CAR_Public/170213.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R


             Monday, February 13, 2017, Vol. 19, No. 31



                            Headlines

99 JOHN'S: Faces "De La Parra" Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
ALTERNATE STAFFING: "Bernarez" Seeks Unpaid OT, Reimbursements
ATLANTIC CITY, NJ: IAFF Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to D.N.J.
BARBEQUE INTEGRATED: Faces "Hart" Suit Under FLSA, S.C. Wage Act
BIOGEN INC: Faces Shareholder Class Action in Massachusetts

BLUE NILE: Faces "Hale" Suit Over Merger in Del. Chancery
BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM: Faces Doctors' Suit Over TCPA Violations
C.R. ENGLAND: Plans to Appeal Class Certification Ruling
CHICAGO COSTUME: "Gruen" Sues Over Gift Cert. with Illegal Expiry
CHILDREN'S PLACE: "Bradley" Labor Suit Seeks to Recover OT Pay

CINTAS CORP: "Williams" Seeks Unpaid OT, Wages and Reimbursements
COMPLETE HIGHWAY: "Abeytua" Labor Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
CORE LABORATORIES: "Ashcraft" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
CRH RENTALS: Overtime Pay Sought in "Arriola" Labor Suit
DENVER MGMT: "Adzhikosyan" Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Missed Breaks

DIAMOND RESORTS: Time-share Fraud Alleged in "Harding" Suit
DIRECT HEATING: Faces "Rosado" Suit Alleging Violations of FLSA
DOMINION CAPITAL: Faces "Merriam" Suit in E.D. of Va.
EAGLE MATERIALS: Class Certification Pending in Wallboard Suit
EAGLE MATERIALS: Discovery Ongoing in Homebuilders' Suit

EMPLICITY ADMINISTRATIVE: "Leon" Seeks Unpaid OT, Missed Breaks
EVERALBUM INC: Faces "Smith" Suit in Eastern Dist. of Missouri
EXCO RESOURCES: "Fisher" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
EZCORP INC: Settlement Hearing Set for April 25
EZCORP INC: Motion to Dismiss Texas Suit Underway

FACEBOOK INC: "Anshen" Sues Over Inaccurate Stats
FINANCIAL BUSINESS: Faces "Brown" Suit in New Jersey
FACEBOOK INC: March 28 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
FCA US: "Feldman" Files Suit Over "Defeat Devices" in Vehicles
GOOGLE INC: Judge Approves $5.5MM Deal in Cookie Blockers Suit

GULF COAST: Faces "Yakubov" Suit in Eastern District of New York
HALLIBURTON COMPANY: Deal Reached in Erica P. John Fund Action
HUNAN MANOR: Faces "Chen" Suit in S.D.N.Y.
INNOCOLL HOLDINGS: Faces "Pepicelli" Securities Litigation
INTELIUS INC: "Dobrowolski" Sues Over Use of Her Name on Ads

INTERCOAST COLLEGES: Faces Suit Over Non-Accredited Programs
KEMET CORP: Says NEC TOKIN Paid Initial Settlement Payments
KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION: Accrued $2.5MM Expense Related to Accord
LOCO 111: "Hernandez" Sues Over Sexual Harassment, Unpaid Wages
LOOP TRANSPORTATION: "Alfinito" Sues Over Unpaid Overtime

MIAMI STEEL: "Morales" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
MINNEAPOLIS, MN: "Stewart" Sues Over Ignored Disability Claim
MONAKER GROUP: To Defend Against "McCleod" Lawsuit
MOUNT VERNON MILLS: Faces E & G Suit in South Carolina
NATUS MEDICAL: Non-disclosure Hit in "Badger" SEC Case

NEXIUS SOLUTIONS: Faces "Van Laningham" Suit Alleging FLSA Breach
OBESITY RESEARCH: "Bozic" Suit Moved from S.D. Cal. to E.D. Cal.
PHILIP MORRIS: Appeals in ADESF Case Still Pending
PHILIP MORRIS: Appeals in Public Prosecutor Case Still Pending
PHILIP MORRIS: Appeal in "Letourneau" Case Remains Pending

PHILIP MORRIS: Appeal in Conseil Quebecois Case Remains Pending
PHILIP MORRIS: Preliminary Motions Pending in "Adams" Action
PHILIP MORRIS: No Activity Anticipated in Canada Class Suits
PHILIP MORRIS: 11 Smoking and Health Class Action Cases Pending
PIPE PROS: Faces "Trevino" Suit Alleging Violations of FLSA

PSYCHEMEDICS CORP: April 3 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
QUALCOMM INC: Faces "McMahon" Antitrust Suit in Calif.
QUALCOMM INC: Motion to Dismiss 3226701 Canada's Suit Underway
QUALCOMM INC: Faces "Bornstein" Class Suit in N.D. Cal.
QUINCY PROPERTIES: "Brasher" Labor Suit Seeks Overtime Pay

REWALK ROBOTICS: Faces "Rolland" Securities Suit Over 2014 IPO
REWALK ROBOTICS: March 27 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
RITE AID CORP: Unpaid Wages Pay Sought in "House" Suit
RJ ACQUISITIONS: "Cabrera" Suit Claims Unpaid OT, Missed Breaks
SAFEWAY INC: United Food Union Suit Hits Late Pay, No Pay Stubs

SHIRE US: "Richard" Antitrust Over Intuniv Moved to Massachusetts
SIRIUS XM: 200 Consumers Opted-Out of TCPA Suit Settlement
STATE STREET: "Delarosa" Seeks Damages Over Share Price Drop
STEMLINE THERAPEUTICS: April 4 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
S.Y.M. INC: "Severina" Suit Seeks OT Pay Under NY Law

TARGET: 8th Cir. Remands $10MM Settlement in Data Breach Suit
TARGET CORP: "Faraji" Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
TIME WARNER: Faces "Fruchter" Suit Over Proposed Sale to AT&T
TIME WARNER: Faces "Gross" Securities Suit Over Sale to AT&T
TOM & TOON: Faces "Tangtiwatanapaibul" Suit in S.D.N.Y.

TYSON FOODS: Faces Haff Antitrust Suit in Oklahoma
UNITED STATES: "Hassanpour" Files Suit for Writ of Habeas Corpus
WEST VIRGINIA: Attys Still Working Out Deal for Water Crisis Suit
WESTERN UNION: March 27 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
YAHOO! INC: Faces "Madrack" Over Data Breach Suit


                            *********


99 JOHN'S: Faces "De La Parra" Suit in Southern Dist. of New York
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against 99 John's Market
Place Inc. The case is captioned as Alejandro De La Parra,
Cornelio Quechotl Valencia, and Delfino Soriano, Individually and
on behalf of others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs v. 99
John's Market Place Inc., doing business as Jubilee Market Place;
180 Marketplace Inc., doing business as Jubilee Market Place; Leo
Y. Yoo; and Gun Soo Youn, the Defendants, Case No. 1:17-cv-00797
(S.D.N.Y., Feb. 2, 2017).

99 John's is a specialty food market open around the clock for
meats, produce & cheeses plus organic fare.

The Plaintiffs appear pro se.


ALTERNATE STAFFING: "Bernarez" Seeks Unpaid OT, Reimbursements
--------------------------------------------------------------
Lesly Mejia Bernarez and Daysi Castillo, individually and on
behalf of all other persons similarly situated who were employed
by Alternate Staffing, Inc., Plaintiffs, v. Alternate Staffing,
Inc., Defendant, Case No. 150826/2017, (N.Y. Sup., January 25,
2017), seeks to recover wages and benefits, minimum wages,
overtime compensation, spread-of-hours compensation, reimbursement
for business expenses, damages arising from breach of contract,
interest, and attorneys' fees and costs under New York Labor Laws.

Alternate Staffing is a certified home health agency located at
4918 Fort Hamilton Parkway, Brooklyn, New York, 11219 and provides
home care aide. Plaintiffs worked as home health care attendants
for the Defendant, providing personal home health care and
assistance to Defendant's clients in New York.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      LaDonna M. Lusher, Esq.
      Leonor Coyle, Esq.
      Milana Dostanitch, Esq.
      Lloyd Ambinder, Esq.
      VIRGINIA & AMBINDER, LLP
      40 Broad Street, Seventh Floor
      New York, NY 10004
      Tel: (212) 943-9080
      Fax: (212) 943-9082
      Email: llusher@vandallp.com

             - and -

      Magdalena Barbosa, Esq.
      Alice Davis, Esq.
      CATHOLIC MIGRATION SERVICES
      47-01 Queens Boulevard, Suite 201
      Sunnyside, NY 11104
      Tel: (347) 472-3500
      Email: mbarbosa@catholicmigration.org


ATLANTIC CITY, NJ: IAFF Suit Moved from Super. Ct. to D.N.J.
------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled International Association of Fire
Fighters, AFL-CIO LOCAL 198, and WILLIAM DILORENZO, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs. v. CITY
OF ATLANTIC CITY NEW JERSEY; CHARLES RICHMAN, commissioner of the
Department of Community Services, sued in his official capacity;
TIMOTHY CUNNINGHAM, Director of New Jersey Department of Community
Services, Division of Local Government Services, sued in his
official capacity; JEFFREY CHIESA, Designee of the Director of New
Jersey Department of Community Services, Division of Local
Government Services, sued in his official capacity, the
Defendants, Case No. ATL L 222 17, was removed from the Superior
Court Of Atlantic County, to the U.S. District Court for the
District of New Jersey (Camden). The District Court Clerk assigned
Case No. 1:17-cv-00725-RMB-JS to the proceeding. The case is
assigned to Hon. Judge Renee Marie Bumb.

The IAFF is a labor union representing professional fire fighters
and emergency medical services personnel in the United States and
Canada.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael A. Bukosky, Esq.
          LOCCKE & CORREIA, PA
          24 Salem Street
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 468 0880
          E-mail: mbukosky@northeastlaborlaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Ronald Lawrence Israel, Esq.
          CHIESA SHAHINIAN & GIANTOMASI PC
          THE OFFICES AT CRYSTAL LAKE
          One Boland Drive
          West Orange, NJ 07052
          Telephone: (973) 530 2045
          Facsimile: (973) 530 2245
          E-mail: risrael@csglaw.com


BARBEQUE INTEGRATED: Faces "Hart" Suit Under FLSA, S.C. Wage Act
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jennifer Hart, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. Barbeque Integrated, Inc. d/b/a
Smokey Bones, Defendant, Case No. 2:17-cv-00227-PMD (D.S.C.,
January 24, 2017), seeks to recover under the Fair Labor Standards
Act, minimum wages, alleged unlawful deductions, and other wages
for Plaintiff and her similarly situated co-workers -- servers,
bartenders, and other "tipped workers" -- who work or have worked
at Smokey Bones restaurants owned and/or operated by Defendant.

Plaintiff also brings this action on behalf of herself and
similarly situated current and former tipped workers in South
Carolina pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 to remedy
violations of the South Carolina Payment of Wages Act.

Smokey Bones regularly conducts business as a food and beverage
operation.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     J. Scott Falls, Esq.
     Ashley L. Falls, Esq.
     FALLS LEGAL, LLC
     245 Seven Farms Drive, Suite 250
     Charleston, SC 29492
     Phone: (843) 737-6040
     Fax: (843) 737-6140
     E-mail: E-mail: scott@falls-legal.com
     E-mail: ashley@falls-legal.com

        - and -

     Douglas M. Werman, Esq.
     WERMAN SALAS P.C.
     Zachary C. Flowerree, Esq.
     77 W. Washington Street, Suite 1402
     Chicago, IL 60602
     Phone: (312) 419-1008
     Fax: (312) 419-1025
     E-mail: dwerman@flsalaw.com
     E-mail: zflowerree@flsalaw.com


BIOGEN INC: Faces Shareholder Class Action in Massachusetts
-----------------------------------------------------------
Biogen Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on February 2, 2017, for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2016, that the Company and certain current and
former officers are defendants in an action filed by another
shareholder on October 20, 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts.

The Company said, "The complaint alleges violations of federal
securities laws under 15 U.S.C. Sec.78j(b) and Sec.78t(a) and 17
C.F.R. Sec.240.10b-5 and seeks a declaration of the action as a
class action and an award of damages, interest and attorney's
fees. An estimate of the possible loss or range of loss cannot be
made at this time."

Biogen is a global biopharmaceutical company focused on
discovering, developing, manufacturing and delivering therapies to
people living with serious neurological, rare and autoimmune
diseases.


BLUE NILE: Faces "Hale" Suit Over Merger in Del. Chancery
---------------------------------------------------------
Blue Nile, Inc. filed a supplement to its definitive proxy
statement related to a merger transaction.

On November 6, 2016, Blue Nile, Inc., a Delaware corporation
("Blue Nile" or the "Company"), entered into an Agreement and Plan
of Merger (the "Merger Agreement") with BC Cyan Parent Inc., a
Delaware corporation ("Parent"), and BC Cyan Acquisition Inc., a
Delaware corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of Parent
("Merger Sub"), providing for the merger of Merger Sub with and
into the Company (the "Merger"), with the Company surviving the
Merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of Parent. Parent and Merger
Sub were formed by funds managed by Bain Capital Private Equity.

Blue Nile said in its Form 8-K Report filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on January 24, 2017, that the Current
Report on Form 8-K is being filed in connection with a putative
class action lawsuit filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery by a
purported stockholder of Blue Nile on January 13, 2017, styled
Hale v. Blue Nile, Inc., C.A. No. 2017-0025-SG (Del. Ch.) (the
"Delaware Action"). The Delaware Action alleges, among other
things, that the Company's Board of Directors breached their
fiduciary duties by failing to disclose all material information
necessary to allow the Company's stockholders to cast a fully
informed vote on the proposed Merger. Among other things, the
Delaware Action alleges that the Company's Definitive Schedule 14A
(the "Definitive Proxy Statement") filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "SEC") on December 28, 2016 failed to
include material information concerning (i) the selected publicly
traded companies and selected precedent transactions analyses
performed by the Company's financial advisor; and (ii) the
Company's financial projections provided by the Company to its
financial advisor. The Delaware Action seeks, among other
remedies, an order preliminarily and permanently enjoining the
proposed Merger, a finding that the Board of Directors is liable
for breaching their fiduciary duties and an award of attorneys'
and other fees and expenses.

The defendants to the Delaware Action deny all allegations of
wrongful or actionable conduct asserted in the action, and the
Board of Directors vigorously maintains that it diligently
complied with its fiduciary duties, that the Definitive Proxy
Statement is complete and accurate in all material respects and
that no further disclosure is required under applicable law.
Nonetheless, the Company has determined to supplement the
Definitive Proxy Statement with the disclosures set forth solely
to alleviate the costs, risks, distraction and uncertainties
inherent in litigation and any potential delay of the proposed
Merger. In making these supplemental disclosures, the defendants
to the Delaware Action do not in any way admit to the factual or
legal allegations therein and further reserve all of their rights
and defenses with respect thereto.

A copy of the Supplemental Disclosures is available at
https://is.gd/SBP8ah


BOEHRINGER INGELHEIM: Faces Doctors' Suit Over TCPA Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Hamblett at New York Law Journal reports that doctors
accusing a drug company of violating a consumer harassment law by
faxing invitations to a free dinner seminar on a sexual disorder -
- while the company was seeking approval of a drug to treat it --
have had their case resurrected.

The doctors claim Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals violated
the federal Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) by
sending unsolicited faxes for a dinner talk on female sexual
dysfunction and hypoactive sexual desire disorder.

In their putative class action, the plaintiffs say the discussion
was really a pretext to set up promotion of the still-to-be-
approved drug Flibanserin.

Under federal Food and Drug Administration rules, companies are
barred from promoting drugs prior to FDA approval. The fax offered
an invitation to "It's Time To Talk: Recognizing Female Sexual
Dysfunction and Diagnosing Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder,"
billed as an "informative and stimulating program" led by speaker
Dr. David Portman.

The doctors' complaint in the District of Connecticut sought $500
for every violation of the TCPA, which is designed to stop
unsolicited advertisements to consumers. They sought treble
damages and an injunction.

Judge Stefan Underhill dismissed, saying there was nothing in the
fax indicating "the dinner was a pretext for pitching a Boehringer
product or service."

Underhill said that, even with the inference the dinner was
intended to "inform potential future prescribers of Flibanserin
about the existence and nature of HSDD, the hypothetical future
economic benefit" to Boehringer defendants doesn't make the fax an
advertisement.

But Judges Ralph Winter, Dennis Jacobs and Pierre Leval of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reversed Feb. 3 in
Physicians Healthsource v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals,
15-288-cv.

Winter said the panel agreed that a 2006 FDA rule under the act
requires plaintiffs to show a fax has a commercial pretext. But
the rule says it's "reasonable to presume" that the offering of a
free seminar is an unsolicited advertisement that potentially
violates the act.

At the pleading stage, Winter said, "where it is alleged that a
firm sent an unsolicited fax promoting a free seminar discussing a
subject that relates to the firm's products or services, there is
a plausible conclusion that the fax had the commercial purpose of
promoting those products or services. "

"Businesses are always eager to promote their wares and usually do
not fund presentations for no business purpose," he said, while
noting Boehringer will have the chance to rebut such an inference
after discovery.

In a concurrence, Leval addressed state and federal courts outside
of the circuit "to air a somewhat different possible
understanding" of the rule -- and he took issue with the
majority's statement that the rule "does not aim at faxes
promoting free seminars per se."

Other courts, he cautioned, may interpret the rule differently.
Glenn Hara of Anderson + Wanca and Aytan Bellin of Bellin &
Associates represent the doctors.

Hara, whose firm has handled dozens of cases under the act, said
Feb. 3 that a number of district courts have opined on this
subject, but the Second Circuit is the first circuit court.

Thomas Goldberg, partner, and Bryan Orticelli, counsel, of Day
Pitney; and Matthew Geelan, associate at Donahue, Durham & Noonan,
represent the defendants.


C.R. ENGLAND: Plans to Appeal Class Certification Ruling
--------------------------------------------------------
Jill Dunn at CJJ Digital reports C.R. England plans to appeal a
federal judge's class certification of a case alleging fraud, a
ruling that could result in thousands of owner-operators joining
the two independent contractors in the 2012 lawsuit.

Judge Robert J. Shelby for the District of Utah gave permission on
January 31 to allow the lawsuit to proceed as a class action
lawsuit and gave plaintiffs 30 days to prepare a final plan for
notice to class members.

T.J. England, the corporation's chief legal officer, said he was
"deeply disappointed" by the ruling. "We vigorously dispute the
allegations made in this case and disagree with the court's
decision to certify a class," the attorney said. "We intend to
immediately appeal the decision and to continue to fight these
unfounded claims as long as is necessary."

Plaintiffs allege fraud and other statutory claims against the
truckload carrier and its related company, Horizon Truck Sales and
Leasing. The England family runs the company as well as
Opportunity Leasing, Inc. which operates under the name Horizon
Truck Sales and Leasing. Horizon's primarily purpose is to lease
trucks to drivers who work as independent contractors affiliated
with England.

Plaintiffs Charles Roberts and Kenneth McKay say the companies
recruit students to CRE's driver training schools with promises
that they can become a company driver or enjoy strong earnings as
a independent contractor.

But truckers say company driver positions were largely
unavailable. Further, they allege students driving schools
students were subject to a misinformation campaign to entice them
to lease trucks from England and become independent contractor
drivers affiliated with the company.

Earlier in the case, plaintiff attorneys indicated the furthest
the plaintiffs' claims will be able to go back is six years prior
to the filing of the complaint.

Shelby's ruling certificates CRE owner-operators as a class if
they:

-- Signed the vehicle leasing agreement with Horizon;
-- Signed the independent contractor operating agreement with C
    C.R. England;
-- Did the above during the applicable statute of limitations
    period; and
-- Drove at least one day as an independent contractor lease
    operator for C.R. England.


CHICAGO COSTUME: "Gruen" Sues Over Gift Cert. with Illegal Expiry
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Lee Gruen, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Paragon, Paradigm, Paradox, Inc., an
Illinois corporation d/b/a Chicago Costume, Defendant., Case No.
2017-CH-01112 (Ill. Cir., January 25, 2017) seeks damages,
equitable and declaratory relief, statutory damages, enjoinment of
selling or issuing gift certificates with unlawful expiration
dates, disgorgement of unlawful profits, costs and expenses, as
well as reasonable attorneys' fees and expert fees and any
additional relief under the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and the
Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act.

Paragon, Paradigm, Paradox, Inc. operates as Chicago Costume, a
privately-held Illinois corporation with its principal place
business located at 1120 West Fullerton Avenue, Chicago, Illinois
60614. It is a retailer engaged in the marketing and sale of
costumes, masks, makeup and accessories. Chicago Costume owns and
operates two year-round retail stores in Chicago, Illinois, as
well as operates pop-up retail stores for the Halloween holiday.
Chicago Costume also maintains an Internet website that allows
consumers to order and ship products anywhere in the United
States, including to Cook County, Illinois. It also markets,
sells, and distributes gift certificates to consumers for
merchandise sold online and in its retail stores.

Plaintiff purchased a $50.00 electronic gift certificate issued by
Chicago Costume bearing an illegal expiration date.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael L. Silverman, Esq.
      Klint L. Bruno, Esq.
      THE BRUNO FIRM
      900 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 4E
      Chicago, Illinois 60607
      Phone: (773) 969-6160
      Email: kbrmo@bmnolawus.com
             msilverman@brunolawus.com


CHILDREN'S PLACE: "Bradley" Labor Suit Seeks to Recover OT Pay
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brandy Bradley and Tinosha Martin-Hardeman, individually and for
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. The Children's
Place, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2017-CH-01124, (Ill. Cir.,
January 25, 2017), seeks unpaid overtime and other compensation,
interest thereon, liquidated damages, costs of suit and reasonable
attorney fees under the Illinois Minimum Wage Law.

Defendant is a Delaware corporation with its principal places of
business located at 500 Plaza Drive, Secaucus, New Jersey. It
operates more than 959 specialty retail stores nationwide, selling
children's clothing and related goods and services where Hardeman
worked as a Store Manager.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
      STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
      205 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2560
      Chicago, IL 60601
      Telephone: (312) 233-1550
      Email: rstephan@stephanzouras.com

             - and -

      Brian D. Gonzales, Esq.
      THE LAW OFFICES OF BRIAN D. GONZALES, PLLC
      242 Linden Street
      Fort Collins, CO 80524
      Telephone: (970) 214-0562
      Email: bgonzales@coloradowagelaw.com

             - and -

      Seth R. Lesser, Esq.
      Fran L. Rudich, Esq.
      Michael H. Reed, Esq.
      KLAFTER OLSEN & LESSER LLP
      Two International Drive, Suite 350
      Rye Brook, NY 10573
      Telephone: (914) 934-9200
      Email: seth@klafterolsen.com
             ffan@klafterolsen.com
             michael.reed@klafterolsen.com

             - and -

      Gregg I. Shavitz, Esq.
      Camar Jones, Esq.
      SHAVITZ LAW GROUP, P.A.
      1515 S. Federal Highway, Suite 404
      Boca Raton, FL 33432
      Telephone: (561)447-8888
      Email: gshavitz@shavitzlaw.com
             cjones@shavitzlaw.com

             - and -

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


CINTAS CORP: "Williams" Seeks Unpaid OT, Wages and Reimbursements
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ato Williams on behalf of himself, all others similarly situated,
and on behalf of the general public, Plaintiff, v. Cintas
Corporate Services, Inc., Cintas Corporation No. 2, Cintas
Corporation No. 3 and Does 1-100, Defendants, Case No. 17847009,
(Cal. Super., January 25, 2017), seeks unpaid wages, overtime,
unpaid reimbursement for business expenses, meal and rest period
compensation, penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief and
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant the California Labor
Code and the Business and Professions Code as well as the
provisions of applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage
Orders.

The Cintas Group own and operate trucks, industrial trucks,
industrial vehicles, and/or industrial work sites and employed
Plaintiff as a truck driver/mechanic. He claims to have been
denied overtime pay, was not reimbursed for business-related
expenses, worked through rest/break/meal periods, and denied
accurate wage statements and final pay upon termination.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      William Turley, Esq.
      David Mara, Esq.
      Jill Vecchi, Esq.
      THE TURLEY LAW FIRM, APLC
      7428 Trade Street
      San Diego, CA 92121
      Telephone: (619) 234-2833
      Facsimile: (619) 234-4048


COMPLETE HIGHWAY: "Abeytua" Labor Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
--------------------------------------------------------------
Pedro Luis Abeytua, Reinaldo Muniz Viera, Edwin Rendon Arango and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Complete Highway
Improvement Inc. and Luis Edgar Moreno Defendants, Case No. 1:17-
cv-20402, (S.D. Fla., January 30, 2017), request double damages
and reasonable attorneys fees from Defendants, jointly and
severally, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act along with
court costs, interest and any other relief.

Plaintiffs worked as handymen for the Defendants, a road
maintenance company in Broward County. They claim to have been
denied overtime pay.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Alex Dehghani, Esq.
      DEHGHANI LAW, P.A.
      6625 Miami Lakes Drive, Suite 350
      Miami Lakes, FL 33014
      Tel: (786) 264-5278
      Fax: (786) 264-5279
      Email: service@dlawpa.com


CORE LABORATORIES: "Ashcraft" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
----------------------------------------------------------
Philip E. Ashcraft and Christopher D. Gandara, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Core
Laboratories LP d/b/a Protechnics, and Core Laboratories LLC,
Defendants, Case No. 4:17-cv-00287 (S.D. Tex., January 30, 2017),
seeks unpaid overtime wages, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees
and costs and such other relief pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act of 1938.

ProTechnics provides laboratory analytics services to the
petroleum industry including crude oil essays, liquid and ion-
chromatography, mercury and arsenic trace analysis, and ultralow
sulphur and nitrogen detection, and does business in at least 10
states throughout the United States. Plaintiffs were hired by the
Defendants as a Field Service Representatives.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Mark Goldner, Esq.
      Maria W. Hughes, Esq.
      HUGHES & GOLDNER, PLLC
      10 Hale Street, Fifth Floor
      Charleston, WV 25301
      Tel: (304) 400-4816
      Fax: (304) 205-7729
      Email: mark@wvemploymentrights.com
             maria@wvemploymentrights.com


CRH RENTALS: Overtime Pay Sought in "Arriola" Labor Suit
--------------------------------------------------------
Julio Arriola, and all others similarly situated, v. CRH Rentals,
Ltd., RH GPCO, LLC, Double H Realty Services, LLC and Rutledge
Haggard, Defendants, Case No. 3:17-cv-00272 (N.D. Tex., January
30, 2017), request double damages and reasonable attorneys fees
from Defendants, jointly and severally, pursuant to the Fair Labor
Standards Act along with court costs, interest and other relief.

RH GPCO, LLC and CRH Rentals, Ltd. provide maintenance and
construction services for properties that are then leased by
Double H Realty Services, LLC.  Arriola worked for Defendants as a
construction and maintenance employee from September of 2010
through the present. Arriola worked an average of 60 hours per
week but was not paid the extra half-time overtime rate for hours
worked above 40 hours in a workweek.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Robert Manteuffel, Esq.
      J.H. Zidell, Esq.
      Joshua A. Petersen, Esq.
      J.H. ZIDELL, P.C.
      6310 LBJ Freeway, Ste. 112
      Dallas, TX 75240
      Tel: (972) 233-2264
      Fax: (972) 386-7610
      Email: zabogado@aol.com
             rlmanteuffel@sbcglobal.net
             josh.a.petersen@gmail.com


DENVER MGMT: "Adzhikosyan" Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Missed Breaks
----------------------------------------------------------------
Aram Adzhikosyan, an individual, and DOES 1 through 1,000,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Denver Management, Inc., a California corporation
doing business as Denver Industries, Inc. and Denver Electric,
Inc., Management Denver Industries, Inc., a California corporation
doing business as Denver Industries, Inc. and Denver Electric,
Inc., DORAN Grinstein, an individual, Dean Feldman, an individual,
Does 1-100, inclusive, Defendant(s), Case No. BC648100, (Cal.
Super., January 25, 2017), seeks to recover the unpaid balance of
minimum wage or overtime compensation, including interest thereon,
reasonable attorneys' fees, and costs of suit pursuant to the
California Labor Code and the Business and Professions Code as
well as the provisions of applicable Industrial Welfare Commission
Wage Orders.

Plaintiff worked for Defendants at their business location at 6935
Valjean Avenue, Van Nuys, California 91406. He claims to have been
denied overtime pay, worked through rest/break/meal periods,
denied accurate wage statements and their final pay upon
termination.

Plaintiff is represented by:

       David G. Jones, Esq.
       Alex V. Vo, Esq.
       SANTIAGO & JONES
       21300 Victory Blvd., Suite 810
       Woodland Hills, CA 91367
       Tel: (818) 657-5600
       Fax: (818) 657-5605
       Email: diones@santiagojoneslaw.com
              Avo@santiagojoneslaw.com


DIAMOND RESORTS: Time-share Fraud Alleged in "Harding" Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Ilona Harding, an individual, Lester Thomas Harding, an
individual, all on behalf of themselves and all similarly-situated
individuals, Plaintiffs, v. Diamond Resorts Holdings, LLC, a
Nevada limited liability company, Diamond Resorts International,
Inc., a Delaware corporation, Diamond Resorts U.S. Collection,
L.L.C., Delaware limited liability company, Diamond Resorts
International Marketing, Inc., California corporation, Diamond
Resorts International Club, Inc., a Florida corporation, Diamond
Resorts Management, Inc., an Arizona corporation, Diamond Resorts
U.S. Collection Members Association, a Delaware corporation,
Diamond Resorts Developer & Sales Holding Company, a Delaware
company, Diamond Resorts Financial Services, Inc., a California
corporation, and Does 1 through 100, Inclusive, Defendants, Case
No. 2:17-cv-00248 (D. Nev., January 29, 2017) seeks rescission of
membership agreements, restitution of all funds to the Plaintiffs
from the Defendants, damages, interest, attorneys' fees, and costs
as applicable and appropriate, civil penalties and punitive
damages resulting from fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach
of implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing and failure to
disclose, and duress under the Nevada Deceptive Trade Practices
Act.

According to the complaint, Defendants market and sell points-
based timeshare memberships, employing a timeshare plan that
subjects consumers to a series of confusing membership fees, up-
sold membership levels and hefty annual assessments. They
intentionally target retired or elderly individuals who are more
vulnerable to their manipulative sales practices. They lure
consumers into purchasing memberships by advertising certain
premium or high value properties at its sales presentations.
Different properties are acquired and then transferred into trusts
and then allocate points to the respective membership collections
for sale to purchasers. Points are then used to book
accommodations.

Plaintiffs, who purchased Memberships in the Diamond Resorts U.S.
Collection and the Diamond Resorts Hawaii Collection, allege that
the monetary value of these points is not correlated to any
traditional market value. The amount of points attributed to a
particular accommodation or use interest within a trust is
entirely arbitrary and can be manipulated at will by the
Defendants to the detriment of the members.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Mark Albright, Esq.
      Chris Albright, Esq.
      ALBRIGHT, STODDARD, WARNICK & ALBRIGHT
      801 South Rancho Drive, Suite D-4
      Las Vegas, NV 89106
      Tel: (702) 384-7111
      Fax: (702) 384-0605
      Email: gma@albrightstoddard.com

             - and -

      Kathryn Honecker, Esq.
      Audra E. Petrolle, Esq.
      ROSE LAW GROUP, PC
      7144 Stetson Drive, Suite 300
      Scottsdale, AZ 85251
      Tel: (480) 505-3939
      Fax: (480) 505-3925
      Email: khonecker@roselawgroup.com
             apetrolle@roselawgroup.com

             - and -

      Robert C. Tarics, Esq.
      THE TARICS LAW FIRM, P.C.
      9810 East Thompson Peak Parkway, Unit 811
      Scottsdale, AZ 85255
      Tel: (480) 686-9390
      Fax: (713) 682-9911
      Email: rtarics@taricslaw.com


DIRECT HEATING: Faces "Rosado" Suit Alleging Violations of FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Esteban Rosado, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. DIRECT HEATING & COOLING, INC., a Florida
Profit Corporation, and Mitzie Fox-Lerner, individually,
Defendants, Case No. 2:17-cv-00043-UA-CM (M.D. Fla., January 24,
2017), seeks to recover alleged unpaid overtime wages under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Defendants hired Plaintiff to work in service and installation of
heating and cooling products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Bill B. Berke, Esq.
     BERKE LAW FIRM, P.A.
     4423 Del Prado Blvd. S.
     Cape Coral, FL 33904
     Phone: (239) 549-6689
     E-mail: berkelaw@yahoo.com


DOMINION CAPITAL: Faces "Merriam" Suit in E.D. of Va.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Dominion Capital
Mortgage, Inc. The case is titled as Jill Merriam, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, v.
Dominion Capital Mortgage, Inc., a Virginia Corporation, the
Defendant, Case No. 3:17-cv-00107-JAG (E.D. Va., Feb. 2, 2017).
The case is assigned to Hon. District Judge John A. Gibney, Jr.

Dominion Capital is a mortgage lender located in the West
End/Innsbrook area of Richmond, Virginia.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Francis John Driscoll, Jr., Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF FRANK J. DRISCOLL JR. PLLC
          192 Ballard Ct., Suite 310
          Virginia Beach, VA 23462
          Telephone: (757) 321 0054
          Facsimile: (757) 321 4020
          E-mail: frank@driscolllawoffice.com


EAGLE MATERIALS: Class Certification Pending in Wallboard Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Eagle Materials Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on January 24, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended December 31, 2016, that Class certification
proceedings are ongoing in the domestic wallboard antitrust
litigation.

Since late December 2012, several purported class action lawsuits
were filed in various United States District Courts, including the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Western District of North
Carolina and the Northern District of Illinois, against the
Company's subsidiary, American Gypsum Company LLC ("American
Gypsum"), alleging that the defendant wallboard manufacturers
conspired to fix the price for drywall sold in the United States
in violation of federal antitrust laws and, in some cases related
provisions of state law. The complaints allege that the defendant
wallboard manufacturers conspired to increase prices through the
announcement and implementation of coordinated price increases,
output restrictions, and other restraints of trade, including the
elimination of individual "job quote" pricing.

In addition to American Gypsum, the defendants in these lawsuits
include CertainTeed Corp., USG Corporation and United States
Gypsum (together "USG"), New NGC, Inc., Lafarge North America
("Lafarge"), Temple Inland Inc. ("TIN") and PABCO Building
Products LLC. On April 8, 2013, the Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict Litigation ("JPML") transferred and consolidated all
related cases to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania for
coordinated pretrial proceedings.

On June 24, 2013, the direct and indirect purchaser plaintiffs
filed consolidated amended class action complaints. The direct
purchasers' complaint added the Company as a defendant. The
plaintiffs in the consolidated class action lawsuits bring claims
on behalf of purported classes of direct or indirect purchasers of
wallboard from January 1, 2012 to the present for unspecified
monetary damages (including treble damages) and in some cases
injunctive relief. On July 29, 2013, the Company and American
Gypsum answered the complaints, denying all allegations that they
conspired to increase the price of drywall and asserting
affirmative defenses to the plaintiffs' claims.

In 2014, USG and TIN entered into agreements with counsel
representing the direct and indirect purchaser classes pursuant to
which they agreed to settle all claims against them.  Under the
terms of its settlement agreement, USG agreed to pay $48.0 million
to resolve the direct and indirect purchaser class actions.  In
its settlement agreement, TIN agreed to pay $7.0 million to
resolve the direct and indirect purchaser class actions.  On
August 20, 2015, the court entered orders finally approving USG
and TIN's settlements with the direct and indirect purchaser
plaintiffs.  Initial discovery in this litigation is complete.
Following completion of the initial discovery, the Company and
remaining co-defendants moved for summary judgement.

On February 18, 2016, the court denied the Company's motion for
summary judgement.  On June 16, 2016, Lafarge entered into an
agreement with counsel for the direct purchaser class under which
it agreed to settle all claims against it for $23.0 million.  The
court entered an order finally approving this settlement on
December 7, 2016.

On July 28, 2016, Lafarge entered into an agreement with counsel
representing the indirect purchaser class under which it agreed to
settle all claims against it for $5.2 million.  Indirect purchaser
plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of this
settlement in September 2016.

On July 14, 2016, the Company's motion for permission to appeal
the summary judgement decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Third Circuit was denied.

Direct purchaser plaintiffs and indirect purchaser plaintiffs
filed their motions for class certification on August 3, 2016 and
October 12, 2016, respectively.  Class certification proceedings
are ongoing.

"We are unable to estimate the amount of any reasonably possible
loss or range of reasonably possible losses. We deny the
allegations in these lawsuits and will vigorously defend ourselves
against these claims," the Company said.


EAGLE MATERIALS: Discovery Ongoing in Homebuilders' Suit
--------------------------------------------------------
Eagle Materials Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on January 24, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended December 31, 2016, that discovery is
ongoing in a lawsuit by a group of homebuilders.

On March 17, 2015, a group of homebuilders filed a complaint
against the defendants, including American Gypsum, based upon the
same conduct alleged in the consolidated class action complaints.
On March 24, 2015, the JPML transferred this action to the
multidistrict litigation already pending in the Eastern District
of Pennsylvania.  Following the transfer, the homebuilder
plaintiffs filed two amended complaints, on December 14, 2015 and
March 25, 2016.  Discovery in this lawsuit is ongoing.

"At this stage, we are unable to estimate the amount of any
reasonably possible loss or range of reasonably possible losses,"
the Company said.

Eagle Materials Inc. is a diversified producer of basic building
products used in residential, industrial, commercial and
infrastructure construction.


EMPLICITY ADMINISTRATIVE: "Leon" Seeks Unpaid OT, Missed Breaks
---------------------------------------------------------------
Roberto Leon, an Individual, and on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Emplicity Administrative
Services, Inc., A-List, Inc. and Does 1-50, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. BC 648165, (Cal. Super., January 25, 2017), seeks unpaid
wages, overtime, unpaid meal and rest period compensation,
penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief and reasonable
attorneys' fees and costs pursuant the California Labor Code and
the Business and Professions Code as well as the provisions of
applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders.

Emplicity provides companies with administrative services, and is
located at 9851 Irvine Center Drive, Irvine, CA 92618 with
additional office space at 146 N. Robertson Blvd., West Hollywood,
CA 9004. Plaintiff last worked as a payroll associate for the
Defendants.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      John L. Holcomb, Jr.
      KRAMER HOLCOMB SHEIK LLP
      1925 Century Park East, Ste. 1180
      Los Angeles, CA 90067
      Telephone: (310) 551-0600
      Facsimile: (310)551-0601

            - and -

      Irma L. Martinez, Esq.
      701 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 610
      Glendale, CA 91203
      Tel: (213) 352-7235


EVERALBUM INC: Faces "Smith" Suit in Eastern Dist. of Missouri
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Everalbum, Inc. The
case is entitled as Daniel T. Smith and Samantha Anderson, on
behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, the Plaintiff,
v. Everalbum, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, Case No. 4:17-cv-
00400-PLC (E.D. Mo., Feb. 2, 2017). The case is assigned to Hon.
Magistrate Judge Patricia L. Cohen.

Everalbum, Inc. designs and develops a mobile application to
gather phone, desktop, and Facebook photos all in one place that
is accessible by phone, desktop, and tablet. The company was
incorporated in 2013 and is based in San Francisco, California.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan E. Fortman, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF JONATHAN E. FORTMAN, LLC
          250 Saint Catherine Street
          Florissant, MO 63031
          Telephone: (314) 522 2312
          Facsimile: (314) 524 1519
          E-mail: jef@fortmanlaw.com



EXCO RESOURCES: "Fisher" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
-----------------------------------------------------
Rodney Fisher, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, v. Exco Resources, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 3:17-cv-
00271 (N.D. Tex., January 29, 2017) seeks unpaid overtime wages,
other damages owed and attorneys' fees and costs owed under the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Exco is a global oil and gas exploration and production company
operating worldwide and throughout the United States. Fisher
worked for Exco as a Drilling Consultant from approximately May
2014 to January 2015. Throughout his employment, he was classified
as an independent contractor and paid on a day-rate basis.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Matthew S. Parmet, Esq.
      Richard J. Burch, Esq.
      BRUCKNER BURCH PLLC
      8 Greenway Plaza, Suite 1500
      Houston, TX 77046
      Tel: (713) 877-8788
      Fax: (713) 877-8065
      Email: rburch@brucknerburch.com
             mparmet@brucknerburch.com

             - and -

      Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
      Andrew W. Dunlap
      FIBICH, LEEBRON, COPELAND, BRIGGS & JOSEPHSON
      1150 Bissonnet
      Houston, TX 77005
      Telephone: (713) 751-0025
      Fax: (713) 751-0030
      Email: mjosephson@fibichlaw.com
             adunlap@fibichlaw.com


EZCORP INC: Settlement Hearing Set for April 25
-----------------------------------------------
EZCORP, Inc., said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 2, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended December 31, 2016, that in the case, In Re
EZCORP, Inc. Securities Litigation (Case No. 1:14-cv-06834-ALC),
the New York court set the settlement hearing for April 25, 2017.

On August 22, 2014, Jason Close, a purported holder of Class A
Non-voting Common Stock, for himself and on behalf of other
similarly situated holders of Class A Non-voting Common Stock,
filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York styled Close v. EZCORP, Inc., et al.
(Case No. 1:14-cv-06834-ALC). That lawsuit named as defendants
EZCORP, Inc., Paul. E. Rothamel (the Company's former Chief
Executive Officer) and Mark Kuchenrither (the Company's former
Chief Financial Officer). That lawsuit was consolidated with a
similar lawsuit filed in the same court on October 17, 2014 by the
Automotive Machinists Pension Plan and styled Automotive
Machinists Pension Plan v. EZCORP, Inc., et al. (Case No. 1:14-cv-
8349-ALC).  On November 18, 2014, the court consolidated the two
lawsuits under the caption In Re EZCORP, Inc. Securities
Litigation (Case No. 1:14-cv-06834-ALC).

The Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint asserted
violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as well as Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder,
alleging generally that:

     * EZCORP and the officer defendants issued false and
misleading statements and omissions regarding the Company's online
lending operations in the U.K. (Cash Genie) and Cash Genie's
compliance history;

     * EZCORP and the officer defendants issued false and
misleading statements and omissions regarding the nature of the
Company's consulting relationship with Madison Park LLC (as entity
owned by Mr. Cohen) and the process the Board of Directors used in
agreeing to it;

     * EZCORP's financial statements were false and misleading,
and violated GAAP and SEC rules and regulations, by failing to
properly recognize impairment charges with respect to the
Company's investment in Albemarle & Bond; and

     * Mr. Cohen and MS Pawn Limited Partnership, as controlling
persons of EZCORP, were aware of and controlled the Company's
alleged false and misleading statements and omissions.

On March 31, 2016, the Court, in response to the defendants'
motions to dismiss, dismissed the Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5
claims insofar as they were based on (1) the alleged misstatements
about the nature of and approval process related to the Company's
consulting relationship with Madison Park, (2) the alleged
misstatements regarding the impairment of the Company's investment
in Albemarle & Bond, and (3) some of the alleged misstatements
about Cash Genie. The Section 10(b) and Rule 10b-5 claims survived
the motions to dismiss insofar as they were based on certain
alleged misstatements about Cash Genie. The Section 20(a) claims
also survived the motions to dismiss.

On November 23, 2016, the parties agreed to a mediated settlement
of all remaining claims, which settlement provides for the payment
of $5.9 million by the defendants (which will be covered by
applicable directors' and officers' liability insurance). The
settlement is subject to several conditions, including court
approval. The parties agreed to, and the plaintiffs filed on
December 23, 2016, a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement, and
on January 4, 2017, the court issued its preliminary approval
order and set the Settlement Hearing for April 25, 2017.

EZCORP is a provider of pawn loans in the United States and
Mexico.


EZCORP INC: Motion to Dismiss Texas Suit Underway
-------------------------------------------------
EZCORP, Inc., said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 2, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended December 31, 2016, that defendants' motion
to dismiss the Second Amended Compliant in a class action
complaint in Texas remains pending.

The Company said, "On July 20, 2015, Wu Winfred Huang, a purported
holder of Class A Non-voting Common Stock, for himself and on
behalf of other similarly situated holders of Class A Non-voting
Common Stock, filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas styled Huang v. EZCORP, Inc., et
al. (Case No. 1:15-cv-00608-SS). The complaint names as defendants
EZCORP, Inc., Stuart I. Grimshaw (our chief executive officer) and
Mark E. Kuchenrither (our former chief financial officer) and
asserts violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. The
original complaint related to the Company's announcement on July
17, 2015 that it will restate the financial statements for fiscal
2014 and the first quarter of fiscal 2015, and alleged generally
that the Company issued materially false or misleading statements
concerning the Company, its finances, business operations and
prospects and that the Company misrepresented the financial
performance of the Grupo Finmart business."

"On August 14, 2015, a substantially identical lawsuit, styled
Rooney v. EZCORP, Inc., et al. (Case No. 1:15-cv-00700-SS) was
also filed in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Texas. On September 28, 2015, the plaintiffs in these
two lawsuits filed an agreed stipulation to be appointed co-lead
plaintiffs and agreed that their two actions should be
consolidated.

"On November 3, 2015, the Court entered an order consolidating the
two actions under the caption In re EZCORP, Inc. Securities
Litigation (Master File No. 1:15-cv-00608-SS), and appointed the
two plaintiffs as co-lead plaintiffs, with their respective
counsel appointed as co-lead counsel.

"On January 11, 2016, the plaintiffs filed an Amended Class Action
Complaint (the "Amended Complaint"). In the Amended Complaint, the
plaintiffs seek to represent a class of purchasers of our Class A
Common Stock between November 6, 2012 and October 20, 2015. The
Amended Complaint asserts that the Company and Mr. Kuchenrither
violated Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act and Rule
10b-5, issued materially false or misleading statements throughout
the proposed class period concerning the Company and its internal
controls, specifically regarding the financial performance of
Grupo Finmart. The plaintiffs also allege that Mr. Kuchenrither,
as a controlling person of the Company, violated Section 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act. The Amended Complaint does not assert
any claims against Mr. Grimshaw.

"On February 25, 2016, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
lawsuit. The plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion to
dismiss on April 11, 2016, and the defendants filed their reply on
May 11, 2016. The Court held a hearing on the motion to dismiss on
June 22, 2016.

"On October 18, 2016, the Court granted the defendants' motion to
dismiss and dismissed the Amended Complaint without prejudice. The
Court gave the plaintiffs 20 days (until November 7, 2016) to file
a further amended complaint.

"On November 4, 2016, the plaintiffs filed a Second Amended
Consolidated Class Action Complaint ("Second Amended Complaint").
The Second Amended Complaint raises the same claims dismissed by
the Court on October 18, 2016, except plaintiffs now seek to
represent a class of purchasers of EZCORP's Class A Common Stock
between November 7, 2013 and October 20, 2015 (instead of between
November 6, 2012 and October 20, 2015).

"On December 5, 2016, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
Second Amended Compliant. The plaintiffs filed their opposition to
the motion to dismiss on January 6, 2017, and the defendants filed
their reply brief on January 20, 2017.

"We cannot predict the outcome of the litigation, but we intend to
defend vigorously against all allegations and claims," the Company
said.

EZCORP is a provider of pawn loans in the United States and
Mexico.


FACEBOOK INC: "Anshen" Sues Over Inaccurate Stats
-------------------------------------------------
Daniel Anshen, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Facebook, Inc., Mark Zuckerberg, David
Wehner and Sheryl Sandberg, Defendants, Case No. 2:17-cv-00679,
(C.D. Cal., January 27, 2017), seeks compensatory damages,
reasonable costs and expenses incurred in this action, including
counsel fees and expert fees and such other and further relief for
violation of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Facebook is essentially an advertising company that connects
sellers and advertisers of consumer goods and services with its
consumer users with the purpose of generating revenue, achieved
primarily through the sale of advertising targeted at its consumer
users. Facebook provides business services through the Website to
serve as a resource for businesses that want to use Facebook for
marketing and advertising.

According to the complaint, Facebook failed to disclose that its
metrics to calculate the average time users spent watching videos
was overestimated by between 60-80% and Facebook provided
inaccurate statistics to advertisers regarding the amount of
activity their ads received on their website.

Plaintiff is represented by:

       Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
       THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
       355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
       Los Angeles, CA 90071
       Telephone: (213) 785-2610
       Facsimile: (213) 226-4684
       Email: lrosen@rosenlegal.com

              - and -

       Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
       Shimon Yiftach, Esq.
       BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN
       1925 Century Park East, Suite 1990
       Los Angeles, CA 90067
       Tel: (424) 322-0322
       Fax: (310) 971-9996
       Email: peretz@bgandg.com
              shimony@bgandg.com


FINANCIAL BUSINESS: Faces "Brown" Suit in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Financial Business
and Consumer Solutions, Inc. The case is captioned as SHARON
BROWN, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the
Plaintiff, v. FINANCIAL BUSINESS AND CONSUMER SOLUTIONS, INC.,
doing business as: FBCS INC. and doing business as CF MEDICAL,
LLC, the Defendant, Case No. 3:17-cv-00733-FLW-TJB (D.N.J., Feb.
2, 2017). The case is assigned to Hon. Judge Freda L. Wolfson.

FBCS is a licensed collection agency.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lawrence C. Hersh, Esq.
          17 Sylvan Street, Suite 102B
          Rutherford, NJ 07070
          Telephone: (201) 507 6300
          E-mail: lh@hershlegal.com


FACEBOOK INC: March 28 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
---------------------------------------------------------
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC, notifies investors that a
class action lawsuit has been filed against Facebook, Inc. and
certain of its officers, and is on behalf of shareholders who
purchased or otherwise acquired Facebook securities between May 5,
2014 through December 9, 2016, both dates inclusive.  Such
investors are advised to join this case by visiting the firm's
site: http://www.bgandg.com/fb.

The class action lawsuit seeks to recover damages against
Defendants for alleged violations of the federal securities laws
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act").
The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period Defendants
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) Facebook's metrics to calculate the average time users
spent watching videos was overestimated by between 60% and 80%;
(2) Facebook provided inaccurate statistics to advertisers
regarding the amount of activity their ads received on the
Website; and (3) consequently, Defendants' public statements were
materially false and misleading at all relevant times. Once this
information was made known to the investing public, the lawsuit
claims that investors suffered damages.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to
review a copy of the Complaint you can visit the firm's site:
http://www.bgandg.com/fb or you may contact Peretz Bronstein,
Esq. or his Investor Relations Analyst, Yael Hurwitz of Bronstein,
Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC at 212-697-6484. If you suffered a loss in
Facebook you have until March 28, 2017 to request that the Court
appoint you as lead plaintiff.  Your ability to share in any
recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC is a corporate litigation
boutique.  Our primary expertise is the aggressive pursuit of
litigation claims on behalf of our clients. In addition to
representing institutions and other investor plaintiffs in class
action security litigation, the firm's expertise includes general
corporate and commercial litigation, as well as securities
arbitration.  Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee
similar outcomes.


FCA US: "Feldman" Files Suit Over "Defeat Devices" in Vehicles
--------------------------------------------------------------
VICTOR L. FELDMAN, DENNIS H. OVERSTREET individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. FCA US LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 5:17-cv-00129-HGD (N.D. Ala., January 24,
2017), alleges an intentional installation of so-called "defeat
devices" on over 100,000 diesel Dodge and Jeep vehicles sold
and/or distributed in the United States since 2014 by FCA.
According to the suit, FCA has now been served by the United
States Environmental Protection Agency with notice of Clean Air
Act violations that show that FCA's claims of selling
environmentally-friendly vehicles were false.

FCA US LLC, together with its subsidiaries, designs, engineers,
manufactures, distributes, and sells vehicles primarily in the
United States.

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     D. Anthony Mastando, Esq.
     Eric J. Artrip, Esq.
     MASTANDO & ARTRIP, LLC
     301 Washington St., Suite 302
     Huntsville, AL 35801
     Phone: (256) 532-2222
     Fax: (256) 513-7489
     E-mail: tony@mastandoartrip.com
             artrip@mastandoartrip.com

        - and -

     Richard Roucco, Esq.
     George Davies, Esq.
     QUINN, CONNOR, WEAVER, DAVIES & ROUCO, LLP
     2700 Highway 280, Ste. 380
     Birmingham, AL 35223
     Phone: (205) 870-9989
     Fax: (205) 803-4143
     E-mail: rrouco@qcwdr.com
             gdavies@qcwdr.com


GOOGLE INC: Judge Approves $5.5MM Deal in Cookie Blockers Suit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Mcparland at Law.Com reports a Delaware federal judge on
February 2 gave final approval to a $5.5 million settlement
between Google Inc. and a nationwide class of plaintiffs that had
challenged the tech giant's practice of overriding cookie blockers
to access users' internet history information.

The payout, preliminarily approved in August, will be distributed
among six cy pres recipients -- all leaders in researching and
advocating for online privacy, according to court documents.

February 2's came over the sole objection of Theodore H. Frank,
who has opposed similar settlements in other cases involving
Subway, Red Bull and Gillette. In the Google case, Frank again
argued that the settlement should be rejected because it did not
directly compensate class plaintiffs for their claims under
California's privacy laws.

But U.S. District Judge Sue L. Robinson of the District of
Delaware said that complex nature of the case -- as well as the
sheer volume and diversity of class members -- justified the
indirect benefit.

"The court concludes that the realities of the litigation at bar
demonstrate that direct monetary payments to absent class members
would be logistically burdensome, impractical and economically
infeasible, resulting (at best) with direct compensation of a de
minimis amount," she said in a 12-page memorandum and order.

The parties agreed to settle the case, captioned In Re: Google
Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation, after the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the Third Circuit reversed in part Robinson's
decision to dismiss the case in its entirety back in 2013.

The three-judge panel in November 2015 found that allegations of
Google's "broad" and "surreptitious" efforts to circumvent privacy
settings on Apple Safari and Microsoft Internet Explorer web
browsers raised serious concerns under California law.

Allegedly, the company had exploited loopholes in both browsers'
cookie blockers, despite public assurances to the contrary.
Cookies enable websites and advertisers to track users' internet
history, allowing them to create detailed user profiles and
deliver highly targeted advertisements.

The revelation, first discovered by Stanford University graduate
student Jonathan Mayer, led to a $22.5 million settlement with the
Federal Trade Commission and a separate agreement to resolve
claims by 38 state attorneys general for $17 million.

It also sparked filings in district courts across the country from
plaintiffs who used the two browsers. The cases were ultimately
consolidated in the district of Delaware and assigned to Robinson.

As a part of the settlement each of the three class
representatives will receive $1,000 in incentive rewards, and
Google will pay for more than $90,900 in expenses.

Robinson did, however, slash the plaintiffs' attorney fees from
the requested $2.4 million to $1.9 million. The reduction, she
said, reflected the nature of the benefit that the settlement
conferred.

"In other words, the court concludes that it is appropriate to
adjust attorney fees to reflect the fact that it is only the
attorneys who have directly benefitted from the settlement," she
wrote. "In this case, given that the settlement fund is relatively
modest and the resolution at bar follows that of the FTC
investigation, attorney fees approaching 50 percent of the
settlement fund is not acceptable."

The cy pres contributions will be made to the Berkeley Center for
Law & Technology; the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society
at Harvard University; the Center for Democracy & Technology;
Public Counsel; Privacy Rights Clearinghouse; and the Center for
Internet and Society at Stanford University.


GULF COAST: Faces "Yakubov" Suit in Eastern District of New York
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Gulf Coast
Collection Bureau, Inc. The case is styled as David Yakubov, on
behalf of himself and all other similarly situated consumers, the
Plaintiff, v. Gulf Coast Collection Bureau, Inc., the Defendant,
Case No. 1:17-cv-00612 (E.D.N.Y., Feb. 2, 2017).

Gulf Coast, a collection agency, provides receivables management
services for commercial, health care, retail, government, and
insurance/subrogation industries in the United States.

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


HALLIBURTON COMPANY: Deal Reached in Erica P. John Fund Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Halliburton Company said in its Form 8-K Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on January 23, 2017, that
Halliburton (NYSE:HAL) announced a loss from continuing operations
of $149 million, or $0.17 per diluted share, for the fourth
quarter of 2016. Adjusted income from continuing operations for
the fourth quarter of 2016, excluding impairments and other
charges and a class action lawsuit settlement, was $35 million, or
$0.04 per diluted share. This compares to income from continuing
operations for the third quarter of 2016 of $6 million, or $0.01
per diluted share. Halliburton's total revenue in the fourth
quarter of 2016 was $4.0 billion, which increased 5% from revenue
of $3.8 billion in the third quarter of 2016. Reported operating
income for the fourth quarter of 2016 was $53 million. Adjusted
operating income for the fourth quarter of 2016 was $276 million,
compared to operating income of $128 million for the third quarter
of 2016, which did not include any impairments or other charges.

In December 2016, Halliburton reached an agreement in principle to
settle the Erica P. John Fund class action lawsuit that has been
pending for over 14 years and which asserted claims in connection
with accounting for long-term construction projects and asbestos
liability disclosures. As a result, Halliburton incurred a charge
of $54 million during the fourth quarter, which is included in
Corporate and other.

During the fourth quarter of 2016, Halliburton incurred
approximately $92 million of foreign currency exchange losses that
were included in the company's $0.04 adjusted income from
continuing operations per diluted share. The single largest loss
was a $53 million, or $0.06 per share, non-tax deductible impact
from the devaluation of the Egyptian pound.


HUNAN MANOR: Faces "Chen" Suit in S.D.N.Y.
------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Hunan Manor
Enterprise, Inc. The case is captioned as Shi Ming Chen, Lianhe
Zhou, Yong Kang Liu, Jixiang Wang, Wei Min Zhu, and Jian Cai,
individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, the
Plaintiffs, v. Hunan Manor Enterprise, Inc., doing business as
Hunan Manor; Hunan Manor LLC, doing business as Hunan Manor (A NY
Domestic Limited Liability Company); Hunan House Manor Inc., doing
business as Hunan Manor; Hunan House Restaurant, Inc., doing
business as Hunan Manor; Hunan House Restaurant NY LLC, doing
business as Hunan Manor; Hunan House, Inc., doing business as
Hunan Manor; Hunan Manor LLC, doing business as Hunan Manor (A NJ
Domestic Limited Liability Company); A Taste of Mao, Inc., doing
business as China Xiang; Jingchao Li, also known as Jing Chao Li
or Diana Li; Wensheng Zhang; Zhida Li, also known as Zhi Da Li;
Zhi Ba Li; Jimmy Cheung; Danny Wing Lok Cheung; and Xiang Yun Ni,
the Defendants, Case No. 1:17-cv-00802 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 2, 2017).

Hunan Manor is veteran hub for classic Chinese food in a spacious
setting outfitted with fish tanks & Asian decor.

The Plaintiff appears pro se.


INNOCOLL HOLDINGS: Faces "Pepicelli" Securities Litigation
----------------------------------------------------------
ANTHONY PEPICELLI, Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, V. INNOCOLL HOLDINGS PUBLIC
LIMITED COMPANY, ANTHONY P. ZOOK, JOSE CARMONA, and LESLEY
RUSSEL, Defendants, Case No. 2:17-cv-00341-GEKP (E.D. Pa., January
24, 2017), is a securities lawsuit.

The case alleges that Defendants failed to disclose that: (1)
Innocoll's New Drug Application submission to the Food and Drug
Administration in October 2016 for XARACOLL, a surgically
implantable and bioresorbable bupivacaine-collagen matrix, was
incomplete; (2) due to the incomplete NDA submission, XARACOLL
would not be approved in 2017 as investors were led to believe;
and (3) as a result, Innocoll's statements about its business,
operations, and prospects, were false and misleading and/or lacked
a reasonable basis.

Innocoll Holdings Public Limited Co. is a global, specialty
pharmaceutical company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
     101 Greenwood Avenue, Suite 203,
     Jenkintown, PA 19046
     Phone: (215) 600-2817


INTELIUS INC: "Dobrowolski" Sues Over Use of Her Name on Ads
------------------------------------------------------------
Anna Dobrowolski, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Intelius, Inc., a Delaware
Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 2017-CH-01177, (Ill. Cir.,
January 25, 2017), seeks an injunction, actual damages, including
profits derived from an unauthorized use of individuals' names, or
statutory damages, punitive damages and reasonable attorneys' fees
and costs for violation of the Illinois Right of Publicity Act.

Intelius is an online service that sells detailed profile reports
about people to anybody willing to pay for them. These reports are
based upon information compiled from extensive databases and
public record repositories, as well as Intelius's own proprietary
genomic technology that it uses to identify connections between
people, places and things. To sell more reports, Intelius displays
paid advertisements to every consumer that searches a person's
name on any search engine and using dynamic keyword insertion,
inserts the name of the searched person into a landing page. This
is usually done without the said person's consent.

Dobrowolski discovered that Intelius uses her name in
advertisements on major search engines to encourage consumers to
visit its website and purchase personal reports about her.

Plaintiffs are represented by:

      Ari J. Scharg, Esq.
      Benjamin H. Richman, Esq.
      EDELSON PC
      350 N. LaSalle St., 13th Floor
      Chicago, IL 60654
      Tel: (312) 589-6370
      Fax: (312) 589-6378
      Email: brichman@edelson.com
             ascharg@edelson.com


INTERCOAST COLLEGES: Faces Suit Over Non-Accredited Programs
------------------------------------------------------------
Louie Torres at Legal Newsline reports that four students have
filed a class action lawsuit against a Maine college, alleging
breach of contract, fraud and negligent misrepresentation.

Stephanie Kourembanas, Caridad Jean Baptiste, Cathy Mande and
Catharine Valley filed a complaint, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Dec. 30 in U.S. District Court for
the District of Maine against Intercoast Colleges, doing business
as Intercoast Career Institute, alleging the defendant
misrepresented that it is offering accredited programs.

According to the complaint, the plaintiffs suffered monetary
damages due to student loan debt. The plaintiffs allege the
defendant misled the plaintiffs to enroll for its programs despite
knowing the programs are not accredited.

The plaintiffs seek trial by jury, an injunction against the
defendant, compensatory damages for taking out student loans,
punitive damages, court costs, interest and al other relief the
court grants. They are represented by attorneys James Clifford and
Andrew P. Cotter -- info@cliffordclifford.com --  of Clifford &
Clifford in Kennebunk, Maine, and by Richard L. O'Meara --
romeara@mpmlaw.com -- of Murray, Plumb & Murray in Portland,
Maine.

U.S. District Court for the District of Maine Case number 2:16-cv-
00639-JAW


KEMET CORP: Says NEC TOKIN Paid Initial Settlement Payments
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kemet Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on February 2, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended December 31, 2016, that NEC TOKIN has paid
the initial installment payments into the two plaintiff classes'
respective escrow accounts.

On May 2, 2016, NEC TOKIN reached a preliminary settlement,
followed by definitive settlement agreements on July 15, 2016
which are subject to court approval, in two antitrust suits filed
with the United States District Court, Northern District of
California as In re: Capacitors Antitrust Litigation, No. 3:14-cv-
03264-JD (the "Class Action Suits"). Pursuant to the terms of the
settlement agreements, in consideration of the release of NEC
TOKIN and its subsidiaries (including NEC TOKIN America, Inc.)
from claims asserted in the Class Action Suits, NEC TOKIN will pay
an aggregate $37.3 million to a settlement class of direct
purchasers of capacitors and a settlement class of indirect
purchasers of capacitors.

Each of the respective class payments is payable in five
installments, the first of which became due on July 29, 2016, the
next three of which are due each year thereafter on the
anniversary of the initial payment, and the final payment is due
by December 31, 2019. NEC TOKIN has paid the initial installment
payments into the two plaintiff classes' respective escrow
accounts.


KNIGHT TRANSPORTATION: Accrued $2.5MM Expense Related to Accord
---------------------------------------------------------------
Knight Transportation, Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form 8-K
Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
January 25, 2017, that during the fourth quarter of 2016 the
Company accrued $2.5 million of expense ($1.5 million after-tax)
related to expected settlement costs for two class action lawsuits
involving employment-related claims in California and Washington.

"We have provided adjusted financial information that excludes
these expenses from our results of operations. We believe the
comparability of our results is improved by excluding these
infrequent expenses that are unrelated to our core operations,"
the Company said.


LOCO 111: "Hernandez" Sues Over Sexual Harassment, Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
Isahid Hernandez, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Loco 111 Inc. (d/b/a San Loco), Loco 124,
Inc. (D/B/A San Loco), Jill Higgins, Kimo Higgins and Tino
Quintana, Defendants, Case No. 1:17-cv-00666, (S.D.N.Y., January
27, 2017), seeks unpaid minimum and overtime wages, liquidated
damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act of 1938 and New York Labor Laws. The suit
further asserts sexual discrimination and hostile work
environment/sexual harassment, and civil battery for offensive
intentional sexual contact under New York State Human Rights Laws
and New York City Human Rights Laws.

San Loco are two Tex-Mex restaurants under the name San Loco owned
by Jill Higgins and Kimo Higgins, located at 111 Stanton Street,
New York, New York 10002 and at 124 Second Avenue, New York, New
York 10002, where Hernandez was employed as a cook and porter.
Aside from being denied overtime pay, she claims that Quintana, a
cook at the Stanton Street location, touched her body against her
will, made explicit sexual advances at her and eventually tried to
violently rape her within the restaurant premises.

Plaintiffs are represented by:

      Michael A. Faillace, Esq.
      MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
      60 East 42nd Street, Suite 2540
      New York, NY 10165
      Telephone: (212) 317-1200
      Facsimile: (212) 317-1620


LOOP TRANSPORTATION: "Alfinito" Sues Over Unpaid Overtime
---------------------------------------------------------
Kimberly Alfinito, on behalf of herself, all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Loop Transportation, Inc. and Does 1
through 10, inclusive,, Case No. CGC-17-556677, (Cal. Super.,
January 25, 2017), seeks recovery of all allowable compensation,
unpaid wages and overtime, penalties/premium pay for missed meal
and rest periods, restitution and restoration of sums owed and
property unlawfully withheld, statutory penalties, interest, and
attorneys' fees and costs pursuant the California Labor Code and
the Business and Professions Code as well as the provisions of
applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders.

Loop is a transport company operating in the Bay Area where
Plaintiff worked as a driver. She claims unpaid wages for pre- and
post-shift work, including compensable travel time, maintaining
the buses and such other related work.

Plaintiff is represented by:

       Eric A. Grover, Esq.
       Robert W. Spencer, Esq.
       KELLER GROVER LLP
       1965 Market Street
       San Francisco, CA 94103
       Telephone: (415) 543-1305
       Facsimile: (415) 543-7861
       Email: eagrover@kellergrover.com
              rspencer@kellergrover.com


MIAMI STEEL: "Morales" Suit to Recover Overtime Pay
---------------------------------------------------
Haydin Morales, and other similarly situated individuals,
Plaintiff, v. Miami Steel Erectors Inc. a Florida Profit
Corporation,  individually, Madalene M. Salas, individually, Tomas
L. Salas, individually, Defendant, Case No. 51621419, (Fla. Cir,
January 25, 2017), seeks unpaid wages compensation, actual damages
in the amount shown to be due for unpaid overtime wages for hours
worked in excess of forty weekly with interest, double/liquidated
damages, costs of this action, together with reasonable attorneys'
fees and such additional relief under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

Miami Steel Erectors is a steel fabricator in the Fountainbleau,
Florida owned by Madalene and Tomas Salas. Morales claims to have
worked in excess of forty hours in a given work week but denied
overtime pay.

Plaintiff is represented by:

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


MINNEAPOLIS, MN: "Stewart" Sues Over Ignored Disability Claim
-------------------------------------------------------------
Laurence Stewart, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. City of Minneapolis, Defendant, Case No.
27-CV-17-985, (D. Minn., January 25, 2017), seeks liquidated
damages, costs of this action, together with reasonable attorneys'
fees and additional relief under the Minnesota Human Rights Act
and the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Stewart worked for the City as an automotive mechanic and was
injured on the job. He alleges that the City failed to accommodate
his disability and was terminated eventually.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Douglas L. Micko, Esq.
      Marissa C. Katz, Esq.
      Brian T. Rochel, Esq.
      222 South Ninth Street, Suite 4050
      Minneapolis, MN 55402
      Tel: (612) 746-1558
      Fax: (651) 846-5339
      Email: micko@teskemicko.com
             katz@teskemicko.com
             rochel@teskemicko.com


MONAKER GROUP: To Defend Against "McCleod" Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------
Monaker Group, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on January 23, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended November 30, 2016, that the Company intends
to vigorously defend against the claims made in the lawsuit,
McCleod v. Monaker Group, Inc. et al.

The Company said, "A class action lawsuit has been filed against
us, William Kerby, our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman,
Donald Monaco, our director, and D'Arelli Pruzansky, P.A., our
former auditor, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida on behalf of persons who purchased our common
stock and options between April 6, 2012 and June 23, 2016 (the
"Class Period"). The case, McCleod v. Monaker Group, Inc. et al,
No. 16-cv-62902 was filed on December 9, 2016. The lawsuit focuses
on whether the Company and its executives violated federal
securities laws and whether the Company's former auditor was
negligent and makes allegations regarding the activities of
certain Company executives."

"The lawsuit alleges and estimates total shareholders losses
totaling approximately $20,000,000. The lawsuit stems from the
Company's announcement in June 2016 that it would have to restate
its financial statements due to issues related to the Company's
investment in RealBiz. The lawsuit asks the court to confirm the
action is a proper class action.

"We believe the claims asserted in the lawsuit are without merit
and intend to vigorously defend ourselves against the claims made
in the lawsuit The Company has no basis for determining whether
there is any likelihood of material loss associated with the
claims and/or the potential and/or the outcome of the litigation."

Monaker Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries operate an online
marketplace for the alternative lodging rental industry.


MOUNT VERNON MILLS: Faces E & G Suit in South Carolina
------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mount Vernon Mills
Inc. The case is titled as E & G Inc., a West Virginia
corporation, individually and as the representative of a class of
similarly-situated persons, the Plaintiff, v. Mount Vernon Mills
Inc. and John Does 1-5, the Defendants, Case No. 6:17-cv-00318-TMC
(D.S.C., Feb. 2, 2017). The case is assigned to Hon. Timothy M
Cain.

The Defendant is a vertically integrated textile manufacturing
company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John Gressette Felder, Jr., Esq.
          MCGOWAN HOOD AND FELDER
          1517 Hampton Street
          Columbia, SC 29201
          Telephone: (803) 779 0100
          E-mail: jfelder@mcgowanhood.com


NATUS MEDICAL: Non-disclosure Hit in "Badger" SEC Case
------------------------------------------------------
Gregg Badger, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. Natus Medical Incorporated, James B.
Hawkins And Jonathan A. Kennedy, Defendants, Case No. 4:17-cv-
00458, (N.D. Cal., January 30, 2017), seeks unpaid minimum wages,
liquidated damages, interest, costs, and attorneys' fees pursuant
to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Florida Minimum Wage Act.

Natus Medical designs, manufactures and markets newborn care and
neurology healthcare products and services worldwide. On October
16, 2015, Natus Medical announced that its Argentinian subsidiary
had entered into a three-year supply contract with the Ministry of
Health of Venezuela. What defendants failed to disclose was that
the Venezuelan government had failed to make the required
prepayment, Natus had no means to effectively enforce its rights
under the Supply Contract as Venezuela was the exclusive forum for
dispute resolution and that the Supply Contract was subject to
foreign currency exchange risk. As a result of these disclosures,
share prices fell and investors, including the Plaintiff, lost
substantially.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Shawn A. Williams, Esq.
ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
      Post Montgomery Center One Montgomery Street, Suite 1800
      San Francisco, CA 94104
      Telephone: (415) 288-4545
      Fax: (415) 288-4534
      Email: shawnw@rgrdlaw.com

             - and -

      David C. Walton, Esq.
      Brian E. Cochran, Esq.
      655 West Broadway, Suite 1900
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Telephone: (619) 231-1058
      Fax: (619) 231-7423
      Email: davew@rgrdlaw.com
             bcochran@rgrdlaw.com


NEXIUS SOLUTIONS: Faces "Van Laningham" Suit Alleging FLSA Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT VAN LANINGHAM, on Behalf of Himself and All Others
Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. NEXIUS SOLUTIONS, INC. d/b/a
NEXIUS, INC. and MARK BAYSINGER, Defendants, Case No. 4:17-cv-
00055 (E.D. Tex., January 24, 2017), alleges that Defendants
violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing to pay their
employees, including Plaintiff, time and one-half for each hour
worked in excess of 40 per work week.

The purported Class Members are the Defendants' current and former
employees who were compensated on a salary basis as construction
managers tasked with the construction of cell phone towers
throughout the United States.

Defendants construct, operate, and maintain cell phone towers on
behalf of AT&T.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Charles M.R. Vethan, Esq.
     THE VETHAN LAW FIRM, PC
     8700 Crownhill Blvd, Suite 302
     San Antonio, TX 78209
     Phone: (713) 526-2222
     Fax: (713) 526-2230

        - and -

     THE VETHAN LAW FIRM, P.C.
     8700 Crownhill Blvd., Suite 302
     San Antonio, TX 78209
     Phone: (713) 526-2222
     Fax: (713) 526-2230


OBESITY RESEARCH: "Bozic" Suit Moved from S.D. Cal. to E.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Regina Bozic, on behalf of
herself, all others similarly situated, and the general public,
the Plaintiff v. Henny Den Uijl, an individual; Sandra Den Uijl,
an individual; Bryan Corlett, an individual; Obesity Research
Institute, a California Limited Liability Company; Continuity
Products, a Delaware Limited Liability Company; National Weight
Loss Institute, a California Limited Liability Company; Zodiac
Foundation, a California Limited Liability Company; Conversion
Systems; and Innotrac Corporation, a Georgia Corporation, Case No.
3:16-cv-00733, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of California, to the U.S. District Court
for the Eastern District of California (Sacramento). The District
Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:17-cv-00222-MCE-EFB to the
proceeding. The case is assigned to Hon. District Judge Morrison
C. England, Jr.

Obesity Research offers dietary supplements for weight loss.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael Houchin, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF RONALD A. MARRON
          651 Arroyo Drive
          San Diego, CA 92103
          Telephone: (619) 696 9006
          Facsimile: (619) 564 6665
          E-mail: mike@consumersadvocates.com

               - and -

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

Henny Den Uijl, Sandra Den Uijl, Obesity Research Institute,
Continuity Products, National Weight Loss Institute, Zodiac
Foundation, Innotrac Corporation

          Hazel Mae B. Pangan, Esq.
          Patrick J. Mulkern, Esq.
          Richard P. Sybert, Esq.
          GORDON & REES LLP
          101 West Broadway, Suite 2000
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 696 6700
          Facsimile: (619) 696 7124
          E-mail: hpangan@gordonrees.com
                  pmulkern@gordonrees.com
                  ipdocket@gordonrees.com

Conversion Systems is represenrted by

          Refugio Jose Gonzalez, Esq.
          JAMPOL ZIMET LLP
          800 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1400
          Los Angeles, CA 90017
          Telephone: (213) 689-8500 x106
          Facsimile: (213) 689 8501
          E-mail: jgonzalez@cmlawfirm.com


PHILIP MORRIS: Appeals in ADESF Case Still Pending
--------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form
8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 2, 2017, that the appeals related to the case, The Smoker
Health Defense Association (ADESF) v. Souza Cruz, S.A. and Philip
Morris Marketing, S.A., are still pending.

The Company said, "In the class action pending in Brazil, The
Smoker Health Defense Association (ADESF) v. Souza Cruz, S.A. and
Philip Morris Marketing, S.A., Nineteenth Lower Civil Court of the
Central Courts of the Judiciary District of Sao Paulo, Brazil,
filed July 25, 1995, our subsidiary and another member of the
industry are defendants. The plaintiff, a consumer organization,
is seeking damages for all addicted smokers and former smokers,
and injunctive relief.

In 2004, the trial court found defendants liable without hearing
evidence and awarded "moral damages" of R$1,000 (approximately
$319) per smoker per full year of smoking plus interest at the
rate of 1% per month, as of the date of the ruling. The court did
not award actual damages, which were to be assessed in the second
phase of the case. The size of the class was not estimated.
Defendants appealed to the Sao Paulo Court of Appeals, which
annulled the ruling in November 2008, finding that the trial court
had inappropriately ruled without hearing evidence and returned
the case to the trial court for further proceedings.

In May 2011, the trial court dismissed the claim. In February
2015, the appellate court unanimously dismissed plaintiff's
appeal.

In September 2015, plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court of
Justice. In addition, the defendants filed a constitutional appeal
to the Federal Supreme Tribunal on the basis that plaintiff did
not have standing to bring the lawsuit. Both appeals are still
pending.


PHILIP MORRIS: Appeals in Public Prosecutor Case Still Pending
--------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form
8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 2, 2017, that the appeals related to the case, Public
Prosecutor of Sao Paulo v. Philip Morris Brasil Industria e
Comercio Ltda., the plaintiff's appeal to the Superior Court of
Justice in Brazil remains pending.

The Company said, "In the class action pending in Brazil, Public
Prosecutor of Sao Paulo v. Philip Morris Brasil Industria e
Comercio Ltda., Civil Court of the City of Sao Paulo, Brazil,
filed August 6, 2007, our subsidiary is a defendant. The
plaintiff, the Public Prosecutor of the State of Sao Paulo, is
seeking (i) damages on behalf of all smokers nationwide, former
smokers, and their relatives; (ii) damages on behalf of people
exposed to environmental tobacco smoke nationwide, and their
relatives; and (iii) reimbursement of the health care costs
allegedly incurred for the treatment of tobacco-related diseases
by all Brazilian States and Municipalities, and the Federal
District."

"In an interim ruling issued in December 2007, the trial court
limited the scope of this claim to the State of Sao Paulo only. In
December 2008, the Seventh Civil Court of Sao Paulo issued a
decision declaring that it lacked jurisdiction because the case
involved issues similar to the ADESF case and should be
transferred to the Nineteenth Lower Civil Court in Sao Paulo where
the ADESF case is pending. The court further stated that these
cases should be consolidated for the purposes of judgment.

"In April 2010, the Sao Paulo Court of Appeals reversed the
Seventh Civil Court's decision that consolidated the cases,
finding that they are based on different legal claims and are
progressing at different stages of proceedings. This case was
returned to the Seventh Civil Court of Sao Paulo, and our
subsidiary filed its closing arguments in December 2010.

"In March 2012, the trial court dismissed the case on the merits.
In January 2014, the Sao Paulo Court of Appeals rejected
plaintiff's appeal and affirmed the trial court decision. In July
2014, plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court of Justice.

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


PHILIP MORRIS: Appeal in "Letourneau" Case Remains Pending
----------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form
8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 2, 2017, that the appeals related to the case, Cecilia
Letourneau v. Imperial Tobacco Ltd., Rothmans, Benson & Hedges
Inc. and JTI Macdonald Corp., Quebec Superior Court, Canada,
remains pending.

The Company said, "In the class action pending in Canada, Cecilia
Letourneau v. Imperial Tobacco Ltd., Rothmans, Benson & Hedges
Inc. and JTI Macdonald Corp., Quebec Superior Court, Canada, filed
in September 1998, our subsidiary and other Canadian manufacturers
(Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. and JTI-MacDonald Corp.) are
defendants.  The plaintiff, an individual smoker, sought
compensatory and punitive damages for each member of the class who
is deemed addicted to smoking. The class was certified in 2005.

"Trial began in March 2012 and concluded in December 2014. The
trial court issued its judgment on May 27, 2015. The trial court
found our subsidiary and two other Canadian manufacturers liable
and awarded a total of CAD 131 million (approximately $100
million) in punitive damages, allocating CAD 46 million
(approximately $35 million) to our subsidiary. The trial court
found that defendants violated the Civil Code of Quebec, the
Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms, and the Quebec
Consumer Protection Act by failing to warn adequately of the
dangers of smoking. The trial court also found that defendants
conspired to prevent consumers from learning the dangers of
smoking.

"The trial court further held that these civil faults were a cause
of the class members' addiction. The trial court rejected other
grounds of fault advanced by the class, holding that: (i) the
evidence was insufficient to show that defendants marketed to
youth, (ii) defendants' advertising did not convey false
information about the characteristics of cigarettes, and (iii)
defendants did not commit a fault by using the descriptors light
or mild for cigarettes with a lower tar delivery.

"The trial court estimated the size of the addiction class at
918,000 members but declined to award compensatory damages to the
addiction class because the evidence did not establish the claims
with sufficient accuracy. The trial court ordered defendants to
pay the full punitive damage award into a trust within 60 days and
found that a claims process to allocate the awarded damages to
individual class members would be too expensive and difficult to
administer. The trial court ordered a briefing on the proposed
process for the distribution of sums remaining from the punitive
damage award after payment of attorneys' fees and legal costs.

"In June 2015, our subsidiary commenced the appellate process by
filing its inscription of appeal of the trial court's judgment
with the Court of Appeal of Quebec. Our subsidiary also filed a
motion to cancel the trial court's order for payment into a trust
within 60 days notwithstanding appeal.

"In July 2015, the Court of Appeal granted the motion to cancel
and overturned the trial court's ruling that our subsidiary make
the payment into a trust within 60 days. In August 2015,
plaintiffs filed a motion with the Court of Appeal seeking
security in both the Letourneau case and the Blais case.

"In October 2015, the Court of Appeal granted the motion and
ordered our subsidiary to furnish security totaling CAD 226
million (approximately $172 million), in the form of cash into a
court trust or letters of credit, in six equal consecutive
quarterly installments of approximately CAD 37.6 million
(approximately $28.6 million) beginning in December 2015 through
March 2017.

"The Court of Appeal heard oral arguments on the merits appeal in
November 2016.

"Our subsidiary and PMI believe that the findings of liability and
damages were incorrect and should ultimately be set aside on any
one of many grounds, including the following: (i) holding that
defendants violated Quebec law by failing to warn class members of
the risks of smoking even after the court found that class members
knew, or should have known, of the risks, (ii) finding that
plaintiffs were not required to prove that defendants' alleged
misconduct caused injury to each class member in direct
contravention of binding precedent, (iii) creating a factual
presumption, without any evidence from class members or otherwise,
that defendants' alleged misconduct caused all smoking by all
class members, (iv) holding that the addiction class members'
claims for punitive damages were not time-barred even though the
case was filed more than three years after a prominent addiction
warning appeared on all packages, and (v) awarding punitive
damages to punish defendants without proper consideration as to
whether punitive damages were necessary to deter future
misconduct."


PHILIP MORRIS: Appeal in Conseil Quebecois Case Remains Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form
8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 2, 2017, that the appeals related to the case, Conseil
Quebecois Sur Le Tabac Et La Sante and Jean-Yves Blais v. Imperial
Tobacco Ltd., Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. and JTI Macdonald
Corp., Quebec Superior Court, Canada, remains pending.

The Company said, "In the class action pending in Canada, Conseil
Quebecois Sur Le Tabac Et La Sante and Jean-Yves Blais v. Imperial
Tobacco Ltd., Rothmans, Benson & Hedges Inc. and JTI Macdonald
Corp., Quebec Superior Court, Canada, filed in November 1998, our
subsidiary and other Canadian manufacturers (Imperial Tobacco
Canada Ltd. and JTI-MacDonald Corp.) are defendants. The
plaintiffs, an anti-smoking organization and an individual smoker,
sought compensatory and punitive damages for each member of the
class who allegedly suffers from certain smoking-related diseases.
The class was certified in 2005."

"Trial began in March 2012 and concluded in December 2014. The
trial court issued its judgment on May 27, 2015. The trial court
found our subsidiary and two other Canadian manufacturers liable
and found that the class members' compensatory damages totaled
approximately CAD 15.5 billion, including pre-judgment interest
(approximately $11.8 billion). The trial court awarded
compensatory damages on a joint and several liability basis,
allocating 20% to our subsidiary (approximately CAD 3.1 billion,
including pre-judgment interest (approximately $2.4 billion)). In
addition, the trial court awarded CAD 90,000 (approximately
$68,500) in punitive damages, allocating CAD 30,000 (approximately
$22,800) to our subsidiary and found that defendants violated the
Civil Code of Quebec, the Quebec Charter of Human Rights and
Freedoms, and the Quebec Consumer Protection Act by failing to
warn adequately of the dangers of smoking.

"The trial court also found that defendants conspired to prevent
consumers from learning the dangers of smoking. The trial court
further held that these civil faults were a cause of the class
members' diseases. The trial court rejected other grounds of fault
advanced by the class, holding that: (i) the evidence was
insufficient to show that defendants marketed to youth, (ii)
defendants' advertising did not convey false information about the
characteristics of cigarettes, and (iii) defendants did not commit
a fault by using the descriptors light or mild for cigarettes with
a lower tar delivery. The trial court estimated the disease class
at 99,957 members. The trial court ordered defendants to pay CAD 1
billion (approximately $761 million) of the compensatory damage
award into a trust within 60 days, CAD 200 million (approximately
$152 million) of which is our subsidiary's portion and ordered
briefing on a proposed claims process for the distribution of
damages to individual class members and for payment of attorneys'
fees and legal costs.

"In June 2015, our subsidiary commenced the appellate process by
filing its inscription of appeal of the trial court's judgment
with the Court of Appeal of Quebec. Our subsidiary also filed a
motion to cancel the trial court's order for payment into a trust
within 60 days notwithstanding appeal.

"In July 2015, the Court of Appeal granted the motion to cancel
and overturned the trial court's ruling that our subsidiary make
an initial payment within 60 days.

"In August 2015, plaintiffs filed a motion with the Court of
Appeal seeking an order that defendants place irrevocable letters
of credit totaling CAD 5 billion (approximately $3.8 billion) into
trust, to secure the judgments in both the Letourneau and Blais
cases. Plaintiffs subsequently withdrew their motion for security
against JTI-MacDonald Corp. and proceeded only against our
subsidiary and Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd.

"In October 2015, the Court of Appeal granted the motion and
ordered our subsidiary to furnish security totaling CAD 226
million (approximately $172 million) to cover both the Letourneau
and Blais cases. Such security may take the form of cash into a
court trust or letters of credit, in six equal consecutive
quarterly installments of approximately CAD 37.6 million
(approximately $28.6 million) beginning in December 2015 through
March 2017.

"The Court of Appeal ordered Imperial Tobacco Canada Ltd. to
furnish security totaling CAD 758 million (approximately $577
million) in seven equal consecutive quarterly installments of
approximately CAD 108 million (approximately $82 million)
beginning in December 2015 through June 2017.

"In December 2016, our subsidiary made its fifth quarterly
installment of security for approximately CAD 37.6 million
(approximately $28.6 million) into a court trust. This payment is
included in other assets on the consolidated balance sheets and in
cash used in operating activities in the consolidated statements
of cash flows. The Court of Appeal ordered that the security is
payable upon a final judgment of the Court of Appeal affirming the
trial court's judgment or upon further order of the Court of
Appeal.

"The Court of Appeal heard oral arguments on the merits appeal in
November 2016.

"Our subsidiary and PMI believe that the findings of liability and
damages were incorrect and should ultimately be set aside on any
one of many grounds, including the following: (i) holding that
defendants violated Quebec law by failing to warn class members of
the risks of smoking even after the court found that class members
knew, or should have known, of the risks, (ii) finding that
plaintiffs were not required to prove that defendants' alleged
misconduct caused injury to each class member in direct
contravention of binding precedent, (iii) creating a factual
presumption, without any evidence from class members or otherwise,
that defendants' alleged misconduct caused all smoking by all
class members, (iv) relying on epidemiological evidence that did
not meet recognized scientific standards, and (v) awarding
punitive damages to punish defendants without proper consideration
as to whether punitive damages were necessary to deter future
misconduct.


PHILIP MORRIS: Preliminary Motions Pending in "Adams" Action
------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form
8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 2, 2017, that preliminary motions are pending in the
class action pending in Canada, Adams v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's Bench, Saskatchewan,
Canada, filed July 10, 2009, in which the Company, its
subsidiaries, and its indemnitees (PM USA and Altria), and other
members of the industry are defendants.

The plaintiff, an individual smoker, alleges her own addiction to
tobacco products and COPD resulting from the use of tobacco
products. She is seeking compensatory and punitive damages on
behalf of a proposed class comprised of all smokers who have
smoked a minimum of 25,000 cigarettes and have allegedly suffered,
or suffer, from COPD, emphysema, heart disease, or cancer, as well
as restitution of profits.


PHILIP MORRIS: No Activity Anticipated in Canada Class Suits
------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form
8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 2, 2017, that no activity is anticipated in class action
cases while plaintiffs' counsel pursues the Adams class action
filed in Saskatchewan.

In the class action pending in Canada, Kunta v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's Bench, Winnipeg,
Canada, filed June 12, 2009, we, our subsidiaries, and our
indemnitees (PM USA and Altria), and other members of the industry
are defendants. The plaintiff, an individual smoker, alleges her
own addiction to tobacco products and chronic obstructive
pulmonary disease ("COPD"), severe asthma, and mild reversible
lung disease resulting from the use of tobacco products. She is
seeking compensatory and punitive damages on behalf of a proposed
class comprised of all smokers, their estates, dependents and
family members, as well as restitution of profits, and
reimbursement of government health care costs allegedly caused by
tobacco products. In September 2009, plaintiff's counsel informed
defendants that he did not anticipate taking any action in this
case while he pursues the Adams class action filed in
Saskatchewan.

In the class action pending in Canada, Semple v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Supreme Court (trial court),
Nova Scotia, Canada, filed June 18, 2009, we, our subsidiaries,
and our indemnitees (PM USA and Altria), and other members of the
industry are defendants. The plaintiff, an individual smoker,
alleges his own addiction to tobacco products and COPD resulting
from the use of tobacco products. He is seeking compensatory and
punitive damages on behalf of a proposed class comprised of all
smokers, their estates, dependents and family members, as well as
restitution of profits, and reimbursement of government health
care costs allegedly caused by tobacco products. No activity in
this case is anticipated while plaintiff's counsel pursues the
Adams class action filed in Saskatchewan.

In the class action pending in Canada, Dorion v. Canadian Tobacco
Manufacturers' Council, et al., The Queen's Bench, Alberta,
Canada, filed June 15, 2009, we, our subsidiaries, and our
indemnitees (PM USA and Altria), and other members of the industry
are defendants. The plaintiff, an individual smoker, alleges her
own addiction to tobacco products and chronic bronchitis and
severe sinus infections resulting from the use of tobacco
products. She is seeking compensatory and punitive damages on
behalf of a proposed class comprised of all smokers, their
estates, dependents and family members, restitution of profits,
and reimbursement of government health care costs allegedly caused
by tobacco products. To date, we, our subsidiaries, and our
indemnitees have not been properly served with the complaint. No
activity in this case is anticipated while plaintiff's counsel
pursues the class action filed in Saskatchewan (see description of
Adams, above).

In the class action pending in Canada, Suzanne Jacklin v. Canadian
Tobacco Manufacturers' Council, et al., Ontario Superior Court of
Justice, filed June 20, 2012, we, our subsidiaries, and our
indemnitees (PM USA and Altria), and other members of the industry
are defendants. The plaintiff, an individual smoker, alleges her
own addiction to tobacco products and COPD resulting from the use
of tobacco products. She is seeking compensatory and punitive
damages on behalf of a proposed class comprised of all smokers who
have smoked a minimum of 25,000 cigarettes and have allegedly
suffered, or suffer, from COPD, heart disease, or cancer, as well
as restitution of profits. Plaintiff's counsel has indicated that
he does not intend to take any action in this case in the near
future.


PHILIP MORRIS: 11 Smoking and Health Class Action Cases Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
Philip Morris International Inc. said in an exhibit to its Form
8-K Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
February 2, 2017, that as of December 31, 2016, there were a
number of smoking and health cases pending against the Company,
its subsidiaries or indemnitees, as follows:

   * 64 cases brought by individual plaintiffs in Argentina (35),
Brazil (16), Canada (2), Chile (6), Costa Rica (2), Italy (1), the
Philippines (1) and Scotland (1), compared with 68 such cases on
December 31, 2015, and 63 cases on December 31, 2014; and

   * 11 cases brought on behalf of classes of individual
plaintiffs in Brazil (2) and Canada (9), compared with 11 such
cases on December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014.

Smoking and Health cases primarily allege personal injury and are
brought by individual plaintiffs or on behalf of a class or
purported class of individual plaintiffs. Plaintiffs' allegations
of liability in these cases are based on various theories of
recovery, including negligence, gross negligence, strict
liability, fraud, misrepresentation, design defect, failure to
warn, breach of express and implied warranties, violations of
deceptive trade practice laws and consumer protection statutes.
Plaintiffs in these cases seek various forms of relief, including
compensatory and other damages, and injunctive and equitable
relief. Defenses raised in these cases include licit activity,
failure to state a claim, lack of defect, lack of proximate cause,
assumption of the risk, contributory negligence, and statute of
limitations.


PIPE PROS: Faces "Trevino" Suit Alleging Violations of FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------
GEORGE TREVINO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. PIPE PROS, LLC, and GARY EDWARDS & MANDO
VALDEZ, individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:17-cv-00034 (S.D.
Tex., January 24, 2017), alleges that Plaintiff and other Field
Workers regularly worked in excess of 80 hours per week during the
relevant time period, but Defendants failed to pay them overtime
for hours worked in excess of 40 each workweek in violation of the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Defendants provide casing, tubing maintenance, and other oilfield
services to oilfield customers.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

        - and -

     Jack Siegel, Esq.
     SIEGEL LAW GROUP PLLC
     10440 N. Central Expy., Suite 1040
     Dallas, TX 75231
     Phone: (214) 706-0834
     Fax: (469) 339-0204
     Web site: http://www.4overtimelawyer.com


PSYCHEMEDICS CORP: April 3 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
-------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP disclosed that a class action lawsuit has been filed
against Psychemedics Corporation and certain of its officers.  The
class action, filed in United States District Court, District of
Massachusetts, is on behalf of a class consisting of investors who
purchased or otherwise acquired Psychemedics securities, seeking
to recover compensable damages caused by defendants' violations of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you are a shareholder who purchased Psychemedics securities
between February 28, 2014 and January 30, 2017, both dates
inclusive, you have until April 3, 2017 to ask the Court to
appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.  A copy of the
Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com.   To discuss
this action, contact Robert S. Willoughby at
rswilloughby@pomlaw.com or 888.476.6529 (or 888.4-POMLAW), toll
free, ext. 9980. Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to
include their mailing address, telephone number, and number of
shares purchased.

Psychemedics Corporation provides patented, FDA-cleared services
for the detection of drug abuse through the analysis of hair
samples. The Company's tests provide quantitative information that
can indicate the approximate amount of drug ingested, as well as
historical data, which can show a pattern of individual drug use
over a longer period of time.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as
failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects.  Specifically, Defendants
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that:  (i) through its affiliate Psychemedics Brasil Exames
Toxicol¢gicos Ltda., the Company engaged in anticompetitive
conduct to maintain a monopoly over the Brazilian market in
violation of the law; (ii) in turn, Psychemedics lacked effective
internal controls over financial reporting; and (iii) as a result
of the foregoing, Psychemedics' public statements were materially
false and misleading at all relevant times.

On January 31, 2017, Bloomberg reported that a Brazilian judge had
ordered Psychemedics' local representative in Brazil, Psychemedics
Brasil, to compensate Omega Laboratories, Inc. USA for losses
caused by anticompetitive practices used for the purpose of
"preventing other companies from accessing (the) market," an
indemnification that may cost the Company millions of dollars.
The Bloomberg article further reported that Psychemedics Brasil
may be further investigated by Brazil's Administrative Council for
Economic Defense for engaging in "cartel practices" in an attempt
to form a drug testing monopoly.

Psychemedics issued a press release in response to the Brazilian
court order denying involvement in the lawsuit, stating that
"Psychemedics Brasil has been a distributor of Psychemedics
Corporation's hair testing services for more than fifteen years"
and that it expects their business in Brazil to "continue as
usual."

On this news, Psychemedics' share price fell $6.75, or 26.35%, to
close at $18.87 on January 31, 2017.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Florida,
and Los Angeles, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in
the areas of corporate, securities, and antitrust class
litigation. Founded by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the
dean of the class action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the
field of securities class actions.


QUALCOMM INC: Faces "McMahon" Antitrust Suit in Calif.
------------------------------------------------------
Thomas McMahon, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated Plaintiff, v.  QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
Defendant, Case No. 5:17-cv-00372 (N.D. Cal., January 24, 2017),
alleges that Qualcomm uses its monopoly position to charge
supracompetitive prices for both its baseband processors and
associated intellectual property from cell phone and tablet
manufacturers in violation of antitrust laws, state unfair
competition laws, and the common law of unjust enrichment.

Qualcomm Inc. develops, designs, licenses, and sells digital
communication products.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jeff D. Friedman, Esq.
     Shana E. Scarlett, Esq.
     HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
     715 Hearst Avenue, Suite 202
     Berkeley, CA 94710
     Phone: (510) 725-3000
     Fax: (510) 725-3001
     E-mail: jefff@hbsslaw.com
             shanas@hbsslaw.com

        - and -

     Steve W. Berman, Esq.
     HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
     1918 Eighth Avenue, Suite 3300
     Seattle, WA 98101
     Phone: (206) 623-7292
     Fax: (206) 623-0594
     E-mail: steve@hbsslaw.com

        - and -

     Mark Robinson, Esq.
     ROBINSON CALCAGINE, INC.
     19 Corporate Plaza Drive
     Newport Beach, CA 92660
     Phone: (949) 720-1288
     Fax: (949) 720-1292


QUALCOMM INC: Motion to Dismiss 3226701 Canada's Suit Underway
--------------------------------------------------------------
QUALCOMM Incorporated said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on January 25, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended December 25, 2016, that the Company's
motion to dismiss the case, 3226701 Canada, Inc. v. QUALCOMM
Incorporated et al., remains pending.

On November 30, 2015, plaintiffs filed a securities class action
complaint against the Company and certain of its current and
former officers in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of California. On April 29, 2016, plaintiffs
filed an amended complaint alleging that the Company and certain
of its current and former officers violated Sections 10(b) and
20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, by
making false and misleading statements regarding the Company's
business outlook and product development between April 7, 2014 and
July 22, 2015. The amended complaint seeks unspecified damages,
interest, attorneys' fees and other costs.

On June 28, 2016, the Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the
amended complaint, which Motion was heard by the Court on November
7, 2016. The Company believes the plaintiffs' claims are without
merit.

Qualcomm designs, manufactures, and markets digital communications
products based on CDMA, OFDMA and other technologies.


QUALCOMM INC: Faces "Bornstein" Class Suit in N.D. Cal.
-------------------------------------------------------
QUALCOMM Incorporated said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on January 25, 2017, for the
quarterly period ended December 25, 2016, that the Company is
facing a class action lawsuit captioned, Bornstein et al. v.
QUALCOMM Incorporated.

On January 18, 2017, a complaint was filed against the Company in
the United States District Court for the Northern District of
California on behalf of a putative class of purchasers of cellular
phones and other cellular devices alleging that the Company
violated various federal and state antitrust and consumer
protection laws by, among other things, refusing to license
standard-essential patents to its competitors, conditioning the
supply of certain of its baseband processors on the purchaser
first agreeing to license the Company's entire patent portfolio,
entering into alleged exclusive deals with companies, including
Apple Inc., and charging unreasonably high royalties that
allegedly do not comply with the Company's commitments to
standard-setting organizations. The complaint further alleges
that, as a result of the foregoing conduct, the Company was
unjustly enriched. The complaint seeks unspecified damages,
interest, attorneys' fees and other costs, and that the Company
and related parties be enjoined from further unlawful conduct. The
Company believes the plaintiffs' claims are without merit.

Qualcomm designs, manufactures, and markets digital communications
products based on CDMA, OFDMA and other technologies.


QUINCY PROPERTIES: "Brasher" Labor Suit Seeks Overtime Pay
----------------------------------------------------------
April R. Brasher and Richard M. Orencia individually and on behalf
of all persons similarly situated as collective representative
under and/or as members of the Collective as permitted under the
Fair Labor Standards Act, Plaintiffs, v. Quincy Properties LLC,
Welcome Inn Hotel Management, Inc., Brett Burge, Kenneth Logan,
Quentin Kearney, Joe Wimberly, as individuals under FLSA and
Illinois Wage Laws, Defendants, Case No. 3:17-cv-03022, (C.D.
Ill., January 28, 2017), seeks unpaid overtime, monetary damages,
declaratory and injunctive relief and other equitable and
ancillary relief, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the
Illinois Minimum Wage Law and the Illinois Wage Payment and
Collection Act.

Quincy Properties LLC and Welcome Inn Hotel Management, Inc. do
business as Welcome Inn and is owned by Brett Burge, Kenneth
Logan, Quentin Kearney and Joe Wimberly. Welcome Inn Hotel
Management, Inc. operates a number of other motels/hotels totaling
at least six separate properties. Brasher was employed as a house
keeper while Orencia worked the front desk. They claim to have
been denied overtime pay.

Plaintiffs are represented by:

      John C. Ireland, Esq.
      THE LAW OFFICE OF JOHN C. IRELAND
      636 Spruce Street
      South Elgin, IL 60177
      Tel: (630)464-9675
      Fax: (630) 206-0889
      Email: attorneyireland@gmail.com


REWALK ROBOTICS: Faces "Rolland" Securities Suit Over 2014 IPO
--------------------------------------------------------------
DONALD ROLLAND, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. REWALK ROBOTICS LTD., LARRY JASINSKI, AMI
KRAFT, AMIT GOFFER, JEFF DYKAN, HADAR RON, ASAF SHINAR, WAYNE B.
WEISMAN, YASUSHI ICHIKI, ARYEH DAN, GLENN MUIR,
JOHN WILLIAM PODUSKA, DEBORAH DISANZO, BARCLAYS CAPITAL, INC.,
JEFFERIES LLC, CANACCORD GENUITY INC., SCP VITALIFE PARTNERS,
YASKAWA ELECTRIC CORPORATION, ISRAEL HEALTHCARE VENTURES 2 L.P.,
PONTIFAX, Defendants, Case No. 3:17-cv-00362-HSG (N.D. Cal.,
January 24, 2017), is a securities suit alleging that the
Defendants issued false and misleading Registration Statement and
Prospectus issued in connection with the Company's initial public
offering on or about September 12, 2014.

ReWalk Robotics Ltd. is a medical device company that designs,
develops, and commercializes robotic exoskeletons for wheelchair-
bound individuals and those with spinal cord injuries who need
assistance walking.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Marc G. Reich, Esq.
     Adam T. Hoover, Esq.
     REICH RADCLIFFE & HOOVER LLP
     4675 MacArthur Court, Suite 550
     Newport Beach, CA 92660
     Phone: (949) 975-0512
     Fax: (949) 208-2839
     Email: mgr@reichradcliffe.com
     Email: adhoover@reichradcliffe.com

        - and -

     Joshua M. Lifshitz, Esq.
     LIFSHITZ & MILLER
     821 Franklin Ave., Suite 209
     Garden City, NY 11530
     Phone: (516) 493-9780
     Fax: (516) 280-7376
     E-mail: jml@jlclasslaw.com


REWALK ROBOTICS: March 27 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
------------------------------------------------------------
Goldberg Law PC, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
announces the filing of a class action lawsuit against ReWalk
Robotics Ltd. Investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Rewalk
shares pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's Stock Offering
on or about September 12, 2014. are encouraged to contact the firm
in advance of the March 27, 2017 lead plaintiff motion deadline.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss during the Class
Period, we encourage you to contact Michael Goldberg or Brian
Schall, of Goldberg Law PC, 1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100,
Los Angeles, CA 90067, at 800-977-7401, to discuss your rights
free of charge. You can also reach us through the firm's website
at http://www.Goldberglawpc.com,or by email at
info@goldberglawpc.com.

The class in this case has not yet been certified, and until
certification occurs, you are not represented by an attorney. If
you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class
member.

According to the Complaint, the Registration Statement and
Prospectus issued in connection with the Initial Public Offering
did not disclose material information, including that ReWalk was
unable to comply with "special controls" requirements or to offer
the U.S. Food and Drug Administration with a postmarket
surveillance study.

When this information was revealed to the investing public, the
value of Rewalk fell, causing investors harm.

Goldberg Law PC represents shareholders around the world and
specializes in securities class actions and shareholder rights
litigation.


RITE AID CORP: Unpaid Wages Pay Sought in "House" Suit
------------------------------------------------------
Elihugh House, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated,
Plaintiffs, v. Rite Aid Corporation, 660 Thrifty Payless, Inc.
d/b/a Rite Aid and Does 1 To 100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No.
BC 648166 (Cal. Super., January 25, 2017) seeks unpaid wages and
interest for all hours worked at the minimum wage and overtime
rates of pay, injunctive relief and other equitable relief and
reasonable attorney's fees pursuant to California Labor Code and
Business and Professions Code as well as applicable Industrial
Welfare Commission Wage Orders.

Defendants employed Plaintiff as a cashier and supervisor at their
location in Los Angeles County at 3745 B Foothill Blvd, Pasadena,
CA 91107. Plaintiff accuses Defendant of forcing closing shift
employees to work off-the-clock, improperly calculating overtime
wages and failing to provide accurate wage statements.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Joseph Lavi, Esq.
      Vincent C. Granbeiry, Esq.
      LAVI & EBRAHIMIAN, LLP
      8889 West Olympic Boulevard, Suite 200
      Beverly Hills, CA 90211
      Telephone: (310) 432-0000
      Facsimile: (310) 432-0001

            - and -

      Sahag Majariau II, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF SAIIAG MAJARIAN, II
      18250 Ventura Boulevard
      Tarzana, CA 91356
      Telephone: (818) 609-0807
      Facsimile: (818) 609-0892


RJ ACQUISITIONS: "Cabrera" Suit Claims Unpaid OT, Missed Breaks
---------------------------------------------------------------
Marbi Cabrera, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. R.J. Acquisitions d/b/a The Ad Art
Company, BaronHR, LLC and Does 1 through 100, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. BC 648112, (Cal. Super., January 25, 2017),
seeks unpaid wages, overtime, unpaid meal and rest period
compensation, penalties, injunctive and other equitable relief and
reasonable attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to the California
Labor Code and the Business and Professions Code as well as the
provisions of applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage
Orders.

Defendants are engaged in manufacturing point-of-purchase
advertising in the County of Los Angeles where Plaintiff worked as
a packer.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael Nourmand, Esq.
      THE NOURMAND LAW FIRM, APC
      8822 West Olympic Boulevard
      Beverly Hills, CA 90211
      Tel: (310) 553-3600
      Fax: (310) 553-3603

            - and -

      Mehrdad Bokhour, Esq.
      BIBIYAN & BOKHOUR, P.C.
      287 S. Robertson Blvd., Suite 303
      Beverly Hills, CA 90211
      Tel: (310) 438-5555
      Fax: (310) 300-1705


SAFEWAY INC: United Food Union Suit Hits Late Pay, No Pay Stubs
---------------------------------------------------------------
United Food and Commercial Workers, Local 5, Plaintiff, v.
Safeway, Inc., Defendant, Case No. RG17847023, (Cal. Super.,
January 25, 2017), seeks restitution, equitable accounting,
statutory penalties and damages, including declaratory and
injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, and costs of suit pursuant to
the California Labor Code and the Business and Professions Code as
well as the provisions of applicable Industrial Welfare Commission
Wage Orders.

This is an action brought by United Food and Commercial Workers,
Local 5 on behalf of its members, against Defendant. Plaintiff is
a labor organization with approximately 30,000 members based in
Hayward, California while Defendants operate several grocery
stores through California where some of its members work. Its
members complain of late wages, lack of accurate pay stubs and
delayed final pay upon termination of employment.

Plaintiff is represented by:

      David A. Rosenfeld, Esq.
      Caren P. Sencer, Esq.
      Caroline N, Cohen, Esq.
      WEINBERG, ROGER & ROSENFELD - A Professional Corporation
      1001 Marina Village Parkway, Suite 200
      Alameda, CA 94501
      Telephone (510) 337-1001
      Fax (510) 337-1023
      E-Mail: courtnotices@unioncounsel.net
              drosenfeld@unioncounsel.net
              csencer@unioncounsel.net
              ccoheii@unioncounsel.net


SHIRE US: "Richard" Antitrust Over Intuniv Moved to Massachusetts
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned CARMEN RICHARD, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. SHIRE U.S., INC.; SHIRE,
LLC, ACTAVIS ELIZABETH LLC, ACTAVIS INC., and JOHN DOES 1-100; ABC
CORPS 1-100, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 1:17-cv-10117-ADB
(November 23, 2016) was transferred from the U.S. District for the
Southern District of Florida to the U.S. District Court for the
District of Massachusetts and assigned Case Number 1:16-cv-24907
under Judge Allison D. Burroughs.

The suit alleges that Shire delayed generic entry of Intuniv for
approximately two years through sham patent litigation against
generic guanfacine manufacturers and by entering into
anticompetitive reverse payment settlement agreements with
Actavis.  Defendants' alleged anticompetitive, unfair, fraudulent,
and/or deceptive behavior violates Florida state law.

The Defendants are pharmaceutical companies.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Allan Kanner, Esq.
     Layne Hilton, Esq.
     Marshall L. Perkins, Esq.
     ALLAN KANNER & ASSOCIATES
     701 Camp Street
     New Orleans, LA 70130
     Phone: (504) 524-5777
     E-mail: a.kanner@kanner-law.com
     E-mail: l.hilton@kanner-law.com
     E-mail: m.perkins@kanner-law.com

        - and -

     Conlee S. Whiteley, Esq.
     KANNER & WHITELEY, LLC
     701 Camp Street
     New Orleans, LA 70130
     Phone: (504) 524-5777
     Fax: (504) 524-5763
     E-mail: c.whiteley@kanner-law.com

        - and -

     David J. Stanoch, Esq.
     Ruben Honik, Esq.
     GOLOMB & HONIK, P.C.
     1515 Market Street, Suite 1100
     Philadelphia, PA 19102
     Phone: (215) 985-9177
     E-mail: rhonik@golombhonik.com

        - and -

     Bradley Winston, Esq.
     WINSTON LAW FIRM
     2924 Davie Road, Suite 201
     Davie, FL 33314
     Phone: (954) 475-9666
     Fax: (954) 475-2279
     E-mail: bwinston@winstonlaw.com

Defendant(s) is represented by:

     Alan Graham Greer, Esq.
     RICHMAN GREER, P.A.
     396 Alhambra Circle
     North Tower, 14th Floor
     Miami, FL 33134
     Phone: (305) 373-4000
     Fax: (305) 373-4099
     E-mail: agreer@richmangreer.com

        - and -

     Amanda J. Hamilton, Esq.
     David S. Shotlander, Esq.
     FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG LLP
     1667 K Street, NW
     Washington, DC
     Phone: (202) 292-1530
     E-mail: ahamilton@flhlaw.com
     E-mail: dshotlander@flhlaw.com

        - and -

     David A. Zwally, Esq.
     FROMMER, LAWRENCE & HAUG LLP
     745 Fifth Avenue
     New York, NY 10151
     Phone: (212) 588-0800
     E-mail: dzwally@flhlaw.com

        - and -

     Fred A. Kelly, Jr.
     NIXON PEABODY, LLP
     100 Summer Street
     Boston, MA 02110
     Phone: (617) 345-1319
     Fax: (866) 947-1649
     E-mail: fkelly@nixonpeabody.com

        - and -

     Gerald F. Richman, Esq.
     RICHMAN GREER, P.A.
     250 Australian Avenue, South, Suite 1504
     West Palm Beach, FL 33401-5016
     Phone: (561) 803-3500
     Fax: 820-1608
     E-mail: grichman@richmangreer.com

        - and -

     Joshua S. Barlow, Esq.
     NIXON & PEABODY, LLP
     100 Summer Street
     Boston, MA 02110
     Phone: (617) 345-6123
     Fax: (614) 345-1300
     E-mail: jbarlow@nixonpeabody.com

        - and -

     Michael F. Brockmeyer, Esq.
     FROMMER LAWRENCE & HAUG LLP
     1667 K Street NW
     Washington, DC 20006
     Phone: (202) 292-1530
     E-mail: mbrockmeyer@flhlaw.com

        - and -

     Nathaniel Mark Edenfield, Esq.
     RICHMAN GREER, P.A.
     396 Alhambra Circle
     North Tower, 14th Floor
     Miami, FL 33134
     Phone: (305) 373-4032
     E-mail: nedenfield@richmangreer.com

        - and -

     Tarae L. Howell, Esq.
     NIXON & PEABODY, LLP
     100 Summer Street
     Boston, MA 02110
     Phone: (617) 345-1249
     E-mail: thowell@nixonpeabody.com


SIRIUS XM: 200 Consumers Opted-Out of TCPA Suit Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------
Sirius XM Holdings Inc. said in its Form 10-K Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 2, 2017, for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, that approximately 200
consumers, or less than 0.002% of the consumers who received
notice of the settlement, opted-out of the settlement of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act class action suits.

The Company said, "We were a defendant in several purported class
action suits that alleged that we, or call center vendors acting
on our behalf, made calls which violate provisions of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (the "TCPA"). These
purported class action cases were titled Erik Knutson v. Sirius XM
Radio Inc., No. 12-cv-0418-AJB-NLS (S.D. Cal.), Francis W. Hooker
v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., No. 4:13-cv-3 (E.D. Va.), Yefim Elikman
v. Sirius XM Radio Inc. and Career Horizons, Inc., No. 1:15-cv-
02093 (N.D. Ill.), and Anthony Parker v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., No.
8:15-cv-01710-JSM-EAJ (M.D. Fla)."

"We have entered into an agreement to settle these purported class
action suits. The settlement was approved by the United States
District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in December
2016. The settlement resolves the claims of consumers beginning in
February 2008 relating to telemarketing calls to their mobile
telephones.  Approximately 200 consumers, or less than 0.002% of
the consumers who received notice of the settlement, opted-out of
this class action settlement.

"As part of this settlement, we made a $35 million payment to a
settlement fund (from which notice, administration and other costs
and attorneys' fees are being paid), and are offering
participating class members the option of receiving three months
of our Select service for no charge."

Sirius transmits music, sports, entertainment, comedy, talk, news,
traffic and weather channels, as well as infotainment services, in
the United States on a subscription fee basis through our two
proprietary satellite radio systems.


STATE STREET: "Delarosa" Seeks Damages Over Share Price Drop
------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Delarosa, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. State Street Corporation, Joseph
L. Hooley, Edward J. Resch and Michael W. Bell, Defendants, Case
No. 2:17-cv-00671, (C.D. Cal., January 27, 2017), seeks double
damages and reasonable attorney fees from Defendants, jointly and
severally, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, to be proven
at the time of trial for all overtime wages still owing from
Plaintiff's entire employment period with Defendants or as much as
allowed by the Fair Labor Standards Act along with court costs,
interest, and any other relief.

State Street, through its subsidiaries, provides a range of
financial products and services to institutional investors
worldwide. The Company is incorporated in Massachusetts and its
principal executive offices are located at One Lincoln Street,
Boston, Massachusetts. The Company also maintains offices at 1801
Century Park East, Suite 1440, Los Angeles, California 90067-2316.

Defendants failed to disclose that State Street engaged in a
scheme to defraud a number of its clients by secretly applying
commissions to billions of dollars of securities trades; its
billing practices relied on unsustainable methodologies;
approximately $240 million or more of expenses may have been
incorrectly invoiced to State Street's asset servicing clients;
and from June 2010 until September 2011, State Street charged
clients mark-ups without their consent.

Upon disclosure, shares of State Street fell $3.64 per share, or
over 5.3%, over two trading days to close at $64.60 per share on
February 3, 2014, damaging investors, including the Plaintiff.

Plaintiff is represented by:

       Laurence M. Rosen, Esq.
       THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
       355 S. Grand Avenue, Suite 2450
       Los Angeles, CA 90071
       Telephone: (213) 785-2610
       Facsimile: (213) 226-4684
       Email: lrosen@rosenlegal.com


STEMLINE THERAPEUTICS: April 4 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, disclosed it
has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of
Stemline Therapeutics, Inc. securities (STML): (1) pursuant and/or
traceable to Stemline's secondary public offering on or about
January 20, 2017; and/or (2) publicly traded on the open market
between January 19, 2017 and February 1, 2017, both dates
inclusive (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit seeks to recover
damages for Stemline investors under the federal securities laws.

To join the Stemline class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-1048.htmlor call Phillip Kim,
Esq. or Kevin Chan, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email
pkim@rosenlegal.com or kchan@rosenlegal.com for information on the
class action.

NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS
IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN
ONE. YOU MAY ALSO REMAIN AN ABSENT CLASS MEMBER AND DO NOTHING AT
THIS POINT. YOU MAY RETAIN COUNSEL OF YOUR CHOICE.

According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period Defendants
made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose
that: (1) a cancer patient in a Stemline clinical trial tied to
SL-401 died from a severe side effect on January 18, 2017; and (2)
as a result, Defendants' statements about its business,
operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the
true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors
suffered damages.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to
serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than
April 4, 2017. If you wish to join the litigation, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-1048.htmlor to discuss your
rights or interests regarding this class action, please contact
Phillip Kim or Kevin Chan of Rosen Law Firm toll free at 866-767-
3653 or via email at -- pkim@rosenlegal.com -- or --
kchan@rosenlegal.com --

Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation.


S.Y.M. INC: "Severina" Suit Seeks OT Pay Under NY Law
-----------------------------------------------------
Gana Severina, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, against S.Y.M. Inc., TKM Kings Highway, LLC,
and Yiannis Mallas, Defendants, alleges that Defendants paid
Plaintiff wages that is far below the overtime rate as required by
the New York State Labor Law.

Defendants operate a retail shoe store in Brooklyn, New York.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Gennadiy Naydenskiy, Esq.
     NAYDENSKIY LAW GROUP, P.C.
     1517 Voorhies Ave., 2nd Fl.
     Brooklyn, NY 11235
     Phone: (718) 808 2224
     E-mail: naydenskiylaw@gmail.com


TARGET: 8th Cir. Remands $10MM Settlement in Data Breach Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
David Stauss, Esq. -- staussd@ballardspahr.com -- Gregory
Szewczyk, Esq. -- szewczykg@ballardspahr.com -- and Philip
Yannella, Esq. -- yanellap@ballardspahr.com -- at Ballard Spahr
LLP, in an article for JD Supra, wrote that the Eighth Circuit
Court of Appeals has remanded a $10 million settlement in the
Target data breach class action on the grounds that the district
court had not rigorously analyzed the propriety of the class
certification.

The class initially certified by the district court was defined to
include "[a]ll persons in the United States whose credit or debit
card information and/or whose personal information was compromised
as a result of the [2013 Target] data breach." Under the
settlement agreement approved by the district court, Target would
have created a $10 million settlement fund for the class. Class
members with documented losses would be compensated first, with
the remaining balance being distributed equally to class members
with undocumented losses. Class members who suffered no loss from
the security breach would receive nothing from the settlement
fund.

No class members objected when the district court preliminarily
certified the settlement class. However, between the district
court's preliminary and final orders certifying the class and
approving the settlement, class member Leif Olson objected to the
settlement class on the grounds that it did not meet the basic
class prerequisites under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(a).
Specifically, Mr. Olson argued that class members who are, like
himself, ineligible for monetary compensation make up what he
termed a "zero-recovery subclass." He argued that no named
plaintiff belonged to this purported subclass, and therefore the
court should certify a separate subclass with independent
representation.

The Eighth Circuit agreed in part, holding that "the district
court abused its discretion by failing to rigorously analyze the
propriety of certification, especially once new arguments
challenging the adequacy of representation were raised after
preliminary certification." The court explained that it was not
taking a position on the propriety of the class, but noted that
Mr. Olson's objections raised "important concerns" about whether
an intraclass conflict exists when class members who cannot claim
money from a settlement fund are represented by class members who
can.

The Eighth Circuit appears to be the first Court of Appeals to
remand a data breach class action settlement for reasons related
to the sufficiency of the class. As such, the holding may provide
guidance for structuring future data breach class action
settlements.


TARGET CORP: "Faraji" Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------
Neda Faraji, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff(s), v. Target Corporation, a Minnesota
corporation and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendant(s), Case
No. RIC1615629, (Cal. Super., January 27, 2017), has been removed
to the U.S. District Court for the Central of California on
January 27, 2016, and assigned Case No. 5:17-cv-00155.

Plaintiff accuses the Defendant of failure to pay for all hours
worked at the correct rates of pay, failure to provide meal and
rest periods and accurate written wage statements, and failure to
timely pay all final wages.

Defendant is represented by:

      Jeffrey D. Wohl, Esq.
      Jesse C. Ferrantella, Esq.
      Andrea B. Dicolen, Esq.
      PAUL HASTINGS LLP
      55 Second Street, 24th Floor
      San Francisco, CA 94105-3441
      Telephone: (415) 856-7000
      Facsimile: (415) 856-7100
      Email: jeffwohl@paulhastings.com
             jesseferrantella@paulhastings.com
             andreadicolen@paulhastings.com


TIME WARNER: Faces "Fruchter" Suit Over Proposed Sale to AT&T
-------------------------------------------------------------
AKIVA FRUCHTER, on Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. TIME WARNER, INC., JEFFREY L. BEWKES,
JAMES L. BARKSDALE, WILLIAM P. BARR, ROBERT C. CLARK, MATHIAS
DOPFNER, JESSICAP. EINHORN, CARLOS M. GUTIERREZ, FRED HASSAN, PAUL
D. WACHTER, and DEBORAH C. WRIGHT, Defendants, Case No. 1:17-cv-
00523-JMF (S.D.N.Y., January 24, 2017), alleges that the proposed
sale of the Company to AT&T Inc. in a merger transaction is a
result of a flawed process designed to ensure the sale of Time
Warner to AT&T on terms preferential to defendants and other Time
Warner insiders, and will subvert the interests of Plaintiff and
the other public stockholders of the Company.

The Proposed Transaction has a total transaction value of
approximately $108.7 billion and is expected to close before year-
end 2017.

Time Warner is a media and entertainment company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Richard A. Acocelli, Esq.
     WEISSLAW LLP
     1500 Broadway, 16th Floor
     New York, NY 10036
     Phone: (212) 682-3025
     Fax: (212) 682-3010


TIME WARNER: Faces "Gross" Securities Suit Over Sale to AT&T
------------------------------------------------------------
MELVIN GROSS, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, vs. TIME WARNER, INC., JEFFREY L. BEWKES,
JAMES L. BARKSDALE, WILLIAM P. BARR, ROBERT C. CLARK, MATHIAS
D™PFNER, JESSICA P. EINHORN, CARLOS M. GUTIERREZ, FRED HASSAN,
PAUL D. WACHTER, and DEBORAH C. WRIGHT, Defendants, Case No. 1:17-
cv-00522 (S.D.N.Y., January 24, 2017), alleges that the definitive
proxy statement with regards to the sale of the Company to AT&T
Inc. is materially deficient and misleading because, inter alia,
it fails to disclose material information regarding Generally
Accepted Accounting Principles reconciliation of the non-GAAP
financial measures contained in the Company's projections, which
were prepared by Company management and relied upon by Allen &
Company LLC, Citigroup Global Markets Inc., and Morgan Stanley &
Co. LLC, the Company's financial advisors. As a result, the
Company allegedly violated the U.S. Securities and Exchange Act.

The Proposed Transaction has a total transaction value of
approximately $108.7 billion and is expected to close before year-
end 2017.

Time Warner is a media and entertainment company.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Thomas J. McKenna, Esq.
     Gregory M. Egleston, Esq.
     GAINEY McKENNA & EGLESTON
     440 Park Avenue South, 5th Floor
     New York, NY 10016
     Phone: 212-983-1300
     Fax: 212-983-0383
     Email: tjmckenna@gme-law.com
     Email: gegleston@gme-law.com


TOM & TOON: Faces "Tangtiwatanapaibul" Suit in S.D.N.Y.
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Tom & Toon Inc. The
case is entitled as Srisuwan Tangtiwatanapaibul, also known as:
Anne Tangtiwatanapaibul, on behalf of themselves and others
similarly situated; and Phouviengsone Sysouvong also known as:
Tukta, Phouviengsone, the Plaintiffs, v. Tom & Toon Inc., doing
business as Broadway Thai; Thai Sliders & Co. LLC, doing business
as Thai Slider; Toon Thai Inc., doing business as Noodle Den;
Silom Thai Inc., doing business as: Silom Thai; Thai Toon At Grand
Central, Inc., doing business as Thai Toon; Wai Ying Lau; Toon
Lau; and Peter Fong Chiu, Case No. 1:17-cv-00816 (S.D.N.Y., Feb.
2, 2017).

Tom & Toon is a restaurant located in New York, New York.

The Plaintiffs appear pro se.


TYSON FOODS: Faces Haff Antitrust Suit in Oklahoma
--------------------------------------------------
Haff Poultry Inc., Craig Watts, Johnny Upchurch, Jonathan Walters,
and Brad Carr, and others similarly situated broiler chicken
farmers, v. Tyson Foods, Inc., Tyson Chicken, Inc., Tyson
Breeders, Inc., Tyson Poultry, Inc., Pilgrim Pride Corporation,
Perdue Farms, Inc., Koch Foods, Inc., Koch Meat Co, Inc., d/b/a
Koch Poultry Co., Sanderson Farms, Inc., Sanderson Farms, Inc.
(Food Division) and Sanderson Farms, Inc. Processing Division,
Defendants, Case No. 6:17-cv-00033 (E.D. Okla., January 27, 2017)
is an antitrust and unfair competition action seeking treble
damages, attorneys' fees and costs, pre- and post-judgment
interest on all amounts awarded, and all such other and further
relief under Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act and Section
202 of the Packers and Stockyards Act.

Defendants are vertically-integrated poultry companies that
operate localized broiler processing plants throughout the
country. Plaintiffs, broiler chicken farmers, accuse Defendants of
anticompetitive, collusive, predatory, unfair, and bad faith
conduct in the domestic market for broiler raising services,
fixing, maintaining, and/or stabilizing grower service levels
below competitive levels.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      William A. Edmondson, Esq.
      EDMONDSON LAW OFFICE
      P.O. Box 18922
      Oklahoma City, OK 73154
      Tel: (405) 810-4226
      Email: drew.edmondson1@gmail.com

             - and -

      Michael D. Hausfeld, Esq.
      James J. Pizzirusso, Esq.
      Melinda R. Coolidge, Esq.
      HAUSFELD LLP
      1700 K Street, NW
      Washington, DC 20006
      Tel: (202) 540-7200
      Fax: (202) 540-7201
      Email: mhausfeld@hausfeld.com
             jpizzirusso@hausfeld.com
             mcoolidge@hausfeld.com

             - and -

      Gary I. Smith, Jr., Esq.
      HAUSFELD LLP
      325 Chestnut St., Suite 325
      Philadelphia, PA 19106
      Tel: (215) 985-3270
      Fax: (215) 985-3271
      Email: gsmith@hausfeld.com

             - and -

      Eric L. Cramer, Esq.
      Patrick F. Madden, Esq.
      Christina Black, Esq.
      BERGER & MONTAGUE, P.C.
      1622 Locust Street
      Philadelphia, PA 19103
      Tel: (215) 875-3000
      Fax: (215) 875-4604
      Email: ecramer@bm.net
             pmadden@bm.net
             cblack@bm.net

             - and -

      Vincent J. Esades, Esq.
      HEINS MILLS & OLSON, PLC
      310 Clifton Avenue
      Minneapolis, MN 55403
      Tel: (612) 338-4605
      Fax: (612) 338-4692
      Email: vesades@heinsmills.com

             - and -

      Warren T. Burns, Esq.
      BURNS CHAREST LLP
      500 North Akard, Suite 2810
      Dallas, TX 75201
      Tel: (469) 904-4551
      Email: wburns@burnscharest.com

             - and -

      Gregory Davis, Esq.
      DAVIS & TALIAFERRO, LLC
      7031 Halcyon Park Drive
      Montgomery, AL 36117
      Tel: (334) 832-9080
      Fax: (334) 409-7001
      Email: gldavis@knology.net

             - and -

      Larry D. Lahman, Esq.
      Roger L. Ediger, Esq.
      Carol Hambrick Lahman, Esq.
      Scott E. Cordell, Esq.
      MITCHELL DECLERK
      202 West Broadway Avenue
      Enid, OK 73701
      Tel: (580) 234-5144
      Fax: (580) 234-8890
      Email: ldl@mdpllc.com
             rle@mdpllc.com
             chl@mdpllc.com
             sec@mdpllc.com

             - and -

      Charles D. Gabriel, Esq.
      CHALMERS, PAK, BURCH & ADAMS, LLC
      North Fulton Satellite Office
      5755 North Point Parkway, Suite 96
      Alpharetta, GA 30097
      Tel: (678) 735-5903
      Fax: (678) 735-5905
      Email: cdgabriel@cpblawgroup.com

             - and -

      Larry S. McDevitt, Esq.
      David M. Wilkerson, Esq.
      THE VAN WINKLE LAW FIRM
      11 N. Market Street
      Asheville, NC 28801
      Tel: (828) 258-2991
      Fax: (828) 257-2767
      Email: lmcdevitt@vwlawfirm.com
             dwilkerson@vwlawfirm.com


UNITED STATES: "Hassanpour" Files Suit for Writ of Habeas Corpus
----------------------------------------------------------------
Shahin Hassanpour and a class of similarly situated persons,
petitioners, v. Donald Trump, President of the United States, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border
Protection, John Kelly, Secretary of the DHS, Kevin K. McAleenan,
Acting Commissioner of CBP and Cleatus P. Hunt, Jr., Dallas/Ft.
Worth International Airport Port Director, CBP, Respondents, Case
No. 3:17-cv-00270, (N.D. Tex., January 29, 2017), petitions for
writ of habeas corpus and seeks declaratory and injunctive relief
for violation of the Fifth Amendment procedural and substantive
due process, First Amendment Establishment Clause under the
immigration statutes, and the Administrative Procedure Act and
Religious Freedom Restoration Act.

Shahin Hassanpour is a non-immigrant visa holders detained by
Respondents at the Dallas/Ft. Worth International Airport pursuant
to the President's January 27, 2017 executive order and was
coerced into withdrawing her application for admission. Hassanpour
is a national and citizen of Iran who was granted an immigrant
visa so that she can come to the United States as a lawful
permanent resident.

Plaintiff is represented by:

       Javier N. Maldonado, Esq.
       LAW OFFICE OF JAVIER N. MALDONADO, PC
       8918 Tesoro Dr., Ste. 575
       San Antonio, TX 78217
       Tel: (210) 277-1603
       Fax: (210) 587-4001
       Email: jmaldonado.law@gmail.com

              - and -

       Sejal R. Zota, Esq.
       NATIONAL IMMIGRATION PROJECT OF THE NATIONAL LAWYERS GUILD
       14 Beacon Street, Suite 602
       Boston, MA 02108
       Tel: (617) 227-9727
       Fax: (617) 227-5497
       Email: sejal@nipnlg.org

              - and -

       Donald E. Uloth, Esq.
       18208 Preston Rd. Suite D-9 # 261
       Dallas, TX 75252
       Tel: (214) 725-0260
       Fax: (866) 462-6179
       Email: don.uloth@uloth.pro


WEST VIRGINIA: Attys Still Working Out Deal for Water Crisis Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ken Ward Jr. at Charleston Gazette Mail reports that more than
three months after a tenative settlement was announced, lawyers
are still trying to work out detailed documents to spell out the
terms of a $151 million deal resolving the class-action lawsuit
over the January 2014 Kanawha Valley water crisis.

Lawyers for area residents and businesses, West Virginia American
Water Co. and Eastman Chemical met for nearly two hours on January
31 with U.S. District Judge John T. Copenhaver "to discuss the
progress of finalization of the settlement agreement," according
to an entry in the court docket that offered no other details of
the closed-door conference.

In a one-page order made public on January 31, Copenhaver pushed
the trial date in the case back from Feb. 7 to March 21. The move
is mostly a formality, because no trial is really planned in the
case, unless the settlement were to fall apart, and there has been
no indication that is likely to happen.

Tentative settlements were reached in late October between the
lawyers for hundreds of thousands of residents and businesses and
attorneys for West Virginia American Water and Eastman Chemical.

Under the deals, West Virginia American would pay up to $126
million and Eastman up to $25 million to residents, businesses,
and workers who were unable to use their tap water during the "do
not use" order period that followed the contamination of the
region's Elk River water supply by a spill of MCHM and other
chemicals from the Freedom Industries facility just 1.5 miles
upstream from the water company intake.

Lawyers are now trying to work out the exact language of longer
and more detailed settlement documents that must be submitted to
Copenhaver for his review and approval and for a public review
period that allows members of the plaintiff class to object or
opt-out of the deal. More information about how residents and
businesses can file claims for compensation will be made public
once those formal settlement documents are publicly filed with the
court.

Since the tenative settlement was announced, Copenhaver has held
at least 10 closed-door meetings with lawyers in the case to
discuss the exact language of the settlment documents those
lawyers are trying to finalize. Notations listing those meetings
are included in the court calendar, and the court docket lists who
attended the meetings and how long they lasted, but little other
information has been made public about what's occurred during
those discussions.


WESTERN UNION: March 27 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
----------------------------------------------------------
Safirstein Metcalf LLP disclosed that a class action lawsuit has
been filed on behalf of purchasers of The Western Union Company
securities from February 24, 2012 through January 19, 2017,
inclusive (the "Class Period").

If you purchased Western Union securities during the class period,
and would like more information about getting involved in the
Western Union Shareholder Class Action, please contact Sheila
Feerick at 1-800-221-0015, or email info@SafirsteinMetcalf.com.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than March 27, 2017.  A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. 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.

The complaint accuses the defendants of violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by virtue of the defendants'
failure to disclose during the Class Period that the Company's
fraud prevention efforts did not comply with applicable laws; it
knowingly failed to maintain an effective anti-money laundering
program; it aided and abetted wire fraud, for at least five years;
it knew of agents structuring transactions designed to avoid the
reporting requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act; it was not
compliant with its regulatory responsibilities; it violated U.S.
laws by processing transactions for its agents and others involved
in an international consumer fraud scheme; and it knew of, but
failed to take corrective action, against its agents involved in
or facilitating fraud-related transactions.

According to the complaint, following the disclosure on January
19, 2017 that the Company agreed to pay $586 million to resolve
criminal and civil charges and a U.S. Department of Justice
announcement that the Company admitted that it failed to maintain
an effective anti-money laundering program and aided and abetted
wire fraud, Western Union's stock price declined significantly.


YAHOO! INC: Faces "Madrack" Over Data Breach Suit
-------------------------------------------------
MARK MADRACK, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, vs. YAHOO! INC., MARISSA A. MAYER, and
KENNETH A. GOLDMAN, Defendants, Case No. 5:17-cv-00373 (N.D. Cal.,
January 24, 2017), alleges that Defendants made false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Yahoo
failed to encrypt its users' personal information and/or failed to
encrypt its users' personal data with an up-to-date
and secure encryption scheme; (ii) consequently, sensitive
personal account information from more than 1 billion users was
vulnerable to theft; (iii) a data breach resulting in the theft of
personal user data would foreseeably cause a significant drop in
user engagement with Yahoo's websites and services; and
(iv) as a result, Yahoo's public statements were materially false
and misleading at all relevant times.

Yahoo, together with its subsidiaries, is a multinational
technology company that provides a variety of internet services,
including, inter alia, a web portal, search engine, Yahoo! Mail,
Yahoo! News, Yahoo! Finance, advertising, and fantasy sports.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jennifer Pafiti, Esq.
     POMERANTZ LLP
     468 North Camden Drive
     Beverly Hills, CA 90210
     Phone: (818) 532-6499
     E-mail: jpafiti@pomlaw.com

        - and -

     Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq.
     J. Alexander Hood II, Esq.
     Hui M. Chang, Esq.
     POMERANTZ, LLP
     600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor
     New York, NY 10016
     Phone: (212) 661-1100
     Fax: (212) 661-8665
     E-mail: jalieberman@pomlaw.com
             ahood@pomlaw.com
             hchang@pomlaw.com

        - and -

     Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq.
     POMERANTZ LLP
     Ten South La Salle Street, Suite 3505
     Chicago, IL 60603
     Phone: (312) 377-1181
     Fax: (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, Suite 1100
     Phone: 1-800-977-7401
     Fax: 1-800-536-0065
     Email: michael@goldberglawpc.com
            brian@goldberglawpc.com


                            *********

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

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  Marion
Alcestis A. Castillon, Ma. Cristina Canson, Noemi Irene A. Adala,
Joy A. Agravantefor, Valerie Udtuhan, Julie Anne L. Toledo,
Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2017. 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  * * *