/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR

/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/190408.mbx C L A S S A C T I O N R E P O R T E R Monday, April 8, 2019, Vol. 21, No. 70 Headlines 30 KENMARE HOTEL: Lopez Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act 3M COMPANY: Garcia Sues Over Injuries From Defective Earplugs 7905 TAVERN: Security Staff Seek Unpaid Overtime Wages AMERICAN BOARD: Sued Over Licensing Certification Restrictions AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY: Bumpas Sues Over Illegal SMS Ads ANNIE'S HOMEGROWN: Morrison Files Fraud Class Suit in New York ARAMARK CORP: Lacher Labor Suit Hits Denied Bonuses ASSERTIO THERAPEUTICS: Continues to Defend Huang Class Action ASSOCIATED CREDIT: Eber Suit Asserts FDCPA Breach AZ METRO: Moreno Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages BENJAMIN MOORE: Traynor Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website BENY'S DELICE: Bamaca & Cortes Seek Overtime Pay BR RESTAURANTS: Moreno Sues over Unpaid Wages for Tipped Employees BRAZTECH INT'L: $38MM Burrow Suit Settlement Gets Initial Approval BROOK TAUBE: Court Halts Vote on Medley-Sierra Merger C.A.G. CREDIT: Naiman Sues over Wide Scale Illegal Telemarketing CARRIER CORP: Cormier Bid to Certify Class Taken Under Submission CENTURY GOLF: Brana Appeals Order in Izzio Suit to Fifth Circuit CHOICE HOTELS: Lopez Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act CONAGRA BRANDS: Faces Estrada Securities Suit in N.D. Illinois CONCORD HOSPITALITY: Lopez Alleges Disabilities Act Violation CONDENSER & CHILLER: Mistras Group Moves Gregor Suit to C.D. Cal. CONTOURE LASER: Torres Suit Asserts TCPA Breach COURIER EXPRESS: Crosby Wants to Stop Storage of Biometric Data COWEN INC: Still Defends Fletcher Class Action CRITICAL INTERVENTION: Kenny Sues Over No-Poaching Policy CV SCIENCES: Jane Ish Named New Lead Plaintiff in Sallustro Suit DRAGON INSIDE: Dennis Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act DREAM HOTEL GROUP: Lopez Alleges Violation under ADA DURST ORGANIZATION: Fischler Alleges Violation under ADA ELLIE MAE: Stevens Balks at Merger Deal with Thoma Bravo EMPLOYERS INSURANCE: Removes FSO Suit to Del. Dist. Ct. EPIC SECURITY: Seeks 2nd Cir. Review of Ruling in Williams Suit FAMOUS DAVES: Graham Hits Illegal Tip Pool FEDERAL NATIONAL: 9th Circuit Appeal Filed in Banneck Class Suit FEDERAL NATIONAL: Walsh Appeals Ariz. Dist. Ct. Ruling to 9th Cir. FERRELLGAS PARTNERS: Appeal in N.Y. Class Action Ongoing FIORELLA INSURANCE AGENCY: Atehortua Hits Illegal SMS Ad Blasts FIRST IMPRESSION: Faces Blackwell & Fishman Suit for Spam Texts FLEXSTEEL INDUSTRIES: Hernandez Suit Removed to C.D. California FLORIDA TECHNICAL: Kempfer Hits Illegal SMS Ad Blasts FLORIDA: Demler Sues FDOC Over Digital Media Player Confiscation FMR LLC: Summers Sues over 401(k) Savings Plans FREEDOM BOAT: Bishop Suit Alleges Disabilities Act Breach GENENTECH INC: Wilson Sues over Sales of Cancer Drugs GROWERS' CHOICE: Lizarraga Hits Unpaid Wages, Missing Pay Slips HAMPTON MARINE: Bishop Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act HORIZON HOUSE: Jones Seeks Unpaid Overtime Compensation IDT CORP: Parties in Sanchez Suit Agree to Dismissal JACOB LAW GROUP: Brownlee Asserts Breach of FDCPA JO MALONE: Olsen Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act KLEINFELD: Korolyshyn Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages KPMG LLP: Cosby Seeks to Certify Miller Energy Stockholder Classes KROGER COMPANY: O'Neil Sues Over Ice Cream Product's Misleading Ads LEADERS IN COMMUNITY: Brooks et al. Seek to Certify RICO Class LIBERTY TAX: Bid to Dismiss NY Consolidated Suit Still Pending LIBERTY TAX: Continues to Defend Labrado Class Action LIBERTY TAX: Trial Ongoing in Delaware Stockholder Suit MASHCOLE PROPERTY: Does Not Pay Proper Wages, Waye Suit Says MEDICAL BUSINESS: Gause Seeks to Cert. FCCPA Class, FDCPA Subclass MEDICAL STAFFING: Junkersfeld Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages MESSAGE COMMUNICATIONS: Hardin Sues over Unwanted Telephone Calls MR. COOPER: Removes Niedzinski Suit to District of Massachusetts NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Mack Seeks Damages Over Personal Injuries NEW YORK, NY: Belle Files Civil Rights Suit in New York NEW YORK: Drivers File Suit v. DMV Over License Suspension NEWLINK GENETICS: Nguyen Appeals Order and Judgment to 2nd Cir. NIAGARA CREDIT: Camarda Alleges FDCPA Violation OCULAR THERAPEUTIX: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss DEXTENZA Suit P&G AUDITORS: Faces Bediako & Miller Labor Suit PEPPERIDGE FARM: Sayward et al. Suit Transferred to C.D. Calif. PRET A MANGER: Falsely Sells Foods as Natural, Cunningham Claims PRINSTON PHARMACEUTICAL: Molinaro Suit Moved to D. New Jersey PUTNAM AUTOMOTIVE: Contreras Seeks Unpaid Wages, Overtime Pay RELISH CONCESSION: Mezon Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages RENAISSANCE POWER: Dean Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls REVOLUTION LIGHTING: Bishop Files Securities Class Action in NY ROADRUNNER TRANS: Faces Gomez Class Action in California ROYAL SEAS CRUISES: Bell Files Class Suit in S.D. Florida SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Lee et al. Sue over Taxi Medallion Transfers SETTLEMENT MARKETING: Levinton Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages SI FINANCIAL: Bushanksy Balks at Merger Deal with Berkshire SMOKER'S OUTLET: Kuhlman Seeks OT Pay, Hits Inaccurate Pay Slips SOGOU INC: Dore Suit Hits Share Price Drop SOUTH FLORIDA RACING: Lawrence Seeks Certification of FACTA Class SUNPATH LTD: Jackson Sues Over Automated Telemarketing Calls TEAM SCHIERL: Does Not Pay Overtime Wages, Abrahamson Suit Says TITAN CONSTRUCTION: Workers Seek Unpaid Overtime Wages TOP'S PERSONNEL: Bid for Class Certification Denied TREMONT ENTERPRISES: Does Not Pay Workers' OT Wages, Batista Says UNITED MICROELECTRONICS: Meyer Files Securities Class Action in NY UNITED PARCEL: Szewczyk Seeks Wages & OT for Drivers & Helpers UNITED STATES: Ellison Files Class Action UNITED TECHNOLOGIES: Oddo's Bid to Certify Class Under Submission VEOLIA ENERGY: Parker Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. WEICHERT CO: Misclassified Workers, Kennedy Suit Says WELLS FARGO: Faces Lewis Adler TCPA Suit WW GRAINGER: Grigg Seeks to Recover Back Wages Under FLSA & IMWL XALER: Derval Suit Assets Invasion of Privacy Under TCPA ZHEJIANG HUAHAI: Lewis Suit Transferred to District of New Jersey ********* 30 KENMARE HOTEL: Lopez Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act ---------------------------------------------------------- 30 Kenmare Hotel, Inc. d/b/a The Nolitan Hotel is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Victor Lopez, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. 30 Kenmare Hotel, Inc. d/b/a The Nolitan Hotel, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02718 (S.D. N.Y., March 26, 2019). 30 Kenmare Hotel, Inc. is a 4-star hotel.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq. 150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: nyjg@aol.com 3M COMPANY: Garcia Sues Over Injuries From Defective Earplugs ------------------------------------------------------------- ROBERTO GARCIA, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated v. 3M COMPANY, Case No. 1:19-cv-21005 (S.D. Fla., March 14, 2019), arises out of alleged serious and permanent personal injuries sustained by the Plaintiff and others for using alleged defective earplugs in training and/or on active military duty domestically and abroad. Roberto Garcia, a veteran of the United States military, brings this federal Complaint against 3M: (1) on his own behalf to recover damages for his personal injuries incurred while in training and/or on active military duty, resulting from the Defendant's defective and unreasonably dangerous product, the Dual-ended Combat Arms(TM) earplugs (Version 2 CAEv.2); and (2) on behalf of himself and all other similarly-situated individuals, requesting to establish a Court-supervised fund to provide medical monitoring to active-duty and veteran service members of the armed forces of the United States of America due to their increased risk from using 3M's defective products, and to extend some of the claims deadlines for fraudulent tolling. 3M is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the state of Delaware with its principal place of business in St. Paul, Minnesota. Among other things, the Defendant is in the business of designing, manufacturing, and selling worker safety products, including hearing protectors and respirators. The Defendant has a dominant market share in virtually every safety product market, including hearing protection. 3M is one of the largest companies in the country.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam M. Moskowitz, Esq. Howard M. Bushman, Esq. Joseph M. Kaye, Esq. THE MOSKOWITZ LAW FIRM, PLLC 2 Alhambra Plaza, Suite 601 Coral Gables, FL 33134 Telephone: (305) 740-1423 E-mail: adam@moskowitz-law.com howard@moskowitz-law.com joseph@moskowitz-law.com - and - R. Seth Crompton, Esq. HOLLAND LAW FIRM, LLC 300 N. Tucker Blvd., Suite 801 St. Louis, MO 63101 Telephone: (314) 241-8111 Facsimile: (314) 241-5554 E-mail: scrompton@allfela.com 7905 TAVERN: Security Staff Seek Unpaid Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------ Carlos Cifuentes, Ana Maria Pulido and Calixto Espinal, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. 7905 Tavern Corp. and Hernan Rejas, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00994 (E.D. N.Y., February 19, 2019), seeks compensatory, punitive and liquidated damages, back pay and attorney's fees for violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Laws. 7905 Tavern operates as Melao, a nightclub in Jackson Heights, New York where Plaintiffs work as security staff. They claim to have worked in excess of 40 hours per week without overtime compensation, and denied spread-of-hours payments and wage notices and proper paystubs. They also claim to be denied meal/rest breaks and day-offs. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Michael Taubenfeld, Esq. FISHER TAUBENFELD LLP 233 Broadway, Suite 2340 New York, NY 10279 Tel: (212) 571-0700 Fax: (212) 233-3801 AMERICAN BOARD: Sued Over Licensing Certification Restrictions -------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Mannis, M.D., Tonianne French, M.D. and Louis Lim, M.D., individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, vs. American Board Of Medical Specialties, American Board Of Anesthesiology and American Board Of Emergency Medicine, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00341, (S.D. Cal., February 19, 2019), seeks damages, injunctive relief and all other appropriate relief for violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act and the California Business and Professions Code. Defendants control the country's medical specialty certifications. Plaintiffs are medical practitioners who claim that Defendants have restricted the licensing certifications by implementing a barrage of allegedly useless and costly certifications, mostly from their own affiliates and subsidiaries. Plaintiff is represented by: David W. Mitchell, Esq. Carmen A. Medici, Esq. Arthur L. Shingler III, Esq. ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP 655 West Broadway, Suite 1900 San Diego, CA 92101-8498 Telephone: (619) 231-1058 Fax: (619) 231-7423 (fax) - and - BRIAN J. ROBBINS, Esq. GEORGE C. AGUILAR, Esq. JENNY L. DIXON, Esq. ERIC M. CARRINO, Esq. ROBBINS ARROYO LLP 5040 Shoreham Place San Diego, CA 92122 Telephone: (619) 525-3990 Fax: (619) 525-3991 AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY: Bumpas Sues Over Illegal SMS Ads ---------------------------------------------------------- Paul Bumpas, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Americans for Prosperity, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00122 (W.D. Mo., February 19, 2019), seeks an injunction prohibiting Adams Toyota from continuing to engage in illegal text messaging ads. The lawsuit also seeks attorneys' fees and costs for violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Americans for Prosperity is a nonprofit corporation that recruits concerned citizens in its cause. To further its purpose, increase its membership and donors and spread its political ideology, it uses auto-dialers to send automated text messages, usually without prior consent, notes the complaint. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Ari N. Rodopoulos, Esq. WOOD LAW FIRM, LLC 1100 Main Street, Suite 1800 Kansas City, MO 64105-5171 Tel: (816) 256-3582 Fax: (816) 337-4243 Email: ari@woodlaw.com ANNIE'S HOMEGROWN: Morrison Files Fraud Class Suit in New York -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Annie's Homegrown, Inc. The case is styled as Aurora Morrison, on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Annie's Homegrown, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02530 (S.D. N.Y., March 21, 2019). The docket states the nature of suit as Fraud. Annie's Homegrown, Inc. produces food products. It offers pastas, snacks, soups, frozen snacks, baked items, dressings, condiments and sauces, and special diet products. The company offers its products through retail stores in the United States. The company was founded in 1989 and is based in Berkeley, California. Annie's Homegrown, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of General Mills, Inc.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: C.K. Lee, Esq. Lee Litigation Group, PLLC 30 East 39th Street 2nd Floor New York, NY 10016 Tel: (212) 465-1188 Fax: (212) 465-1181 Email: cklee@leelitigation.com ARAMARK CORP: Lacher Labor Suit Hits Denied Bonuses --------------------------------------------------- Henry J. Lacher and Michael Ruskowski, individually and on behalf of all other similarly situated individuals, Plaintiffs v. Aramark Corporation, Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00687 (E.D. Pa. February 19, 2019), seeks redress for breach of contract, promissory estoppel and unjust enrichment under the South Carolina Payment of Wages Act. Defendant is in the business of providing food, facilities, and uniform services to customers such as schools and universities, hospitals, convention centers, and sports and entertainment venues throughout the world. Ruskowski has worked for Defendant since October 2009 as Director of Environmental Services while Lacher worked as a District Facilities Manager. They were was both promised annual bonuses pursuant to the applicable Bonus Plan but have yet to receive them. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Peter Winebrake, Esq. WINEBRAKE & SANTILLO, LLC 715 Twining Road, Suite 211 Dresher, PA 19025 Phone: (215) 884-2491 Facsimile: (215) 884-2492 Email: pwinebrake@winebrakelaw.com - and - Shannon Liss-Riordan, Esq. Adelaide H. Pagano, Esq. LICHTEN & LISS-RIORDAN, P.C. 729 Boylston Street, Suite 2000 Boston, MA 02116 Tel: (617) 994-5800 Email: sliss@llrlaw.com apagano@llrlaw.com - and - David E. Rothstein, Esq. ROTHSTEIN LAW FIRNI, PA 1312 Augusta Street Greenville, SC 29605 Tel: (864) 232-5870 Fax: (864) 241-1386 ASSERTIO THERAPEUTICS: Continues to Defend Huang Class Action ------------------------------------------------------------- Assertio Therapeutics, Inc. said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2019, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, that the company continues to defend a securities class action entitled, Huang v. Depomed et al. On August 23, 2017, the Company, its current chief executive officer and president, its former chief executive officer and president, and its former chief financial officer were named as defendants in a purported federal securities law class action filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California (Huang v. Depomed et al., No. 3:17-cv-4830-JST, N.D. Cal.). The action alleges violations of Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and Rule 10b-5 relating to certain prior disclosures of the Company about its business, compliance, and operational policies and practices concerning the sales and marketing of its opioid products and contends that the conduct supporting the alleged violations affected the value of Company common stock and is seeking damages and other relief. In an amended complaint filed on February 6, 2018, the lead plaintiff (referred to in its pleadings as the Depomed Investor Group), which seeks to represent a class consisting of all purchasers of Company common stock between July 29, 2015 and August 6, 2017, asserted the same claims arising out of the same and similar disclosures against the Company and the same individuals as were involved in the original complaint. The Company and the individuals filed a motion to dismiss the amended complaint on April 9, 2018. The lead plaintiff filed an opposition to the motion on June 8, 2018. The Company and the individuals filed a reply in support of their motion to dismiss on July 23, 2018. Oral arguments took place on December 13, 2018. The Company believes that the action is without merit and intends to contest it vigorously. Assertio Therapeutics, Inc., a specialty pharmaceutical company, provides medicines in neurology, orphan, and specialty areas in the United States. The company was formerly known as Depomed Inc. and changed its name to Assertio Therapeutics, Inc. in August 2018. Assertio Therapeutics, Inc. was founded in 1995 and is headquartered in Lake Forest, Illinois. ASSOCIATED CREDIT: Eber Suit Asserts FDCPA Breach ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Associated Credit Services, Inc. The case is styled as Zeldy Eber, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated consumers, Plaintiff v. Associated Credit Services, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-01655 (E.D. N.Y., March 22, 2019). The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Associated Credit Services, Inc. is a debt collection agency in Westborough, Massachusetts.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Adam Jon Fishbein, Esq. Adam J. Fishbein, P.C. 735 Central Avenue Woodmere, NY 11598 Tel: (516) 668-6945 Email: fishbeinadamj@gmail.com AZ METRO: Moreno Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------ The Plaintiff in the case captioned Leslie Moreno, Individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. AZ Metro Distributors LLC, Defendant, Case No. 506437/2019 (Sup. Ct. N.Y., Kings Cty., March 25, 2019) seeks unpaid overtime wages from Defendant for working more than forty hours in a week and not being paid an overtime rate of at least 1.5 times the regular rate and 1.5 times the applicable minimum wage rate for each and all such hours over forty in a week, and entitled to costs and attorney's fees, pursuant to the New York Minimum Wage Act ("NYMWA"), and the N.Y. Lab. Law,("NYLL"). Plaintiff was not paid any wages for her overtime hours (hours over 40 in a week) worked in a week, for each week during her employment with Defendant. The Defendant failed to pay Plaintiff at a rate of at least 1.5 times her regular rate and 1.5 times the applicable New York State Minimum wage rate for hours worked in excess of 40 in a week, for each week during the period of her employment with Defendants, asserts the complaint. Plaintiff Moreno was employed by Defendant from 2016 to February 15, 2019. Defendant was engaged in the beverage distribution business and had contracts with companies such as Arizona Drinks.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Abdul K. Hassan, Esq. Abdul Hassan Law Group, PLLC 215-28 Hillside Avenue, Queens Village, NY 11427 Phone: 718-740-1000 Fax: 718-740-2000 Email: abdul@abdulhassan.com BENJAMIN MOORE: Traynor Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website ------------------------------------------------------------ YASEEN TRAYNOR, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. BENJAMIN MOORE & CO., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02688 (S.D. N.Y., March 26, 2019) is a civil rights action against the Defendant for its failure to design, construct, maintain, and operate its website to be fully accessible to and independently usable by Plaintiff and other blind or visually-impaired people. Because Defendant's website www.benjaminmoore.com is not equally accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers, it violates the the Americans with Disabilities Act, says the complaint. Plaintiff seeks a permanent injunction to cause a change in the Defendant's corporate policies, practices, and procedures so that the Defendant's website will become and remain accessible to blind and visually-impaired consumers. Plaintiff is a visually-impaired and legally blind person who requires screen-reading software to read website content using his computer. Defendant is a paint supply manufacturer and retailer.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Dov Mittelman, Esq. STEIN SAKS, PLLC 285 Passaic Street Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 282-6500 Fax: (201) 282-6501 Email: Mittelmandov@yahoo.com BENY'S DELICE: Bamaca & Cortes Seek Overtime Pay ------------------------------------------------ A class action complaint has been filed against Beny's Delice LLC in Brooklyn. The case is captioned EDI EDUARDO BAMACA and LIONEL VAZQUEZ CORTES, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. BENY'S DELICE LLC (D/B/A BENY'S DELICE), BENY'S EPICERIE INC. (D/B/A BENY'S DELICE), M2M F&B LLC (D/B/A BENY'S DELICE), DAVID BENIZERI (A.K.A. BENIZERS), and MAX DOE, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-01627 (E.D.N.Y., March 21, 2019). The Plaintiffs, who were employed as cooks, worked for Defendants in excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage, overtime, and spread of hours compensation for the hours that they worked. Defendants allegedly failed to maintain accurate record-keeping of the hours worked and failed to pay Plaintiffs appropriately for any hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any additional overtime premium. They also failed to pay Plaintiffs the required "spread of hours" pay for any day in which they had to work over 10 hours a day. Defendants repeatedly failed to pay Plaintiffs wages on a timely basis. Defendants maintained a policy and practice of requiring Plaintiffs and other employees to work in excess of 40 hours per week without providing the minimum wage and overtime compensation required by federal and state law and regulations. The Defendants own, operate, or control a French pastry shop and cafe, located at 903 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY 11238 under the name Beny's Delice. Individual defendants David Benizeri (a.k.a. Benizers) and Max Doe, serve or served as owners, managers, principals, or agents of defendant corporations and, through these corporate entities, operate or operated the French pastry shop and cafe as a joint or unified enterprise. The Plaintiffs are represented by: MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C. 60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510 New York, NY 10165 Telephone: (212) 317-1200 Facsimile: (212) 317-1620 BR RESTAURANTS: Moreno Sues over Unpaid Wages for Tipped Employees ------------------------------------------------------------------ A lawsuit against BR Restaurants Holdings, LLC, and Blue Ribbon Restaurants, LLC, seeks to recover unpaid wages, pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. The case is a purported class and collective action brought on behalf of "Tipped Employees" who work or have worked at restaurants operating under the trade name Famous Dave's BBQ that are owned and operated by the Defendants. According to the complaint, Famous Dave's systematically and willfully deprived Plaintiff and Tipped Employees of minimum wages and overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and the Michigan Workforce Opportunity Act, failing to satisfy the notice requirements of the tip credit provisions of the FLSA and MWOWA. Due to Defendants' unlawful failure to properly inform Tipped Employees of its intention to utilize a "tip credit", the Defendants have improperly applied a "tip credit" against the wages paid to Plaintiff and current and former Tipped Employees, thus paying them less than the mandated minimum wage. Moreover, Defendants' Tipped Employees often clocked in to Defendants' time-keeping systems under different job codes which paid different hourly rates. When Tipped Employees worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek working under different job codes, Defendants only paid the employee overtime based on the rate for the job code the employee worked those overtime hours. In short, and in contravention of applicable law, the Defendants failed to pay overtime at a blended rate based upon a weighted average of the hourly rates for all the job codes worked the week the overtime was incurred. Lastly, when Tipped Employees worked catering events, Defendants improperly capped the amount of tips that could be retained by Tipped Employees working the event, and retained amounts in excess of the capped amount, in violation of Michigan common law, the lawsuit says. The case is captioned VICTORIA MORENO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. BR RESTAURANTS HOLDINGS, LLC; BLUE RIBBON RESTAURANTS, LLC d/b/a FAMOUS DAVE'S; BLUE RIBBON RESTAURANTS II, LLC d/b/a FAMOUS DAVE'S; BLUE RIBBON RESTAURANTS III, LLC d/b/a FAMOUS DAVE'S BBQ; BLUE RIBBON RESTAURANTS NOVI, LLC d/b/a FAMOUS DAVE'S BBQ; BLUE RIBBON RESTAURANTS ROCHESTER, LLC d/b/a FAMOUS DAVE'S BBQ; WINDY CITY RESTAURANT HOLDINGS, LLC; BUCKEYE BBQ, LLC; CAPITAL BLUE RIBBON RESTAURANTS, LLC; COMMONWEALTH BLUE RIBBON RESTAURANTS, LLC; ELLIOT BAUM and DOE DEFENDANTS 1-10, the Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-10515-PDB-RSW (E.D. Mich., Feb. 20, 2019).[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff and the Proposed Classes: Gerald D. Wells, III, Esq. Robert J. Gray, Esq. CONNOLLY WELLS & GRAY, LLP 2200 Renaissance Blvd., Suite 275 King of Prussia, PA 19406 Telephone: 610-822-3700 Facsimile: 610-822-3800 E-mail: gwells@cwg-law.com rgray@cwg-law.com - and - Gary F. Lynch, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Ave, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Telephone: 412-322-9243 Facsimile: 412-231-0246 E-mail: glynch@carlsonlynch.com - and - Daniel Myers, Esq. THE LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL O. MYERS 4020 Copper View Ste. 225 Traverse City, MI 49684 E-mail: dmyers@domlawoffice.com BRAZTECH INT'L: $38MM Burrow Suit Settlement Gets Initial Approval ------------------------------------------------------------------ U.S. Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres grants preliminary approval to the $37,995,000 class action settlement in the consolidated lawsuit styled WILLIAM BURROW, OMA LOUISE BURROW, ERNEST D. BEDWELL, AND SUZANNE BEDWELL v. FORJAS TAURUS S.A. and BRAZTECH INTERNATIONAL, L.C., Case No. 1:16-cv-21606-EGT (S.D. Fla.). On March 2, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed their First Amended and Consolidated Class Action Complaint asserting class claims for breach of warranty, strict products liability and negligence under Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act, and seeking damages, injunctive and other relief against the Defendants in connection with alleged defects in the design and manufacture of the Class Revolvers. Discovery revealed that there were approximately 255,000 Class Revolvers manufactured during the Class Period that were sold in the United States. The Settlement Class is defined as: All individuals in the United States, including its territories and possessions, who owned one or more Class Revolver(s) on the [Preliminary Approval Date]. Excluded from the Settlement Class are (a) all state, local, or federal bodies or agencies, etc., or Persons in an official capacity; (b) the District Judge and Magistrate Judge to whom the Action is assigned and any appellate judge assigned to any appeal in the Action, together with any member of their staffs and immediate families; (c) any Successful Opt-Out, and (d) any other Person who has been recognized by Order of the Court as excluded from the Settlement Class for any reason. There are four major components to this Settlement: (1) the safety warning; (2) an Enhanced Warranty, under which Class Members may submit their Class Revolvers for Enhanced Warranty Service one time, automatically extended to present and future owners of all Class Revolvers; (3) an Enhanced Warranty Service that provides for the free shipping, inspection, repair and/or replacement, certification and cleaning of each Class Revolver submitted; and (4) an Inconvenience Payment to compensate class members for having to have their Class Revolvers submitted for inspection. All Class Members who do not opt out, who avail themselves of the Enhanced Warranty Service, and submit a valid claim during the Claim Period, will receive the "Inconvenience Payment" of $50 per class member. Under the Settlement, Class Counsel have reserved the right to seek a reasonable Service Award, not to exceed $7,500, for each Class Representative for his or her service as the named representative of the Settlement Class. Under the Settlement, Class Counsel has reserved the right to petition the Court for an award of attorneys' fees and reimbursement of costs and expenses incurred in the prosecution of this case, in an amount not to exceed $5,553,000. The attorney's fee negotiated by Class Counsel equates to approximately 14% of the $37,995,000 value of the benefits created by the proposed Settlement. The Court approves the Notice Program as the best notice practicable under the circumstances, and as meeting the requirements of due process under Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court directs that notice be provided to the Settlement Class in accordance with the Notice Program. The procedure for Settlement Class Members to object to final approval of the Settlement Agreement or for Persons to exclude themselves from the Settlement Class is established as set forth in the Order, and the Opt-Out and Objection Deadline is July 15, 2019. The Court approves and appoints Epiq Class Action & Claims Solutions to serve as Claims Administrator, with Hilsoft Notifications (a business unit of Epiq) serving as Notice Provider, to perform the tasks as set forth in the Settlement Agreement and execute the Class Notice and, further, authorizes and approves Braztech's role in the claims process as provided for in Part III(C)(2) of the Settlement Agreement. The Court authorizes and approves Defendants' continuing the Early Warning Program and beginning to provide the Enhanced Warranty Service prior to Final Approval and approves the evidentiary preclusion provided for in Part IV(B) of the Settlement Agreement. A Final Approval Hearing will be held on August 27, 2019.[CC] BROOK TAUBE: Court Halts Vote on Medley-Sierra Merger ----------------------------------------------------- Law360 reports that stockholders can't vote on a complex merger involving Medley Capital Corp. and Sierra Income Corp. until disclosures are amended to provide additional information to Medley Capital's investors about conflicts of interest. The Court held that "Medley Capital's directors violated their fiduciary duties in entering into the Proposed Transactions. Medley Capital is ordered to issue corrective disclosures in accordance with this decision and to permit the stockholders sufficient time in advance of any stockholder vote to assimilate the information." Prior to this, a motion was filed seeking an order scheduling an expedited trial prior to the March 8 vote on the merger, or in the alternative, a preliminary injunction hearing followed by an expedited trial. The proposed mergers will allow Medley Management to sell their interests at a premium far higher than any third-party would pay, perpetuating their advisory fee stream through new agreements and increase their equity in any subsequent sale of the combined company. Plaintiffs filed suit seeking to block the proposed mergers. The case is Frontfour Capital Group LLC and Frontfour Master Fund, LTD., on behalf of themselves and similarly situated stockholders of Medley Capital Corporation, Plaintiffs, v. Brook Taube, Seth Taube, Jeff Tonkel, Mark Lerdal, Karin Hirtler-garvey, John E. Mack, Arthur S. Ainsberg, Medley Management, Inc., Sierra Income Corporation and Medley Capital Corporation, Defendants, Case No. 2019-0100-KJSM, filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware on February 11, 2019).[BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Lori Marks-Esterman, Esq. Adrienne M. Ward, Esq. OLSHAN FROME WOLOSKY LLP 1325 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10019 Tel: (212) 451-2300 Email: lmarksesterman@olshanlaw.com award@olshanlaw.com - and - A. Thompson Bayliss, Esq. ABRAMS & BAYLISS LLP 20 Montchanin Road, Suite 200 Wilmington, DE 19807 Tel: (302) 778-1000 Email: Bayliss@AbramsBayliss.com C.A.G. CREDIT: Naiman Sues over Wide Scale Illegal Telemarketing ---------------------------------------------------------------- Sidney Naiman, individually and on behalf of a class of all persons and entities similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. C.A.G. Credit and Business Services; and Alan Hayon, the Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-01737-JZB (D. Ariz., March 15, 2019), seeks to redress Defendants' wide scale illegal telemarketing under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. C.A.G. Credit and Business Services and its owner Alan Hayon made telemarketing calls to a cellular telephone number of Mr. Naiman for the purposes of advertising its goods and services using an automated dialing system, which is prohibited by the TCPA, the lawsuit says. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff never consented to receive the calls, which were placed to him for telemarketing purposes. Because telemarketing campaigns generally place calls to thousands or even millions of potential customers en masse, the Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of a proposed nationwide class of other persons who received illegal telemarketing calls from or on behalf of the Defendants. C.A.G. Credit and Business Services engages this use of this equipment and the technology of recorded messages because it allows for thousands of automated calls to be placed at one time, but its telemarketing representatives, who are paid by the hour, only talk to individuals who pick up the telephone.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff: Trinette G. Kent, Esq. LEMBERG LAW 3219 E Camelback Rd No. 588 Phoenix, AZ 85018 Telephone: (480) 247-9644 Facsimile: (480) 717-4781 E-mail: tkent@lemberglaw.com - and - Anthony Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: (508) 221-1510 E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com CARRIER CORP: Cormier Bid to Certify Class Taken Under Submission ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Hon. Christina A. Snyder takes under submission three motions filed in the lawsuit captioned PAUL CORMIER, ET AL. v. CARRIER CORPORATION, Case No. 2:18-cv-07030-CAS-E (C.D. Cal.): 1. Plaintiffs' motion for class certification (filed January 18, 2019); 2. Plaintiffs' motion to limit consideration of the expert report of Wayne Schneyer (filed January 18, 2019); and 3. Defendants' motion to exclude opinions of Paul J. Sikorsky (filed February 1, 2019).[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Timothy Mathews, Esq. Zachary Beatty, Esq. CHIMICLES AND TIKELLIS LLP 361 West Lancaster Ave One Haverford Centre Haverford, PA 19041 Telephone: (610) 642-8500 E-mail: TimothyMathews@chimicles.com ZPB@chimicles.com - and - Kolin Tang, Esq. James Shah, Esq. SHEPHERD FINKELMAN MILLER AND SHAH LLP 1401 Dove St., Suite 540 Newport Beach, CA 92660-2425 Telephone: (323) 510-4060 E-mail: ktang@sfmslaw.com jshah@sfmslaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Devin Anderson, Esq. Jonathan Faria, Esq. Allen Kenneth, Esq. KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 333 S Hope St. Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 680-8400 E-mail: devin.anderson@kirkland.com jonathan.faria@kirkland.com winn.allen@kirkland.com CENTURY GOLF: Brana Appeals Order in Izzio Suit to Fifth Circuit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Jillian Brana and Anthony Metzger filed an appeal from a Court ruling in the lawsuit entitled Jillian Izzio, et al. v. Century Golf Partners Management, L.P., Case Nos. 3:14-CV-3194 and 3:15-CV-861, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas. The appellate case is captioned as Jillian Izzio, et al. v. Century Golf Partners Management, L.P., Case No. 19-10306, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, Anthony Metzger and Jillian Brana filed an appeal from a court order in the lawsuit. That appellate case is styled as Jillian Izzio, et al. v. Century Golf Partners Management, L.P., Case No. 16-11463. The Case is brought against the Defendant for alleged violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York Labor Law.[BN] Plaintiffs-Appellees JILLIAN IZZIO, on Behalf of Themselves and all Others Similarly Situated; KARA ASHBY; and HEATHER ZOELLER, on Behalf of Themselves and all Others Similarly Situated, are represented by: Adam Gonnelli, Esq. Innessa Melamed Huot, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI, L.L.P. 685 3rd Avenue New York, NY 10017 Telephone: (212) 983-9330 E-mail: agonnelli@faruqilaw.com ihuot@faruqilaw.com - and - Brian J. Hutchison, Esq. MUSCATO, DIMILLO & VONA, L.L.P. 107 East Avenue Lockport, NY 14094 Telephone: (716) 434-9177 - and - Kenneth M. Stillman, Esq. 11300 N. Central Expressway Royal Central Tower Dallas, TX 75243 Telephone: (214) 522-0633 Facsimile: (214) 526-0849 E-mail: kstill53@gmail.com Movants-Appellants ANTHONY METZGER and JILLIAN BRANA are represented by: Jimmy Derek Braziel, Esq. LEE & BRAZIEL, L.L.P. 1801 N. Lamar Street Dallas, TX 75202 Telephone: (214) 749-1400 E-mail: jdbraziel@l-b-law.com - and - Annette Gifford, Esq. THOMAS & SOLOMON, L.L.P. 693 East Avenue Rochester, NY 14607 Telephone: (585) 272-0540 E-mail: agifford@theemploymentattorneys.com CHOICE HOTELS: Lopez Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act ------------------------------------------------------------- Choice Hotels International, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Victor Lopez, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Choice Hotels International, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02653 (S.D. N.Y., March 25, 2019). Choice Hotels International, Inc., together with its subsidiaries, operates as a hotel franchisor worldwide. It operates through Hotel Franchising and Corporate & Other segments. The company franchises lodging properties under the brand names of Comfort Inn, Comfort Suites, Quality, Clarion, Clarion Pointe, Sleep Inn, Econo Lodge, Rodeway Inn, MainStay Suites, Suburban Extended Stay Hotel, WoodSpring Suites, Cambria Hotels, and Ascend Hotel Collection. It also develops and markets cloud-based technology products to the hotel industry.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq. 150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: nyjg@aol.com CONAGRA BRANDS: Faces Estrada Securities Suit in N.D. Illinois -------------------------------------------------------------- JASON ESTRADA, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. CONAGRA BRANDS, INC., SEAN M. CONNOLLY, DAVID S. MARBERGER, ROBERT G. WISE, ANIL ARORA, THOMAS K. BROWN, STEPHEN G. BUTLER, JOIE A. GREGOR, RAJIVE JOHRI, RICHARD H. LENNY, RUTH ANN MARSHALL, and CRAIG P. OMTVEDT, Case No. 1:19-cv-01805 (N.D. Ill., March 14, 2019), alleges that the Defendants engaged in a fraudulent scheme to artificially inflate the Company's stock price. The action is also brought on behalf of all persons or entities, who purchased shares of Conagra's common stock pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's alleged false and/or misleading registration statement, prospectus and prospectus supplement issued in connection with the Company's secondary public offering, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Act of 1933. The Complaint alleges that in Conagra's Offering Documents and throughout the Class Period, the Defendants failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's financial well-being, including the troubled acquisition of Pinnacle Foods, Inc. Conagra is incorporated in Delaware, and the Company's principal executive offices are located in Chicago, Illinois. The Individual Defendants are directors and officers of Conagra. Conagra is a branded consumer packaged goods food company that operates in many sectors of the food industry, with a focus on the sale of branded, private branded, and value-added consumer food, as well as foodservice items and ingredients. Conagra manufactures and markets packaged foods for retail consumers, restaurants and institutions. The Company has a portfolio of well-known food brands, including Reddi-wip, Hunt's, Healthy Choice, Slim Jim and Orville Redenbacher's.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. J. Alexander Hood II, Esq. Jonathan Lindenfeld, 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 jlindenfeld@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 Facsimile: (212) 697-7296 E-mail: peretz@bgandg.com CONCORD HOSPITALITY: Lopez Alleges Disabilities Act Violation ------------------------------------------------------------- Concord Hospitality Enterprises Company, LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Victor Lopez and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Concord Hospitality Enterprises Company, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02626 (S.D. N.Y., March 24, 2019). Concord Hospitality Enterprises Company, LLC is a property management company in Raleigh, North Carolina.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq. 150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: nyjg@aol.com CONDENSER & CHILLER: Mistras Group Moves Gregor Suit to C.D. Cal. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Defendants Mistras Group, Inc. and Quality Services Laboratories, Inc., removed on March 14, 2019, the action styled GEOFFREY GREGOR, as an individual and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CONDENSER & CHILLER SERVICES, a business entity form unknown; QSL INSPECTION, INC., a corporation origin unknown; THE MISTRAS GROUP, INC., a Delaware corporation; and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Case No. 30-2019-01048981-CU-WT-CJC, from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Orange to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 8:19-cv-00514 to the proceeding. According to the notice of removal, Mistras Group, Inc. was improperly named in the Complaint as "The Mistras Group, Inc." The Plaintiff also incorrectly named QSL Inspection, Inc. as a defendant in this matter. Effective December 13, 2000, QSL Inspection, Inc. changed its name to Quality Services Laboratories, Inc. On February 4, 2019, Geoffrey Gregor filed the State Court Action. The action involves the Plaintiff's claims alleged against the Defendants for wrongful constructive termination, failure to hire in violation of public policy, retaliation, and unfair competition. The Plaintiff also alleges intentional and negligent infliction of emotional distress. Further, the Plaintiff alleges a failure to pay prevailing wages, overtime, proper wages for travel, and timely wages upon termination, in addition to a failure to provide meal periods, rest periods, and compliant wage statements, all in violation of the California Labor Code.[BN] Defendants MISTRAS GROUP, INC., and QUALITY SERVICES LABORATORIES, INC., are represented by: Christina T. Tellado, Esq. John H. Haney, Esq. Deisy Castro, Esq. HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP 400 South Hope Street, 8th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 896-2400 Facsimile: (213) 896-2450 E-mail: christina.tellado@hklaw.com john.haney@hklaw.com deisy.castro@hklaw.com CONTOURE LASER: Torres Suit Asserts TCPA Breach ----------------------------------------------- Francis Torres, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. CONTOURE LASER BODY SCULPTING & COSMETICS CENTER, LLC, a Florida limited liability company, Defendant, Case No. 0:19-cv-60768 (S.D. Fla., March 25, 2019) is a putative class action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"). In efforts to drum-up business, the Defendant would often send marketing text messages providing different types of offers and savings for future purchases without first obtaining express written consent to send such marketing text messages as required to do so under the TCPA. These messages were sent using mass-automated technology through a third-party company hired by Defendant to send marketing text messages on Defendant's behalf en masse. In sum, Defendant knowingly and willfully violated the TCPA, causing injuries to Plaintiff and members of the putative class, including invasion of their privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and conversion, says the complaint. Plaintiff is a natural person who was a resident of Broward County, Florida. Defendant owns and operates several cosmetic centers in the state of Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jibrael S. Hindi, Esq. THE LAW OFFICE OF JIBRAEL S. HINDI, PLLC. 110 SE 6th Street Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: (954) 907-1136 Facsimile: (855) 529-9540 Email: jibrael@jibraellaw.com COURIER EXPRESS: Crosby Wants to Stop Storage of Biometric Data --------------------------------------------------------------- CHRISTOPHER CROSBY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. COURIER EXPRESS ONE, INC., an Illinois Corporation, Case No. 2019CH03391 (Ill. Cir., Cook Cty., March 14, 2019), seeks to put a stop to the Defendant's alleged unlawful collection, use, and storage of the Plaintiff's and the putative Class members' sensitive biometric data. Courier Express One, Inc., an Illinois Corporation, provides parcel delivery services, including delivery for Amazon warehouses in Illinois. The Company is part of Courier Express, Inc., a nation-wide courier, freight, and warehousing services corporation.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: David Fish, Esq. Seth Matus, Esq. Kimberly Hilton, Esq. John Kunze, Esq. THE FISH LAW FIRM, P.C. 200 East Fifth Avenue, Suite 123 Naperville, IL 60563 Telephone: (630) 355-7590 Facsimile: (630) 778-0400 E-mail: dfish@fishlawfirm.com smatus@fishlawfirm.com khilton@fishlawfirm.com kunze@fishlawfirm.com COWEN INC: Still Defends Fletcher Class Action ---------------------------------------------- Cowen Inc. said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on March 7, 2019, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, that the company continues to defend itself from a putative class action lawsuit initiated by Landol Fletcher. On December 27, 2013, Landol Fletcher filed a putative class action lawsuit against Convergex Holdings, LLC, Convergex Group, LLC, Cowen Execution, Convergex Global Markets Limited and G-Trade Services LLC (collectively, "Convergex") in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Landol Fletcher and all others similarly situated v. Convergex Group LLC, Cowen Execution, Convergex Global Markets Ltd., Convergex Holdings LLC, G-Trade Services LLC, & Does 1-10, No. 1:13-CV-09150-LLS). The suit alleges breaches of fiduciary duty and prohibited transactions under ERISA and seeks to maintain a class action on behalf of all ERISA plan participants, beneficiaries and named fiduciaries whose plans were impacted by net trading by Convergex Global Markets Limited from October 2006 to December 2011. On April 11, 2014, Landol Fletcher and Frederick P. Potter Jr., filed an amended complaint raising materially similar allegations. This matter was assumed by the Company as a result of the Company's previously announced acquisition of Convergex Group, which was completed on June 1, 2017. On February 17, 2016, the District Court granted Convergex's motion to dismiss the amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed an appeal to the Second Circuit, and the AARP and Department of Labor filed amicus briefs on plaintiffs' behalf. The appeal was argued on December 12, 2016. On February 10, 2017, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals (1) reversed the District Court, finding that plaintiff has constitutional standing in a "representative" capacity to sue for damages to the ERISA defined benefit plan in which he is a participant, and (2) remanded to the District Court to reconsider, in light of the Circuit Court's decision, the issue whether plaintiff has standing to pursue claims on behalf of ERISA plans in which plaintiff is not a participant. Convergex filed a petition for rehearing, and the Court of Appeals denied the petition. On June 30, 2017, the Company filed a notice of motion and memorandum of law in support of a motion to stay the proceedings in the District Court pending resolution of its petition for writ of certiorari, which the Company intended to file with the U.S. Supreme Court. On August 16, 2017, the District Court granted the Company's motion to stay the proceedings in the District Court pending resolution of the Company's petition for writ of certiorari. On September 1, 2017, the Company filed a petition with the United States Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari requesting review of the decision of the Court of Appeals. On January 8, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the Company's petition for a writ of certiorari. The previously granted stay of the proceedings in the District Court has been lifted, and the case is proceeding in the District Court. Status conferences were held on April 6, 2018, October 12, 2018, and December 4, 2018. Cowen said, "We are indemnified against losses arising from this matter pursuant to, and subject to, the provisions of the purchase agreement relating to the acquisition of Convergex Group. Because the case is in its preliminary stages, the Company cannot predict the outcome at this time, but it does not currently expect this case to have a material effect on its financial position or its results of operations." Cowen Inc. is a publicly owned asset management holding company. Through its subsidiaries, the firm provides alternative investment management, investment banking, research, and sales and trading services for its clients. Cowen Group, Inc. was founded in 1994 and is headquartered in New York, New York with additional offices in Boston, Massachusetts, Chicago, Illinois, Cleveland, Ohio, Dallas, Texas, and San Francisco, California. CRITICAL INTERVENTION: Kenny Sues Over No-Poaching Policy ---------------------------------------------------------- MICHAEL W. KENNY, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CRITICAL INTERVENTION SERVICES, INC.; KKP HOLDINGS, LLC d/b/a THE KKP SECURITY GROUP; KARL POULIN; KIMBERLY POULIN; THE SOLOMON LAW GROUP, P.A.; STANFORD SOLOMON; & GABRIEL PINILLA, Case No. 8:19-cv-00636-JSM-TGW (M.D. Fla., March 14, 2019), arises out of an alleged long-running conspiracy to restrain trade and suppress competition in the private security guard industry, primarily throughout the state of Florida. Karl Poulin, his wife Kimberly Poulin and their companies CIS and KKP have entered customer allocation and no-poaching or no-hiring agreements with competing private security companies throughout Florida and beyond, the Plaintiff alleges. Under these agreements, he contends, competing private security companies agree that they will not compete for each others' customers and will not hire their rivals' employees. He adds that these agreements are all part of one overarching conspiracy to restrain trade and suppress competition in the private security guard industry. CIS is a Florida for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of Florida with a principal place of business in Pinellas County in Largo, Florida. CIS is primarily engaged in the business of providing private security services for residential properties, such as apartment complexes, and commercial properties such as banks. KKP is a Florida for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of Florida with a principal place of business in Pinellas County in Largo, Florida. KKP holds itself out as a trade association of private security companies throughout Florida and beyond. Solomon Law is a law firm located in Tampa, Florida. Solomon Law has served as CIS's outside counsel since at least July 2014. Stanford Solomon is the owner and principal of Solomon Law. Gabriel Pinilla is an employee of Solomon Law.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Pollard, Esq. POLLARD PLLC 401 E. Las Olas Blvd., Suite 1400 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Telephone: (954) 332-2380 Facsimile: (866) 594-5731 E-mail: jpollard@pollardllc.com CV SCIENCES: Jane Ish Named New Lead Plaintiff in Sallustro Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- CV Sciences, Inc. said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on March 12, 2019, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, that the court in the class action lawsuit initiated by Tanya Sallustro has granted plaintiff's counsel request to substitute Jane Ish as new Lead Plaintiff and to withdraw Steve Schuck as Lead Plaintiff. On April 23, 2014, Tanya Sallustro filed a purported class action complaint (the "Complaint") in the Southern District of New York (the "Court") alleging securities fraud and related claims against CV Sciences and certain of its officers and directors and seeking compensatory damages including litigation costs. Ms. Sallustro alleges that between March 18-31, 2014, she purchased certain shares of CV Sciences common stock for a total investment of $16,000. The Complaint refers to Current Reports on Form 8-K and Current Reports on Form 8-K/A filings made by the company on April 3, 2014 and April 14, 2014, in which the company amended previously disclosed sales (sales originally stated at $1.3 million were restated to $1.1 million - reduction of $0.2 million) and restated goodwill as $1.9 million (previously reported at net zero). Additionally, the Complaint states after the filing of the company's Current Report on Form 8-K on April 3, 2014 and the following press release, the company's stock price "fell $7.30 per share, or more than 20%, to close at $25.30 per share." Subsequent to the filing of the Complaint, six different individuals filed a motion asking to be designated the lead plaintiff in the litigation. On March 19, 2015, the Court issued a ruling appointing Steve Schuck as lead plaintiff. Counsel for Mr. Schuck filed a "consolidated amended complaint" on September 14, 2015. On December 11, 2015, the company filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. After requesting several extensions, counsel for Mr. Schuck filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on March 21, 2016. The company's reply brief was filed on April 25, 2016. On April 2, 2018, the Court issued a ruling granting in part and denying in part the motion to dismiss. Thereafter, on October 3, 2018, plaintiff's counsel filed a motion to withdraw Mr. Schuck as Lead Plaintiff and to substitute Jane Ish as new Lead Plaintiff. This motion was granted by the Court. CV Sciences said, "Management intends to vigorously defend the allegations and an estimate of possible loss cannot be made at this time." CV Sciences, Inc. operates as a life science company. It operates through two segments, Specialty Pharmaceuticals and Consumer Products. CV Sciences, Inc. was founded in 2010 and is based in Las Vegas, Nevada. DRAGON INSIDE: Dennis Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act -------------------------------------------------------- Dragon Inside, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Derrick U Dennis, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Dragon Inside, Inc. doing business as: Oliver Wicks, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01703 (E.D. N.Y., March 25, 2019). Oliver Wicks offers custom-tailored suits from Italian and English wool .[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jonathan Shalom, Esq. Shalom Law, PLLC 124-04 Metropolitan Avenue Kew Gardens, NY 11374 Tel: (516) 807-1748 Email: jshalom@jonathanshalomlaw.com DREAM HOTEL GROUP: Lopez Alleges Violation under ADA ---------------------------------------------------- Dream Hotel Group, LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Victor Lopez, on behalf of himself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Dream Hotel Group, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02711 (S.D. N.Y., March 26, 2019). Dream Hotel Group is a hotel brand and management company with a 30-year history of managing properties in some of the world's most highly competitive hotel environments.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq. 150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: nyjg@aol.com DURST ORGANIZATION: Fischler Alleges Violation under ADA -------------------------------------------------------- The Durst Organization Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Brian Fischler, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. The Durst Organization Inc. doing business as: Halletts Point, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02720 (S.D. N.Y., March 26, 2019). The Durst Organization is one of the oldest family-run commercial and residential real estate companies in New York City. Established in 1915, the company is owned and operated by the third generation of the Durst family.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher Howard Lowe, Esq. Lipsky Lowe LLP 630 Third Avenue New York, NY 10017-6705 Tel: (212) 392-4772 Fax: (212) 444-1030 Email: chris@lipskylowe.com ELLIE MAE: Stevens Balks at Merger Deal with Thoma Bravo -------------------------------------------------------- MICHELLE STEVENS, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, the Plaintiff, vs. ELLIE MAE, INC., SIGMUND ANDERMAN, JONATHAN H. CORR, KAREN BLASING, CARL BUCCELLATO, CRAIG DAVIS, A. BARR DOLAN, ROBERT J. LEVIN, MARINA LEVINSON, JEB S. SPENCER, and RAJAT TANEJA, the Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-01414 (N.D. Cal., March 18, 2019), is a class action by Plaintiff on behalf of herself and the other public holders of the common stock of Ellie Mae, Inc. against the Company and the members of the Company's board of directors for their violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, in connection with the proposed acquisition of Ellie Mae by Thoma Bravo LLC. According to the complaint, on February 28, 2019, the Board caused the Company to enter into an agreement and plan of merger, pursuant to which Ellie Mae stockholders will receive $99.00 in cash for each share of Ellie Mae common stock they hold. On March 15, 2019, in order to convince Ellie Mae shareholders to vote in favor of the Proposed Transaction, the Board authorized the filing of a materially incomplete and misleading Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A with the Securities and Exchange Commission, in violation of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act. The lawsuit contends that, while Defendants are touting the fairness of the Merger Consideration to the Company's shareholders in the Proxy, they have failed to disclose certain material information that is necessary for stockholders to properly assess the fairness of the Proposed Transaction, thereby rendering certain statements in the Proxy false and/or misleading. In particular, the Proxy contains materially incomplete and misleading information concerning Ellie Mae's financial projections, which were developed by the Company's management and relied on by the Board to recommend the Proposed Transaction. It is imperative that the material information that has been omitted from the Proxy is disclosed to the Company's shareholders prior to the forthcoming shareholder vote, so that they can properly exercise their corporate suffrage rights.[BN] Attorney for the Plaintiff: Nadeem Faruqi, Esq. James M. Wilson, Jr., Esq. Benjamin Heikali, Esq. FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP 10866 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1470 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Telephone: (424) 256-2884 Facsimile: (424) 256-2885 E-mail: bheikali@faruqilaw.com nfaruqi@faruqilaw.com jwilson@faruqilaw.com EMPLOYERS INSURANCE: Removes FSO Suit to Del. Dist. Ct. ------------------------------------------------------- The Defendants removed on March 14, 2019, the lawsuit styled FIRST STATE ORTHOPAEDICS, P.A., on behalf of itself and all others similarly situated v. EMPLOYERS INSURANCE COMPANY OF WAUSAU; HELMSMAN MANAGEMENT SERVICES, LLC; LIBERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION; LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY; LM INSURANCE CORPORATION; THE FIRST LIBERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION; AND WAUSAU UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. S19C-01-051 CAK, from the Superior Court of Sussex County, Delaware, to the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00509-UNA to the proceeding. On January 31, 2019, First State Orthopaedics, P.A. ("FSO") filed a Proposed Class Action Complaint against the Defendants in the Superior Court of Delaware. FSO alleges that it received Explanation of Payments forms ("EOPs") that "do not set forth any reason for the carrier or TPA's denial of coverage." FSO takes issue with the following written explanation that the Defendants occasionally include on EOPs as the reason for denying certain charges: "THIS SERVICE [IS] NOT AUTHORIZED BY CASE MANAGER. PLEASE CONTACT THE CASE MANAGER FOR FURTHER INFORMATION." FSO claims that this language does not fulfill Defendants' duty to provide "a written explanation of reason for denial" under 19 Del. C. Section 2322F(e), and that this in turn violates 19 Del. C. Sections 2322F(h) and 2362(B).[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John S. Spadaro, Esq. JOHN SHEEHAN SPADARO LLC 54 Liborio Lane P.O. Box 627 Smyrna, DE 19977 Telephone: (302) 235-7745 E-mail: jspadaro@johnsheehanspadaro.com The Defendants are represented by: Kevin J. Connors, Esq. MARSHALL DENNEHEY WARNER COLEMAN & GOGGIN Nemours Building 1007 N. Orange Street, Suite 600 P.O. Box 8888 Wilmington, DE 19899 Telephone: (302) 552-4302 E-mail: kjconnors@mdwcg.com - and - Tiffany Powers, Esq. Andrew Hatchett, Esq. ALSTON & BIRD LLP 1201 West Peachtree Street Atlanta, GA 30309-3424 Telephone: (404) 881-7000 Facsimile: (404) 881-7777 E-mail: tiffany.powers@alston.com andrew.hatchett@alston.com EPIC SECURITY: Seeks 2nd Cir. Review of Ruling in Williams Suit --------------------------------------------------------------- Defendant Epic Security Corp. filed an appeal from the District Court's opinion and order entered on February 22, 2019, in the lawsuit entitled Williams, et al. v. Epic Security Corp., Case No. 15-cv-5610, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (New York City). The lawsuit is brought over alleged violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. The appellate case is captioned as Williams, et al. v. Epic Security Corp., Case No. 19-652, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.[BN] Plaintiffs-Appellees David Williams, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Adrian D. Brown, Jimmy Butler, Sharon Carr, Roger David, Junior Etienne, James Foster, Michael Hurst, Taquesha M. Lawyer, Deniece Martin, Michael A. Mitchell, Jonathan Reece, Warren Richardson, Israel Rivera, Saul Velez, Samuel Wright, Michael Howie, Jose Vicent, Winston E. Synaker, Shakiema Cadora, Michael Moulton, Princess J. Logan-Williams and Hilburn Walker are represented by: Bruce E. Menken, Esq. BERANBAUM MENKEN LLP 80 Pine Street New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 509-1616 E-mail: bmenken@bmbblaw.com Defendant-Appellant Epic Security Corp. is represented by: Brian K. Condon, Esq. CONDON & ASSOCIATES, PLLC 55 Old Turnpike Road Nanuet, NY 10954 Telephone: (845) 627-8500 E-mail: brian@condonlawoffices.com FAMOUS DAVES: Graham Hits Illegal Tip Pool ------------------------------------------ Christopher Graham, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Famous Daves of America, Inc., and Doe Defendants 1-10, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00486 (D. Md., February 19, 2019), seeks to recover minimum and overtime wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Maryland Wage and Hour Law and the Maryland Wage Payment and Collection Law. Famous Daves operates restaurants under the trade name "Famous Dave's BBQ" where Graham worked as a server. Defendants failed to properly inform its tipped employees of its intention to utilize a tip credit against the wages paid to its tipped employees, thus paying them less than the mandated minimum wage rate, notes the complaint. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Gary F. Lynch, Esq. Jamisen A. Etzel, Esq. Arielle Wagner, Esq. CARLSON LYNCH SWEET KILPELA & CARPENTER, LLP 1133 Penn Avenue, 5th Floor Pittsburgh, PA 15222 Tel: (412) 322-9243 Email: glynch@carlsonlynch.com jetzel@carlsonlynch.com aswagner@locklaw.com - and - Gerald D. Wells, III, Esq. Robert J. Gray, Esq. CONNOLLY WELLS & GRAY, LLP 2200 Renaissance Blvd., Suite 275 King of Prussia, PA 19406 Telephone: (610) 822-3700 Facsimile: (610) 822-3800 Email: gwells@cwglaw.com rgray@cwglaw.com FEDERAL NATIONAL: 9th Circuit Appeal Filed in Banneck Class Suit ---------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiff James Banneck filed an appeal from a Court ruling in his lawsuit titled James Banneck v. FNMA/Fannie Mae, et al., Case No. 3:17-cv-04657-WHO, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Francisco. As reported in the Class Action Reporter on March 26, 2019, Judge William H. Orrick granted Fannie Mae's motion for summary judgment. Mr. Banneck brings the instant lawsuit against Defendant Fannie Mae alleging violations of the California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act ("CCRAA") and the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act ("FCRA"). He claims that Fannie Mae's Desktop Underwriter ("DU") system, which is used by lenders to determine whether an applicant's loan can be purchased by Fannie Mae, generated an inaccurate DU findings report that negatively impacted his loan application. He contends that Fannie Mae prohibited mortgage originators from providing consumers with a copy of their DU findings report in violation of the CCRAA and FCRA. The appellate case is captioned as James Banneck v. FNMA/Fannie Mae, et al., Case No. 19-15468, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows: -- Transcript must be ordered by April 12, 2019; -- Transcript is due on May 13, 2019; -- Appellant James Banneck's opening brief is due on June 21, 2019; -- Appellees Federal Housing Finance Agency and Federal National Mortgage Association's answering brief is due on July 22, 2019; -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief.[BN] Plaintiff-Appellant JAMES BANNECK, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: James A. Francis, Esq. FRANCIS AND MAILMAN PC 1600 Market Street, Suite 2510 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 735-8600 E-mail: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com - and - Sylvia A. Goldsmith, Esq. GOLDSMITH & ASSOCIATES, LLC 20545 Center Ridge Road, Suite 120 Rocky River, OH 44116 Telephone: (440) 934-3025 E-mail: goldsmith@goldsmithlawyers.com - and - Paul B. Mengedoth, Esq. MENGEDOTH LAW PLLC 20909 N. 90th Place Scottsdale, AZ 85255 Telephone: (480) 778-9100 E-mail: paul@mengedothlaw.com - and - Stephanie Tatar, Esq. TATAR LAW FIRM, APC 3500 West Olive Avenue, Suite 300 Burbank, CA 91505 Telephone: (323) 744-1146 E-mail: stephanie@thetatarlawfirm.com Defendant-Appellee FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION is represented by: Elizabeth Lemond McKeen, Esq. Danielle Nicole Oakley, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 610 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Telephone: (949) 823-7150 E-mail: emckeen@omm.com doakley@omm.com Intervenor-Defendant-Appellee FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY is represented by: David Eric Shapland, Esq. ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP 777 S. Figueroa Street, 44th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90017 Telephone: (213) 243-4238 E-mail: eric.shapland@arnoldporter.com - and - Michael A. Johnson, Esq. ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP 601 Massachusetts Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 942-5654 E-mail: michael_johnson@aporter.com FEDERAL NATIONAL: Walsh Appeals Ariz. Dist. Ct. Ruling to 9th Cir. ------------------------------------------------------------------ Plaintiff Brandon M. Walsh filed an appeal from a Court ruling in the lawsuit entitled Brandon Walsh v. Federal National Mortgage Association, Case No. 2:15-cv-00761-JJT, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, Phoenix. As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff seeks to put an end to the Defendant's alleged deceptive, misleading, and unfair debt collection practices. The appellate case is captioned as Brandon Walsh v. FNMA, Case No. 19-15466, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The briefing schedule in the Appellate Case is set as follows: -- Transcript must be ordered by April 12, 2019; -- Transcript is due on May 13, 2019; -- Appellant Brandon M. Walsh's opening brief is due on June 21, 2019; -- Appellee Federal National Mortgage Association's answering brief is due on July 22, 2019; and -- Appellant's optional reply brief is due 21 days after service of the answering brief.[BN] Plaintiff-Appellant BRANDON M. WALSH, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, is represented by: Sylvia Antalis Goldsmith, Esq. GOLDSMITH & ASSOCIATES LLC 20545 Center Ridge Rd., Suite 120 Rocky River, OH 44116 Telephone: (440) 934-3025 Facsimile: (440) 934-3026 E-mail: sgoldsmith@sgoldsmithlawoffice.com - and - James A. Francis, Esq. FRANCIS AND MAILMAN PC 1600 Market Street, Suite 2510 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 736-8600 E-mail: jfrancis@consumerlawfirm.com - and - Paul B. Mengedoth, Esq. MENGEDOTH LAW PLLC 20909 N 90th St. Scottsdale, AZ 85255 Telephone: (480) 778-9100 Facsimile: (480) 778-9101 E-mail: paul@mengedothlaw.com Defendant-Appellee FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION is represented by: Angela Elaine Kleine, Esq. Benjamin F. Patterson, Esq. MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105-2482 Telephone: (415) 268-6214 E-mail: akleine@mofo.com bpatterson@mofo.com - and - Michael B. Miller, Esq. MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 250 West 55th Street New York, NY 10019-9601 Telephone: (212) 468-8000 E-mail: mbmiller@mofo.com - and - Gregory J. Marshall, Esq. Erica J. Stutman, Esq. Carlie Tovrea, Esq. SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. One Arizona Center 400 East Van Buren Street Phoenix, AZ 85004-2202 Telephone: (602) 382-6000 E-mail: gmarshall@swlaw.com estutman@swlaw.com ctovrea@swlaw.com - and - Elizabeth Lemond McKeen, Esq. Danielle Nicole Oakley, Esq. O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 610 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 Telephone: (949) 823-7150 E-mail: emckeen@omm.com doakley@omm.com FERRELLGAS PARTNERS: Appeal in N.Y. Class Action Ongoing -------------------------------------------------------- Ferrellgas Partners, L.P. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 8, 2019, for the quarterly period ended January 31, 2019, that the appeal in the securities class action lawsuits filed in New York is ongoing. Ferrellgas has been named, along with several former officers, in several class action lawsuits alleging violations of certain securities laws based on alleged materially false and misleading statements in certain of our public disclosures. The lawsuits, the first of which was filed on October 6, 2016 in the Southern District of New York, seek unspecified compensatory damages. Derivative lawsuits with similar allegations have been filed naming Ferrellgas and several current and former officers and directors as defendants. On April 2, 2018, the securities class action lawsuits were dismissed with prejudice. On April 30, 2018, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The parties have completed briefing and are preparing for oral argument. Ferrellgas Partners said, "At this time the derivative lawsuits remain stayed by agreement. Ferrellgas believes that it has defenses and will vigorously defend these cases. Ferrellgas does not believe loss is probable or reasonably estimable at this time related to the putative class action lawsuits or the derivative actions." No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Ferrellgas Partners, L.P. distributes and sells propane and related equipment and supplies. The company transports propane to propane distribution locations, tanks on customers’ premises, or to portable propane tanks delivered to retailers. Ferrellgas Partners, L.P. was founded in 1939 and is headquartered in Overland Park, Kansas. FIORELLA INSURANCE AGENCY: Atehortua Hits Illegal SMS Ad Blasts --------------------------------------------------------------- Catalina Atehortua and Randal Murallo, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Fiorella Insurance Agency, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-60437 (S.D. Fla., February 19, 2019), seeks statutory damages and injunctive relief for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Fiorella is an insurance company based in Stuart, Florida. To promote its services, it engages in sending unsolicited text messaging en masse. Plaintiffs claim to have received such messages on their cellphone. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Edelsberg, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW, PA 19495 Biscayne Blvd #607 Aventura, FL 33180 Telephone: (305) 975-3320 Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com - and - Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A. 14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 400 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: 305-479-2299 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com FIRST IMPRESSION: Faces Blackwell & Fishman Suit for Spam Texts --------------------------------------------------------------- A class action complaint has been filed against First Impression Interactive, Inc. for violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The case is captioned EMMA BLACKWELL and BETSY FISHMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. FIRST IMPRESSION INTERACTIVE, INC., a Illinois corporation, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-01943 (N.D. Ill., March 21, 2019). Blackwell and Fishman bring this Class Action Complaint and Demand for Jury Trial, alleging that First Impression sent unsolicited, autodialed text messages to consumers, including to consumers whose phone numbers are registered on the National Do Not Call registry. The lawsuit seeks to obtain injunctive and monetary relief for all persons injured by First Impression's conduct. First Impression, headquartered in Chicago, provides advertising and marketing services. It engages in lead generation, such as education, financial, insurance, home improvement, business opportunity, debt consolidation, military, and mortgage leads; media buying; call verified leads; email marketing; and list management services. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Juneitha Shambee, Esq. 701 Main Street, Ste. 200A Evanston, IL 60202 Telephone: (773) 741-3602 E-mail: juneitha@shambeelaw.com - and - Stefan Coleman, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF STEFAN COLEMAN, P.A. 201 S. Biscayne Blvd, 28th FL Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (877) 333-9427 Facsimile: (888) 498-8946 E-mail: law@stefancoleman.com - and - Avi R. Kaufman, Esq. KAUFMAN P.A. 400 NW 26th Street Miami, FL 33127 Telephone: (305) 469-5881 E-mail: kaufman@kaufmanpa.com FLEXSTEEL INDUSTRIES: Hernandez Suit Removed to C.D. California --------------------------------------------------------------- The case captioned Juan Hernandez, an individual; and Richard Diaz, an individual, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Flexsteel Industries, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation; and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, was transferred to the Eastern Division due to incorrect intra-district venue selected by the filer, and assigned New Case No. 5:19-cv-00536-AB. Plaintiffs Juan Hernandez and Richard Diaz filed this class action complaint at the Superior Court of California, County of Riverside, on February 21, 2019, which was assigned Case No. RIC1901569, asserting these causes of action: Failure to Pay Minimum Wages; Failure to Pay Wages and Overtime in Violation of Labor Code; Meal Period Liability Under Labor Code; Rest-Break Liability Under Labor Code; Waiting Time Penalties Under Labor Code; and Violation of Business and Professions. This case was then removed to the United States District Court, Central District of California on March 25, 2019, and assigned Case No. 5:19-cv-00539 and Case No. 2:19-cv-02219, says the complaint.[BN] The Defendants are represented by: Alexander M. Chemers, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SMOAK & STEWART, P.C. 400 South Hope Street, Suite 1200 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Phone: 213.239.9800 Facsimile: 213.239.9045 Email: alexander.chemers@ogletree.com FLORIDA TECHNICAL: Kempfer Hits Illegal SMS Ad Blasts ----------------------------------------------------- Joshua Kempfer, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. National College of Business and Technology Company, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00332 (S.D. Fla., February 19, 2019), seeks statutory damages and injunctive relief for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. National College of Business and Technology Company operates Florida Technical College with multiple campuses in Florida. To promote the school, it engages in sending unsolicited text messaging en masse. Plaintiffs claim to have received such messages on his cellphone. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Scott Edelsberg, Esq. EDELSBERG LAW, PA 19495 Biscayne Blvd #607 Aventura, FL 33180 Telephone: (305) 975-3320 Email: scott@edelsberglaw.com - and - Andrew J. Shamis, Esq. SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A. 14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 400 Miami, FL 33132 Telephone: 305-479-2299 Email: ashamis@shamisgentile.com FLORIDA: Demler Sues FDOC Over Digital Media Player Confiscation ----------------------------------------------------------------- William Demler, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. MARK S. INCH, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC), Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00094, (N.D. Fla., February 19, 2019), seeks redress for the confiscation of inmates' property, in particular digital media players, rescinding access to all of their digital music and books and requiring them to re-purchase their digital media files from the FDOC's contractor in violation of the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The Plaintiff asserts that FDOC profits from the availability of electronic media files to prisoners in its custody. Through its vendor, FDOC sold nearly 6.7 million digital media files, at a cost of roughly $11.3 million to prisoners and their families. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Shawn A. Heller, Esq. Joshua A. Glickman, Esq. SOCIAL JUSTICE LAW COLLECTIVE, PL 434 Skinner Blvd., #206 Dunedin, FL 34698 Tel: (305) 323-6433 Email: shawn@sjlawcollective.com josh@sjlawcollective.com - and - Dante P. Trevisani, Esq. Ray Taseff, Esq. FLORIDA JUSTICE INSTITUTE, INC. 100 S.E. 2nd Street 3750 Miami Tower Miami, FL 33131-2309 Tel: (305) 358-2081 Fax: (305) 358-0910 Email: rtaseff@floridajusticeinstitute.org dtrevisani@floridajusticeinstitute.org FMR LLC: Summers Sues over 401(k) Savings Plans ----------------------------------------------- FMR LLC, Fidelity Management and various related entities have been named as defendants in a class action lawsuit alleging violation of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act. The Plaintiffs are investors in 401(k) and similar defined contribution retirement plans serviced by Fidelity. They seek to enforce Defendants' liability under section 1109(a) to return all Savings Plan losses arising from each breach of fiduciary duty and to restore to the Savings Plans all profits gained through the use of Savings Plan assets, seek to enjoin Fidelity's imposition of the undisclosed Fee, and seeks relief consisting of ERISA civil enforcement remedies against offending fiduciaries and other interested parties. According to the complaint, Fidelity, as a fiduciary for thousands of Savings Plans, must act prudently and in the sole interest of these plans and their participants and beneficiaries. But since at least 2016, Fidelity has breached its fiduciary duties to the Savings Plans by charging mutual fund and other investment companies a substantial fee as a condition for their investment vehicles being offered on Fidelity's fund platform. Although Fidelity refers to this arrangement as an "infrastructure" fee, it is in fact an illegal and undisclosed pay-to-play fee that Fidelity extracts from investment companies that wish to ensure their products are marketed and sold through Fidelity. The Fee drives up expense ratios borne by 401(k) plan participants, causing these participants to pay more in fees and receive lower returns on their investments. The Wall Street Journal reported that Fidelity instructed participating mutual funds not to disclose the Fee to any third party, including plan sponsors, plan beneficiaries, and the public. Based on internal Fidelity documents, the Journal further reported that the Fee represents "0.15% of a mutual-fund company's industry-wide assets." That the Fee is calculated by reference to industry-wide assets, rather than assets held only through Fidelity, confirms that the Fee bears no meaningful relationship to any "infrastructure" maintenance by Fidelity, and hence constitutes excessive compensation. The United States Department of Labor and the Massachusetts Securities Division have each opened investigations into Fidelity's imposition of the Fee. As the Journal noted, "with $1.5 trillion in third-party mutual-fund assets held by Fidelity customers, the firm's FundsNetwork is a powerful platform for fund companies seeking to engage with investors." Fidelity thus has significant leverage to coerce payments from mutual fund complexes interested in offering their funds through Fidelity. Fidelity also offers its own mutual funds, and the Fee enables it to offset losses it has sustained from investors flocking to lower-cost index funds. Fidelity's assessment of the Fee constitutes self-dealing that violates Fidelity's fiduciary duties and ERISA's prohibited transaction rule. Additionally, the Fee constitutes indirect compensation to Fidelity that must be disclosed to the Savings Plans under ERISA, which mandates written disclosure of any such compensation that Fidelity "reasonably expects to receive" in connection with its services. Despite its fiduciary and disclosure obligations, Fidelity continues to charge the Fee and keeps the amount of the Fee payments confidential, the lawsuit says. The case is captioned as GINA SUMMERS, on behalf of the Rock Holdings & Associated Companies 401(k) Savings Plan and on behalf of a class of similarly situated employee savings plans, CYNTHIA EDDY, on behalf of the Cadence Health Matched Savings Plan and on behalf of a class of similarly situated employee savings plans, and KAYLA JONES, on behalf of the Blue Shield of California Tax Deferred Salary Investment Plan and on behalf of a class of similarly situated employee savings plans, the Plaintiffs, vs. FMR LLC, FIDELITY BROKERAGE SERVICES LLC, FIDELITY INVESTMENTS INSTITUTIONAL OPERATIONS COMPANY, INC., FIDELITY MANAGEMENT & RESEARCH COMPANY, FIDELITY MANAGEMENT TRUST COMPANY, NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC, and JOHN DOES 1-100, the Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-10501 (D. Mass., March 3, 2019). Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Jeffrey Block, Esq. BLOCK & LEVITON LLP 155 Federal Street, Suite 400 Boston, MA 02110 Telephone: (617) 398-5600 Facsimile: (617) 507-6020 E-mail: jeff@blockesq.com - and - Dena C. Sharp, Esq. Jordan Elias, Esq. Adam E. Polk, Esq. GIRARD SHARP LLP 601 California Street, Suite 1400 San Francisco, CA 94108 Telephone: (415) 981-4800 Facsimile: (415) 981-4846 E-mail: dsharp@girardsharp.com jelias@girardsharp.com apolk@girardsharp.com FREEDOM BOAT: Bishop Suit Alleges Disabilities Act Breach --------------------------------------------------------- Freedom Boat Club, LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Freedom Boat Club, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02636 (S.D. N.Y., March 25, 2019). Freedom Boat Club LLC operates and franchises a chain of boating clubs in the United States. The company offers an assortment of membership plans to meet various boating needs. It maintains various boats such as flat boats, fishing boats, deck boats, bow riders, pontoons, and larger cruisers. The company was founded in 1989 and is based in Venice, Florida.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq. 150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: nyjg@aol.com GENENTECH INC: Wilson Sues over Sales of Cancer Drugs ----------------------------------------------------- ANDREW WILSON, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. GENENTECH INC.; and GENENTECH USA, INC, Defendants, Case No. 19CIV01022 (Cal. Super. San Mateo Cty., Feb. 26, 2019) alleges violation of the California Unfair Competition Law. The Plaintiff alleges in the complaint that the Defendants are selling cancer drugs in vials that can be used only once which resulted in waste. The Defendants could have substantially reduced the amount of waste by adding just one additional vial size per product. The Defendants also sells expensive drugs which could be bought in bulk and the Defendants are selling their drug products in smaller vials in Europe and not in U.S. Genentech, Inc., a biotechnology company, discovers, develops, manufactures, and commercializes medicines to treat patients with serious or life-threatening medical conditions in the United States. It offers molecular entities and medicines in the areas of oncology, immunology, neuroscience, metabolism, and infectious diseases. Genentech, Inc. was founded in 1976 and is headquartered in South San Francisco, California. Genentech, Inc. is as a subsidiary of Roche Holdings, Inc. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Mike Amfis, Esq. Elise R. Sanguinetti, Esq. Alfredo Torrijos, Esq. ARIAS SANGUINETTI WANG & TORRIJOS, LLP 6701 Center Drive West, 14th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90045 Telephone: (310) 844—9696 Facsimile: (310) 861-0168 E-mail: mike@aswtlawvers.com elise@asmlawyers.com alfredo@aswtlawwers.com - and - Richard S. Cornfeld, Esq. Daniel Scott Levy, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF RICHARD S. CORNFELD, LLC 1010 Market Street, Suite 1645 St. Louis, MO 631 01 Telephone: (314) 241-5799 Facsimile: (314) 241-5788 E-mail: rcornfeld@cornfeldlegal.com dlevy@cornfeldlegal.com - and - John G. Simon, Esq. Kevin M. Camie, Jr., Esq. THE SIMON LAW FIRM, P.C. 800 Market Street, Suite 1700 St. Louis, MO 63101 Telephone: (314) 241-2929 Facsimile: (314) 241-2029 E-mail: isimon@simonlawpc.com kcamie@simon1awpc.com - and - Brian Wolfman, Esq. 600 New Jersey Avenue, NW, Suite 312 Washington, DC 20001 Telephone: (202) 661—6582 E-mail: wolfi113nb®georgetown.edu GROWERS' CHOICE: Lizarraga Hits Unpaid Wages, Missing Pay Slips --------------------------------------------------------------- RAMON LIZARRAGA, and JAIME CARDENAS, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. GROWERS' CHOICE, INC; ROBERT LONGSTRETH, an individual, and DOES 1-10, Defendants, Case No. 2:19 cv-00526-TLN-DB (E.D. Cal., March 25, 2019) asserts claims for violations of the Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act, the California Business and Professions Code, and the California Labor Code. Plaintiffs also seek penalties pursuant to the Private Attorneys General Act. According to the complaint, the Defendants violated federal law by failing to register, failing to comply with the terms of the parties' working arrangement, and failing to make, keep and preserve accurate records of Plaintiffs' hours worked and to pay Plaintiffs and others similarly situated workers their wages when due. The Defendants violated the California Labor Code and the applicable Wage Order by failing to record and compensate all hours worked by Plaintiffs and similarly situated employees, and by denying them overtime premiums to which they were entitled. The Defendants also failed to provide legally required meal periods, or to provide premium pay for missed, late, or short meal periods, as required by California law. Additionally, Defendants did not reimburse employees for work-related expenses. Defendants also did not provide Plaintiffs with itemized wage statements which accurately listed their gross wages earned, total hours worked, net wages earned, the name and address of the legal entity that was the employer, and all applicable hourly rates in effect and the number of hours worked at each rate, says the complaint. Plaintiffs were employed by Defendants to work in seasonal agricultural positions necessary for the cultivation and maintenance of orchards. Defendants GROWERS' CHOICE, INC., and ROBERT LONGSTRETH, an individual, are engaged in farm labor contracting operations for work sites in and around San Joaquin County.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: R. Erandi Zamora, Esq. Emma I. Scott, Esq. CALIFORNIA RURAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE FOUNDATION 2210 K Street, Suite 201 Sacramento, CA 95816 Phone: (916) 446-7904 Fax: (916) 446-3057 Email: ezamora@crlaf.org escott@crlaf.org - and - Virginia Villegas, Esq. Felicia Goldstein, Esq. VILLEGAS CARRERA, INC. 3330 Geary Blvd., 2nd Fl. West San Francisco, CA 94118 Phone: (415) 989-8000 Fax: (415) 989-8028 Email: virginia@e-licenciados.com felicia@e-licenciados.com HAMPTON MARINE: Bishop Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act --------------------------------------------------------------- Hampton Marine, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Cedric Bishop and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Hampton Marine, Inc. d/b/a Hampton Watercraft & Marine, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02630 (S.D. N.Y., March 24, 2019). Hampton Marine, Inc. is a Boat dealer in Hampton Bays, New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeffrey Michael Gottlieb, Esq. 150 E. 18 St., Suite PHR New York, NY 10003 Tel: (212) 228-9795 Fax: (212) 982-6284 Email: nyjg@aol.com HORIZON HOUSE: Jones Seeks Unpaid Overtime Compensation ------------------------------------------------------- Monecka Jones, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Horizon House, Ltd. and K&D Enterprises, Inc., Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00649 (N.D. Ohio, March 25, 2019) is a "collective action" instituted by Plaintiff as a result of the Defendants' practices and policies of failing to include bonuses earned by Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees in their regular rate of pay for purposes of calculating their overtime compensation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), as well as the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act ("OMFWSA"). The Defendants failed to include the bonuses paid to Plaintiff and other similarly-situated employees in their regular rate of pay for purposes of calculating their overtime compensation. As a result, Plaintiff and other similarly-situated employees were denied significant amounts of overtime compensation, says the complaint. Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a Leasing Agent between May 2018 and March 2019. Defendants are residential and commercial leasing companies.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lori M. Griffin, Esq. Chastity L. Christy, Esq. Anthony J. Lazzaro, Esq. The Lazzaro Law Firm, LLC 920 Rockefeller Building 614 W. Superior Avenue Cleveland, OH 44113 Phone: 216-696-5000 Facsimile: 216-696-7005 Email: lori@lazzarolawfirm.com chastity@lazzarolawfirm.com anthony@lazzarolawfirm.com IDT CORP: Parties in Sanchez Suit Agree to Dismissal ---------------------------------------------------- IDT Corporation said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 12, 2019, for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2018, that IDT Telecom and Jean Carlos Sanchez have filed a stipulation of dismissal in the putative class action lawsuit initiated by the latter. On May 2, 2018, Jean Carlos Sanchez filed a putative class action against IDT Telecom in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois alleging that the Company sent unauthorized marketing messages to cellphones in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991. On July 26, 2018, the parties filed a stipulation of dismissal. The Company is evaluating the claim, and at this stage, is unable to estimate its potential liability, if any. The Company intends to vigorously defend this matter. No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. IDT Corporation operates primarily in the telecommunications and payment industries in the United States and internationally. The company operates in two segments, Telecom & Payment Services, and net2phone-Unified Communications as a Service. IDT Corporation was founded in 1990 and is headquartered in Newark, New Jersey. JACOB LAW GROUP: Brownlee Asserts Breach of FDCPA ------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Jacob Law Group PLLC. The case is styled as Lillie Brownlee, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Michael A Jacob, II, Jacob Law Group PLLC, Midland Funding LLC and Midland Credit Management Inc, Defendants, Case No. 4:19-cv-00208-BSM (E.D. Ark., March 26, 2019). The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Jacob Law Group PLLC is a Family law attorney in Oxford, Mississippi.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Cathleen M. Combs, Esq. Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC 20 South Clark Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603 Tel: (312) 626-3585 Email: ccombs@edcombs.com - and - Corey Darnell McGaha, Esq. Crowder McGaha, LLP 5507 Ranch Drive, Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72223 Tel: (501) 205-4026 Fax: (501) 367-8208 Email: cmcgaha@crowdermcgaha.com - and - Daniel A. Edelman, Esq. Edelman, Combs, Latturner & Goodwin, LLC 20 South Clark Street, Suite 1500 Chicago, IL 60603 Tel: (312) 626-3585 Email: dedelman@edcombs.com - and - William Thomas Crowder, Esq. Crowder McGaha, LLP 5507 Ranch Drive, Suite 202 Little Rock, AR 72223 Tel: (501) 205-4026 Fax: (501) 367-8208 Email: wcrowder@crowdermcgaha.com JO MALONE: Olsen Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act --------------------------------------------------- Jo Malone Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Thomas J. Olsen, individually and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Jo Malone Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02563 (S.D. N.Y., March 21, 2019). Jo Malone is a UK-based fragrance designer who got her start in the fragrance industry as a florist.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Christopher Howard Lowe, Esq. Lipsky Lowe LLP 630 Third Avenue New York, NY 10017-6705 Tel: (212) 392-4772 Fax: (212) 444-1030 Email: chris@lipskylowe.com KLEINFELD: Korolyshyn Sues Over Unpaid Overtime Wages ----------------------------------------------------- Oksana Korolyshyn, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, as Class/Collective representative, Plaintiff, v. Kleinfeld, Kleinfeld Bridal Corp, KBC Holding LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-02665 (S.D. N.Y., March 25, 2019) contends that Defendants violated the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ("FLSA"), by knowingly requiring, suffering or permitting Plaintiff and other similarly situated members of the putative FLSA Collective to work more than 40 hours per week without properly paying them overtime wages. This is a case where Korolyshyn, and all those similarly situated to her, worked in excess of 40 hours per week, and Kleinfeld failed to pay Korolyshyn and all others similarly situated the required overtime rate of one and one-half times their standard rate of pay for all hours worked per week, says the complaint. Korolyshyn was employed with Kleinfeld from May 2016 until November 2018. Kleinfeld is an enterprise that provides, among other services, design, tailoring, and alterations of wedding dresses.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Nicholas A. Devyatkin, Esq. TULLY RINCKEY PLLC 777 Third Avenue, 22nd Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: (646) 201-9100 Fax: (646) 705-0049 Email: ndevyatkin@tullylegal.com - and - Michael W. Macomber, Esq. Tully Rinckey PLLC 441 New Karner Rd. Albany, NY 12205 Email: MMacomber@tullylegal.com KPMG LLP: Cosby Seeks to Certify Miller Energy Stockholder Classes ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Plaintiffs in the lawsuit captioned LEWIS COSBY, KENNETH MARTIN, as beneficiary of the Kenneth Ray Martin Roth IRA, and MARTIN WEAKLEY on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. KPMG, LLP, Case No. 3:16-cv-00121-TAV-DCP (E.D. Tenn.), move to: (1) certify a class of all persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Miller Energy common stock, Miller Energy 10.75% Series C Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (the "Series C Preferred Stock") or Miller Energy 10.5% Series D Fixed Rate/Floating Rate Cumulative Redeemable Preferred Stock (the "Series D Preferred Stock") between August 29, 2011 and October 1, 2015 (the "Class Period"), inclusive, and who were damaged thereby (the Section 10(b) Class"); and (2) certify a class of all persons and entities who purchased or otherwise acquired Miller Energy Series C Preferred Stock or Series D Preferred Stock pursuant to or traceable to the Offering Documents and were damaged thereby (the "Section 11 Class"). The Plaintiffs also seek an Order: (1) appointing Lewis Cosby, Eric Montague and Martin Ziesman, as Co-Trustee for the Carolyn K. Ziesman Trust, as Class Representatives; and (2) appointing the law firms of Gordon Ball PLLC and Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC as Class Counsel. The sole catalyst for Miller Energy's ("Miller" or the "Company") dizzying transformation from an East Tennessee-based oil and gas penny stock company on the brink of insolvency to a powerhouse company traded on the New York Stock Exchange was its 2009 acquisition of certain oil and gas reserves in Alaska, the Plaintiffs allege. Despite only paying $2.25 million for the Alaska Assets in a bankruptcy fire sale, the Plaintiffs contend that Miller and its ostensibly independent auditor, KPMG, LLP, spent the next five years deceiving investors into believing that the Alaska Assets were worth a whopping $480 million. As the Securities and Exchange Commission later confirmed, this was an outright fraud and the Alaska Assets were essentially worthless, the Plaintiffs add.[CC] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Gordon Ball, Esq. GORDON BALL PLLC 550 W. Main Street, Suite 600 Knoxville, TN 37902 Telephone: (865) 525-7029 Facsimile: (865) 525-4678 E-mail: gball@gordonball.com - and - Laura H. Posner, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 88 Pine Street, 14th Floor New York, NY 10005 Telephone: (212) 838-7797 Facsimile: (212) 838-7745 E-mail: lposner@cohenmisltein.com - and - Steven J. Toll, Esq. Allen Dreschel, Esq. COHEN MILSTEIN SELLERS & TOLL PLLC 1100 New York Ave. NW, Suite 500 Washington, DC 20005 Telephone: (202) 408-4600 Facsimile: (202) 408-4699 E-mail: stoll@cohenmilstein.com adreschel@cohenmisltein.com KROGER COMPANY: O'Neil Sues Over Ice Cream Product's Misleading Ads ------------------------------------------------------------------- Jennifer O'Neil, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, v. Plaintiff, The Kroger Company and Does 1 through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19STCV10050 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., March 25, 2019) seeks to secure injunctive relief for the Class against the Defendant for false and misleading advertising in violation of Business & Professions Code and Civil Code. Kroger labels and advertises its Products as "artisan" vanilla bean ice creams. "Artisan" refers to a high quality or distinctive product made in small quantities, usually by hand using traditional methods by someone skilled in the trade. Artisan foods are handcrafted in small batches, to ensure quality control, as opposed to mass production. However, Kroger does not handcraft or produce the Products in small batches, asserts the complaint. Kroger mass produces the Products through a highly mechanized process by using mediocre ingredients, including preservatives and artificial flavor enhancers. This is not the "artisanal" quality consumers expect to receive, adds the complaint. O'Neil purchased the Product in California within the last 4 years of the filing of this Complaint. The Kroger Company is a corporation headquartered in Ohio.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan J. Clarkson, Esq. Shireen M. Clarkson, Esq. Matthew T. Theriault, Esq. Celine Cohan, Esq. CLARKSON LAW FIRM, P.C. 9255 Sunset Blvd., Suite 804 Los Angeles, CA 90069 Phone: (213) 788-4050 Fax: (213) 788-4070 Email: rclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com sclarkson@clarksonlawfirm.com mtheriault@clarksonlawfirm.com ccohan@clarksonlawfirm.com LEADERS IN COMMUNITY: Brooks et al. Seek to Certify RICO Class -------------------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit captioned JAMES BROOKS, KYSER WILSON, and ROBERT JACKSON, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. LEADERS IN COMMUNITY IN ALTERNATIVES, INC. (LCA), the Defendant, Case No. 3:18-cv-04609-WHA (N.D. Cal.), the Plaintiffs ask the Court to certify a class under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 23(a) and 23(b)(3) to vindicate the rights of all individuals subjected to Defendant's widespread extortion scheme targeted at individuals in its electronic monitoring program in violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO), the Hobbs Act (31 U.S.C. section 1951), and California Penal Code section 518–519 (extortion).[CC] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Phil Telfeyan, Esq. Marissa Hatton, Esq. EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW 400 7th Street NW, Suite 602 Washington, D.C. 20004 Telephone: (202) 670-1004 E-mail: ptelfeyan@equaljusticeunderlaw.org mhatton@equaljusticeunderlaw.org LIBERTY TAX: Bid to Dismiss NY Consolidated Suit Still Pending -------------------------------------------------------------- Liberty Tax, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 7, 2019, for the quarterly period ended January 31, 2019, that the motion to dismiss in the complaint in the case, In Re Liberty Tax, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 27 CV 07327, is still pending before the Court. Rose Mauro, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Liberty Tax, Inc., Edward L. Brunot, John T. Hewitt, and Kathleen E. Donovan, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on January 12, 2018, Case No. 18 CV 245. The Plaintiff filed a securities class action asserting violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 against all defendants and a second count for violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the individual defendants. According to the complaint, throughout the class period, the Company allegedly issued materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Hewitt created an inappropriate tone at the top; (2) the inappropriate tone at the top led to ineffective entity level controls over the organization; and (3) as a result, defendants' statements about the operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. Patrick Beland, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated vs. Liberty Tax, Inc., Edward L. Brunot, John T. Hewitt, and Kathleen E. Donovan, filed in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York on December 15, 2017, case number 17 CV 7327. The Plaintiff filed a securities class action asserting violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 against all defendants and a second count for violations of Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act against the individual defendants. According to the complaint, throughout the class period, the Company allegedly issued materially false and misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Hewitt created an inappropriate tone at the top; (2) the inappropriate tone at the top led to ineffective entity level controls over the organization; and (3) as a result, defendants' statements about the business, operations and prospects were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. These actions were consolidated with the caption In Re Liberty Tax, Inc. Securities Litigation, Case No. 27 CV 07327 and IBEW Local 98 Pension Fund was appointed the Lead Plaintiff (the "Lead Plaintiff"). On June 12, 2018, the Lead Plaintiff filed its Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, which removed Brunot as a defendant, and added additional securities claim based on Section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and Rules 14a-3 and 14a-9. The Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint, among other things, asserts that the Company's SEC filings over a multi-year period failed to disclose the alleged misconduct of the individual defendants and that disclosure of the alleged misconduct caused the Company's stock price to drop and, thereby harm the purported class of shareholders. The Class Period is alleged to be October 1, 2013 through February 23, 2018. The defendants filed a joint motion to dismiss the Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint on September 17, 2018. The Lead Plaintiff served their opposition on November 1, 2018 and the defendants filed their reply brief on November 27, 2018. A mediation took place on November 12, 2018 but did not result in a resolution. The motion to dismiss is still pending before the Court. Liberty Tax, Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides tax preparation services in the United States and Canada. The company was formerly known as JTH Holding, Inc. and changed its name to Liberty Tax, Inc. in July 2014. Liberty Tax, Inc. was founded in 1996 and is headquartered in Virginia Beach, Virginia. LIBERTY TAX: Continues to Defend Labrado Class Action ----------------------------------------------------- Liberty Tax, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 7, 2019, for the quarterly period ended January 31, 2019, that the company continues to defend a class action lawsuit entitled, Rene Labrado v. JTH Tax, Inc. (Case BC 715076). On July 3, 2018, a class action complaint was filed in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles by a former employee for herself and on behalf of all other "similarly situated" persons. The Complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company allegedly violated various provisions of the California Labor Code, including: unpaid overtime, unpaid meal period premiums, unpaid rest premiums, unpaid minimum wages, final wages not timely paid, wages not timely paid, non-compliant wage statements, failure to keep pay records, unreimbursed business expenses and violation of California Business and Profession Code Section 17200. The Complaint seeks actual, consequential and incidental losses and damages, injunctive relief and other damages. Liberty Tax said, "The Company highly disputes the allegations set forth in the Complaint and plans on filing a dispositive motion. The Company intends to defend the case vigorously." No further updates were provided in the Company's SEC report. Liberty Tax, Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides tax preparation services in the United States and Canada. The company was formerly known as JTH Holding, Inc. and changed its name to Liberty Tax, Inc. in July 2014. Liberty Tax, Inc. was founded in 1996 and is headquartered in Virginia Beach, Virginia. LIBERTY TAX: Trial Ongoing in Delaware Stockholder Suit ------------------------------------------------------- Liberty Tax, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 7, 2019, for the quarterly period ended January 31, 2019, that trial is ongoing in the case entitled, In Re: Liberty Tax, Inc. Stockholder Litigation. The case, Asbestos Workers' Philadelphia Pension Fund, derivatively on behalf of Liberty Tax, Inc., v. John Hewitt, Defendant, and Liberty Tax, Inc., Nominal Defendant, Case No. 2017-0883, was filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware on December 12, 2017. The Plaintiff alleges that the Company's former CEO, John T. Hewitt ("Hewitt"), breached his fiduciary duties as an officer based upon certain allegations of misconduct on his part. The Plaintiff also alleges breach of fiduciary duty against Hewitt in his capacity as a director of the Company. The Complaint seeks compensatory damages and attorney's fees. No claim or relief is asserted against the Company, which is named solely as a Nominal Defendant. Erie County Employees Retirement System, derivatively on behalf of Liberty Tax, Inc., v. John T. Hewitt, Defendant, and Liberty Tax, Inc., Nominal Defendant, Case No. 2017-0914, brought a second derivative suit filed in the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware on December 22, 2017. The Plaintiff also alleges that Hewitt breached his fiduciary duties as an officer based upon certain allegations of misconduct on his part. The Plaintiff also alleges breach of fiduciary duty against Hewitt in his capacity as a director of the Company. The Complaint seeks to enjoin Hewitt from managing our business operations, and seeks compensatory damages and attorney's fees. On December 27, 2017, the two above-referenced shareholder matters were consolidated into the case with the caption In Re: Liberty Tax, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, C.A. No. 2017-0883 (the "Delaware Action"). On April 17, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed an amended complaint (the "Amended Complaint"). The Amended Complaint added former directors, Gordon D'Angelo, Ellen McDowell, Nicole Ossenfort, and John Seal, with Hewitt as individual defendants (the "Individual Defendants") and asserted class action allegations. The Plaintiffs seek (i) a declaration that the Individual Defendants have breached the Company's Nominating Committee Charter (now the Nominating & Corporate Governance Committee Charter); (ii) a declaration that the Individual Defendants have breached their fiduciary duties; (iii) an award to the Plaintiffs and the Class in the amount of damages sustained as a result of the Individual Defendants' breaches; (iv) certification of the action as a class action; (v) an award to the Company in the amount of damages sustained as a result of the Individual Defendants' breaches of their fiduciary duties; (vi) a grant of further appropriate equitable relief to remedy the Individual Defendants' breaches, including injunctive relief; (vii) an award to the Plaintiffs of the costs and disbursements of this action, including reasonable attorneys' fees, accountants' and experts' fees, costs and expenses; and (viii) such further relief as the Court deems just and proper. The Company has answered the Amended Complaint and discovery is underway. The Individual Directors have filed a notice of motion to dismiss. No briefing schedule has been set on the motion. A mediation took place on November 12, 2018 but did not result in a resolution. A scheduling order has been entered which currently schedules trial in this matter to begin on March 18, 2019. Liberty Tax, Inc., through its subsidiaries, provides tax preparation services in the United States and Canada. The company was formerly known as JTH Holding, Inc. and changed its name to Liberty Tax, Inc. in July 2014. Liberty Tax, Inc. was founded in 1996 and is headquartered in Virginia Beach, Virginia. MASHCOLE PROPERTY: Does Not Pay Proper Wages, Waye Suit Says ------------------------------------------------------------ Patricia Waye, individually, and on behalf of all other persons similarly situated, and on behalf of other aggrieved employees, Plaintiff, v. Mashcole Property Management, Inc., Joel Zide, Craig Senia, Jeremy Radicelli and Does 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19STCV05101 (Cal. Super., February 19, 2019), seeks redress for Defendants' failure to pay all wages due to discharged and quitting employees, failure to maintain and furnish accurate itemized wage statements and failure to provide accrued paid sick leaves under the California Labor Code and applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders. Mashcole is a privately owned, for-profit corporation that provides property management services throughout Southern California where Waye is currently employed as a resident property manager. She was not paid an hourly wage for the work she performed, instead, was paid partly in the form of a monthly "rent credit" pursuant to an employment contract. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Kenneth F. Moss, Esq. LAW OFFICE OF KENNETH F. MOSS 20335 Ventura Blvd., Suite 430 Woodland Hills, CA 91364 Tel: (818)340-1414 MEDICAL BUSINESS: Gause Seeks to Cert. FCCPA Class, FDCPA Subclass ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Plaintiff in the lawsuit entitled BRANDON GAUSE v. MEDICAL BUSINESS CONSULTANTS, INC., d/b/a MEDICAL BUSINESS CONSULTANTS SETTLEMENT DIVISION, Case No. 8:18-cv-01726-EAK-AAS (M.D. Fla.), asks the Court to certify a class and subclass: -- FCCPA Class: All individuals who in the State of Florida who: (1) were sent letters by Medical Business Consultants, Inc., that are substantially similar or materially identical to the Collection Letter attached to Plaintiff's Complaint; (2) relating to a consumer debt, (3) on or after July 18, 2016; and -- FDCPA Subclass: All individuals who in the State of Florida who: (1) were sent letters by Medical Business Consultants, Inc., that are substantially similar or materially identical to the Collection Letter attached to Plaintiff's Complaint; (2) relating to a consumer debt, (3) on or after July 18, 2017. The Plaintiff also asks to be designated as representative of the Class and the Plaintiff's Counsel be named Class Counsel. Brandon Gause filed the lawsuit asserting claims for (1) violation of the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act ("FCCPA"); (2) violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act; and (3) a declaratory judgment, based on the Defendant's regular practice of sending form collections communications that are misleading, unfair, and deceptive because they include language that overshadows and contradicts the required debt validation notice.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Katherine Earle Yanes, Esq. Brandon K. Breslow, Esq. KYNES, MARKMAN & FELMAN, P.A. Post Office Box 3396 Tampa, FL 33601 Telephone: (813) 229-1118 Facsimile: (813) 221-6750 E-mail: kyanes@kmf-law.com bbreslow@kmf-law.com - and - Gus M. Centrone, Esq. Brian L. Shrader, Esq. CENTRONE & SHRADER, PLLC 612 W. Bay Street Tampa, FL 33606 Telephone: (813) 360-1529 E-mail: gcentrone@centroneshrader.com bshrader@centroneshrader.com The Defendant is represented by: Sean P. Cronin, Esq. STANTON CRONIN LAW GROUP 6944 West Linebaugh Ave., Suite 102 Tampa, FL 33625 Telephone: (813) 444-0155 E-mail: scronin@sclawyergroup.com MEDICAL STAFFING: Junkersfeld Seeks to Recover Unpaid Wages ----------------------------------------------------------- Teresa Junkersfeld, an individual on behalf of herself and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Medical Staffing Solutions, Inc. and Does 1 to 10 inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19-at-00138 (E.D. Cal., February 19, 2019) seeks to recover all remuneration in the regular rate of pay, and all wages owing at termination of employment under the Fair Labor Standards Act and California state law. Medical Staffing Solutions is a staffing company that employs hourly healthcare professionals for short-term travel assignments at healthcare providers throughout the United States. It allegedly failed to include the value of housing and meal and incidental benefits in the regular rate of pay when calculating overtime wages and failed to pay all wages owing at the termination of employment. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Matthew B. Hayes, Esq. Kye D. Pawlenko, Esq. HAYES PAWLENKO LLP 595 E. Colorado Blvd., Suite 303 Pasadena, CA 91101 Tel: (626) 808-4357 Fax: (626) 921-4932 Email: mhayes@helpcounsel.com kpawlenko@helpcounsel.com MESSAGE COMMUNICATIONS: Hardin Sues over Unwanted Telephone Calls ----------------------------------------------------------------- TENLEY HARDIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiff, vs. MESSAGE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, and each of them, the Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-02002 (C.D. Cal., March 18, 2019), seeks damages and other available legal or equitable remedies resulting from the illegal actions of Message Communications, Inc., in negligently, knowingly, and/or willfully contacting the Plaintiff on her cellular telephone in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, and for recording conversation with the Plaintiff on her cellular phone without her knowledge or consent, in violation of California Penal Code, thereby invading the Plaintiff's privacy. According to the complaint, beginning in or around April 2018, the Defendant contacted the Plaintiff on her cellular telephone, number ending in -2480, in an effort to sell or solicit the services of its client Quick Capital Funding, LLC. The Defendant utilized a prerecorded voice message when calling the Plaintiff, and initiated the call utilizing an automated telephone dialing system, which dials campaigns from a list of phone numbers that it purchases from third party data aggregators and lead generators. The prerecorded message was a form of voice broadcasting, which involved a "Press 1" IVR. The Defendant advertises itself as a prerecorded messaging platform, which provides access to its clients to over 220 million numbers across the United States to call. These numbers are complete with name and address information. Clients can access these calls through a web portal. The system sends out a high volume of calls on an automated basis for various clients, but all calls made are made from Defendant's lists, and all calls utilize the same prerecorded voice broadcasting platform, which is an automatic telephone dialing system. While Defendant advertises that it scrubs the outbound dial list against the National Do Not Call List, the Plaintiff alleges that Defendant does not scrub the outbound dial list for cellular phones, and also illegally uses a pre-recorded voice to send solicitation messages to residential landlines without prior express written consent. Defendant does not implement appropriate, widely available, and reasonable protocols to avoid such violations of federal privacy rights. Defendant thus, sends pre-recorded solicitation messages without prior express consent both to residential lines and to cell phones, and thus its standard policy and practice violates two provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection, the lawsuit says.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiff: 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 Telephone: (323) 306-4234 Facsimile: (866) 633-0228 E-mail: tfriedman@toddflaw.com abacon@toddflaw.com MR. COOPER: Removes Niedzinski Suit to District of Massachusetts ---------------------------------------------------------------- The Defendant in the case of VIVIAN NIEDZINSKI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. MR. COOPER formerly known as: NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE LLC, Defendant, filed a notice to remove the lawsuit from the Superior Court of the State of Massachusetts, County of Worcester (Case No. 1985cv00126-C) to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on February 26, 2019. The clerk of court for the District of Massachusetts assigned Case No. 4:19-cv-40037-TSH. The case is assigned to District Judge Timothy S. Hillman. Mr. Cooper formerly known as Nationstar Mortgage LLC, doing business as Champion Mortgage Company, provides mortgage services. It offers various solutions to meet the reverse mortgage needs of its customers. The company provides its services through its representatives. Nationstar Mortgage LLC was formerly known as Centex Credit Corporation and changed its name to Nationstar Mortgage LLC in 2006. The company was founded in 1994 and is based in Coppell, Texas. Nationstar Mortgage LLC operates as a subsidiary of Nationstar Mortgage Holdings Inc. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Sergei Lemberg, Esq. LEMBERG LAW, L.L.C. 43 Danbury Road Wilton, CT 06897 Telephone: (203) 653-2250 Facsimile: (203) 653-3424 E-mail: slemberg@lemberglaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Jason A. Manekas, Esq. BERNKOPF GOODMAN LLP Two Seaport Lane, 9th Floor Boston, MA 02210 Telephone: (617) 790-3000 Facsimile: (617) 790-3300 E-mail: jmanekas@bg-llp.com - and - Matthew A. Gens, Esq. BERNKOPF GOODMAN LLP Two Seaport Lane, 9th Floor BOSTON, MA 02210 Telephone: (617) 790-3314 E-mail: mgens@bg-llp.com NATIONAL COLLEGIATE: Mack Seeks Damages Over Personal Injuries -------------------------------------------------------------- Abe Mack IV, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA), Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00944 (S.D. Ind., February 19, 2019), seeks economic, monetary, actual, consequential, compensatory, and punitive damages, past, present and future medical expenses, other out of pocket expenses, lost time and interest, lost future earnings, litigation and attorney fees, prejudgment and post-judgment interest, injunctive and/or declaratory relief and such other and further relief resulting from negligence, fraudulent concealment, breach of express contract, breach of implied contract, breach of third-party express contract and unjust enrichment. Mack played football at Cameron University from 1991 to 1992. He suffered from numerous concussions, as well as countless sub-concussive hits as part of routine practice and gameplay. Mack now suffers from depression, emotional instability, loss of impulse control, loss of inhibition, loss of concentration, motor impairment, short-term memory loss, and suicidal thoughts. NCAA is an unincorporated association with its principal office located at 700 West Washington Street, Indianapolis, Indiana 46206. The NCAA is the governing body of collegiate athletics that oversees twenty-three college sports and over 400,000 students who participate in intercollegiate athletics. Mack alleges NCAA knew about the debilitating long-term dangers of concussions, concussion-related injuries and sub-concussive injuries that resulted from playing college football, but did nothing. Plaintiff is represented by: Jay Edelson, Esq. Benjamin H. Richman, Esq. EDELSON PC 350 North LaSalle Street, 13th Floor Chicago, IL 60654 Tel: 312.589.6370 Fax: 312.589.6378 Email: jedelson@edelson.com brichman@edelson.com - and - Rafey S. Balabanian, Esq. 329 Bryant Street San Francisco, CA 94107 Tel: 415.212.9300 Fax: 415.373.9435 Email: rbalabanian@edelson.com - and - Jeff Raizner, Esq. RAIZNER SLANIA LLP 2402 Dunlavy Street Houston, TX 77006 Tel: 844.456.4823 Fax: 713.554.9098 Email: jraizner@raiznerlaw.com NEW YORK, NY: Belle Files Civil Rights Suit in New York ------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against the city of New York. The case is styled as Terron Belle and William Rios, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. City Of New York and John Doe 1-50 in their individual and official capacities, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-02673 (S.D. N.Y., March 25, 2019). The docket of the case states the nature of suit as other civil rights filed pursuant to the Civil Rights Act. New York City comprises 5 boroughs sitting where the Hudson River meets the Atlantic Ocean. At its core is Manhattan, a densely populated borough that’s among the world’s major commercial, financial and cultural centers. Its iconic sites include skyscrapers such as the Empire State Building and sprawling Central Park. Broadway theater is staged in neon-lit Times Square.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Cyrus Joubin, Esq. 43 W. 43rd Street, Suite 119 New York, NY 10036 Tel: (347) 223-4296 Fax: (718) 228-7679 Email: joubinlaw@gmail.com NEW YORK: Drivers File Suit v. DMV Over License Suspension ---------------------------------------------------------- Asror Abshukurov and Aziz Kholmanov, on behalf of themselves and all persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, V. The New York State Department of Motor Vehicles and Theresa L. Egan in her individual capacity and in her official capacity as the Commissioner of the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV), Defendants, Case No. 503668/2019 (N.Y. Sup., February 19, 2019), contests the move by the New York DMV to subject Plaintiffs for re-examination for their drivers' license, and seeks to recover attorneys' fees and costs and such other and further relief pursuant to Sections 909 and 8600 of New York Consolidated Laws, Civil Practice Law and Rules. Plaintiffs acquired their commercial drivers' license from the Pennsylvania Department of Motor Vehicles. They were issued their Commercial Driver's License by the New York State Department of Motor on August 20, 2018. On February 12, 2019, Plaintiffs received a notice from letter from the New York DMV that their commercial driver license issued by the State of Pennsylvania was "improperly issued" and were required to re-take the road test of the New York DMV as their New York commercial license was suspended on February 23, 2019. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Farrukh Nuridinov, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF FARRUKH NURIDINOV ESQ. 1121 Avenue Z, Brooklyn, NY 11235 Tel: (929)365-2306 Fax: (718)376-476 Email: nuridinov.law@gmail.com NEWLINK GENETICS: Nguyen Appeals Order and Judgment to 2nd Cir. --------------------------------------------------------------- Plaintiffs Kelly Nguyen and Michael Nguyen filed an appeal from the District Court's opinion and order, and judgment, both issued on February 13, 2019, in their lawsuit titled Nguyen, et al. v. NewLink Genetics Corporation, et al., Case No. 16-cv-3545, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (New York City). As reported in the Class Action Reporter on March 13, 2019, Judge William H. Pauley, III, granted Defendants NewLink Genetics, Charles Link, and Nicholas Vahanian' motion to dismiss the Second Amended Class Action Complaint. In the wake of the Court's prior Opinion & Order, Nguyen v. New Link Genetics Corp., 297 F.Supp.3d 472 (S.D.N.Y. 2018), NewLink cabined its motion to dismiss to falsity and loss causation, the two elements that the Plaintiffs failed to adequately allege in the First Amended Complaint. The Plaintiffs claim NewLink made a series of misrepresentations regarding the development of its flagship pancreatic cancer drug, algenpantucel-L, also known as HyperAcute Pancreas. Through the Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials, NewLink and its officers allegedly misrepresented the drug's efficacy and misled the market into believing that the company would obtain Food and Drug Administration ("FDA") approval to market the drug. However, the drug failed to achieve the requisite markers in its clinical trial, foreclosing its chances for FDA approval. The appellate case is captioned as Nguyen, et al. v. NewLink Genetics Corporation, et al., Case No. 19-642, in the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.[BN] Plaintiffs-Appellants Michael Nguyen, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, and Kelly Nguyen, Individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by: Kim Miller, Esq. KAHN SWICK & FOTI, LLC 250 Park Avenue New York, NY 10177 Telephone: (212) 696-3730 E-mail: kim.miller@ksfcounsel.com Defendants-Appellees Charles J. Link, Jr., Nicholas N. Vahanian and NewLink Genetics Corporation are represented by: Sarah M. Lightdale, Esq. COOLEY LLP 1114 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 479-6374 E-mail: slightdale@cooley.com NIAGARA CREDIT: Camarda Alleges FDCPA Violation ----------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Niagara Credit Solutions, Inc. The case is styled as Thomas Camarda, on behalf of herself and all other similarly situated consumers, Plaintiff v. Niagara Credit Solutions, Inc. and John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-01272-RBS (E.D. Pa., March 26, 2019). The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. Niagara Credit Solutions, Inc. is a Credit counseling service in Lackawanna, New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Robert P. Cocco Law Offices of Robert P. Cocco PC 1500 Walnut St., Ste 900 Philadelphia, PA 19102 Tel: (215) 351-0200 Fax: (215) 922-3874 Email: rcocco@rcn.com OCULAR THERAPEUTIX: Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss DEXTENZA Suit ----------------------------------------------------------------- Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on March 7, 2019, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, that the court in the consolidated class action involving DEXTENZA held oral argument on the motion to dismiss on February 6, 2019 and took the matter under advisement. On July 7, 2017, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against the company and certain of its current and former executive officers in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, captioned Thomas Gallagher v. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc, et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-05011. The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased the company's common stock between May 5, 2017 and July 6, 2017. The complaint generally alleges that the company and certain of its current and former officers violated Sections 10(b) and/or 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making allegedly false and/or misleading statements concerning the Form 483 issued by the FDA related to DEXTENZA and the company's manufacturing operations for DEXTENZA. The complaint seeks unspecified damages, attorneys' fees, and other costs. On July 14, 2017, an amended complaint was filed; the amended complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased our common stock between May 5, 2017 and July 11, 2017, and otherwise includes allegations similar to those made in the original complaint. On July 12, 2017, a second putative class action lawsuit was filed against the company and certain of its current and former executive officers in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, captioned Dylan Caraker v. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-05095. The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased the company's common stock between May 5, 2017 and July 6, 2017. The complaint includes allegations similar to those made in the Gallagher complaint and seeks similar relief. On August 3, 2017, a third putative class action lawsuit was filed against the company and certain of its current and former executive officers in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, captioned Shawna Kim v. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-05704. The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who purchased the company's common stock between March 10, 2016 and July 11, 2017. The complaint includes allegations similar to those made in the Gallagher complaint and seeks similar relief. On October 27, 2017, a magistrate judge for the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the defendants' motion to transfer the above-referenced Gallagher, Caraker, and Kim litigations to the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. These matters were assigned the following docket numbers in the District of Massachusetts: 1:17-cv-12288 (Gallagher), 1:17-cv-12146 (Caraker), and 1:17-cv-12286 (Kim). On March 9, 2018, the court consolidated the three actions and appointed co-lead plaintiffs and co-lead counsel for the consolidated action. On May 7, 2018, co-lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended class action complaint. The amended complaint makes allegations similar to those in the original complaints, against the same defendants, and seeks similar relief on behalf of shareholders who purchased our common stock between March 10, 2016 and July 11, 2017. The amended complaint generally alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b) and/or 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder. On July 6, 2018, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. Plaintiffs' filed an opposition to the motion to dismiss on September 4, 2018, and defendants filed a reply on October 4, 2018. The court held oral argument on the motion to dismiss on February 6, 2019 and took the matter under advisement. Ocular Therapeutix said, "We deny any allegations of wrongdoing and intend to vigorously defend against these lawsuits." Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on the formulation, development, and commercialization of therapies for diseases and conditions of the eye using its bioresorbable hydrogel platform technology. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. was founded in 2006 and is headquartered in Bedford, Massachusetts. P&G AUDITORS: Faces Bediako & Miller Labor Suit ----------------------------------------------- A class action complaint has been filed against P&G Auditors and Consultants, LLC, GRC Solutions, LLC. and PGX, LLC over alleged violations of Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) and New York Labor Law (NYLL). The case is captioned DAMANI BEDIAKO and KIA MILLER, on behalf of themselves and those similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. P & G AUDITORS AND CONSULTANTS, LLC, a Foreign Limited Liability Company, GRC SOLUTIONS, LLC, a Foreign Limited Liability Company, and PGX, LLC, a Foreign Limited Liability Company, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-02527 (S.D.N.Y., March 21, 2019). Plaintiffs allege, pursuant to the FLSA and NYLL, that they are entitled to unpaid or back wages from Defendants for overtime work for which they did not receive overtime premium pay, as required by law. Plaintiffs also seek liquidated damages and declaratory relief. P&G, GRC, and PGX are foreign limited liability companies with their principal places of businesses located in East Brunswick, New Jersey. These companies provide anti-money laundering consultant services to their clients, among other services. [BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Andrew R. Frisch, Esq. MORGAN & MORGAN 600 N. Pine Island Road, Suite 400 Plantation, FL 33324 Tel: 954-WORKERS Fax: 954-327-3013 E-mail: afrisch@forthepeople.com PEPPERIDGE FARM: Sayward et al. Suit Transferred to C.D. Calif. --------------------------------------------------------------- The case, Edmund Sayward and John Provost, indiviudally and on behalf of all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. Pepperidge Farm, Inc., the Defendant, Case No. 1:13-cv-12770, was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts to the U.S. District Court for Central District of California (Western Division - Los Angeles) on March 18, 2019. The Central District of California Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-01998-MWF-AFM to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald. The suit alleges labor-related violation. Pepperidge Farm is an American commercial bakery founded in 1937 by Margaret Rudkin, who named the brand after her family's property in Fairfield, Connecticut, which in turn was named for the pepperidge tree, Nyssa sylvatica.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Adam J. Shafran, Esq. RUDOLPH FRIEDMAN LLP 92 State Street Boston, MA 02109 Telephone: (617) 723-7700 Facsimile: (617) 227-0313 E-mail: ashafran@rflawyers.com - and - Peter Rukin, Esq. Valerie Brender, Esq. RUKIN HYLAND LLP 100 Pine Street, Suite 2150 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 421-1800 E-mail: prukin@rukinhyland.com vbrender@rukinhyland.com Attorneys for Pepperidge Farm, Inc.: Michael J. Puma, Esq. Paul C. Evans, Esq. MORGAN LEWIS AND BOCKIUS LLP 1701 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-2921 Telephone: (215) 963-5000 Facsimile: (215) 963-5001 E-mail: mpuma@morganlewis.com pevans@morganlewis.com - and - Lisa Stephanian Burton, Esq. OGLETREE, DEAKINS, NASH, SOAK & STEWART, P.C. One Boston Place Boston, MA 02108 Telephone: (617) 994-5734 Facsimile: (617) 994-5701 PRET A MANGER: Falsely Sells Foods as Natural, Cunningham Claims ---------------------------------------------------------------- SKYLAR CUNNINGHAM, individually on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated v. PRET A MANGER, LTD. and JAB HOLDING COMPANY, Case No. 1:19-cv-02322 (S.D.N.Y., March 15, 2019), seeks to remedy the alleged deceptive and misleading business practices of the Defendants with respect to the marketing and sales of Pret a Manger food products. Ms. Cunningham contends that she and those similarly situated relied on the Defendants' misrepresentations that the Products are "Natural" when purchasing the Products and paid a premium for the Products over and above comparable products that did not purport to be "Natural." She argues that the Defendants' representations that the Products are "natural" are false, deceptive, and misleading because the Products contain GMOs, glyphosate, a synthetic chemical, and numerous other synthetic ingredients. Pret A Manger, Ltd., is a corporation headquartered in the United Kingdom. Its Head Office is located in New York City. Pret A Manger was acquired by JAB Holding Company, a German corporation, in May 2018. JAB is a corporation headquartered in Germany and maintains its United States offices in Washington, D.C. The Defendants manufacture, sell, and distribute the Products using a marketing and advertising campaign centered around claims that appeal to health-conscious consumers, i.e., that its Products are "Natural." There are more than 80 Pret a Manger store locations in the United States, with approximately 55 stores located in New York.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jason P. Sultzer, Esq. Janine Pollack, Esq. Jeremy Francis, Esq. THE SULTZER LAW GROUP P.C. 85 Civic Center Plaza, Suite 200 Poughkeepsie, NY 12601 Telephone: (845) 483-7100 Facsimile: (888) 749-7747 E-mail: sultzerj@thesultzerlawgroup.com pollackj@theslutzerlawgroup.com francisj@thesultzerlawgroup.com - and - Michael R. Reese, Esq. George V. Granade, Esq. REESE LLP 100 West 93rd Street, 16th Floor New York, NY 10025 Telephone: (212) 643-0500 Facsimile: (212) 643-0500 E-mail: mreese@reesellp.com ggranade@reesellp.com PRINSTON PHARMACEUTICAL: Molinaro Suit Moved to D. New Jersey ------------------------------------------------------------- The class action lawsuit titled RON MOLINARO, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. PRINSTON PHARMACEUTICAL INC. d/b/a SOLCO HEALTHCARE LLC; SOLCO HEALTHCARE U.S., LLC; and HUAHAI US INC., Defendants, Case No. 2:18-cv-00710, was removed from the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Florida to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on February 28, 2019. The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-07251-RBK-JS to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the Hon. Robert B. Kugler and referred to Magistrate Joel Schneider. The Molinaro suit is a member case in the multi-district litigation proceeding, MDL No. 2875. Prinston Pharmaceutical Inc. develops, manufactures, markets, and registers generic prescription pharmaceutical products. The company's products include Benazepril HCl, Bupropion SR, Donepezil HCl, Escitalopram, Irbesartan, Lamotrigine ER, Levetiracetam, Lisinopril, Losartan Potassium, Methocarbamol, Nevirapine, Paroxetine, Risperidone, Ropinirole HCl, and Valsartan tablets. Prinston Pharmaceutical Inc. was founded in 2009 and is based in Cranbury, New Jersey. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Louis I. Mussman, Esq. Brian T. Ku, Esq. KU & MUSSMAN, P.A. 18501 Pines Blvd, Suite 209-A Pembroke Pines, FL 33029 Telephone: (305) 891-1322 Facsimile: (305) 891-4512 E-mail: louis@kumussman.com brian@kumussman.com - and - Ruben Honik, Esq. David J. Stanoch, Esq. GOLOMB & HONIK, P.C. 1835 Market Street, Suite 2900 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 965-9177 Facsimile: (215) 985-4169 E-mail: rhonik@golombhonik.com dstanoch@golombhonik.com - and - Allan Kanner, Esq. Conlee S. Whiteley, Esq. Layne Hilton, Esq. KANNER & WHITELEY, LLC 701 Camp Street New Orleans, LA 70115 Telephone: 504-524-5777 Facsimile: 504-524-5763 E-mail: a.kanner@kanner-law.com c.whiteley@kanner-law.com l.hilton@kanner-law.com - and - Michael L. Slack, Esq. John R. Davis, Esq. SLACK DAVIS SANGER, LLP 2705 Bee Cave Road, Suite 220 Austin, TX 78746 Telephone: (512) 795-8686 Facsimile: (512) 795-8787 E-mail: mslack@slackdavis.com jdavis@slackdavis.com PUTNAM AUTOMOTIVE: Contreras Seeks Unpaid Wages, Overtime Pay ------------------------------------------------------------- An employment-related class action complaint has been filed against Putnam Automotive, Inc. for its failure to pay wages and overtime compensation. The case is captioned VICTOR CONTRERAS, on behalf of himself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, PUTNAM AUTOMOTIVE, INC., a California corporation doing business as Putnam Chrysler Jeep Dodge of Burlingame, Nissan of Burlingame, Volvo of Burlingame, Putnam Mazda, Putnam Subaru of Burlingame, Putnam Toyota of Burlingame, Putnam Lexus, Putnam Buick GMC, Alfa Romeo of Burlingame, Putnam Cadillac, and Putnam Chevrolet; and DOES 1 to 50, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19CIV01423 (Cal. Super., San Mateo County, March 12, 2019). Contreras also claims that Defendant Putnam Automotive, Inc. failed to pay minimum wage, reimburse for business expenses, timely pay wages at termination, and provide accurate itemized employee wage statements. Contreras also failed to provide meal and rest breaks under Labor Code Sec. 226.7. This action seeks recovery for wages and compensation due and owing to employees under California laws for the maximum period allowed to the present. Putnam Automotive, Inc. is a family-owned business that engages in car dealerships in the San Francisco Bay Area. [BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony J. Orshansky, Esq. Justin Kachadoorian, Esq. COUNSELONE, PC 9301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 650 Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Telephone: (310) 277-9945 Facsimile: (424) 277-3727 E-mail: anthony@counselonegroup.com justin@counselonegroup.com RELISH CONCESSION: Mezon Suit Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages --------------------------------------------------------- Jessica Mezon and Karina Garcia, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Relish Concession and Event Catering LLC, Relish at the Carousel Ltd., Relish Caterers Ltd., Relish BD LLC and Claudine Revere, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-01543, (S.D. N.Y., February 19, 2019), seeks unpaid compensation, liquidated damages, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs, and all other available and appropriate relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act and New York labor laws. Defendants operate, food and beverage concessions at Wollman Rink in Central Park, New York where Plaintiffs worked as food service employees, working more than 40 hours per week and/or in excess of 8 hours in a workday without being paid overtime, says the complaint. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: D. Maimon Kirschenbaum, Esq. Josef Nussbaum JOSEPH & KIRSCHENBAUM LLP 32 Broadway, Suite 601 New York, NY 10004 Tel: (212) 688-5640 Fax: (212) 688-2548 - and - Louis Pechman, Esq. Laura Rodriguez, Esq. PECHMAN LAW GROUP PLLC 488 Madison Avenue New York, NY 10022 Tel: (212) 583-9500 Fax: (212) 308-8582 Email: pechman@pechmanlaw.com RENAISSANCE POWER: Dean Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing Calls ------------------------------------------------------------- JUSTIN DEAN and SHANE KELLY on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated v. RENAISSANCE POWER & GAS, INC., Case No. 1:19-cv-10473-LTS (D. Mass., March 14, 2019), alleges that the Defendant made automated and pre-recorded telemarketing calls to cellular telephone numbers and to residential telephone numbers on the National Do Not Call Registry, both of which is prohibited by the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Renaissance Power & Gas, Inc., is a Nevada corporation with its principal place of business in Las Vegas, Nevada. The Defendant is in the business of selling deregulated energy to consumers.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. PARONICH LAW, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Telephone: (508) 221-1510 E-mail: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Alex M. Washkowitz, Esq. JEREMY COHEN CW LAW GROUP, P.C. 188 Oaks Road Framingham, MA 01701 Telephone: (844) 275-2856 E-mail: alex@cwlawgrouppc.com REVOLUTION LIGHTING: Bishop Files Securities Class Action in NY --------------------------------------------------------------- Bob Bishop, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. Revolution Lighting Technologies, Inc., Robert V. LaPenta, Charles J. Schafer, and James A. DePalma, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-02722 (S.D. N.Y., March 26, 2019) is a class action on behalf of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Revolution Lighting securities between March 14, 2014 and November 14, 2018, inclusive, seeking to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. On September 22, 2017, the Company reduced its 2017 full year revenue guidance to a range of $180-185 million, compared to prior guidance of $195 to 205 million, due in part to "slippage of a number of Energy Source division projects." On this news, the Company's share price fell $1.32 per share, or more than 17%, to close at $6.26 per share on September 22, 2017, on unusually high trading volume. The Company's shares continued to decline over the course of the next two trading sessions, dropping $0.33 per share on August 3, 2018 and $0.22 per share on August 6, 2018. The total decline over the course of these two trading sessions was $0.55, or 18%. The complaint asserts that Defendants made false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose: (1) that the Company was improperly recognizing revenue for certain transactions; (2) that, as a result, the Company's financial statements were misstated; (3) that the Company lacked adequate internal controls over financial reporting; (4) that, as a result, Company would be subject to regulatory scrutiny and incur substantial costs; and (5) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis, says the complaint. Plaintiff Bob Bishop purchased Revolution Lighting securities during the Class Period. Revolution Lighting purports to design and manufacture light-emitting diode ("LED") lighting solutions for industrial, commercial, and government markets.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq. GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP 230 Park Ave., Suite 530 New York, NY 10169 Phone: (212) 682-5340 Facsimile: (212) 884-0988 Email: lportnoy@glancylaw.com - and - Lionel Z. Glancy, Esq. Robert V. Prongay, Esq. Charles H. Linehan, Esq. Pavithra Rajesh, Esq. GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP 1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Phone: (310) 201-9150 Facsimile: (310) 201-9160 - and - Howard G. Smith, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF HOWARD G. SMITH 3070 Bristol Pike, Suite 112 Bensalem, PA 19020 Phone: (215) 638-4847 Facsimile: (215) 638-4867 ROADRUNNER TRANS: Faces Gomez Class Action in California -------------------------------------------------------- Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc. said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on March 11, 2019, for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018, that the company is defending against a class action lawsuit brought by Fernando Gomez. In December 2018, a class action lawsuit was brought against the company in the Superior Court of the State of California by Fernando Gomez, on behalf of himself and other similarly situated persons, alleging violation of California labor laws. This is a new lawsuit and the company is currently determining its effects. Roadrunner said, "We intend to vigorously defend against such claims; however, there can be no assurance that we will be able to prevail. In light of the relatively early stage of the proceedings, we are unable to predict the potential costs or range of costs at this time." Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc. provides asset-right transportation and asset-light logistics services. The company operates through three segments: Truckload Logistics (TL), Less-than-Truckload (LTL), and Ascent Global Logistics. Roadrunner Transportation Systems, Inc. is headquartered in Downers Grove, Illinois. ROYAL SEAS CRUISES: Bell Files Class Suit in S.D. Florida --------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against Royal Seas Cruises, Inc. The case is styled as Brenda Bell, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Royal Seas Cruises, Inc., a Florida corporation, Defendant, Case No. 0:19-cv-60750 (S.D. Fla., March 22, 2019). Royal Seas Cruises is a travel and transportation company offering cruise packages.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ryan Scott Shipp, Esq. Law Office of Ryan S. Shipp 814 W. Lantana Road Suite 1 Lantana, FL 33462 Tel: (561) 699-0399 Email: ryan@shipplawoffice.com SAN FRANCISCO, CA: Lee et al. Sue over Taxi Medallion Transfers --------------------------------------------------------------- PATRICK O'SULLIVAN, SAL LEE, GEORGE HORBAL, ALLIANCE CAB and S.F. TOWN TAXI INC., the the Plaintiffs, vs. CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO; SAN FRANCISCO MUNICIPAL TRANSIT AGENCY; EDWARD D. REISKIN, Director of Transportation; and DOES 1 through 20, Case No. CGC-19-574503 (Cal. Super. Ct., March 13, 2019), seeks declaratory judgment that the San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency's (SFMTA) December 27, 2018 pickup limitations at San Francisco International Airport (SFO) violate the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the California Constitution on their face and as applied, and are therefore invalid and unenforceable. The City and County of San Francisco, through its constituent boards and commissions, issues motor vehicle for hire permits authorizing permit holders to operate taxicabs on City streets and to and from San Francisco International Airport ("SFO"). Motor vehicle for hire permits are often referred to colloquially as "medallions." Prior to June 6, 1978, the City issued motor vehicle for hire permits in the name of individuals and corporations, and one person or entity could hold multiple permits. Subject to City agency approval, permit holders were also allowed to transfer medallions to authorized third parties for consideration, i.e., "sell" the permit for an agreed-upon purchase price. Over the course of the decades after passage of Proposition K, hundreds of pre-K permits reverted to the City for reissuance. Changes and contractions in corporate ownership resulted in the surrender of many permits held in corporate form. Immediately prior to the passage of Proposition K in 1978, there were approximately 700 medallions held by individuals and corporations. By 2018, out of a total of approximately 1,800 medallions authorized by the City, fewer than 275 were still held by pre-K permit holders, individual and corporate. Virtually all current pre-K medallion holders purchased or acquired their permits for consideration prior to 1978. Individual permits typically changed hands for in excess of $15,000 each, in 1976 dollars. At the time, the average income for a San Francisco family was $13,500, and a home in the City could be purchased for $15,000. After 1978, many pre-K permit holders elected to personally operate their medallions to supplement their taxi-related income. However, the passage of time and the infirmities of age now preclude all but a handful of them from safely driving a cab. Instead, the vast majority of pre-K permit holders now rely exclusively on monthly lease payments from color schemes for medallion-derived income. As of 2018, almost all the individuals holding pre-K permits are over the age of 70, the lawsuit says. On November 2007, City voters approved Proposition A, a Charter 3 amendment. Among other things, Proposition A authorized the vesting of plenary authority over taxicabs in the SFMTA. Proposition A provided, in relevant part, that "[o]nce adopted, [SFMTA] regulations shall thereafter supercede (sic) all previously-adopted ordinances governing motor vehicles for hire that conflict with or duplicate such regulations" (Charter section 8A.101(b)). Starting in 2009, the SFMTA enacted various taxi-related amendments and additions to the San Francisco Transportation Code. With the greater regulatory freedom afforded by Proposition A, the SFMTA could override the non-transferability provisions of Proposition K. Accordingly, to reap potentially millions of dollars in new municipal revenue, the SFMTA formulated and put into operation its Taxi Medallion Transfer Program, Transportation Code sections 1116, et seq. ("the Program"). Under the Program, with certain exceptions, taxi drivers could purchase an existing permit from its then-holder for the sum of $250,000. About $200,000 of that sum was retained by the seller. The remaining $50,000 was remitted to the SFMTA. These "Purchased medallions" were themselves transferable, subject to SFMTA approval, creating what the SFMTA believed would be a forward-looking, dynamic taxi medallion marketplace. Given the relatively modest means of most taxi drivers, the Program included provisions authorizing "Qualified Lenders" to loan to the buyer up to 95% of the full purchase price of the medallion. In exchange, the lender obtained a security interest in the medallion. The lender furnishing the overwhelming majority of loans to buyers of taxi medallions was the San Francisco Federal CredithUnion ("the Credit Union"). From the Program's inception in 2010, the Credit Union financed hundreds of Purchased medallion transactions, extending credit in excess of $150 million. In turn, the SFMTA received in excess of $50 million in sales-generated revenue. The Program allowed both pre-K and longtime post-K medallion holders over 65 years of age (later dropped to 60) to "retire" from the taxi industry by transferring their medallions to new "Purchased medallion" holders for consideration. The Credit Union alleged that the SFMTA had breached the lender agreements into which it had entered, breached the covenant of good faith and fair dealing, breached mandatory duties under the Transportation Code and engaged in serial misrepresentations, all to the Credit Union's economic detriment. The Credit Union alleged that while the SFMTA had covenanted to repurchase foreclosed medallions, it had failed and refused to commit municipal resources to that end. In its lawsuit, the Credit Union prayed for damages from the SFMTA in an amount exceeding $31 million. Color scheme operators will also be adversely affected by the SFMTA limitations on airport pickups. With few if any drivers willing to lease a pre-K medallion, those permits will be returned to the permit holder because the color scheme manager cannot justify the overhead associated with a vehicle that is producing little or no revenue. The same effect is likely with respect to more and more post-K permits as they become less and less desirable for drivers to operate. For its part, when the SFMTA Board of Directors adopted its October 16, 2018 resolution granting defendant Reiskin the discretion to "impose restrictions on the types of medallions authorized to operate a taxicab trip originating at San Francisco International Airport", the resolution was expressly premised on a purported Planning Department determination that the reforms were exempt from CEQA under a statutory exemption applicable to changes to "rates, tolls, fares, and other charges by public agencies which are for the purpose of meeting operating expenses, purchasing or leasing supplies, equipment, or materials": Not only did the Board's resolution provide no citation to or analysis of evidence linking pickup limitations at SFO to the statutory exemption referenced in the resolution, the Planning Department never made the determination upon which the Board's resolution relied. Indeed, the only environmental "evaluation" underlying the limitations on medallion pickups at SFO was the self-serving conclusion by SFMTA staff that its earlier and more draconian proposed changes would not adversely affect the physical environment, the lawsuit says. The City and County of San Francisco is a political subdivision of the State of California and a Charter city granted specified home rule powers and authority under the Constitution of the State of California. San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency is the department and administrative arm of the City charged under the San Francisco Charter with enforcing and administrating the municipal regulation of motor vehicles for hire, a/kla taxicabs. The SFMTA has the exclusive authority to enact and amend the San Francisco Transportation Code which provides for the regulation of taxicabs. The SFMTA adopted the Program under which persons were allowed to purchase medallions beginning in 2010. The SFMTA has also authorized and approved the implementation of restrictions on certain medallions limiting their ability to accept fare-paying passengers at SFO. The agency has also granted preferences in accepting passengers at SFO and in permit operation to persons who purchased medallions under the Program.[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs: Philip S. Ward, Esq. Warren R. Webster, Esq. HASSARD BONNINGTON LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 1600 San Francisco, CA 94111-3370 Telephone: (415) 288-9800 Facsimile: (415) 288-9801 E-mail: psw@hassard.com wrw@hassard.com - and - Kenneth A. Brunetti, Esq. Gregory A. Rougeau, Esq. BRUNETTI ROUGEAU LLP 235 Montgomery Street, Ste. 410 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 992-8943 Facsimile: (415) 992-8915 E-mail: kbrunetti@brlawsf.com grougeau@brlawsf.com SETTLEMENT MARKETING: Levinton Sues Over Unsolicited Text Messages ------------------------------------------------------------------ Tomas Levinton, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Settlement Marketing Group LLC d/b/a DebtAway Relief, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-21132 (S.D. Fla., March 25, 2019) seeks damages, injunctive relief, and any other available legal or equitable remedies, resulting from the illegal actions of DebtAway in negligently or willfully contacting Plaintiff on Plaintiff's cellular telephone, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), thereby invading Plaintiff's privacy. DebtAway utilizes prerecorded telemarketing calls and bulk SPAM text messages to market and advertise its business, including at least one pre-recorded call and one unsolicited text message to Plaintiff. Plaintiff did not provide DebtAway or its agents prior express consent to receive calls and/or text messages, including unsolicited calls and text messages, to his cellular telephone, says the complaint. Plaintiff's domicile is in Miami-Dade County, Florida. Plaintiff is a citizen of the state of Florida. Settlement Marketing Group LLC d/b/a DebtAway Relief, is a California Limited Liability Company and citizen of the state of California.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Seth M. Lehrman, Esq. EDWARDS POTTINGER LLC 425 North Andrews Avenue, Suite 2 Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301 Phone: 954-524-2820 Facsimile: 954-524-2822 Email: seth@epllc.com - and - Scott D. Owens, Esq. SCOTT D. OWENS, P.A. 3800 S. Ocean Dr., Suite 235 Hollywood, FL 33019 Phone: 954-589-0588 Facsimile: 954-337-0666 Email: scott@scottdowens.com - and - Justin H. Jaffe, Esq. lowercase pllc, A Law Firm 3250 NE 1st Ave., Suite 305 Miami, FL 33137 Phone: 833-569-3335 Email: justin@lowercaselaw.com SI FINANCIAL: Bushanksy Balks at Merger Deal with Berkshire ----------------------------------------------------------- SI Financial Group, Inc. said in its Form 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed on March 7, 2019, that the company has been named as a defendant in a class action complaint entitled, Bushanksy v. SI Financial Group, Inc. et al. SI Financial Group, Inc. ("SI Financial") and Berkshire Hills Bancorp, Inc. ("Berkshire Hills Bancorp") entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the "Merger Agreement") pursuant to which SI Financial will merge with and into Berkshire Hills Bancorp (the "Merger"). Immediately following the Merger, Savings Institute Bank and Trust Company will merge with and into Berkshire Bank (the "Bank Merger"). On February 26, 2019, SI Financial (SEC File No. 000-54241) filed a definitive proxy statement/prospectus (the "Proxy Statement/Prospectus"), with the Securities and Exchange Commission in connection with the Merger, which was first mailed to SI Financial stockholders on February 26, 2019. On March 5, 2019, one purported SI Financial stockholder filed a putative class action lawsuit against SI Financial and the members of the SI Financial board of directors in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, captioned Bushanksy v. SI Financial Group, Inc. et al., Case No. 3:19-cv-00321. The plaintiff, on behalf of himself and similarly-situated SI Financial stockholders, generally alleges that the Proxy Statement/Prospectus contains material misstatements and omissions in violation of Section 14(a) and Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act, and Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder. The plaintiff seeks injunctive relief, rescission of the Merger or rescissory damages (if the Merger is consummated), declaratory relief, and an award of attorneys' fees and expenses. SI Financial Group, Inc. operates as the holding company for Savings Institute Bank and Trust Company that provides various financial services to consumers and businesses. SI Financial Group, Inc. was founded in 1842 and is headquartered in Willimantic, Connecticut. SMOKER'S OUTLET: Kuhlman Seeks OT Pay, Hits Inaccurate Pay Slips ---------------------------------------------------------------- Danae Kuhlman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Smoker's Outlet, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 19-cv-00047, (W.D. Tex., February 19, 2019), seeks unpaid regular hourly wages, unpaid overtime, liquidated damages, attorney's fees and costs of suit and such other relief under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Smoker's Outlet operates a chain of retail stores in the Midland, Odessa and San Angelo areas selling tobacco pipes, accessories, cigarettes, and alcoholic beverages where Kuhlman worked as a clerk welder. Aside from failing to pay overtime pay, RFC also failed to provide accurate wage statements, says the complaint. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Melissa Moore, Esq. Curt Hesse, Esq. Bridget Davidson, Esq. MOORE & ASSOCIATES Lyric Center 440 Louisiana Street, Suite 675 Houston, TX 77002 Telephone: (713) 222-6775 Facsimile: (713) 222-6739 SOGOU INC: Dore Suit Hits Share Price Drop ------------------------------------------ Asha Lickley Dore, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Sogou Inc., Xiaochuan Wang, Charles (Chaoyang) Zhang, Yuxin Ren, Joanna (Yanfeng) Lu, Bin Gao, Joseph Chen, Janice Lee, James (Xiufeng) Deng, Sohu.Com Inc., Tencent Holdings Limited, J.P. Morgan Securities LLC, Credit Suisse Securities (USA) LLC, Goldman Sachs (Asia) L.L.C., Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC, China International Capital Corporation Hong Kong Securities Limited and Does 1 through 25, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 19CIV00951 (Cal. Super., February 19, 2019), seeks compensatory damages, reasonable costs and expenses, counsel fees and expert fees, rescission or a rescissory measure of damages and such other and further relief under the Securities Act of 1933. Sogou is a Chinese mobile search engine, the fourth largest Internet company in China. It issued American Depository Shares (ADS) in an initial public offering on November 9, 2017. The complaint asserts that their offering documents failed to disclose that Sogou was under investigation by Chinese regulators for its existing advertising and audit procedures, claiming that they were insufficient to safeguard against compliance violations with governing Chinese regulations. It also failed to disclose that the company was facing increased competition and market saturation resulting in the company being unable to grow as claimed and that its historic revenue growth was artificially inflated as a result of partnerships with Tencent, another Chinese internet company. On February 19, 2019, Sogou's ADS reached a low of $5.95 per ADS, closing at $6.13 per ADS, less than half their original IPO selling price. Dore purchased Sogou ADS during the IPO and lost. Plaintiff is represented by: Patrice Bishop, Esq. STULL, STULL & BRODY 9430 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 400 Beverly Hills, CA 90212 Tel. (310) 209-2468 Fax. (310) 209-2087 Email: service@ssbla.com SOUTH FLORIDA RACING: Lawrence Seeks Certification of FACTA Class ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Plaintiff in the lawsuit titled SADIKI LAWRENCE, individually, and on behalf of others similarly situated v. SOUTH FLORIDA RACING ASSOCIATION, LLC, d/b/a "HIALEAH PARK", a Florida limited liability company, Case No. 1:18-cv-24264-UU (S.D. Fla.), seeks certification of a class: All persons in the United States who, at any time between April 4, 2016 and April 4, 2018 (the "Class Period"), performed a cash-access transaction at Hialeah Park casino with a debit card or credit card associated with Visa USA, Incorporated, Visa International, or MasterCard International Incorporated that was processed via technology provided by Everi Payments, Inc., formerly known as Global Cash Access, Inc. Mr. Lawrence alleges that for over two years preceding the filing of this action, the Defendant systematically violated the most basic, easy-to-comply-with federal consumer protection statute on the books--the truncation provision of the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act. He contends that to comply with this important statute, which Congress enacted in an effort to curb identity theft and other financial evils, all Hialeah Park needed to do was refrain from printing transaction receipts bearing more than the last five digits of its customers' credit and debit card numbers.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Scott D. Owens, Esq. SCOTT D. OWENS, P.A. 3800 S. Ocean Dr., Suite 235 Hollywood, FL 33019 Telephone: (954) 589-0588 Facsimile: (954) 337-0666 E-mail: scott@scottdowens.com - and - Frank S. Hedin, Esq. HEDIN HALL LLP 1395 Brickell Avenue, Suite 900 Miami, FL 33131 Telephone: (305) 357-2107 Facsimile: (305) 200-8801 E-mail: fhedin@hedinhall.com SUNPATH LTD: Jackson Sues Over Automated Telemarketing Calls ------------------------------------------------------------ Derek Jackson on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Sunpath Ltd., Andrew Garcia, National Auto Protection Corp, and William T. Finneran, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-10556 (D. Mass., March 25, 2019) seeks to enforce consumer-privacy provisions of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, a federal statute enacted in 1991 in response to widespread public outrage about the proliferation of intrusive, nuisance telemarketing practices. The complaint asserts that National Auto Protection Corp. makes automated telemarketing calls to originate new warranty customers, including for the Defendant Sunpath Ltd. National Auto Protection Corp initiated an automated pre-recorded telemarketing call to a cellular telephone number of Mr. Jackson as well as the cellular telephone of other putative class members for the purposes using an automated dialing system, which is prohibited by the TCPA. The Plaintiff never consented to receive the calls, which were placed to him for telemarketing purposes, says the complaint. Plaintiff Derek Jackson is a resident of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and this District. Defendant Sunpath, Ltd. is a Delaware corporation that has its principal office in Braintree, MA, and conducts business in this District.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Anthony I. Paronich, Esq. Paronich Law, P.C. 350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400 Hingham, MA 02043 Phone: (508) 221-1510 Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com - and - Alex M. Washkowitz, Esq. Jeremy Cohen, Esq. CW Law Group, P.C. 188 Oaks Road Framingham, MA 01701 Email: alex@cwlawgrouppc.com TEAM SCHIERL: Does Not Pay Overtime Wages, Abrahamson Suit Says --------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Abrahamson, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Team Schierl Companies and Schierl Sales Corp., Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00254 (E.D. Wisc., February 19, 2019), seeks unpaid overtime compensation, unpaid agreed upon wages, liquidated damages, costs, attorneys' fees, declaratory and/or injunctive relief and/or any such other relief pursuant to Wisconsin's Wage Payment and Collection Laws and the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. Team Schierl is in the automotive, convenience store, quick-serve restaurant and commercial real estate industries. Its subsidiary, Schierl Sales sells food and goods via convenience stores located throughout the States of Wisconsin. Abrahamson worked for the Defendants as an associate from July 16, 2018 to February 5, 2019. Abrahamson claims he was deprived of overtime pay for all hours worked in excess of forty in a workweek. [BN] Plaintiffs are represented by: James A. Walcheske, Esq. Scott S. Luzi, Esq. David M. Potteiger, Esq. WALCHESKE & LUZI, LLC 15850 W. Bluemound Rd., Suite 304 Brookfield, WI 53005 Phone: (262) 780-1953 Fax: (262) 565-6469 Email: jwalcheske@walcheskeluzi.com sluzi@walcheskeluzi.com dpotteiger@walcheskeluzi.com TITAN CONSTRUCTION: Workers Seek Unpaid Overtime Wages ------------------------------------------------------ Carlos Guajardo, Harold Manuel Baez, Lenny Villao, Prudencio Castillo, Stevan Villalba, Wilson Radhames Diaz, Senen Mora, Billy Buitrago, Reynaldo Hernandez, Nilton Gonzales, Rogelio Ramirez, Milton Mora, Daniel Erasto Martinez and Eugenio Gonzalez, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Titan Construction Services LLC, Eric Mercado and Jose Garcia, as individuals, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-01551, (S.D. N.Y., February 19, 2018), seeks to recover damages for egregious violations of New York State labor laws and the Fair Labor Standards Act; compensatory and liquidated damages; interest; attorneys' fees, costs; and all other legal and equitable remedies. Defendants operate a construction company where Plaintiffs worked as construction workers. They claim to have worked in excess of 60 hours per week without overtime premium and some claim to receive less than the mandate minimum wages. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Roman Avshalumov, Esq. HELEN F. DALTON & ASSOCIATES, PC 69-12 Austin Street Forest Hills, NY 11375 Telephone: (718) 263-9591 Fax: (718) 263-9598 Email: HFDalton6912@Gmail.com TOP'S PERSONNEL: Bid for Class Certification Denied --------------------------------------------------- In the class action lawsuit, APPLIED UNDERWRITERS, INC., a Nebraska Corporation, the Plaintiff and counterclaim defendant, vs. TOP'S PERSONNEL, INC., a New Jersey Corporation, Defendant and counterclaimant, Case No. 8:15-cv-00090-JMG-CRZ (D. Neb.), the Hon. Judge John M. Gerrard has entered an order: 1. adopting Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation that the Court deny Top's Personnel's Motion for Class Certification; 2. overruling Top's' objection to the findings and recommendation; and 3. denying Top's' Motion for Class Certification. The Court held that Top's had the burden of proving it met the requirements of Fed.R.Civ.P. 23(b)(3). Top's contention that a class action is the superior way to resolve this controversy because it was the first New Jersey plaintiff to sue is not compelling. The Court finds no error in, and will adopt, the Magistrate Judge's finding that the superiority requirement of Rule 23(b)(3) was not proven. As reported by the Class Action Reporter, Top's moved the Court for an order granting class certification. The proposed Nationwide Class is defined as: All individuals or entities in the United States who purchased an EquityComp or SoultionOne workers' compensation insurance policy from Applied Underwriters, Inc. or any of its affiliates, and subsequently executed a promissory note with Applied Underwriters, Inc. or one of its affiliates relating to sums allegedly owed pursuant to either the EquityComp or SolutionOne programs. In the alternative, Top's sought to certify a New Jersey statewide subclass: New Jersey Subclass: All individuals or entities in the state of New Jersey who purchased an EquityComp or SolutionOne workers' compensation insurance policy from Applied Underwriters, Inc. or any of its affiliates, and subsequently executed a promissory note with Applied Underwriters, Inc. or one of its affiliates relating to sums allegedly owed pursuant to either the EquityComp or SolutionOne programs.[CC] Top's Personnel Inc. is represented by: Brian T. McKernan, Esq. MCGRATH NORTH First National Tower, Suite 3700 1601 Dodge Street Omaha, NE 68102 Telephone: (402) 633-6896 Facsimile: (402) 952-6896 E-mail: bmckernan@mcgrathnorth.com - and - Ralph P. Ferrara, Esq. Aaron L. Peskin, Esq. FERRARA LAW GROUP, P.C. One State Street Square 50 W. State St., Suite 1100 Trenton, NJ 08608 Telephone: (609) 571-3738 Facsimile: (609) 498-7440 E-mail: ralph@ferraralawgp.com aaron@ferraralawgp.com - and - Benjamin F. Johns, Esq. Andrew W. Ferich, Esq. Zachary P. Beatty, Esq. CHIMICLES & TIKELLIS LLP 361 West Lancaster Avenue Haverford, PA 19041 Telephone: (610) 642-8500 Facsimile: (610) 649-3633 E-mail: BFJ@chimicles.com AWF@chimicles.com ZPB@chimicles.com TREMONT ENTERPRISES: Does Not Pay Workers' OT Wages, Batista Says ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stan Batista, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Tremont Enterprises, LLC and Sherman DeLozier, Defendants, Case No. 19-cv-00361, (N.D. Ohio, February 5, 2019), seek unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages, attorneys' fees and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Ohio Minimum Fair Wage Standards Act. Tremont Enterprises operates as "The South Side," a restaurant in Tremont, Ohio. Batista claims to have frequently worked more than forty hours in a single workweek without overtime compensation. [BN] Plaintiff is represented by: Hans A. Nilges, Esq. Shannon M. Draher, Esq. NILGES DRAHER LLC 7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D Massillon, OH 44646 Telephone: (330) 470-4428 Facsimile: (330) 754-1430 Email: hans@ohlaborlaw.com sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com UNITED MICROELECTRONICS: Meyer Files Securities Class Action in NY ------------------------------------------------------------------ Kevin D. Meyer, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, Plaintiff, v. United Microelectronics Corporation, Shan-Chieh Chienhas, Jason Wang, Po-Wen Yen, and Chitung Liu, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-02304 (S.D. N.Y., March 14, 2019) is a federal securities class action on behalf of a class consisting of all persons other than the Defendants who purchased or otherwise acquired UMC securities between October 28, 2015 and November 1, 2018, both dates inclusive, seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. According to the complaint, the Defendants made materially false and misleading statements regarding UMC's business, operational and compliance policies. Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (i) UMC conspired with Fujian to steal trade secrets from Micron relating to its research and development of DRAM; (ii) UMC hired former Micron employees for the purpose of stealing such information from Micron; (iii) the foregoing conduct placed UMC and certain of its employees at an increased risk of criminal and regulatory investigation by the U.S. government; and (iv) as a result, UMC's public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. As a result of Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, and the precipitous decline in the market value of the Company's securities, Plaintiff and other Class members have suffered significant losses and damages, says the complaint. Plaintiff acquired UMC securities at artificially inflated prices during the Class Period. UMC was founded in 1980 and is headquartered in Hsinchu City, Taiwan. UMC provides semiconductor wafer foundry solutions.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Jeremy A. Lieberman, Esq. J. Alexander Hood II, Esq. Jonathan D. Lindenfeld, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 600 Third Avenue, 20th Floor New York, NY 10016 Phone: (212) 661-1100 Facsimile: (212) 661-8665 Email: jalieberman@pomlaw.com ahood@pomlaw.com jlindenfeld@pomlaw.com - and - Patrick V. Dahlstrom, Esq. POMERANTZ LLP 10 South La Salle Street, Suite 3505 Chicago, Il 60603 Phone: (312) 377-1181 Facsimile: (312) 377-1184 Email: pdahlstrom@pomlaw.com UNITED PARCEL: Szewczyk Seeks Wages & OT for Drivers & Helpers -------------------------------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit against United Parcel Service seeks to recover unpaid wages and overtime compensation pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Pennsylvania Wage Payment and Collection Law, and the Pennsylvania Minimum Wage Act. The Defendant has willfully and deliberately failed to pay its delivery drivers and driver helpers -- individuals who assist drivers in the delivery of packages -- overtime compensation for all hours worked beyond 40 in a work week, in violation of the FLSA. According to the complaint, the Plaintiffs allege that they and Defendant's delivery drivers and driver helpers worked "off-the-clock" (i.e., they worked hours for which they were not paid) in order to pick-up, transfer and deliver their assigned packages and meet Defendant's pre-determined delivery and payroll goals. As a result of these common practices, delivery drivers and driver helpers, including Plaintiffs, were not paid for all hours worked, including during lunch breaks when they continued to work and deliver packages. United Parcel Service is an American multinational package delivery and supply chain management company. The case is styled TODD SZEWCZYK, 15 West Street Parkesburg, PA 19365; JUAN DONES-CRUZ 4345 Elizabeth Street, Philadelphia, PA 19124; and KIMBERLY RUCKER, 5290 Marlboro Pike, Apt. 402 Capitol Heights, MD 20743, On behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, the Plaintiffs, vs. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC., 55 Glenlake Parkway NE Atlanta, Georgia 30328, the Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-01109-JP (E.D. Pa., March 18, 2019).[BN] Attorneys for the Plaintiffs and the Putative FLSA Collectives and PA Classes: Jason Conway, Esq. CONWAY LEGAL, LLC 1700 Market Street, Suite 1005 Philadelphia, PA 19103 Telephone: (215) 278 4782 E-mail: jconway@conwaylegalpa.com - and - Daniel C. Levin, Esq. LEVIN SEDRAN & BERMAN 510 Walnut Street Philadelphia, PA 19106 Telephone: (215) 592 1000 E-mail: dlevin@lfsblaw.com - and - William T. Wilson, Esq. BAILEY & EHRENBERG PLLC 120 North Church Street, Suite PLLC Westchester, PA 19380 Telephone (484) 605 1146 E-mail: btb@becounsel.com UNITED STATES: Ellison Files Class Action ----------------------------------------- A class action lawsuit has been filed against the Unites States in the U.S. Federal Court of Federal Claims on March 22, 2019. The case is styled as Clarence Ellison, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. USA, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-00437-NBF. The docket of the case says the lawsuit was filed pursuant to the Tucker Act. The U.S. is a country of 50 states covering a vast swath of North America, with Alaska in the northwest and Hawaii extending the nation’s presence into the Pacific Ocean. Major Atlantic Coast cities are New York, a global finance and culture center, and capital Washington, DC. Midwestern metropolis Chicago is known for influential architecture and on the west coast, Los Angeles' Hollywood is famed for filmmaking.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Joshua Sanford, Esq. Sanford Law Firm One Financial Center 650 South Shackleford, Suite 411 Little Rock, AR 72211 Tel: (501) 221-0088 Email: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com UNITED TECHNOLOGIES: Oddo's Bid to Certify Class Under Submission ----------------------------------------------------------------- The Hon. Christina A. Snyder takes under submission several motions in the lawsuit titled STEVE ODDO v. UNITED TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, Case No. 8:15-cv-01985-CAS-E (C.D. Cal.), including a motion for class certification. According to the Court's Civil Minutes, hearing was held and tentative order was provided. The Court conferred with counsel and counsel argued.[CC] The Plaintiff is represented by: Timothy Mathews, Esq. Zachary Beatty, Esq. CHIMICLES AND TIKELLIS LLP 361 West Lancaster Ave One Haverford Centre Haverford, PA 19041 Telephone: (610) 642-8500 E-mail: TimothyMathews@chimicles.com ZPB@chimicles.com - and - Kolin Tang, Esq. James Shah, Esq. SHEPHERD FINKELMAN MILLER AND SHAH LLP 1401 Dove St., Suite 540 Newport Beach, CA 92660-2425 Telephone: (323) 510-4060 E-mail: ktang@sfmslaw.com jshah@sfmslaw.com The Defendant is represented by: Jonathan Faria, Esq. Devin Anderson, Esq. Sarah Smith, Esq. Allen Kenneth, Esq. KIRKLAND & ELLIS LLP 333 S Hope St. Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: (213) 680-8400 E-mail: jonathan.faria@kirkland.com devin.anderson@kirkland.com sarah.smith@kirkland.com winn.allen@kirkland.com VEOLIA ENERGY: Parker Labor Suit Removed to C.D. Cal. ----------------------------------------------------- Mitchel Parker, individually on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Veolia Energy North America, LLC; Veolia Water North America Operating Services, LLC, Veolia Wate North America-West, LLC and Does 1 through 20, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. CIVDS19013151 filed in California Superior Court on January 15, 2019, was removed to the United States District Court for the Central District of California on February 19, 2019, under Case No. 19-cv-00306. Plaintiff accuses Defendants of wage and hour violations for failure to provide meal and rest periods, failure to pay hourly wages, failure to provide accurate written wage statements and failure to timely pay all final wages.[BN] Veolia is represented by: Tracy W. Costantino, Esq. Jade M Brewster, Esq. JACKSON LEWIS P.C. 725 South Figueroa Street, Suite 2500 Los Angeles, CA 90017-5408 Telephone: (213) 689-0404 Facsimile: (213) 689-0430 Email: Tracy.Costantino@jacksonlewis.com Jade.Brewster@jacksonlewis.com WEICHERT CO: Misclassified Workers, Kennedy Suit Says ----------------------------------------------------- James Kennedy, II, On behalf of himself and all other similarly situated persons, Plaintiff, v. Weichert Co., d/b/a as Weichert, Realtors, Defendant, Case No. ESX-L-002266-19 (N.J. Super. Ct., Essex Cty., March 25, 2019) is a putative class action against the Defendant alleging that Plaintiff and the putative class members were misclassified as independent contractors, and consequently seek to recover significant economic damages sustained as a result of Defendant's unlawful withholdings or deductions from, and/or unlawful diversions of, their wages and compensation in violation of the New Jersey Wage Payment Law ("NJWPL"). The Defendant Weichert's aforementioned unlawful deductions from the Plaintiff and Putative Class Members' commissions ultimately decreased the amount of wages they were entitled to under the NJWPL, notes the Plaintiff. These deductions deny them compensation to which they are legally entitled to receive, says the complaint. Plaintiff contracted with Defendant Weichert to perform the duties of a "real estate salesperson", in accordance with the RESBA, from August 8, 2012, through to November 6, 2018, out of Defendant's Howell, New Jersey real estate office. Defendant Weichert is a for-profit corporation, organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Ravi Sattiraju, Esq. THE SATTIRAJU LAW FIRM, P.C. 116 Village Boulevard, Suite 200 Princeton, NJ 08540 WELLS FARGO: Faces Lewis Adler TCPA Suit ---------------------------------------- A class action complaint has been filed against Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. for violations of Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The case is captioned Lewis G. Adler, individually and on behalf of others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendants, Case 1:19-cv-08801-RMB-KMW (D.N.J., March 21, 2019). Adler alleges that defendants initiated non-emergency telephone calls using an automatic telephone dialing system to consumers' cellular telephone numbers without the prior express consent of the subscribers of those cellular telephone numbers. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is an American multinational financial services company headquartered in San Francisco, California. It offers online and mobile banking, home mortgage, loans and credit, investment and retirement, wealth management, and insurance services.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: Roger C. Mattson, Esq. Paul DePetris, Esq. ROGER C. MATTSON ATTORNEY AT LAW 26 Newton Ave. Woodbury, NJ 08096 Telephone: (856) 848-4050 E-mail: rogermattson1@yahoo.com WW GRAINGER: Grigg Seeks to Recover Back Wages Under FLSA & IMWL ---------------------------------------------------------------- NICOLE GRIGG, on behalf of herself, and all other plaintiffs similarly situated, known and unknown v. W.W. GRAINGER, INC. D/B/A GRAINGER, Case No. 1:19-cv-01795 (N.D. Ill., March 14, 2019), is brought under the Fair Labor Standards Act and the Illinois Minimum Wage Law to recover unpaid back wages and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. W.W. Grainger, Inc., doing business as Grainger, sells industrial equipment and tools to corporate customers.[BN] The Plaintiff is represented by: John William Billhorn, Esq. BILLHORN LAW FIRM 53 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 840 Chicago, IL 60604 Telephone: (312) 853-1450 E-mail: jbillhorn@billhornlaw.com XALER: Derval Suit Assets Invasion of Privacy Under TCPA -------------------------------------------------------- Alex Derval, Morgan Simmons, and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. Xaler, a Cooperative Corporation and DOES 1-25, Case No. 2:19-cv-01881 (C.D. Cal., March 14, 2019), arises from the Defendants' alleged illegal actions in negligently, knowingly and willfully contacting the Plaintiffs on their cellular telephones, in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, thereby, invading their privacy. Xaler, a Cooperative Corporation, is a California corporation with branches and offices nationwide. The Doe Defendants are currently unknown. Xaler is a recreational marijuana delivery service.[BN] The Plaintiffs are represented by: F. Jay Rahimi, Esq. LOS ANGELES LEGAL SOLUTIONS, APLC 7136 Haskell Ave., Suite 333 Van Nuys, CA 91406 Telephone: (818) 510-0555 Facsimile: (818) 510-0590 E-mail: Jay@LALSLaw.com - and - Sara F. Khosroabadi, Esq. SKB LAW OFFICE 5190 Governor Dr., Suite 108 San Diego, CA 92122 Telephone: (858) 526-3053 Facsimile: (858) 526-3052 E-mail: sara@skblawoffice.com ZHEJIANG HUAHAI: Lewis Suit Transferred to District of New Jersey ----------------------------------------------------------------- The case, LOREN LEWIS individually and on behalf of a class of similarly situated individuals, the Plaintiff, v. ZHEJIANG HUAHAI PHARMACEUTICAL CO., LTD., a Chinese corporation and HUAHAI US, INC., a New Jersey corporation, the Defendants, Case No. 1:18-cv-00247( Filed Oct. 16, 2018), was transferred from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee to the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey on Feb. 20, 2019. The District of New Jersey Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:2019cv06209 to the proceeding. The lawsuit targets Defendants' manufacturing, distribution, and sale of valsartan containing an Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient adulterated with N-nitrosodimethylamine, a carcinogenic substance. Valsartan is a prescription medication mainly used for the treatment of high blood pressure and congestive heart failure. Due to manufacturing defects originating in Zhejiang Huahai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.'s facility in China, certain generic formulations of valsartan have allegedly become adulterated with an organic chemical known as N-nitrosodimethylamine. On July 13, 2018, the U.S. Food & Drug Administration ("FDA") announced a voluntary recall of several brands of valsartan-containing generic medications, including those manufactured and distributed by the the Defendants. The recall was due to the presence of N-nitrosodimethylamine in the recalled products. Generic drugs such as valsartan are marketed and sold to consumers such as the Plaintiff when the patent for the brand-name version of the drug expires, and other competitors are able to seek approval for, market, and sell bioequivalent versions of the brand-name drug. These generic equivalents, such as valsartan, are supposed to be of equal quality and equal safety. The Plaintiff and the putative class members were injured by paying the full purchase price of their valsartan-containing medications and paying for incidental medical expenses. These medications are worthless because they are contaminated with carcinogenic and harmful N-nitrosodimethylamine and are not fit for human consumption, the lawsuit says. According to the complaint, the Plaintiff brings this action both individually and on behalf of the putative class members for equitable relief and recover economic damages and restitution for: (i) violations of the Tennessee Products Liability Act; (ii) failure to warn; breach of contract; breach of implied warranty of merchantability; unjust enrichment; fraudulent concealment; conversion; negligence; and gross negligence. Zhejiang Huahai provides formulations, active pharmaceutical ingredients, and intermediates in China and internationally.[BN] Attorneys for Loren Lewis: Robert A. Cox, Esq. Edwin E. Wallis III, Esq. GLASSMAN, WYATT, TUTTLE & COX, P.C. 26 N. 2nd Street Memphis, TN 38103 Telephone: (901) 527-4673 Facsimile: (901) 521-0940 E-mail: rcox@gwtclaw.com ewallis@gwtclaw.com ********* S U B S C R I P T I O N I N F O R M A T I O N Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante, Psyche A. Castillon, Julie Anne L. Toledo, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman, Editors. Copyright 2019. 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 ***