---

              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Thursday, May 16, 2019, Vol. 21, No. 98

                            Headlines

23 PARK ROW: Fischler Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
ABBVIE INC: Fraternal Order Fund Files Suit Over Humira Monopoly
ACCORD HOME: Does not Pay Workers Overtime Wages, Says Mitchell
ACCOUNT CONTROL: Ford Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Inaccurate Pay Slips
ADROIT HEALTH: Johnson Sues Over Nuisance Telemarketing Practices

ALLTRAN FINANCIAL: Depascale Suit Asserts FDCPA Violation
ANNIE'S HOMEGROWN: Abdullah Files False Labeling Suit in Calif.
APPLE INC: Casillas Sues Over IPhones' Audio IC Defect
ASHTABULA COUNTY, OH: Mullett Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
ATLANTIC CREDIT: Dellarocca Sues Over FDCPA Violation

BEMIS COMPANY: Nolan Sues over a Proposed Merger
BETTER PRODUCE: Mexican Workers Assert Rights to Fed. Min. Wage
BLUE RIBBON: Godino Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act
BLUE SHIELD: Myers Suit Alleges Labor Code Violations
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Key Files Tort Class Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.

BOBCAT NORTH: Huff Seeks Unpaid Overtime Compensation
BURT'S BEES: Dennis Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
CAPITAL ONE: Furnished Erroneous Credit Reports, Crooks Suit Says
CARSON SMITHFIELD: Depascale Sues Over Vague Collection Letter
CDA INC: McKenzie Suit Asserts WARN Act Violation

CENTRAL MISSOURI PIZZA: Lato Seek Proper Wages, Reimbursements
CERTIFIED ASSOCIATES: Turizo Sues over Unsolicited Text Messages
CIRCLE C CORP: Delivery Driver Seeks Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
CITI TRENDS: Thomas Seeks Overtime Pay for Store Managers
CLOSETS BY DESIGN: Grevle Suit Asserts Deceptive Business Practices

COHEN ROBERTS: Manela Alleges Violation Under FDCPA
COMDATA NETWORK: Gas POS Sues Over Fleet Card Service Monopoly
CONAGRA BRANDS: Sued Over False Nutrient Content Claim
DLUX CELL: Freeman Suit Asserts Disabilities Act Violation
EGS FINANCIAL: Faces Eisen Suit Alleging FDCPA Violation

EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Newsom Sues over Inaccurate Credit Report
FORSTER & GARBUS: Hendrickson Files FDCPA Class Action in New York
GENERAL INFORMATION: Cantu Asserts Breach of FCRA in Texas
GIVESURANCE INSURANCE: Shank Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing
GLASS MOUNTAIN: Campos Files FDCPA Class Action in California

GRAND CARIBBEAN CRUISES: Tunkett Sues over Unauthorized Calls
HANJIN INT'L: Hernandez Suit Removed to N.D. California
HARRIET CARTER: Popa PI Suit Transferred to W. D. Pa.
HEALTHCARE SERVICES: Garcia Suit Removed to C.D. California
HFF INC: Jones Files Securities Suit Over JLL Merger Deal

HOME DEPOT: Ford Alleges FCRA Violation in California
HW Gilpin: Knwoles Files ADA Class Suit in N.D. Illinois
INTELEMEDIA PREMIER: Ghist Sues Over Prerecorded Advertising Calls
J&J INC: Garcia Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA
J.J. MARSHALL: Alleges Breach of FDCPA in Florida

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Aitchison Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Bancroft Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Beadle Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Bermudez Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Berning-Szczesny Talc Suit to C.D. Cal.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Bethell Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Agonoy Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Ahlbin Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Ainilian Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Allen Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Almanza Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Amoruso Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Baden Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Bailey Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Bakus Talc Suit to C.D. California

JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Barnhart Talc Suit to C.D. California
JONES LANG: Kobiela Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Kirby Suit Removed to C.D. California
KINGDOM HEALTH MINISTRIES: Faces Pascal Suit over Unsolicited Calls
MANASSEH JORDAN: Waterman Suit Asserts TCPA Violation

MAYAS FOOD: Rodriguez Files FLSA Class Action in E.D. New York
MELLANOX TECHNOLOGIES: Henzel Sues Over Exchange Act Breach
MENIN HOTELS: Conner Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT: Luther Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION: Self Initiated Files Suit Under ADA

MIDLAND CREDIT: Korn Asserts Breach of FDCPA in New York
NEW YORK: Female Teachers Bring Suit for Harassment, Intimidation
NOKIA CORPORATION: Max Hits Share Price Drop Ff. Acatel Merger
NOKIA: Tom Sues over Nondisclosure of Alcatel's Compliance Issues
NORDSTROM: Faces Steele Suit over Data Breach

OCEAN GREEN: Honeywell Files ADA Suit in S.D. Florida
PEPSICO INC: Riddle Suit Transferred to S.D. New York
PET MEDS: Fischler ADA Suit Transferred From S.D. to E.D. New York
PHELAN HALLINAN: Hafner Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection
PIONEER CREDIT: Attaway Files FLSA Class Suit in W.D. Arkansas

PIONEER CREDIT: Calderon Suit Alleges FDPCA Violation
PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Lowenbein Alleges FDCPA Violation
REALOGY FRANCHISE: Fenley Files Labor Class Suit in California
RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT: Gift Card Expiry Violates EFTA, Newell Says
RICHMOND IHOP: Cooray Suit Alleges FLSA Violations

RS CLARK: Chunara Disputes 40% Debt Collection Fee
SETTELE DENTAL: Goldstein Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages Under FLSA
SIGNAPAY LTD: Fabricant Sues Over TCPA Violation
SONO CHICAGO LLC: Knowles Alleges Violation under ADA in Illinois
SPARK THERAPEUTICS: Kent Seeks to Halt Merger Deal With Roche

TCF FINANCIAL: Nelson Seeks More Info re TCF-Chemical Merger Deal
TIER REIT: Franchi Files Securities Class Suit Over Cousins Merger
TOP 1 PERCENT: Wealth Coaches Seek Unpaid Wages Under FLSA
TURNBURY VILLAGE: Gridley Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
UNIFUND CCR: Bhaskar Alleges FDCPA Violation in Georgia

UNION PACIFIC: McCullen Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
VI DEVELOPMENT: Cuaya Files Class Action Over Tax Dispute
VILLAS MARKET: Faces Class Action Over Time-Shaving Practices
WORLD WIDE MEDICAL: Schlesinger Sues over Autodialled Calls
XTO ENERGY: McCarty Suit Transferred to E. D. Arkansas

ZF-TRW AUTOMOTIVE: Alter Sues Over Defective Airbag Systems

                            *********

23 PARK ROW: Fischler Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
--------------------------------------------------------
23 Park Row Associates, LLC 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. 23 Park Row Associates, LLC doing
business as: 25 Park Row, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02435-BMC
(E.D. N.Y., April 25, 2019).

25 Park Row is a new condo development by L+M Development Partners,
Inc. in New York, NY. .[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Christopher Howard Lowe, Esq.
   Lipsky Lowe LLP
   630 Third Avenue
   New York, NY 10017
   Tel: (212) 392-4772
   Fax: (212) 444-1030
   Email: chris@lipskylowe.com


ABBVIE INC: Fraternal Order Fund Files Suit Over Humira Monopoly
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fraternal Order of Police, Miami Lodge 20, Insurance Trust Fund, on
behalf of itself and all those similarly situated, v. AbbVie Inc.,
AbbVie Biotechnology Ltd., and Amgen Inc., Case No. 1:19-cv-01933
(N.D. Ill., March 20, 2019), is brought against the Defendants for
violations of the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act.

The Plaintiff alleges that because of AbbVie's unlawful scheme and
monopolization of the market, AbbVie has continued to reap the
benefits of being the exclusive seller of Humira in the U.S.
market, even though the primary patent on Humira expired at the end
of 2016 and the FDA has approved several biosimilars to compete
with Humira. Absent AbbVie's patent thicket and its pay-for-delay
deal with Amgen, competition for Humira would have begun as early
as the end of 2016, when the original composition patent for Humira
expired. Because of AbbVie's unlawful scheme and the delay it
bought from Amgen, Humira's sales have not yet faced competition
and may not face competition until 2023. Under this scheme, AbbVie
and Amgen win. Humira purchasers lose.

The Plaintiff, Fraternal Order of Police, Miami Lodge 20, Insurance
Trust Fund, and class members are end-payers for Humira. They are
the last links in the pharmaceutical distribution chain, and they
paid overcharges for Humira as a result of AbbVie's anticompetitive
conduct and Amgen's agreement not to compete with AbbVie. This
action seeks to recover those overcharges for the plaintiff and all
others similarly situated.

The Plaintiff is a governmental plan established and funded through
contributions from the City of Miami and the plan's members, who
are current and retired sworn officers from the City of Miami
Police Department and their dependents. FOP Miami was established
pursuant to a duly executed Trust Agreement for the purpose of
providing medical, surgical, and hospital care or benefits,
including prescription drug benefits, to its members.

The Defendant AbbVie Inc. is engaged in the development, sale, and
distribution of a broad range of pharmaceutical and biologic drugs.
Its corporate headquarters at 1 North Waukegan Road, North Chicago,
Illinois 60064.

The Defendant AbbVie Biotechnology is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of Bermuda, with a place of business at
Clarendon House, 2 Church Street, Hamilton HM11, Bermuda and is
owned by AbbVie Inc.

AbbVie's drug Humira has been the best-selling drug in the United
States for six years running, bringing in more than $13.6 billion
in sales in the U.S. in 2018 and nearly $20 billion worldwide.

The Defendant Amgen is a corporation organized and existing under
the laws of Delaware with its corporate headquarters at One Amgen
Center Drive, Thousand Oaks, California, 91320-1799. Amgen is
engaged in the development, sale, and distribution of a broad range
of pharmaceutical and biologic drugs. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Elizabeth A. Fegan, Esq.
      HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
      455 North Cityfront Plaza Drive, Suite 2410
      Chicago, IL 60611
      Tel: (708) 628-4949
      Fax: (708) 628-4950
      E-mail: beth@hbsslaw.com


ACCORD HOME: Does not Pay Workers Overtime Wages, Says Mitchell
---------------------------------------------------------------
ANNETTE MITCHELL on behalf of herself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. ACCORD HOME SERVICES, LLC and ROBERT CARR,
Defendants, Case No. 4:19-cv-01005 (N.D. Ohio, May 3, 2019) is a
case challenging policies and practices of Defendants that violate
the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), as well as the Ohio overtime
compensation statute.

The complaint asserts that the Defendants unlawfully failed to pay
overtime compensation to its workers.

The Plaintiff, the Potential Opt-Ins who may join this case, and
all members of the Ohio Class are current or former non-exempt
employees of Defendants who were paid on an hourly basis and not
paid overtime compensation for all hours worked in excess of 40 in
one workweek, says the complaint.

Defendants' principal place of business is located at 400 Niles
Cortland Road, SE, Suite C, Warren, OH 44484.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Christopher J. Lalak, Esq.
     Nilges Draher LLC
     614 W. Superior Ave., Suite 1148
     Cleveland, OH 44113
     Phone: 216.230.2955
     Email: clalak@ohlaborlaw.com

          - and -

     Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
     7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D
     Massillon, OH 44646
     Phone: 330.470.4428
     Email: hans@ohlaborlaw.com


ACCOUNT CONTROL: Ford Sues Over Unpaid Wages, Inaccurate Pay Slips
------------------------------------------------------------------
Alyshea Ford, individually, on behalf of herself and others
similarly situated v. Account Control Technology Inc. and ACT
Holdings, Inc., Case No. 19STCV09369 (Cal. Super Ct., Los Angeles
Cty., March 19, 2019), is brought against the Defendants for
violations of the Private Attorneys General Act of 2004, Labor
Code.

The Defendants violated the PAGA by failing to pay its employees,
including the Plaintiff, minimum wages, overtime pay, and requisite
meal periods or premium pay. Additionally, the Defendants provided
inaccurate wage statements and failed to pay compensations due and
owing at the time of termination of employment, asserts the
complaint.

The Plaintiff is a resident of California, and during the time
period relevant to this Complaint, was employed by Defendants as a
non-exempt hourly employee based out of Defendants' office in
Bakersfield, California.

The Defendant Account Control Technology Inc., is a California
corporation and describes its type of business with the California
Secretary of State as "debt collection." Account Control, maintains
its corporate headquarters in Woodland Hills, CA. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      David Yeremian, Esq.
      Natalie Haritoonian, Esq.
      DAVID YEREMIAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
      535 N. Brand Blvd., Suite 705
      Glendale, CA 91203
      Tel: (818) 230-8380
      Fax: (818) 230-0308
      E-mail: david@yeremianlaw.com
              natalie@yeremianlaw.com


ADROIT HEALTH: Johnson Sues Over Nuisance Telemarketing Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------------
JARED N. JOHNSON, individually and on behalf of a class of all
persons and entities similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. ADROIT
HEALTH GROUP LLC, Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-00333 (E.D. Va., May
6, 2019) is an action under the Telephone Consumer Protection Act
("TCPA"), a federal statute enacted in response to widespread
public outrage about the proliferation of intrusive, nuisance
telemarketing practices.

According to the complaint, the Defendant made a pre-recorded
telemarketing call to Plaintiff's cellular telephone number, which
is prohibited by the TCPA. Plaintiff never consented to receive the
call, which was placed to him for telemarketing purposes. Because
telemarketing campaigns generally place calls to hundreds of
thousands or even millions of potential customers en masse,
Plaintiff brings this action on behalf of a proposed nationwide
class of other persons who received illegal telemarketing calls
from or on behalf of Defendant, says the complaint.

Plaintiff Jared N. Johnson is a resident of Henrico County,
Virginia.

Defendant is an insurance marketing agency that sells insurance
products throughout the United States, including Virginia.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael B. Hissam, Esq.
     HISSAM FORMAN DONOVAN RITCHIE PLLC
     P.O. Box 3983
     Charleston, WV 25339
     Phone: 681-265-3802
     Fax: 304-982-8056
     Email: mhissam@hfdrlaw.com


ALLTRAN FINANCIAL: Depascale Suit Asserts FDCPA Violation
---------------------------------------------------------
Richard Depascale, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Alltran Financial, LP, Defendant,
Case No. 1:19-cv-02671 (E.D. N.Y., May 6, 2019) seeks to recover
for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
("FDCPA").

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant violated the FDCPA by
using a false, deceptive, and misleading representation in its
attempt to collect a debt.

Plaintiff Richard Depascale is an individual allegedly obligated to
pay a debt.

Defendant is regularly engaged, for profit, in the collection of
debts allegedly owed by consumers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Craig B. Sanders, Esq.
     BARSHAY SANDERS, PLLC
     100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
     Garden City, NY 11530
     Phone: (516) 203-7600
     Fax: (516) 706-5055
     Email: csanders@barshaysanders.com


ANNIE'S HOMEGROWN: Abdullah Files False Labeling Suit in Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Saleha Abdullah, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. ANNIE'S HOMEGROWN, INC.; and Does 1 through
10, Inclusive, Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-02441-JSC (N.D. Cal.,
May 6, 2019) is a class action over Defendant's practices violating
California's Consumer Legal Remedies Act, ("CLRA"), California's
Unfair Competition Law, ("UCL"), and California's False Advertising
Law, ("FAL"). The Defendant's action also give rise to Plaintiff
nationwide class claims for fraud, unjust enrichment and breach of
express warranty.

Among Annie's Homegrown's line of products, it manufactures,
distributes, advertises and sells several products with specific
representations that the products contain "no preservatives".
Consistent with Defendant's self-promotion as a leader in healthier
organic related food, the front or back of the packaging of the
Products state in prominent lettering that they contain "no
preservatives." To reinforce the message that the Products do not
contain artificial coloring, the front packaging of every Product
displays pictures or other language that support the statement "no
preservatives."

The Defendant's representations that its Products contain no
preservatives are deceptive because Annie's Homegrown Products
contain the preservatives tocopherol, ascorbic acid, and/or citric
acid, asserts the complaint. This labeling deceives consumers into
believing that they are receiving healthier, preservative-free food
products, but Defendant's Products do not live up to these claims.
The Defendant's representations are false, misleading, unfair, and
unlawful, says the complaint.

Plaintiff Ms. Abdullah made several purchases of the Products from
various stores in and near San Francisco County and Contra Costa
County, California, in the last approximately 3 years.

The Defendant produces, markets and distributes various Products
across the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Reuben D. Nathan, Esq.
     NATHAN & ASSOCIATES, APC
     2901 W. Coast Highway, Suite 200
     Newport Beach, CA 92663
     Phone: (949) 270-2798
     Fax: (949) 209-0303
     Email: rnathan@nathanlawpractice.com


APPLE INC: Casillas Sues Over IPhones' Audio IC Defect
------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH CASILLAS and DE'JHONTAI BANKS, on behalf of themselves and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. APPLE INC.,
Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-02455 (N.D. Cal., May 6, 2019) seeks to
redress Apple's violations of the various states' consumer fraud
statutes, fraud, negligent misrepresentation, breach of implied
warranty, unjust enrichment, and for violations of the federal
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and California's Song-Beverly Consumer
Warranty Act.

This action arises from Apple's concealment of a material defect
that ultimately causes iPhone audio features to become unresponsive
and fail of their essential purpose as smartphones, called the
"Audio IC Defect". Apple has long been aware of the Audio IC
Defect, yet, notwithstanding its longstanding knowledge, Apple
routinely refuses to repair the iPhones without charge when the
Audio IC Defect manifests. Many iPhone owners communicated with
Apple's employees and agents to request that Apple remediate and/or
address the Audio IC Defect and/or resulting damage at no expense.
But Apple failed and/or refused to do so, notes the complaint.

As a result of Apple's unfair, deceptive, and/or fraudulent
business practices, owners of the iPhones, including Plaintiffs,
have suffered ascertainable losses. Had Plaintiffs and other Class
Members known about the Audio IC Defect at the time of purchase,
they would not have bought the iPhones, or else would have paid
substantially less for them. As a result of the Audio IC Defect and
the monetary costs associated with attempting to repair it,
Plaintiffs and the Class Members suffered an injury in fact,
incurred damages, and otherwise have been harmed by Apple's
conduct, says the complaint.

Plaintiffs purchased an iPhone 7 from retail stores in California.

Defendant Apple designs, manufactures, markets, and sells the
iPhone series of smartphones.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Hassan A. Zavareei, Esq.
     Andrea R. Gold, Esq.
     TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
     1828 L Street, NW, Suite 1000
     Washington, DC 20036
     Phone: (202) 973-0900
     Facsimile: (202) 973-0950

          - and -

     Annick Persinger, Esq.
     TYCKO & ZAVAREEI LLP
     1970 Broadway, Suite 1070
     Oakland, CA 94612
     Phone: (510) 254-6808
     Facsimile: (202) 973-0950

          - and -

     Gregory F. Coleman, Esq.
     GREG COLEMAN LAW
     First Tennessee Plaza
     800 S. Gay Street, Suite 1100
     Knoxville, TN 37929
     Phone: (865) 247-0080
     Facsimile: (865) 522-0049

          - and -

     Nick Suciu III, Esq.
     BARBAT, MANSOUR & SUCIU PLLC
     1644 Bracken Rd.
     Bloomfield Hills, MI 48302
     Phone: (313) 303-3472


ASHTABULA COUNTY, OH: Mullett Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
---------------------------------------------------------
MARK MULLETT, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. ASHTABULA COUNTY, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-01002 (N.D. Ohio, May 3, 2019) seeks all available relief
under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 ("FLSA").

According to the complaint, while the Plaintiff was employed as a
Deputy Sheriff K-9 Handler, he regularly worked in excess of forty
hours in one or more workweeks. However, he was not compensated at
a rate of one and one-half times his regular rate of pay, in
violation of the FLSA. Defendant also failed to make, keep, and
preserve records of the hours Plaintiff worked.

Additionally, the Plaintiff and other similarly situated employees
were paid non-discretionary "longevity bonuses" which were not
calculated into their regular rates of pay for purposes of
calculating overtime compensation. The Defendant's failure to
include Longevity when calculating regular rates of pay resulted in
Plaintiff and other similarly-situated employees not being paid the
proper overtime compensation for all of the hours they worked in
excess of 40 hours each workweek, notes the complaint.

Plaintiff was employed by the County from October 2007 to February
2014 as a Deputy Sheriff, an hourly non-exempt position.

Ashtabula County is the northeasternmost county in the U.S. state
of Ohio.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jeffrey J. Moyle, Esq.
     Nilges Draher LLC
     614 W. Superior Ave., Suite 1148
     Cleveland, OH 44113
     Phone: 216.230.2955
     Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
     Email: jmoyle@ohlaborlaw.com

          - and -

     Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
     Shannon M. Draher, Esq.
     Robi J. Baishnab, Esq.
     7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D
     Massillon, OH 44646
     Phone: (330) 470-4428
     Facsimile: (330) 754-1430
     Email: hans@ohlaborlaw.com
            sdraher@ohlaborlaw.com
            rbaishnab@ohlaborlaw.com


ATLANTIC CREDIT: Dellarocca Sues Over FDCPA Violation
-----------------------------------------------------
Miriam Dellarocca, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Atlantic Credit & Finance Inc.,
Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-02667 (E.D. N.Y., May 6, 2019) seeks to
recover for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
("FDCPA").

The Defendant alleges Plaintiff owes a debt. In its efforts to
collect the alleged Debt, Defendant contacted Plaintiff by letter
("the Letter") dated May 31, 2018. The Letter was the initial
written communication Plaintiff received from Defendant concerning
the alleged Debt. Because the Letter is reasonably susceptible to
an inaccurate reading, it is deceptive within the meaning of the
FDCPA. The least sophisticated consumer would likely be deceived by
the Letter. The Defendant has violated the FDCPA by using a false,
deceptive, and misleading representation in its attempt to collect
a debt, says the complaint.

Plaintiff Miriam Dellarocca is an individual allegedly obligated to
pay a debt.

Defendant is regularly engaged, for profit, in the collection of
debts allegedly owed by consumers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Craig B. Sanders, Esq.
     BARSHAY SANDERS, PLLC
     100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
     Garden City, NY 11530
     Phone: (516) 203-7600
     Fax: (516) 706-5055
     Email: csanders@barshaysanders.com



BEMIS COMPANY: Nolan Sues over a Proposed Merger
------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against Bemis Company, Inc.
for violations of Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities and
Exchange Act of 1934. The case is captioned HAROLD NOLAN,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Plaintiff, v. BEMIS COMPANY, INC., WILLIAM F. AUSTEN, TIMOTHY M.
MANGANELLO, DAVID S. HAFFNER, ADELE M. GULFO, PHILIP G. WEAVER,
GEORGE WILLIAM WURTZ III, DAVID T. SZCZUPAK, ARUN NAYAR, HOLLY A.
VAN DEURSEN, GUILLERMO NOVO, MARRAN H. OGILVIE, KATHERINE C. DOYLE,
and ROBERT H. YANKER, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-03493 (S.D.N.Y.,
April 19, 2019).

Plaintiff Harold Nolan, on behalf of himself and the other public
holders of the common stock of Bemis, brings this class action
against the company and the members of the company's board of
directors for their violations of the Exchange Act, in connection
with the proposed merger between Bemis and Amcor Limited to form
New Amcor.

On March 27, 2019, in order to convince BMS shareholders to vote in
favor of the Proposed Merger, the Board authorized the filing of a
materially incomplete and misleading Form DEFM14A with the
Securities and Exchange Commission. The Form DEFM14A contains
materially incomplete and misleading information concerning the
financial projections for the company that were prepared by the
company and relied on by Defendants in recommending that Bemis
shareholders vote in favor of the proposed merger.

Bemis is incorporated in Missouri and maintains its principal
executive offices at 2301 Industrial Drive, Neenah, Wisconsin. The
company's common stock trades on the NYSE under the ticker symbol
BMS.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


BETTER PRODUCE: Mexican Workers Assert Rights to Fed. Min. Wage
---------------------------------------------------------------
MANUEL DE JESUS ALTAMIRANO SANTIAGO, LUCIO MENDOZA-CASTRO, FREDI
SAUL CANSECO-VASQUEZ and others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v.
BETTER PRODUCE, INC., RANCHO DEL MAR, INC., C.J.J. FARMING, INC.,
and JUAN CISNEROS, Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-03964 (C.D. Cal.,
May 6, 2019) sues to enforce their rights to a federal minimum wage
and to stop Defendants' violations of the H-2A farm labor visa
program.

The complaint asserts that the Defendants violated federal minimum
wage statutes, California's wage law, and breached the Plaintiff's
employment contract and the federal regulations incorporated within
it.

Specifically, the complaint alleges that the Defendants violated
the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") by willfully failing to pay
at least the required hourly wage for every compensable hour of
labor performed in a workweek (including by failing to reimburse
their employment-related expenses as required by law) to Plaintiffs
and to each individual who may opt into this action as allowed by
the FLSA ("Opt-In Plaintiff"), and to other similarly-situated
workers. The Defendants further breached Plaintiffs' employment
contracts by failing to pay the contractually-promised wages,
including those required by the FLSA, for all hours worked, and by
failing to reimburse Plaintiffs' employment-related expenses
including travel expenses, says the complaint.

Plaintiffs are agricultural workers imported from Mexico by
Defendants to work in Defendants' strawberry fields.

Better Produce is a California corporation engaged in the business
of strawberry, pepper and other agricultural products production
and sales.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Dawson Morton, Esq.
     Santos Gomez, Esq.
     LAW OFFICES OF SANTOS GOMEZ
     1003 Freedom Boulevard
     Watsonville, CA 95076
     Phone: 831-228-1560
     Fax: 831-228-1542
     Email: dawson@lawofficesofsantosgomez.com
            santos@lawofficesofsantosgomez.com



BLUE RIBBON: Godino Alleges Violation under Disabilities Act
------------------------------------------------------------
Blue Ribbon Management LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
as Michael Godino, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. Blue Ribbon Management LLC doing business
as: The Brewhouse Inn & Suites, Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-00594
(W.D. Wis., April 24, 2019).

The Brewhouse Inn & Suites is a boutique hotel in downtown
Milwaukee.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   CK Lee, Esq.
   Lee Litigation Group PLLC
   30 E 39th St-2nd Fl
   New York, NY 10016
   Tel: (212) 465-1188
   Fax: (212) 465-1181
   Email: cklee@leelitigation.com


BLUE SHIELD: Myers Suit Alleges Labor Code Violations
-----------------------------------------------------
Brendisia Myers, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated v. Blue Shield of California Life & Health Insurance
Company, Case No. 19STCV09341 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty.,
March 19, 2019), is brought against the Defendant for violations of
the Labor Code.

The complaint alleges that the Defendant failed to pay overtime
wages; timely pay wages at separation; and provide accurate
itemized wage statements.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant in Woodland Hills,
California as a member outreach team specialist. She was hired as a
temporary employee in October 2016, transitioning to full-time in
January 2018. Her employment terminated in June 2018.

The Defendant Blue Shield, founded in 1939, is one of California's
largest health plan providers. The Defendant is headquartered in
San Francisco. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Michael D. Singer, Esq.
      Jeff Geraci, Esq.
      COHELAN KHOURY & SINGER
      605 C Street, Suite 200
      San Diego, CA 92101
      Tel: (619) 595-3001
      Fax: (619) 595-3000
      E-mail: msinger@ckslaw.com
              jgeraci@ckslaw.com


BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Key Files Tort Class Suit in Cal. Super. Ct.
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against BMW OF NORTH AMERICA,
LLC. The case is styled as Gretchen Key, an individual, on behalf
of herself and others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. BMW OF NORTH
AMERICA, LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, DOES 1 THROUGH 10,
INCLUSIVE, Defendants, Case No. CGC19575783 (Cal. Super. Ct., San
Francisco Cty., May 7, 2019).

The case type is stated as "Business Tort".

BMW of North America, LLC engages in the import and distribution of
BMW luxury/performance vehicles.[BN]


BOBCAT NORTH: Huff Seeks Unpaid Overtime Compensation
-----------------------------------------------------
STEVEN HUFF, individually, and on behalf of all those similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. BOBCAT NORTH AMERICA, LLC, d/b/a ORION
WASTE SOLUTIONS, BOBCAT DISPOSAL OF SARASOTA, LLC., RUSSO AND SONS,
LLC, M&MR OPERATIONS, INC. formerly RUSSO AND SONS, INC., MIKE
RUSSO, and MARILYN RUSSO, Defendants, Case No. 6:19-cv-00861 (M.D.
Fla., May 6, 2019) is an action raising individual claims for
unpaid overtime wages pursuant the Federal Fair Labor Standards Act
("FLSA") seeking to represent a class of employees denied unpaid
overtime pursuant to the FLSA.

The Defendants repeatedly and willfully the FLSA by failing to
compensate Plaintiff and all other similarly situated employees, at
a rate not less than one and one-half times the regular rate at
which they were employed for workweeks longer than 40 hours, says
the complaint.

Plaintiff Mr. Huff is a citizen of Florida who worked for Mike
Russo, Marilyn Russo, and Russo and Sons, Inc. until it was
purchased by Bobcat North America in May of 2017.

Defendants provide waste disposal services to the construction
industry.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     N. RYAN LABAR, ESQ.
     SCOTT C. ADAMS, ESQ.
     LABAR & ADAMS, P.A.
     2300 East Concord Street
     Orlando, FL 32803
     Phone: (407) 835-8968
     Facsimile: (407) 835-8969
     Email: rlabar@labaradams.com
            sadams@labaradams.com


BURT'S BEES: Dennis Sues Over Blind-Inaccessible Website
--------------------------------------------------------
Derrick U Dennis, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. BURT'S BEES, INC., Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-04056 (S.D. N.Y., May 6, 2019) is a civil rights action
against 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.

The Defendant's denial of full and equal access to its website, and
therefore denial of its goods and services offered thereby, is a
violation of Plaintiff's rights under the Americans with
Disabilities Act ("ADA"), 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 operates a commercial website, www.burtsbees.com, which
markets and sells health and beauty products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jonathan Shalom, Esq.
     SHALOM LAW, PLLC
     124-04 Metropolitan Avenue
     Kew Gardens, NY 11415
     Phone: (718) 971-9474
     Facsimile: (718) 865-0943
     Email: Jshalom@jonathanshalomlaw.com


CAPITAL ONE: Furnished Erroneous Credit Reports, Crooks Suit Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Jeremy Crooks, individually and on behalf of others similarly
situated v. Capital One, N.A., Case No. 3:19-cv-00516 (S.D. Calif.,
March 19, 2019), is brought against the Defendant for violation the
California Consumer Credit Reporting Agencies Act.

The Plaintiff brings this complaint for damages arising out of the
systematic furnishing of erroneous information on credit reports by
the Defendant. Specifically, the Defendant falsely reported
continual monthly payment obligations on accounts that have been
closed and paid in full for years, asserts the complaint.

The Plaintiff is a resident of the City of San Diego, California.

The Defendant is a lending company in Virginia, authorized to do
business in the State of California. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

      Yana A. Hart, Esq.
      HYDE & SWIGART, APC
      2221 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101
      San Diego, CA 92108-3609
      Tel: (619) 233-7770
      Fax: (619) 297-1022
      E-mail: yana@westcoastlitigation.com


CARSON SMITHFIELD: Depascale Sues Over Vague Collection Letter
--------------------------------------------------------------
Richard Depascale, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Carson Smithfield, LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02670 (E.D. N.Y., May 6, 2019) seeks to
recover for violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
("FDCPA").

The Defendant alleges Plaintiff owes a debt. In its efforts to
collect the alleged Debt, Defendant contacted Plaintiff by letter
("the Letter") dated May 23, 2018. The Letter was the initial
written communication Plaintiff received from Defendant concerning
the alleged Debt. The Letter fails to state whether the payment
must be sent by the consumer, or received by the Defendant, by the
stated deadline. The Letter can be interpreted to mean that such
payment must be mailed to the Defendant by the stated deadline. The
Letter can also be interpreted to mean that such payment must be
received by Defendant by the stated deadline. As a result of the
foregoing, in the eyes of the least sophisticated consumer, the
Letter is open to more than one reasonable interpretation, at least
one of which is inaccurate. Because the Letter is open to more than
one reasonable interpretation it violates the FDCPA, says the
complaint.

Plaintiff Richard Depascale is an individual a natural person
allegedly obligated to pay a debt.

Defendant is regularly engaged, for profit, in the collection of
debts allegedly owed by consumers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Craig B. Sanders, Esq.
     BARSHAY SANDERS, PLLC
     100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
     Garden City, NY 11530
     Phone: (516) 203-7600
     Fax: (516) 706-5055
     Email: csanders@barshaysanders.com


CDA INC: McKenzie Suit Asserts WARN Act Violation
-------------------------------------------------
DAVID MCKENZIE, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs, v. CDA, INC., Defendant, Case No.
3:19-cv-00213 (W.D. N.C., May 3, 2019) is a civil action for
collection of unpaid wages and benefits for sixty calendar days
pursuant to the United States Worker Adjustment and Retaining
Notification Act ("WARN Act") and to recover Plaintiff's unpaid
commissions under the Minnesota Payment of Wages Act ("PWA").

On April 10, 2019, Plaintiff and other employees employed by CDS
were notified of their termination which was to be effective less
than 60 days from the notice. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant laid
off approximately one hundred employees within a 30-day period,
which represents nearly all of Defendant's workforce, except for
some managers, a small packaging force that will be laid off on
April 30, 2019, and some inventory and shipping employees.

The Defendant CDA, Inc. is liable under the WARN Act for the
failure to provide Plaintiff and other similarly situated former
employees at least 60 days advance notice of their employment
losses, as required by the WARN Act, says the complaint.

Plaintiff David Mckenzie has been employed by Defendant as a
salesperson since 2011.

DCA, Inc. manufactures and supplies disc media, flash media, and
micro-functional solutions.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Ann Groninger, Esq.
     Copeley Johnson Groninger PLLC
     225 East Worthington Avenue
     Charlotte, NC 28203
     Phone: (704)200-2009
     Fax: (888)412-0421
     Email: ann@cjglawfirm.com


CENTRAL MISSOURI PIZZA: Lato Seek Proper Wages, Reimbursements
--------------------------------------------------------------
JAMES SCOTT LATO and STEVEN RITTER, individually, and on behalf of
similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs, v. CENTRAL MISSOURI PIZZA,
INC. d/b/a DOMINO'S PIZZA, and GREGORY NEICHTER, Defendants, Case
No. 4:19-cv-01184 (E.D. Mo., May 3, 2019) is a collective action
under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"), under the Missouri
Minimum Wage Law, ("Missouri Wage Law"), and Kentucky Revised
Statutes ("Kentucky Wage Law") to recover unpaid minimum wages owed
to Plaintiffs and similarly situated delivery drivers employed by
Defendants at its Domino's Pizza stores.

The Defendants employ delivery drivers who use their own
automobiles to deliver pizza and other food items to their
customers. However, instead of reimbursing delivery drivers for the
reasonably approximate costs of the business use of their vehicles,
Defendants use a flawed method to determine reimbursement rates
that provides such an unreasonably low rate beneath any reasonable
approximation of the expenses they incur that the drivers'
unreimbursed expenses cause their wages to fall below the federal
minimum wage during some or all workweeks, says the complaint.

Plaintiffs worked for Defendants as a delivery drivers.

Defendants operate numerous Domino's Pizza franchise stores.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

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

          - and -

     J. Gerard Stranch, IV, Esq.
     Joe P. Leniski, Jr., Esq.
     BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC
     223 Rosa Parks Ave. Suite 200
     Nashville, TN 37203
     Phone: 615/254-8801
     Facsimile: 615/255-5419
     Email: gerards@bsjfirm.com
            joeyl@bsjfirm.com


CERTIFIED ASSOCIATES: Turizo Sues over Unsolicited Text Messages
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against Certified
Associates, LLC for violations of the Telephone Consumer Protection
Act (TCPA). The case is captioned RYAN TURIZO, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. CERTIFIED
ASSOCIATES, LLC. d/b/a CERTIFIED MARIJUANA DOCTORS.COM, Defendant,
Case No. 0:19-cv-61007-XXXX (S.D. Fla., April 19, 2019).

In efforts to extract a new stream of revenue into its business,
Defendant would often send marketing text messages providing
various types of promotional offers and savings for future
purchases of Defendant's products and services, which are illegal
Schedule I controlled substances under federal law, to consumers
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. Plaintiff Ryan Turizo
claims that the Defendant knowingly and willfully violated the TCPA
and caused injuries to him and members of the putative class,
including invasion of their privacy, aggravation, annoyance,
intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and conversion. Accordingly,
Plaintiff seeks injunctive relief to stop Defendant's illegal
conduct. Plaintiff also seeks statutory damages on behalf of
himself and members of the class, and any other available legal or
equitable remedies resulting from the illegal actions of
Defendant.

Certified Associates, LLC. is engaged in the business of providing
consumers with assistance in obtaining medical marijuana permits.
[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
     Telephone: (954) 907-1136
     Facsimile: (855) 529-9540
     E-mail: jibrael@jibraellaw.com


CIRCLE C CORP: Delivery Driver Seeks Unpaid Minimum, Overtime Wages
-------------------------------------------------------------------
LINDA FIELD, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
persons, Plaintiff, v. CIRCLE C CORP. d/b/a PAPA JOHN'S PIZZA,
GLENN E. JONES, ROBERT LEE CARROLL, and MICHAEL G. CARROLL, M.D.,
Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00775-JEJ (M.D. Fla., May 6, 2019) is
a collective action under the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA"),
and a class action under Pennsylvania Annotated Statutes, and
common law to recover unpaid minimum wages and overtime hours owed
to Plaintiff and similarly situated delivery drivers employed by
Defendants.

The Defendants employ delivery drivers who use their own
automobiles to deliver pizza and other food items to their
customers. However, instead of reimbursing delivery drivers for the
reasonably approximate costs of the business use of their vehicles,
Defendants use a flawed method to determine reimbursement rates
that provides such an unreasonably low rate beneath any reasonable
approximation of the expenses they incur that the drivers'
unreimbursed expenses cause their wages to fall below the federal
minimum wage during some or all workweeks, says the complaint.

Plaintiff has been employed by Defendants from 2013 to present as a
delivery driver at Defendants' Papa John's Pizza stores.

Defendants operate numerous Papa John's Pizza franchise
stores.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Patrick Howard, Esq.
     Charles J. Kocher, Esq.
     SALTZ MONGELUZZI BARRETT & BENDESKY, P.C.
     120 Gibraltar Road, Suite 218
     Horsham, PA 19044
     Phone: (215) 496-8282
     Fax: (215) 754-4443
     Email: phoward@smbb.com
            ckocher@smbb.com

          - and -

     Joe P. Leniski, Jr., Esq.
     BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC
     223 Rosa Parks Ave., Suite 200
     Nashville, TN 37203
     Phone: (615) 254-8801
     Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
     Email: joeyl@bsjfirm.com


CITI TRENDS: Thomas Seeks Overtime Pay for Store Managers
---------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against CITI Trends, Inc.
for alleged violation of overtime provision of the Fair Labor
Standards Act (FLSA). The case is captioned SHARON THOMAS, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
vs. CITI TRENDS, INC., Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-00601-TMP (N.D.
Ala., April 19, 2019).

During the course of her employment, Plaintiff Sharon Thomas, who
performed the role of a store manager, was paid a specified weekly
hourly flat hourly rate of $16.00 per hour up to 40 hours per week.
Plaintiff, as well as other similarly situated employees, was not
paid any overtime compensation despite the fact that the employees
worked well over the required 40 hours a week to entitle them to
overtime pay at time and one-half for all hours worked over 40 each
week. Accordingly, this action is brought further to recover unpaid
compensation owed to Plaintiff Sharon Thomas and all current
employees and former employees of CITI Trends who are similarly
situated to Plaintiff, pursuant to the FLSA.

CITI Trends, Inc. is a Delaware corporation conducting business in
the state of Alabama. Headquartered in Savannah, Georgia, CITI
Trends operates multiple stores in Alabama and employs more than
5,000 associates in more than 480 stores in 27 states. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Daniel Patrick Evans, Esq.
     THE EVANS LAW FIRM, P.C.
     1736 Oxmoor Road, Suite 101
     Birmingham, AL 35209
     Telephone: (205) 870-1970
     Facsimile: (205) 870-7763
     E-mail: dpevans@evanslawpc.com

             - and –

     Maurine Cambria Evans, Esq.
     THE EVANS LAW FIRM, P.C.
     1736 Oxmoor Road, Suite 101
     Birmingham, AL 35209
     Telephone: (205) 870-1970
     Facsimile: (205) 870-7763
     E-mail: mevans@evanslawpc.com


CLOSETS BY DESIGN: Grevle Suit Asserts Deceptive Business Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------------
KNUT GREVLE, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. CLOSETS BY DESIGN, INC., a California
Corporation, and CBD FRANCHISING, INC., a California Corporation,
Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-03881 (C.D. Cal., May 3, 2019) seeks
to remedy Defendants' unfair, deceptive, and unlawful business
practices with respect to the advertising and sales of closets,
garage cabinets, and other home organizer systems across the United
States.

According to the complaint, throughout the Class Period, Defendants
advertised their home organizer systems at "40% off" or "$200 off."
However, Defendants' "discounted" price is simply their regular
price. Accordingly, the reference price and the supposed "sale"
based on the reference price are deceptive and misleading to
reasonable consumers.

As a result of this illicit pricing scheme, Defendants violated and
continue to violate California's Unfair Competition Law,
California's False Advertising Law, the California Consumer Legal
Remedies Act, and the consumer protection laws in states with laws
similar to California. Defendants also have been unjustly enriched
as a result of their wrongful conduct, breached their contracts
with Plaintiff and Class members, fraudulently induced Plaintiff
and Class members to purchase Closets By Design products, breached
express warranties regarding their products, and violated the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, says the complaint.

Plaintiff used a "40% off" mailer he received from Defendants to
purchase several Closets By Design home organization systems to be
installed in his home on October 26, 2017.

Closets by Design, Inc. ("CBD Inc.") is a California company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     William R. Restis, Esq.
     THE RESTIS LAW FIRM, P.C.
     402 West Broadway, Suite 1520
     San Diego, CA 92101
     Phone: (619) 270-8383
     Email: william@restislaw.com

          - and -

     Joseph J. DePalma, Esq.
     Jeremy Nash, Esq.
     LITE DEPALMA GREENBERG, LLC
     570 Broad Street, Suite 1201
     Newark, NJ 07102
     Phone: (973) 623-3000
     Fax: (973) 623-0858
     Email: jdepalma@litedepalma.com
            jnash@litedepalma.com


COHEN ROBERTS: Manela Alleges Violation Under FDCPA
---------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Cohen, Roberts &
Associates, LLC. The case is styled as Yosef Manela, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Cohen,
Roberts & Associates, LLC and Does 1 through 10, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-03198 (C.D. Cal., April 23, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Cohen, Roberts & Associates, LLC is a financial consultant in
Mayfield Heights, Ohio.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Amir J Goldstein, Esq.
   Amir J Goldstein Law Offices
   8032 West Third Street Suite 201
   Los Angeles, CA 90048
   Tel: (323) 937-0400
   Fax: (866) 288-9194
   Email: ajg@consumercounselgroup.com


COMDATA NETWORK: Gas POS Sues Over Fleet Card Service Monopoly
--------------------------------------------------------------
GAS POS, INC., ANONYMOUS TRUCK STOP, ABC, Plaintiffs, v. COMDATA
NETWORK, INC., and FLEETCOR TECHNOLOGIES, INC., Defendants, Case
No. 2:19-cv-00677-ACA (N.D. Ala., May 5, 2019) seeks reimbursement
of artificially and illegally inflated fees and costs charged by
the named Defendants, which are Fleet Card payment and truck stop
point of sale companies, due to monopolistic and anticompetitive
practices under the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Plaintiffs and Defendants are in the business of selling point of
sale systems and providing payment processing services to merchants
in the retail sector, including gas stations, Truck Stops, travel
plazas, marinas, and convenience stores.

According to the complaint, the Market for the provision of Fleet
Card services is highly concentrated. Defendants have monopoly
power in the Markets for Fleet Card services and Fleet Card Point
of Sale systems, and they have abused their monopoly power by: a)
refusing to allow third party point of sale systems to accept or
process Defendants' proprietary Fleet Cards; b) entering into
agreements with a third party company that supposedly had an
unrestricted license to process Defendants' Fleet Cards in order to
block Plaintiff GP's entry into the Marketplace, and further
evidencing Defendants' retained monopolistic control over the
Market; c) refusing to allow merchants to process Fleet Card
transactions using Plaintiff GP's point of sale system, although
Plaintiff GP had completed the certifications to do so; d) refusing
to grant Plaintiff GP a license to process Fleet Card transactions
using Plaintiff GP's point of sale system, although Plaintiff GP
has completed the certifications to do so; e) refusing to allow
third party companies to compete with Defendants in the Fleet Card
or Fleet Card Point of Sale Marketplace; and f) threatening legal
action against Plaintiff GP and any merchants using Plaintiff GP's
point of sale system to process Fleet Card payments which are
processed using alternative means which do not violate any
contracts or patents held by Defendants.

Plaintiff GP has demonstrated that it can offer the same Fleet Card
Point of Sale system services at a significantly cheaper price to
the merchants and ultimately to the end user-consumers. However,
Defendants and other third parties conspired to and did
unreasonably restrain trade through the anticompetitive agreements
and actions, specifically including instructing and agreeing with a
third party company to prevent Plaintiff GP from entering into the
Marketplace, and other aspects of Defendants' plan, which
maintained and preserved Defendants' monopoly power in the Fleet
Card Market, and thereby maintained Defendants' ability to impose
artificially inflated and exorbitant fees on merchants, says the
complaint.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Cameron Hogan, Esq.
     HOGAN & LLOYD
     2871 Acton Rd, Ste 201
     Birmingham, AL 35243
     Phone: 205-969-6235
     Fax: 205-969-6239
     Email: clhogan@lloydhoganlaw.com


CONAGRA BRANDS: Sued Over False Nutrient Content Claim
------------------------------------------------------
STEVE ALTES, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. CONAGRA BRANDS, INC., Defendant, Case No.
2:19-cv-03952 (C.D. Cal., May 6, 2019) is a class action against
Defendant for false, misleading and an unlawful nutrient content
claim within the meaning of the California Unfair Competition Law.

ConAgra manufactured, marketed, and sold crispy noodle products
containing partially hydrogenated oil ("PHO") under the brand name
La Choy (collectively "La Choy"). PHO was and is an unlawful and
dangerous food additive due to its artificial trans fat content.
Artificial trans fat is a toxic substance whose unlawful use
contributed to hundreds of thousands of untimely deaths in the
United States, primarily from heart disease, cancer, and diabetes.
On June 16, 2015, the FDA issued a final regulation and declaratory
order after extensive public comment, declaring PHO unsafe for any
use in food. The FDA came to the same conclusion when it initially
proposed the regulation in 2013.

The Defendant was aware that PHO was unsafe even before this time,
yet still harmed its customers by adding PHO to La Choy, asserts
the complaint. During the entire class period, inexpensive and
commercially viable alternatives to PHO existed, and were used in
many competitor products. In order to increase profits, ConAgra
instead sold an unsafe and illegal product, and such behavior was
an unfair business practice. For much of the class period,
Defendant also defrauded the class by using the false and
unauthorized "0g Trans Fat" nutrient content claim on La Choy
packaging. All PHO, however, contains trans fat, and the amount in
La Choy was not "0g," but a substantial and dangerous amount. La
Choy's labeling, as used during the class period, violates specific
FDA regulations, as detailed herein, says the complaint.

Plaintiff Steven Altes is a citizen of California who repeatedly
purchased La Choy for personal and household consumption.

ConAgra is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
business in Chicago, Illinois.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     GREGORY S. WESTON, ESQ.
     ANDREW C. HAMILTON, ESQ.
     THE WESTON FIRM
     1405 Morena Blvd., Suite 201
     San Diego, CA 92110
     Phone: (619) 798-2006
     Facsimile: (619) 343-2789
     Email: greg@westonfirm.com
            andrew@westonfirm.com


DLUX CELL: Freeman Suit Asserts Disabilities Act Violation
----------------------------------------------------------
SCOTT FREEMAN v. DLUX CELL CITY CORP d/b/a CELL CITY and OLIVE
BUILDING LLC, Case No. 2:19-cv-02361 (E.D.N.Y., April 23, 2019),
accuses the Defendants of violating the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

Dlux Cell City Corp is a corporation duly licensed to conduct
business in New York State.  Olive Building LLC is a domestic
limited liability company, duly licensed and authorized to conduct
business in the state of New York.  Olive Bldg is the owner of the
property and associated building located at 16 East Sunrise
Highway, in Freeport, County of Nassau, New York.

Defendant-Operator Dlux Cell City Corp, doing business as Cell
City, is a New York corporation licensed to and doing business in
New York State.  Cell City is the operator of a cellular sales
and/or cellular repair store located at the Premises.

Mr. Freeman, who is confined to a wheelchair, alleges that the
Defendants' premises contained architectural barriers that prevents
and/or restricts access to him.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Darryn Solotoff, Esq.
          Jonathan Bell, Esq.
          BELL LAW GROUP, PLLC
          100 Quentin Roosevelt Blvd., Suite 208
          Garden City, NY 11530
          Telephone: (516) 280-3008
          E-mail: DS@BellLG.com
                  JB@BellLG.com


EGS FINANCIAL: Faces Eisen Suit Alleging FDCPA Violation
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against EGS Financial Care,
Inc. The case is styled as Saul Eisen, on behalf of himself and all
similarly situated consumers, Plaintiff v. EGS Financial Care,
Inc., Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02423 (E.D. N.Y., April 25,
2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

EGS Financial Care, Inc. operates as a customer service
organization that delivers outsourced solutions for finance,
healthcare, retail, technology, telecommunication, transportation
and logistics, travel and hospitality, and utility industries in
the United States and internationally.[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



EQUIFAX INFORMATION: Newsom Sues over Inaccurate Credit Report
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against Equifax Information
Services, LLC for negligence and violation of the Fair Credit
Reporting Act (FCRA). The case is captioned KEISHA NEWSOM,
Plaintiff, v. EQUIFAX INFORMATION SERVICES, LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 5:19-cv-00730 (C.D. Cal., April 22, 2019). Plaintiff Keisha
Newsom alleges that Equifax selectively decides which information
to provide to consumers that request the FCRA-governed information
in its possession and which information it will hide from
consumers. Newsom also alleges that Equifax withholds certain
information in order to minimize its compliance costs and to avoid
customer service inquiries directed at them and its business
partners or private vendors that include LexisNexis. Equifax has
allegedly misrepresented the source of consumers' bankruptcy Public
Record Information by falsely stating that a given courthouse is
the source of the Public Record Information, while affirmatively
hiding the true source of the Public Record Information.

Equifax is a credit reporting agency authorized to conduct business
in the state of California. Based in Atlanta, Georgia, the company
collects and reports consumer credit information to financial
entities. It operates as a subsidiary of Equifax Inc. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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

             - and -  
     
     Daniel G. Shay, Esq.
     LAW OFFICE OF DANIEL G. SHAY
     409 Camino Del Rio South, Suite 101B
     San Diego, CA 92108
     Telephone: (619) 222-7429
     Facsimile: (866) 431-3292
     E-mail: danielshay@tcpafdcpa.com


FORSTER & GARBUS: Hendrickson Files FDCPA Class Action in New York
------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Forster & Garbus,
LLP. The case is styled as Adam Hendrickson, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Forster & Garbus,
LLP, Forster Ronald and Mark A. Garbus, Defendants, Case No.
2:19-cv-02263 (E.D. N.Y., April 18, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Forster & Garbus LLP is a full service New York Law Firm
concentrating on creditor's rights law since 1970.

The Plaintiff appears PRO SE.

   





GENERAL INFORMATION: Cantu Asserts Breach of FCRA in Texas
----------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against General Information
Solutions, LLC. The case is styled as Danny Cantu, on behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. General
Information Solutions, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 5:19-cv-00418
(W.D. Tex., April 23, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

General Information Services LLC (GIS) is a provider of accurate,
objective information to the insurance underwriting community.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Sergei Lemberg, Esq.
   Lemberg Law, LLC
   43 Danbury Road
   Wilton, CT 06897
   Tel: (203) 653-2250
   Fax: (203) 653-3424
   Email: slemberg@lemberglaw.com



GIVESURANCE INSURANCE: Shank Sues Over Illegal Telemarketing
------------------------------------------------------------
BROCK SHANK, individually and on behalf of a class of all persons
and entities similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. GIVESURANCE
INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-00136-WHR
(S.D. Ohio, May 7, 2019) is an action under the Telephone Consumer
Protection Act ("TCPA"), a federal statute enacted in response to
widespread public outrage about the proliferation of intrusive,
nuisance telemarketing practices.

The Defendant made an automated telemarketing call to the
Plaintiff's cellular telephone without his prior express consent,
which is prohibited by the TCPA. Because telemarketing campaigns
generally place calls to hundreds of 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 Defendant.

Plaintiff Brock Shank is an Ohio resident and a resident of this
district.

Defendant is a California corporation who engages in telemarketing
into this district, as it did with the Plaintiff.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Brian K. Murphy, Esq.
     Jonathan P. Misny, Esq.
     Murray Murphy Moul + Basil LLP
     1114 Dublin Road
     Columbus, OH 43215
     Phone: (614) 488-0400
     Facsimile: (614) 488-0401
     Email: murphy@mmmb.com
            misny@mmmb.com

          - and -

     Anthony I. Paronich, Esq.
     Paronich Law, P.C.
     350 Lincoln Street, Suite 2400
     Hingham, MA 02043
     Phone: (508) 221-1510
     Email: anthony@paronichlaw.com


GLASS MOUNTAIN: Campos Files FDCPA Class Action in California
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Glass Mountain
Capital LLC. The case is styled as Mayra Campos, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Glass
Mountain Capital LLC and John Does 1-25, Defendants, Case No.
8:19-cv-00717 (C.D. Cal., April 18, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Glass Mountain Capital LLC is a debt collection agency.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Jonathan Aaron Stieglitz, Esq.
   Jonathan Stieglitz Law Offices
   11845 West Olympic Boulevard Suite 800
   Los Angeles, CA 90064
   Tel: (323) 979-2063
   Fax: (323) 488-6748
   Email: jonathan.a.stieglitz@gmail.com




GRAND CARIBBEAN CRUISES: Tunkett Sues over Unauthorized Calls
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against Grand Caribbean
Cruises, Inc. and Jennifer Poole for violations of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act (TCPA) and the California Consumer Legal
Remedies Act. The case is captioned JASON TUNKETT, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated Plaintiff, v. GRAND
CARIBBEAN CRUISES, INC., a Florida corporation, JENNIFER POOLE, an
individual, Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-02146 (N.D. Cal., April
20, 2019). Plaintiff Jason Tunkett alleges that the Defendants are
engaged in illegal practice of making unauthorized calls that play
prerecorded voice messages to the cellular telephones of consumers.
Defendants sell vacation packages. As a primary part of their
marketing efforts, Defendants and their agents place thousands of
automated calls without obtaining consent prior to placing these
calls.

Grand Caribbean Cruises is a corporation and existing under the
laws of the State of Florida with its principal place of business
at 1451 West Cypress Creed Road, Suite 300, in Fort Lauderdale,
Broward County, Florida. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Mark L. Javitch, Esq.
     MARK L. JAVITCH, ATTORNEY AT LAW
     210 S Ellsworth Ave #486
     San Mateo, CA 94401
     Telephone: (402)301-5544
     Facsimile: (402)396-7131
     E-mail: javitchm@gmail.com


HANJIN INT'L: Hernandez Suit Removed to N.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned ESTEBAN HERNANDEZ, on behalf of himself, all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. HANJIN INTERNATIONAL
CORP., a California corporation; INTERCONTINENTAL HOTELS GROUP,
INC. a Delaware corporation; INTERCONTINENTAL HOTELS GROUP (U.S.A.)
FRANCHISING, INC., and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Defendants,
Case No. 19CV344881, was removed from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Santa Clara to the United
States District Court for the Northern District of California on
May 1, 2019, and assigned Case No. 5:19-cv-02393.

Under the case, Plaintiff asserts claims on (1) Failure to Provide
Meal Periods; (2) Failure to Provide Rest Periods; (3) Failure to
Pay Hourly Wages; (4) Failure to Provide Accurate Written Wage
Statements; (5) Failure to Timely Pay All Final Wages; and (6)
Unfair Competition.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

     Michael J. Burns, Esq.
     Eric E. Hill, Esq.
     Michelle Scannell, Esq.
     SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
     560 Mission Street, 31st Floor
     San Francisco, CA 94105
     Tel No: (415) 397-2823
     Fax No: (415) 397-8549
     Email: mburns@seyfarth.com
            ehill@seyfarth.com
            mscannell@seyfarth.com


HARRIET CARTER: Popa PI Suit Transferred to W. D. Pa.
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Ashley Popa, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Harriet Carter Gifts,
Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation and Navistone, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, Defendants, Case No 10248-19, was transferred from the
The Court of Common Pleas of Lawrence County to the U.S. District
Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania on April 19, 2019,
and assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-00450-PJP.

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Personal Injury
- other.

Harriet Carter Gifts, Inc. operates an online store for household
helper, organizer, home decor, kitchen, bed and bath, apparel,
health and beauty, entertainment, lawn and garden, and pet
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Gary F. Lynch, Esq.
   Carlson Lynch, LLP
   1133 Penn Avenue
   5th Floor
   Pittsburgh, PA 15222
   Tel: (412) 322-9243
   Email: glynch@carlsonlynch.com

The Defendants are represented by:

   Emily B. Thomas, Esq.
   Baker & Hostetler LLP
   1801 California Street, Suite 4400
   Denver, CO 80202-2662
   Tel: (303) 861-0600
   Fax: (303) 861-7805
   Email: ethomas@bakerlaw.com

      - and -

   Rachel R. Hadrick, Esq.
   McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC
   100 Pine Street
   PO Box 1166
   Harrisburg, PA 17108-1166
   Tel: (717) 237-5397
   Fax: (717) 260-1781
   Email: rhadrick@mcneeslaw.com


HEALTHCARE SERVICES: Garcia Suit Removed to C.D. California
-----------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned RUBEN GARCIA, GILBERTO LOPEZ, LUIS HERNANDEZ,
MARIA GUTIERREZ, MARIA MOTA, NORA LUCHA, RAQUEL ROSAS, and SOIRA
PEREZ, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
and all aggrieved employees, Plaintiffs, v. HEALTHCARE SERVICES
GROUP, INC., HCSG WEST, LLC, and DOES 1 to 100, inclusive,
Defendants, was removed from the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Los Angeles to the United States
District Court for the Central District of California on May 3,
2019, and assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03869.

On February 20, 2019, Plaintiffs commenced this action against HCSG
in the Superior Court of California for the County of Los Angeles
asserting, on behalf of themselves and a putative class consisting
of all individuals who have been employed by HCSG in California
since February 20, 2015 and classified as non-exempt, five causes
of action for (1) failure to provide rest breaks, (2) failure to
provide accurate wage statements, (3) failure to provide meal
periods, (4) failure to pay minimum and overtime wages, and (5)
unfair competition.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

     KENNETH D. SULZER, ESQ.
     SARAH K. HAMILTON, ESQ.
     MATTHEW SCHOLL, ESQ.
     CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH & PROPHETE, LLP
     2029 Century Park East, Suite 1100
     Los Angeles, CA 90067
     Phone: (310) 909-7775
     Facsimile: (424) 276-7410
     Email: ksulzer@constangy.com
            shamilton@constangy.com
            mscholl@constangy.com


HFF INC: Jones Files Securities Suit Over JLL Merger Deal
---------------------------------------------------------
BRAD JONES, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. HFF, INC., MARK D. GIBSON, JODY B. THORNTON
JR., DEBORAH H. MCANENY, GEORGE L. MILES JR., STEVEN E. WHEELER,
MORGAN K. O'BRIEN, SUSAN P. MCGALLA, and LENORE M. SULLIVAN,
Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-00841-UNA (D. Del., May 6, 2019) is an
action brought as a class action by Plaintiff on behalf of himself
and the other public holders of the common stock of HFF, Inc.
against the Company and the members of the Company's board of
directors for their violations of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "Exchange Act"), in connection with the proposed merger
(the "Proposed Merger") between HFF and Jones Lang LaSalle
Incorporated ("JLL").

On March 19, 2019, the Board caused the Company to enter into an
agreement and plan of merger ("Merger Agreement"), pursuant to
which the Company's shareholders stand to receive $24.63 in cash
and 0.1505 shares of common stock of JLL for each share of HFF
stock they own (the "Merger Consideration"). Upon completion of the
merger, JLL stockholders will own 87 percent and HFF stockholders
will own 13 percent of the combined company. On April 29, 2019, in
order to convince HFF shareholders to vote in favor of the Proposed
Merger, the Board authorized the filing of a materially incomplete
and misleading Form S-4 Registration Statement (the "S-4") with the
Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC"), in violation of the
Exchange Act, says the complaint.

While touting the fairness of the Merger Consideration to the
Company's shareholders in the S-4, Defendants have failed to
disclose certain material information that is necessary for
shareholders to properly assess the fairness of the Proposed
Merger, thereby violating SEC rules and regulations and rendering
certain statements in the S-4 materially incomplete and misleading,
the complaint relates. In particular, the S-4 contains materially
incomplete and misleading information concerning the financial
projections for the Company that were prepared by the Company and
relied on by Defendants in recommending that HFF shareholders vote
in favor of the Proposed Merger. The financial projections were
also utilized by HFF's financial advisor, Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC
("Morgan Stanley"), in conducting certain valuation analyses in
support of its fairness opinion. It is imperative that the material
information that has been omitted from the S-4 is disclosed prior
to the forthcoming vote to allow the Company's shareholders to make
an informed decision regarding the Proposed Merger, adds the
complaint.

Plaintiff is, and at all relevant times has been, a holder of HFF
common stock.

HFF is a provider of commercial real estate and capital markets
services to both consumers and providers of capital in the
commercial real estate industry and is one of the largest
full-service commercial real estate financial intermediaries in the
country.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Michael Van Gorder, Esq.
     FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
     3828 Kennett Pike, Suite 201
     Wilmington, DE 19807
     Phone: (302) 482-3182
     Email: mvangorder@faruqilaw.com

          - and -

     Michael Van Gorder, Esq.
     FARUQI & FARUQI, LLP
     3828 Kennett Pike, Suite 201
     Wilmington, DE 19807
     Phone: (302) 482-3182
     Email: mvangorder@faruqilaw.com


HOME DEPOT: Ford Alleges FCRA Violation in California
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Home Depot U.S.A.,
Inc. The case is styled as Steven Ford, on behalf of himself and
all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Home Depot U.S.A.,
Inc., a Delaware corporation and Does 1 Through 100, inclusive,
Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-00754-AJB-LL (S.D. Cal., April 24,
2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., doing business as The Home Depot, owns and
operates home improvement retail stores. It offers building
materials, lawn and garden equipment, kitchen products, lighting
products, floor designing products, and storage products. The
company was incorporated in 1989 and is based in Atlanta, Georgia.
Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. operates as a subsidiary of The Home Depot,
Inc.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   James Jason Hill, Esq.
   Cohelan Khoury & Singer
   605 C Street, Suite 200
   San Diego, CA 92101
   Tel: (619) 595-3001
   Fax: (619) 595-3000
   Email: jhill@ckslaw.com



HW Gilpin: Knwoles Files ADA Class Suit in N.D. Illinois
--------------------------------------------------------
H W Gilpin Enterprises, Inc. is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
as Carlton Knowles, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. H W Gilpin Enterprises, Inc., Defendant,
Case No. 1:19-cv-02691 (N.D. Ill., April 22, 2019).

Hw Gilpin Enterprises Inc is a privately held company in Galena, IL
and is a Single Location business. Categorized under Business
Consultants, it was established in 2011 and incorporated in
Illinois.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   C.K. Lee, Esq.
   Lee Litigation Group, PLLC
   73 West Monroe Street
   Chicago, IL 60603
   Tel: (212) 465-1188
   Email: cklee@leelitigation.com


INTELEMEDIA PREMIER: Ghist Sues Over Prerecorded Advertising Calls
------------------------------------------------------------------
NINA GHIST, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. INTELEMEDIA PREMIER LEADS, LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, Defendant, Case No. 4:19-cv-00329 (N.D.
Ala., May 3, 2019) seeks to stop Intelemedia's violation of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA") by making prerecorded
advertising calls to consumers without their consent, and to
otherwise obtain injunctive and monetary relief for all persons
injured by Intelemedia's conduct.

Plaintiff received over 50 prerecorded calls from Defendant without
having provided her prior express written consent to receive such
calls, says the complaint.

Plaintiff Ghist is a Findlay, Ohio resident.

Intelemedia provides phone based marketing services, including the
delivery of pre-recorded voice calls to consumers' telephones.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Daniel Baldree, Esq.
     The Law Office of Daniel W. Baldree, P.L.L.C.
     1250 Hwy 96 S
     Silsbee, TX 77656
     Phone: (713) 446-1383
     Fax: (409) 419-1058

          - and -

     Stefan Coleman, Esq.
     LAW OFFICES OF STEFAN COLEMAN, P.A.
     201 S. Biscayne Blvd, 28th Floor
     Miami, FL 33131
     Phone: (877) 333-9427
     Facsimile: (888) 498-8946
     Email: law@stefancoleman.com

          - and -

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


J&J INC: Garcia Seeks Unpaid Wages Under FLSA
---------------------------------------------
Jose Garcia, Ledvin Alarcon, and all others similarly situated v. J
& J, Inc. dba Eagle Painting, Janet S. Field, and John H. Field,
Case No. 0:19-cv-60728 (S.D. Fla., March 20, 2019), is brought
against the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act.

The Defendants operate a residential and commercial painting
company.

The Plaintiffs worked as painters for the Defendants. They seek to
recover unpaid wages and overtime wages.
[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

      J. Freddy Perera, Esq.
      Valerie Barnhart, Esq.
      PERERA BARNHART, P.A.
      12555 Orange Drive, Suite 268
      Davie, FL 33330
      Tel: (786) 485-5232
      E-mail: freddy@pererabarnhart.com
              valerie@pererabarnhart.com


J.J. MARSHALL: Alleges Breach of FDCPA in Florida
-------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against J.J. Marshall &
Associates, Inc. The case is styled as Jacara Monique Gartrell, on
behalf of Herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
J.J. Marshall & Associates, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-00442
(M.D. Fla., April 18, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

J.J. Marshall & Associates, Inc. is a debt collection agency in
Warren, Michigan.

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Brian W. Warwick, Esq.
   Varnell & Warwick, PA
   P.O. Box 1870
   Lady Lake, FL 32158
   Tel: (352) 753-8600
   Fax: (352) 753-8606
   Email: bwarwick@varnellandwarwick.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Aitchison Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 23, 2019, the claims against them in the matter
entitled JACQUELINE AITCHISON, an individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON;
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.; IMERYS TALC AMERICA,
INC. f/k/a LUZENAC AMERICA, INC.; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, from the Superior Court of the State of California for
the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03194 to the
proceeding.

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On February 6, 2019, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Superior
Court of San Bernardino County, which generally alleges that the
Debtors' talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum
powder products, caused the Plaintiff's personal injury and/or
wrongful death.  The Plaintiff's case was coordinated into the
coordinated proceeding pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court
before Judge Maren Nelson: In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder
Cases (JCCP No. 4872).  On February 20, 2019, leadership for all
plaintiffs in the coordinated proceeding filed a Second Amended
Master Complaint ("Master Complaint").

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Bancroft Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the matter titled PAUL BANCROFT, ON
BEHALF OF THE ESTATE OF EDNA E. BANCROFT v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a
New Jersey corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON &
JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES,
INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS
TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place
of business in the State of California; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, Case No. JCCP 4872, from the Superior Court of the State
of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03270 to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit was commenced on May 23, 2018, in the Superior Court of
the State of California for the County of Santa Clara, and was
assigned Case No. 18CV328571.

The Plaintiff seeks recovery for damages as a result of ovarian
cancer, which was directly and proximately caused by the
unreasonably dangerous and defective nature of talcum powder, the
main ingredient of the Defendants' products, which include Shower
to Shower body powder and Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lee Cirsch, Esq.
          Michael Akselrud, Esq.
          THE LANIER LAW FIRM, PC
          21550 Oxnard Street, 3rd Floor
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (310) 277-5100
          Facsimile: (310) 277-5103
          E-mail: lee.cirsch@lanierlawfirm.com
                  michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Beadle Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
---------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the matter styled MARCIA BEADLE, an
individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing
business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.,
a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC
AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of
business in the State of California; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, from the Superior Court of the State of California for
the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03298 to the
proceeding.

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On November 6, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the
Superior Court of Santa Clara County, which generally alleges that
the Debtors' talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum
powder products, caused the Plaintiff's personal injury and/or
wrongful death.

The case was coordinated into the coordinated proceeding pending in
Los Angeles County Superior Court before Judge Maren Nelson: In re
Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Cases (JCCP No. 4872).  On February
20, 2019, leadership for all plaintiffs in the coordinated
proceeding filed a Second Amended Master Complaint ("Master
Complaint").

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Bermudez Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the lawsuit captioned TAMRA CARILLO
BERMUDEZ, an individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey
corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON
CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC., a
New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC
AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of
business in the State of California; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, Case No. JCCP 4872, from the Superior Court of the State
of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03234 to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit was initiated on April 5, 2018, in the Superior Court
of the State of California for the County of San Joaquin and was
assigned Case No. STK-CV-UPL-2018-3930.

The action seeks recovery for damages as a result of the
Plaintiff's ovarian cancer, which was directly and proximately
caused by the Defendants' wrongful conduct in the distribution,
marketing, and sale of the unreasonably dangerous and defective
nature of talcum powder, the main ingredient of their products,
which include Shower to Shower body powder and Johnson & Johnson's
Baby Powder.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lee Cirsch, Esq.
          Michael Akselrud, Esq.
          THE LANIER LAW FIRM, PC
          21550 Oxnard Street, 3rd Floor
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (310) 277-5100
          Facsimile: (310) 277-5103
          E-mail: lee.cirsch@lanierlawfirm.com
                  michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com

               - and -

          Susanne Scovern, Esq.
          Joseph McPeak, Esq.
          SCOVERNLAW
          201 Spear St., Suite 1105
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (888) 725-1890
          E-mail: scovern@scovernlaw.com
                  joseph_mcpeak@scovemlaw.com

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Nicholas Vaughan Janizeh, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street 42nd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Berning-Szczesny Talc Suit to C.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the matter entitled AMANDA
BERNING-SZCZESNY, et al. v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON; JOHNSON & JOHNSON
CONSUMER, INC. F/N/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.;
IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC. F/K/A LUZENAC AMERICA, INC. and DOES 1
— 50, inclusive, Defendants v. ARTHUR HOLMES as heir of MAMIE
HOLMES, deceased; DOROTHY HOLMES As heir of MAMI HOLMES, deceased;
FRED HOLMES as heir of MAMIE HOLMES, deceased; TRAVIS HOLMES as
heir of MANDE HOLMES, deceased, Nominal Defendants for Wrongful
Death Action, Case No. JCCP 4872, from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03255 to the
proceeding.

The matter was commenced on September 30, 2016, in the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of Los Angeles and
was assigned Case No. BC634145.  The case was coordinated into the
coordinated proceeding pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court
before Judge Maren Nelson: In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder
Cases (JCCP No. 4872).

The lawsuit is an action for damages relating to the Defendants'
design, manufacture, sale, marketing, advertising, promotion, and
distribution of Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder and Shower to Shower.
The Plaintiffs allege that the use of the products can cause
ovarian cancer and other serious health conditions.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jennifer Liakos, Esq.
          NAPOLI SHKOLNIK, PLLC
          525 South Douglas Street, Suite 260
          El Segundo, CA 90245
          Telephone: (310) 331-8224
          Facsimile: (646) 843-7603
          E-mail: Jliakos@napolilaw.com

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Nicholas Vaughan Janizeh, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street 42nd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Moves Bethell Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the lawsuit titled KIMBERLY BETHELL, an
individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing
business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.,
a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC
AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of
business in the State of California; and DOES 1 through 100,
inclusive, from the Superior Court of the State of California for
the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03241 to the
proceeding.

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On November 6, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the
Superior Court of Santa Clara County, which generally alleges that
the Debtors' talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum
powder products, caused the Plaintiff's personal injury and/or
wrongful death.

The case was coordinated into the coordinated proceeding pending in
Los Angeles County Superior Court before Judge Maren Nelson: In re
Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Cases (JCCP No. 4872).  On February
20, 2019, leadership for all plaintiffs in the coordinated
proceeding filed a Second Amended Master Complaint ("Master
Complaint").

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Agonoy Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 23, 2019, the claims against them in the matter
titled JANET AGONOY, an individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New
Jersey corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON
CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business
in California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation
with its principal place of business in the State of California;
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03188 to the
proceeding.

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On May 14, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Superior
Court of Santa Clara County, which generally alleges that the
Debtors' talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum
powder products, caused the Plaintiff's personal injury and/or
wrongful death.  The Plaintiff's case was coordinated into the
coordinated proceeding pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court
before Judge Maren Nelson: In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder
Cases (JCCP No. 4872). On February 20, 2019, leadership for all
plaintiffs in the coordinated proceeding filed a Second Amended
Master Complaint.

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Ahlbin Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 23, 2019, the claims against them in the matter
captioned DIANA AHLBIN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey
corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON
CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business
in California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation
with its principal place of business in the State of California;
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03191 to the
proceeding.

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On October 31 2017, the Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Superior
Court of Sacramento County, which generally alleges that the
Debtors' talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum
powder products, caused the Plaintiff's personal injury and/or
wrongful death.  The Plaintiff's case was coordinated into the
coordinated proceeding pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court
before Judge Maren Nelson: In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder
Cases (JCCP No. 4872).  On February 20, 2019, leadership for all
plaintiffs in the coordinated proceeding filed a Second Amended
Master Complaint ("Master Complaint").

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Ainilian Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 23, 2019, the claims against them in the lawsuit
entitled JOHN AINILIAN, individually, and as successor-in-interest
on behalf of the ESTATE OF MARY AINILIAN v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON;
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.; IMERYS TALC AMERICA,
INC.; and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, from the Superior Court of
the State of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03189 to the
proceeding.

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On June 28, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Superior
Court of Santa Clara County, which generally alleges that the
Debtors' talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum
powder products, caused the Plaintiff's personal injury and/or
wrongful death.  The Plaintiff's case was coordinated into the
coordinated proceeding pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court
before Judge Maren Nelson: In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder
Cases (JCCP No. 4872).  On February 20, 2019, leadership for all
plaintiffs in the coordinated proceeding filed a Second Amended
Master Complaint ("Master Complaint").

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Allen Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the matter styled Victoria Allen, an
individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing
business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.,
a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC
AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of
business in the State of California; and DOES 1 through 100, Case
No. JCCP 4872, from the Superior Court of the State of California
for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03232 to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit was commenced on November 6, 2017, in the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara and
was assigned Case No. 17CV318669.

The complaint alleges that the Plaintiff developed ovarian cancer,
and suffered effects and sequelae therefrom, as a direct and
proximate result of the unreasonably dangerous and defective nature
of talcum powder, the main ingredient of the Defendants' products,
which include Shower to Shower body powder and Johnson & Johnson's
Baby Powder.  The complaint accuses the Defendants of wrongful and
negligent conduct in the research, development, testing,
manufacture, production, promotion, distribution, marketing, and
sale of the products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark P. Robinson, Jr., Esq.
          ROBINSON CALCAGNIE, INC.
          19 Corporate Plaza Drive
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Telephone: (949) 720-1288
          E-mail: mrobinson@robinsonfirm.com

Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer
Companies, Inc., are represented by:

          Nicholas Vaughan Janizeh, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street 42nd Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Almanza Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 23, 2019, the claims against them in the lawsuit
styled SYLVIA ALMANZA, an individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New
Jersey corporation doing business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON
CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business
in California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation
with its principal place of business in the State of California;
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, from the Superior Court of the
State of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S.
District Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03177 to the
proceeding.

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On May 14, 2018, Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Superior Court
of San Bernardino County, which generally alleges that the Debtors'
talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum powder
products, caused the Plaintiff's personal injury and/or wrongful
death.  The Plaintiff's case was coordinated into the coordinated
proceeding pending in Los Angeles County Superior Court before
Judge Maren Nelson: In re Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Cases
(JCCP No. 4872).  On February 20, 2019, leadership for all
plaintiffs in the coordinated proceeding filed a Second Amended
Master Complaint ("Master Complaint").

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Amoruso Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Cal.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 23, 2019, the claims against them in the lawsuit
titled Amoruso v. Johnson & Johnson, et al., Case No. JCCP 4872,
from the Superior Court of the State of California for the County
of Los Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the Central District
of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03175 to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit was originally filed on June 20, 2018, as ROBERT
AMORUSO ON BEHALF OF THE ESTATE OF JODI LYNN AMORUSO v. JOHNSON &
JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing business in California;
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER
COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business in
California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with
its principal place of business in the State of California; and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. 18CV329982, in the Superior
Court of the State of California for the County of Santa Clara.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff or his Spouse or his
Decedent purchased the talcum powder based products and used said
products on a daily basis in and around her perineal regions.  She
further used the products to dust other parts of her bodies
including her face, under arms and chest in proximity to their
breathing zone.  She further used the products when diapering her
children and on their bed sheets and for other household purposes.
The Plaintiff's parents and others further used the products when
diapering him.

The Plaintiff alleges that his Spouse or Decedent developed ovarian
cancer, and suffered effects and sequelae therefrom, as a direct
and proximate result of the unreasonably dangerous and defective
nature of talcum powder, the main ingredient of the products, and
the Defendants' wrongful and negligent conduct in the research,
development, testing, manufacture, production, formulation,
processing, packaging, promotion, distribution, marketing, and sale
of the products and/or the talcum powder that comprises the
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lee Cirsch, Esq.
          Michael Akselrud, Esq.
          THE LANIER LAW FIRM, PC
          21550 Oxnard Street, 3rd Floor
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (310) 277-5100
          Facsimile: (310) 277-5103
          E-mail: lee.cirsch@lanierlawfirm.com
                  michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Baden Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the lawsuit styled TIMOTHY BADEN
individually and on Behalf of the Estate of MARY BADEN; and KELLI
RAKOZY individually and on Behalf of the Estate of PAMELA BALL v.
JOHNSON & JOHNSON; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.;
IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., F/K/A LUZENAC AMERICA, INC.; and DOES
1-10 inclusive, and each of them, Case No. JCCP 4872, from the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los
Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03231 to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit was filed on October 3, 2016, in the Superior Court of
the State of California for the County of Santa Clara and was
assigned Case No. 16CV300592.

The claims against the Defendants arise from the Mary Baden's and
Pamela Ball's use of "Johnson's Baby Powder" and "Shower to
Shower," the contributing factors in the development of their
ovarian cancer and their death, and the Defendants' pecuniary loss
resulting from the loss of love, comfort, society, attention,
services and support.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Rachel B. Abrams, Esq.
          Meghan McCormick, Esq.
          LEVIN SIMES LLP
          44 Montgomery St., 32nd Floor
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 426-3000
          Facsimile: (415) 426-3001
          E-mail: rabrams@levinsimes.com
                  mmccormick@levinsimes.com

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Bailey Talc Injury Suit to C.D. Calif.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the lawsuit captioned JOHN BAILEY, AS
PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF KAREN BAILEY v. JOHNSON &
JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing business in California;
JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. F/K/A JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER
COMPANIES, INC., a New Jersey corporation doing business in
California; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with
its principal place of business in the State of California; and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, Case No. JCCP 4872, from the
Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Los
Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the Central District of
California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03248 to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit was initiated in the Superior Court of the State of
California for the County of Santa Clara and was assigned Case No.
18CV325920.

The Plaintiff asserts that his wife, Decedent Karen Bailey, died of
Ovarian Cancer.  He contends that she purchased and used the
Defendants' products, which include Shower to Shower body powder
and Johnson & Johnson's Baby Powder, on a daily basis in and around
her perineal regions.  He argues that his spouse developed ovarian
cancer, and suffered effects and sequelae therefrom, as a direct
and proximate result of the unreasonably dangerous and defective
nature of talcum powder, which is the main ingredient of the
products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Lee Cirsch, Esq.
          Michael Akselrud, Esq.
          THE LANIER LAW FIRM, PC
          21550 Oxnard Street, 3rd Floor
          Woodland Hills, CA 91367
          Telephone: (310) 277-5100
          Facsimile: (310) 277-5103
          E-mail: lee.cirsch@lanierlawfirm.com
                  michael.akselrud@lanierlawfirm.com

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Bakus Talc Suit to C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the matter styled REBECCA BAKUS and
GABRIEL BAKUS as husband and wife v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON; JOHNSON &
JOHNSON CONSUMER INC. f/k/a JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES,
INC.; IMERYS TALC AMERICA, INC. f/k/a LUZENAC AMERICA, INC.; and
DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, from the Superior Court of the State
of California for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District
Court for the Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03257 to the
proceeding.

The State Court Talc Claims against J&J center on allegations that
exposure to the Debtors' talc caused the Plaintiff's injuries,
specifically, ovarian and/or fallopian tube cancer.  J&J disputes
these allegations.

On March 27, 2018, the Plaintiffs filed a Complaint in the Superior
Court of Los Angeles County, which generally alleges that the
Debtors' talc, through the habitual use of J&J cosmetic talcum
powder products, caused the Plaintiffs' personal injury and/or
wrongful death.

The case was coordinated into the coordinated proceeding pending in
Los Angeles County Superior Court before Judge Maren Nelson: In re
Johnson & Johnson Talcum Powder Cases (JCCP No. 4872).  On February
20, 2019, leadership for all plaintiffs in the coordinated
proceeding filed a Second Amended Master Complaint ("Master
Complaint").

On February 13, 2019, Imerys Talc America, Inc., and two
affiliates, Imerys Talc Vermont, Inc., and Imerys Talc Canada, Inc.
(collectively, the "Debtors"), filed a voluntary chapter 11
petition, commencing a reorganization case styled: In re: Imerys
Talc America, Inc., et al., Case No. 19-10289-LSS, in the United
States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware (the "Chapter
11 Case").

Because the Debtors have historically been J&J's sole supplier of
cosmetic talc, the Debtors are routinely named as a co-defendant in
the actions in which the Talc Claims arise.  Even where the Debtors
are not so named as co-defendants, however, the Talc Claims are
related to the Debtors' bankruptcy.[BN]

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Michael C. Zellers, Esq.
          Amanda Villalobos, Esq.
          Nicholas Janizeh, Esq.
          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: michael.zellers@tuckerellis.com
                  amanda.villalobos@tuckerellis.com
                  nicholas.janizeh@tuckerellis.com
                  caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com

               - and -

          Michael F. Healy, Esq.
          Emily Weissenberger, Esq.
          Alexander Guney, Esq.
          SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
          One Montgomery Street, Suite 2600
          San Francisco, CA 94104
          Telephone: (415) 544-1900
          Facsimile: (415) 391-0281
          E-mail: mfhealy@shb.com
                  eweissenberger@shb.com
                  aguney@shb.com


JOHNSON & JOHNSON: Removes Barnhart Talc Suit to C.D. California
----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendants Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc.
removed on April 24, 2019, the lawsuit entitled JONI BARNHART, an
individual v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON, a New Jersey corporation doing
business in California; JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER COMPANIES, INC.,
a New Jersey corporation doing business in California; IMERYS TALC
AMERICA, INC., a Delaware Corporation with its principal place of
business in the State of California. and DOES 1 through 100, Case
No. JCCP 4872, from the Superior Court of the State of California
for the County of Los Angeles to the U.S. District Court for the
Central District of California.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:19-cv-03275 to the
proceeding.

The lawsuit was filed on November 6, 2017, in the Superior Court of
the State of California for the County of Santa Clara and was
assigned Case No. 17CV318662.

The complaint alleges that the Plaintiff developed ovarian cancer,
and suffered effects and sequelae therefrom, as a direct and
proximate result of the unreasonably dangerous and defective nature
of talcum powder, the main ingredient of the Defendants' products,
which include Shower to Shower body powder and Johnson & Johnson's
Baby Powder.  The complaint accuses the Defendants of wrongful and
negligent conduct in the research, development, testing,
manufacture, production, promotion, distribution, marketing, and
sale of the products.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Mark P. Robinson, Jr., Esq.
          ROBINSON CALCAGNIE, INC.
          19 Corporate Plaza Drive
          Newport Beach, CA 92660
          Telephone: (949) 720-1288
          E-mail: mrobinson@robinsonfirm.com

Defendants JOHNSON & JOHNSON and JOHNSON & JOHNSON CONSUMER INC.
are represented by:

          Caroline Toole, Esq.
          TUCKER ELLIS LLP
          515 South Flower Street, Forty-Second Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90071
          Telephone: (213) 430-3400
          Facsimile: (213) 430-3409
          E-mail: caroline.toole@tuckerellis.com


JONES LANG: Kobiela Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------
DIANNA KOBIELA, on behalf of herself, and all other plaintiffs
similarly situated, known and unknown, Plaintiff, v. JONES LANG
LASALLE AMERICAS, INC. Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-03006 (N.D.
Ill., May 3, 2019) is an action brought under the Fair Labor
Standards Act ("FLSA"), the Illinois Minimum Wage Law, and the
Chicago Minimum Wage Ordinance ("CMWO") of the Municipal Code of
Chicago.

The complaint alleges that Plaintiff, and members of the Plaintiff
Class, worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek without pay for
all hours worked over 40 at a rate of time and one-half their
regular hourly rate of pay, pursuant to the requirements of the
federal and state statutes herein relied upon. The Defendant has,
both in the past and present, willfully employed members of the
Plaintiff Class, including the named Plaintiff, and required
employees to work in excess of 40 hours in a workweek without pay
for such hours in order to complete necessary deadlines given by
management and perform other mandatory job duties as assigned by
Defendant, says the complaint.

Plaintiff, DIANNA KOBIELA is a former employee who performed
general bookkeeping duties from approximately July 2017 to December
2018.

JONES LANG LASALLE AMERICAS, INC. provides commercial real estate
acquisition, investment and management services to clients.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     John William Billhorn, Esq.
     BILLHORN LAW FIRM
     53 West Jackson Blvd., Suite 401
     Chicago, IL 60604
     Phone: (312) 853-1450


KINDRED HEALTHCARE: Kirby Suit Removed to C.D. California
---------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned MICHAEL KIRBY, LAURA KINGSTON, KEOSHA GATES,
MARTHA PARRA individually, and on behalf of other members of the
general public similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. KINDRED
HEALTHCARE OPERATING, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company;
KND 52, L.L.C, a Delaware limited liability company; KND 55 L.L.C.,
a Delaware limited liability company; THC-ORANGE COUNTY, L.L.C., a
California limited liability company; Bayberry Care Center, L.L.C.,
a Delaware limited liability company; and DOES 1 through 10,
inclusive, Defendants, Case No. CIVDS1708958 was removed from the
Superior Court of the State of California, County of San Bernardino
to the United States District Court for the Central District of
California on May 3, 2019, and assigned Case No. 5:19-cv-00833.

The Complaint asserted the following causes of action on behalf of
Plaintiff Kirby and the putative class against all defendants,
including Kindred: (1) Failure to Pay Overtime Wages; (2) Failure
to Pay Minimum Wages; (3) Failure to Provide Meal Periods; (4)
Failure to Provide Rest Periods; (5) Non-Compliant Wage Statements
and Failure to Maintain Payroll Records; (6) Failure to Timely Pay
Wages at Termination; (7) Failure to Compensate for Split Shifts;
(8) Failure to Provide Reporting Time Pay; (9) Failure to Reimburse
Business Expenses; (10) Unlawful Business Practices; and (11)
Unfair Business Practices.[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

     ELIZABETH STAGGS WILSON, ESQ.
     JAMES PAYER, ESQ.
     LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
     633 West 5th Street, 63rd Floor
     Los Angeles, CA 90071
     Phone: 213.443.4300
     Fax: 213.443.4299
     Email: estaggs-wilson@littler.com
            jpayer@littler.com

          - and -

     MAGGY M. ATHANASIOUS, ESQ.
     JYOTI MITTAL, ESQ.
     LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.
     2049 Century Park East, 5th Floor
     Los Angeles, CA 90067.3107
     Phone: 310.553.0308
     Fax: 310.553.5583
     Email: mathanasious@littler.com
            jmittal@littler.com


KINGDOM HEALTH MINISTRIES: Faces Pascal Suit over Unsolicited Calls
-------------------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against Kingdom Health
Ministries, LLC and OneShare Health, LLC for violations of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act. The case is captioned BETH
PASCAL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated
Plaintiff, v. KINGDOM HEALTH MINISTRIES, LLC, a Texas limited
liability company, ONESHARE HEALTH, LLC, a Virginia limited
liability company, Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-02148 (N.D. Cal.,
April 20, 2019).

Plaintiff Beth Pascal accuses the Defendant for engaging in illegal
practice of making unauthorized calls that play prerecorded voice
messages to the cellular telephones of consumers nationwide.
Defendants also failed to obtain consent from Plaintiff before
bombarding their cell phones with these illegal voice recordings.

Kingdom Health Ministries, LLC is a corporation organizing and
existing under the laws of the State of Texas with its principal
place of business at 404 Spring Creek Drive in Waxahachie, Texas.
OneShare Health, LLC is a corporation organizing and existing under
the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia with its principal place
of business at 3701 Regent Blvd. Suite 150, Irving, Texas. Kingdom
Health and OneShare Health sell health insurance plans. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Mark L. Javitch, Esq.
     MARK L. JAVITCH, ATTORNEY AT LAW
     210 S Ellsworth Ave #486
     San Mateo, CA 94401
     Telephone: (402) 301-5544
     Facsimile: (402) 396-7131
     E-mail: javitchm@gmail.com


MANASSEH JORDAN: Waterman Suit Asserts TCPA Violation
-----------------------------------------------------
JOHN WATERMAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. MANASSEH JORDAN MINISTRIES and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive, and each of them, Defendants, Case No.
3:19-cv-02481 (C.D. Cal., May 7, 2019) seeks damages and any other
available legal or equitable remedies resulting from the illegal
actions of Defendant, in negligently, knowingly, and/or willfully
contacting Plaintiff on Plaintiff's cellular telephone in violation
of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA"), thereby invading
Plaintiff' privacy.

Plaintiff is not a customer of Defendant's services and has never
provided any personal information, including his cellular telephone
numbers, to Defendant for any purpose whatsoever. In addition,
Plaintiff told Defendant at least once to stop contacting them and
Plaintiff has been registered on the Do-Not-Call Registry for at
least 30 days prior to Defendant contacting him. Accordingly,
Defendant never received Plaintiff' "prior express consent" to
receive calls using an automatic telephone dialing system or an
artificial or prerecorded voice on his cellular telephone, says the
complaint.

Plaintiff, JOHN WATERMAN is a natural person residing in Petaluma,
California.

MANASSEH JORDAN MINISTRIES is a Christian religious
organization.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Todd M. Friedman, Esq.
     Adrian R. Bacon, Esq.
     Law Offices of Todd M. Friedman, P.C.
     21550 Oxnard St., Suite 780
     Woodland Hills, CA 91367
     Phone: (323) 306-4234
     Fax: (866)633-0228
     Email: tfriedman@toddflaw.com
            abacon@toddflaw.com


MAYAS FOOD: Rodriguez Files FLSA Class Action in E.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Mayas Food Corp. The
case is styled as Jose Antonio Marin Rodriguez, Armando Marin, Juan
Manuel Perez, Marqui Ariel Reyes and Margarito Castro, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Mayas
Food Corp., Mohammed Mayas, Abdo Mayas, Beligh Mahmood Mayas, Noman
Mayas, Fares Mayas and John Does #1-2 jointly and severally,
Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-02347 (E.D. N.Y., April 22, 2019).

The lawsuit arises under Fair Labor Standards Act.

Mayas Food Corp is a foodservice distributor in New Hyde Park, New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs appear PRO SE.




MELLANOX TECHNOLOGIES: Henzel Sues Over Exchange Act Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------
MARC HENZEL, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. MELLANOX TECHNOLOGIES, LTD., IRWIN
FEDERMAN, JON OLSON, GLENDA DORCHAK, AMAL M. JOHNSON, JACK R.
LAZAR, UMESH PADVA, DAVID PERLMUTTER, STEVE SANGHI, EYAL WALDMAN,
and GREGORY L. WATERS, Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-02386-CRB (N.D.
Cal., May 1, 2019) is an action stemming from a proposed
transaction announced on March 11, 2019, pursuant to which Mellanox
Technologies Ltd. will be acquired by NVIDIA International Holdings
Inc., a Delaware corporation ("NVA").

On March 11, 2019, Mellanox's Board of Directors (the "Board" or
"Individual Defendants") caused the Company to enter into an
agreement and plan of merger with NVA. Pursuant to the terms of the
Merger Agreement, NVA will acquire all the issued and outstanding
common shares of Mellanox for $125 per share in cash, representing
a total enterprise value of approximately $6.9 billion. Once
complete, the combination is reportedly expected to be immediately
accretive to NVA's non-GAAP gross margin, non-GAAP earnings per
share, and free cash flow. On April 22, 2019, Defendants filed a
preliminary proxy statement with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "SEC") in connection with the Proposed
Transaction.

The Preliminary Proxy Statement omits material information with
respect to the Proposed Transaction, which renders it false and
misleading, the Plaintiff asserts. Accordingly, Plaintiff alleges
that Defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the
"1934 Act") in connection with the Preliminary Proxy Statement.

Plaintiff is, and has been continuously throughout all times
relevant, the owner of Mellanox common stock.

Mellanox trades on the NASDAQ under the symbol "MLNX" and purports
to be a leading supplier of end-to-end Ethernet and InfiniBand
intelligent interconnect solutions and services for servers,
storage, and hyper-converged infrastructure.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Rosanne L. Mah, Esq.
     LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP
     44 Montgomery Street, Suite 650
     San Francisco, CA 94104
     Phone: (415) 373-1671
     Facsimile: (415) 484-1294

          - and -

     Gregory M. Nespole, Esq.
     LEVI & KORSINSKY LLP
     55 Broadway, 10th Floor
     New York, NY 10006
     Phone: (212) 363-7500
     Facsimile: (212) 363-7171


MENIN HOTELS: Conner Asserts Breach of Disabilities Act
-------------------------------------------------------
Menin Hotels, LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed pursuant
to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled as Mary
Conner, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. Menin Hotels, LLC, Defendant, Case No. 1:19-cv-02692
(N.D. Ill., April 22, 2019).

Menin Hospitality is comprised of a collection of 15 unique Hotel,
Restaurant & Nightlife Venues with award-winning bars & restaurants
from Miami to Chicago.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   C.K. Lee, Esq.
   Lee Litigation Group, PLLC
   73 West Monroe Street
   Chicago, IL 60603
   Tel: (212) 465-1188
   Email: cklee@leelitigation.com


METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT: Luther Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------
SANDRA LUTHER, Plaintiff, v. THE METROPOLITAN GOVERNMENT OF
NASHVILLE AND DAVIDSON COUNTY, Defendant, Case No. 3:19-cv-00366
(M.D. Tenn., May 3, 2019) is a collective action pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") against the Defendants.

Metropolitan Government of Nashville and Davidson County is a local
governmental subdivision of the State of Tennessee. Plaintiff
Sandra Luther is a former full-time, police officer who was
employed by the Metropolitan Nashville Police Department until she
retired in January of 2019.

According to the complaint, at the time she retired from her
employment, the Defendant had not paid Plaintiff an overtime
premium for any of the work she had performed.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     W. Gary Blackburn, Esq.
     Bryant Kroll, Esq.
     213 Fifth Avenue North, Suite 300
     Nashville, TN 37219
     Phone: 615-254-7770
     Fax: 866-895-7272
     Email: gblackburn@wgaryblackburn.com
            bkroll@wgaryblackburn.com


METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION: Self Initiated Files Suit Under ADA
----------------------------------------------------------------
Metropolitan Transportation Authority is facing a class action
lawsuit filed pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The
case is styled as Self Initiated Living Options, Inc. a/k/a Suffolk
Independent Living Organization, a nonprofit organization, Raymond
Harewood, David Rodriguez and Gina Barbara, an individual, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs
v. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, a public benefit
corporation, Patrick J. Foye, in his official capacity as chairman
and chief executive officer of the Metropolitan Transportation
Authority, Long Island Rail Road Company, a public benefit
corporation and Phillip Eng, in his official capacity as president
of the Long Island Rail Road Company, Defendants, Case No.
1:19-cv-03564 (S.D. N.Y., April 23, 2019).

Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Inc. provides subway, bus,
and commuter railroad transportation services to customers with
disabilities in the United States. Its subway and commuter rail
stations provide accessibility for customers with visual, hearing,
and mobility disabilities. The company also operates bridges and
tunnels. Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Inc. was founded in
1965 and is based in New York, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Christina Louise Brandt-Young, Esq.
   Disability Rights Advocates
   655 Third Avenue 14th Floor
   New York, NY 10017
   Tel: (212) 644-8644
   Fax: (212) 644-8636
   Email: cbrandt-young@dralegal.org




MIDLAND CREDIT: Korn Asserts Breach of FDCPA in New York
--------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Midland Credit
Management, Inc. The case is styled as Rachel Korn, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Midland Credit Management, Inc., Midland Funding LLC and John Does
1-25, Defendants, Case No. 7:19-cv-03439 (S.D. N.Y., April 18,
2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Midland Credit Management, Inc., a licensed debt collector, assists
customers in resolving past-due financial obligations through
various education and payment plans. The company was founded in
1953 and is based in San Diego, California. Midland Credit
Management, Inc. operates as a subsidiary of Encore Capital Group,
Inc.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Raphael Deutsch, Esq.
   Stein Saks PLLC
   285 Passaic st
   Hackensack, NJ 07601
   Tel: (347) 668-9326
   Email: rdeutsch@steinsakslegal.com



NEW YORK: Female Teachers Bring Suit for Harassment, Intimidation
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CHRISTINE REAVES and MAYA FRISCIC GEIGER, on behalf of themselves
and all other similarly situated persons, Plaintiffs v. THE NEW
YORK CITY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION and P.S. 60 QUEENS PRINCIPAL
FRANK DESARIO, Defendants, Case No. 707928/2019 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.,
Queens Cty., May 6, 2019) seeks damages and equitable relief for
the harm she has suffered, under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964, the New York State Human Rights Law ("State HRL"), the New
York City Human Rights Law ("City HRL"), and for negligence,
negligent supervision and intentional infliction of emotional
distress.

DOE is a Department of the City of New York ("the City") that
operates the public school system in Queens and throughout the
City.

Plaintiffs are female elementary school teachers who were employed
by DOE and have spent their entire careers dedicated to the
education, care and well-being of young children. But even as Ms.
Reaves and Ms. Friscic Geiger have nurtured and protected their
young students, they have not themselves been nurtured or
protected. Instead, Ms. Reaves and Ms. Friscic-Geiger faced the
impossible task of educating and caring for children while fending
off unrelenting gender-based harassment, intimidation, and
predatory abuse from the person tasked with fostering a safe
learning and teaching environment at P.S. 60, their Principal,
Frank DeSario, asserts the complaint.

Mr. DeSario, the school's self-proclaimed "CEO," has created a
climate of fear and intimidation for women, notes the complaint. He
singles out and targets female staff, like Ms. Reaves and Ms.
Friscic-Geiger, for humiliation, abuse, bullying and harassment. He
also has subjected Ms. Friscic-Geiger to sexual harassment in the
form of unwanted and inappropriate physical contact, comments about
her physical appearance and romantic overtures.

The New York City Department of Education ("DOE") is aware of Mr.
DeSario's conduct and the harm it has caused Ms. Reaves, but has
done nothing about it. On information and belief, DOE has known or
should have known of Mr. DeSario's abusive and unlawful treatment
of other women at for some time, but has ignored and otherwise
refused to address it. Instead of taking action to prevent,
remediate or otherwise address Mr. DeSario's misconduct and protect
its female employees, DOE has protected Mr. DeSario, says the
complaint.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Patrick J. Walsh, Esq.
     Robert B. Stulberg, Esq.
     Broach & Stulberg, LLP
     One Penn Plaza, Suite 2601
     New York, NY 10119
     Phone: (212) 268-1000
     Email: pwalsh@brostul.com


NOKIA CORPORATION: Max Hits Share Price Drop Ff. Acatel Merger
--------------------------------------------------------------
J. PHILLIP MAX, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. NOKIA CORPORATION, RAJEEV SURI, KRISTIAN
PULLOLA, and TIMO IHAMUOTILA, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-03982
(S.D. N.Y., May 3, 2019) is a federal securities class action on
behalf of a class consisting of all persons other than Defendants
who purchased or otherwise acquired Nokia's securities between
April 15, 2015 through March 21, 2019, both dates inclusive (the
"Class Period"), seeking to recover damages caused by Defendants'
violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue remedies
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and
Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, against the Company and certain
of its top officials.

On April 15, 2015, Nokia announced plans to purchase Alcatel-Lucent
S.A. ("Alcatel"), a French global telecommunications equipment
company. Nokia finalized the acquisition of Alcatel on November 2,
2016. On March 21, 2019, Nokia filed its Annual Report on Form 20-F
with the SEC, announcing the Company's financial and operating
results for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2018 (the "2018
20-F"), wherein the Company disclosed that it had "been made aware
of certain practices relating to compliance issues" at Alcatel that
raised concerns. Following this disclosure, the price of Nokia's
American depositary receipts ("ADRs") fell $0.38 per share, or
6.07%, to close at $5.88 per share on March 22, 2019. On March 22,
2019, after market hours, Nokia issued a press release responding
to the "market rumors" surrounding the March 21, 2019 disclosure
(the "March 2019 Press Release"). Specifically, the March 2019
Press Release attempted to assuage investor fears regarding these
issues, stating that the "investigation is not expected to have a
material impact on Nokia." Despite Nokia's attempt to soothe
investors in the March 2019 Press Release, the price of Nokia ADRs
continued to decline over the next few trading days, falling an
additional $0.19 per share from its close price on March 22, 2019,
or approximately 3.23%, to close at $5.69 per share on March 28,
2019.

According to the complaint, throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business, operational and compliance policies.
Specifically, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (i) Alcatel maintained insufficient
internal controls and was materially non-compliant in its business
practices; (ii) Nokia had failed to conduct adequate due diligence
into Alcatel prior to its acquisition; (iii) subsequent to the
completion of Nokia's acquisition of Alcatel, the Company
maintained insufficient internal controls over the integration of
Alcatel's businesses; (iv) as a result of the foregoing, at all
relevant times, Nokia was at risk of serious criminal and civil
penalties; and (v) as a result, the Company'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 Nokia securities at artificially inflated prices
during the Class Period.

Nokia engages in the network and technology businesses worldwide.
Among other things, Nokia provides hardware, software, and services
for telecommunications operators, enterprises, and related
markets/verticals, including public safety and Internet of Things
("IoT").[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
     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


NOKIA: Tom Sues over Nondisclosure of Alcatel's Compliance Issues
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against Nokia Corporation,
Rajeev Suri, and Kristian Pullola for alleged violations of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The case is captioned TANNER TOM,
Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Plaintiff, v. NOKIA CORPORATION, RAJEEV SURI, and KRISTIAN PULLOLA,
Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-03509 (S.D.N.Y., April 19, 2019).
Plaintiff Tanner Tom brings this securities class action on behalf
of persons and entities that purchased or otherwise acquired Nokia
securities between Oct. 25, 2018 and March 21, 2019, seeking to
pursue remedies under the federal securities laws.

In November 2016, Nokia acquired Alcatel-Lucent S.A and they have
been operating as a combined company since January 2016. On March
21, 2019, the Nokia revealed that certain compliance issues had
existed at the former Alcatel-Lucent business. On this news, the
Nokia's share price fell $0.38, or over 6 percent, to close at
$5.88 per share on March 22, 2019, on unusually heavy trading
volume.

In this complaint, Plaintiff Tom alleges that Defendants made
materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as failed to
disclose material adverse facts about the Nokia's business,
operations, and prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to
disclose to investors: that Alcatel-Lucent had certain compliance
issues; that, as a result, the Nokia would be subject to regulatory
scrutiny; that, as a result, the Nokia was reasonably likely to
face penalties and fines; and that, as a result of the foregoing,
Defendants' positive statements about the Nokia's business,
operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked
a reasonable basis.

Headquartered in Espoo Finland, Nokia is a multinational network
and technology company that provides hardware, software, and
services for telecommunications operators and enterprises and
provides fixed networking solutions. Headquartered in
Boulogne-Billancourt, France, Alcatel-Lucent is a company that
offers fixed, IP, optical applications and analytics technologies.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq.
     GLANCY PRONGAY & MURRAY LLP
     230 Park Ave., Suite 530
     New York, NY 10169
     Telephone: (212) 682-5340
     Facsimile: (212) 884-0988
     E-mail: 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
     Telephone: (310) 201-9150
     Facsimile: (310) 201-9160


NORDSTROM: Faces Steele Suit over Data Breach
---------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against Nordstrom, Inc. for
a data breach incident wherein a Nordstrom contract worker
improperly handled the personally identifiable information of the
Plaintiff and the class members. The case is captioned AUDREY
STEELE, individually, and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, vs. NORDSTROM, INC.; and DOES 1 through 10,
Defendants, Case No. 8:19-cv-00728 (C.D. Cal., April 19, 2019).
Plaintiff Audrey Steele alleges that the Defendant has improper
made the information available to the public and unauthorized third
parties. The information included names, Social Security numbers,
payment card information, checking account and routing numbers,
insurance provider information, salary information, dates of birth,
addresses, and phone numbers.

Nordstrom, Inc. is incorporated in Washington, with its
headquarters and principal place of business located at 1700
Seventh Ave, Seattle, WA. Nordstrom is a department store chain
that operates approximately 380 stores in approximately 40 states
and is believed to have over 75,000 current and former employees.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Brian S. Kabateck, Esq.
     Christopher B. Noyes, Esq.
     Joana Fang, Esq.
     Stephanie E. Charlin, Esq.
     KABATECK LLP
     633 W. Fifth Street, Suite 3200
     Los Angeles, CA 90071
     Telephone: (213) 217-5000
     Facsimile: (213) 217-5010
     E-mail: bsk@kbklawyers.com
             cn@kbklawyers.com
             jf@kbklawyers.com
             sc@kbklawyers.com


OCEAN GREEN: Honeywell Files ADA Suit in S.D. Florida
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against OCEAN GREEN
INVESTMENTS LLC. The case is styled as Cheri Honeywell, Lanie
Quarterman, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. OCEAN GREEN INVESTMENTS LLC, a Florida
limited liability company, Defendant, Case No. 0:19-cv-61158-XXXX
(S.D. Fla., May 7, 2019).

The Plaintiff filed the case under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

Ocean Green a real estate investment and consulting firm.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Jessica Lynn Kerr, Esq.
     Jessica L.Kerr, P.A. dba The Advocacy Group
     200 S.E. 6th Street, Suite 504
     Fort Lauderdale, FL 33301
     Phone: (954) 282-1858
     Fax: (844) 786-3694
     Email: service@advocacypa.com


PEPSICO INC: Riddle Suit Transferred to S.D. New York
-----------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit captioned KEVIN AND VALERIE RIDDLE, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. PEPSICO, INC., Case No.
8:19-cv-00250, was transferred on April 24, 2019, from the U.S.
District Court for the Middle District of Florida to the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York (White
Plains).

The Southern District of New York Clerk assigned Case No.
7:19-cv-03634-VB to the proceeding.

On January 9, 2019, Plaintiffs Kevin and Valerie Riddle commenced
this lawsuit against PEPSICO by filing a complaint in the State
Court of Hillsborough County, Florida.  The lawsuit is recorded on
that court's docket as Case No. 2019-CA-000296.  In their
Complaint, the Plaintiffs allege that PEPSICO violated the
Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 ("COBRA")
and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA")
because it failed to provide its health plan participants and
beneficiaries with legally sufficient required notices of their
right to continued health care coverage under COBRA and ERISA.

On January 30, 2019, the Defendant removed the lawsuit to the
Middle District of Florida.[BN]

Plaintiff Kevin Riddle and Valerie Riddle, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated, are represented by:

          Brandon J. Hill, Esq.
          Luis A. Cabassa, Esq.
          WENZEL FENTON CABASSA, PA
          1110 N Florida Ave., Suite 300
          Tampa, FL 33602-3343
          Telephone: (813) 224-0431
          Facsimile: (813) 229-8712
          E-mail: bhill@wfclaw.com
                  lcabassa@wfclaw.com

Defendant Pepsico Inc. is represented by:

          Alexandre S. Drummond, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW, LLP
          1075 Peachtree St. NE, Suite 2500
          Atlanta, GA 30309-3962
          Telephone: (404) 885-1500
          Facsimile: (404) 892-7056
          E-mail: adrummond@seyfarth.com


PET MEDS: Fischler ADA Suit Transferred From S.D. to E.D. New York
------------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit titled Fischler v. Pet Meds Inc., Case No.
1:19-cv-00784, was transferred on April 24, 2019, from the U.S.
District Court for the Southern District of New York to the U.S.
District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Brooklyn).

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-02391-LDH-JO to
the proceeding.

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violations of the Americans
with Disabilities Act.[BN]

Plaintiff Brian Fischler, Individually and on behalf of all other
persons similarly situated, is represented by:

          Douglas Brian Lipsky, Esq.
          LIPSKY LOWE LLP
          630 Third Avenue, Fifth Floor
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 392-4772
          Facsimile: (212) 444-1030
          E-mail: doug@lipskylowe.com


PHELAN HALLINAN: Hafner Sues Over Unfair Debt Collection
--------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT HAFNER, and KRISTINA HAFNER, both individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. PHELAN, HALLINAN,
DIAMOND & JONES, LLP, Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-01938-MMB (E.D.
Pa., May 3, 2019) is an action for actual and statutory damages
over Defendant's violations of the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act ("FDCPA") which prohibits debt collectors from engaging in
abusive, deceptive, and unfair practices.

In connection with its attempt to collect a debt on behalf of a
mortgagee client which held a mortgage on Plaintiffs' property,
Defendant, on January 18, 2019--after having obtained a judgment in
foreclosure--filed and served a complaint in ejectment against
Plaintiffs in the Court of Common Pleas of Luzerne County.

Notices which were served and mailed, respectively, by Defendant to
Plaintiffs to collect the debt, were false, misleading, deceptive,
unfair, erroneous and in violation of rules of civil procedure as
the notices failed to provide the correct address and phone number
for the Plaintiffs to contact regarding obtaining information about
hiring a lawyer, asserts the complaint. Despite this, the Defendant
was able to subsequently obtain a default judgment against
Plaintiffs in the ejectment action, the complaint relates.

Plaintiffs, Robert Hafner and Kristina Hafner, are "consumers" and
are natural persons.

Defendant is a law firm and "debt collector", whose primary
services involve collecting debts.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Joseph M. Adams, Esq.
     LAW OFFICE OF JOSEPH M. ADAMS
     200 Highpoint Drive, Suite 21 lA
     Chalfont, PA 18914
     Phone: 215-996-9977
     Email: josephmadamsesq@verizon.net

          - and -

     Marc E. Dann, Esq.
     Brian D. Flick, Esq.
     Dannlaw
     P.O. Box 6031040
     Cleveland, OH 44103
     Phone: 216-373-0539
     Fax: 216-373-0536
     Email: notices@dannlaw.com


PIONEER CREDIT: Attaway Files FLSA Class Suit in W.D. Arkansas
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pioneer Credit
Recovery, Inc. The case is styled as Thomas Attaway, Joshua Taylor
and Jorge Rodriguez, each individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc.,
Devin Dew, Randy Pharr and Billy Pharr, Defendants, Case No.
1:19-cv-01015-SOH (W.D. Ark., April 22, 2019).

The lawsuit arises under Fair Labor Standards Act.

Pioneer Credit Recovery is in the business of credit recovery on
defaulted debt specializing in government collections.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Josh Sanford, Esq.
   Sanford Law Firm PLLC
   One Financial Center
   650 South Shackleford, Suite 411
   Little Rock, AR 72211
   Tel: (501) 221-0088
   Fax: (888) 787-2040
   Email: josh@sanfordlawfirm.com


PIONEER CREDIT: Calderon Suit Alleges FDPCA Violation
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Pioneer Credit
Recovery, Inc. The case is styled as Kathy Calderon, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiff v.
Pioneer Credit Recovery, Inc., Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-02279
(E.D. N.Y., April 18, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Pioneer Credit Recovery is a national leader in credit recovery on
defaulted debt specializing in government collections.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Craig B. Sanders, Esq.
   Barshay Sanders, PLLC
   100 Garden City Plaza, Suite 500
   Garden City, NY 11530
   Tel: (516) 203-7600
   Fax: (516) 281-7601
   Email: csanders@barshaysanders.com


PORTFOLIO RECOVERY: Lowenbein Alleges FDCPA Violation
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Portfolio Recovery
Associates, L.L.C. The case is styled as Shmuel Lowenbein, on
behalf of himself and all other similarly situated consumers,
Plaintiff v. Portfolio Recovery Associates, L.L.C., Defendant, Case
No. 1:19-cv-02426 (E.D. N.Y., April 25, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, also known as Anchor
Receivables Management, manages past-due accounts. It serves
customers through account representatives. The company was
incorporated in 1996 and is based in Norfolk, Virginia. Portfolio
Recovery Associates, LLC operates as a subsidiary of PRA Group,
Inc.[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




REALOGY FRANCHISE: Fenley Files Labor Class Suit in California
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Realogy Franchise
Group LLC. The case is styled as Elizabeth Fenley, individually,
and on behalf all persons similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Realogy
Franchise Group LLC and Sotheby's International Realty, Inc. and
Wish Properties, Inc., Defendants, Case No. BCV-19-101151 (Cal.
Super. Ct., Kern Cty., April 25, 2019).

The nature of suit stated as Other Employment - Civil Unlimited.

Realogy Franchise Group LLC operates as a franchisor of residential
and commercial real estate brokerage offices in the United States
and internationally.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Joshua David Buck, Esq.
   Thierman Buck LLP
   7287 Lakeside Drive
   Reno, NV 89511
   Tel: (775) 284-1500
   Fax: (775) 284-1506
   Email: josh@thiermanbuck.com



RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT: Gift Card Expiry Violates EFTA, Newell Says
-------------------------------------------------------------------
JOUREY NEWELL and FELIPE MACHADO, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. RECREATIONAL EQUIPMENT,
INC., a Washington company, Defendant, Case No. 2:19-cv-00662 (W.D.
Wash., May 3, 2019) seeks to stop REI from violating the Electronic
Funds Transfer Act (the "EFTA"), and Washington's unfair business
practices law, by issuing gift cards that expired earlier than 5
years after the date on which the gift cards were issued or funds
were last loaded, and to otherwise obtain injunctive and monetary
relief for all persons injured by REI's conduct.

In 2009, Congress passed the Credit Card Accountability,
Responsibility and Disclosure Act (the "CARD Act"), amending and
extending the EFTA to further protect consumers in connection with
their purchase of gift cards and other prepaid cards. Importantly,
the EFTA, as amended by the CARD Act, restricts expiration dates on
gift cards for the benefit of consumers, making it a violation to
issue a gift card with an expiration date earlier than 5 years
after the date on which the gift card was issued, or the date on
which card funds were last loaded to the gift card.

The complaint asserts that the Defendant's gift cards expire
earlier than 5 years after the date on which the gift cards are
issued, or the date on which funds are last loaded to the gift
cards. In fact, every year, on a single day in January, every
member gift card issued 2 years prior expires. In 2015, Plaintiffs
purchased REI goods, entitling him to a dividend. In 2016, REI
issued Plaintiffs a dividend in the form of a gift card. In early
2018, Plaintiffs' gift cards expired. As a result of the expiration
of the gift card, Plaintiffs were deprived of the unused balance on
the gift card, says the complaint.

Plaintiffs are REI members who paid a fee to become members.

REI is a sporting goods cooperative owned by its members.
Membership in REI is marketed to the general public for a fee.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

     Samuel J. Strauss, Esq.
     TURKE & STRAUSS LLP
     936 North 34th Street, Suite 300
     Seattle, WA 98103-8869
     Phone: (608) 237-1775
     Facsimile: (608) 509-4423
     Email: sam@turkestrauss.com


RICHMOND IHOP: Cooray Suit Alleges FLSA Violations
--------------------------------------------------
K.A. Dilini N. Cooray, individually and in behalf of all other
persons similarly situated v. Richmond IHOP LLC and Jhong Uhk Kim,
Case No. 1:19-cv-01563 (E.D. N.Y., March 19, 2019), is brought
against the Defendant for violations of the Fair Labor Standards
Act and the Minimum Wage Act.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendant is liable for unpaid or
underpaid minimum wages, overtime compensation, and spread-of-hours
wages. Defendant also failed to reimburse purchased uniform cost
and unlawfully deducted wages, in violation FLSA, MWA and WTPA.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants as a cashier/hostess,
from August 16, 2017 to June 23, 2018.

The Defendants' business is a full-service restaurant doing
business as IHOP and located at 935 Richmond Avenue Staten Island,
NY 10314. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

       Brandon D. Sherr, Esq.
       Justin A. Zeller, Esq.
       LAW OFFICE OF JUSTIN A. ZELLER, P.C.
       277 Broadway, Suite 408
       New York, NY 10007-2036
       Tel: (212) 229-2249
       Fax: (212) 229-2246
       E-mail: bsherr@zellerlegal.com
               jazeller@zellerlegal.com


RS CLARK: Chunara Disputes 40% Debt Collection Fee
--------------------------------------------------
Ameen Chunara, Plaintiff, v. RS Clark and Associates, Inc., and
City Limits Apartments, Defendants, Case No. 3:19-cv-01072-S (N.D.
Tex., May 3, 2019) is a class action complaint for actual and
statutory damages, costs, and attorney's fees pursuant to the Fair
Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA), and for injunctive relief,
actual damages, and attorney's fees and costs pursuant to the Texas
Debt Collection Act ("TDCA").

In February 2019, Defendant City alleged that Plaintiff owed a move
out balance of $515.99. Defendant City then contracted Defendant
RSC to collect the alleged consumer debt for a residential
apartment lease. The Defendant RSC then caused to be sent at least
2 collection letters to Plaintiff alleging that Plaintiff owed a
balance of $722.39. The Defendant RSC added a 40% collection fee to
the balance allegedly owed by the Plaintiff.

The complaint asserts that the addition of the 40% charge or fee is
an attempt by the Defendants to collect an amount including any
interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the principal
obligation that is not expressly authorized by any agreement or
permitted by law. The addition of the 40% charge or fee is a false
representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect
any debt, says the complaint.

Plaintiff is a natural person and is allegedly obligated to pay a
debt to Defendants.

Defendant RSC is a collection agency headquartered in Dallas,
TX.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Shawn Jaffer, Esq.
     SHAWN JAFFER LAW FIRM PLLC
     9300 John Hickman Pkwy., Suite 1204
     Frisco, TX 75035
     Phone: (214) 210-9910
     Fax: (214) 594-6100
     Email: Shawn@jafflaw.com


SETTELE DENTAL: Goldstein Seeks Unpaid Overtime Wages Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------------
HARRY GOLDSTEIN, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. SETTELE DENTAL LAB LLC, and SIEGFRIED J.
SETTELE, Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-01769-MHW-CMV (S.D. Ohio, May
3, 2019) is a case challenging the policies and practices of
Defendants that violate the Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA").

Plaintiff was a non-exempt employee of Defendants who was paid on
an hourly basis and not paid overtime premium for all hours worked
in excess of 40 in one or more workweeks. Plaintiff frequently
worked more than 40 hours in a single workweek entitling him to
overtime compensation under the FLSA, says the complaint.

Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a delivery driver.

Settele Dental Lab's principal place of business is located at 4674
Indianola Avenue, Columbus, OH 43214.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Christopher J. Lalak, Esq.
     Nilges Draher LLC
     614 W. Superior Ave., Suite 1148
     Cleveland, OH 44113
     Phone: 216.230.2955
     Email: clalak@ohlaborlaw.com

          - and -

     Hans A. Nilges, Esq.
     Nilges Draher LLC
     7266 Portage Street, N.W., Suite D
     Massillon, OH 44646
     Phone: 330.470.4428
     Email: hans@ohlaborlaw.com


SIGNAPAY LTD: Fabricant Sues Over TCPA Violation
------------------------------------------------
TERRY FABRICANT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. SIGNAPAY, LTD. and JOHN DOE CORPORATION
D/B/A PAYLORATE.COM, Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-03953 (C.D. Cal.,
May 6, 2019) is an action against Defendants for violations of the
Telephone Consumer Protection Act ("TCPA").

The Defendants do business in California and throughout the United
States, including sending applications to potential customers as it
did with the Plaintiff through PayLowRate.com. However, SignaPay's
contact with the potential new customers is limited, and the
telemarketing is conducted by third parties, such as PayLoRate.com.
The Defendants' strategy for generating new customers involves the
use of an automatic telephone dialing system ("ATDS") to solicit
business. The Defendants uses ATDSs that have the capacity to store
or produce telephone numbers to be called. Defendants' ATDSs
include predictive dialers. Recipients of these calls, including
Plaintiff, did not consent to receive them, says the complaint.

Plaintiff Terry Fabricant is an individual residing in California,
in this District.

SignaPay is a company that supports businesses accepting electronic
payments.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     WILLIAM A. PERCY, ESQ.
     SCHLICHTER & SHONACK, LLP
     2381 Rosecrans Avenue, Suite 326
     El Segundo, CA 90245
     Phone: (310) 643-0111
     Fax: (310) 643-1638


SONO CHICAGO LLC: Knowles Alleges Violation under ADA in Illinois
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Sono Chicago LLC is facing a class action lawsuit filed
pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case is styled
as Carlton Knowles, on behalf of himself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. The Sono Chicago LLC, Defendant, Case No.
1:19-cv-02688 (N.D. Ill., April 22, 2019).

The Sono Chicago LLC is a newly built boutique bed and breakfast
located in the heart of the historic Old Town District of
Chicago.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   C.K. Lee, Esq.
   Lee Litigation Group, PLLC
   73 West Monroe Street
   Chicago, IL 60603
   Tel: (212) 465-1188
   Email: cklee@leelitigation.com


SPARK THERAPEUTICS: Kent Seeks to Halt Merger Deal With Roche
-------------------------------------------------------------
The lawsuit, Michael Kent, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Spark Therapeutics, Inc., Steven
M. Altschuler, Lars Ekman, Katherine A. High, Jeffery D. Marrazzo,
Anand Mehra, Vin Milano, Robert J. Perez, Elliot Sigal, Lota Zoth,
Roche Holdings, Inc. and 022019 Merger Subsidiary Inc., Defendants,
Case No. 19-cv-00485 (D. Del., March 11, 2019), seeks to enjoin
defendants and all persons acting in concert with them from
proceeding with, consummating or closing the proposed sale of Spark
Therapeutics, Inc. to Roche Holdings, Inc. and 022019 Merger
Subsidiary, Inc.

Pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement, all of Spark's
outstanding common stock will be paid for $114.50 per share in
cash.

Spark is a fully integrated, commercial company that discovers,
develops, and delivers gene therapies for genetic diseases,
including blindness, haemophilia, lysosomal storage disorders and
neurodegenerative diseases.

Mr. Kent claims that the solicitation statement failed to disclose
all line items used to calculate unlevered free cash flow and a
reconciliation of all non-GAAP to GAAP metrics for each set of
projections including all line items used to calculate unlevered
free cash flow, the individual inputs and assumptions underlying
the discount rates, the implied terminal value of the company, the
value of tax savings from usage of net operating losses and future
losses and the number of fully-diluted outstanding Company shares.
Said statement also omitted material information regarding
potential conflicts of interest of the Company's financial advisor,
Cowen and Company, LLC as it performed past services for the
parties to the merger or their affiliates, as well as the timing
and nature of such services and the amount of compensation Cowen
received for such services. [BN]

Plaintiff is represented by:

      Brian D. Long, Esq.
      Gina M. Serra, Esq.
      RIGRODSKY & LONG, P.A.
      300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1220
      Wilmington, DE 19801
      Tel: (302) 295-5310
      Facsimile: (302) 654-7530
      Email: bdl@rl-legal.com
             gms@rl-legal.com

             - and -

      Richard A. Maniskas, Esq.
      RM LAW, P.C.
      1055 Westlakes Dr., Ste. 3112
      Berwyn, PA 19312
      Tel: (484) 324-6800
      Email: rm@maniskas.com


TCF FINANCIAL: Nelson Seeks More Info re TCF-Chemical Merger Deal
-----------------------------------------------------------------
EDWARD NELSON, Individually And On Behalf Of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. TCF FINANCIAL CORPORATION, CRAIG R. DAHL,
PETER BELL, WILLIAM F. BIEBER, THEODORE J. BIGOS, KAREN L.
GRANDSTAND, GEORGE G. JOHNSON, RICHARD H. KING, VANCE K. OPPERMAN,
ROBERT J. SIT, JULIE H. SULLIVAN, BARRY N. WINSLOW, and THERESA M.
H. WISE, Defendants, Case No. 2019-0335- (Chancery Ct. Del., May 6,
2019) is a class action complaint against the defendants to remedy
their misconduct in connection with the merger between TCF and the
proposed acquisition of the Company by Chemical Financial
Corporation ("Chemical").

On January 27, 2019, TCF and Chemical issued a press release
announcing that the two entities had entered into a definitive
agreement (the "Merger Agreement"), by which Chemical will acquire
all of the outstanding shares of the Company in an all-stock
transaction (the "Proposed Transaction"). Under the terms of the
Merger Agreement, each outstanding share of TCF common stock will
be converted into the right to receive 0.5081 shares of Chemical
common stock (the "Merger Consideration").

In connection with the Proposed Transaction, on March 29, 2019,
defendants issued materially incomplete and misleading disclosures
in a Form S-4 Registration Statement (the "Registration Statement")
filed with the SEC, notes the complaint. Specifically, the
Registration Statement is materially deficient and misleading
because, inter alia, it omits material information concerning the
concerning: (i) financial projections for TCF; (ii) the valuation
analyses performed by TCF's financial advisor, J.P. Morgan
Securities LLC ("J.P. Morgan"), in support of its fairness opinion;
and (iii) the potential conflict of interest J.P. Morgan faced as a
result of the prior work its performed for TCF. Without all
material information, TCF's stockholders cannot make an informed
decision regarding how to vote their shares in the upcoming
shareholder vote, the complaint says.

On May 2, 2019, TCF filed an Amended Registration Statement (the
"Amended Registration Statement") with the SEC in connection with
the Proposed Transaction that failed to address the materially
deficient and misleading information contained within the
Registration Statement and notified TCF stockholders that the TCF
special meeting would be held on June 7, 2019 (the "Shareholder
Vote").  

Plaintiff seeks to enjoin the Proposed Transaction unless and/or
until Defendants cure their breaches of fiduciary duty, and/or
recover damages resulting from Defendants' violations of their
fiduciary duties, asserts the complaint.

Plaintiff is, and has been at all relevant times, the owner of
shares of TCF common stock.

TCF Financial Corporation is a national bank holding company,
headquartered in Wayzata, Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Ryan M. Ernst, Esq.
     O'KELLY ERNST & JOYCE, LLC
     901 N. Market St., Suite 1000
     Wilmington, DE 19801
     Phone: (302) 778-4000
     Facsimile: (302) 295-2873
     Email: rernst@oelegal.com

          - and -

     Donald J. Enright, Esq.
     Elizabeth K. Tripodi, Esq.
     LEVI & KORSINSKY, LLP
     1101 30th Street, N.W., Suite 115
     Washington, DC 20007
     Phone: (202) 524-4290


TIER REIT: Franchi Files Securities Class Suit Over Cousins Merger
------------------------------------------------------------------
ADAM FRANCHI, Individually and On Behalf of All Others Similarly
Situated, Plaintiff, v. TIER REIT, INC., RICHARD I. GILCHRIST,
SCOTT W. FORDHAM, CHRISTIE KELLY, R. KENT GRIFFIN, JR., DENNIS J.
MARTIN, GREGORY J. WHYTE, COUSINS PROPERTIES INCORPORATED, MURPHY
SUBSIDIARY HOLDINGS CORPORATION, Defendants, Case No.
1:19-cv-01310-CCB (S.D. N.Y., May 3, 2019) is an actions stemming
from a proposed transaction announced on March 25, 2019 (the
"Proposed Transaction"), pursuant to which TIER REIT, Inc. ("TIER"
or the "Company") will be acquired by Cousins Properties
Incorporated ("Parent") and Murphy Subsidiary Holdings Corporation
("Merger Sub," and collectively with Parent, "Cousins").

On March 25, 2019, TIER's Board of Directors (the "Board" or
"Individual Defendants") caused the Company to enter into an
agreement and plan of merger (the "Merger Agreement") with Cousins.
Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, TIER stockholders
will receive 2.98 shares of Parent common stock for each share of
TIER common stock they own. On April 19, 2019, defendants filed a
Form S-4 Registration Statement (the "Registration Statement") with
the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") in
connection with the Proposed Transaction.

The complaint asserts that the Registration Statement omits
material information with respect to the Proposed Transaction,
which renders the Registration Statement false and misleading.
Accordingly, the Defendants violated the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (the "1934 Act") in connection with the Registration
Statement, says the complaint.

Plaintiff is, and has been continuously throughout all times
relevant hereto, the owner of TIER common stock.

TIER is a publicly traded, self-managed real estate investment
trust focused on owning quality, well-managed commercial office
properties in dynamic markets throughout the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Thomas J. Minton, Esq.
     GOLDMAN & MINTON, P.C.
     3600 Clipper Mill Road, Suite 201
     Baltimore, MD 21211
     Phone: (410) 783-7575
     Email: tminton@charmcitylegal.com

          - and -

     RIGRODSKY & LONG, P.A.
     300 Delaware Avenue, Suite 1220
     Wilmington, DE 19801
     Phone: (302) 295-5310

          - and -

     RM LAW, P.C.
     1055 Westlakes Drive, Suite 300
     Berwyn, PA 19312
     Phone: (484) 324-6800


TOP 1 PERCENT: Wealth Coaches Seek Unpaid Wages Under FLSA
----------------------------------------------------------
JOSEPH FALCONE, individually and on behalf of similarly situated
employees, and JASON EVERS, individually and on behalf of similarly
situated employees, Plaintiffs, v. TOP 1 PERCENT COACHING, LLC, a
Florida limited liability company, and JUSTIN T. FOXX,
individually, Defendants, Case No. 2:19-cv-00303-JES-MRM (M.D.
Fla., May 6, 2019) is a collective action seeking to recover the
unpaid wages owed to them and all other similarly situated
employees who are current and former coaches for Defendants, and
who worked for Defendants at any time during the three year period
before this Complaint under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938
("FLSA")

The Defendants have a long-standing policy of misclassifying their
employees as independent contractors, says the complaint.
Defendants required and/or permitted Plaintiffs to work as wealth
coaches for up to and in excess of 40 hours per week but refused to
compensate them at the applicable wage and overtime rate.
Defendants refused and/or failed to compensate Plaintiffs a wage,
failed to pay Plaintiffs on a salary basis, and failed to pay
Plaintiffs for overtime hours they worked for the three years
leading up to this Complaint, the complaint asserts. The
Defendants' conduct violates the FLSA, which requires non-exempt
employees, such as Plaintiffs, to be compensated for the overtime
hours they work at a rate of one and one-half times their regular
rate of pay, the complaint adds.

Plaintiffs are wealth coaches who worked for the Defendants during
the past three years.

Top 1% is a business that sells wealth coaching and consulting
services throughout the world.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Jack C. Morgan III, Esq.
     Aloia Roland Lubell & Morgan PLLC
     2254 First Street
     Fort Myers, FL 33901
     Phone: 239-791-7950
     Facsimile: 239-791-7951
     Email: jmorgan@floridalegalrights.com
            lclement@floridalegalrights.com
            kturner@floridalegalrights.com

          - and -

     John B. Gallagher, Esq.
     2631 East Oakland Park Boulevard, Suite 201
     Fort Lauderdale, FL 33306
     Phone: 954.524.1888
     Fax: 954.524.1887
     Email: gal2701@aol.com


TURNBURY VILLAGE: Gridley Files Suit in N.Y. Sup. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against TURNBURY VILLAGE LLC.
The case is styled as David Gridley, on behalf of himself and
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. TURNBURY VILLAGE LLC,
Defendant, Case No. 700027/2019 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., Queens Cty., May 7,
2019).

The case type is stated as "E-Filed Real Property".

TURNBURY VILLAGE LLC is a corporation registered with New York
State Department of State (NYSDOS).[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     NEWMAN FERRARA,LLP
     1250 BROADWAY, 27TH FLOOR
     NEW YORK, NY 10001
     Phone: (212) 867-2700

The Defendant is represented by:

     SHARON E. COOK, ESQ.
     214-11 NORTHERN BLVD., STE.200
     BAYSIDE, NY 11361
     Phone: (718) 738-7393



UNIFUND CCR: Bhaskar Alleges FDCPA Violation in Georgia
-------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Unifund CCR, LLC. The
case is styled as Arti Bhaskar, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated, Plaintiff v. Unifund CCR, LLC and Lazega
& Johanson LLC, Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-01816-LMM-AJB (N.D.
Ga., April 24, 2019).

The docket of the case states the nature of suit as Consumer Credit
filed pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

Unifund CCR, LLC is a third-party collection agency based in
Ohio.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

   Clifford Carlson, Esq.
   Cliff Carlson Law, P.C.
   1114-C Highway 96, Suite 347
   Kathleen, GA 31047
   Tel: (478) 254-1018
   Email: cc@cliffcarlsonlaw.com

      - and -

   Jennifer Auer Jordan, Esq.
   Shamp Jordan Woodward, LLC
   1718 Peachtree St., Suite 660
   Atlanta, GA 30309
   Tel: (404) 893-9400
   Fax: (404) 872-3745
   Email: jordan@ssjwlaw.com

      - and -

   Ronald Edward Daniels, Esq.
   Daniels Law, LLC
   P.O. Box 1834
   Perry, GA 31069
   Tel: (478) 227-7331
   Email: ron@dlawllc.com


UNION PACIFIC: McCullen Suit Removed to W.D. Missouri
-----------------------------------------------------
The case captioned Jeramie A. McCullen, on behalf of himself and a
class of others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Union Pacific
Railroad Company, Defendant, Case No. 1916-CV10062 was removed from
the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri to the United States
District Court for the Western District of Missouri on May 3, 2019,
and assigned Case No. 4:19-cv-00347-BP.

On April 1, 2019, Plaintiff Jeramie McCullen commenced this action
in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri. McCullen asserts
class action claims for disability discrimination under the
Missouri Human Rights Act ("MHRA").[BN]

The Defendants are represented by:

     Robert L. Ortbals, Jr., Esq.
     Katie M. Rhoten, Esq.
     CONSTANGY, BROOKS, SMITH &PROPHETE, LLP
     7733 Forsyth Blvd., Suite 1325
     St. Louis, MO 63105
     Phone: (314) 925-7270
     Facsimile: (314) 925-7278
     Email: rortbals@constangy.com
            krhoten@constangy.com


VI DEVELOPMENT: Cuaya Files Class Action Over Tax Dispute
---------------------------------------------------------
VICTOR COYOTL CUAYA, on behalf of himself and class of similarly
situated individuals, Plaintiff v. VI DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC d/b/a
BREAD & BUTTER, 570 KCBS CORP. d/b/a BREAD & BUTTER, 401 KCBS CORP.
d/b/a BREAD & BUTTER, 462 BKCS LTD. d/b/a BREAD & BUTTER, BKCS LTD.
d/b/a BREAD & BUTTER, K&H 14 INC. d/b/a BREAD & BUTTER, FOOD &
BEYOND LLC, d/b/a BREAD & BUTTER, TERENCE PARK, and BYUNG IL PARK,
Defendants, Case No. 1:19-cv-03992 (S.D. N.Y., May 3, 2019) is an
action for damages under the Internal Revenue Code for relief,
damages, fees and costs in this matter because Defendants willfully
filed fraudulent tax information forms with the Internal Revenue
Service ("IRS").

The complaint alleges that Defendants failed to withhold any of
Plaintiff's wages for tax purposes. The Defendants further failed
to provide Plaintiff with an accurate W-2 tax statement for each
tax year during which Plaintiff worked. The Defendants knew or
should have known that they had a legal duty to withhold taxes from
all of Plaintiff's earnings and to provide Plaintiff with accurate
W-2 tax statements for each tax year during which Plaintiff
worked.

Accordingly, the Defendants willfully and fraudulently filed false
returns with the Internal Revenue Service by failing to report
Plaintiff, and other employees who were paid in cash, as employees
on IRS Form 941 Quarterly Tax Returns and annual tax returns, as
well as the amount of compensation that was paid. The Defendants'
actions were willful, and showed reckless disregard for the
provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, says the complaint.

Plaintiff was employed by Defendants as a cook from around 2010 to
around January 11, 2019.

Defendants operate a chain of deli restaurants as a single
integrated enterprise under the shared trade name "Bread &
Butter".[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     C.K. Lee, Esq.
     William Brown, Esq.
     LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
     148 West 24th Street, 8th Floor
     New York, NY 10011
     Phone: (212) 465-1188
     Fax: (212) 465-1181


VILLAS MARKET: Faces Class Action Over Time-Shaving Practices
-------------------------------------------------------------
FRANCISCO ALVARADO, on behalf of himself, FLSA Collective
Plaintiffs and the Class, Plaintiff, v. VILLAS MARKET PLACE INC.
d/b/a GARDEN GOURMET MARKET, and ANDREAS ZOITAS, Defendants, Case
No. 1:19-cv-04036 (S.D. N.Y., May 6, 2019) alleges, pursuant to the
Fair Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and the New York Labor Law
("NYLL"), that he and others similarly situated are entitled to
recover from Defendants unpaid overtime, unpaid wages due to time
shaving, statutory penalties, liquidated damages, and attorneys'
fees and costs.

The Defendants unlawfully failed to pay Plaintiff, the FLSA
Collective Plaintiffs, and members of the Class either the FLSA
overtime rate (of time and one-half) or the New York State overtime
rate (of time and one-half) for hours they worked in excess of 40
each workweek, asserts the complaint. At no time during the
relevant time periods did Defendants provide Plaintiff or Class
members with wage notices or proper wage statements as required by
NYLL. Plaintiff and Class members also received fraudulent wage
statements that reflected only their scheduled hours, and not the
actual hours worked, says the complaint.

Plaintiff FRANCISCO ALVARADO was hired by Defendants to work as a
porter in January 2016.

VILLAS MARKET PLACE INC. d/b/a GARDEN GOURMET MARKET, is a domestic
business corporation organized under the laws of the State of New
York.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     C.K. Lee, Esq.
     Anne Seelig, Esq.
     LEE LITIGATION GROUP, PLLC
     148 West 24th Street, 8th Floor
     New York, NY 10011
     Phone: 212-465-1188
     Fax: 212-465-1181


WORLD WIDE MEDICAL: Schlesinger Sues over Autodialled Calls
-----------------------------------------------------------
A class action complaint has been filed against World Wide Medical,
Inc., John C. Garcia, an individual, Joshua Collins, an individual,
d/b/a XpressCapitalGroup.com for violations of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act (TCPA). The case is captioned BRIAN
SCHLESINGER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated Plaintiff, v. WORLD WIDE MEDICAL INC., a Florida
corporation, JOHN C GARCIA, an individual, JOSHUA COLLINS, an
individual, d/b/a/ XPRESSCAPITALGROUP.COM, Defendants, Case No.
4:19-cv-02147-DMR (N.D. Cal., April 20, 2019).

Defendants sell medical braces and business capital loans. As a
primary part of their marketing efforts, Defendants and their
agents place thousands of automated calls employing a prerecorded
voice message to consumers' cell phones nationwide. Accordingly,
Plaintiff seeks to stop Defendants' illegal practice of making
unauthorized calls that play prerecorded voice messages to the
cellular telephones of consumers nationwide, and to obtain redress
for all persons injured by their conduct.

World Wide Medical Services, Inc. is a corporation organizing and
existing under the laws of the State of Florida with its principal
place of business at 8508 Benjamin Road, Suite D, Tampa,
Hillsborough County, Florida. CEO John C. Garcia leads World Wide
Medical Services. Joshua Collins operates a sole proprietorship or
unincorporated business entity called Xpress Capital Group, which
maintains a website at xpresscapitalgroup.com. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Mark L. Javitch, Esq.
     MARK L. JAVITCH, ATTORNEY AT LAW
     210 S Ellsworth Ave #486
     San Mateo, CA 94401
     Telephone: 402-301-5544
     Facsimile: 402-396-7131
     E-mail: javitchm@gmail.com


XTO ENERGY: McCarty Suit Transferred to E. D. Arkansas
------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned as Jerry McCarty, Patricia Thomas, Larry Thomas,
Harold Ray Moore, Doris A Moore, Johnny Bittle, Linda Bittle, Ernie
C Hunt, Sherry L Hunt, William Dellain Nelson, Henry Keith Murphree
and Evelyn Murphree, on behalf of herself and all others similarly
situated, Plaintiffs v. XTO Energy Inc, Defendant, Case No
12-CV-19-00041, was transferred from Cleburne County Circuit Court
to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas on
April 19, 2019, and assigned Case No. 1:19-cv-00029-DPM.

The lawsuit asserts Breach of Contract.

XTO Energy Inc. is an American energy company, principally
operating in America, specializing in the drilling and production
of unconventional oil and natural gas assets, typically from shale
rock through a process known as hydraulic fracturing. It is a
subsidiary of Exxon Mobil Corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

   Richard H. Mays, Esq.
   Williams & Anderson, PLC
   111 Center Street, Suite 2200
   Little Rock, AR 72201-2413
   Tel: (501) 362-0055
   Fax: (501) 362-0059
   Email: rmays@williamsanderson.com

The Defendant is represented by:

   Elizabeth LinanTiblets, Esq.
   K&L Gates LLP
   301 Commerce Street, Suite 3000
   Fort Worth, TX 76102
   Tel: (817) 347-5037
   Fax: (817) 347-5299
   Email: elizabeth.tiblets@klgates.com

      - and –

   Jeffrey Martin Swann, Esq.
   Perkins Peiserich Greathouse Morgan Rankin
   Post Office Box 251618
   Little Rock, AR 72225-1618
   Tel: (501) 603-9000
   Fax: (501) 603-0556
   Email: Jeff@ppgmrlaw.com

      - and –

   Julie DeWoody Greathouse, Esq.
   Perkins PeiserichGreathouse Morgan Rankin
   Post Office Box 251618
   Little Rock, AR 72225-1618
   Tel: (501) 603-9000
   Email: julie@ppgmrlaw.com






ZF-TRW AUTOMOTIVE: Alter Sues Over Defective Airbag Systems
-----------------------------------------------------------
MARK D. ALTIER, WILLIAM BAERRESEN, ERIC FISHON, DRAGAN JAGNJIC,
CYNTHIA SACCHETTI, JACQUELINE SANTOS-SILVA, AND AMANDA SWANSON, on
behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs,
v. ZF-TRW AUTOMOTIVE HOLDINGS CORP., TRW AUTOMOTIVE U.S. LLC,
AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC., HONDA OF AMERICA MFG., INC., HONDA
MOTOR CO.  LTD., HONDA R&D AMERICAS, INC., HYUNDAI MOTOR GROUP,
HYUNDAI MOTOR CO., HYUNDAI MOBIS CO. LTD., HYUNDAI MOTOR AMERICA,
INC., KIA MOTORS CORP., KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC., FCA US LLC,
TOYOTA MOTOR NORTH AMERICA, INC., TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC.,
TOYOTA MOTOR ENGINEERING & MANUFACTURING NORTH AMERICA, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 8:19-cv-00846 (C.D. Cal., May 6, 2019) is an
action concerning defective airbag control units (ACUs)
manufactured by Defendants which are part of airbag systems
equipped in vehicles manufactured by the Defendants (Vehicle
Manufacturer Defendants).

Airbags are a critical safety component in virtually every motor
vehicle sold in the United States and throughout the world. Each
Class Vehicle contains one ACU. ACUs are designed and manufactured
to sense a vehicle crash, determine whether airbag deployment is
necessary, and deploy appropriate airbags and other supplemental
restraints where needed. The ACU contains an electronic
component--an application specific integrated circuit
("ASIC")--which monitors signals from other crash sensors located
in the Class Vehicles. If the ASIC fails, the ACU will not operate
properly. As a result of an electrical overstress ("EOS") condition
that causes the malfunction of the ASIC in the ACUs manufactured by
TRW (the "ACU Defect"), the airbags equipped in the Class Vehicles
do not properly deploy during a crash. The ACU Defect exposes
Plaintiffs and Class members to the serious and life threatening
safety risk that their Class Vehicle airbags or supplemental
restraints could fail to deploy during an accident, resulting in
injury or death, notes the complaint.

No reasonable consumer expects to purchase or lease a Class Vehicle
that contains a concealed ACU Defect that subjects drivers and
passengers to the safety risk that an airbag will not deploy during
an accident, the complaint notes. The ACU Defect is material to
Plaintiffs and members of the Classes because when they purchased
or leased their Class Vehicles, they reasonably relied on the
reasonable expectation that the Class Vehicles' would be free from
defects and contain an ACU and airbag system that properly
functioned. Had Defendants disclosed the ACU Defect, Plaintiffs and
members of the Classes would not have purchased or leased the Class
Vehicles, or would have paid less for their vehicles.

Yet, Defendants knowingly, actively, and affirmatively omitted
and/or concealed the existence of the ACU Defect from Plaintiffs
and members of the Classes. Defendants were aware of the ACU Defect
and fraudulently concealed the defect from Plaintiffs and members
of the Classes. Notwithstanding this knowledge, TRW continued
selling defective ACUs and the Vehicle Manufacturer Defendants
continued selling Class Vehicles equipped with airbag systems
containing the ACU Defect. Defendants failed to disclose the
existence of the ACU Defect to Plaintiffs and members of the
Classes and have not remedied the ACU Defect and/or compensated
Plaintiffs or members of the Classes for this material defect. In
addition, the Vehicle Manufacturer Defendants have not issued
recalls for the Class Vehicles containing the ACU Defect. Rather,
Defendants wrongfully and intentionally concealed the ACU Defect
from Plaintiffs and members of the Classes, says the complaint.

Plaintiffs purchased the Class Vehicles, referring to the following
affected vehicles: 2014-2019 Acura RLX; 2014-2019 Acura RLX HYBRID;
2012-2014 Acura TL; 2015-2017 Acura TLX; 2012-2014 Acura TSX; 2014
Acura TSX SPORT WAGON; 2012-2013 Acura TSX SPORTSWAGON; 2010-2011
Dodge NITRO; 2012-2019 Fiat 500; 2013-2015 Honda ACCORD; 2014-2015
Honda ACCORD HYBRID; 2012-2015 Honda CIVIC; 2012-2015 Honda CIVIC
GX; 2012-2015 Honda CIVIC HYBRID; 2012-2015 Honda CIVIC SI;
2012-2016 Honda CR-V; 2012-2017 Honda FIT; 2013-2014 Honda FIT EV;
2012-2014 Honda RIDGELINE; 2013-2019 Hyundai SONATA; 2013-2019
Hyundai SONATA HYBRID; 2015-2017 Jeep COMPASS; 2010-2012 Jeep
LIBERTY; 2015-2017 Jeep PATRIOT; 2010-2018 Jeep WRANGLER; 2013 Kia
FORTE; 2013 Kia FORTE KOUP; 2013-2019 Kia OPTIMA; 2012-2016 Kia
OPTIMA HYBRID; 2014 Kia SEDONA; 2009-2012 Ram 1500; 2010-2012 Ram
2500; 2010-2012 Ram 3500; 2011-2012 Ram 4500; 2011-2012 Ram 5500;
2012-2018 Toyota AVALON; 2013-2018 Toyota AVALON HYBRID; 2011-2019
Toyota COROLLA; 2011-2013 Toyota COROLLA MATRIX; 2012-2017 Toyota
SEQUOIA; 2012-2019 Toyota TACOMA; and 2012-2017 Toyota TUNDRA.

Defendants design, manufacture, and sell automotive systems,
modules, and components to automotive original equipment
manufacturers, including airbag systems.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

     Robert G. Loewy, Esq.
     Law Office of Robert G. Loewy, P.C.
     20 Enterprise, Suite 310
     Aliso Viejo, CA 92656
     Phone: 949-468-7150
     Fax: 949-242-5105
     Email: rloewy@rloewy.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 ***