/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/CAR_Public/200625.mbx               C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

              Thursday, June 25, 2020, Vol. 22, No. 127

                            Headlines

AAM RESTAURANT: Baten et al. Seek Proper Pay for Staff
AKAZOO S.A.: Rosen Law Files Expanded Securities Class Action
ALDRIDGE PITE: Young Sues in N.D. Georgia Over Violation of FDCPA
ALTRIA GROUP: Somerset Party Store Sues Over Non-Compete Deal
AMERICAN CAMPUS: Faces Smith Employment Suit in Calif. Super. Ct.

AMERICOLD REALTY: $2.5MM Accord Reached in Calif. Employee Suit
AMERICOLLECT INC: Chambliss Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
AMGUARD INSURANCE: Won't Cover COVID-19 Losses, LJ New Haven Says
ARS NATIONAL: Granada Sues in N.D. Illinois Over FDCPA Violation
AVANTEUSA LP: Faces Durham FDCPA Consumer Suit in M.D. Georgia

AZTAR INDIANA: Adams Seeks Unpaid Wages, OT Pay for Casino Staff
BAYPORT CREDIT: Driver Files Suit in Eastern District of Virginia
BENTIS FRESH: Sosa, Velez Sue Over Unpaid Wages for Truck Drivers
CAPIO PARTNERS: Faces Jones FDCPA Suit Over Collection Letter
CASPER SLEEP: Block & Leviton Announces Securities Class Action

CASPER SLEEP: Rosen Files Federal Securities Class Action Lawsuit
CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS: Frank R. Cruz Announces Class Action
CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS: Glancy Prongay Announces Class Action
CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS: Schall Law Announces Filing of Class Action
CO-DIAGNOSTICS INC: Frank R. Cruz Announces Class Action Filing

COLONY CAPITAL: July 27 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
COLONY CAPITAL: Schall Law Files Class Action Lawsuit
COLUMBIA COUNTY, NY: Columbia County COBA Files Suit in N.D.N.Y.
CONN'S INC: Levi & Korsinsky Notifies Shareholders of Class Action
DELL TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Lopez Suit Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty

DRPHONEFIX INC: Faces Stein TCPA Suit Over Unsolicited Text Ads
EATALY CENTURY: Fails to Pay for All Hours Worked, Brunquell Says
ELANCO ANIMAL: Glancy Prongay Reminds of July 20 Deadline
ENDO INTERNATIONAL: Pomerantz Announces Filing of Class Action
ENPHASE ENERGY: Kahn Swick Reminds of Aug. 17 Deadline

EQUITAL LTD: Faces Ligos Suit Alleging Breach of Fiduciary Duties
ERIE INSURANCE: Denies Claims for Covered Losses, Tappo Alleges
FIRST SOLAR: Final Hearing Tuesday on Smilovits Settlement
FORESCOUT TECHNOLOGIES: Entwistle, Susman Godfrey File Class Suits
FORESCOUT TECHNOLOGIES: Schall Law Firm Announces Class Action

FOSTER BAIL: Violates Racketeering Laws, Anderson Suit Alleges
GAME TOUCH: Fabricant Sues Over Unsolicited Phone Calls
GANNETT PUBLISHING: Aronson Appeals C.D. Cal. Ruling to 9th Cir.
GENWORTH MORTGAGE: Chirchir Sues Over Mortgage Premium Overpayment
GOOGLE LLC: Loot Box Encourages Gambling, Coffee et al. Claim

GRANA Y MONTERO: $20-Mil. Accord Reached in Securities Class Suit
GRAND CANYON: Barbuto & Johansson Reminds of July 13 Deadline
GRAND CANYON: Lieff Cabraser Reminds of July 13 Deadline
GRAND CIRCLE: Fitzgerald Wants Refund for Canceled Trip Tickets
GROUPON INC: Robbins Geller Notifies of June 27 Motion Deadline

HAMILTON BEACH: Portnoy Law Files Securities Class Action
HARBOR FREIGHT: Mitchell Files Product Liability Suit in Georgia
HEBRON TECHNOLOGY: Hagens Berman Notifies of Securities Class Suit
HEBRON TECHNOLOGY: Schall Law Files Class Action Suit
HELBIZ INC: Barron Sues in S.D. New York Over Contract Dispute

HERSHEY COMPANY: Fails to Give Proper COBRA Notice, Woods Claims
ICHIRO SUSHI: Seeks 2nd Cir. Review of Order in Hidalgo FLSA Suit
JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS: Health Plan Sues Over Delayed Generic Entry
JBS USA: Erbert & Gerbert's Alleges Price-Fixing of Beef
LIBERTY HOUSE: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Reno Says

LIFE TIME FITNESS: Underpays Fitness Instructors, Schaeffer Claims
LOCKN' LLC: Wellins Suit Seeks Refunds of Unused Event Tickets
LOWE'S HOME: Meeks Labor Class Suit Removed to E.D. California
MARC JONES: Faces Garner Suit in Eastern District of Louisiana
MARYLAND: Zaleskas Class Suit Removed to Maryland District Court

MERCER COUNTY, NJ: Bratton Law Seeks Refund of Convenience Fees
MILWAUKEE, WI: Towing Firms Allege Market Trade Restrictions
MINNEAPOLIS, MN: Violates 14th Amendment Rights, Williams Alleges
MITCHELL D. BLUHM: Davidson Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Virginia
MONROE COUNTY, FL: Lola Appeals S.D. Florida Ruling to 11th Cir.

MONROE INC: Underpays Store Managers, Cerini Alleges
MONSANTO CO: Court Certifies Settlement Class in Roundup Suit
MSTMA INC: Swan Balks at Unwanted Robocalls and Texts
MYSI CORP: Moore Sues in N.D. Illinois Alleging Violation of FLSA
NABORS INDUSTRIES: Shareholders' Appeal in Texas Suit Pending

NATIONAL RAILROAD: D.C. Cir. Appeal Filed in Slaughter ADA Suit
NATIONAL SPINE: Faces Telemarketing Suit from Scoma Chiropractic
NETAPP INC: Continues to Defend Securities Suit in California
NEW YORK: Board Files 15 Appeals in Gulino Suit to 2nd Circuit
NORTHSTAR LOCATION: Faces Friedman FDCPA Suit in S.D. New York

O'BRIEN & TAYLOR: Faces Ivezaj FDCPA Consumer Suit in New Jersey
OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM: Miami FIPO Sues Over Senior Notes Offering
OCULAR THERAPEUTIX: 1st Cir. Affirms Dismissal of DEXTENZA Suit
PARTSBASE INC: Martin Suit Has Conditional Class Certification
PATENAUDE & FELIX: Capi Sues over Debt Collection Practices

PATZI'S PIZZA: Faces Ponce Suit in California Superior Court
PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Glancy Prongay Continues Investigation
PROASSURANCE CORP: Bernstein Liebhard Announces Class Action Filing
PROSHARES TRUST II: Appeal in NY Securities Suit over ETF Pending
RITE AID: Underpays Staffs, Andrews Suit Alleges

ROMEO & JULIETTE: Faces Mukoma Employment Suit in California
ROOFLINE INC: Faces Rojo Employment Suit in California Super. Ct.
RYDER SYSTEM: Berger Montague Probes Securities Fraud Claims
SAHARAH INC: Thompson Sues Over Unpaid Minimum and Overtime Wages
SERVICEMASTER GLOBAL: Teamsters Sues Over Drop in Share Price

SIMPLY HEALTH: Faces Jenkins TCPA Suit Over Unsolicited Text Ads
SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS: Klein Reminds of July 27 Deadline
SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS: Scott+Scott Reminds of Class Actions
SPITZER INDUSTRIES: Moreira Sues Over Abrupt Termination
STATE AUTOMOBILE: Bluegrass LLC Files Suit in S.D. West Virginia

TETRAPHASE PHARMA: Faces AcelRx Merger Related Suits
TILLY'S INC: Objection to Ward Class Certification Bid Due July 6
TILLY'S INC: Settlement Talks in Gonzales Suit Still Ongoing
TRANSAMERICA PREMIER: Faces Phan Class Suit Over Lapsed Policies
U.S. OIL FUND: Block & Leviton Announces Filing of Class Action

U.S. OIL FUND: Robbins Geller Files Class Action Suit
UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Appeals Order in Theodore ADA Suit to 1st Cir.
UNITED STATES: BLM DC Sues Over Use of Violence vs. Demonstrators
UNITED STATES: DHS Faces Moreno Class Suit in C.D. California
VERA LLOYD: Underpays House Parents, Girtmon Claims

VXI GLOBAL: Underpays Service Representatives, Bufford Claims
WALMART: Faces Class Action Over New Covid-19 Return Policy
WEATHERFORD US: Muldowney Seeks Payment for Overtime Work
WILCO LIFE: Faces West Suit Over Increase in Insurance Rate
WILLIAM D BOYCE: Grover Sues Over Edenville & Sanford Dams Breach

WIPRO LIMITED: Faces Lloyd Labor Suit in California Super. Court
WORLD BUSINESS: Quantum-Mac and Okwu File Class Suit N.D. Georgia
[*] Heffler's David Kaufman to Speak on Data Breach Class Actions

                            *********

AAM RESTAURANT: Baten et al. Seek Proper Pay for Staff
------------------------------------------------------
CARLOS BATEN RAMIREZ, DAVID PEREZ CARRILLO, EUCLIDES VELOZ, JAVIER
HERNANDEZ HERNANDEZ, and TIMOTEO PEREZ HERNANDEZ, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. AAM
RESTAURANT LLC (D/B/A BISTANGO), MARC MOHAMMAD MIRBOD, MOHAMMAD ALI
MIRBOD, ANTHONY AVELLINO, and HERON GUTIERREZ, Defendants, Case No.
1:20-cv-04700 (S.D.N.Y., June 18, 2020) is a class action against
the Defendants for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act and
the New York Labor Law by failing to compensate the Plaintiffs and
all others similarly situated workers appropriate minimum wages,
overtime pay, and spread of hours compensation for all hours worked
in excess of 40 hours in a workweek and for failing to maintain
accurate recordkeeping of their worked hours.

The Plaintiffs were employed by the Defendants as dishwashers, food
preparers, cooks, salad preparers and ostensibly as busboys at the
Bistango restaurant located at 415 3rd Avenue, New York, New York
between 2011 and 2020.

AAM Restaurant LLC, d/b/a Bistango, is an owner and operator of an
Italian Restaurant located at 415 3rd Avenue, New York, New York.
[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:  
         
         Michael Faillace, Esq.
         MICHAEL FAILLACE & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
         60 East 42nd Street, Suite 4510
         New York, NY 10165
         Telephone: (212) 317-1200
         Facsimile: (212) 317-1620

AKAZOO S.A.: Rosen Law Files Expanded Securities Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces it has
filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Akazoo S.A. (NASDAQ: SONG) who (1) purchased or
otherwise acquired the publicly traded securities of Akazoo f/k/a
Modern Media Acquisition Corp. ("MMAC" or "MMDM") between January
24, 2019 and May 21, 2020, both dates inclusive (the "Class
Period"); and (2) all persons or entities who held common stock of
MMAC on August 14, 2019 eligible to vote at MMAC's August 28, 2019
special meeting. The lawsuit seeks to recover damages for Akazoo
investors under the federal securities laws.

To join the Akazoo class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1843.htmlor call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.

NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS
IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN
ONE. YOU MAY RETAIN COUNSEL OF YOUR CHOICE. YOU MAY ALSO REMAIN AN
ABSENT CLASS MEMBER AND DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT. AN INVESTOR'S
ABILITY TO SHARE IN ANY POTENTIAL FUTURE RECOVERY IS NOT DEPENDENT
UPON SERVING AS LEAD PLAINTIFF.

According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period
and in the Proxy Statement made false and/or misleading statements
and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Akazoo overstated its revenue,
profits, and cash holdings; (2) Akazoo holds significantly lesser
music distribution rights than it has stated and implied; (3) as
opposed to Akazoo's continued statements, it does not operate in 25
countries; (4) Akazoo has a significantly smaller user base than it
states; (5) Akazoo has closed its headquarters and other offices
around the world; and (6) as a result, defendants' public
statements were materially false and/or misleading at all relevant
times. According to the suit, these true details were disclosed by
a market research firm.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than June 23,
2020. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf
of other class members in directing the litigation. If you wish to
join the litigation, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1843.htmlor to discuss
your rights or interests regarding this class action, please
contact Phillip Kim, Esq. of Rosen Law Firm toll free at
866-767-3653 or via e-mail at pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com.

Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1
by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities
class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the
top 3 each year since 2013. Rosen Law Firm has secured hundreds of
millions of dollars for investors.

Contact:

         Laurence Rosen, Esq.
         Phillip Kim, Esq.
         THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
         275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Tel: (212) 686-1060
         Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
         Fax: (212) 202-3827
         E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
                 pkim@rosenlegal.com
                 cases@rosenlegal.com
         Web site: http://www.rosenlegal.com/
[GN]



ALDRIDGE PITE: Young Sues in N.D. Georgia Over Violation of FDCPA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Aldridge Pite Haan
LLP, et al. The case is captioned as Mildred Young, individually
and on behalf of all others similarly situated v. Aldridge Pite
Haan LLP; Midland Funding LLC; and John Does 1-25, Case No.
1:20-cv-02347-AT-WEJ (N.D. Ga., June 1, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Amy Totenberg.

The lawsuit alleges violation of the Fair Debt Collection Act
regarding consumer credit.

Aldridge is a multi-state law firm offering consumer and commercial
collection services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Misty Oaks Paxton, Esq.
          THE OAKS FIRM
          3895 Brookgreen Pt.
          Decatur, GA 30034
          Telephone: (404) 725-5697
          Facsimile: (775) 320-3695
          E-mail: attyoaks@yahoo.com


ALTRIA GROUP: Somerset Party Store Sues Over Non-Compete Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------
SOMERSET PARTY STORE INC., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff, vs. ALTRIA GROUP, INC., ALTRIA
ENTERPRISES LLC and JUUL LABS, INC. Defendants, Case No.
3:20-cv-04073 (N.D. Cal., June 18, 2020) is a class action over
agreements among horizontal competitors JUUL and Altria to
eliminate competition by Altria in the market for closed system
electronic cigarettes ("e-cigarettes") in exchange for transferring
to Altria a partial ownership interest in JUUL.

According to the complaint, these agreements effectuated a
horizontal allocation of the market. JUUL and Altria agreed that
the latter would exit the e-cigarette market entirely and instead
become a minority shareholder in JUUL. This conduct constitutes a
per se violation of Sections 1 and 3 of the Sherman Act and
constituted an unlawful acquisition in violation of Section 7 of
the Clayton Act.

The agreements also provide the basis for the claims that JUUL
attempted to monopolize and monopolized the relevant market of
e-cigarettes sold in the United States and its territories in
violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act and violated state
antitrust and consumer protection laws. This claim is not based on
circumstantial evidence, but is based on written agreements among
the Defendants -- the "Relationship Agreement", dated December 20,
2018; the "Amended Relationship Agreement," dated January 28, 2020;
and a commitment letter from Altria to JUUL, dated October 5, 2018
-- that contained unequivocal non-compete provisions.

These provisions of the Relationship Agreement constitute a naked
restraint of trade in the form of a market allocation between
horizontal competitors. These provisions continued to be applied in
the Amended Relationship Agreement entered by Altria and JUUL on
January 28, 2020. Such agreements illegally restrained competition
in violation of federal and state antitrust laws. As a direct and
proximate result of Defendants' anticompetitive conduct, Plaintiff
was overcharged and sustained injury to their business and
property. Plaintiff and members of the proposed Classes were
injured by the elimination of the Altria Group as a competitor in
the closed e-cigarette market, paid supracompetitive prices for
JUUL's e-cigarettes as a result, and were denied the benefits of
competitive innovation that could have existed had the Altria Group
stayed in the market as an independent competitor.

Plaintiff purchased JUUL e-cigarette products indirectly, for
resale, during the Class Period.

Altria Group Inc. is a tobacco manufacturer headquartered in
Richmond, Virginia.

Altria Enterprises LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Altria
Group and is located in Richmond, Virginia.

Juul Labs, Inc. is an American electronic cigarette company based
in San Francisco, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Solomon B. Cera, Esq.
          Pamela A. Markert, Esq.
          CERA LLP
          595 Market Street, Suite 1350
          San Francisco, CA 94105
          Telephone: (415) 777-2230
          Facsimile: (415) 777-5189
          E-mail: scera@cerallp.com
                  pmarkert@cerallp.com

               - and -

          Garrett D. Blanchfield, Esq.
          Brant D. Penney, Esq.
          REINHARDT WENDORF & BLANCHFIELD
          332 Minnesota Street, Suite W-1050
          St. Paul, MN 55101
          Telephone: (651) 287-2100
          Facsimile: (651) 287-2103
          E-mail: g.blanchfield@rwblawfirm.com
                  b.penney@rwblawfirm.com

AMERICAN CAMPUS: Faces Smith Employment Suit in Calif. Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against American Campus
Communities Services Inc., et al. The case is styled as Lanzell
Smith, other members of the general public similarly situated v.
American Campus Communities Services Inc., Does 1-50, Case No.
34-2020-00280934-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super., Sacramento Cty., June 18,
2020).

The case type is stated as "Other Employment."

American Campus Communities (NYSE: ACC) is the nation's largest
developer, owner and manager of student housing apartment
communities.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Douglas Han, Esq.
          JUSTICE LAW CORPORATION
          751 N Fair Oaks Ave., Ste. 101
          Pasadena, CA 91103-3069
          Telephone: (818) 230-7502
          Facsimile: (818) 230-7259
          E-mail: dhan@justicelawcorp.com


AMERICOLD REALTY: $2.5MM Accord Reached in Calif. Employee Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Americold Realty Trust said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2020, that the company has entered into a preliminary
settlement of the class action suit initiated by a former employee
for $2.5 million.

On February 22, 2019, a former employee filed a putative class
action against the Company in the San Bernardino County Superior
Court asserting that the Company: (1) failed to pay minimum wages;
(2) failed to pay overtime wages; (3) failed to pay all vacation
wages; (4) failed to provide meal periods; (5) failed to provide
accurate wage statements; (6) failed to pay wages timely to
terminated employees; and (7) violated California unfair business
practices.

On April 10, 2019, the Company filed an Answer and Affirmative
Defenses in response to the complaint and successfully removed the
case to federal court in the U.S. District Court for the Central
District of California.

On May 2, 2019, plaintiff filed a separate lawsuit for civil
penalties under California's Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA")
in the San Bernardino Superior Court against the Company, Case No.
CIV-DS-1913525 based on similar factual allegations that are
asserted in the complaint. The Company successfully obtained a
dismissal of the San Bernardino Superior Court Action.

On June 18, 2019, the plaintiff amended his complaint in the
pending federal court action to add a rest period violation claim
and PAGA penalty claims based on similar allegations that are
asserted in the complaint. Plaintiff's counsel later dismissed
plaintiff's vacation wages claim from his first amended complaint.

The Company denies the plaintiff's claims and denies that plaintiff
and the putative class members have been damaged in any respect or
in any amount as a result of any act or omission by the Company.

The Company also denies that this case is appropriate for class
treatment and further asserts, among other grounds, that this case
is unmanageable as a PAGA representative action.

The Company has entered into a preliminary settlement of the case
for $2.5 million. The settlement of the case is subject to court
approval.

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

Americold Realty Trust is a provider of cold storage services
headquartered in Atlanta, and is organized as a real estate
investment trust. The firm is focused on the ownership, operation,
development and acquisition of temperature-controlled real estate.
Americold also provides additional services including warehouse
handling and value-add logistics services to manage the entire
temperature-controlled supply chain.


AMERICOLLECT INC: Chambliss Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Wisconsin
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Americollect Inc. The
case is styled as Charles E. Chambliss, Individually and on Behalf
of All Others Similarly Situated v. Americollect Inc., Case No.
2:20-cv-00922-WED (E.D. Wis., June 18, 2020).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Americollect, Inc., is a consumer debt collection agency that
markets to creditors in Wisconsin, Illinois, and Michigan.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ben J. Slatky, Esq.
          Jesse Fruchter, Esq.
          Mark A. Eldridge, Esq.
          John D. Blythin, Esq.
          ADEMI & O'REILLY LLP
          3620 E Layton Ave.
          Cudahy, WI 53110
          Phone: (414) 482-8000
          Fax: (414) 482-8001
          Email: bslatky@ademilaw.com
                 jfruchter@ademilaw.com
                 meldridge@ademilaw.com
                 jblythin@ademilaw.com


AMGUARD INSURANCE: Won't Cover COVID-19 Losses, LJ New Haven Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
LJ NEW HAVEN LLC, d/b/a LENNY & JOE'S FISH TALE, Individually and
on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v. AMGUARD INSURANCE
COMPANY, Case No. 3:20-cv-00751-MPS (D. Conn., June 1, 2020),
alleges that the Defendant and most insurance companies, who have
issued all-risk commercial property insurance policies with
business interruption coverage, are denying the obligation to pay
for business income losses and other covered expenses incurred by
policyholders for the physical loss and damage to the insured
property from measures put in place by the civil authorities to
stop the spread of COVID-19 among the population.

On March 11, 2020, World Health Organization Director General
Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus declared the COVID-19 outbreak a
worldwide pandemic. On March 16, 2020, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, and members of the national Coronavirus
Task Force issued to the American public guidance, styled as "30
Days to Slow the Spread" for stopping the spread of COVID-19.

As a result of the closure orders, the Plaintiff had to cease
operations.

The action seeks a declaratory judgment that affirms that the
COVID-19 pandemic and the corresponding response by civil
authorities to stop the spread of the outbreak triggers coverage,
has caused physical property loss and damage to the insured
property, provides coverage for future civil authority orders that
result in future suspensions or curtailments of business
operations, and finds that the Defendant are liable for the losses
suffered by policyholders.

The Defendant issues property insurance and is duly qualified and
licensed to issue insurance in the State of Connecticut and other
States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Robert A. Izard, Esq.
          Christopher M. Barrett, Esq.
          IZARD, KINDALL & RAABE LLP
          29 South Main Street, Suite 305
          West Hartford, CT 06107
          Telephone: 860 493-6292
          E-mail: rizard@ikrlaw.com
                  cbarrett@ikrlaw.com

               - and -

          James E. Cecchi, Esq.
          CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI OLSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO
          5 Becker Farm Road
          Roseland, NJ 07068
          Telephone: 973 994-1700
          Facsimile: 973 994-1744

               - and -

          Christopher A. Seeger, Esq.
          Stephen A. Weiss, Esq.
          SEEGER WEISS
          77 Water Street, 8th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: 212 584-0700

               - and -

          Samuel H. Rudman, Esq.
          Mark S. Reich, Esq.
          Paul J. Geller, Esq.
          Stuart A. Davidson, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
          58 South Service Road, Suite 200
          Melville, NY 11747
          Telephone: 631 367-7100


ARS NATIONAL: Granada Sues in N.D. Illinois Over FDCPA Violation
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against ARS National Services
Inc. The case is styled as Cristeto Granada, on behalf of himself
and all others similarly situated v. ARS National Services Inc.,
Case No. 1:20-cv-03587 (N.D. Ill., June 18, 2020).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

ARS National Services, Inc., offers accounts receivable management
services. ARS caters to financial services organizations; banks;
and credit card companies. The Company is based in Escondido,
California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alejandro Emmanuel Figueroa, Esq.
          Eric Donald Coleman, Esq.
          Nathan Charles Volheim, Esq.
          SULAIMAN LAW GROUP, LTD.
          2500 S. Highland Avenue, Suite 200
          Lombard, IL 60148
          Phone: (630) 575-8181
          Email: alejandrof@sulaimanlaw.com
                 ecoleman@sulaimanlaw.com
                 nvolheim@sulaimanlaw.com


AVANTEUSA LP: Faces Durham FDCPA Consumer Suit in M.D. Georgia
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against AVANTEUSA LP, et al.
The case is captioned as JARVIS DURHAM, individually and on behalf
of all others similarly situated v. AVANTEUSA LP; CASCADE CAPITAL
LLC; JOHN DOES 1 through 25, Case No. 4:20-cv-00115-CDL (M.D. Ga.,
June 1, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Clay D. Land.

The lawsuit alleges violation of the Fair Debt Practices Collection
Act regarding consumer credit.

AvanteUSA is an accounts receivable management firm. Cascade
Capital is an economic development finance company.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Misty Oaks Paxton, Esq.
          3895 Brookgreen Point
          Decatur, GA 30034
          Telephone: (404) 725-5697
          E-mail: attyoaks@yahoo.com


AZTAR INDIANA: Adams Seeks Unpaid Wages, OT Pay for Casino Staff
----------------------------------------------------------------
ANITA F. ADAMS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. AZTAR INDIANA GAMING COMPANY, LLC d/b/a
TROPICANA EVANSVILLE, Defendant, Case No. 3:20-cv-00143-RLY-MPB
(S.D. Ind., June 18, 2020) is a class action against the Defendant
for violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act, the Indiana Wage
Payment Statute, and the Indiana Wage Deductions Statute by failing
to compensate the Plaintiff and all others similarly situated
workers appropriate minimum wages and overtime pay for all hours
worked in excess of 40 hours in a workweek, failing to properly
inform them of the required tip credit provisions prior to paying a
sub-minimum direct cash wage, and making improper deductions from
their paychecks for gaming license fees and other deductions.

The Plaintiff has been employed by the Defendant as a Table Games
Dealer at a casino located at 421 NW Riverside Drive, Evansville,
Indiana from approximately March 2012 through the present.

Aztar Indiana Gaming Company, LLC, d/b/a Tropicana Evansville, is a
casino operator with principal place of business located at 421 NW
Riverside Drive, Evansville, Indiana. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:  
         
         George A. Hanson, Esq.
         Alexander T. Ricke, Esq.
         STUEVE SIEGEL HANSON LLP
         460 Nichols Road, Suite 200
         Kansas City, MO 64112
         Telephone: (816) 714-7100
         Facsimile: (816) 714-7101
         E-mail: hanson@stuevesiegel.com
                 ricke@stuevesiegel.com

                  - and –

         Ryan L. McClelland, Esq.
         Michael J. Rahmberg, Esq.
         McCLELLAND LAW FIRM, P.C.
         The Flagship Building
         200 Westwoods Drive
         Liberty, MO 64068
         Telephone: (816) 781-0002
         Facsimile: (816) 781-1984
         E-mail: ryan@mcclellandlawfirm.com
                 mrahmberg@mcclellandlawfirm.com

BAYPORT CREDIT: Driver Files Suit in Eastern District of Virginia
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Bayport Credit Union.
The case is styled as Rachel Driver, on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. Bayport Credit Union, Case No.
4:20-cv-00090-RBS-DEM (E.D. Va., June 18, 2020).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract.

BayPort is a member-owned, full-service financial institution.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Patrick Thomas Fennell, Esq.
          PATRICK T FENNELL ATTORNEY AT LAW PC
          P.O. Box 12325
          Roanoke, VA 24024
          Phone: (540) 339-3889
          Fax: (540) 339-3880
          Email: patrick@fmtrials.com


BENTIS FRESH: Sosa, Velez Sue Over Unpaid Wages for Truck Drivers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NELSON SOSA and RUBEN VELEZ, individually and on behalf of others
similarly situated, Plaintiffs, -against- BENTIS FRESH BREAD INC.
(D/B/A BENTI'S FRESH BREAD INC.), OLDE BAKERY SHOPPE INC. (D/B/A
OLDE BAKERY SHOPPE), ANTHONY BENTIVEGNA, and LOUIS BENTIVEGNA,
Defendants, Case No. 1:20-cv-04705 (S.D.N.Y., June 18, 2020) is an
action brought by the Plaintiff on behalf of themselves, and other
similarly situated individuals, for unpaid minimum and overtime
wages pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, and for
violations of the N.Y. Labor, including applicable liquidated
damages, interest, attorneys' fees and costs.

According to the complaint, Plaintiffs worked for Defendants in
excess of 40 hours per week, without appropriate minimum wage and
overtime compensation for the hours that they worked.

Rather, Defendants failed to maintain accurate recordkeeping of the
hours worked and failed to pay Plaintiffs appropriately for any
hours worked, either at the straight rate of pay or for any
additional overtime premium.

Plaintiffs were employed as truck drivers and unpackers to deliver
baked goods mostly in Manhattan and the Bronx by companies located
in Bronx, New York.

Bentis Fresh Bread Inc., (d/b/a Benti's Fresh Bread Inc.), and Olde
Bakery Shoppe Inc., (d/b/a Olde Bakery Shoppe), own, operate, or
control a trucking company that delivers baked goods primarily to
locations throughout Manhattan, as well as locations in Brooklyn,
and The Bronx in New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

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

CAPIO PARTNERS: Faces Jones FDCPA Suit Over Collection Letter
-------------------------------------------------------------
Martika Jones, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. CAPIO PARTNERS, LLC; CF MEDICAL LLC; and JOHN DOES
1-25, Case No. 1:20-cv-02349-LMM-RGV (N.D. Ga., June 1, 2020),
seeks damages and declaratory and injunctive relief under the Fair
Debt Collections Practices Act.

On December 9, 2019, Defendant Capio sent the Plaintiff a
collection letter regarding the alleged debt owed to Pinnacle.

The Plaintiff contends that the letter allows her only 30 days to
make a payment to receive the settlement offer, which overshadows
the fact that she has 30 days from the date of receipt of the
letter to dispute and receive validation of the debt pursuant to
the "G Notice." She adds that although a collection letter may
track the statutory language, "the collector nonetheless violates
the Act if it conveys that information in a confusing or
contradictory fashion so as to cloud the required message with
uncertainty."

The Defendants are debt collectors.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Misty Oaks Paxton, Esq.
          3315 Charleston Court
          Decatur, GA, 30034
          Telephone: (404) 725-5697
          Facsimile: (775) 320-3698
          E-mail: attyoaks@yahoo.com


CASPER SLEEP: Block & Leviton Announces Securities Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
Block & Leviton LLP (www.blockesq.com), a national securities
litigation firm, announces that a class action lawsuit on behalf of
shareholders has been filed against Casper Sleep Inc. (NYSE: CSPR)
and certain of its officers for violations of the federal
securities laws. The lead plaintiff deadline is August 18, 2020.
Investors who purchased Casper shares are encouraged to contact the
firm for a free case evaluation.

On February 7, 2020, Casper held its initial public offering
("IPO") of 8.35 million shares at $12.00 each. The lawsuit, filed
in the Eastern District of New York, alleges that the IPO materials
contained untrue statements and omissions of material fact,
including, among other things, that Casper's profit margins were
actually declining, rather than growing, that Casper was changing
an important distribution partner, that Casper had a glut of old
and outdated mattress inventory that it was selling at steeply
discounted clearance prices, and that Casper's core operations were
not profitable. The stock is presently trading at less than $9.00
per share, or approximately 27% less than the IPO price.

If you purchased or acquired shares of Casper and have questions
about your legal rights or possess information relevant to this
matter, please contact Block & Leviton attorneys at (617) 398-5600,
via email at cases@blockesq.com, or at
https://shareholder.law/cases/?case=casper.

Block & Leviton LLP is a firm dedicated to representing investors
and maintaining the integrity of the country's financial markets.
The firm represents many of the nation's largest institutional
investors as well as individual investors in securities litigation
throughout the United States. The firm's lawyers have recovered
billions of dollars for its clients.

Contact:

         BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
         260 Franklin St., Suite 1860
         Boston, MA 02110
         Phone: (617) 398-5600
         E-mail: cases@blockesq.com
         Web site: http://www.blockesq.com/
[GN]

CASPER SLEEP: Rosen Files Federal Securities Class Action Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces it has
filed a federal class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of the
securities of Casper Sleep Inc. (NYSE: CSPR) pursuant and/or
traceable to the Company's initial public offering conducted on or
about February 7, 2020 (the "IPO" or "Offering"). The lawsuit seeks
to recover damages for Casper investors under the federal
securities laws.

To join the Casper class action, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1871.htmlor call Phillip
Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com for information on the class action.
advertisement

NO CLASS HAS YET BEEN CERTIFIED IN THE ABOVE ACTION. UNTIL A CLASS
IS CERTIFIED, YOU ARE NOT REPRESENTED BY COUNSEL UNLESS YOU RETAIN
ONE. YOU MAY RETAIN COUNSEL OF YOUR CHOICE. YOU MAY ALSO REMAIN AN
ABSENT CLASS MEMBER AND DO NOTHING AT THIS POINT. AN INVESTOR'S
ABILITY TO SHARE IN ANY POTENTIAL FUTURE RECOVERY IS NOT DEPENDENT
UPON SERVING AS LEAD PLAINTIFF.

According to the lawsuit, the Offering Documents were negligently
prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements of material
fact or omitted to state other facts necessary to make the
statements made not misleading and were not prepared in accordance
with the rules and regulations governing their preparation.
Specifically, the lawsuit claims the Offering Documents made false
and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1)
Casper's profit margins were actually declining, rather than
growing; (2) Casper was changing an important distribution partner,
costing it 130 basis points of gross margin in the first quarter of
2020 alone; (3) Casper was holding a glut of old and outdated
mattress inventory that it was selling at steeply discounted
clearance prices, further impairing the Company's profitability;
(4) Casper was suffering accelerating losses, further placing its
ability to achieve positive cash flows and profitability out of
reach; (5) Casper's core operations were not profitable, but were
causing the Company to suffer over $40 million in negative cash
flows during the first quarter of 2020 alone and doubling its
quarterly net loss year over year; (6) as a result of the
foregoing, Casper's ability to achieve profitability, implement its
growth initiatives, and expand internationally had been
misrepresented in the Offering Documents, as the Company needed to
shutter its European operations, halt all international expansion,
jettison over one fifth of its global corporate workforce, and
significantly curtail new store openings in order to avoid an
imminent cash and liquidity crisis, let alone achieve positive
operating cash flows; and (7) as a result of the foregoing,
Casper's revenue growth rate was not sustainable and had not
positioned the Company to achieve profitability.

A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve
as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than August 18,
2020. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf
of other class members in directing the litigation. If you wish to
join the litigation, go to
http://www.rosenlegal.com/cases-register-1871.htmlor to discuss
your rights or interests regarding this class action, please
contact Phillip Kim, Esq. of Rosen Law Firm toll free at
866-767-3653 or via e-mail at pkim@rosenlegal.com or
cases@rosenlegal.com.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn:
https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/rosen—firm or on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe,
concentrating its practice in securities class actions and
shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1
by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities
class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the
top 3 each year since 2013. Rosen Law Firm has secured hundreds of
millions of dollars for investors.

Contact:

         Laurence Rosen, Esq.
         Phillip Kim, Esq.
         THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P.A.
         275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
         New York, NY 10016
         Tel: (212) 686-1060
         Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
         Fax: (212) 202-3827
         E-mail: lrosen@rosenlegal.com
                 pkim@rosenlegal.com
                 cases@rosenlegal.com
         Web site: http://www.rosenlegal.com/
[GN]

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS: Frank R. Cruz Announces Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed on behalf of persons and entities that
purchased or otherwise acquired Chembio Diagnostics, Inc.
("Chembio" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: CEMI) common stock between
April 1, 2020 through June 16, 2020, inclusive (the "Class
Period"). Chembio investors have until August 17, 2020 to file a
lead plaintiff motion.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click
https://www.frankcruzlaw.com/cases/chembio-diagnostics-inc/

In April 2020, the Company's COVID-19 antibody test was one of the
first to be granted Emergency Use Authorization ("EUA") by the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration ("FDA").

Then, on June 17, 2020, before the market opened, the FDA revoked
the EUA for Chembio's Dual Path Platform COVID-19 serology test due
to concerns regarding the test's accuracy. Specifically, the FDA
found that the "benefits no longer outweigh its risks" and that "it
is not reasonable to believe that the test may be effective"
because it "generates a higher than expected rate of false results
and higher than that reflected in the authorized labeling for the
device."

On this news, the Company's share price fell $6.04, or nearly 60%,
to close at $3.89 per share on June 17, 2020.

If you purchased Chembio common stock during the Class Period, you
may move the Court no later than August 17, 2020 to ask the Court
to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you
need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of
your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the
Class. If you purchased Chembio common stock, have information or
would like to learn more about these claims, or have any questions
concerning this announcement or your rights or interests with
respect to these matters, please contact:

          Frank R. Cruz
          The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz
          1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100
          Los Angeles, California 90067
          Tel: 310-914-5007
          E-mail: info@frankcruzlaw.com
          Web site: http://www.frankcruzlaw.com/
[GN]



CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS: Glancy Prongay Announces Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM"), a national investors rights
law firm, announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed on
behalf of investors who purchased Chembio Diagnostics, Inc.
("Chembio" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: CEMI) common stock between
April 1, 2020 and June 16, 2020, inclusive (the "Class Period").
Chembio investors have until August 17, 2020 to file a lead
plaintiff motion.

If you suffered a loss on your Chembio investments or would like to
inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss
under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact
information at
https://www.glancylaw.com/cases/chembio-diagnostics-inc/. You can
also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150, Toll-Free
at 888-773-9224, or via email at shareholders@glancylaw.com to
learn more about your rights.

In April 2020, the Company's COVID-19 antibody test was one of the
first to be granted Emergency Use Authorization ("EUA") by the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration ("FDA").

Then, on June 17, 2020, before the market opened, the FDA revoked
the EUA for Chembio's Dual Path Platform COVID-19 serology test due
to concerns regarding the test's accuracy. Specifically, the FDA
found that the "benefits no longer outweigh its risks" and that "it
is not reasonable to believe that the test may be effective"
because it "generates a higher than expected rate of false results
and higher than that reflected in the authorized labeling for the
device."

On this news, the Company's share price fell $6.04, or nearly 60%,
to close at $3.89 per share on June 17, 2020.

If you purchased Chembio common stock during the Class Period, you
may move the Court no later than August 17, 2020 to ask the Court
to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class you
need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel of
your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the
Class. If you wish to learn more about this action, or if you have
any questions concerning this announcement or your rights or
interests with respect to these matters, please contact:

         Glancy Prongay and Murray LLP, Los Angeles
         Charles Linehan
         Tel: 310-201-9150
              888-773-9224
         Web site: http://www.glancylaw.com/
         E-mail: shareholders@glancylaw.com
[GN]

CHEMBIO DIAGNOSTICS: Schall Law Announces Filing of Class Action
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
announces the filing of a class action lawsuit against Chembio
Diagnostics, Inc. (NASDAQ: CEMI) for violations of Sections 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder by the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Investors who purchased the Company's securities between April 1,
2020 and June 16, 2020, inclusive (the "Class Period"), are
encouraged to contact the firm before August 17, 2020.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click
https://schallfirm.com/join-action-form/?slug=chembio-diagnostics-inc&id=2508


We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law
Firm, 1880 Century Park East, Suite 404, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at
310-301-3335, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also
reach us through the firm's website at www.schallfirm.com, or by
email at brian@schallfirm.com.

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

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading
statements to the market. Chembio's COVID-19 antibody test was
among the first to be granted Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) by
the FDA in April. The FDA revoked the Company's EUA on June 17,
2020, based on concerns of test accuracy. According to the FDA, the
"benefits no longer outweigh its risks" and that "it is not
reasonable to believe that the test may be effective" because it
"generates a higher than expected rate of false results and higher
than that reflected in the authorized labeling for the device."
Based on these facts, the Company's public statements were false
and materially misleading throughout the class period. When the
market learned the truth about Chembio, investors suffered
damages.

Join the case to recover your losses.

The Schall Law Firm represents investors around the world and
specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder
rights litigation.

Contact:

          The Schall Law Firm
          Brian Schall, Esq.
          Web site: http://www.schallfirm.com/
          Office: 310-301-3335
          E-mail: info@schallfirm.com
[GN]

CO-DIAGNOSTICS INC: Frank R. Cruz Announces Class Action Filing
----------------------------------------------------------------
The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz announces that a class action
lawsuit has been filed on behalf of persons and entities that
purchased or otherwise acquired Co-Diagnostics, Inc.
("Co-Diagnostics" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: CODX) securities
between February 25, 2020 and May 15, 2020, inclusive (the "Class
Period"). Co-Diagnostics investors have until August 17, 2020 to
file a lead plaintiff motion.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click
https://www.frankcruzlaw.com/cases/co-diagnostics-inc/

On February 24, 2020, Co-Diagnostics announced that it had received
regulatory clearance to sell its COVID-19 tests in the European
Community.

Then on April 6, 2020, the Company announced that it had received
emergency use authorization for its tests from the U.S. Food and
Drug Administration ("FDA").

Finally, on May 14, 2020, after the Company continued to uphold its
statements about the success of its test in its first quarter
results, public reports began to circulate, questioning the
Company's claims of 100% accuracy because the Company was hesitant
to participate in U.S.-based testing. Later in the day, the U.S.
FDA stated publicly that no COVID-19 test is 100% accurate.

On this news, the Company's share price fell $5.06, or over 22%, to
close at $17.07 per share on May 15, 2020, thereby injuring
investors.

If you purchased Co-Diagnostics securities during the Class Period,
you may move the Court no later than August 17, 2020 to ask the
Court to appoint you as lead plaintiff. To be a member of the Class
you need not take any action at this time; you may retain counsel
of your choice or take no action and remain an absent member of the
Class. If you purchased Co-Diagnostics securities, have information
or would like to learn more about these claims, or have any
questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests
with respect to these matters, please contact

          Frank R. Cruz
          The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz
          1999 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1100
          Los Angeles, California 90067
          Tel: 310-914-5007
          E-mail: info@frankcruzlaw.com
          Web site: http://www.frankcruzlaw.com/

If you inquire by email please include your mailing address,
telephone number, and number of shares purchased. [GN]

COLONY CAPITAL: July 27 Lead Plaintiff Motion Deadline Set
----------------------------------------------------------
The following statement is being issued by Levi & Korsinsky, LLP:

To: All persons or entities who purchased or otherwise acquired
securities of Colony Capital, Inc. (NYSE: CLNY) ("Colony Capital")
between August 9, 2019 and May 7, 2020. You are hereby notified
that a securities class action lawsuit has been commenced in the
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California. To get more information go to:

https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/colony-capital-inc-loss-submission-form?prid=7370&wire=5

or contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. either via email at
jlevi@levikorsinsky.com or by telephone at (212) 363-7500. There is
no cost or obligation to you.

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period Defendants
issued materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed
to disclose that: (i) Colony's sale of its industrial real estate
portfolio and the bifurcation of Colony Credit Real Estate's
portfolio were foreseeably likely to negatively impact Colony's
financial and operating results; (ii) certain of Colony's remaining
portfolio companies carried unsustainable levels of debt secured by
hotels and healthcare-related properties and were thus at a
significant risk of default; and (iii) as a result, the Company's
public statements were materially false and misleading at all
relevant times.

If you suffered a loss in Colony Capital you have until July 27,
2020 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your
ability to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as
a lead plaintiff.

Levi & Korsinsky -- http://www.zlk.com-- is a nationally
recognized firm with offices in New York, California, Connecticut,
and Washington D.C. The firm's attorneys have extensive expertise
and experience representing investors in securities litigation and
have recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved
shareholders. Attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee
similar outcomes.

CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
55 Broadway, 10th Floor
New York, NY 10006
jlevi@levikorsinsky.com
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
[GN]


COLONY CAPITAL: Schall Law Files Class Action Lawsuit
-----------------------------------------------------
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
announces the filing of a class-action lawsuit against Colony
Capital, Inc. (NYSE:CLNY) for violations of 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Investors who purchased the Company's securities between August 9,
2019 and May 7, 2020, inclusive (the ''Class Period''), are
encouraged to contact the firm before July 27, 2020.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click
https://schallfirm.com/join-action-form/?slug=colony-capital-inc-2&id=2488

We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law
Firm, 1880 Century Park East, Suite 404, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at
310-301-3335, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also
reach us through the firm's website at www.schallfirm.com, or by
email at brian@schallfirm.com.

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

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading
statements to the market. Colony's sale of its real estate
portfolio and the splitting apart of Colony Credit Real Estate's
portfolio were likely to negatively impact the Company's financial
results. The Company's remaining portfolio companies carried
unsustainably high levels of debt secured by healthcare and hotel
properties and were at a significant risk of default. Based on
these facts, the Company's public statements were false and
materially misleading throughout the class period. When the market
learned the truth about Colony, investors suffered damages.

Join the case to recover your losses.

The Schall Law Firm represents investors around the world and
specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder
rights litigation.

Contact:

         The Schall Law Firm
         Brian Schall, Esq.,
         www.schallfirm.com
         Office: 310-301-3335
         Cell: 424-303-1964
         E-mail: info@schallfirm.com [GN]


COLUMBIA COUNTY, NY: Columbia County COBA Files Suit in N.D.N.Y.
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Murell, et al. The
case is styled as Columbia County Corrections Officer's Benevolent
Association, Local 3828; New York State Law Enforcement Officers
Union, District Council 82, AFSCME, AFL-CIO; Matthew Hogencamp, as
President of the Columbia County Corrections Officer's Benevolent
Association, Local 3828, New York State Law Enforcement Officers
Union, District Council 82, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, individually and on
behalf of all similarly situated members v. Matt B. Murell, in his
official capacity as Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of
Columbia County; P.J. Keeler, Jr., in his official capacity as
County Treasurer of Columbia County; Ronald Caponera, in his
official capacity as County Comptroller of Columbia County; Robert
J. Fitzsimmons, in his official capacity as County Attorney of
Columbia County; Michaele Williams-Riordon, in her official
capacity as Human Resources Director of Columbia County; David P.
Bartlett, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Columbia County;
Columbia County Board of Supervisors; County of Columbia, Case No.
1:20-cv-00684-BKS-CFH (N.D.N.Y., June 18, 2020).

The nature of suit is stated as Constitutional-State Statute for
Breach of Contract.

Matt B. Murell is the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of
Columbia County, New York.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jeffrey P. Mans, Esq.
          P.O. Box 11-282
          Albany, NY 12211-0282
          Phone: (518) 265-4135
          Email: adkhighlander@gmail.com


CONN'S INC: Levi & Korsinsky Notifies Shareholders of Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------------
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is notifying all persons or entities who
purchased or otherwise acquired securities of Conn's, Inc. (NASDAQ:
CONN) ("Conn's") between September 3, 2019 and December 9, 2019
that a securities class action lawsuit has been commenced in the
the United States District Court for the Southern District of
Texas.

To get more information go to:

https://www.zlk.com/pslra-1/conns-inc-information-request-form?prid=7283&wire=5

The complaint alleges that throughout the class period Defendants
issued materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed
to disclose that: (1) Conn's was experiencing an increase in first
payment defaults and 60-plus day delinquencies; (2) as a result,
Conn's was reasonably likely to record an increase to its provision
for bad debts; (3) the Company made certain underwriting
adjustments, including tightening its standards for new customers
and online applicants; (4) as a result, the Company's same-store
sales would be adversely impacted; and (5) as a result of the
foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

If you suffered a loss in Conn's you have until July 14, 2020 to
request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff. Your ability
to share in any recovery doesn't require that you serve as a lead
plaintiff.

Levi & Korsinsky is a nationally recognized firm with offices in
New York, California, Connecticut, and Washington D.C. The firm's
attorneys have extensive expertise and experience representing
investors in securities litigation and have recovered hundreds of
millions of dollars for aggrieved shareholders.

Contact:

         Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
         Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
         55 Broadway, 10th Floor
         New York, NY 10006
         E-mail: jlevi@levikorsinsky.com
         Tel: (212) 363-7500
         Fax: (212) 363-7171
         Web site: http://www.zlk.com/[GN]


DELL TECHNOLOGIES: Faces Lopez Suit Over Breach of Fiduciary Duty
-----------------------------------------------------------------
KENIA LOPEZ v. DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., VMWARE, INC., MICHAEL S.
DELL, ROBERT C. MEE, and CYNTHIA GAYLOR, Case No. 2020-0440-KSJM
(Del. Ch., June 4, 2020), is brought on behalf of the Plaintiff and
similarly situated former public stockholders of Pivotal Software,
Inc., asserting breach of fiduciary duty claims stemming from
VMware's 2019 acquisition of Pivotal.

The Plaintiff contends that the Acquisition was not fair to
Pivotal's Class A stockholders. The Plaintiff alleges that the
Controller Defendants exerted their influence over the Pivotal
Board and leveraged their control to cash out Pivotal Class A
stockholders at an unfair price following an unfair process, in
pursuit of their own self-interest.

As a controlling stockholder of both VMware and Pivotal, Dell stood
on both sides of the Acquisition. At the time the Acquisition was
announced, Dell held an 80.8% economic stake in VMware and a 62.6%
economic stake in Pivotal, according to the complaint. This gave
Dell a powerful economic incentive to favor VMware in the price
negotiations. Dell's Class B common stock had identical rights to
the Class A shares other than additional voting power and the right
to convert to Class A stock (on a one-for-one basis). Yet rather
than accept $15.00 in cash for each share of its Pivotal Class B
stock, Dell elected to receive 0.0550 shares of VMware Class B
common stock, says the Plaintiff.

As a result, the Plaintiff and the Class were harmed by the failure
to receive fair consideration for their Pivotal shares, the value
of their investment was diminished, and they suffered damages in an
amount to be determined at trial.

The Plaintiff was a Pivotal stockholder.

Dell is a technology provider, with a portfolio of IT hardware,
software, and service solutions spanning both traditional
infrastructure and cloud technologies. VMware was part of the
Pivotal control group at all relevant times through its ownership
of Class B shares. Michael Dell is the Chairman and CEO of
Dell.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gregory V. Varallo, Esq.
          Jeroen van Kwawegen, Esq.
          Edward G. Timlin, Esq.
          Thomas G. James, Esq.
          BERNSTEIN LITOWITZ BERGER & GROSSMANN LLP
          500 Delaware Avenue, Suite 901
          Wilmington, DE 19801
          Telephone: (302) 364-3601

               - and -

          Jason Leviton, Esq.
          Joel Fleming, Esq.
          Amanda R. Crawford, Esq.
          BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
          260 Franklin St., Suite 1860
          Boston, MA 02110
          Telephone: (617) 398-5600

               - and -

          Robert Weiser, Esq.
          James Ficaro, Esq.
          THE WEISER LAW FIRM, P.C.
          22 Cassatt Avenue
          Berwyn, PA 19312
          Telephone: (610) 225-2677


DRPHONEFIX INC: Faces Stein TCPA Suit Over Unsolicited Text Ads
---------------------------------------------------------------
AXEL STEIN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. DRPHONEFIX, INC., a Florida corporation, Case No.
108210238 (Fla. Cir., Miami Dade Cty., June 1, 2020), alleges that
the Defendant promotes and markets its merchandise, in part, by
sending unsolicited text messages to wireless phone users, in
violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

The Plaintiff contends that to solicit new paying patients, the
Defendant engages in unsolicited marketing with no regard for
privacy rights of the recipients of those messages. The Plaintiff
adds that the Defendant caused thousands of unsolicited text
messages to be sent to his and and class members' cellular
telephones, causing them injuries, including invasion of their
privacy, aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass,
and conversion.

The Defendant is an electronics repair chain with over 50
locations.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
          Garrett O. Berg, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
          14 NE 1st A venue, Suite 705
          Miami, FL 33132
          Telephone: 305 479-2299
          E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
                  gberg@sharnisgentile.com

               - and -

          Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW, PA
          20900 NE 30th Ave., Suite 417
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Telephone: 305-975-3320
          E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com


EATALY CENTURY: Fails to Pay for All Hours Worked, Brunquell Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GARRETT BRUNQUELL, as an individual and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. EATALY CENTURY CITY, LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company; and DOES 1 through 100, Case No. 20SMCV00773
(Cal. Super., Los Angeles Cty., June 2, 2020), seeks civil
penalties under the Private Attorneys General Act, California Labor
Code.

The Plaintiff alleges that the Defendants failed to compensate the
Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees for all hours worked.
Specifically, Terra operated in two shifts. A lunch shift and a
dinner shift. At least once every other week, the Plaintiff and
other non-exempt employees would attend a meeting conducted by the
Defendants at which they would be given beverages and food that the
Defendants wanted the non-exempt employees to incentivize customers
to buy.

The Plaintiff further alleges that while the Defendants organized
the meeting at their own location and benefited from non-exempt
employees attending the meeting, they nevertheless failed to pay
the Plaintiff and other aggrieved employees for this worktime in
violation of California law. Further, some of this non-compensated
time should have been paid at an overtime rate of pay.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendants at their II Pesce
Cucina Restaurant in Century City, California, as a non-exempt
server from 2017 until he transferred in June 2018 to the
Defendants' Terra restaurant also located in Century City.

The Defendants use the brand name Eataly for a number of
restaurant/market throughout the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Daniel J. Brown, Esq.
          STANSBURY BROWN LAW
          Venice, CA 90291
          Telephone: (323) 207-5925
          E-mail: dbrown@stansburybrownlaw.com


ELANCO ANIMAL: Glancy Prongay Reminds of July 20 Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM") reminds investors of the
upcoming July 20, 2020 deadline to file a lead plaintiff motion in
the class action filed on behalf of Elanco Animal Health
Incorporated ("Elanco" or the "Company") (NYSE: ELAN)  securities
between January 10, 2020 and May 6, 2020, inclusive (the "Class
Period").

If you suffered a loss on your Elanco investments or would like to
inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your loss
under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact
information
https://www.glancylaw.com/cases-application/case-information/elanco-animal-health-incorporated/.
You can also contact Charles H. Linehan, of GPM at 310-201-9150,
Toll-Free at 888-773-9224, or via email at
shareholders@glancylaw.com to learn more about your rights.

On May 7, 2020, before the market opened, Elanco announced its
first quarter 2020 financial results, reporting revenue of $657.7
million and earnings per share of -$0.12, reflecting "a reduction
of approximately $60 million in channel inventory." The Company's
Chief Executive Officer attributed the disappointing results to
"distributor performance," among other things, and stated that
Elanco planned "to tighten [its] approach across many facets of
[its] distributor relationships."

On this news, the Company's share price fell $3.05, or over 13%, to
close at $19.88 per share on May 7, 2020, on unusually heavy
trading volume.

The complaint filed in this class action alleges that throughout
the Class Period, Defendants made materially false and/or
misleading statements, as well as failed to disclose material
adverse facts about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects. Specifically, Defendants failed to disclose to
investors: (1) that, after consolidating its distributors from
eight to four, the Company increased the amount of inventory,
including companion animal products, held by each distributor; (2)
that Elanco's distributors were not experiencing sufficient demand
to sell through the inventory; (3) that, as a result, the Company's
revenue was reasonably likely to decline; (4) that, as a result of
the foregoing, Elanco would reduce its channel inventory with
respect to companion animal products; and (5) that, as a result of
the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's
business, operations, and prospects, were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

If you purchased or otherwise acquired Elanco securities during the
Class Period, you may move the Court no later than July 20, 2020 to
request appointment as lead plaintiff in this putative class action
lawsuit. To be a member of the class action you need not take any
action at this time; you may retain counsel of your choice or take
no action and remain an absent member of the class action. If you
wish to learn more about this class action, or if you have any
questions concerning this announcement or your rights or interests
with respect to the pending class action lawsuit, please contact:

         Charles Linehan, Esquire
         Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP
         1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
         Los Angeles, California 90067
         Tel: (310) 201-9150
         Toll-Free: 888-773-9224
         E-mail: shareholders@glancylaw.com
         Web site: http://www.glancylaw.com/

If you inquire by email please include your mailing address,
telephone number and number of shares purchased. [GN]



ENDO INTERNATIONAL: Pomerantz Announces Filing of Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
Pomerantz LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed
against Endo International plc (NASDAQ: ENDP) and certain of its
officers.   The class action, filed in United States District Court
for the District of New Jersey, and indexed under 20-cv-07536, is
on behalf of a class consisting of all persons and entities other
than Defendants who purchased or otherwise acquired Endo securities
between August 8, 2017, and June 10, 2020, both dates inclusive
(the "Class Period"), seeking to recover damages caused by
Defendants' violations of the federal securities laws and to pursue
remedies under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder, against the Company and certain of its top officials.

If you are a shareholder who purchased Endo securities during the
class period, you have until August 18, 2020, to ask the Court to
appoint you as Lead Plaintiff for the class.  A copy of the
Complaint can be obtained at www.pomerantzlaw.com.   To discuss
this action, contact:

         Robert S. Willoughby
         POMERANTZ LLP
         Tel: 888.476.6529
         Toll-free: 888.4-POMLAW, Ext. 7980.
         E-mail: rswilloughby@pomlaw.com
         Web site: http://www.pomerantzlaw.com/

Those who inquire by e-mail are encouraged to include their mailing
address, telephone number, and the number of shares purchased.

To join the class action, click:
  https://form.jotform.com/pomerantzllp2/ENDP

Endo was founded in 1920 and is headquartered in Dublin, Ireland.
The Company manufactures and sells generic and branded
pharmaceuticals in the U.S. and internationally, including both
generic and branded opioid products.

Endo operates through several subsidiaries engaged in the opioid
market, including Endo Health Solutions Inc. ("EHS"), Endo
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. ("EPI"), Par Pharmaceutical Companies, Inc.
("PPCI"), and  Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. ("PPI").

Endo and its subsidiaries have been substantial manufacturers of
opioids in the U.S., with the State of New York  comprising a
significant part of Endo's opioid market.  Opioids sales
constituted a substantial portion of Endo's overall revenues.
Opioids sales were responsible for roughly $403 million of Endo's
overall revenues in 2012, $657 million in 2014, and $486 million of
Endo's $4 billion in sales in 2016.  Its branded opioid, Opana ER,
yielded revenue of $1.15 billion from 2010 to 2013, and it alone
accounted for 10% of Endo's total revenue in 2012.

The complaint alleges that 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: (i) the full scope of Endo's and/or its
subsidiaries' contributions to the opioid crisis, including, but
not limited to, their opioid products' disproportionately negative
impact on New York, one of the most populous states in the U.S., as
well as the fraud that Defendants perpetrated on the New York
insurance market; (ii) part of that contribution to the crisis
included Endo publishing and disseminating false information to
health care providers regarding the risks and benefits of opioids;
(iii) that the foregoing, once revealed, was foreseeably likely to
subject Endo and/or its subsidiaries to increased regulatory
scrutiny and enforcement, as well as significant financial and/or
reputational harm, particularly with respect to New York; and (iv)
that, as a result, the Company's public statements were materially
false and misleading at all relevant times.

On June 10, 2020, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo ("Governor Cuomo")
announced that the New York Department of Financial Services
("DFS") had filed administrative charges against Endo in connection
with its role in the opioid crisis, alleging that Endo fraudulently
misrepresented the safety and efficacy of its opioid drugs while
minimizing the risk of addiction and other ill effects.  That same
day, DFS issued its own press release specifically announcing that
it "has filed charges and initiated administrative proceedings
against Endo . . . and its subsidiaries, [EHS], [EPI], and [PPCI]"
in connection with "DFS' ongoing investigation into the entities
that created and perpetuated the opioid crisis"; that "[t]he DFS'
statement of charges alleges that, like other opioid Manufactures,
Endo . . . [k]nowingly furthered a false narrative to legitimize
opioids as appropriate for broad treatment of pain by downplaying
their long-known addictive nature and risks"; and that Endo and its
subsidiaries "[m]isrepresented the safety and efficacy of opioids,
without legitimate scientific substantiation," and "[d]eployed a
large sales force to target healthcare providers directly with
these misrepresentations."

On this news, Endo's Ordinary share price fell $0.66 per share, or
14.63%, to close at $3.85 per share on June 10, 2020.

The Pomerantz Firm, with offices in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles,
and Paris, is acknowledged as one of the premier firms in the areas
of corporate, securities, and antitrust class litigation. Founded
by the late Abraham L. Pomerantz, known as the dean of the class
action bar, the Pomerantz Firm pioneered the field of securities
class actions. Today, more than 80 years later, the Pomerantz Firm
continues in the tradition he established, fighting for the rights
of the victims of securities fraud, breaches of fiduciary duty, and
corporate misconduct. The Firm has recovered numerous
multimillion-dollar damages awards on behalf of class members.
[GN]



ENPHASE ENERGY: Kahn Swick Reminds of Aug. 17 Deadline
------------------------------------------------------
Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC ("KSF") and KSF partner, former Attorney
General of Louisiana, Charles C. Foti, Jr., remind investors that
they have until August 17, 2020 to file lead plaintiff applications
in a securities class action lawsuit against Enphase Energy, Inc.
(NasdaqGM: ENPH), if they purchased the Company's shares between
February 26, 2019 and June 17, 2020, inclusive (the "Class
Period").  This action is pending in the United States District
Court for the Northern District of California.

What You May Do

If you purchased shares of Enphase and would like to discuss your
legal rights and how this case might affect you and your right to
recover for your economic loss, you may, without obligation or cost
to you, contact KSF Managing Partner Lewis Kahn toll-free at
1-877-515-1850 or via email (lewis.kahn@ksfcounsel.com), or visit
https://www.ksfcounsel.com/cases/nasdaqgm-enph/ to learn more. If
you wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in this class action, you
must petition the Court by August 17, 2020.

About the Lawsuit

Enphase and certain of its executives are charged with failing to
disclose material information during the Class Period, violating
federal securities laws.

On June 17, 2020, a report by Prescience Point Capital Management
highlighted that "[a]t least $205.3m of ENPH's reported FY19 US
revenue is fabricated, and a significant portion of its
international revenue is fabricated as well…Deloitte should
launch an in-depth investigation of ENPH's accounting practices,"
that there had been hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of
insider sales by Company executives in the prior few months, and
also set a target price of "Delisted" for ENPH.

On this news, the price of Enphase's shares plummeted.

The case is Hurst v. Enphase Energy, Inc., et al., 20-cv- 4036.

Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC, whose partners include former Louisiana
Attorney General Charles C. Foti, Jr., is one of the nation's
premier boutique securities litigation law firms. KSF serves a
variety of clients – including public institutional investors,
hedge funds, money managers and retail investors – in seeking to
recover investment losses due to corporate fraud and malfeasance by
publicly traded companies. KSF has offices in New York, California
and Louisiana.

Contact:

         Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC
         Lewis Kahn, Managing Partner
         E-mail: lewis.kahn@ksfcounsel.com
         Tel: 1-877-515-1850
         1100 Poydras St., Suite 3200
         New Orleans, LA 70163
         Web site: http://www.ksfcounsel.com/
[GN]



EQUITAL LTD: Faces Ligos Suit Alleging Breach of Fiduciary Duties
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Equital, Ltd., et al.
The case is captioned as Joseph Lawrence Ligos v. Asaf Yarkoni;
Equital, Ltd.; Frans Sluiter; Haim Tsuff; I.O.C.-Israel Oil
Company, Ltd.; Isramco Negev 2 Limited Partnership; J.O.E.L.
Jerusalem Oil Exploration Ltd.; Joseph From; Max Pridgeon; Naphtha
Holding Ltd.; Naphtha Israel Petroleum Corporation, Ltd.; Naphtha
US Oil, Inc.; Nir Hasson; United Kingsway Ltd.; YHK General
Manager, Ltd.; and YHK Investment L.P., Case No. 2020-0435-SG (Del.
Ch., June 4, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Sam Glasscock.

The lawsuit alleges breach of fiduciary duties.

Equital was started in 1977 with the goal of oil and gas
exploration. The Company operates in the fields of construction and
real estate management, oil and gas exploration, investments in
food and other industries.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Samuel L. Closic, Esq.
          Stephen D. Dargitz, Esq.
          Kevin Davenport, Esq.
          Corinne Elise Amato, Esq.
          PRICKETT JONES & ELLIOTT
          1310 King St., Box 1328
          Wilmington, DE 19899
          Telephone: (302) 888-6517
          E-mail: slclosic@prickett.com


ERIE INSURANCE: Denies Claims for Covered Losses, Tappo Alleges
---------------------------------------------------------------
Tappo of Buffalo, LLC, and Tappo Pizza, LLC, individually and on
behalf of all others similarly situated v. ERIE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Case No. 1:20-cv-00754-LJV (W.D.N.Y., June 18, 2020), arises from
the Defendant's nationwide policy of denying all claims for covered
losses under the Ultrapack Property Coverage resulting from the
impacts of COVID-19 and the orders issued by civil authorities
prohibiting or limiting business operations of its insureds.

The business operations of both Plaintiffs Tappo and Tappo Pizza
have been severely impacted by reason of the COVID-19 pandemic and
have through no fault of their own been forced to curtail business
and/or severely limit their business operations by governmental
order and to protect and preserve their property from further
damage, according to the complaint.

To insure against such adverse impacts on their respective
businesses and/or to prevent further damage to their property,
Plaintiffs Tappo and Tappo Pizza each purchased commercial
liability and property insurance policies from Defendant Erie that
included special coverage as set forth in the "Ultrapack Plus
Commercial Property Coverage Part" CL 0002 and "Restaurants
Enhancement Endorsement" CL-0348 (collectively the "Ultrapack
Property Coverage").

The policies issued to the Plaintiffs by the Defendant Erie are
commonly known as "all risk policies", meaning that the policies
insure against all risk of loss except risks that are specifically
excluded, according to the complaint. There is no exclusion in the
policies of insurance issued by Defendant Erie to Plaintiffs and
other Class members for viruses or other communicable diseases. The
Plaintiffs were each forced to close or reduce their business
operations due to the effects of COVID-19 and the orders issued by
civil authorities in New York State prohibiting on- site service
for customers, as well as to fulfill Plaintiff's contractual
obligations to Defendant Erie to prevent further damage to covered
property and minimize the suspension of their respective business
loss.

The Plaintiffs contend that Defendant Erie has without basis
adopted a nationwide policy of denying all claims for covered
losses under the Ultrapack Property Coverage resulting from the
impacts of COVID-19 and the orders issued by civil authorities
prohibiting or limiting business operations of its insureds. The
Plaintiffs add that Defendant Erie has denied the claims they and
other Class members submitted under their respective policies.

The Plaintiffs own and operate Tappo Restaurant and Tappo Pizza, a
full service Italian-American bar and restaurant, and an upscale
bar and restaurant specializing in wood fired gourmet pizzas,
respectively.

Erie is a foreign corporation licensed and authorized to do
business in New York State.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Jeffrey F. Reina, Esq.
          James T. Scime, Esq.
          Todd J. Aldinger, Esq.
          LIPSITZ GREEN SCIME CAMBRIA, LLP
          42 Delaware Avenue, Suite 120
          Buffalo, NY 14202
          Phone: (716) 849-1333
          Email: jreina@lglaw.com


FIRST SOLAR: Final Hearing Tuesday on Smilovits Settlement
----------------------------------------------------------
First Solar, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2020, that a final hearing to consider approval of the
parties' settlement in the class action suit entitled, Smilovits v.
First Solar, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-00555-DGC, is scheduled
for June 30, 2020.

On March 15, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit titled
Smilovits v. First Solar, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-00555-DGC,
was filed in the United States District Court for the District of
Arizona against the Company and certain of its current and former
directors and officers.

The complaint was filed on behalf of persons who purchased or
otherwise acquired the Company's publicly traded securities between
April 30, 2008 and February 28, 2012 (the "Class Action"). The
complaint generally alleged that the defendants violated Sections
10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making
false and misleading statements regarding the Company's financial
performance and prospects.

The action included claims for damages, including interest, and an
award of reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees to the putative
class.

On July 23, 2012, the Arizona District Court issued an order
appointing as lead plaintiffs in the Class Action the Mineworkers'
Pension Scheme and British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme
(collectively, the "Pension Schemes").

The Pension Schemes filed an amended complaint on August 17, 2012,
which contains similar allegations and seeks similar relief as the
original complaint.

Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on September 14, 2012. On
December 17, 2012, the court denied defendants’ motion to
dismiss.

On October 8, 2013, the Arizona District Court granted the Pension
Schemes' motion for class certification and certified a class
comprised of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired
publicly traded securities of the Company between April 30, 2008
and February 28, 2012 and were damaged thereby, excluding
defendants and certain related parties. Merits discovery closed on
February 27, 2015.

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on March 27, 2015.
On August 11, 2015, the Arizona District Court granted defendants'
motion in part and denied it in part, and certified an issue for
immediate appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

First Solar filed a petition for interlocutory appeal with the
Ninth Circuit, and that petition was granted on November 18, 2015.
On May 20, 2016, the Pension Schemes moved to vacate the order
granting the petition, dismiss the appeal, and stay the merits
briefing schedule. On December 13, 2016, the Ninth Circuit denied
the Pension Schemes' motion. On January 31, 2018, the Ninth Circuit
issued an opinion affirming the Arizona District Court's order
denying in part defendants' motion for summary judgment.

On March 16, 2018, First Solar filed a petition for panel rehearing
or rehearing en banc with the Ninth Circuit. On May 7, 2018, the
Ninth Circuit denied defendants' petition. On August 6, 2018,
defendants filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S.
Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, in the Arizona District Court, expert discovery was
completed on February 5, 2019. On June 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme
Court denied the petition. Following the denial of the petition,
the Arizona District Court ordered that the trial begin on January
7, 2020.

On January 5, 2020, First Solar entered into a Memorandum of
Understanding ("MOU") to settle the Class Action.

First Solar agreed to pay a total of $350 million to settle the
claims in the Class Action brought on behalf of all persons who
purchased or otherwise acquired the Company's shares between April
30, 2008 and February 28, 2012, in exchange for mutual releases and
a dismissal with prejudice of the complaint upon court approval of
the settlement.

The proposed settlement contains no admission of liability,
wrongdoing, or responsibility by any of the parties.

As a result of the entry into the MOU, the company accrued a loss
for the above-referenced settlement in its results of operations
for the year ended December 31, 2019.

On January 24, 2020, First Solar paid $350 million to the
settlement escrow agent. On February 13, 2020, First Solar entered
into a stipulation of settlement with certain named plaintiffs on
terms and conditions that are consistent with the MOU.

On February 14, 2020, the lead plaintiffs filed a motion for
preliminary approval of the settlement. Following a February 27,
2020 hearing, the Arizona District Court entered an order on March
2, 2020 that granted preliminary approval of the settlement and
permitted notice to the class.

Under that order, among other matters, written objections from any
objectors were due by June 9, 2020 and a final approval hearing is
scheduled for June 30, 2020.

First Solar, Inc. provides photovoltaic (PV) solar energy solutions
in the United States and internationally. It operates in two
segments, Modules and Systems. The company was formerly known as
First Solar Holdings, Inc. and changed its name to First Solar,
Inc. in 2006. First Solar, Inc. was founded in 1999 and is
headquartered in Tempe, Arizona.


FORESCOUT TECHNOLOGIES: Entwistle, Susman Godfrey File Class Suits
------------------------------------------------------------------
Entwistle & Cappucci LLP and Susman Godfrey L.L.P. announced that
they have filed a securities class action lawsuit on behalf of
persons or entities that purchased or otherwise acquired common
stock of Forescout Technologies, Inc. (NYSE: FSCT) during the
period February 6, 2020 through May 15, 2020, inclusive (the "Class
Period"), and who thereby sustained damages (the "Class"). The case
was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern
District of California, Case No. 3:20-cv-03819 against Forescout
and related defendants (collectively, "Defendants").

The class action asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The complaint alleges that
Defendants made materially false and misleading statements and
omissions of material facts regarding the significant and
disproportionate decline in Forescout's financial performance and
the related risk Forescout's planned acquisition by Advent
International Corp. would not close. As a result, Class members
that purchased Forescout common stock during the Class Period did
so at artificially inflated prices. In this action, Plaintiffs
seek, among other things, an award of damages and prejudgment
interest, to Plaintiffs and other Class members.

If you wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in this matter, you must
file a motion with the Court no later than 60 days from today, or
by Monday, August 10, 2020. Any member of the proposed Class may
move the Court to serve as a lead plaintiff in this matter through
counsel of their choice, or they may choose to do nothing and
remain a member of the Class.

Contact:

          Entwistle & Cappucci LLP
          Robert N. Cappucci, Esq.
          E-mail: rcappucci@entwistle-law.com
          299 Park Avenue, 20th Floor
          New York, New York 10171
          Telephone: (212) 894-7200
          Facsimile: (212) 894-7272
          Web site: http://www.entwistle-law.com/

Entwistle & Cappucci is a national law firm providing exceptional
legal representation to clients globally in the most complex and
challenging legal matters. Our practice encompasses all areas of
litigation, including securities, antitrust, corporate
transactions, general corporate and commercial, creditor's rights
and bankruptcy, corporate governance and fiduciary duty, government
affairs, insurance, investigations and white collar defense. Our
clients include public and private corporations, major hedge funds,
public pension funds, governmental entities, leading institutional
investors, domestic and foreign financial services companies,
emerging business enterprises and individual entrepreneurs.

For more than 30 years, Susman Godfrey --
http://www.susmangodfrey.com/--  
has focused its nationally recognized practice on just one thing:
high-stakes commercial litigation. It is one of the nation's
leading law firms, with offices in Houston, Seattle, Los Angeles
and New York. [GN]


FORESCOUT TECHNOLOGIES: Schall Law Firm Announces Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
on June 16 announced the filing of a class action lawsuit against
Forescout Technologies, Inc. ("Forescout" or "the Company")
(NASDAQ:FSCT) for violations of Secs. 10(b) and 20(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Investors who purchased the Company's securities between February
7, 2019 and October 9, 2019, inclusive (the "Class Period"), are
encouraged to contact the firm before March 2, 2020.

We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law
Firm, 1880 Century Park East, Suite 404, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at
424-303-1964, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also
reach us through the firm's website at www.schallfirm.com, or by
email at brian@schallfirm.com.

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

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading
statements to the market. Forescout suffered from significant
volatility related to large customer orders and poor execution on
deals in the pipeline, especially in EMEA. These problems were
likely to have a material impact on the Company's financial
results. Based on these facts, the Company's public statements were
false and materially misleading throughout the class period. When
the market learned the truth about Forescout, investors suffered
damages.

Join the case to recover your losses.

The Schall Law Firm represents investors around the world and
specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder
rights litigation.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some
jurisdictions under the applicable law and rules of ethics. [GN]


FOSTER BAIL: Violates Racketeering Laws, Anderson Suit Alleges
--------------------------------------------------------------
TERRENCE ANDERSON AKA SCOOBY and LEONARD BROWN AKA LB, ON BEHALF of
themselves and all others similarly situated v. Foster Bail Bonds,
KAREN BLACKMON, ANTONIOPFOSTER, WALTER FOSTER, DAVE FOSTER, AND
JOHN DOE AKA JB, Case No. 1:20-cv-02369-SCJ-JCF (N.D. Ga., June 1,
2020), seeks to recover damages for injuries resulting from the
Defendant's violations of the racketeering laws of the United
States.

The alleged violations include fraudulently obtaining money in
exchange for facilitating the release of inmates from Metropolitan
Atlanta area jails, breach of contract, replevin, fraud,
conversion, wire fraud, theft breach of fiduciary duty and bank
fraud.

The Plaintiffs contend that during the period of this conspiracy,
Foster Bail Bonds, the co-conspirators and the Defendants operated
a bail bonds service. Clients of most bonding companies are able to
pay a percentage of a bond or the entire amount in cash or
property. Foster Bail Bonds offered this service and one other,
"BackDoor," the Plaintiffs say.

For a specified amount a client is solicited to pay a large amount
to bond out and have his case dismissed or dead-docketed, the
Plaintiffs allege. The Plaintiffs assert that the Defendants'
entire operation used various means permeated by fraud in order to
obtain inmate releases from jail for their customers, family and
friends of the inmates and the inmates themselves. The Plaintiffs
add that the Defendants executed commercial surety bonds contracts,
illegally requested for-profit recognizance releases from public
officials, bribed Fulton county Sheriffs and court officials and
other public employees to release inmates.

The Plaintiffs bring the lawsuit on behalf of themselves and all
persons, who purchased bail bonding services from Foster Bail Bonds
and the Defendants in the state of Georgia from April 1996 up to
and including the present time.

Foster provides bail bonding services.

The Plaintiffs appear pro se.[BN]


GAME TOUCH: Fabricant Sues Over Unsolicited Phone Calls
-------------------------------------------------------
TERRY FABRICANT, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. GAME TOUCH TECHNOLOGIES INC and DOES 1
through 10, inclusive, Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-05423 (C.D.
Cal., June 18, 2020) is a class action complaint brought against
Defendants for their alleged negligent and willful violations of
the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

According to the complaint, Plaintiff received a call on her
cellular telephone numbers ending in -8950 beginning in or around
September 2019 from Defendant in an attempt to solicit Plaintiff to
purchase Defendants' services.

The complaint asserts that Defendants used an "automatic telephone
dialing system" to place its calls and Plaintiff never provided
"prior express consent" to receive such calls.

Moreover, Plaintiff's cellular telephone number has been on the
National Do-Not-Call Registry well over 30 days prior to
Defendant's initial calls.

Game Touch Technologies is a global gaming business. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


GANNETT PUBLISHING: Aronson Appeals C.D. Cal. Ruling to 9th Cir.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff Vicky Aronson filed an appeal from a court ruling in the
lawsuit styled Vicky Aronson v. Gannett Publishing Services, et
al., Case No. 5:19-cv-00996-PSG-JEM, in the U.S. District Court for
the Central District of California, Riverside.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the Plaintiff
moved the Court for an order:

   1. certifying this case as a class action for the following
      Class:

      "all California residents who are or were delivered
      newspapers on behalf of GPS, and/or their predecessors or
      merged entities in California, who signed independent
      contractor agreements with Gannett Publishing Services,
      LLC, LDC Distribution, LLC, and/or their predecessors or
      merged entities in interest, and who were classified as
      independent contractors during from August 24, 2014
      through the date notice is mailed to the Class";

   2. appointing Plaintiff's counsel, Potter Handy, LLP to serve
      as counsel to the class; and

   3. authorizing notice to the class of the pending action and
      its members' right to opt-out.

The appellate case is captioned as Vicky Aronson v. Gannett
Publishing Services, et al., Case No. 20-80099, in the United
States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Petitioner VICKY ARONSON, individually, and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:

          Mark D. Potter, Esq.
          James Michael Treglio, Esq.
          POTTER HANDY LLP
          8033 Linda Vista Road, Suite 200
          San Diego, CA 92111
          Telephone: (760) 480-4162
          Facsimile: (888) 422-5191
          E-mail: mark@potterhandy.com
                  jimt@potterhandy.com

Defendants-Respondents GANNETT PUBLISHING SERVICES, LLC, a Delaware
corporation, LDC DISTRIBUTION, LLC, a California limited liability
company, and LOUIS COX, an individual, are represented by:

          Bethany Pelliconi, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW, LLP
          2029 Century Park East, Suite 3500
          Los Angeles, CA 90067-3021
          Telephone: (310) 277-7200
          E-mail: bpelliconi@seyfarth.com

               - and -

          Richard B. Lapp, Esq.
          Camille Annette Olson, Esq.
          SEYFARTH SHAW LLP
          233 S. Wacker Drive, Suite 8000
          Chicago, IL 60606
          Telephone: (312) 460-5914
          E-mail: rlapp@seyfarth.com
                  colson@seyfarth.com

               - and -

          Katelyn K. Empey, Esq.
          Shaun M. Murphy, Esq.
          SLOVAK BARON EMPEY MURPHY & PINKNEY, LLP
          1800 E. Tahquitz Canyon Way
          Palm Springs, CA 92262
          Telephone: (760) 322-2275
          E-mail: kempey@sbemp.com
                  murphy@sbemp.com


GENWORTH MORTGAGE: Chirchir Sues Over Mortgage Premium Overpayment
------------------------------------------------------------------
DR. HABIBA CHIRCHIR, on behalf of herself and a similarly situated
class of persons, Plaintiff v. GENWORTH MORTGAGE INSURANCE
CORPORATION, GENWORTH MORTGAGE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF NORTH
CAROLINA, and CITIZENS BANK, N.A. d/b/a Citizens One Home Loans,
Defendants, Case No. 3:20-cv-00416 (S.D. W.Va., June 18, 2020) is a
class action complaint brought against Defendants for their alleged
abusive and deceptive practices in violations of the West Virginia
Consumer Credit and Protection Act, the Homeowners Protection Act,
and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.

Plaintiff has taken out a home loan with United Bank, Inc. on July
1, 2016 in which she was required to pay a Private Mortgage
Insurance (PMI) premium of $50.51 each calendar month together with
her regular mortgage obligation.

According to the complaint, Plaintiff has paid off the total amount
of mortgage loan on June 18, 2019. However, the check for the
escrow balance remitted by Defendant Citizens Bank to Plaintiff
showed that there was a $50.51 deduction made after the payoff on
June 19, 2019 -- to pay Genworth for the June PMI Premium.

The complaint asserts that Defendant Genworth disregarded the
prorated premium of $30.31 by collecting the entire $50.51 PMI
premium for June, and failed to transfer or retransfer to Defendant
Citizens the unearned PMI premium of $20.20 within 30 days of being
notified of the loan's termination or cancellation.

Citizen Bank, N.A. d/b/a Citizens One Home Loans provides
commercial banking services and offers loans solution.

Genworth Mortgage Insurance Corporation and Genworth Mortgage
Insurance Corporation of North Carolina provide mortgage insurance
in the U.S. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Jonathan R. Marshall, Esq.
          BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
          209 Capitol Street
          Charleston, WV 25301-2205
          Tel: (304) 345-6555
          Fax: (304) 342-1110
          Email: jmarshall@baileyglasser.com

                - and –

          Patricia M. Kipnis, Esq.
          BAILEY & GLASSER LLP
          923 Haddonfield Road, Suite 300
          Cherry Hill, NJ 08002
          Tel: (205) 906-1709
          Email: pkipnis@baileyglasser.com


GOOGLE LLC: Loot Box Encourages Gambling, Coffee et al. Claim
-------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN COFFEE; MEI-LING MONTANEZ; and S.M., a minor by MEI-LING
MONTANEZ; S.M.'s parent and guardian, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, Plaintiffs v. GOOGLE LLC, Defendant,
Case 5:20-cv-03901 (N.D. Cal., June 12, 2020) alleges that the
Defendant's Loot Box mislead children to engage in gambling and
addictive conduct.

According to the complaint, the Defendant -- through the games it
sells and offers for free to consumers through its "Google Play"
store -- engages in predatory practices enticing consumers,
including children to engage in gambling and similar addictive
conduct in violation of the laws designed to protect consumers and
to prohibit such practices.

The Defendant relies on creating addictive behaviors in kids to
generate huge profits for the Company. Over the last four years the
Defendant's Google Play store games have brought in billions of
dollars, even though the vast majority of the games are free to
download. A large percentage of Google's revenues from Google Play
store games come from the in-game purchases of what are known in
the gaming industry as "loot boxes" or "loot crates." Dozens, if
not hundreds, of Google Play store games rely on some form of Loot
Box or similar gambling mechanism to generate billions of dollars,
much of it from kids.

Loot Boxes are purchased using real money, but are simply
randomized chances within the game to obtain important or better
weapons, costumes or player appearance (called "skins"), or some
other in-game item or feature that is designed to enhance
game-play. If obtained, these weapons, skins, and other items can
help the player advance in the game and enhance the game playing
experience. But buying a Loot Box is a gamble, because the player
does not know what the Loot Box actually contains until it is
opened.

Google LLC is a global technology company specializes in
internet-related services and products. The Company is primarily
focused on web-based search and display advertising tools, search
engine, cloud computing, software, and hardware. Google serves
customers worldwide. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Andrew J. Brown, Esq.
          THE LAW OFFICES OF ANDREW J. BROWN
          501 West Broadway, Suite 1490
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 501-6550
          E-mail: andrew@thebrownlawfirm.com

               - and -

          Timothy G. Blood, Esq.
          Thomas J. O'reardon II, Esq.
          BLOOD HURST & O'REARDON, LLP
          501 West Broadway, Suite 1490
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 338-1100
          Facsimile: (619) 338-1101
          E-mail: tblood@bholaw.com
                  toreardon@bholaw.com


GRANA Y MONTERO: $20-Mil. Accord Reached in Securities Class Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Grana y Montero S.A.A. said in its Form 20-F report filed with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on June 15, 2020, for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2019, that the Company has entered
into a term sheet with the plaintiffs' counsel in the consolidated
class action suit pending before the U.S. District Court for the
Eastern District of New York.

Two class action lawsuits have been filed against the company and
certain of its former officials in before the United States Court
for the Eastern District of New York during the first quarter of
2017 that were later consolidated into a single claim.

The plaintiffs allege that during the class period the Company
obtained equity investments from investors based on false and
misleading statements that were made in breach of the Securities
Act and that caused material losses to such investors.

In particular, it is complaint alleges that the defendant did not
disclose, among other things, that: a) the Company knew that its
partner Odebrecht was involved in illegal activities; and that, b)
the Company profited from such activities in violation of its own
corporate governance rules.

As of the date of this report, the Company has entered into term
sheet with the plaintiffs' counsel, whereby the parties undertake
to ensure the termination of the class action, through the
negotiation, conclusion and filing of the final settlement
agreement before court. The amount stipulated for the termination
of the class action equals to US$20 million.

As of December 31, 2019, the Company has made a provision of S/49.8
million (US$15 million) and the surplus of US$5 million will be
covered by a professional liability policy pursuant to settlement
agreement entered with the insurer.

Grana y Montero S.A.A., together with its subsidiaries, engages in
engineering and construction, infrastructure, and real estate
businesses in Peru, Chile, and Colombia. The company operates
through Engineering and Construction, Infrastructure, Real Estate,
and Technical Services segments. Grana y Montero S.A.A. was founded
in 1933 and is based in Lima, Peru.


GRAND CANYON: Barbuto & Johansson Reminds of July 13 Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
Barbuto & Johansson, P.A. ("BARJO") and Of Counsel, Neil Rothstein,
Esq. (with over 30 years of Securities Class Action experience,
including cases against ENRON and HALLIBURTON) reminds shareholders
of GRAND CANYON EDUCATION, INC. (NASDAQGS: LOPE) (the "Company") of
the upcoming July 13, 2020 class action deadline to petition the
court for lead plaintiff. Investors who purchased shares of the
Company between January 5, 2018 and January 27, 2020, inclusive
(the "Class Period"), are encouraged to contact the Firm to learn
more about their rights as class members and petitioning the court
for lead appointment.

The Class Action, The City of Hialeah Employees' Retirement System
v. Grand Canyon Education, Inc., et al., Case No.: 1:20-cv-00639,
was filed in the US District Court for the District of Delaware on
behalf of shareholders seeking damages for alleged violations of
federal securities laws. Specifically, the lawsuit involves the
Company's July 2018 spin-off of its education assets through a sale
to purported non-profit entity, Grand Canyon University ("GCU"),
whereby GCU would operate as a separate, non-profit entity. It is
alleged, however, that in reality, GCU functioned as an
off-balance-sheet entity to which the Company was able to funnel
expenses and costs in exchange for a disproportionate amount of
revenue, thereby inflating the Company's financial results.

On January 28, 2020, Citron Research published a report concluding
that the Company is the "educational Enron," using a "captive
non-reporting subsidiary" to "dump expenses and liabilities, while
receiving a disproportionate amount of revenue at inflated margins
in order to artificially inflate the stock price." The stock
dropped as much as over 40 percent during the class period.

If you purchased shares of GRAND CANYON EDUCATION, INC. during the
Class Period and would like to discuss this case, you may, without
obligation or cost, contact:

        Barbuto & Johansson, P.A.
        12773 Forest Hill Blvd., 101
        Wellington, FL 33414
        Anthony Barbuto
        Tel: (888) 715-2520
        E-mail: anthony@barjolaw.com
        Neil Rothstein
        E-mail: neil@barjolaw.com.

Shareholders can also visit the Firm's website at:
https://barjolaw.com/case/lope to fill out the Class Action Inquiry
Form. [GN]


GRAND CANYON: Lieff Cabraser Reminds of July 13 Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
The law firm of Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP reminds
investors of the upcoming deadline to move for appointment as lead
plaintiff in the class action litigation on behalf of investors who
purchased or otherwise, acquired the publicly traded common stock
of Grand Canyon Education, Inc. ("Grand Canyon" or the "Company")
(LOPE) between January 5, 2018 and January 27, 2020, inclusive (the
"Class Period").

If you purchased or otherwise acquired the publicly traded common
stock of Grand Canyon during the Class Period, you may move the
Court for appointment as lead plaintiff by no later than July 13,
2020. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf
of other class members in directing the litigation. Your share of
any recovery in the actions will not be affected by your decision
of whether to seek appointment as lead plaintiff. You may retain
Lieff Cabraser, or other attorneys, as your counsel in the action.

Grand Canyon investors who wish to learn more about the litigation
and how to seek appointment as lead plaintiff should click here or
contact Sharon M. Lee of Lieff Cabraser toll-free at
1-800-541-7358.

Background on the Grand Canyon Securities Class Litigation

Grand Canyon, headquartered in Phoenix, Arizona, is an education
services company. The action alleges that Grand Canyon made
misrepresentations and omissions concerning the spin-off of the
Company's education assets into Grand Canyon University ("GCU").
Defendants allegedly inflated the Company's financial results by
treating GCU as an off-balance sheet entity into which Grand Canyon
stuffed with its own expenses and costs to increase Grand Canyon's
reported profits. The Company repeatedly misled investors by
characterizing GCU as a proper "non-profit" and "independent"
institution and misrepresenting Grand Canyon's role as a
third-party provider of education services to GCU.

On September 9, 2019, Citron Research published a report examining
Grand Canyon's financials and finding that the Company "is stuffing
GCU with expenses to inflate its own profitability and, as a result
bankrupting GCU." On this news, the price of Grand Canyon stock
fell $4.85 per share, or 4.2%, from its closing price of $114.47 on
September 9, 2019 to close at $109.62 the next day.

On November 6, 2019, after market close, Grand Canyon disclosed
that it had received a letter from the U.S. Department of Education
("DOE") denying the Company's application to designate GCU as a
non-profit entity. DOE's denial was based on its findings that GCU
was Grand Canyon's "captive client," and GCU "is not the entity
actually operating [GCU]." On this news, the price of Grand Canyon
stock declined $3.80 per share, or 4.13%, from its closing price of
$91.88 on November 6, 2019, to close at $88.08 on November 7,
2019.

On January 28, 2020, Citron Research released a second report
containing additional details about the DOE's findings and
referenced hundreds of pages of documentation GCE had submitted to
DOE that Citron obtained through a Freedom of Information Act
request. The report called Grand Canyon the "educational Enron,"
and concluded that Grand Canyon used a "captive non-reporting
subsidiary" in order to "dump expenses and liabilities while
receiving a disproportionate amount of revenue at inflated margins
in order to artificially inflate the stock price." On this news,
the price of Grand Canyon stock fell $7.43 per share, or 8.12%,
from its closing price of $91.50 on January 27, 2020, to close at
$84.07 on January 28, 2020, on extremely heavy trading volume.

                      About Lieff Cabraser

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein, LLP, with offices in San
Francisco, New York, and Nashville, is a nationally recognized law
firm committed to advancing the rights of investors and promoting
corporate responsibility.

The National Law Journal has recognized Lieff Cabraser as one of
the nation's top plaintiffs' law firms for fourteen years. In
compiling the list, the National Law Journal examines recent
verdicts and settlements and looked for firms "representing the
best qualities of the plaintiffs' bar and that demonstrated unusual
dedication and creativity." Law360 has selected Lieff Cabraser as
one of the Top 50 law firms nationwide for litigation, highlighting
our firm's "laser focus" and noting that our firm routinely finds
itself "facing off against some of the largest and strongest
defense law firms in the world." Benchmark Litigation has named
Lieff Cabraser one of the "Top 10 Plaintiffs' Firms in America."
[GN]


GRAND CIRCLE: Fitzgerald Wants Refund for Canceled Trip Tickets
---------------------------------------------------------------
SALLY FITZGERALD, an individual; on behalf of herself and all
others similarly situated v. GRAND CIRCLE, LLC d/b/a OVERSEAS
ADVENTURE TRAVEL, Case No. 2:20-cv-02586-MMB (E.D. Pa., June 1,
2020), alleges that the Defendant violated Pennsylvania's Unfair
Trade Practices and Consumer Protection Law by refusing to
reimburse tickets for canceled trip.

Beginning March 2020, COVID-19 pandemic caused the Defendant to
cancel previously scheduled trips, especially trips outside of the
United States. As a result of the near total shut down of the
airline and travel industry, consumers holding tickets for trips
that were canceled as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic were unable
to use what they had purchased.

Like other O.A.T. customers, the Plaintiff says she was refused all
forms of reimbursement, except a voucher, that had to be used for
travel before 2022. The Plaintiff has no desire, plan or intention
to take a trip of this nature in the next two years, and there was
no desire to create a travel plan in the future simply to make use
of a travel voucher, says the complaint.

The Plaintiff contends that the Defendant's conduct has caused her
and all similarly-situated persons to either accept a voucher for
travel that is impractical, unwanted or unneeded, non-transferable
and worth far less than what was purchased or receive nothing at
all. She adds that the Defendant's actions have resulted in
substantial monetary and other actual losses, time and effort spent
trying to reach the Defendant's travel department.

The Plaintiff purchased tickets for an international trip that was
canceled due the travel restrictions. The tickets cost her
approximately $9,258.00 in cash.

The Defendant is an international travel company, which offers
unique small group adventures worldwide by land and sea to
Americans over 50.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Amy L.B. Ginsburg, Esq.
          KIMMEL & SILVERMAN, P.C.
          30 East Butler Pike
          Ambler, PA 19002
          Telephone: 215 540-8888
          E-mail: teamkimmel@creditlaw.com


GROUPON INC: Robbins Geller Notifies of June 27 Motion Deadline
---------------------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP announces that the lead plaintiff
motion deadline in the Groupon securities class action lawsuit
pending in the Northern District of Illinois is on June 27, 2020.
The Groupon class action lawsuit, Macovski v. Groupon, Inc., No.
20-cv-02581, is on behalf of purchasers of Groupon, Inc.
(NASDAQ:GRPN) securities between November 4, 2019 and February 18,
2020, inclusive (the "Class Period").

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any
investor who purchased Groupon securities during the Class Period
to seek appointment as lead plaintiff in the Groupon class action
lawsuit. A lead plaintiff acts on behalf of all other class members
in directing the Groupon class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff
can select a law firm of its choice to litigate the Groupon class
action lawsuit. An investor's ability to share in any potential
future recovery of the Groupon class action lawsuit is not
dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. If you wish to serve as
lead plaintiff of the Groupon class action lawsuit or have
questions concerning your rights regarding the Groupon class action
lawsuit, please visit our website by clicking here or contact J.C.
Sanchez at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at
jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com. Lead plaintiff motions for the Groupon class
action lawsuit must be filed with the court no later than June 27,
2020.

Groupon offers a marketplace that connects consumers to merchants
through mobile applications and websites. Historically, Groupon
operated in three categories: (1) Local, which comprises
subcategories of local experiences, including events and
activities, health and beauty, food and drink, home and garden, and
automotive; (2) Goods, which includes product revenue from
merchandise inventory sold directly to customers and service
revenue from third-party merchants who sell products using Groupon
marketplaces; and (3) Travel, which offers hotels, airfare and
package deals at discounted and market rates.

The Groupon class action lawsuit charges Groupon and certain of its
officers with violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Specifically, the Groupon class action lawsuit alleges that
throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and misleading
statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Groupon was
experiencing fewer customer engagements in its Goods category; (2)
Groupon relied on its Goods category to drive its sales, especially
during the holiday season; (3) as a result of the foregoing,
Groupon was likely to experience reduced sales; and (4) as a result
of the foregoing, defendants' positive statements about Groupon's
business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading
and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On February 18, 2020, Groupon reported sales of $612.3 million, a
23% decline year-over-year. Groupon's adjusted EBITDA for fiscal
2019 was reported at $227.2 million, a significant miss from its
November 2019 forecast of $270 million. Groupon also announced a
"transformational plan to exit Goods" in North America by the third
quarter and globally by the end of the year. On this news,
Groupon's share price fell more than 44%.

On March 25, 2020, Groupon abruptly announced that its Chief
Executive Officer, Rich Williams, and Chief Operating Officer,
Steve Krenzer, were "no longer serving" in their roles, but would
continue as Groupon employees.

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world's leading law
firms representing investors in securities litigation. With 200
lawyers in 9 offices, Robbins Geller has obtained many of the
largest securities class action recoveries in history. For seven
consecutive years, ISS Securities Class Action Services has ranked
the Firm in its annual SCAS Top 50 Report as one of the top law
firms in the world in both amount recovered for shareholders and
total number of class action settlements. Robbins Geller attorneys
have helped shape the securities laws and have recovered tens of
billions of dollars on behalf of aggrieved victims. Beyond securing
financial recoveries for defrauded investors, Robbins Geller also
specializes in implementing corporate governance reforms, helping
to improve the financial markets for investors worldwide. Robbins
Geller attorneys are consistently recognized by courts,
professional organizations, and the media as leading lawyers in the
industry. Please visit http://www.rgrdlaw.comfor more
information.

Contacts

         Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
         J.C. Sanchez
         Tel: 800-449-4900
         E-mail: jsanchez@rgrdlaw.com
[GN]


HAMILTON BEACH: Portnoy Law Files Securities Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------
The Portnoy Law Firm advises investors that the firm has filed a
class action lawsuit on behalf of Hamilton Beach Brands Holding
Company investors that acquired Hamilton Beach securities (NYSE:
HBB) between February 27, 2020, and May 8, 2020. Hamilton Beach
investors have until July 21, 2020 to seek appointment as a Lead
Plaintiff for the class.

Investors are encouraged to contact attorney Lesley F. Portnoy, by
phone 310-692-8883 or email, to discuss their legal rights, or
click here to join the case via the www.portnoylaw.com

Hamilton was founded in 1904 and is headquartered in Glen Allen,
Virginia.  The Company, together with its subsidiaries, designs,
markets, and distributes small electric household and specialty
housewares appliances.  The Company sells its products through a
network of mass merchandisers, e-commerce retailers, national
department stores, variety and drug store chains, specialty home
retailers, distributors, and other retail outlets.

As a holding company, Hamilton primarily operates through its
subsidiaries, which are located throughout the U.S. and
internationally, including Mexico.  According to the Company's most
recent annual report on Form 10-K, Hamilton has two Mexican
subsidiaries—Grupo HB/PS S.A. de C.V. and Hamilton Beach Brands
de Mexico S.A. de C.V.

The complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and/or misleading statements, as well as
failed to disclose material adverse facts about Hamilton's
business, operations, and prospects.  Specifically, Defendants
failed to disclose to investors that: (i) Hamilton had inadequate
disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over
financial reporting, particularly with respect to one of its
Mexican subsidiaries; (ii) consequently, the Company's accounting
included certain irregularities with respect to the timing of
recognition of selling and marketing expenses and the
classification of certain expenditures within the statement of
operations at this Mexican subsidiary, as well as potential
misconduct with respect to the realizability of certain assets of
the Mexican subsidiary; (iii) as a result of all the foregoing,
Hamilton could not accurately attest to its financial results,
particularly with respect to these metrics, and was consequently at
an increased risk of delaying the filing of its periodic reports
with the SEC; and (iv) as a result, the Company's public statements
were materially false and misleading at all relevant times.

On May 11, 2020, during pre-market hours, Hamilton announced that
it could not timely file its 1Q20 10-Q because of "certain
accounting irregularities with respect to the timing of recognition
of selling and marketing expenses and the classification of certain
expenditures within the statement of operations at its Mexican
subsidiary."  Hamilton further stated that its "Audit Review
Committee has commenced an internal investigation" regarding "the
realizability of certain assets of the Mexican subsidiary."

Following these disclosures, Hamilton's stock price fell $1.03 per
share, or 8.99%, to close at $10.43 per share on May 11, 2020.

Please visit our website to review more information and submit your
transaction information. If you suffered a loss you have until July
21, 2020 to request that the Court appoint you as lead plaintiff.

The Portnoy Law Firm represents investors in pursuing claims
against caused by corporate wrongdoing. The Firm's founding partner
has recovered over $5.5 billion for aggrieved investors.

Contact:

         Lesley F. Portnoy, Esq.
         THE PORTNOY LAW FIRM
         E-mail: lesley@portnoylaw.com
         Tel: 310-692-8883
         http://www.portnoylaw.com/
[GN]



HARBOR FREIGHT: Mitchell Files Product Liability Suit in Georgia
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Harbor Freight Tools
USA Inc. The case is styled as Markeith Mitchell, On behalf of
himself and all others similarly situated v. HARBOR FREIGHT TOOLS
USA INC., Case No. 5:20-cv-00236-TES (M.D. Ga., June 18, 2020).

The nature of suit is stated as Tort Product Liability.

Harbor Freight Tools is a privately held discount tool and
equipment retailer, headquartered in Calabasas, California, which
operates a chain of retail stores, as well as a mail-order and
e-commerce business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          John E. Norris, Esq.
          DAVIS & NORRIS, LLP
          420 N. 20th Street
          3000 SouthTrust Tower
          Birmingham, AL 35203
          Phone: (205) 251-3000
          Email: jnorris@davisnorris.com

               - and -

          Dargan M. Ware, Esq.
          DAVIS & NORRIS, LLP
          2154 Highland Ave. S
          Birmingham, AL 35205
          Phone: (205) 930-9900
          Fax: (205) 930-9989
          Email: dware@davisnorris.com

               - and -

          Steven N. Newton, Esq.
          CP LAW GROUP
          401 Westpark Dr., Ste. 200
          Peachtree City, GA 30269
          Phone: (678) 837-6398
          Fax: (770) 716-6270
          Email: snewton@thecplawgroup.com


HEBRON TECHNOLOGY: Hagens Berman Notifies of Securities Class Suit
------------------------------------------------------------------
Hagens Berman urges investors in Hebron Technology Co., Ltd.
(NASDAQ: HEBT) to submit their losses now.  A securities fraud
class action has been filed and certain investors may have valuable
claims.

Class Period: Apr. 24, 2020 – June 3, 2020

Lead Plaintiff Deadline: Aug. 10, 2020

Visit: www.hbsslaw.com/investor-fraud/HEBT

Contact An Attorney Now: HEBT@hbsslaw.com
                         844-916-0895

Hebron Technology (HEBT) Securities Class Action:

The complaint alleges Defendants concealed related third party
transactions and misrepresented the Hebron's financial performance
to prop up the company's stock price.

Specifically, the complaint avers that Defendants concealed that
(1) many of Hebron's recent "acquisitions" were in fact
dysfunctional entities sold by company insiders, (2) the company's
disclosure controls regarding related party transactions were
ineffective, and (3) as a result, certain of Defendants' positive
statements about its performance and outlook were materially
misleading.

Investors began to learn the truth, according to the complaint, on
June 3, 2020 when Grizzly Research published a scathing report,
calling the company an "Insider Enrichment Scheme without Economic
Basis."

Grizzly observed that (1) Hebron's stock price has skyrocketed on
the back of recent private placements that were in fact inflated
stock sales to related parties; (2) the company's financial results
filed with Chinese regulators are inconsistent with those filed
with the SEC, as Hebron's SEC filings inflate annual revenues by
over 80%; and (3) the recent acquired entities were purchased from
Hebron's largest shareholder at inflated prices.

This news sent the price of Hebron shares plummeting lower.

"We're focused on investors' losses and proving Hebron concealed
related party transactions," said Reed Kathrein, the Hagens Berman
partner leading the investigation.

If you purchased shares of Hebron and suffered significant losses,
click here to discuss your legal rights with Hagens Berman.

Whistleblowers: Persons with non-public information regarding
Hebron Technology should consider their options to help in the
investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower program.
Under the new program, whistleblowers who provide original
information may receive rewards totaling up to 30 percent of any
successful recovery made by the SEC. For more information, call
Reed Kathrein at 844-916-0895 or email HEBT@hbsslaw.com.

Hagens Berman is a national law firm with nine offices in eight
cities around the country and eighty attorneys. The firm represents
investors, whistleblowers, workers and consumers in complex
litigation. More about the firm and its successes is located at
hbsslaw.com. For the latest news visit our newsroom or follow us on
Twitter at @classactionlaw. [GN]


HEBRON TECHNOLOGY: Schall Law Files Class Action Suit
-----------------------------------------------------
The Schall Law Firm, a national shareholder rights litigation firm,
announces the filing of a class action lawsuit against Hebron
Technology Co., Ltd. (NASDAQ: HEBT) for violations of Sec. 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5
promulgated thereunder by the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission.

Investors who purchased the Company's securities between April 24,
2020 and June 3, 2020, inclusive (the ''Class Period''), are
encouraged to contact the firm before August 10, 2020.

If you are a shareholder who suffered a loss, click
https://schallfirm.com/join-action-form/?slug=hebron-technology-co-ltd&id=2491
to participate.

We also encourage you to contact Brian Schall of the Schall Law
Firm, 1880 Century Park East, Suite 404, Los Angeles, CA 90067, at
310-301-3335, to discuss your rights free of charge. You can also
reach us through the firm's website at www.schallfirm.com, or by
email at brian@schallfirm.com.

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

According to the Complaint, the Company made false and misleading
statements to the market. Several of Hebron's acquisitions, such as
Beijing Hengpu and Nami Holding (Cayman) Co., Ltd., were actually
deals with undisclosed related parties. The Company lacked
sufficient controls over related-party transactions. Based on these
facts, the Company's public statements were false and materially
misleading throughout the class period. When the market learned the
truth about Hebron, investors suffered damages.

Join the case to recover your losses.

The Schall Law Firm represents investors around the world and
specializes in securities class action lawsuits and shareholder
rights litigation.

Contact:

         The Schall Law Firm
         Brian Schall, Esq.
         Office: 310-301-3335
         E-mail: info@schallfirm.com
         Web site: http://www.schallfirm.com/
[GN]


HELBIZ INC: Barron Sues in S.D. New York Over Contract Dispute
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Helbiz, Inc., et al.
The case is styled as Ryan Barron, Filippo Bulgarini d'Elci, Denis
Desari, Marat Garibyan, Illia Cheherst, Rishi Khanchandani, Daniils
Lebedeus, Dong Seok Lee, Tarek Rahman, Abhishek Sikaria, for
themselves and a class of others similarly situated v. Helbiz,
Inc., Salvatore Palella, Neteller (US) Inc., Skrill USA Inc.,
Lorenzo Pellegrino, Milos Citovek, Jonathan Hannestad, Stefano
Ciravegna, Michael Coppola, Giulio Profumo, Justin Guiliano, Saeed
Aldarmaki, Case No. 1:20-cv-04703-LLS (S.D.N.Y., June 18, 2020).

The nature of suit is stated as Other Contract for Contract
Dispute.

Helbiz, Inc., is an Italian-American intra-urban transportation
company headquartered in New York City with an aim to solve the
first mile/last mile transportation problem of high-traffic urban
areas around the world.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Karen Anne Newirth, Esq.
          LOEVY & LOEVY
          311 N Aberdeen St., 3rd Floor
          Chicago, IL 60607
          Phone: (718) 490-0028
          Email: karen@loevy.com


HERSHEY COMPANY: Fails to Give Proper COBRA Notice, Woods Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Angela Woods, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. THE HERSHEY COMPANY, A Foreign Profit Corporation, Case
No. 2:20-cv-02433-MSN-cgc (W.D. Tenn., June 18, 2020), alleges that
the Defendant failed to provide the Plaintiff and the putative
class adequate notice of their right to continued health care
coverage under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,
as amended by the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of
1985.

The Defendant has repeatedly violated ERISA by failing to provide
participants and beneficiaries in the Company's health plan with
adequate notice, as prescribed by COBRA, of their right to continue
their health insurance coverage following an occurrence of a
"qualifying event" as defined by the statute, the Plaintiff
alleges. She contends that the Defendant's COBRA notice violates
the ERISA because it fails to include a termination date for COBRA
coverage if elected, and to sufficiently identify the Plan
Administrator.
Because the Defendant's COBRA notice omits several critical
information items, it collectively violates the ERISA, which
requires the plan administrator of a group-health plan to provide a
COBRA notice "written in a manner calculated to be understood by
the average plan participant," according to the complaint. Without
information on when COBRA coverage ends, and who is the Plan
Administrator, the notice is not written in a manner calculated to
be understood by the average plan participant.

As a result of these violations, which threaten Class Members'
ability to maintain their health coverage, the Plaintiff seeks
statutory penalties, injunctive relief, attorneys' fees, costs and
expenses, and other appropriate relief as set forth herein and
provided by law.

The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant for nearly four years,
during which time she obtained medical insurance for herself and
dependents through the Defendant's group health plan.

The Defendant is a foreign corporation with its headquarters in
Hershey, Pennsylvania, and is the plan sponsor of the Health
Plan.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marc R. Edelman, Esq.
          MORGAN & MORGAN, P.A.
          201 N. Franklin Street, Suite 700
          Tampa, FL 33602
          Phone: 813-223-5505
          Fax: 813-257-0572
          Email: MEdelman@forthepeople.com


ICHIRO SUSHI: Seeks 2nd Cir. Review of Order in Hidalgo FLSA Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant New Ichiro Sushi Inc. filed an appeal from the District
Court's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law dated April 30,
2020, and Judgment dated May 4, 2020, entered in the lawsuit
entitled Hidalgo v. Ichiro Sushi, Inc., Case No. 15-cv-414, in the
U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (New York
City).

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
seeks to recover unpaid overtime compensation, liquidated damages
prejudgment and post-judgment interest, and attorneys' fees and
costs under the Fair Labor Standard Act.

The Defendants own and operate a restaurant located at 1694 Second
Avenue, in New York City.

The appellate case is captioned as Hidalgo v. Ichiro Sushi, Inc.,
Case No. 20-1785, in the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellee Roberto Hidalgo, on behalf of himself and others
similarly situated, is represented by:

          Peter Hans Cooper, Esq.
          CILENTI & COOPER, PLLC
          708 3rd Avenue
          New York, NY 10017
          Telephone: (212) 209-3933
          E-mail: pcooper@jcpclaw.com

Defendant-Appellant New Ichiro Sushi Inc. is represented by:

          David Yan, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF DAVID YAN
          136-20 38th Avenue
          Flushing, NY 11354
          Telephone: (718) 888-7788
          E-mail: davidyanlawoffice@gmail.com


JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS: Health Plan Sues Over Delayed Generic Entry
-----------------------------------------------------------------
NEW YORK STATE TEAMSTERS COUNCIL HEALTH AND HOSPITAL FUND,
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.; JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS PLC;
JAZZ PHARMACEUTICALS IRELAND LIMITED; HIKMA PHARMACEUTICALS PLC;
ROXANE LABORATORIES, INC.; HIKMA PHARMACEUTICALS USA INC.;
EUROHEALTH (USA), INC.; AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS LLC; PAR
PHARMACEUTICAL, INC.; LUPIN LTD.; LUPIN PHARMACEUTICALS INC.; and
LUPIN INC., Defendants, Case No. 5:20-cv-04056 (N.D. Cal., June 18,
2020) is a class action against the Defendants for violation of 15
U.S.C. Sections 1 and 2, monopolization and monopolistic scheme
under state law, conspiracy and combination in restraint of trade
under state law, and unjust enrichment.

The Plaintiff, on behalf of all individual persons or entities in
the United States and its territories that purchased, paid for
and/or provided reimbursement for some or all of the purchase price
of Xyrem from Jazz Pharmaceuticals or any agents, predecessors, or
successors, starting January 1, 2018, alleges that Defendant Jazz
Pharmaceuticals, a drug company that manufactures and sells sodium
oxybate drug called Xyrem, is engaged in a series of
anticompetitive acts, along with other Defendant conspirators, to
impair and delay generic entry in the market for sodium oxybate
oral solution. These schemes include: (1) acquiring and enforcing
bogus patents, (2) prosecuting citizen petitions before the Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) that had no realistic likelihood of
success, and (3) abusing the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation
Strategy (REMS)-related FDA approval conditions for Xyrem to
frustrate efforts by would be generic competitors to gain FDA
approval for their own generic versions of the product. As a result
of the illegal monopolization and market restriction agreements of
Defendant Jazz Pharmaceuticals and other Defendant conspirators,
the Plaintiff and all other members of the proposed class have
paid, and continue to pay, massive overcharges for Xyrem.

New York State Teamsters Council Health and Hospital Fund is a
self-insured health plan with a principal place of business at 151
Northern Concourse, Syracuse, New York.

Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. is a pharmaceutical company with its
principal place of business at Waterloo Exchange, Waterloo Road,
Dublin 4, Ireland. Its U.S. headquarters is located at 3170 Porter
Drive, Palo Alto, California.

Jazz Pharmaceuticals Ireland Limited is a pharmaceutical company
organized and existing under the laws of Ireland, with its
principal place of business at Waterloo Exchange, Waterloo Road,
Dublin 4, Ireland.

Jazz Pharmaceuticals PLC is an Ireland public limited
biopharmaceutical company organized and existing under the laws of
Ireland, with its principal place of business at Waterloo Exchange,
Waterloo Road, Dublin 4, Ireland. It is the parent company of Jazz
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and Jazz Pharmaceuticals Ireland Limited.

Hikma Pharmaceuticals PLC is a multinational pharmaceutical company
organized and existing under the laws of the United Kingdom, with
its principal place of business at 1 New Burlington Place, London,
W1S 2HR and its U.S. headquarters at 246 Industrial Way West,
Eatontown, New Jersey.

Hikma Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. is a pharmaceutical corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware,
with its principal place of business at 246 Industrial Way West,
Eatontown, New Jersey. It is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hikma
Pharmaceuticals PLC.

Roxane Laboratories, Inc. is a pharmaceutical corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State of Nevada, with its
principal place of business at 1809 Wilson Road, Columbus, Ohio.

Eurohealth (USA), Inc. is a holding company for Hikma
Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Hikma
Pharmaceuticals PLC, organized and existing under the laws of the
State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 246
Industrial Way West, Eatontown, New Jersey.

Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC is a limited liability company that
manufactures and supplies generic pharmaceuticals organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its
principal place of business at 400 Crossing Boulevard, Bridgewater,
New Jersey.

Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. is a pharmaceutical corporation organized
and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its
principal place of business at One Ram Ridge Rd., Chestnut Ridge,
New York.

Lupin Ltd. is a public limited company organized and existing under
the laws of India, with its principal place of business at B/4
Laxmi Towers, Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (E), Mumbai 400 051,
India.

Lupin Pharmaceuticals Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lupin
Ltd., is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the
State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 111
South Calvert Street, Baltimore, Maryland.

Lupin Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Lupin Ltd., is a
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Delaware, with its principal place of business at 111 South Calvert
Street, Baltimore, Maryland. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:
        
         Christina C. Sharp, Esq.
         Scott M. Grzenczyk, Esq.
         GIRARD SHARP LLP
         601 California Street, Suite 1400
         San Francisco, CA 94108
         Telephone: (415) 981-4800
         Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
         E-mail: dsharp@girardsharp.com
                 scottg@girardsharp.com

                - and –
         
         John Radice, Esq.
         A. Luke Smith, Esq.
         Clark Craddock, Esq.
         RADICE LAW FIRM
         475 Wall Street
         Princeton, NJ 08540
         Telephone: (646) 245-8502
         E-mail: jradice@radicelawfirm.com
                 lsmith@radicelawfirm.com
                 ccraddock@radicelawfirm.com

                - and –
         
         Kenneth A. Wexler, Esq.
         Justin B. Boley, Esq.
         Tyler J. Story, Esq.
         WEXLER WALLACE LLP
         55 West Monroe St., Suite 3300
         Chicago, IL 60603
         Telephone: (312) 346-2222
         E-mail: kaw@wexlerwallace.com
                 jnb@wexlerwallace.com
                 tjs@wexlerwallace.com

                - and –
         
         Arthur M. Bailey, Esq.
         RUPP BAASE PFALZGRAF CUNNINGHAM, LLC
         1600 Liberty Building, 424 Main Street
         Buffalo, NY 14202
         Telephone: (716) 854-3400
         Facsimile: (716) 664-2983
         E-mail: bailey@ruppbaase.com

JBS USA: Erbert & Gerbert's Alleges Price-Fixing of Beef
--------------------------------------------------------
ERBERT & GERBERT'S, INC., individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. JBS USA FOOD COMPANY HOLDINGS;
TYSON FOODS, INC.; CARGILL, INC.; and NATIONAL BEEF PACKING
COMPANY, Defendants, Case No. 0:20-cv-01414 (D. Minn., June 18,
2020) is a class action against the Defendants for unjust
enrichment and for violations of Section 1 of the Sherman Act,
State Antitrust Statutes, and State Consumer Protection Statutes.

The Plaintiff, on behalf of itself and all others
similarly-situated commercial and institutional indirect purchasers
of beef that purchased beef other than directly from defendants or
co-conspirators in the United States from at least January 1, 2015
until the present, alleges that the Defendants are engaged in a
collusive agreement in order to reduce slaughter volumes and
suppress the throughput of fed cattle during the Class period. The
Defendants' unlawful conduct had these effects: (1) price
competition for the beef was restrained, suppressed, and eliminated
throughout Wisconsin; and (2) beef prices were raised, fixed,
maintained, and stabilized at artificially high levels throughout
Wisconsin. The illegal conduct substantially affected Wisconsin
commerce and purchasers of beef. As a direct and proximate result
of the Defendants' conspiracy, the Plaintiff and Class members
suffered an ascertainable loss of money or property as they paid
beef at higher prices than they otherwise would have been in a
competitive market.

Erbert & Gerbert's, Inc. operates a sandwich shop in Eau Claire,
Wisconsin.

Cargill, Incorporated is a privately held global company that
offers various products and services including agriculture, animal
nutrition, foodservice, pharmaceutical, industrial, meat and
poultry, transportation, risk management, beauty, and
bioindustrial. It is headquartered in Minnetonka, Minnesota.

JBS USA Food Company Holdings is an American food processing
company and a subsidiary of Brazilian-based JBS SA, with principal
place of business located in Greeley, Colorado.

Tyson Foods, Inc. is a meat processing company headquartered in
Springdale, Arkansas.

National Beef Packing Company is a beef processor headquartered in
Kansas City, Missouri. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:                 
         
         Shawn M. Raiter, Esq.
         LARSON · KING LLP
         30 East Seventh Street, Suite 2800
         St. Paul, MN 55101
         Telephone: (651) 312-6518
         E-mail: sraiter@larsonking.com

                  - and -

         Don Barrett, Esq.
         Katherine Barrett Riley, Esq.
         David McMullan, Esq.
         BARRETT LAW GROUP, P.A.
         404 Court Square North
         Lexington, MS 39095-0927
         Telephone: (662) 834-9168
         Facsimile: (662) 834-2628
         E-mail: donbarrettpa@gmail.com
                 kbriley@BarrettLawGroup.com
                 dmcmullan@BarrettLawGroup.com

                  - and -

         Jonathan W. Cuneo, Esq.
         Blaine Finley, Esq.
         CUNEO GILBERT & LADUCA, LLP
         4725 Wisconsin Ave., NW, Suite 200
         Washington, DC 20016
         Telephone: (202) 789-3960
         E-mail: jonc@cuneolaw.com
                 bfinley@cuneolaw.com

LIBERTY HOUSE: Fails to Pay Minimum and Overtime Wages, Reno Says
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ROBERT RENO, on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated
v. LIBERTY HOUSE RESTAURANT CORPORATION, a Georgia Corporation;
BONES RESTAURANT CORPORATION, a Georgia Corporation; BLUE RIDGE
GRILLE LLLP, a Georgia Limited Liability Limited Partnership; OK
CAFE, LLLP, a Georgia Limited Liability
Limited Partnership; and RICHARD LEWIS, an individual, Case No.
1:20-cv-02385-WMR (N.D. Ga., June 3, 2020), arises under the Fair
Labor Standards Act for the Defendants' failure to pay tipped
employees all earned minimum wages, illegal deduction from and
withholding of tips, and failure to pay all required overtime pay
at the required regular rate.

LHRC, and its enterprise consisting of the Defendants, has (and
had) a policy and practice of paying its employees, including
servers and bartenders, sub-minimum hourly wages under the
tip-credit provisions of the FLSA, says the complaint.

The Defendants operate a restaurant business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          C. Andrew Head, Esq.
          Bethany Hilbert, Esq.
          HEAD LAW FIRM, LLC
          1170 Howell Mill Rd. NW, Ste. 305
          Atlanta, GA 30318
          Telephone: (404) 924-4151
          Facsimile: (404) 796-7338
          E-mail: ahead@headlawfirm.com
                  bhilbert@headlawfirm.com


LIFE TIME FITNESS: Underpays Fitness Instructors, Schaeffer Claims
------------------------------------------------------------------
ALICIA SCHAEFFER, on behalf of herself and others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.; LTF CLUB
OPERATIONS COMPANY, INC.; LTF CLUB MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC; and LTF
YOGA COMPANY, LLC., Defendants, Case No. 0:20-cv-01407-PJS-HB (D.
Minn., June 18, 2020) is a class action lawsuit brought by Alicia
Schaeffer, on behalf of herself and a class of others whose job
titles were "group fitness instructor," against the Defendants for
their refusal to compensate Plaintiff and class members for work
done for Defendants' benefit.

The lawsuit is premised upon Defendants' failure to pay wages due
and owing to Plaintiff and class members for their performance of
work required by Defendants.

Defendants employed Plaintiff and class members as group fitness
instructors. Group fitness instructors teach fitness classes to
Defendants' members, such as spinning, aerobics, and yoga.

According to the complaint, it was impossible for Plaintiff and
class members to complete all the work required of their positions
during the time for which Defendants paid them because Defendants
only paid them for actual class time and not for any of the time
relating to pre- and post-class activities. So if a class was
scheduled for 60 minutes, Plaintiff and class members would only be
paid for that 60 minute period, though they were required to spend
time before and after class preparing and then cleaning the class
space. On this basis, Defendants underpaid-indeed, refused to
pay-Plaintiff and class members for actual time worked.

Life Time Fitness, Inc. designs, builds, and operates fitness
centers with its registered office in Minnesota.

LTF Club Operations Company, Inc., LTF Club Management Company, and
LTF Yoga Company, LLC are subsidiaries of Life Time Fitness, Inc.
based in Minnesota.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Karl L. Cambronne, Esq.
          Bryan L. Bleichner, Esq.
          CHESTNUT CAMBRONNE PA
          100 Washington Avenue South, Suite 1700
          Minneapolis, MN 55401-2138
          Telephone: (612) 339-7300
          Facsimile: (612) 336-2940
          E-mail: kcambronne@chestnutcambronne.com
                  bbleichner@chestnutcambronne.com

               - and -

          Garrett D. Blanchfield, Esq.
          Brant D. Penney, Esq.
          REINHARDT WENDORF & BLANCHFIELD
          W-1050 First National Bank Bldg.
          332 Minnesota St.
          St. Paul, MN 55101
          Telephone: (651) 287-2100
          Facsimile: (651) 287-2103
          E-mail: g.blanchfield@rwblawfirm.com
                  b.penney@rwblawfirm.com

               - and -

          Daniel R. Karon, Esq.
          Beau D. Hollowell, Esq.
          KARON LLC
          700 W. St. Clair Ave., Suite 200
          Cleveland, OH 44113
          Telephone: (216) 551-9175
          Facsimile: (216) 241-8175
          E-mail: dkaron@karonllc.com
                  bhollowell@karonllc.com

LOCKN' LLC: Wellins Suit Seeks Refunds of Unused Event Tickets
--------------------------------------------------------------
ALEX WELLINS and MIKE MILLER, on behalf of themselves and all
others similarly situated v. LOCKN' LLC, Case No. 3:20-cv-03641-LB
(N.D. Cal., June 1, 2020), seeks redress for the Defendant's
unconscionable practices relating to the sale of tickets to the
Lockn' Music Festival and its refusal to provide refunds to
consumers, who bought tickets to that event before it was
rescheduled, on April 9, 2020, due to the outbreak of COVID-19.

Yet, despite having moved the festival to new dates, and despite
the unprecedented hardships and risks now facing the "Lockn'
Family," Lockn' LLC is refusing to refund the money ticketholders
paid to attend the originally-scheduled event, the Plaintiffs
assert.

Before the pandemic struck, the Plaintiffs and Class members
purchased tickets to Lockn' 2020, which was originally scheduled to
take place on June 18-21, 2020.

The Plaintiffs bring this action on behalf of themselves and a
class of similarly situated individuals, who have been refused, or
not been offered, refunds for the purchase price, including fees
and costs, of tickets they bought for Lockn' 2020 before April 9,
2020, when the festival was rescheduled due to the COVID-19
pandemic.

Lockn' LLC is the management company that stages annual four-day
music festival held at Oak Ridge and Infinity Downs Farms, amid the
Blue Ridge Mountains in Arrington, Virginia.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Howard Hirsch, Esq.
          Nancy Tompkins, Esq.
          LEXINGTON LAW GROUP
          503 Divisadero Street
          San Francisco, CA 94117
          Telephone: (415) 913-7800
          Facsimile: (415) 759-4112
          E-mail: hhirsch@lexlawgroup.com
                  ntompkins@lexlawgroup.com


LOWE'S HOME: Meeks Labor Class Suit Removed to E.D. California
--------------------------------------------------------------
The case captioned Kurtis Meeks, individually, and on behalf of
other individuals similarly situated v. Lowe's Home Centers, LLC, a
North Carolina, Limited Liability Company, Case No. FCS054750, was
removed from the Superior Court of the State of California for the
County of Solano to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern
District of California on June 18, 2020.

The District Court Clerk assigned Case No. 2:20-cv-01227-JAM-CKD to
the proceeding.

The nature of suit is stated as Other Labor.

Lowe's Home Centers Inc. retails home improvement, building
materials, and home appliances.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Marcus J. Bradley, Esq.
          BRADLEY GROMBACHER, LLP
          31365 Oak Crest Drive, Suite 240
          Westlake Village, CA 91361
          Phone: (805) 270-7100
          Fax: (805) 270-7589
          Email: mbradley@bradleygrombacher.com

The Defendant is represented by:

          Michele Leigh Maryott, Esq.
          GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
          3161 Michelson Dr.
          Irvine, CA 92612
          Phone: (949) 451-3945
          Fax: (949) 475-4668
          Email: mmaryott@gibsondunn.com


MARC JONES: Faces Garner Suit in Eastern District of Louisiana
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Marc Jones
Construction, L.L.C. The case is captioned as Benjamin Garner, on
behalf of Plaintiff and all others similarly situated v. Marc Jones
Construction, L.L.C., et al., Case No. 2:20-cv-01582-NJB-JVM (E.D.
La., June 1, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Chief Judge Nannette Jolivette
Brown.

The Defendant is in the solar energy contractor business.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Garth Jonathan Ridge, Esq.
          GARTH J. RIDGE, ATTORNEY AT LAW
          Taylor Office Building
          251 Florida St., Suite 301
          Baton Rouge, LA 70801
          Telephone: (225) 343-0700
          E-mail: GarthRidge@aol.com

               - and

          Cathleen M. Combs, Esq.
          Daniel A. Edelman, Esq.
          Heather Kolbus, Esq.
          EDELMAN, COMBS, LATTURNER & GOODWIN LLC
          20 South Clark Street, Suite 1500
          Chicago, IL 60603
          Telephone: (312) 739-4200
          Facsimile: (312) 419-0379
          E-mail: ccombs@edcombs.com
                  dedelman@edcombs.com
                  hkolbus@edcombs.com


MARYLAND: Zaleskas Class Suit Removed to Maryland District Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
The class action lawsuit captioned as STUDENT "A," MATTHEW
ZALESKAS, and EVAN ZALESKAS v. GOVERNOR LARRY HOGAN, and BOARD OF
REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF MARYLAND, Case No.
C-02-CV-20-001155 (Filed May 4, 2020), was removed from the Circuit
Court of Maryland, Anne Arundel County, to the U.S. District Court
for the District of Maryland on June 3, 2020.

The District of Maryland Court Clerk assigned Case No.
1:20-cv-01434-CCB to the proceeding. The case is assigned to the
Hon. Judge Catherine C. Blake.

The lawsuit alleges breach of contract. The Plaintiffs assert that
the transformation of their educational experience from in-person
to remote instruction and the closing of Maryland public colleges
and universities necessitated by Governor Hogan's executive orders
relating to the COVID-19 pandemic constitutes a taking of their
property for which they were not justly compensated in violation of
the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

Appointed by the governor, president of the senate, and the speaker
of the house, the Regents oversee the system's academic,
administrative, and financial operations; formulate policy; and
appoint the USM chancellor and the presidents of the system's 12
institutions.

Lawrence Joseph Hogan Jr. is an American politician. A member of
the Republican Party, he has served as the 62nd Governor of
Maryland since 2015 and chair of the National Governors Association
since July 2019.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Edward N. Griffin, Esq.
          ADELPHI LAW
          2306 Wineberry Terrace
          Baltimore, MD 21209
          E-mail: griffin@adelphilaw.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Ann M. Sheridan, Esq.
          JAMES O'CONNOR, Esq.
          ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
          200 Saint Paul Place, 20th Floor
          Baltimore, MD 21202
          Telephone: (410) 576-6441
          E-mail: asheridan@oag.state.md.us
                  joconnor@oag.state.md.us


MERCER COUNTY, NJ: Bratton Law Seeks Refund of Convenience Fees
---------------------------------------------------------------
BRATTON LAW LLC, on behalf of itself and all others similarly
situated v. MERCER COUNTY, NEW JERSEY; PAULA SOLLAMI COVELLO, sued
in her official capacity as Mercer County Clerk; ATLANTIC COUNTY,
NEW JERSEY; EDWARD P. MCGETTIGAN, sued in his official capacity as
Atlantic County Clerk; ESSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY; JUAN M. RIVERA,
JR., sued in his official capacity as Essex County Register;
MIDDLESEX COUNTY, NEW JERSEY; ELAINE M. FLYNN, sued in her official
capacity as Middlesex County Clerk; MONMOUTH COUNTY, NEW JERSEY;
CHRISTINE GIORDANO HANLON, sued in her official capacity as
Monmouth County Clerk; PASSAIC COUNTY, NEW JERSEY; and DANIELLE
IRELAND-IMHOPF, sued in her official capacity as Passaic County
Clerk, Case No. MER-L-001017-20 (N.J. Super., Mercer Cty., June 3,
2020), seeks a refund of unlawful "convenience fee" or "convenience
charge."

The lawsuit is brought on behalf of a proposed class of persons and
entities, who electronically submitted one or more documents for
recording or filing between July 1, 2016, and April 1, 2019, with
the County Clerk or Register for one of the following six New
Jersey counties: Mercer, Atlantic, Essex, Middlesex, Monmouth, or
Passaic.

The Plaintiff brings this case against these six New Jersey
counties and their County Clerks or Registers seeking a refund of
the unlawful "convenience fee" or "convenience charge" that was
charged by the Defendants on each electronically-recorded or
electronically-filed document.

The Plaintiff contends that the convenience fee charged by the
Defendants for e-Recording documents was not one of the
legislatively authorized fees and was, thus, unlawful, as held by
the Appellate Division and the New Jersey Supreme Court in "Rone."

Mercer County is a county located in the U.S. state of New Jersey.
Mercer's county seat is Trenton, the state capital.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Stephen P. DeNittis, Esq.
          Joseph A. Osefchen, Esq.
          Shane T. Prince, Esq.
          DENITTIS OSEFCHEN PRINCE, P.C.
          5 Greentree Centre, Suite 410
          Route 73 South & Lincoln Drive
          Marlton, NJ 08053
          Telephone: (856) 797-9951


MILWAUKEE, WI: Towing Firms Allege Market Trade Restrictions
------------------------------------------------------------
The case, ALWAYS TOWING & RECOVERY INC.; APYS CARS, INC.; BREW CITY
TOWING LLC; SP TOWING LLC; ADAMS RECYCLING, LLC, individually and
on behalf of all others similarly situated v. CITY OF MILWAUKEE,
MILWAUKEE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, MILWAUKEE CITY TOW LOT,
MILWAUKEE POLICE DEPARTMENT, Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-00919
(E.D. Wis., June 18, 2020), arises from the Defendants' violations
of Sections 1 and 2 of Sherman Act and Section 4 of the Clayton
Act, and for Wisconsin Tortious Interference with a Contract.

The Plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly
situated business entities, allege that that the City of Milwaukee
is engaged in anticompetitive schemes in order to maintain and
acquire a dominant position in the recycling, salvaging, and towing
industry through the assistance of the Milwaukee Department of
Public Works, Milwaukee City Tow Lot, and Milwaukee Police
Department including:

     (1) excluding competitors in the industry and preventing new
competitors through creating its own task force to harass and
intimidate competitors by issuing unnecessary citations,

     (2) enacting prohibitive ordinances that interfere with
intrastate and interstate commerce,

     (3) requiring a municipal license to do business in the City
in an attempt to control the gateway into the market,

     (4) intimidating family members and employees, and

     (5) interfering in targeted individuals business to business
transaction in the salvaging of scrap metal.

In addition, the Plaintiffs claim that the City of Milwaukee has
participated in unreasonable horizontal restraints on trade by
creating arrangements to fix prices which gives the City of
Milwaukee the advantage to wield market power in the recycling,
salvaging, and towing industry.

Always Towing & Recovery, Inc. is an incorporated towing business
with its principal place of business located at 3700 W. Wells
Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Apys Cars Inc. is an incorporated towing business with its
principal place of business located at 4030 W. Douglas Ave.,
Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

Brew City Towing is a limited liability towing company with its
principal place of business located at 1216 Missouri Ave., South
Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

SP Towing LLC is a limited liability towing company with its
principal place of business located at W6567 Forest Hills Parkway,
Neshkoro, Wisconsin.

Adams Recycling, LLC is a limited liability recycling company with
its principal place of business located at W166S8270 Kurtze Lane,
Muskego, Wisconsin.

City of Milwaukee is a duly organized municipality in the State of
Wisconsin in the County of Milwaukee.

Milwaukee Department of Public Works (DPW) is a governmental
subdivision of the City of Milwaukee organized and existing under
the laws of the State of Wisconsin.

Milwaukee City Tow Lot is a governmental subdivision of the DPW
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Wisconsin.

Milwaukee Police Department is a police department operated by the
City of Milwaukee organized and existing under the laws of the
State of Wisconsin. [BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:          
         
         Timothy L. Baldwin, Esq.
         JB ENTREPRISES, S.C LAW & STRATEGY
         10850 W. Park Place, Ste. 560
         Milwaukee, WI 53224
         Telephone: (414) 763-5952
         E-mail: timothy.baldwin@jbentreprises.com

MINNEAPOLIS, MN: Violates 14th Amendment Rights, Williams Alleges
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Annette Williams and all others similarly situated v. The City of
Minneapolis, Officers John Doe 1-100, Case No.
0:20-cv-01303-DSD-BRT (D. Minn., June 2, 2020), alleges that the
Defendants deprived the Plaintiff of her rights, privileges, and
immunities secured by the United States Constitution, and
specifically the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution.

On May 25, 2020, Minneapolis Police Department officer Derek
Chauvin killed an unarmed and restrained black man, George Floyd,
by kneeling on the man's neck for nearly nine minutes. Video of the
incident was distributed worldwide via social media, resulting in
mass protests across the country.

On May 28, 2020, Ms. Williams an African-American female, was
peacefully protesting police tactics against communities of color
on a public sidewalk within the City when, without notice, a member
of the Minneapolis Police Department drove past and sprayed a
chemical respiratory irritant on her and her daughter.

The Plaintiff contends that the protestors in question were fully
peaceful and were not presenting any danger to others or to the
Minneapolis police officers in the vehicles. The chemical irritant
caused her and others to remove their facemasks worn to protect
against the transmission of COVID-19 and to begin to cough
uncontrollably. She has since suffered from labored breathing and
chest pain interfering with her daily activities, she adds.

As a result of the Defendants' conduct, various class members have
suffered from personal injury, anxiety, fear, and have been chilled
in their lawful right to protest and publicly speak against
government brutality and actions of violence against members of
black and minority communities, the Plaintiff contends.

City of Minneapolis is a municipality in the State of Minnesota.
The City is allegedly liable under a Monell theory. Defendants John
Doe 1 is the Minneapolis Police Officer, who sprayed the chemical
irritant from his vehicle at Ms. Williams.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David J.S. Madgett, Esq.
          HUTTON, MADGETT, & KLEIN, PLLC
          1161 E Wayzata Blvd., Suite 314
          Wayzata, MN 55391
          Telephone: (612) 470-6529
          E-mail: dmadgett@madgettlaw.com


MITCHELL D. BLUHM: Davidson Files FDCPA Suit in E.D. Virginia
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against The Law Office of
Mitchell D. Bluhm & Associates, LLC, et al. The case is styled as
Demetria Davidson, Individually and on Behalf of all others
Similarly Situated v. The Law Office of Mitchell D. Bluhm &
Associates, LLC, CF Medical, LLC, John Does 1-25, Case No.
1:20-cv-00680-LMB-JFA (E.D. Va., June 18, 2020).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Debt
Collection Practices Act.

Law Offices Of Mitchell D. Bluhm & Associates is a law firm in
Sherman, Texas.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Aryeh Eliezer Stein, Esq.
          MERIDIAN LAW, LLC
          600 Reisterstown Road, Suite 700
          Baltimore, MD 21208
          Phone: (443) 326-6011
          Fax: (410) 653-1061
          Email: astein@meridianlawfirm.com


MONROE COUNTY, FL: Lola Appeals S.D. Florida Ruling to 11th Cir.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Plaintiff David James Lola filed an appeal from a court ruling in
the lawsuit titled David Lola v. Rick Ramsay, et al., Case No.
4:20-cv-10032-JEM, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of Florida.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the nature of
suit is stated as prisoner civil rights.

Sheriff Rick Ramsay is the most decorated deputy in the history of
the Monroe County Sheriff's Office, receiving ninety-three
commendations of merit.

The appellate case is captioned as David Lola v. Rick Ramsay, et
al., Case No. 20-12101, in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Eleventh Circuit.[BN]


MONROE INC: Underpays Store Managers, Cerini Alleges
----------------------------------------------------
MARK CERINI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. MONROE, INC., Defendant, Case
2:20-cv-00867-RJC (W.D. Pa., June 12, 2020) seeks to recover from
the Defendant unpaid wages and overtime compensation, interest,
liquidated damages, attorneys' fees, and costs under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

The Plaintiff Cerini was employed by the Defendant as store
manager.

Monroe, Inc. is a food brokerage firm. The Company provides
outsourced sales, merchandising, and marketing services to
manufacturers, suppliers, and producers of food products and
consumer goods. Monroe operates throughout the United States,
primarily the eastern United States. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joseph H. Chivers, Esq.
          100 First Avenue
          Pittsburgh, PA 15222
          Telephone: (412) 227-0763
          Facsimile: (412) 774-1994
          E-mail: jchivers@employmentrightsgroup.com

               - and -

          John R. Linkosky, Esq.
          JOHN LINKOSKY & ASSOCIATES
          715 Washington Avenue
          Carnegie, PA 15106
          Telephone: (412) 278-1280
          Facsimile: (412) 278-1282
          E-mail: linklaw@comcast.net


MONSANTO CO: Court Certifies Settlement Class in Roundup Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit styled as LISA JONES, et al., v.
MONSANTO COMPANY, Case No. 19-0102-CV-W-BP (W.D. Mo.), the Hon.
Judge Beth Phillips entered an order:

   1. certifying the civil action as class action for settlement
      purposes only, on behalf of the following Class:

      "all persons in the United States, who during the Class
      Period purchased in the United States, for personal or
      household use and not for resale or distribution, Roundup
      (TM) Products in packaging whose label contained the
      statement "targets an enzyme found in plants but not in
      people or pets" or a substantially similar statement." Any
      person who previously received a full refund is excluded
      from the Class definition.

   2. appointing the named Plaintiffs Lisa Jones, Horacio Torres
      Bonilla, and Kristoffer Yee as the class representatives
      of the Class;

   3. appointing Kim E. Richman and Michael L. Baum as Class
      Counsel to represent the Class;

   4. preliminarily approving the Second Corrected Settlement
      Agreement;

   5. scheduling a Final Settlement Hearing on November 9, 2020
      at 10:00 a.m., in Courtroom 7A, United States District
      Court for the Western District of Missouri, 400 East 9th
      Street, Kansas City, Missouri 64106;

   6. directing Class Counsel within 14 days of this Order, to
      provide to each Class member the Class Notice and Claim
      Form; and

   7. approving the designation of Class Counsel to administer
      the settlement through a third-party administrator.

The Monsanto Company was an American agrochemical and agricultural
biotechnology corporation founded in 1901. In 2018, it was acquired
by Bayer as part of its crop science division. It was headquartered
in Creve Coeur, Missouri.[CC]

MSTMA INC: Swan Balks at Unwanted Robocalls and Texts
-----------------------------------------------------
COLE SWAN, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff, v. MSTMA, INC. d/b/a CONNECTED SF, a
California corporation, Defendant, Case No. 3:20-cv-04053 (N.D.
Cal., June 18, 2020) is a class action complaint brought by the
Plaintiff for damages, injunctive relief, and any other available
legal or equitable remedies, resulting from the illegal actions of
Defendant in negligently or willfully contacting Plaintiff on
Plaintiff's cellular telephone, in violation of the Telephone
Consumer Protection Act, thereby invading Plaintiff's privacy.

According to the complaint, the impersonal and generic nature of
the text message that Defendant sent to Plaintiff further
demonstrates that Defendant used an automated telemarketing text
messages to send the subject messages.

The content of the text message made to Plaintiff and the Class
Members show that they were for the purpose of marketing,
advertising, and promoting Defendant's business and services to
Plaintiff as part of an overall telemarketing strategy.

Plaintiff has become understandably aggravated with having to deal
with the frustration of repeated, unwanted messages, forcing him to
divert attention away from his work and other activities. Not only
did the receipt of the text message distract Plaintiff away from
his personal activities, Plaintiff was forced to spend time
investigating the source of the calls and who sent them to him.

MSTMA, Inc. d/b/a Connected SF is a cannabis store in San
Francisco, California.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW, PA
          20900 NE 30th Ave., Suite 417
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Telephone: (305) 975-3320
          E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com

MYSI CORP: Moore Sues in N.D. Illinois Alleging Violation of FLSA
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against MYSI Corp., et al.
The case is styled as Ronald Moore, Kathurn Owen, Marquell Cotton,
Laconda Mines, Sherry Brooks, on behalf of themselves, and all
other similarly situated v. MYSI Corp., an Illinois Corporation,
Toleda Hart, individually, Case No. 1:20-cv-03586 (N.D. Ill., June
18, 2020).

The lawsuit is brought over alleged violation of the Fair Labor
Standards Act.

MYSI Corporation was founded in 1965 with a focus on eradicating
homelessness by providing shelter care, temporary housing and
community-based clinical case management support for 'at risk'
youth, adults and families with no or limited housing
resources.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Samuel David Engelson, Esq.
          John William Billhorn, Esq.
          BILLHORN LAW FIRM
          53 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 840
          Chicago, IL 60604
          Phone: (312) 853-1450
          Email: sengelson@billhornlaw.com
                 jbillhorn@billhornlaw.com


NABORS INDUSTRIES: Shareholders' Appeal in Texas Suit Pending
-------------------------------------------------------------
Nabors Industries Ltd. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2020, that an appeal before the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit from a lower court decision in the putative class
action suit initiated against the company and Tesco Corporation
remains pending.

On September 29, 2017, the company was sued, along with Tesco
Corporation and its Board of Directors, in a putative shareholder
class action filed in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.

The plaintiff alleges that the September 18, 2017 Preliminary Proxy
Statement filed by Tesco with the United States Securities and
Exchange Commission omitted material information with respect to
the proposed transaction between Tesco and Nabors announced on
August 14, 2017.

The plaintiff claims that the omissions rendered the Proxy
Statement false and misleading, constituting a violation of
Sections 14(a) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The court consolidated several matters and entered a lead plaintiff
appointment order.

The plaintiff filed their amended complaint, adding Nabors
Industries Ltd. as a party to the consolidated action.

Nabors filed its motion to dismiss, which was granted by the court
on March 29, 2019.

The parties have filed appellate briefs with the Fifth Circuit
Court of Appeals, and arguments were heard on March 4, 2020.

Nabors will continue to vigorously defend itself against the
allegations.

Nabors Industries Ltd. provides drilling and drilling-related
services and technologies for land-based and offshore oil and
natural gas wells. It operates through five segments: U.S.
Drilling, Canada Drilling, International Drilling, Drilling
Solutions, and Rig Technologies. Nabors Industries Ltd. was founded
in 1952 and is headquartered in Hamilton, Bermuda.


NATIONAL RAILROAD: D.C. Cir. Appeal Filed in Slaughter ADA Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant National Railroad Passenger Corporation filed an appeal
from a court ruling in the lawsuit styled Alyson Slaughter v.
National Railroad Passenger Corporation, Case No.
1:19-cv-02920-APM, in the U.S. District Court for the District of
Columbia.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
seeks a permanent injunction requiring a change in the corporate
policies of the Defendant to cause its mobile websites and mobile
application to become, and remain, accessible to individuals with
visual disabilities.

The lawsuit asserts claims under the Americans with Disabilities
Act.

The appellate case is captioned as Alyson Slaughter v. National
Railroad Passenger Corporation, Case No. 20-7049, in the United
States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.[BN]

Plaintiff-Appellee Alyson Slaughter, individually and on behalf of
all others similarly situated, is represented by:

          Jeffrey Kaliel, Esq.
          KALIEL PLLC
          1875 Connecticut Avenue NW, 10th Floor
          Washington, DC 20009
          Telephone: (202) 350-4783
          E-mail: jkaliel@kalielpllc.com

Defendant-Appellant National Railroad Passenger Corporation, doing
business as Amtrak, is represented by:

          Alison Nadine Davis, Esq.
          Lindsay Morgan Neinast, Esq.
          LITTLER MENDELSON PC
          815 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 400
          Washington, DC 20006
          Telephone: (202) 842-3400
          E-mail: andavis@littler.com


NATIONAL SPINE: Faces Telemarketing Suit from Scoma Chiropractic
----------------------------------------------------------------
SCOMA CHIROPRACTIC, P.A., a Florida corporation, individually and
as the representative of a class of similarly-situated persons,
Plaintiff, v. NATIONAL SPINE AND PAIN CENTERS LLC, a Delaware
limited liability company, SPINE CENTER OF FL, LLC and PAIN
MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS OF SOUTHWEST FLORIDA, P.L., Florida limited
liability companies, Defendants, Case No. 2:20-cv-00430 (M.D. Fla.,
June 18, 2020) arises from Defendants' practice of sending
unsolicited facsimiles to Plaintiffs and a class of
similarly-situated persons in violation of the federal Telephone
Consumer Protection Act of 1991, as amended by the Junk Fax
Prevention Act of 2005.

On or about April, 2020, Defendants sent Plaintiff an unsolicited
fax advertisement in violation of the TCPA. Upon information and
belief, Defendants have sent the Fax and other facsimile
transmissions of unsolicited advertisements to Plaintiff and the
Class in violation of the TCPA. The Fax describes the commercial
availability and/or quality of Defendants' property, goods or
services, namely, Defendants' availability and quality of
telemedicine appointments for non-urgent as well as in-office
visits for urgent matters.

Plaintiff seeks to certify a class which were sent the Fax and
other unsolicited fax advertisements that were sent without prior
express invitation or permission and without compliant opt-out
language (to the extent the affirmative defense of established
business relationship is alleged). Plaintiff seeks statutory
damages for each violation of the TCPA and injunctive relief.

National Spine and Pain Centers LLC provides medical care through
minimally invasive procedures and fashions itself as a pain relief
provider with more than 70 locations across the U.S.

Spine Center provides the medical services at the Pain Management
Consultants branded locations.

Pain Management Consultants is an affiliate of National Spine and
Pain Centers.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:
        
          Ryan M. Kelly, Esq.
          ANDERSON + WANCA
          3701 Algonquin Road, Suite 500
          Rolling Meadows, IL 60008
          Telephone: (847) 368-1500
          Facsimile: (847) 368-1501
          E-mail: rkelly@andersonwanca.com

NETAPP INC: Continues to Defend Securities Suit in California
-------------------------------------------------------------
NetApp, Inc. said in its Form 10-K report filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission on June 15, 2020, for the fiscal
year ended April 24, 2020, that the company continues to defend a
class action suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of California.

On August 14, 2019, a purported securities class action lawsuit was
filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District
of California, naming as defendants NetApp and certain of its
executive officers.

The complaint alleges that the defendants violated Section 10(b)
and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
SEC Rule 10b-5, by making materially false or misleading statements
with respect to the company's financial guidance for fiscal 2020,
as provided on May 22, 2019.

Members of the alleged class are purchasers of the Company's stock
between May 22, 2019 and August 1, 2019, the date the company
provided revised financial guidance for fiscal 2020.

The complaint alleges unspecified damages based on the decline in
the market price of the company's shares following the issuance of
the revised guidance on August 1, 2019.

NetApp said, "We believe the complaint is without merit and intend
to defend the case vigorously."

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

NetApp, Inc., incorporated on November 1, 2001, provides software,
systems and services to manage and store customer data. The Company
enables enterprises, service providers, governmental organizations,
and partners to envision, deploy and evolve their information
technology (IT) environments. The company is based in Sunnyvale,
California.


NEW YORK: Board Files 15 Appeals in Gulino Suit to 2nd Circuit
--------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Board of Education of the City School District of the
City of New York filed 15 appeals from the District Court's ruling
in the lawsuit styled Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
Case No. 96-cv-8414, filed in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York (New York City).

The Plaintiffs originally filed a class action complaint on
November 8, 1996, alleging that the LAST-1 exam violated Title VII.
The Plaintiffs, a group of African-American and Latino teachers in
the New York City public school system, alleged that the Defendant,
the Board of Education of the City School District of the City of
New York, violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42
U.S.C. Section 2000e, et seq., by requiring the Plaintiffs to pass
certain racially discriminatory standardized tests in order to
obtain a license to teach in New York City public schools.

The appellate cases brought before the United States Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit are:

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3768;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3778;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3777;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3774;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3766;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3779;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3792;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3783;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3795;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3791;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3803;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3797;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3810;

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3800; and

   -- Gulino, et al. v. Board of Education, et al.,
      Case No. 19-3796.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellees Bree Whitlock, Stephen Rivers, Jeffrey Miller,
Marie Micheline Nicolas, Mirna Beeston, Iris Bonilla, Maria Felix,
Nuridiana Caro, Mirna Romero Guzman, Teresa Marino, Dwain Kerron
Mitchell, Ernest Jackson, Shaniese Heyward, Cristobalina Coronado
and Ronnie Roddy are represented by:

          Joshua S. Sohn, Esq.
          STROOCK & STROOCK & LAVAN LLP
          180 Maiden Lane
          New York, NY 10038
          Telephone: (212) 806-1245
          E-mail: jsohn@stroock.com

Defendant-Appellant Board of Education of the New York City School
District of the City of New York is represented by:

          Georgia Mary Pestana, Esq.
          NEW YORK CITY LAW DEPARTMENT
          100 Church Street
          New York, NY 10007
          Telephone: 212-356-2400
          E-mail: gpestana@law.nyc.gov


NORTHSTAR LOCATION: Faces Friedman FDCPA Suit in S.D. New York
--------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Northstar Location
Services, LLC. The case is captioned as Shimon Friedman on behalf
of himself and all others similarly situated v. Northstar Location
Services, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-04280-AT (S.D.N.Y., June 4, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Analisa Torres.

The lawsuit alleges violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act regarding consumer credit.

Northstar provides receivables debt collection services. The
Company offers first and third party debt collections, customer
care programs, and location services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


O'BRIEN & TAYLOR: Faces Ivezaj FDCPA Consumer Suit in New Jersey
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Jerome O'Brien, et
al. The case is captioned as ERICA IVEZAJ, on behalf of herself and
all others similarly situated v. JEROME O'BRIEN, FRANCIS TAYLOR,
and O'BRIEN & TAYLOR, Case No. 2:20-cv-06730-KM-JBC (D.N.J., June
1, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Kevin McNulty.

The lawsuit alleges violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices
Act regarding consumer credit.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM: Miami FIPO Sues Over Senior Notes Offering
----------------------------------------------------------------
CITY OF MIAMI FIRE FIGHTERS' AND POLICE OFFICERS' RETIREMENT TRUST,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated v.
OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORPORATION, et al., Case No. 652161/2020
(N.Y. Sup., New York Cty., June 1, 2020), asserts strict liability
and negligence claims for violations of the Securities Act of 1933
relating to Occidental's 2019 offering of 10 series of senior notes
that commenced on August 8, 2019.

This securities class action is brought on behalf of a class of all
persons or entities, who purchased or otherwise acquired the Notes
pursuant and/or traceable to the Company's Registration Statement,
issued in connection with the Offering.

The Notes were issued by Occidental to finance its August 2019
acquisition of and merger with Anadarko. The Plaintiff alleges that
the Registration Statement failed to disclose to investors that the
integration of Anadarko was not as carefully crafted or lead to
benefits as touted and that the acquired assets, including in the
Permian and Denver-Julesburg Basins and the Gulf of Mexico, would
not produce as much output as expected.

The Plaintiff contends that by the commencement of this action, the
Notes issued in the Offering have traded as low as 60% below par
and investors have been severely damaged as a result.

Occidental is an international oil and gas exploration and
production company with operations in the United States, Middle
East, Latin America, and Africa, and purports to be "the leading
producer and largest acreage holder in the Permian Basin." The
Individual Defendants are Occidental, certain current and former
officers and directors of Occidental, and the underwriters for the
Offering.

The Defendants include VICKI HOLLUB; SPENCER ABRAHAM; EUGENE L.
BATCHELDER; CEDRIC W. BURGHER; MARGARET M. FORAN; CARLOS M.
GUTIERREZ; JENNIFER M. KIRK; WILLIAM R. KLESSE; JACK B. MOORE;
AVEDICK B. POLADIAN; ROBERT M. SHEARER; ELISSE B. WALTER; BOFA
SECURITIES, INC.; CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC.; J.P. MORGAN
SECURITIES LLC; WELLS FARGO SECURITIES, LLC; BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC.;
HSBC SECURITIES (USA) INC.; MUFG SECURITIES AMERICAS INC.; RBC
CAPITAL MARKETS, LLC; SOCIETE GENERALE AMERICAS SECURITIES, LLC;
SMBC NIKKO; BBVA SECURITIES, INC.; CIBC WORLD MARKETS CORP.; MIZUHO
SECURITIES USA LLC; PNC CAPITAL MARKETS LLC; SCOTIA CAPITAL (USA)
INC.; STANDARD CHARTERED BANK; US BANCORP INVESTMENTS, INC.;
ACADEMY SECURITIES, INC.; LOOP CAPITAL MARKETS LLC; and THE
WILLIAMS CAPITAL GROUP, L.P.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Alfred L. Fatale III, Esq.
          Jonathan Gardner, Esq.
          Anna Menkova, Esq.
          LABATON SUCHAROW LLP
          140 Broadway
          New York, NY 10017-5563
          Telephone: (212) 907-0700
          Facsimile: (212) 818-0477
          E-mail: jgardner@labaton.com
                  afatale@labaton.com
                  amenkova@labaton.com


OCULAR THERAPEUTIX: 1st Cir. Affirms Dismissal of DEXTENZA Suit
---------------------------------------------------------------
Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period
ended March 31, 2020, that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First
Circuit has issued a decision affirming the District Court's
dismissal of the class action related to the company's disclosures
related to its DEXTENZA drug.

On July 7, 2017, a putative class action lawsuit was filed against
the company and certain of its current and former executive
officers in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey, captioned Thomas Gallagher v. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc,
et al., Case No. 2:17-cv-05011.

The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who
purchased the company's common stock between May 5, 2017 and July
6, 2017. The complaint generally alleges that the company and
certain of its current and former officers violated Sections 10(b)
and/or 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or the
Exchange Act, and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder by making
allegedly false and/or misleading statements concerning the Form
483 issued by the Food and Drug administration (FDA) related to
DEXTENZA and the company's manufacturing operations for DEXTENZA.

The complaint seeks unspecified damages, attorneys' fees, and other
costs.  

On July 14, 2017, an amended complaint was filed; the amended
complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who
purchased our common stock between May 5, 2017 and July 11, 2017,
and otherwise includes allegations similar to those made in the
original complaint.

On July 12, 2017, a second putative class action lawsuit was filed
against the company and certain of its current and former executive
officers in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey, captioned Dylan Caraker v. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., et
al., Case No. 2:17-cv-05095.

The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who
purchased the company's common stock between May 5, 2017 and July
6, 2017. The complaint includes allegations similar to those made
in the Gallagher complaint and seeks similar relief.

On August 3, 2017, a third putative class action lawsuit was filed
against the company and certain of its current and former executive
officers in the United States District Court for the District of
New Jersey, captioned Shawna Kim v. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., et
al., Case No. 2:17-cv-05704.

The complaint purports to be brought on behalf of shareholders who
purchased our common stock between March 10, 2016 and July 11,
2017.

The complaint includes allegations similar to those made in the
Gallagher complaint and seeks similar relief.

On October 27, 2017, a magistrate judge for the United States
District Court for the District of New Jersey granted the
defendants' motion to transfer the above-referenced Gallagher,
Caraker, and Kim litigations to the United States District Court
for the District of Massachusetts.  These matters were assigned the
following docket numbers in the District of Massachusetts:
1:17-cv-12288 (Gallagher), 1:17-cv-12146 (Caraker), and
1:17-cv-12286 (Kim).

On March 9, 2018, the court consolidated the three actions and
appointed co-lead plaintiffs and co-lead counsel for the
consolidated action. On May 7, 2018, co-lead plaintiffs filed a
consolidated amended class action complaint.  

The amended complaint makes allegations similar to those in the
original complaints, against the same defendants, and seeks similar
relief on behalf of shareholders who purchased the company's common
stock between March 10, 2016 and July 11, 2017. The amended
complaint generally alleges that defendants violated Sections 10(b)
and/or 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated
thereunder.  

On July 6, 2018, defendants filed a motion to dismiss the
consolidated amended complaint. Plaintiffs filed an opposition to
the motion to dismiss on September 4, 2018, and defendants filed a
reply on October 4, 2018.  

The court held oral argument on the motion to dismiss on February
6, 2019. By order dated April 30, 2019, the court granted
defendants' motion to dismiss. On May 31, 2019, the plaintiffs
filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for
the First Circuit regarding the District Court's opinion and order
of dismissal of the Complaint.  

The First Circuit held an oral argument on the appeal on February
4, 2020.  

The First Circuit issued their decision on April 9, 2020, affirming
the District Court's dismissal of the class action.

We deny any allegations of wrongdoing and intend to vigorously
defend against these lawsuits.

Ocular Therapeutix, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company, focuses on
the formulation, development, and commercialization of therapies
for diseases and conditions of the eye using its bioresorbable
hydrogel platform technology. Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. was founded
in 2006 and is headquartered in Bedford, Massachusetts.


PARTSBASE INC: Martin Suit Has Conditional Class Certification
--------------------------------------------------------------
In the class action lawsuit styled as SHAWN MARTIN, individually,
and on Behalf of all others Similarly Situated v. PARTSBASE INC.
d/b/a GOVGISTICS, et. al., Case No. 9:20-cv-80235-DMM (S.D. Fla.,
Filed April 27, 2020), the Hon. Judge Donald M. Middlebrooks
entered an order:

   1. granting Plaintiff's motion to conditionally certify the
      action and to authorize Notice;

   2. conditionally certifying the collective action on behalf
      of:

      "all persons employed by or performing work for Partsbase,
      Inc. as an Inside Sales Representative, under the job
      titles of Defense Analyst, Business Development Sales
      Representative, Account Executive and any other job title
      previously or currently used to describe persons working
      as ISRs at any time within the three years preceding this
      lawsuit to the day of trial";

   3. directing Partbase Inc. to produce to Plaintiff the
      names, addresses, telephone numbers, and emails of all
      current and former ISRs who were employed within the past
      three years; and

   4. directing the Plaintiff to complete all alterations to its
      Proposed Notice and Consent Forms and then may send to to
      all class members in a manner consistent with this Order.

Judge Middlebrooks said, "The Defendant argues that it is not
appropriate to allow potential plaintiffs to sign the consent form
via electronic signatures. Defendant argues that electronic
signatures may lead to fraud and also argues that requiring
pen-and-ink signatures is not overly onerous. I do not find this
argument availing. Precluding electronic signatures would create an
unnecessary hurdle which may deter potential plaintiffs from opting
in. Further, as e-signature technology is widely used, I do not
find that it should be disallowed due to a potential for fraud."

The Plaintiff seeks damages for the Defendant's alleged failure to
pay overtime wages in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The Defendant allegedly employed more than 200 employees termed
Inside Sales Representatives, all of whom worked or continue to
work for the Defendant at its sole company office in Boca Raton,
Florida.[CC]

PATENAUDE & FELIX: Capi Sues over Debt Collection Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------
MARIA CAPI, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. PATENAUDE & FELIX, A.P.C.; and JOHN AND JANE
DOES 1 THROUGH 25, Defendants, Case 8:20-cv-01064 (C.D. Cal., June
12, 2020) seeks to stop the Defendant's unfair and unconscionable
means to collect a debt.

Patenaude & Felix, A.P.C. is a law firm, offering corporate
creditor services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kian Mottahedeh, Esq.
          SM LAW GROUP, APC
          16130 Ventura Blvd., Suite 660
          Encino, CA 91436
          Tel: (818) 855-5950
          Facsimile: (818) 855-5952
          E-mail: Kian@smlawca.com


PATZI'S PIZZA: Faces Ponce Suit in California Superior Court
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Patzi's Pizza
Corporation, et al. The case is captioned as MARICELA PONCE,
ORLANDO MORALES, and MORALES, MARILU, ON BEHALF OF THEMSELVES AND
ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED AND ON BEHALF OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC
AS PRIVATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL v. PATZI'S PIZZA CORPORATION; CORY
(LAST NAME UNKNOWN), A CALIFORNIA RESIDENT; KATI (LAST NAME
UNKNOWN), A CALIFORNIA RESIDENT; and DOES 1 THROUGH 250, INCLUSIVE,
Case No. CGC20584676 (Cal. Super., San Francisco Cty., June 3,
2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Garrett L. Wong. A case
management conference will be held on Nov. 4, 2020.

Patzi's operates pizza stores.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Ronald Leonardo Zambrano, Esq.
          WEST COAST EMPLOYMENT LAWYERS
          350 S Grand Ave., Ste. 3350
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3431
          Telephone: (213) 927-3700
          Facsimile: (213) 927-3701
          E-mail: ron@westcoasttriallawyers.com


PILGRIM'S PRIDE: Glancy Prongay Continues Investigation
-------------------------------------------------------
Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP ("GPM"), a national investor rights law
firm, continues its investigation on behalf of Pilgrim's Pride
Corporation ("Pilgrim's Pride" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: PPC)
investors concerning the Company and its officers' possible
violations of the federal securities laws.

If you suffered a loss on your Pilgrim's Pride investments or would
like to inquire about potentially pursuing claims to recover your
loss under the federal securities laws, you can submit your contact
information at
https://www.glancylaw.com/cases-application/case-information/pilgrims-pride-corporation/.
You can also contact:

         Charles Linehan, Esquire
         Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP
         1925 Century Park East, Suite 2100
         Los Angeles, California 90067
         Tel: (310) 201-9150
         Toll-Free: 888-773-9224
         E-mail: shareholders@glancylaw.com
         Web site: http://www.glancylaw.com/

On June 3, 2020, The Wall Street Journal reported that Pilgrim's
Pride Chief Executive Officer and others had been indicted "for
allegedly conspiring to fix prices on chickens sold to restaurants
and grocery stores."

On this news, the Company's share price fell $2.58, or over 12%, to
close at $18.29 per share on June 3, 2020, thereby injuring
investors.

Whistleblower Notice: Persons with non-public information regarding
Pilgrim's Pride should consider their options to aid the
investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower Program.
Under the program, whistleblowers who provide original information
may receive rewards totaling up to 30 percent of any successful
recovery made by the SEC.

Glancy Prongay & Murray LLP is a premier law firm representing
investors and consumers in securities litigation and other complex
class action litigation. ISS Securities Class Action Services has
consistently ranked GPM in its annual SCAS Top 50 Report. In 2018,
GPM was ranked a top five law firm in number of securities class
action settlements, and a top six law firm for total dollar size of
settlements. With four offices across the country, GPM's nearly 40
attorneys have won groundbreaking rulings and recovered billions of
dollars for investors and consumers in securities, antitrust,
consumer, and employment class actions. GPM's lawyers have handled
cases covering a wide spectrum of corporate misconduct including
cases involving financial restatements, internal control
weaknesses, earnings management, fraudulent earnings guidance and
forward looking statements, auditor misconduct, insider trading,
violations of FDA regulations, actions resulting in FDA and DOJ
investigations, and many other forms of corporate misconduct. GPM's
attorneys have worked on securities cases relating to nearly all
industries and sectors in the financial markets, including, energy,
consumer discretionary, consumer staples, real estate and REITs,
financial, insurance, information technology, health care, biotech,
cryptocurrency, medical devices, and many more. GPM's past
successes have been widely covered by leading news and industry
publications such as The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times,
Bloomberg Businessweek, Reuters, the Associated Press, Barron's,
Investor's Business Daily, Forbes, and Money. [GN]



PROASSURANCE CORP: Bernstein Liebhard Announces Class Action Filing
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bernstein Liebhard, a nationally acclaimed investor rights law
firm, announces that a securities class action has been filed on
behalf of investors that purchased or acquired the securities of
ProAssurance Corporation (NYSE: PRA) between April 26, 2019 and May
7, 2020 (the "Class Period"). The lawsuit filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama alleges
violations of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

If you purchased ProAssurance securities, and/or would like to
discuss your legal rights and options please visit ProAssurance
Shareholder Lawsuit or contact Matthew E. Guarnero toll free at
(877) 779-1414 or MGuarnero@bernlieb.com.

The Complaint alleges that throughout the Class Period, Defendants
made materially false and misleading statements regarding the
Company's business, operations and prospects. Specifically,
Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose that: (i) ProAssurance lacked adequate underwriting
process and risk management controls necessary to set appropriate
loss reserves in its Specialty P&C segment; (ii) ProAssurance
failed to properly assess a large national healthcare account that
experienced losses far exceeding the assumptions made when the
account was underwritten; and (iii) as a result, ProAssurance was
subject to materially heightened risk of financial loss and reserve
charges.

On January 22, 2020 ProAssurance announced that because of a
deteriorating loss experience related mainly to one large
healthcare account the Company was estimating a $37 million adverse
development in its specialty P&C loss reserves for the fourth
quarter of 2019.

In response to this disclosure ProAssurance's stock price fell
$4.18 per share or 11% to close at $33.40 per share on January 23,
2020.

Then, on May 8, 2020, ProAssurance announced that the large
healthcare client would likely not renew its policy and instead
would likely exercise an option for tail coverage that would result
in an additional $50 million in losses in the second quarter of
2020. In response to this disclosure, ProAssurance's stock price
fell $4.38 per share, or 22% to close at $15.95 per share on May 8,
2020.

If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no
later than August 17, 2020. A lead plaintiff is a representative
party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the
litigation. Your ability to share in any recovery doesn't require
that you serve as lead plaintiff. If you choose to take no action,
you may remain an absent class member.

If you purchased ProAssurance securities, and/or would like to
discuss your legal rights and options please visit
https://www.bernlieb.com/cases/proassurancecorporation-pra-shareholder-class-action-lawsuit-stock-fraud-278/apply/
or contact Matthew E. Guarnero toll free at (877) 779-1414 or
MGuarnero@bernlieb.com.

Since 1993, Bernstein Liebhard LLP has recovered over $3.5 billion
for its clients. In addition to representing individual investors,
the Firm has been retained by some of the largest public and
private pension funds in the country to monitor their assets and
pursue litigation on their behalf. As a result of its success
litigating hundreds of lawsuits and class actions, the Firm has
been named to The National Law Journal's "Plaintiffs' Hot List"
thirteen times and listed in The Legal 500 for ten consecutive
years.

Contact:

        Matthew E. Guarnero
        Bernstein Liebhard LLP
        https://www.bernlieb.com
        Tel: (877) 779-1414
        E-mail: MGuarnero@bernlieb.com
[GN]



PROSHARES TRUST II: Appeal in NY Securities Suit over ETF Pending
-----------------------------------------------------------------
ProShares Trust II said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarterly period ended
March 31, 2020, that the appeal in the consolidated class action
suit related to ProShares Short VIX Short-Term Futures
exchange-traded fund (ETF), is pending

ProShare Capital Management LLC (the "Sponsor") and ProShares Trust
II (the "Trust") are named as defendants in the following purported
class action lawsuits filed in the United States District Court for
the Southern District of New York on the following dates: (i) on
January 29, 2019 and captioned Ford v. ProShares Trust II et al.;
(ii) on February 27, 2019 and captioned Bittner v. ProShares Trust
II, et al.; and (iii) on March 1, 2019 and captioned Mareno v.
ProShares Trust II, et al.

The allegations in the complaints are substantially the same,
namely that the defendants violated Sections 11 and 15 of the 1933
Act, Sections 10(b) and 20(a) and Rule 10b-5 of the 1934 Act, and
Items 303 and 105 of Regulation S-K, 17 C.F.R. Section
229.303(a)(3)(ii), 229.105 by issuing untrue statements of material
fact and omitting material facts in the prospectus for ProShares
Short VIX Short-Term Futures ETF, and allegedly failing to state
other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading.

Certain Principals of the Sponsor and Officers of the Trust are
also defendants in the actions, along with a number of others. The
Court consolidated the three actions and appointed lead plaintiffs
and lead counsel.

On January 3, 2020, the Court granted defendants' motion to dismiss
the consolidated class action in its entirety and ordered the case
closed.

On January 31, 2020, the plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the
Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Trust and Sponsor will continue to vigorously defend against
this lawsuit. The Trust and the Sponsor cannot predict the outcome
of this action. ProShares Short VIX Short-Term Futures ETF may
incur expenses in defending against such claims.

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

ProShares Trust II is a Delaware statutory trust formed on October
9, 2007 and is currently organized into separate series.


RITE AID: Underpays Staffs, Andrews Suit Alleges
------------------------------------------------
IMARI ANDREWS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. RITE AID OF NEW YORK, INC.; and RITE AID
CORPORATION, Defendants, Case 1:20-cv-04521 (S.D.N.Y., June 12,
2020) seeks to recover from the Defendants unpaid wages and
overtime compensation, interest, liquidated damages, attorneys'
fees, and costs under the Fair Labor Standards Act.

The Plaintiff Andrews was employed by the Defendants as hourly paid
worker.

Rite Aid of New York Inc. retails pharmaceutical products. The
Company offers prescription drugs, proprietary drugs,
over-the-counter medicines, health and beauty aids, personal care
items, cosmetics, household items, beverages, convenience foods,
and non-prescription medicines. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brian S. Schaffer, Esq.
          FITAPELLI & SCHAFFER, LLP
          Hunter G Benharris
          28 Liberty Street, 30th Floor
          New York, NY 10005
          Telephone: (212) 300-0375


ROMEO & JULIETTE: Faces Mukoma Employment Suit in California
------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Romeo & Juliette Inc.
The case is captioned as Rosaline Kabwika Mukoma, on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. Romeo & Juliette Inc. and Does 1-10,
Case No. 34-2020-00279860-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super., Sacramento Cty.,
June 2, 2020).

The lawsuit alleges violation of the employment-related laws.

Romeo & Juliette was founded in 1985. The Company's line of
business includes the wholesale distribution of footwear.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Bobby Saadian, Esq.
          Justin F. Marquez, Esq.
          Nicol E. Hajjar, Esq.
          WILSHIRE LAW FIRM, PLC
          3055 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90010
          Telephone: (213) 381-9988
          Facsimile: (213) 381-9989
          E-mail: bobby@wilshirelawfirm.com
                  justin@wilshirelawfirm.com
                  Nicol@wilshirelawfirm.com


ROOFLINE INC: Faces Rojo Employment Suit in California Super. Ct.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Roofline, Inc., et
al. The case is captioned as Angel Rojo, On Behalf of Himself and
Others Similarly Situated v. Roofline, Inc., a Texas Corporation;
Roofline Supply & delivery; and Does 1-250, Case No.
34-2020-00279923-CU-OE-GDS (Cal. Super., Sacramento Cty., June 3,
2020).

The lawsuit alleges violation of employment-related laws.

Roofline was founded in 2006. The Company's line of business
includes the wholesale distribution of roofing, siding, and
insulation materials.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Neama Rahmani, Esq.
          WEST COAST TRIAL LAWYERS
          350 S Grand Ave., Ste. 3350
          Los Angeles, CA 90071-3431
          Telephone: (213) 927-3700
          Facsimile: (213) 927-3701
          E-mail: nr@westcoasttriallawyers.com


RYDER SYSTEM: Berger Montague Probes Securities Fraud Claims
------------------------------------------------------------
Berger Montague continues to investigate securities fraud claims
against Ryder System, Inc., on behalf of all purchasers of Ryder
common stock (NYSE: R) between July 23, 2015 and February 13, 2020
(the "Class Period"). In a recent development, Moody's Investors
Service downgraded Ryder, noting a "multi-year, negative trend in
prices for used vehicles," which could lend credibility to the
allegation that the Company belatedly lowered its residual values.

If you purchased Ryder shares, have information, would like to
discuss this investigation, or have any questions concerning your
rights or interests, please contact our attorneys Benjamin
Galdston, Esq. at (619) 678-0187 or Andrew Abramowitz, Esq. at
(215) 875-3015, or visit
www.bergermontague.com/ryder-system-update.

According to a lawsuit filed in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Florida, Ryder misled investors by
assigning significantly overstated residual values to its trucking
fleet, thereby allowing the Company to report depreciation expenses
that were lower than they should have been, thus artificially
inflating Ryder's earnings.

Investors began to learn the truth about these overstated residual
values through a series of disclosures beginning on July 30, 2019.
On that date, Ryder drastically reduced its earnings forecast for
2019, and attributed this lowered guidance primarily to weaker
valuations of the Company's tractors. On this news, the price of
Ryder shares declined 10%, or $5.94 per share, to close at $53.38
per share.

Then, on October 29, 2019, the Company substantially lowered the
residual values for all its vehicles and recorded a $177 million
depreciation expense. Ryder explained that "management concluded
that our residual value estimates likely exceed the expected future
values that would be realized upon the sale of power vehicles in
our fleet." Shares dropped 12% over the next two trading days,
falling from $55.12 per share to $48.44 per share by the close of
trading on October 30, 2019.

Finally, on February 13, 2020, Ryder disclosed that it recorded a
total depreciation expense of $357 million for fiscal year 2019,
and that it expected to record an additional depreciation expense
of $275 million during fiscal year 2020 due to additional
reductions of residual values. In response to this news, the price
of Ryder shares declined 20%, or $10.07 per share, over the next
two trading days, to close at $40.12 on February 14, 2020.

If you purchased Ryder common stock during the Class Period, you
may seek Court appointment as lead plaintiff to represent other
injured investors in a class action. The lead plaintiff appointment
deadline is July 20, 2020. You do not need to be a lead plaintiff
to share in any potential Class recovery.

Whistleblowers: Persons with non-public information regarding Ryder
System, Inc. should consider their options to help Berger
Montague's investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower
program. Under this program, whistleblowers who provide original
information may receive rewards totaling up to thirty percent (30%)
of successful recoveries obtained by the SEC. For more information,
contact us.

Berger Montague, with offices in Philadelphia, Minneapolis,
Washington, D.C., and San Diego, has been a pioneer in securities
class action litigation since its founding in 1970. Berger Montague
has represented individual and institutional investors for five
decades and serves as lead counsel in courts throughout the United
States.

Contact:

         Benjamin Galdston, Shareholder
         Berger Montague
         Tel: (619) 678-0187
         E-mail: bgaldston@bm.net  

         Andrew Abramowitz, Senior Counsel
         Berger Montague
         Tel: (215) 875-3015
         E-mail: aabramowitz@bm.net [GN]


SAHARAH INC: Thompson Sues Over Unpaid Minimum and Overtime Wages
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A. Dominique Thompson, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated v. SAHARAH INC., d/b/a FANTASY and SEIF EL
SHARIF, an individual, Case No. 2:20-cv-00233 (N.D. Ind., June 18,
2020), is brought against the Defendants for damages resulting from
the Defendants evading the mandatory minimum wage and overtime
provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act, and illegally
absconding with the Plaintiff's tips.

According to the complaint, the Plaintiff was denied minimum wage
payments and denied overtime as part of the Defendants scheme to
classify Plaintiff and other dancers/entertainers as "independent
contractors." The Defendants failed to pay the Plaintiff minimum
wages and overtime wages for all hours worked in violation of the
FLSA. The Defendants' conduct violates the FLSA, which requires
non-exempt employees to be compensated for their overtime work at a
rate of one and one-half times their regular rate of pay.
Furthermore, the Defendants' practice of failing to pay tipped
employees pursuant to violates the FLSA's minimum wage provision.

The Plaintiff worked and performed at the adult-oriented
entertainment facility.

The Defendants own and operate a strip club named FANTASY
GENTLEMEN'S CLUB.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Brian Custy, Esq.
          CUSTY LAW FIRM
          4004 Campbell St., Suite 4
          Valparaiso, IN 46385
          Phone: (219) 286-7361
          Fax: 317-458-2001
          Email: bcusty@custylaw.com

               - and –

          Jarrett L. Ellzey, Esq.
          W. Craft Hughes, Esq.
          Leigh Montgomery, Esq.
          HUGHES ELLZEY, LLP
          1105 Milford Street
          Houston, TX 77066
          Phone: (713) 554-2377
          Email: jarrett@hughesellzey.com
                 craft@hughesellzey.com
                 leigh@hughesellzey.com


SERVICEMASTER GLOBAL: Teamsters Sues Over Drop in Share Price
-------------------------------------------------------------
TEAMSTERS LOCAL 237 WELFARE FUND, Individually and on Behalf of All
Others Similarly Situated v. SERVICEMASTER GLOBAL HOLDINGS, INC.,
NIKHIL M. VARTY and ANTHONY D. DiLUCENTE, Case No. 3:20-cv-00457
(M.D. Tenn., June 1, 2020), is a securities fraud class action
brought on behalf of all purchasers of ServiceMaster common stock
between February 26, 2019, and November 4, 2019, inclusive, seeking
to pursue remedies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
against ServiceMaster and its most senior executives.
According to the complaint, the Defendants assured investors during
the Class Period that ServiceMaster was successfully executing its
transformation plan for the Terminix business and that results in
the segment would drive positive trends in the second half of 2019.
Behind the scenes, however, the Terminix business had been beset by
costly termite litigation for the past several years, primarily
related to Formosan activity in Mobile, Alabama. The Formosan
termite is an invasive termite species native to Southern China.
Not only had damage from Formosan termite infestations materially
impacted ServiceMaster's results and operations, but, unbeknownst
to investors, the Company had been taking measures to mitigate this
trend since at least early 2018. These undisclosed adverse facts
rendered the Defendants' positive Class Period statements regarding
the Company's Terminix business materially false and misleading.

On November 5, 2019, ServiceMaster issued a release announcing its
third quarter 2019 financial results. In the release the Company
discussed its "challenging quarter," stating that it had been
impacted by certain "legacy risks," including "termite damage
claims." That same day, the Defendants held an earnings call to
discuss the results. During the call, Defendant Varty revealed that
the increase in termite litigation--which occurred "in the past few
years"--had impacted termite revenue by 7-8%, roughly double the
historical impact. Defendant Varty also stated that increased
claims would continue to impact the Company throughout 2020.
Defendant DiLucente disclosed that, in addition to "$2 million in
increased damage claims expense due to the increase in Formosan
termite activity in the Mobile, Alabama area," the Company
"expected a year-over-year increase from damage claims of
approximately $4 million in the fourth quarter."

On this news, the price of ServiceMaster shares declined 9%. As a
result of the Defendants' wrongful acts and omissions, the
Plaintiff says it and the Class purchased ServiceMaster common
stock at artificially inflated prices and suffered damages when the
relevant truth was revealed.

Teamsters says it purchased ServiceMaster common stock during the
Class Period and was damaged thereby.

ServiceMaster provides services to residential and commercial
customers in the termite, pest control, cleaning and restoration
markets. ServiceMaster's largest and most profitable business
segment is Terminix, a termite and pest control business that
operates primarily in the United States. Defendant Nikhil M. Varty
served as CEO of ServiceMaster. Defendant Anthony D. DiLucente
served as CFO and Senior Vice President of ServiceMaster.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Christopher M. Wood, Esq.
          Brian E. Cochran, Esq.
          ROBBINS GELLER RUDMAN & DOWD LLP
          414 Union Street, Suite 900
          Nashville, TN 37219
          Telephone: 615 244-2203
          Facsimile: 615 252-3798
          E-mail: cwood@rgrdlaw.com
                  bcochran@rgrdlaw.com


SIMPLY HEALTH: Faces Jenkins TCPA Suit Over Unsolicited Text Ads
----------------------------------------------------------------
NAKIA JENKINS, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated v. SIMPLY HEALTH CARE PLANS, INC., a Florida Corporation,
Case No. 108334636 (Fla. Cir., Miami-Dade Cty., June 3, 2020),
alleges that the Defendant promotes and markets its merchandise, in
part, by sending unsolicited text messages to wireless phone users,
in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act.

The Plaintiff contends that to solicit new paying clients, the
Defendant engages in unsolicited marketing with no regard for
privacy rights of the recipients of those messages. The Plaintiff
adds that the Defendant caused thousands of unsolicited text
messages to be sent to her and Class Members cellular telephones
causing them injuries, including invasion of their privacy,
aggravation, annoyance, intrusion on seclusion, trespass, and
conversion.

The Defendant is a medical plan provider.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Andrew J. Shamis, Esq.
          Garrett 0. Berg, Esq.
          SHAMIS & GENTILE, P.A.
          14 NE 1st Avenue, Suite 705
          Miami, FL 33132
          Telephone: 305 479-2299
          E-mail: ashamis@shamisgentile.com
                  gberg@shamisgentile.com

               - and -

          Scott Edelsberg, Esq.
          Aaron M. Ahlzadeh, Esq.
          EDELSBERG LAW, P.A.
          20900 NE 30th Ave., Suite 417
          Aventura, FL 33180
          Office: (786) 289-9471
          Direct: (305) 975-3320
          Fax: (786) 623-0915
          E-mail: scott@edelsberglaw.com
                  aaron@edelsberglaw.com

               - and -

          Michael Eisenband, Esq.
          EISENBAND LAW, P.A.
          515 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 120
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: 954.533.4092
          E-mail: MEisenband@Eisenbandlaw.com

               - and -

          Manuel S. Hiraldo, Esq.
          HIRALDO P.A.
          401 E. Las Olas Boulevard, Suite 1400
          Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
          Telephone: 954 400 4713
          E-mail: mhiraldo@hiraldolaw.com

               - and -

          Ignacio J. Hiraldo, Esq.
          IJHLAW
          14 NE First Ave., 10th Floor
          Miami, FL 33132
          Telephone: 786 351 8709
          E-mail: ijhiraldo@ijhlaw.com


SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS: Klein Reminds of July 27 Deadline
--------------------------------------------------------
The Klein Law Firm announces that a class action complaint has been
filed on behalf of shareholders of Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc.
(NASDAQ: SRNE) alleging that the Company violated federal
securities laws.

Class Period: May 15, 2020 and May 22, 2020
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: July 27, 2020

Learn more about your recoverable losses in DNK:
http://www.kleinstocklaw.com/pslra-1/sorrento-therapeutics-inc-loss-submission-form?id=7435&from=5

The filed complaint alleges that Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc. made
materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to
disclose that: (i) the Company's initial finding of "100%
inhibition" in an in vitro virus infection will not necessarily
translate to to success or safety in vivo, or in person; (ii) the
Company's finding was not a "cure" for COVID-19; and (ii) as a
result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the
Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially
misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

Shareholders have until July 27, 2020 to petition the court for
lead plaintiff status. Your ability to share in any recovery
doesn't require that you serve as a lead plaintiff.

For additional information about the SRNE lawsuit, please contact
J. Klein, Esq. by telephone at 212-616-4899 or click the link
above.

J. Klein, Esq. represents investors and participates in securities
litigations involving financial fraud throughout the nation.

Contact:

          J. Klein, Esq.
          Empire State Building
          350 Fifth Avenue
          59th Floor
          New York, NY 10118
          E-mail: jk@kleinstocklaw.com
          Tel: (212) 616-4899
          Fax: (347) 558-9665
          Web site: http://www.kleinstocklaw.com/
[GN]



SORRENTO THERAPEUTICS: Scott+Scott Reminds of Class Actions
-----------------------------------------------------------
Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP, an international shareholder and
consumer rights litigation firm, reminds investors of pending class
action lawsuits against Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc. ("Sorrento" or
the "Company") (NASDAQ: SRNE) and certain of its officers and
directors alleging violations of federal securities laws.  If you
purchased Sorrento securities between May 15, 2020 and May 22,
2020, inclusive (the "Class Period"), you are encouraged to contact
Scott+Scott attorney Joe Pettigrew for additional information at
(844) 818-6982 or jpettigrew@scott-scott.com.

Sorrento is a biopharmaceutical company that researches human
therapeutic antibodies for the treatment of cancer, inflammation,
and metabolic and infectious diseases. On May 8, 2020, Sorrento
announced a collaboration with Mount Sinai Health System for the
purpose of "generat[ing] antibody products that would act as a
‘protective shield' against SARS-CoV-2 coronavirus infection,
potentially blocking and neutralizing the activity of the virus in
naive at-risk populations as well as recently infected
individuals."

The lawsuits allege that Sorrento made materially false and/or
misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) the
Company's initial finding of "100% inhibition" in an in vitro virus
infection will not necessarily translate to success or safety in
vivo, or in person; (2) the Company's finding was not a "cure" for
COVID-19; and (3) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants'
positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and
prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable
basis.

On May 15, 2020, Sorrento's founder and CEO, Henry Ji ("Ji"),
announced that the Company had discovered an antibody that had
"demonstrated 100% inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 virus infection" and on
that same day told Fox News that "there is a cure."

On this news Sorrento shares increased $4.14 to close at $6.76 on
May 15, and traded as high as $10.00 per share the next day, a
281.7% increase from the May 14, 2020 closing price.

On May 20, 2020 the Hindenburg Report issued a report doubting the
validity of Sorrento's claims and calling them "sensational,"
"nonsense," and "too good to be true."  The Hindenburg report also
quoted experts doubting the validity of Sorrento's claims, and
doubting that Sorrento's antibody was even the most viable antibody
candidate for an effective vaccine.

On this news Sorrento shares closed at $5.70, down 43% from the
class-period high of $10.00.

On May 22, 2020, BioSpace published an article discussing a May 21,
2020 interview with Ji in which Ji "insist[ed] that they did not
say [Sorrento's newly-discovered antibody] was a cure."

On this news Sorrento shares closed at $5.07 per share on May, 22,
2020, a decline of $4.93, or 49.3% from the class-period high.

What You Can Do

If you purchased Sorrento securities between May 15, 2020 and May
22, 2020, or if you have questions about this notice or your legal
rights, you are encouraged to contact attorney Joe Pettigrew at
(844) 818-6982 or jpettigrew@scott-scott.com.  The lead plaintiff
deadline is July 27, 2020.

Scott+Scott has significant experience in prosecuting major
securities, antitrust, and employee retirement plan actions
throughout the United States.  The firm represents pension funds,
foundations, individuals, and other entities worldwide with offices
in New York, London, Connecticut, California, and Ohio.

Contact:

        Joe Pettigrew
        Scott+Scott Attorneys at Law LLP
        230 Park Avenue, 17th Floor
        New York, NY 10169-1820
        Tel: (844) 818-6982
        E-mail: jpettigrew@scott-scott.com
[GN]

SPITZER INDUSTRIES: Moreira Sues Over Abrupt Termination
--------------------------------------------------------
JOSE MOREIRA, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. SPITZER INDUSTRIES, INC., Defendant, Case
No. 4:20-cv-02152 (S.D. Tex., June 18, 2020) brings this complaint
against Defendant for its alleged violation of the Worker
Adjustment Retraining and Notification Act (WARN Act).

Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from March 9, 2018 to April 23,
2020 as an assembly technician at Defendant's facility located at
707 FM 362 in Brookshire, Texas.

According to the complaint, Defendant has shutdown its plant which
resulted to the termination of Plaintiff and other employees on or
about March 26, 2020. However, Defendant failed to provide advance
written notice of plant closing or mass layoff and the
pre-termination wages and benefits pursuant to WARN Act.

Spitzer Industries, Inc. provides steel fabrication services. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Melissa Moore, Esq.
          Curt Hesse, Esq.
          MOORE & ASSOCIATES
          Lyric Centre
          440 Louisiana St., Suite 675
          Tel: (713) 222-6775
          Fax: (713) 222-6739
          Emails: melissa@mooreandassociates.net
                  curt@mooreandassociates.net


STATE AUTOMOBILE: Bluegrass LLC Files Suit in S.D. West Virginia
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against State Automobile
Mutual Insurance Company. The case is styled Bluegrass, LLC, doing
business as: Bluegrass Kitchen, doing business as: Tricky Fish,
doing business as: Starlings, individually and on behalf of all
others similarly situated v. State Automobile Mutual Insurance
Company doing business as: State Auto Insurance Companies, Case No.
2:20-cv-00414 (S.D.W. Va., June 18, 2020).

The nature of suit is stated as Insurance for the Class Action
Fairness Act of 2005.

State Automobile Mutual Insurance Company operates as an insurance
company. The Company offers individuals, businesses, farm and
ranch, and specialty insurance services such as auto, home,
property, industry solutions, risk engineering, liability, and
other insurance policies.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          David R. Barney, Jr., Esq.
          Kevin W. Thompson, Esq.
          THOMPSON BARNEY
          2030 Kanawha Boulevard, East
          Charleston, WV 25311-2204
          Phone: (304) 343-4401
          Fax: (304) 343-4405
          Email: drbarneywv@gmail.com
                 kwthompsonwv@gmail.com


TETRAPHASE PHARMA: Faces AcelRx Merger Related Suits
----------------------------------------------------
Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc. said in its Form 8-K filing with
the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission that the company has
been named as a defendant in several class action suits related to
its merger with AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

On March 15, 2020, Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc. entered into an
Agreement and Plan of Merger with AcelRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and
Consolidation Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and an
indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of AcelRx, ("Merger Sub"),
providing for the merger of Merger Sub with and into Tetraphase,
with Tetraphase surviving the merger as an indirect wholly-owned
subsidiary of AcelRx.

As of May 8, 2020, ten lawsuits have been filed by alleged
Tetraphase stockholders challenging the Merger.

The first lawsuit, a putative class action complaint, is captioned
Plumley v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No.
1:20-cv-00496, and was filed by Patrick Plumley, in the United
States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Plumley
complaint names as defendants Tetraphase and each member of the
Tetraphase Board, as well as AcelRx and Merger Sub.

The second lawsuit is captioned Sahan v. Tetraphase
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03069, and was
filed by Herman Sahan in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York. The Sahan complaint names as
defendants Tetraphase and certain members of the Tetraphase Board.


The third lawsuit is captioned Giacobbe v. Tetraphase
Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-10762, and was filed
by Charles Giacobbe in the United States District Court for the
District of Massachusetts. The Giacobbe complaint names as
defendants Tetraphase and each member of the Tetraphase Board.

The fourth lawsuit is captioned Ravi v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03142, and was filed by Surya Ravi
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York. The Ravi complaint names as defendants Tetraphase and
certain members of the Tetraphase Board.

The fifth lawsuit, a putative class action complaint, is captioned
Garity v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No.
1:20-cv-00542, and was filed by Edward Garity in the United States
District Court for the district of Delaware. The Garity complaint
names as defendants Tetraphase and each member of the Tetraphase
Board, as well as AcelRx and Merger Sub.

The sixth lawsuit, a putative class action complaint, is captioned
Kashavena v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No.
2081-cv-01005, and was filed by Vanamala Kashavena in the Middlesex
County Superior Court. The Kashavena complaint names as defendants
Tetraphase and certain members of the Tetraphase Board, as well as
AcelRx and Merger Sub.

The seventh lawsuit is captioned Waters v. Tetraphase
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-01896, and was
filed by Joshua Waters in the United States District Court for the
Eastern District of New York. The Waters complaint names as
defendants Tetraphase and each member of the Tetraphase Board.

The eighth lawsuit is captioned Gardner v. Tetraphase
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03352, and was
filed by James Gardner in the United States District Court for the
Southern District of New York. The Gardner complaint names as
defendants Tetraphase and certain members of the Tetraphase Board.


The ninth lawsuit is captioned Kopczynski v. Tetraphase
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03426, and was
filed by Christopher Kopczynski in the United States District Court
for the Southern District of New York. The Kopczynski complaint
names as defendants Tetraphase and certain members of the
Tetraphase Board.

The tenth lawsuit is captioned Lapi v. Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., et al., Case No. 1:20-cv-03452, and was filed by Nisjet Lapi
in the United States District Court for the Southern District of
New York. The Lapi complaint names as defendants Tetraphase and
certain members of the Tetraphase Board.

The Plumley, Sahan, Giacobbe, Ravi, Garity, Waters, Gardner,
Kopczynski and Lapi complaints allege violations of Section 14(a)
of the Exchange Act and Rule 14a-9 promulgated thereunder.

The plaintiffs in these actions generally allege that this
registration statement on Form S-4 omits material information with
respect to the proposed transaction, which renders such
registration statement false and misleading.

The Sahan complaint also alleges that the defendants breached their
fiduciary duty of candor/disclosure, by allegedly disseminating a
materially incomplete and misleading registration statement in
connection with the Merger.

The Kashavena complaint alleges that the members of the Tetraphase
Board breached their fiduciary duties of care, loyalty/good faith
and candor/disclosure by allegedly entering into the Merger through
a flawed and unfair process and disseminating a materially
incomplete and misleading registration statement in connection with
the Merger.

The Kashavena complaint alleges that Tetraphase, AcelRx and Merger
Sub aided and abetted in the alleged breach of fiduciary duties.

The complaints seek preliminary and permanent injunction of the
proposed transaction and, if the Merger is consummated, rescission
or rescissory damages.

The complaints also seek the dissemination of a registration
statement that discloses certain information requested by the
plaintiff.

In addition, the complaints seek attorneys' and experts' fees.

Tetraphase said, "The defendants believe that the Plumley, Sahan,
Giacobbe, Ravi, Garity, Kashavena, Waters, Gardner, Kopczynski and
Lapi complaints are without merit."

Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a clinical-stage
biopharmaceutical company, develops various antibiotics for the
treatment of serious and life-threatening multidrug-resistant
infections. The company was founded in 2006 and is headquartered in
Watertown, Massachusetts.


TILLY'S INC: Objection to Ward Class Certification Bid Due July 6
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Tilly's, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on June 15, 2020, for the
quarterly period ended May 2, 2020, that the company's opposition
to the motion for class certification filed in Skylar Ward, on
behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, v. Tilly's,
Inc., Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, Case No.
BC595405, is due July 6, 2020.

In September 2015, the plaintiff filed a putative class action
lawsuit against the company alleging, among other things, various
violations of California's wage and hour laws.

The complaint sought class certification, unspecified damages,
unpaid wages, penalties, restitution, and attorneys' fees.

In June 2016, the court granted the company's demurrer to the
plaintiff's complaint on the grounds that the plaintiff failed to
state a cause of action against the company and dismissed the
complaint.

Specifically, the court agreed with the company that the
plaintiff's cause of action for reporting-time pay fails as a
matter of law as the plaintiff and other putative class members did
not "report for work" with respect to certain shifts on which the
plaintiff's claims are based.

In November 2016, the court entered a written order sustaining the
company's demurrer to the plaintiff's complaint and dismissing all
of plaintiff's causes of action with prejudice.

In January 2017, the plaintiff filed an appeal of the order to the
California Court of Appeal. In February 2019, the Court of Appeal
issued an opinion overturning the trial court's decision, holding
that the plaintiff's allegations stated a claim.

In March 2019, the company filed a petition for review with the
California Supreme Court seeking its discretionary review of the
Court of Appeal's decision. The California Supreme Court declined
to review the Court of Appeal’s decision.

Since the case was remanded back to the trial court, the parties
have been engaged in discovery.

In March 2020, the plaintiff filed a motion for class
certification.

The company's opposition to the motion for class certification is
due July 6, 2020.  

Tilly's said, "We have defended this case vigorously, and will
continue to do so."

Tilly's, Inc. retails casual apparel, footwear, and accessories for
young men and women, and boys and girls in the United States. Its
apparel merchandise includes tops, outerwear, bottoms, and dresses;
and accessories merchandise comprises backpacks, hats, sunglasses,
headphones, handbags, watches, jewelry, and others. Tilly's, Inc.
was founded in 1982 and is headquartered in Irvine, California.


TILLY'S INC: Settlement Talks in Gonzales Suit Still Ongoing
------------------------------------------------------------
Tilly's, Inc. said in its Form 10-Q Report filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on June 15, 2020, for the
quarterly period ended May 2, 2020, that  settlement discussions in
the case, Juan Carlos Gonzales, on behalf of himself and all others
similarly situated, v. Tilly's Inc. et al, Superior Court of
California, County of Orange, Case No. 30-2017-00948710-CU-OE-CXC,
is still ongoing.

In October 2017, the plaintiff filed a putative class action
against the company, alleging various violations of California's
wage and hour laws. The complaint seeks class certification,
unspecified damages, unpaid wages, penalties, restitution,
interest, and attorneys' fees and costs.

In December 2017, the company filed an answer to the complaint,
denying all of the claims and asserting various defenses.

In April 2018, the plaintiff filed a separate action under the
Private Attorneys General Act ("PAGA") against the company seeking
penalties on behalf of himself and other similarly situated
employees for the same alleged violations of California's wage and
hour laws.

The company requested the plaintiff to dismiss the class action
claims based on an existing class action waiver in an arbitration
agreement which plaintiff signed with the company's co-defendant,
BaronHR, the staffing company that employed plaintiff to work at
the Company.

In June 2018, the plaintiff's class action complaint was dismissed.
The parties mediated the PAGA case with a well-respected mediator
in March 2020.

Tilly's said, "Although the case did not settle at the mediation,
the parties have agreed to continue their settlement discussions
with the assistance of the mediator. The court has not yet issued a
trial date. By agreement between co-defendant BaronHR and Tilly's,
BaronHR is required to indemnify Tilly's in this matter. We have
defended this case vigorously, and will continue to do so."

Tilly's, Inc. retails casual apparel, footwear, and accessories for
young men and women, and boys and girls in the United States. Its
apparel merchandise includes tops, outerwear, bottoms, and dresses;
and accessories merchandise comprises backpacks, hats, sunglasses,
headphones, handbags, watches, jewelry, and others. Tilly's, Inc.
was founded in 1982 and is headquartered in Irvine, California.


TRANSAMERICA PREMIER: Faces Phan Class Suit Over Lapsed Policies
----------------------------------------------------------------
DUNG M. PHAN, Individually, and on Behalf of the Class v.
TRANSAMERICA PREMIER LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, an Iowa Corporation,
Case No. 5:20-cv-03665-VKD (N.D. Cal., June 2, 2020), alleges that
TPLIC refuses to comply with mandatory provisions of the California
Insurance Code, as well as California common law, regulating the
lapse and termination of life insurance policies.

Since January 1, 2013, TPLIC and other related entities have
systematically and purposely failed to provide certain classes of
policy owners, insureds, assignees and others, proper notices of
pending lapse or termination, according to the complaint. TPLIC has
allegedly failed to notify thousands of policy owners of their
right to designate someone to receive critical notices and
information regarding life insurance, despite being required to do
so on an annual basis.

The Plaintiff alleges that TPLIC has failed to properly administer
policies, evaluate the status of payments due under policies and
pay claims to beneficiary for policies improperly lapsed or
terminated. Indeed, he adds, thousands of policy owners and
beneficiary have lost, and continue to lose, the benefit, value and
security of their life insurance; have been, and continue to be,
forced into unnecessary reinstatements; and in many instances have
lost all reasonable access to any insurance at all.

TPLIC operates as an insurance firm. The Company offers accidental
and health insurance, annuity, and single premium insurance
plans.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Craig M. Nicholas, Esq.
          Alex Tomasevic, Esq.
          NICHOLAS & TOMASEVIC, LLP
          225 Broadway, 19th Floor
          San Diego, CA 92101
          Telephone: (619) 325-0492
          Facsimile: (619) 325-0496
          E-mail: cnicholas@nicholaslaw.org
                  atomasevic@nicholaslaw.org

               - and -

          Jack B. Winters, Jr., Esq.
          Georg M. Capielo, Esq.
          Sarah Ball, Esq.
          WINTERS & ASSOCIATES
          8489 La Mesa Boulevard
          La Mesa, CA 91942
          Telephone: (619) 234-9000
          Facsimile: (619) 750-0413
          E-mail: jackbwinters@earthlink.net
                  gcapielo@einsurelaw.com
                  sball@einsurelaw.com


U.S. OIL FUND: Block & Leviton Announces Filing of Class Action
---------------------------------------------------------------
Block & Leviton LLP (www.blockesq.com), a national securities
litigation firm, announces that a securities fraud lawsuit has been
filed against United States Oil Fund, LP (NYSE: USO) and certain of
its executives. The lead plaintiff deadline is August 18, 2020.
Investors who purchased USO shares between March 19, 2020 and April
28, 2020, are encouraged to contact the firm for a free case
evaluation.

USO is an exchange traded fund ("ETF") that was purportedly
designed to track the daily changes in percentage terms of the spot
price of West Texas Intermediate ("WTI") light, sweet crude oil
delivered to Cushing, Oklahoma. Because retail investors are
generally not equipped to buy and sell barrels of oil or authorized
to trade oil futures, ETFs such as USO provide one of the primary
means by which such investors can gain exposure to fluctuations in
oil prices.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern
District of New York, alleges that the defendants stated that USO
would achieve its investment objective by investing substantially
all of its portfolio assets in the near month WTI futures contract.
However, unbeknownst to investors, extraordinary market conditions
in early 2020 made USO's purported investment objective and
strategy unfeasible. As excess oil supply increased and oil prices
plummeted, the facilities available for storage in Cushing
approached capacity, causing a "super contango" in which the
futures prices for oil substantially exceeded the spot price.

Rather than disclose the known impacts and risks to the Fund, USO
held an offering of billions of dollars of USO shares in March
2020. Ultimately, the Fund suffered billions of dollars in losses
and was forced to abandon its investment strategy. It was not until
late April and May 2020, when defendants belatedly acknowledged the
extreme threats and adverse impacts that the Fund had been
experiencing at the time of the March offering, but which they
failed to disclose to investors.

If you purchased or acquired shares of USO and have questions about
your legal rights or possess information relevant to this matter,
please contact Block & Leviton attorneys at (617) 398-5600, via
email at cases@blockesq.com, or at https://shareholder.law/uso.

Block & Leviton LLP is a firm dedicated to representing investors
and maintaining the integrity of the country's financial markets.
The firm represents many of the nation's largest institutional
investors as well as individual investors in securities litigation
throughout the United States.  The firm's lawyers have recovered
billions of dollars for its clients.

Contact:

         BLOCK & LEVITON LLP
         260 Franklin St., Suite 1860
         Boston, MA 02110
         Phone: (617) 398-5600
         E-mail: cases@blockesq.com
[GN]

U.S. OIL FUND: Robbins Geller Files Class Action Suit
-----------------------------------------------------
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
(https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-us-oil-fund-class-action-lawsuit.html)
announced that it filed a class action seeking to represent
purchasers of securities of United States Oil Fund, LP
(NYSEArca:USO) during the period between March 19, 2020 and April
28, 2020 (the "Class Period"). This action was filed in the
Southern District of New York and is captioned Lucas v. United
States Oil Fund, LP, No. 20-cv-4740.

The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 permits any
investor who purchased United States Oil Fund, LP ("USO" or the
"Fund") securities during the Class Period to seek appointment as
lead plaintiff in the USO class action lawsuit. A lead plaintiff
acts on behalf of all other class members in directing the USO
class action lawsuit. The lead plaintiff can select a law firm of
its choice to litigate the USO class action lawsuit. An investor's
ability to share in any potential future recovery of the USO class
action lawsuit is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff. If
you wish to serve as lead plaintiff in the USO class action
lawsuit, you must move the Court no later than 60 days from today.
If you wish to discuss the USO class action lawsuit or have any
questions concerning this notice or your rights or interests,
please contact plaintiff's counsel, Brian E. Cochran of Robbins
Geller at 800/449-4900 or 619/231-1058, or via e-mail at
bcochran@rgrdlaw.com. You can view a copy of the complaint as filed
at
https://www.rgrdlaw.com/cases-us-oil-fund-class-action-lawsuit.html.

The USO class action lawsuit charges USO and certain of its
officers and directors with violations of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934. USO is an exchange traded fund ("ETF") purportedly
designed to track the daily changes in percentage terms of the spot
price of West Texas Intermediate ("WTI") light, sweet crude oil
delivered to Cushing, Oklahoma. Because retail investors are
generally not equipped to buy and sell barrels of oil or authorized
to trade oil futures, ETFs such as USO provide one of the primary
means by which such investors can gain exposure to fluctuations in
oil prices.

The complaint alleges that during the Class Period, defendants
stated that USO would achieve its investment objective by investing
substantially all of its portfolio assets in the near month WTI
futures contract. However, unbeknownst to investors, extraordinary
market conditions in early 2020 made USO's purported investment
objective and strategy unfeasible. Oil demand fell precipitously as
governments imposed lockdowns and businesses halted operations in
response to the coronavirus pandemic. In addition, in early March
2020, Saudi Arabia and Russia launched an oil price war, increasing
production and slashing export prices in a bid to increase the
global market share of their domestic petrochemical enterprises. As
excess oil supply increased and oil prices waned, the facilities
available for storage in Cushing, Oklahoma approached capacity,
ultimately causing a rare market dynamic known as "super contango"
in which the futures prices for oil substantially exceeded the spot
price. At the same time, retail investors began pouring hundreds of
millions of dollars into USO in an attempt to "buy the dip,"
believing (correctly) that the price of oil would rebound as
economies exited lockdown periods and the Russia/Saudi oil price
war ended. Because of the nature of USO's investment strategy,
these converging factors caused the Fund to suffer exceptional
losses and undermined the Fund's ability to meet its ostensible
investment objective.

According to the complaint, defendants, as the creators, issuers
and operators of the largest oil-related ETF in existence and
active market-making players in the complex commodities and futures
markets that determined the Fund's performance, possessed inside
knowledge about the negative consequences to the Fund as a result
of these converging adverse events. However, rather than disclose
the known impacts and risks to the Fund as a result of these
exceptional threats, defendants instead commenced an offering of
USO shares in March 2020, ultimately selling billions of dollars'
worth of USO shares to the market. Although the offering increased
the fees payable to defendants, it also exacerbated the undisclosed
risks to the Fund by magnifying trading inefficiencies and causing
USO to approach position and accountability limits as a result of
the Fund's massive positions in the WTI futures market.

Ultimately, the Fund suffered billions of dollars in losses and was
forced to abandon its investment strategy. Through a series of
rapid-fire investment overhauls, USO was forced to transform from
the passive ETF designed to track spot oil prices that defendants
had pitched to investors to an almost unrecognizable actively
managed fund struggling to avoid a total implosion. In April and
May 2020, defendants belatedly acknowledged the extreme threats and
adverse impacts that the Fund had been experiencing at the time of
the March offering, but which they had failed to disclose to
investors.

The plaintiff is represented by Robbins Geller, which has extensive
experience in prosecuting investor class actions including actions
involving financial fraud.

Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP is one of the world's leading law
firms representing investors in securities litigation. With 200
lawyers in 9 offices, Robbins Geller has obtained many of the
largest securities class action recoveries in history. For seven
consecutive years, ISS Securities Class Action Services has ranked
the Firm in its annual SCAS Top 50 Report as one of the top law
firms in the world in both amount recovered for shareholders and
total number of class action settlements. Robbins Geller attorneys
have helped shape the securities laws and have recovered tens of
billions of dollars on behalf of aggrieved victims. Beyond securing
financial recoveries for defrauded investors, Robbins Geller also
specializes in implementing corporate governance reforms, helping
to improve the financial markets for investors worldwide. Robbins
Geller attorneys are consistently recognized by courts,
professional organizations and the media as leading lawyers in the
industry.

Contact:

         Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP
         Brian E. Cochran
         Tel: 800-449-4900
         E-mail: bcochran@rgrdlaw.com
         Web site: http://www.rgrdlaw.com
[GN]



UBER TECHNOLOGIES: Appeals Order in Theodore ADA Suit to 1st Cir.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Defendant Uber Technologies, Inc., filed an appeal from a court
ruling in the lawsuit styled Theodore, et al. v. Uber Technologies,
Inc., Case No. 1:18-cv-12147-DPW, in the U.S. District Court for
the District of Massachusetts, Boston.

As previously reported in the Class Action Reporter, the lawsuit
alleges violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The case
is assigned to Judge Douglas P. Woodlock.

The appellate case is captioned as Theodore, et al. v. Uber
Technologies, Inc., Case No. 20-1574, in the United States Court of
Appeals for the First Circuit.

Appearance form, Docketing Statement and Transcript Report/Order
form are due on July 1, 2020.[BN]

Plaintiffs-Appellees DINO N. THEODORE, on behalf of himself and all
persons similarly situated, and ACCESS WITH SUCCESS ACCESS WITH
SUCCESS, INC., are represented by:

          Nicholas S. Guerrera, Esq.
          SHAHEEN GUERRERA & O'LEARY LLC
          820A Turnpike St.
          North Andover, MA 01845-0000
          Telephone: (978) 689-0800
          E-mail: nguerrera@sgolaw.com

Defendant-Appellant UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC., is represented by:

          Anne Marie Estevez, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          5300 Wachovia Financial Center
          200 S Biscayne Blvd.
          Miami, FL 33131-2339
          Telephone: (305) 415-3330
          E-mail: annemarie.estevez@morganlewis.com

               - and -

          Elizabeth G. Hays, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          1 Federal St.
          Boston, MA 02110-1726
          Telephone: (617) 915-8075
          E-mail: liza.hays@morganlewis.com

               - and -

          Stephanie Schuster, Esq.
          MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
          1111 Pennsylvania Ave. NW
          Washington, DC 20004-2541
          Telephone: (202) 373-6595
          E-mail: stephanie.schuster@morganlewis.com


UNITED STATES: BLM DC Sues Over Use of Violence vs. Demonstrators
-----------------------------------------------------------------
BLACK LIVES MATTER D.C.; TONI SANDERS; J.N.C., through his mother
Demetria Bright; KISHON MCDONALD; GARRETT BOND; and KEARA SCALLAN
v. DONALD J. TRUMP, President of the United States of America;
WILLIAM P. BARR, Attorney General of the United States; MARK ESPER,
Secretary of Defense of the United States; GREGORY T. MONAHAN,
Acting Chief of the United States Park Police; JAMES M. MURRAY,
Director, U.S. Secret Service; MAJOR GENERAL WILLIAM J. WALKE,
Commanding General of the District of Columbia National Guard;
GENERAL JAMES C. MCCONVILLE, Chief of Staff of the United States
Army; JOHN DOES 1-100 and JOHN POES 1-20, Case No. 1:20-cv-01469
(D.D.C., June 4, 2020), arises from the President and AG's order to
use violence against peaceful demonstrators, who were speaking out
against discriminatory police brutality targeted at Black people.

The Plaintiffs contend that the Defendants' actions to shut down
the Lafayette Square demonstration is the manifestation of the very
despotism against which the First Amendment was intended to
protect. This action seeks to uphold, against uncivil, unwarranted,
unjust, and blatantly unlawful attack, cherished rights enshrined
in the First and Fourth Amendment to the Constitution and
foundational to our Democracy: the rights to peaceful assembly,
petition for redress of grievances, freedom of speech, freedom of
the press, and freedom from unwarranted seizures by the
government.

On June 1, 2020, a group of demonstrators, including the
Plaintiffs, gathered peacefully in Lafayette Square to protest the
gross, systemic injustices perpetrated by law enforcement against
Black people in the United States, exemplified by the recent brutal
murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, a Black woman who was
shot eight times and killed in March 2020 by three Louisville
police officers, who entered her home in the middle of the night
without knocking.

On May 25, 2020, Mr. George Floyd, 46 year-old, was accused of a
non-violent offense and arrested by the Minneapolis police. In the
process of his arrest, Mr. Floyd was handcuffed and fell to the
pavement. Less than ten minutes after the police arrived, a police
officer, who participated in Mr. Floyd's arrest placed his knee and
the weight of his body on Mr. Floyd's neck as Mr. Floyd lay on the
ground. For eight minutes and forty-six seconds, the officer held
his knee on Mr. Floyd's neck as Mr. Floyd pleaded for relief. Other
officers held his legs or stood by and watched while he died.

Donald J. Trump is the President of the United States of America.
William P. Barr is the Attorney General of the United States.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Kaitlin Banner, Esq.
          Dennis Corkery, Esq.
          Hannah Lieberman, Esq.
          Jonathan Smith, Esq.
          WASHINGTON LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND
          URBAN AFFAIRS
          700 14th Street, NW, Suite 400
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 319-1000
          Facsimile: (202) 319-1010
          E-mail: kaitlin_banner@washlaw.org
                  dennis_corkery@washlaw.org
                  hannah_lieberman@washlaw.org
                  jonathan_smith@washlaw.org

               - and -

          Scott Michelman, Esq.
          Arthur B. Spitzer, Esq.
          Michael Perloff, Esq.
          AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION FOUNDATION
          OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
          915 15th Street NW, Second Floor
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 457-0800
          E-mail: smichelman@acludc.org
                  aspitzer@acludc.org
                  mperloff@acludc.org

               - and -

          Jon Greenbaum, Esq.
          Arthur Ago, Esq.
          David Brody, Esq.
          Arusha Gordon, Esq.
          Noah Baron, Esq.
          LAWYERS' COMMITTEE FOR CIVIL
          RIGHTS UNDER LAW
          1500 K Street N.W., Suite 900
          Washington, DC 20005
          Telephone: (202) 662-8600
          E-mail: jgreenbaum@lawyerscommittee.org
                  aago@lawyerscommittee.org
                  dspence@lawyerscommittee.org
                  dbrody@lawyerscommittee.org
                  agordon@lawyerscommittee.org
                  nbaron@lawyerscommittee.org

               - and -

          John A. Freedman, Esq.
          David E. Kouba, Esq.
          Thomas D. McSorley, Esq.
          ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP
          601 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
          Washington, DC 20004
          Telephone: (202) 942-5000
          E-mail: John.Freedman@arnoldporter.com
                  David.Kouba@arnoldporter.com
                  Tom.McSorley@arnoldporter.com


UNITED STATES: DHS Faces Moreno Class Suit in C.D. California
-------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against United States
Department of Homeland Security. The case is captioned as Devora
Batres Moreno, Leticia Lupercio, Ivan Rene Ledezma, Sandra
Cervantes Gomez, Pablo Tapia Cruz, and Cesar Centeno Galvan,
individually and on behalf of all similarly situated individuals v.
United States Department of Homeland Security, et al., Case No.
5:20-cv-01136-TJH-JPR (C.D. Cal., June 2, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Terry J. Hatter, Jr.

The Plaintiffs file a petition for writ of habeas corpus.

The Defendants include Chad F. Wolf, Acting Secretary, U.S.
Department of Homeland Security; Matthew T. Albence, Deputy
Director and Senior Official Performing the Duties of the Director,
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; David Marin, Director of
the Los Angeles Field Office, Enforcement and Removal Operations,
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement; James Janecka Warden,
Adelanto Detention Center ICE Processing; and Does 1-5.

The United States Department of Homeland Security is a cabinet
department of the U.S. federal government with responsibilities in
public security, roughly comparable to the interior or home
ministries of other countries.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          Kit Wai Cheung, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF ROSANA WAI CHEUNG
          617 South Olive Street, Suite 710
          Los Angeles, CA 90014-1643
          Telephone: (213) 891-1314
          Facsimile: (213) 891-1318
          E-mail: rosanacheung@lawyer.com

               - and -

          Larry R. Glazer, Esq.
          Nicolette Glazer, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF LARRY R. GLAZER
          1875 Century Park East, No. 700
          Century City, CA 90067
          Telephone: (310) 407-5353
          Facsimile: (310) 388-3833
          E-mail: larry@glazerandglazer.com
                  nicolette@glazerandglazer.com

The Defendants are represented by:

          Timothy Daniel Biche, Esq.
          AUSA-OFFICE OF US ATTORNEY
          300 North Los Angeles Street, Suite 7516
          Los Angeles, CA 90012
          Telephone: (213) 894-7354
          Facsimile: (213) 894-7819
          E-mail: timothy.biche@usdoj.gov

               - and -

          Assistant 2241-194 US Attorney LA-CV
          AUSA-OFFICE OF US ATTORNEY
          CRIMINAL DIVISION-US COURTHOUSE
          312 North Spring Street, 12th Floor
          Los Angeles, CA 90012-4700
          Telephone: (213) 894-2434
          E-mail: USACAC.Habeas@usdoj.gov

               - and -

          OIL-DCS Trial Attorney
          OFFICE OF IMMIGRATION LITIGATION
          PO Box 868 Ben Franklin Station
          Washington, DC 20044
          Telephone: (202) 353-8806
          E-mail: oil-dcs.cacd@usdoj.gov


VERA LLOYD: Underpays House Parents, Girtmon Claims
---------------------------------------------------
LASHANNA GIRTMON, individually and on behalf of all others
similarly situated, Plaintiff v. VERA LLOYD PRESBYTERIAN FAMILY
SERVICES, INC. and VERA LLOYD PRESBYTERIAN FOUNDATION, INC.,
Defendants, Case No. 4:20-cv-00762-DPM (E.D. Ark., June 18, 2020)
is a collective action complaint brought against Defendants for
their alleged willful violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act
and the Arkansas Minimum Wage Act.

Plaintiff was employed by Defendant from September 2019 to June
2020 as a non-exempt and hourly-paid House Parent, whose duties
include spending time with the children and youth, counting money,
counting and passing out medication, and taking residents to doctor
appointments.

According to the complaint, Plaintiff and other House Parents
regularly worked more than 40 hours, but were not paid overtime at
one and one-half times their regular rate for all hours worked over
40. Allegedly, Defendants required them to report 40 hours per week
or less and exclude overtime hours worked when reporting their
time.

Vera Lloyd Presbyterian Family Services, Inc. provides residential
home for Presbyterian children and family in Arkansas and northern
Louisiana.

Vera Lloyd Presbyterian Foundation, Inc. provides financial support
to Vera Lloyd Presbyterian Family Services, Inc. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

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


VXI GLOBAL: Underpays Service Representatives, Bufford Claims
-------------------------------------------------------------
AYANA BUFFORD, individually and on behalf of all others similarly
situated, Plaintiff v. VXI GLOBAL SOLUTIONS LLC, Defendant, Case
No. 4:20-cv-00253-RCC (D. Ariz., June 12, 2020) is an action
against the Defendant's failure to pay the Plaintiff and the class
overtime compensation for hours worked in excess of 40 hours per
week.

The Plaintiff Bufford was employed by the Defendant as customer
service representative.

VXI Global Solutions, Inc. provides information technology
services. The Company offers omnichannel and multilingual support,
software development, CX innovation, quality assurance, and
infrastructure outsourcing solutions. VXI Global Solutions serves
clients worldwide. [BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Ty D. Frankel, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF BONNETT FAIRBOURN
          FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C.
          2325 E. Camelback Road, Suite 300
          Phoenix, Arizona 85016
          Telephone: (602) 274-1100
          E-mail: tfrankel@bffb.com

               - and -

          Patricia N. Syverson, Esq.
          LAW OFFICES OF BONNETT FAIRBOURN
          FRIEDMAN & BALINT, P.C.
          600 W. Broadway, Suite 900
          San Diego, California 92101
          Telephone: (619) 756-7748
          E-mail: psyverson@bffb.com


WALMART: Faces Class Action Over New Covid-19 Return Policy
-----------------------------------------------------------
Courthouse News Service reported that a federal class action claims
Walmart is illegally denying returns under its new "Covid-19 return
policy."

A copy of the Complaint is available at:

                      https://is.gd/9tyJFJ
[GN]



WEATHERFORD US: Muldowney Seeks Payment for Overtime Work
---------------------------------------------------------
THOMAS MULDOWNEY, individually and for others similarly situated,
Plaintiff v. WEATHERFORD US, L.P., Defendant, Case No.
4:20-cv-02158 (S.D. Tex., June 18, 2020) is a collective action
complaint brought against Defendant for its alleged willful
violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act.

Plaintiff worked for Defendant as a Fishing Supervisor from
approximately January 7, 2019 to September 27, 2019.

According to the complaint, Plaintiff and other similarly situated
workers who worked for Defendant in the last 3 years regularly
worked more than 40 hours a week. But, Defendant did not pay them
overtime for all hours they worked in excess of 40 hours in a
single workweek.

Allegedly, Defendant has a policy of paying its employees a flat
daily rate amount regardless of the numbers of hours worked in
excess of 40 hours in a week.

Weatherford US, L.P. provides oil field machinery and equipments.
[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Gabriel A. Assaad, Esq.
          MCDONALD WORLEY, PC
          1770 St. James St., Suite 100
          Houston, TX 77056
          Tel: (713) 523-5500
          Fax: (713) 523-5501
          Email: gassaad@mcdonaldworley.com



WILCO LIFE: Faces West Suit Over Increase in Insurance Rate
-----------------------------------------------------------
SHERRI WEST, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated
v. WILCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation f/k/a CONSECO LIFE
INSURANCE COMPANY, Case No. 3:20-cv-00464 (M.D. Tenn., June 2,
2020), arises from a cost of insurance rate increase on universal
life insurance policies issued by Wilco and written on Policy Form
CLIC-3002.

The Plaintiff contends that Wilco breached the express and implied
terms of the policies and misleadingly stated that the increases
were permitted due to Wilco's past costs.

Under the terms of a universal life insurance policy, a
policyholder pays variable premiums that are deposited into an
accumulation account. In turn, an insurer will credit and deposit a
specified amount of interest on the accumulation account and
withdraw the costs for the policy, including the central cost
component--the cost of insurance--and other expense charges.

On April 1, 1994, American Life issued to Ms. West, as the owner
and insured, a universal life insurance policy with a specified
amount of $50,000, plus certain rider benefits. American Life
subsequently sold Ms. West's policy to Wilco's
predecessor-in-interest, Conseco Life Insurance Company.

Wilco is a stock insurance corporation.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Joe P. Leniski, Jr., Esq.
          James G. Stranch, III, Esq.
          BRANSTETTER, STRANCH & JENNINGS, PLLC
          The Freedom Center
          223 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, Second Floor
          Nashville, TN 37203
          Telephone: (615) 254-8801
          Facsimile: (615) 255-5419
          E-mail: joeyl@bsjfirm.com
                  jims@bsjfirm.com

               - and -

          Stephen J. Fearon, Jr., Esq.
          Paul V. Sweeny, Esq.
          SQUITIERI & FEARON, LLP
          32 East 57th St., 12th Floor
          New York, NY 10022
          Telephone: (212) 421-6492
          Facsimile: (212) 421-6553
          E-mail: stephen@sfclasslaw.com
                  paul@sfclasslaw.com


WILLIAM D BOYCE: Grover Sues Over Edenville & Sanford Dams Breach
-----------------------------------------------------------------
GLORIA GROVER, RAUL VELASCO, MARY MAY, RICHARD WOLF, TINA REINIG,
CARL SWARTHOUT, SHANE NICKERSON, MARK LICKTEIG, VIVIAN KIPFMILLER,
PATRICK WATERMAN, BRIAN PARENT, LAWRENCE DUREK, KARIE DINGMAN,
JOSEPH KRUEGER, CLEORIA FRENCH, TERRY VISNAW, LORI FEINAUER, JARED
BRUNER, and MARQUETTA MAXWELL, individually and all others
similarly situated v. WILLIAM D. BOYCE TRUST 2350 u/a/d 10/1908,
WILLIAM D. BOYCE TESTAMENTARY TRUST 3649 u/a/d
6/1929, WILLIAM D. BOYCE TESTAMENTARY TRUST 3650 u/a/d 6/1929, LEE
W. MUELLER, MICHAEL W. d'AVENAS, STEPHEN B. HULTBERG, JPMORGAN
CHASE & CO., BOYCE TRUST HYDRO PROPERTY 2350 LLC, BOYCE TRUST HYDRO
PROPERTY 3649 LLC, BOYCE TRUST HYDRO PROPERTY 3650 LLC, BOYCE HYDRO
POWER LLC, BOYCE HYDRO LLC, BOYCE MICHIGAN LLC and EDENVILLE HYDRO
PROPERTY LLC , Jointly and Severally, Case No.
1:20-cv-11428-TLL-PTM (E.D. Mich., June 2, 2020), arises from the
failure on May 19, 2020, of the Edenville and Sanford Dams.

The lawsuit is brought on behalf of the Plaintiffs and all others,
who have similarly suffered from flooding, devastation and physical
invasion of their property by water, pollutants, dirt and debris on
May 19, 2020, as a result of the Edenville and Sanford Dams
failing, thereby, causing material injury to their well-being,
properties and belongings.

The breach was reported by Midland County 911 at 5:43 p.m. and an
immediate evacuation was ordered for residents of Sanford and
Edenville, including residents of Midland living west of Eastman
Road and south of U.S. Residents were told to go as far east and
west of the Titabawassee River as possible.

The Plaintiff contends that the Defendants knew or should have
known that the Dams could not sustain a major flood event; yet they
wholly failed to remedy these persistent issues.

The Plaintiffs suffered home and personal property damages as a
result of the Edenville and Sanford Dam failures.

William D. Boyce Trust 2350 is an Illinois-registered Trust. The
Trust is a member owner of each of the LLC Defendants, in
conjunction with the other Trust Defendants. Edenville Hydro
Property, LLC, owns the Edenville dam.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Michael J. Bonvolanta, Esq.
          Robert J. Lantzy, Esq.
          BUCKFIRE LAW FIRM
          29000 Inkster Road, Suite 150
          Southfield, MI 48034
          Telephone: (248) 569-4646
          Facsimile: (248) 569-6737
          E-mail: michael@buckfirelaw.com
                  robert@buckfirelaw.com


WIPRO LIMITED: Faces Lloyd Labor Suit in California Super. Court
----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against Wipro Limited. The
case is captioned as RONALD LLOYD and ETHAN PEARL, INDIVIDUALLY AND
ON BEHALF OF THOSE SIMILARLY SITUATED v. WIPRO LIMITED, A FOREIGN
CORPORATION and DOES 1-10, INCLUSIVE, Case No. CGC20584628 (Cal.
Super., San Francisco Cty., June 2, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge Garrett L. Wong.

The lawsuit alleges that the Defendants failed to pay overtime
wages and failed to pay minimum and regular wages. A case
management conference will be held on Nov 4, 2020.

Wipro is an Indian multinational corporation that provides
information technology, consulting and business process
services.[BN]

The Plaintiff is represented by:

          Kevin F. Woodall, Esq
          WOODALL LAW OFFICES
          100 Pine St., Ste. 1250
          San Francisco, CA 94111
          Telephone: (415) 413-4629
          Facsimile: (866) 937-4109
          E-mail: kevin@kwoodalllaw.com


WORLD BUSINESS: Quantum-Mac and Okwu File Class Suit N.D. Georgia
-----------------------------------------------------------------
A class action lawsuit has been filed against World Business
Lenders LLC, et al. The case is captioned as Quantum-Mac
International Inc. and Imo S. Okwu, Individually and on Behalf of
all Others Similarly Situated v. World Business Lenders LLC and WBL
SPE III, LLC, Case No. 1:20-cv-02353-WMR (N.D. Ga., June 2, 2020).

The case is assigned to the Hon. Judge William M. Ray, II.

The lawsuit seeks declaratory judgment alleging violation of
contract-related laws.

World Business is an American financial company headquartered in
Jersey City, New Jersey, with locations in Georgia, California,
Connecticut, Florida and Texas. World Business is a bank service
provider and a private direct lender specializing in short-term
loans to small and medium-sized businesses.[BN]

The Plaintiffs are represented by:

          James W. Hurt, Jr., Esq.
          HURT STOLZ, P.C.
          1551 Jennings Mill Road, Suite 3100-B
          Watkinsville, GA 30677
          Telephone: (706) 395-2750
          Facsimile: (866) 766-9245
          E-mail: jhurt@hurtstolz.com

               - and -

          Richard S. Alembik, Esq.
          RICHARD S. ALEMBIK, PC
          315 West Ponce de Leon Avenue, Suite 250
          Decatur, GA 30030
          Telephone: (404) 373-0205
          Facsimile: (404) 795-8999
          E-mail: Rick@Alembik.com


[*] Heffler's David Kaufman to Speak on Data Breach Class Actions
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The Knowledge Group, the leading producer of regulatory focused
webcasts, has announced that David Kaufman, Senior Director with
Heffler Claims Group, will speak at its webcast entitled: "Data
Breach Class Action Litigation on the Rise: Winning Strategies."
This event is scheduled for Thursday, July 30, 2020 from 12:00 pm
to 2:00 pm (ET).

For further details, please visit:
https://www.theknowledgegroup.org/webcasts/data-breach-class-action-litigation/

David (Dave) Kaufman is a Senior Director at Heffler Claims Group
and has spent his entire career in the legal field, consulting with
clients to develop innovative class action settlement solutions in
the areas of data breach, consumer, securities, antitrust, and
insurance. Drawing from over 20 years of experience in the legal
services industry, Dave specializes in pre-settlement consultation
and aiding clients through the mediation process. As a sought-after
professional, Dave has had a hand in both large and small
settlements, including complex privacy and data breach cases. Dave
also participated in one of the largest international securities
cases. Dave's experience and specialization in the legal industry
contributes to his ability to identify efficiencies in even the
most complex settlements.

Heffler Claims Group (Heffler), a division of global advisor, Duff
& Phelps, is a national leader in class action settlement
administration, having specialized in the notice and administration
of complex legal matters for more than 50 years. Together with
Prime Clerk, the leading bankruptcy claims and noticing agent and
another Duff & Phelps company, we offer the most comprehensive
administrative services in the industry. As a member of the Duff &
Phelps family of companies, we have nearly 4,000 professionals in
25 countries around the world and provide our clients with
world-class IT, cybersecurity, and global notification and
administration capabilities for class action claims administration
including Consumer, Antitrust, Securities, Data Breach, and Mass
Tort matters.

                            Abstract

Data breaches in the U.S. have shown no signs of slowing down in
the last several years, neither have the wave of class action cases
associated with these. Recent breaches include some of the largest
companies such as LifeLabs, Yahoo, Equifax, and Google LLC. Such
breaches, as well as the infringements incorporated with it, can
impose tremendous burdens on banks and credit card companies that
have to respond to a flood of fraud claims and canceled cards.

Although not every data breach leads to litigation, the massive,
high-profile ones typically do and targeted companies are left to
settle costly cases and damages. As the stakes continue to
escalate, businesses must always be prepared – winning defense
strategies are a must.

In this live webcast, a seasoned panel of thought leaders and
professionals brought together by The Knowledge Group will provide
the audience with an in-depth analysis of the recent data breach
class action litigations. Speakers will also present winning
strategies to use for an aggressive defense while mitigating
possible risks and pitfalls.

Key Issues:

  * Data Breach Class Action Litigation – An Overview
  * Trends and Developments
  * Recent Data Breach Lawsuits
  * Potential Risks and Pitfalls
  * Winning Strategies

                    About The Knowledge Group

Founded in November 2006, The Knowledge Group has been at the
forefront of providing quality continuing education programs for
lawyers, accountants, financial executives, risk and compliance
specialists, human resources professionals, technology officers,
and business consultants in a wide range of industries.

The Knowledge Group strives to be the best-in-class provider of
continuing education by bringing forth relevant content you can't
get anywhere else.  [GN]



                            *********

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 2020. 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 ***