Cir.1987)), Judge Roby held
that three of the four factors factors weigh in favor of denying
the amendment. With respect to the third factor, whether the
plaintiff will be significantly injured if amendment is not
allowed, Judge Roby agreed with the argument that the Plaintiffs
will not be significantly injured by not allowing the amendment
becase the Plaintiffs have not proferred any reason why they would
be injured and the potential liability of the Defendants would be
solidary among liable Defendants if the Plaintiffs recover.

A full-text copy of Judge Roby's Decision is available at
https://is.gd/yBHA0z from Leagle.com.

Nolan Legeaux, Plaintiff, represented by Alex S. Dunn, Jr., Esq. -
- adunn@gorijulianlaw.com -- Gori, Julian & Associates, P.C..

Susan Legeaux, Plaintiff, represented by Alex S. Dunn, Jr., Gori,
Julian & Associates, P.C..

Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, Defendant, represented by Stacey
Leigh Strain, Hubbard, Mitchell, Williams & Strain, PLLC.

Caterpillar Inc, Defendant, represented by Robert S. Emmett, Baker
Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, Kimberly C. Delk, Baker
Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz & Stephanie Noriea Murphy,
Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz.

CBS Corporation, Defendant, represented by John Joseph Hainkel,
III, Frilot L.L.C., Angela M. Bowlin, Frilot L.L.C., James H.
Brown, Jr., Frilot L.L.C. & Kelsey A. Eagan, Frilot L.L.C..

CBS Corporation, Defendant, represented by Meredith K. Keenan,
Frilot L.L.C..

CBS Corporation, Defendant, represented by Peter R. Tafaro, Frilot
L.L.C..

CertainTeed Corporation Inc., Defendant, represented by Arthur
Wendel Stout, III, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP, Barbara Bourgeois Ormsby,
Deutsch Kerrigan LLP, Jason P. Franco, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP,
Jennifer E. Adams, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP & William Claudy Harrison,
Jr., Deutsch Kerrigan LLP.

Cleaver-Brooks Sales & Services, Inc., Defendant, represented by
Michael R. Barnes, Jude & Jude, PLLC.

Crane Company, Defendant, represented by Aleta W. Barnes, Esq. --
abarnes@dwwattorneys.com -- Dogan & Wilkinson, PLLC, Barry C.
Campbell, Esq. -- bcampbell@dwwattorneys.com -- Dogan & Wilkinson,
PLLC, Hanson Douglas Horn, Esq. -- hhorn@dwattorneys.com -- Dogan
& Wilkinson, PLLC & Kevin M. Melchi, Esq. --
kmelchi@dwattorneys.com -- Dogan & Wilkinson, PLLC.

DAP Products Inc., Defendant, represented by Leigh Ann Tschirn
Schell, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Joseph Henry
Hart, IV, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Lori Allen
Waters, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Magali Ann
Puente-Martin, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC & Thomas
A. Porteous, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC.

Flowserve US Inc, Defendant, represented by Brandie Mendoza
Thibodeaux, Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP, B. Adam Hays, Swetman
Baxter Massenburg, LLC, Christopher O. Massenburg, Manion Gaynor &
Manning, LLP, David R. Frohn, Swetman Baxter Massenburg, Glenn
L.M. Swetman, Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Heather Cheesbro,
Ungarino & Eckert, LLC, Jeanette Seraile-Riggins, Manion Gaynor
Manning LLP, Kevin R. Sloan, Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Meaghan
M. Donovan, Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Meghan B. Senter, Manion
Gaynor Manning LLP & Natasha Amber Corb, Manion Gaynor Manning
LLP.

Gardner Denver, Inc., Defendant, represented by Kaye N.
Courington, Esq. -- kcourington@courington-law.com -- Courington,
Kiefer & Sommers, LLC, Daniel Rolando Estrada, Esq. --
destrada@courington-law.com -- Courington, Kiefer & Sommers, LLC &
James Matthew Matherne, Esq. -- jmatherne@courington-law.com --
Courington, Kiefer & Sommers, LLC.

General Electric Company, Defendant, represented by John Joseph
Hainkel, III, Frilot L.L.C., Angela M. Bowlin, Frilot L.L.C.,
James H. Brown, Jr., Frilot L.L.C., Kelsey A. Eagan, Frilot
L.L.C., Meredith K. Keenan, Frilot L.L.C. & Peter R. Tafaro,
Frilot L.L.C..

Georgia-Pacific LLC, Defendant, represented by Gayla M. Moncla,
Kean Miller, Alexandra E. Rossi, Kean Miller, Allison N. Benoit,
Kean Miller, Anthony M. Williams, Kean Miller LLP, Barrye
Panepinto Miyagi, Kean Miller, Gregory M. Anding, Kean Miller, Jay
Morton Jalenak, Jr., Kean Miller, Robert E. Dille, Kean Miller &
Sarah W. Anderson, Kean Miller.

Genuine Parts Company, Defendant, represented by John Joseph
Hainkel, III, Frilot L.L.C., Angela M. Bowlin, Frilot L.L.C.,
James H. Brown, Jr., Frilot L.L.C., Kelsey A. Eagan, Frilot
L.L.C., Meredith K. Keenan, Frilot L.L.C. & Peter R. Tafaro,
Frilot L.L.C..

Goulds Pumps, Incorporated, Defendant, represented by Lauren Ann
McCulloch, Morgan, Lewis & Bockius.

IMO Industries, Inc., Defendant, represented by Leigh Ann Tschirn
Schell, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Joseph Henry
Hart, IV, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Lori Allen
Waters, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Magali Ann
Puente-Martin, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC & Thomas
A. Porteous, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC.

J-M Manufacturing Company, Inc., Defendant, represented by Gayla
M. Moncla, Kean Miller, Alexandra E. Rossi, Kean Miller & Anthony
M. Williams, Kean Miller LLP.

Riley Power, Inc., Defendant, represented by Arthur Wendel Stout,
III, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP, Barbara Bourgeois Ormsby, Deutsch
Kerrigan LLP, Jason P. Franco, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP, Jennifer E.
Adams, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP & William Claudy Harrison, Jr.,
Deutsch Kerrigan LLP.

Union Carbide Corporation, Defendant, represented by Deborah
DeRoche Kuchler, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC,
Francis Xavier deBlanc, III, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner &
Richeson, LLC, McGready Lewis Richeson, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner
& Richeson, LLC, Melissa M. Desormeaux, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner
& Richeson, LLC, Michael H. Abraham, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner &
Richeson, LLC & Milele N. St. Julien, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner &
Richeson, LLC.

Warren Pumps, LLC, Defendant, represented by Leigh Ann Tschirn
Schell, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Joseph Henry
Hart, IV, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Lori Allen
Waters, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Magali Ann
Puente-Martin, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC & Thomas
A. Porteous, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC.

Zurn Industries, LLC, Defendant, represented by Arthur Wendel
Stout, III, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP, Barbara Bourgeois Ormsby,
Deutsch Kerrigan LLP, Jason P. Franco, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP,
Jennifer E. Adams, Deutsch Kerrigan LLP & William Claudy Harrison,
Jr., Deutsch Kerrigan LLP.

Huntington Ingalls, Inc., Defendant, represented by Brian C.
Bossier, Blue Williams, LLP, Christopher Thomas Grace, III, Blue
Williams, LLP, Edwin A. Ellinghausen, III, Blue Williams, LLP,
Erin Helen Boyd, Blue Williams, LLP, Laura M. Gillen, Blue
Williams, LLP, Michelle A. Beaty, Blue Williams, LLP & Patrick
Kevin Shockey, Blue Williams, LLP.

Puget Sound Commerce Center, Inc., Defendant, represented by Scott
C. Seiler, Esq. -- scseiler@liskow.com -- Liskow & Lewis, Charles
B. Wilmore, Esq. -- cbwilmore@liswkow.com -- Liskow & Lewis,
Patrick B. Reagin, Esq. -- preagin@liskow.com -- Liskow & Lewis,
Philip Dore, Esq. -- pdore@liskow.com -- Liskow & Lewis & Tiffany
L. Delery, Esq., Liskow & Lewis.

Vigor Industrial LLC, Defendant, represented by Scott C. Seiler,
Liskow & Lewis, Charles B. Wilmore, Liskow & Lewis, Patrick B.
Reagin, Liskow & Lewis, Philip Dore, Liskow & Lewis & Tiffany L.
Delery, Liskow & Lewis.

Vigor Shipyards, Inc., Defendant, represented by Scott C. Seiler,
Liskow & Lewis, Charles B. Wilmore, Liskow & Lewis, Patrick B.
Reagin, Liskow & Lewis, Philip Dore, Liskow & Lewis & Tiffany L.
Delery, Liskow & Lewis.

BorgWarner Morse TEC LLC, Defendant, represented by Christopher O.
Massenburg, Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Kevin R. Sloan, Manion
Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Meaghan M. Donovan, Manion Gaynor &
Manning, LLP & Meghan B. Senter, Manion Gaynor Manning LLP.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: PI Suits vs. CNA Barred by WR Grace Plan
---------------------------------------------------------
Continental Casualty Company and Transportation Insurance Company
(collectively "CNA") filed an adversary complaint seeking to
enforce the Asbestos PI Channeling Injunction that was established
in W.R. Grace & Co.'s confirmed plan of reorganization to prevent
the Defendants from pursuing certain personal injury lawsuits
brought against CNA in Montana state court.

Defendants Jeremy B. Carr, et al., have moved to dismiss the
adversary proceeding. CNA has moved for summary judgment. The
parties disagree about whether the Montana Claims fall within the
scope of the Asbestos PI Channeling Injunction.

In an opinion dated October 17, 2016, Judge Kevin J. Carey of the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware concluded that
the Montana Claims are enjoined by the Asbestos PI Channeling
Injunction and, accordingly, denied the Defendants' Motion to
Dismiss and grant CNA's Summary Judgment Motion.

According to Judge Carey, the Asbestos PI Channeling Injunction
identifies CNA by name and, by incorporating the CNA/Grace
Settlement Agreement in Exhibit 5 to the Plan, includes all known
and unknown policies issued to Grace by CNA, with certain
exceptions, including an exception for workers' compensation
claims.  Therefore, CNA is identifiable from the terms of the
channeling injunction.

Judge Carey pointed out that whether the language of Section
524(g)(4)(A) limits the scope of the Asbestos PI Channeling
Injunction to bar the Montana Claims requires consideration of the
following questions: (i) do the Montana Claims allege that CNA is
directly or indirectly liable for the conduct of, claims against,
or demands on, the Debtors, and (ii) does the liability alleged in
the Montana Claims arise by reason of CNA's provision of insurance
to the Debtors?

Judge Carey held that the Montana Claims are subject to the
Asbestos PI Channeling Injunction.  CNA is entitled to summary
judgment because (1) the Defendants are seeking to hold CNA
"directly or indirectly" liable for the conduct of and claims
against Grace; (2) CNA's alleged liability arises by reason of
CNA's provision of insurance to Grace; and (3) the Defendants'
claims against CNA are not workers' compensation claims that are
excluded from the channeling injunction.

The case is CONTINENTAL CASUALTY COMPANY and TRANSPORTATION
INSURANCE COMPANY Plaintiffs, v. JEREMY B. CARR, et al.,
Defendants, Adv. Proc. No. 15-50766 (KJC)(D. Del.).  A full-text
copy of Judge Carey's Decision is available at
https://is.gd/esfQPe from Leagle.com.

W.R. Grace & Co., et al., Debtor, represented by Janet S. Baer,
Baer Higgins Fruchtman LLC, Mark M. Billion, Billion Law, Timothy
P. Cairns, Pachulski Stang Young & Jones LLP, David W. Carickhoff,
Archer & Greiner, P.C., Gregory M. Gordon, Esq. --
gmgordon@jonesday.com -- Jones Day, Bruce Grohsgal, Pachulski,
Stang, Ziehl, Young, Jones, Curtis A. Hehn, Pachulski Stang Ziehl
Young Jones & Wein, Daniel K. Hogan, Hogan McDaniel, Laura Davis
Jones, Esq. -- ljones@pszjlaw.com -- Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones
LLP, Kathleen P. Makowski, Esq. -- Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones
LLP, James E. O'Neill, Esq. -- joneill@pszjlaw.com -- Pachulski
Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP & Paul W. Turner, The Carlile Law Firm.

Edward B. Cottingham, Jr., Trustee, represented by M. Dawes Cooke,
Jr., Esq. -- mdc@barnwell-whaley.com -- Barnwell Whaley Paterson &
Helms LLC & William D. Sullivan, Esq. -- bsullivan@sha-llc.com --
Sullivan Hazeltine Allinson LLC.

Richard B Schiro, Trustee, represented by Meghan E.B. DeBard, Cox
Smith Matthews Inc. & Deborah D. Williamson, Esq. --
dwilliamson@dykema.com -- Dykema Cox Smith.

U.S. Trustee, U.S. Trustee, represented by Richard L.
Schepacarter, Office of the United States Trustee.

Roger Frankel, Successor Trustee, represented by John C. Phillips,
Jr., Esq. -- jcp@pgmhlaw.com -- Phillips, Goldman & Spence &
Richard H. Wyron, Esq. -- Frankel Wyron LLP.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Court Narrows Claims in Libby Victims vs. MCC
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ralph Hutt and Carl Osborn filed an adversary complaint seeking a
declaratory judgment that their claims against Maryland Casualty
Company, are not barred by the Asbestos PI Channeling Injunction
that was established in W.R. Grace & Co.'s confirmed plan of
reorganization.  The Plaintiffs have moved for summary judgment,
which is opposed by MCC.

In an opinion dated October 17, 2016, Judge Kevin J. Carey of the
U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, granted in
part and denied in part the Plaintiffs' Summary Judgment Motion.

Judge Carey held that, in this case, the injuries giving rise to
the Plaintiffs' Claims are based on exposure to Grace's asbestos
products or operations at the Libby Facility.  There are no
allegations that MCC produced, mined or marketed any of its own
asbestos products.  Therefore, Judge Carey concludes that the
Plaintiffs' Claims seek to hold MCC indirectly liable for the
Debtors' conduct and products.

Judge Carey rejects the Plaintiffs' argument (asserted in Count I
and Count VI of the Adversary Complaint) that Section
524(g)(4)(A)(ii) of the Bankruptcy Code limits the reach of the
Asbestos PI Channeling Injunction and prevents the injunction from
enjoining the Plaintiffs' Claims.  The Plaintiffs' Claims seek to
hold MCC indirectly liable for the conduct of, claims against or
demands on the Debtors.  Also, MCC's provision of insurance to the
Debtors is legally relevant to (or, at the very least, a close
nexus to) the Plaintiffs' Claims.  Because MCC's liability could
affect the res of the Debtors' estate, determining that Section
524(g)(4)(A)(ii) protects an insurer from claims, such as the
Negligence Claim and the Bad Faith Claim, is not beyond the
jurisdiction of this Court, Judge Carey held.

Judge Carey pointed out that the Asbestos PI Channeling Injunction
enjoins Holders of Asbestos PI Claims from taking any legal action
or making any demand against an "Asbestos Protected Party," which
is defined to include a Settled Asbestos Insurance Company.  MCC
is a Settled Asbestos Insurance Company under the Plan; however,
the Plan's definition of a Settled Asbestos Insurance Company
limits the extent of protection that the insurance company will
receive under the channeling injunction.

Judge Carey further pointed out that the definition of a Settled
Asbestos Insurance Company provides that the Asbestos Insurance
Entity is protected "only with respect to, and only to the extent
of" policies that are identified as the subject of an Asbestos
Insurance Settlement Agreement listed in Exhibit 5 of the Exhibit
Book.  The parties agree that MCC's workers' compensation policies
were not listed in Exhibit 5.

MCC argues that the channeling injunction enjoins claims arising
out of insurance policies, even those policies that are not listed
on Exhibit 5, as long as the requirements of Section
524(g)(4)(A)(ii) are met.  Judge Carey held that this
interpretation makes the Exhibit 5 requirement a nullity.  The
judge said that although he was not the presiding judge on this
case at the time of confirmation, it is apparent that the parties
negotiated many provisions, including the definition of Settled
Asbestos Insurance Company.  Judge Carey said he does not think it
is a proper exercise to look beyond the express terms of the
confirmed plan; no part of that definition should be ignored or
rendered a nullity.

Accordingly, Judge Carey granted the Plaintiffs' Summary Judgment
Motion as to Count II and Count IV, and denied on the remaining
Counts I, III, V, and VI.

The case is RALPH HUTT and CARL OSBORN, Plaintiffs, v. MARYLAND
CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendants, Adv. Proc. No. 14-50867 (KJC)(Bankr.
D. Del.).  A full-text copy of Judge Carey's Decision is available
at https://is.gd/L15l0u from Leagle.com.

W.R. Grace & Co., et al., Debtor, represented by Janet S. Baer,
Baer Higgins Fruchtman LLC, Mark M. Billion, Billion Law, Timothy
P. Cairns, Pachulski Stang Young & Jones LLP, David W. Carickhoff,
Archer & Greiner, P.C., Gregory M. Gordon, Jones Day, Bruce
Grohsgal, Pachulski, Stang, Ziehl, Young, Jones, Curtis A. Hehn,
Pachulski Stang Ziehl Young Jones & Wein, Daniel K. Hogan, Hogan
McDaniel, Laura Davis Jones, Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP,
Kathleen P. Makowski, Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP, James E.
O'Neill, Pachulski Stang Ziehl & Jones LLP & Paul W. Turner, The
Carlile Law Firm.

Edward B. Cottingham, Jr., Trustee, represented by M. Dawes Cooke,
Jr., Barnwell Whaley Paterson & Helms LLC & William D. Sullivan,
Sullivan Hazeltine Allinson LLC.

Richard B Schiro, Trustee, represented by Meghan E.B. DeBard, Cox
Smith Matthews Inc. & Deborah D. Williamson, Dykema Cox Smith.

U.S. Trustee, U.S. Trustee, represented by Richard L.
Schepacarter, Office of the United States Trustee.

Roger Frankel, Successor Trustee, represented by John C. Phillips,
Jr., Phillips, Goldman & Spence & Richard H. Wyron, Frankel Wyron
LLP.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dana's Bid to Dismiss "Murray" Granted
-------------------------------------------------------
In Re Asbestos Litigation relating to HAROLD WAYNE MURRAY AND
JANICE M. MURRAY, Plaintiffs, v. 3M Company, et al., Defendants,
C.A. No. PC-16-0151 (R.I. Super.), the Superior Court of Rhode
Island, PROVIDENCE, S.C., finds insufficient minimum contacts for
personal jurisdiction -- both general and specific -- over
Defendant Dana Companies, LLC.

Additionally, as the Defendant's limited participation in
discovery does not constitute forfeiture of its defense, the
Defendant's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction is
granted.

A full-text copy of the Decision penned by Presiding Justice Alice
B. Gibney is available at https://is.gd/YAQmGN from Leagle.com.

John E. Deaton, Esq., For Plaintiff.

John E. Deaton, Esq., (401) 351-6400, jdeaton@deatonlawfirm.com
for Harold Wayne Murray and Janice M. Murray.

Brian D. Gross, Esq., (401) 443-2100, bgross@mgmlaw.com for 3M
Company.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for A.Y. McDonald Manufacturing Company.

James A. Ruggieri, Esq., (401) 272-3500, jruggieri@hcc-law.com for
AAF-McQuay, solely as successor to Singer.

Mark J. Claflin, Esq., (781) 235-5594, mclaflin@hl-law.com for
AAF-McQuay, Inc., n/k/a Dakin Applied Americas Inc.

Paul E. Dwyer Jr., Esq., (401) 274-9200, paul.dwyer@lockelord.com
for American Cast Iron Pipe Co.

Stephen J. MacGillivray, Esq., (401) 490-3430,
smacgillivray@pierceatwood.com for American Optical Corporation.

Jennifer A. Whelan, Esq., (617) 342-6800,
jwhelan@eckertseamans.com for Amtrol, Inc.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for Armstrong Pumps, Inc.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for Asco Valve, Inc.

Craig R. Waksler, Esq., (617) 342-6800, cwaksler@eckertseamans.com
for Bethlehem Apparatus Co., Inc.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Blackmar Pump Company, BorgWarner Morse TEC LLC.

Mitchell R. Edwards, Esq., (401) 274-2000,
medwards@hinckleyallen.com for Bosch Thermotechnology Corp.

Stephen P. Cooney, Esq., (401) 272-3500, scooney@hcc-law.com for
Briggs and Stratton Corporation.

Anthony J. Sbarra, Jr., Esq., (617) 210-7755,
asbarra@hermesnetburn.com for Burnham LLC f/k/a Burnham
Corporation.

Wayne E. George, Esq., (617) 341-7748, Wayne_george@hotmail.com
for Cameron International Corporation f/k/a Cooper Cameron
Corporation.

James A. Ruggieri, Esq., (401) 272-3500, jruggieri@hcc-law.com for
Carrier Corporation, Including Bryant Heating and Cooling Systems,
Inc.

Thomas W. Lyons, III, Esq., (401) 456-0700,
tlyons@straussfactor.com for CBS Corporation f/k/a Viacom, Inc.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Certainteed Corporation.

Mitchell R. Edwards, Esq., (401) 274-2000,
medwards@hinckleyallen.com for Charlotte Pipe and Foundry Company.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Clarage, A Division of Twin City Fan Companies, Ltd.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Clark Reliance Co.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Clayton Industries.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Coen Co., Inc.

Craig R. Waksler, Esq., (617) 342-6800, cwaksler@eckertseamans.com
for Columbia Boiler Company.

Brian D. Gross, Esq., (401) 443-2100, bgross@mgmlaw.com for
Compudyne Corporation, Individually and as Successor to York
Shipley.

Mark O. Denehy, Esq., (401) 274-7200, mdenehy@apslaw.com for
Conbraco Industries, Inc., Individually and as Successor to Apollo
Valves.

Zachary Weisberg, Esq., (401) 422-5300, zacharyweisberg@gmail.com
for Control Components, Inc.,

David A. Goldman, Esq., (617) 737-9045, dgoldman@governo.com for
Conwed Corporation.

Stephen P. Cooney, Esq., (401) 272-3500, scooney@hcc-law.com for
Copes-Vulcan, Inc.

David A. Goldman, Esq., (617) 737-9045, dgoldman@governo.com for
Crane Co.

Michael D. Chefitz, Esq., (617) 426-3900,
mchefitz@bonnerkiernan.com for Crown, Cork and Seal Company, Inc.

Mark J. Claflin, Esq., (781) 235-5594, mclaflin@hl-law.com for
Daikin Applied Americas Inc. f/k/a AAF-McQuay, Inc.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Dana Companies LLC.

Mitchell R. Edwards, Esq., (401) 274-2000,
medwards@hinckleyallen.com for Danfoss Power Solutions (US)
Company.

John W. Mahoney, Esq., (401) 331-5353, johnmahoney@amlawllp.com
for DAP, Inc.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Defendants' Liaison Counsel.

Craig R. Waksler, Esq., (617) 342-6800, cwaksler@eckertseamans.com
for Dezurik, Inc.

Stephen P. Cooney, Esq., (401) 272-3500, scooney@hcc-law.com for
Domestic Corporation Individually and as Successor to Servel
Corporation and Ark.

David A. Goldman, Esq., (617) 737-9045, dgoldman@governo.com for
Eastman Chemical Company.

Stephen P. Cooney, Esq., (401) 272-3500, scooney@hcc-law.com for
Electrolux Home Products, Inc.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for Emerson Electric Company.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
F.W. Webb Company.

Margreta Vellucci, Esq., 781) 556-0600, mvellucci@pondnorth.com
for Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for Fisher Controls International, LLC.

Jeffrey M. Thomen, Esq., (860) 275-6700, jthomen@mccarter.com for
Fisher Scientific Company LLC.

Paul E. Dwyer, Jr., Esq., (401) 274-9200, Paul.dwyer@lockelord.com
for FMC Corporation, Individually and on Behalf of its Former
Divisions Northern Pump.

Mark O. Denehy, Esq., (401) 274-7200, mdenehy@apslaw.com for
Foster Wheeler, LLC.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Fulton Boiler Works, Inc., Gardner Denver Inc.

Jeffrey M. Thomen, Esq., (860) 275-6700, jthomen@mccarter.com for
General Electric Company.

Matthew C. Oleyer, Esq., (617) 217-5500, moleyer@cetllp.com for
General Insulation Company.

Jason Caron, Esq., (781) 556-0600, jcaron@pondnorth.com for
Genuine Parts Company.

Brian D. Gross, Esq., (401) 443-2100, bgross@mgmlaw.com for
Georgia Pacific LLC f/k/a Georgia-Pacific Corporation.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Goodrich Corporation f/k/a The B.F. Goodrich Company.

Kevin C. McCaffrey, Esq., (718) 855-9000,
kmccaffrey@cullenanddykman.com for Goulds Pumps, Inc.

Stephen P. Cooney, Esq., (401) 272-3500, scooney@hcc-law.com for
Graybar Electric Company, Inc.

Wayne E. George, Esq., (617) 341-7748, Wayne_george@hotmail.com
for Grinnell LLC.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Grundfos Water Utility Inc.

Mark O. Denehy, Esq., (401) 274-7200, mdenehy@apslaw.com for
Hajoca Corporation.

Jennifer E. Wheelock, Esq., jewheelock@juno.com for Hammond Valve
Corporation, Hauck Manufacturing Company.

James A. Ruggieri, Esq., (401) 272-3500, jruggieri@hcc-law.com for
Homasote Company.

Stephen P. Cooney, Esq., (401) 272-3500, scooney@hcc-law.com for
Home Depot U.S.A. Inc.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Honeywell International Inc., Individually and f/k/a AlliedSignal,
Inc.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for IMO Industries, Inc.

Anthony J. Sbarra, Jr., Esq., (617) 210-7755,
asbarra@hermesnetburn.com for Navistar Inc.

Cassandra Feeney, Esq., (401) 521-6100, cfeeney@adlercohen.com for
Ingersoll-Rand Company.

James A. Ruggieri, Esq., (401) 272-3500, jruggieri@hcc-law.com
International Comfort Products, for International Paper Company
f/k/a Manning Paper Supply.

Wayne E. George, Esq., (617) 341-7748, Wayne_george@hotmail.com
for ITT Corporation f/k/a ITT Industries, Inc.

Mark O. Denehy, Esq., (401) 274-7200, mdenehy@apslaw.com for J.H.
France Refractories Company.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Johnson Controls, Inc.

Mark O. Denehy, Esq., (401) 274-7200, mdenehy@apslaw.com for
Jordan Valve, a Division of Richard Industries.

Paul E. Dwyer, Jr., Esq., (401) 274-9200, Paul.dwyer@lockelord.com
for Keeler Dorr-Oliver Boiler Company.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Kohler Company.

John W. Mahoney, Esq., (401) 331-5353, johnmahoney@amlawllp.com
for Lennox Industries, Inc.

Paul E. Dwyer, Jr., Esq., (401) 274-9200, Paul.dwyer@lockelord.com
for Link Belt Construction Equipment Company.

Kendra A. Bergeron, Esq., (617) 737-9045, kbergeron@governo.com
for Marvair.

Mary Cavanagh Dunn, Esq., (401) 831-8900, mcd@blishcavlaw.com for
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.

Craig R. Waksler, Esq., (617) 342-6800, cwaksler@eckertseamans.com
for Modine Manufacturing Company.

Jason Caron, Esq., (781) 556-0600, jcaron@pondnorth.com for
National Automotive Parts Association.

Jeffrey M. Thomen, Esq., (860) 275-6700, jthomen@mccarter.com for
Nibco, Inc.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Nortek Global HVAC, LLC.

Mark T. Nugent, Esq., (401) 331-4660, mnugent@morrisonmahoney.com
PIC Contractors, Inc., for Packing & Insulation Corporation.

Brian D. Gross, Esq., (401) 443-2100, bgross@mgmlaw.com for Pecora
Corporation.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Pneumo-Abex Corp., Individually and as Successor to Abex Corp.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for Rheem Manufacturing Company.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Riley Power Inc. f/k/a D.B. Riley, Inc. f/k/a Riley Stoker
Corporation.

Mark J. Claflin, Esq., (781) 235-5594, mclaflin@hl-law.com for
Rockwell Automation Inc., Individually and as Successor to Timken
Heating Business.

Crystal L. Cooke, Esq., (860) 493-5763, Crys.fraser@gmail.com for
Schneider Electric USA, Inc. f/k/a Square D Company.

Mitchell R. Edwards, Esq., (401) 274-2000,
medwards@hinckleyallen.com for Shearer's Food, LLC.

Lawrence G. Cetrulo, Esq., (617) 217-5500, lcetrulo@cetllp.com for
Sherwin-Williams Company.

David A. Goldman, Esq., (617) 737-9045, dgoldman@governo.com for
Slant/Fin Corporation.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for SOS Products Company, Inc.

Stephen P. Cooney, Esq., (401) 272-3500, scooney@hcc-law.com for
Spirax Sarco, Inc.

Paul E. Dwyer, Jr., Esq., (401) 274-9200, Paul.dwyer@lockelord.com
for Sterling Fluid systems (USA), LLC f/k/a Peerless Pump Company.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for Sundyne Corporation.

Mark O. Denehy, Esq., (401) 274-7200, mdenehy@apslaw.com for
Superior Boiler Works, Inc.

John L. Vonbarta, Esq., (781) 309-1500,
vonbarta@litchfieldcavo.com for Sussman-Automatic Corporation
d/b/a Sussman Electric Boilers.

Craig R. Waksler, Esq., (617) 342-6800, cwaksler@eckertseamans.com
for Taco, Inc.

George E. Lieberman, Esq., (401) 270-0070,
George@gianfrancescolaw.com for Teledyne Technologies, Inc.

James P. Marusak, Esq., (401) 274-6644, JPM@gsm-law.com for
Tenneco Automotive Operating Company, Inc.

Monica R. Fanesi, Esq., (401) 406-3311,
Monica.nelson@lewisbrisbois.com for The Dow Chemical Company.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for The Falk Corporation.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for The Foxboro Company.

Clark W. Yudysky, Esq., (401) 621-4652,
cyudysky@morrisonmahoney.com for The Goodyear Tire & Rubber
Company.

Cassandra Feeney, Esq., (401) 521-6100, cfeeney@adlercohen.com for
The Nash Engineering Company.

Richard M. Dighello, Jr., Esq., (860) 548-2633, rdighello@uks.com
for The W.M. Powell Company.

Brian A. Fielding, Esq., Bfielding37@hotmail.com for Trane US Inc.
f/k/a American Standard, Inc.

James A. Ruggieri, Esq., (401) 272-3500, jruggieri@hcc-law.com for
U.S. Plywood Corporation.

Christopher R. Howe, Esq., (617) 241-3000, chowe@campbell-trial-
lawyers.com for United States Steel Corporation.N

Paul E. Dwyer, Jr., Esq., (401) 274-9200, Paul.dwyer@lockelord.com
for Vapor Power International.

Craig R. Waksler, Esq., (617) 342-6800, cwaksler@eckertseamans.com
for Vermont Talc, Inc.

Brian D. Gross, Esq., (401) 443-2100, bgross@mgmlaw.com for W.M.
Grainger, Inc.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Warren Pumps, LLC.

James A. Ruggieri, Esq., (401) 272-3500, jruggieri@hcc-law.com for
Watts Regulator Co.

Jonathan F. Tabasky, Esq., (617) 737-3100, jtabasky@cmj-law.com
Brian D. Gross, Esq., (401) 443-2100, bgross@mgmlaw.com for Weil-
McLain, a Division of the Marley Wylain Company.

Jason Caron, Esq., (781) 556-0600, jcaron@pondnorth.com for
Western Auto Supply Company.

Cassandra Feeney, Esq., (401) 521-6100, cfeeney@adlercohen.com for
Weyerhaeuser Company.

Theodorus Urbanski, Esq., (401) 941-0909, durbanski@melicklaw.com
for Whirlpool Corporation.

Shannon Marie O'Neil, Esq., (617) 350-0950, SOneil@piercedavis.com
for Zurn Industries, LLC., For Defendants.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Burnham Wins Summary Judgment Bid in "Holzworth"
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Judge John F. Keenan of the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York grants defendant Burnham LLC's
motion for summary judgment as to each of the plaintiff's six
causes of action alleged in the case captioned CHEYANNE HOLZWORTH,
as Personal Representative for the Estate of William Andrew
Holzworth Plaintiff, v. ALFA LAVAL INC., et al. Defendants, No. 12
Civ. 06088 (JFK)(S.D.N.Y.).

On March 22, 2016, Burnham moved for summary judgment, asserting
that New Jersey law is applicable and that there is no genuine
dispute as to any material fact so that (1) the Plaintiff has
failed to establish that the heater with its allegedly asbestos-
containing insulation was manufactured by Burnham and, in any
event, (2) Mr. Holzworth's single exposure of one to three hours
was not a substantial factor causing his illness.  The Plaintiff
does not oppose this motion.

Judge Keenan held that he need not determine whether an actual
conflict exists here because, no matter which test applies, the
Plaintiff has failed to meet her burden of establishing that the
Decedent was exposed to harmful levels of asbestos from a Burnham
product.

A full-text copy of Judge Keenan's Opinion & Order dated October
19, 2016, is available at https://is.gd/dkFm7l from Leagle.com.

Gould's Pumps, Incorporated, Defendant, represented by Raghu N.
Bandlamudi, Esq. -- rbandlamudi@cullenanddykman.com -- Cullen and
Dykman LLP.

H.B. Fuller Company, Defendant, represented by Jordan David Beltz,
Segal McCambrige Singer & Mahoney & Katrina Helene Murphy, Segal
McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, Ltd..

IMO Industries, Inc., Defendant, represented by Annmarie Giblin,
Leader & Berkon LLP.

Ingersoll-Rand Company, Defendant, represented by Lisa M.
Pascarella, Esq. -- lpascarella@pdltlaw.com -- Pascarella Divita
Lindenbaum & Tomaszewski PLLC & Lisa M. Pascarella, Forman Perry
Watkins Krutz & Tardy LLP.

Velan Steam Trap Corporation, Defendant, represented by Richard P.
O'Leary, McCarter & English, LLP.

Burnham LLC, Defendant, represented by John C. McGuire, McElroy,
Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP.

Burnham LLC, Cross Defendant, represented by John C. McGuire,
McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP.

Gould's Pumps, Incorporated, Cross Defendant, represented by Raghu
N. Bandlamudi, Cullen and Dykman LLP.

H.B. Fuller Company, Cross Defendant, represented by Jordan David
Beltz, Segal McCambrige Singer & Mahoney & Katrina Helene Murphy,
Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, Ltd..

IMO Industries, Inc., Cross Defendant, represented by Annmarie
Giblin, Leader & Berkon LLP.

Ingersoll-Rand Company, Cross Defendant, represented by Lisa M.
Pascarella, Pascarella Divita Lindenbaum & Tomaszewski PLLC & Lisa
M. Pascarella, Pascarella Divita Lindenbaum & Tomaszewski PLLC.

Velan Steam Trap Corporation, Cross Defendant, represented by
Richard P. O'Leary, McCarter & English, LLP.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: "Henry" Remanded to Louisiana State Court
----------------------------------------------------------
Judge Lance M. Africk of the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana remanded to the Civil District Court
for the Parish of Orleans the asbestos-related case captioned
LEROY HENRY ET AL., v. COOPER/T. SMITH STEVEDORING CO. ET AL.,
SECTION I, Civil Action No. 16-2608 (E.D. La.).

After considering all the applicable equitable factors, Judge
Africk determined that remand is in order. The judge pointed out
that, to be sure, the plaintiffs should have moved to remand
sooner, but any delay on the part of plaintiffs is dwarfed by
defendant Neeb Kearney & Company, Inc.'s conduct.  Before removing
this case, Neeb Kearney affirmatively chose to present its
bankruptcy issue to the state court.  Neeb Kearney only decided to
remove this case (shortly before the trial date, no less) when the
state court denied summary judgment on the bankruptcy issue based
on what the court believed to be an insufficient evidentiary
showing by Neeb Kearney on constructive notice to unknown
creditors.

A full-text copy of Judge Africk's Order and Reasons dated October
17, 2016, is available at https://is.gd/iEDoI0 from Leagle.com.

Amos Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford, Martzell
& Bickford.

Amos Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Spencer R. Doody, Martzell &
Bickford.

Sharon Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford,
Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody, Martzell & Bickford.

Dymous Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford,
Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody, Martzell & Bickford.

Phyllis Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford,
Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody, Martzell & Bickford.

Cynthia Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford,
Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody, Martzell & Bickford.

Jerome Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford,
Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody, Martzell & Bickford.

Bryan Henry, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford, Martzell
& Bickford & Spencer R. Doody, Martzell & Bickford.

Shawn Henry Noble, Plaintiff, represented by Scott R. Bickford,
Martzell & Bickford & Spencer R. Doody, Martzell & Bickford.

Asbestos Corporation, Ltd., Defendant, represented by Kay Barnes
Baxter, Cosmich Simmons & Brown, PLLC, Brandie Mendoza Thibodeaux,
Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Christopher O. Massenburg, Manion
Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Georgia Noble Ainsworth, Cosmich Simmons &
Brown, PLLC, Glenn L.M. Swetman, Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP,
Kevin R. Sloan, Manion Gaynor & Manning, LLP, Margaret Adams
Casey, Cosmich Simmons & Brown, PLLC & Meaghan M. Donovan, Manion
Gaynor & Manning, LLP.

James J. Flanagan Shipping Corporation, Defendant, represented by
Charles Douglas Wheat, Wheat, Oppermann & Meeks, P.C. & Gus David
Oppermann, V, Wheat, Oppermann & Meeks, P.C..

Hartford Accident and Indemnity Company, Defendant, represented by
John K. Nieset, Christovich & Kearney, LLP & Christy L. McMannen,
Christovich & Kearney, LLP.

Crowley Marine Services, Inc., Defendant, represented by Robert J.
Barbier, Phelps Dunbar, LLP, Kevin J. LaVie, Phelps Dunbar, LLP &
Meredith W. Blanque, Phelps Dunbar, LLP.

Waterman Steamship Corporation, Defendant, represented by Robert
J. Barbier, Phelps Dunbar, LLP, Kevin J. LaVie, Phelps Dunbar, LLP
& Meredith W. Blanque, Phelps Dunbar, LLP.

CSX Transportation, Inc., Defendant, represented by Brent A.
Talbot, Esq. -- talbot@chaffe.com -- Chaffe McCall LLP, Douglas L.
Grundmeyer, Esq. -- grundmeyer@chaffe.com -- Chaffe McCall LLP,
Katharine Rachael Colletta, Esq. -- colletta@chaffe.com -- Chaffe
McCall LLP, Loretta O. Hoskins, Esq. -- hoskins@chaffe.com --
Chaffe McCall LLP & Randall A. Jordan, Jordan Firm, pro hac vice.

Illinois Central Railroad Company, Defendant, represented by John
Joseph Hainkel, III, Frilot L.L.C., Krystle Ferbos, Frilot L.L.C.
& Peter R. Tafaro, Frilot L.L.C..

Kansas City Southern Railway Company, Defendant, represented by
Patrick A. Talley, Jr., Phelps Dunbar, LLP & Jeffrey A. Clayman,
Phelps Dunbar, LLP.

Neeb Kearney & Company, Inc., Defendant, represented by Scott P.
Yount, Garrison, Yount, Forte & Mulcahy, LLC, Darrin L. Forte,
Garrison, Yount, Forte, Mulcahy & Lehner, LLC, Kevin Truxillo,
Garrison, Yount, Forte, Mulcahy & Lehner, LLC & Travis Lyon
Garrison, Garrison, Yount, Forte, Mulcahy & Lehner, LLC.

International Shipholding Corporation, Defendant, represented by
Robert J. Barbier, Phelps Dunbar, LLP & Meredith W. Blanque,
Phelps Dunbar, LLP.

Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London, Defendant, represented
by Paula Marcello Wellons, Taylor, Wellons, Politz & Duhe, APLC,
D. Ashbrooke Tullis, Taylor, Wellons, Politz & Duhe, APLC &
Desiree Weilbaecher Adams, Taylor, Wellons, Politz & Duhe, APLC.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: 2 Cos. Dropped as Defendants in "Floyd"
--------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned Jerry Floyd, Plaintiff, v. Asbestos
Corporation, LTD, et al., Defendants, Case No. 3;15-cv-05382-JST
(N.D. Calif.), Judge Jon S. Tigar of the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California approved the
stipulations dismissing, without prejudice, the action as to
Mechanical Drives & Belting, f/k/a L.A. Rubber Company, and Owens-
Illinois, Inc.

A full-text copy of Judge Tigar's Order dated October 12, 2016,
with respect to Mechanical Drive is available at
https://is.gd/Ygd9pX from Leagle.com.

A full-text copy of Judge Tigar's Order dated October 12, 2016,
with respect to Owens-Illinois is available at
https://is.gd/8wNx6J from Leagle.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Bid to Strike Witness in "Bell" Denied
-------------------------------------------------------
In the case captioned WILLIAM C. BELL ET AL., v. FOSTER WHEELER
ENERGY CORP. ET AL., Civil Action No. 15-6394 (E.D. Pa.), Judge
Lance M. Africk of the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Louisiana issued the following:

   * Order and Reasons dated October 11, 2016, a full-text copy of
which is available at https://is.gd/ZpWxPm from Leagle.com,
granting in part and denying in part the motion in limine filed by
pump and valve defendants to exclude certain studies and videos
produced by Dr. James Millette.  Judge Africk held that though the
Court believes that Dr. Millette can testify as to laboratory
studies that were not substantially similar to Mr. Bell's working
environments, the Court will require that (1) those studies be put
in the proper context, and (2) the plaintiffs will not be able to
use Dr. Millette's testimony as a subterfuge to speculate as to
Mr. Bell's working conditions.  It is neither reliable nor
permissible for Dr. Millette to testify -- as he suggests in his
expert report -- that the studies conducted in wholly disparate
working environments represents the likely exposure Mr. Bell had
from performing a particular activity on a ship.

   * Order and Reasons dated October 12, 2016, a full-text copy of
which is available at https://is.gd/cYDdJu from Leagle.com,
denying the defendants' motion to strike John Croix from the
plaintiffs' witness list.  Judge Africk held that even if the
disclosure technically fell short, any error is "harmless," and
that permitting Mr. Croix to testify is fully justified.  Mr.
Croix's testimony has gained importance to the plaintiffs' case
since Mr. Bell, through no fault of the plaintiffs, succumbed to
mesothelioma, and there will be minimal prejudice to the
defendants because they were plainly aware of Mr. Croix and could
have deposed him.

Vickie G. Campos, Plaintiff, represented by Gerolyn Petit Roussel,
Roussel & Clement.

Vickie G. Campos, Plaintiff, represented by Benjamin Peter
Dinehart, Roussel & Clement, Jonathan Brett Clement, Roussel &
Clement, Lauren Roussel Clement, Roussel & Clement & Perry Joseph
Roussel, Jr., Roussel & Clement.

John A. Bell, Jr., Plaintiff, represented by Gerolyn Petit
Roussel, Roussel & Clement, Benjamin Peter Dinehart, Roussel &
Clement, Jonathan Brett Clement, Roussel & Clement, Lauren Roussel
Clement, Roussel & Clement & Perry Joseph Roussel, Jr., Roussel &
Clement.

Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, Defendant, represented by John
Joseph Hainkel, III, Frilot L.L.C., Angela M. Bowlin, Frilot
L.L.C., David S. Blow, Sedgwick LLP, pro hac vice, James H. Brown,
Jr., Frilot L.L.C., Kelsey A. Eagan, Frilot L.L.C., Meredith K.
Keenan, Frilot L.L.C. & Peter R. Tafaro, Frilot L.L.C..

CBS Corporation, Defendant, represented by John Joseph Hainkel,
III, Frilot L.L.C., Angela M. Bowlin, Frilot L.L.C., Christopher
Conley, Evert Weathersby Houff, pro hac vice, James H. Brown, Jr.,
Frilot L.L.C., Kelsey A. Eagan, Frilot L.L.C., Meredith K. Keenan,
Frilot L.L.C., Peter R. Tafaro, Frilot L.L.C., Robert P. Morgan,
Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC, pro hac vice & William Davis
Harvard, Evert Weathersby Houff.

York International Corporation, Defendant, represented by Rocky
Wayne Eaton, Tyner, Eaton & Fulce, PLLC & Thomas W. Tyner, Tyner,
Eaton & Fulce, PLLC, pro hac vice.

General Electric Company, Defendant, represented by John Joseph
Hainkel, III, Frilot L.L.C., Angela M. Bowlin, Frilot L.L.C., Erik
Nadolink, Wheeler Trigg O'Donnell, LLP, pro hac vice, James H.
Brown, Jr., Frilot L.L.C., John M. Fitzpatrick, Wheeler Trigg
O'Donnell, LLP, pro hac vice, John A. Heller, Sidley Austin, LLP,
pro hac vice, Kelsey A. Eagan, Frilot L.L.C., Meredith K. Keenan,
Frilot L.L.C., Nathan P. Murphy, Wheeler Trigg O'Donnell, LLP, pro
hac vice & Peter R. Tafaro, Frilot L.L.C..

IMO Industries, Inc., Defendant, represented by Leigh Ann Tschirn
Schell, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Bobbie Bailey,
Leader and Berkon LLP, pro hac vice, Caroline Curtiss Marino,
Leader & Berkon LLP, pro hac vice, Joseph Henry Hart, IV, Kuchler
Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Lori Allen Waters, Kuchler
Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Magali Ann Puente-Martin,
Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC & Thomas A. Porteous,
Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC.

Warren Pumps, LLC, Defendant, represented by Leigh Ann Tschirn
Schell, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Joseph Henry
Hart, IV, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Judith Ann
Perritano, Pierce Davis & Perritano LLP, pro hac vice, Lori Allen
Waters, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Magali Ann
Puente-Martin, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC, Maria
E. DeLuzio, Pierce Davis & Perritano LLP, pro hac vice & Thomas A.
Porteous, Kuchler Polk Schell Weiner & Richeson, LLC.

Crane Company, Defendant, represented by Aleta W. Barnes, Dogan &
Wilkinson, PLLC, Barry C. Campbell, Dogan & Wilkinson, PLLC,
Hanson Douglas Horn, Dogan & Wilkinson, PLLC, Kevin M. Melchi,
Dogan & Wilkinson, PLLC & Michael J. Sechler, K&L Gates LLP, pro
hac vice.

Air & Liquid Systems Corporation, Defendant, represented by Stacey
Leigh Strain, Hubbard, Mitchell, Williams & Strain, PLLC, Brady L.
Green, Wilbraham, Lawler & Buba, PC, pro hac vice, Edward Joseph
White, Wilbraham, Lawler & Buba, PC, pro hac vice & Jeffrey P.
Hubbard, Hubbard, Mitchell, Williams & Strain, PLLC, pro hac vice.

Aurora Pump Company, Defendant, represented by Jennifer E. Adams,
Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, LLP, Arthur Wendel Stout, III,
Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, LLP, Barbara Bourgeois Ormsby,
Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, LLP, Jason P. Franco, Deutsch Kerrigan
LLP & William Claudy Harrison, Jr., Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles,
LLP.

Atwood & Morrill Co., Inc., Defendant, represented by Jennifer E.
Adams, Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, LLP, Arthur Wendel Stout, III,
Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, LLP, Barbara Bourgeois Ormsby,
Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles, LLP, Jason P. Franco, Deutsch Kerrigan
LLP & William Claudy Harrison, Jr., Deutsch, Kerrigan & Stiles,
LLP.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Widow Appeals For Help from Husband's Colleagues
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Buxton Advertiser reported that a grieving widow has issued an
appeal for former High Peak work colleagues of her husband to come
forward after he died from an asbestos-related disease.

Reg Williams, was employed by the building company, J W Swindells
Ltd, in New Mills, between 1949 and 1961.

During this period, he spent some time at a print works in
Carbrook, Sheffield and was involved in repairing the factory, re-
roofing and general building.

His widow, Jean Williams, believes Reg was asked to cut asbestos
sheets to put under the roof, and saw asbestos sheets for fire-
proofing at the print works. She thinks her husband could have
come into contact with asbestos again when working at the cotton
mills in Whiteladies Road, Ashton-under-Lyne and Hyde.

Now she is asking for workplace witnesses to get in touch after
Reg died from mesothelioma, the asbestos-related cancer.

The UK's leading legal specialists in asbestos litigation, law
firm Charles Lucas & Marshall, are handling the case. They are
keen to get in touch with anyone who remembers Reg from Swindells,
the Carbrook print works or the cotton mills.

"We are hoping to file a claim against the insurers relating to Mr
Williams's death," said solicitor Brigitte Chandler. "Anyone with
information should ring me on 01793 511055 or e-mail me at
Brigitte.chandler@clmlaw.co.uk in the utmost confidence."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found at Melbourne Pub Demolition Site
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reported that asbestos has been
found at the site of an unlawful demolition of a 19th-century
Melbourne pub.

The Corkman Irish Pub, also known as the Carlton Inn, was
demolished despite a stop work notice, a heritage overlay, and a
lack of demolition or planning permits.

The Environment Protection Authority tested the site, and the next
day confirmed the presence of asbestos.

The owners will be issued a notice to hold them to account for the
waste and require them to prevent any asbestos from leaving the
site, the EPA says.

They may also face fines if they don't dispose of the asbestos
properly.

"EPA is continuing it attempts to contact the site owners to
inform them of the penalties that can apply if construction and
demolition waste from the site is disposed of illegally," EPA
Metro Manager Daniel Hunt said in a statement.

"Anyone who dumps construction and demolition waste -- or permits
its illegal disposal -- faces a fine of more than $7,500 or up to
$758,350 if prosecuted."

Students who live nearby the pub said they received no notice of
the demolition and were worried about potential exposure to
asbestos.

WorkSafe and the Victorian Planning Authority are also
investigating, with widespread condemnation coming from the local
council and the state government on the brazen demolition.

Planning Minister Richard Wynne has also referred the matter to
the Victorian Building Authority and Heritage Victoria for
investigation.

Developers Stefce Kutlesovski and Raman Shaqiri could face
penalties of up to $200,000.

Victorian Planning Authority acting chair Bill Kusznirczuk said
penalties were too low to deter dodgy developers dealing with
multi-million dollar properties.

Melbourne Lord Mayor Robert Doyle called the demolition "the most
brazen and wanton act of destructive vandalism" he had seen.

The pub had been damaged by fire in August, but did not cause
enough damage to warrant demolition, Mr Doyle said.

Attempts by AAP to contact the company behind the building's
destruction have been unsuccessful.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Victims Need Protection from Own Attys
----------------------------------------------------------------
John Ransom, wrote an opinion at dailycaller.com, saying in early
October, Senators Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) and Jon Tester (D-
Mont.) introduced the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act of 2016,
which would expedite the prohibition of asbestos imports while
further curbing current and future uses of the substance.

Like all such initiatives, it is designed to create at least one
toxic side effect: vulture trial lawyers who are predators more
than scavengers. The measure does nothing to address the ongoing
exploitation of victims by those purporting to help them -- the
lawyers who represent mesothelioma and other asbestos-related
sufferers. In fact, it just encourages crooked lawyers who see
cancer and think "cash."

These piratical entrepreneurs engage in such blatantly abusive and
illegal patterns of professional misbehavior as to tarnish the
very cause they allegedly seek to serve.

Sadly, the predatory asbestos lawyers have plenty of cover. The
plaintiffs' bar as a whole is an inveterate funding source for
Democratic lawmakers who seem loath to pursue any action that
might be construed as hostile to this multi-billion dollar
industry. It's an unholy political alliance of vultures helping
other vultures, en-flock, justice be damned. It makes legislation
like the Reinstein Ban just another way to churn further, highly
profitable litigation.

Overcharging clients is just the tip of the iceberg. It's become
almost standard practice among many asbestos lawyers to manipulate
the timing of claims and suborn perjury in order to drive up the
value of settlements. Back in 1997, one asbestos powerhouse, Baron
& Budd, accidentally disclosed an internal memo advising that "a
defense attorney will have no way of knowing whether [claimants]
are lying about their exposure to particular asbestos products."
You may recall that the firm's founder, Fred Baron, also happened
to have a close relationship with then-Senator Jon Edwards, the
former plaintiff's lawyer who almost became Vice President of the
United States.

Remember? He's the lawyer who flew Edwards' mistress around on
private jets, providing money and a place to hide out.

The so-called script memo has become newly relevant as it's
included in civil RICO suits filed against asbestos law firms. In
one notable instance involving gasket manufacturer Garlock Sealing
Technologies, the RICO case came in the wake of a North Carolina
bankruptcy judge George Hodges reducing an asbestos defendant's
liability by 90%.

After plaintiff's attorneys failed to get the RICO case dismissed,
they settled with Garlock in March, 2016 (the case is reportedly
"stayed" pending working out settlement provisions). The
settlement underscores the widespread practice by asbestos lawyers
of withholding evidence of client's exposure to asbestos from
sources besides the one they happen to be suing at the moment.
Plaintiffs often allege different "facts" about time, location,
and level of exposure in order to sue and collect from as many
different companies as they can. Rest assured, they do so at the
behest of their counselors.

At the end of the day, of course, the financial benefits for most
clients are paltry compared to the massive payouts their lawyers
enjoy. Actually, we are all exposed, as a new documentary film,
UnSettled, from Canadian journalist Paul Johnson vividly
dramatizes. It follows a case against a California car dealership
dragged into a Kafka-esque maze of unrelenting litigation -- all
the more Kafka-esque because this dealership never even used
asbestos. (I was fortunate to view a pre-screening; Johnson says
he's 90 percent ready to release the film.)

The movie also documents how Judge George Hodges get fed up in the
Garlock case and responded accordingly. His adjudication of the
Garlock matter is already helping other similarly-besieged
manufacturers in their own legal struggles. Yet it's still not
enough, not when asbestos lawyers are such heavily contributing
members of a political lobby as unshakeable in its resolve as any
gun association or corporate PAC.

And talk about flock of vultures: Peter Kraus is just one example
of an asbestos lawyer whose dalliances reach all the way to the
top. A RICO target in the Garlock case, Kraus is also a golf chum
of, and fundraiser for, Barack Obama. When Hillary Clinton visited
Dallas for a recent fundraiser, it was at the home of Lisa Blue,
the widow of Fred Barron of "script memo" and "Edwards' mistress"
fame.

Yet the problem is bipartisan and, as such, we need to form a
bipartisan front and transcend our respective ideological
predilections. Conservatives who decry the influence of trial
attorneys might reconsider or at least qualify their wholesale
opposition to campaign finance reform. John Pudner, the Executive
Director of Take Back Our Republic, is one conservative who
understands the problem. Calling the influence of asbestos lawyers
"problematic," he at least recognizes that "politicians often act
in the best interests of their contributors instead of their
constituents," underscoring "the need for reducing the influence
of money in politics."

For their part, liberals must recognize that their alliances with
crooked lawyers will, in the long term, disserve their own
interests as well as the interests of asbestos victims who deserve
responsible legal representation. To be sure, there are many
compelling arguments against tort reform -- but there is no
credible argument to excuse subordination of perjury, and those
pious political souls who ride the highest horses often fall the
furthest.

Just like vultures do to claim their scrap of meat.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Dumps Scattered in Western Sydney
-----------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reported that more than 10 tonnes
of asbestos-laden building waste has been dumped around Sydney's
west, including one site in front of a childcare centre.

Four Parramatta streets have been turned into dump sites with
piles of building waste suspected to contain asbestos left there
by unknown people overnight.

A fifth dump site of approximately six cubic metres in waste --
the equivalent of a skip bin -- was discovered in Bachell Avenue
in Lidcombe.

Cumberland Council has advised they expect the Lidcombe site will
be cleaned up by the end of Friday.

One of the Parramatta dump sites is outside a childcare centre in
Isabella Street.

Council contractors have secured all the waste and are removing
it, according to Parramatta Council.

An investigation is underway.

If a business is found responsible, it could face fines of up to
$5 million while an individual faces a fine of as much as $1
million and/or prison.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Rise in Terminal Illness Due to Asbestos
---------------------------------------------------------
Connor McCann, writing for DC Thomson & Company Limited, reported
that a charity which deals with people suffering health conditions
after exposure to asbestos has revealed a "scary" rise in people
receiving terminal diagnoses.

Asbestos Action Tayside says there is an ongoing upward trend in
the number of people coming to the organisation for help, due to
the exposure workers received during the 1960s and 70s.

But charity chiefs are worried about the number of folk being told
they will die as a result of asbestos-related illnesses in the
area.

In the last year, from September 2015 to August 2016, 62 people
have received a terminal lung cancer diagnosis, also known as
mesothelioma, from 210 referrals to the organisation.

In the same period the year before, there were 34 people from 163
referrals.

That's a huge rise in folk diagnosed with the terminal illness
caused by asbestos inside a year.

John Fearn, manager of Asbestos Action Tayside, told the Tele:
"The referral rate for those with mesothelioma coming to us for
support has shot up suddenly in the last year.

"At the moment we are unsure of the reason behind this but we are
working to find out why this is.

"The reason for the steady rise in non-terminal cases is
understandable, as the health service gets better and better at
recognising the symptoms exposure to asbestos brings about.

"But the leap in terminal diagnoses is extremely scary.

"With the vast majority of people exposed to asbestos in the 1960s
and 70s it was thought the number of terminal conditions would
decrease.

"A lot of people would have been exposed to it when manufacturing
firms and ship yards were major employers in the area.

"But the figures throughout last year have definitely bucked the
trend we were experiencing.

"The increase just wasn't expected at all and it's very
concerning."

John fears the situation will only get worse.

He said: "The peak number of asbestos-related diagnoses was
expected to be this year, but it has since been pushed back to
2020.

"So it is very likely these figures will get higher.

"We are currently trying to find out exactly why terminal cases
are getting higher.

"The last year is the busiest the organisation has been since I
started working here eight years ago."

The charity was set up to provide those who have contracted
asbestos-related diseases with emotional and practical help and
support.

It is based in Dundee and helps people across the local area.

John said: "Asbestosis is a really serious condition and has a
massive impact on people's lives.

"Those with the likes of asbestosis are seriously affected
throughout their lives.

"After gentle exercise it can feel like they are walking around
with a plastic bag on their head.

"But terminal mesothelioma can leave the person and their families
totally dejected.

"It's a violent form of lung cancer and has a very short prognosis
-- people affected don't have long after the diagnosis.

"We are here to help people, be that by getting them the welfare
benefits they are eligible for or by helping them find lawyers to
represent them in civil matters."

Despite the fact most folk don't work in environments where
asbestos is an issue any more, John says it's still an issue that
is affecting people.

He said: "The last year's worth of figures shows that asbestos is
still a huge issue in people's lives.

"I would urge people who have worked with asbestos in the past to
ask for a check-up with their GP.

"I would also urge doctors to ask the question whether their
patients have ever been exposed to the material."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Salem Company Fined for Asbestos Violation
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tracy Loew, writing for Statesman Journal, reported that Oregon
environmental regulators have fined SERVPRO of Lincoln & Polk
Counties $5,169 for violating asbestos regulations.

The Salem-based company is owned by Michael W. Harley and
specializes in fire and water damage cleanup and restoration.

According the state Department of Environmental Quality, the
company renovated a commercial building without first having an
accredited inspector survey the building for asbestos.

The violation took place in March at Rodeway Inn & Suites at 1070
SE 1st St. in Lincoln City.

The company removed ceiling, drywall, insulation, flooring and
other components from the facility, according to DEQ.

The incident could have released asbestos fibers into the air and
exposed workers and the public, DEQ wrote in its civil penalty
notice. Asbestos fibers are a respiratory hazard proven to cause
lung cancer, mesothelioma and asbestosis.

"Asbestos is a danger to public health and a hazardous air
contaminant for which there is no known safe level of exposure,"
the agency wrote.

The company should have known an asbestos survey was required as
it has been operating since 2009 and has hired licensed asbestos
survey and removal professionals on 50 to 100 previous projects,
DEQ said.

"Given respondent's experience, licensing and knowledge,
respondent acted or failed to act intentionally with actual
knowledge of the requirement," DEQ wrote.

The company has no prior significant enforcement actions. It has
until Nov. 2 to appeal the penalty.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mechanic Blames Illness on Asbestos Exposure
-------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Abella, writing for Madison-St. Clair Record, reported
that a man who worked at a brake shop, as a laborer, as a shade
tree mechanic as well as ome remodeling projects is suing Akebono
Brake Corp., Allfax Products LLC, American Honda Co. Inc.,
Arvinmeritor Inc., et. al., alleging negligence that exposed him
to asbestos fibers in the course of his work.

Roosevelt Williams filed a complaint on Sept. 23, in St. Clair
County Circuit Court against the defendants, alleging that they
failed to exercise reasonable caution for his safety and that of
others.

According to the complaint, the plaintiff alleges that on Sept.
23, 2015, he first became aware that he had developed lung cancer,
an asbestos-induced disease, and that he has suffered and
continues to suffer great pain and mental anguish and medical
expenses. The plaintiff holds the defendants responsible because
they allegedly negligently included asbestos in their products
when adequate substitutes were available and failed to provide
adequate warnings and instructions on the safe methods of working
with products containing asbestos.

The plaintiff requests a trial by jury and seeks judgment against
the defendants in excess of $50,000 and for additional
compensatory, punitive and exemplary damages in an amount of more
than $50,000. He is represented by Randy L. Gori and Barry Julian
of Gori, Julian & Associates PC in Edwardsville.

St. Clair County Circuit Court case number 16-L-502


ASBESTOS UPDATE: AG Garners Guilty Pleas Over Asbestos Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Seattle Medium reported that two individuals and a corporation
pled guilty in Spokane County Superior Court to multiple
violations of the Washington Clean Air Act. Attorney General Bob
Ferguson filed the criminal charges in May, over the defendants'
illegal handling of hazardous asbestos.

The case stems from renovations at the former Spokane House Hotel,
where asbestos was improperly removed and disposed of without the
required inspections, training, equipment or permits, putting
workers and the public at risk of exposure.

As part of the plea agreement, Dayabir Bath, Gee Grewal and Bath's
company, 2013 Investors LLC, will pay a total of $115,000 in
restitution.  The restitution funds will go toward asbestos
education, awareness and training for workers, employers,
inspectors and the public.

The court also sentenced the two individual defendants to two
years of probation, during which they must comply with
environmental regulations or face up to 364 days in jail.

A third man, their employee John Hickson, pled guilty in August to
three counts of violating the Clean Air Act and was sentenced to
60 days in jail.

"These individuals not only endangered the environment, they put
workers and innocent neighbors at risk to pad their pockets,"
Ferguson said. "Asbestos-removal regulations exist for a reason:
to protect us from exposure to this dangerous pollutant."

According to the Attorney General's Office (AGO), in 2013 and
2014, Kent-based 2013 Investors LLC performed extensive renovation
work on the 89-room hotel at 4301 W. Sunset Blvd. in Spokane.
Although the building contained asbestos, the owners didn't obtain
the proper asbestos surveys or city permits to do the work as
required by law.

Investigators from the Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency only
became aware of the full extent of the renovation when one of them
happened to drive by and noticed the extensive work in June of
2013. Investigators reported piles of debris likely to contain
asbestos sitting out in the open air, endangering workers and
neighbors.

Again in 2014, Clean Air Agency investigators spotted another
debris pile, containing visible asbestos. The asbestos allegedly
sat in the open air for several months, during which the area
experienced high winds of over 40 miles per hour. During such
winds, delicate and breakable asbestos fibers can blow freely
around the neighborhood, endangering the health of those nearby.

"Any business or individual conducting demolition or renovation of
a structure must do so properly to reduce risk of asbestos
exposure," said Julie Oliver, executive director of Spokane
Regional Clean Air Agency. "An uncontrolled release of asbestos
fibers is a health hazard proven to cause lung cancer and other
illnesses."

Bath and his company will pay $90,000 in restitution, and Grewal
will pay $25,000. Half of the total -- $57,500 -- will go to the
Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, which will work with the
Spokane Regional Clean Air Agency to educate workers and employers
about the dangers of asbestos. The remaining $57,500 will go to
the Western States Project, which sponsors education and training
for environmental enforcement.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: SD 22 Fined $75K for Failed Asbestos Management
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jon Hernandez, writing for CBC News, reported that the Vernon
School District has been fined $75,000 for exposing workers to
asbestos without training and without their knowledge.

An investigation launched by WorkSafeBC found that School District
22 failed to effectively identify asbestos-containing material in
the workplace and allowed work to be performed in contaminated
areas without providing the necessary training.

Following the year-long investigation, WorkSafeBC levied fines
after citing several incidents related to poor asbestos
management.

"There were a number of deficiencies in our asbestos control
management plan," secretary treasurer Sterling Olsen told host
Chris Walker on CBC's Daybreak South.

Olsen says prior to the investigation, the district didn't have a
health and safety issue and there wasn't enough focus and priority
on its asbestos management.

"We just weren't taking care of business the way that we should
have," he said, adding he's unsure at this point whether there
were any long-term health effects endured by either students or
staff.

According to the Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and
Safety, long-term exposure to the hazardous fibre can increase
risks of lung cancer and lead to the development of asbestosis --
a chronic lung disease.

Unbudgeted loss

Olsen says the district has responded by hiring a health and
safety specialist and will continue to work with WorkSafeBC to
develop adequate asbestos training for employees.

The fine will come out of the school's yearly operating budget.

"It's an expense that will need to be covered," said Olsen. "That
means we don't have that money to spend on something else."

School District 22 is the third school district since 2011 to be
fined for its asbestos management program.

WorkSafeBC says the $75,000 fine will be directed to the
province's Workers Compensation Fund.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jury Awards $4.6-Mil. in Asbestos Case
-------------------------------------------------------
Edith Brady-Lunny, writing for Pantagraph, reported that a McLean
County jury awarded $4.6 million to a Colfax man who developed
cancer after he was exposed to asbestos while working for a
Bloomington firm more than 50 years ago.

The jury ruled in favor of Charles McKinney, 73, in his claim
against Hobart Brothers Co. McKinney worked for Portable Elevator
Co. at age 19.

According to a statement from McKinney's lawyer, Andrew Kelly with
Wylder Corwin Kelly, "the jury found that Hobart Brothers had
knowledge of the hazards of asbestos and negligently failed to
warn Charles McKinney about the hazards of the asbestos in the
flux of its welding stick electrodes."

McKinney developed mesothelioma, a cancer directly linked to
exposure to asbestos.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Teaticket Asbestos Cleanup Now Close to $900K
--------------------------------------------------------------
Ryan Bray, writing for The Falmouth Enterprise, reported that the
cost of cleaning up asbestos at Teaticket Elementary School is now
close to $900,000.

Falmouth Finance Committee voted 7-1 on October 18 to recommend
funding the cleanup.

Article 23 on the November Town Meeting warrant will propose
appropriating the money.

School officials were notified on August 18 that asbestos was
found at the school while work was being done to install new
heating, ventilation and air conditioning in the building. The
discovery caused students at the school to be temporarily
relocated to Morse Pond School and East Falmouth Elementary School
while Teaticket is closed for the cleanup.

Selectmen voted to make an emergency appropriation of $300,000 for
the asbestos removal on August 29. However, finance committee
member Nicholas S. Lowell said as of Tuesday, the cost is
estimated to be $813,100. He said while the actual cleanup is
nearing completion, other costs have been added onto the cleanup
effort, including those for hiring environmental consultants;
replacing ceiling and floor tiles; new insulation; and
electricians.

The original work of installing the new heating, ventilation and
air conditioning system in the school also has to be finished, he
said.

Mr. Lowell said costs on the project have continued to increase,
making it hard to put forth a figure for the final cost of the
project for the Town Meeting article.

"That [$813,100] is an estimate, and I expect it will go higher,"
he said.

While Mr. Lowell recommended indefinitely postponing the article
until a firmer cost for the project takes shape in the coming
weeks, others at the October 18 meeting favored voting on a figure
to recommend to Town Meeting. Jennifer Petit, who is the town's
finance director, said $710,000 in unused money that was bonded as
part of the library renovation can be put toward the cleanup.

"We've been looking for a project to use that money for, and we
have to use it," she said.

The remaining $190,000 would come from the town's free cash
reserves, Ms. Petit said.

Tell Us What You Think: Take Our Survey

If you liked what you just read, help us improve how we deliver
the news to you.

We invite you to share your thoughts and ideas about our website.
Everyone who completes the survey will have a chance to win a $50
gift card to a local restaurant.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Work Kills Two or More New Zealanders Every Day
----------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Hunt, writing for stuff.co.nz, reported that two or more New
Zealanders are dying each day from the simple act of turning up to
work.

The 600 to 900 work-related deaths each year dwarfs the roughly 60
people killed in workplace accidents annually.

It is on top of up to 6000 workers hospitalised each year with
cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and other chronic
illnesses from workplace exposure to airborne contaminants.


WorkSafe chief executive Gordon MacDonald says fumes and dust in
workplaces can kill, often years after the workers are exposed to
them.

WorkSafe is running a campaign highlighting the risks from welding
fumes, wood dust and carbon monoxide in manufacturing and
construction jobs.

This is as well as the dangers of asbestos which -- despite its
dangers being known about for decades -- still kills about 120 New
Zealanders a year.

WorkSafe's figures show 15 in every 100 employers failed to manage
the risks from fumes and dust.

Shaun Barrer, of Tasman, knows the risks well from working in
engineering and doing a lot of aluminum and galvanised plate
welding.

Whenever he had been welding without a respirator, particularly
with galvanised material, he would get "zinc chills", which came
with uncontrollable shivering, migraine headaches, nausea and sore
joints.

"They generally go away after around 12 hours, but are very
unpleasant at the time."

He has since changed jobs and suffered no long-term effects.

LONG-TERM RISK

WorkSafe chief executive Gordon MacDonald said, assuming Barrer
did not develop long-term problems, things could have been much
worse.

Welding was regarded as a serious hazard because the fumes it
released led to lung and breathing problems, and sometimes lung
cancer.

"A lot of these conditions can take five to 10 years -- with
asbestos 20 to 30 years -- before you start to develop symptoms."

By then, it was often too late to save people.

Inspectors, who visited 1000 New Zealand workplaces, discovered
many dangers, some which came down to "simple ignorance",
MacDonald said.

This included bulldozer workers demolishing buildings, only to
find out afterwards that they contained asbestos; or people
cutting concrete or stone amid "coulds of dust" without protective
gear.

While the dangers of asbestos were well known, the same was not
true of silica and wood dust.

DISEASE DANGER

Marcus Nalter, from WorkSafe, said diseases associated with wood
dust and welding fumes included cancers, asthma and chronic lung
conditions, while carbon monoxide could be deadly.

"Workers in the construction sector are 20 times more likely to
die of exposure to harmful airborne substances than from a
workplace incident, and that rises to 25 times more likely for
manufacturing workers."

Of the 1000 workplaces visited by WorkSafe during the past two
years, inspectors found 150 in which risks were not being properly
managed, and enforcement action was taken.

Ron Angel, engineering and infrastructure industry co-ordinator
for the E tu union, said the issue of dust and fumes was one of
which the union was well aware, and there were still not enough
workplaces taking necessary safety measures.

"It's an issue everyone is aware of in the welding industry."

Yet still, on some construction sites, workers were doing quick
cuts or sweeping up without taking precautions.

"Thirty years later, they are [sick] at home, no longer on the
job. You just don't see it.

"You are dying on the job. It is just taking 30 years to die."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: PAC Spent Half Million vs. Appellate Candidates
----------------------------------------------------------------
Ann Maher, writing for Madison-St. Clair Record, reported that a
campaign committee created to oppose Republican candidates for the
Fifth District Appellate Court spent a half million dollars for
broadcast and digital media.

By contrast, the targeted Republican candidates, Madison County
Circuit Judge John Barberis and sitting Fifth District Justice
James "Randy" Moore, have raised a combined $64,000 to date.

Fair Courts Now, which is supported in large part by asbestos
firms that do business in Madison County, was created four weeks
before the election on Oct. 11

The Simmons firm of Alton and Maune Raichle of St. Louis each
contributed $250,000.

Other firms that contributed to Fair Courts Now include Madison
County asbestos filers SWMK Law of St. Louis, which contributed
$50,000 and the Flint firm of Glen Carbon which contributed
$25,000.

A structured settlement company from Buffalo, N.Y., US Periodic
Payment Assignment Co., contributed $10,000.

In response to the newly created PAC, Barberis wrote the following
on his campaign's Facebook page on Friday:

"I was wondering if the big money, power broker, Democrat
plaintiffs firms would try and influence/buy the 5th District
Appellate Court. Guess I don't have to wonder any more.

"Do we want to allow these morally bankrupt fat cat firms to
decide which of their hand picked judges sit in judgment of all of
us? The fine folks I have met throughout the 37 counties I have
been campaigning in for the last 14 months don't seem the type to
allow people like these political bosses to make decisions like
this for them. Help me and Justice Moore send a message to these
clowns that their money can't influence you as a voter or Justice
Moore and myself as judges deciding their cases. Remember, they
are not donating to their hand picked candidates they are
INVESTING in the outcome of their future cases."

Barberis was first elected circuit judge in Madison County in
2014, having spent $5,000 of his own money without establishing a
committee to accept donations on his behalf in that cycle. He
created a committee in his bid for the appellate court and has
raised nearly $12,000.

Moore's campaign has raised approximately $52,000.

Fair Courts Now is chaired by Bobby Green, showing an address of
1538 N. Church in Belleville, and treasurer is JoLee Siener who
lists an email address at the Simmons firm.

Democrat candidates Jo Beth Weber, a circuit judge from Jefferson
County, and Brad Bleyer, a circuit judge from Williamson County,
already had raised more money than their opponents Moore and
Barberis through their individual campaign committees.

Weber has raised approximately $223,000 and Bleyer has raised
approximately $101,000.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found at Portland Blast Site
------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reported that the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality found asbestos at the blast site after
natural gas sparked an explosion in northwest Portland.

The Oregonian/OregonLive reports that department spokesman Matthew
Van Sickle said tests done discovered asbestos among the rubble of
a 101-year-old building. Roofing felt was found that contained 35
percent of the dangerous fibrous material.

The department will be spraying foam on the debris and monitoring
air quality on a daily basis, but he said there is no public
safety concern at the site.

The explosion hurt eight people, demolished a three-story historic
building and ignited a fire that sent a plume of smoke over the
city. Three firefighters, two police officers and three civilians
were injured.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Clean-Up Firm Fined for Exposing Employees
-----------------------------------------------------------
Terri Oppenheimer, writing for Mesothelioma.net, reported that
mesothelioma is a rare and deadly form of cancer that is caused by
exposure to asbestos. Though all terminal illness is tragic,
mesothelioma and its sister asbestos-related diseases are
particularly so because they are all largely preventable. In tens
of thousands of cases, victims could have been spared illness and
their families spared heartache if only the companies that
knowingly exposed them to this deadly toxin taken appropriate
protective action. People who look at the history of this type of
negligence tend to focus on what happened decades ago, yet there
are many examples of this type of behavior that continue today.
The most recent example was brought to light just days ago, when
the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) called
attention to a Wisconsin asbestos cleanup firm that willfully
violated several important safety rules, thus exposing their
employees to a very real risk of a mesothelioma diagnosis in the
future.

According to reports, OSHA is seeking almost $250,000 in fines
from A&A Environmental Inc. of Polynette, Wisconsin. Their charges
indicate that in the course of renovating a local nursing home,
the company knowingly failed to comply with safety rules that are
specifically designed to protect workers from harm and risk of
asbestos related diseases such as mesothelioma.

The violations that A&A is charged with include failing to provide
workers with a separate decontamination area in which they could
remove their work clothing and shower, failing to provide a place
where asbestos-contaminated equipment could be stored, and failing
to stop employees working in an asbestos-containment area from
drinking beverages and potentially ingesting asbestos fibers.

The discovery of the asbestos violations occurred last April, when
OSHA investigated the work site after five of the cleanup
company's employees were sickened by carbon monoxide poisoning. A
site inspection not only showed that employees had been exposed to
dangerous gas levels and that the company had failed to provide
adequate protection, but also revealed the various asbestos
violations that could lead to employees later being diagnosed with
mesothelioma.

Many of the employee laws that OSHA enforces and safeguards are a
direct result of the disregard that asbestos companies have shown
employees in the past. The willful and negligent behavior of these
companies has resulted in untold number of mesothelioma deaths,
and the companies have been forced to pay and set aside billions
of dollars in compensation for victims. If you or someone you love
worked for an asbestos company that put them at risk, then contact
Danziger & De Llano Legal Advocates today at 1-800-692-8608. Our
attorneys are dedicated to providing you with the information that
you need. http://mesothelioma.net/mesothelioma-attorneys/


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Cancer Patient Pleads for Exposure Funding
-----------------------------------------------------------
Frances Cook, writing for Newstalk ZB, reported that a cancer
patient is pleading with the Government to fund treatment for
everyone exposed to asbestos.

When Maureen Saville first went to the doctor experiencing
shortness of breath, she was given an inhaler. But that didn't
work, because she was actually suffering from mesothelioma, a type
of cancer caused by asbestos exposure.

"I would go to golf and find I could only play nine holes, because
I was getting breathless."

The real culprit was asbestos fibres in her husband's work
clothes, which she had hand washed in the sixties. But because she
hadn't been exposed at a paid workplace, ACC didn't cover her.

Ms Saville put together a petition to Parliament, asking for ACC
coverage for the families of workers who were exposed to asbestos.

The Transport and Industrial Relations Committee has instead made
a recommendation for Pharmac to fund medication for those who
aren't eligible for ACC.

Ms Saville said it's a step forward, but she also wants the
medical community to take notice and consider asbestos exposure
earlier.

"They're missing the point. They feel like they're doing something
constructive by giving the puffer, but they're not looking
further. It takes between 35 and 40 years for it to appear in a
person's body. So the women are generally in their sixties when
they start going to the doctor and saying they can't breathe."

Palmerston North MP Iain Lees-Galloway helped organise the
petition, and worked with the select committee to make the
recommendation. He said a change through Pharmac would be welcome,
but ACC coverage would have been even better.

"ACC coverage comes with compensation as well. But also there
would be a lot more support in terms of if Maureen had to travel
to get her treatment, or if she needed additional support outside
of receiving medications."

"Essentially what she was doing was her work. She was working to
support her husband in his paid work."

"The majority of the select committee did not agree. Some of us
were interested in recommending that the Government explore that
concept a little further."

Acting ACC Minister Nathan Guy is now considering the
recommendation. His office has not yet responded to a request for
comment.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Found in Virginia Beach Apt. Complex
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mechelle Hankerson, writing for The Virginian-Pilot, reported that
Velma Minter spent six years homeless, sleeping in shelters with
her teenage son.

But in April, she found Waypoint at Lynnhaven. It felt familiar
and safe, plus it accepted her veteran's housing voucher, helping
her afford rent.

It wasn't perfect, but her son had his own room and bed.

At least until next week, when Minter and her son worry they could
become homeless again.

"It makes me feel hurt," said Minter. "If I was by myself I
wouldn't care, but I feel useless as a mother."

Management told residents who live in those units they can't
return, leaving many families with few housing options when
Waypoint stops paying for their hotel stays Oct. 31.

The Kettler Company, which manages Waypoint, terminated the leases
of some residents. Residents whose homes didn't test positive for
asbestos were allowed to get their belongings -- if they signed a
waiver preventing them from suing the company.

It's unclear what will happen to the belongings in apartments that
did test positive. Those residents have been barred from entering
the apartments for their own safety, said Kettler spokeswoman Coco
Lyons.

"There's a plan in place to investigate the extent of asbestos on
the rest of the property," she said. "We will go through this
process with our consultant and they will let us know if and when
the units are ready."

She wasn't sure when that might be.

The city will open an assessment center at the Church of Holy
Apostles on Lynnhaven Parkway.

Landlords, the health department, school representatives and human
services will all be there to work with Waypoint residents,
although the center is open to anyone.

Waypoint will return residents' security deposits and prorated
October rent, Lyons said. The company also provided a list of
other apartment complexes that have vacancies.

Most residents have taken issue with the waiver Kettler Company
wants them to sign before accessing their homes, said Phillip
Barada, who has lived at Waypoint for three years.

"None of us want to let them get away with what they did," he
said.

Lyons said the waiver is standard for the Kettler Company.

Waypoint residents, including the children, have been wearing the
same clothes for weeks. Children have gone to school with
waterlogged shoes that have started to smell, said Barada, who has
two sons.

Barada chose Waypoint because of its affordability, $920 a month
for a two-bedroom townhouse.

The night of Hurricane Matthew, he watched as the water came into
his house. He tried to block it by putting towels at the bottom of
the door, but 6 inches of water still got in.

Residents said Waypoint office and maintenance staff didn't
respond to calls for help until the Monday after the storm,
leaving some residents sitting in what they described as "swamp
water" for a day.

The residents who have tried going back said locks on the doors
have been changed and office staff wouldn't give them new keys.

Security guards denied access to everyone, including City
Councilwoman Shannon Kane, who represents the district Waypoint is
in. Kane was frustrated with the response from the Kettler
Company, which seemed to be unresponsive.

"The questions I was asking, they didn't have answers for," she
said. "I can't help unless I know how."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Bare Metal Defense Ruling Muddles Applicability
----------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Penhallegon, Esq. -- kpenhallegon@milesstockbridge.com -- at
Miles & Stockbridge P.C., in an article for JD Supra, wrote that
the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
Louisiana recently issued an opinion in Bell v. Foster Wheeler
Energy Corp., CV-15-6394, Africk, L., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137547
(E.D. La. Oct. 4, 2016) that enunciates what it calls a "third
view" on the so-called "bare metal defense" for asbestos
litigation. This "third view" introduces further uncertainty into
the ever-changing landscape of the "bare metal defense" and would
require additional analysis to evaluate the defense's
applicability to a manufacturer as opposed to the two views that
previously existed within the split of authority.

Split of Authority Prior to Bell Decision

In Bell, the plaintiff is a former U.S. Navy engineman, machinery
repairman and machinist mate and the court analyzed the case under
maritime law. Ten defendants filed a motion for summary judgment
seeking to avoid liability on the basis of the "bare metal
defense." As the court noted in its decision, there is a split in
authority among the various circuits and also within the states as
to the proper application of this defense. The "bare metal
defense" generally makes it more difficult for a plaintiff to
prove causation where the alleged asbestos exposure was from a
component part for which the manufacturer is not directly
responsible. The Bell court noted that where the "bare metal
defense" applies, a manufacturer cannot be held liable unless it
made, sold, or otherwise controlled the asbestos fibers that
caused injury. The law does not impose a duty upon a manufacturer
to warn about any product that is not its own. That view is held
by the Sixth Circuit and other courts following its rationale.
Alternatively, the court cited to the Northern District of
Illinois' decision in Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Co. for the
proposition that a manufacturer has a duty to warn regarding
asbestos under maritime law when "the defendant manufactured a
product that, by necessity, contained asbestos components, where
the asbestos-containing material was essential to the proper
functioning of the defendant's product, and where the asbestos-
containing material would necessarily be replaced by other
asbestos-containing material, whether supplied by the original
manufacturer or someone else." 17 F. Supp. 3d 760, 769-70 (N.D.
Ill. 2014). The Bell court also noted a growing trend in state law
that recognizes exceptions to the general "bare metal defense"
under certain limited circumstances, similar to the view expressed
in Quirin.

The "Third View" Proposed by Bell

Ultimately, the court in Bell rejected both theories and found
flaws in the approach proposed by both the defendants and
plaintiff. In rejecting the defendant's proposed standard, the
court held that "[e]ven if defendants do not have a duty to warn
arising out of merely manufacturing a particular product that
might be used with asbestos, they can nonetheless have duties
arising out of taking the additional action of negligently
recommending that a plaintiff use asbestos in conjunction with the
manufacturer's products." Bell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137547 at
*13. The court found plaintiff's proposed standard equally
unpersuasive and held that "imposing plaintiff's proposed duty to
warn would have had the effect of reading the long-recognized
general rule that 'component sellers should not be liable when the
component itself is not defective' entirely out of products
liability law" and instead found that before imposing liability,
"the Court will require plaintiffs to show that defendants did
something beyond merely manufacturing a product that might
foreseeably be used with asbestos." Bell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
137547 at *14-15.

In its explanation as to why its so-called "third view" should
apply, the court discussed the concepts of component parts
liability and the distinction between a manufacturer's liability
for negligence and strict liability. Accordingly, the court laid
out a set of standards applicable to a variety of different
circumstances and concluded that "it is not appropriate to simply
base a manufacturer's liability on the fact that it is necessary
to use asbestos in conjunction with the manufacturer's product."
Bell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137547 at *19. Under this "third
view," the court will "take into account whether the manufacturer
included asbestos components in the original product and, if not,
the extent to which the component part manufacturer either (1) was
involved in the design of the broader product, or (2) negligently
entrusted its component to an incompetent assembler." Bell, 2016
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137547 at *19-20. Additionally, the court held
that "the standard should also take into account whether the
manufacturer recommended a customer use asbestos in conjunction
with the manufacturer's product." Bell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
137547 at *20.

Analyzing Cases Under Bell's "Third View" Standard

The court's "third view" separated the analysis into two primary
categories: (a) liability of manufacturer that incorporates
asbestos into its finished product, and (b) liability of a bare
metal component part manufacturer.  In category (a), the extent of
the manufacturer's liability turns on "whether the harm was caused
by a component added by the manufacturer or an aftermarket
component added by the user." Bell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137547
at *21. Not surprisingly, the court held that if the harm is
caused by an asbestos component added to the product by the
manufacturer, then the manufacturer can be held liable in both
strict liability and negligence. However, if the harm was caused
by an aftermarket component added to the product, the manufacturer
cannot be held strictly liable but may be held liable for
negligence if a breach of the duty to warn regarding the original
asbestos components that the manufacturer added to the product was
a proximate cause of a later harmful exposure to asbestos from an
aftermarket replacement part. Additionally, the manufacturer can
be held liable for negligence if it negligently recommended the
use of a defective aftermarket part. Bell, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS
137547 at *23-24.

Alternatively, where category (b) applies, "the manufacturer's
liability turns on whether the manufacturer did something beyond
manufacturing the component part that was used in conjunction with
the asbestos." Pursuant to the component parts doctrine, if a
component part manufacturer merely designs the component to its
buyer's specifications, the manufacturer faces no liability unless
the component part itself is defective. However, if the component
part manufacturer goes beyond that and was substantially involved
in the integration of the component part into the design of the
finished product, the manufacturer could be held liable in both
negligence and strict liability if that integration results in a
defective product that harms the plaintiff. Additionally, the
component part manufacturer can be held liable for negligence if
it supplies a component part that it knows or has reason to know
will be used in a manner involving unreasonable risk of physical
harm or if it recommends the use of a hazardous part in
conjunction with the manufacturer's component part. Bell, 2016
U.S. Dist. LEXIS 137547 at *28-29.

If this "third view" proposed by the court in Bell is more widely
adopted, it will require parties to conduct a threshold analysis
of the issues to determine which standard to apply. Therefore,
rather than a clear rule whereby the parties can evaluate
liability based on a set of defined principles, the parties will
be forced to argue over which standard to apply, and then argue
for why the defendant is or is not liable under that proposed
standard. Such an approach could lead to the unworkable position
where the parties cannot even address the merits of the defense
because there is disagreement as to the precise applicability of
the defense at the outset and the scope of the standards to be
applied.




                            *********

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  * * *