CAR_Public/180713.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Friday, July 13, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 140

                            Headlines

ABSOLUTE RESOLUTIONS: Sandoval Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection
AETNA LIFE: Sued for Denying Mental Health Services Coverage
AGRO MERCHANTS: Accused by "Lacy" Suit of Not Paying Overtime
AKERS BIOSCIENCES: Gleason Files Securities Class Suit in N.J.
ANTHEM PRODUCTIONS: Fails to Pay All Wages, "Douglas" Suit Claims

APELLES LLC: Sued by Hughes Over False Debt Collection Practices
APPLE INC: Faces "Kou" Suit Over Defective Keyboards in Laptops
APPLE INC: Admits MacBook Keyboards Are Broken
APPLE INC: Addresses Macbook Keyboard Flaws After Class Action
ASSEENONTVSTORE.COM: "Wuest" Suit Alleges Invasion of Privacy

AUSTIN, TX: Smith Sues Over Handling of Sexual Assault Cases
BANGKOK CAFE: "Palmer" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
BANKERS LIFE: Blind-Inaccessible Web Site Violates ADA, Wu Avers
BELSTAFF 1924: Olsen Sues Over by Blind-Inaccessible Web Site
BHP: Adero Law Prepares Class Action Over Casualisation

BIMBO BAKERIES: "Camp" Suit Alleges FLSA Violations
BP WEST COAST: "Rinaldi" Suit Asserts Gas Price Manipulation
BRAND ENERGY: Fails to Pay All Compensable Hours, McClure Says
C2 EDUCATIONAL: Melchor Seeks to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages
CALIFORNIA CARTAGE: Settles Warehouse Conditions Lawsuit

CAPITAL ONE: "Dress" Suit Alleges Breach of Contract
CASO INC: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Gonzalez Says
CEDAR RAPIDS: Iowa Sup. Ct. Upholds Ruling in Flood Damage Suit
CELGENE CORPORATION: Witchcoff Files Securities Class Suit
CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Sued by Jimenez for Defrauding Consumers

CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: "Bryant" Suit Alleges TCPA Violation
CHICAGO BAR: Staten Island Man Brings Class Suit Over RX Bars
CHOP HOSPITALITY: Leisner Sues Over Invalid Tip Pool Practices
CLARION BRANDS: "Advanced Obstetrics" Seeks Damages under TCPA
CLASSMONEY.NET: Leo Sues Over Unsolicited Calls

CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING: "Amini" Suit Alleges TCPA Violations
COLLEGE OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC: Chided for Legal Maneuvering
D&D ALBA: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks to Recover Minimum and OT Wages
EL AL: Class Action Mulled Over Flight Delays, Cancellations
EL GRAN VALLE: "Andujar" Suit Alleges FLSA and NYLL Violations

EMSA CSTORE: "Ali" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
ENTERGY CORP: New Law May Put an End to Customers' Lawsuit
ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay OT Under FLSA, "Fernandez" Says
EPIC SYSTEMS: Ruling Deals Blow to Workers' Rights
ESPERION THERAPEUTICS: Bailey Files Securities Class Suit

EXPRESS SCRIPTS: Zucker Seeks to Enjoin Vote on Merger With Cigna
FACEBOOK INC: "Bouillon" Suit Alleges SCA Violation
FIRSTFLEET INC: "Carnegie" Suit Alleges ERISA Violation
FLEX PHARMA: Sued by Rumaldo for Overstating Viability of FLX-787
FRONTLINE ASSET: Debt Collection Violates FDCPA, "Boggerty" Says

GEMINI DINER: Espindola Sues to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages
GENTLE RIDE: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Martinez Says
GO NEW YORK: Herbert Sues Over Staff Misclassification
GRAYSLAKE AUTOS: "Eckles" Seeks to Recover Bonus for Sales Reps
HASS INTERESTS: Fails to Pay Overtime Under FLSA, "Griffin" Says

HARRIS CUISINE: Figueroa Sues Over Unpaid Wages
HIGH Q AUTOMOTIVE: "Bowlby" TCPA Suit Alleges Invasion of Privacy
HOSOPO CORPORATION: Accused by "Kiefer" Suit of Invading Privacy
HYUNDAI MOTOR: Smolek Files Suit Over Faulty Theta II Engines
IDAHO: To Establish In-House Public Defense Office Amid Suit

ILLEN PRODUCTS: Gorss Challenges Sending of Unsolicited Faxes
ISSUU INC: Sued by White for Violating TCPA and Invading Privacy
JC PENNEY: Faces "Hernandez" Suit in N.Y. Over Unsolicited Texts
JOHNNY'S PIZZA: Servers File Minimum Wage Class Action
JOHNNY'S PIZZA: Ricker Seeks to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages

KANAN ENTERPRISES: Accused by "Covington" Suit of FLSA Violations
KANSAS, USA: "Moore" Suit Seeks to Stop Release of Personal Info
KANSAS, MO: "Black" Suit Alleges Due Process Rights Violation
KANYE WEST: Must Face Lawsuit Over "The Life of Pablo"
KENNETH EISEN: Not Covered Under Policy, Houston Specialty Claims

KIM RILEY: Doe Files Suit for Racial Harassment, Verbal Assaults
KLONDEX MINES: Faces "Baker" Securities Suit Over Sale to Hecla
LIBRE TECHNOLOGY: Did Not Properly Pay Agents, "Hudson" Suit Says
MAROSI INC: "Florian" Suit Seeks to Recoup Wages Under Labor Code
MATCH GROUP: "Ditnes" Suit Alleges Consumer Fraud

MCKENZIE FLORAL: Fails to Pay Minimum and OT Wages, Durango Says
MENDEZ FUEL: Accused by Tello of Refusing to Pay Overtime Wages
MERCHANT DIRECT: "Abante" Suit Alleges TCPA Violation
MESSERLI & KRAMER: Debt Collection Violates FDCPA, Walters Claims
METLIFE INC: "Roycroft" Suit Asserts Unjust Enrichment

MILLER EMS: Accused by "Wilson" Suit of Not Paying OT Under FLSA
MITEL NETWORKS: Cuddihey Challenges Acquisition by Searchlight
MONSANTO COMPANY: "Wapsie" Suit Asserts Market Manipulation
MUD MIXERS: "Ashcraft" Suit Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA
MULTICARE: Patients Got Calls From Debt Collectors, Suit Says

NAKATO SC INC: Pointer Seeks to Recover Wages Under FLSA, SCPWA
NEWALTA ENVIRONMENTAL: Fails to Pay OT Wages, "Berryman" Alleges
NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS: LEHB Seeks Damages for Exforge Buyers
NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS: Shuts Exforge Competition, UFCW Claims
NOVACOPY INC: Accused by Shelton of Discrimination Against Women

ORTSAC MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Rodriguez" Suit Says
PACESETTER PERSONNEL: "Lopez" Suit Alleges FCRA Violations
PECOS VALLEY: Rager Seeks to Recoup Minimum, OT Wages for Drivers
PENNSYLVANIA: Diamond Sues Over PSEA's "Fair-share Fees"
PG&E CORPORATION: Faces "Moretti" Suit Over False Statements

PINEVILLE MUNICIPAL: Subject of Class Action Lawsuit
PRECISION GROUP: Fails to Pay Oilfield Workers' OT, Elizondo Says
PURDUE PHARMA: "Chu" Suit Alleges RICO Act Violations
PVH RETAIL: "Olmedo" Suit Removed From State Court to S.D. Cal.
QUALCOMM INC: Jadhav Sues Over Broadcom's Frustrated Acquisition

QUINSTREET INC: Bronstein Gewirtz Files Securities Class Action
RELIANCE TRUST: Casey Files ERISA Class Suit Over Plan Losses
RICH PRODUCTS: "Tellado" Suit Seeks to Stop Use of Biometric Data
RPM PIZZA: Fredrickson Wants Minimum, Overtime Wages for Drivers
SAMSONITE COMPANY: Jorge Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Web Site

SAULSBURY INDUSTRIES: Bryer Sues Over Unpaid OT Wages
SHENANDOAH VALLEY: Denies Teenage Immigrant Abuse Allegations
SHRI GANESHA: Accused by Bradley of Not Paying Wages Under FLSA
STALLION OILFIELD: "Bourque" Suit Seeks to Recover OT Under FLSA
STUDENT AID EXPERTS: "Brulee" Suit Alleges Invasion of Privacy

SUCCESS PARTNERS: Magazine Aims at Rebirth Months After Layoffs
TAL EDUCATION: Robbins Arroyo Files Securities Class Lawsuit
TASTE OF NATURE: Buso Sues Over Cookies in Slack-Filled Packs
THAI AP&O LLC: "Bunmat" Suit Alleges FLSA Violation
THUNDERBIRD COLLECTION: "Bieber" Suit Alleges TCPA Violations

TIDAL: Faces Class Action Over Kanye West 2016 Album
TIEMPO COMMUNICATIONS: Does Not Pay Workers Properly, Says Tardy
TMC RESTAURANT: "Davis" Suit Seeks to Recoup Misappropriated Tips
TNT CRANE: Fails to Pay Overtime to Crane Operators, Repass Says
UNITED HEALTHCARE: "Broward" Suit Alleges TCPA Violation

UNITED STATES: Immigrant Reunification Prospects Remain Unclear
UNITED STATES: Suit Aims to Seek Justice for Migrant Families
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN: 200 Ex-Students Join Sex Abuse Suit
US OLYMPIC: Faces "Frederick" Class Suit Over Sexual Abuse
USA HALLOWEEN: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Adams Says

VEGASSPORTSCONSULTANTS.COM: Mitchel Sues for Invasion of Privacy
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Suit Over Sherman Act Violation
VOLKSWAGEN: Exploding Sunroof Class Suit Partially Dismissed
WELLS FARGO: Faces "Ecklund" Suit Over Fraudulent Investment
WINDHAM PROFESSIONALS: Barnes Files Suit Over Autodialed Calls


                         Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: NRG Energy Objects to Claims of ComEd, Exelon
ASBESTOS UPDATE: AMETEK Still Defends Suits at March 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Con Edison Accrues $8MM Liability at March 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colfax Had $53.6MM Accrued Liability at March 30
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colfax Had 18,067 Unresolved Claims at March 30

ASBESTOS UPDATE: MRC Global Faces 533 Suits at March 31
ASBESTOS UPDATE: WestRock Co. Had 675 PI Suits at March 31





                            *********


ABSOLUTE RESOLUTIONS: Sandoval Sues Over Illegal Debt Collection
----------------------------------------------------------------
GEORGINA C. SANDOVAL, on behalf of herself and those similarly
situated v. ABSOLUTE RESOLUTIONS INVESTMENTS, LLC; ABSOLUTE
RESOLUTIONS CORPORATION; FRONTLINE ASSET STRATEGIES, LLC; ANDREW
DUNN; BRYON KOZAK; MARK NAIMAN; DANIEL WINKLER; and JOHN DOES 1
to 10, Case No. 2:18-cv-10904-SDW-SCM (D.N.J., June 21, 2018),
alleges that the Defendants violated the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act by attempting to collect consumer debts on behalf
of debt buyers operating in the state of New Jersey as a consumer
lender or sales finance company without a license to do so under
the New Jersey Consumer Finance Licensing Act, thereby,
attempting to collect amounts not permitted by law.

Absolute Resolutions Investments, LLC, is a foreign limited
liability company with its principal place of business located in
San Diego, California.  Absolute Resolutions Corporation is a
foreign corporation with its principal place of business located
in San Diego.  ARI is a shell company that is solely managed by
ARC.  Mark Naiman is the chief executive officer of ARI and ARC.

Frontline Asset Strategies, LLC, is a foreign limited liability
company located in Roseville, Minnesota, and engaged in the
collection of defaulted consumer debts.  Andrew Dunn is the
managing member of FAS.  Bryon Kozak and Daniel Winkler are
managing members of FAS.  The identities of Doe Defendants are
currently unknown.

The Defendants are not in the business of extending credit,
selling goods or services to consumers, according to the
complaint.  The Defendants regularly collect or attempt to
collect past-due and defaulted debts of natural persons allegedly
owed to others, which were incurred primarily for personal,
family or household purposes.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yongmoon Kim, Esq.
          KIM LAW FIRM LLC
          411 Hackensack Avenue, Suite 701
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 273-7117
          E-mail: ykim@kimlf.com


AETNA LIFE: Sued for Denying Mental Health Services Coverage
------------------------------------------------------------
H.H., individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated; and V.G., individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. AETNA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No.
9:18-cv-80773-DMM (S.D. Fla., June 14, 2018), alleges violations
of the Employee Retirement Income and Security Act.

The lawsuit arises from the Defendant's alleged arbitrary
decision to deny coverage for medically necessary mental health
and substance use services when provided by licensed (a)
wilderness therapy programs and (b) residential treatment centers
even though the plans at issue facially covered both treatment
services.

Aetna Life Insurance Company is a Connecticut corporation founded
in 1850 and is based in Hartford, Connecticut.  Aetna Life
provides group disability, basic life, dependent life, accidental
death, personal loss, long-term care, and supplemental insurance
products.  The Company also offers beneficiary management
services.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jordan M. Lewis, Esq.
          JORDAN LEWIS, P.A.
          4473 N.E. 11th Avenue
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33334
          Telephone: (954) 616-8995
          Facsimile: (954) 206-0374
          E-mail: jordan@jml-lawfirm.com

               - and -

          Edward H. Zebersky, Esq.
          ZEBERSKY PAYNE, LLP
          110 S.E. 6th Street, Suite 2150
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 989-6333
          Facsimile: (954) 989-7781
          E-mail: ezebersky@zpllp.com


AGRO MERCHANTS: Accused by "Lacy" Suit of Not Paying Overtime
-------------------------------------------------------------
KEITH LACY, individually, and on behalf of other members of the
general public similarly situated v. AGRO MERCHANTS OAKLAND, LLC,
a 16 11 Delaware Limited Liability Company; and DOES 1 through
100, inclusive, Case No. RG18909127 (Cal. Super. Ct., Alameda
Cty., June 18, 2018), alleges that the Defendants violate the
California Labor Code by, among other things, failing to pay
minimum and overtime wages, meal period premiums and rest period
premiums.

Agro Merchants is a Delaware limited liability company.  The true
names and capacities of the Doe Defendants are unknown to the
Plaintiff.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas Han, Esq.
          Shunt Tatavos-Gharajeh, Esq.
          Daniel J. Park, Esq.
          JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
          411 North Central Avenue, Suite 500
          Glendale, CA 91203
          Telephone: (818) 230-7502
          Facsimile: (818) 230-7259
          E-mail: dhan@justicelawcorp.com
                  statavos@justicelawcorp.com
                  dpark@justicelawcorp.com


AKERS BIOSCIENCES: Gleason Files Securities Class Suit in N.J.
--------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID GLEASON, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. AKERS BIOSCIENCES, INC., JOHN J. GORMALLY, and GARY
M. RAUCH, Case No. 2:18-cv-10805-ES-CLW (D.N.J., June 20, 2018),
is brought on behalf of a class of persons or entities, who
purchased or otherwise acquired Akers securities between May 15,
2017, through June 5, 2018, seeking to recover damages caused by
the Defendants' alleged violations of the federal securities laws
and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Founded in 1989, Akers is incorporated in New Jersey and
headquartered in Thorofare, New Jersey.  The Individual
Defendants are directors and officers of the Company.

Akers develops, manufactures, and supplies rapid screening and
testing products designed to deliver healthcare information to
healthcare providers and consumers.  The Company also focuses on
the development of proprietary platform technologies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bruce D. Greenberg, Esq.
          LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG, LLC
          570 Broad Street, Suite 1201
          Newark, NJ 07102
          Telephone: (973) 623-3000
          Facsimile: (973) 623-0858
          E-mail: bgreenberg@litedepalma.com

               - and -

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

               - and -

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

               - and -

          Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
          BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 697-6484
          E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com


ANTHEM PRODUCTIONS: Fails to Pay All Wages, "Douglas" Suit Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CARLTON DOUGLAS, on behalf of himself, individually, and on
behalf of all others similarly-situated v. ANTHEM PRODUCTIONS,
LLC d/b/a SOUND, STAGE, AND LIGHTING, and ADVANCED AUDIO
TECHNOLOGY, LLC d/b/a ANTHEM SSL, and EVAGGELOS POULOS a/k/a
ANGELO POULOS, individually, and JOSEPH LODI, individually, and
JASON OJEDA, individually, Case No. 1:18-cv-05789 (S.D.N.Y., June
26, 2018), alleges that the Defendants failed to pay the
Plaintiff and other hourly employees all of the wages lawfully
due to them under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New York
Labor Law.

Anthem is a limited liability company organized and existing
under the laws of the state of New York, with its principal place
of business located in Mount Vernon, New York.  Anthem, as the
successor entity of Defendant AAT, assumed liability for all
debts, legal obligations, and claims against AAT.

Anthem is a full-service live event production and permanent
audio video and effects installation company.

AAT is a limited liability company organized and existing under
the laws of the state of New York, with its principal place of
business located in Bronx, New York.  From January 1, 2016,
Defendants Poulos, Lodi, and Ojeda owned, operated, and/or
managed AAT.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dong Phuong V. Nguyen, Esq.
          Alexander T. Coleman, Esq.
          Michael J. Borrelli, Esq.
          BORRELLI & ASSOCIATES, P.L.L.C.
          1010 Northern Boulevard, Suite 328
          Great Neck, NY 11021
          Telephone: (516) 248-5550
          Facsimile: (516) 248-6027
          E-mail: dpvn@employmentlawyernewyork.com
                  atc@employmentlawyernewyork.com
                  mjb@employmentlawyernewyork.com


APELLES LLC: Sued by Hughes Over False Debt Collection Practices
----------------------------------------------------------------
ERICA HUGHES aka ERICA TYUS individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. APELLES, LLC, and JOHN DOES 1-25,
Case No. 2:18-cv-02408 (W.D. Tenn., June 14, 2018), arises from
the Defendant's alleged deceptive, misleading and false debt
collection practices, which violates the Fair Debt Collection
Practices Act.

Apelles is a "debt collector" as the phrase is defined in the
FDCPA with an address in Columbus, Ohio.  The Defendant is a
company that uses the mail, telephone, and facsimile and
regularly engages in business the principal purpose of which is
to attempt to collect debts alleged to be due another.  The
identities of the Doe Defendants are currently unknown to the
Plaintiff.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Yaakov Saks, Esq.
          STEIN SAKS, PLLC
          285 Passaic Street
          Hackensack, NJ 07601
          Telephone: (201) 282-6500
          Facsimile: (201) 282-6501
          E-mail: ysaks@steinsakslegal.com


APPLE INC: Faces "Kou" Suit Over Defective Keyboards in Laptops
---------------------------------------------------------------
KEVIN KOU, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. APPLE, INC., Case No. 3:18-cv-03570 (N.D. Cal., June 14,
2018), is a consumer class action on behalf of those who
purchased in the United States an Apple laptop containing
defective keyboards with butterfly mechanisms.

Though the Class Laptops contain three iterations of the
Keyboards, each iteration suffers from the same fundamental
defect in that the Keyboards' internal components are unshielded
from contaminants, like dust, which can cause failure of the
Keyboards' delicate internal components, leading to: failures to
register key presses, the registering of ghost key presses, keys
getting stuck, or alterations to the tactile response of the
keys, the Plaintiff alleges.  He contends that failures from the
Keyboard Defect are recurrent, arise through no fault of the
user, and often cause permanent failures of the key, rendering
the Keyboard and the Class Laptop unsuited for their ordinary use
of retrieving and inputting data.

Apple, Inc., is a California corporation with its principal place
of business Cupertino, California.  Apple designs, manufactures,
markets, advertises, sells, distributes, and warrants laptops,
other personal computing products, smartphones, and
accessories.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Nicholas Migliaccio, Esq.
          Jason Rathod, Esq.
          Esfand Nafisi, Esq.
          MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP
          388 Market St., Suite 1300
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 489-7004
          Facsimile: (202) 800-2730
          E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
                  jrathod@classlawdc.com
                  enafisi@classlawdc.com


APPLE INC: Admits MacBook Keyboards Are Broken
----------------------------------------------
Casey Johnston, writing for The Outline, reports that eight
months after a surge of complaints, Apple announced a repair
program for its flawed MacBooks and MacBook Pros.

At long last, Apple admitted to its customers that its MacBook
and MacBook Pro keyboard designs are so flawed and prone to
sticking or dead keys, as originally reported by The Outline in
October, and that it will cover the cost of repairs beyond the
products' normal warranty. The admission comes after the company
has been hit with no fewer than three class action lawsuits
concerning the computers and their ultra-thin butterfly-switch
keyboards.

While the repair and replacement program covers costs and notes
that Apple will repair both single keys as well as whole
keyboards when necessary, it doesn't note whether the
replacements will be a different, improved design that will
prevent the problem from happening again (and again, and again).
Having become a one-woman clearinghouse for people complaining
about these keyboards since I broke this story, I feel justified
in saying that keyboard failures -- dead keys, sticking keys,
double-spacing spacebars -- appear to happen early and often, and
repairs do not permanently fix the issue. I also feel justified
in saying that the design on offer as recently as February still
presented the exact same issues as the design I purchased in the
fall of 2016.

In the same vein, it is worth noting that, prior to the
announcement of the program, repairs involved almost exclusively
swapping out the entire top case of the keyboard. This process
required shipping the computer out to one of Apple's remote
service centers, and then shipping it back either to the customer
or the Apple store, a total turnaround time of about five days if
the computer was brought directly to an Apple store in the first
place.

Apple did not immediately return a request from this reporter for
comments on whether repairs may now be done on site at stores to
shorten the time customers must be without their computers;
whether the keyboard design has changed such that a repair may
eliminate the problem rather than prop up a faulty design; or
whether Apple anticipates releasing updated hardware that is not
so prone to failure at any point in the future. Perhaps their
keyboards, too, are broken.

The support page that Apple posted describing the program notes
that devices will be supported for four years after the date of
purchase. Apple will not only foot the bill for future repairs
and replacements, but offer refunds to customers who may have
paid to have their computers fixed in the time between warranties
running out and the program's announcement. Covered computers
include the 12-inch MacBook going back to early 2015 all the way
up to 2017 models of both 13- and 15-inch sizes of the MacBook
Pro.

Until Apple confirms that the design of its computers is somehow
different, and even maybe then, given its overall poor judgment
in this matter, my personal recommendation would still be: don't
buy them.[GN]


APPLE INC: Addresses Macbook Keyboard Flaws After Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Brendon Foye, writing for CRN, reports that Apple has officially
addressed the flaws with the keyboards included in Macbook and
Macbook Pros that caused customers to file a class action
lawsuit.

The vendor said it had determined problems with a "small
percentage" of the "butterfly" keyboards that come with the
laptop lineups between 2015 and 2017.

Apple identified the issues as:

   -- Letters or characters repeat unexpectedly
   -- Letters or characters do not appear
   -- Key(s) feel "sticky" or do not respond in a consistent
manner

To help address the problem, Apple launched the keyboard service
program, where Apple or one of its authorised service providers
will service eligible keyboards for free.

Apple said the type of service will depend after it has been
examined and could include replacing multiple keys or a full
keyboard replacement.

The service is available for customers worldwide and will be
valid for four years after the laptop is first purchased at
retail.

The butterfly keyboard replaced the traditional scissor-based
keyboard in April 2015 with the reimagined Macbook, which reduced
key thickness by 40 percent, making it Apple's thinnest laptop at
the time.  It was later included in the Macbook Pro lineup in
2016.

In May, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court
Northern District of California, alleging that Apple was aware of
the issue at the time or before the laptops went on sale.

According to the class action, Apple attempted to avoid its
warranty responsibilities by failing to "provide an effective
remedy for the defect, instead instructing consumers to attempt
futile repairs or troubleshooting, and fails to provide an
effective repair that does not lead to repeated keyboard
failure".

"Apple representatives frequently attempt to pass blame for the
defective keyboards to consumers, telling the consumers that
their problems are due to dust and debris getting under the
keyboard, and that consumers -- not Apple -- should try to fix
this problem." [GN]


ASSEENONTVSTORE.COM: "Wuest" Suit Alleges Invasion of Privacy
-------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Wuest, individually and on behalf of a class of similarly
situated individuals v. Asseenontvstore.Com, and Does 1 through
50, Case No. BG18983495 (Calif. Super., May 3, 2018), is brought
against the Defendants for violations of California's Invasion of
Privacy Act.

The Plaintiff, Richard Wuest is an individual and a resident of
California.

The Defendant ASSEENONTVSTORE.COM is a Delaware corporation with
its headquarters in Edison, New Jersey. Defendant owns the
ASSEENONTVSTORE.COM trademark and has a website with the URL
https://www.asseenontvstorc.com. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Eric A. Grover, Esq.
      Robert Spencer, Esq.
      KELLER GROVER LLP
      1965 Market Street
      San Francisco, CA 94103
      Tel: (415) 543-1305
      Fax: (415) 543-7861
      E-mail: eagrover@kellergrover.com
              rspencer@kellergrover.com


AUSTIN, TX: Smith Sues Over Handling of Sexual Assault Cases
------------------------------------------------------------
AMY SMITH, JULIE ANN NITSCH, and MARINA CONNER, each individually
and as representatives of all others similarly situated v. CITY
OF AUSTIN, TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY MARGARET MOORE, FORMER
TRAVIS COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY ROSEMARY LEHMBERG, AUSTIN POLICE
CHIEF BRIAN MANLEY, FORMER AUSTIN POLICE CHIEF ART ACEVEDO,
TRAVIS COUNTY SHERIFF SALLY HERNANDEZ, and TRAVIS COUNTY, TEXAS,
Case No. 1:18-cv-00505-LY (W.D. Tex., June 18, 2018), alleges
that Defendants have committed constitutional violations by
implementing, promoting, or maintaining policies, practices and
customs that, among other things:

   a. refuse to implement and/or ignore proper training and
      supervision of government employees handling sexual assault
      cases or evidence;

   b. allocate more resources to other violent crimes than to
      sexual assault against female victims;

   c. fail to submit and/or timely test Sexual Assault Kits;

   d. prioritize the submission or testing of DNA evidence from
      other violent crimes over SAKs; and

   e. purposely and/or knowingly use or contract with labs that
      do not have the capacity to timely and accurately test
      and/or analyze the SAKs.

City of Austin is a municipal entity located in Travis County,
Texas, and is recognized by the state of Texas as a properly
organized and legal municipal entity.  City of Austin operates
and is responsible for all the actions of the Austin Police
Department and the Austin Police Department Forensic Science
Division's DNA Section.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jennifer R. Ecklund, Esq.
          Mackenzie S. Wallace, Esq.
          THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP
          1722 Routh Street, Suite 1500
          Dallas, TX 75201
          Telephone: (214) 969-1700
          Facsimile: (214) 969-1751
          E-mail: Jennifer.Ecklund@tklaw.com
                  Mackenzie.Wallace@tklaw.com

               - and -

          Elizabeth Myers, Esq.
          THOMPSON & KNIGHT LLP
          98 San Jacinto Boulevard, Suite 1900
          Austin, TX 78701
          Telephone: (512) 469-6100
          Facsimile: (512) 469-6180
          E-mail: Elizabeth.Myers@tklaw.com


BANGKOK CAFE: "Palmer" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
Lermaine Palmer, on behalf of himself and those similarly
situated v. Bangkok Cafe of Ferndale, Inc., and Wasinee
Xamountry, Case No. 2:18-cv-11463 (E.D. Mich., May 8, 2018),
seeks to recover unpaid back wages under the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendants as a dish washer, prep
cook, and cook since 2016.

The Defendants own and operate a coffee shop in Oakland County,
Michigan. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael N. Hanna, Esq.
      Morgan & Morgan, P.A.  
      2000 Town Center, Suite 1900  
      Southfield, MI 48075  
      Tel: (313) 739-1950  
      Fax: (313) 739-1976  
      E-mail: MHanna@forthepeople.com


BANKERS LIFE: Blind-Inaccessible Web Site Violates ADA, Wu Avers
----------------------------------------------------------------
KATHY WU AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHER PERSONS SIMILARLY SITUATED v.
BANKERS LIFE SECURITIES, INC., BANKERS LIFE ADVISORY SERVICES,
INC., BANKERS LIFE SECURITIES GENERAL AGENCY, INC., and CONSECO
SECURITIES, INC., Case No. 1:18-cv-05508-AJN (S.D.N.Y., June 19,
2018), accuses the Defendants of violating the Americans with
Disabilities Act because their Web site
http://www.bankerslife.com/is not equally accessible to blind  
and visually-impaired consumers.

Bankers Life Securities, Inc., is a Foreign Business Corporation
with its principal executive offices in Carmel, Indiana.  Bankers
Life Advisory Services, Inc., is a Foreign Limited Liability
Company with its principal executive offices in Carmel.  Bankers
Life Securities General Agency, Inc., is a Foreign Business
Corporation with its principal executive offices in Carmel.  
Conseco Securities, Inc., is a Foreign Limited Liability Company
with its principal executive offices in Carmel.

The Defendants are wholly owned subsidiaries of CNO Financial
Group, Inc., a Delaware Corporation and a public corporation with
its principal place of business in Carmel.  The Defendants
operate Bankers Life insurance brokerage and financial services
offices as well as the Bankers Life Web site and advertises,
markets, distributes and provides insurance, financial and
related services in the State of New York and throughout the
United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


BELSTAFF 1924: Olsen Sues Over by Blind-Inaccessible Web Site
-------------------------------------------------------------
THOMAS J. OLSEN, Individually and on behalf of all other persons
similarly situated v. BELSTAFF 1924 INC., Case No. 1:18-cv-05541
(S.D.N.Y., June 19, 2018), accuses the Belstaff of failing to
design, construct, maintain, and operate its Web site
http://www.belstaff.com/to be fully accessible to and  
independently usable by the Plaintiff and other blind or
visually-impaired people.

Based in New York City, Belstaff is a foreign business
corporation that is organized under Delaware law, and authorized
to do business in the state of New York.

Belstaff owns and operates stores throughout the United States,
including in New York City.  Belstaff sells, at these stores,
jackets, shoes, dresses, bags, accessories and similar items.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher H. Lowe, Esq.
          Douglas B. Lipsky, Esq.
          LIPSKY LOWE LLP
          630 Third Avenue, Fifth Floor
          New York, NY 10017-6705
          Telephone: (212) 392-4772
          E-mail: chris@lipskylowe.com
                  doug@lipskylowe.com


BHP: Adero Law Prepares Class Action Over Casualisation
-------------------------------------------------------
Darren Gray, writing for Sydney Morning Herald, reports that
mining giant BHP is facing a class action from up to 400 workers
who allege they were left $40 million worse off because they were
hired as "casual" workers by labour hire firms and not as
permanent staff, despite their rosters being published months in
advance.

The landmark action, set to be launched by law firm Adero Law,
could grow to include between 800 and 1500 people and cover an
estimated $40 million to $50 million, according to the lawyer
leading the claim, Rory Markham.

"Four hundred people have indicated they wish to join the
action," Mr Markham said, "but we believe the claim will grow to
between 800 to 1500".

The legal action is, effectively, two separate proceedings that
form one class action.

Two BHP companies, Mt Arthur Coal Pty Ltd and Hunter Valley
Energy Coal Pty Ltd (HVEC) will be sued in the proceedings, as
well as the labour hire firms Chandler Macleod and TESA.

The labour hire firms engaged the workers in question.

"On June 25 we're filing an action that will kick off a series of
four to five further actions around casualisation in the mining
industry," Mr Markham said.

Australia's black coal mining industry was "the only industry in
Australia where a casual will get substantially less than a
permanent, on an hour to hour basis," he said.

"We think this (legal action) is ground-breaking because 15 years
ago, casuals were earning more than they do today, and there are
now mines that are largely casual-driven.  So this industry, as
other industries in the resource sector, are becoming
increasingly casualised but no-one's had the resources to really
take this legal fight up.

"And we hope that it redraws the definition of what truly is a
casual.  And either results in casuals getting substantially more
money, or alternatively, just returning to a permanent
workforce," he said.

The Mt Arthur mine is a black coal mine in the Hunter Valley. Its
workforce includes permanent employees and casual workers.

Adero said the mine is owned by HVEC, which is part of the BHP
group, and that the mine is operated by Mt Arthur Coal, a wholly
owned subsidiary of HVEC.

The Mt Arthur mine, in the same manner as many other mines in
Australian coal mining, has a mix of workers including direct
employees, and workers engaged by contractors and labour hire
companies.  The numbers fluctuate to meet requirements of the
operation.

The lead applicant in the class action is former Mt Arthur mine
worker Simon Turner.  Mr Turner, 47, was a casual who used to
drive huge trucks at the mine, but hasn't been able to work since
a workplace injury he suffered at the mine in late 2015.

Mr Turner alleges that in his time at the mine casual workers did
"exactly the same work" and were on the same roster as permanent
employees, but were paid much less.  Casual workers were not paid
annual leave, nor were they eligible for paid sick leave, he
said.

"I loved my job, I loved working in the mine, mate.  It was long
and hard work but it was an enjoyable job.

"But it just bears down on you when you have permanents taking
holidays, and we basically do the same job but no-one gets
holidays," he said.

"People would go to work while they were sick and they were asked
'How come you're here?' And they'd say, 'I've got to be here,
because I don't get paid otherwise," he said.

Mr Turner said he was concerned about being a casual at the mine
"way before" he was injured and no longer working at the mine.

In response to queries from Fairfax Media about the looming legal
action, a spokesman for BHP said: "BHP has not received any
formal communications about these matters or the claims being
made."

Chandler Macleod released a short statement which said: "Chandler
Macleod has not been notified of any action against us.  In the
event of any action, we would respond to the court process."

Fairfax Media also contacted the labour hire firm Programmed
about the class action, because Tesa is part of the Skilled Group
which was acquired by Programmed in 2015.  Programmed said it was
unable to comment. [GN]


BIMBO BAKERIES: "Camp" Suit Alleges FLSA Violations
---------------------------------------------------
David Camp and Keith Hadmack, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc. and Bimbo
Foods Bakeries Distribution, LLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-00378 (D.
N.H., May 8, 2018), is brought against the Defendants for
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff David Camp is an adult resident of Swanzey, New
Hampshire. Since approximately 1999, Camp has delivered breads
and baked goods on behalf of Defendants in New Hampshire.

The Plaintiff Keith Hadmack is an adult resident of Royalston,
Massachusetts.  Since approximately 2010, Hadmack has delivered
breads and baked goods on behalf of Defendants in New Hampshire.

The business of the Defendants and their affiliates consists of
manufacturing, delivering, and selling breads and baked goods to
grocery stores and other outlets across the United States under
the brand names Sara Lee, Nature's Harvest, and others. The
Defendants and their affiliates operate out of at least three
terminals in New Hampshire located in Hooksett, Lebanon, and
Keene. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

      Christopher B. Coughlin, Esq.
      COUGHLIN LAW GROUP, PC
      35 India Street Suite 3
      Boston, MA 02110
      Tel: (617) 758-8888
      E-mail: cbc@coughlinlawgroup.com


BP WEST COAST: "Rinaldi" Suit Asserts Gas Price Manipulation
------------------------------------------------------------
DAVID RINALDI, JOSHUA EBRIGHT, and PAUL LEE, on Behalf of
Themselves and All Others Similarly Situated v. BP WEST COAST
PRODUCTS LLC; CHEVRON U.S.A. INC., TESORO REFINING & MARKETING
COMPANY LLC, EQUILON ENTERPRISES LLC, EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION,
VALERO MARKETING AND SUPPLY COMPANY, CONOCOPHILLIPS, ALON USA
ENERGY, INC., and DOES 1-25, Inclusive, Case No. 3:18-cv-01377-
BEN-JLB (S.D. Cal., June 21, 2018), is brought over the
Defendants' alleged illegal conspiracy to manipulate and maintain
the prices of gasoline in California at supracompetitive prices.

The Defendants -- gasoline refiners -- have used their market
leverage to keep gasoline prices in California well above the
U.S. average, reaching a peak of $1.50 per gallon above the
national average in Southern California in 2015, the Plaintiffs
contend.  The Plaintiffs allege that according to some reports,
Californians paid more than $10 billion extra at the pump
compared to other drivers in the United States, and at the same
time, the Defendants' profits from their California refineries
reached obscene levels.

BP West is a Delaware limited liability company with principal
executive offices located in Blaine, Washington.  BP West owns
and operates a network of gas and fueling stations in California,
Oregon, Washington, Nevada, and Arizona.  BP West operated a 650
acre refinery in Carson, California, with a crude oil
distillation capacity of 266,000 barrels per day.  BP West
operates as a subsidiary of BP p.l.c.

Chevron is a Pennsylvania corporation with principal executive
offices located in San Ramon, California.  Chevron explores,
extracts, and produces crude oil, natural gas, and natural gas
liquids.  Chevron also refines, markets, and distributes products
derived from petroleum other than natural gas liquids.  Chevron
was formerly known as Gulf Oil Corporation.  Chevron operates as
a subsidiary of Chevron Corporation.  Chevron operates refineries
in Richmond and El Segundo, California.

Tesoro is a Delaware limited liability company with principal
executive offices located in San Antonio, Texas.  Tesoro offers
refining and marketing of motor fuels and petroleum products.  
Tesoro, incorporated in 1996, operates as a subsidiary of
Andeavor (f/k/a Tesoro Corporation).  Tesoro operates refineries
in Los Angeles and Martinez, California.

Shell is a Delaware limited liability company with principal
executive offices located in Houston, Texas.  Shell operates
refineries and crude oil pipelines in the western United States.  
Shell also operates a network of gasoline stations in the United
States.  Shell's Martinez refinery has been in operation since
1915.  Shell is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Royal Dutch Shell
plc.

ExxonMobil is a New Jersey corporation with principal executive
offices located in Irving, Texas.  ExxonMobil operates as a
subsidiary of ExxonMobil Corporation.  ExxonMobil's Torrance
refinery covers 750 acres, processes an average of 155,000
barrels of crude oil per day, and produces 1.8 billion gallons of
gasoline per year.

Valero is a Delaware corporation with principal executive offices
located in San Antonio, Texas.  Valero refines and markets crude
oil in the United States and internationally.  Valero's
activities include refining operations, wholesale marketing,
product supply and distribution, and transportation operations
primarily in the Gulf Coast, Mid-Continent, West Coast, and
northeast regions.

Phillips is a Delaware corporation with principal executive
offices located in Houston, Texas.  Phillips operated a San
Francisco refinery that was comprised of two facilities linked by
a 200-mile pipeline: the Santa Maria facility, located in Arroyo
Grande, California, and the Rodeo facility, located in the San
Francisco Bay Area.

Alon is a Delaware corporation with principal executive offices
located in Dallas, Texas.  Alon is refiner and marketer of
petroleum products, operating primarily in the South Central,
Southwestern, and Western regions of the United States.  Alon's
Bakersfield refinery has a capacity of 70,000 barrels a day and
comprises over 600 acres of land.  The true names and capacities
of the Doe Defendants are presently not known to the
Plaintiffs.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Brian J. Robbins, Esq.
          George C. Aguilar, Esq.
          Michael J. Nicoud, Esq.
          ROBBINS ARROYO LLP
          600 B Street, Suite 1900
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 525-3990
          Facsimile: (619) 525-3991
          E-mail: brobbins@robbinsarroyo.com
                  gaguilar@robbinsarroyo.com
                  mnicoud@robbinsarroyo.com


BRAND ENERGY: Fails to Pay All Compensable Hours, McClure Says
--------------------------------------------------------------
MARLIN MCCLURE, an individual, for himself and those similarly
situated v. BRAND ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware corporation
doing business in California; BRAND ENERGY SERVICES OF
CALIFORNIA, LLC, a Delaware corporation doing business in
California; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 2:18-at-
01073 (E.D. Cal., June 14, 2018), accuses the Defendants of
violating California law by not treating as compensable hours
worked every hour their hourly employees were restrained to the
workplace, i.e., on the Defendants' vessels and platforms,
including sleeping time.

The Defendants are Delaware corporations, with their principal
offices in Logan Township, New Jersey, and their corporate
mailing address in Kenneshaw, Georgia, but which do business and
maintain offices in Fairfield, California.  The true names and
capacities of the Doe Defendants are unknown to the Plaintiff.

The Defendants provide services to drilling operations off the
California coast, including on fixed oil platforms on the Outer
Continental Shelf.  The Defendants mandate that their hourly
workers perform their work in "hitches," which are multiple-day
shifts (varying in length) that begin and end in California and
are also spent either on vessels traveling to, back from, or
between oil platforms or on the oil platforms themselves.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Strauss, Esq.
          Aris E. Karakalos, Esq.
          Andrew C. Ellison, Esq.
          STRAUSS & STRAUSS, APC
          121 N. Fir St., Suite F
          Ventura, CA 93001
          Telephone: (805) 641-6600
          Facsimile: (805) 641-6607
          E-mail: mike@strausslawyers.com
                  aris@strausslawyers.com
                  andrew@strausslawyers.com


C2 EDUCATIONAL: Melchor Seeks to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NISIA MELCHOR, an individual v. C2 EDUCATIONAL SYSTEMS, INC., a
Virginia corporation, and DOES 1-50, Case No. BC710653 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 19, 2018), is a representative
action brought by the Plaintiff on behalf of herself, other
similarly aggrieved employees, and the state of California
against the Defendants to recover civil penalties for alleged
failure to pay all minimum and overtime wages, to provide
adequate meal and rest breaks, to pay meal and rest break
premiums, to provide adequate wage statements, and to pay all
wages upon cessation of employment.

C2 Educational Systems, Inc., is a for-profit company that owns
and operates approximately 50 educational tutoring centers in
California.  The Company was incorporated in the state of
Virginia, and has its principal place of business in Georgia.  
The Plaintiff is unaware of the true names of Doe Defendants.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jeremy F. Bollinger, Esq.
          Dennis F. Moss, Esq.
          Ari E. Moss, Esq.
          MOSS BOLLINGER LLP
          15300 Ventura Blvd., Suite 207
          Sherman Oaks, CA 91403
          Telephone: (310) 982-2984
          Facsimile: (818) 963-5954
          E-mail: jeremy@mossbollinger.com
                  dennis@mossbollinger.com
                  ari@mossbollinger.com


CALIFORNIA CARTAGE: Settles Warehouse Conditions Lawsuit
--------------------------------------------------------
Josh Eidelson, writing for Bloomberg, reports that a leading
logistics contractor and a group of staffing companies agreed to
pay as much as $1.9 million to resolve allegations of wage-and-
hour violations and retaliation at a Los Angeles-owned storage
facility that houses Amazon.com products, among others.

A group of warehouse workers filed the proposed class action in
2014, claiming Amazon contractor California Cartage Co. and
several staffing firms violated the state's minimum wage law and
the city's "living wage" statute. The workers also alleged that
the defendants didn't give employees time to rest during periods
of excessive heat, and retaliated against those who complained.

Amazon.com Inc., which isn't a defendant, declined to immediately
comment. The Los Angeles allegations echo other lawsuits in
recent years alleging the online giant used contractors that
skirted regulations to cut costs. New York-based non-profit China
Labor Watch released a report alleging inadequate safety training
and precautions at a Chinese factory owned by Foxconn, which
produces Amazon's Echo speakers and Kindle e-readers. Amazon said
it had audited the factory and asked Foxconn to remedy
violations.

In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of Amazon
contractor Integrity Staffing Solutions, overturning a lower
court ruling that would have allowed Amazon warehouse employees
to seek pay for time spent waiting in line for security checks.
In 2016, a Washington state judge certified a class of
potentially thousands of current and former Amazon employees in a
lawsuit alleging the company violated state law by not paying
them for time spent in security lines during lunch breaks.

Also that year, former delivery drivers who had been employed by
Amazon contractor Silverstar filed a lawsuit alleging that they
were deprived of overtime pay and that Amazon shared legal
responsibility due to the extent of Amazon's involvement in
evaluating and directing their work. That case later settled. The
Washington litigation is ongoing, as are similar cases under
Arizona, California and Nevada law involving either Amazon, its
contractors or both. Amazon has regularly denied any wrongdoing.

In the Los Angeles case, the facility at issue is used by Amazon
as well as Lowe's, New Balance, Kawasaki Motors Corp, TJMAXX and
Sears, according to the Warehouse Worker Resource Center, a pro-
labor nonprofit. The litigants clashed over whether workers who
sued were covered by a municipal policy requiring that some firms
that lease city property pay a living wage.

In 2016, a judge granted a motion to dismiss those claims, saying
the companies were exempt. But he denied a request to toss
allegations that the companies had retaliated against workers. In
February, a National Labor Relations Board judge ruled that
California Cartage had illegally interrogated employees about
their efforts to address workplace issues at the facility and
made implied threats to employees about the consequences of
taking collective action.

The proposed settlement, which attorneys for both sides set forth
in a June 12 state court filing, would terminate the employees'
appeal of a separate, $800,000 wage-and-hour class action pact
that California Cartage and other defendants reached in 2015.

The plaintiff workers declined to comment. The logistics giant
NFI Industries Inc., which acquired California Cartage last year,
didn't return a call seeking comment. NFI is a privately held
company that operates more than 41 million square feet of
warehouse and distribution space, according to the company. As
part of the proposed settlement, the defendants deny any
wrongdoing.

A final approval hearing is set for Oct. 25 in California state
court.[GN]


CAPITAL ONE: "Dress" Suit Alleges Breach of Contract
----------------------------------------------------
Susan Dress, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Capital One Bank (USA), N.A., Case No. 4:18-cv-40064
(D. Mass., May 2, 2018), is brought against the Defendant for
breach of contract.

The Plaintiff asserts this action for damages and other relief
arising from Capital One's routine practice of charging interest
on credit card accounts on transactions that are fully paid by
the billing period due date.

The Plaintiff, Susan Dress, is a citizen and resident of the
State of Massachusetts and has had a credit card with Capital
One.

The Defendant Capital One is a federal bank headquartered in
McLean, Virginia. Capital One is the fourth largest credit card
issuer in the United States, and has approximately $91 billion
outstanding credit card loans to consumers. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Patrick J. Sheehan, Esq.
      WHATLEY KALLAS, LLP
      60 State Street, 7th Floor
      Boston, MA 02109
      Tel: (617) 573-5118
      Fax: (617) 371-2950
      E-mail: psheehan@whatleykallas.com

          - and -

      Nicholas A. Migliaccio, Esq.
      Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
      MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP
      412 H Street N.E., Ste. 302
      Washington, DC 20002
      Tel: (202) 470-3520
      E-mail: nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
              jrathod@classlawdc.com


CASO INC: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Gonzalez Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
RENE VALDEZ GONZALEZ, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. CASO INC. (D/B/A MAMA'S EMPANADAS), CARIO
INC. (D/B/A MAMA'S EMPANADAS), CHALANA INC. (D/B/A MAMA'S
EMPANADAS), JAVIER GARCIA, and YANIRA DOE, Case No. 1:18-cv-03558
(E.D.N.Y., June 19, 2018), alleges that the Plaintiff worked for
the Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without
appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of hours
compensation for the hours that he worked.

Caso Inc. is a domestic corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the state of New York with its principal place of
business located in Astoria, New York.  Cario Inc. is a domestic
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of
New York with its principal place of business located in Jackson
Heights, New York.  Chalana Inc. is a domestic corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the state of New York
with its principal place of business located in Long Island City,
New York.  The Individual Defendants serve or served as owners,
managers, principals or agents of the Defendant Corporations.

The Defendants own, operate, or control three Latin American
Restaurants under the name "Mama's Empanadas" located in Astoria,
Jackson Heights and Long Island City.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael Faillace, Esq.
          MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 317-1200
          Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
          E-mail: Michael@Faillacelaw.com


CEDAR RAPIDS: Iowa Sup. Ct. Upholds Ruling in Flood Damage Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Gazette reports that the Iowa Supreme Court on June 22 upheld
a district court ruling that property owners cannot sue railroads
for damages in the 2008 flood.

The plaintiffs, who are seeking $6 billion in damages, filed the
class-action lawsuit in June 2013, claiming railways caused the
extreme flooding in Cedar Rapids when railcars filled with rocks
were placed on the CRANDIC rail bridge near Penford Products in
an effort to prevent the bridge from collapsing.

It collapsed anyway and, the plaintiffs argued, worked as a dam,
"causing and/or exacerbating" the Cedar River flooding, which
resulted in "great and extensive property damage and other
damage."

The property owners filed the lawsuit in Linn County District
Court against the Cedar Rapids and Iowa City Railway Co., Union
Pacific Railroad Co., Union Pacific Corp. and Alliant Energy
Corp., claiming negligence and other state law violations.

Sixth Judicial District Judge Paul Miller in February 2016 said
federal law trumps the property owners' claims because the
bridges at issue are "inextricably intertwined" with the
defendants' railroad tracks, which affects rail transportation.

The claims go directly to rail transport regulations, and the
actions taken by railway companies are an "essential part of the
railroads' operations," which are covered under federal law.

The Iowa Supreme Court agreed, ruling the federal Interstate
Commerce Termination Act, which has jurisdiction over
transportation by rail carriers and operations of railroad
tracks, pre-empts the property owners' claims in state court.

Justice Edward Mansfield, writing for the majority, said not all
state law claims involving railroads are pre-empted by federal
authority, but this claim that involves the "second-guessing of
decisions made by railroads to keep their rail lines open are
expressly pre-empted."

Cedar Rapids attorney Sam Sheronick,Esq. in a statement on behalf
of four other attorneys representing the property owners, said
they will ask for a review of the decision.

"We respectfully disagree with the court's ruling and look
forward to seeking review of the decision by the U.S. Supreme
Court so that our clients can hopefully get their day in court
where we can present evidence, the truth and scientific facts to
prove what caused the 2008 flood in Cedar Rapids while exposing
the great lengths others took to hide the truth from the public,"
Sheronick said.

Alliant Energy, parent company of the CRANDIC, did not return a
call for comment on June 22 afternoon.

The lawsuit, pending since 2013, was moved to U.S. District Court
based on the theory that state law claims were pre-empted by
federal law. The court agreed and dismissed the case, but the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit reversed it and sent it
back to state court.

In the years after the flood, consultants and city, state and
federal officials have termed the flood a natural disaster, with
the rail bridge collapse playing a minor role in the height of
the record 31.12-foot crest.[GN]


CELGENE CORPORATION: Witchcoff Files Securities Class Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
Charles H. Witchcoff, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Celgene Corporation, Robert J. Hugin, Mark
J. Alles, Jacqualyn A. Fouse, Peter N. Kellogg, Scott A. Smith,
and Terrie Curran, Case No. 2:18-cv-08785 (D. N.J., May 3, 2018),
seeks to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

This is a federal securities class action on behalf of all
persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Celgene
common stock between January 12, 2015, and February 27, 2018.

The Plaintiff Charles H. Witchcoff, purchased Celgene common
stock at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period and
has been damaged thereby, says the complaint.

The Defendant Celgene is a global biopharmaceutical company
engaged primarily in the discovery, development, and
commercialization of therapies for the treatment of cancer and
inflammatory diseases.

The Individual Defendants are officers of Celgene. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Christopher A. Seeger, Esq.
      SEEGER WEISS, LLP
      55 Challenger Road, 6th Floor
      Ridgefield Park, NJ 07660
      Tel: (973) 639-9100
      Fax: (973) 639-9393
      E-mail: cseeger@seegerweiss.com

          - and -

      Naumon A. Amjed, Esq.
      Ryan T. Degnan, Esq.
      Christopher A. Reese, Esq.
      KESSLER TOPAZ
      MELTZER & CHECK, LLP
      280 King of Prussia Road
      Radnor, PA 19087
      Tel: (610) 667-7706
      Fax: (610) 667-7056
      E-mail: namjed@ktmc.com
              rdegnan@ktmc.com
              creese@ktmc.com


CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: Sued by Jimenez for Defrauding Consumers
----------------------------------------------------------------
CARLA JIMENEZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., SPECTRUM MANAGEMENT
HOLDING COMPANY LLC, and DOES 1 through 25, Case No. BC709676
(Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 19, 2018), alleges that
for years, the Defendants have defrauded and misled the Plaintiff
and similarly situated consumers by promising to deliver
residential Internet service at speeds that the Defendants knew
they could not reliably deliver and that consumers could rarely,
if ever, achieve.

Charter Communications, Inc., is a corporation doing business in
California.  Spectrum Management Holding Company LLC is a limited
liability company doing business in California.  Spectrum is an
affiliate of Charter.  The Plaintiff does not know the true names
or capacities of the Doe Defendants.

The Defendants provide, among other things, Internet services to
consumers in California.  The Defendants currently brand their
Internet services under the name "Spectrum."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jamin S. Soderstrom, Esq.
          SODERSTROM LAW PC
          3 Park Plaza, Suite 100
          Irvine, CA 92614
          Telephone: (949) 667-4700
          Facsimile: (949) 424-8091
          E-mail: jamin@soderstromlawfirm.com

               - and -

          Douglas L. Mahaffey, Esq.
          MAHAFFEY LAW GROUP, PC
          20162 SW Birch Street, Suite 300
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Telephone: (949) 833-1400
          Facsimile: (949) 263-8736
          E-mail: dougm@mahaffeylaw.com


CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS: "Bryant" Suit Alleges TCPA Violation
------------------------------------------------------------
Randy Bryant, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Charter Communications Inc., dba Spectrum, Case No.
3:18-cv-08929 (D. N.J., May 8, 2018), is brought against the
Defendant for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

The Plaintiff brings this action for legal and equitable remedies
resulting from the illegal actions of the Defendant in
negligently, knowingly, or willfully transmitting unsolicited,
autodialed text messages, en masse, to Plaintiff's cellular
telephone and the cellular telephones of thousands of other
individuals across the country.

The Plaintiff is a resident of Fayetteville, North Carolina.

The Defendant maintains its corporate headquarters in Stamford,
Connecticut, and is a nationwide provider of cable television,
internet, and telephone services.  [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      James C. Shah, Esq.
      SHEPHERD, FINKELMAN,
      MILLER & SHAH, LLP
      475 White Horse Pike
      Collingswood, NJ 08107
      Tel: (856) 858-1770
      Fax: (866) 300-7367
      E-mail: jshah@sfmslaw.com


CHICAGO BAR: Staten Island Man Brings Class Suit Over RX Bars
-------------------------------------------------------------
Tracey Porpora, writing for SILIVE.com, reports that  Michael
Pizzirusso says in court papers that he was deceived to believe
RX Bars contained "real" egg whites.

Apparently outraged by the alleged false advertising, Pizzirusso
started a class action suit in New York Federal Court against the
company that manufactures the popular health bar, the Chicago Bar
Company, LLC.

"Defendant's [Chicago Bar Company, LLC] marketing message is
built around the promotion of 'real' ingredients and alludes to
other companies that 'hide' unfavorable or artificial ingredients
deep in their ingredient list on the back of the package," said
the court complaint.

"The defendant does not use egg white power in its complete form,
which would have entitled it to utilize the name 'egg whites' to
refer to the subject ingredient," claims the defendant in court
documents.

Pizzirusso's lawyer, Joshua Levin-Epstein, Esq. --
joshual@shiboleth.com -- of the Manhattan-based Levin-Epstein &
Associates, refused comment about the case.

However, the Lawsuit Reform Alliance of New York said this kind
of court case isn't the intended use of a class action suit.

"This lawsuit highlights the need for reform in how New York
handles class action lawsuits. I am not sure that most consumers
would feel they were deceived and damaged because a product does
not contain entire egg whites," said Tom Stebbins, Lawsuit Reform
Alliance of New York executive director.

"In many false advertising claims the majority of a settlement
goes to the lawyers while the consumers see little to no benefit.
The complaint utilizes a New York law that was never intended for
the class action context. The section of the state business law
that mandates a $50 minimum payout for a plaintiff should not be
applied per class member and the legislature should update the
law to make that clear," he added.[GN]


CHOP HOSPITALITY: Leisner Sues Over Invalid Tip Pool Practices
--------------------------------------------------------------
JOSHUA LEISNER, GEORGE EURING III, and CHRISTINA CALLAHAN,
Individually, and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v.
CHOP HOSPITALITY LLC d/b/a CHICAGO CHOP HOUSE, CHICAGO CHOP
HOUSE, INC. d/b/a CHICAGO CHOP HOUSE, MATTHEW McCAHILL, DORIS
SIEMEN, CHARLES PATEL, and BHARATHBHAI PATEL, Case No. 1:18-cv-
04162 (N.D. Ill., June 14, 2018), alleges that the Defendants
violate the Fair Labor Standards Act by requiring their servers
and bartenders to participate in an invalid tip pool, whereby
servers and bartenders must pay a flat rate every shift ($25 for
servers and $10 for bartenders) to management.

Chop Hospitality, LLC, is an Illinois corporation doing business
as Chicago Chop House.  On October 3, 2017, Chop Hospitality
purchased Chicago Chop House from Chicago Chop House Inc.  
Chicago Chop House Inc. is an Illinois corporation that did
business as Chicago Chop House at all material times prior to the
sale of the restaurant to Chop Hospitality.

Matthew McCahill is an owner, operator and manager of Chop
Hospitality.  Bharathbhai Patel is an owner of Chicago Chop
House.  Charles Patel is an owner of Chicago Chop House.  Doris
Siemen is the General Manager of Chicago Chop House restaurant, a
position she has held throughout the entire relevant statutory
period.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Daniel Zemans, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL ZEMANS, LLC
          500 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 600
          Chicago, IL 60640
          Telephone: (773) 706-7767
          E-mail: dzemans@zemans-law.com


CLARION BRANDS: "Advanced Obstetrics" Seeks Damages under TCPA
---------------------------------------------------------------
Advanced Obstetrics and Gynecology, P.C., filed a class action
complaint v. Clarion Brands, LLC dba Florajen, Case No. 3:18-cv-
00107 (N.D. Miss., May 8, 2018), seeks damages and injunctive
relief pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991,
as amended by the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005.

The Plaintiff Advanced Obstetrics is a for-profit professional
corporation organized and validly existing under the laws of
Mississippi, and located in New Albany, Union County,
Mississippi. The Plaintiff Advanced Obstetrics employs a team of
medical professionals and board-certified physicians that provide
obstetric and gynecologic care for patients in Union County,
Mississippi.

The Defendant Clarion is a consumer products company and
distributor of over-the-counter dietary products, including
probiotic supplements. According to information and belief,
Defendant Clarion is a limited liability company organized and
existing under the laws of the state of Delaware, and has its
principal place of business located at 6 Neshaminy Interplex
Drive, Suite 111, Trevose, Pennsylvania 19053. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      L.N. Chandler Rogers, Esq.
      ROGERS LAW GROUP
      201 E Bankhead Street
      New Albany, MS 38652
      Tel: (662) 538-5990
      Fax: (662) 538-5997
      E-mail: chandler@rogerslawgroup.com


CLASSMONEY.NET: Leo Sues Over Unsolicited Calls
-----------------------------------------------
LOUIS LEO IV, as an individual and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. CLASSMONEY.NET,
COLLEGEEDUCATIONINFORMATION.COM, and VENTRIX ADVERTISING, INC.
d/b/a VENTRIXADVERTISING.COM, a California and Nevada
Corporation, Case No. 9:18-cv-80813-WPD (S.D. Fla., June 21,
2018), is brought pursuant to the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act arising from the Defendants' alleged unlawful, unsolicited
calls made to the cellular telephones of the Plaintiff and others
using an automatic telephone dialing system and an artificial or
prerecorded voice.

CLASSMONEY.NET is a parent, related, and/or affiliate company of
Defendants COLLEGEEDUCATIONINFORMATION.COM and VENTRIX
ADVERTISING, INC.  At this point in time, the Plaintiff has been
unable to locate publicly available information regarding the
whereabouts and corporate structure of Defendants CLASSMONEY.NET
and COLLEGEEDUCATIONINFORMATION.COM.

CLASSMONEY.NET is a Web site, which is engaged in the practice of
advertising "Education Grants" to the public.[BN]

VENTRIX ADVERTISING, INC., is a registered corporation existing
under the laws of the state of California and the State of Nevada
with its principal place of business located in Lake Tahoe,
Nevada.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael J. Pascucci, Esq.
          Joshua H. Eggnatz, Esq.
          Steven N. Saul, Esq.
          EGGNATZ PASCUCCI
          5400 S. University Drive, Suite 417
          Davie, FL 33328
          Telephone: (954) 889-3359
          Facsimile: (954) 889-5913
          E-mail: MPascucci@JusticeEarned.com
                  JEggnatz@JusticeEarned.com
                  SSaul@JusticeEarned.com

               - and -

          Seth M. Lehrman, Esq.
          EDWARDS POTTINGER LLC
          425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 524-2820
          E-mail: seth@epllc.com


CLASSIFIED ADVERTISING: "Amini" Suit Alleges TCPA Violations
------------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Amini, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Classified Advertising Ventures, LLC dba Seller
Networks and Does 1 through 10, Case No. 8:18-cv-00751 (C.D.
Calif., May 1, 2018), seeks damages for the Defendants'
violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Kevin Amini is a resident of the County of Orange, State of
California.

The Defendant is an online company that sells vehicles. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
      Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
      21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780
      Woodland Hills, CA 91367
      Tel: (877) 206-4741
      Fax: (866) 633-0228
      E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.co
              abacon@toddflaw.com


COLLEGE OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC: Chided for Legal Maneuvering
-----------------------------------------------------------
Glen Whiffen, writing for The Western Star, reports that a failed
attempt by the College of the North Atlantic (CNA) to get a
"tactical advantage" in an ongoing class-action suit brought by a
number of former employees of CNA's Qatar campus is insulting to
the employees, according to their lawyer.

James Hughes told The Telegram that from his clients'
perspective, and in the "context of access to justice, good faith
and honesty," the approach taken by CNA in the case is offensive.

"Notwithstanding there is no longer a counterclaim (by CNA), the
attempt to suggest one exists and utilize it to gain a tactical
advantage to frighten people from joining the class proceeding is
troubling on many levels," Hughes said.

The issue is described in a June 6 decision of the Court of
Appeal of Newfoundland and Labrador. That decision strikes down
CNA's counterclaim in a class action brought by several employees
-- instructors or instructor support staff -- who worked for CNA
in Qatar during the years 2008 to 2011.

The Appeal Court decision -- written by Justice Lois Hoegg and
concurred by Justices Gale Welsh and Francis O'Brien -- found
that the counterclaim did not comply with the provisions of the
Class Actions Act and does not meet the statutory criteria.

Of note in the decision is a statement that, "CNA frankly
acknowledged at the appeal hearing that its reason for
counterclaiming rather than pleading the defence of set-off (in
which money owed can be subtracted from awarded damages) was that
counterclaiming gave it a tactical advantage over the class
members by setting up the prospect that class members could end
up owing more to CNA than they would recover from CNA if they
succeeded in their class action, thereby pressuring the class
members to abandon their class action out of fear that they would
end up owing more than they would recover".

The class-action began in 2013 and claims that -- according to
the employees' contracts -- CNA was to pay them a cost of living
allowance in addition to their salaries, which CNA refused to
pay.

CNA filed a defence, along with a counterclaim, in February 2015.

In the defence, CNA denied it breached the contracts with its
employees and stated the details of a contract it had with Qatar
-- known as the comprehensive agreement -- provides that its
employees in Qatar were subject to a salary cap that affects the
cost-of-living allowance. CNA maintained that the employees were
paid in accordance with their contracts and the salary budget,
and also claims that some of its employees in the class action
were overpaid, and CNA sought reimbursement of the amounts
overpaid.

In a statement to The Telegram, CNA says it disputes the
statement in the Appeal Court ruling that suggested CNA launched
a counterclaim merely to gain a tactical advantage to pressure
class members to drop the action.

"CNA believes that it has fully paid all class members everything
that they are entitled to receive under their employment
agreements. We have stated this in our statement of defence filed
with the court. CNA understood, as did the judge in the Supreme
Court and another panel in the Court of Appeal, that the class
members were relying on the comprehensive agreement with Qatar as
part of their claim. CNA disputed that in its defence. However,
if the court ultimately permitted reliance on the comprehensive
agreement, CNA maintains that some of the class members were
overpaid and should repay the excess they received. Relying on
the legal remedy of a set-off (or the amount that would be set
off against another in the final settlement of accounts between
the parties involved) would limit the amount that CNA would be
able to receive. As a result, CNA moved to seek full recovery of
any overpayment through its counterclaim against some class
members. The only tactical advantage that CNA was seeking was
full recovery of any overpayment rather than the limited amount
available under a set-off."

The issue of staff being overpaid made news headlines some years
ago.

In 2010, it was reported the college -- and by extension
taxpayers in the province -- was on the hook for $5.5 million in
overpayments to employees, after the college signed employment
contracts for more money than they were legally allowed to pay
people under the comprehensive agreement.

The provincial government commissioned two investigations into
the reasons it happened.

The resulting tension led to the lawsuit, which could involve up
to 600 people and be worth more than $15 million.

In October 2010, then-education minister Darin King said during a
news conference that, "It's not their (employees') issue or their
fault as to why the college made an error and entered into an
agreement that they ought not to have. So we'll honour the
contracts."

At the same news conference, then-CNA interim president Bruce
Hollett said, "CNA has no legal or moral right to seek
repayment."

Yet, the class-action and counterclaim has worked its way through
the courts up to the June 6 Court of Appeal decision. With the
issue of counterclaim now resolved, the class action is expected
to proceed.

In dismissing CNA's counterclaim, the Court of Appeal also said
that, "In any event, even if CNA were to plead the defence of
set-off, CNA would still have to prove the defence, and if it
were pleaded in contract, such proof would require CNA to prove
that members of the plaintiff class were bound by the terms of
the comprehensive agreement including the salary cap -- something
which they do not appear to be able to do."

CNA's Qatar campus teaches about 2,100 students, with a faculty
and staff of roughly 600, including 400 Canadians. Of those,
about 137 are Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. In spring 2017,
the provincial government signed a three-year extension to CNA's
Qatar contract.[GN]


D&D ALBA: "Hernandez" Suit Seeks to Recover Minimum and OT Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
ADRIAN GARCIA HERNANDEZ, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. D&D ALBA CONSTRUCTION/REN CORP. (D/B/A D&D
ALBA CONSTRUCTION/REN CORP.) and DANNY (A.K.A. DARDAN) GASHI,
Case No. 1:18-cv-05787 (S.D.N.Y., June 26, 2018), seeks to
recover alleged unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law.

D&D Alba Construction/Ren Corp. is a domestic corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the state of New York
and maintains its principal place of business in Hartsdale, New
York.  Danny (a.k.a. Dardan) Gashi serves as owner, officer or
agent of the Defendant Corporation.

The Defendants own, operate, or control a construction company,
located in Hartsdale, New York, under the name "D&D Alba
Construction/Ren Corp."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael Faillace, Esq.
          MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 317-1200
          Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
          E-mail: Michael@Faillacelaw.com


EL AL: Class Action Mulled Over Flight Delays, Cancellations
------------------------------------------------------------
Dror Halavy, writing for Hamodia, reports that El Al customers
were up in arms -- again -- on June 21, as the airline canceled
or delayed flights to a number of destinations. Flights to
Toronto, Hong Kong, Beijing and other destinations were canceled
altogether, while flights to Lisbon, Kiev, London (Luton) and
other designations were delayed.  A flight from London (Luton) to
Tel Aviv was canceled as well.

The delays continued on June 22, with a flight to Barcelona
delayed by four and a half hours, while flights to Warsaw and
Kiev were delayed by one or two hours.  Several of the flights
were code-share flights, which means that El Al may have to
compensate passengers of other airlines on the flights it
operates.  The weekend delays joined other recent cancellations
and delays, which customers have experienced on nearly a daily
basis in recent weeks, Globes reported.

The airline has told passengers that the delays and cancellations
were due to "operational issues."  The report said that a group
of Israeli frequent flyers were preparing to bring a class-action
lawsuit against the airline if the delays do not stop.  According
to Israeli law, El Al is required to compensate passengers only
if a flight is canceled or delayed eight hours or more; according
to rules applying to flights originating in Europe, compensation
must be provided after three hours of delays.  The lawsuit will
demand that El Al observe the European standards on flights to
Europe, the report said. [GN]


EL GRAN VALLE: "Andujar" Suit Alleges FLSA and NYLL Violations
--------------------------------------------------------------
Luis Marino Andujar Mateo, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. El Gran Valle Restaurant Corp. dba El Gran
Valle, Las Hermanas Rest. Inc. dba El Gran Valle, El Nuevo Valle
Rest. Corp. dba El Gran Valle, Manuel Vidal, Griselda Reyes,
Delvy Castio aka Delvy Castro; aka David Castro, and Dario Doe,
Case No. 1:18-cv-04069 (S.D. N.Y., May 7, 2018), is brought
against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the New York Labor Law.

The Plaintiff was employed as a delivery worker at the restaurant
located at 1846 Jerome Avenue, Bronx, NY 10453.

The Defendants own, operate, or control a Mexican restaurant,
located at 1846 Jerome Avenue, Bronx, NY 10453 under the name "El
Gran Valle." [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael Faillace, Esq.
      MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
      60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
      New York, NY 10165
      Tel: (212) 317-1200
      Fax: (212) 317-1620


EMSA CSTORE: "Ali" Suit Seeks to Recover Unpaid Overtime Wages
--------------------------------------------------------------
Naeem Ali, and all others similarly situated v. Shezad Aslam
Kapadia, Mehdi M. Dhukka, Ehjaz Ulhaq Ehsan, Abdullah Abdulaziz,
Banafe, EMSA CStore Inc., FINA090 Investments Inc., Tristar
Beechnut, Inc., Ella Convenience Store, Inc., Houston Fina, Inc.,
and Tri-Star Katy, Inc., Case No. 4:18-cv-01460 (S.D. Tex., May
7, 2018), seeks to recover unpaid overtime wages under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

Naeem Ali, the Plaintiff, is a resident of Fort Bend County,
Texas. Plaintiff was an employee who worked at Defendants' gas
stations/ convenience stores as a clerk.

The Defendants own and operate gas stations and convenience
stores in Texas. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Salar Ali Ahmed, Esq.
      ALI S. AHMED, P.C.
      One Arena Place
      7322 Southwest Frwy., Suite 1920
      Houston, TX 77074
      Tel: (713) 223-1300
      Fax: (713) 255-0013
      E-mail: aahmedlaw@gmail.com


ENTERGY CORP: New Law May Put an End to Customers' Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------------
Jeff Amy, writing for The Associated Press, reports that the
leader of Mississippi's largest privately owned electrical
utility said in February that a new law wouldn't automatically
kill a lawsuit by Attorney General Jim Hood, but Entergy Corp.
now argues that the law, which doesn't even take effect until
July 1, does put an end to the suit.

That's just one prong of the company's argument to U.S. District
Judge Carlton Reeves, seeking to end a suit in which the Democrat
Hood alleges the utility overcharged customers.

Entergy Mississippi, a unit of the New Orleans-based company,
continues to argue that even before the law, the dispute should
have been handled by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or
at least the Mississippi Public Service Commission.

But citing the law seems to confirm Mr. Hood's fears that Entergy
was using its lobbying muscle to cut off the lawsuit, despite
denials.

"They did lie to the Legislature," Mr. Hood said.  "It was all
bogus to get that bill passed."

The law says that the Public Service Commission has "exclusive
jurisdiction" over utility matters, and the attorney general can
only appeal decisions to court or sue with commission permission.

Earlier in June, Entergy filed two separate motions asking Reeves
for summary judgment.

"Mississippi law is clear -- and since the March 19, 2018
enactment of Senate Bill 2295 is even clearer -- that any
challenge to a utility's practices alleged to have impacted rates
charged to retail customers must proceed first before the
(Mississippi Public Service Commission)," wrote lawyers for
Entergy.

Entergy Mississippi CEO Haley Fisackerly told The Associated
Press in February that passage of Senate Bill 2295 wouldn't moot
the lawsuit.  But spokeswoman Mara Hartman said on June 22 that
doesn't stop the company from relying on it in court.

"To clarify, mere passage of SB 2295 would not automatically
extinguish the lawsuit or guarantee dismissal," Ms. Hartmann
wrote in an email.  "Rather, the judge handling the lawsuit would
have to determine whether the amended statute warrants
dismissal."

Mr. Hood claims Entergy wrongly chose to sell overpriced power
from inefficient generating plants from 1998 to 2009 and should
pay back up to $1.1 billion, plus penalties.  His lawsuit argues
Entergy instead had a duty to buy cheaper power from outside
generators for its 447,000 customers in western Mississippi.

Entergy faced claims from the U.S. Department of Justice that it
used its electrical grid to favor its own power plants over
independent generators, even when it cost more to make
electricity at Entergy plants.  Many generators succumbed to
financial distress and Entergy bought seven of their power
plants.  Entergy says it did nothing wrong.  But private lawyers
sued two Entergy subsidiaries in Louisiana, winning about $100
million in class-action damages.  They lost a Texas suit.

Entergy also argues that even the Public Service Commission
shouldn't have jurisdiction, saying the dispute should be decided
by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  That's because it
involved costs allocated to the Mississippi company under
Entergy's now-defunct system agreement. It covered unified
operation of what were then six subsidiaries.

Entergy argues that buying more power for its Mississippi unit
from independent producers would have harmed other subsidiaries
under the system agreement.

The company also says that it needed its own expensive-to-run
power plants that could start and stop quickly.  Entergy notes
that it's required to buy electricity generated as a byproduct at
industrial plants.  Louisiana and Texas have many such plants and
Entergy says the power supply can shift from moment to moment.

Ultimately, Entergy argues that Hood is trying to usurp the
Public Service Commission's ratemaking power.

"The attorney general's attempt to establish a dual system of
utility regulation is improper and is a waste of taxpayer money,"
Ms. Hartmann wrote. [GN]


ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS: Fails to Pay OT Under FLSA, "Fernandez" Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DENICE FERNANDEZ, on behalf of herself and all other similarly
situated individuals v. ENTERPRISE HOLDINGS, INC., a business
entity, Case No. 0:18-cv-61430-UU (S.D. Fla., June 26, 2018),
alleges that the Plaintiff, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards
Act, is entitled to be paid time and one-half for each hour
worked in excess of 40 in each workweek.

Enterprise Holdings, Inc., is a Florida corporation, which
conducts substantial business in Broward County, Florida.  The
Company is a nationwide company that rents cars to the motoring
public, including rentals when car owners get into accidents and
need a temporary rental from a rental company, which is typically
part of their insurance coverage.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Chris Kleppin, Esq.
          GLASSER & KLEPPIN, P.A.
          8751 W. Broward Blvd., Suite 105
          Plantation, FL 33324
          Telephone: (954) 424-1933
          Facsimile: (954) 474-7405
          E-mail: ckleppin@gkemploymentlaw.com


EPIC SYSTEMS: Ruling Deals Blow to Workers' Rights
--------------------------------------------------
Clermont Ripley, writing for The Progressive Pulse, reported that
in in the Epic Systems, Corp. v. Lewis decision, the U.S. Supreme
Court all but obliterated the ability of workers who are victims
of the same workplace abuse to join together to bring class or
collective actions, or to pursue their claims in court. The right
of workers to join together to enforce workplace laws is the
cornerstone of national labor policy. Federal law gives employees
the right to engage in "concerted" -- or group -- activities for
their "mutual aid or protection" and prohibits employers from
interfering with this right. Unfortunately, Justice Gorsuch's
opinion held that despite that right, it is acceptable for
employers to force their employees, as a condition of employment,
to sign mandatory arbitration clauses which include class or
collective action waivers.

These mandatory arbitration clauses bar employees from bringing
their wage and hour, discrimination, and other employment claims
as class or collective actions or from obtaining relief on behalf
of a group of workers. Instead, employees must pursue their
claims in closed-door individual arbitrations -- an expensive
process that has been shown to favor corporations over
individuals.

Large employers have been requiring their employees to sign away
their right to bring class and collective actions or to go to
court with increasing frequency. Last year, a report by the
Economic Policy Institute found that more than half of private
sector nonunion employees were already subject to forced
arbitration clauses and 30% of those employees had also signed
class action waivers. In the wake of Justice Gorsuch's Epic
Systems opinion, those numbers are sure to increase. These
agreements are good for employer because they know that if an
individual employee has to pursue their claim alone, chances are
slim they will actually pursue it. Not only do the workers risk
termination or other forms of retaliation, but in the case of
unpaid wage claims, the expense of litigating a case can easily
dwarf the amount of unpaid wages for an individual employee. It
is far more economical to pursue those claims as a group.

This type of systemic wage theft is no small problem. A new
report by Jobs with Justice and Good Jobs First, found that since
2000, employers have paid out $8.8 billion to employees in wage
theft litigation. Not only that, the giant companies in the
Fortune 500, Fortune Global 500 and Forbes list of largest
privately held firms are some of the worst offenders, with
Walmart leading the pack.

Because arbitration takes place in a private forum the decisions
are usually secret and do not have the effect of curbing bad
behavior by these employers by bringing it to light or by
allowing victims to band together. The #MeToo movement has shown
that when sexual harassment and sex discrimination violations are
dealt with individually and in secret, the perpetrators -- be
they elected officials or large corporations -- will continue to
break the law.


ESPERION THERAPEUTICS: Bailey Files Securities Class Suit
---------------------------------------------------------
Kevin Bailey, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Esperion Therapeutics, Inc., Timothy M. Mayleben and
Richard B. Bartram, Case No. 3:18-cv-11438 (E.D. Mich., May 7,
2018), seeks damages caused by the Defendants' violations of the
federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

This is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class
consisting of all persons other than Defendants who purchased or
otherwise acquired Esperion securities between February 22, 2017
and May 1, 2018, both dates inclusive.

The Plaintiff acquired Esperion securities at artificially
inflated prices during the Class Period and was damaged upon the
revelation of corrective disclosures, says the complaint.

Esperion is a biopharmaceutical company that is primarily focused
on the research and development of oral and small molecule
therapies for the treatment of patients with elevated levels of
low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and other cardio metabolic
risk factors.  Bempedoic acid and its lead product candidate, the
bempedoic acid/ezetimibe combination pill, are targeted therapies
focused on reducing elevated LDL-C levels in patients with
hypercholesterolemia.  The Company owns the exclude worldwide
rights to bempedoic acid. Founded in January 2008, the Company is
headquartered in Ann Arbor, Michigan.  Esperion's stock trades on
the NASDAQ Global Market under the ticker symbol "ESPR."

The Individual Defendants are officers of Esperion. The
Individual Defendants possessed the power and authority to
control the contents of Esperion's SEC filings, press releases,
and other market communications. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


EXPRESS SCRIPTS: Zucker Seeks to Enjoin Vote on Merger With Cigna
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LAWRENCE ZUCKER, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. EXPRESS SCRIPTS HOLDING COMPANY, MAURA C.
BREEN, WILLIAM J. DELANEY, ELDER GRANGER, NICHOLAS J. LAHOWCHIC,
THOMAS P. MAC MAHON, KATHLEEN M. MAZZARELLA, WOODROW A. MYERS,
JR., FRANK MERGENTHALER, RODERICK A. PALMORE, GEORGE PAZ, WILLIAM
L. ROPER, SEYMOUR STERNBERG, and TIMOTHY WENTWORTH, Case No.
1:18-cv-00949-UNA (D. Del., June 26, 2018), seeks to enjoin the
vote on a proposed transaction pursuant to which Express Scripts
will be acquired by Cigna Corporation through its wholly owned
subsidiaries, Halfmoon Parent, Inc. ("New Cigna"), Halfmoon I,
Inc. ("Cigna Merger Sub") and Halfmoon II, Inc.

On March 8, 2018, Express Scripts and Cigna issued a joint press
release announcing they had entered into an Agreement and Plan of
Merger dated March 8, 2018.  Pursuant to the terms of the Merger
Agreement, following a series of mergers, Express Scripts and
Cigna will be combined under a new holding company, New Cigna,
which will be renamed "Cigna Corporation" immediately after the
mergers.  Express Scripts stockholders will receive 0.2434 of a
share of New Cigna common stock and $48.75 in cash for each
Express Scripts common share held.  The Proposed Transaction is
valued at approximately $54 billion, excluding debt.

Express Scripts is a Delaware corporation with its principal
executive offices located in St. Louis, Missouri.  Express
Scripts is the largest independent pharmacy benefit management
company in the U.S.  The Individual Defendants are directors and
officers of the Company.

Cigna is a Delaware corporation with its principal executive
offices located in Bloomfield, Connecticut.  Cigna is a global
health service company that provides medical, pharmacy,
behavioral, dental, disability, life and accident insurance and
related products and services.

New Cigna is a Delaware corporation and a direct wholly owned
subsidiary of Cigna.  Cigna Merger Sub is a Delaware corporation
and a direct wholly owned subsidiary of New Cigna.  Express
Scripts Merger Sub is a Delaware corporation and a direct wholly
owned subsidiary of New Cigna.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          R. Joseph Hrubiec, Esq.
          NAPOLI SHKOLNIK, LLC
          919 Market Street, Suite 1801
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 330-8025
          E-mail: RHrubiec@NapoliLaw.com

               - and -

          Aaron Brody, Esq.
          STULL, STULL, & BRODY
          6 East 45th Street
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 687-7230
          Facsimile: (212) 490-2022
          E-mail: abrody@ssbny.com


FACEBOOK INC: "Bouillon" Suit Alleges SCA Violation
---------------------------------------------------
Matthew Bouillon, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Facebook, Inc., and Does 1-10, Case No.
3:18-cv-02565 (N.D. Calif., May 1, 2018), is brought against the
Defendants for violation of the Stored Communications Act.

The Plaintiff Matthew Bullion is a resident of the City and
County of Denver, Colorado. Plaintiff has held a Facebook account
since at least 2007. Plaintiff is an active user and has been at
all relevant times.

The Defendant Facebook is a Delaware corporation with its
principal place of business in Menlo Park, California.  Facebook
operates www.facebook.com, a social networking platform that
allows users to create online profiles. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Christopher P. Ridout, Esq.
      ZIMMERMAN REED LLP
      2381 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 328
      Manhattan Beach, CA 90245
      Tel: (877) 500-8780
      Fax: (877) 500-8781
      E-mail: christopher.ridout@zimmreed.com


FIRSTFLEET INC: "Carnegie" Suit Alleges ERISA Violation
-------------------------------------------------------
Christopher Carnegie, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Firstfleet, Inc. of Tennessee dba First
Fleet, Inc., Case No. 8:18-cv-01070 (M.D. Fla., May 2, 2018), is
brought against the Defendant for violation of the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended by the
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1984.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant, the Plan Administrator
of the Health Plan, has repeatedly violated ERISA by failing to
provide participants and beneficiaries in the Plan with adequate
notice, as prescribed by COBRA, of their right to continue their
health coverage upon the occurrence of a "qualifying event" as
defined by the statute. As a result, these violations threaten
Class Members' ability to maintain health coverage.

The Plaintiff is a Florida resident and former employee of the
Defendant who was a covered employee and participant in the Plan
the day before the termination of his employment on or about
January of 2017. The Plaintiff was employed by Defendant as a
driver.

The Defendant is a foreign corporation with its headquarters in
Tennessee, and employed more than 20 employees who were members
of the Plan in each year from 2011 to 2017. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
      Brandon J. Hill, Esq.
      WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, P.A.
      1110 N. Florida Avenue, Suite 300
      Tampa, FL 33602
      Tel: (813) 224-0431
      Fax: (813) 229-8712
      E-mail: lcabassa@wfclaw.com
              bhill@wfclaw.com


FLEX PHARMA: Sued by Rumaldo for Overstating Viability of FLX-787
-----------------------------------------------------------------
TEOFILINA RUMALDO, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. FLEX PHARMA, INC. WILLIAM K. MCVICAR AND
JOHN MCCABE, Case No. 1:18-cv-05493-VSB (S.D.N.Y., June 19,
2018), alleges that the Defendants made false and misleading
statements, and failed to disclose that:

    (i) Flex Pharma overstated the viability and approval
        prospects for its product candidate FLX-787 for the
        treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and
        Charcot-Marie-Tooth disease; and

   (ii) as a result, Flex Pharma's public statements were
        materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

Flex Pharma is incorporated in Delaware with its principal
executive offices located in Boston, Massachusetts.  The
Individual Defendants are directors and officers of the Company.

Flex Pharma is a biotechnology company that develops clinically
proven products and treatments for muscle cramps and spasms.  The
Company develops medicines for nocturnal leg cramps, cervical
dystonia, spinal cord spasticity, and multiple sclerosis.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

               - and -

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

               - and -

          Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
          BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 697-6484
          E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com


FRONTLINE ASSET: Debt Collection Violates FDCPA, "Boggerty" Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Andre Boggerty, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Frontline Asset Strategies LLC, JH
Portfolio Debt Equities, LLC and John Does 1-25, Case No. 1:18-
cv-00890-UNA (D. Del., June 15, 2018), alleges that the
Defendant's deceptive, misleading and false debt collection
practices violates the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act.

Frontline and JH Portfolio are debt collectors as the phrase is
defined in the FDCPA.  They use mail, telephone, and facsimile
and regularly engage in business the principal purpose of which
is to attempt to collect debts alleged to be due another.  The
identities of the Doe Defendants are currently unknown to the
Plaintiff.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Antranig Garibian, Esq.
          GARIBIAN LAW OFFICES, P.C.
          1010 N. Bancroft Pkwy., Suite 22
          Wilmington, DE 19805
          Telephone: (302) 722-6885
          E-mail: ag@garibianlaw.com


GEMINI DINER: Espindola Sues to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
MARIO CASTANEDA ESPINDOLA, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated v. GEMINI DINER INC. (D/B/A GEMINI DINER),
KONSTANTINE KASSIMIS, VICENTE DOE, SPIRO DOE, and CHRISTOS
ARGYROS, Case No. 1:18-cv-05425 (S.D.N.Y., June 15, 2018), is
brought for alleged unpaid minimum and overtime wages pursuant to
the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 and the New York Labor Law.

Gemini Diner Inc. is a domestic corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the state of New York. The Individual
Defendants serve or served as owners, managers, principals, or
agents of the Defendant Corporation.

The Defendants own, operate or control a diner located at 641
Second Avenue, in New York City under the name "Gemini
Diner."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael Faillace, Esq.
          MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 317-1200
          Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
          E-mail: Michael@Faillacelaw.com


GENTLE RIDE: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Martinez Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BENNY MARTINEZ, on behalf of himself and all similarly situated
employees v. GENTLE RIDE LLC dba SAFEAID, a California
corporation, and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. BC709670
(Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 18, 2018), accuses the
Defendants of failing to pay minimum and overtime wages, and to
provide rest periods.

Gentle Ride is a limited liability company.  The Company provides
non-emergency medical transport.  The Plaintiff is ignorant of
the true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kevin Mahoney, Esq.
          Shawn I. Pardo, Esq.
          MAHONEY LAW GROUP, APC
          249 E. Ocean Blvd., Suite 814
          Long Beach, CA 90802
          Telephone: (562) 590-5550
          Facsimile: (562) 590-8400
          E-mail: kmahoney@mahoney-law.net
                  spardo@mahoney-law.net


GO NEW YORK: Herbert Sues Over Staff Misclassification
------------------------------------------------------
SHELDON HERBERT, BENJAMIN DAVIS, JUSTYN MARTINDALE, Individually
and on Behalf of All Other Persons Similarly Situated v. GO NEW
YORK TOURS INC., ASEN KOSRADINOV, MICHAEL LONDON, ALON BRAND, and
JOHN DOES #1-10, Case No. 1:18-cv-05653-AJN (S.D.N.Y., June 21,
2018), alleges that the Defendants illegally misclassified the
Plaintiffs and similar bus station/boat dock supervisor employees
as exempt from the Fair Labor Standards Act and not paid federal
minimum and overtime wages.

Go New York Tours Inc. is a New York corporation with its
principal place of business in New York City.  The Individual
Defendants are owners, officers, directors or managing agents of
the Corporate Defendant.

The Defendants provide tour and related services around New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          William C. Rand, Esq.
          LAW OFFICE OF WILLIAM COUDERT RAND
          501 Fifth Avenue, 15th Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 286-1425
          Facsimile: (646) 688-3078
          E-mail: wcrand@wcrand.com


GRAYSLAKE AUTOS: "Eckles" Seeks to Recover Bonus for Sales Reps
---------------------------------------------------------------
JEREMY ECKLES, and EDWARD RISHER on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. GRAYSLAKE AUTOS LLC, SCOTT FALCONE,
individually and ROBERT D. WATSON, individually, Case No. 1:18-
cv-04188 (N.D. Ill., June 15, 2018), seeks to recover minimum
wages, unpaid commissions and unlawful deductions for the
Plaintiffs and similarly situated sales representatives, who
worked for the Defendants.

Grayslake Autos LLC is an Illinois corporation with its principal
place of business located in Grayslake, Illinois.  The Individual
Defendants founded Grayslake Autos.  Until in or around 2018, The
Individual Defendants owned and operated the Rock Chevy
dealership located at 1000 E. Belvidere Road, in Grayslake,
Illinois.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Douglas M. Werman, Esq.
          WERMAN SALAS P.C.
          77 West Washington Street, Suite 1402
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 419-1008
          E-mail: dwerman@flsalaw.com

               - and -

          Joseph A. Fitapelli, Esq.
          Frank J. Mazzaferro, Esq.
          FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP
          28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 300-0375
          E-mail: jfitapelli@fslawfirm.com
                  fmazzaferro@fslawfirm.com


HASS INTERESTS: Fails to Pay Overtime Under FLSA, "Griffin" Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH GRIFFIN, and all others similarly situated v. HASS
INTERESTS, LLC, and, SAMM WIGGINS, JR., Case No. 4:18-cv-01959
(S.D. Tex., June 14, 2018), seeks damages for alleged unpaid
overtime, liquidated damages, injunctive relief, declaratory
relief, and a reasonable attorney's fee and costs pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act.

Hass Interests, LLC, is a limited liability corporation existing
under the laws of the state of Texas and maintains offices in
Houston, Texas.  Hass operates a company that primarily operates
as a contract service provider for Amazon.com, Inc.  Samm
Wiggins, Jr., a resident of Houston, Texas, is a managing member
of Hass.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Charles L. Scalise, Esq.
          Daniel B. Ross, Esq.
          ROSS LAW GROUP
          1104 San Antonio Street
          Austin, TX 78701
          Telephone: (512) 474-7677
          Facsimile: (512) 474-5306
          E-mail: Charles@rosslawpc.com
                  dbr@rosslawpc.com


HARRIS CUISINE: Figueroa Sues Over Unpaid Wages
-----------------------------------------------
GUSTAVO FIGUEROA II, individually and on behalf of other
similarly situated individuals employed as servers at Lilette
restaurant v. HARRIS CUISINE LLC; HARRIS JMH PROPERTIES, LLC; and
JOHN M. HARRIS, Case No. 2:18-cv-06109 (E.D. La., June 20, 2018),
alleges that the Defendants have willfully violated the Fair
Labor Standards Act and state law by intentionally failing and
refusing to pay the Plaintiff and other similarly situated
employees all compensation due them under the FLSA and its
implementing regulations over the course of the last three years.

Harris Cuisine is a limited liability company licensed to do and
doing business in Louisiana with its principal place of business
in New Orleans, Louisiana.  Harris Properties is a limited
liability company licensed to do and doing business in Louisiana
with its principal place of business in New Orleans.  Harris
Properties owns the property wherein Lilette operates.

The Defendants own and operate Lilette, a fine-dining restaurant
located at 3637 Magazine Street, in New Orleans, Louisiana.  John
M. Harris is the chef-owner of Lilette and the managing member of
the Corporate Defendants.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Dominic J. Gianna, Esq.
          William D. Aaron, Jr., Esq.
          Lee M. Rudin, Esq.
          AARON & GIANNA, PLC
          201 St. Charles Avenue, Suite 3800
          New Orleans, LA 70170-3800
          Telephone: (504) 569-1800
          Facsimile: (504) 569-1801
          E-mail: dgianna@aarongianna.com
                  waaron@aarongianna.com
                  lrudin@aarongianna.com


HIGH Q AUTOMOTIVE: "Bowlby" TCPA Suit Alleges Invasion of Privacy
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jay Bowlby, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. High Q Automotive Consulting, LLC, a Florida Limited
Liability Company, Case No. 9:18-cv-80775-RLR (S.D. Fla., June
14, 2018), seeks to secure redress for alleged violations of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

To promote its services, the Defendant engages in unsolicited
marketing, harming thousands of consumers in the process, Mr.
Bowlby asserts.  He argues that the Defendant's illegal conduct
has resulted in the invasion of privacy, harassment, aggravation,
and disruption of the daily life of thousands of individuals.

High Q is a Florida corporation whose principal office is located
in Plantation, Florida.  High Q is an automotive dealership that
sells vehicles for individuals and businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
          14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 400
          Miami, FL 33132
          Telephone: (305) 479-2299
          E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com


HOSOPO CORPORATION: Accused by "Kiefer" Suit of Invading Privacy
----------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL KIEFER, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. HOSOPO CORPORATION d/b/a HORIZON SOLAR
POWER; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 3:18-cv-01353-
CAB-KSC (S.D. Cal., June 20, 2018), accuses the Defendants of
negligently contacting the Plaintiff on his cellular telephone in
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, thereby,
invading his privacy.

Hosopo Corporation, doing business as Horizon Solar Power, is
solar construction company.  The true names and capacities of the
Doe Defendants are currently unknown to the Plaintiff.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
          Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
          Meghan E. George, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
          21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (877) 206-4741
          Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
          E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
                  abacon@toddflaw.com
                  mgeorge@toddflaw.com


HYUNDAI MOTOR: Smolek Files Suit Over Faulty Theta II Engines
-------------------------------------------------------------
ANDREA SMOLEK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA and KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC.,
Case No. 2:18-cv-05255-CAS-JPR (N.D. Ill., June 16, 2018), arises
from alleged defective Theta II engines found in hundreds of
thousands of Hyundai and Kia vehicles in the United States.

According to the complaint, the Theta II engine's fuel injection
system causes contaminants to enter the engine's oil supply.  
Initial symptoms of the Defect include a knocking noise from the
engine, a reduction in engine power, and engine stalling events.  
When the level of contaminants in the oil supply sufficiently
thicken the Theta II engine's oil supply, the engine fails,
leading to an immediate loss of engine power and power steering.

Hyundai Motor America is a California corporation headquartered
in Fountain Valley, California.  HMA is a subsidiary of Hyundai
Motor Company.  HMA is involved in the design, manufacture,
assembly, marketing, distribution and sale of Affected Hyundai
Vehicles sold in the United States.  HMC is a Korean corporation
headquartered in Seoul, South Korea.

Kia Motors America is a California corporation headquartered in
Irvine, California.  KMA is actively involved in the design,
manufacture, assembly, marketing, distribution, and sale of
Affected Kia Vehicles sold in the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jason S. Rathod, Esq.
          Nicholas Migliaccio, Esq.
          Esfand Nafisi, Esq.
          MIGLIACCIO & RATHOD LLP
          412 H. St. NE, Suite 302
          Washington, DC 20002
          Telephone: (202) 470-3520
          Facsimile: (202) 800-2730
          E-mail: jrathod@classlawdc.com
                  nmigliaccio@classlawdc.com
                  enafisi@classlawdc.com

               - and -

          Stacy M. Bardo, Esq.
          BARDO LAW, P.C.
          22 West Washington Street, Suite 1500
          Chicago, IL 60602
          Telephone: (312) 219-6980
          Facsimile: (312) 219-6981
          E-mail: stacy@bardolawpc.com


IDAHO: To Establish In-House Public Defense Office Amid Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
The Associated Press reports that county commissions in central
Idaho say they are moving forward with a plan to establish an
in-house public defense office rather than continue contracting
lawyers to provide representation for poor people caught in the
criminal justice system.

The Idaho Mountain Express reports that the Blaine County plan
comes at a time when Idaho is facing a class-action lawsuit over
allegations the state's public defense system is faulty and
violates the 6th Amendment rights of its citizens.

County commissioners have recently asked staff to figure out the
cost of building a new four-person public defense department that
would mirror the structure of the prosecuting attorney's office.

Last year, Blaine County spent $364,000 in public defense
contracting fees.  Early estimates of the new department are
expected to be around $600,000 annually. [GN]


ILLEN PRODUCTS: Gorss Challenges Sending of Unsolicited Faxes
-------------------------------------------------------------
GORSS MOTELS, INC., a Connecticut corporation, individually and
as the representative of a class of similarly-situated persons v.
ILLEN PRODUCTS LTD. d/b/a IMPRINT PLUS and CCL INDUSTRIES INC.,
Case No. 3:18-cv-01052 (D. Conn., June 20, 2018), challenges the
Defendants' alleged practice of sending unsolicited facsimiles,
in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991, as
amended by the Junk Fax Prevention Act of 2005.

Illen Products Ltd. is a Canadian corporation that does business
as Imprint Plus.  CCL Industries Inc. is a Canadian corporation.  
On April 12, 2018, CCL acquired all of the stock of Illen.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan M. Kelly, Esq.
          ANDERSON + WANCA
          3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 500
          Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
          Telephone: (847) 368-1500
          E-mail: rkelly@andersonwanca.com


ISSUU INC: Sued by White for Violating TCPA and Invading Privacy
----------------------------------------------------------------
STEPHEN WHITE, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. ISSUU, INC., a Delaware corporation, Case No. 1:18-
cv-00107-MW-GRJ (N.D. Fla., June 18, 2018), arises from the
Defendant's alleged illegal actions in contacting the Plaintiff's
cellular telephone in violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act, thereby, invading his privacy.

Issuu is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
business located in Palo Alto, California.  Issuu is a company
that created and marketed a Web site designed to, among other
things, facilitate the distribution and sharing of digitally
bound media and publications.  Issuu, as a digital publishing
company, is paid by content-providers to publish their content on
its digital platform, along with certain other features,
including marketing and distribution.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jacob L. Phillips, Esq.
          NORMAND PLLC
          62 W. Colonial Dr., Suite 209
          Orlando, FL 32801
          Telephone: (407) 603-6031
          E-mail: jacob@ednormand.com


JC PENNEY: Faces "Hernandez" Suit in N.Y. Over Unsolicited Texts
----------------------------------------------------------------
JANIMARY HERNANDEZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. J. C. PENNEY COMPANY, INC., Case No. 1:18-cv-05759
(S.D.N.Y., June 26, 2018), is brought on behalf of all consumers
in the United States, who have received unsolicited and
unconsented-to commercial text messages to their mobile phones
from the Defendant, in violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.

J. C. Penney Company, Inc., is an online/department store chain
headquartered in Plano, Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C.K. Lee, Esq.
          Anne Seelig, Esq.
          LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
          30 East 39th Street, Second Floor
          New York, NY 10016
          Telephone: (212) 465-1188
          Facsimile: (212) 465-1181
          E-mail: cklee@leelitigation.com


JOHNNY'S PIZZA: Servers File Minimum Wage Class Action
------------------------------------------------------
Ben Nelms, writing for The Citizen, reports that a collective
action lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Georgia in Newnan alleges that Johnny's Pizza
improperly denies its servers federally-mandated minimum wages.
Johnny's Pizza in Fayetteville is not part of the litigation.

Johnny's Pizza in Fayetteville franchise owner Marty Martino said
his location is not involved in the lawsuit and has never
participated in the practices mentioned in the litigation.

The lawsuit alleges that Johnny's Pizza requires servers to share
the tips they earn with dishwashers and others who are paid above
the federally-mandated $7.25 per hour minimum wage.  The lawsuit
also claims that Johnny's Pizza servers are required to perform
non-tip producing work, like side-work, more than 20 percent of
their day.  As a result, the lawsuit contends, Johnny's Pizza has
violated the Fair Labor Standards Act.  Ms. (Rebekah) Ricker
seeks compensation in the form of back pay for all hours in which
she was paid below $7.25.  She seeks such a recovery for all
servers in Georgia who have worked for Johnny's Pizza at any time
in the last three years, according to Barret, Johnston, Martin
and Garrison attorney Daniel Craig.

Speaking of his restaurant in Fayetteville, Mr. Martino said, "In
the three years we have owned Johnny's in Fayetteville, we have
never participated in the practices mentioned.  We pay our
servers a base wage well above what most other restaurants pay.
The servers make and keep their own tips.  The servers, if they
so choose, can share their tips with the dish personnel.  That is
completely up to their discretion and is voluntary.  Some do,
some choose not to.  That is between the server and the dish
personnel, we have no say in the matter."

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of all servers for Johnny's
Pizza in Georgia, said Mr. Craig.

"These workers seek nothing more than what they are owed under
the law," said plaintiffs' counsel David Garrison, of Barrett
Johnston Martin & Garrison, LLC.  "If Johnny's Pizza wants to pay
its servers an hourly wage lower than the federally-mandated
minimum wage, then it must allow them to work like tipped
employees and keep the tips they earn, rather than using that
money to pay its dishwashers and other kitchen workers." [GN]


JOHNNY'S PIZZA: Ricker Seeks to Recover Minimum & Overtime Wages
----------------------------------------------------------------
REBEKAH RICKER, On Behalf of HERSELF and All Others Similarly
Situated v. JOHNNY'S PIZZA, INC. and JOHNNY'S PIZZA FRANCHISE
SYSTEMS, INC., Case No. 3:18-cv-00069-TCB (N.D. Ga., June 14,
2018), seeks to recover alleged unpaid minimum and overtime wages
under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Johnny's Pizza, Inc., is a Georgia corporation with its principal
office located in Newnan, Georgia.  Johnny's Pizza Franchise
Systems, Inc., is a Georgia corporation with its principal office
located in Newnan.

Johnny's Pizza operates a pizza restaurant chain with locations
throughout the state of Georgia.  Johnny's Pizza operates nearly
50 restaurants in many Georgia cities, including Acworth,
Alpharetta, Athens, Atlanta, Bethlehem and Bonaire.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael J. Moore, Esq.
          Aimee J. Hall, Esq.
          POPE, MCGLAMRY, KILPATRICK, MORRISON & NORWOOD, P.C.
          3391 Peachtree Road, NE, Suite 300
          P.O. Box 191625 (31119-1625)
          Atlanta, GA 30326
          Telephone: (404) 523-7706
          E-mail: michaelmoore@pmkm.com
                  aimeehall@pmkm.com

               - and -

          David W. Garrison, Esq.
          Joshua A. Frank, Esq.
          BARRETT JOHNSTON MARTIN & GARRISON, LLC
          Bank of America Plaza
          414 Union Street, Suite 900
          Nashville, TN 37219
          Telephone: (615) 244-2202
          Facsimile: (615) 252-3798
          E-mail: dgarrison@barrettjohnston.com
                  jfrank@barrettjohnston.com


KANAN ENTERPRISES: Accused by "Covington" Suit of FLSA Violations
-----------------------------------------------------------------
VIOLET COVINGTON, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. KANAN ENTERPRISES, INC. d/b/a KING NUT COMPANY, Case
No. 1:18-cv-01453 (N.D. Ohio, June 26, 2018), challenges the
alleged policies and practices of the Defendant that violate the
Fair Labor Standards Act, as well as the Ohio overtime
compensation statute.

Pursuant to its uniform companywide policy, the Defendant rounds
its employees' clock-in time in a manner in which an employee
always loses credit for time actually worked, Ms. Covington
alleges.

Kanan Enterprises, Inc., doing business as King Nut Company, is
an Ohio corporation with its corporate offices located in Solon,
Ohio.  Kanan produces and markets peanuts, nuts, dried fruits,
snacks, soy, snack mixes, granolas, pretzels, chocolates, and
candies.  The Company offers gift certificates and baskets,
animal feeds, and salad toppings.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
          Shannon M. Draher, Esq.
          NILGES DRAHER, LLC
          7266 Portage St., N.W., Suite D
          Massillon, OH 44646
          Telephone: (330) 470-4428
          E-mail: hans@ohlaborlaw.com
                  sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com


KANSAS, USA: "Moore" Suit Seeks to Stop Release of Personal Info
----------------------------------------------------------------
SCOTT MOORE, JAMES LONG, AND NANCY PERRY, on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated v. KRIS KOBACH, in his
individual capacity and official capacity as the Secretary of
State of Kansas, Case No. 2:18-cv-02329-CM-GLR (D. Kan., June 19,
2018), arises from Kris Kobach's alleged reckless disclosure of
private personal information entrusted to him by thousands of
Kansas voters.

The Plaintiffs tell the Court that they bring this action to
enjoin Mr. Kobach from continuing to maintain, share, and release
their sensitive voter registration information, including their
partial social security number, to other states in connection
with the Interstate Voter Registration Crosscheck Program.  They
also seek to remedy past disclosures of their sensitive personal
information exposed as a result of Kansas's participation in
Crosscheck.

Crosscheck is a data comparison program administered by Mr.
Kobach and used to compare voter registration information among
participating states, including Kansas.  The program is free of
charge to participating states and is exclusively funded by
Kansas taxpayers.

Kris W. Kobach is the Secretary of State of the State of Kansas.  
He is the State's chief election official responsible for
overseeing all election related matters, including voter
registration list maintenance, and identifying voters who are
possibly registered in another state.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Lauren Bonds, Esq.
          ACLU FOUNDATION OF KANSAS
          6701 W. 64th St., Suite 210
          Overland Park, KS 66202
          Telephone: (913) 490-4100
          Facsimile: (913) 490-4119
          E-mail: lbonds@aclukansas.org

               - and -

          Mark P. Johnson, Esq.
          DENTONS US LLP
          4520 Main Street, Suite 1100
          Kansas City, MO 64111
          Telephone: (816) 460-2400
          Facsimile: (816) 531-7545
          E-mail: mark.johnson@dentons.com


KANSAS, MO: "Black" Suit Alleges Due Process Rights Violation
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dyanna Black, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated individuals v. City of Kansas, Missouri, Nathan Garrett,
Sly James, Leland Shurin, Mark Tolbert, and Don Wagner, Case No.
4:18-cv-00333 (W.D. Mo., May 1, 2018), is brought against the
Defendants for violations of procedural due process rights
protected by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States
Constitution.

The Plaintiff, Dyanna Black, is a United States citizen who
resides in Kansas City, Missouri.

The Defendant City of Kansas City is a political subdivision and
a municipality of the state of Missouri.

The Individual Defendants are members of the Kansas City Board of
Police Commissioners. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Anthony E. Rothert, Esq.
      Jessie Steffan, Esq.
      ACLU of Missouri Foundation
      906 Olive Street, Suite 1130
      St. Louis, MO 63101
      Tel: (314) 652-3114
      E-mail: arothert@aclu-mo.org
              jsteffan@aclu-mo.org


KANYE WEST: Must Face Lawsuit Over "The Life of Pablo"
------------------------------------------------------
Marc Hogan, writing for the Pitchfork, reports that Kanye West
and Tidal can't dodge a lawsuit that alleges they tricked fans
into subscribing to the streaming service by falsely claiming it
would be the only place to hear West's 2016 album The Life of
Pablo, a judge has ruled.

In an an 18-page opinion, U.S. District Court Judge Gregory Woods
granted parts of Tidal's motions to dismiss the proposed class-
action lawsuit but denied other parts, allowing the case to go
forward as it relates to a tweet West made on February 15, 2016.
In the tweet, West said that The Life of Pablo "will never never
never be on Apple. And it will never be for sale . . . You can
only get it on Tidal." Six weeks later, The Life of Pablo was
available on other platforms, including Apple.

Last year, in a motion to dismiss, West pointed out that The Life
of Pablo was "updated and remixed numerous times, with different
vocals, lyrics, and arrangements." He contended that his tweet
was true because only these newly updated and remixed versions of
The Life of Pablo "have been made available for purchase or
streaming on platforms other than Tidal." In the ruling, the
judge wrote that "Mr. West's argument is tenuous, and certainly
does not pass muster in the context of a motion to dismiss."

The lawsuit was filed in 2016 on behalf of Justin Baker-Rhett,
described in the opinion as a fan of West's music, and others in
a similar situation. Rhett claimed that he subscribed to Tidal
because wrongly believed it was the only place he would ever be
able to hear The Life of Pablo. The judge threw out the lawsuit's
claims that West and Tidal violated New York state law, ruling
that Baker-Rhett's transaction with Tidal didn't have enough of a
connection to New York. The judge also dismissed claims based on
a tweet from Tidal on February 14, 2016 saying that The Life of
Pablo would be streaming "exclusively" on the platform, as well
as claims based on the notion that Tidal falsely concealed from
fans that the album would be exclusive only for six weeks.

A Tidal spokesperson declined to comment. Lawyers for West didn't
immediately respond to Pitchfork's requests for comment.

A lawyer for Baker-Rhett cheered the judge's ruling. "The
defendants made a bunch of arguments to get the case thrown out
but the court accepted our core premise: what we alleged
constitutes consumer fraud," the lawyer, Jay Edelson, Esq. --  
jedelson@edelson.com -- told Pitchfork in an email. "The court
wants us to amend our pleadings and, based on how it decided
certain issues, we won't easily be able to have one nationwide
class. That means that we will be bringing a bunch of state-by-
state class actions. This is a bit of a 'be careful what you wish
for' situation for the defendants."[GN]


KENNETH EISEN: Not Covered Under Policy, Houston Specialty Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
HOUSTON SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. KENNETH EISEN &
ASSOCIATES, LTD., and FREDERICK LUSTER, Individually and as
Putative Class Representative, Case No. 1:18-cv-02985-AT (N.D.
Ga., June 20, 2018), seeks a judicial declaration that Eisen is
not entitled to coverage under the Insurance Policy in issue for
the class action lawsuit against Eisen brought by Frederick
Luster.

The Complaint in the Luster Lawsuit, Case No. 1:15-cv-01428 (RWS)
(N.D. Ga.), seeks an award of actual damages or alternatively,
the $500 per violation statutory penalty damage amount (whichever
is greater), as well statutory treble damages for alleged
repeated violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act by
virtue of Eisen's alleged use of an automatic telephone dialing
system.

Houston Specialty issued to Eisen a $1 Million Miscellaneous
Professional Liability Insurance policy, Policy No. MP 00000122-
00, with a policy period of August l, 2014, to August l, 2015.  
The Plaintiff contends that the Policy excludes from the
definition of Damages, amounts that constitute "penalties."  The
Plaintiff asserts that statutory damages under the TCPA
constitute a penalty and are not covered as Damages under the
Policy.

Houston Specialty is a foreign corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Delaware with its principal place of
business located in Houston, Texas.

Eisen is a foreign corporation organized under the laws of the
state of Arizona with its principal place of business located
Phoenix, Arizona.  Eisen is a debt collection service.  Frederick
Luster is a citizen of the state of Georgia.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Fred M. Valz, III, Esq.
          Melissa L. Bailey, Esq.
          CARLOCK COPELAND & STAIR, LLP
          191 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 3600
          Atlanta, GA 30303
          Telephone: (404) 522- 8220
          E-mail: fvalz@carlockcopeland.com
                  mbailey@carlockcopeland.com


KIM RILEY: Doe Files Suit for Racial Harassment, Verbal Assaults
----------------------------------------------------------------
JON WESTLAKE-TENNIS DOE, Individually and On Behalf of All
Other Similarly Situated Plaintiffs v. KIM RILEY and HALEY
GADDIS, Case No. D-1-GN-18-003064 (Tex. Dist. Ct., Travis Cty.,
June 20, 2018), is brought over alleged racial harassment, verbal
sexual assaults, and the Defendants' ongoing efforts to destroy
the lives of student athletes.

The Plaintiff is a minor (one of many over the years) that has
been terrorized by Kim Riley (being the head tennis coach at
Westlake High School) and Haley Caddis (being the Assistant
Athletic Director for Women), according to the complaint.  The
Plaintiff asserts that no form of retaliation and verbal abuse
was off limits as Defendant Riley selected targeted student
athletes and their respective families.

The Defendants are residents of Travis County, Texas, and are
employed by the Eanes Independent School District.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Terry P. Gorman, Esq.
          Chigozie F. Odediran, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF DONALD G. HENSLEE
          901 Mopac Expressway South, Suite 300
          Austin, TX 78746
          Telephone: (972) 235-4700
          Telecopier: (512) 597-1455
          E-mail: tgorman@school-law.co
                  codediran@school-law.co


KLONDEX MINES: Faces "Baker" Securities Suit Over Sale to Hecla
---------------------------------------------------------------
NELSON BAKER, On Behalf of Himself and All Others Similarly
Situated v. KLONDEX MINES LTD., RICHARD J. HALL, PAUL HUET,
WILLIAM MATLACK, CHARLES OLIVER, BLAIR SCHULTZ, RODNEY COOPER,
MARK DANIEL, and JAMES HAGGARTY, Case No. 3:18-cv-00288 (D. Nev.,
June 15, 2018), is brought against the Company and its Board of
Directors for alleged violations of the Securities and Exchange
Act of 1934 in connection with the proposed acquisition of
Klondex by Hecla Mining Company.

On March 19, 2018, the Board caused the Company to enter into a
definitive arrangement agreement with Hecla and 1156291 B.C.
Unlimited Liability Company ("Merger Sub"), pursuant to which
Klondex will become an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Hecla
and each share of Klondex common stock will be converted into the
right to receive (i) the equivalent of $2.47 in either cash,
shares of Hecla common stock, or a combination of cash and Hecla
shares, plus (ii) 0.125 of a share of Havilah Mining Corporation,
a new company formed to hold Klondex's Canadian assets.

Klondex Mines Ltd. is a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of the Canadian Province of British Columbia with its
principal executive offices located in Reno, Nevada.  The
Individual Defendants are directors and officers of the Company.

Klondex engages in the acquisition, exploration, and development
of mineral resources in the United States and Canada.  Klondex
has 100% interests in three producing mineral properties: the
Fire Creek Mine, the Midas Mine and ore milling facility, and the
Hollister Mine, all of which are located in the state of Nevada.
Klondex also has a 100% interest in the True North Mine and mill
in Manitoba, Canada and the Aurora Mine and ore milling facility,
located in Nevada.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Martin A. Muckleroy, Esq.
          MUCKLEROY LUNT, LLC
          6077 S. Fort Apache Rd., Suite 140
          Las Vegas, NV 89148
          Telephone: (702) 907-0097
          E-mail: martin@muckleroylunt.com

               - and -

          Michael J. Palestina, Esq.
          Christopher R. Tillotson, Esq.
          KAHN SWICK & FOTI, LLC
          1100 Poydras St., Suite 3200
          New Orleans, LA 70163
          Telephone: (504) 455-1400
          Facsimile: (504) 455-1498
          E-mail: Michael.Palestina@ksfcounsel.com
                  Christopher.tillotson@ksfcounsel.com

               - and -

          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
          350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4405
          New York, NY 10118
          Telephone: (212) 971-1341
          Facsimile: (212) 202-7880
          E-mail: jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com


LIBRE TECHNOLOGY: Did Not Properly Pay Agents, "Hudson" Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
EBONY HUDSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. LIBRE TECHNOLOGY INC., doing business as Student Loan
Service, Docupop, and Student Loan Service, US; ANTONY MURIGU;
JASON BLACKBURN; and BRIAN BLACKBURN, Case No. 3:18-cv-01371-GPC-
KSC (S.D. Cal., June 21, 2018), alleges that the Defendants
failed to compensate their call center sales employees/agents for
all time worked, to pay bonuses and to properly calculate the
regular rate of pay.

Libre Technology Inc. is a California Corporation headquartered
in San Diego, California.  Antony Murigu owns and operates Libre
and its related entities.  Jason Blackburn is the Chief Operating
Officer of Libre and its related entities.  Brian Blackburn is
Director of Operations at Libre and its related entities.

Libre is in the debt-relief business.  Libre contacts financially
distressed consumers to offer, and purports to provide,
assistance in applying for U.S. Department of Education student
loan consolidation and repayment programs, including Direct
Consolidation Loans and Income-Based Repayment Plans.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Trenton R. Kashima, Esq.
          FINKELSTEIN & KRINSK, LLP
          550 West C St., Suite 1760
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 238-1333
          Facsimile: (619) 238-5425
          E-mail: trk@classactionlaw.com

               - and -

          Kevin J. Stoops, Esq.
          Charles R. Ash IV, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, Suite 1700
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          Facsimile: (248) 436-8453
          E-mail: kstoops@sommerspc.com
                  crash@sommerspc.com

               - and -

          Jason J. Thompson, Esq.
          Jesse L. Young, Esq.
          SOMMERS SCHWARTZ, P.C.
          One Towne Square, Suite 1700
          Southfield, MI 48076
          Telephone: (248) 355-0300
          Facsimile: (248) 436-8453
          E-mail: jthompson@sommerspc.com
                  jyoung@sommerspc.com


MAROSI INC: "Florian" Suit Seeks to Recoup Wages Under Labor Code
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ARNALDO GARCIA FLORIAN, as an individual and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. MAROSI, INC., a California
Corporation, dba US Connection; and DOES 1 through 100, Case No.
BC709674 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., June 18, 2018),
seeks to recover alleged unpaid wages and penalties under the
California Labor Code and the California Business and Professions
Code.

The Defendants operate a company that transports light, medium,
and heavy-duty vehicles.  The Plaintiff does not know the true
names, capacities, relationships or the extent of participation
of the Doe Defendants.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Paul K. Haines, Esq.
          Fletcher W. Schmidt, Esq.
          Andrew J. Rowbotham, Esq.
          HAINES LAW GROUP, APC
          222 N. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 1550
          El Segundo, CA 90245
          Telephone: (424) 292-2350
          Facsimile: (424) 292-2355
          E-mail: phaines@haineslawgroup.com
                  fschmidt@haineslawgroup.com
                  arowbotham@haineslawgroup.com


MATCH GROUP: "Ditnes" Suit Alleges Consumer Fraud
-------------------------------------------------
Matthew Ditnes, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Match Group, LLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-03128
(N.D. Ill., May 2, 2018), is brought against the Defendant for
violation of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business
Practices Act, violation of the Illinois Dating Referral Services
Act, breach of implied contract and unjust enrichment.

The Plaintiff, Matthew Ditnes, is a natural person domiciled in
Bensalem, Pennsylvania. Plaintiff subscribed to the Defendant's
services.

The Defendant Match Group, LCC is a limited liability company
organized under the laws of Delaware with its principal place of
business in Dallas, Texas. Match claims to be the worldwide
leader of online dating services, operating a portfolio of over
45 brands, including Match, Tinder, PlentyOfFish, among others.
Match is the dating services site used by Plaintiff and the class
defined herein. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      William M. Sweetnam, Esq.
      Natasha Singh, Esq.
      SWEETNAM LLC
      100 North La Salle Street, Suite 2200
      Chicago, IL 60602
      Tel: (312) 757-1888
      E-mail: wms@sweetnamllc.com
              ns@sweetnamllc.com


MCKENZIE FLORAL: Fails to Pay Minimum and OT Wages, Durango Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE DURANGO and SILVINA ABARCA GARCIA, individually and on
behalf of others similarly situated v. MCKENZIE FLORAL INC.
(D/B/A MCKENZIE FLORAL) and DAVID GROENENFELD, Case No. 1:18-cv-
03692 (E.D.N.Y., June 26, 2018), alleges that the Plaintiffs
worked for the Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without
appropriate minimum wage and overtime compensation for the hours
that they worked.

McKenzie Floral Inc., doing business as McKenzie Floral, is a
domestic corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
state of New York.  David Groenenfeld serve or served as owner,
manager, principal, or agent of the Defendant Corporation.

The Defendants own, operate, or control a flower shop, located at
1555 Locust Avenue, in Bohemia, New York, under the name
"McKenzie Floral."  The Defendants' flower shop is located in the
Bohemia section of Suffolk County in New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Michael Faillace, Esq.
          MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 317-1200
          Facsimile: (212) 317-1620
          E-mail: Michael@Faillacelaw.com


MENDEZ FUEL: Accused by Tello of Refusing to Pay Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------------
JOSE BERNABE TELLO, and all others similarly situated under 29
U.S.C. 216(b) v. MENDEZ FUEL HOLDINGS LLC, and MICHAEL MENDEZ,
Case No. 1:18-cv-22431-MGC (S.D. Fla., June 18, 2018), alleges
that the Defendants refused to pay the Plaintiff's overtime wages
as required by the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Mendez Fuel Holdings LLC is a corporation that regularly
transacts business within Miami-Dade County.  Michael Mendez is a
corporate officer, owner or manager of the Defendant Corporation.

The Defendants operate convenience stores, which sell a lineup of
local and popular craft beer, a growler and crowler station;
their own line of organic cold-pressed juices, Fuel Juice Miami;
and gourmet breakfast and lunch menus.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


MERCHANT DIRECT: "Abante" Suit Alleges TCPA Violation
-----------------------------------------------------
Abante Rooter and Plumbing Inc., individually and on behalf of
all similarly situated v. Merchant Direct LLC dba Royal Public
Funding and Does 1 through 10, Case No. 3:18-cv-02670 (N.D.
Calif., May 7, 2018), seeks damages for Defendants' violation of
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

The Plaintiff is a resident of Emeryville, California.

The Defendants is an online marketing company. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
      Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
      Meghan E. George, Esq.
      Tom E. Wheeler, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
      21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780
      Woodland Hills, CA 91367
      Tel: (877) 206-4741
      Fax: (866) 633-0228
      E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
              abacon@toddflaw.com
              mgeorge@toddflaw.com
              twheeler@toddflaw.com


MESSERLI & KRAMER: Debt Collection Violates FDCPA, Walters Claims
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JESSY WALTERS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. MESSERLI & KRAMER, P.A., MIDLAND FUNDING LLC and JOHN
DOES 1-25, Case No. 0:18-cv-01704 (D. Minn., June 21, 2018),
alleges that the Defendants' debt collection efforts attempted or
directed towards the Plaintiff violated various provisions of the
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

M&K is a "debt collector" as the phrase is defined in 15 U.S.C.
Section 1692(a)(6) and used in the FDCPA with an address in
Plymouth, Minnesota.  Midland is a "debt collector" as the phrase
is defined in 15 U.S.C. Section 1692(a)(6) and used in the FDCPA
with an address in San Diego, California.

The Defendants are companies that use the mail, telephone, and
facsimile and regularly engage in business the principal purpose
of which is to attempt to collect debts alleged to be due
another.  The identities of the Doe Defendants are presently
unknown.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Avraham Zvi Cutler, Esq.
          BALLON STOLL BADER & NADLER
          729 7th Ave., 17th Floor
          New York, NY 10019
          Telephone: (718) 578-7711
          E-mail: avicutler@gmail.com


METLIFE INC: "Roycroft" Suit Asserts Unjust Enrichment
------------------------------------------------------
EDWARD ROYCROFT, individually and on behalf of all those
similarly situated v. METLIFE, INC., METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE
COMPANY and BRIGHTHOUSE FINANCIAL, Case No. 1:18-cv-05481
(S.D.N.Y., June 18, 2018), accuses the Defendants of conversion
and unjust enrichment relating to MetLife's taking of retirement
annuity benefits from retirees.

Mr. Roycroft also seeks an accounting from MetLife for the
amounts taken, interest, and disgorgement of unlawful profits.  
Through the Class Action, he seeks to hold MetLife accountable
for its conversion of more than $500 million in retirement
benefits, interest, and unlawful profits over the last 25 years -
- depriving retirees of important income in their golden years.  
He contends that MetLife's systematic conversion of retirement
annuity benefits betrayed thousands of annuitants and their
beneficiaries.

MetLife, Inc., is a holding company for Metropolitan Life
Insurance Company ("MLIC").  MetLife is organized under the laws
of the state of Delaware, with its principal place of business in
New York City.  As of the date of this Complaint, it has a market
capitalization of almost $50 billion.

MLIC is among the largest providers of annuities in the world,
recording $22.4 billion in sales during 2009.  MLIC offers
annuities which consist of fixed annuities, variable annuities,
deferred annuities and immediate annuities.  MLIC is a New York
corporation with its principal place of business in New York.

Brighthouse Financial, Inc., was formed by MetLife in 2017
through the spinoff of MetLife's United States retail business,
including individual life insurance and annuities for the retail
market.  Brighthouse is a Delaware corporation with a place of
business in New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kevin Barrett, Esq.
          BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
          137 Betsy Brown Road
          Port Chester, NY 10573
          Telephone: (646) 776-8580
          E-mail: kbarrett@baileyglasser.com

               - and -

          Gregory Y. Porter, Esq.
          BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
          1054 31st Street, NW, Suite 230
          Washington, DC 20007
          Telephone: (202) 463-2101
          E-mail: gporter@baileyglasser.com

               - and -

          Norman Berman, Esq.
          Nathaniel L. Orenstein, Esq.
          Mark A. Delaney, Esq.
          John H. Sutter, Esq.
          BERMAN TABACCO
          One Liberty Square
          Boston, MA 02109
          Telephone: (617) 542-8300
          E-mail: nberman@bermantabacco.com
                  norenstein@bermantabacco.com
                  mdelaney@bermantabacco.com
                  jsutter@bermantabacco.com


MILLER EMS: Accused by "Wilson" Suit of Not Paying OT Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
KYLIE WILSON, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated
v. MILLER EMS, LLC, Case No. 5:18-cv-00597-M (W.D. Okla., June
19, 2018), accuses the Defendant of failure to pay wages,
including overtime wages, in violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

Miller EMS, LLC, is a domestic corporation doing business in
Grant County, Oklahoma.  The Defendant is a private entity that
contracts with Oklahoma counties and towns to provide emergency
medical services.  The Defendant is an entity engaging in
interstate commerce, including making transfers of patients
outside of the state of Oklahoma, advertising on at least one Web
site reaching out of state applicants, and advertises its
services outside of Oklahoma, including transferring patients
outside of Oklahoma.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark E. Hammons, Esq.
          Amber L. Hurst, Esq.
          Kristin E. Richards, Esq.
          HAMMONS, GOWENS, HURST & ASSOC.
          325 Dean A. McGee Avenue
          Oklahoma City, OK 73102
          Telephone: (405) 235-6100
          Facsimile: (405) 235-6111
          E-mail: mark@hammonslaw.com
                  amber@hammonslaw.com
                  kristin@hammonslaw.com


MITEL NETWORKS: Cuddihey Challenges Acquisition by Searchlight
--------------------------------------------------------------
RICK CUDDIHEY, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated v. MITEL NETWORKS CORPORATION, TERENCE H. MATTHEWS,
RICHARD D. MCBEE, JOHN P. MCHUGH, PETER D. CHARBONNEAU, BENJAMIN
H. BALL, DAVID M. WILLIAMS, MARTHA H. BEJAR, and SUDHAKAR
RAMAKRISHNA, Case No. 1:18-cv-05561 (S.D.N.Y., June 20, 2018),
arises from the proposed acquisition of Mitel by affiliates of
Searchlight Capital Partners, L.P.

On April 23, 2018, Mitel's board of directors caused the Company
to enter into an Arrangement Agreement with Searchlight, pursuant
to which Mitel shareholders will receive $11.15 for each share of
Mitel stock they own.

Mitel is a Canadian Corporation with its principal executive
offices located in Ontario, Canada.  The Individual Defendants
are directors and officers of Mitel.

Mitel, incorporated on January 31, 2014, is a provider of
business communications and collaboration software, services, and
solutions.  The Company operates through three segments:
Enterprise, Cloud, and Mobile.  The Enterprise segment sells and
supports products and services for premise-based customers.  The
Cloud segment sells and supports products that are deployed in a
cloud environment.  The Mobile segment sells and supports
software-based telecommunications networking solutions that
enable mobile service providers to deliver IP-based voice, video,
rich communications, and enhanced messaging services to their
subscribers.

Searchlight is a private equity firm specializing in investments
in business acquisitions, growth equity, recapitalizations,
complex situations, distressed-debt-for-control, and leveraged
buyouts.  Searchlight has $3.9 billion of assets under
management. Searchlight's funds invest in companies in various
sectors, including communications, media, consumer and business
services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Juan E. Monteverde, Esq.
          MONTEVERDE & ASSOCIATES PC
          The Empire State Building
          350 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4405
          New York, NY 10118
          Telephone: (212) 971-1341
          Facsimile: (212) 202-7880
          E-mail: jmonteverde@monteverdelaw.com


MONSANTO COMPANY: "Wapsie" Suit Asserts Market Manipulation
-----------------------------------------------------------
WAPSIE FARMS, on behalf of itself and others similarly situated
v. MONSANTO COMPANY, Case No. 6:18-cv-02039-LRR (N.D. Iowa, June
21, 2018), accuses Monsanto of conspiring, agreeing and combining
with other major biotech firms to unlawfully dominate the soybean
seed and herbicide trait markets.

The Plaintiff accuses Monsanto of irresponsibly commercializing
its Roundup Ready 2 Xtend soybean seeds.  The Plaintiff contends
that Monsanto knew full well that commercializing dicamba-
tolerant technology would cause a spike in the use of dicamba, a
dangerous and toxic herbicide, because the exclusive feature of
its patented Roundup Ready 2 Xtend seeds is the seeds' tolerance
to dicamba.  The Plaintiff adds that Monsanto and its co-
conspirators' commercialization of dicamba-tolerant seeds has
created a distorted and monopolized market, a market manipulated
by and susceptible to Monsanto's domination.

Headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, Monsanto is a Delaware
corporation and is one of the largest multi-national corporations
in the world.  Monsanto develops, markets, and sells crop
protection and biotechnology products, including GM crop seeds
and herbicide-tolerant traits.  Of special significance in this
case, Monsanto's dicamba-based system includes GM seeds, such as
its recently-commercialized Roundup Ready 2 Xtend Soybean, along
with a dicamba-herbicide known as XtendiMax with VaporGrip
Technology.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ward A. (Sam) Rouse, Esq.
          ROUSE LAW, PC
          4940 Pleasant Street
          West Des Moines, IA 50266
          Telephone: (515) 223-9000
          Facsimile: (866) 223-9005
          E-mail: wardrouse@rouselaw.us


MUD MIXERS: "Ashcraft" Suit Seeks to Recover OT Pay Under FLSA
--------------------------------------------------------------
MICHAEL T. ASHCRAFT, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. MUD MIXERS, LLC, Q'MAX SOLUTIONS, AND Q'MAX
AMERICA, INC., Case No. 4:18-cv-01995 (S.D. Tex., June 15, 2018),
is brought to recover unpaid overtime wages and other damages
under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Mud Mixers, LLC, is an Oklahoma corporation doing business
throughout the United States, including Texas.  Mud Mixers is a
drilling fluids company.

Q'Max Solutions and Q'Max America, Inc., are Delaware
corporations, with global headquarters located in Houston, Texas.  
The Q'Max Defendants are oil and natural gas exploration and
production companies operating throughout the United States,
including Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
          Richard M. Schreiber, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 352-1100
          Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
          E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                  adunlap@mybackwages.com
                  rschreiber@mybackwages.com

               - and -

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


MULTICARE: Patients Got Calls From Debt Collectors, Suit Says
-------------------------------------------------------------
Alexis Krell, writing for The News Tribune, reports that Low-
income patients in Tacoma have sued MultiCare, alleging the
hospital system failed to screen them for free or discounted care
before sending them to debt collectors.

Joncee Hull and Sharon Shrout argue in their class action that
they were underinsured, couldn't afford the MultiCare bills for
treatment at Tacoma General Hospital and Mary Bridge Children's
Hospital and should have qualified for so-called "charity care"
under state law.

MultiCare subjected "uninsured and underinsured patients to
collection efforts without first affirmatively screening them to
determine their financial eligibility for free or discounted
hospital care," the lawsuit alleges.

Asked about the allegations, MultiCare said in a statement that
it believes it is fully complying with the charity care law, and
that the lawsuit "has no merit."

According to the statement, "... both patients had health
insurance. Under state law, when a patient has coverage, the
hospital is permitted to bill insurance or other coverage
sources, even if the patient is indigent. If the patient does not
have insurance, or if insurance requires the patient to pay a
portion of the bill, payment may be reduced or forgiven if the
patient meets the criteria for charity care."

The MultiCare hospitals aren't the only local ones accused of
mishandling so-called charity care.

The state Attorney General's Office sued St. Joseph Medical
Center in Tacoma and Capital Medical Center in Olympia last year,
alleging they withheld charity care from thousands of low-income
patients.

The state's Charity Care Act says patients qualify for free or
discounted care if their income is below 200 percent of the
federal poverty level -- $48,600 a year in the case of a family
of four, according to the MultiCare suit.

It also requires hospitals to screen patients "at or near the
time of service," the complaint states, and "before any
collection efforts," to decide if they meet the threshold.

"The state of Washington legislated to try to help people that
are indigent by making it mandatory to screen for indigent
patients," Abbas Kazerounian, one of their attorneys representing
Hull and Shrout in the MultiCare suit, told The News Tribune.
"It's a very important policy lawsuit to make sure that indigent
patients are treated fairly by Washington law in the future."

The complaint, filed May 3 in U.S. District Court, seeks
"recovery of excess payments" that the patients made to
MultiCare, unspecified damages under the state's Consumer
Protection Act and that MultiCare be required by the court to
comply with the Charity Care Act.

The suit gives this account of Hull's and Shrout's interactions
with MultiCare:

Hull, a 40-year-old mother with multiple children, works as a
front office supervisor at a hotel.

She had her gallbladder removed at Tacoma General in May 2016,
after which MultiCare sent her to collections without screening
her for charity care and without contacting her about the bill.

Hull alleges the first she heard about the matter was when a
collection agency contacted her.

Shrout, a 38-year-old recruiter for a technology company, brought
her daughter to Mary Bridge Children on May 2, 2017, for
treatment of an injury.

Shrout was sent to a debt collector, without MultiCare screening
her for charity care.

Citing the pending litigation, attorney Kazerounian said he
didn't want to discuss specifics of the daughter's injury, or the
cost of the hospital bills for Hull or Shrout.

MultiCare's statement said its hospitals tell patients about
charity care and other financial assistance throughout
registration and billing. It also argued that MultiCare's charity
care is above state and regional averages.

"In 2016, our charity care represented 5.5 percent of adjusted
revenue, well above the state average of 4.4 percent, and we
helped 34,996 patients receive financial assistance with $101
million in bills for care at a MultiCare hospital or clinic," the
statement said.[GN]


NAKATO SC INC: Pointer Seeks to Recover Wages Under FLSA, SCPWA
---------------------------------------------------------------
EVANGELINE POINTER, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. NAKATO SC, INC. d/b/a NAKATO JAPANESE STEAKHOUSE and
JOHN DOES 1-10, Case No. 4:18-cv-01629-RBH (D.S.C., June 14,
2018), is brought for payment of wages and for other relief under
the Fair Labor Standards Act and the South Carolina Payment of
Wages Act.

Nakato is a South Carolina corporation maintaining offices and
agents in the county of Horry, South Carolina.  The Doe
Defendants are citizens and residents of South Carolina, and
owners or officers of Nakato.

Nakato operates a restaurant in Horry County doing business as
Nakato Japanese Steakhouse.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bruce E. Miller, Esq.
          BRUCE E. MILLER, P.A.
          147 Wappoo Creek Drive, Suite 603
          Charleston, SC 29412
          Telephone: (843) 579-7373
          Facsimile: (843) 614-6417
          E-mail: bmiller@brucemillerlaw.com


NEWALTA ENVIRONMENTAL: Fails to Pay OT Wages, "Berryman" Alleges
----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRIS BERRYMAN, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. NEWALTA ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, INC., Case
No. 2:18-cv-00793-NBF (W.D. Pa., June 15, 2018), alleges that the
Plaintiff and the class regularly worked for Newalta in excess of
40 hours each week without receiving proper overtime, in
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Pennsylvania
Minimum Wage Act.

Newalta is a Canadian based company operating throughout the
United States, including in Pennsylvania, Colorado, North Dakota,
and Texas.  Newalta is an "Environmental Energy Solutions
Company."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
          Jennifer M. Solak, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 352-1100
          Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
          E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                  adunlap@mybackwages.com
                  jsolak@mybackwages.com

               - and -

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

               - and -

          Joshua P. Geist, Esq.
          GOODRICH & GEIST, P.C.
          3634 California Ave.
          Pittsburgh, PA 15212
          Telephone: (412) 766-1455
          Facsimile: (412)766-0300
          E-mail: josh@goodrichandgeist.com


NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS: LEHB Seeks Damages for Exforge Buyers
---------------------------------------------------------------
LAW ENFORCEMENT HEALTH BENEFITS INC., on behalf of itself and all
others similarly situated v. NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS
CORPORATION; NOVARTIS AG; NOVARTIS CORPORATION; PAR
PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.; ENDO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; and ENDO
INTERNATIONAL PLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-05603 (S.D.N.Y., June 20,
2018), seeks damages, measured as overcharges, trebled where
available under applicable law, against the Defendants on behalf
of indirect purchasers based on allegations of anticompetitive
conduct in the market for Exforge(R) and its AB-rated generic
equivalents.

LEHB, a voluntary employee benefits plan organized to provide
health benefits to its eligible participants and beneficiaries,
alleges that the Defendants entered into a pay-for-delay
agreement whereby (1) Par agreed not to compete in the market for
Exforge(R) from at least September 21, 2012, until September 30,
2014, thereby allocating the entire Exforge(R) market to Novartis
until that date; and (2) Novartis agreed not to compete in the
generic Exforge(R) market from September 30, 2014, to March 30,
2015, thereby allocating the entire market for generic versions
of Exforge(R) to Par for that six-month period.  LEHB contends
that the purpose and effect of the agreement between Defendants
was, among other things, to delay generic entry of Exforge(R) in
order to lengthen the period in which Novartis' brand Exforge(R)
could monopolize the market and make supra-competitive profits.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation is a corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware with a
principal place of business in East Hanover, New Jersey.  
Novartis Pharmaceuticals develops, manufactures, sells, and
markets Novartis Corporation's and Novartis AG's drugs in the
United States.  Novartis AG is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of Switzerland, having an office and a
place of business in Basel, Switzerland.

Novartis Corporation is a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the state of New York, having its principal
place of business in East Hanover.  Novartis Corporation handles
the administration, sales, and marketing of a wide variety of
prescription drugs, vaccines, consumer medicines, and veterinary
products, including Exforge(R).

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., was a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the state of New York and having its
principal place of business in Chestnut Ridge, New York.

Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., is a Delaware corporation having its
principal place of business in Chadds Ford, Pennsylvania.  Endo
International plc is a private limited company incorporated and
existing under the laws of Ireland having its principal place of
business in Dublin, Ireland, and a U.S. headquarters in Malvern,
Pennsylvania.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert G. Eisler, Esq.
          Deborah A. Elman, Esq.
          Chad B. Holtzman, Esq.
          Allison J. McCowan, Esq.
          GRANT & EISENHOFER P.A.
          485 Lexington Avenue
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (646) 722-8500
          Facsimile: (646) 722-8501
          E-mail: reisler@gelaw.com
                  delman@gelaw.com
                  choltzman@gelaw.com
                  amccowan@gelaw.com


NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS: Shuts Exforge Competition, UFCW Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
UFCW LOCAL 1500 WELFARE FUND, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly situated v. NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION and
PAR PHARMACEUTICAL, INC., Case No. 1:18-cv-05536-UA (S.D.N.Y.,
June 19, 2018), stems from the Defendants' alleged
anticompetitive scheme to unreasonably restrain competition in
the market for Exforge(R) and its AB-rated generic equivalents
sold in the United States.

The action challenges the Defendants' alleged anticompetitive
agreement to delay generic competition in the United States for
Exforge, a drug product indicated for the treatment of
hypertension comprising the active ingredients amlodipine and
valsartan.  The Plaintiff seeks damages arising out of Novartis's
unlawful agreement with Par not to compete in the market for
Exforge and its AB-rated generic equivalents.

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation is a corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware with a
principal place of business located in East Hanover, New Jersey.  
Novartis is a subsidiary of Novartis AG.  Novartis researches,
develops, manufactures & markets innovative prescription drug
treatments for diseases and conditions.

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc., is located in Chestnut Ridge, New York.  
Par principally develops, manufactures, and markets generic
versions of brand name drugs.  Par is also the holder of the ANDA
for generic Exforge and was responsible for manufacturing and
distributing generic Exforge.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gregory S. Asciolla, Esq.
          Jay L. Himes, Esq.
          Karin E. Garvey, Esq.
          Robin A. van der Meulen, Esq.
          Domenico Minerva, Esq.
          Matthew J. Perez, Esq.
          LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
          140 Broadway New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 907-0700
          Facsimile: (212) 818-0477
          E-mail: gasciolla@labaton.com
                  jhimes@labaton.com
                  kgarvey@labaton.com
                  rvandermeulen@labaton.com
                  dminerva@labaton.com
                  mperez@labaton.com

               - and -

          Roberta D. Liebenberg, Esq.
          Paul Costa, Esq.
          Adam J. Pessin, Esq.
          FINE, KAPLAN AND BLACK, R.P.C.
          One South Broad Street, 23rd Floor
          Philadelphia, PA 19107
          Telephone: (215) 567-6565
          Facsimile: (215) 568-5872
          E-mail: rliebenberg@finekaplan.com
                  pcosta@finekaplan.com
                  apessin@finekaplan.com


NOVACOPY INC: Accused by Shelton of Discrimination Against Women
----------------------------------------------------------------
HAYLEY SHELTON, on behalf of herself and others similarly
situated v. NOVACOPY, INC. and NOVATECH, INC., Case No. 3:18-cv-
00558 (M.D. Tenn., June 14, 2018), accuses the Defendants of
engaging in a pattern and practice of discrimination and
retaliation against women on the basis of their gender in terms
of pay, working conditions, exposure to sexual harassment and
promotional opportunities and complaints.

NovaCopy, Inc., now known as Novatech, Inc., provides copier and
document solutions.  The Company offers invoice processing,
copier equipment, leasing options, consulting, hosting solutions,
mobile access, software, and maintenance services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Donna J. Mikel, Esq.
          H. Eric Burnette, Esq.
          BURNETTE, DOBSON & PINCHAK
          711 Cherry Street
          Chattanooga, TN 37402
          Telephone: (423) 266-2121
          Facsimile: (423) 266-3324
          E-mail: dmikel@bdplawfirm.com
                  eburnette@bdplawfirm.com


ORTSAC MANAGEMENT: Fails to Pay Overtime, "Rodriguez" Suit Says
---------------------------------------------------------------
JULIA RODRIGUEZ, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. ORTSAC MANAGEMENT, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability
Company; SOFIA CASTRO, individually, and ROBERT CASTRO,
individually, Case No. 0:18-cv-61340-DPG (S.D. Fla., June 14,
2018), alleges that the Defendants did not pay the Plaintiff
overtime even though she worked more than 40 hours per week in
most, if not all, of the weeks she worked for them.

ORTSAC is a family owned investment firm focused on developing a
portfolio of premium rental properties.  The Company manages and
develops rental homes and multifamily apartments.  The Individual
Defendants are owners and managing members of ORTSAC.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Steven L. Schwarzberg, Esq.
          SCHWARZBERG & ASSOCIATES
          2751 South Dixie Highway, Suite 400
          West Palm Beach, FL 33405
          Telephone: (561) 659-3300
          Facsimile: (561) 693-4540
          E-mail: steve@schwarzberglaw.com


PACESETTER PERSONNEL: "Lopez" Suit Alleges FCRA Violations
----------------------------------------------------------
Jovan Lopez, on behalf of himself and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Pacesetter Personnel Service of Florida,
Inc., Case No. 71654364 (Fla. Cir. Ct., May 3, 2018), is brought
against the Defendant for violations of the Fair Credit Reporting
Act of 1970.

The Plaintiff, Jovan Lopez lives in Florida. The Plaintiff
applied for work with the Defendant.

The Defendant is a staffing agency in Florida. The Defendant
conducts background checks on the majority of its prospective
employees as part of a standard screening process. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Brandon J. Hill, Esq.
      Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
      WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, P.A.
      1110 N. Florida Avenue, Suite 300
      Tampa, FL 33602
      Tel: (813) 224-0431
      Fax: (813) 229-8712
      E-mail: lcabassa@wfclaw.com
              bhill@wfclaw.com
           

PECOS VALLEY: Rager Seeks to Recoup Minimum, OT Wages for Drivers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
WILLIAM RAGER, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
persons v. PECOS VALLEY PIZZA, INC. and BRIAN BAILEY, Case No.
2:18-cv-00571-GJF-KRS (D.N.M., June 19, 2018), is brought as a
collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the New
Mexico Minimum Wage Act to recover alleged unpaid minimum wages
and overtime hours owed to the Plaintiff and other delivery
drivers employed by the Defendants at its Domino's stores.

Pecos Valley Pizza, Inc., is a Domestic Profit Corporation.  
Brian Bailey is an owner, officer and director of Pecos Valley.

The Defendants own and operate numerous Domino's franchise
stores.  The Defendants employ delivery drivers, who use their
own automobiles to deliver pizza and other food items to their
customers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          J. Forester, Esq.
          Matthew Haynie, Esq.
          FORESTER HAYNIE PLLC
          1701 N. Market Street, Suite 210
          Dallas, TX 75202
          Telephone: (214) 210-2100
          Facsimile: (214) 346-5909
          E-mail: jay@foresterhaynie.com
                  matthew@foresterhaynie.com


PENNSYLVANIA: Diamond Sues Over PSEA's "Fair-share Fees"
--------------------------------------------------------
Arthur Diamond, on behalf of himself and others similarly
situated; Jeffrey Schawartz and Sandra H. Ziegler, on behalf of
themselves others similar situated v. Pennsylvania State
Education Association; Chestnut Ridge Education Association, as
representative of the class of all chapters and affiliates of the
Pennsylvania State Education Association; National Education
Association; Tom Wolf, in his official capacity as governor of
Pennsylvania; Josh Shapiro, in his official capacity as Attorney
General of Pennsylvania; James M. Darby, Albert Mezzaroba, and
Robert H. Shoop Jr., in their official capacities as chairman and
members of the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board; Lesley
Childers-Potts, in her official capacity as district attorney of
Bedford County, and as representative of the class of all
district attorneys in Pennsylvania with the authority to
prosecute violations of 71 Pa. Stat. Section 575, Case No. 3:18-
cv-00128-KRG (W.D. Pa., June 15, 2018), is brought on behalf of
current or former public-school teachers, who have been required
to pay "fair-share fees" to the PSEA, its affiliates, or a union-
approved charity.

The Defendants have violated the Plaintiffs' constitutional
rights by requiring them to pay these "fair-share fees" as a
condition of their employment, even though they do not belong to
the union and do not wish to subsidize the union's activities in
any way, the Plaintiffs contend.  The Plaintiffs argue that the
PSEA's compelled extraction of money from them and their fellow
class members violates their constitutional rights -- regardless
of whether union keeps the money for itself or directs it toward
a union-approved charity.

Pennsylvania State Education Association (PSEA) is a labor union
whose headquarters are located in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.  
Chestnut Ridge Education Association is a local union chapter
affiliated with the PSEA.  National Education Association (NEA)
is a labor union whose headquarters are located in Washington,
DC.

Tom Wolf is the governor of Pennsylvania.  Josh Shapiro is the
Attorney General of Pennsylvania.  James M. Darby is chairman of
the Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, and Defendants Albert
Mezzaroba and Robert H. Shoop Jr. are members of the Pennsylvania
Labor Relations Board.  Lesley Childers-Potts is the district
attorney of Bedford County.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Sean Logue, Esq.
          LOGUE LAW PLLC
          27 West Main Street
          Carnegie, PA 15106
          Telephone: (412) 389-0805
          E-mail: sean@seanloguelaw.com

               - and -

          Jonathan F. Mitchell, Esq.
          MITCHELL LAW PLLC
          106 East Sixth Street, Suite 900
          Austin, TX 78701
          Telephone: (512) 686-3940
          E-mail: jonathan@mitchell.law


PG&E CORPORATION: Faces "Moretti" Suit Over False Statements
------------------------------------------------------------
JON PAUL MORETTI, Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. PG&E CORPORATION, ANTHONY F. EARLEY, JR.,
JASON P. WELLS, GEISHA J. WILLIAMS, CHRISTOPHER P. JOHNS, DINYAR
B. MISTRY, and DAVID S. THOMASON, Case No. 3:18-cv-03545 (N.D.
Cal., June 14, 2018), seeks to recover compensable damages caused
by the Defendants' alleged violations of the federal securities
laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934.

Throughout the Class Period, the Plaintiff alleges, the
Defendants made false and misleading statements, and failed to
disclose that: (i) PG&E had failed to maintain electricity
transmission and distribution networks in compliance with safety
requirements and regulations promulgated under state law; (ii)
consequently, PG&E was in violation of state laws and
regulations; (iii) PG&E's noncompliant electricity networks could
foreseeably cause wildfires in California; and (iv) as a result
of the foregoing, Defendants' statements about the Company's
business and operations were materially false and misleading at
all relevant times.

Founded in 1905, PG&E is headquartered in San Francisco,
California.  PG&E is a holding company that holds interests in
energy based businesses.  The Company's leading operating
subsidiary is Pacific Gas and Electric Company, a public utility
operating in northern and central California that provides
electricity and natural gas distribution, electricity generation,
procurement, and transmission, and natural gas procurement,
transportation, and storage.  The Company generates revenues
mainly through the sale and delivery of electricity and natural
gas to customers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

               - and -

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

               - and -

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


PINEVILLE MUNICIPAL: Subject of Class Action Lawsuit
----------------------------------------------------
Annie Moore, writing for WVVA.com, reports that after a Wyoming
County water company was forced to notify customers it did not
submit necessary water testing on time in 2017, WVVA News has
learned the company is now the subject of a class action suit.

Attorneys Stephen New, Esq., Adam Taylor, Esq., and Mandy Taylor,
Esq., filed the suit on June 19 on behalf of clients with health
concerns they believe may be related to the quality of the water
in Pineville.

"I have very fond memories of growing up in Pineville," said Adam
Taylor. "It breaks my heart to think that maybe things on a
fundamental level there are not safe."

After WVVA News broke the story on June 23, Pineville Municipal
Water responded to the missed reports by saying their water
supply is safe and that the missed reports are just a mail mixup.
A company spokesperson said they now send the reports by
certified mail.

But attorneys on the class action suit are not buying that story.

"Our law firms have been contacted by individuals in Pineville
and Wyoming County that seem to be related to the substances in
the water," said New.

Taylor's father, a Pineville resident, was diagnosed with Kidney
cancer in 2017. "He looks to be on the up and up now. But he
lived a very healthy life up until that point and it seemed very
strange to me and everyone around that this would be something he
came down with."

Whether his father's cancer is related to the quality of the
water remains to be seen.

"We don't have a tremendous amount of faith that people are being
candid about what's going on there. We need answers and we need
to get them soon," said Taylor.

The attorneys encourage any Pineville Municipal Water customers
with or without health concerns to contact the law offices of
Stephen New at  (304) 250-6017 or Taylor & Hinkle at (304) 894-
8733. Residents without health concerns may be eligible for
medical monitoring should future health problems arise.[GN]


PRECISION GROUP: Fails to Pay Oilfield Workers' OT, Elizondo Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
FELIPE ELIZONDO, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. PRECISION GROUP ENERGY SERVICES, INC. and
HAROEEL A. GODINEZ, Case No. 5:18-cv-00597 (W.D. Tex., June 15,
2018), alleges that the Plaintiff and similarly situated oilfield
workers were not paid overtime of at least one and one-half their
regular rates for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours per
workweek.

Precision Group Energy Services, Inc., is a Texas for-profit
corporation.  Precision provides oilfield services to the oil and
gas industry throughout the state of Texas.  Precision is owned
and operated by Haroeel A. Godinez.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Clif Alexander, Esq.
          Lauren E. Braddy, Esq.
          Alan Clifton Gordon, Esq.
          Carter T. Hastings, Esq.
          ANDERSON ALEXANDER, PLLC
          819 N. Upper Broadway
          Corpus Christi, TX 78401
          Telephone: (361) 452-1279
          Facsimile: (361) 452-1284
          E-mail: clif@a2xlaw.com
                  lauren@a2xlaw.com
                  cgordon@a2xlaw.com
                  carter@a2xlaw.com


PURDUE PHARMA: "Chu" Suit Alleges RICO Act Violations
-----------------------------------------------------
Jordan Chu, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Purdue Pharma L.P. et al., Case No. 3:18-cv-02576
(N.D. Calif., May 2, 2018), is brought against the Defendants for
violations of the California's Unfair Competition Law and the
Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants have engaged in a
cunning and deceptive marketing scheme to encourage doctors and
patients to use opioids to treat chronic pain. In doing so, the
Defendants falsely minimized the risks of opioids, overstated
their benefits, and generated far more opioid prescriptions than
there should have been.

The Plaintiff Jordan Chu is a natural person and resident and
citizen of the State of California.

The Defendants manufacture, market, sell, and distribute
prescription opioids, which are powerful, highly addictive
narcotic painkillers. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq.
      Todd Logan, Esq.
      EDELSON PC
      123 Townsend Street, Suite 100
      San Francisco, CA 94107
      Tel: (415) 212-9300
      Fax: (415) 373-9435
      E-mail: rbalabanian@edelson.com
              tlogan@edelson.com


PVH RETAIL: "Olmedo" Suit Removed From State Court to S.D. Cal.
---------------------------------------------------------------
PVH Retail Stores LLC removed on June 21, 2018, the lawsuit
styled MIGUEL OLMEDO, and SIOBHAN MORROW on behalf of themselves
and all others similarly situated v. PVH RETAIL STORES LLC, a
Delaware Limited Liability Company, and DOES 1-20, Case No. 37-
2018-00019565-CUMC-CTL, from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of San Diego to the U.S. District Court
for the Southern District of California.  The District Court
Clerk assigned Case No. 3:18-cv-01373-BEN-JLB to the proceeding.

The action is related to a prior lawsuit filed on February 10,
2016, by one of the plaintiffs in this action, Plaintiff Siobhan
Morrow, entitled Morrow v. PVH Corp., PVH Retail Stores LLC,
Calvin Klein, Inc., and Tommy Hilfiger Wholesale, Inc., Case No.
3:16-cv-00348-L-RBB (S.D. Cal.) (the "Prior Related Action).  The
complaint in the Prior Related Action alleged, inter alia, that:
(i) on November 13, 2015, Morrow purchased a black tee shirt and
a black polo shirt from a Tommy Hilfiger factory outlet store
located in San Ysidro, California; (ii) the items were advertised
as having originally been priced at, respectively, $33.99 and
$59.40; (iii) PVH Retail's advertising represented that these
purported original prices were being discounted by approximately
"50% off"; (iv) Morrow purchased the items in reliance on the
representations by PVH Retail; and (v) the representations were
false and deceptive as the items had never actually been offered
for sale at the $33.99 and $59.40 advertised "original" prices.  
On July 28, 2017, Morrow voluntary dismissed the Prior Related
Action without prejudice.

On April 18, 2018, Morrow and Plaintiff Miguel Olmedo filed their
initial class action Complaint in this action.  With four
exceptions, Morrow's charging allegations in the Complaint in
this action were essentially similar to her allegations in her
complaint in the Prior Related Action.  However, unlike the
complaint in the Prior Related Action, the Complaint in this
action: (i) named Tommy Hilfiger Wholesale, Inc., rather than PVH
Retail, as the defendant; (ii) alleged that the two shirts Morrow
purchased were advertised as having originally been priced at
"approximately $27.00 to $29.00" and "approximately $49.50"
rather than $33.99 and $59.40; (iii) alleged that the discounted
price paid by Morrow was a 40% discount off the reference price,
rather than a 50% discount; and (iv) because the Complaint was
filed in Superior Court, rather than in United States District
Court, omitted the jurisdictional allegations in the Prior
Related Action that the matter in controversy, exclusive of
interest and costs, exceeds the sum or value of $5 million and
there are "hundreds of thousands" of unnamed class members.[BN]

Defendant PVH RETAIL STORES is represented by:

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


QUALCOMM INC: Jadhav Sues Over Broadcom's Frustrated Acquisition
----------------------------------------------------------------
SANDESH JADHAV, Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, STEVEN M. MOLLENKOPF
and GEORGE S. DAVIS, Case No. 3:18-cv-01457-BEN-MDD (S.D. Cal.,
June 26, 2018), is brought on behalf of all persons, who
purchased Qualcomm securities between January 31, 2018, and March
12, 2018, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934.

The complaint alleges that the Defendants made materially false
and misleading statements and failed to disclose to investors
that Qualcomm had secretly filed a unilateral notice with the
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States in order to
frustrate Broadcom Limited's attempt to acquire the Company.

Qualcomm is a Delaware corporation with its principal executive
offices located in San Diego, California.  Steven M. Mollenkopf
was the Company's Chief Executive Officer.  George S. Davis was
the Company's Chief Financial Officer.

Qualcomm develops and commercializes "foundational technologies
and products used in mobile devices and other wireless
products."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

               - and -

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

               - and -

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

               - and -

          Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
          BRONSTEIN, GEWIRTZ & GROSSMAN, LLC
          60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4600
          New York, NY 10165
          Telephone: (212) 697-6484
          E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com


QUINSTREET INC: Bronstein Gewirtz Files Securities Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC reminds investors that a class
action lawsuit has been filed against QuinStreet, Inc.
("QuinStreet" or "the Company") (NASDAQ: QNST) and certain of its
officers, on behalf of shareholders who purchased or otherwise
acquired QuinStreet securities between February 10, 2016 and
April 10, 2018, inclusive (the "Class Period"). Such investors
are encouraged to join this case by visiting the firm's site:
www.bgandg.com/qnst.

This class action seeks to recover damages against Defendants for
alleged violations of the federal securities laws under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period,
Defendants made materially false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that (1) the company displayed reckless
disregard in relation to click-through fraud; (2) Sites owned by
QuinStreet delivered inflated, false, and/or low-quality traffic
for clients; (3) the company's business practices did not have
the aim of delivering to its customers high-potential leads,
quality prospects, and useful clicks; and (4) as a result,
QuinStreet's claims about the company's business operations and
financial prospects were materially false and misleading
throughout the class period.

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:
www.bgandg.com/qnst If you suffered a loss in QuinStreet you have
until June 26, 2018 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.

         Peretz Bronstein, Esq.
         Yael Hurwitz, Esq.
         Bronstein, Gewirtz & Grossman, LLC
         Telephone: 212-697-6484
         Email: peretz@bgandg.com [GN]


RELIANCE TRUST: Casey Files ERISA Class Suit Over Plan Losses
-------------------------------------------------------------
JESSICA CASEY, on behalf of the RVNB Holdings, Inc. Employee
Stock Ownership Plan, and on behalf of a class of all other
persons similarly situated v. RELIANCE TRUST COMPANY, a Georgia
corporation, Case No. 4:18-cv-00424-ALM (E.D. Tex., June 15,
2018), alleges violations of the Employee Retirement Income
Security Act.

The Plaintiff brings this suit against RTC, the trustee for the
RVNB Holdings, Inc. Employee Stock Ownership Plan when the Plan
acquired shares of RVNB Holdings, Inc., in December 2012.  The
Plaintiff is a participant in the Plan, who was vested in shares
of RVNB allocated to her account in the Plan.  She seeks legal
remedies for alleged losses suffered by the Plan and its
participants, and other relief, caused by RTC when it authorized
the Plan to buy shares of RVNB for more than fair market value in
2012.

RTC is a trust company chartered under Georgia law and
headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia.  At the time of the ESOP
Transaction, RTC was one of the nation's largest independent
trust companies.

Based in Carrollton, Texas, RVNB provides moving and storage
services with facilities throughout the United States.  RVNB
operates under the trade name "All My Sons Moving & Storage."[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Thomas R. Ajamie, Esq.
          John S. Edwards, Jr., Esq.
          AJAMIE LLP
          Pennzoil Place - South Tower
          711 Louisiana, Suite 2150
          Houston, TX 77002
          Telephone: (713) 860-1600
          Facsimile: (713) 860-1699
          E-mail: tajamie@ajamie.com
                  jedwards@ajamie.com

               - and -

          Gregory Y. Porter, Esq.
          Ryan T. Jenny, Esq.
          BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
          1054 31st Street, NW, Suite 230
          Washington, DC 20007
          Telephone: (202) 463-2101
          Facsimile: (202) 463-2103
          E-mail: gporter@baileyglasser.com
                  rjenny@baileyglasser.com


RICH PRODUCTS: "Tellado" Suit Seeks to Stop Use of Biometric Data
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH TELLADO, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. RICH PRODUCTS CORPORATION and ADP LLC,
2018-CH-07627 (Ill. Cir. Ct., Cook Cty., June 18, 2018), seeks to
redress and curtail the Defendants' alleged unlawful collection,
use, storage, and disclosure of the Plaintiff's sensitive
biometric data.

Rich Products is a corporation organized and existing under the
laws of Delaware with its principal place of business in Buffalo,
New York.  ADP is a Delaware limited liability company that is
registered to do business in Illinois.

Rich Products is a multinational supplier and solutions provider
for food service, in-store bakery and retail marketplaces.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ryan F. Stephan, Esq.
          James B. Zouras, Esq.
          Andrew C. Ficzko, Esq.
          STEPHAN ZOURAS, LLP
          205 N. Michigan Avenue, Suite 2560
          Chicago, IL 60601
          Telephone: (312) 233-1550
          Facsimile: (312) 233-1560
          E-mail: rstephan@stephanzouras.com
                  jzouras@stephanzouras.com
                  aficzko@stephanzouras.com


RPM PIZZA: Fredrickson Wants Minimum, Overtime Wages for Drivers
----------------------------------------------------------------
HANNAH FREDRICKSON, individually and on behalf of similarly
situated persons v. RPM PIZZA MIDWEST, LLC and GLENN MUELLER,
Case No. 1:18-cv-01884-TWP-TAB (S.D. Ind., June 20, 2018), is
brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Indiana
Minimum Wage Law to recover alleged unpaid minimum wages overtime
hours owed to the Plaintiff and similarly situated delivery
drivers employed by the Defendants at their Domino's stores.

RPM Pizza Midwest, LLC, is a Foreign Limited Liability Company.  
Glenn Mueller is an owner, officer and director of RPM Pizza.

The Defendants own and operate numerous Domino's Pizza franchise
stores.  The Defendants employ delivery drivers, who use their
own automobiles to deliver pizza and other food items to their
customers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Matthew Haynie, Esq.
          Jay Forester, Esq.
          FORESTER HAYNIE PLLC
          1701 N. Market Street, Suite 210
          Dallas, TX 75202
          Telephone: (214) 210-2100
          Facsimile: (214) 346-5909
          E-mail: matthew@foresterhaynie.com
                  jay@foresterhaynie.com


SAMSONITE COMPANY: Jorge Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Web Site
--------------------------------------------------------------
CARLOS JORGE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated v. SAMSONITE COMPANY STORES, LLC, Case No. 1:18-cv-05652
(S.D.N.Y., June 21, 2018), is a civil rights action against
Samsonite for its alleged failure to design, construct, maintain,
and operate its Web site -- http://shop.samsonite.com/-- to be  
fully accessible to and independently usable by the Plaintiff and
other blind or visually-impaired people.

Samsonite is an Indiana Limited Liability Company doing business
in New York.  Samsonite is a luggage manufacturer and retailer
that operates Samsonite stores, as well as the Samsonite Web
site.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H. Mizrahi, Esq.
          COHEN & MIZRAHI LLP
          300 Cadman Plaza West, 12th Floor
          Brooklyn, NY 11201
          Telephone: (929) 575-4175
          Facsimile: (929) 575-4195
          E-mail: Joseph@cml.legal

               - and -

          Jeffrey M. Gottlieb, Esq.
          Dana L. Gottlieb, Esq.
          GOTTLIEB & ASSOCIATES
          150 East 18th Street, Suite PHR
          New York, NY 10003-2461
          Telephone: (212) 228-9795
          E-mail: nyjg@aol.com
                  danalgottlieb@aol.com


SAULSBURY INDUSTRIES: Bryer Sues Over Unpaid OT Wages
-----------------------------------------------------
JAMES BRYER, Individually and For Others Similarly Situated v.
SAULSBURY INDUSTRIES, INC., Case No. 7:18-cv-00105 (W.D. Tex.,
June 15, 2018), alleges that Saulsbury failed to pay the
Plaintiff and other workers like him, overtime pay as required by
the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Saulsbury is a Texas corporation.  Saulsbury is an engineering,
construction and fabrication company to heavy industrial clients
across the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Richard M. Schreiber, Esq.
          Andrew W. Dunlap, Esq.
          Lindsay R. Itkin, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 352-1100
          Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
          E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                  rschreiber@mybackwages.com
                  adunlap@mybackwages.com
                  litkin@mybackwages.com

               - and -

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


SHENANDOAH VALLEY: Denies Teenage Immigrant Abuse Allegations
-------------------------------------------------------------
WSET's Rachel Langlitz, citing WHSV, reports that on June 23,
dozens of people gathered outside the Shenandoah Valley Juvenile
Center to protest allegations that immigrants at the facility
were allegedly abused, WHSV reports.

The protesters weren't part of any specific organization, but
called themselves "concerned citizens."

"I understand these are unproven allegations, but they're
troubling nonetheless," Virginia Peters-Schultz told WHSV.

Said allegations stem from a class action complaint from
immigrant teenagers who say they were the victims of abuse and
left naked in their cells while at the facility.

The program director for the facility told WHSV the allegations
were "without merit" and "looks forward to the opportunity to
present evidence that will allow a jury to reach the same
conclusion."

The protesters outside the facility were hopeful the allegations
have the power to bring about change.

"We do not want to house people, who are merely looking for a
better life, as criminals," Bill Walker, the rally's organizer,
told WHSV.  "We will continue to work on this until we see
action."

People at the protest criticized not only the Shenandoah Valley
Juvenile Detention Center, but also the current situation
immigrants who try to come to this country face.

"These detention centers are starting to feel, to me, as we build
them and they're talking about tens of thousands of people as we
separate children from parents and segregate, they're starting to
feel to me like the internment camps during World War II,"
Peters-Schultz said. [GN]


SHRI GANESHA: Accused by Bradley of Not Paying Wages Under FLSA
---------------------------------------------------------------
MARVINA BRADLEY and SHONECA MARSH, individually, and on behalf of
all other similarly situated individuals v. SHRI GANESHA
HOSPITALITY PARTNERSHIP, a Tennessee General Partnership, d/b/a
RED ROOF INN, SHRI GANESHA, LLC, d/b/a RED ROOF INN, a Tennessee
Limited Liability Company, d/b/a Red Roof Inn, SHRI GANESHA
PARTNERSHIP, a Tennessee General Partnership, d/b/a RED ROOF INN,
SANDRA CORIANO, CHIRAG PATEL, and RED ROOF INNS, INC., Case No.
3:18-cv-00560 (M.D. Tenn., June 15, 2018), accuses the Defendants
of willfully failing to pay the Plaintiffs the wages lawfully due
them under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Shri Ganesha Hospitality Partnership, doing business as Red Roof
Inn, is a for-profit Tennessee General Partnership, organized in
the state of Tennessee with its principal office located in
Nashville, Tennessee.  Shri Ganesha, LLC, doing business as Red
Roof Inn, is a for-profit Tennessee Limited Liability company
organized in the state of Tennessee with its principal office
located in Nashville.

Shri Ganesha Partnership, doing business as Red Roof Inn, is a
for-profit Tennessee General Partnership organized in the state
of Tennessee with its principal office located in Cookeville,
Tennessee.  Chirag Patel is a partner in Shri Ganesha Partnership
and Shri Ganesha Hospitality Partnership.

Red Roof Inns, Inc., is a for-profit corporation conducting
business in the state of Tennessee with a principal place of
business located in Columbus, Ohio.  Sandra Coriano is the
general manager over the Red Roof Inn located in Nashville.

The Defendants are entities that operate as a single business
enterprise and that together run a motel in Davidson County,
Tennessee, commonly known as Red Roof Inn, located at 2407 Brick
Church Pike, in Nashville, Tennessee.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Randall W. Burton, Esq.
          1222 16th Avenue, South, Suite 23
          Nashville, TN 37212
          Telephone: (615) 620-5838
          Facsimile: (615) 721-8547
          E-mail: rburtonlaw@gmail.com


STALLION OILFIELD: "Bourque" Suit Seeks to Recover OT Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTOPHER BOURQUE, Individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. STALLION OILFIELD HOLDINGS, INC., Case No.
2:18-cv-00779-DSC (W.D. Pa., June 14, 2018), seeks to recover
alleged unpaid overtime wages and other damages under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.

Stallion Oilfield Holdings, Inc., is a rental and distribution
company operating in nationwide but with offices in Canonsburg,
Carmichaels, and Williamsport, Pennsylvania.  Stallion
specializes in solids control, drilling support, completion and
production, wellsite construction, offshore services, StaRComm,
camp complexes, and inland-water marine services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael A. Josephson, Esq.
          Andrew Dunlap, Esq.
          JOSEPHSON DUNLAP LAW FIRM
          11 Greenway Plaza, Suite 3050
          Houston, TX 77046
          Telephone: (713) 352-1100
          Facsimile: (713) 352-3300
          E-mail: mjosephson@mybackwages.com
                  adunlap@mybackwages.com

               - and -

          Joshua P. Geist, Esq.
          GOODRICH & GEIST, P.C.
          3634 California Ave.
          Pittsburgh, PA 15212
          Telephone: (412) 766-1455
          Facsimile: (412) 766-0300
          E-mail: josh@goodrichandgeist.com

               - and -

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


STUDENT AID EXPERTS: "Brulee" Suit Alleges Invasion of Privacy
--------------------------------------------------------------
MARK BRULEE and DEBRA BROWN, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. STUDENT AID EXPERTS;
HANDLEMYLOANDOCS.COM; and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, and each
of them, Case No. 2:18-cv-05349 (C.D. Cal., June 15, 2018),
alleges that the Defendants violate the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act, invade the Plaintiffs' privacy and cause the
Plaintiffs to incur unnecessary and unwanted expenses.

Student Aid Experts is a document preparer for student loans.  
HandleMyLoanDocs.com is a document preparer for student loans.  
The true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants are currently
unknown to the Plaintiffs.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
          Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
          Meghan E. George, Esq.
          Tom E. Wheeler, Esq.
          Yoel S. Hanohov, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
          21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (877) 206-4741
          Facsimile: (866) 633-0228
          E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
                  abacon@toddflaw.com
                  mgeorge@toddflaw.com
                  twheeler@toddflaw.com
                  yoel.hanohov@toddflaw.com


SUCCESS PARTNERS: Magazine Aims at Rebirth Months After Layoffs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Karen Robinson-Jacobs, writing for Dallas News, reports that
months after Plano-based Success magazine laid off dozens of
staffers and announced plans to cease publication of its monthly
print edition, the operation is gearing up again.

The magazine announced on its website recently that it was
looking to relaunch a print edition, to be published quarterly.

It has rehired some laid-off staffers, according to one former
executive. And in May it agreed to settle a class-action lawsuit
brought by workers who were let go without the proper notice
required in the federal WARN Act, according to court filings.

Officials with the magazine and the parent company, Success
Partners, could not be reached for comment on June 22.

Success dates to 1897 and includes uplifting articles featuring
well-known figures including Dallas Mavericks' owner Mark Cuban
and fixer-uppers Chip and Joanna Gaines.

With no notice, the magazine appeared to pull the plug on the
print edition at the beginning of the year as it laid off more
than 50 workers.

An April posting on the success.com website, titled "The Future
of Success Magazine," says the publication is "humbled and
excited to announce the upcoming return of Success magazine to
subscribers' mailboxes and newsstand shelves.

"We have spent the last several months working on a sustainable
plan to deliver the most impactful material to you while
preserving the legacy of this iconic brand for years to come,"
the posting said, noting the brand's 121-year history.

"Production is already underway for the next issue of the same
motivational, inspirational magazine you love. . . .  The
magazine will transition from a monthly issue schedule to
quarterly releases, a model that best positions us to deliver at
the high standard you are accustomed to."

Plano resident Shelby Skrhak worked for the company for 12 years,
most recently as director of digital content. She was one of 30
workers listed in the lawsuit, filed in U.S. District Court in
Sherman, which sought severance following the abrupt firings in
January and February.

Skrhak,  who was let go Jan. 15,  said she is not among the
workers returning to the reborn operation, in part because she's
not certain what led to January's upheaval.

"I'm hopeful [for the restart] but I worry," she said. "I don't
understand how the floor just dropped out overnight before."

Especially since the company is listed as the owner of property
in Collin County valued at more than $16 million.

In interviews in January and in court filings, workers spoke of
an operation that seemed to be functioning, then suddenly wasn't.

"This case is about a 'bait and switch' layoff scheme [the parent
company] used to attempt to avoid WARN's 60-day advance notice
requirement to protect employees affected by a 'mass layoff,'"
says the lawsuit, filed by a former worker in the company's IT
department.

"In December 2017, [Success Partners'] high-level management,
including its Chief Executive Officer, Stuart Johnson, baited SP
employees by representing to them that the company was doing fine
and looked forward to a profitable 2018.

"Then the 'switch' occurred. In January and February 2018, SP,
without notice to the affected employees, terminated their
employment," the suit says.

The suit says the company terminated the employment of 50 or more
workers in Plano and at a facility in Lake Dallas.

Details of the lawsuit settlement were not included in the court
file. Skrhak said it included two months of severance pay and
compensation for lost benefits.[GN]


TAL EDUCATION: Robbins Arroyo Files Securities Class Lawsuit
------------------------------------------------------------
Shareholder rights law firm Robbins Arroyo LLP disclosed that
purchasers of TAL Education Group (NYSE: TAL) have filed a class
action complaint against the company's officers and directors for
alleged violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 between
April 26, 2018 and June 13, 2018. TAL, through its subsidiaries,
provides K-12 after-school tutoring services in the People's
Republic of China.

View this information on the law firm's Shareholder Rights Blog:
www.robbinsarroyo.com/tal-education-group

TAL Accused of Overstating Its Net Income

According to the complaint, TAL announced its fourth quarter 2018
and fiscal year ("FY") 2018 financial results on April 26, 2018,
but failed to inform investors that TAL's net income was
deteriorating. On June 13, 2018, Carson Block, founder of Muddy
Waters Research, accused the company of issuing fraudulent profit
figures by overstating net income, net income margin, and other
essential accounting figures. Block said that TAL resorted to
fraud to cover up the company's deteriorating profit margins,
noting that TAL's pre-tax profits from FY 2016 through FY 2018
were inflated by up to $153.2 million, or 28.4%. On this news,
TAL's stock fell nearly 10% to close at $41.11 per share on June
13, 2018.

TAL Shareholders Have Legal Options

Concerned shareholders who would like more information about
their rights and potential remedies can:

         Leonid Kandinov, Esq.
         Robbins Arroyo LLP
         Telephone: (619) 525-3990
         Toll Free: (800) 350-6003
         Website: www.robbinsarroyo.com
         Email: LKandinov@robbinsarroyo.com[GN]


TASTE OF NATURE: Buso Sues Over Cookies in Slack-Filled Packs
-------------------------------------------------------------
ANTHONY BUSO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. TASTE OF NATURE, INC., a California corporation; and
DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Case No. 37-2018-00030055-CU-MT-CTL
(Cal. Super. Ct., San Diego Cty., June 18, 2018), alleges that
the Defendant is selling its Cookie Dough Bites products using
illegal slack-filled containers.

Taste of Nature, Inc., is a California corporation with its
principal place of business located in Santa Monica, California.  
The true names and capacities of the Doe Defendants are currently
unknown to the Plaintiff.

The Company manufactures and markets candies and snack food
items.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott J. Ferrell, Esq.
          PACIFIC TRIAL ATTORNEYS
          A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
          4100 Newport Place Drive, Suite 800
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Telephone: (949) 706-6464
          Facsimile: (949) 706-6469
          E-mail: sferrell@pacifictrialattorneys.com


THAI AP&O LLC: "Bunmat" Suit Alleges FLSA Violation
---------------------------------------------------
Bangon Bunmat, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Thai AP&O LLC dba Madam Mam's, Case No. 1:18-cv-00364
(W.D. Tex., May 1, 2018), is brought against the Defendant for
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff worked for the Defendant as a server.

The Defendant operates a restaurant in Austin, Texas commonly
referred to as Madam Mam's. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Drew N. Herrmann, Esq.
      HERRMANN LAW, PLLC
      801 Cherry St., Suite 2365
      Fort Worth, TX 76102
      Tel: (817) 479-9229
      Fax: (817) 260-0801
      E-mail: drew@herrmannlaw.com


THUNDERBIRD COLLECTION: "Bieber" Suit Alleges TCPA Violations
-------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Bieber, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. Thunderbird Collection Specialists, Inc., and Does 1
through 10, Case No. 1:18-at-003261 (E.D. Calif., May 1, 2018),
is brought against the Defendants for violations of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act.

The Plaintiff is a resident of Los Banos, California.

The Defendant is a debt collection company. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
      Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
      LAW OFFICES OF TODD M. FRIEDMAN, P.C.
      21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780
      Woodland Hills, CA 91367
      Tel: (877) 206-4741
      Fax: (866) 633-0228
      E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.co
              abacon@toddflaw.com


TIDAL: Faces Class Action Over Kanye West 2016 Album
----------------------------------------------------
Jay Scott Smith, writing for the grio, reports that when Tidal,
the music streaming service best known as the home of Jay-Z and
Beyonce, first arrived, it promised exclusive music and albums
that would only be available on the service.

Enter Kanye West.  When his 2016 album The Life of Pablo dropped,
West famously tweeted that the album would be on Tidal only as a
way to drive up subscriber numbers.

"My album will never, never, never be on Apple," West said of his
album's exclusivity.  "And it will never be for sale.  You can
only get it on Tidal."  Just six weeks later, the album was on
Apple Music.

That didn't set well with Justin Baker-Rhett, a Kanye fan who
unfortunately took West seriously when he made this statement.
Rhett says that he signed up for Tidal on the sole condition that
the album would be exclusive to the service.

The album no longer being exclusive led Mr. Rhett to sue West
along with and Tidal.  Before you say the suit is frivolous,
according to Pitchfork the class action suit will move forward.

Jay Edelson, Mr. Rhett's attorney, told Pitchfork that "the court
accepted our core premise: what we alleged constitutes consumer
fraud." However, due to the court's ruling, the class action will
not be one national one, and will instead consist of several
"state-by-state" cases.

Mr. Edelson also tweeted, that he plans to depose West:
There is no word on if West or Tidal is thinking freely about
settling the case. [GN]


TIEMPO COMMUNICATIONS: Does Not Pay Workers Properly, Says Tardy
----------------------------------------------------------------
MARK BOWMAN TARDY, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. TIEMPO COMMUNICATIONS AND UTILITY SERVICES,
INC., BELINDA FLORES, RAUL FLORES, Case No. 4:18-cv-01958 (S.D.
Tex., June 14, 2018), alleges that the Plaintiff routinely worked
in excess of 40 hours per week on the Defendants' behalf but was
not paid lawfully for doing so because they only paid him on a
day and piece rate basis.

Tiempo Communications and Utility Services, Inc., does business
and is headquartered in Texas.  The Individual Defendants served
as owners, officers or directors of Tiempo.

The Defendants provide construction installation of underground
cable systems, technical cable services and repair and
maintenance rehabilitation services to companies operating in the
greater Houston area and South East, South Central Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jay Forester, Esq.
          FORESTER HAYNIE PLLC
          1701 N. Market Street, Suite 210
          Dallas, TX 75202
          Telephone: (214) 210-2100
          Facsimile: (214) 346-5909
          E-mail: jay@foresterhaynie.com


TMC RESTAURANT: "Davis" Suit Seeks to Recoup Misappropriated Tips
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LEILONNI DAVIS, ASHLEY SAFRIT, and LAUREN WILSON, on behalf of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. TMC Restaurant of
Charlotte, LLC d/b/a The Men's Club, Case No. 3:18-cv-00313
(W.D.N.C., June 16, 2018), seeks to recover alleged unpaid
minimum wages, misappropriated tips, misappropriated commissions,
and statutory penalties for the Plaintiffs and similarly situated
coworkers, including servers and bartenders, pursuant to the Fair
Labor Standards Act and the North Carolina Wage and Hour Act.

TMC Restaurant of Charlotte, LLC, doing business as The Men's
Club, is a limited liability company registered and in good
standing in the state of North Carolina with its principal place
of business located in Charlotte, North Carolina.  The Company
operates a restaurant.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Philip J. Gibbons, Jr., Esq.
          GIBBONS LEIS, PLLC
          14045 Ballantyne Corporate Place, Ste 325
          Charlotte, NC 28277
          Telephone: (704) 612-0038
          E-mail: phil@gibbonsleis.com

               - and -

          Gregg C. Greenberg, Esq.
          ZIPIN, AMSTER & GREENBERG, LLC
          836 Bonifant Street
          Silver Spring, MD 20910
          Telephone: (301) 587-9373
          Facsimile: (301) 587-9397
          E-mail: ggreenberg@zagfirm.com


TNT CRANE: Fails to Pay Overtime to Crane Operators, Repass Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
TIMOTHY W. REPASS, Individually and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated v. TNT CRANE AND RIGGING, INC., Case No. 7:18-
cv-00107 (W.D. Tex., June 18, 2018), alleges that the Defendant
has violated the Fair Labor Standards Act by failing and refusing
to pay its crane operators at time-and-one-half their regular
rates of pay for all hours worked in excess of 40 hours within a
workweek.

TNT Crane and Rigging, Inc., is a Texas for-profit corporation
headquartered in Houston, Texas.  The Company is a crane and
rigging company that provides services throughout North America,
including the United States.  The Company provides lifting
services across the Permian Basin, including in Midland
County.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Edmond S. Moreland, Jr., Esq.
          MORELAND LAW FIRM, P.C.
          700 West Summit Drive
          Wimberley, TX 78676
          Telephone: (512) 782-0567
          Facsimile: (512) 782-0605
          E-mail: edmond@morelandlaw.com

               - and -

          Daniel A. Verrett, Esq.
          MORELAND LAW FIRM, P.C.
          The Commissioners House at Heritage Square
          2901 Bee Cave Road, Box L
          Austin, TX 78746
          Telephone: (512) 782-0567
          Facsimile: (512) 782-0605
          E-mail: daniel@morelandlaw.com


UNITED HEALTHCARE: "Broward" Suit Alleges TCPA Violation
--------------------------------------------------------
Broward Psychology, P.A., individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. United Healthcare Services, Inc.,
Case No. 0:18-cv-61028 (S.D. Fla., May 8, 2018), is brought
against the Defendant for violation of the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act.

The Plaintiff seeks an injunction requiring the Defendant to
cease all unauthorized fax-based marketing activities, as well as
an award of actual and statutory damages, along with costs.

The Plaintiff Broward Psychology, P.A. is a Florida professional
association with its principal place of business in Hollywood,
Florida.

The Defendant United HealthCare is a leading health insurer that
offers a variety of insurance plans and services to group and
individual consumers nationwide. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Avi R. Kaufman, Esq.
      KAUFMAN P.A.
      400 NW 26th Street
      Miami, FL 33127
      Tel: (305) 469-5881
      E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com  


UNITED STATES: Immigrant Reunification Prospects Remain Unclear
---------------------------------------------------------------
Colleen Long, Will Weissert and John L. Mone, writing for The
Associated Press, report that a Texas charitable organization
says 32 immigrant parents separated from their children after
crossing the U.S.-Mexico border were freed into its care on June
24, but they don't know where their kids are or when they might
see them again despite government assurances that family
reunification would be well organized.

The release is believed to be the first, large one of its kind
since President Donald Trump signed an executive order on June 20
that preserved a "zero-tolerance" policy for entering the country
illegally but ended the practice of separating immigrant parents
and children.  U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement offered
no immediate comment.

Ruben Garcia, director of Annunciation House in El Paso, said the
group of both mothers and fathers includes some from Mexico,
Guatemala and Honduras who arrived to his group after federal
authorities withdrew criminal charges for illegal entry.  He
didn't release names or personal details to protect the parents'
privacy, and Homeland Security officials said they needed more
specifics in order to check out their cases.

A June 23 fact sheet by the Department of Homeland Security and
other agencies said authorities know the location of all children
in custody after separating them from their families at the
border and are working to reunite them.  It called the
reunification process "well coordinated."

It also said parents must request that their child be deported
with them. In the past, the fact sheet says, many parents elected
to be deported without their children.  That may be a reflection
of violence or persecution they face in their home countries.

It doesn't state how long it might take to reunite families.
Texas' Port Isabel Service Processing Center has been set up as
the staging ground for the families to be reunited prior to
deportation.

How the government would reunite families has been unclear
because they are first stopped by U.S. Customs and Border Patrol,
with children taken into custody by the Department of Health and
Human Services and adults detained through ICE, which is under
the Department of Homeland Security.  Children have been sent to
far-flung shelters around the country, raising alarm that parents
might never know where their children can be found.

At least 2,053 minors who were separated at the border were being
cared for in HHS-funded facilities, the fact sheet said.

The chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee hedged on
June 24 when pressed on whether he was confident the Trump
administration knows where all the children are and will be able
to reunite them with their parents.

"That is what they're claiming," Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., said
on CNN's "State of the Union."

The fact sheet states that ICE has implemented an identification
mechanism to ensure ongoing tracking of linked family members
throughout the detention and removal process; designated
detention locations for separated parents and will enhance
current processes to ensure communication with children in HHS
custody; worked closely with foreign consulates to ensure that
travel documents are issued for both the parent and child at time
of removal; and coordinated with HHS for the reuniting of the
child prior to the parents' departure from the U.S.

As part of the effort, ICE officials have posted notices in all
its facilities advising detained parents who are trying to find
or communicate with their children to call a hotline staffed 8
a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday.

A parent or guardian trying to determine if a child is in the
custody of HHS should contact the Office of Refugee Resettlement
National Call Center at 1-800-203-7001, or via email at
information@ORRNCC.com.  Information will be collected and sent
to an HHS-funded facility where a minor is located.

But it's unclear whether detained parents have access to
computers to send an email, or how their phone systems work to
call out.  Attorneys at the border have said they have been
frantically trying to locate information about the children on
behalf of their clients.

Mr. Garcia, the Annunciation House director, said his experience
has been that telephone contact doesn't provide any information.

"If we bring in 30 cellphones, they're going to call that number,
they're not going to reach 30 children," said Mr. Garcia, whose
organization has been working with federal authorities to assist
immigrants for 40 years.  "Actually (they're) not going to be
able to give them any information on what to expect."

Customs and Border Patrol said it had reunited 522 children and
that some were never taken into custody by Health and Human
Services because their parents' criminal cases were processed too
quickly.  Officials have said as many as 2,300 children had been
separated from the time the policy began until June 9.  It's not
clear if any of the 2,000 remaining children were taken into
custody after June 9.

The "zero-tolerance policy" of criminally prosecuting anyone
caught illegally crossing the border remains in effect, officials
have said, despite confusion on the ground on how to carry out
Trump's order.  Justice Department officials asked a federal
judge to amend a class-action settlement that governs how
children are treated in immigration custody.  Right now, children
can only be detained with their families for 20 days; Trump
officials are seeking to detain them together indefinitely as
their cases progress.  Advocates say family detention does not
solve the problem. [GN]


UNITED STATES: Suit Aims to Seek Justice for Migrant Families
-------------------------------------------------------------
Dianna M. N ?ez, Kaila White and Daniel Gonzalez, writing for
Arizona Republic, report that they were supposed to be going to
take a bath.

But the children, held with their migrant mothers in a federal
detention center near the Texas border, did not want to go with
the officers.

The attorney remembers the mothers weeping as they told their
stories: Some babies too young to talk cried.  Children old
enough to use their words pleaded.


"The officers told their mothers that they were taking them for a
bath, and the children were begging not to go," said attorney
Michael Avenatti.

The mothers tried to calm their sons and daughters.  It was only
a bath.  They'd be back soon.

"That was the last communication these mothers had with their
children, who now believe their mothers lied to them,"
Mr. Avenatti said.

Now, by most accounts, those children may be scattered across the
U.S., as their parents are kept in immigration holding facilities
or deported to other countries. And like the mothers, attorneys
representing those families now say they're desperate and in the
dark -- at a loss for how to find the children or reunite them
with their parents.

Mr. Avenatti announced he's representing about 60 mothers and 70
children separated at the border under the Trump administration's
zero-tolerance border policy.

Mr. Avenatti, a California attorney who became a regular on news
talk shows after representing porn star Stormy Daniels in her
legal battle with President Donald Trump, is among a growing
number of attorneys nationwide attempting to reunite children
with their parents.

The case of a mother from Guatemala who sued the Trump
administration to get her son back -- a deal brokered between the
government and her lawyer  led to a surprise reunion in Baltimore
-- might offer a legal road map for others.  But immigration
attorneys and advocate groups say the legal options for the many
parents who are still in custody remain unclear.

Mr. Avenatti is offering what he says is a speedier solution, one
that may place him on the same side of his foe -- Trump.

Chaos amid a government-created crisis?
Mr. Avenatti visited Arizona to deliver a letter from one
Honduran mother, still in a detention facility in Laredo, Texas,
to her 6-year-old son.

He said the child had already spent about 10 days in a facility
in Phoenix run by contractor Southwest Key.  The letter
Mr. Avenatti delivered was the first message from the mother to
her child since they were separated.

Mr. Avenatti says he's interviewed dozens of mothers in Texas
whose children were shipped across the United States.  He said
only about 20 percent have been told where their children were.

One client filled out a form seeking information on her
daughter's whereabouts.

"ICE responds we don't have that information, and this is the
rule, not exception," he said.  "Americans, we get upset when the
dry cleaning misplaces a shirt or when our luggage gets lost.
Imagine if they took their kid from you and you said, 'But
where's my child?' and they said, 'We don't know.' "

Attorneys say they are facing a U.S. government-created crisis so
chaotic even legal scholars are at a loss.

Immigration-enforcement hard-liners argue the stricter policies
are long overdue and will stem the flow of migrants who cross the
border illegally.

Officials with the Florence Project said they have received about
467 cases this year of children separated from parents.  Since
Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced in May that the zero-
tolerance policy had been implemented, they say they've seen 112
cases.

There's no road map for putting a child back in the arms of their
parents, attorneys say.  And the more time that passes without a
fix, the greater the risks.

Children are at risk of being orphaned if their parent is
deported.  More children may end up lost or traumatized in a
system unprepared for the spike in children in need of placement
and care.

In the weeks since the Trump administration's zero-tolerance
policy, the number of children known to be reunited with their
mother or father appears to be vastly lower than the more than
2,000 children separated from the parent or adult they were with
when they crossed the border.

Each day, attorneys hear more accounts of children without their
family in detention centers.

A Guatemalan mom sues Trump
The story of the migrant mother from Guatemala who sued the U.S.
government to regain custody of her 7-year-old son made national
headlines because it is believed to be the first lawsuit that
ended with a reunion.

Some attorneys see Beata de Jesus Mejia-Mejia's legal battle
against the Trump administration as a path to justice.

Mejia-Mejia's legal team argued that the government had violated
the 39-year-old mother's constitutional rights, and her son's,
when they were separated.

The suit echoed concerns voiced in recent weeks from politicians
on both sides of the aisle, United Nations officials, faith
leaders and the thousands of people who have taken to the streets
to protest family separations.

The lawsuit, in part, argues that the separation: violates the
right to due process, induces trauma on a child who has done
nothing wrong and will deter other people from seeking asylum. It
alleges the separation was used as "a bargaining chip for
Congress to pass a bill funding a 'wall' to fulfill an ill-
conceived campaign promise."

Separating Mejia-Mejia from her son violated her right to due
process, according to the lawsuit, because it was executed
without a hearing and she was not provided "any paperwork to
indicate where her son is located or how she can contact him or
retrieve him from detention."

Attorneys also alleged violations of her civil and human rights
under international laws, including the United Nations Convention
Relating to Status of Refugees.

Department of Justice lawyers never made their case against the
lawsuit filed on June 19 in a federal court in Washington, D.C.

District Court Judge Paul Friedman had fast-tracked the case for
a hearing two days later.

But minutes before the court proceedings were scheduled to begin,
DOJ attorneys told Mejia-Mejia's lawyer, Mario Williams, they
would agree to return her 7-year-old son.

After days of calling officials to find Mejia-Mejia's son Darwin,
trying to persuade them to return her child, Mr. Williams said
the only thing that made a difference was the lawsuit against the
Trump administration.

When Mr. Williams met Mejia-Mejia, he says she showed him a 24-
page document.  It was light on information about reuniting with
her son, he said, but heavy on government jargon.

The document would confuse most people, particularly a migrant
who had just survived the trek from Guatemala. Mejia-Mejia says
death threats were made against her and her son by her husband.

Mr. Williams said that Nexus Derechos Humanos Attorneys, the law
firm he works for that took on Mejia-Mejia's case for free, is
considering a class-action lawsuit.

"Nobody understands the process completely," he said.  "That's
shameful, it's so egregious, so nightmarish, so dark, because the
government won't release a process, the Trump administration
hasn't released the procedures."

Families still separated after Trump enforcement order
Though Trump has issued an executive order ending the separation
policy, confusion remains.

Arizona immigration attorney Stephanie Corcoran said even
national legal groups such as the American Immigration Lawyers
Association, of which she is a member, have yet to issue
directives.

"They've never done this before," she said of the federal
government.  "We had unaccompanied minors . . . but never
children separated from their parents, even small children who
can't tell you who they are or who their parents are."

Ms. Corcoran has a client in her early 20s in the Eloy Detention
Center.  At a recent meeting, the young woman told her an account
of an officer using her as a translator for a distraught Spanish-
speaking woman.

The woman asked, "Can you ask to have them find out where my
child is?"

Ms. Corcoran said the Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer
said, "When you get deported, you can figure that out."

Mejia-Mejia's case may not be the answer for every family
separated, Corcoran said, but it could serve as a starting point.

Lawyer who took on Trump may be his greatest ally in detaining
families together
Not everyone sees Mejia-Mejia's case as the best immediate fix.

In fact, the California lawyer known for taking on Trump may
agree with him on how to swiftly reunify families.

Mr. Avenatti said Mejia-Mejia's case does not factor for the
majority of parents, because unlike her, they are still in
detention.

"She was lucky," he said.

Mr. Avenatti said time is the greatest risk to children separated
from their parents.

He fears children, especially babies and toddlers who can't speak
for themselves, will be lost in the shelter and foster system the
longer they are without their parent.

The best alternative for now, he says, is a fast-tracked process
of uniting families in a mass detention center.  Federal
emergency officials are practiced at opening large shelters
during disasters. Children could be with their mothers in a
matter of days, he said.

"There is really only one reasonable way to solve this right
now," he said.  "All of these mothers and fathers and all of
these children need to be taken to a single staging area for
families."

Trump's executive order called for a similar fix -- stopping
family separations by keeping children and parents together in
detention centers.

The problem: Trump's order may run afoul of the 1997 Flores vs.
Reno settlement.  The agreement requires that migrants under 18
be released "without unnecessary delay" if they have a family
member to stay with.  Additionally, the settlement requires any
minors who must remain in immigration detention to be placed "in
the least restrictive setting appropriate."

In his executive order, Trump directed Sessions to seek a
modification to the settlement that may allow the government to
detain families together.

Legal analysts have questioned whether the courts would budge
given that it quashed the Obama administration's attempts in 2015
to detain families together.

On June 22, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational
Fund released a statement arguing Trump has one mission: detain
more migrants and deport them faster.

"The administration . . . sought to modify a federal court order
so that the government may pursue even lengthier caging of minor
children," said Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of
MALDEF.  "The fact is that the executive order doubles down on
the inhumanity of the heart-rending scenes seen in recent weeks."
[GN]


UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN: 200 Ex-Students Join Sex Abuse Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------
Maura Dolan, writing for Los Angeles Times, reports that at least
200 former USC students have joined lawsuits against the
university, alleging it failed to heed warnings for nearly 30
years that a campus gynecologist was sexually abusing patients.

Lawyers representing the alleged victims expect the number of
women suing to reach at least several hundred and possibly
thousands.  If successful, the suits could cost the university
hundreds of millions of dollars.

"I have never seen anything like the volume of calls we are
getting," said John Manly, a lawyer who has represented sex abuse
victims in mass litigation cases.

In the first three weeks following The Times' revelations, Manly
said he received calls from 120 former patients of Dr. George
Tyndall, a student health clinic gynecologist who was employed by
USC and is now under investigation by the Los Angeles Police
Department over allegations of sex abuse.

"The alarming thing is we have women from the very beginning of
his employment in 1989 to the very end," Mr. Manly said.  "It
indicates he engaged in this behavior throughout his tenure at
USC."

Mr. Manly was the lead lawyer for sexual abuse victims of
Michigan State University sports physician Larry Nassar.

Michigan State settled suits by 332 victims for $500 million,
with the average victim receiving $1.3 million, Manly said.

"There were restrictions in the state of Michigan that kept those
settlements a little bit depressed, whereas in California I think
you are going to see higher numbers," said David M. Ring, who
also has sued USC on behalf of dozens of women.

Suits against the Los Angeles Roman Catholic Archdiocese resulted
in a $660-million settlement in 2007, with sex abuse victims
receiving an average of $1.5 million each.

Settlements stemming from sexual abuse by an L.A. school district
elementary teacher several years ago provided each victim on
average more than $1 million, lawyers said.

A class-action suit against Johns Hopkins Hospital over a
gynecologist who secretly took pictures and videos of patients
led to a smaller, $190-million settlement in 2014.  Former
patients received $1,876.77 to $27,934.93 in compensation,
according to the Baltimore Sun.

The amount of damages awarded in mass litigation generally
differs from victim to victim, depending on the severity of the
abuse and the harm, lawyers said.

Lawyers for Tyndall's former patients say he inappropriately put
his fingers into their vaginas and anuses, watched them while
they undressed, required them to lie naked on the exam table
without a sheet, took pictures of their genitals, commented on
the size of their vaginas, falsely diagnosed some with dreaded
diseases and praised some patients' breasts.

In interviews with The Times, Tyndall, 71, said he had done
nothing wrong. He said his examinations of patients were
extremely thorough, but always appropriate.

Campus authorities allowed him to practice until 2016, when a
frustrated nurse reported him to the campus rape crisis center.

An internal USC investigation determined that Tyndall's behavior
during pelvic exams was outside the scope of current medical
practice and amounted to sexual harassment of students.

Top administrators allowed Tyndall to resign with a payout last
summer without informing his patients or reporting him at the
time to the Medical Board of California.

Although Tyndall is a named defendant in the litigation, USC is
the real target.

"I don't expect to get a nickel out of the doctor," Mr. Manly
said.

About 15 lawsuits have been filed against USC, both in federal
court and in Los Angeles County Superior Court.  They allege a
variety of legal wrongs, falling broadly under the category of
negligence and gender discrimination.

Jason Frank, who has represented defendants and plaintiffs in
personal injury cases, said the California Supreme Court has
limited employer liability only in rare cases.

A hospital would not be liable for an orderly who drugged and
raped patients because that behavior would be considered outside
the scope of his employment, Mr. Frank said.

"It really has to be that extreme in order for a company not to
be liable," said Mr. Frank, who is not involved in the USC cases.

Tyndall's job required him to be with young women when they were
undressed and in vulnerable positions, and USC was warned in the
past about his conduct -- factors that point to liability,
Mr. Frank said.

Richard S. Linkert, a Sacramento-based lawyer who has defended
similar cases for school districts, said employers can be liable
for sexual abuse under a theory that they were negligent in
retaining and supervising the errant employee.

For the defense, the job may be just about "damage control,"
trying to avoid a huge jury award, he said.

"These cases can be so inflammatory and outrageous that it is
very easy to get a jury worked up and award giant numbers," he
said. "It is very shocking the large numbers being awarded in
Southern California."

He said USC probably has plenty of insurance to defray the costs.

"I think USC ought to try to settle the cases, the sooner the
better," Mr. Linkert said.

In an open letter to faculty and staff in May, USC Provost
Michael W. Quick said top administrators had been unaware of the
complaints until 2016.

"It is true that our system failed, but it is important that you
know that this claim of a cover-up is patently false," Mr. Quick
wrote.  "We would never knowingly put students in harm's way."

USC established a hotline for complaints about Tyndall and has
offered free counseling to his former patients.

In investigating the doctor in 2016, USC consulted with a
gynecology expert who found that Tyndall's way of doing pelvic
exams could be considered acceptable, USC said, while an outside
medical review team found that his pelvic exams conflicted with
today's standard of care.

The university said it also consulted two criminal law experts,
who concluded there was no crime to report.

USC blamed the student health clinic's former executive director,
who died two years ago, for "independently" handling complaints
about Tyndall.  In 2013, the executive director referred some
complaints to another department to be investigated. The review
concluded no action was needed.

Lawyers say the state lawsuits are likely to be consolidated
before one Los Angeles Superior Court judge.  In other cases of
mass litigation, committees of lawyers have been appointed to
represent both sides.

Sometimes, a judge in such cases will pick a handful of cases to
go to trial.  The jury verdicts then shape the settlement of the
others.

Because USC is private, it also could face punitive damages,
intended to punish a defendant for wanton and willful misconduct.

USC has retained the law firm of Quinn Emanuel to defend it
against the suits and hired O'Melveny & Myers to investigate the
allegations and the university's response.

For the women who are suing, Los Angeles County Superior Court is
a considered a favorable venue.

The court has handled such large, complex litigation, and the
jury pool is considered friendly to plaintiffs, lawyers said.

The #MeToo movement also has improved the success of such cases,
plaintiff lawyers said.  Juries are more aware of the harm of
sexual assaults, and victims are more willing to come forward,
they said.

"The movement has certainly elevated the standing of these sexual
assault cases," Mr. Ring said.

Manly, a USC alumnus, said the university may want to resolve the
cases quickly to protect its reputation.

"Michigan State treated the victims as adversaries and enemies,"
the lawyer said.  "In my view, that is a very poor legal
strategy.  Penn State did not do that in the [Jerry] Sandusky
cases.  They settled with victims within six months, and in many
ways were able to move forward."

Lawyers defending USC against the suits were unavailable for
comment.

"We are committed to concluding these lawsuits quickly," a USC
spokesman said, "and to achieving a fair outcome for those
affected by Tyndall's behavior." [GN]


US OLYMPIC: Faces "Frederick" Class Suit Over Sexual Abuse
----------------------------------------------------------
MARCIA FREDERICK, individually, and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COMMITTEE, USA
GYMNASTICS (formerly known as the United States Gymnastics
Federation), RICHARD CARLSON, MURIEL GROSSFELD, GEORGE WARD, Case
No. 1:18-cv-11299 (D. Mass., June 20, 2018), accuses the
Defendants of violating the Protecting Young Victims from Sexual
Abuse and Safe Sport Authorization Act of 2017 by systemically
failing to respond to and report suspected child abuse of amateur
athletes to law enforcement.

The Plaintiff, a former Olympic gymnast, also brings this claim
individually, seeking injunctive relief and compensation for
personal injuries and damages suffered when she was repeatedly
molested, sexually abused and assaulted while training and
competing as a minor elite gymnast for the United States across
the nation by Defendant Richard Carlson.

USOC is a federally-chartered nonprofit corporation, having its
principal place of business and headquarters in Colorado Springs,
Colorado.  The USOC is a federally-chartered nonprofit
corporation, which was reorganized by the Ted Stevens Amateur
Sports Act, originally enacted in 1978.  The USOC is the
governing body for all American Olympic teams.

USAG is a business entity of form unknown, having its principal
place of business in the state of Indiana.  USAG is the National
Governing Body for gymnastics in the United States, as designated
and permitted by USOC under the Ted Stevens Act, and selects and
trains the United States gymnastics teams.

Perpetrator Richard Carlson is a former elite level gymnastics
coach, who resides and is a citizen of New York.  Defendants
Muriel Grossfeld and George Ward are residents and citizens of
Connecticut.  Perpetrator Carlson is an agent or employee of
USAG, USOC, Muriel Grossfeld and George Ward.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kimberly A. Dougherty, Esq.
          Vance Andrus, Esq.
          Aimee Wagstaff, Esq.
          ANDRUS WAGSTAFF, PC
          19 Belmont Street
          South Easton, MA 02375
          Telephone: (508) 230-2700
          Facsimile: (888) 875-2889
          E-mail: kim.dougherty@andruswagstaff.com
                  vance.andrus@andruswagstaff.com
                  aimee.wagstaff@andruswagstaff.com

               - and -

          Lori E. Andrus, Esq.
          Jennie Lee Anderson, Esq.
          ANDRUS ANDERSON LLP
          155 Montgomery Street, Suite 900
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 986-1400
          Facsimile: (415) 986-1474
          E-mail: lori@andrusanderson.com
                  jennie@andrusanderson.com


USA HALLOWEEN: Fails to Pay Minimum & Overtime Wages, Adams Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
SAMANTHA ADAMS on Behalf of Herself and All Others Similarly
Situated v. USA HALLOWEEN PLANET, INC., TODD DENNING and TIM LEE,
Case No. 1:18-cv-01842-JMS-MPB (S.D. Ind., June 15, 2018),
alleges that the Defendants violate the Fair Labor Standards Act
by failing to pay the Plaintiff and members of the class minimum
wages and overtime premiums.

USA Halloween Planet, Inc. ("USA Fireworks"), is an incorporated
business headquartered in Indianapolis, Indiana.  The Individual
Defendants are officers and managers of the Company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ronald E. Weldy, Esq.
          WELDY LAW
          198 South 9th Street
          Noblesville, IN 46060
          Telephone: (317) 842-6600
          E-mail: rweldy@weldylegal.com


VEGASSPORTSCONSULTANTS.COM: Mitchel Sues for Invasion of Privacy
----------------------------------------------------------------
STEVEN MITCHEL, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. VEGASSPORTSCONSULTANTS.COM and PERFECT
PRIVACY, LLC, Case No. 0:18-cv-61404-FAM (S.D. Fla., June 21,
2018), accuses the Defendants of negligently contacting the
Plaintiff on his cellular telephone, in violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act, thereby, invading his privacy.

Vegas is a Nevada company and is citizen of Nevada.  Perfect
Privacy is a Florida company and considered a citizen of Florida.  
Perfect Privacy's principal place of business is located in
Jacksonville, Florida.  Perfect Privacy is the registrant and
owner of Vegas.  Perfect Privacy is the marketer for Vegas,
including online media and other marketing campaigns to drive
consumers to the Vegas Web site.

The Defendants operate or are affiliated with multiple auto-
texting numbers and the Internet Web sites, including
http://www.vegassportsconsultants.com/,and have a business model  
whereby Vegas operates an online odds and sports betting
business, and the Defendants send unsolicited texts offering free
money to bet as a means to generate traffic to its online betting
platform.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Seth M. Lehrman, Esq.
          EDWARDS POTTINGER LLC
          425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2
          Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: (954) 524-2820
          Facsimile: (954) 524-2822
          E-mail: seth@epllc.com

               - and -

          Joshua H. Eggnatz, Esq.
          Michael J. Pascucci, Esq.
          EGGNATZ PASCUCCI
          5400 S. University Drive, Suite 417
          Davie, FL 33328
          Telephone: (954) 889-3359
          Facsimile: (954) 889-5913
          E-mail: MPascucci@JusticeEarned.com
                  JEggnatz@JusticeEarned.com


VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS: Faces Suit Over Sherman Act Violation
-------------------------------------------------------------
Brandy A. Allen, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. Verizon Communications, Inc., and Cellco
Partnership dba Verizon Wireless, Case No. 3:18-cv-08918 (D.
N.J., May 7, 2018), is brought against the Defendants for
violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act by limiting the use of
embedded-SIM technology in order to stifle consumers' ability to
switch between wireless carriers.

The antitrust class action arises from a conspiracy among Verizon
and AT&T, Inc., and AT&T Mobility LLC together to stifle
competition in the wireless communication services market in the
United States.

The Plaintiff, Brandy A. Allen is a resident of Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. Ms. Allen has been a subscriber to AT&T wireless
communications services for approximately ten years. As a result
of Verizon's collusive and anticompetitive conduct, Ms. Allen has
been injured in her business or property, says the complaint.

The Defendant Verizon Communications Inc., a Delaware corporation
headquartered in New York, New York, is an American multinational
telecommunications conglomerate and the largest provider of
mobile telephone services in the United States.

The Defendant Cellco Partnership dba Verizon Wireless, is a
wholly owned subsidiary of Verizon, which is headquartered in
Basking Ridge, New Jersey. Verizon Wireless is the largest
wireless telecommunications provider in the United States with
over 150 million subscribers. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      James E. Cecchi, Esq.
      Caroline F. Bartlett, Esq.
      CARELLA BYRNE CECCHI
      OLSTEIN BRODY & AGNELLO, PC
      5 Becker Farm Road
      Roseland, NJ 07068-1739
      Tel: (973) 994-1700


VOLKSWAGEN: Exploding Sunroof Class Suit Partially Dismissed
------------------------------------------------------------
David A. Wood, writing for CarComplaints.com, reports that a
Volkswagen exploding sunroof class-action lawsuit is hanging on
after the automaker filed a motion to dismiss the complaint.

Plaintiff Rosaura Deras filed the lawsuit on behalf of consumers
who purchased or leased in California any of the following
vehicles equipped with factory-installed sunroofs:

2005-2017 Volkswagen Jetta
2015-2017 Volkswagen Golf
2006-2015 Volkswagen GTI
2009-2010 Volkswagen CC
2007-2016 Volkswagen Eos
2006-2009 Volkswagen Rabbit
2012-2017 Volkswagen Passat
2004-2006 Volkswagen Touareg
2011-2017 Volkswagen Touareg
2008 Volkswagen R32
2009-2017 Volkswagen Tiguan

According to Deras, she leased a 2013 Volkswagen Jetta in June
2013 and purchased the vehicle on June 3, 2016, at the end of her
lease term.

In 2017 while driving on the freeway, she claims a loud "BOOM"
like a gunshot went off in the car, followed by a hail of glass
falling on her head and the interior of the Volkswagen. She says
she saw a large hole in the center of her sunroof with the edges
of the glass pointing upward, indicating the glass wasn't broken
from outside the vehicle.

The plaintiff says VW has concealed defects in the sunroofs
because since December 14, 2009, 57 "owners and lessees of Class
Vehicles have reported an incident of their sunroof shattering"
to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

According to the plaintiff, VW further knew of the defect through
its internal tracking systems and because the automaker issued a
recall for its 2013-2015 Beetle.

The recall was issued "relating to the shattering of sunroofs,"
but "it has done nothing regarding the far more predominant
problem relating to all regular and panoramic sunroof shattering
that affects potentially hundreds of thousands or more VW
vehicles."

Volkswagen moved to dismiss the exploding sunroof class-action
lawsuit, starting with implied warranty claims on the grounds
they are barred by the 4-year statute of limitations.

The plaintiff doesn't dispute that she did not file the lawsuit
within four years of the date on which she leased the vehicle.
However, she argues that her claim is timely because her June
2016 purchase re-started the statute of limitations clock. The
judge agreed.

Deras also claims she can bring an implied warranty claim because
Volkswagen sold her the vehicle, but VW argues the lawsuit never
mentions where she actually purchased the vehicle. However, the
judge ruled the assumption is the vehicle was purchased from the
same dealership that leased it.

However, according to the judge, VW won the argument about a
claim of unjust enrichment by arguing the new vehicle warranty
precludes the claim.

Concerning the claim that Volkswagen knew about the sunroof
problems because of internal monitoring and complaints made to
NHTSA, VW says the allegations are not enough to state a claim in
court, and the judge agreed.

Deras alleges NHTSA received 57 complaints of shattering sunroofs
between December 14, 2009, and April 11, 2017, and that safety
regulators monitored the complaints. Of those complaints, 45 were
made before Deras purchased her vehicle on June 3, 2016.

But according to the judge, "the Ninth Circuit has held that
consumer complaints suffice to establish knowledge only where
there were an unusual number of complaints, such that the
manufacturer would be on notice of a specific problem."

The judge also found the plaintiff contends there are
"potentially hundreds of thousands or more of VW vehicles with
defective sunroofs, so 57 complaints out of hundreds of thousands
of vehicles aren't an unusual number of complaints."

As for the allegation that Volkswagen knew about the alleged
shattering sunroofs because of a previous recall related to
sunroofs, the judge ruled Deras has cited no authority, and the
judge is aware of none, holding that prior recalls of similar
products is enough to establish knowledge of a defect.

Therefore, the judge dismissed claims of violations of
California's unfair competition law, California Consumer Legal
Remedies Act and fraud by omission, but with leave to amend the
claims.

Overall, the judge dismissed all the claims against Volkswagen
except claims related to implied warranties.

The Volkswagen exploding sunroof class-action lawsuit was filed
in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
California -- Rosaura Deras, et. al., v. Volkswagen Group of
America, Inc.

The plaintiff is represented by the Law Office of Robert L.
Starr, APC, and the Law Office of Stephen M. Harris, APC.

CarComplaints.com has complaints about the models named in the
lawsuit:

Volkswagen Jetta
Volkswagen Golf
Volkswagen GTI
Volkswagen CC
Volkswagen Eos
Volkswagen Rabbit
Volkswagen Passat
Volkswagen Touareg
Volkswagen Tiguan [GN]


WELLS FARGO: Faces "Ecklund" Suit Over Fraudulent
Investment
------------------------------------------------------------
JENNIFER ECKLUND v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Case No. 4:18-cv-
00452 (E.D. Tex., June 26, 2018), is brought on behalf of the
now-defunct entities BUCF and the Wammel Group, and on behalf of
others similarly situated over claims related to a fraudulent
investment scheme.

The Plaintiff sues in her capacity as the Court-appointed
Receiver for Thurman P. Bryant, III, and Bryant United Capital
Funding, Inc. ("BUCF"), Arthur F. Wammel, Wammel Group, LLC, and
Wammel Group Holdings Partnership receivership estates.

The case arises out of, and is ancillary to, a lawsuit brought by
the Securities and Exchange Commission against the Bryant
Defendants, Wammel Defendants, Carlos Goodspeed a/k/a Sean
Phillips a/k/a GC d/b/a Top Agent Entertainment d/b/a Mr. Top
Agent Entertainment, and Relief Defendant Thurman P. Bryant, Jr.,
for claims related to a fraudulent investment scheme created,
organized, and operated by the Bryant Defendants.  That lawsuit
is styled SEC v. Thurman P. Bryant, III, et al., No. 4:17-cv-
00336-ALM, and is pending in the United States District Court for
the Eastern District of Texas, Sherman Division.

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., is a foreign financial institution
incorporated under the federal law and has its principal place of
business in the state of California.  Wells Fargo provides
personal, small business, and commercial banking services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Timothy Micah Dortch, Esq.
          Maryssa J. Simpson, Esq.
          POTTS LAW FIRM, LLP
          2911 Turtle Creek Blvd, Suite 1000
          Dallas, TX 75219
          Telephone: (214) 396-9427
          Facsimile: (469) 217-8296
          E-mail: mdortch@potts-law.com
                  msimpson@potts-law.com


WINDHAM PROFESSIONALS: Barnes Files Suit Over Autodialed Calls
--------------------------------------------------------------
TYRONE BARNES, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. WINDHAM PROFESSIONALS, INC., Case No. 2:18-cv-01736-
WBS-EFB (E.D. Cal., June 15, 2018), accuses the Defendant of
contacting the Plaintiff and class members on their telephones
using an autodialer or an artificial or prerecorded voice without
their prior express written consent within the meaning of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

Windham Professionals, Inc., is a Massachusetts corporation with
its principal place of business in Salem, New Hampshire.  Windham
provides accounts receivable management and customer care
services.   The Company offers consolidated education, repayment,
and financial literacy services for higher education
organizations to manage the student loan process; business-to-
business services, such as portfolio management, recovery,
attorney/pre-litigation, back office process management, and
account management; and business-to-consumer services in the
areas of customer payment, accounts receivable, and customer
experience.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          L. Timothy Fisher, Esq.
          BURSOR & FISHER, P.A.
          1990 North California Blvd., Suite 940
          Walnut Creek, CA 94596
          Telephone: (925) 300-4455
          Facsimile: (925) 407-2700
          E-mail: ltfisher@bursor.com


                        Asbestos Litigation


ASBESTOS UPDATE: NRG Energy Objects to Claims of ComEd, Exelon
--------------------------------------------------------------
NRG Energy, Inc. has filed an omnibus objection to all remaining
asbestos-related claims of Commonwealth Edison and Exelon,
according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2018.

NRG Energy states, "The Company, through its subsidiary, Midwest
Generation, may be subject to potential asbestos liabilities as a
result of its acquisition of EME.  The Company is currently
analyzing the scope of potential liability as it may relate to
Midwest Generation.  The Company believes that it has established
an adequate reserve for these cases.  On March 27, 2018, ComEd
filed a Motion to Compel Payments of Claims seeking US$61 million
related to asbestos liabilities.  On April 25, 2018, NRG filed an
Omnibus Objection to All Remaining Claims of ComEd and Exelon."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://is.gd/uVifx8


ASBESTOS UPDATE: AMETEK Still Defends Suits at March 31
-------------------------------------------------------
AMETEK, Inc. remains a defendant in a number of asbestos-related
lawsuits, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period
ended March 31, 2018.

AMETEK states, "The Company (including its subsidiaries) has been
named as a defendant in a number of asbestos-related lawsuits.
Certain of these lawsuits relate to a business which was acquired
by the Company and do not involve products which were
manufactured or sold by the Company. In connection with these
lawsuits, the seller of such business has agreed to indemnify the
Company against these claims (the "Indemnified Claims").

"The Indemnified Claims have been tendered to, and are being
defended by, such seller. The seller has met its obligations, in
all respects, and the Company does not have any reason to believe
such party would fail to fulfill its obligations in the future.

"To date, no judgments have been rendered against the Company as
a result of any asbestos-related lawsuit. The Company believes
that it has good and valid defenses to each of these claims and
intends to defend them vigorously."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://is.gd/pMKwaS


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Con Edison Accrues $8MM Liability at March 31
--------------------------------------------------------------
Consolidated Edison, Inc. had accrued liability of US$8 million
for asbestos suits at March 31, 2018, according to the Company's
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2018.  The Company also
deferred US$8 million as regulatory assets related to asbestos
suits at March 31, 2018.

On the other hand, subsidiary Consolidated Edison Company of New
York, Inc. (CECONY) had accrued liability of US$7 million for
asbestos suits and deferred US$7 million as asbestos-related
regulatory assets at March 31, 2018.

The Company states, "Suits have been brought in New York State
and federal courts against the Utilities and many other
defendants, wherein a large number of plaintiffs sought large
amounts of compensatory and punitive damages for deaths and
injuries allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos at various
premises of the Utilities.  The suits that have been resolved,
which are many, have been resolved without any payment by the
Utilities, or for amounts that were not, in the aggregate,
material to them.  The amounts specified in all the remaining
thousands of suits total billions of dollars; however, the
Utilities believe that these amounts are greatly exaggerated,
based on the disposition of previous claims.

"At March 31, 2018, Con Edison and CECONY have accrued their
estimated aggregate undiscounted potential liabilities for these
suits and additional suits that may be brought over the next 15
years.  These estimates were based upon a combination of
modeling, historical data analysis and risk factor assessment.  
Courts have begun, and unless otherwise determined on appeal may
continue, to apply different standards for determining liability
in asbestos suits than the standard that applied historically.  
As a result, the Companies currently believe that there is a
reasonable possibility of an exposure to loss in excess of the
liability accrued for the suits.  The Companies are unable to
estimate the amount or range of such loss.

"In addition, certain current and former employees have claimed
or are claiming workers' compensation benefits based on alleged
disability from exposure to asbestos.  CECONY is permitted to
defer as regulatory assets (for subsequent recovery through
rates) costs incurred for its asbestos lawsuits and workers'
compensation claims."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://is.gd/Uy2YGY


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colfax Had $53.6MM Accrued Liability at March 30
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Colfax Corporation had accrued asbestos liability of
US$53,589,000 and long-term asbestos liability of US$303,134,000
as of March 30, 2018, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended March 30, 2018.

The accrued liability represents current accruals for probable
and reasonably estimable asbestos-related liability costs that
the Company believes the subsidiaries will pay, and unpaid legal
costs related to defending themselves against asbestos-related
liability claims and legal action against the Company's insurers,
which is included in Accrued liabilities in the Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The Company states, "Management's analyses are based on currently
known facts and assumptions.  Projecting future events, such as
new claims to be filed each year, the average cost of resolving
each claim, coverage issues among layers of insurers, the method
in which losses will be allocated to the various insurance
policies, interpretation of the effect on coverage of various
policy terms and limits and their interrelationships, the
continuing solvency of various insurance companies, the amount of
remaining insurance available, as well as the numerous
uncertainties inherent in asbestos litigation could cause the
actual liabilities and insurance recoveries to be higher or lower
than those projected or recorded which could materially affect
the Company's financial condition, results of operations or cash
flow."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://is.gd/HSfqqo


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Colfax Had 18,067 Unresolved Claims at March 30
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colfax Corporation had 18,067 unresolved claims related to
asbestos matters as of March 30, 2018, according to the Company's
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarterly period ended March 30, 2018.

The Company also disclosed that in the three months ended March
30, 2018, there were 1,069 filed and 739 claims resolved.

The Company states, "Claims filed include all asbestos claims for
which notification has been received or a file has been opened.

"Claims resolved include all asbestos claims that have been
settled, dismissed or that are in the process of being settled or
dismissed based upon agreements or understandings in place with
counsel for the claimants."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://is.gd/HSfqqo


ASBESTOS UPDATE: MRC Global Faces 533 Suits at March 31
-------------------------------------------------------
MRC Global Inc. is named a defendant in approximately 533
asbestos-related lawsuits involving approximately 1,143 claims as
of March 31, 2018, according to the Company's Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended March 31, 2018.

The Company states, "We are one of many defendants in lawsuits
that plaintiffs have brought seeking damages for personal
injuries that exposure to asbestos allegedly caused.  Plaintiffs
and their family members have brought these lawsuits against a
large volume of defendant entities as a result of the defendants'
manufacture, distribution, supply or other involvement with
asbestos, asbestos containing-products or equipment or activities
that allegedly caused plaintiffs to be exposed to asbestos.  
These plaintiffs typically assert exposure to asbestos as a
consequence of third-party manufactured products that our MRC
Global (US) Inc. subsidiary purportedly distributed.

"As of March 31, 2018, we are named a defendant in approximately
533 lawsuits involving approximately 1,143 claims.  No asbestos
lawsuit has resulted in a judgment against us to date, with a
majority being settled, dismissed or otherwise resolved.  
Applicable third-party insurance has substantially covered these
claims, and insurance should continue to cover a substantial
majority of existing and anticipated future claims.  Accordingly,
we have recorded a liability for our estimate of the most likely
settlement of asserted claims and a related receivable from
insurers for our estimated recovery, to the extent we believe
that the amounts of recovery are probable.  It is not possible to
predict the outcome of these claims and proceedings.  However, in
our opinion, the likelihood that the ultimate disposition of any
of these claims and legal proceedings will have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated financial statements is
remote."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://is.gd/PGOUPs


ASBESTOS UPDATE: WestRock Co. Had 675 PI Suits at March 31
----------------------------------------------------------
WestRock Company is facing approximately 675 asbestos-related
lawsuits personal injury lawsuits as of March 31, 2018, according
to the Company's Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended March 31,
2018.

The Company states, "We have been named a defendant in asbestos-
related personal injury litigation.  To date, the costs resulting
from the litigation, including settlement costs, have not been
significant.  As of March 31, 2018, there were approximately 675
lawsuits.  We believe that we have substantial insurance
coverage, subject to applicable deductibles and policy limits,
with respect to asbestos claims.

"We have valid defenses to these asbestos-related personal injury
claims and intend to continue to defend them vigorously.  Should
the volume of litigation grow substantially, it is possible that
we could incur significant costs resolving these cases.  We do
not expect the resolution of pending litigation and proceedings
to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial
condition or liquidity.  In any given period or periods, however,
it is possible such proceedings or matters could have a material
adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition
or cash flows."

A full-text copy of the Form 10-Q is available at
https://is.gd/vWRAYV




                            *********


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, Jessenius Pulido, Noemi Irene A.
Adala, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche
Maricon Castillon-Lopez, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G.
Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2018.  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.



                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *